Reasoning: Greek History Review #11: Approaches to Greek Prehisotry

One  of the things that makes grad school challenging is that the classes offered have little or nothing to do with the qualification exams that we have to pass in order to advance to candidacy. As such, the exams are a really good excuse for procrastinating on my other work, because there is never a dedicated time to study for them. After studying for it periodically when my other work was getting me down, I decided that I will probably attempt my Greek History survey exam in a few months time,

Thus, since I finished my final paper, I've been studying Greek history (insofar as the holidays have allowed),  As I've been reading the books on my list (and listening to various lectures while I walk), I've notice a number of interesting and bizarre things about general Greek history (and by this I mean both Greek history as written for students or popular Greek history written for a mass audience).

• The last twenty years have radically changed the way in which Greek history is presented to a general audience, I make this claim from a number of different encounters with texts and I'll illustrate it with a few examples. 
• Back in 1992, Jeffrey McInerney, currently a member of the Art and Archaeology Group at Penn and the chair of the Classical studies department  gave a series of popular lectures through the "Great Courses" series put out by The Teaching Company. While the lectures were never going to be cutting edge, I was surprised at his complete disregard for certain archaeological innovations. Even though he has himself dug at Crete, he argues that we can't ever really know anything about the Minoans. Odder still, he waxes poetic about his admiration of Arthur Evans [1].
• The entirety of the Dark Age chapter in the 1999 edition of is based on the evidence of Homer instead of archaeology. To provide one of any number of examples, consider the foreign relations section (Pomeroy et al [1999] 59-60): "in the Dark Age, 'diplomatic' relations between one chiefdom and another were conducted by the chiefs themselves for by a trusted companion. As part of his training, Odysseus was sent at a young age to Messenia by his 'father and other elders'  on an embassy to collect a 'debt' owed to the Ithacans. This was a serious affair, for the Messenians had raided Ithaca and stolen three hundred sheep and their shepherds. If negotiations failed, Ithacans would stage a revenge raid, and the bad feelings would likley escalate into an all-out war" (Pomeroy et al [2012] 59).
• However, In the 2012 edition of Pomeroy et al's Ancient Greece: A Political, Social, and Cultural History, the authors still present archaeology from the 60s, specifically the survey archaeology used to find settlements from "Dark Age," as a revolutionary tactic (Pomeroy et al [2012] 57).
• Also, something I've noticed about the presentation of ancient history in general (if I end up reviewing Michael Crawford's The Roman Republic, I will have plenty to say on this subject) is that the authors from pre-1995 (although I'm still it still happens more recently) tend to do a lot of moralizing about the history they are presenting. McInerney makes the hilarious claim that the Spartans' fall was partially due to their moral bankruptcy which was shown through their willingness to take their nearby neighboring Greeks (the Messenians) as slaves. I couldn't believe it when i heard this argument. First off, doing that kind of moralizing in a history text seems inexcusable to me. But second, seriously? The Greeks all took other Greeks as slaves-- mostly prisoners of war. Although Sparta's enslavement was more systematic it was essentially the same principle; the Messenians lost two major battles to the Spartans so they were essentially prisoners of war. I remember reading about a similar thing in the scholarship of the women in the Late Republic and Early Empire is the same.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. I will be commenting on Robin Osborne's Greece in the Making 1200-479 BC shortly as well, so stay tuned in the new year.


Happy Holidays, everyone!

Appetitive: Thoughts on the Audio Aeneid

I have a confession to make: I've never been able to get all the way through the Aeneid-- until a few months ago.

I was assigned the Mandlebaum translation in my first year of undergraduate study. I think I managed to get through Book 6 before my interest entirely ebbed away (and the only part I actually liked was Book 5-- the funeral games). I tried again to get through the whole thing when I read Book 8 in the Latin my third year in college. I managed to get through Books 1 and; 2 (and obviously Book 8 in the Latin), but no further. Then, a few summers ago, I tried to read it again for my own edification with the Fagles translation. Once again, I just failed to get through it. Then, two years ago, when I read Book 2 in the Latin, I tried again with the Fitzgerald translation, but it was a failure.

There's something about the Aeneid that just fundamentally doesn't appeal to me. I'm not sure what it is. I just would rather be doing something-- anything-- else. So, since I have a 30 minute walk each way from my apartment to class every day, I decided to get an audio version so I could feel like I was doing something productive on my walks. It worked. I finished the Aeneid in about a week of walking and house-cleaning (audiobooks have save the state of my apartment).

I recommend this version. It's the Fagles translation, which is colloquial without straying too far from the text. Simon Callow's narration is a little over the top (and his female voices are quite annoying), but it kept me engaged in the story while I was doing other things. I actually noticed some interesting things (how many of Aeneas' actions are motivated by omens, for example).

