I am deeply indebted to Mr. J. M. Cook, the Director of the British School at Athens and to Mr. R. M. Cook for their advice and help in the course of my research, and to Dr. D. A. Amyx, Dr. T. Dohrn, and Prof. H. R. W. Smith for photographs of objects I have been unable to study at first hand. My thanks are due to Miss L. H. Jeffery, Prof. Sir John Beazley, and Prof. Rumpf, whom I have consulted on various points. Mrs. Karouzou's assistance and kindness to me in such difficult times for the National Museum in Athens have been invaluable: Mr. Kontoleon kindly gave me permission to study in Mykonos Museum, and Mr. Threpsiades to study and publish pottery in Eretria Museum. I publish photographs of vases in Mykonos and the Louvre through the kindness of Mr. Kontoleon and M. Devambez. It was through the generosity of the trustees of the Walston Studentship which I held 1948/1949 and 1949/1950, the Craven Fund in Cambridge, and my college, Magdalene College, Cambridge, that I was able to undertake this research. The Craven Fund has also kindly assisted in meeting the cost of the illustrations to this article.

¹ Other excavations at Eretria, REG 1895, 439.Google Scholar

² For convenience in the following sections vases in the Delos publication are referred to only by their published group letter and number, and published Samos vases simply by the author's name followed by page or plate reference (Technau, , AM 1929, 6 ff.Google Scholar; Eilmann, , AM 1933, 47 ff.Google Scholar).

³ See below, note 73.

⁴ But see Pliny, NH XXXV 38Google Scholar; Gardner, JHS 1894, 185 n. 36.Google Scholar

⁵ Similar imitations employing a slip have been found at Delphi, and cf. on the late seventh century Vari, vases, BCH 1939, 287.Google Scholar

⁶ On the type cf. Weinberg, , Corinth VII i, 39 f.Google Scholar; imitated often in Attic, once on Delos, Ae73.

⁷ Cf. Délos Ae80.

⁸ Cf. Délos Ae and Bb groups. Both Paros and Naxos made these late geometric small vases, both occasionally employing a slip. Naxian work, on the evidence of its seventh century pottery and finds on the islands themselves, is probably to be distinguished by its darker red micaceous clay and its creamier slip. Délos Ae24–33, 36–47 and most of Bb may well be Naxian, Ae53–60, 75, 76 and perhaps Bb56, 58 Parian.

⁹ Johansen, , Vases Sicyoniens 69 f.Google Scholar, where examples are cited; Weinberg, op. cit. 37.

¹⁰ Young, Hesp. Suppl. II 203; Thera II 319, nos. 91, 92.

¹¹ Cf. Délos Ae36–46.

¹² Cf. Délos Ae5–16.

¹³ Ann. VIII/IX 219 ff.

¹⁴ AM 1929, 159.

¹⁵ On the type, Desborough, , BSA XLIII, 264 f.Google Scholar The clay of the examples I have examined varies considerably. It is, however, hardly ever micaceous and bears some resemblance to that of geometric vases from Tenos—no greater resemblance, however, than it does to Eretrian or even to Attic clay.

¹⁶ Paros, AM 1917, 76.Google ScholarSiphnos, BSA XLIV, pl. XIV 26.Google Scholar For the eight-spoked wheel of Fig. 4. 6 compare Délos Ae68 and our Plate 3 A, 4.

¹⁷ Cf. also Samos, Eilmann, Beil. XXXI 4. On finds in Chalcis, see below, n. 73.

¹⁸ I have not seen the fragment AE 1903, 2, fig. 1; cf. Samos, Eilmann, Beil. XXXI. I also know only from a photograph sent me by Prof. H. R. W. Smith the fragment drawn in Fig. 5. 1. It is no longer in Eretria Museum. For the birds with star and rosette in the panels cf. Délos Ae85, 87, Bb39, 43, 51.

¹⁹ Cf. Délos Bb51.

²⁰ Plate 1B, 7, 9 and Fig. 5. 2 are slipped; cf. Délos Bb39, 51.

²¹ Cf. Samos, Eilmann, fig. 84; Lindos I, pl. 38, 874.

²² Cf. Délos Ae87. Samos, Technau, Beil. VIII 4, 5; Eilmann, Beil. XVIII.

²³ On this motif in late geometric vase painting see Nottbohm, JdI 1943, 2 ff., 30Google Scholar; other examples CVA Fogg Museum pl. 3, 5; CVA Musée Rodin, pl. 8, 7; Athens, Agora P15122; double skyphos in Heidelberg.

²⁴ Cf. Roes, , Greek Geometric Art 23.Google Scholar

²⁵ Cf. Schweitzer, review in Gnomon 1934, 352.Google Scholar

²⁶ Eighth century Argive and Theran examples, Tiryns I, pl. XX 1; Thera II 46, fig. 148.

²⁷ Cf. AM 1929, 153 f., fig. 6, 7.

²⁸ On the type, Kenner, , ÖJh XXIX 117 ff.Google Scholar; Schweitzer, , AM 1918, 104 and 39 n. 4Google Scholar; Tiryns I 140; Weinberg, op. cit., 25 f.; Kontoleon, , AE 1945/1947, 17 f.Google Scholar

²⁹ Eleusis, , AE 1898, pl. 3, 3.Google Scholar Some other parallels: Tiryns I 164, fig. 23, Collignon-Couve 219, pl. 12, Corinth VII i, pl. 12, 73, Johansen, op. cit., pl. 1, 2, CVA Oxford II pl. 1, 1; Clara Rhodos VI, 101, fig. 113. For the style of decoration, Tiryns I, pl. 19, 5; Musée Kalinderu, 19, fig. 1.

³⁰ Vertical strap handles, Berlin 4490, AM 1918, 135; Analatos, NM 190, Wide, , JdI 1899, 213, fig. 92Google Scholar; CVA Copenhagen II, pl. 73, 4.

³¹ Cf. Samos, Eilmann, 103 ff.

³² Cf. Délos Ac1. Rhomaios discusses the type and gives references in Délos X 33.

³³ Better perhaps called lebetes (Richter and Milne, Shapes and Names 9 f.); cf. the lebetes gamikoi, or nymphikoi, of temple inscriptions (AM 1907, 98, n. 1).

³⁴ PAE 1900, 54; 1910, 268.

³⁵ Eilmann 106. There were similar finds on the Acropolis at Athens, at Argos, and at Tiryns (Tiryns I 101; miniature lebetes).

³⁶ Cf. Eilmann, figs. 51–53; and note the incised wavy line on the lip of fragments Beil. XXV 7, 8, 14 where Eretria would use white paint.

³⁷ On this vase, Cook, , BSA XXXV 167Google Scholar, BSA XLII 149, Young, Hesp. Suppl. II 118, Nottbohm, , JdI 1943, 20 n. 2.Google Scholar

³⁸ The amphora in the Rodin Museum also has no maeander band, CVA Musée Rodin, pl. 8, 7.

³⁹ Appearing thus only on Louvre A517, JdI 1943, 8 figs. 5, 6 and the Eleusis amphora, Wide, , JdI 1899, 194, fig. 57.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Cycladic, Délos Ac24, 29, Ad8; Parian, , CVA Copenhagen II, pl. 69, 2Google Scholar and frequent Attic, CVA Musée Rodin pl. 8, 7, and Boston, Fairbanks pl 21, 262.

⁴¹ Leyden, Brants pl. 7; Eleusis, Wide, , JdI 1899, 194, fig. 57.Google Scholar

⁴² Cook, BSA XXXV 168 n. 1.Google Scholar

⁴³ von Mercklin, , Der Rennwagen in Griechenland I 51 no. 55Google Scholar; 53, on the chariot's construction; 54, on the step behind and cf. Kourouniotes, , AE 1903, 21 f.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Cf. Délos Bb5–8.

⁴⁵ Cf. Saraos, Eilmann, Beil. XXIX 2.

⁴⁶ Hesp. Suppl. II 60.

