Oldest Ancient Egyptian Art: Rock Art, Carvings, Palettes and Maceheads | Middle East And North Africa

PREDYNASTIC ART

Naqada piece carved from hippo ivory

David Wengrow of University College London wrote: “Predynastic art” describes a range of visual imagery and ornamental forms attested in Egypt and Lower Nubia from c.4000 - 3300 B.C.. The known corpus comprises a rich variety of figural and non-figural designs, often applied to functional objects that were widely available, such as cosmetic palettes, ceramic vessels, and combs. Free-standing figurines are also known, as are occasional examples of large-scale painting and sculpture. Such images were a pervasive feature of Egyptian social life prior to the formation of the dynastic state, when elaborate personal display appears to have become a prerogative of elite groups. [Source: David Wengrow, Institute of Archaeology, University College London, UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 2009, escholarship.org ]

“The term “Predynastic art” is conventionally used to describe a range of visual imagery and ornamental forms attested in Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia, and subsequently throughout Egypt, during the early and middle part of the fourth millennium (c.4000 - 3300 B.C.). The northward dissemination of these decorative forms constitutes part of a wider expansion of cultural influences and practices from the Nile Valley into the Delta, which begins around 3600 B.C. and characterizes the transition from the Naqada I to Naqada II periods. During the final centuries of the fourth millennium the majority ceased to be produced, or their production was tightly restricted, as the display of images throughout Egypt appears to have become a prerogative of elite groups.

“This attempt by the early dynastic state to co- opt, restrict, or eliminate pre-existing modes of visual expression implies that they had important social functions, reflected in the incorporation of art objects into Predynastic burials as ways of enhancing and extending a funerary image of the deceased that was committed to social memory.

“Most of what is termed Predynastic art derives from cemeteries excavated throughout Egypt during the early twentieth century, such as the large burial grounds of Naqada and Ballas, where the stylistic development of decorative forms provided an important component in Petrie’s establishment of a relative dating sequence. Around that time many examples also entered public and private collections from the antiquities market. Some are of doubtful authenticity, including a number of anthropomorphic figurines and a storage jar painted with an image of a sailing ship which is still widely, but unreliably, cited as the earliest evidence for sail-powered transport in the Eastern Mediterranean.

“The surviving corpus of Predynastic art represents only a fraction of what was produced. Little can be said, for instance, about the decorative designs that were undoubtedly applied to the bodies of people and animals. Life-size sculpture was present by no later than the Naqada II Period, as attested by limestone fragments of a human statue found at Hierakonpolis. Much decorative work in metal, probably hammered rather than cast, has no doubt also been lost through recycling. The existence of other, perishable, media is indicated by the polychrome painting on fragments of linen from Gebelein and by the extensive pictorial decoration found on the plastered walls of a mud-brick tomb at Hierakonpolis, dating to the mid-fourth millennium B.C.. This unique composition comprises vignettes of boats, animals, and humans in combat that vary in scale and orientation, and may have been created by numerous painters during the course of an extended funerary ritual. Elements of these scenes bear comparison with images on Decorated Ware, while others—such as the so-called “master of animals”—reflect the growing influence of representational forms imported from Southwest Asia. These forms are likely to have been conveyed on small and durable objects such as cylinder seals, and may have stimulated the adoption of relief carving (e.g., on ivory knife- handles) towards the end of the Predynastic Period (c.3400 – 3300 B.C.). The latter technique was subsequently taken to new heights on ceremonial cosmetic palettes and maceheads of the late fourth millennium B.C.”

Predynastic Art Objects and Their Subjects and Meaning

gazelle

David Wengrow of University College London wrote: “In spite of its wide currency, the term “Predynastic art” has little meaning outside the context of the art market and the specialized disciplinary conventions of art history. There is no evidence to suggest that such a category had significance for prehistoric actors. It is a modern abstraction from a more encompassing system of communication and display that appears to have been strongly focused upon the ornamentation and modification of the human body, in life as well as death. This is suggested by the highly mobile and portable character of many decorated objects, such as combs, spoons, and pins carved from bone or ivory, siltstone palettes and “tags”, miniature vessels, pendants, and flint knives; by their function in grooming and in the preparation of cosmetic, and perhaps also medicinal, substances; and by the provision of many of these objects with some means of suspension. Most of these artifact types, and the complex system of personal presentation to which they belonged, make their first appearance in the archaeological record of the Nile Valley (Egyptian and Sudanese) during the fifth millennium B.C., when domestic animals and plants were first widely adopted. However, it is only during the early fourth millennium, and within the more restricted area between the Second Cataract and Middle Egypt, that they were routinely used as surfaces for depiction or shaped into the forms of animals and other features of the landscape. [Source: David Wengrow, Institute of Archaeology, University College London, UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 2009, escholarship.org ]

