Tenacious Tendrils: Replicating Nature in South Italian Vase Painting

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper analyzes the presence of floral motifs on Apulian red figure pottery as an expression of the eschatological beliefs held by peoples in Southern Italy. The author demonstrates command over the vast bibliography on south Italian pottery and convincingly draws connections between the “tenacious tendrils” and the funerary undertones of some of these vases. 

Here are some comments:

[ll. 45; 161-171; and throughout the paper]; It is refreshing to see the role of the Italic consumers being discussed together with that of the Greek colonists, since much scholarship still focuses primarily on the painters. However, the reader gets the impression of a fairly culturally homogenous Southern Italy. Should we assume that these images meant the same to the Greeks and the Italics living in Apulia? Or to the people of Apulia and those buried at Paestum, who were a culturally and linguistically different group? The possible differences between Greek and Italic interpretations should be mentioned, for example, when the author discusses the figure of Eros (lines 161-171). The iconography of “Eros” on Apulian pots is fairly different from its Attic counterpart; furthermore, as other androgynous winged characters exist in the iconographic repertoire of other populations in Italy (e.g., the Etruscan Lasa) it cannot be excluded that the people of Apulia read this image differently.

[ll. 19-29; footnote. 1] It is true that floral motifs are fairly rare in Attic vase painting. However, it should be mentioned that they do appear on other media.

[ll. 60-62] Are the flowers represented on the small shapes substantially different from those represented on the larger vases? Why is a practical use (i.e., that they refer to the perfume contained in the vase) assumed? Do they look more realistic?

[footnote 31] A different take on Dionsysos in Southern Italy is offered in Carpenter, T. H. 2011. “Dionysos and the Blessed on Apulian Red-Figured Vases,” in A Different God?: Dionysos and ancient polytheism, ed. R. Schlesier, Berlin, pp. 253-262.

[line 165; and elsewhere in passim] the use of the term indigenous to identify the populations of Apulia is problematic.

[ll. 258-264] Ursula Kastner has recently hypothesized that the buildings in Taranto had been directly inspired by the vase painting , Kastner U., and S. Schmidt 2018. “Unteritalische Vasenmalerei zwischen Griechen und Indigenen,” in Inszenierung von Identitaten. Unteritalische Vasenmalerei zwischen Griechen und Indigenen, pp. 1-10.

[ll. 296-369] Some vases seem to have composite representations of different species of flowers (e.g., the one on the neck of Victoria D88-1969 shown in fig 25). Are some of flowers represented on vases intended to be whimsical? Does this add anything to the general interpretation proposed by the author?

Author Response

I agree that Greek and Italic viewers of these vases could well have interpreted the imagery on the vases I discuss differently. However, since I could not come up with conclusive evidence as to how those interpretations could have varied, I have opted not to specifically determine a "Greek" reading as opposed to an "Italic" one. However, it is a question that I will keep pondering for the future. 

For the footnotes 1 and 31, I made the changes you suggested. Thank you!

The flower types that appear on smaller shapes as opposed to larger shapes are not distinctively different, which I have noted in the text. 

I very much appreciated your thoughts on the "whimsical" flowers - an approach that I had not considered in great depth before your comments arrived. I agree that some of these spectacular creations were the artist's imagination at work and may well have been derived to represent flowers appropriate for a divine setting, wonders beyond what mankind knows, a thought that I worked into the text as well. 

Many thanks for all of the thoughtful feedback - it was most helpful!

Reviewer 2 Report

It would be advisable to carry out a more detailed analysis of the possible influence of other artistic genres that had a direct relationship with ceramics (mosaics, mural painting, architectural decorations) that, despite being cited tangentially in the article, could be developed in greater amplitude.

In the section entitled "The Garden's Inhabitants" it is necessary to quote the references of classical texts that legitimize their hypothesis: Plat. Gorg. 523a, Hig. Fab. 251, Hom. Od. XI. 

The domain of the bibliography is adequate, I would just like to point out some publications in Spanish (if the author is able to read in this language) that would be fundamental since they extensively develop the theme of funerary iconography in Puglia ceramics, and the relationship of Pausias de Sición with the expansion of these floral motifs: 

- Cabrera Bonet, P. (2018): "Orfeo en los Infiernos. Imágenes apulias del destino del alma" Ilu. 

Revista de ciencias de las religiones  23, 31-56.

- Cabrera Bonet, P. (2005): "El dios entre las flores: el mundo vegetal en la iconografía de la Magna Grecia", Paraíso cerrado, jardín abierto: el reino vegetal en el imaginario religioso del Mediterráneo / coord. Ricardo Olmos Romera, Paloma Cabrera Bonet, Santiago Montero Herrero, 147-170.

- Tomás García, J. (2015): Pausias de Sición, Collana/Series: «Maestri dell'Arte Classica» 4 Edizione: Giorgio Bretschneider Editore. 

Author Response

I understand how a comprehensive exploration of floral tendrils in all media during the 4th century B.C. is desirable in this article, but this subject has been explored rather extensively in previous scholarship, particularly in exploration the connections between Macedonia and southern Italy. Rather than risk embarking on a path that could likely end up in cyclical argumentation (e.g. which came first, floral tendrils or Pausias' portrait of Glycera?), I have opted to include more bibliography in the footnotes that discuss these issues. I hope this is an acceptable compromise. However, your point is an issue that I would like to revisit in the future and address more directly. 

I have included the literary references in the section "The Garden's Inhabitants." If I have missed any, my apologies! 

Thank you for the bibliographic suggestions. I was able to get my hands on all of them, and I found them most informative, particularly Cabrera's essays, which made me rethink my own ideas. 

Again, I greatly appreciate the most constructive feedback!

Reviewer 3 Report

106: now on Pausias the monograph J.T. García, Pausias de Sición, Roma Giorgio Bretschneider Editore, 2015.

Note 65: on the apulian naiskoi vases see now: 

L. Todisco, Sulla vexata quaestio dei vasi con naiskoi, Ostraka XXVI, 2017, 165-191
L. Todisco, Vasi con naiskoi tra Taranto e centri italici, in U. Kaestner, S. Schmidt (eds.), Inszenierung von Identitaeten, Unteritalische Vasenmalerei zwischen Griechen und Indigenen, Muenchen 2018, 98-106.

Note 59: "a fragmentary amphora from Altamura now in Taranto": once in Taranto, now in Altamura, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, A 10192;

"Bari, Rizzon Coll, 51": now in Matera, Museo Archeologico Nazionale "D. Ridola", 164510

Note 78: "Melbourne, Geddes Coll....": once Melbourne, Geddes Coll.

Author Response

Many thanks for the suggested new bibliography, all of which I read and included in my revisions. I also appreciated the updated locations and accession numbers that you provided, which was enormously helpful. Your kind assistance has been wonderful!