ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
1
UCL INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY
ARCL3083
PAINTING AND SOCIETY
IN ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL GREECE
2016
Wednesday 11-1, Room 410 IoA, Term II only.
Coordinator: Professor. Jeremy Tanner
Office: IoA 105; Office hours: Tuesday 11-12, Wednesday 9-10 or by appointment
Email: j.tanner@ucl.ac.uk; phone: 7679 1525
nd
rd
2 /3 year course
Turnitin Class ID: 2970226
Turnitin Password IoA1516
Please see the last page of this document for important information about submission
and marking procedures, or links to the relevant webpages
1. OVERVIEW
Course contents: This course explores the development of archaic and classical
Greek wall and panel painting: its early indebtedness to Egyptian and Near eastern
traditions and its extraordinary transformation in the classical city state, with the
development of optical naturalism (The Greek Revolution). We will seek to place
innovations in the forms and contents of painting in the context of the social and
political uses of painting – history painting, theatrical painting, funerary painting –
and transformations in religious and intellectual culture (colour symbolism,
philosophy, optical science). A range of approaches – art historical, archaeological,
sociological – will be taken to the materials in question, which range from the archaic
Greek paintings of Turkey and Southern Italy to the stunning classical frescoes from
the Royal Tombs of Macedon which have transformed our understanding of Greek
painting in recent years.
Summary weekly schedule:
13/1/16
1. Introduction to the Course: Sources and Methods in the Study of
Greek Painting
20/1/16
2. The Origins of Greek Painting: Geometric, Early Orientalising
27/1/16
3. East and West: Regional Interactions in Archaic Greek Painting,
from Ionia to Italy
3/2/16
4. The Greek Revolution and the Problem of Naturalism
10/2/16
5. Polygnotus and History Painting in the Early Classical Period
17/2/16
[Reading Week]
24/2/16
6. Theatre, Optics and the Development of Perspective Representation
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
2/3/16
9/3/16
16/3/16
23/3/16
2
7. The Invention of Shadow Painting: Zeuxis, Parrhasios and the
Transformation of Colour Depiction in Greek Painting.
8. Macedonia and Late Classical Painting: the Royal Tombs at Vergina
and the Alexander Mosaic.
9.The Heritage of Apelles: Optical themes in fourth century painting
and mosaic: sponsors and discontents
10. The Individual Artist: Identity and Agency
Assessment: This course is assessed by means of: a) one standard essay (60%); b)
one practical essay with powerpoint presentation (40%).
Teaching methods: Teaching will combine lecturing, student presentations and in
class discussions based on prepared readings.
Workload: Class attendance: 20 hours; general reading: 90 hours; preparation and
writing of essay 20 hours; Preparation of powerpoint presentation and accompanying
short essay 20 hours. (Total 150 hours).
Prerequisites: Students should normally have taken ARCL2007 Greek Art and
Architecture.
2A. AIMS, OBJECTIVES
Aims:
1) to develop students’ awareness of the complexities of understanding the history of
the art of a complex society rich in textual, visual and archaeological evidence
2) to promote a theoretically informed understanding of the history and sociology of
visual representation in the early Greek world
3) to equip students with a knowledge of the main archaeological, artistic and textual
sources for the history of painting in archaic and classical Greece, and of their
respective possibilities and limitations
Objectives:
By the end of the course, students should be able to demonstrate:
1) an understanding of core theories and methods appropriate to the interpretation and
explanation of practices of pictorial representation.
2) an ability to apply such approaches creatively and sensitively to the changing
character and historical circumstance of archaic and classical Greek painting
3) a good knowledge of the development of Greek painting and its distinctive features
in the archaic and classical periods
Outcomes:
On successful completion of the course students should have developed the ability to:
1) marshal and critically appraise other people’s arguments,
2) produce logical and structured arguments supported by relevant evidence,
3) make critical issue of visual evidence in developing arguments
4) make oral presentation supported with visual media through the use of powerpoint
2B: ASSESSMENT AND PRESENTATIONS
Students are required to submit two pieces of work for this class:
1) A standard essay, 2850-3150 words in length.
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
3
2) A shorter practical essay focused on a particular painting or set of paintings, and
accompanied by a powerpoint presentation, 1900-2100 words in length.
The choices for both types of assessment are listed below lecture by lecture,
with the appropriate bibliography (pp. 6ff). The bibliography for the presentations is
listed at the end of each topic.
Short Practical Essays: Normally students’ practical essay will develop the topic
which they are assigned for their class presentation, though if, after having done their
class presentation, students wish to choose one of the other topics for their practical
essay, they may do so providing they discuss this with the instructor beforehand.
The short practical essay should be accompanied by a powerpoint presentation.
The practical essay will normally be written after the in-class presentation, and the
accompanying powerpoint presentation may accordingly be revised to fit the essay.
The illustrations for the essay may be presented either in normal essay format, or as
power point plates, printed out to accompany the essay.
Presentations: The class presentation should be designed to introduce fellow students
to the key features and key interpretive issues raised by the materials in question.
Keep it clear and simple, bearing in mind that your colleagues will know as little
about the material as you did before you started preparing the presentation.
Presentations should be no shorter than 8 minutes and no longer than 12 minutes.
Failure to make the required in class power-point presentation in class, without
adequate reason and documentation (for example medical) will result in a 10%
reduction from the students overall mark for the course.
A basic selection of digital images for each student’s presentation will be
available from the instructor one week before the presentation.
If students are unclear about the nature of an assignment, they should discuss
this with the Course Co-ordinator. The Course Co-ordinator is willing to discuss an
outline of the student's approach to the assignment, provided this is planned suitably
in advance of the submission date.
Submission Deadlines:
Every student must submit their first piece of written work (whether standard essay or
short practical essay) by class the last Wednesday of the second term (23rd March);
handbacks Thursday 24th afternoon. The second piece of work must be submitted by
Friday of the first week of the third term (Friday 29th April), dates for handback
sessions t.b.c.
Word-length
Guidelines for essay length should be carefully observed. The lower limit is a
guideline for expected length; the upper limit is strict, and the standard draconian
UCL penalities apply for overlength essays.
The following should not be included in the word-count: bibliography,
appendices, and tables, graphs and illustrations and their captions. (For this course
students should feel free, within reason, to write detailed captions (not more than 100
words or so) pointing up specific features of images that play a role in the argument of
their essay: such caption writing, focussing on the specifics of images, is a useful skill
for an art historian, and allows a little wiggle room around the word limit.)
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
4
.
3. SCHEDULE AND SYLLABUS
Classes will be held: Wednesdays 11-1. Room 410 IoA
Course coordinator: Professor Jeremy Tanner.
A complete course syllabus with an outline of each topic and detailed reading lists can
be found at the end of this document, pages 6ff.
4. ONLINE RESOURCES
The full UCL Institute of Archaeology coursework guidelines are given here:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/handbook/common/marking.htm.
The full text of this handbook is available here (includes clickable links to Moodle
and online reading lists if applicable) http://www.ucl.ac.uk/silva/archaeology/courseinfo/.
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Libraries and other resources
In addition to the Library of the Institute of Archaeology, other libraries in UCL with
holdings of particular relevance to this degree are the Classics and Ancient History
sections of the main UCL library.
Institute of archaeology coursework procedures
General policies and procedures concerning courses and coursework, including
submission procedures, assessment criteria, and general resources, are available in
your Degree Handbook and on the following website:
http://wiki.ucl.ac.uk/display/archadmin
It is essential that you read and comply with these. Note that some of the policies and
procedures will be different depending on your status (e.g. undergraduate,
postgraduate taught, affiliate, graduate diploma, intercollegiate, interdepartmental). If
in doubt, please consult your course co-ordinator.
Information for intercollegiate and interdepartmental students
Students enrolled in Departments outside the Institute should obtain the Institute’s
coursework guidelines from Judy Medrington (email j.medrington@ucl.ac.uk), which
will also be available on the IoA website.
.
Dyslexia
If you have dyslexia or any other disability, please make your lecturers aware of this.
Please discuss with your lecturers whether there is any way in which they can help
you. Students with dyslexia are reminded to indicate this on each piece of
coursework.
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
5
FULL SYLLABUS AND READING LIST
The following is an outline for the course as a whole, and identifies
essential and supplementary readings relevant to each session. Information is
provided as to where in the UCL library system individual readings are available;
their location and Teaching Collection (TC) number, and status (whether out on loan)
can also be accessed on the eUCLid computer catalogue system.
Readings marked with an * are considered essential to keep up with the
topics covered in the course. Readings marked ® must be read before the class in
question and will form the basis of in class discussions. Copies of individual
articles and chapters identified as essential reading are in the Teaching Collection in
the Institute Library (where permitted by copyright).
