GREEK GEOMETRIC POTTERY A survey of ten local styles and their chronology UPDATED SECOND EDITION
J.N. COLDSTREAM
BRISTOL PHOENIX
PRESS
.v-
Aeqina
o~
E
P
R
U
(;)
S
..
..
"",Ci
B
Kaki Thalassa
Aphaia
Aegina
cyra
Corcyra
{Jckyros lrWSkyros
ATTICA & ARGOLlD MILES 10 I
psara~
~
~SardiS
D
J
A
I A
Andros
~
lagora
sam~s
Amonakliou
C
Tenos
c!l Kard~tn~8dO 0 0
xobourgo
~Rhene~~
Heraion
4~ J:r
Delo.
C
y
C
E
Df(}lion
Naxia
D
Ps
Siphnos~Kastro dl>~ 11
\j
LAD
V
Paros
'WQO'~ t?~ II 1.1elos
S 0
1>
~"
~
~axos
I A
o Didymc:;:ya lasos
Dirmil o
Asa~ 0
Halicamassus
Calym "\!. calYmnos~ Cs Meropis
ff ," d/
~0c.
CosAstypalaia
I
~
,Q
"
~
DODE~NESE
Camir
KatoLew:kj
.. " ....
GREECE and the AEGEAN Map showing the sites where Geometric Pottery has been found Miles
190
~
~
£3
Kythera~
5,0
---------....
CRETE
15 ,
20 ,
GREEK GEOMETRIC POTTERY A survey of ten local styles and their chronology 'Geometric' is the term describing the linear decoration of fine pottery made by the Greeks from c. 900 to 700 E.C., a period which saw the dawn of Hellenic civilization. Geometric pottery - a leading art of its day - is of special importance for the historians of early Greece, being plentiful enough to establish a workable chronology for a period when there are no contemporary written documents. The main object of this book is a comprehensive study of ten local styles, and their relations with one another. This is followed by an attempt to fix their absolute chronology, in the light of the evidence. A final chapter outlines the importance of Geometric pottery for ancient historians. For the 2008 second edition, the author has added a Supplement dealing with discoveries made since the publication of his original text in 1968.
"Coldstream's study belongs to the handful qf works in classical archaeology that can only be described asfundamental ..." The Art Bulletin, 1970 "Greek Geometric Pottery will remain fir the foreseeable future the indispensable tool qf all archaeologists, as well as qf historians and art-historians, seeking a firm foundation on which to reconstruct the springtime of Classical Greece." Times Literary Supplement, 1969
"Coldstream has written a monumental study ... destined to become the classic in the field. This fir several reasons: intelligence of planning, authority qf judgement, lucidity qf prose style, sensitivity qf observation." Classical Journal, 1970
J.N. ColdstreaD1 is a Fellow of the British Academy and Emeritus Professor of Classical Archaeology at University College London and taught on the Early Iron Age in Greece for many years. His other major work, Geometric Greece, originally published in 1975, was reissued in 2003.
TO THE MEMORY OF MY FATHER
Cover illustration: Attic MG I krater, exported to Lefkandi in Euboea. First published in 1968 by Methuen & Co. Ltd. This second edition published in 2008 by Bristol Phoenix Press an imprint of The Exeter Press Reed Hall, Streatham Drive Exeter, Devon, E)4 4QR
UK Reprinted 2009
ioano.exeterpress.co.uk
© J.N. Coldstream, 1968; supplement material, 2008. The right of J.N. Coldstream to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Acts 1988.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 978
I
904675 81 5
New material typeset by Carnegie Book Production, Lancaster. Printed in Great Britain by Short Run Press Ltd, Exeter.
jJ
fJ
F se
~}~:,~p~o~~,~~,~~ged
fcrests ccntrclled sour ce s and reryr.lcdwood or fibre
\l~''l~'~~rJ>t(s~:\~~''~S~'~~~IOnO(t,i17
Contents
List if plates Acknowledgements Abbreviations Preface to the second edition (2008) 1.
2.
3. 4. 5. 6.
7. 8. 9. ro, 11.
12.
13. 14.
page
XXXI
xxxv xli
Introduction Attic Geometric Corinthian Geometric Argive Geometric Protogeometric survivals in Thessaly, Skyros, Euboea and the Cyclades Thessalian Geometric Cycladic and Euboean Geometric Boeotian Geometric Laconian Geometric West Greek Geometric Cretan Geometric East Greek Geometric Absolute Chronology Historical Conclusions
Bibliography, exclusive if site publications Glossary if linear motifi Site Index Index if collections Supplement
(2008)
8
91 II2
148 158 164 19 6 212 220
233 262
30 2 33 2 39 1 395 399 43 1
Text Bibliography Site Index
General Index
vu -! I
IX
List of Plates
Plate no.
Local style
Date
Painteror Workshop
Height incm*
Shape
40
Provenance context
Agora, Gr. D.16:2
la
Attic
EGI
Shoulder-handled amphora
Ib
Attic
EGI
Kantharos
9·9
Agora, Gr. D.16:2
IC
Attic
EGI
Pedestalled kantharos
8·6
Agora, Gr. D.16:2
Id
Attic
EGI
Oinochoe
24·7
Agora, Gr. D.16:2
le
Attic
EGI
Lekythos-oinochoe
16·9
Agora, Gr. D.16:2
If
Attic
EGI
Pointed pyxis
14·4
Agora, Gr. D.16:2
Ig
Attic
EGI
Globular pyxis
13
Agora, Gr. D.16:2
Ih
Attic
EGI
Globular pyxis
11
Agora, Gr. D.16:2
rj
Attic
EGI
Skyphos
Ik
Attic
EGI
I1
Attic
EGI
Neck-handled amphora (detail) Neck-handled amphora
rm
Attic
EGI
Oinochoe
In
Attic
EGI
Cup
8·6
Agora, Gr. D.16:2
52
Agora, Gr.D.16:4
24·4
Agora, Gr. D.16:4
5. 6
Agora, Gr. D.16:4
Publication
Hesperia 18, 275ff., pis. 66-72 Hesperia 18, 275ff., pis. 66-72 Hesperia 18, 275ff., pis. 66-72 Hesperia 18, 275ff., pis. 66-72 Hesperia 18, 275ff., pis. 66-72 Hesperia 18, 275ff., pis. 66-72 Hesperia 18, 275ff., pis. 66-72 Hesperia 18, 275ff., pis. 66-72 Hesperia 18, 275ff., pis. 66-72 -
Hesperia 21, 279ff., pis. 73-5 Hesperia 21, 279ff., pis. 73-5 Hesperia 21, 279ff., pis. 73-5
Museum inu. no.
&f.
Agora P 19228
11-13
Agora P 19246
11-13
Agora P 19241
11-13
Agora P 19230
11-13
Agora P 1923 1
11-13
Agora P 19239
11-13
Agora P 19240
11-13
Agora P 19229
11-13
Agora P 19242
11-13
Athens 18045 13 Agora P 20 177
11-13
Agora P 20178
11-13
Agora P 20181
11-13
I
*exclusive oflids or high handles
IX
x .
LIST OF PLATES
Plate no. 10
Local style Attic
Date EGI
LIST OF PLATES •
Painteror Workslwp
Shape Kantharos
Height incm*
Prooenance context
8'7
Agora, Gr. D.16:4
Ip
Attic
EGI
Kantharos
12'4
Agora, Gr. D.16:4
2a
Attic
EGII
37'5
2b
Attic
EGII
Shoulder-handled amphora Skyphos
2C
Attic
EGII
Cup
2d
Attic
EGII
Oinochoe
2S'7
2e
Attic
EGII
Kantharos
8
2f
Attic
EGII
38'5
2g
Attic
EGII
Neck-handled amphora Oinochoe
2h
Attic
EGII
72'2
3a
Attic
MGI
46. 6
3b
Attic
MGI
Neck-handled amphora Neck-handled amphora Skyphos
3c
Attic
MGI
Oinochoe
3°'5
3d
Attic
MGI
59
3e
Attic
MGI
Neck-handled amphora Skyphos
3f
Attic
MGI
Flat pyxis
Publication Hesperia 21, 279 ff., pis. 73-5 Hesperia 21, 279 ff., pis. 73-5 K.V.I,220, pI. 42 K.V.I,220, pl. 89 K.V.I,261, pI. 105 K, v, 1,238, pI. 74 K.V.I,261, pI. 84 K.V.I;261, pI. 25 K.V.I,261, pI. 79 K. v. 1,260, pI. 26 K. v. 1,233, pl. 29 K. v. 1,233, pI. 89 K. v. 1,233, pI. 72 K. v, 1,233, pl. 29 K. v. 1,233, pl. 89 K. v. 1,222, pl. 52 K.V.I,222, pl. 52 K.V.I,222, pI. 52 K. v. 1,237, pl. 93 K. v. 1,237, pl. 92 EA 1898, 114, pl, 3, 7
5 1'S
MGI
Shoulder-handled amphora Lekythos-oinochoe
Kerameikos, Gr.14 Kerameikos, Gr.14 Kerameikos, Gr·74 Kerameikos, Gr·43 Kerameikos, Gr·74 Kerameikos, Gr·74 Kerameikos, Gr·74 Kerameikos, Gr,74 Kerameikos, Gr·36 Kerameikos, Gr·3 6 Kerameikos, Gr·37 Kerameikos, Gr,37 Kerameikos, Gr,37 Kerameikos, Gr.20 Kerameikos, Gr.20 Kerameikos, Gr.20 Kerameikos, Gr·42 Kerameikos, Gr·42 Eleusis, Gr.
19'9
-
-
Attic
MGI
Oinochoe
23'5
4a
Attic
MGII
41
4b
Attic
MGII
Neck-handled amphora Flat pyxis
4c
Attic
MGII
Skyphos
4d
Attic
MGII
Kantharos
Kerameikos, Gr·42 Kerameikos, Gr.69 Kerameikos, Gr,69 Kerameikos, Gr,69 Kerameikos, Gr.69
K. v. 1,237, pI. 73 K. v. 1,257, pI. 31 K. v. 1,257, pI. 54 K. v. 1,256, pI. 91 K. v. 1,258, pI. 85
6 5'5
27
6'7
6 6'3
3g
Attic
MGI
Flatpyxis
9'3
3h
Attic
MGI
Flatpyxis
5,8
3i
Attic
MGI
Skyphos
6'5
3k
Attic
MGI
Skyphos
6'5
31
Attic
MGI
3m
Attic
3n
*exclusive oflids or high handles
10'5 6'9 11' 5
Museum inv. no,
Ref.
Agora P20180
11-13
Agora P20179
11-13
Kerameikos 4 12 Kerameikos 4 13 Kerameikos 25° Kerameikos 1253 Kerameikos 25 1 Kerameikos 253 Kerameikos 25 2 Kerameikos 254 Kerameikos 2155 Kerameikos 2 156 Kerameikos 870 Kerameikos 866 Kerameikos 86 7 Kerameikos 262 Kerameikos 263 Kerameikos 265 Kerameikos 2144Kerameikos 2 141 Eleusis 700
14-15
Cambridge GR 2.1943 Kerameikos 2145 Kerameikos 255 Kerameikos 257 Kerameikos 256 Kerameikos 258
Plate no. 4e-h
Local style Attic
Painteror Workshop
Date MGII
Shape Globular pyxis
Height incm* 33
context
Publication
Kerameikos
Arias-Hirmer-
Kerameikos, Gr.22 Kerameikos, Gr.22 Kerameikos, Gr.22 Kerameikos, Gr.22 Kerameikos, Gr.22 Kerameikos, Gr.86 Dipylon, Gr.20r4
5a
Attic
MGII
Oinochoe
27'5
5b
Attic
MGII
Oinochoe
23'3
5c
Attic
MGII
57'7
5d,f
Attic
MGII
Neck-handled amphora Pedestalled krater
5e
Attic
MGII
Skyphos
5g
Attic
MGII
6
Attic
LGIa
Dipylon Master
Shoulder-handled amphora Belly-handled amphora
7a
Attic
LGIa
Dipylon Master
Krater, fr,
58 (PH) Dipylon
7b,c
Attic
LGlb
DipylonW
Oinochoe
21'5
Agora, Gr. E.19:3
7d
Attic
LGla
Dipylon Master
Giant oinochoe
89
7e
Attic
LGla
Dipylon Master
Pitcher
77
8a
Attic
LGlb
Dipylon W
Pedestalled krater
122
Dipylon, Gr.14 Dipylon, Gr.14? Dipylon
8b
Attic
LGlb
Hirschfeld P
Pedestalled krater
123
Dipylon
14-15
5 2'5
14-15 5'2
14-15 14-15 14-15 14-15
Prouenance
5 1'5 155
14-15 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20
Shefton, 266-7, pI. 3 K.V.I,224, pI. 73 K.V.I,224, pI. 75 K. v. 1,223, pI. 32 K. v . 1,223, pls. 20, 21 K.V.I,223, pI. 91 K.V.I, 265, pI. 45 Asios-HirmerShefton, 267, pI. 4 CVA, Louvre 11, pI. I, 1-10; pI. 2, 5 Hesperia 29, 404, no. I, pI. 89 Davision 134, fig. 7
30ff•
Agora P 15122
32ff.
Athens 811
30 ff.
-
Athens 812
30ff.
CVA, Louvre 11, pls, 11-12
Paris A 552
32ff.
Arias-Hirmer-
Athens 990
Shefton, 267-8, pI. 5 AA 1962, 594 ff., figs. 1-2
4 1-4
Munich 8748
4 2-4
Hirschfeld W
Neck-handled amphora
42
17-20
8e
Attic
LGlb
Hirschfeld W
Pitcher
32
-
17-20
8f 8g
Attic Attic
LGlb LGlb
Hirschfeld W Dipylon W
Tankard Tankard
15 21'3
-
9a
Attic
LGla
Skyphos
7
9b
Attic
LGla
Skyphos
5"8
9C
Attic
LGla
Skyphos
5
9d
Attic
LGla
Skyphos
5'7
ge
Attic
LGla
Tankard
13'4
9f,g
Attic
LGIa
Flat pyxis
8'9
-
17-20
17-20 22-25 22-26 22-25 22-25
I *exclusive oflids or high handles
22 28 -
ParisA5 17
LGlb
Agora, Gr. 17 (G.12 :17) Agora, Gr. 17 (G.12:17) Agora, Gr. 17 (G.12 :17) Agora,Gr.17 (G.12:17) Agora, Gr. 17 (G.12:17) Agora, Gr. 17 (G.12:17)
1
29ff.
Attic
17-20
Paris A 514
Ref.
Kerameikos 3°0 Kerameikos 298 Kerameikos 291 Kerameikos 29° Kerameikos 294 Kerameikos 82 5 Athens 804
8c,d 17-20
Museum inv. no,
Agora VIII, no. 260 AgoraVIII, no. 261 Agora VIII, no. 262 Agora VIII, no. 263 Agora VIII, no. 251 Agora VIII, no. 269
22-5 22-5 22-5 22-8 22-5 22-5
Dunedin 4 2-4 E 57,155 Athens 16193 4 2-4 Univ, Coll. 33 ff. London Agora 48-5 1 P 5°73 Agora 48-5 1 P 5°7° Agora 4 8-5 1 P 5°7 1 Agora 4 8-5 1 P 5°72 Agora 47-5 1 P 5°53 Agora 47-5 1 P 5°60
I
xi
LIST OF PLATES • XlU
XlI • LIST OF PLATES
Plate no.
Local 3tyle
Painteror Workslwp
Date
Shape
Height incm*
Provenance context Agora, Gr. 17 (G.12:17) Agora, Gr. 17 (G.12 :17) Agora, Gr. 17 (G.12:17) Kerameikos, Gr.24 Kerameikos, Gr.24 Kerameikos, Gr.24 Kerameikos, Gr·7 1 Kerameikos, Gr·7 1 Kerameikos, Gr·7 1 Kerameikos, Gr·7 1 Kerameikos, Gr·90 Agora, Gr. 18 (G.12 :9)
9h,j
Attic
LGIa
Flatpyxis
10'7
9k,1
Attic
LGIa
Flatpyxis
10'5
9m,n
Attic
LGIa
Flatpyxis
6· I
loa
Attic
LGIb
44. 8
lOb
Attic
LGIb
Neck-handled amphora Skyphos
1OC
Attic
LGIb
Kantharos
1I ·6
rod
Attic
LGIb
Oinochoe
21·8
loe
Attic
LGIb
Skyphos
10
IOf
Attic
LGIb
Skyphos
1I
109
Attic
LGIb
Athens 706W
High-rimmed bowl
7'5
IOh
Attic
LGIb
Athens 706 W
High-rimmed bowl
7'1
IOj
Attic
LGIb
Attic
LGIb
Flat pyxis
rom
Attic
LGIb
Plate
r ra.b
Attic
LGIIa
Subdipylon W
8
Neck-handled amphora
LGIIb
Athens 894 W
One-piece oinochoe
24
LGIIb LGIIb
Athens 894 W Athens 894 W (Stathatou P)
Tankard Neck-handled amphora
16 60
Soldier-bird W
Pitcher
Athens 894 W
lId
Attic
LGIIb
lIe
Attic
lIf lIg
Attic Attic
LGIIa
LGIIa
Pitcher
54
Attic
LGlIa
Birdseed W
High-rimmed bowl
12f
Attic
LGIIa
Birdseed P
Oinochoe
25
12g
Attic
LGIIa
SwanP
Pitcher
37
12d
Attic
12e
I *exclusive oflids or high handles
I
AA 1964, 61 I If, figs. 1-2
I
I
-
Ay. Paraskeve
-
9'4
AJA 71, 821f., pIs. 31-2
-
I
I
&f.
Agora P 5°62 Agora P5066 Agora P 5°61 Kerameikos 377 Kerameikos 376 Kerameikos 373 Kerameikos 34 1 Kerameikos 344 Kerameikos 34 2 Kerameikos 345 Kerameikos 815 Agora P 4782
47-5 1
Agora P4784
47-5 1
Athens 14472 Leiden 1.1909/1.1
49-S 1
Athens 17935 Athens 1747° Agora P 23654 Athens Athens St. 222
I
Plate no.
Local style
Date
Painteror Workshop
Shape
Height incm*
Provenance context
Publications
-
13a
Attic
LGIIa
Bird and LozengeP
Pitcher
39
13b
Attic
LGIIa
RattleW
Pitcher
38
47-5 1
13C
Attic
LGIIa
Anavysos P
Pitcher
48-5 1
13d
Attic
LGIIa
Oinochoe
23'5
-
48-5 1
13e,f
Attic
LGIIa
Concentric Circle Gp Hunt Gp
Oinochoe
21·8
-
47-5 1
14a
Attic
LGIIb
LionP
Pitcher
44
48-5 1
14b
Attic
LGIIb
Athens 897 P
Pitcher
56
48-5 1
14c
Attic
LGIIb
48, SI-2 51-2
14d
Attic
LGIIb
A th ens 897W (Empedocles) Paris CA 3283 P
Neck-handled amphora Oinochoe
14e
Attic
LGIIb
Athens 897 P
15a
Attic
LGIIa
29
15b
Attic
LGIIa
Neck-handled amphora Neck-handled amphora Skyphos
ISC
Attic
LGIIa
Kantharos
1I '2
15d
Attic
LGIIa
Oinochoe
23
15e
Attic
LGIIa
High-rimmed bowl
8·6
58,61
15f
Attic
LGIIa
Skyphos
8
S9ff.
15g
Attic
LGIIa
Kotyle
6
59ff.
15h
Attic
LGIIa
Kotyle
9. 8
Isj 15k ISI
Attic Attic Attic
LGIIb LGIIb LGIIb
Kotyle Plate Cup
8
47-5 1 47-5 1
47-5 1
601f. 591f·
Oxford 1927.4447 Hobart 31
68-7°
British School at Athens A 306
70-1
67-7 0
Athens 894 W
Bull. desMusees deFrance, 1948, fig. I
-
10'2
5'S
7. 6
Attic
LGIIb
High-rimmed bowl
15n
Attic
LGIIb
Oinochoe
14
150
Attic
LGIIb
Kantharos
6
ISP
Attic
LGIIb
Cup
4
16a
Corinthian
PG
Oinochoe
*exclusive oflids or high handles
Festschrift Zw:ker, 178, pis. 7--8 PAE 191I, 122, fig. 21
Davison 143, fig. 31 Daoison 143, fig. 32
26
15m
I
"Neighbourhood of Athens" Anavysos
-
5S-6
Athens 64-S 18432 Paris 66-7 ~CA 1823 Athens 16022 67-7 0
-
48 (PH)
LGIIa
CVAAthens2, pI. 13, I-S AgoraVIII, no. 36o
Agora, WellQ.8:9 Marathon Koropi
Amphora, fr.
Attic
Brants 8, pI. 7,52 Davison, fig. 94
Kerameikos
Hooked Swastika W Birdseed P
rsb,c
-
38
LGIIb
Agora.Grv rS (G.12 :9)
13S
Athens 894 W
Attic
AgoraVIII, no. 265 AgoravIII, no. 267 AgoraVIII, no. 252 K. v. 1,225, pI. 33 K. v . 1,226, pI. 97 K. v. 1,226, pI. 86 K. v. I, 258, pI. 75 K. v. 1,258, pI. 99 K. v. 1,258, pI. 96 K. v. 1,258, pI. 1I9 K. v. 1,268, pI. 120 Hesperia Supp, I I, 89, fig. 6o Hesperia Supp. rr, 89, figs. 60-1
Anavysos
Neck-handled amphora (detail) Hydria
lIC
Attic
18
Tankard
IOk,1
12a
9'2
Museum inv. no.
Publication
25. 6
Kerameikos, Gr·9 0 Kerameikos, Gr·90 Kerameikos, Gr·90 Kerameikos, Gr·90 Kerameikos, Gr·5 l a Agora, Gr. E.19:1 Agora, Gr. E.19:1 Keratea
K. v. 1,268, pI. 38 K. v. 1,268, pI. 99 K. v, 1,268, p.87 K. v. 1,268, pI. 78 K. v; 1,246, pl. 121 Hesperia 29, 4081f., pI. 90 Hesperia 29, 4081f., pI. 90
-
Anavysos Agora, Gr. 6 (G.12:IO)
Hesperia
Kerameikos, Gr. 56 Kerameikos, Gr. S6 Kerameikos, Gr. S6 Kerameikos, Gr·s6 Corinth, well-shaft
30, fig. 17 K. v, I, 2S0, pI. 122 K. v. 1,249, pI. 80 K. v. I, 2S0, pI. 88 K. v. I, 2S0, pl, 107 Corinth VII. I, 10, no. 23, pI. 3
Suppv r r ,
Museum inu. no.
&f.
British School 7 1 at Athens A30S London 11-2 1916. 1--8.2 Athens 144 11 London 77. 12-7. 12 Cambridge GR 1.1935 London 1913.11- 13.1 London 1905·10-28.1 Berlin (East) 3lOOS Paris CA 3283
73 7S-6 76-7 73-4 77--81 71--81 82
Athens 17S19 77--81 Kerameikos 816 Kerameikos 818 Kerameikos 81 7 Kerameikos 814 Kerameikos 1318 Agora P 15°3° Agora P Is029 Oxford 1934·344 Athens 18496 Athens 14449 Agora P 4786 Kerameikos 3 13 Kerameikos 3 12 Kerameikos 320 Kerameikos 3 19 Corinth
85-90 85-90 85-9° 8S-9° 85-90 85-90 85-90 85-90 601f. 85-90 85-90
85-9 0 8S-9° 85-90 8S-9° 92-3
xiv . Plate no.
LIST OF PLATES
Local sryle
Date
LIST OF PLATES • XV
Painteror Workslwp
Shape
16b
Corinthian
EG
Oinoehoe
16c
Corinthian
EG
Skyphos
Height incm*
Prouenance context
32'2
Corinth, well-shaft
6'3
Corinth VII. I, I I, no. 29, pl. 4 Beazley Gifts I9 I2-66,
16d
Corinthian
EG
Globular pyxis
19. 6
Corinth, well-shaft
16e
Corinthian
EG
Oinochoe
29'4
17a
Corinthian
MGI
Oinochoe
28·8
Corinth, Gr.N.of Peirene Athikia, Gr. (1934)
17b
Corinthian
MGI
Aryballos
9
Clenia, Gr.
17c
Corinthian
MGI
Aryballos
8'2
Clenia, Gr.
17d
I7e
17f
Corinthian
Corinthian
Corinthian
MGI
MGI
MGII
Skyphos
Oinochoe
Pedestalled krater
17g
Corinthian
MGII
Lekythos-oinoehoe
17h
Corinthian
MGII
Skyphos
6'7
3 0'5
49'5
12'5
Corinth Agora, Gr. Corinth Agora, Gr. Corinth Agora, Gr.
9
17j
Corinthian
MGII
Krater
18a·
Corinthian
MGII
Oinochoe
24. 6
18b
Corinthian
MGII
Oinochoe
35'5
18c
Corinthian
MGII
Lekythos-oinochoe
11
18d
Corinthian
MGII
Skyphos
18e
Corinthian
MGII
Proto-kotyle
*exclusive oflids or high handles
Corinth, Gr.N.of Peirene Corinth
22'5
'2
12 6·6
Corinth Agora, Gr. Corinth, N. Cemetery, Gr.17 Corinth, N. Cemetery, Gr.18 Corinth, Potters' Quarter, Gr'5 Corinth, S. Stoa Well Thera
Museum inv. no.
Publication
Ashmolean MUS.19 67, no. 63, pl. 5 Corinth VII. I, 13, no. 37, pl. 7 Corinth VII. I, 16, no. 56, pl. 9 Corinth VII. I, 20, no. 71, pl. 11 AJA 59,126, no. 5, pl. 39, fig. 5 AJA 59,126, no. 6, pl, 39, fig. 7 Corinth VII. I, 17, no. 61, pl, 10
Corinth V 11. I, 25, no. 73, pl. 12 Corinth VII. I, 27, no. 76, pI. 12 Corinth VII. I, 27, no. 75, pl. 12 Corinth v 11. I, 26, no. 74, pl. 12 Corinth XIII, 24, no. 17-1, pl. 7 Corinth XIII, 27, no. 18-2, pl. 8
Hesperia 20, 293, pl. 89d
-
Ref.
Plate no.
Local style
Date
Painteror Workshop
Shape
Height in cm*
Provenance context
Corinth
92-3
18f
Corinthian
MGII
Proto-kotyle
7'3
Thera
Oxford 1932.678
92-3
18g
Corinthian
MGII
Kantharos
9. 8
Corinth
19a
Corinthian
LG
Oinoehoe
92-3
29
Corinth CP863
19b
Corinthian
LG
Oinoehoe
92-3
30
Corinth CP 1893
19c
Corinthian
LG
Oinochoe
31 ·6
94-5
Corinth CP2214
Cocinthian
LG
Lekythos-oinochoe
16
94-5
19d
Corinth, Potters' Quarter, Gr·5 Corinth, S. Basilica Well Corinth, S. Basilica Well Corinth, S. Basilica Well Corinth
Corinth CP 2215
1ge
Corinthian
LG
Globular pyxis
22
94-5 19f
Corinthian
LG
Kyathos
Corinth CP865
94-5 199,h
Corinthian
LG
Krater
25' I
Corinth, N. Cemetery
19j
Corinthian
LG
Kotyle
11
Pithecusae
19k 191
Corinthian Corinthian
LG LG
Kotyle Kotyle
10'5 10'3
Anavysos
20a
Corinthian
LG
ThapsosW
Krater
18
Aetos
20b
Corinthian
LG
ThapsosW
Kantharos
20C
Corinthian
LG
ThapsosW
20d
Corinthian
EPC
ThapsosW
20e
Corinthian
LG
Tallpyxis
20f
Corinthian
EPC
Kotyle-pyxis
6
20g
Corinthian
EPC
Flat pyxis
7
20h
Corinthian
EPC
Tallpyxis
15
British School 94-5 at Athens A7 1 Corinth 95-8 G--37- 1 Corinth G--37-5
95-8
Corinth G--37-4
95-8
Corinth G--37-3
95-8
Corinth T2455
95-8
Corinth T2408
95-8
Corinth KPI64
95-8
.
Corinth
95-8
Thera 937
95-8
*exclusive oflids or high handles
AM28,152, one of C 7g-84
-
Hesperia 18, 153, pl. 19, fig. 26 Hesperia 18, 153, pl. 19, fig. 27 Hesperia 18, 153, pl. 19, fig. 26 SievekingHacklv t t ; no. 224, pl. 6 Aetos, Upper BSA43,25, Deposit no. 69, pl. 5 '05T\y6s(1935), 99
9'5
Thera, Schiff'sGr.
Skyphos
13'5
Skyphos
6'5
Aetos, Lower Deposit Suessula, cemetery Aetos, Lower Deposit (lid only) Thera, Schiff'sGr.
15
Publication
Thera, Messavouno Gr·9 1 Thera
Corinth X11 I, 39, S-3, pI. 10 MetTopoli e Colonic, 264, fig. la GPP, pl. 8b Lullies, Kleinkunst, pl. 17, 123 BSA43, ro, no. 4, pl. I Thera 11, 191, no. 2, fig. 383 BSA43,1O, no. I, pi. I
BSA48,30 I, no. 839, pi. 50 Thera 11,316, no. 66, fig. 508 AM28,199, K67, BeiI.36,2 Brants 10, pl. 12, I
Museum inv.no.
Ref.
Thera
95-8
Corinth KPI72
95-8
Corinth C 48-143
98-102
Corinth C 48-137
98-102
Corinth C48- 136
98-102
Munich 2284
98-102
Vathy (Ithaca) Athens, Benaki MUS.26 Corinth T27 13
98-102
Ischia
98-102
98-102
g8-102
Athens 14476 98-102 Munich, v, 98-102 Schoen coIl. 102-4 Vathy (Ithaca) 102-4 Thera
Vathy (Ithaca) London 78.12-12.2 Vathy (Ithaca)
102-4 102-4 104-8
Thera
104-8
Thera
104-8
Leiden VZVN4
104-8
XVI • LIST OF PLATES
Plate no. 21a
21b 21C 21d 21e
Local style Corinthian
Corinthian Corinthian Corinthian Corinthian
Date EPC
EPC EPC EPC EPC
21f
Corinthian
EPC
21g
Corinthian
EPC
21h
Corinthian
EPC
21j
Corinthian
EPC
21k
Corinthian
EPC
22a
22b
22C
22d
22e
22f
22g
Argive
Argive
Argive
Argive
Argive
Argive
Argive
EGI
EGI
EGI
EGI
EGI
EGI
EGI
22h
Argive
EGI
23a
Argive
EGII
23b 23c
Argive Argive
EGII EGII
LIST OF PLATES' XVll Painteror Workslwp
Height incm*
Shape Oinochoe
3°'7
Oinochoe
21 'S
Lekythos-oinochoe Kotyle
6'9
Kotyle
II ·8
Kotyle
9
Tall pyxis
12
Aryballos
S·8
Aryballos
7'5
Krater
23'2
Kantharos
9'7
Pedes tailed skyphos
14'S
Corinth, S. Basilica Well
Cumae, Gr·37 Eleusis, Gr. Corinth, WellC Cumae
Musewn Publicat'IOn
mv. no.
Re.
Hesperia 18, IS3, pI. 19, fig. 27 VS, pI. 7, I
Corinth C48-138
1°4-8
London S9· 2-16·38 Naples
1°4-8 104-8
Eleusis 1020
104-8
Corinth C40-366
104-8
London 19so.1-24·2 Thera
Thera
104-8
MA 22, 276, pI. 37, I EA 1898, 119, pI. 2,3 Hesperia 17, 2II, C 12, pI. 7S
-
Thera, Messavouno Gr·97 Thera, Messavouno Gr. S7 Cumae
AM28,198, K61, Beil·34,4 AM28,19S, K37, BeiI. 33, 8
Corinth, Agora, Well Mycenae, Gr. G 603
Corinth v H. I, 37, no. 116, pI. 16 BSA So, 241ff., pis. 47-8
Mycenae, Gr. G603
BSAso,24 I ff., pis. 47-8
-
Belly-handled amphora
28
Mycenae, Gr. G603
BSAso,24 I ff., pis. 47-8
Oinochoe
19'5
Mycenae, Gr. G603
BSA So, 24Iff., pis. 47-8
Lug-handled pyxis
12
Mycenae, Gr. G603
BSA So, 24Iff., pis. 47-8
London 19S0.1-24· 1 Corinth C 36-SS7 Nauplion, Myc·S426 7 Nauplion, Myc·S4268 Nauplion, Myc'S426S Nauplion, Myc·S4261 Nauplion, Myc'S4269 Nauplion, Myc'S427° Nauplion, Myc'S4266
EGII
Cup
9
23f
Argive
EGII
Cup
6
23g
Argive
EGII
Globular pyxis
8
23h
Argive
EGII
Lug-handled pyxis
8
24a
Argive
MGI
Globular pyxis
18·S
1°4-8
24b
Argive
MGI
Pedestalled krater
29' I
104-8
24c
Argive
MGI
Oinochoe
21·8
Berbati, Gr.
24d
Argive
MGI
Oinochoe
27'S
Berbati, Gr.
24e 24
Argive Argive
MGI MGII
Skyphos Oinochoe
24
24g
Argive
MGII
Skyphos
24h
Argive
MGII
Amphoriskos
II
24j
Argive
MGII
28'4
2sa
Argive
MGII
3°
2Sb
Argive
MGII
Neck-handled amphora Neck-handled amphora Globular pyxis
113-IS
2SC
Argive
MGII
Kantharos
11"S
II3-IS
2Sd
Argive
MGII
Lug-handled pyxis
9
Mycenae, Gr. G II/1
II3-IS
2se
Argive
MGII
Cup
S
Mycenae, Gr. G 11/1
II3-IS
2Sf
Argive
MGII
Globular pyxis
18·S
Mycenae, Gr. G 11/1
II3-IS
2Sg
Argive
MGII
Aryballos
14'S
2Sh
Argive
MGII
Oinochoe
IS
Tiryns, Gr.16 Tiryns
26
Argive
LGI
Globular pyxis
27a
Argive
LGI
Krater
2S
27 b
Argive
LGI
Oinochoe
41
104-8
II3-IS
113-IS
Mycenae, Gr. G603
BSAso,24 I ff., ~Nauplion, II3-IS pis. 47-8 Myc'S4263 BSA So, 24S, Nauplion, lIS-I 7 pI. 4ge Myc·S4211 Nauplion, lIS-I 7 I Myc·S9-3S Nauplion, lIS-1 7 Myc·sg--68
4° 4
Mycenae, Gr. G607 Mycenae, Gr. G607
7
104-8
BSA So, 241ff., pis. 47-8
Neck-handled amphora Skyphos
10·6
Argive
Mycenae, Gr. G603
I
Provenance context
23e
8·8
Mycenae, Gr. G604
Height incm*
Mycenae, Gr. G607 Mycenae, Cr. G607 Mycenae, Gr. G607 Mycenae, Gr. G.607 Mycenae, Gr. G607 Argos, Gr.176/ 1 Berbati, Gr.
Lekythos-oinochoe
24
Shape
Workshop
Skyphos
BSAso,24Iff., pis. 47-8
Oinochoe
Painteror
Date EGII
Mycenae, Gr. G603
12
Local style Argive
7'S
Globular pyxis
Plate no. 23d
Lug-handled pyxis
I
*exclusiv e of lids or high handles
16·S
Provenance context
I
3°
104
Tiryns Tiryns, Gr.24 Tiryns, Gr.24 Tiryns, Gr·3 0 Argos, Gr.191 Argos, Gr.6/1 Argos, Gr.6/1 Mycenae, Gr. G 11/1
Argos, Gr.23 Mycenae, Gr. G 1I/2 Mycenae, Gr. G 11/2
Museum inv. no.
Publication
-
Nauplion, Myc·Sg--67 Nauplion, Myc·sg--66 Nauplion, Myc·Sg-61 Nauplion, Myc·Sg-7° Nauplion, Myc·Sg--63 Argos C 2434 Nauplion 4 161 Nauplion 3832 Nauplion 3833 Nauplion Nauplion 1948 Nauplion
-
-
CGA, pI. 79 SCS4,83, figs. 70-3 SCS4,84, fig. 68 SCS 4,84, fig. 68
Tiryns I, 141, pl. 14,8 Tiryns I, ISO, pl. 18, 11 Tiryns I, 137, pl. 17,7 CGA, pl. 3
I I I
Nauplion
Argos C 2473 Argos CGA, pl. 4 C30 Argos CGA, pI. 79 C43 BSA49,260ff., Nauplion, Myc·S3pl. 44 321 BSA49,260ff., Nauplion, Myc'S3pI. 44 33 1 BSA49,260ff., Nauplion, Myc·S3pI. 44 322 BSA49,260ff., Nauplion, Myc'S3pl. 44 333 Nauplion Tyrins I, 141, pl. 19,6 19S3 Nauplion 4 2S3 Argos CGA, C 209 pis. 100-4 BSA49,262ff., Nauplion, Myc·S3pis. 44-5 338 BSA49,262ff., Nauplion, Myc'53pls·44-S 336
I *exclusive of lids or high handles
Rej. IIS-I 7 IIS-I 7 IIS-I 7 IIS-1 7 IIS-1 7 118-20 118-20 118-20 118-20 118-20 120-4 120-4 120-4 120-4 120-4 120-4 120-4
120-4
120-4
120-4
120-4 120-4 12S-3 1 I2S-3 I
I2S-3 I
LIST OF PLATES • XIX
XV111 • LIST OF PLATES
Plate no.
Painter or
Local
style
Date
Workshop
Shape
Height incm*
Provenance context
Publication
27c
Argive
LGI
Skyphos
II'5
Mycenae, Gr. G II{2
BSA49,262ff., pis. 44-5
27d
Argive
LGI
Krater
24'3
Mycenae, Gr. G II{2
BSA49,262ff., pis. 44-5
Mycenae, Gr. G II{2
BSA49,262ff., pls, 44-5
Asine
Asine 328, no. 17, fig. 222, 6 Asine 331, no. I, fig. 224,2 CGA, pI. 61
27e
28a
Argive
Argive
Hemispherical oinoeboe
29
Atticizing W ofAsine
Oinochoe
46
LGI
LGII
28b
Argive
LGII
Atticizing W of Asine
Neck-handled amphora
41
Asine, House Deposit
28c
Argive
LGII
FenceW
Kantharos
15'2
28d
Argive
LGII
FenceW
Tripod amphora
68
Argos, Gr·45 Nauplion, Pronoia
28e
Argive
LGII
Krater
25'5
29a,b 29C 29d
Argive Argive Argive
LGII LGII LGII
Sparring Horses P VerdelisW Verdelis W Athens 877 P
Oinochoe Skyphos Krater
30 6 22
2ge 29f
Argive Argive
LGII LGII
Schliemann P Athens 877 P
Krater Kantharos
31 14'5
goa.b
Argive
LGII
DanceP
Krater
31' I
30C
Argive
LGII
Flat pyxis
25
30d
Argive
LGII
ArgosC201 W
Kantharos
13
30e
Argive
LGII
Argos C 201 P
Krater
47'3
3 Ia
Argive
LGII
75
3 Ib
Argive
LGII
Neck-handled amphora Kantharos
3 1c
Argive
LGII
Skyphos
7
3 1d
Argive
LGII
Cup
~
3 Ie
Argive
LGII
Skyphos
9
3 If
Argive
LGII
Cup
4'7
3 Ig
Argive
LGII
Cup
5'5
3 1h
Argive
LGII
Plaque
*exclusive of lids or high handles
6'5
28
125- 31
Plate no.
Local
style
Painter or Date
Workshop
Shape
Height incm*
3 Ij
Argive
LGII
Krater
31
3 2a
ThessaloCycladic ThessaloCycladic
SubPG
Cup
10
SubPG
Skyphos
8'5
125- 31 3 2b 125- 3 1 3 2C
ThessaloCycladic
SubPG
Amphoriskos
9'7
32d
ThessaloCycladic ThessaloCycladic ThessaloCycladic ThessaloCycladic
SubPG
Cup
7'4
SubPG
Skyphos
9'3
SubPG
Amphoriskos
3 1' 5
SubPG
Skyphos
11'5
SubPG
Skyphos
7'5
EG
Jug, cut-away neck
20 22
132-3
Provenance context
Argos, Larissa Marmariani, T6 Rheneia, Purification Tr. Tenos, Ktikados Gr. I Rheneia, Parakastri Tenos, Kardiani Rheneia, Parakastri Marmariani
132-3
Argos C 171 Nauplion 10006 Athens 231
134-5
133-4
3 2h
Athens 843 ArgosC20 Athens 877
136 136 138
33 a
ThessaloCycladic Thessalian
33 b
Thessalian
EG
Oinochoe
ArgosC I Nauplion 19 15 Corinth T2545
137-8 138
33 C
Thessalian
EG
Globular pyxis
140-1
33 d
Thessalian
EG
Hydria
Nauplion
142
33 e
Thessalian
EG
PedestaIled krater
36'5
Marmariani
Tiryns I, 144, pI. 15, 13 CGA, pis. 43-5 AE 1912, 131, fig. I AE 1912, 136, fig. 12 CGA,pI. 59
Nauplion 1973 Argos C 201
139-40 33f
Thessalian
MGII
Pedestalled krater
36
Kapakli
33g
Thessalian
LG
Pedestalled krater
Kapakli
141-4
40
Nauplion
34 a
Cycladic
EG
Skyphos
13
Nauplion
14 1-5 34 b
Cycladic
EG
Skyphos
10'2
Nauplion
14 1-4
CGA, pI. 76
Nauplion
14 1-4
34 C
Cycladic
MG
Skyphos
8
Tenos, Ktikados Tenos, Ktikados Gr. I Thera, Messavouno
Tiryns I, 150,
Nauplion .:l003 Nauplion
14 1-4 34 d
Cycladic
MG
Skyphos
6·8
34 e
Cycladic
MG
Kantharos
12
Nauplion, Myc·55-g Aegina 1747
14 1-4 34f
Cycladic
MG
Kantharos
II ·8
34g
Cycladic
MG
Skyphos
CGA, pI. 11
-
Argos, Gr. I Mycenae, Evang.Gr. Corinth, N. Cemetery, Gr·47 Mycenae, Evang.Gr. Tiryns, Gr.26 Argos, Gr·43 Mycenae, Evang.Gr. Mycenae, Evang.Gr. Mycenae, Evang.Gr. Mycenae, Evang.Gr. Tiryns, Gr.26 Tiryns, Gr·37 Mycenae, Gr.G605 Aegina
Nauplion, MyC·5334 0 Nauplion, MyC·53337 Nauplion, Myc·53339 Nauplion
ReI.
Nauplion
CGA, pI. 32
Argos, Gr. I
Museum inv. no.
CGA, pI. 58 AD 16,70, pI. 34 CGA, pI. 28 CGA, pI. 62 Corinth XIII, 35,47-1, pI. 9 CGA, pI. 83
pI. 15, 10 Tiryns I, 151, pI. 18, I BSA 51,128, pI. 33 Kraiker, Aigina 30, no.66; pI. 5, 67
3 2e 3 2f 3 2g
134-5
139-40
14 1-4
141-4
*exclusive oflids or high handles
6'5
Rheneia, Parakastri Marmariani, T.6 Marmariani
Rheneia, Parakastri Tenos, Ktikados Delos, T. near Altar ofZeus Polieus Tenos, Kardiani
Museum
inv.no.
Ref.
CGA,pI. 36
Argos C 645
142-6
BSA 31, 26, no. 92, pl. 6 Delos xv, 54, Ae20, pI. 27a
Athens
152-4
Mykonos
152-4
Tenos
152-4
Mykonos A 1471 Tenos A 1485 Mykonos A 1452 Athens
152-4
Publication
-
PGP,pI. 19
PGP, pI. 19 BSA 31, 28, no. 119, pI. 7 PGP, pI. 25
152-4 152-4 152-4
Mykonos A 1467 Athens
156-7
Athens
158-60
Athens, Vlasto coIl.
158-60
Athens, Vlasto coIl.
158-60
Athens
158-60
Volos
161-3
Volos
161-3
Tenos
165
-
Tenos
165
AM28, II4, among A 97-104 PGP, pI. 18
Thera
166-71
Mykonos A 1469 Tenos
166-71
BSA 31, 21, no. 42, pI. 3 BSA 31, 22, no. 51, pl. 4 PGRT39, no. 145, pI. 13 PGRT39, no. 144, pl, 13 BSA 31, 31, no. 135, pl. 9 PGRT82, fig. 25 PGRT82, pI. 24, left -
-
158-60
166-71
Delos xv, 59, Ae49, pl. 31, c
DeIos B 1.932
166-71
Ann. 8-9, 224, fig. 35, 9
Tenos A 1486
166-71
xx .
LIST OF PLATES· XXI
LIST OF PLATES
Plate no.
Local sryle
Date
Painteror Workshop
Shape
3411
Cyc1adic
MG
Cup
34j
Cyc1adic
MG
Oinochoe
Height incm* 8·6 32
34k
Cyc1adic
MG
Large skyphos
15'8
341
Cyc1adic
MG
Amphoriskos
12
34ffi
Cyc1adic
MG
Belly-handled amphora
73
Provenance oontext Tenos, Ktikados Rheneia, Purification Tr,
"Athens, Acropolis" Melos
Naxian
LG
Cesnola P
Ovoid krater
36a
Naxian
LG
Cesnola P
Oinochoe
35'7
Kourion, Cyprus
36b
Naxian
LG
Lekythos-oinochoe
17
Delos, Heraion Rheneia, Purification Tr. Rheneia, Purification Tr. Rheneia, Purification Tr. Rheneia, Purification Tr. Rheneia,
36c
36d
36e
37 a
37 b
Naxian
Naxian
Naxian
"Parian"
"Parian"
LG
LG
LG
LG
LG
Skyphos
Neck-handled amphora Neck-handled amphora Hydria
13. 8
42. 6
41'7
3 8'7
Neck-handled amphora
36
37c
"Parian"
LG
Hydria
36'5
37d
"Parian"
LG
Shoulder-handled amphora
42
31
37e
"Parian"
LG
Pedes tailed krater
37f
"Parian"
LG
3 8a
"Parian"
LG
Shoulder-handled amphora Skyphos
38b
"Parian',
LG
*exclusive oflids or high handles
Skyphos
50 7' I
12'7
Delos xv, 24, Aa 55, pI. 13
-
35
II5
Publication
Kourion, Cyprus
Purification Tr. Rheneia, Purification Tr. Thera, Messavouno Gr·3 Delos, Artemision Thera Delos, T. near Altar ofZeus Polieus Delos, Workshop of Kerdon
CVA,Munich 3,36-7, pI. 141, 1-2 Arias-HirmerShefton, 278, fig. 24 M yres, Cesnola csu. 288, no. 1702 Delosx,24, pI. 9, 37 Delosxv, 80, Bb41, pI. 39
Museum inv. no.
Ref.
Tenos
166-71
Mykonos
166-71
British School 166-71 at Athens A 108 London 166-71 55.12-20.1 Munich 166-71 6166 New York 74.51.9 65
172-4
New York 74.5 1.838
173-4
Delos B6.084 Mykonos
174-6
Delosxv, 86, Be I, pI. 42
Mykonos
Delosxv, 74, Bb 6, pI. 35
Mykonos
Local sryle
Date
Painteror Workshop
Shape
Height incm*
Provenance context Delos, T. near Altar ofZeus Polieus Delos, T. near Altar ofZeus Polieus Delos, T. near Altar ofZeus Polieus Delos, T. near Altar ofZeus Polieus Delos, T. near Altar ofZeus Polieus Rheneia, Purification Tr. Rheneia, Purification Tr.
Publication
178--S1
Delosxv, 60, Ae54, pI. 31 D
Delos B4· 20 1
178-81
Delosxv, 65, Ae84, pI. 32 A
Delos B 1.931
178--S1
Delosxv, 63, Ae74, pI. 31 E
Delos B 1.941
178--S1
Delosxv, 64, Ae78, pI. 31 E
Delos B 4.215
178--S1
Delosxv, 68,
Mykonos
178--S1
Mykonos
178--S1
London 37. 10-18. 1 ParisA491 (Campana 20) London MsC 2541 Thera British School at Athens Leiden RO 11168 Leiden RO III 84 Thera
182-4
Thera I I, 50, fig. 163
Thera
186-8
AM28, II9, A 164, BeiI.I4 Brants6, no. 9, pl. 5 CVA Copenhagen 2, 47, pI. 65, I
Thera
186-8
Leiden SVL2 Copenhagen Chr. VIII, 324
186-8
LG
Skyphos
38d
"Parian"
LG
Kantharos
12'5
38e
"Parian"
LG
Kantharos
10,8
38f
"Parian"
LG
Kantharos
13
38g
"Parian"
LG
Kantharos
38h
"Parian"
LG
Plate
38j
"Parian"
LG
Plate
V.25· 8
39 a-c
Melian
LG
Stand
15
-
39d
Melian
LG
Stand
20
Pettier I, 22,
3g e
Melian
LG
39f 39g
Melian Melian
LG LG
RottiersW
39 h
Melian
LG
Rottiers P
39j
Melian
LG
Rottiers P
40a
Theran
4 0b
5'8
D.25·4
174-6
M4, pI. 33 B Delosxv, 68, MI, pI. 33A
174-6
Mykonos
Delosxv, 18, Aa 16, pI. 5
Mykonos
Delosxv,17, Aa 7, pI. 4
Mykonos
178--S1
AM28, 187, J 16, BeiI. 30, 3 Delosxv, 36, ACI,pI. 19 JHS22,74, fig. 3 Delosxv, 57, Ae39, pI. 31 A
Thera
178--S1
Delosxv, 62, Ae72, pI. 31 D
Delos B 687
A49 1, pI. 19
178--S1
178--S1
High-rimmed bowl Skyphos Krater, fr.
8'3 6
178-81
Thera Melos
Belly-handled amphora Pedestalled krater
62
Melos?
50
Melos?
LG
Stamnos
37
Theran
LG
Skyphos
8
40C
Theran
LG
Plate
4 0d
Theran
LG
Amphora
48
Thera Sellada Gr.64 burial b Thera, Sellada Gr.64, burial a Thera, Messavouno Gr,29 Thera
40e
Theran
SubG
Amphora
73'5
Thera
177-8
British School 179 .atAthens Delos 178--S1 B 1.943
-
10
*exclusive oflids or high handles
D·32'5
Rej.
Delos B 1.937
"Parian"
7'9
Museum inv. no.
Delosxv,61, Ae61, pI. 31 B
38c
174-6
Delosxv,19, Aa 21, pI. 6
Delos B4·212
Plate no.
-
Branis8, no. 55, pI. 8 Branis8, no. 56, pl. 8 Them I I, 50, fig. 167
182-4
184- 5 184- 5 183- 4 182-4 182-4 186-8
188-g
xxii . Plate no.
LIST OF PLATES
Local style
Date
LIST OF PLATES •
Painter or Workslwp
Shape
Height incm*
4 1a
Euboean
LG
Skyphos
8'g
4 1b
Euboean
LG
Skyphos
9'7
4 IC
Euboean
LG
Jug, cut-away neck
4 Id
Euboean
LG
Shoulder-handled amphora
26
44'1
4 Ie
Euboean
LG
4 If
Euboean
LG
Pedestalled amphora Lekythos
4 1g
Euboean
LG
Aryballos
g'2
4 Ih
Euboean
LG
Kotyle
9'4
4 Ij
Euboean
LG
Lekythos-oinochoe
Provenance context Rheneia, Purification Tr. Lefkandi Lefkandi
Pithecusae
Eretria 17'5
13'5
Cumae, Gr·32 Cumae, Gr·32 Pithecusae
Cumae, Gr·32
Publication Delosxv,82 Bb5I, pI. 39 c ARfor Ig65---6, 10, fig. 14 Lefkandi (lg68),32, fig. 75 Metropoli e Colonie 268, fig.2a GSI65, fig. 26 MA 22, 242, pI. 40,7 MA 22, 242, pI. 40, 2 Metropoli e Colonie 268, fig. Id Metropoli e Colonie 26g, fig·4 a
42a
Boeotian
EG
Cup
6·8
4 2b
Boeotian
EG
Kantharos?
g'8
42C
Boeotian
EG
Ovoid pyxis
13'5
4 2d
Boeotian
EG
Skyphos
5"3
4 2e
Boeotian
EG
Skyphos
5'2
4 2f
Boeotian
EG
Oinochoe
16'5
42g
Boeotian
MG
Skyphos
7'4
Orchomenos, Gr. (Ig03) Orchomenos, Gr. (Ig03) Orchomenos, Gr. (lg03) Orchomenos, Gr. (Ig03) Orchomenos, Gr. (lg03) Orchomenos, Gr. (lg03) Vranesi
4 2h
Boeotian
MG
Miniature oinochoe
6
Vranesi
-
4 2j
Boeotian
MG
Mug
8·8
Vranesi
-
43 a
Boeotian
MG
58'5
43 b
Boeotian
MG
Neck-handled amphora Flat pyxis
43 c
Boeotian
MG
Flatpyxis
43d
Boeotian
MG
43 e
Boeotian
MG
Neck-handled amphora Neck-handled amphora
44 a
Boeotian
LG
*exclusive oflids or high handles
Kantharos
-
Museum inv. no.
Provenance context
Eretria LK/ 65/ P I77 EretriaLK/ 65/ P 163
IgQ-3
44 C
Boeotian
LG
Tall pyxis
Hd
Boeotian
LG
Oinochoe
44 e
Boeotian
LG
Skyphos
44 44g,j
Boeotian Boeotian
LG LG
Tall pyxis Pedestalled krater
33'5
44h
Boeotian
LG
Pedestalled krater
35
45 a
Boeotian
LG
Oinochoe
48'5
45 b
Boeotian
LG
Flatpyxis
II' 5
45 c
Boeotian
LG
60
"Eretria"
45 d
Boeotian
LG
Pedestalled amphora Pedestalled amphora
87
Thebes
Ig0-3
Naples
191-5
Naples
191-5
Ischia
Igl-5
Vranesi
-
41
Mavroneri, nr Chaeronea
-
-
Athens 1470
"Thebes"
7'5
"Near Thebes"
191-5
Ig7-8 Ig7-8 197-8 197-8 197-8
4 6a
Laconian
PG
Skyphos, fr.
4 6b
Laconian
PG
Oinochoe
46c
Laconian
PG
Skyphos, fr.
4 6d
Laconian
PG
Skyphos, fr.
4 6e
Laconian
MG
Amphora, fr.
4 6f
Laconian
MG?
Krater, fr.
4 6g
Laconian
LG
Krater, frs.
4 6h
Laconian
LG
Plate
4 6j
Laconian
LG
Deep cup or pyxis
4 6k
Laconian
LG
Deep skyphos
5 (PH) Amyc1ae
197-8 198-9 198-9 198-9 198-9 198-9 198-9
198-9 7g8-g
201-10
*exc1usive oflids or high handles
Sparta, Hereon Sparta, 13'2 (PH) Hereon Amyc1ae 4'5 (PH) Sparta, Chalkioikos Sparta, Chalkioikos Sparta, Artemis Orthia D.lg Sparta, Arternis Orthia 8 (PH) Sparta, Artemis Orthia Sparta, Chal9'5 kioikos (PH) 19'5
Ref·
London IgI0.1O-13·1
201-10
-
Hanover 1897· 8a (destroyed) Boston 97·3 60
201-10
-
201-10
Athens, private possession Athens 14708 Athensl28g6
201-10
Private possession Copenhagen 537 1
201-10
Hanover 1957·84
201-10
Athens 18553
200-10
Arias-Hirmer-
Athens 5893
200-10
Shefton 273, pI. I I AM52, pl. 2, g; pl. 3,10-11
Sparta
212-14
-
Sparta
212-14
A 0 59, fig. 32
Sparta
212-14
AM52, pl. 2,13
Sparta
212-14
-
Sparta
214-1 5
-
Sparta
214-1 5
A065, pI. 39 Q.
Sparta
215-19
AO 61, fig, 34
Sparta
215-19
A063, fig, 37 H
Sparta
2I5-19
RSA 13,125, fig·5 a
Sparta
2I5-19
-
Thebes
Museum inv. no.
HampeFGS, pI. 25, I (other side)
Fairbanks 86, no. 286, pl. 24
33' I
Ig0-3
Athens 12856
Naples
10
Publication
Ig0-3
Ischia
46
-
Height incm*
Kantharos
-
-
Shape
LG
"Near Thebes"
-
Painter or Workslwp
Boeotian
II·8
-
Date
44 b
-
-
Local style
Ig0-3
Vranesi
6'4
-
Plate no.
Mykonos
Chaeronea 148a Chaeronea 148 Chaeronea 149 Chaeronea 14¥ Chaeronea 144b Chaeronea 100 Chaeronea 159 Chaeronea 143 Chaeronea 153a London 1955·10-n.1 Chaeronea 160 Athens, ~ private possession Chaeronea 164 Chaeronea
-
Rej.
xxiii
HampeFGS, pl. 2g, I (other side) Sotheby 6.7.1964, I CVACopenhagen 2, 49, pl, 67, 3 Woldering, KestnerMuseum I B89- If}64, 71 -
201-10 201-10
201-10
xxiv . Plate no.
LIST OF PLATES •
LIST OF PLATES
Local style
Date
Painteror Workshop
Shape
Height incm*
Provenance context Sparta, Artemis Orthia Sparta, Artemis Orthia Amyclae
4 61
Laconian
LG
Deep cup or pyxis
46m
Laconian
LG
Lakaina
46n
Laconian
LG
Pyxis
22
460 46p
Laconian Laconian
LG LG
Krater, fr. Krater, fr.
47 a
Ithacan
PG
Cup
18 (PH) Amyclae Sparta, Artemis Orthia Aetos, cairns 6'5
47 b
Ithacan
47 c
Ithacan
47d
Ithacan
PG
Krater, fr.
8 (PH) Aetos, cairns
47 e
Ithacan
PG
Kantharos (or cup), fr.
7 (PH) Aetos
PG
Skyphos
PG
Kantharos, fr.
47f
Ithacan
PG
Lekythos, fr.
47g
Ithacan
PG
Jug, fr.
12'5
6·
I
19
Aetos, cairns
8 (PH) Aetos, cairns
Aetos, cairns
9 (PH) Aetos
47h
Ithacan
PG
Kantharos, fr.
4 8a 4 8b 4 8c
Achaean Achaean Achaean
PG PG PG
Kantharos Kantharos Kantharos
13'5 15'5 r r- 5
Derveni, Gr. Derveni, Gr. Derveni, Gr.
48d
Achaean
PG
Kantharos
8'3
Derveni, Gr.
4 8e
Achaean
PG
Skyphos
9'1
Derveni, Gr.
4 8f
Achaean
PG
Pedestalled skyphos
14
Derveni, Gr.
4 8g 4 8h
Achaean Achaean
PG PG
Kantharos Kantharos
13'3 Il '5
Derveni, Gr. Derveni, Gr.
4 8j
Achaean
PG
Oinochoe
26
Derveni, Gr.
*exclusive oflids or high handles
7 (PH) Aetos, cairns
Publication
Museum inv. no.
Plate no.
Ref.
Local style
Date
Painteror Workshop
Shape
Height incm*
Provenance context
Sparta
215-1 9
49 a
Ithacan
MG
Globular pyxis
22'4
Aetos
BSA 34,102, pl. 20e
Sparta
215-1 9
409b
Ithacan
LGI
Jug
31
Aetos
Jd! 14, 84, fig. 42
Athens 234
215-1 9
49 c
Ithacan
LGI
Pedestalled krater
21
Aetos
Sparta Sparta
215- 19 215-1 9
49 d
Ithacan
LGI
Skyphos
12
Aetos, Lower Deposit
4g e
Ithacan
LGI
Kantharos
12
Aetos
49f
Ithacan
LGI
Kantharos, fr.
9 (PH) Aetos
49g
Ithacan
LGI
Cup
7
49 h
Ithacan
LGI
Oinochoe
18
Aetos, Lower Deposit
49j
Ithacan
LGI
Oinochoe
24
Aetos, Lower Deposit
49 k
Ithacan
LGI
Oinochoe, fr.
16 (PH) Aetos, Lower Deposit
5 0a
Ithacan
LGII
Kantharos
13
BSA 34, Ill, pl. 23f BSA 33, 45, no. 54, fig. 18 BSA 33, 40, no. 13, fig. 10 BSA 33,43, no. 16, fig. 13 BSA 33, 43, no. 34, pI. 3 BSA48,270, P.134, fig. 6 BSA 33, 50, no. 75, fig. 26 BSA48,270, P.146, fig. 6 BSA 33,43, no. 18, fig. 15 -
AJA 64,16, no. 54, pI. 5, fig. 39 AJA 64,16, no. 55, pI. 5, fig. 39 AJA 64,16, no. 53, pl. 5, fig. 39 AJA 64,16, no. 56, pI. 5, fig. 40 AJA 64,16, no. 57, pI. 5, fig. 40 AJA 64,16, no. 51, pl. 5, fig. 38
Vathy (Ithaca)
221-3
Vathy (Ithaca)
221-3
Vathy (Ithaca)
221-3
Vathy (Ithaca) Vathy (Ithaca)
221-3
Ii
221-3
Vathy (Ithaca)
221-3
Vathy (Ithaca)
221-3
Aetos
Aetos, Upper Deposit
Vathy (Ithaca)
221-3 50b
Ithacan
LGII
221-3 221-3 221-3
Lekythos-oinochoe, fr.
15 (PH) Aetos
Patras Patras Patras
5°c
Achaean
LGII
Kantharos
13
Pharae, Gr.A
Patras
221-3
5 0d
Achaean
LGII
Kantharos
13
Pharae, Gr.A
Patras
221-3
50e
Achaean
LGII
Kantharos
9
Pharae, Gr. r
Batras
221-3
5 of
Achaean
LGII
Kantharos
10
Pharae, Gr.A
Patras Patras
221-3 221-3
5 0g
Achaean
LGII
Jug
25
Pharae, Gr. r
5 0h
Achaean
LGII
Jug
21' 5
Patras
221-3
Pharae, Gr. r
*exclusive oflids or high handles
Publication
BSA48,300, no. 818, pI. 50 BSA43,75, no. 414, pl. 27 BSA48,297, no. 802; JHS70,9, fig. 5 BSA43,60, no. 28o, pI. 16 BSA 43,63, no. 306, pl. 18 BSA48,292, no. 76o, pl. 47 BSA48,294, no. 778, pl. 44BSA43,75, no. 432, pl. 29 BSA43,79, no. 471, pI. 33 BSA43,79, no. 473, pI. 33 BSA43,67, no. 358 pI. 23 BSA48,323, no. 1020, pl. 48 PAE 1952, 40 1-2,A4, fig. 12 PAE 1952, 4 02,A5, fig. I I PAE 1952, 405, r 2, fig. 20 PAE 1952, 402, A 7, fig. IQ PAE 1952, 405, r 4, fig. 22 PAE 1952, 405-6, r 5, fig. 22
Museum inv. no.
xxv
Rif.
Vathy (Ithaca)
223-8
Vathy (Ithaca)
223-8
Vathy (Ithaca)
223-8
Vathy (Ithaca)
223-8
Vathy (Ithaca)
223-8
Vathy (Ithaca)
223-8
Vathy (Ithaca)
223-8
Vathy (Ithaca)
223-8
Vathy (Ithaca)
223-8
Vathy (Ithaca)
223-8
Vathy (Ithaca)
228-32
Vathy (Ithaca)
228-32
Patras
228-32
Patras
228-32
Patras
228-32
Patras
228-32
Patras
228-32
Patras
228-32
LIST OF PLATES • XXVll
XXVI • LIST OF PLATES
Plate no.
Local style
Date
Painteror Workshop
Shape
Height incm*
5 1a
Cretan
PGB
Hydria
27'7
5 1b
Cretan
PGB
Lekythos
14'5
5 1c
Cretan
PGB
Oinochoe
11
5 1d
Cretan
PGB
Pyxis
11
5 1e
Cretan
PGB
Cup
5 1£
Cretan
PGB
Necked pithos
42
5 1g
Cretan
PGB
Straight-sided pithos
41
5 2a
Cretan
EG
Two-handled pithos
62
5 2b
Cretan
EG
38
5 2C
Cretan
EG
Straight-sided pithos Neck-handled amphora
8
58. 6
5 2d
Cretan
EG
Pedestailed krater
7°
53 a
Cretan
MG
Four-handled pithos
42
53 b
Cretan
MG
Cup
14
53c
Cretan
MG
Mug
10
53d
Cretan
MG
Pyxis
7. 8
53e
Cretan
MG
Aryballos
6
53£
Cretan
MG
Hydria
29
53g
Cretan
MG
Oinochoe
39
53h
Cretan
MG
33'5
54 a,b
Cretan
LG
Neck-handled amphora Four-handled pithos
Cretan Bird P
54c
Cretan
LG-EO Cretan Bird P
54 d
Cretan
LG
54e
Cretan
LG
*exc1usive oflids or high handles
Cretan Bird W
46
Four-handled pithos (detail) Cup
Krater
10
24'5
Provenance context Fortetsa, T.X Fortetsa, T.OD Fortetsa, T.OD Fortetsa, T.OD Fortetsa, T.X/3 Fortetsa, T.II/21 Fortetsa, T.P Teke, Platon's T Fortetsa, T. TFT/35 Fortetsa, T.A Teke, Platon'sT Fortetsa, T.X/83
Publication
F 51, no. 493, pI. 29 F 37, no. 356, pI. 26 F37,no·35 1, pI. 26 F 38, no. 369, pI. 26 F 46, no. 434, pI. 35 F93, no. 1016, pI. 60 F 125, no. 1440, pis. 77, 163
F 65, no. 706, pl. 40 BSA 56,71-2, A I, fig. 4, pI. 8
-
F52, no. 530-1, pI. 30 Fortetsa, F 58, no. 611, T. vlu/6 pI. 39 Fortetsa, F 75, no. 838, pI. 50 T. VU/13 F61, no. 643, Fortetsa, T. TFT/I pI. 45 F 63, no. 666, Fortetsa, T.TFT/12 pI. 45 Teke, BSA49,225, TbolosT no. 24, pI. 21 Ann. 10-12, Milatos 580,fig. 623 Fortetsa, F 49, no. 476, T.X pI. 35 F 118, Fortetsa, no. 1366, T. P/63 pI. 85 FI26, Fortetsa, no. 1441, T. P/73 pls, 86, 163 Fortetsa, F 119, no. 1369, T. P/63 pI. 102 Knossos, BSA55, Geom. 163- 4, Well fig. 6, pI. 44
Plate
Museum inv. no. Herak1eion 14792 Herakleion 12835 Herakleion 12831 Herakleion 12861 Herakleion 14715 Herakleion 13662 Herakleion 12433 Herakleion 12076 Herakleion 14889 Herakleion 1097° Herakleion 12149 Herakleion 14768; lid 14767 Herakleion 13 159 Herakleion 14956 Herakleion 14884 Herakleion 14823 Herakleion
no.
Local style
Date
Painteror Workshop
Shape
Height incm* 4°'5
Provenance context
Publication
54£
Cretan
LG
Two-handled pithos
55a
Cretan
LG
Aryballos
6'5
55 b
Cretan
LG
Aryballos
7'5
55C
Cretan
LG
Lekythos
9'5
55 d
Cretan
LG
Kotyle
7'9
55 e
Cretan
LG
Lid
D.22
55£
Cretan
LG
Lid
D.25"5
55g
Cretan
LG
Skyphos
55h
Cretan
LG
239-4 1
55j
Cretan
LG
Neck-handled amphora Oinochoe
242-4
55k
Cretan
LG
Cup
551
Cretan
LG
Cup
11
56a
South Cretan South Cretan South Cretan
EG
Straight-sided pithos Ovoid pithos
53'6
Straight-sided pithos
3°
42
Adhromyloi
10'3
Kavousi
-
-
235-8
Fortetsa, T. vu/8
F 74, no. 824, pI. 51
235-8 235-8 235-8 235-8 235-8 235-8
239-4 1 239-4 1 7'3
239-4 1 30 22·8 7'2
242-4 24 2-4 56b 24 2-4 56c-d 24 2-4 242-4
Herakleion
24 2-4
Herakleion 1479° Herakleion 12436
24 2-4
Herakleion ~ 12439
246-9
Herakleion 12644
247-9
Knossos
249-55
SubG LG
33'2
Fortetsa, F 75, no. 832, T. VU/II pI. 50 Fortetsa, F 68, no. 738, T.F pI. 49 Fortetsa, F 74, no. 829, T. vU/9 pI. 50 Knossos, Geom. Deposit in Road Trials 1960 Fortetsa, F 57, no. 593, T. vm/4 pI. 39 Fortetsa, F 40, no. 401, T.L pI. 146 Fortetsa, F 93, no. 1006, T. u/19 pI. 73 Fortetsa, F 63, no. 673, T.TFT pI. 43 Fortetsa, F91, no. 977, pI. 70 T. u/13 Fortetsa, F 92, no. 989, T.u/15 pI. 73 Fortetsa, F94, no. 1025, T.U/22 pI. 73 Ann. 10-12, Arkades, T.L 35 2,fig·460 Ann. 10-12, Arkades, T.R 259,fig, 312 Ann. 10-12, Arkades, T.R 247, fig, 292
56e
Eteocretan
57a
Eteocretan
Straight-sided pithos Skyphos
57b
Eteocretan
Skyphos
9
Kavousi
57c
Eteocretan
Skyphos
9
Adhromyloi
57d
Eteocretan
Skyphos
10
Adhromyloi
57e
Eteocretan
Skyphos
I I
57£
Eteocretan
Skyphos
11
Piskokephalo
57g
Eteocretan
Oinochoe
28'5
Piskokephalo
57h,j
Eteocretan
Cup
16·6
Kavousi
57k
Eteocretan
Krater
28
Vrokastro, Room 12
246-9
*exc1usive oflids or high handles
'9
Adhromyloi
BSA 12,45, fig. 28
BSA 12,45, fig. 22 BSA 12,43, fig. 21 BSA 12,48, fig. 21 PAE1953, 294,fig·4 PA E 1953, 293, fig. 3
Vrokastro 107, fig. 61
Museum in», no. Herakleion 14923; lid 14919 Herakleion 14921 Herakleion 1309 1 Herakleion 14955 Knossos
Herakleion 13163 Herakleion 12944 Herakleion 13179 Herakleion 14863 Herakleion 137°2 Herakleion 13175 Herakleion 13692 Herakleion 8126 Herakleion 8008 Herakleion 80 3 1 ; lid 8032 Herakleion 3 180 Herakleion 747 Herakleion 745 Herakleion 3244 Herakleion 2225 Herakleion 2222 Herakleion 12086 Herakleion 12284 Herakleion 741 Herakleion 6644
ReI. 249-55
249-55 249-55 249-55 249-55
249-55 249-55 249-55 249-55 249-55 249-55 249-55 255-7 255-7 255-7
25g-61 25g-61 259---{) I 25g-61 259---{) I 259--61 25g-61 25g-61 25g-61 25g-61
LIST OF PLATES· XXIX
XXV111 • LIST OF PLATES
Plate no.
Local style
Date
Painteror Works/wp
Shape Neck-handled amphora Hydria
Height incm*
Provenance context
3 1'3
Adhromyloi
37
Kavousi
22
Kavousi
56
Ialysos, Marmaro Gr·43 Ialysos, Marmaro Gr·43 Ialysos, Marmaro Gr·43 Ialysos, Marmaro Gr·43 Cos, Serraglio Gr. I Cos, Serraglio Gr. 7 Cos, Serraglio Gr. 7 Cos, Serraglio Gr. 27 Cos, Serraglio Gr. I Cos, Serraglio Gr. I Cos, Serraglio Gr. I Camiros, Acropolis Gr.80 Camiros, Acropolis Gr.80
571
Eteocretan
57 m
Eteocretan
57 n
Eteocretan
5 8a
Dodecanesian
EG
58b
Dodecanesian
EG
Amphoriskos
17
58c
Dodecanesian
EG
Amphoriskos
17·5
58d
Dodecanesian
EG
Skyphos
5 8e
Dodecanesian Dodecanesian Dodecanesian Dodecanesain Dodecanesian Dodecanesian Dodecanesian Dodecanesian
EG
Oinochoe
EG
Pyxis
58f 58g 59 a 59 b 59 c 59 d 5g e
59 f
Dodecanesian
EG MG MG MG MG MG
MG
Straight-sided pithos Belly-handled amphora
Neck-handled amphora Amphoriskos Lekythos Lekythos Skyphos Oinochoe
Lekythos
59g
Dodecanesian
MG
Pedestalled krater
59h
Dodecanesian
MG
Lekythos
6
21'3 9. 6 23. 6 16'9 13'5 22·8 7. 8 12
12
34
25
Camiros, Acropolis Gr.80
Museum inv. no.
Publication
Ref.
60b 60c 60d
60e
Dodecanesian Dodecanesian Dodecanesian Dodecanesian Dodecanesian
MG
Oinochoe
27
MG
Oinochoe
43
MG
Kantharos
13'2
MG
Cup
12'5
MG
Pedestalled krater
*exclusive oflids or high handles
55'5
Cos, Pizzoli Gr.6 Exochi, Gr. V Exochi, Gr.V Camiros, T.82 Camiros
Provenance context
16 (PH) Smyrna, House XLI Exochi D·38
259-61
60g
MG
Tray
259-61
61a
Dodecanesian Rhodian
LG
Bird-kotyle W
Jug
22·8
Camiros
61b
Rhodian
LG
Bird-kotyle W
Oinochoe
27
61c
Rhodian
LG
Bird-kotyle W
Kotyle
265-7
61d
Rhodian
LG
Bird-kotyle W
Kotyle
265-7
61e
Rhodian
SubG
Rheneia, Purification Tr. Ialysos, Gr·5 0 Thera, Sellada Gr.17 Delos, Artemision
61f
Rhodian
LG
Bird and ZigzagP
Oinochoe
39
Camiros
61g
Rhodian
LG
Skyphos
10
Siana
61h
Rhodian
LG
Bird and ZigzagP Bird and ZigzagP
Kantharos
12·6
Siana
62a
Rhodian
LG
Pyxis
17
62b
Rhodian
LG
Aryballos
62C
Rhodian
LG
Kantharos
62d
Rhodian
LG
Kotyle
9'7
62e
Rhodian
LG
Kotyle
9'3
62f
Rhodian
LG
Oinochoe
24'5
62g
Rhodian
LG
Oinochoe
22
62h
Rhodian
LG
27
63 a
Rhodian
LG
Pedestalled kantharos Pedestalled krater
Camiros, Gr.85 Camiros, Gr·45 Exochi, Gr.B Exochi, Gr.L Exochi, Gr.D Exochi, Gr.D Exochi, Gr.D Exochi, Gr.A Exochi, Gr.C
63 b
Coan
LG
Oinochoe
267-73
63 c 63 d
Smyrnaean Milesian
LG LG
Kotyle Fr.
267-73
63 e
Coan
LG
Oinochoe
267-73
63 f
Smyrnaean
LG
Krater, fr.
63g
Chiot
LG
Krater, fr.
CR8,161-4, fig. 149
Rhodes 15535
CR8,161-4, fig. 149
Rhodes 15537
-
Cos 409
-
Cos 478
265-7
Cos 477
265-7
Cos 774
267-73
Cos 407
267-73
Cos 406
267-73
-
Cos 413
267-73
CR6-7,192, no. 6, fig. 231 CR 6-7,192, no. 6, fig. 230 CVAHeidelberg, 3, 63, pI. 122,2 CR6-7, 189-91 ,
Rhodes 14090
267-73
Rhodes 14088
267-73
Heidelberg M7
267-73
Rhodes 14081
267-73
Cos 963
267-73
265-7
265- 7
Bird-bowl
10
5"8
8'1 15
45
I,
fig. 225 60a
Height incm*
Krater, fr.
265-7
no.
Shape
MG
Rhodes 15534
-
Painteror Workshop
Ionic
CR8,161-4, fig. 149
-
Date
60f
Herakleion 3 184 Herakleion 697 Herakleion 699 Rhodes 15533
-
Local style
259-61
BSA 12,44, fig. 21 Ann. 10-12, 580, fig. 624 Ann. 10-12, 586,fig.633 CR8,161-4, fig. 149
-
Plate no.
-
~
Exochi 49, V I, Copenhagen figs. 111-12 12451 Exochi 52, V 3, Rhodes (lost) fig. 115 Rhodes CR 6-7, 194-8, no. 4, 14737 figs. 236-8 London Exochi 102-3, fig. 203 61.4-25.5 1
267-73
*exclusive oflids or high handles
Cos,Ay. Pantaleon Smyrna 10'2 4 (PH) Miletus Cos, Serraglio Gr. 14 22 (PH) Smyrna 25
23 (PH) Chios, Emporio
Publication BSA 53-4, pI. 5C Exochi66, Z I, fig. 137 Exochi118, n.146, fig. 209 Delos, xv, 97-8, Rh I, pl. 46A CR 3, 84, no. I. Thera 11, 30, fig. 80
Museum inv. no. Izmir
267-73
Rhodes (lost) London 60.4-4. 10
267- 73 277-9
Delos B.1958
277-9
Rhodes 11642 Thera
277-9
Delosxv, 101, Delos Rh 26, pI. 47E London Exochi 91, 85. 12-13.6 n·4 2, fig. 197 Oxford LindosI, 248, 1885.622 fig. 30 Oxford Lirulos I, 247, 1885.621 fig. 29 Rhodes CR6-7, 203, fig. 243 14749 Rhodes CR 6-7,132, fig. 148 14079 Rhodes Exochi 25, B 3 (lost) fig. 40 Exochi44, L I, Copenhagen 1244 8 fig. 100 Rhodes Exochi38, (lost) D 16, fig. 72 Exochi, 29 D 7, Rhodes (lost) fig. 68 Exochi36, D 9, Copenhagen 12439 figs. 73-4 Exochi 14, A 2, Rhodes (lost) fig. 8 Copenhagen Exochi25-6, 12432 Cl, figs. 46-8 Cos Bd'A 35, 321, fig. 95 Izmir Izmir 1M9-1O,58, pl. 60, 2 Cos 528 BSA 53-4, pl. 5d Greek Emporia Ill, no. 35, pl. 21
Ref.
277-9
299
280-1
280-1 280-1 275-7 275-7 281-6 281-6 281-6 281-6 281-6 281-6 281-6
28 7-8 297 296 287--8
Izmir
297
Chios
294-5
xxx . Plate TW.
LIST OF PLATES
Local style
Date
Painter or Workslwp
Shape
Height in cm*
64a
Samian
LG
Skyphos
9
64b
Samian
LG
Skyphos
7·2
64c 64d
Samian Samian
SubG LG
Skyphos Cup
10·8
64e
Samian
LG
Cup
II
64
Samian
LG
Olpe
II ·8
64g
Samian
SubG?
Pedestalled kra teriskos
64h
Samian
LG
Kantharos, fr.
64j 64k
Samian Samian
SubG SubG
Jug Kantharos, fr.
641
Samian
SubG
Tray, fr.
*exclusive oflids or high handles
29·5
D.22
Provenance context Heraion, First Inundation deposit Heraion, First Inundation deposit Heraion Heraion, We1IF Heraion, WellF Heraion, WellF Heraion, First Inundation deposit? Heraion Heraion Heraion, Fill under Altar V Heraion Fill under Hekatompedos 11
Museum Publication
in», TW.
AM72,4°, Beil.53, 1
Samos
290-3
AM72,4°, Beil·53,2
Samos K2011
29ll-3
Samos Samos
290-3 290-3
Samos
290-3
Samos
290-3
Samos K1511
290-3
Samos K76 Samos Samos K805
290-3
Samos K802
290-3
AM74,13, Beil.14,2 AM74,13, Beil. 14, 1 AM74,13, Beil. 16, 1 AA 1937, 207, fig. 2 AM54, 15-16, pI. 2 A M 58, 97fl"., figs. 40-1, Beil.28-g AM58, II3, fig. 54e, Beil·33,3
290-3 290-3
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, it is a pleasure to record my deep gratitude to the Managing Committee of the British School at Athens, where I held the Macmillan Studentship from 1957 until 1960; during those years I was privileged to make the School my centre ofoperations while gathering the material for this survey. To many scholars and institutions I should like to express my thanks for their kind permission to illustrate material not previously published: namely, to Mrs S. Karouzou in respect of thirteen vases in the National Museum ofAthens; to Dr E. M. Hatzidakis in respect ofone vase in the Benaki Museum, Athens; to Prof. J. L. Benson in respect oftwo vases from the Potters' Quarter at Corinth; to Lord William Taylour and Mr V. R. d'A. Desborough in respect ofseven vases from Mycenae; to Prof. E. Kunze in respect of six vases from Orchomenos, one from Tiryns, and one from Amyclae; to the late Dr J. Threpsiades in respect of seven vases in the Chaeronea Museum; to Prof. N. Kondoleon in respect offive vases in the Tenos Museum, and one in the Thera Museum; to Prof. Ch. Christou in respect of four vases in the Sparta Museum; to Dr St. Alexiou in respect of five vases in the Herakleion Museum; to Prof. N. Platon in respect of two vases from Teke near Herakleion; to the British School at Athens in respect ofone vase from recent excavations at Knossos, and five in their collection at Athens; to Prof. L. Morricone in respect ofnine vases from Cos; to Mr G. Konstantinopoulos in respect of one vase from lalysos; to Prof. H. Waiter in respect of two vases from Samos; to Prof. J. M. Cook and Prof. E. Akurgal in respect ofone vase from excavations at Old Smyrna; to Mr D. E. L. Haynes and the Trustees ofthe British Museum in respect ofseven vases; to Mr R. V. Nicholls and the Syndics of the Fitzwilliam Museum in respect oftwo vases; to Dr H. W. Catling and the Visitors of the Ashmolean Museum in respect oftwo vases; to Prof. C. M. Robertson in respect ofone vase in the collection ofUniversity College, London; to Mr P. Devambez in respect ofone vase in the Musee du Louvre; to Dr M. Schliiter in respect oftwo vases in the Kestner-Museum, Hanover; to Dr E. Rohde in respect ofone vase in the StaatlicheMuseen, East Berlin; and to Dr J. R. Green in respect of one vase in the University of Otago Museum, Dunedin. In addition, I have benefited greatly from the kindness ofthe many scholars whose names follow, who have generously permitted me to examine and refer to material still unpublished. In the Athenian Agora, Prof. E. L. Smithson and Dr E. T. H. Brann made available tome all the Geometric pottery in their care. To the late Dr J. Papadimitriou I am grateful XXXI
xxxii . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS for the opportunity ofstudying eight unpublished grave groups found at Vari in 19S7, and material in the museum ofChalcis. Prof G. E. Mylonas allowed me to examine unpublished vases from the older excavations at Eleusis, and I am indebted also to Prof P. P. Kahane for information concerning their contexts in the various grave groups mentioned in 18g8 by Skias. Furthermore, my thanks are due to Prof. Sp. Marinatos for access to material from Volimedia in Messenia: to Prof. N. Kondoleon for access to material from Kimolos; to the late Dr N. M. Verdelis for access to material from Kapakli near Volos; and to Dr N. Yialouris for access to material in the museums ofOlympia and Patras. Finally, I should like to express my extreme gratitude to members ofthe Greek Archaeological Service in general, for their constant assistance, kindness, and courtesy at all stages in the preparation of this book. Through their kind offices I have been enabled to study Geometric pottery in the museums of Andros, Argos, Athens (National, Agora, and Kerameikos), Ay. Nikolaos, Chaeronea, Chalcis, Chios, Corinth, Cos, Delos, Delphi, Eretria, Herakleion, Ithaca (Stavros and Vathy), Khania, Kimolos, Kythera, Melos, Mykonos, Nauplia, Olympia, Patras, Rhodes, Samos, Sparta, Tenos, Thera, and Volos. Across the Aegean, material from the Anglo-Turkish excavations at Old Smyrna was made available to me through the kindness ofthe excavators, Prof.]. M. Cook and Prof E. AkurgaI. In pursuit of the first western Greeks I have paid several visits to Ischia, where Dr G. Buchner has most kindly shown and discussed with me his remarkable finds from the colony of Pithecusae. I am grateful also to Prof. Bernabo Brea for facilities of study in the museums of Syracuse and Lipari. In pondering the many problemsarising from Geometric pottery, I have benefited greatly from the expert advice and counsel of many scholars, although the responsibility for all statements and opinions in this book remains mine alone. In particular I would like to thank Pro£. A. Andrewes, Dr]. P. Barron, Pro£.]. L. Benson, Miss S. Benton, Mrs]. M. Birmingham, Mr]. Boardman, Dr]. Bouzek, Dr E. T. H. Brann, Mr]. K. Brock,Dr G. Buchner, Dr ]. Close-Brooks, Pro£. ]. M. Cook, Prof R. M. Cook, Prof. P. E. Corbett, Prof. P. Courbin, Prof.]. M. Davison, Mr V. R. d'A. Desborough, Prof. C. W.]. Eliot, Dr R. A. Higgins, Mr M. S. F. Hood, Prof. G. L. Huxley, Dr L. H. ]effery, Prof. P. Kahane, Prof. E. Kunze, Miss E. Macnamara, Mrs K. R. Maxwell-Hyslop, Mr P.]. Parr, Mr D. Ridgway, Pro£. C. M. Robertson, Pro£. E. L. Smithson, Miss ]. du P. Taylor, and Prof T. B. L. Webster. I am especially grateful to Prof G. L. Huxley who assumed the onerous task of reading the proofs: he brought to my notice many errors and inaccuracies, but for those that remain I accept full responsibility. My warmest thanks are also due to Miss]. Price ofMethuen, and to Miss M. Newland Smith of The Broadwater Press, for their unfailing patience and kindness in dealing with this book at all stages of its production. Finally, I should like to thank the Craven Fund of Cambridge University for a generous grant towards the expenses of illustration. .
I am indebted to Prof. K. F. ]ohansen for permission to reproduce drawings from Exochi (PIs. fioc-d.g ; fizb-c.e-Eh; 6sa); to Dr G. Buchner for two figs. from Metropoli e Colonie
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS· xxxiii (PIs. Igj and 4Ih); to the late Dr N. M. Verdelis for two figs. from PGR T (PI. 3Sf-g); and to the British School at Athens for PIs. 47f and S4e. The following scholars and institutions have kindly supplied me with photographs, and have courteously permitted me to reproduce them: Akerstr6m, Pro£. A. ATHENS American School of Classical Studies: Agora excavations: photographs by Alison Frant; Corinth excavations Benaki Museum British School of Archaeology: Emporio (Chios) excavations Knossos excavations Lefkandi excavations Mycenae excavations Smyrna excavations Sparta excavations Deutsches archaologisches Institut: Kerameikos excavations Samos excavations Tiryns excavations mise. Ecole Francaise ; Argos excavations National Museum BERLIN (East), Staatliche Museen BOSTON, Museum of Fine Arts CAMBRIDGE, Fitzwilliam Museum Cook, Mr B. F. COPENHAGEN, Nationalmuseet DUNEDIN, University ofOtago Museum: photograph by R. M. Cook Frantz, Miss Alison HANOVER, Kestner-Museum HEIDELBERG University, archaologisches Institut HOBART, University of Tasmania Museum ISCHIA, Lacco Ameno, Museum B
PI. 4 1e
PIs. la-j,l-p; 7b-c; ga-n; IOj-l; I le; ISf-g,1 PIs. I6a-b,d-e; I 7a,d,f-j; I8c,g; Iga-c; z ra.e.k PI. Igf PI. 6Sg PIs. S2C; S4c-d ; SSd,g,1 PI. 41b-e PIs. 22a-h; 2sa-h; 2sc-f; Slg PIs. 60f; 6sc,f PI. 46p PIs. za-h ; sa-l,n; 4a-d; sa-g; roa-h; Isa-e,m-p PI. 64a-1 PIs. 24e-h; 2Sg-h; 3le-f PIs. 6; 7d; IIg; 2gf; 30d; Sla-d,h; 33c-d PIs. 24a-j; 2sa-b; 26; 28c; 2gc,e; soe; S rj PIs. 12a, ISC PI. 14c PI. 44d PIs. 3m; Ise-f PIs. 21d; S7f PIs. 40e; 4Sa; 60b; 62d,g PI. 8e PI. 4Sd PIs. 44C; 4Sb PI. Sgg PI. 12f PI. 41d
xxxiv . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ISTANBUL, Deutsches archaologisches Institut, Miletus excavations LEIDEN, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden LONDON British Museum Sotheby and Co. University College London Morricone, Prof. L MUNICH, Antikensammlung NAPLES, Muzeo Nazionale NEW YORK, Metropolitan Museum OXFORD, Ashmolean Museum PARIS, Musee du Louvre: photographs by M. Chuzeoille RHODES, Archaeological Museum
PI. 63d Pis. I Ia-b; zoh; 39h-j; 40d Pis. 13b,d; I4a-b; 2Ib,f,j; 341; 39a-c; 44b; 6oe; fira.f PI. 44h (by kind permission of the owner) PI. 8g Pis. 58e-g; 59a-d; 6oa; 63b,e Pis. 8d; 19d,j; 34m Pis. 21C; 4If-g,j Pis. 35; 36a Pis. 12e; 15h; 16c; firg-h Pis. 4e-h; 7a; 8a; rzb-c; 14d; 39d PI. 61c
Abbreviations
AA AAA AAS AASOR AD ADChr AE Aegina AHII Aigina AION AJ AJA Akurgal, Smyrna
Albizzati AM Ann. Annales Annali AntAb AntClass AntK AO APES
AR ArchClass Anas-Hirmer-Shefton
Archaologischer Anzeiger Athens Annals if Archaeology Annales Archiologiques de 0Jirie Annual if the American Schools if Oriental Research 'APXQlOAOYIKOV ~EATiov. From 1960, MfPOC; A: MEAfTQI 'APXQlOAOYIKOV ~EATiov. MfPOC; B: XpOVIKCt 'APXQlOAOYIKr; 'E
XXXVI
ABBREVIATIONS
AS Asea Asine BA BA Besch BASOR Baur BCH Bd'A Beil. Belleten Berl Int Kong VI BIA BICS BM Cat BMQ Brants BSA BSR Bull Met Mus CAH CAH 11 CCO CGA ChO Class Phil Collignon-Couve CR CretCongr CVA QypDodCr
Davison DdA
Delion
Anatolian Studies The Swedish Excavations at Asea in Arcadia. By EJ. Holmberg Asine: Results qf the Swedish Excavations 1922-193°. By 0. Frodin and AW Persson Biblical Archaeology Bulletin Antieke Beschaving Bulletin qf the American Schools qf Oriental Research Catalogue qf the R.D. Stoddart Collection ... in rale Universiry. By P.VC. Baur Bulletin de Correspondence Hellenique Bolletino d'Arte Beilage Turk Tarih Kurumu Belleten VI Internationaler Kongress jUr Archiiologie, Berlin 1939 Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology, Unioersiiy qf London Bulletin qf the Institute of Classical Studies, Unioersity qf London Catalogue qf Vases in the British Museum British Museum Qyarterfy Leyden, Ry"ksmuseum van Oudheden: Description of Ancient Pottery, I I By J.PJ. Brants Annual of the British School at Athens Papers cf the British School at Rome Bulletin qf the Metropolitan Museum tf Art Cambridge Ancient History, first edition Cambridge Ancient History, second edition The Cretan Collection in Oxford: The Dictaean Cave and Iron Age Crete. By J. Boardman La Ceramique Geometrique de l'Argolide. By P. Courbin XapICITr'}pIOV etc A. K. 'OpAQVOOV Classical Philology Catalogue des Vases Peints du Musee National d'Athenes. By M. Collignon and L. Couve Clara Rhodos Pepragmena Diethnous Kretologikou Synednou Corpus Vtzsorum Antiquorum East Mediterranean, Qyprus-Dodecanese-Crete, sixteenth-sixth century RC. Proceedings qf the International ~mposium held at Rethymnon, Crete, in May 1997, ed. V Karageorghis and N. Stampolides (Athens, 1998) J.M. Davison, Attic Geometric Workshops: Tale Classical Studies, vol. XVI Dialoghi di Archeologia Das Delion von Paras. By 0. Rubensohn
I
.ABBREVIATIONS
Dunbabin, GEN EA EdinbLev 3
EG EPA EPC EPG Ergon Euboica
Exochi Expedition
F FA Fairbanks FDv FGH FGS FHG Fortetsa FS
Ga; Arch GEN GG2 GGA GGAPC
G.LNeg. GPP GraefLanglote GSI Hampe, FGS Hampe, Gleichnisse Hampe, Grabfund
XXXVll
TJ. Dunbabin, The Greeks and their Eastern Neighbours 'E
XXXVlll
ABBREVIATIONS
IEJ ILN IM JBirard 3
JdI JHS JNES JOAI JRS K
KB KCh KNC Kraiker, Aigina Kunze AE Langlot; Lefkandi (1968) LG LMTS LPG LSAG MA Marb WP Matz MDOG MeditArch MEFR Metropoli e Colonie MG Monlnst MonPiot MPA MPC MPG
l
Israel Exploration Journal Illustrated London News Istanbuler Mitteilungen (Mitteilungen des deutschen archiiologischen Institut, Abteilung Istanbul) La ceramique grecque ou de tradition grecque au VIIIe siecle en Italie centrale et mendionale, ed. G. Vallet and M. Cebeillac-Gervasoni (Institut J. Berard, Napoli, 1982) Jahrbuch des deutschen archiiologischen Instituts Journal if Hellenic Studies Journal if Near Eastern Studies Jahrbuch des osterreichen archaeologischen Instituts Journal if Roman Studies Kerameikos: Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen. Vol. I, by W Kraiker and K. Kubler; vol. iv, vol. v part I, and vol. vi part I, by K. Kubler Kretische Bronzereliifs. By E. Kunze KpflTKG XpOVIKG Knossos, North Cemetery, EarI:J Greek Tombs, ed. J.N. Coldstream and H.W Catling, BSA Supp. 28 (1996) W Kraiker, Aigina: die Vasen des IO. bis 7. Jahrhunderts E- Kunze, Disiecta membra attischer Grabkratere (AE 1953, I, I62ff.) E. Langlotz, Griechische Vasen in Wiirzburg Excavations at Lefkandi, Euboea: 1964-66. Preliminary report edited by M.R. Popham and L.H. Sackett (London, 1968) Late Geometric The Last Mycenaeans and their Successors. By Y:R.d' A. Desborough Late Protogeometric The Local Scripts if Archaic Greece. By L.H.Jeffery Monumenti antichi publicati ... dei Lincei Marburger Winckelmann-Programm F. Matz, Geschichte der griechischen Kunst, vol. I Mitteilungen der deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin Mediterranean Archaeology (Sydney) Melanges d'Arduologie et d'Histoire publies par l'Ecole francaise de Rome Metropoli e Colonie di Magna Grecia: Atti del Terzo Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto, 1963 Middle Geometric Monumenti Inediti publicati dall'Instituto di Cornspondenra Archeologica Fondation Eugene Piot. Monuments et Memoires Middle Protoattic Middle Protocorinthian Middle Protogeometric
ABBREVIATIONS
Munz Med MuZ NC Neugebauer Nicole NSc NumChron OJA OlBer OlForsch Op Arch Op Ath Op Rom PAE PAPS PCPS PEQ Perrot- Chipie; PG PGP PGRT Pictorial Pursuits
Pottier PZ QDAP RA RAL RDAC RE RendPontAcc RhA Rhitsona RM Robinson-Harcum-IIiffe Sbornik SCE Schafer, RelieJPithoi
I 1
-]
XXXIX
Muneen und Medaillen; Basel, Kunstwerke der Antike Malerei und Zeichnung. By E. Pfuhl Necrocorinthia. By H.G.C. Payne K.A. Neugebauer, Fiihrer durch das Antiquarium, Staatliche Museen ru Berlin. Vo!. II, Vasen G. Nicole, Catalogue des Vases Peints du Musee National d' Athenes Notirie degli Scavi The Numismatic Chronicle O:ifOrd Journal if Archaeology Bericht iiber die Ausgrabungen in OI:Jmpia OI:Jmpische Forschungen Opuscula Archaeologica Opuscula Atheniensia Opuscula Romana npaKTIKG Til<; 'APXOIOAOYIKil<; 'ETOIpEla<; Proceedings if the American Philosophical Sociery Proceedings if the Cambridge Philological Society Palestine Exploration Qy,arterI:J G. Perrot and C. Chipiez, Histoire de l'Art dans l'Antiquite Protogeometric Protogeometric Pottery. By Y:R.d' A. Desborough '0 npwToyEwllETplKo<; Pu8llo<; Til<; 8EooaAla<;. By N. Verdelis Pictorial Pursuits: figurative painting on Mycenaean and Geometric Pottery. Papers from two seminars at the Swedish Institute in Athens in 1999 and 2001, ed. E. Rystedt and B. Wells (Stockholm, 2006) E. Pottier, Vtzses Antiques du Louvre Priihistorische Zeitschrifl Qy,arterI:J if the Department if Antiquities if Palestine Revue Archeologique Rendiconti del Accademia dei Lincei Report if the Department if Antiquities, 0prus Paulys Realencyclopiidie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia 'PoOlaKr; 'AYYEloypa
xl .
l
ABBREVIATIONS
"
Schiering Schmidt-Schliemann Sieveking-Hackl SMEA Sotheby SPG SSCA StEtr SubG Tolle 'Iransizione
Trendall, Handbook TitrkAD Vrokastro
VS Vl1atzinger
W Schiering, Werkstatten orientalisierende Keramik auf Rhodos H. Schmidt, Schliemanns Sammlung Trojanischer Altertiimer J. Sieveking and R. Hackl, Die KOnigliche Vasensammlung zu Miinchen. Vol. I: Die Alteren nichtattischen Vasen Studi Mediterranei ed Egeo-Anatolici Sotheby and Co., Catalogue qf Greek etc. Antiquities; sale catalogue Subprotogeometric Stockholm Studies in Classical Archaeology Studi Etruschi Subgeometric R. T olle, Friihgriechische Reigentiinze La Transieione dal Miceneo all'Alto Arcaismo: del Palarm alla Ciua. Atti del Convegno Internaeumale, Roma, I4-I9 marro I988, ed. D. Musti et al. (Rome, 1991) B. Trendall, Handbook to the Nicholson Museum, Sydney Tiak Askeoloji Dergisi Excavations in Eastern Crete; Vrokastro. By E.H. Hall. (Universiry qf Pennsylvania Museum: Anthropological Publications, Ill) Vases Sicyoniennes. By K.E ]ohansen C. Watzinger, Griechische Vasen in Tiibingen
Preface to the Second Edition
This book first appeared in 1968. Although still quoted as a handbook for Greek Geometric pottery, revision is long overdue. I am grateful to the University of Exeter Press for this opportunity to bring the original text up to date. In devising a Supplement to cover the vast corpus of new finds during the last four decades, several limitations should be stated. Nothing will be added to the final chapter, Historical Conclusions, based chiefly on the pottery; my second book, Geometric Greece, first published in 1977 and revised in 2003, attempted to offer a historical analysis of society, daily life and religion in the Greek world of the ninth and eighth centuries RC., based on a more comprehensive study of all the available archaeological material. This Supplement, then, will concentrate strictly on the book's subtitle, Ten Local Styles and their Chronology. Discussion in the text will be confined to painted wheelmade pottery; coarse and kitchen wares deserve separate scrutiny. Figured scenes, painted mainly in Late Geometric times, have given rise to numerous iconographic studies; consideration of them here will focus on their place in the development of the local ceramic style. Whether the number of those styles can still be limited to ten is a matter for inquiry, in the light of new finds from Euboea, Central Greece, Western Peloponnese and the extremities of Crete. As for chronology, recent discoveries in the South Levant now offer some better hope of absolute dating for geometric pottery in the ninth century RC. In the main text of the Supplement each regional style is treated in turn. For many, no major alteration is needed, the new finds falling easily into the framework outlined in the original text. The chief exception is the Euboean style, to which there is now good reason to assign the monumental Cesnola krater and its related vases (pp. 172-4, pIs. 35, 36a) rather than to Naxos as previously assumed. Furthermore, many recent excavations in the Euboean homeland and in its western colonies have clarified the progress of a distinctive Euboean style, which should no longer be treated under a sub-heading to the Geometric pottery of the Cyclades. The format of the first edition will be followed as far as possible. After the Supplement text, the Bibliography is arranged under chapter headings and is confined to general surveys; to shorter and more detailed articles, reference will be made in notes to the text. Where no note is supplied, the relevant reference will be found in the Site Index. This proceeds area by area, site by site, to direct the reader to recent reports of Geometric pottery found
. xli .
xlii·
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION
anywhere in the Mediterranean world. The list is limited to site reports rather than to general reflections on a site, which may be quoted in notes to the text; but the aim is to include any preliminary notices, however brief, where enough new finds have been illustrated as to be useful and informative.
CHAPTER ONE
I offer my warm thanks to my colleague Dr John Betts, formerly of the Bristol Classical
Introduction
Press, for suggesting the idea and the possibility of this second edition; to my wife, Dr Nicloa Coldstream, for giving up several days to prepare the final electronic version of the Supplement text; and to Anna Henderson of the University of Exeter Press, for her patience in seeing the new text through to publication. ].N. Coldstream, December 2007
Geometric pottery was made in many different regions of Greece, each with its own style; a comprehensive treatment of each local school is the central object of this book. Exhaustive it cannot be, owing to the huge mass of material now available. Yet several advantages are to be gained by attempting to cover the whole range of Geometric pottery within a single volume - advantages which elude an exhaustive study limited to one local style, and yet are beyond the reach ofmore general works on Greek vase-painting where all Geometric is compressed into a single chapter. My first task in these introductory pages is to define the aims ofthis survey. Then, glancing at the reverse side ofthe coin, I shall warn the reader concerning the topics which he will not find treated here. Finally, with our aims thus limited, I offer some remarks on the methods of achieving them and some instructions for the use of this book. For the art historian, the study ofGeometric pottery is an end in itself The style arose in a period when pottery was the major art ofthe Greeks, in the middle ofthe Dark Age between the fall ofMycenae and the burgeoning ofHellenic civilization. True, this primacy was due to lack of competition, for large-scale painting in ancient Greece was confined to murals; and after the wreck ofthe Mycenaean palaces, and before the revival ofmonumental architecture in the seventh century B.C., it is unlikely that there were any walls worth decorating. Yet this lack of competition explains some of the qualities for which Geometric pottery is most admired. Unfettered by the influence of any larger pictorial art, the Geometric pot painter at first confined his ornament to simple rectilinear designs in small panels, carefully chosen and composed so as to accentuate the shape. For the potters, likewise, there were no metallic prototypes to distract them from throwing natural clay shapes on their wheels. Thus the style grew to maturity, self-sufficient and true to its own laws. At its best, there was complete harmony between shape and decoration. Even in the later phases of the Attic school, when the decoration spread over the whole surface, this harmony was never entirely broken. The finest artists, like the Dipylon Master and his associates, could still punctuate their vases with emphatic and weighty motifs which stood out clearly from the subsidiary ornament. Thus the best Geometric vases possess an architectural beauty, where shape and decoration are conceived as a complete unity. In brief, we are dealing with an early C
. I ·
2 • INTRODUCTION
manifestation of that Hellenic sense of form and proportion whose study needs no apology. Quite apart from their excellence as pots, Geometric vases are of great interest to the student of European painting, since they introduce the first consistent tradition of figured drawing since the end of the Mycenaean world. After three centuries of abstract ornament, it is not surprising that the earliest conventions for representing men and animals should be somewhat strange. But to trace the origin of these conventions is beyond the scope of this book; my treatment ofthe figures will be confined to description, with a view to distinguishing some ofthe painters and workshops in Athens and elsewhere. Here I follow J. M. Cook, Mrs G. Nottbohm, and Miss J. M. Davison in believing that such distinctions are possible in the Geometric style - a belief which has not yet won universal acceptance. We pass now to the fields ofresearch in which the study ofGeometric pottery is not an end in itself, but a means to an end. For the historian of early Greece, pottery offers the only available means of measuring time during the Dark Age: no other class of material is preserved in such a continuous sequence, and there are no contemporary written records within the Greek world. But before we can base any time-scale upon Geometric pottery, it is desirable that all the local styles should first be analysed side by side; in this way we shall be able to follow not only the local sequence in each part of Greece, but also the chronological relationship between the various local schools. Only after the completion ofthis analysis will it be profitable to think in terms ofabsolute dates. At this point in the argument, it has been customary to call in the Thucydidean dates for the Sicilian colonies in order to attach the last phase ofGeometric to calendar years. This approach was first explored by B. Schweitzer, to whom we owe the generally agreed dating of the Geometric style to the ninth and eighth centuries B.C.! Yet in spite ofthis general agreement, there are still considerable differences ofopinion over details. This is especially true ofthe earlier phases ofGeometric when, in the absence of fixed dating points, there are widely divergent views concerning the pace of stylistic development. Furthermore, historians may sometimes be bewildered by the mutually conflicting chronologies offered by specialists in different local styles. For these reasons I have felt bound to re-examine the evidence for absolute chronology, in order to present a consistent scheme of dating for all the regional schools. The results of this re-examination are shown in the table on p. 330. In this table, the vertical dimension represents the passage of time; but the horizontal dimension is also ofgreat historical interest. The proliferation oflocal Geometric styles is in strong contrast to the uniformity ofMycenaean I I I b wares some five hundred years earlier; the progress from unity to diversity is long and gradual, though subject to occasional fluctuations. The change demands a historical explanation. The emergence oflocal styles immediately after the collapse ofthe Mycenaean world may at first be attributed simply to a breakdown in Aegean communications; but this theory will not hold good for the Geometric schools ofthe eighth century, which continue to drift apart at a time when communications were steadily improving. Here, surely, the pottery casts some light on the greatest political change during the Dark Age: that is to say, the growth and consolidation of autonomous city-states, each with a self-conscious pride in its own traditions. Because the local Geometric styles are so easily distinguishable, the historian has at his disposal a sensitive index of the 1
AM 43 (1918),49.
INTRODUCTION •
3
contacts between the various states - contacts which are revealed either through pots exported from one district to another, or through the 'invisible exports' implied by the influence passing from one local style to another. Naturally, it will be necessary to inquire in each case whether these contacts were merely commercial, or whether they were established by a migration of people. The definition of regional styles is never more important than when we are trying to assess the initiative of different Greek states outside the Aegean, whether in the Levant or in the West, whether in trade or colonization. The bulk ofthis book, then, is devoted to a description ofall the local styles, and an examination oftheir similarities and differences. This is followed by an attempt to fix their absolute chronology, in the light of the most recent evidence. Finally, I have ventured to add a historical sketch, showing how the results of the pottery analysis can be combined with other archaeological evidence and with the later written sources, so that more light may be thrown on the political, social, and economic development of the early Greek city-states. In order to compress the material into a single volume, some sacrifices have been necessary. I have restricted myself narrowly - and perhaps unreasonably so - within the limits prescribed by my title. I confine my analysis to Geometric pottery made on the Greek mainland and in the Aegean area; to colonial Greek wares made in Italy, Sicily, or the Levant, I refer only in passing. Although Cyprus was also peopled by Greeks, the affinities of CyproGeometric are more Levantine than Aegean; my references to Cyprus are therefore limited to the rare cases where there is clear contact with Greece. In seeking the origins of Greek Geometric, I have not explored far-flung northern or western parallels; the incised meander patterns of Late Bronze Age Roumania or Villanovan Italy seem less relevant here than the precedents set by the Athenian Protogeometric style. Again, I have given only scant attention to the currents ofinfluence which certainly passed from Greek Geometric to the painted wares of the Etruscans, Sicels, and western Phoenicians. The Geometric style is manifested only in painted pottery thrown on the wheel; I exclude from my survey a large class ofcontemporary handmade ware without any painted decoration, and without any close affinity ofshape to the painted pottery. Such vases often attain to a high standard of technique, especially during the later stages of Geometric; but they cannot offer any independent evidence for chronology, since their dating depends entirely on their association with Geometric painted vases.' Being concerned exclusively with style and chronology, I ignore many important aspects of the figured scenes. Thus I do not inquire into the construction of Geometric ships, wheeled vehicles, and biers; or into the nature of Geometric arms and armour. Nor do I probe very far into the details of funerary ritual as shown on the Dipylon monuments; still less do I speculate on the possible connection with Homeric and other epic, through the alleged portrayal ofspecific myths. Most ofthese topics have recently been treated in special studies, where the evidence from Geometric pottery is supplemented - as it should be - by contemporary figured scenes on metalwork, and by the richer and more explicit imagery of seventh-century art. 1 Useful observations on this class have been made by P. Courbin, who offers a comparative study ofexamples from the Attic, Corinthian, and Argive schools: see CGA 29-34, 70-3.
4 .
I
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION •
~
5
f
Finally, lack of space makes it impossible to mention, let alone describe, every known Geometric pot. To many of the plainer vessels, especially those whose provenance is not known, there is no reference in this book; in quoting examples, I have naturally given preference to vases from organized excavations, found in significant contexts. Yet my generalizations are based upon the whole extant output known to me: and I have tried to be exhaustive in listing (a) all the vases which can be attributed to recognizable painters or workshops, and (b) all the contexts where two or more painted vases are securely associated.
Attic Late Geometric I and 11respectively.' Similar subdivisions are possible in Argive, and, to some extent, in Corinthian; elsewhere I have refrained from making them owing to lack ofevidence from context. Outside Attica the terms Early and Middle usually indicate some stylistic resemblances to the corresponding phases of Attic; the exception is Cretan Early Geometric, which is retained in view of J. K. Brock's careful definition of the somewhat eccentric Cretan sequence. Owing to the wide differences ofstyle between the local schools, anomalies are bound to creep into any comprehensive system of classification.
In describing the methods applied in this survey, I begin with a few remarks on the terms used for shapes and chronological subdivisions; for these vary widely among the more specialized studies devoted to a single local style. Since most Geometric shapes have a previous history in Protogeometric, in the interests ofcontinuity I have adopted the terminology of Desborough's Protogeometric Pottery; in naming the new shapes ofAttic Late Geometric, I usually follow J. M. Cook- and Miss E. Brann.s As far as possible I have retained the names in general use for each local style, sometimes at the expense of consistency. Thus a plump cremation urn with an inset lip is called a paintedpithos in Crete (pl, 53a), and a stamnos in Thera (pl. 4oa); while the giant Argive pyxis (pl, 26) is basically the same shape as the Cycladic ovoid krater (pt 35). Such problems become really acute in the case ofpouring vessels, and here I believe that absolute consistency is essential. Following Desborough I keep the term oinochoe for vases with a trefoil lip ; my jugs are usually round-mouthed, with the exception of the variety with cut-away neck characteristic ofThessaly. Typically Attic variants of the jug, with tall broad neck, are named pitcher (pl, 7 e) or tankard (pf, 9 e) according to their size. The oinochoe and the jug have slow-pouring counterparts with tall narrow necks, more suitable for oil than wine: these are named the lekythos-oinochoe (pl, 3I1l) and the lekythos (pI. 41 f) respectively. A further round-mouthed variant is the aryballos, smaller than the lekythos, and with a much shorter neck (pl, 17b). It is hardly necessary to point out that these names are only schematic, and sometimes at variance with the practice of archaic and classical Greece. For example, our earliest inscribed aryballos introduces itself as Tataie's lekythos:" and the so-called kantharos of Geometric has little in common with the favourite vessel of Dionysos.! However, I retain the terms aryballos and kantharos simply in the interests of brevity and convenience; in these respects, they are vastly preferable to 'short-necked lekythos' and 'cup with two vertical handles'. Similar problems arise in naming chronological subdivisions. Some publications today follow P. Kahane, who has divided Attic Geometric into Early, Severe, Ripe, and Late phases. Yet this system seems a slightly uneasy compromise between chronological and descriptive terms; as we shall see, the epithets 'Severe' and 'Ripe' are far more suitable to Attic than to some ofthe remoter local styles, and it is unsatisfactory to use such terms in a purely chronological sense. In the interests of consistency I have therefore followed the simple tripartite system of the Agora publications, which divides the Attic sequence into Early, Middle, and Late;" here Middle Geometric corresponds to Kahane's Severe. In Attic, each of these divisions may be split into two phases; thus Kahane's 'Ripe' and 'Late' become
In tracing the local sequences I have leaned heavily upon the work of specialists in the various regional styles. During the first stages of Geometric research," much care was devoted towards distinguishing these styles from one another. Yet the internal development within anyone local style was not clearly determined until the epoch-making article of Kahane, composed in 1936 and published in 1940.3 Kahane confined his study to Attica, where the evidence from context was most plentiful; with the help of some thirty grave groups he mapped out the whole course of Attic Geometric. The essential correctness of Kahane's sequence has been confirmed by the large mass of Attic material subsequently published - notably the hundred Geometric grave groups from the Kerameikos, and the pottery associated in the graves and wells of the area which later became the Athenian Agora. For the other schools most nearly related to Attic, local sequences have been built up, partly on their Attic affinities, and partly on the internal evidence ofassociated material. Thus the course of Corinthian Geometric has been plotted by S. Weinberg, C. M. Robertson, and Miss S. Benton; and Argive Geometric has recently received an exhaustive study by P. Courbin. In Cycladic Geometric three additional problems arise: contact with Attica is more intermittent; associated groups of material are much less plentiful; and in the later phases several of the islands develop their own individual schools, whose sure recognition is still hampered by the fact that a large proportion of the extant material was exported to Delos or Thera. The same difficulties often arise in many parts of the East Greek world; in the Dodecanese, however, a continuous sequence can be followed through an adequate number of grave groups from Cos and Rhodes. The later part of this sequence has been elucidated by K. Friis J ohansen in his excellent publication ofthe small cemetery of Exochi on Rhodes; for the earlier phases, the Serraglio cemetery on Cos supplies the only continuous series. In central Crete, the rich material from Fortetsa has enabledJ. K. Brock to trace the whole course of the local school; but the remoter parts of the island developed separate styles, and require separate treatment. In other districts it is doubtful whether we yet have enough material to claim a really continuous sequence. Boeotian Geometric is extremely scarce in the Early and Middle phases; from Thessaly, hardly any Late Geometric pottery has been published; and in both areas the lack of associated groups compels us to rely on Attic affinities for the dating. Euboean Geometric was first recognized by J. Boardman in 1949,4 but its full development is only beginning to become clear, thanks to the abundant material from current excavations; tentatively I have coupled this island with the Cyclades, but its style may in the future prove to be just as closely connected with Boeotia and Thessaly.
1 5
BSA 42 (1947), 139ff. Hesperia 30 (1961),95.
2 Agora VIII.
3
LSAG, pI. 47, 3.
4
P. Courbin, BCH 77 (1953), 322ff.
1 3
Cf. JHS 83 (1963),211-12; JHS 84 (1964), 218. AJA 44 (1940), 464ff. 4 BSA 47 (1952), rff,
• Summarized by R. M. Cook, GPP 301-5.
6.
INTRODUCTION
Most obscure ofall are the two schools without a continuous sequence, and without any close affinities with better-known styles before the Late phase: these are Laconian and West Greek - a generic term embracing the lands from Ithaca to Messenia, including Achaea. I devote a separate chapter to each of these ten regional schools, in which I attempt to follow the whole course of the local Geometric sequence. The chapters are divided into sections, each describing the shapes and decoration current in one particular phase; at the head of each section I quote the significant groups of material on which the description is based, after the precedent set by Kahane.' Where possible, these groups are listed in chronological order, ending with the contexts which illustrate the transition to the next phase: such groups are transitional in the sense that they contain vases belonging to two successive stages of the local style. In schools where there is an abundance ofsignificant contexts - for example, Attic and Argive - the proportion of transitional to 'pure' groups should allow some deductions about the relative duration of any given phase. Within this chronological framework I deal with the output of individual painters and workshops: the attributable works are placed in a list, whose appropriate numbers are repeated in bold print in the ensuing discussion. It is in these vases that we see the most elaborate aspect of a local style: thus the stylistic development within a workshop may usefully complement the evidence from significant contexts. The Attic sequence supplies the essential yardstick for measuring the relative chronology of the other nine local schools. Sometimes a regional style is so closely influenced by Attica that some ofits phases can be defined in Attic terms; in which case no further chronological comment is necessary. But where Attic influence is partial, indirect, or non-existent, each section contains a separate heading discussing the relative chronology: here the clues supplied by stylistic resemblances are considered in conjunction with the evidence from context where the local products are associated with Attic or Atticizing vases. My illustrations are limited to photographs of478 Geometric pots - only an exiguous proportion of the total aggregate in five figures. But these examples are intended to be as representative as possible, so that the reader may see at a glance a fair selection of shapes and motifs current in each local style during each phase. As in the text, the arrangement is geographical and historical, each school in turn being followed through its entire development. References from text to plates are always in bold print; for references in the reverse direction, see the List of Plates. This book is intended as a work ofreference, and I hope that the pursuit of special topics may be facilitated by the indexes, internal references, and bold print. For those wishing to follow the history of a standard shape, no separate index is provided; but wherever shapes are discussed in the text, their names appear in italic. Since my names for the linear motifs are necessarily subjective, I have added a Glossary to prevent ambiguity; here the reader is referred to the illustrations where the motif is most clearly shown. I have deliberately refrained from consolidating the linear patterns in a table of drawings, since many of the simpler motifs are only meaningful when seen in their context: the choice of motifs is often far less diagnostic than the compositions in which they are deployed. Information on any particular linear motif may be compiled through the illustrations, and through internal 1
AJA 44, 48r-2.
.'
INTRODUCTION •
7
references between chapters and sections: the figural motifs are included in the General Index. The Site Index is supplied to aid inquiry into the history and archaeology ofspecific sites or districts during the Geometric period. This idea is borrowed from Desborough's Protogeometric Pottery; to his original layout I have added an extra column stating which phases of the local Geometric school are represented in each body of published material. The Index of Collections is by no means exhaustive, but includes all vases attributed to painters and workshops. In conclusion, I need hardly emphasize the provisional nature ofmany of my judgments. Year by year the material rapidly increases, sometimes filling gaps in our knowledge, and sometimes creating new problems. 'In our present state of knowledge' is a gloss which the reader must constantly supply for himself; for this book is only an interim report.
PG
CHAPTER TWO
Attic Geometric
For several reasons, Attica deserves pride of place in our comparative survey. Athenian potters invented the Geometric style, and carried it to its fullest development; when it reached maturity, they found imitators throughout the Greek world. No other region has yielded a larger aggregate of Geometric pots, and nowhere else can we learn so much from the contexts in which the pots were found. Our first task, then, is to follow the relative sequence of Attic Geometric, guided by the external evidence of context, and the internal evidence of style. Later, in the next ten chapters, we shall relate the development of other local schools to that of the Attic series. Grave groups, well documented from organized excavations, have always provided the foundation of Attic relative chronology. For P. Kahane, working in 1935-6, about thirty such groups were available. Today, some two hundred have been recorded, and their number grows every year. Complementary information is now forthcoming from the Geometric city of Athens, where a series of about twenty-five well deposits in the Agora area allows us to check any conclusions based on the graves. Thus Attic Geometric can be subdivided into chronological stages with a precision that is not possible in other local styles. Because no single system ofsubdivision has won universal acceptance,' I must first define my chronological terms. In company with the scholars who have studied the Agora material, I use a tripartite division into Early, Middle, and Late Geometric; these periods are henceforth abbreviated as EG, MG, and LG, and each may be subdivided into two phases. My account ofeach phase begins with a brief definition, and a list ofthe significant groups. The relation of my system to those of Kahane, Kiibler, and others will become apparent in the course of this chapter. THE TRANSITION FROM PROTOGEOMETRIC Like the Athenians of legend, the Geometric style of Attica has an autochthonous origin. Many of its roots can be traced in the latest phase of Attic Protogeometric (PG), whose 1 Most of the systems suggested in recent years are shown in a comparative table by]. Bouzek, Sbomik 1959, 110. My system resembles that ofBouzek himself, although 1 would place the boundary between Middle and Late Geometric at the division between his MG 2 and MG 3.
·8·
9
influence remained strong until the new style reached maturity. Let us first consider how E G vases differ from the latest PG: we can then follow the actual stages ofthe transition. The repertoire oflate PG shapes is one ofthe most graceful in the history ofAttic pottery. Closed vases have ovoid bodies with taut contours, tapering elegantly to a low narrow foot, and surmounted by a fairly short neck. The neck springs from the shoulder at a well-defined angle, and the curves ofneck and body answer one another. The bodies ofopen vases, which are always deep, usually rest on a high conical foot; this is one of the essential hallmarks of mature Attic PG. The decoration is dominated by black glaze, now brought to a pitch of lustrous beauty which was never subsequently matched until the sixth century. Its invention by Attic PG potters ushered in a dark-ground style where, with few exceptions, the ornament was confined to a minimum. Closed vases are treated as structural unities. The shoulder, the natural centre of the vase, receives the main - and often the only - decoration. The surface, usually spherical, is conveniently adorned with rows ofconcentric semicircles; like all other circular motifs at this time, these are always drawn with compass and multiple brush. Cross-hatched triangles are a less common alternative; but there is never any motif based on the square or the rectangle, for these would do violence to the shape. Open vases offer a deep panel between the handles, roomy enough to accept full concentric circles. In addition, we sometimes find vertical strips ofrectilinear ornament placed between the circles; these tend to take full possession of the smallest vases, where the compass cannot easily be deployed. Let us now turn to the shapes of E G. The first real novelty is the invention of the broadbased oinochoe, which nevertheless fails to displace the ovoid type for a considerable time. Other PG ovoid shapes survive, with a slight tendency to attenuate neck and body. Open shapes, however, break more suddenly with PG tradition. The high conical foot is immediately abandoned. In the E G I phase it is replaced by a lower foot, still conical; but this is a short-lived experiment. In EG 11, the arrival of the shallow skyphos, with ring foot, stabilizes the situation. The flat-based oinochoe and the shallow skyphos remain permanent members of the Geometric repertoire. In their system of decoration, the closed shapes have undergone a real revolution, which began in a small way long before the end of PG. The love of black glaze remains, and ornament is still restricted to a minimum; but now neck and body are treated as separate units, each deserving independent emphasis. The decoration is now placed on the middle of the the neck and round the belly, while the shoulder is glazed. Gone are the concentric semicircles and triangles, no longer suitable for the new decorated areas; instead, the cylindrical surfaces carry narrow bands, or panels, of rectilinear ornament. Three of the commonest motifs - dogtooth, single diluted scribbles, and groups of opposed diagonals - are inherited from PG; but bolder and broader motifs, like the hatched meander and the multiple zigzag, are gradually added to them, and eventually replace them. Open vases follow suit: wide zones, dominated by concentric circles, have now given place to narrower window-like panels surrounded by glaze, and containing rectilinear ornament. We may now summarize the stages of the transition. (a) Long before the end ofPG there are two signs ofa movement towards Geometric prin-
10 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
EG I
11
ciples. First, the flat-bottomed cup with one handle appears, and begins to oust the orthodox PG type with high conical foot.' Secondly, and far more important, an alternative system of decoration is sometimes applied to closed shapes, first on the oinochoe, and later on the occasional amphora or lekythos:" a band of ornament now appears on the belly, instead of on the shoulder, and the rest of the vase is glazed."
Agora, Gr. D 16:4. Hespetia 21 (1952), 279ff., pls. 73:'-5. PI. I1-p ('The Warrior Grave'). Agora, Gr. H 17:2 below a Geometric house. Hesperia 2 (1933),553, fig. I I ('The House Grave').
(b) At the close of PG, the oinochoe receives a panel on the neck, and is thereby transformed into an E G type; the neck-handled amphora, too, abandons its shoulder decoration, and receives instead a neck-panel and a belly zone. At the same time, circular ornament is replaced by rectilinear in nearly every case. Open vases suddenly lose their high conical feet.
Eleusis, Gr. 41. EA 1912, 38ff.; AJA 44 (1940),470, pls. 17, 1-2 and 18, I; Eleusis 812-14. Athens, double grave under Odos Ay. Markou 6-12. ADChr 19 (1964), 53-7, fig. 5, pI. 5Ia-c. Latest PG into EG 11.
(c) Later, the flat-based oinochoe and the shallow skyphos are introduced, and with them comes the multiple zigzag and the broad orthodox meander, diagonally hatched; these become the commonest motifs. (d) Finally the ovoid oinochoe, its shape almost unchanged since PG, passes out ofcirculation after competing with the broad-based type for some time. Of these four stages (b) represents the most fundamental break with tradition; this 1 take to be the upper boundary of the Attic Geometric style. A less drastic break at (c) divides E G into an experimental and a more settled phase, which will now be considered in turn. ATTIC EARLY GEOMETRIC: FIRST PHASE (EG I) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
i.e. groups containing two or more painted vases. Unless otherwise stated, these groups will be listed in what I take to be their chronological order.
Agora, Gr. C 9:8. Agora, Gr. N 16:4. Agora, Well K 12: 2, lower fill. Kerameikos, Gr. I (all the numbers of graves in the Kerameikos refer to Kerameikos v. I, unless otherwise stated). Agora, Gr, D 16:2. Hesperia 18 (1949), 275ff., pls. 66-72; PGP, pI. 15. PI. r a-j ('The Boot Grave'). 'Near Piraeus Street', grave group in the possession of Prof. C. W. Blegen. Hesperia 2I (1952), 279ff., pls. 76-8. Agora, Cemetery Deposit F 16: 5. Kerameikos, Gr. 3. Athens, grave under Odos Ay. Dimitriou 20. ADChr 19 (1964),54-5, fig. 4, pI. 49C- d, pI. 50a. Agora, Well P 8: 3. PGP 101-2. s Oinochoai: PGP 48ff., Class 11. Amphorae: PGP roff., Class Bg. Lekythoi: K. IV, pI. Ig: 2085, 208g. This scheme, with its characteristic scribble ornament, is probably inspired by still earlier skyphoi, where the decoration has Submycenaean antecedents: see PGP 86-8, type IVa. But closed vases are not decorated in this way until late PG. 1
3
Transitional E G I - E G 11
This phase has been called 'transitional' by Desborough- and Kubler ;" here it is treated as the first flowering of the Geometric style. Although several PG features remain, the two main principles of Geometric decoration have already been introduced: on closed vases, the decoration is now placed on the neck and belly, instead of on the shoulder; and the ornament is now predominantly rectilinear. SHAPES
Closed vases show little change, as yet, from the latest PG models. Neck-handled amphorae are slightly slimmer, with taller necks. The plump shoulder-handled amphora, recently invented in late PG to replace the belly-handled variety," remains as plump as ever. The ovoid oinochoe also survives from PG; but there are occasional experiments with a new broad-based type, usually on a miniature scale.' The lekythos has virtually disappeared, and is probably replaced by a squat slow-pouring vessel, with trefoil mouth," here called the lekythos-oinochoe (pl, I e). The globular pyxis with everted lip, another late PG invention, is still found; but now it has to compete with two newcomers: a lipless globular type (pl. I g), and an ovoid variety with blunt point (pl, I f). All three shapes have sloping lids, whose handles leave much scope for the potter's imagination. A conical knob is the normal form; but that on the lipless globular pyxis from Kerameikos Gr. I is a miniature replica of the body, while the lid of a similar vase in the Agora Boot Grave bears traces of a plastic horse, a device not found again until M G 11. We turn now to the open shapes. Skyphoi, so popular in PG, have become extremely rare; an ornate example from the Boot Grave (pl, rj] preserves the deep body of the PG type." The commonest drinking vessel in EG I is the low-handled kantharos (pl, r b), another innovation oflate PG; it usually takes a low conical foot, although ring feet sometimes occur before the end of this phase (Agora Warrior Grave, no. 19). The one-handled cup (pl, ID) always has a flat base. For the krater - as far as we can judge from fragmentary material- a high conical foot is retained; in later generations it is destined to develop into a still higher ribbed pedestal, already foreshadowed by the eccentric little kantharos, pk I c. A few splaying krater feet with a single rib? may all belong to this phase, illustrating the first step in the PGP 2g4-5. • K. v. I, 58ff. 3 PGP 37. • Kerameikos, Gr. 3, no. 4; Agora, Gr. H 17:2, no. 3; larger, Agora, Gr. D 16:4, no. 17. ·PGP 76-7. 6 Its foot has been restored in conformity with the kantharoi. 7 E.g. Agora House Grave, no. 5. 1
12 .
EG 1-11
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
growth of the pedestal. The torso from Kerameikos Gr. 11 provides a profile for foot and body only, which may be supplemented by an unstratified fragment (P 21083) from the Agora Well K 12: 2 ; here we have a concave lip turned outwards at the rim, and marked off from the body by a slight carination. Ifwe possessed a complete Attic E G I krater, it would be surprising ifit differed very much in shape from a fine Thessalian example, no. 144 from Marmariani.s which may be a faithful imitation of an Attic original. DECORATION
Nearly all the standard shapes are now decorated in a manner very different from the latest PG. The stock ofE G I motifs is the most varied in Attica for some time to come. By a process oftrialand error, Athenian potters are gradually discovering what new designs can be most easily accommodated to the new system of adorning closed vases. The circular designs of PG have been largely abolished, as being no longer suitable. A few narrow rectilinear motifs - dogtooth, diluted scribble, and groups ofopposed diagonals - survive from the PG repertoire; to these a further variation is added - the dotted zigzag with filled apices (pI. If,j). Yet by themselves these meagre strips ofornament are not enough; on the larger vases they look timid and inadequate, overwhelmed by huge masses of dark glaze. To produce anything like a viable balance between light and dark, something bolder was required. Hence the invention, at the beginning of Geometric, oftwo broader and more powerful rectilinear designs: the battlement and the meander. Both are used experimentally at first, with a variety of fillings; dots and chevrons were first given a trial, soon to be abandoned in favour of diagonal hatching. The battlement is the commoner motif in E G I, usually appearing in multiple outline (pI. I a) ; the meander often looks cramped and unhappy, as though it had not yet grown to its full stature. Once invented, the new broad designs were used with restraint. Black glaze, still applied in a thick lustrous coat, continued to dominate, but not to oppress. In this age ofexperiment there evolved an important new unit of decoration: a small rectangle ofornament containing one or more motifs, surrounded by glaze on at least three sides, and always placed at handle level where continuous zones would be impracticable. In these window-panels, as we may call them, the broad motifs play a dominant part. Neck-handled amphorae and kantharoi illustrate the use of window-panels on a large and a small scale respectively. On the former, the height ofthe neck demands a tall window, where the broad motifappears between ancillary horizontal strips (pI. I I). In the latter case, a single broad motif is usually enough, placed directly under the lip, which is reserved and striped (pI. I b,o), Square panels were sometimes given a trial (pI. I C),3 but evidently failed to please; suitable motifs like the swastika and the nine-squared checkerboard made a fleeting appearance before the idea was abandoned, at any rate for the time being. Some shapes were slow to accept full-sized window-panels. The ovoid oinochoe, with its limited neck space, sometimes carries a light-weight meander (pI. I d); more often, the space is occupied by a narrow strip of ornament. On the shoulder-handled amphora the decoration is usually centrifugal, with zones round neck and belly; shoulder-panels are less 1K.v. l,pI. 16.' 2BSA31 (193Q-I),PI. 11. 3 Cf. also the oinochoe c in Prof. Blegen's group: CVA Bucharest
I,
pI. 10, 1-2.
frequent. 1 Kraters, as conservative in decoration as in shape, shun window-panels altogether. The example from Kerameikos Gr. I preserves the PG concentric circles, separated by vertical strips of ornament," The three types of pyxis, being all without handles, remain cheerfully exempt from the austerities of the window-panel system. On the two globular varieties three zones become the rule, instead ofthe single narrow zone applied in PG times; in E G I a central broad motif is placed between two narrow ancillaries. On our earliest example of the pointed pyxis (pI. I f) the decoration runs riot, with bands ofornament encircling almost the whole surface. Ifwe add to this the richly decorated skyphos, pI. I j, and the unusually large oinochoe from Prof Blegen's group, we have an almost complete vocabulary of E G I ornament. Old and new motifs appear side by side; and it is typical of this experimental phase that the battlement and the meander are not yet allowed to dwarf the weaket elements. A striking instance is seen on the lekythos-oinochoe, pI. I e, where the meander is actually subordinated to the hatched triangles on the shoulder. Athenian potters were not afraid of carrying their experiments into the depiction of natural life. Horses, not unknown in PG, appear on two EG I vases: a neck-handled amphora, Athens 18045 (pI. Ik),3 and a fragmentary drinking vessel, Agora P 1654.4 The amphora presents a pair of horses, heraldically confronted either side of a swastika with blobs between the arms; the same arrangement may have been repeated on the drinking vessel." It is instructive to compare these two pieces with PG horses." Sketchy, fluid lines have now given place to a stiffer delineation ofthe animals, and the thickening ofthe upper leg joints constitutes the first attempt to show knees and hocks. The glazing of the vacant spaces, especially above the horses' backs, is characteristic of most early representational work (c£ p. 28). ATTIC EARLY GEOMETRIC: SECOND PHASE (EG 11) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Agora, Well K 12: 2, upper fill: includes earlier material. Kerameikos, Grs. 2 and 75a. Areopagus, Gr. I 18:4. CVA Athens I, pI. I, 1-4. Marathon, Gr. 2. P AE 1939, 29ff., figs. 2-3. Kerameikos, Grs. 14 (pI. 2a-b), 38, 74 (pI. z c.e-h). Athens, Odos Aischylou 31, Gr. ADChr 20 (1965), 56, pI. 420:. Agora, Well C 18:6. 'Attica, Grave group' in Berlin and Munich. AM 43 (1918), pI. pI. 125, 7; pI. 129, 1-5.
I,
and CVA Munich 3,
As K. v. I, pl. 42, 610. 2 Cf. a krater sherd from the Acropolis, Graef-Langlotr, pl. 10,272, probably also EG 1. This amphora will be fully published by J. L. Benson in his forthcoming study Horse, Bird and Man. t Hesperia 2 (1933),560, fig. 19, no. 62. The deep profile suggests a kantharos, prior to the introduction of the shallow skyphos in EG II; see p. 14. The horse resembles the pair on the amphora, which is close to Eleusis 813 (Gr. 41) in shape and body decoration. 5 OnP 1654 the variation in the hatching of the linear motifshows that we are approaching a corner, about half-way down thefie1d. On the extreme left, a spot of glaze suggests the presence of a blob. 6 K. IV, pl. 27. 1
3
14 .
EG II
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
Agora, Gr. H 16: 6. Hesperia 37 (1968),
nff., pls, 18-33.
Transitional E G 11- M G I Kerameikos, Grs. 41, 42 (pl, 3j-k,n), 43 (pk ad). Agora, Gr. R 20: I. Hesperia 16 (1947), 196, pI. 41. Eleusis, Gr. EA 1898, I 14, pI. 4, 3, and seven other vases. During E G I, a stable element had been brought into the decoration by the tentative adoption ofthe window-panel; this proved to be an excellent expedient for accommodating rectilinear ornament to any handle zone. In E G I I, with the introduction ofthe multiple zigzag and the growth ofthe meander to its full size, the window-panel acquires greater weight and emphasis. Thus after an initial period of ferment and unrest, Attic Geometric settles down to a more tranquil state. SHAPES
The broad-based oinochoe, one of the most characteristic of all Geometric shapes, now makes its first regular appearance (pI. 2 d). Since the broadest bases come early in the series,' it must be regarded as a new creation; it cannot have evolved from the ovoid oinochoe, which is still current (pI. 2 g). The neck-handled amphora thrusts up its neck higher than before; but since the body's centre of gravity has not risen correspondingly, the proportions can be heavy and awkward (pI. 2£). However, a fine series oflarger examples is better proportioned (pI. 2h).2 The belly-handled amphora, made on a similarly large scale, follows the general tendency towards attenuation ;" the plastic ring below the lip is new in E G. The plump shoulder-handled amphora begins to reduce its girth, but retains a short and widely flaring neck (pI. z a}, Of the three types ofpyxis described under EG I, only the pointed form, and the globular form with inset rim, are still in circulation. Another important innovation is the shallow skyphos; like the broad-based oinochoe, it arrives in its extreme form (pI. 2 b), owing nothing to PG precedent. The lip is offset, and extremely short, leaving the body at an angle of about forty-five degrees. This feature is shared by the one-handled cup, its nearest relation. The kantharos (pI. 2 e) is less deep than in E G I, perhaps through the influence ofthe new skyphos. The one-handled cup is sometimes made in a larger size, decorated with a window-panel containing a pair of mastoi (pI. 2 c) ; like the other drinking vessels, this form usually has a ring foot, whereas the smaller and fully glazed cup retains a flat base. No complete krater of this phase has been preserved; the most substantial fragments come from Kerameikos Gr. 2. 4 Here the pedestal, still widely splaying, has now grown taller, with at least two ribs near the junction with the body; the lip, still concave, has a flatter rim, but an even more pronounced ridge, than the E G I fragment described above. High-ribbed pedestals are occasionally found on skyphoi and kantharoi." E.g. in Eleusis, Gr. 41; Kerameikos, Grs. 2, 38. Others: K. v . I, pis. 26-8; Agora, Gr. R20: I: A]A 44, pI. 19, I. The fabrication of these amphorae may have outlasted the end ofEG 11, since those in Kerameikos Grs. 42-3 occur with smaller vases in the MG I style. 3 K. v. I, pI. 46; ]dI 14 (1899), 200, figs. 67-8. 4 K. v. I, pI. 17. 5 Marathon, Gr. 2, no. 2; Kerameikos, Gr. 2, K. v. I, pI. 84.
Finally, the frequency of tripod stands deserves mention; during EG 11, and in the opening years ofMG I, no less than six examples have been found in graves.' DECORATION
The repertoire of ornament has become much more restricted than in E G I. It is as though the potter, having had his fill of experiment, is now content with a limited range of motifs, which have proved suitable for zones or panels on any of the current shapes. Greater distinction is made between main and subsidiary ornament, and between broad and narrow motifs. Of the former there are only three: the meander, the multiple zigzag, and the battlement. The diagonal hatching of the meander is not yet very adroit, least of all in the matter of negotiating the corners (pI. 2 c,e); the problem is eventually solved by changing the direction ofthe hatching after each third limb. New at this time is the multiple zigzag, which is usually packed tight, closely interlocking. The battlement is less frequent than in EGI. Equally restricted is the stock ofnarrow motifs. Gone are the groups ofopposed diagonals; no fresh designs are introduced. The diluted scribble is used only in isolation, and confined to the more conservative shapes, like the ovoid oinochoe and the smaller neck-handled amphora. Dogtooth and dotted zigzag perhaps owe their survival to their usefulness as ancillaries to the broad motifs on the more ambitious vases (pI. z h), The meander and multiple zigzag occur most frequently in window-panels. On the largest vases they are generally supported by one or two ancillaries; but in the more confined space ofthe oinochoe there is seldom room for more than one broad moti£ The shoulder-handled amphora accepts a panel on the shoulder, at the cost ofsacrificing the EG I belly zone; in this case, a strong urge to decorate the handle zone triumphs over the logical application of the centrifugal system. But the panel is kept strictly within the area bounded by the attachments ofthe handle (pI. 2 a). Meanders and multiple zigzags are used alone on the drinking vessels; but the kraters still preserve a more old-fashioned scheme of decoration, based on two sets of concentric circles enclosed in square panels. Finally, we turn to the areas uninterrupted by handles. Broad motifs stand alone on the short and sharply curving neck ofthe shoulder-handled amphora; but round the belly ofthe largest neck-handled amphorae they are usually accompanied by narrow ancillaries, sometimes as many as four,s Rich accumulations are also found on the pointed pyxis; but on the globular type the zones are still limited to three, as in E G I. The body of the broad-based oinochoe carries no motif, but the glaze is interrupted by two or three groups of three reserved bands; these bands now become a regular architectural feature in the decoration of the lower body on all closed shapes. As yet, there is no evidence of animal drawing in this phase; but its absence may be no more than accidental.
1
2
1
See H. W. Catling, Cypriot Bronzeuorkin the Mycenaean World 21Sff.
2
K. v.
I,
pI. 28.
16 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
17
MG I
ATTIC MIDDLE GEOMETRIC: FIRST PHASE (MG I)
general raising ofthe centre ofgravity; the E G I I prototypes look rather heavy and uncouth by contrast. These modifications were effected within a briefperiod ofconsiderable ferment.
SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
SHAPES
Thorikos, grave group. AJA 30 (1961), 299ff., pls. 63-4. Thorikos, Settlement Deposit. AntClass 34 (1965), 28-g, pls. 17-18: includes some PG, as p. 28, a-b. Thorikos III (Brussels, 1965),31, figs. 32-7,40-1: ADChr 20 (1965), 129, pl. 106. Areopagus, Gr. I 18: 5. CVA Athens I, pl. I, 5-1 I. Piraeus, Palaia Kokkinia, Gr. A. P AE 1951, 121, figs. 35-8. 'Neighbourhood of Athens, Grave group' in Toronto. J H S 5 I (193 I), 164ff., pl, 6. Kerameikos, Grs. 13 and 36. PI. 3a-b. Athens, Odos Kavalotti, Gr.!::J.. A DChr 20 (1965), 78, pls, 43Y, 44, 450 . Agora, Well H 15: I. Areopagus, Grs. I 18: 1-3. Hespetia 17 (1948), 158-g, pl. 41a (I 18: I); Hesperia 2 (1933), 470, fig. 19 (1 18:3). Marathon, Gr. 5. PAE 1939, 30, figs. 3-4· Agora, Well B 18:9. Kerameikos, Grs. 20 (pl, 3f-h), 37 (pt 3C-e), and 76. Agora, Well L 6: 2, lower deposit. Eleusis, Gr. EA 1898, 113, pl. 3, 5 and 10; AJA 44 (1940), 470, pl. 17, 3; pl. 19, 2; pl. 21, I. Six vases, Eleusis 705 and 815-19. Eleusis, Gr. rTI 14 and r 16. P AE 1955, 72-5, pls. 21b, 22a; Ergon 1955, 23, figs. 16- 19. Eleusis, Gr. r I I. P AE 1954, 59, fig. 10. Athens, Odos Zambeliou, Gr. ADChr 18 (1963),42-3, pl. 47b. Myrrhinous, Gr. Ergon 1960, 32, fig. 42. Eleusis, Gr. e 52. P AE 1956, 60, pl. 11; AJA 61 (1957), pl. 84, fig. 8. Eleusis, Gr. c. EA 1898,96, 103-5, pl, 2, 14-17; pl. 4,4; and thirty other vases. Marathon, Gr. I. P AE 1939, 28, fig. L Eleusis, Gr. EA 1898, 114, pl. 3, 7-8; Eleusis 703 and 700 (the latter, pI. 3 1). Eleusis, Gr. EA 1898,86, pl. 3,4. (The amphora is PG!)
Transitional M G I - 11 Kerameikos, Grs. I I and 12. Agora, Well N 12: 2. The Attic Geometric style now passes from adolescence to early maturity. The darkground system has been fully mastered; window-panels and narrow zones, applied with greater confidence, are allowed to encroach on the glazed areas just far enough to achieve a perfect balance between light and dark, and a complete harmony b:tween shape and decoration. At the same time, the standard forms of closed vases are slightly remodelled. Their appearance is improved by a firmer articulation between neck and body, and by a
The neck-handled amphorae ofMG 1 are of moderate size (height c. 0·45-o·60m.), smaller than the monumental EG 11 series. That from Kerameikos Gr. 36 (pl, 3a) is an early example, while in pl. 3d from Gr. 37 we see the full effect ofMG remodelling. The body now has a higher centre of gravity; it is surmounted by a wider neck, whose mild concave curve answers the vigorous outward spring of the shoulder. The same refining process may be seen in the shoulder-handled amphora, which now develops a higher neck (pI. 31); and in the standard oinochoe. Of the latter, some (pI. 3c) have assumed a taller shape; others preserve the squat proportions ofEG II (pl, 3D). With both variants, the broad base remains a dominant feature; there is no sign ofany return to the ovoid PG type, now completely out of fashion. The lekythos-oinochoe, not common in E G 11, is now made in a variety of sizes. The smaller pieces retain the squat shape ofE G I, with a slightly broader base; but there is also a larger and more ornate class (pI. 3 m) with a much taller neck, mastoi on the shoulder, and a generous rounded body. Rope handles (Marathon, Gr. 5; cf pI. 5a) make their first appearance in this phase, as an alternative to the normal strap form. For the pyxis family, M G I is an eventful phase. The old globular type, with inset rim, is now out offashion; but the pointed form enjoys its greatest popularity. An important innovation is the flat pyxis, which may have arrived before the end ofE G I I - that is, ifthe vases in Berlin, A M 43, pl. I, really come from the same grave. At all events, this new form attained immediate popularity at the very beginning ofM G I, and remained one ofthe most characteristic shapes ofAttic Geometric until well into L G. Throughout its history its proportions never became fully standardized, many variations often occurring in the same context. The examples of MG I (pl. 3f-h) all have a vigorously curved profile, and a diameter wider at the rim than at the foot; unfortunately, both these features are sometimes found as late as L G I, thereby complicating the task of dating. In M G I the widest diameter is never more than o- 20m., and miniatures are quite common. The inset rim is inherited from the EG types, together with the corresponding pairs of holes on rim and lid, which provide for suspension. On some of the earliest examples! the steeply sloping lids seem to be influenced by the pointed pyxis; conversely, some of the latest pointed pyxides- take the flat lid which was soon evolved for the flat type. The lid handles always end in a conical knob, reminiscent of woodwork; on some of the flattest pyxides, the knob rests on a tiny reproduction of the pyxis body, and a ribbed stalk which gives a much needed vertical element to counteract the emphatic horizontal lines of the body. As a general rule, the flatter the body, the higher the handle. Although we have no complete example ofthe late M G I pedestalled krater, fragments from the Kerameikos suggest that two distinct types were now in circulation. The more conservative version - hereafter Type ra-is best represented by the large torso from Gr. 43.4 Two ofits characteristics can be traced back through E G to PG precedent: (a) the rib below the 1
K. v.
I,
pI. 51,1202; Agora, Gr. I
18:1,
no. 13.
2
Toronto group, no.
2.
3 Davison II 2.
4
K. v.
I,
pI. 22.
18 .
lip, and (b) the concentric circles round which the ornament is marshalled. These two ancient features are now combined with a third, and entirely new, trait: the extremely tall pedestal with only a slight concave curve. This is the ancestor ofthe L G I Dipylon kraters, which inherit all three of its salient characteristics. A smaller variety - Type I I - is suggested by a lower and more widely splaying pedestal from Gr. 37.1 The body, if it were preserved, would probably resemble that of its MG 11 successor (pI. Sf) ; there we have stirrup handles, a simple offset lip (as for a skyphos), and a centripetal design dominated by a large central meander. Similar decoration occurs on two complete kraters, not far in time from the example in Kerameikos Gr. 37. The first, with a low splaying pedestal, comes from an E G I I context at Argos, but was probably made under Attic influence (p. 116); the other, from Eleusis Gr. r I I, is an unusual variant with ring foot. Both are closely related to Type I I in shape and decoration, although neither has the stirrup handle; but a fragment from Aegina- shows that the stirrup handle was applied to Attic kraters at least as early as M G I. The kantharos has become extremely rare. There are a few unpainted examples where the PG conical foot is reintroduced ;" but these are a short-lived experiment. The deep gadrooned piece from Kerameikos Gr. 434 shows the first experimental use ofthis metallic device, which is also attempted on a skyphos ofthis phase." More orthodox kantharoi, like that from the Thorikos grave, share the shallow shape ofcontemporary skyphoi, which have now superseded them as the most popular drinking vessel. The lip of the skyphos remains fairly low; although not yet sharply offset, it begins to assume a more vertical direction (pI. 3 b) ; sometimes the body is rather deeper than in E G I I. It has a short-lived variation in the shallow stirrup-handled skyphos, which looks like a small krater of Type I I sawn off just below the handles (pf, 3j). This form occurs in several contexts near the change from E G I I to M G I. Less common now is the one-handled cup, which is nearly always glazed; the lip follows the vertical trend ofthe skyphos. A new shape, the mug, 6 combines a skyphoid lip with the bellied body of a miniature rounded oinochoe; the handle passes from the rim to the widest diameter. DECORATION
As the ornament gradually encroaches on the dark areas, there is a decline in the excellence of the glaze itsel£ The lustrous sheen of PG and EG is beginning to disappear; MG I surfaces tend to be thin, matt, and prone to peel (pl. 3e). However, no large area ofglaze now escapes interruption by reserved triple bands, usually more numerous than in E G I I. Thus articulated, the glaze on the lower body becomes an effective foundation for the increasingly complex designs above, which rarely penetrate far below the widest diamefer. On flat pyxides and mugs, the glaze has virtually been banished altogether. Several new narrow motifs came into fashion in MGr. The most important is formed by enclosing solid double axes between groups ofvertical lines. This pattern is most frequently applied to amphorae, round the lip and belly of the neck-handled type (pl, 3a,d),7 and K. v, I, pI. 19,871. 2 Kraiker, Aigina, no. 51. 3 Agora, Wells H 15:1 and L 6:2. 4 K. v. I, pI. 99. Agora, fr. P 26135, Well B 18:9. 6 K. v, I, pI. 112, 1252, from Gr. 43; Eleusis, Gr. a; Agora, Well B 18:9, P 19032. 7 First occurrence, K. v. I, pI. 27, E G I I.
1
5
MG I
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
19
around the neck- and belly of the shoulder-handled (p], 31). When, as often happens, three narrow zones accumulate round the belly, this motif occupies the central position. A second new motif is the row of dots,> often found as an ancillary to broader zones and panels (pl, 3C); it is also at home round the lips ofskyphoi, especially on the stirrup-handled variety (pl, 3j), and round the edge of flat pyxis lids. Less common innovations, in their order of frequency, are the following: gear pattern (pk 3 g), vertical chevrons," sigmas,' and lozenge chains; the last may be cross-hatched- or in double outline," During MG I these five motifs are used only as ancillaries, and generally reserved for the most richly decorated shapes. Ofthe older motifs, dogtooth is still popular as an ancillary, being especially effective near the base of flat pyxides with sharply curving profiles. The diluted scribble of E G is found no more; but a single acute-angled zigzag is a frequent ancillary on the flat pyxis. On two shapes, the pointed pyxis and the large lekythos-oinochoe (pl. 3m), the accumulation of several narrow motifs produces a gay, half-tone effect. There are only two broad motifs in common use: the hatched meander, and the multiple zigzag. The latter is the commoner on the skyphos and the flat pyxis, because of the long and narrow shape of the field. Rarer alternatives include the hatched battlement, used in a subordinate role ;? the battlement in multiple outline," the mill-sail," and a double meander-s - an experiment not followed up until the period of the Dipylon grave monuments, LG I. The hatched meander is drawn with a neat and practised hand; all traces of awkwardness, apparent in E G I I, have now vanished. For the hatching, the paint is often diluted, allowing the outlines to stand out more boldly than before. Window-panels have become more spacious than in E G I I, especially on the larger vases; their expansion can be most easily illustrated on the necks ofneck-handled amphorae. No longer do we see a tiny light area encompassed by an ample dark frame (pl. 2a); the panel has now grown to fill all the available space between the handles, reaching upwards to the upper attachment, and downwards to the junction with the shoulder. The decoration is thus brought into a more intimate relationship with the shape of the vase; here we see a cardinal principle of the M G I style (pI. 3 d). When placed on the necks of closed vases, window-panels are horizontally divided. On the neck-handled amphorae, ancillaries are usually added above and below the main motif; for the oinochoe, a single ancillary is enough. In both cases the decoration stops at the point where the pronounced curve near the lip would make any further addition look awkward. The problem of curving surfaces becomes acute on the shoulder of the shoulder-handled amphora. According to M G I principles, this area bears a panel at handle level; but here the vertical lines are made to radiate from a vanishing point (pl, 31). No ancillaries are allowed on this shape, in order to keep the ornament within the space between the handle attachments. Similar principles are applied in the placing of panels on open vases. With skyphoi, the lowest limit of the decoration coincides with the lowest point of the handles. Often the panels remain in their primitive E G form, still surrounded by glaze; but on the more proCf. pL 2, EG H, with hour-glass instead of double axe. 2 Once seen in EG H: K. v. I, pI. 7°,9 28. AJA 44, pI. 19,2. 4 K. v, I, pI. 72, 2149. 5 K. v, I, pI. 46. 6 K. v. I, pI. 22. 7 K. v. I, pI. 22. 8 CVA Scheurleer 2, pI. 3,4, now Amsterdam 3530. • Marathon, Gr. 5, kantharos. 10 K. v. I, pI. 29,884. 1
3
20 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
MG I
gressive skyphoi the ornament tends to advance towards the handles. The main motif may be elongated; in this case, the long narrow field is more easily filled by a multiple zigzag than by a meander (pf, 3e). Or the panel may be flanked by ancillary columns, containing dots or M's (pI. 3j). Alternatively, the lateral glaze may vanish entirely, leaving the whole ofthe handle zone reserved; when this happens,the small triangular spaces between handles and panel are filled with stars or dotted rosettes (pI. 3 b). Type I I kraters are the largest vases to be decorated with window-panels. Here our evidence is limited to the comparatively rare variant without pedestal. On the example from Eleusis Gr. r 11, the panel is bordered by both horizontal and vertical ancillaries, which enclose the weighty meander in a complete frame. One of the more surreptitious innovations ofM G I may be seen on the shoulders of three closed shapes: the oinochoe,' the large lekythos-oinochoe,» and the neck-handled amphora." Here, instead of the usual glaze, we occasionally find tiny panels of ornament - either stars or short runs ofzigzag. Similar panels sometimes interrupt the bars on vertical handles.' In M G I, Geometric potters had their first experience of decorating a round field. Four of the earliest flat pyxides bear a design on the bottom. Agora P 541 (Gr. I 18:2) and Eleusis 815 have a simple octofoil, whose leaves are drawn in double outline; under pI. 3ho there is a quatrefoil, meticulously hatched in herring-bone fashion to suggest the veining of the leaves. The same design appears under a little lekythos-oinochoe, Eleusis 771 from Gr. 0:. An awkward swastika with round arms is tried out under the pyxis no. 9 of the Toronto group. Stars are often used as filling ornaments in these compositions. Finally, the bottom of an early mug' bears a dotted cross, the quarters filled with diminishing chevrons. We end our survey with the two largest, and most spectacular, ofMG I vases: a huge krater torso of Type I from Kerameikos Gr. 43, and a complete belly-handled amphora." Like their successors in the Dipylon Cemetery, these two shapes were already being set apart for monumental use, standing above the grave and not inside. This fact may explain why they are so unusually ornate for their time; it may also account for a certain conservatism in their decoration, which is still built up round two sets ofconcentric circles, according to the old PG formula. The circles now occupy much less space than in PG, yet still dominate the design. They are separated and flanked by large accumulations ofvertical columns, symmetrically arranged, in which the meander forms the backbone; single chevrons, M's, zigzags, and lozenges fill the narrow columns. The circles themselves contain reserved St George's crosses, the quarters being filled by glaze or diminishing chevrons: the corners of the metopes, after the new M G I fashion, are occupied by stars or dotted rosettes. These vast abstract designs are laid out with the symmetrical precision ofa formal garden; K. v. I, pI. 72, 2149. 2 K. v. I, pI. 83, 895. 3 K. v, I, pI. 30, 859. • K. v. I, pI. I5I. 5 K. v. I, pI. 62. K. v. I, pI. 109, 1252. • K. v, I, pI. 22,47. In placing these vases in MG I, I give them a much earlier date than that suggested by Kubler, because of the vases accompanying the krater in Gr. 43. The large amphora, K. v. I, pI. 28, 1249, looks EG I I: cf. lac. cit. pI. 26, 254, from Gr. 74. The oinochoe, lac. cit. pi. 74, 1253, has the low centre of gravity characteristic of EG 11, and is earlier than that from Gr. 42 (lac. cit. pI. 73,2145). The other vases are best paralleled in MG I contexts. The small banded amphora, lac. cit. pI. 41, 1250, is ofa type already represented in the lower fill of Agora Well L 6:2 (P 6410). The gadrooning of the kantharos, lac. cit. pi. 99,1251, is not without parallel in MG I (p. 18, n. 5); in Attica, the low-handled form is extinct by MG 11. On the mug, lac. cit. pls, 109, 112, 1252, see p. 18, n. 6, for MG I parallels. The gold band is matched by those from Grs. 42 and 13; see Higgins, Greek and Roman Jewellery 93,2°5-6. The krater is thus dated by its context to MG I at the latest.
21
but outside their limits there was room for unobtrusive experiment in representational drawing. Above the handle ofthe krater, we see the first human figure on a Greek vase since Mycenaean times. She is mourning the dead man, whom the horse below will shortly convey to his final place of rest. These two vases are unusually ornate for their time. In general, the M G I style is distinguished by a masterly restraint, whereby the design is strictly subordinated to the needs 0 the shape. We have seen, for example, how closely the decoration is controlled by the position ofthe handles; the ornament articulates and defines the profile, but never fills the surface as though it were a canvas. In no other phase is there such an intimate rapport between shape and decoration. Further progress along these lines was hardly possible. When later potters chose to extend and elaborate their designs, they could not help endangering the sound architectural principles perfected by their M G I predecessors. ATTIC MIDDLE GEOMETRIC: SECOND PHASE (MG II) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Athens, site of Kynosarges Gymnasium, grave: neck-handled amphora, iron knife, two gold bands. Mentioned, BSA 2 (1895-6),25; knife and bands, BSA 12 (1905-6),9 1, fig. 12. Amphora: Society for Promotion of Hellenic and Roman Studies, London, slide 5077: shape as K. v. I, pI. 30, 859, but with triple rolled handles. Neck: meander between triple zigzags. Shoulder: vertical strip containing M's. Belly: zone of double axes and vertical bars, between two zones of dogtooth. Athens, 'grave group', now Amsterdam. CVA Scheurleer I, pI. 2,2-3. Eleusis, the 'Isis' grave. EA 1898, 105ff.; CVA Athens I, pls, 3-6. C£ N. HimmelmannWildschiitz, Marb WP 1961, 6ff. Contains some earlier material. Athens, Odos Kavalotti Gr. B. ADChr 20 (1965), 78, pls. 45f3-Y, 460:- 0. Agora, Well M 13: I. Kerameikos, Grs. 23, 82, and 86 (pI. Sg). Kerameikos, Gr. 68a, Sacred Way, 1964 excavations. Kerameikos, Grs. 69 (pI. 4a-d), 22 (pI. sa-f), 35, 34.1 Agora, Well L 6:2, upper deposit. Hesperia 5 (1936), 33ff. Agora, Gr. 16. Hesperia, Supp. 11, 75-6, figs. 49-5 0. Piraeus (Palaia Kokkinia), Gr. E. P AE 1951, 121, fig. 4 2. Eleusis, Gr. I I. EA 1898, 96, I 10, pls. 4, 2 and 5, I ; AJA 44, pI. 2 I, 2-3; and six other vases. Eleusis 740-4, 746-7, 752-4. Eleusis, Gr. 19. EA 1898,82-3, pI. 4, 6; and seven other vases. Eleusis 822, 825, 890-4. Kerameikos, Grs. 29, 30. Salamis, Cyprus, chamber tomb: one krater, twenty skyphoi, all Attic. Not certainly from same burial, but very homogeneous. AA 1963, 178, fig. 35,43-5; 199-204, figs. 40 - 1 ; BCH89 (1965), 248, fig. 27. Agora, Well C 18: 9. Includes earlier material.
1 6
I
A skyphos from Gr. 34, K. v, I, pI. 131,389, looks LG 11.
22 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
MG 11
Athens, Odos Parthenonos (south of Acropolis), Gr. 3. AD 17 (1961-2), 86, 90-1, pl. 34a-e; ADChr 17, pl. Sb. Athens, Odos Parthenonos, Gr. s. AD 17 (1961-2),86,91, pl. 3Sb. Kallithea, Gr. 4. ADChr 19 (1964),66, pls. 62y, 63· Agora, WellN 11:3 ('Well]'). Hesperia 30 (1961), 114ff., pl. 14ff. Agora, Well P 14: 2. Agora, Gr. N 21 :6. Hesperia 9 (1940), 292, fig. 34; Hesperia 29 (1960),412-13, pls. 9 1-2.
Transitional M G 11- L G I Kerameikos, Grs. 89, 2S, 31. Anavysos (?), 'grave group' in Athens and Oxford.AJA 44 (194 0), pl. 17,4; pl. 21, 4-6; pl. 22, 1-3; Ashmolean Museum, Report ofVisitors 1936,14, pI. rd-e (Oxford 1936.60 1-4). Perhaps from two graves. Agora, Well D 12:3 ('Well 1'). Hesperia 30 (1961), I03ff., pl. 13ff. Apart from the high-handled kantharos, no important new shapes were introduced during this phase. More change is visible in the decoration which, especially on the larger vases, is becoming considerably richer. The strict canons ofMG I are now relaxed, as the ornament is allowed to creep over a larger proportion of the surface. Yet the M G I system is not entirely sacrificed. The heaviest motifs are still reserved for the focal points ofthe vase, and still dominate the elaborate webs of subsidiary ornament that have grown up around them. At the same time there is a growing interest in the world of nature, expressed either in the plastic horses crowning the lids ofpyxides, or more cautiously in the occasional men, animals, and birds painted on the vase surface. These are usually denied any dominating role.in the scheme of decoration. SHAPES
It often happens that a shape which has been in fashion for several generations is apt to harden its contours, asits production becomes more and more a matter ofmechanical repetition. This tendency is apparent if one compares the necks of the oinochoai (pf, Sa-b) and neck-handled amphorae (pl, 4a) with their immediate predecessors ofMG 1. The body of the latter shape continues the general movement towards slimmer proportions, although the smaller pieces here form an exception.' The shoulder-handled amphora, now in its last generation of use, sometimes shows a similar attenuation." The oinochoe, apart from the hardening ofthe neck and a slight tautening of the body, has not altered its shape, and is-still made in two varieties, tall and plump (pl, Sa-b). The other pouring vesselsdo not invite generalization. The smaller kind of lekythos-oinochoe is found in the Isis grave; for the larger type there is nothing, as yet, in clear MG I I context. Towards the end ofthis phase new broad-necked types emerge, either with trefoil lip" or with round mouth ;' both variants became popular in Late Geometric. 1 4
K. v. I, pI. 30, 242; pI. 32, 838. 2 K. v. I, pI. 43,785. Agora P 22453, Well NIl :3. Hesperia 30, pI. 16,J 3·
3
Agora, P 18365, Well C 18:9.
The flat pyxis, now well established, often attains to a greater size than in M G I; near the end ofMG 11, a diameter of c. 0·2s-o·30m. is not unusual. The profile is still vigorously curved, but the proportions tend to be rather flatter than in M G I; the base is usually wider, sometimes just outflanking the rim.' Lids are either flat, or rise at a very low angle. It is normal for the knob handles to rest on a ribbed shaft, perhaps to introduce a vertical element into the shape. Even when their function has been usurped by the charming plastic horses (pI. 4b), low knobs are still found, here applied directly to the lid. The horses occur singly, or in pairs." Their necks and legs are short, their heads comparatively large;" the pronounced articulation of knees and hocks recalls the animal drawing ofthis phase (p. 27). Other varieties of pyxis are rare. The globular type was temporarily revived on a large scale, either without handles," or with upright horizontal handles (pI. 4 e) ; the latter variant was used as a cremation urn ;" both forms have the customary inset lip. There are still a few examples of the pointed pyxis." Both types of pedestalled krater are represented in M G I I by complete examples. New York 34.1 1.27 follows the tradition of the grave monument from Kerameikos, Gr. 43 (Type I), and is the immediate predecessor of the Dipylon kraters now in Paris. PI. Sfis a good specimen of the smaller variety (Type I I), with stirrup handles, lower lip, and a more widely splaying pedestal. The body of the new high-handled kantharos (pI. 4d) is akin to the latter type of krater, except that its comparatively tall offset lip is more reminiscent ofthe contemporary skyphos ; very soon the lip begins to merge with the profile ofthe body." Since the high-swung handles have to be attached while the clay is still soft, the rims are nearly always pressed into a slightly elliptical shape. The lip of the usual skyphos (pl. se) tends to be straighter, taller, and more vertical than in M G I; in other respects there is little change, except that the customary ring foot is sometimes replaced by a flat base (pI. 4c). The shallow elongated form survives from MG I, but strap handles" are now more usual than stirrups.w A rarer by-form of the skyphos is created by drastically heightening the vertical lip ;11 this version, which resembles the Laconian lakaina (p. 2IS), enjoyed only a brief vogue in Attica. The one-handled cup seems to be obsolete in this phase, but the mug is well represented in the Isis grave: in every case the lip is taller than in MGr. From the mug there developed an important variant which shall be called the tankard; here the lip, now vertical and clearly offset, has actually grown taller than the body, and the handle swings up above the rim.> This new shape became extremely popular in Late Geometric times. DECORATION
The increasing richness of the decoration is achieved not so much by introducing new motifs, as by further exploiting those already in existence. At the same time, the standard of draughtsmanship is not always up to the high standards set in MGr. The meander, in particular, is showing signs ofwear. On average, its outlines (pI. 4a; pI. Sg) are less neatly K. v. I, pI. 56, 836. Hesperia 30, pI. 17, 117. 8 K. v. I, pI. 86, 390. 12 CVA Athens I, pI. 3, 11.
1 4
Leiden A.Sx. I, Brants, pI. 9,46. 3 Cf.J. Bouzek, Sbornik 1959,131-4. 5 AD 17,26. • Odos Parthenonos, Gr. 3. 1 Ant K 4 (1961), pis. 17-18. 9 K. v, I, pI. 94, 240, 826-8. 10 Hesperia 20, pI. 36c. 11 K. v. I, pI. 98, 777. 2
24 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
drawn than in M G I; its hatching often assumes a steeper angle.' It is in this phase that the use ofthe multiple brush first becomes noticeable, even in photographs (pf, 4a,c); for the amphora in our illustration, a seventeen-limbed brush has been used. There are a few additions to the linear repertoire. Among the larger ornaments, hatched meander hooks- are a rare alternative to the orthodox meander and the multiple zigzag. The stock of narrow motifs is enriched by two new arrivals: the row of tangential circles (with central dot, as pk 4d; or doubled, as on the horse ofpl, 4b), and the chain of dotted lozenges ;" both are occasionally found on the lips of kantharoi, as well as being used as ancillaries, but neither motifbecomes common until L G I. Another innovation is the row of diagonal bars (pl, sa), used to best effect on the lids and bases ofpyxides. More emphasis is now placed on the vertical chevron. In M G I this was used only as an ancillary; but now it often usurps the place of broad motifs on skyphoi (pl, 4c). So also the sigma,' although far more rarely. Stars, likewise, which were no more than filling ornaments before, are now allowed to occupy spaces where a broad motif could have been placed." When the stars are placed in equal metopes,! we see the genesis of a new system, whose possibilities are not fully exploited until Late Geometric; and of which more will be said presently. Other narrow motifs, such as the row of dots, the single steep zigzag, and the row of dogtooth, are used only as ancillaries; the first two are usually placed above, and the third below, the main motif. The double-axe pattern introduced in M G I is still common on all kinds of amphora. On the belly of the neck-handled type it usually appears alone (pk 4a), instead of being the central zone of three as in M G I; on several occasions it is abandoned altogether, the glaze being interrupted only by large numbers of triple reserved bands." Similarly, on the lips ofskyphoi, the row of dots (M G I) is less usual than three or four horizontal stripes. On a few vases these stripes are painted extensively over wide areas, as a simple means oflightening the tone," in some cases ousting the glaze altogether." But this unambitious system is more typical ofCorinth and the Argolid: in Attica, the process oflightening the surface is more regularly advanced by multiplying the zones of ornament and by enlarging the panels. For the larger zoned areas, unembarrassed by handles, a broad meander between two ancillaries is now the normal scheme (pt 4b; pl. Sg). In the areas at handle level, the window-panels are larger than ever. A broad motifis still given a central position; but the accumulation of horizontal ancillaries has obscured the strict spatial relationship between the panel and the handle attachments. Such is the effect of the upper row ofdogtooth, passing round the neck of the amphora from Kerameikos, Gr. 69 (pl. 4a), well above the handles. Similarly, the panel on the shoulder-handled amphora, pl, Sg, has merged with the belly zone. Furthermore, the panels on both these vases have reached the limit of their lateral expansion without having to negotiate the handles. In this respect the neck-panel ofthe oinochoe has made no progress, in contrast to the contemporary oinochoai of Corinthian (pI. I8b) and Cycladic (pI. 34j) Geometric. pI. g8, 777. a K. v, I, pI. 93, 288. 3 K. v. I, pI. 85, 285. 4 K. v. I, pI. gl, 778. 20, pI. 36c; CVA Athens I, pI. 4,17. For dot rosettes used in this way, K. v. I, pI. 50, 784. • PL 5C; K. v, I, pI. g6,8g7. 7 K. v, I, pI. 32, 276. 8 EA 18g8, pI. 4,2; K. V. I, pI. 72,868 is an isolated MG I example. 9 K. v. I, pI. 95. 1
K. v,
I,
25
MG 11
On skyphoi the decoration had already been spreading towards the handles in the preceding phase; by M G I I, small window-panels flanked by glaze are very rare indeed. When the meander is used, extra lines under the panel sometimes bring the reserved area well below the lowest level ofthe handles; when a narrower motifis used (e.g. vertical chevrons or multiple zigzag), these lines are brought within the panel, so that it may span the full height of the handle area. A typical scheme is that of pl, se, where both the chevrons and the horizontal lines are stopped by vertical bars, and a filling ornament is inserted above the handle. This arrangement was also adopted in Corinthian M G I I, but with one small point of difference. The Corinthian potter, more austere in his ways, avoided the filling ornament by continuing the bars right up to the handle; whereas in Attic the bars are nearly always restricted to three. A variant of this system, where short vertical bars are stopped by the horizontal lines, was also tried out in both centres; but the effect is looser and less satisfactory (pl. 4 c). From the beginning of its career, the high-handled kantharos is larger than the skyphos, and therefore more richly decorated. Since the handle area is relatively shallow, the main motif- regularly a meander - is usually supplemented by two vertical ancillaries at either side. Furthermore, since the handles are attached to the rim, there cannot be a continuous zone round the lip; when it merges with the body- the decoration is absorbed into the panel. Below the handle area an extra zone is usually added; but on our example (pt 4d) there is a horizontal strip under the meander, producing a more closely knit composition. Even more complex is the decoration ofthe Type I I krater. Here, too, the handle zone is long and narrow: too long, in this case, for the panel to reach the handles, even when the meander is elongated to four turns," or when no less than four vertical ancillaries, including a full meander, are added at the sides (pl. Sf). In order to break up the remaining area of glaze, small metopes are placed in the corners formed by the main panel and the lip. On the Amathus krater there is a star; a full-sized swastika on a fragment from Eleusis." In the horses (pl, Sf) we see the first attempt to harmonize representational drawing with a complex linear composition. These tentative side metopes are found on two other large vases: swastikas on a shoulder-handled amphora.' and horses on the globular pyxis in Paris, pl, 4e. In all these large designs, the metopes are strictly kept in a subordinate position at the side, and are never allowed to intrude into the main panel (contrast Argive, p. 123); the central panel still dominates the field. The case is different with the oinochoe and the neckhandled amphora, where the shoulder, usually glazed, is left free for occasional experiments with small units of decoration. Tiny squares or rectangles containing stars (as pl. sc), or short runs of zigzag, had already been tried out in M G I: further experiment produces inverted T -shaped panels," or a large swastika flanked by two smaller star metopes." Birds, too, make an appearance here, often in antithetic pairs (p. 26). When these metopes take possession ofthe main zone? we are on the threshold ofLate Geometric. The pyxis is the first shape to undergo this transformation; one example, still in an M G I I context" reveals an intermediate stage, where square metopes alternate with short runs of meander.
G Hesperia
1 G
K. v. I, pI. 86, 390. EA 18g8, pI. 4, 2.
6
• SCE II, pI. 19, I, from Amathus. Tubingen 1245, Watzinger, pI. I.
7
3 EA 18g8, pI. 3, 3. As K. v. I, pI. 59, 775.
4
A]A 44, pI. 20, I; Athens 218. 8 AD 17, pI. 34a, 3.
26 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
The decoration of the Type I krater in New York (p. 23) marks a turning-point in the progress of the Attic Geometric style. The two circle metopes inherited from PG are still there, and the arrangement of the subsidiary ornament recalls the MG I torso from Kerameikos Gr. 43 (p. 20). But now for the first time a figured scene - a simple funeral- has been placed in the central position, as though the curtains ofhalf-tone linear decoration had been drawn back to let in the full daylight. Continuing the comparison with the earlier piece as far as we may, let us note that many of the narrow zones below have been swept away to make room for an early representation of a sea-battle. We are clearly not far in time from the classic Dipylon kraters in Paris. In M G I I many of the larger pyxides, especially those with plastic horse handles, bear a circular design on the bottom. The most common are the quatrefoil and the octofoil, both anticipated in M G I, but now more often hatched than drawn in multiple outline. We also find their rectilinear equivalents, the Maltese cross! and the eight-spoked millwheel (under pI. 4b) ; and also the awkward swastika with curved arms (Isis Grave). Still rarer motifs are collected on K. v. I, pl. 65, 795 and 833. FIGURED DRAWING
Horse metopes Kerameikos, Gr. 22, krater. PI. Sd. Agora, krater, Well L 6:2, P 6422 (Davison, fig. 145). Paris, pyxis A 514. Arias-Hirmer-Shefton, pl. 3. PI. 4g· Bird metopes, antithetical. (all oinochoai) London, MsC 2532. Benson,]NES Ig61, 75, pl. 3, fig. 2; pI. 4, figs. 1-2. Agora, Well N I I: 3, P 22433. Hesperia 30 (lg61), 114, pl. 14, J 2. Eleusis 820. EA 18g8, pl. 5, 2. Figured scenes K. V. I, mug, 2159, pls, III and 141. Altheim collection, skyphos. Studies presented to D. M. Robinson 11, pl. rea-b. Eleusis 741, skyphos from Gr. I I. EA 18g8, pl. 5, I and la; Davison, fig. 137· New York, krater, 34.11.2. BullMetMus Ig34, 16gff.; Marwitz, AntK 4 (lg61), 3gff., pls, 17-19. Athens and Toronto, stand frs. Cambitoglou, A]A 64 (I g60), 366-7, pl. 109, with refs. Living creatures - humans, animals, and birds - now begin to find themselves at home on Geometric vases. Often, as in the preceding phase, they are cautiously tucked away in irregular spaces by the handles; but by the beginning of M G I I, single animals have established themselves in square metopal panels, flanking the main linear design. Eventually, elaborate figured scenes break into the central area. As the figures become more prominent, so their drawing gains in confidence. 1
Hesperia, Supp.
II,
76, fig. 50.
MG 11
A growing interest in anatomy is well illustrated by a series ofhorses. The animals on the Kerameikos krater look almost as wiry and primitive. as the EG I specimens (pI. r k), except that the fetlocks are now shown, and the knees and hocks are grossly exaggerated; joints are shown not by angles, but by protrusions. On the Agora krater the horses have at last become creatures of flesh and blood. The frame of the body is more substantial; head and hooves are rendered with a care that presages the Dipylon Master (p. 39). On the Paris pyxis, where the horses are drawn with grace and ease, the artist has become further absorbed in anatomical problems; in showing the thigh joint and the stifle he has actually lifted the veil of the flesh to give a clear rendering of the bone structure.' But the accurate depiction of anatomy never became an end in itself, leading to naturalism; the artist seeks only to define his animals in the simplest possible terms. The horse is a creature with four long jointed legs, a long tail, and a tall hairy neck; if the length of the neck be somewhat exaggerated, no one will mistake his horse for a goat or bull. On the same vase, under one of the handles (pI. 4f), he can transform the same basic frame into a stag; he need only abolish the mane and the fetlocks, substituting a short stubby tail and a pair of antlers. Under the other handle (pI. 4h) the sow and her offspring are less happily rendered; nevertheless, the curly tail and the ample ears are enough to establish their porcine nature. Marshbirds, which make their first appearance in M G I I, are drawn with a similar economy of detail; it is hardly possible at this stage to recognize any particular species with confidence. The oldest type is seen on the Eleusis skyphos, and under the handle of the Agora krater. It is plump and compact, standing on short, bent legs. The head and neck are indicated by straight lines, meeting at an acute angle. Two other early features deserve notice: the 'fish-tail' (Eleusis skyphos), and the reverted head (New York krater); both traits are combined on the London oinochoe (Benson, loco cit.). A taller bird, destined to be more popular in Late Geometric, appears on the Eleusis oinochoe: the high legs and the long curving neck remind us of the stork. On this vase both silhouette and hatching are used for the birds' bodies; but by the beginning of L G I hatching is preferred, allowing the birds to be absorbed into the half-tone linear decoration without attracting too much attention to themselves. Cross-hatching, as seen on the New York krater, is very seldom applied to Attic birds. After the M G I mourner (p. 2I), the earliest representation of the human figure is on the Kerameikos mug. Here the two horse-tamers show how far the MG painter was prepared to imitate nature. Head, thighs, and legs are in profile, so that the chin and nose may be clearly marked; thigh and calves carefully rounded. Somewhere between the narrow waist and the broad shoulders, the viewpoint changes from profile to frontal, so that both arms can be seen; the thorax thus takes the form of an equilateral triangle. So far, the MG I I painter is merely setting the fashion for later Geometric figures. But there are also two characteristics already obsolescent by the time of the New York krater, and virtually obsolete in L G 1. First, the proportions ofthe body are comparatively close to nature, the waist being placed just over halfway up the figure; in later times, the length oflegs and abdomen is greatly exaggerated." Secondly, the feet of the figures, like those of the horses and birds 1
Cr. also the goats on the Eleusis oinochoe, EA r8g8, pI. 5,
2.
2
K. v. r, r78.
28 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
in the metopes, are often placed well above the base line, which does not yet represent the ground.' The battle scenes in Eleusis and New York present a lively, if unsophisticated, view of ?eo~etric warfare. Sword, spear, and bow are all seen in action, and particular emphasis IS laid on archery and swordplay.t The Dipylon shield looks much more serviceable than the drastically stylized versions of L G I: the shape is quite near the terracotta model in London," where the scallops torn from the sides still look quite small, leaving a waist adequately broad for defence. Filling ornament is kept to a minimum in M G I I, and sometimes omitted altogether. Only eight-pointed stars are found in the figured scenes; in the horse-panels, columns of chevrons or M's may be added between the legs, but the expanse above the back is often filled with glaze (pI. 4g; cf p. 13). In M G I I it is still premature to speak of a figured style; but valuable experience has been gained, without which no consistent style could have been evolved later. Owing to the very limitations of Geometric art, 'style' demands a fixed degree of stylization, which in turn requires an essential minimum of anatomical knowledge. Schematic figures must be plausible symbols of what they represent, based ultimately on natural observation. In this age ofexperiment, figures are only beginning to attain prominence in vase decoration for the first time. since the collapse of Mycenaean civilization. With no earlier models to guide them, artists were compelled to take their subjects from nature. The warriors on the Eleusis sk~hos fight, lunge, and fall more naturally than their successors on the Dipylon kraters; their contours are more supple, and their proportions more accurate. But there were two insurmountable obstacles in the way of any further advance towards naturalism: the limitations of a silhouette technique, and the conceptual vision inherent in Geometric art. ~itho~t the. aid incision, figures in silhouette must remain uncompromisingly twodIme~sIOnaII.n feel~ng; at the same time, the artist felt free to project on to his picture any essential details which he could not see, but knew to be there.' Thus all four legs ofan animal ~ere al~ays sh.own; with human figures, the limbs could not all be included without varyIng the VIeWpOInt. To complete the artist's conception ofa ship, the decks must be projected ?~er and above the gunwales." Similarly, in the horses of the Paris pyxis (pI. 4g) the thigh JOInts are shown. On a live horse, these are invisible to the eye, but the artist knows them to be a vital part ofthe equine anatomy. The next generation often omitted them; the horse co~l~ be effectively defined without their aid. As soon as the figures had become fully intelligible, there was no need for any further elaboration of anatomical detail until after the end of the Geometric style; for it was only then that the conceptual approach was abandoned, and the slow journey towards realism begun.
0:
On th~ ~leusis skyphos the perspective is especially vague: the archer beyond the ship may even be shown in three-quarter view. If so, this ISan experiment not followed up until the late sixth century. • The combatant swordsmen on the Athens-Toronto stand seem to betray the same hand as that of the New York krater: cf. Brann, Hesperia 30 (1961),97, n. 13· 3 Lorimer, Homerand the Monuments 161, pI. 7. 4 M. Robertson, Greek Painting 36ff.; Webster, From Myeenae to Homer 204. 5 Kirk, BSA 44 (1949), 95ff. 1
29
LG I
ATTIC LATE GEOMETRIC: FIRST PHASE (LG I) At the outset of Late Geometric, the character of Attic vase decoration is transformed in three respects. First, figured scenes now become increasingly prominent; secondly, ornament e~pands over virtually the whole surface of the vase; thirdly, centripetal schemes of decoration are often replaced by bands of square metopal panels. On the most typical ~gured vases ~ happy equilibrium is preserved between the figures and the supporting lInea: d~coratIo~. The two elements are combined into harmonious compositions; the grOWIng Interest In the figures has not yet had any adverse effect on the neatness ofthe linear drawing, which is still comparable with the best Middle Geometric work. On the unfigured vases, however small their size, the decoration is executed with no less care and patience. In terms of linear ornament, the upper and lower limits of L G I may be conveniently marked by two amphorae: Mannheim 137 (CVA I, pl. 3, I) and K. v. I, pl. 35, 385 from Gr. 72.1 As we shall see, this phase may be subdivided into two stages, LG la and LG lb. The rise of figured painting, coupled with the prevailing fashion for ripe and massive schemes of linear decoration, allows the personality of the vase-painter to emerge with a clarity inconceivable in previous generations. The recognition of individual painters and workshops has already been the aim ofseveral valuable studies. This type ofresearch is not only a worthy end in itself, but also an essential preliminary to the establishment of a sound relative chronology; for we have now reached a stage where differences in style do not necessarily imply differences of date," unless they can be shown to reflect the internal development of a single workshop." Conversely, we cannot arrange all the figured vases of LG I (and still less those of LG II) in a single chronological series, owing to the simultaneous activity of rival workshops, widely differing in style from one another. .Our first ~ask, then, is to define the character of each identifiable hand and workshop of this g~neratIOn, and then place them in a chronological framework. Later, the plainer matenal from grave and well groups may serve to check any conclusions based on the figured vases alone, especially with regard to the dating of linear ornament. ~~ begin with the most outstanding and influential personality in Late Geometric vasepamtmg.
I. The Dipylon Master and his Workshop A. Major vases
(i) By the DipylonMaster (LG la) I.
Belly-handled amphora, Athens 804, from Dipylon, Gr. 2 or 4. A M 18 (1893), 104, 106ff.; Pfuhl, MuZIII,pI. I ;CVA l,pI. 8; Collignon-Couve, pl. 11, 200; Jdl58 (1943),
1 Kahane treats this grave group as transitional between his 'reif-' and ispat-geometrisch' (A] A 44, 478), i.e, between my LG I and LG 11. • See Kunze, AE (1953-4), 171, n. 2. This article hereafter Kunr» AE. 3 'W~rksh~p' is a loose term, sometimes used without much reference to the environment in which pottery is made. For Miss Davison (op. cit. 9) It denotes no more than 'a stylistic unity of a sort to catch the eye, but in detail not close enough to warrant ascription to one hand'. I us~ the term in a more restricted sense, in assuming that the pots from the same 'workshop' were made and painted in the. sa~e establishment - under the eye, if not also by the hand, of the leading craftsman. Each 'workshop', however, does not necessarily Imply a separate establishment: cf. E. L. Smithson, A] A 66 (1962),423.
13, fig. 7; Lane, Greek Pottery, pI. 5b; R. M. Cook, GP P, pls. 4a, 5; A M 69-70 (1954-5), BeiI. 8 (detail ofmourners) ; Marb WP 1962, pls. 6-7 (views all round, and detail of neck) ; Davison 133 (further bibliography) and fig. I; Arias-Hirmer-Shefton, pI. 4. PI. 6. 2. Belly-handled amphora, Athens 803, from Dipylon, Gr. I. A M 18 (1893), 101ff.; Davison 133 (further bibliography); AntAb 10 (1961), pI. 3, fig. 5 (detail of prothesis). 3. Belly-handled amphora, fragmentary, in Sevres, formerly Paris A 516. RA, ser. 6, 33 (1945),63, fig. 2; Morin-Jean, Le dessin des Animaux en Grece, Paris (1911), 17, fig. 5; 19, fig. 7 (details of deer and grazing birds); AntAb 10 (1961), pI. 4, fig. 6 (detail of prothesis); Davison 133 (further bibliography) and fig. 2. 4. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, Paris A 517. JdI58 (1943), 8-g, figs. 5-6; CVA Louvre 11, pI. I, 1-10, pI. 2, 5; Kunze, AJA 6 I (1957), 306; Davison 133-4 (further bibliography) and fig. 3. PI. 7a.1 5. Giant oinochoe, Athens 811, from Dipylon, Gr. 14. AM 18 (1893), 13 I ff.; JdI 14 (1899),210, fig. 85; Pfuhl, MUZIII, pI. 3, fig. 13;JdI58 (1943), 15, fig. 9; Davison, fig. 7. PI. 7 d. 6. Pitcher, Athens 812, almost certainly from Dipylon, Gr. 14. Height o· 77m. PI. 7e.2 7. Neck-handled amphora, fr. Agora P 7024. Hesperia, Supp. 11 (1940), 180, fig. 130, C 134; JdI 58 (1943),4, fig. I; Davison, fig. 6. (ii) By the closer associates ofthe Dipylon Master (LG I a) Vases by the same hand are bracketed together in this and subsequent lists.
8. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, in Paris and Athens. 'Krater I', Kunze AE, I 62ff. A fr. in Athens, loco cit. pI. I Paris A 522 (loc. cit. pI. 2, 2; Davison, fig. 15a) Paris A 525 (Kunze AE, pI. 2, I; Davison, fig. 15b). CVA Louvre 11, pI. 4, 3 shows A 550 (Kunze AE, pI. 4, 2) joined by Villard to A 522, incorporating also S 531 (Kunze AE, pI. 4, 4)3 and other newly published material. Non-joining frs.: CVA, pI. 3, 8 (once A 556, Kunze AE, pI. 4, I, bottom left), perhaps belonging to the reverse: CVA, pI. 4, 1-2,4-5; pI. 5, 1-6. 9. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, Paris A 527, Kunze's 'Krater 11'. C VA, pI. 2, 2 and Davison, fig. 13a, upper part only,! incorporating A 520 iKune»AE, pI. 3, I; Davison, fig. 13b) and A 534 (Kunze AE, pI. 4, I, top); A 523 (CVA, pI. 5, 10) also belongs." The frs. A 527 (CVA, pI. 3) and A 535 (Kunze AE, pI. 4, I = Davison, fig. 13C, bottom right) are also assigned to this krater by Villard.
+
+
In CVA, pI. I, 3, the second and third figures from the left are surely a pair ofSiamese twins, as onParis A519 (below, no. 17). Davison tentatively ascribes tothis krater two further frs, inParis, A545 (her fig. 4);these cannot belong, being unglazed inside. a This isthe only vase in Athens answering to the brief description ofthe 'amphora' in this grave (A M 18, 132). Onthe front of the pitcher, where rim and shoulder are missing, Briickner and Pernice evidently assumed a second handle. 3 This last seems out ofplace: see Davison 3I, n. 30. If it belongs to this krater at all, then we should assume a second hand, as Villard and Davison for our no. 9 (q.v.). This already seems likely, in view ofthe individual style ofthe ship scene under the handle, CVA, pI. 4, 7. • See Kunze, A]A 6I, 306-7. 6 Villard, CVA 7, and Davison (op. tit. 30ff.) rightly distinguish two different hands onthis krater. They are (a) the painter ofno. 8, and (b) aninferior craftsman, onwhose later career see Davison 34, and below pp. 56-7. 1
Miss
I THE DIPYLON WORKSHOP· 31
LG I
30 . ATTIC GEOMETRIC
+
10. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, Kunze's 'Krater Ill'. Paris A 528 539 (CVA, pI. 7, 1,6-8,10-11); also A 538 (CVA, pI. 3,10) and A 526 (CVA, pI. 3, 9, lower part),' both joined in error to our no. 9 (CVA, pI. 2, 2; cf. Kunze, AJA 61,307); and CVA, pI. 2, 1,3-4,6. Perhaps also CVA, Fogg Museum, pI. 3, 5; cf. Kune» AE 16 7. I I. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, in Athens and Paris, Kunze's 'Krater IV'. Frs. in Athens (Kunze AE, pI. 5, I and 3; pI. 6,1-2) Paris CA 3362 (C VA, pI. 7, 15-16) Compiegne, formerly Paris A 549 559 (Kunze AE, pI. 5, 2) Gottingen 533 s.2 12. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, Paris A 530. CVA, pI. 6, 1-g.3 13. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary. The main piece, once in Konigsberg (A 18, MonInst 9, pI. 40, 3; B SA 44 (1949), 97-8, fig. 2; Lullies, Antike Kleinkunst in Konigsberg 11, pI. 2, 7), has now fallen apart. Two frs. ofthis are now inWarsaw (CVAI, pI. 2, 4and 6) : another fr., previously unpublished (ibid. pI. 4, 7), is said to belong to the same vase. Paris A 532 (CVA Louvre I I, pI. 7, 2 and 5) may perhaps belong. 14. Stand, fr., Oxford AE 406. Warriors, as on no. 12, lowest zone. 15. PedestaIled krater, fragmentary. Joining frs.: (i) in Brussels, Musee du Cinquantenaire (formerly Paris A 531), RA 33 (1945),86, fig. 8; Verhoogen, Bulletin des Musees royaux d'Art et d'Histoire, Bruxelles (1951), 3Iff., fig. I; (ii) in Athens, assembled by Kunze (F S, 49ff., pI. 4; Davison, fig. 16). Add now Hundt-Peters, Greifswalder Antiken ( I 96 I ), 12, no. 86, pI. 7. 16. Pedestalled krater, frs. in Halle, Robertinum 58 and 58A, 1-2. JdI 58 (1943),6-7, figs. 3-4. 17. PedestaIled krater, fragmentary, Paris A 519. Pottier, pI. 20;JdI 58 (1943),5, fig. 2; CVA, pI. 5, 7-g. Also Yale, C VA Louvre I I, 6, fig. 2; Davison, figs. I I, r sa-b. 18. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, Athens 802. Kunze, FS, pis. 5-8; Davison, figs. rea-c. Add now Gottingen 533n: Canciani, AA 1967, 45 1-3, figs. 9-10. 19. Pedestalled krater from Piraeus Street. ADChr 17 (1961-2), pls, 22-3. 4 20. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, Paris, Musee Rodin. CVA, roff., pI. 9, 1-2, 4; further frs. assigned by Kunze, F S 50, n. I I.
+
+
+
+
(iii) Villard's Group (LG Ib) 2 I. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, Paris A 547. C VA, pI. 14, 4-15; pI. 15, 1-22; Davison, fig. 22. 22. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, Sydney, Nicholson Museum 46.41. Trendall, Handbook (1948), 244, fig. 48; 246, fig. 49; Seltman and Chittenden, Greek Art (1947), 25, no. 38, pI. 8; Davison, fig. 21; AntAb 10 (1961), pl. 2, fig. 4 (detail of prothesis) . 1 The lower zone was first published in MonInst 9,pI. 40, 4,where itwas wrongly attached toa fr. ofour no. 11: see Kunze AE 167, n·3· o Canciani, AA 1967,45°-1, fig.8. 3 Kunze,FS 50, n. 12, adds afr. inAthens, + ParisA532 and S 528'(CVA, pI. 7,2-3,5). A532 cannot belong, owing tothe differentpattern inthe lowest linear zone. It may belong toour no. 13 (q.v.). • Other frs. bythe painter ofnos. 15-19: Paris S 495 (now CA 3384, CVA, pI. 9,5), A551, A560, and six frs, inAthens, all illustrated by Kunze, FS 54ff., pis. g-ro. Paris CA 3382 and 3391, CVA, pI. 9, I and 14: the latter could belong toour no. 16. Also CVA Scheurleer 2, pI. 3,3; Vienna University 651, CVA 'Deutschland 5',pI. 4,2-4.
32 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
LG I
23. Pedestalled krater, fragmentary, Paris A 541. CVA, pl. 13, 1-19; pI. 14, 1-3; Davison, fig. 23. 24· Pedestalled krat~r, fragmentary, ~aris ~ 552. Villard, Melanges Picard (RA 1949), 1065ff., figs. 1-3, CVA, pls, 11-12, Damson, fig. 24. PI. 8a.
1
(iv) The Baring Group (LG Ib). Perhaps late work of the Dipylon Master (cf Smithson, AJA 66 (1962),424) 25. Neck-handled amphora, London, Baring Collection. Antiqu~rian Quarterly 1925-6, pl. 14;JdI 58 (1943),15, fig. 8;JHS 70 (1950), pl. 4a; Damson, fig. 93. { 26. Neck ( ?)-handled amphora, frs. with chariot frieze, Agora P 10664. Davison 27, fig. 9; Agora VIII, nos. I and 245.1
(v) Vases without figured scenes 27. Giant oinochoe, California 8.3352. CVA, pl. 2. 28. Pitcher, Stockholm 1704. OlForsch Ill, pl. 94, 2. 29· Pitcher, Athens 226. JdI 14 (1899), 205, fig. 71; Pfuhl, MuZ Ill, pl. 3, 11; CVA, pl. 7, I; Davison, fig. 109. 30. Giant oinochoe from Phaleron, Copenhagen 4705. CVA 2, pl. 71,5; Davison, fig. 108. 31. Neck-handled amphora, Athens 769. Pfuhl, MUZIlI, pl. 3, 12; Collignon-Couve, pl. 10, 187; CVA, pl. 7,4; JdI 14 ( 1899), 193, fig. 55; Davison, fig. 17. 32. Neck-handled amphora, Munich 6080. Buschor, Griechische Vasenmalerei 35, fig. 18; CVA 3, pl, 106, 1-2; pl. 107, 2-4; Ohly, Griechische Goldbleche, pl. 27; Davison 134 (further bibliography) and fig. 5; Arias-Hirmer-Shefton, colour pl. I. 33· Giant oinochoe, Hanover 1958.60. K. Deppert, Catalogue (Jan. 1959), pl. 2, no. 9; I. Woldering, Kestner-Museum I88g-I964, 68, no. 50.
