Statue of Hatshepsut and the Statue of Khafre
Abstract
In this paper, we highlight on the distinctive features of the Statues of Hatshepsut and Khafre. Throughout the discussion, we compare and contrast the features of the statues that makes them relevant in the historical study of the pyramids. We are in a position to observe that the pyramid of Khafre is located at a point that the rising and setting spaces of the sun in the horizon are visible. With regards to positioning, the statue of Hatshepsut is also located on the ground of pre-historic temple mortuary.
Introduction
The Egyptians referred to statues as living images. The description communicates a lot in relation to reverence and value attached to the statues. Moreover, the statues are perceived as a body that has supernatural abilities since they held the most essential parts of an individual. When it comes to the visibility of statues, the Egyptian Old Kingdom confined it to the few people who they considered holy, for instance the priests (Morgan 2011). Due to their delicate nature and the significance they had to the residents, the statues were kept in temples. Where they were painted without putting into consideration that they were open to the public or could only be viewed by the religious leaders.
In the Old Egyptian Kingdom, they attached magical value to materials that would eventually influence the sculptural forms that they would consider appealing (Morgan 2011). Therefore, magical value had a greater influence in the creation of the statue of Khafre and statue of Hatshepsut. The realization leads to the purpose of this paper, which is to compare and contrast the concepts and features of the statues of Hatshepsut and Khafre.
Statue of Hatshepsut
The name Hatshepsut traces back to the Egyptian queen who ascended to power as a pharaoh and served diligently during her tenure in the new Kingdom. The subject of Hatshepsut has beckoned attention from the nature of controversy that it exudes (Teeter 2006). Quite often, many people deemed her complicated, and yet, she was a strong woman who pioneered a rich legacy. The legacy relates to the material wealth she had created during her leadership and the sense of leadership style she administered in the 18th dynasty. Her leadership period was replete with art, prosperity, pioneering building projects and peaceful existence (Wilson 2006).
Upon assessing the vulnerability of her position, Queen Hatshepsut made her statue sculptured in the form of a male pharaoh. This move was geared towards affirming her position and obtaining a male figure to hide the lack thereof that existed in her position. It further covered up for the unconventional means she employed in the acquisition of power. According to Cathleen Keller, a close examination of the statue reveals some intricate details about the queen. She posits that the statue has finer inscriptions on it that reads, “Daughter of Re,” and “His Majesty, Herself.” (Wilson 2006). The writings are disputing the much put forth proclamations that the queen was leading on the disguise of being a man.
Furthermore, the statue of Hatshepsut was established as a mortuary by the non-conformist queen. During the New Kingdom, its framework was laid at the base of the cliffs, which are located in the west bank, Luxor. After the inception of Christianity, the statue temple obtained the name, Deir el-Bahri, since it was put to use as a monastery (Thebes – Temple of Hatshepsut).
Statue of Khafre
Statue of Khafre is located in Giza. It was constructed by pharaoh Khafra, the son of Khufu. It is the second-largest among the three pyramids that were established in Giza. The inspiration behind its construction was for Pharaoh Khafre to have a great view of the sunrise as much as the sunset (Sparavigna 2016). However, the horizon was inhibited by the initial pyramid in Giza that was constructed by his father. Consequently, Pharaoh Khafre consulted with his architects if they could come up with a pyramid that could allow embracing the full glare of the sun. Therefore, the architectures came up with their plan and constructed a pyramid from which the pharaoh could view the rising and setting of the sun through the different seasons of the year.
The monument of Khafre has its external casing at the top that has outlived the pharaoh. The casing gives it a 10m (33feet) above the plateau upon which its foundation was laid (Calvert 2015). Its foundation is far much structured in comparison with the first monument of Giza. It contains the statues of the pharaoh that were initially created in the structure. Besides, the Great Sphinx is located in close proximity with the pyramid of Khafre. This closeness portrays that the lion sculptured with the head of the king was made to entice the pharaoh, Khafre.
Moreover, the lion sculpture topped with the head of a king was associated with royalty. In the same manner, the ability to embrace the sun at various seasons of the year was linked with the horizon. The blend of these two significant symbols have lasted for a long time and they hold a crucial part in the history of Egypt. Also, the Sphinx has a temple that is distinct and holds two sanctuaries that are seemingly linked with the chanted needs to embrace the sun (Calvert 2015).
Comparison.