“In addition to objects attached to the body, the known repertory of Predynastic art also comprises many free-standing forms. Among the most widely discussed are clay figurines of humans and animals, as well as examples that appear to deliberately combine elements from different species. Free-standing figurines in ivory and bone appear not to have been produced in any quantity until the very end of the Predynastic Period, which saw a proliferation of such figures that continued into the Naqada III Period and beyond. The interpretation of Predynastic figurines is an area of ongoing controversy and no consensus exists as to their purpose or even their basic subject matter. Some are closely comparable in form and surface detail to figures rendered in other media, such as those modeled or painted on ceramic vessels. This fluidity of decorative forms between mobile media is strongly characteristic of Predynastic art as a whole, but frequent attempts to extend such comparisons to the extensive record of Nilotic rock art remain inconclusive and do not in themselves provide a reliable method for dating the latter.

“Another important class of free-standing object is pottery, use of which as a surface for painting underwent a number of changes during the Predynastic Period. Most striking is the shift between two monochrome traditions, from a light-on-dark to a dark-on- light format, which marks the onset of Naqada II (c.3600 B.C.). The former White Cross-Lined Ware (abbreviated as “C-Ware”) is known primarily from cemeteries in Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia, dating to the early fourth millennium B.C.. It features loosely symmetrical arrangements of living beings, particularly wild river-animals such as hippopotami and reptiles, occasionally depicted alongside figures of human hunters. Painting is executed in white on a polished red background and typically appears on open forms such as bowls and beakers. By contrast, the later Decorated Ware (abbreviated as “D-Ware”) was made in a marl fabric that created a pale surface for decoration, executed with a dull red pigment. Its characteristic vessel form is a closed globular jar, probably inspired by contemporaneous stone vessels, the patterned texture of which is sometimes imitated in paint. On vessels with figural decoration, activities relating to water remain a dominant theme, notably through the inclusion of paddled boats with emblematic standards; but the repertory of riverside creatures has changed with the inclusion of flamingos and horned ungulates.”

Rock Art in Egypt

Rock art from a Libyan cave

Dirk Huyge of the Royal Museums of Art and History in Brussels, Belgium wrote: “Rock art, basically being non-utilitarian, non-textual anthropic markings on natural rock surfaces, was an extremely widespread graphical practice in ancient Egypt. While the apogee of the tradition was definitely the Predynastic Period (mainly fourth millennium B.C.), examples date from the late Palaeolithic (c. 15,000 B.C.) until the Islamic era. Geographically speaking, “Egyptian” rock art is known from many hundreds of sites along the margins of the Upper Egyptian and Nubian Nile Valley and in the desert hinterlands to the east and west. Despite clear regional discrepancies, most of this rock art displays a great deal of shared subject matter, such as the profusion of boat figures, supposedly attesting to the existence of a more or less uniform “spiritual culture” throughout the above-defined area. Furthermore, its intimate iconographical relationship to the archaeologically known Egyptian cultures, both in a synchronic and a diachronic perspective, allows for some solid reasoning regarding the raison d’être of this graphic tradition. Without excluding other possible meanings and motivations, it seems that the greater part of the rock art closely reflects the religious and ideological concerns of its makers. [Source: Dirk Huyge, Royal Museums of Art and History, Brussels, Belgium, UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 2009, escholarship.org ]

“In this brief and necessarily selective overview of Egyptian rock art research, the “Bedouin-oriented” petroglyphs from the westernmost part of the Negev Desert and Sinai Peninsula will not be discussed. This art, characterized essentially by ibex-hunting and camel-riding scenes, belongs to the Egyptian rock art domain from a geopolitical viewpoint only. Similarly, the vast “pastoral” pictorial complexes of the Gilf Kebir and Gebel el-Uweinat (near or on the Egypt-Libya-Sudan border) will not be considered. This rock art, in fact, refers much more to the central Saharan artistic repertoire (Round Head and Bovidian schools/periods in particular) than to the Nilotic, and is also quite distinct from anything that has thus far been found in the oases of the Western Desert.

