1 A paper forthcoming in the proceedings of the Sheffield Centre for Aegean Archaeology’s conference MATERIAL WORLDS OF THE AEGEAN, Sheffield 4th ‐6th February 2011 Skeuomorphism in ancient Greece: a cost analysis Michael Vickers (University of Oxford/Ashmolean Museum) One advantage of studying societies such as those of ancient Greece and Rome whose written sources are preserved, if only patchily, is that it is possible to work out a scheme of comparative prices, for horses, food, clothing, pottery and gold and silver plate. The results are instructive. As a general rule, fine black pottery can be viewed as evoking silverware, and red gold. There is a discrepancy between the way in Greek and Roman artefacts—and especially pottery—are often regarded today, and the way in which they were regarded in antiquity. Until recently, some Greek pottery vessels were ranked among the most precious surviving relics, in the belief that the Ancients held them in equally high esteem. Of course, the extant pottery provides a precious resource of iconographic material which can greatly enrich our understanding of ancient Greece; it is simply that its status in antiquity has been exaggerated. I used to share the views I am about to criticise, but in nearly forty years curating the Greek antiquities at Oxford I have come to revise my position. This change of heart (which others share) has provoked much discussion. Our subject currently provides an excellent illustration of the ‘Kuhnian paradigm’ in operation: venerable ‘truths’ being challenged by some, but bitterly defended by others who recognise an endangered vested interest when they see one (cf. Boardman 2001). That I developed divergent views at all is in large part due to many discussions with Andrew and Susan Sherratt. It was largely thanks to them that I began to doubt the claims made in the name of traditional classical archaeology. The traditional attitude towards Greek vases is well epitomized by the late Sir John Beazley who, in discussing two pots found in Campania, claimed that they must have been treasured for many years before they were placed in the grave. Treasured it may be by more than one owner…. Treasured as wonders ... of art pure and simple: not panchrysa [‘solid gold’] ... but peak of possessions [nevertheless] (Beazley 1945, 158). The allusions to ‘solid gold’ and ‘peak of possessions’ are a clear reference to Pindar's ‘solid gold bowl, the peak of possessions’ (Olympian Odes 7. 1-4). Judging by the fees which Pindar could command (he was given 10,000 drachmas, or 43 kilos of silver, by the Athenians for a few lines in the 470s [Isocrates 15.166]), it is unlikely that he—or any other ancient Greek—would have understood the point that Beazley was trying to make in comparing a pottery vase with a gold one. Today, though, many still believe that Greek pottery vases were central to ancient economic, social and artistic life. It is still a