An interesting and informative video. It's good to know that people still care about history. One of the things that makes them so realistic is the very natural expressions. Vermeer was the first name that came to mind, as someone else has commented. The Chinese artist Leng Jun practices what is called hyperrealism, producing oil paintings in stunning detail. These images remind me of the photographs on grave stones (photo ceramics) which have been around since 1854. The purpose is to represent the deceased accurately, so they can be remembered as they were. Whereas later painters equally capable of such accurate representation - Da Vinci, Rembrant, Artemisia Gentileschi, and many others - often had a different agenda, with their paintings having much more to say than (for example) 'this is what Lisa del Giocondo looked like.' Hans Holbein the Younger painted some portraits which capture a great deal of his subjects' characters. Given the popularity of religious themes, the great masters were often painting people who had been dead far longer than the people in the Faiyum portraits, including subjects no one could describe, like Jesus, Mary, and John the Baptist. They were working from imagination. The video says the that it is clear that the subjects were painted after they had died; it does not say why this is clear. Hiring a professional to paint a portrait is something only the rich could afford. So perhaps rich people had their portraits painted before they died? These could have been copied for the portrait on the mummy. Or perhaps people simply had such paintings done well in advance of their death? We don't know that they represent the person as they looked when they died - that is to say, at the age when they died. People today might choose a favourite photograph for a grave stone (or a funeral order of service) rather than a recent image. Either way, these early artists were a lot more skillful than many who followed them.
These are incredible representations of folks from antiquity! I've only ever read about them in passing reference but I never took the time to go and search them out. I can clearly see I was only doing myself a disservice. Thank you World History Encyclopedia for researching and presenting this amazing part of art and human history. 🙏
I first heard about these paintings in a program on ancient art - from the 1st century, to the Byzantine. They're amazing; beautiful, original, and some of the few paintings left from that time, as I understand. Realistic portraiture came to prominence during the Renaissance, through the Dutch Masters, and on through the 19th century, but since the end of the first World War, art has become more abstract. I'm sure there are artists I'm simply unaware of, who paint in this manner today. I'm glad, however, you chose this topic to cover. Thanks. :)
It's possible, especially in the case of young children, that these were after death portraits, but apparently there are cases of much older people in the mummy case than what the portrait shows. One could conclude that sometime in young adulthood it was expected to have a portrait at the ready. Later, gold leaf details might be added, or even jewelry to add to the after life spells representing status. I think it was any mix of before and after death renderings, with some that are just close to realistic based on a glimpse of the corpse.
Fayoum mummy portraits has nothing to do with Romans, it’s portraits made by Egyptian artists for burial purposes of Egyptian citizens during the Greco Roman period that was just a glimpse in the very long Egyptian history !
Hey, correction here: those portraits are actually done before the deceased’s death. In fact, they were hung out as just casual portraits when they were alive; they were only put on the deceased’s sarcophagus later, like they did with the old carved ancient ones as an influence, and this was also during the pagan-Christianity era of Egypt, only for it to decline with time with the faith.
How do we know they were all painted from memory and not from life (at least some) - are there ancient sources for this? I really felt that this claim should have been given some backing evidence in this video, rather than a quick sentence with no follow-up to demonstrate why that was indeed the case
DON'T use the romano-greek art and clothing to come to a conclusion of a "multiethnic" society. It is extremely important to note that these Fayum mummy portraits represent the faces of native Egyptians and NOT Greeks or Romans as they didn't practise mummification. The dental morphology of these mummies proved they were separate from Greeks as well as Romans. However, the were closely akin and clustered with ancient Egyptians, especially those from Thebes, Badari, Hawara. Phenotypically, their current descendants in Egypt look very similar to them. These faces look so homogenous to us because we think we have encountered them in our day to day life.
@Jns Majority of the faces you see are of ancient Egyptians of high social class. The artwork itself is Roman as the Egyptians' clothes in the portraits were influenced by Greco-Roman culture. Some of them even had more greek names even though they were ethnic Egyptians who had still believed in the ancient Egyptian religion.
@@The_Truth- your typical caucasian blue eyes, great jawline etc and etc. We have both, in American terms, "black" and "white" people. But our "black" people looks a bit different compared to "black" people in America with central African ancestry . This is because we are more influenced by the Mediterranea than "African" culture.
Multi ethnic? Were Greeks and Romans as dark as these Egyptians whom look identical to modern Egyptian. There is no blonde hair and blue eyes here so were the ancient Romans and greeks white as the movies depicts them.
