Takhibiat, the sistrum-player of Amun-RE - London Art Week
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Takhibiat, the sistrum-player of Amun-RE
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COM
Takhibiat, the sistrum-player of Amun-RE
An Egyptian greywacke fragmentary figure
of a priestess and noblewoman
THEBES, EARLY PTOLEMAIC PERIOD, CIRCA 332 - 200 BC
Height: 26 cm (10 inches)
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COM
The dark grey green schist torso of a noblewoman, the priestess Takhibiat is of slender and graceful
form. She is well-polished and preserved from below the breasts to just above the knees. The priestess is
shown standing, with her left leg advanced, her arms are held at her sides with no indication of the
elbows, her hands are clenched. She holds in her left hand an emblematic cloth that can only be
identified as such from behind the fist: from the front it appears as a ‘stone core’. In her right hand,
from the fracture outlines, she probably originally held a papyrus umbel. The details of her fingers and
nails are finely carved. Her body has been carved with a narrow waist, elongated, broad hips and thighs,
and a rounded abdominal region with a flat navel. The pubic region is indicated by two lines. She is
wearing a long close-fitting dress with her circular navel visible beneath. She was likely originally
wearing a wide wig with traces of two tresses visible on either side of the deep back pillar. The back
pillar is engraved in sunken relief with two columns of incised hieroglyphs, framed by thin lines for
Takhibiat,’the Sistrum-Player of Amun-Re’
(1) The noble lady, great of favour, holder of
benevolence, excellent of character, sweet of
love and praised in the mouth of everyone,
great of favour without her knowing, the
great lady [… .
(2) Beloved by her brothers, praised by her city
god, the august one, sistrum-player of
Amun-Re, Takhibiat, true of voice, daughter
of the god’s father and prophet [...
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COM
PROVENANCE
George Michaelides (1900-1973), acquired in Egypt in the 1930s-1940s
Curtis C. Strong (1913-2002) and Jane L. Strong (1911-1992), Washington, D.C. area, acquired circa
1966-67
Thence by descent to their son, Michael B. Strong (1937-2019), Washington, D.C. and Virginia, 1992
By descent to the current owner, Virginia, USA, in 2019
Curtis C. Strong (1913-2002) and Jane L. Strong (1911-1992)
Curtis C. Strong was with the US consulate in a number of African countries from 1947-1973, and in
Egypt in 1963-66. He was friends with George Michaelides and it is believed that the piece was gifted to
the Strongs by Michaelides on one of their postings to Egypt.
Curtis held many foreign positions throughout his career, 1946-73 (full list provided in a handwritten
letter); 1960-63 American Embassy, Cairo, United Arab Republics (Egypt/ Syria), First Secretary
Political Section; and again in 1966-67
George Anastase Michaelides (1900-1973)
Michaelides was born in Cairo and educated in Egypt and France. He formed a large collection of
Egyptian antiquities while resident in Egypt during the 1930s and 1940s. After his death in 1973,
Cambridge University Library bought his collection of over 1,700 fragments of papyri, paper and other
materials in the ancient Egyptian languages, Coptic, Greek and Arabic. For further reading on
Michaelides and his important collection of Egyptian texts see: Warren R. Dawson, Eric P. Uphill, and
Morris L. Bierbrier, Who Was Who in Egyptology, London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1995, p. 286; S.J.
Clackson, The Michaelides Manuscript Collection. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 100, 1994,
p. 223-26.
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COM
PUBLISHED
S. Albersmeier, Untersuchungen zu den Frauenstatuen des Ptolemäischen Ägypten, (AegTrev 10), Mainz
am Rhein, 2002, no. 145, fig. 13c, p. 141, p. 379
M. Panov, Women in the Inscriptions of the Late Period, Novosibirsk, 2018, p. 23.
Recorded: CLES (Corpus of Late Egyptian Sculpture) database, Brooklyn Museum, 1960s. B.V.
Bothmer saw the statue in Cairo with Michaelides before 1973, and clearly furthermore before the
Strongs acquired it in the late 1960s. Bothmer compiled CLES between 1956 and 1982, with H. de
Meulenaere. CLES is being digitised, numbered, and extended through the Late Egyptian Artefact
Database (LEAD) project coordinated by Laurent Coulon and Olivier Perdu.