⁴⁷ Johansen, op. cit. 49 and fig. 27.

⁴⁸ Louvre, Pottier A286, pl. 10; Lindos I, pl. 39, 906.

⁴⁹ Délos, Parian, Ab1, 2, 3, 7 and cf. our Fig. 4. 6.

⁵⁰ For a similar use of white paint in the Cyclades cf. Délos Bb10; Boeotian, Wide, , JdI 1899, 82, Fig. 37Google Scholar; Attic, Würzburg group of Protoattic (BSA XXXV 179)Google Scholar, From the Collections, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek II 115; Laconian, , AM 1927, pl. 11.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Cf. JdI 1888, 337, Fig. 10, 338, Fig. 14; BSA XIV, pl. 8.

⁵² Cf. Attic, Hesp. Suppl. II 58, Fig. 39.

⁵³ Cf Délos, Naxian, Aa44–45. Other examples of identical fabrics have been found in large numbers on Naxos.

⁵⁴ Cf. the similarly elaborate Attic vases, CVA Copenhagen II, pl. 74, 4, Délos XV, pl. 65, 10.

⁵⁵ Op. cit. 23; add Samos, Technau, Beil. VIII 1; Eilmann, Beil. XXVIII 5, 6; CVA Musée Rodin pl. 8, 6. ‘Melian’ stand in Berlin with two birds facing each other on the horse's back, as on a Cycladic sherd in Heidelberg. Cf. Fürtwangler, , Antike Gemmen, pl. 4, 29, 34.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ CVA Cambridge I, pl. 1, 20; Nicole Cat. no. 774, pl. 3.

⁵⁷ On Boeotian geometric, Hampe, , Frühe Griechische Sagenbilder pl. 21Google Scholar; Würzburg 62, Langlotz, pl. 8.

⁵⁸ Cf. Halae, , Hesp. IX 494, no. 14.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ For the crooked wing cf. Åkerström, Der Geometrische Stil in Italien 44, Fig. 14, 18, and the body Würzburg 78, Langlotz, pl. 4.

⁶⁰ This type of pyxis is not found in the Cyclades; on the type, cf. Young, Hesp. Suppl. II 48, 205. The snake motif appears on the body of the pyxis JdI 1899, 215, Fig. 100, but I know of no example of it on the handle.

⁶¹ Cf. Délos Ba14.

⁶² But cf. Attic in Tübingen, Watzinger, pl. 1.

⁶³ Example from Melos CVA Sèvres pl. 11, 12–13.

⁶⁴ Athens, Agora, Hesp. Suppl. II 110, 189; Phaleron, , ADelt 1916, 26, Fig. 8Google Scholar; AJA 1942, 32, grave 29, 6 and 52; Dipylon, , AM 1893, 119Google Scholar (Collignon-Couve, Cat. 130, pl. 8Google Scholar); Eleusis, , AE 1898, pl. 3, 9Google Scholar; Boeotia, Ure, Classification de Céramique, Class i. B1; Argive Heraeum II, pl. 50, and from the islands, Thera II 81; Paros (unpublished); Naxos, , PAE 1937, 119Google Scholar; Samos, Boehlau, 17.

⁶⁵ The commonest Attic and Cycladic type of stamped circle decoration on pithoi seems to be of sixth century date, BSA XLIV 55; and cf. Olynthus XIII 433, no. 1119, pl. 265.

⁶⁶ Eilmann, Fig. 17, 18. Also found on Delos (Délos XV, Rhod. 13, 14); Thera, , Thera II 371Google Scholar, Fig. 80, AM 1903, 166; and Naxos, AM 1929, 155, Fig. 8, 6.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ NM 4155, 3929. Hutton, , AE 1899, 27Google Scholar; Robinson, , AJA 1906, 426Google Scholar; Maximova, Vases Plastiques 105 n. 1, 109 n. 3; Nicole, Cat. 862, 862 bis. In the Museum inventory only NM 4155 and 3929 are mentioned as from Eretria.

⁶⁸ Cf. Payne NC 320 on no. 1263.

⁶⁹ NM 4159, Winter, Antike Terrakotten xx.

⁷⁰ Mentioned by Grace, Archaic Sculpture of Boeotia 23.

⁷¹ Munich, , Mon Piot I 32Google Scholar, Fig. 4 (Winter, op. cit. 5 no. 3); Heidelberg, Neutsch, Die Welt der Griechen, Fig. 11.

⁷² Noticed in BCH 1888, 509 and AE 1892, 217 f. See Pfuhl, MuZ I 125Google Scholar, and Courby, , Vases à Reliefs 66, 81 f.Google Scholar

⁷³ Near the Venetian aqueduct at the foot of the acropolis of Chalcis a considerable site has been disturbed by quarry work (JHS 1944, 90). I have picked up archaic sherds there, and there is a small collection in the Museum of the British School at Athens. The clay seems to be much the same as Eretrian; there are slipped fragments of kraters and skyphoi decorated in a Cycladic rather than an Attic style, and some fragments akin to the ‘Boeotian’ seventh century amphorae. Dr. Dohrn tells me that he has picked up black figure sherds in the same area, and in Chalcis Museum there are two or three small vases from Chalcis which do not seem to be Attic, Boeotian, or distinctively Eretrian; these I know only from photographs (below p. 46 and n. 309).

⁷⁴ A fine series of gold diadems discussed by Reichel, Griechisches Goldrelief, 32, nos. 24–28. The incised figure scenes seem decidedly non-Attic and rather in a ‘Boeotian’ sub-geometric style (see Kunze, reviewing Reichel, , Gnomon 1949, 3, 7Google Scholar).

⁷⁵ PAE 1897, 21; 1898, 98; 1900, 55; AE 1903, 1 ff.

⁷⁶ The cleaning of the large amphorae was rather too thorough in some cases (AM 1903, 191). On the clay of Eretrian vases see above p. 2.

⁷⁷ Dugas, , Céramique des Cyclades 111, 156, 193, 234.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Cf. Pfuhl, MuZ III, fig. 105, and references below, p. 24.

⁷⁹ Thera II 198 ff.; AM 1903, 183 ff., Group J; and see Brock, BSA XLIV 75 f.Google ScholarBuschor, (AM 1929, 142 ff.)Google Scholar called these vases Parian and his suggestion seems to have been accepted by most who have written about Cycladic vases since that date (e.g. Karouzou, JdI 1937, 187 ff.Google Scholar; Brock, BSA XLIV 74 ff.Google Scholar, but contrast Blakeway, BSA XXXIII 183, n. 4Google Scholar). He connects them with an earlier group of vases represented notably by the Délos Aa group and many of the Ae group small vases, and by particularly rich and varied finds of fragments of such vases on Paros (the material, still unpublished, in Paros Museum, and the sites at the Delion, the Zeus-Eileithyia hill and the town acropolis, which yield many, sherds), which make it appear highly probable that these vases were made in Paros. They represent a popular late and sub-geometric fabric which is found wherever excavations in the Cyclades are undertaken, Buschor seeks the transition to the Thera vases in Pfuhl, ‘besondere Gruppe’ (AM 1903, 187 f.)Google Scholar and the similarity in style is certainly striking. But the Thera amphorae have a number of notable peculiarities. Unlike the earlier Parian vases which are found all over the Cyclades (and on Thera) these amphorae are found only on Thera. The Rheneia graves yielded examples of all known Cycladic fabrics of the eighth to the sixth centuries with the notable exceptions of the two series found in such numbers on Thera, i.e. the Theran geometric vases, and the amphorae under discussion. No sherds of these vases have been found on Paros, as Buschor admits (op. cit. 143) although many sites have been excavated and much pottery of the period found. Why Delos should not have favoured vases which were so popular in Thera both in the eighth and seventh centuries is a question I would not care to answer, nor, if the Thera vases are Parian, why it was only these Parian vases and the Theran geometric vases that were scorned. The Parian fabric is easily recognisable: a sandy-orange colour, usually with many small particles of mica, similar to that of Naxos but not so red. The only so-called Parian amphorae from Thera which I have examined have coarse dark red clay, not so very unlike that of the Theran geometric vases if it were better cleaned and refined. The distinction can be noted even within the ‘besondere Gruppe’, the ‘dunkelrot’ clay of J 14 and 15, and the ‘orangerot’ or ‘braunrot’ clay of J 16–21. There are considerable similarities in decoration and shape between the Thera vases and the Parian vases, but hardly more than there is between any two other near contemporary Cycladic fabrics. I think the case for calling the Thera amphorae ‘Parian’ is not proven, and that they are probably as native to the island of Thera as are the geometric vases.

