Kendrick 1

Miquel Kendrick, ARH4931, Spring 2010

Professor Barletta

The Meidias Painter’s Contribution:

Mannerism in 5th century Red-figure Vase Painting

Vase painting had long been practiced thorough the Archaic and Early Classical periods in ancient Athens when the red-figure technique came to dominance during the High Classical.

Prior to that, the main approach was the black-figure technique, which had been adopted from

Corinth around 620 BCE (Richter, 1958, 36). The red-figure technique left figures in the clay’s red color with painted interior details and with a black background. It allowed for a more con- vincing way for artists to depict the illusion of space and depth in figures; the contours of faces, limbs and garments could now appear more naturalistic. Despite this, there rose a style of vase painting in the late 5th century that favored less naturalistic forms and traditional content, the

Mannerist style, which was exemplified by the Meidias Painter. At the end of the 5th century

BCE in Athens, the Mannerist style of red-figure vase painting by the Meidias Painter and his school of followers fused earlier Late Archaic motifs with inspiration from monumental wall painting (Mannack, 2001, 10). This created a body of work that was a deliberate shift from natu- ralistic forms replaced with a whimsical portrayal of familiar themes as an escape for Athens during the Peloponnesian War (Burn, 1987, 95).

Late 5th century style in vase painting is characterized as more ornate than the preceding

High Classical period with a tendency for groups of figures and varying ground lines. Artists like the Meidias Painter and his predecessors, the Eretria Painter and Aison, were less concerned with naturalistic tendencies and more interested in sketched anatomy of figures (Boardman, 1989,

145). There is use of foreshortening and slight perspective that shows understanding of 3- dimensionality on a 2-dimensional surface. There is also an interest in pattern not found in the

Kendrick 2 rest of the Classical period and a rise polychrome and gilding techniques (Arias, 1963, 377).

Several artists worked together using a three-step firing process in one workshop, which proba- bly allowed for exchanges in stylistic ideas and technique (Mannack, 2001, 1). This atmosphere most likely led to the use of the Mannerist style by the Meidias Painter, his predecessors, and followers.

A total of 22 vases are attributed to the Meidias Painter who was active in Athens from about 420 to 400 BCE during the height of the Peloponnesian War. He was coined as the first

Mannerist vase painter by the scholar, John D. Beazley in the early twentieth century in an at- tempt to label his style (Burn, 1987, 2). This was due to the use of elongated figures with small heads and what Beazley inferred as a value of form over content. He saw this as reflective of the

Mannerist style in Europe during the late years of the High Renaissance, which was a reaction against the naturalistic principles of artists like Michelangelo and also, a looking back to earlier

Gothic style (Mannack, 2001, 3). Thomas Mannack argues that the Mannerist label in ancient vase painting is essentially an unclear attribution, “Mannerism did not exist in antiquity, only some of its elements. The recognition of Mannerism in antiquity would depend on modern tastes” (Mannack, 2001, 4). As Mannack states, one should be especially critical of such a mod- ern term applied to ancient pieces. Artists from that time may have made a conscious decision to move away from the previous, more naturalistic style, but in no way deliberately used Manner- ism and its pretenses as it is understood today.

Figures in the style of the Meidias Painter are depicted gracefully having long profiles, rounded chins, large eyes, small mouths and elegantly shaped fingers and toes. Women are long limbed and dressed elaborately with multi-layered, clinging garments, gold earrings, necklaces and hair ornaments often with attached leaves or wreath. They are usually grouped together and

Kendrick 3 portrayed in scenes overall much more often than men (Burn, 1987, 4). The Meidias Painter’s figures are arranged according to the narrative depicted with an emphasis on creating balance in relation to the shape of the vessel, although this does not hold true for the placement of the regis- ters. The registers and motifs often do not correspond with the shape of the vase, which is most often a hydria, but also lekythoi and choes were used (Richter, 1958, 149).

These recurring characteristics are found in both scenes on the Meidias Painter’s large hydria name-vase (Figure 1.) in the British Museum. It was acquired in 1772 from the Scottish diplomat and admirer of ancient Greek vase painting, Sir William Hamilton, who proudly dis- played it in the right foreground of his portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds (Burn, 1987, 1). The vase itself was excavated from an Etruscan tomb and contains two scenes connected by a meander band that both relate directly to the theme of death, which was only appropriate for its funerary purpose. It is signed Meidias epoie on the upper right shoulder and was used as a basis for the naming of other works by the same hand. The potter and painter may have been the same person

(Folsum, 1976, 154).

The top registers of the London hydria show the Rape of the Daughters of Leukippos by the Disoskouroi, Polydeukes and Kastor. The top left shows Polydeukes over the reigns of his chariot escaping with Elera in tow. There is an emphasis on the contour of their flowing gar- ments with scroll designs and the movement of the chariot up over the shoulder of the vase to- wards the handle. It is a way to enhance the narrative scene by using the shape of the vessel

(Burn, 1987, 3). Beneath Polydeukes is Kastor who has his arm around the other daughter,

Eriphyle, who appears to be slightly resisting his advance, but not very convincingly. Such theat- rical, elegant postures that do not quite illustrate the danger of the action taking place are charac- teristic of the Meidias Painter’s work (Burn, 1987, 15). Below them Aphrodite who sits at her

Kendrick 4 altar and is flanked on both sides by her fleeing attendants and Zeus to the far left who gazes up- on the whole scene. Aphrodite sits down assuming her typical Meidian pose and looks towards the action occurring in the center, thereby uniting the composition and narrative scene (Burn,

1987, 15). Aphrodite appears not only at her altar as a goddess, but also as an Archaic cult statue of herself. This is found in between the chariots in the top scene and is an example of Archaic retrospection. It could possibly correspond with a similar cult statue found on the north slope of the Acropolis (Burn, 1987, 29).

The figures in bottom scene of the London hydria include Herakles in the afterlife Garden of Hesperides with an apple tree and serpent and several Athenian tribal heroes. The scene is not rigidly symmetrical with the figures and tree slightly off center. It illustrates one of the labors of

Herakles to obtain the apples of Hesperides, yet as in the scene above it, there is little sense of danger involved. This is the first instance of a relaxed Herakles depicted, not actively pursuing his goal. He sits and leans against a club, surrounded by women who offer him apples (Burn,

1987, 17). Once again, the Meidias Painter uses a more whimsical, softened approach to a typi- cally more suspenseful story. The Garden of Hesperides was a paradise for the gods in the after- life and the presence of the tribal heroes of Athens in the scene may have tied Athenian identity to the potential of an ideal afterlife. This would have been especially important for Athenians surrounded by death and hardships due to the Peloponnesian War (Burn, 1987, 19).

One of the most evident themes in the work of the Meidias Painter is his emphasis on na- ture; paradise gardens are the most prevalent settings in his work. Multiple ground lines coupled with wavy lines indicate grass, shrubs, trees, and meadows and create a dreamy atmosphere for his figures to occupy (Boardman, 1989, 11) These fanciful environments almost always show women standing and sitting about never doing anything quite strenuous. They arrange their hair

Kendrick 5 or transparent peplos garments or stare off in one direction that complements the composition and narrative. Their luxurious state is emphasized even more by the the scroll designs on their garments or by the gilded jewelry they wear. Lucilla Burn points out that women in ancient Ath- ens, even wealthy ones, did not have much time to lounge around, so one could infer from these scenes that the Meidias Painter was out to create an alternate reality not grounded necessarily in what Athenians experienced in their own lives (Burn, 1987, 95). Instead, he used his imagination to paint a world not affected by hunger, plague, or war.

Along with an inclination for garden scenes, the Meidias Painter preferred to depict mythological themes over historical events. During the previous Early Classical and High Clas- sical periods, many vase painters had portrayed actual battles and even mythological ones from the Trojan War (Folsum, 1976, 151). While working during the Peloponnesian War, the Meidias

Painter avoided portraying real violence altogether and instead tamed it as in the Rape of the

Daughters of Leukippos from the London hydria. One could infer that war was not as desirable of a subject matter because of its prevalence in Athenians’ lives. Instead, the Meidias Painter and his followers focused on portraying subjects such as Aphrodite, the goddess of love and fertility, or stories like the Birth of Erichthonius who was the mythological early ruler of Athens shown in

(Figure 3.) being handed to Athena (Burn, 1987, 21). These mythological subjects were under- stood by their viewers and were surely desirable as subject matter since they were quite prevalent not only in vase painting, but in other forms of art like sculpture.

