No description available.

Les premiers peintres des vases à figures rouges ont été classés par A.D. Trendall entre 1938 et 1989. Ses recherches, associées à ceux des historiens et archéologues, constituent un remarquable outil d’analyse pour les historiens de l’art. Elles permettent d’appréhender d’un seul coup d’œil le corpus de vases italiotes collectés auprès des collections privées ou des musées. A la manière de J. BEAZLEY pour les vases attiques, A.D. TRENDALL s’est attaché à attribuer des vases anonymes et sans provenance à des peintres qu’il a lui–même nommé. Néanmoins, depuis plusieurs années, ses classements sont revus à la lumière de nouvelles découvertes et réattributions de chercheurs.Ce travail propose de revenir sur la création et le développement de ces premiers artisans en Italie du Sud entre la deuxième moitié du Ve s. et le premier quart du IVe s. av. J.-C.Le travail de réattribution des vases constitue un élément important de notre réflexion puisqu'il met à jour et affine le travail d'A.D. Trendall : il permet de comprendre dans quel contexte artistique sont apparus ces ateliers de production.Puis l'étude des lieux et contextes de découvertes permet d'apporter un éclairage supplémentaire, en observant les associations de peintres et d'ateliers dans les tombes. / Between 1938 and 1989, Trendall ranked the work of the first red figure painters of Southern Italy. His research, together with those of historians and archaeologists, is a remarkable analysis tool for scientists : it allows us to understand, in a glance, the italiote corpus from private collections and museum. Like Beazley on Attic vases before him, Trendall endeavored to assign anonymous vases and without provenances to painters he appointed. However, since years now, the ranking he created is reviewed in the light of new discoveries and reallocations of researchers.This work attempts to reconsider the beginning and development of these early craftsmen in Southern Italy between the second half of the 5th century and the first quarter of the fourth century BC.First we try to reassign vases which it is an important component of our reflexion, allowing to enhance A.D. Trendall's work. We will be able to understant the artistic's contexts in which the first workshops were developed.Then, the studies of places and archaeological contexts allow to highlight the way they produced, comparing associations between painters and workshops' vases in graves.

No description available.

La résolution des images a dû être modifiée afin de respecter les droits d'auteurs. Voir le tableau comprenant la liste des vases afin de trouver ces images en meilleure qualité. / La présente étude sert à rassembler tous les vases attiques à figure rouge présentant des scènes sexuellement explicites connues à ce jour. Un examen attentif de ces sources permit de les décrire ainsi que de les comparer afin d'en faire ressortir les similitudes et les différences. Ces vases, étrangement, proviennent majoritairement d'Étrurie, ce qui surprend lorsqu'on sait qu'ils ont été fabriqués en Grèce. Grâce à l'étude du commerce à cette époque, on constate que ces vases n'occupaient pas une grande place dans les relations commerciales entre Grecs et Étrusques. De plus, ces derniers les utilisaient dans un contexte funéraire, ce qui diffère grandement des Grecs. En effet, ces derniers semblent avoir utilisé ces vases dans un contexte où le vin était central, le symposion. Bien que ce genre de banquet était une activité généralement domestique, on se rend compte, à la lumière de découvertes archéologiques, que les vases sexuellement explicites auraient pu être utilisés dans un contexte lié à la prostitution, les bordels. Ceci nous amène donc à nous questionner quant au statut des femmes qui y sont représentées. Finalement, l'étude des sources littéraires, de peu contemporaines aux vases à l'étude, nous renseigne, en partie, sur les opinions quant aux différentes pratiques sexuelles de l'époque. Au final, bien que des pistes théoriques intéressantes se dégagent de l'étude de ces vases, il reste que des conclusions sûres et hors de tout doute sont impossibles étant donné le manque de source. Ces vases présentent donc un portrait à mi-chemin entre la réalité et le symbolisme de la sexualité en Grèce antique. / This study serves to collect all the red-figure Attic vases with sexually explicit scenes known to date. A close examination of these sources made it possible to describe and compare them to bring out the similarities and differences. These vases, strangely, come mainly from Etruria, which is surprising when we know that they were made in Greece. Through the study of trade at that time, we see that these vases did not occupy an important place in the trade relations between Greeks and Etruscans. In addition, they used them in a funerary context, which differs greatly from the Greeks. Indeed, they appear to have used the vases in a context where the wine was central, the symposion. Although this kind of banquet was generally a domestic activity, we realize, in light of archaeological discoveries, that sexually explicit vases could have been used in a context related to prostitution, brothels. This leads us to question the status of the women that are represented. Finally, literary sources that are contemporary of the studied vases, tells us, in part, on different views on the sexual practices of the time. Finally, although interesting theoretical tracks emerge from the study of these vases, it remains that firm conclusions are impossible given the lack of source. These vases therefore gives us a portrait halfway between reality and symbolism of sexuality in ancient Greece.

