XVI. DETAILS OF TYPES, ARRANGEMENT, AND ORNAMENTATION…

XVI. DETAILS OF TYPES, ARRANGEMENT, AND ORNAMENTATION

Distinctions of types—Costume and attributes of individual deities—Personifications—Heroes—Monsters—Personages in every-day life—Armour and shield-devices—Dress and ornaments—Physiognomical expression on vases—Landscape and architecture—Arrangement of subjects—Ornamental patterns—Maeander, circles, and other geometrical patterns—Floral patterns—Lotos and palmettes—Treatment of ornamentation in different fabrics.

It may be profitable to supplement the foregoing account with a few general considerations, such as the attributes, emblems, and costume by which the different figures may be distinguished, the general treatment of the subjects at different periods, and the use of ornamental motives in the various stages of Greek vase-painting.

§ 1. DISTINCTIONS OF TYPES

In the earlier vase-paintings deities are often not only indistinguishable from one another, but even from kings and other mortal personages, attributes and subtle distinctions of costume being ignored; and in the period of decline a similar tendency may be noted, due in this case not so much to confusion of ideas as to a general carelessness of execution and indifference to the meaning of the subject. In the former vases it was, doubtless, largely the result of conventionality and limitation in the free expression of forms; but it is a peculiarity not confined to painting, and may be observed not only in the minor arts, in terracotta and bronze figurines, but even in sculpture of a more exalted kind—as, for instance, in the female statues from the Athenian Acropolis. Thus, all the deities are draped, and their costume differs in no respect from that worn by mortals; all alike wear the chiton, himation, or chlamys, and ornamentation of the drapery with embroidered patterns is no mark of distinction. It is only as the art advances in the B.F. period that the necessity for differentiation makes itself felt, and each deity becomes individualised by some peculiarity of costume or special attribute which makes it possible to recognise them without difficulty. To give a brief survey of these characteristic marks will be the object of the following pages.[1942]

Among the Olympian deities, Zeus is generally bearded, and fully draped in long chiton and mantle; on R.F. vases he wears a laurel-wreath. He fights the giants from his chariot, but otherwise is standing, or seated on a throne, which is often carved and ornamented with figures.[1943] He usually holds a thunderbolt, or a sceptre, surmounted by an eagle or otherwise ornamented; in one or two cases the termination is in the form of a lotos-bud, curiously conventionalised.[1944] Hera is distinguished by the stephane or broad diadem, often ornamented, and covered with the bridal veil, the edge of which she draws forward with one hand in the attitude considered typical of brides. Her sceptre is sometimes surmounted by her emblem—the cuckoo.

Poseidon, on the Corinthian and Attic B.F. vases—on which he is but a rare figure—is often hardly to be distinguished from Zeus, the approximation of the types extending even to their emblems. Where he holds in addition a dolphin or tunny-fish, there is, of course, no doubt as to his presence; nor, again, in the Gigantomachia, where he wields a rock (see p. 13, and Fig. 112); but his trident, which subsequently becomes the unmistakable evidence of his identity, often assumes (as on the Corinthian pinakes) the form of a sceptre ending in a lotos-bud,[1945] which is typical of Zeus, and, indeed, of Olympian deities generally. The other sea-deities are, however, of a more clearly defined type. The essential feature of Triton is the fish-tail in which his body terminates. Nereus, on the other hand, is represented as an old man, bald and grey-bearded. In this form he contends with Herakles (see p. 101), and it may be that the differentiation was necessary to avoid confusion with the Triton type. As attributes he often holds a dolphin or tunny-fish, and a trident or sceptre. The winged deity with a long sinuous fish-tail seen on early Corinthian vases is probably Palaemon (see p. 26); but in one case this deity is feminine.[1946] Amphitrite, as the feminine consort of Poseidon, holds a sceptre or tunny-fish, and Thetis and the Nereids appear in ordinary female form. The former, however, in her struggles with Peleus, is accompanied by lions, serpents, and other animals, which indicate the transformations she was supposed to assume. Skylla appears as described in Homer, with fish-tail and the fore-parts of dogs issuing from her waist, which is encircled by a fringe of scales or feathers.

Demeter and Persephone are not always distinguishable from one another, both having the same attributes—a torch or ears of corn (cf. Plate LI.). Their identification depends rather on the nature of their respective actions in the scenes where they appear. Triptolemos is always seen in his winged two-wheeled car (sometimes drawn by serpents), and usually holds ears of corn or a libation-bowl; on B.F. vases he is bearded. The other Eleusinian deities, on the late R.F. vases where they occur, are marked by the large torches which they hold.

Apollo on the B.F. vases almost invariably occurs in his character of Kitharoidos,[1947] the lyre which he holds being of the form known as kithara (on later vases it is a chelys); he is therefore, like all musicians, fully draped in long chiton, and his hair falls in curls on his shoulders, or is gathered in a κρώβυλος. Unlike most gods, he is at all times youthful and beardless.[1948] He is also represented holding a laurel-branch, shooting an arrow from his bow, or riding on a swan or Gryphon, or accompanied by a hind or other animal. His sister Artemis is draped in long chiton and mantle, and often wears a high cap on B.F. vases; it is not until the later R.F. period that she appears in hunting costume, with knotted-up hair, short chiton, and high laced-up hunting-boots or endromides; sometimes also a fawn-skin. She is usually distinguished by her bow and arrows, and is accompanied by a hound, deer, goat, or other animal.[1949]

Hephaistos is usually bearded,[1950] and often appears in the workman’s dress of the exomis or short chiton covering one shoulder, and high conical cap; his craft is further symbolised by a hammer or tongs, or by the axe with which he brings Athena forth from the head of Zeus. In the Gigantomachia he uses his tongs with savage violence against an unfortunate opponent (see p. 14). Ares is the typical Greek fully-armed warrior, bearded, with helmet, short chiton, cuirass, and greaves, sword, spear, and shield; but is not otherwise to be distinguished. Hermes, as the messenger of the gods, appears in appropriate costume of chlamys and petasos (the Greek travelling-hat), and carrying the caduceus or herald’s staff; he usually wears high boots, and on the earlier vases a short chiton in addition. He is occasionally winged, but it is more usual to find the wings attached to his petasos or boots. On B.F. vases he is always bearded, but not after the sixth century. Hestia, who but rarely occurs on vases, forms a pair to Hermes in assemblies of the gods, but is not distinguished further than by the Olympian lotos-sceptre.

Athena on the earlier B.F. vases is not always distinguished from an ordinary woman; later, the helmet, spear, shield, and aegis become inseparable adjuncts of her costume, the shield being always circular in form. The spear, which is sometimes her only characteristic, is usually brandished or couched in her right hand, and sometimes she holds her helmet in her hand (see Plate XXXVI. and p. 40). Her costume consists of a long girt chiton, over which the peplos or small mantle is thrown, and the aegis round her chest. The latter is covered with scales and has a fringe of rearing serpents, and sometimes, on later vases, the Gorgon’s head in the centre of the front. On the Panathenaic amphorae she is always represented in the Promachos attitude, at first to left, but later to right, brandishing her spear. At either side of her are columns surmounted by an owl, a cock, or other emblems. On the later specimens her figure is greatly elongated, and her drapery is often elaborately embroidered with patterns in purple and white. Her statue when represented is usually a mere reproduction of the living type; but on some later vases there seems to be a reminiscence of the Parthenos or other statues (see p. 40).

Aphrodite is less individualised than any other deity, at any rate on the earlier vases, on which she is invariably draped in the ordinary manner. She sometimes carries a lotos-headed sceptre (as in Judgment of Paris scenes). Occasionally she is represented armed. On the later vases the influence of fourth-century sculpture becomes apparent in the treatment of this, as of other deities. She now first appears nude (when bathing or washing), scantily clad or half draped, and in transparent Coan draperies, through which the outlines of her form are visible. She has no characteristic attribute, but is frequently represented with a dove or other bird. The types of Eros have already been fully discussed (p. 45); briefly it may be said that on the Attic R.F. vases he is a full-grown nude youth with wings; on those of Southern Italy the type is more boyish, though never the child or putto of the Hellenistic Age, and in Apulia the androgynous type, with hair arranged in feminine fashion and jewellery profusely adorning his person—earrings, necklace, chains, and anklets—is invariable.

Dionysos is distinguished primarily by the ivy-wreath which crowns his head; he generally wears a long chiton and mantle, but on the latest vases is frequently nude. On all B.F. vases, and often on those of the R.F. period, he is bearded, and it is only on those of Southern Italy that he appears as a somewhat effeminate youth, half draped like Apollo, with rounded and graceful limbs. His attributes are the rhyton or keras (only on B.F. vases), the kantharos, a form of drinking-cup specially associated with him, a vine-branch, and the thyrsos; he is accompanied by panthers and other animals, or swings the limbs of a kid (χιμαιροφόνος). Usually he maintains a calm and unmoved attitude amid the wild revelries of his followers. Ariadne is undistinguished except by her association with him. Pan, who only occurs on later vases, is almost invariably represented as a beardless youthful figure, with goat’s horns, but human legs; when, however, he has goat’s legs or feet, he is usually called Aegipan, and in this aspect he assumes a somewhat dwarfish and more bestial aspect.[1951]

Satyrs are either elderly and bearded, or youthful; in all cases with pointed ears and horses’ tails, and undraped except for the fawn-skins which they frequently wear. They carry a thyrsos, drinking-cups, or musical instruments, according to the circumstances in which they are depicted. In Ionic art (Vol. I. p. 353 ff.) the Satyrs invariably have horses’ feet as well as tails, and are usually of repulsive appearance. The Seileni are really aged Satyrs, depicted as bald or white-haired, but not otherwise differentiated, except in the case of Papposeilenos, who is covered with shaggy skin.[1952] The Maenads are often represented (especially on B.F. vases) as ordinary draped women, or only with the addition of a fawn-skin or panther-skin over their chiton; they carry the thyrsos, or frequently on later vases a large tambourine (tympanon).

Of the personages associated with the under-world, Hades is usually an elderly bearded deity of the Zeus type. He carries a sceptre, often with ornamented top, and sometimes from his Chthonian association with Dionysos holds a kantharos, vine-branch, or cornucopia. Kerberos has three heads only on two Cacretan hydriae and the Apulian under-world vases; his usual number is two, but once or twice he has only one.[1953] Hekate has torches for her customary attribute, and the Furies, who only occur on South Italian vases, wear short chitons with cross-belts and have rough hair, in which and round their arms serpents are intertwined. Charon the ferryman is represented as an elderly man in short chiton and conical cap (cf. Fig. 122), but the grim Etruscan Charun is a repulsive and savage hook-nosed demon, wielding a hammer. Thanatos and Hypnos, the two Death-deities, are both winged men, but only the former is bearded (cf. Fig. 123); there is usually nothing forbidding in his appearance. The question of the representation of ghosts or souls (εἴδωλα) has been fully discussed (p. 72); most commonly they are diminutive winged figures, and in other cases they appear as in ordinary life,[1954] but possibly they sometimes appear in the form of birds.[1955]

Gaia is represented half rising out of the earth, a beautiful but not young woman, with long hair (Fig. 112); or, as Pandora, her head alone is seen (see p. 73). Kybele occasionally appears, with her attendant lion, and an even rarer figure is Asklepios, with his serpent. The Eileithyiae, who attend at the birth of Athena, are ordinary women, distinguished by the appropriate gestures of their hands (Fig. 113). Iris, the female messenger of the gods, appears winged, with short chiton to allow of rapid movement, and carrying the caduceus or herald’s staff; Hebe, on the other hand, is an ordinary woman. Nike is usually to be distinguished from Iris by her long flowing draperies, even when in flight; the various attributes usually associated with her have already been dealt with in detail (p. 87).[1956]

Among personifications, Helios is a youthful figure in a chariot, usually with rays round his head (as on Plate LIII.); in one or two cases his head is surmounted by a white disc; Selene appears on horseback, and is sometimes indicated by a crescent moon; where Helios is accompanied by a goddess in a chariot, it is probable that Nyx (Night) is intended (see p. 79). The Stars are represented as nude youths. The Aurae or breezes appear as girls floating through the air; the Hyades or rain-Nymphs are identified by their water-pitchers. A group of winged gods and goddesses is formed by Eos, Agon (the masculine counterpart of Nike), Eris, Lyssa (Frenzy),[1957] and the various wind-gods, such as Boreas and Zephyros. These are found at all periods, but the types vary. Eris, who is only found on B.F. vases, resembles the Gorgons (see below), a somewhat grotesque figure with wings, rough hair, and short girt chiton; Lyssa only occurs on Apulian vases, and is akin in type to the Furies—in two instances her figure is enclosed in a circle of rays of light, perhaps to express the blinding effect of her action, and she holds a goad.[1958] Oistros, a kindred figure, rides in a car drawn by serpents, and carries torches. The type of Agon is assimilated to that of Eros on R.F. vases; on those of earlier date (if this is the correct interpretation) he wears a short girt chiton and holds a wreath. The Wind-gods on B.F. vases wear the petasos and high boots, and short girt chiton; Zephyros is represented as a youth; and Boreas, who only occurs on R.F. vases, wears Thracian costume; he is bearded, and his hair is often rough and shaggy. But these winged deities cannot always be identified with certainty. Among other personifications, Geras is a somewhat ugly old man; the Muses are distinguished by their various musical instruments; and Cities and Countries are occasionally individualised. For instance, Thebes, on a vase by Assteas, wears a turreted crown; Sparta appears as a Nymph on horseback; and, generally speaking, their presence is usually indicated not only by inscriptions, but by their relation to the scene depicted.[1959] River-gods, such as Acheloös, appear as human-headed bulls, with horns, but the last-named on a stamnos by Pamphaios (E 437 in B.M.) has a fish-tail.

Kastor and Polydeukes usually appear on horseback and in hunting costume, with petasos, chlamys, and spears; on later vases they sometimes wear the pileus, a conical cap which often appears as their emblem on coins. Herakles on earlier vases is always bearded, and wears the lion’s skin fastened round his waist with a belt, the forepaws knotted round his throat[1960]; the head covers his head like a cap, leaving his face only exposed, and under it he wears a short girt chiton; he is armed with his club, or bow and quiver, and sometimes with a sword. On R.F. vases he is often nude, or only wears the skin in chlamys fashion. On the earlier vases he is often less characterised, and the same applies to the later R.F. vases, on which he is frequently beardless; in many cases he is only to be identified by his club. Theseus always appears as a youth, and on the R.F. cups usually wears a short loose chiton of crinkly material (cf. Vol. I., Frontisp.); his arms are a sword, or sometimes a club. Perseus wears the winged petasos or cap of darkness and high boots (the shoes of swiftness), sometimes winged; he carries the wallet or κίβισις, and sometimes the ἅρπη or curved sword with which he slew Medusa. Pelops on the Apulian vases is usually characterised as an Oriental, with richly embroidered costume and a tiara or embroidered cap. The Homeric heroes are only to be identified by inscriptions, or by the actions in which they take part, but Paris is usually in Oriental costume; in Judgment scenes he holds a lyre, but when he takes part in combats he is attired as an archer, with bow and quiver, Phrygian cap, jerkin, and trousers. Kekrops, the mythical king of Athens, usually ends in a serpent’s tail, to denote his autochthonous origin; Midas has ass’s ears; Orpheus is recognised by his lyre, and sometimes wears, as a musician, feminine costume (see below, p. 197).[1961]

Of other mythological types the Amazons are, of course, always armed, frequently in the Oriental fashion, with Phrygian cap or kidaris and trousers; their weapons are the crescent-shaped shield or pelta, and a peculiar type of battle-axe, the sagaris. The Giants on B.F. vases are ordinary armed warriors, not even of exceptional size, but in later times they often end in serpents, as on the Pergamene frieze. Typhon appears in this form on a Chalcidian vase.[1962] Geryon is represented in the manner described by Pausanias (vi. 19, 1), as “three men joined together,” with distinctive arms and legs; on Chalcidian vases he has four wings, and is only triple from the waist upwards. The Centaurs on the more archaic vases, as on those of Ionia, appear as men with the body and hind legs of a horse attached behind; by the middle of the sixth century they appear in the familiar form of a human bust conjoined with a horse’s body. The Gorgons are always rendered in grotesque fashion, with grinning faces and dishevelled hair intertwined with serpents; they wear short girt chitons and high winged boots, and have four wings, the upper pair recurved; usually on B.F. vases they appear in what is known as “the archaic running attitude,” or, as the Germans more expressively phrase it, “Knielaufschema,” the figures being represented as if kneeling on one knee. The same grotesque type of face,[1963] with the protruding tongue and teeth, appertains to the Medusa’s head or Gorgoneion, which is at all periods such a favourite decorative motive on vases, either as the interior design of a B.F. kylix, or as a medallion in relief on late vases. The more beautiful type of Medusa head is a creation of later date than most of the painted vases, but in the medallions on Italian vases much of the grotesqueness has disappeared.

Much confusion at one time existed between the conceptions of the Harpy and the Siren, both names being indiscriminately applied to the female-headed bird so common on vases of all periods. But there is ample evidence for the representation of the Harpy more in the style of the Gorgons, as a purely feminine type, with the short chiton suited for rapid movement, high boots, and wings, and often in the conventional running attitude.[1964] In this form they appear in one instance as feminine counterparts of the male Boreades.[1965] The Siren types vary at different times, the earlier Sirens frequently having human arms.[1966] The Sphinx is always a woman-headed winged four-footed beast; sometimes on Corinthian and Ionic vases she wears a high head-dress. The Gryphon[1967] is a winged lion with eagle’s beak, and often with erect ears; the winged Pegasos and the bull-headed Minotaur require no description.

* * * * *

Turning now to personages concerned in events of every-day life, we find great variety of costume and equipment, especially at different periods and under different circumstances. The vases, in fact, may be said to supply the most instructive locus classicus for Greek dress and ornament, as well as for minor details—such as weapons, implements, and furniture—of which they provide contemporary illustrations.

Kings are usually distinguished by dignified flowing robes, by the wearing of a wreath or head-dress, or by the sceptre which they hold.[1968] Oriental potentates wear the costume of their country, with lofty ornamented tiaras, or the Persian kidaris or kyrbasia—a peaked cap decorated with fringes and lappets. Their dress is often very elaborate on the later vases. Actors and musicians both wear appropriate costumes. The former, who hardly occur except on the Italian vases, wear the dress of the Old Comedy, with grotesque mask, padded stomach, loose jerkin, and trousers.[1969] Tragic actors are seldom represented; but it has already been pointed out[1970] that in the setting of the mythological scenes on the vases of Southern Italy there is an unmistakable reflection of the tragic stage, especially in the elaborate and somewhat exaggerated details of costume. Musicians invariably wear a long chiton, over which on R.F. vases they sometimes wear a short loose garment called the ὀρθοστάδιον, embroidered with patterns.[1971] There are also a few instances of male performers (recognisable by their beards) in distinctively feminine costume.[1972]

Athletes are invariably nude when performing their exercises, except in the case of the armed foot-race (see p. 164); in the torch-race they seem to have worn high crowns; on the reverse of late R.F. vases they appear inactive, wrapped in mantles and conversing in groups. Hunters wear a distinctive costume of petasos and chlamys, and usually carry two spears. Boys on horseback are usually represented nude, and on Ionic vases have their hair tied in a tuft behind.[1973] Charioteers are always attired in a long girt chiton reaching to the feet, which on Attic B.F. vases is painted white. They usually hold a goad in the right hand, the reins in the left. Heralds wear the attributes of Hermes—the petasos, caduceus, and high boots, with a chlamys or short girt chiton. Warriors on the early and B.F. vases are equipped in a fashion which tallies to some extent with the descriptions of Homer.[1974] Their armour usually consists of a crested Corinthian helmet, a metal cuirass, under which is a short chiton, and greaves, to which are sometimes added the thigh-coverings known as parameridia. Some peculiarities may also be noted—such as the hooked projection on the front of helmets on the Ionic vases of Daphnae and the Clazomenae sarcophagi,[1975] the linen cuirasses (indicated by white paint) sometimes worn on Attic B.F. vases,[1976] or the heavy helmets with large cheek-pieces seen on the Caeretan hydriae (Plate XXVI.). The R.F. vases often represent the fully armed Athenian hoplite equipped in the same fashion as the B.F.; but in these, and more especially in the Italian vases, there is a tendency to omit much of the defensive armour. Cuirasses on R.F. vases are often decorated with patterns of scales or panelling.[1977] Helmets on Italian vases often assume a local character, with conical crowns and two or three lofty plumes.[1978]

Of offensive armour, the full equipment consists of sword, spear, and shield. The two former call for no comment, but the shields, which are of two forms, the circular Argive or the indented oval Boeotian, present one feature of great interest—the devices with which they are adorned.[1979] Investigations have failed to discern in these any symbolical or heraldic significance; they are not appropriated to particular personages, and all that can be noted about them is that they usually seem to suggest rapid movement. Thus we find an eagle or other flying bird, wheels, balls, chariots, a bent leg, a serpent, Pegasos, and so on. The passage in the Septem of Aeschylus (387 ff.), in which the shield-devices of the combatants are described, is of course familiar, and similar allusions are not wanting in Greek writers.[1980] They are universal on B.F. vases, being painted in white on black ground, and are often found on the earlier R.F. vases in black on red; but they seem to disappear at an early stage of the R.F. period. Sometimes they consist only of letters of the alphabet, as on a Panathenaic amphora, where Athena’s shield has the letters Α to Θ; on a B.F. vase in the British Museum are the letters ΑΘΕ.[1981] Other peculiar subjects are a winged boar, two rams butting, a figure of Artemis, a white-bordered square, and a ladder.[1982] Some of those on R.F. vases are somewhat elaborate—a Seilenos,[1983] a fox eating grapes,[1984] an armed runner,[1985] or a warrior blowing a trumpet.[1986] A variation is when the device takes the form of an object in relief—a Satyr-mask,[1987] Gorgoneion,[1988] mask of Phobos (Panic),[1989] or a Gryphon,[1990] or a rearing serpent[1991]; or when a shield is surrounded by a fringe of serpents.[1992] Shields frequently have a piece of fringed and embroidered stuff suspended from them, which seems to have served as a protection to the legs.[1993]

Archers are depicted in Oriental costume, wearing peaked caps with long lappets and a close-fitting dress of leather, consisting of jerkin and trousers, usually embroidered with various patterns. The different barbarian types which appear on vases—Persians, Scythians, Arimaspi, and Thracians—are more or less individualised, especially on the R.F. vases. Such subjects, indeed, were not really popular until the Persian wars. The details of Oriental costume have already been noted. Thracians on R.F. vases wear a long loose cloak known as the zeira and a cap of foxskin (alopeke) with long flaps, which dress is also worn by Boreas (see above). In the first half of the fifth century Oriental costumes seem to have had a period of popularity among the fashionable young men of Athens, especially the knights; and they are often depicted riding in the zeira or striped and embroidered dresses of outlandish style (see pp. 166, 179). Egyptians are often realistically rendered, with shaven heads,[1994] as are negroes and Aethiopians. The latter, like all barbarians on vases, usually wear trousers. On the vases of Southern Italy details of local (Osco-Samnite or Messapian) costumes often appear (see p. 180, and Vol. I. p. 483), especially in the case of helmets and breastplates worn by warriors on Campanian vases.

