O.’s ambitious goal with this book is ‘to rewrite the history of classical Greek art’ and at the same time to ‘change the way in which we write Greek history’ (p. xvii). He proposes to do this by exploring ‘marked changes that occur in the way scenes of athletic, military, sexual, sacrificial, sympotic and satiric activity are represented on red-figure pots painted between circa 520 and circa 440 bc’, which he believes ‘can be accounted for by social, cultural, and political developments’ (pp. 24–5). The book is well written, the arguments are ingenious and always thought-provoking, and the research on which the arguments are based is solid.

However, before reviewing the argument itself, I need to address a fundamental issue that underlies the whole project. O.’s entire premise is based on the assumption that pot painters working in Athens painted the pots for their fellow Athenians (p. 48). He acknowledges that the bulk of surviving red-figure vases have been found abroad, particularly in Etruscan tombs in Italy (only two of the pots discussed in the text are from Athens), but he concludes that foreigners bought only what was available and had little or no influence on the imagery. This is a traditional view amongst many students of Attic figure-decorated pottery, but it is more and more being called into question as the complexities of foreign markets are explored from post-colonial perspectives. In fact, we know hardly anything about the Attic vase painters themselves and very little about the Athenian market for figure-decorated vases.

While commenting on the fact that the best-preserved pots were found in Etruria, O. uses the Attic ‘Pronomos Vase’ with theatrical imagery on its obverse to prove to his satisfaction that ‘the context in which the pottery is found has no direct or specific connection with the particular imagery shown’ (p. 45). In fact, the Pronomos Vase (c. 400 bc) was found at Ruvo di Puglia in Southern Italy, an indigenous settlement (Peucetian) that had been importing Attic vases for more than a century. Thanks to the archival work of an Italian scholar, A. Montanaro (Ruvo di Puglia e il suo territorio [2007]), we now know the contents of the rich tomb in which the vase was found. Of particular interest are a series of small kantharoi of a local Peucetian shape which, according to J. Beazley, were painted by Attic painters. Most of the vases of that shape have been found at Ruvo, implying that Attic potters were aware of local tastes. The shape of the Pronomos Vase, a volute krater, and the Dionysiac imagery on the reverse of it (not mentioned by O.) point to Peucetian funerary practice. My point is that there were many local markets in Italy and elsewhere with distinct regional exchange systems known to Attic painters. To dismiss the influences these local markets may have had on Attic imagery is convenient but premature.

Furthermore, the implication that Italian purchasers were ‘voracious’ in obtaining attractive pottery ‘whether or not the scene meant anything to them’ (p. 48) is an outdated oversimplification. Research on funerary practices makes it quite clear that items placed in Italic tombs were chosen for specific reasons. When figure-decorated pottery is chosen for the tomb, as opposed, for example, to black glazed ware, the imagery on the pots needs to be carefully considered, particularly in relation to other tomb goods.

That a change in imagery accompanied the change from black-figure to red-figure technique on Attic pots has long been recognised. What is new here is O.’s focus on changes that take place in red-figure towards the middle of the fifth century, his identification of patterns of change and his attempt to search for far-reaching social and political implications as the inspirations for the changes. While his collection of the evidence for developments in mid-century imagery is useful, there may well be other explanations for the changes.

Chapters 3–8 are attempts to define the pattern of mid-century changes in imagery in athletic, military, sexual, sacrificial, sympotic and satiric scenes, with a chapter devoted to each. In each he envisions the change in imagery as moving ‘from explicit to implicit and from focusing on action to focusing on emotional bonds’ (p. 150). By mid-century the focus is on the ‘regular and ordinary, not irregular and extraordinary’ (p. 178). The chapter on satyrs, where O. also sees changes of this kind, emphasises his observation that the imagery in all the scenes (athletic, military etc.) does not reflect ‘real-life’ activities but rather is an expression of the world of the imagination, a point that is central to the thesis of the book.

The changes defined in each of these chapters are convincingly supported by imagery on several carefully chosen pots, though the reader has to take on faith the fact that these are representative of the larger group. However, the interpretation of those changes themselves often seems to be based on preconceptions of what O. thinks they should mean. So, for example, in his discussion of the change in military scenes, he notes that earlier arming scenes focused on a warrior putting on greaves, while in later scenes the focus is on a young man receiving a helmet. He argues that the earlier scenes connect the soldier with epic, while ‘for a young man to take his helmet … is to accept the duty to leave civilian pursuits and leave the private role in the household to take on the public role in the city’ (p. 120). Here the historian's assumptions about political and social changes in Athens seem to determine the meaning of the iconographic variation.

The notes and bibliography show that O. knows well recent literature on Attic figure-decorated pottery, though he is not hesitant to dismiss views with which he disagrees. For his discussion of individual pots he always gives the name of the painter assigned by Beazley in ARV; however, he is interested in a broad overview of changes in imagery and thus avoids looking at developments in individual workshops, thus giving the impression of a rather homogeneous and monolithic pottery industry, which hardly seems to have been the case.

Chapters 9–11 provide a historical perspective on political and social changes in fifth-century Athens, only loosely connected with the previous chapters. This is the core of the book that purports to show how the rewriting of art history will rewrite Classical history. O. summarises the fundamental change gleaned from the changing patterns on pots, ‘What has changed is not what people do but the aspects of behavior that are kept foremost in mind. Participation has become the name of the classical democratic game; Kleisthenic competition and individual stories of success or failure are out’ (p. 218). One wonders whether decorations on such simple clay pots can bear the weight of such a conclusion.