The essay topics are keyed to the lectures, each listing essential reading.
While each essay focuses on a particular class, it will be difficult to assess the
evidence and arguments in particular classes without a good basic knowledge of the
materials covered in essential readings for other classes. In short, to write good essays,
you will need to have read at least the essential (*) readings from the whole range of
topics.
PAINTING AND SOCIETY
IN ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL GREECE
COURSE SCHEDULE
13/1/16
1. Introduction to the Course: Sources and Methods in the Study of
Greek Painting
20/1/16
2. The Origins of Greek Painting: Geometric, Early Orientalising
27/1/16
3. East and West: Regional Interactions in Archaic Greek Painting,
from Ionia to Italy
3/2/16
4. The Greek Revolution and the Problem of Naturalism
10/2/16
5. Polygnotus and History Painting in the Early Classical Period
17/2/16
[Reading Week]
24/2/16
6. Theatre, Optics and the Development of Perspective Representation
2/3/16
7. The Invention of Shadow Painting: Zeuxis, Parrhasios and the
Transformation of Colour Depiction in Greek Painting.
9/3/16
8. Macedonia and Late Classical Painting: the Royal Tombs at Vergina
and the Alexander Mosaic.
16/3/16
9.The Heritage of Apelles: Optical themes in fourth century painting
and mosaic: sponsors and discontents
23/3/16
10. The Individual Artist: Identity and Agency
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
6
TOPIC OUTLINES, ESSAY QUESTIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHIES
1A. Introduction to the course: Greek Painting
Outline: Introduction to course; course aims; outcomes; assessment. A brief outline of
Greek painting.
1B: Sources and methods in the Study of Greek Painting
Outline: Key concepts: formal analysis (Riegl, Wolfflin); semiotic analysis (Hodge
and Kress); Contextual analysis (Thompson); Source materials: texts; images; Roman
copies
Bibliography:
Basic Introductions to Greek Art and Painting
Haynes, D. 1981 Greek Art and the Idea of Freedom.(YATES A60 HAY)
Rumpf, A. 1947. “Classical and post-classical painting”, Journal of Hellenic Studies,
67: 10-21 (JSTOR)
Andronikos, Manolis. 1984. Vergina: the Royal Tombs. Athens. 86-96 “The tomb of
Persephone”, 97-118 “The tomb of Philip – the painting”, 202-6 “The prince’s
tomb – the painting”. (YATES QUARTOS E12 VER; INSTARCH DAE10
AND)
Barasch, Moshe. 1985. Theories of Art, from Plato to Winckelmann. 1-44 “Antiquity”
(ART BA BAR; ART BA BAR)
Yalouris, Nicholas. 1982. “Painting in the age of Alexander the Great and the
successors”, in Bert Barr-Sharrar and Eugene N. Borza eds. Macedonia and
Greece in Late Classixal and Early Hellenistic Times. National Gallery of Art
Washington, Studies in the History of Art 10: 263-8 (YATES QUARTOS A20
BAR)
Lindberg, David C. 1976. Theories of Vision from Al-Kindi to Kepler. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press. (Introductory chapter on classical world) (ART
BE LIN). Plus Xerox for TC
Pollitt, J.J. ed. 2013. The Cambrisge History of Painting in the Classical World.
Cambridge.
Basic Bibliography on approaches to analysis of visual art
*Hodge, Robert and Kress, Gunther. 1988. Social Semiotics. Cambridge, Polity. Pp.
52-59 “Ideology and bodies in space”. (LangSpeSci 401.41 HD; Xerox will
be placed on teaching collection)
*Thompson, J.B. 1990. “Analysing mass-communication: the tripartite approach”,
303-310 in idem Ideology and Modern Culture. Cambridge.
(ANTHROPOLOGY D70 THO)
*Wollflin, Heinrich. 1915. Principles of Art History, extract in Eric Fernie ed. Art
History and its Methods: a Critical Anthology, (London, 1995), 127-151
(ART A8 FER)
*Witkin, Robert W. 2005. “A new paradigm for the sociology of aesthetics”, 57-72 in
David Inglis and John Hughson eds. The Sociology of Art: Ways of Seeing
(London, Routledge). (ANTHROPOLOGY E10 ING), Plus Xerox on
teaching collection
*Baxandall, Michael. 1985. Patterns of Intention: on the Historical Explanation of
Pictures. Yale. 1-11. “Introduction: language and explanation”. [Particularly
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
7
helpful and important for when you are preparing your presentations and
short essays] (ART C10 BAX)
Burke, Peter. 1992. "The social history of art or the history of images", Budapest
Review of Books, English Edition, issue 01, pages 9-12. www.ceeol.com
{most easily found on line as listed - if not via site, via Google Scholar}
Copies and originals: sources for the study of Greek Painting
Ling, Roger. 1991. Roman Painting. (Cambridge). Pp. 128-35 (YATES QUARTOS
P140 LIN; ART FB10 LIN)
Beard, Mary and Henderson, John. 2001. Classical Art from Greece to Rome.
(Oxford), pp. 11-64 “Painting antiquity” (quite short, mainly pics) (YATES
A5 BEA; ART F5 BEA)
Cohen, Ada. 1997. The Alexander Mosaic: Stories of Victory and Defeat. Cambridge.
Pp. 51-82 “The question of the copy”, 175-199 “The mosaic in Roman
context” (YATES P 145 COH)
Pollitt, J.J. 1990. (2nd edition). The Art of Ancient Greece: Sources and Documents.
“Introduction”, 1-9. (ART FA5 POL; YATES A20 POL)
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
8
2. The Origins of Greek Painting: Geometric, Early Orientalising
Outline: Development of Polychrome (esp. Protoattic), Thermon metopes/Chigi vase.
Discussion: Painting as institution in Geometric and orientalising Greece; forms of
representation and institution of art.
Presentations: a) Thermon Metopes; b) Chigi Vase and polychrome pottery
Essay question:: What are the major changes in the character and use of painting as a
monumental art form during the eighth and seventh centuries BC and how can we
explain them?
Short practical essay questions relating to presentations:
a) Thermon metopes: To what extent are the visual strategies characteristic of the
Thermon metopes similar or different to those of contemporary vase-painting, and
what may that tell us about the development of panel painting in this period?
{Probably best if you read German for this topic – Koch}
b) Polychrome vase-painting: With what degree of confidence can we use vasepainting as a source in the reconstruction of the character and development of Greek
free-painting in the eight and seventh centuries BC?
Required Bilbliography:
®Schaus, P.G. 1988. ‘The beginning of Greek polychrome painting’, Journal of
Hellenic Studies 108: 107-17. (Online) [To be compared with Koch’s account
of same materials!; cf. the Boardman vs Roberston debate]
®Bryson, Norman. 1992. “Art in context”, in R. Cohen ed. Studies in Historical
Change. Charlottesville. 18-42. (Xeroxes JJT’s door: use as teaching
collection – i.e. borrow, read, return within 3 hours)
Hurwit, J. 1985. The Art and Culture of Early Greece, 1100-480 BC. Chapter 3, “The
idea of order 760-700”, esp. pp. 73-84, 93-106, 106-124; chapter 4, “The edge
of disorder, the seventh century”, esp. pp. 150-179. (YATES A22 HUR)
Morris, Sarah. 1984. The Black and White Style: Athens and Aigina in the
Orientalizing Period. New Haven. Yale. (IOA ISSUE DESK MOR 13)
*Papastolou, J.A. 2002. “Color in archaic painting”, 53-64 in Tiverios, M.A. ed.
Color in Ancient Greece .[Plus bibl; excellent] (YATES A6 TIV; IoA Issue
Desk TIV)
*Scheibler, I. 2002. “Features and intentions of color schemes in archaic vasepainting”, 65-73 in Tiverios, M.A. ed. Color in Ancient Greece.
Payne, H. 1925/6. “On the Thermon metopes”, ABSA 27: 124-32 (JSTOR)
*Roberston, Martin. 1975. A History of Greek Art. Cambridge. 49-56 “The beginning
of free painting”. (YATES QUARTOS A 20 ROB)
_____. 1951. “The place of vase-painting in Greek art”, Annual of the British School
at Athens (Online)
_____. 1959. Greek Painting. London. 34-51 “The beginnings of Greek painting”.
Boardman, J. 1954. “Painted votive plaques and an early inscription from Aegina”,
Annual of the British School at Athens 49: 183-201 (Online)
Amyx, D.A. 1983. “Archaic vase-painting vis-à-vis ‘free-painting’ at Corinth”, 37-52
in Warren G. Moon ed. Ancient Greek Art and Iconography. Wisconsin.
