Relief in Athenian Vase Painting

doi:10.1017/9781009505789.005

4 - Relief in Athenian Vase Painting

Reflectivity, Presence, and Pictorial Space

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 October 2025

Edited by

Milette Gaifman and

Jas' Elsner: Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Milette Gaifman: Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Nathaniel B. Jones: Affiliation:
Washington University, St Louis

Book contents

Get access

Summary

This chapter addresses the relief features in Athenian vase painting – that is, the painted or gilded added clay affixed to the smooth bodies of vases. I argue that the primary purpose of relief features is the creation of a dynamic visual experience, either by facilitating light effects like reflections or by intensifying the presence of a represented figure. I begin with the origins of added-clay relief for the representation of hair in black-figure vase painting and show how it enhances the experience of reflectivity. Then, I consider relief mask kantharoi. Here, relief afforded the artist the opportunity to translate a two-dimensional pictorial image of the face of Dionysos or a satyr into a partially three-dimensional form. The effect of this was to intensify the sense of the visual presence of the god or satyr for the viewer. Finally, I review the interpretation of added-clay relief in vase painting as a means of creating a sense of pictorial space. Cohen, Hildebrand, and Riegl emphasize the relationship between relief and space, but I believe that in vase painting, relief serves primarily to make one more attuned to material surfaces and their qualities, not less.

Keywords

relief in painting vase painting black-figure and red-figure vases Exekias intermediality light effects in painting masks Dionysos Riegl Hildebrand pictorial space

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Relief in Greek, Roman, and Late Antique Art , pp. 139 - 165

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009505789.005 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Artal-Isbrand, P., and Klausmeyer, P. (2013). “Evaluation of the Relief Line and the Contour Line on Greek Red-Figure Vases Using Reflectance Transformation Imaging and Three-Dimensional Laser Scanning Confocal Microscopy.” Studies in Conservation 58.4: 338–59.Google Scholar

Beazley, J. D. (1961). “An Amphora by the Berlin Painter.” Antike Kunst 4.2: 49–67.Google Scholar

Beazley, J. D. (1986). The Development of Attic Black-Figure. Ed. von Bothmer, D. and Moore, M. B.. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Bell, E. E. (1977). “Two Krokotos Mask Cups at San Simeon.” California Studies in Classical Antiquity 10: 1–15.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bielfeldt, R. (2014). “The Lure and Lore of Light: Roman Lamps in the Harvard Art Museums.” In Ebbinghaus, S., ed., Ancient Bronzes through a Modern Lens: Introductory Essays on the Study of Ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern Bronzes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Art Museums, 171–91.Google Scholar

Boardman, J. (1974). Athenian Black Figure Vases. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar

Boardman, J. (1975). Athenian Red Figure Vases: The Archaic Period. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar

Boardman, J. (1978). Greek Sculpture: The Archaic Period. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar

Boardman, J. (2001). The History of Greek Vases: Potters, Painters and Pictures. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar

Chaviara, A., and Aloupi-Siotis, E. (2015). “The Story of a Soil That Became a Glaze: Chemical and Microscopic Fingerprints on the Attic Vases.” Journal of Archaeological Sciences: Reports 7: 510–18.Google Scholar

Cohen, B. (1977). “Attic Bilingual Vases and Their Painters.” PhD dissertation, New York University.Google Scholar

Cohen, B. (2004). “Bubbles = Baubles, Bangles and Beads: Added Clay in Athenian Vase Painting and Its Significance.” In Marconi, C., ed., Greek Vases: Images, Contexts and Controversies. Proceedings of the Conference Sponsored by the Center for the Ancient Mediterranean at Columbia University, 23–24 March 2002. Leiden: Brill, 57–71.Google Scholar

Cohen, B. (2006). The Colors of Clay: Special Techniques in Athenian Vases. Los Angeles, CA: J. Paul Getty Museum.Google Scholar

Dietrich, N. (2010). Figur ohne Raum? Bäume und Felsen in der Attischen Vasenmalerei des 6. und 5. Jahrhunderts V. Chr. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Dietrich, N. (2017). “Framing Archaic Greek Sculpture: Figure, Ornament and Script.” In Platt, V. and Squire, M., eds., The Frame in Classical Art: A Cultural History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 270–316.Google Scholar

Dietrich, N. (2018). “Order and Contingency in Archaic Greek Ornament and Figure.” In Dietrich, N. and Squire, M., eds., Ornament and Figure in Graeco-Roman Art: Rethinking Visual Ontologies in Classical Antiquity. Berlin: De Gruyter, 167–201.CrossRef Google Scholar

Easterling, P. E. (1997). “A Show for Dionysus.” In Easterling, P. E, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Greek Tragedy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 36–53.CrossRef Google Scholar

Elsner, J. (2006). “From Empirical Evidence to the Big Picture: Some Reflections on Riegl’s Concept of Kunstwollen.” Critical Inquiry 32.4: 741–66.CrossRef Google Scholar

Ferrari, G. (1986). “Eye-Cup.” Revue Archeologique, n.s., vol. 1: 5–20.Google Scholar

Gaunt, J. (2014). “Story and Status: The François Vase and the Krater from Vix.” In Avramidou, A. and Demetriou, D., eds., Approaching the Ancient Artifact: Representation, Narrative, and Function. Berlin: De Gruyter, 349–61.Google Scholar

Gill, D. W. J. (2020). “Context Matters: The Fragmentary Gifts of Werner Nussberger.” Journal of Art Crime 24: 57–60.Google Scholar

Gombrich, E. (1961). Art and Illusion: A Study in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation. 2nd ed. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar

Greenberg, C. (1995). “Modernist Painting.” In O’Brian, J., ed., Clement Greenberg: The Collected Essays and Criticism, vol. 4, Modernism with a Vengeance, 1957–1969. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 85–93.Google Scholar

Hedreen, G. (1992). Silens in Attic Black-Figure Vase-Painting: Myth and Performance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hedreen, G. (2007). “Myths of Ritual in Athenian Vase-Paintings of Silens.” In Csapo, E. and Miller, M. C., eds., The Origins of Theatre in Ancient Greece and Beyond: From Ritual to Drama. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 150–95.Google Scholar

Hedreen, G. (2014). “The Artificial Sculptural Image of Dionysos in Athenian Vase Painting and the Mythological Discourse of Early Greek Life.” In Avramidou, A. and Demetriou, D., eds., Approaching the Ancient Artifact: Representation, Narrative, and Function. Berlin: De Gruyter, 267–80.Google Scholar

Hedreen, G. (2017). “Unframing the Representation: The Frontal Face in Athenian Vase-Painting.” In Platt, V. and Squire, M., eds., The Frame in Classical Art: A Cultural History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 154–87.Google Scholar

Hedreen, G. (2022). “Relief Line in Athenian Red-Figure Vase-Painting: Reflectivity and Light-Effects.” In Morais, R., Centeno, R. M. Sobral, and Ferreia, D., eds., Myths, Gods and Heroes: Greek Vases in Portugal. Porto: Santa Maria da Feira, 242–52.Google Scholar

Hildebrand, A. (1994). “The Problem of Form in the Fine Arts.” In Mallgrave, H. F. and Ikonomou, E., trans., Empathy, Form, and Space: Problems in German Aesthetics. Santa Monica, CA: Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanities, 227–79.Google Scholar

Knauer, E. R. (1965). Die Berliner Andokides-Vase. Stuttgart: Reclam.Google Scholar

Lagogianni-Georgakarakos, M., ed. (2018). The Countless Aspects of Beauty in Ancient Art. Athens: National Archaeological Museum.Google Scholar

Mackay, E. A. (2002). “The Hairstyle of Herakles.” In Clark, A. J. and Gaunt, J., eds., Essays in Honor of Dietrich von Bothmer. Amsterdam: Allard Pierson Series, 203–10.Google Scholar

