ATTİK VAZO RESMİNİN RESİM SANATI BAĞLAMINDA DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Yıl 2017, Sayı: 7, 1 - 17, 30.12.2017

Üftade Muşkara Serpil Şahin

Öz

Arkeolojide, Attik siyah figür ve kırmızı figür vazolarının vazolar üzerindeki çömlekçi ya da ressam imzalarından yola çıkarak özellikle belirli bireylere, ressamlara, atfedilmesi çok önem taşıyan çalışmalardır. Bunun nedeni, vazo resimlerinin detaylı incelenmesi ve stil kritiği ile ressamlar arasında ilişkiyi kurmak ve siyah figür ve kırmızı figür vazolar için bir kronoloji oluşturmanın mümkün olmasıdır.Ancak bu alanda çalışan bazı bilim insanlarının, çalışmaların sınırları ile ilgili şüpheleri vardır. Bu bağlamda Attik figürlü vazoları için ressam belirleme (atıf) çalışmalarının, günümüz “sanatçı” algımız bağlantısı ile yeniden değerlendirilmesi gereklidir. Bu değerlendirmenin bir ressamın bakış açısı ve uzmanlığı ile yapılması atıf çalışmalarının gerçek kapsamı ve içeriğini aydınlatılmasına olanak sağlayacaktır. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Attik vazo ressamları, atıf çalışmaları, Morelli yöntemi, vazo resimleri uzmanlığı

EVALUATION OF ATTIC VASE PAINTING IN THE CONTEXT OF ART OF PAINTING

Öz

The attribution of vases to particular individual hands based on the signatures of painters or potters on the vases, the connoisseurship, obtained too much importance especially in the case of Athenian black figure and red figure pottery. It is because; through close examination of details of style it becomes possible to establish the interaction between “artists” and a sequential chronology for vases of black figure and red figure techniques. But some scholars have raised doubts on the limits of such studies. Reexamination of our perception of artist in connection with the attribution studies for Attic figured pottery and the idea supporting connoisseurship are necessary. Determination of figured pottery from a canvas painter’s point of expertise could illuminate the limitations and real context of attribution studies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Attic vase painters, attribution studies, the connoisseurship, Morellian method

Kaynakça

• Alexandridou, A. 2011. The Early Black-Figured Pottery in Context (c. 630-570 BCE), Leinden: Brill.
• Beazley, J.D. 1931. “Amasea”, JHS, 51: 256-285.
• Beazley, J.D. 1944. Potter and Painter in Ancient Athens, London: Oxford University Press.
• Beazley, J.D. 1986. The Development of Attic Black-Figure, Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Boegehold, A.L. 1985. “The Time of the Amasis Painter”, The Amasis Painter and His World: Vase-Painting in Sixth-Century B.C. Athens, ed. D. Bothmer, Malibu: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 15-32.
• Bothmer, D. 1985. “The World of the Amasis Paniter”, The Amasis Painter and His World: Vase-painting in Sixth-Century B.C. Athens, ed. D. Bothmer, Malibu: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 33-58.
• Cohen, B. 1991. “The Literate Potter: A Tradition of Incised Signatures on Attic Vases”, Metropolitan Museum Journal, 26: 49-95.
• Fichner-Rathus, L. 2008. Foundations of Art and Design: An Enhanced Media Edition, Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
• Frel, J. 1994. Studia Varia, Roma: L'Erma di Bretschneider.
• Liassarrague, F. 1997. “Le peintre des demi –palmettes: aspects iconographiques”. (Eds), Athenian Potters and Painters, eds. J. Oakley et al., Oxford : Oxbow, 125-139.
• Merten, J.R. 1987. “The Amasis Painter: Artist and Tradition”, The Amasis Painter and His World: Vase-Painting in Sixth-Century B.C. Athens, ed. D. Bothmer, Malibu: The J. Paul Getty Museum. 168-183.
• Morris, I. 1994. “Archaeologies of Greece”, Classical Greece: Ancient Histories and Modern Archaeologies, ed. I. Morris, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 8-47
• Morris-Kay, Gillian M., 2010. “The Evolution of Human Artistic Creativity”, Journal of Anatomy, 216(2): 158-176.
• Neer, R. 2005. “Connoisseurship and the Stakes of Style”, Critical Inquiry, 32: 1-26.
• Oakley, J. 1998. “Why study a Greek vase-painter?”, Antiquity, 72: 209-13.
• Oakley, J. 2009. “The State of the Discipline, Greek Vase Painting”, AJA, 113: 599-627.
• Pevnick, S. 2010. “Loaded Names, Artistic Identity, and Reading an Athenian Vase”, Classical Antiquity, 29: 222-249.
• Robertson, M. 1987. “The State of Attic Vase Painting in the Mid-Sixth Century”, Papers on the Amasis Painter and His World, ed. A.P.A. Belloli, Malibu: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 1329.
• Rouet, P. 2001. Approaches to the Study of Attic Vases: Beazley and Pottier, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Sapirstein, P. 2013. “Painters, Potters, and the Scale of the Attic Vase-Painting Industry”, AJA, 117: 493-510.
• Sapirstein, P. 2014. “Demographics and Productivity in Ancient Athenian Pottery Industry”, Athenian Potters and Painters, ed. J. Oakley, Oxford: Oxbow. 175-186.
• Shanks, M. 1996. Classical Archaeology of Greece. London: Routledge. Turner, M. 2000. “Attribution and Iconography”, Mediterranean Archaeology, 13: 55-66.
• Uglow, L. 2014. “Giovanni Morelli and His Friend Giorgione: Connoisseurship, Science and Irony”, Journal of Art Historiography.
• https://arthistoriography.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/uglow.pdf, Accessed 15.09.2015
• Vickers, M. 1985. “Artful Crafts: The Influence of Metal Work on Athenian Painted Pottery”, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 105: 108-128.
• Williams, D. 2009. “Picturing Potters and Painters”, Athenian Potters and Painters. edsJ. Oakley-O. Palagia (Eds),Oxford : Oxbow. 307-317.
• Wilson, N. 2006. Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece. New Yok: Routledge. Whitley, J. 1997. “Beazley as a Theorist”, Antiquity, 71: 40-47.