I THE DIPYLON WORKSHOP •
33
(ii) High-rimmed bowls 42. Munich 6402. CVA 3, pl. 122, 1-2; Davison, fig. 19. 43. Paris CA 1790, 'from Boeotia'. 44· Athens 866.JdI 14 (1899), 214, fig. 96, top right; AJA 44 (1940), 477ff., pl. 26, 2; Davison, fig. 20. (iii) Tankards 45. University College, London. PI. 8g. Height 0·213m. 46. Munich 6217. CVA 3, pl. 113,3-4. NOTE Nearly all vases in this list have at some time been associated with the great amphora Athens 804; but the precise relationship between their makers has remained, and will doubtless continue to remain, a controversial matter. Attributions to a great 'reif-geometrisch' workshop were first suggested by Kahane (A] A 44, 477) who noted the resemblance of three vases - our nos. 32, 34, and 44 - to the celebrated amphora. He tentatively added our no. 31, and two more unfigured bowls. Mrs Nottbohm (]d! 58, rff.) made many additions to the list, and attempted a distinction between the Master's own hand and those of his pupils, among whom she recognized five different painters; to the Master she ascribed nos. 2, 4-5, 7,16-17, and 25: to his workshop, nos. 10, 13, and 29-31. It was she who first demonstrated that the Master ofAthens 804 established a Classical Tradition in Geometric figured painting, persisting throughout his own generation, and well into the next. (Four of her 'Werkstatt' vases, op. cit. 17, W 6--g, belong to our LGIIa;seepp. 55-7.0nChamoux'scriticism ofNottbohm (RA 33 (1945), 55ff.), see Davison, 5ff.) The study of the finest kraters in this Classical Geometric Tradition was further advanced by Kunze, who noted several joins and other close connections between the disiecta membra in Paris and Athens (our 8-13, 15-19) ; he visualized not one, but several master painters, differing from one another in temperament, but belonging to the same generation (Kunze AE 171). Meanwhile Villard drew attention to a distinct group of kraters ofless superlative quality (RA 1949, I065ff.; CVA Louvre 11, pls, 11-15; our nos. 21-4) for which he rightly suggested a slightly later date than for those of which Kunze treats. Finally, Miss Davison has added nos. 3 and 26 to the works of the Master, and ascribed further vases to his associates: 29-30 ('Tapestry Hand' ; see p. 65, n. 2), 35--'7, 40--1 ('Oinochoe Group'), and 42 ('Workshop').
B. Minor vases, generally LG Ib (i) Oinochoai 34· Athens 152. AJA 44 (1940), pl. 26, I; Davison, fig. 9. 35. Oxford 1927.4448. Davison, fig. 103. 36. Athens 192. AM6 (1881), pl. 3; Forsdyke, Greece before Homer (1956), pl. I; Davison, fig. 104; Jeffery, LSAG, pl. I, I. 37· Agora P 15122, from Gr. E 19:3. Hesperia 9 (1940),271, fig. 7; Hesperia 29 (1960), 404, pl. 89, I; Davison, fig. 105. PI. 7b-c. 38. Brussels A 3420. Verhoogen, Bulletin des Musees royaux d'Art et d'Histojre, Bruxelles (195 1), 35, figs. 2-3: ead., Ceramique grecque aux Musees royaux, Bruxelles (1956), 11, fig. 2. 39. Athens, marked G 18, from Marathon. 40. Munich 6400. CVA 3, pl. 110, 3; pl. 112, 1-2; Davison, fig. 106. 41. Eleusis, from Gr. r 10. P AE 1955, pl. 25a; Davison 137. 4 1a. Aigaleos. ADChr 19 (1964), pl. 67y-8. 1
I am not convinced that the prothesis fr. belongs to the same vase as the chariot frieze. See J H S 84,
2 I 7.
All these vases were made by a narrow circle of talented potters working in close enough proximity for ideas to be freely exchanged, and all owing their inspiration to an artist of front rank - the author ofAthens 804. The essential characteristics of his style were thrown into relief by Nottbohm, who drew illuminating comparisons with the output of a rather later workshop centred round the Hirschfeld krater (Athens 990). Perhaps the personal contribution of the Dipylon Master will emerge more clearly if our comparanda be contemporary, or slightly earlier, so that we may see exactly where he diverges from his immediate predecessors and his rivals. His choice of shapes, his system of linear decoration, and his figured style call for separate consideration. SHAPES
The Dipylon Master was a specialist in the production of large funerary vases. His pedestalled kraters and belly-handled amphorae, enlarged to a gigantic size for use as grave monuments, follow traditional forms whose history can be traced back to Protogeometric D
34 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
times. The kraters are all of Type I, although Type I I certainly survived into this generation,! In the belly-handled amphora he gave a final and glorious lease oflife to a shape which was already obsolescent in his timej- after the end of LG I the belly-handled amphora finally passes into oblivion. Our 7 probably comes from an equally gigantic neck-handled amphora, large enough to have been a grave monument (cf. pI. II a; p. 55, nos. 1-2). Smaller examples, 25, 31-2, may have housed late cremations, for which there is evidence in this generation. Although they show a gradual tendency towards slimmer proportions and straighter contours, we have only to compare the first two with contemporary work elsewhere (e.g. pI. loa) to realize that this movement took a far more extreme form outside the circle of the Dipylon Master. Two new shapes make their first appearance in this workshop: the giant oinochoe and the pitcher. Both are best represented by the magnificent pair (pI. 7d-e) from the Master's own hand, the largest and the most beautiful examples of either shape that we possess. They are also the earliest, so that the Dipylon Master may fairly claim to have been their inventor." For the giant oinochoe he favoured a taut, spherical body crowned by an enormously tall straight neck, a feature inherited from the handsome lekythos-oinochoe of M G times (pI. 3 ID.). The pitcher also has roots in the past; its body takes the shape ofthe old shoulderhandled amphora, which just survives into LG 1,4 and then dies out. The pitcher has a less plump body than the giant oinochoe, its rounded profile being answered by a graceful curve on the neck. The smaller shapes made in the Dipylon Workshop are the standard oinochoe, the highrimmed bowl, and the tankard. The oinochoai remain conservative in shape, following the plumper variety current in M G I I (pI. 5b) ; the rolled handle and the absence of the ring foot are both common traits in L G 1. The body is still well rounded, in contrast to the hardening contours of the Concentric Circle Group, which belong to a rather later date (pp. 74-6)· The high-rimmed bowl, another new shape, results from a fusion of two by-forms of the MG 11 skyphos. The shallow body and reflex ribbon handles are the legacy of the elongated variant;" the high rim was first tried out on the lakaina" which, like the high-rimmed bowl, was supplied with a lid. The bowls of this workshop still recall their M G parentage, and look earlier than the type represented in Kerameikos Gr. 71 (pl. 109), where the original skyphoid body has been flattened almost out ofrecognition; this impression is confirmed, as we shall see, by the decoration. The high-rimmed bowl may thus be added to the list of the Dipylon Workshop's inventions. Apart from the outsize tankards 45--6 (pI. 8g), no other shape was decorated in the Dipylon Master's manner. On the rare occasions when pyxides, drinking vessels, and toy vases carry figured drawing, one may say with confidence that these were the work of his less talented contemporaries, outside his workshop. 7 K. v, I, pl. 23,1255; slightly earlier, Athens 812, Mon Inst q, pI. 39, 3; RA 33 (1945),81, fig. 6, top row, second from left. Outside this workshop only three other examples are known: K. v, I, pI. 49,1214, fr.; Athens 805, AJA 44, pI. 24; Brussels A 1506, C VA 2, pI. 54, I a--c, a weak prothesis amphora clearly inspired by this workshop. S Kahane gives priority to A M 43, pI. 2, 1-2, from the Lambros Workshop; but see p. 45. 4 Athens 18433. 5 K. v, I, pl, 94, 828. • K. v. I, pI. 98, 777. 7 E.g. pyxis, pI. 9f-n; kantharos, K. v. I, pI. 87,268; toy amphora, op.cit. pl. 110, 1306. 1
2
I THE DIPYLON WORKSHOP •
LG I
35
. The Dipylon Master's contribution towards the development of Geometric shapes may be summarized as follows. There are strong grounds for believing that he was the inventor of three characteristic new forms: the pitcher, the giant oinochoe, and the high-rimmed bowl. In other respects he was a conservative in the best sense of the word. With the longestablished neck-handled amphora and the standard oinochoe he used his influence to preserve graceful and rounded forms, resisting a contemporary tendency towards straight, wooden contours and meagre proportions. Finally - and herein lies his most memorable achievement - he succeeded in enlarging two of the most time-honoured forms, the bellyhandled amphora and the pedestalled krater, into gigantic monuments of funereal splendour, which remain among the greatest marvels of the potter's art. LINEAR DECORATION
The Dipylon Master's contribution in this field will become clear ifwe compare his pitcher, 6 (pI. 7 e) with an advanced M G I I vase ofapproximately the same size, and the same proportions - the shoulder-handled amphora Athens 218. 1 On the earlier vase, a dark-ground style still prevails. The ornament has been confined to the three focal points - the neck, the shoulder, and the belly. In each area the design is separate and self-contained, consisting of narrow motifs grouped symmetrically round a meander. Below the belly, the least important part of the vase is still covered by black glaze, punctuated by two narrow zones enclosed between triple bands; on smaller examples (pl. 5 g) this function is performed by triple bands alone. The glazed areas left in the handle zone have been weakened by the intrusion ofsquare metopes; but the central panel is still surrounded by a dark frame. The result is a harmonious balance between the half-tone ornament and the black glaze, and a clear definition of the shape of the decoration; because they stand out so boldly from the glaze, the simple orthodox meanders are strong enough to dominate the whole scheme. On the pitcher, the last vestiges of the dark-ground style have been swept away, giving place to an almost continuous web of half-tone decoration covering the whole surface. The wide bands of glaze below the belly have been replaced by broad zones oflinear ornament, separated from each other by the Dipylon Master's favourite narrow motif, the chain of dotted lozenges: these have taken the place of the reserved bands, and are used to separate wider zones everywhere else. In the lowest register ofall, where the profile is sharply curved, the row ofhatched leaves (perhaps borrowed from the bottom of the contemporary pyxisc£ pI. gg) admirably fills an area where a rectilinear design would look awkward. In the register immediately above, the use of the meander is revolutionary, and poses an architectonic problem. Since the beginning of Geometric, we have been accustomed to think of the meander as a powerful motif, confined to the portions of a vase which require most emphasis; but here, for the first time, it can no longer play its dominant role, since it has been lavished on a less important field, formerly occupied by glaze. The Dipylon Master was too good a craftsman to allow the wealth of his ornament to obscure the underlying shape: the three focal points still needed emphasis, but when the whole surface became covered with decoration, the design could only be dominated by something broader than any of the 1
AJA 44, pI. 20,
I.
36 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
motifs hitherto devised. For this purpose the simple meander could no longer be ofservice. To have enlarged its scale would have been an unsatisfactory solution, since large and ugly reserved hooks would have been left, most distracting to the eye, and fatal to the half-tone effect of the grand design.' The only course left to him was to increase the complexity of the meander in proportion to the size of the field: hence the double meander on the shoulder, and the triple meander on the neck. There is even a quadruple meander on the neck of the amphora 2, the largest vase of all. Comparison of the two vases leads to the following conclusion. In their different ways, both offer fine examples of Geometric linear decoration at its best; in both cases the choice and arrangement of the ornament is carefully related to the shape. But whereas on the M G amphora only two sizes of motif are required, the riper scheme on the pitcher demands at least three, in order to attain the same degree of architectonic success. Greater variety is also needed in the repertoire of the motifs themselves, to prevent the repetition of the different forms of meander from becoming monotonous. For the largest fields of all, the Dipylon Master also devised the handsome 'tapestry' design, seen on the belly zone of our pitcher in its most elaborate form: a five-tiered net oflozenges is encased by two hatched zigzags, and the compartments are alternately checked and quartered. As alternatives to the single meander, he often used the battlement, and the zone of leaves which we have already noted; chains ofchecked lozenges are rarer (2, 24 (pI. 8 a) and 27) ; the hatched zigzag is occasionally inserted as a border above krater handles (~). Among the narrow motifs, the chain of dotted lozenges is by far the commonest. Others, in order offrequency, are: row oflarge separate dots (especially on the plastic ribs of grave monuments - e.g., I, 24); chain of tangential dots, mainly on feet; row of cross-hatched triangles, pointing upwards or downwards; sigmas; gear pattern; tall single zigzag; triple zigzag; and dogtooth. A popular combination consists of a row of dotted lozenges sandwiched between cross-hatched triangles pointing up and down. Four more motifs were adopted in our workshop only in its later stage, LG Ib: a 'wolftooth' design, with interlocking rows of hatched equilateral triangles (28,30-1); vertical wavy lines (19, 24, 28, 30); single floating zigzag, either continuous (2~) or interrupted (22, 24); and checked zones (19, 24, 27, 28, 31-2). These motifs have no roots in MG; on the contrary, all four survive well into L G I I, when they are drawn in a looser and more cursory form. To complete this account, some negative evidence should be stated. Two more innovations ofL G I, popular elsewhere, were never apparently accepted by this workshop: the hatched serpent, and the dotted serpent in single line. Nor do we see here the row of tangential circles, already current in MG 11 (pI. 4d). All three ofthese non-Dipylon motifs appear on the fragmentary amphora K. v. I, pl. 49, 1214. • One important new aspect of L G I decoration found little favour with the Dipylon Master: this was an increasing tendency to divide an important field into equal square metopes (pp. 49-50). The idea had its roots in MG 11 (p. 24), but was not applied to the main zone until LG I: as Kahane points out," it was a contemporary alternative to the 1 Cf. the amphora Athens 805, A]A 44, pI. 24, a grave monument by a less skilful contemporary; the heavy single meander on the neck comes dangerously close to this pitfall. • A]A 44, 47 8.
LG I
I THE DIPYLON WORKSHOP'
37
Dipylon Master's own 'umlaufstil'. The metope system was used not only on pyxides and drinking vessels, but also on nearly all the shapes made in this workshop. Typical examples are the krater Athens 806;1 the amphora Athens 805;2 the pitcher Athens 174;3 the giant oinochoe Athens 178 (p. 44); and the high-rimmed bowl, pI. log. On the last three, a band of equal square metopes passes round a continuous zone, uninterrupted by handles. This practice was entirely foreign to the Dipylon Workshop, where the broadest continuous zones are always filled by continuous friezes. Even in the handle zones, these painters used metopes very sparingly. Square panels of concentric circles, which had been traditional to the belly-handled amphora since PG, still survive on the reverse of the amphorae 1-3; but it is only on the shoulder offour late vases - 28-30, 33 - that we find a more extended application of the metope system. Here, the metopes are managed in a way that is strictly relevant to the shape. Vertical divisions in a horizontal zone are bound to arrest the eye, and were therefore used with caution. By confining the metopes to the handle zone on the shoulder, the painter has drawn attention to a field where we should naturally expect the decoration to lend some emphasis; and by limiting them to the side of this zone, flanking a short run of double meander, he has concentrated the main weight of decoration on the front ofthe vase. His restrained handling ofthe metopes has given the vases a sense ofdirection. On a much larger scale, the same principles are applied in the marshalling of linear decoration round the bier scene on the front of the Master's great amphora (pI. 6). The vertical meanders rivet our attention on the figures; on the reverse, similar meanders frame the concentric circle metopes in the M G manner - the Dipylon Master had clearly learned his trade in a good M G workshop. Later, in his maturity, he was the first artist to demonstrate how the entire surface of a monumental vase could be covered with bands of linear ornament without fear of monotony, and without any risk of obscuring the underlying shape. FIGURED STYLE
Of all the legacies of the Dipylon Master, the most personal is his figured drawing. Its character is too well known to need an exhaustive analysis here; but some attempt will be made to show wherein his own contribution lay. The portrayal of funerary and battle scenes had already been attempted before his time (pp. 27-8); but he was the first to evolve in them the canons of a consistent style. Although the details oftheir iconography vary among his associates,' the outstanding quality of these scenes derives from their most homogeneous aspect - the delineation of the figures themselves. The warriors, the charioteers, the rowers, the mourners, and the corpse laid out on the bier - all these conform to the same archetype established in the figures ofthe prothesis scene on I (pI. 6). In order to appreciate the originality of the Dipylon Master's style, we have only to contrast his figures with the work of his predecessors and contemporaries. For comparison we shall choose two scenes which cannot be far from him in time, but which reflect a less violent break with the MG If manner. First, the horse-taming on a toy 1
A]A 44, pl. 25.
2
op. cit. pI. 24.
3
]d! 14, 208, fig. 77.
4
Kunze AE 17()--1.
38 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
bail-amphora,' where the man is modelled on much the same lines as the figures on the MG 11 mug (p. 26); secondly, the prothesis on a krater fragment, Athens 812. 2 On both vases the figures are taller than in M G I I, the legs being longer in proportion to the torso; but the thorax is still in the form of an equilateral triangle." Its contours are hardening into straight lines; yet the buttocks and calves of the horse-tamer are still vigorously rounded, while even the arms are curved. These characteristics survive as late as the end of L G I, sometimes in a grossly exaggerated form.' The mourners on the great amphora, I, differ markedly in two respects. First, they are taller and slimmer than any other representations of the human figure in Geometric times; secondly, the curves have been restricted to a minimum, although they cannot be avoided altogether. The outline of the buttocks, after springing out abruptly from the waist, settles down to a virtually straight course; the same contour is repeated on a smaller scale for the calves. The upper part of the body has been reduced to a severe rectilinear pattern - a tall isosceles triangle, with angle at waist and elbows." This posture identifies the figures as mourners. In a style where there is so little variation in the rendering of the human body, and so many figures could be crowded together on to a single vase, the position of the arms assumes a vital importance: it provides the most significant clue by which we may recognize the multifarious activities of the men and women grouped in their various scenes. In contrast, therefore, to the slipshod habits which prevailed elsewhere (below, n. 4), the painters of the Dipylon Workshop took pains to make the limbs of their figures anatomically plausible, so that their action should be clearly defined. In the marine combat of 10, were it not for the meticulously careful drawing oflimbs and weapons," we should not be able to understand the intensely dramatic narrative which the artist has portrayed with such astonishing economy ofdetail. 7 The love ofclear definition is carried yet further: even when the warriors are encumbered with the huge Dipylon shield, the arms are always shown, reminding us of the vitality ofthe human body underneath; in LG I this practice is peculiar to the Dipylon Workshop." Elbows are marked by a sharp angle, dividing the arm into two parts, ofwhich the upper is nearly always straight, except on some occasions when the figures are relaxed in death (2, 13, 15). Even with figures advancing in profile, the arms always spring directly from the shoulders, instead ofbeing both attached to one side ofthe body." As a result ofthis convention, it became necessary, in the interests of clarity, to exaggerate the length of the rear forearms of the charioteers, archers, and rowers, in order to bring both into line; but elsewhere both parts are of equal length, as in nature.I'' Hands and fingers are usually omitted, except for mourners making expressive gestures (I, seated figure under bier), and for corpses in funeral and battle scenes. The painter of 15-19 goes to even greater lengths to K. v. I, pIs. 110 and 141, 1306. 2 MonInst 9, pl. 39, 3· Cf. also the mourner on the amphora fr., K. v. 1, pI. 49, 1214. 4 Cf. the Lambros oinochoe, A M 43, pI. 3; oinoehoe, Berlin 3374, p. 75, no. 15; oinoehoe, Athens 194, AJA 44, pI. 23, 2. 6 The mourners on VilIard's group, 21-4, suggest a more summary hand, and a slightly later date. The triangle has become shorter, tapering into a long thin waist; the position of the arms on 21 has begun to assume the rectangle favoured by the Hirschfeld Workshop; see p. 43. 6 CVA Louvre, pi. 7,7. 7 See Chamoux, RA 33, 82-4. 8 In unskilful hands, it could lead to the absurdity noted by ViIIard in his description of 9, C VA Louvre, pi. 5, 10: the forward arm of the warrior in the right-hand chariot seems to be divorced from his body. • Cf. the Eleusis skyphos, p. 26; later, the kantharos Copenhagen 727, Davison, fig. 128. 10 Cf. the ugly and unnecessary shortening of the mourners' upper arms on Athens 806, A M 6g-70, Beil. 6. 1
3
LG I
I THE DIPYLON WORKSHOP •
39
distinguish his dead, giving them a huge, staring eye; but all other heads are in full silhouette, without any internal reservation. Women might be expected to play a leading part in the prothesis scenes; yet in this highly impersonal style it is not easy to distinguish them. Occasionally the painter of 15-19 adds physical attributes ;' otherwise, drapery offers the only possible criterion for recognizing women on and around the bier. To take the dead first. For the grave monuments of this workshop, it is a general rule that the corpses on the belly-handled amphorae are draped, but nude on the kraters; the only exception is the late krater 21, where the corpse is clothed. Both shapes have a long history, going back to the cremations of Protogeometric times. During that period, it has been noted- that the belly-handled amphora was normally intended for women, whereas the ashes of men were placed in the neck-handled type. The same distinction is preserved in the cremations of E G and M G;3 furthermore, no grave of those times is furnished with a pedestalled krater without also containing a neck-handled amphora; and no krater is ever associated with a female cremation amphora, with handles on belly or shoulder. Thus there are strong grounds for believing that the huge kraters and belly-handled amphorae made in this workshop were intended for men and women respectively - a conclusion borne out by the absence of martial scenes on the amphorae, and their presence on many (but not all) of the kraters. Assuming, then, that the painters took the trouble to distinguish the sex oftheir deceased patrons lying on the bier, we may venture to argue from the dead to the living. We may suppose that the draped mourners are all female, while conceding that the nude figures are not necessarily men; some, as we have seen, must be women. We must concede, too, that these conventions were observed only by the Dipylon Master and his closest associates (1-20). Elsewhere there is no uniformiryjand in the next generation, new conventions were required as soon as charioteers took to wearing long robes (p. 62, n. 4). The delineation of the horse is one of the chief glories of this workshop. There is less uniformity than in the drawing of humans; yet the most typical traits, once again, will emerge through a comparison with contemporary work elsewhere. In the stallions of 4 (pI. 7a) we see the archetype created by the Master himself In the following account they should be contrasted with the horses on the krater K. v. I, pI. 141, 1255; this vase is later than the Master's prime, but its horses have more in common with the MG II type on Paris A 514 (pI. 4g) than with any representations in our workshop. We begin with the features that are most variable within the workshop. The extreme tallness of the animals on 4 should not be regarded as entirely characteristic; their stature is dictated by the context, where the height of the horses must equal that of chariot and charioteer combined; when horses are shown singly and unharnessed, the proportions may be closer to nature (23). More typical is the shaping of the legs. The stifle, shown in some M G I I representations (e.g. pI. 4g), has been eliminated. As with human arms, both forelegs and hindlegs are divided into two straight parts, meeting at a well-defined angle; the hooves are slightly offset, and planted firmly on the ground. This austerely rectilinear convention was not followed by all the Master's associates. It was relaxed by the painter of 1 4
Women, 18 and the ScheurIeer fr.; men, 18, 19, Paris A 560. • PGP 5-6. 3 J. Bouzek, Sbornik 1959, 136-7. See Brussels A 1506, p. 34, n. 2, belly-handled amphora with nude corpse; Athens 812, krater fr. with draped corpse.
40 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
15-19, who allowed a graceful curve for the lower thigh (18-19); and after the workshop's prime (21-4, pl, 8b), the angle at the knee tended to lose its clear definition, or to vanish altogether. Similarly the heads soon lost the straight contours ofthe Master's archetype; jaw and muzzle began to be more vigorously emphasized, leaving a concave curve in between (pI. 8a). Another chronological development within the workshop can be seen in the gradual thickening of the shoulder, apparent in the sequence 4, 18, 24, and 25, leading eventually to the heavily built creatures on early L G I I work in the same classical tradition (pl. 11a-b). The backward thrust ofthe rear hocks on 25 is yet another trait foreshadowing the regular practice of the next generation. In contrast to these minor variations, due mainly to difference in time, there is one truly diagnostic trait shared by all the horses of the Dipylon Workshop, setting them apart from practically all other LG I representations. Elsewhere (e.g. Kerameikos 1255) the convex curve of the shoulder passes into the leading forearm without a break; but on the horses of 4 the line from throat to shoulder completes a graceful double curve, first concave and then convex, until it meets the forearm at a well-defined angle.' This flowing contour can be traced on all horses in the classical tradition, even until the very end ofAttic Geometric. We turn now from the main figured scenes, with their ritual and narrative content, to the purely decorative use of goats and deer. These animals had been tentatively sketched in MG 11 (p. 27); but their appearance in continuous files constitutes yet another innovation ofthe Dipylon Master, eventually giving rise to those animal friezes which dominated Greek vase-painting for the next two centuries. Both animals are seen to best advantage on the neck of 1. 2 Goats are recognizable by their curved horns and wattles; the deer, represented by the female ofthe species, have long erect ears. The tails, short and stubby in both cases, point upwards for goats, and downwards for deer. By these details alone the identity of the animals would be sufficiently obvious, yet it is typical of the Master's love ofclear definition that he should have consistently posed each of these three quadrupeds in different positions: his horses stand erect, his goats (always looking backwards) kneel, and his deer graze." The goats rest on two legs; the deer stand on four. Marshbirds play only a minor part in the imagery of this workshop. All of them follow the long-necked type introduced on the M G I I oinochoe, Eleusis 820 (p. 26). At first their function is to lend colour - and perhaps a foreboding ofdoom - to the battle scenes, whether they be shown in full flight (9), at rest (4, under handle), or grazing (17). According to the whim of the painter, they may be hatched or in silhouette, with one or two legs; eyes are generally reserved. Birds in file are first found under the funeral wagon of 2; at a rather later stage, bird files occupy a subsidiary zone in the same way as goats or deer ~2). In two instances (28; handle, 29) we may note an early appearance of stiff-legged 'soldier-birds' in file - an extreme form of stylization confirming other grounds for placing these two pitchers late in our series (p. 36). Both methods of attaching the forelegs were current in MG 11: Kerameikos 1255 recalls Paris A 514, while our 4 accentuate. a tendency already apparent on the mug, K. v. I, pI. 141,2159, and continued in the toy amphora, ibid. pl. 110, 1306. 2 Marb WP 1962, pI. 5. 3 The kneeling animals on the bowl 44 have assumed the ears - and in one case the tail - of the deer. I cannot therefore agree with Kahane's attribution of this vase to the Master of Athens 804; this may, however, be the work of one of his more negligent assistants.
1
I THE DIPYLON WORKSHOP'
LG I
41
Filling ornament is an essential complement of Geometric figured drawing: it has the effect ofbinding the figures into a harmonious relationship with the linear designs, reducing the contrast between the bold silhouette of the former and the half-tone hatching of the latter. When the motifs are actually borrowed from the narrow zones and panels (e.g. the dotted lozenge chains and M-columns on 4), the rapport is still closer. The potentialities of filling ornament, hardly explored by his predecessors and contemporaries,' were first realized to the full by the Dipylon Master and his associates, who invented suitable motifs to fill all vacant spaces in the figured fields. Three of his innovations, seen together on 7, are especially characteristic: the sixteen-pointed star, the double axe in outline, and the dotted ovule. Among the others, the eight-pointed star (inherited from MG) and the swastika are popular elsewhere. The dot rosette was seldom used by this workshop, and only on smaller vases. Bulky lozenges sometimes occur, either cross-hatched (1-2, 4) or checked (1-2, above handle) ; the lozenge star (p. 50) makes its earliest appearance above the handles of 8 and 9. The Dipylon Master evolved the first consistent figured style in the long history of Attic vase-painting. In the funerary scenes, he achieved a blend of solemnity and sophistication which made the tentative efforts of his predecessors and contemporaries look rather naive by contrast. His style derives both its stability and its vigour from the meticulous draughtsmanship applied to scenes and linear ornament alike. Through the regular repetition of his archetypal figures, as well as through the judicious insertion of filling ornament, the scenes are easily assimilated to their geometric environment; and owing to the fastidious care with which their various actions are defined, the figures lend vitality to the context in which they are placed.
11. The Hirschfeld Painter and his Workshop (LG Ib)
(i) By the Hirschfeld Painter I. Pedestailed krater (a) Athens 9go. Nottbohm, JdI 58 (1943), 23ff., fig. 10; Davison 141 (further bibliography), fig. 25; Arias-Hirmer-Sheflon, pI. 5. PI. 8b. (b) Four frs. in Athens. Kunze, F S 48, n. 3. (c) Fr., Bonn 1634, now returned to Athens: an adjoining fr. in Freiburg. AA Ig67, 16g, n. I. (d) Fr., CVA Scheurleer 2, pI. 3, 2.
I.
Pedestalled krater, foot and part offunerary scene ADChr 18 (lg63), 29-30, pI. 2ga-b. From Kerameikos, Gr. 290.
3. Pedestalled krater, frs. (a) Halle, Robertinum 59. JdI58 (1943), 24ff., fig. 14. (b) CVA Scheurleer 2, pI. 3, 2. (c) Paris A 533. Morin-Jean, Le Dessin des Animaux en Grice, Paris (Igl I), 15, fig. 2, left. 1 Cf. krater fr. Athens 812, and the Lambros oinochoe, p. 38, n. 4, where filling ornament is entirely lacking.
42 .
LG I
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
(d) Bonn 16. AA 1963, 659, figs. 17-18, drawing inaccurate; better, AA 1967, 170, figs. 1-2. (e) Fr. in Athens, tentatively assigned by Kunze, ibid. 4. Pedestalled krater, frs. (a) Leipzig T 2384. ]dI 58 (1943), 24ff., figs. 11-13· (b) Leiden. Brants, pI. 7, nos. 53, 54. (c)Sarajevo. Wiss. Mit. aus Bosnien u. Herzegotoina 12 (1912),268, fig. 23. (d) Dunedin E 48.195. J. K. Anderson, Greek Vases in the OtagoMuseum, Dunedin (1955), 16, pI. 2, 3. (e) Paris A 544, RA 33 (1945),69. fig. 3, right (perhaps). 5. Pedestalled krater fr. Hundt-Peters, Greifswalder Antiken (1961), 12, no. 87, pI. 7. Kunze assigns this fr. to our no. 3. 6. Neck-handled amphora, Athens 18062. Villard, MonPiot 49 (1957), 31-3, figs. 14-16; Davison, fig. 28. (ii) Workshop 7. Spouted krater, Copenhagen 726. CVA 2, pI. 72, 4a-b; pI. 74, I; Davison, fig. 27a-b. D. Callipolitis-Feytmans, Les 'Louteria' attiques (Athens 1965), 31ff., pI. lb.
11 THE HIRSCHFELD WORKSHOP •
43
SHAPES
Apart from the monumental kraters, the vases are all of moderate size. There is an even stronger preference than in the Dipylon Workshop for plump forms and rounded contours: see especially 9-12, 14. Two shapes have not appeared before, and may be inventions of this workshop: the spouted krater, 3, and the plump neck-handled amphora, 9 (pI. 8d). LINEAR DECORATION
Linear motifs play a strictly subordinate part in the scheme of decoration, and are more summarily executed than in the Dipylon Workshop. Metopes are used more extensively, but are still confined to the handle zones (7, 10-12). The double meander is consistently drawn in the opposite direction to those of the Dipylon Master. Other large motifs are: hatched serpents (13-14), and dotted serpents (10-11). The favourite among the narrow motifs is a single steep zigzag; checked zones (6-7) and vertical wavy lines (1,3, 13) recall the later stage ofthe Dipylon Workshop. A few innovations are characteristic: the chains of lozenges dotted not only in the centre, but above and below the intersections (6, 13); tangential circles with a similar invasion of extra dots (7) ; dotted circles without tangents (1314); and tangential blobs (10-11). Elongated blobs (9, 12, 14) begin late in LG 11 and continue throughout LG IIa.
8. Oinochoe, Munich 6249. CVA 3, pI. 113, 1-2; pl. 110, 4.
FIGURED STYLE
9. Plump neck-handled amphora, Munich 8748. AA 1962, 594ff., figs. 1-2. PI. 8c-d.
The human figures of the Hirschfeld Painter lack the finesse of the Dipylon Master's, yet have an unmistakable character of their own. Eyes are often reserved and dotted (1,3,6; not 2, 4) ; heads taper to a beak-like point which may represent either nose or chin. For the thorax, the Dipylon Master's strict triangle is avoided; the shoulders are broad and usually straight, but the outlines of the chest are normally concave. The curves of the lower body are more pronounced, and more even; the symmetrical thighs, apparently seen from frontal view, give the figures a bow-legged appearance. Among the mourners, women are distinguished by short strokes for the breasts, and sometimes by triple tufts of'hair.s Their arms are raised in the rectangular position already introduced by the kraters of Villard's group (p. 38, n. 5). Male mourners and charioteers are allowed hands, but fully equipped warriors are denied arms altogether. The rendering of horses - here always stallions - has reached an extreme degree of stiff, rectilinear stylization, lending them a static and frozen look. The cannon-bones, thin and straight as matchsticks, look enormously elongated at the expense of the puny thighs, where the angular stifle is still preserved - a last relic of M G II tradition (p. 27); the forelegs pass straight into the shoulder. The accentuation of the jaw, which we have already noted in connection with the Villard group, is characteristic of this painter's work, although the upper contour of the head has been flattened out on some of the workshop vases (7,10-11).
10. Tankard, Athens 16193. PI. 8f. Height o· 15m. I I.
Tankard, Brussels A 1942, ex. Lambros collection. A M 43 (1918), pI. 5, 3; CVA Brussels 3, pI. 2, 9a-b.
12. Kantharos, Tiibingen 2658a. Watzinger, pI.
I,
B9.
13. Pedestalled krater, New York 14.130.14. A]A 19 (19 15), pls, 17-20;]dI58 (1943),29, fig. 15; MonPiot 49 (1957), 28, fig. 13 (reverse); Davison 141 (further bibliography), fig. 26. Perhaps a late work by the Hirschfeld Painter. 14. Pitcher, Dunedin E 57.155. PI. 8e. Height 0·32m. NOTE This workshop was first distinguished by Nottbohm, JdI58, 23ff.: with the name-piece, no. I, she associated nos. 3a-e, 4a-b, 7, and 13. Kunze (FS 48, n. 3) corrected and expanded her list ofkrater frs., adding r b-d, 3c-e, and 4C. 6 was attributed by Villard, and 9 by Lullies. On Davison's ascriptions to the workshop (op. cit. 39-40, 142) seeJHS 83 (1963),212.
The association of these vases rests largely on the strange idiosyncrasies of their figured drawing; their other aspects may be briefly dismissed.
1 Cf. Robertson,]HS60 (1940 ), 4. 2 On the pitcher Dresden ZV r935 (AntAb IQ (r96r), pl. r), reserved eye, hair, and breasts are all found on figures whose general proportions recall the Dipylon Master's archetype. Perhaps this is an early work by the Hirschfeld Painter, while still influenced by the Dipylon Workshop.
44 .
LG I
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
Deer are unknown from this workshop; goats, ever popular, differ consistently from the type of the Dipylon Master. Whether shown in a kneeling (6-7, 13) or a standing position (9, 14), they always look to their front; and all four legs are shown. Eyes are reserved and dotted; wattles are ignored. Marshbirds follow the normal type ofAttic stork, taking their place as filling ornaments in the figured fields. They are usually hatched; eyes are sometimes reserved on the larger vases, but in most cases the head is shown only by a slight thickening ofline between beak and neck. Except on 13, linear filling ornament is relatively sparse, the stock of motifs being limited virtually to chevron columns and various dotted formations. Dot rosettes are ubiquitous; sometimes they enclose stars (I, 4) or swastikas (3). Rows of dots are also extremely common, whether vertical, horizontal, or swirling round in sympathy with the figures. Their combination with the rosette (9), where they supply a stalk for the dotted flower, often appears on small contemporary vases (pI. IOC). The dotted circles floating in the fields of 13 and 14 are a rare alternative. The Hirschfeld Painter flourished at a slightly later date than the prime of the Dipylon Workshop.! One trait - the marking of horses' stifles - he retained from an MG II tradition which the Dipylon Master rejected; but in the details where the two styles are most closely allied - e.g. the rectangle formed by mourners' arms, and the accentuation ofhorses' jaws - only the later stage of the Dipylon Workshop is reflected in the Hirschfeld Painter's work. His iconography, too, is most closely matched in the kraters of the Villard group; with the sole exception of the battle fr. (5), his scenes are restricted to the prothesis, the ekphora, and the chariot processions, where warriors on foot sometimes alternate with chariots (I, under handle; 4). 2 Among the minor details, the plastic snakes on the handles (6; cf. p. 32, no. 31), the vertical wavy lines, and the elongated tangential blobs all support a late date in LG I for the activity ofthis workshop. This painter had very little influence on the future of Attic figured painting; as we have seen, the eccentricities of his style place him far outside the Classical Tradition founded by the Dipylon Master. Nevertheless, he has a special importance for our comparative study, since there are obvious echoes of his manner in the figured work of Naxos, Melos, and Boeotia (pls, 35, 39 d, 44 c) .
Ill. The Lambros Workshop (LG Ib) Pitcher, ex Lambros collection. AM 43 (1918), pl. 2, I. 2. Giant oinochoe, ex Lambros collection, now Basle 1953.9. AM 43 (1918), pl. 2, 2; Davison, fig. 86; Schefold, Meistenoerke griechischer Kunst 1960, no. 42. • 3. Giant oinochoe, Athens 178. Jd! 14 (1899),21 I, fig. 87; Collignon-Couve, pl. 13,238; Davison, fig. 85. I.
{
These vases were first associated by Kahane, AJA 44, 475-6; he assigned nos.
The poor, sagging shapes of
1
and
2
and 3 to the same hand.
may be adversely compared with the crisp and
Cf. Chamoux, RA 33, 58--9; Kunze, F S 48, n. 3; Villard, CVA Louvre I I, I. 2 Cf. Paris A 552, pl. 8a; and Athens 806 (AJ A 44, pl. 25), another LG Ib krater.
1
2
III THE LAMBROS WORKSHOP'
45
vigorous contours of the Dipylon Master's prototypes (pI. 7d-e). Even more revealing is the progressive deterioration in the marshalling of the linear design. On none of the three vases is there any accent on the widest diameter; yet on 1 the shoulder and belly have been satisfactorily emphasized by the bold tongues (pp. 50- I ), while on I and 2 a band ofmetopes, wider than the continuous zones, still attracts attention to the focal points on neck and shoulder respectively. The five large body zones of 2 recur on 3, and in the same order; but there is a disastrous difference in their placing. On 3 the metopes have lost their structural significance, and at the same time have dwindled to the size ofthe larger continuous motifs, which no longer carry any particular emphasis. Likewise, the focal point on the neck has been obscured by the division into two equally wide zones. The laboured neatness of the decoration places this workshop within the confines of L G I, but other clues point to an advanced stage within that phase. The files of silhouette birds and the use of check recall the later products of the Dipylon Workshop; the lozenge chains with extra dots suggest contemporaneity with the Hirschfeld Workshop, and this synchronism is confirmed by the presence of the tankard, p. 42, no. I I, in the same context as our 1 and 2. The frequent use ofhatched serpents places these vases outside the Classical Dipylon Tradition; but a comparison of 3, our latest piece, with the Dipylon-influenced amphora from Kerameikos Gr. 72 (p. SI, no. 4; end ofLG I) makes it seem unlikely that there can be more than a very few years between the two vases. Finally, the bird file of 2, with the dotted filling ornament, anticipates the most characteristic feature of the Birdseed Workshop, whose floruit belongs to the early part of L G n. Having attempted the analysis of the three workshops, we may now summarize their relative chronology. The career of the Dipylon Master can be traced back to the earliest years of Late Geometric; indeed, he has a good claim to be the inventor of the Late Geometric style. The activity of his workshop lasts through virtually the whole of the phase defined as LG I (p. 29). This phase may be subdivided into two parts. The earlier stage, L G I a, represents the workshop's prime; inspired by the example of the Master himself, its painters brought to maturity the first consistent figured style, and acquired the art ofapplying ripe linear decoration to funerary vases of enormous size. There follows a later stage, L GIb, heralded by the Villard group, during which the same style was continued and imitated, often by less accomplished hands; slight adjustments were made to the figured drawing, and a few new motifs (p. 36) were admitted into the subsidiary decoration. These later modifications are so clearly reflected in the work of the Hirschfeld Painter that his own workshop can hardly have gone into production before L GIb; this assumption is now confirmed by the discovery of one of his kraters in a grave group (Kerameikos, Gr. 290 : see p. 46) with linear vases assignable on other grounds to LG lb. The Lambros Workshop offers no figured style; but since its linear decoration recalls both the Hirschfeld Workshop and the LG Ib stage of the Dipylon Workshop, its activity should belong to the same date. Our next task is to examine the evidence of context offered by graves and wells, in order to throw further light on the development oflinear ornament, and on the character of the
46 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
LG I
47
Dipylon, Gr. 5. Pitcher,Athens 706. J dI I4 (1899),206, fig. 73; Davison, fig. 91; see p. 51, no. I. Gold band: AM 18 (1893), 107-11, fig. 7. Athens, junction of Odos Diakou and Odos Anapafseos, Gr. 2. ADChr 18 (1963),37-8, pls. 37d, 38c-d, 39-42. (The bowl, pl. 41b, looks LG lIb.) Thorikos, Gr. 56. Thorikos III (Brussels, 1965),45-7, figs. 53-6.
less ambitious pottery in this generation. Finally, a fourth workshop, spanning the transition between L G I and I I, will supply matter for an epilogue to this section. SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
L G I a Prime ofthe Dipylon Workshop Agora, Gr. 17. Hesperia, Supp. 11, 76ff., figs. 51-7; Agora VIII, nos. 250-69, pI. 15. PI. g. Dipylon, Gr. I. AM 18 (1893), 101-4; Athens 803 (p. 30, no. 2) and other vases, unidentifiable; gold band, zigzags. Dipylon, Gr. 14. A M 18 (1893), 131-2; Athens 811, 812 (p. 30, nos. 5, 6). PI. 7 d-e. Vari, Gr. 7. Includes the amphora, BCH82 (1958),673, fig. 7, right. Kerameikos, Grs. 9, 15, 88. Agora, Well P 7:3. Hesperia 21 (1952), 110, pl. 29a-b; Hesperia 30 (1961), 115, 'Well K', pl. 13ff. Agora, Gr. 20. Hesperia, Supp. 11, 94ff., figs. 65-7.
Transitional LG Ib - LG IIa Kerameikos, Grs. 72 (p. 5 I, nos. 4, 7, 8, 12), 2I, 28. Agora, Well S 18: I. Hesperia 8 (1939), 227, fig. 2I; Hesperia 30 (1961), I 17ff:, 'Well L', pl. 13ff. Agora, Well L 18: 2. Eleusis, Gr. EA 1898, 98, n, I; pl. 4, I, 8, 9 and twelve more vases, comprising nine tankards, two skyphoi, and one pyxis; Eleusis 895, 1044-57. Spata, Gr. 3. AD 6 (1920-1), Parartema, I34ff., figs. 6-10; Athens 1528o-g. SHAPES
Transitional L G I a - I b Kerameikos, Grs. 50, 32. Dipylon, Gr. 3. AM 18 ( 1893), 104- 6 ; 92ff., figs. 4-5. Krater: Athens 806, AJA 44 (1940), pl. 25; detail, A M 69-70 (1954-5), Beil. 6. Other vases: JdI 14 (1899), 19Iff., figs. 51, 88, 97 right, 99; Marb WP 1961, pl. I. Athens,junction of Odos Kalisperi and Odos Karyatidon; context not stated. AD 11-12 (1927-8), Parartema 2, fig. 2a-e: ten vases, of which four are illustrated. Fig. 2a looks MGII. L GIb Stage ofthe Hirschfeld krater, and oflater vasesfrom the Dipylon Workshop Kerameikos, Gr. 26. Agora, Gr. 18. Hesperia, Supp. ri, 87ff., figs. 58-63. PI. rcj-L Pnyx area, 'Nea Sphageia', grave: eight vases, and Cypriot bronze tripod stand. A M 18 (1893),414, pl. 14. Amphora: Athens 186,JdI 14 (1899), 195, fig. 58; Collignon-Couve, pl. 10, 179. On the other vases, see Young, Hesperia, Supp. I I, 74. Vari, Gr. I. Includes the amphora, BCH82 (1958), 673,fig. 7, left. Corinth (?), tankard and tripod stand, apparently belonging. Hesperia I (1932),63, fig. 9. Attica, twenty-one vases ex Lambros collection, allegedly a closed deposit. Schweitzer, AM 43 (1918), 138ff., pls. 2-6. See p. 42, no. II; p. 44, nos. 1-2. Kerameikos, Grs. 24 (pl. loa-e), 71 (pf, rod-g ; p. 51, no. 2),48. 'Southeast ofAthens, grave group', Robinson collection. Skyphos and Phoenician scarab. Hesperia, Supp. VIII, 310-1 I, pl. 40, 7, 7a. Vari, Grs. 4 and 5. Kerameikos, Gr. 290. ADChr 18 (1963), 29-30, pl. 29a-b. See p. 41, no. 2. Agora, Gr. E 19:3. Hesperia 9 (1940),27 1; Hesperia 29 (1960), 403ff., pl. 89. See p. 32, no. 37. PI. 7b-c. Eleusis, Gr. r 10. P AE 1955, 76, pl. 25c. See p. 32, no. 41.
If we disregard the idiosyncrasies ofthe figured workshops, it is still possible to trace a steady and consistent development in the shapes of the plainer vases. Thus the orthodox neckhandled amphora, whose decoration usually clings to M G tradition, still continues that gradual process of attenuation, and that hardening of contour, which we have been following since the beginning of Geometric. In this respect, the slim example from Kerameikos Gr. 24 (pl, loa) is the lineal descendant of the normal MG 11 type (pf, 4a), the intervening stage being filled by the amphora from Vari Gr. 7 (LG la). Similarly, the necks of the standard oinochoai become increasingly straight and wooden, although their bodies remain plump and well-rounded (pl, rod}; the handles are now often cylindrical or double-reeded. Broad-necked variants are now current, often decorated with wavy lines only. The handle rises above the rim, and the ring foot is omitted; the mouth is sometimes round! but more usually trefoil. 2 Both types are found together in Agora Well P 7: 3; and unlike the onepiece version of L G I I b (pl. I le), there is some attempt to set the neck off from the body. The pitcher and the giantoinochoe, as we have seen, were first conceived by the Dipylon Master on a monumental scale (pl. 7 d-e) ; both these shapes were also made in a more moderate size, but neither reaches the peak of its popularity until L G I I a. The same applies to the tankard; one may nevertheless follow its progress from its origin in MG 11 (p. 23) through both stages of LG I (pl. ge; pl, roj}: the shape becomes progressively taller, while the junction between lip and body loses its clear definition; the high handle, now more vertically placed, is joined to the side of the vase by a strut, as with the pitcher. The shape of the pyxis defies generalization. In Agora Gr. 17 there are several small and well-rounded pieces (nos. 7-8, 10-1 I), old-fashioned in decoration as well as in shape; and the survival ofM G types is well attested in even later contexts." At the other pole, the unique piece from Kerameikos Gr. 5°,4 with its sides almost straight, does not come anywhere near the end of the series; for the pyxis survives into the early years of L G I IS before being 1 4
K. v. K. v.
I,
I,
pI. 116,13°5. pI. 60, 1310.
2 op.cif. pI. 82, 874. 3 K. v. • K. v, I, pI. 59, 338, Gr. 59.
I,
pI. 60, 333, Gr. 32; Agora, Gr. 18, no. 7, P 4781.
48 .
finally superseded by the high-rimmed bowl. Nevertheless, with these res~rvatio~s, the straightening of the wall profile may still be accepted as a rough chronological guIde,. especially in the case of the large pyxides with plastic horses - a cla~s less liable to archaIs~ than their plainer and smaller contemporaries. The enormous SIze of some examples m Agora Gr. 17 (pf, 9f,l) suggests the influence, but not the hand, ofthe Dipylon Master. The horses now stand in teams of three or four, and their modelling shows a fairly consistent development.' In comparison with the lone M G I I horse already discussed (p. 23; pl. 4b), the LG la animals have grown in stature, matching the tallness of the Dipylon Master's painted horses (pl. 9f) ; the style is freer and more relaxed, with less emphasis on anatomical details. By LG Ib, extreme stylization has set in; the wooden-legged creatures, pl. rok, recall the stiff drawing of the Hirschfeld Painter. Of the monumental kraters, the traditional Type I is associated with the Dipylon and Hirschfeld Workshops, offering the freest scope for figured painting on a large scale. In this respect Type I I plays a less distinguished part;" but the shape has a wide circulat~on in many parts of Greece from M G I I onwards. In Attica it gave rise to three smaller vanants : (a) a true miniature of the monumental version, with horizontal double-arc handles and a high-ribbed pedestal (Agora, Well P 7:3, P 21706); (b) a deeper-bodied vase with horizontal strap handles and no pedestal, as ]d! 14, 213, fig. 93; a vase from Thera, assuredly Attic," belongs to this type; . (c) a spoutedkrater - possibly a louterion, 4 e~ther with low foot (p: 4:, no. 7! or on a widely spreading pedestal." This type first appears m L GIb,. and ~as I~tated m the C~cl~des (pl, 37e) and Euboea." Unlike variants (a) and (b), It survives mto LG 11, albeit m a modified form. The high-handled kantharosand the standard skyphos develop on parallel lines from their M G I I prototypes. Both have acquired tall vertical lips, passing without clear ar~iculation into a narrow shoulder and a deep body, whose profile has become much straighter by LG Ib; the feet are either flat, or omitted altogether. Typical skyphoi are pl. 9a-d, LG la; pl. lob, LG Ib; typical kantharoi, A]A 44, pl. 22, S, LG la; pf, IOC, LG lb. Of the two variants of the skyphos (p. 23), the lakaina is now rare, and dies out in LG Ib. 7 The elongated variety, on the contrary, reaches the height of its popularity in ~his phase; its handles, whether ofthe strap or the rolled type, have adopted the reflex form; Its shape, now rather deeper, has developed in the same direction as the standard skyphos (pf, IOf). It would be tempting to trace an evolution from this variant to the high-rimmed howl through the intermediate stages represented by]d! 14, 21S, figs. 99 and 100 right (Athens 723 and 166), were it not evident that these hybrid forms are later than th~ bowls from the Dip~lo~ Workshop, whose tall rim is more probably derived from the lakaina (p. 34). Even so, It IS unlikely that the bowls began before L GIb; after a brief experimental stage, they settled down to a standard form (pI. log) where the rim is considerably taller than the body. The For a detailed study, see Bouzek, Sbomik 1959, 131fT.; his three phases 'MG 2', 'MG 3', and 'SG I' correspond respectively to my MG 11, LG la, and LG lb. • K. v, I, pl. 23. 3 AM28, Beil. 20, C 68. ~ See D. Callipolitis-Feytmans, Les 'Louteria' attiques; cf. Brann, Agora VIII, 43. i Berlin 4490, AM 43, 135, fig. 30; later, Athens 190,]dI 14,213, fig. 92. • BSA 47,2, pI. 2. 7 Latest example, AgoraVIII, 319, Gr. D 16:3, P 20085. 1
LG I
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
49
provision ofa lid suggests that, even at this early stage, they had begun to usurp the function of the pyxis, now nearing the end of its long career. For the firsttime, the plate enters the repertoire ofcommon shapes. In K. v. I, pl. 101,779, it has a rare M G I I predecessor; in this phase, the curved profile is drastically straightened out, and the ends of the reflex handles spring back more vigorously from the rim. Typical examples are Agora P 4777, Gr. 20 (LG la) and Athens 14472, pl. ro m (LG Ib). DECORATION
Much of the ground here has already been covered in our examination of the workshops. Of the figured vases, many unattributed pieces have been treated as comparative material, bringing into sharper focus the style of the recognizable hands. The enlarged repertoire of linear motifs has also been rehearsed (pp. 36-7); and the innovations of LG Ib have been set apart. In dealing with the largest vases (p. 3S) we have observed the guiding influence of the Dipylon Master in the sudden change from the severe dark-ground system ofMG to a ripe manner of decoration where the whole surface is divided into zones ofhalf-tone ornament, alternately broad and narrow. Here we may note in passing that the new shapes the pitcher and giant oinochoe - are always ripely decorated; but on the neck-handled amphora and the standard oinochoe, both of which have a long history behind them, the tradition of dark-ground decoration was slow to die out. The arrival of the ripe style presented a fresh challenge to those potters who still troubled to subordinate decoration to shape. The Dipylon Master set a high standard ofarchitectonic excellence, which was not always attained by his successors, simply by increasing the breadth of the zones at the focal points. This solution was particularly suitable for vases of monumental size. On a more moderate scale, a different kind ofemphasis could be attained by cutting up a focal zone into square metopes, whose vertical divisions attracted the eye to those parts of the vase needing the greatest stress. This system of metopes was the only important element of L G I decoration which developed independently of the Dipylon Master's influence. As we have seen, it was used with great caution in his own workshop, and only in L GIb. But on the smaller and less ambitious shapes now under consideration, metopes became current at a rather earlier stage. As early as M G I (p. 20) tiny metopes had begun to intrude upon the glaze on shoulders ofclosed vases. Further experiments on these lines were tried out in M G I I. A later development ofthis idea can be seen on several L G I a vases, where the glaze has been replaced by a zone ofhorizontal lines, now interrupted by a single full-sized metope.! In LG la, however, the growing popularity of metopes was causing a more radical break with past tradition. The old-fashioned M G designs, based on a central meander, were now giving place to a band of equal square metopes. The new scheme was first tried out on the pyxis; and the presence ofseveral intermediate stages in the same grave group (Agora, Gr. 17) shows that this transformation was effected quite suddenly; the alternation between square metopes and short lengths ofmeander (or other motifs in long rectangular frames) represents a fleeting stage of transition beginning in MG 11 (p. 2S) and no longer in evidence after LG la 1
E.g. PAE 1951, 121, fig. 41; K.
V. I,
pI. 76,274.
50 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
(pl, gC-I). A similar sequence can be traced for the kantharos: pl, 4d, MG 11; intermediate stages, AJA 44, pI. 22, 5; Vari, Gr. 7 (single turn of meander, flanked by quatrefoils); finally, Prague 1849/ with equal metopes. Similar experiments are seen on miniature hydriai and belly-handled amphorae; see AJA 44, pI. 22, 1-3. On these early .metopal vases (L G la) the quatrefoil and the swastika are by far the commonest of the square motifs, but the potters were already seeking to widen the repertoire. Occasionally we find birdsjs more rarely, animals (pl. gl) ;3 and a new sun-like motif, consisting offalse spirals enclosed in a circle;' all these remained in the repertoire until the end ofL G I I as alternatives to the commoner motifs. Filling ornament, if it occurs at all, is confined to small compact motifs like diminishing triangles (with the quatrefoil), stars, dot rosettes, and small swastikas. For additional emphasis, the metopes on pyxides are usually separated from one another by one or three small vertical panels, which we may call 'triglyphs' to preserve the architectural metaphor: here the most regular formula consists of a central double chevron (M's) flanked by narrower columns ofzigzag (pl, g:m.-n). Skyphoi were rather slow to accept metopal schemes, perhaps because of their long tradition of centripetal decoration. In L G I a, I know of only two examples which bear metopes: Athens 725 (Dipylon, Gr. 3) and K. v. I, pI. 97, 1301 (Gr. 50). Especially typical ofthe less ornate skyphoi are three from Agora Gr. 17 (pl. 9 a-b,d). The single pair oflong meander hooks is a debasement of the original M G I I scheme, where two pairs were customary; the idea was widely imitated in the Cyclades (pl, 38a). More exclusively Attic are the spaced rosettes; once again, these recall a tendency already apparent in M G I I (p. 24), where rarefied ornament is applied to a free field. Stars" and floating chevrons are also treated in this way. Many skyphoi, especially in domestic contexts, are virtually without ornament: the reserved handle zone may contain nothing but horizontal stripes, or nothing at all (pf, gd); or the bodies may be fully glazed, with dots or bands on the lip. In L GIb the metopal system becomes the rule on skyphoi, and is also applied to tankards and high-rimmed bowls; finally, it spreads to the bellies of large closed vases. The most notable addition to the repertoire is the checked lozenge encased in a hatched frame (pl. 109), with or without the four cross-hatched triangles which convert it into a lozenge star." Marshbirds with long necks - possibly storks - are now quite frequent, usually flanking a linear metope on skyphoi and kantharoi.? Filling ornament tends to become heavier: rows of chevrons, zigzags, tangential circles, or even small panels of check (p. 5 I, no. 5) are packed into the spaces between the arms of the swastika; cross-hatched triangles are found between the leaves ofthe quatrefoil. On the pyxides, the intervening triglyphs have been invaded by check, which occupies the central position. Sometimes the triglyphs have been expanded to such an extent that the accent on the metopes has been seriously weakened; on the pyxis from Agora Gr. 18, pl. rok, the checked areas have almost become metopes in their own right. On many drinking vesselsofL GIb, an apparently new motif, the cross-hatched tongue, has been admitted into the metope system (pl, roe). In fact, these tongues are nothing but Sbomik 1959, pI. 4, 7. 2 Sbornik 1959, pI. I, 2I, pyxis in Peruc. Cf. also Munich 8599, CVA 3, pI. 127,2, an eccentric pyxis with a zone ofMG II style birds below the metopes. • Leiden, A.SX.I, Brants, pI. 9, 47. S K. V. I, pI. 91,368. • K. V. I, pI. II9, 384. This motif had already been introduced in the Dipylon Workshop as a filling ornament, see p. 41. 7 This group is usefully studied by N. Himmelmann-Wildschiitz, Marb WP 1961, g-I4. 1
3
IV THE WORKSHOP OF ATHENS
LG I
706 . 51
flattened gadrooning - a further adaptation of a metallic device, beginning on pottery as far back as M G I (p. 18, n. 5). Real gadroons are still found on many L G I shapes; not only on the drinking vessels,1 but even on new shapes like the pitcher" and the broad-necked oinochoe ;" there is also a large gadrooned krater- which must have tested the potter's skill to the utmost. The intervening spaces between the gadrooned tongues may be either glazed or left free for filling ornament; no chronological distinction is possible here, since in some cases the glaze survives as late as L Glb;5 afterwards, real gadrooning passes out offashion. Circular designs on the bottom of pyxides have increased in complexity since M G I I, and are now also applied to the outside of plates. Two broad concentric zones are now the rule, sometimes supported by narrow ancillaries (pl. 9 g). In L G I a the central place is often occupied by an octofoil or quatrefoil with carefully veined leaves, surrounded by an outer zone of detached leaves." The leaves continue in LG Ib, with two small points of difference: cross-hatching is now common, and the gaps between their inner points are often glazed." At this time, dotted wavy lines are added to the repertoire (pI. 101). THE TRANSITION TO LG II IV. The Workshop of Athens 706 (a)
Pitcher, Athens 706, from Dipylon, Gr. 5. JdI 14 (1899), 206, fig. 73; Ohly, Griechische Goldbleche, pI. 29; Davison, fig. 91. 2. High-rimmed bowl, Kerameikos 345 (Gr. 71). PI. 109. 3. High-rimmed bowl, Cairo 26.134. Edgar, Greek Vases in the Cairo Museum, pI. 1. I.
(b) 4. Neck-handled amphora, Kerameikos 385 (Gr. 72). K. V. I, pI. 35; Ohly, pI. 25; Davison, fig. go. 5. Pitcher, Prague Univ. 1.285. Bouzek, Sbornik I959, I I 7-18, pI. 2, 10. 6. High-rimmed bowl, Kerameikos 815, Gr. 90. PI. roh. 7. High-rimmed bowl, Kerameikos 382, Gr. 72. K. V. I, pI. 119. 8. High-rimmed bowl, Kerameikos 384, Gr. 72. K. V. I, pI. IIg.
op, cit.
(c) 9. Pitcher, Kerameikos 819, Gr. 79. K. v. I, pI. II6. 10. Pitcher, GothaJ 2503. CVA I, pls, 20-2. 11. Pitcher, Tiibingen 1090. Wateinger, pI. I, B7. 12. High-rimmed bowl, Kerameikos 381, Gr. 72. K. V. I, pI. IIg. NOTE Kahane, A]A 44, 478, discovered this workshop; most of my list has been assembled by Bouzek, loco cit.
Personal traits here are few; too few, certainly, to justify the attribution of these vases to a single painter. My purpose, however, is not to look for individual hands, but to draw attention to a milestone in the progress of Attic Geometric ornament. 1 K. v. I, pl, 99; kantharos, Athens 18480. 2 Karlsruhe B 2680, CVA I, pI. 3, 4. 3 Munich 8500, CVA 3, pI. III, 1-2. • AgoraVIII, no. 325, P 7317. • Pitcher, Athens I 74,]dI 14,208, fig. 77. 6 K. V. I, pI. 64, 275. 7 Copenhagen 4741, CVA 2, pI. 71,4.
52 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
These pitchers and amphorae all have the plump, rounded bodies favoured by the Dipylon Workshop, which is also the source of inspiration for the grazing deer on I, 4, and 11. The animals are alike in their hardened outlines and emaciated bodies; the same type recurs, in still more degenerate form, on the pitcher and skyphos from Kerameikos, Gr. 5 I .1 The ornament belongs to the common repertoire in vogue towards the end of L G I, including several motifs not found in metopes before LG Ib: the checked lozenges (2-3, 10), lozenge stars (4,8, 10), and checked squares (2-3,6,8). In the narrow zones, likewise, we find more innovations of LG Ib: the wolftooth (passim), the elongated tangential blobs (1,4,9; cf p. 43), and bird files (I). The wolftooth deserves special attention. Since its first appearance on the later vases of the Dipylon Workshop (p. 36), it has settled down to a standard form. The interlocking teeth are now set at a steeper angle; the upper row is small, and hatched in one direction only; the lower row, much larger, is cross-hatched. In this form the wolftooth lasts far into LG 11, sometimes with both rows cross-hatched (p. 68). The main link between these vases is the atectonic use of metopes, arranged (except on 10) round the widest diameter, but without any regard for the position of the handles and the ornament in the handle zone. Three chronological stages may be distinguished, according to the care and patience with which the decoration is executed. In each case, at least one large ripe vase forms the nucleus, round which a number ofhigh-rimmed bowls may be grouped. In terms of style, stage (a) falls just within LG Ib, according to the definition given above (p. 29), while (b) stands at its lower frontier; with (c), where the hastier drawing falls well below the best M G standard, we have passed into L G I I. Parallel to the decline in draughtsmanship, a slackening of architectonic discipline may also be noted. On the large vases, the emphasis on the focal points is steadily weakened by the gradual shrinking of the metopal zones; at the same time, the force of each individual metope is further weakened by the encroachment of the triglyphs, which by stage (c) have grown as large as the metopes, and usually surpass them in size by the end ofLG II (p. 89). From the contexts of our vases we learn that the progression from (a) to (c) cannot have occupied many years. I and 4 are both associated with gold bands from the same mould; of the four bowls accompanying 4, two belong to stage (b), a third to (c), and the fourthto a more advanced stage ofL G I I, where the drawing shows a further deterioration. From this point onwards, the same metope formulae are repeated with increasing carelessness until the end of Geometric. Our series thus shows evidence of a sharp decline in these years: a decline in the quality of draughtsmanship, a decline in the marshalling of linear design, and a decline in the painter's power ofinvention. By the end ofLG I a certain creative spirit, which had hitherto informed and guided the development ofGeometric ornament, may be said to have died. Perhaps its death coincided with the end of the Dipylon Master's career; perhaps it was his K. v. I, pI. 113, 1314; pI. 13°,1319. On the evidence of these deer Miss Davison assembles a 'Knickerbocker Workshop', op, cit, 63if. On the vases of her 'Painter' the animals have a family likeness, yet are not quite close enough to banish the possibility that they may have been independently derived from the Dipylon Master's prototype. In the linear decoration, the resemblances are rather more distant. The painter of the pitcher from Kerameikos Gr. 51 clearly owed more to the Dipylon Master's example (cf. pI. 7d) than any of the vases under discussion; nevertheless, he shares with our 5 the rare use of the check as filling ornament (cf. p. 67). For the curious checked motif on the neck of ro, cf. a LG Ib bowl, ADChr 18, pI. 29, third from right. 2 K. v. I, pI. 119, 383. 1
LG II
53
inspired example that had kept it alive so long after the rise of figured painting. At all events, it was the lure offigured work which eventually undermined the severe discipline of Geometric ornament. In its final generation, the vitality of the Attic school lies in the increasing fluency of the figured style. ATTIC LATE GEOMETRIC: SECOND PHASE (LG II) In this final and restless phase ofAttic Geometric, the main lines ofdevelopment have been elucidated by Kunze,! J. M. Cook,> Kahane," Villard,' Miss Davison (op. cit.), and Miss Brann," Much attention has been lavished on the workshops of this period, since the variations in style are even greater than in LG I. Yet the cumulative evidence from grave and well groups confirms one fundamental hypothesis: that the gradual deterioration of linear ornament offers a safe guide to the relative chronology of the Attic style as a whole. Such an assumption was made by Kahane and Kunze, who were the first scholars to suggest a subdivision of this phase into two parts. The earlier stage was represented by the pitcher from Dipylon Gr. 13, Athens 771, where a strict metope-and-triglyph system is applied after the manner of Athens 706 (p. 52), but executed with considerably less care (p. 66). For Kunze, this grave group bridged the gap between his 'klassisch-geometrisch' (LG I) and a later stage, named by him the 'dichter stil' after the tightly packed linear ornament which had become extremely hasty and slovenly, while the metope system had been loosened almost to the point of collapse." Among the works of this final decadence he detected two distinct hands: the Lion Painter and the Painter ofAthens 897. A similar subdivision was suggested by Kahane, who based his classification on a careful study of the grave groups then available. Although he could find no single group to illustrate the earlier stage ofLG 11 (i.e. his 'spatgeometrisch, Stufe 1') which did not also overlap into its neighbours, his judgment has received ample confirmation from a mass of more recent material. His two stages are therefore accepted here as true chronological subdivisions, and will be henceforth abbreviated as LG IIa and LG IIb. 7 For major vases of this period, the linear ornament offers the safest criterion for assigning them to one or other ofthe two stages; with the smaller and plainer vases, shape is at least as important as decoration in determining their relative date within L G 11. Complementary to the pioneer work of Kunze and Kahane, the study of figured work has been pursued in detail by J. M. Cook and Miss Davison. Both scholars approached the problems of relative chronology by attempting to isolate the output of individual workshops, and then noting their stylistic interrelationships. To J. M. Cook we owe the discovery of a vigorous, progressive, and extremely homogeneous style of painting, typified by the amphora Athens 894, looking ahead to the earliest Orientalizing work of the Analatos and 1 G GA 1937, 289-92. 2 AJA 44, 478-82; lecture delivered in 1936, see 464, n. I. • BSA 35 (1934-5), 166-9; BSA 42 (1947), 143-55. • MonPiot 49 (1957),18-4°. 6 Agora VIII. a Cf. Matz 63, who uses the term 'flimmerstil'. 7 See the list of significant groups, pp. Bzff, The high proportion of groups containing both L G I I a and L G I I b material merely confirms the impression, gained from oilier sources (pp. 56-7; cf. Davison 10 I ff.), that the development of Attic L G 11 moves rapidly in terms of absolute dates. Aliliough a slight chronological overlap is not improbable, the two stages cannot be contemporary; otherwise, LG lIb vases would often occur with LG I, and LG lIa with Early Protoattic. Neither is the case.
54 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
Mesogeia Painters. The output of this workshop falls into our L G 11 b stage, although differing profoundly from the tired productions of the contemporary Athens 897 Workshop ;' the focal areas are filled with figured scenes in a lively and fluent style (pI. r r c-g) whose origin can be traced back to the influence of the Dipylon Master. The intermediate stage in this Classical Tradition - i.e. our LG Ha - is marked by Miss Davison's 'SubDipylon' group, containing a nucleus of monumental amphorae whose style derived from the Baring amphora, a late work of the Dipylon Workshop. 2 Finally, the stylistic link between the monumental Sub-Dipylon amphorae and Athens 894 is supplied by the Philadelphia Painter, another discovery ofJ. M. Cook (op. cit. 149). Thus we have a continuous sequence offine figured vases in the Classical Tradition, beginning with the chefd' euore ofthe Dipylon Master (Athens 804) and the works of his associates, continuing through the Sub-Dipylon group, the Philadelphia Painter, and the Workshop of Athens 894, and finally blossoming into the early Orientalizing masterpieces of the Analatos Painter. Outside the Classical Tradition, the stylistic progression is less coherent, chiefly owing to the comparative dearth of figured painting. We are confronted with a large number of pitchers and fewer amphorae, illustrating the gradual decay of the ripe linear schemes evolved in L G 1. At the end of this decline comes the prolific L G I I b workshop of Athens 897. Apart from a tendency towards careless and slovenly draughtsmanship, its vases remain reactionary in form and unadventurous in the choice of ornament; there is hardly any trace of that ferment which led to the emergence of an Orientalizing style in more progressive circles. The pedigree ofthis workshop may be traced back through the Lion Painter, a mannerist working at the beginning of L G I I b, to a host of minor craftsmen (L G I la) who specialized in the pitcher." Two of Miss Davison's New Workshops (her I and VII) belong to this category; I have ventured to add a few more, although the groups are so closely interlinked that their separation is not always an easy matter. The most influential personality among them is the Birdseed Painter, whose characteristic dotted bird files were remembered even in the closing stages of the Athens 897 Workshop. The debt of these pitcher painters to the L G I workshops cannot easily be assessed: figured scenes, when they occur, show no really close resemblances either to the Classical Dipylon Tradition or to the Hirschfeld manner; and the linear decoration in each group is too eclectic to point exclusively to any single workshop of the preceding generation. There are only isolated points of contact, just as there are occasional echoes of the new experiments being tried out in the more progressive L G I I workshops of the Classical Tradition. My analysis will deal in turn with the workshops inside and outside the Classical Tradition; as before, vases which seem to be by the same hand will be bracketed together. Finally, I offer a general summary of L G I I shapes and decoration, with special reference to the smaller and plainer vases, based on the evidence of graves and wells (pp. Beff.). 1 See]. M. Cook, BSA 42,151. VilIard, op,cit, 36, makes Athens 897 'bienplus recent' in relation to 894; but this would surely make the later output of the 897 Workshop contemporary with the earliest Protoattic - a hypothesis which finds no support from grave and well groups. 3 P. 32, no. 25. Davison, 66ff. Villard, op,cit, 27-34, includes these monumental amphorae in his 'Dipylon Ib' stage, thereby making them earlier than the Hirschfeld krater; but see below p. 56. 3]. M. Cook, op. cit. 151.
LG 11
V THE SUB-DIPYLON GROUP'
55
A. WORKSHOPS OF THE CLASSICAL TRADITION
v. The Sub-Dipylon Group (I-g LG IIa; 10-12 LG lIb) I. Amphora, Leiden 1.1909/1.1. Brants, pl. 7,52; Davison, fig. 94. PI. Ha-b. 2. Amphora, Paris, Musee Rodin. CVA, pl. 8, 7; Davison, fig. 95. These illustrations show only the body; on the neck, see Kunze apud Himmelmann-Wildschiitz, { Gnomon 1962, 77. 3. Pitcher, Paris CA 3319. Revue des Arts 1954, 231, fig. I. 4· Spouted krater 'from Thebes', London 1899.2-19.1. JHS 19 (1899), pl. 8; Pfuhl, MUZIII, pl. 4, 15; Hampe,FGS, 26ff., pl. 22b; Davison 138-g (further bibliography) and fig. 98. 5· Amphora, Eleusis 454. JdI 14 ( 1899), 194, fig. 57; Davison, fig. 99. 6. Amphora neck, Agora P 22435, from Well N I I : 5. Hesperia 22 (1953), 39, fig. I 8a; Hesperia 30 (1961), pl. 14, M I; Davison, fig. 100; Agora VIII, no. 303. 7· Amphora, Athens 223· JdI 14 (1899), 193, fig. 54. 8. Amphora body from Eretria, Athens 14763. AE 1903, 15ff., fig. 7; BSA 47 (1952), pl. 3a; Davison, fig. 101. 9· Oinochoe, Agora P 4885, from Gr. 13. Hesperia, Supp. II, 68-71, figs. 43-4; BSA 50 (1955),4°, fig. I; Webster, From Mycenae to Homer, pl. 25; Davison 138 (further bibliography) and fig. 97. 10. Amphora, Athens 184. JdI 14 (1899), 194, fig. 56; Davison, fig. 96. II. Amphora, Oxford 1916.55. AM 53 (1928), Beil. 8, 13 (detail); Davison, fig. 11 ra.b, 12. Amphora, Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg 3187. Meddelelserfra.Nj Carlsherg Glyptotek 19 (1962), 3ff., figs. 2, 3; Tblle, pl. 30a.
NOTE 4, 9, and 10 were associated by Young, Hesperia, Supp. 11, 70-1. These, together with I, were included by Mrs Nottbohm (Jd! 58,17) among the later output of the Dipylon Workshop. The term Sub-Dipylon was coined by Miss Davison, who added 2, 5-6, and 8. On the other vases in my list, 3 is a linear work in the manner ofthe Leiden amphora, very close in shape to Athens 226 (Dipylon Workshop, p. 32, no. 29); 11 is detached from Miss Davison's 'Tapestry Workshop' (see below p. 65, n. 2). Miss Davison ascribes two other amphorae to this group - that in the Baring collection, and London 1914.4-13.1: these I place elsewhere (p. 32, no. 25; p. 67, no. 15·) Ofthe two frs, in Karlsruhe attributed by Himmelmann-Wildschiitz (Gnomon 1962,77), B 2675 seems more at home in the Workshop ofAthens 894 (p. 58, no. 3). Three more figured frs. may belong here; Acropolis, Graef-Langlotz, pI. 10, 293; Athens, British School (man leading horse); HeidelbergG 140, AM 43 (1918), 136-7, fig. 31;CVA 3, pI. II6, 1-2. To thelinearfrs. ascribed by Miss Brann (Agora VIII, 8) add a fr. in Mainz, Jahrbuch des Romisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Maine; 7 (1960), pI. 55,4.
The monumental neck-handled amphorae form the nucleus of this group. At a time when enormous vases were passing out of fashion, this shape is the only survivor of the
56 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
Dipylon Master's giants; other workshops outside the Classical Tradition (p. 67) imitated its profile, but reduced its size. Following the prototype invented by the Dipylon Master (p. 30, no. 7), a continuous tradition prevails in the highly organized neck designs; but the decoration of the body shows signs of disintegration. The appearance of floating sigmas (2-4) and the accumulation of horizontal stripes show the incipient influence of Corinth, where both these traits were current at an earlier stage (p. 99). The seven contiguous narrow zones on 2 would never have been allowed by the Dipylon Master; in the absence of any broad meander to act as ballast (as on I), the linear ornament has lost its architectural quality; it is nothing more than a means offilling space. The suppression ofbroad motifs on the amphorae leaves a vacuum eventually filled by a second figured zone (8); this provides a precedent for the richer iconography of the Philadelphia Painter and his successors. The static chariot scenes of the amphorae (pI. I I b) look back to the Classical Tradition of L G I for their stylistic inspiration; there is nothing new, even in the filling ornaments. In particular, one may note the close resemblance of the charioteers to those on Paris A 5 I 7 (pI. 7a), and the double curve on the horses' leading contours, to which the forelegs are separately attached. In the L GIb stage ofthe Dipylon Workshop we have already observed the thickening of the shoulder and the backward thrust of the hocks; these are among the most typical Classical traits ofLG 11, accentuated in the horses ofthe krater, 4, and eventually passed on to the Philadelphia Painter- and the Workshop ofAthens 894. On the other side of 4, the drawing of the hero follows the Dipylon Master's archetype (p. 38); but the painter ofthis highly original vase is more remarkable for his innovations. Here we see the first cavalier; the first ship with two rows ofoarsmen; almost the first charioteer to wear a long robe.t The long-haired heroine, with her cross-hatched dress," is the prototype ofall the female mourners and dancers belonging to the L G I I b stage ofthe Classical Tradition. On the periphery of this group lie the smaller vases 9 and 10, painted by later and less skilful hands. The arrangement of the decoration on 10 recalls Athens 894; the wall pattern above the chariot scene - a slack degeneration of the check - is not found before LG lIb. The same pattern suggests an equally late date for the amphora I I; yet the style of the burial scene reflects a much earlier stage of the Classical Tradition. Are not the horses strangely reminiscent of the giraffe-like creatures by 'Painter B' on Paris A 527?4 Perhaps this amphora was painted by an elderly survivor from the Dipylon Master's immediate circle of associates ;" if so, it offers an interesting clue to the duration of the Geometric figured style. Equally revealing is the extraordinary mixture ofold and new in the amphora, 12. The shape, and the arrangement of the scenes, recall the Classical workshops of L G lIb; this late date is confirmed by the plastic snake on the shoulder, and the small round shields with white blazons. Yet the charioteer and horses have a strangely old-fashioned look, hardly distinguishable from the manner of the Classical Dipylon kraters." In view of
LG 11
57
these remarkable survivals of style, it is difficult to credit that Attic Late Geometric lasted more than two generations.
I
VI. The Philadelphia Painter (LG lIb) Amphorae I. Philadelphia MS.5464. Pennsylvania Univ. Mus. Journal 1917, 16; Davison, fig. 49. Detail, BSA 42 (1947), 149, fig. 7c. 2. Germany, private possession. Tblle, pl. 8. 3. Berlin 3203. AA 1892, 100, no. 4; RendPontAcc 1941, 161, fig. 4; Davison, fig. 48a,b. 4. Brussels A 3474. Verhoogen, Bulletin des Musees royaux d'Art et d'Histoire, Bruxelles (195 I), 39ff., figs. 5-7; ead., Ceramique grecque aux Musees royaux, Bruxelles (1956), fig·3· 5. Berne 23270, fr. AntK 9 (1966),53, pl. 12, 2; Tblle, pI. 15. 6. Brauron, from Myrrhinous. Ergon 1960, 35, fig. 48; BCH 85 (1961), 629, fig. 7; Tblle, pls, 11-12, details. 7. Prague, private possession. A. Salac, Lisry filologicke 55 (1928), 16Iff.; Bouzek, Sbornik 1959, 115, no. 7, pl. 6.
NOTE See]. M. Cook, BSA 42,149. With the painter of Cook's original pair, 1 and 3, Miss Verhoogen associates 4, a slightly later work. Still more advanced is 6 - an attribution suggested by Himmelmann-Wildschiitz (Gnomon 1962, 76). 7, to judge from the neck panel, is related to 1-6, and may be by the same hand; the chariot procession on the body cannot be seen in the illustrations.
After a short lull in the production of the moderate-sized amphora, our I stands at the head ofa figured series representing the best work in the Classical Tradition during the final stage of Attic Geometric. Having no immediate predecessor, the shape looks back to MG I 1;1 but for the first time the rim, handles, and shoulder are all overlaid with plastic snakes, rendering the vase unserviceable for domestic use." On the later amphorae in this list, the neck grows taller, and the body more attenuated; a more level field is provided for the figured zones," and more room for the depiction of those funerary processions in which the Philadelphia Painter was an enthusiastic specialist. These scenes, separated by linear zones, dominate the decoration as never before. Only on the shoulder (I, 3-4) is the linear ornament allowed to accumulate; here the crosshatched triangles (I) and hatched zigzag (3) are well suited to the curved surface. The growing influence of Corinth may be seen in three innovations: the files of stiff-legged soldier-birds (3-4; cf. p. 105), the two-tiered lozenge nets (p. 106), and the use of white paint to dot the plastic snakes. Bird files, ofcourse, have appeared before in Attica (p. 32, no. 28) ; but this painter's birds seem to have been carefully copied off Corinthian kotylai, which were already being deposited in Attic graves.' Sometimes they are tentatively admitted
J. M.
Cook, BSA 42, 149, n. 7. 2 Earlier: krater, Athens 806, A]A 44, pI. 25. See p. 62, n. 4, for a possible explanation of this feature. 4 P. 30, no. 9; Davison 31, fig. I3b. 5 N.B. also two characteristic filling ornaments: the sixteen-pointed star, rarely seen after the Baring amphora; and the eight-armed swastika, elsewhere found only under the handle of Athens 804. G Cf. especially pI. 7a, charioteer; p. 31, no. 22, horses. 1
VI THE PHILADELPHIA PAINTER'
3
1 Cf. K. v. I, pI. 32, 276. • Villard, op. cit. 39, gives precedence to his Paris CA 3468; on the relative date of this vase, see p. 60, n. 3 J. M. Cook, op.cit. 151. 4 Cf. J. M. Cook, op. cit, 147, fig. 6a.
I
I.
58 . ATTIC GEOMETRIC
LG 11
into the figured fields, either singly or in small groups, their feet never leaving the ground line. The figured work possesses a studied elegance, hardly affected by the fluent and cursive style of the Athens 894 circle. The iconography reveals an inventive mind, especially interested in details of armour. The Dipylon shields have now been abandoned in favour of the more practical round form; the blazonry - sometimes tricked out in white paint - leaves scope for individuality.' The accommodation of the round shield to the human body poses a problem of proportions solved only by trial and error. At first the shield reaches down to the knees (1-2); later, the thighs appear below it (3-4,6). From behind each shield, two spears project above and below; but these projections are not aligned with one another. Helmets, in earlier times, were only recognizable by their waving crests; but this painter makes the rear edge of the metal stand out clearly from the back ofthe neck. 2 The sex of the mourners is carefully distinguished by drapery. Women always wear long hatched skirts; men, when dressed, have short kilts (1-3). There is also a consistent difference in their gestures: women raise both arms, men only one. Less original are the chariot scenes, which owe much to the Sub-Dipylon Group; yet the horses, with their stiff, straight legs, have a certain individuality; leaning forward and straining on the bit, they seem to have been suddenly arrested against their will. Apart from the grazing horses on 2 and 6, animal friezes have no part in the work of this painter.
VII. The Workshop of Athens 894 (LG lIb) Amphorae I. Athens 17935. PI. r r c (detail). 2. Hanover 1953.148. MunzMed 11 (23.1.1953), no. 307; Hentzen, Erwerbungen des Kestner-Museum, Hannover 1952-5, fig. 12. { 3. Karlsruhe, fr., B 2675. CVA I, 12, fig. 2. 4. Athens 894· JdI 14 (1899), 197, fig. 61; BSA 42 (1947), pI. 22b; Davison, fig. 33; Arias-Hirmer-Shefton, pI. 9. 5. Paris CA 2503. Villard, MonPiot 49 (1957),35, figs. 18-19. 6. Cleveland 1927.27.6. Bull. Cleveland Museum, June 1927,99; BSA 42 (1947), pI. 21. 7. Baltimore 48.2231, ex Lagunillas collection (Havana). Villard, MonPiot 49 (1957), 34, fig. 17; Munz Med 16 (30.6.1956), no. 59; Davison, fig. 35; Hill, Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 24 (1961), 39ff., figs. 1,3. 8. Karlsruhe 60/12. AA 1960,58, fig. 12; Tolle, pI. 30b. 9. Basle market. MunzMed 26 (5.10. 1963), no. 53. 10. Private possession. Tiille, pl, 14. I I. Agora P 4990, from Gr. 12. Hesperia, Supp. 11,55-7, figs. 37, 38; Davison, fig. 36; Agora VIII, nos. 12,336. 12. Lucerne market. Schefold, Antiken (Luzern), 5.12.1963, pI. 13, no. 382. Perhaps later work by the painter of 1-3. 13. Paris CA 3468. Villard, MonPiot 49 (1957), I7ff., figs. 1-12. 1
Tiille, Beil. 3, 11-12, 14-16.
• Cf. Snodgrass, Early Greek Armour and Weapons,s, 6 nn, 15, 17.
l
VII THE WORKSHOP OF ATHENS 894 . 59
14. Amsterdam 6249. Allard Pierson Museum, Algemeene Gids (1937), pI. 48. 15. Athens, Stathatou collection, from Koropi (St. 222). Cook, B SA 46 (195 I), 45; Davison, fig. II5; Himmelmann-Wildschutz, AA 1964, 611ff., figs. I, 2. PI. IIg. 16. Toronto C 951. Robinson-Harcum-Iliffe, no. 630, pI. 101; Davison, fig. 119. 17· Copenhagen 7029· CVA 2, pI. 73, 3; BSA 50 (1955), 49, fig. 3· 18. Mannheim 170. CVA I, pl. 2, 3, pl. 3, 2. 19. Keos K 3026, from the Temple at Ay. Irini (fr.). 20. Athens 898. Collignon-Couve, pl. I I, 2I0. 21. Essen K 969. Tolle, AA 1963, 2IOff., figs. 1-4; Tiille, pI. 13. See HimmelmannWildschiitz, AA 1964, 611-14. 2Ia. Buffalo C 12847. Gestalt undGeschichte : Festschrift K. Schefold (Berne 1967), 24, n. 94, pl. 7, I, detail. 22. Copenhagen 9378. Guide to NationalMuseum, Copenhagen (1950), pI. 13; Breitenstein, Greske Vaser (1957), pI. 6. Details: Johansen, Arkaeologisk-Kunsthistoriske Meddelelser 3 (1945), I4ff., figs. 5, 6. 23· Kerameikos 1371, frs., from Gr. 5Ib. K. v. I, pI. 39; Davison, fig. 39.
Pitcher 24. Athens, Passas collection. Tblle, pI. 10. Hydriai 25· Paris CA 1333. Folzer, Die Hydria, no. 19, pI. 2; Tsue, pI. 5. 26. Munich 6228. CVA 3, pI. 109, 1-4; pI. 110, 1-2; Davison, fig. I24a,b. 27. Mainz Univ. 46, from Vouliagmeni. Neugebauer, Antiken in deutschem Prioatbesitz, pI. 59, no. 139; CVA I, pL5; Davison, fig. 125. 28. Athens 17470. CVA 2, pI. 13, 1-5; Davison, fig. 123. PI. r r d, 29· Agora P 5499, fr., from Gr. I I. Hesperia, Supp. 11, 49, fig. 34. 30. Brauron, from Myrrhinous. Tiille, pI. 6a (detail). 3 1. Cambridge, Museum of Classical Archaeology CAM 345. Tiille, pI. 18. 32. Berlin 32029, neck. Rohde, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Antikensammlung: Fiihrer (1957),79 n. 3, fig. 43· 33. Baghdad IM 52°41. Davison, fig. 116a,b. Oinochoai 34· Kerameikos 1356, from Opferrinne I. K. v. I, pl. 79. 35. Agora P 21428, from Well R 9:2. Hesperia 30 (1961),137, P 6, pI. 15; Davison, fig. 118; AgoraVIII, no. 51. One-piece oinochoai 36. Agora P 23654, from Well Q 8:9. Hespetia 30 (1961), 129, N I I, pI. 16; Davison, fig. I 17; Agora VIII, no. 360. PI. r r e, 37· Agora P 22427, from Well N I 1:6. Hesperia 30 (1961), 144, R 5, pI. 15. Kraters 38. Agora P 13287, fr. Agora VIII, no. 341.
60 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
39. Athens 810, cauldron on stand. AM I7 (1892), pl. 10; Davison, fig. 38; Hampe, Ein fruhattischer Grabfund, figs. 33-8; Tblle, Beil. I. 40. Athens, frs. AM 17 (1892), 226, figs. roff.; Hampe, op. cit., fig. 39. 41. Paris CA 3256; deep, on fenestrated pedestal. Unpublished. Tankards 42. Paris CA 1779. Unpublished. 43. Paris CA 1780. Unpublished. 44. Athens, no number, from Marathon. Tiille, no. 23. PI. IIf. Height o- 16m. Skyphoi 45. Munich 8506. CVA 3, pl. 125,3-4; Davison, fig. 122. 46. Athens 14441, from Anavysos. P AE 191 I, 121, no. 18. 47. Wiirzburg. Langlotz; pl. 5, no. 58. 48. Athens 784, from Dipylon, Gr. 7. A M 18 (1893), I 13, fig. 10; F S, pl. 3. Kotylai 49. Agora P 5286. Hesperia, Supp. 11, 138, fig. 91, B 85; Agora VIII, no. 343. 50. Athens 18496, from Empedocles collection. PI. 15j· NOTE See]. M. Cook, BSA 42 (1947), 146ff. Nos. 4, 6, II, 39-40 formed his original nucleus, to which Miss Davison (op. cit. 144ff.) added 7,15-17,20,26-8,33,36,45, quoting Miss Brann's attribution of23 and 34. Elsewhere (Agora VIII, under nos. 51, 341, 360) Miss Brann adds 14, 18,35,38,48. Himmelmann-Wildschiitz assigns 8 to the hand of 7, and 21 to the painter of the Stathatou amphora, 15. Other figured frs. from this workshop, not listed: Agora VIII, nos. 302, 315, 385 (Brann); AA 1963, 642ff., figs. 5, 7, 10-12,24; Kraiker, Aigina, pI. 4, 60; K. v. I, pI. 79, 1244; perhaps BSA 12 (1905-6),82, fig. za. Two hydriai in Miss Davison's list are omitted here: Villa Giulia 1212, a wild Subgeometric work (see now R. Bronson, AJA 68 (1964),174-8, pI. 57-8); and Princeton 28-15 (Davison, fig. 121), which I place with the two hydriai of the Vulture-Wiirzburg group in Reading and in the Geroulanos collection (Brann, AJA 63 (1959), 178-9, pI. 45); cr. also Berlin 31°45 (ToUe, pI. 7)·
SHAPES
The slim neck-handled amphora is the leading shape of this workshop. After the precedent set by the Philadelphia Painter, its funerary purpose is made clear by the full complement of plastic snakes, attached to rim, handles, and shoulder. A few years before the emergence of the Protoattic style, the snakes are sometimes doubled.' The main series - from which we exclude the plump variant, 18 - begins with a firm articulation between neck and body, which is gradually smoothed out as the neck grows taller; eventually, the "provision of struts (21-3) foreshadows the Early Protoattic custom of binding neck and body together with fretwork. The hydria, for the first time in its history, attains popularity as a funerary vase, and is honoured with figured decoration; its plump form is distinct from the more attenuated Early Protoattic type which follows. A third major shape (38, 39?) is intro1 13,21,22,23; cf. the cauldron 39, and the Analatos hydria. ViIlard claims too high a relative date for the amphora 13. The horses, lions, and dogs all betray the hallmarks of this workshop, although drawn by a hand less supple than the painter of Athens 894. The lions, with their full stride, cannot be far from the transition to Protoattic.
LG 11
VII THE WORKSHOP OF ATHENS
894 . 61
duced near the end of this workshop's activity - a cauldron on a tall fenestrated pedestal, its body being closely modelled on a bronze original.' This is the largest member of an extensive family of new forms, all standing on fenestrated pedestals, and evidently designed for funeral pyres; many of them betray some affinity with this workshop." Three more forms, decorated with human figures, also seem to be intended for funerary use: the unusually tall oinochoe 34, the pitcher 24 (both related to the amphora in shape as well as in iconography), and the tankard, modelled after the latest Geometric type, with tall flaring profile and a sharp carination near the base; here mourning women appear in friezes on 42 and 44, and in plastic figurines upon the handles of 42 and 43. The other shapes - one-piece oinochoai, skyphoi, and kotylai - are free of plastic attachments, and have no obvious connection with funerary ritual; some were found in domestic contexts (35-8,49), and all belong to common L G I I types often found outside this workshop. DECORATION
The amphorae I and 2, painted by the same hand, are the earliest in our series. Shape, linear ornament, and iconography all owe much to the Philadelphia Painter; the figured style betrays a hand more fluent, yet in closer touch with the Sub-Dipylon Group. The horses of I (pI. r r c) share many features with those on the London krater, p. 55, no. 4; here, once again, are all the Classical traits mentioned above (p. 56), but without any of the stiffness apparent in the Philadelphia Painter's work. The stocky soldiers round the lower frieze of I link this pair with our name-piece, 4. There they are repeated more carelessly, yet are equipped with the same round shields bearing the same blazonry. On I these shields reached down to the knees; with the soldiers of 4, part of the thighs are visible. The proportion between shield and body is finally adjusted on 7, where the rim of the shield hardly comes below the waist, so that the men look considerably taller; we have noted a similar development within the series by the Philadelphia Painter. In the chariot procession of 4, the two- and four-horse teams have lost much of the elegance of the solitary horses on I. The leading contour of the shoulder still retains something of the Classic double curve, but the bodies have become emaciated, and the buttocks protrude to an absurd degree." With these vases, the Classical figured style reaches its most cursive stage, possibly in the interests of mass-production. On four more amphorae by this same hand (6--7, 10-11)4 the funerary iconography is more complete. Here we see the full range of themes previously explored by the Dipylon Workshop, with the sole exception of the battle scenes, which were now apparently out of fashion. A prothesis fills the neck-panel, with attendant mourners on the reverse; I I offers Young, op. cit. 58; Hampe, op, cit. 48ff. Cook, op. cit. 148. Almost the full range of these shapes is seen in Agora Gr. 12, and in the two 'Opferrinnen' in the Kerameikos; here we see miniature cauldrons, cups, saucers, and plates all provided with pedestals. The most common form, the pedestailed bowl, does not appear to have been made in this workshop; see p. 86. 3 This last feature is repeated on 5, a smaller and hastier work by the same hand; note also the close resemblance in the helmeted charioteers, with their precarious stance. 46,7 are attributed by Miss Davison, op. cit, 42. On 10 and II the mourning soldiers are surely brothers to the stocky charioteers of 4 and 5; the triple teams of horses have the same contours as on 7, but in more emaciated form. Cook (op. cit, 148) noted the close similarity between the women of6 and II. The homogeneous group ofhydriai, 25--9, could be by the same painter; there is no need to postulate a separate 'Hydria Hand' (Davison Bzff.). 1
2
J. M.
62 . ATTIC GEOMETRIC an additional cortege in a zone immediately under the lip. On the body, the procession of chariots still fills the main zone, which may be supported by animal friezes above and below. A few comments on the style of this central group will apply in some measure to the workshop as a whole, thereby offering us a standard of comparison by which the L G I I figured drawing outside the Classical Tradition may be assessed. At the same time, we may take the opportunity to isolate a few mannerisms peculiar to the painter of Athens 894. First, let us consider his human figures - if one may risk any generalization about figures so roughly sketched. Heads are rendered extremely summarily; noses are often omitted, butjaws protrude boldly. The thorax has become a low isosceles triangle, whose apex passes into a long tapering waist; this careless trait is certainly not peculiar to the Classical Tradition, and perhaps indicates nothing more than lateness of date.' When thighs and calves are visible, the contours ofthe Dipylon Master's prototype can still be recognized. Arms are rendered with the usual clarity of the Classical workshops; but the strange pose of the mourners, whose elbows form an acute angle high above their heads, is peculiar to this painter. According to the general custom of this workshop, both sexes have hair; especially characteristic of our painter are the short locks which stand erect from the heads of both male (11) and female mourners, as though drawing attention to the stress of their emotion." The sexes are distinguished only by dress. Women invariably wear hatched skirts;" men are either armed, or nude, or clad in long silhouette robes.' The horses have already been discussed; but it is worth noting how, in their most cursive form (4-11), fetlocks and hooves have been omitted from their hindlegs. The running dogs (6-7, 12-13,24) were perhaps imitated from a more careful prototype invented outside the Classical Tradition, and will be discussed below (p. 80). The deer, apart from the unique use of outline for their ears (7), are derived from those of the Dipylon Workshop, appearing now in a hardened and debased form. In the figured fields, the Corinthianizing birds have now become a commonplace motif, drawn with a flick of the wrist and inserted into any vacant space. Ofthe linear motifs, the check band and the gear-pattern are especially popular with our painter; on I I, the latest of the vases under consideration, the spiral hooks on the dotted lozenges remind us that the beginning of Protoattic cannot be many years away. The fine amphora, 15 (pI. I I g), from the Stathatou collection, has been recognized as the work of a different, and rather more fastidious, craftsman. S This Stathatou Painter was Cf. pI. 12b; contrast the stricter and steeper triangles of the Philadelphia Painter, and even of our I and 2. Cf. the tankard 42, another work by the same hand. S This rule applies only within the Classical Tradition, and its closest imitators - e.g. the Benaki Painter. EIsewhe!e (e.g. pI. 12d,f, pI. 14d), the skirts are still in silhouette. • This is in direct contrast to the practice of the Dipylon Workshop, where all the drapery is in silhouette, and invariably limited to women; p. 39. Perhaps the hatching of women's skirts began in order to distinguish the sexes at a time when charioteers were taking to long robes in silhouette; see the London krater of the Sub-Dipylon Group. On the strict relation between amphora shapes and the sex of the deceased, see p. 39. My assumption that the neck-handled type was still reserved for men does not depend exclusively on the drapery in the prothesis scenes; Young (op. cit. 55) thinks that our 11 was probably offered at a man's grave, on an analogy suggested by the other offerings. Cf. J. M. Cook on the Stathatou amphora, BSA 46 (1951),4,6. 5 Miss Davison's Stathatou Hand, 01. cit. 79ff., to whom she assigns 15-16, 20, 33, 35--'7; Himmelmann-Wildschlitz adds 21. In my view, 33 merits 'workshop' status only. A plump amphora, Berlin F 3901 (Neugebauer 9, pI. 3), may be a Cycladic imitation of this painter's style. The following analysis is based mainly on 15 and 16. 1
2
VII THE WORKSHOP OF ATHENS 894 . 6g
LG II
evidently a younger contemporary, perhaps a pupil of the Athens 894 hand. He seems to have taken over the style ofhis senior colleague in its most cursive form, and then refined it with new mannerisms of his own. These are especially noticeable in his rendering of animals. The leading forelegs are delicately bent; the lower joints ofthe hind legs are drawn in a continuous backward curve. The bodies of his solitary horses preserve the straight and meagre profile to which we have become accustomed in the massed teams ofthe 894 Painter: the heavy shoulder on I is seen no more. All the animals of the Stathatou Painter are consistently taller than those ofhis colleague, and walk with more delicate tread. In his human figures he accentuates the tapering waist, but the heads are rounder, and their hair flows in longer locks. In his choice oflinear decoration he avoids the bold check design, preferring quieter half-tone motifs. His zones are tidier, his filling ornament lighter and more strictly controlled; his schematic trees (15, under handle; 16, 38) set a precedent for the use of vegetable ornament in the figured fields. During the career of the Stathatou Painter - and perhaps under his influence - the imagery of the workshop became more varied and adventurous. Three mythical creatures appear on the scene: the centaur (10, 17, 33, 41), the sphinx (48), and the winged goat (43, 46). Lions on the prowl are occasionally seen in friezes (13,21-2). Two vases forestall the Analatos hydria - and Orientalizing custom in general - in portraying animals heraldically confronted either side of a 'Tree of Life', schematically constructed out of the new lozenge-and-spiral design of I I ; these are 31 (lions) and 41 (centaurs). With the well-worn theme of the chariot procession, the Stathatou Painter took unprecedented liberties: on 15, a tall interloper seeks to dislodge one of the charioteers; a solitary rider on 16 breaks the measured monotony of the chariot teams. In the neck-panels, the mourners are often replaced by dancers with hands linked; although they were first introduced in LG 1/ it is only at this stage that the dancers are accepted into the Classical Tradition. In its final stages, the workshop began to lose its homogeneity ofstyle. The cursive manner of Athens 894 could still inspire fine and vigorous work (39); but in less able hands the drawing tended to become rigid and lifeless (13, 41). Degenerate work in the same tradition is still found in the early years of Protoattic, when at least one elderly survivor of this circle was still drawing feeble Subgeometric dancers, while admitting a few Orientalizing ornaments.s More important is the legacy of the Stathatou Painter, who included among his pupils the finest artist of the next generation: the author of the hydria from Analatos, Athens gIg. 3 Between the name-pieces of master and pupil, three amphorae provide a stylistic progression: 16,22, and Oxford I9g6.599.4 The first, as we have seen, comes from the master's hand: the other two look forward to the mature work of the Analatos Painter, and may belong to his apprenticeship. Through this series we may follow the delicate tread of the deer (15-16, Athens gIg), and the evolution of the long-limbed, short-bodied colts." 22 must have been painted under the eye of the Stathatou Painter, but the conscientious neatness of the horses' hooves suggests a different hand; the upper thighs are beginning to 1 TUlle, Group I, pis. 1,2. 2 Hydria, Berlin A I, CVA I, fig. I, pl. I, 1-3: standed bowl, Tubingen 1086, TUlle, pis. 20, 21. a J. M. Cook, BSA 35,166,172-6, pis. 38b, 39. The connection between the two painters was demonstrated by Miss Davison, op.
cit. 97-8, II9. 'Davison, fig. 60.
5
16, in the shoulder frieze, and the rider's horse in the main frieze:
22,
Oxford 1936.599. Cf. Davison98.
64 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
fill out, and for the first time a pair ofhorses walk side by side with open stride (cf. also 23), foreshadowing the pose and movement on the Analatos Painter's amphora in Paris.! Likewise the lions in the uppermost frieze, though still Geometric in conception, look forward to the shapely beasts on the Analatos hydria, sharing with them the convex curve ofthe upper jaw - a feature which sets them apart from the general run of Late Geometric lions. With the Oxford amphora we have passed beyond the limits of this workshop, and stand on the threshold of Protoattic. Here, as Cook remarks, 'the Analatan rhythm is in the making,' especially in the sinuous outlines of the human form, where all sharp angles have been eliminated. From these graceful figures it is only a short step to the choir on the neck of the Analatos Painter's name-piece. His contemporary, the Mesogeia Painter," a less polished but equally recognizable hand, also owes much to the same master. Deer of the Stathatou type survive on his hydria, Berlin 31312,3 and subsequently, in rather debased form, on the second hydria in the Vlasto collection.' The tall colts ofI6 appear again on the first ofthe Vlasto hydriai- and on another amphora in Oxford, 1935. I 9, where Cook has noticed a close resemblance to the Mesogeia Painter's style." B. WORKSHOPS OUTSIDE THE CLASSICAL TRADITION (I) THE PITCHER WORKSHOPS
VIII. The Soldier-bird Workshop (1-6, LG IIa; 7-11, early LG lIb) I. Pitcher, Kerameikos, from Gr. 291. AA 1964,464, fig. 53. 2. Pitcher, Munich 6404. CVA 3, pl. 114, 1-2; pl. 11 5, 2; pl. 104, 4. 3. Pitcher, Athens 18432, from Empedocles collection. PI. 12a. 4. Pitcher, Eleusis 708. EA 1898, pl. 3,6. 5. Giant oinochoe, Athens 18142, from Empedocles collection. Unpublished. 6. Pitcher, British School at Athens A 303, from Empedocles collection. Unpublished. 7. Pitcher, Nauplia 4065. Unpublished. 8. Giant oinochoe, Nauplia 4063. Unpublished. { 9. Pitcher, Warsaw 138516. CVA I, pl. 3, 1-2. I O. Pitcher, Athens, Vlasto collection. AJA 44 (1940), pl. 27, I; A M 78 (1963), Beil. 28,2. { I I. Pitcher, Athens 15267, from Spata, Gr. I. AD 6 (1920-1), Parartema, 132, fig. 2; better, AJA 44 (1940), pl. 27, 2; A M 78 (1963), Beil. 28,3. I Arias-Hirmer-Shefton, colour pI. 1I. 2 Cook, BSA 35, 176-8, pis. 43-6. 3 C VA I, pI. 40. 4 Cook, op. cit. pI. 45. • BSA 42, pI. 22a. 8 BSA 42, 150; illustrated BSA 35, pI. 38, I; Davison, fig. 59. In spite of Miss Davison's doubts (op. cit. 52), I believe that this amphora is an early work from the Mesogeia Painter's hand. In addition to the resemblances noted by Cook, the dancers are closely related to those on the Berlin hydria; cf. the diamond-shaped thorax, the sharp points of wig, nose, and chin; the horses in the neckfrieze share with those on the first Vlasto hydria the peculiarity of having their hind legs close together, and exactly parallel; cf. also the deer, BSA 35, pl. 45. Only the Mesogeia Painter abbreviates a three-tiered lozenge net by mass-producing sigmas with a multiple brush. Other possible juvenilia by the Mesogeia Painter: (a) amphora fr., K. v. I, pl. 4°,137°; cf. Cook,JHS 76 (1956),124. The mourners owe much to our 16, although neck and chin are already exaggerated in the manner of the Berlin hydria; (b) kantharos, Oxford 1927.4332, with two horses like those on the first Vlasto hydria; on the reverse, a bull (see now Sir John and Lady Bea;:lty's gifts, I9I2-I,96"6, Ashmolean Museum (1967), pI. 4, 54); (c) tankard, Athens 138,Jd1I4 (1899),2°9, fig. 80: frieze ofsimilar horses.
LG 11
VIII THE SOLDIER-BIRD WORKSHOP'
65
This series is named after the ubiquitous files of stiff-legged birds (absent only on 4, which is incomplete), which may occur as many as three times on the same vase (2-3, ~). Their origin can be traced as far back as the Athens and Stockholm pitchers of the Dipylon Workshop (p. 32, nos. 28-g); here they are taller, more closely bunched, and always treated as a minor abstract motif.' The pitcher I is a transitional piece between the later Dipylon manner and the main output ofthis workshop. No other natural representations are attempted; yet the choice and arrangement of linear ornament is individual enough to reveal three distinct hands, working in association with one another. The painter of 2-6 still owes much to the Classical Tradition; his debt to Athens 226 (p. 32, no. 29) is especially close. After the manner ofthe Dipylon Workshop, he concentrates the weightiest decoration in the three focal fields. In the neck-panel, the Classical double meander (3, 5-6) and the simplified tapestry pattern (2, 4)2 are interchangeable. In decorating the shoulder, he imitates the Dipylon Workshop on two occasions, in confining his metopes to the side ofa field (2, 4; cf. p. 37). A further link between the five vases and their Dipylon prototypes is the rare use of four horizontal lines to divide the zones, instead ofthe normal three." This painter departs, however, from the Classical Tradition in encircling the widest diameter with equal square metopes, showing a strong preference for the lozenge star. His relative date - L G I I a - is suggested by the floating sigmas, still neatly drawn (3-4, 6), and the narrowness of the metope zones.s In the later vases, the heavy Dipylon motifs are abandoned, and further non-Classical ideas creep in. Our second painter keeps the lozenge star metopes on the shoulders of 7-9, and on the neck of 8; for the belly of this oinochoe, he borrows the hooked swastika from another workshop (p. 66). Elsewhere, metopes are replaced by narrow vertical panels." A later date is indicated by the more cursive draughtsmanship; note especially the omission of the vertical lines in the checked zones. On the final pair, the metopes (swastikas and lozenge stars) still occupy the neck, but have disappeared from the belly, leaving an accumulation of continuous zones placed without any emphasis on the widest diameter. A narrow metope zone on the shoulder of I I has two points of interest: the triglyphs now consist of a single panel of multiple zigzag as large as the metopes; and in the metopes themselves, the orthodox check pattern alternates with a motif hardly seen since the opening years of Geometric (p. 12): a checkerboard of nine squares, here with cross-hatching and stars placed in alternate compartments (cf. pl, le). This pair ofpitchers belongs to the opening years ofLG llb, and should be contemporary with the pitchers of the Lion Painter."
Davison 76• The Munich pitcher, our 2, is ascribed by Miss Davison to her 'Tapestry Workshop'. For the vases of her 'Tapestry Painter', see p. 32, nos. 29-30; for her other 'Workshop' vase, p. 55, no. 11. If the tapestry design was invented by the Dipylon Master himself (p. 36; cf. pI. 7e), there is no need to postulate a separate workshop for the vases on which it occurs. The design is part of the Classical heritage, appearing occasionally throughout Attic LG on large vases which have little else in common. 3 Noted by Davison 76. 4 Cf. p. 51, nos. 9-1 I; and the Birdseed Painter, pp. 67 ff. • The necks of7 and 9 bear vertical meanders; belly of7, hatched tongues. 8 P. 73, nos. 1-2; Kahane, AJ A 44, 480, pl. 2 7. E
I
2
66 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
IX. The Workshop of the Hooked Swastikas (1-8, LG Ila; 9-13, early LG lIb) Pitcher, The Hague, Volz collection. Scheurleer, Grieksche Ceramiek, Rotterdam (1936), pI. 2, 6. 2. Pitcher, Athens 771, from Dipylon, Gr. 13. JdI 14 (1899), 207, figs. 74, 74a; OlForsch Ill, pI. 94, centre; Davison, figs. I 44a,b. 3. Pitcher, Lisbon, Salazar collection. Pereira, Greek Vases in Portugal, Coimbra (1962), pI. 2. 4. Pitcher, Athens 782, from Dipylon, Gr. 7·JdI 14 (1899), 207, figs. 75, 75a. 5. Amphora, Boston 03.779. Fairbanks, pls, 24, 264. 6. Amphora body, Paris CA 1823. PI. rab-c. 7. Amphora fr., Agora P 4886, from Gr. 14. Hesperia, Supp. 11, 74, fig. 48; Davison, fig.Bq, 8. Pitcher, Kerameikos 393, from Gr. 33. K. v. I, pI. 115. 9. Pitcher, Athens 18440, from the Empedocles collection. Unpublished. 10. Pitcher, Kerameikos 399, from Gr. 16. K. v. I, pI. 114. I I. Amphora, Athens market: rider in neck-panel. 12. Amphora, Dresden ZV 1820. AA 1902, 114, no. 17. 13. Giant oinochoe, Cambridge, Museum of Classical Archaeology CAM 328. Unpublished. I.
All these vases have strict metope zones on the neck and round the belly. I might well deserve a place within the Workshop of Athens 706 (p. 5 I ; cf stage (b)) if it were not for two traits which set it apart as the head of a separate series: the unusually slender shape, and the preference for a new variety of swastika, where two extra limbs are added to the arms of the normal type. Such hooked swastikas are rarely found in Attica before the beginning ofLG 1I,l and have a short life, passing out offashion during LG lIb; in their latest form (8, Io-II) they sometimes lose their second extra limb (cf. p. 73, no. I). Even within these narrow chronological limits, their occurrence is rare, and almost confined to this workshop. In the metope bands of these vases, hooked swastikas are by far the commonest motif Next in order ofpopularity comes the lozenge star: octofoils and quatrefoils are considerably rarer (I, 8, 12). In the continuous zones, three motifs predominate: standing triangles, wolftooth, and check, on the later vases degenerating into a wall-pattern (6,8, 10, II, 13). Figured drawing is seldom attempted, and largely derivative when it occurs; a ,comparison of the warriors on the two figured fields of6 (pI. 12b-C) makes it seem unlikely that any consistent tradition of funerary iconography was ever evolved within this workshop. By another hand are the stallions in the metopes of 3; later, these are crudely imitated in the pair facing over a tripod on the neck of 12, together with the three heavy lozenges as filling ornament. The affinities of this workshop may be easily traced. I has its roots in the circle ofAthens 1 a. p. 129 for their first appearance in the Argolid, which may be earlier.
LG 11
IX THE WORKSHOP OF THE HOOKED SWASTIKAS •
67
706, where even the characteristic hooked swastika is found once (p. 5 I, no. I I) ; the rare use of check as a filling ornament (7-8) also points in that direction. On 3 the complex meander, the stallions, and the dotted bird files are all borrowed from the Birdseed Painter. 1 The zigzag panel on the same pitcher, taken together with the thinness of the hatched motifs on all the vases, is found again in the work ofthe Lion Painter, who also imitated the hooked swastikas (p. 73, no. I). With the Classical Tradition there are fewer points of contact. The chariot scene of 6 recalls the style ofnos. 9-10 ofthe Sub-Dipylon Group (p. 56). A little later, the ornament of 9 and 13 is strongly influenced by the common stock ofthe Athens 894 Workshop. 2 Finally, in the metope zone of the latest vase (13), the accumulation oftriglyphs recalls the bowls, Athens 773-4, from Dipylon Gr. 13. Between these pieces and the end of Geometric stands virtually the whole output of the Athens 897 Workshop.
X. The Birdseed Workshop (Dlainly LG Ha)
(i) By the Birdseed Painter I. Amphora, Boston MF A 98.894. Fairbanks, pI. 20, 261; Lane, Greek Pottery, pI. 6; Davison, fig. 76. 2. Pitcher, Hamburg 1919.363. AA 1928,289, figs. 16, 17; Davison, fig. 74. 3. Pitcher, Toronto C 20 I. Robinson-Harcum-Ilijfe, pI. 8, 117; Davison, fig. 72. 4· Pitcher, New York 41.11.4. Richter, Handbook ofthe Greek collection (1953), pI. I5b; Davison, fig. 73. 5. Pitcher, Athens 16022, from Ay. Paraskeve. PI. 12d. 6. Amphora, Erlangen 1458. Griinhagen, Antike Originalarbeiten (1948), 32, pI. 10; Davison, fig. 77a-e. 7· Skyphos, Athens 13038, from Thera. AM 28 (1903), HI 19, pI. 3; Pfuhl, MUZIII, pI. 4, 14; Davison, fig. 80. 8. Oinochoe, fragmentary, Hobart. R. G. Hood, Greek Vases in the Universiry of Tasmania (1964), no. 31, pI. 3, detail; id., AJA 71 (1967), Bzff., pls. 31-2. PI. 12£. 9. Pitcher, London 'A 362'. Conze, Zur Geschichte der Anfange der griechischen Kunst (1870), pI. 5, I; Davison, fig. 75. 10. Giant oinochoe, London 'A 361', from the Elgin collection. Davison, fig. 79. I I. Krater, Munich 6234. C VA 3, pls, 104-5, 107; Davison, fig. 78. 12. Hydria,Brauron, from Myrrhinous. Eikones, March 1961,14. (ii) Workshop 13· Giant oinochoe, Athens 18472. Unpublished; cf Davison, 56, no. 9. { 14. Pitcher, Athens 18477. Unpublished. 15. Amphora, London 1914.4-13.1. Davison, fig. 102. { 16. Amphora, Berlin 31046. Unpublished. 17· High-rimmed bowl, Leiden 1.98/6.18. Brants, pI. 7,44. pp. 68ff.;
cr. Davison 121 on our no. 2. Cf. the two-tiered lozenge net, the spaced double zigzag, and the simplified tapestry design of our 9-10; also the plastic snake of 9, bordered by hatched triangles. For all these details, cr. 9 with the Mainz hydria, p. 59, no. 27.
1 2
68 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
X THE BIRDSEED WORKSHOP •
LG 11
18. High-rimmed bowl, Leiden 1.98/6.17. Brants, pl. 7,45. 19. High-rimmed bowl, Oxford 1927.4447. PI. 12e. 20. Skyphos, Munich 6220. CVA 3, pl. 124, 1-2; Dauison, fig. 81. 21. Skyphos, Kerameikos 788, from Gr. 91. K. v. I, pl. 129; Dauison, fig. 82. 22. Skyphos, Edinburgh L 364. Webster, Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary andPhilosophical Society 82 (1938-9), pl. sb. 23. Skyphos, Manchester. Webster, loco cit. fig. I;]. M. Cook, BSA 42 (1947), 145, fig. 5. 24. Skyphos, London 1950.11-9.1. Dauison, fig. 83. 25. Skyphos, Athens 15284, from Spata, Gr. 3. AD 6 (1920-1), Parartema, 134, fig. 8. 26. Skyphos, British School at Athens A 343. Unpublished. 27. Skyphos, Schiff's Grave. Thera 11, fig. 510. 28. Skyphos, Edinburgh L 363. Webster, Ope cit. pl. ea, 29. Amphora fr., Oxford 1914.18. Sir J. and Lady Beaelef s gifts, 1912-66, Ashmolean Museum (1967), no. 53, pl. 4.
69
single-hatched bird packed into a narrow frame. The same hatched variety, garnished with birdseed, is found in a frieze on I, where the conscientious draughtsmanship may reflect an early stage in the painter's career. The same birds reappear in heraldic pairs on 18, thereby establishing a link with the three bowls. This link is confirmed by the close correspondence in the linear decoration: note especially the characteristic wolftooth on 17, and the double meander of 18-19 (pI. 12e). The floating chevron in the triglyphs unites all three bowls with the pitchers, 3-5. The eccentricities of the figured style will allow a few more attributions. The female mourners of5, with their curved arms, their curious forked feet, and their trailing skirts, are found again on the oinochoe, 8 (pI. 12 f), and the hydria, 12; and the gesticulating warriors on 8 have a close kinsman inside the skyphos, 7. Apart from these unusual traits, the human figures differ from the tall and elegant Classical type current in the contemporary SubDipylon Group. More individual are the horses. Their shoulders are always prominent; forelegs are stiff, without hock; fetlocks are exaggerated, and hooves are heavier than in any of the Classical workshops. Eyes are sometimes, not always, reserved; stallions are distinguished from mares (1-2,29). The glorious bull inside 7 is the earliest in Geometric vase-painting. As is the way with animals depicted for the first time, its salient features have been greatly exaggerated; hence the vast body, the semicircular sweep of the horns, and the highly individual tail.' A little later, the bulls on 28 are partially hatched in an attempt to show the markings; the more solid treatment of the legs cannot be far from Protoattic. The skipping goats on 12 have a delightful freshness which almost conceals their Hirschfeld ancestry (cf. especially p. 42, no. 13). From the work of the Birdseed Painter himself, two pairs of large vases stand slightly apart. 13 and 14 might have been painted by the same hand within the same week. They share two extremely rare motifs: a sixteen-pointed star in metopes on the handle, and a version of the lozenge star where the centre is quartered, and little cross-hatched lozenges are inserted into the compartments. In both cases, the painter has used the multiple brush in the narrow zones of dotted lozenge chains, and in other respects the drawing falls below the standard set by 1-12.2 More interesting are the amphorae, 15 and 16; another pair from a single hand, each bearing a martial scene round the belly. Their painter has concocted a hybrid style of his own by blending the manner of 1-12 with ideas borrowed from the Sub-Dipylon Group. 15 resembles the Leiden (pI. 11 a) and Rodin amphorae in shape, and in the tripartite division of the shoulder-panels. In the figured drawing, Classical influence is apparent in the stance of the charioteer, and in the armour of the foot soldiers, still equipped with Dipylon shields. Yet the stallions are unaffected by the Classical Tradition, and accentuate even further the individual traits of the Birdseed Painter's own horses (6). The forked feet of the warriors, and the double meander on the neck of 15, are two more hallmarks of our workshop. The acme of the Birdseed Painter lies in L G I I a, contemporary with the Sub-Dipylon Group. Although he borrowed some ideas from the Classical Tradition, his own roots lie
NOTE This important workshop was discovered by Miss Davison, Ope cit. 55. Her attributions comprise our 1-4, 6-7,9-11,13,20-1,24-5; also the oinochoe Munich 8696, which I place elsewhere (p. 76). HimmelmannWildschiitz adds 15 and 16, detaching the former from Miss Davison's 'Sub-Dipylon Workshop' (Gnomon 1962,76). My reasons for including the remaining vases will be explained in the following pages.
SHAPES
In contrast to the preceding group, the closed vases here are all on the plump side; the pitchers, in particular, have almost globular bodies, and widely flaring mouths. Ofthe open shapes, the shallow skyphoi belong to a highly individual type, popular throughout LG I I (pp. 86-7); this could have been an invention of the Birdseed Painter, before entering the repertoire ofthe Athens 894 Workshop. The high-rimmed bowls, which by now have replaced the pyxis, are enlarged to their maximum size, with a rim diameter of C. o· 250·3 0m. DECORATION
The whole series is named after the characteristic files of birds in silhouette, standing on two stiff legs; their diagonal necks and bodies are answered by diagonal rows of dots. The largest vases are more closely linked by two rare idiosyncrasies in the linear ornament. In the rendering ofthe double meander, the Dipylon Master's version is inverted ap.d reversed; the wolftooth, contrary to the normal practice (p. 52), consists of two interlocking rows of equilateral triangles, both of them cross-hatched, and of equal size; generally they are placed immediately under the lip. The combination of these three motifs, and the order in which the linear elements are arranged, led Miss Davison to attribute a nucleus of large vases (1-4, 6, 9, 11, 13) to a Birdseed Painter. I would add another pitcher, 5 (pl, 12d), which combines several other features typical of her nucleus: the plastic snakes, extending from the handle round part ofthe rim; the triglyphs of3; and the metopes of4, including the
1
-I
On Geometric bulls see Brann, Hesperia 30 (lg61), 126-7, under M 7.
2
Davison 58, n. g.
70 .
LG II
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
XII. The Bird-and-Lozenge Painter (LG IIa)
XI. The Swan Painter (LG Ib-LG IIa)
Pitchers I. Boston 99.503. Fairbanks, pl. 21,266. 2. British School at Athens A 305, formerly Empedocles collection. PI. I3a. Height 0·39m. 3. Nauplia 4062. Unpublished. 4. Bremen E 471. Schaal, Criechische Vasen und figurliche Tonplastik in Bremen (1933), pI. I. 5. Kerameikos 821, from Gr. 93. K. v. I, pl. 116.
Pitcher, Frankfurt-am-Main, private possession. Neugebauer, Antiken in deutschem Prioatbesitz; pl. 58, no. 140; Davison, fig. II3· 2. Pitcher, Cleveland 24.259. Davison, fig. II2. 3. Pitcher, Sydney 48.08. Davison, fig. 114· 4. Pitcher, British School at Athens A 306, from Empedocles collection. PI. I2g. Height o· 37m. 5. Strainer cup, Laon 37770. CVA I, pl. 2, 5 and 8. 6. Deep krater, Munich 403=A 852. Sieveking-HackI36, fig. 49; CVA 6, pI. 264. 1.
An undistinguished group ofpitchers, probably all from the same hand. Their somewhat debased style derives from the preceding group (cr. p. 70, no. 3). The designs are still dominated by leaves and swan-like birds, which are now more tightly packed into narrower zones. The leaves have lost their outlines and their filling ornament; and their hatching is in one direction only. The birds' legs have become stiff and vertical, their bodies more compact: each zone is usually separated from its neighbour by a heavy cross-hatched lozenge. Apart from the careful metopes on the shoulder (1-3), the drawing is rather slovenly, without any of the deft fluency that distinguishes the latest Geometric work in the Classical Tradition.
The diagnostic traits of this group have been described by Miss Davison.' Most notable are the short jointed legs of the swan-like marshbirds; and the panels of leaves on the shoulder, their diagonal hatching slanting in alternate directions, with standing triangles between the leaves. On 4 (pI. 12 g) the leaf zone repeats that of I; the six birds, in metopes round the widest diameter, are indistinguishable from those on the other pitchers; some have two legs (as I, 2), others only one (as 3). Birds ofidentical build recur on the strainer cup 5· The four pitchers owe much to Athens 706 in shape and decoration. The orthodox form of wolftooth, the use of check in metopes as well as in zones, the tangential blobs with or without the extra dots - all these motifs are the common property of the less progressive painters during the transition from LG Ib to LG 1I (p. 52). Much use is made of metope zones round neck and belly, and these are still comparatively wide: yet the accent of the metopes themselves is weakened by the expansion of the ill-disciplined triglyphs (I, 4), which are now no longer held together by a dominant central motif (cf. pp. 50, 52). The unusual krater 6 poses an intriguing problem. The form is unknown at this time in Attic Geometric, but paralleled by imports of similar fabric at the Samian Heraion." The dark tone ofthe clay, too, seems foreign to Attica. Yet it is difficult to believe that the design was not painted by an Athenian craftsman, and it is tempting to think that this craftsman was the Swan Painter himself. Here, once again, are the swan-like birds; their filling ornament is slightly different, but the wisps of zigzag in the upper corners appear also on 4· Below the handles is a zone of our distinctive leaf pattern, where the usual intervening triangles are omitted owing to the more even surface ofthe vase. We do not, unfortunately, know the provenance of the krater; but we should naturally look to the lands which were still in close touch with the Attic style in L GIb. This restricts • AM 58 (1933),51, figs. 1,2.
71
us to the Cyclades, Boeotia, and Euboea. The absence ofmicain the fabric makes a Cycladic origin unlikely. Boeotia, suggested by Sieveking and Hackl, seems an improbable source of exports to Samos. A stronger case can be made for Euboea, since flaring fenestrated feet are also known from Eretria, although in coarse ware;' furthermore, Euboean commerce was vigorous at this time. Whatever its provenance may be, the krater throws some interesting light on the influence ofthe Attic style overseas; and in this case, the style may have been circulated by the potter himself.
elsewhere. The inspiration for his bird friezes may have been derived from the Lambros Painter of L GIb (cf. p. 44, no. 2). His own career lasts into L G llb, to judge from the obvious resemblance between the hydria 12 and those of the Athens 894 Workshop not only in shape but also in the arrangement ofthe decoration. Outside his own circle, his bird files passed into the repertoire ofthe Lion Painter (p. 74), and were still remembered at the very end of Geometric in the Workshop ofAthens 897. His figured style, though lessmemorable, nevertheless had its imitators (pp. 73, 77, 82).
lOp. cit. 78--9, on our 1-3.
XI, XII THE SWAN AND BIRD-AND-LOZENGE PAINTERS'
XIII. The Rattle Group (mainly LG IIa; 8-g, LG lIb)
Ij r
;•. :
Pitchers I. Paris CA 1940. W. Hahland, Festschrift Zucker, Berlin (1954), 178, pl. II, figs. 7-8. 2. Athens 17497. CVA 2, pI. 12, 1-4. Hahland, op. cit. 179; Davison, fig. 129 ('Burly { Workshop'). 3· Prague 2500. Sbornik 1959, 120, no. 12, pI. 7. 4. Paris CA 2516. Unpublished. 5· London 1916.1-8.2. Hahland, op. cit. 178, pl. 7, fig. 2. PI. I3h. 6. Boston 03.777. Fairbanks, pI. 22, 267; Hahland, op. cit. 178, pls. 9- IQ, figs. 4-6. 7. British School at Athens K 83, from the Kynosarges Cemetery. BSA 12 (1905-6), 81, figs. I, zb ; J. M. Cook, BCH 70 (1946), 97ff.; Hahland, op. cit. 178, pI. 7, fig. 1. 8. Athens 18542. Hahland, op. cit. 179, pls, 13-14, figs. 10-12. 9· Copenhagen 9367. Hahland, op. cit. 179, pls. 16-17, figs. 13-14. 1
AE 1903, 18, fig.
ID.
72 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
LG 11
10. Athens 18474; prothesis ofa man, with armed cortege. Unpublished. I I. Baltimore, Robinson collection. CVA I, pI. 13.
73
XIV. The Anavysos Painter (1-2, LG IIa; 3, LG lIb) I. Pitcher, Athens 1441I, from Anavysos. PAE 191I, 122, fig. 21. PI. 13C. 2. Pitcher, Frankfurt-am-Main VF Beta 224. CVA I, pls, 6-7. 3. Amphora, London 1927.4-11.1. B MQ2 (1927-8), 16, pI. 8; Davison 101-2, fig. 136.
Giant oinochoe 12. Private possession. Boardman, J HS 86 (1966),4-5, pI. 4. By the same hand as 5--9· The painters of this group specialized in the musical aspects of funerary ritual. S~veral studies have been devoted to the meaning of the figured scenes ;' but these vases are lmked by style as well as subject matter. All the pitchers are on the small side; the largest, 6, stands only 0·40m. high. With the exception of 3-12, none has the usual ring foot. The drawing of the ornament is hasty, and lacking in precision - yet the choice and arrangement of motifs are strangely reIniniscent of careful L G I models. After the example of the Dipylon Master, the neck and belly are regularly emphasized by broad continuous friezes, and never by metopes. Round the neck, the most popular motifs are large hatched s~rpents (2-4), and double meanders usually winding in the same direction as those ofthe Blfdse~d Painter (5-7, 10, 12). Round the belly there is either a zone of check (7-11), or leaves m triple outline (1-6). The repertoire of narrow motifs is no less circumscribed: standing cross-hatched triangles, lozenge chains, and tangential blobs. Metopes, as in the Dipylon Workshop, are confined to the shoulder-panel, where they often flank a small figured scene (5, 7-9, 12): triglyphs are restricted to a single column, containing either cross-hatched lozenges, or simple cross-hatching. The figured panels are limited to the shoulder, where they are either bounded or interrupted by mastoi; these may be ringed with tangential circles, or bordered by two cross-hatched triangles. Like the linear ornament, the figured drawing owes something to L G I precedent. The Dipylon shields, carefully drawn and always hatched, follow the outlines of the best models in the Dipylon Workshop. The seated women of I, with their tall triangular chest~, still have some affinity with the Dipylon Master's mourners; but thereafter the drawmg of humans becomes too sketchy to merit detailed analysis. There is a general tendency to elongate the waist - a tendency typical ofLG II drawing (pp. 62, 75). Within our group, two distinct hands may be recognized. Painter A (1-2) causes both arms ofhis rattle-shakers to emerge from the same side of the body, and favours a concave curve for the upper outline of the shoulders.t He declines to mark off his scenes from the area occupied by the mastoi, but allows his celebrants the luxury of a four-legged chair with high back. Painter B (5-9, 12) pays greater respect to the human anatomy by bringing the rear arm in a curve from the rear shoulder; but his waists have been reduced to a straight vertical line. His scenes are panelled off, and his figures are seated on cross-hatched stools or chairs. 8-g are probably the work of his later years; the figures are more cursive, the check is degenerating into wall-pattern, and the shape is taller and slimmer, like the pitchers of the Bird-and-Lozenge Painter. This pair should be placed in LG lIb.
XIV, XV THE ANAVYSOS AND LION PAINTERS·
An eclectic and mannered painter, with a taste for the grandiose. The elaborate framing ofthe neck-panels is demanded by the scale ofthe vases, all ofwhich stand over o· 65m. high. The impression of sumptuousness is heightened by the revival of the quadruple meander (2-3) and the rich tapestry pattern in a slightly simplified form (1-2). The decoration of the two pitchers is almost identical. Between 2 and 3 the relation is less close: but apart from the quadruple meander, another significant link is the unusual hybrid between meander and battlement. All three vases share the same two zones at the top ofthe shoulder area, and the use of a thin and elongated meander in narrow vertical columns. Many elements can be derived from the Birdseed Workshop. The characteristic dotted bird files have been crudely imitated (1,2), but in a form quite distinct from later adaptations by the Lion Painter and the Athens 897 Group. The shape of 1-2 is so close to the Hamburg pitcher (p. 67, no. 2) that all three might have been thrown by the same potter. On 3 the figured drawing is comparable to the Birdseed Painter's amphora in Erlangen:! note especially the warriors' forked feet, the outlines and reserved eyes of the horses, and the placing ofthe sparse filling ornament. Where the Anavysos Painter pursues an independent course, it is in the direction of an affected mannerism, best seen in the curious arched necks of the horses. His iconography is rigidly conservative. At this late stage, it is surprising to find chariots with two wheels and four horses, and a file ofwarriors still wearing the Dipylon shield. More progressive are the running dogs on the shoulder, borrowed from a contemporary source (p. 77): they run on two legs only, thereby betraying the late date ofthe vase, which may be placed at the beginning ofLG lIb.
XV. The Lion Painter (LG lIb) Pitcher, Athens market. AJA 44 (1940), pI. 27, 3; Davison, fig. 30; A M 78 (1963), BeiI. 29, I. 2. Pitcher, London 1913.11-13.1. Daoison, fig. 31. PI. l4a. 3. Standed bowl, Athens 901. Jd! 14 (1899),215, fig. 102. 4. Kotyle, Vlasto collection. AJA 44 (1940), pI. 28, 3; B SA 42 (1947), I43 ff., fig. 4a; A M 78 (1963), pI. 28, 7. 5. Kotyle, Manchester. BSA 42 (1947), I43ff., fig. 4b. 6. Pitcher, Dunedin E 48.193. Anderson, Greek Vases in the Otago Museum, Dunedin (1955), no. 2, pI. I. I.
The mannerisms of this painter stand out clearly, and have been frequently discussed.! 1 J. M. Cook, BCH 70, 97ff.; S. Karouzou, CVA Athens 2,10; Hahland, op, cit. 77ff.; G. Ahlberg, OpAth 7 (1967), 177ff. The group takes its name from Cook's explanation of the cult vessels shown in the funerary ritual. 2 For both details, cf. the kantharos Copenhagen 727, which could be an earlier work by this hand: see Davison 83ff., fig. 128.
P. 67, no. 6. Cf. Kiibler, K. v. I, 15!. Kahane, AJA 44, 482,J. M. Cook, BSA 42, 143ff., Davison 41,143. I and 4 were brought to light by Kahane, who assigned them to the same hand as 2. Cook added 5 to the workshop, and another pitcher in London, 1905.10-28.1 (pI. 14b). The latter had
1
2
74 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
He was named after his speciality, the massive two-legged lions with exceptionally narrow waists. The stiff, perfunctory horses of 1-2 show that he was less interested in other animals. His dotted bird files are based on the Birdseed Painter's, but their necks are absurdly elongated. A similar affectation can be seen in his thin, fragile meanders, which he shares with the Anavysos Painter. In considering his place in the development of the Attic style, two features in his linear decoration are of great importance: his use of the double axe, and his treatment of the metope system. The double axe passed out of the Attic repertoire after the end ofMiddle Geometric, but survived in Corinthian LG as a metopal motif (p. 100). It is particularly common on the kotylai that come at the end of the Corinthian LG series (pk 191). Kotylai of this stage were reaching Attica in the Lion Painter's time (p. 109), and it may have been due to his influence that Attic imitations first became fashionable. He is thus one of the first Attic craftsmen to turn towards Corinth for inspiration. On his own kotyle, 4, he ousted the Corinthian birds to make room for his lion; yet he not only retained the double axes in their original context, but applied them in profusion to his other shapes. On the vases where they accompany lions (2, 4) it may not be too fanciful to see the influence of the axes in the symmetrically balanced masses of the great beasts; on I, before the arrival of the axes, the lions are much looser in structure. All three pitchers are articulated by a metope frieze round the neck, shoulder, and belly. In this series we may trace a gradual relaxation of the system, up to the verge of collapse. Panels ofzigzag, at first used as the central member ofa triglyph (I), eventually grow to the size ofthe metopes (2,6); at the same time, the vertical lines are increased beyond the usual number of three. On 6, a late work in the manner of the Lion Painter, these verticals take up as much room as the metopes, while 'triglyph' motifs have entirely dropped out. Yet the drawing never falls below a certain standard ofmannered neatness. It was left to the Painter ofAthens 897 to reduce the metope system to a slovenly mass of toneless decoration.
B. WORKSHOPS OUTSIDE THE CLASSICAL TRADITION (2) THE OINOCHOE WORKSHOPS XVI. The Concentric Circle Group (1-2, LG Ib; rest LG Ha) I. Kerameikos 1327, from Gr. 48. K. v. I, pl. 76. 2. Ex Lambros collection. AM 43 (1918), pl. 5, 2; Pfuhl, MuZlu, pl. 2, 6. 3. Frankfurt-am-Main VF Beta 222. Schaal, Griechische Vasen, Frankfurt-am-Main (1923), pl. rb-c; CVA I, pl. 5, 2-3. 4. Brussels A 1676. CVA 3, pl. 115, I la-b. 5. Athens 14424, from Anavysos. PAE 19II, II7, fig. 5· 6. Athens 193. JdI I4 (1899), 212, fig. 90. Collignon-Couve, pl. 13,242. 7. Athens 18154, from Empedocles collection. Unpublished.
already been coupled with 2 by Kunze (GGA 1937,290) as examples ofhis 'dichter stil'. Prof. Cook informs me that he now wishes to withdraw this last attribution. The vase belongs elsewhere (p. 77, no. 11).
XVI THE CONCENTRIC CIRCLE GROUP'
LG II
75
8. Athens, marked G 15, from Marathon. PAE 1934, fig. 9. 9. London 77.12-7.12. PI. 13 d . 10. London, MsC 2531. BSA 35 (1934-5), 104, fig. IIa. I I. London market. Sotheby 16. I I. 1959, no. 174. 12. Boston 25-43. Fairbanks, pl. 23, 269c. 13. London 1920.10-14.4, from Vari. Unpublished. 14. Paris CA 2999. Unpublished. 15. Berlin 3374. AM 43 (1918), 144, fig. 32; Neugebauer, 7ff.; Johansen, Historiskfilosofiske Meddelelser 39, no. 3 (196 I), pl. 8. NOTE
See Schweitzer, AM 43, 143ff.; Young, Hesperia, Supp. II, 208; Marwitz,]dI 74 (1959), 86-8,93-4. I have followed Marwitz's order with minor alterations. Oinochoai of this type, but with only linear decoration on the body, have been omitted here.
The contours of these oinochoai are consistently harder than those from the Dipylon Workshop. A cylindrical neck turns out suddenly into a trefoil lip: the shoulder falls away steeply to a low centre of gravity: below, the profile is almost straight. There is no attempt to turn a foot; the bottom is either flat, or slightly concave. Only an external model could have inspired a system of decoration so foreign to Attic tradition. The obvious source is Cyprus, where a similar use of concentric circles had been current since the late Bronze Age. In Attica, the circles first appear in L GIb. An early forerunner from the Lambros collection! follows a Cypriot type in shape as well as decoration ;" at the same time, a late oinochoe from the Dipylon Workshop (p. 32, no. 41) adapts the circle system to the traditional dark ground, retaining the usual deer on the neck-panel. Even the birds on the shoulder of 1-2 are not entirely at variance with Cypriot custom;" these, too, are foreshadowed on another late Dipylon oinochoe (p. 32, no. 4Ia). After I, the scheme is modified to suit Attic taste. The circles are cleared away from the front of the body, leaving room for a regular figured field between the circles at the side. After 2, these circles are no longer drawn with the compass, and are more widely spaced. The field gradually grows in size. At first it is restricted to the shoulder by lines across the belly, and the space below is filled with wavy lines (horizontal or vertical) or common linear motifs. Later, the circles round the flanks are thrust back, leaving more room for the figures. Below, the linear ornament is eventually swept away, and we are left with either a single free field (13-14) or two figured zones (15). As the size of the field increases, single animals (2-7) are replaced by antithetical compositions (8-15). Except on 3, the neck is always glazed. The figured drawing is the work of a fluent hand, who could have painted the whole series 3-15. His men (12, 15) have the elongated waists typical of the time (cf. p. 62, 72). The curved arms, the sharp acute angles at the elbows, the prominent fingers, the ample thighs - all these traits place them outside the Classical Tradition; their nearest relations are on the LG Ib Lambros oinochoe, Paris CA 2509.4 The horses have that elegant double 1
A M 43, pI. 6, 2.
2
Cf. SCE IV.2, pl. 34, 16b.
3
Cf. SCE IV.2, pl. 33, 6b.
4
AM 43, pI. 3; Johansen, op,cit, 24ff.
76 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
LG 11
curve on their shoulders that we have come to associate with the Dipylon Workshop; but in other respects they lack the Classical finesse. Their heads are summarily drawn, sometimes passing into the neck without articulation (13) : legs, similarly, broaden into heavy hooves, without any clear break. The fetlock is usually rendered by a simple diagonal stroke. Birds, after 1-2, are always in silhouette; filling ornament progresses from rows of dots and zigzags (3-7) to lighter motifs - dot rosettes, stars, and swastikas.
77
horses on the necks of4-5. 1 The men have little in common, except for broad shoulders and rounded thighs, both traits being foreign to the ClassicalTradition. We need not be unduly surprised at this lack of consistency; a comparison of the embattled warriors on the front and back of 5 will show how little attempt there was to standardize the human figures, even on the same vase. The horse scenes on the necks of 4 and 5 are by the same hand; the resemblance extends as far as the hunt scenes on the shoulder, the file ofsoldiers on 4, and the combat between the huge warriors on the back of 5. Yet for the ship scene on the front ofthe same vase, our painter has either thrown care to the winds, or called in a colleague.t The only obvious affinities of the Hunt oinochoai (apart from I) are with the Birdseed Painter and his circle. Dotted bird files, this time with jointed legs, appear on 3; the warriors of4 have forked feet. A slightly earlier amphora, Ny Carlsberg 2680,3 combines the mourners ofthe Birdseed Painter (as pI. 12d) with the hounds ofour 3; similar animals found their way on to the amphora of the Anavysos Painter, perhaps another member of the same circle (p. 73, no. 3).
XVII. The Hunt Group (I, LG Ib; 2-5, LG IIa) Oinochoai I. Athens 17457. CVA 2, pI. 14, 1,3· 2. Boston 25.42. Fairbanks, pIs. 23, 269b; Hampe, Gleichnisse, fig. 6; Davison, fig. 132. Arias-Hirmer-Shefton, pI. 6. 3. Munich 8696. AA 1954, 263-4; Hampe, Gleichnisse, figs. 7-11, 13a; Webster, From Mycenae to Homer, pI. 28a-b; Davison, fig. 84. 4. Cambridge G R-I-1935. PI. 13e-f. 5. Copenhagen 1628. CVA 2, pI. 73, 4a-b; Webster, op. cit. pI. 20; Dunbabin, The Greeks and their Eastern Neighbours, pI. 3, 2; Davison, fig. 133. In comparison with the preceding group, the profiles here are more rounded. The centre of gravity is higher, and the profile of the lower body curves round to a narrower base, where there is still some attempt at a ring foot. 5, with its smooth transition between neck and body, is the most advanced in shape as well as in decoration. All five oinochoai are rich in figured drawing, sometimes to the exclusion of linear zones (I, 4-5). They present an interesting series of hunt scenes, placed at first round the belly (1-2), and subsequently removed to the shoulder. These pictures offer an instructive study in devolution. On I, the three hounds and fox have a laboured look, as though they were being drawn for the first time. In his anxiety to make them intelligible, the painter has caricatured their salient features: every limb is conscientiously articulated; pursuers and pursued are distinct in heads, bodies, and tails. Such distinctions have already begun to break down in the hunt of 2, where hounds and fox are of dangerously similar build: the hounds have lost their heavy trunks and ravening jaws, so that the fox can only be recognized by his long furry tail. On 3 the hare enters the scene, cornered between four hounds: long ears, short tail, lighter body, and the lack of claws set him apart from his pursuers. By the time of the pair 4-5 we can no longer identify the animals by their bodies, which have become mere matchsticks. In the six long-tailed creatures of4 (pI. 13 e-f), dog and fox have become hopelessly confused: on 5, the hare by the handle can only be distinguished from his pursuers by ears and tail. The whole series shows how a new theme, at first realistically portrayed, could quickly degenerate into a mere decorative pattern. The logical sequel to these hunts is the mechanical repetition of running dogs in the subsidiary zones ofLG lIb amphorae, both in and outside the Classical Tradition. In the other figured drawing there is less unity. The meagre stallions of I belong to the periphery of the Hirschfeld Workshop, and have nothing to do with the more substantial
XVII THE HUNT GROUP •
B. WORKSHOPS OUTSIDE THE CLASSICAL TRADITION (3) THE LATE AMPHORA PAINTERS
XVIII. The Workshop of Athens 897 (LG lIb) (i) By the Empedocles Painter I. Amphora, Athens 18138, from the Empedocles collection. Davison, pI. 44. 2. Amphora, Athens BSA 35 (1934-5), pI. 26, I; ]HS 70 (1950), pI. 5a. 3. Amphora, Berlin (East) 31005. Neugebauer 7; S. Benton, BSA 35 (1934-5), 106, no. 14. PI. 14C. 4. Amphora, Athens, from Vari, Gr. 2. Unpublished. 5. Pitcher, Prague 46/56. Bouzek, Sbornik 1959, 121, no. 13, pI. 3.
(ii) By the Painter of Athens 897
6. Amphora, Athens 897.JdI 15 (1900),53, fig. 114; BSA 42 (1947), pI. 20b; Davison, fig. 40; AM 78 (1963), BeiI. 29, 2. 7· Amphora, Paris CA 1789. MonPiot 49 (1957),37, fig. 20; AM 78 (1963), BeiI. 29,3· 8. Amphora, Basle Market. Mun; Med 18 (29. I I. 1958), no. 77; Davison, fig. 42. 9. Amphora, Athens 17519. PI. 14e. 10. Oinochoe, Athens 18444, from the Empedocles collection. BSA 35 (1934-5), pI. 25, 3-4; Davison, fig. 45. I I. Pitcher, London 19°5.10-28. I. Dohan, Italic Tomb Groups, pI. 28, I; Davison, fig. 32. PI. 14b. They are best paralleled on a small pitcher, London 1912.7-18.1, AM 43, pI. 4, 5. Miss Davison, op.cit. 107, compares this with the MG 11 sea-battle on the skyphos Eleusis 741. Both scenes share the same theme and show a similar lack ofstyle, but there the resemblance ends. 3 F. Poulsen, Vases grecs recemment acquis par la GlyptotMque de Ny Carlsberg, Copenhagen (1922), figs. 2, 3. 1
2
78 . ATTIC GEOMETRIC
(iii) Workshop Amphorae 12. Paris MNB 2102. Unpublished. 13. Paris market. Hotel Drouot, Catalogue (21.5.1926), pl. I, I. 14. Warsaw 198558, fr. CVA I, pI. 2, I. 15· Prague 1654. Bouzek, Sbornik 1959, 113, no. 4, pI. 7. 16. Reading 50'x.1. AR 1963, 56, no. 2. 17· Athens 18135, from the Empedocles collection. BSA 35 (1934-5), pI. 25, 2. 18. Athens 17514. Unpublished. Pitchers (20-3 perhaps by the Painter ofAthens 897) 19· Athens 15298, from Spata, Gr. 4. AD 6 (1920-1), Parartema, 137, fig. I I. 20. Ny Carlsberg 2674. F. Poulsen, Vases grecs recemment acquis par la Clyptotheque de Ny Carlsberg, Copenhagen (1922), fig. I. 2I. Paris A 5 I I. Pottier, pI. 20. 22. Munich 8447a. CVA 3, pls, 115,3; 116, 1-2. 23. Stuttgart KAS 9. CV A I, pls, 6, 2; 7,1-2. 24. Berlin (East) F. 48. Unpublished. 25. Athens 18439, from the Empedocles collection. Unpublished. 26. London 1912.5-22.1. Davison, fig. 29. 27. Munich 8448. CVA 3, pI. 116, 3-4; Matz; pI. I I. Hydria 28. Budapest 50. I 79. Szilagyi-Castiglione, Criech.-rom. Sammlung Fiihrer, Budapest (I957), pI. 3, I; Bouzek, Bulletin du Musee hongrois des Beaux-Arts 2I (1962), I4ff., figs. 5-6. Ovoid kraters 29. London, private possession. Beazley, The Development of Attic Black-figure, London (1951),5-6, pI. 2. 30. Stanford University (California) T 05, from Cesnola collection. Unpublished. Spouted kraters 31. Bonn 15, fr. Schweitzer, Herakles, fig. 9; BSA 42 (1947), pI. 20a. 32. Aegina, fr. Kraiker, Aigina, no. 53, pI. 3. 33. Syracuse 49 637, fr. Dog's rump and tail. Perhaps NSc 1925, 320, bottom, 'stamnos con zampa e coda di bove', from Sperduta, Ortygia. Unpublished. 34. Kerameikos 1329, fr. from Gr. 53. K. v. I, pI. 24. 35· Agora P 22440, fr. from Well N I I: 5. Hesperia 30 (1961), 126, M 7, pI. 17; Agora VIII, no. 339. 6. 3 Agora P 22715, from Well 0 12: I. Hesperia 30 (1961),332, F 19, pls, 66, 76. One-piece oinochoai 37. Agora P 20730, from Well R 10:5. Damson, fig. 43; Agora VIII, no. 83. 38. Agora P 23655, from Well Q8:9' Hesperia 30 (1961), 129-30, N 12, pI. 15; Agora VIII, no. 84-359.
LG 11
XVIII THE WORKSHOP OF ATHENS 897 . 79
39. Agora P 22430, from Well N I 1:5. Hesperia 30 (1961), 126, M 4, pI. 15; Agora VIII, no. 361. o 40. Canale (Calabria). Akerstrom, CSI 41, fig. 12,2. Smaller vases 41. Tankard, Leiden 1922/4. Brants, pI. 9, 51. 42. Tankard, Prague 1656. Bouzek, Sbornik 1959, 122, no. 15, pI. 5. 43. Kotyle, Brussels A 2248. CVA 3, pI. II2, I; AM 78 (1963), BeiI. 29,4. 44. Shallow skyphos, Brussels A 2I 13. C VA 3, pI. I 12, 2a-b. NOTE See Kunze, GGA 1937, 290; J. M. Cook, BSA 42 (1947), 144ff.; ViIlard, MonPiot 49 (1957), 35ff.; Damson, 45ff., 146ff. Among the larger works of his 'dichter stil' (including our 20-1, 23-4, 26) Kunze first distinguished the hand of Athens 897. To Kunze's original pair, ~,J. M. Cook added 31 ; Miss Davison, 8 and 37. To the Workshop, J. M. Cook attaches 2 and 10; Miss Davison, 38, and other vases not listed here. (On the amphora Oxford 1895.76, see below; on Mannheim 170, see p. 59, no. 18.) Further ascriptions to the workshop: R. M. Cook (JHS 65 (1945), 120),40; Lullies (CVA Munich 3, 16),20-2; Bouzek (loc. cit.), 5; Miss Brann, the Agora pieces 36,39. To a second painter, the 'Empedocles Hand', Miss Davison assigned I and 2; the close relation between 2 and 3 was observed by Miss Benton, loco cit.
SHAPES In L G I I a the fashion for pitchers was at its height, and there was little demand for amphorae. Later, in this final stage of Attic Geometric, the amphora once again became the most popular funerary vase; pitchers now took second place, and were extinct by the transition to Protoattic. At first, the potters ofthis workshop modelled the bodies oftheir amphorae in the likenessoftheir pitchers ;1 this tendency is especially notable in the plump and ungainly group 15-17. Later they reduced the girth of the body (3, 12-14) and, perhaps under the influence ofthe Classical workshops, applied the funerary plastic snake to the rim (2-4) ; but the neck was never lengthened, as happened in the workshop of Athens 894, in order to make room for funerary scenes. The other shapes lack individuality, and follow the usual forms current in LG lIb. The one-piece oinochoai are strikingly like those from the Athens 894 Workshop (pI. 11 e); both groups must have been potted under the same roof, although their manner of painting is irreconcilably different." FIGURED DRAWING Human figures appear only on 26, which lies on the periphery of the group. This prothesis has a laboured and old-fashioned look, perhaps the work ofan elderly hand who had known the Hirschfeld Painter." More typical of our workshop are the horses and dogs, which allow us to distinguish the Cook, BSA 42,151; cf. our I, 5. 2 See]HS84, 217-18; cf. J. M. Cook, Gnomon 1962,821. Miss Davison's ascription of this pitcher to the Hirschfeld Workshop, op.cit. 39, is based more on iconography than on style. The mourners lack the Hirschfeld Painter's symmetrical thighs; the curved arms and the filling ornament owe more to the Birdseed Painter (cf. pI. I2d). These ladies are the last to go to a funeral unattired. 1 3
J. M.
80 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
two leading hands. The Empedocles Painter, the senior partner,' favours a lean horse, and a lithe dog (pI. 14c)~ His horse is a creature of the circus, whose two halves have almost parted company. More coherent, but otherwise very similar, are the horses on a LG IIa amphora in Oxford," decorated with careful metopes in the manner ofthe Hooked Swastika Workshop. This could perhaps be an early work of the Empedocles Painter; at any rate, it points to the circle in which he learned his craft. His supple dogs recall those on the Munich oinochoe of the Hunt Group (p. 76, no. 3) : as an individual mannerism, he has imparted a double curve to the dorsal outline, concave at the shoulder, and convex behind. The Painter ofAthens 897 introduced a very different type of dog; heavy, uncouth, and on its first appearance (6) geometricized in the manner of the Lion Painter's lions, with chest and rump rendered as balanced masses." The outline of the back is at first almost straight; later (7) it assumes a double curve, taking the opposite direction to the outline of his colleague's dogs - convex at the shoulder, and concave at the back. In its developed form, this heavy breed was sometimes borrowed by contemporary painters in the Classical Tradition (pp. 58-g, nos. 6-7, 12-13, 18,23, etc.), who drew the animals more cursorily, and lightened the filling ornament by eliminating the bulky triangles. On the closely related pair 9-10 the dogs are accompanied by strange, brooding horses, whose heavy build and uncouth style (pI. 14e) set them apart from the neat and highly mannered creatures of the Empedocles Painter. On the pitcher, 11 (pI. 14b), we see them grazing, supported by almost identical filling ornament: here the dorsal outline exactly repeats that of the dogs in their most developed form (cf 31). LINEAR DECORATION
The Empedocles Painter confines his animal drawing to the neck and shoulder. He always fills the belly zone with a neat meander, whose outlines coincide with the framing lines above and below. His younger colleague, the hand ofAthens 897, prefers a band ofmetopes for the belly, and a clumsy complex meander on the neck. The shoulder is often occupied by dotted files of birds in the tradition of the Birdseed Painter, but their bodies have now been reduced to mere blobs. An alternative here is a hatched zigzag with triangles between the arms - perhaps an attempt to simulate the plastic snakes of the late amphorae in the Classical Tradition. The group of pitchers 20-3, perhaps by this same painter, shows the linear decoration ofthis workshop at its most characteristic: they are among the latest vases where purely geometric ornament is deployed on a large scale. The shallow metope zones stand at the end of a long tradition which had by now lost all its vitality, surviving only through the repetition ofoutworn formulae. The commonest motifs are now the nine-square checkerboard, debased lozenge stars, and the 'sunburst' enclosing a ring of false spirals (11). Swastikas and quatrefoils have virtually passed out of the repertoire. Metopes are now embedded among a mass of vertical lines, which rob them of their original force. Nearly all the decoration is mass-produced with the multiple brush, whose use is blatantly obvious in the subsidiary zones: the general effect is toneless and slovenly, and profoundly 1 Miss Davison, op. cit. 46, takes the opposite view; but I find the linear ornament of Athens 897 considerably more debased than anything by the Empedoc1es Painter. See]HS 83,212. • 1895.76: Damson 47, fig. 47. 3 ] . M. Cook, BSA 42, 146.
LG 11
XVIII THE WORKSHOP OF ATHENS
897 . 81
depressing to the eye. With the disappearance of the pitcher at the end of L G I I, linear metope zones are found no more. The painters of this workshop pursued their craft throughout L G I I b, but took little notice of their contemporaries. Their only significant link with the Classical Tradition is through the running dogs, ofthe type invented by the Painter ofAthens 897. His late pitcher, 11, where the hatched lozenges on the neck have acquired spiral hooks, cannot be far from the transition to Protoattic. On the frontier stands our latest vase, 29: here the same ornament has sprouted into a Tree of Life, and there has been some attempt to remodel the cumbersome horses of I I under the influence of the Orientalizing movement. After this piece, the style of the workshop dies out, without leaving any mark on the next generation of painters.
XIX. The Mannheitn Painter (Transitional, LG IIa-b) Amphora, Mannheim 66. CVA I, fig. 2, pls. 2,1-2; 4. 2. Amphora, London market. Sotheby (10.12.1931), pl. I. 3. Amphora, private possession. H. Bloesch, Kleinkunst in Winterthur (1964), pl. 1,3. 4. Krater fr., Paris CA 3442. CVA Louvre 11, pls. 16, 17. I.
All four pieces are the work ofa late mannerist. His chariot scenes have a mixed ancestry. The horses' heads, with flaring muzzle and reserved eye, are derived from the Hirschfeld Painter: their bodies are similar to those of Paris CA 1823 from the Hooked Swastika Workshop (pI. 12 b), but the protruding rump comes from the more cursive animals ofthe Athens 894 Workshop. The vases are dated by the latest feature in the linear decoration, on the shoulder of 2: here the zigzag panels have grown to the same size as the neighbouring check; compare the Spata pitcher of the Soldier-bird Workshop (p. 64, no. I I).
XX. The Benaki Painter (LG lIb) I. Amphora, New York 10.210.7. BullMetMus 1911,33, fig. 6; Davison, fig. 51. 2. Amphora, Athens, Benaki Museum 7675. BSA 42 (1947), pl. 19; Davison, fig. 50. 3· Oinochoe, Agora P 24847, from Well N I 1:4. Davison, fig. 52; Hesperia 30 (1961), 142, Q4, pl. 14; Agora VIII, no. 324. 4. Small oinochoe, Copenhagen ABC 1009. CVA' 2, pl. 73,2.
NOTE To J. M. Cook we owe the association of Miss Davison.
I, 2,
and 4; see BSA 42, 150; Gnomon 1962,821. 3 was added by
Another late mannerist, with a stiffer style than that of the preceding. The essential ingredients ofhis figured drawing are 'the nutcracker features of man and beast, round central eye' (Cook), and the dotted helmet plumes. The nutcracker jaws of the horses may be a linear stylization of the Hirschfeld Painter's muzzles; the wolftooth on I and 2 is inherited
LG 11
82 . ATTIC GEOMETRIC
Eleusis, pi thos burial. E A I 898,94, fig. 22,pI. 2, 13,and eleven other vases; Eleusis 896-g08. Liossia, 'grave group' in Copenhagen. C VA 2, pI. 70,2-8, 10. Agora, Gr. D 16:3. Hesperia 19 (1950), 330, pI. 104, I. The lakaina, bottom right (=Agora VIII, no. 319) is LG lb. Agora, Grs. 13, 14, 15. Hesperia, Supp. 11 (1940), 7Iff., figs. 43-8. (See p. 55, no. 9; p. 66, no. 7.) Piraeus (Palaia Kokkinia), Gr. n. PAE 1951, 117ff., figs. 32-4. Marathon, Gr. 8. PAE 1939, 35, figs. 6-7. Vari, Gr. 8. Includes the pitcher, BCH82 (1958),673, fig. 8. Eleusis, gr. EA 1898, 99, fig. 23, pI. 3, 6; Eleusis 708 (see p. 64, no. 4) and 80g-10. Kallithea, Grs. 3, 5. ADChr 19 (1964),65-7, pI. 62b,d. Dipylon, Gr. 13, Athens 770-5. See Kahane, AJA 44 (1940),482 for full bibliography. Best photographs: Amphora 770, HampeFGS, pI. 32; pitcher 771, OlForsch Ill, pI. 94 (seep. 66, no. 2); bowls 772, 775, Hampe,FGS, pI. 33; 773, BCH 19 (1895),277, fig. 6; 774, AJA 44, pI. 26, 3· Kerameikos, Grs. 83,91,93. Thorikos, Deposit 77. Thorikos III (Brussels, 1965),44-5, figs. 51-2.
from the Birdseed Painter. But this craftsman also learned much from the Classical Tradition, especially from his contemporary the Philadelphia Painter. Hence come the full complement of plastic snakes, the neat Corinthian herons that walk beside the horses, and the double-tiered lozenge net (I, foot); also, the hatched skirts ofthe ladies beside the bier, and the use ofwhite paint for blazonry. Most significant ofall is the repetition ofthe process by which the round shield is accommodated to the human form, at first reaching down to the knees (I), and subsequently revealing the thighs (2). Cf pp. 58, 61.
XXI. The Painter of Paris CA 3283 Oinochoe, Paris CA 3283. Devambez, Bulletins des Musees de France (1948), fig. I. PI.14 d. 2. Amphora, London market. Sotheby (25.7.1935), pI. 3; AM 53 (1928),33, no. 18. I.
On both vases there is a full prothesis round the body, and the procession of female mourners continues on the neck. A man lies on a bier with four bulbous legs. He is mourned by his womenfolk, who kneel under the bier in an uncomfortable posture. More mourners approach from either side, men from the left, and women from the right. The men at the head of the procession (two on I, one on 2) are unarmed, and gesticulate with open hands: warriors follow, holding the left hand to the head. The women are distinguished by a physical attribute as well as by their long trailing skirts - an extreme instance ofconceptual vision. Their leader kneels on a three-legged stool, and lays a branch upon the corpse. Her followers raise both hands to their heads: their arms are bent, forming a pentagon with the shoulder. There is much here to remind us of the Birdseed Painter's figured style; the gestures of the unarmed men, the trailing robes ofthe women, the forked feet ofall the standing figures, and the skinny grazing horses on the shoulder of 2 - all these features are forestalled in his work (cf. p. 67, nos. 1,5,7-8,12; pl.12d,f). It is not inconceivable that our pair is the work of the Birdseed Painter in his declining years.
Transitional, LG IIa-b Dipylon, Gr. 7, Athens 782-4. Pitcher 782,JdI 14 (1899), 207, figs. 75, 75a (see p. 66,no. 4); bowl 783,unpublished; skyphos 784, A M 18 (1893), 113, fig. 10 (see p. 60, no. 48). Eleusis, gr. EA 1898, 83ff., pI. 2, 5, and seven other vases, including a kantharos like ibid. fig. 20; Eleusis 710-17. Eleusis, pithos burial. EA 1898, 119, pls. 2,3, and 12, and eight other vases; Eleusis 101422. Cf VS 41, where numbers given are 938 and 833-42. Imported E P C kotyle, pI. 21 d. Kerameikos, Grs. 33 (see p. 66, no. 8), 59,85. Spata, Gr. 4. AD 6 (1920-1), Parartema 138, figs. 11-12; Athens 15290-8. Spata, Gr. I. Loc. cit. 135, figs. 1-3 (see p. 64, no. I I) ; Athens 15267-7 I. Spata, Gr. 2. Loc. cit. 135-6, figs. 4-5; Athens 15272-g. Agora, Well N I 1:5. Hesperia 30 (1961), 125ff., pI. 13ff., 'Well M'. (See p. 55, no. 6.) Kerameikos, Grs. 49, 97. Agora, Gr. 7. Hesperia, Supp. 11, 3Iff., figs. 19-20. Kerameikos, Gr. 58. Thorikos, Gr. 50. Thorikos III (Brussels, 1965),43-4, fig. 50.
C. GENERAL REMARKS ON SHAPE AND DECORATION, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE PLAINER VASES SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Late Geometric lIb Vari, Gr. 2. Amphora by the Empedocles Painter (p. 77, no. 4), and Corinthian LG kotyle, as pI. Igk. Athens, 'grave group', Viasto collection. AJA 44 (1940), pls. 27, I; 28, I (see p. 64, no. IQ); AM 78 (1963), BeiI. 28, 2 and 4. Athens, 'grave group', Vlasto collection. B SA 42 (1947), 153, figs. 4a (=AJA 44, pI. 28, 3; see p. 73, no. 4), 6a, and 7a. Kerameikos, Gr. 16. (See p. 66, no. 10.)
Late Geometric I I a Kerameikos, Gr. 90. PI. Isa-d. (See p. 51, no. 6.) Agora, Gr E.19: I. Hesperia 29 (1960), 408ff., pI. 90. PI. ISf-g. Kerameikos, Gr. 291. AA 1964,467, fig. 53. (See p. 64, no. I.) Kerameikos, Gr. 51a, inhumation. PI. Ise. Kerameikos, Gr. 79. (See p. 51, no. 9.) Agora, Well or Pit M I I: I. Hesperia 30 (1961), 131ff., pI. 13ff., 'Well or Pit 0'. Includes two Protoattic scraps, 0 I and 02.)
1
84 .
LG II
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
Kerameikos, 'Opferrinne' I. (See p. 59, no. 34·) . Eleusis pithos burial. EA 1898, 93, pls, 2, 12; 4, 7, and seven other vases; Eleusis 953":5, 95g-60, 964-7. Cr. VS 40, where numbers given are 823- 3 2. Eleusis, pithos burial. EA 1898,92, figs. 19-21, and two other vases. Cf. S 41. Eleusis, Gr. 46. AE 1912, 34, fig. 15, I and 3, and four other vases; Eleusis 858-63. Kerameikos, Grs. 5, 6, 10,52-6,57 with 'Opferrinne 2', 85, 94, 95· Gr. 56: PI. I5 m - P ' Agora, Gr. 4. Hesperia, Supp. II, 24ff., figs. 11-13· Agora, Gr. 6. Hesperia, Supp. II, 29ff., figs. 16-18. PI. 151. . Agora, Gr. B 21: 10. Hesperia 20 (1951), 85ff., pI. 37a, 'Gr. 2'. Agora VIII, 125. Agora, Gr. 11. Hesperia, Supp. II, 45ff., figs. 30-6· (See p. 59, no. 29·) Aigaleos, gr. AJA 64 (1960), 71. pI. 15, 1-4· Kallithea, Gr. 2. ADChr 19 (1964),65, pI. 62a. Thorikos, Gr. 6. AntClass 34 (1965), 16- 17, pI. 5· Pithecusae, Gr. 129. Unpublished. Attic one-piece oinochoe, plain banded; Early Protocorinthian globular aryballos. Vari, Gr. 3. Dipylon, Gr. 9. AM 18 (1893), II7-18, pI. 8, 2. 'Grave group' in Frankfurt-am-Main. CVA I, 13ff., pls, 9, 1-2,7; 10,4· Agora, Gr. 12. Hesperia, Supp. II, 55ff., figs. 37-42. (See p. 58, no. 11.) Kerameikos, Gr. 63. 'Grave group' in Munich, pitchers 8447a, 8448. CVA 3, pI. I 15, 3-4; pI. I 17, 15· (See p. 78, nos. 22, 27.)
Kalyvia, 'grave group', VIasto collection. Hydria, BSA 35 (1934-5), pls, 45, 46a; AM 78 (1963), BeiI. 34, 2,5; pI. 19· J. M. Cook (BSA 35, 203) mentions the other contents: a kotyle, and two standed bowls. One bowl illustrated, B SA 42 (1947), 142, fig. 3. Spata, 'grave group', Vlasto collection. Hydria, BSA 35 (1934-5), pI. 46b-c; AM 78, BeiI. 34, 3, 6. Kotyle: BSA 42 (1947), 147, fig. 6b; AM78, BeiI. 35, I. SeeJ. M. Cook, BSA 35, 203; BSA 47, 154, n. 1. Eleusis, pithos burial. EA 1898,91, pI. 3, 2; kotyle like pI. 2, 12; eight other vases, including VS, pI. 10,4; Eleusis 950-2, 956-8, 961-3. Cf. VS 40, where numbers given are 935, 675-83. Eleusis, Gr. 62. AE 1912, 37; VS, pI. 4,7; BSA 35,183, fig. 6, and seven other vases; Eleusis 878-85. Eleusis, Gr. 6. AE 1912, 34, 36, fig. 14; Eleusis 823, 855. 'Grave group' in Frankfurt-am-Main. CVA I, I5ff., pI. 10, 5-6; pI. 13, 1. 'Closed find' in Mainz. C VA I, 18ff., pls. 8-26; Hampe, Einfruhattischer Grabfund. Vari, pyre for Grs. 2-3. AD 18 (1963), 120ff., pls. 49-53.
rnu,
V.
NOTE In the following pages, workshops are indicated by Roman numerals as given in the text, and in the Time Chart on p. 331. Arabic numerals refer to individual vases in the Workshop lists. Thus VII.4 refers to the amphora Athens 894 (p. 58).
SHAPES
Transitional, L G lIb - Early Protoattic Kerameikos, Gr. 51b, child burial and pyre. (See p. 59, no. 23,) Dipylon, Gr. 8. A M 18 (1893), II5-17, pI. 8, 1. Agora, Well R 9:2. Hesperia 30 (1961), 136ff., pI. 13ff., 'Well P'. (See p. 59, no. 35·) Agora, Well N II :4. Hesperia 30 (1961), 14Iff., pI. I3 ff., 'Well Q', Agora, Well Q8:9' Hesperia 30 (1961), I28ff., pI. I3 ff., 'Well N'. (See p. 59, no. 36. PI. r r e.) ) Agora, Well N II :6. Hesperia 30 (1961), 143ff., pI. 13ff., 'Well R'. (See p. 59, no. 37· Subgeometric, contemporary with Early Protoattic Agora, Gr. 5. Hesperia, Supp. II, 26ff., figs. 14-15. Kerameikos, Grs. 64, 66, 67, 99, 100. Phaleron, Grs. 47, 83, 19,56,27, 70, 10,29, 11. AJA 46 (1942), 25ff. Agora, Grs. Q I 7: 6, N I I : I. Hesperia 29 (1960), 4 I 3- I 4, pI. 9 2. Kallithea, Grs. '1',4-6. BCH87 (1963), 404ff., figs. 1-17· Early Protoattic, with Attic Orientaiizing vases Kerameikos, Gr. 98. '1 Agora, Well J 15: 1. Hesperia 30 (1961), 32Iff., pI. 65ff., 'Well E'; AM 78 (1963), Bel. 33,4-5,
We have seen that the larger shapes vary a good deal from workshop to workshop; yet the smaller and plainer forms follow a more consistent development. A simple type of amphora, with low neck and ample bodyproportions (pI. 15a), can be traced back to L Gib, as far as the Hirschfeld Workshop (11.9, pI. Bd). Throughout L G 11 its neck, body, and foot become progressively narrower. At the end ofthe series (Agora Gr. 6) the foot is almost vertical, and the appearance of a rolled lip prepares the way for the commercial 'SOS' amphora of Protoattic times;' only the plastic ring below the lip is missing." Pitchers and giant oinochoai are always elaborately decorated; the profile varies according to the whim ofthe individual potter or workshop. The standard oinochoe is more regular in shape; it usually has a rolled handle, and a straight neck offset from a globular body, with flat base (XVI, XVII). Sometimes the junction between neck and body is less clearly defined (XVII.5), especially when the oinochoe is reduced to a miniature scale." When the neck begins to slope inwards.' we have crossed the frontier into Protoattic. After the experiments of L G I, a true one-piece oinochoe was evolved by the Workshop ofAthens 897;5 the profile of the shoulder is almost straight, falling away to a low centre of gravity (pl, I le). This proved to be a useful shape for drawing water, and is found mainly in domestic contexts. Small slow-pouring vases come back into circulation, usually on a miniature scale. The squat lekythos-oinochoe and even the Young, AJA 46, 50-I; Brann, Hesperia 30, 338, on F 40; AgoraVIII, 32ff. • E.g. K. v. I, pI. 38, I2g8. • E.g. Davison, fig. 56. • The 'olpe' of AgoraVIII, 40. • Agora, Gr. 9, 3; Spata, Gr. 4.
1
3
K. v.
I,
pI. 80.
86 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
lekythos1 are occasionally revived, but experiments with the oriental neck-ridge" prove still3 born. Corinthian globular aryballoi are not imitated in Attica until after the passingofL G I 1. Tankards are still made in great quantities, mainly for funerary use. The L Gib type with rounded body (pI. roj) lasts through L G I I a, but thereafter there are signs of attenuation. The LG lib piece from Marathon (pI. 11£, VI 1.44), with an extremely low carinated body and a widely flaring lip, represents the Classical Tradition;" elsewhere the body remains rounded (XVIII.4I-2). In all cases, the rim now begins to overhang the widest diameter, and the articulation between neck and body loses its sharpness. The flat pyxis hardly survives into L G I 1;5 its function was probably taken over by the high-rimmed bowl, since the two shapes are practically never found in the same context." Bowls frequently accompany pitchers, to which they are stylistically related through the metope friezes painted round their tall vertical rims. The gradual degeneration of these metopes allows us to trace the progress of the shape. The orthodox LG I type (pI. log) continues through LG Ha, occasionally attaining monumental size (X.I7- I9, pI. 12e; Dipylon Gr. IS). At the transition to LG llb, fenestrated stands begin to appear, very low at first, with twelve or more windows," Then the diameter of the bowl contracts, the rim slopes outwards, and the windows below ate reduced to six or fewer (pI. IS:m); this is the normal form throughout LG lIb. At the very end, the stands grow higher, often with a pronounced flare;" but the tallest stands, with two rows of windows, are not introduced until the opening years of Protoattic, when they are much favoured by the Analatos and Vulture Painters." The bowl thus falls into line with a whole family of pyre vases with high stands, many ofwhich had already been introduced by the workshop ofAthens 894· Kraters show a distinct break with the past. Gone are the days ofthe huge Dipylon gravemarkers: of the traditional forms, Type I is extinct, and Type II survives only in a lowfooted piece by the Birdseed Painter (X.II). The commonest form is now the spouted krater with low foot, horizontal handles, and a very low rim: the body progresses from shallow (V.4, LG Ila) to deep (XVIII.S5-6, LG Ilb).lO Towards the end ofLG llb, two new types emerge, with fenestrated stands: the ovoid krater (VII·4 I, XVIII. 29-So), perhaps adapted from a Cycladic prototype (cf. pI. 3S); and the cauldron (VII.S9), combining the body ofthe Geometric bronze tripod version with the tall pedestal ofthe Oriental model. Both of these novelties, as well as the spouted krater, have a distinguished career in Protoattic.!' Drinking vessels are mass-produced, summarily decorated, and often carelessly thrown. As a general rule, the bases are flat. Old and new varieties occur side by side. The traditional forms of skyphos, kantharos, and cup, with vertical or nearly vertical lip, all survive throughout L G I I a, but the shoulder is now extremely narrow, the profile below the handles is almost straight (pI. IS£).12 On the skyphoi, reflex handles are still occasionally found (pI. ISh). The most remarkable innovations are the lipless kantharos (pI. ISC) and the shallow 'bird1 Munich 618 5, CVA 3, II7, II-Il!. 2 AM 43, pI. 4, I; pI. 6, 5; cf. East Greek, p. Q81. 3 K. v. I, pI. 139; Phaleron, Grs. 83,19; Bakalakis, AD 17, 77ff. 4 Cf. the Dipylon type 1.45, pI. 8g, which still survives in Spata Gr. 4. 6 Latest example: Warsaw 138533, CVA I, pI. 5,1-2. 6 Sole exception: Kerameikos, Gr. 59, the latest context where a pyxis occurs. 7 K. v, I, pI. IQ5, 360-I. Q, 8 K. v. I, pl, IQ4, 116o. • K. v. I, pI. IQ6; BSA 4 I39ff. 10Cf. Brann, Hesperia 30, IQ6. 11 See]. M. Cook, BSA 35,17°; Hampe, Einfriihattische Grabfund. 12Cf. also Agora, Well M II: I, Ig-22; Agora, Gr. 9, 6-10.
LG II
seed' skyphos with flaring rim (X.2Q-4); both frequently carry figured decoration. Both forms enjoy their prime in LG Ila, but survive into LG lIb in debased form (pI. 15 0, VII.45-8). Poor relations of the new skyphoi' lead the way to a deeper glazed type where the ~ari~g rim is flattened and shortened." This degenerate version begins in L G I I a, and survrves mto Subgeometric contexts. Closely related to this skyphos are two contemporary types of cup. 3 One is the so-called 'Phaleron' cup, with a straight shallow profile (pI. 15P) ; the other has a deep, rounded body, straightening out towards the base.s The shape of the latest kantharoi is also deep and narrow: at the end of Geometric there are two varieties ' with and without articulationj' both versions survive into Protoattic." The decline in the quality of Attic drinking vessels coincides with the import of fine Corinthian kotylai, which inspired local imitations. The Attic kotylai, like their Corinthian counterparts, progress from shallow (pI. 15g-j) to deep; yet in Athens the shallow form has a longer life than in Corinth, and the deep type rarely appears before the end of Attic Geometric." At the transition to Protoattic, two other Corinthian shapes begin to inspire imitations: the kotyle-pyxis- and the deep skyphos with vertical lip, modelled after the deep kotyle. 9 In return, the only Attic shape to inspire a Corinthian imitation is the high-standed bowl.w Plates usually have a straighter profile than in LG I, and tend to be deeper (pI. ISk); otherwise, their decoration is more informative than their shape in distinguishing them from their predecessors. DECORATION
In this period offerment and upheaval, two simultaneous movements were at work. A fluent and dynamic figured style, the parent of the best Protoattic, was perfected within the Classical workshops: at the same time there was a collapse in the organization and quality of Geometric ornament, especially notable on vases outside the Classical Tradition. Hence the extraordinary unevenness in the artistic standards of this generation, which could produ~e the fine Stathato~ ~mp.hora 'at the same time as the dismal works of the Athens 897 Pamt~r. Hardly less striking IS the contrast between the decoration oflarge and small pots. Even m the best workshops, the manner ofpainting was too cursive, too imprecise to be successfully adapted to a small scale. After the fine skyphoi of the Birdseed Workshop, good artists reserved their most conscientious efforts for the large vases; perhaps they entrusted their assistants with the mass-production of the drinking vessels, which had little or no ornament. We are moving towards the situation which obtained in Protoattic a style seen at its best only on large surfaces. ' The figu~e~ drawing of L G I I is too varied to permit generalization on matters ofstyle; f?r only wlthl~ the Classical workshops is there a continuous tradition. The progress of hnear decoration follows a more coherent pattern, moving from maturity to decay; here there is more scope for general statements. By the end of L G I the possibilities of ripe decoration had been fully explored. Linear 1 Agora VIII, nos. 143-4. 2 ibid. no. 136. 3 Brann, Hesperia 30, 101. 4 Agora VIII, no. 180. E.g. Dipylon, Gr. g, 3; Agora P 7474, Hesperia, Supp. n, C 63. 6 oft. cit. C 67 (P 7022), C 65 (P 7016). 7 See p. IIO for a comparative study; cf. JHS 84, QIB. 8 Agora, P 21439, Hesperia 30, pl, 17, 'P 16'. • Agora, P 2245°, loco cit. pI. 19, 'R IQ'. 10 K. v. I, pI. 127,661. 5
88 .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
LG 11
ornament was applied to large closed vases in broad fields round neck, shoulder, and belly, with narrow zones in between - an arrangement which responded perfectly to the needs of the shape. From the architectonic point of view, no further progress was possible. The endless repetition of the same motifs, and the same system, could only lead to a deterioration of draughtsmanship, and a slackening of discipline. Stagnation set in, both in the matter and the manner of the decoration; each calls for separate comment. No new motifs were introduced in L G I I a, but many old ones were debased. Meanders! and swastikas (pl. Ise) were weakened by attenuation. The square compartments of the check pattern were filled with round dots, leaving their corners empty:" at a late stage, only the horizontal guide lines are drawn (X.9- I 0). Multiple brushes were often used for dotted lozenges, which became more pointed at the ends and rounded at the sides; sometimes the dots are omitted (X-4). Tangential blobs are vertically elongated, and sometimes degenerate into a thick scribble (pl. 12d, X.5). Even in the best workshops, sigmas no longer touch the framing lines, but are allowed to float (V.I-4). Leaves and tongues, now more simply hatched than in L G I, are apt to lose their second outline (XI.3, XI I) ; alternatively, leaves may be drawn in double outline, with a straight line down the middle, and one end left open (XIILI-2, pI. ISk). Some minor motifs are detached from their original context; for example, the single row of cross-hatched triangles pointing upwards, which in L G I was answered by a corresponding row pointing downwards (p. 36). We shall consider other similar abuses when dealing with the decline of the metope system. In LG lIb the rift between Classical and non-Classical ornament is widened, and a few new motifs arrive. In Classical circles, the chief innovation is the two-tiered lozenge net drawn with a multiple brush, probably borrowed from Corinth (p. 106). Gear-pattern and triple zigzag are revived, and much use is made of a loose double zigzag (pf. ISm.). The drawing is hasty but deft, never falling below a respectable standard of neatness, except occasionally in the lower zones (VIL6). But outside the Classical Tradition the old repertoire suffers a further degeneration. The check pattern is transformed into a wall pattern by the substitution ofvertical strokes for dots ofpaint (XVIILIO, pl, ISI). Lozenge chains are usually undotted, and drawn with extreme slovenliness. Two new patterns, neither of which figures in the Classical Tradition, are the nine-square checkerboard (V I I L 11, XVIIL6)3 and the cross-hatched triangles alternating with short runs of triple zigzag (X.12, XXI.I; AM 28, Beil. 24, I). Shortly before the end of Geometric, both in and outside the Classical Tradition, we find diagonal scribbles (VIL33, XX.2), and spiral hooks attached to lozenges (VILI I, pl. 14b); both motifs survive into the common stock of Early Protoattic. In the arrangement of decoration, the craftsmen of L G I I had very few original ideas, and all were still-born. For a moment, the Birdseed Painter experimented with vertical strips across the neck (X. I) and then promptly abandoned them. The huge free circles on the bodies of oinochoai (XVI), ultimately inspired by Cypriot models, were an isolated phenomenon. The decoration of drinking vessels with widely spaced filling ornament is an idea which dates back to MG 11 (p. 24), and dies out at the end of Geometric.s Otherwise, 1 4
K. v: I, pI. 113, 1314. Latest: Agora, Gr. 5,3.
3 K.
v.
I,
pI. 120, 1319.
3
Once found in LG Ib, on a bowl from Kerameikos, Gr. 290.
89
the orthodox system holds the field: on large closed vases, horizontal zones emphasize the focal points, separated from each other by narrow bands. By slow degrees, the architectonic discipline is loosened. An early symptom ofweakness occurs on the monumental amphorae of the Sub-Dipylon Group (V.I-2) where many narrow zones are allowed to accumulate on the lower part of the body. At the beginning ofLG 11 we have already observed how the width of the main zones tended to contract (p. 52), thereby reducing the emphasis; yet this trend was resisted in some workshops (XI, XIII, XVI) until the end ofLG IIa. Thereafter, further decay was arrested in the Classical workshops by establishing figured scenes on the neck and round the belly: this led to the widening ofthe main fields, and hence to the attenuation of the amphorae; sometimes, the narrow linear ornament in the intervening zones was eliminated (VII.7). Elsewhere, the main fields were narrowing down: but even at this late date the Empedocles Painter, by drawing and placing his meanders with exceptional care, could give them a prominence out of proportion to their modest size (pk 14c). Where he succeeded, his younger colleague failed. The Painter ofAthens 897 often ignored the shape of his vases by allowing a narrow zone to coincide with the widest diameter (XVIIL7-8, 11). Even where this is not so, his running dogs eclipse his feeble meanders and metopes, thereby wrenching the accent away from the focal points. The final collapse of the architectonic system is connected with the gradual relaxation of discipline within the metope zones. We have already followed this process of decline through the pitchers of several non-Classical groups (VIII, IX, XV, XVIII): here we need only summarize our conclusions, which also apply to other shapes, especially the highrimmed bowls." We noted the first symptoms of unrest at the transition from L GIb to L G I I a (p. 52) , when the triglyphs began to expand at the expense ofthe metopes : the check pattern, at first used as the central member of a triglyph, often grew to the size of a full metope panel. In L G I I a, thin columns of diagonal strokes, which once flanked the check, sometimes stand on their own (XI.2): on some occasions they are aimlessly massed together (XLI, pl, 1St). Even when supporting a central motif, they are often hatched in the same direction, thereby losing their symmetrical effect (pl, ISm.). But the triglyphs are still preserved in some form or other, however greatly their size may vary. In the central place, common alternatives to the check and the M-column are fillings of cross-hatching (I X.8, X.4) or lozenge chains." The bowl Athens 774, from Dipylon, Gr. 13,3 combines many of these new traits, and shows how far the metope system had disintegrated by the end of LG Ila. Further signs of disruption come from the triglyphs at the outset of L G I I b. The Mcolumns now grow into full metopes of multiple zigzag (IV.II, XV.I-2). The vertical bounding lines increase in number until they, too, grow to the size of metopes on some occasions (XV.6). These two innovations were introduced by the Lion Painter, probably under Corinthian influence (p. 74). The massed verticals and the loose multiple zigzags are symptomatic of a general movement towards shimmering, toneless decoration.' In the workshop of Athens 897 the swastika and quatrefoil, with their strong arresting outlines, 1 On smaller open vases, the metope system died out when the old forms, with vertical offset lips, passed out of currency. The surface of the new shallow skyphos was too sharply curved to permit this scheme of decoration. • K. V. I, pI. 11 9, 381. 3 AJA 44, pI. 26, 3. 4 Mat; 63; 'flimmerstil'.
go .
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
are replaced by weaker designs such as the nine-square checkerboard and the 'sunburst' of tangential circles. Even the normal check pattern is often considered too loud, and the grid is sometimes left unfilled (pI. Isj). On the standed bowls, similar effects are obtained by multiplying the triglyph columns.' The logical outcome of this movement may be seen in Munich 844 8 (XVIII. 27), perhaps the latest ofGeometric pitchers; here the decoration is in a state of complete collapse, from both the calligraphic and the architectural points of view. By this time, other non-Classical painters (XIX-XXI) had gone over to the production of amphorae, where figured drawing occupied their attention, diverting their minds from the problem of marshalling geometric ornament. The conception of a large linear vase, as an architectural form, had died a natural death. 1
K. V.
I,
CHAPTER THREE
Corinthian Geometric
pI. 124, 1160.
Fine pale clay; plump, rotund vase-forms; austerely simple ornamerit, painted with fastidious neatness: these are the main ingredients of Corinthian Geometric. Its internal development, which is logical and consistent, can be followed through an adequate series of grave and well groups from Corinth and the surrounding country. Its chronology, relative to Attic, is not difficult to establish. During the earlier stages, Corinthian potters derived much inspiration from Attic E G I I, M G I, and M G I I, so that corresponding phases may be defined in the Corinthian sequence.' Thereafter, the Corinthians pursued an independent course, and soon reversed the current of influence: synchronisms with Attic L G depend on the export of Corinthian kotylai to Attica, and on the Attic imitations which they inspired (pp. 109-10). After the end of the local LG - a quiet and delicate style- - the potters of Corinth embarked on their first bold experiments in Orientalizing ornament; yet the great mass of their output was still decorated in a Geometric manner. This later linear ware, contemporary with the Orientalizing vases of the Early Protocorinthian style (E P C), is of paramount importance for our relative chronology; and will be treated in detail at the end of this chapter. Corinthian Geometric was distributed in ever-widening circles. E G and M G I occur only in Corinth, in the inland villages ofthe Corinthia, and on the Isthmus as far as Megara. From M G I I onwards, Corinthian pottery was exported in some quantity to Delphi and Ithaca. Corinthian L G reached Thera, Smyrna, and Dodona, and travelled with the first colonists to Italy and Sicily. Finally, E P C vases turn up in practically every important centre within the expanding Greek world, and found favour even among Carthaginians and Etruscans. A special importance attaches to the internal sequence of the L G and E P C phases, and to their chronological relationship with other local schools; for here lies the main hope of constructing an absolute chronology for all L G pottery, based on the dates preserved by ancient authors for the foundations of the Sicilian colonies. 1 With much reluctance, I use a different nomenclature from that suggested by Weinberg in Corinth VII. I, and followed in subsequent American publications of Corinth - e.g. R. S. Young in volume XIII. Typical ofWeinberg's 'Late Geometric' is the grave group, pI. 17f-j, which I must call M G 11 because of its affinity with the Attic style shown in pIs. 4-5; cf. Dunbabin,] H S 68 (1948), 68, n. I. Weinberg's long 'Early Geometric' comprises my EG and MG I together. 2 Weinberg's 'Protocorinthian Geometric', A]A 45, 30ff.
92 .
CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
EG
Of Corinthian Protogeometric we know very little; enough, though, to show that there was some selective borrowing from Attica in the later stages.' Near the end stand some small vases from a grave at Vello (W 7-19)2 and a similar group in the British School at Athens," Behind some of the shapes - oinochoe, pyxis, and kalathos - Attic prototypes may be discerned: but Attic decoration has been rejected in favour of plain reserved banding. Links with Attica were strong at the end ofAttic PG, when the Corinthians were following Attic decoration as well as shapes.' Thereafter, the Athenian connection lapses for a while. The late PG manner may have lingered on in the Corinthia throughout the experimental E G I style of Attica and the Argolid, since the Corinthian sequence shows no knowledge of Attic E G 1, and a Corinthian PG oinochoe accompanies Argive E G I vases in a grave group from Mycenae." When a true Geometric style emerges in Corinth, its affinities are with the more settled phase of Attic Early Geometric, which we have defined as EG 11.
a diluted scribble (pI. 16a) or a zone ofalternating diagonals (W 35) may be painted round the belly of a closed vase. But once the new style is established, we find nothing more than one or two triple reserved bands ;' this applies not only to the oinochoai, whose Attic counterparts are equally austere (pl, z d), but even to the neck-handled amphorae, where a contemporary Athenian would have allowed at least one zone ofornament. Several skyphoi are still treated in a debased PG manner; at first, with a diluted scribble between horizontal lines (W 38); then with lines only (W 39,43), as though the scribble had dropped out of their midst. Slightly later, a steep zigzag may be driven across the horizontals (W 64); or vertical bars may be enclosed between them (W 60, 72). SHAPES
CORINTHIAN EARLY GEOMETRIC (EG) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Corinth, grave under West Shops. Hesperia 17 (1948), 204, group B, pls. 71-2. The oinochoe B 3 is still PG. Corinth, vases from modern well-shaft. Corinth VII. I, roff., W 22-53. Perhaps from three graves, from PG through EG. PI. rfia-b.d. Zygouries, grave. Blegen, Zygouries 174-6, figs. 171-2. Corinth (Mavrospelaies), grave. Hesperia 33 (1964),89-91, pL 17· DECORATION
Decoration, rather than shape, offers better criteria for telling the local E G vases apart from their PG predecessors. The most significant novelty is the window-panel, flanked by glaze, and containing either a hatched meander or, more commonly, a multiple zigzag. On open shapes the panel is placed at handle level (pl. 16c); on closed vases, it occupies the neck. The multiple zigzags often reveal a local peculiarity: the apices may be joined by vertical bars to the framing lines above and below (pI. rfib-c). This trait is sometimes encountered in later Argive work (pl. 24b), and recurs in Corinthian LG. Athens is clearly the source of the new system. Attic potters, as we have seen, had been experimenting with the window-panel scheme in their E G I style before reducing it to a regular formula in E G I I. Since the Corinthians first adopted the window-panel in its E G I I form, we must conclude that the idea travelled from Athens to Corinth: Apart from these panels, the decoration is minimaL Just before the transition from PG, IPGP202-4· Vases published by Weinberg in Corinth vu. 1 are henceforth indicated by the letter W followed by their number in Weinberg's catalogue. 3 PGP 198, pl. 29C. 4 E.g., oinochoe W 20 and lekythos AJA 35 (1931),426, fig. I; cf. K. IV, pl. 15,2070, and pl. 17,2018, both from PG Gr, 48. For the jug W 6, cf. PGP, pl. 9,1081, from Eleusis, 5 BSA 50 (1955), pl. 48f: below p. "3, n. 6. 2
93
I :1
I I I
I I
Just before the introduction ofa true E G style, there was a movement towards full, rounded profiles. This development, which has nothing to do with Attic influence, is well illustrated by a series of oinochoai, W 22-8, following after W 20, their PG prototype with an orthodox ovoid body. W 23 (pI. 16a) is still PG in decoration, but the body has begun to fill out. The process is complete in large oinochoai like W 28 and W 56 (pl, 16e), which are almost spherical; by this time, the window-panel has arrived from Attica, but the shape is far from Attic. There are, nevertheless, some attempts to follow the broad-based model of Attic EG 11 (as W 29, pl. 16b), and these must be contemporary with the globular series. No other closed shapes are represented in quantity; but all extant examples share the globularity of the oinochoe W 56. In the Mavrospelaies grave a small neck-handled amphora is accompanied by a well-rounded aryballos. The latter is the first of a Corinthian darkground series extending throughout E G and M G. The decoration - invariably crosshatched triangles on the shoulder - goes back to a prototype found in Attica just before the end ofP G. 2 Another survivor from PG, but with no successors, is the lekythos from under the West Shops (B 5). The pyxis W 37 (pl, 16d) has the inset rim of its Attic counterpart;" the handles, however, are a non-Attic feature, for which there are earlier - and contemporary - parallels in the Argolid (pls. 22 h; 23 g). Open vases show a similar mixture ofAttic and local elements. Some skyphoi are deep and almost hemispherical, with minimal lips (W 38-40); others follow the shallow variety current in Attic E G 1 I (pl, 16 c) ; and there are attempts at compromise between these two extremes (W 41-3). A long Attic variant, with stirrup handles, is once imitated (W 45). A low-handled kantharos, W 44, is close to its Attic counterpart (pl. 2 e) ; the rounded handles and the short lip are characteristic of this early period. Of the two small kraters one, from Zygouries, is an enlargement of the kantharos; the other, W 36, is modelled after the Atticizing skyphos, with the addition of a low pedestal and one rib. Plates are represented by two examples: W 46 has a lug handle pierced for suspension ;' in W 47 we see the earliest occurrence of reflex handles in a well-documented context.
-1
i 1
W 33, an oinochoe with four such bands, lies on the verge of M G I: cf. pi. 3 c in the Attic series.
• Hesperia 30 (1961), no. 34, pl. 24. For the Corinthian sequence, see P. Lawrence, Hesperia 33, 90, n. 5. 3 Cf. PAE 1939, 30, fig. 3a. 4 Cf. K. v, I, pl. 101,348; Attic EG 11.
94 .
CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
CORINTHIAN MIDDLE GEOMETRIC: FIRST PHASE (MG I) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Athikia, 'grave group'. Hesperia 33 (1964),91-3, pI. 17. Corinth, sixteen vases outside a sarcophagus north of Peirene. AJA 9 (1905),411-21, pls. 11-16. Thirteen ofthese republished, Corinth VII. I, W 54-66. Not certainly from one burial. PIs. 16e, 17d. Athikia, 'grave group'. Corinth VII. I, 19ff., W 69-72. PI. 17a. Athikia, 'grave group'. AJA 61 (1957),169-71, pl. 65. Clenia, 'grave group'. AJA 59 (1955), 125-8, pls. 39-40, figs. 1-9, 14, 15. PI. 17b-c. The first three groups are roughly contemporary. If they represent single burials, there must have been a considerable overlap between the E G and M G I styles in the Corinthia. A significant proportion ofthese vases are still in the older manner (W 55-6, 59, 60, 69, 72) ; furthermore, old and new traits sometimes meet on the same vase.
MG I
Aryballoi, which are relatively abundant, now tend to be biconical rather than truly globular.' Special attention is due to two examples of the lekythos-oinochoe (Clenia nos. 3,4), the ancestors of the tall-necked conical form which was to become so popular in Corinth during the later phases of Geometric; these specimens, however, still have the well-rounded profiles of contemporary Athenian versions." Among open shapes, only skyphoi are represented. W 61 (pI. 17d) and W 62 have the shallow profile and vertical lip typical of Attic MG I; but the deeper local type was still being made (W 59-60, 72). An elongated skyphos from Clenia, although unstratified, probably belongs to this phase." The body, and its decoration, have close Attic counterparts (pI. 3j) ; the rope handles, substituted for the usual stirrups (cf.W 45), recall yet another innovation of Attic M G I. CORINTHIAN MIDDLE GEOMETRIC: SECOND PHASE (MG 11) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Corinth, Agora, grave. Corinth VII. I, 25ff., W 73-7. PI. 17f-j. Ay. Theodoroi, Gr. 2. ADChr 17 (1961-2),53, pI. 56b, and nine other vases. Ay. Theodoroi, Gr. 4. ADChr 17 (1961-2), 53, pI. 55a (Attic MG 11), and four other vases. Corinth, Potters' Quarter, Gr. 5. Corinth xv. 1,8-9. PI. 18c,g, and twelve other vases. Corinth, N. Cemetery, Grs. 14, 15, 16 ('Group A'). Corinth XIII, 21-3, pI. 6. Corinth, N. Cemetery, Gr. 20. Corinth XIII, 28, pI. 6. Corinth,N. Cemetery, Gr. 17. Corinth XIII, 24-6, pI. 7. PI. 18a. Corinth, N. Cemetery, Gr. 2 I. Corinth X II I, 28-g, pI. 7. Corinth, well in area of South Stoa. Hesperia 20 (1951),293-4, pI. 89d. PI. 18d. Some frs. may be later. Ay. Theodoroi, Gr. 3. ADChr 17 (1961-2),53, pls. 54, 55b, 56a (Attic LG la). Twenty vases in all. Corinth. N. Cemetery, Gr. 18. Corinth XIII, 26-7, pI. 8. PI. 18b.
