Extra Credit: The Woman or Goddess with Snakes

When thinking about what we went over this quarter, I remembered one figure that really stood out to me which was the "Woman or Goddess with Snakes." Her face, her clothing, along with the items such as the cat and the snakes all made her very interesting to me. She is interesting to look at and she is interesting to wonder about. Because of my fascination with her, I decided to look up more about her and how she has come to exist. 

According to witcombe.sbc.edu, the Minoan Snake Goddess was discovered in 1903 by Arthur Evans on the Aegean island of Crete. When she was found, she was apparently missing her head, most of her hat, her right arm, the lower part of her left snake, and parts of her skirt. Some of these pieces were later recovered within the same area that she was found but those that were not, were reconstructed, by Evans, based on other Snake Goddesses that he has seen. On this website, there are photos of her when she was first found without her head, arm, etc. 

She greatly reflects the Minoan culture through her colors as well as her clothing. According to our book, the red, blue, and green colors were common in clothing from Minoan weavers. Also, the geometric layers were often seen in the Minoan culture. And as stated in the article by Witcombe, she shows elegance high intelligence, beauty, fashion, and a forthright personality like many other Minoan creations. 

She becomes more interesting when it comes to interpreting her meaning. Just like the Venus of Willendorf, the Snake Goddess contains many theories as to what her meaning is. In WItcombe's article, the girdle that the Snake Goddess has around her waist is discussed as possibly being related to the Goddess Aphrodite. Aphrodite, in one story, lends her girdle to Hera so that she can seduce and distract Zeus from the Trojan war. This event just happened to take place on Mount Ida on Crete island. Could the Snake Goddess possibly be an interpretation of Aphrodite herself? Or perhaps the girdle just resembles strength and power. 

Another theory is that the Snake Goddess might be an interpretation of a spirit of the Nether World or in other words, evil. It has been thought that maybe the snakes found in many Minoan pieces stands for a cult. This can be understood as the Goddess herself has a very powerful yet controlling and manipulating look on her face. Also, when I think of snakes, I think of them as usually being evil creatures. A snake is used in the Christian religion to resemble satin, Medusa with her head full of snakes is an evil character in Greek mythology and there seem to be many movies where snakes are depicted as evil and harmful. When I first saw the Snake Goddess, I thought of her as being evil. 

A more common interpretation of the Snake Goddess is that she resembles fertility. This is common for may women figures just like the Venus of Willendorf. In Witcombe's article it discusses how the Snake Goddess might not have any meaning regarding women and their power. The creation of the Snake Goddess could just be a resemblance of deity and ensuring the growth of crops, animas, and human beings. The fact that she is revealing her breasts is more evidence towards this theory. The breasts, the hips, and the torso area seem to be the main areas of a woman's body that resemble fertility and in this case, we see the Snake Goddesses breasts and her hips have a wide structure to them. So perhaps she was a symbol of fertility for the land of Crete. 

T

he existence of the Snake Goddess also suggests that the Minoans lived in a matrilineal or even a matriarchal society. According to WItcombe, many pieces such as the Snake Goddess are evidence of this. The women created within these pieces show much dominance and seem fearless. Witcombe also explains how usually the absence of women in art means that they were not as important as men. Many Minoan pieces revolve around women, therefor supporting the idea of either a a matrilineal or matriarchal society. 

Overall, the Snake Goddess is a beautiful figure and is very eye-catching. After doing more research, I find her to be just as interesting as her appearance. I like that she has mystery behind her and could be interpreted in many ways. I also enjoyed reading more about the condition she was found in and how she was put back together, yet I still wonder what her face originally looked like. 

Source: http://witcombe.sbc.edu/snakegoddess/fertility.html

Visually and Historically Interesting Periods

Throughout this quarter we have gone over a lot of very unique and interesting periods full of many eye catching and important works of art. When reviewing my notes and looking through each chapter in our books, I found that the Prehistoric period was the most visually interesting to me and Jewish, Early Christian, and Byzantine period was the most historically interesting to me. 