Once I finished that, I started downloading other audio books of various other classical texts (including Ian McKellen's wonderful reading of Fagles' Odyssey). It makes me feel productive on my walks to and from class. More recently, I've been listening to Paul Cartledge's The Spartans, in order to study for my Greek history survey exam.

Appetitive: Greek History Review #10: Lectures on Greek History

http://www.feedbooks.com/userbook/12750/introduction-to-ancient-greek-historyI am still really sick and am confined to activities which require little brainpower and less physical strength. It is a nasty flu. Anyway, one of the few things i have been up to doing is listening to Donald Kagan's lectures on Greek history and reading along with the class assignments in Ancient Greece. I don't, sadly, have access to a copy of the second textbook, Problems in Ancient History, but I've been doing the rest of the reading. It's been fun so far. His lectures are enjoyable and move at a steady pace and they enliven the somewhat dry, textbook approach of Ancient Greece.

 

I am currently listening to lecture number 5, the second of a two-part set on the "Rise of the Polis." A list of the lectures can be found here, or you can read the text of the lectures here. I am posting the current lecture below:

Enjoy!

Appetitive: Greek History Review #9: Reading Herodotus

I have been enjoying the Berekeley podcasts I have been listening to so much that I started reading Herodotus. Professor Pafford discusses Herodotus often, and I became so excited about Herodotus that I decided to read it in, at least at the moment, in lieu of my other Greek History studying.

I am reading the Landmark Herodotus, edited by Robert Strassler. Cerinthus gave me this absolutely stunning a thorough volume for Christmas a few years ago. I read the introduction this morning out on the porch in between a desperate (and successful) attempt to salvage some badly-mangled pizza dough and an attempt to talk to Propertius II about Isocrates (sadly unsuccessful due to technical difficulties with skype). The introduction is written by Rosalind Thomas, and is a delightful and meandering introduction (divided into sections for easy reference by the text itself) and it goes through some of the big issues in Herodotus, such as his accuracy, in a way that provides new information to either a layman or someone with an undergraduate degree in classics. Her writing style is warm and accessible. More reviews on the volume as I continue.

Appetitive/Reasoning: Greek History Review #8: The Invasion of the Safety Pins

I mentioned in "Greek History Review #7" that I was listening to Berkeley's 2007 History 4A, which is a basic survey history of the Mediterranean world from Mesopotamia to late antiquity. The course is obviously brief, but it was a nice survey of Egypt for me, having little previous experience with Egyptian history. It was not until the moment where she spoke about the end of the Mycenean age that I decided that I really liked (now Professor, then doctoral student) Isabelle Pafford.

 

I find Mycenean archaeology pretty fascinating, although I know little about it. Until this summer when I started my Greek history review, I had always assumed that the Dorian invasion was a myth made up by the Greeks. It was not until I read an ancient Greek history textbook my grandfather gave to me and (if I remember correctly) Early Greece, proposed the possibility of a possible historical Dorian invasion. Pomoroy et al say that this is problematic because "the only material signs of the Dorians are now dated much later than the destruction period, to around 1000 BC or later" (Pomeroy et al 39). What the book does not say is exactly what constitutes that material evidence. Pafford tells her audience it is a total of 48 non-Mycenean safety pins. Seriously. Safety pins. That just cracked me up. I really enjoy the humor of classical historians.

Apparently, according to Lecture 11, the "safety pins" may correspond to a section in Herodotus that talks about the women with the Heracedae who wore distinctive long pins in their manner of dress. Still, safety pins as the material evidence amuses me.

Perhaps I am an idealist, but I like the idea of an historical Dorian invasion. I am sure that if I ever study the safety pins and any other potential evidence I will be as much of a skeptic as anyone else. I guess I'll see.

Appetitive/Reasoning: Greek History Review #7: A Brief History of the Mediterranean

Although I have been working on improving my Greek and Latin reading, some of my attempt to review my history has fallen by the wayside. I have, however, been listening to various lectures while I do chores. I decided that I should listen to history in my own field (what a concept!) while I cook and do the various chores I have to do anyway. I am currently listening to Berkeley's History 4A which is a basic history of the Mediterranean. It can be found on Berkeley's Webcast Site or on iTunes U (the lectures are in reverse order on iTunes). The professor's voice is a little grating and she has a lazy way of speaking, but she is informative and reasonably engaging in her content. I am on the second lecture that is available, which is on Egypt. The lectures will move into Greece soon. I recommend the lectures thus far.

Appetitive: Bread in Anicent Greece

As I abandoned my work on reading Μήδεια this morning to bake some bread, I thought I should investigate bread in the ancient world. Amusingly, most what I know about Ancient Greek cooking comes from Plato and Xenephon. In the Republic, Plato describes the healthy city, the minimalist city with which he and his interlocutors begin their discussion, as being essentially vegetarian. The feverish or unhealthy city that follows it in the discussion not only lets in actors and prostitutes but also brings in meat alongside the bread, vegetables, and porridge of the more primitive version. In Xenephon's account of the Symposium, Socrates questions a young man who takes too much "savory," which I presume is a chunky stew or stirfry of some kind, with his bread. This method of eating appears to make the eater immoderate, pleasure seeking, and troublesome in Xenephon's eyes [1].

