William H. Shea
[William H. Shea is Associate Professor of Old Testament at Andrews University in Barrien Springs, Michigan, and a frequent contributor to Bible and Spade.]
When the sons of Jacob sought relief from famine in Egypt, and later when they, their families, and Jacob descended into Egypt to settle in the land of Goshen, they followed in the footsteps of generations of Canaanite and Egyptian traders. Joseph had already gone before them into Egypt as a captive of Midianite merchants returning from a foray into Canaan. These stories of the patriarchs as well as many documents attest to commercial interaction between the areas. In addition, a famous Egyptian tomb painting from the 19th century B.C. portrays a particular group of Asiatic traders journeying into Middle Egypt. Their depiction contributes not only to evidence of and knowledge about Canaanite trade with Egypt during the patriarchal period, but also to a greater familiarity with the appearance, dress, and habitual equipment of the patriarchs themselves.
The painting of Asiatic traders, first published in 1845 by Francois Champollion, a decipherer of hieroglyphic Egyptian, and many times since reproduced in works on Egyptian art and in biblical handbooks, decorates an Egyptian provincial governor’s
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 2
Full view of the painting on the north wall of the inner chamber of the 19th cock-cut tomb of khnum-hotep III at Beni Hasan. The visit of the Asiatics is depicted in the third register from the top.
tomb at Beni Hasan. Beni Hasan lies about 160 miles south of Cairo near the ancient site of Monet-Khufu, the capital of the 16th, or Antelope, nome (= province) of Egypt. This city flourished in the early 2nd millennium B.C., but today hardly anything remains of it except the tombs of some of its rulers, cut in the cliffs high above the eastern shore of the Nile. Although the city is gone, the paintings on the walls of these tombs provide an interesting glimpse into the everyday life of the people who lived here around the time of the biblical patriarchs.
The mural depicting the Asiatic traders decorates Tomb 3, which was cut and decorated for a nomarch or provincial governor named
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 3
Full view of the painting on the north wall of the inner chamber of the 19th cock-cut tomb of khnum-hotep III at Beni Hasan. The visit of the Asiatics in depicted in the third register from the top.
Khnumhotep, designated Khnum-hotep III because of two other Khnum-hoteps known at this site. The mural, which dates to the 6th year of Sesostris II (1892 B.C.), indicates that this Khnum-hotep must have carried out his official duties during the early part of the 19th century B.C. The doors, rooms, pillars, and other architectural features of his tomb were carved into solid rock, as were the tombs of other officials in the vicinity. The walls of the spacious second, or main, hall of Khnum-hotep III’s tomb are almost even in length, 31 feet in one direction and 32 in the other. The ceiling is 19 feet high, and four fluted columns divide the hall into three naves. S. H. Horn has described the decoration of the tomb:
All the walls are covered with inscriptions and colored paintings describing the life story of the owner and his administration, and the special events that took
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 4
place in his time… One scene shows people in front of the ruler weighing silver, which has been brought in as taxes. Others depict the measuring of grain, the work in the fields and vineyards, life by the river, hunting scenes, and various sports events that the ruler and his wife viewed for recreation. Rows of pictures show wrestling matches in all stages. One can follow such a match from its beginning to its close by looking at these pictures.
(The Spade Confirms the Book, by S. H. Horn, Review and Herald, Washington, DC, 1957, pages 78–79.)
The third row on this hall’s north wall holds the painting of the Asiatics, its adult human figures painted about 0.5 m tall. The visit of the Asiatic traders recorded here apparently merited inclusion among the notable events of Khnum-hotep’s nomarchy by virtue of its rarity and so, with them, was painted on the walls of his tomb. While Asiatics traveled to and fro across the isthmus of Suez into the region of the eastern delta throughout the history of ancient Egypt, these particular traders must have traveled as far south as Middle Egypt to find a market for the stibium, or eye-paint, which they sold, and their visit here aroused considerable attention.
