Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(42)
-
▼
January
(17)
- 7,000 year old ruins found...
- Question #5, January 26 Ancient Near Eastern
- Question #4, January 26 Ancient Near Eastern
- Question #3, January 26 Ancient Near Eastern
- Question #2, January 26 Ancient Near Eastern
- Question #1, January 26 Ancient Near Eastern
- STUDY GUIDE: Ancient Near East
- Question #5, January 19 Egyptian
- Question #4, January 19 Egyptian
- Question #3, January 19 Egyptian
- Question #2, January 19 Egyptian
- Question #1, January 19 Egyptian
- Question #5, January 12 Prehistoric
- Question #4, January 12 Prehistoric
- Question #3, January 12 Prehistoric
- Question #2, January 12 Prehistoric
- Question #1, January 12 Prehistoric
-
▼
January
(17)
7 comments:
It had been thought that the palette of King Narmer either depicted the unification of Lower Egypt by the king of Upper Egypt. OR represents the events of the year in which the object was dedicated to the temple. The images on this and other pre-dynastic palettes could also mean establishing the king as a visual metaphor of the conquering hunter, caught in the moment of delivering a mortal blow to his enemies.
Are we supposed to write these in APA?
The palette of King Narmer was started out to glorify the king. The palette was given to the king by his father that represented the unification of lower and upper Egypt. The palette reveals the meaning of hierarchy of Egyptian life. It was used to record historical events. The bigger image is the king wearing a white hat that was said represents Upper Egypt. The king is holding a mace ready to smash the poor man head in. The figures at the top represent the gods that he worships. the people on the bottom represents his slaves.
Many representations of the same depictions are found. Narmer conquering men on a battlefield, Horus picking up a head, Narmer inspecting headless bodies, and a bull trampling an enemy and structure are all depicted on the Narmer Palette and all represent the same thing: the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt.
The Palette of King Narmer is basically a palette of the kings power, a nice big ego trip for him. So he can see that he is powerful.
So, pretty much historians really don’t know what this actually meant to portray? As I was researching I discovered that there are multiple ways this particular ancient history art piece has been perceived. I found a website that laid it all out, short and sweet. I have copied the text and added the link if you are interested in a more descriptive explanation, personally, I was having difficulties organizing my answer. So, I figured, this is blog to share info, not a research paper. So, I’m sharing. Enjoy!
1. military symbol
2. wearing the crown of Upper Egypt
3. the Red Crown with Lower Egypt
4. important military campaign waged by Narmer against a marshy area
5. the foundation of a region indicated by the signs ship-harpoon-falcon
Meaning
The overall military symbolism on the palette is clear. Using different types of imagery, the king is shown again and again as victorious over his enemies. He is shown striking down a kneeling enemy, whilst stepping on the bodies of some other foes on the palette's back. On the front of the palette, he is represented as a human overlooking the decapitated corpses of his foes or as a bull vigorously trampling an enemy and breaking down the walls of a city or a fortress.
The fact that the king is represented on one side wearing the crown of Upper Egypt, the region from whence he came, and on the other side the crown of Lower Egypt is very often seen as proof that the Upper-Egyptian Narmer was the one who successfully conquered Lower Egypt or part thereof.
The association of the Red Crown with Lower Egypt can not be doubted for later periods of the Ancient Egyptian history, but this association may not have been made during or before the Early Dynastic Period. Indeed, a pottery fragment dated several generations before Narmer and found in Upper Egypt already bears the representation of the Red Crown. It is thus possible that the Red Crown indicated a different aspect of royalty than the White Crown and did not, at that time, have any geographical meaning at all. That Narmer is represented wearing the Red Crown would, in this case, not prove that he conquered or ruled the whole of Lower Egypt.
But even despite the doubt concerning the meaning of the representation of the Red Crown, it still is clear that the decoration on the palette refers to an important military campaign waged by Narmer against a marshy area. Three names of cities or fortresses that were overthrown during this campaign are mentioned and even though we do not know which places these names refer to, they were part of the conquered marsh lands. The fact that their names and the name of a fallen enemy are mentioned on the palette points to the great importance Narmer attached to this conquest.
The palette also refers to the foundation of a region indicated by the signs ship-harpoon-falcon, a group of signs that at least in later times would be used to denote the 7th Lower Egyptian province located in the eastern Nile Delta. If this group of signs indeed can be interpreted as the founding of a province in the eastern Nile Delta then the Narmer Palette can still be viewed as a historical document referring to the conquest of the eastern part of Lower Egypt.
http://www.ancient-egypt.org/index.html
Post a Comment