(YATES QUARTOS A70 MOO)
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
9
Pemberton, E. 1989. ‘The beginning of monumental painting in ancient Greece’, in
Studia Pompeiana et Classica in Honor of WF Jashemski II, 181ff. (Not in
UCL: contact JJT for copy)
*Pollitt, J.J. 1990. The Art of Ancient Greece: Sources and Documents. Cambridge.
124-6 “Origins, early inventions and the archaic period” (ART FA5 POL;
YATES A20 POL)
Hurwit, J. 2002. “Reading the Chigi vase”, Hesperia 71: 1-22. (Online)
Charbonneaux, J; R. Martin and F. Villard. 1971. Archaic Greek Art 620-480 BC. 2954 “The early achievements 620-580 BC. Painting and Pottery” (Villard)
(YATES QUARTOS A24 CHA).
Stansbury O’Donnell, Mark D. 1999. Pictorial Narrative in Ancient Greek Art, pp.
118-124 discussing narrative strategies on Thermon metopes. (YATES A60
STA)
Supplementary readings:
Koch, Nadia J. 1996. De Picturae Initiis. Die Anfänge der Griechischen Malerei im 7.
Jahrhundert v. Chr. (YATES A20 KOCH)
Presentation readings:
Thermon metopes: Payne, Charboneaux Villard, Papostolou, Stansbury O’Donnell;
Papastolou; if you read German: Koch
Chigi vase and polychrome ceramics: Hurwit, Charboneaux-Villard, Scheibler,
Papostolou
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
10
3. East and west: regional interactions in archaic Greek Painting, from Ionia to
Italy
Outline: Asia Minor, Etruria and Greece. Greek painters in Anatolia: Kizilbel and
Karabarun. Greek Painters in Etruria – Ionian workshops? - (Tomba degli Auguri,
Tomb of the Lioness, Tomb of the Baron, Tomb of the Giocolieri); Pitsa Plaques;
Tomb of the Diver. Discussion: What do we mean by “Greek painting” in the archaic
period: forms, purposes, meanings, institution; regional traditions; ‘ethnic’ traditions
Presentations: a) Tomb of the Diver; b) Kizilbel.
Essay question: Either: How legitimate is it to use paintings from Italy and Anatolia in
reconstructing the history and character of archaic Greek painting?
Or: How far can the concept of “influence” take us in understanding the
character and development of painting in the archaic Mediterranena world?
Short essay questions for presentations:
a) Tomb of the Diver: What factors shaped the iconographic and stylistic choices
made by the painters who decorated the Tomb of the Diver?
b) Kizilbel: What factors shaped the iconographic and stylistic choices made by the
painters who decorated the painted tomb at Kizilbel? (For the presentation, you may
wish to focus on just two of the more important scenes, or a specific wall – for
example the Departure Scene and the Death of Medusa, or the North Wall)
Required reading:
Materials
Slater, W.J. 1976. “High flying at Paestum”, America Journal of Archaeology 80:
423-425 (reply Ross Holloway AJA 91, 1977, 554-5 [Online]
*Holloway, R. Ross. 2006. “The tomb of the diver”, American Journal of
Archaeology 110, 265-88. (With fantastic bibliography) [Online]
*Mellink, Machteld J. 1971. “Excavations at Karatas-Semayük and Elmali, Lycia”,
American Journal of Archaeology 75: 245-55. [Online]
_____. 1973. “Excavations at Karatas-Semayük and Elmali, Lycia”, American
Journal of Archaeology 77: 293-303. [Online] {nb also 1972?}
*_____. 1974. ‘Notes on Anatolian wall-painting’ in Mélanges Mansel I, 537-57
(plates 163-67 Kizilbil; 168-70 Karaburun) (INSTARCH DBC100 MAN) Xerox TC
*_____. 1978. “Local, Phrygian and Greek traits in Northern Lycia” in Proceedings
of the Xth International Congress of Classical Archaeology Ankara, 1973:
805-9. (YATES A6 INT) Xerox TC
_____. 1980. “Archaic wall-paintings from Gordion”, in From Athens to Gordion ed.
K. DeVries, 91-98. Philadelphia. (INSTARCH DBC 100 DEV)
_____. 1998. Kizilbel. An Archaic Painted Tomb Chamber in Lycia. (YATES
QUARTOS E82 KIZ)
*Akerstrom, Ake. 1981. “Etruscan tomb painting: an art of many faces”, Opuscula
Romana XIII.1: 7-34 [xd; req; pics to find, scans] (Not in UCL: Xerox from
JJT, office door)
Steingräber, Stephan. Ed. 1986. Etruscan Painting. No 42, p. 283, plates 13-22,
Tomba degli Auguri;; No 44, p. 285, plates 27-34 Tomb of the Baron; No 70,
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
11
p. 310-311 plates 79-85 Tomb of the Giocolieri); No 77, p. 316-7 plates 97104 Tomb of the Lioness. (YATES QUARTOS P132 STE - Reference Only)
Metzger Henri, Moret Jean-Marc. “Observations sur certaines peintures tombales de
Kizilbel en Lycie du Nord-Est”. Journal des savants, 1999, n° pp. 295-318
[Available online, through Google Scholar]
Theoretical Frameworks:
®Hay, Jonathan. 1999. Toward a theory of the intercultural”. Res: Anthropology and
Aesthetics 35: 5-9. [Online]
®Hannerz, Ulf. 1992. Cultural Complexity: Studies in the Social Organisation of
Meaning. New York: Columbia University Press. Chapter 2, pp. 40-61
“Patterns of process”. [IOA ISSUE DESK, INST ARCH 3781]
®Baxandall, Michael. 1985. Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of
Pictures. New Haven: Yale University Press. 58-62 “Excursus against influence”
(though nb also to skim the previous pages to get sense of the objects he is talking
about and why ‘influence’ does not help explain them) [IOA Issue Desk INST ARCH
3782]
Supplementary reading:
Cristofani, Mauro. 1976. “Storia dell’ arte e acculurazione: le pitture tombali arcaiche
di Tarquinia”, Prospettiva 7: 2-10
Cook, R.M. 1981. Clazomenian Sarcophagi.
Roosevelt, Christopher. 2009. The Archaeology of Lydia: from Gyges to Alexander.
Cambridge (August 2009). Ch 6 on funerary customs, index sv painting. (IOA
DBC 100 ROO)
Steingräber, Stephan. 2006. Abundance of Life: Etruscan Wall Painting: from the
Geometric Period to the Hellenistic Period. Malibu, Getty. Introduction. 1-27
“From Asia Minor to Magna Graecia, from Thrace to Alexandria: the ‘koine’
and the place of Etruscan painting in the art of the Mediterranean”. Pp. [Very
nice plates, and the essay worth reading as a whole at some point, for the
notion of development of a Mediterranean koine, though it goes well beyond
the archaic period which is all you need to focus on for this class] (YATES
QUARTOS P132 STE)
Boardman, John. 1994. The Diffusion of Classical Art in Antiquity. London: Thames
and Hudson. 21-48 “The Near East and the Persian Empire”, 225-272
“Etruria”
Baughan, Elizabeth P. 2013. Couched in Death: Klinai and Identity in Anatolia and
Beyond. Cambridge. [INST ARCH DBC 100 BAU]
Miller, Margaret. 2010 Essay on Karabarun in Gruen, Erich ed. Cultural Identity in
the Ancient Mediterranean. Getty Research Institute. ANCIENT HISTORY A 72
GRU
Reading for presentations: a) Tomb of Diver: Holloway, Slater; b) Kizilbel: Mellink
1974. 1978, 1998.
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
12
4. a) The Greek Revolution and the problem of ‘naturalism’.
Topic Outline: What was the Greek revolution? Gradualism or sudden change? The
relationship between vase-painting and free-painting in the ‘Greek revolution’. The
Pioneers and the Siphnian Treasury. Discussion: Gombrich on Greek revolution vs
Neer: the calligraphic, critique of naturalism; concept of naturalism.
Presentations: a) Euphronios and the pioneers: b) the Lykaon painter.
Essay: To what extent do you think it justified to characterise the changes which
took place in Greek painting in the late archaic and early classical periods as
“revolutionary” and how would you explain such changes as did take place?
Short essays linked to presentations:
a) Pioneers: How central was the development of “naturalism” to painters of the
generation of the pioneers and their immediate successors?
b) Lykaon painter: How far should the work of the Lykaon painter be seen as
manifesting a revolutionary transformation in the character of Greek painting?
Required reading:
Carson, A. 1992. ‘Simonides painter’, in Innovations in Antiquity,ed. R. Hexter and D.
Selden. New York and London. 51-64. (CLASSICS C6 HEX)
*Williams, Dyfri. 1991a. “The drawing of the human figure on early read-figure
vases”, 285-300 in D. Buitron-Oliver ed. New Perspectives in Early Greek Art.
National Gallery of Art, Washington. (YATES QUARTOSA A6 BUI Reference only).