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COM
DISCUSSION
This statue represents the idealised, modest yet desirable depiction of the female form refined in the
Late Dynastic to early Ptolemaic period. The long tightly fitting dress enhances her figure as much as it
covers, with the shape of her thighs, her pubic region, slightly rounded stomach as well as the dip of her
navel all visible beneath the drapery. On the reverse, careful attention has been made to show the curve
of her buttocks juxtaposed with the straight lines of the back pillar.
A recent study (M. Panov, Women in the Inscriptions of the Late Period, Novosibirsk, 2018) notes that
in the Late Period it became increasingly common for women to record their own biographies on stelae
and statues and this figure should be seen in the context of that. Text on monuments belonging to men
tend to promote their careers and record their public titles. The inscriptions for woman more usually
focus on their marriage, family and religious roles. Frequently employed epithets, such as those found
on the Strong statuette of Takhibiat, suggest the ideal woman was ‘amiable’, ‘rich in praise’, praised by
the gods, and kind toward others. (Panov, op. cit. p. 13)
Another of the Strong Takhibiat’s epithets is ‘true of voice/justified’, which although not exclusively
used for the deceased, makes it likely that the statue was erected posthumously for the priestess:
(S. Albersmeier, ‘Ptolemaic Statues of Priestesses from Thebes’, in Peter F. Dorman and Betsy M. Bryan
(eds), Perspectives on Ptolemaic Thebes: Papers from the Theban Workshop 2006, SAOC 65, Chicago,
2011, p. 63).
The title of ‘noble lady’ found on this statue of Takhibiat, is extremely unusual in a private statue of this
period. Found right at the beginning of her inscription, this and indeed the sequence of her titles are
close to that of Queens and Wives of the God and indicates that Takhibiat was a noble woman of high
rank, possibly connected to the royal family: S. Albersmeier, Untersuchungen zu den Frauenstatuen des
Ptolemäischen Ägypten, AegTrev 10, Mainz am Rhein, 2002, p. 141. There is similar titulature on the
royal early Ptolemaic rose granite statue of Arsinoe II inv .no. 22681, in the Vatican, Museo Gregoriano
Egizio, Rome. For further discussion of such titulature see L. Troy, Patterns of Queenship in Ancient
Egyptian Myth and History, Boreas 14, Uppsala, 1986, Register B, no. A 2/1; B 1/11; B 3/10; B 4/11; D
2/1. See also, M. Gitton, ‘Variation sur le thème des titulatures de reines’, BIFAO 78, 1978, pp. 389-
403.
The title of Sistrum-player is found from the 22nd dynasty through to the Ptolemaic Period. The fact
that Takhibiat ‘appears to be holding a papyrus umbel and bears the title, sistrum-player links her to
the cult of Amun at Thebes. In that clerical capacity, she may have been involved in rituals demanding
the playing of the sistrum which relate to Amun’s role in the creative process of the world, particularly
in accompanying performances the objective of which was to ensure a successful Nile inundation which
symbolised the maintenance and continuity of cosmic creation, Amun of Thebes being the prime
generator of creation.’ (R.S. Bianchi, private correspondence, 2021)
Albersmeier points out that the Strong Takhibiat is also highly unusual for the attributes she holds. The
cloth she holds in her left hand is a rare occurrence in female statuary and particularly so in the left
hand (which is usually restricted to royal figures), as it is far more commonly found in the right hand:
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COM
See E. Staehelin, ‘Untersuchungen zur Tracht im Altem Reich’, MÄS 8, 1966, p. 163 with note 7. It
appears to be a ‘stone core’ from the front and this has been interpreted by Fischer as a piece of material
that represents a hieroglyph, and he describes it as a 'handkerchief'. Its meaning is still rather opaque.
(H.G. Fisher, ‘An Elusive Shape within the Fisted Hands of Egyptian Statues’, in Ancient Egypt in the
Metropolitan Museum Journal 1-11, (1968-1976), 1977, pp. 143-155, Addendum S. 184, Erstabdruck
in: MetrMusJ 10, 1975, 9-21).