No description available.

Desde a primeira publicação da alcunha Pistóxenos Painter (Pintor de Pistóxenos), designando o artista cujas mãos originaram pinturas de um conjunto de vasos áticos, passou-se a dispor de uma nova classificação para este material. Tal classificação ainda e tida como muito mais precisa que qualquer cronologia ou tipologia existente. Quase a totalidade dos pesquisadores de ceramologia e iconografia gregas entenderam que enquanto a denominação foi uma invenção moderna, o pintor anônimo por ela determinado foi uma descoberta. O autor desta e de centenas de outras atribuições, o helenista inglês John D. Beazley (1885-1970), foi indubitavelmente o mais importante perito ou connaisseur de que se tem registro, a julgar pela extensão enciclopédica de suas listas de pintores e pela aceitação quase universal dos resultados de seu método de atribuir. Críticas e revisões deste método (surgente no século XIX, com os estudos do medico e perito Giovanni Morelli) são datadas já das primeiras décadas do século XX e tiveram uma historia descontinua e desprestigiada. Uma analise recorrente do revisionismo o atribui a falha de seus defensores e a ignorância das técnicas morellianas. Talvez a principal característica dos ataques dirigidos as atribuições de Beazley tenha sido a falta de importância atribuída ao reconhecimento de pintores vasculares. Seja pela proximidade com a arte do metal, seja pelo lugar que estes artistas ocupavam na sociedade ateniense, sobretudo entre o fim das guerras medicas e a ascensão política de Péricles. A presente tese se propõe a considerar o problema do método de atribuição a partir da obra de um só pintor, escolhido dentre aqueles que não foram diversas vezes reconsiderados e extensivamente justificados (a única monografia dedicada ao Pintor de Pistóxenos foi publicada nos anos 1950). A divergência estilística entre os fundos brancos e as figuras vermelhas do Pintor de Pistóxenos e a conservação fragmentaria da maioria de suas obras também colaboraram para a decisão de revisar esta serie de atribuições dentre tantas outras. / Since the first publication of the nickname Pistoxenos Painter, like identity of an artist whose hands had originated attic vase-paintings, a new classification of the series of vases and fragments was developed. This classification is still recognized like more precise than all other existing chronology or typologies. Almost all the specialists in Ancient Greek ceramology and iconography understood that while the denomination was a modern invention, the anonymous painter determined was a discovery. The author of this and hundreds of other attributions, the English Hellenist John D. Beazley (1885-1970), was doubtlessly the most important well-know connoisseur of all the History, what can be judged by the encyclopedic extension of his lists of painters and by the almost universal acceptance of his method of attribution\'s results. Criticisms and revisions of this method - initiated in XIX century, with the studies of Giovanni Morelli, an Italian doctor and connoisseur - are dated already of the first decades of XX century, but their development was discontinuous and discredited. A current interpretation of the revisionism considers it like an error and ignorance of the techniques developed by Morelli. The principal characteristic of the attacks against attributions of Beazley is perhaps the lack of importance given to the recognition of the vascular painters. Either by the proximity with the metal\'s art, or by the place that the pottery artists occupied in the Athenian society, chiefly between the end of the Persian wars and the political ascension of Perikles. This thesis proposes to considerate the problem of the method of attribution from only one painter\'s workmanship, chosen among the least published and not extensively justified (the only monograph dedicated to the Pistoxenos Painter was published in the years 1950). The stylistic divergence between the white-grounds and the red-figures of the Pistoxenos Painter, and the fragmentary conservation of the majority of his works had also collaborated for the decision to revise this particular series of attributions.