On the earlier vases, down to the end of the B.F. period, there is frequently no distinction between the dress of men and women, and to this fact may have been due the practice of painting the latter white to differentiate them. Both wear the long Doric chiton, with a mantle or himation thrown over it; but men often wear the smaller chlamys over the shoulders in place of the himation. Women, again, on the earlier B.F. vases, often appear without the himation, and wear a long chiton tightly girt at the waist, with a short apoptygma or fold falling over the breast. On R.F. vases the Doric chiton is sometimes worn by women, open down one side (known as the χίτων σχιστός). Men in the “strong” R.F. period wear a short loose chiton of fine crinkly linen. Generally in the R.F. period there is greater freedom of costume and variety of material and arrangement. The Ionic chiton is introduced about 500 B.C., but its vogue does not seem to have lasted long at Athens. In place of the apoptygma women sometimes wear a loose over-garment, known as the diplois. On the earliest vases men are often nude, with the exception of a loin-cloth or pair of tight-fitting “bathing-drawers.” Women are practically never nude on vases, except when occupied in bathing or washing, or in the case of hetairae and jugglers.

The draperies, especially the chitons, are often richly embroidered with patterns, represented by incising and purple and white colours on the B.F. vases, by black paint on the R.F. On the former the women’s chiton is often covered with a sort of diaper pattern of squares, filled in with circles and stars, or the dresses (both of men and women) are covered with groups of dots and flowers in white and purple. In the late fine R.F. period and on the vases of Lucania and Apulia the patterns become exceedingly rich and varied[1995]: chequers, wave-pattern, palmettes, stars, egg-pattern, maeander, and all kinds of borders are introduced. A further extension of the principle is seen in the introduction of borders of figures, the most notable instances of which are on the François vase and the Hieron kotyle.[1996] On the former the technique is remarkable as a kind of anticipation of red figures on black. Aristotle speaks of a garment made for Alkimenes of Sybaris on which deities were represented between borders decorated with Oriental figures, the subjects being the sacred animals of the Medes and Persians.[1997] We may also cite the remarkable statue of Demeter found at Lykosura in Arcadia, the drapery of which is decorated with inlaid borders of figures,[1998] and the mantle of Jason described by Apollonius Rhodius.[1999]

The hair of women on B.F. vases, and frequently also that of men, usually falls loose or in tight curls on the shoulders, with a fringe over the forehead. On the early R.F. vases men often wear their hair looped up behind in the fashion known as the κρώβυλος,[2000] which, as we know from Thucydides, went out about 480 B.C. Women, on the other hand, have theirs knotted up and confined under a cap. On later R.F. vases and on those of Apulia their hair is usually gathered up in the opisthosphendone, or in a broad coif or fillets, and arranged in bunches of curls in front and behind. On late R.F. vases a radiated diadem, painted white, is often seen. Men are seldom represented with long hair after 480 B.C., but they usually wear a wreath or plain fillet. Head-coverings are rarely worn by ordinary persons, with the exception of the traveller’s and huntsman’s petasos; but Oriental personages usually wear a high cap of some kind (see above, under Barbarians). Jewellery—such as necklaces, earrings, armlets, or anklets—is comparatively rare on B.F. vases, but becomes more and more common, until it reaches profusion on those of Apulia. Bracelets and anklets are often in the form of serpents. Various forms of sandals or shoes are seen on later vases, but on the black-figured the only kind of footgear is the high boot or endromis, with a curved tag in front.

* * * * *

The extent to which physiognomical expressions are rendered on vases varies at different periods[2001]; but it is not true, as has sometimes been thought, that the artists altogether ignored such expressions in their figures; it was only in the earlier phases that this was the case, and even during the fifth century the advance was timid and slow, much more so than in sculpture. As a rule, in the same vase all the faces are alike, and no physiognomical distinction can be drawn between gods and heroes, or even between men and women, except (on the Attic vases) in the treatment of the eye. On the B.F. vases the ordinary type of face has a long nose, with a tendency to turn up, a pointed chin, deep rounded jaw, and large eyes, while the limbs are sinewy, angular, and tapering. Beards of some length are invariable for grown or elderly men; otherwise distinctions of age are hardly observed until the R.F. period. And as in sculpture of the archaic period all figures have the same conventional smile, so on the B.F. vases gods, heroes, and mortals alike all pursue the actions in which they are engaged with the same unvarying expression. The contrast of violent action and calm unmoved physiognomy is often quaint, and almost grotesque.

Indications of expression or sentiment are, in fact, rather implicit than explicit. They are given in a sort of shorthand fashion, just as Polygnotos in his great paintings, by some subtle touch—by a change of attitude or the action of a hand—indicated the emotion he wished to convey. In the different treatment of the male and female eye there is, no doubt, an attempt to give to the man a more lively expression by means of the round pupil, while the oval form of the woman’s eye gives her a softer and less intense look. The neglect of this principle on Ionian vases, where the male eye is oval, seems to be a reflection of the effeminate tendencies of the Ionian races.[2002] At an early date we may observe a special treatment of the eye to represent it as closed, in the case of a blind or dying person. Thus the Phineus of the Würzburg cup has merely an angular mark in place of an eye, representing the fall of the upper eyelid over the lower, or the eye is represented as a vacant space without pupil.[2003] The mouth is sometimes open to express pain or anger, as in the Nessos of the Proto-Attic vase,[2004] or the quarrelling heroes on a vase in the Louvre (F 340). It is also used to express the agony of a dying or injured person, as on a vase with the outraged Polyphemos,[2005] with which we may compare the dying warrior of the Aegina pediment. But all these are rather exceptions than the rule on B.F. vases.

After the time of Polygnotos the influence of painting makes itself felt, and we may recall that he perfected the advances of Kimon in this respect. Not only did the vase-painters learn from him how to dispose figures en face or in three-quarter view, but they also learned how to mark different expressions. It has also been observed that the influence of tragedy must have been strong at this time. The krater from Orvieto in the Louvre (Vol. I. p. 442) is a good instance of the progress made in the fifth century in this direction. On one side of the vase (see Fig. 103, ibid.) we have a dying Niobid and a youth with face to the front and eyes closing; on the other, in the Argonautic scene, a warrior holding his knees, with lower lip fallen, giving him a melancholy expression, and Herakles with a face of sadness, marked by wrinkles. Other figures show exactly in what direction they are looking (compare Kimon’s figures “looking down or upwards”).[2006] In the later developments of the Apulian vases, with their scenes drawn from tragic themes and represented in such dramatic fashion, there is plenty of ability to represent emotion, and in several cases it is accurately expressed, as in some of the scenes from the sack of Troy. But in other cases, as on the Assteas vase in Madrid (Fig. 107), much of the old quaintness and grotesqueness is apparent.

* * * * *

It is also necessary to treat of the methods adopted by the artist for indicating locality or landscape in his pictures, a thing which is often done in the briefest and most cursory manner. The germs of this principle are perhaps to be observed (as noted elsewhere, Vol. I. p. 312) in the floral ground-ornaments of the Corinthian and other early vases. In the more developed vase-paintings a sort of shorthand system is customary, a system which in some degree probably prevailed on the Greek stage, as on that of the Elizabethan drama. Thus a temple or a house is represented by a column, or two columns supporting a pediment, a wood or grove by a single tree, water by two dolphins swimming in the lower part of the design, and so on. A notable exception is in the palace depicted on the François vase, in which Thetis awaits the arrival of the bridegroom Peleus. So much of the building is given in detail that it is even possible to attempt a restoration.[2007] On the same vase the walls of Troy are depicted, with a double door studded with nails. In the Hydrophoria scenes (p. 173) considerable attention is paid to the architectural details of the well-house, which was probably in the form of a small temple, perhaps circular, surrounded by a colonnade. The water issues from spouts in the form of lions’ heads, and statues are often depicted in different parts of the building. The François vase also gives an illustration of a well-house, with portico supported by columns. The architecture is almost invariably Doric. In outdoor scenes rocks occasionally appear, but only where they are necessary to the subject, as in the ambuscade of Achilles for Troilos. The branches of trees which frequently cover all the vacant spaces of the design on later B.F. vases, especially in Dionysiac scenes, may be mainly intended for decorative effect.

In the R.F. period more and more attention is paid to landscape and architectural detail as the style develops, but there is still a strong tendency to adhere to the shorthand system—a tendency which increases rather than disappears, especially on the white-ground vases. The artist’s object was always to make his figures stand out, as far as possible, clear against the background, and he therefore deliberately avoided anything likely to interfere with the desired effect. Landscape proper, with indications of ground-lines, rocks, and trees, was only introduced when the Polygnotan influence became strong, and the Orvieto krater in the Louvre may be once more cited as a good and early instance of a new development. Scenes in architectural settings are rare, but an exception may be noted in the case of some of the late R.F. vases with scenes in women’s apartments, where careful attention is paid to the details of the door-ways, even to the locks and key-holes.[2008] For the rest, it usually sufficed to indicate the palaestra by a strigil or oil-flask suspended, or a pair of jumping-weights; musical gatherings by a lyre or a flute in a case; banqueting-rooms by cups and other vases hung up, or by rows of boots. Similarly, women’s apartments are represented by a window, door, or column, or by sashes, hoods, mirrors, wreaths, and wool-baskets scattered about.[2009]

In the vases of Southern Italy this principle is carried almost to excess. Not only is the old idea of rosettes and flowers scattered about the scene revived, but the whole surface of the design is often covered with miscellaneous objects, such as balls, sashes, and mirrors. On the Apulian vases the use of a double line of white dots to indicate the ground is invariable, and loose stones are scattered about where it is intended to be rocky. Flowers grow about in rich profusion. In the mythological scenes an elaborate architectural background is frequent, and altars, tripods, and columns serve the same end; the heroa or shrines and other forms of tomb in the sepulchral scenes have already been described. In athletic scenes, especially on the reverse of the kraters, a ball, a stylus and tablets, or a pair of jumping-weights are suspended in the air to indicate the palaestra; and on Lucanian vases subjects of a military nature are suggested by a suspended shield only partly visible. The “courting-scenes” on Apulian vases usually have a representation of a window in a corner of the design.

§ 2. ARRANGEMENT OF SUBJECTS

The next point to be considered is the method of arrangement and composition of the figures in general on Greek vases. As regards the Mycenaean, Geometrical, and other early wares, they may be left out of consideration,—firstly, because their ornamentation is mainly composed of decorative motives or single figures of animals; secondly, because even where compositions of figure subjects are found, as on the great Dipylon vases, the method of arrangement is still tentative and without system. The figures are arranged in haphazard groups and bands, and all the remaining spaces are filled in with ornament.

The first attempt at an organised method of decoration is seen in the vases of Corinth and Ionia, and is exemplified principally in the arrangement of the friezes of animals. Roughly speaking, there are two main tendencies, one characteristic of each line of development—the procession and the heraldic group. Both are essentially Oriental (i.e. Assyrian) in origin, the prototype of the latter being the familiar motive of the two animals and the sacred tree, which is so frequently found on Mycenaean gems, and is best exemplified in the famous Lion Gate of Mycenae.[2010] Yet this typically Mycenaean and Oriental motive was not the one adopted by its natural inheritors, the Ionians, and it is in Dorian Corinth that we find its reflection on the painted vases. On one Corinthian vase[2011] it actually occurs in the form of a conventional palmette and lotos-pattern (representing the tree), on either side of which two lions are confronted in true Mycenaean fashion. Later, it becomes a common device on the necks of vases, the ornament taking the form of a decorative combination of palmettes (see below, p. 226). Even when on Corinthian vases a whole frieze of animals is found, there is always a central “heraldic” group of two, towards which the whole seems to lead up, or else the frieze is broken up into several isolated heraldic groups.[2012] But on the Ionic vases, as on those of Rhodes and Naukratis, we have over and over again regular processions of animals all facing the same way, or, as at Daphnae, solemn dances of women, similarly placed and joining hand-in-hand (see Plate XXV.).

In the developed B.F. vases the same principles are observed to some extent, especially where friezes of animals are introduced; but there is much greater freedom of treatment within the limits of the field available. Generally speaking, however, all designs on B.F. vases may be regarded as following one of the three methods of architectural composition—the frieze, the pediment, or the metope. The frieze style, which is seen on the shoulders of hydriae, the exteriors of kylikes, and sometimes on the bodies of amphorae, oinochoae, or lekythi, implies a series of figures, all turned in the same direction, but without any central point for the action, as in processions of warriors, dances of Satyrs and Maenads, and so on. In the pediment style of composition the essential feature is a centre-point, in which the interest of the subject is concentrated, as in such scenes as the Birth of Athena[2013] or Theseus killing the Minotaur.[2014] The central group is then flanked by figures immediately interested in the action (Eileithyia and Hephaistos, or Ariadne, in the instances quoted; Athena and Iolaos at the labours of Herakles); and the ends of the pediment, so to speak, are occupied by groups of bystanders, often nameless and uncharacterised, who are in fact only included to fill up the space required.

The metope style, which only admits of three, or at most four, figures, was found convenient for all the vases with subjects on panels, where space was restricted, and also on the kylikes of the “minor artist” class, on which a limited use of figures was preferred, and on those of later date where the space was mainly taken up by the large eyes. But in all these cases—friezes, pediments, or metopes—one thing was held to be essential: the correspondence of the two halves of the design (except in friezes), producing perfect symmetry in the composition.

Lastly, there are a limited number of cases where a single figure was found sufficient, as in the interior of kylikes, on the circular pinakes,[2015] and sometimes on the vases where the large eyes take up most of the space.[2016]

Subordinate designs, bordering the main design of an amphora above or below, or decorating the cover, are usually in the form of animals or chariot-races, in the frieze style of composition. Similar friezes are sometimes also found (in the old B.F. method) on R.F. vases, and even on the kraters of Southern Italy.

The earlier R.F. vases preserve the principles of the preceding period; and, in regard to the kylikes, the system of decoration has been discussed in detail elsewhere (Vol. I. p. 427). In all of them we see particular attention paid to arrangement, and the variations in the principles of composition form one of our guides in determining the development of the style. In the amphorae and hydriae of the transition from the severe to the strong period the number of figures employed in one scene was diminished, while they became larger in their proportions and were treated with more care; the usual number on the Nolan amphora is one or two each side. On the smaller vases, such as the oinochoë, the number of the figures never exceeds three. Sometimes the hydriae have an elongated composition on the shoulder, containing a frieze of several figures[2017]; but usually the design runs into both shoulder and body. Designs in framed panels are rare, except on the earlier amphorae and hydriae, and on the column-handled kraters. The latter are unique in preserving the older methods of decoration right through the R.F. period down to the fourth-century specimens from Southern Italy.

The influence of Polygnotos and his contemporaries brought about, as we have seen, a great change in the arrangement of the compositions, by the introduction of landscape and perspective, and the depicting of figures at different levels. This new development was subsequently exemplified in the large vases of Kertch and Apulia, but in the late fine period at Athens small vases with single friezes or simple subjects were the rule. In the pyxides and other vases with frieze subjects the figures are often crowded together and of dwarfish proportions (Plate XLII. fig. 3). A return to the old system of several friezes is seen where the figures are arranged in two or more rows divided by bands of ornaments, as in the Meidias hydria, or the early Apulian and some of the Lucanian vases.[2018]

The earlier vases of Southern Italy, especially those of Lucania, preserve in some measure the spirit of the best R.F. vases, in the arrangement of the figures, and at all times the composition is one of the best features of these vases; but in the later examples the purely decorative element obtrudes itself; single figures of little more than ornamental character abound, and the old preference for mere ornament asserts itself, the patterns encroaching all over the scenes.

§ 3. ORNAMENTAL PATTERNS

Although by far subordinate to the subjects in point of artistic or archaeological interest, the ornamental patterns which are employed on the vases are by no means without their value in both respects.[2019] They are, indeed, intimately interwoven with the subjects themselves, which they frame in, relieve, or embellish. Numerous vases are decorated with ornaments only, even in the advanced stages of the art; and this is, of course, an extremely common occurrence in the earlier fabrics, such as the Geometrical and Rhodian. Others, again, are only ornamented in the simplest fashion, with plain bands of red left to show through the black varnish round the body or foot. That the artist took a pride even in this form of ornamentation is shown by the fact that some potters, such as Nikosthenes and the “minor artists,” have left their names on vases only decorated with simple patterns.

From the very beginning of Greek vase-painting there may be observed an endeavour to dispose the ornamental patterns in accordance with some system; and even though in some cases, as in the Cypriote Geometrical vases, there is an offence against the canons of art, yet at all periods the prevailing effect is one of symmetry and taste. It may be thought that in some respects there is a poverty in the variety of ornaments employed—as compared, for instance, with mediaeval art; but it should be remembered that—as their architecture shows—the Greek principle was to achieve the highest results within a limited sphere. Their system was conventional, but its conventions are forgotten in the artistic effect that it produces.

It is on the earliest vases that the greatest variety and richness of ornament occurs; as the art is developed the ornamentation becomes more and more subsidiary, until on the vases of the finest R.F. period it has almost disappeared. But in the later phases it again comes to the fore, tending more and more to obscure and finally to supersede the subjects. To set forth as briefly as possible the growth and development of Greek ornament, both as a whole and in the case of individual motives, will be the object of the succeeding summary. It will be found advisable to treat the subject in a twofold aspect,—firstly, dealing with individual forms and their development; and, secondly, in their relation to the decoration of the vases and their subjects, as exemplified in the different periods and fabrics.

Various theories have been propounded as to the origin of the ornaments found on Greek vases. Some have seen in the patterns architectural adaptations, suggested by the ornamentation of the different members of a temple, such as the maeander, egg-and-tongue pattern, or the astragalus, just as the disposition of the subject is often a reminiscence of the frieze or metopes. But this is no real explanation. In the first place, the patterns are found on vases at a period when they were hardly as yet used in architecture; and, secondly, their use on vases and in architecture must undoubtedly be traced to a common source. Others, again, have regarded them as conventional symbols, the kymation or wave-pattern representing water, a flower or rosette the ground on which the figures stand, and so on. Or, again, it has been thought that they were originally derived from textile patterns, being produced mechanically by the ways in which the threads ran in the loom, whence they were applied with deliberate artistic intention to the surface of a vase.

It is, in fact, impossible to put forward any one theory which will account for the whole system of decorative ornament. As has been pointed out in our introductory chapter, many of these patterns are not only spontaneous, but universal in their origin among primitive peoples; every nation has begun with its circles, triangles, spirals, or chevrons. We are also, in regard to the Greeks, met with the remarkable fact that in its earliest form their painted pottery presents a very elaborate and highly developed system of ornamentation—purely geometrical, it is true, yet none the less of an advanced character. It is a composite system, formed partly from Mycenaean and pre-Mycenaean local elements, and partly from the decorative ideas introduced by the Dorians from Central Europe; subsequently the range of Greek vase-ornament was yet further enlarged by the introduction of vegetable patterns, the palmette, the lotos-flower, and the rosette, which are due to the growth of Oriental influences, both from Egypt and from Assyria.

* * * * *

In order to deal with the various ornaments and patterns in detail, it may be found convenient to divide them under three heads—rectilinear, curvilinear, and vegetable or floral. Of the first class the most consistently popular is the typically Greek pattern known as the maeander, key, or fret pattern. It first appears with the Geometrical style, in which it plays an important part, often covering a large proportion of the surface of a vase, arranged in broad friezes. Three varieties are found—a simple battlement pattern (Fig. 139), and the slightly more elaborate forms, Fig. 140, and the pattern given in Vol. I. p. 283, Fig. 83. In the Boeotian Geometrical, Phaleron, and Proto-Corinthian fabrics it is seldom found, or only in a debased form, as [maeander] but one or two forms occur in the “Rhodian” and “Samian” fabrics of Ionia; one of these is given in Fig. 141, and another consists of squares of the same alternating with crosses or stars in panels. We meet with a most interesting development of the latter variety in the vases of the so-called Pontic class and on the Clazomenae sarcophagi, where an elaborate maeander pattern, usually in two rows, is interspersed with stars or rosettes (Fig. 142). It thus becomes almost a distinguishing characteristic of the later Ionian fabrics.

In the Attic B.F. vases there is a return to simplicity. Here we find it for the most part in the form Fig. 140 above, and its usual position is below the designs on the red-bodied amphorae; but it is sometimes found on other vases, as above the panels on the bodies of hydriae or oinochoae. In the R.F. period its development is most important for determining the succession of the kylikes, on which it almost becomes a date-mark, so regular is its evolution. This has, however, been already dealt with in the chapter on the history of the style (Vol. I. p. 416). After the severe period it is of frequent appearance on all forms of vases, the kylix, amphora, krater, and pelike in particular; the usual arrangement is a group of three to five maeanders, either of the simple Fig. 140 type, or of a more complicated form (Fig. 143), divided by rectangular panels or squares composed of chequers, or of crosses (diagonal and vertical) with dots or strokes between the arms.[2020] A curious variety of the maeander is used by Duris; it consists of a double intersecting maeander interspersed with squares[2021] (Fig. 144).

The invariable place for this ornament is below the design on the large vases, and it is usually continued the whole way round (except on the earlier Nolan amphorae); it is also found on the R.F. and white lekythi along the top of the design. It is always painted in black on the clay ground.[2022]

A similar form of maeander prevails on the vases of Southern Italy (except in Campania); it is found on the krater, amphora, lebes, kotyle, etc., and is almost invariable. But there is one unique variety which is occasionally found on the great Apulian kraters, as on F 278 in the British Museum; the type is that of the pattern in Fig. 144, but the maeander is represented in perspective, being painted in white on the black, the shaded edges left in the colour of the clay.

Of patterns akin to the maeander, the so-called swastika or hook-armed cross, 16[21]swastika occurs in panels on the Geometrical vases, but subsequently it is only found as a ground-ornament in the field, as frequently at Naukratis, in Rhodes, and elsewhere. It is, strictly speaking, to be regarded as a fragmentary piece of maeander, without any of the symbolical meaning which it bears in the art of northern nations, with whom it was the emblem of the Scandinavian god Thor. Another pattern, 16[63]maeander or 16[90]maeander which may be called a variety of the maeander, is frequently found as a continuous border on early vases, such as the Phaleron and Proto-Corinthian wares, and occasionally in the B.F. period.

Next there is the chevron, zigzag, or herring-bone pattern, consisting of systems of V-shaped patterns, arranged in two ways, either 20[15]chevron or 16[64]zigzag these patterns are practically only found on the earlier fabrics of Greece and Cyprus, or on the native wares of Apulia. On the incised vases of the early Bronze Age found at Hissarlik and in Cyprus this is the prevailing motive, the lines of zigzag being either single, or arranged in groups of four or five parallel:

On the Geometrical vases such patterns are of very frequent occurrence, and panels or bands of chevrons arranged vertically, 20[15]chevron or 20[22]zigzag occur in many instances (Fig. 83). These groups of chevrons or zigzags are also a distinguishing mark of the Boeotian Geometrical fabrics (cf. Fig. 85); they occur to a lesser extent on the Melian, Proto-Corinthian, and Early Corinthian vases, and even in the Chalcidian fabrics. They are either employed as ground-ornaments to fill in spaces, or as panels forming part of the subsidiary decoration. A variation, or rather development, of the chevron, sometimes employed as a ground-ornament on early Ionic vases, is composed of a cross, 22[21]cross with sets of chevrons between the arms.

