Early Medieval Art

I have first chosen the piece, “Page with St. Matthew the Evangelist, Coronation Gospels” on page 442 in our textbook in comparison to “Page with St. Matthews the Evangelist, Ebbo Gospels” on page 443. The Ebbo Gospels piece is very different from the original piece. The Coronation Gospels piece is a very lifelike representation. The colors are dull and old looking, nothing too vibrant. The Ebbos Gospels piece is not natural looking at all. His face figure looks more cartoon like, along with a different hairstyle than the other piece. There is a lot more going on in this piece, details in the background give it more energy and also there are more specific parts of his clothing you can see. The background gives you a part of some history. The colors are vibrant and there’s more in the picture to look at. There is definitely more gold in this frame than the other. I personally like the more deviant picture; it seems more “alive”, although he seems more stressed, this piece definitely shows more emotion. Although it’s not naturalistic, it seems to bring out more liveliness. It’s interesting to me because the Byzantine icons have flat gold halos and in the Coronation Gospel picture, he has one and the other manipulated picture does not.

Secondly, I chose “Page with Christ Washing the Feet of His Disciples, Aachen Gospels of Otto |||” on page 451. This piece is very interesting because the colors are so ecstatic. The buildings behind Christ seem unreal because they are so manipulated and stylized. There is a lot of gold and vibrant colors shown in this piece compared to a similar piece called “Presentation Page with Abbess Hitda and St. Walpurga, Hitda Gospels” on page 450. In this picture the colors are dark and gloomy, but definitely more naturalistic. There’s not really a lot of energy in this picture. The Aagen Gospel picture seems more cheerful with bright colors. The detail is more embraced in their clothes, faces and the buildings. Their eyes are bigger then normal especially compared to the other piece. It’s very unnatural and stylized, also showing more colors than you would see in a naturalized piece. I do like the manipulated pieces better because they give you more to look at and they are more appealing to the eye. There are more excitable features.

Hercules & Caracalla

The portrait of head Caracalla (c. 217-230) from the Roman age is a very sacred piece. This portrait seems a lot similar to the portrait of an Elder (c. 80 BCE) and that piece was very important to the Romans because they valued age. I think the sculpture of head Caracalla represents wisdom and experience, just through the sense of this man’s eyes and the details of the expression of his face. I automatically think that he has gone through something in his life, to have such a fierce appearance. The expression on his face seems strong and proud. I feel like this sculpture carries itself that way because when other ancestors see this piece, they are proud to see one of their own with such gratification.

As for the Commodus as Hercules (c. 191-92 CE), he is not quite as fierce as Caracalla, but they do share some of the same qualities. What it seems to me, Hercules and Caracalla both seem like they’ve been through battle, war, or some sort of interrogation. They both seem well put, strong, and proud. One thing I noticed that is extremely different, are the eyes. Even though Hercules sculpture shows more detail, the eyes are what really make these pieces separate. Caracalla’s eyebrows seem more like he is angry or waiting for battle. Which in a sense is not a bad thing, it makes him seem robust and convincing. Hercules on the other hand, what really gives away the solid attitude is the lion hanging over his head. As I would assume, lion’s are a symbol of strength and threatening, maybe he’s using this lion head to show how strong he is, that he killed a lion. The claws wrapped around his chest are very interesting as well. He seems content, yet ready for anything. Even though his eyes don’t show anger or sadness, the lion really gives away the boldness of this sculpture. Also, at the bottom of the sculpture there is a headless woman taking a knee next to this man. I wonder why this woman is headless and why it’s there in the first place. My assumption is that this man was brave and she is admiring his courageousness. Even though the portrait of head Caracalla does not have any lions or women bowing down to him, his face just seems so daring and fearless. I think this ruler wants people to realize that he is fearless and he’s ready to take on anything. I believe he wants his people to feel safe and remember him as a brave emperor. As for the portrait of Hercules, I think he wants his people to feel proud and protected. Not as angry as Caracalla, but still fearless and impressive. Both of these emperors have a sense of honor throughout these sculptures. I think that it’s important for a ruler to seem intimidating, yet still honorable. What would an emperor be if he were weak?

