Egyptian Art in the Age of the Pyramids by James P. Allen

Egyptian Art in the Age of the Pyramids Reviews

• 
  Marc

  Catalog of an ambitious exhibition that was shown successively in Paris, New York and Toronto in 1999 and 2000. It was a real success and that is not surprising: the art of Ancient Egypt appeals to the imagination of the public. This book (and the exhibition) is limited to the art of the Old Kingdom, roughly the period 2600-2200 BCE, and focuses not only on the pyramids and tombs, but especially on sculptures and reliefs. And the Ancient Egyptians appear to have already achieved astonishing mastery in this. Not only does the book offer excellent introductory articles, but the catalog itself is - apart from the enormous number of works of art - also worthwhile because of the analysis offered of each work of art itself. This may be a bit too detailed for the layman, but for the enthusiast it is a delight!
  A critical side note in my History account on Goodreads:
  https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
  By the way, this book is downloadable (free) on the site of the MET.
• 
  Sense of History

  A stunning book (see my review in my general account,
  here). But here I want to offer a general critical comment about our fascination with Ancient Egyptian culture. The most recent and in-depth synthesis of Ancient Egyptian history, in 3 parts, by John Romer (
  A History of Ancient Egypt: From the First Farmers to the Great Pyramid,
  A History of Ancient Egypt, Volume 2: From the Great Pyramid to the Fall of the Middle Kingdom,
  A History of Ancient Egypt, Volume 3: From the Shepherd Kings to the End of the Theban Monarchy) argues that the culture of the Nile Valley essentially was a visual culture, much more so than others of the Ancient Near East. In other words, the buildings, sculptures and murals themselves express everything there is to say about Nile Valley culture. It is an attractive view, because it is indeed striking how much this culture produced what we now call 'works of art', and how spectacularly high the technical and artistic level was, even in the earliest period of the Old Kingdom (ca 2600-ca 2200 bce), which is the subject of this book. In popular studies this often results in comparative descriptions such as 'the first peak of human civilization', 'an original culture that cannot be compared with anything', etc.
  
  As an historian I have to add a critical note here. Of course, the visual aspect cannot be ignored, I am not going to haggle on that. But Ancient Egyptian culture differs from other Near Eastern cultures (and by extension from early cultures on other continents) in that it pre-eminently used stone as a medium, both in architecture and in the visual arts. And, of course, stone is much less perishable than wood, textiles, papyrus or other mediums. I think we should factor this into our comparative equations. Could it be that other cultures have used such ephemeral materials much more than the Ancient Egyptians? And could it be that as a result much less 'art' from those other cultures has been preserved? So, could it be that – as a consequence - it only seems that the technical and artistic level of these other cultures was lower? I deliberately formulate this in the form of questions, because I know how difficult it is to make firm, let alone definitive, statements about that earliest period of human history. But perhaps it would behoove archaeologists and art historians to take these relativizing questions into account before venturing into jubilant comparative statements. Once again, this does not detract from the astonishing technical and artistic prowess of Ancient Egypt, as this book clearly shows.
• 
  emanumela

  Ponderoso catalogo della mostra sull’antico regno tenutasi al Met. Questa mostra è stata un collettore di moltissimi reperti giunti da numerosi musei del mondo ed è fondamentale per avere una visione definitiva delle prime sei dinastie. Testi esaustivi e immagini stupende.