⁸⁰ 1. Louvre CA 824. RA 1899, 5, pl. 3; Pfuhl, MuZ III, fig. 18; Hampe, Frühe Griechische Sagenbilder, V47.

2. Louvre CA 825. RA 1899, 5.

3. Athens NM 12856. Åkerström, Der Geometrische Stil in Italien, 65, Fig. 46; this vase was not found in Eretria as Dr. Åkerström suggests.

4. Hague, CVA pl. 1, 4.

5. Hague, CVA pl. 1, 5.

6. Munich, Sieveking-Hackl, 38, Fig. 51.

7. Kiel, Inv. B. 24. I am indebted to Prof. Kraiker and Miss Sauer for notes and a drawing of this vase. It must be the amphora called Eretrian by Pfuhl, , MuZ I 76.Google Scholar

8. Bonn.

9. Athens Market 1936. Said to have come from Eretria. I am indebted to Dr. Amyx for photographs of this vase.

⁸¹ E.g. Hampe, pl. 19; still found on sixth century bird kylices, e.g. Pfuhl, MuZ III, Fig. 95.

⁸² AM 1903, Beil. XXVI, J2; Thera II 204, fig. 411; Leyden, Brants, pl. 11; note also its appearance on the back of the New York Nessos vase, Pfuhl MuZ III, Fig. 87; JHS 1912, pl. 12, where it is continuous.

⁸³ Triple or quadruple brushes were in regular use in Eretria, and evidence of brushes with four or five members can be found. On the Theran amphora in the Museum of the British School at Athens (JHS 1902, 73—unfortunately the photograph reveals nothing) a quadruple brush was used for the upright wavy lines and the narrow bands of On our D 10 a quintuple brush was used for the wavy lines on the neck and in the narrow body frieze, also for the transverse lines on the top of the rim and on the foot. A sextuple brush was used on the Leyden vase, Brants, pl. 11, JHS 1926, pl. 9, 1.

⁸⁴ But cf. AJA 1942, 31, fig. 11.

⁸⁵ E.g. MA XXII, fig. 145; pl. 34, 2; 36, 1; MA XXIII 818; Åkerström, op. cit. pl. 12, 1; 14, 3; 17, 4, 6; 18, 1–4; 24, 1–3; 27,6; Blakeway, , BSA XXXIII, pl. 28, 26, 47Google Scholar; Vatican, Albizatti, pl. 2, 46; 3, 31; Munich, Sieveking-Hackl, pl. 25, 602, and the unusual plate in Bonn, , AA 1936, 366Google Scholar, fig. 22, which is in style and technique close to our orientalising Group C, cf. the rosettes of C3 and fragments Plate 10.

⁸⁶ Corcyra was perhaps first colonised by Eretria (Dunbabin, The Western Greeks, 16, see, however, Cook, R. M., JHS 1946, 70, n. 32Google Scholar), but finds on the island have been slight (Rodenwaldt, , Kerkyra II 169, 170, 172Google Scholar) and though, no doubt, some of the Waterhouse Collection vases in the British Museum came from Corcyra, none show any peculiarly Eretrian characteristics.

⁸⁷ Dunbabin, op. cit., 5.

⁸⁸ Frühe Griechische Sagenbilder, 20 ff.

⁸⁹ I list examples of one of the larger seventh century groups in note 80 above.

⁹⁰ See note 73 above.

⁹¹ Vulci, , BSA XXXIII, pl. 28, 60Google Scholar, and oenochoe, Munich, Sieveking-Hackl 602, pl. 25.

⁹² Délos Ab 12, 13, Bb 14, 15; and Argive geometric vases in Nauplion Museum.

⁹³ Young, Hesp. Suppl. II, 185; cf. JdI 1943, 15, fig. 8, AJA 1940, pl. 25.

⁹⁴ Cf. B4; Naxian orientalising Délos C9; Ithacan, , BSA XLIII, pl. 20, 329Google Scholar; Theran, , AM 1903, Beil. XXVII 1.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Cf. Attic amphorae in Otago, and the Empedocles Collection, Athens.

⁹⁶ Cf. Protoattic amphora Copenhagen, From the Collections, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, II 115, and Délos Ac1.

⁹⁷ Attic exceptions, an amphora on the Paris market, and one in the Museum of Classical Archaeology, Cambridge.

⁹⁸ The inventory numbers of vases from Eretria are not always correctly quoted by Nicole.

⁹⁹ Theran amphorae, Copenhagen, CVA II, pl. 69, 2Google Scholar; AM 1903, Beil. XXVIII, J7, and Délos Ba2, 15.

¹⁰⁰ E.g. Melian, , JHS 1902, 69.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ Cf. Berlin, CVA I, pl. 40.

¹⁰² For the isolated wavy line between the clusters of upright lines at either side of the central panel cf. AJA 1942, 31, Fig. 11.

¹⁰³ Cf. Delos orientalising C24, 27 b.

¹⁰⁴ The practice is known in Attic vase painting from the late Geometric period, when such a wash was often used for details on the plastic snakes attached to vases.

¹⁰⁵ Cf. subgeometric A2, B5–6.

¹⁰⁶ Cf. Melian, Pfuhl MuZ III, Fig. 109, 110. Protoattic, CVA Berlin I, pl. 23.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ Attic: Cook, , BSA XXXV 199.Google Scholar White lines, AA 1934, 217, Fig. 13; Kübler, Altattische Malerei figs. 11, 16; and his other illustrations point the parallel well. Incised outlines and details to 600: Siren, amphora BSA XXXV, pl. 60Google Scholar, Menidi, , JdI 1899, 110Google Scholar, BSA XXXV, pl. 55e, 54f, AA 1934, 209, 1943, 409, AJA 1936, 544, Berlin CVA I, pll. 4, 24, 36 and Kübler op. cit. The unpublished Melian vases in Mykonos Museum offer closer parallels, and cf. the use of white Délos XV, pl. 5, 33.

¹⁰⁸ Hahland, Corolla Curtius, 125 and references.

¹⁰⁹ E.g. AM 1928, Beil. X. Possibly so on our C2, see below p. 26.

¹¹⁰ Beazley, , Hesp. XIII 52Google Scholar, e.g. nos. 20, 21, 33, 67; the central groups often appear to be holding something. Many were found in the Rheneia Purification grave.

¹¹¹ Johansen, Vases Sicyoniens, 117; Boehlau, op. cit. 111; Nilsson, , JdI 1903, 142.Google ScholarRobinson, lists examples, Olynthus XIII 40 f.Google Scholar

¹¹² Délos C13: Mykonos Museum Inv. IA 558, 400, Johansen op. cit. Fig. 70, BCH 1911, 409, Fig. 67.

¹¹³ Délos Ba 5: the back of JdI 1937, 169, Fig. 2, miniature Naxian.

¹¹⁴ Type β, a Kerameikos krater. Very common in Attic are the large floral interlaces which play the part of the large Eretrian loops, e.g. BSA XXXV, pl. 44 and kraters in the Kerameikos, Kübler, op. cit. fig. 5 and in the plates, nos. 22, 58, and others unpublished.

¹¹⁵ Corinth: Würzburg 756, Langlotz pl. 226; MA XXII 385, fig. 139. East Greece: Larisa am Hermos III, pl. 23, 3; Clara Rhodos VI 507, Fig. 33. Also cf. Crete, , Hesp. XIV, pl. 22, 23Google Scholar; Ithaca, BSA XLIII, pl. 25, 382.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ Boehlau, op. cit. 111, fig. 62, 6.