The average ancient Greek or Roman would have looked like people from the Mediterranean, today (olive skin and dark features). However, there would have been ancient Greeks and Romans who were fair and had blonde hair, etc. There were a lot of cultures mixing in ancient times, just like there is today.
@@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia yea like Ethiopians and Persians/Indians even Asians. Jubilees say Shems portion is the middle and all the way towards east to India. It say Zion is in the land of Canaan and Eden towards the east. Alexanders mosaic and these portraits and ancient coins like drachma from sassanids show the appearance too
@@berniefynn6623 You’re ridiculous. Science doesn’t use BC or AC anymore because of it’s religious implications. Science is secular. If you want to study religion or discuss Jesus, you should go to your local church or talk about it in your house.
@@richardlopez4318 You mean scientists, not science and CHRISTIANS have been at the fore front of science and if secular want to use their dating what else are they changing to cover up the truth.
Can you think of any modern paintings or artworks that are equally as realistic as the Fayum mummy portraits?
Very well done and informative. To answer your question. Girl with the pearl earring or anything by Vermeer. But that’s 1800 years later or so
Surprised she didn’t talk about the Byzantine icons
An interesting and informative video. It's good to know that people still care about history. One of the things that makes them so realistic is the very natural expressions. Vermeer was the first name that came to mind, as someone else has commented. The Chinese artist Leng Jun practices what is called hyperrealism, producing oil paintings in stunning detail.
These images remind me of the photographs on grave stones (photo ceramics) which have been around since 1854. The purpose is to represent the deceased accurately, so they can be remembered as they were. Whereas later painters equally capable of such accurate representation - Da Vinci, Rembrant, Artemisia Gentileschi, and many others - often had a different agenda, with their paintings having much more to say than (for example) 'this is what Lisa del Giocondo looked like.' Hans Holbein the Younger painted some portraits which capture a great deal of his subjects' characters.
Given the popularity of religious themes, the great masters were often painting people who had been dead far longer than the people in the Faiyum portraits, including subjects no one could describe, like Jesus, Mary, and John the Baptist. They were working from imagination.
The video says the that it is clear that the subjects were painted after they had died; it does not say why this is clear. Hiring a professional to paint a portrait is something only the rich could afford. So perhaps rich people had their portraits painted before they died? These could have been copied for the portrait on the mummy. Or perhaps people simply had such paintings done well in advance of their death? We don't know that they represent the person as they looked when they died - that is to say, at the age when they died. People today might choose a favourite photograph for a grave stone (or a funeral order of service) rather than a recent image. Either way, these early artists were a lot more skillful than many who followed them.
These are incredible representations of folks from antiquity! I've only ever read about them in passing reference but I never took the time to go and search them out. I can clearly see I was only doing myself a disservice. Thank you World History Encyclopedia for researching and presenting this amazing part of art and human history. 🙏
Thank you for your kind words. 🙂 The mummy portraits are incredible and definitely deserve to be widely known about.
I first heard about these paintings in a program on ancient art - from the 1st century, to the Byzantine. They're amazing; beautiful, original, and some of the few paintings left from that time, as I understand. Realistic portraiture came to prominence during the Renaissance, through the Dutch Masters, and on through the 19th century, but since the end of the first World War, art has become more abstract. I'm sure there are artists I'm simply unaware of, who paint in this manner today. I'm glad, however, you chose this topic to cover. Thanks. :)
You're very welcome. 🙂
Was watching a documentary recently, the inscription on the mummy was in Greek on an an Egyptian mummy box with a Roman style painted face amazing.
They sure are!
Very Exquisite for the time and place
It's possible, especially in the case of young children, that these were after death portraits, but apparently there are cases of much older people in the mummy case than what the portrait shows. One could conclude that sometime in young adulthood it was expected to have a portrait at the ready. Later, gold leaf details might be added, or even jewelry to add to the after life spells representing status. I think it was any mix of before and after death renderings, with some that are just close to realistic based on a glimpse of the corpse.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. We think it's definitely possible that it was a mix of before and after death portraits. 🙂
Fayoum mummy portraits has nothing to do with Romans, it’s portraits made by Egyptian artists for burial purposes of Egyptian citizens during the Greco Roman period that was just a glimpse in the very long Egyptian history !
nope... no cacasian or bedouin in kemet
@@ime3126 Yes, no Caucasian nor Sub Saharan.