Looking at the Prehistoric age, my favorite pieces were those that represented humans. In prehistoric art, the human figure was represented in such an abstract way which I found to be very appealing. Figures represented in the book as well as lectures that have the abstract appearance include the Venus of Willendorf, the Woman From Brassempouy, the Human Figure, and the Figures of a Woman and a Man. I find these pieces to be so intriguing because of how they portray different parts of the human body. They leave my mind with questions as to what humans looked like back in the prehistoric period and why certain areas of the body were more emphasized than others. We have already studied the Venus of Willendorf and know that most theories suggest that her larger hips and breasts represent fertility. Yet this is not a fact, just a theory. The human figures found in the Prehistoric period, one could say, are mysterious which creates an everlasting impression on me. I like to look at the pieces and come up with theories of my own as well as read what others have to say. All in all, I just like the fact that human figures in the prehistoric period raise questions and have a little mystery behind them. I also find that they can be a bit disturbing to the eye but in an intriguing way. When looking at the Human Figure on page 21, it scares me a bit yet it also grabs my attention. I love the fact that this figure has no mouth and that its eyes are emphasized. I think that overall, the lack of mouth and the dark eyes make the figure intriguing and again, raise questions as to why there is no mouth and what was meant to be told within the eyes. The lack of a mouth scares me a bit and it is shown again on the Woman From Brassempouy on page 7. A lot of the human figures are missing important parts of a natural human body yet the fact that they are lacking these parts, i feel, makes them more visually interesting. 

When thinking about what was historically interesting to me, I thought that they Jewish, Early Christian, and Byzantine Art was the most historically interesting. I have never known a lot about any kind of religion because in a way, I was never too interested. When looking into Judaism, Christianity, and the Islamic religion through art, it became more interesting to me. A lot of the pieces that we talked or read about, I knew bits and pieces about but not a whole lot. in the last blog, I chose to look at the Hildesheim Cathedral Doors and I knew a bit about the fall of Adam and Eve and Christ being crucified but I learned a lot more from just looking over and reading about the Hildesheim Cathedral. I also found the doors to be very interesting with how they related each story from the old testament to a story within the new testament. The stories that each religious piece tells is mostly interesting to me because i am somewhat familiar with each religion and at times, these religions are brought up in my life and I usually have no input on them nor do I have any idea about what is being said but now because of this section that we went over, I am a little more familiar. It was interesting to learn more about these religions and see what they actually have in common with one another. Each religion had a place of worship, whether is be a temple, a synagogue, or a cathedral, they were all decorated with work representing their beliefs. We can see the crucifixion of Christ depicted in many ways and hist story is placed all around churches and different houses of worship on walls and in paintings. For instance, in Jonah and the Whale, we are seeing a story that represents Christ. Jonah is cast overboard on a boat and is swallowed by a great fish. Three days and three nights later, the fish spits Jonah out. This story is parallel to the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ where he too rises three days and three nights later. Through Jonah and the Whale, we are given two different historical stories, one being obvious and the other being more hidden. The Sarcophagus of Junius Bassus is also a very interesting piece depicting very important scenes within monotheistic religion. In this piece we are seeing how Christianity is rising up and is appealing more to rich Romans. We see the defeat of polytheism taking place in this piece. It is interesting to me how shameful it was for people to convert to a monotheistic religion. I had no idea that such a change created so much drama and chaos among people. Overall, i think the movement from a polytheistic to a monotheistic religion was very historically interesting. I think that he art work involved with this transformation and the art work used to promote Christianity was very historically interesting in the stories that were told and how they informed me even more about what I feel was somewhat familiar but still very unclear to me. Christianity is still big and is still around and because of the art work that we have discussed, I feel like I am a little more in the know with this belief. 

We have learned about many great types of art and overall there is something interesting to me about each of types that we have learned about. The human figure in the Prehistoric period specifically stood out to me and has made an impression on me and historically, the Jewish, Early Christian, and Byzantine Art chapter served as the most interesting and attention grabbing for me. 

The Temptation and Fall of Adam and Eve Versus Crucifixion

On the Hildesheim Cathedral Doors are readings of the Old and the New Testaments. Scenes are shown on the Bernward Doors, the left side, containing the story of Adam and Eve from the Old Testament and the right side containing the story of Christ from the New Testament. Although each side tells a different story, when matched up, side by side, they have a lot in common. The left side also tells the story from top to bottom where as the right side tells the story from bottom to top. Even with this difference, the scenes that are side by side still have many similarities and can relate to one another. 