DECORATION
Several changes reflect the influence ofAttic M G I. On the bodies ofclosed vases, the number of triple reserved bands is increased to three or four. On the most progressive skyphoi, the whole of the handle zone is now reserved (pI. 17d; cf. pI. 3b). In the window-panels on the necks of oinochoai the main motif is sometimes accompanied by a horizontal ancillary, as in contemporary Attic (pI. 17a; cf. pI. 3c). The repertoire ofmotifs is still very limited. Among the many innovations ofAttic M G I, only one - the row of dots - found favour in Corinth (W 70; Clenia nos. 3-4). Hatched meander hooks (pI. 17e)1 come to Corinth earlier than their arrival in Athens, which is not until M G I I. Two E G mannerisms of local origin are still found: the multiple zigzag with bars on the apices (pI. 17d) and the single steep zigzag across horizontal lines (W 64). Otherwise the ornament has no individuality. Orthodox meanders and multiple zigzags are as common as in E G; cross-hatched triangles are placed round the shoulders of aryballoi. In many cases the decoration is done with a carelessness unusual for Corinth; in no other phase does Corinthian Geometric look quite so provincial. SHAPES
Once again, the oinochoe is the most plentiful shape. Some retain the globularity ofEG, but with a larger complement of reserved bands (W 54, 67). Others, with broader base and higher neck (pI. 17a,e) approach nearer to the oinochoai of Attic MG I (cf. pI. 3c), although there is a local tendency for the necks to slope inwards. A small neck-handled amphora, from the first Athikia group, still has the E G plumpness; slightly later is an example exported to Rheneia,» with a more ovoid body. The larger amphora, W 58, is still more attenuated, although the neck-panel has not advanced beyond the simple E G form. 1
Cf. A]A 61, pI. 65, figs. 1,3.
2
PGP 158, pI. 19, A 1451.
95
NOTE The two published oinochoai from Ay. Theodoroi, ADChr 17, pls. 55a and 56a, seem Attic rather than Corinthian on grounds of style: I have not seen them, but]. L. Benson kindly informs me that he considers their fabric to be Attic. DECORATION
Two new motifs now enter the Corinthian repertoire: the vertical chevron, and the fourlimbed sigma. Chevrons invade Attica at about the same time, and sigmas are not unknown there; but during this and the succeeding phase, Corinthians made so much use of both motifs that they may fairly be said to have claimed them for their own. As in Attica, 1 3
P. Lawrence, loco cit, 2 Cf. K. v. I, pI. 83, 864, 895. A]A 59, 127-8, pI. 40, fig. 10. The clay seems to me local; not Attic, as Charitonides suggested.
96 .
CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
chevrons and sigmas are often drawn with the multiple brush; groups ofsigmas sometimes alternate with vertical bars drawn with the same brush. Drinking vessels, when decorated at all, nearly always bear a panel of chevron~ with two or three horizontal lines underneath. Sometimes the whole of the reserved area IS stopped by vertical bars (pIs. 17h, 18g); or the verticals may be set beside the chevrons only (N. Cemetery, Gr. 16. IQ) ; or the verticals may be omitted altogether, allowing the chevro~s to run on into the irregular daub ofglaze by the handles (pl. 18 d-e). Ofthe three alternatives, only the first two are found in Attica; the third is customary in Argive, Cycladic, Cretan, and East Greek.' Attic influence is still strong in many of the larger designs, consisting of a heavy central meander flanked or surrounded by ancillaries (pt 17f).2 Yet at the same time a local system is beginning to evolve, which avoids any centripetal emphasis; a typical arrangement is seen on the krater W 74 (pl, 17j), where two narrow strips ofornament are separated by horizontal lines. 3 Towards the end ofM G, even the meander appears in emaciated form, as though it were reluctant to impose itself on our attention (Aetos B 882). As in Attic M G I I, there is a steady increase in the proportion of light areas to dark, although the lightening process takes a different course from that followed in Attica. Typically Corinthian is the habit of placing one or two narrow zones just above the belly ?f a closed vase, and just below the lower handle attachment (pl. 18b).4 On the largest omochoai, the shoulder may bear a panel of decoration. 5 A simpler - and more characteristic - method oflightening the tone is by covering large areas with fine banding. This idea is first applied to the lekythos-oinochoe, whose shape does not take kindly to organized geometric decoration. W 76 (pl, 17g), at the beginning of this phase, is still dark-ground; later, the banding extends down to the base (pI. 18c), and may even reach up to the trefoil lip (N. Cemetery, Gr. 20.1). Apart from the narrownecked oinochoe, pl, 18a, none ofthe larger shapes is treated in this way until the transition toLG. Shortly before the end ofthis phase, one Corinthian vase betrays some acquaintance with Attic LG I decoration: on the amphora from Gr. 17 in the N. Cemetery the handle zones .are filled with square metopes containing large hatched birds.s But in spite of this link with Attic L G I, the amphora is still predominantly dark-ground, with triple reserved bands breaking up the lower glaze in the usual M G manner; and the other contents of the grave in which it was found are orthodox M G I I without exception. There is some evidence, then, that the end of Corinthian M G I I is contemporary with the incipient metope style ofAttic L G I a - a supposition confirmed by the association of an Attic L G I a oinochoe with Corinthian MG 11 vases in Gr. 3 at Ay. Theodoroi. Yet the Atticizing metopes never became fashionable in Corinth; as we shall see, the metope system evolved in the local L G 1 See AA 1963, 203. Cf. N. Cemetery, Gr. 17.3; Ithaca, AetosB 787. (I refer to the Geometric vases from Aetos as follows: R=vases catalogued by Robertson, BSA 43 (1948), 9ff.; B=Miss Benton's catalogue, BSA 48 (1953), 275ff.) Smaller Atticizing panels: W 83, ADChr 17, pI. 55. 3 Cf. W 78; ADChr 17, pI. 56b; AJA 45 (1941),33, fig. 4; Aetos R 55, B 793. • Cf. also Aetos BBdr ; ADChr 17, pI. 55b; BCH74 (1950), pI. 39, I, top row, second from left. 5 AetosB 882, 885. e Cf. pyxis, Sbornik 1959, pl. 1,21, LG la.
2
MG 11
97
was of a different character, owing nothing to Attic influence. In brief, the N. Cemetery amphora represents a false start towards an Atticizing L G style which was never followed up; here we see the last signs ofAttic influence in Corinth, before the local craftsmen finally emancipated themselves. One more rarity deserves mention: the first use of added paint, conventionally called 'white', but in reality a fine solution of the local yellow clay. The designs are limited to small circles painted on the dark glaze: a single circle on a fragmentary oinochoe (Perachora I, pl, 124,4), and double circles on some proto-kotylai like pl, 18f. 1 SHAPES
Oinochoai vary considerably in profile: the only common factor is the straightness of the neck, also characteristic of contemporary Attic. The bodies are usually on the plump side; a fine group in Ithaca, of enormous size, are exceptional for their slim, ovoid shape (Aetos B 881-2, 885). Attention should be drawn to a variant with tall narrow neck (pl, 18a) of which we shall see more in LG. The lekythos-oinochoe now has an extremely broad base; the body is lower, and the neck higher, than in MG I (pls, 17g, 18c). A dark-ground aryballos, from Gr. 5 in the Potters' Quarter, retains the biconical shape evolved in MG 1. The neck-handled amphora, to judge from the only example illustrated from Ay. Theodoroi, follows the same development as in Attica, towards a slim body and a straight neck. The belly-handled amphora enters the Corinthian repertoire for the first time (N. Cemetery, Gr. 18.1), but remains a rarity. The only knownpyxis is of the globular sort (ADChr 17, pl. 56b), with inset rim and horizontal handles set at a high angle; almost identical in shape with our E G example, W 37 (pl. 16d). Kraters may be divided into two categories. The first is comparatively large, set on a high ribbed pedestal, and provided with stirrup handles (pI. 17f); this is the Attic Type II, decorated in the Attic manner with a central meander. More typical of Corinth is a lowfooted krater, not more than o· 25m. high, and decorated only with chevrons and sigmas (pt 17j): the handles are ofstrap form, set either horizontally -like our illustrated example - or vertically, as for a low-handled kantharos." Kantharoi also fall into two types, distinguished by their handles. The high-handled variety (pl, 18 g), borrowed from the Attic repertoire, never found much favour in Corinth. More popular was the traditional version with low handles (Aetos B 716); a revival- or perhaps a survival - of the local E G type. With the skyphoi, too, we can now see a clear dichotomy between Atticizing and local versions. Typical of the former is W 75 (pl. 17h), with shallow body and offset vertical lip. Towards the end ofMG, the shape seems to have deepened; in pl, 18d we have the immediate predecessor ofthe L G skyphos ofthe Thapsos class (pl. 20C). 3 Beside this conventional skyphos, the Corinthians were also developing a variety of their own, remarkable for a full, This last vase belongs to a class seen by Pfuhl as Cretan (AM 28 (1903), 151-2, C 7g-84) owing to the frequency of white circles in Cretan LG. The clay, however, is of the same pink-buff hue as pI. lSe, and Pfuhl's K 32. Another fr. of this class: Perachora I, pI. 13, 13· Cf. J. Anderson, BSA 53-4 (I958-g), 141, on 43--8. 2 BCH 74, pI. 39, I, bottom right; AJA 45, 33, fig. 3. 3 Miss Benton's 'Tall Cups': BSA 48, 272ff. 1
F
98 .
CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
LG
hemispherical body and a minimal lip (pI. 18d-e).1 This shape has precursors in the local EG (W 38-42), but does not settle down until this phase. Perhaps it should be called the proto-kotyle, since it is clearly the parent of the fine-walled kotylai of L G times, where all trace of the lip has vanished. Rarer shapes include a mug with characteristically rounded body; a kalathos; and a pomegranate vase: all three shapes are represented in the N. Cemetery," CORINTHIAN LATE GEOMETRIC (LG) This style is sometimes called Protocorinthian Geometric. I avoid this term on two grounds: first, as Dunbabin pointed out CJH S 68, 68, n. I), it is illogical that Protocorinthian Geometric should succeed Corinthian Geometric; secondly, the term is confusingly vague, since good pottery in a Geometric manner was made throughout the period of Protocorinthian Orientalizing: see Weinberg, AJA 45, 30ff. SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Corinth, pithos burial. Corinth VII. I, 35ff., W 103-15. Volimedia (Messenia), deposit in Mycenaean Chamber Tomb 4. PAE 1953,242. Seven out of ten vases are Corinthian: three hydriai, two globular pyxides with inset rim, one small krater, and one kyathos as Aetos R 48. On the other three vases, see p. 223. Smyrna, deposit C. BSA 53-4 (1958-g), 138-g, pl. 21, 7-12; pl. 26, 10. Delphi, House Deposit. BCH85 (1961), 338:ff., figs. 25-35. Pithecusae, Gr. 236. G. Buchner, Metropoli e Colonie 265, n. 3, fig. lb. Delphi, deposit below Sacred Way. BCH68-g (1944-5), 36ff., figs. 1-11, pls. 1-3. Thapsos, grave. MA 6 (1895), 103-4, pl. 4, 16; BCH 74 (1952), 338, fig. I I. Aetos (I thaca), Lower Deposit. B SA 43 (1948), 7ff.; cf B SA 48 (1953), 259. The following thirty Corinthian vases are illustrated by photographs in B SA 43: PI. I: 1-4, 17; PI. 2: 10, 22-3; PI. 3: 43-4, 68; PI. 4: 44, 47-g, 56; PI. 5: 63, 70-2, 74-5; PI. 6: 43, 77, 112; PI. 8: 125, 128-g, 131; PI. 10: 158 - perhaps a stray from a higher level. Also pl. 43, 567-8, two Euboean LG pieces. For the local vases in the same context, see p. 223. PI. 20a,c (R I, R 4). Smyrna, Deposit D. BSA 53-4 (1958-g), 139, pl. 21, 13-15. Also includes the East Greek krater fr., op. cit. pl. 5d (pl, 63f); and an Attic figured fr. showing a warrior of Sub-Dipylon type, perhaps LG IIa. Corinth, well under South Basilica, lower fill. Hesperia 18 (1949), 153-4, pIs. 19-20, figs. 26-8. Transitional LG - EPC. PI. Iga-c, pl. 21 a. Perachora, Temple of Hera Akraia; Geometric Votive Deposit. Perachora I, chapter 11; pottery, pls, 11-16, 121-4. Also includes MG 11 material (p. 97), and one early EPC fr., pl. 122,6. This important phase extends from the end of the dark-ground M G style up to the first experiments in Orientalizing decoration at the outset ofE P C. Corinthian potters were now beginning to outstrip all their rivals in the delicacy of their craft. In particular, there is a Cf. W 80; N. Cemetery, Grs. 14.2, 15.2, 17.4; South Stoa Well, nos. 3-4; Perachora a Corinth XIII, 47-8. 1
I,
pI. 11,3; Aetos B 620-1, 624.
99
remarkable improvement in the quality of drinking vessels; the shallow kotylai, with their fine thin walls, already point the way to the superlatively high standard of their Protocorinthian successors. Like most other contemporary regional styles, Corinthian L G is predominantly lightground, in contrast with the dark-ground of earlier periods. We have watched the beginning of the change in M G I I, when an increasing number of fine lines was making inroads into areas which had hitherto been glazed; this process was stabilized early in LG. The light ground now extends about two-thirds ofthe way down the vase, leaving a glazed area near the base; the decorated zones are no larger than in MG, but the fine banding covers much more of the surface. The lower glaze is sometimes broken up by one or two reserved lines; gone, though, are the triple reserved bands which were so regular a feature ofMG. Corinthian L G thus grows naturally out of the preceding phase, without any trace of outside influence. It is a neat and restrained style, utterly foreign to the grandiose and exuberant manner of the Athenian grave monuments. No shape ever reaches monumental size; indeed, the style is seen at its best on small vases. Nor did the Corinthians make any steadfast attempt to develop figured drawing; the only living creature to find an assured place in their repertoire is a crested bird, conventionally called the heron. In the following section I leave on one side a large class ofvases - kraters, kantharoi, and skyphoi, a few pyxides and oinochoai - where the ornament is chosen from a narrow range of motifs not otherwise typical of Corinthian L G: meanders, meander hooks, spirals, and vertical wavy lines. Following Vallet and Villard- I refer to all these vases as the Thapsos class, named after the source of the earliest published examples. They will be discussed in a later section (pp. I02ff.); our first task is to survey the more orthodox aspects ofCorinthian LG. DECORATION
We begin with the simplest motifs. Chevrons and sigmas - the latter now drawn with three, four, or even five limbs - are still used in many contexts. They often appear as the main ornament on kotylai, in subsidiary positions on kraters, and in the narrow zones on the shoulders of closed vases. Though mass-produced with the multiple brush, they are nevertheless quite carefully drawn, usually touching the framing lines above and below. Sometimes they are broken up into groups, separated by blank spaces (pI. Iga-b). As a further variation, they may alternate with groups of verticals, drawn with the same multiple brush; here the effect is looser than in MG 11 (Aetos R 56: cf. pl, 17f). The zone may even be divided up into little elongated panels, in which chevrons or sigmas take their turn with single or double zigzags, or rows of dotted lozenges, each motif neatly barred off from its neighbour. 2 A single zigzag, thickly drawn and floating in a narrow field, is quite common in a continuous zone. Rarer motifs include check pattern," diagonal zigzags," and clumsy snakes in silhouette." During this phase the Corinthians developed a metopal system of their own. At the close BCH 74 (1952), 337, 340ff. 2 Aetos R 113, R 131, B 799; AJA 45,33, fig. 5. Aetos R 44; Perachora I, pI. 14,2 and 7. • FD v, fig. 534; BCH 85,344, fig. 31; Aetos R 293, local imitation. S Perachora I, pI. 122, 13-14.
1
3
100 .
CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
ofMG 11 we found them toying with the Attic scheme of equal square metopes, only to abandon it; the latest experiments ofthis nature are transitional between M G I I and L G.1 Thereafter, Corinthian metopes assume a tall and narrow form, and are nearly always placed in subordinate positions flanking a long panel in the centre. Most of the metopal motifs are variations on the diagonal cross. At first, half-tone patterns are preferred, with diminishing triangles filling the upper and lower quadrantsj- later, the solid double axe gains ground, until it becomes the rule in EPC. Piles ofzigzag (pI. 199) and herons (pl, 19d) are also used in metopes. The drawing of herons follows a fairly consistent development within this phase, moving gradually from naturalism to stylization. The heron first appears in Atticizing square metopes on two closed vases from Aetos: the pyxis, R 63, and the oinochoe B 886.3 Both vases stand on the verge ofM G 11; on the pyxis, the lower body still bears the triple reserved bands characteristic of the older manner. The herons, outlined and hatched with care, hardly differ from Attic marshbirds, except for their double crests; among the filling ornaments, the worm on the oinochoe is a delicacy well favoured by future Corinthian herons. The next stage may be seen on the fine krater from the N. Cemetery, pI. 199-h. Here the Attic metope system has been abandoned; the birds, still hatched, face one another either side of a pile of zigzags which seems to place them in their natural habitat by an expanse of rippling water:" Their necks are longer and their bodies thinner, but the drawing is still careful; even the wing is indicated. On some smaller vases, such as the Benaki kyathos (pI. 19f), the same theme is treated more summarily. The next stage can be seen on the kotyle from Anavysos (pI. 19k), where the birds' bodies are no longer hatched, but appear in silhouette; the drooping tail seems to trail along the ground. The aquatic setting often degenerates into a scribble towards the end of L G (pl, 19c). Sometimes the waves are omitted, and the birds are left in direct confrontation (pI. 191). We see them actually greeting one another on a fragment from Syracuse, the earliest known export from the mother city to the new colony." We are now approaching the end ofLG, for it is only a short step forward from here to the one-legged creatures on the neck of an Orientalizing oinochoe from Cumae." White paint, as a medium of decoration, continues to be a rare alternative to glaze (pI. 19a). No vase combines light and dark patterns, as in contemporary Crete (pI. 54c,f); but there is a class ofshallow kotylai where white lines frame a reserved hour-glass (W I 1215). The class with white circles also continues." SHAPES
Oinochoai may be sorted out into two main types. The more common has a broad straight neck, and a body varying from globular to ovoid (pI. 19a-c). Less frequent is the slowpouring variety with globular body and tall narrow neck, as Aetos B 972. Some oinochoai, like AJA 45, 33, fig. 6, occupy an intermediate position between these two extremes. Of the lekythos-oinochoe no Corinthian original can be assigned to this stage with complete Aetos R 63, B 886. 3 Aetos R 56; AJA 45, 33, fig. 5. 3 BSA 43, pl, 3; BSA 48, pI. 51. ~ Cf. J. K. Anderson, BSA 53-4 (1958-<j), 139. 5 MA 25, fig. 140; BSA 42, 152, fig. 7b. 8 MA 22, pl. 30, I; R. M. Cook, GPP, pl. 8c. 7 PAE 19", 120, fig. 16. 1
LG
101
certainty. There is, however, a local imitation ofthis shape inGr. 236 at Pithecusae, decorated with a floating zigzag on the neck, and a single-line meander on the shoulder; the rest of the surface is covered with fine banding, except for small glazed areas near the lip and base. The body is more conical than in M G 11; the profile, while still slightly convex, no longer turns inward towards the base. Munich 2284, an original from Corinth (pl. 19d), has a similar body, and should belong to this phase; the presence oftriangles on the shoulder might indicate an earlier stage, but the profile shows a considerable advance on the M G I I type (pI. 18d). There is a similar scarcity of aryballoi in this phase. The older dark-ground type has disappeared, and the well-known globular version ofEPC has not yet arrived.' No aryballoi of any kind came to light in the Lower Deposit at Aetos, in the Geometric Deposit at Perachora, or in the L G graves at Pithecusae. The only example which may fill this lacuna is N. Cemetery Gr. 40.1, unusually decorated with close concentric circles in the Cypriot manner; the same scheme is applied in white paint to a Corinthian L G oinochoe at Aetos (R 135), and the same idea enjoyed a briefvogue on the contemporary oinochoai ofAttica (p. 75) and the Argolid (p. 133). As a plain handmade shape, the hydria occurs in Corinthian graves throughout E G and MG;2 but the first painted examples belong to this phase," Neck-handled amphorae are represented by two slim examples from Aetos, R 125 and B 864; there are a few fragments of a belly-handled amphora, which must have been among the latest Geometric offerings to Hera Akraia.' Pyxides are now plentiful and varied. The old globular type with inset rim, of which we have seen glimpses in EG (pI. 16d) and MG 11, is continued in Aetos R 70-1; the shape is unchanged, except that the rolled handles are now set higher on the shoulder, near the rim. A more common globular variety has a raised rim leaning inwards, and a strap handle set at a much lower angle; the edge of the lid is turned down vertically in order to fit the rim (pI. 1ge; lid, B 822).5 Two other new types share this raised rim: the tall pyxis, and the kotyle-pyxis. The formers is extraordinarily reminiscent ofan Attic PG example.' The profile of the body has a convex curve, continued by the steep rounded dome of the lid. The handles, surprisingly, are of the high rolled type found on the old globular version with inset rim, not the newer type with raised rim. The kotyle-pyxis" is related to the shallow kotyle, but has no handles; the raised rim and the lid" are imitated from the corresponding globular type. The true kotyle - a hemispherical drinking vessel without any trace ofan offset lip - makes its first appearance at the beginning of L G. The earliest examples (pl, 19j) take over the chevron scheme ofMG 11 without any alteration, except for an increase in the number of horizontal framing lines. A little later, the field is occupied by herons facing over zigzag waves (pI. 19k); side metopes of double axe are introduced near the end of this phase (pI. 191). The handles are barred, and set a little distance below the rim. Unlike its M G II forerunner with vestigial lip (pI. 18e), the kotyle has no groups of bars inside the rim; the Globular aryballoi like Perachora II, nos. 7-9, are dated to LG by Dunbabin; but see below pp. 106--7on this class. Young, Corinth XIII, 41. 3 Aetos R 128=B 866; Volimedia, Tomb 4. ~ Perachora I, pl. 124, 7. 5 Cf. also W 103; Aetos R 64, R 69, B 827. R 63, the earliest of this class, is exceptional in having a tall vertical lip. • Aetos R 77. 7 PGP, pl, 13, top. 8 BSA 53-4, pl. 10,26. • Aetos B 846, 849. 1
2
102 .
CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
interior is fully glazed. In comparison with earlier drinking vessels, the fabric is very much thinner and finer. Outside the Thapsos class, which will presently be discussed, there are no kantharoi, and very few skyphoi; ofthe latter, those with clearly offset rims may be on the verge ofM GIL l The kotyle has a first cousin in the kyathos, a new straight-rimmed drinking cup with two vertical handles (pI. 19f); this form was derived from the low-handled kantharos, just as the skyphos gave birth to the kotyle. The kyathos shares with the kotyle the same schemes of decoration: chevrons" followed by herons.t It isa short-lived shape, not often found after L G. One-handled cups, absent from the repertoire since PG r,yv 2 I ), are occasionally found in this phase;' mugs, also rare, continue from M G I I (W 106). Kraters, unlike most of the smaller open vases, never lose their offset lips. The handles are always of the stirrup type inherited from the Atticizing class ofMG 11 (pI. 17f), but the pedestals of the latter are now out of fashion. The bodies are usually deeper than those of the contemporary kotylai, but the decoration is often comparable (pl, 19h).5 Finally, the tray - a rare shape which appears sporadically in several other local styles. MG examples are known from Rhodes (p. 270) and Samos (p. 291); those from Thessaly (p, 159) and Crete (p. 270, n. 8) are earlier still. All these precursors have a broad flat base, a low straight wall rising at an angle of about 45-60 degrees, and three loop handles aligned with the walls; inside, the profile of the wall passes into the base without articulation. With good reason, this is thought to be a clay version of the kanoun, the Homeric libation basket." In Corinthian L G a few fragments of this shape are known from the sanctuaries of Delphi and Perachora," but without any trace of handles; the profiles, however, share the salient features of the earlier examples elsewhere. THE THAPSOS CLASS
Having surveyed the character of the more orthodox pottery, we now turn to the special class mentioned on p. 99. The open vases, which form the vast majority, consist ofkraters, skyphoi, and kantharoi. The kraters include the only known example of this time with a pedestal. S The others, which are low-footed, rarely exceed o· 20m. in height; the handles are usually horizontal, and rolled (pI. 20a). Nearly all the Corinthian skyphoi of this phase, and every one of the kantharoi, belong to this class; the handles on the kantharoi may be low (pI. 20 b) or high." The three shapes betray a strong family likeness; typical are the high offset lip, the deep body, and the straightness of the lower profile, tapering towards a narrow foot. The closed vases consist of large oinochoai with globular bodies.w large roundmouthedjugs,l1 and a globular pyxis;12 also ajlat pyxis, a shape not otherwise known in Corinth until EPC.13 ~ In the decoration, four motifs are common among the Thapsos class, but foreign to other Corinthian pottery of this time: meander, meander hooks, running spiral, and widely E.g. Aetos R !rIO; R I4=B 628. 2 Aetos R48-g. 3CGA 54, n. I. • Aetos R 47, B 777. Other examples: N. Cemetery, Gr. 44.1, S 1-4; Aetos R 56; A]A 45, 33, fig. 5; BCH 85,343, fig. 30; Kraiker, Aigina, no. 126; Hesperia 17, pI. 72, Cl, with a fish in the central panel. 6 Heurdey and Skeat, BSA 31, 29, n. 4; Johansen, Exochi, I39ff. • D. Callipolitis-Feytmans, BCH 86 (1962), 119, 143, fig. 9. 8 VS, pl. 1,2. 9 Aetos B 727; Dresden ZV 837, AA 1892, 162, fig. 24. 10 ADChr 18, pl, 167a; VS, pI. 1,3. 11 BCH 85,346, fig. 33a--e. 12 VS, pI. 3, I. 13 VS, pI. 3, 2.
LG
spaced vertical wavy lines. Other patterns include three-limbed sigmas, single zigzag, multiple zigzags with vertical bars on the apices,' and rounded S'S.2 The orthodox heron never appears here; instead, we see a strange kind of goose, always in silhouette, with protruding feathers." On a few krater fragments at Delphi there are traces of a figured style, showing chariot scenes and animal friezes ;' a large oinochoe from Thebes bears a representation of a ship." The characteristic unit of decoration is a narrow panel at handle level, surrounded by horizontal lines on all four sides. On the kraters, and on some kantharoi, a second panel is placed on the lip, also flanked by horizontal lines. In the handle zone on the largest kraters, the central panel may be flanked or surrounded by ancillaries in the M G manner ;" here the triple vertical zigzag and the spidery eight-armed swastika make their appearance, later to be borrowed by Boeotian potters (p. 210). In contrast to more orthodox LG work, the fine banding under the handle zone is often carried down to the foot. The unorthodox character of these vases was first noted by Weinberg who, after a consideration of provenance, fabric, and style, dissociated the whole class from Corinth.' As a possible source he suggested Aegina; but this now seems unlikely, after the full publication ofthe pottery from that island." The absence, so far, ofthis class among the finds at Corinth is not a strong argument for a non-Corinthian origin, since the aggregate ofCorinthian LG and EPC found at home is still remarkably small." As for the fabric, Weinberg contrasts the powdery green-grey clay and shiny black glaze of the Thapsos class with the pale buff or pinkish clay and red-brown glaze of orthodox Corinthian L G; but this variety could surely be obtained by firing the same clay in closed and open kilns respectively, and it has been observed that the former technique is typical of later Corinthian ware.w I would prefer, then, to regard the Thapsos class as the output ofa particular Corinthian workshop, which cultivated a rather different style from that of the first kotylai, and other related vases. The differences between the two classeshave been emphasized in some detail; but the fact remains that they are closer to each other than either is to any other contemporary local style. In both classes, the undecorated surface of the vase is partially or wholly clothed in fine banding; this practice has its roots in Corinthian M G I I, and was never consistently followed elsewhere. In some respects, the Thapsos class breaks less radically with older Corinthian tradition than the orthodox LG style; witness the retention ofhatched meander designs, narrow panels, and articulated lips on drinking vessels. At any rate, both classes have a common parent in Corinthian M G I I; in pI. 18d-e we see the prototypes of the Thapsos skyphos and the shallow kotyle side by side. The jloruit of the Thapsos style lies mainly within L G; yet there are a few indications that it was not entirely forgotten in EPC. A krater from Aigion in Patras has a central meander panel, with vertical wavy lines underneath j-! but the lateral metopes contain Early Orientalizing sphinxes, while the rim bears a cable ornament, still flanked by hori-
1 5
1 Aetos B 635. 2FD v, figs. 523-4. 3 FD v, figs. 541-4, 551-2; VS, pI. 1,3. 'FD v, figs. 536-40; BCH85, 328, fig. 15. 5 VS, pI. 1,3. 6 FD v, figs. 501-6. • A]A 45, 40-4. 8 Kraiker, Aigina; see p. 13, n. 5. 9 Perachora, however, has yielded three frs, ofThapsos type; Petachora II, nos. 682, 686, 1277. 10 Villard, MEFR 60 (1948),12, n. 2; Dunbabin, Perachora II, I, n. I. 11 Cf. FD v, fig. 508.
104 . CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
EPC
zontallines in the Thapsos manner. There is also a group ofThapsos-type skyphoi, usually found in E P C contexts (pp. 107-8), where the panel of decoration has dropped out, leaving nothing but lines and glaze (pl. zed}; sometimes the panel, too, survives, containing a few spaced S'S.1
We have now reached the starting point of the Orientalizing movement in Corinthian pottery. A well-known oinochoe from Cumae' shows an amazing blend ofold and new elements. The neck is still decorated with a stock formula of L G - two herons facing across zigzag waves; but the body is covered with exotic loops of plant ornament, utterly foreign to Geometric principles. The first phase of the Orientalizing style, manifested in the oinochoai of the Cumae Group, and in the globular aryballoi with outlined figures, has received several detailed studies- and lies outside the scope of this book. Less well known, but more relevant to our quest, is the enormous mass ofE P C material whose decoration is still linear ; for these vases represent the last truly creative stage in the Geometric tradition of Corinth. In quality of fabric, elegance of shape, and dexterity of ornament, they surpass anything that Corinth had previously produced; perhaps the first Orientalizing experiments acted as a refining influence on them without submerging their Geometric character.
EARLY PROTOCORINTHIAN, LINEAR WORK (EPC) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS Corinth, Potters' Quarter Deposit. AJA 37 (1933), 605ff., figs. 1-4. Includes a few LG frs. Pithecusae, Gr. 197. Buchner, Metropoli e Colonie 265, n. 3. Includes one LG skyphos of the Thapsos class. Corinth, Well C. Hesperia 17 (1948),208-14, pIs. 72-7. PI. 21e. The krater C I and the oinochoai C 4-5 are LG. Pithecusae, Gr. 282, with the Nestor Inscription. AR 1956,61, fig. 4. The only Corinthian vases are the four aryballoi on the bottom right of the picture. Thera, Messavouno Tomb 47. AM 28 (1903),51-2, BeiI. 33, K 28, K 39, K 42. Not certainly from the same burial. Cumae, Gr. 103 bis. MA 13 (1903), 263ff., figs. 53-61. The only Corinthian vase is the kotyle, fig. 58. AJA 62 (1958), pI. 69, fig. 35· Cumae, Gr. Ill. MA 13 (19°3),278-80, fig. 65· Cumae, Gr. 32. MA 22 (1913), 241-2. One skyphos of EPC type (pI. 40, 5), several friable Rhodian aryballoi as pI. 49, 3 (see J ohansen, Exochi, I55ff.), one locallekythosoinochoe (pI. 36, 3), and three Euboean vases (pI. 40, 2, 7-8 and pl. 41 f-g,j). Pithecusae, Gr. 102, with the Bocchoris Scarab. Buchner, ibid.; Antiquity and Survival 4 (Hague, 1955), fig. 17. The only Corinthian vases are two aryballoi andone skyphos. Syracuse, Fusco Gr. 337. NSc 1895, 150, fig. 37; BCH 74 (195 2), 330, fig. 4· Mylae, Gr. V. Mylai 39, fig. 34, pI. 40,4-5, 8-g; pI. 56,8. Smyrna, Deposit E. BSA 53-4 (1958-g), 139-41, fig. I and pI. 21, nos. 16-33. Pithecusae, Gr. 67. Unpublished. Taras, grave. N Se 1940, 483, fig. 49; Ann. 21-2 (1959-60), 8-g, fig. I. Mylae, Gr. 37. Mylai 52, pI. 40, I and 7; pI. 50,8. Syracuse, Fusco Gr. 466. NSe 1895, 179, fig. 78; BCH 74 (1952), 330, fig. 3. Three aryballoi, Syracuse 13742-3, 13860. The skyphos in the BCH illustration comes from a later grave, no. 372. The third aryballos, not illustrated, 13860, is transitional to ovoid. Syracuse, Fusco Gr. 219. NSe 1895, 136, figs. 14- 16; BCH 74 (195 2),332, fig. 5. Corinth, well in south-central area of Agora. Corinth VII. I, 37ff., W 116-34. PI. 21k. Aetos (Ithaca), Upper Deposit. BSA 43 (1948), rff The following eight EPC vases are illustrated: 136, 138, 142, 159, 163, 207, 225, 265. Earlier: 55 (MG 11), 69 (LG: pl. Ige). Later: 82, 162, 173,206,212,220,255, For the local vases in the same context, see pp. 228ff. 1
AM
28, Beil. 33, 3, K 28; Naples 139901 from Cumae; NSc 1962,4°5, fig. 88 from Ge1a.
DECORATION The Cumae oinochoe mentioned above introduces another novelty in the broad solid rays. These are associated with Orientalizing and linear work alike, but in E P C are confined to closed shapes: the oinochoe, the lekythos-oinochoe, and the aryballos. As we might expect, they are reserved for sharply curving surfaces, either on the lower body (pk 21 c) or on the shoulder (pI. 21 h). Their shape varies according to the field, from equilateral to tall isosceles; but at this stage they are never very attenuated." Their bases are always contiguous. Another important development is the decline of the L G heron. As soon as this creature began to be shown in silhouette, the way was opened to an ever-increasing degree oflinear stylization. On the same Cumae oinochoe, where the birds stand on one leg, this process Iias already begun. On the fragment Aetos R 24 the tail has left the ground, while the body has been simplified into a stroke ofpaint. The crest is the next distinguishing feature to go, and by the time ofSmyrna no. 23 the day ofthe single bird is over. The heron has now become a stiff-legged soldier on parade, in a file occupying the whole of the central panel. These soldier-birds are sometimes drawn with two legs (pl, 2oh);4 their appearance on a plate with early Orientalizing lotuses" is a further indication of their E P C date. Finally comes the even more schematic wirebird with hooked neck, a small blob for the body, and a single flimsy bent leg (pl. 21 e), which at the end of the series degenerates into a summary wiggle." At the end of E P C, or soon afterwards, wirebirds pass into oblivion. This series of birds is most fully represented on the kotyle whose shape, as we shall see, grows deeper as the drawing of birds becomes more careless. The linear ornament, too, changes with the birds. During the vogue for soldier-birds, zigzag waves are still found," sometimes with a row ofloose chevrons or sigmas set between the zigzags." Loose sigmas begin to replace the bird files altogether before the end ofEPC (pI. 2If).9 Metopes, rare on 1 VS, pl, 6, I; GPP, pl. 8c. •]ohansen, VS, chapter 2; Payne, Ne, chapter I; Dunbabin and Robertson, BSA 48 (1953),173-5. 3 Benton, BSA 48, 262-3. • Cf. the kotyle Delos XVII, pl. 53, 35; in this form they were adopted by Eretrian imitators, who debased them yet further; see p. 194 and pI. 41h. 5 Aetas R561. 6 VS, pl, 17, 1. 7 BSA 42,147, fig. 6a. 8 AJA 37 (1933),607, fig. 3, I. 9 Also Mylae, Gr. V; Pithecusae, Gr. 67.
10 7
106 • CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
EPC
the shallow kotylai ofLG, appear more often on the deeper forms ofEPC; but the double axe is now the only motif used. The base remains glazed, the glaze frequently being interrupted by a single reserved line. The handles, at the stage of the soldier-birds, bear dots between horizontal lines ; later, on the deepest kotylai, the horizontal lines stand alone.' Before we leave the kotyle, the perseverance ofthe white-on-glaze system should be mentioned; as before, the small central metope with the reserved hour-glass remains the standard formula (pI. 2Id). Other vases decorated in this manner include a kotyle-pyxis from Thera (pI. 20f), and the krater no. 2 from Well C at Corinth. Among the other new linear motifs, the most notable are (a) the net of dotted lozenges with two, three, or four tiers (pI. 20g), and (b) the dotted serpent, either (i) with white dots on its body, or (ii) flanked above and below by rows of dots in dark glaze, or (iii) with both types of dotting combined. Both motifs are applied to other shapes; they are especially at home on the conicallekythos-oinochoe, often appearing on the neck and shoulder respectively of the same vase (pI. 21 c) ; here, too, the hatched battlement appears in a tall form. Serpents sometimes encircle the little shoulders of globular aryballoi; lozenge nets are favoured on tall and flat pyxides (pI. 20 g). Rarer novelties include rows of small cross-hatched lozenges (pI. 21 g), horizontal S's (pI. 2Ik), and the N-ornament. 2 Linear aryballoi often borrow petals and rays as shoulder decoration from their Orientalizing contemporaries. Spiral hooks (pI. 21 k) become common just before the end of E P C, and of the globular aryballos." In conclusion, we should note a pleasant innovation in the little outline fish found swimming on some aryballoi and kotylai.s Larger fish are rendered in solid glaze, with eye, gill, and median line reserved: a typical example is painted under the oinochoe Aetos R 171.
rather than shape is the safest criterion for arranging the aryballoi in a chronological sequence. Thus the lower zone below the handle is usually a sign of earliness; the later class, where only the handle area is decorated, looks forward to the scheme on the 'transitionalto-ovoid' aryballoi.' The ovoid oinochoe (pl, 21 a-b) continues with little change in shape, except for a general tautening of contour caused by the raising of the centre of gravity. The conicallekythosoinochoe ofEPC (pI. 21 c) is larger and more profusely decorated than its predecessors; the neck has become taller, and the contours of the body rather straighter. The strap handle is now broad enough to deserve its own panel of decoration, often filled by a dotted serpent like the shoulder. The body is generally covered with much finer lines than have ever been seen before; short rays are sometimes placed on the base. The neck bears two or three panels separated by lines; and pairs of soldier-birds occasionally keep watch either side of the lip. Of the various kinds of pyxis the globular has virtually died out; the tall type continues with straighter contours, and slimmer form (pI. 20h).2 The kotyle-pyxis (pI. 20f) is still in fashion, sometimes borrowing its decoration from the kotyle." The commonest variety, however, is the newly created flat pyxis. This may be derived from a handleless LG type belonging to the Thapsos class, represented by VS, pI. 3, 2, and A M 28, BeiI. 35, K 69. At any rate, the orthodox workshops were making a flat variety with reflex rolled handles by the beginning of EPC, like pI. 20g; the ornament on the handle and the one-legged heron place this vase at the stage of the intermediate kotyle. The lid, which is flat, has a flange near the edge to anchor it firmly on to the straight rim of the body; the walls are usually vertical, but one can sometimes detect a slight concavity here before E P C has run its course." The E P C kotyle progresses from the shallow, hemispherical form ofL G to a much deeper version, whose depth is nearly as great as the rim diameter (pI. 21 d-F). The change seems to have taken place within a few years at the beginning ofE P C. We can see a fleeting intermediate stage on three examples where the heron is gradually giving way to a file ofsoldierbirds." When the wirebirds arrive, the deep form has become fully established. Near the end ofEPC (pI. 21f)6 there is movement towards straighter walls and narrower bases, leading eventually to the extremely pointed form ofMPC 1.7 By the end ofEPC the handles ofthe deep kotyle are set horizontally, and the vertical barring ofLG handles has been replaced by a single horizontal line," The kyathos is not as common as in L G; but there are some deep examples which should belong here, including a few with one handle only: VS, pI. IO, 3-4, are representative. The kantharos, now comparatively rare, is always fully glazed and usually on the small side; the handles are invariably low." Some skyphoi are still being produced in the Thapsos manner,
SHAPES
Let us begin with the well-known type-fossil of this generation, the globular aryballos. After a lull in its production during LG, this little perfume-flask is now manufactured in large quantities, and exported throughout the Greek world. The E PC aryballos is a refined version of the old dark-ground type; the body is rounder than in MG, and the neck smaller in relation to the whole. PI. 21 h should come at the beginning ofthe E P C series; the centre of gravity is still comparatively low, while the zone of grouped sigmas is reminiscent of LG closed vases." Later, the shoulder becomes broader, and the base begins to taper; the lower zone ofdecoration sometimes survives, but the original sigmas or chevrons often degenerate into dashes." At the end of-EPC the lower zone tends to die out, and the decoration is confined to handle level (pI. 2Ij). In some cases? the shape continues to develop, moving towards the 'transitional-to-ovoid' class detected by johansen," and placed by Payne at the beginning of Middle Protocorinthian." There is, however, a group oflate EPC aryballoi whose bodies (pI. 21j) are still uncompromisingly round: typical examples occur in the same graves as the 'transitional-to-ovoid' variety." Because of this late plump group, syntax Benton, BSA 48,279. • MA 25, 543, fig. 129. 3 AJA 46 (1942), 26, fig. 3, no. 3. VS, pI. 9, 3; MA 22, pI. 44,3. 5 Similar examples in Pithecusae, Cr. 282; Cumae, MA 22, pI. 43, 2, 9, II. B VS, pI. 4, 6; MA 22, pl, 44,7 and 10. 0 E.g. MA 25, 547, fig. 133, left. 8 VS 73-4, pl. 14. • NC 7-8. 10 E.g. Syracuse, Fusco Grs. 219, 466; also in Mylae, Gr. V, with a late EPC kotyle; in the Taras Cr., with a late EPC skyphos. 1
4
This attempt to subdivide globular arybalIoi is not new. Johansen (VS, 16ff.) segregated his 'arybalIes pansus' into two classes, 'globulaire' and 'conique'; but because both types often occurred in the same grave, he declined to make any chronological distinction between them. It would have been rash to make such a distinction if one thought, as he did, that the 'arybaIle pansu' was in circulation for 75 years (VS 185). But now that recent evidence (pp. 322ff.) has shortened its life to one generation, one may logically detect two typological stages in its development without being surprised when examples of both stages occur in the same context; indeed, it would be strange if this were not so. • Cf. AM 28, Beil, 34-5, K 61-5. • E.g. the soldier-birds on Aetos B 845. 4 VS, pI. 18, 1. 5 Series: BSA 42, 153, fig. 7a; Delos XVII, pl. 53, 35; BSA 42, 147, fig. 6a. B Cf. Mylai, pI. 40, 9. o Benton, BSA 48,279, on Aetos R 30: C. Brokaw, Essays in memory of Karl Lehmann (1964), 51ff. 8 Benton, loe.cit, 9 E.g. A M 28, BeiI. 33, K 34. 1
108 .
CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
as is shown by the fragment Aetos B 658 with soldier-birds in the panel (cf. p. 105) ; but in most cases the panels have now gone, leaving only lines and glaze (pl, 2od). Later, towards the end ofE P C, a new series begins with deep shape, and crisp straight contours; the handles project horizontally; and a panel, bounded by vertical lines, is filled with floating chevrons or sigmas in the manner of contemporary kotylai.' Kraters tend to be rather deeper than in LG, in conformity with the development of the kotylai; near the end of this phase (pl, 21k) one may detect the same straightening of the lower profile typical of the contemporary deep kotylai," In contrast to the stirrup handles which were customary in LG, the kraters ofEPC regularly have simple horizontal straps. Of the two apparent exceptions to this rule, both in the N. Cemetery, one (Gr. 47.1) is certainly an Argive import (p. 140), and the other (Gr. 43.1), ifnot also an import, has strong Argive affinities." Trays, or kana, continue to be offered at the sanctuaries. Those of E PC differ from their L G predecessors in having a more pronounced articulation inside, between base and wall r' and the walls themselves tend to rise less steeply than before." An exceptionally delicate class, with carefully formed ring foot, and walls rising at about thirty degrees, swelling in the centre, may be the precursors of the handleless plate which became commoner in the later phases of Corinthian pottery;" but the distinction between these and orthodox kana is not always clear, while the material is too fragmentary to generalize on the presence or absence of handles. RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
It now remains to place the L G and E P C phases ofCorinth in relation to the Attic sequence. For the earlier periods, the stylistic rapport between Athens and Corinth is close enough to enable us to define the Corinthian phases in terms ofAttic; but this rapport vanishes at the end ofMG. The last sign of Attic influence, as we have observed, occurs near the close of Corinthian M G I I, when the system of square metopes characteristic of Attic L G 1a was adapted to the local dark-ground style. We may therefore conclude that the MG 11 of Corinth persevered throughout the period of Attic LG la: Corinthian LG, then, will not have begun before Attic L GIb. For later synchronisms there is abundant evidence from context, owing to the plentiful exports of Corinthian fine pottery to Attica and elsewhere; something, too, may be learned from the Attic imitations which these exports inspired, although the information supplied by the Corinthian originals is naturally of greater value. Here I list thirty-two significant groups which offer useful correlations between the Attic and Corinthian sequences: twentyeight graves, three wells, and one house deposit. Unless otherwise stated in the first column, references and full particulars are given in the list ofAttic L G 1 I groups on pp. 82-5; here I concentrate on the chronological relevance ofthese contexts. Taras gr. Z Other EPC kraters: N. Cemetery, Gr, 32.1: Well C, no. 2: Aetos R 378 (Upper Deposit) and B 799. • Courbin, CGA 550, n. 4: 'parait bien argien'. 'E.g. Aetos R 265, Upper Deposit. S D. Callipolitis-Feytmans, BCH 86 (1g62), 143ff., fig. g. 6 op. cit, 119-20, 145-6, fig. 10; add Aetos R 561 - surely a Corinthian original- and B 1058-62. 1
109
EPC
ATTIC-CORINTHIAN GROUPS
SMYRNA,
Deposit D
Gr. E Gr. 2
AGORA, VARI,
SPATA,
Gr.
19.1
I
Vlasto colI., gr. Vlasto colI., gr. KERAMEIKOS,
ELEUSIS,
Opferrinne I
Gr. EA
1898, 119
Gr. EA 1898,93 PITHECUSAE, Gr. 129 Frankfurt, gr. ELEUSIS, Gr. 62 ELEUSIS,
Date ofAttic pottery j Corinthian imports : references to vases shape anddate attributable to Workshops
Attic imitations of Corinthian: shape, anddate in Corinthian terms
LGlIa LGlIa
Kotyle, frs., LG Kotyle, LG
LG lIb early (p. 74, no. 4) LG lIb early (p. 64, no. I I) LG lIb early (p. 64, no. IO) LG lIb early (p. 73, no. 4) LGlIb (p. 59, no. 34) LGlIa,b LGlIb LGlIb
Kotyle, LG late
LGlIb LGlIb,EPA
Kotyle, LG-EPC Kotyle, LG- E P C Kotyle, LG late Kotyle, EPC early
2
Kotyle, EPC
Aryballos, EPC late
Gr.
98
KERAMEIKOS,
Gr.
99
EPA early (Analatos p.) SubG
KERAMEIKOS,
Gr.
100
SubG
KERAMEIKOS,
Gr.
64
SubG
KERAMEIKOS,
Gr.
66
SubG
KERAMEIKOS,
Gr.
67
SubG
Standed bowl, E P C (imitation of Attic)
"Gr.
I"
SubG EPA early
Amphora and 3 aryballoi, EPC
SubG, EPA LGlIb, EPA (p. 59, no. 35) LG lIb, SubG, EPA (p. 59, no. 37)
Kyathos, EPC Pyxis and kotyJe, E P C
Gr. EA I898,~9I AGORA, Well R 9:2
ELEUSIS,
AGORA,
Well N
I I: 6
kotylai, LG-EPC
Kotyle, EPC Kotyle, EPC
Aryballos, E PC early
KERAMEIKOS,
KALLITHEA,
Kotyle, LG-EPC
Kotyle, EPC Kotyle, EPC (with EPAdog)
Kotyle, E P C late Kotyle, EPC late
Kotyle, MP C I
Aryballos, E P C Kotyle, EPC Kotyle, EPC Aryballos, E P C Kotyle, EPC Kotyle-pyxis, EPC Kotyle, EPC
EPC
110 • CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
Corinthian imports: Date ofAttic pottery; references to vases shape and date attributable to Workshops AGORA,
SPA T A,
WellJ 15:1
SubG, EPAearly
Gr. (Vlasto colI.)
EPA (Mesogeia p.)
PHALERON,
Gr. 47
SubG
PHALERON,
Gr. 83
PHALERON,
Gr. 19
SubG SubG, EPA
PHALERON,
Gr. 56
SubG
PHALERON,
Gr. 27
SubG
PHALERON,
Gr. 29 Gr. I I
SubG
PHALERON,
PHALERON,
Gr.
48
SubG
EPAlate
Kotyle, E P C late
Attic imitations of Corinthian: shape, and date in Corinthian terms Kotyle, EPC Kotyle, EPC late
Aryballos, E P C Kotyle, E P C late Aryballos, EPC late 3 kotylai, EPC Kotyle and aryballos, MPC I
Aryballos, E P C Kotyle, EPC
Pyxis, kotyle, aryballos, MPC I Aryballos, MPC I Kotyle, EPC 2 aryballoi, 2 kotylai, EPC Pyxis.z aryballoi, M P C I 6 aryballoi, I kotyle, Kotyle-pyxis, E-MPC I MPC I
It will at once be clear that Corinthian LG must have lasted far into the period of Attic L G I I. A useful landmark is provided by the second Vlasto group, containing three kotylai: two Corinthian originals, and one Attic imitation. The former are (a) a late hemispherical example of L G type, with two debased herons facing one another across waves; and (b) a shape intermediate between the shallow and deep forms, bearing four soldier-birds flanked by waves - a type which we have placed in thefirstyearsofEPC (p, 107). It follows that the Attic Lion Painter, who is the author of the local imitation, must have been active at some time near the change from L G to E P C in Corinth. Two other groups, both containing Corinthian imports, point to a similar conclusion. In Vari Gr. 2 a late LG heron kotyle accompanies an amphora by one of the Lion Painter's contemporaries, the Empedocles Painter. Likewise, in the first Vlasto group, a late pitcher from the Soldier-bird Workshop is found with a kotyle transitional between L G and E PC: the shape is still shallow, but the white-dotted serpent is in the E P C manner. 1 Since all three ofthe Attic vases mentioned are attributable to the early years of L G I I b, we shall not be far wrong in assuming that This shallow type, with thin lines going down to the base, looks like the model for three of the Attic imitations in our groups; Kerameikos 1360 in Opferrinne I, Athens 15271 in Spata, Gr, I, and the Lion Painter's kotyle - a strikingly mannered version; cf. J. M. Cook, BSA 42,153. Only two Attic kotylai bear decoration of authentic Corinthian LG character: the other example from Opferrinne 1 (no. 1355), and Oxford 1934.344, pi. Ish· 1
EPC and LG lIb began at approximately the same time, if we allow a few years for the Corinthian kotylai to be used and admired by their Attic owners before being interred in graves. Kerameikos Gr. 98 supplies the next important landmark: here a late EPC kotyle, deep and straight-sided, keeps company with a standed bowl, an early work of the E P A Analatos Painter. Similar kotylai turn up in three other Attic contexts, in association with plain local subgeometric wares, and the occasional early E P A vase: Kerameikos, Gr. 99; Agora, Well J IS: I; Phaleron, Gr. 47. A little later, MPC types begin to arrive in the Phaleron Cemetery, but before E P A has run its course. Hence E P C must span the first years ofEP A as well as the whole ofLG lIb. Corinthian LG, then, will fall into position as the contemporary of Attic L Gib and L G I I a.' These conclusions rest ultimately on the best possible evidence from context - i.e. the association of fine Corinthian imports with elaborate Attic vases, whose attribution to recognizable hands allows their place in the local sequence to be defined with considerable precision. Less reliance can be placed on the imitations of Corinthian, owing to the archaizing habits of some Athenian imitators : an obvious example is Agora P 7157 (Hesperia, Supp. 11, 153, fig. 109, C 28), a kotyle whose shape is still on the shallow side, although the row of wire birds betrays knowledge of a deep prototype, late in EPC.
1
Kotyle-pyxis, E-MPC Kotyle, EPC Kotyle, EPC
III
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC' 113
CHAPTER FOUR
Argive Geometric
With the exception of Attic, no local school of Geometric is now better documented than Argive. The material is plentiful, and much ofit comes from carefully excavated cemeteries; thus the progress of the style can be followed through well over sixty significant groups. Furthermore, Argive Geometric has recently had the benefit of a full and masterly survey by the director of the French excavations at Argos,' who for the first time offers a definitive presentation of his material, and beyond doubt establishes Argos as the most important and prolific centre in the Argolid. Tiryns, Asine, and Mycenae, however, have also yielded Geometric in considerable quantity; and isolated grave groups from Berbati and Lerna help to fill in the picture. The great mass of pottery comes from cemeteries; yet there are also two significant domestic deposits from Argos and Asine. In addition, the Argive Heraion and another sanctuary on the Larisa of Argos (not yet fully published) have produced interesting, though fragmentary, votive material. The clay ofArgive Geometric is usually of a cold buff colour, sometimes with a greenish tinge reminiscent of Corinthian fabric. Yet the preparation is much less careful than in Corinth, large particles ofwhite grit often being left in the clay; mica, however, is virtually absent.! Some of the pottery found at Asine possesses a warmer tone than is normal for the Argolid, more orange than buff; here, as we shall see, was the home of a local variant of Argive LG, often as distinct in style as in fabric from the more orthodox ware ofArgos. During the earlier periods of Geometric, close stylistic resemblances between the Argolid and Attica make it possible to define four Argive phases in terms of Attic: E G I, E G I I, MG I, MG II.3 Argive LG, an ambitious and complex style, may also be divided into two phases, but only on internal grounds; it bears very little relation to Attic, or to any other regional school, so that the problems of external relative chronology need special attention (pp. I45ff.). Such problems are partially solved by the occasional import and imitation of Corinthian LG and EPC; much more enlightening, however, is the gradual progress in the use of the multiple brush, which appears to have been uniform in Argive, Corinthian, and Attic workshops.' 1 P. Courbin, CGA. • CGA 182-3. 3 My EGand MGphases do not always correspond with those ofCourbin, as set out in CG A 175-7. Where I diverge from Courbin's system, my reasons will be stated in the course of this chapter. 4CGA84ff. . I
12 .
The intimate relationship between Attic and Argive pottery began in the later part of the Protogeometric period, when practically all the Argive painted shapes were modelled on Attic prototypes.' The open shapes are deep, and set on high feet which are often conical in the Attic manner, although a slight flare is sometimes found. Closed shapes, again as in Attica, have elegant ovoid contours, and normally rest on low conical feet. The repertoire of ornament is largely confined to concentric circles and semicircles, or cross-hatched rectilinear designs. The latest Attic PG manner is also represented in the Argolid by the narrow zones of diluted scribble, wide dogtooth, and groups of alternating diagonals, always engulfed between large areas of glaze. 2 Sometimes, however, a single reserved band with two or three horizontal lines is thought to be sufficient decoration - a simple scheme more typical of Corinth than of Athens. 3 The transition to Geometric in the Argolid takes a very similar course to that followed by Attic potters. Circular ornament and high conical feet pass out of general currency, although flaring feet survive in isolated cases (pt 22 b). As in Attic, the adoption of neckpanels on closed shapes coincides with the other two changes. Thus at a stage when their influence on Corinth suffered a temporary lapse (p. 92), Attic potters maintained close relations with the Argolid. The affinities between Attic and Argive E G I are close enough to suggest that both districts progressed from PG to Geometric at about the same time. ARGIVE EARLY GEOMETRIC: FIRST PHASE (EG I) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS Tiryns, Gr. 2. Tiryns I, 128; pI. 14,7; pI. 16,6; skyphos as pI. 18, 14 (ibid. 150). Transitional from PG. Tiryns, Gr. III/1. 4 A M 78 (1963), 48ff., pI. 23, I and 6. Transitional from PG. ArgOS, Giagos Gr. I. Unpublished. See CGA 172, 216-17. Tiryns, Revma Gr. 2. Unpublished. Small belly-handled amphora; pointed pyxis with vertically pierced lugs. Mycenae, Gr. G 603. BSA 50 (1955), 241-5, pls. 47a-b, d-e; pI. 48. PI. 22. ArgOS, Phlessas Gr. 4/1. Neck-handled amphora, BCH 85 (1961), 678, fig. 10; other vases unpublished. See CGA 13, n. 5; 188. The largest and most informative group is Mycenae G 603, whose affinities with a classic Athenian E G I group have been noted by Desborough:" both the similarities and the differences are instructive. One oinochoe from the Mycenae group is excluded from this analysis, on the grounds that it is a Corinthian import." To judge from its decoration, which is •Argos C54, CGA 66, pI. 148, is an Attic import of this date. 78 (1963), pI. 23, I: cf. PGP, pI. 29. 4 Roman numerals refer to the graves atTiryns excavated by Verdelis (A M 78, rff.), in order to distinguish them from those published in Tiryns I. Where a grave contains two or more successive inhumations, the individual burial is indicated by the number after the oblique stroke. S B SA 50, 243-5; cr. pI. I a-j. 8 ibid. pI. 48f, 54-262. Typical of Corinth are the fine yellow-green fabric and the olive-brown glaze of the bars on the handle. Cf. Hesperia 17 (1948), pl, 71, B 3.
1
S
PGP 204-12, pis. 27-8. E.g. Tiryns I, pI. 14, 6; A M
114 .
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
limited to a narrow zone round the belly, it offers some confirmation that a PG manner persisted in Corinth through the E G I phase of Attica and the Argolid. SHAPES
A solitary neck-handled amphora, from Phlessas Gr. 4 at Argos, has an Attic counterpart from Kerameikos Gr. 1/ close in shape and decoration. Two belly-handled amphorae,2 large and plump, are likewise comparable in shape to an example in Athens (pl, I a); but the shoulder handles of the Attic version never found favour in the Argolid, where the bellyhandled variety continued in use. The oinochoai, with their plump bodies and minimal decoration, recall Corinthian rather than Attic types. That from Tiryns Gr. III is still indistinguishable from the latest PG: pf, 22d, slightly later, has a broader base prophetic of the EG 11 type," and has a twin in G 604, an EG II grave group at Mycenae.' The smalllekythos-oinochoe, pl. 22 g, is a poor relation of the Attic type represented by pI. le. More individual are the pyxides. PI. 22h, a globular version with a tiny everted rim, differs from its Attic counterpart (pl, I g) in possessing handles - although the handleless type was known in the Argive PG.5 The other two pyxides from the Mycenae group have some affinity with the pointed variety ofAttic E G I (pl, I f) ; peculiar to the Argolid, however, are the strange suspension lugs, pierced either vertically or horizontally. This curious little shape seems to be a local invention in EG I, combining a new Attic shape with an old prehistoric device. The earliest form is represented by pl. 22f, where the end is truncatedj" pf, 22 e, where the point is exaggerated, looks forward to later examples of E G I I and MGI. The open vases have shallower bodies than their local predecessors, and their Attic contemporaries." Furthermore, their lips are more sharply offset than with any of the corresponding Attic shapes at this time. As for the feet, the high conical form ofPG seems to have been replaced at once by a ring base; in this respect the low-handled kantharos (pl. 22a) has an Attic counterpart from a late E G I grave (pI. I 0). 8 Skyphoi seem to be more popular at this time than in Attica: the two glazed examples from Tiryns Grs. 2 and I I I, with fine rounded profiles, invite comparison with Corinthian, Cycladic, and Thessalian forms at the same stage of development." The splaying pedestal of the Mycenae skyphos (pk 22 b) has a slight rib half-way up - a device more boldly exploited in Attic E G 1.10 DECORATION
As in contemporary Attica, the decoration is dominated by large areas of dark glaze.
Much of the ornament is placed in narrow zones or panels. The appearance Qfpanels on the necks of two closed vases - the Mycenae oinochoe (pI. 22d) and the Phlessas neckhandled amphora from Argos - recalls one of the most important innovations of Attic K. v, I, pI. 25, 2132. 2 PI. 22C: Tiryns I, pI. 14,7. 3 Cf. Corinth VII. I, no. 26. • BSA 50, pI. 49d. Mycenae, Gr. PG 602. BSA 50, pI. 47f. 6 Cf. Tiryns i, 156, fig. 19, left, which may be earlier still. 7 Leaving out of account the unusual tripod kalathos, Tiryns I, pI. 16,6, which looks PG. 8 Low conical feet, however, survive into Argive EG Il as a rare alternative; pI. 23d. • Corinth VII. I, no. 41; Tenos, pI. 3411; Theotokou (Magnesia), Wace and Thompson, Prehistoric Thessaly 210, fig. 145d. 10 Cf. Hesperia 2 (1933),553, fig. 11,5. 1
5
EG I
E G I; the belly-handled amphora, however, departs from Attic custom in bearing a panel on the shoulder instead of the neck (pf, 22C).1 Small window-panels, after the Attic fashion, appear on the two drinking vessels from the Mycenae grave (pl, 22a-b). The range of motifs is more restricted than in Attic E G I. A battlement in multiple outline fills the small panel of the kantharos (pl, 22 a), which is only half the size of its Attic counterpart (pI. I c). The meander has not yet come to the Argolid; on the other hand, the use of the double axe in isolation (pl. 22 b) has no parallel in Attic, and the multiple zigzag (pl. 22e) is not common in Athens until EG 11. Triangular motifs, inherited from PG, are confined to shoulders, as in Attic: cross-hatched triangles on the pointed pyxides, and inset triangles on the smalllekythos-oinochoe (pl, 22e-g). The narrow motifs include diluted scribble, broad dogtooth, and opposed groups of diagonals (Phlessas amphora); these, too, are survivors from the local PG repertoire, and figure prominently in contemporary Attic. Foreign to Attic, however, is the narrow panel containing nothing but horizontal lines ;2 this seems to be a North Peloponnesian mannerism, found also in Corinth" and Achaea (pl, 48e). In general, Argive E G I decoration is more austere than in the corresponding phase of Attic. Not only is the repertoire more restricted; but we never find any of the gaudy elaboration (e.g. pf, rj) with which the Athenian potter occasionally indulged himself ARGIVE EARLY GEOMETRIC: SECOND PHASE (EG 11) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Argos, uppermost stratum ofapsidal house. CGA 162, n. I: kraters, C 204, 417; stand, C 219; oinochoai, C 458-g; skyphoi, C 299, 301, 613; cups, C 98,164-7; handmade aryballoi, C 97, 163, 462. Argos, Gr. 106/1. BCH80 (1956),376; CGA: amphora, C 891; skyphos, C 889; plate, C 897; cups, C 893-4; pyxis, C 895; bottle, C 898; spindle-whorl, C 899. Argos, Gr. 16. BCH 77 (1953), 263, 'tombeau 4'; 265, fig. 59; CGA: amphora, C 63; cup, C 62. Argos, Katsaros Gr. BCH86 (1962), 716; unpublished. C£ CGA 17 2 • Mycenae, Gr. G 604. BSA 50 (1955), 245-7, pl. 49a-e. Two burials, but very near in time; c£ CGA 165, n. 4. PI. 23a. Nauplia, Pronoia Gr. 34. BCH 80 (1956),266; 267, fig. 13; PAE 1955, 234, pl. 83a-b. Tiryns, Gr. 19. Tiryns t, 130, fig. 4, pl. 14,3; pl. 16, 12; small jug, unpublished (seeCGA 194)· Mycenae, Gr. G 607. AR for 1959-60, 9; unpublished. PI. 23b-h, and seventeen other vases. Argos, Gr. 164/2. CGA: pyxis, C 2410; handmade oinochoe andjug, C 2411-2. Argos, Gr. 14/1. BCH 77 (1953),260, 'tombeau 3'; CGA 66-7, n. 8; 165; 565, n. 1. Amphora, C 51; oinochoai, C 52 and 54, the latter being an Attic PG import; skyphos, C 61. 1 The small amphora from Tiryns, Revma Gr. 2, is also decorated in this manner. • Belly of small amphora from Revma Gr. 2; cf. also Argos C 2479, pyxis from Gr. 191, C G A, pl. 78, as late as M G I. 3 Corinth VII. I, nos. 39, 43.
116 .
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
Argos,Gr.- 193. CGA: lekythoi-oinochoai, C 2482-3; cup, C 2484. Argos, Gr. 90/1. BCH 80 (1956),376; 374, figs. 20-1; CGA 565, n. I: amphora, C 833; oinochoe, C 829; small oinochoe, C 842 (?); plate frs., C 843; pyxis fr., C 839; C 845, unpublished. Transitional to M G I.
NOTE My E G I I includes most of the groups from both phases of Courbin's 'Geometrique ancien'; cf. C GAl 75-7, 557-8. Courbin claims no clear difference ofstyle between his 'GA I' and 'GA 2'; the division between them is marked only by the disappearance of all PG survivals. The earliest and latest of his 'GA' groups I have removed into my EG I and MG I respectively.
Like its predecessor, Argive E G II can be defined in terms of the corresponding phase of Attic; indeed, the resemblances between the two schools are now closer than ever. SHAPES
Amphorae are now represented only by the neck-handled type (pt 23 b). 1 Their shape is heavy and ungainly, like their Attic counterparts (pl, 2f); in both cases the centre ofgravity is too low to counteract the upward thrust of the neck. The oinochoe (pf, 23a) follows the new broad-based version ofAttica (pf, 2d) without any noticeable deviation." The lekythosoinochoe, which has no known contemporary in Attic, survives from the local E G 1 without change, except that the base is sometimes broader than before, in conformity with the new oinochoai." Of the pyxis there are now several distinct varieties. Argos C 895, a globular type with inset rim and no handles, is the only one clearly inspired by an Attic model. 4 A local adaptation of this version" has a flatter body, and two horizontal handles. Another globular example (pI. 23 g) preserves the raised lip current in E G I. 6 The lug-handled pointed type also continues," and gives rise to a new variant with a small conical foot (pl, 23h).8 Pre-eminent among the open shapes is a fine pedestalled krater, C 204 from the apsidal house at Argos. This is the earliest known complete example of a type which became current in many local MG styles (Attic, p. 18, Type 11), and whose essential characteristics are as follows: (i) a simple offset rim, like the contemporary skyphos; (ii) a widely splaying pedestal with several plastic ribs near the junction with the body; and (iii) a centralized design, dominated by a meander. It is not clear whether this type was already established in the E G II ofAttica; the Kerameikos, however, has produced a pedestal ofsimilar shape," which might well have belonged to a contemporary Attic counterpart; and the combination ofmeander and dogtooth on the Argive krater is certainly suggestive ofAttic influence. The simple strap handles are unusual for a krater of this size; on later examples, in the Argolid as elsewhere, stirrup handles became the rule. Cf. also Argos C 51, 63, 891. 2 Cf. also Argos C 52, 458, 829; Nauplia, Pronoia Gr. 34. 2 Argos C 2482. • Mycenae, Gr. G 604; Argos C 839, fr. • Cf. P AE 1939, 30, fig. 3a. • Cf. also Royal Tombsat Dendra (1931),41, fig. 24. • Mycenae, Gr. G 60 7, 59-74. • Cf. also Tiryns, Gr. 19; Argos, Gr. 164/2, C 2410; Mycenae, Gr. G 607,59-64. A rare variant, with high ring foot, may be seen in Tiryns I, 156, fig. 19, right. S K. v; I, pI. 16, 1294.
EG 11
The skyphos,.like.its Attic contemporary (pt ab), is distinguished by a short, offset, and outward-slantmg hp. Nearest to the Attic shallow type is pf, 23c; other examples (e.g. pI. 23d) have deeper and more rounded bodies, like those ofCorinthian E G. As an alternative to the usual ring foot, we sometimes find a low conical foot,' and once a pedestal with at least one rib." Curiously enough, this pedestalled skyphos is the only E G II example from the Argolid to bear any decoration. No Argive kantharoi are known in this phase. Cups, as in Attica, exist in two sizes: the smaller, fully glazed (pl. 23f), follows a prototype already existing in the local PG· the II larger, bearing a window-panel and two mastoi (pl. 23e), corresponds to the Attic type established in pl, 2C. 3 For the plates, pierced lug handles seem to be the rule; in this respect, the two examples from Argos have contemporary parallels in Athens and Corinth.'
Ea
DECORATION
The main ornament, as in Attica, is now enclosed in window-panels surrounded by glaze; these panels are pla~ed on the necks ofclosed shapes, and on the bodies ofsome open shapes at handle ~evel. ThIS system of decoration is now applied with greater boldness and assurance than m the local E G I. The panels ~sually contain closely stacked multiple zigzags, or heavy.hatched meanders - the.latter being new to the Argolid during this phase; rarer alt~rnatIves are ~he battlem~nt m multiple outline.s the cross-hatched lozenge chain," the diagonal cross, and a CUrIOUS lambda-ornament of local derivation, found on two vases fro~ Mycenae (pl, 23e,g)- In contrast to Attic, the main motifis seldom accompanied by ancillaries; but where this happens, the dogtooth of Argos C 204 and the M-columns of C 2410 offer further evidence of close Attic contacts. As in E G I, two. shapes normally carry their main ornament on the shoulder, consisting of cross-hatched triangles: the lekythos-oinochoe and the lug-handled pyxis. T?e narrow zones current in E G I have been largely eliminated in this phase. On the bodies of ~mph?rae ~nd oinochoai we now find nothing more than one or two groups of reserved lines: m this respect the Argive style is more in line with Corinth than with Athens, where it was customary at t~is time to place a zone of decoration round the belly of the neck-handled amphorae. Pyxides, however, are often permitted one or more subsid~ary z?nes, consisting of single zigzag,« double zigzag," or a row of dots. The last motif, as m Attica, makes a sporadic appearance in E G 11 (cf. p. 19, n. 2) before becoming fully established in the next phase. Argive decoration is still closely related to Attic; but as in E G I, its character is more a~stere. Low-fo.oted skyphoi,. as we have seen, are not decorated at all; on other shapesWIth the exception of the pyxIs - the ornament is confined to window-panels, supported by one or two groups of reserved lines on the bodies of closed vases.
1
a Argos C 299, 613 ; the foot of pI. 23d is conical underneath. 2 Argos C 889; cf. P AE 1939, 30, fig. 30Y. • Cf. also Argos C.62. 4 Argos C 843, 897; cf. Corinth VII. I, no. 46; K. v. I, pI. 101,348. s Argos C63. Argos C 52; P)'Xls at Dendra, p. 116, n. 6. • Argos C 62. 8 Argos C 895; Mycenae, Gr. G 607 59"-64 50--74. • Argos C 2410. ' ';;J
118 .
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
ARGIVE MIDDLE GEOMETRIC: FIRST PHASE (MG I) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Nauplia, Pronoia Gr. 21/1. P AE 1954,235, figs. 4-5. The only vases certainly associated are two oinochoai and a cup; cf C GAl 66, n. 2. Tiryns, Revma Gr. I. Unpublished. Neck-handled amphora, oinochoe, shallow skyphos, globular pyxis. CGA 118, 122, 172-3. Berbati, Gr. SSCA 4 (1965), 81-g0, figs. 65-75; thirty-six vases. PI. 24b-d· Argos, Makris Gr. 4/3. ADChr 18 (1963),60, pI. 72 (amphora and krater). Argos, Gr. 14/2. BCH 77 (1953),260, 'tombeau 3'; CGA 565, n. I: oinochoe, C 53; pyxis, C 56; skyphos, C 59· Lema, pithos burial. Hesperia 23 (1954), 7, pI. 2C. Tiryns, Gr. x, A M 78 (1963),30-1, pI. I 1,4 and 6. Argos, Gr. 176/1. BCH83 (1959),763-4, fig. 20; CGA: oinochoe, C 2435; pyxis, C 2434; cups, C 2530-1. PI. 24 a . Argos, Gr. 129. CGA:jug, C 924; aryballos, C 925; pyxis lid, C 946. Argos, Gr. 90/2. BCH 80 (1956), 376; CGA 565, n. I: lekythoi-oinochoai C 83 1-2; amphora, C 834; skyphoi, C 837-8; kantharoi, C 835-6. Transitional toMG 11. Argos, Gr. 191. BCH 83 (1959), 757, fig. 10; CGA 173: amphora, C 2473 (pI. 24i, MG 11); oinochoe, C 2476; skyphoi, C 2477-8; pyxides, C 2475, 2479; handmade amphora, C 2474; handmade jug, C 2480; pithos, C 3967. Transitional to MGII.
MG I
II9
them apart from their predecessors. Globular aryballoi, in the Argolid, are usually plain and handmade; but during M G I there is a passing fashion for wheelmade and painted aryballoi; there are five dumpy examples from Berbati, and a more elegant biconical specimen from Argos, C 925.1 Four local forms of pyxis continue without much change; none of them has any counterpart in the Attic repertoire. Most distinguished is the globular type with handles and inset rim (pI. 24a), which Argos shares with Corinth (pI. I6d). The ornate knob, however, reminds us of an Attic conceit ;" it is a miniature replica of a more old-fashioned globular variety with short everted lip. This form survives in Berbati no. 2, but with a short vertical lip; elsewhere, the lip is considerably higher." Of the two lug-handled types, the pointed variety makes a final appearance in the Berbati grave (nos. 11-14); thereafter, all pyxides with lugs also have conical feet:' A small krater from Berbati (pl, 24 b) rests on a ribbed pedestal higher than that of the EG 11 krater from Argos (p. 116); in this respect, the development ofArgive kraters keeps pace with Attic." The Berbati vase has a low-footed counterpart at Argos, in Makris Gr. 4; in both cases the body is simply an enlargement of the shallow skyphos. 6 On kraters and skyphoi - as on all other open shapes of this time - we now find a higher and more vertical lip than was customary before; this is yet another trait which Argive M G I shares with the corresponding phases of Attic and Corinthian. No kantharos can be attributed with certainty to MG I (see p. 122). Cups, however, are represented by numerous glazed specimens," and by an unusually small example of the class with a window-panel between mastoi ;" these, too, have a higher and more vertical lip than their E G I I predecessors. Finally, there are two plates from Berbati (nos. 8-g) with horizontal loop handles.
NOTE My M G I corresponds to Courbin's 'G M 1', except that I have set the lower limit ofmy phase slightly earlier. See p. 121. SHAPES
Most of the standard shapes are now remodelled in much the same way as their Attic counterparts at the beginning of M G. Closed vases usually have their centre of gravity higher than before, thereby improving their general appearance. The neck-handled amphora Argos C 833 (Gr. 90/ I), standing on the threshold ofM G I, has a more pleasing profile than its ungainly predecessor (pI. 23 b) ; two other examples, Argos C 834 and that from Revma Gr. I, combine a taut ovoid body with a broader neck, like their Attic contemporaries (cf pI. 3 d). Likewise, the standard oinochoai have close relations in Attica and in Corinthia. A new tall variety (pI. 24 d ) is evolved,' whose inward-sloping neck is especially reminiscent of its Corinthian counterpart (pI. I7a,e). This tall type, however, fails to oust the lower EG 11 version, which continues into MG I without any appreciable alteration of shape (pI. 24 c ) ; both varieties are found side by side in the Nauplia and Berbati graves." The lekythos-oinochoe is represented by two examples at Argos (C 831-2) whose taller necks set 1 Other examples: Argos C 53, 2435; Tiryns, Gr. x; Nauplia 10033 from Pronoia Gr. 21/1. Cf. pI. 3e, Attic. • Other example: Tiryns, Revma Gr. I. a. pl, 3D, Attic.
DECORATION
The main ornament is still kept within the bounds of a window-panel, flanked by glaze. This system is now applied to the great majority of shapes - including the shallow skyphos, which had been fully glazed in EG II. Unlike their Attic contemporaries (cf. pI. 3b), the Argives rarely attempted to expand the panel into a continuous reserved zone. Yet on the open vases, the panels are longer than in E G I I; while on several shapes - e.g. amphorae, kraters, skyphoi, and the pyxis pl. 24a - the horizontal limits of the panel are brought into relation with the handle attachments, as in Attic M G 1. Among the larger motifs, the commonest are still the hatched meander and the multiple zigzag; the latter are closely packed, and often have wider angles at the apices than in Attica; on the Berbati krater (pl. 24 b) we meet a Corinthianizing variant, where small vertical bars join the apices to their framing lines above and below. Other panel motifs include cross-hatched lozenge chains," opposed 1 Both varieties have counterparts in the Corinthian MG I gr, group from Clenia: AJA 59 (1955), pI. 39, fig. 7, and pI. 17b--c. The two examples in the Schliemann collection, not certainly from the Argolid (Jd! 15 (1900),52, fig. 111-12), have their closest parallels among a class of imported aryballoi in Thera (AM28 (1903), 213, BeiI. 38, 7-8), possibly of Cretan origin; cf. p. 244, n. g. • Cf. K. v. I, pI. 51, 2135, EG I; see CGA 127, n. 5. 3 Argos C 2479; Revma Gr. I. 4 Argos C 56, 2475. 5 a. K. v . I, pI. 19, 1293. 6 PI. 24e; Argos C 59, 837, 2478; Berbati, nos. 6-7. 7 Nauplia 10039 from Pronoia Gr. 21/1; Berbati, seventeen examples. 8 Argos C 35; for Cycladic parallels, see p. 170, n. 10. • Argos C 35; Revma Gr. I, oinochoe.
120 .
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
diagonals, 1 and horizontal Iinesj> the last two designs have an old-fashioned look at this time. More typically Argive is a new motif, where eight-pointed stars alternate with groups of verticals (pI. 24e).3 This is the only panel design which is ever carried as far as the handles: in its M G I form, the rays of the stars always touch the frames enclosing them. Inside the panel, ancillaries are rarely added to the main motif, except on the largest vases. 4 Cross-hatched triangles occupy the shoulder of the lekythos-oinochoe, the aryballos, and both types of lug-handled pyxis; on these shapes, subsidiary zones are sometimes added below." Yet on vases where ornament is placed in window-panels, there are no subsidiary zones: the glaze on the rest of the surface is interrupted only by groups of reserved lines; these are more numerous than in E G I I, usually amounting to three or four on amphorae and oinochoai: kraters, too, have their lower glaze broken up in this way. On two vases, however, we see the experimental use of continuous fine banding over a large area;" this idea was to be exploited much more frequently in the next phase.
I
MG II
121
30-I ; oinochoe, C 32; pyxis, C 43; kantharos, C 33; cup, C 29; handmade amphora, C 16. PI. 25a-b.
NOTE My MG II phase includes Courbin's 'GM 2', but begins a little earlier. Among the innovations ofMG II I include (i) the first regular use of the multiple brush, for the bars inside the lips of skyphoi (Argos C 838, 2477; cf. CCA 84--6); and (ii) the first appearance of the shoulder-panel on amphorae and oinochoai (pI. 24f,j). Both of these features arrive towards the end of Courbin's 'G M I', in groups which I call transitional between MG I and II: Argos, Grs. 90/2 and I9I.
In contrast to the stagnation of the previous phase, the Argive style now progresses at a more lively pace. At last the local potters are breaking free ofAttic influence, and producing more individual shapes of their own; and as the decoration becomes increasingly complex, we see the beginning of the transition to a light-ground style, and the first groping experiments in figured drawing.
ARGIVE MIDDLE GEOMETRIC: SECOND PHASE (MG 11) SHAPES SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Tiryns, Gr. 24. Tiryns I, 131, pl. 14,8; pl. 18, I I. PI. 24f-g. Mycenae, Tsountas' Gr. Tiryns I, 136, fig. 8. C£ BSA 49 (1954), 265, n. 15. Argos, Gr. 32. BCH 78 (1954), 177, fig. 36; CGA: amphoriskoi, C 190-2; oinochoe, C 193; bird-vase, C 194; handmade kernos, C 195. Argos, Gr. 89. CGA: amphoriskos, C 816; handmade bowl, C 813; handmade amphoriskoi, C 814.-15. Argos, Gr. 90/3. CGA 565, n. I: amphoriskos, C 825-7; hydria, C 828; oinochoe, C 830; pyxis, C 840; handmade amphoriskos, C 841. Argos, Makris Gr. I. ADChr 18 (1963),57-8, pl. 7oa-b and seventeen other vases. Tiryns, Gr. XVI. AM 78 (1963),32-4, pl. 8, 3-4; pl. 12. Argos, Phlessas Gr. 3. ADChr 16 (1960),93, pl. 7Ia-c. Argos, Alexopoulos Gr. cx. ADChr 17 (1961-2),55, pl. 57a, two cups and an oinochoe. Cf. CGA 188-g, 221-2. Argos, Alexopoulos Gr. 5/2. ADChr 17 (1961-2), 56, pl. 58a and ten other vases. (A MG I amphora, pl, 57c, apparently belongs to the earlier of two burials.) Tiryns, Gr. 16. Tiryns I, 129, pl. 18, 7; pl. 19, 6; skyphos and cup, not illustrated (ibid. 150-1, dI5, dI9). C£ CGA 173. PI. 25f. Tiryns, Gr. 30. Tiryns t, 132, pl. 17,2-3,7,9; pl. 18,2,5,9; skyphos (ibid. 150, dI2) as pl. 18, I I. PI. 24h. Mycenae, Gr. G I1/I (vases outside). BSA 49 (1954), 260-5, pl. 44 (except 53-336); pl. 46 (except 53-335, 39-262). PI. 25 c-f. Argos, Gr. 6/1. BCH 77 (1953),260, 'tombeau 2', figs. 51-2; CGA 173: amphorae, C 28, Revma Gr. I, pyxis. a Argos C 2479. 3 Also Argos C 59, 837, skyphoi; C 56, pyxis, E.g. Makris Gr. 4; amphora, dots; krater, dogtooth. 6 Berbati, no. 10, multiple zigzag in metopes; Berbati, no. 14, row of dots; Argos C 56, dots and panelled stars. 6 Berbati, amphora no. 3; pyxis, no. 10. Cr. K. v. I, pI. 72,868, Attic MG I. 1
&
Unlike their predecessors, the neck-handled amphorae can no longer be matched with Attic counterparts. While Athenian potters continued to attenuate the bodies of their amphorae, the Argives now favoured a movement in the reverse direction, towards plumper proportions (pI. 24j);1 this movement, however, began to lose force at the end ofMG (pI. 25a). A miniature of this shape, the neck-handled amphoriskos, now enters the repertoire, and enjoys its greatest popularity during this phase. At first its decoration is limited to a few spaced bands on a light ground," like the domestic amphorae which persist throughout the Geometric period in the Athenian Agora; but in the course ofM G I I various motifs appear on the neck, among which the favourite is the arrow (pI. 24h).3 Before leaving the amphora family, we should mention two fragmentary belly-handled amphorae with circle metopes,' closely related to Cycladic work ofthis time (c£ pI. 34:m). 5 This shape, too, has a miniature, 6 which disappears after M G I I. Oinochoai show the same tendency towards plumpness as the neck-handled amphorae. The tall type ofM G I now has a rounder body;" more common is the lower version which has survived continuously since E G I I, varying its decoration according to the prevailing fashion (pI. 24f).8 This plump type gives rise to a variant with short, concave neck," of which we shall see more in L G I. PI. 25h, from Tiryns, has the tall narrow neck ofa lekythosoinochoe; its shape is best paralleled in the contemporary pottery of'Corinth.w Before passing on to the other closed shapes, let us note the popularity ofrope handles on amphorae and oinochoai alike.tCf. Mycenae, Tsountas' Gr.; Argos, Alexopoulos Gr. a; Argos C 28, 31. a Argos C 192,816,825-7; Tiryns I, pI. 17,6. Cf. Tiryns i, pI. 17,2-3,9; AM78, pl, 12,7. & Nauplia 10043, Pronoia Gr. 21, BCH 79 (1955),239, fig. 17; Nauplia 4235 from Tiryns, unpublished. 6 An amphora from Argos, Phlessas Gr. 4, is thought by Courbin to be a Cycladic import; C GA 554, pl. 151. • Argos C 190-1. 7 AM 78, pI. 19,5; Mycenae, Gr. G utI, 53-334. 6 Cf. alsoArgosC 2476; Mycenae, Tsountas'grave; Argos C830; PhlessasGr. 3. 9 ArgosC32; ADChr I8,pI. 7Ib. 10 ADChr 17, pI. 54. 11 Mycenae, Tsountas' Gr., amphora; Alexopoulos Gr. A; Makris Gr. I; Argos C 28, 31; pI. 24£; Argos C 830. 1
3
122 • ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
I
Painted aryballoi are rarer than in M G 1; an unusually large specimen, pl. 25g, is the first to break away from the traditional decoration ofcross-hatched triangles. Among other rarities, a plump hydria1 and a bird-oase: deserve notice. Pyxides, after the disappearance ofthe pointed type, are now made in three varieties. Two are globular, with ring foot and horizontal handles, differing only in the rim which may be inset (pI. 25f) or raised (pI. 25b). The lug-handled pyxis now always rests on a conical foot (pl. 25d); its body becomes increasingly plump throughout this phase." The kraters, as in earlier phases, are always related to the Type 11 ofAttica (pI. 5f), with short offset lip, and a centripetal scheme of decoration. The only complete example- has a low ring foot, and simple horizontal strap handles; but a larger krater, of which only the foot is missing," preserves stirrup handles, and part of a ribbed pedestal. Some of the latest M G I I examples, ofwhich only fragments survive, attain monumental size." Skyphoi (pl. 24g) betray no consistent development of shape, which varies from very shallow? to very deep;" but the vogue for reflex handles is new in this phase," and reminds us of the strap-handled skyphoi of Attic M G 11. 1 0 Of the cups, a larger proportion are now decorated; at the end ofMG a new shallow variety is evolved (pl. 25e), which continues throughout LG.u On Argos C 29, the sole representative of the larger variety, the mastoi have been moved from their usual position in order to make room for a longer panel. Finally, we should note the return ofthe kantharos, which we have not seen in the Argolid since E G I. Argos C 836, one of the earliest M G I I examples, has handles slightly raised above the rim, though not as high as any ofits Attic contemporaries (cf. pI. 4d) ; it has closer relations in Corinth (pI. I8g). Thereafter, however, the low-handled type (pl. 25c) was to remain the standard form.P
12 3
square metopes into the central area, have had the effect of removing any strong emphasis from the design. Equally illuminating is a comparison of the Attic krater, pI. 5f, with the frs. Argos C 289 and 423. On the Attic krater, once again, the ancillary panels all serve as an elaborate frame, directing our eyes towards the strong central meander; whereas the metopal divisions on the Argive pieces attract our attention away from the centre. A further symptom of disintegration is seen on a large fragment from Tiryns,' where the central area is divided into two horizontal panels, each containing a meander of equal size, stopped at each end by quatrefoil metopes, and separated from each other by a small strip containing triple zigzag. In Corinth, too, there was a similar avoidance of centripetal design at this time (pI. I7j); but the Argive schemes are very much more complex, and lead on to one of the most intricate of all L G styles. A second important development in Argive M G I I decoration is the gradual disappearance of the dark-ground system on the larger shapes. At first there is a further increase in the number of reserved bands (pl. 24.i), much as in Attica. Later, thin stripes begin to accumulate round the belly," and eventually cover most of the body (pl, 25a). This simple method of lightening the surface, as we have seen, is more reminiscent of Corinthian (p. 96, pl, I8a) than of Attic. These far-reaching changes in the principles of decoration are accompanied by the introduction of several new linear patterns. To begin with the smaller motifs: vertical chevrons and sigmas now arrive in the Argolid at about the same time as their first appearance in Attica and Corinth. They are usually drawn with the multiple brush ;" under the influence of that labour-saving tool, the sigma is liable to degenerate into a vertical wavy line (pI. 25b). Less common innovations are the gear-pattern (pI. 25g)4 and the double axe alternating with vertical bars ;" both of these motifs had already figured in Attic M G I, but in the Argolid the double axe is sometimes used in isolation." Dotted lozenge chains' and dotted tangential circles" come to the Argolid a little later than their first appearance in Attica." The motif of panelled stars, already known in the local MG I, is now more summarily rendered; the stars no longer touch their frame.w Towards the end ofMG, a loose single zigzag becomes a common panel motif." Dots, multiple zigzags, and cross-hatched lozenge chains are still popular; new, however, is the panel containing nothing but dots.'> Among the broader motifs, the orthodox hatched meander maintains its popularity: no large design is complete without it, and on one krater it appears in a complex form.> Its 'negative', the meander hook, enters the repertoire during this phase (pI. 25a).14 Also new to the Argolid is the hatched battlement, which now enjoys a considerable vogue :15 it, too, has a 'negative' in the hatched gear-pattern found once on a M G I I kantharos.v To complete the range of large motifs, we should note the arrival of the hatched zigzag near the end ofMG (pI. 25a). We have already observed the surreptitious introduction of quatre-
DECORATION
From the beginning of this phase, there are signs of ever-increasing elaboration, at least in the decoration ofthe larger vases. The first step is illustrated by the amphora and oinochoe, pl. 24.i,f. Here a second window-panel has been placed on the shoulder, in addition to that on the neck;13 each panel now contains a subsidiary row ofdots, as on the skyphos, pl. 24g, from the same grave as the oinochoe.v A little later, the ornament is liable to break out of the panel, and to spread right round the vase.v By the end ofM G I I, there is a consistent tendency to vary the richness ofthe decoration according to the size of the vase. The fine pyxis, pl. 25 b, when compared to its slightly earlier Attic counterpart in Paris (pI. 4 e), 16 illustrates a typically Argive method ofcovering a large surface, which we shall see carried further during the next phase. On the Paris vase, according to the prevailing Attic fashion, the whole composition is dominated by a heavy central meander; on the Argos pyxis, the attenuation of the meanders, and the intrusion of Argos C 828. 2 Argos C 194. 3 Series: Argos C 840; Makris Gr. I; Mycenae, pI. 25d. 4 Phlessas Gr. 3. Nauplia 10465, from Mycenae. 6 Argos C 289, 423, 878; Tiryns, G.!. Neg. 1276. 7 Tiryns, Gr. XVI, 3. 6 Mycenae, Gr. G I1/l. • Argos C 2477; Tiryns, Gr. XVI, 5. 10 P. 23; K. v, I, pl. 90, 839-40, Gr. 82; cf. CGA 135. 11 CGA 223-4, 'tasses basses', 12 a. Argos C 835; Phlessas Gr. 3; Alexopoulos Gr. S/2; Argos C 33. 10 a. Argos C 828,830; pI. 2Sg; ADChr 18, pl. 7oa; ADChr 16, pl, 7IC. 14 Cf. also Tiryns, Gr. XVI, 4-5. 15 Mycenae, Tsountas' Gr., oinochoe; amphora, pI. 25a; cup, pI. 2se. 16 Or with another Attic globular pyxis in a Tiryns gr.: Tiryns I, pl. 19,5; cf. CGA 553, pl. 149.
MG II
1
G.!. Neg. 1276. 2 Alexopoulos Gr. a, amphora; Argos C 830, oinoehoe. Mycenae, Gr. G I1/I, skyphos, and cup, pI. 25e; cf. CGA 87--9. 4 a. Argos C 287, 878. 5 Makris Gr. I, amphora. s Argos C 289, 836. 7 Argos C 31. 8 Argos C 33. • Cf. K. v. I, pI. 85. 10 Argas C 423, 251I; Alexopoulos Gr. a, amphora; Tiryns I, pI. 18, 12. Exception: Argos C 878. 11 Tiryns I. pl, 18,2,5,9; ADChr 18, pI. 7Ib. 12 Argos C 2476. 13 Argos C 423. 14 Cf. Argos C 29, 31. 15 Argos C 289, 423, 835; Phlessas Gr. 3, oinoehoe; Alexopoulos Gr. S/2, kantharos; Makris Gr. I, amphora. 16 R. Lullies, Griechische Plastik, Vasen undKleinkunst, Priuatbesitz, Kassel (1964), no. 40. 1
5
3
I
I
j I
~H!4
• ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
foil metopes, and their catalytic effect on the complex designs; according to Argive custom, their leaves are always hatched, and sometimes the hatching passes straight across a diagonal midrib (pI. 25 b).l The star is the usual filling ornament. Octofoils occur only on the krater Argos C 423. The Argive figured style begins quietly with the row ofgrazing marshbirds in silhouette, on the lekythos-oinochoe from Tiryns (pI. 25h); if this vase is as early as it 100ks,2 here we have the earliest known bird frieze in Greek art. It is followed by three M G I I figured vases from Argos: two pyxides and a kantharos. On the small lug-handled pyxis, C 840, we see similar birds, still in silhouette, but this time standing erect, and more fastidiously drawn. A little later, on the pyxis from Makris Gr. I, we have our first glimpse ofthe Argive animal kingdom: two stiff grazing quadrupeds (horses?), with a rudimentary man in a separate panel. Finally, the kantharos C 33 shows five horses on one side, and five stags on the reverse. The horses are surprisingly like the stringy creatures on the Attic M G I I krater, pI. 5d; already, however, four Argive mannerisms attract our attention: (i) the high carriage of the head, the upper outline being concave; (ii) the protruding shoulder; (iii) the backward bend ofthe forelegs; and (iv) the bushy tail. The solitary fish behind the birds on C 840 introduces to us another common feature ofthe Argive figured style; it also appears in a more abstracted form among the stags of C 33, and in the lateral panels of another kantharos." On all four ofthe figured vases, the background is filled by a mass ofswirling dots, which produce the desired half-tone effect; this is the only filling ornament applied to the figured work ofMG 11. Massed dots may also be added to linear metopes containing quatrefoil- or concentric circles. 5 RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
So far, the upper limit ofeach Argive phase has been defined in terms of the contemporary style of Attica; this is still possible at the beginning of M G I I, when the two schools were still producing closely comparable work. 6 By the end ofthis phase, however, the Argive style has diverged so far from Attic that a problem ofrelative chronology arises. Among the latest vases of Argive M G I I, there are three features which suggest a slight overlap with Attic LG I. The first is the growing popularity of vertical wavy lines, drawn with the multiple brush;" in Attica, the first appearance of this motif is on a monumental krater from the Dipylon Workshop, at the end ofLG Ta." Secondly, the hatched zigzag (pI. 25a), another motif which in Attica makes its debut on the LG la kraters of the Dipylon Workshop (p. 30, nos. 8-g). Finally, we should note how square metopes, of the Attic kind, intrude into the larger compositions (pI. 25 b), before the dark-ground manner ofArgive M G has run its course: this is a phenomenon which Argive shares with Corinthian (cf. pp. 96-7), giving us the impression that both Peloponnesian schools had some acquainCf. Argos C 28g, 878. 2 Beginning of M G I I ? a. the supporting linear ornament with pI. 24£. AIexopoulos Gr. 5/2. 4 Argos C 731. • AB I I, pl. 58, 2. 8 In both regions, M G I I begins with the first use ofthe multiple brush for the grouped bars inside the lips of skyphoi: Attic, K. V. I, pl, go, 8g3 (Kerameikos, Gr. 12); Argive, C 838, 2477 (Grs. gO/2, IgI). A further innovation common to both schools is the first appearance of the high-handled kantharos, although this form never became established in the Argive repertoire. 'CGA gO--I. 8 P. 31, no. Ig; ADChr 17, pI. 22.
MG II
125
tance with Attic L G I before the end of the local M G I I. Furthermore, the commonest metopal motifin Argive M G I I isthe hatched quatrefoil with four stars as filling ornament - a combination which in Attica is especially characteristic ofLG la (c£ p. 50). There are strong grounds, then, for assuming that Argive M G I I lasted through the period of Attic LGIa. ARGIVE LATE GEOMETRIC: FIRST PHASE (LG I) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Nauplia, Pronoia Gr. 21/2. PAE 1954, 234-5; BCH 79 (1955), 239, fig. 18, amphoriskos. Also two oinochoai and a kantharos, unpublished. C£ CG A 173· Asine, Barbouna Gr. 2. Bulletin de la Societe Royale des Lettres de Lund 1922-3, 93, pl. 46; OpAth 6 (1965), 134ft, pl. 4. Tiryns, Gr. 41. Tiryns I, 134; oinochoe, CGA, pl. 20; kantharos, shape and decoration like Argos C 2466, CGA 217, pl. 61. (Nauplia 2002.) Argos, Gr. 80. CGA: oinochoe, C 463; mug, C 652. Tiryns, Gr. I I 1/2. A M 78 (1963),48-50, nos. 3-8, Beil, 22, I; 23, 2-5; 24, 3· Argos, Gr. 190/1. BCH83 (1959), 759, fig. 9; CGA 565, n. I: banded amphora, C 2459; skyphos, C 2464; kantharos, C 2466; kotyle, C 2470; mug, C 246I ; handmade amphoriskos, C 2460; pithos, C 3966. Argos, Gr. 152. CGA 174: skyphos, C 1576; cups, C 1574-5, 1577-8, 1581; handmade amphora, C 1651; handmade jug, C 1579. Argos, Gr. 14/3. CGA 38, 58, 565, n. I: kantharoi, C 57, 94; cups, C 58, 60, 93, 95-6; Corinthian L G kotyle, C 92; handmade lekythos-oinochoe, C 55· Mycenae, Gr. G 11/2 (vases inside). BSA 49 (1954), 260-5, pls, 44 (53-33 6), 45· Cf. CGA 165, 173-4. PI. 27 a -e. Dendra, possible grave group. OpAth 4 (1963), 89ft, nos. l-g, pls, 4-6 less fig. 18. Argos, Raptis Gr. BCH85 (1961),675; 676, figs. 5-6; ADChr 16 (1960),93, pl. 7ob ,d . One amphora and two kraters, illustrated; also two more kraters, two oinochoai, one skyphos, one kantharos, one cup; one handmade amphora, one handmade oinochoe. Transitional LG 1-11; but there are two burials (CGA 13, n. 5). Lerna, gr. Hesperia 25 (1956), 171-2, pl. 48. Transitional LG I-I I.
NOTE My LG I phase is almost exactly commensurate with Courbin's 'GR I' (CGA 177), except that I have placed Mycenae Gr. G I 1/1 - nine vases in a consistently dark-ground style - towards the end of my M G II; on pl, 25c-e the 'zigzags verticaux trembles' (CGA 173-4) need not be any later than those on pf, 25b, which Courbin places in his 'GM 2'. It must be admitted, however, that the dark-ground manner persists on some shapes until the end of L G I; cr. p. 128.
1
3
SHAPES
We begin with a solitary neck-handled amphora, from Tiryns Gr. I I 1/2; its tall, slim shape, and the straight profile of the lower body, are very reminiscent of the type current in Attic
126 • ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
LG Ib. 1 New in this phase is a small plump variety, with broad neck, and handles attached to rim and shoulder; the decoration is limited to spaced bands." The neck-handled amphoriskos is still in circulation; related to it is a lekythos, unique in Argive Geometric. 3 The oinochoai of this generation fall into three main categories. Most popular is the old plump type, whose neck is usually short and concave.' The other two kinds are new: a characteristically Argive type" with hemispherical body, first seen in pl, 27c; and a tall variety with slim ovoid body, seldom less than 0·3Sm. high (pI. 27b).6 A conicallckythosoinochoe.' based on a Corinthian model," may belong to this phase, or the next. Other rarities among the pouring vases include a smalljug9 and a high-handled mug;1O the latter recalls the Attic type current in MG lIP Three pyxidcs, each of a different shape, may be attributed to this phase. The giant from Argos, C 209 (pI. 26), is a vast enlargement of the high-lipped globular pyxis ofMG 11 (pI. 25 b), with the addition of three strap feet. The other two are both small: a squat globular variety with inset rim ;" and a new flat type with horizontal handles.P which became one of the most important shapes in L G I I. The krater is now the leading shape in the Argive repertoire, attracting the painter's most ambitious efforts. All examples have a hemispherical body, crowned by an offset vertical lip; but there is much variety in the handles. The stirrup is found only on Argos C 240, a fragment ofa very large krater; when the size is more modest, stirrupless horizontal handles are the rule. These may be of the double-arc type;14 rope handles, however, are more popular (pI. 27 a) .15 New in this phase is the krater with high handles, an enlargement ofthe Attic kantharos (pI. 27d) ;16 these handles may be divided by grooves into two or more reeds. The small krater from Asine Gr. 2 has a high unribbed pedestal; otherwise, ring feet are universal. Skyphoi tend to have shallow bodies (pI. 27 C);17 near the end ofthis phase we see the emergence of a new variety with tall flaring lip.ls Cups are plentiful, ifsummarily decorated; the new shallow type'" takes its place beside the deeper variety, whose profile now tends to straighten out towards the base.w With the kantharoi, high handles are exceptional. 21 The orthodox low-handled type2 2 is also represented by miniatures, no bigger than the CUpS;23 these probably began in M G I I, to judge from the star-panels ofthe earliest examples.v Finally, the hemispherical kotyle is now added to the Argive repertoire.v imitating the earliest class of Corinthian LG (c£ pI. I9j).
1 Cf. pI. loa; CGA 120. 2 Argos C 2459. 3 Tiryns, Gr.III/2, nos. 4-5. 4 Dendra gr., nos. 5-7; Argos C 463, and two examples from the Raptis Gr.; Nauplia 10029, from Pronoia Gr. 2;/2; Lema gr., g; Tiryns, Gr. 41, with longer neck. 6 Cf.CGA 200-1. 8 Also Asine, Gr. 2; Nauplia roogo.from PronoiaGr. 21/2. 7 AM78,Beil. 19,2. 8 Cf. pI. 19d. 9 Argos C 2461. 10 Argos C 652. 11 K. v, I, pI. 111,2159; cf. CGA 121, n. 8. 12 Tiryns, Gr. 111/2. 13 CGA, pI. 81, from Monastiraki. 14 Dendra gr., no. 8; Asine, Gr. 2. 16 Also Raptis Gr., nos. 2-3; AM 78, pI. 21, 3. 18 Also Raptis Gr., krater no. I, BCH85, 676, fig. 5; Dendra gr., no. 9. 17 Cf. Argos C 1576. 18 Argos C 2464. 19 Argos C 95,1587,158 1. 20 Argos, CGA, pI. 71, seven examples; Dendra gr., nos. 2-4. 21 Tiryns, Gr.III/2. 22 Argos C 64, 2466,2521--2; Nauplia 2002 (Tiryns, Gr. 41) and 10032 (Pronoia Gr. 21/2); Lema gr., c. 23 CGA, pI. 66; C 57, 94. 24 C 487,251 I. 26 C 872,2470; Asine 320, fig. 219, 7.
LG I
12
7
DECORATION
For this classic phase of Argive Geometric, the giant pyxis of Argos (pI. 26) is a definitive vase. It offers us a compendium of the local L G I motifs; and it illustrates to the full a peculiarly Argive method of marshalling a large design, of which we have already had a preview in M G I I. Once again, a comparison with an Attic counterpart will be instructive; let us therefore set this pyxis beside the great amphora of the Attic Dipylon Master (pI. 6). Both vases represent the zenith of the local style at its grandest and best. In both cases, figured drawing is used with great restraint, occupying only a modest proportion ofthe surface; as for the linear decoration, even the humblest details are still executed with the greatest possible care. On both vases the general design remains true to one ofthe cardinal principles of Geometric vase-painting, whereby the largest surfaces are covered by multiplying the number of the decorative units, and never by increasing their size. But here the resemblance ends. One is immediately struck by the comparative simplicity of the Dipylon amphora; our attention is at once claimed by the funerary scene, to which the vast framework of linearornament inevitably leads the eye. On the Argos pyxis, from whatever angle we view it, there is no such focus; the figured units are deliberately kept away from the central position, and are almost dwarfed by the striking sun-like patterns in the largest metopes, The only symmetrical part of the composition lies in the handle zone; even there, the disruptive effect of the metopes, already seen at work in MG II (p. 123), causes the eye to travel all over the various panels without ever coming to rest. This lack of emphasis is still more remarkable in the central part of the vase; here symmetry has been thrown to the winds, and the large sun-like metopes have been placed without any relation to the main axis of the design. Even on the neck, the painter must needs interpose his metopes and panels; the only uninterrupted zones lie at the bottom of the decoration. These, reinforced by the dark glaze near the foot, supply a stable foundation for the whole vast composition. When seen as a whole, the intricacy of the design betrays no lack of intellectual control in the mind ofthe painter who conceived it; this vase has more in common with a finely designed carpet than with the accidental felicity ofa patchwork quilt. The designs of the larger kraters, in spite oftheir fragmentary state,' show the same kind of arrangement as we find in the handle zone ofthe giant pyxis: a broad area in the centre, divided into horizontal strips; at either side, ancillary vertical columns, sometimes subdivided into square metopes and smaller panels; and under the level of the handles, one or more continuous zones to bind the whole composition together. Even pI. 27d, a krater of more modest size, is treated in this way, with no less than twelve subdivisions in the design. The other medium-sized kraters have simpler designs, but the tripartite division is always preserved; on this smaller scale there is more emphasis on the central area, which may be occupied by a figured panels or by a large meander (pI. 27a).3 The same tripartite scheme, but without any subdivision ofthe panels, is sometimes found on other shapes of moderate size: for example, on the large skyphos, pl. 27 C;4 a long central TirynsI, pI. 110, 3; Argos C 240, 244. 2 Raptis Gr., kraters 2, 3. Also Raptis Gr., krater no. I, BCH 85,676, fig. 5; Dendra gr., no. 8; Tiryns, Gr. xxv, AM 78, Beil. 21, 3; Tiryns, G.I. Neg. 855; Asine, Gr. 2. 4 Also kantharoi, Nauplia 10°32 (Pronoia Gr. 21/2) and Dendra gr., no. I; cf. necks ofoinochoai, pl, 27e and Argos C 283.
1
3
128 • ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
LG I
panel is stopped at either end by a square metope - a scheme already known in the larger designs ofMG 11 (pl. 25b), but hardly applied on a smaller scale until the outset ofLG. Here, too, a comparison with Attic is illuminating. Square metopes were used in a similar manner by the Dipylon Workshop, flanking a more weighty central motif (p. 37); yet the general practice in Attic LG I was to divide the field into three or more square metopes, sometimes separated by 'triglyph' ancillaries (p. 50). The Argive system has more in common with Corinthian LG, where the central panel was similarly prolonged at the expense ofthe flanking metopes (pI. Igh); yet in the Argolid these metopes never assumed a tall and narrow form, as in Corinth, but always retained the square Attic shape. Thus the Argive scheme is a compromise between Attic and Corinthian practice. On the bodies of closed vases, and on the smallest of the open shapes, the metope system was hardly used at all.' Only once, on the body of the Mycenae oinochoe, pI. 27e, do we find any parallel to the Attic custom of encircling a large zone with square metopes, separated by 'triglyphs' ; otherwise the motifs run continuously round the bodies of closed vases (pI. 27 b) on the rare occasions when they bear any decoration at all. Similarly the smaller open vases have nothing more than a narrow undivided panel, stopped only by a few vertical lines, 2 just as in M G 11.3 A further sign of conservatism on these plainer vases may be seen in the frequent retention ofa dark ground, interrupted only by triple reserved bands in the M G manner.' In this respect, the amphora from Tiryns Gr. I I 1/2 has several Attic counterparts (e.g. pI. loa); yet the persistence of the older tradition is more widespread in the Argolid than in Attica, where the proportion ofripely decorated work is much higher. So far we have been concerned only with the composition; it is now time to deal in turn with the linear motifs, and the figured drawing.
the less ambitious vases chevrons, sigmas, or vertical wavy lines are often found, sometimes in a loose form (pI. 27 b), and always executed with the multiple brush. Vertical strips are sometimes filled with small circles, with or without tangents; but more frequently with columns of floating chevrons (pIs. 26, 27b). Among the heavier motifs, the most striking innovation is the step-meander, another diagnostic hallmark ofArgive L G (pI. 26). Like its Attic counterpart, the complex Dipylon meander, it enters the repertoire at the moment when the local style reaches its fullest development, on a vase of monumental size. The giant pyxis also bears a selection of older hatched motifs, all common in LG I: orthodox meander, meander hooks, and multiple zigzags - the last are now used vertically as well as horizontally. Here the meander motifs are still hatched obliquely in the traditional manner; a little later, however, the hatching is perpendicular to the outlines (pI. 27 c-e), in anticipation of the usual practice in L G I I. Similarly, a tendency to lighten the weight ofthe meander patterns' prepares us for the thin, wiry meanders of the next phase. As we have seen, metopes are rarer than in Attic; the range of metopal motifs is correspondingly restricted. The most frequent is the quatrefoil; the leaves often have a central midrib, with neat diagonal hatching (pI. 26). 2 The hatched swastika appears on only two vases (pls, 26, 27 e) ; these are usually ofthe hooked type, with three limbs to each arm. Two simple circular designs seem peculiar to the vases from Dendra ;" there is also the elaborate sun-like motif on the giant pyxis. In addition, metopes are often filled by birds and horses; these we consider in the next section.
LINEAR ORNAMENT
Let us first consider the narrower motifs. Two newcomers appear on the krater Argos C 240, at the very beginning of this phase: diagonal crosses between groups of vertical bars, and tangential circles drawn with a compass ;" sometimes the circles float freely, without tangents." A little later, two more motifs make their debut on the giant pyxis (pI. 26): the serpentine wavy line with stars in the field," and the row of dotted leaf-lozenges. Of these four novelties, only the last remained in general use after this phase, becoming the commonest and most characteristic small motifin the Argive repertoire; clearly, it is an adaptation of the rectilinear lozenge chain, whose mass-production with the multiple brush presented obvious problems (pI. 27a).8 In LG I the leaf-lozenge is neatly drawn, with slender proportions and pointed tips: each lozenge is usually separated from its neighbour (pI. 27 e). Like the related lozenge chains, they are sometimes drawn 'blind', without any cerrtral dot." Of the older stock, dots and zigzags (single or multiple) are common throughout LG; on At Asine, however, the Attic metope system was often applied during the next phase, pp. 132-3. 2 E.g. Argos C 1576, 2466. Cf. also the chevron kotylai of Corinth, pI. 19j. 4 E.g. Argos C 463; Tiryns, Gr. 41, oinochoe; pI. 27a-b,d, lower body; 'I'iryns, Gr. IU/2, amphora. 6 CGA 10'r8. The earliest Attic parallel for the compass-drawn tangential circles is on Agora VIII, no. 41: MG II or LG la. 6 PI. 26; Asine, Gr. 2, krater. Cf. Attic LG la, Hesperia 21 (1952), pI. 29a-b. • Cf. Asine, Gr. 2, oinochoe; Argos C 244, 4660; very rare after LG I - Argos C 14, and pI. 29a with chevrons instead ofstars. 8 See CGA 94-7. 9 CGA 96. Argos 2464; pI. 27a, C 566, and oinochoe from Pronoia Gr. 21/2. 1
12 9
FIGURED DRAWING
It is reasonable to assume that the main centres ofproduction lay in or near the fertile Argive plain. Within this small world the local painters could develop their own figured style, based on first-hand observation of the fauna around them. In that traditional pastureland of horses, that animal assumed a leading place in their repertoire; they also depicted the birds who frequent the coastal marshes, and the wide variety of fish for which the gulf of Argos is still famous. Man occasionally makes an appearance: he is chiefly concerned with the taming of horses.! On the earliest Argive figured scene, in a side-panel of the krater Argos C 240, the horse-tamer is combined with a row of dancers - a theme not seen again until an advanced stage of L G I I. Here the figures look stiff and laboured; the strictly equilateral thorax, and the vigorously rounded buttocks recall some inferior productions ofAttic LG 1.° Much more accomplished are the pairs of wrestlers on the giant pyxis, cautiously tucked away under each handle;" their long, lithe bodies have some of the Dipylon Master's finesse, and the crossing of their long necks produces a most effective composition for this rather awkward field. The horses ofthis phase show a similar increase offluency. At the beginning, the drawing
3
First in MG 11, pI. 2Sb; then Argos C 240, 244; pI. 27a. Also Dendra gr., no. 8; Tiryns I, pI. 20,3; Argos C 4314. Without midrib: Monastiraki pyxis, CGA, pI. 81; Nauplia 10032, kantharos from Pronoia Gr. 21/2. 3 OpAth 4, 101; fig. eok.m. 4 Argos, Raptis Gr., kraters 2-3. 6 See p. 38; cf. especially the Lambros oinochoe, AM 43, pI. 3; Marb WP 1961, pls, 2-3. 6 CGA, pI. 102.
1 2
G
130 .
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
LG I
is hardly less stiff than on the kantharos Argos C 33;1 more elegant, and more relaxed, are the stallions on the giant pyxis. Here, once again, we see several features characteristic of most Argive horses throughout LG: the high carriage ofthe head, the protruding shoulder, the bushy tail, and the backward bend of the forelegs. No other local style offers a greater variety of bird life. On the giant pyxis, two distinct species are depicted. Those in the corners of the sun-like metopes resemble the Attic marshbirds, but their drawing is more detailed; the eyes are reserved and dotted, while even the tail feathers can sometimes be distinguished. Under the horses' bellies we see a variant of this type with longer neck, rather like a pelican." Of quite different build are the birds grouped in threes in the smaller panels ofthe handle zone (cf also pI. 27c-d); their upright long legs and sinuous necks suggest the flamingo. A more formidable creature, with long beak and massive body, first appears on the Mycenae oinochoe, pI. 27e, and then on two LG 11 vases:" this has been identified as the Great Bustard.! Without delving any further into the problems of natural history," let us be content to observe that birds are hatched during the prime of L G I; but silhouettes come back into fashion towards the end of this phase." Groups ofthree silhouette birds seem to be a feature ofArgive LG I, and perhaps of a particular painter ;" continuous files, however, are not found before the beginning of LG 11.8 Fish appear only on the giant pyxis, and the fragment Argos C 240. On both vases they serve as filling ornaments; but it is not until L G I I that they find what was to be their most regular place - under the horses' bellies. Among the linear filling ornaments, there is considerable variety, many motifs being borrowed for this purpose from the smaller panels and zones. Thus on the giant pyxis we see leaf-lozenges and detached concentric circles used in this way; and short runs of chevrons, or zigzags, are adapted to fill every kind ofgap. Much use is also made ofstars, small wheels, and outlined diagonal crosses, the last motif being especially characteristic of the Argolid. The cascade of dots, fashionable in M G I I, continues into early L G 1.9 The space above horses' backs is often barred offinto a small corner-panel, containing leaf-lozenges (pl, 26) or zigzags,"" In general, the filling ornament ofL G I is kept light, allowing the figures to breathe: the extreme manifestations of horror vacui are yet to come (pI. 29 e).
the continuous band of square metopes and triglyphs round the belly of the Mycenae oinochoe (pI. 27 e) recalls a practice not found in Attica before L GIb; and it is in the same phase that the hooked swastikas have their first Attic counterparts,' although the motif is certainly commoner in Attic L G I I a (p. 66). Complementary evidence comes from the connections with Corinth. An imported kotyle, relatively early in the Corinthian LG sequence, occurs in Argos Gr. 14/3; while Gr. 190/1 contains a close imitation ofthe very earliest Corinthian model. A later link with Corinthian L G may be seen in some antithetic pairs of hatched birds," clearly inspired by Corinthian herons. In the Argive contexts this composition first arrives at the end of L G 1,3 and continues into LG 11.4 It seems, then, that Argive LG I is contemporary with Attic LG Tb, and with the earlier part of Corinthian L G - a conclusion which is in harmony with our analysis of Corinthian chronology relative to Attic (pp. 108-11). ARGIVE LATE GEOMETRIC: SECOND PHASE (LG 11) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Asine, Barbouna Gr. I. OpAth 6 (1965), II8ff., pls. 1-3. Asine, House Deposit. Asine 330-3, fig. 224; add Nauplia 2249, OpAth 6 (1965), 131, pl. 4. Cf. CGA 28, n. 2. PI. 28b-c. Tiryns, Gr. VIII. AM 78 (1963), 51-3, Beil. 22, 5; 26; 27, I. (Two burials: the barrel oinochoe, no. 3, looks L G I.) Argos, Gr. 175. BCH 83 (1959), 762, fig. 18; CGA 174: banded amphora, C 2433; krater, C 2432; skyphoi, C 2430-I. Argos, Gr. 84 his. CGA 58, 174: amphora, C 847; Corinthian LG kotyle, C 942. Argos, Gr. 190/2. BCH 83 (1959), 757; 759, fig. 9; CGA 565, n. I: oinochoe, C 2462; skyphoi, C 2465, 2467, 2469; cup, C 2463. Argos, Gr. I. BCH 77 (1953),260; 257, fig. 48; CGA 174: amphora fr. with glazed body, C 2; oinochoe, C 3; krater Cl; skyphoi, C 18-26; bronze bowl, and six iron spits (Annales 14 (1959), 225, figs. 6-7). PI. 29c,e. Tiryns, Gr. 38. Tiryns I, 133, pls, 14,2; 15,7-8; 17, I; 18,3,8, 10. Argos, Gr. 6/2. BCH 77 (1953),260, 'tombeau 2', fig. 50; CGA 174-5: amphorae, C 12, 15; oinochoe, C I I; kraters, C 13, 14; kantharos, C 4; cups, C 5-10; stand, C 27. Tiryns, Gr. XXIII. AM 78 (1963), 35-40, Beil. 9, 1-3; 14-17; 18, 1-3. Sixteen vases lying on cover slab, not certainly from a single burial. Tiryns, Gr. 39. Tiryns I, 134, pls, 14, I; 17,4; 18, 16; cup and handmade oinochoe, not illustrated. Argos, Gr. 45 (The Panoply Grave). BCH 81 (1957), 322ff., figs. 1-67; CGA 174: amphora, C 170; krater, C 229; kantharoi, C 171-2; cups, C 173-7. PI. 28d. Tiryns, Gr. 26. Tiryns I, 131-2, pIs. 14, 5; 15, 9, 10, 13; 16, I I; 18, 6; eight more cups, not illustrated. PIs. 30d, 31 e. Tiryns, Gr. 11. AM 78 (1963),47-8, Beil. 22,4; 24, 1-2,4; 25, 1-2.
RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
We have already seen that Argive M G 1 I persevered into the period ofAttic L G 1 a; hence the change to L G in the Argolid should be approximately contemporary with the emergence of Attic L Gib. Although the two schools have by now developed widely divergent styles, a few points of contact between them confirm this synchronism. The slim amphora from Tiryns Gr. I I 1/2 is a close relative of a type common in Attic LG Ib (cf. pI. loa); Argos C 240; Tiryns I, pI. 20, 3. The horse on the first fr. is strangely reminiscent of the Attic Hirschfeld Painter's type, pI. 8a. S. Benton,]HS 81 (1961),52, n. 91. 3 PI 28e; Argos C 14, top right corner. 4 S. Benton, loco cit. n. 92. 6 Cf. CGA, 392ff. 6 PI. 27a,c-d; Raptis Gr., kraters I and 3. 7 cr. CGA 449, paras. 3-4, pI. 126; add C 291, pI. 80. • Argos C 240; Monastiraki pyxis, CGA, pI. 81. • Raptis Gr., krater no. 4, ADCht' 16, pI. 70d. 10 Raptis Gr., all four kraters.
1
2
1 4
K. v, I, pI. 23, Gr. 26. 2 CGA 152, n. 10. 3 Raptis Gr., kantharos, no. 6. Tiryns I, 114, fig. 45, left, from the Argive Heraion; the wiry step-meander cannot be prior to LG I I.
132
• ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
Mycenae, grave excavated by Evangelidis (Ev. Gr.). AE 1912, 127ff., figs. 1-15; CGA 175, pIs. 25,59,62, 74, 76,82-3. Two burials (cf. CGA 165-6), but evidently close in time. PIs. 29£, 30c, 3 I a -d. Argos, Gr. 163. CGA: oinochoe, C 2303; cup, C 2302. Argos, Gr. 176/2. BCH 83 (1959), 763-4; CGA 175: amphoriskos, C 2443; bottle, C 2440; kantharos, C 2441; cups, C 2457-8; pyxis, C 2436; stand, C 2438; pomegranate vases, C 2442, 2444, 2447; EPC kotyle, C 2448; handmade aryballoi, C 2439, 2446; handmade pyxis, C 2437; fr. of conical oinochoe, C 2537· Tiryns, Gr. 22. Tiryns I, 131, pl. 19,4, 7. Transitional to Subgeometric.
NOTE My LG 1I has virtually the same limits as Courbin's 'GR 2' (CGA 177,562-4), with its lower boundary marked by Tiryns Gr. 22. But I doubt whether it is possible to make any chronological subdivisions, owing to the widely divergent styles of different workshops. 'G R za' lacks clear definition; to its most important group, Argos Gr. 45, I assign a rather later place in the LG 1I sequence (pp. 134-5,140-1). 'GR zb', which Courbin calls 'I'akme du geometrique argien', spans most of the development within LG 1I. 'GR 2C' contains some material which I would class as Subgeometric (cf. J. M. Cook, B SA 48, 38); if its lower limit be set between the two kraters of Tiryns Gr. 22 (as CGA 175), the Subgeometric example, Tiryns I, pI. 19,4, must take with it many of the kraters of'GR 2C' - e.g. CGA, pis. 46-7; C 169,2428. Among the figured vases, the end ofmy LG 1I is marked by the kraters C 201 and 645 (pIs. 30e, 3Ij); their date relative to Attic and Corinthian is discussed below pp. 145-6·
During this final phase of Argive Geometric, two broad developments are at work: the gradual loosening ofthe linear decoration, and the increasing prominence of figured drawing. It is not easy to generalize about the figured productions: for as in contemporary Attic, many ofthe best vases are attributable to individual painters and workshops, widely divergent in style. These I treat separately at the beginning of this section, in order to illustrate various aspects ofArgive figured work; later I offer a more general summary ofshapes and decoration; and finally, a few words on the chronology of Argive LG 11 relative to Attic and Corinthian.
I. The Atticizing work of Asinel Neck-handled amphora. Asine 331, fig. 224,2, from the House Deposit. PI. 28b. 2. Large oinochoe. Asine 327, fig. 222,6. PI. 28a. 3. Oinochoe, Nauplia 2228. OpAth 6 (1965), 121, pl. 2, from Asine Gr. I. 4. Krater. Asine 321, fig. 219, I. 5. Spouted krater, Nauplia 13971. OpAth 6 (1965), 124, pl. 3,from Asine qr. I. I.
Before dealing with the more orthodox workshops ofthe Argolid, we should first consider a local variant of the Argive style found only at Asine. The vases listed here are representative of this style; they share too few idiosyncrasies to permit their attribution to a single workshop, but their manner reflects a degree of Attic influence quite exceptional in other Argive pottery of this phase. 1
Cf. R. Hagg, OpAth 6, 132-3.
I THE ATTICIZING WORI{ OF ASINE •
LG 11
133
The slim amphora, 1/ has the straight lower profile of a class common in Attic LG Ib (p. 47), and surviving into the LG 11 Workshop of the Hooked Swastikas." In the decoration, the bird files and leaf-lozenges are of local origin; in the neck-panel, however, the ladder-column is a feature of Attic L G I I not found in the Argolid outside Asine." The ladder reappears on the large oinochoe, 2, another vase in this same hybrid style; here, too, we see an elegant pair of horses unusually close to the Attic Classical Tradition (cf. pk r r b). The smaller oinochoe, 3, is closely related to the Concentric Circle Group of Attic L G IIa4 in shape as well as in decoration; the distinctive scheme also occurs on three other Asinaean oinochoai.s but nowhere else in the Argolid. The krater, 4, introduces three more Atticisms: a metopal system where birds flank a central quatrefoil (cf. pl. rob-e}; in the field of this quatrefoil, the use of cross-hatched triangles as filling ornament (stars being the general rule in the Argolid); and the crosshatched tongues in double outline." Elsewhere,' the tongues have only a single outline - a variation not found in Attic until L G I I (p. 88). 8 5 is the only known Argive example of the spouted krater - another loan from Attica, or from some region where Attic fashions still prevailed at this late stage." It seems, then, that some Asinaean craftsmen were heterodox in accepting Attic ideas, at a time when other centres in the Argolid had long since emancipated themselves from Attic influence.
11. The Painter of the Sparring Horses I.
2. 3. 4. 5.
Krater, Athens 231. Tiryns I, 146, fig. 11; CGA, pl. 32, both sides. PI. 28e. Krater, Nauplia, from Tiryns, Gr. VIII. AM 78 (1963),51-2, Beil, 26, 3. Krater frs., Argos C 242. CGA, pl. 48. Krater fr., Paris, Institut d'Art. C G A, pl. 48. Pedestalled krater, Berlin 4286, from Melos. Tiryns I, 147, fig. 13; Neugebauer 6, pl. 4.
NOTE I and 2 were associated by Verdelis, AM 78,52. Courbin adds 3, the fr. C 3291, and possibly the fr. C 3288 (CGA 450, para 12). An oinochoe fr. from the Heraion, CGA 452, para. 25 and pI. 146, is associated by Courbin both with this painter and with the fr. Agamemnoneion A 37; it has more in common with the latter vase.
Turning now to the more orthodox workshops ofthe Argolid, let us begin with a series of kraters not far removed from L G 1. The first two are very close in shape to an L G I example, pl, 27 a; the body is slightly deeper, and the foot narrower. The lean horses are reminiscent 1 a. also Asine 327, fig. 222, 4. • P. 66; cf. especially the Boston amphora, no. 5; and contrast the more rounded contour of Argos C 12. 3 CGA 144, n. 5: cf. pl, 15£. 4 P. 75, pI. 13d; cf. especially JdI 74 (1959),89, figs. 9-10. 5 Asine 325, fig. 221, 7-9. 6 a. also Asine 321, fig. 219, 2. 7 Asine, Gr. 1,5; skyphos, Nauplia 2249, from Asine House Deposit. S For the rare combination of birds and tongues, cf. Agora P 17183, skyphos, from Well M. II: I, LG IIa: Hesperia 30 (1961), pI. 19,021. • E.g. Euboean, or 'Parian'; cf. especially the Delos krater, Ac I, pI. 37e, for decoration as well as shape. The heavy billets on the Asine krater are unknown in Attic, but present in 'Parian'; see p. 178.
III THE FENCE WORKSHOP' 135
LG Il
134 . ARGIVE GEOMETRIC ofthe stallions on the giant pyxis (pl. 26). Further signs ofconservatism are t? be seen in the shape of 5, whose tall ribbed pedestal is unique in this generation? and also m the su~stan tial area of glaze on the lower body (1-2, 5), still punctuated by triple reserved bands m the MGmanner. The painter is named after the aggressive pose of his horses on 1-3, which are among the earliest heraldic pairs in Argive Geometric. On 5 this pose has been abandoned, and the creatures are separated into lateral metopes in the manner of the Fence Workshop (p. 1.3~)· Nevertheless, 3-5 may be attributed to the same hand, on the. str~ngth o.f the motIf.In the lowest register - an extremely rare combination of concentnc CIrcles WIth small gridsquares in the field. The circles, which also appear in the lateral panels of 3-4, are always drawn with a sixfold brush; whereas the leaf-lozenges, common to all ~ve kraters, a~e generally executed in fours. (With the possible exception of 4, ~~ere the ~ud. files are eVIdently drawn in sixes.) 2,4, and 5 are linked by two f~rther idiosyncrasies m the horsepanels: the bushy tails, unusually, are hatched on both sides ;' and the small corner-panels of filling ornament have curved frames, fol~owing ~he curvature of the. h~rse' s neck. On all five vases, the space under the horse's belly IS occupied by a.fish; b~t this IS a regular feature of Argive LG I I. On 1-3 the hatching ofth~ fish beco~es mcreasmg~y elaborate. The mass-production of birds is another SIgn of the times. In .the ~Ide-panels of 1 we can still recognize the long-legged flamingoes ofLG I, although ~eu tails ar~ pro!onged to ~he point of mannerism, and their legs reduced to single strokes, like the soldIer-buds of Cormthian and Attic. Later, on 4-5, the tails have disappeared, and the body has become a blob; yet two stiff legs are still shown. It remained for lat~r hands ~o deb~se the birds e:en further, by robbing them ofone leg (p. 138), or by convertmg them into Wlg~le-leggedwI~e birds (p. 144; pI. 30 b). It seems, then, that this series comes to an end considerably earlIer than the close of Argive Geometric.
Ill. The Fence Workshop I. Tripod amphora, Nauplia 10006, from Pronoia. P AE 1953, 194, fig. 2; better, {
CGA, pl. I I. PI. 28d. 2. Flat pyxis fr., Nauplia 4266, from Tiryns. Unpublished. G.I. Neg. 1043. 3. Krater fr., Argos C 239. CGA, pI. 48. 4. Kantharos, Argos C 171, from Gr. 45. BCH81 (1957),333, fig. 14; CGA, pls, 61,
all oflean bui~d; forelegs are !hrust forward, encroaching onthe frame in front; the weight rests o~ the ~mdlegs. The tails are rendered by a single stroke. The stiff forelegs, without any articulation a~ the elbows (one exception: no. 3), recall the cruder productions ofL G 1.1 Through these .ammals we can follow a development within the workshop, which may well span a generation. . On 1 the horses have clearly marked fetlocks: these are no longer in evidence in 2, a slightly later work by the. same painter. ~ven the forearms have vanished by the time of 6, one ofthe latest Geometnc vases from Asme. But in compensation for this loss, the Asinaean horses s~o,: three new tendencies, characteristic ofthe latest Argive Geometric: the forelegs are begmmng to open out, the hoof is conceived as a separate mass, and the fetlock is now shown as a sharp angle, not as an excrescence. In t~e main zone, the ho~ses are p~ace~ in lateral square metopes. The central position, accordmg to the usual Argive practice, IS occupied by a thin and wiry step-meander of L G I I type; on 1 and 6, .four limbs of this meander are left detached in the corner. I, 3, ~nd 4 ,show the horse peer:ng over the 'fence' into the intervening triglyph panels; on 6 the fenc~ has ,been absorbe? mto the horse's domain, and a second triglyph has been inserted. The ~ence and the vertical lozenge chain recur on the Berlin krater by the Painter of the Sparrmg Horses (p. 133, no. 5), who may perhaps have been influenced by this workshop towards the end of his career. The Great Bustards on the neck of r are derived from those of the Mycenae oinochoe pk 27e (p. 13~, n. 4), which could have been an early product of this workshop." Bird files are abse~t UI~tIl 6, when they arrive in force; there both two-legged soldier-birds and onelegged wirebirds are represented. Fish are entirely absent. The chief fil~i?g. ornament is.the large outlined cross, inherited from the giant pyxis of LG I. (pl. ~6), It IS very promment on 1-2, less so on 3-4. Lighter motifs include small swastikas WIth acute-angled arms (1-2), and dotted leaf-lozenges (1-2 4-6). 5-6 differ from the rest o~ the series in having an enclosed panel above the horse's back, and a square manger below ItS belly. .Owing to the adept use of the multiple brush, the ornament on these vases displays a crIspness and flu~ncr r~rely combined in the work ofthis generation. Comparison with the effort ofa ~acoman mutator (pl, 46 0) will serve to illustrate the high technical accomplishment of this workshop.
IV. The Miniature Style
I I I. PI. 28c. 5. Krater fr., Argos C 3279. CGA, pl. 133· { 6. Flat pyxis, Nauplia 4232, from Asine. Asine 3 20-2, fig. 220, I.
(i) By the Verdelis Painter (all from Tiryns, Gr. XXIII) named in honour of the late Dr N. M. Verdelis, who excavated and published these vases
NOTE I
and
2
Kantharos. A M 78 (1963), 38, Beil. 17, Cup. Ibid. 39, Beil, 16, 2. 3· Cup. Ibid. 39, BeiI. 16, 3. 4. Cup. Ibid. 40, Beil. 16, I. I.
are associated by Courbin, CGA 450.:.1, para. 18.
2.
This workshop is named after the peculiarity of the horses, whose thin and elongated muzzles protrude over the triple vertical divisions as though peering over a fence. They are 1 1
See CGA 408, n.
I,
for other examples.
Cf. Tiryns I, pI.
20,
3.
2
Cf. CGA 45 1 •
I.
136 .
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
LG 11
(ii) Related 5. Hemispherical oinochoe, Argos 0 2462, from Gr. 190/2. CGA, pls. 23, 137. 6. Oinochoe, Argos C 11, from Gr. 6/2. CGA, pls. 25,137. 7. Oinochoe, Athens 843. PI. 29 a- b . 8-16. Skyphoi, Argos C 18-26, from Gr. I. CGA 448, pI. 58 (0 20, 22). PI. 29c (C 20). 17· Lug-handled pyxis, from Tiryns, Gr. XXIII. AM 78 (1963),39, Beil. 17,3. 18. Lekythos-oinochoe fr., Argos 0 2537, from Gr. 176/2. CGA, pI. 138.
(i) By the Schliemann Painter I. Krater, Argos 0 I, from Gr. I. BCH 77 (1953), 257, fig. 48; CGA, pls. 28, I I I. PI. 2ge. 2. Krater fr., Agamemnoneion A 13. BSA 48 (1953), pI. 18. 3. Krater fr., Argos 0 1018. CGA, pI. 35. 4· Krater fr., from Tiryns. Schliemann, Tiryns, pI. 18; AM 43 (1918), 108, fig. 27; Jd! 79 (1964),5 1, fig. 39, showing new join. 5· Krater fr., Agamemnoneion A 9. BSA 48 (1953),38, fig. I I.
Verdelis, AM 78,40, assigned 2-4 to the same hand, to which Courbin also ascribes I: CGA 452, para. 24. To a second painter Courbin attributes 6 and 8-16 (CGA 449, para. 8); to this hand I would assign 7 and 17.
(ii) Workshop 6. Shoulder-handled amphora, Nauplia 2248, from Asine; much restored. Asine 330; 329, fig. 223, I; CGA, pI. 12. 7. Fr., perhaps from krater pedestal, Argos C 4029. CGA, pI. 51. 8. Neck-handled amphora, Argos 0928. CGA, pls. 6-7. 9. Neck-handled amphora frs., Argos 0 1016. CGA, pI. 140.
NOTE Courbin assigns 7-g, and perhaps 6, to his 'Maitre de l'amphora C 928': CGA 451, para. 21. I am not convinced by his association of 1 with the oinochoe C 3 (ibid. para. 10), which rests solely on the similarity of the bird friezes.
This list includes some of the largest and most intricate vases ever to be made in the Argolid. There are several reminiscences of the LG I grand manner, as exemplified by the giant pyxis (pl, 26): for example, the elaborate and unequal division of the design into square metopes and narrow panels (I, 4); and the vertical partition of the lip zone (4). New, however, is the tendency to draw some motifs in bold silhouette: e.g., the circle (2), quatrefoil (3), octofoil (4), and fish (2,4-9). The imagery, once again, is confined to the stock theme of horse-taming, and usually placed in a large central panel.' The figured drawing is curiously mannered: men and horses are exceptionally tall, their legs being prolonged far beyond nature. The horses' croups and the human calves and thighs are all accentuated with vigorous, swinging curves: when calves and thighs curve in opposite directions, the tamers have an unstable look (3-4). The gesture of raised arms and spread fingers is typical of painter and workshop alike (1,3-4,8-g). In this mannered style, the horses' necks curve round in a complete semicircle before reaching the heads. The tails are long and thin, nearly reaching to the ground line.s At the end ofthe long cannon bones, the hooves are rendered in some detail. The painter makes his animals stand on tiptoe; fetlocks take the form ofeither a long triangle (4-5) or two to three horizontal strokes (I), which are absurdly prolonged to the ground line on two workshop With the sole exception of 6, where the horse scenes are confined to lateral square metopes. IOn I the tail actually touches the ground; the hatching is exceptional for this workshop.
1
1
See CGA 408, nn.
12-13,
for discussion.
137
v. The Schliemann Workshop
NOTE
1-4 share a centralized scheme, where a large figured panel is flanked by several small panels oflinear ornament. In each scene, a man is placed between two horses; on this small scale, the horse is reduced to its simplest terms. The neck, forming the quadrant of a circle, rises out of an almost rectangular body. The tail and legs, shorter than ever before, are drawn in single strokes; elbows and hocks are clearly marked; but there are no fetlocks, and even the hooves are omitted. Oommon to all four vases is the mysterious appendage between the forelegs.' The filling ornament in these scenes is kept light. Little grid-squares float freely in the field, accompanied by chevrons and dots; pendent triangles are placed above the man's head. There are no corner-panels above the horses. The horizontal side-panels are invariable: a quintuple brush is used alike for the rough soldier-birds above, and for the detached leaf-lozenges below. In the figured field, however, chevrons, dots, and grid-squares are drawn with a four-armed instrument. The lower body is striped down to the base; below each handle is a cross, or a set of converging diagonals. The sketchiness ofthe animal style makes it difficult to speak ofa workshop, but a number ofsmall heraldic horse-panels show some kinship with this painter's work. The nearest relation is 5, where the man has been replaced by a bulky fish; but the rare grid-squares, and the cross under the handle, are as on I. The same miniature style may be seen on the shoulders of the two larger oinochoai, 6-7 (pI. 29 b), where linear stylization has been carried to the extreme; even the horses' bodies have been reduced to single strokes, and the filling ornament has been correspondingly lightened. At their best, these small pictures have a dry vigour, economically achieved through a few clean and rapid strokes; but when the scale is reduced yet further (e.g. 10, plo 29c), the style almost dwindles away into nothing. At a time when the Oorinthians were beginning to cultivate the miniature for their finest and most fastidious work, the Argives could never bring themselves to take small-scale painting very seriously. It is now time to look at Argive figured work on the grand scale.
V THE SCHLIEMANN WORKSHOP'
138 .
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
vases (7-8). The space under the belly is usually occupied by large fish, sometimes hatched in outline, but more often in silhouette with reserved median line, according to the contemporary Corinthian practice (p. 106). Curved linear fins are characteristic of the painter (2,4-5)· The filling ornament is nothing less than tempestuous: men and horses have been bombarded with a rain of heavy motifs until they have no room to breathe. Meander hooks, at first confined to the linear panels, are eventually admitted into the figured field (3-4, 9); other popular ornaments are triangles, leaves, and various forms of lozenge. Bird files play only a small part in the decoration, yet offer some clue to the relative dating. They progress from the two-legged soldier-birds of I to the one-legged creatures (3-4, 9) characteristic of an advanced stage of L G 11. This is a grandiose style, whose aspirations are greater than its achievements. The general designs are finely conceived; yet the figured scenes lack any sense of effective spacing, so that the result is depressing to the eye.
VI. The Painter of Athens 877 Kantharos, Nauplia 1915, from Mycenae, Ev. Gr. AE 1912, 132, fig. 3; better, CGA, pl. 62. PI. 29f. 2. Krater, Athens 877. Tiryns I, 146, fig. 12; AD 16 (1960), 70 (further references), pl. 34. PI. 29 d. 1.
NOTE I
and 2 are associated by Evangelidis (AE 1912, 132) and Courbin, CGA 451, para. 20.
The details on these vases correspond very closely. In the figured scenes, the canons established by the Schliemann Painter are adopted in a less exaggerated form, the proportions of men and horses being rather closer to nature. On both vases there is a consistent difference in the shapes of the horses' necks: a semicircle on the left, and a mere quadrant on the right. Hocks are clearly shown, but the heavy hooves leave no room for the fetlock. Both horses bow the head to their tamer, who raises his arms in a commanding gesture reminiscent of the Schliemann Painter's scenes. The man's nose and chin are prominent; the thorax is quadrilateral, as on the Schliemann Painter's first krater (pI. 2ge). Large fish, with dotted round eyes, float under the horses' bellies. Corner-panels are framed by a dotted meander hook, used also as a field ornament; the heavier hatched form is more suitable to the larger field ofthe krater. Wheels and hatched lozenges fill the smaller gaps, packed far less tightly than the filling ornament of the Schliemann Painter. The side-panels of the kantharos correspond to those of the Verdelis Painter: a row of birds above leaf-lozenges, both drawn with a quintuple brush. These two vases represent the average level of Argive figured work in the middle of L G I I. Vases ofgreater distinction were produced both before and after: but the drawing here is still careful enough for a personal style to be recognizable.
LG II
VII THE MASTER OF ARGOS C
VII. The Master of Argos C
201
201' 139
and his antecedents
Kantharos, Nauplia 1973, from Tiryns, Gr. 26. Tiryns I, pl. IS, 13. PI. 30d. 2. Krater fr., Nauplia 1984, from Tiryns. Tiryns I, pl. 15,3. 3. Kraterfr., Argos C 210, from Gr. 23. CGA, pls. 41-2, 1I3. 4. Krater, Argos C 201. BCH 78 (1954), pl. 6, 2; Archaeology 9 (1956), 170, fig. 8; { CGA, pls, 43-5, 1I3. PI. 30e. I.
{
NOTE Courbin assigns 3 and 4 to the 'maitre': also an unpublished fr. from Tiryns, G.I. Neg. 1293: CGA 451-2, para. 22.
This interesting series takes us to the lower limit of Argive Geometric. We begin with a slight work in a rough miniature style, and end with a superb krater of monumental size, where Geometric and Early Orientalizing elements are finely balanced. The four vases may be separated into two pairs, each pair being the work of one hand: but 2 and 3 are so close that a common authorship for all four is not out of the question. The two pairs might represent the apprenticeship and maturity of the same painter who, having learned his craft in a strict LG 11 workshop, never ceased to develop his own personal style. But this hypothesis must remain in doubt, since so little remains of 2, a vital link in the chain. The kantharos, I, is a hasty little piece, not unlike the work of the Verdelis Painter and his colleagues; the figure style, however, lacks the crispness of the best miniature painting. Several features also recall the Schliemann Painter: the individual manner ofdrawing bird files;' the triangular fetlocks; the heavy filling ofmeander hooks; and above all the pose of the tamer, who raises his forearms in an emphatic gesture of command. In two respects, however, this artist breaks new ground. Here we see the first - and extremely summary attempt in the Argolid to reserve the human eye; secondly, instead of the usual heraldic arrangement, a single animal is being led off by his tamer. This simplified taming scene, which is the exception rather than the rule, persists throughout the series. The fr. 2 is closely related to I through the anatomy of the human figures: and there is a similar attempt to reserve the eye. The birds, too, are identical with those on I: in both cases a quadruple brush has been used. Some novelties, however, are prophetic ofthe monumental style of 3-4. Reins are now placed in the tamer's hands, forming an arc over his head, while a cascade of meander hooks tumbles down either side of his body. Under the horse's belly, the square manger of I is replaced by a dotted T-shaped form. It is a pity that too little of this krater survives for a sure restoration of the whole design: but it seems likely that the step-meander occupied the central position, with a horse-panel at either side (cr.
3-4)· From these two vases sprang the maturer style of 3-4, a pair so closely interrelated that they can hardly have been painted by different hands. 3 bears two main registers, of which the upper corresponds to the handle zone of 4. The figured metopes in each case are practically identical in content and composition, almost down to the smallest details of filling 1
See CGA 450, para.
10.
140 .
LG II
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
ornament; and the same mannered flamingoes are enclosed in the corner-panels behind the horses' backs. On both vases the linear ornament is drawn with a care that is unusual for the period, and I cannot see any sure trace of the labour-saving multiple brush. If the two kraters come from the hand of the same man, it will be obvious from the figured drawing that they represent two different stages in his career. Lanky proportions are the rule for human figures, produced by a mannered elongation of the thighs. Yet the men of 3 still bear a family resemblance to the solitary tamer preserved on 2; the head, although now drawn largely in outline, is still sketchily rendered, with a dot for the eye, and rough projections for nose and chin - as on 2. Passing to the right-hand figure on 4 (pl, 30e), we see that the features are now carefully exaggerated in an Early Orientalizing manner, with a small circle for the eye, and waves ofhair falling down the back ofthe neck. Yet the men on the reverse show that our painter was not afraid to progress still further; here he has returned to full silhouette, but the faces are more compact and lifelike; white paint is used, not only to outline the body, but also to mark the eyes and eyebrows.' The horses show a similar progression. Those on 3, with their neat angular fetlocks and their substantial triangular hooves firmly planted on the ground.t show a marked advance on 1-2; yet they seem meagre and skinny in comparison with the fine barrel-chested stallions of 4. On the reverse of this masterpiece, white paint is applied to the horses even more effectively than to the men; the inner marking ofshoulder and thigh recalls the exploratory use of incision at the beginning ofMiddle Protocorinthian," In spite of these daring innovations in the figured drawing, the linear ornament remains strictly within the Geometric repertoire; even the running spirals of 4 have a precedent in the Thapsos style of Corinthian LG (cf pt 2oa-e). However, the single-line step-meander on the handle belongs to the very end of Argive Geometric. Two other features deserve special notice: the first appearance offemale dancers on 3, and the bellied shape of 3 and 4. These will be considered in the next section, where we review the work of another distinguished painter who flourished at the end of Argive Geometric.
VIII THE DANCE PAINTER'
141
For this painter, too, the krater is the characteristic form. Although no complete example of his work survives, I and 3 have much in common with the masterpiece Argos C 201 : a short lip, broad flat stirrup handles, and a taut, bellied body of relatively shallow proportions. In addition, I and 3 share a refinement not found on C 201 : the rim projects slightly from the lip. They are clearly by the same potter, as well as by the same painter. This painter's figured work seems to be confined to the female dance, a new theme not found in the Argolid before an advanced stage ofLG 11. The women are placed in square panels, in groups of three or four. Like some of their contemporaries in the Athens 894 Workshop (pl, r r d.f-g), they link hands and hold branches: they differ, however, from most Attic dancers in having skirts in silhouette, and long strings dangling to the ground from their girdles.' Their first appearance in the Argolid was on the krater C 2 I 0, where they move off to the right in a realistic dance; this painter, however, has turned them into a static emblem. Ancillary to the dancing scenes are narrow panels containing bird files. Here we see the fully debased wirebird, first with two legs (I), and subsequently with only one (3); but hardly to be expected in any form before an advanced stage ofL G 11. The linear ornament is always neatly drawn; but there is nevertheless a clear development within the series, from the angular zigzags of I to the massed scribbles of 3. The composition, too, changes. On I, the field is divided according to an orthodox L G I I formula: two figured panels flanking a wiry step-meander. 3, however, shows the painter in a more experimental mood. A single figured panel, framed by birds and scribbles, floats upon a vast expanse of glaze, which bears free ornament in added white: the realistic dotted snake round the lower body suggests Corinthian inspiration, towards the end ofEPC (cf pl, 2IC). This series, like the previous one, takes us to the end of Argive Geometric. Once again, the fastidious neatness of their decoration is exceptional in a period and district where so much rough and careless work was tolerated. However, this preoccupation with extreme neatness in linear ornament became a typical feature of Argive Subgeometric, as exemplified in the kraters of Fusco type (pp. 146-7).
VIII. The Dance Painter Krater fr., Argos C 229, from Gr. 45· BCH83 (1957), 334, fig. 17; 336-7, fig. 18; CGA, pI. 40. 2. Krater fr., Fogg Museum 1954.33· Tblle 45, no. 115, pI. 24C • 3. Krater, Corinth T 2545, from N. Cemetery, Gr. 47: foot and one handle restored. AJA 34 (1930 ) , 4 Il , fig. 5; Corinth XI r r, 35-6, 45-6, pl, 9. PI. 30 a - b. 4. Fr., from Argive Heraion. AHn, pI. 57, 16; CGA, pI. 145. I.
NOTE This is Courbin's 'Peintre du cratere de Corinthe' (CGA 449, para. 7), to which he assigns I, 3-4, and two frs. showing a white serpent as on 3: Argos C 754, AH I1, pl. 60, 18. For other attributed frs. see CGA 429, n. 4. Of these, C 4442 is virtually identical in style with the krater from Corinth, whose Argive origin cannot now be seriously challenged - pace R. S. Young, Corinth XIII, 46, n. 33. On its fabric, see now J. L. Benson, ClassPhi161 (1966),271.
GENERAL REMARKS ON SHAPE AND DECORATION, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE PLAINER VASES SHAPES
While discussing the workshops, we have already encountered the most distinguished vaseforms of this period; but since most ofour attention has been claimed by the ornament, some general remarks on the shapes - and especially the plainer shapes - will not be out ofplace. The standard type of neck-handled amphora is tall and slim, though less extreme in this respect than the Atticizing class from Asine (pt 28b). Sometimes the decoration is wholeheartedly light-ground j- more frequently, the ornament is restricted to the neck, while the body is covered in glaze (pl, 31 a).3 There is also a rarer variant with plump body and 1
1
CGA, pls. 44-5, top.
I
Cf. p. 134, no. 6, a late work from the Fence Workshop.
3
Cf. Kraiker, Aigina, pI. 12.
3
In Attic, girdle strings figure only on one Subgeometric hydria; Villa Giulia 1212. See p. 60. lArgos C 12,928. Also Tiryns, Grs, 38, 39: Argos, Raptis Gr., BCN 85,676, fig. 6; C 15; frs. C 2, C 170: Troezen, ]dI 14, 86, figs. 46-7.
142 .
broad neck;' and a plain banded class with handles to the rim, continuing from L G 1.2 The only amphoriskos of L G I I is a somewhat debased specimen of the neck-handled class." The belly-handled amphora is represented by a slim fragmentary example from Tiryns.s ripely decorated. Most imposing ofall, however, is the shoulder-handled type with tripod strap feet (pl, 28d), which belongs to the same genus as the LG I giant pyxis (pl. 26), and could well have evolved from it." The oinochoai betray no radical novelty of shape; the three main classes of L G I all continue into this phase. The large ovoid type is especially popular at Asine (pI. 28a),6 though also known at Tiryns.? Smaller plump oinochoai occur in considerable quantity; their necks vary greatly in width and height, the tallest being those of the Atticizing examples from Asine." The hemispherical class is at home in Argos, and varies in size from the monumental (C 3) to the miniature (C 2462). The conicallekythos-oinochoe is borrowed from the Corinthian repertoire; both wheelmade" and handmade'? versions are occasionally found. Other rarities among the pouring vessels are the high-lipped mugs,ll and small roundmouthed olpai: the latter are confined to Asine,'> where they suggest further evidence of Attic influence. The bottle, ofelongated bulbous shape, is a strange innovation ofthis phase. 13 Among the pyxides, the flat type now holds the field, and has grown considerably since L G I. The walls usually have a gentle double curve in their profile. The lip may be inset to take a flat lidY alternatively, the rim may project outwards (pl, 30c), supporting a domed lid. 15 The handles, with two or more reeds, are placed and set horizontally. This orthodox Argive form has no counterpart in Attic or Corinthian; in Wiirzburg, however, there is a rounded variant without handles.v which is clearly related to the Attic flat form (c£ pf, rok). Ofthe older pyxis shapes, only the lug-handled form survives, with a very tall foot." The shape of the krater does not invite generalization, owing to the whims of individual potters and workshops. The body, however, is often deeper than in LG I (pl, 3Ij), the shoulder more rounded (pl. 30 a,e) , and the lip higher (pf, 29 d) ; all three developments are united in the Subgeometric kraters ofFusco type. Except for the high pedestal of the Melos krater (p. 133, no. 5), the feet are always low. As in LG I, horizontal handles are the rule, usually taking the form of ropes or straps; but the high vertical handle (pl. 2ge) also continues from L G I, while stirrups were reintroduced by two distinguished craftsmen at the end of Geometric (pl, 30a,e). Skyphoi, as in L G I, tend to be on the shallow side, with the exception of some large and glazed examples from ArgoS.18 The lip is often tall and flaring, so that the rim overhangs the Argos C 847; AHII, 117, fig. 42, CGA, pI. 8. 2 CGA, pl. 10. a Argos C 2443. C Tiryns I, pI. 20,4. More strap feet, CGA, pl. 105. The Asine amphora from the Schliemann Workshop, Nauplia 2248, also belongs to this class; the foot is missing. 6 Also Asine 325, fig. 221, 7~; 327, fig. 222, 5; two more Asinaean examples, unpublished, Nauplia 13216, 13222. 7 Gr. XXIII. 8 Asine, Gr, I, nos. 2, 5. 9 Heraion, A]A 43 (1939),441, fig. 30: frs., Argos C 2537, and Tiryns, G.1. Neg. 1191. Tiryns Gr. XXIII, no. 4, is possibly LG I; cf. p. 126. 10 Tiryns Gr. II, no. 4. 11 Tiryns I, pI. 18, 16; A M 78, BeiI. 25,3. 12 Asine 325, fig. 221, 1-2; Gr. I, nos. 8-9. 13 CGA 195-6, 'flacon'; Argos C 2440, etc. 1C Asine, fig. 220, I, from the Fence Workshop. 16 Mycenae, Ev. Gr., no. 7; CGA, pI. 81. 16 Langlotz; pI. 5, no. 63; convincingly assigned to the Argolid by Courbin, CGA 228, n. 2, pI. 78. 17 Tiryns, Gr. XXIII, no. 5; Argos C 2436. 18 CGA, pis. 54-5. 1
5
LG II
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
143
body (pl. 31 c,e) ; at the other extreme, however, a small class painted in the miniature style (pI. 29c) (p. 136, nos. 8-16) has hardly any lip at all, and seems related to the Corinthian shallow kotyle. Cups, as before, are extremely plentiful, and vary considerably in depth; pIs. 31 f-g illustrate the extremes ofshape, as well as two ofthe most characteristic schemes of decoration. Kantharoi, as we have seen, are often big enough to bear detailed figured scenes (pls. 28c, 29f, 30 d) ; the handles are always low on these larger examples, but may sometimes rise above the rim in the case of smaller kantharoi (pl, 3 1 b),! Rectangular plaques, with a loop handle at one end, were made for votive use. Several were offered at the Heraion.s while others found their way to Aegina." One specimen from Aegina, pl, 31 h, was painted by the same hand- as a plaque from the Heraion," a skyphos from Prosymna," and a fr. from Troezen.? DECORATION
The best figured drawing has already been considered in our discussion ofworkshops. As we have seen, horse-taming is by far the most popular theme; the chorus of female dancers does not appear before an advanced stage of L G I I, but continues into Subgeometric (p. 146). Other figured subjects are extremely rare, and survive only in fragments. Some pieces from Argos, perhaps all from the same krater, show a procession offemale mourners.s Traces of chariot processions are apparent at Argos and the Heraion." Armed warriors are occasionally seen wearing Dipylon," round>' or even square-s shields. A fragment from the Heraion preserves part ofa battle in which archers are involved.'! From the same source we see a representation ofSiamese twins, a row ofmale dancers clapping hands to a lyre, and a pair of boxers competing for a tripod.> Quadrupeds, other than the horse, are only sparsely represented. A limited fashion for kneeling deer, with all four legs showing, was introduced towards the end ofLG II by the Master ofArgos C 20 I ;15 a krater from Tiryns, ofwhich only fragments survive.v combines these deer with a row ofhelmeted sphinxes and a helmeted rider. The same deer appear in white paint on an Early Orientalizing votive shield from Tiryns;" where they adorn the caparison of a chariot horse. Standing deer are found only twice;" and the goat only once.P Although the bird file is a distinctive hallmark ofArgive L G I I, the day ofthe individual bird is not quite over. Antithetic pairs, based on the Corinthian L G heron, last into the early years of this phase (p. 131, n. 4); and large single birds, with careful hatching, occur sporadically until quite a late stage, sometimes in conjunction with the bird files.w The files themselves are less standardized than in Corinthian, varying considerably from workshop to workshop; the development, however, is fairly consistent. After the relative naturalism Also Tiryns I, pI. 18, 10; Tiryns Gr. XXIII, no. 16. 2 AH 11, pI. 58, 9-11. Kraiker, Aigina, nos. 67-8; Fiirtwangler, Aegina, pI. 125, nos. 31-2, 37. C CGA 450, para. 16. 5 AHII, pI. 57, 9. 6 AE 1937, 385, fig. 9, no. 1215. 7 ADChr 18 (1963), pI. 59C. 8 CGA, pI. 144, C. 255I~. 9 CGA, pI. 142, C 4178; AHII, pI. 57, 12. 10 ]dI 14 (1899), 85, fig. 44. 11 CGA, pI. 142, C 599. IZ AHII, pI. 57, 8. 13 AHII, pI. 57,10. 14 ibid. nos. 9, 7, I I. No. 13, showing a curious combination oflion and ship scene, looks Attic rather than Argive. 1. SeeCGA, pI. 42, C 210. 16 Nauplia 4268, 4274. 17 RSA 42 (1947), pl. I8Ac. 18 AHu, pl. 57, 22; Argos C 4177, CGA, pl. 139. 19 Argos C 3805; the tips of the horns are just visible. 20 E.g. pI. 28e; Asine 321, fig. 220, I. 1
3
144 .
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
of the LG I birds drawn in threes (pI. 27c-d), the two-legged soldier-birds come on the scene at the beginning ofL G I I; almost at once, they are mass-produced with the multiple brush.' Later, one-legged birds appear (pI. 29f), and sometimes the soldier-bird gives place to the wirebird (pI. 30 b) ; but the fashion for bird files seems to be waning already by the end of Geometric, and hardly survives into Subgeometric. The L G I parent of these schematic birds could well be the flamingo of the giant pyxis (pI. 26) (see p. 130), whose raised beak and widely curving neck can still be discerned in the cursory wire birds of the Dance Painter (pI. 30 b); these features distinguish them from the files of contemporary Corinthian vases (pI. 21). Filling ornament, as a rule, is much heavier than in L G I; in most cases, however, the accumulation is not disastrous, since the firm silhouette ofthe figures still stands out through the welter of half-tone ornament in the field. Many of the motifs enjoy special favour with individual painters and workshops: for example the outlines cross (Fence Workshop), grid-squares (Verdelis Painter), quartered or cross-hatched lozenges (Painter of Athens 877), and meander hooks (Master of Argos C 201); the tight style of the Dance Painter leaves no room for anything more substantial than dots, chevrons, and sigmas. The space under the horses' bellies is at first filled by fish: later, square or T -shaped mangers! become more common. The area above the horses' backs is usually enclosed by a double frame, containing a small group of birds or a single zigzag. The L G I practice of filling the smaller spaces with stars is not continued in L G I I; instead, the small circular gaps under the horses' necks are often occupied by a small wheel, while pendent triangles are placed over the tamer's head (pI. 29d,f). Outside the figured fields, the step-meander has become by far the most popular of the larger linear motifs. On large vases it often occupies the central place, flanked by two figured panels. Its limbs are thin and wiry, and hatched at right angles to the outline. Orthodox meanders have been abandoned. Hatched zigzags and meander hooks are ancillary motifs on large vases, but often form the main decoration on shapes which are too small to take the step-meander (pI. 31 d-e). Thin zones are regularly filled by leaf-lozenges (pI. 31 c,g), dots, single zigzag, and gearpattern, in this order offrequency: all are mass-produced with the multiple brush. The shape ofthe leaf-lozenge varies according to workshop: some (e.g. Painter ofthe Sparring Horses, and those of the Miniature Style) preserve the neat and detached type current in L G I; others allow the lozenges to merge into a continuous chain, and the shape degenerates from a careful diamond (Fence Workshop) to a rough oval (Painter of Athens 877; Master of Argos C 20 I ; Dance Painter). A distinct class of L G 11 cups (pI. 31 f) is decorated with solid leaves alternating with vertical bars. 3 ~ Vertical columns are most usually filled by piles of horizontal zigzags or chevrons (pls. 28c-e, 30c-d); later, festoons of vertical zigzags are executed with a vertical movement of the multiple brush (pI. 3Ij).
LG 11
RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
According to our previous analysis, Argive L G I was contemporary with Attic L GIb, and the earlier part of Corinthian L G. Argive L G I I should therefore begin at the same time as Attic L G I I a, and somewhere in the middle of Corinthian L G. This synchronism is fully confirmed by the contents of the two significant groups from Asine - Gr. I and the House Deposit - which stand at the head of our Argive L G I I series. Gr. I contains an oinochoe, no. 2, which is strongly influenced by the Concentric Circle Groups of Attic L G I I a; and the spouted krater, no. 13, is another Atticizing piece which suggests an Attic prototype of the same date. On the other hand, the krater no. 10 is orthodox Argive work, similar in style to the first krater by the Painter of the Sparring Horses (pI. 28e), which on internal grounds we have placed at the beginning ofArgive L G I I; this vase is now seen to be contemporary with Attic L G I I a on the evidence of the Asine grave. The House Deposit actually contains an Attic import, a kantharos (no. 4) decorated with hatched leaves in panels: this has good parallels in Agora grave groups of L GIb and L G I I a.' This deposit also provides a cross-reference to Corinthian through the oinochoe, no. 3, which, ifnot an import, is certainly very similar to some Corinthian L G examples.s Further indications of an overlap between Argive L G I I and Corinthian L G are supplied by the survival of Corinthianizing 'herons' into Argive L G I I (p. 131, n. 4), and the association of an imported LG kotyle with a local LG II amphora in Gr. 84 his at Argos. It is fortunate that these data are available for marking the beginning of this phase in terms of Attic and Corinthian, since the orthodox work of Argive L G I I bears very little stylistic resemblance to the other two schools. True, the bird files are common to all three districts; but it follows from our synchronism that they first arrived in the Argolid later t~an in Athens (p. 32, nos. 28-g, LG Ib), but earlier than in Corinth (pI. 20h, beginmng of EPC). Near the end of Argive Geometric, the wirebirds of the Dance Painter (pI. 30 b) seem to be contemporary with their Corinthian counterparts, towards the end of EPC; another cross-reference - though not a very useful one - is offered by Argos, Gr. 176/2, where some very late local vases are accompanied by a glazed kotyle, probably EPC.3 The masterpiece from Argos, C 201, marks the end of Argive Geometric; where does it stand in relation to the Attic and Corinthian sequences? Although the linear ornament is still purely Geometric, several details in the figured drawing betray some acquaintance with the Early Orientalizing conventions practised elsewhere. On the side illustrated here (pI. 30e), the human heads are fully in outline, each feature being clearly defined to the point of exaggeration. In Attic, this detailed treatment of the human face was beyond the scope ofeven the most advanced Geometric artists. The idea was introduced there by the Analatos Painter, but not at the beginning ofhis career: the first comparable outlined face occurs on his amphora in Paris,' some years after the beginning of E P A. 5 Likewise, on the horses of LG Ib: E.I9:3, Hesperia 29 (1960), pI. 89, S; LG Ha: Young Gr. IS, Agora VIII, no. 170. E.g. BSA 43 (1948), pI. 30, 44S; Hesperia 17 (1948), pI. 7, C 4; Corinth VII. I, no. 104, fr. 3 CGA SI. 4 Arias-Hirmer-Shefton, colour pI. 2. . 5 J. M. Cook, BSA 3S, 20S, dates this vase about twenty years later than Oxford I93S.I9, which marks the lower boundary of Attic Geometric. 1
3 2 For full discussion see CGA 44 0-3. Also Asine House, nos. g-IO; Tiryns, Gr. II, nos. 6-7; Gr. XXIII, nos. IO-IS; other examples, CGA 372, n. 6. Such cups already figure in the Dendra group along with LG I vases (p. I2S); but the association is not altogether secure. 1
3
CGA 99.
145
146 .
ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
the reverse side, 1 the addition of inner details in white paint invites comparison with first tentative uses of incision in Protocorinthian. Although the harness of the head is already incised on an E P C vase," the inner curve of the shoulder is not marked until the beginning ofMPC 1.3 It follows, then, that LG 11 was a relatively long period in the Argolid. In the Attic sequence, it coincides with the whole ofLG 11, and the early part ofEPA; in Corinthian terms, it is contemporary with the later part ofLG, and the whole ofEPC. This conclusion is in harmony with our scheme of Corinthian chronology relative to Attic, whereby EPC also overlapped the end of Attic Geometric, and lasted into the earliest years of Protoattic
(p. Ill). ARGIVE SUBGEOMETRIC: THE KRATERS OF FUSCO TYPE
As we have seen, Argive L G I I was a somewhat retarded and conservative style, betraying very little sign of the ferment apparent in the contemporary, but more progressive, wares of Corinth and Attica. After its close, ambitious figured scenes were sometimes attempted in an Orientalizing manner ;' but we do not know whether any consistent Orientalizing style was ever evolved. We are much better informed, however, on the contemporary linear work, where a distinctive Subgeometric style evolved out of the latest L G I I. The painters ofLG had reserved their best efforts for large shapes, and especially for the krater; after the passing of true Geometric, the krater is virtually the only shape where we can follow any consistent development of style. Argos C 645 (pI. 3Ij) stands on the lower frontier ofLG 11; but it already has the great depth characteristic of developed Subgeometric examples. The old formula of confronting horses is still retained; but the piles ofclose zigzags have been gaining ground, and are soon destined to creep all over the field to the exclusion of figured drawing. Argive Subgeometric kraters may be divided into two phases. The first is represented by the later ofthe two examples from Tiryns Gr. 22;5 the shape is extremely deep with a narrow shoulder and a slightly concave lip, thickened outside the rim. The stirrup handles, characteristic of the whole series, consist of a rolled horizontal member rising at an angle ofabout forty-five degrees, bound to the rim by a curved strap. Feet are low, but substantial; the high conical pedestal recorded at Mycenae" may be a provincial feature, also seen in a painted representation from the Heraion.? The decoration is now almost exclusively linear, most of the field being packed tight with horizontal and vertical zigzags. The only figures are dancing women," drawn in a decaying Geometric manner enlivened by the use of outline for heads; they occupy but a small part of the main panel, hedged in on~ all sides by piles and festoons of zigzag. CG A, pI. 44, 45, top. 2 New York, lekythos-oinochoe; Hampe, Grabfund 56, fig. 42. 3 Kraiker, Aigina, pI. 12. Tiryns, votive shields; BSA 42 (1947), pI. I8a. AHII, pI. 60, nos. 18--19.Argos, Polyphemus krater, and other frs.; Courbin, BCH 79 (1955), rff 5 Tiryns I, pI. 19,4. Other kraters of this group: Mycenae, Nauplia 4037; Athens 12334 (Tiryns I, 145, fig. 9); Agamemnoneion A I (BSA 48, 35, fig. 8); Argos C 208. • BSA 48,34; A 2. 7 AHII, pI. 60, I9b. 8 Argos C 208; for other frs. by the same hand seeCGA 429, n. 4. 1
4
SUBG
147
Kraters of the second phase- differ little in shape from their predecessors: the lip, however, now tends to be strictly vertical, flat on top, and sharply offset from a broader shoulder. More significant are the changes in decoration, which at last begins to thin out. Blocks of zigzags continue, sometimes degenerating into rough scribbles ;" but wide spaces are now left for small Orientalizing ornaments such as solid buds (C 2509), solid crescents (Karantanis), S's (C 9 I 5), and large-dot rosettes connected by radiating lines (Perachora). Another fragment from the Agamemnoneion- bears a bold Middle Orientalizing lotus. Towards the ~nd ofthis phase the cumbrous zigzags drop out altogether, and the rolled part ofthe stirrup handles rises at a steeper angle (Agamemnoneion A 8). The Subgeometric krater is eventually succeeded by a shallower and more bellied vase where the stirrup handle still persists; but now the rolled member stands almost vertical, and isjoined to the rim by an almost flat strap. The surface is largely glazed ;' but sometimes the base is rayed while purple and white lines encircle the middle," as on Corinthian kotylai of the later seventh century," Much attention has been devoted to the resemblance ofthis series to a class ofkraters from the Fusco Cemetery of Syracuse, which were once thought to be Argive exports." The similarities are certainly striking, especially in the decoration, which recalls our second Argive Subgeometric phase in many details. 8 Yet the Fusco profiles often lack the crispness of Argive originals, and tend to sag in a distressing manner; furthermore, the poorly levigated reddish fabric, coated in a yellow slip, is entirely foreign to the Argolid. Hence the whole class is now thought to be oflocal origin; the affinities with the Argive series are perhaps best explained by the migration of one or more Argive craftsmen to Syracuse during the first half of the seventh century. 1 Series: Argas C 2509, C 9 15; Corinth XIII, pI. 9, 43-1 (see CGA 550, n. 4, 'parait bien argien'); Perachora 11, pI. 44, 4° 0 1; Argos, Karantanis Tomb, BCH 85,676, fig. 4; Agamemnoneion A 8, BSA 48, 35, fig. 8. 2 E.g. Karantanis krater: cf. frs, Argos C 169,2428. • A 18: BSA 48, 39, fig. 12. 4 Agamemnoneion B I, B SA 48, 43, fig. 16. 5 Nauplia 4039, from Mycenae: Wace, Chamber Tombs at Mycenae (Archaeologia 82), pI. 56, HI. 6 Cr. Corinth VII. I, no. 17 6. 7 Arias, BCH60 (1936), 146-8, pls, 10-12; CVA, Syracuse 1,3-4, pIs. 1-2, with refs. 8 See CGA 37, n. 7· The most remarkable correspondence is between Arias, pI. I2b, and the Karantanis krater, above n. I, which share the same curious crescents as well as the characteristic festoons of vertical zigzag. An exception must be made of Arias pI. I la whose decoration is of Corinthian rather than Argive character; cf. Corinth XIII, pI. 7, 32-1. ' ,
PG
]49
Our survey begins in Late Protogeometric times, when the diffusion of the Attic style imposed a degree of uniformity over the Aegean area unknown since the days of the Mycenaean koine. We may distinguish a number of Thessalo-Cycladic groups of this period, which on stylistic grounds should be earlier than the transition to Geometric in Attica. Here the homogeneity of the painted vases is partly due to their common debt to Attic inspiration; yet even at this early stage an individual Thessalo-Cycladic style was in the making, common to all districts in our area, but quite distinct from Attic.
CHAPTER FIVE
Protogeometric survivals in Thessaly, Skyros, Euboea, and the Cyclades
THESSALO-CYCLADIC PROTOGEOMETRIC (contemporary with Attic LPG) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Theotokou, Magnesia, Gr. B. Wace and Thompson, Prehistoric Thessaly 213, fig. 146a-e ; PGP 148-g, pI. s ra-e. Halos, Gr. 7· BSA 18 (1911-12),6, fig. 4; PGP 151, pI. 20, '7'. Halos, Grs. 4 and 8. BSA 18 (1911-12),4,8, fig. 2; PGP 150-1, pI. 20, '8'. Iolcos (Nea lonia), gr. ADChr 18 (1963), 140-1, pI. 172b. Skyros, gr.AA 1936, 228-34; PGPI65, 'Papadimitriou'sTomb'. Further to Desborough's description, the 'Schiissel' mentioned in the AA report is a large fragmentary krater, with rim missing. It is similar in shape and decoration to Marmariani 142 (BSA 3 1 , pI. 10) except that the splaying foot is lower, and unglazed. Chalcis (Arethusa), 'grave group'. PGP 199. A. Andreiomenou, GhO 257ff., nos. 13-16, pls. 48b, 49; BSA 61 (1966), pI. 21d. Tenos (Kambos), 'grave group' found in 1958. Unpublished. Five vases oflocal fabric, surface badly worn: (i) Lekythos. Shape and decoration as K. IV, pI. 18, 2097, but without the vertical scribble: the neck is glazed. (ii) Pitcher. Shape and decoration of body like the oinochoe, K. IV, pI. 16, 20 72; but with round mouth, handle attached below lip, and wider foot. Close to Marmariani 71 (BSA 31, pI. 5). (iii) Jug. Most of mouth missing. Shape as GVA Reading, pI. 15, 10, with handle to rim. Decoration entirely worn off. (iv) Skyphos. Shape similar to the example from Amathus (seebelow) , with high flaring foot and tall overhanging lip. In handle zone, two setsofninefold concentric circles, without interior filling; remainder ofexterior apparently glazed, but much worn. (v) Cup. High conical foot; shape as K. IV, pI. 24, 1104. Decoration entirely worn off. Rheneia (Parakastri), 'grave group' in Mykonos; both pieces marked 'T6:<pos 14'. Unpublished. (i) Conical foot of high-footed skyphos: glazed, but with three reserved lines at base. Probably Attic. (ii) Amphoriskos with vertical handles. Shape similar to that from Kardiani Gr. I (p. 152). Reserved handle zone, with diagonal cross-hatching; remainder of exterior glazed.
In the three districts which we have so far considered, it has been a comparatively easy task to trace the birth and growth of a Geometric style. In each case we have found significant groups ofassociated material illustrating the transition from Protogeometric~ we h~ve also been greatly aided by the close stylistic affinities between t~e three. local f~bncs, which c~n be seen long before the end of Protogeometric, and persist far mto MIddle ?eometnc. Throughout this long period, most Corinthian and Argive vases can be dated, With reasonable certainty, by reference to an Attic counterpart; and for th.ose vases ~h~ch sh~w local peculiarities, there is usually enough evidence from context to lmk them m time WIth contemporary Atticizing shapes. Elsewhere in the Aegean area, problems ofrelative chronology are more acute: there are fewer groups ofassociated material, and the Attic affinities ofthe local fabrics are less constan~. In its latest phase, Attic Protogeometric was widely imitated overseas ;' but with the transition to Geometric at home, there was a sudden decline ofAttic influence abroad. The Early Geometric ofAttica made hardly any impression beyond her own immediate neighbours in Boeotia the Corinthia and the Argolid. In remoter parts, local varieties of Protogeometric lived o~, free from a~y fresh Attic influence, at least until the advent of Attic Middle Geometric. This chapter is devoted to one particular 'sub-Protogeometric' style, which was cur~ent over a wide area: Thessaly, Skyros, Euboea, and the northern Cyclades. The convement term 'Thessalo-Cycladic' draws attention to its geographical limits; but in the light of recent study and excavation.t Euboea may well prove to be its pl.aceoforigin. I ~s char~cter istics have been defined by Desborough in his thorough analysis of the matenal available in 1950.3 The present study is based on his conclusions; more recent evidence will also "?e considered with a view to throwing more light on the style's internal development, and ItS chronology relative to the Attic series. Much depends, once again, on the contents of individual graves; but many of these, unfortunately, were not scientifically excavated, so that their witness must be treated with some reserve.' PGP, 291ff. 2 J. Boardman, BSA 52 (1957),7-8. 3 PGP 127£[. I omit from the following lists any groups of pottery said to come from more than one grave - e.g. the groups from Andros and Rheneia, PGP, pIs. 16, 18-19. 1
4
I
-r
150 . THESSALO-CYCLADIC: PROTO GEOMETRIC SURVIVALS Amathus, Cyprus. Skyphos and cup, probably of North Cycladic origin, said to have been found in a burial with Cypro-Geometric I I vases. Desborough, J H S 77 (1957), 212ff., fig. 4. ATTICIZING ELEMENTS All the above groups are presumed to be contemporary with Attic Late Protogeometric on the grounds that they contain at least one vase derived from an Attic prototype ofthis date. In each case, the Atticizing vases conform to the canons ofthe parent style. Thus among the closed vases, the trefoil-lipped oinochoai- and the lekythos" have graceful, ovoid bodies, and bear compass-drawn semicircles on the shoulder; the rest of the body is glazed, apart from the occasional set ofreserved bands. Among the drinking vessels, the skyphoi and cups (with the exception of the low glazed cups from Halos and Skyros) stand on high feet; these may be strictly conical, as in Attic," but sometimes their profile assumes a flaring form- - an easier alternative for the provincial potter. An analogous shape, on a larger scale, is the fragmentary krater from the Skyros grave; round this piece we can group a number of fine Thessalian kraters from Marmariani and Kapakli, perhaps the finest vases ever made in Thessaly." Their decoration usually consists of concentric circles, carefully drawn and closely packed; each set is generally enclosed in a square panel, bounded by vertical strips of rectilinear ornament in which every motif falls within the Attic LP G repertoire. Since the style in these kraters is so close to Attic, they must have been made before the PG of Attica had passed into oblivion. The latest features are the alternating groups of diagonals (Marmariani 140, Kapakli 43), which in Attica last from PG into EG; and the solid battlement under the handles of Marmariani 142, reminiscent of a transitional vase from the Athenian Kerameikos;" this is perhaps the latest sign of direct Attic influence in Thessaly before its decline in Early Geometric times. Returning to the vases in the grave groups, we should note a remarkable consistency in the ornament. The concentric circular motifs are confined to complete circles (generally applied to open shapes), and standing semicircles, reserved for the shoulders of closed vases. Pendent semicircles, foreign to Attic custom, are not found in any of our LPG groups; hence there is a strong case for believing that their first appearance is subsequent to the passing of Attic PG. LOCAL ELEMENTS Alongside the Atticizing vases, a few local shapes are already in evidence. One is a characteristic form of round-mouthed jug7 owing little, if anything, to Attic influence. In comparison with its rare Attic counterpart," it has a shorter and more widely flaring neck; the body is biconical, in contrast to the rounded Attic profile. Examples are known from all four of the districts which make up the Thessalo-Cycladic area." The shoulder sometimes bears standing semicircles, in the Attic manner; occasionally the zone is left blank. But the shape 1 All five Thessalian grs.; Skyros, Papadimitriou's gr. 2 Tenos, Kambos, 3 Theotokou; Tenos, cup. 4 Amathus; Tenos, skyphos. •Marmariani 140-3, BSA 31, pl, IOj Kapakli, PGRT, nos. 43-4. 6 K. IV, pl. 21, 2031, kantharos from PG Gr. 48. 7 PGP 170, no. 13. 6 PGP, pl. g: Eleusis 1081, 1085. 9 Halos, Gr. 7; Skyros, Papadimitriou's gr.; Chalcis, nos. 15-16; Tenos, Kambos.
PG is evidently of local derivation, being well represented in earlier PG contexts before the arrival 0: any strong Attic influence; these prototypes are usually decorated with one or more scnbbles on the shoulder, a scheme which has nothing to do with Attica.' Another pouring shape, although decorated in the Attic manner, is nevertheless unp~ralleled in Attica: this is a type ofpitcher, shaped like a small neck-handled amphora, but WIth o~ly ?ne h~ndle~ttached well below the lip. 2 It appears both in Thessaly3 and Tenos4 in a very s~mI1ar guise, WIththe usual semicircles on the shoulder, and the rest ofthe body glazed. A third local form, with a long future, is already found in these LPG contexts: the amphoriskos w!th vertical handles from belly to shoulder. It occurs in the groups from Theotokou, Chalcis (nos. 13,. 14), an? Rheneia. These early examples vary considerably in girth, from the plump Rheneian speCImen to the slender and graceful piece from Theotokou: the only .con~tant features are the narrow foot, and the widely flaring lip. None of these amphonsko~ bears more t~an a. superficial rese~blance to the only known Attic example;" once agam, we are dealing WIth a locally denved shape, represented in this case by earlier examples from Chalcis.s Of the drinking vessels, only one form stands entirely outside the Attic tradition: the jiat?ased cup. 7. Here, to~, Attica o.ffers a counterparts from which the local type differs radically m shape: Its profile IS deeper, ItS walls straighter, and its centre ofgravity lower' furthermore the glaze is carried right up to the rim, while the Attic version has one or ~ore reserved bands on the lip. So far, the local type has not been found outside Thessaly (Halos) and Skyros (Papadimitriou's gr.) in a clear PG context. The other drinking vessels, as we have seen, stand on high feet, and are more or less indebted to Attica. Of especial importance are the two large and decorated skyphoi from the ~enos and Amath~s groups, which differ from the Attic prototype in two respects: (i) their hps ~re cove~ed WIth a thick band of glaze; and (ii) the decoration consists of only two sets of CIrcles, WIthout any subsidiary rectilinear ornament, in contrast to their Attic LP G counterparts, which bear either three sets of circles, or two sets separated by a rectilinear panel. 9 Both ofthese features persist in the later development ofthe Thessalo-Cycladic style ' to which we now turn. THESSALO-CYCLADI C S UB-PROTOG EO ME TRI C (contemporary with Attic E G) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS Halos, Gr. 6. BSA 18 (1911-12),4, fig. 3; PGP 151-2, pI. 20, '6'. Theotokou, Gr. A. BSA 13 (1906), 32Iff., figs. 9-1 I; Wace and Thompson, Prehistoric The~saly ~09ff., figs. 145, 146g; PGP 149-50; PGR T 86-8, pI. 15, nos. I, 3-6. Four bunals, eighteen vases. 1 Kapakli, PGRT, pl. 5, 3<:3; Skyros, Dawkins' grs., BSA II (lg04-5), 79, fig. 3; Evangelidis' gr., AD 4(lgI8), 42 fig. 10 4' lolcos P AE Ig61, pl. z rd; Chalcis, Ch0, pl. 47Y. ' " , : PGP 17 1, no. 17. : Marmariani 71, BSA 31, pI. 5. •Kambos: perhaps also avase from Exoburgo; cf. PGP 161. 9 K. IV, pI. 24, 95g· Ch0, pI. 46a-b. 7 PGP 168, no. 4, Type A. 8 PGP 101-2; cf. Hesperia 30 (lg61), pl. 27,43. PGP, pl. 10,2032, 109!.
152 . THESSALO-CYCLADIC: PROTOGEOMETRIC SURVIVALS Skyros: perhaps most of the 150-60 local vases (PGP 165-6) found by Stavropoulos in four graves. Chalcis (Nea Lampsakos): 'grave group'. ADChr 16 (1960), 150, 'PG'. Two vases, both local: (i) Skyphos: fragmentary, but with complete profile preserved. OfThessalo-Cycladic type, with low foot. In handle zone, two sets of interlocking pendent semicircles, drawn with sevenfold multiple brush; lip, handles, and lower body glazed. The nearest parallel to the shape is PGR T, no. 56, from Kapakli; the profile from lip to body is very similar to that of the fr. from Tell Abu Hawam, PGP, pI. 26,4. (ii) Skyphos or cup fr.: preserved from rim to near foot; base and handle(s) missing. Imitation of Attic E G I I. Profile and decoration similar to pI. 42 e from Orchomenos. One window-panel, containing triple zigzag, is completely preserved. Theologos, near Cha1cis: 'grave group'. ADChr 16 (1960), 152, pI. I33d. Tenos (Kardiani), Grs. I, 2,3. Ann 8-g (1925-6), I03:ff., figs. 19-28; PGP 159-60. Tenos (Ktikados), Gr. I: (i) Amphoriskos, H. o·097m. Orange clay, without mica. High glaze, brown-black; handles barred. PI. 32 c. (ii) Skyphos, H. o' I02m., D. of rim o- I62m. Orange micaceous clay, black glaze. Flat foot. Reserved band inside rim, with groups of vertical bars: remainder of interior glazed, except for reserved circle on the floor. See below p. 165. PI. 34 b. 'Tine' (Tenos?): possible grave group in the Vatican. Albiezati, fasc. I, 1-2, pI. I, 1-4, nos. I-5;]HS 60 (1940), 2-4; PGP 158-9, pI. 25a. Before inquiring into the chronology of these groups relative to the Attic sequence, let us first attempt to follow the progress of the local style, using the internal evidence offered by the vases themselves. DECORATION The innovation that first catches the eye is the use ofpendent concentric semicircles, which now become the most common ofthe circular motifs. They are found not only on the ubiquitous low-footed skyphoi, but also on amphoriskoi and once on a large krater- whose shape, too, fits most easily into this period. As a general rule the semicircles intersect, since the field is seldom long enough, in proportion to its depth, to accommodate two sets hanging side by side. This is always the case on the smaller amphoriskoi, where the diameters coincide with the narrowest point ofthe vase. From the architectural point ofview, the new motif is more at home on the skyphoi than on any other shape; and there, perhaps: it was first introduced.s Full circles, however, are not entirely ousted from the less progressive skyphoi (pI. 32 b), and survive in Thessaly on other Sub P G kraters:s standing semicircles continue on the larger amphoriskoi.' On some debased PG shapes, such as the oinochoe and jug in Halos Gr. 6, full or three-quarter circles are partially painted over to look like semicircles 1 4
Kapakli, PGRT, no. 45. 2 PGP 188-9. Kardiani, Cr. 2; also Rheneia A 1452. PI. 32f.
3
Marmariani, nos. 145--9.
SUBPG
153
one of the more decadent features of the ornament in this period, apparently peculiar to Thessaly: Cycladic work is consistently more refined in this respect. Rectilinear ornament still plays only a minor part, as in true PG.1 Narrower zones are often filled by groups of opposed diagonals, another p·G motif surviving in debased form: but the intervening triangles are now no longer glazed, and the lines themselves are more loosely drawn. This unspectacular motif is chiefly used on CUpS, 2 and on a contemporary neck-handled amphora;" also on Thessalian Sub PG kraters.' On amphoriskoi- and on the solitary lekythos (from the Vatican 'group') the design is slightly adapted to the curve of the surface so that the groups of lines radiate from the neck; but the triangular gaps still remaIn. SHAPES We begin with the low-Jooted skyphos, 6 the most characteristic shape of this period. At this early stage of its development, it is well represented by Marmariani 119 and Tenos 1485 (pI. 32 g,e) , besides the examples in our groups. A comparison with pI. 2 b (a type sometimes imitated in Euboea - e.g. in the Theologos group, and the fragment from Nea Lampsakos) will reveal the wide rift that separates this local form from Attic E G: the Thessalo-Cycladic skyphoi owe nothing to Attic influence, except what they have indirectly inherited through the Atticizing PG skyphoi from Kambos and Amathus.? High feet are now out of fashion:" but the retention of a deep body and a narrow foot shows that the transition from true PG was less revolutionary than the upheaval in Attica that produced an entirely new type, the Attic E G I I shallow skyphos. Even the offset glazed lip is already foreshadowed by the Amathus skyphos. At this stage, the size ofthe lip varies a great deal, being generally heavier in Thessaly than in the Cyclades: a more consistent feature is the outward flare, which generally causes the rim to overhang the body. With the glazed cups, too, the lip is the most variable part of the profile, but it is usually heavy and flaring. It may be a sign of the times that the lips are now regularly set off from the body, as with the skyphoi (pI. 32 d) ;9 otherwise there has been no consistent change, and the deep shape remains in fashion. An interesting variant, decorated with opposed diagonals, has its handle attached below the lip :10 this may be a relation ofthe native Thessalian trigger-handled type!' which shares the same decoration. Both types of handle have a northern prehistoric origin.P and the example in the Tenian grave was doubtless inspired At Marmariani and Kapakli a gaudy rectilinear style, peculiar to Thessaly, probably flourished at the same time. Since it is just touched by Attic EG influence, it will be treated in the next chapter as an early stage ofThessalian Geometric, rather than as a late survival of the PG manner. 2 Theotokou, Gr. A; Kardiani Gr. 2; cf. Marmariani, nos. 90, 92, pI. 32a; Kapakli, PGRT, nos. 86-g0. 3 Kapakli, PGRT, no. 8. 4 Marmariani, nos. 146, 149. 5 Rheneia A 1453, PGP, pI. 19; Delos xv, Aa 60. 6 PGP 169, no. 9, Types A and B. 7 P. 150. These two vases reinforce Desborough's theory ofan evolution from the high-footed skyphos (PG P 188-9). The absence of the low-footed type from any clear L PG context militates against Verdelis' view (PG R T 84) that it was continuously in circulation since Mycenaean times: his 'Submycenaean' skyphoi from Kapakli (PGR T, pI. 14,5-7) seem indistinguishable from, and hence contemporary with, the glazed SubPG piece in Halos Gr, 6. 8 Except with large skyphoi, as Schefold, Meisterwerke griechischer Kunst 1960, no. 36, apparently from Thessaly. 10 Theotokou, Gr. A: Kardiani Gr. 2. 11 Marmariani, no. 92, pI. 32a. • Cf. Kardiani, Grs. 1-2. 12 T. C. Skeat (The Dorians in Archaeology, London (1934), 14) traced the progress of the trigger handle from BronzeAge Macedonia to EG Athens: for the low attachment of the other type, cf. Marmariani, no. 13. 1
154 .
THESSALO-CYCLADIC: PROTOGEOMETRIC SURVIVALS
by a Thessalian prototype.' The same might be said ofthe orthodox glazed cup, not known in the Cyclades until this period. No kraters occur in our groups, but several ponderous Thessalian examples can be attributed to this stage on stylistic grounds: these are Marmariani nos. 145-50, 139, and Kapakli PGR T no. 45. 2 They are the immediate descendants of the Atticizing class of LP G times, and show us the Thessalian potter's average level of achievement when cut offfrom Attic inspiration. Deeper bodies, taller rims, and more crowded decoration set these kraters apart from their elegant predecessors. The only comparable krater that might be Cycladic" belongs to the very beginning of this series. Of the closed shapes, the vertical-handled amphoriskos is the most universally popular form in our area. Four occur in our groups,' and several others from Rheneia." The shape is still plump, with a narrow foot: on the smaller examples, the lip is flaring and generally offset, as with the skyphoi. Some, though, are now tall enough to be called amphorae, and are somewhat different in profile: here the lip is concave, rises more vertically, and merges with the body. The largest is Rheneia 1452 (pI. 32f: H. O·315m.), perhaps rather later than no. 7 from Kardiani Gr. 2, owing to its slimmer profile. About the other closed vases little can be said, since the evidence from context is so limited. We may, however, hazard one generalization. The biconical profile of the local PG jug tends to be exaggerated, and to influence the shape of other vases: note the hydria,jugs, and oinochoai of Halos Gr. 6, the neck-handled amphora from Kardiani Gr. 2, and, to a lesser extent, the oinochoe from Kardiani Gr. I: to these we may add the oinochoe Delos XVII, pI. 36, 7, and the four pyxides in the group from Theologos near Cha1cis. The same thing happens to the later vases from the Thessalian tholoi" with which we shall deal in the next chapter. RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
Even if there were no Atticizing vases in these groups, it should now be sufficiently clear from our stylistic analysis that we have been dealing with a later stage than that ofthe pure PG material with which we began this inquiry. One question remains: how far does this particular Sub PG style, as defined in this section, last into the period ofAttic Geometric? An easy answer would be provided by the pair of Euboean vases from Nea Lampsakos, if we could be absolutely sure of their association; for here we find a good low-footed skyphos ofThessalo-Cycladic type in company with a piece of Atticizing EG 11 ware. Fortunately this chronological link is reinforced by better-documented evidence elsewhere. The Atticizing skyphos from Ktikados Gr. I (pI. 34b) is identical in shape with two from Corinth (Corinth VII. I, nos. 41, 42) typical of the local EG, and contemporary with Attic EG 11 (p. 93). A glazed Thessalo-Cycladic cup, with heavy offset rim, accompanies Atticizing vases of E G I I type in a grave at Orchomenos (pI. 42 a-f). Some Attic E G motifs (close multiple zigzag; battlement in multiple outline) creep on to Thessalian SubPG kraters PGRT 79. 2 Marmariani 144 illustrates the transition from true PG. 3 Fortetsa, no. 1481; cf. Marmariani 144. Halos, Gr. 6; Vatican gr.; Kardiani, Gr. I; Ktikados, Gr. I. 5 PI. 32£; Delos xv, Aa 58-61 look approximately contemporary. • E.g. from Marmariani, the oinochoe with cut-away neck, no. 42 (pt 33a), and the pitcher, no. 70. 1
4
SUBPG
155
(Marmariani, nos. 147, 150): conversely, the Thessalian trigger handle (as Marmariani, nos. 91-2) seems to have inspired a boot-handled cup in an Attic EG II grave.' Furthermore, we know that a great deal of Atticizing M G pottery (especially M G I) was made in the Cyclades, yet not a single piece of it occurs in our groups. Hence we may argue, with reasonable confidence, that this sub-Protogeometric stage of the Thessalo-Cycladic style is roughly contemporary with Attic Early Geometric. LATER SURVIV ALS A strong current of Attic influence hit the northern Cyclades at the beginning of M G I (p. 165) and broke up the stylistic homogeneity between Thessaly and the islands. Three local shapes, however, lingered on: in Thessaly, the large krater; in the Cyclades, the amphoriskos and the skyphos with pendent concentric semicircles. Ofthese, the first two were eventually modified by Attic Geometric influence, and will be further discussed in later chapters: not so the skyphos, which continued to pursue an independent course, retaining its PG character to the end. Ofthe other local forms, there is no more trace of the biconical jugs and the heavy-rimmed cups: these were presumably replaced by Atticizing trefoillipped oinochoai and shallow CUpS. 2 In the latest kraters from Marmariani, a strong native element still persists: they form a sequence (nos. 138; 137; 136; 134; 135, pI. 33e)3 illustrating the final passing of the PG tradition, followed by a phase of wild experiment. In the decoration, concentric circles survive at first, but are eventually replaced by ill-disciplined rectilinear schemes (134-5). The flaring foot of the SubPG class now grows into a tall pedestal, its cylindrical stem spreading out suddenly into a broad base: the final result ( I 35) is so unlike the ribbed pedestals of Attic M G f4 that any influence from Attica at this time can only have been of the most indirect. After no. 138, the bodies become shallower again: lips (apart from 136) grow shorter and finally merge with the body (134-5, and the miniature 133). Rims, however, still keep the flat out-turned profile characteristic of PG times." The number of handles is increased from two to four: the drooping stirrup handle, first found on Kapakli 46, is probably a clumsy imitation of an Attic device which, as we have seen (p. 18), first appears on kraters in M G I. From the same quarter comes the rectilinear decoration of Marmariani 135 (pI. 33e) where, once again, the double axes and dots point to a date not earlier than M G I. Finally, well before the end ofM G I I, the latest kraters of'Kapakli" betray a thorough remodelling under the influence of the Attic Type II krater (as pI. 5f) at a time when this form was widely imitated in many other local styles. The amphoriskos, now an exclusively Cycladic shape, underwent a similar transformation. A M 43 (19 I 8), pI. I; the fragmentary boot in an Attic E G I grave, Hesperia 2 (1933), 553, probably came from a similar monstrosity. 2 In Euboea, however, there are signs of extreme conservatism: a deep rubbish pit at Lefkandi has produced oinochoai, amphorae, and kraters decorated in a PG manner, in association with Atticizing MG pottery (Lefkandi (1968),27-8, fig. 66). 3 Kapakli, PGRT 46, fills the gap between 138 and 137. Surprisingly, a miniature belonging to this class, similar in fabric and technique, was found in far-away Thera: AM 28 (1903), Beil. 28, J 35. Close in shape (cf. Marmariani 136) is a krater of Lesbian grey ware from Antissa, BSA 3 I (1930-1), 16g-70, fig. 3; from a level below the archaic bucchero, but above the imitations of Mycenaean ware. 4 K. v. I, pI. 18. 5 Cf. the monumental Attic kraters, Type I. • PGRT80ff.; pI. 33£. 1
156 .
