Czére Andrea szerk.: A Szépművészeti Múzeum közleményei (Budapest, 2007)
KATALIN ANNA KÓTHAY: A Defective Statuette from the Thirteenth Dynasty and the Sculptural Production of the Late Middle Kingdom
Due to its awkwardness, the Budapest statuette was clearly the product of a workshop producing lower quality. However, the attempt made to rectify the defect that occurred during the carving of the base suggests a certain level of proficiency. Moreover, the rendering of the face and the more careless treatment of the garment show r a discrepancy. In addition to the uncommon, highly formalized rendering of the two tabs, which has been discussed above, other details of the kilt (the straight diagonal line running across the front of the garment and the simply modelled even bottom edge 44 ) also indicate that the sculptor did not bother much with the modelling of some details. Does it show that the piece is not the work of one artist? Perhaps the defective statuette was given away to an apprentice or to a less skilled artist. It would not be the first time that an imperfect product was used for a purpose other than the original one. At Lahun, a limestone statue of a squatting official was found. 4- Considering its quality, it was evidently made for an individual of higher rank. However, the Lahun statue and the Budapest statuette have several features in common: both are defective (the Lahun piece had been broken at the elbows in ancient times), neither are inscribed, the modelling of the kilts seem to have been unfinished in both cases, and neither of them received a final polishing. Since the Lahun statue was found at the town site and bore no inscription, it has been postulated that it never left the sculptor's workshop. 46 Indeed, the two facts together would seem to be enough to support the belief that the statuette was neither placed in a tomb, nor was it an ex-voto deposited in the court of a temple. However, this may not necessarily be the case. Another uninscribed and damaged statuette (the arm has broken off) found at Abydos was used as a tomb statue. 4 " While this statuette is of a very fine workmanship, the undisturbed burial from which it comes is relatively modest: apart from the statuette, a skeleton and the remains of an uninscribed wooden coffin, it contained no other items. It is thus obvious that the damaged piece was probably rejected by the original commissioner and then used by someone else who normally could not afford to buy a statuette of this quality. Since the features of the statuette point to a date early in the Twelfth Dynasty, perhaps to the reign of Senusret I, a time when statues were not manufactured for lesser ranking individuals it cannot be ruled out that the statuette was acquired by the owner of the tomb at a later date. It seems that in these two instances work on the otherwise almost finished statues was not continued following the accidents since both sculptures lack a final polishing and inscription. However, in the case of the Budapest statuette it appears that the defect had taken place at an early stage of the work, before the sctdptor started to carve the details. The way he tried to repair the statuette, i.e. changing the position of the feet, shows that the base had been damaged during the phase of roughing out the shape of the statuette, before carving its details.