I have chosen to look at the Temptation and Fall of Adam and Eve versus Crucifixion. The Temptation and Fall of Adam and Eve shows Eve giving into temptation by listening to the serpent and eating the fruit off the tree. Adam also ate the fruit and from this, Original Sin was brought into the world. Crucifixion shows Christ being crucified on the cross, sacrificing his life to bring salvation to mankind. On the right of him is Christ's mother, the Virgin Mary and on the left is John the Beloved. We also see on one side, a roman guard stabbing Christ in the side with a spear and on the other side, one is offering Christ some vinegar to drink. 

When looking at the two scenes and thinking about why they were put together, side by side, it is quite interesting to me. I realized that the Temptation and Fall of Adam and Eve depicts the situation that began sin and eventually led up to Crucifixion where Christ died for the sins of mankind. Both scenes revolve around sin which is why I believe they were put together. One shows the creation of sin and the other shows Christ trying to end sin. WIth just these two scenes, we are given the beginning and the end to a story, which is the story of sin. It could also be said that the Temptation and Fall of Eve and Adam created Crucifixion. The two panels show scenes that give off such opposite feelings. In the Fall of Eve and Adam, one might get a sense of anger because of the mistake that Eve and Adam made by giving in to temptation. With Crucifixion, one might feel grateful or happy to see that Christ was willing to sacrifice his life for mankind. Where as Adam and Eve brought about the evil of sin, Christ was trying to take sin away. There is also the fact that Adam and Eve's story goes from top to bottom, or falls and Christ's story goes from bottom to top, or rises. We already get a negative feeling from the left side as the scenes fall down and we get a more positive feeling from the right side as the scenes rise up. These two compositions are opposite in their meanings and emotions but they are similar in the fact that they both deal with sin. 

When looking at the compositions, i noticed that the main object within the scene is in the center. We have the fruit, that is the start of sin, in the middle of the scene on the tree and then we have Christ, trying to end sin, on the cross in the middle as well. The two main objects that affect sin are the center of attention in each composition. They also have a good balance of other objects around them. Christ has two people on either side of him and the fruit has a tree on either side and Adam stands on the right and Eve stands on the left. With having two objects on either side, both of the more important objects stand out in the middle. Even the body language in each composition, draws the eye straight to the middle. Both Adam and Eve are gesturing towards the fruit on the tree. Both of their arms are extended, reaching for the fruit and leading us to focus on what is in the middle. In Crucifixion, the two Roman guards are gesturing straight up to Christ on the cross while the Virgin Mary and John the Beloved also stand facing Christ on the cross. The Virgin Mary holds out her hands towards Christ and through it all, our eyes are drawn to what is in the middle. It also appears to me that Adam, Eve, and the fruit stand out more than the rest of the scene just as Christ does too. They all look as if they are given deep cuts or more detail so that they appear more vivid and alive than the rest of the figures in the two scenes. 

Overall, when looking at the two scenes, it is clear that they both revolve around sin. One depicts the beginning of sin and the other depicts an attempt to end sin. After looking over each composition, it can be inferred that they were paired together to show two different scenes depicting sin in two opposite ways. 

The Bust of Commodus as Hercules and the Head of Caracalla

When looking at the Bust of Commodus as Hercules and the Head of Caracalla side by side, I see two completely different men yet they both still have such a similar meaning behind the creation of their statues. 

The Bust of Commodus as Hercules appears to have  what looks like a lion wrapped around him, The mouth of the lion covers Commodus' head with its sharp teeth lining Commodus' head. The paws of the lion rest on Commodus' chest, and Commodus holds a bat his right hand as if he had just dominated this lion. He wears the lion skin as if it is his trophy to show his courage and strength. The way he holds his bat over his shoulder makes him look as if he is showing off and showing those, perhaps under his rule, that he is capable of taking charge. Just like the sculpture of Augustus of Primaporta, Commodus is portrayed as a God. Augustus was barefoot giving him the appearance of a God while Commodus is given the appearance of Hercules. With a God-like appearance, they would probably be more appealing to others around them or the people under their control. Below Commodus is a head-less and arm-less figure. They figure has features that could resemble either a man or a woman.Their breasts are shaped more like a woman's breasts yet the leg and the foot looks very masculine. Next to the figure is a sphere, leading up to what looks like a shield with the Sun in the middle of it. On top of theses objects, rest the powerful looking Commodus. His body is very muscular and even his facial air is given an orderly look to it. Overall, with his bat, perfect hair, muscular body, a God like face, and trophies surround him, Commodus appears to be a strong and courageous ruler. 