THESSALO-CYCLADIC: PROTOGEOMETRIC SURVIVALS
It appears in Attic dress in two examples from an unpublished MG cemetery on Naxos (Nx 1 I, 12), closely paralleled by a vase in London.' In all three cases the decoration now consists of simple rectilinear motifs- enclosed in a window-panel at handle level; the lip is tall, straight, and almost vertical, in the manner ofAttic M G skyphoi; the centre ofgravity is lower than is the case with the pure Thessalo-Cycladic type. Perhaps the earliest Atticizing amphoriskos is Rheneia A 1455,3 a somewhat misshapen vase bearing a panel of hatched lozenges r' two other examples (A 1453-4) from the same graves conform to the more traditional schemes ofdecoration - either pendent semicircles, or groups ofvertical and oblique lines. Unfortunately, we cannot separate the contents of the individual grave groups: but since the latest Atticizing vases that accompany the amphoriskoi are of M G I type," we may reasonably assume that the amphoriskos first came under Attic influence during that phase. The same context will yield us an approximate terminus ante quem for the relative dating of the six fine Thessalo-Cycladic skyphoi, A 1463-8.6 These form the nucleus ofa distinct class, widely exported to the eastern Mediterranean, but probably manufactured in the northern Cyclades where they occur in greatest numbers." Some of their contexts in the Near East will supply them with absolute dates, but only within wide limits (pp. 3 roff.) : here we are more concerned with their chronology relative to Attic Geometric. Stylistically, they have nothing to do with any Attic counterpart: they are clearly descended from the heavier local SubPG variety, from which they inherit their decoration ofpendent concentric semicircles. In shape, they differ in several important respects: their profile is shallower, often following a straighter course, and the lip, instead ofoverhanging the body, is now swept back in a concave curve, usually rising from a marked carination." Typologically, the new version stands one more remove away from the PG prototype than the SubPG class, and should therefore be later in time: its absence from SubPG contexts" confirms this impression, and diminishes the likelihood of an overlap with the heavier skyphos so often represented in the groups examined in the previous section. Ifthese groups are approximately contemporary with Attic EG, we shall not be far wrong if we place the evolution of the new shallow skyphos somewhere near the transition from Early to Middle Geometric in Attica. The skyphoi from the Rheneia graves, according to Desborough," 'probably represent the highest point in technique at which the potters arrived in making this shape': let us suppose, then, that this zenith was reached at the same time as the production of the Atticizing M G I vases from the same find, to which we have already drawn attention. What of the subsequent decline? Among the series from the Purification Trench on Rheneia!' there is no trace ofa falling off in quality, either in elegance ofcontour, or fastidiousness ofdecoration: only two pieces (Ae 18-19) fail to live up to the high standard ofA 1463-7, and these 55. I 2-20. I, pI. 341. Height o· I zm.; probably of Melian fabric. Nx I I: dots and single zigzag; Nx 12: vertical chevron; London: double zigzag. 3 PGP, pI. 19. 4 Cf. the cup of Attic type, ibid. A 1472. s Oinochoai, A 1457--8; skyphos, A 1469, pI. 34d. sPGP,pl. 25: pI. 32h (A 1467). 7 PGP 169, no. 9, TypeC: 18oir. 8 A Euboean variant, common at Lefkandi, still preserves the overhanging rim of the earlier SubPG version: but the lip is nevertheless shorter than before. See Lefkandi (1968), 27, fig. 65. 10 PGP 187. 11 Delosxv, Ae 4-19. • Except in the Vatican 'group', whose association is uncertain. 1
2
LATER SURVIVALS
157
belong to the earlier heavy-lipped variety. Although we are deprived of the exact contexts (this time by the religious zeal ofthe classical Athenians) it would nevertheless be surprising if Ae 4-17 were not the immediate predecessors of the Atticizing skyphoi Ae 24-9, which all bear that hallmark ofM G I I decoration, the panel ofvertical chevron. There may have been some overlapping in time between the native and the Attic types,' but we can hardly suppose that the former were being made, even by the most reactionary craftsmen, much later than the end ofAttic M G I I : otherwise we would surely find some trace oftheir shape or decoration in Italy or Sicily, in the wake of the great colonizing movement.s Two more examples, still of good quality, occur in a Cypriot built tomb at Salamis, probably in association with four plates in a similar style, and twenty-one Attic MG 11 vases." Another specimen, from a warrior's tomb at Paphos,' shows a slight slackening ofdiscipline: the semicircles are smudged, and the ring foot is now replaced by a flat base. On typological grounds this should be later than the Salamis pieces, and among the latest of all pendent-semicircle skyphoi; this is confirmed by its association with two other imported skyphoi, both of L G type." Other degenerate pieces of this class occur at Al Mina" where the semicircles are fewer in number, less carefully drawn, and apt to encroach on the lower glaze because of the extreme shallowness of the body. When the pendent-semicircle skyphos passes out offashion, we lose sight of the last surviving remnant of a delayed Protogeometric style, once diffused over a wide area from Thessaly to the northern Cyclades. Its roots lay mainly in Attic Late Protogeometric, although some essential features were inherited from local tradition. This style attained its greatest uniformity throughout the area when Attic influence sank to its lowest point - that is to say, in Early Geometric times. Later, the link between Thessaly and the Cyclades was broken by the circulation ofAttic Middle Geometric ideas, which affected the two districts in different ways. Under the guidance of Attica, one local Geometric style grew up in Thessaly, another in the Cyclades: each now calls for separate treatment. Cf. Boardman, BSA 52 (1957),8. On the stratigraphy at Tarsus, where they are said to be present in a destruction level of 696 a.c., see Boardman's observations, y HS 85 (1965), 5ir. 3 AA 1963, 177,46; 204ir., fig. 42. 4 BCH 87 (1963),267, fig. 3a-b. i ibid. fig. 2, perhaps 'Parian' - cf. Delos xv, Ae I. 2: AntK IQ (1967), 133-4, n, 8, an early example of Euboean LG - cf. pl, 41 a, and see below p. 192. S yHS60 (1940), 3, fig. rg-k, 1
2
EG-MG I
CHAPTER SIX
Thessalian Geometric
Owing to the extreme dearth of published material, the progress of Thessalian Geometric can only be roughly sketched. Our sole stratified evidence comes from the Tumulus at Halos, I where it was possible to separate the pyre offerings at sixteen individual burials: this material, however, is scanty, and consists mainly of small vases in a fragmentary state. A fuller view of the local style is afforded by the rectilinear vases from the tholos tombs at Marmariani and Kapakli: here, unfortunately, the individual burials could not be distinguished, so that our relative sequence must depend to a large extent on internal analysis ofstyle, and resemblances to the more fully documented series ofAttica. The existing material may be broadly classified into two chronological phases. In our first division we place the rectilinear vases ofMarmariani, and those from Kapakli which are closely related to them. These are later than the local vases in a pure Protogeometric style (p, 150), but do not yet show any steady influence from Attic Geometric. The lower limit ofthis phase is marked by the latest krater from Marmariani, no. 135 (pl, 33e), which is probably contemporary with Attic M G 1 (p. 155). The second phase is represented by the later vases from Kapakli" and the pyres from Halos: here the influence ofAttica is more clearly seen, and in fact nearly all the shapes are based on Attic models dating from MG 11 onwards. Until more material comes to light, it is not profitable to attempt any further chronological subdivision. The clay ofThessalian Geometric varies from deep orange to coffee-brown, and is usually fired quite hard: it is inclined to be porous in texture, with many minute airholes. Sometimes there is a little white grit in the clay, but mica is extremely rare. The glaze is usually fired black, and has a dull metallic sheen. THE RECTILINEAR STYLE OF MARMARIANI (contemporary with Attic E G-M G I)
DECORATION
The Thessalian rectilinear style is seen to best advantage on the four closed shapes mentioned at the beginning of this section. As a rule only the neck and shoulder are decorated: the BSA 31, 43. 2 E.g. Vergina, AD 17 (1961-2), PI.I49fl'. 3 E.g. Marmariani, nos. I-g. E.g. Marmariani 74, 53, 42,70; Kapakli, PGRT, nos. 7, 22, 40, 29. 6 Marmariani 75, 66,40,71. 6 Recognized as Thessalian by Verde1is, PG R T 39. 7 Marmariani, no. 125; cf. Ann. 8-g (1925-6), 224, fig. 26a, from Kardiani, Gr. 3. 6 Marmariani, nos. 93-1 13. 9 Marmariani, nos. 14-29. 10 PGR T, nos. 79-82. 11 PGR T, pI. 15,5-6, from Gr. A. 12 a. PGP 167. 13 Marmariani, no. 126; Argissa, eEO'O'aAIKO: 3, (196o), 25ff., figs. 1-4. 14 Marmariani, no. 131. 16 Marmariani, nos. 128-g. 16 a. Corinth VII. I, no. 47.
4
For our knowledge of this style we are mainly dependent on four closed shapes, all bearing rich rectilinear decoration on the neck. Two of these, the neck-handled amphora and the tre1
Wace and Thompson, BSA 18 (Igl 1-12), 8fl'.
I
PGRT80ff., figs. 24-5, three kraters; the rest unpublished. PI. 33f-g•
. 158 .
159
foil-lipped oinochoe (pl, 33b), are the common property of all regional Geometric styles. A third, the jug with cut-away neck (pl, 33a), is a northern type adapted from a Macedonian handmade version first made in the Bronze Age, I which in the Early Iron Age has successors both in Macedonia- and in Thessaly." The fourth is the comparatively rare round-mouthed pitcher which we have already noted as common to Thessaly and the Cyclades in LP G (p. 15 I ). All four shapes are represented in the Thessalian tholoi ;' they are descended from local LP G prototypes, decorated in the Attic manner with standing semicircles on the shoulder, and the necks glazed." When rectilinear ornament first appears on the neck, there is a fairly consistent change in the shape of the body: the rounded contours of the LP G prototypes are replaced by a straighter biconical profile, sometimes accentuated by a carination at the widest diameter (pl. 33 a) ; we have observed the same development in the Sub P G vases treated in the previous chapter (p. 154). A hydria and a globular pyxis in the Vlasto collection (pl, 33d,c)6 belong to the same family ofshapes. We have already followed the decline of the krater from the elegant PG prototypes to the latest examples from Marmariani (p. 155). Their decoration, as we have seen, remains Protogeometric in spirit until the very end ofthe series (pl, 33e), when post-PG rectilinear motifs at last became dominant. Thessalian cups and skyphoi of this period also retain their SubPG ornament whenever they are decorated: with the exception of the trigger-handled cup, their shapes belong to the Thessalo-Cycladic koine (p. 153). The same applies to the kantharos with low handles;' but the commonest and most characteristic kantharos in Thessaly is the form with high swung handles, bearing rectilinear ornament from the start." The shape is derived from a primitive handmade version, with tall lip and straight body," another northern form surviving from the Bronze Age: its evolution seems quite independent ofthe Attic high-handled type, which does not appear until M G I 1. A more sophisticated variety, with tiny lip and well-rounded body, is found at Kapakli-v and Theotokou.v but not at Marmariani: this may be a later development of the native type,12 its body being assimilated to the shape ofthe other drinking vessels. The tray or kanoun (p. 102), with three loop handles rising from the rim, is a shape which occurs sporadically in several regions at different times (pp. 102,243,270): itisrepresented by two examples in the Thessalian rectilinear style.'! The plates may be divided into two types according to their handles, which may be either flat and reflex'! or in the form of a pierced square lug: I S the former class suggests some contact with southern Greece, however indirect."
1
SHAPES
RECTILINEAR STYLE OF MARMARIANI •
160 • THESSALIAN GEOMETRIC
remainder of the body is covered with glaze, punctuated by reserved bands. The shoulder still bears ornament in the PG tradition: either hatched triangles, or concentric semicircles, usually drawn as three-quarter circles and then partially painted over (pp. 152-3). The neck, however, is now invaded by a medley of rectilinear motifs placed in vertical strips,' sometimes carried right up to the lip. This is an ugly system ofdecoration, most unsuited to the sharply curving surface which it covers, and quite foreign to the contemporary Attic practice where the neck bears only a small horizontal panel. Similar columns of rectilinear ornament are gradually introduced on the kraters between the concentric circles ;" eventually, at the end of the series (pI. 33e), they have taken possession of the whole surface. How can we account for the appearance ofthis gaudy and ungainly style? Each shape to which it is applied seems to be a degenerate descendant ofa fine LPG prototype; hence, if the system was inspired from outside Thessaly, we must look for a possible source of inspiration in the pottery immediately following the transition to Geometric elsewhere. The massing of rectilinear ornament in vertical strips is by no means uncommon in Attica, especially during the years around the transition." On the Attic vases, the rectilinear columns are placed round the widest diameter or in the main zone, where the ornament has room to breathe; whereas the Thessalians, lacking the tectonic sense oftheir Attic colleagues, transferred the scheme to the necks of their closed vases, where it looks cramped and unhappy. Nevertheless, the same principles of decoration are at work in both areas. The resemblances, however, do not stop here, for many ofthe individual motifs are common to Attica and Thessaly. Columns of diagonal hatching, filled lozenges (pI. 33c), cross-hatched lozenges, filled triangles, and single zigzag (pI. 33a) all belong to the Attic LP G stock: the groups ofopposed diagonals are derived from the Attic LP G-E G version where the intervening spaces were filled with glaze (p. 150). Battlements in multiple outline (pI. 33e) first appear in Attic EG I; multiple zigzags arrive in EG 11, and filled double axes (pI. 33a-b,e) in MG 1. It seems that the only motifs invented by the Thessalians are the diminishing squares (pI. 33c) and right angles (pI. 33a), which occupy the panels often found at the centre of the neck compositions. In fine, the Attic and Thessalian repertoires have enough in common to suggest that at the transition to Geometric, or soon after, there was some contact between the two areasa much lessintimate contact, to be sure, than in LP G or M G times, when Thessaly borrowed shapes as well as ornament. In this rectilinear style, which presumably spans the intervening years, we find no sign ofthe vigorous and creative spirit inherent in the early stages ofAttic Geometric. We are dealing instead with a stagnant survival of the PG manner, only just saved from monotony by the introduction of rectilinear motifs from the south, wrenched out of their original contexts, and scattered over the neck in barbaric profusi
See BSA 31, 45, fig. 18, lowest two rows, and figs. 19-20 for the repertoire; also PGRT68, fig. 23. Marmariani, nos. 144-9. 3 E.g. shoulder-handled amphora, K. IV, pI. 12; neck-handled amphora, PGP, pI. 3d; krater, Hesperia 30 (1961), pl. 29; all LPG. Skyphos, pI. rj ; oinochoe, Hesperia 21 (1952), pls, 76-8; both EG I.
1 J
MG-LG
161
LATER THESSALIAN GEOMETRIC (contemporary with Attic M G and L G) During the course of Attic MG, the Thessalians began to abandon their outlandish rectilinear style, and to turn once again to Attica for fresh inspiration. The evidence for this Atticizing phase is still very scarce, being virtually restricted to the Tumulus at Halos, and the later material from the Kapakli tholos. Both these places lie on the Gulf of Pagasae, the very area which we should in any case expect to be most open to southern influence: but it remains an open question how far, and how soon, the new movement penetrated into the interior plain. The cemetery ofMarmariani, on the northern confines ofThessaly, yielded no pottery of this type, and it may be that the potters there clung resolutely to the older manner: other inland sites, however, have produced surface sherds of southern Greek MG to LG type,' which incline the balance ofprobability against this view. In our present state of knowledge, it is more reasonable to suppose that the Marmariani tholoi passed out ofuse at about the same time that Attic MG shapes first arrived in the coastal lands. SHAPES
The most striking sign of the new movement is the transformation of the krater, which is now remodelled after the Attic Type I 1. The standard form in Thessaly has a short vertical lip, two stirrup handles with single horizontal members, a deep rounded body, and a comparatively short ribbed pedestal. Those illustrated from Kapakli (pI. 33f-g) are representative ofat least ten kraters from the tomb, except that on some of the smaller examples the pedestals have no ribs; in the Halos report, the frequent references to 'ring-stemmed vases" testify to the popularity ofthe krater among the offerings at the Tumulus. We should note that this is the first appearance ofthe ribbed pedestal in Thessalian Geometric, and that its arrival coincides with the renewal of direct Attic influence - a circumstance which conflicts with a widely held theory that seeks to derive the ribs from a local ancestor in the Minyan ware which went out offashion some seven or eight centuries earlier." The earliest ofthe Atticizing kraters, pI. 33£, has a tiny flaring lip and a centralized design which should be dated well before the end of Attic M G: to judge from the loose metope designs of some later examples (e.g. pI. 33g), the Kapakli series continues well into the period ofAttic LG. Atticizing skyphoi are abundant both at Halos and Kapakli. At the former site they occur in everyone ofsixteen pyres. The earliest in appearance, which has a very short lip and a window-panel containing close multiplezigzags, seems to be based on an Attic model not later than M G 1;4 later examples from the pyres have taller lips," and this series, too, lasts well into Attic LG.6 Approximately the same range is covered by the sequence at Kapakli, 1 E.g. in the sherd collection of the British School at Athens: (i) from Magoula Karagac, rokm. east of Larissa, rim of M G krater, like the Attic Type I I: side-panel containing double axe; (ii) from Nea Lefki, rokm, southeast of Larissa, fr. of LG kotyle-pyxis, Corinthianizing, with zone of two-tiered lozenge net. J BSA 18, 12, fig. 7. 3 T. C. Skeat, The Dorians in Archaeology, London, 1934, 13, 38; Verdelis, PG R T80-2. On Verddis' 'transitional' piece, Kapakli no. 50, see below under 'skyphos'. 4 As PAE 1939, 30, fig. 3, from Marathon, Gr. 5. 5 BSA 18, 10, fig. 6, 3. • BSA 18, 15, fig. 9, re, H
162 • THESSALIAN GEOMETRIC
MG-LG I
which begins with a fine large example on a ribbed pedestal,' combining the concave lip of the latest Thessalo-Cycladic type (c£ pl, 32h) with the shallow rounded body of the Attic MGskyphos. For the kantharoi, published evidence is almost entirely lacking. From Halos 'two-handled cups with high projecting handles' are often mentioned, but none are illustrated as such. One ofthe photographs, however, shows a piece which almost certainly came from a kantharos, with traces of a high handle rising from the rim;" the quatrefoil metope betrays the influence of Attic L G I. There is also a fine Atticizing kantharos among the unpublished material from Kapakli, decorated with metopes in the Attic L G manner (p. 50). But the native forms may not have been entirely superseded. On Kapakli no. 773 the oblique diagonals are drawn with a multiple brush: this suggests a date not earlier than Attic M G II, when this labour-saving tool was first used freehand in the more progressive southern schools. No one-handled cups are mentioned from Halos, but Kapakli offers many varieties. Of special interest are (i) a large and deep version, decorated with a panel of meander hooks between mastoi, probably M G I I: and (ii) a late survival ofthe trigger-handled type, with summary decoration of vertical wavy lines." The plate from Kapakli, PGR T no. 143, has rolled reflex handles which are more nearly related to the Attic L G form (cf. pl, IO:m) than to the heavy straps ofMarmariani no. 13I. For the closed shapes, our information is extremely meagre. In Halos Pyre 7 an unillustrated amphora with 'a hatched meander in panels below the rim" suggests an Attic MG model. From Kapakli I have seen a large lekythos-oinochoe with globular body, and a hydria, both richly decorated in a manner characteristic ofAttic M G. Older forms, however, continue. Halos provides us with fragmentary jugs with cut-away necks: and trefoil-lipped oinochoai' in contexts which cannot be earlier than M G I I, to judge from the skyphoi said to have accompanied them: the only novel feature seems to be the occasional appearance of mastoi on the shoulders ofboth forms. The jugs are usually undecorated, in contrast to their showy predecessors of the rectilinear style; the oinochoai sometimes bear concentric circles on the shoulder," but their necks are always glazed.
gests that the skyphoi with window-panels precede those with continuous reserved zones,1 just as in Attic. The change to L G is marked by the adoption of the Attic metopal system. Hatched marshbirds enter the repertoire (pl, 33 g) : on an unpublished skyphos from Kapakli, the birds are accompanied by small dotted lozenges in the field, in the manner ofEuboean LG (c£ p. 192, pI. 4Ia). Other metopal motifs shared with Euboea are the grid-lozenges, and hatched St Andrew's crosses." A strange ladder-like motif, with hatching between alternate rungs, looks like a legacy from the earlier handmade ware." Quatrefoils are known at Halos r' on an unpublished kantharos from Kapakli they flank a central swastika in an Atticizing scheme ofthree metopes, separated by 'triglyphs' containing stacked W's. Here the quatrefoils assume an elaborate form, with triangular 'calyx leaves' set between the petals - a variant also found in the LG of Naxos" and Boeotia" at an advanced stage. Concerning the end ofThessalian Geometric we are completely in the dark. We do not know whether the Thessalians ever achieved an Orientalizing style of their own, and among the existing material there is no sign ofany Orientalizing influence from elsewhere. The latest foreign fashion of which we have any record is the Attic metopal system of the latest Kapakli vases, whose ultimate origin is Attic L G I. These are painted in a quiet, unambitious style reminiscent ofEuboea, Boeotia, and the Cyclades; but whether or not they represent the final stage of Thessalian Geometric, we cannot yet know.
DECORATION
Our few remarks under this heading are confined to the kraters and drinking vessels, which are the only shapes numerous enough to afford a glimpse of the local development. . Most ofthe ornament follows the Attic fashions ofM G to L G I, but in a much simplified form; at the same time, the local repertoire of the preceding phase was not entirely forgotten. The austere decoration of the M G I I krater from Kapakli (pI. 33£) -illustrates a typical compromise. The central panel containing meander hooks represents the new Attic element: but the ancillary columns contain an old Thessalo-Cycladic motif surviving from the previous style (cf. pI. 32a). On the MG skyphoi, these groups of alternating diagonals appear no less frequently than the designs borrowed from the Attic repertoire - multiple zigzags, vertical chevrons, sigmas, and meander hooks. The development of the shape sug1
6
PGRT, no. 50. 2 BSA 18, 15, fig. 9, lb. BSA 18, 18, fig. 12,2-4. 7 BSA 18, 16, fig.
3
10.
PGRT, pl. g. • Skeat, Ope cit. pI. 2, 7. 8 Pyres 4,5, g.
5
BSA 18, 14.
As BSA 18,
10, fig. 6, 3. : Unpublished kraters from Kapakli; ef. p. 193. Cf. Marmariani, no. 27; BSA 31,17, fig. 6, 27. ·BSA 18, 15, fig. g, lb. a Pp. 20g-IO,CVA Scheurleer I, III G, pI. 1,5.
1 3
a P. 175, Diws xv, pI. 54, Bc 4.
EG
CHAPTER SEVEN
Cycladic and Euboean Geometric
In Chapter Five we dealt with a retarded Protogeometric style, which flourished in Euboea and the Cyclades long after the end of Protogeometric in Attica. It now remains for us to consider what pottery from these islands can be related in time to the various phases of Attic Geometric. The resemblances are often close enough to suggest contemporaneity with Attic models, allowing us to divide the local Geometric into Early, Middle, and Late. Except in the case of a few distinctive shapes, finer chronological subdivisions are not yet possible, owing to the lack of significant contexts among the local material. So far, ten Cycladic islands have produced Geometric pottery from excavations.' Geographically, they can be divided into four areas: (i) the northern chain, formed by Andros, Tenos, Rheneia, and Delos; (ii) at the centre, Paros and Naxos; (iii) a southwestern group, consisting of Melos, Kimolos, and Siphnos; finally (iv) Thera, which stands on its own. Except for Rheneia, Delos, and possibly Kimolos and Paros, each ofthese islands produced its own pottery. But since no single island ever exerted an overriding influence on all the others, we must not be surprised to find more stylistic variation within the archipelago than in any district of mainland Greece. The diversity is particularly noticeable in Late Geometric, when distinct schools were established in Naxos, Melos, Thera, and perhaps Paros, each one related in a different way to the parent Attic style. At the same time a fifth local style grew up in Euboea, compounded ofAttic and Corinthian traits: this we shall consider at the end of this chapter. CYCLADIC EARLY GEOMETRIC For Euboean EG the evidence is minimal: (a) a cup or skyphos fragment ofEG II type from Nea Lampsakos, near Chalcis - see p. 152; (b) a few similar fragments, Lefkandi (1968), 27, fig. 64. •
The relevant material, which is scarce, comes from two areas: the northern chain, and the southwestern group. The northern islands, as we have seen, shared a SubPG style with Euboea, Skyros, and I To this number we must now add Keos, where Geometric pottery is reported from the temple at Ay. Irini: see Hesperia 33 (1964), 333, and above p. 59, no. 19. On the provenance 'Keos' for Boeotian vases in Heidelberg and elsewhere, see below p. 205, n. 2.
. 164 .
Thessaly, which was now reaching its most homogeneous stage (p. 151). From this quarter only a very few vases show any connection with Attic E G: namely a broad-based E G I I oinochoe from Rheneia,' and three skyphoi from Ktikados, on Tenos. Of the latter, tworecall the Attic EG I type (pI. rj), The third skyphos (p. 152, pI. 34b) has a low ring foot and a slanting offset lip like the Attic E G I I version, but the body is deeper: the closest parallels are from Corinth, Argos, and Theotokou in Thessaly (pp. 93, 114, n. 9). The general impression is that these islands had very few dealings with the southern mainland; and that their rare contacts in that direction were not always with Attica. In the southwestern group the situation is somewhat different: there is no trace of the Sub P G style, and rather more evidence of Attic E G influence. Melos had already become a centre for the production of belly-handled amphorae. The Melian series begins with a plump example" with neck missing; in the subsidiary decoration of the handle zone, a dot-filled lozenge chain suggests a slight affinity with Attic EG 1. Later, but still EG, is another fragmentary amphora from Melos, Sevres 1419, 1. 4 Next comes a complete example exported to Knossos, probably also from Melos," whose resemblance in shape to that from Kerameikos Gr. 416 places it at the end of E G. In their decoration all three vases follow the Attic system, but with one significant departure: the handle zone contains three circlepanels, instead of the two usually found on the Attic amphorae. Smaller Atticizing shapes are also represented on Melos, all of E G I I type: a squat broad-based oinochoe once in The Hague," and two drinking vessels in London - a glazed CUp8 and a glazed kantharos with low handles (unnumbered). Kimolos has produced a lekythos-oinochoe like those from the EG I Boot Grave in the Athenian Agora (pI. le), and an E G I I shallow skyphos with a windowpanel of multiple zigzag." Further skyphoi of this type are known from Siphnos.w If one may argue from such sparse material, it seems that the influence ofAttic E G was fairly steady in the southwestern group of islands: on the other hand, it made hardly any impression in the northern chain, where Thessalo-Cycladic SubPG was the reigning style. CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN MIDDLE GEOMETRIC Although there are no significant groups for this period, the material is plentiful, and the style of the vases speaks for itself: we learn that the influence of Attic now became evenly diffused throughout the Cyc1adic archipelago, thereby imposing a remarkable uniformity on the various island fabrics. Surprisingly enough, the imitations of Attic M G are closest in Euboea and the northern Cyclades, the very islands which had previously been the strongholds of the non-Attic SubPG style. The Atticizing movement also spread to the central islands, and arrived in Thera during the course ofM G. The southwestern group continued to I A 1460, PGP, pI. 18. • One, illustrated here, pI. 34a: Height o- I3m., diameter of rim o- I48m. ; orange micaceous clay, with high red-black glaze: reserved band inside rim, reserved circle on floor; the other side of the exterior is wholly glazed. The second skyphos bears the same decoration, but its conical foot is still lower. 3 Kunze, JOAf 39 (1952), 54if., figs. 1-3. 4 CVA Sevres, pI. 12,4. 5 Fortetsa, no. 269. • K. v . I, pI. 46. 7 CVA Scheurleer I, I I F, pl. 1,3, no. 3318. • 52.6-21.14. • Both vases described by Moustakas, AM6g-70 (1954-5), 154; known to me from G.!. Negs. Melos 53A-B, 54. The body of the lekythos-oinochoe is decorated like Hesperia 18,293, fig. 7; on the neck, horizontal lines only. la BSA 44 (1949), pl. 14, nos. 16,19.
166 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
MG
followAttic fashions, with a tendency to simplify the decoration towards the end ofthe period. Since the M G material is so widely dispersed, I begin with a condensed catalogue before proceeding to the analysis. ANDROS
Zagora: PGP 161-3, nos. 143-4, 148-g, 151, pl. 16; Ergon 1968. Amonakliou: pedestalled krateriskos, Sauciuc, Andros, fig. 59. TENOS
Kardiani: Levi, Ann. 8-g (1925-6), 222ff., figs. 130ff., A 1476-9,1481-4,1486 (pI. 34g). These vases have been cleaned since Levi's publication. Ktikados: two vases. (i) Cup. H. 0·086m. D. of rim o· 13m. Orange micaceous clay, handles barred, foot slightly concave, mastoi flanking the zigzag panel. PI. 34h. (ii) Kantharos. H. o· 12m. D. ofrim o· 14-0' 15m. Soft orange clay with small particles of mica. Either side of the meander, a column containing two cross-hatched lozenges. The handles, largely restored, decorated with double St Andrew's crosses. Flat foot. PI. 34e. RHENEIA
Parakastri: PGP 156-8, pls. 18-19; A 1451, 1456-8, 1469 (pI. 34d), 1472-4. Purification Trench: Delos xv, Aa 44-55 (pls. 11-14); Ae 24-g, 31-6, 40-2, 44-7,50-1,53, 56 (pls, 27-g); 'Attique' 13 (pl, 42); 'Cretois' 14 (pl, 52).
handled amphora in the Nomikos collection, whose neck-panel combines gear-pattern, quadruple zigzag, and dogtooth; reserved triple bands on body. Another belly-handled amphora, Paris A 266, Pottier I, pl. 10. Of the M G vases from Thera, only the skyphoiA 97-104 seem to be of local clay: the remainder of those listed here are imports from other Cycladic islands. MELOS
With provenance 'Melos' : Belly-handled amphorae, Munich 6166, pI. 34m.; two others similar in Vienna and Melos (Kunze, ]OAI 39 (1952), 56, n. 14); another, Schloss Fasanerie Ba, CVA 2, pl. 55. Oinochoaiin Melos: (a) H. 0·25m. Shape as TenosA 1477 (Ann. 8-g, 228, fig. 3 I, n. 2) ; single zigzag in neck-panel, quadruple zigzag on shoulder between mastoi; below, three triple reserved bands. (b) H. o· 20m. Short and narrow neck, with five horizontal lines; globular body, rope handle; on shoulder, crosshatched triangles and mastoi, cf. Rheneia A 1459. Below, three triple reserved bands. Large skyphos, Athens 878,]dI 15 (1900),55, fig. 12, I. No provenance, hutattrihutahle to Melian L G bystyle andfabric: Belly-handled amphorae: perhaps all the Cycladic examples from Thera (see above). Oinochoai: Paris N 3130, N 3135, Pottier ti, D 16-17. Large skyphoi: London 43.5-7.78; Leiden, Brants, pl. 6, 37; British School at Athens A 108, pI. 34k (H. o· 158m. D. ofrimo· 192m.).Amphoriskos: London 55.10-20.1, pI. 341 (H. o· 12m.). KIMOLOS
Hellenika, cemetery: a few of the earliest vases - oinochoai, amphoriskoi, skyphoi, one globular pyxis. Unpublished.
DELOS
Sanctuary area: Delos xv, 'Attique'
I
(pl, 42); Ae 49, pI. 34£.
Kastro : BSA 44 (1949), pl. 13,25; pl. 14, 7, 20, 23. Frs.
PAROS
Delion: Rubensohn, Delion, pl. 14: 4, 6-7. Frs. Acropolis: A M 42 (1917), 78ff., figs. 87, 93, 95. Frs. NAXOS
Grotta: AE 1945-7, rff., figs. 1-3, belly-handled amphora. Naxia: cemetery excavated in 1936-7 by Karouzos and Kondoleon, PAE 1937, 116-18; unpublished. About fifty M G vases in the local museum, marked N or N~ followed by a number. THERA
Sellada: Thera II, 18, fig. 107, belly-handled amphora. Messavouno: A M 28 (1903), I I 4, skyphoi A 97- I 04 (one of this class illustrated here, pl, 34c); I 79ff., belly-handled amphorae, at least three of HI 2-8;1 pedestalled skyphos, HI 17; neck-handled amphorae, J 19-20; lekythos-oinochoe, J 25. Another neck1
Of the five examples which I saw in the Thera Museum, only H I
SIPHNOS
I
and one other are of Attic fabric.
EUBOEA
Eretria: AE 1903, rff., figs. 2-4; BSA 47 (1952), pl. 2, A 2-7 (A I looks Attic); PAE 1952,159, fig. 4, 3; AntK9 (1966), pl. 26, I. Frs. only. Lefkandi: frs. of Atticizing skyphoi with hatched meander, multiple zigzag, vertical chevrons, and meander hooks. Lefkandi (1968), 27, fig. 66. Limni: oinochoe, BSA 61 (1966),49, n. 51, pl. 21e. CRETE
Knossos : BSA 55 (1960), 161, no. 20, fig. 4; Fortetsa, nos. 364-7,671; Teke, BSA 49 (1954), pl. 26, nos. 7 I, 79, 81. Phaistos: Ann. 39-40 (196 I -2), 408, fig. 5 I c. Vrokastro: Vrokastro 173, fig. 106. AL MINA
] H S 60 (1940), 3, fig. I l,o,q,r. (See below p. 3 I 2.)
168 .
MG
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
Ten of the most typical Attic M G shapes are more or less faithfully copied in the Cyclades: the neck- and belly-handled amphorae, the oinochoe, the lekythos-oinochoe, the flat pyxis, the pedestalled krater (Type I I), the skyphos, the high-handled kantharos, the cup, and the mug. One more shape, the vertical-handled amphoriskos, is taken over from the Thessalo-CycladicSubPG, but modified by Attic influence. The skyphos with pendent semicircles, as we have seen (p. 157), survives alongside the Attic form, but its production is apparently confined to Euboea and the northern Cyclades. Ofthe amphorae, the neck-handled is the rarer ofthe two types. Excluding the small example from Rheneia (A 1451), which may be a Corinthian import,' one has been found on Naxos, one on Rheneia,s and three on Thera. N axos is the most likely source for all five, which are all distinguished by reddish micaceous fabric, with a cream slip. As in Attic MG, the main decoration is placed in panels on the neck, with horizontal divisions; the bodies are coated with glaze, interrupted only by triple reserved bands. Naxos" was also producing belly-handled amphorae, but Melos still remains their most prolific source. In the decoration of the handle zone Kondoleon (loc. cit.) has observed four local peculiarities shared by nearly all Cycladic examples, but rarely found on contemporary Attic amphorae.' (i) There are three circle-panels, whereas the Attic prototypes have only two. (ii) The circles are not, as often in Attic, supported by 'cushions' ofhorizontal rectilinear ornament. (iii) The circles are separated from one another by thin vertical columns, usually containing single chevrons or M's: owing to lack of space no use is made of the vertical meander, much favoured in Attic. (iv) For the inner filling of the circles, there is a preference for the reserved St George's cross, or a hatched Maltese cross:- the diminishing chevrons in quadrants, which form the most popular design on contemporary Attic examples, are shunned in the Cyclades. In other respects the decoration is faithful to Attic principles (p. 20), and repeats two definitive features of Attic M G: the three zones round the neck, and the insertion of stars or dot rosettes as filling ornament in the corners of the circle panels. Oinochoai are plentiful enough to allow some generalization on the differences from island to island. The most faithful imitations ofAttic come from the islands nearest to Attic shores. Andros 148-g and Tenos A 14766 are the most canonical, with tall bodies, broad bases, and high centre of gravity: they look contemporary with an early example of Attic M G I, pI. 3c. In the Parakastri graves ofRheneia an Attic import (A 1456) is accompanied by two Cycladic oinochoai, one ofwhich (A 1458) is still a faithful copy; the other, A 1457, is beginning to develop a narrower foot. Here we see the point of departure for a local development away from the Attic model, continued in the series from the Purification
Trench: the latest, Aa 55 (pI. 34j), has a slim ovoid body, foreign to Attic,' but reminiscent of Oorinthian:- a small trefoil metope on the shoulder dates this piece to an advanced stage ofMG. Ofthe eight oinochoai on Naxos" the best specimen, N 3, is very like Tenos A 1477,4 and both are similar in shape to a plump example ofAttic M G I I, pI. 5 b, except that their necks are rather narrower. In the southwest, the Siphnos fr. B SA 44, pI. 13,35, seems close to Attic, but elsewhere there are more hints ofnon-Attic contacts, and local development. Two Melian examples" have panels of ornament not only on the neck, but also on the shoulder, set between mastoi - a scheme closely matched in Argive MG 11 (pI. 24f). Otherwise, Melian painters tend to limit the decoration to a panel of dots or single zigzag on the neck." The lekythos-oinochoe is represented by two examples on Naxos requiring little comment, except that both have unmistakable affinities with Attic. One belongs to the same gaily decorated class as pI. 3m; the other has its closest parallel in Kerameikos, Gr. 12. 7 A good M G I I piece, with neck missing, is Thera J 25: 8 the drawing is well up to Attic standards, but the deep tone ofthe clay suggests a central Cycladic origin. An example from Rheneias also seems to be ofisland clay, but is modelled instead on a Corinthian M G original somewhere between Clenia no. 4 (p. 95) and pl. 18c. Pyxides are rare. Andros 144 is intermediate between the Attic globular and flat types, but this intermediate version is not known in Attica. The flat pyxis is found in Eretria.w but is absent from Cycladic M G: Thera, however, imported an Attic M G I I original'! whose shape was subsequently enlarged to a monstrous size by a local LG potter." A globular pyxis from Kimolos Tomb 4, with central meander panel and horizontal rolled handles, recalls the northeast Peloponnese'> rather than Attica. Among the open vases, two features are universal: the lips are set more or less vertically, and the decoration consists of a central panel at handle level, sometimes supported by ancillary motifs. These characteristics relate them to their Attic counterparts; but there is room for local variation in the details of their ornament. On the kraters we have little information: in the absence of any complete example from the Cyclades we must fall back on fragments from Eretria (p. 167) and imports at Knossos-s and V rokastro.v These are all imitations of the Attic Type I I, distinguished by a widely spreading pedestal, stirrup handles, and a central meander in the handle zone (p. 25). On the Eretrian fragments the ancillary columns reveal some attempt to keep pace with the elaboration of the Attic M G I I model. The Fortetsa piece, more simply decorated, probably comes from Melos, to judge from the clay and the tall spiky zigzag (p. 185) under the meander. It is unlikely to be very much earlier than the L G krater in Leiden (pI. 39j), which it closely resembles in shape: the simplicity of its decoration is consistent with what we know of other late M G vases from that island (p. 167). Before dealing with the orthodox shallow skyphos, let us note the popularity in the Cyclades of a larger and deeper variety, intermediate in size between the krater and the general run of drinking vessels. Two of the earliest (MG I ?) have high feet: Andros 151, with a single Contrast the Attic imports Delos xv, pI. .p, 'Attique' 3, 14. 2 Cf. especially BSA 48 (1953), pI. 48, 881-2. PGP 213. • Ann. 8-9, 228, fig. 31, n. 2. 5 Oinochoe (a) in Me1os; Paris N 3130. 8 A M 28, Beil. 31, 5. 9 De'losxv, pI. 50, 'Cretois' 14. • Paris N 3135; Kimolos, four examples. • K. v. I, pI. 83, 895. 10 P AE 1952, 159, fig. 4, &-7. 11 HI 18. 12 A 60, D. o- 50m.! 13 cr. Corinthian, pI. I6d; Argive, pI. 25 f . U Forte/sa, no. 671, pl. 44. 15 Vrokastro 173, fig. 106. 1
PGP 158. 2 De'losxv, 'Attique' 12. 3 Kondoleon, AE 1945-7, rff, • Cf. pI. 34111 with Athens 216, AJA 44 (1940), pI. 23, 3. 5 Both borrowed from Attica, where they are known since PG: see K.I, pI. 49; Hesperia 30 (1961), pI. 27,46. • Ann. 8-g, 227, fig. 30: large meander on neck. 1
169
3
170 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
rib at the junction with the body, seems to follow on directly after the SubPG series from the same find ;' with Thera HI 17, the tall ribbed pedestal is already fully developed. Large skyphoi with low feet are common in the central and southwestern islands.s their decoration is generally confined to a simple window-panel. Those from Melos and Kimolos are distinguished bytheirextreme simplicity imeanders (as pl, 34k) are exceptional, the most usual motif being a single spiky zigzag underlined several times ;" the lower body bears a triple reserved band. The orthodox shallow skyphoi are closely related to their counterparts in Attica and other mainland regions. Both stages ofthe Attic series can be followed in the Cycladic imitations: multiple zigzags (pI. 34d) are most characteristic ofM G I, while vertical chevrons (pI. 34g) (for the circulation of this type in Italy, see p. 355) and two pairs of meander hooks- are typical designs of Attic MG 11. One local trait, however,deserves mention: the unruly habit ofstopping the panels with a diagonal daub from the handles, in contrast to the neat vertical barring that is usually found on the Attic models." Stars or dot rosettes are often added at the sides, as in Attic, but their original function has been forgotten: instead of filling the triangular space by the handles (p. 20), they are thrust inwards towards the main panels and are sometimes absorbed into it.' On the occasions when tall vertical bars are carried right up to the handles, we may again suspect the influence of Corinth: Delos Ae 31, for example, repeats the formula found on pI. 17h. The high-handled kantharos arrived in Attica only in M G I I. The earliest type, with central meander surrounded by ancillaries (pI. 4d), is the model for several exceptionallyfine imitations from Tenos." Another, from Ktikados on the same island (pI. 34e), is rougher work, but still keeps the ancillary columns at either side. Delos has yielded a kantharos with only a simple window-panel (pl. 34£, Ae 49), but this cannot be appreciably earlier than the others, since the sigmas are drawn with multiple brush. Ae 50, with comparatively low handles, has its closest parallel in a Corinthian piece, pI. 18g, and may be influenced from that quarter. 9 The three remaining shapes - cup, mug, and amphoriskos - show how whole-heartedly the islanders had assimilated the principles of Attic M G decoration: all three bear simple window-panels at handle level, even though none ofthem figure in the Attic M G repertoire in this guise. Large cups, with short vertical lips and panels between mastoi (pI. 34h),1O imitate an Attic form which seems to have gone out offashion at the end ofEG: however, it remained popular in the Argolid, and pl. 34h has a good parallel in Argive M G 1.11 Darkground mugs with window-panels occur on Naxos'> even though the Attic light-ground variety was widely exported." Finally, the local amphoriskos, as we have noted (pp. 155-6), PGP, pI. 16. 2 Naxos, N~ 13-17; 'Parian', Delosxv, Ae 32, 33,44-7; Melos and Kimolos, p. 167. Leiden, Brants, pI. 6, 37. • Delos xv, Ae 36. • PI. se; further details, AA 1963,203. 8 BSA 55, 162, fig. 4. • PI. 34g; Delos xv, pI. 28, Ae 32. 8 A 1481-4, Ann. 8-9, 223fT., nos. 4-7, figs. 32-3. No. 7 (A 1484) has a triple zigzag, and is similar to PAE 1934, 37, fig. 10, from Marathon. 9 Cf. Benton, BSA 48, 262, n. 42. 10 Also Andros, 143; Rheneia A 1472-4; Naxos N~ 19; Delos xv, pI. 27, Ae 34-5. 11 CGA, pI. 71, Argos C 35. l' Three examples, each with double zigzags in panel; shapes vary between C VA Athens I, pI. 3, I I, and Fortetsa, no. 707. 13 MG I: Mykonos r 137, unpublished, near to Agora P 19032 from Well B 18:9. MG 11: Delos xv, pI. 52, 'Origine Indeterminee' 10; Thera HI 12-15; cf. these with K. v, I, pl. I I 1,831, from Gr. 86. 1
3
MG
171
assumes Attic dress at some time during M G: pI. 341, probably Melian, differs from the earlier SubPG version in having a clearly offset lip, perhaps a further sign of mainland influence. This shape continues into the LG ofMelos and Kimolos (p. 184). To sum up: throughout the M G period, Cycladic and Euboean craftsmen derived much inspiration from Attic models. Occasionally, towards the end of M G I I, a Corinthian flavour may be detected in a few Cycladic vases; nor need this surprise us, since by this time Corinthian pottery was already being exported in competition with Attic ware. NeverthelessAttica remains the chiefsource ofnew ideas for a long period, from the beginning ofM G until well into LG. Attic influence on the local island fabrics was so continuous, and so profound, that we can hardly at this stage speak of an independent Cycladic style. Of the shapes, only the amphoriskos and the large deep skyphos can claim to be peculiar to the Cyclades; in the decoration, there are only a few local idiosyncrasies, and even these can be attributed either to a loose application ofAttic principles, or to a desire to simplify the more elaborate Attic schemes. CYCLADIC LATE GEOMETRIC As in Attica, the L G pottery of the Cyclades differs from earlier wares in three respects: light-ground decoration now spreads over the greater part of the vase surface; figured drawing makes its first appearance; and a metopal scheme was generally adopted for the decoration of small vases. Since stratified material is almost totally lacking, we can still follow the progress of Cycladic Geometric only through internal stylistic analysis, and through affinities with Attic. Fortunately, such affinities are close: in fact, no other regional style remains so faithful to Attic in its L G stage. On many small vases the Attic L G I system ofequal metopes (p. 50) is taken over without modification, so that the style is indistinguishable from that of the Attic originals.' In the choice and arrangement of ornament, it is the larger surfaces that offer the greatest scope for local invention, thereby allowing us to recognize four local schools within the archipelago. At the outset ofLG the Attic tradition is still so strong that the stylistic differences between these island schools are no more striking than those obtaining between rival and contemporary workshops in Attica. Later, however, the Attic connection lapses, and the island schools drift farther away from one another. Finally, each ofthem independently develops a local Orientalizing style," with very little common ground. The division of Cycladic L G into four local schools depends on the close correspondence between fabrics, shapes, and mannerisms ofornament. For attribution to individual islands, fabric is all-important. In three cases the clay is so distinctive, and occurs in such abundance on specific islands, that the schools can be safely assigned to Naxos, Melos, and Thera. For the location of the fourth school, the evidence is less helpful, for two reasons. In the first place, the greater part of the material comes from Delos and Rheneia (Delos xv, Class A) and Thera (Dragendorff's 'bootisch', or Pfuhl's group J - 'euboisch'), 3 three islands where Delos xv, Ae 67, 87; cf. pI. rob-c. 2 With the possible exception of Melos, where there is a gap in the sequence. The close stylistic similarity between the Delos and Thera groups was first demonstrated by Buschor (AM 54, 142fT.); for other views see Boardman, BSA 47, 16, n. 79; and I. Strom, Acta Arch. (Copenhagen), 1962, 244fT.
1
2
172 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
LG
(ii) Workshop 4. Fragments ofpedestalled krater, from Naxos (Palati). AM 54 (1929), 154, figs. 6, 7. 5. Pedestalled krater, once in The Hague, 3284. CVA Scheurleer I, I I F, pl. I, no. 4; A E 1945-7, 15, fig. 6. (The foot is modern.) { 6. Krater fr. from Amathus, London 94.11-I.3I. Murray, Excavations in Cyprus, 103, fig. 150.
THE NAXIAN SCHOOL
The Cesnola Painter and Workshop
(i) By the Cesnola Painter I. Ovoid pedestalled krater, from Kourion, Cyprus: New York, Cesnola collection. Cesnola, Cyprus, its Cities, Tombs, and Temples, London 18n, pl. 29; Myres, Handbook to the Cesnola Collection, no. 1701; AE 1945-7, 12, fig. 4; Arias-Hirmer-Shefton, pl. 24. PI. 35. 1 Paros: Boardman, WC. cit.; Siphnos: Brock, BSA 44 (1949), 75, n. 65; Tenos: see p. 177, n. I. aL. Ghali-Kahil, Etudesthasiennes v ti (Ig60), 51-2, pIs. 2Q-1. • Cf. Blakeway, BSA 33 (1932-3), 183, n. 4; Kondoleon, AE 1945-7, 3. Rubensohn, the excavator of Paros, doubts whether in ancient times the island possessed any clay beds suitable for fine ware: in his view, both Siphnos and Aegina are more plausible homes • for the school, but he prefers to use the non-committal term 'Nesiotisch'. See Delion 85-7. • Buschor, A M 54 (1929), 152ff., figs.6-7, Beil. 53-4. Add now Ergon 1963, 15I, figs. 163-4, from Aplomata, erroneously called 'Parian'. 6 Ignoring East Greek imports, asAM54, Beil. 54; 4,11,16. 8AE 1945-7, 2. 7 BCH35 (1911), 36Iff., 388ff. 8 Dllosxv. 9 A word of caution: in distinguishing these categories, the authors paid more attention to the slip than to the clay underneath: hence not all the Bb group are necessarily Naxian. Boardman (BSA 47,2, n. 8) assigns Bb 56 and 58 to 'Parian'; Bb 51-3 are here treated as Euboean (p. 192, pi. 4Ia). On the other hand, Ac IQ-I I, unslipped, are of Naxian clay (cf. Karouzos, JdI 52 (1937), 190 , n. 3). 10 J H S 60 (1940), 4, fig. ef, h-k, 11 Vrokastro 97-8, fig. 53a-d,f,g. 12 Green clay, covered with a buff slip. 13 AE 1945-7, r rff,
173
2. Oinochoe, from Kourion: New York, Cesnola collection. Myres, op. cit. no. 1702. PI. 36a. 3. Pedestalled krater, from Delos. BCH 35 (1911),368, no. 36, figs. 27,28; Delos xv, pl. 44, Bc 8; AE 1945-7, 13, fig. 5·
it is certainly imported. Secondly, the clay used by this school is not peculiar to a single island, but is shared by at least three ofthose which have yielded L G pottery - Paros, Siphnos, and Tenos.' A similar clay is regarded as local to Thasos, where the first Parian colonists made Subgeometric skyphoi in the style ofthis elusive school 2 - a fact which lends additional support to Buschor's belief that Paros was its home. Buschor's case, however, is not overwhelming: until more conclusive evidence comes to light, it would be prudent to use the term 'Parian' in inverted commas.>
So far, the island ofNaxos has yielded little Late Geometric pottery, but the little that we have is informative. A number of fragments, some of them figured, come from the temple site on the peninsula ofPalati, overlooking the island harbour.' Their fabric is highly distinctive :" the clay varies from brick-red to dark brown, and contains golden mica; the surface is usually coated with a thick cream slip, a custom already in force on some Naxian MG vases." Our authority for ascribing other vases to the Naxian school depends on their similarity in fabric and style to these important sherds. With good reason, Buschor claimed aNaxian origin for a large class from Delos 7 later incorporated with corresponding Rheneian finds" under the categories Bb and Bc.9 Farther afield, a few krater fragments from AI Mina'? are of Naxian fabric. Sherds of a krater from Vrokastro in East Crete, with a chariot scene, are also related to this school.t- although the clay seems misfired.v Finally, we owe to Kondoleon'" the association of three large figured works with the Bb-Bc class: the two Cesnola vases, and the Scheurleer krater; with their help, we can now form some impression of the leading painter of the school, who may have been the first to draw figures on Naxian pottery.
THE NAXIAN SCHOOL: THE CESNOLA PAINTER •
The Kourion krater is the masterpiece of this painter, and of the Naxian school. Apart from the miniature hydria crowning the lid - an Attic conceit - the shape is original: composed ofa wide low neck, an ovoid body, and a stemmed foot, it looks forward to the grandest ofall Cycladic forms, the pedestalled amphora, which bore so much ofthe finest Orientalizing painting. The slim oinochoe, another important Naxian form, is the prototype of the later series Bb 18-25, which leads up to the transition to Orientalizing. The Delos and Scheurleer kraters are less original, and belong to the traditional Attic Type 11. 1 In accordance with the normal custom in LG times, the surface ofthe monumental vases is broken up into a network ofzones, panels, and metopes, where figured drawing alternates with linear ornament. In the interests of good composition, the main divisions are vertical at handle level, and horizontal below. In the ordering of the decoration, no other island school approaches nearer to the elaborate and sumptuous manner of the Athenian gravemarkers: and if we compare the coherent design on the Cesnola krater with the disjointed patchwork on an equally huge Argive vase (pI. 26), we see that the Naxian master achieved his elaboration without any loss of overall clarity. The Delos krater simplifies the design of an Attic model, the grave-marker Kerameikos 1255,2 while preserving the essential elements: a central area divided horizontally into friezes, flanked by two metopes on either side. This became a common formula in other Cycladic schools," where it was simplified even further, with a less generous proportion of figured drawing. None of the linear ornament is exclusively Naxian. The Cesnola Painter chose a few motifs from the vast Attic repertoire ofhis time, and drew them with superb precision. He is particularly fond of check, tangential concentric circles.s tangential blobs (always strictly circular), and columns ofcross-hatched lozenges; to the last three he generally adds dots in the intervening spaces." For filling ornament, he favours dot rosettes, circles ringed by dots," and swastikas with acute-angled arms. 7 His figured work, as far as we know, is confined to the delineation ofthe normal Geometric animals (horse, goat, deer) and birds." He introduces two themes unknown in Attic Geo1 Perhaps the handles of the Delos krater should be restored with stirrups, in conformity with all other large examples of this type. K. v. I, pI. 23. 3 Melian, p. 183; Theran, p. 188. • Cf. Argive LG I, p. 128. 6 Cf. the Attic Hirschfeld Painter. 6 Cf. Athens 804, pi. 6, animal friezes. 7 Cf., once again, the krater Kerameikos 1255. 8 On contemporaryNaxianfrs. showing humans (PAE 1939, 119, fig. 2; Vrokastro, pp. 97-8, fig. 53) too little survives tojustify attribution.
2
174 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
metric: antithetical goats flanking a tree,' and a horse at the manger with a double axe suspended over his back. He probably forestalls Attic potters in showing horses in a grazing attitude:" under their bellies, the pecking birds are inspired by the Dipylon Master's type (p. 40 ) , but the raised feathery wing ( I ) is peculiar to Naxian, and reappears, fully extended, among the Vrokastro and Al Mina fragments," His style, however, is less striking, and less original, than his iconography. All his animals have a stiff, wooden appearance foreign to the manner ofthe Dipylon Master, but often found in less good Attic work towards the end of L G I. The stallions, with their plank-like bodies, stiff forelegs, and reserved eyes, have much in common with the Hirschfeld Painter's type (p. 43) : the grazing deer of the Delos krater lack the fluid lines ofthe Dipylon model" and cannot be much earlier than the emaciated creatures on Athens 706 (p. 51, no. I); the kneeling deer in the goat-and-tree panel (I) recall those on the rim of the Attic kantharos in Copenhagen," transitional between LG I and 11. All these comparisons with Attic drawing suggest a date towards the end of LG I for the activity of this meticulous, but mannered, painter - an impression confirmed by the use of check as a metope design on the rim of the name-piece (cf. pI. roh,
P·5 2 ) . The later imitators debased his style. On the Scheurleer krater, the horses have lost their fetlocks: the grazing pair in the central frieze, wraith-like creatures, are now closely comparable to the deer on Athens 706. Another man, who painted the Naxos fragments (4), suppressed all filling ornament, and added a massive protruding ear to his horses, as though he were turning to bronze figurines for inspiration." We may perhaps see his later work in Be 4-5: 7 on Be 4, the open stride of the horses brings us near to the end of Geometric. We cannot follow the Cesnola Painter's influence any farther; the scrappy remains ofother late Naxian figured drawings do not reveal any steady contact with Attic LG 11, nor do they point the way to the earliest Naxian Orientalizing." In our present state of knowledge, the Cesnola Painter remains an isolated figure - the only Naxian ofhis time who aspired to the Athenian grand manner.
Plainer vases SHAPES
Especially typical of Naxos are the tall and slim neck-handled amphorae and oinochoai, the attenuated successors of the standard M G types, which were both known on the island (p. 168). The amphora Delos xv, Be I (pI. 36d), still decorated in the dark-ground manner, has close parallels in Attic LG Ib (cf. pI. loa): the series Bb 1-11 reflects a later stage, where the triple reserved bands have been simplified into broad stripes (pI. 36e). Similarly, the attenuation of the oinochoe begins with Bb 13 (? L G I), and continues through the Cesnola piece to the final series Bb 18-25, one of which (Bb 20) may be classed as Early Orientalizing. Otherwise both shapes die out at the end ofGeometric, but their proportions survive in the belly-handled amphorae of the Heraldic Group, Delos XVII, class Ba. Plump perhaps a Mycenaeanrevival; cf. BM Cat I. i.A 719. 2 In Attic, notbeforeLG 11: p. 67, nos. 1,2. Contrast the Euboean wings, bent and generally hatched, p. 193. 4 Contrast those on Munich 6080, Daoison, fig. 5, the latest from the workshop. 5 C VA 2, pl. 73, 5. 6 Cf. Lullies-Hirmer, Greek Sculpture, pI. I. • Dilosxv, pI. 54a. 8 Bb 8,9,23; Bc 6-7; Ac IQ-II. • Dilos XVII, class Ba, the 'Heraldic Group'. 11: 3
THE NAXIAN SCHOOL·
LG
175
oinochoai (Bb 14, 15) and tankards (Bb 28, 2g) were also made - at the final stage ofGeometric, to judge .from their relaxed decoration. Two vases are exceptionally faithful copies oflate foreign models: an Atticizing lekythos, Bb 32/ and a conicallekythos-oinochoe from the Delian Heraion that might have been made by a visiting Corinthian craftsman (pI. 36b; cf. pI. 2IC). Apart from the kraters, open shapes are limited to skyphoi and kantharoi? Both maintain close relations with the usual Attic L G I types, with vertical offset lip, although most Naxian examples are larger and proportionately deeper: a taste for capacious drinking vessels evidently survived from M G times (cf. p. 170). These traditional forms, to judge from their decoration, survived until the end of Geometric, and none of the latest Attic models (pp. 86-7) appear to have reached Naxos. DECORATION
The arrangement ofornament in the Naxian school is simple, orderly, and effective. Drinking vessels bear metopes, as in Attic L G I. Closed shapes, as a rule, have metopes in the neck-panel, with ancillaries above and below them: there are often friezes round the shoulder, and sometimes round the belly as well: the remainder of the body is striped. When the stripes are fine and thin, we may suspect Corinthian influence: otherwise, the strongest affinities of the ornament are with Attica. Even at the end of Geometric, the metope system is never weakened, as in Attic L G I I, by excessive padding or reduction in size; the only sign of laxity is seen on the drinking vessels, where the vertical dividing lines tend to exceed the usual three, and leave no room for triglyph motifs. Metopes are most frequently occupied by marshbirds, or hatched hourglasses with a horizontal line through the middle (pI. 36c). The birds conform to the Attic LG type, but the normal hatching (pI. 36e) is sometimes abandoned in favour ofa single line running horizontally along the centre of the body (pI. 36c). The hour-glass ornament is peculiar to Naxos, and may be derived from the double axes in the Cesnola Painter's horse-panels. Quatrefoils are occasionally found, as well as their rectilinear counterpart, the St Andrew's cross (Bb ID): near the end of Geometric, calyx leaves are suggested by triangles set between the petals, with their apices pointing outwards (Bb 4, 57; Be 4) : this is the first step towards the more elaborate blooms of Early Orientalizing." Continuous motifs are mainly chosen from the Attic L G I stock. Tangential blobs are no less popular on the plainer vases than in the workshop ofthe Cesnola Painter: often they become vertically elongated, with wavy tangents. This version finally degenerates into a widely spaced billet, without tangents, but touching the bands above and below - a common motifat the end of Geometric (Bb 3, 14, 15, 18, 2g), just surviving into Early Orientalizing.s A broad zigzag with filled apices (pl. 36e) resembles an Attic EG ornament, but this resemblance may be fortuitious, in view of the discrepancy in time: here the vacant spaces are regularly filled by dotted circles. Shoulders often bear serpents in silhouette, with the same filling ornament between their coils. Two other motifs arrive near the end of Geometric, and span the transition to Orientalizing: horizontal S's (Bb 3, 4, 21, 22) and 1
3
Cf P AE 1911, 118, figs. 7-8; Munich 6185, C VA 3, pl. 117, 11-12. Delos xv u, Ba I. 4 DiloSXVII, Ba 10.
2
Bb 38-50; Bb 52, 55-9; Bb 41, pi. 36c,
176 .
cable (Bb 28, 30). Filling ornament is usually light, and confined to dot rosettes, dotted circles, stars, and swastikas: the group of four lozenges, a common ornament in Naxian Orientalizing, is first found on the L G hydria, Be 2. The original inspiration of the Naxian school came from Attic LG I: the Attic flavour is particularly strong in the monumental vases of the Cesnola Painter, datable in Attic terms to the close ofLG I. Thereafter the Naxians were less open to foreign ideas, but continued to develop the Attic L G I manner to their own taste. The linear motifs never became cursive, as in the L G I I stage ofAttica, nor was there any relaxation ofarchitectonic discipline. In short, the Naxians were attracted by the most orderly elements in the Attic style, and held to them with dogged persistence. THE 'PARIAN' SCHOOL The bulk of 'Parian' LG comes from Delos and Rheneia, and was classed by Dugas and Rhomaios in Delos xv under the general heading A. The clay contains golden mica, and varies in colour from orange (often ofa deep tone) to brown: unlike Naxian, it is not covered with a cream slip, but sometimes bears a thin wash diluted from the clay used for the vase.' PAROS
Delion: Rubensohn, Delion 85-100, 'Nesiotische Gattung', most ofpis. 14- 17; pl. 18, 1-5· Acropolis: AM 42 (1917), 73fT., figs. 85-6,9 1,97.
l-g;
Ae 1-3,30,37-9,43,5 2, 54, 55, 58-63, 65-89;
THERA
Sellada: Thera I1, fig. 84, 87; 198fT., 'Bootische Amphoren'. Messavouno: AM 28 (1903), 183, amphorae J 1-19; kraters J 3 1-4. J 16, pI. 37 d .
J
26-30; drinking vessels
Except for J 16-19, all the amphorae quoted here are Subgeometric or Early Orientalizing. For full list see I. Strem, Acta Arch. (Copenhagen) 1962,222-3. SIPHNOS
BSA 44 (1949), pl. 12,9, 13, 16,25,27; pl. 13, 1-3, 13-20; pl. 14, 1-6,8,36-7; pl. 15, 1-2. Frs. only. AEGINA
Kraiker, Aigina, nos. 90 (=AM 22,270, fig. 4), 93-6 (MG ?). Frs. AL MINA
JHS60 (1940), rff., figs. r m, 3n. Frs. 1
On the fabric see Rubensohn, Delion 85.
177
The home of this school, as we have seen above, remains an open question. Iffabric were the only criterion, there would be little to choose between the claims of Paros, Siphnos, and Tenos (p. 172); but the style of vases actually found on those islands must be considered. Tenos is hardly known to us in this period, except as a centre for relief pithoi: her claims cannot fairly be assessed until she yields more painted LG pottery,' but she could well be the source of the M G vases from Rheneia and Delos, to judge from her ceramic record in the earlier phases of Geometric. Buschor's plea for Paros rested largely on the decoration of sherds founds on that island, whose dotted patterns linked them to the Delos Ab class: but the discovery ofidentical material on Siphnos - an island still noted for a flourishing pottery industry - has somewhat weakened his case. Geography, however, favours Paros, well placed for supplying Delos, and not impossibly remote from customers on Thera, who imported heavy 'Parian' cremation urns: the absence ofthese urns on Paros need not surprise us unduly, since no Geometric cemetery has yet been found there. Further evidence in favour of Paros comes from the Parian colony on Thasos, where the earliest local wares are in the 'Parian' tradition (p. 179, n. 13). On the whole, then, the Parian hypothesis is the most plausible in our present state of knowledge. The stylistic development within the 'Parian' school is reasonably logical and clear: as elsewhere in the Cyclades, Attic influence is strong at first, but becomes progressively weaker, and has virtually vanished by the end of Geometric. Let us first consider a group of large vases, illustrating the 'Parian' style at a stage when it isjust beginning to part company with Attic.
Delos X V, Ac
DELOS AND RHENEIA
Dilos XV, Aa 1-42,56; Ab, all; Ac M 1-6. PI. 37a-c,e; pI. 38a-j.
THE 'PARIAN' SCHOOL·
LG
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
I-of,
and their affinities
This small but homogeneous group, probably from a single workshop, consists ofa spouted krater on a low ribbed pedestal (Ac I, pI. 37e) and the fragments of three monumental amphorae, of which two (Ac 2, 4) are clearly of the belly-handled type that reached its climax in the Dipylon grave-markers. A few comparisons with Attic will yield a relative date for these vases. Spouted kraters make their first appearance in the Hirschfeld Workshop (LG Ib), and the nearest Attic parallel to our piece is Athens 190,2 with which there are many points ofresemblance in shape and decoration: this piece belongs to the transition between L G I and I I. The amphorae Ac 2-4 are not so intimately related to any single Attic counterpart, but several features in their decoration suggest a similar date on independent grounds, quite apart from their resemblance to Ac I. The kneeling goats of Ac 2 are clumsy imitations ofthe Dipylon Master's type, as seen on the bowls that are among the later output ofhis workshop (p. 33, nos. 42-4) ; for the checked lozenge encased in a hatched frame, in the centre of the reverse panel, cr. the bowl, pI. 109, from Kerameikos Gr. 71 (L Gib); hooked swastikas (p. 66) and loose sigmas (p. 56) are both characteristic of L G I I a; the use of check as filling ornament is found in the transitional years between L G I 1 In the local museum I have seen only one LG vase: A 1488, from Kardiani. Its fabric - orange clay with golden mica, brownblack streaky glaze - is consistent with the MG vases from the same site (p. 166), except that the glaze is thinner and more hastily applied. It is a fragmentary closed vase with an ovoid body - perhaps an amphora - preserved up to its widest diameter, round which there are traces ofa mewpe band containing a bird and a quatrefoil (for style cf. K. v. I, pI. 97, 326); below the metopes, a narrow zone of tangential blobs; lower body glazed down to the foot. 2 Collignon-Couve, pl. 12,218; detail, A M 69-70 (1954-5), Beil. 18.
178 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
and II (p. 52, n. I). The two-tiered lozenge net (Ac 3) may be earlier than its first appearance in Attica, where it occurs in a looser form (L G I I b: p. 57). Too little figured drawing survives in this group to allow us to assess its character, or its relation to contemporary work in other island schools. It seems clear, however, that the stiff goats of Ac 2 foreshadow those of the Early Orientalizing Ad category, which there is no reason to dissociate from the 'Parian' school.' It is more relevant to our present quest to note the rise of a typically 'Parian' repertoire of small motifs, consisting of floating sigmas (more widely spaced than in Attic), floating billet (Ac 1,4), and thick wavy line (Ac I, 3); nearer the end ofGeometric, these three are joined by a fourth characteristic ornament, the horizontal S's (Ac 5, 7: Thera J 16, pI. 37d). On large surfaces, as in this group, they are drawn with a thick brush, and have an overblown look: as we shall see, all four are to play a vital part in the decoration of humbler vases, once the 'Parian' potters have emancipated themselves from the Attic manner. The excessive size of these minor motifs is one of the chief weaknesses in the architecture oflarge 'Parian' vases: in this respect, the amphora Ac 2, the most ambitious work of this school, invites comparison with the Naxian Cesnola krater, which is slightly, if at all, earlier. The Naxian design, closer to Attic principles, is both more complex and more coherent: the size of the various units is subtly graded, so that our eyes are immediately attracted to the main figured scenes. The 'Parian' Painter, on the other hand, has taken a simpler design, suited to a much smaller vase (i.e. the three-metope scheme of Cycladic M G amphorae - see above, p. 168) and enlarged it to an enormous size in order to fill his surface. The result is far less harmonious: the design of the handle zone is heavy, and depressing to the eye, largely because the usual triglyph motifs have been left out: hence the huge metopes, which should dominate the design, merely choke each other." Similarly, the goats below the handle zone are swamped by the minor linear ornament in the lowest zones, which have been enlarged to the same size. The contrast between these two monumental pieces reminds us once again ofan important principle in the decoration ofGeometric vases: that the largest surfaces are most effectively covered by multiplying the number, rather than by increasing the size, of the units of decoration. At all events, these huge 'Parian' grave-markers enjoyed only a passing fashion, which hardly outlasted their disappearance in Attica: the later funerary amphorae were more modest in size, and hence offered a more suitable field for the simple architectonic schemes favoured by the local potters.
LG
THE 'PARIAN' SCHOOL·
any Attic example.' The neck-handled amphora has some affinity with the plump Attic LG 11 type (p. 85), but the neck is usually taller.s The shoulder-handled amphora is a local variety, whose earliest version may have had its handles vertical, as Ab 8. 3 All three shapes survive into 'Parian' Orientalizing, with richer decoration and in slightly attenuated form. The later career of the shoulder-handled amphora can' be most conveniently followed among the exports to Thera. A class distinguished by Pfuhl.s which is approximately contemporary with Delos Ab 1-3 and 7, leads to a more ovoid type with a broader neck, and handles set at a lower angle: the example illustrated here- belongs to the very end ofGeometric, when a stemmed foot was beginning to come into fashion ;" with few exceptions," this high foot persists throughout the Orientalizing series. Likewise the other two shapes have their Orientalizing successors in the neck-handled amphorae and the hydriai of the Ad group, although the hydria also continues in a plainer form," as is only natural for a shape whose primary purpose is domestic. A fourth closed shape, decorated in the 'Parian' manner, is represented by only one example - a lekythos with a slim ovoid body, a plastic ring on the neck, and a heavy and widely flaring mouth." The plastic ring is an Oriental feature; the lekythos may be a Hellenized version ofthe red-slipped Phoenician flasks which were beginning to penetrate into the :'-eg~an at th~s time.l".In the Greek world, the nearest parallels for this 'Parian' shape are the Praisos type lekythoi of Crete (p. 250) and the ovoid lekythoi - without neck ring - from ~ithecusae and Cumae which are probably Euboean imports (p. 19I, pI. 41 f) ; all three versrons may be collateral descendants of the same Oriental original. There is a great abundance of skyphoi and kantharoi (pI. 38a-g), modelled after the Attic L G I types with vertical lips and round shoulders. These are succeeded by a later class of skyphoi, where the handles are almost horizontal, the body profile straighter, and the lip sharply ?ffset at about fo~ty-five degrees, overhanging the bodyt-! these must be postGeometnc, because of their resemblance to the profiles of the Early Orientalizing Ad group's a~d. because of their occurrence in North Aegean contexts.w Kraters apparently follow a similar development ~fshape, from the Atticizing spouted example Ac I (pI. 37e) through the very late Geometnc fragment from Paros-s to Thera J 26 which is Early Orientalizing. Finally, the plates. Attic models, probably not later than L G I I a, inspired the main rO~p;l5 a later. stage is indicated by an unpublished fragment from Paros, with typically Pariandecoration.»
Plainer vases SHAPES
Among the Delian finds, three closed forms bear simple decoration of a typically 'Parian' character: the hydria, the neck-handled amphora (both Aa), and the amphora with horizontal handles set at a high angle on the shoulder (Ab 1-3, 7). All are extremely plump, in contrast to the slim forms favoured by the Naxian school (p. 174). The hydriai are also fatter than 1 Forotherlinks between Ac and Ad, see Brock, BSA 44 (1949), 79, n. 89: apart from Ad 6 (Atticizing LG 11 work) and Ad 7, the whole category seems to be the work of a single and highly individualistic painter. 2 Contrast the more skilful handling of a similar design on an Attic amphora, Athens 8°5, AJA 44 (1940), pl. 25.
179
1 Cf. Hesperia 30 (1961), pI. 4, row 2. 2 Ad 6, however, is a close imitation of the Attic type. 3 In Euboean LG, cr. pI. 41 d from Pithecusae. 'AM 28 (1903), 187, J 14-17 + Munich, Sieveking-Hackl, no. 456: J 16, pI. 37d; see also Brock, BSA 44 (1949), 74 ff. 5 PI. 37£, from Thera, in the collection of the British School at Athens.JHS 22 (1902), 74ff., fig. 3. a Thera 11, figs. 398,401; AM 28, J I. 1 AM 28, J 11; Theta 11, fig. 407; Delos xv, Ab 19. 8 Delos XVII, pI. 344ff. 9 Delos X, pI. 10,38. 10Cf. Johansen, Exochi 17, A 16; 161-4. 11 E.g. Delos XV, Ae 57, 64; Delos x, pI. 55, 665-8; DelosXVII, pI. 68, Lin. 20. 13 Delos xv, pI. 27, Ad 12; AM6g-70 (1954-5), Beil. 56--8. 13 Etudesthasiennes VII, 55ff., pis. 20-1; Kalamitsa, near Kavalla, P AE 1935, 40, fig. 8. 14 A M 4 2,77, fig. 86 . 15 M 1--6: pi. 38h,j; cf. AD 6 (1920-1), Parartema 134, fig. 4, from Spata, Gr. 2. 16 British School at Athens, sherd collection: zones of interrupted zigzag (as on pI. 37e) and broken cable.
180 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
DECORATION
Drinking vessels supply the earliest stage in 'Parian' L G decoration, in which Attic designs are still faithfully imitated. The M G system, with a single central design, survives in the elongated pair of meander hooks (pI. 38a-b); even in Attica, this scheme lasts far into LG 1.1 Metopes follow soon afterwards, in which marshbirds and quatrefoils are introduced. One of the earliest 'Parian' metope vases can hardly be told apart from its Attic LG Ib original ;" even where the imitations are looser, the local skyphoi and kantharoi are closer in detail to Attic than are their Naxian counterparts. The resemblance persists into Attic LG Ha (pl, 38e),3 but by this time the 'Parian' school has begun to develop a more individual manner of decoration, whose essential elements we have already seen on the monumental vases Ac 1-4 (pp. 177-8). Briefly, this 'Parian' manner is formed by placing minor ornament in the fields normally reserved for more substantial motifs. Thus, in the metopes of the drinking vessels, the hatched designs of the Attic repertoire are now replaced by a dense mass of dots, dashes, and sigmas (pI. 38c,f), drawn with a multiple brush. The same mixture is repeated on some of the closed vases,' but as a rule the flimsy ornament is more widely spaced: sigmas and quartered lozenges float in a wide field, supported by wavy lines or broken cables, vertical or horizontal (pI. 37 b-e); zigzags and lozenge chains are rendered down into dotted patterns ;" all the ornament is light, airy, and insubstantial. As Attic influence wanes, circle motifs come back into fashion. On the shoulders of some hydriai (pI. 37a) the standing semicircles may even represent a continuous tradition surviving from the latest Sub P G vases," and are difficult to date." More typically 'Parian' is the use in metopes ofa single thick circle, containing four or eight spokes, with dots or chevrons in the corner spaces - a loose adaptation of the scheme on M G belly-handled amphorae (p. 168). The nucleus ofthis Wheel Group, as R. M. Cook has aptly named it," is formed by the shoulder-handled amphorae Ab 1-7; to these we may add the amphorae Thera J 16 and 17, the skyphoi Ae 59 and 69, the kantharoi Ae 77 and Thera J 33, and the krater fragment Ab I I. The wheels have a short life: very near the transition to Orientalizing, we learn from the series of amphorae that they tend to be supplanted by concentric circles." The Wheel Group thus belongs to a definite stage in the development of,Parian' decoration, later than the passing ofAttic influence, but earlier than the rise ofa local Orientalizing style: in short, it is contemporary with Attic LG 11, and later than the group Ac 1-4. For the epitome of 'Parian' Late Geometric at its ripest, we should turn once again to the amphora Thera J 16 (pI. 37d) : here the 'wheel' scheme is combined with all four of the most typical minor motifs - floating sigmas, floating billets, broken cables, and, wavy lines. Contexts: Kerameikos, Gr. 9, 26; Agora, Gr. 17. 2 Cf. pI. IOC, from Kerameikos, Gr. 24, with Ae 87. Cf. Hesperia 30 (1961), pI. 19,022. • Delos xv, Ab 8; AM 22, 1897,27°, fig. 4; Thera, AM 28, 187--8,] 18. s Aa 12-13, Ab 1,3; Thera ] 17. • The earliest is Aa 27: for the loose sets of intersecting semicircles, cf. the skyphoi from AI Mina,] H S 60 (1940), fig. I a-k. The other six, apart from their semicircles, are similar in all other respects to those with light 'Parian' ornament, and need not be any earlier. • High dates have sometimes been proposed (Kondoleon, AE 1945-7, 6), but we should remember that even in Attica the hydria is notorious for its archaizing habits (Brann, Hesperia 30 (1961), on N 6). 8 GPP 106. 9 PI. 37f, BSA: AM 28, Thera ] 9-10; latest wheel, Thera ] 8. 1
3
LG
THE 'PARIAN' SCHOOL·
181
The general effect is much looser than in the latest stage ofNaxian Geometric. The Naxians retained the closely-knit Attic system, albeit in a diluted form; the potters of the 'Parian' school, on the contrary, broke away from Attica altogether, and began to move towards the 'draughty' style that Payne saw in the mature works of ,Parian' Orientalizing.! THE MELIAN SCHOOL A third school of Cycladic L G has its home in the southwestern islands. The great mass of the material comes from cemeteries on Melos and Kimolos: in addition, a few related vases have been found on Siphnos and Thera. Since Melos has apparently produced so many of the more ambitious works, we may assume that she was also the main centre ofproduction. The Geometric cemetery ofMelos has been known and explored since the early nineteenth century, when Melian Geometric vases began to flow into the museums ofEurope. Only in a few cases was the Melian provenance recorded,e but these form a reliable nucleus round which many other vases, comparable in style and fabric, may be grouped." The clay ofMelos is a shade darker than Attic, varying from deep buff to reddish-brown according to the firing conditions. The most characteristic impurities are silver mica, and black grit, presumably of volcanic origin. 4 On the neighbouring island of Kimolos over two hundred vases of this school were recovered from twenty rock-cut tombs at Hellenika, on the southwest shore of the island facing Melos.s A few of the earliest vases are MG (p. 167), but most are ofLG character, without the slightest hint ofan Orientalizing style to come. From outside the Cyclades there are two Corinthian LG kotylai of the earliest type, with panels of vertical chevron (cr. pl, Igj); unfortunately, these cannot throw any clear light on the relative chronology of the Melian school, since each tomb contained several cremation burials as in Thera and Crete. Nevertheless, the Kimolos vases offer valuable complementary evidence on the Melian repertoire. It is not yet clear whether Kimolos imported from Melos, or had a ceramic industry of her own. Only a close study of fabric can decide the problem, since there is no consistent difference of style between the two islands. At first sight, the clay of the Kimolos vases - a soft gingery brown - seems to differ from Melian, but the same impurities are found. The difference in texture and colour may perhaps be explained by the humid atmosphere in which the vases were found, so near to the sea. A few fragments found on Siphnos, all from drinking vessels, repeat common formulae of the Melian school," but there is no reason to think that they must be Melian imports: they suggest no more than that Siphnos lay on the boundary between the 'Parian' and Melian spheres of ceramic influence. The case is different on Thera, where the local fabric is so individual that imports are easily distinguished: among them are several vases in the ]HS 46 (1926), 205. • E.g. CVA Sevres, pI. II, nos. 9, II-14; several vases in Athens and London. Cf. Buschor, AM 54 (1929), 160--1. • These observations are based on the sherds from Melos in the British School at Athens. s BCH 78 (1954),146, figs. 41-4. These await publication by their excavator, Professor N. Kondoleon, through whose kindness I am permitted to refer to this important collection. • BSA 44 (1949), pI. 14,8. 15,17,24. 1
3
182 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
Melian idiom which are probably Melian imports.' Finally, mention should be made ofsix small Melian vases in Chalcis" ofunknown provenance: it is not clear whether they reached Euboea in ancient or modern times." The salient features of the Melian school are most easily seen in the output ofits leading workshop, for which an amphora and a krater in Leiden (pl, 39h,j) supply the nucleus. After considering these vases and their affinities, we shall pass on to the supplementary evidence offered by the smaller and plainer shapes. The Rottiers Painter and Workshop NOTE Named after Colonel B. E. A. Rottiers, who in 1826 presented I and 4 to the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden at Leiden. Information kindly supplied by J. H. C. Kern.
(i) By the Rottiers Painter I. Pedestalled krater, Leiden RO I I I, 84, perhaps from Melos. Brants, pI. 8, 56. PI. 39j. 2. Stand, London 37.10-18.2. Unpublished. 3. Stand, Paris A 491. Pottier t, pI. 19· PI. 39 d. 4. Belly-handled amphora, Leiden RO I I I, 68. Brants, pl. 8, 55. From the same grave as I (information kindly supplied by J. H. C. Kern). PI. 39b. 5. Pedestalled krater, Sevres 1419.2, from Melos. CVA, pI. 12, 1-3. 6. Pedestalled krater, Athens 841, from Melos. JdI 14 (1899), 34, fig. 11; CollignonCouve, pl. 12,219. 7. Stand, London 37. 10-18.1. PI. 39 a-c. 8. Stand, London 65.7-26. I. Unpublished. 9. Stand, Cabinet de Medailles 44. C VA I, pl. 6, 4-6· 10. Belly-handled amphora, Stockholm 2116. Bielefeld, AA 1962, 103, fig. 20. I I. Low-footed krater, Moscow 3001. Blavatsky, Imestia Gosudarstoennoy Akademii Historii Materialnoy Kultury 5 (1927), 114-23, pI. 15· 12. Low-footed krater, Paris CA 2946. Villard, Vases grecs (1926), pI. 3. 13. Stand, Amsterdam 1230, from Melos. CVA Scheurleer I, 11£, pI. 1,2. 14. Stand, Wiirzburg U.1.153, 'from the Piraeus'. Langlotz, pI. 4, 78. (ii) Workshop 15. Stand, Athens 172, 'from the Kerameikos'. Collignon-Couve, pI. 14,267. { 16. Stand, Paris A 490. Pottier I, pI. 19. 17. Stand, Berlin F 52, from Melos. Annali 1872, pI. K, 12; Neugebauer 10: 1 CVA Sevres, pl. 6, 2, 5-6; Thera n, fig. 377; skyphos, pI. 39£ (H. 0·083m., D. of rim o· 1I8m.), perhaps AM 28 (1903), A 1I7dark red clay with black grit, and black semi-lustrous glaze. 2 Inv. nos. 381, plate like Theta rr, fig. 377; 395, kalathos; 396, cup; 397, tall-rimmed skyphos (cf. Buschor, AM 54,161); 398, amphoriskos; an unnumbered skyphos as pI. 39£. a Other Melian vases have even more surprising provenances, furnished by dealers: (a) Berlin 30070, oinochoe, BSA 47 (195 2), pl, 33, 'Klazomenai': see Schweitzer, A M 43 (1918),84, n. 2; (b) London, amphoriskos 55. I 2-20. I, pI. 341; and skyphos, 55.12-20.2, as pI. 39£ but with a row of dots in the panel; both 'dug out of the tombs under the Acropolis at Athens' ; (c) Athens 172, stand, ColligTWn-Couve, no. 267, 'Kerameikos'; (d) Wiirzburg, stand, Langlotz; no. 78, 'Piraeus',
THE MELIAN SCHOOL: THE ROTTIERS WORKSHOP·
LG
18. Oinochoe, Berlin 30070, 'from Klazomenai'. B SA 47 (1952), pI. 33; Neugebauer 19. Krater fr., British School at Athens, from Melos. PI. 39g.
183 10.
SHAPES
Nearly all the ripest works of this school can be attributed to a single workshop, dominated by a painter with a quaint animal style. The belly-handled amphorae follow on after the M G series, for which Melos was the main centre in the Cyclades: the wide neck of 10 indicates a local development, parallel to that followed in the Theran school (p. 186; pI. 40d). The kraters are related to the Attic Type I I, but have a local peculiarity in the four metal-like bosses on the rim near the handlesr- the ribbed pedestal survives on I, 5, and 6,2 but is abandoned on I I and 12 in favour of a low ring foot. The most individual shape in the Melian repertoire is the fenestrated stand. All examples have the broad neck of the Attic tripod stand in its L G I stage;" and all except 2 share the tall and wide feet ofthe Attic prototype. The essential peculiarity of the Melian version lies in the more elaborate manner of bracing between the feet: instead of the simple struts favoured by most Attic potters, fenestration is here used from the start, with two windows between each foot. Sometimes, when the feet are tall, the lower part ofthe intervening space is spanned by two sausages of clay, bent to meet each other in the form of an X (3, 7). But in spite of these eccentricities, 2 and 3 are still recognizable as tripods. Later, when a continuous horizontal ring bisects the tall feet (7-9), the memory ofthe metal original seems to be fading. Later still (14, 16-17), all pretence ofimitating a tripod is abandoned: the stands now rest on four or five feet, and when we reach the Subgeometric stage,' the feet have been replaced by a continuous ring at the base." DECORATION
The choice and arrangement of the ornament owe much to Attic precedent. Here, as in Naxian, Kerameikos 12556 supplies the model for the design on the local kraters. The composition has been greatly simplified - more so than in Naxian - but the essentials are still there: a central area divided horizontally into two main friezes, flanked by two metopes at either side. Except on I I only the metopes contain figured drawing. The linear ornament is all borrowed from the common stock ofAttic L G I: one metopal motif, the 'sunburst' (2-3, 10), occurs nowhere else outside Attica. Two Melian mannerisms should be mentioned: the tall and spiky zigzag, inherited from the local M G (p. 170), and the quatrefoil in double outline (8-g, 11), whose petals sometimes radiate from a central dotted circle (12, 15). In the figured metopes, filling ornament is restricted to stars only. The animals of this workshop have a fragile and youthful look: reserved eyes, oval and cr.CGA 137 for Argive parallels. 2 Of which only I is free from injudicious restoration. a Cf. K. v, I, pI. 69, 340. Sevres 2032 and 1495.8, CVA, pl. 1I, 1I and 14; Athens 239, unpublished. 5 My account of the Melian stands differs from that ofH. R. W. Smith (CVA California 10), who reasonably compares the Sub. geometric Athens 239 with a Minoan clay tower from Gournia; and then, with less reason, sees all the non-Attic stands as house models, and argues for a development in the islands entirely independent of Attica, with fenestration as the salient feature. For an earlier example offenestration in Attica, see the stand frs. in Athens and Toronto (Cambitoglou, A]A 64 (1960),366-7, pI. 109), which I place in MG 11 (p. 26). 6 K. v, I, pI. 23. 1
4
184 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
inquiring. Kneeling stags, with birds perched on their backs, are the painter's own fancy (7, 12). His other quadrupeds - horses and goats - owe much to the Athenian Hirschfeld Workshop: we need but compare the horses of7 with those on Copenhagen 726/ and the goats ofg with those under the bier ofNew York 14.130.14.2 The painter's birds form a revealing series. The earliest (1-3) follow the common Attic type, and have no individuality. Then a fan tail appears (4), which at once (5-8) merges into the body, so that for a time the upper and lower contours are concave. Finally, the body outlines are straightened, so that the tail appears to have been chopped off (12-14). This debased creature frequently appears on the smaller vases of Melos and Kimolos, and has been noted as typical of the Melian style." An assistant ofthe painter had begun to draw these birds in silhouette (15-16) before their contours had finally hardened into straight lines (17): the greeting pairs (15, 17) are found again on a fine krater from Kimolos, Tomb 5. Human figures do not seem to have entered the repertoire of this workshop until a very late stage, to judge from the extremely debased birds which accompany the strange manikins on the oinochoe, 18. The grappling heraldic lions of 194 must be another late innovation. The juxtaposition of this Orientalizing subject with the carefully hatched meander argues a long life for this workshop: it may have continued in business at least until the close of Geometric in Attica, where heraldic lions appear only at the end ofLG II (p. 59, no. 31). Ifwe allow the Rottiers Painter a slight overlap with the Hirschfeld Painter, who so clearly influenced his animal style, then the activity ofthis workshop will have lasted from the later years ofLG Ib until the end ofLG llb, in terms of the Attic sequence.
Plainer vases SHAPES
The plump and broad-necked oinochoe from Berlin (p. 183, no. 18) may be taken as typical of the Melian school; other examples, I) decorated with vertical wavy lines, belong to an equally late stage. Small vertical-handled amphoriskoi still survive, with very tall rims.s Small hydriai, with poorly articulated necks, are fairly popular.' Athens 132,8 a more pleasing variant, with handle to rim, is decorated with two characteristically Melian birds: one, on the neck, is hatched and curtailed; the other, between the mastoi on the shoulder, is more carefully drawn, and still preserves the traces of a tail. Mugs, too, are common: those found on Thera" are probably ofMelian origin, and many others came from the Kimolos cemetery. Of the drinking vessels, skyphoi and glazed cups are plentiful. The skyphos (pI. 39 g) remains close to the normal Attic L G I type, with offset vertical lip ; larger skyphoi, numerous throughout the Cyclades since M G times, are still made.t? Melos was the only centre outside Attica to imitate the Attic high-rimmed bowl (pI. 3ge).n Kantharoi are rare, but two isolated 1 CVA 2, pI. 72,4. 2 Davison, fig. 26. 3 Schweitzer, AM 43 (1918),84, n, 2. • For the pose, cf. the bronze tripod leg from Olympia, Ohly, Griechische Goldbleche, pI. 28. 5 Athens 820; Kimolos, Tomb 4. • Athens 153 and 881; many on Kimolos. 7 Sevres 1495.5, CVA, pI. 11, nos. 12-13; Athens 133,JdI 15 (19°0),54, fig. 120; several others on Kimolos, 8 JdI 15, 54, fig. 119. • Thera 11, figs. 236, 512-13. 10 Kimolos cemetery. 11 Also Sevres 3°85.3, CVA, pI. 6, 5; Cabinet de Medailles 59, CVA I, pI. 32, 6-7.
LG
THE MELIAN SCHOOL'
185
pieces deserve attention: Athens 879,1 a comparatively early form with a quaint file of cranes in silhouette, and a Subgeometric high-footed piece from Kimolos" whose style has little connection with the Melian school; possibly an import from another Cycladic centre," Finally, the plates conform to the Attic type with reflex handles; only their decoration is individual. DECORATION
On minor vases the ornament is generally applied in thin strokes: the execution is careless, and the multiple brush is not always exploited to the full (pl. 39 e). As in the later stages of MG, there is a preference for narrow motifs; full meanders, and metope designs of Attic derivation, are rarely applied to small surfaces. Indeed, there is some reluctance to admit the metope system at all: many skyphoi and amphoriskoi still keep to the M G arrangement, where a single narrow panel is framed by horizontal and vertical lines. These panels often cont~in dots,' v:rtical dashes (pl, 39f), or tall, spiky zigzags (pl, 39 e) ; later, perhaps come vertical wavy hnes and, less frequently, rows of double circles." When the panel is broken up, the orthodox Attic metope system is occasionally used" and here t~e typical t~il-less bi.rds are sometimes found. More often the field is divided by groups ofvertical wavy hnes, while the spaces between are filled with short vertical dashes either in several horizontal rows (cf. pl. 38c,f) or in a single diagonal row.? Skyphoi of this kind have a Subgeometric look, and may well be later than their shape would suggest. The Attic formula for the decoration ofplates, which was faithfully copied in the 'Parian' sc~ool (pI. ~8h-j), reache.s Melos in a garbled form," The base is still occupied by a quatrefoil, usually III double outline; but the outer row ofleaves has been reduced to a minor motif. The plate from the Fogg Museum stands at the end of the LG series: Delos xv, Af8, which is probably Melian, supplies the Subgeometric stage. .The Melians evolved a simple a~d naive L G style, reasonably accomplished when apphed to large vases, but rather squalid on a small scale. At first the influence ofAttic L G I is paramount, especially on the earlier works ofthe Rottiers Painter; this influence, however, reaches Melos in a more diluted form than it took in the Naxian or 'Parian' schools. Subseq~ently the local style, cut offfrom external contacts, degenerated into a dull Subgeometric, WIthout any movement towards Orientalizing habits. This debased fabric may well have outlasted the end of Geometric in the more progressive schools of the central Cyclades. THE THERAN SCHOOL The Geometric vases made in Thera form a homogeneous body of material in both fabric and style. The clay of this volcanic island is ofa purplish red colour, studded with particles of JdI 15 (1900),54, fig. 117. 2 AM6g-70 (1954-5),156, BeiI. 58. Cf. Delos xv, pI. 51, the plate no. 4 ofthe class 'Origine Indeterminee'. The two superimposed birds might suggest Cretan influence, but the shape is without parallel. 4 London 55.12-20.2. 5 Kimolos cemetery. 6 Boston 12.777, Fairbanks, pI. 17,226. 7 Sevres 1495.4, C VA, pI. 1 I, 9; others from Kimolos, 8 Thera ti, fig. 377; CVA Fogg Museum, pI. 3, 2; Chalcis gdr, p. 182,n. 2; four more on Kimolos. 1
3
187
186 • CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
LG
black, white, purple, and red lava. Unlike the other three Cycladic fabrics, Theran possesses no mica: it also differs from Melian in containing a higher proportion of volcanic matter. Theran clay is more suitable for large cremation urns than for drinking vessels: yet the earliest decorated vases in the local fabric are the skyphoi in the M G style (pl. 34 c) apparently the first painted pots to be made on the island since the volcanic upheaval ofthe fifteenth century B.C. Here the ornament is directly applied to the dark and lumpy surface of the clay: but from L G times onwards, the Therans preferred to use a thick cream slip, to provide a lighter and smoother ground for the decoration. Practically all the local material comes from the two rock-cut cemeteries of ancient Thera, excavated by Baron Hiller von Gartringen. One is situated on the flank of the Acropolis (Messavouno); the other, on the saddle (Sellada) connecting the Acropolis with the mountain ofProphetes Elias. The finds were carefully published by Pfuhl! and Dragendorffs respectively. Like their Dorian kinsmen in Kimolos and Crete, the Therans were usually cremated in family tombs, where the offerings at individual burials cannot be distinguished with complete certainty except where the smaller vases were placed inside the cremation urn. However, thanks to the meticulous observation of the excavators, there are enough associations with Corinthian imports to give us a tentative chronology for the local style. Since Dugas's thorough analysis ofTheran pottery," very little new material has come to light: hence only a summary treatment is required here. We shall preserve Dugas's division into three chronological phases- which we might call Late Geometric, Subgeometric, and Restrained Orientalizing. Here we are concerned with only the first two phases.
development (pI. 40d), paralleled in Melian (p. 182, no. 10). The earliest Theran amphorae (pI. 40d)1 are almost as plump as the stamnoi, and their necks are broad to match. Later, the amphora settles down to a more elongated form- whose body becomes increasingly taut in the Subgeometric phase." Finally, in the Orientalizing stage, the body assumes a conicalor even a piriform" shape, while the orthodox handles are abandoned in favour of ornamental openwork from neck to shoulder, like some Orientalizing relief pithoi." There are, however, a few survivors of the plump type.' Miniature versions were also made." The other shapes may be briefly dismissed. A low-footed kratet" perpetuates the stirrup handle ofthe Attic Type I I, but its gaudy decoration belongs to the end ofthe Subgeometric phase. An ambitious local potter achieved a vast pyxis,t° modelled after the flat type ofAttic M G to L G I. Cups, skyphoi, and kantharoi were all made locally in L G, when great efforts were made to refine the island clay - perhaps under the stimulus ofthe imports which were pouring in from Corinth and elsewhere. The L G skyphos, pI. 40 b, has fine thin walls, and the volcanic impurities are only just visible to the naked eye. Later, however, the Therans gave up the unequal struggle, and were content to drink out of coarser glazed cups like A M 28, A 151-3. Similarly, fine decorated plates of the usual LG type (pI. 40c) were succeeded by coarser dishes on a flaring pedestal.P The only small shape to retain its ripe decoration into the Orientalizing phase is the openwork kalathos, which stands on a flaring foot. 12
SHAPES
1
Late Geometric SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Sellada, Tomb 64, cremation (a). Thera it, 50: stamnos, fig. 161, containing the drinking vessels, figs. 162-6. The other side ofthe skyphos, fig. 163, is shown here, pI. 40b . Messavouno, Gr. 91, northeast corner. AM 28 (1903), 77: stamnos, A 49, Beil. 7; cup, A. 136; imported EPC flat pyxis, K 67, pl. 20g. The grave is marked as an 'Einzelgrab', op. cit. pI. I.
(Late Geometric and Subgeometric)
The most important ofTheran shapes are the two types ofcremation urn, with and without neck: the handles are nearly always horizontal, and invariably placed on the shoulder (pI. 40a,d). Both types are suited to the prevailing burial rites: with their wide mouths and capacious bodies, they are perfectly designed to take not only the ashes ofthe dead, but the more personal of the gifts as well (drinking cups, unguent vases, etc.). The neckless urn, or stamnos, is thus the exact counterpart of the painted pithos in Crete (p. 233). At the beginning ofthe series, in the LG phase, both shapes are equally popular: later, the stamnos falls from favour," leaving the field to the necked amphora. The stamnos is always the plumper shape ofthe two. At first the body is well rounded, and the mouth relatively wide (pl. 40a). A little later, the profile becomes biconical, and the mouth is drawn in," The low incurving lip was evidently designed for a lid.? A universal feature of the local amphora is the broad flat lip, usually with a plastic ring immediately below: both these refinements were inherited from the Atticizing belly-handled amphora, which reached the island in some quantity;" the widening of the neck is a local A M 28, 1903, I If.: class A.
2
Theta I I.
3
La Ceramique desCyclades, Paris (1925), I 551f.
phase, because ofits strict LG metope scheme. Latest example, A M 28, A 48. 6 Thera n, figs. 351-2. 7 Thera n, 150; Leiden SVL 2, Brants, pI. 5, 8, with lid. AM 73 (1958), BeiI. 98, has a low inset lip.
DECORATION
We select three vases as typical of this phase: an amphora in Leiden (pI. 40d), a skyphos from Sellada Tomb 64 (pI. 40b), and a stamnos for another cremation in the same tomb (pI. 40a), almost identical with the urn which contained the skyphos. All three could have been painted by the same hand: taken together, they offer a comprehensive view ofa local L G style in the making. The decoration of cremation urns is nearly always confined to one side only," and never descends below the shoulder. The rest ofthe body is banded: the stamnoi, perhaps following the Cretan painted pithoi (cf. pI. 53a), usually have a dark ground, but the amphorae adopt the light-ground system from the start. A series of continuous zones covers the neck Also Thera rr, figs. 313-14. 3 AM 28, A 30. 3 PI. 4of, followed by Theta n, figs. 322-4. • Thera rr, pI. I, 1-2. Thera n, fig. 341. 6 J. Schafer, Reliefpitlwi 88. • Thera n, figs. 345, 326, Subgeometric; fig. 347, Orientalizing. 8 Thera n, fig. 344, nos. 40-2, LG; London 1950.11-12.1, BICS 12 (1965), 34ff., pI. 4, Orientalizing. • AM 28, A 84; AM 73 (1958), Beil. 99-100. 10 AM 28, A 60. 11 AM 28, A 161-3· 12 Series: Thera I I, figs. 363, 364, 495. 13 Exception: A M 73 (1958), pI. 98. 1
• op. cit. 16 I If.; I diverge from Dugas's sequence only in detaching the stamnos A 49 (A M 28, Beil. 7, 5) from the second to the first S
6
AM 28, HI 1-8.
THE THE RAN SCHOOL'
S
188 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
SUBG
ofthe amphora, but on both shapes the main ornament is concentrated between the handles in the best Geometric tradition. The design there is generally built up round a central meander; the two metopes at either side (pI. 40d) still recall the traditional formula for Cycladic L G kraters, which the Therans borrowed from Attica - perhaps at second hand, through Melos (cr. pI. 39i, p. 183). At a slightly later stage, as the amphorae grow taller and slimmer! the lateral metopes may be omitted, but the meander still occupies the centre. On drinking vessels, too, the meander still reigns supreme (pI. 40 b) : the Attic system ofsquare metopes is once used on a stamnos- but never, strangely enough, on small vases. The L G motifs ofThera are predominantly rectilinear, apart from quatrefoils, tangential circles, and birds with drooping tails. Several features in the decoration are foreign to Attic, and we must look elsewhere in the Aegean for their origin. Corinth is the source ofthe dotted lozenge nets" and zigzags with bars on the apices.- but the cross-hatching oflozenge nets (pI. 40a-b,d), hour-glasses," and birds" is paralleled in the East Greek world, where we also find the columns of cross-hatched lozenges with hooks attached," Attic LG, however, remains the strongest external influence on the Theran school, both in the choice and in the marshalling of ornament. A clue to the relative chronology is furnished by Messavouno Gr. 91, where the stamnos A 49 is accompanied by the imported Corinthian pyxis, pl. 20 g; this is datable to the opening of E P C (p. 107) or, in Attic terms the middle of L G I I (p. 11 I). If we take Theran L G as a somewhat retarded style contemporary with Attic LG I I we shall not be far wrong.
Subgeometric SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Messavouno, Tomb II3, child burials. AM 28 (1903),98: amphora All, Beil, 1,2; 'small Protocorinthian skyphos', not described or illustrated; Protocorinthian 'lekythos' (aryballos), K 55, not illustrated, but in the context 'der jungerer form' (op. cit. 196-7) implies ovoid; base of glass vessel, W I. Sellada, Gr. 84, single cremation. Thera 11, s8-g: amphora, fig. 199, containing four small vases, figs. 200-3. Figs. 200-1 are imports, perhaps Cretan (op. cit. 178). During this phase the Theran amphora reaches its acme. A fine series, culminating in pI. 40e8 brings the local style to fruition. The chief novelty is the sudden intrusion of a heavy circle metope in the middle of the main panel, usually enclosing an octofoil and surrounded by a dotted border: this forms a more effective focal point than the small meanders of the preceding phase. Subsidiary motifs are piled up in panels and metopes either side. After pI. 40 e, no further elaboration is possible without endangering the clarity ofthe design. On subsequent pieces, where the circle metopes are increased to two, and then three, the style becomes fussy and over-ripe. In three cases" the vertical partitions are replaced by a A M 28, A 30; Cabinet de Medailles 21; CVA, pI. I, 7. 2 A M 28, A 49. 3 Dugas, op. cit. fig. 10Ih. op.cit, fig. 101C. 6 op.cit. fig. 100C, tore. 6 A M 28, A 49. 1 op.cit. fig. rord. 8 Earlier members of the series: Cabinet de Medailles 22, CVA I, pI. 2; AM 28, A 12; Thera 11, fig. 315 and AM 28, A same hand; Thera 11, fig. 320, by the hand of pI. 4oe. 8 AM 28, A 17,18; Thera 11, fig. 331. 1
4
11,
by the
THE THERAN SCHOOL'
189
strange agglomeration of linear motifs, perhaps intended as a geometricized Tree of Life, and flanked by two birds. The latest Subgeometric amphorae! show signs of staleness and exhaustion. A I I, near the beginning of our series, is dated by an ovoid aryballos from Corinth, not earlier than the first halfof the seventh century; and the imported aryballos accompanying the plump amphora from Sellada Gr. 84 recalls a type common in early seventh-century contexts at Knossos." Subgeometric amphorae may have continued until the middle of the century, to judge from the contexts of some amphorae of the Orientalizing phase." The persistence ofthe local Geometric tradition can hardly be due to the isolated position of the island; in the early seventh century the Therans had every opportunity of learning Orientalizing habits from the imported 'Parian' urns (p. 177). The survival is more plausibly explained by local pride in a handsome architectonic style which the Therans were slow to learn, and slow to abandon. Eventually, when the style became exhausted from within, they began to borrow Orientalizing motifs from the outside world ;' but even then the system of decoration was not radically changed. EUBOEAN LATE GEOMETRIC The Euboeans were already widely dispersed in Late Geometric times. From historical sources we learn of their presence in Pithecusae and Cumae, the earliest western colonies; and there is archaeological evidence for Euboean residents on the North Syrian coast, notably at the emporium of Al Mina (p. 314). Thus an exhaustive survey of Euboean LG must embrace four categories of material: A. Pottery made and found in Euboea; B. Pottery made in Euboea, and exported to Italy, Sicily, the Levant, or elsewhere; C. Pottery made locally by Euboeans in the Levant; D. Pottery made locally by Euboeans in Italy. Needless to say, any attempt to analyse the Euboean style must be securely founded on category A. Since B-D can be identified only through resemblance to A, there is no point in giving these categories separate treatment; but the material from outside the Aegean may be brought into the discussion wherever it reflects any light on the somewhat fragmentary pottery so far recovered from Euboea. At the same time we must explore the differencesas well as the similarities - between the Euboean colonial wares and the home products. In Euboea, our knowledge of the local L G is derived from three sites: Cha1cis, Eretria, and Lefkandi. From Cha1cis the published material is very sparse and fragmentary: a few surface sherds from the site near the Venetian aqueduct;" and more sherds from two wells at Gyphtika nearby, filled with the rubbish offour centuries." Eretria, fortunately, has been more prolific. Material from about fifty graves was briefly reported by Kourouniotis,? and studied in greater detail by Boardman together with some 1
Theta 11, figs. 330, 322, 323, 324.
3
A Af 28,84, Gr. 103: amphora A 32, and PC aryballos with running dogs, c. 650 or later. Thera I1, Gr, 10, where the latest Orient-
2
Thera 11, fig. 200; cr. Fortetsa 157, class liB (ii), 150.
alizing amphora (fig. 11) was found with three small rough kotylai as fig. 47b, probably very late seventh century. 4 Dugas, op.cit, figs. 104-5. 6 In the British School at Athens: Boardman, RSA 52 (1957), rff., pI. Ib-C. 6 ADChr 16 (1960), 151, pI. 132b-c. 1 AE 1903, rff., figs. I, B-g.
190 .
pieces from the sanctuary of Apollo Daphnephoros.' Subsequent Greek excavations at this sanctuary have yielded more local LG,2 and yet more material is now forthcoming from the Swiss-Greek excavations under the later West Gate," A special importance attaches to the pottery from the recent British excavations at Lefkandi, a large coastal settlement between Chalcis and Eretria. Here the occupation came to an abrupt end before the close ofthe Euboean L G sequence; thus the latest pieces from the Geometric city should provide a useful fixed point for the relative chronology ofthe Euboean style. A large quantity of LG material has come from the settlement.' including the two restorable vases, pI. 41 b-e. S Such is the sum of the material so far recovered from Euboea: too little to afford a complete view of the local style, but enough to allow generalization on the clay and technique, and also the affinities of style with better-known schools elsewhere. Detailed study of the pottery from recent excavations may reveal regional variations ofstyle and fabric within the island; but for the time being we shall treat Euboean L G as a single local school, in the absence of any clear evidence to the contrary." Typical Euboean clay varies in colour from pink-orange to buff (see n. 6), sometimes indistinguishable in tone from Attic: but the clay is often more carefully refined, and fired to a harder consistency. Euboean fabric parts company with most Cycladic ware in possessing little or no mica: impurities are limited to small particles ofwhite grit, rarely found except in large vases. A thick cream slip is sometimes applied; but slipped vases do not differ consistently, whether in fabric or in style, from those where the decoration is painted directly on to the clay. We shall see, however, that there are special cases where the slip is used as a medium, rather than as a background, for the decoration. SHAPES
Whole profiles are something of a rarity among the pottery so far found in Euboea. There are, indeed, a number of complete vases from Italy which are attributable to Euboea; but the case for their attribution is better stated under the next heading, since it rests more on their ornament than on their shape. The most imposing closed form is a large burial amphora, with wide neck, and horizontal handles on the shoulder. In the cemetery ofEretria we see it in a Subgeometric stage, with a high conical foot:' this type has relations in both 'Parian' (p. 178) and Boeotian (p. 202). An earlier stage, just within L G, is represented by Athens 12856 (pI. 41 e) ;8 a possible precursor of the whole series, made by a Euboean colonist in Pithecusae (pI. 4Id), has a low foot and vertical handles, like one of the earliest 'Parian' examples." A few small hydriai from Eretria'" havea Subgeometric look: their necks slope inwards, 1
BSA 47 (1952),
I
fr., pis. 1-3.
a J. Constantinou, PAE 1952, 153ff., figs. 4, 8-10; PAE 1955, 125ff., pI. 43; ADChr 17 (1961-2), 155, pI. 167e. 8 Schefold, AntK 9 (1966), 108ff. 4 E.g. AJA 69 (1965), pI. 85, fig. 8; BCH89 (1965),844, fig. 4; Lefhandi (1968), figs. 72-7.
1 am grateful to Messrs M. Popham and J. Boardman for permission to illustrate these vases. 6 Boardman, BSA 52, 2, finds 'a uniformity offabric between Chalcis and Eretria'. • BSA 47, 16ff., Groups A-B, pI. 4. 8 Akerstrom, GSI65, fig. 26, 'aus Eretria'; but cf. Boardman, BSA 47, 17, n. 80. The decoration, however, has Euboean features: see pp. 192-3. • Delos xv, pI. 16, Ab 8. 10 AE 1903,15, fig. 8; BSA 47, H, figs. 14-16a, pI. 3A 17-23. 5
LG
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
EUBOEAN •
191
in the manner of Early Protoattic oinochoai.! Slightly earlier, perhaps LG, is a solitary example from Chalcis.> The cemetery of Pithecusae is rich in local trifoil-lipped oinochoai whose purpose, in the opinion ofthe excavator," was to quench the flames ofthe pyre. At home, traces ofthem are extremely fragmentary.s An alternative pouring vessel, the jug with cut-away neck, is known at Lefkandi (pI. 41c) and Eretria," providing an interesting link between Euboea and Thessaly in L G times (p. 162). Ofthe slow-pouring forms suitable for oil or unguents there is hardly any trace at home, perhaps because the material from cemeteries is so scanty. This deficiency, however, may be filled from the Italian colonies by an imported class once thought to be Cretan (pp. 194-5), but now more reasonably diagnosed as Euboean. The three shapes represented in this fabric are an ovoid lekythos (pI. 41 f), a conicallekythos-oinochoe (pI. 4Ij), and a globular aryballos (pI. 41 g). The last two forms are clearly derived from Corinthian prototypes - an impression which will be confirmed by their decoration. The lekythos, on the other hand, has no roots in Greek Geometric tradition, but may owe something to the red-slipped flasks of the Phoenicians.s For open shapes the material from Euboea is more plentiful, though still largely fragmentary. Among the drinking vessels we can recognize various forms well known in the Attic repertoire, like the glazed cup' and the kantharosv but the most enlightening shapes are the skyphos and the kotyle, both of which are preserved in sufficient quantity to allow us to follow their development throughout LG. The skyphoi may be divided into three stages. (i) The earliest examples still have a slight shoulder, from which a tall vertical lip is offset (pI. 4Ia). (ii) Later, the lip runs into the body without articulation, so that the wall appears to be vertical down to the widest diameter (pI. 4Ib). (iii) With the most advanced type, the rim overhangs the body, which now assumes a straight profile and a conical form: here the lip is sharply offset once again," as though recalling a new metallic original.w KO!Jlai are rarely preserved in whole profile: nevertheless we can follow their development, parallel to the Corinthian series ofwhich they are imitations. Our earliest example is shallow and hemispherical, preserving the slight nick found on the earliest Corinthian originals.'! The latest Geometric form is shown by imports at Pithecusae (pI. 4Ih), where the deeper shape reflects the earliest E P C prototype, decorated with the first files of'birds.P There, as far as we know, the Euboeans parted company with the Corinthian sequence; for there are no Euboean counterparts to the extremely deep Corinthian versions current at the end ofEPC. Kraters, in Euboea, are known only from fragments. The popularity of the spouted type at Eretriav is a sure sign of Attic influence. Among the imported kraters at Pithecusae, several whole profiles have been recovered: the standard type has a deep body and a tall flaring pedestal.i- sometimes combined with a spout.> Although the spout must be an Attia. AJA 46 (1942),34, fig. 16. a A. Andreiomenou, ChO 254, 8 (1349), pI. 46b. 8 Buchner, Expedition 8 (1966),5-6. BSA 47, pI. 3A 8-g. 5 BSA 47, pI. 3B. 6 Cf. p. 179 for a 'Parian' counterpart. • PAE 1952, 161, fig. 8b. 8 AE 19°3, I, fig. I. • ADChr 17 (1961-2), pl, 167e. 10 er. Fortetsa, pI. 113, 1563. In Attic, cf. the 'Birdseed' type of L G 1 I, p. 68, nos. 20-8. 11 P AE 1952, 161, fig. 9a; cf. pIs. 18e, Igj. 12 P. 105; cf. Delos XVII, pI. 53, 35. 18 BSA 47, 6, pI. 2B 1-5. 14 E.g. Buchner, RM6o-1 (1953-4),49, fig. 2; Metropoli e Colonie, 267-8, fig. 2b-c. 15 AR 1956, 61, fig. 14. 1
4
192 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
cizing trait, this form is quite unlike its Attic counterparts- which have a shallower body and a lower pedestal; the tall proportions are matched only in the Corinthian 'Thapsos' classj" and the ornament, too, has Corinthian features. Thus the kraters are typical of a certain eclectic spirit, ofwhich we shall see many more symptoms in the decoration. DECORATION
In exploring the origins ofthe four Cycladic schools we have been led to the same conclusion in each case: the sole formative influence from abroad comes from Attic L G I. In Euboea the situation is somewhat different. Many Attic forms were indeed imitated: some Euboean small vases" are indistinguishable in style from their counterparts in 'Parian' and Naxian, and this is surely due to their common debt to Attic originals. But Attic L G was never the only source of ideas for the Euboean craftsman, who also tried his hand at emulating the fine-walled kotylai of Corinth. The Euboean style thus became a mixture of two foreign strains, and sometimes there was little regard for consistency even on the same vase: Attic shapes occasionally bear Corinthian motifs, and vice versa. Small wonder, then, that the Euboeans never produced any consistent style oftheir own: we can only point out a number ofmannerisms which they developed while imitating the pottery oftheir neighbours. In this section we shall try, as far as possible, to disentangle the Attic and Corinthian elements, basing our analysis on the skyphos for the Attic contribution, and the kotyle for the Corinthian. For each stage in the development ofthese drinking vessels, dates in terms ofthe Attic sequence will be suggested.
The Atticizing tradition In M G times, strong affinities with Attic can be deduced from the earliest pottery found in the Eretrian cemetery (p. 167). Three classes ofLG skyphoi, whose shapes have been described above, illustrate the gradual weakening of Attic influence in the decoration, and the emergence of local mannerisms. (i) With tall vertical lip, clearly offset from the shoulder. Best example, pI. 41 a, from Rheneia.s Date, L G I. A respectable metope style has arrived from Attica, in which hatched marshbirds and quatrefoils play leading parts, as in the Attic original (cf pl. lob). Two local mannerisms, however, deserve notice: (a) on the lip, the row of double or triple compass-drawn circles, closely packed but detached; (b) the slack dotted lozenge in the field of the bird metopes. This class has a wide distribution in and outside the Aegean, throwing an interesting light on the activities of the Euboeans overseas." The same bird-and-lozenge combination occurs on the jug with cut-away neck, pI. 41 c; and a similar metopal system is used for the Pithecusan amphora, pI. 41 d, the lozenges here being dotted and quartered. On the later amphora, pI. 41 e, the central quatrefoil metope 1 Cf. ]dI 14 (1899), 213, fig. 92; A M 43 (1918), 135, fig. 30. 2 Cf. VS, pI. 2. a Cf. Boardman, BSA 52, 6. • Delos xv, Bb 51. Examples from Euboea: Eretria, P AE 1952, 161, fig. 8a; frs., ibid. fig. 4, 8-9; BSA, pI. 47; pI. IB, 7-g. Chalcis, Gyphtika wells, rim frs, Lefkandi, many frs., as Lefkandi (1968), fig. 72. 5 AI Mina,]HS60 (194°),5, fig. 2a,d-e. Paphos: AntK 10 (1967), 133-4, n. 8. Knossos: fr. unpublished. Rheneia: DIlosxv, Bb 51, 53· Ithaca: BSA 43 (1948), pI. 43,567 (Aetos, Lower Deposit). Castelluccio (Sicily): BSA 33 (1932-3), pI. 26,45. Rome: RM 71 (1964),8, pI. 2, I (cross-hatched lozenge). Related, and probably Euboean: Veii, NSc 1963, 271, fig. 132f (single bird-l-Iozengepanel, no circles on lip). For the bird-l-Iozenge combination in Thessalian LG see p. 163.
LG
EUBOEAN •
193
has dropped out, so that the birds confront one another, with quartered lozenges in the field. This simplified formula is seen on a funerary urn from Sulcis in Sardinia, perhaps of Euboean manufacture.' (ii) With vertical lip, merging into the body. Best example, pI. 41 b, from Lefkandi. Date, L G 11. The ornament is more varied than in the previous class. The lips may have stripes or dots, like their Attic counterparts, but three local alternatives are especially common: diagonal cross-hatching (pI. 4Ib), vertical dashes,» and a dotted lozenge net, usually in two tiers ;" the last is a motifof Corinthian origin, not current before E P C or Attic L G I lb. The metopes in the handle zone are now separated by five to seven vertical bars drawn with the multiple brush: the motifs are looser. Various forms oflozenge predominate, whose centres are usually quartered inside a hatched frame (pI. 41 b); a common variant is the square grid-lozenge, sometimes standing on its corner,' and sometimes aligned with the border." Other alternatives include a hatched St Andrew's cross, and a simplified version of the Attic sunburst;" the latter is found again on a piece from Al Mina belonging to the next class.' Birds of this group sometimes have raised wings, bent and hatched." On an unpublished fragment in Oxford of this class from AI Mina, three Corinthianizing soldierbirds are used as a metopal design: cf the small hydria, AE 1903, 15, fig. 8. Loosely related to this class are the local skyphoi from AI Mina, recognized as the work of resident Greek potters." In several respects, these stand apart from the home products: the bichrome technique, and the fine stripes on the interior, are symptoms of Levantine influence; the metope system is on the verge of collapse, the favourite motif being the group of vertical wavy lines. The profiles, however, recall Euboea in their tall vertical lips ; and one fragment'? bears a typically Euboean bird, with raised wing (cf n. 8). (iii) The late conical class with overhanging rim. Best example, ADChr 17 (1961-2), pI. 167e, from Eretria.v Date, L G 11 - Subgeometric. The metope system has now been abandoned: the decoration is placed in a free field, after the manner of some Attic L G I I examples.> the ornament there, however, is lighter and more effectively spaced. What is unique about this advanced Euboean class is the use ofcream slip as a medium ofdecoration, between the outlines of the larger motifs. A bichrome effect - quite different from that achieved by the Greek potters of AI Mina - is heightened by the combination of the slipfilled motifs (swastika, hollow lozenge, diagonal cross) with the dotted designs in silhouette (sunburst, snake, ovule, and rosette). Lips are sometimes enlivened by wavy lines in added white,l3 a device also found on Subgeometric dinoi.>'
The Corinthianizing tradition Among the material found on Euboea there are many imitations of Corinthian kotylai. The Euboeans, of course, were not alone in their attempt to reproduce this highly sophisticated G. Pesce, Sordegna Punica (1961),116; cf. p. 388. 2 PAE 1955, pI. 43A, I; BSA 47, pl. lA 9, pl. 2B I. • BSA 47, fig. 3, 7; BSA 52, pl. I, 18. 5 AI Mina, ]HS 60,7, fig. 3k. 6 P AE 1952, 161, fig. 9b. 7 BSA 52, pI. 2A,d. 8 P AE 1955, pI. 43A I; the wings are longer than those found on Samos, AM 58 (1933), Beil. 29, 2; Beil. 31, 10. • Boardman, AS 9 (1959), 163ff., pis. 24-5. 10 loco cit. pI. 24, I. 11 Also BSA 47, 4, pI. IB, 10-27; P AE 1952, 163, fig. 10; BSA 52, 5, pl. 2A, a-d. 12 E.g. Hesperia 30 (1961), pI. 19, I, 38, 39, 41; Agora VIII, pI. 8, 143. 13 BSA 47, 4, pl. IB, 13. U BSA 47, 7, pl. 2B, 14. I 1
a P AE 1952, 161, fig. 9b.
194 .
CYCLADIC AND EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC
LG
EUBOEAN •
195
drinking vessel; but there is evidence to suggest that (a) they began to make kotylai very soon after the shape was invented in Corinth, and (b) in style and technique their imitations came closer to the Corinthian originals than any other version made elsewhere in the Aegean. As with the skyphoi, the local classes will be set out in what I take to be their chronological order, and dated in terms ofAttic. (i) Chevron kotylai. Date, LG I; imitation of Corinthian LG. PAE 1952,161, fig. 9a, nearly complete; BSA 47, 3, fig. I, I, fr. These pieces combine the decoration of the first Corinthian kotylai with the nicked rims of their immediate predecessors (e.g. pI. 18e-f); the only departure lies in the looseness ofthe chevrons. The type arrived in Pithecusae with the first generation ofcolonists, and was reproduced by the colonial potters, usually without any trace of a lip.' (ii) Heron kotylai, with deep panels. Date, LG lIa; imitation of Corinthian LG. Very scarce. From Eretria: B SA 47, 3, fig. I, 2; also an unpublished fragment with two metopes, containing a crested bird and a solid double axe. Pithecusae, imported fragment: three metopes, with double axe, bird, double axe. The Corinthian model (pI. Igk-l) is still shallow and hemispherical. The linear ornament on the published piece from Eretria is adapted from the waves which often separate the herons on the Corinthian originals. (iii) Kotylai with files of soldier-birds. Date, LG lIb - Subgeometric; imitation of E P C. By far the most numerous class. Two whole profiles have been recovered from Pithecusae,» one ofwhich is pl. 41 h. 3 The bird files are taken from the type made in Corinth at the beginning ofE P C, whose shape is intermediate between the shallow and deep forms;' of the deepest Corinthian kotylai, and the debased wirebirds associated with them (e.g. pI. 2If), there is no trace in the Euboean school. Four local mannerisms in the decoration deserve notice. (i) The use of white paint for fine banding in places where the Corinthians preferred to reserve: e.g. immediately inside the rim. See pI. 41 h; white lines marked by crosses. (ii) Occasionally a second zone of birds is added below the handle - a practice foreign to the Corinthian originals. (iii) The birds themselves are more thickly drawn than on the originals," and often stand on two legs; since the legs are always stiff, it seems that the Euboeans ceased to follow the Corinthian series after the stage of the soldier-birds. (iv) The birds sometimes have large talons, lending them a predatory look: BSA 47, 3, fig. I, 7. At home in Euboea, the soldier-birds also appear on skyphoi," and are still seen on a Subgeometric hydria? and amphora.t In the western colonies, these schematic creatures furnish an important clue for assigning a whole category ofimported closed vases to Euboea, although no parallels for these shapes have yet been encountered in the mother cities. This category is well represented at Cumae
and Pithecusae; the standard shapes are the ovoid lekythos, the conicallekythos-oinochoe, and the globular aryballos. These vases are so homogeneous in style and fabric that all must surely come from a single source. This was once thought to be Crete/ but there are radical differences ofstyle between them and the huge amount of slow-pouring vessels now known from Cretan tombs. In the cemeteries of Fortetsa and Arkades we shall look in vain for the zones of bird files, or the hatched rays on the shoulder, or the herring-bone pattern on the handles - three cardinal features of these vases. The conical lekythos-oinochoe was not imitated in Crete, nor do we find much attempt there to copy the fine Corinthian banding until well into the Orientalizing period. In short, the style ofthese vases approaches nearer to Corinth than the contemporary Cretans were ever prepared to go: it is quite in keeping, however, with what we have gathered about Euboean imitators from our examination of the kotylai. We may point to two details: the Euboean birds with talons have found their way on to the conical oinochoe from Cumae, pl. 41j;2 and on the ovoid lekythos from the same grave (pl, 41 f) the spaced vertical waves and the cross-hatched rays reappear in the same positions on a small hydria from Chalcis," Pursuing this category still further, we shall find obvious signs ofeclecticism in the decoration. Corinth is the source of the soldier-birds and the fine banding, as well as the shape of the aryballos and the lekythos-oinochoe; a large crested bird on one of the handles- recalls the Corinthian heron; and on the shoulders of the taller vases (pI. 41 f,j) the long inverted triangles filled with cross-hatching are also of Corinthian origin." Other details, however, are borrowed from the Attic tradition: for example, the hatched birds," hatched leaves," and wolftooth." Finally, we should note an authentic Euboean creation in the birds with long folded wing," a counterpart in silhouette to the hatched version known from Eretria.v The kraters of Pithecusae show a similar mixture of Attic and Corinthian strains. Very recently, a domestic deposit has produced a number ofimported fragments decorated in an Atticizing manner. Some of these, bearing pictures of men, horses, and birds.v should be placed fairly early in the Euboean LG sequence: the horses, which are sometimes shown feeding at mangers with double axes suspended over their backs, recall the work of the Naxian Cesnola Painter in style as well as in subject (cf pl, 35). Later, the Corinthian element asserts itselfin the pedestalled kraters from the cemetery. That from Gr. 282,12 probably a Euboean import, has the meander hooks ofits counterpart in the Corinthian Thapsos classj'" and the rim bears a row of soldier-birds with single stifflegs, in this case placed upside down. The famous shipwreck krater.w an ambitious colonial work, resembles a late E P C piece from Corinth (pI. 21 k) not only in its deep conical shape, but also in the S-pattern on the lip: and the fishes in the scene have the reserved median line, in the Corinthian manner.P The Corinthian tradition continues into an Orientalizing phase in the local kraters of Pithecusae.w
E.g. Buchner, Metropoli e Colonic 264, fig. lb. 2 Buchner, Metropoli e Colonic 268, fig. I c-d, Others: Eretria, c. 20 frs., including BSA 47, 3, fig. 1,6-8, I I; pI. lA, 1-8. AI Mina: Robertson, JHS 60 (1940), 18, fig. 19c; Boardman, B SA 52, 6-7, pI. zb, a-f; and many other frs, in London and Oxford. Lefkandi: none from the final Geometric occupation, but somefrs. in a later pit mixed with pottery down to Classical: AR 1967, 13. ~ Cf. p. 105; Delos XVII, pI. 53, 35, represents the Corinthian model. 5 Cf. Perachora 11, pI. 25. • BSA 47, 3, fig. 1,5 and 9; cf. Al Mina,JHS 60, 19, fig. 8b, and above P- 193. 1 AE 1903, 15, fig. 8. 8 BSA 47, pI. 4, B 2.
Blakeway, BSA 33 (1932-3),202. 2 Buchner, Metropoli e Colonie 269. A. Andreiomenou, ChO 254, 8 (1349), pI. 47b. Published as PG; but the vertical wavy lines are hardly to be expected before LG. • Buchner, Metropoli e Colonie, fig. 3b. 5 Cf. MA 22 (1913), pl. 37, 2. • Buchner, Metropoli e Colonie, fig. 3d. 1 loco cit. fig. 3a. 810c• cit. fig. 3f. • loco cit. fig. 3b. 10 P AE 1955, pI. 43A, I. 11 Buchner, Expedition 8 (lg66), 10; AR Ig67, 31, fig. 2. 12 AR 1956, 61, fig. 14. 13 VS, pl. 2. 14 Buchner, RM6o-1 (1953-4), 37ff.; Brunnsaker, Op Rom 4 (1962), 165ff., figs. 1-8. 15 Cf. BSA 43 (I948), pI. 13, 171. 16 OpRom 4 (lg62), 174, fig. gb.
1
3
1 3
EG
of Attic LP G forms. 1 Yet although Attic influence was already powerful, the Boeotians were also in touch with their other neighbours. A group of three Corinthian LPG vases is alleged to come from Thebes," and the port ofAntikyra, on the north side ofthe Corinthian gulf, has yielded a Corinthian pyxis of the same date:" but these imports do not appear to have affected the local style. More significant in this respect are the relations between Boeotia and the Thessalo-Cycladic area. The local skyphoi with pendent concentric circles are probably later than Attic PG.' Not so the small biconical jugs with scribbles on the shoulder, which owe nothing to Attica either in shape or in decoration:" these may be paralleled in LPG grave groups from Skyros, Halos, and Chalcis (p. 149). Thus even before the end ofAttic PG, Boeotian potters were already sensitive to influences from their northern neighbours as well as from Attica. This state of affairs continues into Early Geometric.
CHAPTER EIGHT
Boeotian Geometric
Several hundreds of Geometric vases have emerged from Boeotian soil, but less than a quarter come from systematic excavations. Ofthe remainder, a large proportion have been sold on the Athenian market, and are now widely dispersed outside Greece. Reliable groups of associated material are therefore exceedingly rare. Yet owing to the marked similarities to Attic throughout our period, the chronological sequence ofBoeotian Geometric is reasonably clear. Stylistic cross-reference to the Attic series will enable us to distinguish Early, Middle, and Late phases in the local school, followed by a Subgeometric stage contemporary with Early Orientalizing work elsewhere. Further subdivision must wait until more evidence from context is forthcoming. Nor can we assume that Boeotian imitators always kept pace with current Attic fashions: as we shall see, the possibility of a time-lag at various stages of the Boeotian sequence must be seriously considered. The Early and Middle phases are represented in the cemeteries at Orchomenos, and at the neighbouring site ofVranesi Copaidos; these were excavated during the earliest years of this century, yet still await publication. Two small Late Geometric grflve groups are recorded from Rhitsona, but neither is very informative. Of the vases without context (and these include all the Late Geometric figured pieces) more are said to come from Thebes than from any other site; others have no provenance at all, and are ascribed to Boeotia on grounds of style and fabric. Boeotian clay is not always easy to separate from Attic in the Geometric period, but its tone tends to be a shade deeper. The colour varies from a cold brown to a warm orangebrown according to the conditions offiring. The levigation of the clay is less careful than in Athens, but not less so than in the outlying parts ofAttica; for this reason provincial Attic vases with summary decoration have occasionally been mistaken for Boeotian: Impurities in the clay often include white limestone grits;' lessfrequently, small particles ofsilver mica, as in Attica. In Late Geometric, a thin cream slip sometimes lies under the decoration.
BOEOTIAN EARLY GEOMETRIC SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Orchomenos, cist grave in Chaeronea Museum; six vases. PI. 42a-f. 6 ATTIC ELEMENTS
The Orchomenos group may be dated, in relative terms, by the small broad-based oinochoe and the two shallow skyphoi, which are closely modelled after Attic E G I I forms (cf. pk 2d,b). These two common shapes are represented by several more examples from Orchomenos and Vranesi, where the decoration is confined to a meander or a multiple zigzag framed in a window-panel. Several other Attic forms were also imitated. A small fragmentary lekythos-oinochoe from Orchomenos bears a window-panel on the neck containinga battlement in triple outline with dots in the vacant spaces." The same site has yielded several shallow cups ofAttic type, one ofwhich has a panel ofmultiple zigzag between mastoi. From Thebes" there is a local version of the Attic globular pyxis with inset rim, decorated with a zone of cross-hatched battlement - a non-Attic variant found again on a comparatively deep skyphos from Orchomenos. The curious ovoid pyxis in the Orchomenos grave group (pl, 42 c) is of a type peculiar to Boeotian EG. It may perhaps be related to the contemporary Attic pointed version, but the pronounced neck suggests an independent derivation from the Late Protogeometric globular pyxis with everted rim. Of the five other examples, three are similar to ours, and are fully glazed. The fourth, from Vranesi, has a reserved band round the belly, a more globular body with wider base and broader neck; in these respects it stands nearer to the E.g. op. cit, pI. 17, I and 4; and the skyphos from Orchomenos described op. cit. p. 87. I pep Ig8, pI. 2gc. Chaeronea Museum; H. 0·16m.; shape similar to Corinth VII. I, pI. 1,8; thin zone of reserved lines just above belly, enclosing single scribble. 4 PGP Igo-l, Ig7-8, pI. 17,5; cf. p. 154. 5 Examples in Boeotia: Copais, CVA Reading, pI. 15, 10; Orchomenos, unpublished; Thebes, AD 3, Ig17, 30, fig. 2g; I have seen a fourth in the Athens market, with provenance Rhitsona. • I am grateful to Professor E. Kunze for permission to illustrate these vases. 7 As K. v. I, pI. 15,7. 8 Paris A 563; GazArch. 1888, pI. 25. 1
3
The immediate antecedents of Boeotian Geometric may be traced at Orchomenos and Vranesi, where the earliest vases are contemporary with Late Protogeometric in Attica.> They include at least one Attic import, a high-footed CUp, 3 as well as several close imitations 1
Cf.]dI 3 (1888),327.
I
Cf. pep 195--8, pI. 17.
3
pep, pI. 17,2.
. 196 .
197
198 .
MG
BOEOTIAN GEOMETRIC
LP G prototype. The fifth, Heidelberg G M G rather than E G.
10,1
has four triple reserved bands, suggestive of
THESSALO-CYCLADIC ELEMENTS
The clearest evidence of northern affinities in this phase is offered by the two skyphoi from Vranesi and Orchomenos decorated with pendent concentric semicircles.t Both have the deep bodies and the heavy overhanging lips characteristic of those ~hessal~-Cycladic skyphoi which on other grounds we have assumed to be contemporary with AttIC E G (p. I 5~). There is a third specimen ofthis class from Orchomenos, fully glazed (Chaeronea 167); ~ts body is even deeper, and the overhanging rim has a convex profile like the complete cup m our illustrated grave group (pI. 42a). This cup, with its fully glazed surface and low centre ofgravity, is another shape reminiscent of the Thessalo-Cycladic style ;" in the Chaeronea Museum there are several more examples from Orchomenos, and one from Elatea. Especially remarkable is a decorated cup from Orchomenos,' which imitates the Thessalian trigger-handled variety; like one of its prototypes- it bears a zone of alternating diagonals. The fragmentary vessel fro~ the Orchomenos grave group (pI. 42 b) is similar in technique to these cups, although considerably larger; it may have been a kantharos. . , Closed vases in the Thessalo-Cycladic tradition are represented by a smgle amphoriskos from Orchomenos with vertical handles on the shoulder. Its state is very fragmentary, but the decoration on the shoulder zone is preserved: two sets ofstanding concentric semicircles, with nineteen in each set. The style is reminiscent ofthe large skyphos from Vranesi. RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
Since the Atticizing vases of this period are all based on E G I I models, it follows that Boeotian Geometric began somewhat later than Attic; and that some of the looser imitations of Attic LP G6 may well be contemporary with Attic E G I, an experimental style which made no impression on the Boeotians. This temporary lull in Attic influence may be partly due to an intensification of contact with the Thessalo-Cycladic area. A little later, the arrival of the Attic E G 11 style did not entirely oust Thessalo-Cycladic forms, as is shown by the contents ofthe Orchomenos grave group. By MG, however, the northern connections seem to have lapsed, and Attica had become the only regular source of external influence. BOEOTIAN MIDDLE GEOMETRIC This must necessarily be a short section. The extant material amounts to no more than two dozen vases, mainly from Orchomenos and Vranesi. Most of these are too close in style to Attic MG to require detailed description or analysis: here and there, however, a few local mannerisms may be noted. 1 5
CVA 3, pI. 117,3. 2 PGP 190-1, pI. 17,5. 3 P. 153. Marmariani, no. 92, pI. 328. 6 E.g. PGP, pI. 17,3.
6
Skeat, The Doriansin Archaeology, pI.
2,
8.
199
Among the most individual vases are the three large amphorae illustrated here; each of them follows an Attic MG prototype, but at a distance. An example from Vranesi (pI. 43d) departs from the usual Attic practice in bearing a panel of decoration on the shoulder instead ofa continuous zone round the belly; this may indicate some contact with the Argolid, where the same arrangement is perfectly regular in the local M G 11,1 A plainer amphora in London, pI. 43a, is here attributed to Boeotia owing to its close similarity to another example from Vranesi: both vases have rope handles, a neck-panel containing a St George's cross in triple line, and a plump body whose dark ground is punctuated by groups of reserved bands. The rope handles are derived from Attic MG, and the plump proportions recall some ofthe plainer amphorae ofAttic M G I I (cf. pI. 5 c) ; but the St George's cross may prove to be a typically Boeotian feature. Our third amphora (pI. 43 e), from the neighbourhood of Chaeronea, takes us to the end ofMG. The shape is now more attenuated, and the profile of the lower body has assumed a concave curve. Round the belly is a heavy rendering of the Attic gear-pattern; the medallion on the shoulder is surely copied from the bottom of an Attic flat pyxis." The smaller vases stand much closer to their Attic models, and require less comment. There are several squat little oinochoai, as pI. 42h from Vranesi, of the kind that are sometimes found in Attic M G I contexts." A series of light-ground mugs runs parallel to Attic, beginning with the low and broad MG I type (p. 18), and ending with a high-handled tankard reminiscent of Attic MG I I (pI. 42j, cf. p. 23). Another new arrival from Attica is theflatpyxis (pI. 43 b, from Vranesi), which in Boeotia retains until far into Late Geometric the deep shape and the vigorously rounded profile found only at the beginning of the Attic series. An unusual variant with handles in Utrecht- also bears Atticizing MG decoration. Open shapes are extremely scarce. A krater fragment from Orchomenos in Athens bears an intricate design in the Attic M G I I manner, where ancillary strips are grouped round a large central meander. A skyphos from Vranesi (pI. 42g) is an excellent imitation of Attic M G I. From the same site there is a fragmentary high handle, which seems to have come from a high-handled kantharos ofAttic M G I I type. RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
In the absence ofany reliable grave groups, our only clue to relative chronology comes from a vase in private possession revealing a mixture ofstyles. An Atticizing flat pyxis from 'near Thebes' (pI. 43 c) is decorated in a purely MGmanner, except for one detail: the small zone round the knob of the lid is occupied by a row of tangential blobs, typical of an advanced stage ofAttic L G I (p. 43). This evidence, slender as it is, points to a considerable overlap between MG and LG in Boeotia; the hypothesis is strengthened if, as is alleged, the pyxis was found in association with the LG metope skyphos, pl, 44e. Much more material is needed, however, before we can consider ourselves adequately informed concerning the transition to Late Geometric in Boeotia.
1 3
P. 122; cf. pI. 24f,j. Cf. also the oinochoe in Leiden, Brants, no. 39, which may well be Boeotian. 2 Cf. K. v, I, pIs. 62-3. Agora Gr. at I 18.3; Eleusis, Gr. a. 6 Jongkees, Greek Antiquities in Utrecht I, 1957 (Archaeologica Traiectina) 11, pI. 34.
200 .
201
LG
BOEOTIAN GEOMETRIC
SHAPES
BOEOTIAN LATE GEOMETRIC AND SUBGEOMETRIC SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
The full sequence oflarge oinochoai is set out below in four chronological stages. The arrangement of (ii)-(iv) is Kunze's, with minor alterations: an earlier stage, (i), has been added at the beginning of the series.
(both LG)
Rhitsona, Gr. I.JHS 30 (1910),341-2, figs. 5-6. Rhitsona, Gr. 134. Rhitsona 17,88, pl. 3. Boeotian Late Geometric is an eclectic style, heavily dependent on neighbouring schools for its inspiration. At first, the direct influence of Attica is still strong enough to impose a certain degree of homogeneity from outside. Later, the local potters began to look in other directions for fresh ideas, but without abandoning what they had already absorbed into their repertoire from Attic sources. Shortly before the close of Geometric, a selection of delicate linear motifs arrived from Corinth; but this Corinthian element played only a minor role in the decoration, which never lost its predominantly Attic character. This late survival of Atticizing influence, long after the current Attic style had ceased to be imitated elsewhere, raises problems of transmission as well as of relative chronology. It will be shown that most of the linear motifs current at the end ofBoeotian L G arc retarded survivals from the Attic L G I stock. Perhaps some of them have been introduced into Boeotia at second hand, through the Euboeo-Cycladic area; for it was from this quarter, and at this time, that the Boeotians first adopted their most imposing shape, the pedestalled amphora (pl, 45c-d). Many allowances, however, should be made for the innate conservatism ofthe Boeotians themselves, who were extremely slow to forget what they had already learned from the Attic L G I originals. Their vigorous and varied figure style, like their linear repertoire, owes much more to the generation of the Attic DipylonMaster than to its successors; and the idea of figured drawing must surely have come directly from Attica, rather than through Euboea and the Cyclades, where human figures were rarely attempted. The establishment of a sound chronological sequence is beset with many difficulties. U nfortunately, only the plainer and humbler shapes are represented in the two grave groups from Rhitsona. The more important vases have no context, and can be dated only on stylistic grounds. This is seldom an easy task, owing to the eclectic borrowing from more than one foreign source at the same time, and the frequent mingling of old and new elements on the same vase. Hampe's perceptive study! contains the first attempt to arrange these vases into chronological groups. His treatment, however, was not intended to be comprehensive; his chief aim was to throw light on the date of the Boeotian fibulae, for which the decoration of the pottery offered useful comparative material. But since most of these fibulae were engraved in an advanced Subgeometric manner, Hampe was naturally more concerned with the end of Boeotian L G than with its beginning. It remained for Kunze" to suggest how a full and sound relative sequence could be based on a series oflarge oinochoai, whose steady development spans the whole course of the L G phase. We begin our analysis by following the progress of this all-important shape; its decoration is considered below p. 208.
(i)
I. Boston 97.360. Fairbanks, pI. 24, 286. PI. «d. 2. Athens 12455. Nicole, no. 782. Side-spout and strainer on the neck. 3. Athens 12897. Nicole, no. 776.
(ii) 4. Athens market.JdI 14 (1899),83, fig. 39; Hampe,FGS zoff., v 29. 5. Yale S 52, from 'Thebes'. Baur, no. 52, fig. I I ; Hampe, FGS, v 28. 6. Toronto C 215. Robinson, etc., pI. 9, 12I. 7. Wiirzburg, from 'Thebes'. Langlotz; pl. 8, 62; Hampe, FGS, v 27, fig. 7. 8. Athens 236.JdI 14 (1899),81, fig. 36; Hampe,FGS, v 7;JdI80 (1965),67, fig. 19. Debased: probably contemporary with group (iii). (iii) 9. Copenhagen 5371, from 'Thebes'. CVA 2, pI. 67, 3; Hampe, FGS, v 5, pI. 20a. PI. 45a. 10. Paris A 568, from 'Thebes'. Gae.Arch. 1888, pI. 25; Hampe, FGS, v 6, fig. 24, pI. 20b. I I. Athens 12573. Hampe, FGS, v 30, pI. 21a. 12. Hamburg 1898.57. Hampe, FGS, v 37, pI. 21b; H. Hoffmann, Kunst des Altertums in Hamburg (1961), pl. 52. 13. Wiirzburg, from 'Thebes'. Langlotz; pI. 6, 61; Hampe,FGS, v 37. Debased: probably at end ofLG. (iv) 14. Berlin 3310, from 'Boeotia'. AA 1895,33; Hampe, FGS, v 34, pl. 20C. 15· Boston 92.2736, from 'Thebes'. Fairbanks, pl. 25, 287; Hampe, FGS, v 33, pI. 20d. Group (i) is homogeneous in decoration, but not in shape. No. I has a tall narrow neck, fitted on to a globular body with a plastic ring at the junction; this is a modest version ofthe giant oinochoe invented in Attica by the Dipylon Master.' 2 has much the same proportions. 3, a cruder piece, foreshadows the canonical shape of stage (ii): globular body, shorter and wider cylindrical neck, no foot. The plainer oinochoe from Rhitsona Gr. I looks like a poor relation of this second group, if it is not, as the excavator suspects, an import," From now on the series develops on independent lines. With group (iii) the body becomes more ovoid, and acquires a ring foot; a plastic snake is added to the handle; the neck grows taller again, but remains comparatively broad. The bodies of group (iv) are still more attenuated, and the necks even higher. The overall height is steadily increased from group (ii) onwards, reaching a maximum of o· 7om. with no. I 4. For groups (iii) and (iv) a funerary purpose is indicated by the monumental size and the plastic snake; although excavation 1
The nearest Attic parallel is LG Ib: Agora P 532, Hesperia 2 (1933),557-61, fig. 18, whose neck is restored.
• Rhitsona I 7.
202 .
BOEOTIAN GEOMETRIC
LG
2°3
data are entirely lacking, one suspects that these oinochoai fulfilled the same function as the Attic LG pitcher. We shall have many occasions ofreferring to the decoration of this comprehensive series, with a view to establishing the relative date ofother shapes, and the relative chronology of Boeotian L G as a whole. Onelekythos-oinochoe, Munich 8719,1 may be tentatively attributed to Boeotia, where the stiff vertical zigzags are most at home; the shape is based on the conical Corinthian type. More original is a small baggy oinochoe formerly in Bonn.t which looks Subgeometric; and a larger LG example in Hanover, with a horse-taming scene (p. 205, no. 3). Hydriai are represented by four examples, of which two are small and plump- and the other two large and slender.' The latter pair, whose shape is even more attenuated than the Early Protoattic hydria from Analatos, are ofSubgeometric date: the latest is A 575, a vase of monumental size decorated with a chaotic funerary scene. The only neck-handled amphora of this period is Berlin 3124,5 from the same workshop as 14 and 15 of the large oinochoai. A solitary belly-handled amphora, of Subgeometric date," is a very late reminiscence ofa large monumental shape which the Athenians had abandoned before the end of LG I (p. 34). Apart from these two rarities, all the amphorae belong to a pedestalled type, which first appeared in Boeotia at the end ofLG, and became the leading shape of the Subgeometric phase. Those of the main group' share the following features: an ovoid body with double horizontal handles on the shoulder, surmounted by a broad flaring neck, and resting on a flaring pedestal (pI. 45C), which is sometimes fenestrated. There is considerable variety in the proportions: the height of the neck varies according to the height of the foot and the attenuation of the body. As far as we know, this shape has no roots in earlier Boeotian pottery. Possibly it may have been borrowed from the 'Parian' or the Euboean repertoire; for in each of those schools the corresponding amphorae seem to have evolved from an earlier L G version with low feet (p. 190). The 'Parian' series, however, differs from the Boeotian in having a much lower and more vertical neck; and the handles are single." For geographical reasons, iffor no others, one would expect to find the intermediate link in Euboea; and a likely precursor of the Boeotian group may be seen in Athens 12856 (pI. 41 e), a vase which anticipates the Boeotian shape, and bears a Euboean mannerism in its decoration." Contemporary with this Subgeometric group is the fine 'Artemis' amphora, Athens 5893 (pI. 45d), which stands slightly apart in shape as in style; the neck is vertical, and the lip
inset, as though to take a lid. The Subgeometric amphorae are followed by an Orientalizing group where the neck is usually vertical, and the body more plump; the pedestal is rather lower, and splays more abruptly.' Two types ofpyxis are in fashion: flat, without handles; and tall, with handles.s The flat versions is inherited from the Atticizing MG tradition, and continues until the end ofLG. Although the latest examples bear advanced LG decoration, the development ofthe profile seems to have been arrested at a stage which was passed in Attica before the end ofMG. The Boeotian shape is usually deeper than the Attic L G pyxides; and in every case the wall curves in sharply to a foot which is considerably narrower than the rim. The lids, however, show occasional attempts to keep up with the times: the handle may take the form of a miniature skyphos,' or a single plastic horse (pI. 45b), 5 or even four horses," as on the lids ofthe latest Attic pyxides. The bottoms are often decorated with linear ornament, and once with a figured scene." Tall pyxides enter the Boeotian repertoire in the course ofL G. The earliest are a pair from the same workshop, Athens 117958 and Hanover 1897.8a (pI. 44c); their careful metope decoration looks contemporary with stage (iii) of the large oinochoai. The shape was probably borrowed from the tall class of Corinthian L G;9 the bodies are not so high, but the inset rim of the Corinthian model is retained in these two examples. Madrid 1948210 is a taller, later, and more careless member of this group. Towards the end ofLG the lids are no longer conical, but flat (pI. 44 f) . The latest may well be Subgeometric: these include London 88.10-15.14,11 Berlin 3143.15,12 Copenhagen 5373,13 and Leiden 1.1922/4.18.14 The huge pyxis in Brussels, A 1036,15 is the latest example ofthis shape: its figured drawing shows clear signs of influence from Early Protoattic.P Kraters ofthe orthodox kind are all pedestalled. The L G series begins with Munich 2253,17 and a vase in private possession, pI. 44h,I8 both of which preserve the salient features of the Attic Type I I: clearly offset lip, stirrup handles, and tall pedestal. Somewhat later is Heidelberg G 44,19 where the profile of the lower body has been considerably straightened out. Subsequently there arises a more specifically Boeotian type, where the lips and pedestals become shorter, and the stirrups disappear. These developments are illustrated by a krater recently on the market.w which is unusual in possessing a lid. To the same stage belongs a cruder vase, once in the Meissner collection.v whose lip is still high. Subgeometric are three figured examples with simple vertical handles, and pedestals which are even lower, and more conical: Athens 12896 (pI. 44j) and Tubingen 123922 are by the same hand, while
AA 1957,374, figs. 1-2. I AM 26 (1901),35, fig. I; Hampe, FGS, v Ig, fig. 4. Wiirzburg, Langlote, no. 60; Paris A 566, Pottier I, pI. 2I. 4 Paris A 574, Petrot-Chipiez.VII, fig. 93; Paris A 575, p. 205, no. 17. 5 JHS 87 (1967), pI. I2a. 6 Munich 2234, Sieveking-Hackl, no. 400. 7 Boardman, BSA 47 (1952),17, n. 80, nos. I-g; add BSA 52 (Ig57), 5, n. 19. Further examples, and a full catalogue of the whole group: Canciani,JdI80 (I965), I9ff., nos. I- I5. Both Boardman and Canciani include Athens 12856, which 1 believe to be Euboean: see pp. 190, n. 8, and Ig2-3, pl'4Ie. 8 Nearer to 'Parian' isa low-footed amphora, Copenhagen 7314 (CVA 2, pI. 68, 2; but this has no provenance, and has been ascribed to Boeotia on insufficient grounds. Ifnot actually 'Parian' [Stram, Acta Arch. (Copenhagen), Ig62, 223, n. 7), this vase is certainly under strong 'Parian' influence. 9 Date: shortly before the end ofLG. Provenance: 'aus Eretria' according to Akerstrom (GSI65), but doubted by Boardman. However, the combination ofhatched bird and quartered lozenge is authentically Euboean: cf. the earlier L G amphora from Pithecusae, pl·4 I d•
Canciani,JdI80, 21-2, nos. 16-22,24. The handleless globular pyxis, Rhitsona, Gr. 134.5, is thought by its excavator to be an import, and its date is possibly PG; cf. PGP I95. 3 Canciani,JdI80, 35ff., 1-16; add Heidelberg G 20, CVA 3, pI. 122,3. 4 Vienna IV.3458, FGS, pI. 2gb; cf. Attic LG la, Hesperia 2g (lg60), pI. gI, Gr. N.21 :6, no. 3. s Also Berlin 3143.6, Schweitzer, Herakles, fig. 8. 6 Prdhistorische Zeitschrift I (lgOg), pI. 13, I. 7 Heidelberg GIg, CVA 3, pI. 118,1-3. 8 FGS, pI. 2IC. 9 Cf. Canciani, Jd180, 41. Heidelberg G 22, a squat variant with handles (C VA 3, 65, pI. 122, 4) is thought by Canciani to be Cycladic; it is more probably a Boeotian LG successor to the MG pyxis in Utrecht, p. Ig9, n. 4. 10CVA I, III G, pI. I, I. llFGS, pI. 2Id. 12 JdI3 (1888),351, fig. 29. 13CVA 2, pI. 67, I. 14 Brants, pI. 6, 27. 15 P. 205, no. 15. 16 P. 206, n. 6; cf. Canciani, JdI80, 71. 17 Sieoeking-Hackl, no. 406. 18 Sotheby 6.7.64, no. 171. 19 CVA 3, pI. II7, I. 20 Sotheby II.II.63, no. 161. 21 Neugebauer, Antiken in deutschem Prioatbesitz; pI. 60, no. 144; Ars Antiqua, 2g+lg61, pI. 34, 84. 22 Watzinger, pI. I.
1
I
1
2
204 .
BOEOTIAN GEOMETRIC
Providence 23.3001 is related. Athens 237, from Thebes,e is a logical Early Orientalizing successor to this series. Ovoid kraters had entered the Boeotian repertoire by the beginning of the Subgeometric phase. Athens 1222 I, contemporary with Early Protoattic," has a ring foot; later, a pedestal is added on two examples decorated with Early Orientalizing animals.s This shape was originally a Cycladic invention (pI. 35) ; the Boeotian series is probably headed by Heidelberg G 77, decorated in a pure LG manner.s The high-handled kantharos is the most popular ofBoeotian drinking vessels, and the most ornate; it frequently carries figured decoration. Every large example conforms to the Attic lipless type, which enjoyed its prime in L G II a (p. 86). One of the earliest is Athens 1470 (pI. 44a), which has a pleasantly crisp shape like its Attic counterparts; towards the end of L G the profile tends to sag.s Munich 2235, 7 an unusually large vase, was evidently intended for funerary use, to judge from the plastic snakes draped over its handles. The other drinking vessels are usually decorated with simple linear ornament, and may be briefly dismissed. The kantharos has a small relation in Rhitsona Gr. I, with a high concave lip. Only one kotyle has been ascribed to Boeotia, and this looks Attic," An early LG skyphos, already mentioned above (p. 199, pI. 44e), is the only imitation known to me of the Atticizing type with short offset lip. Later on, tall lips were evidently preferred;" some ofthe latest examples-v are not unlike the lakaina of Laconian LG (pI. 46m). High-handled mugs survive from the M G repertoire. Copenhagen 5374,11 decorated with animals in metopes, still bears some relation to Attic LG.12 Later, and more typically Boeotian, are a pair with shorter lips and more bellied bodies.P There are also a few shallow cups with short offset rims.t! DECORATION
Boeotian LG arose under the influence of Attica. Its decoration reflects all three of the innovations which distinguish Attic L G I: first, the replacement of a dark ground by a light ground; secondly, the evolution ofa consistent figure style; and thirdly, a fondness for equal square metopes arranged in horizontal bands. Since many ornaments borrowed from Attic L G I survive in Boeotia until after the end of Geometric, the local style does not lend itself easily to chronological subdivision: we can do no more than separate true Late Geometric from Subgeometric. Nor is it an easy task to look for individual workshops in a school where there was so much eclectic borrowing, although pairs ofvases can occasionally be attributed to a single hand.v Several mannerisms, however, may be recognized as characteristic ofBoeotia as a whole, C VA, pI. 8, I. 2 Collignon-Couue, pI. 19, no. 463. 3 P. 205, 11 (i); on its date see p. 206. • Athens 228, BCH 22 (1898),274, fig. I; Bonn 900, AA 1935,411, figs. 2-4. 5 C VA 3, pI. 124, I, from 'Keos'; probably Boeotian rather than Cycladic. For the decoration, cf. pl. «h. a FGS, pl. 25b, 26a. • Sieueking-Hackl, no. 401. a Karlsruhe B 1838, CVA I, pl, 36, I; cf. K. v. I, pI. 132, second row, R. • Rhitsona, Gr. 134.1.; Wiirzburg, Langlotz, pI. 7, 73. 10 Boston 92.2597, Fairbanks, pI. 24, 274; Berlin,JdI 3 (1888),339, fig. 17. 11 CVA 2, pI. 67, 4. 12 Cf. EA 1898, pI. 4, 9. 13 Hoppin colI., CVA, pI. 4, 3, and OxIord,JHS 24 (1904), 293, R. 14 E.g. Wiirzburg, Langlotr, pI. 4,72; Rhitsona, Gr. 1,2. 15 Canciani,JdI80; 52, figs. 2-3; 55, figs, 7-9; 58ff., figs. 11-16. 1
LG
and not found elsewhere: these will be duly emphasized in the following pages, together with the obvious affinities ofBoeotian LG with neighbouring schools.
Figured andanimal drawing The Boeotian figured style is second only to Attic in the variety of its imagery. The themes include hunting, dancing, boxing, horse-taming, and funerary ritual. The vases with human figures are listed here in what I judge to be their chronological order; nos. I - 10 are LG, and 11-17 Subgeometric.' I. Kantharos, Dresden ZV 1699. AA 1900, I roff., fig. I; Hampe, FGS, v 35, pl. 23. 2. Oinochoe, Athens 236. See above p. 201, no. 8. 3. Baggy oinochoe, Hanover 1897.8c. Unpublished. 4. Oinochoe, Paris A 568, from 'Thebes'. See above p. 201, no. 10. 5· Tall pyxis, Athens 256. Jd! 14 (1899),81, fig. 35a; Hampe, FGS, v 8, pl. 24. 6. Kantharos, London 1910.10-13.1. (a) Hampe, FGS, v 46, pl. 29a; (b) pI. 44 b. 7· Kantharos, Bonn 664· AM 26 (1901), pl. 5; Hampe, FGS, v 23, pl. 25b; Jd! 80 (1965),43, no. 15, figs. 3-4. 8. Kantharos, Gottingen 533h.Jd!80 (1965),42, no. 11, figs. 7-g. 9· Kantharos, Hamburg 1936.2. AA 1940,5, figs. 1-2; Hoffmann, Kunst des Altertums in Hamburg (1961), pl. 53. 10. Flat pyxis, Vienna Kunsthistorisches Museum IV.3458, from 'Keos'. Hampe, FGS, pl. 29; Tblle, pl. 26b; Canciani, Jd! 80, 36-7, n. 66. 2 11. (i) Ovoid krater, Athens 12221, from 'Corinth'. BCH 25 (1901), 143, figs. 1-2 (overpainted) ; Hampe, FGS, v 25. { (ii) Fr., Sarajevo. Hampe, FGS, v 24; 52, fig. 25. 12. Krater, Athens 12896. (a) Hampe, FGS, v 9, pl. 22; (b) pI. 44g,j. { 13. Krater, Tubingen 1239. Waizinger, pl. I, B 10. 14· Amphora, Munich 2234, from 'Thebes'. Sieveking-Hackl, pl. 14, no. 400; BSA 42 (1947), 123, fig. 12. 15· Tallpyxis, Brussels A 1036.CVA I, I I I G,pl. I. 16. Amphora, Athens 5893, from Thebes. EA 1892, pl. 10; Hampe, FGS, v I, pl. 17b, 18. PI. 45d. 17· Hydria, Paris A 575. Pottier t, pl. 21; Pfuhl, MUZIII, pl. 5,16-17; AA/53 (19 28), Beil. 9, 17· The figures of I possess a certain refinement absent in later Boeotian work. Their proportions recall the canon established by the Attic Dipylon Workshop; they have the same tall isosceles triangle for the thorax, and the same straight contours for their lanky legs. But there the resemblance ends: the drawing has already become stiff and mannered, lacking 1 The krater, MunzMed 1963, no. 54, which has been claimed for Boeotia (cf. Tolle 53, no. 136), is probably provincial Attic work; for the lively but careless figured drawing, cf. the Attic LG 11 kantharos from Anavysos, Athens 14447 (ToUe, pI. 3), perhaps by the same hand. 2 On the unreliability of the dealer's provenance 'Keos', see the foreword to C VA Heidelberg 3. To the 'Keos' vases in Heidelberg which Canciani classes as Boeotian, I would add four more: op.cit. pI. 122, 3-4, and pI. 124, I, 4-6.
20
7
206 • BOEOTIAN GEOMETRIC
LG
both the spontaneous inventiveness of the Dipylon Master, and the deft fluency of his Athenian successors in the next generation. There is also a slight hint oftop-heaviness, which becomes more apparent in later figures (e.g, 2-3, 10). Two minor traits seem to be characteristic of Boeotian L G: the representation of the warriors' sword-belts (cf 2-3, 6, 12, 17) and the separation of the buttock from the thigh - a feature still noticeable in 4, but not thereafter .1 Much the same proportions are followed in the LG sequence 2-10, with only one significant change: the triangular thorax tends to be more equilateral (pI. 44b). Although the drawing becomes progressively coarser, there is never any relaxation in the rigidity of the contours. The local figure style seems to have been frozen until the arrival offresh foreign influences in the Subgeometric scenes 11-17, which form a much less homogeneous group than the true L G work. The athletes of I I (ii) are stiffly copied from the latest work ofthe Athens 894 Workshop. 2 12 is free of external influence, and illustrates the decay of the local tradition: note the absurd exaggeration of the hands, the unsteady knees, and the general lack of coordination in the limbs: moreover, the broadening of the waist is a post-Geometric trait." 14 derives its style from the Athens 894 Workshop;4 but here, too, there are several postGeometric details: notably, the use of a spear for thrusting instead of throwing, the Corinthian helmet," and the thickened tails of the horses. This last trait recurs on IS, where the charioteers look later still, in spite of their rigid contours: their angular features recall the Early Protoattic amphora New York 10.210.8, ofthe Wiirzburg group," The frontal face ofthe nature goddess on 16 is the earliest in Greek vase-painting. Foreign to the Geometric manner are the careful marking ofher features within an outlined head,' and the detailed zoning of her patterned drapery; but the wavy cords hanging from her skirt - perhaps another Boeotian mannerism - have already been anticipated.in the. ~G pyxis 10. The chaotic prothesis ofl7 betokens the final collapse of the Geometnc tradition in Boeotia. Although the proportions of these figures are still based on L G precedent, there is much evidence ofOrientalizing influence from more progressive schools: most noteworthy are the wigs, the pinched and exaggerated features, and the elaborate subdivisions of the hatched drapery (see below p. 21 I). The earliest Boeotian horses are tethered to a manger, and enclosed in a square metope; they figure on the krater Munich 2233,8 a tall pyxis in Hanover (pI. 44c), and the oinochoe in Copenhagen (pI. 4Sa). They owe much to the wooden manner of the Attic Hirschfeld Painter: a plump amphora from his workshop, where a similar theme is portrayed (pI. 8c-d) , offers the nearest Attic parallel; but the panel on the Copenhagen oinochoe has a much closer counterpart on the name-piece of the Naxian Cesnola Painter (pI. 3S), w}1o likewise took his lead from the HirschfeldWorkshop. The Boeotian horses are even stiffer than their
Attic prototypes: on all three vases the leading contour, from neck to fetlock, is almost a straight line. The pyxis and the oinochoe show a common mannerism ofthe Boeotian horse: the mane overlaps from the neck on to the shoulder. In a second group ofhorse pictures the drawing is rougher and more relaxed, yet still well within the limits ofLG. Here the cannon-bones are shorter, and the shoulders more substantial; the transition between the neck and the shoulder assumes a flowing curve. To this group belong the taming scenes on 2-3 and the chariot horses of 8; also the horses at the manger on the kantharoi Munich 2235,1 and Athens II456.2 On 9, near the end of LG, the rump becomes extremely meagre - a development typical of much Boeotian animal drawing at this time." The horses on a pair ofSubgeometric kraters - 12 (pI. 44j) and 13 - suffer from the same lack of co-ordination as their masters: but the protruding rumps show that their painter may have been acquainted with the lively manner of the Athens 894 Workshop (cf p. 6 I ) . After these weary creatures, the horses on the Brussels pyxis (IS) seem to be animated by a new and eager spirit: their tense fluency recalls the Passas Painter of Early Protoattic.' and an Early Protocorinthian essay in animal-drawing." The horses ofthe late Paris hydria (17) are derived from the tall and compact type current at the beginning ofProtoattic, 6 but their . outlined heads suggest a somewhat later date: in this respect they look forward to the Early Orientalizing krater Athens 228. 7 Deer enter the Boeotian repertoire in an emaciated form. For the frieze on the pyxis Athens 255 (Jd! 1899, fig. 34), the Attic prototype may be seen on the pitcher and skyphos from Kerameikos Gr. 51,8 at the beginning ofLG IIa; hence comes a curious mannerism, the reversal of the knee bends on the forelegs, typical ofnearly all Boeotian representations of this animal. At the end of the local LG, the grazing animals on the fine Berlin oinochoe (p. 201, no. 14) are remarkable for their well-bred, supple, and mannered style: the Hamburg oinochoe (p. 201, no. 12) presents coarser work of the same time. The stags on a pyxis in London (p. 203, n. I I) are wooden and Subgeometric. Not much later are the eager and springy does in the fourth zone ofthe Brussels pyxis IS; so heavy is their build that they can be told apart from the horses only by their extremities, and by the tell-tale backward bend of their forelegs. Nothing could be more unlike these zestful creatures than the sad Subgeometric family on an Orientalizing amphora in Copenhagen." Goats make only two appearances in Boeotian LG: on an early LG pyxis, Heidelberg G 18,10 and on the mug in Copenhagen 5374 (p. 204), where they flank a sacred tree. The lion figures five times in a panel, either as a hunter or as a quarry; never in a frieze, as mere decoration. The hunted beast on the pyxis S, still LG, is stiffly copied from the type favoured by the Athens 894 Workshop;l1 the others are all Subgeometric adaptations, tending towards emaciation.P elegant mannerism.P or grotesque exaggeration of the jaws. 14
Both traits are extremely rare in Attic Geometric. For the sword-belt, cf. Athens 8Io,Davison, fig. 38 (end ofLG IIb). For the articulation of the buttock, see Athens 806 (LG Ib), AM6g-70 (1954-5), BeiI. 60; cf. also a Laconian LG fr., A M 52 (19 27), pI. 4, 4· • Cf. especially the cauldron Athens 810, p. 60, no. 39· 3 J. M. Cook, in BSA 35 (1934-5),2°7, usefully compares these 'allantoid' men to the figures on Boeotian Subgeometric fibulae. & Cf. especially the amphora Paris CA 3468, p. 58, no. 13; on the relative size of the round shield, see p. 61. 5 Cf. Lorimer, BSA 42 (1947), 122. • Damson, fig. 69 a. ? Reasonably compared by F. Grace (Archaic Sculpture in Boeotia 12, figs. 6--7) to a Boeotian LG figurine in Paris. 8 Sieveking-Hackl, no. 406.
Sieoeking-Hackl, no. 401, by the same painter as 8; Canciani,]dI80, 55, 'Pferde-Gruppe'. • Nicole,pI. 3, 774. Cf. the krater Heidelberg G 44, C VA 3, pI. 117. & Cf. Hampe, Ein friihattische Grabfund, pI. 9. 5 op. cit. figs. 40-2. • BCH 22 (1898),274, fig. I. 8 K. v, I, pis. r rg, 130. • 3873; CVA 2, pI. 68, lb. • As Dauison, figs. 59, 60. 10 Hampe,FGS, pI. 28, 2. 11 Cf. AA 1963,211, fig. I. 12 Pyxis, HeideIberg G 21, Hampe, FGS, pI. 24b. 13 Amphora, Bonn 2085, op. cit. pI. 19c; another amphora, Paris CA 825, RA 1899,5-6, portraying a similar scene, is thought by Hampe to be by the same hand (FGS 27); see now Canciani,]dI80, 58ff., 'Lowen-Gruppe', figs. 11-13, 16. U Amphora, Paris CA 824; RA 1899, fig. 2, pl, 3; ]dI80, 65, fig. 17.
1
1 3
208 • BOEOTIAN GEOMETRIC
LG
On this last amphora, the elaborately varied hatching of the lion's body is typical of the local Subgeometric. More accomplished are the pair attending the goddess on the 'Artemis' amphora (16 ; pl, 4Sd), whose debt to the heraldic beasts on the Analatos hydria is apparent: these are the only Boeotian lions which look even remotely feline. It is worth noting that on all four of these Subgeometric amphorae the tails still wave in the air, like Attic LG II lions; whereas the lions of Early Protoattic let their tails drop between their hind legs. The first truly Orientalizing lion in Boeotia, on Athens 228,1 shows affinities with the Cyclades rather than withAttica,t The only wild boars in Geometric vase-painting appear on two Boeotian kantharoi, in London and Bonn (6-']). The lack ofAttic models may account for the extraordinary helplessness of these shaggy beasts, who passively await their fate at the hands of the hunters. Altogether more formidable are the bulls below the rim of IS, though it is a pity that their rumps have been crowded out of the picture. Their combination with a Tree of Life recalls a favourite theme in contemporary Cypriot vase-painting." Dogs and hares each occur several times: such is the crudity oftheir drawing that they can be told apart only by the length of their ears.s Hares are still found on the Orientalizing amphorae, painted in a somewhat retarded style." Atticizing marshbirds are extremely popular in Boeotian L G, where they are not without individuality. Tails here droop more frequently than in Attica; and there is often an extra outline along the upper contour, which assumes a double curve in the more mannered work (pl. 4Sa). Wings are occasionally shown, once folded in the Euboean manner." For the body, simple hatching is more common than silhouette. Antithetical pairs are much favoured: sometimes the birds are enclosed in metopes and separated by a linear motif, 7 more frequently they stand in a free field, with bulky filling ornaments placed between and around them (pl, 44a,f). Subgeometric birds are more varied. In addition to the featureless marshbird, which survives in a debased form," the following species can be recognized: the great bustard on the 'Artemis' amphora," the pelican on the vase Copenhagen 5381,1° and perhaps the cock and hen on the krater Providence 23.300P
(nos. 8, 12) occupies a free field, as on the kantharoi. Finally (nos. 13-15), the Atticizing neckmetopes are replaced by a turbulent combination of horizontal and vertical strips, such as we see later on several ofthe larger Subgeometric vases (p. 205; nos. 14, 15, 17). By the end of the oinochoe series, all pretence of an architectonic system has been abandoned: the decoration merely covers the surface, without defining the shape. In the broadest ofthe continuous zones, there is a marked preference for rows ofconcentric circles. An early variant, where the sets of circles are connected by wavy tangents,' is peculiar to Boeotian. Equally typical ofthe local style is the alternation ofthese circle zones with horizontal strips containing single or triple zigzags.t The hatched battlement, found once in a horizontal zone at the beginning ofLG (pl, 44d), is more often placed in a vertical panel between two metopes.t Apart from the circles, only one other motifis regularly used in a broad continuous zone: this is the row of thick vertical wavy lines found on many large Subgeometric vases. The occurrence of this motif on all the pedestalled amphorae constitutes another link with the related classes in Euboean and 'Parian' (pp. 178, 190 ) . N arrow zones and panels are often filled by single or triple zigzags: the use of the latter in a vertical frame is typically Boeotian. Commoner still are tangential blobs, copied from Attic. Even in their earliest appearances (pf, 44c)4 they reveal three motifs not found in Attic before L GIb: wavy tangents, added dots, and elongated blobs (cf. p. 43). In Boeotia this last motif lasts well into Subgeometric.' Although most of the linear ornament is of Attic origin, three narrow motifs were undoubtedly borrowed from Corinth: the triple zigzagwith barsjoining the apices to the frame, the meander in single outline, and the running spiral. These patterns are all characteristic of the Corinthian 'Thapsos' Workshop (pp. 102-3), whose products reached Thebes.6 All three motifs had been absorbed into the Boeotian stock by the end ofLG, as is shown by the Berlin oinochoe (p. 201, no. 14) ; the barred zigzags and the single meander must have made their debut somewhat earlier," The single-line meander remains popular in Subgeometric, where it is usually cut up into sections, as on the 'Artemis' amphora: in this form it even survives into the local Orientalizing.s As Hampe has observed," the adoption of Corinthianizing ornament had a refining influence on the best Boeotian work, from L G onwards. The repertoire of linear metope motifs is much more restricted than in Attica. In our oinochoe series, quatrefoils and hooked swastikas occur on the neck ofno. 2, and St Andrew's crosses on.nos. 4 and 6: thereafter, until the end ofL G, the Boeotians preferred to put living creatures In the square compartments. There is a slight revival oflinear metopes in the Subgeometric phase, when the same three motifs reappear: hooked swastika and quatrefoil on IS, quatrefoil and St Andrew's cross on the amphoraScheurleer 3351.10 The quatrefoil now assumes a more intricate form, where calyx leaves are suggested by triangles inserted between the petals: the same idea is adapted to a tall and narrow frame on the latest L G oinochoai (p. 201, nos. 14-15). The combination of this elaborate quatrefoil with the St
LINEAR DECORATION
The series oflarge LG oinochoai (pp. 201-2) reveals a fairly clear development in the architecture of the decoration. In group (i) the three focal points of the vase - neck, shoulder, and belly - are equally emphasized by broad zones, in the manner of good Attic work: apart from the square metopes on the neck ofno. 2, these zones are all undivided. In groups (ii) and (iii) the weightiest decoration is often restricted to neck and shoulder (nos. 8- 10, 12), and sometimes confined to the neck (IQ): the most important zones are now regularly divided into Atticizing square metopes, although some ofthe more careless animal-drawing
Oinochoai, pI. 44d; p. 201, 1-3. 2 Oinochoai g-II, 14; pyxides,]dI 14 (1899), 80-1, figs. 34-5. Oinochoe, p. 201, 12; krater, Providence 23.300, p. 204, n. I; kantharos, Athens 11456, p. 20 7, n. 2. 5 Scheurleer 3283, CVA I, III G, pI. 1,4. a VS, pl. 1,3. • Also pL 43 c, p. 199; Munich, Sieveking-Hackl, nos. 405-6. 7 Oinochoai, p. 201, 10--11; kantharos, Munich 2235, Sieveking-Hackl, no. 4°1; pyxis, Athens 11795, FGS, pl. 21C. 8 Hampe, FGS, pI. 18,3-4; pI. 19,3. • op. cit. 26. 10 CVA I, I11 G, pI. 1,5. The quatrefoil and St Andrew's cross even survive into Orientalizing: see Hampe, FGS, pI. 19, 1-2. 1
]dI 14 (1899),82, fig. 37a. 2 Cf. DelosXVII, pl. 27, no. I I. 3 Karageorghis,]dI80, rff • Cf. FGS 23, fig. 4 with pI. 25a. 5 Series: HampeFGS 21-2, pI. 18. a Wiirzburg, oinochoe, Langlotz, pI. 8, 62. For other variants, cf. the figurines, Grace, ArchaicSculpturein Boeotia, figs. I, 3. 1 FGS, pI. 21C. 8 Pyxis, Berlin 3143.15: ]dI3 (1888),352, fig. 29. • S. Benton,] HS 81 (1961), 53. 10 CVA 2, pI. 67, no. 5. 11 CVA, pI. 8, la. 1
209
3
210 • BOEOTIAN GEOMETRIC
LG
Andrew's cross (a rarity in Attic) might indicate another link with Naxos, where both motifs are common near the end of L G (p. 175): yet such quatrefoils also appear in the earliest Protoattic,' while the hooked swastika must have come directly from an Attic source, at least in the first instance. The favourite Boeotian filling ornaments are based on either the swastika or the triangle. Especially common, and virtually confined to Boeotia, is the eight-armed swastika-s sometimes an extra limb is added to each arm, as on I and 15. On the Subgeometric amphorae, the four-armed swastika is the rule. Triangles, as in Attica, are often placed on the borders of the figured panels: to detach them, and leave them floating in the field (pI. 44h), is an exclusively Boeotian habit. The triangles may be filled with cross-hatching, as is the custom in Attica; or with simple hatching, or with diminishing chevrons. They are usually outlined: sometimes their outer frame is hatched." Other filling ornaments include festoons ofvertical zigzag, rows ofobtuse-angled chevrons, double axes, and vertical rows of dots. In general, Boeotian filling ornament tends to be bulky, but not unduly crowded.
Boeotian Subgeometric ends with the Paris hydria A 575 (17). Here the pinched, angular features of the human figures recall the style of the Attic Wiirzburg group;' and the emphatic hatching of the mourners' hair suggests some acquaintance with the Orientalizing 'layer-wig' which came into fashion with the rise of the Dedalic style in plastic art. A date at the end ofEarly Protoattic is indicated: c. 680-670 according to the accepted chronology,s Hence the Boeotian Subgeometric phase will run contemporarily with the whole of Early Protoattic.
RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
We have already noted some evidence that a Middle Geometric manner persevered in Boeotia well into the period ofAttic L G I (p. 199) : this supposition is now confirmed by our analysis of the local Late Geometric. The figured style begins, as we have seen, with the Dresden kantharos, whose painter must have seen some good Attic work in the Classical Tradition: he may have taken his canon from the later figures ofthe Dipylon Workshop, or possibly from the Sub-Dipylon Group of L G I I a. 4 The first horses in Boeotian are in the manner of the Attic Hirschfeld Workshop: the first deer have Attic counterparts at the beginning of L G I I a. We may conclude, then, that the Boeotian figured style arose under Athenian influence, somewhere near the transition between Attic L G I and I I - contemporarily, perhaps, with thefloruit of the Naxian Cesnola Painter, whose name-piece (pI. 35) offers a good parallel to our earliest Boeotian horses. A scrutiny of the earliest L G linear decoration will lead to the same conclusion: in our first group of oinochoai, for example, no. I looks contemporary with an Attic L GIb vase (p. 20 I ), while no. 2 already bears the hooked swastika of Attic L G I I a. The end of the true LG phase is marked by the oinochoai 14-15, where the elaborate quatrefoils in silhouette are an early experiment in Orientalizing plant ornament. There follow a number offigured vases, where a Geometric stiffness is tempered by a few nuances indicating a slight degree ofOrientalizing influence from Attica and elsewhere. By this Subgeometric series, we may gauge the extent of the time-lag in Boeotia. Its beginning may be fixed by a small detail on the Sarajevo fragment (p. 205, I I (ii)): here the subsidiary zone contains a row of8's drawn with a multiple brush, recalling one of the most personal mannerisms of the Early ProtoatticMesogeia Painter." Cf. Davison, figs. 65-6. Elsewhere it occurs under the handles of the great Dipylon amphora, Athens 804; and in the Corinthian Thapsos class (p. 103). 3 Hampe, FGS, pl, 21,4. • R. Tolle, op,cit. 13, cites for comparison the LG Ib krater Paris A 552; but cf. also the departing hero on the Sub-Dipylon krater exported to Thebes (Hampe, FGS 22b). s Cf. p. 64, n. 6, and especially BSA 35, pl. 46d. 1
2
211
Cf. Davison, fig. 6gb. J. M. Cook, BSA 35, 205; Brann, AgoravIII, 4-5. For the beginning of the Dedalic style, seeJenkins, Dedalica 24ff. The Early Orientalizing krater, Athens 228, need not be much later; for the horses' outlined heads, cf. the krater, Berlin A 35, CVA I, pls. 25-6, datable to c. 670-660.
1 2
PG
CHAPTER NINE
Laconian Geometric
No regional Geometric style is enshrouded in deeper obscurity than Laconian. Virtually no new material has come to light since the publication of the deposits at Sparta and Amyclae in the 1920'S. These were abundant enough to display the originality of many Laconian shapes; but the pottery is too fragmentary to throw much light on their development, or on the progress of the local style as a whole. The Laconians seem to have been extremely slow in developing a true Geometric style. There is nothing corresponding to the Early Geometric of Attica and her neighbours. A few pieces may fairly be classed as Middle Geometric, showing signs of external Geometric influence; but these amount to no more than a handful. It remains impossible to recognize any settled stage between the 'Amyclaean' Protogeometric first detected by Furtwanglerand the developed Geometric studied by Droop- and Lane," which has clear affinities with both Argive and Corinthian Late Geometric. Since the Protogeometric at the Amyclaean sanctuary is stratified immediately under a layer containing Late Geometric,' it may have continued in fashion until the advent of Late Geometric styles elsewhere in the Aegean. Laconian PG has been fully analysed by Desborough;" it requires only a briefsummary here, so that we may assess its relation to the succeeding L G style, and the strength of the local tradition. LACONIAN PROTOGEOMETRIC SHAPES
Ninety-five per cent of the PG sherds at the Amyclaean sanctuary come from open vases, and most are from skyphoi. Although no whole profiles are preserved, the larger-rim fragments suggest the existence oftwo distinct types, of which pf, 46a,d are representative. The flaring skyphos (pl, 46d)6 is evidently the shallower of the two. The lip, which overhangs the body, is slightly turned out at the rim, but not offset. On most examples the only zone of decoration, which is usually panelled, falls immediately under the lip, its lower AM 52 (19 27), 46ff., pis. 2-3. 2 A 0 54ff. 3 BSA 34 (1933-4), IOIff. 'AM 52,32-3. 6 PGP 283---9° ' • From A M52,PI. 2,13. Other examples: AM52,PI. 3, 1,4,9,12; PGP, pl. 3 8, 2;CVA Cambridge I, pI. 3, 3, 81, 94; CVA Heidelberg 3, 95ff., figs. 23, 25, 27-3I, pl. 134, I, 4, 7---9, I I, 14· 1
• 212 •
21 3
limit being defined by a horizontal groove coinciding with the attachment of the handles. The other variety, a deep belliedskyphos (pl. 46a),I has a tall vertical lip, again slightly turned out at the rim, but not clearly offset. The profile is usually divided by two horizontal grooves into lip, shoulder, and lower body: the handles are attached at the widest diameter, which comes just below the lower of the two grooves. The shoulder bears the main decoration, which is panelled; the lip carries a subsidiary zone, usually filled by diagonal crosshatching. No bases of either type have been illustrated; but many of the ring feet and flat bases mentioned by the excavators" must belong to these skyphoi. Two more open shapes may be recognized among the Amyclae fragments, both related to the bellied skyphos: a krater bearing the same system of decoration- and a bellied cup or possibly a kantharos - entirely glazed.' Closed vases are scarce, and we shall confine our attention to four complete or nearly complete specimens: an oinochoe from the Hereon at Sparta (pl, 46b);5 a miniature votive hydria from Amyclae ;" a hydria and a neck-handled amphora recently recovered from a grave at Mavrovouni near Gytheion." All four vases have plump biconical bodies and relatively wide necks, their profiles being somewhat reminiscent of the bellied skyphos: the first two, furthermore, are articulated by grooves in the same manner as the open vases. DECORATION
The decoration of Laconian PG follows a stereotyped system. The handle zone is usually occupied by a row of square metopal panels, separated by three or more vertical bars. Rectilinear motifs are more common than concentric circles; semicircles are unknown. Triangles, cross-hatched and outlined, are especially popular, and often alternate with panels of diagonals or diagonal cross-hatching. Several other ideas, less common but more exclusively Laconian, deserve mention: the triangle surmounted by a lozenge, as on the Gytheion amphora; the insertion of little triangles as filling ornaments ;" and the checked lozenge with cross-hatching in alternate compartments." When concentric circles appear, there is rarely any room for more than four in each set, and even these look cramped. It is these circles, however, and their frequent combination with cross-hatched panels, which constitute one ofthe few links with Attic PG ;10 presumably there was some contact in that direction before the end of the PG style in Attica. Further traces of external influence may be seen in the decoration of the Spartan oinochoe, pl, 46b, consisting of two jagged scribbles in thinned glaze: the same kind of ornament recurs on a fragmentary skyphos (pf, 46c)11 whose deep, unarticulated profile seems foreign to local tradition. Both vases have relations in Argive PG ;12 but apart from these exceptional pieces, the PG of Laconia possesses many local traits which cannot be derived either from Mycenaean precedent or from contemporary Attic or Argive models. Some parallels, however, may be drawn 1 Based on the profile of AM 5.2,pl, 2, 9; decoration supplied from AM 52, pl. 3, IQ-II. Other examples: A M 52, pI. 2, 12; pI. 3, 2; PGP, pl, 38, 1,3, I3;CVA Cambridge I, pl. 3,83, 92;CVA Heidelberg 3, 95ff.,figs. 24, 26, 32, pl, 134,2,6,17. 2 AM 52,47. 3 AM 52, pl. 3,7,21. 'AM 52, pl, 2, IO-II. 6 AO 58, fig. 32. • AM 52,47, fig. 27. 7 BSA 56 (1961), 115, fig. 2. 8 AM 52, pI. 3,16. 9l oe. cit, nos. 21, 23. 10 PGP 268• 11 PGP 289, also from the Spartan Hereon, 12 E.g. Asine427, fig. 275b; 429, fig. 277c.
214 • LACONIAN GEOMETRIC
MG
with the PG of the western Peloponnese, which will be discussed in the next chapter. This distinctive PG fabric is as readily recognized by its shiny black micaceous glaze as by its characteristic shapes and decoration. It appears to have been widely distributed outside Sparta and Amyclae. In the southern coastal region ofLaconi a, the vases from Mavrovouni suggest the existence ofa PG cemetery; surface sherds have also been collected at the settlements of Apidia and Daimonia.' To the north, one skyphos rim figures among the sherds illustrated from Tegea.s
LG. The change seems to have been an abrupt one, when the native PG was submerged under a wave of new influences from other L G styles in the Peloponnese; there are, however, a few signs of continuity in the local tradition, which will be discussed below.
LACONIAN MIDDLE GEOMETRIC The Attic M G style, which had so many imitators in other parts of the Aegean, made very little impression on the Laconians; its influence is confined to a small handful ofpieces. The gear-pattern and the steep single zigzag, two minor motifs ofAttic MG, appear on a few sherds from Amyclae," and could well have been copied directly from Attic imports.' Of the meander sherds at the same site," those with diagonal hatching could also derive from the same source; the others, however, are more reminiscent of Argive L G, where narrow outlines and perpendicular hatching were the rule. One amphora sherd from the Chalkioikos, pI. 46 e, showing a panel ofconcentric circles with a reserved cross in the centre and massed dots in the corners, is either an import or a close imitation of Argive MG.6 A further hint ofArgive influence may be seen in Frankfurt University in an unpublished fragment from Amyclae, from a cup with star-panels (cf. pI. 24e). But such is the rarity ofthese pieces that we can hardly think of Laconian M G as a distinct phase; it seems rather that there were sporadic contacts with :M G styles elsewhere when the local PG was at last nearing the end of its long career. It remains to consider how the transition between PG and L G was effected. This problem was first tackled by Droop," who saw an intervening stage in some sherds from the Spartan Acropolis decorated only with rows of concentric circles, and lacking the usualwhite slip ofLG times. Uninterrupted circle zones may well have been in fashion immediately after the end of PG ; on some debased PG pieces" the panels ofhatching between the circles look extremely perfunctory, and their eventual omission would have been a natural step. One large piece from the Chalkioikos (pI. 44 f) , with two zones ofcircles, comes from a deep krater with short offset lip, such as one might find in MG schools elsewhere. It is certain, however, that these large circle zones must have persisted into L G, since another krater from the Chalkioikos (pI. 44g)9 combines them with a quatrefoil metope, while one of the circle fragments from Amyclae-? also bears subsidiary ornament of L G type.P These circle zones, then, may represent a debasement of PG, but do not stop at the }ransition to 1 BSA 55 (1960),87, pl. 22b, 10, 12; map, pl. 24. • BCH 45 (1921),408, fig. 56, no. 261. • A M 52, pl. I I , 1-6; possibly all from a single closed vase decorated like pI. 3m. • The following Attic M G sherds from Laconia are known to me: (a) Sparta Acropolis, Sparta Museum tray 2944": wall from lower body ofkrater, with three narrow horizontal zones containing (i) steep single zigzag, (ii) double zigzag, and (iii) dogtooth; cf. Huxley, Early Sparta, 100, n. 57. (b) Amyclae, surface sherd in the British School at Athens: wall from shallow skyphos, with M's and single chevrons in vertical columns. I have not seen the complete MG skyphos in Berlin from 'Cyrene' (?), said to resemble Laconian fabric CA M 52, 53, fig. 3 I ); in style it is indistinguishable from Attic, cf. K. V. I, pls. 8!r90. See Boardman, The Greeks Overseas 172. s AM52,PI. 8. • Cf. p. 124; AHrr, pl. 58, 2. 7 AO 6D-3. • E.g.CVA Cambridge l,pI. 3,1. 9 The lower fr. is AO, fig. 39q. 10 A M 52, pl. 8, top right. 11 Cf. the Argive LG 11 krater, Berlin 4286, p. 133, no. 5.
LACONIAN LATE GEOMETRIC Laconia now emerges from her comparative isolation ofearlier times. Although most ofher L G shapes are found nowhere else in Greece, their decoration owes much to Argive and Corinthian LG, the Argive element being the stronger of the two. The change from PG to L G is accompanied by a change oftechnique: now for the first time the local potters began to apply the thick white slip which was to become a marked feature of Laconian archaic pottery. The use of this slip, however, was not universal in LG.l It is commonest on the thinner wares, which attempt to emulate the fine fabric of Early Protocorinthian; on the larger vases, where Argive influence is paramount, the slip is often omitted. Here we deal only with the pottery defined by Lane as Late Geometric.s His 'Transitional' makes too much use ofOrientalizing linear ornament to be treated within this survey; even further beyond our limits is Droop's 'Subgeometric' phase," in which an Orientalizing figured style seems to be already established.' SHAPES
The following account of L G shapes is based largely on the work of Lane, who wisely refrained from conjectural restorations in his profile drawings.! In describing the many new open shapes, we may begin with a generalization. All of them lack the horizontal grooving and the sharp articulation of their PG predecessors.s There remains, however, a persistent tradition ofbaggy profiles with a low centre ofgravity. The bellied PG skyphos (pI. 46 a) has several L G descendants: the most obvious are shown in Lane's drawings," while the kantharos- is no less clearly related to its PG ancestor.s The most important member ofthis baggy family is the lakaina, a form destined to play a pre-eminent role in the later repertoire of Laconia. An almost complete miniature (pI. 46 nt ) shows how this new shape had settled down by the end ofLG: it is simply a bellied skyphos with a very tall lip, which is straight in profile but leans slightly outwards. The evolution ofthe Laconian version is probably quite independent ofparallel forms in Attica (p. 23) and Boeotia.w which enjoyed only a very briefcareer. A near relation ofthe lakaina (pI. 46 k) ,11 decorated in an early LGmanner, has an almost vertical wall curving in abruptly below the handle; this may, as Lane suggests, have been the immediate forerunner of the lakaina, of which there are no certain examples before an advanced stage ofLG. Another deep shape, with a taller and more cylindrical profile, seems to have been frequently offered at the sanctuaries ofAmyclae and Sparta; it is described by von Massow as Percentages of slipped wares: Amyclae, more than two-thirds, A M 52,50; Sparta, Artemis Orthia, ninety-three per cent, A 060; Sparta, Acropolis, thirty-five per cent, BSA 28, 50. • BSA 34,101-7. 3 AO 60ff. • Boardman, BSA 58 (1963), 3. S On Droop, AO 57, fig. 31, see Kunze, Gnomon 9 (1933),3-4. • BSA 34,103, fig. 2 S, v, and w, seems to be later than LG. 7 lac. cit. G, L, o. 3 lac.cit. F, pI. zoa. • A M 52, pI. 2, ID-I 1. 10 P. 204; cf. BSA 34, 102, n. 2. 11 Showing two frs. of the same vase superimposed: BSA 13, 125, fig. 5; BSA 34,103, fig. 2A. 1
216 • LACONIAN GEOMETRIC
a skyphos, and by Droop and Lane as a pyxis. The inset rims of Tsountas' two Amyclaean examples- favour the latter identification, although none has ever been matched with a lid. The profile usually takes the form of a gentle convex curve; but double curves are also known." Where there is evidence for handles, these are usually horizontal; one figured example (pI. 46j),3 however, has attachments for a single vertical handle, and so could only have been closed with the help of pins passing through the stringholes of a lid. Perhaps this is not a pyxis at all, but simply a deep cup. Among the less common drinking vessels are the following: a shallow skyphos with flaring rim," another shape with a PG forerunner (pl, 64 d) ; and a large hemispherical skyphos with a short offset lip." Orthodox kraters with short offset lips were already in the Laconian repertoire by the beginning ofLG (pI. 46f). A later piece from Amyclae is close in shape and decoration to Argive L G I I, and has a metallic boss on the rim (pI. 460). Trays and plates both figure among the offerings to Artemis Orthia. The trays have a rather individual form, with sharply incurving walls," Only one plate may qualify as truly LG (pI. 46h);7 its shape is quite canonical, and has the usual reflex handles." Since most of the material comes from sanctuaries, our knowledge of the closed shapes is scanty. There is one complete imitation ofa Corinthian globular aryballos;9 and fragments ofanother, with Corinthianizing fish on the shoulder .10 Among the various shapes of oinochoe mentioned by Lane, the imitations ofthe E P C conicalform deserve especial notice. A body, 11 a neck,12 and a handle with a painted snake-" are already illustrated; there is also a handle with a plastic snake from the Spartan Acropolis (tray 2956). Two fragments from the Chalkioikos are both of enormous size, and one is distinguished by the addition of several ribs at the base of the long neck - perhaps a local mannerism. Further outsize Laconian imitations of this shape have been found at Tegea.v' One of these fragments, no. 250, preserves traces of a strut on the inner side of the handle - a circumstance which makes one wonder whether the strutted neck mentioned by Lane-s may not also have belonged to one of these huge conical oinochoai. DECORATION
Virtually all the new motifs are due to the influence of the two leading Peloponnesian schools. From Corinth, the Laconians learned the rudiments ofa delicate linear style, which they applied on a miniature scale to thin-walled vases; the Argive contribution is more evident in the linear decoration ofthe larger vases, and in the introduction ofa tentative figured style. There are, of course, some cases where Corinthian and Argive ideas are blended; nevertheless, it is worth attempting to isolate and define exactly what the 10cal·LG owes to each of its foreign sources of inspiration. EA 1892, pl. 4, 1-2, the latter pi. 46n. BSA 34, 102, fig. I; AO, fig. 38, u and y, from one vase. Many more similar bases in tray 2951 from the Acropolis. 3 AO, fig. 37h. • BSA 34,103, fig. 214: for a possible Argive counterpart, see Courbin, CGA 503, pl. 47, C 2431. 5 A 0, fig. 39s, B SA 34, pl, 21C. • B S A 34, 103, fig. 2P-R. 7 A 0, fig. 34. • Cf. K. v. I, pl. 102, 878, Attic L G I. 9 BSA 34,107, fig. 4. 10 BSA 34, pl, 25e. 11 BSA 34, pl. zof 12CVA Cambridge I, pl. 3,15. 13 AO, fig. 38r. 14 BCH 45 (1921),4°5, fig. 52, no. 249; 406, fig. 53, no. 250; 407 fig. 54, no. 325. 15 BSA 34,104; improbably restored by Droop as AO, fig. 310. 1
2
LG
21 7
Fine half-tone ornament was easily transferred from Corinthian kotylai to Laconian skyphoi and lakainai. The main field is usually filled by a single narrow motifof Corinthian type: double zigzag (pl. 46 m.), floating chevrons or sigmas, and files ofsoldier-birds are the most popular. For the rest of the vase the Laconians had their own system of banding: instead of following the Corinthian habit of covering wide areas with fine lines of uniform thickness, they preferred to insert thicker bands at regular intervals (pl. 46m.). Corinthian influence was particularly strong when the Laconian style began to degenerate into a fussy Subgeometric. On the curious two-handled jug, A 0, fig. 36, three more motifs of Corinthian origin make their appearance: dotted snakes, short rays, and check pattern. A fourth motif, the zone of diagonal scribbles, is often borrowed from E P C plates. All four are much favoured in Lane's 'Transitional' phase.' Argive influence is seen most clearly in the decoration of two large shapes, the tall pyxis and the krater. Large linear motifs from this source include the step meander (pl, 460);2 the hatched zigzag;" and the orthodox meander and meander hook with straight instead of diagonal hatching} Gridded versions of the last two motifs are a local peculiarity." Among the smaller Argive motifs, leaf-lozenges are extremely common in Laconia; they often have a central dot or midrib, and are always drawn with the multiple brush (pI. 46h,k-I). Even the bird files sometimes follow the Argive, and not the Corinthian, pattern: for the head-inair flamingoes," cr. pl. 27c-d. At or just after the end ofLG proper, the massed lines and zigzags of the Argive Subgeometric kraters (p. 146) make an occasional appearance in Laconia.? The large vases are too fragmentary to tell us for certain how far the Laconians followed the elaborate compositions ofthe Argolid. Yet the krater fragments, pl, 46 0, reveal a system typical of Argive L G I I where linear metopes alternate with panels containing natural representations. On the pyxides the decoration is usually applied in continuous zones (pI. 46n); yet several pieces show elaborate subdivisions in the Argive manner." In the metopes, only two motifs are in common use: the circles with elaborate filling" and the quatrefoil; the latter often appears in a typically Laconian form, where the petals are reserved against a background of cross-hatching (pl. 46f).1O The figured drawing ofLaconia is related to Argive in both subject matter and style. The themes (in so far as they can be identified from the existing fragments) are limited to dancing and horse-taming, the two favourite subjects of Argive potters. Argive stylistic influence is especially strong in the delineation of horses. A fragment from the Spartan Acropolis'! reproduces the horizontal muzzle so characteristic ofArgive work. The same feature recurs on the fragmentary krater from Amyclae (pt 46 0), a vase that can hardly have been painted without knowledge ofthe Argive FenceWorkshop (cr. pp. 134-5); the general composition, the style of the horse, and the choice of linear ornament have all been inspired from this source (cr. especially pf, 28d, shoulder). For the most complete and typical view ofthe Laconian human figure we must turn to the male dancers on the Amyclaean pyxis, pl, 46n. The drawing is stiffer and more wooden AO, fig. 33; BSA 34,109-11, figs. 5-6. 2 Also the pyxis, BSA 34,102, fig.!. 3 AM 52, pi. 4,1-4. • AM 52, pl, 8, bottom; A 0, fig. 28a, c. 5 A M 52, pi. 6, bottom. 6 AM 52, pl, 5, bottom row. 8 AM 52, pi. 5, bottom left; AO, fig. 39S. 9 BSA 34,106, fig. 3. 10 For one example in Argive LG, see CGA, pl. 121, C 421 I. 11 BSA 28 (1926-7), 52, fig. le. 1
7
BSA 34, pl, 21a.