_____. 1991b. “The invention of the red-figure technique and the race between vasepainting and free painting”, in N. Spivey and T. Rasmussen eds. Looking at
Greek Vases. Cambridge. 103-118. (YATES P5 RAS; ISSUE DESK IOA
RAS)
[®]Gombrich, E. 1959. “Reflections on the Greek revolution”, 99-125 in Art and
Illusion: a Study in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation. London,
Phaidon. (ART BE GOM; ARCHITECTURE A77 GOM)
®Neer, Richard. 1995. “The lion’s eye: imitation and uncertainty in Attic red-figure”,
Representations 51: 118-53. (Online)
_____. 2002. Style and Politics in Athenian Vase Painting. Cambridge. 27-86 “The
evolution of naturalism, or drawing the net” (YATES P5 NEE)
Giesecke, Annette L. 1999. "Elpenor, Amymone and the truth in the Lykaon painter's
painting", Babesch 74: 63-78 Nb also Neer on Lykaon painter (Not in UCL;
ask JJT {ICS})
Neer, Richard T. 1998. "Imitation, inscription, antilogic", Metis 13: 17-38. (Lykaon)
(Not in UCL, ask JJT {ICS})
®Bryson, N. 1983. Vision and Painting, ART BA BRY) – Quite a challenging book, but
before class please read: pp. 37-66, esp. 55ff "Perceptualism", 156-162 "Image,
discourse, power"; (for essay: try also: pp. 1-12 "The natural attitude", 13-36
"The essential copy", 133-163 "Image, discourse, power")
*Vernant, Jean-Pierre. 1991. Mortals and Immortals. Collected Essays. Ed. Froma I.
Zeitlin. Chapter 9, pp. 164-185 “The birth of images”, (chapter 8 “From the
presentification of the invisible to the imitation of appearances” also worth
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
13
reading though primarily focussed on sculpture). (ANCIENT HISTORY P74
VER)
Robertson, M. 1975. A History of Greek Art. Cambridge. 214-239. (YATES
QUARTOS A 20 ROB)
®Witkin, Robert W. 2005. “A new paradigm for the sociology of aesthetics”, 57-72
in David Inglis and John Hughson eds. The Sociology of Art: Ways of Seeing
(London, Routledge). (ANTHROPOLOGY E10 ING) Xerox for TC
Keuls, Eva. 1978. Plato and Greek Painting. Leiden: EJ Brill. “Plato’s mimesis
doctrine”, 9-30 (esp. 9-22 before Plato)
Supplementary reading:
Brinckman, Vincent. 1994. Die Friese des Siphnierschatzhauses. 39-53 on painting
Else, Gerald F. 1958. “‘Imitation’ in the fifth century”, Classical Philology 53: 73-90.
Robertson, Martin. 1992. The Art of Vase-Painting in Classical Athens. Cambridge.
Chapter 2, pp. 20-42 “A time of ferment: the red-figure pioneers and their
contemporaries”, chapter 3, pp. 43-132 “After the pioneers; red-figure mastery;
the beginning of white ground”, 133-5 “A change of background: the
revolution in wall-painting”; 211-13 Lykaon painter. (YATES QUARTOS
P26 ROB - Reference)
Reading for presentations:
a) Pioneers: Williams 1991a and 1991b, Robertson 1992, Neer 1995;
b) Lykaon: Neer 1995, Neer 1998 Giesecke 1999, Robertson 1992, 211-13
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
14
5. Polygnotus and History Painting in the Early Classical Period
Topic outline: Polygnotan wall-painting and the development of pictorial space –
reconstructing Polygnotan painting, the evidence of Pausanias and vase paintings –
the Lesche of the Knidians, Delphi; The Stoa Poikile, Athens and history painting –
the battle of Marathon; The Theseion, Athens; Polygnotos and ethos in painting.
Presentations: a) The Niobid painter and Polygnotan painting; b) The paintings of the
Lesche of the Knidians, Delphi.
Essay: “How far are we able to recover the character and significance of monumental
Greek painting in the early classical period?”
Short essays linked to presentations:
a) The Niobid painter: To what extent can the vase-paintings of the Niobid painter and
his circle offer us a useful source in reconstructing the character of early classical
wall-painting?
b) The Lesche of the Knidians, Delphi. To what extent can we construct the program
and the character of Polygnotus paintings in the lesche of the Knidians.
Required reading:
*Pollitt, J.J. 1990. The Art of Greece: Sources and Documents. 124-145 – early
classical painters: Polygnotus, Mikon etc (ART FA5 POL; YATES A20 POL)
*Pollitt, J.J. 1976. ‘The ethos of Polygnotos and Aristeides’, in In Memoriam O.J.
Brendel: Essays in Archaeology and Humanities, 49-54. (
*Barron, J.P. 1972. “New light on old walls: the murals of the Theseion”, Journal of
Hellenic Studies 92: 20-45. (comments of H. Metzger REG 1973, p. 396)
(Online)
Harrison, E.B, 1972a. “The south frieze of the Nike temple and the Marathon painting
in the painted Stoa”, American Journal of Archaeology 76: 353-78 (JSTOR)
_____. 1972b. “Preparations for Marathon: the Niobid painter and Herodotus”, Art
Bulletin 54, 390-402 (Online)
Cohen, Beth. 1984. “Paragone: sculpture versus painting. Kaineus and the
Kleophrades painter”, 171-192 in Warren G. Moon ed. Ancient Greek Art and
Iconography. (YATES QUARTOS A70 MOO – 2 copies, one reference only)
*Webster, T.B.L. 1972. Potter and Patron in Classical Athens 82-90, “Theseus” on
the vases as special commissions for feasting at the Theseia. (YATES P26
WEB) Xerox for TC
*Stansbury O’Donnell, Mark. 1999. Pictorial Narrative in Ancient Greek Art. Pp.
175-190 “Ethos” (primarily on Lesche of the Knidians; nb whole chapter, no 5,
pp. 158-190 probably worth reading if you do essay on this topic, to think
about issues of narrative and character). (YATES A60 STA)
*Boardman, John. 2005. “Composition and content on classical murals and vases”, in
J.M. Barringer and J.M. Hurwit eds. Periklean Athens and its Legacy:
Problems and Perspectives. Austin, Texas. 63-72 (YATES QUARTOS A6
BAR)
Stewart, Andrew. 2009. Classical Greece and the Birth of Western Art. Cambridge.
Pp. 101-5 “Art and drama”, on Polygnotan painting and Niobid painter.
(YATES A20 STE)
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
15
Simon, E. 1963. “Polygnotan painting and the Niobid painter”, American Journal of
Archaeology 67: 43-62 [Online]
®Settis, S. 1984. “Images of meditation, uncertainty and repentance in ancient art”,
History and Anthropology 1: 193-237 [Online]
Keuls, Eva. 1978. Plato and Greek Painting. Leiden: EJ Brill. “Plato’s mimesis
doctrine”, 9-30 (esp. 9-22 before Plato)
Arias, P.E. and Hirmer, M. 1962. A History of Greek Vase Painting. 354-357 (with
figs 173-81) “Niobid painter”
Supplementary reading:
Stansbury O’Donnell, Mark. 1989. “Polygnotos’s Iliupersis: a new reconstruction”,
American Journal of Archaeology 93: 203-215 (JSTOR)
_____. 2005. “The painting program in the Stoa Poikile”, ”, in J.M. Barringer and J.M.
Hurwit eds. Periklean Athens and its Legacy: Problems and Perspectives.
Austin, Texas. 73-87. (YATES QUARTOS A6 BAR)
Castriota, David. 2005. “Feminizing the barbarian and barbarising the feminine:
amazons, Trojans and Persians in the Stoa Poikile”, in J.M. Barringer and J.M.
Hurwit eds. Periklean Athens and its Legacy: Problems and Perspectives.
Austin, Texas. 89-102. (YATES QUARTOS A6 BAR)
_____. 1992. Myth, Ethos and Actuality: Official Art in Fifth Century BC Athens. 3395 “Ethos and antithesis in the Kimonian monuments”, 96-133 “Polygnotos
and the transformation of the Trojan theme in the Knidian leschos and the Stoa
Poikile”. (YATES A50 CAS – two copies one ref only)
Kebric, R.B. 1983. The Paintings in the Lesche of the Knidians and their Historical
Context. Mnemosyne Suppl. 80. (YATES P120 KEB - Reference)
Tanner, Jeremy. 2002. “Social structure, cultural rationalisation and aesthetic
judgement in classical Greece”, in N. Keith Rutter and Brian A. Sparkes eds.
