SOPHOKLES AND HIS RELATION TO VASE PAINTING
Sophokles appears to have enjoyed together with Euripides a large share
of popularity in the fourth and third centuries, and it is well known
that with the Roman tragedians he was a very important factor. It must
be held as passing strange that we can point to but few monuments
inspired by him. One feels that there is abundant material in the
_Antigone_, for example, to have aroused both painters and sculptors,
and yet there is, so far as I know, no trace in Greek art of any
Antigone scene that owes its existence to Sophokles. It is, however,
true that tragedies which were known in ancient times as among the most
celebrated, and which are to-day counted the masterpieces of Greek
tragedy, were often particularly neglected by the artists. How meagre is
the record of monuments based on the _Prometheus_, the _Ion_, or the
_Oedipus Rex_! The reputation of a play cannot be taken as any guaranty,
therefore, that the artist found in it the required motives. The gentle
and calm Sophokles, who ‘made men as they ought to be and not as they
are,’ wrote in a grand and dignified manner that charmed the people of
his own time and won the praise and admiration of all posterity. How
then is one to account for the small part that he played in ancient art?
It seems to me that it rests on the fact that Sophokles was not a
creative power. Say what we may of the elegance and grace of his style
and the perfection of his diction, a glance at his extant work convinces
us that he seldom allowed his imagination to carry him beyond the bounds
of the accepted form of a myth. He preserved the mythological fabric
with religious fervour and altered little. He was neither an iconoclast
nor an innovator. The gods and heroes in their old-time relations to
each other and to humanity served him fully, and he showed an
unwillingness either to shatter the popular faith or to disturb it with
new doctrines. So long, therefore, as nothing new mythologically was
introduced, the value of the Sophoklean plays, from an artist’s point of
view, was far below the fresh and dashing manner of Euripides, who left
the old and beaten paths and added new chapters to the lives of the
heroes and the exploits of the gods. It has already been observed that
where Aischylos broke new ground he was followed by the painter and
sculptor. The novelty of the _Eumenides_ appealed to the artist even
more strongly than to the public; here was something absolutely new,
unheard of before. So it was with the _Choephoroi_, and we have already
seen that of the extant plays these two are the only ones that
influenced vase painting. Had Sophokles grafted new branches on the old
trees of myths he would likewise have had a far larger following among
ancient artists. As it is, it does not seem possible to point to a
single vase painting that is indisputably a Sophoklean product, and one
must be perplexed by the strange problem. To be sure conjectures have
not been wanting, and here and there a painting has been named in
connexion with Sophokles. But this is by no means a frequent occurrence,
and there has never been any consensus of opinion among archaeologists
that this or that picture _must_ be the outgrowth of one of his extant
tragedies. I have accordingly not published any painting under this
head. It seemed best merely to point out the few instances where
Sophoklean influences have been seen by some, and leave the student free
to determine each case for himself[153].
_Antigone._ A Lucanian amphora in the Brit. Mus., cat. iv. F 175. A.
2. Pub. Reinach-Millingen, _Peintures_, pl. 54; cf. Hirzel in
_Arch. Ztg._ 1863, p. 70, who bases the scene on vs. 376 ff. It
may be remarked that the oriental cap of the king does not at
all fit the position of the Theban Kreon.
_Oed. Rex._ Painting pub. Inghirami, _Vasi fitt._ iii. pl. 248 =
Overbeck, _Bildwerke_, pl. 2. 11; cf. _ibid._ p. 62 ff., where
vs. 316 ff. are thought of. A much more satisfactory
interpretation is that kindly sent me by Professor Carl Robert.
The scene represents Chryses before Agamemnon and is based on
_Il._ 1.
_Trachiniai._ Herakles wrestles with the river god Acheloös in the
presence of Deianeira. Reinach-Millingen, _op. cit._ pl. 10. B.
11. Robert in _Arch. Ztg._ 1883, p. 262, refers the painting to
vs. 9–24 of the prologue, and calls my attention in a letter to
another similar painting, unpublished, in the Jatta-Ruvo coll.
no. 1092.
Two of the lost plays that have been held by some to be represented on
vase paintings have already been referred to above[154].