Modern imitations, pirated copies, and forgeries have been extensively explored in terms of copyright law, transaction cost models, and the valorization of originality. In historical perspective similar issues have arisen; for example, Rubens’ writings on imitation, originality in Chinese art, definitions of plagiarism in Arab literature, or transaction costs as recognized in Jewish law. Greco-Roman ideas about imitation figure prominently in many such discussions.
The invited scholars have all explored issues of imitation in particular
ancient media and specific social contexts. The planned workshop will
encourage sharing of expert knowledge among Canadian and American researchers,
many of whom have internationally recognized research profiles. As described
below, the problems of imitation have tended to be studied in a number
of isolated sub-fields and a more integrative approach has a demonstrably
high potential for successful development of the research questions.
SIGNIFICANCE AND TIMELINESS: Parallel trends in studies of ancient imitations
Recent advances in the diverse
nature of ancient imitations and renewed interest in production and
consumption in ancient economies make a workshop with these objectives
particularly timely. Scholarship on ancient Greek and Roman imitation
can be grouped into two broad but rarely intersecting classes: those
that study imitations of rare objects and those that study imitations
of divisible products. Rare objects include fine art, literature, and
performances (speeches, productions of plays, dances, etc.). Divisible
products are available in variable quantity or variable supply such
as money, agricultural products, or (non-‘art’) manufactured goods.
Rare objects
Economists have long had difficulty creating any predictive theory of value for artistic production. William Baumol sums up the problem in the title of his article “Unnatural value: Or art investment as floating crap game” (American Economic Review 76, 1986, 10-14). When imitative arts enter the question, the problem becomes even more complicated.
One genre of imitation that has come to dominate the research is the ‘Roman copy of a Greek original’ statue. Much of the ancient statuary studied over the past three centuries came from collections assembled during the Roman Empire. As early as the 18th century, it was proposed that the superior, but rarely available, Greek statuary could be reconstructed by comparative study of these later copies (Kopienkritik). Only in the last decade or so has there been an effort to study Roman statuary on its own terms. Even when Roman sculptors were slavishly copying Greek prototypes (considered now by many scholars to have been a rare event), they did so in a particular cultural and intellectual environment in which factors other than artistic originality played significant roles.
These new trends in the study of Roman sculpture depend heavily on values expressed by Roman rhetoricians – particularly the appropriate emulation of revered models. While the actual performances of speeches no longer survive, many texts do survive, as do handbooks of rhetoric and critiques of bad practice. Research in this area too highlights the complex interaction between Greek models, Roman imitation and originality. This interaction has been studied since antiquity, but the extrapolation of these rhetorical values to other fields of ancient culture is a more recent, and seemingly productive, phenomenon.
In the broader field of ancient literature, too, imitation played a prominent
role. Occasionally, this constituted trying to ‘put one over’ on
unsuspecting readers (e.g., the belief that a poetess Erinna was in
fact an unnamed poet). Many works, in fact, borrowed heavily
from earlier or contemporary models to varying degrees and with varying
aims (e.g., Petronius’ spoof on Lucan’s Pharsalia
in the Satyricon). And yet in this area of research, the recognition
of the instances of imitation has tended to dominate over any interpretation
of the values underlying the behavior.
Divisible products
The valuation of more banal products, whose value can be linked to the labor costs of production and the interacting factors of supply and demand, may also be complicated by problems of imitation.
Both in antiquity and in modern scholarship much attention has been paid to imitation or counterfeit coinage. Ancient legal texts address issues of discovering and destroying false coins; modern scholarship has focused first on identification of fakes (ancient and modern) and more recently on refining the vocabulary and implications of imitative coinage. While certain forms of imitative coinage would carry the same basic value but without a reliable ‘brand’ (e.g., an anonymous imitation of an Athenian ‘owl’ might have the same silver content and weight as the original but would lack the high reputation of the Athenian prototype), other imitations would be considerably less valuable and potentially deceptive (e.g., plated coins with very little precious metal content). Responses by states to the possibility of false coinage are starting to draw increasing attention as economic historians explore the applicability of transaction costs and institutional economics to the ancient world.
Many other commodities were imitated in varying degrees. Wines, for example,
could be referred to as a type from a well-known region even if the
actual production area was quite far removed (e.g., Koan wine in Egypt);
even the packaging could be intended to remind the purchaser of the
famous ‘brand’. Well-known styles of pottery spread across the Mediterranean
as local producers imitated presumably more costly imported examples.