Since the preservation of this kind of historical evidence is much less common in the delta, Khnum-hotep’s interest in this visit of the Amorites to his domain is fortunate. Whether one dates the biblical patriarchs just before, around the time of, or sometime after this 19th-century B.C. record, the representation of these traders probably fairly indicates the appearance of people like them and their manner of dress, mode of travel, and equipment. As W. F. Albright noted:
Since it is unlikely that the dress of the Palestinian, semi-nomad changed appreciably in the following century or two, we can scarcely go far wrong if we picture Jacob and his family as clad in much the same way.
(The Archaeology of Palestine, by W. F. Albright, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1949, page 208.)
An inscription which accompanies this scene identifies the two Egyptians who introduce the Asiatics as Neferhotep, Scribe of the Royal Documents, and Khety, Overseer of Hunters. The portion of the inscription adjacent to the Asiatic chieftain identifies him as Ibsha, Ruler of a Foreign Country. The specific Semitic form of his name has not been definitely established from its transcription into Egyptian here, but Albright suggested that it may have been Abishar. If this suggestion is correct, the short sentence which
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 5
constitutes his name means, “My father is king.” This name is a typical instance of names denoting kinship; both forms of Abraham’s name indicate the existence and use of such names. The Egyptian title used here, “Ruler of a Foreign Country,” is the word from which the name Hyksos was later derived. In this later usage the term referred to the foreigners who ruled northern or Lower Egypt during a portion of what is known as the Second Intermediate Period of Egyptian history, extending from the end of the Middle Kingdom of Dynasty XII to the beginning of the New Kingdom with Dynasty XVIII.
The label above the scene tells the purpose of the Amorites’ visit: “The arrival, bringing stibium, which thirty-seven Asiatics brought to him.” Stibium, a black cosmetic used for painting around the eyes, was much prized by the Egyptians. The docket shown in the hand of the scribe, Nefer-hotep, restates the purpose of their coming, adding the date of their visit and their place of origin: “Year 6 under [Sesostris II]… List of the Asiatics whom the son of Count Chnum-hotep brought on account of stibium, Asiatics of Shut. List thereof: thirty-seven.” The presence of this docket in the scene indicates that this event was of sufficient significance to warrant making a formal record of it; it also draws attention to the difference between the actual number of Asiatic visitors, 37, and those painted to represent them, 15.
On the basis of dated astronomical references in other texts from the 12th Dynasty, a rather precise chronology has been reconstructed for this period. From that chronology the 6th year of Sesostris II can be equated with the Julian year of 1892 B.C. The reference to Khnum-hotep’s son’s bringing the Asiatics could mean that he went north to the delta, met them there, and prevailed upon them to come to his town further south with their wares. The precise location of the land of Shut(u), from which they came, is uncertain, but it is sometimes taken to refer to Transjordan.
The intrinsic historical significance of Khnum-hotep’s tomb painting needs no belaboring, and its interest to students of the age in its detail of dress and appearance has been explored elsewhere. Recognition of its artistic framework, within which the historical detail has been set, however, must surely enhance both its general appeal and its historical interest. It is the approximate symmetry of this mural around its central point, occasionally interrupted by significant variations from the expected balance, which draws the
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 6
Detailed view of the register of the Beni Hasan tomb painting which depicts *** of a caravan of Asiatic traders during the time of the biblical patriarchs.
viewer’s attention. A division of the painted scene at its center reveals a careful and intentional balancing of all its elements; the painter or painters of these Canannite merchants of stibium organized them around a midline, pairing and balancing them in even symmetry.
People
The mural portrays two Egyptians, the aforementioned scribe and the overseer of hunters, presenting a procession of 15 Asiatic traders to their ruler, presumably Khnum-hotep himself. He stands twice the height of all other figures and is drawn to a larger scale. The painting of the procession itself divides naturally just between the two donkeys in the scene. An analysis of the procession of Asiatics must of course exclude both Khnum-hotep and the two Egyptians who lead the Asiatic traders; this exclusion moves the midpoint of the painting backward, cutting the first donkey in half and allowing all comparisons of the two halves of the painting to revolve around him.
Excluding the two Egyptian figures, the human figures in this scene number 15, in direct contradiction of the 37 specified on the scribe’s docket. The 15 figures, along with their animals and equipment, are clearly not intended, then, as strict representations of objective reality, but as artistic and functional representatives of that reality, dramatic stand-ins on the historical record. Their portrayal takes on special significance in light of that understanding.
