This pdf of your paper in Athenian Potters and Painters II belongs to the publishers Oxbow Books and it is their copyright.

As author you are licenced to make up to 50 offprints from it, but beyond that you may not publish it on the World Wide Web until three years from publication (September 2012), unless the site is a limited access intranet (password protected). If you have queries about this please contact the editorial department at Oxbow Books (editorial@oxbowbooks.com).

Athenian Pottersand Painters

Volume II

This volume is dedicated to Michalis Tiverios

The honoree at the conference (Photo: June Allison)

Athenian Pottersand Painters

Volume II

edited by

John H. Oakleyand Olga Palagia

Oxbow BooksOxford and Oakville

Published byOxbow Books, Oxford

© Oxbow Books and the individual authors, 2009

ISBN 978-1-84217-350-3

A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library

This book is available direct from

Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK(Phone: 01865-241249, Fax: 01865-794449

and

The David Brown Book CompanyPO Box 511, Oakville, CT 06779, USA

Phone:860-945-9329; Fax: 860-945-9468

or from our website

www.oxbowbooks.com

Printed in Great Britain byThe Short Run Press, Exeter

Contents

Foreword vii

1 DionysosinContext:TwoAtticRed-figureKratersoftheEarlyFourthCenturyBC Amalia Avramidou 1

2 AtticRed-figurePotteryfromOlympia Martin Bentz 11

3 Spruce, Pine, or Fir – Which did Sinis Prefer? Elke and Hans-Joachim Böhr 18

4 Inside/Outside:RevisitingaChousinTheMetropolitanMuseumofArt Sheramy D. Bundrick 27

5 Herakles,AthenaundChthoniaGorgo:MythosundKunstindenTöpferwerkstättendesKerameikos in Athen Stamatis Fritzilas 36

6 SeeingtheImage:ConstructingaData-BaseoftheImageryonAtticPotteryfrom635to300BC Filippo and Innocenza Giudice 48

7 Nέοφωςσεπαλαιάευρήματα.ΔύοκλασικοίτάφοιαπότοοικόπεδοΣαπουντζάκηστηνΟδόΠειραιώς ΓιώργοςΓ.Καββαδίας–ΆνναΛάγια 63

8 TheJenaWorkshopReconsidered:SomeNewThoughtsonOldFinds Kleopatra Kathariou 73

9 TheIconographyofMadnessinAtticVase-Painting Eurydice Kefalidou 90

10 Women and Deer: from Athens to Corinth and Back Sonia Klinger 100

11 The Sky as hippodromes–AgonisticMotiveswithinAstralRepresentations Bettina Kratzmueller 108

12 AnAristocratintheAthenianKerameikos:TheKleophradesPainter=Megakles Bettina Kreuzer 116

13 SourcingStories:theEmbassytoAchillesonAtticPottery Elizabeth Langridge-Noti 125

14 IconographicalDivergenciesinLateAthenianBlack-Figure:TheJudgementofParis Anna A. Lemos 134

15 WheelwithoutChariot–AMotifinAtticVase-Painting Adrienne Lezzi-Hafter 147

vi Contents

16 EroticImagesonAtticVases:MarketsandMeanings Kathleen M. Lynch 159

17 Nikosthenic Pyxides between Etruria and Greece Claire L. Lyons 166

18 CoupesattiquesàfiguresrougestrouvéesàThasos Jean-Jacques Maffre 181

19 OldAgeinAthenianVase-Painting Susan B. Matheson 192

20 PrometheusoderAtlas?ZurDeutungderAmphoraMünchen1540 Heide Mommsen 201

21 The‘Unheroic’Corpse:Re-readingtheSarpedonKrater Jenifer Neils 212

22 AtticImportsatMarion:PreliminaryResultsofthePrincetonUniversityArchaeologicalExpedition to Polis Chrysochous, Cyprus J. Michael Padgett 220

23 The Relocation of Potters and the Dissemination of Style: Athens, Corinth, Ambrakia,andtheAgrinionGroup John K. Papadopoulos 232

24 White-groundLekythoiinAthenianPrivateCollections:SomeIconographicObservations Maria Pipili 241

25 EarlyRed-figureinContext Susan I. Rotroff 250

26 TopographiesofCultandAthenianCivicIdentityonTwoMasterpiecesofAtticRed-Figure H.A. Shapiro 261

27 TheInventionoftheFemaleNude:Zeuxis,Vase-Painting,andtheKneelingBather Robert F. Sutton 270

28 Aγγεία-αναθήματααπότοΜεγάλοΕλευσινιακόιερό MιχάληςΤιβέριος 280

29 TheMeidiasPainterandtheJenaPainterRevisited Olga V. Tugusheva 291

30 MortalsFacingtheGoddess:ThoughtsonthePanathenaicAmphoraofLydosinFlorence andsomePseudo-PanathenaicVases Panos Valavanis 297

31 PicturingPottersandPainters Dyfri Williams 306 32 Σκηνέςγυναικωνίτησε«άγνωστηςχρήσηςσκεύος»τουτέλουςτου5ουαι.π.Χ. ΆγγελοςΖαρκάδας 318

