The Throne of Tutankhamen is of wood, covered with a thin plating of
gold and adorned with finely carved lions’ heads. The arms of the
chair are of modelled wood also overlaid with gold, and beneath them,
on either side, is a sacred uræus, partly wrought in glaze, with the
crown of Egypt in silver. On the back of the throne is a panel of
beautiful workmanship, on which the king is represented seated, with
his legs crossed, and giving his hand to the Queen, who is standing--a
motive which in its unconventionality speaks distinctly of the
realistic art of Tell el-Amarna, and suggests comparisons with the
famous Berlin relief in which Akhenaten leans on his staff, while his
Queen Nefertiti holds out a lotus bloom for him to sniff. The exposed
flesh of the faces and other parts of the body is beautifully modelled
in semi-opaque reddish glaze, while the King’s costume is rendered in
painting overlaid with crystal. The queen’s dress is wrought in silver,
and beside her, on a table, there stands a charming bouquet formed
of semi-precious stones inlaid. The seat of the throne is patterned
with blue, white, and gold mosaic squares, set in diagonal lines. The
whole effect is gorgeous in the extreme, and the description of the
workmanship takes one’s mind back at once to the King’s Gaming Board
of the Palace of Knossos, with its blaze of blue and gold and crystal
on ivory. Whether we are to infer Cretan influence in the Egyptian
splendour, or whether Crete derived from earlier Egyptian work, is a
question which may prove of interest in the future. At any rate, we
know that the two great cultures were for many centuries in the closest
touch, and that each borrowed from the other, adapting the foreign
ideas to its own tastes.
One of the features of the throne is highly suggestive of the
conditions of Tutankhamen’s reign. On the gold plating of the chair,
the royal cartouche has been altered, and shows the name which the
king adopted after his conversion to orthodoxy. At the side of the
arms, however, the cartouche, wrought in inlay of semi-precious stones
and glass, remains unaltered, and still shows the old heretical form
Tutankhaten. The manifest reason for the difference is that while it
was comparatively easy to alter a cartouche wrought in gold plate, it
was very much the opposite with one wrought in inlay. Tutankhamen,
spite of his royal dignity, had, like Mrs. Gilpin, a frugal mind, and
could see no sense in discarding his old Tell el-Amarna throne, even
though it could not be perfectly adapted to his change of circumstances
and of faith.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account