Diagonally or directly intersecting lines form another universal element of early decoration, varying from a simple arrangement of cross lines 22[54]mesh to an elaborate diaper-pattern, and in such forms found even in later times. Beginning with the simple intersecting lines, or bands filled in with hatching, of the primitive incised vases, further developed in the white slip ware of Cyprus (Vol. I. p. 243), we next come to their use on the vases of the Geometrical period, both in Greece and in Cyprus. The variety of these patterns is so great that they can hardly be described in any detail; the usual method of treatment is in a band or panel of lozenges, squares, or triangles, filled in with a reticular pattern formed by the short intersecting lines. Sometimes dots are inserted in the spaces to enrich the general effect. Some very good examples of these patterns are to be seen in the Geometrical vases of Apulia (p. 327). In the B.F. period plain bands or panels of intersecting lines are not infrequent; sometimes small amphorae or lekythi are decorated entirely in this fashion.[2023] A variation of the motive is the border of network which often surrounds the panels on hydriae or oinochoae, in which the points of intersection are ornamented with studs, resembling the knots of a net (Fig. 145). It is also frequently found on the later Corinthian vases. Chequer-patterns are often used with great effect, at all periods from the Geometrical vases down to the fourth century, their usual position being on the neck of a vase (Fig. 146).[2024]

The circle as an ornament occurs comparatively rarely, but there are two exceptions. In the Geometrical vases we find a use both of concentric circles and of rows of single circles joined by straight lines forming tangents, a motive which is obviously derived from the Mycenaean spirals (Fig. 147). Secondly, in the Graeco-Phoenician pottery of Cyprus, especially in its later phases and in the smaller vases, such as the jugs and lekythi, the decoration is practically confined to systems of concentric circles, of a character quite peculiar to this fabric.[2025] The chief feature of these systems is that the ordinary principles of vase-decoration are entirely ignored, and the circles, arranged in series of five or six, forming a band about three-quarters of an inch in width, are placed not only at right angles to the axis of the vase, but parallel to it. The illustrations in Plate XIII. and Fig. 75 (Vol. I. p. 251) will give a better idea of the arrangement than any description; it is clear that the circles were easily produced by applying a fine brush to the vase while turning on the wheel, first in its natural position and then on its side. Artistically, of course, the principle is a wrong one, and this is most glaringly conspicuous in the barrel-shaped lekythi, in which the axis of the vase is regarded as horizontal rather than vertical. Groups of small concentric circles are also arranged vertically or otherwise on the bodies and necks of vases.

The spiral, which forms such a conspicuous element in Mycenaean decorative art, appears again prominently in a class which, as we have seen (Vol. I. p. 302), owes much to that source—the Melian amphorae. Systems of spirals are arranged to fill the spaces at the sides of the design,[2026] especially in combination with floral ornaments and reticulated lozenges; and the same feature may also be observed in the Proto-Attic vases. It occurs similarly, combined with a flower, on the Samian or Fikellura vases (Vol. I. p. 337). In later times the spiral passes from the sphere of inorganic to that of organic ornament, being combined in various ways with vegetable patterns, and merging in the tendril or volute. But it occasionally reverts to its old form, notably in the red-bodied amphorae of Exekias,[2027] who, in place of the usual palmette-and-lotos ornament under the handles, contrives an elaborate system of large spirals to fill the space between the designs (Fig. 148). A variation of this is the figure-of-eight ornament, 15[34]figure-eight sometimes continuous, 15[61]continuous figure-eight which is found on vases of the Proto-Attic class, such as the Burgon lebes in the British Museum (Fig. 87).

The wave-pattern or kymation moulding, shown in Fig. 149, is one which constantly occurs in Greek architectural decoration, but on the vases at any rate seems to be found only at a late period. On the Campanian vases it is the regular border below the design; it is also found on those of Lucania and Apulia. The crescent is only found on early Ionic vases, including those which have been attributed to a Samian origin (Vol. I. p. 336 ff.), and some of the Daphnae and Naukratis fragments, which probably borrowed it from Samos; it is arranged in bands alternating in colour, black or purple and white. Another typically Ionic ornament is the scale-pattern, which occurs on many of the so-called Rhodian vases, and also on those from Daphnae (Fig. 150). In the former it is produced by means of incising on the black varnish, the alternate scales being often coloured purple; but in the latter it is painted in outline. Curiously enough, it also occurs in the incised form on an early group of Corinthian vases (Plate XIX. fig. 3). Like other patterns, it can be traced to a Mycenaean origin, being very common in that style. Subsequently it occurs but rarely, but is sometimes employed on the neck or shoulder of a vase.[2028] It differs from most other patterns in that it does not lend itself to the panel or frieze, but covers a surface of indefinite extent. It is also known as the “imbricated” pattern, from its likeness to overlapping tiles (imbrices).

The guilloche or plait-band (Fig. 151) is characteristic of early fabrics, such as those of Naukratis and Samos, the Clazomenae sarcophagi (Plate XXVII.), and the small Proto-Corinthian lekythi, but is not often found in later times.[2029] It is typically Ionic, and seems to be derived from Mycenae (cf. A 209 in B.M.). Lastly, there is the so-called tongue-pattern, which is exclusively used as an upper border to designs. On its first appearance in the Geometrical vases it is rectilinear in form, 15[63]tongue-pattern and formed of alternating bars; but from the beginning of the sixth century onwards it assumes a curvilinear form, all the tongues pointing downwards, broader, and close together, as in Fig. 152. In the Daphnae vases and the later Corinthian wares it is treated in polychrome fashion, black, purple, and white alternately. On the lip and shoulders of Caeretan hydriae it appears in an exaggerated form, painted red, with black edges, as on Plate XXVI. In the Attic B.F. vases it forms the invariable upper border of the designs, below the necks of the amphorae and hydriae, and is also used as a border to the interior designs of the kylikes; here, too, purple is often applied to the alternate tongues. Occasionally the rectilinear form reappears. In the R.F. period it changes its character again, and the tongues become short and semi-oval in form, with black centre and narrow outlined edge; in this form it is usually described as an egg-pattern (Fig. 153). It is found in the smaller hydriae, and in many other shapes above or below the designs; also round the lip of the vase. The same form and arrangement obtain in the South Italian vases, especially in Apulia and Lucania, except that a dot is often placed between each pair of tongues. In some cases it approximates closely to the egg-and-dart, as on F 179 in the British Museum. Both tongue and egg-patterns are often ranged round the base of the handles. The egg-and-tongue, with its variants, is a typically Ionic architectural pattern; hence its non-appearance in Attic vases before the fifth century. In later Roman pottery (Chap. XXIII.) it becomes very common. The variety known as the Lesbian kymation is found in a few late instances.[2030]

* * * * *

Having surveyed the various types of inorganic patterns, whether rectilinear or curvilinear, we now come to the consideration of those which are not only derived from vegetable ornament, but still preserve, in greater or less degree, a naturalistic character. To begin with the simple leaf-ornament, which is of too conventional a type to associate with any particular plant, this occurs most frequently in the form of of a calyx, placed round the lower part of the body, immediately above the foot, so that the leaves radiate from the foot, pointing upwards.[2031] This ornament begins at a very early period, and is found in most fabrics, continuing down to the latest stages. It is, however, specially associated with the B.F. period, in which it is invariable on the large vases with a more or less marked stem, the amphorae, hydriae, and kraters. On the smaller ones, however, it does not occur. In the “affected” B.F. amphorae (Vol. I. p. 388) the calyx is double, with two tiers of rays.[2032]

An arrangement of four leaves saltire-wise in a panel sometimes occurs on the Geometrical vases, a remarkable instance of vegetable ornament in this style (cf. Vol. I. p. 282); an analogous pattern is also found on many early Corinthian aryballi (Vol. I. p. 314; B.M. A 1086 ff.), the leaves not being united at the base, and usually interspersed with reticulated or other motives.

Another form of leaf-pattern is of rare occurrence, and is found now and then on Attic vases; in this small leaves are joined together in a sort of ribbon or chain-pattern[2033] (Fig. 154). The peculiarity of this ornament is that even in the B.F. period it is red-figured in technique, being left in the colour of the clay with a background of black.

The ivy-leaf was not adopted as a decorative pattern before the middle of the sixth century; it seems to be Ionic in origin.[2034] Single large leaves occur on the necks of B.F. lekythi, on late Ionic B.F. vases, and to a considerable extent on the imitations made in Etruria.[2035] These are usually treated in a very naturalistic manner. Double rows of smaller leaves, forming a straight wreath, constantly occur as borders to the panels on B.F. hydriae, kraters, and oinochoae (Fig. 155); and similar ivy-wreaths are found along the flat edges of the flange-shaped handles on the larger panel-amphorae, as well as on the volute-handles of kraters.[2036] These patterns preserve their vogue in the R.F. amphorae of the earlier period, and in the kraters of Lucania, and it should be noted that they are always painted in the B.F. method (black leaves on red ground) except in the vases of Apulia and Paestum. But as a rule on the South Italian vases the ivy-leaf is treated in a naturalistic manner, with tendrils and berries, occupying a large panel on the necks of the column-handled kraters, or forming a border on the lip of the vase (Fig. 156).[2037] The vine as an ornament is very rare, but there is a good instance on a late phiale in the British Museum (F 503), where it is treated in a very naturalistic manner, forming the sole decoration of the interior; it is also of frequent occurrence on the vases from the Kabeirion at Thebes (Vol. I. p. 391). The pomegranate occurs only on the Cyrenaic cups (Fig. 93), where it forms a continuous frieze of buds round the exterior, united by interlacing lines. The acanthus is only introduced quite late (except where it appears as an ornament on the top of a stele), and is found on the necks of kraters and other large Apulian vases, forming a rich and luxuriant mass of foliage, often with a flower in the centre, on which rests a female head. Myrtle or olive-wreaths occur at all times, especially on the flat rim of the mouth of a vase; the myrtle seems to be a typically Ionic motive, and is found at Daphnae, Samos, Rhodes, and on the Caeretan hydriae.[2038] In the Rhodian vases it is either roughly painted in black on red, or else in red and white on a black ground. It was also adopted at Athens—e.g. by Nikosthenes. Laurel-wreaths form the regular decoration of the neck in the bell-shaped kraters and wide-bellied amphorae of the late R.F. period and the decadence (Fig. 157). These wreath-patterns on the late vases, it should be noted, are either treated in R.F. technique or painted in opaque white on the black varnish. They are often drawn with great care and accuracy.

The history of the development of the palmette (or honeysuckle), the lotos-flower and bud, and of continuous foliated patterns in general, has been skilfully treated by Riegl.[2039] To write a complete account of this class of ornamentation would be impossible within the limits of the present work; only a few main features can be noted, to show the form the patterns assume at different periods, so universal is their appearance on vases of all shapes and dates. The lotos-flower or bud is, of course, a motive of purely Oriental origin, which found its way into Greece probably through the medium of Phoenicia; the palmette, on the other hand, is purely Greek, although it may possibly be derived from a Mycenaean prototype, the Vallisneria spiralis plant, which is so frequently found on Mycenaean vases (Fig. 158).[2040] They are found not only as single motives, isolated or repeated, but also combined together, or forming part of elaborate systems of floral ornament, with stems and tendrils often conventionalised, which link them together, either in continuous bands or in groups occupying a limited space, on the neck or under the handle.

In the Graeco-Phoenician pottery of Cyprus the lotos-flower often appears in a purely Egyptian form (Fig. 159, from C 165 in B.M.), but it is more often combined with and almost merged in some elaborate system of patterns too complicated to describe or define by any name.[2041] But in Greek vase-paintings, in which it first makes its appearance in the seventh century, it is always more or less conventional. It is thus found on the Melian amphorae in combination with systems of spirals[2042]; though on the shoulder of the example given by Riegl there occurs a band of lotos-flowers alternately upright and inverted, linked together by scrolls, where the form is almost that of Egyptian art, except that the cup of the flower is rounder, the petals shorter and blunter. It is obviously as yet in the transitional stage. Next we meet with it in the vases of Ionia, especially in those of the so-called Rhodian and earlier Naukratite styles, which have friezes of lotos-flowers alternating with closed buds or with palmettes, connected by tendrils (Fig. 160). A similar pattern, on an exceptionally large scale and treated in polychrome (white and purple), surrounds the lower portion of the body on several of the later Caeretan hydriae (cf. Plate XXVI.). But in most of the fabrics of the sixth century the bud seems to have been preferred to the open flower of the ornament.[2043] Rows of lotos-buds linked by tendrils, upright or inverted, are found on the Cyrenaic cups, on the vases of the Chalcidian type, and on the later Ionic fabrics, such as the Rhodian kylikes in the British Museum (B 379–81). Sometimes, too, a single bud appears in the design itself, overhanging the scene or rising from the ground. On the so-called Pontic vases the buds are isolated, and placed alternately upright and pendent. In the Corinthian and early Attic fabrics the lotos-flower is found, combined in various ways with palmettes and tendrils, as a neck-ornament, or above a panel, or under the handles, and also as a centre in heraldic compositions (Fig. 161); but subsequently the buds resume their sway, and are found bordering the panels of black-bodied amphorae (as in Fig. 162), forming a lower border to the designs on the red-bodied, and also on the shoulder of lekythi. These motives linger on in the earlier R.F. amphorae and hydriae, and in the column-handled kraters; rows of buds of a degenerate elongated form, on the lip, neck, or shoulder, are continued well into the period of the South Italian fabrics.

(EARLY B.F.).

The palmette or honeysuckle ornament is not usually found as an independent ornament before the middle of the sixth century.[2044] Its development in this direction really belongs to the R.F. period. But in combination it is found, as we have seen, in Corinthian and Attic B.F. vases, and also in Chalcidian. Before the Athenian unification of styles it usually appears linked with lotos-flowers in a sort of double chain, each pattern being alternately upright and reversed, as in Fig. 163; in this form it is usually found on the neck, or as an upper border to the design. This type of ornament is favoured in the Proto-Attic, Corinthian, and Corintho-Attic vases, and the earlier panel-amphorae; the palmette is here regarded as the foliage of the lotos-flower, which at first always predominates. Subsequently the palmette gains the upper hand, as on the necks of the red amphorae (see Fig. 165), and the lotos-flower is gradually ousted altogether. It, however, returns occasionally on R.F. hydriae and amphorae.[2045] Another variety, which may be described as a metope-like treatment, compared with the frieze-like treatment above, consists of an interlacing arrangement filling the space of a square, with two palmettes and two lotos-flowers respectively opposed, or a symmetrical arrangement of palmettes and lotos-flowers, connected by tendrils, as in Fig. 164. This is found under the handle, or on the neck, or in the middle of a frieze of the Corinthian “heraldic” type.[2046] On the red-bodied B.F. amphorae the universal neck-ornament is a band of large palmettes vertically opposed, linked by a continuous chain passing between them and separated by elongated lotos-flowers (Fig. 165); this is also found on the Panathenaic vases and the earlier R.F. amphorae. Towards the end of the sixth century, however, there is a tendency to drop these composite ornaments, and attention is devoted to the palmette alone. The method of its application to the kylikes as a handle-ornament, linked thereto by a scroll, has already been treated in detail (Vol. I. p. 413); it first appears on the Cyrenaic cups, and is usually employed by the “minor artists” of the B.F. period. The chief feature of the new advance is that the palmette is no longer a stiff upright design with straight unenclosed petals, the form to which it adheres down to the end of the sixth century; but now assumes a more flexible and graceful form, being encircled and linked to its fellows by means of slender scrolls or tendrils, which thus form a series of elliptical or oval forms capable of great variety of arrangement and position (Fig. 166). This framed palmette is first found in the Fikellura or Samian ware. It occurs in the form of a frieze, with linking scrolls, on the later B.F. hydriae.[2047] The number of leaves or petals of which the palmette is composed is usually limited to seven. Another important and very effective improvement is achieved by placing opposed pairs of palmettes no longer vertically, but obliquely, forming an upper or lower border to the design (Fig. 167). These are frequently found on the krater and hydria, and appear constantly on the vases of Apulia and Lucania, especially on the lip. Great attention is paid to the effective grouping of the framed palmettes in the spaces under the handles, the object aimed at being more and more naturalism rather than symmetry.[2048]

In the later R.F. period, on the other hand, there is a certain reaction in the direction of conventional ornament, combined with exaggeration and lack of refinement. The palmette under the handle returns to the old erect unframed type, and increases enormously in size, so that one or at most two vertically opposed suffice to fill the space. In this form it appears on the bell-shaped kraters and hydriae of Southern Italy, and especially those of Campania, surrounded by elaborate scrolls and tendrils. In the latter fabric the palmette, which has become almost gross and ugly, is usually flanked by two large convolvulus or other flowers rising from the ground, and drawn in profile (Fig. 168). In the Apulian and Lucanian vases there is no rule as to the number of the palmettes, and sometimes the effect is exceedingly rich and elaborate. Speaking generally, there is no ornament which prevails so universally and in such varied forms and systems on Greek vases, but to give an exhaustive account of all its uses would be far beyond the limits of this work.

There remains only to be discussed the rosette, which, in spite of its often purely formal character, may be reckoned as in its origin a floral motive, even if it is not obvious that it is derived from any particular plant. It may be said to have two distinct forms, the star and the disc,[2049] the former consisting of an indefinite number of radiating arms or leaves, the latter of a simple disc surrounded by a row of dots. In both forms it is found at all periods, not so much as a formal pattern in bands or groups, but as a decorative adjunct to surfaces within or without the field of the design, especially as a ground ornament on Ionic, Corinthian, and other early fabrics, or as an embellishment of the draperies worn by the figures on the vases.

In the Mycenaean period it is found usually in the dotted disc form, as a ground ornament, but the star form is by no means rare.[2050] In later Cypriote pottery the star-shaped rosette sometimes occurs in a band of ornament, left in the colour of the clay on a black background[2051]; but the other type is more common in conjunction with the concentric circles. In Hellenic pottery the rosette at first appears exclusively as a ground-ornament, and this function it fulfils both in Corinthian and early Ionic pottery to a large extent, as well as in some of the smaller groups. In the Rhodian and Naucratite wares it assumes very varied forms (e.g. Fig. 169, from the Euphorbos pinax), intermingled with hook-armed crosses and bits of maeander; in the early Corinthian wares it takes the shape of an approximately circular flower of six petals, which covers every available vacant space over the area of the design[2052]; these are often rendered with great carelessness, the artist’s only object being apparently to insert a patch of colour where it would fill in a space. Subsequently the rosettes become both more symmetrical and at the same time fewer in number, and by the beginning of the Attic B.F. style have altogether disappeared. Occasionally they are employed for a band of ornament on the lip, neck, or handles of a B.F. vase.[2053] Lost sight of for a period of some two hundred years, the rosette springs again to life in the vases of Apulia, resuming its old functions as a ground-ornament, and also being employed in bands on the neck or elsewhere. It usually appears in the form of a star-shaped flower of six or eight petals, in red edged with white on the black ground (Fig. 170).

* * * * *

It may also be found convenient to treat the ornamentation of Greek vases from a different point of view, in order to give an outline of the decorative system adopted in each of the principal styles, and as considered appropriate to the various forms.

In the vases of the prehistoric period, from the primitive incised wares down to the end of the Mycenaean style, there is an entire absence of anything like rule or formalism. The principle observed in the very early classes, such as the Cypriote relief and white slip wares (Vol. I. p. 241 ff.), is the imitation of other substances, of metal or leather. The object of the artist was to cover the surface of the vase as far as possible with decorative designs; and if, as was generally the case, his artistic capacity restricted him to linear or simple vegetable patterns, the utmost he could achieve was to adapt these to the whole of the space at his disposal—i.e. the whole body of the vase. Mycenaean vases, however, are usually only decorated on the upper part, as far as the middle of the body, which was encircled with one or more plain bands of black. Thus there remained a sort of panel between the handles, of varying extent.

In the Geometrical period, however, a great change takes place, which from the artistic point of view is a reaction in the direction of formalism, but nevertheless forms the basis of the decorative systems of later times. Here we see for the first time a regular partition of the surface of the vase by means of bands and panels of ornaments, without indeed any restriction of particular patterns to any part of the vase, but yet a deliberate endeavour to establish a decorative system.[2054] With the increase of animal and human subjects the ornament becomes more subsidiary, merely a framework to the design, but even in the succeeding Proto-Attic and Melian classes it plays a very important part. In the Melian vases the system is Geometrical, but the ornamentation is curvilinear and Mycenaean. The ground-ornaments, however, are derived from the former source as well (hook-cross and zigzags in conjunction with rosettes). In both these classes the space under the handles is selected for the display of a grouping of ornamental motives, such as spirals or palmettes, or the two combined in a series of heart-shaped motives or panel-compositions; similar patterns cover the neck and the lower part of the body. The ornamentation of Phaleron and Proto-Corinthian vases is an echo of the Geometrical system. The ground-ornaments are the hook-cross, rosettes of dots, and bits of maeander; the bands of pattern consist of zigzags, chequers, double rows of dots, and toothed patterns. The early Ionic vase-painters treat the subsidiary ornamentation as they do their principal subjects, adopting the frieze principle in most cases; the only exception is in the Rhodian pinakes, where it is usually confined to simple patterns round the rim, with a sort of fan-pattern in the exergue below the central design.[2055] The ground-ornaments are really the chief feature of Rhodian ornamentation, as in Corinthian vases. The decoration of the Fikellura or Samian ware is very characteristic, and demands separate mention. The patterns are highly developed, and suggest a late date—as, for instance, the scroll, the ivy-leaf, and the framed palmette. In later Ionic vases the ornamentation is not very prominent, except in the Caeretan hydriae, in which the broad bands of palmette-and-lotos ornament, and the exaggerated tongue-pattern on the lip and shoulder, occupy a proportion of the surface unusual at this period. Besides the typical ground-ornaments (rosette and hook-crosses) of the earlier vases, the favourite Ionian patterns are the maeander, the guilloche, and wreaths of ivy and myrtle. At Corinth, as we have seen, for a long time ornament is confined to the ground-filling rosettes, with some simple motives, such as zigzag lines or tongue-pattern, on the mouth and shoulder, or bordering the design; even in the later examples, when the rosettes have disappeared, it is practically confined to the interlacing palmette-and-lotos pattern on the neck, above the design, or inserted in the subordinate friezes of animals.[2056] The same principle applies in the Corintho-Attic and Chalcidian fabrics.[2057]

In Athenian B.F. vases we at last find a stereotyped system of ornament for each kind of vase, from which there is little or no variation. Generally the system is as follows:—On the panel-amphorae, an interlaced palmette-and-lotos pattern or a row of inverted lotos-buds above the panel, and a calyx of leaves round the foot, those with flanged handles having also ornaments thereon, ivy-leaves or rosettes. On the red-bodied, a chain of double palmettes round the neck, tongue-pattern on the shoulder, a grouping of palmettes, tendrils, and lotos-flowers under the handle, and a row of three or four narrow bands of ornament below the design (lotos-buds upright or inverted, maeander, zigzags), terminating with the calyx round the foot. The Panathenaic amphorae have the same neck-ornament as the red-bodied, with tongues above the panel, and thick rays round the foot; the fourth-century examples have palmettes on the neck, with elongated tongue-pattern immediately below. On the hydriae, tongue-pattern above the shoulder-design, borders to the panels (maeander above, ivy or network down the sides, lotos-buds or framed palmettes below), and calyx round the foot. On the oinochoae, panel-borders like those of the hydriae, but on the olpae (Vol. I. p. 178) only two or three rows of chequer, maeander, etc., on the neck above; on the lekythi, lotos-buds, ivy-leaves, and palmettes on the shoulder, and a double row of dots above the design. The kylix-ornament is practically limited to the handle-palmettes of the “minor artist” class, and a circle of straight-edged rays, alternately black and outlined, round the stem on the later varieties (together with the large eyes).

