The Cyclades people of the Bronze Age in the Aegean Era, like many other cultures around that time, had a particular style about their works. The “Figure of a Woman” statuette from approximately 2500 BCE very much resembles the “Venus of Willendorf from the Paleolithic Era about 20,000 years earlier. These figures each hold a distinct style from the periods in which they were carved.
The Cycladic figure is carved out of marble, which is not surprising, due to their ample supply of it. This contrasts with the limestone Venus. The figure stands 24 ¾” tall, but like the Willendorf figure, standing 4 3/8th,” it does not stand on its own. If they do not stand, then perhaps they were meant to be carried. This could mean that the people of these cultures did large amounts of traveling or maybe the statues were used for rituals of some sort. The marble stone makes for a smooth texture on the Cycladic figure, whereas the limestone looks to have been worn a bit more, and leaves a rougher texture. Both figures are obviously of women, and it is likely that women also carved them.
The artists of each figure left their pieces faceless, so they do not appear to represent anyone in particular. The only features that appear are a nose on the Cycladic woman and what looks to be braided hair or a knitted hat on the Venus. The body of the Willendorf statue is thought to represent fertility through an emphasis on the female reproductive parts and the belly. Even though the Cycladic figure is not represented in such a way, they have the same symmetrical pose with small arms carved folding across the torso. Also, there is evidence of an original painted design on the Cycladic woman, including multiple eyes on the head. This is thought to be another way of depicting fertility or pregnancy, so they could have had the same function in each culture.
Interesting thoughts. I'm especially intrigued by the asymmetrical and painted markings on the Cycladic figurine (like the isolated eye that was painted on the thigh of the figure on p. 88 in our textbook). It's interesting to realize that this symmetrical, sleek figure looked a little bit different during the Cycladic period.
ReplyDelete-Prof. Bowen
I thought you made a good pint with the comparison of the two pieces; I specifically thought the fact that both pieces do not have defined faces to be very interesting. This makes me wonder, perhaps if the faces are not defined and both are meant to be carried, maybe it is passed down over time, and with no defined form, it can represent anything the bearer wants it to represent.
ReplyDeleteI find it very interesting that a 2 foot marble statue was not made to stand. I realize that this piece may have been intended to be carried, but that doesn't seem quite as convenient as a 4 inch limestone figurine. I think that maybe the Cycladic figure of a woman was carved with pointed feet so she would have to be laid upon the ground.
ReplyDeleteI found it very interesting that you mentioned the materials that the figures were made out of and how each must have been chosen because of what was readily available in each area. Another thing that caught my attention is the texture of each that you have described. There must have been a reason that each of these works has a different feel to it,then again it may have just been all that they had in their possession.
ReplyDeleteWhile the comparison is short, it is relatively concise and to the point. The fact that the undefined faces allows for a certain anonymity would contribute to the theory that they were used as representations of fertility. It is curious that both statues were meant to be carried.
ReplyDelete