¹¹⁷ AA 1943, 341; Kübler, op. cit. pl. no. 23.

¹¹⁸ Berlin, , CVA I, pl. 7, 3.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ From these fragments it also appears that the vases had an added small moulding at the junction of body and foot, not found on other Eretrian amphorae.

¹²⁰ BSA XXXV 195. Melian polychromy in Mykonos Museum, and cf. the plates Délos X, pl. 7, 57, 58.

¹²¹ Pfuhl MuZ III, fig. 82.

¹²² Cook, , BSA XXXV 190.Google Scholar Angular head beginning to be rounded, the teeth, the lumpy paws.

¹²³ JHS 1926, pl. 10, Délos C1.

¹²⁴ Eretria was probably still on good terms with Miletus who helped her in the Lelantine War, and who later received help from her in the Ionian revolt of 499.

¹²⁵ Common, of course, to most seventh century fabrics, particularly Transitional Corinthian, but their appearance thus in figured panels is best paralleled by the Nessos vase, Pfuhl MuZ III, fig. 85, 89, the Berlin Harpy bowl, CVA Berlin I, pl. 46, the Vari vases Kübler, op. cit. pl. nos. 76, 77, and cf. no. 62, Hesp. VII 368 ff.

¹²⁶ In Attic till late in the seventh century, Kübler, op. cit. figs. 18, 70, cf. Délos C1 and group D.

¹²⁷ Many East Greek examples. The Cycladic are mainly Melian, e.g. Pfuhl, MuZ III, fig. 108.

¹²⁸ Cambridge, CVA I, pl. 2, 7Google Scholar; Hesp. Suppl. II 129; Piraeus amphora, Pfuhl, MuZ III. fig. 88.

¹²⁹ Euphorbos plate, Pfuhl, MuZ III, fig. 117; common on Attic and Corinthian; on Melian, Mykonos IA 493.

¹³⁰ Very common on the large Melian amphorae.

¹³¹ Profuse on the Boeotian amphora in Bonn, AA 1935, 411Google Scholar, figs. 2–4 (Cook, , BSA XXXV 170, n. 4Google Scholar).

¹³² Hampe, Frühe Griechische Sagenbilder, pl. 37—there surely dated too high.

¹³³ Aegina, Kübler, op. cit. pl. no. 62 (Berlin CVA I, pl. 23); Kerameikos, Kübler ibid. pl. no. 68; Boston pinax, AM 1928, Beil. X.

¹³⁴ Pfuhl MuZ III, fig. 108; Neugebauer, Führer, pl. 16 (and see below p. 26).

¹³⁵ Most recently discussed by Brock, , BSA XLIV 80Google Scholar and Karouzos, , JdI 1937, 191 f.Google ScholarCf. Kontoleon, , AE 1939, 17Google Scholar; Payne, , JHS 1926, 208 ff.Google Scholar; Buschor, AM 1929, 160 ff.Google Scholar; Dugas, Céramique des Cyclades, 255 ff.; and the description of the Mykonos, vases JHS 1902, 46 ff.Google Scholar

¹³⁶ Finds in Delos, , BCH 1911, 408 ff.Google Scholar, Délos X, nos. 1–36, and unpublished; Ikaria, , PAE 1939, 137Google Scholar; Kavalla, , AE 1938, 114Google Scholar, PAE 1937, 61; Lindos, , Lindos I, pl. 46, 991Google Scholar; Naxos, unpublished; Paros, , AM 1917, 85Google Scholar, AA 1923/4, 121 and unpublished; Rheneia, in Mykonos Museum unpublished (cf. JHS 1902, 46 ff., Kunze, Kretische Bronzereliefs, pl. 55, AM 1932, Beil. XXXI, AE 1939, 17); Siphnos, , BSA XLIV 48 f.Google Scholar; Thasos, , Études Thasiennes I 117 ffGoogle Scholar. Sardis, , AJA 1922, 395Google Scholar, and Delphi, Fouilles V, 145, nos. 142–4 (BSA XIX 62, n. 3) seem unlikely.

¹³⁷ Large grave amphorae in Athens, Collingnon-Couve, Cat. nos. 473–477, pl. 21; Conze, Melische Thongefässe; AE 1894, pl. 12–14; JdI 1887, pl. 12; Pfuhl MuZ III, figs. 104–110; JHS 1902, 69. Fragments in Berlin (F301), Neugebauer, Führer pl. 16, JdI 1937, 178–9, figs. 13, 14, and in Bonn, and from excavations in Delos, Ikaria, Kavalla, Lindos, Naxos, Paros, Rheneia, Siphnos, Thasos. See note above.

¹³⁸ Most of the Poulsen-Dugas, ‘Proto-Melian’ fragments (BCH 1911, 381 ff.)Google Scholar seem to me to be either sub-Melian, or imitations of Melian or other Cycladic fabrics: in the same style is CVA Providence I, pl. 4, 2 (Brock, BSA XLIV 79, n. 92Google Scholar) and Boston, Fairbanks, Cat. 318. 2, 319. 8 (from Naucratis). The Delos fragment, BCH 1911, 410, no. 76, Kunze, , AM 1932, pl. 5, 5Google Scholar, and Haspels ABL 158, n. 2, has a lip profile quite unlike that of any Melian vase I have seen, but is quite close to that of the Naxian ‘Heraldic’ amphorae (Delos group Ba and Thera II 212; a fragment from a vase of this type has been found on Naxos by R. V. Nicholls).

¹³⁹ Described by Hopkinson, JHS 1902, 46 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁴⁰ Represented by an amphora in Mykonos with octopus and dolphin in silhouette in the reserved body panel, a hydria with the same device in Mykonos, and a similar larger hydria in Munich.

¹⁴¹ Except perhaps in Naxos, e.g. the Aphrodite vase (JdI 1937, 166 ff.), probably not much earlier than the Apollo Amphora.

¹⁴² Cf. Payne NC pl. 31, 6, 7, 11; 34, 4; 40, 1, 2 and figures ibid. 102–113.

¹⁴³ Kontoleon, AE 1939, 17.Google Scholar Early Corinthian heads NC 100.

¹⁴⁴ Cf. NC. pl. 30, 8.

¹⁴⁵ A Boeotian form: cf. Tanagra, , IG VII, 612, 630Google Scholar (AZ XXXIII, 159, nos. 6, 7), and once in Eretria, , IG XII, 9, 285.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁶ Cf. the Naxian vase JdI 1937, 167, Fig. 1 which is not very much earlier than our vase.

¹⁴⁷ Poulsen, Der Orient 177 for references. Compare as the common Argive geometric motif: Argive Heraeum II 114, pl. LVII 15–18; Tiryns I 146 n. 4, pl. 19, 2; Asine; Tegea, , BCH 1921, 410, fig. 56, no. 324Google Scholar; Corinth, , AJA 1930, 411, Fig. 5Google Scholar (a very Argive piece, cf. AH II, pl. LX 18). In Protoattic, , PennMusJ 1917, 16Google Scholar and RendPontAc 1941, 151; Laconian, , BSA XXXIV 111, pl. 23 f.Google Scholar; a Berlin gold band, Bruns, Schatzkammer der Antike 6, fig. 1.

¹⁴⁸ Beazley, , JHS XLVII 141, ‘an Eretrian daub’.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁹ The sphinx is called a siren.

¹⁵⁰ Cf. Attic, , CVA Berlin I, pl. 5, 1, 34, 2.Google Scholar It is a feature common on the headbands of the female protomes on the necks of Melian hydriae and amphorae.

¹⁵¹ I know this fragment and D7–8 only from photographs in the British School at Athens and sent to me by Dr. Amyx. They were seen in 1936 in the National Museum, in the apotheke where Perachora pottery was stored. They certainly are not from Perachora and can only be strays from the other sherds from Eretria housed nearby. They cannot now be found.