In the R.F. period the same system of appropriate patterns for each form of vase is in the main adhered to, but with greater freedom; there is also a wide difference between the earlier amphorae and hydriae, which cling to the old panel-system with its ornamental borders, and the vases of the fine period, in which there is an absence of all restraint on the one hand, and a tendency to dispense with ornament almost entirely on the other (as in the Nolan amphorae). On the kylix, the ornament is throughout confined to the palmettes under the handles and the maeander encircling the interior design, which have been dealt with already (Vol. I. p. 413 ff.). The earlier amphorae and hydriae, as we have seen, have panels with borders as in the B.F. period, usually in the older technique; those of the fine style (including the wide-bellied amphorae) have a short noncontinuous border, such as egg-pattern or maeander, above and below the figures, with similar patterns on the lip and round the bases of the handles. The stamnos has egg-patterns round the lip and handles, tongue-pattern round the shoulder, and a system of palmettes between the designs. The red lekythi have egg-pattern or palmettes on the shoulder, and maeander-pattern (with crosses) above or below the design; the white have black rays on red ground or black and red palmettes on white on the shoulder, and maeander above the designs. The bell-krater and wide-bellied amphora of the late R.F. period, as also those of Southern Italy, have a band of oblique palmettes or a laurel-wreath round the top, maeander with crosses below the design, palmettes grouped under the handles, and egg-pattern round their bases. The column-handled krater, on the other hand, adheres throughout to the B.F. system of ornamentation, with ivy-wreaths and elongated lotos-buds on the rim, similar lotos-buds on the neck, panels bordered with tongue-pattern and debased ivy-wreaths, and the calyx round the foot. The wide-bellied lekythi have palmettes or egg-pattern above the design, and maeander below.

In the vases of Southern Italy there is, as a rule, no system observed in the ornamentation; in the large vases of Lucania and Apulia it is used with great profusion and variety, chiefly in bands on the neck. In the smaller Apulian vases and in those of Campania it is often confined to a wave-pattern below the designs; the Campanian hydriae usually have in addition a wreath of myrtle or laurel round the shoulder. Generally speaking, the large vases, such as the bell-krater, the hydria, and the wide-bellied amphora, continue the principles adopted in the R.F. period. The systems of palmette-patterns under the handles have already been discussed, and for other details the reader is also referred to what has already been said in discussing the individual patterns.

-----

Footnote 1942:

To give detailed references throughout may be considered superfluous, the order of subjects followed being that of the preceding chapters, to which reference may in all cases be made without difficulty by the reader.

Footnote 1943:

Cf. B.M. B 147; for other representations of Zeus, Figs. 111, 113, 114; Plate LI.

Footnote 1944:

See J.H.S. xiii. p. 19.

Footnote 1945:

See J.H.S. loc. cit.

Footnote 1946:

Él. Cér. iii. pl. 32 B.

Footnote 1947:

Cf. the type created by Skopas in the fourth century.

Footnote 1948:

An exception is Él. Cér. i. pl. 62, where he is bearded (on a B.F. vase).

Footnote 1949:

See for these two, Fig. 116.

Footnote 1950:

Exceptions are B.M. D 4; Él. Cér. i. pls. 46 A, 47, 63.

Footnote 1951:

Cf. for the two together on a vase, B.M. E 228.

Footnote 1952:

For an attempted distinction of the various Satyr-types, see Loeschcke in Ath. Mitth. 1894, p. 521 ff.

Footnote 1953:

See J.H.S. xviii. p. 296.

Footnote 1954:

Cf. the Greek heroes on B.F. vases (B.M. B 240, B 543).

Footnote 1955:

See B.M. E 477 and Weicker, Seelenvogel, passim.

Footnote 1956:

See also Roscher, iii. p. 330.

Footnote 1957:

Only on B.M. F 271 and Naples 3237; elsewhere unwinged.

Footnote 1958:

See p. 91.

Footnote 1959:

See J.H.S. ix. p. 47 ff.

Footnote 1960:

Note that the vase-painters are careful never to represent him wearing the skin when contending with the lion.

Footnote 1961:

E.g. Reinach, ii. 80.

Footnote 1962:

Munich 125.

Footnote 1963:

See Six, De Gorgone.

Footnote 1964:

See above, p. 146.

Footnote 1965:

B.M. B 4.

Footnote 1966:

See Weicker’s Seelenvogel, passim.

Footnote 1967:

See the article Gryps in Roscher’s Lexikon, vol. i.

Footnote 1968:

E.g. B.M. E 198.

Footnote 1969:

See Körte in Jahrbuch, 1893, p. 61 ff.; also Figs. 105, 134.

Footnote 1970:

Vol. I. p. 472.

Footnote 1971:

E.g. B.M. E 270; Hartwig, Meistersch. pls. 65–6.

Footnote 1972:

Él. Cér. ii. 16 and iv. 90–93; B.M. E 308.

Footnote 1973:

E.g. B.M. B 59, B 103_{14}.

Footnote 1974:

See Helbig, Hom. Epos^2, pp. 284 ff., 342.

Footnote 1975:

Vol. I. p. 353.

Footnote 1976:

As on the Exekias amphora, B.M. B 209: see J.H.S. iv. p. 82.

Footnote 1977:

E.g. B.M. E 263, E 469.

Footnote 1978:

Cf. B.M. Cat. of Bronzes, 2823–24.

Footnote 1979:

On this subject generally see T. Ely in Archaeologia, li. p. 477 ff.

Footnote 1980:

Xen. Hell. iv. 4, 10, vii. 5, 20; Paus. iv. 28, 5; Plut. Apophth. Lacon. 234 D; Vit. Demosth. 20; Bacchyl. frag. 41 (Bergk).

Footnote 1981:

B.M. B 574: cf. B 608 and Urlichs, Beiträge, pl. 14.

Footnote 1982:

Berlin 1698, 1852; Munich 1121; Reinach, i. 453; Inghirami, Vasi Fitt. pl. 109, 2.

Footnote 1983:

B.M. E 575.

Footnote 1984:

Cambridge 70.

Footnote 1985:

Jahrbuch, 1895, pp. 191, 198.

Footnote 1986:

Reinach, i. 77; Vienna 332.

Footnote 1987:

Reinach, i. 508, 6; ii. 94, 270.

Footnote 1988:

Ibid. i. 126, 181.

Footnote 1989:

See above, p. 90, and Roscher, iii. p. 2389 ff.

Footnote 1990:

Reinach, i. 181; Berlin 1701.

Footnote 1991:

Berlin 3988, 3992; B.M. B 364; Reinach, ii. 63.

Footnote 1992:

Reinach, i. 513; Louvre E 732 = Fig. 111.

Footnote 1993:

Cf. B.M. E 167–68, 295, etc.

Footnote 1994:

Cf. B.M. B 106_{1}, and the Busiris vases (p. 102).

Footnote 1995:

See especially the Meidias vase and the Python krater (B.M. E 224, F 149).

Footnote 1996:

See Plate LI.; also Furtwaengler and Reichhold, pl. 3; $1$2 1883, pl. 3; 1885, pl. 5, fig. 3; Röm. Mitth. 1890, pl. 11 (on head-band).

Footnote 1997:

Auscult. Mirab. 96.

Footnote 1998:

Kavvadias, Fouilles de Lycosura, pl. 4.

Footnote 1999:

Argonautica, i. 729 ff.

Footnote 2000:

Jahrbuch, 1896, p. 248 ff.

Footnote 2001:

See on this subject throughout Mon. Grecs, 1895–97, p. 7 ff.

Footnote 2002:

Cf. a funerary plaque in the Louvre, where the male mourners, no doubt intentionally, have the oval form of eye; also Louvre F 256 (figure of Aeneas).

Footnote 2003:

For other instances M. Girard (Mon. Grecs, loc. cit.) refers to Louvre E 753, 754; E 643, 808; Jahrbuch, 1893, pl. 1; see also B.M. E 440 (R.F. period).

Footnote 2004:

Ant. Denkm. i. pl. 57.

Footnote 2005:

Anzeiger, 1895, p. 35, fig. 9: cf. Louvre E 612 bis, and Ant. Denkm. ii. 24, 15.

Footnote 2006:

See also Mon. Grecs, 1895–97, p. 16.

Footnote 2007:

Furtwaengler and Reichhold, Gr. Vasenm. p. 8.

Footnote 2008:

E.g. B.M. E 773, 774, 779, 780.

Footnote 2009:

See on the subject P. Gardner in J.H.S. xix. p. 254.

Footnote 2010:

See on this motive and other heraldic groups, Jahrbuch, 1904, p. 27 ff.

Footnote 2011:

B 18 in B.M.: cf. also the fragment from Naukratis, B 103_{17}.

Footnote 2012:

This principle in its most developed form may be observed on the Chalcidian and Tyrrhenian amphorae: see Vol. I. p. 321 ff.

Footnote 2013:

B.M. B 147.

Footnote 2014:

Ibid. B 313.

Footnote 2015:

B.M. B 589–91.

Footnote 2016:

E.g. B.M. B 264, B 428, etc.

Footnote 2017:

Cf. B.M. E 164 ff.

Footnote 2018:

See Winter, Jüngere Attische Vasen, p. 69; Röm. Mitth. 1897, p. 102; also Plate XLV.

Footnote 2019:

This subject has hitherto received little or no general scientific treatment from archaeologists. Riegl’s Stilfragen (1893) contains an interesting study of vegetable ornament on Greek vases; but the plates of Brunn and Lau’s Gr. Vasen, though intended to illustrate the system of ornamentation, are not very instructive.

Footnote 2020:

For the various types of these patterns see Vol. I. p. 416, Fig. 102.

Footnote 2021:

This is also found on a B.F. vase in the British Museum (B 330): see Hartwig, Meistersch. p. 220; also B.M. E 84; Thiersch, Hell. Vasen, pl. 5; Arch. Zeit. 1873, pl. 9.

Footnote 2022:

The Pamphaios hydria in the British Museum (B 300) has bits of red-on-black maeander down the sides of the design on the shoulder.

Footnote 2023:

See examples from Cyprus and Rhodes in Cases 24, 25, 28, Second Vase Room, B.M.

Footnote 2024:

E.g. B.M. B 205, 474, 476, 620, D 15, E 151, F 178.

Footnote 2025:

It appears, however, to be of Mycenaean origin: cf. the B.M. vases A 253, 323, 324, and Excavations in Cyprus, p. 6, fig. 6, from Ialysos and Cyprus, decorated in this fashion with vertical concentric circles.

Footnote 2026:

Riegl, p. 155.

Footnote 2027:

E.g. B.M. B 209, B 210.

Footnote 2028:

E.g. B.M. E 564.

Footnote 2029:

For its use on a B.F. kylix see B.M. B 382 (probably Ionic work).

Footnote 2030:

Munich 810, 849 = Brunn-Lau, Gr. Vasen, pls. 35–6: cf. B.M. F 278.

Footnote 2031:

Examples may be seen in Plates XXIII., XXVIII.-XXXIII.

Footnote 2032:

B.M. B 148–49, 151, 153; J.H.S. xix. p. 163.

Footnote 2033:

E.g. B.M. B 212, B 593, B 677, B 679: see also Jahrbuch, 1899, p. 161.

Footnote 2034:

See Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1898, p. 298.

Footnote 2035:

E.g. B.M. B 63 (Plate LVIII.).

Footnote 2036:

E.g. B.M. B 364.

Footnote 2037:

As on the Python krater, B.M. F 149.

Footnote 2038:

See Jahrbuch, 1895, p. 44, note 15.

Footnote 2039:

Stilfragen, passim, especially p. 48 ff. and p. 178.

Footnote 2040:

See Riegl, p. 115 ff., and Houssay in Rev. Arch. xxx. (1897), p. 91 ff.

Footnote 2041:

For the Egyptian types of lotos-flower and bud see Riegl, p. 48 ff.

Footnote 2042:

Riegl, p. 155: see also an early Boeotian example in the B.M. (A 564 = Riegl, p. 173).

Footnote 2043:

Thiersch, Tyrrhen. Amphoren, p. 70, points out that the form of lotos-flower with two large points is Peloponnesian (Corinthian, etc.) and Ionic; the form found in Attic, Boeotian, and Proto-Corinthian fabrics has three principal points.

Footnote 2044:

See generally Riegl, p. 155 ff.

Footnote 2045:

E.g. B.M. E 169.

Footnote 2046:

The varieties of this pattern should be carefully distinguished. Corinthian vases have a composition of lotos-flowers only; Chalcidian, palmettes only (cf. Vienna 219; B.M. B 34). In the “Tyrrhenian” amphorae, and subsequently in Attic red-bodied amphorae, the two principles are seen to be united, and palmettes alternate with lotos-flowers. See also Fig. 161.

Footnote 2047:

Cf. also an elegant oinochoë with white ground in the British Museum (B 631). On a similar jug at Munich (334 = Brunn-Lau, Gr. Vasen, pl. 22) the palmettes are enclosed in heart-shaped borders. For other vases which, like these, have palmettes for their sole decoration, see British Museum, Second Vase Room, Case 28, and Laborde, Vases de Lamberg, ii. pl. 41.

Footnote 2048:

Cf. Riegl, pp. 201–3, and Vol. I. p. 415.

Footnote 2049:

They are distinguished by German writers as “Blattrosette” and “Punktrosette.”

Footnote 2050:

Cf. Furtwaengler and Loeschcke, Myken. Vasen, pls. 4, 25, 28, 37, 38; J.H.S. xxiii. pl. 5 (Crete).

Footnote 2051:

E.g. C 244 in B.M., and Fig. 76 (Vol. I. p. 254).

Footnote 2052:

See Riegl, op. cit. p. 197. He points out that the rosette, although Assyrian in origin, is not here used in a strictly Assyrian fashion.

Footnote 2053:

E.g. B.M. B 51, B 197 ff.: cf. also the Proto-Attic vase, Ant. Denkm. i. 57.

Footnote 2054:

See what has already been said on this subject in Vol. I. Chapter VII. p. 282: cf. also Perrot, Hist. de l’Art, vii. p. 165.

Footnote 2055:

Cf. a similar pattern on the Daphnae situlae (B.M. B 105–6).

Footnote 2056:

See generally Wilisch, Altkor. Thonindustrie, p. 41 ff., for Corinthian ornamentation.

Footnote 2057:

See on the ornamentation of the former Thiersch, Tyrrhen. Amphoren, p. 69 ff.; on the latter Riegl, p. 187.

XVII. INSCRIPTIONS ON GREEK VASES

Importance of inscriptions on vases—Incised inscriptions—Names and prices incised underneath vases—Owners’ names and dedications—Painted inscriptions—Early Greek alphabets—Painted inscriptions on early vases—Corinthian, Ionic, Boeotian, and Chalcidian inscriptions—Inscriptions on Athenian vases—Dialect—Artists’ signatures—Inscriptions relating to the subjects—Exclamations—Καλός-names—The Attic alphabet and orthography—Chronology of Attic inscriptions—South Italian vases with inscriptions.

The practice of inscribing works of art with the names of persons and objects represented was one of some antiquity in Greece. The earliest instance of which we have historical record is the chest of Kypselos, which dated from the beginning of the sixth century B.C., and concerning which Pausanias[2058] tells us that “the majority of the figures on the chest have inscriptions written in the archaic characters; and some of them read straight, but other letters have the appearance called by the Greeks ‘backwards-and-forwards’ (βουστροφηδόν), which is like this: at the end of the verse the second line turns round again like a runner half through his course. And any way the inscriptions on the chest are written in a tortuous and hardly decipherable fashion.” There is, however, no mention of inscribed vases until a much later date; Athenaeus speaks of a cup with the name of Zeus Soter upon it, also of γραμματικὰ ἐκπώματα, or cups with letters on them.[2059]

Inscriptions on Greek vases are found in comparatively early times, even prior to the date to which the chest of Kypselos is attributed. This question will receive more attention subsequently; meanwhile, we may point out some of the ways in which they have proved important in the study of archaeology. In the first place, they were originally among the principal, perhaps the strongest, arguments in the hands of Winckelmann, Sir W. Hamilton, and the other upholders of the true origin of Greek vases against Gori and the other “Etruscans” (see Vol. I. p. 19). They are, in fact, if such were required, an incontestable proof of Greek manufacture. Secondly, in more modern times, they have been of inestimable value in enabling scholars to classify the early vases according to their different fabrics. The alphabets of the different cities and states being established by inscriptions obtained from trustworthy sources or found in situ, it was an easy matter to apply this knowledge to the vases. In Chapters VII.-VIII. numerous instances have been given of the value of this evidence (see also below, p. 247 ff.), perhaps the best being that of the Chalcidian class, for which the inscriptions have been a more important criterion even than style. Thirdly, the inscriptions are sometimes of considerable philological value. Those on Attic vases may fairly be said to represent the vernacular of the day; and thus we learn that the Greeks of the Peisistratid age spoke of Ὀλυττεύς, not Ὀδυσσεύς, and of Θῆσυς, not Θησεύς; that they used such forms as υἱύς for υἱός,[2060] and πίει for πίε (see below, p. 255). Traces of foreign influence in the inscriptions, as in the frequently occurring Doric forms, imply that many of the vase-painters were foreigners, probably of the metic class. We shall also see that one class of inscriptions gives some interesting information on the subject of the names and prices of vases in antiquity.

The whole subject has been treated exhaustively—especially from a philological point of view—in a valuable treatise by P. Kretschmer,[2061] to which we shall have occasion to make constant reference in the following pages. He classifies them under two main headings: (a) inscriptions incised with a sharp tool in the hard clay; (b) inscriptions painted with the brush after the final baking. They are also found in very rare instances impressed in the soft clay and varnished over.[2062] In later times inscriptions in relief are actually found, sometimes painted with thick white pigment, sometimes gilded.[2063] On the so-called Megarian bowls and on the Arretine and other wares of the Roman period they are stamped from the moulds. Lastly, there are the stamps imprinted on the handles of wine-amphorae, which have been discussed in Chapter IV.

The =incised inscriptions= are of three kinds: (1) those executed by the maker of the vase; (2) those scratched under the foot; (3) those incised by the owner. As these represent a much smaller class than the painted ones, they shall be dealt with first.

(1) Inscriptions incised by the maker before the final baking. These are found on the handles and feet, round the edge of a design, or interspersed therewith like the painted inscriptions. Generally they represent the signature of the potter, as in the case of the early Boeotian vase signed by Gamedes,[2064] the vases of the fifth-century artist Hieron,[2065] and those of Assteas, Python, and Lasimos in Southern Italy.[2066] On the vases of the latter class explanatory inscriptions seldom occur, but when they do (as on the vases of Assteas) they are always incised. Of their palaeographical peculiarities we will speak later. On a vase in the South Kensington Museum[2067] the words Βραχᾶς καλός are incised and painted red, and on the pottery found on the site of the Kabeirion at Thebes the same process is often adopted, except that the paint used is white.[2068]

(2) Of inscriptions scratched under the foot a considerable number remain, especially on B.F. vases. They are often difficult to decipher, being in the form of monograms, and frequently appear to be meaningless. In many cases they may have been private marks of the potter or his workmen; others, again, are evidently private memoranda made by the workman, relating to the number of forms of vases in his batch, or by the merchant respecting the price to be paid. Commonly they take the form of names of vases,[2069] such as [ΗVΔΡΙ] for ὑδρία (hydria), [ΛΗΚ] or [ΛΗΚV] for λήκυθος (lekythos), [ΣΚV] for σκύφος (skyphos),[2070] and so on. Many of the inscriptions give the words in full, with numbers and prices, and we may obtain from them some curious information.

Among the more elaborate examples given by Schöne in his valuable monograph is one from a krater in the Louvre[2071]:

[ΚΡΑΤΕΡΕΣ : ΠI] κρατῆρες ἑξ

[ΤΙΜΕ : ͰͰͰͰ ΟΞΙΔΕΣ : [Π]ΙΙΙ] τιμὴ τέσσαρες ὀξίδες ὀκτώ

[ΒΑΘΕΑ : ΔΔͰΙ] βαθέα εἰκόσι (at 1 dr. 1 ob.)

That is, six kraters, value four drachmae; eight oxides; twenty bathea (an unknown form), one drachma one obol. The bathea were probably deep cups or ladles; the oxides (lit. vinegar-cups) were small vessels, probably answering to our wine-glasses.

Another instance given by Schöne[2072] is:

[ΛΗΚΥΘΙΑ Δ] ληκύθια δέκα [ΟΙΝΟΧΟΑΙ ΙΙ] οἰνοχοαὶ δύο

or ten lekythi and two oinochoae.

Another good example is on a krater in the British Museum (E 504):

[ΚΡΑΤΕΡΕ [Π]Ι : ͰͰͰͰ] κρατῆρε(ς) ἑξ τέσσαρες

[ΠΕΛΛΙΝΙΑ : ΔΙΙ : ΙΙΙ] πελλίνια[2073] δώδεκα τρεῖς

[ΟΞΙΔΕΣ : ΔΔ : ΙΙΙ] ὀξίδες εἰκόσι τρεῖς

[ΟΞΥΒΑΦΑ : ΔΔͰI] ὀξύβαφα εἰκόσι (at 1 dr. 1 ob.)

i.e. six kraters at four drachmae, twelve cups at three obols, twenty oxides at three obols, twenty oxybapha at one drachma one obol.

Another in Vienna[2074]:

[ΚΡΑΤΕΡΕ[Σ] : [Π]Ι : ΤΙΜΕ : κρατῆρες ἑξ τιμὴ τέσσαρες (4 dr.) ͰͰͰͰ]

[ΒΑΘΕΑ : ΔΔ : ΤΙΜΕ : ͰΙ] βαθέα εἰκοσι τιμὴ ͰΙ (1 dr. 1 ob.)

..[ΟΞΙΔΕ[Σ] : Δ] ὀξιδες δέκα

is to the same effect as the two preceding. On a hydria at Petersburg[2075] we find:

[ΥΔΤΡΙΔΡΑΧΠΟΙ ΑΝ]

ὑδ(ρίαι) τρ(ε)ῖ(ς) δραχ(μῶν) π(έντε) ὀ(βόλου) ἑνός

or three hydriae worth five drachmae one obol. The last example that need be mentioned is from a vase at Berlin[2076]:

[Α] · ΛΥΔΙΑ ΜΕΙΩ : Ι : Ε : ΛΕΠΑΣΤΙΔΕΣ : Κ : Ι

ὠά(?)· Λύδια με(ί)ξω ιέ λεπαστίδες κξ’

Here the letters probably stand for numerals of the ordinary kind, denoting the numbers of the batch (ιε’ = 15, κξ’ = 27).

The form of the letters in all these cases is that of the fifth century. In the case of the second, third, and fourth examples given, it will be noted that the shape of the vase itself corresponds with the first item. Jahn and Letronne originally held the view that these marks were made by the potter on the feet of the vases before they were attached to their respective bodies.[2077] Schöne, in the light of the examples already quoted, makes the ingenious suggestion that each list represents a different “set” of so many vases of different forms, and used for different purposes, sold together in a batch, like a modern “dinner-set” or “toilet-set” of china. Thus we have in our fourth example a set of six mixing-bowls at four drachmae (3_s._) apiece, ten wine-glasses at (probably) three obols or 4½_d._ apiece, and twenty cups or ladles at about 10½_d._ apiece.