A group of three children comes in the center of the Asiatic line, and the middle child of those three divides the line into equal halves, each composed of seven identically grouped people. In fact, the midpoint of the line itself once the Egyptians have been excluded
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 7
Detailed view of the register of the Beni Hasan tomb painting which depicts *** of a caravan of Asiatic traders during the time of the biblical patriarchs.
falls upon this central child, so that while he does not look to the untutored eye like the central figure, he is so both numerically and metrically.
Two groups of four figures each appear on either side of the three children, a group of four men on their right and a group of four women on their left. Differences of gender, stance, and equipment differentiate these two groups; the artist distributed the elements similarly but did not slavishly repeat them. The people in both groups stand so closely together that they overlap in the painting, obscuring one another’s arms and clothing. In front of the group of four men, two men appear, separated one from the other. Similarly, two men, also separated from one another, appear behind the group of four women.
The distribution of people in the relief is both balanced and functional. The chieftain naturally leads the procession, while the children, most in need of protection, come at the center of the line of march, just before the women. A large group of warriors precedes the women and children, and a small rearguard follows them. The Asiatic figures, painted a lighter color than the Egyptians who introduce them, have black hair, cropped short on the men and long on the women, who tie it with a band around the forehead. The Asiatic men all wear short, pointed beards.
Animals
Four animals appear in the painting, and they too are distributed evenly, in two pairs. The two animals at the head of the procession, identified on occasion as an antelope and a gazelle, are male and
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 8
female, as are the two donkeys toward the end of the line. In each case the male animal goes before the female. At the head of the line, the antelope is larger and darker than the gazelle which follows, and his beard proves him to be male. Similarly, toward the end of the procession, the lead donkey is depicted with male genitalia, while the donkey following him is smaller and lacking obvious genitalia. At each end of the procession, then, comes a male and female animal pair, balancing and complementing the groups of men and women.
Spatial alternation also marks the four animals, as it does the human figures. For example, the gender identification of the two males is spatially differentiated. That is, the male at the head of the procession is so identified by the secondary sex characteristic on his chin, his genitalia being hidden by the robe of the chieftain, while the male donkey is so identified by his genitals, which appear just before his hind legs. Again, the pointed objects associated with these animals project from them in alternating directions. The horns on the lead antelope curve backward, while those on the gazelle point upward. While the donkeys have no horns, both carry bellows with pointing handles; those on the saddle of the first donkey point upward, while both the bellows’ handles and the spear on the following donkey point backward. (Actually, of course, the bellows’ handles point in two opposite directions; those on the first donkey point up and down, those on the second forward and backward. The special value of the spear on the second donkey is its reinforcement of the bellows’ backward-pointing handles; this reinforcement determines the viewer’s perception of the primary direction of the second set of bellows’ handles. The direction of the first bellows’ handles may be similarly reinforced by the two small heads pointing upward on either side.)
Even the colors connected with these beasts alternate. The chieftain, who stands in front of the lead antelope, wears a red, white, and blue garment which, because of his position, covers part of the flanks of the antelope. Similarly, the saddle placed over the lead donkey covers part of his flanks, and it too is colored red, white, and blue. In contrast, the chieftain’s assistant stands behind the gazelle, allowing the yellow of her belly to appear more prominently. The second, female, donkey bears a brown and yellow saddle.
In a different kind of balance, the two animals at the head of the procession belong to the same family of wild animals, just as the
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 9
two donkeys of course belong to the same species of domesticated animal. In this case, then, the leading pair, the wild animals, balance the following domesticated pair.
The four main features of the animals are distributed, then, in three different patterns. In gender, a female animal both times follows a male, establishing a pattern of A:B::A:B. The same parallel pattern occurs in the colors associated with the animals. The brighter colors distinguish the males — red, white, and blue appear at or on their sides — while yellow is the primary color seen on the females. Again, two wild animals precede two domesticated ones, establishing another parallel pattern of A:A::B:B. Reinforcing this pattern, the two wild animals wear no saddles but follow guides, while the donkeys wear saddles but seem to need no guides. Finally, the projections from the animals form a different, alternating, pattern of A:B::B:A; the horns of the antelope and the spear of the second donkey point backward, while the horns of the gazelle and the bellows’ handles of the lead donkey point upward.