Word and Image in Ancient Greece. Edinburgh. 183-205 (YATES A70 RUT)
Reading for presentations:
a) Niobid painter and Polygnotan painting: Harrison 1972b, Barron 1972, Simon
1963, Stewart 2009, Boardman 2005; Arias and Hirmer.
b) Lesche of the Knidians: Stansbury O’Donnell 1999, 1989, Kebric 1983, Castriota
1992 sv Lesche of the Knidians.
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
16
6. Theatre, optics and the development of perspective representation in Greek
painting.
Topic outline: Agatharchus, scene painting and perspective: painting and theatre from
the mid 5th century; from central vanishing line to central vanishing point –
perspective in the Hellenistic world. Perspectives on perspective, from classical
antiquity to early China (Panofsky, Hay); role of the theatre in development of
perspective representation in the ancient Greek world (evidence of vase-paintings,
technical context, cultural context); space and perspective representation in other
cultural traditions.
Presentations: a) Vase painting and perspective representation; b) Perspective
representation in 2nd style Roman wall painting, esp. House of the Masks.
Essay: How can we account for character and development of perspective
representation in classical antiquity?
Short essays linked to presentations:
a) Vase-painting: What does the evidence of vase-painting suggest about the
development of perspective representation in the classical Greek world?
b) Roman wall painting: What, if anything, can the evidence of Roman wall-painting
tell us about the development of perspective representation in the Hellenistic-Roman
world?
Required reading:
*Pollitt, J.J. 1990. The Art of Greece: Sources and Documents. 145-7 (ART FA5
POL; YATES A20 POL)
*Christensen, Jesper. 1999. “Vindicating Vitruvius on the subject of perspective”,
Journal of Hellenic Studies 119: 161-166. (JSTOR)
*Camerota, Filippo. 2002. "Optics and the visual arts: the role of skenographia", 121141 in Jurgen Renn and Giuseppe Castagnetti eds. Homo Faber: Studies on
Nature, Technology and Science at the Time of Pompeii. L'Erma di
Bretschneider. Richter. (YATES QUARTOS E22 POM - Reference) Xerox
for TC
McKenzie, Judith. 2007. The Architecture of Alexandria and Egypt. Chapter 5
“Classical architectural style of Ptolemaic Alexandria and its depiction”, esp.
97-113 “Reflections of Alexandrian architecture at Petra and in second style
Pompeian wall-painting”. (EGYPTOLOGY QUARTOS K5 MCK – two
copies one reference)
*White, J. 19873 The Birth and Rebirth of Pictorial Space. (All recommended.) Pp. 236273 "Spatial design in antiquity" = idem 1956 "Perspective in ancient drawing and
painting" Supplement of the Hellenic Society (ART KI10 WHI)
*Richter, G. M. 1970. Perspective in Greek and Roman Art. (Short sensible text, just 60
pages, lots of very useful plates.) (YATES QUARTOS P1 RIC – two copies one
reference)
®Panofsky, G. M. 1991 (ov 1924/5). Perspective as Symbolic Form. “Introduction” 7-24
by Christopher Wood, required; whole book strongly recommended, esp. if doing
the essay – nb the actual essay by Panofsky quite short, and there is no need to get
bogged down in the footnotes. (ART TD30 PAN – one 3 hr, one overnight)
Introduction Xerox for TC
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
17
Keuls, E. C. 1972. Plato and Greek Painting, ch 4, pp. 59-87 "The state of Greek painting
in Plato's time", ch 7, pp. 119-138 "The case for Plato's growing hostility towards
painting" (CLASSICS GT45 KEU)
®Padel, R. 1990. "Making space speak", pp. 336-365 in J. Winkler and F. Zeitlin eds.
Nothing to do with Dionysos. (CLASSICS GC32 WIN) Xerox for TC
Little, A.M.G. 1971. Roman Perspective Painting and the Ancient Stage.
Kennebunkport, Maine: Starr Press, Inc.
_____. 1956. “A Roman sourcebook for the stage”, American Journal of Archaeology
60: 27-33 (Online)
_____. 1937. “Perspective and scene painting”, Art Bulletin 19: 487-95 (Online)
_____. 1936. “Scaenographia”. Art Bulletin 18: 407-18. (Online)
Gombrich, E. 1972. “The ‘what’ and the ‘how’: perspective representation and the
phenomenal world”, 129-49 in Logic and Art: Essays in Honour of Nelson
Goodman, ed. Richard Rudner and Israel Scheffler. Indianapolis: BobbsMerrill. (PHILOSOPHY A60 GOO)
Beyen, H.G. 1957. “The wall decoration of the cubiculum of the Villa of P. Fanniuis
Synistor near Boscoreale in its relation to ancient stage painting”, Mnemosyne
ser. 4. 10: 147-53. (JSTOR)
Solso, Robert L. 1994. Cognition and the Visual Arts. Chapter 7 (157-188) “A truly
marvellous feast: visual perspective”, chapter 8 (189-230) “Perspective and
the history of art”. [PSYCHOLOGY G 27 SOL]
Pappalardo, Umberto. 2008. The Splendor of Roman Wall Painting. 32-45 “The Villa
of P. Fannius Synistor”, 64-81 “The Villa of Oplontis”, 82-88 “The House of
the Labyrinth”.
Clarke, John. 1991. The Houses of Roman Italy 100 BC – AD 250: Ritual, Space and
Decoration. Berkeley: University of California Press. 78-123. “Decorative
ensembles of the late Republic, 100-30 BC”.
Lehmann, Phyllis. 1953. Roman Wall Paintings from Boscoreale in the Metropolitan
Museum of Art. 149ff on perspective
Summers, David. 2007. Vision, Reflection and Desire in Western Painting. 22-4 on
skenographia.
Supplementary:
Iacopi, Irene. 2008. The House of Augustus: Wall Paintings. Milan: Electa. Esp. 16-29
Room of the Masks.
Rouveret, A. 1989. Histoire et Imaginaire de la Peinture Ancienne, ch 2, pp. 65-128
"Scaenographia: 5th century perspective construction".
Baines, John. 1985. “Theories and universals of representation: Heinrich Schäfer and
Egyptian art”, Art History 8.1: 25
Hay, J. 1994. “Chinese space in Chinese painting”, 151-174 in C. Andrew Gerstle and
A.C. Milner eds. 'Recovering the Orient: Artists, Scholars, Appropriations'.
Harwood Academic Publishers: Chur, Sw.
Caswell, James. 2001. “Lines of communication: some secrets of the trade in Chinese
painters use of ‘perspectives’”, Res: Anthropology and Aesthetics 40: 189-209.
Wong, Dorothy C. 1998/9. “Four Sichuan Buddhist steles and the beginnings of Pure
Land imagery in China”, Archives of Asian Art LI: 56-79
Clarke, John. 1991. The Houses of Roman Italy 100 BC-AD 250: Ritual, Space and
Decoration. Berkeley. 31-53 on second style painting. (YATES K73 CLA;
ISSUE DESK IOA CLA 19)
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
18
Polaccio, L. 1989. "Il teatro greco come arte della visione: scenografia e prospettiva",
Dionisio 59, 137-71.
Senseney, John R. 2011. The Art of Building in the Classical World: Vision,
Craftsmanship and Linear Perspective. Cambrudge
Reading for presentations:
a) Vase-paintings: Christensen, White pp. 236-248 “Vase painting in Greece and Italy”,
Richter 11-48;
b) Roman wall painting: White 249-271 “Antique perspective theory and Pompeian
practice”; Little 1937, 1956; Beyen; Clarke; (add Iacopi if it has arrived – on
order)
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
19
7. The invention of shadow-painting: Zeuxis, Parrhasios and the transformation
of colour depiction in Greek painting.
Topic outline: The uses of colour in classical painting. Zeuxis and Parrhasios: line
and colour; light and shade: trompe l’oeil and the revolution in late fifth century
painting. Linear traditions: Group R Lekythoi; the Kazanlak tomb; the Great Tomb at
Lefkadhia: shadow painting in context. The Zeuxian tradition in later Greek art.
Presentations: a) the Kazanlak tomb; b) the Great Tomb at Lefkadhia; c) Plato and
skiagraphia
Essay: What is the character of the change in Greek painting associated with the
name of Zeuxis? What is its cultural significance and how can we explain it?
Short essays linked to presentations:
a) The Kazanlak tomb: analyse the paintings of the Kazanlak tomb, paying special
attention to artistic style and iconographic programme.
b) The Great tomb at Lefkadhia: analyse the paintings of the Great Tomb at Lefkadhia,
paying special attention to artistic style and iconographic programme.
