CC BY
13
ECHOES OF FAMOUS STATUES IN THE VASE PAINTING OF THE LATE 4TH CENTURY BC.
Резюме: В статье рассматриваются случаи отображения в вазовой живописи IV в. до н. э. известных статуй, в частности, работ Праксителя «Аполлон, убивающий ящерицу» и «Отдыхающий сатир», а также обсуждается проблема, каким образом индивидуальный художественный стиль, свойственный определенной скульптурной мастерской, был отражен вазовым живописцем.
Ключевые слова: sculptor, statues, workshop, vase painter, Resting Satyr, Apollo Sauroctonus, Plato, Archytas.
The aim of this paper is to forward a couple of figures in the late classical vase painting which are inspired by renowned and nearly contemporary statues and whose dependence from these masterpieces has not been yet noticed.
Moreover I wish also to suggest how the transmission of peculiar styles from the workshop of a sculptor to that of a vase painter took place.
The first example is a naked youth on an Attic red - figured hydria representing Heracles and the Hesperides attributed to the Hesperides Painter and dated around 350 BC, kept in New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, no. 24. 97. 5. The other figures composing the representation are 3 Hesperides, a Nike, Heracles, Pan and a Satyr. The youth rests on the right knee of a Hesperid, the mantle hangs from the right arm, a wreath adorns his head (fig. 1).
This youth (fig. 2) bears a mirrored configuration of the type of the Resting Satyr (fig. 3) in the context of a comic evoking of the episode of Heracles in the garden of the Hesperides.
The youth has been generally identified as Iolaus but he may be a Satyr because the other Satyr represented is also humanized.
The representation is probably inspired by a comedy or a Satyr play or a dithyramb (see Richter, Hall 1936: 217-219, no. 171 and Corso 2010: 123-124, note 221, no. 1).
Fig. 1. Attic Red-figured hydria in New Fig. 1. Detail of the hydria in fig. 1 York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, no. 24. 97. 5.
The reuse of the style of the Resting Satyr may be explained with the suggestions that Praxiteles’ group of Methe with the Resting Satyr recorded by Pliny
З4. б9 among the most beautiful bronze works of Praxiteles commemorated a theatrical performance bearing on stage a comic version of Heracles in the Hespe-rides’ garden and that both Methe and the Satyrs were characters in the play. Praxiteles’ group of Methe with the Resting Satyr probably was set up in an Athenian choregic monument which celebrated a performance which took place in the theatre of Dionysus.
Fig. 3. Resting Satyr, marble copy in Rome, Capitoline Museums, room of the dying Galata, no. 739.
The statue of the Resting Satyr would very soon have become much more popular than that of Methe. Thus when the Hesperides Painter represented the episode in painting he reused the configuration of such a famous statue. Therefore this remarkable vase painting would give us the mythological context of the Resting Satyr. The tree - trunk on which he rests would be an allusion to the garden of the Hesperides (for the Resting Satyr, see Corso 2010: 42-69).
The second example is an Apulian oinochoe kept in Florence, Villa La Pagliaiuola, no. 116, dated around 340 BC, near the Chamay Painter (fig. 4). Admetus and Apollo are represented together: Admetus bears a diagonal position of the body which is very similar to that of Praxiteles’ Apollo Sauroctonus (fig. 5). The position of the feet is reversed when compared to that of the Sauroctonus. Head and arms are not inspired by this type (see Schmidt 1981: 218-221, particularly 220, no. 11).
PLATE 158 Lycurgan Followers
1-2. Florence, private coll. 116 (16/68)
Fig. 4. Apulian oinochoe kept in Florence, Villa la Pagliaiuola, no. 116.
The Apulian imagery of the third quarter of the 4th c. BC is very receptive of Praxitelean styles: a Praxitelean charioteer is reused by the Darius Painter; the Praxitelean formula of the Kidnapping of Kore by Hades is also reproduced in the Apulian vase painting as well as the Praxitelean style of a Maenad, while the styles of the Centocelle type of Eros and of the Eros of Parium are found in the Gnathia vase painting. Finally Praxiteles’ Niobe and the Niobids are reproduced respectively in the Apulian vase painting (fig. 6) and clay figurines (see Corso 2010: 140, no. 430). This trend may be due to the circumstance that the most prominent intellectual figure of Tarentum around 350 BC - Archytas - had been a student of Plato (see Huffman 2008): thus it is logical to suppose that artistic
creations conceived by artists who were close to the world of the Academy became also popular in Tarentum as expression of a very respected intellectual environment (Praxiteles’ closeness to the world of Plato is argued by a lot of evidence: see Corso 1998: 63-91).
Fig. 5. Bronze Apollo Sauroctonus, kept Fig. 6. Apulian red-figured lutrophorus
in Cleveland, Museum of Art, by the Painter of Louvre MNB 1148 in
no. 2004. 30 Malibu, J. Paul Getty Museum, no. 82.
AE. 16.