The Head of Caracalla is very similar to the Portrait Head of an Elder statue. They both show a mans face and in each sculpture, we see men who look aged and worn out. Caracalla has fine lines or perhaps wrinkles on his forehead and cheeks. Because of these lines, his cheeks appear to be saggy. He has his eyebrows creased as if he is angry or unhappy. He looks as if he has been defeated with such a stern look on his face. Also, his jaw looks clenched as if he is angry. The fact that his eyes are looking up makes me think that he is looking up to someone who has defeated him. Normally throughout the pieces that we have viewed so far, those who defeat look down upon their enemy but Caracalla is looking up. He also has creases below his eyes making them look tired and saggy. Unlike, the Bust of Commodus as Hercules, the Head of Caracalla gives off the impression of defeat and a real man, not a man seen as a Godly figure. Caracalla depicts a real man who has done his time as a ruler. 

Although both of these sculptures depict two different men in two opposite forms, they are both similar in a sense that they both portray propaganda. Commodus being viewed as a God, Hercules, a man that he is not, probably made people believe that he was a God-like man with the great courage and power. The fact that he is also seen with trophies around him such as the lion skin that he wears and the headless figure below him. makes him also seem powerful to the viewers of this statue. One can propagate from this bust that Commodus was the perfect ruler. The Head of Caracalla's old and defeated look still makes him look appealing to his viewers giving a sense that he was a hard worker and gave it his all as a ruler. Just like the Portrait Head of an Elder, he looks as if he has the wisdom and experience of a powerful and successful ruler. I feel that both of the statues appeal to the same audience which would be those who they ruled, future generations, and enemies. The fact that they are both almost praising these men as rulers shows that they wanted people then and now to see them the way they are depicted in these sculptures. 

All in all, even though both of these sculptures portray two different men, one full of strength and one very fragile looking, they both show a sense of courage and strength through their propagating features. 

The Marbles of Parthenon

After hearing the lecture and reading the few articles about the Parthenon Marbles, I feel that my opinion goes back and forth. Overall though, I feel that having the marbles in a museum is fair and I feel that having them in a Greek museum would also be fair. Yet there seem to be pros and cons to both.

Lord Elgin, ambassador of Constantinople, made up his mind that he wanted to put the Parthenon Marbles in his home as decoration. He solely wanted these sculptures for their beauty. He negotiated with the Turkish government who were in control of Greece at the time. Eventually his agents began chipping away at the Parthenon Marbles. the Ottoman's were very pleased with Britain's help in blocking Napolean in Egypt that they forced Elgin, in 1816, to sell the marbles to the British government. He was given what would be four million dollars today, for the marbles. It was enough to pay off his debt from his divorce. The British museum then had the frieze depicting the birth of Athena placed along their walls where people could walk by and see every detail. In 1879, more than 15,000 art students studied the marbles and from then on, many more students were given the opportunity. 

By placing the marbles in a museum, they were not only better preserved, but also easier to look at. If the marbles were still on top of the Parthenon, the details and techniques used would not be able to be examined because they would be so high up. I think that is one pro for them to be held in a museum. Although, it is sad that they were separated from their original origin, I still think that the marbles themselves serve as one whole piece of artwork that should be admired to the fullest. For scholars and people who show a great interest in art history, I think that this makes for another positive aspect of the marbles being separated from the Parthenon. It's already amazing just learning about the sculptures and the meanings behind them, so being able to see them up close would be even better. Seeing the Parthenon itself would also be great, but if the marbles were up high on the Parthenon, we would not be able to appreciate them as much. 