“Egyptian rock art, as considered here, is therefore limited to the southern Egyptian and northern Sudanese (Nubian) Nile Valley, the Eastern (Red Sea) Desert, and parts of the Western (Libyan) Desert, including most of the oases. Apart from the numerous technical and stylistic similarities, the rock art within this area displays a great deal of shared subject matter, perhaps the most striking of which is the profusion of boat representations. It may therefore be postulated that this rock art reflects a more or less uniform “spiritual culture”—a cognitive consensus or communal sphere of ideas in which communication through rock art (the collective use of certain intellectual concepts and structures) was possible and stimulated by society as a whole. This vast rock art repertoire can moreover be intimately linked with the local, archaeologically known cultures. These cultures, both prehistoric and historic, are characterized by an overwhelmingly rich iconography. That the latter have often been found in well-documented archaeological contexts holds great potential, not only with regard to dating and culture-historical attribution of the rock art, but also with regard to interpretation (meaning and motivation).

Rock Art Sites in Egypt

Qurta rock art

Dirk Huyge of the Royal Museums of Art and History in Brussels, Belgium wrote: “The potentialities of Egyptian rock art have been explored at many different locations throughout the above-defined area. One of the places where highly significant discoveries have been made during the past few decades is the Theban Desert immediately northwest of Luxor. In the scope of the Theban Desert Road Survey, John and Deborah Darnell of Yale University have recorded, apart from a wealth of rock inscriptions, an impressive array of early to terminal Predynastic rock art, including depictions of boats, various animals, and superbly detailed human figures. Much of this rock art is closely linked to ancient caravan routes short-cutting the Qena Bend of the Nile and/or leading from the Nile Valley to the oases of the Western Desert. The age of many of these figures is well established. On the basis of close resemblances to depictions on painted ceramics and other decorated artifacts, many date unquestionably to the mid- to late Predynastic Period (Naqada I-II, c. 4000 – 3200 B.C.). Others may even be older and can be attributed to the early Predynastic (Tasian or Badarian, c. 4500 – 4000 B.C.). [Source: Dirk Huyge, Royal Museums of Art and History, Brussels, Belgium, UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 2009, escholarship.org ]

“These new discoveries complement rock art long known from the Nile Valley proper, such as that from the site of Elkab and from the Eastern Desert. The latter area, already partly explored by Weigall, Winkler, and others in the early part of the previous century, has seen relatively little systematic recording in recent years. However, some surveys, conducted by amateur archaeologists since the late 1990s between the Wadi Hammamat in the north and the Wadi Barramiya in the south, have substantially added to the currently available documentation. One of the most striking features of this Eastern Desert rock art is the preponderance of images of high-prowed boats, more than 240 of which have been logged to date. In this sense and in several other aspects (for instance, a greater emphasis on cattle representations and herding scenes), it is different from the rock art of the Nile Valley. How these regional discrepancies should be explained is still a matter of dispute and speculation. It has been suggested that the Eastern Desert rock art was the work of “proto-Bedouin”—that is, nomads who resided in the desert on a semi- permanent basis, but were in regular contact with Nile Valley dwellers and had an intimate knowledge of the natural and cultural Nilotic environment.

“The suggestion may also apply to the rock art of the Western Desert, the oases in particular, which also has its own particularities as well as many similarities to the rock art of the Nile Valley. One striking feature of Western Desert rock art, that of Dakhla and Kharga Oases in particular, consists of stylized images of sitting or standing obese women dressed in often elaborately decorated long skirts. According to Lech Krzyżaniak (personal communication) the images are certainly pre-Old Kingdom and should be dated to early or mid-Holocene times (eighth to fourth millennium B.C.). As the area of distribution of these figures corresponds to that of the local Neolithic (Bashendi A and B) assemblages, they are possibly associated and may therefore belong to the sixth or fifth millennium B.C.. It is possible that rock art from Farafra Oasis, including cave paintings featuring numerous hand stencils, may be equally old. The bulk of the rock art in the oases of the Western Desert, however, seems to be Pharaonic (dating mostly to the late Old Kingdom) and displays a rather stereotypical repertoire: incised sandals, outlines of feet, hunting scenes, mammals, birds, feathered men, and pubic triangles (see, for instance, Kaper and Willems 2002 for rock art related to late Old Kingdom military installations at Dakhla Oasis). Still later rock art, of the Greco-Roman and Islamic Periods, is known from, among other places, Kharga and Bahriya. Among its representations are geometric signs, equid drawn carts or chariots, and schematic figures of humans and camels.

