Artful crafts: The influence of metalwork on Athenian painted pottery

The Journal of Hellenic Studies

Volumn 105, Issue , 1985, Pages 108-128

  Vickers, Michael ^a  

^a Ashmolean Museum ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84972054350     PISSN: 00754269     EISSN: 20414099     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/631525     Document Type: Article

References (310)

1. E.g. R. Hampe and A. Winter, Bei Töpfern und Töpferinnen in Kreta, Messenien und Zypern (Mainz 1962);
2. id., Bei Töpfern und Ziegkrn in Suditalien, Sizilien und Griechenland (Mainz 1965);
3. M. Farnsworth and I. Simmons, ‘Coloring agents for Greek glazes’, AJA lxvii (1963) 389–96, pis 87–88;
4. J. V. Noble, The technique of Attic painted pottery (New York 1965);
5. A. Winter, Die antike Glanztonkeramik; Praktische Versuche(Mainz 1978).
6. E.g. L. D. Caskey, Geometry of Greek vases (Boston 1922) 160;
7. P. N. Ure, CVA Reading (1954) text to pl. 35:.’. for one of the silver vases of which these little black mugs were a cheap imitation …’;
8. W. Züchncr, ‘Von Toreuten und Töpfern’ JdI lxv–lxvi (1950–1) 175;
9. J. D. Beazley, ‘An amphora by the Berlin Painter’, AK iv (1961) 53:
10. ‘Our kantharos is doubtless of metal, and the shape had probably a metallic origin’; B. F. Cook, ‘Aristaios’, BullMMA xxi (1962–3) 31–36;
11. H. Hoffmann, ‘The Persian origin of Attic rhyta’, AK iv (1961) 21–26, pis 8–12;
12. J. R. Green, ‘The Caputi hydria’, JHS lxxxi (1961) 73–75, pis 6–7;
13. F. Mellinghoff, ‘Materialkopie bei den Griechen’, Museum Folkwang Essen Mitteilungen ii (1968) 56–65;
14. B. B. Shefton, ‘Persian gold and black-glaze. Achaemenid influences on Attic pottery of the 5th and 4th centuries B.C.’, AArchSyr xxi (1971) 109–11, pis 20–2;
15. J. R. Green, ‘Oinochoe’, BICS xix (1972) 1–16, pls 1–5;
16. C. M. Stibbe, Lakonische Vasenmaler des sechsten Jhdts v. Chr. (Amsterdam 1972) 116, 145;
17. D. C. Kurtz, Athenian white lekythoi (Oxford 1975) 38, 70, 91, 117;
18. S. R. Roberts, The Attic pyxis (Chicago 1978) 87;
19. W. G. Moon, Greek vase-painting in Midwestern Collections (Chicago 1979) 45;
20. K. Hitzl, Die Entstehung des Volutenkraters (Frankfurt/Bern 1982);
21. T. Weber, Bronzekannen (Frankfurt/Bern 1983) 149–50;
22. D. Williams, ‘Sophilos in the British Museum’, Occasional Papers on Antiquities i (1983) 11.
23. H. A. G. Brijder, Siana Cups i (Amsterdam 1983) 35–7.
24. The opposite view has been maintained by D. K. Hill, ‘The technique of Greek metal vases and its bearing on vase forms in metal and pottery’, AJA li (1947) 248–56
25. —unaccountably called a ‘scrupulous analysis’ by B. A. Sparkes and L. Talcott, Agora xii: Black and plain pottery of the 5th, 6th and 4th centuries B.C. (Princeton 1970) 15.
26. E.g. C. Robert, ‘Homerische Bechcr’, 50.
27. Berl. W.P. (1890) 5: ‘… die Modelle Originalarbeiten griechischer Toreuten aus Silber waren’;
28. F. Courby, Les vases grecs à reliefs (Paris 1922) 169 ff.;
29. G. Kopcke ‘Golddekorierte attische Schwarzfirniskeramik des vierten Jahrhunderts v. Chr.’ AthMitt lxxix (1964) 25;
30. G. Siebert, ‘Les bols a relief. Une industrie d'art de l'epoque hellenistique’, Ceramiques hellenistiques et romaines (Besançon 1980) 55, 74;
31. F. Chamoux, La civilisation hellénistique (Paris 1981) 397–8;
32. J. W. Salomonson, ‘Der hellenistische Töpfer als Toreut’, BABesch lvii (1982) 164–73;
33. S. I. Rotroff, Agora xxii: Hellenistic pottery. Athenian and imported moldmade bowls (Princeton 1982) 6: ‘…there is no doubt that bowls of precious metal served as models for the first moldmade relief bowls’;
34. B. Barr-Sharrar, ‘Macedonian metal vases in perspective: some observations on context and tradition’, Studies in the History of Art xx (1982) 123;
35. M. Moltescn, ‘Solvtøj i ler’, Meddelelser fra Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek xxxix (1983) 32–53.
36. Kopcke (n. 3).
37. Cf. M. Platnauer, CQ xv (1921) 153;… a natural and on the whole commendable diffidence prevents our attributing to the Greeks anything that seems in the least derogatory from an artistic point of view’.
38. E.g. J. Ebert, ‘Ein Homerischer Ilias-Aithiopis-Becher im Robertinum zu Halle en dcr Saale’, Wiss-Zeits.U.Halle xxvii (1978) 126;
39. cf. Rotroff (n. 3) 13.
40. E.g. Noble (n. 1) 42;
41. 2 (London 1972) 212.
42. The tone was set many years ago by E. Pottier, Douris et les peintres de vases grecs (Paris n.d.) 43, who refers to ‘une decadence profonde’;
43. cf. G. M. A. Richter, BullMMA xi (1916) 64.
44. Noble (n. 1) 61.
45. D. Hughes and P.J. Parsons, POxy lii (1984) 3659. 5–8: καίτοι τί γϵ ́νοιτ' ἂν ἀρ γύρου λευκότϵρον;—ἀλλ' ὅ μως τοῦτον ὁ Θρασυάλκης ϕησὶν εἶναι μϵ ́λανα Thanks are due to Mr Parsons for bringing this reference to my attention.
46. G. Olson and B. Thordemann, ‘The cleaning of silver objects’, MusJ 1 (1951) 250–2;
47. V. R. Evans, The corrosion and oxidation of metals. Scientific principles and practical applications (New York 1960).
48. Cook (n. 6) 153.
49. Theoc. Id. 16. 16–17.
50. Ath. xi 489: πϵριττῶς δϵ̀ καὶ τοῦτ' ϵ̓́ϕρασϵν ὁ ποιητής, τοὺς χρυσοῦς ἥλους παρατιθεὶς τῇ τοῦ ἀργυροῦ ϵ̓κπώματος ϕύσει, τὴν τῶν ἀστϵ́ρων καὶ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ∊̓κτυπῶν κατὰ τὴν ἰδ∊́αν τῆς χρόας οὐσίαν. ὁ μϵ̀ν γὰρ οὐρανός ἀργύρῳ προσϵ́οικεν, οἱ δέ αστϵ́ρες χρυσῷ διὰ τὸ πυρῶδϵς.
51. Ath. xii 535f: αἱ δϵ̀ χλαμύδες αὐτοῦ -ἦσαν ὂρϕνινον ϵ῎χουσαι τὸ ϕϵ́γγος τῆς χρόας, τὸ δϵ̀ πᾶν ϵ̓νύϕαντο χρυσοῦς ἀστϵ́ρας ϵ῎χον καὶ τὰ δώδϵκα ζῴδια.
52. G. Seure, ‘Un char thraco-macédonien’, BCH xxviii (1904) 224–5.
53. Prof. Robertson kindly notes that support for the view that silver may have been dark may be found in the frescoes illustrated in M. Pallottino, Etruscan painting (Geneva 1952) 45, 97, and in
54. A. Maiuri, Roman painting (New York n.d.) 19, 21. Dr Paul Craddock draws attention to Pliny NH xxxiii 10.56, who speaks of the Egyptians darkening their silver so as to see Anubis.
55. For bibliography, see British Museum, Thracian treasures from Bulgaria (London 1976) 93–5.
56. E.g. B. A. Sparkes, ‘Quintain and the Talcott class’, AK xx (1977) 24;
57. Sparkes-Talcott (n. 2) 15
58. A. Oliver Jr., Silver for the gods: 800 years of Greek and Roman silver (Toledo, Ohio 1977) 29, 31.
59. 3 xi (1891)319–20; further bibliography
60. CVA Schwerin, p. 38.
61. See too, D. B. Thompson's allusion to ‘silvered Italian pottery’ in the context of the closely related cups adorned with casts of coins of Heraclea: ‘Mater caelaturae; impressions from ancient Metalwork’, Hesperia viii (1939) 315.
62. G. E. Pazaurek, Guter und schlechter Geschmack im Kunstgewerhe (Stuttgart-Berlin 1912) 127, fig. 108 (whence plate IVb).
63. The bibliography is substantial, but the best illustrations and earlier references can be found in: B. D. Filow, Die Grabhugelnekropole hei Duvanlij in Sudbulgarien (Sofia 1934) 63, pi. 4 (phiale), 106 ff, pi. 7 (kantharos) (pictures after conservation: I. Venedikov and T. Gerassimov, Thrakische Kunst [Vienna/Munich 1973] pis 163–9);
64. K. S. Gorbunova, ‘Engraved silver kylikes from the Semibratny Barrows’, Kultura e iskusstvo antichnogo mira (Leningrad 1971) 18–38, 123;
65. O. Lordkipanidze, ‘La civilisation de 1'ancienne Colchide aux Ve—IVe siecles (a la lumiere des plus recentes decouvertes archeologiques)’, RA 1971, 281–2.
66. E. D. Reeder, Clay impressions from Attic metalwork (Diss. Princeton 1974) 212–14 has an extremely useful list of engraved silver vessels. There is general unanimity that the silver vases in question are Attic: e.g. ‘Attisch sind auch die schonsten Funde, die Silbergefässe mit Gravierungen’
67. (K. Schefold, in a review of Filow, Gnomon xii [1936] 576); ‘The analysis of the engraved and gilt decoration on the vessels has shown that they are stylistically related to the work of Attic vase painters. This fact is important for establishing their … provenance which is defined as Attic’ (Gorbunova 121); ‘Coupes attiques en argent dore’ (Lordkipanidze 282).
68. Gorbunova (n. 20) 20, fig. 1 (profile), 23, fig. 5 (interior); L. Byvanck-Quarles van Ufford, Zilveren en gouden Vaatwerk uit de Griekse und Romeinse Oudheid (1973) 60, pi. 20. My thanks are due to Mmc Irene Saverkina for allowing me to study this and other gilded silver vessels in the Hermitage and for supplying the photograph in PLATE IVc.
69. H. Bliimner, Technologie und Terminologie der Gewerbe und Kunste bei Griechen und Romern iv (Leipzig 1887) 311.
70. C. Houser, ‘The Riace Marina bronze statues, classical or classicizing?’, Source, Notes in the History of Art i.3 (1982) 8.
71. If a shining, non-tarnishable, effect was desired, tin might be used: M. Vickers, JHS xciv (1974) 177 n. 3;
72. cf. Horn. Il. xviii 565, 574.
73. The detail (though not its purpose) has been discussed by A. J. Clark, ‘The earliest known chous by the Amasis Painter’, MetrMusJ xv (1981) 45.
74. See further M. Vickers, ‘Silver, copper and ceramics in ancient Athens’, in Pots and Pans, Proceedings of the Colloquium on Precious Metals and Ceramics in the Islamic, Chinese and Greco-Roman Worlds, Oxford 1985 (= Oxford Studies in Islamic Art ii [1986]). Note that a rivet on an archaic hydria handle in the Ashmolean (1965.288) has been shown to contain 98% copper;
75. P. T. Craddock, ‘The composition of the copper alloys used by the Greek, Etruscan and Roman civilisations 2. The archaic, classical and Hellenistic Greeks’, J. Archaeol. Science iv (1977) 118.
76. Plut. Nic. 28, 6.
77. Cf. Alcibiades’ ἀσπίδα … ϵ̓κ χρυσοῦ καὶ ϵ̓λϵ́ϕαντος πςποιμϵ́νην, Ath. xii 534e;
78. and the χρυσϵλεϕαντηλϵ́κτρους ἀσπίδας of Phocian mercenaries; Plut. Tim. 31.
79. 2 1415.26–1415.7; 1421.112. In general see Daremberg—Saglio ii (1892) 2359 ff. s.v. ‘Ebur.
80. I owe this observation to my colleague Dr Oliver Impey of the Department of Eastern Art, Ashmolean Museum. Ivory is a substance which is laminated concentrically, T. K. Penniman, Pictures of ivory and other animal teeth, bone and antler (Oxford 1952) 15, so that a single section of tusk might provide the material for several lekythoi, rather on the principle of ‘Chinese boxes’. It was always a relatively precious commodity, and little was allowed to go to waste; even the tip of the tusk was put to use if white-ground ‘Columbus’ alabastra are any indication (plate IVa). Plates of ivory up to ‘thirty inches square’ have been achieved by softening ivory cylinders in phosphoric acid: ‘The ivory is then subjected to hydraulic pressure, and when washed and dried, it regains its former consistency’
81. G. C. Williamson, The book of ivory (London 1938) 12. This is of interest in the context of ‘ivory softeners’ in Periclean Athens (Plut. Per. 12.6; cf. Paus. v 12.2; Plut. Mor. 499e; Sen. Ep. 90.33. I owe the last two references to Prof. P. Stadter who is preparing a commentary on Plut. Per.), and may well be relevant to such vessels as white-ground cups and craters.
82. P. Jacobsthal, Ornamente griechische Vasen (Berlin 1927) 39, 144.
83. M. Vickers, ‘Les vases peintes: image ou mirage?’, in F. Lissaraguc and F. Thelamon, eds, Image et ceramique grecque: Actes du collogue de Rouen 25–26 novembre 1982 (Rouen 1983) 29–41;
84. id., ‘The influence of exotic materials on Attic white-ground pottery’, in Proceedings of the Symposium ‘Ancient Greek and related pottery’, Amsterdam 1984(Allard Pierson Series V) 88–97.
85. Pliny NH xv 33.
86. A. A. Perdolskaya, ‘Les dessins sur ivoire du Tumulus Koul-Oba’, Trudy OIIKAM i (1945) 69–83, pis 1-6; colour:
87. M. Artomonov, Richesses des tombeaux scythes (Prague/Leningrad 1966) pis 25 8, 261. For the regular use of ivory at upper-class Greek funerals, see Plut. Pel. 34.1; Aem. 39.4;
88. Amsterdam (n. 36). The colours actually found on white-ground lekythoi correspond closely to the palette (red, blue, violet, green, yellow, black) employed by Chinese ivory sculptors in recent times. For an account of the relatively simple materials used, e.g. cinnabar (a by-product of silver smelting) for red
89. see W. E. Cox, Chinese ivory sculptures(New York 1946) no.
90. Cf. A. H. M. Jones, Athenian democracy (Oxford 1957) 93–4: ‘Among industrial products Attic pottery is of course famous, and has, perhaps, owing to its durability, unduly overshadowed other high-grade products, such as silver plate and furniture.’
91. Ath.Pol. 22.7. As J. F. Healy has observed, there is no reason to believe in Pisistratean interest in the Laurium mines (Mining and metallurgy in the Greek and Roman world [London 1978] 102)
92. and W. P. Wallace's dismissal of the explicit statement in Ath.Pol. that the big strike was made in c. 483 is based on untenable judgements regarding the chronology of Athenian coinage:
93. 7 ii (1962) 25–30;
94. 6 xvi (1956) 57–8;
95. 7 ii (1962) 418;
96. M. Vickers, ‘Early Greek coinage, a reassessment’, NC 1985 1–44.
97. For information concerning recent research on and in Laurium itself, see N. H. Gale, W. Gentner and G. A. Wagner, ‘Mineralogical and geographical sources of archaic Greek coinage’, Metallurgy in Numismatics i (1980) 3–49;
98. J. Ellis Jones, ‘Another Eleusinian kernos from Laureion’, BSA lxxvii (1982) 191–9, esp. 194 ff.;
99. G. Wcisgerber and G. Heinrich, ‘Laurion—und kein Ende? Kritische Bemerkungen zum Forschungstand über eines der bedeutendsten antiken Bergreviere’, Der Anschnitt, Zeits. für Kunst und Kultur im Bergbau xxxv (1983) 190–200.
100. For a detailed discussion of the problems involved, see A. J. Podlecki, The Life of Themistocles (Montreal 1975) 201–4.
101. See Podlecki (n. 41).
102. Aesch, Pers. 240.
103. On the relative shortage of silver in the Achaemenid empire at the time, sec M. J. Price and N. Waggoner, Archaic Greek silver coinage, the ‘Asyut’ hoard (London 1975) 139 n. 246.
104. J. K. Davies, Athenian propertied families 600–300 B.C. (Oxford 1971) 260–1;
105. cf. Nepos Cim. 1.3, magnas pecunias ex metallis fecerat. For other massive fortunes made from the Laurium mines, albeit in the fourth century, see Jones (n. 39) 87, 90.
106. The only comprehensive account is to be found in the chapter on ‘Booty’ in W. K. Pritchett, Ancient Greek military practices i (=The Greek art of war i) (Berkeley/L.A. 1971) 53–84.
107. Jones (n. 39) 87: ‘… it does… seem to have been true that there was a heavy concentration of wealth at the extreme top of Athenian society, in a small group of approximately 300 families’.
108. Thuc. iv 105.
109. Cf. F. Haskell, Patrons and painters: a study in the relations between Italian art and society in the age of the Baroque (London 1963).
110. G. Reitlinger, The economics of taste ii (London 1963) 20–1.
111. D. E. Strong, Greek and Roman gold and silver plate (London 1966) 74.
112. Aesch. fr. 184.
113. Pind. Ol. 7. 1–4.
114. Pind. fr. 221.1–3 Snell-Maehler;
115. cf. Bacchyl. Encomia 20A. 13–16; the ἀργυρίδες to be won at the games at Marathon in 468 BC (Pind. Ol. 9.90) and the ἀργυρϵ́αι ϕιάλαι at Sicyon (Pind. Nem. 9.51). On the perennial connection between the horse-racing set and silver plate
116. see D. Udy, ‘Piranesi's “Vasi”, the English silversmith and his patrons’, BurlMag cxx (1978) 820–37.
117. E.g. Ar. Equ. 814;
118. Diod. xii 3–4; Ath. xii 512b-c, 553e;
119. Arist.] Ath.Pol. 24.1;
120. Aristid. Panath. 143–4;
121. cf. M. Vickers, ‘Attic symposia after the Persian wars’ in O. Murray, ed., Sympotica (Oxford 1985).
122. Thuc. i 6.3. Pace A. W. Gomme, HCT i 103, Thucydides will actually have seen older men who favoured τϵ́ττιγϵς and κρωβύλοι. B. Jowett's note ad loc. is much more satisfactory; for him, as for Aristophanes (Equ. 1331 [performed 424); Nub. 984 [revision of a play performed 423]) τϵ́ττιγες ‘are the signs of old-fashioned gentility’.
123. Davies (n. 47) 41.
124. Plut. Alc. 4. Elsewhere, Alcibiades used, illegally, the gold plate belonging to the Athenian state delegation to the Olympic games of 416: [Andoc.] in Alc. 29, Plut. Alc. 13. That Athenians in the circles in which Alcibiades moved were extremely wealthy is indicated by the value of 8 talents (Diod. xiii 74.3) placed on a team of chariot horses which Alcibiades purloined, probably in the same year.
125. Dem. xxiv 184; cf. xx 10, xxii 76.
126. Thuc. vi 32.1. Cf the 200 dr. kotylos mentioned in Aristophanes’ Babylonians of 426 (Pollux x 85).
127. Diod. xiii 3.2.
128. Thuc. vi 32. 5–6.
129. Whether or not W. M. Calder III is correct in his preference for the view that the gold shield set up by the Selinuntines in ‘Temple G’ was paid for from the proceeds of the Athenian disaster (The inscription from Temple G at Selinus [Durham, N.C. 1963]), pp. 61–3 make instructive reading.
130. D. A. Amyx, ‘The Attic stelai III’, Hesperia xxvii (1958) 208.
131. Amyx is surely correct, as D. M. Lewis saw (Ancient society and institutions: studies presented to V. Ehrenberg [Oxford 1966] 183 n. 37) in regarding the ποτή[ριον]τορ[ϵντόν] (ποτϵ́[ριον ἀργυρο͂ν] τορ[ϵυτόν]: Lewis) as a piece which its unlucky owner was unable to secrete before it was conffscated: ‘The reason why such precious objects are not found elsewhere in the Stelai can only be that they had been successfully removed by the convicted persons, or stolen by others’.
132. See too, D. B. Thompson's wise observation (n. 17) 316 that ‘our ignorance of the quality and quantity of [lost masterpieces in precious metals] has perhaps warped our judgement as to their position in the history of [the] artistic tradition’.
133. 2 (London 1973) 353.
134. POxy xiii 1606. 153–5;
135. cf. Davies (n. 47) 589.
136. Lys. xii 11.
137. K. J. Dover, Lysias and the Corpus Lysiacum (Berkeley/L.A. 1968) 30.
138. Ath. vi 229c. For the tendency to see earlier periods, even classical Athens, as possessing wholesome simplicity, see R. Vischer, Das einfache Leben (Göttingen 1965) (a reference I owe to Mr E. L. Bowie).
139. Antiquarian interest: e.g. Pliny's account of the prices paid for antique silver (NH xxxiii 147)
140. C. Verres’ rapacious collecting activities (Verr. iv 23–4)
141. and the intimation that M. Antonius might have ‘set a value on some curious pieces of ancient workmanship’ (Plut. Ant. 28.7).
142. Cf. Juv. Sat. 8. 104 and Mayor ad loc. Old silver melted down: J. Stone, English silver of the eighteenth century (London 1965) 2.
143. E.g. IG ii2 1469.3–17. Cf. Dem. xxii 69 (where Androtion is accused of melting down crowns and phialai and having new ones made for which he took the credit).
144. IG vii 303.
145. Reitlinger (n. 52) 14.
146. E.g. Oliver (n. 16) 79;
147. cf. W. Grünhagen, Der Schatzfund von Gross Bodungen (Berlin 1954) 65–7.
148. P. M. Lewis, ‘New evidence for the gold-silver ratio’, in C. M. Kraay and G. K. Jenkins, eds., Essays in Greek coinage presented to Stanley Robinson (Oxford 1968) 109.
149. A. W. Johnston, Trademarks on Greek vases (Warminster 1979) 33, 113, 165. Mme Irene Saverkina kindly sent me the height of the Leningrad pot.
150. For details, see Amsterdam (n. 36) n. 26.
151. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum 1971.894, formerly Bomford collection. One is reminded of the scale of values expressed by the Tyanean: ‘When I enter a temple, I would prefer to find an image of gold and ivory in a small shrine, than a big shrine and nothing but a rubbishy terracotta thing in it’ (Philostr. VA v 22).
152. Xen. Cyr. viii 2. 8. The practice evidently continued into the sixth century AD: cf. Procop. Bell. i 17.28.
153. We might compare the fact that the use of plate in France, prior to the mid-seventeenth century, was confined to the royal family and the most aristocratic circles: C. Hernmarck, The art of the European silversmith 1430–1830 (London 1977) 6.
154. Most of the plate that has survived from our period has apparently come from Asia Minor. No one would disagree with such a provenance for e.g. many of the 255 gold and silver objects acquired since 1966 by the Metropolitan Museum: D. von Bothmer, ‘Les tresors de I'orfevrerie de la Grece orientale au Metropolitan Museum de New York’, CRAI1981, 194–207;
155. id., ‘A Greek and Roman treasury’, BullMMA xlii/i (1984) 24–45.
156. Cf. the ϵ̓κπώματα καὶ χρυσία which formed part of Demosthenes’ inheritance: Dem. xxvii 10.
157. Kurtz (n. 2) 70.
158. There are useful studies by Pritchett (n. 48). and
159. M. Pape, Griechische Kunstwerke aus Kriegsbeute und ihre offentliche Aufstellung in Rom (Diss. Hamburg 1975).
160. See too G. Finlay, Greece under the Romans (London 1856) ch. 1;
161. O. Vessberg, Studien zur Kunstgeschichte der romischen Republik (Lund/Leipzig 1941) 26–114;
162. J. Griffin, ‘Augustan poetry and the life of luxury’, JRS lxvi (1976) 91.
163. E.g. those of T. Quinctius Flamininus (194 BC): Livy xxxiv 52.4–5; and
164. L. Scipio Asiagenus (188 BC): Livy xxxvii 59. 3–5.
165. Cf. the Acragantines’ proverbial taste for luxury (e.g. Acl. VH xii 29: silver lekythoi and solid ivory couches).
166. K. F. Stroheker, Dionysios I. Gestalt und Geschichte des Tyrannen von Syrakus (Wiesbaden 1958) 159 ff.
167. Livy xxv 40.1–3;
168. Plut. Marc. 21.
169. Cic. Verr. iv 23–4.
170. Cic. Verr. iv 16, 20, 25, 27.
171. Cf. Russian court practice in the sixteenth century:‘… for goodly and rich plate we never saw the like or so much before. There dined that day in the Emperor's presence above 500 strangers and 200 Russians, and all they were served in vessels of gold, and that as much as could stand by one upon the tables. Besides this there were four cupboards garnished with goodly plate, both of gold and silver’, R. Hakluyt, The discovery of Muscovy (London 1904) 134.
172. At the Field of the Cloth of Gold in 1519, there was a cupboard of seven stages ‘covered with plate of gold, and no gilt plate’, J. H. Pollen, Gold and silver (London 1879) 136.
173. R. W. Lightbown, ‘Ex-votos in gold and silver: a forgotten art’, BurlMag cxxi (1979) 353.
174. My colleague P. D. C. Brown kindly draws my attention to C. R. Dodwell, Anglo-Saxon art, a new perspective (Manchester 1982) 12: ‘If the survival pattern of the various crafts of the Anglo-Saxons has distorted our knowledge of their arts, it has also falsified our understanding of their tastes.’ Their favourite materials, it seems, were silver and gold.
175. E.g. E. C. Dodd, Byzantine silver stamps (Washington, D.C. 1961);
176. Catalogue, Spätantike und früh-byzantinische Silbergefässe aus der Staatlichen Ermitage Leningrad (Berlin 1978).
177. E.g. when Syracuse was taken by the Saracens in 846, ‘the plate of the cathedral weighed five thousand pounds of silver’, E. Gibbon, Decline and fall ch. 52 (dependent on Abulfeda, Annal.Moslem. 271–3; Muratori, Script.Rer.Ital. i).
178. M. Vickers, Greek vases (Oxford 1978), comm. on figs 23–5.
179. Even letters of inscriptions might occasionally be ‘reserved’ (M. Robertson, ‘Euphronios at the Getty’, J. Paul Getty Mus.J. ix [1981] 23–5, figs 1 and 4), a practice which recalls the χρυσότϵυκτα γράμματα at Aesch. Septem 660;
180. Plut. Dem. 20; Ath. xi 466e (the latter gold letters on a silver cup).
181. Good bibliography in M. B. Moore, Horses on black-figure vases of the archaic period, ca. 620–480 B.C. (Diss. New York Univ. 1971).
182. Xen. Hipparch. v 14.
183. B. Cohen, Attic bilingual vases and their painters (New York 1978) 55–60 (esp. 59), pis 46–7.
184. Cook (n. 6) 186.
185. Cf. Rotroff. (n. 3).
186. Cf. the many thousands of talents of gold and silver taken by Alexander from Susa, Ecbatana, Pasargadae, and Persepolis: bibl. in G. C. Cameron, Persepolis Treasury Tablets (Chicago 1948) 10–11.
187. Contrast e.g. the fifth- and fourth-century Acropolis inventories with Delian treasury accounts of the third century BC:Inscriptions de Delos 298, 313, 320. Comparable too is the transition from black to red sigillata that can be observed in the west in the mid-first century BC (e.g. M. Schindler, Die ‘schwarze Sigillata’ des Magdalensberges [Klagenfurt 1967] 64–6), soon after Lucullus and Pompey's eastern victories. Lucullus ‘was the first to introduce luxury to Rome’: Ath. vi 274f; cf. xii 543a.
188. R. M. Cook, ‘The date of the Hesiodic Shield’, CQ xxxi (1937) 204–5. ‘Silver-figure’ is described at Scut. 183, 188, 212, 224–5, 295, 299.
189. For an evocative discussian of the inlaid metal on the comparable Shield of Achilles and House of Alcinous, see W. Pater, Greek studies (London 1895) 193 ff.
190. AA 1930, 285 f., fig. 11; Kunze, Ol. Ber. vi (1958) 149–9, fig. 108 (from Trcbenischte); (2) Kunze fig. 107, pls 51–2; 100 Jahre deutsche Ausgrabung in Olympia (Munich 1972) pl. 2.3 (from Olympia); cf. the ἀργυρόπαστα ὅπλα at Polyaen. iv 16.
191. Illustrated in colour in Materiali per service alla storia del vaso Francois (Bollettino d'Arte, serie speciale i, 1977 [1981]) pls 2–8.
192. For good colour photographs of tin-rich bronzes, see G. Fehervari and Y. H. Safadi, 1400 years of Islamic art, a descriptive catalogue (London 1981) 88–91, nos 34, 36.
193. Called by J. D. Beazley ‘Rosincrantz and Guildenstern’, ‘Amasea’, JHS li (1931) 258–9; and
194. ‘Our Danish friends’. 261.
195. Profit, moreover, will have been the motive behind the introduction of large white figures on fourth-century red-figure pots: the makers of the metal prototypes could make a figure in ivory for rather less than its equivalent in gold; cf. Amsterdam (n. 36) 92.
196. Cf. the heavy orange-yellow handles on large Etruscan red-figure vessels of the fourth century: e.g. J. D. Beazley, Etruscan vase-painting (Oxford 1947) pls 13a, 14, 20.1, 30.1–2, 35.5, 36.3, which were probably made in imitation of gold (Etruria was noted in the fifth century for its production of gold vessels: Ath. i 28b).
197. The figures certainly suggest as much. M.J. Price has estimated that a talent of bronze with an alloy of 15% tin would cost 64.25 dr., ‘a ratio of bronze to silver of about 93:1. The greatest quantity of tin yet found in a Greek coin is 14.74%, and therefore we may expect that this valuation of 93:1 is the highest possible for coined bronze. In all probability it should be lower, 100:1 or 120: i’: ‘Early Greek bronze coinage’, in Kraay-Jenkins (n. 78) 103.
198. For otherwise there would have been no point in the weighing operation described at Plut. Per. 31.
199. See e.g. E. B. Harrison, ‘Motifs of the city-siege on the shield of Athena Parthenos’, AJA lxxxv (1981) 281–317.
200. R. Joffroy, Le tresor de Vix (Cote d'Or) (Paris 1954); for an account of subsequent Vix scholarship
201. see M. Robertson, A history of Greek art (Cambridge 1975) 144–5, 640–1, n. 150.
202. Cf the ‘beautiful golden colour of the bronze’ on the unpatinated parts of the Monteleone chariot in New York: G. M. A. Richter, Greek, Etruscan and Roman bronzes (New York 1915) 29, and the ‘golden appearance’ of the Dherveni crater ‘due to a high content of tin [nearly 15%]’:
203. G. F. Varoufakis, ‘Metallurgical investigation of the bronze crater of Dherveni’, in W. A. Oddy, ed., Aspects of early metallurgy (London 1977) 71–86.
204. The tin content of the Vix crater (approx. 10%) was fairly high: that of the archaic and classical bronzes in the Ashmolean averages just over 8%, and most have a substantial amount of lead (average approx. 5%) as well: see Craddock (n. 29) 118, 120.
205. E. Diehl, Die Hydria: Formgeschichte und Verwendung im Kult des Altertums (Mainz 1964).
206. Weber (n. 2);
207. D. von Bothmer, ‘A bronze oinochoe in New York’, in Studies in Classical art and archaeology, a tribute to P. H. von Blanckenhagen (Locust Valley, N.Y. 1979) 63–7, pls 17–22.
208. Cf. B. B. Shefton in Rouen (n. 36) 172–3.
209. Pace Cook (n. 6) 153.
210. Scholars seem to agree that bucchero imitates metal (e.g. G. Camporeale, ‘Brocchetta cipriota dalla Tomba del Duce di Vetulonia’, Arch. Class. xiv (1962) 65;
211. T. B. Rasmussen, Bucchero pottery from Southern Etruria [Cambridge 1979] passim;
212. M. Schmidt, in H. Bloesch, ed., Greek vases from the Hirschmann Collection [Zurich 1982] 40), but the relevant metal prototypes are for the most part absent.
213. Could it be that the Etruscans of the classical period, like the Athenians, like us, preferred not to bury heritable wealth with the dead? The presence of gold jewellery in some burials ‘rich’ in pottery and bronze should not be regarded as an impediment to such a hypothesis. Such jewellery usually belongs to females and is part of their personal adornment. There is never more than one set per person, and yet in any elite of which we have detailed knowledge, the woman who possesses one parure possesses several (e.g. an inventory of Queen Elizabeth I's jewellery dated 1587 lists 627 items [B.L. Royal App. 68]; see too D. Scarisbrick, ‘Queen of the dressing-table: the jewellery of Madame de Pompadour’, Handbook to the Grosvenor House Antique Fair [1983]; ead., ‘Blazing like the Sun: the Marchioness of Londonderry's jewellery’, Country Life [June 14 1984] 1728–31. I am also grateful to Mrs Scarisbrick for a quotation from A Lady of Fashion by Mrs Gore [1856]: ‘I cannot always be sparkling in diamonds, I must have emeralds for one style of dress, and sapphires for another—no leader of bon ton can get on without all sorts and sizes of pretty gems.’). What happened to the rest? Perhaps they, like the family silver, were passed on to the living whose ‘need was greater’.
214. Cf. A. J. Evans, ‘Silver vessels and clay imitations’, Palace of Minos i (London 1921) 191–3.
215. Grey and yellow Minyan pottery, for example, may owe their respective colours to a desire on the part of potters to evoke, as best they could, silver and gold. ‘[Grey Minyan] was once thought to be a product manufactured from a special kind of clay at a centre from which it was widely distributed. Now it is known that almost any kind of clay will do’: C. Blegen, Troy and the Trojans (London 1963) 141.
216. The uniform appearance of wares with ‘distinctive, largely angular shapes’ (Blegen 140) throughout the Aegean world is surely due to an external factor, and recent work on silver metallurgy in the area in the Bronze Age (e.g. N. H. Gale and Z. Stos-Gale, ‘Lead and silver in the ancient Aegean’, Scientific American cciv [1981] 176–92;
217. id., ‘Cycladic lead and silver metallurgy’, BSA lxxvi [1981] 169–224, pis 33–40) which shows how wide-spread silver extraction was, suggests what that factor might have been.
218. The highly burnished yellow-slipped ‘Early Helladic sauceboats’ of which S. S. Weinberg speaks in ‘A gold sauceboat in the Israel Museum’, AK xii (1969) 3–8 were clearly made in imitation of precious metal. A. H. Sayce's note ad Hdt. i 14 may explain the existence of many black and grey wares in Anatolia: ‘Silver seems to have had a special attraction for the Hittites, whose monuments in Asia Minor are usually met with in the neighbourhood of old silver mines, and their fancy for the metal may have been communicated to the Lydians.’ An anonymous referee notes the existence of ‘test sherds’ for black-glaze Protogeometric pottery at Athens; we may suppose that the intention to evoke silver vessels was already present.
219. ‘Situla ware’ from Tell Defenneh provides a link here, as A. S. Murray saw, Handbook of Creek Archaeology (London 1894) 37; not only, however, is the shape ‘derived from an Egyptian bronze pitcher’, but the colour as well.
220. Prof. Shefton has drawn my attention to a contrast between dark copper-rich and light tin-rich bronze on an extant metal vessel: B. B. Shefton, Die “Rhodischen” Bronzekannen (Mainz 1979) 72–3, pls 6.3, 7.1.
221. ‘Gelbglänzende und grünpatinierte Bronzevasen waren die Vorbilder’: S. Loeschke, Mitteilungen der Altertumskommission für Westfalen v (1909) 190 n. 1;
222. cf. id., ‘Römische Gefässe aus Bronze, Glas und Ton im Provinzialmuseum Trier’, Trierer Zeits. iii (1928) 75. In view of this and more recent literature, it is surprising to find the following statement made by an acknowledged expert in the field of ancient metalwork: ‘Nobody has been foolish enough to suggest that green vitreous glaze outside and yellow within, as it occurs on Roman cups of Cicero's time, was imitation of dirty and clean bronze, so let me not start here on such a false scent!’
223. D. K. Hill, ‘Bronze working’, in C. Roebuck, ed., The Muses at work: arts, crafts and professions in Ancient Greece and Rome (Cambridge, Mass. 1969) 83. Contrast: ‘Fast ausschliesslich grün und (oder) gelb glasiert, sollen die Gefässe augenscheinlich glänzende oder patinierte Bronzegefässe nachahmen’
224. D. Pinkwart, Hellenistisch-römische Bleiglasurkeramik aus Pergamon, Pergamen. Forsch. i (1972) 140; and ‘die grüne Bleiglasurkeramik in der Farbe Bronze imitiert’
225. H. Gabelmann, ‘Zur hellenistisch-römischen Bleiglasurkeramik in Kleinasien’, JdI lxxxix (1974) 266.
226. Gabelmann, Gnomon li (1979) 679, rightly criticises the odd view expressed by A. Hochuli-Gysel, Kleinasiatische glasierte Relief keramik (50 v. Chr.—50 n. Chr.) und ihre oberitalischen Nachahmungen (Bern 1977) passim, that such vessels imitate silver.
227. Cf. J. W. Allen in Kunst des Orients xi (1976–7) 5–21;
228. M. Medley, Metalwork and Chinese ceramics (London 1972);
229. J. Rawson, ‘Song silver and its connexions with ceramics’, Apollo July 1984
230. and many of the contributors to the Oxford Pots and Pans colloquium (n. 29).
231. F. Andrelini, ‘Liviam vehementer increpat quod cyathum variis hystoriis depictum fregerit. Deinde earn solatur’, in Livia (Paris, F. Baligault c. 1495–6) n.p.
232. E.g. we might compare the sixteenth-century references in Vendramin inventories to ‘Un vaso di terra lavorado… un vaso di terra miniado… un altro vaso di terra figurado depento, un altro vaso di terra istoriado, un altro vaso grando istoriado con do manegi …’: A. Rava, ‘II “camerino delle antigaglie” di Gabriele Vendramin’, Nuovo arckivio veneto xxxix (1920) 161; or that in a Grimani inventory to ‘Tre vasi di terracotta antiqui lavorati’:
233. C. A. Levi, Collezioni veneziane d'arte e antichità (Venice 1900) 6, a reference I owe to the kindness of Prof. L. Beschi.
234. The full title of the work (of which Wilhelm von Kaulbach's original study is still extant in the Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen, Munich) is: König Ludwig, umgeben von Kunstlern und Gelehrten, steigt iiber die Stufen des Thrones herab, um die aus fruheren Jahrhunderten stammenden und ihm darbrachten Werke Plastik und Malerei ndher zu besehen; discussed most recently by W. Mittlmeier, Die Neue Pinakothek in München 1843–1854, Planung, Baugeschichte und Fresken (Munich 1977) 53, fig- 57.
235. E.g. the great majority of titles in the bibliography to C. D. Fortnum, A descriptive catalogue of the maiolica in the South Kensington Museum (London 1872) 657–65 were published after 1850.
236. The most influential work of this kind was A. Jacquemart's Histoire de la ceramique (Paris 1875) where (219) it was stated: ‘il devient incontestable aujourd'hui qu'on doit etudier la ceramique grecque avec les memes methodes, disons plus avec la mcme impartialite qu'on apporterait a l'examen des produits indous, egyptien ou chinois’.
237. Both F. Jaennicke, Grundriss der Keramik (Stuttgart 1879) and
238. J. J. Young, The ceramic art (London 1879) depend heavily on Jacquemart's work.
239. R. Charles, Continental porcelain of the eighteenth century (London 1964) 18;
240. J. Hatcher and T. C. Barker, A history of British pewter (London 1974) 280–1.
241. According to P. Mathias, The brewing industry in England (Cambridge 1959) 375, per annum consumption of tea in England had grown from I oz per head to 2–3 lbs between 1722 and 1833; the change in drinking habits ‘favoured the potter … and having sold the cups [he] also supplied the matching saucers, plates and other dishes as well’ (Hatcher—Barker 281).
242. A. Caiger-Smith, Tin-glaze pottery in Europe and the Islamic World (London 1973) 191.
243. Trans. W. S. Heckscher, in ‘Pearls from a Dungheap: Andrea Alciati's “Offensive” emblem,”Adversus naturam peccantes”’, Art the Ape of Nature, H. W. Janson Festschrift (New York 1981) 297.
244. While there may be echoes of the Persian chamberpots at Ar. Ach. 82, the immediate origins of More's image lie in the New World, early reports of which held that there were societies there which ‘held as nothing the wealth that we enjoy in this our Europe such as gold and jewels, pearls and other riches’: A. Vespucci, The first four voyages (Florence 1505/6, London 1893) fol. 4v.
245. The influence such reports had on More has been well described by A. J. Slavin, ‘The American principle from More to Locke’, in F. Chiappelli, ed., First images of America (Berkeley etc. 1976) 139–64.
246. P. Turner, Thomas More, Utopia (Harmondsworth 1965) 13.
247. Cited by W. S. Heckscher (n. 141) 296.
248. W. Morris. News from Nowhere (1890), in A. Briggs, ed., William Morris, selected writings and designs (Harmondsworth 1962) 221–2.
249. B. Ashmole, ‘Sir John Beazley, 1885–1970’, PBA lvi (1972) 443.
250. J. D. Beazley, AJA xlix (1945) 158.
251. A. Briggs, ‘The appeal of William Morris’, The Design Council, William Morris and Kelmscott (London 1981) 19.
252. Cf Pind. Ol. 7. 1–4.
253. Pind. Ol. 1.1f.
254. The best account of Beazley's golden youth is to be found in the early chapters of J. Sherwood, No Golden Journey, a biography of James Elroy Flecker (London 1973).
255. His life-long admiration for Maynard Keynes and Lytton Strachey (Ashmole [n. 146] 446) may not be without significance.
256. On their intellectual background, see P. Levy, Moore: G. E. Moore and the Cambridge Apostles (London 1979).
257. Beazley's friendship with the silversmith C. R. Ashbce (they travelled round Sicily together in 1910) will scarcely have given him reliable insights into the traditions of working in precious metals. Ashbee (who in 1898 bought up the printing machines of the Kelmscott Press) prided himself on not employing silversmiths ‘with trade experience; such experience was, in the eighties when we began our work, regarded rightly as rather a detriment’: C. R. Ashbee, Modern English silverwork (London 1909) 5. I am grateful to Prof. W. G. Moon and Mr R. S. Sennott for information about Ashbee.
258. G. Naylor, The Arts and Crafts Movement, a study of its sources, ideals and influence on design theory (London 1971);
259. R. J. Clark, The Arts and Crafts movement in America 1876–1916 (Princeton 1972) esp. 119–20: ‘It was in Cincinnati that the American art pottery movement began.’ In 1872 there was ‘instituted a class in china painting for socially prominent women at the Cincinnati School of Art;… enthusiasm for this new medium spread quickly in the city, for not only did it satisfy the ambitions of an age bent on culture’ but, in the words of a contemporary observer, ‘tidings of the veritable renaissance in England under the leadership of William Morris and his associates had reached [the United States]’.
260. Thus H. A. Shapiro claims that Attic pots were decorated by ‘great artists encouraged by prosperous and appreciative patrons’: ‘Courtship scenes in Attic vase-painting’, AJA lxxxv (1981) 137.
261. J. Boardman, Athenian red-figure vases: the archaic period (London 1975) 30. Contrast Hdt. ii 167: ‘whether the Greeks borrowed from the Egyptians their notions of trade, like so many others, I cannot say for certain. I have remarked that the Thracians, the Scyths, the Persians, the Lydians, and almost all other barbarians, hold the citizens who practise trades, and their children, in less repute than the rest, while they esteem as noble those who keep aloof from handicrafts, and especially honour such as are given wholly to war. These ideals prevail throughout the whole of Greece, particularly among the Lacedaemonians. Corinth is the place where mechanics are least despised’ (trans. Rawlinson). But see n. 176, to account for the comparative respectability of gold- and silversmiths in most societies.
262. Diogenian. v 97, κϵραμϵ́ως πλοῦτος: ϵ̓πὶ τῶν σαθρῶν καὶ ἀβϵβαίων καὶ ϵὐθραύστων; cf. v 98, κϵραμϵὺς ἅνθρωπος: ϵ̓πὶ τοῦ σαθροῦ.
263. Johnston (n. 79) 35;
264. cf. I. Scheibler, Griechische Topferkunst, Herstellung, Handel und Gebrauch der antiken Tongefasse (Munich 1983) 121–33.
265. For what can be known of the vita of Lcagros, sec E. D. Francis and M. Vickers, ‘Leagros katas’, PCPS xxvii (1981) 97–136, pl. 1.
266. F. Willemsen, ‘Die Ausgrabungen im Kerameikos 1966’, Arch. Delt. xxiii (1968) Chron. 29. Thanks are due to Professor Willemsen for sending me a photograph of the ostracon describing Leagros as Κϵραμϵύς, and to Dr D. M. Lewis for drawing attention to the original publication in this context.
267. 2 1514–29), none of which is true for pottery. The care of textiles will have been a serious and expensive matter. Philocleon ap. Ar. Vesp. 1127–8 spent ‘a whole day's pay’ on cleaning a rag fifty years old: ‘how much worse it would be with a costlier garment’ (Rogers ad loc.). Plutarch (Mor. 830c) includes ἀναβάϕους among the characteristic signs of luxury. Prof. Raubitschek kindly reminds me that Acropolis inscriptions which read ho κϵραμϵύς cannot be demotic and must refer to craftsmen. The fact is, however, that this expression only exists in restorations made in the belief that the inscriptions in question concern ‘potters’. No. 179 could easily be restored Ἐλϵυθϵριϵ∣ύς for example, and the ho in no. 225 is unwarranted.
268. H. Payne and G. M. Young, Archaic marble sculpture from the Acropolis (London n.d.) pls 129–30;
269. J. D. Beazley, ‘Potter and painter in ancient Athens’, PBA xxx (1944) pls 3.3 and 4.
270. J. BaŽant, in ‘Homerian gold and Athcnian pottery’, Studies on the use and decoration of Athenian vases (Prague 1981) 4–12 has suggested that Xen. oec. ix 6–9 be added to the scanty corpus of texts relating to ancient pottery. He believes that painted vases possessed a symbolic value and were consequently kept with the family treasures. The Greek text does not, however, bear the weight which BaŽant wishes to place on it; this notwithstanding his argument is important in that it represents the only possible alternative to the hypothesis put forward here.
271. Pind. Pyth. 8.58; a reference I owe to Dr N. J. Richardson. Cf. Artabazus’ speech at Hdt. ix 41: ‘Coined gold was plentiful in the camp, and uncoined gold too; they had silver moreover in great abundance, and drinking cups. Let them not spare to take of these, and distribute them among the Greeks, especially among the leaders in the various cities…’ (trans. Rawlinson). The fact that the distribution was never made (at least until after Plataea) is not important; Artabazus accurately assessed the tastes of Greek plutocrats.
272. 4 (London 1874) 89–108.
273. For a thoroughly misleading account (pace O. Murray, Early Greece [London 1980] 307), see M. Vickers, Greek Symposia (London n.d.).
274. Γραμμὰ Παρρασίοιο, τϵ́χνα Μυός ϵ̓μμὶ δϵ̀ ϵ̓̀ργον Ἰλίου αἰπϵινᾶς, ἅν ϵ̔́λον Αἰακίδαι, Ath. xi 782b. The date of Parrhasius’ and Mys’ collaboration is disputed, but, as D. L. Page observes, there is no reason to dismiss this epigram as a late forgery: Further Greek epigrams (Cambridge 1981) 495.
275. Paus. i 28, 2.
276. E. His, Dessins d'ornements de Hans Holbein (Paris 1886).
277. J. F. Hayward, ‘Ottavio Strada and the gold-smith's designs of Giulio Romano’, BurlMag cxii (1970) 10–14;
278. F. Hartt, Giulio Romano (New Haven 1958) figs 130–47.
279. Plin. NH xxxv 68: ‘et alias multa graphidis vestigia exstant in tabulis ac membranis eius, ex quibus proficere dicuntur artifices’.
280. Cf. Theoc. Id. 15.80–1, where Praxinoa is amazed at a carpet in the royal palace at Alexandria: ποτνι᾿ Ἀθαναία, ποῖαί σϕ᾿ ϵ̓πόνασαν ϵ̓́ριθοι, ποῖοι ζῳογράϕοι τἀκριβϵ́α γράμματ᾿ ϵ̓́γραψαν.
281. The carpet makers are clearly not the designers. For parchment before Pergamum, cf. Hdt. v 58 and G. R. Driver, Aramaic documents of the fifth century BC (Oxford 1957) 1–3: ‘ubiquitous but costly’.
282. The vessels in question have recently been discussed by J. R. Guy, ‘A ram's head rhyton signed by Charinos’, Arts in Virginia xxi, 2 (Winter 1981) 14, n. 70.
283. 2 1057, no. 99 (on which see M. Robertson, JHS lxxxv [1965] 97).
284. Beazley (n. 185) 25, but
285. cf. M. Robertson's candid statements: ‘The evidence is difficult to evaluate and appears contradictory’, and ‘The signing practice on Greek pottery seems to be totally haphazard’ (‘“Epoiesen” on Greek vases: other considerations’, JHS xcii [1972] 180, 182).
286. For arguments in favour of a manager, see R. M. Cook, ‘“Epoiesen” on Greek vases’, JHS xci (1971) 137–8;
287. M. M. Eisman, ‘A further note on epoiesen signatures’, JHS xciv (1974) 172.
288. Potter: Robertson 181. For a long and thoughtful study of the question, see R. Rosati, ‘La nozione di “proprieta dell’ officina” e Yepoiesen nei vasi attici’, Atti della Accademia delle Scienze dell'Istituto di Bologna, Classe di Scienze Morali lxv (1976–77) 45–73.
289. Beazley claimed (n. 163) 26, that the norm for such inscriptions when they occur together is for them to read ‘X epoiesen, Y egrapsen’, and his unconscious prejudice in the matter caused him occasionally to invert the expressions so that such indeed appeared to be the case.
290. An example is provided by a standlet in New York (31.11.4) which bears an inscription which can only be read, as G. M. A. Richter rightly saw (BullMMA xxvi [1931] 289–90) Κλϵ́τιας ⋮ [ϵ̓́γρα]ϕσϵν Ἐργότιμος ⋮ ϵ̓ποίϵσϵν(there is a substantial gap between ϵ̓ποίϵσϵν and Κλϵ́τιας; Beazley, however, printed them the other way round (ABV 78 no. 12).
291. Cf. H. Honour, writing in the context of medieval and later goldsmiths: ‘The fact that they worked in the very materials of wealth set them apart from all other artists and craftsmen’ and ‘… the goldsmith was the most highly honoured of all artists because he worked in the most precious materials’ (Goldsmiths and silversmiths [London 1971] 20).
292. G. M. A. Richter has observed the transmission of part at least of a silversmith's signature from metalwork to clay: ‘It is noteworthy that on some terracotta quadrigae the word ϵ̓ποϵι appears faintly in relief between the spokes of Dionysus’ chariot wheels. Presumably it was part of the signature of the original silver bowl. …’(‘A Greek silver phiale in the Metropolitan Museum, and the light it throws on Greek embossed metalwork (toreutice) of the fifth century B.C. and on the “Calene” phialai mesomphalai of the Hellenistic period’, AJA lxv [1941] 388).
293. E.g. the Boeotian vases discussed by J. H. Oakley, The Phiale Painter (Diss. Rutgers 1980) 16.
294. Beazley (n. 163) 38;
295. cf. Noble (n. 1) 50.
296. (= CVA Oxford i, pi. 18.12) and 1916.68 (=. pi. 29.1). Beazley compares with the latter a stamnos with ‘the same subject … but from a different hand, in the Cabinet des Medailles (388)’ (p. 24).
297. H. Erbse, ‘Uberlicferungsgeschichte der griechischen klassischen und hellenistischen Litcratur, methodische Vorbermerkungen’, in Geschichte der Textüberlieferung der antiken und mittelalterlichen Literatur (Zurich 1961) 210.
298. E. Hudeczek, ‘Theseus und die Tyranncnmörder’, ÖJh l (1972–75) 134–49;
299. M. Schmidt, ‘Zu Amazonomachiedarstellungen des Berliner Malers und des Euphronios’, Taenia, Fests. R. Hampe (Mainz 1980) 153–72, pls 37–41.
300. 2 82–6).
301. E.g. the various spellings of Phintias: Φιντιας, Φιντις, Φιτιας, Φιλτιας (23–4);
302. Memnon: Μνϵμϵμνον, Μϵμνον, Μϵμμνον, Μϵμνοον, Μϵμνομος, Μϵμον (56–66);
303. Pamphaios: Παμαϕιος, Πανϕαιος, Πανοαιος, Πανϕανος, Πανθαιος (71, 124).
304. E.g. κοσθϵνϵςϵποι ‘complete aft, and probably fore’, Beazley. 161 no. 1.
305. On these see now Giudice, ‘Osservazioni sul commercio dei vasi attici in Etruria e in Sicilia: su una lekythos del pittore della Gigantomachia con l'inscrizione “LASA SA”’, Cronache di Archeologia xviii (1979) 6–7.
306. For a recent exercise in exegesis, see M. Robertson in L. Burn and R. Glynn, Beazley addenda (Oxford 1983) xi–xvii.
307. J. Boardman is less enthusiastic (n. 155) 9: ‘not all students will be able to follow all these distinctions’. See too P. Bruneau: ‘& le souci de l'attribution stérilise depuis des décennies l’étude de la céramique attique’ (‘Situation méthodologique de l'histoire de l'art antique’, AC xliv [1975] 451).
308. P. E. Corbett, ‘Preliminary sketches in Greek vase-painting’, JHS lxxxv (1965) 25.
309. For a rough idea of what these drawings may have been like, see D. C. Kurtz and J. D. Beazley, The Berlin Painter (Oxford 1983).
310. Cf. A. M. Snodgrass, Archaic Greece, the age of experiment (London 1980) 193: ‘… vase-painters sought to divert their masses with the spectacle of the upper classes at play’.