Required reading:
**Bruno, V. 1977. Form and colour in Greek Painting, ch 1, pp. 23-30 "Shading methods
in Greek painting", ch 2, pp. 31-40 "Zeuxis and Parrhasios- a controversy", ch 11,
pp. 95-104 "Conclusions: the dichotomy of form and colour". (ART FA10 BRU –
3 hours; IOA YATES 120 BRU)
*Pollitt, The Art of Ancient Greece: Sources and Documents, pp. 147-8 Apollodorus,
149-58 Zeuxis, Parrhasios etc 7 (ART FA5 POL; YATES A20 POL)
*_____. 2002. “Peri chromaton: what ancient Greek painters thought about colours”, in
M.A. Tiverios and D.S. Tsiafakis eds. Color in Ancient Greece: the Role of
Colour in Ancient Greek Art and Architecture 700-31 BC. Thessalonike.1-8
(YATES A6 TIV)
Rumpf, A. 1947. “Classical and post-classical Greek painting”, Journal of Hellenic
Studies 67: 10-21. (JSTOR)
*_____. 1951. ‘Parrhasios’, American Journal of Archaeology 56: 1ff (JSTOR)
*Summers, David. 2007. Vision, Reflection and Desire in Western Painting. 1-15
“Introduction”, 16-42 “Shadow-painting and scene-painting: the beginnings of
optics and classical art”. (ART BE SUM; Main Library Issue Desk SUM – 3
hours)
Robertson, Martin. 1975. A History of Greek Art, Cambridge. pp. 565-8 Kazanlak;
568-571 Lefkadia . (YATES QUARTOS A 20 ROB)
**Walter-Karydi, E. 2002. “Colour in Greek painting”, in M.A. Tiverios and D.S.
Tsiafakis eds. Color in Ancient Greece: the Role of Colour in Ancient Greek
Art and Architecture 700-31 BC. Thessalonike. 75-88. (YATES A6 TIV)
Supplementary reading:
Rouveret, A. 1989. Histoire et Imaginaire de la Peinture Ancienne, ch 1, pp. 16-64
"Skiagraphia", ch 2, pp. 65-128 "Scaenographia: 5th century perspective
construction", 157ff Zeuxis centaurs.
Keuls, E. 1974. ‘Plato and Greek painting’, Am. J. Phil 95.2: 10ff.
_____. 1975. ‘Skiagraphia once again’, AJA 79:1ff
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
20
Pemberton, E. 1976. ‘Archaeological notes: a note on skiagraphia”, vs Keuls.
American Journal of Archaeology 80: 82-84.
Robert, R. 1993. “Des oiseaux dans les architectures”, 168-73 in AIPMA V.
(Functional and Spatial Analysis of Wall-Painting. Atti del V Convegno
Internazionale sulla Pittura Parietale antica. Amsterdam 1992. E.M. Moorman
ed. BABesch Suppl. 3. Leiden.
_____. 1995. “Une théorie sans image? Le trompe-l’oeil dans l’Antiquité Classique”
in P. Mauriès ed. Le Trompe-l’oeil. Paris. 17-62. {excellent} (On order –
Main)
Wehgartner, I. 2002. “Color on classical vases”, in M.A. Tiverios and D.S. Tsiafakis
eds. Color in Ancient Greece: the Role of Colour in Ancient Greek Art and
Architecture 700-31 BC. Thessalonike. 89-96
Hoddinott, R.F. 1981. The Thracians. Pp. 119-30 “The Odyrsian state, 4th-1st
centuries BC”, for historical context of Kazanlak tomb. (INSTARCH DAR
HODD – overnight; also a stores copy)
Zhikova, Lydmila. 1975. The Kazanlak Tomb. (YATES QUARTOS P12O ZHI Reference),
Mikov, Vasil. 1954. Le Tombeau Antique près de Kazanlak. Sofia. (Yates Quartos
E32 KAZ)
von Graeve, V. 1979. ‘Zum Zeugniswert der bemalten Grabstelen von Demetrias für
die griechische Malerei’, in La Thessalie. Actes de la Table-Ronde Lyon 1975,
111-138. CMO 6, Arch. 2. (x – colour pics to scan) (also for
Zeuxis/Parrhasions vs Bruno)
Martin, R. 1968. “Sculpture et peinture dans les facades monumentales au IVe siècle
av. J.-C.” Revue Archeologique : 171-84 [Online]
Verdiani, C. 1945. “Archaeological notes: original Hellenistic paintings in a Thracian
tomb”, American Journal of Archaeology 40: 402-15 [Online]
Bann, Stephen. 1989. The True Vine: Essays on Visual Representation and the
Western Tradition. Cambridge. Chapter 1.
Bacchielli, L. 1983. “Une nuova lettura della facciata della grande tomba di
Leukadia” in Richerche di Pittura Hellenistica, Rome. 193-96
Levides, A.Vl. 2002. “Why Plato did not suffer color blindeness? An interpretation of
the passage on color-blending in Timaeus”, in M.A. Tiverios and D.S.
Tsiafakis eds. Color in Ancient Greece: the Role of Colour in Ancient Greek
Art and Architecture 700-31 BC. Thessalonike. 9-21.
Mansfield, Elizabeth C. 2007. Too Beautiful to Picture: Zeuxis, Myth and Mimesis.
Minnesota. (esp. ch. 2 on antiquity) (IOA YATES P120 MAN)
Arnheim, Rudolf. 1974. Art and Visual Perception. Berkeley: University of California
Press. 303-329 “Light”, 330-371 “Colour”.
Reading for presentations:
a) Kazanlak tomb: Zhikova; Verdiani; Bruno s.v. Kazanlak in index; Hoddinott;
Robertson
b) Lefkadhia, Great Tomb: Bruno, s.v. Lefkadhia; Robertson; Robert 1995, esp. 3033, {Martin 1968}, {Bacchieli}.
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
21
8) Macedonia and Late Classical Painting: the Paintings of the Royal Tombs at
Vergina and the Alexander Mosaic
Topic outline: This class will look in detail at the extraordinary late classical paintings
recovered from the Macedonian Royal Tombs at Vergina, and also at the closely
related Alexander Mosaic. We will explore the debates over the occupants of the
tombs, and how the themes of the paintings may relate to them; we will discuss the
technical and stylistic diversity of the paintings, and what that may tell us about the
history of Greek painting in the fourth century BC.
Presentations:
a) The Alexander Mosaic: b) The Tomb of Persephone; [c) The Hunting Frieze and
the tomb of Phillip]
Essay:
How did the contexts and intended audiences for the paintings of late classical
Macedonia effect the visual strategies adopted by their artists?
Short essays linked to presentations
a) The Alexander Mosaic: What are the distinctive visual strategies adopted by the
original painter lying behind the Alexander mosaic and how do they relate to the
purpose of the painting?
b) The Tomb of Persephone: What are the distinctive visual strategies adopted by the
painter of the Persephone tomb and how do they relate to the purpose of the painting?
Required reading:
Cohen, Ada. 1997. The Alexander Mosaic: Stories of Victory and Defeat. Cambridge.
Pp. 83-142 “The battle between Darius and Alexander; the first level of
existence”, 143-161 “The narrative and the dramatic”, 162-174 “The narrative
and the descriptive”. (YATES P145 COH)
Franks, H.M. 2012. Hunters, Heroes, Kings. The Frieze of Tomb II at Vergina.
Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2012. [YATES
QUARTOS P 120 FRA] {Rather eccentric on dating and hence interpretation of frieze, but
the most recent contribution in English}
*Moreno, Paolo. 2001. Apelles: the Alexander Mosaic. Skira, Milan. Chapter 1, pp.
11-28 “The battle”, chapter 2, pp. 29-38 “The painter”. {Fabulous plates,
though the argument concerning Apelles rather controversial} (YATES
QUARTOS P145 MOR)
*Stewart, Andrew. 1993. Faces of Power: Alexander’s Image and Hellenistic Politics,
pp. 130-150 “The Alexander mosaic: a reading”; (ANCIENT HISTORY P16
STE, one one week, one overnight)
Andronikos, Manolis. 1994. Vergina II: the Tomb of Persephone. (INSTARCH DAE
10 AND – Reference)
*Andronikos, Manolis. 1984. Vergina: the Royal Tombs. Athens. 86-96 “The tomb of
Persephone”, 97-118 “The tomb of Philip – the painting”, 202-6 “The prince’s
tomb – the painting”. (YATES QUARTOS E12 VER; INSTARCH DAE
10AND; IoA Issue Desk VER2)
Andronikos, Manolis. 1980. “The royal tombs at Aigai (Vergina), 188-231 in M.
Hatzopoulos and M. Loukopoulos eds. Philipp of Macedon. London.
(ANCIENT HISTORY QUARTOS P16 HAT)
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
22
Palagia , O. 2000. “Hephaisteion’s pyre and the royal hunt of Alexander”, in A.
Bosworth ed. Alexander the Great in Fact and Fiction. Oxford. 167-206.
