Tuesday, October 11, 2011

Ziggurats versus Pyramids: The differences and similarities


Since the dawn of civilization humans have succeeded in the inventions of many things. Nothing, however, was more monumental and permanent than that of extravagant structures, like ziggurats and pyramids. Although both are large in size both the inside and out are very different. First off, Ziggurats are seen in the Ancient Near East around the time of 2100-2050 B.C., specifically the Nanna Ziggurat, in Ur which was built in honor of the moon god Nanna. This structure is made of mud-brick and is completely solid, as opposed to the hollow rooms contained in the pyramids. The Ziggurat structure’s base is that of a rectangle and have different step levels. The different terraced levels are stacked on this structure and there are three staircases leading up to the top of the Ziggurat, all of which angles are slanted away from the building. The Ziggurat served as a temple for worship and at the very top there was thought to be a shrine used for worship. As well as a sacred temple this structure also had a practical use, because of its shape, water runs off the angle of the sides and this decreases the chance of eroding done on the mud-brick. It also may have served as a place for people to escape to during floods, so it helped in that aspect of life.
                The Pyramids of Giza are an example of great monumental structure; however, these structures are very different than the Ziggurats of the Ancient Near East. The pyramids were very much more complex than the Ziggurats, starting with the material. Pyramids were constructed of limestone, more sturdy and heavy material compared to the mud-brick method used in ziggurats. As well as the material pyramids differ due to their layout, meaning the structure itself. The structure has a triangle base with tiny steps, each smaller than the one before leading to the top where a gold cap used to sit. With a tunnel that leads to a funeral tomb in the middle of the pyramid, these structure obviously were somewhat hollow inside as well the fact that they were not used for worship. The pyramids were used for funerary purposes to honor the dead pharaoh who built it. In the pyramids of Giza’s case the three pharaohs were Khufu, Khafre, and Menkaure and these pharaohs each built a pyramid to be buried in. The extremities that the Egyptians went through to build these pyramids are so great and this can be seen in the fact that each cut stone weighed an average of 2.5 tons!
                Although both of these structures seem at glance like they are similar, if you look closely you see that they are in fact very different, and that the only thing they have in exact similarity is the fact that they are grandeur in structure. There are however many differences, including the format of the structure, the material, and especially the purpose. The funerary purposes versus a sacred worship center are two very different things, but shown in reflection of the cultures. Egypt had a very strong view of the afterlife, believing in the importance of extravagant tombs for helping aid the pharaohs into the afterlife. In the ancient Near East worshipping gods in extravagant and monumental temples was important in their society. It is fascinating that two cultures around the same time had the ability to build huge formations with such little technology and they actually differentiated in function and composition.

6 comments:

  1. It is amazing the planning and the foresight that was needed to make both of these structures. Did you realize that the square base of the pyramid of Khufu (the largest of the pyramids in Giza) is almost 20 times as big as that of the Nanna Ziggurat? For the common Sumerian, I'm sure that the Ziggurats would have appeared to be large rising above the flat plains. In comparison the Egyptian pyramids would have seemed like colossal giants. I wonder if this wasn't part of the Egyptian strategy for making them so big. That they wanted to make theirs bigger than any other structures in the known world at that time and ones built in the future, and proclaim their superiority with the large and impressive pyramids.
    I know you meant the base of the pyramids are square instead of triangle when you described them :). Since the Egyptians plastered the outside of the pyramids with limestone, would the sides of the pyramids have been smooth instead of stone steps, or would they have followed the shape of the steps?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nicely written! You were very informative about both structures and supported your thesis well. I like that you mentioned that both buildings and their use were due to their culture. I think it's so true, and it is amazing that past societies, especially ones near the beginning, had such a grasp on architecture to build large scaled formations. Thinking about the construction of the ziggurats, I wonder how many workers it took to complete it versus how many for the pyramids, or how long it took as well.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I actually wrote about this topic too, and something I thought was interesting is that, to me at least, the pyramids seem much more self-serving than the ziggurats. The pyramids are about one man living in grandeur for all eternity, while the ziggurat could be a great symbol of religion to all in the Sumerian society. Of course, that's not to say that the pyramids are not beautiful and amazing feats of engineering, they were just made for a vastly different purpose than the ziggurats.

    ReplyDelete
  4. you missed the bit about the pyramids purpose as platforms for the Goa'uld 's starships to rest on when they land....

    ReplyDelete
  5. very informative!
    came here to get info for my poster about this and you did not disappoint

    ReplyDelete