Oldest Rock Art in Egypt

Zach Zorich wrote in Archaeology magazine: Petroglyphs found near the village of Qurta in southern Egypt have been confirmed as the first known Paleolithic artwork in North Africa. They were dated using a technique called optically stimulated luminescence on sand that had piled up against the rock face where the images were carved. The team of archaeologists from Belgium, Australia, and the United States showed that the carvings are at least 15,000 years old and possibly much older. Before this research, the idea that Egypt had any Paleolithic rock art had been controversial. [Source: Zach Zorich, Archaeology magazine, Volume 65 Number 2, March-April 2012]

“The site consists of at least 179 figures deeply carved into sandstone. Many depict animals in a more naturalistic style than was used in later petroglyphs at sites nearby. Some of the most remarkable petroglyphs are less naturalistic — stylized images of people with large buttocks, similar to ones made in Europe around 14,000 years ago. According to Dirk Huyge of Belgium's Royal Museums of Art and History, these images could be evidence of an indirect link between very distant cultures. Since 2005, when the team first published descriptions of the art at Qurta, four or five other sites with images made in a similar style have been identified about 45 miles south of the site. "One find provokes another," says Huyge. "Qurta has opened up a whole new area of Paleolithic art research. "

Dirk Huyge of the Royal Museums of Art and History in Brussels wrote: “Whereas the bulk of Egyptian petroglyphs can be ascribed to the Predynastic cultures immediately preceding and foreshadowing Pharaonic civilization (mainly fourth millennium B.C.), still older rock art has come to light in recent years. Dating to the very end of the Palaeolithic, the so-called “Epi-palaeolithic” (c. 7000 - 5500 B.C.), are most probably the bizarre-looking mushroom-shaped designs that characterize the rock art of el-Hosh, about 30 kilometers south of Edfu. Frequently appearing in clusters and occasionally as isolated figures, these designs, which can tentatively be interpreted as representations of labyrinth-fish-traps, are often associated with abstract and figurative motifs, including circles, ladder-shaped drawings, human figures, footprints, and crocodiles. Probably affiliated “geometric” rock art assemblages are known from Sudanese Nubia (Abka) and have recently also been reported from the Aswan area . The occurrence of similar rock art at several locations in the Eastern Desert (and possibly also at Dakhla, Farafra, and Siwa in the Western Desert) suggests that the Epi-palaeolithic image- makers were extremely mobile and must have lived a nomadic existence. Rock art examples pre-dating the Epi-palaeolithic have recently been discovered at three locations in the Upper Egyptian Nile Valley: Abu Tanqura. [Source: Dirk Huyge, Royal Museums of Art and History, Brussels, Belgium, UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 2009, escholarship.org ]

Um messalam

Bahri at el-Hosh, Qurta, and Wadi Abu Subeira. The rock art repertoire at these sites is fundamentally different from the Epi- palaeolithic assemblages and consists for the most part of naturalistically drawn animal figures. Bovids (wild cattle or aurochs) are largely predominant , followed by birds, hippopotamuses, gazelle, fish, and hartebeest. In addition, there are also several highly stylized representations of human figures and a small number of probable non-figurative or abstract signs. For the time being, the dating evidence is entirely circumstantial, but it is likely that this rock art is late Palaeolithic in age. A date of about 15,000 B.C. has tentatively been proposed. If this is correct, this rock art is not only Egypt’s most ancient art, but one of the oldest graphic traditions known to date from the African continent.

Why Was Early Rock Art Made in Egypt?

Dirk Huyge wrote: “Setting aside simplistic and naive explanations—for instance, that the rock drawings may be merely the result of casual pastime or the exercises of sculpture- apprentices—magical, totemistic, religious, and politico-ideological motivations have been advanced to explain the ancient Egyptian rock art tradition. None of these clarifies the rock art phenomenon as a whole, but it appears that religion and ideology offer more satisfactory and certainly less circuitous approaches than magic and totemism, both of which are grounded on indirect ethnographical comparisons. Inevitably, both the religious and the ideological approach have been carried to extremes. For instance, Červiček, in various contributions, has attempted to demonstrate that Egyptian rock art is completely permeated with religion: without exception human figures pose in cultic attitudes, carry out liturgical actions, or represent anthropomorphic deities; boats are meant to be divine or funeral barques, and animals relate to offering rituals or represent a zoomorphic pantheon. Ultimately, creating rock art is performing a devotional act in itself. A more cautious and balanced approach may be required. [Source: Dirk Huyge, Royal Museums of Art and History, Brussels, Belgium, UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 2009, escholarship.org ]

