A Ram in a Thicket

< Table of Contents


Despite the fact that all the published literature on this piece invariably describes it as a ram, it’s actually a goat … but what’s an ovicaprid between friends? He dates to around 2500 BC and was excavated from the evocatively titled ‘Great Death Pit’ at Ur. He’s one of a pair and the golden tube springing from his neck indicates that he would have originally functioned as support for a table or stand of some description.

This goat is simply a masterpiece of craftsmanship. The original core was created in wood with various pieces of gold, copper, lapis lazuli, limestone, and shell, all attached with bitumen. I do like the symbolic combination of themes around nature and fertility, but I’m particularly enthralled by the fact that is still retains a particular ‘goatyness’ … yes, it works beautifully on the level of symbol, but it is still an exceptional rendition of a feeding goat.
Location: London, UK

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Always remember to draw the swastika turning to the right": Some thoughts on swastika directionality in Early Medieval Irish Art

Image
Swastikas are, for a number of reasons, endlessly fascinating symbols. Like all symbols, they are only invested with the meanings we give them. Otherwise they are just little shapes and drawings that mean nothing in and of themselves. Owing to its long history and brief (if traumatic) association with Nazism, the swastika probably has a stronger resonance than most. You won’t spend long on the internet attempting to discuss the swastika before someone, trying to be helpful, notes that the Nazi version rotated counter-clockwise (elbows pointing left) and was bad, but the good Buddhist/Hindu version rotated clockwise. They may be trying to be helpful, but they are invariably wrong. It’s true that the version Adolf Hitler designed for the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei only went one direction: counter-clockwise. What’s wrong is that not all other ( i.e. non-Nazi) swastikas turn the opposite direction (elbows pointing right). Rather than dutifully plod through a debun...
Read more

The dreaded first test post!

Image
An irregularly updated blog about archaeology and related madness! ... might just be good! ** I'm always looking for guest writers! So if you have something that you want to say about archaeology, please get in touch! ** [** If you like any of the posts on this blog, please consider making a small donation. Each donation helps keep the Irish Radiocarbon & Dendrochronological Dates project going! **] &amp;amp;amp;lt;A HREF="http://ws.amazon.co.uk/widgets/q?rt=tf_sw&amp;amp;amp;amp;ServiceVersion=20070822&amp;amp;amp;amp;MarketPlace=GB&amp;amp;amp;amp;ID=V20070822%2FGB%2Frobmchaarc-21%2F8002%2Fb7e77064-bfea-4ba8-954d-a415ec05ad0c&amp;amp;amp;amp;Operation=NoScript"&amp;amp;amp;gt;Amazon.co.uk Widgets&amp;amp;amp;lt;/A&amp;amp;amp;gt;
Read more

Three Billboards Outside University College London: A case of approved plagiarism by Prof Andrew Bevan et al.

Image
Introduction The oft-recited adage is that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Going by this logic, there can be no higher praise from an academic than outright plagiarism of your work. I have had recent cause to be on the receiving end of just such praise and I can assure you, dear reader, that it doesn’t feel like a compliment at all. In fact, it sucks. I decided that, rather than meekly accept it, I was going to fight back for the recognition due to my work. To this end, I reached out to the two universities involved (University College London and Plymouth University) and the publishing journal (PNAS) and asked them to initiate investigations into the conduct of their employees/authors. I trusted that these institutions would be keen to ensure that their academics adhered to the highest standards and that any deviation would be met with swift correction. I was wrong and my trust was sorely misplaced. Until now I have only really discussed this issue with my cont...
Read more