Day 31 - Two coffins
March 14, 2018
This study gallery (130) contains literally thousands of objects dating from various points in the first millennium B.C.E. It is astonishing to think about a single room in a museum that would contain an assortment of objects from the Americas, say --or anyplace, really -- spannng a comparable length of time.
There are hundreds of amulets, some well under an inch in size; I especially like the ones of monkeys, but a couple of lioness goddesses also catch my eye. There are statuettes galore (including one of a jackal -- or is it a dog? -- that has such sleek lines it looks positively modern), necklaces and other pieces of jewelry, and both shards and papyri with hieratic writing on them rather than hieroglyphs. (Yes, time is passing.) Also ceramic and alabaster jars, linens used for mummy wrappings, and many other things.
Three large glass cases contain inner and outer coffins, and it's two of these outer coffins that I want to write about, more for their sociological significance than for their artistic value, although they are not devoid of the latter, and that value contributes to the sociological interest. One, which dates from the Late Dynastic Period, 656-332 B.C.E., is human in shape (why does the caption say "anthropoid," which makes it sound as if it were built for an ape?), and has the head of a man whose beard is as long as the rest of the head. The ears, nose, and mouth are clearly modeled, the other features less so. The coffin is made of wood and, unlike the others in the room, is undecorated. It is, however, painted white, and the caption says that this may have been done to imitate limestone, which was more expensive, and therefore more valuable ,than mere wood.
The second coffin, also of wood, comes from an earlier period, the 21st dynasty (about 1085-945 B.C.E.) It was also made for a man, I would guess from the headdress. In contrast, to the previous coffin it is elaborately painted, with small red and blue squares to imitate a breastplate and detailed hieroglyphs and other designs on the "shroud." Moreover, the caption says that a shiny varnish was applied over the wood to give the red and blue raised circles on the shroud the appearance of jewels. But what makes it particularly interesting is that, according to the caption, it was not made for a particular individual but rather, produced for general sale. Thus, while the face has no distinctive features, the whole is meant to be expensive-looking.
There are hundreds of amulets, some well under an inch in size; I especially like the ones of monkeys, but a couple of lioness goddesses also catch my eye. There are statuettes galore (including one of a jackal -- or is it a dog? -- that has such sleek lines it looks positively modern), necklaces and other pieces of jewelry, and both shards and papyri with hieratic writing on them rather than hieroglyphs. (Yes, time is passing.) Also ceramic and alabaster jars, linens used for mummy wrappings, and many other things.
Three large glass cases contain inner and outer coffins, and it's two of these outer coffins that I want to write about, more for their sociological significance than for their artistic value, although they are not devoid of the latter, and that value contributes to the sociological interest. One, which dates from the Late Dynastic Period, 656-332 B.C.E., is human in shape (why does the caption say "anthropoid," which makes it sound as if it were built for an ape?), and has the head of a man whose beard is as long as the rest of the head. The ears, nose, and mouth are clearly modeled, the other features less so. The coffin is made of wood and, unlike the others in the room, is undecorated. It is, however, painted white, and the caption says that this may have been done to imitate limestone, which was more expensive, and therefore more valuable ,than mere wood.
The second coffin, also of wood, comes from an earlier period, the 21st dynasty (about 1085-945 B.C.E.) It was also made for a man, I would guess from the headdress. In contrast, to the previous coffin it is elaborately painted, with small red and blue squares to imitate a breastplate and detailed hieroglyphs and other designs on the "shroud." Moreover, the caption says that a shiny varnish was applied over the wood to give the red and blue raised circles on the shroud the appearance of jewels. But what makes it particularly interesting is that, according to the caption, it was not made for a particular individual but rather, produced for general sale. Thus, while the face has no distinctive features, the whole is meant to be expensive-looking.
But whom were these more expensive-looking coffins meant to impress? Did people believe the gods would look down and think, "This man was a success in his life"? Would that have advanced his cause in the underworld (sort of like Calvin's preaching that material wealth was a sign of election)? Or was it meant to gratify the purchaser, whether that buyer was the coffin's prospective tenant, planning ahead for his demise, or the decedent's heirs, wishing to give their relative the best that their money could buy? I've been wondering about the burial practices of people who weren't pharaohs or their high officials, and these coffins answer my questions, at least in part. They point to a degree of status-consciousness among more ordinary Egyptians, at least those who were reasonably well off. And they also remind me of our own funerary practices, whereby funeral directors encourage the purchase of a mahogany coffin lined with silk to hold the body of the loved one. I guess it makes for a nice display for the few hours or days that the coffin is above the ground.
I wonder whether Jewish burial customs developed in contradistinction to those of the surrounding cultures. (Have I written this before? It sounds awfully familiar!) In any event, I'll be happy to be buried in a pine box. Status-consciousness in life feels more or less inescapable, but giving it up in death is a pleasant thought.
later
I realize that material wealth would not have influenced the election-or-damnation decision of Calvin's God. Rather, it would only have been a signal to the surrounding society of a person's election while he was still alive.
Comments
Post a Comment