The Aegen Societies and The New Kingdom

On Crete, culture and religion was developing, while the temples were taking the shape of the landscape and integrating with it. Natural powers were important by then and because of this, they were trying to give the sense of naturalistic process. What I mean, they were keeping every material they use as it is, all natural, no shaping. Having a peaceful atmosphere was important for these societies, thus they started to consider  militarism and focused to it. To have safer towns, fortification got important.

Knossos is a settlement in Crete and; in Knossos, there is a similar approach for protecting the Labyrinth by rising it up from the ground level. This brings up an argument I guess, because Minoans’ people they also gave rise to there cities.There was no other layer of shelter at the outer the city, the only protection method was the level difference. Can we really feel safe, even there was fortified towers along the island? (Comparing it with encloser level) Unfortunately, the temple collapsed several times, because of the natural forces and it was rebuilt.  The final version was built under the new government of Mycenae. There were bull imagery throughout the temple which refers to the Greek god Poseidon. After reconstruction, Labyrinth was fortified more with massive walls. On top of all these, we also should consider the plan of the Labyrinth, because it is like a maze. This condition also has big importance in protection of the locals.

Around 1450 BCE, Minoans gave way to Mycenaeans. This societies’ architectural approach was different then the others, they altered the structure relying on the need of military. There cities were elevated and unlike the other societies, they had very thick walls around the town for protecting the public from the danger of outsiders. The Labyrinth was the only structure left from the Minoans and Mycenaeans added the Lion Gate to the Labyrinth. The community did also interact with Egypt (Mycenaeans were sailer and sailing help interconnect the two societies.), because the concept of the graves, the way they bury the bodies and funeral practices have similarities. So, how does Mycenaeans’ architectural structure doesn’t have very small similarity with Egyptian structure? 

The city Troy was under the protection of Hattushas, and Hattusha was the new society after Mycenaean. Like Mycenaean cities, Troy was also crowned by an upper fortress set in a circuit of thick walls. They gave big importance defending their town, like the other communities. They made use of natural configuration and around 1400 BCE, they expanded their area. Now, the field was as big as the Ur. They also placed guard tower along the walls. They also created tunnels under the walls.

Roughly around 1560 to 1070 BCE, during the period of New Kingdom of Egypt, gigantic columns and colossal statues gained importance and designer focused on alteration of from open to closed experiences.  Thebes was used as the capital of Egypt and the two important temple was located there: Karnak and Luxor (one was at the one side of the Nile and the other was at the other side of it.). These temples were rose over the ground level, unlike the rest of the city. There wasn’t enough protection in side city. The used material was also another way of differantion of the houses and the temples. Houses were made of clay  and expandable materials; and the temples were made of solid limestone. Locals also enjoyed being in the streets, because the streets were wide. Also there was windows with millions. The temple of Amon-Ra in Karnak was expanded in time and got bigger. They added massive sloping pylons and ceremonial thresholds. In Amon-Ra, the architect of it, also designed the doors different than usual. They added openings above the doors which was named as fastigium later on by Romans. Like the most Egyptian temples, Karnak presented a sequence of a central axis through  a colonnaded entry court to a more secluded hypostyle hall and then a restricted inner sanctum ( Global History of Architecture,  M. Jarzombek, F.D.K. Ching and V. Prakash, pg.89).  In 1479-1458 BCE Queen Hatshepsut was the new King and she changed the old perspective of architecture. She also sponsored numerous temples and monuments.

Refence:

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s