DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.68516#0103
MESOPOTAMIA
whole. But here again, we are in the presence of an isolated and, as far as
I know, unique example. Evidently the constantly disturbed political
history of Mesopotamia with its perpetual civil wars between cities may
be held to explain the sudden appearances and disappearances of efforts
which in better circumstances might have developed into a splendid and
consistent tradition.
One period of relative quiet we can fix on in the age of Gudea at
Lagash and at this moment (about 2500 b.c.) such a consistent tradi-
tion is developed. But we must begin with an earlier example of
human sculpture. The portrait (76) of an official from Tel-el-Obeid
dates from about 3000 b.c. Here that gross superabundant vital energy
which distinguishes early Sumerian art is strikingly evident. There is
nothing of the almost photographic realism of the mule; on the con-
trary, it shows very little direct observation, the proportions are utterly
incorrect, the mask takes up nearly all the surface of the skull, the eyes
are many times too big. But none the less, the energy of the inner life
comes through, and though there is no subtlety of sensibility in the
modelling, such crude feeling as there is is not polished down or ob-
literated. The head (77), which may be Gudea himself, is only a few
hundred years later, but crude vital energy has here been harnessed to a
more deliberate purpose. There is by now a real sense of plastic se-
quence and harmony of proportions, but I think the vitality, the sense
of personality and character still survives. It would be too much to say
that this is a supreme work of plastic imagination, but it comes nearer
perhaps to that than anything else that Mesopotamian art achieved.
In other heads a process of stylization set in. A purely decorative
formula was evolved for the hair, so that it became entirely schematic,
and similarly the eyebrows became decorative insertions contradicting
the plastic sequence. The eye was also stylized, but in a more sensitive
way, so that it took account of the subtlety of the natural form—though
stylized it was not schematic. Apart from the stylistic isolation of the
features, however, the modelling of the masks is often of extraordinary
delicacy and sensitiveness, the feeling for the salience of the cheek-bone
< 67 > 5-2
whole. But here again, we are in the presence of an isolated and, as far as
I know, unique example. Evidently the constantly disturbed political
history of Mesopotamia with its perpetual civil wars between cities may
be held to explain the sudden appearances and disappearances of efforts
which in better circumstances might have developed into a splendid and
consistent tradition.
One period of relative quiet we can fix on in the age of Gudea at
Lagash and at this moment (about 2500 b.c.) such a consistent tradi-
tion is developed. But we must begin with an earlier example of
human sculpture. The portrait (76) of an official from Tel-el-Obeid
dates from about 3000 b.c. Here that gross superabundant vital energy
which distinguishes early Sumerian art is strikingly evident. There is
nothing of the almost photographic realism of the mule; on the con-
trary, it shows very little direct observation, the proportions are utterly
incorrect, the mask takes up nearly all the surface of the skull, the eyes
are many times too big. But none the less, the energy of the inner life
comes through, and though there is no subtlety of sensibility in the
modelling, such crude feeling as there is is not polished down or ob-
literated. The head (77), which may be Gudea himself, is only a few
hundred years later, but crude vital energy has here been harnessed to a
more deliberate purpose. There is by now a real sense of plastic se-
quence and harmony of proportions, but I think the vitality, the sense
of personality and character still survives. It would be too much to say
that this is a supreme work of plastic imagination, but it comes nearer
perhaps to that than anything else that Mesopotamian art achieved.
In other heads a process of stylization set in. A purely decorative
formula was evolved for the hair, so that it became entirely schematic,
and similarly the eyebrows became decorative insertions contradicting
the plastic sequence. The eye was also stylized, but in a more sensitive
way, so that it took account of the subtlety of the natural form—though
stylized it was not schematic. Apart from the stylistic isolation of the
features, however, the modelling of the masks is often of extraordinary
delicacy and sensitiveness, the feeling for the salience of the cheek-bone
< 67 > 5-2