The use of three different patterns, two parallel and one alternating, in arrangement of the features linking the four animals shows a skillful unity in diversity. Additionally, each of the patterns accomplishes a particular purpose in the pattern of the whole painting. The A:B::A:B pattern of the animals’ gender and of their associated colors emphasizes the traditional male:female arrangement. The second parallel distribution, the A:A::B:B pattern of wild and domesticated animals, indicates that the wild animals at the head of the procession were to be a gift to the Egyptians and remain with them, while the domesticated animals toward the rear of the procession were to continue as beasts of burden for the Asiatics and remain with them. The traders’ apt gift of an antelope to the nomarch of the Antelope nome merits note. Finally, the one alternating pattern occurring with the animals is primarily an aesthetically functioning one; the A:B::B:A pattern of points projecting from the animals draws the eyes of the viewer toward the center of the relief and divides the whole into two halves around that center.
The painter’s depiction of two children riding a donkey in the center of this scene betrays more than a casual or merely aesthetic interest. Horn has noted:
Riding on an animal was also something strange to the Egyptians, for which
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 10
reason they depicted it. The ancient Egyptians never used animals for ridin purposes until late in their history, and they were so surprised to see foreigner riding on the back of donkeys that they depicted them each time they saw suc a curiosity. (ibid., pages 80–81.)
Clothing
The garments of the men and women in the procession contribute to the overall artistic balance of the scene, as does the grouping of the people themselves and of the animals. The three children at the center of the line presumably dress alike, all in loincloths like the child walking behind the donkey. But as no garment shows on the two riding figures, the small boy standing alone is the central figure in the arrangement of the people by clothing. On either side of this child stand the groups of four. All the people in these two groups wear long garments which reach from the shoulder to below the knee, the women’s garments extending a little farther below the knee than those of the men. At the end of the procession come two men in loincloths, which reach only from the waist to below the knee. The corresponding figure at the beginning of the procession is the gazelle’s guide, a man also dressed in a short kilt.
Up to this point the length of the adult garments in the two halves of the relief balances. The garment of the chieftain, however upsets this balance. For total symmetry, he should have been painted in a kilt like that of the last man in line, but, in accord with his importance, he wears a very colorful fringed robe which covers him from shoulder to below the knee. Although this impressive garment disturbs the balance between the two halves of the relief, *** provides some in another direction. Although all of the women wear garments that extend from the shoulder, three of them wear those garments as if they were fastened, presumably with toggle pins over one shoulder. Two of the men in the corresponding group of four also wear their long garments fastened over one shoulder. The addition to their number of the chieftain, who wears his garment similarly, gives, in the first half of the relief, three men who wear their garments off one shoulder and, in the second half, three women who wear theirs off one shoulder.
The garment of one of the men in the first group of four remains out of balance, however. Two men in that group wear full-length undyed garments hanging from both shoulders. In the group of
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 11
women, the third wears a garment corresponding to this; hers also hangs from both shoulders. But no other woman dresses like her to balance the second man so attired.
Balance may, however, be established in a different way. Three men, including the chieftain, wear full-length, off-the-shoulder garments in the first half of the relief, and three women in the second half of the relief wear garments similar to these. Again, in the first half of the scene, two figures wear full-length garments extending from both shoulders, and in the second half two figures wear kilts. One figure in the first half wears a kilt, and one figure in the second half wears a full-length garment that extends from both shoulders. Despite the differences, then, the adult garments may be categorized into three types: A (full-length, off-the-shoulder garments), B (full-length garments covering both shoulders), and C (loincloths or kilts). Their distribution in the two halves of the scene is A(3):B(2):C(1)::A(3):C(2):B(1). The last two elements have here been interchanged. Between these two arrangements stands the small child wearing the loincloth.