Colour Plates 329

Foreword

Thepapersinthisvolumearebasedonthelecturesgivenatthe international conference Athenian Potters and Painters II, which was held in the American School of Classical StudiesatAthensonMarch28–30,2007.Thesubjectofthe conference was the study of Athenian painted pottery, the finest ware in the ancientMediterranean during theArchaic and Classical periods of Greece. Athenian vase-paintingsarenotonlythesinglemostimportantsourceofimagesofGreekeverydaylifeandmythology,butalsoacrucial dating tool for archaeologists.Yet, even thoughnewexamplesofthiscity’sbeautifulblack-andred-figurevases are found constantly in Greece, Italy and elsewhere, only this conference and its predecessor, Athenian Potters and Painters, held at the American School of Classical Studies in 1994, ever focused on this pottery. The rationale forbothconferenceswasthatit isbesttoorganizetheminAthens,wherethepotterywasmade.Holdingasecondconferenceonthesubjectisjustifiedbythelargeamountofnewmaterialandbythedynamicappearanceofayoungergenerationofscholarsdealingwiththesubject. Thirty-three people were invited to speak, eleven of whomwereGreek.Oneofthegoalsoftheconferencewastobringtogetheradiversegroupofscholarswhovariedin age, nationality and the approaches they took to thestudyofGreekvases.WespecificallyinvitedanumberofyoungGreekandAmericanscholarstoparticipate,sincethe earlier conference had served as a springboard intotheprofessionforseveralyoungscholars.Thefollowingcountries were also represented by speakers: Austria, Belgium,England,France,Germany,Israel,Italy,Russia,Switzerland,andtheUnitedStates. Anotherofourgoalswastorepresentasmanydifferentapproaches to the study of Attic painted pottery and as much new, important unpublished material as possible. Subjectareasincludednotonlythestudyofpottersandpainters and their workshops, but also the study of shape,

ornament,subjectmatter,chronology,export,excavationpottery,context,and the influenceofAthenianvasesonpotteryfromotherregionsoftheMediterraneanandviceversa. The conference took place in Cotsen Hall, the new auditorium of the American School of Classical Studies atAthens.WeareverygratefultoStephenV.Tracy,thethen Director of the American School, and other members of the staff for their support, particularly Pandelis Panos, whoprovidedcrucialhelpwithraisingthefundstoholdtheconference.Forfinancialsupportweareindebtednotonly to the American School, but also to Alpha Bank, whoseverygenerous subsidy allowedus tohold afirstclass conference. The conference and this volume are dedicated to Michalis Tiverios. He, as the honorees of the previousconference – Erika Simon and John Boardman – has greatlycontributed to thestudyofGreekvase-painting,nowonlybyhispublications,butalsothroughthestudentshe has produced and placed across the world. Like his predecessors,heisaninternationalfigureofgreatrenownandaverygenerouscolleaguetousall. The abbreviations and notation system can be found in the Archäologischer Anzeiger 1997, 611–628. Wechose to use the same system as the earlier volume for continuity and for its succinct nature. The abbreviations of ancient literary sources are those of the Oxford Classical Dictionary3(1996).Thefollowingadditionalabbreviationsare used:

ABV J.D. Beazley, Attic Black-Figure Vase-Painters (1956).

ARV2 J.D. Beazley, Attic Red-Figure Vase-Painters2 (1963).

Para J.D.Beazley,Paralipomena (1971).BAdd2 T.H. Carpenter, Beazley Addenda2 (1989).

John H. OakleyOlga Palagia

The starting point for the thoughts that follow was the Panathenaic prize amphora of Lydos in Florence that was found in Orvieto and dates to the decade 550/40 BC (Fig. 1; Color Pl. 23).2 It is one of the so-called pre-canonical amphorae, made before their iconography was standardised in 540–535 BC.3 The columns with the cocks have not yet made their appearance on the main side, while an agonistic inscription is on the rear of the vase. In front of Athena Promachos a nude bearded man is depicted, who offers the goddess a ribbon with his left hand.4 According to Beazley’s interpretation, which is unanimously accepted, he is the owner of the victorious chariot depicted on the rear and offers the goddess the ribbon – the symbol of victory – in thanks for her aid.5

There are some distinctive elements in the iconography of the main side, and this is the only Panathenaic prize amphora, in which another figure – and indeed a mortal – appears in front of Athena.6 The fact that an Athenian vase-painter dares or, more probably, is obliged to depict a mortal facing the goddess on these public vases would be unique, were it not for the fact that, five hundred years later, another Athenian painter created a similar representation on a partially preserved Panathenaic amphora from the first century BC. Here a male figure stands beside Athena, who, according to the interpretation suggested by D. Tsouklidou, depicts the Roman general Mark Antony. He visited Athens in 38 BC and took part in the Panathenaic Games.7

The other distinctive element of the main side of the Lydos amphora is that the mortal is nude, despite being the victor in a chariot-race. Furthermore, he is shown at the same size as Athena and fills nearly half the panel,

Κάλλιστον αἱ μεγαλοπόλιες Ἀθᾶναι προοίμιον Ἀλκμανιδᾶν εὐρυσθενεῖ γενεᾶι κρηπίδ’ ἀοιδὰν ἵπποισι βαλέσθαι.

(Pind. Pyth., VII,1–3)1

Panos Valavanis

Fig. 1. Panathenaic prize-amphora of Lydos in Florence no. 97779. Photo: after Ν. Σταμπολίδης – Γ. Τασούλας (eds), Μεγάλη Ελλάς. Αθλητισμός και Ολυμπισμός στην περιφέρεια του Ελληνικού κόσμου (2004) 213 no. 134.

30 Mortals Facing the Goddess: Thoughts on the Panathenaic Amphora of Lydos in Florence and some Pseudo-Panathenaic Vases

298 Panos Valavanis

leaving the other half for the goddess. Generally speaking, the two figures are treated as equals.8

A similar iconography with mortals facing the goddess is found on four pseudo-Panathenaics dating from the third quarter of the sixth century BC.9 The earliest of these, dating to 550–540, is in Amsterdam. On the main side two men wearing himatia are depicted to either side of Athena, who, surprisingly, faces right (Fig. 2).10 The figure in front of the goddess, though moving to the right, turns his head around and addresses her, raising his right hand.

