posted
Just wanna ask experts and members who studying the race of ancient egyptians here about something..,according to this article Egyptian Art and since I was at art education college we learnt that the ancient egyptians were believe in that the pharaoh is the son of GOD and pharaohs spirits were immortal...then from this concept the egyptian artist was cautious from picture any kind of flaws which exist in the kings or queens bodies..,and king or queen must be pictured by the best view in wall paintings or in sculptures.
This way in egyptian art was followed till the age of Pharaoh Akhenaton[Amenhotep IV] and then he changed all of this rules in art and the egyptian artist started to picture the pharaoh,his wife and his daughters with all of real flaws they having in their bodies..,but yet the egyptian art specially in painting was still governed by the genral rules which the artist take through them the best viewing position for every part in the body:-
- the eye from front. - face from side. - torso from front. - the 2 hands are the right hand. - feet from side..and etc..
However..,I noticed that there are some here use examples from egyptian painting or sculptures as an evidences for the race of ancient egyptians.
My question is..,Is it accurate and scientific enough to use the egyptian art as an evidence for the race of ancient egyptians although all of these rules which the egyptian art was governed by them??
hope someone can benifit me in that..,thank you
Posts: 712 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course. They drew and painted themselves as black in many of their artwork. They distinguished themselves very well from other people. Some people today just refuse to see that.
Posts: 603 | From: Mobile, Alabama | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting Hetsho, I guess if people simply go by what is evidenced from artifacts or paintings we can assume some REAL people were mythological. Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hetsho: My question is..,Is it accurate and scientific enough to use the egyptian art as an evidence for the race of ancient egyptians although all of these rules which the egyptian art was governed by them??
hope someone can benifit me in that..,thank you
Hetsho, The art gives you clues but I don't think it is enough evidence for the race. An example would be the copying of the Egyptian art by the Greeks and Romans. The Egyptians have a classic left foot forward in their scuptures and the Greeks and Romans copied this art form.
Posts: 342 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hetsho, first of all Pharaohs weren't just viewed as sons of gods (more than one, but which specific one depended on the cult of prominence during the certain time period), but were viewed as gods themselves. (Just like in many African cultures)
Second, to answer your question the fact that Egyptian royalty were depicted in ideal conditions does not negate what the physical features were of the persons or population. In other words, just because the Egyptians potrayed royals with ideal features, does this mean these features do not somehow represent what the people look like at all! Are you saying that since much of the artwork we use is idealized, that those African features cannot be trusted?? Are you saying that the Egyptians idealized African features but did not have those features themselves??
The same could be said of Greek art. The ancient Greeks also made sculpture and other artwork with idealized characterstics especially in the case of their gods. Does that mean those features did not represent the Greek people?? Practically all Classical Greek art holds many features that are stereotypical of Greeks today.
It just doesn't make any sense to say the Egyptians portrayed ideally portrayed themselves as black but were not black themselves!!
Posts: 26246 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Well..,First I would like to confirm..,that im not here to discuss the ancient egyptian race..,or what was their skin colors..,and i have no problem if they were black or red or yellow or any color..,Cause sir I felt that you do think iam discussing their race..,or denied that they were black...,in this matter I do believe that now in every where on earth there is no any kind of pure ancient race..,and most are just mixed from diffrent races according to the normal evolution of humankind history.
maybe just in specific areas you might find pure race since ancient ages without being mixed to any other race.
My question was kind of seeking an accurate information from those [experts specially] who studying the race of people..,and I just wanted scientific answer about how the art could be useful in studying the race of people..,specially symbolyic art like the ancient egyption art..,and what is this scientific rules and conditions which the researcher have to follow with using art as an evidence in studying the race???
quote: The same could be said of Greek art. The ancient Greeks also made sculpture and other artwork with idealized characterstics especially in the case of their gods. Does that mean those features did not represent the Greek people?? Practically all Classical Greek art holds many features that are stereotypical of Greeks today.