The Parthenon Marbles

I think the Parthenon Marbles is very unique and has interesting features. The location of the Parthenon Marbles I find really odd and I don’t believe it should be in the British museum. It’s not where it originated and I think it should take part of its history where it belongs. Maybe even split some for the British and then the rest in Athens. But I really think it’s important that at least some of the Marbles be moved back to its original homeland. It would make a very interesting story if later on, the marbles were split into two different countries. It is said that the reason the Marble statues were moved is because they wanted to rescue them, but I don't think it's fair that they were moved to a completely different country.

         I believe the Greeks took pride in their work and for the British to take some of these characteristics away, I think it’s an insult to them. They shouldn’t be changed just to look beautiful, it’s about history and the meaning behind the piece. I think that it’s problematic that the British encourages aesthetics over historical context because it’s original value makes it that much more important.  Sometimes it’s about the deep meaning behind the pieces rather than on beauty. Lots of art pieces are not very beautiful but the meaning of them makes you want to appreciate them more. Having the Marbles in the British Museum would not have as much meaning as it would if it were back in Athens, Greece.

         I think that the Marbles should be moved back because Its such an important part of art history that it only makes sense for it to be in its original area. If the British are concerned with aesthetic art pieces, why don’t they re-new the Parthenon Marbles with modern technology and put the copy in the British Museum and return the Marbles back to their home.  

The Vase & The Fisherman

The first piece of art I looked at was the vase. It has a very smooth texture and it is very rounded. I definitely feel like this piece of art belongs to the Minoan civilization. It seems to have a very “bold” feel and its shape is very interesting. Just like the Harvester Rhyton, the vase tells a story of battle or warriors. The Mycenaens like to show brutality or war. The Mycenaean’s Vases are shaped wide at the top and small at the bottom just like this vase does. It is also a crater shaped, which the Mycenaean’s used for mixing water and wine. The crater form is very popular with the Mycenaean’s. It also compares to the interior of Tholos, because the tressed stone is smoothed down so much, just like the exterior and interior of the vase. The Mycenaean’s also painted their human figures until the Minoan’s would. Also, Mycenaean’s men are more cartoon-like structures, which these characters look like.

            The fisherman on the other hand does not look like something the Mycenaean’s would have made. The fisherman looks like the Minoan’s made because of the style used to make this man. Just like the Bull leaping fresco, c150-1450 BCE because the style and texture are very similar. The Minoan’s have a lot to do with strength and power, a lot of that is in their artwork, just like this piece. The Minoan’s had a lot to do with natural and being part of nature. They enjoyed the beauty of life and the world around them. The fisherman is part of everyday life and surviving. They have to fish to eat and it definitely represents a part of nature. The Minoans also have a very distinct relationship with the sea. That I feel is also another reason why the fisherman is so important because fish are apart of the sea. Most of the Minoan culture has fresco art influences throughout most of their art. The style of the way they create people is also very familiar in the fisherman. The detail from the “Flotilla” Fresco form Akrotiri, c 1650 BCE compares to the fisherman because of the marine life. The ocean is their lively hood and what they know best.

The Great Pyramids at Giza & Ancient Ziggurats

 

The Pyramids at Giza and the Ziggurats of the ancient near east monuments are very unique and beautiful in their own way. The Pyramids at Giza are located in Egypt during c. 2575-2450 BC. They have three pyramids known as Menkaure, Khafre, and the great pyramid Khufu. The Ziggurat at Magaiyir, Iraq, was built during c. 2,100-2,050 BCE and contained many different entrances around the pyramid. The Great Pyramids were much larger than the Ziggurats. The average height of the Ziggurats was about 150 feet and the pyramids averaged around 480 feet. Which is absolutely amazing because they are all man-made structures. The Ziggurats are also spread out across different countries such as Babylonia, Assyria, and Samaria. It is also known that about 25 of these were built.