The other three vases are products of the workshops of the Swing and the Princeton Painters.11 Two of them are the only Panathenaics on which women are depicted. On the one in Bonn, a woman approaches Athena, holding a wreath in her raised hand (Fig. 3);12 on the other which was formerly in Basel (Fig. 4; Color Pl. 24A-B),13 a woman holding a wreath addresses the goddess in the presence of Hermes. She has been interpreted as a relative of the victor of the boxing contest depicted on the other side.14 On the last vase, the well-known amphora in London B 144 (Fig. 5), the mortal is shown behind the goddess, while Hermes is now in front of her.15 This mortal has been interpreted as the owner of the victorious horse depicted on the rear, the name of which is given as Dysniketos by the inscription issuing from the mouth of the herald.16

The Historical Background of the Representations The outburst of athletic subjects in the iconography of this period has long been associated with the reorganisation of the Panathenaia in 566/5 BC, and attests to the enthusiastic response to the new festival and the popularity of the distinctive shape of vase created for it.17 So far, two related iconographical types have been noted: the first and most numerous is the holding of the contest itself and the second, considerably smaller group, is the depiction of the victor with his prizes, usually tripods.18 To these, we may now add another small group, comprising the five vases we have just examined. Their message, which the vase-painter highlights, is gratitude to the goddess for her assistance in the victory. In what follows, we shall attempt to see why the depiction of this subject is confined to the brief period of the third quarter of the sixth century, or an even shorter interval, and why the vase-painters render it with the distinctive features just noted.

After the reorganisation of the Panathenaic games, the entire city of Athens appears to have come under the influence of the great festival and its contests. For the members of the aristocratic clans, in particular, those who participated actively in the contests, this activity had other parameters, since the pursuit and achievement

Fig. 2. Pseudo-PA in Amsterdam no. 11845. Photo: after Bentz 2001, pl. 30,1–2.

29930 Mortals Facing the Goddess

Fig. 3. Pseudo-PA in Bonn, no. 43. Photo: after Shapiro pl. 13a–b.

Fig. 4. Pseudo-PA formerly in Basel. Photo: after D. Vanhove (ed.), Olympism in Antiquity. Olympic Museum Lausanne (1996) 46 no. 63.

300 Panos Valavanis

of victory was one of the most important expressions of political rivalry.19 A victory in the Panhellenic games and in the Panathenaia was the springboard for political advancement, expansion of political influence, and pursuit of high office.20

We are quite well informed about these events by the ancient authors, particularly Herodotus, and also by dedications in the sanctuaries made by victors. Leaving aside the victories won by Athenian aristocrats at the Olympic games of the first half of the sixth century,21 we come to the Panathenaia of 554 or 550 BC, when two members of the Alkmeonid family were victorious in two different events: Alkmeonides I son of Alkmeon I, probably in an equestrian event, and one of his younger brothers (?), probably in the pentathlon.22 These two nobles jointly dedicated a column on the Acropolis, on top of which stood a metal tripod or cauldron.23 A little later, the former of the two was also victorious in a four-horse chariot-race, possibly at the Panathenaia. This victory resulted in a columnar dedication bearing a statue of Apollo in the sanctuary of Apollo Ptoios in Boeotia.24

Herodotus (6.103) preserves another characteristic example of indirect political rivalry in Athens, based on athletic victories. It is the well-known story of Kimon, a member of the Philaid family, famous for its horses. In the third quarter of the sixth century, Kimon won

three successive victories at the Olympic Games, with consequences for his private life that were different on each occasion, but which are indicative of the political climate and the role played by athletic victories in Athens at his time.25

All these events enable us to comprehend the atmosphere of Archaic Athens and reveal the significant role played by the games in the politics of the city.26 Especially for the families of Alkmeonidai and Philaidai, success at the games was a political tool, used even from exile in seeking leadership or at least influence.27 In this spirit, then, we can also understand the special iconography of the Panathenaic amphorae under discussion, which probably expresses the very specific political environment of this period.28

The IconographyOn the basis of the above, and also of the rule that in

Archaic iconography it is not the content of an event that is important but the social class of those involved in it,29 we may speculate as follows. When the Athenian vase-painters made these images, they had in mind specific members of the ruling class of their city.30 By placing them on the main side of the vases in a position of equal status to that of the patron goddess of the Athenian state, as on the Lydos and the Amsterdam amphorae, they projected their

Fig. 5. Pseudo-PA in London no. B 144. Photo: after Ε. Böhr, Der Schaukelmaler (1982) pl. 170.

30130 Mortals Facing the Goddess

important, leading role in the society and politics of the time.31 This daring depiction can be more easily interpreted in the case of the pseudo-PAs, while for the prize amphora of Lydos, it can be understood only in the frame of the pre-canonical Panathenaic amphorae. Moreover, the nudity of the victor of the chariot-race in the presence of Athena on the Lydos amphora is comparable with the nudity of the kouroi of the period, as Beazley suggests,32 obviously because this was the best iconographical way to promote the victor’s kalokagathia, the most important value of Archaic society.33

In connection with the presence of Hermes, we may make the following suggestion. The internal relationship between this god and Athena has not yet (in my opinion) been established.34 His presence on two of our vases has been accounted for by his role as an intermediary between mortals and gods, either because he announces the victory to the goddess, or because he introduces the mortals to her, possibly as a divine counterpart to the human herald on the other side.35 But what does ‘to introduce the mortals to the goddess’ mean? Does this perhaps denote Hermes’s intervention in elevating the victor to the status of a hero? Can we trace the first signs of the heroisation of victors in this iconography?36 It is noteworthy that at this precise period, the third quarter of the sixth century, statues of victors were the first statues of mortals that began to be erected in the sanctuary of Olympia, a privilege that had belonged before exclusively to the gods.37