218 • LACONIAN GEOMETRIC
LG
than anything in the Argolid, except for work at the very beginning of Argive LG 1.1 A fairly close resemblance to the mourners of the Athenian Hirschfeld Workshop may be no more than fortuitous, since the local L G is otherwise free from Attic influence. Comparison with the Acropolis fragment quoted above, and with two other figured pieces from Amyclaes will yield parallels for the most striking traits of the Amyclaean dancers: the careful separation of the fingers, the strict equilateral triangle of the thorax, and the heavy calves which taper into a line well above the ankles. Thorax and calves are similarly treated on three dance fragments from Tegea" painted on deep pyxides ofLaconi an type, and perhaps of Laconian make; two of them also share the enormously tall necks of the men on the Amyclae pyxis. All these fragments form a fairly homogeneous group, illustrating the local figured style at an early stage of its development. A more supple style, perhaps indicating a later date, appears on several pieces from Artemis Orthia where the drawing is on a miniature scale: of these the most informative is the cup-pyxis, A 0, fig. 37h, pf, 46j. Apart from their flowing contours, the figures here are in several other respects more advanced than the Amyclaean dancers: their knees are bent, their necks less exaggerated, and in one case at least the eye is reserved. Other figures in this miniature style include the man, A 0, fig. 38z, and the dancing women, A 0, fig. 37d (=fig. 38 a) and 37e. The latter seem to offer further evidence ofthe Argive connection (cf. pp. 140ff., pl. 30 b) which persisted until the very end ofLaconi an Geometric; this is demonstrated by the krater fragment, pl. 46P,4 where a more advanced group ofdancing women, still drawn in the Argive manner with cords attached to their waists, is accompanied by two linear motifs announcing the arrival of Lane's 'Transitional' phase: solid triangles and large round blobs.
del Tonne,' a former Mycenaean entrepot on the heel of Italy, and adjacent to the colony ofTaras founded by the Spartans in 706. The earlier ofthe plates is decorated in the Argive LG 11 manner with clumps ofleaf-Iozenges drawn with a three-armed brush; cf. pl, 46h. I t was not found in a significant context, the site being poorly stratified; but apart from one sherd of PG character, it has produced no Greek material later than the Mycenaean occupation, and earlier than the first colonial grave group from Taras, which contained a late EPC aryballos," Assuming, then, that the plates were brought by the first generation of Spartan colonists, we learn that Laconian Late Geometric, like Argive Late Geometric I I (p. 146), persisted throughout the period of Early Protocorinthian.
RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
Although the internal development of Laconian L G is still far from clear, we have mentioned enough points of resemblance to Argive L G to argue that the two Peloponnesian styles were approximately contemporary. This assumption is confirmed by the evidence of context from the only two cases where Laconian L G exports keep company with vases of other local schools. At Volimedia in Messenia ten Geometric vases were deposited together in the dromos of a Mycenaean chamber tomb:" seven Corinthian, two local, and one Laconian. The Corinthian vases (three hydriai, two globular pyxides, one krater, and one kyathos) all belong to an early stage of L G I; one of the hydriai bears a pair of greeting herons, but otherwise the decoration is entirely linear (vertical chevrons, sigmas, single zigzag, meander). The Laconian vase is a deep L G cup, with a flaring base like A 0, fig. 38 y; the decoration is limited to thick and thin bands, spaced as on the lip ofthe smalllakaina, pl, 46:m. It follows that the Laconians established their L G style at about the same time as the Corinthians, and hence also the Argives. Somewhat later than the Volimedia cup are the two Laconian L G plates from Scoglio a. Argos C 240, CGA, pI. 40; Tiryns I, pI. 20, 3. 2 AM 52, pI. 4, 4-5; Tolle, pI. 26a. BCH 45 (1921): (a) men, 409, fig. 55, no. 278; (b) women, loco cit. no. 282, which joins loco cit. no. 275; (c) men, Talle, pl. 25. • BSA 34, pl. 23f. 5 Cf. Huxley, EarlySparta 101, n. 57. 1
3
1
P. Pellegatti, Ann. 33-4
21 9
(I955~), 8ff.,
figs. 1-2.
2
For details, see p. 104; absolute dating, p. 326.
PG
221
WEST GREEK PROTOGEOMETRIC CHAPTER TEN
SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Derveni (Achaea), pithos burial. BCH 76 (1952), 222; AJA 64 (1960), 16ff. and pI. 5. Nine out oftwelve vases illustrated here, pk 48; the other three are (i) body ofoinochoe, AJA 64, pI. 5, fig. 38, R; (ii) one-handled handmade jug; (iii) tall kantharos as pl, 48c, but with plain reserved handle zone. 'From the northern Peloponnese'. Mainz, CVA I, rzff., pI. 3 and figs. 1-10; c£ Desborough, LMTS 265. Salmone (Elis), grave group found in 1960. Unpublished. Four vases in the Olympia Museum: BE 1052-3, oinochoai; BE 1054, tall kantharos; BE 1055, kalathos. Aetos (Ithaca), pottery from 'cairns' or collapsed houses. 1 BSA 33 (1932-3), 37ff., pIs. 3-6·
West Greek Geometric
This chapter deals with six districts: Messenia, Elis, and Achaea in the western Peloponnese; Aetolia, Acarnania, and the island oflthaca. All have produced local Geometric pottery, in succession to local Protogeometric; and in both periods there are features common to each district, but unknown in the rest of Greece. Some generic term is therefore needed to cover the whole area; I call it West Greek, since for the greater part of our period, until the colonial movement of the eighth century, these lands lay on the western periphery of the Greek world. 1 The succession ofstyles in West Greece follows the pattern that we have already observed in Laconia: Protogeometric is everywhere succeeded by Late Geometric, without any settled phase in between. To an even greater extent than in Laconia (c£ pp. 2I5ff.), the shapes ofWest Greek PG were remembered in the L G which followed; once again, therefore, we must begin with a brief account of the local PG, so that the strength of the local tradition may be fairly assessed. Ithaca is by far the most prolific of the West Greek centres. Her two sanctuaries, at Polis and Aetos, have yielded a wide range of Protogeometric shapes. At Aetos the influx of votives continues throughout Geometric into Orientalizing times; here the sealing of Heurtley's Lower Deposits is extremely important for our relative chronology, since the local vases in this context are accompanied by a mass of Corinthian imports, not later than LG. Achaea is the only other West Greek district to have produced pottery in quantity; all the vases come from well-documented grave groups, whose contents reveal affinities with Ithaca both in Protogeometric and Late Geometric times. From the other four regions the material is still very scarce; we shall see, however, that there is already enough evidence to • justify their inclusion within our West Greek koine.
The Ithacan material has already been thoroughly analysed by Desborough," who saw therein 'the nucleus of a local Ithacan Protogeometric style'; in his view it owed far more to the local Mycenaean tradition than to the example of contemporary Attica. With the latter conclusion I agree whole-heartedly. My cursory reference to this material is directed to two limited ends: first, in the light of recent discoveries elsewhere, to show that many facets oflthacan Protogeometric are reflected in other parts ofthe West Greek area; secondly, to lay particular emphasis on the shapes which survived from this style into the ensuing Late Geometric, not only in Ithaca but in all the other regions ofWest Greece. We begin with the open shapes. The favourite drinking vessel in West Greece is the kantharos with low handles; there is both a tall and a broad variety, and both are well represented in the Derveni group. The broad kantharos (pI. 48a-b,h) bears some resemblance to the Attic PG model. Yet there are important differences: the conical foot is wider and lower (on one of the Derveni examples (pl. 48d), it is omitted altogether); the handles are more angular, either leaving the lip level with the rim, or slightly drooping. Closely similar to the tall kantharoi ofDerveni (pk 48c,g) are three examples from neighbouring lands; the first is Olympia BE 1054, from Elean Salmone; the second, from Calydon in Aetolia;" and finally, the kantharos from the group in Mainz, whose exact provenance is unknown, although this may well be somewhere in Achaea. Ithaca, too, is rich in PG kantharoi. There are several complete examples from the Polis cave," but all are of the broad variety; the same applies to the numerous pieces of cups or kantharoi from Aetos, H 16-53,5 ifHeurtley's reconstructions are typical ofthe whole class." Here we meet again the angular handles characteristic of West Greece (e.g. pl. 47c,h); there is considerable variation in the height ofthe foot, but this may indicate a chronological Cf. Benton, BSA 48,255. a PGP 271ff. 3 ADGhr 17 (1961-2), 183, pI. 212a, no. I; cf. Derveni, pi. 46c. BSA 39 (1938-g), I I, nos. 25-31; on the date, Benton, BSA 44 (1949),31 I. 5 I refer to the Aetos vases in the same manner as Miss Benton, BSA 48,267: H=Heurtley's catalogue, BSA 33, 37ff.; R=Robertson's, BSA 43,9 ff.; P=Benton's Protogeometric, BSA 48, 267ff.; B=Benton's Geometric, op.cit. 275ff. 6 The restorations ofH 16-18 are thought to be too broad by Miss Benton (BSA 44, 318, n. 18) and Desborough (PGP 273.)
1
4
1 My use ofthis term is purely geographical; it has no reference to the distribution of Greek dialects in historical times, as Chadwick, GAHn, 1963, ch. xxxix, 11. a BSA 43 (1948),7.
. 220 .
222 .
WEST GREEK GEOMETRIC
development.' Both the broad and the tall kantharoi, as we shall see later, have descendants inWest Greek LG. The other shapes call for little comment. In addition to the kantharoi, Ithaca produced thefollowingdrinkingvessels: (i) a deep skyphos (Aetos H 12-15; pk 47b) having much the same body as the deep kantharoi ofDerveni but a higher lip; (ii) a shallow-bellied cup with the usual angular handle (Aetos H 54-5, pf, 47a), another shape with a Geometric future; and (iii) a kylix with conical body and three ribs on its stem (Polis 62-8; Aetos H 4,6-7) an interesting Mycenaean survival which Ithaca shares with Elis." The closed vases, although less individual in shape, offer the most striking parallels in decoration between the various western centres. The Derveni oinochoe, pl. 48j, combines three ofthe most typical motifs ofWest Greek PG: (i) cross-hatched interlocking triangles, or wolftooth;" (ii) steep zigzag in a vertical panel; and (iii) a fringed triangular motif: all three are also found at Aetos, the last two recurring on the lekythos H 75, pI. 47f.4 The fringed triangle, another survival from the local Mycenaean tradition, also dominates the shoulder of the oinochoe from Salmone, Olympia BE 1052. Fringes are sometimes added to vertical bars both in Ithaca (P 146, pl, 47g)5 and in Achaea (Derveni, pl. 48b), as well as on the Salmone oinochoe; furthermore, wolftooth appears on several PG sherds found on the surface at Kaphirio in eastern Messenia." So far we have considered only the rectilinear motifs, which certainly supply the majority of the West Greek PG repertoire. Turning to the usual circular designs, we find them, too, being handled in an idiosyncratic manner at both ends ofour area: the rare use ofstanding semicircles on open vases, and the even rarer juxtaposition of standing and pendent semicircles (pI. 47d) constitute two further links between Ithaca? and Messenia." In brief: even though little material has come to light outside Ithaca, there are already many indications that a fairly homogeneous PG style prevailed throughout West Greece. It remains to explore the relation of this style to other PG schools. With Attica, as Desborough has shown, the links are weak, although at least one Attic vase came to Aetos." More important are the occasional resemblances to the 'Amyclaean' PG ofLaconia, which otherwise occupies such an isolated position. Between Ithaca and Amyclae several connections have been noted by Desborough ;10 most significant is the preference in both places for close cross-hatched rectilinear decoration, occasionally varied by small sets of concentric circles or semicircles. With the publication of the Derveni group we may now note a practice common to Laconia and Achaea: the practice of enclosing cross-hatched triangles in metope panels, so common at Amyclae (pl, 46a,d), and also adopted on the tall kantharos from Derveni, pf, 48g. The relative chronology ofWest Greek PG is still a mystery, for there are n.o significant contexts where the local pottery can be dated by imports from the more progressive Aegean Series: Polis 25-6; Aetos H 16; Polis 44. 2 Cf. BSA 44,309, fig. 1,2, from Olympia. 8 Cf. FD v, fig. 560. This resemblance was noted by Desborough, L M T S 101. Another lekythos, with almost identical decoration, has now been found at Medeon, on the Phocian coast: ADCIrr 19 (1964), pI. 26¥. • Also Aetos H 19,29. • W. McDonald and R. Hope-Simpson, A]A 65 (1961), 248, n. 75; the authors kindly allowed me to see a photograph of these sherds. 7 Aetos H 35, 42; H 39. 8 Traganes, AE 1914, 107, fig. 12, 1-2,5; 4. The alternating semicircles occur also in Cretan PGB; see p. 237. 9 H 84; PGP 279, pI. 37; Benton, BSA 48, 267. 10 PGP 280. 1
4
223
PG
styles.' Neither are we helped much by the internal evidence ofstyle. There are some hints ofexternal Geometric influence - e.g. (i) the stirrup handle, Aetos H 69; (ii) the shallowish pedestalled krater from Derveni, pI. 48f, which may not be very much earlier than Aetos R 368 (LG I); but these will hardly allow a precise relative dating. We can only surmise that the local PG may have survived long after the passing of Protogeometric in Attica. WEST GREEK LATE GEOMETRIC: FIRST PHASE (LG I) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Aetos (Ithaca), Lower Deposit. BSA 43 (1948),7 ff.; cf BSA 48 (1953), 259. The following forty-one local vases from the deposit are illustrated by photographs in B SA 43 : pl. 16, 280-1, 284, 286-g, 293; pl. 17, 300; pl. 18, 305 (=B 735), 308-g, 312; pl. 19, 3 10-11,320 (=B 708); pl. 20, 313-15; pl. 21, 319,331 (=B 715); pl. 22,343, 347-g; pl. 23, 34 2; pl. 24, 362; pl. 25, 368; pl. 27,410,413,415; pl. 28,446-7; pI. 29, 432; pl. 30,445 (Corinthian original?); pl. 32, 566; pl. 33,471,473,484; pl. 40, 541, 545. PI. 49 d,h-k. (On the imported vases see p. 98.) Palaiomanina (Acarnania), pithos burial. ADChr 17 (1961-2), 184, pl. 212a, nos. 2-10 (Agrinion Museum, TT 2-10). Volimedia (Messenia), deposit in Mycenaean Chamber Tomb 4 (PAE 1953, 242). Ten vases, including seven Corinthian LG, one Laconian LG, and two local. On the imports see pp. 98, 218. The two local vases are: (i) Large globular jug; similar to Palaiomanina 4, but with round mouth. (ii) Hydria; imitation of Corinthian LG. Volimedia (Messenia), deposit in Mycenaean Chamber Tomb 5 (PAE 1953, 243). Ten local vases: (i) Oinochoe, narrow-necked; similar to Aetos B 97 2. (ii) Oinochoe, narrow-necked and carinated; same class as Aetos R 489, but taller; groups of reserved bands on lower body. (iii) Oinochoe, narrow-necked and carinated; same class as Aetos R 471, but with carination below shoulder. Decoration in the manner of Corinthian LG: sigmas on shoulder, lines to near base. A forerunner of the Achaean LG 11 type, as pl. 50g. (iv) Oinochoe, globular; similar to Palaiomanina 3, but with shorter neck. (v) Hydria; plump, with bands only. (vi) Pyxis, globular, imitating Corinthian L G; shape and decoration as Heidelberg G 2, CVA 3, pl. 126,8. (vii) Pyxis, globular; taller than (vi). Handle-panel contains double zigzag, three lines, and dotted lozenges. (viii) and (ix). Shallow bowls, comparable to Aetos R 292, but with short splaying lips like pl, 47f. (viii) is slightly deeper; (ix) is shallower, and has reflex handles, like a plate. (x) Skyphos, handmade. 1 The 'cairns' of Aetos, which produced both Attic PG a closed deposit.
CH 84) and 'Corinthian Geometric' (BSA 33, 28, 30), cannot be said to offer
224 .
WEST GREEK GEOMETRIC
PG
All the districts ofWest Greece have produced some Late Geometric, but only Ithaca can boast a continuous sequence. The votives ofAetos are numerous enough to offer a coherent series for each of the standard shapes; and as the local style comes increasingly under the influence of Corinth, even so the problems of relative chronology vanish away. At the beginning ofLG, when Corinthian influence is still relatively weak, we are greatly helped by the sealing ofHeurtley's Lower Deposit; for here the local pottery can be roughly dated by the Corinthian imports, which begin with a few advanced M G I I vases, and continue with a large mass ofLG, coming to an end shortly before the end of that phase. In the Upper Deposit (p. 228), the local series begins with a few close imitations of advanced Corinthian L Q.1 and thereafter moves in step with E P C. We can therefore distinguish an early phase ofthe local LG sequence, in Corinthian terms datable by context as well as by style. Outside Ithaca, three other groups warrant ascription to this phase on similar grounds. The two Messenian deposits - presumably the votive offerings to some local Mycenaean hero and not contemporary grave goods - contain either imports or imitations ofCorinthian L G. In the Acarnanian burial, the vases are plainer, and some have an old-fashioned 100k:2 but the group as a whole must be dated by vases like the broad kantharos, no. 6, comparable to Aetos R 33 I, and the kyathos, no. 9, an imitation of the Corinthian L G shape. These three groups form a valuable supplement to our knowledge of the closed vases, which are comparatively scarce in Ithaca. Furthermore, the carinated oinochoai ofVolimedia Tomb 5, seem to reveal an earlier stage of one of the favourite shapes ofAchaean LG I I (p. 230). Ithaca, however, supplies the largest quantity ofLG I pottery, and the widest range of shapes and ornament: my analysis will therefore be based on the Lower Deposit ofAetos, and any other vases from that sanctuary which betray a stylistic affinity with the contents ofthe Deposit. At the same time I shall take the opportunity ofmentioning any significant resemblances between this Ithacan material and the groups from Acarnania and Messenia, so that we may assess the degree of unity that prevailed at this time between the West Greek areas. SHAPES
The kantharos is still the favourite drinking vessel. The Ithacans evidently retained their preference for the broad type; for example, out of fifteen in the Aetos Lower Deposit, only two (R 314-15) are tall, and these may well have had high feet. Among the broad class there is great diversity ofshape, reflecting various degrees ofcontact with other Geometric styles. A purely native tradition survives in the massive kantharoi R 33 I and 319, and their Acarnanian counterparts Palaiomanina 6 and 8; they stand much nearer than their contemporaries to the PG prototype (H 16-18), and have abundant issue in the LG 11 of many parts of West Greece (p. 229). All the other Ithacan examples are more or less influenced from abroad, and differ consistently from the PG type in the following respects: conical feet are replaced by ring feet; and there is now some attempt to distinguish the lip from the body, although the articulation is not yet very sharp. In most cases the body assumes a rounded convex profile, not unlike the kantharoi of the Aegean styles. The handles rarely droop, as in PG; more often they are either level with the rim (pI. 49 e),3 1
E.g. R 295, 299 (=B 687); 392.
2
The amphoriskos no. 10 looks almost Mycenaean.
3
Also R 308, 357, B 728.
225
or rise slightly above it.' Some of these changes may have been inspired by the presence at Aetos of Corinthian models, where there is a similar variation in the height of the handlesjs but when we come to consider the decoration, it will be clear that the local potters were also open to ideas from further afield. The kantharos has a smaller relation in the deep cups with one or two handles, called 'mugs' in the Aetos publications; cups of similar shape, but fully glazed, have been found in Messenia, above the debris of the Mycenaean Palace at Pylos," The Ithacan examples follow on quite naturally after their shallower PG ancestor, Aetos H 55, whose zigzag decoration survives on the earliest ofGeometric series (pI. 49 g; R 345 = B 778). This is a conservative shape, betraying no sign of external influence in either shape or decoration; even on developed L G I examples (e.g. R 346; Palaiomanina 7) the old-fashioned drooping handles are sometimes retained. Cups are not known in Ithaca after LG I; at Aetos their function may have been usurped by the straight-walled Corinthian kyathos, which already inspired local imitations in LG 1.4 Drinking vessels with horizontal handles are relatively unimportant. Skyphoi were never popular among the Ithacans: four members ofa deep class, R 280 (pI. 49d), 281, 283-4, are sealed in the Lower Deposit at Aetos, and their deep unarticulated profiles are the natural successors of'H 14 (pI. 47b). All other LG I skyphoi are either Corinthian imports, or wan imitations thereof (R 286). Shallow Corinthian kotylai, too, were already being copied in the last years of the Lower Deposit (R 293, 300), and in the first years of the Upper Deposit (R 295,299). The main line of Ithacan Geometric kraters is represented by Miss Benton's pedestalled series, R 368, B 802 (pI. 49c), and B 803. The first comes from the LG I Lower Deposit, and must take the second with it; the third could be as late as L G I I. This trio is preceded by R 363, whose splaying lip takes us one step back in the direction of the PG example from Derveni (pI. 48f). Achaea can also supply a L G I I successor to this sequence in Troumbe 3, 5 a krater with a tall fenestrated foot - a feature which already appears in the Aetos Lower Deposit (R 370). All the West Greek pyxides of this phase are globular. The shape is not known in the local PG; and, with one exception, none of the Geometric examples is free from Corinthian influence. The exception is Aetos B 818 (pI. 49a), the earliest ofthe Ithacan series. It is remarkable for its low raised rim, its depressed globular shape, its ribbon handles attached at the widest diameter, and its low flaring pedestal with a sharp vertical edge; this is a combination of features unparalleled in any Aegean style. This pyxis is decorated in a M G manner, with a narrow hatched battlement in an otherwise dark-ground scheme; perhaps this vase represents an Ithacan M G phase, of which it is the only extant example bearing any decoration.s There is a fragmentary counterpart ofthis shape from Olympia, decorated in an advanced L G I style. 7 1 R 305=B 735; R 309, 3I1, 313; B 730-1, 736. 2 Low, B 716; high, B 717-18, 727. 3 A]A 61 (1957), pI. 42, fig. 6. • R 360, B 779; cf. Palaiomanina 9. 5 P. 230. Patras 483; P AE 1956, 199, 3, pI. 93~. • As Miss Benton kindly suggested to me, other vases may be grouped round this pyxis through resemblances of fabric and shape: cf. especially the krater R 375 (pedestal); kantharos R 331 and jug R 413 (thick continuous bars on the rim, as on the pyxis). 7 At handle level, two narrow panels containing (a) groups of three sigmas, spaced, Cb) single sigmas, spaced; elsewhere, fine banding down to below the widest diameter; glaze on the lower body. K
226 .
WEST GREEK GEOMETRIC
The other globular pyxides are easily related to Corinthian LG prototypes. Four examples- imitate the version with inset rim." There remains the handsome R 392 (Upper Deposit), with pedestal and raised rim; this must be brought into LG I, since in the next generation the globular pyxis disappeared from the Corinthian repertoire. Finally we come to the pouring vases, whose shapes are manifold. Two types of oinochoe were now being manufactured in Corinth, the broad-necked and the narrow-necked; both were exported to Ithaca, and locally imitated. Of the former class, R 445 is an extremely faithful copy, ifnot a Corinthian original; the straight necks, R 446-7, belong to the same type, but bear native decoration. Similarly, the narrow-necked category may be subdivided through their ornament into close (e.g. B 975a-e)3 and free (R 473, pl. 49k) imitations. There are, in addition, two further varieties, neither of which is known at Corinth. One combines a tall narrow neck with a narrow cylindrical body - a kind of bottle with trefoil lip; the series begins with pl, 49j (R 471, LD) and thereafter develops a carination below the shoulder." The other indigenous class has a short neck, and a more or less globular body (pt 49b, R 432, LD); in the course of the series" the width of the neck steadily decreases. One other strange variant deserves notice: the cut-away neck, R 427, suggests some knowledge of Thessaly or Euboea, where such necks are still found on the local jugs of this generation (pp. 162, 191). There remains the series of tall metallic round-mouthed jugs, which develops within the limits ofthe Aetos Lower Deposit: the earliest member bears triangles on the neck (R 413), but soon we are left with nothing but the sober scheme ofreserved bands (pk 49 b) applied to many other West Greek shapes at this time. It is most interesting to note that an exactly parallel sequence exists at Delphi, which also begins with triangles" and continues with bands.' The shape may well have come ultimately from Corinth, since imports decorated in the Corinthian 'Thapsos' style have now been found at Delphi ;" yet the close correspondence in decoration between the Ithacan and Delphian sequences seems to indicate connections independent of Corinth. DECORATION
This section will deal first with a strange style of decoration, which at present is almost unknown outside Ithaca. We shall then proceed to consider the influence of Corinthian and other Late Geometric schools in this area. The native Ithacan decoration appears on three shapes which are themselves of local origin - the kantharos, the deep cup (or 'mug'), and the pedestalled krater; also on the oinochoai of local and Corinthianizing types alike. The ornament has been carefully analysed by Robertson, who traced its origin toindigenous Protogeometric roots." The favourite motif, a group of concentric quarter-circles drawn by hand and floating on a vertical axis (pl, 49C), had already appeared in the PG deposit from the 'cairns' (H 43). The double
LG I
pendent arcs or 'pothooks' (pl. 49k)l seem to be a drastic simplification of pendent concentric semicircles. The other common survivals from the PG repertoire are concentric triangles" and multiple wavy lines: the latter may either occupy the main zone" or be used in an ancillary capacity." There remains the mysterious 'sausage' (pl. 49f)5 which deserves to be regarded as a motifin its own right, and not merely as an inefficient means of glazing the handle zone. In spite ofits primitive appearance, this style is unlikely to be earlier than L G I; the fine banding in which the motifs are framed must come from Corinth, and can hardly have been borrowed before this time. Ifwe may judge from the solitary 'sausage' on Palaiomanina 9, this style was also known in Acarnania.s It may have had an even wider circulation; but until some contemporary material is found in Aetolia, Elis, and Achaea, we have no means offixing its geographical limits. There is no trace of it in the deposits at Volimedia in Messenia. In Ithaca there is also a class oflocal vases that is innocent of decoration; the entire surface is covered in glaze, punctuated only by groups offine reserved bands at wide intervals. The nucleus, which has been collected by Robertson," consists of the kantharos R 33 I, the 'pithos' R 401, and the tall jugs R 414 (pl, 49b) and 415; the jugs, as we have seen, are closely paralleled at Delphi. The plainer vases at Palaiomanina (2-8) and at Volimedia (Tomb 4 (i); Tomb 5 (ii), (iv)) are treated in the same austere manner, as are several of the L G I I vases from Achaea and Elis. 8 The copies of Corinthian L G decoration need not detain us for long. At home this style is more remarkable for its high technical standards than for the intrinsic interest of its ornament; consequently, the efforts of provincial imitators can be most uninspiring." We have already noted the ubiquity of fine banding, which invades even the vases decorated in the local Ithacan manner. The most popular of the linear motifs are the thin zones of sigmas or single zigzag, which are frequently borrowed in Ithaca and Messenia. Passable imitations of heron kotylai were offered at Aetos, although the local artists sometimes committed a solecism in divorcing the birds from their watery habitat.w There are also some untidy attempts to reproduce the Corinthian Thapsos style.n Four Ithacan vases are subject to influences from further afield. The kantharos B 749 and the oinochoe R 452 reproduce Atticizing M G I I ornament ofthe kind that the Corinthians themselves eschewed - a heavy meander framed by ancillary strips ofdotted lozenge ;12 after the pyxis B 818 (p. 225) these are the earliest West Greek vases to be painted in a truly Geometric style. They are soon followed by R 357, a kantharos ofmixed ancestry; the architecture ofthe decoration is still Atticizing M G I I, but the fine banding and the low handles come from Corinthian LG. The series is closed-" by the kantharos R 313 (LD), whose Atticizing metopes place it well down in L G 1. The composition, where birds flank a central quatrefoil, is popular in Attica, Euboea, and the Cyclades. The nearest counterpart to this Also R 308, 474; B 914. 2 R 3II; B 731, 733. 2 R 309,293; B 730. • R 319; B 728, 733. Also R 319, 320 (=B 708); B 728,860. 6 Cf. also Aetos B 733 with the sherd BSA 32, 239, fig. 20, 3, from Astakos in Acarnania. 7 BSA 43, 109. 8 The existence of this dark-ground manner in West Greek LG causes me to question all Miss Benton's attributions of Aetos material to 'Early Geometric'. 8 R 286, 293. 10 Cf. p. 100; BSA 43, 110, R 298 and 300; the scrawny creatures on R 314-15 are debased herons. 11 R 285; B 755. 12 For R 452, cf. Agora P 22433 (WellJ 2), Hesperia 30 (1961), pl. 14. 13 I exclude B 734, which seems to be an Attic LG lIb import; cf. Agora VIII, pl. 8, 144. 1
5
1 Aetos R 386, LD; B 833; Volimedia, Tomb 5 (vi) and (vii). 2 As R 71. 3 Also Volimedia, Tomb 5 (i). • R 472; R 522; B 1025; cf. Volimedia, Tomb 5 (ii) and (Hi). 5 Aetos R 432; Palaiomanina 3,4; Volimedia, Tomb 5 (iv). 6 Neck, fr., Delphi 5988, unpublished; cf. BSA 48, 268. 7 Several examples, one illustrated in RA 12 (1938),216, bottom centre. 8 BCH85 (1961),347, fig. 33a,c. • BSA 43, I04ff.
227
228 .
WEST GREEK GEOMETRIC
LG 11
quatrefoil occurs on a vase made by a Euboean or Cycladic potter at AI Mina on the Syrian coast,' a vessel that shares with our kantharos the following rare mannerisms: the central circle, the hatching across the axis of the petals (instead of the usual diagonal direction), and the background of dots. There is no close parallel for the confronting pairs of birds, who carry their young on their backs. It can, however, be claimed that this is a unique combination of two unusual ideas, both of which figure independently on Euboean vases," More evidence of Euboean connections at Aetos may be found among the 'Cycladic' imports, of which R 567 (LD) and R 568 reveal mannerisms only found in Euboean LG (cf. pp. 192-3). We conclude with one other possible case of Thessalian influence: the cross-hatched squares on B 707 are very much at home in Thessaly, and a kantharos from Kapakli" offers the closest parallel to shape and decoration.
229
Asani, near Kalavryta (Achaea), grave group. Unpublished: (i) Patras 600: tall-necked globular oinochoe. Four zones on neck contain dotted zigzag, zigzag, S's, and (). Simple leaf pattern on shoulder; fine lines; glaze. (ii) Patras 602: broad kantharos with wide base. Wavy line on rim; two zones at handle level containing () and S's; fine lines; two bands at base. (iii) Patras 601: kantharos, glazed, with three fine reserved bands immediately below rim. Shape similar to Aetos B 768, but slimmer. (iv) Patras 603: Protocorinthian aryballos, transitional to ovoid; spiral hooks on shoulder, with groups of sigmas as filling ornament; below, zone containing groups of sigmas. Olympia, well near the R. Kladeos. ADChr 18 (1963), 103, pl. 135b. SHAPES
In spite of local differences, relations between the various West Greek centres are still quite close; this is most clearly seen in the wide diffusion within West Greece of individual shapes like the broad kantharos, and the angular and globular oinochoai. There is also some measure ofuniformity in the decoration, but this is imposed from outside; for here the only common factor is the universal desire to imitate Corinthian ornament. The connection with Laconia, so evident in PG times, seems to have lapsed. The influence ofCorinth is now strong at all West Greek centres, and in addition Ithaca has independent relations with Euboea, Delphi, and Thessaly. The links with Euboea are especially interesting, in view ofthe tradition that the Eretrians settled in Corcyra before the Corinthians (p. 367). WEST GREEK LATE GEOMETRIC: SECOND PHASE (LG 11) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Aetos (Ithaca), Upper Deposit. RSA 43 (1948), rff Also includes a few LG I vases (see p. 224, n. I) and much Orientalizing. PI. 50a. (On the Corinthian imports see p. 104.) Pharae (Achaea), grave groups: Gr. a. PAE 1952, 401-3, figs. 9-12, 23, 26, 29. PI. 50c-d,f. Gr. (3, earlier of two burials. P AE 1952, 403-4, nos. 3-6, figs. 15-18. Gr. y. P AE 1952, 404-6, figs. 19-22, 24-5. PI. 50e,g-h. Gr. at the location Phteri. PAE 1956, 196-7, pI. 90b; pI. 91a, 1-3; Patras 531-4. Gr. by modern road, 28 km. from Patras. P AE 1956, 197-8, pI. 92; Patras 527-30. Built tomb at Troumbe tis Chalandritsis, more than one burial. P AE .1930, 83-5, figs. 5-9 (three vases), here 'Troumbe 8-10'; PAE 1956, 198-201, pls. 93-4 (seven more vases, recently restored and mended; Patras 481-4, 550, here 'Troumbe
1-7'). Cf. AS 9 (1959), 164ff'.,no. 4, pl, 24 and fig. I. Cf. the kantharos fr. from Eretria, AE 1903, 2, fig. tropoli e Colonic 268. 3 PGRT, pl. 10,80. 1
2
I;
and a skyphos from Pithecusae with a pair of fighting birds, Buchner, Me-
Kantharoi remain universally popular; large numbers of them were still being dedicated at Aetos, and offered to the dead in Achaea. Those from the Achaean cemetery of Pharae illustrate the strength oflocal tradition through their resemblance to their PG ancestors. Both the tall and the broad kantharoi of Derveni have their successors; the two varieties remain distinct, not so much in the proportions of the body as in the height of the lip and foot. The tall type (pI. 50c), always decorated down to the lower handle attachment, has a close counterpart in Aetos R 358 (pI. 50a) which differs only in the possession of three handles; other Ithacan examples' have their handles high, not level with the rim as in Achaea. Broad kantharoi are rarely decorated, except in Ithaca, where both highs and low handles" are found; in Achaea, apart from the abnormally shallow example Pharae y 2 (pI. 50e), all are coated in glaze interrupted only by reserved bands. A good representative ofthis class is Pharae a 7 (pI. 50f) ; there are also many examples in Ithaca- and at least two at Olympia," In all three districts such kantharoi must have had a Subgeometric phase lasting well into the seventh century. A figured example at Olympia- bears an Orientalizing dog that can hardly have been drawn before the second quarter ofthat century." At Asaniin Achaea an attenuated version (Patras 602) accompanies a MP C I aryballos, of the first quarter. In Ithaca there is a considerable development in the shape from R 354 (UD) to B 773; the latter, with its smaller shoulder and narrower foot, may be even later than the Asani kantharos.r Alongside this dark-ground class, Ithaca produced a decorated series of broad kantharoi, which also continued into the seventh century, to judge from the Corinthianizing Subgeometric ornament of Aetos B 761-2. The deep cups or 'mugs' of I thacan L G I have no local successors in this phase; in Achaea, however, the shape survives in a solitary figured example showing a lion pursuing a deera scene hovering on the verge of a local Orientalizing style." 1 R 326 (UD), B 744. 2 Aetos R 324 (UD); B 732. 3 Aetos R 333 and 337 (UD). • Aetos R 352-4; B 768-73. • OIBer 111,38, fig. 24; OIBer VII, 127, fig. 68, from Well F. For the bronze original, see Olympia IV, 35, 670. • Olympia IV, pI. 69, 1296. 1 For even later contexts, see BerichtVII, 127. 81 leave out of account the kantharos Aetos R 325=B 741, UD, which looks out of place in Ithaca; Miss Benton suggests that it may be Argive. For the shape and the subsidiary decoration, cf. OpAth 4 (1963), 93, fig. 14, from Dendra. • Troumbe 7; PAE 1956, 199, fig. 2, pI. 93Y.
230 .
WEST GREEK GEOMETRIC
Skyphoi are rare. The Ithacans were content to import this shape from Corinth. In Achaea, the only two examples (Pharae, Phteri 4; Troumbe 4) keep the splaying lip inherited from the local PG.l This feature is shared by two ofthe Achaean kraters from the Troumbe tomb: no. 8 with a low conical foot," and no. 3 resting on a tall fenestrated pedestal. Their shallow bodies place them in the same tradition as the pedestalled series of Ithacan LG I (p. 225); even the splaying lip is not peculiar to Achaea, but appears both in Ithaca (R 363) and Messenia (Volimedia, Tomb 5 (viii) and (ix)) during the interval between the Derveni and Pharae groups. The third ofthe Troumbe kraters, no. 9,3 is patently Corinthianizing. Shape and decoration are reminiscent of the deep E P C kotyle, but the Corinthian kraters of that phase no longer have stirrup handles; the nearest counterpart from Corinth is an advanced L G I piece from the N. Cemetery (pI. I9h). A solitary krater from Olympia- is an enlargement of the broad kantharos, on a flaring foot. The strangeness of the decoration makes this vase hard to date; yet it should not be very much later than its nearest Ithacan relations, the large kantharoi R 319 (LD) and R332 (UD). The only two pyxides of this phase come from Achaea (Pharae f3 3) and Olympia." They have the following features in common: a flat, bulging body without handles; a contracted mouth with everted rim; and a comparatively narrow raised foot. Neither of them has any parallel outside West Greece; nor can we yet trace their immediate origin, although a derivation from the depressed globular type represented by Aetos B 818 (p. 225) would not be impossible. The Olympian piece, which has an angular profile, looks the later of the two; a more advanced version of the same shape," decorated with purple paint, must be dated well down into the seventh century. In Achaea the pouring vessels are among the most individual of the local shapes. Oinochoai with trefoil lips are completely lacking, but there are three distinct varieties ofjug. A tall version with ovoid body occurs in the Kladeos Well at Olympia; we have already met it in I thacan L G I (cf pI. 49b). The other two varieties - the angular and the baggy - are well represented in the Achaean grave groups. The angular type (pI. 50g)7 has its widest diameter at the base, and a carination below the shoulder: the body recalls a L G I oinochoe from Volimedia in Messenia," but the neck is lower and wider. There is also some resemblance to the Ithacan angular series, which continues into L G I 1;9 but there the widest diameter comes at the carination, not at the base. The baggy jugs of Achaea are less consistent among themselves: sometimes the widest diameter is very near the baser sometimes very much higher ;!' most examples, however, achieve a mean between these two extremes (e.g. pI. 50 h), 12 having a conical body curving in towards a broad base. This class has been compared to the Corinthian Iekythos-oinochoe.P but the comparanda are all very much earlier, and in any case the shortness of the neck Cf. pI. 47ffrom Derveni. 2 PAE Ig30, 85, fig. 6, R. PAE Ig30, 86, fig. B. Since its publication, this vase has been fully mended and restored. 'OIBer VII, 126, figs. 70-1. 6 OIBcn, 47, fig. 16. 61oc. cit. fig. 17. 7 .Pharae, y 4; also Pharae, a I, Phteri I (Patras 531), and three more, ADChr 17, I2g, pI. 153, bottom (patras 60g-I I). 8 Tomb 5 (iii), p. 223. 8 Aetos R 522 (UD); B 1026. 10 Pharae, y 6. 11 Olympia, Kladeos Well. 12 Pharae, Y 5; also Troumbe 1,2,10; Pharae, Road I. 13 Zapheiropoulos, PAE Ig52, 409.
LG 11
makes a Corinthian derivation improbable. A closer parallel to the shape may be found in Aetos R 43 I, which looks like a Subgeometric descendant of the L G I globular oinochoe R 432. In fine, both types ofAchaean jug have their nearest relations within the West Greek area; but their ultimate origin is obscured by the considerable gap in the Achaean series between Derveni and Pharae. Apart from the comparanda already cited, the other I thacan pouring vases follow Corinthian models. There were occasional attempts to imitate the E P C conicallekythos-oinochoe (pI. 50 b) ;1 while the painters of ovoid oinochoai were soon tempted into wild experiments in emulation of the Cumae Group;s like their Corinthian prototypes, these probably begin within the period of E P C. DECORATION
Our first task is to discover what became of the SubPG ornament which was so prominent in Ithacan LG 1. In the Upper Deposit ofAetos there are still a few examples of this homemade style," but these may well belong to the closing years of L G I with the earliest Corinthian imports in the same context (p. 104). A little later, the local motifs begin to disappear even from the kantharoi, and their place is taken by minor ornaments borrowed from E PC: clusters offloating chevrons or sigmas drawn with the multiple brush,' double lozenge net," and serpents." Later still, near the end ofLG II, come the EPC horizontal S'S.7 Two vases reveal a compromise between old and new fashions: on the tall neck, pI. 50 b, a row of floating 'pothooks' is inserted into a scheme which is pure Corinthian in other respects; likewise on the kantharos R 337 (U D) a zone ofdouble arcs accompanies the Corinthianizing horizontal S's, and some Early Orientalizing birds that seem to have been borrowed from Corinthian globular aryballoi." Much the same compromise is apparent in the decoration ofthe Elean krater from Olympia, quoted above. The front of the handle zone is occupied by a farrago of Corinthian motifs (double axe, chevron, horizontal S's) wrenched out of their usual context; but the 'comb' ornament on the rear is probably of local origin, while the wavy line on the rim places this vase in the same tradition as the Ithacan kantharos R 319. The latter feature appears again on some Subgeometric skyphos fragments from Olympia," and seems to be at home in West Greece. Before leaving Olympia, we should note an even later survival of local LG ornament in the 'sausage' under the handles of the Orientalizing dog-kotyle.> The Achaeans, too, evolved their own blend oflocal and Corinthian ingredients. Nearly all the motifs are of Corinthian extraction: small clusters of floating sigmas, rays, spirals (pI. 50d),1l and heron-like birds's which lack only the crests of the Corinthian original. The three-limbed motif on Pharae y I and f3 6 recalls the Corinthian N-ornament (p. 106, n. 2). The hatched triangles on the shoulders of the angular oinochoai have an old-fashioned look, but the addition of bars at their apices'" is a Corinthianizing touch. Finally, Achaean
1
3
R 493=B 1020; also R 4gI =B IOIB. 2 R 500ff. 3 R 324, 441, 474. 'R 333; B 744-5,747. • R 330=B 763. 7 R 322=B 761; B 762. 8 Cf. VS, pI. 5,5. 9 AM 36 (IgII), IgO, fig. 24, 1-3. 10 OlymPUlIV, pI. 6g, I2g6. Cf. the ship krater from Agrapidochori, AR Ig67, 11, fig. 16, top. 11 Pharae, a 5; for the vertical spiral, cf. the krater from Thera in the Thapsos style, VS, pI. 1,2. 12 Troumbe 10, Road I; P AE Ig56, 19B,fig. I. 13 ADChr 17 (lg6I-2), pI. 153, bottom R; Patras 60g. 1
5
R326.
232 .
WEST GREEK GEOMETRIC
potters often borrowed from their Corinthian neighbours the idea of fine banding, which they applied without hesitation to non-Corinthian shapes like the angular and baggy oinochoai. In the marshalling of this ornament, however, the Achaeans departed from Corinthian practice. They cultivated a thin, staccato style where the motifs are broken up into small units, and widely spaced. Thus the floating sigmas are usually restricted to three to five in a group; continuous spirals are often rendered down into S's (pI. 50c), whirligigs (pI. 50e), or interlocking arcs such as are found on two vases in the Subgeometric group from Asani; the thin, detached rays on the lip of pl, 50 b are another case in point. This loose manner has something in common with the treatment of the local ornament in Ithacan LG I and I I, and may prove to be typical ofthe West Greek area as a whole; it is also paralleled in Elisand Aetolia,s Achaean figure-drawing is limited to two vases. On the kantharos Pharae, a 5 (pI. 50d)3 the two outlined fish are evidently inspired by Corinth,' although the fish ofE PC are more often rendered in silhouette." The mug Troumbe 7 presents a lion pursuing a deer, 6 an Attic rather than a Corinthian theme. The Achaean picture can hardly be earlier than the oldest Athenian representations of the opening years of'Protoattic;' for although the drawing seems stiffand primitive, the date is revealed by two late features, both ofEarly Orientalizing origin: the schematic tree in front of the deer, and the position of the lion's tail between the hind legs (cf. p. 184, n. 4; p. 208). Several unstratified figured works from Aetos also seem to belong to this generation: the lions on R 491 and R 563; the outlined man on R 53 I; and the clumsy horse scene on R 537. 8 From the material of this final phase the following conclusions may be drawn. Most of the shapes are still oflocal origin; their survival bears witness to the persistence ofan indigenous West Greek tradition, shared by all three ofthe districts which have so far yielded L G I I pottery - Ithaca, Elis, and Achaea. The decoration, however, reflects a much greater degree offoreign influence than was present in L G I; and this influence is now exclusively Corinthian. The wide spacing of Corinthianizing ornament may prove to be a typically West Greek mannerism; all other correspondences in decoration between the various areas seem to be symptomatic of a common debt to Corinth, which eventually stifled the local style after the end of L G I 1. 1 3 7
OlForsch v, 158, pl, 59: AR 1967, I I, fig. 16, bottom right, from Agrapidochori. Details: PAE 1952, 410, fig. 29. 4 Cf. VS, pl, 9, 3. 5 As Aetos R I7I. Cf. Hampe, Einfriihattischer Grabfund, figs. 19 and 21. 8 CfRobertson, BSA 43,
BSA 32, 239, fig. 20, 2, from Kryoneri. 6 PAE 1956, 200, fig. 2. II 1-12. 2
CHAPTER ELEVEN
Cretan Geometric
Crete is a prolific source of Geometric pottery. Most of our material comes from cremations in tholos and chamber tombs, which remained in use for many generations. The forms of these tombs were inherited from the Late Minoan I I I period, when inhumation was the prevailing rite: but in the course of the local PG style, cremation was gradually adopted,' and eventually became the rule, except in the extreme east ofthe island (pp. 257ff.). During the succeeding Geometric period, the cremation urn was always the leading shape in the repertoire of Central Crete, and the most lavishly decorated. The most popular type is particularly well suited to the local burial customs - a plump, capacious vase designed with a wide mouth, so that it could house not only the ashes, but also the smaller and more personal of the funerary gifts: in this way the Cretan dead were partially compensated for the lack of that privacy enjoyed by the Athenians and other mainlanders who rested in individual graves. Urns of this shape (pl. 53a) - or painted pithoi, as they are called in Crete- - are rare in other Geometric schools, except on the island of Thera, where similar burial customs were observed." The solid construction of the tombs has allowed many thousands of Cretan Geometric vases to survive in good condition: yet the circumstances of discovery have rarely been favourable towards establishing their relative chronology. Very few tombs were abandoned in Geometric times: all too frequently, Geometric cremations were disturbed and displaced to make room for newcomers in the seventh century. Luckily, it was possible to isolate a useful number of individual burials in the two Knossian cemeteries near Fortetsa; and on the evidence of these valuable groups, the first sound division of the Knossian Geometric style into chronological phases was offered by J. K. Brock in his exemplary publication, to which all further research will be profoundly indebted. Brock's internal relative chronology is here accepted in principle, although a few minor modifications will be suggested. Absolute dating depends partly on the contexts of a few imports, but mainly on the stylistic links with Attic and other Geometric schools: the links deserve some re-examination in the light of the most recent evidence. Latest inhumations in the Knossos area: Ay. loannis, Tombs I, H, VII, VHI (E-MPG), BSA 55 (1960),144; tomb at Isopata (MPG), BSA 58 (1963),38. 2 After Payne, BSA 29 (1927-8), 233ff. 3 Cf. Theran stamnoi, p. 186, pI. 4oa. 1
. 233 .
234 .
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
Before descending to particulars, we must make some broad geographical distinctions. The greater part of this chapter will be devoted to the Knossian Geometric style, which prevailed over most of the island. It can be traced as far west as Eleutherna ;' to the east, it penetrated over the pass leading to the GulfofMirabello (p. 257); in the south, it is amply represented at Arkades and in the Messara plain, although the southern potters evolved a few local idosyncrasies (p. 255). At the two extremities of the island the situation is different. In the extreme west there is some evidence of a local PG style independent of Knossos.t the later material is still too scanty to inform us whether this independence was maintained into Geometric times." But in the far east, beyond the isthmus of Hierapetra, the Eteocretan communities evolved a highly individual Geometric school of their own, influenced only very superficially by the Central Cretan style. 'Eteocretan Geometric', as the eastern school may be conveniently called, will be treated separately at the end ofthis chapter (pp. 257ff.). KNOSSIAN OR CENTRAL CRETAN GEOMETRIC In the early Iron Age no other part of Crete was more sensitive to foreign ideas than the north central plain, dominated by Knossos. On two occasions, the pottery ofthis area came under strong Attic influence. The first contact with Attica, through the medium ofimported vases, put an end to a stagnant Subminoan phase, and inspired the evolution of a local Protogeometric school. 4 From first to last, this was a hybrid style, where the native elements were never entirely swamped by the influence ofAttic PG: Knossian potters, always selective in their borrowing, adapted Attic ideas to their own taste, and to the needs of the local burial customs. Thus the stirrup-vase still survived from Minoan times, but now assumed the crisp ovoid contours ofthe Attic lekythos. Conversely, the Attic neck-handled amphora was often imitated, but its body sometimes emerged from the Cretan potter's wheel with that double curve that is so characteristic of the Late Minoan tradition.s The same feature also survives in the bell-krater, the most popular cremation urn ofthe day; yet in its later stages, even this native shape assumes the plastic neck-ring ofthe Attic PG krater," The decoration shows a similar compromise: on large vases, such as the bell-krater and the necked pithos (another common cremation vase), Subminoan fringed schemes are at first combined with Attic concentric circles,' and then ousted by them:" the bell-krater borrows the symmetrical system ofthe Attic skyphos, where a simple rectilinear panel is flanked by concentric circles. Smaller vessels, meanwhile, show little contact with the corresponding Attic forms, and usually retain Subminoan wavy lines for their decoration. The context ofAttic imports" proves that Protogeometric began at Knossos ~ot long before it ceased in Attica: the final stage of the local PG style coincides with Attic Early BSA 31 (1930-1), 108ff., fig. 35. 2 From the Khania area: (a) eight PG vases from Vryses: Jantzen, Festschrift E. v. Mercklin, Waldsassen (1964),60-2, pis. 33-4; (b) c. eighty PG vases from Modi, unpublished: Platon, KCh 7 (1953), 48Sff.; Desborough, LMTS 267-8. 3 Aptara, two sherds: Matz, Forschungen aufKreta I942 (1951), pI. 72, 2--3; Khania, LG lid and skyphos, shortly to be published in ADChr by the excavator, Mr I. Tsedakis, who kindly permitted me to mention these vases. 4 PGP 236ff. 5 Fortetsa (hereafter F), pI. 9,179. OF, pl. 16,221; er.PGP, pI. 12. 7 BSA 58 (1963), 37, fig. 7, 11,3; F, pl, 8, 117. 8 F, pl, 16,221-2, both MPG. 9 F 189, 213. 1
PGB
235
Geometric, whose impact in Crete was negligible (p, 328.) The influence ofAttica remained in abeyance until an advanced stage ofAttic Middle Geometric (p. 239), when a true Geometric school arose in Central Crete. So far, this pattern ofdevelopment is paralleled in the Cyclades and in East Greece; in both those areas there was a similar lull between two periods ofstrong Attic influence, when the local potters were left to their own devices, and continued to debase an enfeebled Protogeometric style. But in one respect the Cretan record is unique: the arrival of mainland Geometric influence was delayed by a phase of wild experiment, where the characteristic ornament owes little either to the expiring PG tradition of Crete, or to any other Aegean school. This mysterious interlude, which has been called Protogeometric B,I deserves our detailed attention, since it introduced a rich repertoire of new motifs which were never entirely forgotten during the succeeding Geometric style. PROTOGEOMETRIC B (not in chronological order) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Fortetsa, Tomb 0 D, four contemporary burials, nos. 339-76. PI. 51 b-d. Fortetsa, Tomb X, burial 3, nos. 428-39. PI. 51 e. Fortetsa, Tomb 11, burial 21, nos. 1016-19 (pI. 51f) ; burial 23, nos. 102g-39. Fortetsa, Tomb P, group 81 (LXXX), nos. 1492-4. Knossos, Geometric Well, rubbish in lower deposit. BSA 55 (1960), 159ff., nos. 1-38. The whole waterpots and some ofthe larger frs. - e.g. 14, 19 - are earlier. Vrokastro, Bone Enclosure VI. Hall, Vrokastro 163, fig. 99. Phaistos, Vano P, deposit. Ann. 39-40 (1961-2), 406ff., fig. 51. Arkhanes, Tomb: house model and twenty vases, all in the Giamalakis collection. Alexiou, KCh 4 (1950), 44 1ff., figs. 1-9, pls, 29-32; Marinatos and Hirmer, Crete and Mycenae 154, pls, I 38-g. A fairly homogeneous group, but not certainly from one burial; some of the vases - e.g. KCh 4, pI. 17, 1-2 and 8-9 - could well be EG. SHAPES
Two types of cremation pithos are current. The first, with short concave neck and rounded body (pI. 51f, F 1016), has roots in the local PG tradition. Brock has divided necked pithoi into three groups, according to the position of their handles is but hardly any two are alike in profile or proportions. It may be that the variety with vertical handles on the shoulders (e.g. F no. 344) is influenced by the Thessalo-Cycladic amphoriskos which was exported to Crete." Secondly, a new form, the straight-sided pithos. Its essential features are these: a straight shoulder, distinguished from the body by a sharp carination; handles horizontal, and set at a high angle; flat base (pI. 5Ig).4 The lip is sometimes everted, and sometimes inset; I I follow Brock's terminology, F 214. PG proper, which precedes PGB, is not called PG'A', but is subdivided into Early, Middle, and Late phases. 2Fno.147. 3Fno. 1492; cf. pl. 32f. 4Fno.I440.
236 .
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
otherwise the shape is an enlargement of an old local pyxis with vertical lip, surviving from LM III into EPG.l In this phase the body is still gently curved, and relatively plump, in contrast to the straighter and more attenuated examples found in Early Geometric contexts (p. 239). For this new shape a conical knobbed lid was made to measurers the traditional kalathos, with two horizontal handles," may still have been used to close the necked pithoi. The hydria had already been used as a domestic waterpot well back into PG properr' it now becomes popular as a funerary gift, with appropriately lavish decoration (pI. 51 a, F no. 493). In comparison with earlier examples, the neck is narrow, and the body usually has a low centre of gravity. The stirrup-vase is now obsolete: its function as an unguent vase is probably inherited by the numerous smalllekythoi (pI. 51 b, F no. 356) found in PG B contexts," Closely related to these arethe jugs with handle to rim (Fno. 1038), the precursors ofthe globular aryballos ;" and many small oinochoai (pI. 51 c, F no. 35 I ). 7 All three shapes share a narrow neck (varying in length), and a globular body with sagging profile, tapering to a narrow foot or base. Pyxides are always globular, and usually small, with two horizontal handles (pI. 51 d, Fno. 369): their lip, low and sharply everted, suggests a derivation from the Attic LPG type which previously inspired closer imitations," The bell-krater, a favourite cremation urn from E PG until LP G, makes its last appearance in this phase: it retains the plastic neck-ring first found on MP G examples, e.g. F no. 22 I. Its miniature, the bell-skyphos, is still current as a drinking vessel, but disappears at the end of P GB: the latest examples are considerably wider, and less carefully thrown, than their predecessors." More common is a glazed cup of heavy fabric, with short flaring lip, and a single vertical handle attached inside the rim (pI. 51 e, F no. 434). In general, PGB shapes show remarkably little influence from any other contemporary Geometric style. At this time, Attic broad-based oinochoai and shallow skyphoi were being reproduced in practically every other local school; but not in Crete. The only Attic Geometric shape to make anyimpression here is the belly-handled amphora.l" which had already been imported, and had inspired earlier imitations.P A unique pedestalled krater from Ay. Ioannis'" may owe something to the Thessalo-Cycladic school in its SubPG stage.v DECORATION
In the rich and exotic decoration ofPGB vases Brock rightly saw the 'confluence of three separate currents'v" The three classes ofornament may be distinguished as (a) circular and Cf. F no. 163. 2 Fnos. 343, 350. 3 F nos. 346, 357--8. 4 RSA 55 (1960), 159, nos. 1-4; 163. • Rather than by the hydria, as suggested by Brock,F 143; for the normal domestic use ofM-LPG hydriai, see preceding note. • The name 'aryballos' is reserved for unguent vases with a neck short enough to be comparable to the well-known Corinthian type. In Crete, true aryballoi already occur in polished unpainted ware: see RSA 58 (1963), pl. 13, 11-12; F no. 1017, with two necks; a painted aryballos from the Dictaean cave (Boardman, eeo 56, no. 240, pl. 18) may well be PGB. 7 In conformity with our nomenclature for other local styles, 'oinochoe' implies a trefoil lip, 'jug' a round mouth. In Brock's system, these are 'jug' and 'aryballos' respectively. • E.g. F no. 435. 10 Fno. 339· • E.g. Fno. 1470; for an actual import, see RSA 58 (1963), pl. 12b, 11. 17. 11 F nos. 269, 301. 12 RSA 55 (1960), 130, r. 11, pI. 31. 13 See p. 154: cf. especially Marmariani 147--8, PGP, pI. 23. The spreading foot may have been inspired by an earlier import like Fno.1481• 1
14F 143.
PGB
237
compass-drawn; (b) rectilinear; and (c) curvilinear, freehand. In this composite style each of its three ingredients deserves separate treatment: finally, we shall consider a few early essays in figured drawing. (a) Full concentric circles, as we might expect, are mainly confined to the more conservative shapes that survive from PG proper: chief among these are the bell-krater and the various types of necked pithos. Occasionally, circles are combined with new curvilinear motifs of class (C).1 Full circles, as we have seen, go back to the beginning ofEPG, when they were borrowed directly from Attic PG; not so the concentric semicircles, which do not arrive in the local style until LPG - hence after they had passed out of fashion in Attica. Their popularity in LP G and PG B may be due to Cycladic influence, especially when we find them in pendent sets, and on shapes related to Thessalo-Cycladic originals.t Typical of PG B is the alternation of standing and pendent sets, attached to the same horizontal line." Standing semicircles are used canonically on the shoulders of the larger oinochoai;' in this context we should also mention the cross-hatched triangles, another PG motif that appears in Central Crete only after the end ofAttic PG: they occur frequently in this phase on the shoulder ofany pouring vase. Other and more complicated triangular designs, inherited from the extinct stirrup-vase, survive into PGB.5 (b) Of the rectilinear motifs (apart from triangular designs), some at least owe their derivation to the earlier stages ofAttic and Cycladic Geometric. Two of these are faithfully reproduced on the necked pithos already quoted (pI. 51 f) : groups of diagonals separated by black triangles, and the chain of cross-hatched lozenges; on this same vase the dark ground, punctuated by reserved banding, is another feature newly introduced from the same source. But such close imitation is rare: more frequently the motifs are adapted to local taste." Single zigzags are loosely drawn, with a thick brush. Cretan potters develop a fondness for hatching, often across a triple or quadruple outline - a local habit that begins in LPG,7 and becomes extremely common in PGB: the basic motifs treated in this way are zigzag (pI. 51 b), single floating chevrons (pI. 51 a), battlements," horizontal bands," and vertical ladders,"? Hatching is perpendicular to multiple outlines, but usually diagonal, in the Attic manner, when the outlines are only double.P Thicker hatching, or 'billet', may be applied to narrow horizontal zones,12 or even in the outer rings of concentric circles." The windmill pattern':' makes its first appearance in PG B, and seems to be a Cretan invention.P In this phase, its use is confined to narrow zones.P and the diagonal lines are curved. (c) Freehand curvilinear motifs form the most original component of the PG B style: basically, these are three in number: the arc, the running spiral, and the cable. Each lends itself to elaboration. Arcs are often drawn in double outline, either in confronting pairs.v E.g. bell-krater, Fno. 712; neckedpithos,Fno. 690. 2RSA 29 (1927--8), pl. 6, nos. 8 and 12. F motif IOC; to Brock's examples, add RSA 55 (1960), pl. 31. In West Greek PG cf. p. 222, n. 8. • F nos. 443, 487, 1363. 5 E.g. F motif ¥g; to the examples cited, add the jug Vrokastro 164, fig. 99C. • FOI'Cretan adaptations of these two motifs, see the central zones ofF no. 1440 (pi. 51 g) and 350. 7 Fnos. 277, 301. 8 F motif 7a: Phaistos, hydria, Ann. 39-40 (1961-2),4°9, fig. 5In. • Fmotif rq. 10 Fmotif 11. 11 As pi. 51 c, F no. 35 I; Vrokastro 164, fig. 99C. 12 PI. 51 a, F no. 493, lip. 13 F no. 346. 14 F motif IX. 15 For an occurrence in Attica (MG I) see Attic, p. 19, n. 9. 18 RSA 31 (1930-1), pl. 13. 17 Fmotif IOm. 1 3
238 .
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
239
PGB
or piled up to form a scale pattern (pI. 51 g).l The spiral is once expanded into a spiral net (pI. 51 g). Cables may be enclosed in additional outlines (pI. 51 a) or, as mentioned above, wrapped round concentric circles (Fno. 690). All three motifs are often hatched.s or, less commonly, dotted: in the case ofthe spirals, hatching is applied only within alternate loops when the outline is single," or to all the space between two spirals (pI. 51 g). But even with these elaborations, the new motifs are still confined to fairly narrow zones: it is only in the next phase that they are allowed to range widely over the vase surface (p. 240).
tell much the same story. Four glazed examples ofMG type, but not closely datable,' were found in Tomb OD; part of a MG I skyphos accompanied PGB rubbish in the well at Knossos ;" another came from the PGB domestic deposit at Phaistos." PGB is therefore contemporary with the whole or part of Attic M G 1.4
At this time the Cretans were more adventurous than any other Aegean potters in depicting the natural world. In the 'kangaroo' bird they had already evolved a distinctive local type.' Human figures occur on two vases from Fortetsa: there are two representations ofa goddess under the handles of the pithos 1440 (pI. 51 g, F, pI. 163), and a frieze of women round the shoulder of the Atticizing amphora 339 (F, pl, 144). On both vases, the figures raise their arms. Those on the amphora are surely mourners: apart from the detail on their skirts, they are drawn in silhouette after the Attic manner, and their strictly triangular thorax may show knowledge of an Attic convention, already established in the single mourner on a M G I krater from the Kerameikos (p. 2 I ). In other respects, the inspiration is local. Triangular abdomina suggest full skirts in the Minoan tradition; and the pigtails may be paralleled on a Subminoan clay goddess from Karphi." In the case of the goddesses ofno. 1440, the latticed rectangles recall the bell skirts of the Karphi terracottas; and the flat headdress, or polos, is paralleled in the figurines attached to the Giamalakis house model. 6 The hatching of arms, polos, chest, and spiral snakes is in harmony with the other ornament on the vase, and typical ofthe PG B style in general. 7
SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
With what phase of Attic Geometric is Cretan PGB contemporary? Here the evidence is limited to (a) two Atticizing Cretan vases in Fortetsa Tomb OD, and (b) three instances where imported skyphoi are found in PGB contexts. (a) The figured amphora F 339 bears the same system ofdecoration, in a much simplified form, as the amphora from Kerameikos Gr. 41:8 for the boxed pattern between the circles, an even closer parallel may be found on another Attic amphora of similar date, from Aegina." Gr. 41, as we have seen, spans the transition from Attic E G to M G: on the Aegina vase, the corners ofthe circle metopes are filled by dot rosettes, a motif hardly found before Attic MG I (p. 20). The small mug,F37S, is also based on an Attic MG I prototype (p. 18); but the system of decoration - a window-panel surrounded by glaze - connects it rather with tire Cyclades (p. 170) than with Attica, where the ornament is richer and applied to a light ground. (b) The imported skyphoi, which are all Atticizing Cycladic rather than genuine Attic, F motif IOU. 2 F motifs roi, 11 m.n,z, 3 F no. 524. F no. 354; BSA 55 (1960), 130, pI. 31; Vrokastro 96, fig. 52a, from a ?bell-krater, could also be PGB. • Marinatos and Hirmer, Crete and MycentJl! 1960, pI. 136. 6 0p. cit. pI. 139. ? On the interpretation of the figures, see Alexiou, KCh 21 (1958),287--8, with refs. 6 K. v. I, pI. 46, 2146; noted by Willemsen, Gnomon 30 (1958),615. • Kraiker, Aigina, pI. 3, 45· 1
4
CENTRAL CRETAN EARLY GEOMETRIC (not in chronological order)
Fortetsa, Tomb LST: burial 2, nos. 382-3; burial 6, nos. 387-8. Fortetsa, Tomb TFT: burial 32, nos. 697-g; burial gg, nos. 706-9. PI. 52b. Khaniale Teke, Platon's Tomb: nearly all of c. fifty vases, unpublished. KCh 633. PI. 52a,d. Vrokastro, Bone Enclosure 12. Vrokastro I 68-g, figs. 101-3.
I
(1947),
Protogeometric B was virtually an original creation ofKnossian potters, owing very little to any other Geometric school. Subsequently, no settled style emerged anywhere in Crete until the rise of Mature Geometric, the phase in which the influence of Attic Geometric reached its highest point. Such a radical transformation did not happen overnight. A transitional phase, brief though it may have been, is clearly marked by the style ofcertain large vases, and deserves separate treatment: this phase has been suitably named Early Geometric." At last, a true Geometric style is in the making, comparable with the definitive Attic school. For the first time, standard Geometric shapes and ornament are regularly copied from Attica; simultaneously, other shapes and motifs survive from PG B. Some vases, where old PG B and new Atticizing features are uneasily blended (pI. 52 a,d) , bear witness to a state of lively ferment in Knossian workshops. Such a heady mixture could not have endured for long. E G made little impression outside the Knossos area; even at Knossos the Attic element soon prevailed, and a settled Mature Geometric style became established. SHAPES
The wide variety in the shapes ofcremation pithoi is symptomatic ofthis experimental phase. Necked pithoi are on their way out; but before they finally disappear, their shape and fabric are greatly improved." The straight-sided pithos continues, with a body slimmer and straighter than in PGB, tapering to a narrower foot (pI. 52b).7 But before the end ofEG a third type was introduced, destined at Knossos to oust all other forms, and to remain the Nos. 364-7; see Smithson, AJA 63 (1959),304. 2 BSA 55 (1960), 161, no. 20, fig. 4. Ann. 39-40 (1961-2),408, fig. 5 1C. 4 There are other similar imports in the tholos tomb at Khaniale Teke, B S A 49 (1954), pI. 26, nos. 7 I, 79, 8 I : their precise contexts are not known, but none of the local vases is earlier than PGB. s F 143-4. 6 Series in Tomb LST: 387 (baggy, perhaps PGB); 392, 382 (finer fabric; shape refined, perhaps under the influence of Attic imports like 454). ? F no. 706; also no. 697; BSA 31, 60, fig. 6; a huge example, I -oom, high with conical lid, from Platon's Teke Tomb; perhaps AD 14 (1931-2),5, pl. 5 left, from Phoinikia, an early instance oflight-on-dark decoration. 1 3
240 • CRETAN GEOMETRIC
standard form ofcremation urn for nearly two centuries: this is the neckless ovoidpithos. In E G it has two rising horizontal handles (pI. 52 a) ;1 the shape may have been modelled on a comparatively rare Attic form, which was already being exported to Crete at about this time.s The lids are no less varied. The old kalathos type is almost extinct," Straight-sided pithoi, as before, take tall conical lids with knob handles, where Attic influence can sometimes be seen.' Small domed hemispherical lids are also found in EG contexts ;" they will not fit any pithoi, and may have been intended for pyxides. Many ofthe more imposing vases in Platon's Teke Tomb are modelled after Attic prototypes. Of the six amphorae, one is a fine Attic M G import of the belly-handled type ;" four more are local imitations ofthis shape;" the sixth, like pI. 52C, is a local version ofthe Attic neck-handled amphora. A mighty pedestalled krater (pI. 52d) is the earliest Cretan copy of the Attic Type I I (p. 18). The accompanying oinochoai include four huge examples with tall narrow neck: three ofthese have ovoid bodies," but the fourth is certainly inspired by the Attic MG lekythos-oinochoe, in its most ornate form (pI. 3m). There are also three broadbased oinochoai, decorated in the Attic dark-ground manner, with panels of multiple zigzag on the neck; but these seem to be Cycladic rather than Cretan imitations. The same, I think, applies to an Atticizing skyphos in Tomb L S T, no. 396; but the two mugs found in the EG pithoi from Tomb TFT (nos. 698,707) are oflocal fabric. Among the smaller vases, many shapes survive from earlier times without any obvious alteration: the globular oinochoe with short neck" and its miniature ;10 the hydria, the globular pyxis with everted lip, and the glazed cup with handle attached inside the rim, all present in Platon's Teke Tomb; and the wide shallow bowl, with ribbon handles." In brief, Knossian potters imitated only the more grandiose Attic shapes; for their humbler vases, they still drew on local tradition. DECORATION
(a) Survival of the PGB repertoire. Circular motifs are now confined to old-fashioned Cretan shapes-" and to the belly-handled amphora, where circles also appear in the Attic original: as in PGB, billets are sometimes added." Four Cretan motifs, new in PGB, survive through E G: windmill pattern, running spiral, arcs, and cable. They often fill broader zones than in PG B.14 The windmill pattern is now often drawn with straight diagonals (pI. 52d): the running spiral is sometimes broken up into carefully rounded and closely interlocking S's (pI. 52b), a variation which survives into MG. One new curvilinear design arrives: a large rosette with solid or hatched petals, and arcaded outline (pI. 52 a). AlsoF no. 69 1, with purely PGB decoration; no. 779, a hybrid between the straight-sided and ovoid types. In Brock's list ofEG examples, F 148, the last four are here treated as MG. • F no. 454. The fabric is unmistakably Attic. Late MG I or early MG 11; earlier than pl, 4e or ADChr 17 (196 1-2), pI. 5 b. 3 F no. 69 1, PG B ? • F no. 697; for the handle cf. pI. 3 f . s F nos. 699, 709; others similar, RSA 56 (1961), 74, no. 24, with refs. 6 Near to Athens 216, A]A 44 (194 0), pI. 23, 3· 7 a. also Vrokastro 164, fig. 102. 8 Shape like pl, 53g, MG. 8 F no. 383; cf. RSA 55 (1g60), 163. 10 F no. 388. 11 F no. 394: virtually unchanged since no. 280, LPG. I' As the necked pithoi, Fnos. 382, 387. 13 Cf. Vrokastro 169, fig. 102, R; also on an amphora in Platon's Teke Tomb. uFno. 697; RSA 31 (1931-2),60, fig. 6; Platon's Teke Tomb,passim.
EG
(b) Intrusion of Attic Geometric ornament. The Attic hatched meander now enters the local repertoire, together with its derivative, the meander hook (pI. 52 band F no. 779). In their train come many of the Attic subsidiary motifs, including multiple zigzag (pl, 52 b-c), dogtooth, and the chain of cross-hatched lozenges (pl. 52 a). With the arrival of a strong Attic element in the decoration, the dark-ground system prevails: but in the arrangement ofthe ornament, Cretan potters show little inclination, as yet, to learn from the architectural discipline ofAttic M G. On the largest vases the central area of the handle zone is split up into a number of panels: the new meanders are usually kept away from the most prominent positions, which are still reserved for Cretan motifs (pI. 52a,d). Once, however, the tables are turned: on the pithos F no. 779, a central meander is flanked by ancillary columns, containing the Attic lozenge chain and the Cretan cable. 1 This vase sets a precedent for the pithoi of Mature Geometric, where curvilinear Cretan motifs are restricted to subsidiary zones. (c) Figured drawing. One figured vase may be ascribed to this phase: the Atticizing neckhandled amphora, pI. 52 C,2 where horses and mangers appear in metopes on both sides of the shoulder. These lumbering creatures are of much heavier build than their wiry Attic counterparts (cf. pI. 5d) ; yet in both schools we see the same tendency to render the leg joints by excrescences, rather than by angles as in L G. The legs and tails ofthe Cretan horses are curiously bovine, recalling an equally helpless attempt by a much earlier Cretan ( ?) artist to depict the equine anatomy." RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
Reliable evidence from context is limited to one vase in an E G urn: this is F no. 698, a fragmentary mug whose shape and decoration are based on an Attic model, M G I I rather than MG I.' To the same phase belongs the imported skyphos no. 396, from Tomb LST, decorated with vertical chevrons; but this need not necessarily be associated with an E G burial, since a later cremation urn (no. 385) is also reported from the same tomb. A few clues are offered by stylistic links with Attic. The meander hooks on the pithos F no. 706 suggest the influence of Attic M G I I : on the other hand, the low pedestal of the krater pI. 52d is best paralleled in Attic MG 1.5 The large amphorae from this same tomb are all based on Attic M G models, but we cannot be more precise. The only Attic import is a belly-handled amphora, a shape which unfortunately defies close dating, since it appears so rarely in well-documented Attic grave groups. In the light of our limited evidence, it seems that Knossian E G is a short transitional phase, spanning the transition from M G I to I I in Attica.
1
1 Here, once again, one suspects the influence of the Attic pithos no. 454. • RSA 56 (1961), 71, no. 2, pls, 8-9. Published by Boardman as LG; a much earlier date is demanded by (i) the close correspondence ofshape and linear ornament to Attic MG I models like pI. 3d; and (ii) the drastic attenuation of the shape in the local LG (pI. 55 h) , where first-hand knowledge of contemporary Attic examples has lapsed. For reserved figured metopes on the shoulders of other Attic MG vases, see p. 26. 3 Mycenae, Shaft-grave stele; Marinatos and Hirmer, Crete and Mycenae, pi. 147. • P. 23: cf. K. v. 1, pI. II 1,831. • K. v. 1, pI. 19,871.
242 .
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
CENTRAL CRETAN MATURE GEOMETRIC (not in chronological order) SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Fortetsa, Tomb X: burial 2, nos. 426-7, 498; burial 4, nos. 440-2; burial 12, nos. 452-3 and perhaps 527; burial 83, nos. 530-2. PI. 53a. Fortetsa, Tomb VIII: burial 5, nos. 596-601; burial 6, nos. 608, 6II. PI. 53b. Fortetsa, Tomb TFT: burial I, nos. 642-6 (pI. 53 e) ; burial I I, nos. 657-9 and perhaps 660-3; burial 12, nos. 665-7 1 (pI. 53 d) ; burial 29, nos. 693-4. Fortetsa, Tomb VII: burial 13, nos. 837-8 (pI. 53 c) ; burial 15, nos. 841-2. Fortetsa, Tomb P: burial 65, nos. 1391-8. SHAPES
At Knossos all cremations are now housed in the recently invented neckless pithos, the only type ofurn to survive from the experimental E G phase.' M G pithoi (pI. 53a, F nos. 530-1) are always plump and bulky, with an inset lip slightly raised, and a ring foot. Perhaps owing to their greater weight, most ofthem have four handles on the shoulder, instead ofthe original two (p. 240). A pair of vertical strap handles is attached near the rim; between them, two double arc handles spring from the widest diameter, which on the most developed pithoi (Brock's second and third groups) are linked to the rim by a stirrup, as on the Atticizing pedestalled krater. From the rim, the decoration extends downwards over two-fifths of the surface, usually as far down as the widest diameter. The lids are ofthe conical type, with knobbed handles.s These M G pithoi contained a wide variety of small unguent vases, which illustrate the scope ofCrete's foreign relations in this phase. With F no. 666 (pI. 53 d), the globular aryballos becomes truly established in the Cretan painted repertoire: it is surely modelled on the Corinthian import, no. 668, found in the same urn: variants with longer necks also occur," A new form of lekythos, with globular body and a ridge where the handle joins the neck, looks to Cyprus for its inspiration: the Cypriot prototype, whose export to Crete begins in MG,4 is the black-on-red one-handled juglet. 5 As yet, the Cretan imitations- lack the crispness of the originals. The broad-based oinochoe is sometimes crudely imitated on a small scale." The only mug in a sure M G context (pl, 53 c, F no. 838) has less to do with the Attic counterpart than with a local unpainted shape already current in PGR8 The Atticizing skyphos is not yet established in the local repertoire. Glazed cups occasionally follow the shallow Attic model," although the native variety (Type I I), deeper and rougher, still survives: a unique decorTo Brock's list, F 148, add BSA 49 (1954), pl, 22, 11 (Teke); BSA 31 (1931-2),7°, fig. 14 (Episkopi); JdI 14 (1899), 38, fig. 20 (Anopolis). In South Crete a few MG neckless pithoi have been found (Arkades, Ann. 10-12 (1927-9),433, fig. 580, frs.; Ligortino, sherds in Stratigraphical Museum, Knossos; Rhytion, several unpublished, from tholos tomb), but they do not entirely replace the older forms (p. 255, n. 8). sF 163, class C (i), (ii), • F nos. 427, 597. 4 F nos. 669,694,842. 6 J. Birmingham, AJA 67 (1963), 36, ill. I, 20, with refs, 6 F nos. 453, 527. 7 F no. 1392; perhaps no. 1009. a BSA 55 (1960), pl. 43, 31. 9 Fno. 615, Type C; cf. no. 467, Attic? 1
MG
243
ated example (pI. 53 b), with a conical foot, has a body like the large Atticizing cup with mastoi, which is especially common in Cycladic M G (p. 170). The small globular pyxis, a purely local shape (pI. 53e, Fno. 643), has developed a narrower mouth since PGB, with a more vertical lip. The evidence from the contents ofMG urns will take us thus far, and no farther: but there are also several larger shapes, mostly ofAttic character, which may be attributed to M G on stylistic grounds. The pedestalled krater of Type I I is both imported- and imitated.s Neckhandled amphorae, seldom used as cremation urns," are understandably rare, and usually reduced in size; few are more than 0·40m. high (pI. 53h, Fno. 476).4 Larger examples at Arkades- and Vrokastro- illustrate the wide diffusion in Crete of Attic MG influence, but not necessarily through Knossos. In every case the shape is attenuated to a degree comparable with the Attic MG 11 amphora (cf pl, 4a). Hydriai are out of fashion: a single example, similar in shape and decoration to the amphorae, comes from the Teke tholos (pI. 53f).7 We should also include two large oinochoai with tall, narrow neck: one, from Milatos (pI. 53g), takes after the EG examples from Platon's Teke Tomb; the other, from the Teke tholes," is influenced by the Attic broad-based type. Finally, a pair of threehandled trays from Fortetsa, a rare shape which recurs intermittently throughout Cretan and other local styles.9 DECORATION
On the larger vases, and especially on the cremation pithoi, the influence of Attica is now overwhelming, in both the choice and the arrangement of the motifs. The ornament is normally confined to the upper part of the vase: on the lower body the dark ground is interrupted by a few groups of reserved bands. On the four-handled pithoi the decoration continues well below the handle zone, in the most flamboyant manner ofAttic M G 11. But something ofthe Attic discipline has also been learned: heavy meanders tend to occupy the central position, bordered by ancillary zones above and below, and sometimes flanked by columns of chevron either side (pI. 53a). There are, however, two respects in which the Cretans departed from Attic precedent: the ornament on a pithos is usually varied from panel to panel; and sometimes the fields are divided vertically.t? Metopes are as yet unknown, except for the small ornaments on strap handles (pI. 53a), perhaps in imitation of Attic M G I I;l1 yet the central motifs on a late M G pithos, F no. 841, suggest some knowledge of two Attic metopal motifs - the quatrefoil, and the St Andrew's cross. In the subsidiary zones, Cretan craftsmen show a preference for two Attic motifs: the multiple zigzag, and the chain of cross-hatched lozenges. Occasionally the lozenges are quartered and dotted insteadv - a variant already found in PGR13 The narrowest zones are often filled by a single steep zigzag, or chains ofdotted lozenges; lessfrequently, by check pattern, tangential blobs, and hatched triangles.> Rarest of all are three ofthe commonest 1 F no. 671; cf. p. 169, n. 14. Perhaps also BSA 56 (1961), 72, no. 7. • BSA 49 (1954), pl. 25, 19. 4 Also F nos. 458, 663, and BSA 29 (1927-8),248, nos. 68-g. • Twice, Fnos. 880, 889, dated LG by Brock. 6 Ann. 10-12,290, fig. 376. 6 Vrokastro, pI. 28. 7 BSA 49, pI. 21, 24. 9 BSA 49 (1954), pI. 21, 27. 9 Cf. Excohi Z I, and pp. 139-42, where Johansen examines this shape in detail. 10 F no. 693; BSA 49 (1954), pl. 22,16; cf. amphoraFno.476, pl'S3h. llK. v, I, pis. 151-2. 12 F nos. 4 23,1391. 13 F no. 350. 14 F nos. 642, 837, 596.
244 .
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
motifs in the Attic repertoire: the vertical chevron (pI. 53f), the dogtooth,' and the double axe alternating with groups ofverticals. 2 Instead, several motifs oflocal derivation are used in this subordinate role: the cable," interlocking S's (pI. 53c,f),4 and billet;! the arcaded black tongues" are a new local invention. On the cup, pI. 53 b,7 these tongues are enclosed in an orthodox Atticizing window-panel - a typical instance of the fusion between Attic and Cretan ideas to form a harmonious local style. Other foreign elements have not yet been assimilated. Ornament of Cypriot type (e.g. intersecting circles, small double circles) is confined to the imitations of Cypriot shapes." Globular aryballoi usually retain the hatched triangles on the shoulder, as on the Corinthian prototype," Figure-drawing, as far as we know, is limited to birds, which appear on three vases from Fortetsa: the tray no. 422, the lid no. 596, and the pithos 841. 10 The 'kangaroo' bird ofPGB has disappeared. M G birds look experimental, and vary widely from vase to vase: fan tails and raised wings are among their most distinctive features. RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
Two imported Greek vases are associated with M G pithoi: the oinochoe F no. 441, and the aryballos F no. 668. The latter is ofCorinthian origin, but not closely datable: in the Corinthia the type recurs intermittently throughout M G without any consistent development in shape or decoration.v The oinochoe is more helpful: it is certainly Attic work, and has a close parallel in an example from an M G I I grave in the Kerameikos.v We have already seen that the local E G overlaps into the beginning ofAttic M G I I : from our evidence of context, it appears that the remainder of this Attic phase is contemporary with Cretan MG. This conclusion is supported by a consideration of the Attic elements in the local style. On the pithoi we have already noticed a tendency towards flamboyant schemes ofdecoration, built up round weighty meanders at the centre: this is precisely what we should expect of a local school that derived much of its inspiration from Attic M G I I. We should also observe the popularity ofa certain minor motif- the chain ofdotted lozenges - which is unknown even in the Attic repertoire in any earlier phase. On the later M G pithoi the ornament betrays a slight acquaintance with the earliest Attic L G I. On F 841, as we have noted above, the Attic quatrefoil and St Andrew's cross are expanded into large panels; the use here ofstars as filling ornaments is typical ofAttic L G I a (p. 50). On F no. 642, perhaps the latest of all M G pithoi, we find zones of check pattern and tangential blobs, motifs which do not appear in Attica before the age of the Dipylon Master (p. 36). Cretan M G therefore begins soon after the outset of Attic M G I I, and lasts into the early years of Attic L G I. F no. 642, reverse. • F no. 452. 3 Fno. 693. 4 AlsoF nos. 423, 764, 1419. 5 Fnos. 422-3, 498. F nos. 423, 444, 498. • F no. 611. 8 F nos. 453, 527. 8 Fnos. 65g-61, 1398; cf. pI. 17b-c. Perhaps also Cretan MG: Thera, AM 28 (1903), 213, R 5-7, Beil, 38, 7-8; 'Argolid',]dI 15 (1900),52, figs. II 1-12; cf. p. II9, n. I. 10 See F patterns 17k-l, 17r, 17m. 11 P. 97; cf.F213, n. 5. 12 PI. Sb, from Kerameikos Gr. 22: note especially the straight neck and the high centre of gravity, both typical of this phase. Brock suggested a Cycladic origin: but the fabric and technique suggest Attica, and the painting is much finer than on any contemporary island work. 1
6
LG
245
CENTRAL CRETAN LATE GEOMETRIC SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
In three stages. A and B are based largely on Brock's classification of the pithoi F 148-9, although B includes also some ofBrock's EO pithoi. On these, and on the transitional Stage C, see below p. 246 .
Stage A Knossos, Evans' Tomb, burial: BSA 29 (1927-8), 238, pI. 8, nos. 3-6. Fortetsa, Tomb X: burial L 2, nos. 409-10. Fortetsa, Tomb VIII: burial 2, nos. 584-8; burial 3, nos. 589-g2; burial 4, nos. 593-5. PI. 55e. Fortetsa, Tomb F: burial 9, nos. 758-61. Fortetsa, Tomb V I I: burial 9, 827-g. PI. 55 c. Fortetsa, Tomb P2: burial 8 (L), nos. 867-g, Transitional MG-LG; burial 9 (Q), nos. 870-4· Fortetsa, Tomb 11: burial 15, nos. 988-g2. Fortet.sa, Tomb P: burial 54, nos. 1337-41; burial 63, nos. 1366-71 (pI. 54 a - b ,d ) ; burial fir, nos. 1409-12. Stage B Fortetsa, Tomb TFT: burial 25, nos. 682-4 (perhaps 685); burial 33, nos. 700-2; burial 34, nos. 703-5. Fortetsa, Tomb F: burial 4, nos. 748-50. Fortetsa, Tomb V I I : burial 8, nos. 824-6 (pI. 54f) ; burial I I, nos. 831-5. PI. 55 a . Fortetsa, Tomb 11: burial 18, nos. 999-1001. Fortet.sa, Tomb P: burial 13, no~. 1252-4; burial 39, nos. 1314-15; burial 48, nos. 1325-6; bunal 51, nos. 1329-32; bunal 76, nos. 1457-61; burial 77, nos. 1462-6; burial 85, nos. 1501-2. Anopolis, pithos and lid.Jd! 14 (1899), 37, fig. 17. Ay. Paraskeve, bu~ial N. AE 1945-7, 47ff., nos. 2,89, 116, and perhaps 4 2. Dreros, burial 8. Etudes cretoises VIII, 60ff., pI. 4 2. Knossos, Geometric Well, upper fill. BSA 55 (1960), 163ff., nos. 39-124. PI. 54 e . Stage C: transitional between L G andE 0 Fortetsa, Tomb F: burial I, nos. 732-40. PI. 55b. Fortetsa, Tomb P2: burial 55, nos. 875-7. Fortetsa, Tomb 11: burial 13, nos. 975-81. PI. 55j. (978-81 are probably EO.) Fortetsa, Tomb P: burial 55, nos. 1342-4; burial 73, nos. 1441-3 (pI. 54c); burial 86, nos. 1503-5. Knossos, Road Trials 1960; deposit in sounding for well. PI. 55 d . Our first task is to define the lower limit ofthis phase: in other words, we must attempt to answer the question 'At what point does the pottery ofKnossos become truly Orientalizing?'
246 .
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
Payne, who first examined the problem, was inclined to class all freehand curvilinear ornament as post-Geometric,' noting at the same time that 'the first arrival of the new (Orientalizing) influences in Crete coincides, curiously enough, with the fullest development of the Geometric sense.' This paradox became less surprising when the evidence from Fortetsa was fully published: for now it was demonstrated by Brock that several of the commonest curvilinear motifs - including cables and arcaded tongues - had long been established in the Cretan Geometric repertoire. In MG and LG (as defined by Brock), they play only a subordinate part in a style dominated by Atticizing rectilinear ornament. On the pithoi immediately following Brock's LG, curvilinear ideas come once again to the fore, without entirely ousting the rectilinear motifs or destroying the architectural discipline of the Geometric style. Such vases, although classed by Brock as EO, are not fully Orientalizing, and have been included above in a separate, transitional category. True Orientalizing decoration - of the kind that put an end to Geometric styles elsewhere - first comes to Knossos in the form of plant ornament, organically portrayed: the pithos F no. 1047, with its Tree of Life and lotus flower, may rank as the earliest work in a purely Orientalizing style, and the immediate predecessor of the first polychrome pithoi. Fortunately, we can follow in some detail the antecedents of this splendid vase. It is the latest ofa group ofpithoi, all from the same workshop. The first five are in a pure L G style: thereafter the series leads us through the transitional stage, across the frontier into true Orientalizing. The pithoi ofthis 'Bird Group', as Brock has named them, are the finest and most exuberant works of their time. They deserve a section to themselves.
The Cretan Bird Workshop Large pithoi: 1-5, LG; 6-7, Transitional; 8, EO. I. Fortetsa, pI. 63, no. 988. 2. Fortetsa, pI. 85, no. 1366. PI. 54a-b. 3. BSA 29, (1927-8),236, no. 27, fig. 7; from Payne's Tomb, Knossos. 4. BSA 29 (1927-8),236, no. 28, fig. 9, pI. 7,6; from Payne's Tomb, Knossos. 5. Fortetsa, pI. 85, no. 150 1. 6. BSA 49 (1954), pI. 22, 17; from the Teke tholos. 7. Fortetsa, pI. 86, no. 1441. PI. 54C. 8. Fortetsa, pi. 63-4,no. 1047. 1-5 and 7-8 attributed by Brock, F 149.
Smaller vases: L G 9. Small pithos, from Anopolis. ]dI 14 (1899), 37, fig. 15. 10. Cup. Fortetsa, pls, 44, 153, no. 672. I I. Cup. Fortetsa, pI. 102, no. 1378. 12. Cup. Fortetsa, pls. 103, 166, no. 1515. 13. Cup, from the Teke tholos. BSA 49 (1954), pI. 26,84. 1
BSA 29 (1927-8), 277ff., fig. 34.
LG
THE CRETAN BIRD WORKSHOP'
247
14. Cup. Fortetsa, pI. 102, no. 1369. PI. 54d. 15. Fr., from the Knossos Palace. BSA 31 (1930-1), pI. 17, I; cf. Payne, BSA 27 (19278), 288, fig. 37. SHAPES
The plump proportions of M G pithoi continue in this series, almost until the end: only in nos. 7-8 is there any sign of attenuation, when the body begins to taper towards the foot, and the lower profile becomes straighter. There are always four handles: the double-arc type, customary in M G, survives on I, but thereafter the horizontal handles are single. Lids are conical, and knobbed; some (1,7,8) are crowned with miniature vases. The only real novelty is the addition of tripod ribbon feet, which occur on all except 3 and 4. The shape of these pithoi is closely followed by the earliest of the EO polychromes' where the tripod feet assume a double-rolled form. The cups are large, deep, and bellied, like the contemporary glazed type with offset lip (pf, 551). On some examples, e.g. 14, the usual articulation is omitted, so that the lip merges with the body. DECORATION
In the arrangement of their decoration, these pithoi have much in common with their flamboyant M G predecessors. As a rule, the ornament still extends over about two-fifths of the surface, with a substantial zone running round the vase under the handles. The lower body, although still dark-ground, is now interrupted by a greater number ofreserved bands than before. The motifs used in continuous zones, and in horizontal panels, are mainly derived from the MG stock: the meander, now drawn with heavy outlines and long horizontal limbs, packed into a comparatively narrow field; zigzags, double or multiple; less frequently, arcaded tongues (I, 6); once each, battlement, lozenge chain, and double axes between grouped verticals (4). Late in the series - later, perhaps, than outside the workshop - triple circles are added in white paint on the dark zone immediately below the main decoration (7,8; cf cup, 12). Especially typical of this workshop is its whole-hearted adoption of the Attic L G metope system, whether the idea came immediately from Attica, or by way of the Cyclades. On 1 the system is strictly applied in the Attic L G I manner, the square bird-panels being separated and flanked by single 'triglyph' columns ofinverted chevron. Later (2-5), the triglyphs are either omitted, or expanded into full zigzag panels, as happened in Attic L G I I: but by this time the painter has evolved his own rich repertoire ofmetope motifs, and so this superficial resemblance to Attic L G I I may be no more than coincidental; it suggests an independent and parallel development, rather than any fresh influence from the Attic style. The metope system is sometimes carried to extreme lengths: on 2, 4, and 5 even the narrow zones are divided into square compartments. With the first tentative experiments in Orientalizing plant ornaments, the system begins to break down (6,8). Square metopes, how-
i
248 .
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
f f
THE CRETAN BIRD WORKSHOP'
LG
249
ambitious pithoi of this same generation. To get a more complete picture of Cretan Late Geometric, and ofthe transition to Orientalizing, we should now turn to these plainer pithoi, and to the smaller vases associated with them by either context or style.
ever, are still found on the ripest EO polychromes, with one characteristic difference: in the continuous zones below the handles, every other metope is left blank. This idea is reflected on some of the contemporary EO monochrome pithoi,' but has not yet occurred to the painter of the Bird Group. We now come to the motifs themselves. Let us begin with the birds, after which the workshop is named. To some extent they are influenced by the long-necked birds of Attic LG, yet two of the most characteristic features can be attributed to local tradition: the raised wing, and the fan tail (see p. 244). The wing curves gently away from the body: the upper outline is once straight (10), otherwise invariably concave. The fan tail, less emphasized than in MG, droops downwards. Eyes are reserved and dotted; beaks clearly marked, and sometimes opened (I); legs sometimes bent, sometimes straight. Many other intentional variations are often found, even between birds on the same vase, as though our painter were deliberately trying to give his creatures as much individuality as possible. For the normal vertical hatching of the body he sometimes substitutes vertical chevrons (4-5, 14-15) or cross-hatching (1-2, 10, 14). In the uppermost zone of 2 (pl. 54b) he departs from the usual pose for Geometric birds in giving them reverted heads :" occasionally two, three, four, or even five heads emerge from the same body, perhaps indicating a family, rather than a mythical monster," Most advanced is one of the families of no. 14 (pI. 54d) where the tail is prominent once again, and the necks are hatched. The EO stylization showing two out-stretched wings, above and below the body,' is beyond the scope of this workshop. Filling ornaments are sometimes added in the field, after the Attic fashion: besides the star and the dot rosette, the Cretans contributed a third, the quartered and dotted circle (5). Of the linear patterns, most are peculiar to Crete. They include (a) a dotted quatrefoil superimposed upon a large lozenge, with dots or small lozenges between the leaves;" (b) two diagonal leaves intersecting to form a cross ;" (c) a St Andrew's cross imposed upon a large lozenge, with smaller lozenges inserted in the compartments so formed;" (d) a circle, quartered and dotted, surrounded by dots and an outer circle (pI. 54 b; 2, 5; F motif 9ba); (e) the square guilloche, also dotted - a purely geometrical adaptation ofthe cable to a metopal form (4, 5; F motif r raj}; (f) at the end of the series, primitive lotus volutes, which look unhappy when cramped into a small frame (pI. 54 c ; 7-8). When 'triglyph' columns are interposed between the metopes, they are filled by chevron (I), cross-hatching (7), or intersecting vertical zigzags (5, 12, 14)· The Bird Group pithoi are among the most distinguished, and the most important, of Cretan L G vases. They form a logical series, supplying an obvious stylistic link between the robust and flamboyant M G examples, and the earliest of the EO polychromes. Whether or not they fill the whole of this chronological gap, is a question that we must defer for the moment; but we shall see at once how profoundly they influenced the decoration of the less
Outside the Bird Workshop, practically all closed vases undergo a natural process ofattenuation. The cremation pithoi ofBrock's L G period are divided by him into two chronological stages, largely on the criterion ofshape. 1 His class A stands nearer to the plump M G pithoi; but the foot is already narrower and taller, while the widest diameter has appreciably risen. With class B the proportions are still leaner (pl, 54f, Fno. 824) and the profile of the lower body tends to harden into a straight line. The four vases illustrated in F, pI. 82 (Brock's EO), should be included in this category;" in shape they are the most advanced pithoi to be decorated in a purely L G style. Ofthe later examples that are still monochrome, some are of even slimmer build, and reintroduce the Minoan double curve ;" others, of more ample shape, are mounted on fenestrated pedestals.' Both ofthese later classes, on the evidence oftheir decoration, seem to overlap in time with the first E 0 polychromes. Further monochrome pithoi, with Subgeometric decoration ofsimple concentric circles in black and white, continued to be made throughout the Orientalizing period." Within the limits of LG proper, the necked pithos occasionally reappears as a rare variant;" a necked example with ribbed pedestal? perhaps belongs to the beginning ofLG,8 but more probably to the end ofMG; the double-arc handles and the centralized scheme of decoration are certainly more at home in the earlier period. L G pithoi, as a rule, have only a single arc for their two horizontal handles; between them, the vertical straps are sometimes added, and sometimes omitted. In contrast to the pithoi of the Bird Workshop, the decoration is usually confined to the handle area. Ofthe lids that are associated with pithoi, by far the greater number conform to the conical type with knob handle already established in M G. These are almost always made to fit their pithoi, and are plainly decorated in the dark-ground technique. At the same time, a new type, domed and knobless, enters the repertoire r' some of these have a single horizontal handle attached near the rim,lo but most are handleless. Very few domed lids fit pithoi : those that do bear simple dark-ground decoration, like the conical type ;'! the others, which form the great majority, are more floridly adorned, either on a light ground, or in white on a dark ground. Among the most spectacular are those with central omphaloi.P or with handles in the form ofanimals' heads.v None ofthese ornate varieties fits pithoi, nor were they primarily designed as lids: their original purpose may have been votive, to judge from their obvious affinities with the bronze shields from Mount Ida.14 There is, however, enough evidence
Fno. 1313, 1350. • Cf.]. L. Bemon,JNES 20 (1961), 73ff.; no. 2 should be added to his catalogue on p. 83. a. Payne, BSA 29 (1927-8),288. • a. Payne, op.cit. 290; Benson, op.cit. on his 'RH painter'. I> PI. 54b; 2-3, 5; Fmotif 12Z. 6 PI. 54c; 3, 7; F motif 12r. Occurrences elsewhere: earlier, Attic LG la, oinochoe ADChr 17 (1961-2), pI. 56a; later, 'Parian' Subgeometric, Thera n, fig. 404b. 72,5--6,9,12-13; Fmotif sat-sav, 'lozenge cross'.
F no. 148. • Cf. Willemsen, Gnomon 30 (1958), 616-17. 3 F, pl. 56; cr. p. 234. • F nos. 1313,686, 1350. F 150, class v, 6 Fno. 593. 7 Fno. 1424. 8 For the shape, cf. pl, 35, the Naxian Cesnola krater, 9 PI. 55e, F no. 593. 19 BSA 49 (1954), pI. 23. 11 F no. 1377; BSA 29 (1927-8), 238, fig. 10; pI. 8, nos. 5, 10; BSA 49 (1954), pI. 22, 15. 12 PI. 55f, F no. 401. 13 F 164 ; E (ii), F. 14 Cf. also the clay shield-lids from a sanctuary ofGortyn, Ann. 17-18 ([955-6), 223, figs. [6ff., probably all seventh century.
1
3
Other Vases SHAPES
1
I>
250 .
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
from the Knossos Well to show that bothknobbed and domed lids, when divorced from their pithoi, were sometimes put to simple domestic uses.' Small neck-handled amphorae (H. c. o· 30m.) of extreme slimness are quite common (pi. 55h, F no. 673):2 the belly-handled amphora is represented by a single large example, with metope decoration typical of this phase." A poorly made hydria from Fortetsa- shows that this old-fashioned shape is not yet extinct; it even survives the transition to Orientalizing." Oinochoai vary greatly in shape. Some have the same slender proportions as the amphorae (F nos. 588, 591); another variety appears in the transitional phase (pI. 55j, F no. 977), related to the one-piece oinochoe ofAttic L G I I : our example lacks the constriction at the neck that becomes normal in true EO (F, pI. 94). This vase is accompanied by a lightground globular jug whose handle is attached slightly below the mouth:" this may be a revival of a domestic PG shape." The one-piece oinochoe and the globular jug are among the most common funeral gifts throughout the Knossian Orientalizing style. On a smaller scale, a plain striped olpe is twice found in a pure L G context." Unguent vases, more varied and numerous than in M G, remain strongly under the influence of Corinth and Cyprus. Most LG globular aryballoi still follow the dark-ground Corinthian model, with a low centre of gravity;" at the transition to EO the shape tends to become more taut and spherical, and some examples assume the fine banding of the E P C prototype.w In F nos. 978-9 we see a curious hybrid between the E P C aryballos and the ridged Cypriot lekythos: these are probably EO. A new shape, the trefoil-lipped alabastronris copied from another Cypriot black-on-red prototype, the 'sack-shaped juglet'.12 Globular lekythoi, with a ridge on the neck (pI. 55C, Fno. 829),13 imitate a Cypriot model taller than their M G predecessors, with a spherical body and a ring foot;14 originals of this shape, and its two-handled variant, were already arriving at Knossos by the end ofLG.15 By now the local potters have learned to match, and even to surpass, the high technical standards ofthe Cypriot originals. A larger and slimmer form oflekythos, the 'Praisos type', 16 has a mixed ancestry. The ovoid body is related to the Atticizing amphorae, but with the addition of a neck-ridge the shape comes under Cypriot influence. The series is as follows: (a) Fno. 76 I, with Atticizing decoration; (b) RSA 29, 249, fig. 16; (c) Fnos. 1128, 1362, 1499; RSA 31, pI. 12; RSA 8 (1901-2), pI. 9d, from Praisos. Here (c) is a closely knit group, transitional to EO, and related to the later stages of the Bird Workshop. The little globular pyxis continues to develop on independent lines, although it now has a close counterpart from Cyprus." The local pyxides from Knossos have a tall and vertical lip, BSA 55 (1960), 170, on frs. 64-77. Those onF, pl, 43, lower row, are all oflocal fabric: addBSA 31, 61, nos. I I and 75, no. 48; many more, as yet unpublished, were found in domestic contexts during recent excavations at Knossos. 3 JdI 14 (1899), 39, fig. 21; Ann. 10--12 (1931),59°, fig. 639; Hesperia 14 (1945), 19, pI. 3, 3. 'BSA 31, 64, fig. 9; cf. also Kourtes, AJA 5 (1901), pl, 9, 10, perhaps a Knossian export. 6F976. 7 Cf.BSA 55, pI. 42, 5-12. 8 Fnos. 835, 868. 5 BSA 29, 249, fig. 15, transitional toEO; fig. 14, EO. • PI. 55a-b, Fnos. 832,738. 10 Fnos. 973, 1253-4. 11 BSA 29, pI. 8, 6; F nos. 705, 1000. 12 J. Birmingham, AJA 67 (1963),36, ill. I, no. 21. 13 Also F nos. 7°1-2,833-4,1315,1339. u SCEIV.2, fig. 38, 3b. For other local imitations see BSA 49, pI. 26, nos. 5g--6o (MG type), nos. 61-3 (LG type). 15 F nos. 1448, 141 I. 16 F 155, E, n. I. 17 F no. 1451. 1
LG
sharply offset from the body. 1 On the more provincial examples the articulation is less clear.s In the open vases, the Atticizing tradition still waxes strong. Kraters, more common in domestic than in funerary contexts, are now of moderate size. One example from Anavlokhos" has a pedestal and old-fashioned stirrup handles; the rest have ring feet, and simple rolled handles (pI. 53e)4 or straps." Cups have much the same proportions as the kraters (pI. 55k, F no. 1003); from the technical standpoint, the large glazed cups (pi. 551, Fno. 1025) are outstanding for their fine thin fabric, sometimes rivalling Middle Minoan eggshell ware. Skyphoi at last settle down to the Atticizing shape (pI. 55g, Fno. 1006).6Finally, a few kotylai, modelled after the Corinthian L G shallow type (pI. 55 d) ; early imitations are found in the Knossos Well,7 but the shallow shape lasts through our transitional phase into EO.8 DECORATION
Late Geometric in Central Crete begins with a sudden loss oftouch with the Attic style; the lower limit, as I have defined it above (p. 246), coincides with the arrival of Orientalizing plant ornament, after a brief transitional phase. Contacts with other Aegean L G schools are few and sporadic; imports from Cyprus increase in volume, but the influence of these small Cypriot vases hardly extends beyond the local imitations of the same shapes. In the decoration of the larger vases, Cretan potters were once again left to their own devices. In the absence of any new and powerful inspiration from abroad, they continued to develop the M G dark-ground style to the point of stagnation; hence the 'formality and restraint' characteristic ofBrock's L G phase. 9 Even ifwe extend the lower frontier as I have suggested, Brock's judgement requires very little modification: we need only remark that the Bird Painter, whose early work falls into our pure LG phase, is the most creative personality of his generation; by inventing a new stock oflocal motifs, he saved the enfeebled Geometric tradition from complete atrophy. We have already noted his contributions to the formation of the EO polychrome style. Outside the Bird Group, L G cremation pithoi are more soberly decorated than their Mature Geometric predecessors. The ornament rarely extends below the handle zone: the rest of the body is covered with dark glaze, punctuated by reserved bands, which are more numerous than before. In the later part ofL G, one or more friezes oftriple circles are added in white paint over the dark zones immediately below the handles. The arrangement ofthe decoration is somewhat monotonous. On the rare occasions when Atticizing metopes appear, we may suspect Cycladic influence, perhaps through the Bird Workshop.lO More frequently, metopes are used in the Corinthian fashion, stopping a long panel at either end, as on the pithos, pI. 54f.11 This scheme is also used on the one-piece
2
F nos. 733, 1404; BSA 27, pl. 8,3; Boardman, CCO, pl. 32, no. 436. • BSA 31,72, fig. 16, Episkopi; AD 14 (1931-2), 6, fig. 6,3, Anavlokhos; EtudesCretoises VIII, pis. 7 and 42, D 3-5, Dreros. 3 AD 14,5, fig. 5, right. 'For others, see BSA 55, 163-4 with refs, 5J NES 20 (1961), pI. 5, from Anopolis. 6 Also F nos. 763, 874, 919,1005; BSA 29, 252, fig. 18, nos. 148-9; BSA 31, 65, fig. 10, no. 19; BSA 55,165, nos. 48-53; Ay. Paraskeve, AE 1945-7, 62, fig. 13, nos. 76-7; Dreros D 38, EtudesCretoises VIII, pis. 16,42. 7 B S A 55, pl. 45, nos. 55-6. 8 P. 255, n. I; for catalogue, see B S A 55, 171. • F 144. 10 Fno. 758; BSA 29 (1927--8), pl. 7,9; cf. amphora,JdI 14 (1899), 39, fig. 21; krater,J NES 20 (1961), pI. 5. 11 Also nos. 385, 1252, 151I. 1
252 • CRETAN GEOMETRIC
LG
oinochoe,' the krater,» the skyphos," the CUp,4 and the pyxis;" it may be the hallmark ofa distinct workshop. Rarely, the fields are divided vertically:" otherwise, on the great majority of the pithoi, the ornament is unimaginatively arranged in horizontal strips. Variations between panels on the same vase are less frequent than in MG. Meanders and battlements are still the most common of the larger motifs. On early L G pithoi they still carry considerable weight and emphasis: later, in Brock's Group B, they tend to become lean and spidery, hardly occupying any more space than the ancillary panels.' The occasional use of the tapestry pattern" supplies a rare link with Attic L G (p·3 6). In their choice of minor motifs, the local potters still show a marked preference for multiple zigzags and cross-hatched lozenges. The zigzags are found on practically all L G pithoi, and on many open vases: as L G progresses, the angles become more obtuse, and the style ofdrawing more fussy and miniaturist.t Lessfrequent are inset lozenges ;10 simple dotted lozenge chains'! die out at the beginning of this phase. From the native Cretan stock, the following motifs survive through L G: billetsj'> cablej-" horizontal 8'S14 which sometimes assume a more angular form ;15 and outlined tongues, whose interior is no longer black, as in MG.16 Near the end of LG, these patterns are crammed into an increasingly narrow space. The only new motif of this type is the row of detached leaves, appearing either in outline.t" or hatched.v or blacked and outlined (pI. 55£),19 or blacked without outline rw when blacked, the leaves sometimes alternate with loose columns of chevron. 21 Rows ofdouble or triple circles are new to the Cretan repertoire: they were probably introduced through the new Cypriot unguent shapes. Double circles eventually become the usual decoration for the reserved panel on the shallow kotyle.v On the pithoi of stage A, circles are confined to the light ground of the reserved panels :23 later, in stage B and in the transitional phase, they frequently appear in white paint on one or more of the glazed zones.s- At this time the white-on-black technique becomes increasingly widespread on lids and small vases; and at the very end of Cretan Geometric we often find a compromise between black and white paint on the same vase, as well as a curious habit of reinforcing reserved lines in white.v Metopes, as we have seen, are not often found outside the Bird Group; when they occur elsewhere, the favourite motifs are the lozenge cross (pIs. 54£, 55j) and the dotted and quartered circle (pI. 55k), the latter being most common on small vases :26 both of these motifs are simplified versions adapted from the new stock ofthe Bird Workshop (cf. pI. 54a, lid). Guilloches arrive in the transitional phase, when we also find increasingly elaborate combinations of circles and Iozenges.v Further experimentation along these lines leads to
the introduction ofsimple lotus blooms and Trees of Life, at the beginning of EO proper. 1 We have already noted a class of domed lids which were not designed to fit pithoi: these are decorated in a style quite foreign to the somewhat austere dark-ground manner which we have hitherto been considering. In most cases the ornament is applied to a light ground, arranged either in concentric zones- or in panels radiating from the centre." The motifs here are mainly curvilinear, the Attic element being reduced to a minimum, or entirely suppressed: at the same time, old Cretan motifs like the scale pattern, hatched chevrons, and hatched arcs are revived from the PG B-E G stock, thereby creating an impression of deliberate archaism.s Unguent vases have a very limited repertoire of motifs, nearly all of which are copied or adapted from their foreign prototypes. Neck-ridged lekythoi bear large sets ofcircles on their flanks, in the Cypriot manner; sometimes the outer circle is thickened, as on the Cypriot original- - an idea that is eventually adopted on pithoi and other shapes throughout Cretan Orientalizing, but not before. Down the front of the lekythoi we find either loose chevrons (mainly LG: see F 158, (iii)a) or small sets of circles - a scheme rarely used before the transitional phase," and appearing at about the same time on trefoil-lipped alabastra? and the new globular jugs. 8 All three of these shapes are habitually decorated on a clay ground. On the globular aryballos the traditional dark ground is sometimes preserved, but more frequently replaced by spaced bands on a light ground; on the shoulder, as an alternative to the usual cross-hatched triangles (pI. 55a), double circles are introduced in LG, and become increasingly popular in EO.9 Two aryballoi, at the end of LG, try to emulate the fabric and the fine banding of the E PC type.t? No regular style of human figure-drawing ever arose in Cretan Geometric: the Zeus lid,ll which bears the only Knossian LG figured scene,'! is no more than an isolated experiment. The body is articulated in the usual Geometric manner, with triangular thorax and narrow waist. More characteristic of Crete is the detailed rendering ofthe head, which is unusually large in proportion to the body. The outline technique, unique in Greece at this time, we have already met in PGB (pI. 51 a) : the jagged contour of nose and chin and the roundness of the head are features which recur on EO painted vases and relief pithoi.v The unusual silhouette birds which accompany the god appear again on a mastoid lid;14 this suggests that the two lids are at least contemporary, ifnot actually by the same painter.v Here the procession of birds is interrupted by a lion, who bears no relation to the slimwaisted and shapeless creatures ofAttic LG I I: his solid rectangular body, and his square, compact head are copied from the 'Hittite' lions of Orientalizing metalwork, found at
1 PI. 55i, F no. 977. 2PI. 54e, Knossos Well no. 39; also nos. 40, 42. 3 BSA 31 (1930-1),65-6, fig. 10, no. 19. 4 PI. 55k, F no. 1003. 6 Boardman, eeo, no. 436. 8F nos. 748, 827. 7 PI. 54£, F no. 824. 8 F, pl. 82. 10 Fmotif 5af, 5ai. 11 Fno. 1337. 12 Fnos. 479, 700, 1462, 151I. 8 Fnos. 748, 870; motif 5ap. 13 BSA 29, pI. 8, nos. 1,5,8. 14 BSA 29, pI. 7,9; 235, fig. 6; 249, fig. 16; BSA 55, pI. 47a. 16 BSA 29, pI. 8, 5; BSA 31, 64, fig. 9; BSA 55,166, nos. 65, 97. 18 Fnos. 884,1457; BSA 29, 238, fig. 10. l? Fno. 827. 18 Fnos. 408, 1409. 18 Also BSA 55, pl, 46, 82. 20 BSA 29 (1927-8), 235, fig. 6;Fno. 1342. 21 F nos. 781, 1409; ]dI 14 (1899), 37, fig. 17. 22 PI. 55d, from the Knossos Road Deposit; for others, see BSA 55 (1960), 17I. 23 Fnos. 884,1056; BSA 29 (1927-8), pl. 7,9. 24 a. also the krater, BSA 55,164,40. 25 F 188; pI. 54c. 28 Cf. BSA 31,80, fig. 20; no. 28. 27 F nos. 875, 732, 1503.
253
1F nos. 686, 1345. The pithos F no. 1402 is a curiosity, combining large areas of guilloche and advanced birds with scrupulously neat Geometric swastikas. It must be dated by the last feature, the rectilinear cable which separates the panels; this motif is unknown before true EO. 2 PI. 55e-£, Fnos. 401, 593: Fnos. 488,1237; BSA 29 (1927-8), pI. 10, I; BSA 49 (1954), pl. 23, nos. 3g-41. 3 ]dI 14 (1899),37, fig. 17; BSA 49 (1954), pl, 23,43. 4F 164-5, nos. 4°9,1414. 6Fno. 701. 7 F no. 1000. 8 F no. 976. • PI. 55 b; F 157-8, B, C. 8 F 159, (iii) b; nos. 1339, 150g-1O. 10 F nos. 1253-4; cf. the EO hybrids between aryballos and lekythos, F nos. 978-g. 11 F no. 1414. 12 See F 164. 13 BSA 29 (1927-8), pl. II, nos. Io-II, and pl. 12; cf. Kavousi, hydria, Ann. 10-12 (1927-g), fig. 644a; Boardman, eeo, nos. 511-12; Schafer, &liefpitlwi, 36--7, pI. I. 14 F no. 1435. 15 A further chronological link: Fno. 1415, from the same context as the Zeus lid, shares with no. 1435 an extremely rare ornament in the pairs of vertical S-cables.
254 . CRETAN GEOMETRIC
LG
Fortetsa in contexts as early as MG:l the reservation of the shoulder certainly suggests acquaintance with engraved metallic models. The only other animal known on Cretan L G vases is the deer, who stands over her young in two panels of a small pithos from Fortetsa,> The style is Atticizing, but the closest analogies are with the stiff goats of the 'Parian' Ac group. 3 The form ofLG birds varies widely, according to the whim of the painter. Earliest are those on the pithos, BSA 29 (1927-8), pI. 7,9, which are directly descended from the plump birds ofF no. 841, pI. 157. Thereafter the most orthodox type, following the example of the Bird Painter, has raised concave wings, fan tails, and hatching." More experimental are the birds on the ornate lids F nos. 677-8, 1414, and 1435, drawn either in silhouette or with partial hatching: here, as in the Bird Workshop, the poses are effectively varied, and on no. 1435 there is even an attempt at a frontal rendering of the head." I know of no continuous bird files in Cretan L G. 6 Finally, mention must be made ofthe stylized octopus, which appears on five vases in the white-on-black technique:" four times in the central medallion of domed lids, and once in square metopes on a fragment from a pithos; this last piece should belong to our transitional stage, to judge from the advanced style ofthe bird in the upper zone. The octopus is a shortlived revival from the art of the Late Bronze Age, for none is known on local Orientalizing
ofthe shallow original ofCorinthian L G are found in both L G and EO contexts." The deep kotyle is first attempted by Cretan potters at the beginning ofE 0, 2 and so overlaps with the shallow variety. The Knossos Road Deposit, where the local pottery is late LG-EO, contains two scraps of a L G Corinthian original, and a shallow imitation with double circles (pI. 55 d) ; but no deep kotylai. More informative are the two globular aryballoi, F nos. 1253-4, clearly indebted to E P C, and found with one ofthe latest L G monochrome pithoi, no. 1252. The series oftrue LG pithoi must therefore have ended at some time during EPC, the period of the globular aryballoi. The local shallow kotylai, which last into Cretan EO contexts, are unlikely to have survived in Crete more than a generation after their prototypes were supplanted in Corinth by the deep variety. Hence EO should have begun not later than the end of E PC; and at some time within E P C we must reserve a few years for our transitional stage.
vases."
RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
We begin with the only chronological link with Attic LG. Fno. 988, the first pithos of the Bird Group, follows the Attic metope system in its strict L G I stage. This scheme may, of course, have reached Crete by way of the Cyclades; however, the only import in this style yet found in the Knossos area is an Attic vase - the LG Ib high-rimmed bowl from Teke, B SA 49 (1954), pI. 25, no. 55. Since we have already noted that the local M G survives into the early stage of Attic LG I, our pithos should stand near the beginning of the local LG: this conclusion is supported by its close resemblance in shape to M G pithoi like F no. 530, pl, 53a.9 The immediate source of the tripod ribbon feet is by no means clear. The idea is first found in Attic M G,I° but may have travelled to Crete via the Argolid, where it arrives in the L G I phase.v To establish the lower limits ofLG, and of the transitional stage, we must look for some points ofcontact with the Corinthian series. Kotylai are not particularly helpful. Imitations 1 Gold leaf ornament, no. 578, found with the pithos no. 530, pI. 53a: for other examples, see Boardman, GGO, I341f., 'earliest stage'. For the same type oflion in terracotta modelling, cf. the protome on the shield-lidF 1439, perhaps MG: seeF 125,199. • BSA 31 (1930-1),59, no. 6, fig. 4. 3 Delos xv, pl. 18. 4 JNES 20 (1961), pl. 5; BSA 31 (1930-1),76, fig. 17. 6 The pithos F no. 888, which has obvious Cycladic affinities, is probably EO, and contemporary with both F'no. 1402 and the 'Parian' amphora AM 28 (1903), 186, J I I: the outlining ofsilhouettes is especially typical ofCycladic Orientalizing, although the idea is once anticipated in Cretan M G (F no. 422). • The fr. KGh 4 (1950), pI. 16, second row, looks Argive; cr. pI. 2ge. 7 Alexiou, KGh 4 (1950), 294ff., pls, 14-15. 8 The white octopods sometimes found in Protoattic, e.g, Agora VIII, nos. 592-3, may have been borrowed from Crete. 9 Brock assumes that the bulky pithoi of the Bird Group represent a revival of the M G type after an interval of more than two generations - a judgement that I find hard to accept. 10 MG I: Marathon Gr. 5, PAE 1939, 31, fig. 4, amphora: low ribbon feet, attached near the base. MG 11: amphora, Athens 218, AJA 44 (1940), pI. 20, I : higher feet, closer to Cretan pithoi. . Il PI. 26. Willemsen (Gnomon 30 (1958),618) reverses the current of influence, but takes no account of the Attic examples.
255
SOUTHERN IDIOSYNCRASIES Three sites in southern Crete have yielded Geometric pottery in quantity. Two lie at opposite ends ofthe Messara plain: the town ofPhaistos, near the western outlet to the sea" with its cemetery nearby at Petrokephali;' and Rhotasi (the Homeric Rhytion) at the extreme east, where over two hundred Geometric vases were discovered in 1958 in a diminutive tholos tomb. A third prolific site lies in the plateau to the northeast: Afrati (ancient Arkades), whose town and cemetery have yielded much Orientalizing pottery, but less Geometric. s In the foothills to the north ofthe Messara, two more sites deserve mention: Kourtes, the source of a score of vases ;" and Ligortino, an extensive Geometric settlement." The Geometric ofsouthern Crete is best considered as a provincial branch of the Central style. In many respects, southern potters kept pace with developments at Knossos: any deviations from contemporary Knossian fashions are not due to local originality, but rather to a spirit ofextreme conservatism. In assessing the extent ofthis divergence, the cremation pithoi are the most revealing of the southern vases. Least individual are the neckless ovoid pithoi, whose shape and decoration follow the Knossian prototype so closely that they can easily be dated in Knossian terms." More relevant to our present inquiry is the survival of two other varieties which virtually disappeared at Knossos after E G: the straight-sided, and the ovoid necked pithoi. Both shapes are well represented at Arkades. Assuming the cemetery to have been in continuous use, we may assemble a series for the former type, which will demonstrate the conservatism of South Cretan decoration. Straight-sidedpithoi: refs. to Ann. 10-12 (I927-g). (I) Fig. 460, pl, 56a. (2) Fig. 387. (3) Fig. 352. (4) Fig. 156. (5) Fig. 61. (6) Fig. 292, pl. 56c-d. (7) Fig. 318. (8) Fig. 254. No. I is under strong influence from Knossian Protogeometric B. The shape, broad and 1 F no. 1340, perhaps transitional, with an LG pithos: the association is doubted by Brock, but cf. pI. 191 (end ofCorintlIian LG) for the shape, the double-axe panels, and the barred handles. EO contexts: Fnos. 805 and 997, the latter with a polychrome pithos. • Earliest: F no. 1346, with the monochrome pithos no. 1345. 3 Ann. 39-40 (196 I-2), 377ff. 4 Ann. 35-69 (157--8), 355ff. 6 Ann. 10-12 (I927-g). • AJA 5 (1901), 302ff., pls. 8-g; Ann. 10-12 (1927-9), figs. 616-19. 7 Sherds in Stratigraphical Museum, Knossos: tomb excavated by C. Davaras in 1962. 8 Rhytion, twelve examples, ofwhich six are MG, five LG, and one EO: Arkades, Ann. 10-12, figs. 260 and 520, both LG-EO; cf. F, pl, 84.
256 .
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
massive, is close to Fortetsa 1440 (pI. 51 g), while the decoration is heavily indebted to the new stock of curvilinear motifs that arrived in the north of the island during this phase.' Several smaller vases belong to the same style: two oinochoai and a lekythos from Kourtes ;2 and three crude hydriai from Kourtes," Arkades,' and Phaistos," the last being found in a context containing bell-skyphoi and black cups comparable to those of Knossian PGB. This style may have had a long life in the south. Our no. 2, where the process ofattenuation is already far advanced, should be contemporary with Knossian E G on the strength of the interlocking S-ornament, which comes to the north only in this phase: the same may be said of another old-fashioned survival, the bell-krater from Phaistos, Ann. 39-40, 500, fig. 192. Next comes a close group, nos. 3-5. The ornament, still predominantly curvilinear, is now restricted to the upper halfofthe vase. In the dotted shells ofno. 4 we seem to have an exclusively southern motif.s To judge from the hatched leaves on the same vase, and the thick banding on the lower body in all three cases (cf the amphora, pl, 55 h), we have already come to a time contemporary with Knossian Late Geometric: in other words, we have entirely bypassed the Atticizing movement which inspired the Mature Geometric of the Central style. Not that southern potters were entirely unacquainted with Attic decoration: meanders and zigzags are much in evidence at Rhytion,' and even at the more inaccessible site of Arkades there are a few Atticizing vases ofMG type." But there was no attempt in the south, as there was at Knossos, to blend the two sources of inspiration - to graft the Attic rectilinear motifs on to the native curvilinear tradition: as a consequence, the Attic style left no lasting impression on southern Crete, and had already been forgotten in the Late Geometric phase. Towards the end of our series (nos. 6-8), the shoulder gradually disappears; the shape becomes extremely tall and slender, with a slight concave curve near the base." No. 6 (pI. 56 c-d) belongs to the final stage ofthe local Geometric: the arrangement and the fussy neatness ofthe ornament are reminiscent of advanced Knossian L G. Small sets ofconcentric circles, painted either in black or in white, now enter the repertoire, and soon begin to displace all other motifs: nos. 7-8, decorated only with circles, are probably Subgeometric.P Several other southern vases, spanning the transition from L G to EO, illustrate the popularity of this new circle style, where the decorated zones sometimes alternate between the dark-on-light and the light-on-dark techniques.v Many small vases of this period can be exactlymatched in the Knossian repertoire: globular aryballoi with cross-hatched triangles-s or double circles'" on the shoulder; lekythoi in the Cypriot manner-s or of the hybrid The hatched spiral hook, although unknown at Fortetsa, is present on several frs. from the Knossos Royal Road excavations. AJA 5 (1901), pI. 8, 7 and 9; pI. 9,11. 3 Ann. Io-H!, fig. 619. 4 Ann. 10-12, fig. 367. 5 Ann. 39-40, 409, fig. 5In. 6 Cf. Ann. 10-12, fig. 580, bottom centre. 7 Neckless pithoi; one belly-handled amphora; one late survival ofkalathos, with full meander. 8 Ann. 10-12: neck-handled amphorae, fig. 376; fig. 582, TR 140 (import?), neckless pithosfrs., fig. 580, top R; lid fr., fig. 581, third rowR. 9 The shape survives into southern Orientalizing, without shoulder: Rhytion, one example with double curve; Arkades, the Potnia pithos, fig. 43 I. 10 The back of the Potnia pithos, Ann. 10-12, fig. 431, bears similar decoration. 11 Phaistos, Ann. 39-40: neck-amphorae, 403, fig. ~, and 412, fig. 57 R, the former with spirals instead of circles; necked pithos 413, fig. 59; small jar, 413, fig. 58; lid, Ann. 35-6, 360, fig. 218. The plate Ann. 10-12, fig. 100, by its association with the cylindrical urn fig. 99, shows that this manner of decoration lasted far into the Orientalizing period. 12 op. cit, fig. 340. 13 op. clt, fig. 83. 14 op. cit. figs. 84, 399-4°°. 1
2
SOUTHERN IDIOSYNCRASIES'
257
'Praisos' type;' pyxidea;s black cups, which abound at Phaistos, Rhytion, and Arkades. The plate, Ann. 10-12, fig. 477, and the hydria from Kourtes, AJA 5 (1901), pl. 9,10, could well be imports from Knossos. Ovoid neckedpithoi are harder to date, owing to the extreme monotony oftheir decoration: for on this shape it appears that concentric circles survived from a Protogeometric tradition, and were never displaced. From Arkades and Phaistos we may tentatively reconstruct the following series: (I) Ann. 10-12, fig. 262. (2) Ann. 39-40,403, fig. 44b. (3) Ann. 10-12, fig. 232. (4) Ann. 10-12, fig. 252. (5) Ann. 39-40, 413, fig. 59, now mended and complete. (6) Ann. 10-12, fig. 295. (7) Ann. 10-12, fig. 306. (8) Ann. 10-12, fig. 455. No. I is similar in shape to EG examples at Fortetsa, especially nos. 387 and 39 2: its decoration, which consists of concentric circles containing billets, is certainly known in the Knossian PGB-EG repertoire. The everted rim, however, suggests a later date: perhaps not earlier than LG, if the contents include a fragment of an aryballos with circles on the shoulder.s Thereafter the body assumes a plumper form, while the neck tends to contract, and rises from the shoulder with a clearer articulation. The appearance ofwhite decoration on no. 4 heralds the end of Geometric. No. 5, an unusually ornate piece from Phaistos, is covered with circle zones alternately in white and black: the use of purple for one of the horizontal stripes suggests a Subgeometric date. Later still, with nos. 7-8, the moulding of the rim has disappeared. At some time in the Orientalizing period, the ovoid pithos is largely superseded in the south by a more compact and globular form, where the neck has dwindled into a short lip (pl, 56b).4 Before its disappearance in the south, the necked pithos was exported to Thera:" its revival at Knossos during the Orientalizing periods may be due to southern influence. EAST CRETE: ETEOCRETAN GEOMETRIC The Central style travelled far along the main route to the east of the island. In the mountainous country between the plain ofMallia and the GulfofMirabello, vases in the central L G manner have been found at Anavlokhos (p. 25 I) and Dreros (pp. 245; 25 I, n. 2). From the road between Neapolis and Mirabello comes an LG neckless pithos in a pure Knossian style," About the earlier phases of Geometric in this area we have very little information, except that Dreros was open to Atticizing M G imports" which may have inspired a local Atticizing style corresponding to Knossian MG.9 To judge from the only two Geometric vases yet published from the Dictaean cave,"? the orthodox Knossian style also penetrated into the upland Lasithi plain. It is only when we lOp. cit. figs. 358, 363: Kourtes, AJA 5 (1901), pl. 9,14.
2 Ann. 10-12, figs. 359, 397. 3 Ann. 10-12,231. A relative date for this characteristically southern form is supplied by the only example yet found in the north-central area: no. 12 K at Ay. Paraskeve, EA 1945-7,59, fig. 9, which contained a Knossian aryballos of EO type (op. cit, fig. 15, no. 95). The occurrence of this shape among the earliest colonial pottery at Gela, founded in 68g-688 B.C., is consistent with such a late relative date for its first appearance (NSc 1956,3°5, fig. 23, pithosfrom Gr. 32: for shape cf. Ann. 10-12, fig. 272, and for the coursing hounds op. cit, fig. 443b). 5 A M 28 (1903), Beil. 16, C 6, and BeiI. 17, C 13. 6 F 150, class C: cf. AE 1945-7, 53, fig. 5. 7 RSA 12 (19°5-6),37, fig. 15, centre. 8 Etudes cretoises VIII, 37, pI. 20, 4. 9 op. cit. pI. 20, 3. 10 Boardman, eeo, nos. 241-2: lekythos with neck-ridge, and globular aryballos, both LG---EO. L 4
258 •
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
ETEOCRETAN GEOMETRIC·
come to the shores of Mirabello that the character of the local wares begins to change. At Vrokastro we come to the frontier between the Central and Eteocretan styles: let us first consider the pottery there having westward affinities before dealing in detail with the Eteocretan school. To begin with, there are a few distinct reminiscences of Central PG RI Perhaps in the next generation, ornament ofP GB type was applied to amphorae ofAttic shape, somewhat in the grandiose manner of the large EG vases in Platon's Teke Tomb." We then find vases corresponding to Knossian MG, where the decoration, as well as the shape, reflects the influence ofAttic M G I I: but owing to the total absence oftypically Knossian forms, like the neckless ovoid pithos, it is easier to believe that these Atticizing vases were directly inspired by imports," rather than imitated from Attic at second hand through the style of Knossos. These imports continue well into L G4 and still influence the local school: a significant example is a necked pithos," a shape unknown in the Knossian repertoire at this time. At Vrokastro the Central LG style is represented by only a few globular aryballoi" and an occasional fragment with white-on-black decoration." Ifwe may generalize from so little material, Knossian influence seems to have been quite strong in PG B, and to have declined steadily thereafter. A smaller number ofvases from Vrokastro, consisting only of skyphoi and kraters," have little or no relation to the Central school, but conform closely to a local Geometric style found only in East Crete: the name Eteocretan is suggested as a convenient geographical term. The relevant material, as far as it is published, comes from tombs at three eastern sites:
therefore depend on stylistic resemblances with other schools for our relative chronology. Indeed, until enough evidence from context is available, it would be premature to subdivide Eteocretan Geometric into hard and fast chronological phases: yet the ornament, at least, offers some clues to the internal development ofthe style. SHAPES
The painted pithos is understandably scarce in East Crete, where cremation is rarely practised: both of the published examples (pIs. 56e, 57n)I belong to the straight-sided variety. Far commoner is the neck-handled amphora, which seems to undergo the usual development from stout to slender, as shown by the following series: P A E 1953, 294, fig. 4, 3; B SAl 2, 46, fig. 23, 3185; BSA 12, 43, fig. 21, 3183-4, the last pI. 571. From Kavousi come one slim belly-handled amphora- and two fragments ofmonumental size, provided with stirrup handles - a strange compromise between the neck- and belly-handled type:" all three vases are decorated in a rich L G style. The hydria is also popular as a tomb offering, especially at Kavousi, where several examples bear florid decoration towards the end of Geometric (pI. 57m).4 Among the many oinochoai we may single out a local variety where the handle is attached half-way up the neck, instead of at the mouth: P AE 1953, 293, fig. 3, I and 3, the latter pI. 57g. Other oinochoai with this peculiar feature have narrow necks, and are thus closely related to lekythoi in shape and function." To the same family ofshapes belongs the two-handled flask with figured decoration, mentioned below (p. 26 I). Pyxides sometimes have a raised vertical lip, as in Central Crete," but more often the lip is inset:" the latter variety usually bears the more advanced decoration. Kraters from Vrokastro (pI. 57k)8 and Kavousi" share a relatively straight upper profile, curving inwards abruptly towards the base: the Kavousi vase has, in addition, a tall fenestrated foot. Both are somewhat reminiscent of the Knossian PG bell-krater, but the proportions are broader: in the absence ofany obvious influence from outside, the shape seems to have a local pedigree going back to the end of the Bronze Age. IDSkyphoi are oftwo types. The first, with a high foot in the PG manner, is a broader version of the Knossian bellskyphos, and has a body profile similar to that ofthe local kraters : its decoration shows that it survived far into the Geometric period (pI. 57d,-f). Secondly, a skyphos with low base, and some attempt at an offset lip: the shape, and sometimes the decoration as well, shows signs ofAttic influence (pI. 57a-e).1l Its decoration is generally more advanced than that of the high-footed type. An enlargement of this shape, with mastoi, is found at Kavousi.P Cups vary in profile and decoration from site to site, but these variations probably have some chronological significance. First come several shallow glazed cups at Piskokephalo; later, at Adhromyloi, the same shape bears a panel of decoration, sometimes between
(I) Kavousi: (a) A tholos tomb cleared by a local inhabitant in 1885 at the location 'Plai tou Kastrou',> Over eighty vases, some illustrated in Ann. 10-12 (1927-9), figs. 625-7, 643; perhaps also 631-8 and 640. (b) Tholos tomb at the location Skouriasmenos containing Orientalizing as well as L G vases.w Among the other material from Kavousi, the contents ofthe tombs atVronda, 'Thunder Hill' (A]A 5 (1901), 131ft'., pis. 1-2) are of'pre-Geometric character: cf. PGP 288.
(2) Adhromyloi: a tomb of unspecified type. Ninety vases, BSA 12 (19 05-6), 43ff. (3) Piskokephalo: a cave tomb excavated by Platon: twenty-six vases illustrated, P AE 1953,292, figs. 3-5, offering a view of the local style at an early stage in its development. More information is supplied by a collection of over fifty unpublished Geo~etric vases in the Museum ofAy. Nikolaos, chance finds from the Eparchy ofSiteia. It is unfortunate that no published group ofvases from East Crete can be assigned to a single burial: we must 1
Vrokastro 164, fig. 99, Bone Enclosure 6: also hydria, pI. 27, 3.
op. cit, 169, fig. 102. 3 op, cit. 173, fig. 10. sop. cit. 159, fig. 96. op. cit. 103, fig. 57E; 118, fig. 68 A. 1 op, cit, 95, pI. 51a. 8 op. cit, figs. 51g, 60 A, 68 B, C, 69; 61, 101. AJA 5 (1901), 149. 10 AJA 5 (1901), 143ff., fig. 9, pIs. 3-4; Ann. 10-12 (I 92 7-g), figs. 620-1, 628. 2
• op, eit. 98, fig. 53, including frs, from Naxos (p. 172); also pI. 26, Attic. 8
9
259
-
1 Adhromyloi, BSA 12,52, fig. 28; Kavousi, Ann. 10-12, fig. 633. 2 Ann. 10-12, fig. 640. 3 Ann. 10-12, fig. 620. • Ann. 10-12, fig. 624: also figs. 628, 638, 643; fig. 637 looks earlier both in shape and ornament. sop. cit, 295, fig. 5; 1,5---6: BSA 12,43, fig. 21, 3192, 3187. 6 PAE 1953, 293ff., fig. 3, 8; fig. 4, 6. 1 ibid. fig. 5,8:BSA 12,45, fig. 22, 3246, 3248: three examples in Ay. Nikolaos. 8 Vrokastro, fig. 61. 9 Ann. 10-12, fig. 626. 10 Series: Mouliana, AE 1904, pI. 3, I, LM I1IC; Vrokastro, fig. 78 and pI. 29, 1-2, all in a Subminoan style, but perhaps contemporary with Knossian PG; ibid. fig. 101, related to Knossian PGB-EG. 11 Also Vrokastro, figs. 5IG, 60A, 68B-G, 69; three more, unpublished, from Kavousi. 12 Ann. 10-12, fig. 627.
260 • CRETAN GEOMETRIC
ETEOCRETAN GEOMETRIC' 261
mastoi;' latest of all are the ornate pedestalled cups of Kavousi, where the whole surface is covered with decoration (pl, 57h,j).2 DECORATION AND RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
Broadly speaking, there are three distinct elements in Eteocretan decoration: (I) compassdrawn circles and semicircles; (2) rectilinear ornament, ultimately ofAttic origin; and (3) a large stock of freehand motifs, mainly curvilinear, and usually placed in a succession of narrow zones. The first two elements are certainly borrowed from elsewhere, and may be shortly dismissed: the third class of ornament may well have developed locally, and deserves more extended treatment. (I) Circular motifs are predominant at Piskokephalo. Several vases, which bear no other ornament, represent a style which passes for Protogeometric in this remote area. Some oinochoai may even be contemporary with Knossian PG proper.s Other vases, with only a few circles in each set," are later, but probably precede the arrival ofAtticizing and freehand curvilinear ornament: a date corresponding to Knossian PGB-EG seems reasonable for these vases, and for the related krater from Vrokastro, pl, 57 k. It should be noted, however, that narrow friezes ofcircles, as at Knossos, survive as a subsidiary ornament until the end of Geometric (pl, 57j). (2) The influence of Attic MG 11 has already been noted at Vrokastro: it also appears, in a more diluted form, in the heart ofthe Eteocretan country. At Kavousi and Adhromyloi the arrival ofthe meander hook and the vertical chevron coincides with the introduction of the low-based skyphos (pl, 57a,c). The meander is once faithfully copied on a good imitation of a M G I I kantharos ;- elsewhere, it receives rougher treatment, almost becoming a curvilinear motif (pl. 57d).6 Vases in this Atticizing style must surely be contemporary with Knossian Mature Geometric: they are so scarce, however, that they can hardly have formed more than a small minority of the local potters' output, even in that generation. Furthermore, the fashion for Attic decoration seems to have been brief: the latest link with the Attic school is an octofoil ofL G I type, in a metope on one ofthe monumental amphorae from Kavousi:? it is surrounded by ornament in the native curvilinear style, which by this time had already come to maturity. (3) It is in the freehand curvilinear ornament that we see the local school at its most individual. The style reaches its climax in the output ofa Late Geometric workshop at Kavousi, well represented by pf, 57 h-j.rn, Here it became the fashion to cover the whole surface with narrow zones of close ornament, with very little regard for the shape of the vase. The commonest motifs are as follows: cables in single (pl. 57Dl) or double (pl, 57j) outline; broken cables, or horizontal S's, in single outline (pl. 57g-h), and sometimes-alternating with dots; single or double arcs, often in two opposed rows, as Vrokastro, fig. 60A; intersecting wavy lines, as in pf, 57 b; and a carelessly scribbled wavy line, as in pf, 571. A few rectilinear n:otifs are admitted, usually in subsidiary positions: dotted diagonal net (pf, 57 e), hatched zIgzag (pl, 56e), hatched columns (pf, 57h); filled triangles, alternately pointing up and BSA 12,48, fig. 25a-b. 2 Also Ann. 10-12, fig. 625. P AE 1953, 295, fig. 5, 3-4; cf. respectively BSA 55, pI. 42, 9, and F no. 142. 5 BSA 12,50, fig. 27. 6 BSA 12,43, fig. 21, 2225; also loco cit. 50, fig. 26.
1 3
4
7
P AE 1953, 294ff., fig. 4, 1-2; fig. 5, 8. Ann. 10-12, fig. 620, right.
down (pl, 56~); zones of vertical or diagonal strokes. The range of patterns is not unlike that of Knossian PGB and EG, but there is one radical difference in the treatment: in the Knossian style, hatching is always internal, and confined to motifs with two or more outline~; here, in East Crete, hatching is applied indiscriminately to both single and double outlines, and when the motif is curvilinear, it is nearly always the background that is hatched (pI. 57j,Dl-n). Owing to this fundamental distinction, it is improbable that the Eteocretan curvilinear style grew up under any direct influence from Central Crete. If, as seems likely, the tomb at Piskokephalo shows us an early stage of the local Geometric school, then the curvilinear el~ment made i~s first appearance in a quiet form (pl, 57 g) : probably contemporary with this early stage IS the amphora from Adhromyloi (pl, 571). It is only at Kavousi - and on some vases in Ay. Nik?laos - that the style reaches a ripe stage: here the Atticizing octofoil on the amphora mentioned above offers us a date not earlier than Attic L G I for the fullest develo~~en~ of the curvili~ear manner. How long this wild and chaotic style may have lasted, It IS dd~cult to say WIthout clear evidence from context: perhaps its latest occurrence may be at Praisos, where the same type of ornament is found in vertical panels on an amphora from Tomb 53, in a predominantly Orientalizing context." The vases so far published from eastern Crete include only two with figured decoration. On the shoulder ofa two-handled flask," there are human figures on both sides: on the front four women in bell skirts, drawn somewhat in the manner of the Knossian PG B amphora Fno. 339, but more crudely: on the reverse, where four women and three men join hands in a dance, t~e figures have almost degenerated into a linear pattern. A hydria from Kavousi" bears a fneze of goats and deer drawn in an equally ungainly style which reflects the local potters' love of free curvilinear ornament. 1
BSA 12 (19°5-6),32, fig. 9.
2
BSA 12, 45ff., figs. 22 and 24, 32°5.
3
Levi, Ann. 10-12,601, fig. 643a--c.
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC •
CHAPTER TWELVE
East Greek Geometric
It now remains to consider the local Geometric pottery ofthe eastern Aegean. At the outset we may exclude the most northerly part ofthis vast region; for in Lesbos, and on the Asian mainland north of the river Hermus, the prevailing local pottery was a grey monochrome ware ofnative Anatolian character. We are still left with the whole seaboard ofwestern Asia Minor from southern Aeolis to Caria, and the offshore islands from Chios to Rhodes. This is a larger area than any that we have so far considered within the compass ofa single chapter. As one might expect, there is considerable variety ofstyle between one eastern Aegean centre and another; yet there are also enough features common to each of the leading centres to justify our use of the generic term East Greek, denoting a distinct and recognizable branch of Greek Geometric. Nearly all our material comes from two districts in particular: the Dodecanese, and Ionia. About the Dodecanesian style we are relatively well informed. The cemeteries of Rhodes and Cos have yielded several hundreds of whole vases in significant contexts, since hardly any of the graves held more than a single burial. Of especial importance is the Serraglio cemetery on Cos, the only site to provide a continuous sequence of graves from Protogeometric through to Late Geometric.' The Coan series stops well before the end ofGeometric, but the latest stages of the Dodecanesian style are amply illustrated by material from the Rhodian cemeteries at Ialysos, Camiros, and Exochi. Further information is available from the settlements and sanctuaries of Camiros and Lindos, which have yielded unstratified Geometric deposits; but it is largely owing to the abundance of grave groups that the development of the local style is reasonably clear. The situation in Ionia is much less satisfactory. So far, no Ionic city has produced a Geometric cemetery;" we must therefore rely on the somewhat fragmentary material from settlements and sanctuaries, where whole vases - or even whole profiles - are rare. Only two sites - the settlements at Miletus and Smyrna - have been sufficiently well explored to boast a continuous sequence of Geometric pottery in any quantity. At Miletus, where excavations are still in progress, the preliminary reports are full enough to justify some tenta1 This cemetery has not yet been fully published; I am deeply grateful to Prof L. Morricone for permission to refer to and illustrate some of the material. 2 Except perhaps Colophon, where the material was unfortunately destroyed in the Graeco-Turkish war of 1922 before it could be studied: see AJA 27 (1923),67.
263
tive conclusions based on stratigraphical evidence (p. 268). The material from the excavations at Smyrna ( I 947-52) will prove to be ofparamount importance; only a few pieces have so far been illustrated, but it is encouraging to note from a drawn section- that in one part of the settlement no fewer than seven Geometric strata could be distinguished.t At all other Ionic sites, the Geometric pottery is virtually confined to the late phase. Rich L G deposits have been unearthed at the Samian Heraion, and at the settlement ofKato Phana on Chios. A sanctuary at Emporio, another Chian site, has produced stratified pottery from Late Geometric onwards. Further Geometric material is reported from Phocaea. From these sources it is just possible to follow the development of Ionic Geometric in bare outline, although our information concerning the Early and Middle phases is still very meagre. East Greek Geometric has not been previously studied as a whole; I therefore begin with a brief definition of the three chronological subdivisions, before proceeding with a detailed analysis of the pottery. The phase here called Early Geometric might as aptly be described as debased Protogeometric; the decoration is still dominated by the concentric circle, and the style is simply a degeneration of East Greek PG, with little sign of influence from EG styles elsewhere. Our Middle Geometric begins with the arrival of the hatched meander, which probably travelled from Attica to the Eastern Aegean via the Cyclades: in this phase all the main East Greek centres betray some influence from Attic MG, but in varying degrees. The local Late Geometric has a more individual flavour: in the absence of any consistent figured style, the system of decoration is usually metopal, as with many linear vases ofAttic L G; the individuality lies in the choice ofmotifs, which include several designs not found in any other local style. The Geometric tradition had a long life in the Eastern Aegean, and persisted long after the passing of Geometric on the Greek mainland; indeed, one local Subgeometric shape, the Rhodian bird-bowl, survived until the end of the seventh century B.C. with hardly a trace of Orientalizing influence. EAST GREEK LATE PROTOGEOMETRIC SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Camiros, Acropolis, grave group. JdI I (1886), 136, bottom; feeding jug, Berlin 2996, and two cups. Ialysos, Marmaro Grs. 44, 45. CR 8, 164-5, figs. 152-3. Camiros, Patelle Grs. 35, 40, 43. CR 6-7; I 19ff., figs. 135 (bottom row), 139, 144-6, 148 (top row). Cos, Serraglio Gr. 10. PG P 224, pI. 30c. Dirmil (Caria), tomb. AJA 67 (1963), 357ff., pls. 83-4. In the East Greek area, as in many other parts of the Aegean world, the pottery ofAttica inspired close imitations in the Late Protogeometric period; indeed, almost the full range ofAttic LP G shapes can be matched in one or other ofthe East Greek centres. Thus oinochoai RSA 53-4 (I958--g), pl. 9. • I am greatly indebted to the joint Directors of this excavation, Profs. references to the unpublished pottery.
1
J. M.
Cook and E. Akurgal, for permission to make some
264 .
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
and high-footed skyphoi turn up in quantity wherever PG is found: lekythoi,jugs, hydriai, and high-footed cups all occur in the Serraglio cemetery of Cos. Large kraters, elaborately decorated in the Attic manner, have come to light at Smyrna- and at Dirmil in Caria,s Of the three main kinds of amphora, the belly-handled is the most popular, especially in the Dodecanese eyet the other two varieties, with handles on neck' and shoulder- were also known. Although East Greek PG is still somewhat scarce, some distinctions may nevertheless be made between the styles ofIonia and the Dodecanese. Our criteria are threefold: the choice ofornament in general, the shape ofthe skyphos, and the presence ofsome shapes in Rhodes and Cos which are apparently absent from Ionia. In each case it appears that the parent Attic style found closer imitators in Ionia than in the Dodecanese. Thus Ionic shares with Attic a predilection for concentric circular decoration, where the sets of circles are often filled with Maltese or St George's crosses; rectilinear panels play only a subordinate role." At Smyrna the dependence on Attic models is further illustrated by the shape of the skyphoi, which are said to have high conical feet;" the throwing of these feet is a technical achievement to which few provincial potters aspired outside the borders ofAttica. Furthermore, the Ionic LPG repertoire includes no shapes (as far as we yet know) that are not closely related to Attic prototypes. It is interesting to note that this intimate connection with Attica extends from Ionia into Caria, where the vases from the tomb at Dirmil have a particularly strong Attic flavour," The potters of the Dodecanese pursued a more independent course. Rectilinear motifs play a more prominent part in the decoration than is customary in Attica; for example, on the shoulders of closed vases, cross-hatched triangles are at least as common as the semicircles, while on skyphoi circular decoration forms the exception rather than the rule. The feet of these skyphoi are seldom conical, but usually have a flaring profile; in one case both the shape and the decoration will justify close comparison with Argive LPG, rather than with Attic." We should, however, give Dodecanesian potters the credit for inventing the most popular rectilinear motif found on these skyphoi: this is the hour-glass design, formed by two cross-hatched triangles meeting at their apices." Finally there are four regional shapes which have no connection with Attica. The first is a plain glazed cup with flat base and comparatively straight walls, which may well be a local invention.P The other three, which are all present in the LP G tombs of Cos, are the duck-vase, the one-handled globular pilgrim flask, and the openwork kalathos.v Since the duck-vase and the pilgrim flask have earlier parallels in Cypro-Geometric 1,13 it is reasonable to see in them the first signs of a special relationship between the Dodecanese and Cyprus which was to persist throughout the Geometric period. AJA 66 (1962), pI. 96, fig. I. 2 AJA 67, pI. 83, no. I. 3 PGP 31. Smyrna, AJA 66, pI. 96, fig. 2; Teos, TurkAD 13 (1964), 117, fig. 9. 5 Dirmil, AJA 67, pI. 83, no. 2. 6 Typical examples: Miletus: I M 7 (1957), pI. 36,4; I M g-IO (195g-60), pI. 53, 3; pI. 55, I. Kato Phana: BSA 35 (1934-5), pI. 36c; Smyrna:JHS 72 (1952), 103, fig. 9b. • PGP 314. 6 Cf. Desborough apudBass, AJA 67, 361. 9 Cf. PGP 224, pl, 30Cwith Courbin, Stratigraphie et Stratigraphie (Etudesarchiologiques) 71, fig. 7. 10 Camiros; CR 6-7, figs. 135, 150: several from Cos besides PGP, pI. 30c. 11 CR 6-7, figs. 135, 139. 12 Kalathos: PGP, pI. 30c. The pilgrim flask CR 6-7, fig. 148, from Camiros Gr. 45 is probably LPG; cf. PGP 228. 13 Cf. SCEIV.2, fig. 7, 5; fig. 3,11-17. The kalathos is not known in Cyprus until CG II, but is probably of Oriental inspiration; see SCE IV.2, 304-5. On Attic openwork kalathoi, see now E. L. Smithson, Hesperia 37 (1968), 98ff. 1
LPG
So much for the regional differences between Ionic and Dodecanesian LPG. But there are also similarities - a few nuances ofdecoration common to both areas, distinguishing the whole East Greek world from other parts ofthe Aegean at this time. These nuances are seen in the small ornaments inserted in the field between the main circular or rectilinear motifs. Three ancillary ornaments are especially common: (i) groups of pendent tongues, sometimes degenerating into simple strokes; (ii) one or more vertical rows of dots; (iii) one or more wavy scribbles, either vertical or horizontal; if the latter, they link sets of concentric circles. The tongues are derived from Attic PG, but their reduction to mere strokes is a peculiarity ofthe East Greek world; rows of dots and wavy scribbles, in this context, are also limited to the eastern Aegean. The use of all three ornaments is well illustrated by the six vases from the Dirmil tomb, which in other respects are so similar to their Attic prototypes. 1 These minor nuances of East Greek PG have not yet been traced further north than Miletus. EAST GREEK EARLY GEOMETRIC SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Ialysos, Marmaro Gr. 43. CR 8, 161-4, fig. 149. PI. 58a-d. Ialysos, Stin PIazza Gr. 141. CR 3, 146-7, fig. 142. Iasos, well deposit. Ann. 39-40 (1961-2), 563, fig. 99 (four fragmentary closed vases: (I) ?neck-handled amphora, (2) ?oinochoe, (3) and (4) hydriai). Cos, Serraglio Gr. 22. PG P, pI. 30b, where the following vases are not illustrated: (I) globular pyxis without handles, glazed except for reserved bands round the belly, and (2) low-footed skyphos, decorated in both handle zones with three sets of five concentric circles. Cos, Serraglio Gr. 7. Five vases, ofwhich two are illustrated here, pI. 58e-f. The pottery of this phase shows no sudden break with Protogeometric tradition. In the shapes, a few innovations suggest some knowledge ofEG styles elsewhere; the decoration is more conservative, and indicates the survival ofthe local PG style in a debased form. Owing to the extreme dearth ofEG material from Ionia, the following account is largely based on groups from the Dodecanese; nevertheless, many traits ofDodecanesian E G decoration can also be found on the published fragments from Miletus. SHAPES
4
Two neck-handled amphorae, from Cos Gr. 22 and Camiros,» recall Attic EG amphorae in two respects: when compared with their predecessors in the local PG style their necks are taller, and their shapes slimmer. A similar process ofattenuation may be observed in a bellyI For other good examples, see the Rhodian amphora, CR 6-7, figs. 144-5; another amphora, once in the Syra Museum but now in Athens, probably of East Greek origin, AM 22 (1897),245, fig. 16; and the little Milesian oinochoaiIM g-IO (I 95g-60), pis. 53,1-2. 2 JdI 1 (1886),137, Berlin 2980.
266 . EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
EG
handled amphora from Camiros, CR 6-7, fig. 133: other examples, like that from lalysos Gr.43 (pI. 58a) and another from Camiros (CR 6-7, figs. 244-5), still retain the plump proportions of PG, and should therefore be placed early in our EG series. Amphoriskoi now appear for the first time: their shape is always somewhat uncouth in the Eastern Aegean, where plump bodies and wide necks are the rule, without any clear articulation in between. Their handles are usually placed on the shoulder, sometimes horizontally (pI. 58b),t and sometimes vertically (pl. 58c).2 One amphoriskos from Cos Gr. 7 (pl. 58e) is a barbarized miniature of the neck-handled amphora. Oinochoai, as elsewhere, vary greatly in shape, but here their bodies are usually globular. One E G example, which accompanies M G vases in Cos Gr. I (pl. 58 g), belongs to the same broad-necked family as the amphoriskos just quoted; another, from Cos Gr. 22,3 is exceptional in showing the influence of the Attic broad-based variety. Lekythoi, so numerous in the next phase, seem to be out offashion in EG. Two fragmentary hydriai have been found in the lasos well. The Coan cemetery has yielded two E G pyxides, both of the globular sort: that from Gr. 22 follows the Attic model in having no handles; the other, from Gr. 7 (pI. 58f), is provided with horizontal handles, and resembles the E G type current in the Argolid. Further contact between the Dodecanese and Cyprus is indicated by the four pilgrim flasks and the birdvase in the groups from Ialysos.s No complete krater survives, but the fragments Lindos I, nos. 830-2, should perhaps be dated to E G on the strength ofthe high pedestal ofno. 830.5 Skyphoi, which occur in plenty, still have the depth ofthe Protogeometric shape: but in every case the high PG foot has been replaced by a lower conical foot (pl. 58d). Our groups include two cups, both from Cos. That from Gr. 22 follows the shallow Attic E G model: a deeper example, from Gr. 7, recalls a typical Thessalo-Cycladic form (p. 153) in having its handle attached below the lip.
Rectilinear ornament, as before, is more at home in the Dodecanese than in lonia. Triangles are often found, either cross-hatched or (lessfrequently) in multiple outline. Hatched hour-glasses are still the most characteristic motiffor skyphoi (pl. 58d), appearing also on other vases with a comparatively deep field of decoration, like the pyxis, pl, 58f, and the bell-doll and duck-vase from lalysos Gr. 141. Finally, we should note the survival of the small groups of pendent vertical bars, which still separate the main circular or triangular motifs, especially in the shoulder zones: as these zones decrease in depth, so the bars become more conspicuous. Of the other ancillary ornaments found in the local PG, the wavy lines are rarely found now, and the dots not at all. RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY From the marked degeneration of the Protogeometric ornament, it appears that these vases are later than the close imitations ofAttic LP G which we considered at the beginning ofthis chapter. But how much later? The clearest evidence comes from Cos Gr. 22, a group that should be placed late in the local EG series; hence come three vases - a tall-necked amphora, a shallow glazed cup, and a globular pyxis - all of which can be closely paralleled in shape, ifnot in decoration, by Attic E G counterparts. A fourth vase from the same grave is still more helpful: a broad-based oinochoe recalling Attic EG not only in shape, but also in its decoration, which consists ofa window-panel containing two zigzags on the neck, and two groups of reserved bands round the body. For its shape, the closest Attic parallel is Agora P 186I6 from Well C. 18: 6, in an advanced E G I I context: the tall body of both vases already looks forward to Attic M G I. We shall not be far wrong, then, ifwe assume that our series of local groups is approximately coterminous in time with the Early Geometric of Attica.
DECORATION
EAST GREEK MIDDLE GEOMETRIC
The method ofplacing the ornament has hardly changed since PG 'times. Most ofthe closed vases still bear the main decoration on the shoulder, where the zone tends to be rather narrower than in true PG. Occasionally, however, a second zone breaks up the glaze on the neck, in the manner of Attic E G: this subsidiary zone is regularly filled by a single thick zigzag (pf, 58 e). 6 Circles and semicircles are still in fashion, but there are several signs of deterioration in their treatment. Semicircles, for example, often degenerate into roughly drawn threequarter circles, with their ends overlapping the base-line." When full circles appear, there are often fewer in each set than in PG, 8 and the central fillings ofcrosses are more-summarily drawn, without any solid glaze. 9
SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Also lalysos Gr. 141.4, with two bodies; Carniros,JdI I (1886),137, Berlin 2992. Also lalysos Gr. 43.4; Cos Gr. 22, two examples. 3 PGP, pI. 30b, extreme right. 4 Gjerstad, SCE 1V.2, 264. • Cf. PGP 23 I. 6 Also lasos Well, nos. 1-2; Camiros, CR 6-7, fig. 133. 7 Cos, Gr. 22, oinoehoe, bottom right; lasos Well, nos. 3, 4; Miletus, I M 7 (1957), pI. 36, 3. Thesame trait appears in Thessaly, cf. p. 152. 8 Cos, Gr, 22, skyphos; lasos Well, no. 1; Miletus, I M 7, pI. 36, 1; and pI. 37, 2. 9 Camiros, CR 6-7, figs. 244-5; Miletus, I M 7, pI. 39,4; I M g--ro, pI. 85,2; perhaps also Samos, AM 58 (1933), Beil. 20,2, on the floor of Altar I 1 • 1
!
A. Dodecanesian COS, Serraglio Gr. 27. One amphoriskos, pf, 59a; one oinochoe, six lekythoi, eight lekythoi-oinochoai; one glazed cup; two skyphoi,of which one is a Cycladic import, described in PGP 185-6. Cos, Serraglio Gr. 8. Three oinochoai, onejug, three lekythoi. Cos, Serraglio Gr. I. Five oinochoai, including pl. 58g, EG; twelve lekythoi, including pf, 59 b-e; four lekythoi-oinochoai; one double duck-vase; one cookpot; two skyphoi, including pl, 59d. Cypriot imports: one narrow-waistedjuglet, as SCE IV.2, fig. 39, 30; one black-on-red juglet, as SCE IV.2, fig. 25, 10. Massari-Mallona, 'grave group', Copenhagen 7575-82. CVA 2, pI. 65, 3-8; Johansen, Exochi 128, n. 193, figs. 210-12. Camiros, Acropolis Gr. 80. CR 6-7, 189ff., figs. 223-31. PI. 59e-f,h. Cos, Pizzoli Gr. 6. Three amphoriskoi; two oinochoai including pI. 6oa; eight lekythoi; three skyphoi; 'three cups.
268 .
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
Camiros, Chamber Tomb 83 near Temple A. CR 6-7,201-2, figs. 240-1. Vizikia, 'grave group' in Berlin and Karlsruhe. JdI I (1886), 136; bird-vase, Karlsruhe B 2312, CVA 2, pl. 46, 4. Asarlik (Caria), Chamber Tomb C. JHS 7 (1887),69-71; BM Cat. I, I, nos. 1105-7. Cos, Serraglio Gr. 68. Bd'A 35 (1950),320, fig. 92. Exochi, Gr. V. Exochi 49-53, figs. I I 1-25. PI. 60b-c. Exochi, Gr. Y. Exochi 65-7, figs. 133-6. Camiros, Chamber Tomb 82 near Temple A. CR 6-7, 193-201, figs. 233-9. PI. 60d. Exochi, Gr. M. Exochi 44-9, figs. 103-6.
B. Ionic Samos, 'grave group', Vathy 583-6. Unpublished; cf. PGP 216. Miletus, burnt layer of Geometric house. I M 9-10 (1959-60), 38-g, fig. I; pl. 58, 1-2. Smyrna, 'occupation before the curved buildings'. B SA 53-4 ( I 958-g), 138: local krater fr. pl. 5C (pI. 60f), with Corinthian MG 11 fr. 138, no. I, pl. 21 (information from Prof. J.M. Cook). Miletus, Geometric well. I M 9-10 (1959-60), 40ff., pls, 53,4; 54, 1-4; 57, 1-4; 61. The oinochoai and the hydria look earlier than the rest, and may perhaps date the use ofthe well to EG.
After the relative stagnation ofthe previous phase, this long period begins with the arrival of fresh external influences from east and west. The chief contribution from the east (and from Cyprus in particular) is a new globular flask, or lekythos, with a ridge where the handle joins the neck (pI. 59 h) : this became a popular M G form in the Dodecanese, but is so far unknown in Ionia.' Its introduction is soon followed by the first appearance of meanders, battlements, and other rectilinear motifs ofAttic origin. Our first two Coan groups indicate the order in which these innovations arrived. Gr. 27 already contains a ridged lekythos, in company with vases still decorated in the debased PG tradition (as pI. 59a): meanders and battlements make their debut slightly later, in Gr. 8. It is typical ofthe local school that the new Atticizing motifs are at once applied to the shoulder of the new Orientallekythos, for the Middle Geometric ofthe Dodecanese was always a composite style, combining Attic, Cypriot, and indigenous elements in varying proportions at different times. Faithful imitations ofAttic M G are rarer in the Dodecanese than in Ionia; yet in both areas they often provide useful indications of relative chronology when found in association with vases of a ~ more indigenous character. Once again our conclusions must be mainly based on the Dodecanesian groups, which form the great majority of the significant material. Sometimes, however, it will be possible to distinguish traits peculiar to Ionic M G, which will be duly stressed in the following account.
1 For its appearance in Crete at a later stage, see p. 242.
MG
269
SHAPES
All types of amphora are rare. Of the neck-handled variety the only published example, rather badly worn, comes from Tomb C at Carian Asarlik. It recalls Attic MG 11 not only in shape, but also in decoration, which consists of an abridged meander-panel on the neck, and reserved bands on the body.' The survival ofthe belly-handled amphora, still decorated in the PG tradition, is attested by an example found in the burnt layer at Miletus,» and by two others exported to Thera, both found in L G contexts;" but the shape has become much slimmer since PG times, and the small ridge under the rim is now a regular feature. Amphoriskoi hardly survive into M G except in Cos, where their form is further debased (pI. 59a, from Gr. 27). Oinochoai, on the other hand, are many and various. The broad-based Attic M G I type is faithfully copied in Vathy 585, and in the Coan example, pI. 60a, from Pizzoli Gr. 6. More frequently, however, the broad base is combined with a narrower neck (pI. 5ge, Camiros Gr. 80).4 Attic influence is evident also in the two large oinochoai Exochi V I (pI. 60 h) and V 2; yet their narrow feet and ovoid bodies have closer parallels in Corinthian and Cycladic imitations (pIs. I8h, 34j) than in the Attic originals. The narrow-necked oinochoai Exochi Y 2 and Z 2 are handsome imitations of an Attic M G I I original. 5 At the outset of M G, as we have already seen, the new neck-ridged lekythos enters the Dodecanesian repertoire; it seems to supplant the round-bottomed pilgrim flask - another Oriental shape - as the chief unguent vase." In addition to the ridge, the essential features ofthe Cypriot prototype are the tall neck, the widely flaring lip, and the globular body with flat base. Dodecanesian potters made no consistent attempt to Hellenize the shape: in the earliest Coan M G groups the rib is sometimes omitted, or summarily rendered, while the body occasionally assumes a squat biconical form (as pl, 59f); but most of the mature MG examples, such as pI. 59 b-c from Cos Gr. I, follow the contours ofthe Cypriot version very closely.' Three of these lekythoi were exported to Thera ;" the shoulder of a fourth has been found on Rheneia." Among the rarer closed shapes are a globular pyxis with handles from the Vizikia group (Berlin 2964); the duck-vase in Karlsruhe from the same group, similar in style to the crude EG example from lalysos Gr. 141; and a double duck-vase from Cos Gr. I, rather more naturalistic in conception. A third duck-vase, from the Massari-Mallona group, bears Atticizing decoration on the neck; the bird's head has been replaced by a trefoil lip. The pedestalled krater became especially popular towards the end of this period, when the Attic Type I I (pI. 5f)· was being widely exported and copied. The closest Rhodian imitation may also be the earliest - London 61.4-25.51 (pI. 60e) from Camiros. Shortlyafterwards come Exochi D I, M I, and Y I, a krater from Siana in Oxford.v and Heidelberg M 7 (pI. 59g). OfJohansen's 'Circle Group'i-' Heidelberg MR 10,12 and Camiros Tomb 82.1 1 Cf. PGP 21g-20. • I M g-1O, 39, fig. I. 3 AM 28 (19°3),17°, E 4-5; cf. PGP 34,215. • Also several from Cos Gr. I; Massari-Mallona, eVA Copenhagen 2, pl. 65, 4-5. 5 Cr. Brussels A 1702, eVA 2, II1 Hb, pI. 1,4. • Latest pilgrim flasks: Massari-Mallona gr., Exochi 210-12. Two of these have trefoil lips, instead of the usual round mouth. 7 Cf. especially SeEn, pI. II 3, 7-8. 8 A M 28 (1903), 150, C59-6 I. 9 Delos xv, pI. 14, Aa 57. 101885.616, eVA 2, II D, pI. I, I. 11 Exochi 110. 12eVA 3, pI. 122, I.
270 .
ought to be included among the latest vases of M G rather than among the L G kraters, which tend to have taller and more cylindrical stems. The following Ionic fragments may also qualify as late MG: Samos, AM 58, Beil, 32,5 (foot); Miletus, I M 7, 123, fig. 8, I and 2; pl. 37b. The large body fragment from Smyrna, pI. 60£, looks transitional to LG (p. 273). Another new Atticizing shape is the high-handled kantharos, which arrived in the Dodecanesian repertoire shortly after its invention in Attic M G I I. Once again, the earliest examples, pI. 60c,I are nearest to the Attic prototype in both shape and decoration: Exochi M 2, with its deeper body and straighter walls, foreshadows the later Rhodian variety (p. 282) and may be classed as transitional to L G. Skyphoi vary widely in shape. At one pole we have the local survivor ofthe deep PG type, with its flaring and overhanging lip (pI. 59d, from Cos Gr. I); at the other, there are many close imitations of the shallow Attic M G variety, whose lip is vertical and offset. Cos seems to be the main stronghold of the deep native form, which persists there even into LG without any serious competition from the Attic type; our example even preserves a low conical foot, but ring feet are more common at this time. The same class is also represented at Camiros (Gr. 80. 9), and Miletus (Well, I M g-IO, pl. 57, 1-3); also at Asarlik in Caria, by an exceptionally deep one-handled skyphos (Tomb C, A 1105). The Atticizing skyphoi are all close imitations, and we need mention only their distribution: Camiros Tomb 83, two examples: Exochi M 3, V 5-6:2 Cos, Aspripetra, Ann. 8-9 (1925-6), 268-9, figs. 49-5 I ; Serraglio Gr. 28, the only Atticizing skyphos in all the Coan cemeteries: Samos, Vathy 479, two examples; frs. AM 54 (1929), 13, fig. 4, Beil. 2, I and 4; AM 58 (1933), Beil. 21, 3: Chios, Kato Phana fr., RSA 35 (1934-5), pl. 34, 20: Miletus, frs., I M 7, pl. 37a,c; I M g-IO, pl. 58, 2, from burnt layer: Pygela-Kusadasi, two frs. in the British Institute ofArchaeology, Ankara: Smyrna, several examples. One-handled cups are relatively rare, but there are enough to justify a division into two types, on the same lines as for the contemporary skyphoi. Several glazed cups, based on the shallow Attic model, occur in Cos; one decorated example comes from Camiros Gr. 80 (no. 10). There is also a deeper variety, with flaring and overhanging lip: an early one, from Cos Gr. I, has its handle attached below the lip, but others are more orthodox in this respect. Ornate examples, at the end ofMG, may have a carination below the handle zone" and a low conical foot (pI. 6od, Camiros, Tomb 82.4). The carination recurs on some MG glazed cups from the Coan Aspripetra cave,' and from Wells A and D at the Samian Heraion.s The hemispherical kotyle is mainly a LG shape; but it is important to note that the earliest East Greek examples are decorated in the M G manner (e.g. pI. 61 c). 6 Finally, two rare shapes, the plate and the tray, both represented in the Rhodian cemetery of Exochi. The plates V 7 and 8 probably derive from an Attic M G I I model, as K. V. I, pl. 101,779. The magnificent tray Z I (pI. 60 g) is certainly decorated in the Attic manner," but for the shape, the slanting walls, and the three rising handles, there is no contemporary parallel. 8 Also Exochi V 4; Cos, Aspripetra, Ann.ll--9 (1925-6), 267, fig. 47. V 6 has a low conical foot, and is thus a hybrid between the Attic and native types. 3 Miletus, Well, I M 9-10, pI. 57,4; perhaps also I M 7, pl. 39, 2. 4 Ann. 8-9, 270-1, figs. 53-7. »AM 74 (1959), Beil. 12. 6 Also frs., Samos (AM 58, Beil. 21,9), Smyrna, and Pygela-Kusadasi, 7 Cf. Exochi I'll. 8 The resemblance to Fortetsa, nos. 74 and 90 (EPG), and Marmariani, no. 126 (BSA 31, pI. 8), is no doubt fortuitous. 1
2
MG
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
27 1
DECORATION
For the first time since the end of PG the potters of the Eastern Aegean now turned to Attica for fresh inspiration. In the Dodecanese our sequence ofgroups is full enough to show exactly how this transformation came about. The vases of Cos Gr. 27 just precede the renewal of Attic influence, and are still adorned in the EG manner. On the closed shapes (cf. pI. 59 a) the shoulder zone has been narrowed even further than before, so that the space-filling bars loom larger than ever.' Like the hatched triangles on this vase, other motifs from the PG to E G stock are reduced to a diminutive scale. Outlined triangles and hour-glasses are present in this grave, while semicircles are still found in Camiros Gr. 80 (pI. sse): small sets of circles survive on Coan skyphoi throughoutMG, and even later. In general it is the traditional shapes - belly-handled amphorae, oinochoai, and skyphoi with overhanging lip - that are most conservative in their decoration; the earliest experiments with Atticizing M G ornament were carried out on the newest and commonest oflocal M G shapes - the oriental globular lekythos with ridged neck. Hatched meanders and battlements make their first appearance on the shoulders ofthree lekythoi in Cos Gr. 8. At this early stage they are even framed in a typically Attic mannerwindow-panels surrounded by glaze. Later, from Cos Gr. I onwards, they run right round the vase, interrupted only by the handle attachment. By a curious paradox, no shape could be less suited to accommodate them. Dodecanesian potters soon realized that these heavy rectangular ornaments, in their broadest form, were quite out ofkeeping with the spherical surface of the shoulder; yet they obstinately refused to abandon their old habit of concentrating the main ornament on this part of the vase. One obvious way out of their dilemma was to contract the rectangular motifs as far as possible - just as they had contracted the old P G-E G repertoire - and then to fill out the field with ancillary zones. Thus it became the custom to place two or three continuous parallel zones on the shoulders of lekythoi (pI. 59b). As the main motif, the battlement was eventually preferred to the meander, since it could be more readily reduced to a compact and miniature form, in which the vertical lines could be most easily reconciled to the curve of the shoulder. The other zones, which are hardly any narrower, were filled with minor motifs drawn from the Attic M G I stock, and used in the following order offrequency: single zigzag, gear-pattern, dogtooth, dots, stars, cross-hatched lozenges, multiple zigzag, double axes. Later in M G, hatched zigzag (c£ Argive M G I I, p. 123) is added to the repertoire (pI. 59h). 2As a happier alternative, a new design oflocal origin was introduced, excellently suited to fill the whole ofthe shoulder field: this is the triangular lozenge net, first found in Cos Gr. I (pI. 59c); thereafter applied indiscriminately to any closed shape; and once to a krater (pI. 59 g), framed in a window-panel. So far we have confined our remarks to the Dodecanese, where the early use ofAttic M G ornament was strictly controlled by the needs ofthe globular lekythos. We cannot yet speak of a true Atticizing style in these islands: Attic motifs were merely adapted to a locally evolved system of decoration, largely dictated by the dominant local shape. But in Ionia, where the lekythos was apparently unknown," the local style seems to have been much more 1
3
Cf. also PAE 1959, pI. 166b. 2 Also Cos Gr. 68, Bd'A 35, 320, fig. 92, top right, other side of vase; P AE 1959, pI. 166a. One late MG fr. from MiIetus (1 M 7, pI. 39, IC) is decorated in the elaborate Coan manner, and could be from a lekythos.
272 .
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
profoundly influenced by Attica from the very beginning ofM G, ifwe may judge from the limited material at present available from Miletus and Samos. Two skyphos fragments from Miletus, I M 7, 122, pI. 37a,c, deserve close attention. The first, bearing a window-panel with quadruple zigzag, looks like an Attic MG I import (cf pl, se); the second fragment is thought by the excavator to be oflocal make, but its decoration recalls a gadrooned Attic example of the same early date.' The three dark-ground Samian oinochoai in Vathy tell a similar story. No. 585, decorated with a quadruple zigzag in the neck-panel and two sets of reserved bands on the body, is extremely close to an example from Kerameikos Gr. 41 ;3. no. 583, a tall-necked vase with globular body (close in shape to Exochi Y 2), also has a multiple zigzag panel on the neck, and a band of opposed diagonals round the body; no. 584 is fully glazed, except for reserved bands on the body. There is no sign here of the old PG habit of decorating the shoulder, whose long survival into Geometric is such a marked feature ofthe Dodecanesian style: in Samos it evidently passed out of fashion with the arrival of Attic MG influence. We have too little material, however, to tell whether these few Atticizing vases are typical of Ionic M G as a whole; some evidence to the contrary is offered by the burnt layer at Miletus, where an Atticizing M G I I skyphos is accompanied by a bellyhandled amphora still decorated in a debased PG manner." Towards the end ofM G, close imitations ofAttic are found in the Dodecanese as well as in Ionia; but even now these form the exception rather than the rule. In Cos, where the local style was still dictated by the lekythos, we can point to only two whole-heartedly Atticizing vases of this period: the kantharos from the Aspripetra cave- and a skyphos from Serraglio Gr. 28, with a triple zigzag in a window-panel. In Rhodes, the extent ofAttic influence varies from site to site; comparatively weak in the Camiros area, where it is represented only by the kraters in London (pI. 60e) and Oxford.! the two skyphoi from Tomb 83 on the acropolis, and the oinochoe Berlin 2982 from the Vizikia group: these five pieces are greatly outnumbered by the vases from the same and contemporary contexts, still decorated in a more indigenous manner. But at Exochi, in the eastern plain ofthe island, the Atticizing style is predominant, at any rate in the oldest grave groups. The three earliest kraters, D 1,6 M I, and Y I, are particularly close to the Attic M G I I model, not only in their main design - a powerful central meander surrounded by horizontal and vertical ancillaries - but also in the imitation ofthe tiny square metopes set in the glaze outside, a minor detail not copied by any other local school (cf. p. 25). There is, however, some evidence - stylistic as well as geographical - that the Attic centripetal system came to Rhodes by way of the Cyclades: note, for example, the inclusion ofthe stars (originally a filling ornament) within the central panel of the kantharos V 3 (pI. 60 c), and the omission ofvertical barring from the skyphos V 5 (cf p. 170). The oinochoai V I (pl, 60 b) and V 2 reveal several further deviations from the authentic Attic M G I I type: the ovoid shape and the band ofdecoration below the lower handle attachment are both reminiscent of Corinth (pp. 96-7); but these, too, may have been introduced to Rhodes by Cycladic intermediaries." On the other hand, the indigenous K. v, I, Gr. 43, pI. 99,1251. • K. v. I, pI. 72,2149. 3 I M 9-10,39, fig. I. 4 Ann. 8-9, 26 7, fig. 47· 6 CVA 2, II D, pI. I, I, Siana. • I follow Johansen's assumption that Gr. D contains material from two burials of which the later should be placed well into LG, see p. 274. 7 For the ovoid shape, cf. p. 169, pI. 34.i.
1
MG
273
Dodecanesian tradition is still represented by the hatched triangles on the shoulder, combined with the vertical rows of dots - an old local filling ornament not seen since PG times (p. 265), and now joined to an Attic dot rosette.' The orthodox hatched meander soon gave rise to more intricate local versions in Rhodes and Ionia. Thus before the end ofM G we already have the meander fork ;> complex meanders with extra winds in their midst ;" and hooks with three or four limbs attached to a double-hatched battlement (pk 60d). Another typically East Greek notion is first tried out on the krater Exochi Y I, where an ordinary hatched meander has its interstices stuffed with solid meander hooks. On the same principle, the meander ofthe Siana krater is surrounded by a continuous outline; alternatively, in the panels ofthe earliest kotylai (pl, 61 c), hatched meander hooks are enclosed by a continuous outline meander - a variant which just survives into the LG metope style (p. 278). Battlements are similarly stuffed with the gearpattern.' Perhaps these interlaced designs were originally suggested to the potter by the engraving of meanders on broad gold bands like those from Camiros Tomb 82. s Late survivals ofthe concentric circles are sometimes treated in a similar way at about the same time, interlaced either with single zigzags (pl, 60d), dots," or small circles." The end of M G is conveniently marked by three ornate vases from different sites, but decorated in the same restless manner: the cup from Camiros Tomb 82 (pl. 60d), a fragmentary cup from the Miletus well," and the krater fragment from Smyrna (pt 60f). In each case the centripetal Attic scheme has broken down; the local style is in a state of ferment, out of which the regular metope system of Late Geometric will shortly emerge. Another sign of things to come is the first appearance, on the Smyrna krater, of the East Greek tree ornament, formed by attaching two square hooks to the apex of a cross-hatched triangle;" this strange motifis destined to become the chief hallmark of Late Geometric all over the East Greek area. RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
In the foregoing analysis we have said enough about the stylistic links between East Greek and Attic MG to prove that the two styles run contemporaneously. Only one problem now remains: to fix the end of the local M G in terms of Attic and Corinthian. The krater fragment from Smyrna (pl, 60f) was found in association with a rim fragment ofa Corinthian krater, whose central meander is carelessly executed with a multiple brush; this imported piece may therefore be dated to the end of Corinthian M G I I, a phase which just overlaps the beginning ofAttic L G I (p. 108). Confirmation ofthis relative dating may be found in the decoration of the local krater, which includes two heavy hatched swastikas without filling ornaments, such as appear on Attic L G la vases (pl, 7h). A second important link with Corinth is provided by the emergence of the East Greek kotyle just before the end of the local MG. It has the same hemispherical shape as the earliest Corinthian type, and Cf. also the tray Exochi Z 1 (pI. 60 g), and the cup frs. from Miletus, I M 7, pI. 39, zc,e. 2 Exochi D 11. Samos, AM 54, pI. 2, 4; Sardis, ILN 1961, 537, fig. 6; Miletus, I M 7, pI. 39, ad. 4 Miletus, cup from well, I M 9-10, pI. 57,4; Sardis, ILN 1961,537, fig. 6. 5 CR 6-7, fig. 239. • Miletus, I M 7, pI. 39, za,c. 7 loco cit. pI. 37, 2f. 8 I M 9-10, pI. 57, 4. 9 A simpler, perhaps earlier, version occurs on a Samian hydria, A M 74, BeiI. 13, I. 1
3
274 .
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
EAST GREEK LATE GEOMETRIC
RHODIAN LATE GEOMETRIC SIGNIFICANT GROUPS
Camiros, Patelle Gr. 39. CR 6-7, 123, figs. 135 (upper row), 135 his, 136, 137· Possibly MG; cf. Brock, Fortetsa 217, n. 2. Ialysos, Gr. 58. CR 3, 100-3, figs. 93-5· . Camiros, Checraci Gr. 200. CR 4,342-5, figs. 379-82; CVA Rodi I, 11 De, pl. 1,3· Ialysos, Gr. 56. CR 3, 94-7, figs. 90-1. Ialysos, Marmaro Gr. 51. CR 8, 172, fig. 161. ., Exochi, Gr. D. Exochi 28-39, figs. 61-87; pI. 62e-g. Not a smgle burial ; nos. I and I I perhaps belong to an earlier burial in MG. Camiros, Gr. 85. CR 6-7,203, fig. 243. PI. 62a. Ialysos, Gr. 57. CR 3, 97- 100, fig. 9 2. Ialysos, Gr. 51. CR 3,85-7, figs. 74-8· Ialysos, Gr. 62. CR 3, 106-7, fig. 99. The Corinthian amphoriskos no. 4 can hardly belong to the original burial. Ialysos, Gr. 63. CR 3, 107, fig. 100. Camiros, Papatislures Gr. 25. CR 6-7, 79-80, figs. 86-8. Exochi, Gr. L. Exochi 44,figs. 100-2. PI. 62d. • Exochi, Gr. X. Exochi 53-65, figs. 126-3 2. Camiros, Papatislures Gr. 26. CR 6-7,80, fig. 76, top row nos. 1-2, second row nos. 1-2. Ialysos, Gr. 61. CR 3, 105, fig. 98. . Camiros, Checraci Gr. 203. CR 4,349-50, figs. 392-4; better, CVA Rodi I, 11 C, pl. I, 1-2 (not 'ciprioto'). Camiros, Papatislures Gr. 23. CR 6-7, 74, 78, fig. 76, bottom centre. Camiros, Papatislures Gr. 8. CR 6-7,35-8, figs. 37-41.
275
Camiros, Papatislures Gr. 7. CR 6-7,32-4, figs. 33-6. Exochi, Gr. A. Exochi 12-21, figs. 5-31. PI. 62h. Ialysos, Gr. 8. CR 3,37-8, figs. 22-3. Exochi, Gr. B. Exochi 21-5, figs. 34-45. PI. 62C. Exochi, Gr. C. Exochi 25-8, figs. 46-59. PI. 63a. Camiros, Papatislures Gr. 22. CR 6-7, 73-4, figs. 82-4. Camiros, Checraci Gr. 201. CR 4,345-8, figs. 384-6. Transitional to Subgeometric.
preserves in an exaggerated form the nicked rim of the 'proto-kotyle' of Corinthian M G I I (pI. 18e-f). We may therefore fix the end of East Greek M G at a date early in Attic LG I, but about contemporary with the transition from M G to L G in Corinth.
In the eastern Aegean, as in many other parts of the Greek world, the pottery of the Late Geometric period surpasses the earlier wares not only in the richness and ~ersatility of its decoration, but also in the quantity ofmaterial preserved. For these reasons It now becomes easier to make stylistic distinctions between the various centres within our area, and each of them will accordingly be treated under a separate heading. The first and longest section is on Rhodes, where both the material and the stratigraphical evidence are the most plentiful; Cos Samos and Chios are then considered in turn. Later, we shall venture a few observations on thevarious sites on the Asiatic mainland from Aeolis to Caria, where the available evidence is more scanty than in the islands.
RHODIAN •
LG
I. Rhoman Unitations of Levantine and Cypriot work Before examining the more orthodox aspects of Rhodian Late Geometric, we must first mention the various categories of vases which betray fresh influence from the Orient. Within the East Greek world, these categories are all peculiar to Rhodes, and illustrate the perseverance of that special relationship between the Dodecanese and Cyprus which we have observed from Protogeometric times onwards. One might argue that this relationship now became closer than ever before, since some potters on the island were no longer content with the mere borrowing of shapes; they began to reproduce the decoration, and even the fabric, ofthe oriental originals. Yet it must be remembered that the great mass ofRhodian LG has its own indigenous character, quite uninfluenced by Levantine ideas. In this section, then, we are dealing only with a few byways of the local school, and not with its most typical products. Our treatment may be brief, since many of the more striking imitations have already been fully studied by Johansen in his excellent publication of the Exochi cemetery.' Our first category was thought by Johansen to have been influenced by Oriental work in ivory: it consists of two cylindrical pyxides- and three elegant ovoid oinochoai." The pyxis bodies are probably modelled on a Levantine ivory prototype, and their surfaces are toned with a reddish slip resembling the dyeing of ivory." The decoration includes much that is reminiscent of Levantine ivories from Nimrud, e.g. (i) the cable on pI. 62a; (ii) the small circles on the oinochoai corresponding to the 'dice-eyes' of the ivory worker; and, most remarkable, (iii) the rows of impressed dogtooth defining the sharp angles of the pyxides." This last device recurs on the oinochoe Ialysos Gr. 6 I. I, whose shape and decoration are in other respects based on a Cypriot clay original: theblack-on-red scheme ofthe two pyxides and the Exochi oinochoe may perhaps be another sign of influence from the same quarter, rather than a deliberate attempt to imitate ivory." Red slip, this time without any decoration, is the distinguishing feature ofa second classof Rhodian imitations, modelled on the red-slipped unguent vases of the Syrian and Phoenician coast. Johansen lists three shapes in this fabric, ofwhich the commonest is a baggy flask or lekythos with a slight ridge on the neck, and the everted 'mushroom' lip ofthe Phoenician original. 7 The Rhodian series has its own development, beginning with a tapering neck and 2 Camiros, Gr. 85.1, pI. 62a; Exochi X 3. Gotha ZV3 ... ,CVA I,pl. 5, I; Camiros,Berlin 2949,]dI 1,137; ExochiD2. 4 Exochi 149ff. 6 Cf. Boardman, A]A 63 (1959),399. s Cr. the Levantine ivories imported to Camiros; Hogarth, Ephesus, pI. 28, 1,4. • See D. B. Harden, The Phoenicians 149, pis. 110-11; Exochi, fig. 225. A flask from Ialysos Gr. 132, CR 3, 145, fig. 139, is clearly a Phoenician original. 1
3
Exochi 148-64.
276 .
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
a rounded body (as Exochi A I 7), and thereafter assuming a straighter neck and a sharper angle near the base; this later form survives into the Orientalizing period.' The other two shapes in this ware are a globular aryballos, usually preserving the oriental ridged neck; and the ring-vase." We cannot yet say whether the idea of red-slipped ware came directly to Rhodes from the Levantine coast, or at second hand through Cypriot imitationst" this question must remain open until general agreement is reached on the relative and absolute dating of the Cypriot wares.' A third category is more exclusively Cypriot in its inspiration. A wide variety ofshapes, listed by Johansen in Exochi 155-6, bear a typically Cypriot combination ofsmall concentric circles and vertical wavy lines. The two motifs are sometimes united in a single spaghettilike ornament (pI. 62 h) ; when drawn as separate units, the same multiple brush is used for both. No less individual is the fabric. The clay, usually ofa yellow or light brown hue, is well washed; the surface is highly polished, and soapy to the touch. Decoration is applied in a matt pigment, which rarely survives in good condition. By far the commonest shape is the globular aryballos, which is so widely distributed round the Greek world that its source was for a long time in doubt. Johansen argues convincingly for its Rhodian origin, pointing out that the closest imitations of the Cypriot prototype, with the original neck-ridge," exist only in Rhodes. The shape was soon Hellenized by the local potters, who eliminated the ridge and ran the handle to the lip, thereby producing a true aryballos, comparable to the Corinthian type which it almost rivals in popularity. Later examples have a biconical body; this version accompanies the globular variety in Camiros Gr. 8, and survives well into the Orientalizing period." The other shapes in this fabric are rare outside Rhodes. Those found in Geometric contexts include horn-vases (Exochi A 12), small oinochoai with horizontal ribs on their bodies (Ialysos Gr. 58: a plain example already in Camiros Gr. 82, M G), amphoriskoi with horizontal handles on the shoulder (Camiros Gr. 8), and a large bulbous oinochoe with round base (Ialysos Gr. 62). On the oinochoe from Camiros Gr. 22 (CR 6-7, fig. 84) the typical ornament ofthis class is combined with meanders in a curious hotchpotch ofHellenic and oriental elements. Our fourth and last category consists ofimitations oflarge Cypriot black-on-red oinochoai with straight narrow necks and globular bodies, decorated with fine concentric circles of various sizes; the largest horizontal and vertical sets often intersect each other." Cypriot originals have been found in two graves at Ialysos, 5 I and 57; and all the Rhodian L G imitations come from this site. In some cases the decoration is faithfully copied ;" more often the larger sets are replaced by single broad bands, over which small circles are often superimposed." Another Cypro-Levantine device that appealed to the Rhodian potter is the addition ofa modelled human face on the neck (Ialysos, Grs. 56.2, 28. I 3-15).10 This class, too, is confined to Ialysos during LG, but occurs elsewhere in Orientalizing contexts.P Exochi 161, n. 321; er. G I. • List: Exochi 16[. • AJJ SCE IV. 2, fig. 43, 5-6. Recent proposals to raise the low chronology advanced by Gjerstad in SCE IV. 2: J. du Plat Taylor, Iraq 2[ (1959),85; J. Birmingham, A]A 67, 1963,25-6. Cf. p. 318. • White-painted IV 'jug', SCE IV. 2, fig. 28, 18,20; Exochi, fig. 224. 6 Camiros Gr. 10, CR 6-7, fig. 43; Gr. 205, CR 4, figs. 399ff. 7 SCE IV. 2, fig. 39, 2, 4. 8 CR 3, fig. 39a. 9 CR 3, figs. 84-5. 10 Cf. SCE IV. 2, 297-8, n. 21; for the Levantine prototype, Expedition 8. 4 (1966), 7, an export to Pithecusae. 11 Vroulia, pl. 20, 3, 7. 1
4
RHODIAN: IMITATIONS OF LEVANTINE AND CYPRIOT·
LG
277
Apart from these various attempts to copy eastern Mediterranean forms, Rhodian L G pottery is virtually free from external influences. We now return to the later development of the native style; following the practice in previous chapters, we shall examine the leading workshops before concluding with a general summary of shapes and decoration. We proceed first with a series of vases, closely related in style, which spans the whole course of the Late Geometric period, and found ready imitators at many other sites in the Eastern Aegean.
11. The Bird-kotyle Workshop Firstphase I. Kotyle, Rhodes 11642. Ialysos, Gr. 50.1; CR 3,84. PI. 61 c. (Still MG.) 2. Kotyle fr., Ialysos, Marmaro Gr. 51.2. CR 8, fig. 161, row 2, no. I. 3. Kotyle, Pithecusae Gr. 282, with Nestor Inscription. RAL 1955, 215-34. 4. Kotyle, Thera, Sellada Gr. 17. Thera 11, fig. 80. PI. 61 d. 5. Kotyle. Asine 321, fig. 219,4. 6. Kotyle, Ialysos Gr. 57. CR 3, fig. 92. 7. Kotyle, Ialysos Gr. 62. CR 3, fig. 99· 8-12. Kotylai, Rheneia. Delos xv, pls, 46-7; Rh. 4-5, 13-15. 13. Kotyle fr., AI Mina.JHS 60 (1940), 19, fig. 8f. 14. Krater, Ecole francaise d'Athenes, from Myrina. BCH 36 (1912), pls, 9-10. 15. Oinochoe, Delos. Delos xv, pI. 46, Rh. I. PI. 61h. 16. Lekythos-sprinkler, Thera. AM 28 (1903), BeiI. 24, H I 10. Second phase I 7-2 I. Kotylai, Rheneia. Delos xv, pls. 46-7, Rh. 6-10. 22. Jug, Dublin 1921.28, from Rhodes. Unpublished. 23. Jug, Munich 2300, perhaps from Crete. Sieveking-Hackl, no. 455. 24. Jug, London 60.4-4. 10 from Camiros. Exochi, fig. 209. PI. 61 a. 25. Jug or oinochoe fr., Rheneia. Delos xv, pI. 46, Rh. 2. 26. Oinochoe, Ialysos. Ann. 6-7 (1923-4), 263, fig. 163. SHAPES
This workshop is named after its most striking ornament, and its commonest shape. The kotyle, as we have noted, first came to this area from Corinth at the end ofMG. The first Corinthian model has a hemispherical profile, modified at the rim by a slight nick. Both features were copied in the earliest East Greek examples, and perpetuated in this workshop: the hemispherical form was preserved in the local L G style long after it had passed out of fashion in Corinth, and the nick was exaggerated so that the rim became inset (pI. 61 d). At the end of its long career, this kotyle was replaced not, as in Corinth, by the deeper variety, but by the shallow Subgeometric bird-bowl (pp. 298ff., pI. 6Ie). The body of the krater 14 is simply a magnification ofthe same shape: the lip is proportionately a little taller, yet still leans inward, as on the kotyle.' 1
Cf. also Delos XV, Rh 3, pI. 54 B.
278 .
