Skip to main content

'Not Praising, Burying': Cambridge Workshop

The acquisition of figure-decorated Greek pottery by museums and its display alongside fine art raises certain issues about the ancient status of such ancient objects. Even Athenian pots attributed to "high status" artists can be shown (from ancient trademarks) to have had relatively low status. So when a museum pays $1 million for an Athenian krater, does it distort our perception of ancient "art"?

Issues such as this were explored in Artful Crafts, co-authored with Professor Michael Vickers, formerly of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

A workshop on the theme will be held at the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge on Friday 2 November. Details are available from the McDonald Institute website.
A workshop/symposium, to be understood as an artwork, that brings together archaeology, art practice, art history, philosophy, classics and history to interrogate assumptions about status, art and culture through classical Greek pottery will take place at the Fitwilliam Museum. This talk will describe this type of art practice and its processes. A few of the workshop participants including artist and Arts and Humanities Research Council Fellow in the Creative and Performing Arts with the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Alana Jelinek, archaeologist David Gill, and Kettles Yard's Sarah Campbell will present their impressions.
The following week (Thursday 8 November, 5.30 - 7.00 pm) there will be a discussion:
Alana Jelinek and Prof David Gill plus other participants will discuss the workshop process and the potential for relationships between art and archaeology and the potential of this methodology for art practice.

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know


kyri said…
hi david,i think the main problem archaeologists have is having antiquities labled as "art" in the first place.we can use your words for any other number of art mediums.
so when a museum pays $100,million for a van gogh
[who like some athenian painters was of "relatively low status and couldnt give his paintings away when he was alive] does it distort our perception of "art" of course it doesnt.
my mother commissioned a preist to paint an icon for our local greek orthodox church last year,she presented the icon to the church as a gift,it doesnt have any intrinsic value now and would probably fetch £100 at auction,it is the spiritual value that is important to her,as it was for the people that painted the byzantine icons of 1000 years ago that in some cases are now priceless,at the time they were painted they were anything but.
personally i believe the greek figured pots are exactly the same as these icons,they were painted to order by the deceased or the family of the deceased and placed in the tomb for spiritual reasons and its obvious that they were not high status objects but they were very high status when it come to the religeos beliefs of the people that were buried with them.
for me some of these everyday objects of the ancients are great works of art,whether they are sold for $1k or one million,why does a price tag ,that is created by economic markets of supply and demand distort our many euphronios kraters are there,not many,so this is reflected in the price people are willing to pay now.whatever the value was 2000 years ago is totally irrelevant,is it not.
when i see a bed made by tracy emin sell as "art" for hundreds of thousands i cant get my head round it but when i see a volute krater with maybe 20 figures painted on it and it sells for 100k i can understand exactly why the buyer is paying the money.just like beuty is in the eye of the beholder,so is art,in whichever forms it comes in,including antiquties.
kyri said…
hi david,i wrote the last comment after a 13hr shift.i wanted to say that i believe these pots were commissioned by the familys,not done by them.there must have been ready made examples but the really special ones are totally unique and these are the ones i believe were commissioned.we have plenty examples of votive steles commissoned,to everyones individual needs,why not pots.
why is it so hard for michael vickers and yourself to believe that some painters may have been famous and sought after above others.the ancients were not much different from ourselves,we have many people who desire a certain brand or work by a certain artist,i dont subscribe to the idea that everything in clay was a poor mans version of an example in silver or gold,just the shear size of some of these pots,volute kraters especially makes that idea to simplistic.

Popular posts from this blog

Marble bull's head from the temple of Eshmun

Excavations at the temple of Eshmun in Lebanon recovered a marble bull's head. It is now suggested that it was this head, apparently first published in 1967, that was placed on loan to New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art (Tom Mashberg, "Met Museum Turns Over Another Relic With Disputed Past to Prosecutors", New York Times August 1, 2017 ). The head is reported to have been handed over to the Manhattan district attorney after a request was received from the Lebanese authorities.

It is suggested that the head may have been looted from an archaeological storage area at Byblos in the 1980s during the Lebanese civil war. Mashberg has rehearsed the recent collecting history:
The owners of the bull’s head, Lynda and William Beierwaltes of Colorado, say they have clear title to the item and have sued Manhattan prosecutors for its return.  The Beierwaltes bought the head from a dealer in London in 1996 for more than $1 million and then sold it to another collector, Michael …

The Toledo skyphos and a Swiss private collection

The Attic red-figured skyphos attributed to the Kleophon painter in the Toledo Museum of Art (inv. 1982.88) is now coming under further scrutiny following the research of Dr Christos Tsirogiannis. The skyphos shows Hephaistos returning to Olympos.

Tsirogiannis has identified what appears to be this skyphos in five photographs in the Medici Dossier. The museum acknowledged that the skyphos had resided in a 'private Swiss collection'. Tsirogiannis suggests that this is probably a reference to Medici.

Enquiries to the museum by Tsirogiannis elicited the information that the skyphos had been acquired from Nicholas Koutoulakis (although that information does not appear on the museum's online catalogue).

The curatorial team at the Toledo Museum of Art will, no doubt, be contacting the Italian authorities to discuss the future residence of the skyphos.

For further discussion of the Toledo Museum of Art on LM see here.

Tsirogiannis, C. 2017. "Nekyia: Museum ethics an…

Metropolitan Museum of Art hands over Paestan krater

In May 2014 I commented on a Paestan krater acquired by New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art after it had been identified by Dr Christos Tsirogiannis in photographic images seized from Giacomo Medici. Tsirogiannis published his full concerns in the Journal of Art Crime in 2014, but it has taken a further three years for the museum to respond.

The krater showing Dionysos in a hand-drawn cart was purchased in 1989 from the Bothmer Purchase Fund (details from the Museum's website, inv. 1989.11.4). The krater surfaced through Sotheby's New York in June 1989.

It is unclear who consigned the krater to Sotheby's New York.

It has now been revealed that the krater has been handed over to the US authorities after a warrant had been issued (Tom Mashberg, "Ancient Vase Seized From Met Museum on Suspicion It Was Looted", New York Times July 31, 2018).

It appears that the museum did make an attempt to resolve the case in December 2016. Mashberg notes:
The Met, for its par…