1

ON ARTISTIC METHODS IN THE NORTH-WEST PALACE OF ASHUR NASIR-PAL II

Lydia Alpural-Sullivan

The north-west palace of Assyrian king Ashur Nasir-Pal II, is home to hundreds of figures carved in

bas-relief. Completed in 876 B.C., the palace contains multitudes of panels depicting the king’s life and

accomplishments as well as carvings of divine beings and magical creatures. These figures of human and

other anthropomorphic beings are stylistically and characteristically very similar to one another, though

each is distinct in size, measure, and style. Though each figure is unique up close, the similarities and

harmony of design strongly suggest that some standard model or system must have been used during

construction.

No direct evidence of what this system may have been exists today, but others have approached

the problem of how the carvings were made in such a harmonious fashion. These approaches as well as

my own analysis of a single genie figure at the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art will be discussed in this

paper, with the hope that by closely examining the actual measurements of an example from the

northwest palace, some new insights can be added to the body of knowledge about Assyrian carving

methods. Dr. Gay Robins approached the problem by attempting to apply the concept of grids as known

from artists creating similar reliefs in Egypt. These approaches will be looked at and expounde d upon

using my own measurements from the Kansas City Genie.

The Kansas City Genie is one of many similar panels taken from the palace of King Ashur Nasir-

Pal II; one of thirty-six slabs originally found in room L (Paley, 63). the panel features a large side-

oriented male genie sporting two great feathered wings and stands at 2.31 meters tall by 2.02 meters

wide. The figure faces to the onlooker’s right, framed on both sides by geometrically arranged date-

palm fronds and vines forming a latticed pattern. The left leg is placed forward of the right in a

stabilizing pose, with both soles of the feet firmly planted to the ground. The right arm is raised above

the waist with fingers and thumb wrapped around the base of a palm inflorescence, with which he dabs

at a palm frond. The Genie’s left arm hangs at his side, the hand grasping a small pail. The Genie wears

an ankle-length robe, carved with beautiful detail down to the individual strands of each tassel. In his

waistband are two daggers and a decorative whetstone. He sports earrings in the shape of a phallus1.

The Genie’s sandals have retained a very small amount of black and red paint along the sole, revealing

that the figure was probably once colorfully painted. On each wrist the Genie dons a rosette bracelet,

with two bands encircling the biceps of the figure. A double strand of beads rests around his neck, and

on his head, a horned helmet.

Though the carving is large and monumental in quality, there are some fine details. Particularly,

the cuticles of each finger, the tassel fibers and individual strands of hair, the individual filaments of

each feather and the whetstone in the Genie’s belt are all individually etched and display a level of

1 Similar to beads of bone or clay found in Middle-Assyrian temples of Ishtar and Tukulti-Ninurta I (Kremer, 31) Possibly a symbol of male fertility or a reference to the Goddess of war and sexual desire, Ishtar.

2

sculptural skill. Lines of cuneiform appear in a broad band below the hip of the figure. These lines,

called the Standard Inscription, are carved directly over the Genie’s hands, pail, and mid -section. The

Standard Inscription is repeated across all slabs of the palace, likely serving a magical purpose.

The Genie is depicted using simultaneous multiple points of view. The angle of the legs and feet,

and the turning of the head are directed forward and offer a fully side -oriented view. The shoulders are

both visible despite the left-side exposure of the body. The pose is purposeful, erect and unnatural.

When taken into consideration with the over-sized proportions of the genie, these qualities give the

carving a monumental and talismanic quality. The detail of the robe about the ankles shows some

consideration for layering – the robe and tassels disappear behind the left leg and re-appear above the

left foot.