(ANCHIST P16 BOS)
Reilly, L.C. 1993. ‘The hunting frieze from Vergina’, Journal of Hellenic Studies 113:
160-62 (Online)
*Saatsoglou-Paliadeli, Chrysoulla. 2002. “Linear and painterly: colour and drawing in
ancient Greek painting”, in M.A. Tiberios and D.S. Tsiafakes eds. Colour in
Ancient Greece: The Role of Colour in Ancient Greek Art and Architecture
700-31 BC. Thessaloniki. 97-105. [xd, good basic descriptions of Persephone
and hunt,] (YATES A6 TIV)
*Kottaridi, A. 2002. "Discovering Aegae, the old Macedonian Capital", 75-82 in
Stamatopoulou, Maria and Yeroulanou, Marina eds. Excavating Classical
Culture: Recent Archaeological Discoveries in Greece. Bar International
Series. 1031. (YATES QUARTOS E10 STA)
Carney, Elizabeth. 2003. “Hunting and the Macedonian elite: sharing the rivalry of
the chase”, in D. Odgen ed. The Hellenistic World: New Perspectives.
Duckworth. 59-80 [xd] (ANCIENT HISTORY P6 OGD)
Wooton, William. 2002. “Another Alexander mosaic: reconstructing the hunt mosaic
from Palermo”, Journal of Roman Archaeology 15: 265-274. (JSTOR)
Walter-Karydi, E. 2001. “Alexander as lover and other images from his lifetime” In
S. Buzzi ed. Zona Archeologica: Festschrift fur Han Peter Isler zum 60
Geburtstag Bonn 467-80. (Not in UCL – ask JJT)
*Von Blanckenhagen, P.H. 1982. “Painting in the time of Alexander and Later”, in
Barr-Sharrar, B. and Borza, E. eds. Macedonia and Greece in Late Classical
and Early Hellenistic Times. National Gallery of Art, Washington: Studies in
the History of Art, 10: 251-60 (YATES QUARTOS A20 BAR)
Supplementary reading:
Baumer, L.E. and U. Weber. 1991. ‘Zum Fries des Phillipgrabes von Vergina’. Hefte
des Archäologischen Seminars der Universität Bern 14: 27-41. [xd, excellent,
core for the lecture]
Briant, P. 1991. ‘Chasse royals macedoniennes et chasses royals perses: la theme de la
chasse au lion sur la Chasse de Vergina’, Dialogues d’histoire ancienne 17:
211-55. [xd]
Saatsoglou-Paliadeli, Chrysoulla. 2007. "La peinture de la Chasse de Vergina". 47-55
in Sophie Descamps-Lequime ed. 'Peinture et Couleur dans la Monde Grec
Antique.
Stewart, Andrew. 1993. Faces of Power: Alexander’s Image and Hellenistic Politics,
181-190 “Make war not love” (interesting marriage painting from Pompeii),
191- 209 “The heritage of Apelles”; 363-380 sources on paintings of
Alexander.
Saatsoglou-Paliadele, Chrysoulla. 2004. Vergina. Ho Taphos tou Philippou. He
Toichographia me to Kynegi. Athens. Bibliotheke tes en Athenais
Archaiologikes Hetaireias, Ar. 231. (Full publication of hunt painting with
excellent plates) (INSTARCH DAE 10 SAA)
Reading for presentations:
Alexander Mosaic: Cohen, Stewart, Moreno.
Persephone tomb: Andronikos 1984, 1994; Saatsoglou-Paliadeli 2002;
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
23
9. The Heritage of Apelles: optical themes in fourth century painting and mosaic:
sponsors and discontents
Outline: After looking in some detail at the best examples of painting of the second
and third quarters of the fourth century BC in the last class, this week we step back
from the details to try to put the character of mid fourth century painting in a broader
historical, social and cultural context. Pausias and flower painting provides an entry
point into the changing social contexts of painting (and mosaic), particularly in the
context of the development in elite housing, and with Macedonian patrons leading the
way. These new style grand peristyle houses also provided the social setting for a new
elite life-style with cultural practices, for example philosophy, which also have
interesting relationships to developments in painting, whether the intellectualism of
the Sicyonian school and Apelles, with his interest in optical science, or Plato’s attack
on illusionism in painting.
Presentations: a) Pausias and flower painting; b) Plato, Republic 10
Essay : What is the character and importance of the role played by contemporary
intellectual culture (science, philosophy) in shaping the development and evaluation
of Greek painting in the fourth century BC?
Short essays linked to presentations:
a) Pausias and flower painting: to what extent can we reconstruct the character and
significance of the paintings of Pausias?
b) Plato. Republic, esp. book 10: Why was the character of contemporary painting so
problematic for Plato?
Required readings:
*Gombrich, E.H. 1976. “The heritage of Apelles”, 3-18 in The Heritage of Apelles:
Studies in the Art of the Renaissance. (ART KI7 GOM – 1 copy only). Xerox
for TC
*Gage, J. 1981. ‘A locus classicus of colour theory: the Fortunes of Apelles’, Journal
of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 44: 1-26 (JSTOR)
*Zanker, G. 2004. Modes of Viewing in Hellenistic Poetry and Art. Madison, Illinois:
U Wisconsin. Esp. chapter 2 on enargeia, interest in images and light in
hellenistic art and literature, cf with contemporary catoptrics etc; = pp. 55-65
(YATES A60 ZAN - reference).
Havelock, E. A. 1963. Preface to Plato, ch 11, pp. 197-214 "Psyche or the separation of
knower from known", ch 13, pp, 215-233 "Poetry as opinion", ch 15, pp. 276-311,
"The supreme music of philosophy" (CLASSICS GT45 HAV)
®Plato, The Republic, book 10. (Best translation and commentary is that of S. Haliwell
1988). (CLASSICS GT 28)
*Keuls, E. C. 1972. Plato and Greek Painting, ch 4, pp. 59-87 "The state of Greek
painting in Plato's time", ch 7, pp. 119-138 "The case for Plato's growing hostility
towards painting" (CLASSICS GT45 KEU)
Hailiwell, Stephen. 2000. “Plato and painting”, in N. Keith Rutter and Brian A. Sparkes
eds. Word and Image in Ancient Greece. 99-116. (YATES A70 RUT)
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
24
*Robertson, M. 1965. “Greek mosaics”, Journal of Hellenic Studies 85: 72-89.
(Online)
_____. 1982. “Early Greek mosaic”. In Macedonia and Greece in Late Classical and
Early Hellenistic Times. Studies in the History of Art 10. Ed. B. Barr-Sharrar
and E.N. Borza. Washington D.C. 241-49. (YATES QUARTOS A20 BAR)
*Dunbabin, Katherine, M.D. 1999. Mosaics of the Greek and Roman World. 5-17
“Origins and pebble mosaics” . (YATES QUARTOS P145 DUN; ISSUE
DESK IOA DUN2)
Moreno, Paolo. 2001. Apelles: the Alexander Mosaic. 97-122 “The life and work of
Apelles” (with caution) (YATES QUARTOS P145 MOR)
Stewart, Andrew. 1993. Faces of Power: Alexander’s Image and Hellenistic Politics.
181-190, “Make war, not love” (painting after Aetion’s marriage of Alexander
and Roxane), 191-208 “The heritage of Apelles” (ANCIENT HISTORY P16
STE).
Walter-Karydi, Elena. 1998. The Greek House: the Rise of Nobles Houses in Late
Classical Times. Archaeological Society at Athens Library, no 171.
*Demand, N. 1975. ‘Plato and the painters’, Phoenix 29: 1-20. (Online)
®Gorgias. Encomium of Helen. Edited with introduction, notes and translation by
D.M. MacDowell. 1982. Bristol Classical Press. 21-27
®Xenophon, Memorabilia. III.x-xi. JJT to handout Xerox previous class.
*Vernant, Jean-Pierre. Mortals and Immortals: Collected Essays. 164-85 “The Birth
of Images”
Supplementary reading:
*Childs, WAP. 1994. ‘Platon, les images at l’art grec du IVe siècle avant J.-C.’,
Revue Archéologique 1994: 33-56. [Online; exceptionally interesting if you
read French]
Balensiefen, L. 1990. Die Bedeutung des Spiegelbildes als ikonographisches Motiv in
der antiken Kunst. Tübinger Studien zur Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte 10
Taylor, Rabun M. 2008. The Moral Mirror of Roman Art. Cambridge. (YATES A60
TAY)
Halliwell, Stephen. 2002. The Aesthetics of Mimesis: Ancient Texts and Modern
Problems. (PHILOSOPHY C65 HAL)
Reading for presentations:
Pausias: Robertson 1965, 1982; Dunbabin.
Plato: Havelock, Keuls, Demand
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
25
10: The individual artist: identity and agency.