There is actually a concise, but sadly rather short, description of the varieties of Greek bread on Wikipedia. Apparently, according to the article, Solon ordained that leavened bread should be reserved for special occasion, and bread was leavened with a yeast coming from wine fermentation.

Another random factoid from my memory is that in Ancient Greece: A Political, Social and Cultural History, the authors alledge that the ancient Greeks did not like the taste of butter. My first question was, "how would you know?"

Endnotes

1. I apologize for my lack of citation but I am doing this from memory. I will hopefully come back and add the section numbers at some point.

Reasoning: Greek History Review #6

I've been organizing my Greek History studying in order to put it into a coherent pattern and create a "syllabus" [1]. In tracing the history, I am not focusing on the Minoan and Mycenean developments because I although I have some interest in archaeology, it is not my primary interest nor something about which I have a lot of background. Some of this I have related before, but not in an organized fashion.

So here is my reading for Greek History from c.2000-600 BCE [2]:

Minoans, Myceneans, Early Dark Ages, and Sources:

Secondary Sources (General background on Early Greece)

• Early Greece by Oswyn Murray, chapters 1-2 (pages 1-34)
• Ancient Greece: A Political, Social, and Cultural History by Pomeroy et al, chapter 1 (pages 1-40)
• The Art and Culture of Early Greece, 1100-480 B.C.by Jeffrey Hurwit chapter 1 (pages 15-32)
• Archaic and Classical Greek Art by Robin Osborne chapter 1 (pages 1-21)
• "The Emergence of the State in the Prehistoric Aegean" [3] by John F. Cherry. 

Primary Sources (The Greeks on their own early history)

•  Histories by Herodotus 1.56, 2.53
• The History of the Peloponnesian Wars by Thucydides 1.1-8, 1.12

The Dark Age (c.1100-750): 

Primary Sources (Possible evidence for Dark Age aristocracy and politics)

•  Odyssey by Homer, Books 1-19 (I will read through 24 in order to check it off my reading list)
• Agamemnon by Aeschylus. Lines 1-907.

Secondary Sources (The Dark Age and Homer as a Historical Source)

• Early Greece by Oswyn Murray, chapters 3-4 (pages 35-68)
• Ancient Greece: A Political, Social, and Cultural History by Pomeroy et al, chapter 2 (pages 41-81)
• The Art and Culture of Early Greece, 1100-480 B.C.by Jeffrey Hurwit, chapters 2-3 (pages 33-125)
• Archaic and Classical Greek Art by Robin Osborne chapter 2 (pages 23-41)
• Sons of the Gods, Children of Earth by Peter Rose, chapter 1-3 (pages 43-130) [4]
• "The Use and Abuse of Homer" Ian Morris (JSTOR)

The Early Archaic Age (c.750-600): 

Primary Sources (Early Archaic politics and the beginnings of the polis)

•  The Works and Days by Hesiod

Secondary Sources (Politics in the Early Archaic and the Influence of Trade)

• Early Greece by Oswyn Murray, chapters 4-5
• Ancient Greece: A Political, Social, and Cultural History by Pomeroy et al, chapter 3 (pages 82-130)
• The Art and Culture of Early Greece, 1100-480 B.C.by Jeffrey Hurwit, chapter 4 (pages 125-202)
• Archaic and Classical Greek Art by Robin Osborne chapter 2 (pages 21-40) 
  
• "Hesiod and His World" [3] by Paul Millett
  

Endnotes

1. I borrowed significantly from the Greek History syllabus from the class I took in Fall 2008. My own additions primarily are the art and archaeology sources (some of which I borrowed from my classical world survey course), and some textbook background on Greek History. I also changed many of the translations used either because I liked the editions or translations better, or they were more easily accessible.
2. These dates are going to overlap a lot, and each of the articles and chapters deal with different eras. I am going to go by the traditional dates of the Mycenean's arriving in Greece c.2000 and the Dark Age beginning c.1100.
3. I realize that this literary analysis-- and specifically an unorthodox Marxist literary analysis-- is a bizarre choice for a history reading list. However, I really like Rose's work and his methodology, and I think that his readings try to situate the reader in the culture of the period, and specifically in terms of what relations between ruling groups.
4. The Cambridge Philosophical Journal: The Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society (1984). I happened upon this article when I was looking for the Hesiod article and I ended up enjoying it.

Reasoning: Greek History Review #5, the Minoan Palace Culture

I found (what I deem to be) a fascinating article on the emergence of the Palace culture in the Aegean. The article is called "The Emergence of the State in the Prehistoric Aegean" [1] written by John F. Cherry [2]. The article is both methodologically reasonable and provides a persuasive case for the problems with and conclusions that may be drawn from Minoan archaeology. However, I am no expert on early (or really any) Minoan culture and if anyone has a perspective on the article, I would love to hear your comments.

