posted
People like Amr1 think that 'all' Kemetian art were 'symbolic', while at the same time, contradicting themselves with the notion that the "yellow" coloration of Women in paintings is actually due to their being indoors. The rational here is that, these women weren't exposed to the heat, and hence, were able to retain their 'light' skin tone, while their male mates were still 'brown' in tone. Funny thing here, is that the a couple may be shown in brown and yellow tones in the same setting and yet, the male is somehow supposed to be sun-burnt.
Separating Symbolic painting from efforts to capture 'realistic' situations:
There are paintings indeed that show women uniformly in "yellow" tones, while men uniformly in their conventional "brown" tones. It becomes apparent that these are mainly symbolic. However, there are artworks that reflect the artist's intention to capture 'realistic' situations. For instance, when one looks at depictions of Kemetians along with foreigners, the artists often attempt to capture what they consider unique qualities of each group, whether it be facial hair, wig or hair style, dress codes, and facial features. Here again, in 'most' depictions, Kemetians are depicted in the conventional 'brown' tone.
Now, deity and royalty are at times depicted in unconventional tones like blue. It doesn't exactly take a genuis to figure out the 'symbolic' nature of this expression. It has nothing to do with the person being 'indoors' or 'outdoors'.
Then you have depictions, showing the commoners working or engaged in some activity(s). When the depictions show women and men in the same tones, and in varying degrees, again, it is an indicator of the artist's attempt at expressing 'realistic' imagery. Good examples of this can be seen particularly in figurines, like this:
All depictions, show women and men working both 'indoors' and 'outdoors'.
*As a courtesy, oversized pictures are best left as links. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
Notice how these soldiers are depicted in different heights, each with their own unique faces and even their shields have their own unique designs. Again, nothing more than the artist’s intent in depicting a ‘realistic’ image. Above that picture, you have people on a boat in varying ‘brown’ skin tones, not to mention heights. Same thing below, people being depicted in varying skin tones, not to mention dress styles, and facial features.
Courtesy of the Museo Civico Archeologico
Courtesy of the Museo Civico Archeologico
Notice the distinct features of these Upper Nubians. Nubians features and tones varied from region to region. The lower Nubians were usually portrayed with more or less the same features as the Kemetians, as exemplified from Old Kingdom depictions. Later on, as one goes into the Middle and New Kingdoms, more variations appear among the Nubians, which coincides with the extensions of Kemetian dealings with Nubians further up the Nile. The Kemetians were careful observers and they depicted their observations accordingly. Yet there are folks, like Amr1, who think they can fool others into believing that the Kemetians and Asiatics were one and the same, when the Kemetians made quite clear, that the opposite was true! That issue was exemplified here: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001778.htmlPosts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
An exchange that started out sarcastically, nonetheless was turned into a more enlightening discourse. Hence, I hereby re-present the following, as it seems relevant to this topic, imo:
Ceelgabo_11 posts:
The good old days
I respond with:
^^Nice pic of war captives.
Ps - Matter of fact, here is a Kushite/"Nubian", with his enemies:
As did Rameses II:
...happens in war, to have captives.
Ceelgabo_11 then posts:
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: ^^Nice pic of war captives.
Fircoons Bantu cattle....
I respond with:
Is this from a "real" scholarly source, or just stupidity?
Ceelgabo_11 replies:
Of course real schoolar source...
My feedback to the above, was:
Well then, produce the primary Kemetic text that states these folks in the depictions are anything but war captives, and that they are not indigenous Nile Valley folks + that they spoke a Bantu family language.
In the meantime, other depictions from the same "Touregypt.net" link that you retrieved that image of captives:
Yonis then weighs in:
ceelgabo, those captives by Egyptians are not bantu, the bantu migration had not started yet during that time, they were most likely nilo-saharans. Supercar is right they were the builders of kush (and also AMR1's and other northern sudanese ancestors who were dinka type) and consequently they were among the few civilized people in the world during that period, they eventually ruled over the Egyptians anyways.
On a second note, how do they come to conclusion that these captives are the kushites, is it because of the facial features, or are there writings beneath those depictions that state this?
My feedback to the above, was:
quote:Originally posted by Yonis:
On a second note, how do they come to conclusion that these captives are the kushites, is it because of the facial features, or are there writings beneath those depictions that state this?
Well, what are the odds of these folks being outside of the Nile Valley? The Kemetians haven't ventured much deep into sub-Saharan Africa, but they have reached a generalized region of what they described as "pwanit" or better known as "Punt".
Ps:
^^It would appear that Kemetians look not much different from their "Nubian" counterparts, save for garments.