¹⁵² M. Devambez kindly gave me permission to publish this piece. It is mentioned by Burr, in Hesp. II 608, as Boeotian.Google Scholar

¹⁵³ On the type cf. BSA XXXV 170, 217, Hesp. Suppl. II 207, AJA 1942, 49, AA 1934, 211, fig. 9 a late example.

¹⁵⁴ AA 1932, 196. Kerameikos Painter, no. 1 in Beazley's, list, Hesp. XIII 43.Google Scholar Now mended and restored with its low splaying foot and single handle.

¹⁵⁵ A habit often considered barbarous, but one which invariably seems to have ensured the better preservation of the colour. Used much in Boeotia (e.g. the bird kylixes) and cf. Délos C23–27.

¹⁵⁶ Cf. in the subgeometric series B4.

¹⁵⁷ Cf. Mingazzini, Vasi delle collezioni Castellani pl. 17, 4.

¹⁵⁸ E.g. Würzburg 70, Langlotz, pl. 8.

¹⁵⁹ Cf. Délos C24, 27b.

¹⁶⁰ For elaborate seventh century Attic examples of type γ, cf. CVA Berlin I, pl. 3, 5; 14; 15; Hesp. Suppl. II 167. Protocorinthian, Cumae, , MA XXII 385, Fig. 139.Google Scholar Cycladic, Délos Ba5.

¹⁶¹ CVA Athens pl. 11, 7, a krater from the Marathon tumulus containing ashes and bones, thought by Pfuhl pèrhaps to be Eretrian (MuZ I, xi, and cf. Vanderpool, , Hesp. XV 330Google Scholar, and Haspels, ABL 92). In the Athenian Agora are two bowls (P 13270, P 12605) with similar coarse hooks rising from their bases, which may not be Attic; cf. some Boeotian bird kylixes, e.g. in Bonn, , AA 1933, 5, fig. 2.Google Scholar

¹⁶² Délos X, pl. 7, 15. In Attic, Acropolis 351 (Graef, 35 f.) and a tripod kothon in the Empedocles Collection, with rough hooks and framed crosses as filling. Cf. also the Boeotian orientalising lekane. MetrMusStud IV (1932), 18.

¹⁶³ Buschor, , AM 1929, 146Google Scholar, noted Eretrian affinities in this group which he calls ‘Parian’ (see above n. 79). Brock rightly identifies the rest of the group as Naxian, , BSA XLIV 76.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁴ D1, 2, 5: I know these pieces only from photographs sent me by Dr. Amyx; D1 is here illustrated from a new photograph.

¹⁶⁵ D7, 8: on the whereabouts of these fragments see above under Catalogue C7, n. 151.

¹⁶⁶ Payne, NC pl. 28, 9.

¹⁶⁷ Beazley, , Hesp. XIII 52.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁸ MonPiot I, pl. 4; Boehlau, op. cit. pl. 12, 4, 5.

¹⁶⁹ Délos X, pl. 5, 33.

¹⁷⁰ JHS 1929, 160 ff., pll. 9–13.

¹⁷¹ Dugas, , Céramique des Cyclades 199 f.Google Scholar: Délos Ba, Bc2, 16, 17, C21.

¹⁷² Other literature, Pfuhl, , MuZ I 206Google Scholar; Dugas, , Mélanges Holleaux 76.Google Scholar

¹⁷³ See above p. 13 f.

¹⁷⁴ Melian, British School, Athens, amphora, JHS 1902, 69, pl. 5; Berlin F301, JdI 1937, 178f., Fig. 13, 14; Herakles Amphora, Pfuhl, MuZ III, Fig. 109, 110; Mykonos IA 582, and cf. the Apollo Amphora, Pfuhl ibid., Fig. 108, the interpretation of which is uncertain. Naxian, , JdI 1937, 166 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁵ BSA XXXV, pl. 56–8. Though this has not double handles.

¹⁷⁶ JHS 1950, 10. Mr. J. M. Cook kindly gave me permission to examine this vase.

¹⁷⁷ Attic black figure lebetes gamikoi: Smyrna; Menidi frr., JdI 1899, 109, fig. 11–13; British Museum B 298, Richter and Milne, Shapes and Names Fig. 72; Petit Palais, CVA pl. 9, 1–4; Délos X, Heraion 594, pl. 48; Agora, P 7897, AJA 1936, 412Google Scholar, ÖJh 1939, 92, ARV 949; Tübingen, Watzinger, pl. 10; Vlasto Coll., Zervos L'Art en Grèce 143; Athens Market; Kalebdjian fr. by Acheloos Painter, Beazley Panmaler under Catalogue no. 83; Acropolis frr., Graef nos. 1206, 1207, 1209–1211, 1213, 1214, 1220; Eleusis frr., and PAE 1937, 51; Kerameikos, , JdI 1946/1947, 74, nos. 78, 79, pl. 23Google Scholar; perhaps Vienna 698, CVA I, pl. 5, 8, and cf. Swan Group miniatures, Hesp. XIII 55Google Scholar; Collignon-Couve, , Cat. 654, pl. 27Google Scholar; Agora P 7237, Hesp. VI 345, Fig. 9; Acropolis 567, Graef, pl. 25; Louvre MNB 2042, MonPiot IX 177, n. 1.

From the seventh century some of the footed Attic vases from Aegina in CVA Berlin I may be associated here. For red figure lebetes gamikoi see Robinson's, list, AJA 1936, 516 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁷⁸ Richter and Milne, op. cit. 11; Brückner, , AM 1907, 98.Google Scholar I think the use of the name on the strength of these inscriptions only is not justified. A case could be made for calling it a type of loutrophoros, see below n. 192.

¹⁷⁹ Refs. by Robinson, op. cit. 507, n. 1.

¹⁸⁰ ARV 767, no. 15, Painter, Marlay, JHS XLI, pl. 6Google Scholar; Agora P 15259.

¹⁸¹ Berlin 3373, JdI 1900, pl. 2.

¹⁸² ARV 726, no. 25, Eretria Painter, FR pl. 57, 3.

¹⁸³ ARV 726, no. 27, Painter, Eretria, AM 1907, 95.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁴ ARV 706, no. 27, Painter, Naples, AM 1907, 98, n. 2.Google Scholar

¹⁸⁵ ARV 552, no. 30, Amymone Painter; ARV 355, no. 4, Mykonos Painter.

¹⁸⁶ ARV 795, no. 1, Painter of Athens 1454, AM 1907, pl. 5, 2.

¹⁸⁷ CVA pl. 9, 1–4; see further on the connection of these two scenes, below, n. 215.

¹⁸⁸ E.g. Smyrna; and cf. Attic hydria lips.

¹⁸⁹ The feet of the Eretrian vases are not pierced at the top as are many Attic examples.

¹⁹⁰ Délos X, pl. 48; Richter and Milne, op. cit. Fig. 72; and a new Acropolis sherd in Athens of the first half of the sixth century. A palmette is in this position on Louvre MNB 2042, see above n. 177.

¹⁹¹ JdI 1946/7, pl. 23, 78, 79.

¹⁹² Hesychius and others say that loutrophoroi stand above the graves of unmarried people. Judging by the number of loutrophoroi, terracotta, marble and in relief, found in Attic cemeteries the proportion of the population who died unmarried might seem a little strange. So-called lebetes gamikoi, found in tombs and with scenes of mourning upon them, might better qualify for the name loutrophoros, which is also associated with marriage by Hesychius and others. But further enquiry into this problem is beyond the scope of this study.

¹⁹³ Cf. Thiersch, Tyrrhenische Amphoren 113, 115.

¹⁹⁴ Rare in Attic but cf. Louvre F 51, BSA XXXII, 12, no. 2, pl. 5, 2.

¹⁹⁵ On the Herakles Amphora, and Gorgon Amphora (p. 40, no. 3).

¹⁹⁶ Eretrian indecision, subgeometric A1 (Fig. 19), orientalising C6 (Plate 6) and Group D animals (Plate 8).

