"AEGEAN WALL-PAINTING IN LATE BRONZE AGE: THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN EDUCATED ETHNIC IDENTITY THROUGH THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ART"
ΕΙΣΗΓΗΣΗ ΣΤΟ 4ο ΔΙΕΘΝΕΣ ΣΥΝΕΔΡΙΟ ΜΕ ΘΕΜΑ "WORD IN EDUCATION. MORAL UPBRINGING THROUGH ARTS AND LITERATURE", ΠΟΥ ΔΙΕΞΗΧΘΗ ΣΤΙΣ 27 ΚΑΙ 28 ΟΚΤΩΒΡΙΟΥ 2016 ΤΟ ΙΗΣΟΥΙΤΙΚΟ ΠΑΝΕΠΙΣΤΗΜΙΟ JESUIT UNIVERSITY IGNATIANUM OF KRAKOW, POLAND
The
basic intention of this work is to demonstrate clearly how the ideology of the
Aegean peoples during the Late Bronze Age incorporates in wall paintings, in
its iconographic programs, symbolism and ritual, particularly in the depiction
of the natural environment, which has central position in the objectification
and spread of that ideology on citizens or
nationals of the state through the process of their education.
In the Late Bronze Age a civilization was
developed in the Aegean, belonging mostly in the
world of the Eastern Mediterranean, but also deeply independent. In the
East during the same period there has been a flourishing of cultures with
mutual deep influences. However, the Aegean civilizations, the Minoan
civilization, the Cycladic and the Mycenaean, tried through their art- among
others - to build their own ethnic identity, to give their own mark in the
Mediterranean world. Art and
especially the monumental painting, through the public and private expression, contributed
a lot to that aim, to "educate" people to
form their own cultural characteristics. Thus, they were
able to stand out from the Egyptians and the Canaanites, with whom they had
very close relations, both in politics and religion, commerce and art.
So, wall-paintings were used as a "school" that educated the
inhabitants of the Aegean world in an ideology, on which the first great
civilization of Europe was based.
So, why do we
think that the frescoes can play a role in
building the state ideology and thus how they can educate the generations of a society
to an ideology associated with ethnic characteristics?
First
of all, you will comprehend the murals as an integral part of social life of
the people and not as decorative objects in exposure conditions.
Apart
from this, the wall-paintings serve as visualization elements of signified.
Pure architectural surfaces are activated, they lose the neutral character, the
distinction between open - closed space is cancelled. A characteristic of the
mural painting is that it constitutes a representation through images, it is a
visual idiom and in parallel a communication medium. It constitutes a narrative
text, which formulates central concepts and symbols, making them tangible and
it deposits in space. The iconography to a large extent is reproduced if the
meanings in the context of a "long-term" are reproduced, which aimed
at justification, support and reproduction of that authority which designated
its construction.
To achieve this,
Aegean peoples used the depiction of the landscape in murals as
an ideological element, considering that the landscape has a very important
role in the ideological construction they wished.
We
will examine the features of the Aegean iconography associated with a special
element which characterizes the way collectivity is expressed; i.e. how the
Aegean natural environment is depicted on Aegean frescoes and how this type of
depiction illustrates the “constructing” of an ethnic landscape.
.
In order to succeed in this, Aegean people usually turned to symbolism. So, it
looks like the selection of some themes, associated with natural environment in
Minoan and Theran art, is not random at all. The significance of the patterns,
which are repeated but also possess a specific place in the “architecture” of
the representation, shows that they are charged with special meanings.
Moreover, the repetition of the same figurative units in diverse
archaeological contexts (utensils, seals, jewellery), and the ritual of the
rules followed in the representation impose their
association with special meanings expressing a symbolic idea for the people who
conceived them. So, a “symbolic narrative” is composed referring to cultural
processes that affect the Minoan lifestyle.
In
this frame, between the edges of symbolism and representation,
are these special features of Aegean iconography that allow the configuration
of Ethnic Landscapes and are associated
with nature. It is the representation of a number of conventions and hybrid
depictions of the natural world, that seem to relate directly to ideology –
maybe not with our contemporary meaning of the term ideology, but at least
freed from financial or other associations such as tradition or social memory.
On
the other hand though, In Egypt, illustration is a separate, special chapter in
studying the way landscapes were depicted in the Eastern Mediterranean in the 2nd
millennium BC, during which it dominated the region from an economic and a
cultural point of view. At the same time, the Aegean had developed a
multidimensional way of communication with Egypt, exchanging merchandise,
people, ideas and… “art”. This kind of contact in turn, participated in forming
an art, where each group of people contributed in their own way in depicting
the landscape, maintaining, to a great extent, their own ethnic
characteristics.
Egyptian
iconography cannot be understood – like other forms of prehistoric art–
outside its special functions and ideological or religious context.
The
Egyptians’ attempt to impose the invariance on their iconography
(sculptured, graven, wall-paintings, in both anthropogenic and natural
landscapes), in the context mentioned above, turned out to be a kind of regularity to a great extent.
It
has been stressed that this invariance is interpreted by the
standardization principle. Naturally,
both the canon and the invariance do not find their roots in esthetic choices.
On the contrary, we could state that they serve social decisions. Nevertheless, the Egyptian
iconography is idealistic, it has an intense symbolism and it can be viewed in
a religious, ritual and of course in a social context, since the viewers of the
representation should be integrated in an homogenized ethnic community, in
order for the message to be semantically recognisable. Usually, this message is
considered to be a medium of reproducing political power and dominance over the
world based on its regularity. Thus, we must consider the canon as an
ideological element promoting the static, which is finally surpassed by social
principles, but also the esthetic that, at the end, has an impact on the art.