Let us now turn to the two vases on which women are present before Athena. As relatives of the victors, they are also female members of the ruling class of Archaic Athens, expressing their gratitude to the goddess for her help. Just as the victor on Lydos’s amphora was compared with a kouros, so the ladies or the maidens on these vases may be also compared with the statues of korai, some of which hold a wreath in their hands.38

Concerning their iconography, the images on the two pseudo-PAs could also be fragments from a victory procession, and, why not, from the Panathenaic procession itself, in which the victors and their relatives undoubtedly occupied a dominant position, holding the prizes (wreaths, ribbons or more usually branches) and brandishing them upright, like the man with the tripod on the amphora of Dysniketos and the one in front of the horse on the amphora by the Mastos Painter in Nauplion.39

As to the purpose of these pseudo-PAs, we may speculate as follows:40 a victory won by a male member of the family undoubtedly reflected favourably on all the other members of it.41 The appearance of female figures on vases connected with contests or in victory scenes transforms these vases into objects of ostentation, commissioned in order to record the contribution of the women, too, to the achievements, and the corresponding glory stemming from them. If they were ordered for dedication in a sanctuary, they must have been dedicated by the women. If they were ordered for a celebration party, as Webster asserts,42 this will certainly have been a party in

which the women of the family also took part, and not the usual all-male affair. If they were ordered for burial gifts, they must have been placed in the tombs of these women. In any case, the objective of these vases is to display prominently the honour reflected by an athletic victory on the entire family, particularly its female members.43

‘Male’ Subjects on ‘Female’ VasesGenerally speaking, the presence of women on Panathenaic vases, a shape of totally ‘male’ character, is curious, but it acquires special interest if it is compared with the opposite case: the presence of equestrian and athletic iconography on vases of ‘female’ character. The number of these vases was proportionately very small. The figures given by Webster are indicative:44 of 730 black- and red-figure vases with horsemen and chariots, only 5 are ‘female’ shapes: one pyxis, two alabastra and two tripod kothons. Furthermore, of 1567 vases with athletic scenes, only 5 are vases of ‘female’ shapes: two pyxides, three alabastra and two squat lekythoi. Webster merely notes this fact and finds it entirely natural.45

Since Webster’s calculations, the number of ‘female’ vases bearing ‘male’ subjects known have increased and are now predominantly pyxides and to a lesser extent lekanides with depictions of chariot-races.46 The best-known is the pyxis with the name of Stesagoras from a tomb near Brauron, which, as H. Mommsen has shown, is not by Exekias but by the Epitimos Painter.47 This vase, along with a cup by the same painter, again associated with the artist by Mommsen,48 attests to the fact that the Philaid family engaged in the breeding of horses and competitive events, as we noted above.49 The vase is surely a special commission, but we are not able to uncover more details of the case, since we have no evidence for the sex of the occupant of the tomb, or for the other vases contained in it.50

The phenomenon of mainly black-figure pyxides bearing male subjects has already engaged the interest of scholars. It had already been perceived by Roberts, who said that ‘it seems clear that the family pride was being extended to a female member of the family’.51 More generally, Roberts concludes that since the repertoire commonly found on other vases is also found in pyxides, ‘there seems to be no realization yet that the pyxis requires a special iconography of its own’.52 Μercati53 distinguishes many more ‘male’ subjects on various types of pyxides54 and reaches the conclusion, on the basis of the difference in iconography between black-figure and red-figure vases, that in the Archaic period and down to 490 BC pyxides may have been used also by men for their own toiletry items.55 A similar conclusion is reached by S Schmidt and by J. Oakley in a forthcoming paper on Attic red-figure Type D pyxides.56

But the type and the number of ‘female’ vases, where ‘male’ subjects are depicted is greater, including epinetra and alabastra.57 Recent research usually explains this by claiming that the opposite sex is an attractive subject

302 Panos Valavanis

for vessels intended for gifts.58 The other explanation of the phenomenon is that some of these shapes are not gender-specific vases, but they could have also served as real gifts or as votive and burial offerings in relation to both genders.59 The same idea was recently expressed for the aryballoi, along with the dispute about the exclusive ‘male’ character of the strigil, from the fourth century BC onwards.60 All these new ideas have changed our perceptions about the ‘male’ or ‘female’, raising new questions about the use – practical and symbolic – of some objects of everyday life and shedding new light on the world of the Athenians of the Classical period.

Returning to our original subject and concerning the exclusive connection of the Panathenaic amphorae with the games in that early period, we cannot interpret our pseudo-PAs in this light. The small number of these representations and the very short period of their appearance show that their vase-painters were directly inspired by contemporary, individual events.61 The most probable is that they have been commissioned especially by or for the female relatives of the victors, either as gifts for them or as separate dedications made by them.62 In any case, they were objects of ostentation, ‘advertising’ the glory of the whole family.

AcknowledgementsI am grateful to M. Tiverios, not only for reading the text of this article and making useful suggestions, but also because I have enjoyed for more than 25 years his friendship and help in all my work. I also want to thank H. Mommsen, D. Tsouklidou, J. Oakley and E. Baziotopoulou for help, information and discussion. For the translation I am indebted to D. Hardy.