The colors of the garments also show an interesting distribution. All four of the women wear garments colored red, white, and blue, but white predominates in the garments of the first and third women. The second and fourth members of the group of four men wear undyed garments of white. Thus some correspondence exists between the all-white garments of the second and fourth men and the predominantly white garments of the first and third women. The predominant blue of the clothing of the chieftain and the man following him is balanced by the predominant red of the garments of the two men in the rearguard. The centrally placed child’s loincloth is red.
Fringes on the garments appear to be evenly distributed. None appears on the clothing of the men or the women in groups of four. They do appear, however, on the hems of the garments of the chieftain, at the head of the procession, and of the last two figures in the relief. The kilt of the second person in line may also bear a fringe along its hem, but the gazelle obscures it. The fringe down the side of the chieftain’s garment compensates for its absence. The pattern of fringing is, then. A:B::B:A.
The distribution of footwear follows a different pattern. In general, the men wear sandals and the women wear low boots or moccasin-type shoes. The two men at the rear of the procession
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 12
wear sandals, as do the four grouped men who precede the children. All four of the women wear shoes, and the central figure, the walking child, wears similar shoes. At the head of the scene walk the chieftain and his assistant, barefooted like the Egyptians who lead them into the presence of Khnum-hotep, and presumably for the same reason; probably these two were the only members of the trading party to be admitted into the presence of the nomarch. Organizing the footwear simply in terms of sandals and non-sandals, then, from back to front the pattern shows sandals: nonsandals (shoes)::sandals:nonsandals (bare feet), an A:B::A:B pattern of distribution.
Equipment: Weapons
In this scene 11 different items of equipment appear, dividing almost equally into the categories of weapons (5) and nonweapons (6). The items in both categories are relatively evenly distributed between the two halves of the scene. As weapons the people bear bows, a quiver for arrows, spears, throw sticks or boomerangs, and a battle-axe. The first man of the group of four carries a bow slung over his shoulder in the first half of the scene, and, balancing him, the last man in the second half of the scene carries a bow in his left hand. The quiver slung over the shoulder of the last man in the scene does not immediately appear to be matched in the first half.
The spears show a particularly interesting distribution, and the direction in which they point contributes to the scene’s symmetry. Two spears appear in the first half of the scene, and two more in its second half. The spears in the first half are carried by the last two men in the group of four, while the first spear in the second half is carried by the small child behind the male donkey, and the second is attached to the saddle of the female donkey. The first man with a spear carries it pointing forward, and the second carries his pointing backward. Again, the boy’s spear points forward and that on the donkey backward. This forms an A:B::A:B parallel pattern, but more interesting is the aesthetically functional fact that the two inner spears point toward the center of the scene, so enclosing it, while the outer two point outward, away from the center. The other pointed objects in the procession, those associated with the four animals, form a similar pattern, as has been shown above; the horns of the gazelle and the handles of the first bellows point upward,
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 13
The rear guard of the caravan of Asiatic traders.
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 14
focusing attention on the center of the scene, while the horns of the antelope and the bellows on the second donkey point backward.
The throw sticks and the battle-axe, painted with similar configurations, can be considered together. It is interesting in this context to note that the throw stick was so common a weapon among the Canannites that the Egyptians adopted it as a hieroglyph meaning “Asiatic;” it occurs in the top inscription in this painting, just above the chieftain, before the bound, kneeling man. Two men in the first half of the procession carry such objects with them. The short staff with which the chieftain guides the antelope has also been classified as a throw stick or boomerang, but it is evident that it differs considerably from those of the second and third men in the group of four, and it should not be considered with them. Two such objects come, then, in the first half of the procession, and another two of a similar configuration in the second. The first of these is carried on the back of the second donkey. This curved wooden object has the same curves as those of the throw sticks held by the men toward the front of the line, and so has also been identified as a throw stick. Its colors suggest that this piece might be a part of the saddle furniture rather than a weapon, but its juxtaposition here with another weapon, the spear, supports its identification as a throw stick.
From the perspective of artistic balance, it is not necessary to decide between these alternatives. The artist’s purpose was not exactly to replicate two objects here but to depict two similarly shaped objects in both halves of the scene. The same point can be made about the second similar object in the second half of the procession, the battle-axe in the right hand of the last warrior. It is not the precise equivalent, in shape or function, of the throw sticks carried by the earlier men, but its general configuration echoes their shape and so establishes an overall balance in the scene.