Desde a primeira publicação da alcunha Pistóxenos Painter (Pintor de Pistóxenos), designando o artista cujas mãos originaram pinturas de um conjunto de vasos áticos, passou-se a dispor de uma nova classificação para este material. Tal classificação ainda e tida como muito mais precisa que qualquer cronologia ou tipologia existente. Quase a totalidade dos pesquisadores de ceramologia e iconografia gregas entenderam que enquanto a denominação foi uma invenção moderna, o pintor anônimo por ela determinado foi uma descoberta. O autor desta e de centenas de outras atribuições, o helenista inglês John D. Beazley (1885-1970), foi indubitavelmente o mais importante perito ou connaisseur de que se tem registro, a julgar pela extensão enciclopédica de suas listas de pintores e pela aceitação quase universal dos resultados de seu método de atribuir. Críticas e revisões deste método (surgente no século XIX, com os estudos do medico e perito Giovanni Morelli) são datadas já das primeiras décadas do século XX e tiveram uma historia descontinua e desprestigiada. Uma analise recorrente do revisionismo o atribui a falha de seus defensores e a ignorância das técnicas morellianas. Talvez a principal característica dos ataques dirigidos as atribuições de Beazley tenha sido a falta de importância atribuída ao reconhecimento de pintores vasculares. Seja pela proximidade com a arte do metal, seja pelo lugar que estes artistas ocupavam na sociedade ateniense, sobretudo entre o fim das guerras medicas e a ascensão política de Péricles. A presente tese se propõe a considerar o problema do método de atribuição a partir da obra de um só pintor, escolhido dentre aqueles que não foram diversas vezes reconsiderados e extensivamente justificados (a única monografia dedicada ao Pintor de Pistóxenos foi publicada nos anos 1950). A divergência estilística entre os fundos brancos e as figuras vermelhas do Pintor de Pistóxenos e a conservação fragmentaria da maioria de suas obras também colaboraram para a decisão de revisar esta serie de atribuições dentre tantas outras. / Since the first publication of the nickname Pistoxenos Painter, like identity of an artist whose hands had originated attic vase-paintings, a new classification of the series of vases and fragments was developed. This classification is still recognized like more precise than all other existing chronology or typologies. Almost all the specialists in Ancient Greek ceramology and iconography understood that while the denomination was a modern invention, the anonymous painter determined was a discovery. The author of this and hundreds of other attributions, the English Hellenist John D. Beazley (1885-1970), was doubtlessly the most important well-know connoisseur of all the History, what can be judged by the encyclopedic extension of his lists of painters and by the almost universal acceptance of his method of attribution\'s results. Criticisms and revisions of this method - initiated in XIX century, with the studies of Giovanni Morelli, an Italian doctor and connoisseur - are dated already of the first decades of XX century, but their development was discontinuous and discredited. A current interpretation of the revisionism considers it like an error and ignorance of the techniques developed by Morelli. The principal characteristic of the attacks against attributions of Beazley is perhaps the lack of importance given to the recognition of the vascular painters. Either by the proximity with the metal\'s art, or by the place that the pottery artists occupied in the Athenian society, chiefly between the end of the Persian wars and the political ascension of Perikles. This thesis proposes to considerate the problem of the method of attribution from only one painter\'s workmanship, chosen among the least published and not extensively justified (the only monograph dedicated to the Pistoxenos Painter was published in the years 1950). The stylistic divergence between the white-grounds and the red-figures of the Pistoxenos Painter, and the fragmentary conservation of the majority of his works had also collaborated for the decision to revise this particular series of attributions.