Here I would like to note..,There is an absolute diffrence between the concept of idealism in Egyptian Art and Greek Art..,the art in egypt was first of all symbolic which stand on the egyptian beliefs about death and relive much more than other fields..,and was not goverend by the acadmic rules to draw things as it is in real..,the idealism in egyptian art was care about cut every part in human body and put it in the best viewing for it.
in the Greek art the idealism was acadmic..,care for first by rules like [The Golden ratio,The ratios of autopsy for the human body,use the human body ratios as a genral rule for every kind of art included Architecture..etc]
so the human body was kind holy for the ancient greek and the greek artist was caring about showing it as it is in real.
what is a diffrent concept from idealism in egyptian art which was depend on symbolism more than caring of showing things as it is in real.
for example the color skin for 2 figures here is green in this pic..,can someone use it as an evidence that maybe the egyptians were aliens!!
And here is also a study talking about colors in egyptian painting Egyptian painting
Im just dont know about the rules of studying the race..,and wished to know simply what is the scientific conditions for using the art as an evidence for studying the race??
some copy and paste pictures from art as an evidence for the race..,so what is the rules for that in Ethnological Sciences?? or any person can depend on what he think and see it by his own eyes??..some say egyptians were black and others say they were not..and every side prove for his point by pasting pictures from art which mach his own think.
but what is the scientific rules for that in Ethnological Sciences?
Posts: 712 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Well, according to Keita and a great many of biological anthropologists, convention or not, art is not a very good way to assess the validity of "race" and/or biogeographic origins. Portraiture in the context of race carries stereotyped assumptions of how dark or how light the skin should be or how broad or aquiline featured a particular population of individuals is supposed to be, when none of this can be inferred from generalized art work. The very fact that Egyptian art was idealized or followed artistic convention, like for example the fact that women were contrasted from men and drawn lighter until the Armana period (or in various tomb paintings depicting practical scenes from daily life) where they were portrayed in the same brownish hue as equals, emphasizes its overall unreliability.
Sure, I will concede however, that knowing what to look for can determine, or narrow down identity per se. For instance, certain individual features are emphasized and certain extensions like hair styles, dress, etc, may reveal some sort of identity or commonality with other groups given that these same elements can be seen depicted or observed else where, in which that common element is exclusive, though I reiterate that overall, ancient portraiture should not be seen as reliable in supporting racial identity.
S. Keita and A.J. Boyce on the reliability of art work as a means of assessing biological affinities. They note with caution the danger in this type of subjective interpretation, though do note realistic similarity with East Africans from the Horn:
quote:Art objects are not generally used by biological anthropologists. They are suspect as data and their interpretation highly dependent on stereotyped thinking. However, because art has often been used to comment on the physiognomies of ancient Egyptians, a few remarks are in order. A review of literature and the sculpture indicates characteristics that also can be found in the Horn of (East) Africa (see, e.g., Petrie 1939; Drake 1987; Keita 1993). Old and Middle Kingdom statuary shows a range of characteristics; many, if not most, individuals depicted in the art have variations on the narrow-nosed, narrow-faced morphology also seen in various East Africans. This East African anatomy, once seen as being the result of a mixture of different "races," is better understood as being part of the range of indigenous African variation.
- "The Geographical Origins and Population Relationships of Early Ancient Egyptians " (1996)
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is it accurate to use the idealized hyper muscular well proportioned always youthful and beautiful depictions of the ancient Greeks as indicators of THEIR race? Are you saying no Greeks were old, fat, ugly, skinny with no muscles? Idealized means that you portray someone always in the prime of life, youthful, fit and strong, no matter if they were fat, weak and old. Almost all artwork from the ancient world is idealized and even modern art like movies and magazines portray people in idealized form using photoshop, make up and special lighting to hide flaws. This has nothing to do with race because there is only one race and skin color is not race. Egyptian art was generalized and they generally painted themselves as brown, which is just as brown as any other African, which we normally call black. Black means person who possesses brown skin of various complexions in the range of light to very dark, most notably the indigenous people of Africa.
Posts: 8891 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you have ever painted a portrait of someone, coloring them entirely gold, black, white or red would be accepted if those colors were given some noble interpretation.