Some of the shorter inscriptions also throw light on the prices at which different vases were sold. For instance, 15[123]ΛΗΚV : ΛΔ : ΛΗ would denote thirty-four lekythi for thirty-seven obols, or roughly 1½_d._ apiece; 15[121]ΛΗΚV : ΙΓ : ΙΑ thirteen lekythi for eleven obols, at a slightly lower price.[2078] Aristophanes[2079] tells us that one obol would purchase quite a fine lekythos, just as elsewhere[2080] he mentions three drachmae as the cost of a κάδος or cask. This latter statement is borne out by the inscription on a vase, [[Π]·ΚΑΔΙΑ·ΔΙΙ], or five κάδια value twelve drachmae, i.e. at about 2½ dr. apiece.[2081] An inscription quoted below shows that the owner of a cup valued it at one drachma. Other examples of the same kind are collected by Schöne. The cup from Cerigo in the British Museum, on which is incised [[Ͱ]ΕΜΙΚΟΤVΛΙΟΝ] (ἡμικοτύλιον)[2082] does not strictly come into this category, but may be mentioned as having an inscription of the same class.

(3) Inscriptions incised by the owner, and subsequently to the completion of the vase. These usually take the form of the word [ΕΙΜΙ] ([ΕΜΙ]), with the owner’s name in the genitive, as [ΑΣΤΥΟΞΙΔΑ ΗΜΙ] (“I am Idamenes’”), or [ΑΣΤΥΟΞΙΔΑ ΗΜΙ] (“I am Astyochidas’”), on two B.F. cups from Rhodes.[2083] Sometimes this appears in an extended and metrical form, as on another B.F. kylix from the same site:

[ΦΙΛΤΟΣΗΜΙΤΑΣΚΑΛΑΣΑΚΥΛΙΞΣΑΠΟΙΚΙΛΑ]

Φιλτῶς ἠμὶ τᾶς καλᾶς ἁ κύλιξ ἁ ποικίλα

“I am the painted cup of the fair Philto.”[2084]

Another metrical inscription runs:

Κηφισοφῶντος ἡ κύλιξ· ἐὰν δέ τις κατάξη δραχμὴν ἀποτείσει· δῶρον ὄν παρὰ Ξενο....

“I am the cup of Kephisophon; if any one breaks me, let him pay a drachma; the gift of Xeno(krates).”[2085]

A yet more remarkable example is on an early lekythos from Cumae in the British Museum,[2086] which, in the manner favoured by modern schoolboys, invokes an imprecation on the head of a thief:

Ταταίης ἐμὶ λήϙυθος ὃς δ’ ἄν με κλέφσῃ θυφλὸς ἔσται “I am Tataie’s oil-flask, and he shall be struck blind who steals me.”

Others, again, record the gift of the vase, as: “Epainetos gave me to Charopos”[2087]; [ΤΕΝΔΙ[Σ]ΟΙ ΘΟΔΕΜΟ[Σ] ΔΙΔΟ[Σ]Ι[:]] “Lo, this Thoudemos gives to thee.”[2088] A boat-shaped vase (kymbion) in the British Museum has incised on it the exhortation [[Π]ΡΟ]Π]ΙΝΕ ΜΗ ΚΑΤΘΗΣ], “Drink, do not lay me down.”[2089] The owner’s name is found in the nominative on a vase from Carthage at Naples: [ΧΑΡΜΙΝΟΣ] [ΘΕΟΦΑΜΙΔΑ] [ΚΩΙΟΣ], “Charminos, son of Theophamidas, a Coan”[2090]; similarly in the genitive with the omission of εἰμί: [ΑΡΙϹΤΑΡΧΟ] [ΑΡΙΣΤΩΝΟϹ], Ἀριστάρχου Ἀρίστωνος; [ΑΛΕΞΙΔΑΜΩ] Ἀλεξιδάμου.[2091]

Under the same heading comes the class of votive or dedicatory inscriptions, found in such large numbers on the pottery of certain temple-sites, such as that of Aphrodite at Naukratis,[2092] and that of the Kabeiri at Thebes.[2093] The usual formula at Naukratis is ὁ δεῖνα ἀνέθηκε τῇ Ἀφροδίτη (or τῷ Ἀπόλλωνι)[2094]; but sometimes we find the formula Ἀπόλλωνος εἰμί, where the god as the recipient of the gift is regarded as the owner.

One of the most interesting, and certainly the most ancient, of all incised inscriptions on Greek vases is that engraved on a jug of “Dipylon” ware found at Athens in 1880.[2095] It runs: ὃς νῦν ὀρχηστῶν παντων ἀταλώτατα παίζει, τῦυ τόδε.... “He who now sports most delicately of all the dancers,” etc. Though probably not contemporary with this eighth-century vase, it is still of great antiquity, and the earliest Athenian inscription known.

In studying these graffiti, it must always be borne in mind that they lend themselves easily to forgery, and that many are open to grave suspicion. Instances of these doubtful inscriptions are the Kleomenes vase in the Louvre[2096] and a late vase signed by Statios in the British Museum (F 594).

* * * * *

The =painted inscriptions= are practically limited to a period extending over two centuries, from the time at which the primitive methods of painting were slowly emerging into the black-figured style, down to the finest stage of red-figure vases. Rare at first, they rapidly spring into popularity, being constantly found on the sixth-century fabrics; but throughout the red-figure period they gradually become rarer and rarer, until they drop out almost entirely. In the vases of the Decadence they have for the most part fallen into disuse; at any rate, they are comparatively scarce. Some of the latest inscriptions are in the Oscan and Latin languages, showing the increasing influence of the Romans over Southern Italy, and especially Campania. The inscriptions always follow the laws of palaeography of the region and period to which they belong.

Generally speaking, it may be said that they have some reference to the design painted on the vase; at least, the majority are explanatory of the subject represented. Sometimes not only is every figure accompanied by its name, but even animals and inanimate objects, instances of which are given below. On the François vase there are no less than 115 such inscriptions. In almost all cases we can be certain that they are original, and contemporaneous with the vase itself.

The explanatory inscriptions are generally small in size, the letters averaging one-eighth of an inch in height. On B.F. vases they are painted in black; on R.F. vases of the “severe” style, in purple on the black ground, or in black on the red portions; on later R.F. vases, in white. There is no rule for their position, or indeed for their presence; but, as a general rule, it may be said that they are oftener found on the finer and larger vases, and that they are placed in close juxtaposition to the figures to which they refer. The direction in which they are written may be either from left to right or right to left (as generally on Corinthian or Chalcidian vases); on the Panathenaic amphorae are the only known examples of κιονηδόν inscriptions, in which the letters are placed vertically in relation to each other. They are occasionally found on the objects depicted, as on stelae or lavers (see pp. 260, 272), on shields,[2097] or even on the figures themselves.[2098] Signatures of artists are occasionally found on the handle or foot of a vase.[2099]

Kretschmer (p. 5) illustrates the practice of employing inscriptions on vases from the art of the Semitic nations. He instances clay vases from Cyprus with painted Phoenician inscriptions,[2100] for which the same pigment is used as for the decoration of the vases themselves. But none of these are likely to be earlier than the first Greek inscriptions, and it is more than probable that the Cypriote Phoenicians borrowed the practice from the Greeks. In order, therefore, to obtain information as to the date of these painted inscriptions, we are entirely dependent upon internal evidence.

The importance of these inscriptions may, perhaps, be best realised when it is pointed out that they are one of the chief guides to the age of the vases, and have contributed more than any other feature to the establishment of a scientific classification of the earlier fabrics, as will be fully indicated in the succeeding account.

The Greek alphabet, as is well known, is derived from the Phoenician, and this is attested not only by tradition, but by the known existing forms of the latter, the signs being twenty-two in number. The invention of the two double letters, and of the long η and ω, which are purely Greek, was attributed by popular tradition to various personages without any authority. With the question of the introduction of writing into Greece this is not the place to deal. Recent discoveries, especially in Crete, have greatly modified all preconceived notions on the subject, and for the present we are only immediately concerned with the earliest use of the Greek alphabet, as we know it.

This can be traced as far back as the seventh century B.C. on various grounds, and in all probability the traditional view which placed its introduction into Greece at about 660 B.C. is fairly correct. The earliest inscriptions on the vases are certainly not later, perhaps earlier than this (see below, p. 254). At Abou-Simbel in Egypt, Greek inscriptions have been found in which the name of Psammetichos occurs, and this king is generally supposed to be the second of that name (594–589).[2101] In Thera and other Aegean islands, and on the coast of Asia Minor, inscriptions are known which, for various reasons, have been placed even earlier than this, and the vase with Arkesilaos, the inscriptions on which are discussed below, is hardly later, as it can be shown to date between 580 and 550 B.C.

Before proceeding to discuss the early inscriptions, it may be as well to note, for the benefit of those to whom Greek Epigraphy is an unfamiliar subject, the chief peculiarities of the earlier alphabets.[2102] They fall into two principal groups, the Eastern and Western, each of which has many subdivisions. Certain forms, such as [Χ] for Χ, are characteristic of one or the other division; but the distinction is not so clearly marked on the vases, on which many alphabets, such as the Ionic and Island varieties, are scarcely represented. The vase-inscriptions fall mainly under three heads: Corinthian and Athenian in the Eastern group, Chalcidian in the Western. During the fifth century (or even earlier) there is a rapid tendency to unification in the Greek alphabet, which is chiefly brought about by the growing supremacy of Athens. This acted in two ways: firstly, by the fact that Attic became the literary and therefore the paramount language in Greece; secondly, by the fact of her artistic pre-eminence, which crushed out the other local fabrics. Finally, by the time of the archonship of Eukleides in 403 B.C., the alphabet, if not the language, had become entirely unified, and the Ionic forms universally adopted for public and official purposes. For private use they had, of course, long been known at Athens; but the official enactment of that year only set the seal to a long recognised practice. Throughout the fifth century the old Attic and the Ionic forms are found side by side on R.F. vases.[2103]

In the later archaic period the coins come in as an important source of evidence.[2104] None of the inscribed ones appear to be earlier than the sixth century, the oldest being perhaps the electrum stater usually attributed to Halikarnassos, with the name of Phanes(?). The only characteristic letter (the alphabet belonging to the Ionic group) is the sign [heta] in place of Η to denote eta, which has not been found on any vase with the Ionic alphabet, and therefore betokens a very early date. Next comes an Attic stater of about 560 B.C., with the legend [(Α)☉Ε], which may be fitly compared with the oldest Panathenaic amphora,[2105] on which the dotted [☉] is also found. The earliest coins of Haliartos in Boeotia have the curious form 15[8]curious asper for the spiritus asper or Η, dating apparently before 550 B.C.; the succession can thence be traced through 14[10]asper2 14[9]asper3 and [heta], down to about 480 B.C., when it is dropped entirely. At Himera in Sicily [heta] occurs in the fifth century for the spiritus asper, and is followed by the HH form, which in the West is employed down to about 400 B.C. On the early coins of Poseidonia (Paestum) the [M] form of Σ is found (550–480 B.C.), being also characteristic of Corinthian vases of the sixth century; it also lingers on in Crete, but in Sicily and elsewhere the [Σ] form of Attic and other alphabets is more usual, until replaced in the fifth century by Σ. Of the specially Ionic letters, Η (= eta) is found generally at an early date, as at Teos (540–400 B.C.), and also Ω. At Corinth the koppa Ϙ for Κ is in use from the earliest times down to the days of the Achaean League, and does not therefore afford evidence of date by itself, but only of a local peculiarity, being equally universal on vases. The digamma is only found on coins of Elis and Crete, whereas it often occurs on early Greek vases.[2106]

It may also be of interest to note that the [heta] form for the rough breathing occurs on the helmet of Hiero in the British Museum,[2107] which can be dated 480–470 B.C., and that the use of Η for eta and of the four-lined [Σ] at Athens previous to the archonship of Eukleides can be deduced from the well-known fragment of Euripides[2108] in which the letters forming the name [ΘΗΣΕΥΣ] are carefully described.

In the following pages illustrations of the points above noted will be fully detailed where occurring on the vases. The annexed scheme of alphabets used on vases (Fig. 173) will serve to give a general idea of the variations of form in different fabrics.

The painted inscriptions on vases first appear, as already noted, about the beginning of the seventh century B.C. The earlier fabrics—Mycenaean, Cretan, and Cycladic—generally belong to an epoch when writing, if not unknown, was at any rate little practised[2109]; nor have any inscriptions been found on the Dipylon or Geometrical vases, except the incised one which we have already discussed. The oldest known painted inscriptions are found on a Proto-Corinthian lekythos (see p. 254), the Euphorbos pinax from Kameiros (B.M. A 749), and the krater signed by Aristonoös, which is perhaps of Ionic origin, strongly influenced by Mycenaean art.

SCHEME OF ALPHABETS USED ON GREEK VASES

With the great impulse given to vase-painting at the beginning of the sixth century by the development of the art in Corinth, Chalkis, and Athens (especially in Corinth), the number of inscribed vases rapidly increases. Among the earliest examples are those remarkable painted pinakes found at Corinth (Vol. I. p. 316), nearly all of which have dedicatory inscriptions, while in most cases the names are given of the deities, Poseidon and Amphitrite, to whom they were dedicated, and whose figures appear on them. They may be dated 600–550 B.C. The custom of inscribing names on works of art is illustrated by other products of this period, as we have already noted in the case of the chest of Kypselos; and they occur on the early bronze reliefs from Olympia,[2110] the Samothrace relief in the Louvre,[2111] the archaic reliefs at Delphi, and the newly found painted metopes at Thermon,[2112] as well as later on the paintings of Polygnotos.

On the Euphorbos pinax already mentioned[2113] appear the names of Menelaos ([ΜΕΝΕΛΑΣ]), Hector ([ΡΟΤΚΕ]), and Euphorbos ([ΙΥΦΟΡΒΟΣ]). Although found in Rhodes, it is proved to be of Argive origin by the characteristic form [Λ] of the Λ in Menelaos.[2114] Although its date cannot be exactly ascertained, it is probably about 620–600 B.C. It is a vase important in more than one respect, as it may be said to foreshadow the beginnings of the black-figure style.

The vase of Aristonoös[2115] was found at Cervetri, and bears the artist’s signature,

[ΝΕΣΙΟΠΕΣΟΦΟΝΟΤΣΙΡΑ], Ἀριστόνο<φ>ος ἐποί[η]σεν,

in an alphabet from which, unfortunately, all characteristic letters are wanting, so that its origin is uncertain. It is, however, as we have said, probably a seventh-century product of an Ionian fabric, on the coast of Asia Minor. The 14[13]halved circle has been taken by several scholars[2116] to denote [F] as in the Phrygian alphabet, but Kretschmer (p. 11) prefers to read it as ϑ 14[13]halved circle = 14[13]quartered circle We have, however, already seen that it is most probably a superfluous letter.

Early in the sixth century must be placed another remarkable vase, the Arkesilaos cup of Cyrenaean fabric.[2117] The inscribed names on this vase are as remarkable as its subject; there are nine in all, two only fragmentary. The only proper name is that of Arkesilas ([ΑΡΚΕΣΙΛΑΣ]), who was king of Kyrene 580–550 B.C.; the others seem to be titles, such as [ΙΟΦΟΡΤΟΣ], Ἰόφορτος or Σώφορτος, “Keeper of the burdens”; [ΣΛΙΦΟΜΑΧΟΣ], Σλιφόμαχος, a word having some reference to silphium, the subject of the vase; [ΦΥΛΑΚΟΣ], “Guardian”; [ΙΡΜΟΦΟΡΟΣ], and [ΟΞΥΡΟ], ὀρυξό[ς. One word, [ΣΟΜΘΑ], στ]αθμός, refers to an inanimate object (a balance). The dialect is Doric, Kyrene having been colonised by that race.

Next we have to deal with a very important class of inscriptions—those found on Corinthian vases.[2118] They are too numerous to be dealt with in detail; Kretschmer mentions nearly fifty inscribed vases, exclusive of the pinakes. Wilisch attributes the earliest to the latter half of the seventh century, the latest to the middle of the sixth century; but they certainly do not become common before the sixth.[2119] They include several artists’ signatures—viz. Chares, Milonidas, and Timonidas (Vol. I. p. 315). One of the most famous of the inscribed vases is the Dodwell pyxis at Munich,[2120] representing a boar-hunt. The figures are inscribed with fanciful names, such as [ΑΓΑΜΕΜΝΟΝ] (Agamemnon), [ΔΟΡΙΜΑΧΟΣ] (Dorimachos, or “spearman”), [ΠΑϘΟΝ] (Pakon), and so on. A krater in the British Museum (Plate XXI.) represents a similar scene, also with fancy names, such as Polydas and Antiphatas. Another famous vase is the Amphiaraos krater in Berlin,[2121] representing the setting out of Amphiaraos and the funeral games of Pelias; no less than twenty names are inscribed. Of these, [ΒΑΤΟΝ] (Baton) and [ἹΠΠΑΛϘΜΟΣ] (Hippalk(i)mos) illustrate other palaeo graphical peculiarities. Other good examples are the vase by Chares,[2122] another in the British Museum with the name of the owner ([ΑΣΝΒΤΑ ΒΜΣ], Αἰινετα ἐμίἐ),[2123] and that by Timonidas representing Achilles lying in wait for Troilos.[2124] A study of the pinakes in Berlin is also instructive in this respect. One is signed by Timonidas, another by Milonidas, while others bear interesting inscriptions, such as Fig. 174:

Πειραείοθεν ἵκομες, “We have come from Peiraeus”[2125]; [ΤΥΔΕΔΟΣΧΑΡΙΕΣΑΝ ΑΦΟΡΜΑΝ] τὲ δὲ δὸς χαρίες(ς)αν ἀφορμάν, “And do thou make a graceful repayment”[2126];

and so on. The majority have only the names of Poseidon and Amphitrite, or (ὁ δεῖνα) ἀνέθηκεν,

In view of the palaeographical importance of these inscriptions, it may be worth while to dwell briefly on their peculiarities. The dialect is of course Doric, and consequently the names often differ widely from the forms to which we are accustomed; and this is increased by divergencies of spelling, which produce many anomalous results. For instance, ([ΚΕΣΑΝΔΡΑ]) (Κεσάνδρα) appears for Kassandra on a vase in the Louvre.[2127] ΑΕ is used for ΑΙ, as in [ΑΕΘΟΝ] (Ἀέθων = Αἴθων) on the Chares pyxis, and in [ΠΕΡΑΕΟΘΕΝ] (Περαεόθεν for Πε(ι)ραιόθεν) on the pinax already quoted. A nasal is dropped before a consonant, as in the names of Amphiaraos ([ΑΦΙΑΡΕΟΣ]) and Amphitrite ([ΑΦΕΤΡΙΤΑ]) The digamma lingers as a medial (more rarely as initial) in many words, such as ϝαχύς, Δαμοϝάνασσα, Ποτειδαϝων, and Διδαίϝων; its written form is 15[9]Ϝ or 15[9]ϝ The use of [heta] for the rough breathing is invariable.[2128]

One or two vases have been recognised as of Sicyonian fabric by the use in inscriptions of the unique 15[16]E for Ε, peculiar to that place (Vol. I. p. 321). The only certain example, however, is a krater in Berlin (Cat. 1147), with the names of Achilles ([ΣΥΕΛΙΞΑ]) and Memnon ([Μ[Ε]ΜΝΟΝ]). It may also be noted that an Athenian sixth-century vase, signed by Exekias, has a Sicyonian inscription incised upon it by its owner[2129]:

[ΕΠΑΙΝΕΤΟΣ Μ ΕΔΟΚΕΝ ΧΑΡΟΠΟΙ]

Ἐπαίνετός μ’ ἔδωκεν Χαρόπω.

Boeotian vases never attained to the importance of the Corinthian fabrics, though, on the other hand, the manufacture lasted longer; but there are several instances of early signed vases from this district. Two, of which one is in the British Museum, are by Gamedes, the others by Theozotos, Gryton, Iphitadas, Mnasalkes, and Menaidas.[2130] They are recognised as Boeotian by the use of typical letters, as well as by origin, style, and dialect; such are the [Boeotian A] for A, [Boeotian Χ] for Χ, and so on. There is also a fifth-century vase with the Boeotian alphabet.[2131] The Kabeirion vases have inscriptions in the local alphabet, with a few exceptions, which are Ionic.[2132]

A unique vase, from the epigraphical point of view, is E 732 in the Louvre, found at Cervetri, to which allusion has been made elsewhere (Vol. I. p. 357, and see Fig. 111). It bears eleven names (of gods and giants) in an alphabet which has been recognised as Ionian, and is according to Kretschmer most probably that of the island of Keos. The great uncertainty as to the Ε sounds presented by this vase finds parallels in the stone inscriptions found on that island, while in the use of Β for Ϲ (the older form of that letter), the four-stroke [Fourline Σ] and [☉], with a central dot, this attribution finds further support. The only other islands that would fit the conditions are Naxos and Amorgos. As instances of the confused use of Ε, we have [ΖΗΥΣ] for Ζεύς, but [ΠΟΛΥΒΟΤΕ] for Πολυβώτη[ς, while again Ἐφιάλτης appears as [ΕΙΠΙΑΛΤΕΣ]! But this confusion does not occur in Naxos or Amorgos.

Other vases are undoubtedly of Ionic origin, but their actual home is uncertain; they are usually assigned to the coast of Asia Minor. For some reason, however, it is very rare for these vases to bear inscriptions; in all the numerous instances now collected, only some half-dozen with inscriptions can be found.[2133] One of these is the well-known Würzburg kylix with Phineus and the Harpies (see Vol. I. p. 357); another is a vase from Vulci, published by Gerhard,[2134] which has since disappeared. On both of these we find the characteristic Ionic letters Ω for ω, Η for η, Χ for χ, Λ for λ, and [Σ] with four strokes. Both vases are of the sixth century, and other details attest their Ionic origin.

We now come to a very important but somewhat puzzling class of inscriptions, those in the Chalcidian alphabet.[2135] The number of these is hardly more than a dozen, but such as they are they have enabled archaeologists to establish a Chalcidian school of painting by comparisons with other uninscribed vases. In all cases the inscriptions relate exclusively to the figures in the designs. Among the characteristic Chalcidian letters are the Ϙ for Κ, as in [ΣΙΟΤΥΛϘ] (Κλύτιος); the curved Ϲ for Γ, as in [ΣΕΝΟϜΥΡΑϹ] (Γαρυϝόνες=Γηρυόνης); [Ξ] for Λ and [Ξ] for Χ, as in [ΑΧΙΛΛΕΥΣ]; (Ἀχιλλεύς); [Ξ] for [Ξ], as in [ΣΟΘΝΑΞ] (Ξάνθος); and the abnormal form of the digamma [Ϝ], as in [ΣΥΧΑϜ] (Ϝαχύς). [Ψ] is represented by [ΦΣ] in one instance ([ΜΠΟΦΣΟΣ] = Μ<π>όψος).

Kretschmer has compiled a list of twelve vases with inscriptions in this alphabet, to which one or two may be added, but for a fuller treatment of the questions involved in studying this group the reader is referred to Chapter VII. This, however, may be a more suitable place for a few remarks relating to the inscriptions alone.