¹⁹⁷ Note also that the body scene is not accurately centred, but on the right extends under the handles.

¹⁹⁸ Amyx, , AJA 1941, 69.Google Scholar

¹⁹⁹ Cf. JHS 1931, pl. 13. Rumpf, Sakonides, pl. 26b.

²⁰⁰ Cf. CVA Brussels III, pl. 28, 15.

²⁰¹ Acr. 610, Hesp. IV 216; Acr. 627, Graef pl. 39.

²⁰² Cf. Rumpf, Sakonides, pl. 4, 5, 6.

²⁰³ Hesp. VIII 256, fig. 12.

²⁰⁴ From the Vari vases (e.g. Kübler, Altattische Malerei pl. no. 76), to the Acropolis dinos 606, Graef pl. 31 and the baby siren Fouilles de Delphes, V 156, Fig. 646.

²⁰⁵ Especially on work of the Siren Painter (Dohrn, , Die schwarzfigurigen etruskischen Vasen 151 ff.Google Scholar), e.g. Munich, Sieveking-Hackl nos. 842 (202), 845 (218a), 851 (227), 895 (214), 898 (215), 909 (224)—Dohrn's catalogue numbers are in brackets; Beazley calls this painter the Micali Painter, La Raccolta Benedetto Guglielmi 77 ff.

²⁰⁶ Again often on work of the Siren Painter, cf. Munich examples, Sieveking-Hackl 845 (218a), 853 (237), 895 (214), 898 (215), 909 (224) (Dohrn, op. cit. numbers in brackets), and ‘Pontic’ vases, Ducati, Pontische Vasen pl. 5, 14, 23 (Dohrn nos. 115, 72, 104).

²⁰⁷ Chalcidian, Rumpf, CV, pll. 90, 116, 141; pseudo-Chalcidian CV pll. 197, 198, 207, 214, 217, 220 and figs. 12, 15.

²⁰⁸ References in Dohrn, op. cit. 108 f., n. 100; cf. Acr. 471, Graef pl. 18, the only good Attic parallel. Attic blooms e.g. Rumpf, Sakonides, pl 17a, Brit. Mus. CVA III, pl. 23, 2. For occasional dot rosettes and lines of dots in the field in Attic as on this vase, cf. Rumpf Sakonides, pl. 2, 5gh, 6, 9a, AJA 1944, 253, Fig. 2.

²⁰⁹ Cf. Louvre E 810, Pottier pl. 57 (Zahn thought this vase Eretrian, , PhW 1902, 1261Google Scholar), and Thiersch, Tyrrhenische Vasen 83.

²¹⁰ Smith Hearst Hydria, 246 and n. 45.

²¹¹ Harrison, , JHS 1886, 196 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pfuhl, MuZ I 326Google Scholar; Dugas, , Antiquité Classique VI 6Google Scholar; Schulze, , Das Paris-Urteil, Diss. Würzburg 1921Google Scholar; latest on these scenes is Wüst, in RE, s.v. ‘Paris’, where our vase (his no. 1a) is described as ‘Altatt. Amphora d.spät. Phaleronstils’; to his list add, Type A, Mykonos KZ 1125; Type B, Mykonos KZ 1489; Acr. 725, Rumpf, Sakonides pl. 17b; Payne NC 135, Fig. 48; CVA Louvre VIII, pl. 77, 12, Beazley, JHS 1933, 310Google Scholar; Louvre CA 616 and another tripod pyxis; Corolla Curtius pl. 51, 1; MA I 906; CVA Fogg Museum, pl. 9, 1; CVA Brussels III, pl. 22, 1; Type C, CVA Petit Palais, pl. 9, 1–4; CVA Gallatin Coll., pl. 37, 2; CVA Brussels III, pl. 26, 2; and Louvre F 43, New York GR 349 (BSA XXXII 14, no. 42), and caricature, Watzinger, Tübingen, pl. 15 (Haspels ABL 117).

²¹² Rumpf, CV 108, pl. 114, 150 and pl. 134.Google Scholar He waits patiently on a black-figure vase in Mykonos, KZ 1125, which may not be Attic.

²¹³ CVA Villa Giulia I, pl. 4, 3.

²¹⁴ Gerhard AV, pl. 71. Wreaths are commonly carried, cf. Louvre F 13, Pottier Cat. pl. 64; F 31, ibid. pl. 66.

²¹⁵ On the lebes gamikos in the Petit Palais (above n. 177), and on two tripod pyxides in the Louvre. On Gerhard AV pl. 72, 171 and Munich 1392, CVA Munich I, pl. 26, the marriage scene is of a warrior leading away his bride by her mantle (Haspels, , BCH 1930, 437Google Scholar, Type A; Dugas, , BCH 1936, 159 ff.Google Scholar). As the dispute between the goddesses which occasioned the Judgement was initiated by Eris while they were attending the wedding of Peleus and Thetis, and as that dispute directly caused the Trojan War, the connection, with the Judgement, of the wedding of Peleus and Thetis, or of the warrior (Menelaus?) leading away his bride (Helen?) is easily understood.

²¹⁶ Haspels, , BCH 1930, 431 ff.Google Scholar; Payne NC 114, nn. 3, 4, 5.

²¹⁷ Acr. 2203, Graef pl. 93 seems to be of a later stage in the ceremony when the bride is being led to her nuptial bed.

²¹⁸ Laurent, op. cit., notices only one siren; ADelt 1890, 50, no. 1 mentions only birds. Cf. Brit. Mus. CVA III, pl. 24, 1, and in Corinthian, Payne NC Cat. no. 1197. Similar baby sirens over a warrior's chariot in Brit. Mus. CVA III, pl. 38, Louvre, CVA, III pl. 19.Google Scholar On their significance see Buschor, Die Musen des Jenseits, 27 ff.

²¹⁹ Peleus and Thetis on our Peleus Amphora (Plate 9) and on Florence 3790. Helen and Menelaos on the Smyrna lebes gamikos (above, p. 31). Kadmos and Harmonia on Louvre CA 1961, Wiener Vorlegeblätter C, pl. 7, 3, Haspels ABL 239. Herakles and Hebe, on Goluchow, pyxis, CVA Poland I, pl. 16, 1Google Scholar; on Gerhard AV pl. 325; on Médailles, Cabinet des, AZ 1866, pl. 209Google Scholar; on New York 14. 105. 10, BullMetrMus 1915, 123, Fig. 2: on such scenes, cf. Luce, , Philadelphia Mus. Journal 1916, 269–276Google Scholar, where others are doubtfully identified.

²²⁰ When two women with torches are present we may suppose that both mothers are intended, one bidding farewell, the other greeting the bridal couple on arrival at their new home; cf. Acr. 2195, Graef pl. 95; Munich 1406, CVA pl. 38; CVA Brussels II, pl. 57 (R 310).

²²¹ Zeus and Hera on a pyxis in the Vlasto Collection, Haspels ABL, 43 n. 1.

²²² On the Goluchow, pyxis CVA Poland I, pl. 16, 1.Google Scholar

²²³ Brit. Mus. CVA, pl. 38; Munich no. 432 in Jahn, Beschreibung; probably on Florence 3790 with Amphitrite.

²²⁴ On Berlin 1998, Gerhard AV pl. 326.

²²⁵ Florence 3790, Heydemann 88: a key piece on which the names of guest deities are inscribed; no photograph has been published.

²²⁶ On the Peleus Amphora (Plate 9) they are identified by inscriptions. The famous pedimental group from the Apollo temple at Eretria may be of Peleus, and Thetis, , AD III, pll. 27, 28.Google ScholarCf. Casson, , Journ. Intern. Archéol. Numism. XX, 1920–1921, 89 ff.Google Scholar

²²⁷ With her husband on Florence 3790, see above n. 225.

²²⁸ In Eur. Troades 323 Kassandra calls on Hekate. In Apoll. Rhod. IV 808 it is Hera who carries the σέλας νυμφίδιον for Thetis' marriage. Strangely Athena in aegis and helmet bears torches on CVA Poland I, pl. 16, 1.