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
In keeping with the rounded profiles of the open vases, the oinochoe 15 (pI. 61 b) and the lekythos 16 have plump globular bodies. Later, it seems as though these two shapes were eventuallyfused to form the squat biconicaljugs that are typical ofour second stage (pI. 61 a). Here the broad neck of the oinochoe is combined with the flaring round mouth of the lekythos; the attachment ofthe handle below the rim also recalls the latter shape. At the end of our series the trefoil lip reappears on 26, where the angle in the biconical profile is softened. The squat proportions ofthis late L G group are retained by the earliest Orientalizing pouring vessels, where the base becomes much broader.' DECORATION
This workshop evolved a simple metopal system, which could be applied to almost any shape. Its mature form is seen on the kotyle from Thera (pI. 61 d) : here a main panel, divided into four tall rectangular metopes, is underlined by a thin ancillary zone, and the whole is surrounded by glaze. Metopes are usually divided from one another by only two lines, instead of the normal three. Intervening 'triglyph' motifs, in the Attic manner, are exceptional (4, I I). On the open shapes, the lip is too small to merit any independent decoration: that part which lies above the metopes is absorbed into the reserved panel, while the remainder ofthe lip, like the rest ofthe body, is glazed. This feature is exclusively East Greek; in all other L G schools it is the custom to reserve the entire lip ofany open vessel whose body is decorated. The East Greek system is a sign of arrested development, which could only occur in a style that was still predominantly dark-ground: it is simply a local expansion of the M G window-panel. The closed vases (apart from the lekythos 16) are fully decorated down to the widest diameter. Neck and belly receive ancillary zones; in accordance with Dodecanesian custom, the shoulder is still the place ofhonour, and this field is therefore occupied by the metopes much to their inconvenience, since the motifs must now be drastically adapted to suit a trapezoidal frame (pI. 6Ia). The typological development of this system is fairly clear from the internal evidence of the kotylai. On I (pI. 61 c) an interlaced meander occupies the whole of the main panel, as in M G. This scheme is modified on 2 by the insertion of a metope at either side. The oldest kotyle with the full complement of four equal metopes is probably the 'Nestor' kotyle 3: here the meander hooks - an abbreviation of the M G meander - are hatched in only one direction, and the bird has not yet appeared. Birds are first seen on 4 (pI. 61 d); and from then onwards both birds and hooks are cross-hatched. I follow M. Robertson in supposing that 17-21, the kotylai with three metopes, belong to the most advanced stage, on the grounds that their symmetrical scheme points the way to the Subgeometric birdbowls." Only four metope motifs are in regular use; these, in order of frequency, are the lozenge (always in the side-panels), the tree ornament, the bird, and a pair of meander hooks. On three-metope kotylai the central position is reserved for the bird. All four motifs are usually 1
2
Schiering, 15ff., pls. 2-3; cf. eR 4, pI. 7, figs. 4°0-1; Amsterdam 1234, AlgemeineGids, pI. 50. JHS 60 (1940), 14. For further confirmation from stratigraphical evidence, see Boardman, Greek Emporia, 132ff.
LG
RHODIAN: THE BIRD-KOTYLE WORKSHOP·
279
cross-hatched, although the bird sometimes appears in silhouette: the lozenge, and the triangular base of the tree, are always enclosed by an extra outline. The birds' bodies are more often outlined at the beginning ofour series than at the end; the later birds tend to be leaner than the earlier, and approximate more nearly to the slim, drop-shaped creatures of the first bird-bowls (pI. 6Ie). For the birds, the usual filling ornaments are cross-hatched triangles, above and below the tail; for the tree, a rough Z either side. The ancillary zones of the early kotylai are normally filled by double axes alternating with vertical lines - another survival from M G: on the three-metope group, this motif is replaced by a jagged and untidy zigzag, drawn with a multiple brush. The two motifs occur together on the closed vases, where we also find ..r.'s (early) and Z's (late). FABRIC, DISTRIBUTION, AND SOURCE
The influence ofthis workshop was felt all over the East Greek world, where the bird-kotyle became the most universally popular drinking vessel of the L G period.' Outside this area, exports travelled far and wide.s Even within the East Greek area, it will be seen that the great majority of extant examples were found outside Rhodes. Many of them, after more detailed study oftheir fabric, may prove to be local imitations: none ofthe numerous pieces from Samos, indeed, were thought by the excavators to be imports, and it must be confessed that the style of this workshop is remarkably easy to copy. The vases in our list have been ascribed to the original Rhodian workshop not only because of their style, but also on account of their fabric, which agrees well with that of orthodox Geometric vases such as are found in Rhodes and nowhere else:" their clay is deep-toned, varying in colour from dark orange to coffee-brown, according to the firing conditions; the surface is well polished; the glaze varies from chestnut brown to full black, and occasionally achieves a medium lustre: impurities include white grit, and occasionally a little silver mica. Ifwe may assume, then, that these vases are ofRhodian origin, it is not difficult to decide in which part of the island our workshop was situated. The eastern coastal plain may at once be ruled out: at Lindos there is only a single scrap of a bird-kotyle.s while there is nothing in this style from Exochi; the kotylai there are decorated in a much simpler manner, more reminiscent ofthe Corinthian originals (p. 283). We are left, then, with the sites on the northwest coast; and ifwe take into consideration the provenance ofour vases, then lalysos would seem to be the most probable centre for their production, with Camiros as a second possibility.
1 Distribution: Samos, AM 54, 9-ID, fig. 2, 2-8; fig. 3, I; AM 58, 67ff., BeiI. 23, I-ID; 43, 1-5. Chios, Greek Emporia 132ff., nos. 437-47· Lama Ill, pI. 57, 14. Smyrna,JOAI 27 (1932), Beiblatt 175, fig. 87, ID; Akurgal, Smyma, pI. A I; pI. 9a-d. Ephesus, JOAI 23 (1926), Beiblatt 254, fig. 4a-b. Miletus, RerlIntKong VI (1939), pI. 25; I M 9-10,59, pI. 62. 2. Didyrna, I M 13-14 (1963-4), pis. 8,4; 13,2; 24, 1. Iasos, Ann. 43-4 (1965-6), 420, fig. 26, row 2, left. 2 I. N.E. Aegean: Troy, Schmidt-Schliemann 185, nos. 3758-61; Troy IV, figs. 303, 9-ID, and 3°8,14-17. Lesbos, Antissa, RSA 32, pI. 23, I and 3. 11. Central and W.Aegean: Rheneia, as above. Thera, as above, andAM28, 166, D 3-4. Naxos, AM 54,155, fig. 8, 6; BeiI. 54, nos. 4, I 1,16. Eretria, RSA 47,12, three fragments. Chalcis, RSA 52, pl. 1,6. Aegina, Kraiker, pI. 7, 103. Asine, as above. Ill. Eastern Mediterranean: Al Mina,JHS60, 19, fig. 8f-h. Tarsus Ill, pI. 99,1447. IV. Western colonies: Pithecusae, as above. Megara Hyblaea II, 77-8, pl. 62, 1-2,4. GeIa, NSc 1960, 106, fig. 26 bis; NSc 1962,393, fig. 72. 3 Cf. Blinkenberg, Lindos I, 242ff.; Johansen, Exochi 84-6. «Lindos I, pI. 38, 873.
280 . EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
Ill. The Bird-and-Zigzag Painter I. Skyphos, Camiros Chamber Tomb I I. CR 6-7,46, fig. 56. 2. Skyphos, Siana, Copenhagen 9399. Vroulia 4, fig. 8. 3. Fragments of skyphos or kantharos. Ialysos, Marmaro, Gr. 5 I : CR 8, fig. 16I, top row I and centre row 5. 4. Oinochoe, Camiros, Berlin 2940. Jd! I (1886), 134-5; BCH 36 (1912),500, fig. 7. 5. Skyphos, Siana; Oxford 1885.622. CVA 2, I ID, pI. 1,3; Lindos t, 248, fig. 30. PI. 61 g. 6. Oinochoe, Camiros, London 85.12-13.6. Exochi, fig. I97a-b. PI. 61f. 7. Kantharos, Siana; Oxford 1885.621. CVA 2, IID, pI. 1,2; Lindos I, 247, fig. 29.
PI.6Ih. Other frs. by the painter: Lindos 1, pl. 37, 871; pl. 38, 872 and 876. Another skyphos, found at Tzingana near Kattavia, is said by Kinch to be similar to no. 2 (Vroulia 4).
Related (8-g by the same potter as nos. 4 and 6) 8. Oinochoe, Camiros, Checraci Gr. 200. CR 4,342, figs. 379-80; CVA Rodi I,ll De, pI. 1,3. 9. Oinochoe, Paris CA 3033. Unpublished. 10. Kantharos, private possession. Boardman, Burlington Magazine, Sept. 1966, 47 I, fig. 31. The first seven vases form a compact group, evidently the work of a single painter within a few years: to judge from the context of3 and 8, he must have been active at an early stage of Rhodian L G. Unlike the bird-kotylai, his wares did not travel outside Rhodes: their provenances suggest that he worked at Camiros or Siana. His most imposing shape is a large ovoid oinochoe with a broader neck than is customary at this time (p. 281): its funerary purpose is clear from the plastic snakes attached to the openwork handles on each of our four examples. His skyphoi and kantharoi 2-3, 5, and 7 also have a strong family resemblance to one another: their profile is practically vertical down to a pointjust below the handles, and then sweeps down towards the foot in a spherical curve. The skyphos I, where the lip is still slightly offset, need not be much earlier; for in Exochi M 2 we already have evidence of a vertical-walled kantharos which, through its association with an MG krater, cannot be later than the beginning ofLG. This painter also adopted a metopal system of decoration, usually without triglyphs, and carried it further than most of his fellows: the oinochoai 4 and 6 have no less than three metope bands on neck and shoulder. On I, 2, and 7 the whole decorated panel is surrounded by glaze, in the usual manner ofEast Greek L G open shapes; but on 5 not only is the metope band carried under the handles, but the ancillary zones continue down to the foot, and even under the floor. 1 The birds are highly individual. Their stylization is not always uniform, even on the same vase (e.g. 3 and 5), but all share the following traits: sharp bend between head and neck, humped back, drooping tail, and simple diagonal hatching on the body; legs are usually
short and straight. Those on 1 preserve eyes and feathers, and may be the earliest: the latest are on 6-7, where the head has deteriorated into a long straight line. The zigzag panels are always tightly packed, recalling squares of closely woven textile: peculiar to this painter is the habit of stuffing the gaps with extra chevrons. The other main motifs belong to the general stock ofRhodian LG: cross-hatched lozenges with eight square hooks (4,6); outlined hatched lozenges (6) or lozenge nets (4); reserved quatrefoil with dotted background (base of5). The linear oinochoai 8 and 9 stand apart from the main group, and may represent an earlier stage ofour painter's workshop. Two motifs, in particular, mark them as the immediate successors of the latest M G closed vases - the triangular lozenge nets on the shoulders, and the almost continuous zone of meander hooks round their bellies ;' furthermore, the chevron triglyphs of 8 and 10 may indicate a formative stage of the local metope system before it had finally emancipated itselffrom Attic influence. Both oinochoai are linked with 4 and 6 not only through their identical shape; they share, in addition, the careless daub of glaze below the snakes, which encroached on the body zones after the ornament was painted. IV. Other vases SHAPES It only remains now to consider the vases that did not enter the repertoire of either workshop, and are not closely related to new Oriental types; this briefsummary is much indebted • to Johansen's excellent survey in Exochi 86-148, to which the reader is referred for more detailed treatment. The only true neck-handled amphora, Exochi A I, imitates the slim Bb class of Naxos (pI. 36 e) not only in shape, but also in the addition ofa white zigzag over a glazed zone." Ofthe two belly-handled amphorae, Ialysos Gr. 58.1 is the latest and most attenuated member of the old-fashioned local series decorated with concentric circles; the other, from Camiros," is one ofthe few Rhodian vases to show the influence ofAttic Dipylon ornament. In L G we see the first and last of a curious four-handled hybrid, combining the handles of both the standard types:" Camiros Gr. 39.2, still decorated in a M G manner, looks the earliest, and the series probably closes with the florid pair from Camiros Gr. 203. Several varieties of oinochoe have already been mentioned in connection with the local workshops, and the imitations oforiental shapes. Ofthe others, the straight-necked example from Ialysos Gr. 63 combines the Cypriot shape with local decoration. There remains a large East Rhodian class with tall narrow necks and globular or ovoid bodies which follow soon after their M G prototypes Exochi Y 2 and Z 2; their necks still keep an elegant concave curve, which passes into the body without any strong articulation (pI. 62f-g).5 The lekythoi of this period follow on naturally after the M G series: the neck-ridge is usually retained, but there is little sign of any fresh influence from Cyprus. The earliest are Camiros Gr. 39.3 and Exochi D 12-14, a motley group varying widely in shape and dimen1
1
Cf. Lindos I, no. 876.
RHODIAN: THE BIRD-AND-ZIGZAG PAINTER' 281
LG
5
Cf. Lindos1, no. 862. 2 Pp. 1 74ff.; Exochi88ff. Exochi D 3-10, Z 3; Lindos 1, nos. 849, 862.
3
Vroulia, fig. 54; Exochi, fig. 218.
• For examples see Exochi, n. 31.
282 .
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
sions. D 14 belongs to a short-necked globular class ofmodest size, more at home in the LG graves of Cos (p. 287): on the smallest examples, which are aryballoi rather than lekythoi, the ridge often disappears, and the handle rises towards the rim.' The longer neck and ovoid body ofD 12 are more exclusively Rhodian. Next come three large and lavishly decorated examples, Ialysos Gr. 51.1 and Exochi X 1-2, where the multiplication ofneck-ridges suggests a metallic prototype." The latest are also the tallest and the most attenuated: Camiros, Gr. 22.1 (height 0·46m.), and that in Florence, Exochi, fig. 213. A new addition to the lekythos family is the two-handled flask," another Oriental shape decked out in Hellenic ornament: the Cypriot original- appears in Ialysos Gr. 51.6, CR 3, fig. 75, top right. Copenhagen 121635 looks like a hybrid between this flask and the true neck-handled amphora. Apart from the cylindrical examples imitating ivory boxes, the pyxis is represented only by two fragments of the globular sort, with horizontal handles and inset rim. Ialysos Gr. 58. 18 seems to have been painted by the same hand as the accompanying amphora, no. 17, with which it shares the curious decoration of four-and-a-half sets of concentric circles. The other, Camiros Gr. 39.1, was apparently used as a cremation urn, and is said by the excavators to be a Cretan import. All Rhodian L G kraters have pedestals, and are directly descended from the local M G imitations of the Attic Type I I, which thus lived on in Rhodes long after it had been forgotten in Attica. Using decoration as the main criterion, the following chronological order is suggested: I. Camiros, Gr. 200.2. 2. Camiros, Berlin 2941 (Jd! I, 135). 3. Exochi N 1. 4. Myrina, from Bird-kotyle Workshop(p. 277, no. 14). 5. Camiros, London 85.12-13.5 (Exochi, fig. 204). 6. Camiros, London 60.4-4.9 (Exochi, fig. 205). 7. Exochi C I (pl, 63a). 8. Exochi B I. 9. Camiros, Gr. 201.1. In the shape of the body, no consistent development can be traced, but the pedestal is more helpful; the plastic rings ofthe M G prototype soon disappear, and are replaced either by isolated sharp ridges, or by a single reserved area half-way up the stem; and the stem itself gradually assumes a taller and more cylindrical form. The L G kantharoi of Rhodes are deeper than their own M G predecessors, and their contemporaries in other local styles. Deepest of all is a late pedestalled class, whose stems resemble those of the latest kraters (Exochi A 2-3, B 3, pl. 62h).6 Another variety, with a small spreading foot, is rather earlier, but nowhere near the beginning ofLG> Most kantharoi, however, still have ring feet (pl, 62C), and these show no consistent development in profile: some, like Exochi M 2, lose their offset lip at the beginning of this period, while Camiros, Gr. 25.2; Gr. 26.3; Copenhagen 8225, CVA 2, pl. 65, 9. 2 Cf. Exochi 138, n. 240. Camiros, Gr. 8. I; Camiros, London 64-10-7. 1582, Exochi, fig. 195. 4 SCE IV. 2, fig. 39, 18: for contemporary but closer Cretan imitations, see p. 250. 6 Exochi, fig. 194. 6 In Camiros Gr. 7.5 they have a shallower prototype, whose fully ribbed stem recalls the earlier kraters. , Copenhagen 6352, C VA 2, pl. 65, 10; Exochi, fig. 208; Camiros, Gr. 25.3: Camiros, Paris N 2371 : Exochi A 4. 1
3
LG
RHODIAN •
283
others retain theirs to the end. Tall,' vertical, or inward-leaning rims are characteristically East Greek," and occur spasmodically throughout the Rhodian series." The most individual skyphoi are the vertical-walled examples of the Bird-and-Zigzag Painter: the others are more summarily decorated, and keep to the conventional profile with offset lip and shallow body.s Cups are few, and usually glazed; both ofthe older types, those with offset and overhanging lips, survive side by side in Camiros Gr. 26. I -2. By far the commonest drinking vessels are the hemispherical kotylai, which divide themselves conveniently into two local groups within the island. The bird-kotylai, as we have suggested, were probably made at Ialysos, or perhaps at Camiros: their individuality in both shape and decoration will be appreciated if we compare them to an equally coherent East Rhodian series at Exochi (L I, pl, 62d; C 2; B 4; C 3; D 16, pI. 62e; F 1-2; L 2). With the exception of L I these are all true kotylai with straight rims, like the developed Corinthian examples: on L I, one of the earliest, there is a barely perceptible nick, but the inset rim typical of the bird-kotylai is entirely absent from this group. Even remoter from the birdkotylai is their decoration, which follows that of the Corinthian series, albeit at a distance." They are eventually succeeded by imitations of the deep kotyle (C 4-5) soon after the deep E P C originals began to arrive in Rhodes," and shortly before the end of Rhodian L G. 7 Deep imitations must have continued far into the Orientalizing period: in Camiros Gr. 1438 one of them accompanies an advanced Subgeometric bird-bowl- a juxtaposition which draws attention to an extreme case of regionalism in Rhodian pottery; for both shapes are collateral descendants of the same Corinthian original, the L G hemispherical kotyle. DECORATION
Although the vases of this period are more fully decorated than earlier Geometric wares, Rhodian L G never became a true light-ground style of the kind that arose in many other parts of the Aegean. On closed shapes the ornament often reaches down to the widest diameter, but rarely encroaches on the glaze below; on open shapes, the decorated panel is still hemmed in at the sides by glaze, which is usually carried up to the rim and sometimes along the lip as well, thereby framing the panel on all four sides. The chief syntactical innovation is the rise of a local metope system, whose progress we have already watched on the series ofbird-kotylai (pp. 278-9). On an early member of that series, from Ialysos Marmaro Gr. 5 I, we saw its embryonic stage, where a central meander motif, still reminiscent ofMG, is flanked by single metopes; this stage is also illustrated by the krater Camiros Gr. 200.6. 9 Another early feature is the interruption by small panels of a meander in a continuous zone ;10 a practice also found in Attic L G I a (pl, 9f-1). But when the local system reaches maturity, its resemblances to Attic are few and superficial. Nearly all the motifs are of local extraction; the triglyphs of the Attic scheme appear occasionally Ialysos, Gr. 8.1. 2 a. Samos, p. 290. 3 Lindos I, nos. 845--6; Camiros Gr. 7.7; Exochi A 2--6,B 2-3. • Camiros, Gr. 7.8; Gr. 25. I, a solitary stemmed example; Ialysos Gr. 51.2 and CR 3, figs. 124- 5. 6 a. Corinth VII. I, pI. 13,80, and pI. 19j. 6 Camiros, Gr. 23.1; Exochi A 8-g. 7 Evidence ofa slight overlap between the shallow and deep imitations may be noted in Exochi C 2-5. 8 CR 4, fig. 301. S CR 6-7, fig. 38 I. 10 LindosI, nos. 849, 862; Camiros, p. 28o, 8---9. 1
284 .
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
in the early stage of the Rhodian (Camiros, Gr. 200.1; Exochi D 6) but are subsequently eliminated.' Different, too, is the placing ofmetopes on closed vases; instead ofusing them to emphasize the widest diameter, as an Attic potter would have done, the Rhodians still clung obstinately to their old habit of concentrating the weightiest decoration on the shoulder. The difficulty offitting square metopes into this unsuitable field was only partially eased by alternating them with triangular lozenge nets," Many potters avoided this problem altogether by perpetuating the M G system of dividing the shoulder field horizontally into thin strips." The lekythos Ialysos Gr. 51.1 illustrates an elaborate compromise between the two systems which we shall meet more often on Cos (p. 287). Metopes were more comfortably deployed on open vases, especially on the products of our two workshops; elsewhere - and on kantharoi in particular - horizontal strips were often preferred:" Here, too, there were various attempts to combine both systems. One of the most characteristic is a three-metope scheme where the central panel is horizontally divided into several strips:" this arrangement occurs late in LG, like most tri-metopal systems." Another sign of lateness is the monotonous repetition of the same metope motif. 7 At the end of L G the final collapse of the metope system is illustrated by two of our latest vases (Camiros, Grs. 201.1, 22.1), where the painter no longer troubles to divide his panels with vertieallines. Before considering the various motifs in detail, we should note one more peculiarity of syntax which Rhodes shares with Crete (p. 252): this is the practice of varying the choice and arrangement of linear motifs on different sides of the same vase." The stock oflinear motifs, including those of the Exochi vases," has been fully set out by Blinkenberg in Lindos I, pI. 35; here we need only draw attention to the ornament that is most typically Rhodian or East Greek. We begin with the metope motifs, before passing on to the contents of horizontal zones. The tree ornament, which made its debut on a Smyrnaean krater at the end of M G (p. 278, pI. 60f), became one of the hallmarks ofall East Greek LG. Its simplest form, where a double T-shaped hook emerges from a hatched triangular base.i" is especially characteristic ofthe Bird-kotyle Workshop.v- A more complex variant is the eight-hooked lozenge (no. 83), used in a rudimentary form on the late MG krater Camiros Tomb 82.1, and subsequently adopted by the Bird-and-Zigzag Painter, among others (pI. 61 f; cf. also pI. 62, Exochi D 4, D 8).12 Hooks are sometimes combined with other hatched motifs in a baroque extravagan1 With one exception: the panels of cross-hatching which begin fairly late in LG (Camiros, Gr. 26.3; Gr. 22.1) and survive well into Rhodian Orientalizing (Exochi, figs. 201-2). • Exochi D 4, 7-9; Lindos 862; Copenhagen 8225, CVA 2, pI. 65, 9. 3 Camiros, Gr. 8. I; Gr. 25.2; lalysos, Gr. 63.1; Lindos t, no. 849. • Camiros, Gr. 7.7; Ialysos, Marmaro Gr. 51, frs.; Gr. 8.1. LindosI, no. 885. Exochi A 2, 4, 6; B 3; L 3. 5 Paris A 288, BCH 36,500, fig. 6; Copenhagen 6352, Exochi, fig. 208; Exochi B 2. 8 Cf. p. 278; also Exochi C I (pI. 63 a) ; Camiros, Gr, 25.3. 7 Camiros, London 60.4-4.9, Exochi, fig. 205: Exochi A 3. Small hatched lozenges, however, are so treated early in LG (Exochi D 14), and even in MG (Vizikia pyxis, p. 269.) 8 Exochi B I, NI. Myrina krater, p. 277, no. 14; p. 280, no. 7, pI. 6Ih. 9 But excluding, of course, the material from lalysos and Carniros published later in CR. 10 loco cit. no. 86. 11 Since this 'T' form already appears on the Smyrna krater, it need not, asJohansen suggests (Exochi II8-19), be a later development from two separately drawn hooks. 12 For contemporary use on goldwork, see Hogarth, Ephesus, pI. 10,16.
LG
RHODIAN •
285
za.' It is only at a late stage that they occur in isolation (p. 277, nos. 25-6) or become rounded (Exochi B 2). Quatrefoils may have been originally borrowed from Attica, yet are rarely hatched in the Attic manner (nos. 73-4; Exochi A 2,7; Camiros, Gr. 201.1). Usually they are either reserved, or drawn in outline round a solid centre;" the background may be dotted" or partially filled by hatched segments lying against the frame.s Meander hooks, placed one above the other (pI. 61 a), are popular in the Bird-kotyle Workshop; metopes of close multiple zigzag are the speciality of the Bird-and-Zigzag Painter. Lozenges, cross-hatched or with alternately hatched compartments, are universally popular. Rarer alternatives include diagonal check (Exochi NI), and various motifs enclosed in a circle (sexfoil: Exochi D 7, pl. 62 g ; chain of tangential circles: Camiros Grs. 22.1,201.1). The stylized palm-tree, another loan from Levantine ivory work," occurs in metopes on five vases: I. Krater from Camiros, Berlin 2941. Jd!l, 135. 2. Kantharos, Camiros Gr. 25.3. 3. Kantharos from Camiros, Paris A 288. BCH 36,500, fig. 6. 4· Aryballos from Rhodes, Copenhagen 8225. CVA 2, pI. 65, 9. 5. Krater, Exochi C I. PI. 63a. The Berlin krater must stand at the head of this series: it cannot be much later than the related piece Camiros T.82.1, which we have presumed to be late MG; furthermore, its palms still keep the leafage on their trunks, and seem to have been added as an afterthought between the SubPG concentric circles. The latest is surely Exochi C I, where the stylization is much more remote from nature. We turn now to the ornaments in the horizontal zones, beginning with the weightiest. Meanders survive throughout, first with simple diagonal hatching all in the same direction, and later with cross-hatching (pl. 62d,h). Meander hooks and hatched zigzags (pl, 62C) are also common, but these are hatched in one direction only. Cables are found not only on imitations ofivory, but on orthodox L G vases as well. 6 Minor zones are filled by gear-pattern, single zigzag, dogtooth, or sigmas; this last motif often degenerates into vertical wavy lines towards the close of Geometric. Birds are the only living creatures to find a permanent place in the local repertoire; in our study of the workshops we have seen that their rendering allowed much scope for individuality, although they are unlikely to have been drawn from nature on this island. Of animals there are only two isolated representations: a horse (Exochi Z 8) and an indeterminate quadruped listening to a lyre (Exochi C 2). Humans were completely alien to Rhodian Geometric tradition; two fragments from Lindos show parts of figures, but of these no. 905 is thought to be an import, while on no. 867 the man is cautiously tucked away under a handle. The first confident presentation of a human figure, on the Naxianizing amphora Exochi A I, is no longer Geometric in style. Cf. pI. 6od, end ofMG; Ialysos, Gr. 5I.I. • Exochi A 3. Nos. 75-8. Also Exochi D 4--6; Exochi, fig. 204; Lindos 1,862. • Camiros, Gr. 200.6; Exochi NI. 5 Johansen, Exochi 111-12, n. Ill. 6 Exochi, fig. 208; cf. the votive table, Lindos 1,267, fig. 34. Simpler cables: Lindos I, nos. 846, 937-8. 1
3
286 • EAST
GREEK GEOMETRIC
The debt ofRhodian LG to other Hellenic styles is remarkably slight. The belly-handled amphora from Camiros (p. 281) betrays a knowledge ofthe Attic Dipylon Master's intricate tapestry pattern (cf. pI. 7 e) : the general idea ofmetope decoration may have been borrowed from Attica, perhaps at second hand through Cycladic imports like lalysos Gr. 56.8. The fragments of a votive table, Lindos I, no. 944, reveal an eclectic mixture of foreign styles, where an Attic Dipylon meander keeps company with a Corinthian L G heron. Corinthian influence is otherwise limited to the various imitations of the kotyle, ofwhich only the East Rhodian Group attempt to copy the original decoration as well as the shape. RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
Since Rhodian LG has so few stylistic links with other Aegean schools, its relative dating must depend mainly on the context of exports and imports. We have already found reason to suppose that East Greek M G survived into the period of Attic L G I a (pp. 273-4). This conclusion is confirmed by the presence, in two ofour earliest L G groups (Ialysos, Gr. 56; lalysos, Marmaro Gr. 51), of Cycladic kantharoi in the style of Attic L G I b. t The Marmaro group is especially useful in relating the beginning ofthe Birdkotyle Workshop to other local styles: later bird-kotylai are found in later contexts. At AI Mina only one fragment (unpublished) occurs in levels VIII-IX; the rest are from levels V-VII. 2 In Gr. 282 at Pithecusae, the 'Nestor' kotyle accompanies globular aryballoi early in EPC; but this context provides only a terminus ante quem, since the inscribed vase must have been used by the owner during his lifetime." The bird-kotyle at Asine must antedate the destruction of that place by Eratos king of Argos, shortly before the end of Argive L G 11,4 and hence ofEPC (p. 146). The more advanced stages of the local L G are dated by Corinthian imports in Rhodes. The tall pyxis Camiros Gr. 7.4 belongs to the very end of E P C, to judge from the debased wire birds, and the broad bands near the base; with it is the earliest of the local pedestalled kantharoi, typical ofour late LG phase. The original deep kotyle Camiros Gr. 23.1, which is approximately contemporary, 5 carries with it an imitation ofthe oriental aryballos whose shoulder is beginning to be flattened, although the profile is not yet biconical as in later examples (e.g. Exochi C 9-10). Two more original kotylai of the same date accompany a rich assembly oflocal vases in Exochi Gr. A; in this group we also have a link with the beginning ofEarly Protoattic in the figured amphora no. I, where the style ofthe man recalls the drawing on the Analatos hydria." But the contents oflalysos Gr. 8 show that the local Geometric tradition persisted even longer than this: here part of a kantharos, very like Exochi A 4, was found with a figured aryballos whose shape is transitional between the globular and ovoid types, and therefore datable to the beginning ofMiddle Protocorinthian. According to the excavator this is probably a local imitation, but the manner ofthe drawing has considerable affinity with the later work of the Early Protoattic N-Painter7 which must be contemporary. We must therefore fix the end of our Rhodian Geometric series near the lower limit of Early Protoattic and after the beginning of Middle Protocorinthian, while lCR3, figs. 90-1; CRB,fig. 161, bottom row, no. 3: cf. pl.locfromKerameikos, Gr. 24. 2 JHS60, 14. Buchner, RAL 1955, 215ff. 4 Courbin, CGA 565. 5 The closest parallel is in Pithecusae, Gr. 67; cf. p. 104. 6 Exochi 97. 1 a. Hampe, Einfriihattischer Grabfund, pI. 23. 3
LG
RHODIAN •
287
conceding that the first isolated attempts at an Orientalizing figure style fall well within the later development of our LG. This relative dating will receive independent confirmation from the contexts ofthe earlier Subgeometric bird-bowls (p. 299, Groups 1-11), one ofwhich accompanies our latest Geometric krater in Camiros Gr. 201. COAN LATE GEOMETRIC SHAPES
The L G style ofCos is illustrated by more than three hundred vases from ten prolific graves.' Its closest affinities, as is only natural, are with Rhodes; yet it lacks the variety ofRhodian, and is far more conservative in spirit. Only four shapes are common, all ofwhich have a long local pedigree: the oinochoe, the lekythos, the skyphos, and the cup. Of the newer shapes fashionable in Rhodian L G, very few came to Cos. The kantharos, the kotyle, and the aryballos are entirely missing. The pedestalled krater and the four-handled amphora are represented only by a few miniatures, such as one expects to find in a cemetery where adults were heavily outnumbered by children.s Other rare shapes include two-handled amphoriskoi, pyxides (one globular, one straight-sided), duck-vases of the naturalistic sort, ringvases, and barrel-vases: the last two may have been modelled on contemporary Cypriot prototypes, since Cypriot imports continued to flow in. Of the commoner forms, the most individual are the lekythoi and the skyphoi. In the absence of any other unguent vases, lekythoi occur in huge quantities: their shape is usually that ofExochi D 14, with short flaring neck, ridge, and globular body. The skyphoi still retain a strong Protogeometric flavour both in shape and decoration: their bodies are shallower than in M G, but the flaring lips remain, and low conical feet have come back into fashion: many ofthem are even now decorated with small sets ofconcentric circles. A typical example is Ann. 8-g, 267, fig. 48, from the Aspripetra cave; those from the Coan cemeteries are often remarkable for their fine thin fabric, which almost rivals that of the best Corinthian LG. Cups are usually of rougher make, and rarely carry any decoration, apart from a few survivors ofthe M G type with low conical foot. The prevailing shape is deep, with overhanging rim, and almost vertical walls curving in abruptly towards a narrow base. DECORATION
Coan L G, like Rhodian, is still a dark-ground style. The ornament on closed vases is often richer than in M G, yet rarely descends below the widest diameter; the shoulder, as before, receives the main emphasis. Many of the smaller vases are still treated in the M G manner, with one or more horizontal strips of ornament running round the shoulder, and nothing below. A more ornate scheme is seen on a large oinochoe from Serraglio Gr. 14 (pI. 63e): here the strips on the shoulder are interrupted by a central metope on the front of the vase, and there are minor variations between the motifs on either side; the whole composition is then bound together by a continuous zone running under the handle. This complex arrangement, which came into fashion at the beginning ofLG, is typically Coan, and occurs only 1
Serraglio, Grs. 14, 17, 19,20,23,43,54,64; Fadil, Grs.j n, v,
2
Bd'A 35 (1950), 320ff.; PGP 222.
288 .
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
once in Rhodes (p. 284) ; on the other hand the Rhodian metope system, based on a row of several equal panels, hardly appears in Cos at all. Most of the ornament on this vase survives from the Dodecanesian M G stock: here and elsewhere, the narrow strips are regularly filled by battlements, lozenges, dogtooth, single zigzag, gear-pattern, triangles, and dots; lessfrequently, by meanders, hatched zigzag, stars, and alternating diagonals. One of the few additions to the repertoire occupies the metopal panel ofour oinochoe, just out ofsight on the photograph: this is the eight-hooked lozenge, which we have already met in Rhodes (cf pl. 62f). Its near relation, the tree ornament, is also introduced at this time, but nearly always assumes a strangely anthropomorphic form, where four hooked 'limbs' emerge from the base ofthe triangle, while the T -hook springing out of the apex does duty for the head. The only other novelties are the palm-tree and the cable; both appear on a fine oinochoe, a sporadic find in the cemetery area near the church of Ay. Pantaleon (pl, 63b). These motifs are clearly of oriental origin; yet in view of the obvious parallels from Camiros (p. 285) they may well have come to Cos via Rhodes. We must, however, note the curious habit of hatching the background of the cable, which the Coans share only with the potters ofeastern Crete (cf pl, 57j). RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
The ten L G grave groups from the Coan cemeteries are remarkably homogeneous in style, betraying little sign of internal development; furthermore, there is no trace on this island of the kotyle or the aryballos, shapes which became extremely popular in the LG ofRhodes and Samos. Unless the Coans isolated themselves from their nearest neighbours to an extraordinary degree - an unlikely hypothesis in view of the copious flow of imported Cypriot wares - then we are driven to the conclusion that these ten groups cannot fill more than a very briefperiod, and that the final stages ofCoan Geometric have yet to be found.' The end of the local series, as we have it now, is surely marked by the handsome oinochoe from Ay. Pantaleon, which may be dated to a point not later than midway through Rhodian Late Geometric. 2 SAMIAN LATE GEOMETRIC AND SUBGEOMETRIC We now enter Ionic territory, where the progress oflocal LG styles is much harder to follow than in the Dodecanese. We miss, in particular, the evidence of cemeteries, where large quantities of whole vases are associated in individual graves; the L G material of Ionia is scarcer, more fragmentary, and less well stratified. On the island ofSamos all the extant L G pottery is from the Sanctuary ofHera. The stratified deposits which concern us here are as follows: I. Fill under Altar v. A M 58 (1933), 97ff., figs. 40-1, Beil. 28, 8, and 29, I; Beil. 33, 2; Beil. 37, 2. Ct AM65 (1940),84. PI. 64k. 2. Layer under South Building, prior to first inundation. A M 72 (1957),38-43, figs. 2-3, 1
er. Morricone, Bd'A 35, 322.
2 Cables and palms both enter the Rhodian repertoire quite early in LG; the former, on the pyxis from Camiros Gr. 85, accompanied by frs. of a krater apparently ofMG type; the latter, on the krater Berlin 2941, on which see above P- 285.
SAMIAN •
LG, SUBG
289
Beil. 51-g (except 52,4; 54, 2-4; 60, 1-2; 65,2). Probably also AA 1937,207, fig. 2. PI. 64a-b,g. 3. Well F. AM 74 (1959), 12-18, Beil. 14-25. PI. 64d-f. 4. Scattered deposit under the second Hekatompedos. AM 58 (1933), 47ff. and 142, Beil. 18-42 (with many exceptions, as stated in the captions) and pl. I. PI. 641. 5. Layer under South Building, immediately above 2 and prior to second inundation. A M 72, 43ff., with illustrations quoted. Further Geometric material accompanies later pottery in contexts that were not sealed until c. 640-630: Deposit under South Hall, AM 58,142-3, Beil. 43-4 (cr. WaIter, AM 72,48); Well G: AM 74,18-27, Beil. 31-57, 102-3·
All five deposits were accumulated within the life of the first Hekatompedos, but some chronological distinctions may be drawn between them. 4 and 5 must have been sealed when the temple collapsed after a general inundation of the site by the river Imbrasos ;' the same catastrophe may also have destroyed the well 3, whose latest vases correspond to those of5.2 I and 2 were closed much earlier: the end of 1 is separated from the destruction of the first temple by the whole life ofAltar V; while 2, which lies under 5, was sealed by an earlier and less disastrous inundation. Our material thus falls into two phases, each terminated by an inundation: both are represented in 3 and 4, but I and 2 belong exclusively to the earlier, and 5 to the later. These phases are distinguished by the excavators as 'geometrisch' and 'spatgeometrisch"; yet very few pieces from the earlier horizon are prior to L G, while there is much in the later deposits that might be better described as Subgeometric. However, problems of nomenclature will be postponed until our discussion of relative chronology; here it is enough to mention the chiefdifficulty - that neither inundation coincides with any clear-cut change ofstyle. Our deposits differ consistently in character as well as in date. 2,3, and 5 contain several hundred whole vases, found in closely packed nests, and bearing little or no ornament; many of these plain shapes show considerable changes in their profiles throughout the two phases, and their development has been described by H. Waiter with as much precision as the evidence will allow. We shall be more concerned here with the scattered votive debris in I and 4, which is in a sadly fragmentary state, yet includes nearly all the finely decorated pottery. It is unfortunate that the context offers us so little help in tracing the stylistic development: for deposit I contains only two vases, while 4 covers a wide span of time, beginning well back in M G, and ending with pieces ofa distinctly Subgeometric character. Samian fabric has been described in detail by Eilmann.s The clay of L G vases is usually reddish-brown, with plenty ofsilver mica and some white grit; a white slip is often applied in the Subgeometric phase, and sometimes in LG. SHAPES
Nearly all the shapes in the votive deposits are open, and with them we begin. Full-sized kraters survive only in fragments, but many of them, if not all, were of the pedestalled sort: 1
WaIter, AM 72,39, SI. M
2
WaIter, AM 74,14.
3
AM 58, 47ff.
SAMIAN • 291
290 • EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
LG, SUBG
high feet, according to Technau, were' plentiful, and the earliest ofthose illustrated reaches back into M G. 2 A complete krateriskos, pl, 64g, must be among the latest vases from deposit 2, to judge from the decoration and the cylindrical ribless stem." Eilmann distinguishes two varieties of offset rim: (i) sloping outwards, like the orthodox Type 11 of Attica; and (ii) slightly inset; the latter class has affinities with the Bird-kotyle Workshop- and may be under Rhodian influence. An even stronger link with Rhodian L G may be noted in the tall and inward-leaning lips of Samian kantharoi (pf, 64h),5 some of which also have stemmed pedestals like the latest Rhodian class. Less typical is an example with vanishing lips whose shape and decoration betray knowledge ofa variety current in Attic LG 11 (cf pl, Ise). The local kotylai7 nearly always imitate the inset rim and metope system of the hemispherical bird-kotyle, whose invention we have attributed to the Rhodians: the only direct imitation ofa Corinthian original comes from a late context" at a time when the deep version was well established at Corinth. In Samos, kotylai are less popular than skyphoi9 which are numerous enough to offer a full series ofprofiles. We have seen that the shallow Attic type, with vertical offset rim and rounded body, was already established in Samos before the end ofM G.1O Early L G skyphoi follow this model; their shape is often deeper, but the lip remains distinct (pk 64a-b).11 Later examples have a straighter profile below the handle, and a narrower foot. Deep skyphoi with vertical lips-s become increasingly rare towards the end, being gradually replaced by a more elegant Subgeometric version with crisper contours, which arrives at about the time ofthe first inundation j'" here a straight and shallow body is combined with a lip leaning out at an angle of about sixty degrees, and more sharply offset than ever. As the foot contracts in width, so it grows in height (pl, 64c),14 until we can eventually recognize the first 'Ionian cups', in contexts later than the end of our Geometric deposits.v In no other East Greek centre can the evolution of this popular archaic shape be so clearly traced. A representative selection of cups may be seen in deposit 2, prior to the first inundation." Only a very few follow the shallow Attic model with offset lip; far commoner are the deep cups local to the Eastern Aegean, whose progress we have followed at various centres throughout the Geometric period. On this type the angular, carinated profile fashionable at the end ofM Gt 7 is soon softened; the wall now assumes a slight concave curve down to the lower handle attachment, and then turns in towards the foot (pI. 64e). Straight-walled cylindrical cups (pf, 64d) are exclusively Samian; so are the two-handled variants ofboth deep and shallow types.'! Apart from a few decorated fragments from the votive debris.v Samian cups are always glazed.
Trays- bear rich decoration (pl, 641), and were continuously offered to Hera from MG2 until well into the Orientalizing style." There is nothing individual about their shape, except for the curious 'frying-pan' handles- which sometimes replace the normal L G reflex handle. Plates'> are plainer and rarer, and follow the orthodox LG shape current in other local styles. The closed vases of Samos are rarely decorated, and may be briefly dismissed. The wells and inundation deposits have produced many glazed olpai with round mouths (pl, 64£), and some one-piece oinochoai with similar baggy bodies ;" their progress from stout to slender has been described by WaIter. To the same family ofshapes belong the 'pelikai" and a series ofsmall amphorae, whose latest member bears a modelled head in a developed Orientalizing style. S Vases with articulated necks include plump amphorae, oinochoai, and hydriai, whose ornament is confined to bands and wavy lines. Globular aryballoi have a sagging profile," foreign to both Corinth and Rhodes. The only closed shape that regularly bears full decoration is thejug (pI. 64j) ;10 some specimens are clearly influenced by the Bird-kotyle Workshop of Rhodes (cf. pl, 61 a), but the use of rays on the most careful example'! indicates that the Samian jugs are more likely to be contemporary with the Subgeometric birdbowls than with the LG bird-kotylai.
AM 54,13. s AM 58, Beil. 32, 5. Cf. p. 282. Boardman (BSA 52, 9, n. 46) suspects that this might be an import from Euboea; but there are local parallels for the shape of the foot (AM 58, fig. 45c) and the decoration (AM 72, Beil. 56, I). 4 Shape: cf. A M 58, 74, fig. 24 with the Myrina krater, p. 277, no. 14. Decoration: cf. Ope cit. Beil. 25, 9 with the early bird-kotylai, p. 277, nos. 1-2, and pi. 61 c. 5 AM 58,92. 6 ope cit, 101, fig. 43. 7 Called 'skyphoi' by the excavators: AM 58, 67ff., figs. 17-22. 8 Well G: AM74,Beil. 33, 2; cf. pL 21d. • 'Schalen', AM 58, 60ff. 10 AM 54,13, fig. 4, Beil, 2, 1,4-5. 11 Also A M 58, 61, fig. 7, Beil, 20, 8-g, II. 11 E.g. A M 58, 64, fig. 10. 13 A M 72, Beil, 53, 4. 14 Also AM 74, Beil. 15, I. 15 AM 72, Beil, 54, 3-4; AM 74, Beil. 33, 3-4. 18 AM 72, Beil. 51-2. 17 P. 270; cf. AM 74, Beil. 12. 18 Ope cit. Beil. 52,1-2. It AM 58, Beil. 19,6-12; 20, I and 3. 1 3
DECORATION
Samian L G is an eclectic style, compounded of Attic, Rhodian, and local ingredients. Let us begin by defining the influence of Attica, which is predominant only in the earlier stages. In conformity with the prevailing fashion, the Samians now adopted a metopal scheme of decoration, whose progress may be followed on the open vases throughout the period of our deposits. At the beginning ofLG it preserves several features ofthe Attic system found nowhere else in the East Greek world. First, the lips are reserved and independently decorated instead ofbeing absorbed into the metopal composition below, as in Rhodes. Secondly, not only are the metopes arranged in the Attic manner, but many of their motifs are borrowed from the Attic repertoire. Two of the commonest - the bird and the quatrefoil (pf, 64h) - are accurately copied from Attic LG Ib, perhaps at second hand through Cycladic or Euboean imports like AM 58, Beil. 18, 1.12 Other motifs of Attic origin include hatched tongues.v wolftooth.w tangential blobs, dotted lozenge net (pI. 64i), and hatched leaves in a circular field (pk 641). Further affinities with Attic - again, probably via the Cyclades - may be noted among the few local attempts at figure-drawing. On the kantharos pk 64h the central panel contains one of the few representations of the prothesis outside Attica. The style is laboured rather than careless, and difficult to date in Attic terms; the composition ofthe scene is best 'Teller', AM 58, r roff; 2 Ope cit. Beil. 34, 3; ADChr 18 (1963), pl. 331a. 3 AM 58, "3, fig. 56. Ope cit. Beil. 34, 5 and 8. 5 'Schiisseln', op. cit, 114ff. 8 A M 72, Beil. 56-8, 63. 7 Ope cit, Beil, 64. 8 Op. cit, Beil. 62. • A M 74, Beil, 21, 1-5. lOOp. cit. Beil. 49ff. 1
4
11
A M 58, 133, figs. 84-5, Beil. 44, 1-2.
Cf. p. 70. A possible sign of Euboean influence may be seen in the raised wings of the birds on A M 58, Beil. 29, 2, which are bent and hatched; cf. p. 193. I3 AM 58, Beil. 30, 2. 14 op. cit. 77, fig. 27b. 11
292 .
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
paralleled on a LG ITa pitcher, Athens 18474, of the Rattle Group (p. 72), but the Samian vase may be somewhat earlier, in view of the careful quatrefoils in the supporting metopes. Much later are the stooping warriors on the fragments A M 54, 16, figs. 7-8; here the style is more relaxed, and the proportion of round shield to body indicates a date near the end of Attic LG lIb (cf. pp. 58, 61). Samian horses have their closest relations on Atticizing Naxian vases; one fragment even repeats the Naxian formula of horse plus double axe.' The other examples share a strange local mannerism in the hatching of the manes, which come to an abrupt end half-way along the back: 1. Krater, frs. A M 54, Beil. 8, 1-3. 2. Kantharos, frs. AM 58, pI.. I, 1. } b Yt h e same h and 3. Kantharos, frs. A M 58, Bell. 28, 5-6. 4. Kantharos, frs. AM 58, 97ff., figs. 40-1, Beil. 28,8 and 29, 1. PI. 64 k. I may be compared to the stiff animals on the Scheurleer krater from the Naxian Cesnola Workshop (p. 173): 2-3 betray a more fluent hand, but the rigid pose remains. The horses on 4 are in every respect more advanced: note in particular the reserved eyes, full open stride, angular fetlocks, heavy hooves planted squarely on the ground, the cross-hatching of the enormous manes, and the more sensitive contours of the body. This last vase, which dates the construction ofAltar v, is also an important landmark in the development of the local LG. To judge from the rendering of the horses, we seem to be on the threshhold of an Orientalizing figure style. At the same time, the supporting ornament is no longer derived from Attic, but reveals instead an eclectic combination of other elements: the fish have affinities with E P C, 2 while the linear motifs - eight-hooked lozenges and elaborate cross-hatched meanders - belong to the common stock of all East Greek L G. The last trace of Attic syntax has also vanished; in accordance with normal East Greek custom, the lip zone now ends in line with the metopes below." This kantharos, then, belongs to a stage when the Samians had already emancipated themselves from Attic influence; its relative date will be discussed later. Contact with Rhodian LG lasted longer, but the Rhodian contribution is virtually limited to the imitations of bird-kotylai, which follow the originals throughout the entire sequence suggested above (pp. 277ff.). Among the motifs, two Samian variants sometimes occur: (i) dot-filled meander hooks- which are perhaps more at home in Chios (p. 295); and (ii) another anthropomorphic version of the tree ornament, simpler than the Coan, with a pair of short 'arms' emerging at or near the apex ofthe triangle." The characteristic decoration of birdkotylai is rarely applied to other shapes." It remains to consider the simple metope patterns that are more at home on Samos than at any other East Greek centre: these are especially common on skyphoi, but may be applied to other shapes as well. At first, St Andrew's crosses are often found, either in their simplest
LG, SUBG
AM 58, Beil, 39, I. 2 Cf. BSA 43, pls. 10 and 13, 171. For a Rhodian counterpart to the whole composition, cf. Copenhagen 6352, Exochi, fig. 208. 4 AM 54,11, fig. 2, I; AM 58,68, fig. I7C. 5 AM54, 12, fig. 3, I; 18, fig. 10, top row, nos. 2, 3;Beil. 1,6. For a more prirnitive MGform, seeAM74, pl. 13, I. e E.g. skyphos, pi. 64b; krater, AM 58, BeiI. 25, 3; aryballos, AM 58, 132, fig. 83; much later, the biconicaljugs, p. 291. 1
293
form (pI. 64a),I or with chevrons lining their top and bottom compartments and a vertical line driven through the centre." Simple lozenges, quartered, dotted, and sometimes outlined, appear throughout LG (pI. 641).3 The most advanced skyphoi bear motifs ofa more Subgeometric character: either two rows offloating vertical chevron, or two widely spaced zigzags, often degenerating into scribbles (pI. 64c).4 Three more late features may be distinguished: (i) the application of these local motifs to the kotyle, in place of the usual Rhodian ornament;" (ii) the preference for a two-metope system divided by large numbers of vertical bars; and (iii) the addition of a painted (pI. 64 b) or incised" wavy line round the lips of kraters and skyphoi, replacing the Atticizing dots or tangential blobs which vanish after the earliest L G. RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY
The lower limit ofSamian LG must be fixed soon after the kantharos (pI. 64k): for this is not only the last member of our series with horses, but also the latest Samian vase of any pretensions to be decorated in a purely Geometric manner. Our main task is to discover its relative date in terms of other styles. The horses still have a trace of Geometric rigidity, but their painter was already acquainted with some Early Orientalizing formulae. The best external parallel for their treatment is on the Argive krater, pI. 30e, which, like our vase, also stands at the end of a retarded Geometric figured style. This krater we have already associated in time with a mature work of the Analatos Painter (p. 145): the end ofSamian LG (like the end ofArgive Geometric) should therefore be fixed at a point midway through Early Protoattic. Our kantharos must have been shortly followed by the Early Orientalizing krater A M 58, Beil. 26,4, where the lion seems to have a reserved head stylized in the manner ofthe Analatos Painter's later work," although its forelegs are still close together in the Geometric manner. But if the drawing on this vase lags behind the more progressive schools of Corinth and Attica, it is precocious when compared with the clumsier - and later - attempts ofthe Rhodians to draw figures in a fully Orientalizing manner." We may assume, then, that the most ambitious Samian potters moved on to an Orientalizing style soon after our all-important kantharos - or, in terms ofthe history of the Heraion, at about the time of the first flooding of the site by the river Imbrasos, and the replacement of Altar IV by Altar v. All the later material from our deposits - apart from the occasional Orientalizing piece," must therefore be classed as Subgeometric, and some of the very latest pieces from the first inundation deposit might well be added to this category."?
Also AM 58,62, fig. 8c and BeiI. 20, 8. 2 AM 54, Beil, 7, 2; AM 58,63, fig. 9b and BeiI. 22, 7. Also AM 58,62, fig. 8b; 66, fig. 14; 41, 2-3. 4 Also AM 54, BeiI. 5--6; AM58, 63, fig. 9C; BeiI. 20, 5; 21, II; 44, 5. AM 74, BeiI. IS, I. cr. Corinth VII. I, pI. 17, no. 122. 5 AM 58, Beil. 43, 1,5; AM 74, BeiI. 33, I. e AM58, BeiI. 25, 7-8,14; export to Al Mina, JHS 60, 14, fig. 7h,j. 1 Cf. Cook, BSA 35, 174, pl. 42b. 8 Exochi, figs. 201-2. • E.g. A M 58, pI. 1,2, and BeiI. 18,9; AM 72, Beil. 62; A M 74, BeiI. 23, I. 10 E.g. AM 72, Beil. 53, 4; AA 1937,207, fig. 2; pi. 64g. 1 3
3
SAMIAN •
LG
294 • EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
DECORATION
CHIOT LATE GEOMETRIC The relevant material from Chios comes from two sanctuaries on the south shore of the island: the Temple ofApollo at Kato Phana (ancient Phanai) and a temple site overlooking the small bay ofEmporio. 1 As in most votive deposits, this pottery is in a sadly fragm~ntary state, and almost all the fragments come from open shapes: enough, however, survives to offer at least a partial view of a consistent local L G style. . .. The fabric is especially distinctive. The clay is usually deep reddish-brown, with a little silver mica. From L G onwards, Chiot potters often used a thick white or cream slip, much thicker than the Samian; this sometimes serves as a ground for the interior glaze, as well as for the decoration on the exterior." When added to a slipped surface, the glaze usually fires to a red or chestnut colour. At an advanced stage of'Subgeometric" the walls become thinner and the slip smoother, so that the fabric begins to approach the high standard ofthe Orientalizing and archaic chalices characteristic of this island. . . The pottery published from Kato Phana is plentiful, but not, unfortunately, stratified III any significant context. More helpful is the temple site at Emporio, where deposits were sealed behind three successive terrace walls.! A few pieces at Kato Phana seem to belong to earlier periods.- the rest may be classed as either Late Geometric or Subgeometric, according to their style and fabric. We must, however, make two reservations: neither phase can yet be reliably dated in terms ofother local styles; nor is our name f~r the ~a~ter phase stri~tly justified, since Chios offers no evidence ofa contemporary Early Orientalizing style to which her more ambitious potters turned their attention. Chiot 'Subgeometric' is merely a convenient generic term for the simple linear pottery of this island that must be roughly contemporary with the Subgeometric of Rhodes and Samos.
CHIOT·295
Chiot L G differs from all other East Greek schools in that it lacks a true metopal system. A fragmentary krater from Emporio (pI. 63g) illustrates the most typical method of dividing the larger surfaces: here the central area of the handle zone is carved into horizontal strips, and flanked by two vertical columns either side. The lip zone, in the normal East Greek manner, is bounded by glaze, and thus brought into line with the main composition; imm~ diately below, a second horizontal motif (lozenge chain, not visible in the photograph) IS added in the concavity above the carination. Horizontal panels are most frequently filled by the following patterns, which are applied indiscriminately to lip or body: horizontal S alternating with dots; double or triple zigzag; meander hooks, hatched or in single outline. In the vertical columns the commonest motifs are as follows: cross-hatched and outlined lozenge chain, sometimes in double form;' triple zigzag; stacked triangles, cross-hatched; hatched meander hooks; and a typically North Ionic cross-hatched pattern where a lozenge has triangles attached to each ofits apices (pl. 63 g). 2 Many ofthese motifs continue into Subgeometric, with the following additions to t~e repertoire: dot-filled meander and meander hooks, and empty meander." Subgeometnc skyphoi are at first decorated with single vertical wavy lines, alternating with groups of vertical bars: eventually, on the fine-walled precursors of the chalice, we find the characteristic scribbles in long horizontal panels.' Chiot figure works is adventurous, but not very accomplished. Subjects include a procession of warriors; a hero, armed with spear and shield, attacking a lion; a rider; a goat, several birds, and a ship. The style is stiffer and cruder than in Samos; and since there is no trace of any Orientalizing influence from the more progressive schools of the Greek mainland, all these pieces should be classed as LG rather than Subgeometric."
SHAPES
Only two shapes can be recognized from the fragmentary material of Kato Phana: krater and skyphos. The kraters apparently had pedestals, ~one of which is illustrate.d. 6 ~t first their lips were simply offset from the body, like the AttICType I 1;7 later, the vertical lips are separated from the carination by a concave recess, which usually carries an independent zone of ornament ;" this is a typically Chiot trait. On skyphoi the offset lips are less clearly articulated than in Samos;" but there is nothing individual in their shape until well into Subgeometric, when the lip grows to a great height, and the ancestor of the Chiot chalice may be recognized.w The deposits from Emporio contain several bird-kotylai, and many fragments from the related biconicaljugs or oinochoai; both shapes were made in the local fabric.P 1 The ancient and modem town ofChios has so far produced only one LG sherd: BSA 49,136, pI. 7a, no. 25. • AD I (1915),79; BSA 35 (1934-5), 157. 3 Miss Lamb's 'transitional' ware, op. cit. 158. 4 Boardman, Greek Emporia 52ff. 5 PG: see PGP 217. EG: BSA 35, pI. 35, 5. MG: lac. cit. pI. 35, I; pI. 34, 20 (Attic or Atticizing import), 24, 26--8, 31, 34-5. • At Emporio, however, one example could be restored with high flaring pedestal: GreekEmporia 106, fig. 62=pI. 63g. 7 BSA 35, pI. 35, 1-2. • BSA 35, pI. 35, 3, 9, 33, 36; Greek Emporia, pI. 19,6; pI. 20, 20-1. • BSA 35, pI. 34, 21-2. 10 R. M. Cook, GPP 129; cf. Greek Emporio II9ff., fig. 74. 11 Greek Emporia 132ff., 14Iff.; cf. also BSA 35, pI. 35, 17, perhaps from a bird-kotyle.
LATE GEOMETRIC IN WESTERN ASIA MINOR In L G times the diffusion ofGeometric pottery on the Asiatic mainland covers a wider area than in the earner phases; yet the published evidence from this quarter is extremely scanty in comparison with the plentiful material from the offshore islands. Until the final publication of the Geometric from Smyrna and Miletus,it will hardly be possible to distinguish local styles with any confidence. Sometimes, however, we may be justified in isolating an occasional mannerism as typical of a certain centre on the mainland; we may also note a few stylistic links with one or other of the East Greek island schools which we have already examined. BSA 35, pI. 34, 8; AD I, 78, fig. 15,5. • Also BSA 35, pI. 36e; pI. 35, 33. an expanded version. This motif occurs also at Phocaea. 3 lac. cit. pI. 35,16 and 22; pI. 36a, 2. 41oc. cit, pI. 37,19; BSA 49,134, pI. 6, no. I. 5 BSA 35, pI. 35, 28-36; GreekEmporio 108-g, fig. 64, pI. 28. • In two cases the iconography, ifnot the style, is closely paralleled by Attic LG 11 vases: for the lion-fighter Kato Phana, fr. 33, cf. the warrior to the left of the ship on the oinochoe Copenhagen 1628, from the Hunt Group (Davison, fig. 133); the procession of Ohiot warriors with their white-dotted shields (Kato Phana, fr. 28) recalls the lower zone on the name-piece of the Philadelphia Painter (Davison, fig. 49), but the proportion of shield to body is more in keeping with his later work (Davison, fig. 48). 1
296 . EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC CARIA AND SOUTHERN IONIA We begin our briefsurvey in the hinterland of Caria, where the earliest Hellenic material is Late Geometric. A sanctuary site at Sinuri, near Mylasa, has yielded twenty-two sherds painted in a LG manner. All are said to be of local fabric,' and most are from skyphoi and kotylai. The prevalence of the latter shape (frs. 8, 10-12, 15-16, 18), as well as the arrangement of the decoration in tall metopes flanked by glaze, might suggest an affinity with Rhodian L G; but the connection is slight, since there is apparently no sign of the nicked rim characteristic of the bird-kotylai; furthermore, the usual tree ornament seems to have been excluded in favour of the hour-glass pattern (frs. 15-16, 18) which Rhodian potters had abandoned long before LG. Among the other motifs, the eighthooked lozenge (fr. 21) and the various cross-hatched designs cannot be associated with any particular East Greek school; they belong to the common stock of all L G in the eastern Aegean. Further inland still, a pithos burial has been reported from a cemetery on the site later occupied by the Hellenistic city of Stratonikeia.t The pithos contained two Subgeometric vases: a shallow kotyle, and a squat jug or oinochoe whose neck is missing. The kotyle is distantly related to the earliest group ofRhodian bird-bowls (p. 299). The other vase also has Rhodian affinities: in shape and syntax it is similar to an Early Orientalizing jug from Camiros," although the lion in the central panel is still rendered in a retarded and provincial Geometric manner. On the Carian coast, L G pottery is by no means the earliest Hellenic material, and is therefore ofless historical importance than in the interior. The published evidence from the Halicarnassus peninsula is limited to a few surface sherds, including one from a nicked kotyle from the Lelegian city of Pedasar- Rhodians evidently passed this way. Of the fragments from Iasos- two call for special comment: on one (row 2, no. I) the rare combination of circles and square grid recalls the Rhodian cup from Camiros Gr. 82 (pI. 60d); the other (row 2, no. 8) repeats a favourite motifofthe Milesian potter, the ladder pattern alternating with vertical bars. Miletus is probably the most important source ofLG pottery in southern Ionia; yet the pieces so far published hardly give the impression ofany coherent local style. Ifwe disregard the numerous imports and imitations ofRhodian bird-kotylai (p. 279), there is no consistent attempt to apply the metope system; the linear decoration rarely advances beyond a loose conglomeration ofscribbles, dots, and circles," or the ladder pattern" that we have already noted at lasos. Rows of horizontal S's, and plain or double St Andrew's crosses, seem to be indicative ofa Subgeometric stage." Rare essays in representational drawing include padded dancers (pI. 63d) and swimming birds ;"in both cases the conception is refreshingly original, but the style is too crude for us to presume that there was any regular tradition of figure work at Miletus in L G times. There are, however, signs of an Early Orientalizing animal Devambez and Haspels, Sinuri11, 15-17, pI. 22, 1-22. 2 A M 12 (1887), 226ff., pl. 6. London 61.4-25.48, Exochi, fig. 202. • BSA 50,125, n. 166. 6 Ann. 39-40 (1961-2), 537, fig. 50b. • I M 7, pl. 37, sb and f; pI. 39, 3d, 4c,e; I M 9-10, pI. 59, la-b, 4; pI. 79, sd-e. 7 BerlIntKong VI (1939), pI. 25, 5; I M 9-10, pl. 57, 2. 8 I M 7, pI. 38; I M 9-10, pI. 85,2-3. D I M 9-10, pl, 60. 1
3
LG
WESTERN ASIA MINOR . 297
style- at least as advanced as Samian, and considerably more accomplished than contemporary Rhodian efforts. Ephesus has not produced any Greek material earlier than LG, but the lowest levels of the city yet have to be fully explored. The oldest piece, which comes from under the Temple of Artemis, may not be far off M G: the excavator found that its fabric was similar to Rhodian." Fragments from the city" include two rims of the ubiquitous bird-kotylai, and part of a skyphos (bottom right) with floating chevrons, reminiscent of Samian Subgeometric (p. 293). NORTHERN 10NIA AND AEOLIS We now come to the central reach of the western Asiatic coastlands, whose potters still produced grey monochrome ware as well as painted Geometric. We cannot yet assess the relative popularity of the two fabrics in general terms, but the evidence from Smyrna, at least, is clear. Here the painted style had been rapidly gaining ground since the end of Protogeometric, and had become dominant by M G. In the eighth century 'the monochrome is at its lowest ebb',4 but it apparently returns to favour in the seventh." Ofall the sites within this area, Smyrna was the most receptive ofexternal influences. The importation of both Corinthian L G6 and Attic L G had some effect? on the local L G style in its earlier stages. The influence of the former appears on a nicked hemispherical kotyle (pI. 63c) decorated like the earliest Corinthian originals. Attic metope motifs appear in the side-panels of a large fragmentary krater (pI. 63f), where swastikas alternate with careless multifoils; the syntax, however, is not Attic, but follows the Chiot system where several vertical columns flank a central panel divided into horizontal strips (pI. 63g). This krater cannot be much later than the advanced M G piece discussed above (pI. 60 f) . Later on, the influence of Rhodes waxes strong. Bird-kotylai became extremely common;" there are also closed vases in the same style." The Rhodian metope system survives on several Subgeometric dinoi, one of which presents a seven-stringed lyre. 1 0 Also Subgeometric is a plump amphora adorned with a shoal of swimming fish;ll both the shape, and the preference for outline drawing, suggest some acquaintance with 'Parian' Cycladic work (cf. pp. I 78ff.). The earliest evidence for an Orientalizing figured style is offered by a sherd showing a file ofwarriors.v whose nearest relations are to be found on the earliest vases of Middle Protoattic.P The most informative of the Aeolian sites is the settlement at Buruncuk, which some scholars have identified with Larisa on the Hermus.v According to the excavators, the local manufacture of painted pottery did not begin before a Subgeometric phase :15 a handful of earlier Geometric sherds are thought to be imports.v The only intruder from outside the East Greek world is also the earliest piece: a rim of a Thessalo-Cycladic skyphos with pendent concentric semicircles." which is probably not later than M G (p. 157). The other imHogarth, Ephesus 220, fig. 46. 3 JOAI 23 (1926),255-6, fig. 44. 6 AkurgaI, Smyrna 61-2. 6 JOAI 27 (1932), BeibIatt 178, fig. 88; BSA 53-4, 138ff. 7 BSA 53-4,14,152; above p. 98. 6 JHS67 (1947),44, fig. 7, top row; AkurgaI, Smyrna 60, pl, 9a. D JHS 67, loco cit. bottom right. 10 JHS 71 (1951),248, fig. 8; cf. Hanfmann, HSCP61 (1953),16. ll.7HS 70 (195°),13, fig. 8; cf. Sardis, ILX 1961,537, fig. I I. 12 AkurgaI, Smyrna, pI. I la. 13 Cf. BSA 35 (1934-5), pI. 52; Hanfmann, op, cit. 17. 14 For a contrary view, see J. M. Cook, BSA 53-4, 20, n, 47. 1. Larisa In, 59ff., pIs. 13- I 6. 16 op.cit. I 70- I, pl. 57, nos. 2-6. 8-14. 17 loco cit. no. 4. 1
I M 9-10, pI. 80, 2.
2
•J. M. Cook, BSA 53-4,13.
298 .
SUBG
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
ported sherds are all LG. Nos. 12 and 14 are from original Rhodian bird-kotylai, of which nos. 2 and 6 are imitations from nearer home; the dotted meander ofno. 6 points to Samos or Chios. No. 3, a krater wall with an Atticizing hatched bird, is almost certainly Chiot since both surfaces are coated with thick cream slip (cr. p. 294). Further signs ofChiot influence may be seen in the preference for several vertical columns on nos. 8, 9, and 13; also in the profile and rim decoration of the local Subgeometric krater, Ope cit. pI. 13, I (Cr. pI. 63g). From the other Aeolian sites, only two Geometric vases have been illustrated: a complete krater from Myrina- and a krater fragment from Cyme,s The former is certainly an import from the Rhodian Bird-kotyle Workshop, and the latter may come from the same source; it must therefore remain an open question whether any Aeolian city (other than Smyrna) produced any painted pottery earlier than the Subgeometric ofBuruncuk.
Rhodian bird-bowls were made throughout the seventh century. In general their shape grows shallower with time; but the development of their profile is not always consistent.' The following attempt to divide them into four chronological stages is based mainly on the decoration. The main criteria for constructing our sequence may be sought in the treatment ofthe base (glaze and dots; glaze only; rays), the style ofthe birds, and, above all, the character ofthe filling ornament. For each stage a few representative examples will be quoted, including those that have significant contexts. Group f. c. 690-675 Tarsus Ill, 297-8, no. 1448, fig. 99. With no. 1519, MPC I aryballos, transitional to ovoid; c. 690-680. J H S 85 (1965), 6, fig. I. 2. Delos xv, pI. 48, 25. 3· Ithaca, BSA 43 (1948), pI. 44, 25· 4. Sardis P 65.161. BASOR 182 (Apr. 1966), 13, fig. 6. With PC aryballos, running animal. 5. Delos xv; pI. 47, Rh 26. PI. 6Ie. I.
This early group has much in common with the latest bird-kotylai, with which it probably overlaps in time. The three metopes are still underlined by a narrow zone, occupied at first by diagonal dashes, and then by dots (5). The base is glazed. The birds are carefully drawn, with clear reserved eye and drop-shaped body. Filling ornament is limited to pendent crosshatched triangles. The central compartment occupies a greater proportion of the handle zone than on the bird-kotylai, but is never more than twice the size ofthe lozenge panels. Group If. c.675-640
6. Malta F 2. BSR 21 (1953),39-40, pI. 14C. With MPC skyphos. 7. Camiros, Gr. 201.2. CR 4, 346, fig. 385, R. With latest Rhodian LG krater; cf. P·275· 8. Camiros, Gr. 34.2. CR 6-7, 115, fig. 125. With MPC ovoid aryballos, c. 670-650. 9- 1I. Delos xv, pI. 47, 17-19. 12. Camiros, CR 6-7, fig. 64 (not from Gr. 12: see 26 below). 13. AI Mina, levels V-VI. AJ 17 (1937), visible in pI. I 1,2, 4th row, no. 6. 14. Athens, Agora P 26491, fr. Hesperia 30 (1961), 377, S 20. In well deposit filled by c.650. 15. Syracuse, Athenaion, fr. MA 25 (1919),490, fig. 82. With MPC II pottery, c. 670650 . 16. Syracuse, Gr. 72. NSc 1925, 202, fig. 37. With ?piriform aryballos ('lekythos cuoriforme'), running dogs. After 650.
RHODIAN SUBGEOMETRIC: THE BIRD-BOWLS SOURCE
Within the island ofRhodes the distribution ofbird-bowls is remarkably uneven, but similar to that of the bird-kotylai. In the east, there is none at Exochi, and only a few scraps at Lindos," The numerous examples from Vroulia, near the southern cape, are confined to the latest types; to judge from the general character ofits pottery finds, this settlement was not founded until a mature stage ofRhodian Orientalizing. The greatest concentration ofbirdbowls is at the northern cities, lalysos and Camiros, to which we have already assigned the manufacture of the bird-kotylai. It is hard to escape the conclusion that those cities were also the main sources ofthe bird-bowls, and ofother related shapes. BeH 36 (1912), pls,
g-IO.
I
Listyjilologickl 1961,22, pI. 7,31.
3
Lindos I, 309, no. I060.
299
CLASSIFICATION
Until more evidence is published, no further progress can be made in isolating the individual traits that distinguish the various local schools. Taken as a whole, East Greek Late Geometric is surprisingly homogeneous, when we bear in mind the wide area over which it was manufactured. At all the main centres, for example, there is a preference for crosshatched patterns; the tree ornament, and its derivatives, are universally popular; nearly everywhere there is a tendency to divide the field into metopes, or smaller units; on open vases the main panel is usually flanked by glaze, which is carried up to the lip. If we must look to the example of one particular centre to explain this striking uniformity, this must surely be Rhodes. Her leading workshop, as we have seen, exported its wares all round the shores ofthe Aegean; the wide diffusion ofher bird-kotylai is clearly the most powerful unifying influence in East Greek LG. The popularity ofthese attractive vases ensured for them a long career, during which their makers were loath to make any radical change in their decoration. When the bird-kotyle eventually gave way to the Subgeometric bird-bowl, the metope system was slightly modified to suit the new shape, yet still preserved the strict discipline oftrue Geometric work. The bird-bowls therefore come within the bounds of our study, and provide the matter for an epilogue to this chapter.
1
RHODIAN •
1
Robertson,JHS60, 14; Hanfmann, TarsuSIII, 296.
300 . EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
SUBG
17. Camiros, Gr. 143.2. CR 4,271, fig. 301. With imitation of deep PC kotyle, not later than c. 650. 18-20. Delos xv, pI. 48, 33-5. 21. Camiros, Gr. 14.2. CR 6-7, 58, fig. 70 (not fig. 72). With PC 'running dog' aryballos, c.-650 orlater: on this class see]. Ducat, BCH86 (1962), 171-4. The central compartment now expands to between two and three times the size of the lateral metopes. Birds are less carefully drawn, and sometimes their eyes are omitted; but their bodies are still drop-shaped, their upper and lower contours meeting at the tip of the tail. The filling ornament is now much lighter; one pendent triangle above the bird's back, and a tiny arc and circle to the right. At first the glaze remains, separated from the decorated panels at first by a dotted zone (6), then by a blank zone (7-16) ; later, the glaze disappears, and is replaced by void rays.
Group Ill. c.650-6I5 22. Heidelberg 61/10. Canciani, AA 1963, 666, fig. 2. Allegedly found with a midseventh-century PC skyphos, loco cit: fig. I. 23. Ialysos, Gr. 19.8. CR 3, 47, figs. 33, 37. With LPC pyxis; and local imitation of ovoid aryballos: c. 650 or later. 24. Dllos xv, pI. 48, 29. 25. Camiros, Gr. 13.2. CR 6-7, 56, fig. 66. With Corinthian Transitional alabastron, figs.67-8,c.635-6 25· 26. Camiros, Gr. 12.2. CR 6-7, 54, figs. 61, 72 (not fig. 64). With wild goat oinochoe and plate, and Early Corinthian alabastron, c. 625 or later. 27. Delos xv, pI. 48, 30. 28. Tarsus Ill, fr. 298, no. 1462, pI. 99. With Assyrian tablet dated to 636 (op. cit. 132). 29. Corinth, fr. in Well D. Hesperia 17 (1948),223, D 53, pI. 82. Early Corinthian context, after c. 625. 30. Tocra I, 55, no. 733, pI. 38. 31. Naukratis, fr. CVA Oxford 2, I I D, pI. I, 13. There is a marked deterioration in the drawing of the birds: the eyes are always omitted (except on 23), and their tails are now formed by prolonging the lower outline of the body. In the field, Geometric hatched triangles have been replaced by Orientalizing rays, which may be solid, or in outline, or vertically bisected. The bird-panels are now at least three times as long as the lozenge metopes. The base, after 22, always bears void rays.
Group I V. After 6 I 5 32. Tarsus Ill, fr. 298, no. 1449, fig. 99. 33. Delos xv, pI. 48, 31. 34. Histria, two whole examples and many frs. Lambrino, Les Vases archaiques d'Histria, Bucharest 1938, 39, fig. 7-8; Histria II, Bucharest 1966, pI. 2, 15-2 I.
RHODIAN . 301
35. Naukratis, frs. CVA Oxford 2, I I D, pI. I, 8-g;J HS 44 (1924), 185, fig. 7. 36. Vroulia, pI. 42, Gr. 18.2'. The chief innovation here is the omission of the base line dividing the metopes from the rays, so that the birds are left in mid-air. Their feet begin to fork at or near the lower contour of the body. The transition from bird-bowl to rosette bowl need not concern us here: it may easily be followed in Vroulia, pI. 25, nos. 5ff.
PALESTINE •
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
Absolute Chronology
The absolute dating of the Geometric style depends on the contexts where the pottery can be connected with recorded historical events. Within the Greek world, such events are limited to the foundation of the western colonies, whose dates are given by Thucydides and by later Greek authors. But these dates will take us no further back than Late Geometric, and their validity has often been questioned. Historians have looked with disfavour upon the lapse of time separating the ancient authors from the foundations of which they speak, and upon the inevitable disagr-eements between the various sources. In recent years, some archaeologists have seen a discrepancy between the relative order of the foundations as stated by Thucydides, and the relative chronology oftheir earliest Geometric pottery. Such difficulties do not warrant the wholesale rejection of the Thucydidean system: but it becomes more necessary than ever to check his dating against the evidence arising from the Near East, where the records are contemporary with the pottery.' Our first step, therefore, is to muster all the available evidence from non-Greek sources: to collect all the contexts where Geometric pottery can be dated by reference to Oriental documents. When the data from this direction have been fully explored, the colonial foundation dates will be called in as additional evidence. Ifthere is no major disagreement between the eastern and western contexts, our only remaining task is to construct upon them a coherent dating system for all Geometric, supported by the conclusions reached in chapters 2-12 on the chronological relationship between the ten local styles.
I. EVIDENCE FROM NON-GREEK SOURCES A. PALESTINE Three sites in the kingdom of Israel have yielded small quantities of Geometric in stratified contexts: the port ofTell Abu Hawam in the Bay of Haifa, Megiddo in the plain ofEsdraeIon, and the royal capital at Samaria. Before considering the historical interpretation ofthese contexts, let us first attempt to establish the relative date of the Greek pottery which they contain. 1 Cf. Dunbabin, AE 1953.2, 247ff.
. 302 ·
303
At Tell Abu Hawam, two Greek imports have come to light in Stratum Ill: part of a Thessalo-Cycladic skyphos with pendent concentric semicircles, and a glazed cup. 1 The skyphos belongs to a long-lived class whose stylistic evolution is not at all well documented, in spite of its wide circulation. It is worth remarking, however, that the profile of our fragment is unlike all other examples found in the eastern Mediterranean: points to be noted are the heavy overhanging lip, and the comparatively deep body. There are reasons (p. 153) for believing that these traits are characteristic of an early stage in the development ofthis form, probably contemporary with Early Geometric in Attica: there is a particularly close counterpart from a grave near Chalcis, apparently found with a piece of Atticizing E G I I ware (p. 152). Later examples of these skyphoi, contemporary with Middle Geometric, have a shallower profile, and a lip swept back in a concave curve: we shall encounter this variety in considerable quantity among the Greek exports to Syria. The cup has attracted less attention than the skyphos, presumably owing to its lack of decoration: the shape, however, deserves study. The excavator, Mr R. W. Hamilton, claims 'exact parallels' for this vase among the material from Marmariani, in northern Thessaly: this is a hard judgement to accept. The Thessalo-Cycladic cups, of which the six at Marmariani are representative, are distinguished by three significant features: the rim overhangs the body, the glaze is carried up on to the exterior ofthe lip, and all over the inside of the base. Our cup differs in all three respects: the rim is considerably narrower than the widest diameter, the exterior of the lip bears two reserved lines, and there is a reserved circle on the floor inside. The lines on the lip and the bellied shape are much more characteristic of the Attic tradition; yet the streakiness of the paint argues against Attic manufacture. The cup may well be of Cycladic origin, like the skyphos: ifthis is so, then it is unlikely to be before M G I, the first phase in which Attic Geometric influence became widespread in the Cyclades. This date is confirmed by the comparatively tall and almost vertical lip, which would be surprising in any Atticizingdrinking vessel before MG 1.2 The nearest counterpart to the shape is a glazed cup from Rheneia, probably ofMG I date." From Stratum v at Megiddo come five fragments found together - two rims and three walls - which have been classed as Greek Geometric by C. Clairmont.' For the wall fragments, nos. 3-5, it is difficult to accept a Hellenic origin. No. 5, decorated with thin stripes, could as well be Cypriot or local. On the skyphos sherds, nos. 3-4, the bands on the interior suggest the hand of an eastern imitator ;" the bichrome bands of no. 3 are clearly non-Greek. Nevertheless it is still possible to define, in terms of Attic, the relative dates of these pieces: the Hellenizing meanders cannot be earlier than E G I I, and could well be MG. There remain the rim sherds, nos. 1-2, which look definitely Attic or Atticizing. Both seem to come from broad, shallow skyphoi, a form that was invented by Attic potters in E G I I; the short, splaying lips are still quite close to the E G I I version. The best parallels, however, are to be found in Attic M G I. No. 2, with its simple window-panel containing a quadruple zigzag, is very close to two skyphoi in the Kerameikos, K. v. I, pI. 89, 886-7. The 1 Q.DAP 4 (1934),23-4, pl. 12,96, and pl. 13,95. Cf. PGP 180ff., pl. 26. 2 For a different view, see Kiibler, K. PGP, pl. 19, A 1473. Cf. also the decorated cup from Ktikados on Tenos. PI. 34h. 4 Berytus II (1955),99-100, pl. 20, 1-5, A 4-7. 5 Cf. Boardman, AS 9 (1959), 164, pl. 25.
3
I,
164, n. 2.
PALESTINE . 305
304 . ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY ancillary M-column of no. I first appears in Attic M G I. There is no exact parallel to its association with a multiple zigzag; but compare the stirrup-handled skyphos, K. v. I, PI.g3, 88g, where the M's flank a meander. All three of our comparanda are from Gr. 13 in the Kerameikos, which has been placed near the beginning ofM G 1. Eleven Geometric sherds may be recognized among the material published from Samaria. All of them are Attic or Atticizing: with one possible exception, none is later than M G 11. Four pieces emerged from the old American excavations, directed by Reisner: see Harvard Excavations at Samaria (1924), I, 28Iff., fig. 157, and 11, pI. 69. There is a complete profile ofa MG 11 plate (fig. 157, 1);1 a rim and a wall from other MG vases (fig. 157, 6b, roa ; pI. 6gi); and another rim said to be the 'neck of a jar' (fig. 157, ga) - possibly from a mug.s None of these sherds, unfortunately, is assigned to any particular level, although their loci are quoted. The other seven sherds came from the later British excavations, led by Crowfoot and Kenyon: see Samaria-Sebaste Ill, 210ff., pI. 18. A fragment with a narrow zone of dots, diagnosed as 'East Greek, possibly Rhodian, early sixth century' (loc. cit. 213; pI. 18, 18) is surely part ofa M G pedestalled foot: it has no context. The remaining six pieces, allegedly from 'Argive kraters' (pp. 210-12, pI. 18, 1-2), were found in four different strata: v, VII, Hellenistic, and Late Roman." There are two rim sherds decorated with triple zigzag, which clearlybelong to the short-lipped Type I I krater. A third fragment shows the transition from lip to body, with part of a hatched motif-perhaps a large central meander. Another wall sherd is divided horizontally into two zones: above, three legs of a horse and the lower half of a bird; below, part of a narrow zone containing four vertical bars, and a glazed area which could be part of a double axe. The last two fragments are from a pedestaIled foot, showing zones of dots and dogtooth. The latest feature of these sherds is the representation of the horse and bird, which could perhaps be LG. Yet horses already appear on the side-panels ofMG 11 kraters and other large vases: the bird in mid-air is more typical ofM G 1 I than ofL G (cf. p. 28) : and the stiff legs of the horse recall the drawing on the large MG 11 pyxis in Paris (pl, 4e). To judge from the photographs, all six sherds could well come from the same krater, and this possibility is left open by the excavator. If a single krater could be restored from these pieces," it would occupy a place in the Attic series towards the end ofM G I I; later than Kerameikos 290, where the equine anatomy is even more primitive (pI. Sd), but contemporary with the Paris pyxis. Even if the sherds are not from the same krater, they look homogeneous in date; their terminus ante quem must be supplied by the end of Period v, the earliest of the four horizons in which they were found. All three sites, then, are potential sources of information on the date of Attic Middle Geometric. M G I had only just begun when Stratum v at Megiddo was closed: the destrucFor shape cc. K. v. I, pl. 101,779. 2 Cf. K. v. I, pI. 112, 1252, MG I. In attributing these frs. to the Argolid, Crowfoot was following the diagnosis of Gjerstad, who found a similar vase at Arnathus (Se EII, 81, pl. 19, I). Such kraters were made in many parts of the Aegean in M G 11 : yet the decoration of the examples at Amathus and Samaria is well up to the best Attic standard. • Cf. Samaria-Sebaste Ill, 2 I 2, fig. 34a. 1
S
tion of Tell Abu Hawam Stratum III also falls somewhere early within MG: and the end ofM G I I must be dated somewhere near the end of Period v at Samaria. The historical interpretation of these strata would be an easy matter if there were unanimity among Palestinian specialists; unfortunately, no such unanimity exists. Not that there is any lack of historical records: on the contrary, the kingdom of Israel suffers from an excess of history, so far as the archaeologist is concerned. To take a celebrated example: the destruction of Tell Abu Hawam (Stratum Ill) has been attributed by various scholars to three potential destroyers: to the Pharaoh Sheshonq I in c. g26 B.C.; to Hazael, king of Syria, in c. 815 B.C.; and, most recently, to Jehu, king oflsrael, in 840 B.C. 1 The proposition of such divergent interpretations implies a considerable measure of disagreement on the absolute chronology of the local pottery - and perhaps also on the relative dating of the various types and shapes; for ifthere had been any general consensus in these matters, such wide divergences ofopinion would not have arisen. Within the last decade, however, notable progress has been made towards the solution of the outstanding problems, thanks to the accumulation of new evidence from excavations. The publication of the material from Samaria,s the capital city founded by King Omri in c. 880 B.C., now furnishes an important new fixed point for the ninth-century chronology of Palestine; while the energetic exploration of Hazor (1955-8) has lent a new impetus to the work of correlating contemporary strata at the leading Israelite cities. Razor, unlike Samaria, has not yet produced any Geometric imports: it does, however, offer a rapid succession of clearly defined strata, which must be considered in any fresh attempt to interpret the three contexts where Greek pottery has been found. We shall confine our attention here to the two most recently published systems ofdating, 3 which are unfortunately in conflict over many details: they may be called the 'Hazorite' and 'Samaritan' points ofview, according to sites excavated by their respective champions. The 'Hazorite' system received its fullest exposition in an article by Y. Aharoni and R. Amiran, entitled 'A New Scheme for the Sub-division ofthe Iron Age in Palestine'," As far as it concerns our present inquiry, it is tabulated on p. 306. Before looking into the credentials of this chronology, we should note that the phases at Samaria are numbered according to a different method from that used at other Palestinian sites. Elsewhere the architectural phases are given the same number as the pottery of their occupation and destruction; but at Samaria 'the pottery and other finds ascribed to a structural period are those actually associated with the building operation, from the foundation trenches, floor make-up, and so on. '5 In other words, the building ofphase x seals the pottery of Period x at Samaria, or the pottery of Stratum x+ I at Razor or Megiddo. Another preliminary point to be noted - and this concerns our Geometric chronology more directly is the emergence of a new stratum at Megiddo, va I IVb. This arises from a reinterpretation of the stratigraphy by the critics of Megiddo I which has won general acceptance among specialists." The closing of this composite stratum must now be taken as the terminus ante lE] 8 (1958), 178. 'Samaria-SebastelII,1957. • For a survey of earlier opinions, published before and during the early 1950's, see Desborough, PGP 182, 294, andJHS 77 (1957), 216-19. 'lE]8 (1958), 171ff. fi Kenyon, BlA4 (1964),145. 8 Kenyon, BlA 4,144, with refs.; G. E. Wright, BA 13 (1950), 39ff. 1
PALESTINE . 307
306 . ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY SYSTEM OF Y. AHARONI AND R. AMIRAN T. A. Hawam
Hazor
Samaria
Va/IVb built Va/IVb
X built by Solomon
95°
Megiddo
IVa built X-IX
1-11
VIII built
II built
III
VIII
III
destroyed by Jehu
destroyed by J ehu VII built
destroyed by J ehu III built
VII
IV
VI built
IV built
III built
VI
V
III
V built
V built
V
VI
IVa
uninhabited
732
72 1
destroyed by T -P 11 I II built
destroyed by T -P III uninhabited IV built
destroyed by Sargon I I
-
quem for the date of our M G I sherds, unless their locus within the original Stratum v can be more precisely determinedr- at all events, they cannot be later than the latest possible date for the end ofthe new Stratum vajIvb. And so to the historical interpretation. The dates for the Hazor strata are those of the Director ofthe excavations, Y. Yadin.s The building of Stratum x, with its fine four-piered city gate, is placed in the reign ofKing Solomon (c. 960-930 B.C.), who 'built ... Hazor and Megiddo and Gezer" after a period when the sites were desolate. Stratum IX is thought to have been burnt by Ben-hadad, king ofAram, during the reign of the Israelite king Baasha (c. 88S B.C.). Stratum VIII is associated with Omrid Samaria (c. 880-841 B.C.): Stratum VII perished at the hands ofHazael, king of Damascus, at the end of King Jehu's reign (C.8IS B.C.). Strata VI and V are separated by a layer of debris, possibly caused by an earthquake in the reigns of Jeroboam 11, king of Israel, and Uzziah, king of Judah. 4 At the end of Stratum v, Hazor was completely destroyed by the Assyrians under King Tiglath-Pileser I I I in 732 B.C. 5 All these dates are adopted by Aharoni and Amiran, who optimistically declare that 'the dates of the six strata can hardly be more than a few years out.' While correlating their strata with the sequences at other sites, the authors saw a sharp cultural break at c. 840 B.C., caused by the fall of the Omrid dynasty in Israel, and the accession of the usurper J ehu. In their opinion, this break was so clearly marked in the pottery that they wished to treat it as a boundary in their new subdivision of the Palestinian Iron Age. Immediately before the break comes Hazor Stratum VIII, which is most important for our present inquiry: for, according to this system, it is co-terminous with Stratum III at Tell Abu Hawam, and contemporary with part of Stratum rv a at Megiddo: our sherds in Megiddo Stratum Vmust therefore be earlier than Stratum VIII at Hazor. Both these equations, however, are controversial. On the question ofTeIl Abu Hawam III, there is dissension even within the 'Hazorite' camp: for Yadin- is prepared to accept Maisler's date of8IS B.C.' The discrepancy, however, is not serious. More problematical is the placing ofMegiddo vaJIvb. Here the authors follow Albright- and G. E. Wright9 in seeing this as the Solomonic town, destroyed by Sheshonq I in 9 I8 B.C. In the 'Hazorite' view, this dating gains further strength from the striking resemblance between the city gate of Megiddo rvb and the gate ofSolomonic Hazor in Stratum X. 1O Here we come to one of the main grounds for disagreement between the 'Hazorite' and the 'Samaritan' schools of thought. Before the subdivision of Strata IV and V at Megiddo, J. W. Crowfoot wished to remove the whole of'rv from the time of Solomon, because of an equally striking similarity between its architecture and the Omrid palatial buildings unearthed by him at Samaria.P This is also the view of K. M. Kenyon, who is today the chief exponent of the 'Samaritan' case. The table on p. 308 is based on her most recent article.P where she correlated the sequences at Samaria and Hazor with the revised strata ofMegiddo. It will be seen at a glance that the differences between the two systems lie mainly in the correlations. Let us begin with Dr Kenyon's interpretation of her own site." The architecture of Period I is ascribed without doubt to King Omri, who built on a G. E. Wright, however, speaks of 'the unreliable nature ofMegiddo loci': BASOR 155 (Oct. 1959), 15, n. 6. Hazor i (1958), eh. 2. 3 I Kings ix. 15. 4 Amos i, I; Zechariah xiv. 5. 52 Kings xv. 29. 8 Hazor i, 23. 7 Cf.JHS 77,217. 8 AASOR 21-2 (1943),2-3, n. I. • BA 13 (195°),42-3. 10 Yadin, IEJ 8 (1958),3. 11 PEQI (194°),143. 12 BIA 4 (1964), 148. 13 See also Samaria-Sebaste Ill, 198--9. 1
2
PALESTINE . 309
308 . ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY SYSTEM OF K. M. KENYON Hazor
Samaria
Megiddo Vb ?destroyed by Sheshonq, c. 930
? built by Solomon X 900
uninhabited
?8g0
I
-I-built-by-Omri-- rebuilt after II abandonment?
880
87°
II built
IX built
III
IX
V (?Va/IVb) IV (?IVa) built
?850 84° VIII built
IIlbuilt (Jehu?) IV
VIII
?800 IV built
VII built
VII
V
IV (?IVa)
virgin hill. The buildings of Period 11 may represent the 'completion of the layout of the town under Ahab': it clearly followed soon after, since 'no distinction could be drawn between the ware of Periods I and 11':1 'the pottery ofboth Periods represents that in use c. 890870 B.C. '2 The walls ofOmrid Samaria were built in fine ashlar masonry, after the Phoenician manner: but in the structures of Period III there is a change of style, associated with the reaction against foreign influence under Jehu in c. 840 B.C. At the same time, there is a marked change between the pottery ofPeriods III and IV. A possible cause for the rebuilding at the end of Period IV is the Aramaean invasion of 7g8 B.C.: at all events, the life of these buildings - and with them the pottery of Period V with our M G I I krater sherd - is dated 'early in the eighth century'. This is the horizon underneath the architecture ofv, the final Israelite rebuilding which was destroyed by Sargon I I of Assyria in 722 B.C.: the pottery in the destruction level (Period VI) is datedc. 750-7 2 2 B.C. 3 In the correlations with Hazor and Megiddo, Period III is the most significant for our purposes. Here Kenyon diverges from the Hazorite system in equating this period with Hazor Stratum IX, and not Stratum VIII as suggested by Aharoni and Amiran. This adjustment has two important consequences for the dating of Geometric pottery. In the first place, ifthe end ofStratum VIII at Hazor is still accepted as the yardstick for the end ofTell Abu Hawam Level Ill, then the destruction of the latter must be very late in the ninth century: in this case, Maisler's date of c. 815 B.C. may then prove to be the correct one. Secondly, Hazor Stratum IX - and by implication, Period III at Samaria - is found by Kenyon to be contemporary with the latest pottery from the houses ofMegiddo Stratum va, which immediately precede the royal quarter of Stratum rv a.' Her date for the end ofva (?+Ivb) is c. 850 B.C., a decade before the general upheaval caused by Jehu: this brief interval is assumed because ofthe Phoenician style ofthe masonry in Megiddo Stratum IVa, which implies some overlap with Omrid Samaria.(; This is perhaps an unnecessary refinement, since the excellent ashlar blocks of Stratum rv a are apparently reused:" in any case, similar 'Phoenician' masonry was still in favour at the Judaean city of Ramath Rahel as late as the eighth century." This last fact should remove any objection to regarding Megiddo va as co-terminous with Period III at Samaria, in the light of Dr Kenyon's own detailed correlation of the pottery from both these horizons with Hazor Stratum IX.S It is not my intention to take sides in the dispute over correlations. To do so would be grossly presumptuous, since I have no experience of handling the local pottery. Nevertheless, whatever system is eventually accepted, two firm conclusions may be drawn about the dating of Attic Middle Geometric: I. The end ofM G I I must be placed not later than c. 750 B.C., since the dating ofPeriod V at Samaria to the early eighth century is generally accepted." 1
Samaria-Sebaste Ill, 94.
2
BlA 4, 147.
3
Samaria-Sebaste
Ill,
203.
• B lA 4, 151; this equation leads her to suggest that the Solomonic town destroyed by Sheshonq may well have been an earlier
stratum, vb. 6 Samaria-Sebaste III, 203. 6 BlA 4, 149. 7 Aharoni, lE] 6 (1956), 138ff., pI. 23; cf. O. Tufnell, P EQ 1959,92, n. 2. 8 BIA 4,151,153--6. 9 Cf. also Albright, BASOR 150 (Apr. 1958),23: 810-745 B.C. for the buildings of IV. The lowest estimate is 765-732 B.C., by O. Tufnell, P EQ 1959, 105.
310 • ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 2. By Greek standards, Middle Geometric was a very long period. Even according to the low 'Samaritan' chronology, the early MG I sherds must have 'reached Megiddo by the mid-ninth century: the 'Hazorite' system would force their date up into the late tenth century. It goes without saying that Dr Kenyon's chronology offers the more credible time-span for Middle Geometric: the dating of Aharoni and Amiran would stretch the M G I phase alone over practically a whole century, between 950-925 B.C. (Megiddo, Stratum va/Ivb) and 841 B.C. (Tell Abu Hawam Stratum IH). But we cannot bring this reasoning to bear on the Palestinian controversy without incurring the danger of a circular argument. At this stage we can only conclude that any attempt to compress Middle Geometric into the second halfofthe ninth century' or into the first half ofthe eighth- will run counter to all the rival systems of Palestinian chronology. Our next task is to see how these two basic conclusions will stand up to the evidence from other non-Greek sources.
B. NORTH SYRIA Here the volume of Geometric imports is much greater than in Palestine: and copious enough to indicate commerce, if only on a small scale. Seven sites are potential sources of absolute dates, and may be divided into two groups. On the coast are the three emporia inhabited or visited by Greek merchants: AI Mina at the mouth ofthe Orontes; Tell Sukas, near Jebleh; and. Tabbat-al-Hammam, between Tortosa and Tripoli. Inland lie the neoHittite principalities with whom the merchants did business: Greek wares have been found at Hama, at two sites in the Amuq plain (Tell Tayinat and Judaidah), and as far east as Tell Halaf, on the river Khabur. Each one of these seven sites has produced Cycladic skyphoi with pendent concentric semicircles." Typologically, these are all later than the fragment from Tell Abu Hawam: the short concave lip and the shallow body are characteristic of the more advanced class, contemporary with Attic M G (p. 156). In addition, Hama has yielded five sherds from an Attic MG 11 krater- and three LG pieces ofCycladic or Euboean origin." From Tell Sukas there is part of a locally made L G skyphos ;" AI Mina has produced a considerable quantity of material, including Atticizing MG and LG, mainly of Cycladic or Euboean ongm. Of the coastal emporia, only Al Mina is a new foundation. The other two ports were inhabited throughout the Bronze Age, and a cemetery at Tell Sukas proves occupation throughout the twelfth to the tenth centuries." Near Eastern documents do not, tell us when the emporia were established: but the Greeks could have installed themselves only at a time when the powers of the interior were friendly towards them. P. J. Riis, the excavator of As Kahane, AJA 44 (194°),481-2, 'Strenggeometrische'. E.g. Brann, Hesperia 30 (1961),95-7; Davison 130. Cf. JHS83 (1963),212. 3 To those studied by Desborough, PGP 181fl'., pI. 26, add now AAS 10 (1960), I23fl'., fig. 13, from Tell Sukas. The example from Tell Halafis now illustrated: Tell Halof tv; 101, no. 188, pl. 69. 4 Exochi 107-8, n. 86, fig. 207. 6 AAS 15.2 (1965),80--1, fig. 23 witIr refs. • AAS 11-12 (1961-2), 137-8, fig. 7. 7 AAS 11-12, 140--1. I
II
SYRIA' 31 I
Hama and Tell Sukas, has discovered some important evidence bearing on this question. At Tell Sukas, immediately underneath the trading settlement, he found a destruction deposit; this he reasonably associates with the punitive campaigns of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser I I I in 853-844 B.C. l During the next hundred years the attention of the Assyrians was distracted by the warlike Urartians on their northern frontier, so that Syria was left in comparative peace until the final conquest of the Levant by Tiglath-Pileser III (746-727).2 As Riis points out, this long interlude is a favourable time for the arrival of Greek traders, who would have found willing customers among the rulers ofHama and the other neo-Hittite states. Thus our tentative dates for M G, based on the Palestinian evidence, are in harmony with Riis's theory about the foundation of the emporia. We must now consider the contexts in which the imports were found. The excavations at Tell Tayinat and Judaidah have not yet been published, but a pendent semicircle skyphos is said by the excavator, R. J. Braidwood, to have come from a stratum dated to c. 860-800. 3 A similar skyphos from Tell Halafhas no context, but its date is more likely to be before than after 808, when the city was annexed by Assyria.s At Tabbat-al-Hammarn the 'few odd sherds of Greek bowls with concentric semicircle ornament' were found in the same horizon as pottery ofCypriot character," which defies close dating. At Tell Sukas the Danish excavations are published only in preliminary reports, and the architecture ofthe emporium has not yet been subdivided into strata. In the meantime, then, Hama and Al Mina are the most enlightening places for our present inquiry. Hama provides a clear terminus ante quem for all Greek imports, since the site lay desolate after the sack ofthe neo-Hittite city by Sargon I I in 720. From the cemetery came two fragmentary skyphoi with pendent semicircles. One is a stray find: the other was placed in a cinerary urn in the lowest layer of Stratum IV, a context dated by the excavator to the beginning ofthe eighth century.s The settlement produced two more ofthese skyphoi, ofwhich one came to light in a burnt deposit associated with the Assyrian destruction." If this vase had been found on a floor, a precise dating of 720 would have to be accepted: as it is, the destruction can only serve as a terminus ante quem within broad limits, since the skyphos was discovered in debris outside the Palace, or Building H. Much the same admission must be made for the five sherds ofthe Attic M G I I krater, found scattered over a wide area outside the Temple, Building HI: 8 but in this case the remodelling of the temple after 800 9 gives us also an upper limit. The 720 destruction is more relevant for the dating of the three L G fragments-" which, although not stratified, cannot be later than 720. The most advanced of these pieces is the rim ofan Atticizing (Naxian?) krater with a zone oflarge blobs connected by wavy tangents: its nearest counterpart is a Boeotian krater near the beginning of the L G series.'! I A A S 10, 123-5. In a list of Shalmaneser's adversaries, the Assyrian records include Siyannum, Usnatu, and Suks], all situated in the ]ebleh plain. Suksi is also mentioned in a tenth-century Phoenician inscription recently found at Tell Sukas (AAS 11-12, 141), and could well be the ancient name of the site. S Cf. also S. SmitIr, AJ 22 (1942),99. 3 The Aegeanand the Near East; Studies presented to H. Goldman (1956), 175, n. 36. The evidence for this date is not stated. 4 Tell Halaf IV, 116-17. The local pottery in the nintIr century has westward affinities; in the eighth, it is exclusively 'neusassyrisch'. 6 Syria 21 (194°),193, fig. 4. • P.]. Riis, Hama 11.3, 113-14, 202, 256, fig. 134B,8A, 189. 7 Hama 11.1,232, n, 6, fig. 310, 7B, 23. 8 Hama 1l.1, 179, n. 3; 190,200,205, fig. 245. 9 op. cit. 189. 10 Riis, AAS 15.2 (1965),80--1, fig. 23. 11 Munich 2233, Sieveking-Hackl, no. 406: see p. 206, n.8.
gl2 • ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
SYRIA' gIg
The emporium at AI Mina is the most prolific source of Geometric pottery in Syria, and it is generally agreed that the initiative for its foundation came from the Aegean. Let us assume, for the time being, that merchants from Greece were among the original settlers. In this case, the earliest Levantine material from the site ought to give an approximate date for the earliest Greek sherds, since the settlement was dug down to virgin soil.' For the Levantine pottery Miss]. du Plat Taylor has suggested an upper limit of c. 825 B.C., based on comparisons with many other Syrian and Palestinian sites. S The oldest Greek fragments are ofM G date, and may be divided into (A) Pendent-semicircle skyphoi, and (B) Atticizing work.
with MG, yield much the same dates: late ninth century (Tell Tayinat), and early eighth century (Hama). The following chronology is therefore proposed for Attic Middle Geometric, as a working hypothesis: M G I - second half of ninth century B.C. M G I I - early eighth century B.C. NOTE These dates are in harmony with the 'Samaritan' chronology for Palestine, which receives some independent confirmation from the Syrian evidence. It should be noted, however, that Miss du Plat Taylor followed Dr Kenyon's system in dating the earliest Levantine pottery at AI Mina to c. 825: see Iraq 2 I (1959),85, n. I.
A. J H S 60 (1940), 2-4, fig. Ia-k. Two complete profiles can be recovered. One, based on frs. d and j, is an unusually deep example ofthe 'advanced' class, and should come early in MG. On the other, a later and more debased piece (fr. h), see p. 157, n.6.
AI Mina can also offer some guidance in the dating of Late Geometric. In her study of the Levantine material Miss du Plat Taylor places the break between Levels VIII and VII at c. 720 B.C.! From a stratigraphical point ofview this is not an ideal landmark, because VII is merely a reconstruction ofVIII ; whereas VIII and VI both begin with a new architectural layout.s Unfortunately, nearly all the sherds of VIII have been mixed with IX, and those from VII with VI, so that the new buildings of VIII and VI cannot be used as dating points. Faute de mieux, we must rest content with the beginning ofVII as our only available point of reference. Our aim is to determine what stage ofthe various L G sequences is marked by the dividing line of c. 720 B.C. To achieve this, it is necessary to confront the latest sherds from IX-VIII with the earliest ofV11- VI. Where there is an overlap, the latest pottery from the lower levels must be taken as decisive, since later horizons may always contain earlier rubbish. Stylistically, the material may be divided into - A. Attic and Atticizing, including Oycladic, most ofthe Euboean, and local imitations; B. Corinthian, and Euboean imitations of'Corinthian ; and C. East Greek. For each sherd, or group of sherds, I assign a relative date within the Attic, Corinthian, or Rhodian sequences.
B. Of op. cit. figs. I and g, the following sherds are Atticizing MG:3 L Fig. 11. From large skyphos with meander in window-panel. The size is typical of the Cyclades (cf pp. 16g-70, and pI. 34k) : the fabric is very micaceous, and looks Naxian. MGI. 2. Fig. 10. From skyphos or cup, with panel of cross-hatched lozenges. O£ PGP, pI. 19, A 1472 from Rheneia; and BSA 55 (1960), 161, no. 20, fig. 4, from Knossos. Early MGI. g. Fig. rq, From skyphos with panelled stars. A rare scheme, paralleled only in Attic M G. O£ K. v. I, pI. 96, 897, from Gr. 12. Late MG I. 4. Fig. gr. Edge of pedestalled foot, perhaps from large skyphos as A M 28 (I 90g), Beil. 25, I (RI 17). MG. 5. Fig. go-po From neck-handled amphorae: cf Delos XV, pI. 42, 'Attique' Ig. The elongated dots and the lozenge chain suggest late MG, or early LG. Before passing on to the later pottery from AI Mina, we should attempt to fix the limits ofMiddle Geometric as best we can: for all the dating evidence for this period has now been reviewed. Our two previous conclusions, based on the Palestinian contexts, are at no point contradicted by the Syrian material. The Attic krater sherds at Hama show that M G I I must come well down into the eighth century. M G I, the style brought by the first Greek settlers to Al Mina, should extend well back into the ninth - unless, of course, many years went by between the foundation of the settlement and the arrival of the Greeks. Yet the sherds at Megiddo, dated to C. 840 at the very latest, do not look much older than the earliest Atticizing pieces at AI Mina. Conversely, the destruction of Tell Sukas by Shalmaneser III in C. 850 B.C. ought to provide an upper limit for the establishment of Greek traders on the North Syrian coast - an event which apparently occurred some time during M G I. The contexts of the 'advanced' pendent-semicircle skyphoi, which we have shown to be contemporary 1
JHS 58 (1938),16,155.
2
Iraq 21 (1959),91.
3
Of these I have seen only no.
LEVEL VIII AND EARLIER
A. Attic and Atticizing
(i) Figured andanimaldrawing I
J HS 60, fig. 2f,h-k: kraters. Naxian: manner of Cesnola Painter. For birds, cr. Vrokastro 98, fig. 53a. End ofLG I at earliest.
2 loco cit. fig. 3h: tankard? Possibly Attic; cf. Berlin 3374, Concentric Circle Group (p. 75), LGIIa. 3 loco cit. fig. 3g: perhaps same vase as fig. 3a (p. 6). Possibly Attic. Relaxed work of L G I lb. 1
I.
I
I
Iraq 21, 9 1 •
2
JHS 58,14-16.
LEVEL VII AND LATER
314 .
ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
LEVEL VIII AND EARLIER
SYRIA'
LEVEL VII AND LATER
(ii) Cycladic metope skyphoi
LEVEL VIII AND EARLIER
315
LEVEL VIl AND LATER
19 loco cit. nos. 8-10. Careless diagonals. LG 11-
SubG.
4 loco cit. fig. 2o-q. Neat quatrefoils; cf. K. V. I, pI. 97, 327, Gr. 32. Attic or 'Parian', LG lb.
20
5 loco cit. fig. Im.Elongated meander hooks; cf. pl, 38a. 'Parian', LG I.
loco cit. no. 20. Vertical wavy lines. LG 11.
21 loco cit. no. 15. Bird. ?LG 11.
22 loco cit. nos. 16-17. Empty panel: hatched triangles. LG 11 I Sub G.
6 AJ 17 (1937), pI. 14, I, row 4, no. 3. (The misprints on this plate are corrected by Boardman, RSA 52, 8, n. 45.) Cf. pI. 38b. 'Parian', LG I/II.
7 JHS60, fig.
In.
(vii) Miscellaneous I, nos. 1-3; row 4, nos. 1,4; row 5, nos. 2-3; row 6, no. 2. Sundry SubG patterns.
24
J H S 60, pI. 41'. Outlined fish; cf. VS, pI. 9, 3.
Debased bird. LG 11.
8 loco cit, fig. 3m. Bird, with line running horizontally along body; cf. pI. 36c. Naxian, LG.
AJ 17, pI. 14,2, row
23
B. Corinthian and Corinthiauizing
(i) Corinthian deep kotylai
(iii) Cycladic kraters 9 loco cit. fig. 3q. Neat quatrefoil. LG I.
EPC. (Also illustrated: AJ 17, pI. 14,2, row 5, no. I; V I I - V according to Boardman, loco dt.)
10 loco cit. fig. 3n. 'Parian': later than Delos xv, Ac I, pI. 37e. LG I I.
25 loco cit. pI. 4e. Cross-hatched lozenges, double axe; cf MA 13 (1903),26, fig. 58, from Gr. 103
his. EPC.
(iv) Euhoean metope skyphoi
26 loco cit. pI. 4g. Dotted lozenge net, double axe; c£ MA 22 (1913), pI. 50, I, from Cumae. EPC.
I I loco cit. fig. sa.d-e. Tall lips, with double circles; cf. pl, 41a. LG I. n
loco cit. fig. 3d-f. Birds and quatrefoils: dotted lozenge as filling ornament. LG I.
13
I. Debased bird, dotted lozenge. LG 11. (In Oxford marked VII-VI, in spite of Board man, loco dt.)
14 J HS 60, fig. Ip; fig. zr (kotyle); AJ 17, pI. 14, I, row I, no. 4. Bulky grid-lozenge. LG 11. (The profile of the kotyle can be restored from frs. in London: the shape is extremely shallow, like Corinth VII. I, no. 107.) 15
AJ 17, pI. 14,2, row 5, no.
I: small gridlozenge. LG II. (In Oxford: marked VIII, but from V I I - V according to Boardman, loco cit.)
27 loco cit. pI. 4h. Reserved hour-glass framed in added white; cf. pi. 21d. EPC.
AJ 17, pI. 14, I, row 4, no.
(ii) Corinthian pyxides 28 loco at. pI. 4d. Lid ofkotyle-pyxis. LG/EPC. 29 loco cit. 16, pI. 4C. Lid of flat pyxis. MPC.
16
AJ 17, pI. 14,2, row 5, no. 4. Cross-hatched lip; cf. pI. 41b. LG 11.
(iii) Euhoean imitations ofCorinthian kotylai 30 RSA 52, 6, n. 28, pI. zb.ar two rows of twolegged soldier-birds. From an intermediate kotyle as pl, 41h; for Corinthian prototype, c£ DeZos XVII, pI. 52, 35. Early EPC.
31 RSA 52, pI. zb.e-f Meander hooks, single row
of two-legged soldier-birds. EPC.
(v) Euhoean skyphoi, slip-filled designs 17 RSA 52, pI. za, and many other frs. in Oxford. See p. 193, (iii). LG II-SubG.
C. East Greek: probably all Rhodian
(vi) Metope skyphoi, locally made
(i) Bird-kotylai
18 AS9 (1959), pI. 24, nos. 4,13: quatrefoil,
32 Unpublished, in Oxford. Tree ornament. LG.
bichrome. L G 1/1 I.
33
J H S 60, fig. 8f: several unpublished frs. in Oxford. LG.
316 .
ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
LEVEL VIII AND EARLIER
EGYPT'
LEVEL VII AND LATER
(ii) Oinochoai andjugs,jrom the Bird-kotyle Workshop 34 JHS60, fig. 4h. Trace of shoulder metope. LG.
35 AJ I7,PI. 14, 2, row fig. 7c,e. LG.
2,
nos. 1-2,4;JHS60,
(iii) Bird-bowls 36 AJ 17, pI. 11,2; pI. 14, I, row 5; JHS 6o, fig. 8h-j. SubG.
The neat quatrefoils, no. 4, can be closely matched in Attic L GIb: but these are by no means the latest Atticizing sherds in the lower levels. After them come the figured pieces nos. 2-3, which take us far into LG 11: no. 3 looks LG lIb. By the end of Level VIII the Naxian Cesnola Workshop has been in business for some years (no. I): the 'Parian' school has had time to diverge from Attic (no. 10). From the upper levels there are relatively few metope pieces, and these are mainly Euboean or local: apart from the one debased bird (no. 13), the patterns are all of Subgeometric character. On this showing, the year 720 B.C. must be placed shortly before the end ofAttic LG. From Corinth the earliest stratified sherds occur in Levels VII-VI: none is demonstrably earlier than E P C. In the same context are many Euboean imitations of the E P C kotyle with soldier-birds: but one of them copies a Corinthian model intermediate between the L G and E P C types, and was found in Level VIII. We must therefore place the boundary between L G and E P C very near 720 B.C. Rhodes is abundantly represented by bird-kotylai, and the related closed vases: but since all but two pieces occur in the higher levels, it seems that in 720 B.C. Rhodian LG still had many years to run. This much, then, may be learned from the stratification of Al Mina: the dividing line comes at about the end ofCorinthian LG, shortly before the end ofAttic LG 11, and relatively early within Rhodian LG. These conclusions are in perfect harmony with our previous observations on the relative chronology of the three regional styles. C.EGYPT The evidence from Egyptian sources is limited to two objects bearing the cartouche of the Pharaoh Wohkere or Bocchoris, whose reign is usually dated to 718-712 B.C. 1 I. A scarab of blue paste was deposited with the inhumation of a child at Pithecusae, in Gr. 102. It is said to be original Egyptian work." The date of manufacture can hardly be after 712 B.C., for Bocchoris had a briefandundistinguished reign before beingdethroned and burned alive by the Ethiopian Shabaka, founder of the xxvth dynasty. The year 718 B.C. is thus the terminus post quem for the Pithecusan burial; and unless the scarab was treasured for some time as an amulet, the other offerings could also be dated as early as the penultimate decade of the eighth century B.C. 1 2
B. Gunn, apud E. H. Dohan, Italic Tomb Groups in the Unioersity Museum, Philadelphia, 1942, 106-7. S. Bostieco, Parola delPassato 12 (1957),218, no. 102, fig. 2.
317
Among the grave goods are three vases imported from Corinth i! a skyphos and two globular aryballoi. The skyphos is a simplification ofthe Thapsos form, where the usual windowpanel has been replaced by continuous banding from the handle zone to the rim (cf pI. 2od): the contexts for this type are usually E pc. 2 Both aryballoi bear a zone of grouped sigmas below the handle, in the Corinthian L G tradition: this feature is already obsolescent by the time of the latest globular examples (p. 107). In neither case is the shape very advanced: both have a low centre of gravity, the first being actually broader than its height. The second aryballos, rather taller, has begun to taper towards the base: it is the latest of the three Corinthian imports, and may be placed in the middle of E P C. 2. A faience situla, found in a chamber tomb at Tarquinia, is nowadays thought to be a garbled Phoenician imitation, and not an Egyptian original. 3 The date ofmanufacture may therefore be considerably later than the death of the Pharaoh. His reign still provides a terminus postquem for the burial; but this can only be applied within wide limits. The furniture of the tomb includes two Greek vases, imitations of Protocorinthian: a kotyle with a frieze of griffins, and an oinochoe with the neck missing.' Both vases are considerably later than the grave group from Pithecusae: E. Dohan- reasonably dated them to MP C Ion the evidence ofthe rayed bases, and the hooked rays on the oinochoe. The kotyle should be placed early within that phase because of the Subgeometric animals, which are derived from the workshop ofAthens 897 at the end of Attic L G 11. 6 The evidence from Tarquinia should be treated with some caution. The finds were first studied by Helbig, who implies that they belonged to a single burial:" but he did not witness the excavation, and his assumption has been challenged." If Helbig's view is correct, then the tomb must have been closed about a generation later than the Pithecusan grave, to judge from the Greek vases in the two contexts. Such an interval would not be at all surprising ifthe scarab were made by an Egyptian during Bocchoris' reign, and the situla after his death by a Phoenician imitator. Alternatively, the situla could have been treasured very much longer than the scarab as a rare and exotic luxury: but this is unlikely, since faience is a fragile material, and the situla is actually the better preserved of the two objects. If it could be proved that the situla was buried a generation later than the scarab, we should be all the more justified in interpreting the terminus post quem for the Pithecusan group within narrow limits. In any case, even if the association at Tarquinia is open to doubt, the dating of the grave at Pithecusa to the reign of Bocchoris would agree extremely well with the Syrian evidence. From Al Mina we have already learned that Early Protocorinthian was just beginning in 720: on the strength of the Bocchoris scarab, its full bloom may now be placed during the following two decades.
M. W. Stoop, Antiquiry andSurvival 4 (1955), 265, fig. 17. 2 See p. 104: Cumae Gr. 32; Mylai, Gr. V; Pithecusa, Gr. 282. Dohan, lac. cit. This diagnosis receives some additional support from the presence of an almost identical vase (NSc 1941, 284-6, fig. 2!5a--e) at the Phoenician colony of Motya, founded at least as early as EPC (cf. ILN1962, 328, fig. 7). • Montelius, La Civilisation primitive enItalie n, pI. 295 (whence AM 45 (1920), 109, fig. I), nos. 12 and 15. 5 op. tit. 108. S Cf. Athens 17519, pI. 14e. The mixture of Attic and Corinthian elements suggests thatthe maker of this kotyle might have been an Euboean. 7 NSc 1896, 15-21. 8 Dunbabin, AE 1953.2, 253, n. 2, with refs, In support of Helbig: Gjerstad, OpRom 5.1 (1962),60. 1
3
318 .
ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
D.CYPRUS No fixed points in Cypriot history can help us with our present inquiry. The only recorded event within our period is the Assyrian conquest of 709: this seems to have been accomplished without violence, leaving no mark upon the material record ofthe island. Cypriot pottery, like Greek until LG, must therefore be dated through equations with Syria and Palestine. Here there has been much scope for disagreement among specialists. Part ofthe trouble lies in the unresolved controversy over Palestinian dates; but there have also been differences ofapproach in working out the Cypriot correlations with the Levantine mainland. 1 Yet even ifthe experts were to reach unanimity in future years, their findings on Cypriot chronology could only offer indirect evidence for the dating of Greek Geometric. I therefore confine myselfto a tabulation ofthe significant contexts where Greek and Cypriot wares have been found together. These contexts should prove equally valuable - or equally valueless - to both Greek and Cypriot specialists for checking conclusions founded on more solid evidence from other sources. For each Cypriot group I quote two dates. The first is derived from the system of the Swedish Cyprus Expedition, worked out by Gjerstad:" according to the development of the pottery, he subdivides the Iron Age into Cypro-Geometric I, I I, and I I I, Cypro-Archaic I, I I, etc. It should be noted that his dating around 700 rests partly on a rather low .chronology for Greek L G wares at Rhodes and AI Mina, and partly on the stratigraphy ofTarsus, which is now under review (p. 321).3 Secondly, I give the dates suggested by Gjerstad's most recent critics, who challenge his relative sequences as well as his absolute chronology. The need for an alternative system, stated by Miss du Plat Taylor in her publication ofAl Mina.! has been largely met in a comprehensive article by Mrs J. Birmingham." On dates after c. 825 B.C. these two scholars are in substantial agreement. The earlier material is treated only by Mrs Birmingham: ifsome of her ninth-century dates seem rather high in relation to the Greek pottery, it should be remembered that her Palestinian equations are partly founded on a high chronology for Megiddo va/lvb (c. 950-918 B.C.), corresponding to the 'Hazorite' scheme," I make no further comment - except to observe that the Taylor-Birmingham system is the easier to reconcile with our other dating evidence: but this is not entirely surprising, since we have already followed Taylor's dating of the Levantine material at AI Mina, in suggesting approximate limits for the various phases of Geometric.
CYPRUS·
SIGNIFICANT GROUPS CONTAINING GREEK AND CYPRIOT MATERIAL NOTE The Cypriot dates are supported, where possible, by references to the three publications already quoted, abbreviated as G(jerstad), T(aylor), and B(irmingham) respectively. Where the initial letter is not accompanied by a page reference, the date has been kindly communicated to me by the author concerned, either orally or in correspondence. Dates in inverted commas represent the opinion of excavators applying Gjerstad's system to their finds. GREEK POTTERY
(Taylorand Birmingham) Abs. date Mid-lOc. (B 38)
Site
Publication
Local style
Rel. date
CYPRIOT POTTERY (Gjerstad) Rel. date Abs. date
AMATHUS, Gr. IALYSOS, Marmaro, Gr·43 cos, Serraglio Gr. I
]HS 77, 2I2ff.
Cycladic
LPG
CGII (B)
CR 8,161-4, fig. 149
E. Greek
EGearly
P· 267
E. Greek
MGearly
CGII 9S0-8so (G 264) (local ?) CGIII Bc. CAI 7c.
AMATHUS, T.I3 SALAMIS, Royal T. FORTETSA, T. TFT.2g FORTETSA, T. VII.IS SOLI, Gr.
SCE II, 7g-83, pl, Ig, I AA 1963, I26f.
Attic
MGII
CG III (B) Late Bc.
Attic
MGII
CG III (B) 'Late Bc.'
Fortetsa, nos. 693-4 Fortetsa, nos. 841-2 BCH 8S, 27&-80, figs. 2Ba, 28c
Cretan
MG
CG III (B) Late Bc.
Early 8c. (B)
Cretan
MG
CG III (B) Late8c.
Early 8c. (B)
Cycladic
MG
CG III (B), 'End8c.' CAI
8c.: cf. B 26-7 (I1)a
BCH 87, 26Sff., figs. 2-3 AntK 10,133 Murray, Cyprus 110, fig. 160, 3
Cycladic
CAI
Euboean Cycladic
MG LGl LGI MGII
E. Greek
LG early
E. Greek
LGearly
E. Greek
LGearly
PAPHOS, T.
AMATHUS
COS, Serraglio Gr.64 IALYSOS, Gr. SI 1 For a recent summary of the disputed points, as far as they concern the Hellenist, see Desborough,JHS 77 (1957), 216-19. • SCE IV.2, 427. 3 op. cit. 423-4. Any arguments in favour of a Iow Greek chronology which are based on Gjerstad's system must therefore be regarded as circular: e.g.}, F. Daniel, AJA 44 (1940), 161. 4 Iraq 21 (1959),63,89. 6 AJA 67 (1963), 15ff. • op,cit, 24.
319
CR 3, 8S-7, figs·7S- 8
IALYSOS, CR 3, g9- 100 , fig.g2 Gr·S7 1 a. Dilos xv, Ae I.
Early gc.
Late 9cearly Bc. (B) Not later than 730 (B 27)
'7 c.'
'2 handleridge jugs' (?CG Ill) CGIII (8s0-7°0) CG III and Late 8c.CAI Early 7c. (G423) CG III late End8c. (G423)
gc. (B)
Bc. (B 34)
Late 8c. (B)
320 .
CILICIA •
ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY GREEK POTTERY
Site
Publication
IALYSOS,
CR 3,100-3,
Local style
Rel. date
(Gjerstad) Rel. date
Abs. date
(Taylorand Birmingham) Abs. date
CG Ill? (local) CAI
'7c.'
Late 8c.
CYPRIOT POTTERY
E. Greek figs. 93-5 Euboean AntK 10, 134-5, pl. 38, 2-3, 6-7
LG early
AntK 10, 134-5, pl. 38, 5, 8-g
Euboean
LGIlSubG
CAI
AMATHUS,
SCE I 1,55-64,
C A I I early After 600
nos. 76, 122, pl, 139, 7 SCE 11,146, pl. 139, 11 (see pp. 313-16)
CycIadic or Euboean
LG
T·9· 1
8c. (B 31) Early 7c.
(Cypriot copy) CycIadic, etc. E. Greek
MGII style LG
CA I early
Early 7c.
CA I early
LG-SubG
CAI
Early 7c. (G 424) c. 7
Before 725 (B 31) Before 720 (T 91)
Cretan
LG/EO
CAI
7c.
Gr·58 ERETRIA,
Temple of Apollo ERETRIA
Hereon, Gr.18
STYLLI,
T.2 AL MINA,
Level 8 CAMIROS,
CR 4,346-8,
Gr.201
figs. 385-6 Fortetsa, nos. 875-7
FORTETSA,
T. P2. IOn
LGI
'7c.'
Late 8c.
End 8c. (B)
E. CILICIA Tarsus is a potential source of absolute dating: the city was destroyed and annexed by the Assyrians in 696 B.C., and the excavators claim to have identified the destruction level. Here I list only the latest of the Greek imports which are said to be prior to the catastrophe. The numbers refer to Hanfmann's catalogue in Tarsus III (where see 127ff.), but the relative dating is my own.
Corinthian 1519: Aryballos, transitional to ovoid. MPC I. 1520: Deep kotylai, scraps. E-MPC. Cycladic, etc. 1375: Skyphos, as Al Mina local. LG 11. 1499: High-rimmed skyphos, 'Euboean' (perhaps Chiot?). SubG. East Greek» 1447: Bird-kotyle. LG. 1439: Bird-jug. LG. 1448: Bird-bowl, Group I. SubG. (+scrap, 1454,) 1450-1: Bird-bowls, Group 11. (+scraps, 1440, 1453, 146 1.) 1
See]HS85, 6, fig.
1.
1449: 1387: 1383: 1632:
32 I
Bird-bowl, Group Ill. Plain version of bird-bowl, called 'Ionian cup'. 'Skyphos' (or, rather, 'Ionian cup': cf AM 74, Beil. 33,4). SubG. Plate. Orientalizing.
According to the excavators' view of the stratigraphy, all these vases should be dated before 696. Furthermore, Hanfmann points out that the Protocorinthian aryballos 1519 and the early bird-bowl 1448 were found together on the penultimate floor below the destruction level: on these grounds he wishes to date them to before c. 725. It is difficult to reconcile these dates with the evidence already reviewed. If Protocorinthian aryballoi were becoming ovoid before 725, could the globular type still be at the height of its popularity in 718-712 (c£ pp. 316-17)? And if the Subgeometric bird-bowls were already being made before 725, is it not strange that their predecessor, the L G bird-kotyle, had only just begun to arrive at AI Mina by c. 720? Most difficult of all are the advanced birdbowls, 1449-51, which are certainly more at home in the later seventh century (cf. p. 300) than inc. 700 B.C.: 1449 is actually more debased than 1462, found with an Assyrianinscription of636.1 These apparent contradictions have led Hanfmann to deny any orderly development within the bird-kotylefbird-bowl sequence: from his analysis, there emerges a picture offeverish experiment in the late eighth century, followed by a curious stagnation throughout the seventh. The same admission would also have to be made for the development of Protocorinthian aryballoi; and this would demolish, at one blow, the foundation of all relative chronology from c. 725 to c. 650. There remains the possibility that the destruction horizon at Tarsus has not been correctly identified by the excavators. Fortunately, their recording of the find data is so precise that their conclusions can be checked at every point. An alternative interpretation of the stratigraphy has now been proposed by J. Boardman.s who finds traces of the Assyrian destruction at a deeper level. In the meantime, while the matter is still under discussion, it would be wisest to disregard altogether the dating evidence from Tarsus. Having examined all the available sources of information outside the Greek world, we may suggest the following approximate dates: Early Geometric: before c. 850 B.C. Middle Geometric I: second half of ninth century. Middle Geometric 11: early eighth century. Late Geometric: later eighth century, ending around 720 B.C. in Corinth, shortly after 720 B.C. in Attica, and considerably after 720 B.C. in Rhodes. Early Protocorinthian: last quarter of eighth century. It is now time to turn to the western foundation dates, in the hope that they may give closer definition to the limits ofLate Geometric. lOp. cit. 132. No less puzzling is the mention of c. fifty frs. of 'Ionian cups' prior to
the destruction: but Hanfmann seems to use this term in a sense somewhat different from that accepted by most scholars, to judge from the examples quoted (1387, 1390). Cf. also The Aegean and the Near East, 168ff. 2 ]HS85 (1965), roff
N
322 • ABSOLUTE
CHRONOLOGY
THE WESTERN COLONIES • COLONY
II. EVIDENCE FROM GREEK SOURCES
DATE
Thuc.
When Payne defined his 'orthodox' chronology in Necrocorinthia, the evidence was limited to Syracuse and Gela, and the authority of Thucydides was not questioned. Syracuse gave a terminus postquem for the life of the E P C globular aryballos: Gela, a terminus ante quem for the transition to the ovoid type at the beginning ofMPC T. In Payne's view, the change of shape took place in the earliest years of the seventh century, since at Gela the oldest known aryballoi were already ovoid. Such a conclusion would agree perfectly with the non-Greek evidence available today, which indicates that EPC flourished during the last quarter of the eighth century. But now there is earlier pottery from Gela; and six more See K. J. Dover, Maia 6 (1953), IfT.; M. Piraino, Kokalos 3 (1957), 123ff., n. 1; J. Ducat, BCH 86 (1962), 165ff., with refs. The Western Greeks 435-52. 3 But not as much as twenty years: cf. Kiibler, K. v ,r, 112, on the Taras Grave. 4 a. Byvanck, Mnemosyne 4 (1936-7), 233. 1
2
EARLIEST CORINTHIAN POTTERY
Settlement
Sanctuary
Cemetery
NAXOS
734
741 LG. Thapsos style: or skyphos. (Bd'A 1964, 736 164, fig. 41.)
SYRACUSE
733
736 LG-EPC. Thapsos LG late. Kyathos fr., EPC. Fuseo, Grs. 337, or style: several skyphos two herons greeting. 466: globular aryballoi, EPC early. Globular none of earliest type. 734 frs. (BCH 76,333, aryballos. (MA 25, (BCH 76,329, figs. figs. 8-9a.) 3-4: see P: 104.) 539, fig. 140.)
LEONTINI
729
LG. Thapsos style: 2 frs. kraters; I fr. skyphos. (NSc 1955, 365, fig. 65, 7-8, 14.)
MEGARA
728
LG. Thapsos style: many frs. skyphoi and kraters; skyphos, kotyle, kyathos, with chevron panels; pyxis with herons. (Megara Hyblaea 11, pls, 1-3, figs. 1-8.)
THE FOUNDATION OF THE WESTERN COLONIES I do not propose to re-examine the internal validity ofthe foundation dates - a topic which has been virtually exhausted in recent discussions.' No scholar has expounded the literary evidence more lucidly than T. J. Dunbabin- and I begin by making two assumptions on the strength of his arguments, which I find completely convincing: I. That the Thucydidean chronology is internally coherent; 2. That there is no serious discrepancy between the Thucydidean and Eusebian systems, as far as the dating ofGeometric pottery is concerned. The only major disagreement is over Selinus, which need not trouble us here. Coherence, however, does not necessarily imply accuracy. No colonial foundation can be accepted as a sound dating point, unless it can be shown that the relative order ofthe foundations in the literary tradition corresponds to the relative chronology oftheir earliest pottery. In the table on p. 323 the dates of Thucydides and Eusebius are confronted with the archaeological evidence. Only those sites are included which may reasonably be supposed to have yielded up some oftheir earliest pottery. For the sake of clarity, the relative dating of the material is confined to the Corinthian sequence, which is everywhere represented among the oldest finds. The few Atticizing pieces will, however, be considered in the discussion. One further principle may be conceded, in the interests ofobjectivity: that in any colonial settlement which has been extensively explored, the earliest imported pottery must date from the time of the foundation, or very shortly before," Cemeteries are another matter. Colonists arriving in a strange land must needs provide for daily life and worship, before setting aside a regular home for the dead.' Casualties from the voyage, or from initial skirmishes with the natives, would have to be given sporadic burial, like Lamis at Thapsos; but cemeteries could hardly be planned until the limits ofthe new city had been approximately determined. For this reason, it is worth while to distinguish under separate headings the earliest finds from settlements, sanctuaries, and graves.
Eus.
323
HYBLAEA
ZANCLE
After 734
MYLAE
Before 717
(MPC, so far)
LG late: kotyle fr., herons and waves. (Vallet, RMgion et Zancle, pl. 7b, top left.)
717
EPC. Grs. 65, V: globular aryballoi, kotyle. (Mylai 39, figs. 3-4, pI. 40, 2,4-5, 9; 58, pI. 40, 2.)
706
E P C late. Globular aryballos. (Ann. 37-8, 8, fig. I.)
(CHERSONESOS)
TARAS
GELA
688
690
E P C late. Thapsos type: skyphos fr.; deep kotyle, wirebirds. (NSc 1962, 405ff., figs. 88-9.)
E P C end. Globular aryballos. (NSc 1960, 225, fig. 16,4·) MPC I. Gr. 235: early ovoid aryballos. (M A 17, 131, fig. 95·)
colonies must be taken into account. If confidence in Thucydides is waning in some quarters, it is because there are many more points at which his order of foundations can be checked. According to Thucydides, the first four colonies on our list were founded within a space
324 .
ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THE WESTERN COLONIES •
325
of six years. At Naxos,t Leontini, and MegaraHyblaea, recent soundings have been carried down to the deepest levels of the settlement; and at each site the earliest pottery looks impressively homogeneous. All three colonies have produced samples of the L G Thapsos style: these include skyphoi with panels of three-limbed sigmas, exactly matching the panelled skyphos from the Thapsos Grave, after which the type is named. There is also a close similarity between the kraters with meander designs at Megara and Leontini. Furthermore, Megara has yielded several pieces in the style of the early kotylai, decorated with hatched herons, or chevron panels: but there is nothing quite as old as the hemispherical kotyle Corinth VII. I, no. 107, which marks the beginning ofLG. In terms of our significant groups (p. 98), the earliest pottery from these three colonies may be placed at about the same stage as the House Deposit at Delphi, or Gr. 236 at Pithecusae. Ifthe absolute dates can be accepted, then the first group ofSicilian colonies offers a good selection ofshapes current in the 73o's. The beginning of Corinthian LG would be placed not earlier than c. 750, and a transition to E P C at or shortly before c. 720 would be in harmony with the evidence from AlMina. Syracuse, however, has been causing difficulties. IfThucydides' account is wholly correct, then the earliest material from here should be as old as any Greek pottery in Sicily. But the excavators of Megara, MM. Vallet and Villard, feel convinced that this is not so. After a detailed comparative study ofthe material, they are driven to the conclusion that their own site is older than Syracuse by fifteen to twenty-five years.! This leads them to adjust the relative order given by Thucydides: they retain his absolute date of 733 for Syracuse, but raise the foundations ofNaxos and Megara respectively to 757 and 750 through an ingenious combination ofconflicting ancient sources." The acceptance ofthese high dates would mean that the beginning of Corinthian L G would have to be placed in c. 770, if I am right in supposing that its earliest stage is not represented in Sicily. The end ofthis phase would still have to come into the 72o's, since the earliest Corinthian sherds at Syracuse are undoubtedly LG. Although one should listen with respect to an excavator's analysis of his own pottery, it seems to me that Vallet and Villard have overstated their case. They base much of their argument on the Thapsos-type skyphoi, which are certainly far more numerous at Megara than at Syracuse. Yet we should not be unduly impressed by the mere quantity of the Megarian material; for Megara has been more accessible to the excavator than the earliest settlement ofOrtygia, which lies under the heart ofmodern Syracuse. Neither will typology be of much help in deciding the issue, in view of the fragmentary nature of the material. The tall S-profile of the lip, which Vallet and Villard see as a late feature in the Syracusan skyphoi,' is already present in the example from Gr. 236 at Pithecusae, found with early L G
chevron kotyle. Similarly, the presence or absence ofpanels1 is not always a safe criterion of date: panels with loose motifs survive well into EPC,2 while the skyphos without panels appears well back in L G, in the Thapsos Grave. The kotyle style offers a more reliable sequence, and here, admittedly, Megara has the older material; for the chevron panels and hatched herons" look distinctly earlier than the pair ofsilhouette herons on the kyathos from Syracuse. On the other hand, Syracuse has produced two Atticizing pieces which look considerably older than any ofher extant Corinthian material, and at least as early as anything from Megara. Among the sporadic finds from the Fusco cemetery is a substantial fragment ofa Cycladic amphora, decorated in a pure M G style r' even ifwe concede that this may be a conservative form of vase, which could have survived far into LG, the fragment should still be older than the first globular aryballoi from the neighbouring graves." The other piece, perhaps from an isolated burial, bears a frieze of grazing stags," whose style looks appreciably earlier than the end of Geometric, where it has sometimes been dated." If it were Attic, I should place it in LG IIa, contemporary with the Birdseed Workshop," and with the middle of Corinthian LG. It may be objected that these are isolated pieces, ofless significance than the large mass of Megarian material; but it would be unjust to discount them altogether, since the opportunities for making deep soundings at Syracuse have been very much more limited than at Megara. There is some doubt, then, whether Vallet and Villard have proved their case ;" Thucydides must be given the benefit of this doubt, until it can be resolved by further discoveries in the deepest levels at Syracuse. Meanwhile, the Thucydidean system may be retained as a working hypothesis, to be tested by further evidence from other colonies. Zancle and Rhegion both lack foundation dates, and so cannot help with the precise dating of pottery. According to Strabo.w Rhegion must be the later colony, since Zancle assisted in her foundation; and Zancle, by implication, must be later than N axos, the earliest colony in Sicily. At both sites, the early material is sparse; but so far there is nothing to conflict with this relative order. The settlement of Rhegion has not yet been systematically excavated, and her only Geometric vase comes presumably from a gravej'" it is a good imitation of a Corinthian L G oinochoe in the Thapsos style. The oldest pottery from Zancle was discovered at the sanctuary of San Raineri, at the tip of the sickle-shaped peninsula which gave the colony its name. The earliest piece here is from a late L G heron kotyle, comparable with the kyathos fragment from the Syracusan Athenaion.P If one may judge from so little material, it would seem that both the cities of the Straits were settled shortly after Naxos, but well within the first generation of Sicilian colonial foundations. The earliest colony in Italy is Pithecusae, followed shortly by Cumaer" Literary evidence cannot date their foundations precisely, but Strabo implies that Cumae is older than any
The recent finds from here are reported only in a preliminary notice. Any conclusions based on them must be treated as provisional, and liable to modification when the material is fully published. It does seem, however, that the excavators have been at pains to illustrate a selection of their earliest pottery. 2 BCH 76, 343. 3 Megara, 750=Selinus, 650 (Diodorus) the interval of 100 years quoted by Thucydides. One may wonder, with J. Ducat (BCH 86, 168-9), why this interval should be so respected, if the Thucydidean order is to be abandoned. Cf. also Dunbabin, AE 1953.2, 249-50: 'it is unsound to accept variants from later authors to correct Thucydides, for there is no reason to believe that later historians or chronographers had any better evidence.' 4 BCH 76, 333-5, fig. 8, 9b.
Cf. op. cit. 340-1. BCH 76, fig. 8, top left from Syracuse is no later than Megara Hyblaea 11, pI. 2, 5-6, 8: all are contemporary with A M 28, K 28 from Thera Gr. 47, EPC. 3 Megara Hyblaea 11, pI. 2, 6; pI. 3, 9-10. 4 BCH 76,331, fig. 7; cf. pI. 34111. 5 Later sherds of this shape, decorated in a LG manner, are now known from Megara (Megara Hyblaea 11, 93, pI. 81, 1-2), and even from Gela (NSc 1956, 315, fig. 31). 6 NSc 1925, 316, fig. 69. 7 BCH 76,333, n. I, with refs. 8 Pp. 67ff.: cf. Davison, figs. 74, 76. 9 Kubler is also sceptical, but on different grounds: K. v. 1,272, n. 10 VI.25. 11 Vallet, Rhigion et Zancle 37, pI. 5, I. 12 op. cit. pI. 7b, top left. 13 Livy VIII.22.
1
+
1
2
326 .
ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
of the Sicilian colonies.' Afortiori, Cumae is older than Zancle; and this inference is independently confirmed by Thucydides who knew that Zancle was settled first by Cumaean pirates, and subsequently by a regular expedition from Chalcis in partnership with Cumae." If this tradition is correct, the earliest pottery at Cumae has yet to be found; for whereas there is an LG kotyle from Zancle, the oldest published material from Cumae is E PC. It is worth noting that the settlement on the Cumaean acropolis has never at any point been explored down to the deepest level. We pass now to the colonies ofthe second generation. The cemeteries of Mylae and Taras have produced nothing earlier than globular aryballoi. There are several ofthese at Mylae, including one of the early class with a second zone under the handle." From Taras there is only one, and that belongs to the late plump class, which has already been noted (p. 106) as a frequent companion of the transitional-to-ovoid variety. Neither foundation is dated by Thucydides; but the system ofEusebius may be given a trial here, since the two authors are in substantial agreement over Naxos, Syracuse, and Gela, the only early foundations for which they both give years. Eusebius' dates of 717 for Mylae (assuming that this is Chersonesos)! and 706 for Taras agree excellently with the internal development shown by their earliest aryballoi, and the approximate date already suggested for the limits of the E P C style. Until 1959, Gela had produced no Corinthian vases older than the early ovoid aryballoi from the regular cemetery. Since then, however, E PC pottery has come to light in two different parts ofthe site. On the summit ofthe acropolis, under a later votive deposit and immediately above a native rock, fragments of two drinking vessels were found: a Thapsos-type skyphos with a panel ofloose and widely spaced S's; and a deep kotyle with wirebirds. Down below, on the south slope, an isolated burial contained three aryballoi: two are plain Rhodian; the third belongs to the end of the Corinthian globular series, just before the transition to the ovoid shape. The skyphos is not closely datable, but the kotyle and the Corinthian aryballos must come at the very end of E P C. If these vases are treated as the chattels ofthe first colonists, then Payne's terminus of c. 700 for E P C must now be lowered to c. 690: not a very drastic modification. The excavators, however, prefer to preserve Payne's terminus by attributing the vases to a pre-colonial phase." But this hypothesis could be applied no less plausibly to any colonial site where the Greek pottery does not begin in quantity (e.g. Syracuse, Zancle, and Taras) ; if such an argument were admitted, it would be difficult to interpret any of the Western dating evidence with complete objectivity. In fact, the new discoveries have merely brought Gela into line with Syracuse. At both sites, it now appears that the use of the regular cemetery began about half a generation later than the first signs of habitation in the. city. Since it would be illogical to apply one law to Syracuse and another to Gela, there is no alternative but to accept c. 690 as the lower limit of E P C. The new evidence from Gela has some bearing on the absolute dates ofthe earliest founStrabo v.247. Eusebius' date of 1°51 must be ignored. 2 TIme. VI.4-5. 3 Mylai, pI. 40.2. This assumption is based on the scholiast to ApolloniusRhodius IV.g65: cf. Brea, Mylai 116-17. In spite of the scepticism ofVallet (Rhigionet Zancle 83), there can hardly be more than one Chersonesos which was (a) in the territory ofZancle and (b) settled in the eighth century. 5 D. Adamasteanu, NS, 1960, 226; P. Orlandini, NS, 1962,4°7.
1
4
THE WESTERN COLONIES •
327
dations. If Thucydides' order is altered, and the dates of Naxos and Megara are pushed back into the 750'S, then the 'orthodox' chronology will have to be raised to suit the earliest colonies, and lowered to suit Gela; as a consequence, there would be an awkwardly long interval of 62-69 years in the Corinthian sequence between the middle of L G and the end of E P C. Such a slow development is not impossible; but it will prove difficult to reconcile with the internal evidence ofthe Attic figure style, which implies a more rapid rate ofchange within Late Geometric. With this in mind, we obtain a more reasonable interval of 39-46 years by accepting the Thucydidean system in toto, including his absolute dates. That will mean a uniform lowering of the 'orthodox' chronology by about a decade, to cover the LG deposits at the earliest colonies as well as the E P C vases at Gela; and ifthe interval between Naxos and Gela is established as forty-six years, then each phase will fall comfortably into a generation of about thirty years: Corinthian Late Geometric: c. 750-720 B.C. Early Protocorinthian: c. 720-690 B.C. These dates have been obtained by whole-heartedly following Thucydides. How consistent are they with the Near Eastern sources? The Egyptian evidence causes no difficulty: Gr. 102 at Pithecusa would now be dated to c. 710-705 by its aryballoi, and the Bocchoris scarab would have been treasured for about a decade by its owner, before being deposited with his child. From Al Mina we have already learned that the transition from L G to E P C happened somewhere around 720: here the evidence depended largely on Euboean imitations, but there is no reason why their decoration should not have kept pace with their Corinthian prototypes. There is substantial agreement, then, between three sources which are entirely independent ofone another; and this agreement should help to restore faith in Thucydides as an accurate chronographer. Ill. COMPARATIVE CHRONOLOGY OF THE TEN LOCAL STYLES Historical records have given us approximate dates for Attic Middle Geometric, Corinthian Late Geometric, and Early Protocorinthian. Upon these foundations we may now construct a comprehensive system ofabsolute dates, by applying what has already been learned about the chronological relationships between the ten local styles. The final test of such a system lies in the extent to which it coheres internally; when all the correlations have been translated into absolute dates, each style should move at a pace consistent with its own intrinsic character at any given time. For the beginning of Attic Geometric there is very little external evidence. A vague terminus postquem may be derived from Amathus in Cyprus, where two Cycladic LP G vases were found in association with local pottery dated by Mrs Birmingham to the middle of the tenth century (p. 319); but it would be unwise to place too much faith in Cypriot correlations. In the absence of any more reliable context, we must fall back on the method ofdead reckoning. The beginning of Attic MG has been fixed at c. 850 (p. 313): from this date we must count back the number of years which Attic E G seems to need on internal grounds.
328 .
COMP ARATIVE CHRONOLOGY OF TEN LOCAL STYLES •
ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
Four considerations incline me to the view that Attic EG is a much shorter period than the MG which followed, requiring not more than half a century. In the first place, the material is comparatively scarce. Secondly, the style creates an impression offerment and instability in the Athenian potters' quarter. E G I seems like a brief transitional phase. In E G I I, a new system of rectilinear decoration is tried out, but only tentatively; there is no development within this phase, and the new movement gathers no momentum until MG. Thirdly, in striking contrast to her LP G and M G styles, the E G ofAttica made hardly any impact beyond the territory ofher immediate neighbours. 1 And finally, there is the problem of the contemporary skyphoi with pendent semicircles, which Attic E G failed to displace in many parts of the Aegean. Seeing that this form lasts well into the eighth century, it would be difficult to place its evolution from a PG prototype much earlier than c. 900.2 EG I and II will thus fall into the first and second quarters respectively ofthe ninth century." E G I is contemporarily imitated in the Argolid; meanwhile, the Corinthians and Boeotians persevere with LP G until Attic influence is reasserted in the E G I I phase. The early ninth century will also be the period of the SubPG style in Thessaly, Skyros, Euboea, and the Cyclades; it spreads to Boeotia, at least during Attic E G I I, and possibly before and after; Thessaly, meanwhile, possesses in addition her own barbarous brand of E G, which bears only a faint resemblance to Attic. In Laconia and West Greece, PG remains undisturbed; in East Greece, the local SubPG is only sporadically affected by Attic EG. For Crete, I retain Brock's initial date of c. 870 for the transient LPG phase, since the Cycladic amphora Fortetsa no. 269, in a Cretan LP G context, has close relations in Attic E G 11.4 Attic MG began in c. 850; Corinthian MG lasted until c. 750, overlapping slightly with Attic L G I; the end ofAttic M G is therefore put at c. 760, allowing a total ofninety years for its two phases. Half-a-century is not too long for M G I, a settled and harmonious style with a marked internal development. With M G I I, the tempo ofchange begins to quicken. In Corinthian and Argive, the grave groups show that the transition fromE G to M G was more gradual than in Attica. There is no such evidence for Boeotia, but allowance has been made for her tendency to lag behind. No time-lag can be assumed for the Cyclades, where the oldest M G vases correspond to early M G I: Thessaly, on the other hand, had no steady contact with Attic Geometric until M G I I. In Laconia and West Greece, there is no settled phase between PG and L G. East Greek M G was never wholly Atticizing, but several ideas were borrowed from Attic M G I in its earlier stages; an initial date of c. 850 is reasonable, because the Atticizing ornament does not arrive at the very beginning. Crete, meanwhile, passes through three phases: PGB (contemporary with part of Attic MG I), Early Geometric (spanning the change from MG I to 11), and Mature Geometric (influenced by Attic MG 11). The eventfulness of the Cretan sequence is a further argument.for a long Attic M G period. Attic L G I is dominated by the personality of the Dipylon Master: I allow twenty-five This phenomenon will be further discussed in my final chapter; it may, of course, be explained by other reasons as well as by the brevity ofAttic E G. • Cf. PGP 193; Boardman, BSA 52, 8. 3 Here I am in full agreement with Desborough, who regards my EG I as transitional from PG, and dates the beginning of'Geometric proper' (i.e. my EG 11) to c. 875 B.C.: see PGP 294-5. • Cf.]dI 14 (1899),200, fig. 68.
329
years for his working life, and the production ofhis workshop. From c. 735 onwards, Corinthian kotylai are exported to Attica, and inspire local imitations. The shallow kotyle first appears in an early LG Ila grave in the Agora, but continues into LG lIb contexts: conversely, an Atticizing LG Ila sherd was found at Syracuse, and so cannot be much before 733. Deep EPC kotylai and globular aryballoi (with their imitations) are not known in Attica until L G I I b, and both shapes continue into Early Protoattic. A terminus ante quem for the end of Attic Geometric is given by Eleusis Gr. 62, where a late EPC aryballos (c. 700-690) is accompanied by an imitation ofa deep kotyle, bearing an E P A dog ;' hence my terminal date ofc. 700. Ofthe thirty-five years allowed for LG 11, about twenty should go to LG llb, which contains the Philadelphia Painter, the Lion Painter, and the whole development of the Athens 894 and 897 Workshops. (See the chart, p. 331.) Attic LG Ib was imitated in Naxian, 'Parian', Melian, Euboean, Boeotian, Samian, and Thessalian: Boeotian, as usual, was the last to move out ofM G. Argive L G I begins at this time, too, but passes on to L G I I before the end of Corinthian L G: the end ofArgive Geometric probably coincides with the end ofEPC. Laconian LG moves with Argive. West Greek LG I is contemporary with Corinthian LG: West Greek LG 11, with EPC and possibly later. In Crete, the EPC period sees the end ofLG and the beginning of EO, with a brief transitional phase between. Boeotian L G overlaps slightly with E P A. East Greek L G lasts almost until the end ofE P A and well into the period ofthe ovoid aryballos (M P C I) ; furthermore, Rhodian L G bird-kotylai have now been found at Gela, 2 and so can hardly be earlier than c. 690 B.C. In Thessaly and Melos we do not yet know what style ofpottery followed L G, since there is a gap in the local series. All other schools are known to have produced both Orientalizing and Subgeometric. The latter term has been used with a strictly local connotation, to cover the linear vases still decorated in a Geometric manner after the beginning of an Orientalizing style in the same area: but this definition cannot always be applied with complete consistency. With the most progressive schools -Attic, Corinthian, Naxian, 'Parian', and Cretan - there is no danger of ambiguity: for in each of these areas the birth of an Orientalizing style was marked by a clear break with the Geometric tradition, illustrated by a large amount ofmaterial. Anomalies creep in where the change was more gradual. In some schools - for example, Rhodian, Boeotian, and Laconian - Early Orientalizing vases are extremely scarce, and seem more like abortive experiments than the pioneer work of a new movement. In these cases it is unreasonable to deny the term 'Subgeometric' to the most debased ofthe linear vases, quite regardless ofwhether a settled Orientalizing style has been formed, or not. On my time chart I acknowledge this ambiguity by marking in Early Orientalizing styles only for the five most progressive schools, and Subgeometric for the rest. In the most backward areas, the dividing line between L G and Sub G represents a change in the intrinsic character of the linear ornament, rather than the date ofthe first Orientalizing experiment.
1
1
Cf.]. M. Cook, BSA 35, 203.
• NSc 1960, 106, fig. 26 bis; NSc 1962,393, fig. 72.
330 .
COMPARATIVE CHRONOLOGY OF TEN LOCAL STYLES·
ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY Attic
Corinthian
Argive
Thessalian Cycladic & Euboean
Boeotian
Laconian
~
Greek
Cretan
ATTIC PAINTERS AND WORKSHOPS
E Greek
9 00
900
EGI
LPG
331
Classical Tradition
Outside Classical Tradition
LPG
EGI
MPG SubPG EGII
EG
EG or SubPG
SubPG
I LGla
Sub- EG PG
EGII
750 11
LPG
III
850
850
MGI
74
Xl
V <; MGI
PG
PG PGB
MGI
VIII
730
MG (+SubPG skyphoi)
XVIIXVII Oinochoe Paihters
X
LGIIa
XII XIII Pitcher Painters XIX
810
XIV
72 0
MG
VII VI
EG
XV
XVII~1
XX Late Amphora Painters I
79°
MG
LGllb
71 0
MGII MGII
IX
V
800
MGII
LGlb
IV 0
EG
I
MG MG?
Mm
XXII"
I
MG
t
70 0
I
LGIa
750
r--
75° 745
LGIb LGI
735
!Rub
LG
74°
LGI
rean
LG
73° LGIIa
LG
Nax- Par- Me! ian ian ian "I--
LG LG LG
LG LG
LGIIb
LGII EPC
700
LG
LG
Trans,
Theran
LG
.
LGII
710
7°°
;>
. I - - Sub
690
EO EO EPA
690
Cl
680
?
MPCI
SubG
Sub
SubG
SubG
EO
G MPA
SubG MPCII
SubG
I. 11. Ill. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. I X. X. XI.
Dipylon Workshop Hirschfeld Workshop Lambros Workshop Workshop of Athens 706 Sub-Dipylon Workshop Philadelphia Painter Workshop of Athens 894 Soldier-bird Workshop Hooked Swastika Workshop Birdseed Workshop Swan Painter
XII. XIII. XIV. XV. XVI. XVII. XVIII. X I X. Xx. XXI.
Bird-and-lozenge Painter Rattle Group Anavysos Painter Lion Painter Concentric Circle Group Hunt Group Workshop of Athens 897 Mannheim Painter Benaki Painter Painter of Paris' CA 3283
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS'
CHAPTER FOURTEEN
Historical Conclusions
How far can the study of Geometric pottery assist the historian today? Our understanding of the Greek world in the ninth and eighth centuries B.C. derives partly from the written word, and partly from the material record. To expect any sensational increase in the literary sources would be unduly sanguine; any future progress in the reconstruction of historical events must come from the archaeological front, where new evidence accumulates year by year. Yet the two kinds of data are complementary, and the clarity of the overall picture depends on the extent to which they can be reconciled. The value ofthe literary evidence is impaired by the length oftime separating the ancient authors from the events to which they refer. With no first-hand documents to guide them, they could do no more than repeat what later Greeks believed or remembered about their predecessors, relying on a transmission which must have been oral in its earlier stages. Some of the events of which they write must be passed over in this chapter, on the grounds that archaeology can neither confirm nor refute them; such, for example, are the earliest wars between Sparta and her immediate neighbours, the inauguration of the Olympian festival, and the Athenian constitutional reform of the mid-eighth century. Our references to the Greek historians must be limited to the occasions when their statements can be confronted with the material record. Within our period there are two broad historical developments which are reflected both in literary and in archaeological sources: the hardening oflocal divisions within the Aegean, and the expansion of the Greek world outside the Aegean. Before attempting a historical narrative, we should first consider what can legitimately be argued from the archaeological evidence bearing on these two topics. I. I begin with the penetration beyond the Aegean, where the task of interpretation is comparatively simple. Geometric pottery is diffused over a wide area, as far west as Carthage, and as far east as northern Mesopotamia. Where it makes its first appearance on a virgin site, or where it suddenly and completely ousts a non-Greek fabric and then becomes the normal type of pottery used on that site, its presence must indicate the establishment of a Greek colony. As we have seen in the previous chapter, some of the Sicilian foundations have historical dates which are reliable enough to offer fixed points for the dating of Greek pottery; these dates have been taken on trust not only because oftheir internal consistency,
. 332
•
333
but also because they are in substantial agreement with the evidence derived from nonGreek historical records. After a relative chronology of the various Geometric styles has been worked out (a task with which this book has been especially concerned), archaeology can repay the historian by suggesting approximate dates for those foundations which are not assigned to a calendar year in the literary record. At the other extreme, there are many places outside the Aegean where Geometric pottery appears only rarely and sporadically, always in company with plentiful non-Greek local wares, and in association with architecture, burial customs, or religious cults of non-Greek character. Such intrusive appearances prove no more than commercial initiative on the part of the Greeks in foreign lands; whether that initiative can be exclusively attributed to the centre where the pots were made is a question which I defer for the moment. Intermediate between these extremes are the sites where full sequences of Greek and native pottery run continuously and contemporaneously. Where that happens, one may suppose that Greeks and non-Greeks were living side by side; this hypothesis is confirmed ifthere be a similar diversity in the architecture and burial customs. Good examples ofthese mixed communities may be found in the West at Leontini, where the Sicel cemetery ofS. Aloe continues in use after the arrival of the Cha1cidians in 729; and in the East, at the emporium of Al Mina, where Greek merchants established an enclave among the Levantine population. NOTE R. M. Cook, following S. Smith (A] 22 (1942),96), thinks that 'in the East an appreciable quantity of Greek pottery is evidence ofGreek residents' (GPP 277), on the assumption that Orientals had no use for Greek wares. He has persuaded P. J. Riis to believe in a ninth-century enoikismos of Greek merchants at Tell Sukas, on the strength of Greek imports: cf. AAS 10 (1960), 124-5; AAS II-12 (1961-2), 139. Cook's generalization is rather too sweeping. Even if Cyprus is left out of account, Cyc1adic skyphoi were offered to the dead at Hama (p. 3 I I). The absence of Geometric pottery in the Phoenician homeland may be due to lack of excavation; in the West, Phoenician colonists were importing and imitating Greek wares by c. 725-700 (pp. 387--8). In the long run, the case for an early enoikismos at Tell Sukas may come to rest more securely on the presence of Greek architecturalforms (see AAS 13 (1963),213-14; AAS 15.2 (1965), 63ff.) than on the quantity of Geometric pottery, which seems very small in comparison with the local wares.
Within the Aegean, the political geography cannot be deduced from archaeological evidence alone. Yet the emergence of numerous local Geometric styles must surely be connected in some way with the rise of autonomous city-states. A long process of political decentralization may be inferred from written sources, beginning with the collapse ofMycenaean unity in c. 1200, and completed by c. 700 at the latest. To some extent, this transformation is reflected in the character of the pottery, which moves from extreme homogeneity in Late Helladic IIIB! to extreme variety in Orientalizing times. In the ninth and eighth centuries, the degree of local variation is always intermediate between the two opposite poles. Geometric wares are never as homogeneous as the L H I I I B style, and never as divergent as the fabrics of the Orientalizing period; although the Late Geometric schools show a marked acceleration in the movement away from uniformity. 2.
1
Cf. Desborough, LMTS 1-4, 219.
334 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS'
There is a good case for supposing that the development oflocal styles was encouraged by the growth oflocal autonomy; but this argument cannot be safely reversed. The spread ofa uniform style over the Aegean need not imply a return to political unity, unless such an implication is supported by other archaeological evidence, and by the literary tradition. This last point may be illustrated from within our period. The change from the Mycenaean koine to the extreme diversity of the seventh century is by no means a steady process. Within this long span of time, there are two phases when Aegean potters seem to be moving back towards the homogeneity ofthe Mycenaean era: in the late tenth century (Late Protogeometric), and in c. 850-750 (Middle Geometric). Both ofthese reactionary movements were set offby the reigning Attic style, which was imitated in many Aegean areas. Yet on neither occasion are we entitled to assume that the Athenians established a hegemony extending far out into the Aegean. Such an assumption would be difficult to reconcile with the evidence of Attic burial rites, which do not correspond with the rites practised overseas in either of these periods. Nor is there any supporting evidence from the literary record: it contains a few isolated hints that Argos and Euboea were politically powerful in Geometric times, but about Athenian influence there is complete silence. What positive conclusion, then, can be drawn from a close affinity of style between two or more areas? Clearly there must have been some sharing ofideas, either through travelling potters, or through the export of pottery. The first hypothesis may account for one or two exact reproductions in local clay of a highly sophisticated foreign original (e.g. p. 175, pI. 36b). Far more frequently, however, a derivative local style debases or simplifies its models, thereby betraying the hand of the imitator. In any case, the circulation ofa single style round the Aegean could hardly have been achieved by peripatetic potters; otherwise, the Athenian Potters' Quarter would have been seriously depopulated in LP G and M G times! The alternative theory, that influential styles were disseminated through exports, is much more credible. At many outlying sites, imported prototypes have actually been found alongside local imitations: where no such imports have come to light, their presence in ancient times may be inferred wherever a local school is strongly influenced by foreign models.' When this influence persists over a long period of time, a steady flow of imports may be assumed. There is no safe rule ofthumb to explain why Geometric pots should travel from one centre to another. According to the contexts, exports may represent the wares of traders, the chattels of colonists or resident aliens, or the votive offerings of pious visitors. It is difficult to generalize on this topic; but it will receive detailed treatment in the following pages, as the occasion arises. Here I can only state my personal belief, that commerce supplied by far the strongest motive for the export of Geometric pottery, and that the existence of commerce may be assumed whenever there is no contrary evidence which might imply the·movement of people. This assumption may seem arbitrary; but it is fully supported by the evidence of Geometric cemeteries, where imported vases are always associated with the local burial rites, and never with the rites of the district where the vases were made." The following explanation, then, may be offered for the similarities and differences between local Geometric styles. With the downfall of the Mycenaean empire in c. 1200, com1
Cf. Brock, Fortetsa 191 on 'invisible imports'; Blakeway, BSA 33 (1932-3), 173.
2
Cf. PGP 299.
335
munications were seriously disrupted. The immediate effects of this disruption were a loss of political unity, a sharp decline of commercial enterprise, and the emergence of regional pottery styles out of the Mycenaean koine. In the early part of the Dark Age, travel was severely restricted - apart from the migrations across the Aegean. The situation improved in the tenth century, when the pottery ofAttica began to inspire imitations in several other areas. After a relapse in the early ninth century, the influence of the Attic style became widely diffused once again. By c. 800, there was more homogeneity in Aegean pottery than at any time since the Mycenaean collapse. From these facts we may infer a resumption of peaceful communications in the tenth and ninth centuries, and a revival ofcommerce. The cities which manufactured Atticizing M G pottery must have been in close touch with Athens; and the Athenians, no doubt, played an important part in establishing these links. But there was no return to political unity. Throughout the eighth century, the centrifugal forces in the development ofpottery were steadily gathering strength. From c. 750 onwards the local styles were drawing apart again, more rapidly than ever before. Faulty communications can no longer explain this new flight from uniformity; for in the Late Geometric period there was a rise in the quantity ofexports, implying a marked increase in the volume ofAegean commerce. The causes of this apparent paradox will be more fully explored in a later section of this chapter: here it is enough to observe that the years 750-700 saw a growing pride in local craftsmanship, which may well reflect a deeper awareness ofthe city-state as a self-sufficient political unit. It is now time to proceed with the historical narrative, which shall be as detailed as the evidence allows. Of the material record, pottery forms by far the largest part; but architecture, burial customs, and metal objects must also enter into the picture. Reference will also be made to ancient authors, where opportune. My account of the Geometric period is divided into four schematic periods of fifty years each; and I begin with a brief account of the Late Protogeometric phase, which sets the scene. SECOND HALF OF THE TENTH CENTURY
NOTE In this section I am much indebted to Desborough's comprehensive treatment of the period in PGP. Any additional suggestions which I have to offer are largely based on the late PG material found since the appearance of that book. More recently Desborough has summarized and slightly modified his conclusions in CAB 11 (1962), eh. 36, 15-21. In his latest analysis (LMTS 258-70,277-80) he lists all subsequent publications of PG material up to 1962, but only discusses the early stages of the PG period.
Athenian potters invented the Protogeometric style; and by this invention they inaugurated a rebirth of decent craftsmanship, of a standard unknown since the fall ofMycenae. Protogeometric vases have a professional touch quite lacking in Submycenaean. It requires an adept hand to turn a crisp conical foot, or to swing a multiple brush round a neat circle. Such skills could hardly be acquired by men compelled to spend most of their energies in fighting for their lives, or repelling barbarous invaders. The invention of Protogeometric
336 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
implies a return to settled conditions after the chaos of the early part of the Dark Age. It is not surprising that Athens should have fostered the new style; for Athens was one ofthe very few Mycenaean cities to have escaped the destructions of c. 1200-1 ISO. Yet the people ofAttica had experienced a considerable upheaval in the twelfth century, whose effects were still felt in the tenth. Its extent can be appreciated ifwe compare the pattern of habitation in Late Helladic I I I B, and in Late Protogeometric. Before the disasters of c. 1200 the sites are spread evenly over the best arable land, with a considerable proportion of the settlements on or near the coast. 1 By contrast, the Protogeometric inhabitants show an extraordinary reluctance to live by the sea, or in small isolated communities. Ofthe many coastal sites occupied in Mycenaean times, only four have produced PG material Eleusis, Marathon, Thorikos, and Aliki;» and in the whole ofthe Mesogeia plain ofsouthern Attica, only one PG vase has been recorded." The great mass of people seem to be living in and around Athens: there are small outlying communities at Menidi and Nea lonia, and a relatively huge concentration in Athens itself. Here the wells of the later Agora area form the only material evidence ofsettlement, but the wide distribution ofcemeteries proves that the city had become very much larger and more populous since Mycenaean times. The richest of these cemeteries, by the banks of the river Eridanos, lies a kilometre to the northwest of the Acropolis, and five hundred metres beyond the remotest Mycenaean chamber tomb.! The cause of this transformation must be sought in the troubles of the twelfth century. The increase in the Athenian population may be partly due to the arrival ofnorthern newcomers from outside the Mycenaean world, as is suggested by the skeletal evidence from the gravest! but there must also have been a great influx ofrefugees, from the Attic countryside as well as from other parts ofMycenaean Greece. Two centuries after the fall ofMycenae, even though the conditions ofdaily life were more settled, there had been no reversal ofthis movement. There was still a great concentration ofpeople in Athens, while the Attic coasts and plains were extremely underpopulated. The men of Attica, so it seems, were still affected by a general feeling ofinsecurity, which deterred them from living in small villages. Yet the apparent desertion ofthe coasts may be no more than an illusion, liable to be modified by future discoveries; for the vigour of Attic seafaring is clearly attested by the spread of the Protogeometric style, to which we now turn our attention. The most diagnostic feature of PG is the use of the multiple brush to draw concentric circles - a technical device first seen in Athenian grave groups transitional from Submycenaean." This device, as Desborough now believes," may have travelled to other parts ofGreece soon after its invention in Attica; and the local vases on which it appears may thus qualify as Early Protogeometric." But a new technical discovery does not in itselfconstitute a style, and we have to wait until a late stage of Attic PG before there are any close nonAttic imitations. Five areas now call for separate comment; the order in which they are treated reflects the degree ofinfluence from the parent Attic style on the local vases. Stubbings, BSA 42 (1947),3; Hope Simpson, BICS, Supp. 16 (1965), 1OI-I1. 2 CVA Heide1berg 3, pI. 102,6,8. Oinoehoe, Boston 14.740; Fairbanks, pI. 22, 258, from Kouvara. Other PG vases, however, may have reached the Athens market from this area. • See I, T. Hill, The Ancient City ofAthens (1953), 9, fig. 3. 5 LMTS 37ff.; cf. Smithson, AJA 69 (1965), 176. 6 E.g. PGP, pl. I. 7 LMTS 262-3. 8 E.g. Iolcos, PAE 1961, pI. 22b; Miletus, I M g-1O (195g-60), pl. 51,4. 1 3
337
c·9S0-9°0
I. Aegina, Boeotia, the Corinthia, and the Argolid Aegina produced no pottery of her own, but imported from Attica at this time. In each of the other three districts, Attic late PG models were faithfully copied. Boeotia, it is true, also betrays some acquaintance with the pottery of her northern neighbours; but her Atticizing vases are hardly distinguishable from Attic, and the mention ofa cremation at Vranesi may even indicate the presence of Attic immigrants.' There are no similar indications in the northeast Peloponnese, whose inhabitants were regularly inhumed; yet here, too, the local potters borrowed many of their ideas from their Attic neighbours. In the Corinthia, where decoration is minimal, Athenian influence is seen mainly in the shapes; Argive potters, who were less restrained, freely used and misused the Attic schemes of ornament. Apart from the frequent appearance of cross-hatched triangles in positions where an Athenian would have preferred a circular motif, Argive late PG shows a strong family likeness to Attic. The pottery of her immediate neighbours remained under strong influence from Attica until well into the eighth century, and free communications must have existed within this area from the late tenth century onwards. As R. M. Cook points out," the area includes the seven member cities of the Calaurian Amphictyony; the antiquity of this league will be discussed in the next section.
11. Thessaly, Skyros, Euboea, and the Cyclades Here, too, the shapes and decoration ofAttic PG found many imitators; curiously enough, some of the closest imitations occur in the remotest corner of this wide area, at Marmariani in northern Thessaly. Yet at the same time a distinctive local style was in the making. Four individual shapes, all foreign to Attic, have a wide distribution from Thessaly to Naxos in LPG contexts (pp. Isoff.); one of these shapes, the small biconicaljug, was known also in Boeotia. Thus although there was free intercourse between Attica and many points within this area, communications were especially frequent along the sea routes between Thessaly and the Cyclades. The sailors and merchants of these parts were certainly among the most active in the Aegean during the late tenth century; all the main centres - lolcos, Skyros, Chalcis, Lefkandi, and Naxos - are placed by the sea, and at lolcos there are four distinct levels ofsubstantial PG settlement. Furthermore, the only PG vases sent outside the Aegean - a skyphos and a cup at Amathus in Cyprus - are probably of North Cycladic origin. It seems, then, that the cities ofthis area were not only in close contact with one another; their maritime enterprise in more distant parts may even have exceeded that of Athens at this time.
Ill. Aeolis, lonia, Caria, and the Dodecanese There is already some degree of uniformity in the pottery of the East Greek world. Admittedly, many of the common features were imposed from without, through the influence of Attic LPG; nevertheless we can point to three non-Attic nuances of decoration shared by several centres between Miletus and Rhodes (p. 26S). Where there are differences between 1
PGP 197-8.
2
PCPS 188 (1962), 21.
338 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
one centre and another, lonia and Caria tend to follow Attica more closely, while the Dodecanese pursues a more independent course. The close links between Ionic and Attic PG are of great historical interest, in view of literary traditions concerning the Ionian Migration. Whatever the origin of the colonists themselves, their expeditions are said to have mustered in Attica.' In the archaeological record, the earliest trace ofthis migration is to be found at Miletus, a city refounded shortly after a destruction late in the twelfth century. The oldest pottery from the new settlement is thought by Desborough to be ofAttic type, transitional between Submycenaean and Protogeometric.t The traditional foundation ofMiletus by Neleus and his Pylians must therefore be placed well back into the eleventh century - a date which is quite consistent with the literary tradition, which places thefloruit ofNeleus not later than c. 1050.3 To determine the end of the Ionian Migration is a more difficult task, since the deepest colonial strata at many Ionic cities have yet to be explored. We can only say that by the late tenth century the movement was well advanced, ifnot complete; for Atticizing late PG has been found on Samos and Chios, and more PG material is reported from Phocaea, Clazomenae, Teos, and two minor sites near Erythrae and Ephesus.s It might even be argued that the Athenians of this time maintained quite close communications with the Ionic colonies, since a trail of Attic or Atticizing late PG pottery leads along the main route across the central Aegean via Keos, Andros, Tenos, Delos, and Samos. For the Aeolian Migration, the archaeological evidence is still very slender. Apart from one Attic LPG sherd said to have come from near Mitylene,> Smyma is the only Aeolic foundation known to have produced any Protogeometric material. The oldest published vases from there- belong to an early stage of PG, betraying no sign of Attic influence; but neither do they bear any obvious likeness to the PG pottery ofAeolian Greece, whence the colonists came." The later PG of Smyma is more distinctly Atticizing, and falls into line with the pottery of the Ionic foundations. By the late tenth century, perhaps, the city had already passed into the hands of the lonians from Colophon, who are said to have ousted the original Aeolian inhabitants."
NOTE A different interpretation is offered by J. M. Cook, who feels that the Aeolic element at Smyrna is represented not by any of the painted Protogeometric, but rather by the grey monochrome ware; this is plentiful in the lowest Greek levels, but becomes extremely scarce by the late eighth century. However, the Grey Ware returns to popularity in the seventh century, at a time when the city must certainly have been under Ionic control; for we learn from Pausanias (v.8.7) that Smyma had become an Ionic city by the Olympic festival of 688. Although the Grey Ware is characteristic of many Aeolic sites, the fabric was developed by the Anatolian natives long before the arrival of Greek colonists; its persistence at Smyma may indicate the survival of an indigenous population rather than an Aeolic strain. But ethnic interpretations ofpottery are often hazardous, Thuc. 1.2, 6 and 1.12,4; Strabo xlv.632-3; Paus, vu.2-4. See]. M. Cook, CAHu (1962), eh, 38, roff; s LMTS 21, 163,254. 3 Hammond,CAHn (1962), ch. 36, 47; Akurgal, AJA 66 (1962), 26g-70. a. Huxley, The Earry Ionians (1966),26: 'end of twelfth century'. 4 .]. M. Cook, AR for 1959--60,40. For Teas, see TurkAD 13.1 (1g64), I15ff. 6 PGP 217. 6 BSA 53-4 (1958-g), pI. 5b. , However, at a later stage - perhaps in the ninth century - a bucchero krater from Lesbos recalls the shape of some painted Thessalian examples: cf. p. 155, n. 3. 8 Hdt. 1.150; Paus. IV.5.
1
c·950-9°0
AEOLIS, IONIA, CARIA, DODECANESE •
339
and the question must remain open until more evidence has been collected and published from the deepest levels of other Aeolic colonies.
The Carian coast and the Dodecanese were colonized by the Dorians at some time during the Dark Age; yet the Protogeometric from Carian sites bears a closer resemblance to the Atticizing pottery ofIonia than to the more independent style ofRhodes and Cos. The Attic connection is especially strongin the Halicarnassus peninsula. It is already apparent in the offerings from cremations at Asarlik- which, like the oldest colonial pottery from Miletus, belong to the transition from Submycenaean to Protogeometric. Attic influence continues in a group of late PG vases from Dirmil, probably also from a cremation." The Asarlik material has led Desborough to assume the arrival ofsettlers from Attica at about the same time as the beginning of the Ionian Migration. If the PG pottery from these two sites represents a pre-Dorian phase, the archaeological record of the peninsula during the next two centuries is much too scanty to tell us when the Dorians eventually came to these parts. . More positive evidence of Dorian colonization may be found in the Dodecanese, and especially in Cos. Here, as in Rhodes, the earliest known post-Mycenaean pottery is late PG. It comes from a cemetery of cist graves cut into the Mycenaean settlement; the arrival of a new people is clearly indicated." The pottery is influenced by Attic, but there is one marked difference: the decoration is more often rectilinear than circular, cross-hatched triangles being especially common. In this respect Coan PG stands nearer to Argive than to Attic; and the practice ofinhumation in cists constitutes a further link with the Argolid. In the material record, then, there is some support for the tradition that this Dorian colony was founded by Argives from Epidauros.' The PG repertoire ofthe Dodecanese also includes three exotic shapes of Cypriot character - the duck-vase, the one-handled pilgrim flask, and the openwork kalathos; already in the late tenth century there must have been some coming and going between Cyprus and the Dodecanese. Perhaps these eastward connections were established soon after the arrival ofthe Dorian colonists which, according to the available evidence, need not be placed earlier than the second half of the tenth century.
IV. Crete During the Dark Age, Crete is a land of gradual transitions rather than violent upheavals. The first intrusion of non-Mycenaean newcomers - perhaps Dorians - is marked by the appearance of long bronze dress-pins at Knossos and Mouliana, contemporary with Submycenaean Athens." Their introduction approximately coincides with the several new pottery shapes which, though foreign to Cretan tradition," have been called Subminoan. Yet many Minoan customs continue in force, in the exposed coastal plains no less than in refugee settlements such as Karphi. For example, inhumation in chamber tombs remained the general rule, until replaced by cremation towards the end of the tenth century; and the Subminoan shrine in the Knossian Spring Chamber is still of pronouncedly Minoan charac1
3
PGP 218-21. s AJA 67 (1963),361, pI. 82. 3 Cf. LMTS 253-4. 4 Hdt. VII.99. LMTS 53. The Knossos pins will be published in BSA 63 (1968). 8 LMTS 192.
340 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
ter. Evidently the newcomers soon merged with the natives, and the island was hardly affected by any further external influences until the middle of the tenth century, when Attic LP G imports began to arrive. These imports, and the local style which they inspired (Cretan EPG), are virtually confined to Knossos and the north central plain; with the exception of a single amphora at Vrokastro near the GulfofMirabello- there is no sure sign ofany Attic PG influence in the other parts of the island. Even within the Knossos area, the potters were never slavish imitators of Attic; in general they were content to adapt Attic schemes of decoration to local shapes. The evidence proves nothing more than that Athens and Knossos were now in free communication with one another; the arrival ofsettlers from Attica is unlikely, owing to the hybrid character of the Cretan PG style which owes as much to Subminoan precedent as to the inspiration of Attic PG. Like the Dodecanese, Crete had some dealings with Cyprus at this time. Cypriot imports include three iron spears of the sigynna type," and two bronze rod-tripods at Fortetsa and Vrokastro ;" moreover, Cypriot duck-vases had Cretan imitators.' Further signs ofeastward commerce may be seen in the small articles ofivory and faience which occur not infrequently in Cretan EPG contexts of c. 950-g00.5
v. LacoDia and West Greece We come now to the two regions where the PG pottery ofAttica made the least impression. Here Attic imports are confined to a single vase on Ithaca; Attic influence on the local styles is virtually limited to the use of concentric circles and semicircles drawn with a multiple brush, and even so the paucity ofcircles in each set lends the vases ofboth areas a distinctly non-Attic look. Nor does the PG ofWest Greece show any clear sign ofCorinthian initiative in western waters, such as we find later. If the connections with the Aegean were weak, there was a considerable sharing ofideas within this area. This is especially true of the West Greek seaboard, where several striking features ofa local PG style are found at several points between Ithaca and Messenia. Laconian PG stands somewhat apart, yet has more in common with West Greek than with Attic. The Laconians of this time - and also of the next century - had more dealings with their neighbours in the western Peloponnese than with the Aegean world; evidently Cape Malea was a formidable obstacle to Protogeometric shipping, dividing the Greek coastline into two parts which had little connection with one another. As Desborough has shown in his original analysis,' the late tenth century was a time of peaceful progress. The spread of the Attic PG style across the Aegean implies an improvement in sea communications, and the existence of trade on a small scale. Athens, whose pottery was imported and imitated, may have played a prominent part in these exchanges; yet the evidence for coastal settlement in Attica is still very meagre. The Thessalo-Cycladic area offers more positive indications ofmaritime initiative, and it was from this quarter that Cyprus received her first post-Mycenaean imports from the Aegean. Crete and the Dode1 Vrokastro 143, fig. 84. • Fortetsa 202. • Catling, Cypriot Bronzeuotkin the Mycenaean World Ig8-9, nos. 19-20. • Fortetsa no. 50. 5 Forteisa 208-9; cf. Vrokastro, pl. 35. 6 PGP 298-302.
c. 95D-900
LACONIA, WEST GREECE •
341
canese also have some Cypriot connections, but their role seems to have been more passive. Recent excavation in western Asia Minor has shown that the Ionian Migration was either complete or at least well advanced by this time, and the original Ionic colonies may have extended as far south as the Halicarnassus peninsula. In the Dodecanese, on the other hand, there is no trace ofthe Dorian colonists before c. 950; perhaps this is the only area where the appearance ofa late PG style indicates a major movement of people, rather than the opening of commercial relations. FIRST HALF OF THE NINTH CENTURY Differences between local styles became much more pronounced in this period. The Early Geometric ofAttica made hardly any impression beyond her immediate neighbours; meanwhile, each of the remoter areas persisted with its own version of delayed Protogeometric.
I. Attica, Aegina, Boeotia, the Corinthia, and the Argolid In Attica there was no change in the pattern ofsettlement ; with the exception ofa few vases from graves at Eleusis and Marathon, no examples ofAttic E G are known to come from any source other than Athens itself The material is not very plentiful; yet there is enough evidence from grave groups to justify a division of this period into a transitional (E G I) and a more settled (E G I I) phase. After its invention in Attica, the new style soon reached the neighbouring areas. Aegina, as before, continued to import Attic pottery. EG I was imitated by the Argives but not, as far as we know, by the Corinthians or the Boeotians. In this generation perhaps it was easier to travel by sea across the Saronic gulf than by land along the Isthmus; and Boeotia may have had closer links with Euboea than with Athens. At all events, the ceramic unity ofthis area was fully restored during the second quarter of the ninth century, when the EG II of Attica was faithfully copied by all three ofher neighbours; indeed, the degree ofuniformity in this area was now greater than it had ever been during the Protogeometric period.
11. Thessaly, Skyros, Euboea, and the Cyclades In these parts there was a swift decline in the popularity of Attic ceramic fashions. Some knowledge ofAttic E G I decoration may have reached northern Thessaly in a garbled form (p. 160); and at the other end of this area, in the southwestern Cyclades, Atticizing EG work seems to have been the rule rather than the exception. But elsewhere the only reigning style is a local descendant oftenth-century Protogeometric, whose homogeneity is indicated by the wide circulation oftwo shapes, and one motif: a low-footed skyphos with heavy overhanging rim, an amphoriskos with two vertical handles, and a reserved zone of decoration containing two sets of pendent semicircles. This Sub P G style reigned supreme from Delos to the Gulf of Pagasae, meeting the Attic sphere of influence in northern Boeotia (p. 198), reaching out westwards as far as Delphi," and northwards into Macedonia.s One skyphos was even exported to Tell Abu Hawam on the coast of Israel. 1 BCH85 (lg61), 355-6; FD v, fig. 74.
• PGP, pl. 24lr-c; BalkanStudies 2 (lg61), pl. 8,16.
342 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
In the outlying areas there is no sign of any development, apart from a general loss of contact with the Attic sequence. From Laconia and West Greece there is no clear information, but the local PG styles probably continued. In Crete, the Knossians imported four large vases from the Cyclades;' yet the influences from that direction on the local pottery were no more than sporadic. The situation is much the same in the Dodecanese, where a debased Sub PG style was hardly affected by the outside world: two shapes are still shared with Cyprus, and there are a few faint echoes ofAttic E G; that is all.
This lack ofrapportbetween local styles is striking enough to suggest a general decline in Aegean communications. Yet there are two notable exceptions: the links between Attica and her neighbours in c. 875-850 are stronger than ever, and the same is true of the intercourse within the Thessalo-Cycladic area. The western half of the Aegean, so it seems, has been divided into two camps which have hardly any dealings with one another; meanwhile the outlying areas are more or less left to their own devices. What historical conclusion can be drawn from this strange state of affairs? What ties bound Thessaly to the northern Cyclades, and why is Athens so closely associated with her Dorian neighbours? At a time when communications were generally poor, intercourse within these two areas must have been exceptionally vigorous; can this extraordinary polarization ofinfluences be explained by commerce alone? To account for the cohesion between Thessaly and the northern Cyclades, one might suppose that some power was exerting a strong centripetal pull. That power was surely vested in Euboea, ifthere is any truth in the literary traditions concerning the early prominence ofChalcis and Eretria.t Strabo" records that Eretria once controlled Andros, Tenos, Keos, and other islands. According to Pseudo-Skymnos (11.584-5), Skyros and other islands in the northern Sporades were repeopled from Chalcis after a period ofabandonment. Since the previous inhabitants of these islands are said to have been Cretans and Pelasgians, this passage reads like a genuine tradition ofthe early Iron Age; and presumably the islands remained within the Chalcidian sphere ofinfluence for some time after their colonization. It is now abundantly clear that the Sub P G style common to Thessaly and the northern Cyclades was also at home in Euboea, where much of the material is of extremely high quality. 4 If, then, there ever was a Euboean hegemony over the neighbouring islands, the most likely time for its establishment would be during the early ninth century, when the pottery of the Thessalo-Cycladic area attained to its greatest degree of uniformity. In Thessaly, however, there are no signs in the literary record of Euboean political influence in early times; perhaps the ceramic affinities in that direction can be explained simply by trade ~long the easy sea route between lolcos and Chalcis. Is there any trace in written sources of another political grouping at this time, linking Athens with her neighbours? In a period when Attic ceramic influence was at a low ebb elsewhere, the uniformity ofAtticizing E G I I in these central regions implies an unusually close relationship of some kind. There is some correspondence between this area and the 1
4
Fortetsa nos. 269, 311, 1481, 1492. 2 Cf. Boardman, BSA 52 (1957), 7ff. 3 X.448. E.g. sherds from Lefkandi: A]A 69 (1965), pl. 85, fig. 7; BCH89 (1965),844, fig. 3; Lefkandi (1968), 25, fig. 59.
C·90 0-8 50
POLITICAL GROUPING •
343
territory of the seven members of the Calaurian Amphictyony: Hermione, Epidauros, Aegina, Athens, Prasiai, Nauplia, and Minyan Orchomenos.' It cannot be proved that this league had any political or economic significance ; yet such unions are rarely formed in the Greek world except in response to a common external danger. The high antiquity of this league is generally accepted, but the estimates of its date vary widely." The oldest offerings recovered from the Calaurian sanctuary are said to be no earlier than the eighth century;" yet the Swedish excavators describe a sherd bearing a meander with diagonal hatching' which might go back into the ninth. The league must have been founded before the close of the seventh century, when Nauplia lost her independence to Argos: thereafter, we are told, her dues were paid by Argos, and the Spartans did the same for Kynourian Prasiai, annexed by them in the mid-sixth century. Some scholars favour a Mycenaean origin, seeing in the inclusion ofBoeotian Orchomenos-the commercial activity ofthe prehistoric Minyans. 5 Yet Orchomenos was still a flourishing place in c. 950-800, and an alliance with Athens in the ninth century would not be surprising if, as the material evidence suggests, neighbouring Vranesi had received immigrants from Attica during the late tenth. Apart from the ceramic evidence, two other factors are consistent with a ninth-century date for the league: first, the omission of Corinth, which did not become a leading power until the eighth century; and secondly, the association of Athens and Aegina, indicating a period well before the 'ancient hostility' between these two states had taken root.s If the Amphictyony began in the ninth century, the men of the Argolid would have had a controlling interest in its counsels; for in addition to the three cities on the Argive coast, Aegina and Kynourian Prasiai would also have lain within the Argive sphere of influence. It is difficult to say what emergency, if any, brought the league into being. Perhaps the menace of piracy was especially acute at this time; perhaps Orchomenos may have joined through fear ofEuboean encroachment. But these suggestions are highly speculative. The general impression left by this period is one ofparochialism, stagnation, and even of conflict. No doubt, the barriers between the city-states were hardening, and there is no sign of any further movement of people. There was no progress in any of the civilized arts. In contrast to the free exchanges of the late tenth century, merchants seldom travelled now beyond the land oftheir immediate neighbours. Trade with the eastern Mediterranean was still extremely rare. In any case, the early ninth century would have been a most unpropitious time for Greek enterprise in that direction, since the Levant was being constantly devastated by the Assyrians under Ashurnasirpal (884-859) and Shalmaneser I I I (859824).
I
Strabo VIII.374.
2
RE sub Amphiktyonia (3). The most recent examination of the problem is by T. Kelly (A] A 70 (1966), 113ff.) who surveys pre-
vious suggestions, and favours a seventh century date. sWelter, TroizenundKalaureia (1941),45, 4 AM 20 (1895), 317. I have not seen this piece. S Most recently, see F. Kiechle, Lakonien undSparta 30-1. 6 Hdt, v.82--8. Dunbabin (BSA 37 (1936-7), 88ff.) dates the dispute to the early seventh century; but see below p. 361 on the possibility of a late-eighth-century war between Athens and Aegina.
344 •
c.850-800
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
SECOND HALF OF THE NINTH CENTURY After a relapse in the early ninth century, a marked improvement in Aegean communications is indicated by the greater homogeneity of the pottery. Once again, it is Attica which provides the ceramic inspiration. In Laconia and West Greece the material record is still obscure; but the four Aegean areas now offer plenty ofevidence, and each deserves separate consideration.
I
ATTICA AND HER NEIGHBOURS •
345
Corinthia and the Argolid there was a considerable overlap between E G and M G I; but the new Attic style, once established in these parts, was followed with very little local variation. Another link between Attica and the Argolid is supplied by the new bronze fibula with square catchplate, whose first appearance outside Attica is in an Argive M G I context.'
11. Thessaly, Euboea, and the Cyclades Skyros is henceforth omitted from this survey, since no material from that island later than c. 850 has been either published or described.
I. Attica and her Neighbours In Attica there are several signs ofan awakening from the Dark Age. For the first time since the upheavals of the twelfth century, there is some evi?ence of a mov~ment t~~ar?s the Attic coast. From two sites on or near the sea - Myrrhinous, and Palaia Kokkima III the Piraeus area - the earliest post-Mycenaean pottery is Middle Geometric 1. At Eleusis, the grave material now becomes plentiful as never before. The movement towards the coast was followed at once by a sudden increase in communications with the Levant. Two pieces of early M G I pottery, probably from Attica, have been found at the Israelite city ofMegiddo (pp. 303-4). In the Athenian Kerameikos cemetery, soon after 850, the graves of two men and a woman contain offerings ofa variety and richness unknown in Greece for three centuries past.' A bronze bowl, embossed with a frieze ofmen and animals, is an import from North Syria. An ivory ornament, carved in the form ofa duck's head, looks like a Levantine import; ifnot, at least the material comes fro~ the Levant. Thin diadems of beaten gold, of a kind which has immediate precedents m Cyprus and Syria- make their first Aegean appearance among the funerary offerings to the two men. The contents ofthese graves also reveal an increased interest in representational drawing, which had hitherto been confined to the occasional horse on PG or E G vases (p. 13). Five bronze fibulae with square catchplates - another new form of this time - are among the gifts in the woman's grave; all are adorned with swimming fish, and on the largest catchplate the prow of a ship can be made out. Bolder still is the introduction ofa mourner. a?ove the handle of a huge krater, which stood over one of the two male graves." Perhaps It IS no coincidence that this first portrayal of the human form in Geometric art should be contemporary with the first known import offigured work from the Levant. The richness and variety ofthese gifts may be no more than a flash oftransitory brilliance; elsewhere, Oriental imports and local attempts at representational drawing are rare until well into the eighth century, even in Athens. Yet even if the offerings in these graves are exceptionally rich for their time, they must at least imply a drastic widening of Athenian contacts overseas in the middle of the ninth century. Close relations, meanwhile, were maintained between Attica and her immediate neighbours. Exports to Aegina include two large and elaborately decorated vases ofthe beginning ofMG 1.4 The few extant vases of this period from Boeotia are all fully Atticizing. In the 1
2
K. v. I, Grs. 41-3, pIs. 158-62. Another rich grave, c. 850 or slightly earlier, came to light in the Agora in 1967: Gr. HI6:6 (p. 14). R. Higgins, Greek andRomanJewellery 93; SCE I, pI. 55, tenth century. 3 K. v, I, pI. 22. • Kraiker, Aigina, nos. 45, 51.
This area now loses its ceramic unity: the chief cause is the renewal of Attic influence, dormant since the late tenth century. Thessaly, to judge from the latest kraters at Marmariani, was scarcely affected by the new Atticizing movement. The islanders, on.the other hand, soon learned an M G style based closely on Attic prototypes; yet at the same time the Sub P G style of the early ninth century was not entirely forgotten. In Euboea and the northern Cyclades, the skyphoi with pendent concentric semicircles survived in a refined and shallow form, whose fabric and technique compare favourably with the best of the contemporary Atticizing drinking vessels. Such skyphoi enjoyed a wide circulation as exports to the Levant. To this period, perhaps, belong the examples found at Tell Tayinat in the Amuq plain, and at Tell Halafin northern Mesopotamia. But the most conclusive evidence for Euboeo-Cycladic trade comes from the settlement ofAl Mina at the mouth ofthe Orontes, where island merchants set up their own emporium on a virgin site in c. 825. They were joined at once by a motley collection of Levantines from the surrounding areas. Among the earliest non-Greek material from this site, Red Slip Wares indicate the presence of Phoenicians; there are also some painted fabrics typical of Cilicia and Cyprus.> The oldest Greek pottery includes three pieces of Atticizing MG I from the Cyclades, one ofwhich is of Naxian clay (p. 312); and some skyphos fragments with pendent concentric semicircles, from the northern Cyclades or Euboea. No other Greek styles are represented until the arrival of Corinthian and Rhodian pottery during the last quarter of the eighth century. Two other North Syrian emporia - Tell Sukas and Tabbat-al-Hammam - may have received a few settlers from the islands at about this time. Both sites have yielded pendentsemicircle skyphoi; but Tabbat-al-Hammam has not yet been sufficiently excavated to justify the assumption of a Greek enclave during the Geometric period. The evidence is clearer at Tell Sukas, where a trading settlement arose upon the ruins of an older city, destroyed in the mid-ninth century. The destruction must surely be the work of the Assyrians under Shalmaneser Ill, who ravaged the coast in 853-844; thereafter, Syria was left in comparative peace for the next hundred years. The withdrawal ofShalmaneser allowed the Euboean and Cycladic merchants an opportunity ofestablishing themselves on the North Syrian coast; but they could not have settled there without enjoying the goodwill of the interior powers." Their outposts at Al Mina and Tell Sukas were well placed for supplying the Aramaean principalities ofUnqi (Amuq) and 1
SSCA 4 (1965), 90, no. 47.
2
J. TayIor, Iraq 21 (I959),62ff.
3
Riis, AAS
IQ
(1960), 123- 5.
346 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
c.850-8 0 0
Hama; the presence ofM G vases in the Syrian hinterland is evidence oftheir trade. Yet the extreme scarcity ofM G material in the emporia themselves suggests that the original number of Greek residents was very small; during the period c. 825-750 they can have formed only a small minority among a predominantly Levantine population.
Ill. The East Greek World Here, too, the renewal ofAttic influence had different effects on different areas. In Ionia the material of this period is still very scarce; yet there are some traces of a markedly Atticizing style at Samos and Miletus. Dodecanesian potters, as in the late tenth century, pursued a more independent course, forming their own M G style out of Attic, Cypriot, and local ingredients. The chiefcontribution from Cyprus to the Dodecanesian repertoire is a type of unguent vase which was new to the Greek world; a globular flask or lekythos, with a ridge where the handle joins the neck. The Cypriot original, made in the black-on-red fabric,' appears in several MG graves on Cos. It immediately inspired local imitations, but in Hellenic dress; while the shape was unaltered, the decoration was usually adapted from the Attic M G stock. Between 850 and 750 this kind of flask was locally manufactured in vast quantities, and soon became the most usual offering in Dodecanesian M G graves. In Crete, too, the Oriental originals were imported and imitated, but only after c. 800. Elsewhere in the Aegean they were virtually unknown. The black-on-red flasks were presumably exported for their content of unguents. If so, they were the first unguent vases to travel either to or from the Aegean since the passing of the Mycenaean stirrup-jar. Although the sea-route between Cyprus and the Dodecanese had been open since the late tenth century, exchanges hitherto had been somewhat sporadic, and limited to a few ornamental luxuries. But now Cyprus begins to supply one ofthe necessities oflife in elegant little containers, whose importation was continuous enough to have a steady influence on the local style of the Dodecanese. The flasks arrived at a time when there was a general shortage of unguent shapes in Greece: the PG lekythos had passed out of currency, and the only real rival to the ridged flask was a small round-mouthed shape made in small quantities by the Corinthians (pl, 17b) - the ancestor of the EPC globular aryballos." It would be absurd to suppose that unguents were scarce in the Aegean during the early ninth century, until they were reintroduced in quantity from the eastern Mediterranean. Clearly, the contents of the imported flasks were not indispensable to the Greeks, to judge from the rapidity with which imitations were produced on Cos, Rhodes, and (later) Crete. The imitations, however, were made only for home consumption, and no Greek unguent vase ofany kind was sent outside the Aegean until the late eighth century. In marketing this commodity overseas, merchants from the eastern Mediterranean had forestalled the Greeks by about a hundred years. But who were these merchants? Cyprus is the source of the imported flasks; yet black-onSCElv.2, pI. 25, 10. • The Athenians, so it seems, were pouring their unguents out of narrow-necked vessels with trefoil mouths, as K. v, 86 4. 1
I,
pI. 83, inv.