Even more significant is that Takhibiat holds a papyrus umbel in her right hand. Flowers are among the
oldest attributes in Egyptian art and in all periods one can find representations of both women and
men with flowers, bouquets or wreaths in their hand. In the Ptolemaic period some priestesses are
shown carrying a flower in one hand at the thigh, and others with a large, three-dimensional papyrus
umbel at the chest. However, Robert Bianchi points out that it is 'exceeding rare for a sculptural
representation of a women to be holding a floral attribute in the fisted-hand of a lowered arm. Such
floral attributes are more commonly associated with high-ranking elite male members of Ptolemaic
society. Hence, that attribute is indicative of her advantaged, and very elevated social status', and
perhaps even more compelling combined with the cloth in her left hand. For further discussion see J.
Dittmar, ‘Flowers and Bouquets of Flowers as Offerings in Ancient Egypt’, MÄS 43, 1986, p. 132ff.
Leiden Rijksmuseum van Ouden, inv. no. F. 1960/3.1 Museo Archeologico Nazionale, Museo Egizio, Florence,
1st century BC, holding a blossom inv. no. 6315, Sistrum player, Takhibiat, 26th Dynasty
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COM
The name Takhibiat has been explained by H. de Meulenaere as meaning ‘she who has a joyous
character’ (H. de Meulenaere, ‘Quatre noms propres de Basse Époque’, BIFAO 55, 1955, pp. 141-148,
147 f.) The name apparently only became popular in the Ptolemaic period and in fact appears on other
near contemporary Theban statues of sistrum-players of Amun-Re, including one from the Karnak
cachette now in Cairo: JE 37452. For an overview of the other Ptolemaic statues with the name
Takhibiat see Albersmeier, 2002, pp. 150-151, chapter 6.4.3.
Considering her name and her connection with the cult of Amun-Re at Karnak, it is probable that the
Strong Takhibiat also originates from Thebes and may be viewed alongside this Ptolemaic group of
priestesses from Karnak. ‘The group attests to a strong priestly community in Ptolemaic Thebes, where
higher level priestly families still had the influence and means to dedicate statuettes of their female
family members throughout the Ptolemaic period’: Albersmeier, 2011, p. 65.
Such priestesses usually came from priestly families where their fathers held high office and familial
connections would seem to have played a part in which cult they served, particularly with fathers and
daughters who both served Amun-Re. All priestesses with the title Sistrum-Player of Amun-Re have
fathers with the title ‘God’s Father and Prophet of Amun-Re in Karnak’. (Albersmeier 2002, pp. 147-8,
chapter 6.3.4). Although the full title of the father of our Takhibiat is truncated, the title ‘daughter of
the God’s Father and Prophet [...]’ strongly suggests that Takhibiat’s father was also a priest of Amun-
Re. On priestesses in general see A.M Blackman, ‘On the Position of Women in the Egyptian
Hierarchy’, in JEA 7, 1921, pp. 8-30.
Sculpture of the 30th Dynasty to the early Ptolemaic period is stylistically very similar and the small
scale and nature of these statuettes of priestesses make a chronology somewhat challenging. However,
by close analysis of the stylistic development of chronologically fixed and datable statuary beginning
with such as the rose granite Vatican statue of Arsinoe II (inv .no. 22681) dated to circa 270 – 246 BC
and the Louvre limestone statue of a priestess Heresankh, (inv. no. N. 2456) dated to circa 264/3,
Albersmeier dates the Strong Takhibiat to the second half of the third century BC. This is broadly due
to the shape of the body, with its rounded stomach, large, flat navel, the short upper abdomen, and the
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COMVatican, Museo Gregoriano Egizio, Rome, statue of Musée du Louvre, Paris, statue of a priestess Heresankh,
Arsinoe II inv .no. 22681, circa 270 – 246 BC inv. no. N. 2456, circa 264/3
Ägyptisches Museum and Papyrussammlung, Berlin,
in. no. 21763, second half of the 3rd century BC
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COMschematically indicated pubic area and thighs. A contemporary example of a similar but complete
statue in greywacke is in the Ägyptisches Museum and Papyrussammlung, Berlin, in. no. 21763. A close
stylistic parallel is also the greywacke torso in Bucharest from the Anastase Simu museum, dated to the
30th Dynasty to early Ptolemaic period.