Of the five types of weapons carried in the procession, then, four are paired, at least by shape, in the two halves of the scene. Each half of the relief contains one bow, two spears, and two throw sticks or similarly shaped weapons. The quiver alone of the weapons is not precisely balanced in the first half of the scene, except perhaps by the unidentified stick used by the chieftain to guide the antelope. Its position in the line may also explain its balance. Slung over the shoulder of the last warrior, it may be artistically balanced not by another weapon, but by the garment worn over the shoulder of the chieftain at the head of the procession.
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 15
Equipment: Nonweapons
The Canannite traders carry with them other equipment, apparently not weapons. Of such nonweapons the scene depicts the previously discussed short stick with which to guide the antelope, a rope used as a halter on the gazelle, water skins, bellows, a lyre, and a plectrum with which to pluck the lyre. If the lead stick or short staff with which the chieftain guides the antelope is not allowed to balance the quiver at the end of the line, it has no functional equivalent in the second half of the procession. It finds a visual parallel, however, in the bow carried in the left hand of the last figure in the line, the man who is the chieftain’s own parallel. The curve of the chieftain’s short staff resembles, to some extent, the upper half of the bow at the other end of the line.
The bow, of course, already functions to balance the bow carried by the first man in the group of four, so should not perhaps be counted here as well. The quiver is a closer match to the chieftain’s guide stick in shape and, not itself a weapon, but only a container for weapons, may belong more truly with the nonweapons than with the weapons. In that case, the last inanimate piece of equipment in the procession perfectly balances the first such object.
The rope used for a halter around the neck of the gazelle can be seen upon close inspection to be balanced by the strings of the lyre. As the second person from the front holds the rope in his left hand, so the second from the end holds the lyre in his. The plectrum in his right hand then parallels the horn of the gazelle, grasped by the right hand of the guide. These parallel figures, then, each hold a pointed object in the right hand and a cord of some sort in the left. Incidentally, the lyre pictured here is the earliest extant portrayal of a Canaanite musical instrument.
Other equipment carried in the procession also balances. The second man in the group of four carries one water skin slung over his left shoulder, while the man next to the end of the procession carries another slung over his right. Both donkeys carry bellows on their backs. The bellows’ presence in the scene argues that these Asiatics worked with metal, perhaps as tinkers, at least some of the time. The position of the bellows alternates: one stands upright, the other lies flat. As the scene as a whole divides at the second boy on the first donkey’s back, the vertical bellows comes in the first half of the scene between the two small riders, and the horizontal one in
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 16
the second half. While not all the nonweapons balance in the same way in the scene, all may be said to balance in one way or another between the two halves of the scene.
Bodily Attitude
Another aspect of balance within the procession of the Asiatic traders has to do with their bodily stance or the position of their arms and legs. For example, the men second from the end of the line and second from the front hold their arms almost identically. Each holds a rope or some strings in his left hand and, in his right, a sharply pointed object, a plectrum in that of the former and a gazelle’s horn in that of the latter. Similarity also occurs in the arm position of the chieftain and of the last man in line. The left arms of both reach forward, grasping curved wooden objects. Their right arms both extend downward, the arm of the last man in line more sharply. The right hand of the leader reaches down to the neck of the antelope, while the right hand of the last man in line holds a battle-axe.
The main groups of four also show similarity in this respect. The painting presents their arms in three ways: bent at a right angle at the elbow, hanging directly downward from the shoulder, and obscured. The left arms of the first and third men in the group of four are bent at right angles, as are those of the first and fourth women. The men’s hands hold weapons, while those of the women are empty. The right arms of the first, second, and fourth women hang down, as do the right arms of the second and third men. Thus one more of the women is depicted with a hanging right arm. Again, the right hands of the men hold weapons, while those of the women are empty. Both arms of the fourth man and of the third woman are obscured, as are the left arms of the second man and the second woman and the right arm of the first man. Of the eight arms on the four adults in each of these groups, seven can be matched in the other group. One man’s obscured right arm and one woman’s hanging right arm fail to match. This balance, it should be noted, does not occur by order of depiction in the scene but is purely numeric.
