154 TEN ARTISTS’ SIGNATURES ON ARCHAIC GREEK VASES FROM ATHENS Sarah Bolmarcich and Georgina Muskett The quest to defi ne individual, artistic personalities in ancient Greek art is not new; a large number of books and articles on the subject exist. This chapter, however, focuses on a particular type of evidence related to the “individual” in ancient Greek art: the craftsman’s signature. While discus- sions of signatures in mosaic, on statue bases, or in other media have borne interesting fruit, in this study we will focus on signatures found on Athenian pottery. 1 As a body of evidence Attic pottery is preserved in substantial quantities, is well- recorded, and represents a discrete data set. By setting these parameters, we hope to be better able to answer the questions of why Attic vases in particular were signed and what these signatures may suggest about the role of the individual craftsman in Greek art and history. While the incomplete nature of the archaeological record must render tentative any conclusions drawn on the basis of the number of signatures preserved, we do believe that enough evidence exists to allow us to suggest trends and to off er some conclusions, however speculative, about signed Athenian pottery. Thus, our aims in the present chapter are twofold. First, we will present a current consideration of artists’ signatures, those of both painters and pot- ters, which appear on Athenian pottery from the early sixth century to the mid- fourth century b.c.e. Second, we will explore why signatures appeared on vases at all, and why it was appropriate (and possible) for an individual to express his identity in this manner in the fi rst place. 2 154 155 ARTISTS’ SIGNATURES ON ARCHAIC GREEK VASES FROM ATHENS 155 HISTORY OF SIGNED VASES The Database Using Immerwahr’s fundamental Corpus of Attic Vase Inscriptions ( CAVI ), we have compiled a database of 1039 signatures. This small corpus of signatures is vital to our attempt to isolate and examine the material evidence related to ancient individuals. 3 While several dozen non- Attic signatures are known (and to which we will make occasional reference), we have limited our database, for the purposes of this study, to Attic vases. 4 We have also added signed vases miss- ing from CAVI to our catalogue and have corrected a number of Immerwahr’s errors and duplications with the hopes that our database will be valuable to scholars working on the study of signatures on Attic pottery. 5 Potters and Painters Generally a painter signed his name followed by some form of the verb “painted” ( ἔγραψεν, or egrapsen ), while a potter (or the painter signing for him) used the verb “made” ( ἐποίησεν, or epoiesen ). 6 The subject of epoiesen could indicate the person who made the vessel or under whose direction it was made, or the name of the manager of a workshop. 7 Often these inscriptions occur alone, at other times with an egrapsen inscription. Egrapsen or megrapsen ( μἐγραψεν) might have indicated “created the original design” and/or “drew.” The same person might sign as both potter and painter, although this is rare. 8 At other times, it is clear that potter and painter were diff erent persons and one or both of them signed distinctly, as on the famous François Vase; with- out the presence of signatures, it would be tempting to identify potter and painter as the same individual. 9 Signatures also permit reconstruction of the personnel active in Athenian pottery workshops and emphasize the close fam- ily links within the workshops. The trade of potter (and occasionally painter) can pass from father to son, although no other relationships are noted. 10 The most striking example of this phenomenon is the family of Nearchos; he was an accomplished potter and painter as indicated by his signature as both pain- ter and potter on a kantharos fragment. 11 Two slightly later potters, the highly prolifi c Tleson and Ergoteles, proudly sign themselves “son of Nearchos,” suggesting they were brothers. 12 Other “dynasties” of potters include the fam- ilies of Nikias and Amasis, with occasional instances of other patronymics. The most remarkable instance of a family of potters extends three genera- tions, and includes Ergotimos, his son Eucheiros, and an anonymous grandson, who signs one vessel as “son of Eucheiros.” 13 The only surviving instance of a painter who used a patronymic in his signature was Euthymides, although his father, Pollias, is not fi rmly known as either painter or potter. (It is possible, 156 156 SARAH BOLMARCICH AND GEORGINA MUSKETT however, that Euthymides’ father may have been the sculptor Pollias, who was responsible for several statue bases found on the Athenian Akropolis, where an individual named “Polias” dedicated a painted clay plaque attributed to Euthymides.) 