AbbreviationsIn addition to the usual abbreviations, the following are used in this article: Bentz 1998 M . B e n t z , P a n a t h e n ä i s c h e

Preisamphoren, AntK Beiheft 18 (1998).Bentz 2001 M. Bentz – N. Eschbach (eds),

Panathenaïka. Symposion zu den panathenäischen Preisamphoren, Rauischholzhausen 25.11. – 29.11.1998 (2001).

Κεφαλίδου E. Κεφαλίδου, Νικητής. Εικονογραφική μελέτη του αρχαίου ελληνικού αθλητισμού (1996).

Kyle D.G. Kyle, Athletics in Ancient Athens2 (1993).

Μανακίδου Ε. Μανακίδου, Παραστάσεις με άρματα. 8ος-5ος αι. π.Χ. (1994).

Mommsen Η. Mommsen, AntK 45, 2002, 27–38.Neils 1992 J. Neils (ed.), Goddess and Polis. The

Panathenaic Festival in Ancient Athens (1992).

Neils 2007 J. Neils, in: O. Palagia – A. Choremi-Spetsieri (eds), The Panathenaic Games (2007).

Nicholson N.J. Nicholson, Aristocracy and Athletics in Archaic and Classical Greece (2005).

Shapiro H.A. Shapiro, Art and Cult under the Tyrants in Athens (1989).

Notes 1 “The mighty city of Athens is the fairest prelude of songs,

which the widely powerful race of the Alcmaeonidae can lay as a foundation of odes in honor of their steeds” (Transl: Sir John Sandys, Loeb [1968] 256–257).

2 Florence, Museo Archeologico Nazionale no. 97779. ABV 110,33. It is generally dated in the decade 550–540 BC. M. Τιβέριος, O Λυδός και το έργο του (1976) 74. 84. 131 no. 45 pls 66b-67; R. Brandt, Acta Arch 8, 1978, 4 no. 20; 11; Κεφαλίδου, 147. 229; Bentz 1998, 124 no. 6.008 pls 6–7; M.B. Moore, Black-figured Greek Vases of the Archaic Period: Ca 620–480 BC (diss. New York University, 1971) 48 no. A 268, dates it back to the decade 560–550 BC. Cf. also Ν. Σταμπολίδης – Γ. Τασούλας (eds), Μεγάλη Ελλάς. Αθλητισμός και Ολυμπισμός στην περιφέρεια του Ελληνικού κόσμου (2004) 213 no. 134 (Α.Μ. Esposito).

3 For the pre-canonical amphorae see Bentz 1998, 41. 59; M. Tiverios, in: O. Palagia – A. Choremi-Spetsieri (eds), The Panathenaic Games (2007) 5.

4 For the question whether the Athena on PAs is a depiction of a statue see Shapiro 29; Bentz 1998, 41; P. Marx, AntK 46, 2003, 14 with n. 3. For the Athena on this vase see Marx, supra 20.

5 J.D. Beazley, The Development of Attic Black-Figure2 (1986) 114; Shapiro 29.

6 Beazley (supra n. 5) 148 and n. 16. 7 Δ. Τσουκλίδου, in: Πεπραγμένα του Διεθνούς

Αρχαιολογικού Συμποσίου ‘Η Αθήνα κατά τη Ρωμαϊκή Εποχή. Πρόσφατες ανακαλύψεις. Νέες έρευνες, 19–21/10/2006’, forthcoming.

8 A distinctive feature of the rear is the fawn skin worn by the charioteer over his long white chiton. Κεφαλίδου 147.

9 Beazley (supra n. 5) 148 n. 16; Shapiro 32–36; Bentz 1998, 41 n. 193.

10 Amsterdam, Allard Pierson Museum 11845; Bentz 2001, 113 and n. 18; 177 no. 1 pl. 30,1–2. On the rear there is a depiction of a sprint. For Athena to the right, see also R. Lindner, in: Greek Vases in the J. Paul Getty Museum.

11 Shapiro, 35; Bentz 2001, 113. For these painters and their workshops see Ε. Böhr, Der Schaukelmaler (1982) esp. 103–112.

12 Shapiro, 33 pl. 13a-b; H. Kotsidou, Die musischen Agone der Panathenäen in archaischer und klassischer Zeit (1991) 294 no. 3; Bentz 2001, 185 no. 164. On the rear there is a depiction of a music contest. Cf. H.A. Shapiro, in: A. Verbanck-Piérard – D. Viviers (eds), Culture et cité. L’avènement d’Athènes à l’époque archaïque. Actes du colloque international (1995) 128 fig. 1.

13 Böhr (supra n. 11) 92 no. 91 pl. 89 (Swing Painter); Shapiro, 33 pl. 12b; Kotsidou (supra n. 12) 295 no. 25; D. Vanhove (ed.), Olympism in Antiquity. Olympic Museum

30330 Mortals Facing the Goddess

Lausanne (1996) 46 no. 63; Bentz 2001, 184 no. 152; Neils 2007, 47 n. 29.

14 The boxers are fighting to either side of a PA, watched by referees or spectators at the sides. Shapiro, 33. For spectators at athletic contests see most recently M.D. Stansbury-O’ Donnell, Vase Painting, Gender and Social Identity in Archaic Athens (2006) 19–23.

15 Böhr (supra n. 11) 110 pl. 170 (Circle of the Princeton Painter); Shapiro, 32 pl. 12a; Ε. Maul-Mandelartz, Griechische Reiterdarstellungen in agonistischem Zusammenhang (1990) 120–129; Kotsidou (supra n. 12) 295 no. 23; Κεφαλίδου, 147. 226 no. I2; Kyle, 200–201 no. A21; Mommsen, 27; Bentz 2001, 189 no. 238; Neils 2007, 46; Nicholson, 104–107. In LIMC II (1984), s.v. Athena (P. Demargne) the vase is cited and illustrated twice: On the first occasion (969 no. 119 pl. 716) it is dated to 550–540 BC and on the second (1001 no. 493 pl. 755) to 540–530. The vase is also cited twice by Neils 2007, the first on page 46 n. 28, as Br. Mus. B 144 (as a work of the Swing Painter [Beazley]) and the second on page 49 n. 41, as Br. Mus. 1849.11–22.1 (Circle of the Princeton Painter [Böhr]).

16 For the view that the male figure behind the goddess may be Zeus see CVA British Museum 2 pl. 6; Κεφαλίδου, 226; Bentz 2001, 189 no. 238; Neils 2007, 49.

17 Beazley (supra n. 5) 29; Тιβέριος (supra n. 2) 43; Shapiro, 35; Bentz 1998, 113. Stansbury-O’ Donnell (supra n. 14) 93–94.

18 For vases that shift the focus from the game itself to the owner of the horse or the chariot see Mommsen 27–28; Nicholson 106–107. Especially for this iconography on the Panathenaic Amphorae see D. Kyle, in: J. Neils (ed.), Worshipping Athena. Panathenaia and Parthenon (1996) 107; Κεφαλίδου, 151–152.

19 For the use of the games for political purposes see Κyle, 155–168; J.K. Davies, Wealth and the Power of Wealth in Classical Athens (1984) 31–36; Μανακίδου, 95. Most recently R.T. Neer, in: H.A. Shapiro (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Archaic Greece (2007) 225–264, with previous bibliography.

20 Kyle, 111. M. Stahl, Aristokraten und Tyrannen im archaischen Athen (1987) 86–89; Μανακίδου, 96–97.

21 As early as the Olympic Games of 592BC, the victor was Alkmeon I son of Megakles I, while Miltiades III son of Kypselos emerged victorious at the Olympiad of 560 or 548. See Davies (supra n. 19) 371–372; Kyle, 196 no. A5; 208 no. A46; Nicholson, 28. See the recent proposal by U. Knigge (AM 121, 2006, 127–163) for the identification of the tombs of Alkmeon and his son Megakles in tumulus G in the Kermeikos.

22 [Κράτι]ος Αλκμέωνος Ι. See Kyle, 205–206 no. Α38 and Davies (supra n. 19) 372–373.

23 A.E. Raubitschek, Dedications from the Athenian Acropolis (1949) no. 317; C.M. Keesling, The Votive Statues from the Athenian Acropolis (2003) 66; P. Themelis, in: Palagia – Choremi-Spetsieri (supra n. 3) 30.

24 This dedication by an Athenian victor in the Ptoon has led scholars to make some interesting suggestions. See J. Ducat, Les Kouroi du Ptoon. Le sanctuaire d’ Apollon Ptoieus à l’ époque archaïque (1971) 242ff. no. 14; L. Jeffery, LSAG (1990)2 73 no. 30; A. Schachter, in: M. Osborne – S. Hornblower (eds), Ritual, Finance, Politics (1994) 291–306,

esp. 294–299; D. Donos, Studien zu Säulen- und Pfeiler-Monumenten der archaischen Zeit (diss. Frankfurt/Main, 2003) 348. 404; Nicholson, 53–57. 229–230.

25 Kyle, 158. 204 no. A34; Stahl (supra n. 20) 116–120; C. Mann, Athlet und Polis im archaischen und frühklassischen Griechenland (2001) 82–85; Mommsen, 34–36; F. Jünger, Gespann und Herrschaft (2006) 192–202.

26 Davies (supra n. 19) xx; Kyle, 157; Μανακίδου, 95–98. 27 The absence of Peisistratos from athletic contests is striking.

Although he made a great contribution to the development of athletics in Athens (foundation of the three gymnasia, etc.), there is no evidence that he participated either in Panhellenic games or in the Panathenaia. Peisistratos himself was not descended from a family that reared horses (Μανακίδου, 96 n. 329), but the names he gave his sons are a clear indication of his strong desire for them to engage in this aristocratic activity. (For the children of Peisistratos see Davies [supra n. 19] 444–452). It seems as if he felt powerful enough in a time when the other aristocrats tried to raise their profile through participating in the games. The only evidence for the participation of the Peisistratids in the games is the dedication by Hipparchos of a tripod in the Sanctuary of Apollo Ptoios, probably after a victory in the Panathenaia. See Schachter (supra n. 24) 299–304; Kyle, 221 nos. P 95. 96. Mann (supra n. 25) 83–84. For the connection of the Peisistratids with the Panathenaia on the basis of the surviving Panathenaic amphorae see Brandt (supra n. 2) 17–20.

28 For examples in which it is clear that the vase-painters indicate the topical character of the representations see Μανακίδου, 97. See also the corresponding interpretation of the pyxis of Stesagoras by Mommsen, below.

29 J. Boardman, in: T. Rasmussen – N. Spivey (eds), Looking at Greek Vases (1991) 96–97.

30 In the absence of an inscription, there is no point in engaging in speculation. For the other undoubtedly few cases of the depiction of historical figures in ancient vase-painting see Mommsen 36 with n. 60; R. Neer, Style and Politics in Athenian Vase Painting (2002) 93–96; Neils 2007, 47 n. 30.

31 For Athena and politics see LIMC II (1984) 1027–1028, s.v. Athena (P. Demargne); I. Kasper-Butz, Die Göttin Athena im klassischen Athen. Athena als Representantin des demokratischen Staates (1990). On these particular vases it is unlikely that the figures depicted are those of the Athenian magistrates connected with the festival, as, for example, the hieropoioi on the Buffalo lekythos by the Athena Painter. (Shapiro, 35–36 pl. 15a; Neils 1992, 18 fig. 55; 182–183 no. 55). On the pseudo-PA from Kameiros in the Bibliothèque Nationale no. 243 (Shapiro, pl. 12c; Neils 1992, fig. 23; Bentz 2001, 191 no. 275; Neils 2007, fig. 5) the two youths or boys who stand to either side of the goddess are half her height.

32 Beazley (supra n. 5) 114. 33 Kεφαλίδου, 147 describes him as ‘nude like an athlete’.

According to Nicholson, 29 ‘the victor won his chariot race much as, say, a wrestler wins his victories – by doing the physical work himself’. For another example of a nude charioteer, see the pyxis by the Epitimos Painter at Brauron below and Μανακίδου, 59. With regard to the views of Nicholson, 29–32, we may note that these representations are not to be taken as a reflection of reality, but rather as symbolic ways of denoting the event.

304 Panos Valavanis

34 On some pseudo-PAs the two gods appear on the main side for no apparent iconographical reason: see, e.g. Oxford 1965.117 (ABV 307,60 of the Swing Painter, Böhr [supra n. 11] 91 no. 89 pls 86–87) and Liverpool 56.19. 27. Cf. Brandt (supra n. 2) 12 with n. 4. Shapiro, 34 n. 123 asserts that the presence of Hermes is random.

35 Neils 2007, 49; Nicholson, 104; Maul-Mandelartz (supra n. 15) 125 associates the presence of Hermes with his role as helper of athletes during the contests, although the god acquired this capacity at a much later date. See W. Burkert, Greek Religion (1985) 336. The greeting addressed to her by the god on the Dysniketos vase also denotes the awarding of honour to the great goddess. LIMC II (1984) 1025, s.v. Athena (P. Demargne).

36 For the heroisation of the winners, see most recently M. Bentz – C. Mann, in: R. von den Hoff – S. Schmidt (eds), Konstruktionen von Wirklichkeit: Bilder in Griechenland des 5. und 4. Jhs v. Chr. (2001) 225–240; S.G. Miller, Ancient Greek Athletics (2004) 160–165.

37 According to Pausanias (6.18.7), the first statues of athletes dedicated were those of the Aeginetan Praxidamas, winner of boxing at the 59th Olympiad of 544 BC and the Opuntian Rexibios, winner of the pankration at the 61st Olympiad of 536. Cf. Ν. Παπαχατζής, Παυσανίου, Μεσσηνιακά Ηλιακά (1979) 362–363 n. 4. For the statues of the victors at Olympia in general see H.V. Herrmann, Die Siegerstatuen von Olympia, Nikephoros 1, 1988, 119–183; S. Lattimore, in: S. Bandy (ed.), Coroebus Triumphs: The Alliance of Sport and the Humanities (1989) 245–256; F. Rausa, L’ imagine del Vincitore. L’ athleta nella statuaria greca dal eta arcaica all’ ellenismo (1994) 77–83; O. Peim, Die Siegerstatuen von Schwerathleten in Olympia und ihr Zusammenstellung durch Pausanias, Nikephoros 13, 2000, 95–100.

38 See for example the ‘pomegranate’ kore, Acropolis Mus. 593 (Neils 1992, 137 fig. 89; Κ. Karakasi, Archaische Koren [2001] pl. 129). Since the statues of korai on the Athenian Acropolis have been also interpreted as priestesses of Athena (see most recently J.B. Connelly, Portrait of a Priestess [2007] 124–127), one might think that the daring position of the women on these Panathenaic vases could also reflect their role as priestesses, but there is no evidence to support such an idea.

39 For both vases see Κεφαλίδου, pl. 8. For other related scenes see Maul-Mandelartz (supra n. 15) 120–129. For the holding of the wreaths in the processions see M. Blech, Studien zum Kranz bei der Griechen (1982) 257. 284. For processions of winners see Μανακίδου, 57–62; Mommsen, 28–31; Nicholson 36. A similar procession is depicted on a covered kylix in Boston (Κεφαλίδου, 186 no. Γ 33 pl. 29; Mommsen, 30 n. 19). For women onlookers who hold wreaths see recently Stansbury-O’ Donnell (supra n. 14) 208–210.

40 Generally for the role of the pseudo-PAs see Μ. Τιβέριος ΑDelt 29, 1974, A, 143–144; Neils 1992, 44–46; Bentz 1998, 105; Bentz 2001, 115–117.

41 Μανακίδου, 95; Nicholson, 38. 52–53. 42 T.B.L. Webster, Potter and Patron in Classical Athens

(1972) 64. 43 Shapiro, 33 explains these vases as commemorating

individual victories in the Games. Cf. also R. Hamilton, in: Neils (supra n. 18) 156 n. 4. Of the five examples seen above, the two for which the provenance is known come

from Etruria, which is true for the majority of the pseudo-PAs, but this does not rule out these being the reasons for their manufacture. For the role of these vases in Etruria, see Bentz 2001, 113. For their provenance see the catalogue in Bentz 2001, 177–195. For victory vases from South Italy see Nicholson, 232 n. 73. Generally for the reception of Attic vases in Etruria see C. Reusser, Vasen für Etrurien. Verbeitung und Funktionen attischer Keramik in Etrurien des 6. und 5. Jhs. v. Chr. (2002); idem, in: P. Rouillard – A. Verbanck-Piérard (eds), Le vase grec et ses destins (2003) 157–178.