Two features of posture in this scene do not match at all, but perhaps for good reason. The chieftain bends forward, unlike any other Asiatic figure, although like the first of the Egyptians who
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 17
precede him. Obviously this is a gesture of humility and respect to Khnum-hotep from the leader of the foreign visitors. The other anomalous figure is the last man in the group of four, who alone in the scene faces backward. In fact, curiously, his head and shoulders face backward, but his feet point straight ahead. This unique position probably has both artistic and functional significance. Artistically, this is where the scene divides in half, between this warrior and the child following the donkey. His looking back, like the inward-pointing spears, focuses attention on the center of the scene. Functionally, this last member of the group of warriors looks back upon the women and children he is assigned to protect.
While the balancing physical stances on either half of the procession line appear only to contribute to the overall symmetry of the portrait, one balancing pair holds a particular interest in its very unexpectedness. Additionally, it may represent a glimpse into the artist’s attitude toward the people he paints. The first man in the group of four is unmatched by any other adult figure in the group but mirrored in posture by the small boy who walks just before the group of four women. Both appear, oddly, to lack right arms, but their left arms bend at the elbow to cross their bodies, and they hold weapons in their left hands, the man his bow, the boy his spear.
This unexpected parallel implies a functional parallel as well, for each of these two leads a group of marchers who represent those Asiatic traders without specific role in the procession. That is, the first two men in line bring gifts and the last two guard the procession, but the eight adults and three children who come between represent the undifferentiated mass of those 37 who come selling stibium to the Egyptians. The two armless leaders of these groups function as their heads and protectors, and their identical portrayal emphasizes their parallel roles within the groups.
For perfect parallelism, of course, one might expect either two groups of five or two of four with an armed leader for each. The fact that the first group contains only four marchers led by a man while the second holds five led by a child seems inconsistent in light of the predictable pattern of symmetry within the painting. The very reliability of that pattern, however, may in fact yield insight into the painter’s attitude toward his subjects. Perhaps the painter preferred to portray a child leading and with his spear protecting the group of women rather than placing a warrior in such close propinquity to the women and so by implication diminishing his valor. Or, perhaps the
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 18
painter felt that four men could better balance four women plus one child than four women alone. Counting this group of four women plus one child as the equivalent of four men, then, would leave the two riding children alone at the center of the scene, so narrowing the focus there and balancing the procession with a portrayal of 2 + 4 male-equivalents on each side of the line.
As has just been suggested, the dramatic character of the procession determines the location of all the people in the line of march. The unarmed women and children march in the center of the line, where they can be protected. The larger group of warriors precedes them, but they are also protected by a rear guard, the second of whom is the most heavily armed figure in the scene. In front of him comes an unarmed man who carries a water skin and plays the lyre. The chieftain and his assistant, who lead the procession, are naturally unarmed and are ready with gifts — the two wild animals — to enter the presence of Khnum-hotep. The artistic balance of the scene results, then, from the functional distribution of the persons in it rather than from a meaningless aestheticism.
Children
In a curious way the central position of the three children in line emphasizes their somewhat anomalous relationship to the scene as a whole. Neither men nor women, dressed like the rear guard but shoed like the women (so far as one can see), two riding and one walking, associated with both weapons and nonweapons, the children play a constantly shifting thematic role in the procession, one befitting and amplified by their fluctuating structural function.
The sex of the three children is ambiguous, although the viewer perceives them as male because of their short hair and the loincloth of the third child, whose shoes, on the other hand, resemble those of the women. The children’s central position between the men and women assures their protection, and two of them are carried upon a donkey for additional ease and safety, but one of them himself carries a spear and acts as both leader and protector of the women who follow, a role confirmed by his physical mirroring of the leader of the male group of four.
As the children’s dramatic function and identification shift back and forth within the scene, so too does their spatial role. Metrically
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 19
and numerically they are central to the line, and the second of the two riding children is in those terms the central figure. But the two children on the donkey are so closely linked visually as to appear to be together at the center of the picture, and both visually and functionally the walking child takes his place with the second half of the line rather than between the two halves; furthermore, his forward-pointing spear separates him from the other two children while reinforcing their visual centrality.
