The making of images in metal seems to have flourished throughout the Third Intermediate Period and most of the Late Period. Most of the evidence from the Twenty-first Dynasty comes from the tombs of Psusennes I and Shoshenq II within the temple enclosure at Tanis. It includes the silver anthropoid coffin and gold mask of Psusennes I, the gold mask of his official Wendebawended, and that of Shoshenq II (Stierlin and Ziegler 1987: pls. 1-4, 56-7, 94-5). These objects strongly reflect New Kingdom influence; it seems that the craftsmen of the Twenty-first Dynasty had inherited from the New Kingdom advanced skills in making metal images of which, apart from the gold mask and coffins of Tutankhamun, almost nothing has survived.
Even less has survived of fine metal sculpture made during the New Kingdom; most probably, examples from that period had been melted down for reuse. But the size, the quality and, in many cases, the elaborate inlays on bronze statues made during from the Twenty-first Dynasty down to the Twenty-sixth would not have been possible without a knowledge of earlier casting techniques. One of the finest of these bronze statues, made in the Twenty-second Dynasty and now in the Louvre, is a standing figure of the Divine Consort Karomama (Hill 2007: fig. 19, p. 39; Aldred et al. 1980: figs. 105, 108, pp. 121, 127). Like the later Divine Consorts, Karomama was a princess. She is sumptuously garbed in a pleated gown of New Kingdom type, with a large necklace which, like the various patterns on her dress, is inlaid in gold and silver, much of which is still preserved.
Bronze figures of kings and of the Twenty-fifth Dynasty Divine Consorts were usually quite small, but sometimes richly inlaid with gold (Hill 2007: 82-3, 90-1, Russmann 2001: no. 115, pp. 217-18). A standing figure of the god Amun in the Metropolitan Museum deserves mention for its material. The statuette, which is almost seven inches high, is cast in solid gold (Hill 2007: 84-9). Bronze statues of private people were made in the same styles as the stone sculpture of their day. Those from the Twenty-first to the Twenty-fourth Dynasties have costumes, hairstyles, and facial features reminiscent of the preceding New Kingdom (Russmann 2001: no. 117, pp. 119-21). Though not heavily inscribed, as were contemporary stone statues, the bronze figures are often decorated with representations of gods (Hill 2007: figs. 45-6, pp. 76-7).
Almost no bronze statues of private individuals can confidently be ascribed to the Twenty-fifth Dynasty. The figure of a high-ranking woman named Takushit, in the Athens National Archaeological Museum, is usually ascribed to this period, because her name means ‘‘The Kushite Woman.’’ Takushit’s plump figure is covered by a long-sleeved dress, which is decorated with incised figures of gods inlaid with precious metals (Hill 2007: 98-105). A partially preserved standing figure of a man, which was imported in antiquity to Greece, was found there in the 1960s (Hill 2007: 110-13). The best preserved section of this statue includes the torso, which has proportions of Old Kingdom type, characteristic of Twenty-fifth Dynasty stone sculpture.
A Twenty-sixth Dynasty bronze figure in the British Museum wears a leopard skin and an inscribed band like those described above for Montuemhet and his son, over a long, pleated kilt (Russmann 2001: no. 130, pp. 238-9). Like many stone statues of this period, he held the figure of a god, only the base of which remains. Another Twenty-sixth Dynasty figure is the silver statuette of a woman in the Metropolitan Museum (Hill 2007: 114, 150-5). Her full-breasted figure and her short, curled headdress are characteristic of her day. Her identity, however, is a mystery. She is nude, except for her jewelry and, like some stone statues of Twenty-sixth Dynasty officials, she has the cartouches of King Necho on her upper arms. She may represent a servant, or even a concubine.
FURTHER READING
The Third Intermediate Period and the Late Period are seriously underrepresented in almost all books about Egyptian sculpture or Egyptian art generally. But the books cited in this text as sources for particular images also include other late statues, very often others discussed here. Thus the reader who does not have access to the book cited for a particular statue may well find it included in one or more of the others. Sculpture of the Third Intermediate Period has just begun to receive concentrated study in the work of Helmut Brandl, whose ‘‘Bemerkungen’’ and Untersuchungen mark the first major attempt to organize this large body of material and to deal with such problems as the reuse of earlier statues. For royal sculpture of the Twenty-fifth
Dynasty, Russmann 1974 is out of date, but remains a useful collection of Egyptian representations of these kings. For those found in Kush, Bonnet and Valbelle 2006 is essential. I have discussed in the text the problems of attempts to identify royal representations of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty. The same is true, to a large extent, of Thirtieth Dynasty royal sculpture, which has yet to be completely published. As for private statuary of the Twenty-fifth through the Thirtieth Dynasties, I do not know of any comprehensive publications of images, much less serious studies.
World History