Methodology
Cherry tries to balance between a comparative historical approach and while not generalizing the comparison so far that it yields no useful results. He argues that Aegean provides a situation within a small area in which there were multiple cycles of complex societies in which the early society completely collapsed before the next cycle (Cherry 18). He explains that it is unusual for scholars (or was in the mid-1980s) to do so, and "the lack of incentive is no doubt attributable to the feeling that there are simply too many real differences, both in general structure and particular detail, between the political systems of the Classical world and those of the Bronze Age for a unified analytical framework to be anything other than superficial" (Cherry 19). He balances against the "too much writing both about Greek Bronze Age states and about the later poleis has been bedevilled by the assumption that they are simply sui generis and thus cannot stand in comparison with other institutions" [3] (Cherry 24).

He has two aims: first, to crystalize the analysis around the central concept of the state in order to understand changes in the archeological record and second to distill a long history of analysis in different fields in order to place the 'polities of the Minoan and Mycenean worlds in the broader contests they demand" (Cherry 24).

Historical Analysis
According to Cherry, there are a number of different factors that are often included in the explanation for ancient state formation, including agriculture, the nature of the earlier settlements, etc but there are a large group of similar societies that did not develop into states (e.g. place-like cultures). Cherry's question, then, is what makes the Minoan settlements, and specifically Crete, develop unlike other areas with similar circumstances (Cherry 21-23).

The first major change is the shift from the subsistence basis of the economy in the Neolithic to the cultivation of the grape vine and the olive tree (Cherry 24) and the "secondary products revolution" using livestock for "milk, wool, riding. traction, and pack transport" (Cherry 25) rather than solely for meat. However, although this certainly boloster the economic base, it cannot be sufficient for the creation of a palatal society because many places  experienced this "secondary products revolution" and did not become full civilizations (Cherry 26-27).

Another problem with the traditional model of understanding the rise of Minoan civilization is that scholars and archaeologists usually assume a slue period of growth over 2 millennia that lead to the emergence of palace culture, including a culture of "proto-palaces." However, according to Cherry, there is little evidence of this slow growth, especially because more recent excavations and analysis shows the "proto-palaces" to be small villages rather than single manors (Cherry 27-29). This points to a quicker development, but there is little evidence of this developmental phase (Cherry 33).

One of the unique things about the evidence of Minoan society is a lack of defensive walls a militaristic culture. This lead to the dominant "'consensus' model of palace origins, in which the palaces are seen as the focal points of activities contributing to the general welfare" (Cherry 33). However, as Cherry points out, "Rather than asking 'What services did Minoan rulers provide for society', perhaps the question should be inverted: 'In spite of the fact that their activities serve their own ends, how did the elite establish and maintain their control?' No ruler can hope to retain power without using the stick as well as the carrot" (Cherry 34). So if there was not a militarism of direct force, ther must have been a strong ideological basis for the rule, although I think cherry goes too far when he compares it to the Augustan ideological reforms (Cherry 35).



The final point that Cherry makes is that the location of Crete, with easy trade-routs to the established cultures in the east might have provided the necessary edge for the development of an organized and bureaucratic palatal society (Cherry 36) based more on wealth and diplomatic contacts than military might.

Endnotes

1. Early on in the article, Cherry addresses the problem with the anachronism and problematic model connoted by the word "state" and explains it as such: " The state can be defined as a powerful, complex, permanently instituted, system of centralised political administration; it exercises sovereignty in carrying out basic political functions (e.g. maintaining territorial rights and internal order, or making and executing decisions regarding group action) and its authority in these matters is buttressed by sovereignty in the use of force within its jurisdiction. States are also societies with relatively complex and specialised administrative organisation, involving hierarchically ordered personnel who perform specialised administrative task and make decisions" (Cherry 23).
2. Cherry, John F. "The Emergence of the State in the Prehistoric Aegean," The Cambridge Classical Jounral: Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society. No. 210 (New Series, No. 30). 1984. p18-28.
3. While I found myself banging my head against the wall in classes listening to wind-bag history majors making absurd claims comparing Athenian metics to 19th century Eastern European emigrants and subsequently decided that all comparative historical claims were totally bogus for the Ancient World, I realized that Cherry has a point. Restricting comparisons by location and period, as well as critically evaluating the comparative frameworks, could provide useful information that might not arise from avoiding comparative methodology entirely.
   

Reasoning: Sophistocation and Idiots in Greek Art

In my first year of college I took an interdisciplinary survey course on the classical world. The class had a lecture component, in which professors gave lectures, primarily in their own field, one some aspect of the Greek or Roman world in vaguely chronological order. One of the early lectures was by an Art History professor who I will call William, since I cannot come up with an adequate late Republican pseudonym, and it concerned one of the most famous works in early Greek art: the Dipylon Vase (750-700 BCE).

Dipylon Vase from this website [1].

After the lecture, I thought to myself what an ugly vase and what a stupid lecture. Little did I know that not only would I ultimately grudgingly vindicate the ideas in this lecture that I initially excoriated, but I would also write a chapter of my thesis on the funerary images like that prominently figured on the Dipylon Vase (close up below).

A close-up of the burial scene from this website [2].

Willaim's Claim: In his lecture William claimed (almost verbatim) was that the Greeks had perspective, they just were not employing it because it was not the proper means to the end they were trying to achieve. More infuriated by the wording of the claim than anything, but specifically incensed that a tenured art history professor was allowed to make such a bogus claim.

It was not until now that I realized what he meant. He was not making the claim that the Dipylon Master [3] could achieve Renaissance-style perspective, but rather that the art of this time period had it's own particular style of representation and visual formula that it employed to depict certain recognizable images to its audience. This pottery conveyed the events in a recognizable and stylized manner because it effectively communicated to the audience, possibly more effectively than a more realistic attempt. For evidence of this, when I decided to write this blogpost, I was scouring the internet for images and happened upon the Dipylon Krater (below) and it took me about half-an-hour before I realized that this was not the Dipylon Vase which I was seeking.

Dipylon Krater (700-750 BCE) from this website [5].

Obviously I am not saying that any attempt at an accurate depiction would have been particularly life-like, especially given the almost complete absence of figure drawing in Submycenean and Protogeometric art (Hurwit 53-59) [4]. My contention is that the oddities of representation, such as the three-quarter legs, the full-frontal torso, and the profile head on the mourners, has a stylistic purpose rather than evidence of crude, "bad" art.


The tropes and stylization in this art is actually something of a bonus for scholars/students like me who are looking not for artistic sophistication, but rather evidence of burial practices. In a future blogpost, I will show images of the geometric vase that I found on display at the end of a hallway at the Getty that provides incredible evidence for early differentiation of the genders in mourning practices which is not shown in either of the Dipylon vases in this blogpost.

Endnotes

1. This picture is from the University of Texas Webpage. Because there are two Dipylon Vases, this one is sometimes known as the Dipylon Amphora.
2. I found a clean, but rather small close-up from a humanities blog. Below is a much clearer close up of a similar scene from the Dipylon Krater.



Close up of burial on Dipylon Krater from this website [5].

3. The Dipylon Master is the name given to the artist who painted the Dipylon Amphora.
4. For a more in-depth but still succinct description of the evolution of art from the collapse of the Mycanean Palace system through the Geometric period, see Jeffrey Hurwit's The Art and Culture of Early Greece, pages 53-70.
5. Both pictures of the Dipylon Krater are from the Glendale Community College webpage.

Reasoning: Iconography of Greek Theater #8, T.H. Carpenter

The second to last talk on that Friday was T.H. Carpenter. I am sure that I have read Carpenter before in some class, but I cannot remember. T.H. Carpenter teaches at Ohio University, and his work focuses on Greek art. His most recent work is on South Italian vase painting and the archaeology of Apulia.

My description of both T.H. Carpenter and his talk is not as vibrant as the others. this is because I spent most of the talk trying not to fall asleep. This is not because Capenter was boring-- his talk was actually quite fascinating. However, I had been up since 6am and I had not consumed any food or caffeine for quite a few hours by the time he got up to speak, so my notes were not as easy to interpret as usual.

If any of the factual information in this section is incorrect, I apologize. This is not the fault of Carpenter, but rather the fault of an inaccuracy in my notes or understanding. If anyone notices anything, comment or email me.

Map of Apulia from this website.

Carpenter's talk primarily concerned the Italiac settlements in Apulia (as opposed to the the Greek settlements in that region, like Taranto). He explained that although there was certainly an theater loving population in the Greek settlements [1]. However, Carpenter makes the surprising case that the Italian settlements also enjoyed Greek theater. There was something in Carpenter's air-- almost sheepish-- that at first made me want to be skeptical of his claims, but his style was engaging and his logic was persuasive so I ended up agreeing with him in the end.

Apulia is the region in the heel of the Italian boot. Taranto was a Spartan settlement in Apulia and Tarantines were supposedly addicted to theater. In the Laws, Plato talks about the Italian and the Sicilian love of theater (659b-c) when he criticises the demos-lead system for deciding upon the winners of theatrical competitions.The Athenian Stranger, the main character in the Laws, seems to see this as a system which encourages typically hedonistic mentality of those who love theater.