Showing imperfections or creating chiseled or nubile images would also be seen as acceptable to your subject, if again given some noble interpretation.
However, an artist could not get away with painting a subject, royal or wealthy commoner with incorrect facial and ethnic features without being called a fraud.
Posts: 96 | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hetsho: Well..,First I would like to confirm..,that im not here to discuss the ancient egyptian race..,or what was their skin colors..,and i have no problem if they were black or red or yellow or any color..,Cause sir I felt that you do think iam discussing their race..,or denied that they were black...,in this matter I do believe that now in every where on earth there is no any kind of pure ancient race..,and most are just mixed from diffrent races according to the normal evolution of humankind history.
maybe just in specific areas you might find pure race since ancient ages without being mixed to any other race.
First of all, I never accused you of denying that they were black or anything. I just merely pointed out the fallacy of your argument in how idealistic artistic portrayals do not undermine the reality of a peoples physical features.
Second, if you really know about biology and human evolution you would know that there is no such thing as 'race' in the first place whether "pure" or "mixed".
And third, anthropology and genetics shows that the Egyptians were not an ethnically 'mixed' people but were predominantly if not entirely indigenous Africans. On the other hand, did you know people of the Levant and Arabia are the ones who are ethnically mixed?
quote:My question was kind of seeking an accurate information from those [experts specially] who studying the race of people..,and I just wanted scientific answer about how the art could be useful in studying the race of people..,specially symbolyic art like the ancient egyption art..,and what is this scientific rules and conditions which the researcher have to follow with using art as an evidence in studying the race???
Your question was answered already-- artwork can give you an idea as to how a people look like but should not be taken by itself when assessing the appearance of a people. Since art can and often is subjective and therefore not very accurate. Likewise, study of physical remains gives a much more accurate view minus however certain features, specifically soft tissue parts like lips and nose which bones cannot show you.
I think the best way is to use a combination of both physical remains complemented with artistic depictions.
quote:Here I would like to note..,There is an absolute diffrence between the concept of idealism in Egyptian Art and Greek Art..,the art in egypt was first of all symbolic which stand on the egyptian beliefs about death and relive much more than other fields..,and was not goverend by the acadmic rules to draw things as it is in real..,the idealism in egyptian art was care about cut every part in human body and put it in the best viewing for it.
in the Greek art the idealism was acadmic..,care for first by rules like [The Golden ratio,The ratios of autopsy for the human body,use the human body ratios as a genral rule for every kind of art included Architecture..etc]
so the human body was kind holy for the ancient greek and the greek artist was caring about showing it as it is in real.
what is a diffrent concept from idealism in egyptian art which was depend on symbolism more than caring of showing things as it is in real.
for example the color skin for 2 figures here is green in this pic..,can someone use it as an evidence that maybe the egyptians were aliens!!
And here is also a study talking about colors in egyptian painting Egyptian painting
LOL Obviously the green color is symbolic. You said it yourself, that the Egyptians sometimes used religious symbolism in their art. The thing is knowing what that symbolism is. Deities painted green are associated with the fertility of the land. The large seated in figure dressed in white is most likely the god Ausar (Osiris). Does this mean we should dismiss the more realistic brown color of the tiny mortal worshipper to the left of him?? Notice that even the uadjet eye giving offerings has arms in realistic dark brown color as well.
quote:Im just dont know about the rules of studying the race..,and wished to know simply what is the scientific conditions for using the art as an evidence for studying the race??
some copy and paste pictures from art as an evidence for the race..,so what is the rules for that in Ethnological Sciences?? or any person can depend on what he think and see it by his own eyes??..some say egyptians were black and others say they were not..and every side prove for his point by pasting pictures from art which mach his own think.
but what is the scientific rules for that in Ethnological Sciences?
Again, there is no such thing as 'race', but yes artwork can and does give clues as to how a peoples or individual persons looked like.
Posts: 26246 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
It just doesn't make any sense to say the Egyptians portrayed ideally portrayed themselves as black but were not black themselves!!
Printer-friendly view of this topic