Topic outline: To what extent is the individual artist a meaningful focus of analysis in
the history of Greek painting. Questions of copies and attribution of Roman copies to
individual Greek artists – example of Nikias; attribution of Greek paintings; issue of
the role of the individual, creativity, agency; levels at which individual (agency)
recogniseable and or analytically important; character of artistic practice; social
organisation of art production and status of artists; techne and technology.Design and
transmission of design (Artemidorus papyrus).
Presentations:
{a). Alexander Mosaic – copy and context}
{b). Artemidoros papyrus}
{c.) Material techniques}
Essay: Either: To what extent and in what respects, if any, is the individual artist a
proper focus of analysis in the history of Greek painting?
(Note: Students who focussed on Polygnotus, or Pausias for their
presentation essays should be sure not to rely heavily on the same material for this
essay).
Required reading:
Copies
*Cohen, Ada. 1997. The Alexander Mosaic: Stories of Victory and Defeat. Cambridge.
Pp. 51-82 “The question of the copy”, 175-199 “The mosaic in Roman
context” (YATES P145 COH)
Beard, Mary and Henderson, John. 2001. Classical Art from Greece to Rome.
(Oxford), pp. 11-64 “Painting antiquity” (quite short, mainly pics) (ART F5
BEA; YATES A5 BEA)
Bergmann, B. 1995. “Greek masterpieces and Roman recreative fictions”, Harvard
Studies in Classical Philology 97: 79-120 (JSTOR)
*Trimble, J. 2002. “Greek myth, gender and social structure in a Roman house: two
paintings of Achilles in Pompeii”, 225-248 in Gazda, E. ed. The Ancient Art
of Emulation. Studies in Artistic Originality and Tradition from the Present to
Classical Antiquity. Ann Arbor, U. Michigan. (YATES QUARTOS M5 GAZ
- overnight)
Ling, Roger. 1991. Roman Painting. (Cambridge). Pp. 128-35
Barringer. Judith. 1994. “The mythological paintings in the Macellum at Pompeii”,
Classical Antiquity 13: 149-66 (copies of 4thC Gk paintings – Io, Penelope)
Materials/techniques: technical analysis
Artists
Allison, PM. 1991. ‘Workshops and pattern-books’, Kölner Jahrbuch für Vor- und
Frühgeschichte 24.4: 79-84. Internationales Kolloquium zur Römischen
Wandmalerei, Koln. 2023 September 1989. (Not in UCL; JT box)
Anderson, Flemming Gorm. 1985 “Pompeian painting: some aspects of creation”, in
Analacta Romana Instiuti Danici XIV: 113-128 (Not in UCL; JT box)
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
26
Brisson, L. and F. Frontisi-Ducroux 1992. "Gods and artisans: Hephaistos, Athena,
Daedalus", pp. 84-90 in Y. Bonnefoy ed. Greek and Egyptian Mythologies. (TC
MAIN 1051)
Burford, A. 1972. Craftsmen in Greek and Roman Society, , ch 1; ch, 2 pp. "Greek and
Roman Society; ch 6, pp. "Concepts of the nature of craftsmanship". (INSTARCH
K BUR; ANCHIST M64 BUR [REF])
Murray, P. 1989. "Poetic genius and its classical origins", pp. 9-31 in idem ed Genius.
(PSYCH K54 MUR; MAIN LIBRARY TC 1024)
®Nahm, M. C. 1947. "The theological background of the idea of the artist as creator",
Journal of the History of Ideas 8.3, 363ff (Online)
Tanner, Jeremy. 1999. “Culture, social structure and status of visual artist in classical
Greece”, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 45: 136-75 (JSTOR)
®Wolff, J. 1981. The Social Production of Art, ch2, pp. 26-48 "The social production of
art", ch 6, 117-136 "The death of the author" (ANTH E10 WO2)
Vernant, J-P. 1983/1955. "Work and nature in ancient Greece", pp. 248-70 in Myth and
Thought amongst the Greeks. (CLASSICS GA 58 VER)
Material practices:
Allison, PM. 1991. ‘Workshops and pattern-books’, Kölner Jahrbuch für Vor- und
Frühgeschichte 24.4: 79-84. Internationales Kolloquium zur Römischen
Wandmalerei, Koln. 2023 September 1989. (Not in UCL; ask JJT)
Anderson, Flemming Gorm. 1985 “Pompeian painting: some aspects of creation”, in
Analacta Romana Instiuti Danici XIV: 113-128 (Not in UCL; ask JJT)
*Elsner, Jas. 2009. “P. Artemid. The Images”, 35-50 in Brodersen, Kai and Elsner, Jas
eds. 2009. Images and Texts on the ‘Artemidorus Papyrus’. PAPYROLOGY PA 5
ART
Adornato, G. 2009. “Goya, Bramante and others on P. Artemid.?”, 51-56 in Brodersen,
Kai and Elsner, Jas eds. 2009. Images and Texts on the ‘Artemidorus Papyrus’.
PAPYROLOGY PA 5 ART
*Kakoulli, Ioanna. 2009. Greek Painting Techniques and Materials from the Fourth
Century to the First Century BC. Chapters 2-5. INST ARCH KN 1 Qto KAK.
Settis, Salvatore. 2006. “Il Papiro di Artemidoro: un libro di bottega e la storia dell’arte
antica”, 21-65 in Claudio Galllazzi and Salvatore Settis eds Le tre vite del Papiro
di Artemidoro. Voci e sguardi dall’ Egitto greco-romano. Electa, Napoli. (MAIN
PAPYROLOGY QUARTOS P8 BRI)
Adornato, Gianfranco. 2006. “Animali, teste, mani, piedi. L’arte del disegno e le pratiche
di bottega nel mondo antico”, ibid. 110-123.
Brekoulaki, H. and Perdikatsis, V. 2002. “Ancient painting on Macedonian funerary
monuments, IV-II C BC: a Comparative Study on the Use of Colour”, 147- 154 in
Tiverios, M.A. ed. Color in Ancient Greece .[Plus bibl; excellent] (YATES A6
TIV; IoA Issue Desk TIV)
Cipriani, M. et al. 2002. “The diver’s tomb: mineralogical and petrographical features”,
179-90 in in Tiverios, M.A. ed. Color in Ancient Greece .[Plus bibl; excellent]
(YATES A6 TIV; IoA Issue Desk TIV)
Supplementary reading:
Many of the required materials from earlier classes are potentially relevant to
this topic, so worth reviewing those readings. (Note: Students who focussed on
Polygnotus, or Pausias for their presentation essays should be sure not to rely heavily
on the same material for this essay).
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
27
Wesenberg, B. 1988. “Zur Io des Nikias in den pompeianischen Wandbildern” in
Kanon: Festchr. E. Berger. 344ff. Ant. Kunst Beiheft 15. (Io as late classical).
Stewart, A. 1979. "Sculptors and sculpture", pp. 101-114 in Attika: Athenian Sculpture of
the Hellenistic Age. (YATES M50 STE)
Stewart, A. F. 1990. Greek Sculpture: an Exploration, part I, pp. 19-99 "The sculptor's
world". (Kind of model for range of issues one might think about – no comparable
study of “the painter’s world”) (YATES QUARTOS M20 STE)
Tanner, Jeremy. 2006. The Invention of Art History in Ancient Greece. Religion, Society
and Artistic Rationalisation. 141-204 “Culture, social structure and artistic agency
in classical Greece”, exp. 141-9, 158-170. (YATES A5 TAN; MAIN – ART A8
TAN).
{Heinich, Natalie. 1993. Du Peintre à l’Artiste: artisans et académiciens à l’Age
Classique. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.}
ARCL3083 GkP1 Handbook, 2016
28
APPENDIX – IOA PROCEDURES
INSTITUTE OF ARCHAELOGY COURSEWORK PROCEDURES
General policies and procedures concerning courses and coursework, including submission procedures,
assessment criteria, and general resources, are available in your Degree Handbook and on the following
website: http://wiki.ucl.ac.uk/display/archadmin. It is essential that you read and comply with these.
Note that some of the policies and procedures will be different depending on your status (e.g.
undergraduate, postgraduate taught, affiliate, graduate diploma, intercollegiate, interdepartmental). If in
doubt, please consult your course co-ordinator.
GRANTING OF EXTENSIONS:
New UCL-wide regulations with regard to the granting of extensions for coursework have
been introduced with effect from the 2015-16 session. Full details will be circulated to all
students and will be made available on the IoA intranet. Note that Course Coordinators are
no longer permitted to grant extensions. All requests for extensions must be submitted on a
new UCL form, together with supporting documentation, via Judy Medrington’s office
and will then be referred on for consideration. Please be aware that the grounds that are now
acceptable are limited. Those with long-term difficulties should contact UCL Student
Disability Services to make special arrangements.