Even though it is characterized by similarity, in the end innovation manages to
enforce itself (see the New Kingdom and Amarna period).
In
conclusion, one could argue that the canon in Egyptian iconography
gives some data that the artist should strictly keep to. Not
only external but also internal factors influenced
deeply the evolution of art in
Egypt. The repression of the Hyksos
during New Kingdom, and especially during the 18th Dynasty, makes
the changes and innovations in the Egyptian art even more tangible. The artistic
trends are liberated from the conventions and the themes are often
characterized by uniqueness. We observe that the elements of
natural environment evolve in an illustrative way and
receive some elements associated with the Aegean art, probably combined with
internal movements in Egypt, and thus are worth being thoroughly investigated.
In this way, we realize that by not having clarified the seriousness of the
Aegean impact, we stand to the point that Ethnic Landscapes reveal the dynamics
that the iconography, as well as the iconography of the natural
environment has in its interaction with other people’s arts.
Summarizing
the references to the appearance of the iconographic programs, motifs and
thematic in other means of expression during the Bronze Age, we could argue
that the patterns we see in the Aegean murals are not the product of
"parthenogenesis". Any contact with other cultures of the Eastern
Mediterranean, as close as they are, cannot demonstrate here the beginnings of
the Minoan iconography, which seems to be a case inside Crete. The mural
painting appears in the Aegean during the Middle Minoan III initially in Crete,
and particularly in the palatial surroundings of Knossos, as a key component of
Minoan art with specific uses and purposes. Certainly, the study needs to be integrated
into the wider question about the role of palaces and villas, possible as
control centers of construction and redistribution of raw materials, craftsmen
and products. Certainly, anyone considering the specific functional role of the
frescoes on the life of Minoan or Mycenaean people, will consider how the
artist was expressing the experiencing of the landscape and how the viewer was
receiving it. The stamps, the Kamares pottery, the pottery "of
prestige", the floral, the marine and the palatial style, the murals and
the ornate jewelry, all related each other (theme, time, etc.) probably because
they served the same - palatial -
ideology. They incorporate or represent the same status symbols, which explain
the particular nature as well, carrying entitlement to specific readings from
the viewer. However, it should be emphasized that these pictorial units not
suddenly appeared in the MMII period in the frescoes, but instead we encounter
in their development at other means of expression of human perception of the
landscape as well, including written pottery, seals or jewelry.
The concept of ethnic identity, which derives from the ideology dominant
during the establishing of the European national states, does not always allow
us to consider the exchange of ideas of ethnic groups as an interaction degree
and as a degree that reflects the closeness of their relation. Whereas its
homogenization – which reflects the material culture – refers to the relation
and interaction, its discontinuity -referring to the socio-political relation-
is due to the natural distance that exists between ethnic groups. The cultural
role that the ethnic qualities have is obvious, while at this point, we should
emphasise that a direct association between cultural similarities /
dissimilarities and ethnic limits rarely exists. Despite that, the cultural
practices, and ethnic characteristics which might be potentially a part of
them, create symbols via which the acting subjects materialize their cultural
distinctive traits (through similarities or dissimilarities or even both of
them) and thus, their identity in regard to the others. This materializing is
reflected in the material culture and can be considered as evidence of the
subject’s identity.
Moreover, the collectivities modulate the landscape they experience as
an identity. In other words, the socio-cultural identity the collectivities
create and express is converted in notion of landscape, amongst others. The
reminiscences, the stories, the comprehension, the temporality, the social
activity are the means that the collectivities use in order to create the
notion of landscape and to express that notion through the representative art,
announcing at the same time their collective identity. Thus, the Ethnic
Landscapes are associated not only with the space but also with the identities
of the collectivities that generate them.
Thus, the Aegean inhabitant either uses the symbols delivered to them or
creates new ones or even alters the ones belonging to other peoples with who
they comes into cultural contact (Egyptians, Babylonians, Canaanites, Hittites
etc), in order to define their self-reference and develop ethnic
characteristics. These characteristics will on the one hand distinguish them,
from these people, by enhancing the collectivity, and on the other hand, will
enable themselves to come into contact with the aforementioned peoples, to
co-evolve themselves and to co-operate with them, on the grounds of some
specific capabilities they will develop.
In this frame, the Aegean inhabitants use the elements of the natural
environment, either these are real or imaginary, native or exotic (the
bisectors may not play a substantial role at that time), in order to depict a
landscape that will enable them – beside the rest of the functions that such a
representation might have – to create an element of self-reference so as to
structure or develop an identity relative to their aspirations, according to
their social memory, tradition, and feelings.
On the other hand, the ethnic characteristics include also the notion of
diversity, of cultural difference form the “others”. And actually, apart from
the references to “Egyptianization” of the Aegean area and the “Aegeanization”
of Egypt, Egyptian art, mostly during the Old and Middle Kingdom, presents
special features when depicting a landscape, as these features are primarily
defined by the invariance and the Canon. But on the other hand, Aegean art too
keeps having a special character, which allows the inhabitants of Cyclades and
the Cretans and also the people of the Eastern Mediterranean with whom they
came into contact, to realise the (self-) determination of the ethnicity in the
Aegean area and the place it had inside of them. The highlights of the elements
of the natural environment are reflections of the inhabitants’ ideology in the
representative art. These reflections enable them to articulate their own
cultural speech. Therefore, these people presented their ideology turning it
into the material culture they produce and, in this case, into the frescoes on
the wall of some specific buildings and spaces, materializing also the elements
of the natural and the unrealistic environment which participate to that
ideology. In this way, they set out the self-reference points that the subject
would have used as such managing at this way to educate the new generations to
that ideology they developed.