Much controversy has come about as to whether or not the marbles should be returned to Greece. In November of 2002, the Director of the British Museum, Neil MacGregor finally agreed to meet with the Greek Minister, Evangelos Venizelos to discuss the return of the marbles. Greece threw out the option of opening up a museum in Athens, that could  be ran by the British, and hold the marbles of Parthenon. They even offered to provide the British Museum with other Greek artifacts.To me, there seem to be plenty of benefits for the British in this agreement yet they won't give in. I feel that placing the marbles back in Athens would be fair because they would be close to their origin and after all, they are Greek artifacts. It would also be nice having the Parthenon and its marbles close together so that they can be seen almost together. According to the Britishmuseum.org, they have 5 million visitors per year, which is probably why they would like to keep the marbles where they are at. Yet, if they still had control over the museum in Athens, they would still probably have the same number of visitors if not more. To me, they are just being stubborn. I feel that Greece has offered them some great incentives that could be very profitable and beneficial to the British. Having two museums with several different artifacts, including more of the Greeks best antiquity seems like quite the deal to me. The British museum also seems to mainly focus on the aesthetics of the marbles making them pieces that are solely meant for beauty. Within the marbles are great historical stories about the Goddess Athena, also known as the Goddess of Wisdom. These pieces tell her story and although they are very beautiful pieces, they should also be appreciated for the story that they tell. I think that by placing the marbles in Athens, the history behind them would come back. They would be closer to the Parthenon, where they were first created, and together, they would create the entire story of the Goddess Athena. There is also the fact that "Athens" was named after Athena. It would make sense to have a work of art dedicated to the Goddess Athena, in the town that was named after her. 

All Greece is asking for, is for the Parthenon marbles to be placed back where they belong, which is in the area that they originated from. I think that Greece is being very fair about this situation and that they really aren't asking for a lot from the British. The marbles of Parthenon should also be returned to the city of Athens for the sake of its history and to represent the town that it was created in and for. I also think that having the marbles placed in a museum rather than on the Parthenon is more suitable for those who appreciate art and the beautiful marbles themselves. 

The Statues of the Cycladic Women Compared to Venus

I really enjoyed learning about the Venus of Willendorf and her story as well as the many theories that were brought up. Her story really stuck with me and now that the statues of the Cycladic women have been brought up in our lectures, my interest has been struck again because of the major similarities that the Venus of Willendorf and the statues of the Cycladic women share. They are similar yet very different in many ways but one can still infer that the statues have a similar meaning and one might have influenced the other. 

Discovered early on in the Aegean area were stylized statues of men and women. These statues were found to be representations of the Cycladic people and more of these statues represented women. Structurally, the statues are very simple and abstract. None of them contain faces, hiding their identity. They all have extended feet so that they are standing on their toes which could mean that they are meant to lay down. The figures of women all have a slight curve in the abdomen area, giving them the appearance of a stomach. They are also given slight curves on their chest, creating the appearance of breasts. Across their chests, resting upon their stomach, are their arms as if to cover up their breasts. These statues are very interesting  because they hide so much meaning within them and they also relate to another very prominent statue, The Venus of Willendorf.

When comparing the two statues, there are some very obvious features that they share. They both lack faces, keeping their identity hidden or maybe making it so that it is not the center of attention. Both of the statues have emphasis on two prominent areas related to reproduction such as the breasts and the belly. The emphasis in these areas lead to the theories of these statues representing fertility and reproduction. Both of their feet are extended with their toes facing down so that they are unable to stand. They both hide their meanings leading to many different theories as to why they were created in the first place. 

While both of the statues have pretty big similarities, they also have many differences. While the Venus of Willendorf portrays a larger and more immodest woman, these Cycladic statues of women are portrayed as being the opposite. They appear to have a thinner shape, they have emphasis on their breasts and stomach yet not as much as Venus, and they are also much taller than Venus standing at twenty-five inches where as Venus stands at about four inches. The Cycladic statue shows a more modest woman in the fact that her arms are crossed, covering up her breasts. She is representing the original Venus statue more because the original statue would pose in a way to cover up her breasts and torso area. 

Both statues have their own individual characteristics that are different from one another but still support their theory of representing reproduction. The Venus of Willendorf also contains a large torso area. The areas that seem to matter to reproduction are all very emphasized on the Venus of Willendorf's body making her look ideal for child baring. The statue of the Cycladic woman was discovered to have once been painted. One theory for these paint marks was that they were used to draw attention to certain areas where people needed healing power of some sort. In the Cycladic woman's case, the paint would be on her stomach drawing attention to a fertile area on her body. The paint could have also represented that she was already pregnant. 

A lot of the evidence and theories given to both the Venus of Willendorf and the the statues of the Cycladic women lead to them being representations of reproduction. Because of their similarities, it seems as if this theory gets a little closer to becoming a fact. The similarities also lead us to believe that the Venus of Willendorf, from the prehistoric age, influenced the creation of the statues of the Cycladic women later on.