The Strong Takhibiat is a superbly carved fragment of elegant form and in a fine quality greywacke as
opposed to the more commonplace limestone statues surviving from Karnak in this period. Greywacke,
‘was considered to be one of the most prestigious materials used during the course of the Egyptian Late
Period. It was the stone of choice for royal images of the Persian kings of Egypt, for which see the statue
of Darius the Great from Susa, and it continued to be so regarded by the Julio-Claudian emperors of
Rome who employed it repeatedly for representations of members of their royal family’ (R.S. Bianchi).
This choice of stone, the quality of the carving, combined with her rare set of titles, make this a unique
piece of excellent provenance, and a wonderful rediscovery.
With thanks to Ollivier Perdu, Carol Andrews, Robert Bianchi
Bucharest, Museul Simu, Sais, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, inv. no.
30th Dynasty to early Ptolemaic 2010.18, circa 300–250 B.C.
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COMKALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COMCONDITION
The lower break at the knees runs horizontally. The upper fracture surface ends below the breasts and
drops sharply from back to front. Both hands are chipped and the flower in her right hand has broken
off. The back pillar is bumped several times on the edges with parts of the text on the left-hand column
missing. The bottom of the back pillar is missing.
The statue is mounted on a wood base characteristic of the period during which she was with
Michaelides.
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COMKALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COMCONTEXT
This statue fragment was produced in a time of great change in Egypt: the end of Dynasty 30 saw the
last Egyptian king, and the accession of the Ptolemaic dynasty of Alexander’s successors.
The first king of Dynasty 30, Nectanebo I (380–362 B.C.), managed to repel a Persian attack shortly
after he ascended the throne. The remaining years of his reign were fairly peaceful and were marked by
an ambitious program of temple construction, which was continued on an even grander scale by
Nectanebo II (360–343 B.C.). The latter king managed to hold off another Persian attack in 351 BC, but
in 343 BC a third attack succeeded, and Egypt fell once again to the Persians, who were defeated in turn
by Alexander the Great in 332 BC. These final invasions were the death blow to Egyptian control of
their own country.
Alexander the Great initiated the Macedonian dynasty of the Ptolemaic Period. On the death of
Alexander’s last heirs, his conquests were divided among his generals: the Ptolemaic dynasty begins in
305 B.C., when one of Alexander’s generals, Ptolemy, became Ptolemy I of Egypt. Thereafter, kingship
was handed down through Ptolemy’s descendants until 30 B.C., when Roman takeover followed swiftly
on the defeat of Cleopatra VII.
Alexander established the new city of Alexandria on the north-western Delta coast. The Ptolemies were
very much Hellenistic rulers, with the country as their military prize. The magnificent city had splendid
palaces, temples, and libraries oriented on a Hellenistic street grid, with cemeteries stretched to the east
and west. Temples included those for the royal cult and for the chief god Serapis, a deity combining
aspects of Osiris, Apis, and Ptah, but in a Hellenistic guise and whose consort was Isis. There were also,
however, temples to Egyptian gods and traditional pharaonic monuments relocated from other sites,
although the extent of the latter practice in the Ptolemaic Period is very difficult to ascertain because it
continued through Roman times. Ptolemaic queens received special attention as guarantors of the
inheritance of divine rulership. The Pharos lighthouse, at the entry to the great harbour, announced the
shining city to those arriving, but the Ptolemies also embraced the resonant imagery of Egypt, setting
up colossal statues of themselves as Egyptian pharaohs to welcome the ships that entered the harbour.
With an international population, Egyptian resources, and Egyptian and Greek artistry, the city was
reputed for its beauty and for the fine arts produced there.
Outside Alexandria, excavations in the Delta have attested flourishing communities integrating Greek
and other trade or immigrant groups at certain sites—Canopus, Herakleion/Thonis, and Naukratis, of
course, but also, Athribis, Memphis, and throughout newly developed agricultural lands in areas near
the coast or in the Fayum. An already established and significant Greek population experienced a new
influx, particularly in the northern areas of the country. And social hierarchies were certainly affected
by the existence of Greek rulers and members of the ruling elite. Greek became a major language
alongside Egyptian, which was now written in the Demotic script except on monuments.
