SAMENVATTING SUMMARY

1. H. G. BEYEN: THE SOCIAL STATUS OF THE PAINTER IN GREEK ANTIQUITY The opinion has been expressed on more than one occasion that in the Greek world the sculptor or painter was not held in esteem as much as one would have expected, because. people invariably saw the f3avav(Jo~ , i.e, the artisan in him. This opinion is founded mainly on passages in Plato and Aristotle. However, the word f3avav(Jo~ was tinged with an element of contempt only to the conser- vative aristocrat and to the abstract thinker who saw an unbridgeable gulf between the work of the mind and that done by hand. Plato combined the two types and even Aristotle's liberality was extremely moderate. They definitely do not voice the "communis opinio". Polygnotus was a national character and was thought ofvery highly. Owing to his distinguished, human art [mural decoration in the full sense ofthe word, destined for the community] he became the educator of his contemporaries. He was honoured by numerous distinctions [such as the citizenship ofAthens, "hospitia gratuita" on behalf ofthe Delphic Amphictyom, the appointment as {}ewe6~ by his native town Thasos]. The subsequent period (from about 45o-about 325) was the time when indi- vidualism and the "free" art of painting, i.e. not executed in connection with architecture and carried out in the studio on panels or slabs ofmarble, flourished. In this period too the painters reaped great personal fame and considerable riches [Zeuxis, Nicias], presumably even more so than the sculptors. The self-assurance of some of them is reminiscent of that of the artists of the Renaissance [Parrha- sius]. Apelles presumed to put Alexander in his place. Numerous anecdotes in connection with the painters of that period characterize the typical "artistic genius", similar to the type which has developed in the last few centuries : in- dependent, bold, eccentric and individualistic. Fortunately, however, there was hardly a sign of any "unappreciated" genius yet. The interest and appreciation of the public were all that could be desired. As yet many public commissions were given. On the other hand an academy was founded for the first time (Sicyon) where painting was practised scientifically. In the Hellenistic period the fruitful natural contact with the surrounding world was in danger of getting lost. The painter not only worked in the studio, but as a rule he also sold his work to private persons who used it for their personal pleasure, as for instance to the royal personage or wealthy citizen for the palace or for the private residence, with their beautiful decorations in constructive manner. He became rather too much the servant of the well-to-do, which state of affairs proved disastrous in more than one respect. The number of great artists decreased while the artist's social position was frequently lowered. From two letters written by a painter named Theuphilos to Zenon (Zenonpapyri, about 250 b. C) we learn of the modest fees, the unemploy- ment and straitened circumstances of the artist, also a common phenomenon of the last few centuries. Like the present time Hellenism saw the professor of the official academy existing alongside of the poor neglected artist. [Delphic inscription on account of a commission given by Attalos II of Pergamon for the making of copies after Polygnotus 140-139 b. C.]

375 SAMENVATTING After the political collapse ofGreece and the Hellenistic kingdoms most painters sought refuge in Rome. Metrodorus of Athens entered into the service of Aemi- lius Paullus (after 164 b. C.; Pydna). Demetrius, painter at the court of Ptolemy Philometor (180- I 45 b. C.) has a xunJ).vftu at Rome. lt was hard for the free painters to compete with the studios founded by "redemptores", which consisted of slaves, for the greater part also Greeks. The rebirth of the mural painting in Italy (about 90 b. c., the so-called archi- tectural style) dealt a heavy blow to the Greek art of painting panels. "Free", by which is meant non-decorative painting, only survived in the portrait, the simple votive pictures and the copy, but even those genres were often not executed by free painters.

2. A. N. ZADOKS-JOSEPHUS JITTA: THE BEGINNING AND THE END OF ROMAN ART. One of the most urgent problems presented by Roman art is the uncertainty as to the exact time when it began and ended. Unfortunately it has not yet been sufficiently clearly defined for anyone to solve the difficulty on the evidence of style. For the present the only method is to start from typically Roman works of art of the late Republic and early Roman Empire and to include those works which are more closely related to it than early art (Italian and Hellenistic) and later art (early medieval, in particular Byzantine). As regards sculpture, it is certain that the reliefs which represent the magistrate or emperor in official capacity are typically Roman. In the last quarter of the second century this genre reached its culmi- nation. This applies to the statues of "togati" as well. Coins and works of archi- tecture also reveal that Roman art became clearer in outline about 1 5° b. C and took definite shape about 125 b. C. This period coincided with the time when Rome developed from a small rural town to the centre of a world-empire. At that time Latin, the language of Rome, began to preponderate. The transition to Byzantine art manifested itself in the mosaics rather than in the reliefs. In Rome the first Byzantine mosaic was that ofthe church ofSS. Cosma e Damiano belonging to the years 526-53°' Specimens in Ravenna point to the same epoch. It is true that the famous Justinian mosaics closely follow the older examples as regards subject, but they are already purely Byzantine in form. Sarcophagi and consular diptyches as well as coins and works of architecture testify to the decline of Roman art after 526. It is the year when Theodoric the Great, who had to a certain extent succeeded in keeping the Western Empire independent from Byzantium, died. From 536 onwards Italy was occupied terri- tory. About the same time the Latin language became obsolete and was super- seded by Greek.

3. E. PELINCK: CORNELIS ENGEBRECHTSZ, THE ORIGIN OF HIS ART. The study of the work of the Leyden painter Cornelis Engebrechtsz (1468-1533) presents three problems: I. The work dating from the time before 1508. 2. The dates of the two Leyden triptyches. 3· The difficulty of distinguishing between his later work and that of his pupils.

376