In one or two instances the dialect alone is peculiarly Chalcidian, as the characteristic letters happen to be wanting. In some instances, as Kretschmer points out, the Aeolic fondness for the vowel υ is to be traced, as in [ΣΥΝϘΥϘ], for Κύκνος, which finds parallels in the Chalcidian colony of Cumae, and probably influenced the Latin language through that means. Hence, too, the preference for the Q sound of the Ϙ, as in English and other languages when υ is preceded by a guttural. On the British Museum Geryon vase (B 155) there is a curious mixture of dialect in the forms Γαρυόνης, Νηίδες.

It must be borne in mind, in speaking of the Chalcidian alphabet, that it really extended over a wide area, including not only Chalkis in Euboea, but Chalkidike in Northern Greece, and the colonies on the coast of Italy, such as Cumae, and this may partly account for the mixed character of the dialect on some of these Chalcidian vases. But although an attempt has been made to connect them with Cumae, it cannot be said at present that any certainty has been attained as to the place of their manufacture.

Though not belonging to the Chalcidian group, there is a vase which must be mentioned here, on account of its inscription, which is partly in the alphabet of the Chalcidian colonies. The vase is of the “Proto-Corinthian” class (see Vol. I. p. 308), and dates about 700–650 B.C.; it bears the name of the maker, Pyrrhos[2136]:

[ΠΥΡΟΣΜΕΠΟΙΕΣΕΝΑΓΑΣΙΛΕϜ] Πυρ(ρ)ος μ’ εποιησεν Αγασιλεϝου

and is therefore one of the oldest existing signatures.

ATHENIAN VASES

Under this heading are included all remaining vase-inscriptions, except a few from Italy. Their value to us, as Kretschmer points out, is not to be measured only by the mythological information they provide, or by the list of Athenian craftsmen and popular favourites which can be drawn up from them, but it is also largely philological. In other words, they illustrate for us the vernacular of Athens in the sixth and fifth centuries, just as the Egyptian papyri have thrown light on the Hellenistic vernacular of the second. In countless small details the language of the vase-painters varies from the official language of state documents and the literary standard of Thucydides, Sophocles, and even Aristophanes. The reason is, of course, a simple one—namely, that the vase-artists occupied a subordinate position in the Athenian state; they were mere craftsmen, of little education, and in all probability their spelling was purely phonetic.[2137] Hence we constantly find such forms as πίει for πίε, υἱύς for υἱός, or Θῆσυς for Θησεύς (see above, p. 237); and even the rich potter Hyperbolos is ridiculed by the comic poet Plato[2138] for saying ὀλίον (sc. oliyon) for ὀλίγον, and δῃτώμην for διῃτώμην.

Another interesting point is that many of the artists who have signed their vases were obviously not Athenians by birth. Thus we find such names as Phintias, Amasis, Brygos, Cholkos, Sikanos, Thrax,[2139] and even such signatures as ὁ Λυδός (or ὁ Σκύθης) ἔγραψεν. It is, then, evident that many of them were μέτοικοι or resident aliens, and consequently occupied but a humble rank in the social order of the city.[2140] One name, indeed, that of Epiktetos, is actually a slave’s name (Ἐπίκτητος = “acquired”).

We need not, then, be surprised at meeting with many un-Attic forms or spellings in the vase-inscriptions, which sometimes give a clue to the origin of the artist, and of which it may be interesting to give some specimens. Kretschmer notes that these variations are always Doric, never Ionic.

The commonest Doricism on Attic vases is the use of Α for H, of which there are many instances, such as [ΔΑΙΑΝΕΙΡΑ], Δαιάνειρα for Δηιάνειρα[2141]; [ΗΙΜΕΡΟΠΑ] for Ἱμερόπη (B.M. E 440); [ΟΙΔΙΠΟΔΑΣ] for the Attic Οἰδιπούς.[2142] Such forms as Ὀλυσσεύς and Φερρέφασσα are also clearly un-Attic. On the other hand, the names Menelaos and Iolaos always appear in their Attic form Μενελέως, Ἰολέως. The above instances are all from proper names; but there are other remarkable instances, such as the use of καλά for καλή in [ΠΑΝΤΟΞΕΝΑ] [ΚΑΛΑ] [ΚΟΡΙΝΘΩΙ].[2143] On one of his signed vases Exekias uses the un-Attic form [ΤΕΣΑΡΑ], τέσ(σ)αρα, but, as Kretschmer notes, he also uses Ἰόλαος for Ἰολέως, and was probably not an Athenian. On a B.F. amphora in Rome (see below, p. 263) occurs the form παρβέβακεν.

Perhaps the most remarkable use of non-Attic Greek on a vase is in the case of the artist Brygos, who, as we have already pointed out, was of foreign origin. On a kylix in his style (B.M. E 69) we find the forms Δίπιλος, Νικοπίλη, Πίλων, and Πίλιππος. These were at one time referred to a Macedonian origin,[2144] but Kretschmer points out that that people used Β, not Π, for Φ. He aptly quotes the Scythian in the Thesmophoriasusae,[2145] with his πιλήσει, παίνεται, and κεπαλή, as giving a likely clue to the home of this dropping of the aspirate.[2146]

The painted inscriptions on the Attic vases may be divided into three classes: (1) those relating to the whole vase and its purpose, such as artists’ signatures; (2) those relating to the designs on the vase, i.e. explanatory inscriptions, and those found on Panathenaic amphorae; (3) those which stand in no direct relation to the vase, such as the so-called “love-names” or “pet-names,” and interjections such as “hail,” “drink deep,” etc. The incised inscriptions have already been discussed.

The artists’ signatures first call for consideration. In relation to their works they are fully discussed elsewhere (Chapters IX., X.), but the present may be regarded as a convenient opportunity for some general outline of the style and palaeography of these inscriptions.

Klein in his Meistersignaturen (2nd edn.) reckons a total of ninety-five signatures, a number which has probably been largely increased since he wrote in 1887. These names he finds distributed over some 424 vases, one name, that of Nikosthenes, occurring on no fewer than seventy-seven; he divides them into four classes, as follows: (1) masters in the B.F. method; (2) masters combining the two methods; (3) masters in the R.F. method (including S. Italy vases); (4) masters whose names appear on vases without subjects. These four classes are not mutually exclusive, as names in (1) and (3) appear again in (2) and (4).

The form which the signature takes is usually (1)—

ὁ δεῖνα ἐποίησεν (of the potter);

or (2)—

ἔγραψεν (of the painter);

or (3), the two combined, either under one name, as—

Ἐξηκίας ἔγραψε κἀποιησέ με;

or (4), with separate names, as on the François vase—

Κλίτιας μ’ ἔγραψεν Ἐργότιμός μ’ ἐποίησεν.

The form (3) may possibly indicate the priority of the artist, but it is more probable that it was adopted as forming an iambic trimeter. When ἐποίησεν only occurs on a painted vase, it is generally to be assumed that the potter is also the painter.

The older artists avoided, as a rule, the imperfect ἔγραφε or ἐποίει, but its use came into fashion for a short time among the early R.F. artists, such as Andokides, Chelis, and Psiax, who use ἐποίει (Vol. I. p. 430); it was again adopted by the Paestum and Apulian schools, as a modest affectation that their work was as yet unfinished.[2147] But the majority preferred the more decided aorist, indicating completeness. The word με or ἐμέ is usually added by the earlier artists, as in the instance already quoted from Exekias. Generally speaking, ἔγραψεν rarely occurs on B.F. vases, ἐποίησεν being the rule. A rare form of inscription is the formula ἔργον (τοῦ δεῖνα), as in the doubtful signature of Statios[2148]; and even more unique is the use of the word κεραμεύειν by the early Attic potter Oikopheles,[2149] as a synonym for ποιεῖν. Other peculiarities of signature are to be seen on the works of Lykinos (ἠργάσατο), Paseas (Πασέου τῶν γραμμάτων), and Therinos (Θερίνου ποίημα).[2150]

The potter sometimes added the name of his father, either as being that of a well-known man, or to distinguish himself from others of the same name. Thus Timonidas of Corinth signs [ΤΙΜΟΝΙΔΑΣ ΕΓΡΑΨΙΑ] Τιμωνίδας ἔγραψε Βία (sc. son of Bias); Tleson, Τλήσων ὁ Νεάρχου; Eucheiros, Ὁργοτίμου υίυς (the son of Ergotimos); Euthymides, [ὉΠΟΛΙΟΥ], ὁ Πολίου. The latter in one instance not only gives his patronymic, but challenges comparison with his great rival Euphronios, in the following terms: [ὉΣ ΟΥΔΕ ΠΟΤ ΕΥΦΡΟΝΙΟΣ], ὁς οὐδέποτ(ε) Εὐφρόνιος, i.e., “Euphronios never made anything like this.”[2151] Other peculiarities are: the omission of the verb, as was sometimes done by R.F. artists (e.g. Psiax); or, on the contrary, the simple ἐποίησεν, without a name, sometimes found on R.F. kylikes of the Epictetan school[2152]; or the addition by the artist of his tribe or nationality. Among the latter we have Kleomenes, Teisias, and Xenophantos, who style themselves Ἀθηναῖος, and Nikias, who not only gives his father’s name, but also his deme in Attica:

Νικίας Ἑ[ρ]μοκλέους Ἀναφλύστιος ἐποίησεν.

Two other artists call themselves ὁ Λυδός (the Lydian) and ὁ Σκύθης (the Scythian). Smikros signs one of his vases in the Louvre[2153] ΔΟΚΕΙΣΜΙΚΡΩΕΙΝΑΙ, “It seems to be Smikros’ work.” There are also frequent vagaries of spelling, as in Φιτίας for Φιντίας, Πάνφαιος or Πάνθαιος for Πάμφαιος, and Ἱέπων for Ἱέρων. Sakonides once spells his name Ζακωνίδης, and Nikosthenes once uses the koppa Ϙ for Κ. Fuller information in regard to this subject may be found in Klein’s admirable work; there is also much of interest relating to the R.F. cup-painters in Hartwig’s exhaustive treatise. A complete list of all known artists’ names is given at the end of this chapter.

* * * * *

We now come to the inscriptions which have relation to the subjects depicted on the vases. These are seldom of a general kind, having reference to the whole composition; but on a Panathenaic amphora in Naples a boxing scene is entitled [ΠΑΝΚΡΑΤΙΟΝ], “general maul,”[2154] and on another in Munich over a foot-race is written, [ΣΤΑΔΙΟ ΑΝΔΡΟΝ ΝΙΚΕ], σταδίου ἀνδρῶν νίκη,[2155] while B.F. lekythos in the same collection with Dionysos and dancing Maenads is inscribed [ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΑ(Κ)Α].[2156] On a vase with a Homeric subject is [ΠΑΤΡΟΚΛΙΑ], and on one with a scene from Theban legend [ΚΡΕΟΝΤΕΙΑ].[2157] Localities are sometimes hinted at by the use of such words as [ΚΡΕΝΕ] (κρήνη) on the François vase, where Polyxena goes to the fountain, or by the [ΚΑΛΙΡΕΚΡΕΝΕ] Καλλιρρ(ό)η κρήνη on the British Museum hydria (B 331) with girls drawing water at the fountain of Kallirrhoë. More often names are given to inanimate objects like the θᾶκος (seat) and ὑδρία (pitcher) on the François vase, σταθμός on the Arkesilas cup, the βῶμος (altar) on a vase in Munich (Cat. 124), λύρα (lyre) on a cup in Munich (333), and θρονός (throne) on an amphora in the Louvre.[2158] On a washing-basin on a R.F. vase published by Tischbein appears the word [ΔΗΜΟΣΙΑ], i.e. “public baths.”[2159] The word τέρμων sometimes appears on a stele on later vases.[2160] Animals are also occasionally named, such as the ὗς on the Munich vase already quoted (333).[2161]

But the greater majority of these inscriptions refer to the names of persons, deities, and mythological figures, the name being usually in the nominative, but occasionally in the genitive, with εἶδος or εἰκων understood.[2162] Sometimes generic names or nicknames are given to ordinary figures in genre scenes, as Ἀρχεναύτης, “the ship’s captain”; Κώμαρχος, “leader of the revels”; or, again, Πλήξιππος for a horseman, Τόξαμις and Κιμμέριος for a Scythian bowman.[2163] Names of real contemporary persons are occasionally introduced, as on a hydria by Phintias, on which his comrade Euthymides and the “minor artist” Tlenpolemos are represented, with names inscribed[2164]; and on a stamnos by Smikros at Brussels the artist introduces himself and the potter Pheidiades at a banquet.[2165] Although proper names usually stand alone, they are sometimes accompanied by some interjection, as ὁδὶ Μενεσθεύς, “Here is Menestheus,”[2166] Σφίγξ ἥδε χαῖρε, “This is the Sphinx; hail!”[2167] or in the form of a phrase, as Ἑρμῆς εἰμὶ Κυλλήνιος.[2168] So also we find [ΗΑΛΙΟΣ ΓΕΡΩΝ] Ἅλιος γέρων, “the old man of the sea,” for Nereus[2169]; [ΝΕΣΤΟΡ ΠΥΛΙΟΣ] “Nestor of Pylos”[2170]; [ΔΙΟΣ ΦΟΣ] Διὸς φῶς, for Dionysos[2171]; [ΔΙΟΣ ΠΑΙΣ], “the son of Zeus,” for Herakles[2172]; ταῦρος φορβάς, “the grazing bull,” for the metamorphosed Zeus (a doubtful instance).[2173]

Besides the names of figures and objects, words and exclamations are sometimes represented as proceeding from the mouths of the figures themselves, in the same manner as on the labels affixed to the figures of saints in the Middle Ages. They vary in length and purport, but in some cases they appear to be extracts from poems or songs, or expressions familiar at the time, but now unintelligible or lost in the wreck of Hellenic literature. They are found on both B.F. and R.F. vases, but more commonly on the former, and generally read according to the direction of the figure, as if issuing from the mouth.

Thus a boy pouring wine out of an amphora cries, [ΕΝΧΕ ΗΔ . . ΟΙΝΟΝ], ἔ(γ)χει ἡδ[ὺν] οἶνον, “Pour in sweet wine”[2174]; over the first of three runners in a race appears νικᾷς, Πολυμένων, “Polymenon, you win”[2175]; again, Amphiaraos is exhorted to mount his chariot with the word ἀνάβα,[2176] or one personage says to another, χαἶρε or πῖνε καὶ σύ.[2177] Sometimes the words are evidently those of a song, as on a R.F. kylix at Athens, where a man lying on a couch sings an elegy of Theognis beginning ὦ παίδων κάλλιστε, “Fairest of boys!”[2178] Another sings [ΜΑΜΕΚΑΙΠΟΤΕΟ], which has been recognised as an inaccurate version of an Aeolic line, καὶ ποθήω καὶ μάομαι.[2179] On a red-figured vase in the British Museum (E 270) a man accompanied by a flute-player has an inscription proceeding from his open mouth, which runs, [ΕΟΠΟΔΕΡΟΤΕΝΤΥΡΙΝΘΙ], ὡδέ ποτ’ ἐν Τύρινθι; evidently the beginning of a song, “Here once in Tiryns....” On a stamnos in the British Museum (E 439) the letters ΝΟΝ appear before the mouth of a Seilenos, and evidently represent notes of music.[2180]

On a psykter by Euphronios[2181] a courtesan playing at kottabos casts the drops out of a cup with the words [·ΡΓΑΕΛΟΣΣΑΤΑΛΕΔΝΑΤΝΙΤ], τὶν τάνδε λατάσσω Λέαγρ(ε), “To thee, Leagros, I dash these drops.” Another kylix (Munich 371) represents a surfeited drinker on a couch, saying, οὐ δύναμ’ οὔ, “I can no more!”

To turn to another class of these expressions, we have a Panathenaic amphora in the British Museum (B 144), on which a herald proclaims a victor in the horse-race as follows: [ΔΥΝΕΙΚΕΤΥ : ΗΙΠΟΣ : ΝΙΚΑΙ], Δυ(σ)νείκητου ἵππος νικᾷ, “The horse of Dysneiketos[2182] wins.” On another of the same class[2183] is an acrobat on horseback before judges, of whom one cries, [ΚΑΛΟΣΤΟΙΚΥΒΙΣΤΕΙΤΟΙ], καλῶς τῷ κυβιοτῇ[2184] τοι, “Bravo, then, to the acrobat.” A boy walking with his dog calls to it, [ΜΕΛΙΤΑΙΕ], Μελιταῖε (i.e. “Maltese (?) dog”).[2185] A charioteer calls to his horses, ἔλα, ἔλα, “Gee up!”[2186] Women weeping over a corpse cry, οἴμοι, “Woe is me!”[2187] In a representation of Oedipus and the Sphinx on a R.F. vase in Rome the words [ΚΑΙΤΡΙ[ΠΟΥΝ]], καὶ τρίπουν, occur, evidently with reference to the well-known riddle.[2188]

An interesting bit of dialogue appears on a B.F. vase,[2189] which represents boys and men watching a swallow, evidently the first of the returning spring; one boy says, ἰδοὺ χελιδών, “See, the swallow”; to which a man replies, νὴ τὸν Ἡρακλέα, “Yes, by Herakles!” Another boy joins in with αὑτηί, “There she is,” and ἔαρ ἤδη, “It is already spring.” Another good instance is on a B.F. vase in the Vatican.[2190] On one side we see the proprietor of an olive garden extracting oil from the olives, with the prayer, [ΟΖΕΥΠΑΤΕΡΑΙΘΕΠΛΟΥΣΙΟΣΓΕΝ] ὦ Ζεῦ πάτερ, αἴθε πλούσιος γέν[οιμ’ ἄν, “O Father Zeus, may I be rich!” while on the other he sits over a full vessel, and cries to the purchaser, [ΕΔΕΜΕΝΕΔΕ ΠΛΕΟΙ ΠΑΡΒΕΒΑΚΕΝ], ἤδη μέν, ἤδη πλέο(ν) παρβέβακεν, “Already, already it has gone far beyond my needs.”[2191]

To conclude with a few miscellaneous and unique inscriptions, we have firstly, on a vase in the British Museum (E 298), a tripod, on the base of which are the words Ἀκαμαντὶς ἐνίκα φυλή, showing that it is intended for a monument in honour of a choragic victory, with the name of the victorious tribe. On a sepulchral stele on a B.F. funeral amphora at Athens[2192] are the words (now nearly obliterated) ἀνδρὸς ἀπ[οφθιμ]ένοιο ῥάκ[ος] κα[κ]ὸν [ἐν]θάδε κεῖμα[ι, “Here lie I, a vile rag of a dead man.” Similarly, on a sepulchral plaque at Athens are the words, [SÊMATODESTIN : AREIOU], “This is the grave of Areios.”[2193] In a representation of Sappho reading from her poems, she holds an open roll, on which are visible the words Θεοί, ἠερίων ἐπἐων ἄρχομαι ἄλλ[ων] ... ἔπεα πτερόεντα[2194]; and in the well-known school-scene on the Duris vase in Berlin[2195] a teacher holds a roll, on which are the words (in Aeolic dialect, and combined from the openings of two distinct hymns):

[ΜΟΙΣΑΜΟΙ] Μοῖσά μοι [ΑΦΙΣΚΑΜΑΝΔΡΟΝ] ἀ(μ)φὶ Σκάμανδρον [ΕΥΡΩΝΑΡΧΟΜΑΙ] ἐύρ(ρ)ων ἄρχομαι [ΑΕΙΝΔΕΝ] ἀεί<ν>δειν.[2196]

A small fragment of a red-figure kylix (?) of fine style, found at Naukratis in 1899 (and now in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford),[2197] has a similar scene of a dictation lesson. A seated figure unrolls an inscribed scroll, on which is the boustrophedon legend, στησίχορον ὕμνον ἄγοισαι, while another figure, of which the right hand alone remains, is writing on a tablet (Fig. 177).

In a very puzzling scene on a R.F. vase of fine style, generally supposed to have some reference to the Argonautic expedition, one figure holds up an object inscribed with the name [ΣΙΣΥΦΟΣ].[2198] This object has generally been interpreted as a tessera hospitalis, or “letter of introduction,” as we should say.

Lastly, there is the class of Panathenaic vases with their inscriptions.[2199] They fall into two groups: (1) the words [ΤΟΝ ΑΘΕΝΕΘΕΝ ΑΘΛΟΝ], to which [ΕΜΙ] is sometimes added, “(I am) from the games at Athens”; (2) the names of archons, which only occur on the fourth-century examples. They form a unique instance of inscriptions which give direct information as to the date of a vase, and range from 367 to 313 B.C. (see Vol. I. p. 390).

Sometimes vases (especially in the B.F. period) are covered with meaningless collocations of letters, either separate or in the form of words. Some ingenious explanations of these have been propounded, but none are very satisfactory. They are often found on the class known as “Corintho-Attic” or “Tyrrhenian amphorae,” and it is just possible that in this case they are attempts by an Athenian workman to copy the unfamiliar Corinthian alphabet.

* * * * *

The third class of inscriptions on Attic vases is composed of those which have no direct relation to the vase itself. They include invocations to deities such as were used in making libations, e.g. Διὸς Σωτῆρος, “To Zeus the Saviour”[2200]; or, again, the exhortations so frequently found on B.F. kylikes of the “Minor Artists’” school, of which the commonest is χαῖρε καὶ πίει εὖ, “Hail, and drink deep!”[2201] or χαῖρε καὶ πίει τήνδε, “Hail, and drink this!”[2202] On a number of R.F. kylikes appears the word προσαγορεύω, “I salute you.”[2203]

But the most numerous and important inscriptions of this class are those conveniently named by German archaeologists “Lieblingsnamen,” or “Lieblingsinschriften,” for which we have no satisfactory equivalent in English, though “pet-name” and “love-name” have been suggested, and latterly “καλός-name.” The latter title has been adopted from the fact that the usual form which these inscriptions take is that of a proper name in the nominative case, generally masculine, with the word καλός attached. Sometimes, but not so frequently, the name is feminine, with καλή[2204]; the superlative form κάλλιστος is also found.[2205] In other cases ὁ or ἑ παῖς appears in place of the proper name, or the word δοκεῖ is added, and sometimes also ναί or ναιχί, emphasising the statement. The most remarkable instance is a B.F. jug at Munich, round the shoulder of which is the inscription καλός Νικόλα Δωρόθεος καλὸς κἀμοὶ δοκεῆ, ναί· χἄτερος παῖς καλὸς, Μέμνων κἀμοὶ καλὸς φιλός.[2206] It is not quite certain how far the word καλὸς should be interpreted in a physical sense as “handsome” or “fair,” or in an ethical sense as “good” or “noble”; but having regard to the manners and customs of fifth-century Athens,[2207] it is more likely that the physical meaning of the word is to be inferred.

These inscriptions are often found on B.F. vases, but far more frequently in the succeeding period, and generally in more or less direct connection with artists’ signatures, from which fact interesting results have been obtained. Special attention has been drawn to them of late years, from the fact that many of the names are those borne by historical personages, such as Miltiades, Megakles, Glaukon, and so on, and attempts have been made to connect them with those characters (see Vol. I. p. 403).

Klein, the chief writer on this subject, has collected in the second edition of his valuable work no less than 558 instances of these καλὸς-inscriptions,[2208] as against 424 signatures of artists; and there are besides these the numerous instances in which no proper name is given.