14 Family traditions in the craft are known as late as the second half of the fourth century. Two potters named Kittos and Bakchios, known from a later fourth century inscription in Ephesos, are named as the sons of Bakchios, who is known from a funerary inscription as a prize- winning pot- ter; the similarity of names makes it plausible that all three were members of the same family. 15 In addition to family associations, Neer’s study of “potter- portraits” and inscriptions naming painters and potters within the early- fi fth- century circle of “Pioneers” in Athens also allows the discussion of potential working relationships. 16 Neer suggests two groupings/ workshops, one includ- ing Euphronios, Smikros and Kachrylion, and another, Euthymides, Sosias and Phintias. 17 In addition, Cohen has noted a possible link among Oltos, Euphronios and Euxitheos. 18 Not all known painters or potters signed all their work, of course, and some seem never to have signed their vases at all. It should also be noted that even when multiple vases in the oeuvre of a painter or potter are signed, they need not necessarily be signed by the same person. Hands can vary widely within an artist’s body of work, both in signa- tures and in other types of vase inscriptions. 19 The variations are obvious, even to the untrained eye. The signatures of Sakonides, for instance, are not all by the same hand. 20 Likewise, the signatures of Pamphaios vary widely from cup to cup. 21 Immerwahr suggests that the person responsible for the signature may not even be the potter, as orthodoxy holds, but rather the painter, who may have been copying models for his inscriptions. 22 If Immerwahr is correct that signatures were painted from models provided to the artists, it suggests that potters or painters and their workshop had a great deal of control over what they chose to present on their pot and, perhaps, how much eff ort they expended in meeting market forces. This would be particularly true of potters whose work is usually signed, such as Nikosthenes, Tleson, and Pamphaios, all of whom had a large presence in Etruria. While this particular issue cannot be explored in depth here, at minimum the lack of consistency among artists’ hands and the fact that not all works of a particular artist were signed demon- strate the innate mutability of signatures. There is much that we cannot know. Chronology From the time of the adoption of the Phoenician alphabet in Greece in the eighth century b.c.e. , pottery was a vehicle for text. 23 The earliest known Attic inscription is a graffi to on an oinochoe found in the Dipylon cemetery in Athens. 24 Signatures appear later in the Archaic period, becoming common in Athens only after the mid- sixth century. Their use continues throughout the 157 ARTISTS’ SIGNATURES ON ARCHAIC GREEK VASES FROM ATHENS 157 Table 10.1. Chronological Breakdown of Signed Vases 600 400 200 0 600–575575–550550–525525–500500–475475–450450–425425–400400–375375–350350–325 Number of Signed Vases Classical period until the early fourth century, after which only a few vessels were signed. The earliest known painted inscription with a signature appears on a bowl dating from 720 to 700 b.c.e. , found at Pithecusae on Ischia. As will be dis- cussed later, the signature is clearly part of the decoration. 25 The earliest extant signed Attic vases, both the work of Sophilos and using both the verbs egrapsen ( ἔγραψεν) and epoie ( ἐποίε), date from 600 to 575 b.c.e. 26 The practice quickly caught on. From 575 to 500 b.c.e. , CAVI lists thirty such vases. It would appear, then, that Attic vase painters and potters may have come later to the idea of signing their wares than did non- Attic artists. As time passed, the practice of signing one’s work became increasingly pop- ular among Attica’s vase painters and potters. Table 10.1 demonstrates this. From two signatures between 600 and 575 b.c.e. , and thirty between 575 and 550 b.c.e. , the numbers soar to 449 between 550 and 525 b.c.e. After that, a slow decline begins from 525 to 500 b.c.e. , when there are 252 signed pot- tery vessels known, to 500 to 475 b.c.e. , from which period 172 signed vases are extant. After 475 b.c.e. , a very steep decline begins, with thirty- six vases from 475 to 450 b.c.e. , twelve from 450 to 425 b.c.e. , fi fteen from 425 to 400 b.c.e. , two from 400 to 375 b.c.e. , and one each in the periods 375– 350 b.c.e. and 350– 325 b.c.e. Even given the fragmentary nature of the evidence, the trend is a powerful one: artists who signed their work did so almost entirely in the Archaic period.