Such imitation pottery is well-documented, but the economic implications
these products have not drawn much attention. As with coinage, so with
these other products: the accuracy and reliability of information about
the product known to the producer, the seller, and the consumer would
have affected the nature of related transactions. Since many of these
objects are ubiquitous parts of the archaeological record, and since
many others that no longer survive would have been equally commonplace,
such imitation must have had wide economic consequences.
CONTRIBUTIONS of the workshop to Classical Studies and other disciplines
The evaluation of imitations might seem to have two quite separate spheres: imitations which compromise valued originality (in the case of the arts) and imitations which undermine or falsify qualities of a commodity. And yet, this dichotomy can be misleading if the status of the prototype object can slide between art and commodity, and if imitations can carry multiple purposes. Anthropologists and sociologists have taken great interest in the multiple values an object might have throughout its ‘social biography’ (following A. Appadurai, ed., The Social Life of Things, 1986). A commodity in one situation can become a valuable (but not priced) gift in another. The extensive textual and material record from Greco-Roman antiquity, in which imitations of many different sorts figure so prominently, allows us to contribute to current discussion of ‘social biography’ and value: Given a class of object, how is the intended ‘original’ production valued? How are various forms of its imitation evaluated? And, how does the coexistence of ‘originals’ and imitations affect transactions? While recognizing the potential movement of goods into and out of classification as commodity, this workshop turns more attention to the problem of classification, value, and intention at the stage of production.
Insufficient attention to intentions and meaning at the stage of production has led to problems of evaluating value; Roman sculpture provides an ideal example. When Roman sculpture was evaluated solely in terms of a modern ideal of artistic originality, it was considered to be lacking in ‘rarity’ and hence became a commodity. Once Roman sculpture is considered in terms of ancient ideals such as decorum (appropriateness) and phantasia (revealing the true nature of the subject), then the Roman statue does become ‘art’, even if originality/rarity are devalued.
The more nuanced view of the broad concept of imitation that has recently arisen particularly in sculptural and numismatic research makes it now possible to consider the details of ‘imitation’ in a much broader range of arts and commodities. Furthermore, the same recent exemplars bring to the foreground certain themes:
Through these themes, and through our general focus on production and imitation, we are responding to Brian Moeran’s recent statement of ongoing difficulties in studies of values: “To understand how a field of values operates, we need to know who is bestowing things (commodities, valuables, goods) with what kind of values, when, where, why.” (from “Women’s fashion magazine: people, things, and values,” in D. Bell and C. Werner, eds., Values and Valuables: From the sacred to the symbolic, 2004, p. 267). The close attention to the details of imitation and the values of imitated and original objects, already so well-advanced thanks to the vast textual and material evidence available from ancient Greece and Rome, will allow the workshop to contribute to discussion of commodity identity and value in anthropology, sociology, and economics.
STRUCTURE of the WorkshopIn order to broaden the attention paid to imitated commodities and arts in antiquity and to consider imitative phenomena in the context of these emerging themes, we have invited papers exploring how ancient social, commercial and legal institutions functioned in response to the presence or potential presence of imitations (Ober, Van Alfen), and how we might address the nuances of imitation in various different products: Amphoras as commercial containers (Lawall, Rauh, Moore); sculpture (Stirling, Bell); architecture (Perry); money (Weir and Meadows); literature (Liapis and Joyal); and perfumed oil (Reger). To add perspectives encouraging a broader view of ancient Greece and Rome in light of other socio-economic circumstances we have also solicited a contribution on unofficial currencies in the 1930s in the United States (Elvins).
The lead-up to the workshop and the workshop itself are designed so as to
maximize the dialogue between details of imitated objects and broader
issues of interpretation. Circulation of pre-workshop drafts in the
early Fall will allow the various authors to consider their ideas in
terms of the research results offered by their colleagues. The presentation
of papers at the meeting in Winnipeg will be accompanied by generous
periods for discussion, and we anticipate that the earlier opportunity
to read drafts and prepare for this discussion will enhance its effectiveness.
We also plan to invite attendance from local departments of Anthropology,
History and Economics.
OUTCOMES – Deliverables and vehicles of dissemination
The multi-draft, multi-stage structure of this workshop aims to provide a coherent statement of the nature and impact of imitations in the Greco-Roman world. As a result, we can anticipate that the resulting volume with have the necessary unity of theme and purpose that academic presses seek in agreeing to take on a publication project. The multi-stage structure also provides for internal peer review of the ideas over the course of the workshop, so we can be reasonably confident that once the papers are revised for publication they should satisfy any further editorial scrutiny. We enclose a letter of interest from Prof. Jonathan Edmondson, editor of the Phoenix Supplement series.