THE EAST GREEK WORLD •
347
red is a fabric of Phoenician origin- which came into general use in Cyprus at about the same time as the foundation of the Tyrian colony at Kition. By the late ninth century, the Phoenicians were well established in their new outpost," As far as we know, they made no attempt to extend their political control outside Kition: yet the presence ofPhoenician inscriptions at seven other sites" implies that their merchants, in later times, mixed freely with the Greek-speaking population. Their coming had the effect ofrousing the island out of a rather torpid phase, and bringing it into a much closer rapport with the culture of the Levant coast. Any increase in Cypriot trade observable at this time must be attributed to their enterprise; and the export of black-on-red flasks to the Dodecanese marks the beginning ofPhoenician activity in Greek waters. For the time being, however, their commerce penetrated no further than the southeast corner of the Aegean.
IV. Crete During the last half of the ninth century there flourished the curious style known as Protogeometric B. Although it was invented at Knossos, some knowledge ofit spread southward into the Messara plain, and as far east as Vrokastro. This indicates a considerable improvement in Cretan communications; only the two extremities of the island were now isolated from Knossos. PG B is an exceptionally daring and original style, bearing very little relation to any other Geometric school; it was not until the end of the ninth century, when the EG manner was formed at Knossos, that there was any close contact with Attic Geometric. Yet Crete was by no means isolated from her Aegean neighbours. Imports continue to arrive from the Cyclades, and in greater numbers than before, reaching the Messara plain as well as the Knossos area. The most bizarre aspect of P G B is the prevalence offreehand curvilinear ornament, of a kind not seen on any other Greek pottery until the close ofthe eighth century. Double arcs, running spirals, and cables were all present in the Mycenaean potter's repertoire; but their sudden reappearance in the ninth century implies a contemporary non-ceramic source." It is not necessary that all three motifs should have been derived from the same material. The spirals and arcs are at home on Geometric metalwork, but none of the comparanda seems earlier than the eighth century;" hence Brock may have good reason to suspect the influence of Oriental metalwork, or even textiles. For the cables, however, it is tempting to see their origin in Phoenician and North Syrian ivory work, especially since this motif is present in a deposit ofOriental ivories from the Idaean cave, which probably goes back into the ninth century." W. Culican, Abr-Nahrain 1(1959),38; J. Birmingham, AJA 67 (1963), 36. • For the foundation of Kition, Gjerstad's original estimate of c. 800 (SCEIV.2, 439) now proves to be too late. In the light of more recent work on Cypro-Palestinian correlations, Miss J. Taylor raises this date to 'the latter part of the ninth century' (Iraq 21 (1959), 91) - a conservative estimate. Mrs Birmingham (loc. cit. 42) favours a date as early as 925. The oldest Phoenician inscription from the island - a tomb curse - is dated by Albright to the beginning of the ninth century, on epigraphical grounds (Iraq 6 (1939), 108). 3 SCE IV. 2,440; add Ayia Irini, FA 16 (1961), pl. 5, fig. 18. • Brock, Fortetsa 143. 5 Pace Kunze, Gnomon 21 (1949),5, on the horse tripod, Olympia IV, pI. 30, 574. For the double arcs, see now a Thessalian LG bronze fibula, AR for 1963-4, fig. 51. 6 AM6o-1 (1935-6), pI. 85, 9. Kunze has shown that the sphinx plaque, loco cit. pI. 84, I, has a close counterpart among the Arslan Tash ivories, which are almost certainly of the mid-ninth century; loco cit. 219-21, 225-6, pI. 88. Cf. Barnett, The NimrodIvories, 126-7. 1
348 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
The evidence for Oriental contacts in the late ninth century is not so clear-cut in Crete as in some other parts ofthe Aegean. Yet the ivories dedicated at the ldaean sanctuary seem to show that the island was now more open than before to Levantine commerce; and this impression is confirmed by the 'proto-orientalizing' character of the Protogeometric B style. In the late ninth century the isolation of the Greek world was at last coming to an end. For the first time since the Sea Raids, there is evidence ofregular trade between the Aegean and the Levant, if only on a small scale. On the Greek side, the merchants of Euboea and the Cyclades must have taken a leading part in these exchanges; for it was they who established the entrepots at Al Mina and Tell Sukas, where resident Greeks could transact their business with Phoenician traders, and with the Aramaean princes of the interior. The Athenians, meanwhile, were not idle. Their enterprise in Greek waters is attested by the movement of people towards the Attic coast, and by the diffusion of the Attic M G I style across the Aegean to the Cyclades and Ionia; and some Levantine commerce is indicated by the sherds at Megiddo, and the Oriental imports deposited in the richer graves of the Kerameikos Cemetery. Crete and the Dodecanese seem to be playing a more passive role. Although imports were already arriving from the eastern Mediterranean, nothing from these islands was marketed outside the Aegean for another hundred years. In Cos, the import of a Cypro-Phoenician ware is strong evidence ofPhoenician salesmanship in Aegean waters; and the ivories offered to Zeus on Mount Ida may also have come to Crete in Phoenician ships. Thus the credit for initiating these exchanges must be shared between Greeks and Phoenicians. There is no reason to suppose that the arrival of Greeks at Al Mina excluded Phoenician traders from the Aegean. A mere handful of resident Greek merchants could hardly have established a monopoly ofGraeco-Levantine traffic against the formidable mercantile power of the Phoenicians. On the contrary, their presence must have advertised to the Phoenicians that the Aegean market, after a period ofself-imposed isolation, was now fully open. Unlike the Greeks on the North Syrian coast, the Phoenicians had no need of a forward base for their trade in Greek waters. The new Tyrian colony at Kition would have served them well enough. FIRST HALF OF THE EIGHTH CENTURY This age saw an increase in the Levantine traffic; a livelier intercourse between Aegean maritime states; the emergence of Corinth as a mercantile city of the front rank; and a growing interest in westward exploration, which eventually brought Euboean colonists to Italy before the middle of the century. Attic MG, now in its second phase, was still the dominant style, and no regional school was entirely free of its influence; but in some of the outlying parts this influence was only indirect.
I. Attica There is much evidence of Attic maritime enterprise in this period. The coastward movement continues; at Anavysos the earliest graves are of M G I I date. The export of Attic
l
c.800-750
ATTICA·
349
pottery now reaches its highest point before the sixth century. Within the Aegean, this is the time when the Attic style had its widest and profoundest influence on other local schools. In the eastern Mediterranean, fine kraters are sent to Hama, Samaria, Amathus, and Salamis; the krater at Salamis is accompanied by twenty Attic skyphoi, all deposited together in the tomb of a Cypriot ruler. Oriental exports to Attica are limited to a few trinkets, all of Phoenician origin: ~ glass pendant from a M G I I well in the Agora,' a glass gem said to have come from a Dipylon grave," and a collection ofEgyptianizing faience in a grave at Eleusis, comprising a statuette of Isis and fifteen scarabs." This is not a very impressive list; but in this context we should also consider the work of Attic goldsmiths, whose mastery of granulation and inlay could not have been acquired without the help of resident Levantine craftsmen. Among the most impressive 'Orientalizing' finery of this period are two lunate earrings from Eleusis.s and five earrings with circular plates, which are probably all contemporary with the ornaments from Eleusis." Further evidence of rising prosperity is offered by a set of four golden fibulae, whose catchplates bear delicate engravings of two deer, two horses, a lion, a~d a ship." These fibulae, together with two ofthe circular-plated earrings, are the masterpieces among the goldwork collected by Lord Elgin; their exact provenance is not known, but an Athenian origin is more than likely. 7 The cemetery by the banks of the Eridanus, which had hitherto been the source of the richest offerings, now begins to sink in the social scale., The M G I I graves contain many fine vases but no ornaments to match the splendour ofthe Elginjewellery. Already, so it seems, the richest families were buried elsewhere. Later, after c. 760, there is a notable scarcity of well-furnished graves by the Eridanus; and even the pottery, for some years, declines in quality." For the next generation - the period of Attic LG I - the most distinguished Athenians were interred in a plot ofland some three hundred and fifty metres farther out to the west, which now became a burial ground for the first time; since its discovery in 187I, this has been named after the Dipylon Gate (p. 400). The term 'Dipylon' is still applied to the vast libation vases which stood over the earliest graves in this cemetery; and the wonderfully creative artist who designed the greater part ofthese monuments deserves the title ofDipylon Master. In discussing the historical significance of these great vases, I confine my attention here to those which are no later than the Dipylon Master's prime (LG la; c. 760-75 0 ) . They number three amphorae and thirteen kraters from his own hand, or from his workshop; one amphora and two kraters by less gifted contemporaries outside his workshop;" and a krater by one ofhis predecessors in M G 11.1 0 As far as we know, the Dipylon cemetery is the source ofeighteen ofthese vases, ofwhich fourteen came from the original excavations of 187 I.n All twenty bear figured scenes, and are among the first Geometric vases to do so. Hesperia 5 (1936),34, fig. 33; Hesperia, Supp. VIII, 427fl"., fig. 64, I. • FiirtwangIer, Beschreibung tier geschnittenen Steine im Antiquarium (1896), 9, no. 75; I owe the reference and the identification to Dr R. A. Higgins. 3 EA 1898, pl. 6. 4loc. cit. 5 Higgins, BMQ 23 (1960-1), 103, with refs.; id., Greekand Roman Jewellery 99· 6 BMQ 23, 105, pI. 46. 7 BMQ 23, 101. 6 See K. v. I, Gr. 9,15,65,88; cf.]. M. Cook,JHS 76 (1956),125. 9 Amphora,BrusselsA 1506 , C VA 2, III Hb, pl, la-b; Kraterfrs., Mon Inst tx; pI. 39, 3; Annali 1872, pI. 1,2 (? same vase), and RA 23 (1945), 81, fig. 6, no. 2. 10 New York, 34.11.2, AntK 4 (1961), pls, 17-19. 11 Of the amphora in Brussels and the early krater in New York, the provenances are not known. 1
350 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
On the amphorae, the monuments of women (p. 39), the imagery is confined to funerary ritual; the kraters, which show battle scenes as well, are reserved for men. What is the place of these vases in Athenian history, and what do they tell us about the patrons for whom they were made? Clearly, that the families who bought them were prosperous, at least by early eighth-century standards; the sumptuous character of the monuments themselves is matched by the richness of the grave goods found below them.' But the mere quantity of the monuments is also impressive. Not that there is any novelty in the custom, which goes back in Athens to the tenth century, when for the first time a grave was marked with a large vase, into which libations could be poured to the dead. But during the two hundred years before c. 770, we know of only twelve Athenians to whom such respect was paid.s Then, suddenly, twenty monuments were set up in the next twenty years. The men and women who reposed under them must have been in their prime during the first half of the eighth century; evidently, they lived at a time of increasing opportunities - for acquiring not only wealth, but also the kind of personal distinction which leads to such posthumous honours. To judge from the record ofAttica in M G I I, their wealth could have been won through overseas commerce. But can wealth alone explain the personal esteem implied by the grave monuments? Here we must consider the most striking innovation of all - the rise of the figured style. True, its seeds had already been sown in the art of the ninth century, where we occasionally meet single mourners, single horses, and even single ships. What is really new is the desire to record a definite action - the laying out of the dead on the bier, or the procession to the grave, or a battle on land or sea. The funerary scenes we must leave on one side; they appear on all the monuments, taking pride of place on the front of the vase between the handles. The battle scenes on the back are ofmuch greater historical interest, for two reasons. First, their imagery is more variable, each scene telling a slightly different story; secondly, their appearance on the large kraters ceases abruptly around 750, at the end ofthe LG la phase. It is difficult to believe that the choice ofsubject was left entirely to the potter's whim. One would expect the imagery on a Geometric monument, no less than the relief carving on an archaic or classical grave stele, to have some reference to the life of the dead man. In any case, the monuments must have been specially commissioned; they are too large to be useful in domestic life, and no potter would encumber his shop with them unless he was certain of selling them without delay. On the occasions when two or more hands collaborated on the same krater (p. 30, nn. 3, 5), one might conclude that the potters were working against time to complete an order. Can we then accept the kraters as personal monuments, and the battle scenes as referring to the life ofthe dead man? Miss G. M. A. Richter, in her publication ofthe early New York krater, would go even farther; in her opinion, not only is this the monument ofan Athenian sea-captain, but the picture shows the sea-fight in which he lost his life; the frequency ofthe . sea-battles on Dipylon kraters proves the reality of Athenian sea power." A different view 1 The finds of 1871 included swords with wooden hilts; daggers; spearheads in pairs - all of iron; also bronze spearheads; a silver fibula; several gold bands, some decorated with zigzags, and others with processions of animals: see Annati1872, 135-7, and RayetCollignon, Histoire delaCeramiquegrecque (1888), 23-4. Since the grave groups were not kept separate, some of these offerings may have belonged to graves ofLG Ib and later. 2 See W. Kraiker, Bonner Jahrb. 161 (1961), lOaff. 3 BullMetMus 29 (1934), 172; cf. P. N. Ure, The Origin of Tyranny 321ff.
c.800-750
ATTICA·
351
is propounded by T. B. L. Webster, who holds that all Geometric figure scenes - not only the battles - reflect the diffusion ofepic poetry, and not ofcontemporary life.' He concedes, however, that the style of the Dipylon battle scenes is generally too impersonal to allow the rendering ofany specific story in the epic cycle; here the resemblance to epic is limited to the character of the armour and weapons, the presence of chariots, and the general manner of fighting. 2 Yet there is one epic story which may be easily recognized. This is the combat between a hero and a pair of Siamese twins - a strange subject which occurs eight times in Geometric art, but never afterwards. The combatants were identified by Hampe as Nestor and the Molione, whose encounter is described in book XI ofthe Iliad." Webster points out the special relevance of the subject to the noblemen of eighth-century Athens, some of whom claimed descent from the Neleids ofPylos. On the Dipylon kraters this single combat is never associated with an extended battle scene. In the second zone of Paris A 5 I 9, 4 the hero and twins are placed next to a peaceful file of soldiers who are walking in the opposite direction; the land-battle is confined to the zone above. On Paris A 5 I 7 the same combatants seem to be intruding on the funeral scene, just to the left of a wagon in the cortege;" once again, they are entirely detached from their surroundings. I believe that this group forms a family crest, indicating that the men who lay under these kraters were members ofthe Neleid clan. This strengthens my conviction that the kraters are personal monuments, where the imagery was carefully chosen ad hominem. If this interpretation is correct, the kraters will not be valueless as contemporary documents. No doubt, the Athenians of the early eighth century were becoming increasingly aware oftheir Mycenaean forefathers; perhaps it was a respect for Mycenaean custom that induced them to change their burial rite from cremation back to inhumation. Likewise, the early circulation ofepic poetry may have fired the Dipylon Master with an urge to paint his narratives; yet, with the exception ofhis Molione scenes, these narratives were generic, impersonal, and timeless. The choice ofsubject, however, must have been influenced by contemporary life. At a time when there are so many other indications of Athenian seafaring, it is not surprising to find nine out of our sixteen kraters painted with ship scenes. Ships, empty of men, had been in the thoughts of Attic artists since the mid-ninth century; now, in the more adventurous art of c. 770-750, the ships became peopled with fighting warriors. The dead men who lay under the kraters were given posthumous honours; there is no historical reason why they should not have won these honours through their prowess at sea. These grave monuments, with their rich and varied iconography, commemorate a generation of Athenians who had taken an energetic part in overseas commerce; in their day, Athens was a prosperous maritime city, which had been as active as any other Greek state in the revival offree communication with the Near East.
BSA 50 (1955), 43ff.; From Mycenae toHomer 167ff. 2 Cf. also Chamoux, RA 23 (1945), 87ff. 3 FGS 45ff. Davison, fig. I I. 6 C VA Louvre II, pI. 1,3. Only the legs survive - two legs confronting four legs; but the four legs are too close together to leave room for two separate bodies. I
4
352 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
11. The Argolid and Laconia Argive MG 11 is still close to Attic; but as the decoration grows richer, there is more scope for local variation. Argive is now an ambitious and progressive style, distinct enough from Attic for its own influence to be detected, whenever it occurs elsewhere. Tegea, to judge from a few M G pieces, I produced no independent style, but followed the Argolid; and there are hints of Argive influence in Laconia, and on the island of Kythera. The only known Geometric vase from Kythera is a dark-ground oinochoe decorated in an Argive M G I I manner, bearing equal reserved panels of double zigzag on the neck and shoulder." However tenuous this evidence may seem, it is worth considering in the light of Herodotus' statement (I. 82) that Argos once ruled Kythera, as well as the east coast of the Peloponnese down to Cape Malea." In Laconia, contact with other M G schools was only sporadic. A few motifs may have been borrowed direct from Attica, since there is some evidence of Attic imports; yet two local vases - an amphora fragment from Sparta and a cup from Amyclae - clearly follow Argive prototypes. The Laconian debt to Argive Geometric became very much greater in the late eighth century; but its first appearance at this time is historically significant. After a long period when Laconia seemed somewhat isolated from her northern neighbour, relations ofsome kind were now established between Argos and Sparta. According to Pausanias, these relations were ofa hostile nature throughout most ofthe eighth century. 4 But the early wars at least imply an improvement in land communications between the northern and southern Peloponnese; and to this extent the literary record is in harmony with the slender evidence offered by the pottery.
Ill. Corinth, Perachora, Delphi, and Ithaca Although her potters still owed much to Attic inspiration, Corinth, too, was now evolving an independent style. Her pottery was beginning to travel in quantity. As yet, there was no exchange with the Levant. Within the Aegean, a few vases reached Aegina, Thera, Knossos," Smyrna, and Iolcos ;" and near the end ofMG 11 there are slight traces of Corinthian influence on the Cycladic (p. 170) and East Greek (p. 272) styles. But the greatest quantity of Corinthian exports was sent down the Corinthian gulfto Perachora and Delphi, and to Aetos on I thaca. Since all three places are sanctuaries, one migh t wonder whether the vases arrived through commercial exchange, or were dedicated by Corinthian travellers - or even by Corinthian residents. Yet all three of these possibilities invite the same conclusion: that in the early eighth century Corinth assumed a leading role in the exploration ofwestern waters. The sanctuary at Perachora was new in these years, since none of the pottery from the Temple ofHera Akraia seems prior to c. 800.7 Although the Corinthians supplied the earliest E.g. BCH 45 (1921),415, fig. 59, no. 304; 420, fig. 61, no. 307. 2 BSA 56 (1961), 158, no. 8. Cf. Huxley, Early Sparta 26, n. 121. 4 Ill. 2, 2-3, 7; 7,3-4. Huxley, op. tit. ch. 2. 6 In addition to Fortetsa no. 668, three frs. ofCorinthian MG 11 are among the settlement pottery excavated in 1957--61. • One narrow-necked oinochoe, unpublished, from the tholos tomb at Kapakli. 7 Dunbabin dated five vases to the ninth century (JH S 68 (1948), 64). His nos. 1-2, the black cups, defy close dating, and it can no longer be said that their Attic counterparts cease in c. 850. On the three decorated vases, the vertical chevrons (no. 3) and the fine banding (nos. 4-5) preclude a date earlier than MG II.
1
3
c.800-75 0
CORINTH, PERACHORA, DELPHI, ITHACA •
353
votives, it is very doubtful whether they can have founded the temple. The Perachora peninsula was originally part ofthe Megarid, I and the cult ofHera Akraia points to Megara rather than Corinth.s The preponderance of Corinthian wares in the Akraia deposit is no argument for a Corinthian foundation, since the Megarians themselves appear to have used Corinthian fine pottery in both E G and L G times." The poverty of the Geometric Akraia deposit is in striking contrast with the rich and varied offerings to Hera Limenia ofthe late eighth century, when Perachora had certainly become Corinthian territory." Delphi produced no independent school of Geometric pottery, but was a meeting-place for other styles. During the tenth century she had had some contact with Attica." In the ninth century (p. 341) her affinities were mainly with the Thessalo-Cyc1adic area, although there is also some material ofAtticizing character, probably ofM G I date." But after c. 800 Corinthian imports begin to pour in; virtually all the M G I I painted pottery is ofCorinthian origin. On the eve of the great colonial movement to the west, Corinth and Delphi were in close touch. Both parties, later, were to profit from this association." On Ithaca, the dedication of Corinthian pottery at the Aetos shrine begins around 780.8 In the opinion of the excavators, the site owed its sanctity to a group of Protogeometric cairns, which may have been tombs or dwellings." The place must have been holy ground before c. 780, since its holiness would have been recognized by the locals before it came to the notice ofCorinthian visitors. I 0 But once the Corinthian vases began to arrive, their quantity is too large to be explained either by commercial exchange with the Ithacans, or by the piety of passing travellers: furthermore, it is significant that none of the imports before c. 730 come from anywhere but Corinth.'! The Corinthians clearly had strong interests in these parts, and it is not unreasonable to suppose, with the excavators, that they set up a small trading post on the island. From Ithaca they could control the entrance to the Corinthian gulf, and explore more distant waters. Tinl 2 and amber'" are among the commodities which might have lured them up the Adriatic, although as yet there is no evidence of their presence farther north. Furthermore, a Corinthian station established on Ithaca in c. 78014 would be logical as a preliminary measure before the departure of colonists for Italyalthough it was the Euboeans, not the Corinthians, who were to take the first leap in that 1 Plut, Qu. Graee. 17. • N. G. L. Hammond (BSA 49 (1954), 93ff.) argues convincingly for a Megarian foundation of the sanctuary, and a Corinthian take-over during the second half of the eighth century. But the offerings identified by the excavators as Argive cannot be explained away as Megarian. As Payne suggested, they indicate Argive interest in the cult; but hardly before e. 750. Only one Argive vase looks earlier than LG: the amphora fr. Perachora I, pl, 15,3. 3 From Megara: Corinth VII.I, pI. I I; PAE 1934, 55, fig. 15. At Ay. Theodoroi in the Megarid, most of the fine cemetery vases are Corinthian MG. The first colonists at Megara Hyblaea also used a preponderance of Corinthian imports among their fine pottery. 4 Perachora I, 33-4. 6 PGP 200. 6 BCH 85 (1961), 356, fig. 41a, b4, c6. 7 Cf. W. G. Forrest, Historic 6 (1957),172-5. 8 As Dunbabin has demonstrated (JHS 68,65, n. 52), the Corinthian pottery here begins later than at Perachora. Miss Benton's 'Early Geometric' I consider to be local Late Geometric (p. 227, n.B), Corinthian MG I, a style well documented in its homeland, is absent from Ithaca. Among the earliest imports at Aetos are the fine oinochoai BSA 48 (1953), pl. 54, which are far advanced in MGII. • BSA 33 (1932-3),22-7; cf. BSA 48 (1953), 255. 10 Cf. C. M. Robertson, BSA 43 (1948), 121-2. 11 At a conservative estimate, there are twenty-five Corinthian MG 11 vases among the published finds; the late-eighth-century votives run into several hundreds. 10 Cf. Will, Korinthiaka 39ff. 13 See BSA 48, 260. 14 My later date disposes of Will's objections (op. cit. 38) to Corinthian settlement on Ithaca.
°
354 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
direction. 1 For many Greeks who were to cross the Ionian Sea for the first time, the votives at Aetos are a tangible expression of their hopes and fears.
IV. Boeotia and Thessaly Both of these areas copied the simpler aspects of Attic MG 11, without developing any independent style of their own. In Boeotia, Attic influence had been continuous since the tenth century; but for the Thessalians, this was their first steady contact with Attica since c. goo. Attic ideas may have reached them by land through Boeotia - or, more probably, by sea via Euboea. The survival of an old native shape - the jug with cut-away neck - illustrates the strength of local tradition; yet the coming of an Atticizing style to Thessaly is further evidence of a general improvement in Aegean communications.
V. Euboea and the Cyclades These islands continue to make pottery in two different styles. In Euboea and the northern Cyclades, pendent-semicircle skyphoi were still made in their refined shallow form; but at the same time the production ofAtticizing M G I I is spread over the whole area, including even the remote island ofThera. Shortly before c. 750, slight contact with Corinth is suggestedby some of the Cycladic vases found in the Purification Trench on Rheneia. In Euboea an important event took place soon after 800; the move ofthe Eretrians to the city which they occupied in Classical times. Except for a solitary LP G sherd from the sanctuary ofApollo Daphnephoros," this site has yielded no pottery which must be earlier than M G I I. The older Eretria, whose memory is preserved by Strabo," has yet to be located with certainty; but according to Strabo's topographical indications, it should lie about two kilometres to the east of the later city.s Euboean and Cycladic merchants continued to do business in the eastern Mediterranean. Their pottery is now found all round the shores of Cyprus: at Salamis, Amathus, Paphos, Soli, and near Kyrenia." From their small emporia at Al Mina and Tell Sukas, their wares travelled inland to Hama and the Amuq plain, and across the corner of the Mediterranean to Tarsus in Cilicia. This was a propitious time for trade, since the Levantine coast was enjoying a long respite from Assyrian aggression, the Assyrians at this period being hard pressed by the warlike Urartians on their northern frontier. Not later than c. 760 the Euboeans established their first Italian colony, at Pithecusae on the island of Ischia." There one of the earliest vases comes from the cemetery, and is oflate MG 11 character: it is a skyphos oflocal clay, modelled after a Corinthian variety with a See, however, pp. 227-8 on the possibility ofEuboean interest in Ithaca before c. 750. • P AE 1952, 159, fi~. 4, 2. 8 IX. 403; x, 448. • See J. Boardman, B SA 52 (1947), 22ff. Strabo must have been mistaken in attributing the move to the Persian wars, since the occupation ofNew Eretria is continuous from the eighth century. Two candidates for the title of Old Eretria have been suggested: (I) Lefkandi, nine kilometres west of new Eretria. Here a large Bronze Age settlement, surviving into the Early Iron Age, is in the process of excavation. If this is Old Eretria, the move will have been a very gradual one, since the occupation there continues throughout the eighth century. Furthermore, Strabo will have been wrong about tile location of the old city, as well as the date of tile move. (2) Kotroni, three kilometres to tile northeast of New Eretria; walls ofMycenaean type, as well as prehistoric sherds, are reported (K. Schefold, AntK 7 (1964), 104), but tile site has not yet been excavated. Vases from PG 'tombs', found two kilometres east of Eretria (BSA 52,14), may be from the cemetery of this site, whose location corresponds well enough with Strabo's description. S List: Dunbabin, The Greeks and their Eastern Neighbours 72. 6 Livy VIII. 22; Strabo V. 247. 1
c.800-750
EUBOEA, CYCLADES •
355
very short lip - almost a kotyle.! The closest parallel, however, is another Corinthianizing imitation made in Eretriaj- this, and the Pithecusan skyphos, are the oldest known vases made by Euboeans which follow Corinthian rather than Attic prototypes. From the acropolis, Monte Vico, the earliest pieces so far recovered are Corinthian imports not later than c. 750.3 Earlier Greek pottery, however, has been found in native contexts, implying a brief phase of'trade before the flag'. In the native Osta cemetery ofCumae, the three well-known skyphoi- are ofAtticizing M G I I type, imported from somewhere in the Euboeo-Cycladic area." Two occur in the same burial as an Egyptianizing statuette offaience" which, like the scarab in another grave," could have been hawked to the natives by Euboean or Cycladic merchants. More evidence ofpre-colonial trade comes from the cemeteries ofVeii, an inland city of Etruria; here, in the course of recent excavations, more M G I I skyphoi, similar to those from Osta, have been coming to light in some quantity." As at Cumae, they are accompanied by Oriental objects in the same horizon, suggesting the arrival of traders with Levantine contacts." All the skyphoi at Veii, and two ofthose at Cumae, are decorated with a narrow panel ofvertical chevrons, enclosed by horizontal and vertical lines. In the Aegean, this is a universally popular formula of M G I I, whose use can be dated only within broad limits - i.e. somewhere within the first half of the eighth century. However, the Veientine cemetery ofQuattro Fontanili now supplies a firm relative sequence, quite independent of the Greek imported pottery, but based upon a well-stratified series of Etruscan bronze fibulae. This sequence can be related to early colonial graves from Pithecusae of c. 72o-6go through exported Etruscan fibulae ofVeii III A, but the MG 11 skyphoi at Veii are accompanied by fibulae assigned to Veii I I A.10 Since a whole phase of the Veii sequence I I B - elapses in between, the export ofthe M G I I skyphoi should be placed nearer 800 than 750. Thus it appears that the Euboeans and their confederates were already active in the Etruscan market during the generation before the first colonists came to Pithecusae. According to Livy-! it was a contingent from Pithecusae which established the colony at Cumae. Unfortunately, the evidence for dating this event is still very defective. On the Cumaean acropolis, the earliest Greek settlement has never been explored down to the deepest level; and from the Greek cemetery there is no published material older than the abundant globular aryballoi ofE PC. Following Strabo, we can only assume that the colony was established before the first Greek settlers came to Sicily - i.e. before 734.12 Nor does the site offer any stratigraphical evidence to tell us whether the colonists ousted the natives: the native cemetery of Osta is some distance from the acropolis." and nowhere near the earliest Greek burials. To be sure, the M G 11 skyphoi imported by the natives are much Cf. BSA 48 (1953), pI. 41,624. • PAE 1952, 161, fig. 9, left. Expedition 8.4 (1966), I I, top row nos. 1,3; cf. Corinth VII. I, nos. 80 and 75, tile latter pI. 17h. • MA 22 (1913), fig. 52, pI. 18, 7,9; better, Gjerstad, OpRom 5 (1962), 70, fig. 35. s Blakeway, BSA 33 (1932-3),200, pI. 34. For the careless use ofthe multiple brush cf. pI. 34ffrom Delos. 6 MA 22, fig. 51. 7 loco cit, fig. 54. 8 Quattro Fontanili: NSc 1963, 166, fig. 59a=271, fig. 132a-b: 192, fig. 76c. D. Ridgway (AR 1967, 30, n. 9; StEtr35 (1967),3IIff.) mentions a total ofsix from this cemetery, and 'more to come'; he also states that a skyphos from the Grotta GraIniccia cemetery mentioned by Blakeway (BSA 33, 196, n. I) is of tile same class. • Dr J. Close-Brooks kindly informs me that two paste scarabs have been found at the Quattro Fontanili cemetery in contexts belonging to her phase Veii II A (Grs. G 24, GH 25). 10 J. Close-Brooks, NSc 1965, 57ff., fig. 5. 11 VIII. 22. 12 Strabo v, 4. 13 iliA 22, 91, pI. I; Vallet, Rhlgionet Zanele 56. 1
3
356 .
c.800-75 0
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
earlier than any material from the Greek colony; but it is not yet clear how near their contexts are to the end of the native cemetery. VI. East Greece
The influence of Attic M G I I is widely spread over the eastern Aegean; but, once again, Ionia was more deeply affected than the Dodecanese. Atticizing vases have been found at Smyrna and Miletus, and on Chios, Samos, Cos, and Rhodes. At the first four centres, these vases represent the reigning style; there is no trace of any consistent M G manner typical of Ionia and independent ofAttic. The situation is different in Cos and Rhodes, where only a small minority of the pottery reflects contemporary Attic fashions. To judge from the Atticizing vases from the Rhodian cemetery at Exochi, these fashions were introduced by Cycladic middlemen.' Far more numerous, on both islands, are the vases made in a distinctly Dodecanesian M G style, evolved in the late ninth century out ofAttic, Cypriot, and indigenous elements. The leading shape, as we have noted, is a ridge-necked lekythos borrowed from the Cypriot repertoire; it is still made in large quantities, and the Cypriot originals are still being imported to COS. 2 More evidence of Levantine trade may be found among the votives at Lindos, which include at least one oriental ivory of this period. 3 It is not surprising that Dodecanesian pottery should show affinities with both Attica and Cyprus. Rhodes lies on one of the main sea-routes between the Aegean and the Near East, and without doubt her merchants exploited any opportunities for trade that might come their way. But there is little sign ofany Rhodian or Coan initiative in these exchanges. Apart from four ridge-neckedlekythoiwhich reached the Cyclades (p. 269), we know ofno exports from these islands earlier than the late eighth century. VII. Crete
After the wild PG B style had worked itself out, Cretan potters became more receptive of ideas from the outside world. As in the Dodecanese, these ideas arrived from both Attica and the Near East; for Crete, too, lies on an important sea-route to the Levant. Knossos, where most of the visible imports have been found, was once again the sounding board for new influences. Only there can we follow the gradual change from PG B to a settled Mature Geometric, through a brief transitional phase which has been named Early Geometric. Knossian M G has a more restricted distribution than PG B; it was known in the Messara, but we cannot say how far it travelled towards the east. Probably at Dreros, and certainly at Vrokastro, the contemporary pottery owes more to the occasional Atticizing import than to the example of Knossian potters. In the extreme east, a few Attic ideas appear in garbled form, but there is no point of contact with the Central Cretan school. Even at Knossos, Attic influence is more clearly marked in the decoration than in the choice ofshapes. This is understandable, since Cretan burial customs demanded the manufacture of vase-forms which were outside the normal Attic repertoire (p. 233). Most indispensable was the neckless cremation pithos, which had to be capacious enough to hold the gifts of unguent vases as well as the ashes. Surprisingly enough, one ofthe earliest of these 1
Cf.]HS 80 (1960), 241.
2
E.g. Bd'A 1950,320, fig. 92, no. 2.
8
Lindost, 399, no. 1582, pI. 64.
CRETE·
357
pithoi' was made in Athens, and one is tempted to believe that it was made for the Cretan market. At all events, Attic imports are plentiful- enough to justify the assumption that the stylistic influence came directly from Attica, and not through Cycladic imitations. For the unguent vases, Knossian potters had to turn elsewhere for inspiration. Darkground aryballoi were imported from Corinth, and accepted into the local repertoire. The ridge-necked Cypriot lekythoi, in the black-on-red technique, now arrive in Crete for the first time; their Cretan imitators, unlike the Dodecanesians, tried to copy the Cypriot decoration as well as the shape." Levantine connections are also apparent in more spectacular media than pottery. In the Idaean cave, the series of oriental ivories continues.' Knossian jewellers and bronze-workers were already producing ambitious figured reliefs, covered with Orientalizing imagery siege scenes, lion combats, and straight-winged sphinxes." The general impression is that Crete, like the Dodecanese, was now frequently visited by Phoenician traders; and that an Orientalizing movement in Cretan metalwork had already begun, perhaps under the guidance of resident Levantine craftsmen.
By the middle of the eighth century, there were many signs in the Greek world of a general awakening from the Dark Age. Three forms ofdarkness had been dispelled for good: the darkness of Aegean isolationism; the darkness of taboo on figured representation; and the darkness of illiteracy. In concluding this section, I offer a few general remarks on each of these three topics. The Greeks recovered contact with the outside world in two successive stages. First, the lure of commerce attracted them to Levantine waters, and by the end of the ninth century their merchants were established on the North Syrian coast. Later, in the middle years of the eighth century, they began to found colonies in the West; land, rather than trade, is thought by most modern historians to have been their most urgent need." A possible causal link between the two movements may be found in the general increase in Aegean population, of which there is plenty of evidence in the material record (p. 360). Archaeology can also offer a commentary on the relative performance ofGreek states in opening up relations with the outside world: their maritime initiative may be measured in terms ofexported pottery, 1 and their contacts with the Levant may be revealed by the import and imitation ofOriental ornaments. Most enterprising of all were the Euboean cities, which founded both Al Mina and Pithecusae. The Cycladic islanders probably collaborated with them in both these ventures. To judge from the wide diffusion oftheir ceramic style, the Athenians must have been active in the Aegean; their dealings with the Levant are illustrated by exports to Cyprus, Fortetsa no. 454. Other Attic imports: Fortetsa no. 441 (p. 244, n. 12); BSA 31 (1930-1), pI. 18.2; eightfrs. of Attic MG II from excavations above the Royal Road at Knossos in 1957--6 I. 8 Fortetsa no. 453. • Kunze, AM60-1 (1935--6),227. S Brock, Fortetsa, 197-9; Boardman, CC 0 134-5. Boardman's 'earliest stage' of metalwork is dated by the gold strip Fortetsa no. 578, found in association with the MG pithos no. 530. • For the most recent discussion, see A. J. Graham, Colony andmother city in Ancient Greece (1964), 218ff. 7 We cannot, of course, assess the performance of Aegina and Megara, who made no painted pottery of their own, but used Attic and Corinthian wares respectively. 1
2
358 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
Syria, and Israel, and by the Orientalizing goldwork in Attic cemeteries. Corinth now emerges as a maritime power; but most of her energies were directed towards the west. Crete, Rhodes, and Cos were less active. By virtue of their geographical position, these islands had no need to seek out foreign markets; they offered convenient entrepots for Attic, Cycladic, and Phoenician merchants. The cities oflonia show little sign, as yet, of an~ traffic with the Orient.' At the bottom of the scale come the land powers of the Greek mamland, which had little or no interest in trade: Thessaly, Boeotia, Argos, and Sparta. Figured scenes began to appear at about the same time on Attic pottery and Cretan metalwork; but these are two quite independent phenomena. The ~tyle and content of ~he Attic scenes are wholly Greek. The funerary scenes show the local ntual; the battles, which must have had some contemporary relevance, were coloured by local epic. The style had no roots in Mycenaean art, nor was it introduced from the Orient. It was derived from a few cautious experiments with single figures on earlier Attic vases, and then elaborated by an artist of genius to convey narrative on a grand scale. The work of Cretan smiths is more accomplished, but much less creative. Both the style and the imagery were borrowed from the Levant: the only Hellenic contribution was to impose symmetry at the expense of meaning." These are the first Orientalizing figured works to be made by Greeks. It seems that only the Cretans, at this time, had both the opportunity to observe the narrative art of the Orient, and the inclination to copy it. The tradition behind these works could hardly have been transmitted through casual Oriental imports; it is much easier to believe that Cretan metalworkers, like Attic goldsmiths, learned their skill from Levantine craftsmen living in their midst. 3 There are several centres, then, where Greek and Levantine either were living together, or at least had frequent communication with one another: notably Al Mina, Cyprus, Rhodes, Crete, and Athens. In one such meeting-place, Greek was written down in the Phoenician alphabet for the first time. Where, and when? Our earliest known text is engraved on an Athenian oinochoe, made in the Dipylon Master's Workshop around 740 (p. 3 2 , no. 36). Another graffito, on a recently published sherd from Pithecusae," merits a date before c. 725. The art of alphabetic writing, then, was established in the Greek world by the third quarter of the eighth century. Furthermore, the hexameter on the Dipylon oinochoe already includes a chi, one ofthe supplementary letters which the Greeks added to the original Phoenician repertoire. Miss Jeffery, with keen insight into the psychology of people learning to write for the first time, argues convincingly for a period when the first literate Greeks accepted the Phoenician alphabet more or less as it stood, without making any deliberate effort to improve on it by adding letters of their own, or consciously altering the Phoenician sound-values." From the Dipylon oinochoe we learn that this period of unAt Miletus, however, one Orientalizing fragment has been found in a M G well; the rim of a clay stand, decorated in relief with masks, birds, and straight-winged sphinxes. See I M !rIO (195g--60), 56-7, pI. 56. 2 E.g. on the Fortetsa quiver, no. 1569. 3 Dunbabin, The Greeks and theirEastern Neighbours 41; Higgins, Greek and RomanJewellery 96-7· • M. Guarducci, ArchClass 16 (1964), 129, pi. 40, 2. The sidelong alpha here, as Miss Guarducci points out, should be appreciably earlier than the upright alphas on the 'Nestor' kotyle from the same site, which was deposited in a grave with Corinthian globular
c.800-750
ALPHABET •
359
critical acceptance was over by c. 740. The Greeks must therefore have been using the alphabet before the middle of the century; but not very long before, in view of the absence of extant inscriptions. From Semitic sources, some complementary evidence comes from the Phoenician graffiti at Samaria, whose cursive writing offers better parallels for three Greek letters than anything in the more monumental script;' these are currently dated to c. 774766, during the reign ofJeroboam 11. 2 For many other Greek letters, closer counterparts may be found on a fragmentary silver bowl from Cyprus of the third quarter of the eighth century than on the mid-ninth-century stele ofMesh a, king ofMoab.3 In our present state of knowledge, a date of c. 775-750 seems the most reasonable for the birth of the Greek alphabet. Where was the birthplace? A case has recently been argued for Al Mina, resting on the identification of Euboeo-Cycladic pottery at the emporium, and the survival of two nearPhoenician letters in the Euboean script.' If this theory is correct, alphabetic writing will have been brought from North Syria to the Aegean by Euboean and other Greek merchants; and the variations between local scripts will have grown up during the secondary transmission between one centre and another.s Nearest to Phoenician, however, stands the alphabet of Crete, which could not have been introduced by Euboean middlemen. It is hard to believe that the Cretans had no knowledge ofthe original Phoenician letter-forms, acquired either in the Levant, or, more plausibly, at home; for Crete still seems to be playing a passive role at this time.s But this is not the place to become involved in an epigraphical discussion; the problem ofthe alphabet's birthplace cannot yet be solved on epigraphical grounds, nor does the archaeological evidence lend overwhelming support for anyone centre. Too much stress, perhaps, has been laid on Al Mina as a meeting-place between Greeks and Phoenicians. A Greek of c. 775-750 need not have travelled so far in order to master the Phoenician tongue; for in these years the Phoenicians were not a home-keeping race. As we have seen, Crete and Rhodes were often visited by their traders; and it is probable that Knossos and Athens attracted some of their craftsmen. Wherever it may have been invented, the alphabet was rapidly circulated round the Greek world. Crete and Euboea, which had the closest dealings with the Phoenicians in the mideighth century, preserved letter-forms nearest to the Phoenician parent. Other states learned their writing at second hand, and local variations crept in at once. The wide variety of epichoric scripts finds some reflection in the wide divergence of Late Geometric pottery styles. We are now entering a period when good communications no longer impose uniformity. In many aspects of Greek life, local pride is becoming an increasingly potent force.
1
aryballoi of c. 720-710. 5 See LSA G 2-5, 22, on the possibility that the earliest Greek scribes unconsciously adapted non-vocalic Phoenician symbols to serve as Greek vowels.
LSAG 18. 2 Driver, Semitic Writing 109, with refs; add Birnbaum, PEQ 1942, 108; Samaria-Sebaste 111,2,9, 199. Rhys Carpenter, AJA 37 (1933), roff., figs. 1-3. • Boardman BSA 52, 24-7. One may now add a third near-Phoenician letter: the sidelong alpha on the sherd from Pithecusa, quoted above. 5 LSAG 14-1 5: 6 The case for Crete as the source of the Greek alphabet is argued fully by Miss Guarducci in Geras A. Keramopoullou (1953),34 2-54; cf. ArchClass 16 (1964),124-7. 1 3
360 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
SECOND HALF OF THE EIGHTH CENTURY The vigour of a rising civilization is now more than ever apparent in the abundance, richness, and variety ofthe material. In every part ofGreece, the massive quantity ofLate Geometric pottery indicates a substantial rise in the population. In addition to the painted pottery, many other arts were now attempted. Under the stimulus ofthe Orient, stone seals and ivory figures were made in Greek workshops for the first time since the fall ofMycenae. Likewise, the new interest in figured imagery finds expression in several media other than vase-painting: for example, in the embossing ofgold bands and bronze shields, the engraving of bronze fibulae, and the relief decoration of clay pithoi. The increasing prosperity of the Greek world is illustrated by the growth of these new arts, and especially by the lavish use of bronze for gigantic tripods, ornamented with figures of men and horses. Pottery, nevertheless, is still the most useful index of the differences between one centre and another. As its decoration grows richer and more intricate, so the local styles become more clearly distinct than ever before.
I. Attica The increasing abundance of pottery is nowhere more striking than in Attica; nor is this surprising, since her inhabitants did not join in the colonial emigration to the West. In Athens itself, the rise in population may be estimated either in terms of the dead, through the larger aggregate of burials in the scattered cemeteries; or, more reliably, through the needs of the living, who required a greater number of wells. Within that part of the Geometric city which lay in and near the later Agora, a count ofwells suggests that the population was at least trebled during the course ofthe eighth century.' The Attic countryside, too, became more densely settled; indeed, many ofthe Classical demes have yielded no Iron Age pottery earlier than Late Geometric. Along the west coast, this is true of Phaleron, Trachones (Euonymon), Helleniko (Halimous), Aliki and Voula (Aixone), Vouliagmeni (Cape Zoster), and Vari (Anagyrous)." Even more noteworthy is the peopling ofthe inland Mesogeia plain; at Draphi, Spata, Koropi ( ? Sphettos), Kalyvia Kouvaras (Prospalta), Keratea, and Kaki Thalassa (Kephale), the finds begin likewise in the late eighth century. The absence of earlier material need not mean that these sites were previously uninhabited, since there has not been much systematic excavation in these parts. It does, however, seem that the population ofrural Attica increased even more rapidly than that ofAthens; and it is not unlikely that the coasts and plains received some Athenian immigrants in this period. Yet in spite ofthe rise in population, there was a steady decline in Attic activities overseas. One important symptom is the waning ofAttic ceramic influence, which had been so widespread in M G I I. By c. 750-735, Corinth and the Argolid had set up completely independent styles; yet themetope system of Attic LG Ib was still copied in Boeotia, Euboea, the Cyclades, Thessaly, and Samos; the animal style of the Hirschfeld Painter has echoes in Mrs E. L. Smithson kindly supplied me with the statistics for the Geometric period, which are as follows: c. 900-850 (EG), three wells; c. 850-800 (MG I), four wells; c. 800-750 (MG I1-LG la), seven wells; c. 750-700 (LG Ih-I1), thirteen wells. See Agora VIII, pl. 45. 2 On the location of these demes see C. W.]. Eliot, The Coastal Demes ofAttica, Toronto (1962).
1
c·750-700
ATTICA'
361
Boeotia, Naxos, and Melos. But in the later years of the century, the innovations of Attic L G I I made no impression elsewhere (except in Boeotia), and even Attic potters began to follow some Corinthian fashions. Complementary evidence comes from exports: as late as c. 725-700, a fewAttic vases still reached Ithaca (p. 227, D. 13), Thera,' Samos,? and Cyprus," and some even found their way to Sicily! and Italy;" but their quantity is negligible when compared with the vast mass ofcontemporary Corinthian wares which travelled both inside and outside the Aegean. A similar story is told by the more precious offerings in Attic graves, which show a progressive decline ofLevantine influence. In the third quarter ofthe century we have the five ivory maidens from Dipylon Gr. 13; the gold necklace from Spata Gr. 3; and the gold bands embossed with naturalistic animal friezes from Dipylon Gr. 5, and from contemporary contexts in the Kerameikos cemetery." All these works are probably by Attic craftsmen; yet they could not have been made without some first-hand knowledge of Oriental styles and techniques, acquired either through imports, or, more plausibly (since no related imports have yet come to light), 7 from Oriental masters living in Athens. But during the last quarter ofthe century, the later gold bands- became fully Hellenized: the supple 'ungeometric' animals were replaced by stiff-figured panels, whose manner is more in keeping with the contemporary work of Attic vase-painters. On the eve of the 'Orientalizing' movement in Attic pottery, the Athenians no longer had any direct contact with Oriental art. New ideas from the Levant now reached them at second hand, whether through Corinthian vase-painting, or through imitations of Oriental bronze cauldrons made by other Greeks. 9 It appears, then, that during the late eighth century the men ofAttica were contracting out of their enterprises abroad, and transforming themselves into a quiet, inward-looking people whose interests were in agriculture, and no longer in commerce. Archaeology alone cannot supply the reason for this change; but one possible explanation is offered by Herodotus, who records the memory ofan early naval war in which Athens was worsted by Aegina with Argive help.l" Such a reverse might have dealt a severe enough blow to Athenian shipping to allow the commercial initiative to pass into Aeginetan hands. Be this as it may, the rapid peopling of rural Attica suggests that the landed aristocracy were becoming increasingly powerful. At Menidi, Spata, Koropi, and Anavysos there are late-eighth-century graves containing offerings of gold, and furnished as richly as any in Athens; not only the population, but the wealth too, was being decentralized from the city, and distributed AM 28, HI II and 19, pl, 3; Thera II, fig. 510. 2 AM 58, fig. 9a, and Beil, 20, 10; cf. Agora VIII, no. 131. BCH 87 (1963),362, fig. 56. 4 Syracuse 49637, see p. 78, no. 33; Megara Hyblaea II, 93-4, pl, 81. S Canale, CSI, fig. 12,2, see p. 79, no. 40; Pithecusae, Gr. 129, see p. 84. • See Ohly, Griechische Goldbleche 15ff., Group I; add now AA 1964,462, fig. 53; ADChr 18 (1963), 29-30, pl, 29. 1 Actual Oriental imports, at this time, seem to be limited to Phoenician scarabs: see Hesperia, Supp. VIII, 310, no. 7, pI. 40; Brann, Hesperia 29 (1960),406, pl. 89. 8 Ohly, op. cit. Groups III and IV. 9 Cf. Brann, Agora VIII, 18. 10 Hdt, v.82-8: see Dunbabin, BSA 37 (1936-7),83-91. Dunbabin argues that the war happened during the reign of Pheidon of Argos, and places both in the early seventh century (cf. also Ure, Origin of Tyranny 165ff.). If the Pausanian chronology for Pheidon is accepted, and if Dunbabin was correct in linking the war with Pheidon, the date of the war must be raised to c. 750 or soon after. This is exactly the time of the later (LG Ib) Dipylon kraters, where the subject of naval battles, so popular before c. 750, is suddenly dropped; perhaps the theme was no longer auspicious for Athenians. Similarly, Herodotus' story of an embargo on Attic pottery at the Aeginetan sanctuary ofDamia and Auxesia may be reflected in the total absence of Attic LG Ib wares anywhere on Aegina; instead, Corinthian LG was imported in quantity. The flow of Attic pottery to Aegina begins again in LG I I, and is continuous throughout the seventh century. 1
2
362 .
c·750-7 00
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
evenly over the Attic countryside. It was chiefly in the service of these gentry that the most versatile ofLG 11 potters turned out their large and elaborate figured vases. At the other end of the social scale, the poor graves at Phaleron contain a preponderance of small and squalid shapes, which were now mass-produced for the home market and no longer exported. Extremes of wealth and poverty are even more poignant in the grave offerings of the seventh century, when commercial enterprise remained at a standstill, and the landed aristocracy was all-powerful. 1
11. The Argolid and Laconia The Argolid, like Attica, is now a land without colonies, and an extraordinarily prolific source ofLate Geometric pottery; here, too, one may assume that the rise in population was more rapid than in those city-states which founded colonies overseas. As in Attica, the best vase-painting is on the grand scale. The size and elaboration ofsome Argive figured vases suggest that their potters were working for rich patrons, for whom sumptuous grave offerings were required. The smaller shapes, meanwhile, were carelessly mass-produced; unlike the vastly superior wares of Corinth, they were intended for local use, and not for export. Argive L G is a highly individual style, owing very little to any other school. Corinthian influence is limited to a few clumsy attempts to copy the shallow kotyle, and a predilection for bird files. Asinaean potters were in sympathy with the Attic metope style, and there are some traces ofit at Nauplia and Tiryns; but it was never imitated at Argos. As in the ninth century (p. 341), communications with Attica must still have been easier by sea than by land. In the literary record, Argos has the reputation ofbeing the strongest state in Greece during this period. She was never more powerful than when under King Pheidon who, according to Pausanias," seized Olympia in 748; his reign would thus be contemporary with the climax ofArgive Geometric in L G I, and it is pleasant to think of the giant pyxis ofArgos (pt 26) as being representative of a Pheidonian Palace Style. In spite of many attempts to put Pheidon into the early seventh century- there is much to be said for retaining Pausanias' earlier date," especially now that the minting of the first Aeginetan coinage can no longer be numbered among that monarch's achievements.s Archaeology, however, offers no conclusive evidence for either dating. Of the confused literary tradition relating to Pheidon's monetary reforms, nothing now remains credible except that he standardized weights and measures, and perhaps dedicated iron spits at the Argive Heraion. The bundle of spits recovered from the Heraion cannot be dated by their context. In Argos itself, a grave of c. 730-720 (no. I) contained a set of six complete spits - the earliest known drachma of six obeloi. Further examples, in a more fragmentary state, were found in the Argos Panoply Grave (no. 45), of c. 710-700. According toa recent analysis conducted by the excavator of Argos," these three sets differ considerably in weight; hence if the spits were standardized by Pheidon, the set from Gr. I must precede his reform. But since even the most complete spits have become lighter after oxidation, there are bound to be uncertainties in any Cf. Dunbabin, BSA 45 (195°),201-2. 2 VI.22.2. P. N. Ure, The Originof Tyranny 154ff.; Wade-Gery, CAHIII, 761-2. 4 G. Huxley, BCH 82 (1958), 59Iff.; id., Early Sparta 28-30. 5 w. L. Brown, NumChron • P. Courbin, Annales 14 (1959), 209ff. 1 3
IQ
(1950), 19Iff.
ARGOLID, LACONIA •
363
attempt to estimate their original weight. All that can be said with confidence is that by c. 730-720 the Argives were already using iron spits as currency; but if we attribute this system to Pheidon, to the exclusion of any other monetary reform, we should be forcing the literary evidence. Pheidon was also remembered for a military achievement - the reunion of the Lot of Temenos (i.e. the whole Argolid) under his sway.1 The military prowess ofArgos is attested by two archaeological facts; but neither of them can be associated with Pheidon. No city in the Argolid had more relations with the outside world than the little port of Asine. Her lively commerce is illustrated by the import ofAttic, Corinthian, and Rhodian wares; her potters, as we have noted, were heterodox in accepting Attic fashions. According to Pausanias, she was also friendly with Sparta; and this sealed her doom. In retaliation for her support ofa Spartan invasion ofthe Argolid, Asine was attacked by Eratos, king ofArgos; after a prolonged struggle, the town was razed to the ground." Pausanias' account is confirmed by the material remains, which include no pottery between Geometric and Hellenistic.! To judge from the latest Geometric vases," the destruction must be placed in the closing years of the eighth century - a date which agrees reasonably well with Pausanias' chronology. 5 The military might ofArgos is also illustrated by the contents ofthe now famous Panoply Grave." Here a young man aged twenty-five to thirty years was buried with vases of c. 710700, and a suit of armour consisting of a helmet with conical top ('Kegelhelm') and a bellshaped corslet. The helmet, which apparently follows a Urartian type also known to the Assyrians, is among the oldest of its kind to be found in Greece." The corslet, too, was a novelty in this period; although it has a remote ancestor in the Mycenaean example from Dendra, the intervening stages are represented only in Central Europe." In the last quarter of the eighth century it seems that the soldiers of Argos were exceptionally well armed for their day. In the corslet, they already possessed the most essential part of the full hoplite panoply. Even though it may be doubted whether, at this early date, they also fought in close formation," the Argives possess as strong a claim as any other Greeks to be regarded as the inventors of hoplite tactics. The armour from the Panoply Grave, ifit is really based on Urartian and Central European prototypes, implies that the foreign relations of the Argives were surprisingly farreaching at the end of the eighth century - unless, of course, we assume that the Euboeans were their middlemen both in the Levant for Urartu, and in the Italian colonies for Central Europe. But such an assumption is not wholly necessary. Although Argive LG pottery was exported only on a small scale, its distribution is wider than is sometimes realized. In neighbouring lands, Argive wares of this period reached Corinth.P Perachora.v Aegina.t> Ephoros, FGH II A, 70 FII5; Strabo VIII. 358. 2 Paus, II. 36, 4-5; III. 7,5. 3 Asine437. Asine 323, fig. 220. I; 329, fig. 223. I. See Courbin, CG A 565, n. 6. 5 See G. Huxley, BCH 82 (1958),590-1; id., Early Sparta 21, 3I. • No. 45; P. Courbin, BCH 81 (1957),322-86. 7 A. M. Snodgrass, Early Greek Armourand Weapons I3ff.; J H S 83 (1963), 20I . 3 Early Greek Armour and Weapons 73ff. • op. cit. 195ff. Snodgrass points out that there are no certain portrayals of the hoplite phalanx before c. 650. 10 Corinth VII. I, pI. 22, no. 154: Corinth XIII, pI. 9, 47.1, pace R. S. Young; see p. 140. In this and the following notes, I take no account of'Argive monochrome' vases, whose fabric cannot always be told apart from Corinthian. See B. Shefton, Perachora n, 314; Courbin, CGA 29ff. 11 Perachora I, 34ff., pIs. 8-9, house models: on the pottery published as 'Argive', see CGA 550-1. Aegina, pI. 125,31-2,37; Kraiker, Aigina, pI. 5, nos. 67-8. 1
4
1.
364 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
Tegea,' ~nd perhaps Asea,s Further afield, a large krater is said to come from Melos (p. 133, no. 5); m return, Cycladic Geometric seals were imported and imitated in the Argolid." From a tomb near Knossos, one fragment is of distinctly Argive appearanccr- there is also a sherd of Argive Subgeometric from Kythera." At Aetos on Ithaca a house models and a kantharos? are probably of Argive origin: the same has been argued for a sherd from Corcyra," which looks MG 11, and therefore considerably earlier than the Corinthian colony. In Sicily, there is a sprinkling of Argive LG among the earliest finds at Megara Hyblaea." Argos was never primarilya commercial power; yet some Argives travelled widely, especially to other Dorian lands. In Laconia the archaeological evidence is far too meagre to illustrate the early expansion of the Spartan state. Ifwe follow the chronology ofPausanias, the capture ofAmyclae and Helos must be placed in c. 750-725.10 Unfortunately, these events are not reflected in the material record. No pottery of this time is known from Helos, or any other site in southern La~onia. Sparta and Amyclae shared a common style in the late eighth century; but this umformity does nothing to confirm Pausanias, since the preceding PG was no less homogeneous. Conversely, the fact that Laconia had already a ceramic unity before the end of the local PG (p. 214) need not imply that her political union had been accomplished before
c·750 . The character of Laconi an LG, however, does throw some light on Sparta's foreign relations. Generally speaking, the shapes are of native origin; but the ornament is deeply influenced by both Argive and Corinthian. The Argive element is present throughout the course of the local style, especially on the large vases, and in the figure-drawing; a steady flow ofArgive imports is implied, although none has yet been found. The debt of Laconi an potters to the Argolid may seem somewhat surprising when we read of the frequent wars ?etween Argos and Sparta recorded by Pausaniasj-" but no doubt there were some peaceful interludes, when commerce was possible. At all events, Laconian L G was never swamped by Argive influence; the two styles are always distinct, and each had some impact on the pottery of Arcadia. At Asea, a Laconian lakaina keeps company with a possibly Argive kantharos.P The pottery of Tegea is chiefly oflocal make, but there is no sign of an independent Arcadian style; Argive and Laconian influences are now combined in approximately equal proportions, and some pieces may be Laconian exports (p. 2 I 6). The import and imitation of Corinthian wares begins in c. 730-720, towards the end of Corinthian LGY As one might expect, Corinthian patterns are usually reserved for the smaller and more delicate shapes in the local repertoire. The arrival of Corinthian influence seems to be about contemporary with the formation of a political alliance, which secured the aid of Corinth on the Spartan side during the First Messenian War. 14 But this 1 See CGA 549, n. 5, with refs. 2 Asea 112, fig. 1I0a; cf. Hesperia 25 (1956), pI. 48c. 3 Boardman, IslandGems 112-16. • KCh 4 (1950), pI. 16, facing p. 313; znd row, no. 5. 5 Unpublished. 6 BSA 43 (1948), 101, no. 600, pl, 45. 7 BSA 48 (1953),291, no. 741, pI. 46. 6 G. Dontas, ADChr 18 (1963), 182, pI. 211a. 9 Megara Hyblaea 11, 71-2, pI. 59. N.B. also a piece from Leontini, NSc 1955, 365, fig. 65.5, bearing the leaf-lozenges typical of Argive LGII. 10 Cf. Huxley, Early Sparta 24, 30. 11 Huxley, op.cit. 26ff. 12 Asea 112, fig. r roa.b. 13 E.g. A 063, fig. 37c. 14 Paus. IV. 11.1; cf. Huxley, BCH 82 (1958),596-7.
c. 750-700
ARGOLID, LACONIA •
365
coincidence is ofno great historical significance; as we have seen, Laconian potters were as much influenced by the Argive foes as by their Corinthian friends; in any case, practically every part ofthe Greek world was importing Corinthian pottery at this time. Sparta was not a trading power in the late eighth century. Apart from the few exports to Arcadia, no Laconian L G vases have been found anywhere beyond the limits of Spartan political control. One vase came to light at Volimedia in Messenia, contemporary perhaps with the First Messenian War; after the end ofthat war, the Spartan colonists who founded Taras in 706 took with them some oftheir local wares (p. 372). OfOriental contacts there is no sign, except for a few Levantine scarabs and scaraboid seals among the offerings to Artemis Orthia, dedicated around 700.1
Ill. Corinth, Delphi, and West Greece Corinth was now a thriving commercial polis, rapidly increasing in size. The nucleus of the Geometric town seems to have been in the neighbourhood of the future Agora, where a sequence of pottery from graves and wells covers the whole Geometric period. But from M G I I onwards, two outlying areas enter the picture. About one thousand five hundred metres to the northwest, a long-forgotten cemetery received its first burials since Middle Helladic times." At about the same distance to the west, a new settlement grew up near some excellent clay beds, with a small cemetery close by; here fine pottery was certainly manufactured in the seventh century, and perhaps already in the eighth." To judge from the existing evidence, which is not yet very plentiful, the pattern ofsettlement is rather reminiscent of Geometric Athens - a cluster ofscattered villages, each with its own cemetery. The expansion of Corinth need not have been retarded by the foundation of Syracuse, if, as Strabo has it,4 most of the original colonists were drawn from Tenea in the Corinthian countryside." There is no need to enumerate all the places to which Corinth sent her fine pottery during the second halfofthe eighth century. It is present at practically every Greek site where any appreciable quantity of material has been found; its influence was felt in every local style, with the possible exception of Thessalian. The wide circulation of Corinthian wares is a symptom of the rapid expansion of Corinthian trade; but much of the credit must go to the superlative technique of the Corinthian potter, who was beginning to outstrip all his Greek rivals in the delicacy ofhis craft. The most popular ofthe exported shapes were the fine thinwalled kotylai, and (after c. 720) the globular aryballoi. The latter, presumably, were imported chiefly for their content ofunguents, yet the excellence oftheir fabric must have contributed to their popularity abroad. From the great abundance of these two shapes in all Greek lands, one may conclude that the workshops of Corinth had already begun to specialize in the production offine small vessels, with an eye to the export market. It has often been remarked that, during the later years of the eighth century, Corinth 1 3
A 0 37g-80, figs. 143, l44a-d; cf. Boardman, BSA 58 (1g63), 7. Corinth XV, The Potters' Quarter, 6-11. • Strabo VIII. 380.
2 Corinth XIII,
The NorthCemetery 13ff.
5 Tenea, the modem Athikia, has not been systematically excavated. The casual finds, however, have some bearing on Strabo's statement: they include three grave groups ofthe ninth century, but nothing, so far, ofthe eighth. At two other sites in the Corinthian h~terland - Clenia (Cleonae ?), and Zygouries - the known finds ofGeometric pottery are limited to one ninth-century grave group apiece.
366 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
replaced Attica as the most influential source ofceramic ideas in the Greek world; this was a natural consequence of the decline of Attic exports, and the seizure of the commercial initiative by Corinth. But the extent of Corinthian influence on other schools was more restricted than that of Attica in Middle Geometric. There are two reasons why this should have been so. In the first place, the technical excellence of Corinthian pottery, and the volume in which it was exported, may have had an inhibiting effect on would-be imitators of Corinthian shapes. Local versions ofthe kotyle were made in Euboea, Attica, the Argolid, Crete, and Rhodes; but only the Euboean potters could match the finesse of the originals. Secondly, Corinthian LG is more remarkable for the delicacy ofits fabric than for the variety ofits decoration. Almost every other region had evolved a more adventurous repertoire of ornament, which was not lightly to be abandoned in favour of the staid formulae of the Corinthian style. A few typically Corinthian ideas - e.g. bird files, lozenge nets, and fine banding - were often borrowed elsewhere, especially in Attica, Boeotia, and the Argolid from c. 730 onwards: yet in all three ofthese schools, the Corinthianizing motifs played only a subsidiary role. Even after the Orientalizing movement had begun in Corinthian pottery, foreign imitators continued to follow the simple linear vases. Indeed, among the total output of Early Protocorinthian wares, the Orientalizing experiments form only an exiguous proportion; their novel and daring ornament had no influence elsewhere before the end of the eighth century. Within the Greek homeland, four recipients of Corinthian pottery call for special comment: Aegina, Thera, Delphi, Ithaca. At each ofthese places, the quantity ofimports is too great to be explained by casual commerce; furthermore, the range of shapes extends far beyond the ubiquitous kotylai and aryballoi. Aegina, as before, still bought her fine pottery from her neighbours. Here an influx of Corinthian L G coincides with a break in the Attic imports; this may have been the result ofa war between Aegina and Athens (p. 36 I, n. 10). Corinthian fine wares must have been especially welcome in Thera, whose volcanic clay was suitable only for large funerary urns and coarse domestic vessels. At Delphi, and at Amphissa nearby,' Corinthian LG was the reigning style ofpainted pottery, in the absence ofany local alternative. A similar story is told by the Geometric bronzes ofDelphi, where a marked preponderance of Corinthian work has recently been noted." On Ithaca, where the Corinthians had already set up their own trading station (p. 353), the imports are exceptionally plentiful; yet they failed to submerge a native L G style, evolved out of the local Protogeometric. During the late eighth century, the decoration of these Ithacan vases came increasingly under Corinthian influence; yet the shapes remained individual. The local school did not disappear until the early seventh century, after some brave attempts to emulate the Early Protocorinthian oinochoai of the Cumae GrOUp.3 The style was not peculiar to Ithaca, but seems to have been characteristic of the whole West Greek region, from Acarnania to Messenia; evidently the Corinthians did not possess the monopoly of shipping along this coast. Furthermore, Ithaca had independent relations with Delphi, Thessaly (p. 228), and Euboea; the Euboean connection is seen not only in ADChr 18 (1963), pis. 166, 167a. H-V. Herrmann,JdI 79 (1964),42. Two human figurines are securely dated to the third quarter of the eighth century, by their association with Corinthian LG pottery; see BCH68-g (1944-5), 36ff., pi. I. 3 BSA 43 (1948), 83ff., nos. 499-520, pIs. 35-7. 1
2
C·750-7 0 0
CORINTH, DELPHI, WEST GREECE •
367
imports, but also in a local series ofAtticizing vases beginning before 750 (p. 227). It would not be surprising to find Euboeans cruising in these waters in the middle ofthe eighth century, and leaving their votives at Aetos on their way to Pithecusae or Cumae. One thinks also of those Eretrians who, according to Plutarch,' settled in Corcyra before being ejected by the first Corinthian colonists. On Corcyra, however, the eighth-century material is still too scanty to clarify the date of the Corinthian colony.s If Strabo is correct in making its foundation contemporary with that of Syracuse," we should expect to find an appreciable amount of Corinthian L G on the colonial site; but no Corinthian pottery of this date has been found further north than Dodona.! The oldest sherd from Corcyra, which may be prior to c. 750, is not of Corinthian origin (p. 364) ; but neither does it look particularly Euboean. It is followed by a number of Corinthian pieces, none of which needs be earlier than the end of the eighth century." At present, therefore, there is no archaeological support for a Corinthian foundation before 7°8, the date implied by Eusebius.
IV. Euboea, the Cyclades, Boeotia, and Thessaly Unlike the Peloponnesians, the potters of these regions preserved an Atticizing style well into the second half of the eighth century. In the third quarter, the strict metope system of Attic L G I was widely copied; and there were occasional attempts at representational drawing, after the Attic manner. Even after c. 725, when no fresh inspiration came from Athens, the motifs ofAttic L G I were still reproduced; but the local styles are now easier to recognize through their mannerisms, which become more clearly marked as the century nears its end. There remains, however, a strong family likeness between the styles of the four districts, which is not entirely due to their common derivation from Attic. It should be noted, for example, that the pedestaIled amphora, an imposing shape shared by Boeotian, Euboean, and 'Parian', is absent from the Attic repertoire; again, a form ofThessalian origin, the jug with cut-away neck, has now been found among the local pottery at Lefkandi in Euboea. To some extent, then, we can still speak of this area as a ceramic unity, with Euboea as its centre." Little can be said about Thessaly and Boeotia, owing to the dearth of evidence. The decoration ofThessalian LG seems to have some affinities with Euboean; at the same time, some ideas survive from the ninth-century rectilinear style found at Marmariani (p. 162). From Boeotia there is plenty ofpottery, but very little evidence from organized excavation. Most of the best L G vases are alleged to have come from Thebes; if this provenance is correct, Thebes had by now become the chief centre ofBoeotian art. Boeotian LG combines a backwardness of style with a surprising readiness to tackle ambitious figured themes; the same may be said of the remarkable series of engraved bronze fibulae. Evidently, the Boeotians of the late eighth century were somewhat out of touch with the outside world; but their Hesiodic indifference to commerce was counterbalanced by a growing interest in the expression of epic narrative. Around 700, when Geometric art was dying out in most 1 Qu. Graee. II. 2 Cf. A. J. Graham, Colony and Mother City in Ancient Greece 219ff., n. 6. 3 Strabo VI. 269. • ADChr 18 (1963), 149-50, pi. 187b. 5 PAE 1955, 191, fig. 2. 6 Cf. Boardman, BSA 52 (1957),9.
368 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
parts of Greece, Boeotian LG at last reached its climax in a number of large and lavishly decorated vases; these may be a symptom of rising prosperity, presumably based on agriculture rather than trade. The Cyclades, on the other hand, took a lively part in commercial exchange. The record offour islands can be assessed through the stylistic nuances of their painted pottery. Naxos and Pares' were the most active exporters. Both islands sent vases to AI Mina and Cyprus. Within the Aegean, both islands flooded the Delian sanctuary with their wares; Naxian has been found in Crete, whereas 'Parian' reached Siphnos, Kimolos, Thera, Rhodes, and Samos. Melos exported to Siphnos, Thera, and probably Kimolos; she imported one vase from the Argolid (p. 133) and three from Crete (p. 382). Thera marketed no pottery, except for a few funerary urns ;" perhaps because her own clay was so coarse, she bought a large proportion of her fine wares from overseas. In order of frequency, her imports of the late eighth century come from Corinth, Crete, Rhodes, Paros, Attica, and Melos. The abundance of Cretan wares, which were seldom exported elsewhere, is explained by geography; otherwise, this order offers a fair commentary on the commercial energy ofthe various states. A fifth island, Tenos, already specialized in the production offigured-reliefpithoi, many of which were dedicated at a local sanctuary." Their makers clearly shared the Boeotian enthusiasm for myth, and it is not surprising that the idea spread to Boeotia soon after 700. Finally, Euboea. Before discussing the obscure conflict known as the Lelantine War, it will be as well to review the archaeological evidence, which has been accumulating rapidly during the last ten years. We are now comparatively well informed about New Eretria which, after its settlement in the beginning of the eighth century, soon became one of the largest cities of Greece. Much LG pottery has been found at the earliest temple ofApollo Daphnephoros, situated midway between the harbour and the acropolis about two kilometres inland. Two cemeteries are now known; one, recently discovered under the later West Gate, has produced several LG cremations in bronze vessels.' From the other cemetery, farther out to the west, the offerings from about fifty graves included five gold bands, contemporary with the latest of the Attic series," i.e. c. 720-700; these confirm the impression that Eretria was an opulent and thriving state towards the end of the eighth century. From Chalcis, the L G material is confined to a handful of surface sherds, and a great deal of fragmentary pottery from two wells. Style and fabric are very close to the Eretrian Geometric; in the well groups, at least, the sequence continues after 700 into a Subgeometric phase, as is also true ofthe Eretrian material. Whatever hostilities may have arisen between the two rival states, neither of them seems to have suffered destruction or desertion." Less fortunate was Lefkandi, a large coastal town lying between the two, on the Eretrian edge of the Lelantine Assuming that 'Parian' has been correctly located. Frs, listed in Acta Arch. (Copenhagen) 33 (1962),222, n. 4; cf. BICS 12 (1965),36, n. 2. 3 Schafer, Reliefpitlwi 67ff. In preference to Schafer's earlier dating, I would place his first Tenian group in c. 730-700. See J H S 8 I (1961),217, and cf. Kondoleon, Gnomon 1960, 721-2. • AntK 9 (1966), 121ff. 5 Ohly, Griechische Goldbleche 46ff., pis. 13-14. 6 Boardman suspected that 'Chalcis in the early seventh century fell from prosperity, and was perhaps in part abandoned - at any rate suffered some loss of status in comparison with Eretria' (BSA 52,28). But this judgement was based only on the surface sherds, before the discovery of the wells.
1
2
C·750-7 00
EUBOEA, CYCLADES, BOEOTIA, THESSALY •
369
plain. Lefkandi - its ancient name is not known - had been continuously inhabited through the Dark Age; but its occupation comes to an abrupt end around 720-710. It is not yet clear whether the site was destroyed, or abandoned without destruction. There are enough mannerisms in the Euboean style to allow the recognition of exports in the Levant and in the western colonies. These will receive fuller comment in the later sections ofthis chapter; here it is enough to stress two important facts, which may have some bearing on Euboean politics during this period. In the first place, commercial ties with Corinth seem to have been close from the mid-eighth century onwards, to judge from the copious importation ofCorinthian pottery to Pithecusae and Cumae immediately after their foundations. This impression is confirmed by the Euboean efforts to copy the kotyle, which brought a Corinthian element into a predominantly Atticizing style. At home in Euboea, no less than in Pithecusae, these imitations began sooner, and remained closer to the Corinthian originals, than the kotylai of any other local school (pp. I 93ff.). Even so, there seems to have been some loss ofcontact with the Corinthian sequence at the very end ofthe eighth century. On the Euboean versions, the files of stiff-legged 'soldier-birds' are copied from Corinthian originals of c. 720-710; later, they do not give place to the 'wirebirds', as happens in Corinth in 710-700; but they are eventually followed by linear Subgeometric kotylai like P AE 1952, 162, fig. 11. A second point of interest is the sudden drop in Euboean exports after c. 700. At Al Mina there are large quantities of L G skyphoi and imitations of E P C kotylai; they seem to be especially common at the time ofthe change from Level VIII to VII, in c. 720. Later, a small class ofskyphoi with slip-filled designs may go well past 700; but there are no Subgeometric kotylai. In the West, even before 700, the Euboean colonies had imported more pottery from Corinth than from their mother cities; but in the seventh century, Euboean wares are entirely unknown. Such is the material evidence bearing on the war which the Chalcidians and Eretrians fought over the Lelantine plain - an affair which has been placed in the late eighth century for several valid reasons.' Relations between the two cities may have been embittered by trade rivalries,» but overpopulation was the immediate cause of the war. IfChalcis had been driven by famine to found her colony at Rhegion," it would not be surprising to find her coming to blows with Eretria for the possession ofa small, but fertile plain: geographically, she had the stronger claim. Suitable allies have been found for both protagonists in a conflict which, according to Thucydides," involved the Greek world at large; Corinth, Samos, and Thessaly were ranged on the Chalcidian side, while Eretria was joined by Megara and Miletus. Each of the Euboean cities sought her allies among neighbouring pairs of states, which had their own reasons for mutual animosity. Unfortunately, none of these alliances have any sure reflection in the archaeological record, since each pair ofwarring neighbours shares a common Geometric style: Chalcis and Eretria, Corinth and Megara, Samos and Miletus. Nor is it clear how far the allies on each side were held together by commercial interests. We can say no more than that in the eighth century both Chalcis and Eretria were trading cities, active in the Levant and in the West; that both cities had close dealings with Corinth from c. 750 until c. 710; and that both cities lost their commercial initiative in the 1
See W. G. Forrest, Historia 6 (1957), 160ff.
2
Cf. Boardman, BSA 52, 27.
3
Strabo VI. 257.
• I.
15.
370 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
early seventh century, perhaps as a result of post-war exhaustion. For the actual course of the war, the last decade of the eighth century may have been the most critical period. It was probably in 708 that the Eretrians were ousted from Corcyra by Corinthian colonists (p. 367); the naval assistance to Samos rendered by Ameinocles of Corinth is dated by Thucydides' to 704; finally, if Hesiod won a prize at the funeral games ofAmphidamas of Chalcis, the great Euboean battle in which that prince lost his Iife- should have occurred somewhere near the end of the eighth century. The decline of Corinthian influence on Euboean pottery after c. 7I 0 may be symptomatic ofthe disruption ofpeaceful communications caused by the outbreak of hostilities.
v. Italy and Sicily: Colonies and Trade The Euboean settlers in Pithecusae and Cumae may have been impelled by land hunger to leave their native cities; yet some oftheir number, at least, were not blind to the possibilities of trade in their new homes. The eighth-century finds from Pithecusae show how extensive were their contacts overseas. From the start, Corinthian imported pottery was more plentiful than Euboean, both styles being imitated by the colonial potters. East Greek wares, probably from Rhodes, were not infrequent. Attic L G, Etruscan impasto, Apulian Geometric, Phoenician Red Slip, and a black Syro-Hittite fabric are each represented by one vase. Apart from the pottery, there is a considerable quantity ofNorth Syrian seals, and of Egyptian or Egyptianizing scarabs." At Cumae, Corinthian, Euboean (pp. I94ff.), and East Greek wares occur in about the same proportions as in the Ischian colony. In addition, there is one possibly Cretan sherd.s and a bronze cauldron ofUrartian type, with bull's-head protomes." Nor should we forget the Egyptianizing trinkets purveyed to the native inhabitants (p. 355). The abundance of Oriental objects at both colonies suggests that the Euboean settlers were often visited by their compatriots who were active in the Levant; Phoenician traders, too, may have come this way. Cumae lies on the northern limit ofGreek settlement, but not ofGreek cultural influence. Even before the foundation of Pithecusae, M G I I skyphoi were being exported to Etruria (p. 355); these were locally imitated in a SubMG manner, which may have survived after 750 . 6 The flow ofimports continues with LG metopal skyphoi, whose tell-tale combination of bird and lozenge betrays their Euboean origin;" these, too, gave rise to respectable local copies." From these small beginnings there arose a local painted style, where Euboean L G decorationwas applied to Greek and native shapes alike. It became diffused over most of southern Etruria, as far north as Clusium, with the Tiber as the southern boundary; in addition to the sites already mentioned, it is especially prominent at Vulci and Visentium." This Etruscan metope style may have lasted far into the seventh century, in a diluted Subgeo1 1• 13. 2 Plut. Moralia 153 F. 3 G. Buchner, Metropoli eColonie 263ff., pis. 1--6; Expedition 8.4 (1966), 4ff.; for the Etruscan vase, see Gjerstad, OpRom 5 (1962), 50ff., fig. 30.1. North Syrian seals: G. Buchner andJ. Boardman,JdI8I (1966), rff, • MA 22, 471, fig. 172; BSA 33, 201, fig. 18. • Copenhagen 2952: Amandry, Studies presented toH. Coldman (1956), 242-3, pi. 28. 6 E.g. BSA 33, pi. 3 1, nos. 7 1, 75, 77· 7 Veii: PSc 1963,149, fig. 47£; 271, fig. 132f. Rome: Muller-Karpe, ;;:,ur Stadtwerdung Roms(RM Erganz. 8), pI. 43, 9; Dohrn, RM 71 (1964),8, pi. 2, I. 8 BSA 33, pI. 31, nos. 74, 76. 8 Akerstrom, CSI, pls, 11-14, 17-18; E. H. Dohan, Italic TombCroups, pI. 14, 15; pl, 21, 3; pI. 4 8, 5·
C·750-7 00
ITAL Y: COLONIES, TRADE •
37 I
metric form;' but it must have become established in Etruria by c. 730 at the latest, before the metope decoration of Euboea lost the strictness of the Attic LG I system, from which it had originally been derived." About a generation later, around 700, Corinthian wares began to be imported in quantity, especially at Caere, where the Atticizing metopal scheme seems to have been unknown. 3 These imports gave rise to the style called Italo-Corinthian, and in the seventh century Corinth became the most influential source ofnew ideas for the Etruscan potter. 4 But before 700, it was the Atticizingstyle ofEuboea which gave the Etruscans their first taste ofGreek art. The Euboeans, then, were the first Greeks to trade with the Etruscans. Lured, perhaps, by the mineral wealth ofthe hinterland, a few Euboean merchants may have settled in southern Etruria, just as in the Levantine emporia; for some of the local Geometric vases are close enough to their Hellenic prototypes to betray the hand ofthe Hellenic potter. 5 These metoikoi, no doubt, would have played an important part in spreading the knowledge ofthe Cumaean alphabet during the late eighth century." Cumae and Pithecusae must have profited from these early exchanges; at Pithecusae there is evidence of an iron foundry, for which the ore can only have been mined in Tuscany or Elba. 7 Yet there are two reasons for doubting whether the Etruscan trade was organized by the colonists themselves." In the first place, there appears to be no close correspondence between the late-eighth-century pottery made in the col?nies and the contemporary Hellenic or Hellenizing wares from the Etruscan sites; the colonists preferred, on the whole, to follow Corinthian models rather than the Atticizing metope system current in Etruria.v Secondly, the profusion ofOriental objects in the colonies seems to indicate the presence of Euboean merchants with Levantine experience, who may also have purveyed Oriental work to the Etruscans.v' Passing down the Italian peninsula, we shall find little comparable evidence of trade in the eighth century between Greeks and Italic peoples until we come to the extreme south. Latium, for the time being, was ignored.t- In the Campanian hinterland, M G I I skyphoi are now reported from Suessula and Capuaj'> but Greek exports do not begin in quantity until the end of the century.P 1 E.g. CSI, pis. 24-6; see below n. 4. 2 Cf. the evidence from AI Mina, Levels VIII and VII, pp. 313ff. 8 On the vases in Paris attributed to Caere by Blakeway (BSA 33, 197-9), see Vallet, Rhigionet Zancle 36, n. 5. Corinthian imports at Caere, c. 700--650: MA 42 (1955),223, fig. 12,2 and 4; Albizzati 3-4, nos. 6-9 and 11; Vallet, op.cit. 33, n. 6. Before 700, Etruria ~as yielded only four vases in the Corinthian manner. A hemispherical kotyle from Veii (W. L. Brown, The Etruscan Lion 13, fig. 6a) IS oflocal manufacture. The other three could all be Corinthian imports: a LG skyphos from Narce (BSA 33,196, no. 73, pi. 31), and EPC skyphoifrom Tarquinii (MA 22, 395, fig. 148) and Veii (OpArch 7 (1952), pI. 18, 11). 4 Nevertheless, the metope style was not finally ousted until late in that century. There are, indeed, numerous Etruscan vases of c. 700--650 in which Corinthian and Euboean elements are combined: these hybrid works are most plentiful at Tarquinii (e.g. CSI, pI. 24, 7 and 9; MA 22,380, fig. 138), where both Euboean and Corinthian imports occur. However, some of the Corinthianizing traits may have been inherited not from Corinthian originals, but from Corinthianizing vases made in the early seventh century by the colonists ofPithecusae and Cumae (cf. p. 195). • See Blakeway,JRS 25, 129ff.; BSA 33, 192ff.; Class B. 6 Jeffery, LSAC 236ff. 7 Buchner, Expedition 8.4 (1966), 12. 8 In addition to the argument advanced by R. M. Cook, Historia I 1 (1962), 113-14. 9 PI. 41 d shows one of the few metopal vases yet found in Pithecusae; none has come to light in Cumae. 10 Boardman, The Creeks Overseas 21off. 11 In Latium, there is no sign of Greek influence earlier than an I talo-Corinthian aryballos of c. 690, from Marino by the AIban lake (P. G. Gierow, The Iron AgeCulture of Latium (Lund 1964),11, I, 156, fig. 91, 4). 12 AR 1967, 29; Johannowski, Dialoghi di Archeologia 1.2 (1967), 159ff., pls. 3-16. 13 A skyphos from Suessula, pI. znd, is representative of a large unpublished collection found at that site, consisting ofE PC imports, and Campanian imitations like those made at Cumae and Pithecusae. There is also a deep kotyle from Nola (VS, pi. 17,4).
372 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
At Canale and lanchina, two native cemeteries in the hills above Locri, a Hellenizing painted style flourished contemporarily with the indigenous impasto ware.' The only obvious import is an Attic oinochoe of c. 710 (p. 79); but Greek inspiration is apparent in several of the shapes.t and all the motifs of decoration. To judge from the dumpiness of the shapes and the slackness of the painting," these local painted vases were made by native potters, rather than by Greek metoikoi. Yet the metopal scheme used on the amphorae is evidently borrowed from some Atticizing L G school; and two of the designs - the bird with raised wing, and the hollow lozenge - are of Euboean origin (pp. 193, 195). The style can have been communicated to the natives only in the late eighth century, long before the foundation of'Locri ;' it was probably introduced through Euboean commerce in c. 730-720, at about the same time as the arrival of the Chalcidians at Rhegion. S No eighth-century material has been recovered from Sybaris or Croton, where the deepest levels have not yet been reached. At Taras, however, the colonial cemeteries offer a continuous sequence of burials from the arrival of the Spartans in 706. Among the earliest pottery, there is a great preponderance of Protocorinthian," as is normal in all western colonies during the seventh century. Of greater historical interest are the fragments of two Laconian LG plates, which look about contemporary with the foundation. It is reasonable to assume that they were brought by the first colonists, since the Spartans of c. 700 were not interested in trade; in fact, we know of no more Laconian imports to Taras until the sixth century." These fragments came not from the colony, but from the neighbouring headland of Scoglio del Tonno - a former Mycenaean entrepot which, in the Dark Age, had passed into the hands ofthe lapyges ofApulia. Were they, in their turn, ousted by the first Spartan settlers, or were they suffered to remain as neighbours ofthe Greek colony? Apart from the Laconian pieces, the site has produced several Corinthianizing vases of local make, all meriting a date around 700.8 But it is not clear whether this pottery was used by Greeks or natives, since there is no trace ofany Greek structure - perhaps owing to the poor stratification of the site - until the solid foundations of a small Classical building. 9 The Iapygian occupation of Scoglio del Tonno is represented by a local painted ware, bearing no resemblance to any Greek Geometric school. It is also current at other Apulian sites - notably at Leporano, a coastal settlement twelve kilometres southeast of Taranto, where the sequence is more continuous, and far better stratified, than at Scoglio del Tonno. lapygian Geometric, as the fabric has been named;" has not yet been exhaustively studied, nor is its chronology at all certain; but the style seems to have reached a ripe stage by c. 750-720, to judge from the deposits at Leporano found in the same horizon as a Corinthian MA 31 (1926), 5ff.; BSA 33, I 76ff., pis. 22-3; CSI37ff., pis. 8-10. Skyphoi, kantharoi, oinochoai. The amphorae, on the other hand, are modelled on the native impasto urns, as M.&3 I, pI. 14, 2 and 8, even though both fabrics could have been influenced by Euboean or Cycladic amphorae; see Blakeway, BSA 33, 179, fig. 4, and cf. pI. 4Id (colonial Euboean), and the 'Parian' amphora, pI. 37£. 3 Cf. Akerstrom, CSI44. 4 In 673 according to Eusebius; see Dunbabin, The Western Creeks 35ff. 6 Rhegion's foundation should be placed in the 720'S; later than Zancle, which was itselffounded after Naxos (734); earlier than c. 720, on the assumption that the Corinthianizing L G oinochoe comes from the cemetery (p. 325, n. 11). 8 Ann. 37-8 (195~0), 7ff. 7 Ann. 33-4 (1955-6),8-11. 8 Saflund, Dragma M. P. Nilsson dedicatum 461, figs. I and 3=Taylour, Mycenaean Pottery in Italy "9, nos. 167-8; frs, of a skyphos (Taylour, loco cit. no. 170) and a deep kotyle, both of Subgeometric type, with panels offloating sigmas. 9 NSc 1900,463, fig. 19. 10 Taylour, op. cit, 120. 1
C·750-7 0 0
ITALY, SICILY: COLONIES, TRADE'
373
LG mug.' Iapygian Geometric is unlikely to have persisted far into the seventh century, if it was the parent of the Daunian and Peucetian fabrics studied by Mayer and RandallMaclver ;s for recent evidence from Pithecusae shows that the Daunian style had already arisen by c. 700.3 Thus there is no compelling reason to abandon the hypothesis of'Saflund, who argued that Scoglio del Tonno must have been evacuated by the lapyges very soon after the foundation of Taras.' At Leporano, which is reasonably equated with the sister colony of Satyrion, the arrival of the Greeks is marked by an even sharper break; there the latest lapygian occupation is buried under a layer ofsterile soil, above which lies a colonial stratum of the seventh century, containing nothing but Greek material." Hence there is little sign of any friendly exchange between Greeks and Iapyges, either before or during the colonial movement ;" such a conclusion rests on the withdrawal of the lapyges from Leporano and Scoglio del Tonno, and the absence of any Hellenizing traits in their painted pottery such as we have noted in the wares of Etruria and Calabria. This striking lack of rapport may be partly explained by the non-commercial character of the Spartan colonists, who would have regarded the natives as a military menace rather than as a potential market. No doubt it was with a shrewd knowledge of the Spartan temperament that the Delphic oracle foresaw that Satyrion and Taras would be 'a bane to the Iapyges'.? In Sicily, a single decade (c. 735-725) saw the foundation ofNaxos, Syracuse, Leontini, Catana, Megara Hyblaea, and probably Zancle as well. Here, too, the colonial movement was accompanied by hostilities with the natives; but only at the outset. Syracuse and Leontini were forcibly cleared ofSicels by the first colonists ;" the other four sites were previously uninhabited. Thereafter, relations improved. The Chalcidians of Leontini tolerated the presence ofa Sicel community less than two kilometres from their own city. The Megarians, after three abortive attempts to settle themselves, were granted a suitable site by Hyblon, a Sicel king." When the first colonies were safely established, Corinthian and Euboean traders lost no time in exporting their wares to the Sicel settlements ofthe hinterland.
NOTE Since Blakeway argued for 'trade before the flag' in Sicily (BSA 33, rSo-qr}, much contrary evidence has emerged. When he claimed certain Greek and Hellenizing vases as 'pre-colonial', Blakeway was under the impression that the E P C grave groups from Syracuse were the earliest colonial material. More recently, however, Corinthian LG has been found at Naxos, Leontini, and Megara Hyblaea; and some pieces in that style have been identified among the finds from colonialSyracuse (pp. 322ff. BSA; 42 (1947), 153, fig. 7b; BCH76 (1952),333, fig. 8). This pottery looks contemporary with the oldest Corinthian vase from a Sicel context-
2
1 Bd'A 49 (1964), 75ff., 'grotticella-cuccina'; figs. 20-1, 23, 25; for fig. 23 cf. BSA 48 (1953), pI. 58,1029. See now NSc 1964, 217ff., figs. 34-9; 223-4,fig·44,2. • Mayer, Apulien;R.-Maclver, The IronAge in Italy 211-32. Cf. Taylour, op. cit, 120, 167-8. • Buchner, Metropoli e Colonie 272, pI. 6b-c. • Saflund, op. cit, 48g--go. 6 Bd'A 49 (1964),76-8, figs. 28-33; NSc Ig64, 227ff., figs. 44 (lessno. 2),45-54. 8 Prior to the foundation ofTaras, Greek imports are limited to the Corinthian LG mug mentioned above, and a piece of PG character from Scoglio del Tonno (Taylour, op. cit, 118-1 g, no. 165, pI. 14, Ig). I am not persuaded by G. Lo Porto that the sherds NSc Ig64, 220ff., figs. 41-2, are Greek PG. 7 Strabo VI. 279; Saflund, op, cit. 489. 8 Thuc, vr.g, 2-3. 9 Thuc. VI.4, I.
374 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
the LGskyphosofModica (MEFR68 (1956), pl. I, I). The Euboean pieces from Castellucio (BSA 33, pl. 26, no. 45) do not look any earlier. To prove the existence of pre-colonial trade in Sicily, it would now be necessary to establish at least one of the following premises: I. That Greek material was imported or imitated by the Sicels of Ortygia and/or Leontini, prior to their expulsion by the first colonists; 2. That the oldest Hellenizing pottery from any Sicel context is inspired by a Greek prototype appreciably earlier than e. 735; Le. MG or early LG. At present there is no reliable evidence to support either of these propositions. I. At Ortygia, Orsi found traces of Sicel occupation under the site of the Athenaion, represented by oval huts and pottery (MA 25 (1919), 427ff., figs. 42-3; 499ff., figs. 92 his-108). Unfortunately, there was some confusion between the Siculan and earliest Greek layers (op. eit. 743, lines 31-4;-). Among the material associated with one of the huts, Hellenic influence was suspected by Blakeway and Dunbabin in three sherds painted with triangular patterns (loe. eit. figs. 97-9). Against this view, two points deserve notice. In Greek Geometric, it is very rare for triangles to be hatched in one direction only, as here; secondly, painted triangular patterns have a long pedigree in the pottery ofthe Sicilian Iron Age (see B. Brea, Sicilybefore theGreeks, fig. 36a, Siculan I n, preceded by op.cit. fig. 30, Ausonian n, dated by Brea to e. 1000-850). The sherds in Orsi's fig. 109, hailed by Blakeway as pre-colonial Greek imports, are of colonial Syracusan manufacture (Vallet and Villard, BCH 76,331, n. 4), and of Subgeometric character. At Leontini, the earliest Greek city grew up on the hill of S. Mauro. Deep soundings here have failed to reveal any signs ofSicel habitation (NSe 1955, 362ff.; section, fig. 6I) ; but much ofthe hill remains unexplored. IfThucydides is more loosely interpreted, the users ofthe S. Aloe cemetery, about one and a halfkilometres to the west (RM 15 (1900), 62ff.), might be equated with the Sicels expelled by Theocles and his Chalcidians, since none ofthe pottery there seems much later than e. 700; in that case, Thucydides would have ignored a full generation of peaceful coexistence between Chalcidians and Sicels (c£ Dunbabin, The Western Greeks 45-6). Yet even if this solution is accepted, one must admit that none of the Hellenizing vases from S. Aloe reflects any Greek style earlier than Atticizing LG, in a rather decaying stage. 2. In fact, it is impossible to point to any Hellenizing vases in Sicel cemeteries which mustbe earlier than e. 735. Conceivably, the hatched meanders incised on vases from Finocchito (BSA 33, pl. 27, nos. 52-3) could derive from an MG model; a more likely source, however, is the type ofCorinthian LG krater used by the first colonists at Leontini and Megara Hyblaea (p, 323). A Corinthianizing oinochoe from near Taormina (BSA 33, pl. 26, no. 46) might have been based on an early LG prototype like AJA 45 (1941),33, fig. 6; but the loose chevrons suggest a later date, though still within the period ofCorinthian LG. In general, there is a striking correspondence of style between the earliest pottery in the colonies, and the earliest Hellenizing wares made by Sicels. I therefore share with Villard and Vallet (MEFR 68, 7ff.) a reluctance to believe in pre-colonial trade in these parts.
A reflection ofthis commerce may be seen in the Hellenizing painted wares ofthe natives. This Sicel Geometric style was influenced by both Corinth and Euboea, the Corinthian contribution being the greater. Euboean inspiration is apparent in some vases from S. Aloe, made by the neighbours of the Chalcidians at Leontini. The shapes are mainly of native origin, but their decoration includes several Euboean mannerisms: files of hajched birds, birds with dotted lozenges, and rows of triple concentric circles. 1 At the other Sicel sites, however, it is the Corinthian traits that first catch the eye - chevrons, zigzags, and lozenge chains floating in long, narrow panels; or tall, thin metopes containing double axes. CorinI E.g. RM 15, 62ff., figs. 9, 16,21. For the bird files, Blakeway noted parallels in Boeotian; the complex hatching offigs. 9 and 21 is certainly reminiscent ofBoeotia (cf. Hampe, FGS, pI. 2 I b). It is reasonable to refer these affinities to Euboea (Villard and Vallet, MEFR 68, 23ff.; Boardman, RSA 52, 25), and cf. now PAE 1955, pI. 43b.2, from Eretria. The circles offig. 16 (and also RM 13, 342, figs. 59, 60) could have been taken from the tall rims of Euboean skyphoi, like the example exported to Castelluccio; seep. 192 n·5·
c. 750-700
ITALY, SICILY: COLONIES, TRADE'
375
thian shapes, too, were copied; notably, the plump oinochoe,' the Thapsos-type skyphos, and the kotyle.s Corinthianizing work is especially common at Finocchito and Medica," two cemeteries in the extreme south ofthe island; for the sites in this area, Syracuse would have supplied the ceramic inspiration, and her merchants must have had some hand in spreading the style inland. Yet the Corinthian element in Sicel Geometric cannot always be attributed to Corinthian enterprise. All the colonists - Chalcidians and Megarians as well as Corinthians - were themselves importing the fine wares of Corinth; hence arose a local Siceliot style, where Corinthian shapes and motifs were always predominant, whatever the origin ofthe colonists.s There are good grounds for believing that the Sicel potters learned most of their Hellenizing habits from this colonial fabric, and not from imported Greek originals. 5 This view receives additional support from the presence of Corinthianizing Sicel vases at S. Aloe and Ossini," whose nearest Greek neighbours were the Chalcidians of Leontini. In comparison with Corinthian and Euboean, other Geometric schools play only a minor part in the record ofeighth-century Sicily; no other regional style had any noticeable effect on the pottery of the Sicels. In some colonies, Attic and Argive were imported in small quantities." At Mylai, a daughter colony ofZancle, the painted hydriai may be of Cycladic origin or inspiration.s but few, ifany, can be prior to 700, since the colony was founded only in c. 7I 6. Rhodian wares begin to arrive around 700.9 At Gela, the tradition of a joint foundation by Rhodians and Cretans is happily confirmed by the character of the earliest colonial pottery.w A Sicel sanctuary nearby has produced a small pyxis of Cretan type;'! probably made by one ofthe first colonists. In the homeland, the Cretan-style vases ofGela have no parallels in the Knossos area; their only close relations are among the material found in or near the Messara plain (p. 257, n. 4), and it is likely that the Cretan contingent came from the south of the island. Painted Geometric pottery is our chiefguide to the relations between the Greeks and the peoples of Italy and Sicily. In Central Italy, Greek merchants were already active in the generation before the founding of Pithecusae (p. 355) ; elsewhere, there is little sign of any Hellenic contacts before the establishment of the first colony in any given area. The commercial energy of the colonists may be gauged by the degree of Hellenic influence on the pottery of their native neighbours. The results ofsuch an analysis are in harmony with the commercial record of the mother cities. From what we know of the Spartans at home, it comes as no surprise that the first Tarentines did not trade with the Iapyges. Corinth, on the other hand, was as enterprising in the West as in the Aegean; her merchants hawked her fine pottery in every colony, and the Syracusans were not slow in establishing relations with the Sicel interior. Most energetic of all, however, were the Euboeans, especially in their exchanges with the natives. It was they who took the lead in the Etruscan trade; they were also active in Calabria; in Sicily, they at least kept pace with the Corinthians. Some distinc1 As RSA 43 (1948), pl. 8, nos. 129, 131. • Cf. MEFR 68, 12-14. 3 GSI, pl. 2; Ampurias 15-16 (1953-4),23 1, pI. 18. • E.g. MegaraHyhlaea H, I39ff., pI. I22ff. 5 See Villard and Vallet, loco cit. 6 RM 15, 62ft, figs. 14, 15,20; GSl, pI. I, 1-4. 7 pp. 361, 364. The seventh-century kraters in the 'Fusco'style, once thought to be Argive imports, are now seen to be local copies of Argive Subgeometric; see p. 147. 6 Mylai 108-10, pI. 47. 9 MegaraHyhlaea H, pI. 62, 2. 10 Rhodian: NSc 1960, 225, fig. 16; NSc 1962,393, fig. 72. Cretan: MA 17 (1906),124-5, pl, 5, 2; NSc 1956,3°5, fig. 23. 11 MA 17,596, fig. 404; RSA 33,183, no. 32, pI. 24.
376 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
tion, perhaps, may be observed between the nature oftheir dealings with the Etruscans and the Sicels. In Etruria, the merchants seem to have come from the mother cities rather than from the colonies ofPithecusae and Cumae; the case rests partly on the presence ofOriental imports in the colonies, and partly on the resemblance of Etruscan Geometric to the home products of Euboea. Sicily, on the other hand, does not appear to have lured many traders from the Aegean; here there is no trace ofOriental contact, and the closest affinities ofSieel Geometric are with the colonial wares; hence, it was the colonists who traded with the Sicels. The general impression is that Etruria had more to offer the Greek prospector than any other part of the western world. Etruria received the first Greek visitors; after the colonial movement had begun, Etruria alone could attract merchants from the Greek homeland. If the Euboeans held the commercial initiative in the late eighth century, the immediate future lay with Corinth. After c. 700 Corinthian wares flooded all the western markets, and Corinth ousted Euboea as the chief source of inspiration for the Italian potters. For this sudden decline in Euboean enterprise, the most convincing explanation may be sought in the exhaustion ofChalcis and Eretria at the end of the Lelantine war.'
VI. Aeolis, Ionia, and Caria; Lydia and Phrygia Three main developments in this quarter call for comment. First, the consolidation and growth ofthe Greek cities; secondly, the beginning ofa new colonial movement in the northeast corner of the Aegean; and thirdly, the increasing amount ofintercourse between the Greeks and the peoples of the Anatolian hinterland. The excavation ofOld Smyrna offers the clearest picture of an expanding polis ofaverage size.s The city area was already becoming congested with houses ofcurvilinear plan, whose number in the late eighth century is estimated at about 450. Although the economy was mainly agricultural, some commerce is indicated by Corinthian, Attic, Chiot, and Aeolic imports; the abundance ofbird-kotylai implies some intercourse with Rhodes. But the most striking feature is the presence of fortifications, first erected in the ninth century, then repaired and extended in the late eighth; during the Geometric period, city walls form the exception rather than the rule. What menace prompted their construction at Smyrna? No Cimmerians were yet on the warpath; there was no danger from Lydia until the reign of Gyges, in the early seventh century. Before this, the only recorded conflicts were between Greeks: the seizure of Smyrna by the Ionians" and the war which ended in the destruction ofMelia. For the latter, a terminus postquem may now be forthcoming from the site identified as Melia, whosefloruit is placed in the eighth century on the strength of Geometric finds.' The colonial movement to the northeast, as far as we can judge from the archaeological evidence, began with the resettlement of Troy, deserted since the end of the Bronze Age. The earliest datable vases of the eighth city are bird-kotylai ofRhodian type," c. 720-700; but some sherds with semicircular decoration may be older." Eighth-century sherds have also been found at Larisa, Colonae, and Hamaxitus, three small sites on the west coast ofthe Buchner, Metropoli e colonie 272; cf. above p. 369. 2 ] . M. Cook, BSA 53-4 (1958-9), 14-22. P. 338; cf.]. M. Cook, op. cit. 13-14. 4 AR for 1964-5,49-5°. 5 Troy IV, 256: pl. 303, 9-10; pl. 3°8,14-17. 6 E.g. Troy IV, pl. 303, 8; pl. 314,4; Schmidt-Schliemann 192, no. 3921; cf. Boardman inJHS 82 (1962), 197.
1
3
c. 750-700
AEOLIS, IONIA, CARIA •
377
Tread.' The tradition of Aeolian colonization is supported by the abundance of local grey wares at Troy, closely related to Lesbian bucchero.t The occupation ofTroy must have secured for the Greeks free access to the Hellespont; but it remains an open question how far they exploited this advantage before 700. Eighthcentury dates are given or implied by Eusebius for the first colonies in the Propontis (Cyzicus, Astacus, Parion) and on the southern shore of the Black Sea (Sinope, Trapezus)," but none of these dates has yet received any archaeological confirmation. Soundings at Cyzicus and Sinope produced nothing prior to the late seventh century;' the other three colonies have yet to be excavated. It is likely, however, that the southern shore ofthe Propontis was known to the Greeks by c. 700 at the latest, because a settlement at Daskylion, about thirty kilometres inland from Cyzicus, has yielded Corinthian and East Greek pottery ofthat time." More problematical is the date of the earliest Greek penetration into the Black Sea. The evidence is mainly Iiterary ;" but stray Geometric pots are alleged to come from Berezan? and Histria," near the mouths ofthe Dnieper and the Danube respectively. Both provenances must be viewed with some reserve, not only because the organized excavations of these colonial sites have turned up no other material prior to the late seventh century. Yet some casual commerce in this direction during the eighth century is not entirely out of the question, before the establishment of permanent colonies. It remains to consider the relations between the Greek cities and their neighbours inland. In Caria, we have already noted the presence of a Hellenizing L G fabric at Sinuri, near Mylasa, offered at a native shrine (p. 296); the style is sufficiently Greek to suggest the infiltration of metoikoi among the Carian inhabitants. To judge from fragmentary surface finds, the influence of East Greek pottery reached as far as the upland valleys between Pamphylia and the upper Meander. This was the centre of a Southwest Anatolian school of painted ware, owing much ofits inspiration to the Aegean; although the Greek prototypes are mainly post-Geometric, some ofthe earliest Hellenizing pieces betray knowledge ofLG shapes and motifs." A similar style was current in Lycia; an imported L G sherd is among the oldest material from Xanthos, dating the earliest occupation of that site to the end of the eighth century.P Farther north, there were intermittent exchanges between the Greek world and the Anatolian powers of the interior. Lydia was in touch with the Ionic cities long before the accession of Gyges. The earliest graffiti from Old Smyrna include what may by a Lydian inscription of the late eighth century.P Surer evidence comes from Sardis, where a deep sounding has revealed several successive floors of the early Iron Age. Well below the CimM. Cook,ARfor 1959-6°,3°. 2 Troy iv; 252. 2 See R. M. Cook,JHS66 (1946), 72, 77. Akurgal, Anatolia I (1956), 15; Vorliiufiger Bericht iiber die Ausgrabungen in Sinope, Ankara (1956), 4ff., pl. I. 5 Anatolia I, 24. 6 See A. ] . Graham, B I CS 5 (1958), 25ff., for a full discussion. • AA 1910,227, fig. 27: small hydria, dealer's provenance; cf. R. M. Cook,JHS 66 (1946), 76, n. 90. Attic or Atticizing MG 11; cf. CVA Athens I, pI. 4, 2I, from the Isis grave. 8 Cambridge, Museum of Classical Archaeology IS.I: rim of Euboean LG kotyle likeBSA 47 (1952),3, fig. 1,4. Prof. R. M. Cook kindly allowed me to examine and to mention this piece. • ]. Birmingham, AS 14 (1964), 3D-3, figs. 4-24. N.B. especially fig. 4, a meander cross-hatched in the East Greek manner; fig. 7, a nicked hemispherical kotyle. For the distribution of this style see]. Mellaart, Belleten 19 (1955), I55ff. 10 Xanthos tt, 17; 78, n. 5. 11 BSA 59 (1964),4°, no. 2.
1]. 4
378 .
c. 750-700
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
LYDIA, PHRYGIA •
379
merian destruction level, a deposit contained some pieces of East Greek LG,l perhaps c. 750-725. Still earlier Greek imports are claimed by the excavator, including part ofa 'bowl' with pendent concentric semicircles.t The frequent recurrence of this motif on the local painted pottery may prove to be a sign of Greek influence, especially when the semicircles are drawn with a compass and multiple brush;" if the idea comes from Greece, it was probably transmitted at some time between 900 and 750, when pendent concentric semicircles were most fashionable in the Aegean. It remains to be seen, however, whether there is any correspondence ofshape as well as of decoration. On the strength of the available evidence, it seems that Lydian potters were already borrowing a few Greek motifs in the eighth century; but their debt to Greece became much greater during the period of the Mermnad dynasty in the seventh and early sixth centuries. Central Anatolia, in the Late Geometric period, was dominated by the kingdom of Phrygia, which reached the zenith of its power under the great Midas. Excavations at Gordion, its capital, have shown that the Phrygians were well ahead ofthe Greeks in several aspects of their material culture; notably, in architecture and bronzework. It is the bronzes that offer the clearest evidence of Greek borrowing from Phrygia. Several creations of the Phrygian bronzesmith - mesomphalic phialai, shallow bowls with spool handles, fibulae with bosses or reels - had a wide circulation in the East Greek world, and even reached the chiefsanctuaries of the Greek mainland. Belts ofPhrygian type were locally manufactured in several Ionic cities.' The Phrygians, in their turn, imported or imitated Urartian cauldrons fitted with protomes in the form of sirens ('Assurattaschen') or bulls' heads. Since similar protomes have been found in Greece, there are good grounds for believing in an overland trade route running along the whole length ofAnatolia from Urartu to the Greek cities on the west coast, passing through Gordion. For the operation ofthis route, conditions were especially favourable at the end of the eighth century, when both Phrygia and Urartu were powerful, centralized kingdoms, united in opposition to Assyria. This overland traffic would have been severely disrupted in the early seventh century, when Cimmerian marauders sacked Gordion and threw the whole of eastern Anatolia into turmoil. 5 HPhrygian bronzesmiths had much to teach the Greeks, one cannot make the same claim for Phrygian potters. Before 700, we know ofno exchange ofpottery between Phrygians and Greeks." At Gordion, and in the heart ofPhrygia, the commonest ware is grey monochrome: this may prove to have some affinities with the corresponding fabrics ofLydia and the Aeolis, but many of the shapes seem to be locally derived from plump metal prototypes. Painted pottery was also current at Gordion during the latest pre-Cimmerian times; and it has a longer history farther east, in the land of the Halys bend. The earliest stage is most abundantly represented in Level IV at Alishar Huyiik ;" the typical decoration consists ofanimals drawn in silhouette, with compass-drawn circles in the field. Although Greek affinities have
So far, we have been considering only the Phrygian contributions to Greece. Did the Greeks offer anything in return, before the kingdom ofMidas succumbed to the Cimmerians? The finds at Gordion suggest two possible answers to this question: mercenaries, and alphabetic writing. An ivory furniture plaque, from one of the pre-Cimmerian princely houses, portrays a Greek cavalryman wearing a Corinthian helmetj- a surprising choice of subject for a Phrygian craftsman, if Greek soldiers were not occasionally enrolled in the service of king Midas. The evidence from alphabetic inscriptions is more equivocal. The Greek and Phrygian alphabets share the same system of vowels, and therefore cannot have been derived independently from the vowelless Phoenician script. Somewhere along the line of transmission, Greek and Phrygian scribes must have collaborated. Three possibilities arise. Either the Phrygians learned their alphabet from the Greeks of Asia Minor; or the knowledge of the alphabet spread in the other direction, from Phrygia to the west coast; or the vowelled
BASOR 162 (Apr. 1961), 14ff.,fig. 5, top row; [LP 1961, 537, fig. 6, bottom row, nos. 1,3,4. 2 BASOR 177 (Feb. 1965), 14. E.g. BASOR 162 (Apr. 1961),23, fig. 12; Archaeology 20 (1967), 67. 4 Boardman, Anatolia 6 (1961), 179ff. 5 On Phrygian bronzes and the overland route, see]. M. Birmingham, AS I I (1961), 185ff.; R. S. Young, PAPS 107.4 (1963), 348ff. 8 No Phrygian pottery, of any date, has been found in the Aegean. The earliest known Greek vase in Phrygia is a Rhodian bird-bowl of Group I, c. 690-675 (see p. 299), from a tumulus near Ankara; Akurgal, Smyrna 89, pI. AI; Phrygische Kunst 57, pI. H3. 1 Akurgal, Phrygische Kunst Iff., pis. 1-7. Akurgal calls this ware 'Early Phrygian', although Hieroglyphic Hittite appears to have been the language spoken in this district. See]. Mellaart, Belleten 19 (1955), 124-6; cf. M.]. Mellink, AJA 6I (1957), 394. Massive excavations at Gordionhave yielded only a very few sherds of this ware (AJA 64 (1960),235, pI. 58, fig. 15).
Akurgal, op. cit. roff., pI. 10-12,14-21. Akurgal, op.cit, 46-7; I. Strem, ActaArch. (Copenhagen) 33 (1962),228,232. 'Parian' shares with Phrygian two curious mannerisms otherwise unknown in Greek vase-painting: I. A deep U-shaped re-entrant between a bird's wing and body: cf. Thera] 4 (A M 28 (1903), Beil, 27. 2) and Akurgal, op. cit. pis. 16, 19b, from Gordion, Tumulus Ill. 2. Reservation of an animal's shoulder, the rest of the body being spotted or striped: cf. Thera] 7 (A M 28, BeiI. 28) with AJA 61 (1957), pI. 93, fig. 25, and Akurgal, Die Kunst Anatoliens, fig. 50, both from Gordion, Tumulus P. 4 AJA 64 (1960), 240, pI. 60, fig. 25c; see A. M. Snodgrass, Early Greek Armour and Weapons 27. a AJA 61, 330, n. 23.
1
3
been claimed for this ware, I cannot feel that it is related to any school ofAegean Geometric. It is only when the pottery reaches a 'ripe' stage that there is any obvious rapport with Greek work.' Some ofthe latest pre-Cimmerian vases from Gordion are decorated in a rich metopal style, somewhat reminiscent of East Greek L G; but the most striking correspondences of detail are with the outlined birds and animals of the 'Parian' or Linear Island amphorae of the early seventh century." Since the Phrygian drawing is in every respect more advanced than the 'Parian', it follows that the island potters were following a Phrygian model, and not vice versa. This conclusion is borne out by the relative chronology of the two fabrics, ifthe Phrygian vases are correctly dated around 700.3 NOTE Akurgal, op. cit. 33££" believes that the Alishar IV style arose under strong Greek influence during the period ofAttic 'Ripe' Geometric (LG I), and dates it accordingly to c. 775-725. In the light ofrecent stratigraphical evidence from Bogazkoy, this chronology may have to be raised into the ninth century (R. Opificius, MD 0 G 95 (1965), 87-8)· If the beginning of the style is placed before 800, the animals cannot have been based on Greek Geometric. In any case, Akurgal's Greek parallels are far from convincing. Much of his case rests on some LG sherds from Samos, showing less than halfofa horse (AM 54 (1929), Beil. 8,1-3); this creature has nothing in common with the Alishar animals, except the straightness of its legs. Furthermore, long rays and circular filling ornaments, which are the hallmarks of the Alishar IV style, are extremely rare in Greek Geometric. Nothing is gained, however, by reversing this supposed current of influence (as M. J. Mellink, A]A 61, 393). The Samian pieces in question are not Phrygian imports, nor do they show any sign ofinspiration from Alishar IV. The style ofthe horse is related to Naxian work, but the hatching ofthe mane is a typically Samian mannerism (see p. 292). For the North Syrian affinities of Alishar IV ware, see Opificius, loc. cit.
1
2
380 .
parent of both alphabets was evolved by Greeks and Phrygians residing together somewhere in the Levant. The least likely hypothesis is the second, since the earliest Greek inscriptions preserve three near-Phoenician letter forms, none of which is found in Phrygia.' The third possibility has been aired by R. S. Young, after his discovery of five alphabetic graffiti in the Great Tumulus at Gordion,> These he dates to c. 725, partly because the gifts in the tomb include a superb bronze situla in the form of a lion's head recalling Assyrian work at the time ofSargon 11 (722-705), and partly from a conviction that the king immured in the tomb was the predecessor ofthe famous Midas who figures in Assyrian records between 7 I 7 and 709.3 U ntil the graffiti have been subjected to epigraphical analysis, the strength ofYoung's case cannot be fairly assessed; but it may receive some support from a more recently discovered graffito, in a context preceding the final pre-Cimmerian occupation of Gordion.s In the meantime, one may doubt whether the new evidence is weighty enough to exclude the first, and strongest, ofour hypotheses - that alphabetic writing came to the Phrygians from the West, and not directly from the Levant. According to the chronology suggested in this book (p. 33 I ), the earliest known Greek inscription will still be at least fifteen years older than the inscriptions from the Great Tumulus; and the existence of eighth-century graffiti from Old Smyrna- suggests a possible route of transmission, through Ionia and Lydia.
VII. The Dodecanese This eventful period saw a sudden increase in the commercial enterprise of Rhodes. In the past, this island had always been a convenient entrepot for visitors hawking their goods between Aegean and Levantine waters; two massive gold bands, from a Camiran tomb of c. 750,6 show that the local merchants were not slow to profit from these callers. Yet it is only after c. 725 that the Rhodians begin to assume the initiative, and to market their wares abroad. During the next generation, Rhodian pottery reached all the liveliest centres of Greek commerce, from Pithecusae in the West to AI Mina in the East; its volume is exceeded only by Corinthian exports of the same period. Like Corinth, the Rhodian cities found a ready market for unguent vases and fine drinking vessels. Rhodian bird-kotylai were especially popular in the eastern Aegean, where they found many imitators; their distinctive style may thus go far towards explaining the striking uniformity of all East Greek L G (pp. 279, 298). Rhodian unguent vases are interesting not only for their wide distribution, but also for their markedly Near Eastern character (p. 276). Links with Cyprus are now stronger than ever. A whole family of new forms, of which the globular aryballos is the most important, betrays the influence of Cypriot prototypes in both shape and ornament, with only slight modifications to suit Hellenic taste. Seeing that their inspiration came from the East, one is Sidelong alpha, crooked iota, five-limbed mu; seejeffery, LSAG 23ff. AJA 62 (1958), 153-4, pI. 25, fig. 21; PAPS 107.4 (1963),362-4. 3 Archaeology 11 (1958), 231. Akin to the lion situla, lac. cit. 229, is a bronze fr. from a similar vessel at Veii, accompanied by a Corinthianizing kotyle ofLG type: see W. L. Brown, The Etruscan Lion 12-13, pI. 6a-b. • AJA 70 (1966), 276, pI. 73, fig. 22. For this piece Young suggests a date in the first half of the eighth century, while admitting the obscurity of earlier Phrygian chronology. 6 eR 6-7, 200, fig. 239. s jeffery, BSA 59 (1964),40. 1
2
c·750-7 00
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
DODECANESE·
381
not surprised that the Rhodian versions were always exported in a westerly direction.' Since the commercial initiative in Cyprus rested in Phoenician hands (p. 347), it is likely that these forms were introduced to the Rhodians through Phoenician enterprise, although their circulation round the Greek world must have been a Rhodian achievement. More specifically Phoenician are the local copies of vases in the red slip technique. The chief form, the bulbous 'mushroom-topped' flask, may have provoked some more elegant versions in Cretan, Euboean, and 'Parian' workshops (pp. 179, 191; pI. 41 f); but in Rhodes there was no attempt at Hellenization. Even though their clay is Rhodian, it is hard to accept these ungainly vessels as the work ofGreek potters. Just as the Hellenizing Geometric of Etruria implies the settlement ofa few Greek metoikoi among the natives, even so the Red Slip fabric of Rhodes betrays the presence of resident Phoenician artisans. This conclusion is in harmony with Dunbabin's view concerning the Egyptianizing objects offaience found on the island: namely, that their huge abundance is due to the existence of a local factory, set up by Phoenician rather than Egyptian craftsmen.s Since there is no other trace ofPhoenician residents in the material record, their number must have been very small. Yet the numerous Oriental imports in more precious media and the local imitations which they inspired - all serve to show how lively was the traffic between Rhodes and the Levant." In these exchanges the Rhodians were at least as active as the Phoenicians by the last quarter of the century; the settlement of a few Phoenicians on their island is more than counterbalanced by the arrival of a Rhodian contingent at AI Mina (p. 385). And since her merchants were no less busy in a westerly direction, Rhodes must rank as an important disseminator of Oriental influences on the art of other Greeks. Ifher own potters were slow to evolve an 'Orientalizing' style-in the accepted sense of the word-this is surely because they were gifted with less artistic imagination than their contemporaries on the Greek mainland. Cos is the only other Dodecanesian island where the evidence is plentiful enough to invite conclusions. Nearly all the extant material comes from cemeteries under the modern capital in the north of the island. Here a continuous sequence of at least one hundred burials, beginning in the tenth century, comes to an abrupt end at a point midway through the LG series of Rhodes,' in c. 720-710. Thereafter, no finds are recorded until the fifth century, although the site has been explored at many points. This apparent lacuna should be considered in relation to recent topographical research. From Strabo and Diodorus we learn that the islanders moved their sovereign city in 366, from Cos Astypalaia to Cos Meropis. With good reason, G. E. Bean and J. M. Cook identify Meropis with the site under the modern town, and locate Astypalaia on a commanding eminence near the south end of the island." This being so, we must concede that Meropis was also the chief city in Mycenaean and Geometric times, if one may judge from the visible remains. The sudden end of the Geometric sequence in the cemeteries of Meropis could well be explained by a general migration to Astypalaia, when that city first assumed the primacy;" but this must remain a tentative hypothesis until the deepest levels at Astypalaia have been sounded. Exochi 155-6. 2 Dunbabin, GEN 49; cf. T. H. G. james, Perachora 11, 462-3. Gold: see Exochi 171 on discs paralleled only in Cyprus. Bronze: Lindos I, protomes, figurines, harness. Ivory: see Barnett, Nimrud Ivories 128-g; influence of ivory work on pottery, Exochi 148ff., p. 275, and Kardara, RhA 31. • P. 288; L. Morricone, Bd'A 35 (1950),322. • BSA 52 (1957), 119-26. 61oc•cit. 123.
1
3
382 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
VIII. Crete In this age of ferment, the pottery forms only a minor part of Crete's material record; but it is still the most sensitive index ofregional differences within the island. Three local variations may now be distinguished. The most advanced is the Central L G style of Knossos, which spread along the north coast as far as the gulfofMirabello, and also into the Lasithi plain. Within this wide region are the cave shrines ofIda and Dicte, sources ofso much ofthe most ambitious work in other materials. A southern school was based on the Messara plain and the surrounding foothills; although owing much to Knossos, its style is more conservative, and less open to foreign influences. It was probably from this area that Cretan colonists sailed to Gela in 689, since the southern school supplies the only close parallels to the earliest Geloan cremation pithoi (p. 257, n.4). Finally, in the eastern peninsula from Vrokastro onwards, there reigned a wild and exuberant style bearing little relation to either of the other schools. Here lav the heart of the Eteocretan country, although Eteocretan inscriptions have also bee~ found at Dreros and Psychro, within the eastern boundary of the central style. Crete, unlike Rhodes, made no sudden leap into the export trade. After c. 725 her pottery began to travel abroad, but only in very limited quantities. Thera, her nearest neighbour, was her only regular customer. 1 Elsewhere, three vases are known from Melos,» five from Delos," fragments of a large vase from Athens,' and perhaps one sherd from Cumae.s In more precious materials, a gold finial from Ithaca," a bronze openwork stand from Delphi, and three bronze votive shields from Delphi, Dodona, and Miletus' are the only exports of this period which can be attributed with reasonable confidence to Cretan workshops. Crete's relations with the Near East still seem to have been as one-sided as in earlier Geometric times. Nothing from the island has come to light in the North Syrian emporia; yet she was now receiving a wide variety of Oriental imports and influences. Their sources have been discussed at length by many scholars, and most recently by Boardman;" only a brief summary is required here. The Phoenicians supplied ivories, figured bronze bowls, and black-on-red unguent flasks of Cypriot make; the last were imitated in Central Crete, and some Knossian goldwork could hardly have been made without the guidance ofPhoenician goldsmiths. The famous bronze shields from Mount Ida" combine several Near Eastern influences, communicated by immigrant craftsmen rather than through casual imports.P Students of their style have defined Phoenician, North Syrian, Urartian, and Assyrian elementsj-' perhaps it takes a Phoenician to mix all four strains while passing on his craft to Cretan exports to Thera, c. 725--65°: Thera 11, figs. 193,212,368, 369a, 499a-e, h-o; AM 28 (1903), 140ff., class C nos. 6,13,17 (Eteocretan?), 38--56, 62-5; perhaps 2I3ff., class R 1-7, with Thera rr, figs. 79, 243a-b. The necked pithoi look ~outh Cretan; cf. P·257· • T. Burgon, Transactions oftheRoyalSociety of Literature 11, vOI.II (1847), 286, and pI. facing 296, London 52.12-20.5 (cf. Fortetsa no. 15°9); G. Pe1legrini, Bologna Gat. I, fig. I; Smithsonian Institute (Washington) 5475, lekythos, unpublished. 3 Delosx, pI. 55, nos. 660, 662-3; Delosxv, pI. 50,13, and pI. 52, 15. 4 Graef-Langlote; 31, nos. 313-14. 5 P. 370, n. 4. A large class of closed vessels from Cumae and Pithecusae, often called Cretan, are more probably Euboean; see pp. 194-5 and Buchner, Metropoli e Golonie 268--g. • BSA 43 (1948), pl, 46, G4; see Robertson, BSA 50 (1955),37. 7 BGH68--g (1944-5),45-9, pI. 3, I; 56--61, pI. 4, I; Kunze, KB 281 and pI. 51d. a eGO I34ff.; especially 14g-54. • I follow Boardman's dating of the shields to within the century 750--650; see GGO 83-4. le Dunbabin, GEN 40-1. 11 Subsequent to Kunze, KB; see especiallyH. Hencken, AJA 54 (1950), 297ff.
c·750-70 0
CRETE·3 83
Cretan pupils. More exclusively North Syrian is the character of some bronze figurines ;' sealstones were imported from that quarter, and one Knossian potter was already rendering Syro-Hittite lions before 700.2 Another North Syrian notion is the use of a mould for terracotta modelling; although even the earliest of Cretan moulded work may be later than 700,3 it is arguable that the Cretans led the Greek world in this technique. All these ideas, imports, and influences were most probably transmitted through Al Mina and the other North Syrian emporia; hence, too, came work from the remote interior, like the bronze pendant of'Luristan' type found at Fortetsa.' With so much Oriental commerce coming their way, the Cretans had little need to seek markets overseas. The rich offerings ofIda, Dicte, and Knossos show that they had become one of the most prosperous of Greek peoples without having had to exert themselves overmuch. Why were they so privileged? Since the late ninth century, Crete had been regularly visited by Phoenician traders; but now she had an important new role to play, as a midway station between the Levant and the lucrative markets of Etruria." At this juncture, it is interesting to contrast the records of Crete and Rhodes. In the seventh century there were to be frequent exchanges between the two islands; witness the joint foundation of Gela, the sharing of the 'Dedalic' style in plastic art, and the export of Rhodian pottery to Crete." There is a curious lack of any similar contacts during the period under consideration; this lack of rapport is striking enough to suggest that the route between the two islands lay athwart the main currents of Mediterranean trade, in which the major roles were played by Euboeans, Corinthians, Phoenicians, and Etruscans. For a Phoenician merchant, Rhodes and Crete were the nearest points of entry into the Greek world; but they were alternative points of entry. Beyond Rhodes lay the moderate resources of the Aegean, and the Greek mainland; beyond Crete, the wealth ofthe West awaited exploitation. In both spheres, the Phoenicians had to face stiff competition from the Greeks. As we have seen, they were not idle along the Rhodian route; yet there is evidence to suggest that a greater volume oftheir shipping was attracted to the West, via Crete. It is against this background that we should view the passivity of the Cretans, at a time when the Rhodians suddenly became so commerciallyactive. One is tempted to wonder whether the lure of Etruria may not have diverted much of the Levantine traffic from the Rhodian to the Cretan route, thereby forcing the Rhodians to seek their markets abroad; but this is mere speculation. The fact remains that Crete was a vitally important station along the main route from the Levant to the West; consequently, her art was open to strange currents of Oriental influence, which more or less bypassed the rest of the Aegean.
1
IX. The Greeks in the Levant During the second halfofthe eighth century the Levant passed under Assyrian domination. The conquest was achieved by Tiglath-Pileser IH (745-727) and consolidated by Sargon I I (722-706). The coming of the Assyrians was not fatal to the Levant trade ofthe Greeks; but the circulation of Greek pottery was still confined to the northeastern corner of the GGO IIB--20. 2 Fortetsa no. 1435, pI. 162; pp. 253-4. 3 eeo 109. • Fortetsa 199, no. 1570. The evidence for this assumption is discussed below pp. 38g-90; cf. K. R. Maxwell-Hyslop, Iraq 18 (1956), 159ff. • GeO 152, n. 9.
1
5
384 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
Mediterranean. Three areas call for separate comment: Cyprus, North Syria, and Cilicia. No Cypriot city ofthe eighth century has yet been excavated; but about a dozen imported L G vases have come to light in Cypriot cemeteries. With the exception ofone Attic oinochoe, these are all of Cycladic or Euboean origin; the most distinguished are the three figured vases from Naxos, including the splendid krater found by Cesnola at Kourion.' In addition, there are occasional signs ofAegean influence on Cypriot Geometric. Skyphoi and kraters, the most frequent shapes among the imports, were sometimes imitated;" hatched meanders and quatrefoils sometimes found their way on to Cypriot vases before 700.3 Yet such influences were never more than sporadic, since the Cypriot potters had their own long-standing tradition of Geometric decoration. Whenever their context is known, these imports come from chamber tombs of the traditional Cypriot type, where they are always vastly outnumbered by the local wares; hence there is no cause to suspect the presence ofAegean metoikoi. Yet the Greek rulers of Cyprus, like their kinsmen in the Aegean, were becoming increasingly aware and proud of their Mycenaean ancestry; this is clearly shown by the lavish chariot burials recently discovered at Salamis and Paphos, in an impressive group of built tombs dating from the early eighth to the early seventh century. 4 In North Syria, the progress of Greek trade can best be followed at the emporium of Al Mina. Around 750, at the beginning ofPeriod VIII, 5 the warehouses were laid out on a more substantial scale." To judge from the pottery of Level VIII - in so far as it can be separated from Level IX - the population still included a minority of Greeks among a majority of Levantines.? Among the Greek contingent, Euboeans and Cycladic islanders were still predominant, although Rhodian pottery had begun to arrive by 725. The imports are now supplemented by fine local skyphoi, where the decoration is Greek, but the internal banding and the bichrome scheme are in the Levantine tradition:" this fabric was exported to Tell Sukas," and perhaps to Cyprus." AI Mina seems to have been a depot for the shipment of ivory tusks from the Syrian interior, where elephants abounded in the eighth century, but were scarce thereafter." In rePI. 35. See Dunbabin's list (GEN 72-3, section 3(a)), where (i) 12 is Attic, now illustrated BCH 87 (1963),362, fig. 56; (i) 4-5 and (ill) I are Naxian; (i) 6-8, (ii) 2, (ill) 3 may be Euboean orCycladic. BCH85 (1961),268, fig. 3, looks 'Parian'. I have no knowledge of (i) g-I I; the other vases listed by Dunbabin are all prior to 750 (p. 354). Add now a Euboean LG skyphos from Paphos, AntK 10 (1967), 133. B SCE IV.2, 306, fig. 32, I and 6 (kraters); SCE 11, pl. 139, I I; Myres, Cesnola Collection, nos. 1706-g; AJA (1965),64; BCH 86 (1962),367, fig. 53a (left) and 53b (skyphoi). 3 SCEIV.2, 308, n. 3, 6; JdI80 (1965),9, fig. 9. Gjerstad suggested a Rhodian origin and a seventh-century date for the ornaments borrowed from the Aegean; but only one Rhodian Geometric vase is so far known from Cyprus (BCH 90 (1966), 309, fig. 25; cf. pI. 62 e) in contrast to the plentiful L G exports from Euboea and the Cyclades. According to the revised Cypriot chronology of Mrs Bimtingham (AJ A 67 (1963), 3 I), Gjerstad's Aegean-style vases should come within the eighth century, and thus be contemporary with the Attic and Cycladic imports which they seem to imitate. For the bichrome quatrefoil on SCE 11, pI. 166, 7, cf. the local skyphos fromAl Mina, AS9 (1959), pI. 24-4, from Level VIII, prior to 720. • Dikaios, AA 1963, 172-4; Karageorghis, Archaeology 18 (1965), 282ff. s Taylor, Iraq 21 (1959),83, line 32: Miss Taylor has kindly informed me that 'ninth' is a misprint for 'eighth'. 6 SeeJHS 58 (1938), final pl, 7 Woolley, inJHS 58,16, speaks ofa 'complete change' from Greek pottery (Level IX) to the wares of the 'Cypriot Iron Age' (Level VIII). This is now seen to be an overstatement (Boardman, The GreeksOverseas 68). 8 Boardman, AS 9 (1959), 163ff. • P. 310, n. 6. 10 Boardman, loco cit. 166. 11 See Barnett, Nimrud Ivories 165, n. I; er. Boardman, J H S 85 (1965), 13, n. 28. I
C·750-70 0
THE GREEKS IN THE LEVANT'
385
turn, some L G pottery of Cycladic type was sent to Hama;' 'mainland Geometric', perhaps ofearlier date, is reported from the Amuq plain." What else the Greeks were able to market inland must remain a matter for conjecture. But the times were no longer propitious for trade· with the powers of the hinterland. Assyrian armies were constantly on the march, suppressing insurrections among tributary peoples. Matters came to a head in 720 when Iaubi'di, king ofRama and vassal ofSargon I I, joined a large coalition of Levantine cities in a general revolt against the Assyrian yoke. After the rebels had been crushed in a decisive battle at Karkar, Hama was annexed to the Assyrian empire;" the city was destroyed, and the site lay desolate until late in the Hellenistic period. 4 The merchants of Al Mina cannot have been unaffected by these commotions. One of their chiefcustomers had been finally eliminated; in the emporium itself, the repairs at the beginning of Period VII5 imply considerable havoc among the warehouses. Whatever its political status in earlier times, AI Mina must now have become part ofthe Assyrian empire. The traders were allowed to remain; but since the export of Greek pottery inland comes to a halt after the fall of Hama, the Greeks may now have confined their attention to coastal trade. Rather surprisingly, the Greek element in the emporium seems to increase at the expense of the Levantine, to judge from the pottery of Level VII; a possible explanation will be suggested in the next section (p. 388). Among the Greek settlers, the Euboeans are still there in force; but there is an increase in the quantity of Rhodian pottery, while Corinthian makes its first appearance both at Al Mina and at Tell Sukas. It is likely that the North Syrian emporia now included some Rhodians and Corinthians among their residents, ' or at least among their visitors. During the seventh century (Levels VI and v) Al Mina was to become a predominantly Greek port; Levantine fabrics grew progressively scarcer, and among the Greek fabrics Euboean was superseded by East Greek and Corinthian.s The change to Level VI involves a complete replanning of the warehouses, which must have been caused by some major disturbance soon after 700. A likely occasion is the Cilician revolt of 696, in which Greek mercenaries are said to have supported the insurgents against the army of Sennacherib.? The Greek traders of Al Mina may well have suffered for the temerity of their fellowcountrymen in Cilicia. We are more concerned, however, with Cilician affairs before the revolt; and here the record is extremely meagre. The literary tradition records only one foundation of the Greeks in Cilicia. This is hardly surprising, if the hostilities of 696 are a fair sample of Graeco-Assyrian relations. Soloi, on the coast eleven kilometres west of modern Mersin, was settled by Rhodians in collaboration with Argives- or Achaeans." The date of foundation is nowhere stated, nor has the site yielded any early Greek material, being heavily 1 E. Fugmann, Hama 11.1,262, 4C 321; Riis, AAS 15.2 (1965),80-1, fig. 23. 2 Hanfmann, Tarsus 111,130. 3 CAHIII (1929),56-7. • Hama 11.1,269. s JHS 58 (1938), 18; on the date, p. 313. 6 Boardman, The GreeksOverseas 70-4; Taylor, op, cit. 63. 7 Berossos apud Euseb. Verso Arm, FHG 11.504,fr. 12!. On the topographical details, see Luckenbill, Ancient Records of As~ia and Babylonia 11, paras. 286-9. 8 Polybius XXI, 24.10. • Strabo XIV, 67!. P
386 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
overlaid with Roman structures. It is doubtful, however, whether the colony could have been established after 709, when Cilicia had definitely become an Assyrian province.' Some reflection ofthis colonial activity may be seen at Tarsus and Mersin, two native settlements where a few sherds of Greek Geometric are vastly outnumbered by the local wares." The Greek sequence is much the same at both sites; a handful of Euboeo-Cycladic skyphoi with pendent semicircles (c. 850-750) is followed by a larger amount of LG, mainly of East Greek origin. But the proportion of Greek pottery is never as high as at AI Mina, and never high enough to warrant the assumption that Greeks settled at either place." Nevertheless, the predominance of East Greek L G suggests that the Rhodians often travelled in Cilicia, and enjoyed a larger share of the commerce there than in North Syria - a circumstance which could readily be explained by the presence of Rhodian colonists at Soloi during the late eighth century." Yet this is only a tentative hypothesis, which needs to be tested by deep soundings at Soloi.
NOTE Among the enemies overcome by Sargon I I, the Assyrian records often mention the Iamani (Ionians?), dwellers in the land ofIa, Iatnana, or Iadanana. A certain Iadna or Iamani leads a revolt at Ashdod in 7 1 2 ; the seven kings ofIa offer submission in 709; Sargon 'drew the Iamanaean from out the sea of the setting sun, like a fish' (Luckenbill, op. cit. paras. 30, 44, 80, 94). More often than not, the Greeks of Cyprus are probably meant (Gjerstad, SCE IV. 2,449); yet the allusion to la as a district or province of Atnana suggests that the Assyrians thought of Cyprus as part ofa larger whole - i.e. the Greek world. Cf. also Dunbabin, GEN 30-1. It has been suggested by Forrer (Be~lIntKong VI (1939),364) that Midas ofPhrygia was assisted by Greeks in 7 15, during his campaign against the Assyrians in Cilicia. For other evidence of Greek mercenaries in Midas' army, see above p. 379.
x. The Phoenicians in the West
c. 750-700
Luckenbill, op. cit. para. 42; cf. H. Saggs, Iraq 20 (1958),205-6. • In addition, surface sherds of 'Greek Geometric' are reported at three sites in eastern Cilicia; M. V. Seton-Williams, AS 4 (1954),
1
136-7· Hanfmann, Tarsus Ill, 1 I I; contra, Boardman,JHS85, 12. 4 Cf. Boardman, op,cit. 15. s ApudDion. HaI. 1.74. 6 P. Cintas, Ceramiquepunique (1950), 490ff., pi. 65; Rhys Carpenter, AJA 62 (1958),39-41, pi. 4; D. Harden, ThePhoenicians (19 62), 101, n. 76, figs. 26-7. • Cintas, op. cit. 501; P. Demargne, RA 38 (1951),49-50; Boardman, The Greeks Overseas 218. 3
387
only say that each vase looks like a botched version of a Greek prototype. The most convincing account oftheir origin is given by W. Culican, a specialist in Phoenician and Punic pottery; after examining their fabric, he finds them to be local Punic imitations of Greek Late Geometric.' They will thus stand at the head ofa long sequence ofpainted Punic wares, made under varying degrees of Hellenic influence. The vases may be dated by their affinities with the pottery of Corinth. The rays and floating sigmas (nos. 4-5, 8) imply some knowledge ofEarly Protocorinthian; but there are also several unmistakable echoes of Corinthian Late Geometric. The kotylai have the shallow shape of the earliest Corinthian prototypes; the spirals and vertical scribbles (nos. 5-6) are borrowed from the LG Thapsos style.t On the amphora, another hallmark of Corinthian L G may be seen in the alternation ofverticals with closely packed sigmas;" even the check pattern may come from the same source," Of the other seven shapes in the deposit, none looks particularly Greek, and some may be definitely Phoenician." A sprinkler (no. 3/9) and a bird-vase (no. 10/13) carry the same kind ofornament as the vases under discussion, and there is no reason why they should be dated any earlier or later. I therefore accept the whole deposit as a homogeneous group of c. 730-7 10• If, then, we are correct in assuming that the 'chapel' was built by the first Phoenician colonists," Carthage will have been settled in c. 730: that is, at about the same time as the first Greek foundations in Sicily. The cemeteries contain no burials before the end of the eighth century," but this fact need not surprise us; we have already noted the same phenomenon at Syracuse, where the first offerings at the Athenaion precede the earliest Fusco graves by about twenty-five years (p. 322). Evidently, Tanith protected the first Carthaginians just as surely as the first Syracusans were safeguarded by Athena. W. Culican, Abr-Nahrain I, Melbourne (I95g--60), 47--8. • Cf. VS, pi. 2. In the published drawing of no. 5 the scribbles have been reduced to straight verticals. Prof. Cintas kindly supplied me with photographs of the actual vases. 3 See the photographs, Cintas, op.cit. 493-4, figs. 23-4. For the decoration of the neck, cf. BSA 43, pi. 6, 113; for the rope handles, VS, pI. 1,3. 4 Cf. BSA 43, pi. 4, 44; pi. I I, 172. • For nos. 2 and 14, the 'thistle' vase and the cookpot, W. Culican notes parallels in an eighth-seventh century cemetery at EzZib, in the Phoenician homeland (Abr-Nahrain I, 47, n. 19). No. 11, the red-slipped carinated bowl, is ofa type extremely common in eighthcentury levels at Palestinian sites; cf. Hazor H, pi. 98.5; Samaria-Sebaste III, 128, fig. I I, 18. The little olpe, no. 15, has counterparts at Motya (unpublished), Mylae (Mylai 106, pi. 42, I, and 43,2) and Cumae (MA 22, pi. 49, I), and the shape may be of colonial Greek origin. 6 P. Cintas, the excavator, proposes a different interpretation (op. cit. 504); that the 'chapel' represents a pre-colonial cult, established by passing Phoenician sailors. Accepting the Timaean foundation date of 814, he places the upper limit of the 'chapel' deposit as far back as the tenth century. Demargne, with good reason, lowers this limit to 750 (op. cit, 50-I). E. Frezouls (BCH 79 (1955), 166-7) follows Demargne's dating, yet shares Cintas's belief in a pre-colonial 'chapel'; he is led to this conclusion by an apparent lacuna in the Carthaginian sequence. After the 'chapel' deposit there is nothing, in his view, which implies occupation earlier than c. 675-650; he is therefore inclined to accept the low foundation date of c. 673-663, proposed by E. Forrer on historical grounds (FestschriftF. Dornseij[, Leipzig (1953), 85-93). Personally, I do not believe that any such lacuna exists. In the precinct of Tanith, the earliest tophet urns were deposited in the debris of the 'chapel'. The urns are arranged by Cintas in a convincing relative sequence (op. cit. 462, Tableau I). Those of his third stage are dated to c. 700-675 by a deep kotyle from Corinth, with lower body glazed; stages I and 2 should therefore go back before 700, and must either overlap, or follow immediately after, the period when the 'chapel' was in use. Further imports from Corinth a globular aryballos and two more deep kotylai (see Cintas, op, cit. 456, 462-3, Tableaux H-HI; Demargne, op. cit, 47) - show that the cemeteries of]unon and Dermech were already in use around 700; Culican comes to a similar conclusion about the date of the earliest Red Slip wares in funerary contexts (op. cit. 39-47). • See previous n. 1
I conclude this survey with a few remarks on the beginning of Phoenician colonization in the western Mediterranean, a topic on which the study of Geometric pottery can throw much interesting light. The foundation of Carthage is placed by Timaeus in the year 814;5 but the credentials for this date are far from satisfactory, and most specialists prefer to date the arrival of the Phoenician colonists by other criteria. The oldest material from the site of Carthage is a deposit of pottery resting on virgin soil within the precinct of Tanith." We are especially concerned with six vases in this deposit: an amphora, three oinochoai, and two kotylai (nos. I and 4-8 in Cintas's illustration), all ofwhich are closely related to Greek Geometric. Their date and origin have been frequently discussed, for both questions are of great historical importance. Various Greek provenances have been suggested: Corinth, the Cyclades, and Euboea. 7 Yet no Greek centre can offer parallels close enough to be decisive; one can
THE PHOENICIANS IN THE WEST •
388 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
At this point we must consider the record of the first Phoenicians in Sicily. There is no material evidence to support the surmise of'Thucydides,' that their traders once had stations all round the coast before the arrival ofthe Greeks; on the contrary, it seems that the Greek, actually forestalled the Phoenicians in founding colonies on the island. Within our periods it is only at Motya that we find any trace of Phoenician settlement. Here the oldest Greek imports are Early Protocorinthian: a skyphos, several globular aryballoi, and numerous fragments of deep kotylai which need not be any later; Siceliot Greek wares are also represented among the oldest finds." The colonists themselves were turning out Hellenizing pottery by c. 690 at the latest." All this material suggests a date of c. 720-7 I 0 for the arrival ofthe Phoenician colonists. Their exact origin is not recorded in literature, nor do the earliest local wares at Motya offer much enlightenment on this question. Yet the parallels noted with Al Mina- may prove to be ofsome significance, since the foundation ofMotya coincides with a decrease in the Levantine population of the North Syrian emporium (p. 385). The fall of Hama, perhaps, may have inclined some Phoenician merchants to leave the North Syrian coast, in search of more tranquil markets in the western Mediterranean. Once established at Carthage and Motya, the Phoenicians were able to control the narrows ofthe Mediterranean, and to secure the initiative in exploiting more westerly regions. Sardinia, logically, was the next step. At Sulcis, on the southwest corner ofthe island, a lateeighth-century urn ofEuboean L G character has been found in the Punic tophet sanctuary;" otherwise, there is no clear evidence of Phoenician settlement in Sardinia until the seventh century." No Greek Geometric pot, or any imitation thereof, is known to have been found further west than Sardinia. 7 This is not the place to follow the Phoenicians any further afield; Carthage, Motya, and Sulcis are their only western settlements whose foundation can safely be placed in the eighth century. The ceramic evidence shows that all three colonies had early contacts with the Greeks; let us endeavour to define these contacts more closely. A surprising picture emerges. Phoenician traders, as we have seen, were able to market unguent vases in the Aegean from c. 850 onwards; but now, in the late eighth century, we find Phoenieian colonists actually buying aryballoi from the Greeks. In earlier times, the Greeks occasionally imitated Levantine shapes; now it is the Phoenician potters who borrow Greek ideas. Evidently, during the second half of the eighth century, the initiative in Mediterranean commerce - especially in the export of unguents - was beginning to pass from Phoenician to Greek. How and why this change occurred, we are not yet in a position to tell, since a vital part of the evidence is still missing. In the four major cities of Phoenicia - Tyre, Sidon, Byblos, and Arvad - the levels ofthe ninth to the eighth centuries have never yet been explored; hence we cannot yet appreciate how the rise of Greek commerce affected the Phoenicians at home. I! has some6. 2 BSR 26 (1958),26, n. 2; Annual ofLeedsUniversiry Oriental Sociery 4 (1962-3), 118-19 and 122, n. I, pi. 12, 1-4. A grave excavated by Cintas in 1962 contained (i) an EPC globular aryballos; (ii) a local skyphos of Corinthian shape, decorated in a debased black-on-red technique. I am indebted to Prof. Cintas for permission to mention this group. See also Culican, op, cit. 48. 'B. Isserlin, BSR 26 (1958),4; Culican, loco cit. 21-2; Taylor, Annual ofLeeds Univ. Oriental Sociery 4,127. 5 G. Pesce, Sardegna punica (1961), 70, fig. 116; for the decoration, cf. Akerstrom, GS] 65, fig. 26. 8 See Cintas, op.cit. 584ff. on the Punic pottery: Rhys-Carpenter, AJA 62, 47-8, on the much-discussed Nora Stone. 7 Three eighth-century vases, perhaps of Melian origin, are said to come from Marseilles and Hyeres (BSA 33, 199-200, pi. 33, 85-7); but these provenances are suspect. See F. Benoit, Provenance historique 6 (1956), 3-37; Villard, La Ceramique grecque de Marseille (1960),75-6. 1 VU, 3
C·750-7 0 0
THE PHOENICIANS IN THE WEST •
389
times been said (p. 333), on rather slender evidence, that Levantines had no use for Greek pottery; but this is clearly not true of the western Phoenicians, since the earliest deposit at Carthage includes six Hellenizing vases, which could not have been made without some knowledge of Corinthian L G. Where was this knowledge acquired? Probably not in the Levant, where the Greek emporia have no Corinthian imports before E PC; before the coming ofthe globular aryballoi, Corinthian pottery is exported mainly in a westerly direction. It seems likely that the Carthaginians learned the style from Greeks already settled in the West, seeing that Corinthian L G was also the commonest imported fabric in the first Greek colonies ofltaly and Sicily. The urn at Sulcis, likewise, suggests contact with colonial Euboeans. At Motya, there seems to be a curious absence ofimported Levantine wares, even among the oldest material; perhaps the first Motyans had to rely on their Greek neighbours for their fine wares, before setting up their own potteries. Pottery, however, forms only a small item of commerce; in the trading of more precious materials, the Phoenicians were certainly not idle. From their bases at Motya and Sulcis they were well placed for trade across the Tyrrhenian Sea. Pithecusae and Cumae, as we have noted, are rich in Levantine objects, some of which may have travelled in Phoenician ships. More positive indications come from Etruria. Here, by 700, an Orientalizing movement was well under way. It found its fullest expression in costly bronzes and ivories; in the stand of the Barberini cauldron, made in North Syria or in Urartu, we have one of the Oriental models. The style of this stand, and ofrelated objects made by Etruscans, is hard to parallel in the Greek world at this time, except in the full-blooded Oriental manner ofthe Idaean shields.' Now it is unlikely that this style was communicated to Etruria by the Cretans, who were not at all active in western commerce (pp. 382ff.); it is far easier to believe that both Crete and Etruria were visited by Phoenician merchants, plying along a route which bypassed the Aegean. After 720, the new colony ofMotya would have been a strategic station for Phoenician shipping bound for Etruria, and unwilling to run the gauntlet of Euboean piracy in the Straits. Let it be recalled that Motya has produced an exact counterpart ofthe Bocchoris faience situla from Tarquinia (p. 317, n. 3); as both vases are of Phoenician make, direct relations are implied between Motya and Tarquinia around 700. The occurrence of the 'Phoenician palmette' in Etruscan Orientalizing arts affords further evidence of similar exchanges, continuing throughout the seventh century. In view of the recent finds at Veii (p. 355), it is less likely than ever that the Phoenicians forestalled the Greeks in establishing commercial relations with Etruria. Nevertheless, just as the appearance ofan Etruscan Geometric style in the mid-eighth century is a reflection of Euboean initiative, even so, towards the end of the century, the arrival of the Phoenicians in the West may have set off the Etruscan Orientalizing movement." We must now consider whether the westward travels of the Phoenicians had any similar effect on the Greeks at home. After the foundation of Carthage and Motya, one would expect a good deal of coming and going between the Levant and the new colonies - at any rate, during the first generation oftheir existence. It was open to Phoenician sailors, ifthey so wished, to hug the North 1 2
See W. L. Brown, The Etruscan Lion 2ff., 9ff., pls, 1 and 5, for striking resemblances between Crete and Etruria. R. M. Cook, GPP 148, fig. 25; J. Close-Brooks, NSc 1965, 57, fig. 5, 82. 3 Cf. Rhys-Carpenter, op, cit. 44,.
390 .
HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
African shore all the way to Carthage; but this would have been a tedious and unnecessary detour along a coast where good harbours are rare, and where no anchorage could afford them protection against the north wind; in fact, we have yet to find any trace ofPhoenicians along the Libyan shore before the late seventh century.1 A shorter and safer route skirted the southern Aegean - and how much more profitable! On their way to the west, Phoenician merchants could take full advantage ofthe busy markets ofCyprus and Crete; a short detour would bring them to Rhodes, where a few of their countrymen may have set up a small depot (p. 381). Once in Greek waters, they would now have been met by stern competition from Corinth and Rhodes in the sale of unguents; as for more precious commodities, ivory and gold could be shipped from Al Mina by Greeks, to be worked by Greek craftsmen at home. But the Phoenicians could still find a ready market for those exotic and ornamental luxuries which the Greeks had not yet learned to imitate. Among their own handiwork which still survives - this is not the place to speculate about perishable materials - they found Greek customers for bronze bowls embossed with elaborate figured scenes- and Egyptianizing scarabs of blue paste (p. 381). They must also have purveyed many articles from other Near Eastern sources (pp. 382-3). The Phoenician travellers ofthis generation did not set offthe Orientalizing movement in Greek art. As we have observed, Oriental tendencies were already apparent in Greek jewellery and metalwork well before 750, as a result ofearlier exchanges between the Aegean and the Levant. But the movement certainly gathered tempo during the last years of the century, when the decoration ofpottery first came under steady Levantine influence. True, many novel ideas may have been gathered by Greek visitors to the East; but we should not underestimate the part played by the Phoenicians, whose westward migration may have caused them to travel through Greek waters in greater numbers than ever before. It is here, surely, that we catch a glimpse of the Phoenician traders mentioned in the Odyssey. Homer has placed them in an older setting, in company with Mycenaean heroes; but he is not concerned with the Canaanite merchants ofMycenaean times, who preferred to do their business at home. His Phoenicians belong rather to his own day, plying between Tyre and Carthage and hawking their athurmata on the way. He finds them in the central part of their long route, exactly where, on archaeological grounds, we should expect them to pass; off Crete, and off the western Peloponnese." Homer's Phoenicians are an anachronism, but not a mirage. 1
3
See T. H. Carter, A]A 69 (1965), I 23ff., on recent finds at Leptis Magna. Od, XIII. 271ff.; XIV. 30 1ff.
• Gjerstad, OpArch 4 (1946), I ff.
Bibliography (exclusive of site publications, which are listed in the Site Index, pp. 399 ff.)
CHAPTER
I:
GENERAL STUDIES
S. Wide, Jd! 14 ( 1899), 26-43, 78-86, 188-2 I 5; Jd! 15 (1900), 49-58. 'Geometrische Vasen in Griechenland'. B. Schweitzer, AM 43 (1918), 1-152. 'Untersuchungen zur Chronologie und Geschichte der geometrischen Stile in Griechenland, rr'. E. Pfuhl, Malerei und Zeichnung der Griechen I (Munich, 1923), 58-96. F. Matz, Geschichte der griechischen Kunst I (Frankfurt-am-Main, 1964), 37- 101. R. M. Cook, Greek Painted Pottery (London, 1960), 14-37. CHAPTER
2:
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
P. Kahane, AJA 44 (1940), 464-82. 'Die Entwicklungsphasen der attisch-geometrisch Keramik'. Gerda Nottbohm, Jd! 58 (1943), 1-31. 'Der Meister der grossen Dipylon-Amphora in Athen'. F. Chamoux, RA ser. 6, 33 (1945),55-97. 'L'ecole de la grande amphore du Dipylon'. J. M. Cook, BSA 42 (1947), 139-55. 'Athenian Workshops around 700'. E. Kunze,Festschrijt B. Schioeitrer (Stuttgart and Koln, 1954),48-58. 'Bruchstiicke attischer Grabkratere'. E. Kunze, A E 1953.I, 162-7 I. 'Disiecta membra attischer Grabkratere'. F. Villard, MonPiot 49 (1959), 17-40. 'Une amphore geometrique attique au Musee du Louvre'. J. Bouzek, Sbornik 1959, 102-3 8. 'Die attisch-geometrische Keramik im Nationalmuseum in Prag und in den anderen tschechoslowakischen Sammlungen'. H. Marwitz, Jd! 74 (1959), 52-113. 'Kreis und Figur in der attisch-geometrischen Vasenmalerei'. N. Himmelmann-Wildschiitz, Marb WP 1961,6-20. 'Attisch-geometrisch: I. Das Isis-Grab in Eleusis; 2. Die Vogelmetopen-Gruppe'. Jean M. Davison, r aleClassical Studies 16 (196I ). 'Attic Geometric Workshops' . Renate Tolle, Frilhgtiechische Reigentdnre (Hamburg, 1964), 11-4 0. Clotilda Brokaw, AM 78 (1963), 63-73. 'Concurrent styles in late Geometric and early Protoattic Vase Painting'.
.39 1
•
392 .
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY •
393
CHAPTER 3: CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC
CHAPTER 14: HISTORICAL CONCLUSIONS
K. F. Johansen, Les Vases sicyoniennes (Paris, 1923),4-70. S. Weinberg, A]A 45 (1941),30-44. 'What is Protocorinthian Geometric Ware?' Clotilda Brokaw, Essays in memory ofKart Lehmann (New York, 1964),49-54. 'The dating of the Protocorinthian Kotyle'.
(a) General V. R. d'A. Desborough, Protogeometric Pottery (Oxford, 1952),296-305. T. J. Dunbabin, The Greeks and their Eastern Neighbours (London, 1957). C. G. Starr, The Origins ofGreek Civilization, IIocr650 B.C. (New York, 1961). Lilian H. Jeffery, The Local Scripts ofArchaic Greece (Oxford, 1961). V. R. d'A. Desborough, Cambridge Ancient History, znd edition, eh. 36 (1962), 15-21. 'The Protogeometric period'. J. Boardman, The Greeks Overseas (Harmondsworth, London, 1964).
CHAPTER 4: ARGIVE GEOMETRIC
P. Courbin, La Ceramique geometrique de l'Argolide (Paris, 1966). CHAPTERS 5-6: PROTOGEOMETRIC SURVIVALS IN THESSALY AND THE CYCLADES: THESSALIAN GEOMETRIC
V. R. d'A. Desborough, Protogeometric Pottery (Oxford, 1952), 127-95. N. M. Verde1is, <0 TTpCAlTOySCA)j.lSTpl1
C. Dugas, La Ceramique des Cyclades (Paris, 1925), 155-76. E. Buschor, AM 54 (1929), 142-63. 'Kykladisches'. J. K. Brock, BSA 44 (1949), 74-9. 'Chronology ofCycladic Pottery'. N. Kondoleon, AE 1945-7, 1-21. 'rSCA)j.lSTPl1
R. Hampe, Friihe griechische Sagenbilder in Biiotien (Athens, 1936), 20-3 I . F. Canciani,]dI80 (1965), 18-75. 'Bootische Vasen aus dem 8 und 7 Jahrhundert'. CHAPTER 9: LACONIAN GEOMETRIC
A. Lane, BSA 34 (1933-4),99-107. 'Lakonian vase painting'. J. Boardman, BSA 58 (1963), 1-7. 'Artemis Orthia and chronology'. CHAPTER 13: ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
V. R. d'A. Desborough,] HS 77 (1957),212-19. 'A group of vases from Amathus'. J. Boardman,] HS 85 (1965), 5- 15. 'Tarsus, Al Mina, and Greek chronology'.. F. Villard, MEFR 60 (1948),7-34. 'La chronologie de la Ceramique protocorinthienne'. F. Villard and G. Vallet, BCH 76 (1952), 289-346. 'Les dates de fondation de Megara Hyblaea et de Syracuse'. T. J. Dunbabin, AE 1953.2, 247-62. 'The Chronology of Protocorinthian Vases'. K. J. Dover, Maia 6 (1953), 1-20. 'La colonizzazione della Sicilia in Tucidide'. J. Ducat, BCH86 (1962), 165-84. 'L'archaisme cl la recherche de points de repere chronologique'.
(b) Regional G. L. Huxley, BCH82 (1958),588-601. 'Argos et les derniers Temenides'. G. L. Huxley, Early Sparta (London, 1962). T. J. Dunbabin,] HS 68 (1948),59-69. 'The early history of Corinth'. N. G. L. Hammond, BSA 49 (1954),93-102. 'The Heraeum at Perachora, and Corinthian encroachment'. E. Will, Korinthiaka (Paris, 1955), 29-80. J. Boardman, BSA 52 (1957), 1-29. 'Early Euboean pottery and history'. G. de Santerre, Delos primitive et archaique (Paris, 1958), 201-96. A. Blakeway, BSA 33 (1932-3), 170-208. 'Prolegomena to the study of Greek commerce with Italy, Sicily and France in the eighth and seventh centuries B.e.' A. Blakeway,]RS25 (1935),129-49. 'Demaratus'. A. Akerstrom, Der geometrische Stil in Italien (Uppsala, 1943). T. J. Dunbabin, The Western Greeks (Oxford, 1948), 1-47,437-71. F. Villard and G. Vallet, MEFR 68 (1956), 7-27. 'Geometrique grecque, geometrique siceliote, geometrique sicule'. W. G. Forrest, Historia 6 (1957), 160-75. 'Colonisation and the Rise of De1phi'. J. Berard, La Colonisation grecque de l'Italie meridionale et de la Sieile dans l' antiquite (Paris, 1957). G. Vallet, Rhegion et Zancle (Paris, 1958), 19-108. G. Buchner, Metropoli e colonie di Magna Grecia: Atti del Terzo Convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 1963 (Naples, 1964), 263-74. G. Buchner, Expedition 8.4 (1966),4-12. 'Pithekoussai, oldest Greek colony in the West'. R. M. Cook,] H S 66 (1946), 67-98. 'Ionia and Greece in the eighth and seventh centuries n.c.' G. M. A. Hanfmann, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 61 (1953),23-54. 'Ionia, leader or follower?' Jean M. Birmingham, AS I I (1961), 185-95. 'The Overland Route across Anatolia in the eighth and seventh centuries B.e.'
394 .
BIBLIOGRAPHY
]. M. Cook, Cambridge Ancient History, znd edition, eh. 38 (1962). 'Greek Settlement in the Eastern Aegean and Asia Minor'. E. Akurgal, AJA 66 (1962), 369-73. 'The Early Period and the Golden Age of Ionia'. R. S. Young, PAPS 107 (1963),347-64. 'Gordionon the Royal Road'. G. L. Huxley, The Early Ionians (London, 1966),23-54. ]. Boardman, The Cretan Collection in Oxford (Oxford, 1961), 129-59. S. Smith, AJ 22 (1942),87-104. 'The Greek Trade at AI Mina'. Rachel K. Maxwell-Hyslop, Iraq 18 (1956),150-67. 'Urartian Bronzes in Etruscan Tombs'. R. Carpenter, AJA 62 (1958),35-53. 'Phoenicians in the West'. W. Culican, Abr-Nahrain I (Melbourne, 1959-60), 36-55. 'Aspects ofPhoenician Settlement in the Western Mediterranean'.
Glossary of Linear Motifs References are given to the plate illustrations in this book where the motifs are clearly shown.
Arcs: double, hatched: 56a dotted, background hatched: S7n Arrow: 24h Bars: vertical: Ih, 53g horizontal: 28a diagonal: 5a, 7b, roh, ISf, 60c Battlement: single line: 30a, 52a double line: 43b, 57f multiple outline: ra-b.e-f 22a, 33e dot-filled: 10 chevron-filled: If-g,l hatched: rh, ge, 4ga, 50b, 5gb,d,h double, hatched: 8g, 60d Billet, floating: 37d, 38g Cable: outline: 56d hatched: 51a outline, hatched frame: 62a outline, background hatched: 63b outline, background cross-hatched: 57j Check pattern: in horizontal zone: If, 13d in 'triglyph' composition: 12d metopal checkerboard: roh, 35 Chevron: horizontal, in vertical panel: lp, 12e vertical, in horizontal panel: 4c, se, 17h, 18b, d-e,g, 34g,ssa,57c vertical, in groups: Iga cross-hatched, floating: 51a Circles, concentric compass-drawn: double or triple: 18f, 4 1a, 54, 5Sb (see also Tangential circles)
multiple: 28a, 2gd, 32b, 44a, etc. multiple, dot-filled: S7k, 61g multiple, zigzag-filled: 60d multiple, with inscribed crosses: see Cross Cross: St George's, triple: 43a St George's, reserved, inside concentric circles: 34m , 46e St Andrew's, simple: 64a St Andrew's, simple, alternating with vertical bars: 28a St Andrew's, simple, with chevrons in field: S4e outlined, as filling ornament: 26, 28d, 30C, 460 Maltese, in outline: 20f Maltese, solid, inside concentric circles: 58a Cross-hatching: ,p b, 46a Dashes, vertical floating: 3gf Dogtooth: ra.f Dots: 3k, se Dot rosette: se, 8c,e, 2Sh, 3S Dotted ovule: 7c Double axes: solid, in metope: Igl, 21b,g,k solid, in metope, with chevrons in field: 33a,e solid, alternating with vertical bars: 3a,d, 34m, S2C, 60b, 6la-e cross-hatched: 63f outline, as filling ornament: 7a, IIC Gear-pattern: 3g, 2Sg, 28c, 42j, 43d-e, 60b Hour-glasses: solid, alternating with vertical bars: sa hatched: 36c cross-hatched: S8d,f reserved, surrounded by glaze: 21d Ladder pattern: 33g Lambda ornament: 23g
·395 .
396 . GLOSSARY OF LINEAR MOTIFS Leaves: hatched: I3a hatched, diagonal and intersecting: 54c hatched, with midrib: 7j hatched, double outline: 6, 7g, I2g, 35, 38h, 641 triple outline: 7n, I3b, 38j, 4gh cross-hatched double outline, as filling ornament: 44j single line, background hatched: 56c Lotus volutes: 54c Lozenge: quartered and dotted: 37b-c, 4Id-e cross-hatched, double outline: 6Id,f with eight square hooks attached: 6If, 62f checked, as filling ornament: 8a checked centre, hatched frame, double outline: 109 leaf: 27e, 28b,e, 3IC,g, 46h,I,0 Lozenge chain: solid: rj, 33c, 58a outline, without dots ('blind'): I2g, 14e, 27a, 4 6j-k,55h outline, dotted: 6, 7e, rof double outline: 5d, 60c cross-hatched: I3b, 2Ig, 24j, 25f, 36b, 3ga, 47g-h, 5 If, 55e, 58a cross-hatched, with spiral hooks: 14b Lozenge cross (St Andrew's cross imposed upon lozenge) : 54a,f, 55j Lozenge net: two-tiered, 'blind': IIg two-tiered, dotted: 36b, 50b two-tiered, enclosing small lozenges : 30e three-tiered, dotted: 2I b four-tiered, dotted: 20g four-tiered, enclosing small dotted lozenges: I Ig cross-hatched, in panel: 40a-b,d-e, 47e cross-hatched, triangular: 5gc,f, 62f cross-hatched, triangular, with fringe: 47f, 48j Lozenge star: metopal: rza.c-d as filling ornament, with 'rays' in outline: IIg M's (double horizontal chevron in vertical panel): 4 d,5g in 'triglyph' composition: rza.c, 3gh as filling ornament: 7a Meander: single line: 2ge, 30e, 45c, 50g, 6Ih hatched, orthodox: ze, 3j, I6d, 23b, 53a hatched, double: 6, rza,e, I3b
GLOSSARY OF LINEAR MOTIFS·
hatched, triple: 6, 7a, I4b hatched, step: 26, 28d, 30e, 460 cross-hatched, orthodox: 62d,h Meander hooks: single line: 5·7m hatched: ga, I7e, 20b, 25a, 27b, 2ge, 3Ie, 33f, 38a,d, 3ge, 5 2b hatched, interlaced with single-line meander: 6IC cross-hatched: 57a Octofoil: hatched: 109, 2ge, 35 hatched, inscribed in circle: 40e Opposed diagonals: groups separated by solid triangles: rrn, 33c, 5If groups separated by reserved triangles: 32f, 33f Palm-tree: 63a-b Pothooks: 4gk, 50b Quarter circles, hand-drawn: 4gc,e Quatrefoil : hatched: 71, rob, 20b, 40c-d, 4Ia,d, 62h hatched, with midrib: 25b hatched, with central dotted circle: 3ga reserved, with cross-hatched background: 46g,P double outline, background glazed: 56d dotted, imposed on lozenge: 54b-c Rays: broad: 36b thin: 50C Rhodian tree (triangle with two square hooks): 60f, fira.d Rosette: hatched petals, double outline: 52a solid petals, double outline: 52a (see also Dot rosette) S's: upright: 50C horizontal: curved, 37e, 53c, 55e, 57g,j, 64j horizontal, angular: 2Ik, 6Ib, 63g (with dots) Sausage: 4gf Scale pattern: single arcs: 55f double arcs, dotted: 5Ig Scribble: single: 2f-g, I6a, 22c,h, 34a, 46c, 48c,f, 49g, 57g double: 46b, 571 double, with multiple brush: I Id, 64c multiple, with multiple brush: Igc Semicircles, concentric hand-drawn: 46a, 47c Semicircles, concentric compass-drawn: standing: 32f, 33a, 47a, 58e,g, 5ge
pendent: 32e,g-h alternately standing and pendent: 47d Serpents, snakes: flanked by rows of dots: 8f, 101, 36a, 45d with added white dots: 36b with stars in field: 26 hatched: 8e, 39h Sigmas: four-limbed: IOk, I2f, 17f,j, 42h, 60c four-limbed, in groups: zog-h, 2 ra-b.g four-limbed, floating: I2a, I4C, 2If, 37d-e, 38g three-limbed, in groups: Iga- b Spaghetti ornament: 62b Spiral: running: 20a-c, 30e,4oe,5Ia running, with background hatched: 5Ig, 57m Spiral hooks: 2Ik, 56a attached to lozenge chain: 14b hatched: 56a Spiral net: 5Ig Squares: diminishing: 33c gridded: 60d Stars: eight-pointed, in small metopes: 24e eight-pointed, as filling ornament: 3b, 5C, 25b, 34 m,3ga,d sixteen-pointed, as filling ornament: 7a, I la Sunburst (false spirals enclosed in a circle with outer fringe): I2d, I4b,39d Swastika: single line, as filling ornament: 8f, 4Id, 45d, 5Ig, 5 2a metopal, hatched: rk, 7j,n, IOg,60f metopal, cross-hatched: 12e, 33c metopal, hatched, with extra hooks: 12C, 27e Tangential blobs: round: 7a, 101 round, with dots flanking the tangents: 8f, 35, 36a elongated: 8d, 45a Tangential circles, hand-drawn: single circles, with central dot: 4d, 39j double circles, with dots flanking the tangents: 4b Tangential circles, compass-drawn: double or triple circles: 26, 4oc-e double or triple circles, with dots flanking the tangents: 35, 45b multiple circles, with wavy tangents: 44d Tapestry pattern (lozenge net, various fillings, enclosed by hatched zigzag): 7e, I3c
397
Tongues: cross-hatched, double outline: roe, 12g, 44f chevron-filled, double outline: 15b arcaded: 53b, 57g Triangles: solid: Ij double outline: 39j, 55a multiple outline, or diminishing: 22g, 60a hatched, as filling ornament: IOh, 44a,c cross-hatched, as filling ornament: I4e,45a cross-hatched, floating in field: 44b,h, 45a cross-hatched, in zone: le, I3b, 46a, 48g, 58b-c, 5g a cross-hatched, with double outline: I7g, 23h, 46d cross-hatched, with triple outline: Igd, 53g cross-hatched, alternating with triple zigzag: 14d Wall pattern (degeneration of check pattern): 151,n Wavy line: horizontal: 13d, 37a,c, 39h, 4Ij vertical, spaced: 37b-c, 49j vertical, close (degeneration of sigma): 25b-e, 37 f vertical, heavy: 4Ie, 45c-d Wheels: four-spoked: I la eight-spoked: 37d, 4¥ Whirligig: 50e Windmill pattern: 52a,d, 56a Wolftooth (interlocking rows of triangles) : small upper row, hatched; larger lower row, crosshatched: rog-h both rows cross-hatched, and of equal size: 12d, 48h Z's: 64j Zigzag: single, thick: rf-h.l single, thin, steep: 3ge,j, 50a single, with apices filled: 53g, 56e single, with apices filled, and dots: If,j single, with apices filled, and dotted circles: 36e single, hatched: 25a, 53e, 56e, 57m, 5gh, 62C single, hatched, between wolftooth : 14b multiple: zb.d, 23a, 34c-d, 42d-e,g multiple, with vertical bars on apices: rfib-c, 24b, 45 b multiple, drawn with multiple brush: Igf,h,k, 30b multiple, hatched: 27e, 28d multiple, massed vertical festoons: 3Ij two vertical zigzags, intersecting: 54d
Site Index NOTE Site publications marked with an asterisk are not fully considered in the text, since they came to my notice only after the MS went to press.
(I) ATTICA Locality
Type ofsite Publication
Museum
Remarks
Date
Cemetery
PAE 1956, 47ff., pls. 1-3 P AE 1958, 5ff., pl. roa P AE 1959, 8ff., pl. 3
Athens
Not fully published
LGI
Votive dump
P AE 1958, 8-g, pI. 6
Athens
Not fully published
PG? EGI?
Sanctuary
ADChr 16, 33 ADChr 17, 21, pl. 21b P AE 1962, 5ff., pI. 1
Athens
Not fully published
incl. LG I
-
EGILGIIb
13,55
EG?LGIb
11
Re].
ATHENS
Academy
" "
Acropolis
Sanctuary
Graef-Langlots; 23ff., Acropolis pls, 8-11
Agora area
House
Hesperia 2, 542ff.
Agora
Apsidal shape: EG I gr. under floor
Cemetery
Agora volume (forthcoming)
Agora
For preliminary EGIMGII reports see eh. 2, Significant Groups
Cemetery
Hesperia, SuppI. II Hesperia 29, 402ff., pls. 89-92
Agora
"
"
·399·
MGIILGIIb
11-15
e rff., 4 6ff., 82ff.
SITE INDEX· 401
400 . SITE INDEX
Locality
Type ofsite
Publication
Museum
ATHENS Agora area
Wells
Agora volume (forthcoming) Hesperia 30, 93ff., pis. 13-23
Agora
Agora VIII
Agora
Selection of best LGmaterial from area
Athens
To be republished in Hesperia
" Areopagus
'Dipylon' (Odos Peiraieos)
" " Kerameikos
Misc.
Cemetery
CVA Athens I, 3-4, pis. I; 2, 1-6 Hesperia 2, 470, fig. Ig Hesperia 17, 158-9, fig·4 Ia *Hesperia 37, n ff., pis. 18-33
Agora
Nymphaeum area
Date
Ref.
EGI11-25 MGII MGII2Iff., LGIIb 4 6ff., 82ff.
EGIIMGI
13-21
Agora
Rich burial
EGII
14
Annali 1872, 13Iff. Monlnstg, pis. g-IO C V A Louvre II
Widely dispersed, most in Paris and Athens
Rich burials, with many gr. monuments
LGlalIb
2gff., 4 6ff., 82ff., 349-5 1
Cemetery (exc. 18gI)
AM 18, 73ff., pis. 6-8 AA Ig63, 642ff.
Athens
Rich burials, with many gr. monuments
Cemetery (exc. Ig6I)
ADChr 17, pis. 22-4
Athens
Cemetery
K. v. I
Kerameikos
Cemetery (exc. 187 1)
Athens
Cemetery
Cemetery
ADChr 18, 29-30, pI. 2ga-b AA Ig64, 467, fig. 53 BSA 12, 8off.
PAE Ig59, 6, pI. eb
Kerameikos Kerameikos Athens, and British School at Athens Acropolis
LGlalIb
349-5 1
LGlalIb
3 1, no. Ig
The fullest and EGIch. 2 the best stratiLGIIb passim fied sequence of Attic Geometric Discussions of K. v. I: topography, stratigraphy, etc. Grs. found after publication of K. v. I MGIILGIIb
Locality
Type ofsite Publication
Museum
ATHENS Odos Aischylou 3 I
Grave
Graves Odoi Diakou and Anapafseos, corner
21, 71
Date
Rif.
Athens
EGII
13
ADChr 18, 37-8, pis. 38-41
Athens
LGIalIb
*ADChr 20, 56, pI. 420:
Grave
ADChr Ig, 54-5, pis. 4gc-d, 50a
Athens
EGI
Odos Garibaldi 28
Graves
ADChr 18, 41, pI. 46a
Athens
MGI-II
A D I I, Parartema 2, figs. za-c
Athens
MGIILGI
46
Cemetery *ADChr 20, 75ff., pis. 43Y-470: Grave, OdosAy. ADChr Ig, 55-6, Markou 6-12 double pI. 51 Odos Meidani Graves ADChr Ig, 60, 12-14 pI. 54b-c Graves Odos AD 17,86, g0-I, Parthenonos pis. 34a-c; 35b Grave Odos ADChr 18, 42-3, Zambeliou 9 pI. 47b Grave Pnyx area AM 18,414, pI. 14
Athens
MG l-II
16,21
Athens
PG-EGII II
Athens
LGII
Acropolis
MGII
22
Athens
MGI
16
Athens
LGlb
46
Odos Kavalotti
10
Grave
AJA 64,71, pI. 15, 1-4
Athens
LGIIb
84
Grave
ADChr Ig, 70, pI. 47c-d
Athens
LGlb
32, nO,4 Ia
Myc. P AE Ig55, g6, chamber pI. 28e tomb
Athens
?
Furtwangler, Beschreibung, nos. 49,59
Berlin
LG?
ANALATOS
?
JdI 14,213, fig.g2
Athens
LGlb
ANAVYSOS (Anaphylstos)
Cemetery
P AE IgII, r roff,
Athens
AIGALEOS
" ALIKI GLYPHADAS (Aixone)
"
" EGI? LGlbIIa
Remarks
OdosAy. Dimitriou 20
Odoi Kalisperi Grave(s?) and Karyatidon, corner
Agora
GGA 215, 47ff. AA Ig64, I45ff.
Kynosarges area
Remarks
DRAPHI
Graves
Not fully published
LGII
MGIILGla
Pitcher, pf, I2d
Athens
LGIIa
BCH82,68I, fig. 24
Athens
Not fully published
48
LGlblIb
Athens and Oxford
Grave(s ?)
AY. PARASKEVE ?
Votive in Myc. tomb
LGIIb
22
402 .
SITE INDEX
SITE INDEX·
Locality
Type ofsite
Publication
Museum
Remarks
Date
ELEUSIS
Cemetery
EA 1885, 169ff. EA 1898, 29ff.,
Eleusis Eleusis
Not fully published
EGIch. 2 LGlIb passim
pis. 2-6 EA 1912, Iff. CVA Athens I, pis. 3-6 P AE 1953, nff. P AE 1954, 50ff. PAE 1955, 67 ff., pis. 21-2 P AE 1956, 57ff., pI. I I HELLENIKO (Halimous)
?
Arvanitopoulou,
Eleusis Athens Eleusis
Ref.
The Isis Gr.
MGII
21
Not fully published
MGILGI
16ff., 4 6ff.
Locality
Type ofsite
Publication
Museum
PHALERON
Cemetery
AD 2, 13ff.
?
CVA Copenhagen
" PIRAEusarea Palaia Kokkinia
PAE 1951, 116ff.
Grave
ADChr 17,43,
SPATA
Graves
pI. 45a AD 6 Parartema, 13 1ff.
THORIKOS
Grave
AJA 30, 299ff.,
ArchPoikilia 52,
fig, 39, centre
"
HYMETTOS
Sanctuary
AJA 38, 1Off.
Athens
LGlIb
KAKI THALASSA
Graves?
A A 1963, 455ff.
Private possession
LGII
KALLITHEA
Graves
BCH87,404ff.
Athens
LGlIb
84
Graves
ADChr 19, 65-7,
Athens
MGIILGlIa
22, 83-4
TRACHONES (Euonymon)
87
VARI (Anagyrous)
"
"
pI. 62-3
KEPHISSIA
?
Neugebauer 8, F 47
Berlin
LG
KERATEA (Kephale)
?
PI.I5 h
Oxford
LGlIb
KOROPI (Sphettos)
'Grave'
BSA 51, 45ff.
Athens
LGlIb
KOUKOUVAONES ? (Sypalettos)
CVA Heidelberg 3,
Heidelberg
LGI?
LAVRION
CVA Heidelberg 3,
Heidelberg
LGlb
Copenhagen
LGlIa
?
11
'Grave'
MARATHON
Graves
PAE 1934, 35ff.
Athens
MGIILGlIa
Graves
P AE 1939, 27ff.
Athens
EGIIMGI
?
Ohly, Griechische Goldbleche, pI. 24
Berlin
LGlb
?
CVA Heidelberg 3,
Heidelberg
MGI?
MENIDI (Acharnae)
" MERENDA (Myrrhinous)
Athens
LGlIb
Copenhagen
LGlb
84 32, no. 30
MGILGlIa
16, 21,83
Athens
" VOULIAGMENI (Halai Aixonides)
CVA Copenhagen
83
2,51-2, pI. 70, 2-8
LGlIa Athens
American School, Athens Cemetery AntClass 34, 16-17, Athens pI. 5 * Thorikos Ill, 38ff. Settlement AntClass 34, 28-9, Athens deposit pis. 17-18 * Thorikos Ill, 31ff. Graves Geroulanos colI. Graves
BCH82,672,
Athens
figs. 7-8 Graves
LGlblIb
47,83
MGI
16
MGIILGlIb
83-4
? ?
PG, MGI 16
Excavated by the owner on his estate
LG IIa-b
-
Not fully published
LGIalIb
4 6, 83-4
ADChr 20, 112ff.,
Athens pis. 75-9 CVA Mainz I, Mainz pis. 5-6 CVA Heidelberg 3, Heidelberg pI. 107, I
LG IIa-b LGlIb
59, no. 27
LGlIb
(2) AEGINA TEMPLE OF APHAIA
Sanctuary
Aegina
Mainly Attic: in LG, some Corinthian, a little Argive and Rhodian
EGLGlIb
34 1, 344, 361
Settlement, Aigina, nos. 30-178 Aegina perhaps sanctuary
Mainly Attic: inLG, some Corinthian, a little Argive and Rhodian
EGLGlIb
34 1, 344, 361
Grave
Attic
LGlIb
Aegina 436ff.,
pIs. 125-7
13, 16 AEGINA Acropolis
pI. 103,7 Cemetery
Not fully published
I, 1,5-7
LIOSSIA (Kropia?)
"
59, no. 15
pI. 109,7 pI.
Re]
pis. 63-4
LGI
?
Date
2, pI. 71,5 Graves
Nea Kokkinia or Nikaia
Remarks
403
BCH85,626ff.
Markopoulo
Not fully published
MGILGlIa
16
"
Aigina, nos. 25-9
Aegina
404 .
SITE INDEX
Locality
SITE INDEX·
Type ofsite Publication
Museum
Remarks
Date
Rej.
(3) THE MEGARID MEGARA
"
?
Corinth v 11. I, pI. I I, oinochoe
Athens
Corinthian
EG
Grave
P AE 1934, 54-5, figs. 14-15
Athens
Corinthian
EPC
AY. THEODOROI Graves
PERACHORA
"
Sanctuary Sanctuary
ADChr 17, 52-4, pls. 54-6
353
Locality
Type ofsite
CLENIA
'Grave'
DIOLKOS area
ISTHMIA Corinth
Athens, Perachora I, 53ff., Perachora pls. 11-16; 121-4 Perachora I I, 4ff. Athens, Perachora
Mainly CorinMGII thian: some Attic. Not fully published
95
Temple of Hera Akraia
MGIILG
98, 352-3
Temple of Hera Limenia
LG-EPC
353
ZYGOURIES
" "
North area West area: Potters' Quarter
" Mavrospe1aies ATHIKIA (Tenea)
Graves
Grave Wells
Cemetery
Corinth VII. I, nos. 22-68, 73- 134 Hesperia I 7, 204, pIs. 71-2 Hesperia 20, 293-4, pI. 89d Hespetia 18, 153-4, pIs. 19-20 Hesperia 17,208-14, pIs. 72-7 Corinth XIII, 13ff., pIS.6-II
ARGOS Area west of Theatre
" Corinth
EG-EPC
eh, 3, passim
Corinth
EG
92
Corinth
MGII
95
Corinth
LG
98
Corinth
EPC
1°4
Area under centre of modern town
Deiras Corinth
Settlement AJA 37, 605ff. deposit
Corinth
Graves and Corinth xv. 1,8-9, settlement PI.18c,g
Corinth
'Grave'
Hesperia 33,89-91, pI. 17
Corinth
'Graves'
Corinth Hesperia 33,91-3, pI. 17 Corinth VII. I, 19ff., Corinth nos. 69-72 Corinth AJA 61, 169-71, pI. 65
AJA 59,125-8, pls, 39-40 Settlement AM 71, 5Iff., and Beil. 38, 2; graves 39,2 Sanctuary Hesperia 27, pI. 12C Grave Zygouries 174-6, figs. 171-2
Museum
Remarks
Date
Ref.
Corinth
MGI
94
Corinth
LG-EPC
Corinth
LG-EPC
Corinth
EG
92
(5) THE ARGOLID
(4) THE CORINTHIA CORINTH Central area: Agora, etc.
Publication
405
MGIIEPC
95ff., 14°
Contains three graffiti
EPC
1°4
Pottery awaits publication
MGIIEPC
95
EG
92
MGI
94
MGI
94
MGI
94
Larissa
AMORIANI (Amaranon)
Cemetery and wells
Courbin, CG A; also Tombes geometriques d'Argos (forthcoming)
Argos
Full, continuous, EGIand wellLGII documented sequence
eh. 4, passim
House, upper stratum Cemetery
CGA 162, n. I
Argos
Apsidal shape
EGII
II5
Argos
Not fully published
EGILGII
eh. 4, passim
Argos
Votives in Myc. tombs
LG 1-11
Argos
Not fully published
EG, MGIILGII
BCH 78, 41Off. ADChr 16, 93, pIs. 70-1 ADChr 17, 55ff., pIs. 57-58a ADChr 18, 57ff., pIs. 69-72 BCH 85, 675ff., figs. 4-6, 9-II *BCH9I,832ff. Myc. *Deshayes, Deiras cemetery 215ff., pIs. 50-7 Sanctuary BCH 77, 90ff., pls, 24-8; more in CGA ? Amphora, CGA 190
Nauplion
LGII
Athens
MGIILGII
ARGIVE HERAION
Sanctuary
ASINE
Settlement Asine 312ff.
Nauplion
Graves
Nauplion
A H II, pls. 58-60
BERBATI
Grave
OpAth 6, II8ff., pIs. 1-4 SSCA 4, 81ff.
CALAURIA
Sanctuary
AM 20,317
"
Nauplion
Destroyed before LG I-II end ofLG 11 LG 1-11 MGI MG?
124n·5, 143, 146 131-3 125, 131 II8
406 .
SITE INDEX
SITE INDEX •
Locality
Type ofsite
Publication
Museum
DENDRA
'Grave'
OpAth 4, 89ff., pls, 4-6
Nauplion
KANDIA
Settlement OpAth 6, 132, n. 90
LERNA
Graves
" " "
"
" NAUPLION, PRONOIA
PROSYMNA TIRYNS
"
Type ofsite
Publication
Museum
LG 1-I1
125
TIRYNS
Cemetery
AM78 Iff., Beil. 1-27, pIs. 1-2
Nauplion
MGI
118
TROEZEN
Graves
LG 1-I1
125 126 n.13
]d! 14, 86, Athens figs. 46-7 ADChr 18, 52, Athens pI. 59c Welter, Troieen u. ? Kalaureia, pI. 27a
LG?
LGI
Schliemann, Mycenae, figs. 68; 157-8, 192-5, 201, 203-5
Nauplion
MGIILGII
Graves
BSA 50, 24Iff., pls·47-g
Nauplion
Grave
PI. 23a-h
Nauplion
Grave
Tiryns I, 136, fig. 8
Grave
?
"
Locality
Argos, private possession
MYCENAE
"
Ref.
Argos
?
"
Unexcavated
Date
Hesperia 23, 7, pI. 2C Hesperia 25, 171-2, pI. 48 Pyxis, CGA, pI. 81
MONASTIRAKI
"
Remarks
113, 115
EGII
115
Athens
MGII
120
BSA 49, 260ff., pls, 44-5
Nauplion
MGIILGI
Grave
EA 1912, 127ff.
Nauplion
LGII
120, 125 132
Grave
BSA 51, 128-g, pI. 33a BSA 25, 502 BSA 48, 80, pI. 28c-d P AE 1952, 470, fig. 35 Wace, Mycenae, pI. 106a
Nauplion
LGII
Myc. tholos tombs
Myc. palace
Nauplion
Votives
Ref.
EGILGII
ch. 4, passim
LGII
141n·3
LGII
143
MG?LGII
ASEA
Graves?
Tegea
Imitations and ? imports of Argive and Laconian
LG
MAN TINEA
Settlement, ADChr 18, pI. 103a Tegea Sanctuary?
Imitations and ?imports of Argiveand Laconian
SubG
TEGEA
Sanctuary, BCH 45, 404ff. Athena Alea
Imitations and ? imports of Argive and Laconian
MGIILGII
214, 216ff., 35 2
PG-LG
ch. 10 passim
Asea 112, fig. 110
Tegea
364
LG
(7) LACONIA AMYCLAE Nauplion
BSA 48, 30ff., pIs. 17-18
Nauplion
Hero-cult of Agamemnon
LGII
137, 146-7
Cemetery
P AE 1953, 194ff. P AE 1954, 232ff. P AE 1955, 233ff.
Nauplion
Not fully published
EGIILGII
115, 118, 125, 134 no. I
Nauplion
Sanctuary
PG, LGII
Sanctuary
Myc. Prosymna 262ff. cemetery AE 1937, 377ff. Schliemann, ? Tiryns 90ff., pls, 16-20
Nauplion
LG
137
Cemetery
Nauplion
EGILGII
ch. 4, passim
Tiryns I, 127ff., pls. 14-20
?
Date
(6) ARCADIA
EG 1-I1 Not fully published
"
Remarks
407
Votives
LGII
MA VROVOUNI, near Gytheion SPARTA Acropolis
Grave?
EA 1892, pI. 4 AM 52, 45ff., pIs. 2-12 CVA Cambridge I, pI. 3, 8o-g5 CVA Heidelberg 3, pI. 134, 1-26 BSA 56,115, fig. 2
Settlement B SA 28, 49ff.
Sparta
Cambridge Heidelberg Gytheion
PG
Sparta
PG-LG
eh. 10, passim
143 Artemis Orthia Sanctuary
AO 54ff. CVA Cambridge I, pI. 3, 1-77
Sparta Cambridge
PG,LG
ch. 10, passim
Chalkioikos
BSA 13, I42ff. CVA Cambridge I, pI. 3, 96- I 10
Sparta Cambridge
?M-LG
214ff.
Sanctuary
408 .
SITE INDEX
SITE INDEX .
Locality
Type ofsite
Publication
Museum
SPARTA Hereon
Sanctuary
BSA 12, 291ff. PI. 46b-c
Sparta
Sanctuary
BSA 15, 113ff. CVA Cambridge I, pI. 3, I I 1-35
Sparta Cambridge
Mene1aion
Remarks
Hero-cult of Helen and Mene1aus
Date
Ref.
PG,LG
213- 14
Locality
Type ofsite Publication
Museum
PHARAE
Graves
P AE 1930, 83ff. P AE 1952, 4Olff. P AE 1956, 197ff. ADChr 17, 129, pI. 153e
?LGSubG
(I I)
(8) MESSENIA ANO ENGLIANOS
Myc. palace
KAPHIRIO
Settlement AJA 65, 248 Later burial AE 1914, 99ff., in Myc. fig. 12 tholos tomb
TRAGANES
VOLIMEDIA
AJA 61, pI. 42, fig. 6
Chora Triphylias
LG?
225n·3
Kalamata?
PG
222
Athens?
PG
222n.8
Chora Triphylias
Myc. cemetery
Votives. Includes L G Corinthian and Laconian imports
9 8, 218, 223ff.
AGRAPIDOCHORI
Well
OLYMPIA
Sanctuary
"
" SALMONE
? Well
ASANI, near Kalavryta
'Grave'
PG
221
KRYONERI
Graves
BSA 32, 239, fig. 20 (not no. 3)
British School at Athens
LG?
232n. 2
BSA 32, 239, fig. 20,3
British School at Athens
LGI?
227n. 6
ADChr 17, 184, pI. 212a, 2-10
Agrinion
LGI
223ff.
ADChr 18, 149, pI. 187b
Janina
Corinthian
LG
367
Corfu
Corinthian
EPC
36 7
Corfu
Argive?
MGlI?
364
PG
221-3
(12) ACARNANIA ASTAKOS
?
Olympia
LGSubG
225, 229ff.
Olympia
PG
222
ADChr 18, 103, pI. 135b
Olympia
SubG
229ff.
(14) IONIAN ISLANDS
Olympia
PG
221-3
CORFU (Corcyra, Kerkyra)
Settlement P AE 1955, 191, fig. 2 ADChr 18, 182-3, pI. 21 la
ITHACA
(Summary: BSA 40, 11-12) Settlement? BSA 33, 22ff., pIs. 3-6 Sanctuary BSA 43, rff., pIs. 1-44 BSA 48, 255ff., pIs. 41-62
DERVENI
Grave
'NORTH 'Grave' PELOPONNESE'
LGlI
229ff.
AJA 64,16ff., pI. 5. PI. 48a-j
Patras
PG
221-3
CVA Mainz I, rsff., pI. 3
Mainz
PG
221-3
228ff.
Agrinion
For refs. see OlForsch v, 158, n·3 Kylix, BSA 44, 309, fig. I, 2
Patras
LGlI
Kantharos, ADChr 17, 183, pI. 212a, I
23 1 n.ro, 23 2n. 1
(10) ACHAEA
Patras Patras Patras Patras
?
LGlISubG
'Grave'
Ref.
CALYDON
Olympia
*AR 1967,11, fig. 16
Date
AETOLIA
PALAIOMANINA Grave
(9) ELlS
Remarks
409
(13) EPIRUS DODONA
Aetos, cairns Aetos
Sanctuary
Vathy, Ithaca Vathy, Ithaca Vathy, Ithaca
Many Corinthian PG? 98, imports from MGlI- 104, MGlI EPCj 223-3 2 onwards LGlI
412 .
SITE INDEX
Locality
CHALCIS Kamares
Gyphtika
Museum
Remarks
Date
Ref.
Settlement BSA 52, rff., pl. I
British School at Athens
Unexcavated
SubPGLG
368
Wells
ADChr 16, 151, pl. 132b-c
Chalcis
Not fully published
SubPGLG
368
ADChr 16, 150
Chalcis
SubPG, EGII
152, 154
Type ofsite
Nea Lampsakos 'Grave' ERETRIA Ta Magazia, W.ofmodern town W. Gate area
Cemetery
Cemetery
Temple of Sanctuary Apollo Daphnephoros
KERINTHOS
LEFKANDI, or 'Xeropolis'
SITE INDEX •
?
Publication
AE 1903, Iff.
Eretria, Athens
Further pieces published in BSA 47, Iff.
MGIILG
MGIILG
AntK 9, 108ff.