Still, the country’s traditional practices and forms remained strong. The Ptolemaic rulers supported
Egyptian cults and priesthoods. During the first three reigns of the Ptolemaic dynasty, temple building
projects of Dynasty 30 were continued by the new kings and official classes, closely following Egyptian
styles. As time progressed, the Ptolemies aggrandized or embellished age-old temples, especially in
Upper Egypt; consequently, most of the temples still standing today are actually Ptolemaic
constructions. The kings also installed celebrations of their own ruler cults in the Egyptian temples.
Within these parameters, the relationship of the artistic styles of the two cultures varies by region,
purpose, and individual circumstance. Notably, the Ptolemies themselves employed different sculptural
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COMstyles for political reasons—in the earliest years, they adopted the pharaonic style of Dynasty 30 to such
an extent that it is often difficult to distinguish pieces from the two periods, while at the same time
depicting themselves as Greek dynasts in Alexandria and for the Mediterranean world. 1
However, ‘despite the presence of the Hellenistic Greeks in the land, the Egyptians continued to adhere
to their centuries old traditions, particularly at Thebes where evidence for the predominance of all
aspects of pharaonic traditions severely restricted the display of Hellenistic, visual expressions.’ (R.S.
Bianchi)
1
Citation:
Allen, James, and Marsha Hill. “Egypt in the Late Period (ca. 664–332 B.C.).” In Heilbrunn Timeline of
Art History. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–.
Hill, Marsha. “Egypt in the Ptolemaic Period.” In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. New York: The
Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000-
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COMBIBLIOGRAPHY
B. V. Bothmer, H. W. Müller, and H. De Meulenaere, Egyptian Sculpture of the Late Period, 700 B.C. to
A.D. 100. Brooklyn, 1960
S. Albersmeier, Untersuchungen zu den Frauenstatuen des Ptolemäischen Ägypten, Mainz am Rhein,
2002
M. Panov, Women in the Inscriptions of the Late Period, Novosibirsk, 2018
S. Walker and P. Higgs, eds., Cleopatra of Egypt, from History to Myth, London, 2000
D. Arnold,. Temples of the Last Pharaohs. New York, Oxford University Press, 1999
S. Albersmeier, ‘Ptolemaic Statues of Priestesses from Thebes’, in Peter F. Dorman and Betsy M. Bryan
(eds), Perspectives on Ptolemaic Thebes: Papers from the Theban Workshop 2006, SAOC 65, Chicago,
2011
A.M Blackman, ‘On the Position of Women in the Egyptian Hierarchy’, in JEA 7, 1921, pp. 8-30
J. Quagebeur, ‘À la recherche du haut clergé thébain à l’époque gréco-romaine’, in Vleeming, Hundred-
Gated Thebes, pp. 139-161
H. de Meulenaere and B.V. Bothmer, ‘Une statue thébaine de la fin de l’époque ptolémaïque’, ZÄS 101,
1974, pp. 109-113
H. de Meulenaere, ‘Quatre noms propres de Basse Époque’, BIFAO 55, 1955, pp. 141-148
L. Troy, Patterns of Queenship in Ancient Egyptian Myth and History, Boreas 14, Uppsala, 1986
M. Gitton, ‘Variation sur le thème des titulatures de reines’, BIFAO 78, 1978, pp. 389-403
H.G. Fisher, ‘An Elusive Shape within the Fisted Hands of Egyptian Statues’, in Ancient Egypt in the
Metropolitan Museum Journal 1-11, (1968-1976), 1977, pp. 143-155, Addendum S. 184, Erstabdruck in:
MetrMusJ 10, 1975, 9-21
KALLOS GALLERY LIMITED
15 SACKVILLE STREET LONDON W1S 3DJ
TELEPHONE +44 (0) 20 7493 0806 E-MAIL INFO@KALLOSGALLERY.COM
KALLOSGALLERY.COMYou can also read
