Essay on Hatshepshut v/s Kouros

The seated statue of Hatshepsut is dated around ca. 1473-1458 B.C. around the 18th dynasty in Deir el-Bahri, Upper Egypt. This statue is made entirely out of indurated limestone and has a height of 195 cm, width of 49 cm, and diameter of 114 cm. Many statues like this were found in her mortuary temple that has been ransacked and destroyed by bandits and pharaohs. I consider this statue to be in very bad condition because of its age and the history behind it. From first glance I noticed the statue has significant damage in many places. There are noticeable chips in the headdress, nose, and left eyebrow. The left hand placed upon left knee has completely fallen off while half of her right arm is missing. The

The overall all renditions are block-like and sculpted with geometric reduction of details. The anatomy is made up of planes, completely symmetrical. The hair, ears, and eyes have been reduced to simple shapes – again, all identically symmetrical. Kouros is depicted nude, symbolic of Archaic Greece's emphasis on the ideal individual male and autonomous Greek citizen. In contrast, Aphrodite is a considerably large female (7 feet tall and substantially wider than the Kouros). Given the larger than real-life scale, this statue probably served as a cult image in a temple. The statue's excellent state of conservation also suggests that it was kept indoors. It is free standing but also in an anatomical, not just mechanical sense. The pose is full and rounded, not solely frontal. You get a sense of the body being relaxed, with one hand extended in a gesture that gives a sense of it moving forward.

If you drew a line down the center of its body, you would be able to notice that both sides are identical. Meanwhile, in The Spear Bearer these things have changed, here one can see a slight “S” curve through the motions of the upper body, hips, and legs, rather than a straight symmetrical line down the middle (Khan Academy). This is when, for the first time in Western Art we have figures that seem fully alive. Lastly, regarding the statues’ naturalistic qualities, even when both are stylized, The Spear Bearer is clearly much more naturalistic. In contrast, the Metropolitan Kouros has body parts and features that have been reduced to geometrical

Hatshepsut is not only known for being a rare woman ruler during this archaic time period, but also for the representation of her in art- blending imagery of a male king with presentations of herself as a woman. During the early years of her reign, Hatshepsut had herself portrayed in the traditional garb of a woman. However, in the seventh year of Thutmose III’s reign, the year that Hatshepsut took over, she began to be portrayed in male attire, still attempting to further her legitimacy as Egypt’s ruler. The surviving representation in art varies on this masculine and feminine

In one respect, Hatshepsut is viewed as the female pharaoh who had a particularly unsuccessful reign that was devoid of any real achievements. Historians writing in the 1970’s and 1980’s often made sexist and unfounded assumptions about Hatshepsut’s rule, including her apparent scheming to take the throne from the

This piece does not have several viewpoints but mostly one. It is to be approached from its front view. It is extremely direct with Hatshepsut looking straightforward. The sculptor’s primary focus seems to be her resemblance as pharaoh. She is of power and should be approached directly as king. Hatshepsut is also displayed so that the statue could only be seen by the front. Her back is to the wall; hence, having no access to approach the statue toward its back. On the side of her thighs, there are horizontal lines playing a contrast to everywhere else, as her body is smooth. Even when entering this section of the Egyptian gallery, she can be viewed from the outside. She is directly aligned to the entrance. The museum seems to structure the approach of Hatshepsut to be presented directly.

Examining the Ancient Egyptian civilization reveals much about the nature of its art. The art was mainly religious in content and purpose and, as the “religious dogma” remained unchanged for nearly 3000 years, so did the art (Piper, 1991: 24). Because Isis and Horus are divine beings, they had to be portrayed “with limited human expression” according to “strict formal conventions, in keeping with their divinity” (Mason, 2007:13). The sculpture is fairly flat on the back side of the throne, for the sake of functionality. It was not “intended to be seen in the round”, but was most probably placed against the wall of a tomb (Ancient Egypt – Myth & History, 2002: 439). In fact, this sculpture was not made

Hatshepsut was the first woman pharaoh ever recorded in history. Although there are a few obvious breaks, this granite sculpture was put back together nicely. Because this piece is so important, the Metropolitan Museum of Art has to be careful of what to light up on the sculpture. This does not look easy because the statue is so massive, but the Met did a good job capturing the face with light, and the top of the orbs. The shadows also reflect how angular this statue really is, and the unrealistic body of the woman pharaoh Hatshepsut.