Anatomical proportions are an especially striking feature of the genie. In addition to being much

larger than life in size, the body is hyper-masculinized with the arms, legs, feet and hands, shoulders,

and general musculature enlarged beyond what is natural. Even so, many elements of the body are

carved with meticulous attention to anatomical detail. For example, the bulge of the calf muscle is

clearly visible; the vastus medialus and flexor digitum longus are readily identifiable, as is a large vein

carved in a superposed fashion over the musculature, indicating it rests between flesh and muscle. The

same attention to detail can be observed in the arms, where the extensor carpi radialus longus and

extensor carpi ulnaris, the two large muscle groups of the forearm, are carved so as to appear to wrap

around suggesting the radius and ulna beneath, with both muscles terminating at the point of the

elbow, showing a clear distinction between soft tissue and bone.

AN ELUSIVE METHOD

To find a meaningful system for proportioning the figures, Dr. Gay Robins examined 125 of the

268 slabs depicting genies from the north-west palace. Taking the concept of guide-line systems that

Egyptian artists used as a starting point2, Robins thought that “It should be possible to analyze and

compare any figures in similar postures by placing them on grids consisting of the same number of

squares between fixed upper and lower reference points” (107), though she admits that no known

system of this kind is known to have been used in Assyrian or other Mesopotamian artistic practices.

(107). Robins first attempts to apply the Egyptian proportional convention of eighteen lines from

baseline to hairline to find the upper and lower limits of the grid, assuming distance from the knee to

the baseline to be one-third of the total grid height. This proved unfruitful, so Robins then adjusted the

number of horizontal lines to fifteen, which puts the lower line of the top row of cells through the center

of the eye in many –though not all - of the samples. Additionally, her findings seem to show that at

approximately the fifth, tenth and fifteenth gridline in many cases, the lines intersect key points of the

body: the knee, the waist, and the mid-eye. It is clear, however, that Robins rejects the idea that these

gridlines have a relation to any form of real linear measurement, as any mention of units is absent from

her method, which instead relies on abstracting the figure into a grid division.

2 Robins (107) described the grid system used by ancient Egyptians: the system consisted of 18 grid lines between the hai r and

baseline, with key points of the body approximately placed at given lines. This system defined the height and width of limbs, the s ize of the head, etc.

3

There are a few contentious points made by Robins. Firstly, the key points of the body which she

identified and compared amongst the genies (see fig II) are not all obviously relevant. For example,

Robins does not explain why the distance from the baseline to the bottom of the kilt or the distance

from the center of the eye to the center of the ear was chosen as key distances. Furthermore, her

findings using a 15-line grid system most significantly revealed that, often but not always, the mid-eye

level appears to lie along the 15th gridline, but this is accomplished by assuming away a portion of the

head, helmet or hair in many cases. For best accuracy, the entire figure should be included, especially

because the figures are carved into space limited by the total height of the panel. Therefore, the rest of

the figure must be affected by what lies above the hairline as would be forced to fit into the remaining

space. Lastly, it is very possible that the primary assumption – that the artists used a standardized line

system that is in any way comparable to the Egyptian guide-lines – is faulty. Lacking overt evidence as

we have for this method in Egyptian bas-relief, it is reasonable to select the hypothesis with the least

number of assumptions – supposing a sophisticated proportioning system before supposing basic linear

standards or general guidelines appears a backwards approach.3 In contrast with Robins, Samuel Paley

that “essential lines which stressed the stance and character of the person or object…” (12) were

employed. “This is”, he continues, “supported by the estimation of Greek sculptural techniques – that

with reliefs of shallow depth, it was not necessary to use many guidelines”.

Rather than approaching the problem of standardization in the Northwest palace reliefs with

conviction regarding the existence of a grid system, I instead started by taking measurements of any and

all possible key visual points. These included especially the major joints such as the knee and elbow, the

narrowest points of the body such as the waist, and the vertical distances between these point.4 I also

included in the data set measurements of the vines and palm fronds, which appear to be significant

elements of the work, especially when one considers them as they would have originally appeared:

repeating in a more or less parallel fashion throughout the room, with anthropomorphic figures

occupying the spaces between.