²²⁹ Payne NC nos. 1188, 1452. Attic, Louvre, CVA VI, pl. 62Google Scholar, a Louvre tripod-pyxis, and Acr. 610, Hesp. IV 216.

²³⁰ Athens NM Apotheke. H. of largest fragment 0·155 m. The glaze has fired red and the surface of the background is dull. Traces of red in a broad band on the smaller fragment; white lines on the tail of the bird or siren, and white dots on the rosette in the field.

²³¹ Cf. AJA 1944, 253, Fig. 2 and a krater in Naples, , MA XXII, pl. 56, 5.Google Scholar

²³² The amphora inscribed ᾿Εχσεκὶας ὲποὶεοε, Στεσὶας καλὸς which fits uneasily into the E Group, Beazley, BSA, XXXII 3, no. 31Google Scholar, by Technau, ‘Maler der Athena-Geburt’, Exekias 18, n. 46, 23 no. 6.Google Scholar

²³³ Nearest rival the Tyrrhenian amphora Louvre, E851, CVA I, pl. 5, 5, 13Google Scholar; 7, 4, a scene like ours in many details; see below n. 249.

²³⁴ Cf. the Wedding Amphora and Gorgon Amphora (p. 40: no. 3).

²³⁵ Cf. the Gorgon Hydria and Amphora (p. 40: nos. 2, 3).

²³⁶ Cf. the Gorgon Hydria (p. 40: no. 2), Mykonos and Tanagra amphorae, and Delos plate, below pp. 45–46, Plate 14.

²³⁷ E.g. Würzburg 248, Langlotz, pl. 80, 84.

²³⁸ E.g. Technau, Exekias, pl. 30.

²³⁹ On sirens in this position cf. Jacobsthal, Orn. gr. Vasen, 30, n. 45.

²⁴⁰ See above p. 33.

²⁴¹ Rumpf CV pl. 63, cf. pl. 82.

²⁴² Two lotuses: Attic, , AJA 1944, 253Google Scholar, Fig. 3 (this piece is an uneasy addition to the Sakonidean vases: the palmette device behind the sirens' wings is most uncommon at this period—it appears on a vase in Mykonos), Fouilles de Delphes, V 144, Fig. 596 (upside down: a siren), Thiersch, op. cit. 85, fig. 28; Boeotian, , Ure, , Sixth and Fifth Cent. Pottery from Rhilsona, pl. 13, 49. 257Google Scholar; Chalcidian, Rumpf CV, pl. 60: Corinthian, Payne NC 145.

²⁴³ See above, p. 33.

²⁴⁴ See above, p. 33.

²⁴⁵ Pseudo-Chalcidian, Rumpf, CV pl. 209, 213, 220; Chalcidian, Smith, Origin of Chalcidian Ware pl. 20, 21, Rumpf CV pl. 160, 162; Attic, e.g. Acr. 464, Graef pl. 16, common as handle ornament, cf. Jacobsthal Orn. gr. Vosen 23 ff., 111 ff.

²⁴⁶ Cf. subgeometric B2 (Plate 4).

²⁴⁷ P. 45.

²⁴⁸ Latest literature, Brommer, Marburger Winckelmannprogramm 1949, to which add Attic, CVA San Francisco I pl. 13, Agora P 8964, Agora P 20029, Mykonos KZ n 34. On Corinthian types cf. Amandry, , MonPiot XL 23 ff.Google Scholar, to which add Bonn fr. AA 1936, 362 and Perachora fragment, Hopper, , BSA XLIV 219.Google Scholar

²⁴⁹ Holding a branch on the Tyrrhenian amphora Louvre CVA I, pl. 5, 5, 13; 7, 4, where Hermes is also present.

²⁵⁰ CVA, Copenhagen III, pl. 112.

²⁵¹ The forked tail and twist at the base of each neck distinguish the best Hydrai. Contrast the weakly creature on the Diosphos Painter's lekythos, Perrot-Chipiez X 689, 690.

²⁵² Frontal chariot of typical Attic type, Hafner, Viergespann in Vorderansicht 5, no. 30.

²⁵³ He wears a tall conical cap, or possibly a turban as there appears to be a fold. Cf. Louvre, CVA II, pl. 9Google Scholar, Rumpf, Sakonides pl. 12c, the archer from the Aegina pediment, Welter, Aigina 74, fig. 64, and Beazley, Lewes House Gems, 83.

²⁵⁴ The charioteer wears a panther skin on the Sparta relief pithos, Artemis Orthia, pl. 16. Cf. the presumably engraved decoration Hesp. XV, pl. 18, and the Aristion stele. Iolaos' back is turned to us; note the position of the sheath and the sword.

²⁵⁵ See above p. 35.

²⁵⁶ AE 1901, 178. I have not seen the complete vase as the foot had not yet been unpacked from its place of wartime storage when I left Athens. Mrs. Karouzou kindly sent me the photographs, which I publish here (Plate 9), confirming my assumption.

Amyx had noted that the animals on the foot were painted by the same hand as those on the lid of the Peleus Amphora. The knob on the lid is missing. For the lozenge attachment between the double handles see above p. 31, n. 190.

²⁵⁷ E.g. AE 1937, 16, fig. 4. JHS 1931, pl. 13.

²⁵⁸ But cf. Louvre, F 53, CVA III pl. 19.Google Scholar

²⁵⁹ Cf. Painter, Gorgon, AJA 1938, 446, fig. 1Google Scholar, AJA 1933, 292, fig. 1, frr. in Eleusis.

²⁶⁰ So the vase should be dated soon after the change from the ‘Hearstian’ type of drapery (Smith, Hearst Hydria 245 ff.) on this type of figure.

²⁶¹ But cf. Louvre F 31, Pottier pl. 66.

²⁶² But cf. IG XII 9. 285. Kourouniotes on the Eretrian, alphabet AE 1897, 155.Google Scholar

²⁶³ Strabo X 449.

²⁶⁴ Herodotos I 62; Aristotle Ἀθπολ. 15; Adcock, CQ XVIII 174 ff.Google Scholar

²⁶⁵ As on the Petit Palais lebes gamikos CVA pl. 9, 1–4; Brit. Mus. CVA III, pl. 38; Agora P 2612; Vienna 698, CVA I, pl. 5, 8; Gerhard AV pl. 313; from Selinus, , MA XXXII, pl. 90, 3Google Scholar; in red figure, Ausonia IX 65.

²⁶⁶ On ‘lebetes gamikoi’ see above p. 30 f.

²⁶⁷ Deubner, JdI 1900, 144 ff.Google Scholar

²⁶⁸ See references in next note, as they are always carried in scenes in which λίκνα appear.

²⁶⁹ Harrison, , JHS 1903, 315 f.Google Scholar, Minto, , Ausonia IX 68.Google Scholar On Brit. Mus. CVA III, pll. 31, 34; Louvre, CVA VI, pl. 64, 7, 65Google Scholar; Naples, Heydemann 2498, Ausonia IV 134; Italy, Private Coll., Ausonia IV 130, fig. 1,3; Boston, vase figured in Loeb ed. of Athenaeus, vol. V (an amphora also is being carried in the procession).

²⁷⁰ In this section I am indebted to Dr. D. A. Amyx for advice and information (I was not able to study his unpublished dissertation on Eretrian black figure for the University of California before writing the present study), and to Dr. T. Dohrn for some photographs.

²⁷¹ See further below p. 45. The latest work on Eretrian black figure is by Amyx, , AJA 1941, 64 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁷² Where the composition of silen and doe is compared with that of Herakles and Nessos on the Athens Nessos vase, Pfuhl, MuZ III, fig. 85.

²⁷³ I think our creature is a doe. For the silen's behaviour compare satyrs with mules in Athenian scenes of the Return of Hephaistos and CVA Villa Giulia III, pl. 50, 4.

