THE ART OF THE GOLDSMITH OF GREEK ARTS

The work of the goldsmith, understood as metal-work in gold, and sometimes extended to include silver and bronze, is not so itself linked to the figurative sculpture under discussion here; sculpture is rarely made in precious metals, and wrought metals, while always worked into various shapes, are less often figurative. However, it is true that the most elaborate pieces of worked metal do hear images so relief or even in the round, and thus it becomes a subdivision of sculpture, sharing the same stylistic approach and working methods; the art of the Florentine goldsmith Cellini, for example, is the same in his statue of Perseus and his salt—cellar. While the art of the goldsmith is technically related to sculpture, it is obviously different in terms of the craft itself — just as the bronzesmith and the sculptor in marble do not work in the same way to make the same kinds of images — and it is even more different in terms of use: the goldsmith made things in precious materials but for down-to-earth purposes, chiefly domestic utensils or weaponry.

The metal-working tradition is an old one; we have good evidence of this in the bronze protomes of griffins and sirens attached to Archaic cauldrons, and spectacular evidence in the piece dug up at Vix near Châtillon-surSeine. This is an enormous sixth—century krater (its date and precise origins are disputed), with a series of eight quadrigas alternating with seven warriors on its neck. However, it is mainly from the fourth century that pieces made in gold or gilded bronze have come down to us: the decoration of the “treasure of Panagjurist” (in Bulgaria), consisting of four rhyta, three jugs, an amphora and a gold phiale, can be identified as Greek as much by its style as from the subjects depicted: the judgment of Paris, the combats of Herakles with the hind of Keryneia and of Theseus with the bull of Marathon; and Achilles on Skyros. Works in metal have also been found among Macedonian grave goods: chief among them are the hater of Dhervens — its main body bearing images in relief of Dionysos, Ariadne and the Maenads, while four figurines sit on the shoulder of the vase — and the pieces found in the tomb said to be that of Philip II at Vergina, in particular a plaque from a golden quiver showing the sack of a city (one woman is taking refuge near a divine statue while another woman and her baby are trying to escape).

At first, the concentration of work in precious metals in Thrace and Macedonia during the Classical period makes it look as if it was peculiar to these regions, and we may even wonder if it is really Greek art. That would be to fall victim to a kind of archaeological optical illusion: the inventories of the sanctuaries on Delos, for instance, tell us that vessels of gold and silver were present there in great quantities. However, Greece itself consisted of small cities, usually under democratic rule, with citizens who were not particularly prosperous, particularly in the fourth century, and could not afford to build large private tombs. Hence, goldsmith’s work would have been found only in the temples, from which looters have long since stolen them. In Thrace and Macedonia, on the other hand, where tombs were much more elaborate both architecturally and in respect of the grave goods they contained, rich men might take precious items with them to the next world, and those items, better hidden in tombs than in temples, have more often been left for us to discover. The large percentage of goldsmith’s work found in excavations in northern Greece, therefore, is the predictable consequence of forms of conservation. However, it must be evidence not just of the wealth of this social group (a class not entirely absent from the south, judging by temple inventories), but also of the private luxury of an aristocratic class equipped to enjoy it in both life and death, which is something that southern Greece did not experience.

In spite of all this, most goldsmith’s work has been lost, since it was made of precious metal and easily melted down. The few remaining pieces are enough to give invaluable evidence of the skill and quality of their execution. But there are not enough of them for us to judge their relationship with the rest of Greek sculpture, and thus their banality or perhaps, conversely, their originality and creativity. There is nothing improbable about this last idea. The marble Nemesis of Agorakritos in the temple of Rhamnons holds a phiale decorated with negro heads like the one from Panagjurist, was the sculptor copying a type of existing phiale, or was he providing the goldsmiths with an original model? In any case, there were goldsmiths whose names the historians of antiquity saw fit to preserve, such as the famous Mys, and above all Myron, both of whom were known as the authors of large statues, and after all, we have only to read the description of the throne of the Zeus of Olympia to be persuaded that it was not far from goldsmith’s work to chryselephantine statuary.

Posted by jokjak

0 comments: