On Attic Red-Figure Pottery Author(S): Robert F
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Family Portraits: Recognizing the "Oikos" on Attic Red-Figure Pottery Author(s): Robert F. Sutton, Jr. Source: Hesperia Supplements, Vol. 33, ΧΑΡΙΣ: Essays in Honor of Sara A. Immerwahr (2004), pp. 327-350 Published by: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1354076 Accessed: 23-10-2017 14:51 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms The American School of Classical Studies at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hesperia Supplements This content downloaded from 173.250.147.127 on Mon, 23 Oct 2017 14:51:09 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms CHAPTER 17 FAMILY PORTRAITS: RECOGNIZING THE OIKOS ON ATTIC RED-FIGURE POTTERY by Robert F Sutton Jr. Sara A. Immerwahr was an inspiring and supportive teacher whose direct- ness, clarity of thought, and lack of pretension made study with her a plea- sure. In this paper I consider a small group of red-figure vase paintings that depict the classical Athenian oikos, returning to material originally 1. Sutton 1981, pp. 216-232,257- 260, 347-379. I thank John Oakley included in my dissertation written under Sara's direction.1 for his useful critique of an earlier Since the interpretation of vase paintings identified as scenes of the draft of this paper, and the anonymous oikos is often uncertain, a primary aim of this study is heuristic, to identify reviewers for their valuable comments; criteria that allow one to recognize the oikos in Attic vase paintings. A any remaining errors and lapses of second aim is to consider what these scenes reveal about the conception of judgment are my own. For help with the family and household in classical Athens. After a brief review of how photographs and permission to study material under their control I am the oikos is presented in ancient texts and a discussion of iconographic grateful to Barbara Philippaki, Olga principles, based on consideration of a few problematic scenes that have Tzachou-Alexandri, Theodora Kyri- sometimes been identified as illustrations of family life, this paper isolates akou, and Hans Goette in Athens, a small group of red-figure domestic scenes that can be securely recog- Ursula Kastner in Berlin, Aaron Paul and Toni MacDonald-Fein at Harvard nized as representations of the oikos through elements that present the University, Dyfri Williams in London, family as a unit of economic production and procreation linked by bonds Donna Kurtz and Thomas Mannack in of affection. These generic family portraits are found primarily on vase Oxford, Christa Koppermann and shapes used by women, and their imagery was apparently intended to honor Martin Schultz in Munich, Dietrich a wife's contribution to the household. Similar imagery appears in two von Bothmer and Joan Mertens in New other classes of representation: contemporary courting scenes, and mytho- York, Giuseppe Voza and Beatrice Basile in Syracuse, and a private logical illustrations of Eriphyle. The former indicates the need for caution collector who prefers to remain in interpreting domestic imagery, while the latter presents a monitory tale anonymous. of wifely betrayal on pottery aimed at a male audience. Three works touching on the theme of this paper became available to me only after it was in press: Massar 1995, THE OIKOS IN TEXTS Lewis 2002, and Ferrari 2002. In in- stances of my disagreement, it has not been possible to answer here in suffi- The oikos-the family or household-was regarded by Aristotle as the cient detail many of the thoughtful most basic unit of the classical polis (Pol. 1252b). Scholarship on the an- arguments in these works, though cientI Greek family has drawn primarily on textual representations, gener- stand by what I have written. ally favoring prose sources over poetry, and much work in recent decades 2. See Patterson 1998, Pomeroy 1997, Foxhall 1989, and Cox 1998, has been inspired by or written in response to feminist critique.2 Scholars which cite earlier literature; Lacey like1968 Cynthia Patterson now take a balanced view of both ancient society remains useful. and the sources, reasserting the value of Attic drama. Their work is being This content downloaded from 173.250.147.127 on Mon, 23 Oct 2017 14:51:09 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 328 ROBERT F. SUTTON JR. joined by an increasing amount of socially based archaeological research on domestic architecture, burials, and iconography.3 In texts from Homer and Hesiod to Aristotle and Menander, the oikos is presented as a household of persons united by bonds of kinship and law engaged in a