Page 26 - The Art & Architecture of the Ancient Orient_Neat

INTRODUCTION

Strictly speaking, a history of the art of the ancient Near East has never been written.
Twenty-five years ago it would have been impossible to make the attempt, for most of
the monuments illustrated in this volume have only been discovered since then. But even
to-day a basic difficulty remains. There is nothing resembling the continuity of tradition
which has preserved our familiarity with the art of classical antiquity. We may be
attracted by the peculiar beauty of some Near Eastern works, and repelled by others;
in either case they remain enigmatic, unless we acquire some insight into the spiritual
climate and the geographical and historical conditions in which they were created. In
other words, it is the archaeologist who must build the scaffold from which we can view
these ancient monuments as works of art. Once this is done, we sec in their proper light
not only the individual works, but ancient Near Eastern art as a whole.
The art of the ancient Near East occupies a peculiar position, in that it brought into
being many of the artistic categories which we take for granted. When, in Egypt or
Mesopotamia, men built monumental temples or erected statues, or steles, they dis­
covered modes of expression without precedent. These innovations in the field of art
constitute but one aspect of a change by which prehistoric cultures were transformed
into the first great civilizations.
For untold centuries the ancient Near East, like the rest of Asia, Europe, and North
Africa, sustained a sparse population of farmers. They dwelt in small villages or home­
steads which were self-supporting, self-contained, and practically unchanging. The crafts
of agriculture and stockbreeding, spinning and weaving, flint-knapping and pot-making
were known, and art consisted in the adornment of man’s person, or of his tools and
chattels. But between 3500 and 3000 u.c. two societies of an entirely different order
emerged within this vast continuum of prehistoric village cultures. The Mesopotamians
congregated in cities, the Egyptians united under the rule of a single divine king. Writ­
ing was invented, copper was employed for implements instead of stone, and trade with
foreign countries assumed unprecedented proportions. It was then that monumental
architecture and sculpture made their appearance.
The change took place almost simultaneously in Mesopotamia and Egypt, Meso­
potamia starting a little earlier. It is certain that the two countries were in contact, and
that Egypt was stimulated by the Mesopotamian example. Yet there is no question of
slavish imitation. In fact it is characteristic of this pre-classical world that it possessed, at
all times, two distinct centres. Egypt and Mespotamia were the focal points of civiliza­
tion from about 3000 until 500 b.c., when Greece took the lead. But from die very first
the two centres showed different, and often contrasting, mentalities.
The other countries of the ancient Near East - Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, and Persia
- lack cultural continuity. Their art shows a succession of more or less promising starts
winch lead nowhere. It may be that some of these peoples were not gifted in die^plastic
XXV