Amun and religion played a large role in Hatshepsut’s reign due to the use of a higher being to consolidate her reign. The limestone bust of Hatshepsut as Osiris, a portrait from her mortuary temple at Deir el Bahari depicts her as the male god Osiris, giving her a sense of power as she is depicted as a powerful god, god of

Senenmut, an excellent architect within Ancient Egypt who came from a large educated family, was appointed by Hatshepsut to oversee any royal works, as well as overseeing slaves, fields, and gardens. It is said by some Egyptologists that he initiated a very personal relationship with her—he was even a tutor for Hatshepsut’s daughter. This suggests that Hatshepsut befriended Senenmut for her own advantage, in order for her building plans to be carried out as she pleased. Not only did she effectively choose a skilled architect, but she kept high standards for the location for her memorial tomb. This was at a natural bay near the Theban Mountains, facing the entrance to the Amen-Re Temple at Karnak. This location was especially chosen because it was the existing tomb of her father, and had great importance as it was previously a cult center for Hathor (goddess of ruling kings). A new entrance was created with a staircase leading to a new burial hall carved out of rock. Although her choice called for those extensive alterations of the existing tomb, Hatshepsut wanted to be remembered as a highly regarded leader and appointed Senemut to carry out with those building plans. Hatshepsut’s choice resulted in one of the most beautiful temples in Egypt, known as Djeser Djeseru, meaning holiest of the holy. This specific project displayed Hatshepsut’s creativity

Throughout different time periods and civilizations come many different types of art that would never be comparable to those of another time or place. There are also the pieces that come from a completely different time and place, but yet they can still be compared to one another. The Torso of a God (Egyptian, New Kingdom, Dynasty 18, last decade of the reign of Amenhotep III, Granodiorite, 1359-1349 B.C.) and the Statue of Asklepios (Greek, Hellenistic period, Pentelic Marble, 2nd century B.C.) are two sculptures made hundreds of years apart, yet they both display many similarities and show how art is constantly changing whilst keeping the same core ideas.

The two statues of Diadoumenos and Hermes & Dionysos differ in that all Polykleitos' sculptures were 8 heads tall, where as all Praxiltiles' sculptures were 9-10 heads tall. Also Polykleitos' Diadoumenos is more sculpted more muscular than Praxitiles' sculpture of Hermes & Dionysos.

Our world is full of so many grandiose monuments, eye-catching sculptures, and stunning statues, each having an individual story to tell. Thousands of them have been created however, only a small number of them are actually extraordinary and picture-worthy. This paper will compare and contrast two of those picture-worthy sculptures. Furthermore, I will examine the aspects of each of these sculptures. I will compare and contrast what each of them represents, the differences in texture, their size and their tone.

The Classical Period statues were designed to be a bit more casual, depicting one leg being stretched forward as the other supports the body and the head tilted to the side. If you look closer at most of the Classical statues you can see the

Over the years of art history, there are many great empires that we think of and two of those were ancient Greek and Egyptian. When talking about Greek and Egyptian art history, it is the sculptures that come to mind when you are comparing and contrasting artworks. Egyptian art and Greek art both had mesmerizing sculptures but Egyptian art was more oriented towards religion and Greek art was more focused on philosophy. The Egyptian statue of the Menkaure and a Queen was similar to the Greek statue of Metropolitan Kouros in their posture but both of these statues also had many differences. Menkaure and a queen statue was created from an unusual stone and the statue was discovered in Menkaure’s valley temple. The sculpture has a hard texture and because of the time-consuming task of polishing this sculpture was never completely polished. So, the sculpture is greywacke and has traces of red paint on king’s face, ears and neck because male figures were traditionally painted red and there are traces of black in queen’s hair. The sculpture itself is 54 ½ inches in height and is displayed in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Metropolitan Kouros was created from marble which seems like it has a rough and hard texture. The statue is 6 feet in height and is displayed at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.