Choose two pieces of furniture from the Tomb of King Tut and relate them to two furniture pieces from a later time. How are they related in shape, materials, symbolism, etc. How are they different (for example, new materials). Hints: Eileen Gray’s Rue de Lota apartment furnishings; Thomas Hope’s Egyptian Room furnishings; Victorian Egyptian Revival rooms, etc. Your analysis should be about 200 words (or more) for each piece.
Ancient Egyptians had appealing pieces of furniture such as tables, chest tools couches, and bets. Some of these tools were preserved and found in museums. The tools were recovered from pharaohs, queens, and wealthy ancient Egyptians tombs. There was a considerable difference and similarities, between furniture made in the king Tuts tomb, and those from earlier time such as those made in Victorian Egyptian Revival rooms. Some two commonly known furniture in the king Tuts tomb, were chairs and tables (Booth, 2015).
Materials used are both wood and metal, to make chairs of four curved legs, two in the front, and the other two in the rear in both in king Tuts tomb and those in Eileen Gray’s Rue de Lota apartment furnishings are related in that both sit upon a modified drum coated with copper. The armrest on top of both chairs is of designed pieces of wood that extend to the backrest. Both the back and the front hardened by strips of leather passing diagonally and coated with gold lining on the surface (Lambert, 2019). In both times, the chair was used for dining or even for gaming purposes. There were also chairs designed for wealthy people such as kings and those designed for the peasants. There were carving made on the wood to make the tools more appealing on both times
The solid ebony chair from Tomb of King Tut was made of more furniture, with high-quality pieces than those in Victorian Egyptian Revival rooms. Chairs in ancient times were used by wealthy people such as kings while in were used by all people in earlier days. Decorations from animal skins in the ancient times were made to chairs in contrary to those made in previous times (Booth, 2015).
While antique chairs were painted black and white colours to represent animals in Thomas Hope’s Egyptian Room furnishings. Chairs were decorated by different colours, which make them more appealing. The chairs’ legs were designed to look exactly like those of a duck while those made in the earlier times had no such decoration. While the antique chairs had an animal skin to make it more comfortable and appealing, the more previous time tables had cushions.
In King Tuts tomb and Victorian Egyptian Revival rooms, tables were made of wood with gold and silver lining to make them more appealing. In both times, there were tables designed for the rich and those designed for the poor. In both times, meals would be made of either three legs or one leg and were used for dining or gaming (Markel, 2016). For decoration purposes in both errors, tables were carved or designed to look more appealing. The table was also designed in such a way they would have one two three legs.
Like the chairs, most tables would be decorated with animal skins in king Tuts tomb while in the Victorian Egyptian Revival rooms; the table would be decorated with different colours, which would make them more appealing. In ancient times the use of wood and steel was limited while more such materials are used in the earlier days (Markel, 2016). Great legs made of mahogany and cherry were developed in previous times as compared to the ancient times where wood would be of low quality and poorly designed. The table’s leg would also be designed to look like those of a duck in the king Tuts tomb, while such decoration does not exist in Victorian Egyptian Revival rooms. Most furniture’s was simple in the king Tuts tomb. People made themselves simple tools whiles tools made in Victorian Egyptian Revival rooms are of high quality and made by trained people.
- Booth, M. R. (2015). Victorian spectacular theatre 1850-1910. Routledge
- Lambert, R. (2019). Howard and the Mummy: Howard Carter and the Search for King Tut’s Tomb. Children’s Book and Media Review, 40(3), 182.
- Markel, H. (2016). Unlocking the Medical Mysteries of King Tut’s Tomb.