These actual measurements (in centimeters), elucidated an interesting clue: the narrowest point

of the knee coincides with the termination of the right wing, with an actual difference in distance from

the baseline of one centimeter between the two. Robins had also identified this particular point as

significant, particularly in rooms H, I and L; where this height frequently coincides with the fifth gridline

(112). The knee and tip of wing stand at 62 and 63 cm above the baseline, respectively. Interestingly, the

3 Commonly referred to as Occam’s razor, the argument that, given a lack of certainty, the wisest hypothesis is that with the fewest number of conditions. There is no direct evidence of a grid system having been used, whereas in Egypt it is known that there was a consistent, canonical grid system used. In that case, I elect to approach the problem fro m the simplest angle possible and seek complexity as the conditions remain unsatisfied. 4 A ful l directory of the distances given in centimeters follows: Total height of the figure: 231. Tota l Width: 202. left wing tip to left fingertip: 165. Right wingtip to right fingertip: 183. Helmet top to beard tip: 56. Edge of helmet horn to edge of hair, diagonal: 51. Shoulder to waist: 55. Helmet height: 20. Helmet width: 29.5. Right fingertip to elbow: 56. Left forearm: 44.5. Left hand width: 14.5. Left bicep width: 14.5 Knee to baseline: 62. Waist to top of helmet: 102. Shoulder to waist: 55. Right shoulder

to elbow: 49. Waist, horizontal: 36. Ki l t of left knee to baseline: 66. Shoulders, horizontal: 61. Beard length: 23.5. ha ir l ength: 27. Thigh, thickest point, horizontal: 23. Knee, slimmest point, horizontal: 15.5. ca l f, thickest, horizontal: 21. Left foot, horizontal: 38. Right foot, horizontal: 37.5. Baseline to lower hem: 11. Baseline to ca lf: 43. Waist to baseline: 126.5. wing tip to

baseline: 63. Hair to baseline: 181. Mid-eye to mid-ear: 12. Right shoulder to wingtip: 113. Left shoulder to wingtip: 41. See a lso: Fig. 1, Pg. 7.

4

narrowest point of the waist lies at 64 cm above the knee, at 126.5 cm above the baseline. Following

this trend, a further 62 cm above the waist places another mark in the center of the neck. If one were to

draw a horizontal line through each of these marks, the panel would be divided into roughly four

sections which divide the figure into a lower quarter ending at the knee; a mid-quarter from knee to

waist, an upper-quarter from waist to neck, and the top quarter from the neck above. These sections

appear to be related to the palm fronds of the sacred tree as well.5 As these imaginary lines fall across

the top of each third frond on the left, and include three fronds in each quarter on the right (with the

exception of the bottom right section, where a palm frond is missing). Though, the fronds are not

exactly parallel and in fact appear to be unevenly numbered and generally less precise. The vertical

spaces between the fronds range from twenty inches to eight inches, hinting that spacing the fronds

precisely was probably not very important. In fact, the extremely short distance of the final frond from

the baseline may well be an indicator of the artist simply working by hand in the case of the sacred tree ;

it’s possible the artist chose to cram a third frond on the bottom quarter, where a third frond was simply

left off of the right side; or that different artists were at work on each side. Since the distances between

each frond diminished steadily in a descending fashion, it’s possible the artist(s) began at the top and

ran out of room approaching the bottom of the panel.6

Regarding the significance of each proposed section’s height, I suggest a possible metrological

element at work. There are a couple of likely ancient units which may have been used by the carvers at

the Northwest palace. Of particular interest in this example are the cubit and its base unit, the palm.