There is a lot of imagery that seems to relate directly to theater found in this area, but most of it was not exported. There was only 1%  of these vases outside Apulia, so market for the vases were probably not to sell in Attica. There are a lot of rich tombs in Ruvo, an Italic city in Apulia, which include vases as well as collections of gold and silver. New evidence [1], as well as the evidence from Plato and others, demonstrates that there was tragedy and comedy in this area. One of the tombs at Ruvo had seven vases, four of which had a relationship to theater. The vases came from between 450 and just after 400, and the theater vases came from around 400 which means that the vases were probably not on the second hand market before they went into the tomb. Some of the vases have Attic dialect which hints that the someone understood enough tow ant the vases in their tomb.

Carpenter's conclusion was that even the Italic settlements must have witnessed the performance of tragedy and comedy. Obviously, this seems problematic as both genres were written and performed in Greek and at tragedy contained both Attic and Doric dialect. Also, for poets such as Aeschylus, the language was elevated and formalized far beyond that of everyday speech. How would those in the Italic settlements be able to understand it? But Carpenter hypothesized that because the vases were both produced in Apulia and buried in tombs there, it seems reasonable to conclude that those who chose to have them in their tombs would have been lovers of theater rather than collectors of pottery they did not understand.

The Pronomos Vase was the only vase in the rich Ruvo tomb that was Attic in origin. Carpenter hypothesized that the vase was commissioned by a person who had fallen in love with theater in Athens and perhaps wanted to bring it back to demonstrate the importance of theater. He explains that the volume krater, the particular shape of the vase, was not popular in Athens, but it was popular in Italy where the vase was found. This became a very contentious topic during the question and answer session. Oliver Taplin among other argued that it was probably bought on the second-hand market, since it seems to be commemorating a victory of a particular poet. I am not sure which side I fall on when considering who commissioned the vase and whether or not it was on the second hand market. However, I do think it is reasonable that some of the more educated and wealthier of the Italic people might know Greek and travel to the Greek settlements for the sake of theater. Rather than to collect the Pronomos Vase in order to demonstrate the importance of theater, it might be a momento of a passion and pasttime of a particular group of elites.

Endnotes

1. Plato Laws 659b-c.
2. Oliver Taplin makes this claim in his talk, from which I will post the notes tomorrow.

Reasoning: Iconography of Greek Theater #7, Jeffrey Rusten

Jeffrey Rusten spoke next. He is a professor at Cornell and he specializes in Thucydides as well as working on Greek comedy and tragedy. The most memorable quality about Rusten was his earnestness; he seemed so sincere in his attempt to persuade the audience of the importance of the Phanagoria Chous. It was nice to see a scholar not only passionate about his ideas but who so vehemently tried to convert his audience.

Rusten presented on the importance of an attic chous, a type of small vase, found in Phanagoria on the Black Sea. The vase is from around 400 BCE and is currently housed in the Hermitage State Museum, Talman collection ΦΑ869.47, and is currently in a box in the basement. It was discovered in 1869 in a Ukranian village and a line drawing was published five years later. Part of the reason it has taken me so long to post this is that I cannot seem to find an image of the pot on the internet anywhere. This, of course, actually backs up Rusten's claim. If anyone knows of an image, and could send it to me or post it in a comment, that would be great.

Jeffrey Rusten claims that this is a unique chous which provides important information for the study of Attic comedy, but has unfortunately fallen under the radar of almost all modern scholars. This vase has spent a lot of time in storage and has, according to Rusten, not appeared in scholarship since 1981. His passionate and sincere argument in his talk was that the chous should not be ignored.

The chous is 9.5cm high and shows a surprising five figures and five masks which is paralleled on no other vase of this size. It depicts three actors, one in costume and two in comedy undergarments, and two aulos players in full stage attire. Obviously since there are only three actors, there should only be three masks, but instead there are five. This adds to the incredible symmetry of the vase, where the three center players are framed by the two aulos players who are all facing a center character.

Aside from the costumes which are symbolic of comedy, the central figure sits on a bedroll and carries a twisted staff which indicates that he is a traveler, a character commonly depicted on comic vases. Rusten explains that two of the masks are undistinguished, one is comic, one is tragic, and one looks like a Zeus mask. The scene seems to be taking place backstage, but leaves open a number of questions as to what play it might represent (if it represents a specific scene) and why the vase was found so far from its point of origin.

I thought that Rusten made a persuasive case for the importance of the vase, and I hope that more scholarship will be written about this fascinating depiction of comedy.,

Reasoning: The Iconography of Greek Theater #6, Alan Shapiro

Alan Shapiro was a scholar whose work I had a read in some of my college classes. Shapiro a professor of Archaeology at Johns Hopkins and he writes on Greek vase painting, iconography, and mythology. Alan looked like the stereotypical fabulous professor; he was perfectly

The paper that he presented at the Getty was about depictions of the birth of Helen. Specifically, he spoke about one particular piece of art that showed a representation of the birth of Helen from an egg.