Hey, correction here: those portraits are actually done before the deceased’s death. In fact, they were hung out as just casual portraits when they were alive; they were only put on the deceased’s sarcophagus later, like they did with the old carved ancient ones as an influence, and this was also during the pagan-Christianity era of Egypt, only for it to decline with time with the faith.
Hi! I believe some were completed before death, and others were completed afterwards.
Faiyum mummy portrait dental traits and recently genetics proves they were indigenous Egyptians, and not Greco-Romans!!!!
How do we know they were all painted from memory and not from life (at least some) - are there ancient sources for this? I really felt that this claim should have been given some backing evidence in this video, rather than a quick sentence with no follow-up to demonstrate why that was indeed the case
cool.
DON'T use the romano-greek art and clothing to come to a conclusion of a "multiethnic" society. It is extremely important to note that these Fayum mummy portraits represent the faces of native Egyptians and NOT Greeks or Romans as they didn't practise mummification. The dental morphology of these mummies proved they were separate from Greeks as well as Romans. However, the were closely akin and clustered with ancient Egyptians, especially those from Thebes, Badari, Hawara. Phenotypically, their current descendants in Egypt look very similar to them. These faces look so homogenous to us because we think we have encountered them in our day to day life.
@Jns Majority of the faces you see are of ancient Egyptians of high social class. The artwork itself is Roman as the Egyptians' clothes in the portraits were influenced by Greco-Roman culture. Some of them even had more greek names even though they were ethnic Egyptians who had still believed in the ancient Egyptian religion.
sorry bedouin that are just invaders of the black civilisation kemet
❤️
Not sold on the multi-ethnic comment, most like physical and social description of the Mediterranean people.
Egyptian, Roman and Greeks can still be described as "multi-ethnic" even if they all come from the Mediterranean region. 🙂
@@WorldHistoryEncyclopediaExcept the original Egyptians are African. Fatiums portraits shows foreigners.
Egyptians till this day can have white features with african curly hair.
@@FS-me8mj What are white features? Because we know the original Egyptians are the furthest thing from white.
@@The_Truth- your typical caucasian blue eyes, great jawline etc and etc. We have both, in American terms, "black" and "white" people. But our "black" people looks a bit different compared to "black" people in America with central African ancestry . This is because we are more influenced by the Mediterranea than "African" culture.
this is surely not greek style
Multi ethnic? Were Greeks and Romans as dark as these Egyptians whom look identical to modern Egyptian. There is no blonde hair and blue eyes here so were the ancient Romans and greeks white as the movies depicts them.
The average ancient Greek or Roman would have looked like people from the Mediterranean, today (olive skin and dark features). However, there would have been ancient Greeks and Romans who were fair and had blonde hair, etc. There were a lot of cultures mixing in ancient times, just like there is today.
@@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia yeh true that but Hollywood always portrays Romans and Greeks as nordic looking people
@@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia is that a joke???
This is how Israelites really look like according to Bible
Well, none of us really know for sure, but it's safe to say that they looked Mediterranean (dark hair, olive skin, etc).
@@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia yea like Ethiopians and Persians/Indians even Asians. Jubilees say Shems portion is the middle and all the way towards east to India. It say Zion is in the land of Canaan and Eden towards the east. Alexanders mosaic and these portraits and ancient coins like drachma from sassanids show the appearance too
@@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia other people became Jews/Christians too. They were very mixed
You use the term BCE,where is your start date,if Christ, it is BC And AD
Hi Bernie, please note that the BCE/CE and BC/AD timeline is exactly the same. 1 BC = 1 BCE.
@@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia so why use it, you taking your time from chris5 so are you d3nying christ
@@berniefynn6623 You’re ridiculous. Science doesn’t use BC or AC anymore because of it’s religious implications. Science is secular. If you want to study religion or discuss Jesus, you should go to your local church or talk about it in your house.
@@richardlopez4318 You mean scientists, not science and CHRISTIANS have been at the fore front of science and if secular want to use their dating what else are they changing to cover up the truth.
SO WHY USE BCA??????You are acknowleging jesus by saying they intertwine.
Hi! Please read our article for more information: worldhistory.org/article/1041/the-origin--history-of-the-bcece-dating-system/
@@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia Using A D as your reference point is acknowledging Jesus,so why the extra letter? Making fools of your selves