AS-LEVEL CLASSICAL CIVILISATION CIV2C Athenian Vase Painting Report on the Examination 2020 June 2016 Version: 0.1
Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright 2016 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved. AQA retains the copyright on all its publications. However, registered schools/colleges for AQA are permitted to copy material from this booklet for their own internal use, with the following important exception: AQA cannot give permission to schools/colleges to photocopy any material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within the centre.
CIV2C Athenian Vase Painting General Comments It was gratifying to see the significant rise in the number of entries for this paper in 2016 which produced its largest cohort since the Specification was introduced. This increase did not impact negatively on the high quality of work that has always been apparent from the relatively small number of students studying vase painting. This year over two thirds opted to answer Option B focusing on the work of the Sosias and Kleophrades Painters rather than Option A on the Achilles and Brygos Painters. The Option B majority performed somewhat better on the 20-mark question, although the opposite was true for the 10-mark question. Again on Section 2 there was a two-thirds to one-third division in favour of those attempting the Black-Figure alternative in Option C over those who preferred to look at the work of the Berlin Painter in Option D. There was very little difference in performance between these two groups. Section 1 Option A The short questions were generally well done with most students recognising the oinochoe, dating the Achilles Painter correctly and giving at least two details (sometimes three, although this occurred less often) of the white-ground technique. Question 04 assessing the Achilles Painter s lekythoi produced many full answers with most students linking the theme of the young soldier with the funerary associations of the vessel. Many had clearly met this example, as detailed comments were sometimes offered on parts of the vase which were not visible in this particular photograph. Some drew a nice contrast between the calm atmosphere of the vase, emphasised by the ease of the young man s stance, and the likely sadness of the situation depicted. The female figure was variously identified as mother, sister or partner; most felt that her seated position contributed to ensuring that the young man was the main focus of the vase. There were many interesting suggestions regarding the large eye on his shield. All in all, this question was well done. Question 05 produced a more mixed response. Students who saw the painting in Photograph A as being generally typical of the Brygos Painter found this a hard argument to justify. Even when they used the dancing Maenad white-figure example as evidence, the differences seemed to outweigh the similarities. Most of the better answers took the opposing view and backed this with good descriptions of the more common red-figure examples such as the Death of Priam vase, while providing a degree of counter-argument using one of the painter s red-figure single figure lekythoi. There were however significantly fewer answers reaching the Level 4 threshold here than on Question 10. Option B Students on this paper seem to know their dates and this was certainly true for the two vases featuring here. Question 08 on the red-figure technique was also generally well done although, as with the white-ground answer in Option A, fewer than half scored the full three points. The Sosias Painter s Achilles and Patroclus tondo painting was well-known, with this vase being the only fullyattested example of the painter s work. While some theories on the sexual undercurrents in the portrayal were interesting, students who focused on these alone missed many opportunities to show the way the painter adapted his theme to the shape and limited space provided by the tondo. There were some very good answers in this vein. Similarly the comparison of the two vase scenes in Question 10 produced some well-focused work. Over the years there has been a tendency in similar questions for students to describe each painting separately rather than compare detail by detail. This was occasionally true here but more often students took the opportunity to show real 3 of 5
flair and knowledge, producing some of the best work in recent years. There was some excellent discussion of the relative merits of the drapery on view, often used to argue against the essay s statement, with equally full debate about the portrayal of movement and emotion, frequently coming down heavily on the side of the Kleophrades Painter. All in all there was much to admire here, with more than half of students reaching at least Level 4. Section 2 Option C Question 11 offered an opportunity to look at the work of the three black-figure painters named in the Specification. The predominance of mythological scenes (possibly in itself a strong hint to the direction a response might take) led some students to overlook the comparison required by the quotation. This was the main reason why this question produced a very slightly lower mean mark than Question 12. Some students offered only mythological examples while still arguing a case in line with the title; a few simply described four mythological scenes without mentioning everyday life. These struggled to reach far above the Level 3 borderline. Others used good examples from the Amasis Painter, such as the wedding procession lekythos or his women weaving vase to good effect in illustrating both the limitations and opportunities which black-figure painting offered for daily life subjects. For Exekias the Panathenaic amphora served equally well. There were some dubious everyday scenes offered but where gods or heroes were described performing everyday tasks, due credit was given. Students were often happier with the well-known mythological examples: Dionysus in his boat recurred regularly while the Andokides Painter s Hercules feasting with Athene was the most common example of his work. Often the main focus remained on Exekias, with Achilles and Penthesilea and / or the Achilles versus Ajax board game scene among the most regularly discussed. Although students knew and described these paintings well, they tended not to discuss in more than the most general terms what it was that the limitations of the black-figure incision technique added to or took away from the success of the scenes. Hence the lack of Level 5 responses. Option D The Berlin Painter offers qualities quite different from his predecessors with his minimal use of decoration, love for single spot-lit figures and early mastery of anatomy. Students made much of this when arguing that he largely broke away from the forms of painting represented by the Pioneers. Even so, his prolific nature and the variety of his compositional forms allowed some direct comparisons with examples by Euphronios and Euthymides. The best answers here resisted the temptation to discuss briefly a multitude of examples by all three and focused on a limited number in detail, with brief supporting evidence from other relevant paintings. So Euthymides Revellers vase was often used to show the typical strengths and weaknesses of the Pioneers figure drawing, while drawing comparison with the Berlin Painter s group picture of Achilles fighting Hector. The crowded nature and stylised portrayal of Euphronios Sleep and Death carry off Sarpedon was contrasted with the Berlin Painter s single-figure focus on Ganymede, Athene or similar. There were significantly more students here who reached at least the top of Level 3 than in Option C; many achieved this by combining good knowledge with genuine feeling for the work of the Berlin Painter in particular. In short, there was a range of performance but an overall impression of time well spent studying this topic. 4 of 5
Mark Ranges and Award of Grades Grade boundaries and cumulative percentage grades are available on the Results Statistics page of the AQA Website. Converting Marks into UMS marks Convert raw marks into Uniform Mark Scale (UMS) marks by using the link below. UMS conversion calculator 5 of 5