A Look at the ZIggurats and the Pyramids of Giza

The Ziggurats of the Ancient Near East were built using brick and tar-like structure to hold the bricks together. The structures were large and blocky, consisting of stairs and terraces. The Ziggurat temples would be whitewashed or made white once they were finished being built. Many of the temples were even built on top of rubble. The Ziggurats stood about 170 feet tall and resembled mountains through their large shape and height. Mountains were known as spiritual plains and had spiritual imagery to the people. The sole purpose for the building of the Ziggurats was to worship. Names such as "the House of the Mountains" and "Bond Between Heaven and Earth" were given to the Ziggurats because they represented the middle ground between Heaven and civilization. On top of the Ziggurats were shrines where people could go and worship as well as take offerings to the gods and goddesses.  

The Pyramids of Giza were comprised of 2.5 ton stones and the ground had to of been made flat before building. Each pyramid began with a Mastaba, which was a rectangular structure with a flat top and underneath the mastaba was a tomb. Within the mastaba was a room called a Serdab where the statue of the deceased was kept. Bodies were mummified and placed in the mastabas. The reasoning behind the mummifications and statues were to preserve the Ca of the deceased or in other words, their soul. The Pyramids were then built on top of the mastabas. The Pyramids of Giza were built West of the Nile, also known as the land of the setting sun, symbolizing death. They were given a white limestone casing with a gold cap. Today the white limestone is no longer there because it wore away. The three main pyramids dedicated to Pharaoh's were Khufu, Khafe, and Menkaure. The pyramid Khufu is the oldest and the tallest standing at 450 feet tall. Pharaoh Khufu was placed within his pyramid instead of below. Blocks had to push on the sides of the pyramids to keep them from collapsing on the Pharaoh's tomb. The pyramids were often raided by thieves because of the art and treasures that were within. 

When comparing the Ziggurats and the Pyramids of Giza, it's clear that they were both used to worship. The Ziggurats were used to get closer to gods and goddesses and show appreciation for them and the pyramids were used to worship and appreciate the pharaohs. To many people in our culture today, the ZIggurats the Pyramids were like a church. Both structures stand tall and show greatness in their height as well as their all around large structure. They were both also given the color of white, which could symbolize peace and purity. The pyramids as well as the Ziggurats were given names dedicated to those whom they worshipped or treasured. Both structures were purposely built for important figures and were meant to carry on the names of either their gods and goddesses or their pharaohs. Both structures were very successful with their dedications and carrying on the names of those whom they worshipped. 

There are also many differences within each of these structures. The Ziggurats were meant to be climbed and for people to stand on top of them to get closer to their gods and goddesses, where as the pyramids held their important figures within. The shapes of both of these figures are very different. The Ziggurats were more blocky where as the pyramids were obviously shaped as pyramids with a triangular structure. When it came to the structure of the pyramids, having a flat ground was very important. When it came to building the Ziggurats, they were just built on top of rubble. 

Overall, the Ziggurats and the Pyramids of Giza are both very intriguing structures and the physical features, as well as the meaning behind them, both make them the important structures that they were and continue to be today. 

The Warka Vase

Standing about three feet tall, telling a story within three different registers is the Warka Vase. The Warka Vase illustrates different scenes from early Mesopotamia's offerings and ritual marriages. I chose this work of art because it shows great importance in its story through its detail, the stone that it was carved into, and the placement of each figure and scene. 

According to our book, the vase was carved out of alabaster or a fine white stone. From the picture, the stone looks very sturdy, which to me means that this piece was meant to last and preserve what stories are being illustrated. After reading about the Warka Vase and looking at the pictures, I feel that the illustrations were meant to last and be passed on to remind generations after, what was important. I think that this was their way of documenting their culture and trying to keep it alive. In one of the lectures, we hear that writing was not an option, therefore illustrations were created. Considering that this was their only form of documenting, their illustrations must have been like photo albums or videos to us. 