This is a picture of part of the pot from this website. [1]

Alan Shapiro opened his talk with an introduction about miraculous births in Greek mythology. Specifically he focused on the different versions of the myth of Helen. The first version involved Zeus perusing Nemisis. Nemisis, in her flight from Zeus' advances turns herself into a swan. Zeus turns himself into a goose, and rapes her. The egg she lays produces Helen; from the very beginning, Helen is an instrument of retribution. According to Shapiro, Leda was not introduced into the story until later.

The first version including Leda introduces Leda as adopting the baby Helen from Nemisis, who does not want it. One possible way in which this adoption takes place is when Hermes brings the egg to Leda and leaves it by her while she is asleep. Later in the evolution of the myth, Zeus chases Leda and turns into a swan in order to rape her. Another possible story, one which does not involve the birth from an egg, is that on Leda and Tyndareus' wedding night, before Tyndareus could join Leda in their marraige bed, Zeus sneaks in and then leaves, so all of Leda's children are conceived on the same night.

There are a variety of red figure vases that show the egg from which Helen is born. These paintings often depict Leda, Zeus, and the Dioskari surrounding the egg. The Dioskari, Castor and Pollux, are usually portrayed as Helen's older brothers, but are sometimes portrayed as her contemporaries [2]. Some of the vases also portray Leda with a look of astonishment on her face, which can either be interpreted as caused by the first time that she has seen the egg or as an astonishment at the hatching egg. Artists competed for the birthplace of Helen-- some portraying Helen as a native of Athens while others placed her as a native of Sparta. According to Shapiro, Kretinus [3] and Euripides both represented the story in plays.

The end of the lecture focused on the comic portrayal of the image of Helen's birth on the stage. Specifically, this particular vase (shown above) portrays, presumably Leda watching surreptitiously through the door into a room in which a character, presumably Tyndareus is swinging an ax at an egg sitting on the table. On the other side, someone, possibly a slave, looks horrified. Out of the egg, Helen bursts, holding out her hand as to stop the attack.

Much of the question and answer session was devoted to the possible interpretations of this vase. Shapiro noted two possibilities. The first was that Tyndareus hears of Leda's marital infidenlity and attempts to murder her offspring with the offender. This was a typical comic trope. Another possibility is that Tyndareus was trying to break the egg open and managed it. Helen emerges and stops him from delivering another blow. There are any number of possibilities.

My thoughts on this scene is that it might come from a play or represent a story where Tyndareus decides to see whether the offspring in the egg is actually his (which borrows from both of the plotlines above) and cracks the egg open, hoping to have some kind of a traditionally ridiculous Greek recognition scene between family member or to realize that this was the product of another man. Shapiro mentioned that the audience would have been steeped in the layered visuals surrounding the different possibilities for the mythology, which makes this avenue possible.

Endnotes

1. Unfortunately, I could not find the part of the vase that is important to Shapiro's argument. If anyone knows what the vase was called or where I could find a complete picture of it, please post it in a comment.
2. One image that Shapiro showed was a wonderful mosaic on the floor of a Roman villa which depicted Leda and Tyndareus and an egg which is depicted as housing Helen, Castor, and Pollux.
3. I am not sure about the spelling on this.

Reasoning/Spiritied: A Second Addendum to the Barbara Kowalzig Post

 

The Oxford Classical Dictionary sheds (some minimal) new light on "new music." I ended my last post with a question about the dramatic date of Plato's Laws (that was proposed by Zuckert) in light of Kowalzig's argument about new music. My question was, if "new music" (the experimenting with meters of dithyrambic choruses) was contemporary with Plato (as an author) rather than with Zuckert's proposed dramatic date (460-450), then must we discard the dramatic date she proposes. Alternatively, could the Athenian Stranger and be discussing early "new music" or something which sounds like a description of "new music" but actually is something different? So I decided to research the date of "new music" to see if it began c. 450 or whether it was a much later invention.

I have not been able to find much, but I managed to get access to an online version of the Oxford Classical Dictionary. Although there is no specific date for the beginning of "new music," this entry seems to me to create a beginning date of about 430, but this is just an estimate from the names on the list and their careers. Other than the transliterated Greek words, all italics are mine (in order to establish emphasis on the particular sections that are important).