“On a general epistemological level, it may be suggested that any hermeneutic approach to rock art should ideally be conceived as a historical exegesis. This implies that the search for meaning and motivation should basically be founded on contemporaneous materials and sources. With regard to the prehistoric and early historic periods, however, such information is sparse or even non-existent. Non-synchronous sources then have to be sought. To a considerable extent this is also the case for the Egyptian rock art production. Not unlike many other rock art traditions in the world, Egyptian rock art is truly a “fossil” record, in the sense that no living or oral traditions elucidate its contents, meaning, or motivation. Fortunately, from the Predynastic through the Pharaonic Periods, ancient Egyptian civilization displayed a single line of progress and a considerable degree of conceptual conservatism. Pharaonic culture was a gradual outgrowth of indigenous prehistoric traditions. In fact, what occurred in Egypt between c. 3200 and 3030 B.C. (at the time of state formation), was not an abrupt change of iconography but rather a profound formalization, standardization, and officialization. Image-making passed from a less disciplined “pre-formal” artistic stage to a “formal” canonical phase. This change is immense, but, basically, it is cosmetic, with the content of the iconography (the themes) and the underlying beliefs (the meaning and motivation) remaining much the same, as they would for several millennia. With that in mind, a diachronic approach to rock art, in which phenomena are not considered individually but as integral parts of a historical chain of development, can be considered scientifically sound.

“Attempts toward such an approach, applied to the rock art of the Upper Egyptian site of Elkab, suggest that petroglyphs were subject to religious, ideological, and other mental shifts traceable through time in the culture-historical record and correspond to a range of meanings and motivations, such as cosmology, ideology, and personal religious practice, as well as more trivial incentives, such as pride and prestige.

graffiti drawings made on rocks

Ancient Egyptian Palettes

Made from gray siltstone and carved with images of animals, gods, and kings, Ancient Egyptian palettes were tablets that were used to grind and mix cosmetic pigments. Some were designed for practical use, while others were ceremonial, and others were deposited in temples as votive offerings. [Source: National Geographic, National Geographic, June 10, 2022]

Alice Stevenson of the Pitt Rivers Museum at Oxford wrote: “In the Naqada III period, within the context of emerging kingship, palettes were appropriated as vehicles to convey the ideology and iconography of a small ruling elite. Skillfully carved in elaborate relief, these palettes are referred to as ceremonial palettes, and share stylistic similarities with other ceremonial objects such as knives and maces. Just over 25 of these ceremonial palettes are known, both whole and fragmentary, and while it is hard to assess how representative these objects are, the small numbers found in comparison to other classes of object do suggest that the ownership of such palettes was restricted. [Source: Alice Stevenson, Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford, UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 2009, escholarship.org ]

“The quintessential ceremonial palette is undoubtedly the Narmer Palette, from the “Main Deposit” at Hierakonpolis. On the basis of its style, with the composition arranged using registers and with examples of some of the earliest hieroglyphs, it is considered to be chronologically one of the latest ceremonial palettes, in comparison to an earlier group, on which the images are scattered across the surface. Examples of this latter type include the Hierakonpolis Two-dog Palette, carved with primarily zoomorphic scenes; the Hunters’ or Lion Hunt Palette, depicting hunting scenes; and the Battlefield Palette, bearing defeated naked prisoners. Within the decorated surface, many ceremonial palettes retain a circular area bounded by a raised edge for the grinding of minerals, although indicative traces of such use are absent.

“The motifs on the ceremonial palettes have been the subject of extensive scholarly debate. Early twentieth century interpretations considered palettes such as the Narmer Palette and the Cities (or Libyan) Palette to be historical documents depicting actual events. Such literal interpretations are seldom fully accepted today; rather, more general observations on the overall representational schema on the palettes and the ideology conveyed in this medium occupy academic discourse. For instance, the dominant role of animals, in both their natural and fantastic conceptions, is one focus. These animal motifs have been variously interpreted as ideological referents to themes such as the hunt, chaos and order, containment and rule, as well as social otherness. Notable is the inclusion of what are regarded as Near Eastern motifs on the ceremonial palettes including the serpopards on the Narmer Palette, and the palm tree flanked by two giraffes found on the Louvre Palette and the Battlefield Palette.