Aphrodite is one the most frequently portrayed figures in the Meidias Painter’s garden scenes. She usually sits on the ground, a way to emphasize her connection with nature (Burn,

1987, 29). Lucilla Burn asserts that the Meidian Aphrodite is always Aphrodite of the Gardens, a cult specifically associated with the goddess that was at one point a sanctuary on the Acropolis.

Kendrick 6

This connection with the cult is further emphasized by the artist’s placement of altars or cult statues nearby in the scenes (Burn, 1987, 29). Women that are almost always portrayed alongside the goddess are symbolic personifications of Harmony, Good Order, Health, Good Fortune and

Happiness. This is understood from inscriptions of identification on the vases. These personifica- tions usually attend to Aphrodite and are for more decorative purposes than narrative ones (Burn,

1987, 34). They act as elegant fillers in the garden scenes. Other than gardens, Aphrodite takes part in mythological narratives or is participating in the celebration of a festival. In one well- preserved hydria (Figure 2.), she rides a chariot presumably to a festival in her honor. Her preva- lence in the Meidias Painter’s vases probably reflected her general popularity in Athens in the late 5th century. This is also indicated by a rise in women using lekythoi vases as perfume con- tainers, which often contained images of Aphrodite (Burn 1987, 34).

As in the Mannerism of the Italian Renaissance, there is strong evidence for a looking back to earlier artistic style in the Mannerism of the Meidias Painter. The Mannerists of the 16th century turned to Gothic elements in their work, while the Meidias Painter looked to Archaic ones that occurred a century before (Mannack, 2001, 10). This is apparent in the red-figure lekythos with Birth of Erichthonius from 410 B.C.E. (Figure 3.). The register along the top and the motif in the upper right are truly representative of an earlier style before the Persian sack of

Athens in 480 BCE. It has been suggested that such a gesture could indicate a longing for the past or even just a respect for any surviving Archaic works that influenced the Meidias Painter and his predecessors (Mannack, 2001, 8). Either way, their presence in his work show a con- scious decision to draw influence and be nostalgic about a distant past.

Other influential factors for the Meidias Painter came from monumental wall paintings in

Athens from that time, none of which has survived today and are only known from literary

Kendrick 7 sources. From Polygnotos, the artist most likely learned the use of a varied ground line to arrange his figures (Arias, 1963, 376). This varied ground line led to figures being stacked to indicate distance (Neils, 1984, 277). Despite similarity with a varied ground line, the work of Polygnotos did not include Aphrodite as a prominent figure (Matheson, 1995, 156). The painter, Parrhasios, strove to show ethos or as it is translated from the writings of Pliny, the “character” of his sub- jects (Lydakis, 2004, 122). Zeuxis was interested in perspective, which in Greek terms never as- sumed one central point, but rather multiple points. He was primarily concerned imitating reality

(Lydakis, 2004, 132). It is understood that these three artists had a part in shaping the approach that the Meidias Painter took to his 2-dimensional surfaces, though by how much, one can not be completely sure.

Influence from sculpture is also inferred since one can reason that artists working in Ath- ens had access to sculpture and architectural sculpture on the Acropolis from that time. Parallels are seen in the treatment of drapery and gesture of Phidias’ Aphrodite Frejus of which only Ro- man copies survive (Burn, 1987, 3). As shown in bodies of the women personifications (Figure

4.), the Frejus Aphrodite too tugs at the top of her peplos in a movement that could not have been coincidental. Other parallels have been drawn from another work of Phidias’, the Sandal Binder of the Nike Temple parapet from 427-423 BCE. It shows Nike leaning over in similar frozen ac- tion as seen in the figures of the hydria with Aphrodite in her chariot. The artists in both instanc- es are concerned with the portrayal of clinging drapery and also, its button details (Burn, 1987,

10). Such influence from sculpture, especially in drapery, is difficult to confirm because one cannot be sure if a vase or sculpture was created first, but similarities exist nonetheless.

The teachers of the Meidias Painter surely had great influence on the artist. Two of these teachers, the Eretria Painter and Aison, were both active in the period of the High Classical right

Kendrick 8 before and during the early years the Meidias Painter around 420 BCE. The Eretria Painter was mainly a small cup painter who is believed to have started the manner of drawing used by his student. Both artists have scenes of groups of women with soft features in transparent, clinging garments doing similar activities such as leaning on each other’s shoulders or playing with a bird

(Folsum, 1976, 138). Aison has been more recently attributed as a teacher. His style is less deli- cate than the other two with an interest in more movement, diagonals, and athleticism in his scenes. He too included his figures on different levels to create a sense of depth. Each of the

Meidias Painter’s teachers rejected Classical severity for more sensitivity, enhanced by flowing drapery and gilding techniques (Burn, 187, 12).

The Meidias Painter’s style of vase painting was learned by a group of followers and is sometimes referred to as “sub-Median” (Folsum, 1976, 154). A total of 192 pieces are attributed to those who worked in his Mannerist style up until the early years of the 4th century (Burn,

1987, 3). One of the most distinguished of his followers was Aristophanes who was at first mis- taken to have been his teacher. His figures are slightly more rigid and unlike the Meidias Painter, he portrayed traditional heroism, centaurs and amazons. The work of his students is usually con- sidered less skilled than their teacher’s and often deviates from purely whimsical scenes (Richter,

1958, 149). Since Athens surrendered in the Peloponnesian War in 404 BCE, moving on to harsher subject matter may have been a shift by artists who were once again comfortable with portraying violence in its absence for Athens.

Dating the work of the Meidias Painter and his followers has been considered quite accu- rate, although no Mannerist vase has been found in an absolutely reliably dated deposit (Man- nack, 2001, 107). Lucilla Burn argues that the shapes and scenes that the Meidias Painter uses corresponds to painting and sculpture from the late 5th century, thus making the dates attributed

Kendrick 9 to him probably correct (Burn, 1987,11). This is evident in similar drapery techniques in the work of Phidias on the Acropolis and in the monumental wall painting described in literary sources. More evidence of reasonably correct dating comes from one of the Meidias Painter’s vases depicting the arrival of the god Asklepios in Athens. This is understood to have been tied to an actual event that occurred around 420 BCE, right when the Meidias Painter was assumed active (Burn, 1987, 7). Despite his usual mythological scenes that are unable to be precisely dat- ed, there are the instances of stylistic similarities that allows scholars of be quite positive that the

Meidias Painters worked in the last half of the 5th century from 420 to 400 BCE and influenced others well into the 4th century.

The Mannerist work of Meidias Painter exemplifies a combination of stylistic elements drawn from the Archaic past, yet was quite innovative in its fanciful themes. It was a intentional move to leave behind the naturalism and preoccupation with perfect representations of reality of the High Classical as found in the works on the Parthenon. During the time of the Peloponnesian

War, Athens suffered many hardships including poverty, plague and great loss of life. The em- phasis on nature, fantasy, ornateness, and a lack of violence in the work of the Meidias Painter points to a desire for more peaceful scenes in a tumultuous world. His figures often sit in nature, possibly representing a desire for a rural lifestyle, which was very unlike city life in Athens

(Burn, 1987, 96). Mannerism became was a way in which the Meidias Painter and his followers could create a alternate world for their viewers and patrons, which included gods and goddesses, personifications, and women that could lounge around idly and enjoy life in a way that was not possible in war-time Athens.

Kendrick 10

Figure

1. Figure 2.

Kendrick 11

.

. Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Kendrick 12

Bibliography

Arias, P.E. Hirmer, Max. 1963. A history of 1000 years of Greek vase painting. New York:

Clarendon Press.

Boardman, John. 1989. Athenian Red Figure Vases: the Classical Period, a handbook.

London: Thames and Hudson Ltd.

Burn, Lucilla. 1987. The Meidias Painter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Folsom, Robert S. 1976. Attic Red-Figured Pottery. Park Ridge, NJ: Noyes Press.

Lydakis, Stelios. 2004. Ancient Greek Painting and its Echoes in Later Art. Los Angeles, CA: J.

Paul Getty Museum.

Mannack, Thomas. 2001. The Late Mannerists in Athenian Vase-painting. New York: Oxford

Univeristy Press.

Matheson, Susan B. 1995. Polygnotos and Vase Painting in Classical Athens. Madison, Wiscon-

son: University of Wisconsin Press.

Neils, Jennifer. 1984. “A Greek Nativity by the Meidias Painter”. The Bulletin of the Cleveland

Museum of Art, Vol. 70, No. 7 (Sep., 1984), 274-289.

Richter, Gisela M.A. 1958. Attic Red-Figured Vases: a Survey. New Haven: Yale University

Press.