The chief question which calls for consideration in regard to these inscriptions is their purport, and the reason why they occur exclusively on vases, and of these exclusively on Attic vases covering a period of not more than one hundred years. The custom was not, of course, an unfamiliar one at Athens, as two references in Aristophanes indicate. In the Acharnians[2209] he describes the Thracian Sitalkes as being such a “lover” of the Athenians that he wrote on the walls, “The Athenians are fair”; and, again, the slave Xanthias, in the Wasps, speaking of his master’s litigious proclivities, says that if ever he saw Δῆμος καλός written on a door he promptly wrote by the side κημὸς καλός.[2210] But the most interesting and apposite instance recorded is that of Pheidias, who scratched on the finger of his statue of the Olympian Zeus, Παντάρκης καλός.[2211] Generally speaking, the word was no doubt intended to refer to the personal beauty of boys (as indicated by the use of ὁ παῖς), or at any rate of young athletes, and was applied to popular favourites of the day,[2212] whose occupations in the gymnasium, at the banquet, and elsewhere were matters of every-day talk.

These names may have been placed on the vases with the view of attracting the public to purchase them, or may even have been the subject of special orders from customers. Some light seems to be thrown on the matter by a cup signed by the painter Phintias,[2213] which represents a young man, purse in hand, making purchases of vases in a potter’s workshop. This vase has the inscription Χαιρίας καλός, but whether it is intended as a representation of Chairias or his admirer it is impossible to say. The names, however, are not always those of every-day life. They may have relation to the figures on the vase, as [ΗΕΚΤΟΡ ΚΑΛΟΣ].[2214]

We have already noted that historical names frequently occur in this series, and it is obvious that if they can be identified with the actual historical owners of such names much valuable information in regard to the chronology of Greek vases will be gained. The question has already been discussed in a previous chapter (Vol. I. p. 403), and the principles there laid down need not be repeated. It is sufficient to say that so far only two or three names have been identified with those of historical personages, though more results may yet be obtained. Of these one is Stesileos, occurring on two vases in Berlin, and identified with a strategos who fell at Marathon in 490.[2215] On two lekythi (one late B.F., the other R.F.) the name of Glaukon son of Leagros[2216] appears, and these two names have also been identified with Athenian strategi, Leagros having fallen in battle against the Edones in 467, while Glaukon commanded at Kerkyra in 433–432 B.C. It may be roughly inferred that Leagros was a boy (παῖς) about 510 B.C., and his son Glaukon about 470 B.C., which gives an approximate date (within ten years or so) for these two groups of vases. It is, however, obvious that much at present only rests on hypothesis.

It is curious to note that nearly all these names have an aristocratic sound: thus we have Alcibiades, Alkmaeon, Hipparchos, and Megakles, besides those already quoted. Miltiades καλός occurs on a R.F. plate at Oxford,[2217] but there seems hardly sufficient evidence for referring it to the youth of the conqueror of Marathon (cf. Vol. I. p. 403). The table at the end of this chapter may be found useful as giving a conspectus of the principal names and their relation to the artists.

* * * * *

It is now necessary to discuss some of the principal peculiarities of the Attic vase-inscriptions, in regard to palaeography, orthography, and grammar.[2218] The variety in the forms and uses of the letters is somewhat surprising at first sight, but it must be remembered that non-Attic influences were always strong, as has indeed already been pointed out.

Α usually appears either in that form or as [Corinthian Α], [Sicyonian Α]; but such variations as 15[14]RF Attic alpha 15[14]RF Attic alpha 15[13]RF Attic alpha are found on R.F. vases, while at a later period even 15[13]RF Attic alpha occurs. Δ on the vases of Duris generally appears as 15[13]RF Attic alpha [Attic lambda2] is found for [Attic lambda], the Attic form of Λ. Σ varies between [sigma] and [fourline sigma], while such abnormal forms as 15[11]rounded S (Oikopheles), and 15[11]E-shaped sigma are not unknown. The minor artist Xenokles uses a sort of cursive handwriting for his signature. Η is used for ἑ and ἡ, as in [HΡΜΕΣ] for [ΗΕΡΜΕΣ], [ΗΡΑΚΛΕΣ] for [ΗΕΡΑKΛΕΣ], which seems to be a confusion of ideas resulting from its use for eta in Ionic, and for h in Chalcidian (i.e. Western) alphabets.[2219] The sign for the aspirate occurs first as [heta], afterwards as Η, and is sometimes introduced without apparent reason, as in [ΗΙΛΕΙΘΙΑ] for Εἰλείθυια, and [HΑΦΡΟΔΙΤΕ] for Ἀφροδίτη. The digamma is unknown on Attic vases, but the François vase and the allied 'Tyrrhenian' group give some interesting examples of the use of Ϙ for Κ. Thus we find [ϘORAΞΣ] for Κόραξ, [ΕΤΕΟϘΛΟΣ] for Ἐτέοκλος, [ΧARIϘΛO] for Χαπικλώ. On the Corintho-Attic vase in Berlin (1704) are two curious instances of dittography, due no doubt to Corinthian influence, Κυλλήνιος being written [ΚϘYΕNIOΣ] (Κϙυελνιος) and Ζεύς as [ΔΒΕYΣ], where the Corinthian and Attic forms of Κ and Ε stand side by side. So on a vase in the Louvre (E 852) we have [ΖDEYΣ] = Ζδεύς.[2220]

As a result no doubt of the unsettled state of the alphabet in the fifth century, a confusion in the use of ε and η, and ο and ω respectively, often arises, and we find Ἀλκιμάχως κάλως for Ἀλκίμαχος καλός, [ΚΥΜΟΔΩΚΕ] for Κυμοδόκη, [ΘΗΤΙΣ] for Θέτις, and similar forms.[2221] The diphthong ει is sometimes rendered by ΕΙ, sometimes by Ε, as in [ΚΑΛΕΔΟΚΕΣ] for καλὴ δοκεῖς; αι and ει are also rendered by Ε, as in the name [ΑΛΚΜΕΟΝ] for Ἀλκμαίων and [ΠΕΝΘΕΣΙΛΕΑ] for Πενθεσίλεια, or αι by Α, as in [ΑΘΕΝΑΑ] for Ἀθηναία. In a few words, such as [ΧΙΡΟΝ] (Χείρων) and [ΣΙΛΕΝΟΣ] (Σείληνος), the diphthong ει is represented by its other member Ι. On the other hand, we find [ΕΙΟΛΕΟΣ] for Ἰολέως (B.M. B 301). The general vagueness of the Attic craftsmen’s orthography is well illustrated by Kretschmer in the word Ὀδυσσεύς, which is not only invariably spelled with a Λ, reminding us of the Latin form Ulixes, but occurs in the following different forms[2222]:— 15[86]ΟΛΥΤΕΥΣ 15[79]ΟΛΥΤΕΥ 15[99]ΟΛΛΥΤΕΥΣ 15[103]ΟΛΥΤΤΕΥΣ 15[73]ΟΛΥΤΕΣ 15[81]ΟΛΥΣΕΥΣ 15[91]ΩΛΥΣΣΕΥΣ this order being roughly chronological. The ordinary δ-form is, however, found.[2223]

A tendency to assimilation of aspirated consonants, always avoided in literary Greek, is seen in such forms as [ΘΑΛΘΥΒΙΟΣ] for Ταλθύβιος, [ΧΑΧΡΥΛΙΟΝ] for Καχρυλίων, and [ΦΑΝΦΑΙΟΣ] for Πάμφαιος. The reverse tendency is curiously illustrated in [ΚΑΡΙΘΑΙΟΣ] for Χαριταῖος. Unassimilated forms occur, as in the case of [ΑΝΧΙΠΟΣ] for Ἄγχιππος.[2224] Another peculiarity is the omission of nasals before consonants, as in [ΑΤΑΛΑΤΕ] for Ἀταλά(ν)τη, [ΤΥΤΑΡΕΟΣ] for Τυ(ν)δαρέως,[2225] [ΙΑΦΥΙ] for Νύ(μ)φαι, [ΛΑΠΟΝ] for Λά(μ)πων, and [ΕΚΕΛΑΔΟΣ] for Ἐ(γ)κέλαδος. There is also a tendency to avoid double consonants, as in [ΜΕΣΙΛΑ] for Μνήσιλλα, [ΑΡΙΑΝΕ] for Ἀριάδνη, [ΚΛΥΤΑΙΜΕΣΤΡΑ] for Κλυταίμνηστρα, [ΠΕΡΟΦΑΤΑ] for Περσέφαττα[2226]; this is especially common in the case of double Λ or double Σ, as in [ΟΛΥΤΕΥΣ] and [ΜΕΣΙΛΑ] just quoted. On the other hand, on later vases consonants are often doubled without reason, as in [ΚΑΣΣΤΟΡ] for Κάστωρ,[2227] [ΤΡΙΠΠΤΟΛΕΜΟΣ] for Τριπτόλεμος, [ΜΕΜΜΝΟΝ] for Μέμνων, this being commonest with [fourline Σ] and [Π]. [Χ] and [Chalcidian Χ], originally absent from the Attic alphabet, are represented usually by [ΞΣ] and [ΘΣ], exceptionally by [ΚΣ] and [ΠΣ], as in [ΧΑΡΟΠΣ], [ΚΣΕΝΟΚΛΕΣ][2228]; also occasionally by metathesis, as [ΕΛΡΑΣΦΕΝ], [ΣΧΑΝΘΟΣ], [ΠΙΣΤΟΣΧΕΝΟΣ].[2229] Attic contractions, such as [ΧΑΤΕΡΟΣ] for καὶ ἕτερος and [ΚΑΜΟΙ] for καὶἐμοί, are also found.[2230]

Among peculiarities of inflection (some of which may of course be mere misspellings) may be mentioned [ΗΥΙΥΣ] = υἱύς for υἱός, [ΠΑΥΣ] for paῖs, [ΘΕΣΥΣ] for Θησεύς, and [ΠΕΡΣΕΣ] for Περσεύς; also the open form -εες for -hς, as in [ΗΕΡΑΚΛΕΕΣ], [ΧΣΕΝΟΚΛΕΕΣ], and the form πίει for πίε; to some of these allusion has already been made.

* * * * *

From this mass of detail it is possible to deduce certain chronological results,[2231] which are not without their value for the dating of the various Athenian fabrics. Excluding the doubtful Dipylon vase, the inscriptions extend from the seventh century[2232] down to the time of Xenophantos and the late Panathenaic amphorae, a period of over three hundred years.

In the François vase we meet with the closed [asper] for the aspirate, the Ϙ and Κ together, and the two forms [Θ] and [Θ] of Θ; as the [Θ] form dropped out of private use earlier than out of official documents, and is found in the latter down to 520 B.C., we can date the François vase about the middle of the sixth century (not later, as the closed [asper] shows); the same date will also apply to the earliest Panathenaic amphora (B.M. B 130), and the cup of Oikopheles. The fact that Eucheiros, a “minor artist,” calls himself the son of Ergotimos, who made the François vase, permits us to place him some thirty years later, about 520 B.C., and this point may be regarded as the zenith of the B.F. period. In the later B.F. vases the H and Ω for Ε and Ο begin to make their appearance[2233]; but the conservative Panathenaic amphorae, like the coins, adhere to the original spelling right down to the end.

The existence of the R.F. style for some time previous to 480 B.C. has now been established by the discoveries on the Athenian Acropolis. This is also borne out by the appearance on vases by Euthymides of the [Θ] form for [Θ], and the complete absence in the earlier vases of the H and Ω forms, which are not found among the Acropolis fragments. The hydria of Meidias (B.M. B 224), which marks the zenith of the “fine” period, has a purely Ionic alphabet. The Ionic forms seem to have come in with the “fine” R.F. style after 480 B.C., and for some time we find a mixed alphabet on the vases.[2234] It is also interesting to note the appearance in some cases of the Thasian alphabet, with its use of Ω for Ο (as in Ἀλκιμάχως καλώς, B.M. E 318), which has been traced to the influence of Polygnotos.[2235]

* * * * *

We conclude our account of inscriptions on Greek vases with a brief survey of those found on the vases of Southern Italy[2236]; it will be seen that they are neither numerous nor specially interesting.

The inscriptions are for the most part in the Doric dialect and Ionic alphabet, with the addition of the Doric sign [doric asper] for the aspirate. Generally speaking, these Doric forms are found on the Apulian vases, whereas on the products of Paestum they are mainly Ionic, with admixtures of Doric. Attic forms also occur. It seems probable that the Doric tendencies of the Apulian inscriptions are due to the influence of the great Laconian colony of Tarentum (although the vases were not made there), while Paestum was influenced, on the other hand, by the neighbouring Ionic colonies, such as Cumae.

The latter, being for the most part of earlier date, will first occupy our attention. They include two artists’ signatures, which appear in the form [ΑΣΣΤΕΑΣ] [ΕΓΡΑΦΕ] and [ΠΥΘΩΝ] [ΕΓΡΑΦΕ]. We have already remarked on the use of the imperfect tense (p. 258); there are five vases by Assteas and one by Python, on all of which the figures also have their names inscribed.[2237] The Ionic forms appear in [ΜΕΓΑΡΗ], Μεγάρη, [ΑΛΚΜΗΝΗ], Ἀλκμήνη, and so on; on the other hand, Python uses the Doric form [ΑΩΣ], Ἀώς = Ἠώς, and Assteas the Doric [Doric heta] in [ἙΣΣΠΕΡΙΑΣ] = Ἑ<σ>σπεριάς. Ionic forms are also found on a few Apulian vases, as for instance Berlin 3257 (from Ceglie), which has [Ε]ΥΘΥΜΙΗ] and [ΕΥΝΟΜΙΗ] for Εὐθυμία and Εὐνομία, or Naples 2296 with [ΝΗΣΑΙΗ] for Νησαία.

Some of the inscribed Apulian vases are not without interest, as for instance that in the Louvre, which bears the signature of Lasimos: [ΛΑΣΙΜΟΣ ΕΓΡΑΨΕ], Λάσιμος ἔγραψε.[2238] He was probably not a Greek, but of Messapian origin. On the great Dareios vase in Naples (No. 3253) several names are inscribed, such as [ἙΛΛΑΣ] forἝλλας, [ΑΣΙΑ], [ΔΑΡΕΙΟΣ], and the general title of the scene, [ΠΕΡΣΑΙ]. On a well-known burlesque scene in the British Museum (F 269) the characters are inscribed [ΗΕΡΑ] (Ἥρα), [ΔΑΙΔΑΛΟΣ] (Δαίδαλος = Hephaistos), and [ΕΝΕΥΑΛΙΟΣ] (Ἐν<ε>υάλιος = Ares); and on the fine amphora F 331, representing Pelops at Olympia, are numerous incised inscriptions: [ΠΕΛΟΨ], Πέλοψ; [ΟΙΝΟΜΑΟΣ], Οἰνόμαος; [ἹΠΠΟΔΑΜΕΙΑ], Ἱπποδάμεια, etc. On the altar is painted [ΔΙΟΣ], Διός, sc. “the altar of Zeus.”

A curious inscription is that on a krater in Naples (No. 2872), which represents Eros and a woman playing at ball; the latter leans on a stele on which is inscribed [ἹΗΣΑΝΜΟΙΤΑΝΣΦΙΡΑΝ] which was interpreted by Cavedoni, probably correctly, as ἵης ἄν μοι τὰν σφ(α)ῖραν, “You might send me the ball.” The [Sicyonian Χ] is an error for [Doric heta], the [heta reversed] for Η. This inscription, be it noted, is painted, contrary to the general rule in these vases, as they are generally incised; but an exception seems to be made in favour of inscriptions on stelae and similar objects, which are not uncommon, though many are open to suspicion. In the British Museum there are several examples,[2239] but by far the most curious is on an amphora in Naples (No. 2868), where a stele is inscribed:

A curious and unique inscription is found engraved on a kotyle from Chiusi: οὗτος τὸν δᾶμον ἔφα ποναρόν, “This fellow said that the people were a depraved lot.”[2241] The η of πονηρόν was first written Ε, and then corrected into Α, the Doric form. It may be supposed that the inscription is due to a workman who did not approve of the democracy under which he lived.

On an amphora from Gnatia (Fasano), with a goose and a cock, in white on the black ground, is the quaint dialogue:

[ΑΝΗΧΝΟΤΙΑ, ΟΤΟΝΕΛΕΤΡΥΓΟΝΑ] αἴ τὸν χῆνα, ὦ τὸν ἐλετρυγόνα, or, “What, the goose?” “Oh, the cock!”[2242]

Etruscan inscriptions do not come within the scope of this chapter, but an Oscan inscription should be mentioned here, which is incised on a vase in the British Museum (F 233), over an actor: [ΑΙΤΝΑΣ] = Santia, the Oscan form of Ξανθίας, which was a common name for the slave of comedy.

LIST OF ARTISTS’ SIGNATURES FOUND ON GREEK VASES

I. EARLY FABRICS (CHAPTER VII.)

Aristonoös ἐποίησε Uncertain fabric See Vol. I. p. 297

Pyrrhos ἐποίησε Proto-Corinthian Rev. Arch. xl. (1902), p. 41

Chares ἔγραψε Corinthian Klein, Meistersig. p. 29

Milonidas ἔγραψε do. Wiener Vorl. 1888, pl. 1, fig. 4

Timonidas ἔγραψε do. Klein, p. 28

Gamedes ἐποίησε Boeotian Ibid. p. 31

Gryton ἐποίησε do. Boston Mus. Report, 1898, p. 54

Iphitadas ἐποίησε Boeotian Röm. Mitth. 1897, p. 105

Menaidas ἐποίησε do. Wiener Vorl. 1889, pl. 1, fig. 1

Mnasalkes ἐποίησε do. Boston Mus. Report, 1899, p. 56

Theozotos ἐποίησε do. Louvre F 69

II. ATTIC BLACK-FIGURED VASES (Vol. I. p. 379).

Amasis ἐποίησε Amphorae and Klein, p. 43; Vol. I. p. oinochoae 383

Anakles ἐποίησε[2243] Minor artist Ibid. p. 75

Antidoros ἐποίει Minor artist Notizie degli Scavi, 1897, p. 231

Archikles ἐποίησε Minor artist Klein, p. 76

Charitaios ἐποίησε Hydria and kylix Ibid. p. 51

Cheiron ἐποίησε Minor artist Ibid. p. 79

Epitimos ἐποίησε Minor artist Ibid. p. 84

Ergoteles ἐποίησε Minor artist Berlin 1758

Ergotimos ἐποίησε Potter of François Klein, p. 37 vase; kylix

Eucheiros ἐποίησε Minor artist Ibid. p. 72

Euphiletos ἔγραψε Pinax Ibid. p. 49

Exekias {ἔγραψε } Amphorae and kylikes Ibid. p. 38

{ἐποίησε}

Glaukytes ἐποίησε Minor artist (with Ibid. p. 77 Archikles)

Hermogenes ἐποίησε Minor artist Ibid. p. 82

Kaulos ἐποίησε Potter for Sakonides Notizie degli Scavi, 1903, p. 35

Kittos ἐποίησε Panathen. amph. (4th B.M. B 604 cent.)

Kleisophos ἔγραψε Oinochoë (Xenokles Athens 691 as potter)

Klitias ἔγραψε François vase Klein, p. 32; B.M. B (painter) 601_{4–5}

Kolchos ἐποίησε Oinochoë Berlin 1732

Mnesikleides ἔγραψε Aryballos Athens 669

Myspios ἐποίησε Minor artist Klein, p. 84

Neandros ἐποίησε Minor artist Ibid. p. 79

Nearchos ἐγρ. κ. ἐπ. Situla Ibid. p. 38

Nikosthenes ἐποίησε About eighty vases Ibid. p. 51

Oikopheles ἐκεράμευσε Kylix Oxford 189

Paseas γράμμα Pinax Klein, p. 49

Phrynos ἐποίησε Minor artist B.M. B 424 and Boston

Priapos ἐποίησε Doubtful B.M. B 395

Psoieas ἐποίησε(?) Minor artist B.M. B 600_{40}

Sakonides ἔγραψε Minor artist Klein, p. 85

Sikelos ἔγραψε Panathen. amphora Ibid. p. 86

Skythes ἔγραψε Pinax Ibid. p. 48

Sokles ἐποίησε Minor artist Ibid. p. 79

Sondros ἐποίησε Minor artist B.M. B 601_{6}

Sophilos ἔγραψε Fragment Ath. Mitth. 1889, pl. 1

Taleides ἐποίησε Various shapes Klein, p. 46

Thrax ἐποίησε Minor artist Notizie degli Scavi, 1903, p. 36

Timagoras ἐποίησε Hydriae Klein, p. 50

Tlenpolemos ἐποίησε Minor artist; potter Ibid. p. 84 for Sakonides

Tleson ἐποίησε Minor artist Ibid. p. 73

Tychios ἐποίησε Hydria Ibid. p. 50

Xenokles ἐποίησε Minor artist; potter Ibid. p. 80 for Kleisophos

III. TRANSITIONAL OR “MIXED TECHNIQUE”

Andokides { ἐποίησε } Amphorae, etc. See Vol. I. p. 386

{ ἐποίει }

Chelis See below

Epiktetos See below

Epilykos See below

Hischylos ἐποίησε Potter for Klein, p. 97 Epiktetos, Sakonides, Pheidippos

Nikosthenes See above; two mixed; three R.F.[2244]

Pamphaios ἐποίησε Various shapes Ibid. p. 87

Pasiades ἐποίησε White-ground B.M. B 668

Thypheithide ἐποίησε Doubtful See B.M. E 4 s

IV. ATTIC RED-FIGURED VASES (see Vol. I. p. 420 ff.)

Aeson ἔγραψε Kylix Ant. Denkm. ii. pl. 1

Amasis II (ἔγραψε) Kylix Bibl. Nat. 535; Hartwig, Meistersch. chap. xvi.

Apollodoros ἔγραψε Kylikes Ibid. chap. xxii.

Aristophanes ἔγραψε Kylikes Berlin 2531; Boston Mus. Report, 1900, p. 49 ff.

Brygos ἐποίησε Kylikes Hartwig, chap. xiii.

Chachrylion ἐποίησε Kylikes Ibid. chap iv.

Chelis { ἐποίησε} Kylikes (one Klein, Meistersig. p. “mixed”) 116

{ ἐποίει }

Deiniades ἐποίησε Potter for Phintias

Duris ἔγραψε Various shapes Hartwig, chaps. x., xxi.

Epigenes ἐποίησε Kantharos Klein, p. 186

Epiktetos ἔγραψε Kylikes and plates Ibid. p. 100

Epilykos ἔγραψε Kylikes Ibid. p. 114: see Monuments Piot, ix. p. 135 ff.

Erginos ἐποίησε Potter for Aristophanes

Euergides ἐποίησε Kylikes Klein, p. 99

Euphronios { ἔγραψε } Various shapes Hartwig, chaps. vii., xviii.

{ἐποίησε }

Euthymides ἔγραψε Various shapes Hoppin, Euthymides

Euxitheos ἐποίησε Amphora; potter for Klein, p. 135 Oltos

Hegesiboulos ἐποίησε White-ground cup Branteghem Cat., No. 167

Hegias ἔγραψε Kylix Klein, p. 186

Hermaios ἐποίησε Kylikes See Vol. I. p. 424

Hermonax ἔγραψε Stamni and “pelikae” Klein, p. 200

Hieron ἐποίησε Kylikes and kotylae; Hartwig, chap. xii. potter for Makron

Hilinos ἐποίησε Potter for Psiax

Hischylos ἐποίησε See above

Hypsis ἔγραψε Hydria Klein, p. 198

Kalliades ἐποίησε Potter for Duris: see Table V.

Kleophrades ἐποίησε Potter for Duris and Amasis II.