In analysis of the picture by clothing and by colors, the two children who ride must be excluded from consideration, for their clothes and shoes are hidden and no color is associated with them. Suddenly, then, the walking child becomes numerically central to the scene, but the red of his loincloth continues to associate him more closely with the rear half of the procession, as it is the two men in the rear guard whose garments are predominantly red. The same effect results from analysis of the scene by weapons: the two riding children are put out of consideration, but the spear-carrying boy, while numerically central, is clearly associated with the second half of the scene.
A consideration of nonweapons in the scene reinforces the identification of this child with the second half of the line of march, for the two riding children flank a bellows and must be brought back into consideration. Now the second riding child is again the central figure, but the bellows is one of three nonweapons in the first half of the procession matching three in the second half, and the scene divides behind the donkey which carries it and behind the central child. When considering the scene with regard to animals, however, the center dividing line suddenly shifts forward, before the first donkey and the children he carries. Now the second child is again the central figure, but he rides well back from the visual division of the scene.
The fluctuating center of the line of march finds its clearest representation in the shifting and occasionally ambiguous representation and roles of the three children. The painter, then, with all his concern for balance within his painting, chose to represent that balance not as a rigid symmetry with a fixed and immutable center, but as a fluid yet dependable concept. As the dramatic center moves gently forward and backward, so the depictions and roles of the children who embody that center shift and fluctuate as well. The very ambiguity of their portrayal points
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 20
consistently to the painter’s firm control of the balance and symmetry of his painting.
Conclusion
The basic pattern of human distribution in this scene determines the distribution of most of the scene’s other features. The group of two men at the beginning of the procession is balanced by the group of two men at the end of the procession. The group of four closely spaced men balances the group of four closely spaced women. The three children appear at the center of the scene, and the middle one of the three is the central human figure in the whole procession. Thematically this pattern is A:B:(C):B:A, a chiastic arrangement. Features like clothing, nonmilitary equipment, and bodily attitudes generally follow the same distribution.
To recapitulate, the clothing on the last two men closely resembles that of the pair at the beginning of the procession, excepting, naturally enough, some aspects of the chieftain’s garb. The garments of the more centrally located group of four men more closely match those of the group of four women. The bodily attitudes of the pair at the end of the line resemble those of the lead pair, while the bodily attitudes of the four men again are closer to those of the four women and the small child who leads them. The pieces of equipment not used as weapons follow much the same distribution, as most of these objects are carried by the advance and rear parties.
The weapons, on the other hand, follow the distribution A:B::A:B; for obvious functional reasons, neither the lead pair entering to Khnum-hotep nor the four women carry weapons. All of the weapons are carried by the advance guard, the group of four men, the walking child, and the second of the men in the rear guard. The animals move in a still different distribution, A:A::B:B; two wild animals appear at the head of the procession, and two domesticated animals follow later in line. Regardless of the pattern in any individual feature, however, the pairs which characterize all three of these schemes indicate a conscious effort on the part of the artist to balance the two halves of the scene symmetrically, and the gently shifting center of the painting, accented by the fluctuating dramatic roles of the children who represent that center, reveals his flexibility, his refusal to define order and balance as rigidity. He achieved his
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 21
aesthetic goal to a remarkable, previously unappreciated degree.
The variously balancing elements and the overall symmetry of this portrait of 19th-century Asiatic traders delight and illuminate. As the halves of the procession reflect one another with only occasional discrepancies, so the whole may be seen to reflect, again with inevitable errors, the biblical patriarchs and their world. This symmetry, this representation of historical reality, was surely not intended by the painter for the purposes of 20th-century scholars, but it was unquestionably a real part of his mural. Essaying to mirror the real world while confessing the inevitable inaccuracies of his portrayal, the painter of Beni Hasan composed an indelible statement about art, about history, and about reality.
(Reprinted from the Biblical Archeologist, Vol. 44, No. 4, Fall 1981, by permission of the American Schools of Oriental Research 4243 Spruce St., Philadelphia PA 19104.)
BSP 12:1-2 (Winter-Spring 1983) p. 22