Ancient Egyptian Art: Difference between revisions
From WikiDemocracy
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 214: | Line 214: | ||
[https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0752/11/3/59 by Jennifer Miyuki Babcock 1/4/22 MDPI] | [https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0752/11/3/59 by Jennifer Miyuki Babcock 1/4/22 MDPI] | ||
Because of a long-standing bias toward examining human representation in Egyptian art, scholars have overlooked many details of how wild animals are rendered, at least until recently. Usually, the stylistic differences between animals and humans in ancient Egyptian art are emphasized to support the argument that animals and their environs encapsulate ancient Egyptian ideas of “chaos”, while humans and their cultivated world encapsulate “order”. | Because of a long-standing bias toward examining human representation in Egyptian art, scholars have overlooked many details of how wild animals are rendered, at least until recently. Usually, the stylistic differences between animals and humans in ancient Egyptian art are emphasized to support the argument that animals and their environs encapsulate ancient Egyptian ideas of “chaos”, while humans and their cultivated world encapsulate “order”. | ||
=====Mathematical bases of ancient Egyptian architecture and graphic art | |||
Author links open overlay panel===== | |||
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0315086085900023 by Gay Robins, Charles C.D Shute ScienceDirect] | |||
In ancient Egyptian buildings, such as pyramids and pylons with inclined walls, the inclination was contrived to give a horizontal displacement measured in palms, half-palms or quarter-palms for a drop of one royal cubit of seven palms. The inclination of the edges between adjacent walls was not relevant to the design. Evidence is presented suggesting that in two-dimensional art the obliquity of slanting lines may have been determined by a similar system, but with a drop of six units instead of seven. | |||