The statues of Khafre and Hatshepsut holds some similarities in the context of structure and the historical significance they hold for the contemporary Egypt. For instance, the first attribute they share is the fact that they are both historical sites. Conventionally, historical sites are associated with the generation of income once a country opens its doors for tourists from various countries to learn and embrace their monuments. Besides this preconceived notion, the monuments are also feeding on the cultural wealth of Egypt and adds into their backpack of knowledge in relation to their historical sites.
Secondly, these structures were both established by the ancient Egyptian pharaohs, though they served in different dynasties. In the descriptions above, the statue of Hatshepsut was put up in the 18th dynasty during the period associated with the New Kingdom (Teeter 2006). The statue was a combined effort of the architects and Queen, Hatshepsut, who took to the throne with much audacity. In the same way, statue of Khafre was brought to life by the collective efforts of architects and the pharaoh Khafre. It was the second pyramid to grace the plateaus of Giza. Consequently, the second-largest preceded by the pyramid of Khufu.
The third combining element of the two statues is the idea that they both held sentimental values to the pharaohs who spearheaded their construction. Primarily, the statues are monuments of communication in form of structures. For instance, the statue of Hatshepsut had tiny inscriptions that carried words which revealed more of the queen. For instance, “His Majesty, Herself.” (Wilson 2006). The words implied that she never abandoned her feminine aspect. In the same manner, the pyramid of Khafre ensued meaning from the structural positioning. It was guided by the need to have a full glare of the sun that held cultural importance to the pharaoh, Khafre.
Contrast
As much as the two statues holds some common elements, they also have major disparities that are influenced by the various factors surrounding their constructions. In the first place, we can take into consideration the inspiration behind the setting up of the statues. Seemingly, the statues had different motivation to their construction. For instance, the statue of Hatshepsut was inspired by the need of the pharaoh to reinstate her position as the leader (Teeter 2006). She was facing a lot of resentment from the way she acquired her leadership role. Therefore, as an act of instilling her position and authority, she constructed the statue of Hatshepsut as part of her celebrated construction ambitions. On the flip side, the construction of the pyramid of Khafre was heavily influenced by the need of the pharaoh to have a clear visuals of the setting and rising of the sun (Sparavigna 2016). The conviction behind the need was that the pharaoh saw to it as a connection with the horizon.
Secondly, the statues are different in their periods of constructions. For example, the statue of Hatshepsut was established during the reign of Queen Hatshepsut the in the 18th dynasty. She was the sixth pharaoh in line with the predecessors (Wilson 2006). However, the statue of Khafre was put up by the pharaoh, Khafre, who is line with the fourth dynasty pharaoh, Khufu (Sparavigna 2016). This dynasty is associated with the old Kingdom. It traces far back to the initial monuments of ancient Egypt.
The thirds difference stems from the fact the statues were constructed by leaders of different gender. According to Wilson, the construction of the statue of Hatshepsut was orchestrated by Queen Hatshepsut. The acquisition of power by the pharaoh did not have a warm reception which therefore pushed her to build a statue of feminine kind, but with a touch of her father’s sculptures. Therefore, the feminine aspect still crowded the statue. On the contrary, the statue of Khafre was built by a male pharaoh. It was situated among that of his father and his descendant at Giza (Sparavigna 2016).
Conclusion.
Generally, the statues hold an integral part in the history of Egypt. They reveal more about their culture and the form of life they found appealing during the rise of civilization. Therefore, we are predisposed to learn of the establishment of the monuments to add into our backpacks of knowledge.
References
Calvert, A. (2015). “Pyramid of Khafre and the Great Sphinx,” in Smarthistory. https://smarthistory.org/pyramid-of-khafre-and-the-great-sphinx/
Morgan, L. (2011). Enlivening the Body: Color and Stone Statues in Old Kingdom Egypt. Source: Notes in the History of Art, 30(3), 4-11. https://doi.org/10.1086/sou.30.3.23208555
Sparavigna, A. C. (2016). Khufu, Khafre and Menkaure Pyramids and the Sun. arXiv preprint arXiv:1604.05963. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301875489_Khufu_Khafre_and_Menkaure_Pyramids_and_the_Sun
Teeter, E. (2006). Museum Review: Hatshepsut and Her World. American Journal of Archaeology, 110(4), 649-653. www.jstor.org/stable/40025062
Thebes – Temple of Hatshepsut. (n.d.). https://www.memphis.edu/egypt/resources/colortour/westbank3.php
Wilson, E. B. (2006). The Queen Who Would Be King. SMITHSONIAN MAGAZINE. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-queen-who-would-be-king-130328511/