Yonis again:
Well every one in the nile valley couldn't possibly be the kushites, so what if these captives were people who lived in the nile valley but were also the enemies of the kushites? I mean all these are just speculations where facial features determine who these people are. What if they also were Egyptians but some upper Egyptian kind who rebelled against lower Egyptians. There are thousands of scenarious that can be constructed if no additional information is given and features is the only source to follow.
Finally, my response to the above:
quote:Originally posted by Yonis:
Well every one in the nile valley couldn't possibly be the kushites, so what if these captives were people who lived in the nile valley but were also the enemies of the kushites?
Cannot be certain, unless primary text indicates so, but they are highly likely Upper Nile Valley groups, more easily accessible to Kemetians.
quote:Yonis:
I mean all these are just speculations where facial features determine who these people are.
My line of reasoning follows more than mere speculations. See my earlier post. And no, facial features has nothing to do with it.
quote:Yonis:
What if they also were Egyptians but some upper Egyptian kind who rebelled against lower Egyptians.
I highly doubt it, because Egyptians had conventional styles for Egyptians, whereby in wall paintings all Egyptian males are similar in form, as do their female counterparts, even if in reality the Egyptians themselves were more physically diverse. See for yourself in every wall painting. See, the example I just posted above.
quote:Yonis:
There are thousands of scenarious that can be constructed if no additional information is given and features is the only source to follow to draw conclusions.
posted
Most women in ancient Egypt usually worked outdoor on rooftops doing household chores,so its doubtful women just stayed indoors all day.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
And the answer was that the woman is placed before the man.
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
And the answer was that the woman is placed before the man.
That's right; the conventional presentation, as shown in the Mdu Ntr below, is to have the male placed ahead of the female figure, facing the same direction...
Here are miscellaneous more detailed artistic examples that follow this conventional presentation...
Ausar of the Nederworld/underworld accompanied by Auset and Nebt Het; also look at details of the top portion of the pic., in what appears to be Heru followed by the king (Pharaoh), and accompanying figures [the green looking persons are likely associated with deity, or else, are symbolic of eternity of some sort] which include males and females.
King tut and wife.
Left to right: Akhenaten and Nefertiti; A noble accomodated by his wife.
Notes for the two Sennefer paintings, from left to right:
Sennefer and his wife paying respect to Ausar and Anpu (Anubis) > "Offering the king gives to Osiris, Lord of Eternity, so that he might provide bread and beer, meat and every good and pure thing for the ka of Sennefer purified." - courtesy of touregypt.net,
and
"On the left front wall we discover a scene representing Sennefer and his wife seated on high backed chairs in a conventional attitude. Meryt's hair is tied with a band that is adorned with a large lotus flower. After that comes a scene in which the two are standing while they prepare to "appear in broad daylight" so they may see the solar disk in its daily journey, after which they symbolically leave from the entrance of the burial chamber." - courtesy of touregypt.net
quote:Originally posted by Myra Wysinger:
From the artist point of view it illustrates that Kemet wasn't a sexist society.
.
Are you talking about the artist of the earlier picture presented with the question, or Kemetians themselves?
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: Are you talking about the artist of the earlier picture presented with the question, or Kemetians themselves. At any rate, it's true that the Kemetian society was not "sexist", as displayed here before: An ancient society of social superlatives
ditto
Thanks for the link.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Detail of a wall painting from the Theban tomb of Rekhmire an Egyptian official, showing an Egyptian scribe recording deliveries of Nubian products shortly after Egypt's conquest of Nubia. Visible are ebony logs, ivory tusks, baskets of ostrich eggs and gold ingots, ostrich feathers, leopard skins, resins, tamarind nuts, aromatic herbs - even a monkey. Reign of King Thutmose III (about 1479-1425 BCE).
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
The people who ran this website used to have a depiction of the captives but I guess they took it down. You migfht be able to inquire more from the following people.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Does anyone know if this relief was actually found painted the way it is shown here?
I don't know, but of course much of the paint was lost since the millennia it was first painted
Posts: 26285 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep I had only seen the uncolored relief and I found suspicious that Southerners are depicted with an uniform brown tone and an unusual uniformly yellow dress as well as Kemetians being depicted in an unusual and uniform pink tone.
-------------------- Federico Da Montefeltro Posts: 203 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
And I like the idea of paying attention to the works portraying varying hues,
^Though the above depicted millitary men may not appear to vary all that much in complection, if you look at their faces/ bodies, there is clearly some variation.