"Choral lyric, an indissoluble blend of poetry, melody, accompaniment and, dance, was already an admired art in the 7th cent., notably in Sparta and at the Delian festivals; competition was endemic and essential in this genre too (see particularly Alcman fr. 1 Poetae Melici Graeci, and the Homeric Hymn to Apollo). We hear of many types: the story of the two that later achieved highest status, dithyramb and tragedy , cannot be retold here. Both originated in the singing and dancing of choruses to the auloi, which always remained the accompanying instrument: the dialogue of drama perhaps grew out of interchanges between the chorus and its leader. Other choral genres, such as paeans, maiden-songs, and victory-songs, were often accompanied by a kithara, sometimes by aulos and kithara together (but the question whether Pindar's victory-songs were indeed choral, or were solo pieces prefacing choral singing, is now the subject of lively dispute). Poet-composers of the late 6th and early 5th cents.— Lasus , Pratinas , Pindar , Simonides , and others—were often self-consciously reflective about their art: traces of various musical controversies survive, and Lasus is said to have written the first treatise on music. Pindar repeatedly proclaims himself a musical innovator (e.g. Olympian Odes 3. 4–6, fr. 61 B. Snell and H. Maehler ). But to moralists from Aristophanes (1) onwards, their period marks the pinnacle of the ancient, simple, educative, and edifying style: afterwards there is nothing but decline into theatricality and populism. As the 5th cent. progressed, melodies came to be embroidered with ornaments and turns, both in the vocal line and independently in its accompaniment. Modulations between scale-systems, facilitated by developments in instruments (more finger-holes on auloi, added strings on the kithera) became common, undermining old links between genre and musical structure. Traditionally distinct genres, such as kitharidia and choral dithyramb, began to merge into new and indeterminate forms. Technical expertise and startling dramatic effect were untiringly pursued: star instrumentalists and singers were idolized by the public, and like their modern counterparts enhanced their musical acts with striking costumes and histrionic bodily movements. Whereas previously the sense, rhythm, and cadence of the words had dictated their musical interpretation, now they were progressively subordinated to musical ideas worked out in their own terms and for their own sake. These developments spelled the downfall of an integrated art closely allied to religion and civic tradition; but it also meant the emancipation of pure music from ritual and, crucially, from poetry, which came gradually to be seen as a separate art. This musical revolution went hand in hand with the radical political and social changes of the later 5th cent., and with the individualistic, questioning modes of thought exemplified in the sophists and Socrates. The main names associated with it are Phrynis, Melanippides (2) , Cinesias , Philoxenus (1) , and especially Timotheus (1) : Cinesias and other purveyors of the ‘new music’, including Agathon and Euripides, are regularly pilloried by Aristophanes (1) . The Theban school of auletes (see Thebes (1) ), notably Pronomus and Antigenidas, achieved astonishing new levels of technical virtuosity and emotional expression.

The new music met with resistance not only from Aristophanes and Plato. A 4th-cent. source paraphrased at [ Plutarch ] De musica 1137–8 lists a string of musicians who deliberately rejected the elaborate styles and theatrical tricks of Timotheus in favour of older and severer forms. But as always in musical history, the new music gradually became old hat. The subtle nuances of intonation and the complex modulations characteristic of Timothean music came to seem heavy and ‘classical’ in their turn, and were supplanted by straightforward diatonic progressions lightly flavoured with chromaticism." (Oxford Classical Dictionary, the entry on "music," section 4: history)

This evidence is problematic for the date of the that Zuckert proposes for Plato's Laws. However, this data is still inconclusive, as is the fact that Plato was talking about "new music" rather than some kind of precursor to that genre. Furthermore, if anyone has a anymore ideas about this, that would be lovely.

Reasoning/Spirited: An Addendum to the Barbara Kowalzig Post

At Barbara Kowalzig's talk, she talked about the differing depictions of chorality in ancient Greece and ancient Egypt. She explains that the Eygptian depictions were much more rigid and formulaic than the corresponding artistic representations in Greece. Also, she mentioned that the according to Herodotus, the Egyptians did not use choruses in their celebrations of Dionysus, which were otherwise much these same as the Greek celebrations (Herodotus 2.48). This aroused my curiosity because of the way that the Athenian Stranger in Plato's Laws advocates employing Egyptian principles for musical and choral dance.

I tried to ask the following question, but unfortunately Mary Louise Hart ended the question-and-answer session before I got the chance:

"In the Laws, the Athenian Stranger suggest using Egyptian Laws for music, but to use them in order to celebrate Dionysus with a chorus. Does Plato's schema alter the civic Hellenic culture of choruses by incorporating the Egyptian rhythms and musical modes (which were different than the Greek choruses) into the musical and military education?"

At the end of the conference during the wine and cheese social, I managed to find her and ask her this question. Gratifyingly, she told me that it was a good question. She explained that at the time that Plato was writing, the art of dithyramb was changing. This change involved the incorporation of new rhythms and modes and came to be called New Music. She explained that the regulation with the unchanging Egyptian rhythms would be a way to strain out the new experimental influence.

This may indeed have been the case. However, it brings up two new questions. First, if this is true, it might call into question Zuckert's dramatic timeline for Plato's dialogues. I say might because I am not sure whether the introduction of New Music happened in around 450 (Zuckert's hypothesis for when the Laws took place.). On the other hand, I cannot seem to find much on New Music at all, so this might not throw off the timeline. [1] Second, if Herodotus, who I strongly believe that Plato would have read for reasons that I can substantiate at some other time, pointed out the connection between Egypt and chorality, could Plato have been trying to make another point, rather than just considering the rigidity of Egyptian rhythms, with the references to the system?

Endnotes

1. If you have any ideas for articles about New Music, please comment or email me.