Though there is no universally acknowledged cubit used in Mesopotamia in the late Assyrian period7 it

does appear that there were linear measurements in use that could account for a division of the figure

into sections approximately 62 cm in height. Angelo Segré posits a Babylonian “large cubit” of 62.6 cm

(80), which suits the proposed quarter sections of the Kansas City slab precisely, though it is larger than

the cubits of previous late Assyrian palace decorations such as those of Sargon I, as described by

Guralnick. (102) this raises new questions as to why a Babylonian measure may have been used. Samuel

Paley suggests that in quarrying scenes it appears that foreigners or possibly slaves are working in the

northwest palace (19-7). Could it be possible, then, that Babylonian measures were employed at the

Northwest palace due to the presence of a foreign, captive workforce? Another conside ration may be

5 Using the palm fronds as a basis for hypothetical division into sections seemed to be a logical starting point because they are found throughout the palace and particularly as part of an a lternating pattern of genies and sacred trees in room L, to which the Kansas Ci ty s lab belongs. Since the lattices of the fronds have a geometric quality, and sit more or less parallel to one another, they might have proven to be a point from which the artist could reference length or height either while referencing one piece to another, or coordinating with another artist or artists. This does not seem to be exactly the case, however, as even in this single example the palm fronds are unevenly numbered (11 on the left side, and 10 on the right.) though, a general pattern of three fronds to a section does emerge, with one exception to the pattern. The vertical lengths of the vine separating each frond in descending order for the right are: 15, 15.5, 15.5, 15.5, 17, 16, 15, 13, 14, 13, 8. The measurements of same from

the left s ide are: 11, 15, 15, 14, 15, 17.5, 14, 15, 14.5, 17, 20. 6 In the Kansas Ci ty example, in addition to an extra palm frond having apparently been hurriedly carved in at the bottom only eight inches in distance from the one above, the fourth palm frond from the top appeared to have forgotten or unfinished deta ils at the stem. 7Eleanor Guralnick delineates three possible varieties of late-Assyrian cubit: a “Standard Cubit”, a “Big Cubit” and the “Cubit of the King”, the latter of which she supposes is equal to the “Royal Cubit” mentioned by Heredotus. These mentions of measurements appear in late Assyrian Cuneiform texts. (Sargonid Sculpture and the Late Assyrian Cubit, 89) IRAQ, vol. 58 1996

Aditionally, Angelo Segré offers his reckoning of three Babylonian cubits: a “Large Cubit” measuring 62.6 cm, a s imple “Cubit” at 50.1 cm and a “Small Cubit” at 42.9 cm. (Babylonian, Assyrian and Persian Measures: 80)

5

that King Ashur-Nasir Pal II aspired to build a palace of grand scale, which included even larger and more

impressive figures upon the palace walls than had been made for any Assyrian King before him.

The palm, another unit used in Mesopotamia, is generally accepted to be the width of four digits

and which Ancient Egyptian sources ascribe a length of 7.5 cm with seven palms to a cubit (Katz, 17).

When we take the total height (approximately 129 cm) of the Kansas City Genie and divide it by 7.5, the

resulting measure in palms is 30, plus a small excess equal to two digits (3.75 cm). the use of the number

30 would have been significant for ancient Babylonian or Assyrian carvers, who used a sexagesimal

numeral system – equivalent to ½ as converted to decimals8 The palm is especially intriguing as a

possible metrological unit in use to create the northwest palace carvings because, in addition to

providing a plausible number for the full height of the figure they may explain some of the issues of

widths, as many key widths are divisible or very close to divisible by a palm of 7.5 cm. The upper arm of

the Kansas City genie measures 14.5 cm, the width of the hand holding the pail is also 14.5 or nearly two

palms. The knee at the slimmest point is 15.5 cm. The thigh at the thickest is 23 cm and calf at the

thickest point is 21 cm, close to two and three palms, respectively. The beard measures 23.5 cm. the

feet measure 37.5 and 38 cm, approximately 5 palms in length. The palm to the tip of the finger of the

left hand is 29 cm, approximately 4 palms. As an anthropic unit of measure, it’s reasonable to expect

that the palm would produce some inconsistency in measure, therefore the preceding examples are

presumed to be general and have an average deviance of about one centimeter9

Robins points out that according to her findings, “The key measurement with the largest range

and greatest standard deviation is the level of the bottom of the wing above the baseline, as though