The illustrations are divided into registers which are horizontal bands. On the Warka Vase, there are three registers and each of them have an important illustration in them. The illustrations carved into these registers provide a lot of detail. In the animals and humans, you can see lines and shapes that make them appear muscular. The lines all look very deep and sharp, producing depth and bringing the illustrations more to life. Movement is implied by the placement of the legs on the animals and on the people which also brings more life to the illustrations, especially in the second register. In the second register, men walk along with offerings in their hands.  Their torsos face the viewers also giving us a sense of movement. Clearly they are taking their offerings to someone who is important to them such as the goddess Inana who is carved into the third register. They each hold something different to present to the goddess

In the third register, the goddess Inana stands between two poles, or her gate, with her rich land behind her. She is the tallest figure in the third register and also has a larger appearance which leads the eye to her. Her scale compared to the other figures also makes her look more powerful. The fact that she is higher up than everyone else shows that she is someone of importance, which is also known as the hierarchy of scale.Depth is shown in the third register making her land look big and full. Also, out of all three registers, the third seems to be the largest which could indicate that it is the most important part of the story. It also overpowers the other two registers by being at the top. It has more control over the other two by sitting on top of them. In the book, it states that the third scene represents the ritual marriage between the goddess Inana and her consort, Dumuzi. It says that this took place during the New Year's festival to ensure fertility of crops, animals, and people, to continue the wellness of Uruk. This could be why the register with the goddess Inana sits above the other two. Inana was the Goddess of Fertility therefore she was seen as having power over the production of crops, animal, and humans. Everything that humans needed to survive and keep their land, was in the hands of the Inana. 

The structure of the Warka Vase also seems to show from the bottom to top, what is important in means of survival. At the bottom there are the crops and the animals. The crops being before the animals. In the middle there are the humans, and at the top is a celebration of survival. The crops feed the animals and humans, the crops and animals both feed the humans, and with healthy, surviving humans, the population of Uruk can grow and survive. 

The fact that this Vase was produced to share the story of the goddess Inana and the New Year's festival for fertility shows that this was an important event and the goddess Inana was an important person to the town of Uruk. I find the vase to be a beautiful work of art and I love how so much is told within three registers of illustrations. 

The Venus of Willendorf

        The Venus of Willendorf serves as an all around interesting figure because of the theories that were made, the questions that were raised, and the questions that still remain. I myself am still very curious about the exact meaning behind her unique creation. The carving of the Venus of Willendorf portrays a woman with a very large figure, lacking a face and feet. She appears to have no clothes on and every part of her body can be seen. The body of Venus seems to be the start of the mystery behind her origination. 

        Venus of Willendorf was given the name "Venus" by Marguis Paul de Vibraye because of the sense of irony that he found. Venus of Willendorf is exactly the opposite of the traditional Venus that is represented in prehistoric art. Most women in prehistoric art showed a sense of modesty as they cover up their breasts and pubic area. They are also tall and more fit compared to Venus of Willendorf, hence the sense of irony. Edouard Piette called her "Venus" which describes an ivory woman who's torso only survives. She has been nicknamed "The Pear" because of her round shape. Now, the name "Venus" has a negative connotation because it describes obese and masculine. Some have found a debate in whether or not Venus is a woman. The parts of her body all clearly say that she is a woman, but because of her large figure, she appears physically dominant and to some that means she is masculine making her a man. Because of the appearance that is seen in the carving of Venus of Willendorf, the name "Venus" is no longer a name given to an ideal woman. In our generation today, many women would not appreciate being called a Venus, especially if they were being referred to as Venus of Willendorf. We seem to think that the original Venus, just like many artists did before, has an ideal appearance. She is pretty, she is fit, and she is feminine. 

        The carving of Venus of Willendorf has lead to the creation of many theories. In some cases she is thought to represent fertility. The fact that she has large breasts, larger hips, and an exaggerated pubic area has lead to the belief that she is a representation of the ideal child barer. Another theory is that she was an obese woman of power. Her large shape proves that she was not out hunting and gathering her own food so she must have had someone doing it for her. This then leads to the thought of there once being a matriarchy where women were in power. Women might have been the ones who were once masculine and powerful. Then, there is the theory that Venus of Willendorf represents the Earth Mother. It became known that many tribes worshipped females in certain instances. 

        Overall, Venus of Willendorf raised a lot of questions and created a negative meaning for the name "Venus" but she still got many people thinking and left an impression on those who found interest in her. She even added a little twist in prehistoric art with her unusual portrayal of the female figure. I found the story and theories about Venus of Willendorf to be very intriguing and I believe that there was a purpose for her creation.

Introduction

Hello! My name is Courtney and I am currently a junior at Central Washington University. I have always loved creating through many different forms of art, which is why I chose to major in Graphic Design. I am excited for this class because I feel that I have very little knowledge in the history of art and I hope to be inspired. Good luck to everyone!