common economic enterprise. Marriage, the partnership be- tween husband and wife, is regarded as its fundamental bond, providing the economic basis of the oikos and guaranteeing its continuity through procreation. This is stated explicitly in Xenophon's Oeconomicus, where Ischomachos describes how he and his in-laws arranged marriage "after considering who was the best partner we could choose for running the household and for having children" (7.11).4 A similar view is evident in the pseudo-Demosthenic speech against Neaira ([Demosthenes] 59.118- 122), in which a wife's role of overseeing the house and producing heirs is distinguished from other domestic and sexual unions with pallakai (con- cubines) or hetairai. Xenophon's ideal oikos includes slaves, and in practice the ancient household might also include kin such as grandparents, sib- lings, stepchildren, and even more distant relatives. Moving beyond such strictly practical considerations, ancient texts also emphasize the affective dimension and the importance of emotion in sus- taining the oikos. Household members are tied to one another by affection and trust, even if, as Aristotle makes clear (Pol. 1323a5-6), authority is disposed hierarchically and enforced by various forms of compulsion. From Homer onward these emotions are shown to be essential to an oikos, and their absence guarantees its ruin. In the Odyssey Odysseus, the faithful Penelope, Telemachos, and some of their servants strive with common purpose to keep a house that is literally and figuratively founded on the marriage bed. The Odyssey and later Greek literature also abound with negative examples of oikoi, such as those of Agamemnon and Amphiaraos, which are destroyed through the betrayal of affection and trust. Affection and trust are also crucial to Xenophon's systematic presen- tation of the oikos as an economic unit, which finds symmetry in the comple- mentary roles of husband and wife (Oec. 3.15, 7.18-25).5 His ideal hus- band works outdoors at agricultural and other labor toward the acquisition of goods, while the wife toils within the house caring for the children and 3. On houses, Ault 2000, Cahill overseeing the production of food and other finished goods from the raw 2000, Antonaccio 2000, Morris 1999, materials her husband provides. This symmetry extends Nevett to 1999their with comple- earlier literature. On mentary protective roles: the husband's bravery suits burials, him to Morris military 1992, de- chaps. 4-5. On fense outside the home, while the timid wife conserves iconography, and protects e.g., things Berard et al. 1989, within the house. Although the marriage is arranged Lissarrague (Oec. 7.10-11), 1992, Keuls this 1993, Oakley 2000, and works cited below. partnership of spouses is based in affection and sexual activity. The wife 4. .. 3 ouoXcu6oevo; 8' Eycoye 6rr7p feels respect and affection for her husband (&aLto(pRXYco; [Oec. 10.3, 10.5], Etoio xal ol sol yovi U7trep ooo Ttv' &v ao ocaeaOoat ?x -rq; oX; [Oec. 10.4]); he in turn expects xotLVovOv to pekXToTOv be sexually oi'xoo Txa xodl Trxvwov aroused (xLVrTLx6v [Oec. 10.12]) by her and finds greater XBpot[ikev. pleasure Translation in their adapted from sexual relations together than with a slave, since the latter Pomeroy performs 1994; this under and subsequent compulsion (Oec. 10.12).6 references are to the text, translation, and commentary of this edition. Xenophon's view is hardly unique, for David Schaps has recently ob- 5. On the date of composition, served that in authors from Homer to Menander, Pomeroy "it was 1994, presumed pp. 1-8. that affection bound husband and wife together."7 Xenophon's 6. Pomeroy discussion 1994, p. 306. of connubial affection is embedded in a speech in which 7. Schaps Ischomachos 1998, p. 165. This content downloaded from 173.250.147.127 on Mon, 23 Oct 2017 14:51:09 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE OIKOS ON ATTIC RED-FIGURE POTTERY 329 Figure 17.1. Drawing of wedding scene on loutrophoros (Boston, Museum of Fine Arts 03.802, Francis Bartlett donation). Beazley Archive, Oxford persuades his wife not to present herself falsely through cosmetics (Oec. 10.2-13), which may be recognized as a metaphoric statement that complete honesty is the basis of the fundamental trust between spouses that sustains the oikos.8 8. Laurence Lampert bringsMETHODOLOGICAL to CONSIDERATIONS my attention the suggestion of Leo Strauss ([1970] 1998, pp. 157-158) Before we turn to the representation of the oikos on Attic pottery, it is that this passage may be ironic, if this is the same Ischomachos whose necessary to discuss briefly the visual language of Attic vase painting.