Mackay, E. A. (2010). Tradition and Originality: A Study of Exekias. BAR International Series 2092. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar

Marconi, C. (2017). “The Frames of Greek Painted Pottery.” In Platt, V. and Squire, M., eds., The Frame in Classical Art: A Cultural History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 117–53.Google Scholar

Mertens, J. R. (1987). “The Amasis Painter: Artist and Tradition.” In Papers on the Amasis Painter and His World. Malibu, CA: J. Paul Getty Museum, 168–83.Google Scholar

Neer, R. T. (2002). Style and Politics in Athenian Vase-Painting: The Craft of Democracy, ca. 530–460 B.C.E. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Neer, R. T. (2010). The Emergence of the Classical Style in Greek Sculpture. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Noble, J. V. (1960). “The Technique of Attic Vase-Painting.” American Journal of Archaeology 64.4: 307–18.CrossRef Google Scholar

Noble, J. V. (1965). The Techniques of Painted Attic Pottery. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art.Google Scholar

Pächt, O. (1963). “Art Historians and Art Critics – VI: Alois Riegl.” Burlington Magazine 722: 188–93.Google Scholar

Panofsky, E. (1981). “The Concept of Artistic Volition.” Trans. K. J. Northcott and J. Snyder. Critical Inquiry 8.1: 17–33.CrossRef Google Scholar

Panofsky, E. (1991). Perspective as Symbolic Form. Trans. C. Wood. New York: Zone.Google Scholar

Peirce, S. (1998). “Visual Language and Concepts of Cult on the ‘Lenaia Vases.’” Classical Antiquity 17.1: 59–95.Google Scholar

Podro, M. (1982). The Critical Historians of Art. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Riegl, A. (1985). Late Roman Art Industry. Trans. R. Winkes. Rome: Bretschneider.Google Scholar

Riegl, A. (2004). Historical Grammar of the Visual Arts. Trans. J. E. Jung. New York: Zone.Google Scholar

Robertson, M. (1992). The Art of Vase-Painting in Classical Athens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Rotroff, S. I. (2009). “Early Red-Figure in Context.” In Oakley, J. H. and Palagia, O., eds., Athenian Potters and Painters, vol. 2. Oxford: Oxbow, 250–60.Google Scholar

Seiterle, G. (1976). “Die Zeichentechnik in der rotfigurigen Vasenmalerei: Die Rätsel der Relieflinien.” Antike Welt 7.2: 2–10.Google Scholar

True, M. (1986). “Pre-Sotadean Red-Figure Statuette Vases and Related Vases with Relief Decoration.” PhD dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar

von Bothmer, D. (1966). “Andokides the Potter and Andokides the Painter.” Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 24: 201–12.CrossRef Google Scholar

Williams, D. (1991). “The Invention of the Red-Figure Technique and the Race between Vase-Painting and Free Painting.” In Rasmussen, T. and Spivey, N., eds., Looking at Greek Vases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 103–18.Google Scholar

Williams, D. (2008). “Some Thoughts on the Potters and Painters of Plastic Vases before Sotades.” In Lapatin, K., ed., Papers on Special Techniques in Athenian Vases. Los Angeles, CA: J. Paul Getty Museum, 161–72.Google Scholar

Wölfflin, H. (2013). “How One Should Photograph Sculpture.” Trans. G. A. Johnson. Art History 36.1: 52–71.CrossRef Google Scholar

Wölfflin, H. (2015). Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Early Modern Art. Trans. J. Blower. Los Angeles, CA: Getty Research Institute.Google Scholar

Wollheim, R. (1987). Painting as an Art. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.1 AA

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

The HTML of this chapter complies with version 2.1 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), covering newer accessibility requirements and improved user experiences and achieves the intermediate (AA) level of WCAG compliance, covering a wider range of accessibility requirements.

Content Navigation

Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.

Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.

Reading Order & Textual Equivalents

Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.

Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.

Visual Accessibility

Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.

Structural and Technical Features

ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.