Although these have similar qualities, they are also very different. They both appear to look like pyramid shapes but the ­­­­­surfaces, textile, and layout are slightly different. The Ziggurats are only made of one very large shape with other stacks of smaller rectangle shaped pyramids. The Ziggurats are made with flat surfaces on each layer, as well as the very top. They were also built higher up off the ground to be near the Gods. The Pyramids at Giza were made to a point, with smooth textures, looking sharp and very angular. The Great Pyramids were made up of limestone and had internal chambers and pathways all over. The Ziggurats were made up of baked brick and had no internal chambers, just a thick core made up of mud brick. The Ziggurats had so many entrances/exits to their pyramids for the priests to escape and be with the gods whenever they wanted. I thought that was very ingenious and unique, and somewhat personal.

         The Ziggurats were built for religious purposes and the Great Pyramids at Giza was supposedly built as chambers to protect their pharaoh’s tombs. I find that very interesting because each the Great Pyramids were each built for their pharaohs and leaders, and the ziggurats were built as a temple to be closer to their gods, to be closer to the sky. And that’s why they are built so high off the ground. I think that each of these reasons are cherished in their own way. I find that the Great Pyramids are fascinating because they have ascending pathways and descending pathways, which is amazing architecture for being so old. I also think its remarkable that these were all man-made structures and they are still standing to this day.The Ziggurats and the pyramids are so different in structure, but if you think about it, they were built for the purposes of the higher power and to cherish their gods just like we do today, with churches, mosques, etc.

 

The Good Shepherd Sculpture: Ancient Art

The Good Shepherd is a remarkable piece of early ancient history. It is an early Christian sculpture that also relates to the “The Good Shepherd” painting. I have chosen this piece because I find this sculpture to be very interesting and mysterious. When I first saw this piece it made me feel as if the man was at peace and content. I say this because of the way he seems to be standing, in a relaxed matter. The way he's holding the sheep by its legs seems like he it protecting it from any harm and will take care of it.

The composition of the piece is very organized. The three baby sheep around the man seem very close and intrigued by their surroundings. I really like that the sheep are laying so close to the man because its almost as if he is their protector. The detail in the sculpture is nice and realistic. It is easy to specify the coat of the sheep is soft and the man’s attire is baggy. The lines on his cloth make it look “flowy” and possibly worn. The stump and stick are a nice detail like they are outside. The way he is standing and holding on to the stick makes me feel like they’ve been walking for a long time and are exhausted. Or perhaps he comes off as confident and challenging.

The sculpture is made of marble, which is a smooth and gentle texture kind of like the piece represents. I think this texture works well with the sculpture because it shows so much detail. The color and texture work well together. The warm colors and smooth details make it easy to look at. The marble makes me think of something that is delicate, yet strong. I think the man holding the sheep treasures the sheep on its back like it is something fragile. The sheep on his back makes me wonder why he’s carrying this animal that way. “The Good Shepherd” name alone makes me wonder what makes this shepherd so “good”. My theory is when I look at this sculpture I think of how this shepherd would do anything just for his sheep, even carry a “weak” or in pain sheep. I say the animal is weak because of the way its positioned on his shoulders like he is frail and cannot walk anymore. Then I look at the younger sheep lying by his feet and I think, maybe the mother is dying. The man is holding the sheep with one hand, which gives off the energy that he is strong.

This piece is three dimensional and only 19 3/4 x 10 1/16 x 6 1/4 inches. It is small with good equal proportion. The man is standing large but what it seems like, he is resting by the stance of his leg and the stick. The dimensions give the piece a nice contrast with shadows. Everything is symmetrical and easy to identify. The angles are not too dramatic but define each figure with just enough detail. The sculpture is a fairly light color and the shadows help separate the figures. It seems the man is looking away from the viewer, which could easily give off mystery because it is unknown why he is looking in a different direction. It also makes me wonder why the other figures are looking in the same direction. The artistic style definitely makes this sculpture seem as if it were ancient because of the worn marks. Some parts are not as smooth as the others, probably due to how old it is. The sculpture is all the same material and color. The visual interest in this piece is comforting and gives off an innocence feel. This artistic style is an ancient piece also because of the clothes he is wearing. All of the figures are close together and connected. The atmosphere of this piece feels innocent and mysterious.