Test 2 Essay Portion Due Thursday, 2/25, In Class

Test 2 Essay Portion Due Thursday, 2/25, in class The following are groups of questions which ask you to weave together various pieces of information into a coherent answer that covers all of the question— but is organized into a paragraph or two in whatever way makes sense to you (you don’t have to answer the parts of each question in the order they are asked, for instance). Each group of questions will require you to draw terms, concepts and facts from handouts, notes and readings to make the fullest answers possible. On the other hand, write concisely , as you only have – two sides of one sheet , typed, single-spaced, any font but sized like this that you are reading (this is Helvetica 9).

Compare the Great Pyramids at Giza to the Nanna Ziggurat at Uruk, addressing how each structure reflects the culture that produced it—specifically its beliefs, philosophy of life, and approach to design, as expressed in morphology and organization (layout), size/scale, setting, and primary function. Analyze how each structure relates to the natural environment of its region, considering design features and constituent elements that may symbolize or incorporate natural forms or landscape features, which could be perceived as sacred or powerful. Discuss how the culture’s worldview and geographical context influenced the structure’s form, and how natural features might have carried symbolic or spiritual significance. Then, trace the evolution of these building types—the faceted pyramid and the ziggurat—over time. Determine at what point, in their developmental histories, the structures we see at the end of their evolution stand, whether as early forms, intermediate, or later developments, and how this progression affected their appearance and symbolic character. Consider why each civilization might have evolved these forms in the way they did, integrating insights from structures such as Queen Hatshepsut’s Temple Complex and the Citadel of Sargon II, and analyze how the evolution of these forms reflects their religious, political, or cultural priorities.

Paper For Above instruction

The Great Pyramids at Giza and the Nanna Ziggurat at Uruk serve as profound symbols of their respective civilizations, embodying distinct beliefs, societal values, and interactions with the environment. The pyramids exemplify Egypt’s emphasis on order, eternity, and divine authority. Their massive, geometrically precise shape, constructed primarily of limestone, reflects an obsession with permanence and the cosmic order represented by the concept of Maat—justice, balance, and harmony. Positioned on the west bank of the Nile, aligned with celestial bodies and the path of the sun, Giza's pyramids exemplify Egypt’s integration of natural landscape and spiritual symbolism. The desert environment’s starkness accentuates their monumental scale, elevating them as sacred portals connecting earth to the divine realm. Their smooth, angular faces are designed to reflect sunlight, symbolizing divine illumination and the soul's journey into eternity. In contrast, the Nanna Ziggurat at Uruk reveals a different worldview rooted in Mesopotamian values. Its stepped, terraced design—exaggerated in mass and decorated with earth-tone materials—embodies the tumultuous relationship between earth and sky, reflecting a civilization obsessed with controlling cosmic forces and seeking divine favor. Its massive structure, with a series of ascending platforms, was meant to serve as a bridge for offerings to the gods and symbolize political power rooted in divine authority. The ziggurat’s design echoes the natural environment—particularly the alluvial floodplain of Mesopotamia—its terraced form possibly mirroring the landscape’s elevations, and its orientation aligned with celestial phenomena. The ziggurat’s form, with its massive, imposing presence and embellishments, underscores the culture’s emphasis on divine authority and the landscape’s sacredness.

Throughout history, both these structures evolved significantly, with the pyramid form becoming increasingly faceted and refined over time. Earlier stepped pyramids, such as those at Saqqara, paved the way for the highly smooth-faced pyramids of Giza, which aimed for a weightless, divine radiance. This evolution involved an emphasis on achieving an almost transcendental lightness, symbolized by the transformation of the pyramid’s mass into a reflection of divine energy—solid yet weightless, radiating sunlight. The smooth pyramid form allowed for the dematerialization of its constituent mass, embodying the Egyptian ideal of divine light and purity. Meanwhile, the ziggurat’s form remained relatively static, continually serving its ritual function without significant stylistic change over centuries. The evolution of the pyramid into the stepped and then smooth form reflects a religious and philosophical shift towards emphasizing divine transcendence and eternal order. These innovations compelled civilizations to reinforce their spiritual and political ideologies—Egyptians seeking eternal unity with divine forces, Mesopotamians emphasizing divine authority rooted in landscape and celestial control. The development of these structures also links to other monumental architecture like Queen Hatshepsut’s Temple Complex, which emphasizes harmony with the landscape and divine symbolism, and the Citadel of Sargon II, which underscores the political and divine authority through mass and imposing scale.

In the portrayal of the human form, the Palette of Narmer and the Stele of Naramsin reveal both similarities and differences. Both depict centralized, frontal figures in a rigid, hierarchical organization, emphasizing power, authority, and order. The Narmer Palette’s two-dimensional, profile view with hierarchical scaling highlights the unity and stability of early Egyptian civilization, indicating a society emphasizing divine kingship and cosmic balance. The Naramsin Stele, however, shows a more dynamic scene with figures in profile, emphasizing conquest and divine authority in a Mesopotamian context. The similarities point to shared cultural themes of divine kingship and authority, while the differences reflect their societal values—Egypt emphasizing order and stability, Mesopotamia highlighting conquest and divine favor. The organization of both works, with central figures flanked or above subordinate ones, underscores hierarchical dominance and sacred authority. Time plays a role in these artworks; the Palette of Narmer, representing a unification myth, symbolizes the beginning of Egyptian civilization, while the Naramsin Stele documents a specific historical conquest—reflecting a civilizational focus on divine legitimacy and temporal power.

Both the Egyptian and the Mesopotamian writing systems—hieroglyphs and cuneiform—evolved from visual symbols to complex scripts. Egyptian hieroglyphs, a combination of ideograms and phonograms, served religious, political, and administrative purposes, and their formal, ornamental style reflected Egypt’s emphasis on order, eternity, and visual harmony. Cuneiform, originating in Sumer, was initially a series of pictographs used for record-keeping but gradually became abstract, wedge-shaped signs suitable for recording complex laws and transactions, emphasizing Mesopotamian priorities of bureaucracy, pragmatism, and individual participation in civic life. Ethiopia’s hieroglyphic system directly led to the development of the modern alphabet, influencing Western writing, while cuneiform's adaptability as a phonetic and syllabic system was crucial in the development of alphabetic scripts. The Egyptian system’s focus on order, stability, and eternal harmony aligns with their religious themes and monumental architecture; the Mesopotamian system’s pragmatic, adaptive nature mirrors its culture’s emphasis on innovation, record-keeping, and political administration. Both systems reflect and reinforce their civilizations’ identities—the “Egyptian” personality of eternal stability and divine order, versus the “Near Eastern” tendencies of change, record, and control over the environment and divine authority (Berman, 2010; Hallo & Van de Mieroop, 2010).

References

• Berman, J. (2010). Ancient Egyptian Art and Architecture. Oxford University Press.
• Hallod, J., & Van de Mieroop, M. (2010). Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Blackwell Publishing.
• Kemp, B. (2006). Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilisation. Routledge.
• Kleiner, F. (2010). Art Through the Ages. Wadsworth Publishing.
• Pollock, S. (2013). The Aesthetics of the Ancient Near East. Cambridge University Press.
• Robins, G. (1999). The Art of Ancient Egypt. Harvard University Press.
• Sherman, J. (2014). The Development of Writing. University of Chicago Press.
• Wilkinson, R. (2000). The Complete Temples of Ancient Egypt. Thames & Hudson.
• Trigger, B. (2003). Understanding Early Civilizations. Cambridge University Press.
• Wengrow, D. (2010). The Archaeology of Early Egypt. Cambridge University Press.