“Often, however, such deliberations abstract the surface imagery of the palettes from the artifact itself. Recent discussions have appealed for a more holistic approach that situates ceremonial objects as historically contingent classes of artifact that draw efficacy from the role that their antecedents played in the social lives of communities throughout the Predynastic period. Unlike the common Predynastic palettes discussed above, the provenances of most of these ceremonial palettes are unknown. The final resting place of the Narmer and Two- dog palettes, while recognized as the Hierakonpolis “Main Deposit,” is clearly not the context of their original manufacture or use. Similarly, the most recently discovered palette, the Minshat Ezzat palette, despite being found in situ in an elite three- chambered First Dynasty (Naqada IIIC1) mastaba , is in a poor state of preservation indicative of a longevity of use prior to its interment. A recent attempt to assess a likely context of use is provided by O’Connor, who considers the possibility of a secluded temple context.”

Palettes of Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt

20120211-Narmer Palette 3100 B.C..jpg
Narmer Palette 3100 B.C.
Alice Stevenson of the Pitt Rivers Museum at Oxford wrote: “Flat stone palettes for the grinding of pigments are particularly associated with Predynastic Egypt, when they were made almost exclusively of mudstone and were formed into distinctive geometric and zoomorphic shapes. Ceremonial palettes of the late Predynastic and Early Dynastic periods are linked with the emerging ideology of kingship, and are especially elaborate, as they are often decorated with carved relief over the entire surface. Following the Early Dynastic period, the importance of palettes diminishes significantly. [Source: Alice Stevenson, Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford, UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 2009, escholarship.org ]

“Flat pieces of stone upon which colored mineral matter could be ground are known from Paleolithic and Neolithic times in Egypt. In the Badarian period, these artifacts began to be fashioned into elongated forms with notches at each end and were made almost exclusively of the greenish-grey stone procured from the Wadi Hammamat. This material continued to be almost the sole medium for the production of palettes in the Predynastic period. This stone is often mistakenly identified as slate or schist, but it is in fact a form of greywacke, which is an umbrella term that encompasses the other geological stones siltstone and mudstone, and these stones only differ in the size of the grains that make up the rock.

“Such preferential selection of stone for the production of Upper Egyptian palettes, in comparison to the diversity of materials utilized by contemporary groups in Nubia and Lower Egypt for the same purpose, is suggestive of a perceived social value in the Wadi Hammamat rock. Thus, the significance and value of the palettes may have resided as much in their originating area, their visually perceptible qualities or “numina”, as in the material’s amenability to the production of flat pieces of stone.

“The vivid green mineral malachite was most often ground upon the palettes of the Predynastic period, at least as far as we know from burial contexts, in which the majority have been found. Palettes thus apparently played a role in the production of cosmetics. In particular, it is often assumed, following Petrie, that the minerals ground upon palettes were used to prepare eye paint. Although the use of green eye paint is attested in Early Dynastic times, corroborating evidence from Predynastic contexts is limited, with a large baked clay female head with eyelids outlined with green from the Naqada I grave H97 at Mahasna being one of the few sources suggestive of the practice. More recently, direct traces of malachite on the faces of several bodies at Adaima have been observed, bolstering Petrie’s original hypothesis. The symbolism of the green color prompts speculation as to a possible connection with regeneration and fertility, properties certainly appropriate for a mortuary context. Galena, hematite, and red ocher are also known to have been processed on the palettes, probably mixed with resins, oils, or fats. There has been the suggestion, on the basis of the excavations at Adaima, that red ocher was more commonly used on palettes in the settlement. Smooth brown or black jasper pebbles were used to grind the pigment, and these types of pebbles often accompany palettes in Predynastic burials.

“The use of both plain palettes and ceremonial palettes waned from the outset of the First Dynasty and flat, shaped, mudstone palettes as a distinct category disappeared by the mid- First Dynasty. It is evident that cosmetics retained a potent symbolic role throughout Pharaonic history, as the inclusion of malachite and kohl in tomb offering lists demonstrates. Examples of rather thick, rectangular grinding palettes, often trapezoidal in cross-section with a rectangular depression, have been recovered from later tombs, such as Old Kingdom mastabas at Giza and Middle Kingdom tombs at Beni Hassan, but no standard material was used in their production, and their forms were rarely elaborate.”

