Mimesis et filiation artistique : la question du style de Lysippe et de ses disciples dans l’épigramme 62 A.‑B. de Posidippe et chez Pline l’Ancien (NH 34, 66)

Abstract

This paper examines the notion of “artistic filiation” in Early Hellenistic theories of art. We wish to highlight the links between the first epigram of Posidippus’ andriantopoiika cycle and the theories of art probably illustrated in the contemporary treatises of Duris of Samos and Xenocrates of Athens. In his epigram, Posidippus establishes a contrast between “ancient” and “modern” art. Ancient art was possibly represented by the mention of three artists belonging to three successive generations (an ancient master, his pupil and his Enkelschüler). Their works share a characteristic rigidity, apparently passed from one generation to the next. On the contrary, “new” works should now imitate the works of Lysippus, an artist believed to have had no other master than nature herself. Other epigrams by Posidippus express ideas on the stylistic qualities of ancient and new works of art and suggest that Lysippan principals were the source of inspiration of works as different as Hecataios’ slender and subtle portrait of the poet Philitas and of Chares of Lindos’ gigantic and noble representation of Helios, the Sun god. Pliny’s presentation of Euthykrates (one of Lysippus’ pupils), which probably derives from Xenocrates, expresses a similar conception of the transmission of artistic education, stylistic qualities and technical knowledge between master and pupil. The stylistic vocabulary that Pliny uses to characterize the works of Lysippus’ pupil allow us a tantalizing glimpse into Early Hellenistic theories of art.

Keywords

• art (conception of)
• artistic filiation
• epigram
• Duris of Samos
• Xenocrates of Athens
• Posidippus of Pella