Makron ἔγραψε (With Hieron)

Maurion ἐποίει Pyxis B.M. E 770; Class. Rev. 1894, p. 419

Megakles ἐποίησε Pyxis Klein, p. 205

Meidias ἐποίησε Hydria B.M. E 224 = Plate XLI.

Mys ἐποίησε Lekythos Athens 1362

Nikias ἐποίησε Krater in B.M See p. 259 above

Oltos ἔγραψε Kylikes Hartwig, chap. v.

Onesimos ἔγραψε Kylikes (Euphronios Ibid. chap. xix. as potter)

Peithinos ἔγραψε Kylikes Ibid. chap. xi.

Pheidippos ἔγραψε Kylix B.M. E 6

Phintias ἔγραψε Various shapes Hartwig, chap. ix.

Pistoxenos ἐποίησε Kotylae; potter for Ibid. chap. xiv. Euphronios

Polygnotos ἔγραψε Amphorae; stamni Mon. Antichi, ix. p. 1 ff.

Praxias ἔγραψε (Non-Athenian?) Klein, p. 31

Psiax ἔγραψε Kylix and alabastron Amer. Journ. of Arch. 1895, p. 485

Python I. ἐποίησε Potter for Epiktetos and Duris

Sikanos ἐποίησε Plate Klein, p. 116

Smikros ἔγραψε[2245] Stamni Monuments Piot, ix. p. 15 ff.

Sosias ἐποίησε Kylix Berlin 2278; Klein, p. 147

Sotades { ἐποίησε } White-ground vases { Branteghem Cat. 159–166

{ ἐποίει } { Klein, p. 187

Syriskos ἐποίησε Astragalos vase Hartwig, chap. xxiv.

Xenophantos ἐποίησε Lekythos Petersburg 1790

Xenotimos ἐποίησε Kylikes Branteghem Cat. 84–85

V. UNFIGURED AND MODELLED VASES

Charinos ἐποίησε Modelled vases Klein, p. 215; Röm. Mitth. 1890, p. 316

Kalliades ἐποίησε Modelled vases; Klein, p. 216 potter for Duris

Kleomenes ἐποίησε Modelled vase in Mon. Grecs, 1897, pls. Louvre 16–17

Kriton ἐποίησε Jug; no subject Klein, p. 213

Lydos ἐποίησε Fragment; painter’s Ibid. p. 217 name lost

Lykinos ἠργάσατο Pyxis Ibid. p. 213

Lysias ἐποίησε Jug; no subject Ibid. p. 213

Myson ἐγρ. κ. ἐπ. Fragment Ibid. p. 217

Prokles ἐποίησε Modelled lekythos Berlin 2202

Teisias ἐποίησε Vases without Klein, p. 212 subject

Therinos ποίημα Chytra Ibid. p. 214

VI. SOUTH ITALIAN (see Vol. I. p. 478)

Assteas ἔγραψε Kraters, etc. See Vol. I. p. 478

Lasimos ἔγραψε Krater Klein, p. 210

Python ἔγραφε Krater B.M. F 149

Statios ἔργον Doubtful See B.M. F 594

LIST OF ΚΑΛΟΣ-NAMES ON GREEK VASES

Names in parentheses denote the artists with whom they are associated

I. BLACK-FIGURED VASES

Aischis Myia

Andokides (Timagoras) Mys

Anthylle Neokleides (Taleides)

Automenes Onetor

Chairaia? (Nikosthenes) Onetorides (Exekias)

Chares Pyles

Dorotheos (Charinos? also Pythokles I. R.F.)

Eresilla Rhodon

Euphiletos Rhodopis

Hippokrates (also R.F.) Sibon (Kabeirion vase: see Vol. I. p. 218)

Hippokritos (Glaukytes) Sime

Hippon I. Sostratos

Kallias I. (Taleides) Stesias (Exekias)

Kallippe Stesileos

Klitarchos (Taleides) Stroibos

Leagros (Exekias; also R.F.) Timotheos

Lysippides Xenodoke (Charinos)

Mnesilla

II. RED-FIGURED VASES

Aisimides Antimachos

Akestor Antiphon

Akestorides Aphrodisia

Alexomenos Archinos II.

Alkides Aristagoras (Duris)

Alkimachos Aristarchos

Antias Aristeides

Athenodotos (Peithinos; with Lichas Leagros)

Brachas Lyandros

Chairestratos Lykopis

Chairias (Phintias) Lykos (Euphronios, Duris, Onesimos)

Chairippos Lysis (Hartwig, chap. xxiii.)

Charmides Megakles I. (Phintias, Euthymides)

Damas Megakles II.

Diogenes (see Hartwig, chap. Memnon (Chelis, Chachrylion) xv.)

Diokles Midas

Dion Mikion II.

Dionokles Miltiades

Diphilos Naukleia (Hieron)

Dorotheos (also B.F.) Nikodemos

Dromippos Nikon

Elpinikos Nikophile

Epidromos (Chachrylion?) Nikostratos II. (Hartwig, chap. xx.)

Epileios Oinanthe

Epimedes Olympiodoros (also one B.F.)

Erosantheo Panaitios (Euphronios, Duris)

Erothemis (Euphronios and Pedieus Onesimos)

Euaion Perses

Eurymachos Phayllos

Euryptolemos (Apollodoros) Pheidiades

Glaukon (Euphronios) Pheidon

Heras Philon

Hermogenes (Duris) Praxiteles

Hiketes Sekline (Euphronios)

Hipparchos (Epiktetos) Sikinnos

Hippodamas (Duris and Hieron) Simiades

Hippon II. Smikythos (Euthymides)

Hygiainon Sokrates

Kallias II. Solon

Kallides Sophanes

Kallikles Sostratos

Kallisto (Hieron) Thaleia

Karton Theodoros

Kephisios Thero (Oltos)

Kephisophon Timarchos

Kleinias Timokrates

Kleophon (with Megakles I.) Timoxenos or Timaxenos

Krates Tleson

Laches (see Hartwig, chap. Xenon xx.)

Leagros (Chachrylion, Xenophon. Euphronios, Euxitheos)

[The foregoing list is not exhaustive, but only gives the more frequently occurring names; reference should be made throughout to Klein’s Lieblingsinschriften, 1898 edition.]

-----

Footnote 2058:

v. 17, 6.

Footnote 2059:

xi. 466 D-E.

Footnote 2060:

Hence the oblique cases υἱεῖ, υἱεῖς, etc., of classical usage.

Footnote 2061:

Die griechischen Vaseninschriften, Gütersloh, 1894.

Footnote 2062:

See Berlin 2891; Arch. Zeit. 1879, p. 96.

Footnote 2063:

Cf. Berlin 2866 and the vase of Xenophantos (Reinach, i. 23).

Footnote 2064:

B.M. A 189* = Plate XVII. fig. 6.

Footnote 2065:

Vol. I. p. 436; Klein, Meistersig. p. 162 ff.

Footnote 2066:

Vol. I. p. 478; Klein, ibid. p. 206 ff.

Footnote 2067:

Klein, Lieblingsinschr.^2 p. 118.

Footnote 2068:

Ath. Mitth. 1890, p. 396.

Footnote 2069:

For the explanation of these names see Chapter IV.

Footnote 2070:

B.M. E 497; Schöne in Comm. Phil. in hon. Mommseni, p. 658, Nos. 29–32.

Footnote 2071:

Op. cit. p. 651, No. 5. In this and the other examples it will be understood that [Δ] denotes 10 (δέκα), [Π] 5 (πέντε), and so on; [Ͱ] being the sign for a drachma.

Footnote 2072:

Op. cit. No. 17.

Footnote 2073:

A diminutive of πέλλα, a large deep cup or bowl (see Vol. I. p. 186).

Footnote 2074:

Schöne, op. cit. p. 650, No. 3.

Footnote 2075:

Ibid. No. 7 = Cat. 1206.

Footnote 2076:

Cat. 2188; Schöne’s No. 8. The meaning of Λύδια μείζω is uncertain.

Footnote 2077:

Ber. d. sächs. Gesellsch. 1854, p. 36.

Footnote 2078:

B.M. B 310; Munich 693. See Jahn in Ber. d. Sächs. Gesellsch. 1854, p. 37.

Footnote 2079:

Ran. 1236.

Footnote 2080:

Pac. 1202.

Footnote 2081:

Schöne, op. cit. p. 655, No. 13.

Footnote 2082:

F 595: see Vol. I. p. 135.

Footnote 2083:

B.M. B 451; J.H.S. vi. p. 374 ff.

Footnote 2084:

B.M. B 450 = J.H.S. vi. p. 372.

Footnote 2085:

Boeckh, C.I.G. i. 545.

Footnote 2086:

A 1054 = Roehl, I.G.A. 524, p. 151. See also Kretschmer, pp. 3–4.

Footnote 2087:

I.G.A. 22: see below, p. 252.

Footnote 2088:

Ibid. 2 = B.M. A 1512.

Footnote 2089:

B.M. F 596: see Vol. I. p. 186.

Footnote 2090:

Heydemann’s Cat. 1212.

Footnote 2091:

B.M. F 605–6.

Footnote 2092:

Naukratis I., pls. 32–4, p. 54 ff.; Naukratis II., pl. 21, p. 62 ff.; Brit. Sch. Annual, 1898–99, p. 53.

Footnote 2093:

Ath. Mitth. xv. p. 395 ff.

Footnote 2094:

See Vol. I. pp. 139, 345.

Footnote 2095:

Ath. Mitth. 1881, p. 107; 1893, p. 225; Kretschmer, p. 110; also Vol. I. p. 291.

Footnote 2096:

Mon. Grecs, 1897, pls. 16–7, p. 55; and see Vol. I. p. 493.

Footnote 2097:

B.M. B 134; Urlichs, Beiträge, pl. 14.

Footnote 2098:

Berlin 2314.

Footnote 2099:

Examples in the B.M. are E 12 and E 457 (Pamphaios), E 61 (Hieron), E 65 (Brygos), E 258 (Euxitheos); and cf. Fig. 129.

Footnote 2100:

Perrot, Hist. de l’Art, iii. p. 670. They have been found at Larnaka, Paphos, Dali, and Amathus.

Footnote 2101:

Roberts, Gk. Epigraphy, i. p. 154.

Footnote 2102:

On the subject generally see Roberts, Greek Epigraphy, vol. i. (Cambridge Press).

Footnote 2103:

See the table given by Kretschmer, p. 105.

Footnote 2104:

See Hill, Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins, p. 208 ff.

Footnote 2105:

B.M. B 130.

Footnote 2106:

See for other details of coin-inscriptions Hill, op. cit.

Footnote 2107:

Cat. of Bronzes, No. 250.

Footnote 2108:

No. 385 (Didot).

Footnote 2109:

It should be borne in mind that Mycenaean vases have been found in Argolis, Cyprus, and elsewhere, with characters incised on the handles, of contemporaneous execution, and forming parallels to the Cretan script and the later Cypriote syllabary.

Footnote 2110:

Olympia, iv. pl. 39, p. 102.

Footnote 2111:

Roehl, I.G.A. 377.

Footnote 2112:

$1$2 1903, pls. 2–6: see Vol. I. p. 92.

Footnote 2113:

See also Vol. I. p. 335.

Footnote 2114:

Jahrbuch, 1891, p. 263; Kretschmer, p. 7.

Footnote 2115:

Vol. I. p. 297 and Plate XVI.; for the latest interpretation of the name, as here adopted, see Class. Review, 1900, p. 264.

Footnote 2116:

E.g. Ramsay in J.H.S. x. p. 187.

Footnote 2117:

Studniczka, Kyrene, p. 11 ff.; Vol. I. p. 342.

Footnote 2118:

Collected by Blass, Dialektinschr. iii. 3120 ff., and Wilisch, Altkorinthische Thonindustrie, p. 156.

Footnote 2119:

Roberts (Gk. Epigraphy, i. p. 134) distinguishes three periods in the Corinthian alphabet from 700 to 400 B.C., but the vases seem to belong almost entirely to the first, down to 550 B.C.

Footnote 2120:

Vol. I. p. 316, Fig. 90.

Footnote 2121:

Cat. 1655: see Vol. I. p. 319.

Footnote 2122:

Louvre E 600 = Reinach, i. 395.

Footnote 2123:

B.M. A 1080 = Reinach, i. 306.

Footnote 2124:

Athens 620 = Reinach, i. 394.

Footnote 2125:

Roehl, I.G.A. 20, 5.

Footnote 2126:

Ibid. 20, 63.

Footnote 2127:

E 638 = Mon. dell’ Inst. 1855, pl. 20. It has been suggested that the name is originally a corruption of Alexandra = Xandra = Ksandra = Kesandra (Kretschmer, p. 28).

Footnote 2128:

The general peculiarities of the Corinthian alphabet are not touched on here, as examples have been given of all characteristic letters. See Roberts, Gk. Epigraphy, i. p. 134.

Footnote 2129:

Kretschmer, p. 51; Roehl, I.G.A. p. 14, No. 22.

Footnote 2130:

See Vol. I. p. 300; Klein, Meisters. p. 30; Boston Mus. Report, 1898, p. 54, 1899, p. 56; Röm. Mitth. 1897, p. 105.

Footnote 2131:

Ath. Mitth. 1892, pl. 6, p. 101.

Footnote 2132:

Ath. Mitth. 1890, p. 411.

Footnote 2133:

See Vol. I. p. 357; Karo in J.H.S. xix. p. 156; Ath. Mitth. 1900, p. 93, note.

Footnote 2134:

Auserl. Vasenb. 205, 3, 4: see Vol. I. p. 357.

Footnote 2135:

See Vol. I. p. 322 and Kretschmer, p. 62.

Footnote 2136:

Rev. Arch. xl. (1902), p. 41.

Footnote 2137:

As is often the case with English seventeenth-century inscriptions.

Footnote 2138:

Frag. Com. Gr. (Script. Gr. Bibl., xlii.), p. 248.

Footnote 2139:

Notizie degli Scavi, 1903, p. 34.

Footnote 2140:

For the language spoken by the μέτοικοι cf. Kretschmer, p. 76, and Philostratus, Vit. Soph. ii. 1, 14; also Plat. Lys. 223_a_, ὑποβαρβαρίζοντες παιδαγωγοί.

Footnote 2141:

Naples 3089 = Millingen-Reinach, 33–4.

Footnote 2142:

Bibl. Nat. 372 = Reinach, i. 92.

Footnote 2143:

Bibl. Nat. 846 = Klein, Lieblingsinschr.^2 p. 129.

Footnote 2144:

Hartwig, Meistersch. p. 320; Dümmler in Berl. Phil. Woch. 1888, p. 20; Kretschmer, p. 81.

Footnote 2145:

Ar. Thesm. 1084–1225.

Footnote 2146:

Kretschmer also hints that it seems to indicate the pronunciation of Φ by the Athenians as PH in “hap-hazard,” not as F.

Footnote 2147:

There are also isolated instances of ἔγραφε; Timonidas of Corinth, Pheidippos, Euthymides, and Aristophanes. See Klein, Meisters. p. 13.

Footnote 2148:

B.M. F 594.

Footnote 2149:

Gardner, Ashmolean Vases, No. 189, pl. 26: Εκεράμευσεν ἐμὲ Οἰκυφέλης. We are reminded of the jest about Chairestratos made by the comic poet Phrynichos, who speaks of “Chairestratos soberly pottering (κεραμεύων) at home” (Athen. xi. 474 B).

Footnote 2150:

See list at end of chapter, and Klein, op. cit. pp. 49, 213, 214.

Footnote 2151:

Munich 378 = Furtwaengler and Reichhold, pl. 14. See Vol. I. p. 428.

Footnote 2152:

Klein, Meistersig. p. 111.

Footnote 2153:

G 107: see Monuments Piot, ix. p. 33.

Footnote 2154:

Naples 3415.

Footnote 2155:

Munich 498 = Reinach, i. 215.

Footnote 2156:

Cat. 1152.

Footnote 2157:

Munich 380, 810 = Reinach, ii. 115, i. 363.

Footnote 2158:

Louvre E 852 = Reinach, i. 156.

Footnote 2159:

Reinach, ii. 292.

Footnote 2160:

E.g. B.M. F 62.

Footnote 2161:

See also Kretschmer, p. 84.

Footnote 2162:

E.g. B.M. B 164, B 254; Louvre F 297 = Reinach, ii. 26.

Footnote 2163:

Kretschmer, p. 85: see p 92.

Footnote 2164:

Munich 6: see Vol. I. p. 428, and Hoppin, Euthymides, p. 18.

Footnote 2165:

Monuments Piot, ix. pl. 2.

Footnote 2166:

Berlin 1737.

Footnote 2167:

Munich 333 = Reinach, ii. 119.

Footnote 2168:

Berlin 1704 = Reinach, i. 198; Vol. I. p. 326.

Footnote 2169:

Berlin 1732 = Reinach, ii. 66.

Footnote 2170:

Plate XXIII.: see Vol. I. p. 326.

Footnote 2171:

Bibl. Nat. 219.

Footnote 2172:

Louvre F 385 = Millingen, Anc. Uned. Mon. pl. 38.

Footnote 2173:

Reinach, ii. 49.

Footnote 2174:

Kretschmer, p. 86.

Footnote 2175:

Reinach, ii. 128.

Footnote 2176:

Kretschmer, pp. 86, 197.

Footnote 2177:

See Kretschmer, p. 86.

Footnote 2178:

Cat. 1158 = Ath. Mitth. 1884, pl. 1.

Footnote 2179:

Kretschmer, loc. cit.: cf. Bergk, Poet. lyr. Gr. iii.^4 p. 97, frag. 23.

Footnote 2180:

See Hartwig, Meistersch. p. 255.

Footnote 2181:

Petersburg 1670. The Doric dialect is explained by Kretschmer as due to the Sicilian origin of the game.

Footnote 2182:

Sc. “hard to beat.”

Footnote 2183:

Kretschmer, p. 88.

Footnote 2184:

I.e. κυβιστητῆρι.

Footnote 2185:

Reinach, i. 294. Probably, as Kretschmer points out, a dog of Melita off Illyricum, not of Malta.

Footnote 2186:

Kretschmer, p. 91.

Footnote 2187:

Benndorf, Gr. u. sic. Vasenb. pl. 1.

Footnote 2188:

Helbig, 186 = Wiener Vorl. 1889, pl. 8, 6.

Footnote 2189:

Reinach, i. 96.

Footnote 2190:

Reinach, i. 106.

Footnote 2191:

This translation is somewhat doubtful: see Reinach, loc. cit.

Footnote 2192:

Cat. 688 = Reinach, i. 164.

Footnote 2193:

Reinach, i. 513.

Footnote 2194:

Athens 1241 = Dumont-Pottier, i. pl. 6.

Footnote 2195:

Plate XXXIX.

Footnote 2196:

On the form of the Δ see below, p. 268.

Footnote 2197:

Brit. Sch. Annual, 1898–99, p. 65.

Footnote 2198:

Reinach, i. 277: see on the subject, Hermes, 1898, p. 640; Notizie degli Scavi, 1895, 86 ff.; and above, pp. 115, 137.

Footnote 2199:

See on this subject, Urlichs, Beiträge, p. 33 ff., and Vol. I. p. 389.

Footnote 2200:

Athen. xi. 466 D; not found on Attic vases, but cf. B.M. F 548.

Footnote 2201:

B.M. B 415, 422; Berlin 1775–76.

Footnote 2202:

Berlin 1764; Munich 37. For variations see Kretschmer, p. 195.

Footnote 2203:

See Klein, Meisters. p. 110; Kretschmer, p. 82.

Footnote 2204:

Instances are B.M. B 330, B 339, B 631, E 182, E 718.

Footnote 2205:

E.g. B.M. B 400.

Footnote 2206:

Cat. 334 = Reinach, i. 79. The vase is probably by Charinos.

Footnote 2207:

Cf. the story of Pericles and Sophocles told by Cicero, De Offic. i. 40, 144.

Footnote 2208:

Vasen mit Lieblingsinschriften, 2nd edn., 1898. Of these, 528 are masculine names, and only 30 feminine.

Footnote 2209:

143 ff. There is, of course, a play here on the word ἐραστής.

Footnote 2210:

97 ff. Demos is here a proper name; κημός means the ballot-box, in which the juries recorded their votes.

Footnote 2211:

Cf. Frazer’s note on Paus. vi. 10, 6 (vol. iv. p. 37).

Footnote 2212:

Such as the Laches καλός on Berlin 2314, a name which recalls the Platonic dialogue with that title.

Footnote 2213:

Hartwig, Meistersch. pl. 17, 1.

Footnote 2214:

Reinach, ii. 94.

Footnote 2215:

Hartwig in Mélanges d’Arch. 1894, p. 10 note.

Footnote 2216:

The name of Leagros occurs on many vases by Euphronios and other artists: see Klein, Lieblingsinschr.^2 p. 70 ff.

Footnote 2217:

Klein, Lieblingsinschr.^2 p. 87 = Ashmolean Vases, No. 310.

Footnote 2218:

See for this section, Kretschmer, p. 94 ff.

Footnote 2219:

See Kretschmer, p. 98.

Footnote 2220:

See Vol. I. p. 326.

Footnote 2221:

But see p. 271 for the probable explanation of this use of ω.

Footnote 2222:

Kretschmer, p. 146.

Footnote 2223:

Naples 2899; B.M. E 156.

Footnote 2224:

Louvre F 53 = Reinach, ii. 59 (Exekias).

Footnote 2225:

Berlin 2291.

Footnote 2226:

Munich 340 = C.I.G. 7433.

Footnote 2227:

B.M. E 224; Karlsruhe 209: cf. Berlin 2184 ([ΟΡΕΣΣΤΕΣ]) and 1906 ([ΤΡΙΤΟΝΝΟΣ]).

Footnote 2228:

Kretschmer, p. 179.

Footnote 2229:

Ibid. p. 180.

Footnote 2230:

Munich 334.

Footnote 2231:

See generally Kretschmer, p. 110 ff.

Footnote 2232:

The two Proto-Attic inscribed vases (Berlin 1682 and Art. Denkm. i. 57: see Vol. I. p. 293).

Footnote 2233:

Berlin 2008; Röm. Mitth. 1886, p. 21.

Footnote 2234:

See the table given by Kretschmer, p. 105.

Footnote 2235:

See Vol. I. p. 443, and Dümmler’s article in Jahrbuch, 1887, p. 168 ff.

Footnote 2236:

See Kretschmer, p. 211 ff.

Footnote 2237:

For the proof that Assteas and Python worked at Paestum, see Vol. I. p. 479.

Footnote 2238:

The name is perhaps a by-form of Dasimos (see Vol. I. p. 478). The correspondence of D and L is not uncommon, as in δακρύς = lacrima.

Footnote 2239:

F 62, [ΤΕΡΜΩΝ]; F 92, [ΟΡΕΣΣΤΑΣ]. See also Millingen-Reinach, pls. 14, 17, 18.

Footnote 2240:

Cf. the version given by Eustathius ad Odyss. p. 1698, 25.

Footnote 2241:

Kretschmer, p. 218; Rev. Arch. xii. (1888), p. 344.

Footnote 2242:

Rayet and Collignon, p. 330 (in Louvre): see above, p. 186; also Vol. I. p. 488.

Footnote 2243:

One kylix in partnership with Nikosthenes.

Footnote 2244:

In one case as potter for Epiktetos.

Footnote 2245:

See also Vol. I. p. 440.