Form of Palettes in Ancient Egypt

Alice Stevenson of the Pitt Rivers Museum at Oxford wrote: “There was a diversity of palette forms in the Predynastic period; this was first presented in Petrie and Quibell’s Naqada and Ballas publication, although it was not until 1921 that Petrie published his corpus. Predynastic palettes display a clear chronological development, but their long life- histories mean that they are less reliable than ceramics for dating contexts. Many palettes exhibit evidence of a longevity of use, including deep depressions as a result of repeated mineral grinding, or smoothed-down breaks. [Source: Alice Stevenson, Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford, UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology 2009, escholarship.org ]

“In the Naqada I period, palettes were primarily rhomboidal in shape and could vary in size from two centimeters to large examples of over 70 centimeters in length. Some palettes have a pair of horns or a bird embellishing one end. At the end of Naqada I and during Naqada II, palette forms proliferated. While rhomboid examples decreased in frequency, animal forms such as turtles, birds, and, in particular, fish appear, together with shield-shaped examples, the latter often being decorated with antithetically facing bird heads. These forms are repeated across different media and types of objects, appearing on contemporary stone vessels, pins, and combs, and thus, as Wengrow suggests transcend strict distinctions between decorative form, medium, and function. Other animal forms, such as hippopotami, elephants, and gazelles, are far less common shapes for palettes. The appearance of such animals is as if in “silhouette” , with the only interior feature commonly delineated being an eye, which is occasionally enhanced with a small shell or bone ring; occasionally, the edge of fins, feet, or tails are incised. A single hole is often drilled at the central edge of the palette, presumably for suspension. Rough and unworked pieces of mudstone were also used for the grinding of minerals in the Naqada I and II periods, although their frequency is more difficult to determine given that early excavation reports focusing on unusual or special-interest objects tended to be brief. There was a decline in zoomorphic forms from the Naqada III period onwards, with a concurrent proliferation of geometric types, predominately rectilinear, and, to a lesser extent, circular and oviform pieces. These often have incised border lines.

“A minority of palettes are further elaborated with incised designs. For instance, the el- Amrah palette, from a Naqada IID1 grave, bears the “Min emblem,” while a palette from grave 59 at Gerzeh (the so-called “Hathor” or “Gerzeh Palette”) is carved in rough low relief with a stylized cow’s head surrounded by five stars. The “Manchester” or “Ostrich Palette” is particularly elaborate and is decorated with a relief of a man following a group of ostriches. “Diminutive examples of Naqada I and II palettes have been typologically distinguished from larger palettes through their designation as “magic slates”. These miniature palettes are presumed to have had no utilitarian function, rather only a symbolic one, although they are of the same design and material as their “normal-sized” counterparts. There is, however, a continuum in the size of palettes, thus the assessment of what constitutes the distinction between functional and non-functional palettes is arbitrary. Moreover, any distinction between “utilitarian” and “non-utilitarian” erroneously assumes that there is a dichotomy between the functional and symbolic meanings of palettes.

Neolithic paint holder

“Palettes became progressively rarer towards the end of the Predynastic period, from Naqada IIIA2-B onwards, possibly because the source of the material used to make them had been appropriated by the elite and was exploited for other purposes, such as the production of bangles, stone vessels, and, in particular, ceremonial palettes (see below). This reduction in the availability of palettes, together with the progressive plainness of such pieces, contrasts with the ceremonial, elite versions, which are discussed in more detail below. This phenomenon forms part of what has been termed the “evolution of simplicity” in Naqada III, and the “aesthetic deprivation of the non-elite”.

“Attempts to interpret the “meaning” of palette forms tend to appeal to, and thus impose upon prehistory, the ideologies of later periods, such as interpreting the zoomorphic repertoire of palettes in terms of gods like Horus, or interpreting fish-shaped palettes with reference to later Egyptian word-play. At best, such anachronistic interpretations remain speculative. The specificity of the stones used for palettes and grinding pebbles, together with the relatively limited repertoire of designs, are qualities that can be reasonably presumed to have symbolic meanings, but the content of that symbolism currently remains obscure.