44 Webster (supra n. 43) 180. 45 Webster (supra n. 43) 214. 46 See S. Rutherford Roberts, The Attic Pyxis (1978) 178;

I. Wehgartner, Attisch weissgrundige Keramik (1983) 136–137; Μανακίδου, 39 with ns. 27–28; Mommsen, 33. 36 with n. 61. The continuous zones encircling the bodies and lids of the pyxides form an ideal space in which to develop chariot-races (see also Mommsen, 31. 33) but this is not a sufficient reason for the selection of this shape.

47 Mommsen, 37 pl. 8 with the previous bibliography. It should be noted that Tiverios (supra n. 2) 68–72 n. 322 believes that the Epitimos Painter is the later phase of Lydos.

48 Mommsen, 37 pl. 9a. 49 Shapiro, 157 pl. 69; Μανακίδου, 58–62; Κεφαλίδου,

126–128; Mommsen, 32–36. The objects on the diphros of the chariots on the kylix Naples 81127 (Mommsen, pl. 7,3) and on the volute-krater in Munich, Antikensammlung 1740 (Mommsen, pl. 7,1–2), which have been interpreted by both Μανακίδου, 59 pl. 12 and Kephalidou, 85. 99–100 as piriform amphorae, are certainly the chitons of the charioteers, as Mommsen, 30. 32 correctly notes. The misinterpretation has arisen from the fact that on both these vases the chitons are tied to the diphros of the chariot, while on the Stesagoras’s pyxis the garment is simply folded and placed on the diphros. Cf. the new photograph of the Naples kylix in Mommsen, pl. 7,3, where the restored upper part of the chiton has been removed.

50 Mommsen, 36 n. 61. The very general presentation made by the excavator I. Papadimitriou in Ergon 1961 preceded his death, before he could publish it in greater detail in Praktika. An investigation of the remains of his archive in the Archaeological Society, undertaken with the help of I. Ninou, yielded no new evidence. For this cemetery cf. also E. Vivliodetis, Ο Δήμος του Μυρρινούντος. Η οργάνωση και η ιστορία του, ΑΕphem 144, 2005 (2207) 167. 183–184.

51 Roberts (supra n. 46) 178. 52 Roberts (supra n. 46) 177–178; Wehgartner (supra n. 46)

136. 53 C. Mercati, Studi Classici 24, 1986/7, 107–140. 54 Supra passim. Mythological representations with male

protagonists, such as the myths relating to Herakles, satyrs, etc., are also regarded as male subjects.

55 Mercati (supra n. 53) 122. 136–137; Mercati (supra) 133–134 interprets the isolated examples of later red-figure pyxides with ‘male’ subjects as special commissions. Similarly, we should exclude pyxides of Nikosthenic type, since they seem to have been aimed for the Etruscan market. For the Nikosthenic pyxides with such iconography, see also the paper of Claire Lyons in this volume.

30530 Mortals Facing the Goddess

56 S. Schmidt, Rhetorische Bilder auf attischen Vasen (2005) 107–151. 279–282. J.H. Oakley, in A. Tsingarida (ed.), Formes et usages des vases grecs (VIIe–IVe siècles av. J.-C.). Colloque international, 27–29 Avril 2006, Universitè Libre de Bruxelles (forthcoming).

57 For the iconography of epinetra and alabastra see P. Badinou, La laine et le parfum: épinetra et alabastres: forme, iconographie et fonction: recherche de céramique attique feminine (2003) 103–111. 123; C. Mercati, EPINETRON. Storia di una forma ceramica fra archeologia e cultura (2003); F. Heinrich, Das Epinetron. Aspekte der weiblichen Lebenswelt im Spiegel eines Arbeitsgeräts (2006); E. Hatzivassiliou, in: Tsingarida (supra n. 56) with the previous bibliography. For the iconography of the different ‘female’ vases in general see Badinou (supra) xii. Cf. the reviews of both books by K. Ananiades, in Archaiognosia 13, 2005, 255–266.

58 D. Williams, in: A.J. Clark – J. Gaunt (eds), Essays in Honor of D. von Bothmer (2002) 348; Badinou (supra n. 57) 103–111.

59 Hatzivassiliou (supra n. 57); Oakley (supra n. 56). 60 See B. Kratzmueller, in: Tsingarida (supra n. 56); B.

Kratzmueller – R. Lindner – N. Sojc, in: B. Heininger (ed.), Geschlechterdifferenz in religiösen Symbolsystemen

(2003) 91–126, with the previous bibliography. For the frequent presence of strigils in the tombs even of the fifth century see the classical cemetery of Akanthos, Macedonia, D. Grammenos – M. Tiverios, ADelt, 39, 1984, A (1990) 1–48 passim, esp. 19.

61 Cf. Mommsen 39. 62 Panathenaic amphorae were exclusively connected with

the games until the end of the fifth century BC. From the fourth century on and especially during the Hellenistic and Roman periods they adopt a wider range of symbolic messages even for women. See P. Valavanis, in: Bentz 2001, 161–173. It is interesting to note that parts of a PA dated to 420 BC are found in a robbed cist-grave in Vergina, along with ten white-ground lekythoi and other vases. According to M. Andronikos (Ergon 1989, 73; Prakt 1989, 197) the tomb belonged to a woman. Sherds of more than one PA from the archonship of Lykiskos (344/3 BC) have also been found outside (on the vault) of the tomb with the throne. Andronikos attributes the tomb to Eurydice, the mother of Phillip II (Ergon 1987, 49. Prakt 1987, 131). The sherds of the PA were burnt and come very probably from the burial pyre of the dead. If Andronikos' attribution is correct, we have PAs used to honor the queen.