²⁷⁴ As on Eretrian grave amphorae and ‘Andrian’ vases; see below p. 44 f.

²⁷⁵ Rumpf, Sakonides no. 44, pll. 29–31, and cf. the Chalcidian stag Rumpf, CV no. 112, pl. 122.

²⁷⁶ Gerhard, AV pl. 52. Met in the Peloponnese, Brommer op. cit., n. 26, nos. 12–14. Common on Ionian gems, Furtwängler, Antike Gemmen pl. 6, 53; 8, 4, 24; 15, 17. An Etruscan parallel, BullMetrMus 1925, 301 (Beazley, Etruscan Vase Painting 11, Ivy-leaf Group). The head is a wilder version of the Lydos satyr head MetrMusStud IV 170, pl. 1.

^276a Smith, Origin of Chalcidian Ware, 134 f.

²⁷⁷ AM 1884, 354. Seltman, , Athens, Its History and Coinage 146, pl. 1, 2, A 9–13, 19–22Google Scholar where they are identified as of an Athenian mint (op. cit. 24 f.). But on Eretrian fondness for the horse see Wallace, , Hesp. 1947, 128 fGoogle Scholar, and references there.

²⁷⁸ Exceptions in the Kerameikos, , JdI 1946, 7, pl. 2, 7Google Scholar, and in the Agora, P 12653. Also a trick of the Painter, Amasis, JHS 1931, 269.Google Scholar

²⁷⁹ The nearest in Attic are on the Swan Group e.g. CVA Petit Palais, pl. 6; Corinthian are usually conical; Chalcidian are distinctive, Rumpf, CV pll. 32, 127, Smith, Origin of Chalcidian Ware 140.

²⁸⁰ Cf. Boeotian, Ure, Sixth and Fifth Cent. Pottery from Rhitsona, pl. 12, 80. 8.

²⁸¹ Cf. Louvre, CVA III, pl. 20Google Scholar, where he holds a sword, not a stone as on our fragment.

²⁸² Berlin 1999, Beazley, BSR XI 12, no. 22Google Scholar; Haspels, ABL 217, no. 21.

²⁸³ Cf. examples listed and illustrated in AM 1928, 40 ff., Beil. 12–14.

²⁸⁴ CV ix. I have seen only the Cologne vase which seems quite Chalcidian in fabric.

²⁸⁵ Langlotz, op. cit., and Kraiker, (Gnomon 1934, 244)Google Scholar call it Chalcidian. Amyx (op. cit. 64, n. 4) declares it Attic.

²⁸⁶ Mr. P. E. Corbett kindly drew my attention to this vase which is not published.

²⁸⁷ E.g. Rumpf, Sakonides, pl. 6 (cf. Würzburg and British Museum examples with lids).

²⁸⁸ Omitted.

²⁸⁹ Height of letters in (a) about 0·017 m., in (b) about 0·019 m. I am deeply indebted to Miss L. H. Jeffery for her comments on these inscriptions.

²⁹⁰ AE 1896, 244 ff. It is interesting to note that this type of skyphos has been connected with Eretria by Amyx, cf. Bonn, AA 1935, 471Google Scholar, no. 37, Mannheim Cg 149.

²⁹¹ Kretschmer, Gr. Vaseninschriften, 79. The -εια would normally be -εα in Attic, but there are exceptions, Kretschmer, op. cit. 130. The doubling of the λ, as in (a), occurs in Attic only on the later vase inscriptions.

²⁹² E.g. Acr. 474, Graef pl. 17 and cf. the text to Acr. 472.

²⁹³ Certainly Attic though not necessarily Athenian. Called Eretrian by Thiersch, Tyrrhenische Amphoren 92, n. 3.

²⁹⁴ Rumpf, CV 44 f.

²⁹⁵ Cf. pp. 33, 37, 38, 40, 42 above.

²⁹⁶ Cf. p. 17–18 above.

²⁹⁷ References in Amyx, , AJA 1941, 69, n. 38.Google Scholar

²⁹⁸ Louvre E 735 is interesting. Zahn called it Chalcidian. See also Pfuhl, , MuZ I 206Google Scholar, Rumpf, AM 1921, 175Google Scholar, CV 44 f., Smith, Origin of Chalcidian Ware 119, n. 82.

²⁹⁹ Graef pl. 18.

³⁰⁰ Graef pl. 21, Pfuhl, , MuZ I 130.Google ScholarCf. our D 10 (Plate 8).

³⁰¹ Graef pl. 98.

³⁰² Note especially Acr. 470, 2388, 2391, 2421. Amyx, (AJA 1941, 69, n. 38)Google Scholar mentions also Acr. 1344: he also suggests, ibid., Boston 13. 75 (Smith, Origin of Chalcidian Ware 106, n. 49) which is Attic, and Mannheim Cg 129 which may be Boeotian (cf. Bonn, , AA 1935, 471Google Scholar, no. 37, AE 1896, 244 ff.).

³⁰³ Full literature by Smith in CVA California Univ., 23. Four examples are known, one in California, one in New Haven and two in Heidelberg (two other vases in Heidelberg from Andros are Boeotian, , AA 1936, 398, fig. 55Google Scholar). On the connection of Andros with Eretria, see Strabo X 448, CAH III 617, Sauciuc, Andros 57.

³⁰⁴ AJA 1941, 69, n. 36; on the Delos plate ibid., 68.

³⁰⁵ Mr. Kontoleon kindly gave me permission to publish this vase.

³⁰⁶ Cf. Smith, ibid., 106, n. 49. Restored height 0·26 m.; no part of the foot is preserved. Red: alternate buds, base of neck, panthers' ribs, sirens' fillets, middle petal of palmette between the sirens, three bands on the body. White: lotus sepals, sirens' faces, necks and dots on wings, panthers' bellies and faces. Very badly thrown. The clay seems darker and redder than Attic and the glaze has little lustre.

³⁰⁷ The photograph is by Prof. H. R. W. Smith.

³⁰⁸ Feytmans, , L'Antiquité Classique XVII 187Google Scholar, Type ‘E’, pl. 2.

³⁰⁹ I know these vases only from photographs. Haspels, in ABL mentions four as Attic, Museum Inv. 562, 563, 567, 569. Kraiker speaks of one as Chalcidian, (Gnomon 1934, 244, n. 2)Google Scholar, which Amyx, (AJA 1941, 64, n. 4)CrossRefGoogle Scholar assumes to be Inv. 569. There is, however, another lekythos in Chalcis bearing on the shoulder unlinked buds (alternate ones showing white sepals) and on the body an ill-drawn panther, which may be the one referred to by Kraiker. There is also an unusual jug with red and black zig-zag decoration in the body zone. On other finds from Chalcis see above n. 73.

³¹⁰ Of the inventoried lekythoi in the National Museum at Athens 255 are from Eretria.

³¹¹ Ure, Sixth and Fifth Cent. Pottery From Rhitsona, pl. 13, 51. 229; 16, 80. 256, BSA XIV, pl. 9 f.; cf. kylix AE 1915, 123, fig. 12 and bowl AA 1933, 18, fig. 15. On the possible connections between Eretria and Rhitsona, cf. BSA XIV 236 ff.Google Scholar, JHS XXIX 332.

³¹² Délos X, nos. 562, 570, pl. 42, no. 563, pl. 43, and cf. the plate no. 630, pl. 51.

³¹³ Above, n. 309.

³¹⁴ On archaic groups see above pp. 18 ff.

³¹⁵ JHS XIV 184 f., and n. 36.

³¹⁶ Prof. Wallace has kindly told me of some of the interesting results of pursuing this line of study. If, after the sack of Eretria and deportation of its people by the Persians (Herodotus VI 101) the city was soon resettled from Attica, as the finds of pottery in Eretria seem to suggest, and if, say, an Athens-trained Achilles Painter and others worked regularly for potters in Eretria, and probably export their work also, is their painting then Athenian or Eretrian?

³¹⁷ Ure, Classification de Céramique 17, BSA XLI 27 f.