Palettes have been found in the graves of both children and adults alike, usually near the hands and face of the deceased. Despite being cited as the most frequent object in Predynastic graves after pottery, palettes were certainly not standard mortuary equipment. On average, only 15 percent of graves in any Predynastic cemetery contained a palette, although grave robbing may have led to an underestimation of their frequency. From Naqada IIIA2-B onwards, this apparently low frequency decreased even further. The majority of the Predynastic palettes are not associated with richly furnished graves. One limiting factor that is often asserted is that palettes were the property of females. Statistical analysis of burial contexts suggests that while palettes are more common in the graves of females, they are not exclusively associated with females, although the accuracy of sexing skeletons found on early excavations must be taken into account.”

Ceremonial Palettes in Ancient Egypt

Lion Hunting Palette

Discovered in Armana, the Lion Hunting Palette is made of mudstone and dates to around 3200 B.C. The central circular compartment was for grinding cosmetics; the surrounding decoration depicts a vibrant hunting scene, complete with armed men in pursuit of many animals—including two lions, a gazelle, an ostrich and a jackal. [Source: National Geographic, National Geographic, June 10, 2022]

According to National Geographic History: The palette also reveals the evolution of Egyptian visual style. Prior to Narmer, influences from outside Egypt made their way into works of art. Some seem merely decorative, like the rosette (an Elamite motif) used to identify the king’s sandal bearer, who stands just to his left on the front of the palette. On the reverse, two serpopards—mythical felines with long serpentine necks—form a circular compartment with their intertwined necks; these creatures are also found in ancient Elamite art.

On this mudstone palette, the central circular compartment was for grinding cosmetics; the surrounding decoration depicts a vibrant hunting scene, complete with armed men in pursuit of many animals—including two lions, a gazelle, an ostrich, a jackal, and a hare. A bull trampling a human figure has been interpreted by scholars as a symbol of royal victory. Beneath a rampaging bull is a lion enclosed in a circle, symbolizing a fortified city. One side of this siltstone piece shows two serpopards, long-necked feline creatures whose sinuous bodies encircle the area where cosmetics would have been ground.

Other Mesopotamian influences were the depiction of leaders as actual beasts— fearsome creatures like lions, bulls, hawks, or scorpions that destroy cities and crush enemies. Narmer is clearly shown twice on the palette in human form, and some scholars believe he shows up twice as a beast-king; on the front, he may be the falcon whose human arms perch above an enemy’s head, while on the reverse, in the lowest section of the chevron, he may be a bull charging through city walls and trampling a helpless foe. This beast-king iconography largely disappears after Narmer’s reign, although some vestiges of it remained. Pharaohs might be shown in human form but wearing a bull’s tail (such as Den, the fourth pharaoh to rule after Narmer).

Ancient Egyptian Maceheads

According to National Geographic History: The shield-shaped palettes that the late Predynastic kings of Upper Egypt had inscribed with images are a key source for scholars of the period, but so too are limestone maceheads. These also bore images symbolizing the ideology of power and elites from the earliest days of the united Egypt. [Source: National Geographic, National Geographic, June 10, 2022]

While palettes were designed to serve practical purposes, maces were weapons. Narmer consecrated both the palette and mace that bear his name to the Temple of Horus in Hierakonpolis (Nekhen). The city was a center of worship of the falcon god. While the Narmer Palette expresses royal dominion and duality, the macehead represents the jubilee celebration Heb-Sed, a great renewal of power ceremony that took place after a pharaoh had reigned for 30 years. The rituals performed at the Heb-Sed appear to have been a reenactment of the unification of Egypt. The Narmer macehead depicts for the first time a ceremony that will become a part of Egyptian kingship for millennia.

Image Sources: Wikimedia Commons

Text Sources: UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, escholarship.org ; Internet Ancient History Sourcebook: Egypt sourcebooks.fordham.edu ; Tour Egypt, Minnesota State University, Mankato, ethanholman.com; Mark Millmore, discoveringegypt.com discoveringegypt.com; Metropolitan Museum of Art, National Geographic, Smithsonian magazine, New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Discover magazine, Times of London, Natural History magazine, Archaeology magazine, The New Yorker, BBC, Encyclopædia Britannica, Time, Newsweek, Wikipedia, Reuters, Associated Press, The Guardian, AFP, Lonely Planet Guides, “World Religions” edited by Geoffrey Parrinder (Facts on File Publications, New York); “History of Warfare” by John Keegan (Vintage Books); “History of Art” by H.W. Janson Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.), Compton’s Encyclopedia and various books and other publications.

Last updated July 2024