artists had a wide choice in its placement” (115). This type of variation is precisely why supposing a grid

system seems counter-intuitive. Rather than accept that there was a grid system with properties that

the artists consistently violated, it would make the most sense to assume (as Paley does) that the artists

were more or less free to do as they choose given a few general guidelines. Though Robins makes the

claim that an “underlying model” is suggested by the fact that “(The) variations… do not occur by chance

as in a normal distribution” (116), this fact may be more coincidental than it first appears. After all, the

artists are carving the human body in a more or less realistic way - any more than small amount of

deviation would result in a bizarre and disfigured representation. Certainly, any more than two standard

deviations from the mean in proportions would produce an odd look in most cases, even to the naked

eye. Robins does identify every fifth gridline as a significant point, and this coincides with the quarter

sections I have proposed. Sadly, without both actual metrics provided by Robins or a more

comprehensive test for evidence of units being used for examples besides the Kansas City Genie, cross-

comparison is difficult.

8Sexagesimal numeral systems use a base 60, in contrast with decimal systems which rely on a base of 10. Therefore, the number thirty would have been represented as “one of two parts”, or one-half. 9 for the measurements given, the following observations are made: 5 tota l cm of negative deviance averaged across the 5 negative samples, (2) -.5 cm deviations of two-palm widths (measures which came up short), (2) -1.5 cm devations of 3 palm widths and (1) -1 cm deviation of 4 palm widths provided a -1 cm average error, assuming palm measures are being used this

amount of error could even be accounted for by physical i rregularities or s imple imprecision, although the sample is a dmittedly extremely small. Nevertheless, the total range from multiples of 7.5 i s not more than 1.5 cm for the given widths.

6

Ultimately, Robins concludes that there was “some desire for variation”. However, I find it more

likely that the variation are better assigned to indifference or an acceptable amount of deviance from a

standard model, rather than a deliberate desire for variety – Robins herself remarks that “no single

figure has key dimensions that conform to all modes” (119). additionally, Paley asserts that “a careful

examination of the form and proportions of the standing figures suggests that, despite their size, only a

minimum number of guidelines were required to draw these figures from the models” (12). I conclude

similarly that the gridline theory is interesting but weak, and instead propose that Paley’s conclusion

that very general guidelines were used a more intriguing hypothesis. To this I add further that there was

possibly a unit of measure in use that formalized refined the proportions of the figures in the Northwest

palace, very likely related to palms or large cubits. Such a combination of general guidelines followed

using anthropic measures explains both the level of harmony and similarity from figure to figure, as well

as the unique differences present in each and the difficulty that various scholars have had in pinning

down a very precise system.

7

Figure I – Key points identified and measured, Kansas City Example. See directory of measurements, N-4.

8

Figure II – Key points as identified by Gay Robins, with centimeter measurements added.

9

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Amiet, Pierre. “Art of the Ancient Near East”. Harry N. Abrams. 1980. pp.513-515.

Guralnick, Eleanor. “Sargonid Sculpture and the Late Assyrian Cubit” Iraq, Vol. 58. 1996, pp. 89-103 URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4200421

Katz, Victor J. et al. “The Mathematics of Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, India and Islam”. Princeton

University Press. 2007. pp 17.

Kremer, Rita. “Middle Assyrian Jewelry from Tell Sabi Abyad, Syria”. Leuven University. Accessed

November 2014. URL: https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/21015 pp 31.

Paley, Samuel. “King of the world: Ashur-Nasir-Pal II of Assyria 883-859 B.C.” Brooklyn: The Brooklyn

Museum, 1976. pp. 12 – 63.

Robins, Gay. “Proportions of Standing Figures in the North-West Palace of Ashur-nasirpal II at Nimrud”.

Iraq, Vol. 52. 1990. pp 107-119.

Segrè, Angelo. “Babylonian, Assyrian and Persian Measures” Journal of the American Oriental Society,

Vol. 64-2. 1944. pp. 73-81. Accessed November 2014. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/594731