On this oinochoe the myth of Admetus is represented in a comic version of the story. The figures are disposed on two levels: on the upper one there are two Satyrs and Pan together with a libation -bearing girl and with Persephone. In the lower frieze in sequence from the viewer’s left to right, Apollo, Admetus, Heracles, Alcestis and two young girls, the paedagogus and another libation - bearing lady are portrayed.
The representation probably depends from a comic play focused on this story: a possible candidate is the comedy ’Admetus’ by Theopompus (frgg. 1-2 K - A) which may have been performed in the second quarter of the 4th c. BC.
In the lower frieze Admetus is represented according to to the general style of the Sauroctonus type except for the position of the legs which is reversed and for the arms which are adapted to the act of welcoming Apollo who is coming toward him.
The adoption of the style of the Sauroctonus in order to represent Admetus strengthens the probability already suggested by Winckelmann (see Winckelmann 1767: 43 and 75) that the sauroktonia was conceived in the context of the homoerotic relationship of Apollo with Admetus1.
The transfer of the style of the Sauroctonus from Apollo to Admetus should be compared to the similar case of Myron’s Discus -thrower: the statue perhaps represented Apollo while he was about to throw his discus which eventually killed Hyacinthus as it is argued by Philostratus Major, Imagines 1. 23: this neo-sophist in his description of a pinax describes Apollo in that mythical moment and attributes to him the shape of the Discobolus. However the style of the creation of Myron ended up being adopted also for the eromenos Hyacinthus, as it is known from an inscribed gem bearing a miniature copy of the type (see Villard 1990: 549, no. 48).
The fact that statues set up in centres of the eastern Mediterranean world could be imitated at Tarentum requires an explanation. The most plausible one seems to me the following: when classical artists finished their works they exposed them in their workshop before shipping them to their final destinations. This conclusion is argued for Praxiteles by Pliny 36. 20-21 and Pausanias
1. 20. 1-2, for Zeuxis by Lucian, Zeuxis 7 and for Apelles by Pliny
35. 84-85 (see Anguissola 2006: 124-131).
Since Archytas, the most eminent figure of Tarentum until his death which occurred around 350 BC, was a friend and probably a pupil of Plato, it is not unlikely that his pupils and companions flocked to the Academy of Athens in order to get high learning (about the close relationship of Plato with Archytas and his social circle, see Plato, Letters 7. 339 d-e and 350; Plutarch, Dion 18. 5 -20. 2; Nepos, Dion 2. 1-2; Demosthenes 61. 44; Cicero, De re publica 1. 10. 16; De finibus 5. 29. 87; Tusculanae disputationes 5. 23. 64; Philodemus, Historiae philosophorum, PHerc 1021. 5. 32 -
1 This mythical context explains the bucolic flavor of the episode because Apollo was a shepherd of this king. Moreover the androgynous look of the Sauroctonus would fit the moment of the homoerotic relationship of Apollo with Admetus quite well.
6. 12; Valerius Maximus 8. 7. ext. 3; Apuleius, Plato 1. 3; Hyerony-mus, Contra Rufinum 3. 40; Olympiodorus, Ad Platonis Alcibiadem I
2. 86-93; Tzetzes, Letters 75 and Historiae 10. 988-992).
They must have admired the creations made by a master close to the world of the Academy as Praxiteles was and when they returned to their homeland they may have promoted the re-use of these styles by local artisans.
This model of transmission of styles from Athens to Apulia looks to me the most economic.
Of course Athenian vase painters must also have drawn inspiration from the masterpieces exposed in the lodges of the most renowned artists of their age.
Summary
This article focuses the reuse of styles of renowned statues in the vase painting of the 4th c. BC. In particular the spread of the iconographies of the Resting Satyr and of the Apollo Sauroctonus is considered. Finally the problem of how peculiar styles moved from the workshop of the sculptor to that of the vase painting is discussed.
Literature
Anguissola 2006 - Anguissola A. La bottega dell’artista // Le tre vite del papiro di Artemidoro / C. Gallazzi and S. Settis (eds.). Turin, 2006. P. 124-131.
Corso 1998 - Corso A. Love as Suffering // BICS 42, 1998. P. 63-91.
Corso 2010 - Corso A. The Art of Praxiteles iii. Rome, 2010.
Huffman 2008 - Huffman C. A. Archytas of Tarentum. Cambridge, 2008. Richter, Hall 1936 - Richter G. M. A., Hall L. F. Red Figured Athenian Vases in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. New Haven, 1936.
Schmidt 1981 - Schmidt M. Admetos I // Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae. Vol. 1. Zurich; Munchen; Dusseldorf: Artemis & Winkler Verlag, 1981.
Villard 1990 - Villard F. Hyacinthus // Lexicon Iconographicum Mytho-logiae Classicae. Vol. 5. Zurich; Munchen; Dusseldorf: Artemis & Winkler Verlag, 1990.
Winckelmann 1767 - Winckelmann J. J. Monumenti antichi inediti. Rome, 1767.
