The differences in the ruling class in Mesopotamia and Egypt are subtle yet fundamental. Both societies had similar tiered social structures, with a gradation from slaves to lower-middle-upper class and, finally, to the rulers – pharaoh in Egypt and King in Mesopotamia. However, the ruling classes’ organization differed between the two countries, which was partially dictated by geography. Moreover, both rulers used art to reinforce their societal goals in their respective nations.
While Egyptians entrusted absolute power to a single pharaoh, Mesopotamians relied on nobles to take the roles of kings. Unlike the pharaoh, who had control over the entire land, each king ruled over a single city (Awan et al. 20). This difference, for instance, can be partially explained by the vast number of river tributaries, which sectioned Mesopotamia into numerous sub-regions (Awan et al. 28). Thus, any form of the absolute central authority of the entire nation would effectively be ephemeral. Given the finer division of applied power, the approach of Mesopotamian kings to ruling was much more practical. Overall, the kings were not perceived as god-like or intermediaries between the humane and divine: rather, they operated in a managerial capacity.
Both Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia were founded and developed around river valleys. The richness of the frequently flooded soil, absorbing rivers’ nutrients, allowed embracing the agrarian lifestyle (Awan et al. 19). In Mesopotamia, these were Tigris and Euphrates; in Egypt, it was the Nile (Awan et al. 19). An example of geographic influence can be found in the flood regime of the Nile River, which occurs annually in the summer (Awan et al. 20). The orderly nature of Nile floods caused Egyptians to put the utmost faith in the natural phenomena, subsequently endowing them with divine power. The pharaoh represented a connection between the gods and humans, upholding the ‘ma’at,’ universal law of harmony (Handy). Thus, the primary responsibility of the pharaoh was not the minutia of the office – those were delegated to viziers and other court members down the line (Handy). Rather, the pharaoh was concerned with maintaining the harmony and balance between gods and people according to divine will. In contrast, in Mesopotamia, where floods occurred more unpredictably, kings were not perceived as such.
Both Mesopotamian and Egyptian rulers employed art as one of the methods to reinforce their ideology and remain in the cultural memory. One evident difference would be the approach to death as depicted in Mesopotamian and Egyptian art. The kings of Mesopotamia viewed death as an unpleasant phenomenon that faced all ‘regular’ people. The traditional Mesopotamian art depicts death as absconded by kings becoming gods or standing on the threshold of being gods, gaining a special status and protecting them from death (Shahverdi 41). Thus, the kings strived to avoid death by creating a new artistic universe in which it was no longer pertinent.
Unlike fantasy-centered Mesopotamian art, ancient Egypt’s pharaohs used art to perpetuate the ideology and religion of their present. The pharaoh’s job was to maintain the cosmic order – artistic expression served as one of the ways to bring permanence to this order. However, both ruling elites relied on artistic rendering to obtain subject perpetuity – in the case of pharaohs, the permanence of order and religion; in the case of kings, the permanence of self.
To conclude, the position of the rulers in Egypt and Mesopotamia differed in their applicability, with a pharaoh being the representational figure of the gods’ will and a king performing a more executive role. While pharaohs ruled over the entire of Egypt, the kings ruled over their respective cities, which may be explained by higher land separation due to numerous river tributaries. Lastly, both authority figures required artists to represent their goals: while Mesopotamian kings strived to defeat death, pharaohs intended to secure the extant religious and societal state.
Works Cited
Awan, Muhammad Yusuf, et al. “Role of Geography in Formation of Character of Civilizations Case Studies:”Journal of Art, Architecture and Built Environment, vol. 2, no. 2, 2, 2019, pp. 17–34. journals.umt.edu.pk.
Handy, Lowell K. “Wisdom for the King: Wisdom for Rulers throughout History.” Biblical Wisdom, Then and Now, Routledge, 2021.
Shahverdi, Amin. “Thinking about Death as a Foundation for the Study of Ancient Mesopotamian Art.” Theoretical Principles of Visual Arts, vol. 4, no. 2, 2020, pp. 41–50. jtpva.alzahra.ac.ir,