Plus they're all painted in what seems to be the normal colour of an ancient Kemetian in paintings:
Brown.
Just a few pieces that exemplify this "norm" IMO:
**
Stylistic as it may seem, and small as it [the pic] is, the below contains a significant degree of physical difference between the people depicted:
I've once seen someone post a larger pic, would be much apreciated if anyone who has seen it could post it (or similarly pic above it).
Now as for this next pic, for some reason it's one of my favorites but I have a question for the experts in general on the AE:
I know Anubis isn't akin to a 'demon' per se (and that in general in AE spiritual concepts, we don't really see anything like Western demons other than dieties of lesser potency and thus importance)
but nevertheless does this above pic remind anyone of the modern concept of conscience instigators?
quote:Originally posted by Pax Dahomensis: Yep I had only seen the uncolored relief and I found suspicious that Southerners are depicted with an uniform brown tone and an unusual uniformly yellow dress as well as Kemetians being depicted in an unusual and uniform pink tone.
^^Well to me initially it was surprising, but then.. I've never thought about what the points you just brought up.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box): This is a really nice thread.
And I like the idea of paying attention to the works portraying varying hues,
^Though the above depicted millitary men may not appear to vary all that much in complection, if you look at their faces/ bodies, there is clearly some variation.
Plus they're all painted in what seems to be the normal colour of an ancient Kemetian in paintings:
Brown.
Just a few pieces that exemplify this "norm" IMO:
**
Stylistic as it may seem, and small as it [the pic] is, the below contains a significant degree of physical difference between the people depicted:
I've once seen someone post a larger pic, would be much apreciated if anyone who has seen it could post it (or similarly pic above it).
Now as for this next pic, for some reason it's one of my favorites but I have a question for the experts in general on the AE:
I know Anubis isn't akin to a 'demon' per se (and that in general in AE spiritual concepts, we don't really see anything like Western demons other than dieties of lesser potency and thus importance)
but nevertheless does this above pic remind anyone of the modern concept of conscience instigators?
(:
Yes the idea of balance between Horus and Set was found in Egypt long ago. There are statues showing horus and set on each side of the king showing clearly that they had a concept of balance between two natures.
I have some images somewhere showing the concept, if I can find them.
Here it is, a statue of Ramses III from the Cairo Museum shown between Horus and Set:
Similar images go as far back as the Middle Kingdom, where there is an image of the king, actually two images of the king, sitting under two canopies, the canopies are back to back, along with the mummyform image of the king, one receiving power from the standard of horus and the other from set. Taken together the whole scene, especially the two canopies look like a balance.
I have posted half of it here somewhere.
Here is the image, also from the Cairo museum, this time showing Senwosret I in his jubilee receiving power from Horus and Set. As you can see the overall composition reflects balance as the king of Upper and Lower Egypt. In the image you see set, as a standard for Upper Egypt, offering power to the King with the crown of Upper Egypt. On the other side, in the part not visible, you see Horus offering power to the King wearing the crown of Lower Egypt in the same way.
quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box): This is a really nice thread.
And I like the idea of paying attention to the works portraying varying hues,
^Though the above depicted millitary men may not appear to vary all that much in complection, if you look at their faces/ bodies, there is clearly some variation.
Plus they're all painted in what seems to be the normal colour of an ancient Kemetian in paintings:
Brown.
Just a few pieces that exemplify this "norm" IMO:
**
Stylistic as it may seem, and small as it [the pic] is, the below contains a significant degree of physical difference between the people depicted:
I've once seen someone post a larger pic, would be much apreciated if anyone who has seen it could post it (or similarly pic above it).
Now as for this next pic, for some reason it's one of my favorites but I have a question for the experts in general on the AE:
I know Anubis isn't akin to a 'demon' per se (and that in general in AE spiritual concepts, we don't really see anything like Western demons other than dieties of lesser potency and thus importance)
but nevertheless does this above pic remind anyone of the modern concept of conscience instigators?
(:
It is really a good question as to why most people cant accept the fact that Egypt was an indiginous and African BLACK AFRICAN society, started and maintained by Indiginous Black Africans until the 25th dynasty.
I laugh when I see the neaderthal rednecks of Stormfront claim Egypt was White let alone nordic then have the never to post pictures of supposed blond Egyptians...which are wither shaved heads, reactions to embalming methods, result of burials, or unpainted sculptures. LOL.
Posts: 8805 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Yeah, the 'Nordic Egypt' is a complete joke!
That said, the 'non-African' Kemet is a joke as well.
(When considering actual evidence of prehistoric population movements, genetics, and language etc.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic