It’s curious how certain things work
as memory triggers. A few days ago, my son-in-law, Michael, prepared a
simple but, nonetheless, delicious Greek meal for us: chicken souvlaki, barbecued
veggies and the tasty smoked orange
loukaniko,
a typical pork sausage I love. As it is usual when we get together, we talked about many things and, at one point in the evening, the conversation turned to *throwbacks*.
After the family dinner, on the way back home, I thought back to the delights prepared by Michael and the many ideas we touched on; one thing led to another and I ended up recalling one of many visits to the Royal Ontario Museum years ago, when I
was a student at the University of Toronto. That particular visit had a specific purpose, I needed to take
photographs of some Greek vases in order to complete an assignment for
Professor Catherine Rubincan, my Ancient Art prof. Naturally, the memories also brought back the paper I wrote for the assignment.
The text below is a throwback to a very
gratifying exercise on the development of Greek art.
In painting, as in any other
artistic manifestation, it is difficult to mark the beginning as well as the
end of a current or movement. However, ancient Greek art steadily provides guidelines about the evolution of its artistic substance. (Schuchhardt, 1972, p.14) One of the most fascinating stages in this development occurs in the Late Geometric Period when the function of vase painting shifts from merely ornamental to narrative, marking a very important transition
in Greek art.
To illustrate this change, I have selected two vessels.
[i]
The first one, attributed to the Birdseed painter, is a
pitcher, or
olpe, from Attica, dated
730 – 720 B.C.
[ii]
The second one is an amphora,
also produced in Attica, dated
c. 700
B.C.
[iii]
Prior to analysis of the aforementioned transition, a
few facts about the vases:
Clearly, medium and support of
these two pieces are the same: paint on clay.
The most evident difference is in
their shape. This is indicative of the different functions of the vessels. Whereas
the
olpe was used to serve water or
wine, the most ornate
amphorae served
as a grave markers, ash containers and prizes for deserving athletes in the
Panathenaic games.
[iv]
Both examples call to mind the
symbiotic relationship between potter and painter: the potter created the most
harmoniously shaped vase, and the artist worked hard to emphasize the beauty of the
pot’s forms. The olpe and amphora presented here show the potters’
sensitivity to form in the suave contours of the vases' swelling bodies and bell-shaped necks. In the same way, their decoration exhibits the abilities
of two gifted artists capable of enhancing the beauty of the ceramics with the
chosen patterns and images, and their articulation.
The techniques used for the
making and painting of the pieces were most probably quite similar.
[v]
Both present a smooth surface in the natural colour of clay with the ornaments
painted in a contrasting colour, most often black. As Metzer explains, the
substance used for the decorations of Attic vases resulted from a clay
composition that owed its colours to a process of chemical oxidation and
reduction.
(La Céramique
Grecque, 1973, pp. 10-12) The brown colour of the decoration on the
pitcher is, in all probability, due to a variation in the chemical
process of its paint. The shine, common to the most refined Attic
pottery of the time, represents the beginning of vitrification, which occurred
when an alkali, like wood ash, was used.
(Metzger, 1973, pp. 10-12)
In terms of the painting
technique, whereas the earlier vase displays its figures strictly in
silhouette form, the later one presents an innovation introduced in the Late
Geometric Period: the incorporation of reserved
areas. These were blank spaces reserved
for the eyes of the human as well as the animal figures.
In what concerns the articulation and
motifs displayed on the two ceramics, they are closely related and interdependent, as it was the case in all vase painting of the period. However, in comparison, the amphora
exhibits a remarkable development in these two elements. The mere lapse of
twenty years, or so, was a determining factor for substantial differences with respect to the function of the images depicted.
First, let’s look at the olpe.
Its surface flaunts the horror vacui characteristic of the
Geometric Period and a design articulation typical of the
Late Geometric Period: patterns of zigzag, meander, lozenges, checker board,
diamonds, little hooks and birdseeds are arranged in thin horizontal bands at
the edges of the neck and shoulder and at the bottom of the vase. These thinner
bands are used as frames for the emphatic bands located on the neck, shoulder and body of the vase. A large meander and a smaller
diamond frieze, both common at the time, fill the two higher bands respectively. However, the main band, the one on the body of the vessel, presents an innovation which may be considered the beginning
of an aesthetic revolution: this, the thickest of all bands, is broken into rectangular
decorated panels running all around the vase and carefully separated by two vertical lines flanking a thicker, also vertical, band formed by a sequence of oblique lines. This articulation was a novelty. Moreover, some panels repeat
an individual motif, a horse accompanied by sparse ornament fillers. The other
panels, decorated with rows of zigzag pattern are, evidently, subordinate to
the horse motif because they are arranged in such a way that they flank the animal figure all around the vase,.
Even if the inclusion of an animal figure is of note, we mustn't overstate its importance for this figure is similar to the kind represented in animal friezes; in this case, it has been isolated and placed, as an *object*, to fill in a panel. Be that as it may, the end result is similar to that of any black figure Geometric pot: very repetitive to the point of becoming monotonous. What is meaningful here is the break from a design based on horizontal bands decorated with geometric and animal friezes. Also significant is the insertion of a single animal motif with so few filler forms around it.
Now, let's look at the decoration of the amphora in order to ascertain the course taken by Greek artists in view of these changes.
The articulation of the decoration on the amphora is very similar to that on the pitcher. The amphora also displays thin horizontal bands confined to the pot's mouth, neck, shoulder and bottom. Likewise, these thin bands are filled with small and repetitive patterns of geometric designs and are used to frame the emphatic thicker bands placed in analogous areas: the neck, shoulder and at the higher part of the body, where the vase swells the most. In remarkable contrast, however, the amphora’s emphatic bands are not broken into panels, they display figure scenes. Although, the scenes are accompanied by some filler figures, the overall appearance of the amphora is not loaded; in fact, the effect is that of an aery composition that invites the observer to focus on the most relevant areas, those with the narrative scenes: the soldiers driving on chariots, the horses grazing, and, most remarkably, the lion attacking the doe.
 |
| Detail of the olpe above. |
To resume, despite the similarities between the vessels, the changes presented in the articulation and motifs on the amphora represent a drastic transformation in the essence of vase painting in particular and that of Greek art in general. In the first place, the geometric patterns decorating both vases have a different character: an essential one on the pitcher, opposed to a subordinate one on the amphora. Furthermore, the central images on the amphora mark a true revolution in Greek art. The fact that the figures represented in these central zones take on an active role - albeit the fact they recount uncomplicated events - marks the begining of what will be, later on, the essence of Classical art; that which narrates the stories of men, heroes, fabulous creatures and gods.
_(8706164801)%2B(1).jpg) |
| Battle between Centaurs
and Lapiths, (c. 432 B.C.) Originally on a metope,
south side of the Parthenon, Athens, today in the British Museum.[vi} |
 |
The Birth of Athena, part of the remains of the East Pediment of The Parthenon, Athens. On the image, the godesses Hestia, Dione and Venus witnessing the birth of Athena. Today in the British Museum[vii]
|
[i] I have changed the examples used in the original paper because of the ROM’s photo sharing limits.
[ii] Image taken from: "Birdseed Painter Pitcher" (66.10). Bloomington: Indiana University Art Museum, 2014. http://www.indiana.edu/~iuam/online_modules/colors/objects.php?p=40 Consulted : April 25, 2015.
[iii] Image taken from: Beazley, John Davidson. Development of the Attic Black-Figure, Revised Edition. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft1f59n77b/ Consulted : April 25, 2015.
[iv] In
their more simple forms, they were used for storage and transport of commercial
goods. Evidently, the example above belongs to the first group. and is of the
most sophisticated variety.
[v] Despite
the evident difference between the images, one in colour and the other in black-and-white,
the recurrence of characteristics presented in ceramics produced in the region
at the time allow the making assumptions in this regard.
Metzger, Henri. (1973). La
Céramique Grecque. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Schuchhardt, Walter-Herwig. (1972) Greek Art. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson.
.jpg)
_(8706164801).jpg#/media/File:Sculptures_du_Parth%C3%A9non_(British_Museum)_(8706164801).jpg){kind=link}
