¹ See Andriomenou, A., Γεωμετϱιϰη ϰαί ὑπογεωμετϱιϰη ϰεϱαμειϰή ἐξ Ἐϱετϱίας, II, AE 1977 128 nn.1–2.Google Scholar

² For the first, a Late Geometric skyphos or cup with the graffito,---]νος τό τοι[έριον, see Andriomenou, A., Ἀψιδωτά οἰϰοδομήματα ϰοά ϰεϱαμειϰη τοῦ 8^ου ϰαί 7^ου π.Χ. αἰ. ὲν Ἐϱετϱία, ASA 59 (1981) 235Google Scholar, fig. 102 few details of the second graffito, published herein, are given ibid. p. 235. For a third Late Geometric graffito, a sketch of a boat, on a black-glazed skyphos, see ibid. p. 234 and in particular Andriomenou, A., Γεωμετϱιϰή ϰαί ὑπογεωμετϱιϰή ϰεϱαμειϰἠ ἐξ ἐϱετϱίας, V, AE 1983, 185 no. 224Google Scholar, fig. 10 and pl. 64.

³ For three further fragments of similar large Rhodian kotylai from Eretria see Boardman, J., BSA (1952) 12.Google Scholar Additional fragments are noted by Kahil, L., ASA (1981) 172.Google Scholar

⁴ The developed drawing is by Nikos Sigalas, the draughtsman of the French School in Athens. I am grateful to him, and also to the School. The piece is included in Jeffery, L.H., Local Scripts of Archaic Greece (revised edition, 1989) 434, pl. 73.Google Scholar

⁵ According to L.H. Jeffery, op. cit. 235, ‘This (the cup of Pithekoussai) is the only certain example of a really early inscription written in the Phoenician retrograde style’. This observation increases the importance of the Eretria kotyle, given that, in view of the size of the vase, one has no recourse to arguing that the graffito was in a single line which spiralled round the pot (ibid. 45). Further, the arrangement in three lines written consistently retrograde ties the Eretria kotyle in extremely closely with the piece from Pithekoussai, and with it constitutes a unique pair of examples in the record of early Greek epigraphy. For further, much later, retrograde texts see Wescoat, B. and Johnston, A., Epigraphica Anatolica xi (1988) 1–8.Google Scholar

⁶ Walter, Hans, Frühe Samische Gefässe (= Samos V) 40.Google Scholar This dating seems to be accepted by J.N. Coldstream, Geometric Greece 300.

⁷ See Walter, ibid. 40, pl. 42, 240 and 245 and similarly Eilmann, R., ‘Frühe griechische Keramik im Samischen Heraion’, AM 58 (1933) 68Google Scholar, Abb. 17c. Professor A. Snodgrass, The Dark Age of Greece 78, fig. 38, places a kotyle, which is comparable to ours, c. 730 BC.

⁸ See Samos V 40, pl. 44, 268.

⁹ See below, (n. 18) on the sherd from Pithekoussai, Pl. 41. Other continuous retrograde texts are sporadically located in time and place. See n. 5.

¹⁰ For the xi see LSAG 80.

¹¹ Johnston, Atti 18 Convegno Magna Grecia 244.

¹² On assumption that μαλλα- or μαλλισ- are unlikely interpretations. The evidence for μάλαas the second word of a hexameter is of course extensive, too much so for it to help us in elucidating the context.

¹³ See Heubeck, , Schrift (Arch. Hom. X) 113–4, with refs.Google Scholar

¹⁴ A search of Ibycus found no matches in Homer, Hesiod and the Homeric Hymns. It may be thought that το θυμο Κα...should not be disregarded; it would not, however, fit readily into any metrical scheme.

¹⁵ A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, I (Oxford, 1987) 228. We may consider Θυμοϰά[ρης (in whatever case) another possibility.

¹⁶ Euboean and Ionic examples are cited in Bechtel iii § 34.

¹⁷ Nestor, Tataie, Dipylon oenochoe.

¹⁸ Peruzzi, , Origini di Roma II 26Google Scholar; Heubeck, op. cit. 123, 6c.Google Scholar This is not the place for a full discussion of the piece. The text is cut on the lower wall and there is no preserved sign of any further lines. The major problem lies with the penultimate letter, which is an alpha corrected from an epsilon, or vice versa. While the dialect is therefore uncertain, one can at least say that we either have a feminine form of a two-termination adjective, or that the text must be construed slightly (Εὔποτα .[...) or very differently (e.g. εῦ ποτε.[...). I thank Dr Giorgio Buchner for allowing me to study the piece and to take the photos, Pl. 41.