Eretria
*AntK 10,134-5, pl. 38
Eretria
With Cypriot imports
BSA 47, Iff., pIs. 1-3
Eretria
P AE 1952, I53ff.
Eretria
Includes some MGIIpieces from Ta LG Magazia graves MGIIOne piece PG LG
P AE 1955, 125ff. ADChr 17, 155, pl. 167e *ADChr20 (1965), 285-7, pls, 336-7
Eretria Eretria
BSA 52, 7, n. 34 *BSA 61, pl. rod
Type ofsite
Graves
I67ff., 18995, 354, 368-7°
ANDROS Amonakliou Zagora
? Graves
?
Limni
MG
THEOLOGOS, near Chalcis
'Grave'
Chalcis
SubPG, EG
Date
Ref.
See PGP 165-6
Skyros
Unpublished
SubPG
152
Andros
MG
166
Andros
SubPG, MG
166, 168-70
Excavations in progress
Sanctuary
BCH 35, 350ff. Delos xv, passim
Delos
Pottery all SubPG, 153-7, imported: MG-LG 166ff., mainly'Parian' 173-81 and Naxian
Heraion
Sanctuary
Delos x, pl. 9, 37-8
Delos
LG, EPC
175
KEOS Ay. Irini
Sanctuary
Hesperia 33, 333
Keos
LG
164n.1
KIMOLOS, Hellenika
Cemetery
BCH78, 146, figs. 41-4
Kimolos
MG-LG
165, I67ff., 181-5
?
A M 69-70, 153ff., BeiI. 56-61
Private possession
Cemetery
JdI 14, 33ff. BSA 2,70-1 JOAf 39, 54ff. CVA Sevres, pl. I I, nos. 9, 11-14 CVA Scheurleer r rf., pl. 1,3 C VA Munich 3, pl. 141, 1-2 CVA Schloss Fasanerie 2, pI. 55
Athens Melos? Melos Sevres
DELOS Hieron of Apollo and Artemis
155
n.z, 164, 167, 18~5
152
Sauciuc, Andros, fig. 59 PGP 161-3, pI. 16
Mykonos
MELOS, area of Classical city
LIMNI
Remarks
Settlement BCH85,839, fig. 8 (Andros, not Samos)
"
SubPG
Preliminary reSub PG, ports. SettleEG-LG ment destroyed or abandoned before end of LG
Museum
(20) THE CYCLADES
" British School at Athens
Publication
g) NORTHERN SPORADES
Eretria
Eretria
ADChr 16, 152, pI. 133d
(I
SKYROS
LG
Settlement AR for 1965-6, 10, fig. 14 A]A 69, pl, 85 BCH89,844, figs. 3-4 BCH90, 899, figs. 3-4 *Lefkandi (1968), 23ff. *BSA 61, 49, n. 51, pl. 21e
Locality
413
NAXOS, sites in and near Naxia: Aplomata Cemetery
Ergon 1963, 151, figs. 163-4
Amsterdam
Not fully published
MGIILG
EG-LG Many other vases, unpublished, in Athens, Melos, Leiden (?), London,and elsewhere
EG-LG
165, 167ff., 181-5
Not fully published
LG
172n·4
Munich Schloss Fasanerie
Naxos
414 .
SITE INDEX
Locality
Type ofsite
SITE INDEX'
Publication
NAXOS, sites in and near Naxia: Grotta Settlement AE 1945-7, IfI'. Graves Gymnasium PAE 1937-8, area I 17ff. Kaminaki Settlement P AE 1939, II9ff., fig. 2 Palati PAROS Acropolis Delion
RHENEIA Parakastri
Settlement AM 54, 152ff., Beil. 53-4
Museum
Remarks
SIPHNOS Kastro
TENOS Exoburgo
Ref.
Unexcavated
MG
168
Naxos
Not fully published
MG-LG
I66ff.
Naxos
Not fully published
LG
I 73n.8
Unexcavated
LG
Naxos
Naxos
I 72ff.
Settlement AM 42, 73ff.
Paros
MG-LG
Sanctuary
Paros
MG-LG
'Graves' Cemetery deposit
Rubensohn, Delion 85ff., pls. 14-17 PGP 156-8, Delos xv, passim
Settlement B SA 44-, 33ff.
Sanctuary
P AE 1953, 258ff.
166, I 76ff. 166, I 76ff.
Publication
Museum
Matz, Forschungen auf Kreta, pl. 72
Remarks
Date
Ref.
Khania
LG
234n·3
LG LG
234n. 1 234n·3
PG
234n. 2
WEST CRETE
APTARA
Sanctuary
ELEUTHERNA
Settlement BSA 31, I09ff.
Herakleion
KHANIA
Settlement
Khania
MODI
Cemetery
KCh 7, 485ff.
Khania
VRYSES
Tombs
jantzen, Festschrift
Khania
PG
234n. 2
Herakleion
EG-LG
245-9
Not fully published
Mykonos Mykonos
Grave material removed from Delos in 426 n.c.
Pottery unpublished
152-6, 165ff. 153-7, 165ff., 173-81
165, 167, 176
SubPG, MG-LG 149-5 1 152-5, I66ff.
Ann. 8-g, I03ff.
Tenos
SubPG, MG
Graves
PIs. 32C; 33 a-b,e,h
Tenos
SubPG, 152-5, EG-MG 166ff.
'Grave'
PGP 158-9,
Vatican
SubPG
Graves
Ktikados ?
Cemetery
Cemetery
Thera II, 13ff. A M 73, I 28ff.,
Beil. 97-8
NORTH CENTRAL CRETE
Thera
Plentiful imports MG-LG from many sources Plentiful imports MG-LG from many sources
104, I66ff., I 76ff., 185- 9 I 76ff., 185-g
Jd! 14, 36ff.,
figs. 13-15, etc.
"
ARKHANES
Tombs
J,NES2o, pl. 5
Tomb
KCh 4, 44- l ff.,
Herakleion
pis. 29-32
ATSALENIO, suburb of Herakleion
KNOSSOS and environs: Kephala ridge
Fortetsa
PGB With house model, Giamalakis coll,
235
?
BSA 3 1, 73ff.
Tombs
BSA (forthcoming) Herakleion
PGB-LG
AE 1945-7, 47ff.
Herakleion
LG
BSA 31, 69ff.,
Herakleion
PGB-LG 25 In . 2
BSA 6, 63, fig. 25 BSA 29, 224ff.,
Herakleion Herakleion
PGB-LG ch. I I,
pls·5ff. B SA 58, 42-3, pl. 14
Knossos
AY. PARASKEVE Tholos tomb EPISKOPI Tomb? PEDIADOS
Teke Thera
Tombs
Cemetery
152-5
pl. 25a AM28,96ff.
(22)
"
EG-LG
Siphnos
Tenos
SubPG, EG-MG Sub PG, MG-LG
PG
Kardiani
pIs. 33-4
ANOPOLIS
Tenos
'Grave'
Sellada
Type ofsite
Mercklin 60-2,
Kambos
THERA Messavouno
Locality (2 I)
pIs. 18-19 Purification Trench
Date
415
Herakleion
PG-LG
245
pl, 13
Tholos tomb
BSA 49, 215ff., pls, 19-30
Herakleion
Cemetery
Fortetsa BSA 31, 56ff.,
Herakleion Herakleion
PGB-LG eh. I I, passim
pI. 12 BSA 56, 68ff.,
passim
Herakleion
The fullest sequence of Cretan Geometric
PGB-LG
ch. I I, passim
pIS.8-II Minoan Palace ?
BSA 3 1, 75ff.,
pls. 14-17
Herakleion
PGB-LG eh. I I, passim
418 .
SITE INDEX
SITE INDEX'
Locality
Type ofsite
Publication
Museum
Remarks
Date
Ref.
cos COS Meropis
Cemetery
Bd'A 35, 320ff. PGP, pl. 30b PAE Ig59, pI. 166a-b PIs. 58e-g; 59a-d; 6oa; 63 b,e
Cos
Full and continuous sequence of grave groups from PG into early LG
EG-LG
26374, 287- 8, 381
RHODES Camiros
" Exochi
Cemetery: Salzmann, Necrograves poles de Camiros, and pI. 45; more chamber illustrations, tombs Exochi, fig. Ig5ff. ]dI I, 134ff. CR 4, 34 1ff. CR 6-7, 32ff., I Igff., 18gff.
London, Paris, and elsewhere
Many vases unpublished
EG-LG
ch. 12, passim
Berlin Rhodes Rhodes
CR 6-7, 360ff., figs. 100; 103-5
Rhodes
Cemetery
Exochi 12ff.
Rhodes, Copenhagen
MG-LG
268-87
Ialysos
Cemetery
CR 3, 37ff. CR 8, 161ff.
Rhodes
EG,LG
eh. 12, passim
Lindos
Sanctuary of Athena
Lindos I, 23Iff., pIs. 33ff.
Istanbul
EG-LG
eh, 12, passim
MassariMallona
'Grave'
CVA Copenhagen 2,47-8, pl. 65, 3-8
Copenhagen
MGI
26 7
Siana
Cemetery
Vizikia, near Camiros
'Grave'
?
MG-LG
26g
Berlin
MG
(26) EAST AEGEAN ISLANDS CHIOS Chios town
Date
Ref.
Chios
LG MG-LG
294-5 294-5
Settlement, BSA 32, 56ff., Sanctuary? pI. 23
Mitylene
All painted LG Geometric ware is imported
PSARA
?
ADChr 17, 266, pI. 321a
?
Unexcavated
SAMOS Heraion
Sanctuary
AM 54, gff., BeiI. I-8, pI. 2 A M 58, 47ff., Beil. 18-44, pls. 1-4 AM 72, 35ff., BeiI. 45-76 AM 74, 12-18, BeiI. 12-25 PGP 216
Heraion
EG-LG
288-g3
Heraion
MG-LG
289-93
Vathy, Samos
MG
268
Kato Phana
Heraion
Wells
?
'Grave'
?
(27) AEOLIS AND N.W. ASIA MINOR BURUNCUK (? Larisa)
DASKYLION
TROY
Settlement Larisa-am-Hermos Istanbul No local painted LG ware till SubG Ill, 169ff., pI. 57 Settlement Listy Filologicke Prague Rhodian? LG 1961,22, pl. 7,31 Settlement Anatolia I, 24 Ankara Univ. LG ? BCH 36, pIs. g-Io Athens, Rhodian LG Ecole francaise Cemetery A]A 70, 157 ? ? Settlement Troy IV, 255ff., Troy, All painted LG Istanbul VIII Geometric ware pls·3 02ff. is imported
(28 ) IONIA CLAZOMENAE
Settlement BSA 49, 136, pI. 7a, no. 25
Remarks
294-5
280 268
Museum
LG
PITANE
]dII, 136
Publication
Chios
MYRINA ?LG
Type ofsite
Sanctuary *Boardman, Greek Emporio 102ff. Sanctuary AD I, 79, fig. 15 of Apollo BSA 35, 157ff., pls. 34-6
CYME
CVA Oxford 2,75; Oxford 11 D, pI. I, 1-4 Copenhagen Vroulia 4, fig. 8 Vroulia 4
CHIOS Emporio
LESBOS Antissa
Sanctuary
Tzingana, near Graves Kattavia
Locality
Chios
LG
419
294-5
Q.*
Settlement Sakellariou, La Migration grecque en Ionie 506
Athens
Unpublished
EG,LG
297-8 298 377 277
376
420 .
SITE INDEX·
SITE INDEX
Publication
Locality
Type ofsite
COLOPHON
Cemetery? AJA 27, 67 H. Lorimer, Homer and the Monuments 106, n. 4 and 348
Material lost
?
262n.2
( 29) CARIA
297
Settlement JOAI23, BeibI. 255-6, fig. 44
LG
PYGELA
?
Anatolia I, 10
Settlement JOAI27, BeibI. 170ff., figs. 85-8 Akurgal, Smyrna 59ff., pl. 9a BSA 53-4, 8ff., pl. 5c-d BSA 53-4, 138ff., pls. 21-2; 26, 10
TurkAD 14,231
Museum
ASARLIK
Tomb
JHS 7,69-71 BMCat I. I, nos. 1105-7
DIRMIL
Tomb
AJA 67, 357ff., pis. 83-4
"
Tomb
EG-LG?
EG-LG Not fully published
Ankara Univ.
MG-LG
Sherds, Ankara, unpublished British Institute of Archaeology
MG-LG
Izmir
EG-LG Not fully published
BSA 50,125, n. 166
279n. 1
tants?
26874, 296-7
27on.6
26874, 297
" "
Settlement Ann. 39-40, 537, fig. 50 *Ann. 43-4, 4 17, figs. 25-6 Well Ann. 39-4°,563 fig. 99 Graves *Ann. 43-4, 498ff., figs. 118-23
Date
Ref.
London
MG
268
Bodrum
PG
263- 5
Bodrum
MG-LG
Athens, British School
Remarks
One sherd
LG
Izmir
EG-LG
Izmir
EG
Izmir
MG?
SINURI
Sanctuary
Sinuri 11, 15-I 7, pl. 22, 1-22
?
STRATONIKEIA
Grave
AM 12, 226ff., pl. 6
Private possession
AA 1910,227, fig. 27
Leningrad?
296
265- 7
SubG
296, 377 296
MGII?
377
Cambridge, Provenance Mus. of doubtful Class. Arch.
LG
377
Ankara
Rhodian import
SubG
378n.6
Local imitation of East Greek
LG
(3° ) BLACK SEA BEREZAN
?
HISTRIA
Settlement
Provenance doubtful
(3 I) ANATOLIA, INLAND
B SA 59, 40ff.
Settlement
Publication
IASOS Carian inhabi-
Istanbul, Settlement BerlIntKong VI, Izmir pI. 25a IM7,12Iff., pis. 37-9 I M 9- 10, 54ff., pls, 54-62; 79, 2; 85 Sanctuary
Type ofsite
HALICARNASSUS ?
Settlement, *Panionion und Melie (JdI Erganz. 23), Cemetery 78ff.
PHOCAEA Temple of Athena
TEOS
Locality
LG
Sanctuary of Artemis
SMYRNA (Bayrakh)
Ref.
Hogarth, Ephesus 220,fig·46
EPHESUS
MILETUS
Date
279n. 1
Sanctuary IM 13-14, pls.8ff. of Apollo
MELIA
Remarks
LG
DIDYMA
"
Museum
42 I
Izmir
Corinthian imports Attic import (unpublished) Graffiti: one ?Lydian
MGIIEPC LGn
Unpublished
?
9 8, 104
ANKARA
Tomb
GORDION
Settlement, tombs
Ankara, Gordion
No Greek Geometric imports
SARDIS
Settlement BASOR 162, 14ff. BASOR 177, 14ff. BASOR 182, 13ff. *BASOR 186, 17ff.
Manisa
East Greek and Corinthian imports
98
LG
Akurgal, Smyrna 89, pl. AI
378-80
SubPG? 377-8 MG-LG
SITE INDEX •
422 .
423
SITE INDEX
Locality
Type ofsite
UPPER MEANDER AREA
XANTHOS Acropolis
Date
Rej.
Locality
Type ofsite
Publication
Museum
Remarks
Date
Rej.
Local ware Ankara, based on East British InGreekLG stitute of Archaeology
LG
377
SALAMIS
Tomb
AA 1963, Iggff., figs. 40-7
Nicosia
Attic, Cycladic
MGII
21, 3 19, 384
SOLI
Tomb
Nicosia
Cycladic
MG
3 19
One sherd, East Greek import
LG
STYLLI
Tomb
Nicosia
Cypriot copy of Aegean
LG?
320
?
?
BCH 85, 278-80, figs. 28a,c SCEn, 146, pI. 139, I I ] dI I4, Ig6, n. 7; . amphora, Athens 117
Athens
Attic
LGIa
Cycladic, Euboean: after c. 725, also Rhodian and Corinthian
MG-LG
publication
Museum
Belleten 19, I55ff. AS I 1,30-3, figs. 4-24
Settlement Xanthos n, I7; 78, n. 5
Istanbul
Remarks
377
(3 2) CILICIA MERSIN
TARSUS
Settlement Garstang, Prehistoric Mersin 254ff., fig. 160, 4,6 LAAA 26, Ig8ff. Settlement Tarsus Ill, 27gff., figs. 95ff., I45ff.
Adana
East Greek and Cycladic imports
Sub PG, LG
East Greek and Cycladic imports
Sub PG, LG
386
(34) SYRIA AL MINA
Adana Adana
320-1, 386
(33) CYPRUS (Cf. Dunbabin, GEN 72-3) AMATHUS
AY.IRINI IDALION?
Murray, Cyprus 103, fig. 150; 110, fig. 160, 3 SCEn, pl. 139, 7,10; pl. 140, I 09, BCHgo,3 ? fig. 25 Sanctuary M yres, Cesnola Coll., no. 17° 6
Cemetery
London
Cycladic
MGII, LG
173, no. 6
Nicosia
Attic: Cycladic or Euboean
MGII, LG
3 19- 2o
Nicosia
Rhodian
LG
New York
Cypriot copy of Aegean
LG?
HAMA
"
?
PGP 181, pl. 25c
Nicosia
Cycladic
MG
354
KARAPHANI near K yrenia
Tomb
New York
LG
172-4. 384
LARNACA
?
?
?
?
New York
Cycladic or Euboean
LG
MARION?
Nicosia
Cycladic, Euboean
MG-LG
PAPHOS
Tomb
Myres, loco cit., nos. 1701-2 Lorimer, Homer and the Monuments 163, n. I Myres, loco cit. no. 1703 BCH 87, 265ff., figs. 2-3 *AntK 10, 133-4, pl. 37
Naxian
KOURION
?
JUDAIDAH
TABBAT-ALHAMMAM TELL HALAF TELL SUKAS
3 19, 384
Settlement A] 17, pl. 14 (for Antioch, correct captions London, see BSA 52,8, Oxford, Cambridge, n·45) ]HS60,2ff., and figs. 1-3 elsewhere BSA 52, 5ff., pl. ea-b AS g, 163ff., pIs. 24-5 Settlement Hama n. 1,232, Aleppo, Copenn.6,fig·3 IO hagen Hama n. I, 179, n. 3, fig. 245= Exochi 107--8, n. 86, fig. 207 AAS 15. 2, 80-1, fig. 23 Cemetery Haman. 3, 113-15, fig. 134 Settlement PGP 181, pl. 26 Antioch
Settlement Syria 21, Ig3, fig. 4 Settlement Tell Halof tv; 101, no. 188, pl. 6g
3 10-16, 384-5
384-5 384-5
Local imitations of Aegean
LG
Cycladic
MG
Attic
MGII
Ig3, 384 3 11 - 13, 385 385
Cycladic or Euboean
LG
385
Cycladic
MG
385
Cycladic Not fully published
MG
3 11
?
Cycladic
MG
3 11
?
Cycladic
MG
3 11
Cycladic
MG
3 11
Local imitation LG of Aegean LG EPC Corinthian
384
Settlement AAS 10, 123ff., Aleppo fig. 13 AAS 11-12, 137-8, fig. 7 AAS 13,214. fig. 5
333
424 .
SITE INDEX·
SITE INDEX
Locality
Type ofsite
Publication
TELL TAYINAT Settlement PGP 181-2, pl. 26
Museum
Remarks
Date
ReJ.
Locality
Typeofsite
Antioch
Cycladic Not fully published
MG
3 II
VEIl
Cemeteries NSc 1965, 53ff., figs. 27, 36,40, etc. AR 1967, 30, fig. I, with refs. NSc 1963, 271, fig. 132f. OpArch 7, pl. 18, I I Cemetery
(35) PALESTINE Chicago
MEGIDDO
Settlement Berytus II, 99-I00, pl. 20, 1-2
SAMARIA
Jerusalem Settlement Harvard Exc. at Samaria I, 28Iff., fig. 157; rr, pl. 89 Samaria-Sehaste III, 2IOff., pl, 18
TELL ABU HAWAM
Settlement QDAP 4,23-4, pI. 12,96; pl. 13,95
Jerusalem
Attic
MGI
303ff.
Attic?
MG
304ff.
Attic?
MGII
304ff.
Cycladic
SubPG, MG
303ff.
VULCI
NSc 1928, 434 ff. G S I55 ff., pIs. 11-16
Rome, Villa Giulia
Local ware decorated in Euboean style
LG
Cemetery
MA 42,223, fig. 12, etc.
Rome, Villa Giulia
No Greek imports or influence before c·70 0
MPC
37 1
CHIUSI
?
Albizzati, pis. 2, 37; Rome, Vatican 3,43
Local imitations of Greek
LG
370
NARCE
Cemetery
Rome, Villa MA 4, 260ff. Giulia Dohan, Italic Tomb Groups, pl. 14, 15-20; pI. 21, 3-7
LG Local ware decorated in Euboean style. One imported Corinthian LG skyphos; much Corinthian influence after c·70 0
Cemetery
CERVETRI (Caere)
TARQ.UINIA (Tarquinii)
Cemetery
MA 22, figs. 139-54 GSI73ff., pIs. 19-22
Museum
Remarks
Rome, Villa Giulia
Imports, MGII Cycladic or Euboean; local imitations
355, 37on·7
Rome, Villa Giulia Rome, Villa Giulia
LG Euboean imported skyphos EPC E P C imported skyphos
355, 37on·7 355, 37on·7
GSI69ff., pl, 17-18 Dohan, Italic Tomb Groups, pl. 48, 5
Berlin
Local sequence similar to Narce and Tarquinia
37°
Philadelphia
Date
LG
Rej.
(37) LATIUM MARINO
Cemetery
Gierow, Iron Age Culture ofLatium rt, I, 156, fig. 91,4
Rome, Villa Giulia
No sign of Greek MPC contacts before c·7 0 0
37 1 n.r I
ROME
Cemetery
RMErganz.8, pl. 43, 9
Rome, Villa Giulia
Imported Euboean skyphos
LG
37on·7
Native *Dialoghi di Archeocemetery logia 1.2, 159ff.
Naples
Imported Cycladic or Euboean skyphoi
MGIILG
37 1
Native MA 22, fig. 52, cemetery pI. 18, 7,9
Naples
Imported Cycladic or Euboean skyphoi
MGII
355
Colonial M A 13, 263ff. cemetery MA 22, 214ff., pls·30ff.
Naples
Many Corinthian EPC imports, with local imitations. Some Rhodian aryballoi
(36) ETRURIA BISENZIO (Visentium)
Publication
425
Tarquinia Berlin
Local sequence similar to Narce.lmported EPC skyphos
LG
37°
37 In·3
(3 8) CAMPANIA CAPUA
CUMAE Osta
3 16-17
Various locations
1°4, 194-5, 325-6, 37°
426 .
SITE INDEX·
SITE INDEX
Date
Ref.
Local imitation of Corinthian
EPC
372-3
Taranto
Earliest colonial grave. Corinthian imports
EPC
104, 323
Publication
Museum
Remarks
Date
Ref.
Locality
Type ofsite
CUMAE Acropolis
?
RM6o-l,5 Iff., fig. 3
Naples
Colonial Euboean
LG
326
SCOGLIO DEL TONNO, near Taranto
Settlement Dragma M. P. Nils- Taranto son, 460ff. Taylour, Mycenaean
NOLA
?
VS, pl. 17,4
Berlin
Earliest Greek import, c. 700
EPC
37 1 n.13
PITHECUSAE Valle di S. Montano
Atti e memorie 1954,
3ff., pls. 1-4 RM6o-l,37 ff.
Lacco Ameno
*JdI8I,lff., figs. 3-5, 19
SUESSULA
Museum
Pottery in Italy
II9ff. Ann. 33~4, 8ff.,
figs. 1-2 Cemetery
Antiquity and Survival 4, fig. 17 Metropoli e colonie 263ff., pls, 1-6
MonteVico
Publication
Remarks
Type ofsite
Locality
Settlement Expedition 8. 4, 6ff. *AR 1967,3°, fig. 2 Cemetery
MGII, Earliest Greek LG, colony in West. Imports from EPC Corinth, Euboea, Rhodes, and elsewhere: local imitations MGII? LG, EPC
Lacco Ameno
Von Duhn, Italische Naples Criiberkunde
I,
549-54
EPC Corinthian imports, with colonial.imitations. Unpublished, apart from pI. 20d
84,98, 104, 195, 3 16-17, 325-6, 354-5, 37°
37°
TARANTO (Taras)
Cemetery
Ann. 37-8, 8ff.,
fig. la-b
(4 I) SICILY CASTELLUCCIO
Cemetery
BSA 33, pl. 26, 45 CSI 16, pl. 1,5-6
Syracuse
Euboean skyphos frs.
LG
374n. 1
FINOCCHITO
Cemetery
BSA 33, 189ff.,
Syracuse
Native ware decorated in Corinthian manner
EPC
375
Gela
Corinthian and Rhodian aryballoi
EPC
323, 326
Gela
Corinthian imports: urns of Cretan type
MPC
323, 326
Gela
Corinthian and Rhodian imports
EPC
323, 326
Gela
Pyxis of Cretan type
pJ. 27 CSI 17ff., pI. 2 37 1 GELA Spina Santa
Grave
NSc 1960, 225,
fig. 16,4 Borgo
Cemetery
MA 17, 131,
fig. 95
RHEGION
Cemeteries MA 3 1, 5ff. C S I37 ff., pis. 8-10
Villa Garibaldi Cemetery
NSc 1956, 305,
Acropolis
NSc 1962, 393,
Reggio
Reggio Cemetery? Vallet, RMgion et Zancle 37, pl. 5, I
LG Local ware decorated in Euboean style. One Attic import
37 2
Imitation of Corinthian Thapsos class
325, 37 2
LG
Bitalemi
(40) APULIA Settlement Bd'A 49, 75ff. NSc 1964, 217ff.
LEONTINI Cava S. Aloe
MEGARA HYBLAEA Taranto
Corinthian LG LG mug with native painted ware
372-3
Sanctuary
fig. 72; 405ff., figs. 88-9
S. Mauro
LEPORANO (Satyrion)
Gela
fig. 23
(39) CALABRIA cANALEand IANCHINA
427
Native MA 17, 131, sanctuary fig. 95
375
Native RM 15, 62ff. cemetery
Native ware decorated in Euboean manner
LG
374-5
Colonial NSc 1955, 362ff., settlement fig. 65
Corinthian: one Argive fr.?
LG, EPC
323-4
Settlement Megara Hyblaea 11, Syracuse pls. I-I I, 59,62, 81,122ff.
Many Corinthian LG, EPC imports; also Argive, Attic, Rhodian. Colonial imitations.
323-5
428 .
SITE INDEX
Locality MODI CA
SITE INDEX •
Type of site Publication Cemetery
Museum
Syracuse Ampurias 1953-4, 231, pI. 18 MEFR 68, pls, I, I; 3,2; 4, 1,7; 5,2-3
Remarks
Date
Ref.
Locality
Type ofsite
Publication
Museum
Remarks
Date
Ref.
Corinthian LG LG, EPC skyphos: colonial and native wares in Corinthian manner
375
ZANCLE, S. Raineri
Sanctuary
Vallet, RMgion et Zancle 140, pI. 7
Messina
Corinthian
LG,EPC
323, 325
Urn decorated in Euboean style
LG
388
Hyeres and Marseilles
Melian? Provenance doubtful
LG
388n·7
Tunis
Phoenician imitations of Corinthian?
LG-EPC
386-7
Tunis
Corinthian imports
EPC
38 7
Berlin, private colI.
Laconian or Attic? Provenance doubtful
MG
2I4n·4
(4 2 ) SARDINIA
MOTYA
Mozia Settlement, Ann. ofLeeds Cemetery Oriental Soc. 4, 118-19, I22n. I; pI. 12, 1-4
Corinthian imEPC ports: imitations by Greek and Phoenician colonists
388
MYLAE
Cemetery
Lipari
Corinthian and EPC Rhodian imports: hydriai, Cyc1adic?
104, 323
Corinthian. Preliminary report only
322-4
Mylai 39ff., pls, 40-1, 47
NAXOS
Settlement Bd'A 49, 164, fig. 41
OSSINI
Cemetery
SYRACUSE Athenaion
" Sperduta, and area of Station Fusco
Syracuse
CS! 17, pI. I, 1-4 Syracuse MEFR 68, pls, 1-2
Syracuse MA 25, 539ff., figs. 122, 127-9, 133, 140 Syracuse Native MA 25, 427ff., settlement figs. 42-3; 499ff., figs. 92-108 Syracuse Colonial NSc 1925, 3I6ff., settlement figs. 69, 73-6 BCH 76,333, figs. 8, 9a Syracuse Cemetery NSc 1895, 109ff. BCH 76, 329ff., figs. 1-6; 331, fig. 7 Sanctuary
429
LG-EPC
Corinthian imEPC ports: native and colonial ware decorated in Corinthian manner Corinthian
375
SULCIS
(43) SOUTH FRANCE HYERES and MARSEILLES
Junon, Dermech CYRENE
Native ware: no Greek imports or influence
374
Corinthian: Attic and Atticizing frs.
LG-EPC
325
Corinthian: one Cyc1adic LG(?) fr.
EPC
1°4
TAORMINA area
?
BSA 33,188, pI. 26,46
?
Imitation of Corinthian
LG
374
THAPSOS
Grave
MA 6, 103-4, pI. 4, 16 BCH 76,337, fig. I I
Syracuse
Corinthian
LG
98,322
?
BSA 33,199, pI. 33, 85-7; cf. Benoit, Provence historique 6, 3-37
(44) NORTH AFRICA CARTHAGE Tanith, 'chapelle Cintas'
LG-EPC 3 22-5
Tophet Pesce, Sardegna sanctuary punica 70, fig. 116
Sanctuary
Cintas, Ciramique punique 490ff., pI. 65 Cemeteries Cintas, op. cit. 456, 462-3, tabI. 11, III ? AM 52,53, fig. 31
Index of Collections
In accordance with the system of Sir John Beazley, my references in the text to the main museum in any place are limited to the name of that place: thus London indicates the British Museum, and Paris the Musee du Louvre. Such museums are always given precedence in the following index, wherever more than one collection is listed under the same town or city. It is hardly practicable to list every single vase mentioned in the text. However, this index is comprehensive of four categories of material: (a) All vases illustrated in this book: the reader is directed to the illustration, and thence to a page reference via the List of Plates. (b) All vases attributed to painters or workshops, or listed in the text for any other reason. The names of the painters and workshops are included in the General Index. (c) All vases whose inventory numbers are quoted in the text or in the footnotes. Museum inventory numbers are given precedence in the entry for each collection. (d) All vases to which reference may conveniently be made through a definitive site publication, or an excavation catalogue. This method is especially useful for several large bodies of excavated material- e.g. from Aetos, Corinth, Delos-Rheneia, Fortetsa, and Thera. In the entry for each museum, such references are placed after the section listing the inventory numbers.
.43 1
•
432 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS •
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
ADOLFSIECK, Schloss Fasanerie Mus.lnv. 167 amphora 84 AEGINA, Museum Kraiker, Aigina: Cat. krater fr. 53 plaque 66 plaques 8 67103 126
kotyle fr. krater fr.
AMSTERDAM, Allard Pierson Mus.lnv. stand 1230 oinochoe 1234 amphora 353° amphora 6249 ex-Scheurleer coll., C VA Cat. krater fr. 20°9 krater fr. 2010 krater fr. 2015 amphora 283 3 krater 284 3 oinochoe 33 18 amphora 1 335
78-81 pl. 31h 143n·3, 363n. 12 279n. 2 102n·5 Museum 182-4 278n. 1 19n.8 59 ff. 4 1ff. 4 1ff. 3 Ill·3,3gn. 1 20gn·5 173-4 165n·7 2°9
ANDROS, Museum Mus.lnv. cup 143 pyxis 144 oinochoe 148 oinochoe 149 skyphos 15 1
17° 169 168 168 169
ARGOS, Museum Mus. lnv.: C(cramique) krater amphora fr. 2 oinochoe 3 oinochoe II amphora 12 krater 14 amphora 15 skyphos 20 amphora 28 cup 29 amphora 3°
pl. 2ge 14In·3 137, 142 136 133n.2, 141n. 2 128n·7,130n·3 14In·3 pl. 29c 12Inn. I, I 1,14 122 pl. 25a
31
amphora
32 33
oinochoe kantharos
35
cup
43 51 52 53 54 56
pyxis amphora oinochoe oinochoe oinochoe pyxis
57 59 62 63 64 94 95 169 17° 171 190-1 192 194 201 2°4 208 2°9 210
kantharos skyphos cup amphora kantharos kantharos cup krater amphora fr. kantharos amphoriskoi amphoriskos bird-vase krater krater krater pyxis krater fr.
223-4 229 239 24°
cups krater fr. krater fr. krater fr.
242 244 28 7 289 2g1 299 4 23 45 8 4 63 487 599
krater frs. krater fr. oinochoe fr. krater fr. krater fr. skyphos krater fr. oinochoe oinochoe kantharos fr.
121nn. 1,1I, 123nn·7,14 121n·9 122n.12, 123n.8, 124, 130 119nn.8-g, I 7on. I I pl. 25b 116n.1 116n.2,117n. 6 118n.1 113n. 2 119n·4, 120nn·3,5 126n.23 IIgn.6, 120n.3 117n·3 116n.l, 117n.5 126n.22 126n.23 126n.19 132 14Ill·3, 147n. 2 pl. 28c 121n.6 121n.2 122n.2 pl. 30e 116-17 146nn·5,8 pl. 26 139-40 , 143n. 15 122n. I I 140-1 134-5 126, 129-30, 218n.1 133-4 127n.I,128n·7 l23 n·4 122-4 130n·7 117n. 1 122-4 116n.2 126n·4, 127n.4 126n.24 143n.1 I
ARGOS, Museum (cont.) 61 3 skyphos krater 645 mug 65 2 krater fr. 73 1 fr. 754 amphoriskos 816 amphoriskoi 82 5- 7 hydria 828 oinochoe 829 oinochoe 830 83 1 83 2 833 834 835
oinochoe oinochoe amphora amphora kantharos
836 837 83 8 839 840 843 847 87 2 878 88g 89 1 895 897 9 15 925 928 1016 1018 1576
kantharos skyphos skyphos pyxis fr. pyxis plate amphora kotyle krater fr. skyphos amphora pyxis plate krater aryballos amphora amphora frs. krater fr. skyphos
158 1 1587 24 10 2428 243 1 2434 2435 2436 244° 2443 2459 2461
cup cup pyxis krater skyphos pyxis oinochoe pyxis bottle amphoriskos lekythos jug
I I 7n. I pl. 31j 126n.IO 124n·4 140 121n.2 121n.2 122nn.I,13 116n.2 12Inn.8,1 I, 123 118 118 118 118 122n.12, 123n.15 122, 123n.6 119n.6, 120n·3 121, 124n.6 116n'5 122n.3, 124 117n·4 142n.1 126n.25 122-4 I 17n.2 116n.1 116, 117n.8 117n·4 147 IIg 127-8, 14 In. 2 137-8 137-8 126n.17, 127n.2 126n.19 126n.19 116n.8, I17n.9 132, 147n. 2 216n·4 pl. 24a 118n.1 142n. 17 142n. 13 142n·3 126n.2 126n.g
2462 24 64
oinochoe skyphos
2466
kantharos
247 0 2473 2475 2476
kotyle amphora pyxis oinochoe
2477
skyphos
247 8 2479
skyphos pyxis
2482 2509 25 11
oinochoe krater kantharos
2521-2 2537 255 1-8 3 279 3288 3291 3805 4 029 4 177 4 179 4 211 43 14 444 2 4660
kantharoi oinochoe fr. frs. krater fr. fr. fr. fr. fr. fr. fr. fr. fr. fr. fr.
ARGOS, private possession pyxis
433
136, 142 126n.18, 127n·9 126n.22, 127n.2 126n.25 pl. 24j 119n·4 12In.8, 123n.12 121,122n.g, 124n.6 119n. 6 115n.2, Ilgn·3, 120n.2 116n·3 147 123n.lo, 126n.24 126n.22 136, 142n·9 143n. 8 134-5 133 133 143n. 19 137-8 143n. 18 143n·9 217n.IO 129n.2 14° 128n·7
126n.13, 12gn.2
ATHENS, National Archaeological Museum Mus.lnv. hydria 184 132 hydria 184n·7 133 tankard 64 n.6 138 oinochoe 152 32ff. amphoriskos I84n.6 153 166 bowl 48 stand 172-4 172 pitcher 174 37,5 In·5 pitcher 37,44-5 178 amphora 184 55-6
434 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS •
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
A THENS, National Archaeological Museum (cont.) amphora 186 46 krater 4 8n·5, 177 190 oinochoe 3 2ff., 358-g 192 oinochoe 74-6 193 oinochoe 38n·4 194 amphora 168n·4 216 amphora 25n-4,35n. l, 218 254n. 1O amphora 55-6 223 pitcher 3 2ff., 55, 65 226 krater 204n.4, 207-8, 228 211n.2 pI. 28e krater 1 23 pl. 46n pyxis 234 oinochoe 201, 205-7 236 04 krater 2 237 stand 183n·5 239 pyxis 2°7 255 pyxis 6 2°5-7 25 hydria 53-4, 60n. I, 3 13 63-4,202 1-3,66-7, pitcher 47,5 06 7 70, 174 bowl 48 723 skyphos 25 5° 7 amphora 3 2ff. 769 pitcher 53,66-7,83 1 77 bowl 67,83 773 67,83,89 bowl 774 pitcher 66-7,83 782 60ff., 83 skyphos 84 7 krater frs. 3 1ff. 802 0ff., 46 amphora 3 8°3 pl. 6 amphora 80 4 amphora 34n.2,36n.l, 8°5 37, I78n.2 krater 37,38n. l o, 806 44 n. 2,46, 56n. 2, 206n.1 fioff., krater 810 206nn.I-2 pl. 7d oinochoe 81I pitcher pI. 7e 812 krater fr. 812 34n. l, 38, 39 n·4 oinochoe 820 184n·5 amphora 824 187n·3
8 24b 84 1 843 866 877 878 881 894 895 897 89 8 899 9°1 99 0 147° 5893 11456 11795 12221 12234 12455 12573 12856 12896 12897 13°3 8 1441 I 14424 1444 1 14447 14472 14476 14708 14763 15267 15271 15284 15298 16022 16193 17384 17457 1747° 17497 175 14 175 19 17935 18045 18062 18135
amphora krater oinochoe bowl krater skyphos amphoriskos amphora amphora amphora amphora amphora bowl krater kantharos amphora kantharos pyxis krater krater oinochoe oinochoe amphora krater oinochoe skyphos pitcher oinochoe skyphos kantharos plate kotyle pyxis amphora pitcher kotyle skyphos pitcher pitcher tankard stand fr. oinochoe hydria pitcher amphora amphora amphora amphora amphora amphora
187n.1 182-4 pl. 29a-b 3 2ff. pI. 29d 167 184n.6 53-4, 56, 58ff. I 79n.6 53-4,77-8 1 59ff. 187n·9 73-4 pI. 8b pI. 44a pI. 45d 2°7,209n·3 203,209n·7 204-6 146n·5 201 201 pI. 41e pI. 44g,j 201 67-70 pl. 13c 74-6 60ff. 205n.1 pI. IOm pI. 19k pI. 44f 55-6 64-5,81 r ron.r 68-70 78-81 pI. 12d pl, 8f 26-8 7.6 -7 pI. r rd 7 1-2 78-8 1 pI. 14e pl. IIC pI. rk 4 2ff. 78-8 1
ATHENS, National Archaeological Museum (cont.) amphora 181 38 77- 81 oinochoe 181 4 2 64-5 oinochoe 181 54 74-6 pitcher pI. 12a 18432 amphora 18433 34 pitcher 18439 78-81 oinochoe 18444 77-8 1 oinochoe 18472 67-9 pitcher 18474 72,292 pitcher 18477 67-9 kantharos 18480 5 1n. 1 kotyle 18496 pI. 15j pitcher 1854 2 7 1-2 amphora 18553 pI. 45c oinochoe "G 15" 75-6 "G 18" oinochoe 32ff. amphora Vari, Gr. 2 77-81, 109-1O AHn, pI. 57, 16 fr. 140n·4 Marmariani, BSA 31: Cat. l-g jugs 159n·3 cup 13 153n. 12 kantharoi 14-29 159n·9 kantharos 163n·3 27 jug 159n·5 4° jug pl. 33a 42 oinochoe pl. 33b 51 oinochoe 159n·4 53 oinochoe 66 159n·5 pitcher 154n.6, 159n·4 7° 1 pitcher 15 In·3, 159n·5 7 amphora 159n·4 74 amphora 159n·5 75 cup 153n.2 9° 1 cup 155 9 cup pI. 32a 92 kantharoi 159n.8 93- 113 skyphos pI. 32g 1I9 kantharos 125 159n·7 tray 126 159n. 13, 27on.8 128-g plates 159n. 15 plate 1 I59n. 14, 162 13 krater 134 155 krater pI. 33e 135 kraters 136-8 155 krater 139 154 krater 150 14° krater 142 15°
144 145-9 146 147 149 15°
krater kraters krater krater krater krater
435
I54lln.2-3 152n.3, 160n.2 I53n-4 155,236n. 13 153n·4 155
A THENS, Acropolis Museum Graef-Langlotz : Cat. krater fr. 27 2 fr. 293 frs. 3 13-14
13 55 382n·4
ATHENS, Agora Museum Mus. Inv.: P(ottery) oinochoe 53 2 pyxis 1 54 1654 fr. plate 4777 pyxis 8 1 47 tankard 47 82 pyxis 84 47 oinochoe 885 4 amphora fr. 4886 amphora 499° tankard 5°53 pyxis 5060 pyxis 061 5 pyxis 5°62 pyxis 5°66 skyphos 5°7° skyphos 5°71 skyphos 5°72 skyphos 5°73 kotyle 5 286 hydria fr. 5499 amphora 10 64 krater 64 22 kantharos 0 16 7 kantharos 7°22 157 kotyle fr. 7 krater fr. 17 73 amphora fr. 10664 krater 13287 oinochoe 122 15 skyphos 17 183 18365 oinochoe oinochoe 18616 mug 2 19°3 amphora 19228
201n.1 20 13 49 47 n·3 pl. IOj pl. IOk,1 55-6 66-7 58ff. pl. ge pl. 9f-g pl. 9m-n pl. 9h--j pl. 9k-1 pl. 9b pl. 9c pl. 9d pl, 9a 60ff. 59ff. 2on·7 26-7 87 n. 6 87 n.6 I I In. I 5 In·4 3 2ff. 59ff. pI. 7b--c 133n. 8 22n·3 26 7 18n.6, 170n.13 pI. la
,li I
436 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
ATHENS, Agora Museum (cont.) pyxis 19229 oinochoe 19230 oinochoe 19231 pyxis 19239 pyxis 19240 kantharos 19241 skyphos 19242 kantharos 19246 amphora 201 77 oinochoe 201 78 kantharos 201 79 kantharos 20180 20181 cup oinochoe 20730 21083 krater fr. 21428 oinochoe 21439 pyxis krater 21706 oinochoe 22427 oinochoe 22430 oinochoe 22433 amphora fr. 22435 krater fr. 22440 kotyle 22450 jug 22453 krater 227 15 oinochoe 23654 oinochoe 23655 oinochoe 24847 26135 skyphos fr.
ATHENS, Benaki Museum Mus.lnv. 26 kyathos amphora 7675
ATHENS, British Mus.lnv. A 71 A 108 A 303 A 305 A 306 A 343 K83
pI. rh pI. Id pI. le pI. If pI. Ig pI. IC pI. rj pI. rb pI. 11 pI. rm pI. Ip pI. 10 pl. In 78-81 12 59ff . 87n.8 48 59ff . 79-81 26-7,227 n. 12 55-6 78-81 87 n·9 22n·4 78-81 pI. lie 78-81 81-2 18n·5
pI. 19f 81-2
School, Museum oinochoe skyphos pitcher pitcher pitcher skyphos pitcher amphora krater fr.
pI. 17e pI. 34k 64-5 pI. 13a pI. 12g 68-7 0 7 1-2 pI. 37f pI. 39g
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS'
ATHENS, Ecole francaise krater
ATHENS, Kerameikos Museum Mus.lnv. skyphos 240 amphora 2 24 cup 250 1 kantharos 25 oinochoe 252 amphora 253 amphora 254 amphora 255 6 pyxis 25 skyphos 257 kantharos 258 262 pyxis 263 pyxis 265 pyxis 268 kantharos oinochoe 274 pyxis 275 amphora 6 27 285 kantharos 288 skyphos krater 290 1 amphora 29 skyphos 294 oinochoe 298 00 oinochoe 3 12 oinochoe 3 13 bowl 3 19 cup 3 kantharos 320 skyphos 27 3 pyxis 333 8 pyxis 33 stand 340 1 oinochoe 34 skyphos 2 34 skyphos 344 bowl 345 8 plate 34 bowls 360-1 kantharos 373 skyphos 376 amphora 377 81 bowl 3
277-9,282, 284 n.8, 290n·4,298
23n·9 22n.1 pI. 2C pI. ze pI. 2g pI. zf pI. 2h pI. 4a pI. 4b pI. 4c pI. 4d pI. 3f pI. 3g pI. 3h 34n·7 49 n. 1 5 In. 6 24n·7,57n. 1 24n·3 24n. 2 pI. 5d,f pI. 5c pI. se pI. 5b pI. 5a pI. 15n pI. 15m pI. 15P pI. 150 3 14 47 n·3 47 n·5 183n·3 pl. IOd pI. IOf pl. roe pI. 109 93n.4, I 17n-4 86n·7 pI. 10C pI. rob pI. loa 51-2, 89 n. 2
ATHENS, Kerameikos Museum bowl 382 bowl 383 bowl 384 amphora 385 skyphos 389 kantharos 39 0 pitcher 393 pitcher 399 12 amphora 4 skyphos 4 13 661 bowl pyxis 775 lakaina 777 778 779 784 785 788 795 814 815 816 81 7 818 81 9 821 82 5 826-8 83 1 833 836 838 839-40 859 864 866 86 7 868 870 87 1 874 884 886-7 889 893 895 R
skyphos plate hydria amphora skyphos pyxis oinochoe bowl amphora kantharos skyphos pitcher pitcher amphora skyphoi mug pyxis pyxis amphora skyphoi amphora oinochoe amphora skyphos oinochoe amphora krater fr. oinochoe amphora skyphoi skyphos skyphos oinochoe
(cont.) 5 1-2 5 2n.2 50n.6,5 1-2 29,45,5 1-2 21n.1 23n.8, 25n. I 66-7 66-7 pI. za pI. zb 87 n. l o 25n·7 23 n. l I , 24n. l, 34n.6 24n·4 27°,304n. 1 24n·5 22n.1 68-70 26 pI. 15d pI. IOh pI. 15a pI. 15c pI. 15b 5 1-2 71 pI. ss 23 n·9, 34n·5 170n. 13, 24 In -4 26 23 n. 1 22n.1 122n.lO 20n·3 95 n.2 pI. 3d pI. 3e 24ll.8, 120n.6 pI. 3c 18n.l, 24In.5 47 n.2 19n. 1O 303 304 124n.6 eon.e, 95n.2, 169n·7
897 928 935 959 1160 1202 1214 1244 1249 1250 125 1 1252
1253 1254
1255
1256 1293 1294 1298 1301 1305 1306 1310 1314 1318 1319 1327 1329 1355 1356 1370 1371 2031 208 5 2089 213 2 2133 2135 2141 2144 2145 2146
skyphos oinochoe krater fr. amphoriskos bowl pyxis amphora fr.
437
24n.6, 312 19n.2 14n -4 15 In·5 86n.8, 90n. I 17n. 1 34n. 2,36, 38n'3 oinochoe 60 amphora 2on·7 amphora 20n·7 kantharos 2on·7,272n. 1 mug 18n.6, 20nn·6-7, 304n.2 oinochoe pI. zd krater fr. 17n·4, 19nn·6-7, 2on·7 krater 34n. I, 39-40, 13 In. I, 173, 183 amphora 20n·7 krater fr. 119n·5 krater fr. 116n·9 amphora 85n. 2 skyphos 50 oinochoe 47 n. 1 amphora 34n. 7, 38n. I pyxis 47 n·4 pitcher 52n. I, 88n. I bowl pI. 15e skyphos 52n. I, 88n.2 oinochoe 74-6 krater fr. 78-81 kotyle lion. I oinochoe 59ft: amphora fr. 64n.6 amphora frs. 59 ff. kantharos 150n.6 lekythos 10 lekythos 10 amphora 114n. 1 krater fr. 12n.1 pyxis 119n.2 skyphos pI. 3k skyphos pI. 3j oinochoe pI. s» oinochoe 19n·5, 165n.6, 238
438 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
ATHENS, Kerameikos Museum (cont.) 2149 oinochoe 19n.4,20n.7, 272n.2 amphora pl'3a skyphos pI. 3b mug 26-7,40n.I, 126n.I I krater fr. (Gr.290) 4 1-4 pitcher 64-5 (Gr.29 I) ATHENS, ex-Lambros colI. oinochoe pitcher
74- 6 44-5
ATHENS, market amphora pitcher ATHENS, Passas colI. pitcher
66-7 73-4
59ff.
ATHENS, private possession pyxis skyphos
pI. 43c pI. 44e
ATHENS, Stathatou colI. amphora St222
pI. JIg
ATHENS, Vlasto colI. hydria pitcher kotyle pyxis hydria
64nn·5-6 64-5 73-4,110 pI. 33c pI. 33d
BAGHDAD, Archaeological Museum Mus.lnv. I M 52°41 hydria 59ff. BALTIMORE, Robinson colI. pitcher
72
BALTIMORE, WaIters Art Gallery Mus.lnv. 48.2231 amphora 58ff. BASEL, Historisches Museum Mus.lnv. oinochoe 1953·9
44-5
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS •
BASEL, market amphora
77-81
BERKELEY, Univ. of California Mus.lnv. oinochoe 32ff. 8,3352 BERLIN, Staatliche Museen Mus.lnv. krater A35 pitcher F 48 stand F 52 oinochoe 294° krater 1 294 pyxis 2964 amphora 2980 oinochoe 2982 amphoriskos 2992 jug 6 299 amphora 3 124 pyxis 143.6 3 pyxis 143.15 3 amphora 203 3 oinochoe 33 10 oinochoe 3374 39°1 4 286 4490 30°7° 3 1°°5 3 1045 3 1°46 3 1312 32029
amphora krater krater oinochoe amphora hydria amphora hydria hydria fr.
BERNE, Historisches Museum Mus.lnv. amphora fr. 23270
2JIn.2 78-81 182-4 280-1 285,288n.2 269 265n.2 272 266n.I 263 202n·5 203n·5 203,208n.8 57-8 201 38n·4,75-6, 3 13 62n·5 133-5, 214n.I I 4 8n·5 183- 4 pI. 14c 60 67-9 64 59ff.
57
BONN, Univ., Akademisches Kuqstmuseum Mus.lnv. 15 krater fr. 78-81 16 krater fr. 42ff. 664 kantharos 205-8 900 krater 204n·4 1634 krater fr. 4Iff. (now in National Museum, Athens) 2085 amphora 207n. 13
BOSTON, Museum of Fine Arts Mus.lnv. oinochoe 9 2 . 273 6 oinochoe 97.3 60 amphora 98.894 pitcher 99·5°3 pitcher 03·777 amphora °3·779 skyphos 12·777 oinochoe 14.740 oinochoe 25.4 2 oinochoe 25-43
CAIRO, Archaeological Museum Mus. Tnv.
201 pI. 44d 67-7 0
71 71- 2 66-7, 133n~~k 185n.6 336n ·3 76-7 75-6
BRAURON, Museum of the Mesogeia amphora 57- 8 hydria 59ff. hydria 67-70 BREMEN, Stadtische Museum Mus.lnv. E 471 pitcher
439
71
BRUSSELS, Musees royaux d'Art et d'Histoire Mus.lnv. pyxis A 1°36 2°3,2°5-7 A 1506 amphora 34n.2, 39n·4, 349ll·9 A 1676 oinochoe 74-6 A 1702 oinochoe 269n·5 tankard A 1942 42ff. A 2113 skyphos 79-81 A 2248 kotyle 79-81 oinochoe A 3420 32ff. amphora A 3474 57-8 21.628 krater fr. 3 I ff. (ex Paris A 531) BUCHAREST, National Museum of Antiquities Mus.lnv. °3 218 oinochoe 12n.3 BUDAPEST, Szepmuveszeti Muzeum Mus.lnv. 50. I 79 hydria 78-81 BUFFALO, Museum of Science Mus.lnv. C 12847 amphora 59ff.
26.134
bowl
51-2
CALIFORNIA, Univ.: see BERKELEY CAMBRIDGE, Fitzwilliam Museum Mus.lnv. GR-I-I935 oinochoe pI. 13e-f GR-2-1943 oinochoe pI. 3m CAMBRIDGE, Museum of Classical Archaeology Mus.lnv. CAM 328 oinochoe 66-7 hydria CAM 345 59ff. CHAERONEA, Mus.lnv. 100 143 144a 144b 148 148a 149 153a 159 160 164 167
Museum oinochoe oinochoe skyphos skyphos kantharos cup pyxis mug skyphos pyxis amphora skyphos amphora
CHALCIS, Museum Mus.lnv. plate 381 hydria 1349
pI. 42f pI. 42h pI. 42d pI. 42e pI. 42b pI. 42a pI. 42C pI. 42.i pI. 42g pI. 43b pI. 43d 198 pI. 43e
185n.8 19In.2, 195n·3
CHIOS, Museum krater fr.
pI. 63g
CLEVELAND, Museum of Art Mus.lnv. pitcher 24.259 70 - 1 amphora 1927. 27. 6 58ff. COMPIEGNE, Museum See PARIS, Musee du Louvre, A 549, A 559
440 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
COPENHAGEN, Danish National Museum Mus.Inv. pI. 40e Chr. VIII. 324 amphora 2ff., 184 krater 26 4 7 kantharos 72n.2, 38n.9, 27 7 I 74n.5 81-2 oinochoe ABC 1009 oinochoe 1628 76-7, 295n.6 amphora 873 207n·9 3 oinochoe 32ff. 4705 In·7 pyxis 1 5 474 oinochoe pI. 45a 1 537 20 pyxis 3 5373 204, 20 7 mug 5374 208 pyxis 8 1 53 kantharos 282n·7, 284n·5, 6352 292n·3 8ff. amphora 029 5 7 202n.8 amphora 73 14 lekythos 282n.I,28411·2, 8225 285 1-2 pitcher 7 67 93 amphora 59ff. 9378 282 amphora 12163 krater pI. 63a 12432 pI. 62g oinochoe 12439 pI. 62d kotyle 12448 pI. 60b oinochoe 1245 1 Exochi: Cat. (inclusive of vases formerly in Rhodes, now lost) amphora 281,286 AI pI. 62h kantharos A2 kantharos 282, 284n.7, A3 285n.2 kantharos 282n·7, 284n·4, A4 286 kantharos A6 284n·4 285 kantharos A7 kotylai 283n.6 A8-g horn-vase A 12 276 lekythos 276n. 1 AI? krater 282, 284n.8 BI kantharos 283, 284n'5, B2 285 pI. 62C kantharos B3 kotyle 282 B4 krater pI. 63a Cl kotyle 283, 285 C2 kotyle 28 C3 3 kotylai 283 C4-5
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS·
Cg-IO DI D2 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 DII D 12 D 13 D 14
aryballoi krater oinochoe oinochoe oinochoe oinochoe oinochoe oinochoe oinochoe oinochoe lekythos lekythos lekythos
D 16 F 1-2 LI L2 L3 MI M2 M3 NI
kotyle kotylai kotyle kotyle kantharos krater kantharos skyphos krater
VI V2
oinochoe oinochoe (now in Lund) kantharos kantharos skyphoi plates lekythoi pyxis krater oinochoe tray oinochoe oinochoe fr.
V3 V4 V 5-6 V 7-8 X 1-2 X3 YI Y2 ZI Z2 Z3 Z8
286 26g,272 275n·3 284, 285n·3 285n·3 284, 285n·3 pI. 62f 284 pI. 62g 273n.2 281-2 281 281-2, 28411.7, 287 pI. 62e 283 pI. 62d 283 284n·4 269,272 270,282 270 282, 284n.8, 285 pI. 60b 269, 272 pI. 60c 27on. 1 270,272 270 282 275n.2 269, 272- 3 269,272,281 pI. 60g 269,281 28In·5 285
COPENHAGEN, Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek Mus.Inv. pitcher 2674 78-81 amphora 2680 77 amphora 55-6 3187 CORINTH, Museum Mus.Inv. kotyle C 40-366 oinochoe C 48-136
pI. 21e pI. Igc
CORINTH, Museum (cont.) oinochoe 048- 137 oinochoe 048- 138 oinochoe 048- 143 CP 2180 aryballos KP 164 oinochoe KP 172 kantharos T2408 oinochoe oinochoe T2455 krater T2545 krater T 2713 Corinth VII. I: Cat. W(einberg) 6 oinochoe 20 oinochoe 21 oinochoe oinochoe 23 26 oinochoe 28 oinochoe oinochoe 29 oinochoe 33 amphora 35 krater 36 pyxis 37 skyphos 38 skyphos 39 skyphos 40 skyphos 41 skyphos 42 skyphos 43 kantharos 44 skyphos 45 plate 46 plate 47 oinochoe 54 oinochoe 56 amphora 58 60 skyphos 61 skyphos 62 skyphos oinochoe 64 oinochoe 67 skyphos 69 oinochoe 70 oinochoe 71 skyphos 72 krater 73 krater 74 skyphos 75 oinochoe 76 krater frs. 78
pI. 19b pI. 21a pI. 19a pI. 17c pI. 18c pI. 18g pI. 18b pI. 18a 140-1, 363n.lo pI. Igg-h 9 2n .492n·4 102 pI. 16a 114n·3 93 pI. 16b 93 93 93 pI. 16d 93,9 8 93,98, 115n·3 93,98 93, 114n·9, 154 93,154 93, 115n·3 93 93,95 93, 117n·4 93,159 n. 16 94 pI. 16e 94 93-5 pI. 17d 95 93-4 94 93-4 94 pI. 17a 93-5 pI. 17f pI. 17j pI. 17h pI. 17g 96n·3
80
kotyle
83 103 104 106 107 116 122 154 176
skyphos pyxis fr. oinochoe fr. mug kotyle krater skyphos fr. krater
98, 283n·5, 355n·3 96n.2 IOln·5 145n.2 102 3 14,324 pI. 21k 293n·4 363n. l o 147n.6
lekythos lekythos oinochoe skyphos amphora pyxis oinochoe amphoriskos oinochoe oinochoe
pI. 59c pI. 59b pI. 58e pI. 59d pI. 58g pI. 58f pI. 63e pI. 59a pI. 60a pI. 63b
COS, Museum Mus.Inv. 4 06 4 07 4 09 4 13 477 478 5 28 774 963
DELOS, Museum Delos x v: Cat. amphorae Ab 1-3 amphora Ab7 Ab8 amphora Ab II Ac I AC2-4 AC5-7 AClo Ac I1 Ae I Ae39 Ae49 Ae54 Ae 61 Ae 72 Ae 74 Ae 78 Ae84 Bb 14-15 Bb 28-9 Bb 32 Bc 4-5
krater fr. krater amphorae frs. fr. fr. skyphos skyphos kantharos kantharos skyphos skyphos kantharos kantharos kantharos oinochoai tankards lekythos frs.
441
178-8o,180n·3 178-80 I 79, 180n·4, 190n·9 180 pI. 37e 177-8 178 172n·9 I 72n.9 3 19n. 1 pI. 38a pI. 34 pI. 38d pI. 38c pI. 38b pI. 38f pI. 38g pI. 38e 175 175-6 175 174-5
442 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
DELOS, Museum Dllos xv: Cat. (cont.) frs. Be 6-7 krater Bc8 oinochoe Rh I fr. Rh3 bird-bowl Rh 26 kotyle Delos XVII, pI. 53,35 oinochoe Duos x, no. 37
I 74n.8 173-4 pI. 61b 277n. l pI. 61e 105n·4, 107n·5, 19In.12,315 pI. 36b
DELPHI, Museum FD V, figs. krater frs. 5°1-6 krater 5°8 frs. 523-4 fr. 534 frs. 536-40 frs. 54 1-4 frs. 55 1-2 fr. 560
103n.6 I03n.l I 103n.2 99n·4 103n·4 103n·3 103n·3 222n·3
DRESDEN, Albertinum Mus.Inv. kantharos ZV837 kantharos ZV 1699 amphora ZV 1820 pitcher ZV 1935
102n·9 2°5-6, 210 66-7 43
DUBLIN, National Museum ofIreland Mus.Inv. oinochoe 1921.28 277-9 DUNEDIN, Univ. ofOtago Mus.Inv. krater fr. E 18.195 pitcher E 48.193 pitcher E 57.155
4 2ff. 73-4 pI. 8e
EDINBURGH, Royal Scottish Museum Mus.Inv. skyphos 68-70 L363 skyphos 68-7° L364 ELEUSIS, Museum Mus.Inv. amphora 454 amphora 7°° pitcher 7°8 skyphos 1 74
55-6 pI. 31 64-5,83 26-8, 38n.9, 77n .2
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS •
77 1 815 820 1020
oinochoe pyxis oinochoe kotyle
ERETRIA, Museum Lefkandi excavations, Cat. LK/65/ P I63 jug LK/65/ P I77 skyphos ERLANGEN, Univ. Mus.Inv. amphora 1458 ESSEN, Folkwang Museum Mus.Inv. amphora K9 69
20 20 26-7,40 pI. 21d
pI. 41C pI. 41b
67-7°,73
59ff.
FRANKFURT -AM-MAIN, Holzhausen Mus.Inv. VF Beta 222 oinochoe 74-6 VF Beta 224 pitcher 73 FRANKFURT -AM-MAIN, private possession pitcher 70-1 GERMANY, private possession amphora 57-8 amphora 58ff. GOTHA, Schlossmuseum Mus.Inv. oinochoe ZV3· ., pitcher J 2503
275n·3 5 1-2
GOTTINGEN, Mus.Inv. 533h 533n 533n
2°5-7 31 3 In. 2
Univ. kantharos krater fr. krater fr.
GREIFSWALD, Univ. Hundt-Peters, Cat. 86 krater fr. krater fr. 87
3 1ff. 42ff.
HAGUE, THE: Volz colI. pitcher 66-7 Scheurleer colI.: see AMSTERDAM
HALLE, Robertinum Mus.Inv. krater fr. 58 8a krater fr. 5 krater fr. 59
3 1ff. 3 1ff. 4 1ff.
HALLE, Altheim colI. skyphos
26-7
HAMBURG, Museum fur Kunst und Gewerbe Mus.Inv. 1898.57 oinochoe 201 19.363 pitcher 19 67-70, 73 kantharos 205- 7 1936.2 HANOVER, Kestner-Museum Mus.Inv. pyxis 1897·8a oinochoe 1897·8c amphora 1953.148 84 pyxis 1957. 8.60 oinochoe 195
pI. 44c 2°5-7 58ff. pI. 45b 32ff.
HAR V ARD, FoggMuseum Mus.Inv. 1835 krater fr. 12.33 plate 19 krater fr. 1954·33
3 1ff. 185n.8 140-1
HEIDELBERG, Mus.Inv. G 10 G 18 G 19 G20 G 21 G22 G44 G77 G 140 M7 MRIO
198 207 203n·7 203n·3 207n.12 203n·9 203,207n·3 2°4 55 pI. 59g 269
Univ. pyxis pyxis pyxis pyxis pyxis pyxis krater krater fr. krater krater
HERAKLEION, Archaeological Museum Mus.Inv. hydria 697 pI. 57m pithos 699 pI. 57n cup pI. 57h,j 74 1 skyphos 745 pI. 57b skyphos 747 pI. 57a
2222 skyphos skyphos 2225 pithos 3 180 amphora 3 183 amphora 3 184 amphora 3 185 oinochoe 3 187 oinochoe 3 192 lekythos 3205 skyphos 3244 pyxis 3246 pyxis 3248 krater 6644 pithos 1°97° pithos 12°76 12086 skyphos 12149 krater 12284 oinochoe Arkades, Ann. 10-12, figs. 61 pithos aryballos 83 lekythos 84 urn 99 100 plate pithos 156 aryballos 231 pithos 232 pithos 252 pithos 254 260 pithos 262 pithos pithos 272 pithos 292 pithos 295 pithos 306 pithos 3 12 pithos 3 18 aryballos 34° pithos 352 lekythos 358 pyxis 359 lekythos 363 hydria 367 amphora 376 pithos 387 pyxis 397 lekythos 399 lekythos 4°0 pithos 43 1 pithos 455
443
pI. 57e pI. 57d pI. 56e 257 pI. 571 259 259n·5 259n·5 26In.2 pI. 57c 259n·7 259n·7 pI. 57k pI. 52C pI. 52a pI. 57f pI. 52d pI. 57g 255 256n. 13 256n. 14 256n.l I 256n.l I 255 257n·3 257 257 255 255n.8 257 257n·4 pI. 56c-d 257 257 pI. 56b 255 256n. 12 255 257n. 1 257n.2 257n. l 256n·4 243n·5, 256n.8 255 257n.2 256n. 14 256n. 14 256n. 1O 257
444 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
HERAKLE ION, Archaeological Museum Arkades, Ann. 10-12, figs. (cont.) pithos pI. 56a 460 plate 257 477 pithos 255n.8 5 20 frs. 242n. l, 580 256nn. 6,8 fr. 256n.8 582 hydria 619 256n'3 amphora 620 259n·3, 260n·7 oinochoe 623 pI. 53g hydria 624 259n·4 cup 260n.2 62 5 krater 626 259n·9 skyphos 62 7 259n. 12 hydria 628 259n·4 pithos pI. 57n 633 hydria 638 259n·4 amphora 640 259n.2 hydria 259n.4, 26m·3 643 hydria 644 253n. 13 Fortetsa: Cat. duck-vase 34° 5° trays 27on.8 74,90 pithos 117 234n·7 pithos 235n.2, 236n. 1 147 pyxis 163 236n. 1 amphora 179 234n·5 krater 221 234n.8 amphora 269 165n·5, 236n.1 I, 328,342 askos 277 237n·7 amphora 236n.1 I, 3°1 237n·7, 342n. 1 fr. 11 342n. 1 3 amphora 236n.lo,238, 339 261 lid 6n. 23 2 343 pithos 235 344 kalathos 236n·3, 346 237n. 13 lid 236n.2, 237n.6, 35° n. 13 243 oinochoe pI. SIC 35 1 askos 238n·4 354 lekythos 6 pI. 51b 35 kalathoi 6n·3 23 357-8 skyphoi 239n. 1 364-7
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS •
369 375 382 383 385 387 388 392 396 401 408 4°9 4 22 423
pyxis mug pithos oinochoe pithos pithos oinochoe pithos skyphos lid pithos lid tray pithos
427 434 435 44 1 443 45 2 453
aryballos cup skyphos oinochoe oinochoe pithos pithos lekythos
454
pithos
444
458 467 476 479 487 488 493 498 524 527 53° 53 1 588 59 1 593 596 597 611 615 642 643 65g-61 663 666
amphora cup amphora pithos oinochoe lid hydria lid kalathos lekythos pithos lid oinochoe oinochoe pithos pithos aryballos cup cup pithos pyxis aryballoi amphora aryballos
pI. 51d 238 239n.6 240n·9 241, 25 1n. 1I 239n.6,255 240n. 1O 239n.6,255 24 1 pI. 55f 252n. 18 253n·4 244, 254n·5 243n. 12, 244nn·4-6 2n·3 24 pI. 51e 236n·9 244, 357n. 1 237n·4 244n.6 244n. 2 242n.6, 244n.8, 357n·3 239n.6, 240n.2, 357n. 1 243n -4 242n·9 pI. 53h 252n. 12 237n -4 253n.2 pI. 51a 244nn·5- 6 283n·3 242n.6, 244n·7 pI. 53a pI. 53a 25° 250 pI. 55e ~43n.14, 244 242n·3 pl. 53b 242n·9 242n. 14, 144 pI. 53d 244n·9 243n·4 pl, 53e
HE RAK LE ION, Archaeological Museum Fortetsa: Cat. (cont.) 668 aryballos 242,244, 352n·5 lekythos 2n·4 669 24 krater 169n.14, 67 1 243n. 1 cup 672 24~ amphora 673 pI. 53h lids 677-8 254 686 pithos 249n.4, 253n. I pithos 690 237n. I,23 8 pithos 69 1 240nn. I,3 pithos 693 243n. lO , 244n·3,3 19 lekythos 2n·4,3 19 694 24 pithos 697 239n·7, 240n. 14 mug 698 240-1 lid 699 240n·5 pithos 2n. 12 25 7°° lekythoi 701-2 250n. 13, 253n·5 alabastron 250n. 1I 7°5 pithos pI. 52b 7°6 mug 170n. 12,24° 7°7 lid 7°9 240n·5 krater 7 12 237n. 1 pithos 732 252n. 27 pyxis 25 In. 1 733 pithos 25 2nn.6,8 748 pithos 25 1n. 1O 758 lekythos 76 1 25° skyphos 25 In . 6 763 pithos 764 244n -4 pithos 240n. 1 779 pithos 78 1 25 2n. 21 kotyle 8°5 255n . I 824 pithos pl. 54f 82 7 pithos 252nn.6,17 829 lekythos pI. 55c aryballos 832 pl. 55a lekythoi 833-4 250n. 13 olpe 835 250n.8 pithos 837 243n. 14 mug 838 pI. 53C pithos 84 1 243-4,254,3 19 842 lekythos 24 2n·4,3 19 868 olpe 250n.8 pithos 87° 252n.8
874 875 876 880 884 888 889 9 19 973 976 977 978-g 988 989 997 1000 1°°5 1006 1009 1016 1017 1021 1025 1038 1047 1056 1128 1237 125 2 1253- 4 1313 1315 1316 1337 1339 134° 1342 1345 1346 135° 1362 1363 1366 1369 1377 1378 1383 1391 1392
skyphos pithos oinochoe amphora pithos pithos amphora skyphos arybaIlos jug oinochoe arybaIloi pithos cup kotyle alabastron skyphos skyphos oinochoe pithos aryballos pithos cup jug pithos pithos lekythos lid pithos aryballoi pithos lekythos pithos pithos lekythos kotyle pithos pithos kotyle pithos lekythos oinochoe pithos cup lid cup pithos pithos oinochoe
445
25 In. 6 252n.27,320 320 243n·3 252nn.16,23 254n·5 243n·3 25 In. 6 250n. 1O 250n.6,253n.8 pI. 55j 250, 253n.lo 24~,254
pl. 55k 255n. 1 250n. I I, 253n. 7 25 In. 6 pI. 55g 242n·7 pI. 51f 236n.6 247n. 1 pI. 551 236 24~
252n.23 250 253n.2 25 In. 11,255 250n. l o, 253n. lO, 255 248n. I, 249n.4 250n. 13 247n. 1 252n.1 I 253n.6 255n. 1 252n.20 253n. 1 255n.2 248n. I, 249n-4 250 237n·4 pI. 5¥-b pl. 54d 249n.1 I 246-9 247n. 1 243n. 12 242n·7
446 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
HERAKLEI ON, Archaeological Museum Fortetsa: Cat. (cont.) aryballos 1398 244n·9 pithos 253n. I,254n·5 14°2 pyxis 25 1n. 1 14°4 pithos 252nn.18,21 14°9 lekythos 250n. 15 1411 14 lid 14 253n·4,254 15 lid 253n. 15 14 19 pithos 14 244n·4 pithos 24 14 249n·7 lid 253nn. 14-15, 1435 254, 382n. 2 lid 254n. 1 1439 pithos pI. 51g 144° 1 pithos pI. 54c 144 lekythos 1448 250n. 15 1 pyxis 145 250n·17 pithos 252n. 16 1457 pithos 1462 252n. 12 pyxis 236n.8 147° 81 krater 14 154n·3, 236n. 13, 34 2n. 1 2 amphoriskos 149 235n·3,342n. 1 lekythos 1499 25° pithos 246-9 15°1 pithos 252n. 27 15°3 lekythoi 253n.6, 382n. 2 15og- 1O pithos 25 In. lI, 1511 252n. 12 cup 246-9 1515 Phaistos, Ann. 39-40: figs. amphora 256n. I I 44 a b pithos 257 44 hydria 256n·5 5 In amphora 256n. 1I 57 jar 256n. 1I 58 pithos 6n. II,257 25 59 krater 192 256 Teke, BSA 49: Cat. 11 pithos 242n. 1 lid 249n.1 I 15 16 pithos 243n. l O pithos 246-9 17 krater 243n. 2 19 21 oinochoe 243n.8 hydria pI. 53f 24 oinochoe 27 243n.8 lids 243n. 2 39-4 1
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS'
lid 43 bowl 55 lekythoi 5g-60 lekythoi 61-3 skyphos 1 7 cup 79 cup 81 Knossos, B SA 29: Cat. pithos 27 pithos 28 Anopolis, ]dI 14, fig. pithos 15 HOBART, Univ. of Tasmania Mus.Inv. oinochoe frs. 31
253n·3 254 239n·4 250n. 14 239n·4 239n·4 239n·4 246-9 . 246-9 246-9
pI. 12f
ISTANBUL, Archaeological Museum Lindos I: Cat. krater frs. 266 830-1 kantharos 283n·3 845-6 oinochoe 28In·5, 849 283n.lO, 284n·3 28In.l, oinochoe 862 283n.lo, 284n.2 fr. 285 86 7 frs. 280 87 1-2 fr. 873 279n -4 fro 280 876 fr. 284n-4 885 fr. 285 9°5 frs. 285n.6 937-8 frs. 286 944 I Z M I R, Archaeological Museum krater fr. kotyle fr. krater fr.
KEOS, Museum (Ay. Irini) Excavations, Cat. amphora fr. K30 26
KONIGSBERG (KALININGRAD) Mus.lnv. A 18 krater fr. 3 l ff. (part now in Warsaw, q.v.) LACCO AMENO (Ischia), Museum kotyle pI. 19j amphora pI. 41d kotyle pI. 41h LAON, Museum Mus.lnv. cup 3777°
KARLSR UHE, Mus.lnv. B 1848 B 2675 B 2680 60/12
Badisches Landesmuseum kotyle fr. pitcher amphora
204n.8 55, 58ff. 5 1n. 2 58ff.
70-1
LEIDEN, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden Mus.lnv. A.SX.I pyxis 23n. 2 A.SX.I pyxis 50n-4 RO III 68 amphora pI. 39j RO III 84 krater pI. 39h ROIII krater fr. 4 2ff. SVL2 amphora pI. 40d VZVN4 pyxis pI. 20h bowl 1.98/6. 17 68-7 0 bowl 1.98/6. 18 68-70 amphora I. 1909/1. I pI. lIa-b pyxis I. 1922/4. 18 2°3 tankard 1922/4 79-8 1
KALININGRAD: see KONIGSBERG
6of 63c 63d 63f
59ff., I64n. I
KNOSSOS, Stratigraphical Museum krater pI. 54e kotyle pI. 55d
LEIPZIG, Univ. Mus.lnv. krater fr. T2384
pI. pI. pI. pI.
55.12-20.2
skyphos
oinochoe 59.2- 16.38 krater 60·4-4·9 60.4-4. 10 jug jug 61.4-25.48 krater 61.4-25.5 1 10-7. 1582 flask 64. stand 65·7-26.1 oinochoe 77. 12-7. 12 78. 12-12.2 skyphos 12-13.5 krater 85. oinochoe 85. 12-13.6 88.10-15.14 pyxis krater fr. 94. 11-1.31 krater 1899.2-19. I 10-28.1 pitcher 19°5. 1910.10-13. I kantharos 1912.5-22.1 pitcher 1913.11-13.1 pitcher amphora 1914.4-13.1 pitcher 1916. 1-8.2 1920. 10-14.4 oinochoe amphora 1927.4- 11.1 aryballos 195°.1-24. I 195°.11-19. 1 skyphos 1955.10-1 I. I amphora Ms C (Manuscript Cat.) oinochoe 253 1 2 oinochoe 253 BMCat. I.I skyphos A 1105 amphora A 1107 Other Cat. nos. "A 361" pitcher "A 362" pitcher
447
182n·3, 185n·4 pI. 21b 282, 284n.7 pI. 61a 296n·3 pI. 60e 282n·3 182-4 pI. 13d pI. 20d 282 pI. 61f 2°3 173-4 55-6, 21On·4 pI. 14b pI. 44b 78-81 pI. 14a 55,67-9 pI. 13b 75-6 73,77 pI. 21j 68-70 pI. 43a 75-6 26-7 27° 268-g 67-70 67-70
4 2ff.
LONDON, Baring colI. amphora
32ff',54-6
LISBON, Salazar coIl. pitcher
66-7
LONDON, University College tankard
pI. 8g
LONDON, British Museum Mus.lnv. 37. 10-18.1 stand 52.6-21.14 cup 52.12-20.5 lekythos 55.12-20.1 amphoriskos
pI. 39a-c 165n.8 382n. 2 pI. 341
LONDON, private possession krater oinochoe kantharos krater
78-81 72 280n.1 pI. 44h
448 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
LONDON, market oinochoe amphora amphora LUCERNE, market amphora
75-6 81 82
58
MADRID, Archaeological Museum Mus. Inv, pyxis 2°3 19482 MAINZ, Romisch-Germanisch Zentralmuseum fr. 55 MAINZ, Univ. Mus. Inv. 46
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS •
6234 6249 6400 6402 6404 8447a 8448 8500 8506 8599 86 96 87 19 8748
krater oinochoe oinochoe bowl pitcher pitcher pitcher oinochoe skyphos pyxis oinochoe oinochoe amphora
MUNICH, von Schoen coIl. kotyle hydria
59 ff.
MANCHESTER, Univ. skyphos kotyle
68-7° 73-4
MANNHEIM, Reiss-Museum Mus. Inv. amphora 66 amphora 137 amphora 11°
81 29 59 ff., 79
MOSCOW, Pushkin Museum Mus. Inv. krater 3° 01
182-4
MUNICH, Antikensammlung Mus. Inv. 403 (=A 852) krater amphora 2168 krater 2233 2234 2235
amphora kantharos
2284 23°0 6080 6166 618 5 621 7 6220 6228
oinochoe oinochoe amphora amphora lekythos tankard skyphos hydria
70-1 179 206n.8, 3 II n. II 202n.6, 205-6 204,207, 2°9n·7 pI. 19d 277-9 32ff., I 74n.4 pl. 34m 86n.l, 175n.1 33ff. 68-7 0 59ff.
MYKONOS, Museum Mus. Inv, amphora A 1451 amphoriskos A 1452 amphoriskos A 1453 amphoriskos A 1454 amphoriskos A 1455 oinochoai A 1456-8 oinochoe A 1460 skyphoi A 1463-8 skyphos A 1467 skyphos A 1469 cup A 1471 cup A 1472 A 1473-4 r 137 Delosxv, Cat. Aa7 Aa 12-13 Aa 16 Aa 21 Aa 27 Aa 55 Aa 57 Aa 58-61 Ab 19 Ad6 Ad 7 Ad 12 Ae4-17 Ae 18-19
cups mug hydria hydria amphora hydria hydria oinochoe fr. amphoriskoi amphora amphora fr. skyphos skyphoi skyphoi
67-70 42ff. 32ff. 33ff. 64-5 78-81 78-81,9° 5 In·3 60ff. 50n·3 68,76-7,80 202 pI. 8c,d
pI. 191
94n. 2,168 pI. 32f 153n.5, 156 154 156 156n'5,168 165 156 pI. 32h pI. 34d pI. 32d I56n.4, 17on.lo, 312 170n. 1O 170n. 13 pI. 37c 180n·5 pI. 37b pI. 37a 180n.6 pI. 34j ~69n·9
I54n.5 179n·7 178n. 1 178n. l, 179n. 2 179n. 12 157 156
MYKONOS, Museum DIlosxv, Cat. (cont.) Ae20 skyphos skyphoi Ae 24-9 skyphos Ae 31 skyphos Ae32 skyphos Ae33 skyphos Ae36 skyphoi Ae44-7 kantharos Ae50 skyphos Ae57 skyphos Ae59 skyphos Ae64 skyphos Ae67 skyphos Ae69 kantharos Ae 77 kantharos Ae87 MI plate plate M4 M 1-6 plates Bb 1-11 amphorae Bb6 amphora oinochoe Bb 13 oinochoai Bb 18-25 skyphos Bb 41 skyphos Bb 51 skyphoi Bb 51-3 kantharos Bb 56 kantharos Bb 57 kantharos Bb 58 Bc I amphora BC2 hydria fr. BC4 oinochoe Att 3 Att 12 amphora amphora Att 13 oinochoe Att 14 oinochoe Crl4 Rh2 fr. kotylai Rh 4-5 Rh 6-10 kotylai kotylai Rh 13-15 Or Ind a plate Or Ind 10 mug NAPLES, Muzeo Nazionale Mus. Inv. oinochoe 1399°1 MA 22, pls. oinochoe 37. 1
pI. 32b 157 17° 170nn. 2,7 17on. 2 17on·4 17on. 2 17° 179n.1 I 180 I 79n.II 17 In. 1 180 180 17In. I,180n.2 pI. 38j pl, 38h 179n. 15 I 74ff. pI. 36e 174 I 74ff. pI. 36c pI. 41a 172n·9 172n·9 175 172n·9 pl. 36d 176 163n·5 169n.1 168n.2 3 12 169n.1 169n·9 277-9 277-9 277-9 277-9 185n·3 170n. 13
104n. 1 pI. 21C
4°·2 4°·7 40.8
aryballos lekythos oinochoe
449
pl. 41g pl. 41f pI. 41j
NAUPLIA (NAUPLION), Museum Mus. Inv. kantharos pI. 29f 1915 8 oinochoe pI. 24f 194 aryballos pl. 25g 1953 kantharos pI. 30d 1973 84 krater fr. 19 139-40 2002 kantharos 126n.22 skyphos pI. 31e 20°3 2228 oinochoe 2-3 13 amphora 2248 137-8, 142n·5 skyphos 2249 133n·7 832 oinochoe 24c pI. 3 833 oinochoe 24d pI. 3 krater 146n·5 4°37 krater 147n·5 4°39 pitcher 4 062 71 63 oinochoe 64-5 40 pitcher 64-5 4065 161 krater pI. 24b 4 232 pyxis 134-5, 140n. 2 4 amphora 235 121n·4 4 oinochoe pl. 25h 4 253 pyxis fr. 4266 134-5 krater fr. 143n. 16 4 268 krater fr. 274 n. 16 143 4 10006 amphora pI. 28d 10029 oinochoe 126n·4 oinochoe 126n.6 10°3° kantharos 126n.22, 1°°32 127n·4 oinochoe II8n.1 1°°33 cup II9 n·7 1°°39 amphora 121n·4 1°°43 104 65 krater 122n·5 oinochoe 142n.6 13216 oinochoe 142n.6 13222 krater 132-3 1397 1 Mycenae excavations: Cat. kantharos pl, 25C 53-3 21 cup pI. 25e 53-3 22 pyxis pl. 25d 53-33 1 pyxis pl. 25f 53-333 oinochoe 12In·7 53-334 oinochoe pI. 27b 53-33 6 krater pl. 27d 53-337
450 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS·
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
NAUPLIA, Museum Mycenae excavations: Cat. (cont.) pI. 27a krater 53-338 oinochoe pl. 27e 53-339 skyphos pI. 27c 53-340 oinochoe pI. 23a 54-211 pI. 22d oinochoe 54-261 92n.5, 112n.6 oinochoe 54-262 pI. 22h pyxis 54-263 pI. 22C amphora 54-265 pI. 22g oinochoe 54-266 pI. 22a kantharos 54-267 pI. 22b skyphos 54-268 pI. 22e pyxis 54-269 pI. 22f pyxis 54-27° pI. 31g cup 55-9 pl, 23b amphora 59-35 pI. 23f cup 59-61 pyxis pI. 23h 59-63 116n.8, pyxis 59-64 117n.8 pI. 23e cup 59-66 skyphos pI. 23d 59-67 skyphos pI. 23c 59-68 pyxis pI. 23g 59-70 I 16n.7, pyxis 59-74 117n.8 Mycenae, Agamemnoneion: BSA 48, Cat. krater fr. A8 147 krater fr. 137-8 A9 krater fr. 137-8 A 13 fr. 133 A33 Tiryns, Schliemann, pls, krater fr. 18 137-8 Tiryns, AM 78: Cat.: Grs. in Roman figures krater VIII. I 133-4 kantharos XXIII.3 135-6 pyxis XXIII.5 135-6 cup 135-6 XXIII·7 cup XXIII.8 135-6 cup 135-6 XXIII.9 Asine, figs. krater 132-3 219. 1 kotyle 219.4 277-9 pyxis 220.1 363n·4 pI. 28a oinochoe 222.6 amphora 223. 1 363n·4 pI. 28b amphora 224.2 oinochoe 213n.12 275b skyphos 213n.12 277c
NAXOS, Museum Mus.Inv. oinochoe N3 amphoriskoi Nx 11-12 skyphoi Nx 13-17 krater frs.
169 I56n.2 17on.2 173-4
NEW YORK, Metropolitan Museum Mus.Inv. oinochoe pI. 36a 74.51.838 krater 65 pI. 35 74.51.9 81-2 amphora 10.210·7 206 amphora 10.210.8 184 krater 13°.14 42ff., 14. n·7,26-8, krater 23 34.11.2 349n. l o 0 pitcher 67-7 41.11.4 OLYMPIA, Museum Mus.Inv. oinochoe BE 1052 kantharos BE 1054 kantharos 1269
222 221 229
OXFORD, Ashmolean Museum Mus.Inv. stand fr. AE406 3 1ff. krater 269n.lo, 1885.616 272n·5 pI. 61h kantharos 1885.621 pI. 61g skyphos 1885.622 amphora 1895.76 79-80 0 skyphos 18 68-7 1914. amphora 55-6 1916,55 kantharos 64n.6 1927.4332 pI. 12e bowl 27.4447 19 oinochoe 27.4448 32ff. 19 pI. 16c skyphos 2.678 193 kotyle pI. 15h 1934·344 n'5 amphora 19 64,145 1935. amphora 63-4 1936.599 PARIS, Musee du Louvre Mus.Inv. kantharos N 2371 oinochoe N 3130 oinochoe N 3135 amphora A 266 kantharos A 288 stand A 490
282n·7 167, 169n·5 167, 169n.6 167 284n·5,285 182-4
PARIS, Musee du Louvre (cont.) stand A49 1 pitcher I I A5 pyxis A5 14 amphora 16 A5 (now in Sevres) krater fr. 17 A5 krater fr. 19 A5
pI. 39d 78-81 pI. 4e-h 30ff. pI. 7a 30n.I,3Iff., 35 1 0ff. 3 30ff., 124 30ff. 30ff. 3 1ff. 30ff., 56, 124 3 1ff. 3 1ff. 3 1ff.
krater fr. kraterfr. krater fr. krater fr. krater fr. krater fr. krater fr. krater fr. krater fr. (now in Brussels) krater fr. 2 3 1ff. A53 krater fr. 4 1ff. A533 krater fr. 30ff. A 534 krater fr. 30ff. A535 krater fr. 3 1ff. A 538 krater fr. 3 1ff. A539 1 krater fr. 32ff. A54 krater fr. 42ff. A 544 krater fr. 30n. 1 A 545 krater fr. 3 1ff. A 547 krater fr. 3 1ff. A 549 (now in Compiegne) krater fr. A55 1 3 In·3 krater pI. 8a A 552 krater fr. 0ff. 3 A 556 krater fr. 3 1ff. A559 (now in Compiegne) krater fr. A 560 3 In·3,39n.2 pyxis 197n.8 A 563 hydria A 566 202n·3 oinochoe 201, 205-6 A 568 hydria 202n·4 A 574 hydria 202n·4, 205-7, A575 211 amphora MNB 2102 78-81 krater fr. S 528 3 In . 2 krater fr. ff. 30 S 531 amphora CA 824 2°7n.14 amphora CA 825 2°7n.13 hydria CA 1333 59ff. tankard 6off. CA 1779
A5 20 A5 22 A5 23 A5 25 A5 26 A5 27 A 528 A530 A 531
CA 1780 CA 1789 CA 1790 CA 1823 CA 1940 CA 2503 CA 2509 CA 2516 CA 2946 CA 2999 CA 3033 CA 3256 CA 3283 CA 3362 CA 3382 CA 3384 CA 3391 CA 3442 CA 3468
tankard amphora bowl amphora pitcher amphora oinochoe pitcher krater oinochoe oinochoe krater oinochoe krater fr. krater fr. krater fr. krater fr. krater fr. amphora
P A TRAS, Museum Mus.Inv. krater 483 kantharos 602 jug 6°9 jugs 6°9- 11 krater Derveni, PG gr. kantharos kantharos kantharos kantharos skyphos skyphos kantharos kantharos oinochoe Pharae, grs. (see pp. 228-g) jug A I kantharos A4 kantharos A5 kantharos A7 pyxis 8 3 kantharos 8 6 kantharos r I kantharos r 2 jug r 4 jug r 5 r 6 Jug
451
60ff. n--81 33ff. pI. rab-c 7 1-2 58ff., 75 38n.4, 129n·5 7 1-2 182-4 75-6 280-1 60ff. pI. 14d 3 1ff. 3 In·3 3 1n·3 3 In·3 81 57n.2,58ff., 206n·4
225n·5 229 23 In. 12 230n·7 103- 4 pI. 48a pI. 48b pI. 48c pI. 48d pI. 48e pI. 48f pI. 48g pI. 48h pI. 48j 230n·7 pI. 50C pI. 50d pI. 5of 23° 23 1 23 1 pI. 50e pI. 50g pI. 50h 230n. 1O
45 2
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS •
• INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
P ATRAS, Museum Pharae, grs. (cont.) jug Road I Phteri I Phteri 4 Troumbe I Troumbe 2 Troumbe g Troumbe 4 Troumbe 7 Troumbe 8 Troumbeg Troumbe 10
jug skyphos jug jug krater skyphos mug krater krater jug
230n. 12 23 In. 12 0n·7 23 23° 230n. 12 230n. 12 225,23° 23° 22gn.g,232 23° 23° 230n. 12, 23 1n. 12
PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania Univ. Museum Mus.Inv. amphora 57-8,2g5n.6 MS 5464 PRAGUE, National Museum Mus.Inv. amphora 1654 tankard 1656 kantharos 1849 pitcher 2500 pitcher 6/56 4 PRAGUE, Univ. Mus.Inv. pitcher 1.285 amphora (ex-Salac colI.)
78-81 7g-81 50 71-2 77-8 1
5 1-2 57-8
PROVIDENCE, Museum of Rhode Island School of Design Mus.Inv. krater 204,208, 23.3 00 20gn·3 PYTHAGOREION: see SAMOS READING, Univ. Mus.Inv. jug 26.xii.28 amphora 50. x. 1 REGGIO, Museum oinochoe
Ig7 n·5 78-81
79-81, 26In·5
RHODES, Museum Camiros, CR 6-7: Gr.+Cat. pyxis 7·4 kantharos 7·5 kantharos 7·7 skyphos 7.8 flask 8.1 skyphos 11.4 lekythos 22.1 kotyle 23. 1 skyphos 25. 1 lekythos 25.2 kantharos 25·3 cups 26.1-2 lekythos 26·3 pyxis 3g· 1 amphora 3g· 2 lekythos 3g·3 aryballos 45·4 lekythos 80.1 lekythos 80.6 oinochoe 80.6 skyphos 80.g 80.10 cup krater 82.1 cup 82·4 pyxis 85. 1 Camiros, CR 4: Gr.+Cat. kotyle 143·3 oinochoe 200.1 krater 200.2 krater 200.6 krater 201.1 amphorae 203.2 Ialysos, CR 3: Gr.+Cat. aryballos 8.1 kantharos fr. 8.5 oinochoai 28.13- 15 kotyle 50. 1 lekythos 51.1 skyphos 51.2 flask 51.6 oinochoe 56.2 kantharos 56.8 oinochoe 57. 1 kotyle 57. 2 amphora 58. 1 amphora 58. 17
286 282n.6 283n'3, 284n·4 283n·4 282n·3, 284n.3 280-1 282, 284-5 283n.6,286 283n·4 282n. I, 284n-4 282n·7, 284n.6, 285 283 282n.l, 284n.1 282 281 281 pI. 62b pI. 59f pI. 59h pI. 5ge 27° 270 26g-70, 284-5 pI. 60d pI. 62a 28 3 280-1, 284 282 283, 285 282, 284-5, 28 7, 3 20 281 286 286 276 pI. 61c 28~2, 284-5,319 283n·4 282, 319 276 286 3 19 3 19 281, 320 282, 320
RHODES, Museum Ialysos, CR 3: Gr.+Cat. (cont.) 58.18 pyxis 6 I. I oinochoe 62.1 kotyle 63. I oinochoe
282,320 275 277-9 281, 283n.3, 284n·4 132. I flask 266n. I 141.1 amphoriskos 266n.1 Ialysos, Marmaro: CR 8, Gr.+Cat. 43 amphora PI.58a 43.2 amphoriskos pI. 58c 43.3 amphoriskos pI. 58b 43.5 skyphos pI. 58d 51.1 frs. 280-1,283 51.2 kotyle fr. 277-9 Ialysos, Ann. 6-7: fig. 163 oinochoe
ROM E, Villa Giulia Mus. Mus.Inv. hydria 1212
60,14 In. 1
SAMOS (Vathyor Pythagoreion), Museum Mus.Inv. 479 skyphoi 27° 583 oinochoe 272 584 oinochoe 27 2 269, 272 585 oinochoe Heraion excavations: Cat. K 76 kantharos fr. pI. 64h K 802 tray fr. pI. 641 K 805 kantharos fr. pI. 64k K 151 I krateriskos pI. 64g K 20 I I skyphos pI. 64b skyphos pI. 6¥ skyphos pI. 64c cup pI. 64d cup pI. 64e olpe pI. 64f jug pI. 64j S ARA] E V 0, Bosnisch-herzegowinischer Landesmuseum krater fr. 42 fr. 20 5- 6, 2 10 SEVRES, Musee ceramique Mus.lnv. 1419.1 amphora
1419.2 1495-4 1495·5 1495.8 2°3 2 3°85·3
453
krater 182-4 skyphos 185n.7 hydria 184n.7 stand 18gn.4 stand 183n.4 I 84n. 11 bowl (see also Paris A 5 I 6)
SPART A, Museum skyphos fr. skyphos fr. oinochoe skyphos fr. amphora fr. krater fr. krater fr. krater frs. cup-pyxis skyphos cup-pyxis lakaina krater fr. krater fr.
pI. 46a pI. 46b pI. 46c pI. 46d pI. 46e pI. 46f pI. 46g pI. 46h pI. 46j pI. 46k pI. 461 pI. 46m pI. 460 pI. 46p
STANFORD Univ., California Mus.lnv. T 05 krater STAVROS (Ithaca), Museum BSA 35: Cat. kantharoi 25-6 kantharos 44 62-8 kylix
222n.1 222n.1 222
STOCKHOLM, National Museum Mus.Inv. pitcher 17°4 2116 amphora STUTTGAR T, Wiirttemburgisches Landesmuseum Mus.Inv. KAS 9 pitcher 78-81 SYDNEY, Nicholson Museum Mus.Inv. krater fr. 46.4 1 pitcher 4 8.08
gdr. 70-1
456 .
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS
V A THY (Ithaca), Museum RSA 43, R(obertson)'s Cat. (cont.) kantharos 229n. I,23 1O·5 326 10 . 6 kantharos 0 23 33 n.6 kantharos 1 224,225 33 kantharos 2 23° 33 kantharos 229n·3,23 In·4 333 kantharos 229n·3,23 1O·4 337 cup pI. 49g 345 cup 225 6 34 kantharoi 229n -4 352-4 kantharos 224n·3,227 357 kantharos pI. 50a 8 35 n -4 kyathos 225 60 3 krater 63 225,23° 3 krater 223,225 368 krater fr. 225 37° 108n.2 krater 378 226n.1 pyxis 86 3 224n. I,226 pyxis 392 pithos 227 4°1 n.6 jug 225 13 4 jug pI. 49b 14 4 jug 227 4 15 oinochoe 1 23 1 43 oinochoe pI. 49h 2 43 10.3 oinochoe 1 23 44 226 oinoehoe 445 226 oinoehoai 6-7 44 n. 12 oinoehoe 227 2 45 oinochoe 1 pI. 49j 47 oinoehoe 226n·4 47 2 oinoehoe pI. 49k 473 oinoehoe fr. 227n. l, 2310.3 474 In. l, 232 oinoehoe fr. 23 1 49 oinoehoe fr. pI. 50b 493 oinoehoai 23 10.2 500ff. fr. 232 53 1 fr. 232 537 105n.5, 108n.6 plate 61 5 2 fr. 63 23 5 2n·5,228 skyphos fr. 67 19 5 228 fr. 68 5 RSA 48, B(enton)'s Cat. kotyle 620 98n. 1 kotyle 621 98n. 1 kotyle 98n. I, 355n. I 624 102n.1 skyphos 628 skyphos 103n. 1 635 108 skyphos 658
INDEX OF COLLECTIONS·
687=R299 694=R30 7°7 708=R32O 7 16 7 17-18 727 728 730-1 732 733 734 735=R 305 736 741=R 325 744 747 755 760 761=R 322 762 763=R330 768-73 777 779 787 795 799 802 80 3 818 822 827 833 839 845 846 849 860 864 866=R 128 881 882 885 886 9 14 97 2 975 1018=R49 1 102o=R493
kantharos
228
kantharos kantharoi kantharos kantharos kantharoi kantharos kantharos kantharos
97,225 n. 2 225n. 2 102n.9, 225n.2 224n.3, 227n·4 225n. 1 229n. 2 227n. 2 227n. 13
kantharos
225n. 1
kantharos kantharos kantharos kantharos fr.
226,23 10.4 23 10.4 227n. 1I pI. 49f
kantharos
229
kantharoi cup kyathos krater krater krater krater krater pyxis lid pyxis pyxis pyxis pyxis lid pyxis amphora amphora
229n·4 102n·4 225n·4 96n. 2 96n·3 99n. 2 pI. 4ge 225 pI. 49a 101 IOln·5 226n.1 pI. 20e 107n·3 101n·9 IOln·9 227n·5 101
oinoehoe oinochoe oinoehoe oinoehoe oinochoe oinoehoe oinochoe
~6n.4,
97 96-7 96n·5,97 100 227n. 1 100 226
V A THY (Ithaca), Museum RSA 48, B(enton)'s Cat. (cont.) oinochoe 1025 1026 oinochoe plates 1058-62 RSA 48, Cat., P(rotogeometric) fr. 134 fr. 146
226n·4 230n·9 108n.6 pI. 47e pI. 47g
V A THY (Samos): see SAMOS VIENNA, Kunsthistorisches Museum Mus.Inv. pyxis IV·345 8 203n·4,205 VIENNA, Univ. Mus.Inv. krater fr. 65 1
3 10.3
VOLOS, Museum Kapakli, PGR T: Cat. amphora 7 8 amphora 22 oinochoe pitcher 29 jug 40 krater 43 krater 45 krater 46 skyphos 50 kantharos 77 kantharoi 79-82 80 kantharos
I59n.4 153n·3 159n·4 159n·4 159n·4 15° 154 155n·3 16In·3,162n.1 162 159n. 1O 228n'3
86-g0 143 fig.24a fig. 25
cups plate krater krater
457
153n.2 162 pI. 33g pI. 33f
W ARSAW, National Museum Mus.Inv. pitcher 138516 64-5 pyxis 138533 86n'5 krater frs. 142172 3 Iff. (see Konigsberg A18) amphora 198558 78-81 WASHINGTON, Smithsonian Institute Mus.Inv. lekythos 382n.2 5475 WINTERTHUR, private possession amphora 81 WDRZBURG Univ., M. von Wagner Museum Langlotz; Cat. skyphos 60ff. 58 60 hydria 202n·3 61 oinochoe 201 62 oinochoe 201,208n.6 eup 72 2°4n.14 stand 182-4 78 YALE, Univ., Dept. ofClassies Mus.Inv. oinoehoe S 52 krater fr.
201 3 1ff.
Supplement
ATTIC GEOMETRIC In Chapter Two, based on over 150 significant groups of stratified whole vessels, it was already possible to construct a firm and well-documented sequence of the Attic Geometric style, the most influential in the Greek world. This sequence has not been shaken by recent finds. For the E G and M G phases, recent discoveries have helped to fill some gaps in the development of major shapes. As a cremation urn for affluent women, the LPG belly-handled amphora was previously thought to have been replaced in E G by a smaller shoulder-handled type (pp. 11, 14; pIs. la, 2a) before its return towards the end of E G 11 (p. 14); but now we have a good E G I example from the Odos Kriezi cemetery I and, more surprisingly, among numerous exports to Knossos; its North Cemetery has produced seven belly-handled amphorae, mainly fragmentary, through E G I and IP Copious Attic imports to Lefkandi in Euboea, found in cemeteries abandoned early in M G I, include fine examples of two large M G I shapes at present poorly documented among Athenian finds. Of the Type 11 pedestalled krater with short offset lip (p. 14), a vessel mended from charred fragments from a Lefkandian pyre 3 (see cover) fills a gap between an E G 11 Atticizing vessel from Argos (p. 116) 4 and the earliest preserved complete profile of Attic M G 11 (p. 23, pI. Sf).5 The globular pyxis, previously thought to have become obsolete after EG 11 (P.17), is now seen to survive on a monumental scale - again, among vessels recovered from the pyres of Lefkandi: a restorable pyxis with its lid," H. 58 cm, is among several more fragmentary pieces from those pyres. The large handleless globular pyxis is eventually replaced by a M G 11 type with two rising handles, as pI. 4e (p. 23). On the smallest scale, Attic M G I imports from Lefkandi include several carefully decorated feeding vessels, equipped with a tubular spout set at right angles to a vertical handle, 7 suitable for feeding infants. No counterparts have hitherto been recorded in Attica since, perhaps by chance, no child burials of this time have yet come to light. The feeders take the form of a small squat oinochoe, a low mug and a globular aryballos; the last two shapes are innovations of M G I. For the later phases, an unusually large grave group 8 adds much to our understanding ADChr 23 (1968) 67 pI. 35d. 2 KNC 394-5. 3 Lefkandi III pI. 110. 4 CGA pI. 27, C 204. A full study of the Geomctric kratcr is being prepared by B. Bohen. 6 Lejkandi III pI. 110. 7 Lejkandi I, 352, pIs. 226-7. a M. Brouskari, Apo km Athenaiko Kerameiko tou 8 ECh. Aiona (Athens, 1979). I
5
. 459 .
460 .
SUPPLEMENT
of the inventive and creative LG la style, independent of the Dipylon workshop. South of the Acropolis, grave Theta 2 contained 83 vessels. A large set of skyphoi, conservatively decorated with M G meanders, is accompanied by others on which single metopes intrude, as also on some flat pyxides (PP.49-50); other skyphoi bear various bird motifs, either in procession or confronted across a shower of dots. A whirligig of dotted circles linked by tangents appears on skyphoi and kantharoi, and is perhaps a prototype of the LG 11 'sunburst' (pI. 12d). One innovation seems to be the double-handled skyphos with lid, as though for a pyxis. Most oinochoai preserve the M G 11 habit of placing a reserved panel on the shoulder (p. 25), though there are also scenes of horse pasture on the neck. Most striking are the lions, the earliest in Attic vase-painting, shown attacking a man on a squat oinochoe (no. 643) and also confronted on an early high-rimmed bowl. I There have been detailed studies of three specific shapes. One volume has been devoted to the amphorae in the world's largest collection of Attic Geometric pottery;" another to the development of the pyxis, paying special attention to the workshops of Attic M G 11 - LG I that made flat pyxides with terracotta horses crowning their lids;" and a third to the shallow LG 11 skyphoi influenced by imports of Levantine metal bowls with figured scenes embossed inside." Otherwise, the main thrust of recent research has been directed towards the iconography of LG figured decoration. A study of battle scenes on land and sea 5 was accompanied, by the same author, by a thorough scrutiny of funerary representations, in which the monumental grave vases of the Dipylon workshop occupy a central place." Another iconographic study has dealt with the richer repertoire of figured scenes in L G 11, drawing contrasts with fashions earlier in L G I and later in Early Protoattic." This last study has shown that not all the monumental funerary vases were made in Athens. It now seems likely that the unusual LG Ha krater New York 14.130.15,8 portraying Siamese Twins several times, is from the same hand as a krater excavated in the rural cemetery of Trachones,? in local clay. Another workshop, based somewhere in the Attic countryside, has produced other monumental kraters excavated at Thorikos and Merenda (ancient Myrrhinous).'" A full publication of the Merenda cemetery draws attention to 'east Attic' divergences from Athens. II Most remarkable is the divergence at Oropos, where the normal drinking vessels often display Euboean features," influenced by Eretria across the water. CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC Excavations in Corinth have helped to fill several gaps in the local Geometric sequence, as outlined in Chapter Three. At its outset, a grave group from the central area-l" illustrates lOp. cit. pis. IO-II, [6. 2 N. Kourou, CVA Athens 5 (2002). 3 B. Bohen, K XIII, Die Geometrischen Pyxiden (Berlin, [988). B. Borell, Attisch Geometrische Schalen (Mainz, 1978). 5 G. Ahlberg, Fighting on Land and Sea in Greek Geometric Art (Stockholm, [97[). 6 G. AWberg, Prothesis and Ekphora in Greek Geometric Art (Goteborg, 1971). , T Rombos, The Iconography qf Attic Late Geometric 11 Pottery (lonsered, [988). 8 Davison fig. 139; Boardman, ]HS 86 (1966) pis. 1-3. 9 AM 88 (1973) pIs. 25, 34.-5; Rombos, op. cit. 360-8. 10 Rombos, op. cit. 357-62, pis. i ra, 66. 1I M. Xagorari-Gleissner, Die geometrische Nekropole oon Merenda (Dettelbach, 2005) 4-6. 12 A. Mazarakis Ainian, in Euboica 208. 13 C.K. Williams, Hespena 39 ([970) 16-20. 4
SUPPLEMENT
.
461
the transition from PG and displays some affinity with the fleeting E G I phase of Attica. Most recently a group of E G I -MG I graves, with stone sarcophagi, has come to light in the Panayia field, south-east of the central area. During the later phases the Corinthians were chary in offering fine painted pottery in the graves of their North Cemetery, founded by MG 11;1 but the scarcity of complete vessels is to some extent remedied by fragmentary material from the settlement, which has amplified our understanding of the local development. The large well deposit 1981-6, late in M G 11, is remarkable for the protokotyle with a minimal nicked rim (p. 98, pI. 18e)2 as the favourite drinking vessel. Here we see no sign of the true hemispherical kotyle of LG (pI. Igi), but a few LG scraps in the deposit suggest that the production of local protokotylai may have persisted into the early years of LG.3 From another context comes an extraordinary protokotyle near the M G /LG transition, showing Siamese Twins in metopal panels, upside down." A later well deposit, rich in whole vessels (1978-4),5 spans the change from LG to EPC. The numerous kotylai illustrate the gradual evolution of the deeper EPC shape; in the decoration, the big-breasted heron of LG (e.g. pI. Igh) gives way to the mass-produced soldier-birds of EPC (as pl.2Ie). One EPC kotyle, no. 23, shows us the earliest known experiment with incision, used for the dots on a snake's body. The unorthodox Thapsos class of L G (pp. 102-4) has given rise to an exhaustive study of its stylistic development," culminating in the fine EPC krater from near Aigion with Early Orientalizing sphinxes in metopal panels (p. 103).7 The problem of origin has now been conclusively solved in a laboratory analysis, which finds that the clay of the Thapsos class exactly matches that of Corinth." The surprising rarity of this class among excavated finds from Corinth would seem to indicate a workshop with a special interest in export towards the West. Other major studies of Corinthian Geometric in recent years include an intensive and critical scrutiny of the LG and EPC kotyle;? a volume devoted to Corinthian exports to the Western colonies; 10 and a full publication with detailed discussion of the pottery offered at the sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia II - mainly open shapes, but covering the entire chronological range of Corinthian Geometric. ARGIVE GEOMETRIC The progress of Argive Geometric, as in Attica, is documented by numerous closed contexts in single graves in Argas and elsewhere in the Argolid, forming a continuous sequence throughout the Geometric period (Chapter Four). The magnum opus on the Argive style 12 is now complemented by the full publication of the cemeteries at Argos," which have supplied the bulk of the available material. Corinth XIII. Recent discoveries, awaiting publication, may indicate a date well back in EG for the foundation. C.A. Pfaff, Hesperia 57 (1988) 21--80. 3 art. cit. 27, n. 21. 4 K. De Vries, Corinth XX, 142 5, fig. 8.3. 5 C.K. Williams, Ann 59 (1981) [4Q-4, figs. 1-3, nos. 8-33. 6 C.W Neeft, MEFR 93 (1981) 7 -88. , N. Kourou, Ann 6[ (1983) 257-9. 8 Journal qf Archaeological Science 7 (1980) 227-39. 9 Neeft, BABesch 50 (1975) 97- 134. 10 C. Dehl, Die Korinthische Keramik des 8 undfridien 7]h. v. Chr. in Italien, AM Beiheft II (1984). 11 C.A. Morgan, Isthmia VIII (Princeton, 1999) 261-94, 321-6. 12 P. Courbin, CGA. 13 Courbin, Tombes Geometriques d'Argos I (Paris, 1974). 1
2
462 .
SUPPLEMENT
New information comes mainly from discoveries of figured pottery. A M G 11 oinochoe from Argos ' bears the earliest known human representation in the local style: seen in frontal view, two commanding figures raise their arms with fingers spread, in a pose recalling the Minoan and Mycenaean gesture of epiphany. Three LG I vessels expand the Argive figured repertoire. The giant pyxis, pI. 26, now finds a slightly later companion portraying two ships with their crews, placed under the handles with birds and fish in the field. 2 Two ships also appear on a globular jug, again with birds and fish, beside a man controlling two horses." A drop-shaped bottle/ a rare form, shows an extraordinary medley of unrelated themes crowded into its main field: a lion attacking a deer, a horse between two gesticulating men, a large scorpion, and other diminutive human figures in the field. In style, and also as an experimental vase-painter's 'pattern-book', this composition recalls the scene on the LG I krater Argos C 240.5 EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC Outside Attica, the terms E G and M G have been applied to styles in neighbouring regions which imitate the shapes and rectilinear decoration current in the corresponding phases of Attic Geometric. Beyond those regions, to the north, a large part of the western Aegean area continued to decorate its fine pottery with a survival of the PG repertoire in which compass-drawn circular decoration played a dominant role in the local style. In Chapter Five this conservative manner of decoration was described as 'Thessalo-Cycladic', drawing attention to the outer limits of where the style flourished. This term has now become obsolete, since a suspicion (p. 148) has now been amply confirmed that this Subprotogeometric style spread outwards from its centre in Euboea. Abbreviated here as SPG,6 its progress can be charted through a firm sequence of single burials in the cemeteries of Lefkandi, lasting through most of the ninth century. A steady flow of fine Attic imports had virtually no impact on the local style; nevertheless, their correlation in Lefkandian contexts allows the distinction of S PG I, I I, I I la and I I Ib phases corresponding respectively to Attic EG I, EG 11, MG I and MG 11. Publications of the Lefkandi cemeteries, using what is now one of the best-documented sequences anywhere in Greece, have expounded in detail? the progress of the Euboean style in its SPG I-IlIa phases. Most of the ornament - circles, semi-circles, latticed triangles, scribbles and opposed groups of diagonals - is still adapted from the PG stock. There are also two latticed rectilinear motifs, the swastika and the battlement; both are seen on a large pedestalled SPG 11 krater" of Atticizing shape, which may have served as a grave monument. These two motifs are shared with Thessaly (e.g. pI. 33e). Two open shapes of SPG, remarkable both for their long history and their wide export H. Palaiologou in Etudes Argiennes: BCH Suppl. 6 (1980) 7584. 2 GG' 392 fig. 124. E. Pappi in Pictorial Pursuits 232f., figs. 2-5. 4 art. cit. 233ft:, figs. 6-11. 5 CGA pI. 40; GG' 141-2 fig. 45b. 6 In preference to SubPG (e.g. p. 152), and following the terminology of the Lsfkandi publications. 7 Y.R.d'A. Desborough in Le.fkandi I, 281-350; I.S. Lemos in Lifkandi III (forthcoming). The sequence of SPG graves is tabulated in Lefkandi III Plate volume, tables 2 and 3. a f41wndi III pl, 106; GG' 372 fig. II 6. I
3
SUPPLEMENT
.
463
round the East Mediterranean, call for special comment: the skyphos and the plate, both decorated with pendent concentric semicircles. The skyphoi, once thought to have been a novelty of c. goo n.c.,' now prove to have had an origin well back in LPG, and perhaps even earlier." They persist throughout the SPG phases without much change, except for a development of the shape from deep to shallow, of the lip from high to low, and an increasing carelessness in the drawing of the semicircles. A special study 3 distinguishes six successive types, arguing for the survival of type 6 even into LG times; but the absence of these skyphoi from the Euboean Western colonies tells against this supposition." The life of the pendent-semicircle plate is almost as long as that of the corresponding skyphos, and even harder to confine to a consistent typology; this is because most known examples are exports to the East Mediterranean, where they lack precise stratigraphical contexts. Their first appearances are in two SPG I graves at Lefkandi," where three plates already display several differences from each other: in single or double handles, in the number of semicircle sets, and whether sets are separate or intersect. However, one consistent feature of these early plates has been detected in an attempt to trace their typology:" the thin line or lines between the semicircles and the solid paint below, a feature not seen later. Subsequent developments in SPG IlIa-b with a deeper shape and, eventually, a flat base, have been discussed in publications of plates exported to Amathus in Cyprus. 7 Apart from these two pendent-semicircle shapes, little is known of the SPG IIIb style. After the abandonment of the cemeteries at Lefkandi during Attic M G I, the only stratified deposit from there is of fragmentary material from the Xeropolis settlement" where it seems that the influence of Attic M G I I was gaining ground. At Eretria and Kyme, two sites not consolidated before 800, the prevailing style is Atticizing," without much trace of SPG. Our knowledge of Euboean LG has been greatly expanded by excavations of the settlements at Eretria and Lefkandi, by casual finds at Chalcis, and by reflections of the Euboean style in the Western colonies. One change that needs to be made is the transfer from Naxos (p. 172-4) to Euboea of the workshop of an influential painter of figured vessels, named after the monumental ovoid krater in the Cesnola collection (pI. 35), exported to Kourion in Cyprus. Arguments in favour of this transfer are threefold.'? a small hydria, by the same hand as the big krater, has come to light in Chalcis; close copies of the Cesnola style, portraying the usual combination of grazing horses with grazing birds, occur among the colonial Euboean pottery of Pithecusae;!' and a chemical analysis of the Cesnola krater, lacking the usual micaceous content of the Cyclades, finds the clay more consistent with Euboea than with NaxoS.1 2 GG' 40. 2 Le.fkandi 1l.1, 92. 3 R. Kearsley, The Pendeni-Semiarde Skyphos, BICS Supp. 44 (1989). M. Popham and I.S. Lemos, Gnomon 64 (1992) 152-5. 5 Lefkandi III, pI. 102. 6 A. Nitsche, Hamburger Beitrage zur Arduiologie 13-14 (1986-7) 37-8. 7 Coldstream, RDAC 1995, 192-4, 200 2. " Lefkandi I, 36-42, pis. 18-21, 'the levelling material'. 9 Eretria: Ann 59 (1981) 19()-3; AM 100 (1985) 23-38 and 101 (1986) 97-111. Kyme: Euboica 59-88. 10 Coldstream BICS 18 (1971) 1-15. For full publication, bibliography and history of research see M. Moore, CVA New York 5 (2004.) 79-85, pis. 16- 19. 11 G. Buchner, DdA 3 (1960) 99 fig. 27, second row, right; AR 17 (1971) 67. 12 R.E.Jones, Greek and Cypriot Pottery, a review if scientific studies. BSA Fitch Occasional Paper I (1986) 659; N. Kourou in Oropos and Euboea in the Early Iron Age, ed. A. Mazarakis Ainian (Volos, 2007) 293-4, 297. I
4
464 .
SUPPLEMENT
The Cesnola painter's career coincides approximately with Attic LG Ib,' but he was not the first Euboean to experiment with a figured style. From Eretria, at the turn from M G H, comes the neck of a monumental amphora 2 showing two chariot friezes without filling ornament, and a third frieze containing birds with 'fish-tails', all in the Attic M G II tradition (pp. 26-8). Equally early, but more fragmentary, is a huge Euboean krater exported to Knossos," showing horses in lateral panels and a ship under the handle - again, with a survival of M G II linear decoration. A study of figured kraters from the sanctuary of Apollo at Eretria," displaying the Cesnola painter's favourite scenes of hippotrophia, horses grazing in the field and fed at the manger," reveals a general but not exact resemblance to the painter's style, increasing the likelihood that Chalcis may have been his home. On the shoulder of the miniature hydria that crowns the lid of the Cesnola krater (pI. 35) is a composition dominated by a single metopal bird. Skyphoi decorated thus, in contrast to the more usual LG scheme of two opposed birds with or without a central motif, are absent from the abundant material from Lefkandi and Eretria, but well represented among the comparatively scarce finds from Chalcis." Here, then we seem to have a type of skyphos peculiar to Chalcis. In that case, precolonial exports of these one-bird skyphoi to Etruria,? which seem to have had their origin before the end of MG II,8 would attest the early initiative of the Chalcidians in Western waters. Later colonial adaptations of this type occur in Sicilian Naxos,? the first Greek colony on that island, founded jointly by the Chalcidians and the Naxians. For the general run of Euboean LG skyphoi and other drinking vessels there is abundant material from Lefkandi and Eretria, and a large well deposit from Chalcis. Whole vessels are scarce due to the rarity of evidence from Euboean L G cemeteries, but this rarity is to some extent compensated by exports found in cemeteries in Cyprus and Italy, especially at Amathus and Pontecagnano. A division into LG I and H phases (pp. 192-3) still rests largely on style rather than on stratigraphical context. From Lefkandi,!? deserted shortly before the end of LG, we learn that the LG Bichrome conical skyphoi (P.I92, iii)," peculiar to Euboea, occur only in the final deposits, and that the local imitations of EPC kotylai with soldier-birds (p. 194, iii, pI. 4Ih), found at Eretria," appear to have flourished after the desertion of Lefkandi. Two Eretrian shapes, late in LG H and persisting into a SubG phase, have received special study. Aryballoi imitating the EPC globular shape, but with a taller neck, have been assigned to a Crab painter," named after the marine creatures massed on the shoulder zone. An open-air sanctuary near the temple of Apollo received among its votives many small and
I Coldstream, art. cit. (n. 52) 9. ' K. Reber, AntK 42 (1999) [26-41. 3 KNC 216-17, 403-4, pI. 205, tomb 219.71. • J.R. Gisler, Archaiognosia 8 (1995) [ 95. 5 Coldstream, Ann 59 (1981) 241~. 6 A. Andreiomenou, BCH J08 (1984) 5[-3 nos. 42-50, figs. 23--6; and pp. 65- 68. 7 Veii: StEtr 35 (1976) 317-18, pI. 58.1. Tarquinii: NSc 19°7, 231 fig. 33. a Coldstream, JBl:rard 3 (1982) 24-7. 9 M.C. Lentini in Euboica 380-[; 385, figs. 15, 16. JO Lsfkandi I, 73-4. More stratigraphical information will be forthcoming from the publication by A. Kenzelmann-Pfyffer in Eretria XX of deposits from Eretria. 11 CC' 194, fig. 62b. 12 E.g. BSA 47 (1952) 3, fig. 1.6-8, 11. 13 J.p. Descoeudres, BCH 96 (1972) 269ff.; CC' [95, fig. 62d.
SUPPLEMENT
.
46S
slim hydriai, I decorated with birds, animals, and sometimes human figures, once appearing in a mysterious ritual scene (H I2S). In conclusion, notice should be taken of the colonial LG style that developed in the earliest Euboean colonial outpost in the West, at Pithecusae. From its earliest years (M G H/LG I) Euboean pottery was imported 2 and copied. From the start there was also a steady flow of Corinthian imports, giving rise to local Corinthianizing imitations from LG I onwards, more frequent than in the Euboean homeland (pp. I 94-S). Several figured themes - the Tree of Life, and hippotrophia at the manger and in the field - are derived from the Cesnola painter's repertoire and imitate his style." The local potters also felt free to improvise, drawing on other sources." We see an Attic element on a fragment showing a warrior dying at sea, recalling the naval battles of LG la (pp. 30-1, nos. 9, IS), one of the earliest finds from the colony. There is also a procession of warriors with round shields on the fragment of a large amphora, rendered in the Attic LG Ha manner. Most original is the appearance of three female figures carrying objects resembling spindles - perhaps an early portrayal of the three Fates - wrapped round the neck of a slow-pouring oinochoe with a barrel-shaped body of Cypriot type. At the very end of LG a Corinthianizing pedestaIled krater shows, in metopes, a commanding female figure raising her arms, flanked by horses: a potnia theron. The geometricized rendering of her full flounced skirt, recalling a fashion of the Late Bronze Age, is seen again on a large SubG oinochoe painted by an expatriate Euboean artist in Etruria, in a scene that appears to refer to the Crane Dance which Theseus and Ariadne performed on Delos after their escape from the Minotaur." GEOMETRIC IN CENTRAL AND NORTHERN GREECE Geometric pottery from a large swathe of lands verging on the North-West Aegean, from Phocis to Macedonia, is briefly considered here. In spite of regional differences, two general comments can be made. First, local handmade fabrics of northern derivation, especially in Thessaly and further north, compete with the fine painted and wheelmade Geometric pottery with which we are specially concerned. Second, in all those areas, the Geometric pottery shows in various ways the influence of Euboea both in SPG and LG, without much sign of an intervening M G phase. Within this vast area the most distinctive regional style is that of Thessaly, in itself large enough to display regional variations of which, as yet, we are not well informed. Excavations at the settlement of lolcos, modern Volos, have produced enough material to enable a study of the local PG style," already showing many correspondences with Euboea. Thereafter, recent discoveries have not shed much new light on the ensuing Geometric style, considered in Chapter Six, divisible broadly into two chronological stages. First, there is the Rectilinear style of the later pottery from the tholoi of Marmariani which appears to have S. Huber, Eretria XlV, 48 -58, pls. 14-20 and 6[-78. ' BSA 90 (1995) 251-67. Coldstream in Apoikia: studi in onore di C. Buchner, AWN N.S. 1 (1994) 77-86. • The following four scenes are discussed by Coldstrcam in Demarato: studi... qjJerta a P. Pelagatti, eds I. Berlingo et a!' (Milano, 2000) 9 2 - 6. 5 Coldstream, B1CS 15 ([968) 86~8. 6 M. Sipsie-Eschbach, Protogeometrische Keramik aus Iolkos in Thessalien (Berlin, [99[). 1
3
466 .
SUPPLEMENT
been contemporary with Attic E G-M G I and the S P G of Euboea, showing many signs of contact with that island I which may also be the origin of several rectilinear motifs.! Second is a MG II-LG style, seen especially on pottery from the pyres of Halos, ultimately of Atticizing character, but conveyed through a Euboean filter. A tholos tomb at Kapakli or Nea Ionia, near Volos, containing some 300 PG-G vessels, was briefly reported in 1914.3 From this tomb the PG and SPG pottery has been fully published," but there are also numerous LG vessels among which only two kraters (pI. 33f-g) have so far been illustrated. The remainder, when fully published, should shed much new light on the - as yet - sparsely documented LG style of Thessaly. Of recent excavations the most informative is likely to be the three cemeteries discovered in the neighbourhood of Halos." All three were used in S PG. One of them, Voulokalyva, with adult pyre cremations and child inhumations covered by tumuli, contains well over a hundred single graves of SPG, LG and later. In due course the cemeteries of Halos should offer a well documented sequence for a rather sober South Thessalian style, apparently lacking the ebullient rectilinear decoration contemporary with the S PG stage in the northern tholoi of Marmariani, also present in the Kapakli tholos. Across the water from northern Euboea, finds from two cemeteries in Eastern or Opuntian Locris may supply most of a full Geometric sequence. A paper introducing 43 graves excavated at Atalanti" includes those of a local aristocracy, to judge from the metal finds; this cemetery is said to date from the end of the tenth century until the mid-ninth, i.e. from LPG until SPG n. Several interesting vessels are illustrated: a lentoid flask of East Mediterranean type with a circular frieze of strange triangular birds on its flank; a pointed pyxis of Boeotian type (cf p. 197, pI. 42C); what seems to be a local type of cylindrical jug, fully painted; and a globular pyxis with a dogtooth zone, paralleled in a Lefkandian LPG/SPG I grave.' A Euboean connection is confirmed by a SPG amphoriskos with pendent semicircles on the shoulder," a shape frequent at Lefkandi - although with standing semicircles." One third of the ceramic corpus from Atalanti is handmade, and of good quality!" The preliminary paper provides a chart, stating the contents of each grave. The other Locrian site, Tragana, has produced 47 graves, also rich in metal: 36 are fully published,'! the rest in preliminary notices.l" In the lower of two strata the pottery from adult pithos burials is mainly of a simple M G I I character. Atticizing skyphoi and cups carry narrow window panels or zones of grouped verticals; aryballoi bear nothing but lines on neck and shoulder, above solid paint. Links with Euboea appear in skyphoi with pendent semicircles and opposed groups of diagonals. Handmade aryballoi and small oinochoai 1 Y.R.d'A. Desborough in Lefkandi I, 291-2. 2 In addition to those noted on P.462, n.b. the large hourglass (cf Kapakli nos. 7-8, PeRT pl, 2 with Lefkandi I pI. 109, S 59al) and the large double axe (cf Marmariani no. 135, here pI. 33e, with f4kandi I, pI. 93, S 5.[). 3 Arvanitopoulos, AE 1914, [42. Recently another Early Iron Age tholos has been reported from this area: ADChr ([993) 231-3. , Verdelis, PeRT. 5 Preliminary report: Z. Malakasioti in APES, 353ff. I thank Dr Malakasioti for supplying me with the text of this paper in advance of publication. 6 P. Dakaronia in EdinbLev 3, 483-504. 7 Cf Lifkandi Ill, pI. 64, 1: 59.[2. • P. Dakaronia in Lokrida, Istoria kai Politisrrws (Ktima Hadzimichali) 52, fig. 31. 9 Cf Lejkandi I, 308-II, fig. 12D. 10 ibid. (n. 8) 51, fig. 29. 11 A. Onasoglou, AD 36 (1981) I-59. 12 ADChr 41 (1986) 74; 42 ([987) 235.
SUPPLEMENT
.
467
are also frequent. In the upper stratum, with LG urn cremations and child inhumations, pottery is scarce; most noteworthy is a small krater decorated with a figure-of-eight shield in a metopal panel. 1 It would be hard to claim that any distinctive regional Geometric style ever arose in Eastern Locris where decoration is sparse, and the shapes owe much to neighbouring lands. Further south, the same is true of the fragmentary pottery recovered from the great Phocian sanctuary at Kalapodi (of Apollo at Abai) where, in the ninth century, strong influences came from Euboean S P G, followed by an Atticizing movement from M G n onwards, and imitations of Corinthian late in LG.2 In Macedonia the normal ware is handmade, of northern character: any wheelmade and painted Geometric pottery of southern derivation was an exotic alternative. Suspicions of a Euboean precolonial penetration of the North Aegean 3 have arisen from the export and local imitations of Euboean PG types at Torone, Koukos and Mende, followed by SPG pendent-senicircle skyphoi at Vergina and Dion, and a rare occurrence of Atticizing M G II-LG I at Sindos or Nea Anchialos." At all these sites, however, local handmade pottery greatly outnumbers the painted wheelmade vessels, which can nowhere be said to betoken an independent Macedonian Geometric style. CYCLADIC GEOMETRIC NAXOS
Of the four islands surveyed in Chapter Seven, the local style of Naxos has been most illumined by recent excavations and research. The South cemetery of Naxos town, in the area of the modern Gymnasium (p.166), has now received a full and wide-ranging publication 5 presenting 60 vessels, mainly E G IIM G II and with much M G I. A larger North cemetery, at the locations Grotta, Aplomata and Plithos, has yielded some 400 vessels, LPG-MG, from which a selection has been illustrated in a preliminary report." From a predominantly Atticizing style only two shapes from the South cemetery exhibit a local divergence: a shoulder-handled amphoriskos of Euboean S P G origin but here decorated with rectilinear motifs in an Atticizing window-panel; and a deep tankard, similarly adorned." Among the Atticizing shapes there is a preference for large and deep skyphoi, and a conservative survival of cups with window-panels later than their last Attic appearance in E G n (pI. 2C). Of special interest are a pair of miniature clay boots decorated in a dark-ground manner, and a flight of numerous clay birds with wings outspread. For both the boots and the birds it has been possible to reconstruct the M G I grave groups in which they occur. 8 Onasoglou, art. cit. pI. 25b. 2 R. Fclsch, AA [980, 47-54; A. Nitsche. AA [987, 35 19. A.M. Snodgrass, AION N.S. 1 (1994) 87~1. ' M. Tiverios in Euboica 250-[, figs. 10, [I. 5 N. Kourou, Anaskaphes Naxou: to Notio Nek:rotapheio tesNaxou kata le geometrike periodo (Athens, (999). 6 P. Zapheiropoulou, Ann 61 (1983) 12[-36. 7 Both of these local shapes receive further study from N. Kourou in BCH Supp. 23 (1992) 131-43. • ibid. (n. 90), 64-81, pIs. 45--51; see pp.21O-II for the grave contexts. I
3
468 .
SUPPLEMENT
Another corpus of Atticizing M G pottery, in a rougher style, comes from the tumulus burials at Tsikalario in the island's wild hinterland. The shapes are similar to those from Naxos town, with the addition of the flat pyxis, not previously recorded in the Cyclades (p. 169), and the high-handled kantharos, typical of the M G II phase. The knobs on the handles of one kantharos I suggest a North Aegean connection, also apparent in the massed tumuli with pithos burials recalling those at Vergina in Macedonia." In LG, when a more individual local style developed, though at first still drawing on Attic metopal compositions, no Naxian cemetery has so far come to light; thus the abundant but fragmentary finds from the settlement still have to be supplemented by complete vessels in the Delos-Rheneia corpus, the class B presumed to be Naxian because of the highly micaceous red clay bearing a light slip (pp. 172, 174-6). Recent finds also include Naxian slipped versions of the unslipped hydriai and amphorae, Delos classes Aa and Ab, attributed to the 'Parian' school (pp. 178~9). The most adventurous strain in Naxian LG is the 'Cesnola' style," where horses, birds and linear motifs are rendered in the manner of the monumental ovoid krater exported to Kourion (pI. 35), now transferred with its painter and workshop to Euboea, probably to Chalcis. It has been suggested that this Cesnola painter might have been a Naxian immigrant to Euboea," a hypothesis that would need a demonstration that the Cesnolian figured themes - hippotrophia and the Tree of Life - appeared earlier in Naxos than in Euboea, which seems unlikely on present evidence. Even so, a close association between Naxos and Chalcis was to bear fruit in their joint foundation of Sicilian Naxos, the earliest Greek colony on that island. There, beside LG pottery of Euboean character, a Naxian element appears in slipped hydriai of the Delos Aa shape, found in the early colonial cemetery"
PAROS
The most spectacular new find from Paros is of two massed graves (polyandria) contammg the urn cremations, in neck-handled amphorae, of some 200 young men apparently fallen in battle." For the first time this island has yielded a large corpus of whole LG vessels which, when fully published, should establish beyond doubt what is truly Parian among the Delos-Rheneia finds. Meanwhile, the plainer and smaller shapes so far illustrated are quite consistent with the allegedy 'Parian' style of Delos classes Aa and Ae (pp. 178-81, pIs. 37-8). Of unusual interest are two cremation amphorae carrying lively scenes of war. On one 7 we see a rare instance of chariots involved in a Geometric battle, amid dead bodies and spears floating in the field. The main scene on the other amphora 8 shows a fallen warrior flanked by archers, horsemen, foot soldiers and a catapult shooter. On the shoulder the dead warrior lies fully extended, and boldly rendered in white on dark. On the neck he is mourned in a scene of prothesis. The soldiers in the main scene recall the austere style of the Attic Dipylon workshop (c£ pI. 7a), but the female mourners on the neck, with their trailing skirts, are in I
5 6
7
ADChr 20 (1965) pI. 655b. ' GG' 92. 3 Kourou in Euboica 168-74. • Boardman in Lefkandi I, 74-6. Coldstream in Le due ciua di Naxos, ed. M.C. Lentini (Archaeologia Viva, 2004) 46-8, fig. 9. P. Zapheiropoulou, AEON N.S. 6 (1999) 13-23; AE 2000, 283~3; Pictorial Pursuits, 271-7. Pictorial Pursuits 271-5 figs. 1-4, 11. B ibid. figs. 510; GG' 398~, fig. 125.
SUPPLEMENT
.
469
the manner of the Atttic Birdseed workshop of LG Ha (cf. pI. I2d). This, then, is a likely date for the amphora, and probably for the earliest use of the cemetery. OTHER ISLANDS
No new finds have added to our understanding of the Melian and Theran schools (pp. 181-9), but much fragmentary pottery has been recovered from settlements on three more islands, none of which shows much evidence of an independent local style. From excavations at Zagora on Andros, a town occupied throughout M G and LG, much fine ware was imported from Euboea, including a krater bearing two figured registers: chariots above, horsemen below. 1 Other imports came from Attica and (mainly kotylai) from Corinth; local imitations of all three show little sign of local invention. Among finds from Minoa on Amorgos are two MG cremation burials with Atticizing pottery;" also a SPG pendent-semicircle skyphos;" in the fragments from the settlement it is hard to distinguish any local characeteristics. More distinctive is the pottery from the islet of Donousa, from a M G apsidal house and nearby pyre deposits, showing surprisingly little rapport with its larger neighbour, Naxos; the only obvious link, as it seems from preliminary reports, is a large and deep Atticizing M G I skyphos. Other vessels preserve a survival from PG, and some reveal contact with the East Greek region;" the pendent semicircle skyphos is also present. BOEOTIAN GEOMETRIC New enlightenment on the EG and MG periods has come from the full publication of grave finds from Vranesi Copaidos (pp. 196-8)5 and especially from recent excavations of the large cemetery at Akraiphia, which have more than quadrupled the Boeotian corpus of those periods. Twenty five graves have been reported, ranging from EG II to MG II, the M G I phase being especially well represented." The pottery is influenced from three directions, but mainly from Attica. Imitations of Attic oinochoai and skyphoi can be extremely close; of kantharoi and pyxides (e.g. pI. 43b), less SO.7 A Corinthian element is seen in the globular aryballoi, both wheelmade (cf pI. I7b,c) and handmade. SPG pendent-semicircle skyphoi and plates of Euboean type also occur, Akraiphia being only 20 km from Chalcis. The transition from M G to L G remains obscure. The three extraneous sources of ceramic ideas continue into LG, when Boeotian potters eventually evolved their own eclectic mixture. From rich cemeteries at Paralimni and at Pyri near Thebes, plentiful LG finds still await publication. Meanwhile, any advances in our understanding of Boeotian LG depend on further art-historical scrutiny of the corpus scattered world-wide in museums, lacking any known context or reliable provenance. A thorough analytical study," concentrating on the I A. Cambitoglou, Archaeological Museum of Andros, Guide (Athens, (981) 601, fig. 28. ' 1. Marangou, PAE 1993, 188 208. s PAE 1985, pI. 90. ' P. Zapheiroploulou, ADChr 24 (1969) 397. 5 A. Andreiomenou, AE 1985, 57-84. Unfortunately, no individual grave groups could be distinguished in this early excavation. 6 On the MG pottery: Andreiomenou, Epetens tis Etaireias Boiotikon Meleton: Diethnes Synedrio Boiotikon Meleton la (Athens, 1988), 169 -82. 7 A. Andreiomenou, Ann 59 (1981) 257 fig. 14; Transirione 455-61. B A. Ruckert, Friihe Keramik Biiotiens, AntK Beiheft 10 (1976); review,J. Boardman, Gnomon, 50 (1978) 90-2.
470 .
SUPPLEMENT
SUPPLEMENT
larger and more ornate vessels, has clarified the various strands in the Boeotian L G and SubG output, treating shape and decoration in turn. There was clearly more than one centre of production. Thebes is likely to be the source of the series of large oinochoai (P.201), mainly unslipped, on which zones of concentric circles are combined with metopal motifs, at first of Atticizing LG I character, and later developing on independent lines. The Artemis amphora (pI. 45d) and several flat pyxides (e.g. pI. 45b) are among other shapes produced by the same local school. Less easy to locate is a second centre in eastern Boeotia not far from the Euripus channel, where the influence of Euboea is now clearly evident thanks to recent discoveries on that island. The chief shape there is the pedestalled amphora of Euboean character, always carrying a thick cream slip, starting late in LG and continuing into a SubG phase.' Earlier in LG, other shapes also show Euboean influence." The eclectic character of Boeotian LG shapes and linear decoration should not mask an adventurous spirit among the vase-painters in devising their figured scenes, for which Boeotia is second only to Attica in the variety of its repertoire: themes include hunting of various animals including boars (p. 208), dancing, boxing, horse-taming, and funerary ritual. Especially original is the scene on a large and tall cylindrical pyxis or pithos 3 from the Pyri cemetery, a late work from the Theban school, housing a child burial; there we see a gathering of women with two small children listening to the recital of a lyre player.
Ruckcrt group C, 87~0, amphorae nos. 29-40, pis. 7-8. Ruckert 56-80; add the pyxis Tubingen 4.876, ibid. 98, FP 14, pI. 23. 3 Ruckert 91, pI. 16. 3-4.; S. Langdon, A]A 105 (2002) 592-9. 4 WD.E. Coulson, RSA 80 (1985) 29-8{.\ L. Margreiter, Friihe lakonische Keramik von geometrische bis zu archaischer Zeit (Waldsasscn-Bayern, 1988).
471
ARCADIAN GEOMETRIC Geometric pottery from Arcadia lacks any independent style, exhibiting at various times the impact of its larger neighbours, the Argolid to the east and Laconia to the south. The finds are plentiful but, as in Laconia, confined to fragments coming from sanctuaries, especially that of Athena Alea at Tegea. A fuller study of the pottery from the French excavations of that site 1 offers a full catalogue (P 1----g6), clarifying the local development upon which more light will be shed from the most recent excavations at Tegea in the 1990s. Already in PG we see the interplay of Argive (P 7) and Laconian (P 9) influences. The latter piece, from a carinated and grooved skyphos of Laconian DA II type with rectilinear decoration in panels, represents a larger find of pottery in the Laconian DA tradition from the deepest levels of the sanctuary;" which may prove to contain Laconian imports. In any case, Tegea provides clear evidence, together with Messenia, of Laconian DA influence on neighbouring lands. The finds from Tegea exhibit a M G Il phase lacking in Laconia, evidently owing to the persistence there of the local DA style. The frs. P 14-22 include five pieces from shapes of Argive character: an amphoriskos, oinochoe, pyxis, krater and cup. The fragment P 8, however, from a carinated skyphos with concentric circles, seems to correspond with a fleeting stage in the Laconian sequence, immediately preceding the emergence of the local LG (pp. 214-15). Argive influence is still paramount in the local LG (P 23-59), offering numerous essays in figure drawing. The themes comprise horses and their tamers, long-necked flamingoes of Argive character, dancers with curiously elongated necks - perhaps a Laconian feature (cf pI. 46a) - and even a man rowing a boat, a surprising choice for a land-locked region (P 25)· Towards 700 Corinthian influence may have encouraged the potters towards a monstrous enlargement of the EPC conical lekythos-oinochoe (e.g. pI. :lIC), with snakes modelled down the flat handle (P 60, 61). Pottery from a rich cemetery at Mantinea, MG Il-LG, awaits publication.
LACONIAN GEOMETRIC No major new finds of Laconian Geometric have been published during the past forty years; and we also miss the enlightenment that would come from whole vessels found in cemeteries, essential for recovering the development of a local sequence but never, so far, found in Laconia. Any progress, therefore, can come only from further scrutiny of the corpus already known from the sanctuaries of Sparta and Amyclae. Preceding the local LG style, and without much evidence of an intervening M G phase, is the Laconian pottery hitherto defined as PG (pp. 212-14) but showing virtually no rapport with the concentric-circular decoration of PG in Attica and its neighbours; its motifs are almost all rectilinear and arranged in panels, and most of the shapes are peculiar to Laconia. A careful examination of that style, with full catalogue," proposes instead an independent local terminology of DA (Dark Age) phases L-LlI, placing I before 950, Il (a long phase) c.950-800, and III in the early eighth century. This classification depends largely on the progress of the three local types of skyphoi: deep, carinated with ridge, and flaring (respectively pI. 46c, a and d). For Laconian LG and SubG a general study" has deduced what is possible from a patient analysis of much fragmentary material, dispersed world-wide in museums and study collections.
.
WEST GREEK GEOMETRIC Geometric pottery from the western periphery of Greece, from Messenia to the Ionian islands, was grouped together under this heading in Chapter Ten. Pottery from this large area shares characteristics in common, both positive and negative. A positive feature, seen everywhere except Messenia, is an abiding local preference for the kantharos as the favourite drinking vessel. The West Greek regions also share an isolation from any contact with Aegean styles before LG, when external influences came mainly from Corinth. Since recent finds have added much to our knowledge of West Greek local styles, each region will need separate treatment here.
I
2
I
2
M.E. Voyatzis, The Early Sanctuary of Athena Aka at Tegea and other Archaic Sanctuaries in Arcadia (G6teborg, 1990) 62 -83. Voyatzis in Tegea I (forthcoming).
472 .
SUPPLEMENT
MESSENIA
The local D(ark) A(ge) sequence, preceding LG, has been recovered through patient study of pottery from the settlement of Nichoria, fragmentary but nevertheless well stratified. I A somewhat isolated Messenian D A style produced relatively few shapes: deep skyphoi, cups, jugs, oinochoai, and a few kraters and amphorae, always with a dark ground; reserved zones may contain latticed or stacked triangles, scribbled zigzags, or semicircles drawn freehand. The fullest development of this style is in the DA II phase (c. 975-850), showing Laconian connections especially in the enclosing of triangles within square panels. A transitional DA I III I I phase follows, ending in a destruction of c. 800, after which the pottery of D A I I I (early eighth century) is increasingly devoid of ornament. After the abandonment of the settlement of Nichoria, perhaps due to Spartan aggression, we have a glimpse of an early LG style, now adopting the Corinthian habit of covering the lower body with fine lines, in a homogeneous group of vessels deposited as votives in Mycenaean tombs at Volimedia.! Many Corinthian imports there (p. 223) are accompanied by two local pouring shapes, globular with a short neck, and carinated with broad base; the latter occurs also among the grave groups from Pharae in Achaea (pp. 230-3, pi. 50g). The widening horizons of the Messenian LG style are further illustrated by two LG grave groups from Nichoria later than the desertion of the settlement, one from a chamber tomb in the Vathyrema gorge (c. 750-725), the other from a warrior's pithos burial (c. 725-700);3 there we see deep and baggy skyphoi and cups of Laconian shape, narrow zones of leaflozenges in the Argive manner, a Corinthianizing hemispherical kotyle, and an imported Attic pyxis lid crowned by terracotta horses. ELlS
Much pottery, mainly fragmentary, has come from recent excavations at Elis town, Elean Pylos, and Olympia. The largest corpus from Olympia, centred round the Early Bronze Age mound later devoted to the cult of the local hero Pelops," includes the earliest votives from the sanctuary, going back to the survival of a late Mycenaean form into PG, the kylix with ribbed stem (e.g. p.222, n. 2). We can follow the progress of the favourite drinking vessel, the kantharos, from a deep shape with a conical foot in the delayed PG stage, towards a less deep version in L G with flat base and usually fully coated. Two varieties of this LG kantharos are evident: (i) with S profile near the rim, and, starting later, (ii) with a short offset lip. Both varieties occur together in another deposit from Olympia," associated with a Corinthian LG kantharos of the Thapsos class. The first type, together with a cup of similar shape and several oinochoai, coincides in a L G group from Coulson, The DarkAge Pottery of Messenia (Goteborg, 1986), and in Niduma III (Minneapolis, [983) 61-259. Coulson, A]A 92 (1988) 53-74. 2 3 Further discussed in CC 161-2, and now fully published in Nu/zona III, 109-10, 182-3 (drawings), 225-6 (P [574-76), 257 (P [592-7) and pis. 278-9. 4 B. Eder in H. Kyrieleis, ed., Ariftinge und Friih:;;eit des IJeiligtums van Olympia: die Ausgrabungen am Pelopion 1987-1996 (Berlin, 2006) 141-246. 5 Eder in H. Kyrieleis, OIBer XII (2003) 72-5. I
2
SUPPLEMENT
.
473
Trypiti in the Alpheios valley,I all fully coated. Both types of kantharos persist into a SubG phase; on the second, with offset rim, the overall paint is often relieved by a thin reserved zone under the handles (cf pl.50t). From Elis town, in a deposit from the area of the later Theatre," both types of kantharos are accompanied by a deep krater bearing the 'sausage' motif as seen in Achaean LG I (P.227, pi. 49t), caused by the curved edge of the daub under the handle, prolonged towards the centre of the reserved zones. We see this motif again on the fragmentary ship krater from Elean Pylos (p. 231, n. 10).3 ACHAEA
4
The local LG style was already well documented from single grave groups at Pharae and Chalandritsa, classed on p. 228 as LG n. There has been a reasonable suggestion 5 for raising its initial date to a LG I phase, which would make good sense in view of the similarity of shape between the carinated and flat-based Achaean oinochoe (pI. 50g) and a similar vessel from the LG I context at Volimedia in Messenia. What immediately precedes this LG style remains mysterious. All we have is the pithos burial no. 2 from Drepanon containing a floridly decorated kantharos," a later development from those in the PG grave group from Derveni (pI. 48a-b, g-h); and a small slow-pouring vessel from a grave at Priolithos 7 near Kalavryta bearing a gear-pattern motif, giving us a glance at what may be a fleeting M G stage. Apart from the fragmentary finds from the sanctuary at Ano Mazaraki," two grave groups expand our knowledge of Achaean LG. From a grave at Manesi? near the Arcadian frontier, two vessels show influence from elsewhere: a deep plate of Laconian character, and an unguent bottle related to the oriental horn vase. The SubG grave group from Asani (p. 229) is now fully published;" it contains another local vessel of exotic inspiration, an oinochoe with a long and narrow neck recalling a Phoenician bronze prototype. Also present is a SubG kantharos with a narrow reserved band, of a type common to Achaea, Elis and Ithaca (e.g. pi. 5ot); this form has now been detected, in fragments, among the earliest pottery from the Achaean colony of Sybaris.!'
Eder in S. Landstatter, ed., Synergia: Festschriflfiir E Krin:;;inger, 163-70. 2 Eder, ]OAI 68 ([999) 10-[4; AE 2001, I l l - I 3. CC2 181, fig. 59d; Hespena Supp. 2[ (1986) 20-2, B I. 4 See, in general, Coldstream in D. Katsonopoulou et at. eds, Helike 11: Ancient Helike and Aigaleia, Proceedings of the znd International Conference, Aigion, 1995 (Athens, [998) 323 31. A full study of Achaean Geometric is being prepared by A. Gadolou. 5 C.A. Morgan, RSA 83 (1988) 325, nn. 84-5. fi 1. Dckoulakou, AE 1973, 19, pI. nb-c. 7 ADChr 22 (1967) 217, pI. [56e. B A. Gadolou in E. Greco, ed., Cli Achei e l'identu« etnica degli Achei d'Occidente (Paestum and Athens, 2002) 165-86. 9 Dekoulakou, Ann 60 (1982) 231-2, figs. 21.--9. 10 ibid. 232, figs. 30-4II L. Tomay et at. in I Greci in Occidente (Napoli, 1996) 2[8, no. 3.95. On the spread of the Achaean kantharos shape in Magna Graecia see J. Papadopoulos, Hesperia 70 (2001) 373-460. I
3
474 .
SUPPLEMENT
SUPPLEMENT
.
475
NORTH-WEST GREECE
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
From Aetolia three sites have produced grave groups in a local PG manner which may have persisted far into the ninth century. At Pleuron three cist graves have been excavated, 1 and three more cists and five pithos burials at Gavalou near Mesolongi." From both sites, tall kantharoi suggest a link with Achaea, across the Corinthian gulf; also frequent is the shoulder-handled amphoriskos, which may have Thessalian affinities. Another PG group, from Homeric Pylene," contains a deep bell-krater floridly decorated in the fringed manner of the oinochoe from Derveni (pI. 48j). In Acarnania the LG pithos burial from Palaiomanina (p. 223) can now be supplemented by a collection of some forty vessels in a PG style, said to come from graves near Agrinion." Again, tall kantharoi and shoulder-handled amphoriskoi are frequent; interesting rarities are a pilgrim flask and a miniature tripod cauldron. The latest feature there is the broad base of some oinochoai, perhaps a distant reflection of M G in the Aegean regions. Two sites in Epirus, Arta 5 on the coast (ancient Ambracia) and Vitsa Zagoriou 6 in the Pindus mountains, have yielded copious Corinthian imports going back at least to M G 11, alongside local handmande wares. There are also southward connections. From Arta a deep skyphos with a reserved zigzag zone is of a shape matched in Ithaca.? Vitsa, likewise, has produced seven vessels, mainly LG, suggesting contacts with West Greek centres further south," including a kantharos as pI. 50£ There are also two vessels of Thessalian type: a high-handled kantharos and a jug with cutaway neck."
Within this large and long island three local Geometric styles were distinguished in Chapter Eleven: North Central, South, and East or Eteocretan. Recent excavations now permit a view of a fourth style in the island's extreme West.
THE IONIAN ISLANDS
From Ithaca no new finds have been published, but there have been interesting reflections on its LG figured work. A recent study has identified as Ithacan a LG kantharos exported to the Euboean colony of Pithecusae, bearing a crude chariot scene close in style to the figures on a fragmentary house model from the Aetos sanctuary.'? Here we have a small indication that the role of Ithaca may have been more active than just as a staging post for Corinthian colonists on their way to the West. On Cephalonia, a sounding at Pale II has found traces of a late LG and SubG settlement, with some imports from Corinth, and plentiful local imitations thereof. From Same 12 a few earlier pieces correspond to the delayed PG of Ithaca, and also include part of a M G I I chevron skyphos. As for Corcyra, doubts have been expressed 13 concerning the literary tradition of an early Eretrian colony there, preceding that founded by the Corinthians in 733 E.C. (P·370 ) · On Cythera, imports of Argive, Corinthian and Attic LG have been found in the sanctuary area on the Paleokastro mountain. I Dekoulakou, art. at. 220-4. 2 M. Stavropoulou-Gatzi, AD 35 (1980) 10230. 3 ADChr 22 (1967) 320. • A. Vokotopoulou, AD 24 (1969) 741f. 5 Vokotopoulou, Ann 60 (1982) 78-86. 6 ibid. 91-8. 7 ibid. 83, figs. 12, 13; cf RSA 43 (1948) pI. 16, nos. 280-1. a Vokotopoulou, art. at. 95, figs. 25-6. 9 ibid. 95, figs. 28-9' 10 C.A. Morgan in Pidorial Pursuits 217-28. 11 B. d' Agostino and P. Gastaldi, Ann 80 (2002) 145-72. 12 ibid. 146 fig. 39; Euboica 361-3. 13 CA Morgan in Euboica 281-302.
NORTH CENTRAL CRETE
The Knossian style, widely diffused, was already well known from the Fortetsa tombs. Its sequence is now amply confirmed by a larger corpus from the recently excavated North Cemetery, supplemented by stratified deposits from the settlement. Thanks to the full publication of pottery from the North Cemetery 1 and a more general study of the Knossian sequence also embracing finds from the settlement," here we need only summarise the most striking additions to our knowledge of the Knossian style, illustrated by finds from the North Cemetery. Each of the ninth-century phases, MPG, LPG and PG B (see p. 330) is now represented by bold experiments in figure drawing. A MPG bell-krater, F I, carries a hunting scene spread over its two sides, the earliest extended scene in Greek vase-painting. On a LPG bell-krater, E 3, 3 we see a warrior struggling between two lions and, on the reverse, heraldic sphinxes wearing Neo-hittite helmets. On I04.II4'+ a straight-sided pithos-urn of PG B, a nature goddess appears on an abbreviated chariot between two trees with birds, luxuriant trees on one side, wintry on the reverse. Two other such pithoi, 283.II and 292.144, not at all consistent in shape, seem to be by the same hand, a specialist in trees. Influence from Attic MG I is already apparent in the local EG phase (pp. 239-41) when some belly-handled amphorae of Attic shape display 'bilingual' decoration," combining Attic rectilinear motifs on one side with, on the reverse, a survival of the local curvilinear and circular ornament from PG B and earlier. The Atticizing tendency, once firmly established in the local M G (pp. 242-4), introduced a new discipline into the Knossian style whereby a closer link between potter and painter" allows the recognition of two individual workshops specializing in the production of the new and bulky ovoid pithos-urn (pI. 53a). One workshop sometimes portrayed the favourite Attic animal, the horse, here its only appearance in Knossian vase-painting; another is named after the massive stirrup-handles, devised for lifting these weighty vessels without mishap. Local invention, however, was not wholly submerged by Attic influence: Knossos also possesses a distinct M G fabric 7 covered with a thick cream slip, well polished, and decorated with narrow strips of local motifs applied to domed lids, and precursors of the L G lekythoi of 'Praisos' type (p. 250). The most progressive strain in the LG phase is seen in the Bird workshop, producing
I 3
5 6
KNC. 2 ].N. Coldstream, LJ. Eiring and G. Forster, Knossos Pottery Handbook, Greek and Roman, BSA Studies 7 (2001) chapter L.H. Sackett, BSA 71 (1976) II7-29; KNC 371. • Coldstream, BICS 3[ (1984) 93-104; KNC 316. Coldstream in Eilapine: tomos timetikos .. , N. Platona (Herakleion, 1987) 335--g; KNC 337-8. Coldstream in CretCongr 9 (2006) A 7[-80; KNC 318-19. 7 KNC 4.[8-[9.
I.
476 .
SUPPLEMENT
the successors of the bulky M G pithos-urns, and large cups, always decorated in a vigorous metopal style (pp. 246-9). At a late LG stage, metopes on the pithoi may be rendered in the newly fashionable white-on-dark scheme, the motifs even including a resurrection of the Minoan octopus rendered in severely geometricized form. I The later pithoi from this workshop, now equipped with tripod ribbon feet, are the immediate precursors of the first polychrome urns. On a large cup related to this workshop 2 the metopes enclose a helmeted sphinx, a bird in flight, and two lions seen in frontal view, recalling the protomes on the bronze votive shields from the Idaean cave. These, however, are rare departures for their time into experiments with figured themes. How wide was the diffusion of the Knossos style? To the East it extended as far as the approaches to the Gulf of Mirabello (P.257). Inland, to the South, pottery from tombs excavated at Kounavi (ancient Eltynia) and Archanes shows no local divergence. Further afield, to the West, the tombs of Prinias (perhaps ancient Rhizenia) have produced a rustic imitation, on a straight-sided pithos," of the style of the Knossian PG B painter of trees. At Eleutherna, pottery from the rich cemetery of Orthi Petra, like the tombs of Prinias, awaits full publication; forming a continuous sequence from LPG onwards, it exhibits a more independent style, independent of both Knossos and the extreme West.
SOUTH CRETE
Recent publications of old excavations of PG tombs at Kourtes, and of settlement deposits at Phaistos and Kommos add little to our previous estimate of Southern idiosyncrasies (pp. 255-7). In general one notes, in contrast to the Knossian style, the extreme rarity of Atttic M G influence, especially at Phaistos and Kommos, allowing the survival of local motifs into LG.
SUPPLEMENT
.
477
of the Early Iron Age in that style, in which the scarcity of associations in single interments is to some extent compensated by the sheer quantity of the pottery, inviting stylistic classification. Throughout there is a preference for curvilinear motifs, in a local tradition with Minoan origins. A PG B phase, distantly connected with Knossos, seems to persist without any M G sequel, there being no Attic or Atticizing imports in this remote region. One curious PG B shape, a ribbed juglet in coarse red micaceous ware, and perhaps designed as a container for opium, I seems to be of East Cretan origin, exported to Knossos and elsewhere. In the following LG phase, curvilinear decoration still persists; but some connections with Knossos are once again seen, as at Vrokastro, in white-on-dark decoration and globular aryballoi. WEST CRETE
An austere, remote and conservative style prevailed in the far West, on a dark ground and with mainly rectilinear ornament. Fragmentary LG deposits in the settlement of Kydonia (modern Khania) are supplemented by whole vessels from tombs in the Kissamos district, going back to a PG phase: these await full publication. Before LG, problems of dating are caused by the extreme rarity of contacts with the outside world, even with Central Crete. From the PG cemetery at Modi, broad and high-footed bell-skyphoi resemble those of LPG at Knossos, in the mid-ninth century" An imported Attic M G II kantharos provides a date in the early eighth century for at least some of the local amphorae and kraters in chamber tomb 1 at Oavalomouri.! In the stratified deposits from Kydonia, LG I and II phases are distinguished," the later phase extending far into the seventh century in the absence of any Orientalizing features. A dark-ground rectilinear style still persists, unrelated to developments at Knossos; but there is no lack of imports from overseas, especially from Corinth and (surprisingly) from the Argolid, suggesting a special link with the Peloponnese.
EAST CRETE
Two major publications in recent years have greatly amplified the island's ceramic record from the Gulf of Mirabello eastward. With the tombs and settlement of Vrokastro we reach a frontier between the styles of Central and East Crete (p. 258). A thorough study of relevant finds from the old excavations there 4 has helped to clarify the local sequence. Tenuous links with the Central style allow identification of some vessels as PG Band E G; the existence of a M G phase is due to Attic imports, independently of Knossos. In LG Knossian influence is apparent in white-on-dark decoration, and a few globular aryballoi. Among the imports, fragments of a 'Gycladic' LG krater must now be attributed to Euboea.! Vrokastro has also produced LG skyphoi and kraters in the 'Eteocretan' style of the extreme East (pp. 258-61). A monumental volume 6 presents a full scrutiny of nearly a thousand vessels
EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC New information about Geometric pottery in the East Aegean is best presented under two main headings in which islands are grouped with closely related parts of the Asiatic mainland near by.
THE DODECANESE AND CARIA
From Rhodes, notice of new finds is limited to two graves from Vati 5 in the relatively unexplored southern part of that island. The pottery - skyphoi, kraters and lekythoi - seems to conform well to the description of East Greek M G in pp. 267- 74. Coldstream in Acts if the 3rd International Congress if Cypriot Studies (Nicosia, 2000), 463-9; KNC 346[ M. Andreadaki-Vlazaki in CretCongr 5 (1986) 14-, pI. na-b (cf KNC 379-80, A (ii)). 3 art. cit. 25-7, pI. 17• Andreadaki-Vlazaki in E. and B. Hallager, eds, The Greek-Swedish Excavations at the Agia Aikaterini Square, Kastelli, Khania, [97°--1]7, 1.I: from the Geometric to the modern Greek period (Stockholm, (997) 229-40. 5 Preliminary report: J. Papachristodoulou, Ann 61 (1983) 9- 17. I
KNC 321-4. 2 Coldstream, RA (1982) 25-32; KNC 390, fig. 1I8, tomb 134.47. 3 G. Rizza in Creta Antica: cento anni di archeologia italiana (Roma, 1984) 242, figs. 451-3. • B. Hayden, Reports from the Vrokastro area, East Crete. I, Catalogue if Pottery from the Settlement if Vrokastro (Philadelphia, 2003) 1I-19, 48-745 BICS 18 (1971) 6-8, pI. zb. 6 M. Tsipopoulou, I Anatoliki Kriti stin proimi epochi tou Siderou (Herakleion, 2005). I
2
478 .
SUPPLEMENT
The Bird-kotyle workshop (pp. 277-g), which created a LG metopal style that became ubiquitous throughout the East Greek world, was previously thought to have its original home in Rhodes. In the light of recent chemical analysis, there is now good reason to transfer this workshop to a North Ionic centre, which will be considered in a note at the end of this section. In Cos the local style is better understood, thanks to the full publication of the cemeteries excavated under the Italian administration, together with an analysis of the 'Cypriot' imports.' The Coan LG style was not, as previously thought, interrupted by the abandonment of the cemeteries and a supposed desertion of Cos town (pp. 288, 381); it now appears that, at the end of LG, burials were transferred to a new cemetery at Marmaroto, in the town's outskirts. In Caria, slightly beyond the limits of the early Greek world, painted pottery in a Geometric manner was locally made, progressing from PG through MG to LG.2 Two vessels from Asarlik tomb C,3 excavated long ago, fall into the MG phase, as do most of the finds from a recently excavated cemetery at Iasos, with some overlap into LG. The LG phase is best represented in the Carian heartland at Tepe Gencik (Mylasa) and Becin (perhaps Old Mylasa). Typical shapes are plump amphoriskoi and jugs lacking articulation, and local adaptations of the nicked Bird-kotyle."
IONIA
This central part of the East Aegean area may be divided, ceramically, into South and North Ionic regions: these comprise, respectively, the large islands of Samos and Chios, each associated with sites nearby on the Asiatic coast. From Samos, Geometric pottery is now recorded from the ancient town (modern Pythagoreion)" going back to MG neck-handled amphorae, followed by LG. The sanctuary of Hera, however, remains the most fruitful source of LG pottery, fully expounded in a volume of the final report." Of the five domestic deposits listed in pp. 288-9 it is now unlikely that any was sealed until well into SubG, and a later date is now favoured for the first temple." Atticizing tendencies in the metopal decoration of LG can now be most plausibly attributed to Euboea which, unlike Attica, is the source of several imports." Of the chief South Ionic centres on the mainland, Miletus has accumulated much fragmentary new material from continuing excavations of the settlement," without adding anything new to our sketchy knowledge of the local style (pp. 296-7). At Ephesus the discovery of a LG peripteral temple 10 in the sanctuary of Artemis has revealed, below it,
I
SUPPLEMENT
~'
479
a sequence said to be continuous from the Late Bronze age, sealed under a clay floor; the pottery remains largely unpublished. From Chios no major finds have been presented since the full publication of LG and SubG pottery finds from the sanctuaries of Emporio.' Typical of Chiot LG, and apparently of North Ionic LG in general, is the avoidance of Atticizing metopal schemes, and the division of a large central panel into thin horizontal strips." This syntax accounts for the miniaturist character of Chiot figured work; placed in long and narrow strips within the central panel of a krater, none of the scenes - to judge from fragments - is more than five cm high. A most dramatic fragment from Kato Phana, showing an armed warrior confronting a crouching lion," may well be part of a longer extended scene. For the chronology of Chiot SubG Bird bowls, the Harbour sanctuary of Emporio offers useful stratigraphical evidence." On the Asiatic mainland the most productive North Ionic settlements are Smyrna and Clazomenae. For Smyrna more Geometric pottery has been illustrated," but the stratified deposits dating the town's early fortifications 6 remain largely unpublished. From Clazomenae two well-documented preliminary reports 7 outline the site's early history, starting with the PG dwellings of the first Ionian settlers. In the ninth century the frequency of SPG pendentsemicircle skyphoi, locally made, seems to indicate a link with Euboea. Without any clear sign of a M G phase, a fleeting L G horizon is followed by a long gap in the area so far excavated, until well into SubG. Much in evidence among the early LG pottery is the nicked Bird-kotyle shape (as pl.6IC-d),8 though without the birds; instead, the wide variety of motifs, including multiple zigzags and meander hooks in a M G tradition, suggests an early stage in the development of this shape.
THE BIRD-KOTYLE WORKSHOP (PP.
277-9):
A NOTE ON CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
The metopal style of these vessels, seen especially on the nicked hemispherical kotylai, was imitated by all the major East Aegean regions, including Caria. Its origin was once thought to be at Ialysos in Rhodes, source of several of the earliest kotylai; but a laboratory analysis of its standard fabric (as opposed to local imitations) has made a persuasive case? for transferring this workshop, and the creation of its style, to a centre in North Ionia. Clazomenae is a likely candidate, in view of the survival there of several M G motifs in its earliest kotylai.
I]. Boardman, Greek Emporio, BSA Supp. 6 (1966) 101-17. ' E.g. on the kraters pI. 63£ (Old Smyrna) and pI. 64g (Chios). Coldstream in]. Boardman and E.Y. Richardson, eds, Chios, a Conference in the Homereion in Chios (Oxford, 1986) 181-6. 4 Greek Emporia, 13 2 - 4. 5 Ci Ozgunel in G. Vallet, ed., Les ceramiques de la Grece de l'Est et leur diffusion en Occident (Paris, 1978) 17-26, pIs. 1-5; E. Akurgal, AltSmyrna I (Ankara, (983) with review by W Schiering, Gnomon 60 (1988) 24.9-53. 6 R.Y. Nicholls, BSA 53-1 (1958-9) 120-8, pI. 9 (section). 7 N. Aytaclar in A. Moustaka et al. eds, Klaromenai, Teos and Abdera: Metropoleis and Colony (Thessaloniki, 2004) 17-41; YE. Ersoy in ibid. 3
I L. Morricone, Ann 56 (1978) 9-427. Of the three 'Cypriot' fabrics only the first (P.405) seems to be imported, the others being local imitations. , C.Ozgiinel, Carian Geomelric Pottery, I (Ankara, 1979). 3 ]HS 8 (1888) 70, nos. 2, 4; BMCat 1.1, nos. 1105-17. 4 GG' 259-60, fig. 84b, c. 5 ADChr 32 (1977) 301-3; AR 32 (1986) 83-4. 6 H. Walter, Samos V (1971); review, ]HS 81 (1971) 202-4. 7 A. Mallwitz, in a reassessment of the stratification, argues that the foundations of Hekatompeda I and II belong to the same building, erected little, if at all, before 700: Ann 59 (1981) 86-g1 and AA 1981, 624-33. 8 E.g. Samos V, nos. 42, 155, 282~. 9 ]M 24 (1974.) 84--97 and 25 (1975) 41-58. 10 A. Bammer, AS 40 (1990) 137-60.
.
43-5 2. ibid. 44-9, figs. 3-6. 9 See, most recently, M. Kerschner in F. Krinzinger, ed., 7(jpferzentren der Osfiigiiis (Wien, 2002) 63~2. I am most grateful to Dr Kerschner for his helpful guidance on this matter.
8
480 .
SUPPLEMENT
ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY The chief hope of extracting absolute dates for Geometric pottery lies in the correlation of Aegean exports to the Levant found in contexts datable from Near Eastern historical sources. For evidence of this nature we should begin by stressing its limitations. Ideally, the Greek exports in any such correlation should be plentiful, well preserved, securely placed within their local sequence, and well stratified in their eastern contexts associated with datable historical events. No Geometric pottery found in the East satisfies all these requirements, but we must make the best of what we have. As in Chapter Thirteen, the evidence comes mainly from the South Levant, where, more recently, there have been gains and losses. We take the losses first. From Tel Abu Hawam level III (pp. 303, 305) no useful correlation can now be extracted. The date of the destruction remains controversial, and the SPG imports in that level are followed by a later fragment of an Atticizing M G I I cup or skyphos. I At Megiddo (pp. 303-7) the association of two fragments of Attic early M G I skyphoi with the composite level Va/IVh ending in the mid-ninth century is now thought to be stratigraphically unreliable by the current director of the excavations there." Fortunately, this chronological equation now receives powerful confirmation in the recent discovery of two more skyphos sherds, also early Attic M G I, in the burnt destruction (level IV) of the lower town of Tel Rehov in the Jordan valley, followed by a desertion. This devastation has been persuasively attributed to the invasions of King Hazael of Syria in the 830S after the fall of the Omrid dynasty in the Northern Kingdom of Israel," a devastation that also affected Megiddo and other neighbouring sites. From the immediately preceding level V at the same site comes part of a Euboean SPG 11 globular pyxis" contemporary with Attic E G 11. The fragments of a late M G 11 pedestalled krater from Samaria, including traces of a horse metope (c£ pl.4e), were scattered among four levels: \S VII, Hellenistic and Roman (p. 304). The excavator expressed her considered opinion 5 that the original context could not have been later than level V in the early eighth century (p. 308). To argue for any later date 6 would be to imply that the extremely careful excavators would have missed a pit in their stratigraphical digging, which seems unlikely. The krater, for which a reconstruction is suggested," would make good historical sense as a prestigious vessel sent to Samaria during the apogee of the Northern Israelite kingdom in the reign of Jeroboam 11 (788-749); similar kraters have been found in several other royal capitals in Syria, Phoenicia and Cyprus." Among specialists in the South Levant, especially for the early centuries of the Iron Age, there are still disagreements between advocates for a High or Low chronology, respectively the heirs of the 'Hazorite' and the 'Samaritan' systems outlined in pp. 305-9. There seems, J. Balensi, BASOR 257 (1985) 65-74. 2 Information kindly provided by D. Ussiskin; see Tel Aviv 30 (2003) 256. A. Mazar and J.N. Coldstream, IF] 53 (2003) 353-6, fig. 7. • ibid. 34--5, figs. 5-6. 5 K.M. Kenyon apud PJ. Riis, Sukas I (Copenhagen, 1970) 14-6. 6 E.g. A. Fantalkin, Levant 33 (2001) 1I9-20. 7 Coldstream, Tel Aviv 30 (2003) 24-9-50, fig. I. The caption should read 'M G 11'. 8 Coldstream in R. Hagg, ed., The Greek Renaissance rif the Eightlt Century BC, Tradition andInnovation (Stockholm, 1983), 202-4-. I
3
SUPPLEMENT
.
481
however, to be general agreement concerning absolute dates extracted from destructions following the fall of the Omrid dynasty in the third quarter of the ninth century. A brief article, I also taking in Euboean PG exports to Tel Hadar and Tel Dor, argues that the low chronology is easier to reconcile with the pace of ceramic development in the Aegean. I
ibid. (n. 189).
SUPPLEMENT BIBLIOGRAPHY . 483
8. BOEOTIAN GEOMETRIC A. Ruckert, Friihe Keramik Biiotiens, AntK Beiheft
IO
(Bern, 1976).
9. LACONIAN GEOMETRIC
Bibliography
w.D.E. Coulson, 'The Dark Age Pottery of Sparta', BSA 80 (I985) 29-84. I. Margreiter, Friihe lakonische Keramik von geometrischer bis zu archaischer Zeit (Waldsassen-Bayern, 1988)
(exclusive of site reports, listed below in the Site Index)
IO. WEST GREEK GEOMETRIC
w.D.E. Coulson in Nichoria Ill, 61-259. 1.
GENERAL II.
B. Schweitzer, Greek Geometric Art (London, 197I) 22-rr8. R.M. Cook, Greek Painted Pottery3 (London, 1997) I5-40. J. Boardman, EarlY Greek Vase Painting (London, 1998) 23-82. I.S. Lemos, The Protogeometric Aegean (Oxford, 2003). 2.
J.N. Coldstream in J.N. Coldstream, J.L. Eiring and G. Forster, Knossos Pottery Handbook) Greek and Roman, BSA Studies 7 (zoor) chapter r. M. Tsipopoulou, I Anatoliki Kriti stin proiini epochi tou Siderou (Herakleion, 2005).
ATTIC GEOMETRIC
12. EAST GREEK GEOMETRIC
B. Borell, Attische Geometrische Schalen (Mainz, 1978). 1: Rombos, The Iconography qf Attic Late Geometric 11 Pottery Gonsered, 1988).
3. CORINTHIAN GEOMETRIC C. Dehl, Die Korinthische Keramik des 8 undfriihen 7 ]h) v. Chr. in Italien, AM Beiheft rr (I984). 5. PROTOGEOMETRIC SURVIVALS R. Kearsley, The Pendent-Semicircle Skyphos, BICS Supp. 44 (I989) 6. THESSALIAN GEOMETRIC M. Sipsie-Eschbach, Protogeometrische Keramik aus Iolkos in Thessalien (Berlin, 7. EUBOEAN GEOMETRIC A. Kenzelmann-Pfyffer in Eretria XX, forthcoming.
CRETAN GEOMETRIC
199I).~
R.M. Cook in Cook and Dupont, East Greek Pottery (London, 1998), chapter 4.
..
,-',
Site Index
SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
Locality
1jJpe
HYMETTOS KOKKINOS MYLOS
if site
Publication
Date
Sanctuary
[M. Langdon, Hespena, Supp. 16 (197 6) 55ff.
EG-LG
Grave
ADChr, 48, 72
MG 11
MARKOPOULO
Graves
ADChr 26, 38ff; 39, 61£
LG 11
MERENDA
Cemetery
t M. Xagorari-Gleissner, Die geometrische Nekropole von Merenda (Dettelbach, 2005)
EG-LG
ADChr 25, I27ff.
MG II-LG
" Entries marked
t are final
Locality
1jJpe
reports; the remainder are preliminary notices.
if site
Publication
NEA MAKRI
Graves
ADChr 40, 72£
LG I
OROPOS
Setdement
Euboica 179-215 tOropos I (forthcoming)
EG-LG
SALAMIS
Graves
ADChr 46,71
PG-EG 11
THORIKOS
Graves, Setdement
tThorikos Iv, 71-108
MG-LG
TRACHONES
Cemetery
tAM 88, Iff.
LG 11
Date
(I) ATTICA
. 485
ATHENS Acropolis, Areopagus
Cemeteries (old excavations)
t Hesperia, 43, 32sff·
EG II-MG I
Agora
Well (K 12:2)
tAJA 106, I87ff.
EGI
Kerameikos
Graves
t K XII, 89ff.
LG II-EPA
Grave
tAM 89, rff t BSA 98, 33 Iff.
LG Ib-IIa
Kynosarges area
Cemetery
MG II-LG 11
(2) AEGINA Sanctuary, well deposit AAA
85fI'.
PG-MG I
(3) MEGARID AY. THEODOROI
Graves
AD 47, 54ff.
MG II-LG
Grave
t Hesperia, 39, rfff
EG I
ADChr 27, 93ff. AAA 5, I65ff.
J3,
" (4) CORINTHIA
t M. Brouskari, Apo ton Atheniiiko Kerameiko tou 8 P.ChAiona (Athens, 1979)
MG II-LG la
ADChr 23, 55£
MG II-LG I
Graves
t Corinth Xv. I, 8ff.
MG II-LG
LG
Graves
AR 51, I6f; 52, 21£
EG I-MG I
Sacred Spring
Ann 59, I39ff.
LG
MG II-LG 11
Sanctuary (Demeter)
t Hesperia 68, 55ff.
EG-LG
Odos Mitsaion/Zetrou Graves
ADChr 27, 93ff. ADChr 22, 102£
MG I
Well
Odos Poulopoulou 20
ADChr 22, IIOff.
EG.I
Odos Theophilopoulou Grave
ADChr 27,62
MGII
Plateia Kotzia
Graves
ADChr 43,26
LG
Cemetery
ADChr 2I, 97ff.
MG 11
ADChr 29, 108ff.
LG Ib-II
tG.E. Mylonas, To dutiko Nekrotapheio Eleusinos (Athens, 1975)
MG I-LG 11
Odos Erechtheiou
Odos Erectheiou 20
Grave
Graves
Odos Erysichthonos/Neleos
Graves
Odos Kriezi
Cemetery
"
ANAVYSOS ELEUSIS
Grave
Cemetery
ADChr 22, 79ff. AAA I, 20ff.
CORINTH
(Apollo)
" ISTHMIA
Sanctuary (poseidon)
Hespena 45, 203ff.
EPC
t Hesperia 57, zrff
MG II-LG
t Hespena 59, I40ff.
LG-EPC
t Isthmia VIII, 26Iff.
EG-LG
486
.
SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
Locality
1jpe if site
SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
Publication
Date
(5) ARGOLID ARGOS
1jpe if site
Publication
Date
OLYMPIA
Sanctuary
[B. Eder in H. Kyrieleis, ed., Arif(inge
PG-LG
und Frilhzeit des Heiligturns Don OlYmpia: die Ausgrabungen am Pelopion 1987~6
Cemeteries
t p. Courbin, Tombes geO'fllitriques d'Argos I (Paris, Ig74)
Graves
AAA 3, 130ff.
Graves
ADChr 23, 127£
LG 11
ADChr 24, I06£
MG
(I 0) ACHAEA
ADChr 26, 79
EG I
AIGION
Graves
Ann 60, 224ff.
MG-LG
ADChr 27, Ig2ff.
MG
ANO KASTRITSI
Grave
Ann 60, 223
LG 11
ADChr 23, 127ff.
LG 11
ASANI
Grave
Ann 60. 232ff.
LG II-SubG
Ann 60, 33ff
EG-LG
DREPANON
Graves
t Asine II. I, 3 rff ADChr 36, I05ff. tTiryns V, 17 t Tiryns VIII, 27£
EG-LG
MANESI
Graves
tAE Ig73. 15ff. Ann 60, 23I£
LG 11
MGII
MAVRIKIO, near Aigion
Grave
N. Kourou, Stele eis mnemen .N. Kontoleontos (Athens, Ig37) 303ff.
LG 11
PRIOLITHOS
Graves
ADChr 22, 217
MG?
GAVALOU
Cemetery Graves
tAD 35, I02ff Ann 60, zzoff
PG
PLEURON
PG
Graves
ADChr 22, 323ff.; AD 24, 74ff.
PG
ARTA (Ambracia)
Settlement
Ann 60, 73ff.
PG-LG
VITSA
Cemetery, Settlement
ADChr 22, 246ff.; 23, 237ff; Ann 60,
PG-LG
ASINE
Settlement
NAUPLION
Graves
TIRYNS
Graves
EG-LG
(Berlin, 2006) 14Iff.
EG I EG 11
PG-LG
(II ) AETOLIA
(6) ARCADIA TEGEA
Locality
. 487
Sanctuary (Athena Alea)
M.E. Voyatzis, The EarlY Sanctuary if Athena Alea at Tegea (Goteborg, IggO), 62ff.; OpAth 20, 126ff.; tTegea I (forthcoming)
PG-LG
(I 2) ACARNANIA PALAIOMAMINA
(7) LACONIA AMYCLAE and SPARTA
Sanctuaries
tWD.E. Coulson, BSA 3o, 2gff.
PG
(I3) EPIRUS
(8) MESSENIA NICHORIA
Settlement
tNichoria Ill, 6I£
PG-MG
VOLIMEDIA
Tomb votives
[Coulson, AJA g2, 53ff.
LG I
36ff.
(I4) IONIAN ISLANDS (9) ELlS
CEPHALONIA
ELEAN PYLOS
Settlement
ELlS TOWN
Settlement
OLYMPIA
Sanctuary
t Hesperia Supp. 21 JOA! 63, toff C.A. Morgan, Athletes and Oracles
LG-SubG
Pale
Settlement
Ann Bo, 123ff.
LG-EPC
LG
Same
Settlement
PG, LG-EPC
LG
CORCYRA
Euboica 356ff. Ann 60, 6gff.
EPC
Cemetery, disturbed
ADChr 391-400
EPC
Sanctuary
APES 453ff.
LG
(Cambridge, Ig3g), 243ff. CYTHERA
Settlement
488 .
SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
Localiry
7jpe
if site
SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
Publication
Date
(15) THESSALY HALOS
Pyres, tumuli
ADChr 47, 229ff.; 48, 238ff.
PG-LG
IOLKOS Nea Ionia
Tholos tomb
ADChr 48, 231ff.
PG-LG
Localiry
7jpe
PYRI (nr Thebes) VRANESI COPIADOS
if site
.
Publication
Date
Cemetery
ADChr 21, I97f; 26, 216ff.
LG, SubG
Cemetery
t A.
PG-MG
Settlement
BCH 108, 37ff; 109, 49ff.; 110. 89ff.; BCH Supp. 23, 87ff.
PG-LG
Cemetery
t Eretria
LG 11
Settlement
Eretria VI, 3ff.
LG
tAntK 43, 134ff. XX (forthcoming)
MG 11, LG
Andreiomenou, AE 1985, 57ff.
(18) EUBOEA CHALCIS
(15A) MACEDONIA DION
Cemetery
Catalogue
if Exhibition,
Ancient Macedonia S P G
(Athens, 1967) I66ff. KOUKOS MENDE Poseidi
Cemetery, Settlement Settlement Santuary
To Archaiologiko Ergo sti Makedonia kai Thraki 2, 357ff.; 3, 425ff. Euboica 255ff. Euboica 263ff.
ERETRIA
W Gate area PG, SPG PG, G
Central area
TORONE
VERGINA
Settlement
Euboica 243ff.
PG
Cemetery
tJ.K. Papadopoulos,
Cemetery
MG 11, LG
The Early Iron Age PG, SPG cemetery if Torone (California, 2005) 409ff, 7nff. SPG t Vergina I (Athens, 1969); PZ 64,
Aire sacrficielle
t Eretria t Eretria
Settlement
AE 1975, 206ff.; 19n I28ff.; 1981,
Sanctuary of Apollo
NEA ANCHIALOS (Sindos)
Isolated grave
Harbour area
III
XIV
SPG LG, SubG LG
85ff.; 1982, 161ff.; 1983, 161ff. Settlement, graves
Ann 59, 187ff.; t Eretria XVII.
MG II-LG
KYME
Settlement
Euboica 73ff
PG-LG
LEFKANDI
Settlement
t Lejkandi I,
Cemeteries
tLejkandi I, 101ff.; t Lefkandi Ill; tBSA n 213ff.; AR 35, II7ff.; OJA, 14,
88ff.
27ff.
PG-LG PG-SPG
151ff.
(15B) EASTERN LOCRIS ATALANTI
Cemetery
TRAGANA
Cemetery
F. Dakaronia, EdinbLev 3, 483ff. t A. Onasoglou, AD 35, rff
Large apsidal building Antiquiry 82, 169ff; t Lefkandi 11. I with graves
PG-SPG
PG
MG II-LG
(19) NORTH SPORADES SKYROS
(16) PHOCIS AND WESTERN LOCRIS Ann 61, 228ff.
AMPHISSA
Graves
ANTIKYRA
Cemetery
221£
LG
GALAXIDI
Graves
232ff.
LG
(20) CYCLADES
KALAPODI
Sanctuary
PG-LG
AMORGOS
MEDEON
Cemetery
AA 1980, 47ff.; 1987, 35ff. Ann 61, 213ff.
Graves
PG, SPG
LG
Graves, Settlement, Sanctuary
t L. Marangou,
Zagora
Settlement
t Zagora
Hypsele
Settlement
C. Televantou, Andriaka Chronika 21 (1993), 187ff.; APES 421ff.
Settlement, Pyres
ADChr 24, 393ff.; 25, 426ff.; 26, 465ff. MG AAA 4, 21Off; 6, 256ff.
LG
PAE 1993, 166ff. PAE 1990, Inff. Minoa I
MG,LG
ANDROS
(17) BOEOTIA AKRAIPHIA
Cemetery
PARALIMNI
Graves
Ann 59, 254ff.; Transinone 451ff.; Euboica 16rff
EG-MG
ADChr 21, I98ff.; 26, 215ff.
LG
DONOUSA
I, 11; PAE 1972, 251ff.
PG-LG MG,LG
489
490 .
SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
Locality
1jpe
if site
Publication
Date
Gypsades
NAXOS
Plithos
N. Cemetery
t N. Kourou, To Notio Nekrotapheio tis Naxou kata te geometrike periodo (Athens, 1999) Ann 61, I2Iff.
Palati
Settlement
AA 1972, 386ff.
EG-LG
Tsikalario
Cemetery
ADChr 20, 5I5ff.
MG
Paros town
Cemetery
AION 6, I3ff.; AE 2000, 283ff.; Pictorial Pursuits, 27Iff.
LG
Koukounaries
Settlement
Le Cicladi ed il mondo Egeo, ed.
EG-LG
Gymnasium
S. Cemetery
EG II-MG 11
EG-LG
PAROS
E. Lanzillotta and D. Schilardi (Rome, 1996) 33ff. TENOS
Exoburgo
Sanctuary (relief pithoi) [N. Kontoleon, AE 1969, 2I5ff.
Settlement
ELEUTHERNA
Cemetery
GAVALOMOURI
Child burial
GAVALOMOURI, KAVOUSI, KISSAMOU, MODI, VRYSES
Tombs
1jpe
if site
Tomb
Publication
Date
t BSA 76,
PG-LG
144£ Sanctuary of Demeter tBSA Supp. 8, I8ff.
LG PG-LG
Settlement
t BSA 67, nff. t BSA 95, 264£ t BSA 92, 236ff.
Strat. Mus. area
Settlement
AR 31, 124£
PG-LG
'Unexplored' mansion area
Settlement
tBSA Supp. 21, 67ff.
PG-LG
Villa Dionysus area
Settlement
t BSA 98, 29Iff., 30 Iff. t KCh 36, 7ff.
PG-LG
Royal Road area
Settlement
Palace environs
Settlement
S.w. House area
PG-LG PG-LG
ARCHANES
Tombs
KOUNAVI (Eltynia)
Tombs
ADChr 48, 463ff.; BSA Studies 12 (2005), 42Iff.
PGB-MG
PRINIAS
Cemetery
G. Rizza in Ancient Crete, 100 years if Italian Archaeology (Rome, 1985) I52ff.
PGB-LG
LG
PGB-LG
(23) S. CENTRAL CRETE
(21) WEST CRETE KHANIA (Kydonia)
Locality
t M. Andreadaki-Vlazaki
in The Greek- LG Swedish Excavations ... Khania 1.1, ed. B. and E. Hallager (Stockholm, 1997) 229ff.; APES zrff
N. Stampolides, Reprisals (Rethymno, 1996) 26ff.; CypDodCr I75ff. SMEA 26, 307ff. sCretCongr (1986), roff.
GORTYN
Settlement
Transirione 309ff.
LG
KOMMOS
Sanctuary
PG-LG
KOURTES
Cemetery
PG-LG
PHAISTOS
Settlement
t Kommos IV, 210-301 t Ann 66-67, I73ff. t Ann 52-53, I69ff.
t B. Hayden, Reports from Vrokastro ... Catalogue if pottery from the settlement
PG-LG
PGB-LG
LPG-LG LG
(24) EAST CRETE
PG-LG
VROKASTRO
Settlement
VARIOUS SITES
Tombs
(Philadelphia, 2003)
t M. Tsipopoulou, I Anatoliki Kriti stin prouni epochi tou Siderou (Herakleion, 2°°5)
PG-LG
Cemeteries
t L. Morricone,
EG-LG
Graves
ADChr 35, 552ff.; 39, 335·
MG-LG
Vati
Graves
Ann 61, 9ff.
MG
Ialysos
Graves
APES I65ff.
EG
(22) N. CENTRAL CRETE KNOSSOS area
Teke, Medical Faculty site
N. Cemetery
t KNC,
Kephala ridge
Tombs
t BSA 97, 20Iff.
PG--LG
Teke
Tombs
PG-LG
Atsalenio
Tombs
Mastamba
Tomb
t BSA 62, 57ff. tBSA 63, I33ff. t PAE 1970, 270ff.
Teke
Tomb E
BSA 71, II7ff.
PG
esp. 3 IIff.
PG-LG
(25) THE DODECANESE COS
Meropis
PG-LG PG-LG
Ann 56, 9ff.
RHODES
.
491
49 2
SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
. SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
Ijpe
Locality
if site
Date
Publication
if site
Locality
Ijpe
AMATHUS
Cemeteries
.
493
Date
Publication
(26) EAST AEGEAN ISLANDS SAMOS
Pythagoreion
Settlement, Graves
ADChr 32, 30Iff.; APES 189ff.
MG--LG
Heraion
Sanctuary
tSamos V (1971)
MG--LG
Graves
CHIOS
PG, SPG
APES 207ff.
(27) AEOLIS AND N.W. ASIA MINOR CYME
Settlement
TROY
Settlement
Euboica 273ff. Studia Troica 8, 151ff.
LG
Settlement
Klaeomenae, Teos and Abdera: metropolis and colony, ed. A Moustaka et aL (Thessaloniki, 2004), 17ff., 43ff.
SP G, L G
EPHESUS
Sanctuary of Artemis
AS 40, 137ff.; RA 1991, 63ff. Kleiner, Alt-Milet (1966); IM 18, 87ff.,
PG--LG EG--LG
MILETUS
Settlement
KITION
SMYRNA
(Bayrakh)
Settlement
tE. Akurgal, Alt-Smyrna I (Ankara, PG--LG 1983); C.Ozgiinel in Les ceramiques de la Grece de l'Est et leur diJlUsion en Occident (Naples, 1978) 17ff.
GGAPC 65ff.
Sanctuary of Astarte
GGAPC firff.; t Kition Iv, 17ff.; tKition VI.
SPG, MG, LG
Tomb
LG I SPG, LG
PAPHOS
Tomb
RDAC 1994, 155( t Karageorghis, Tombs at Palaepaphos (Nicosia, 1990), 150ff.
SALAMIS
Settlement
GGAPC 12-13
LG
AL MINA
Settlement
Eretria VI, 7ff.; t MeditArch 8, 7ff.
LG
RAS EL BASIT
Settlement
SPG, LG
RAS IBN HANI
Settlement
.$yria 43, 190ff Syria 55, 282ff.
BEYIN
(Old Mylasa?) (Termile)
IASOS
MYLASA
(Gencik)
KHALDEH
Tomb
SAREPTA
Settlement
TAMBOURIT
Tomb
TYRE
Settlement
MS 21, 193ff. tJ.B. Pritchard, Sarepta, a Phoenician city (Philadelphia, 1975) 85ff. tBerytus 25, 147ff. tP.M. Bikai, Pottery if Tyre (Warminster, 1978) 53ff.; RDAC 1988.2,
SPG SP G MG SPG, MG, LG
33ff.
LG
Tombs
Belleten 1971, rff Ozgunel, Carian Geometric Pottery (Ankara, 1979); Belleten 40, 3ff.
Cemetery
Ann 43-44, 49 8ff.; 47-48, 464if.
MG--LG
Settlement
Ann 39-40, 533ff.; 43-44, 4I7ff.;
MG--LG
Graves
Settlement Graves
I
" (T. Rachidiyeh)
tC. Doumet, Annales d'Histoire et d'Archiologie I (Beyrouth, 1982) 124(
SPG
Settlement
BASOR, 257, 65ff.; Levant 18, 169ff.
MGII
Settlement
BASOR, 293, 58
LG
Settlement
tIE] 53, 29ff.
SPG, MG I
(35) PALESTINE/ISRAEL
45-46, 554if.; 47-48, 4 61ff.
TELL ABU HAWAM
Acta Archaeologica (Copenhagen) 68, 97iI LG
TEL MIQ,NE
(30) ANATOLIA, INLAND Settlement
Tombs
MG?
TEL REHOV
SARDIS
SPG
(34A) PHOENICIA
(29) CARIA DIRMIL
SPG, MG, LG
Settlement
SPG
144if.,; 19-20, II3ff., 25, 259ff.
Chypriotes VIII)
12ff.; RDAC 1995, 187ff.
(28) IONIA CLAZOMENAE
t Amathonte 11 (Etudes
tYhe Corinthian, Attic and Laconian LG, EPC pottery from Sardis, ed. J.S. Snyder et al. (Harvard, 1997) 17ff.
(Ekron)
494 .
SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
Locality
7jJpe
if site
SUPPLEMENT SITE INDEX
Publication
Date
Locality
7jJpe
if site
Publication
Date
.
(40) APULIA
(36) ETRURIA PES CIA ROMANA
Tomb?
VEIl
Cemeteries
VULCI
Tombs
M. Cristofani, The Etruscans (London, 1979) 59 StEtr 35, 311; BSA 78, 9££; NSc, 1972, 246. MEFR 90.2, 465££, DdA 8, 79££; AntK 25, 173££
LG
Tombs
CURES SABINI
Ann 60,318
MG II
OTRANTO
Settlement
Ann 60, 107££; Archeologia dei Messapi, catalogo della mostra (Bari, 1990) 36££
MG I1, LG
VASTE
Settlement
op. cit. 53££
MG I1, LG
CATANE
Settlement
Ann 59, 318
EPC
LEONTINI
Settlement
Ann 59, 313££; JBirard 3, 160££, pls. 58-6o
LG, EPC
MEGARA HYBLAEA
Settlement
JBirard 3, 181££
LG, EPC
NAXOS
Settlement
SYRACUSE
Settlement, sanctuary
Tombs
JBirard 3, 141££; Ann 59, 293££; Euboica LG, EPC 377££ JBirard 3, 125££; Ann 60, 117££; LG, EPC tG. Voza, Siracusa I999, 10 scaoo archeologico di Piazza Duomo (Siracusa, 1999), 25 JBirard 3, Il7££ LG
Settlement
AR 41, 79££; Euboica 316££
LG
EPC
Settlement
Civiltii di Lazio Primitivo (Rome, 1976) 263 Archeologia Lariale 8, 326
FICANA
Settlement
Le necropoli archaichi di Veio, ed.
LG
ROME
Settlement
SATRICUM
Tombs
LG
G. Bartoloni (Rome, 1997), 219££ JBirard 3, 45££; MEFR 89, 471££; 92, 591££ op. cit. (Castel Decima), 326£
Settlement
MG I1, LG
(37) LATIUM CASTEL DECIMA
INCORONATA
LG EPC TAORMINA
area
(3 8) CAMPANIA CAPUA
Tombs
DdA
CUMAE
Settlement
Euboica 367
PITHECUSAE
Cemetery
t Pithekoussai I (1993)
LG, EPC
Tomb 944 Settlement
AION 5 (1983) 1££
LG
Metalworking quarter PONTECAGNANO
159££; 3, 31££
M G I1-LG LG
JBirard 5 (Naples, 1981) 45££; tBSA 90, MG I1, LG 251££ LG Expedition 14.2, 34ff.
Cemeteries
Prima de Pithecusa. Catalogo della mostra Pontecagnano Faiano (1999)
SPG, MG I1, LG
Cemetery
JBirard 3, 57
LG
(picentia) SAN VALENTINO
I,
(42) SARDINIA SANT'IMBENIA
(43) NORTH AFRICA CARTHAGE
Settlement
RM 96, 213££; 100, 226££; 106, 398££; LG, EPC A/ONN.S. 1 (1994) 104ff.
HUELVA
Settlement
tF. Gonzales de Canales et al., El Empono fenicio precolonial de Huelva (Madrid, 2004) 82££
(39) CALABRIA AMENDOLARA
Cemetery
MEFR 85, 7££
EPC
CROTON
Settlement
Ann 60, 251££
LG, EPC
FRANCAVILLA
Sanctuary
DdA 3, 132£; Atti e Memorie 6-7 (1965-66), 7££; Ann 60, 237££ NSc Supp. Sibari I (1969) 86; V (1988~), 124.
LG, EPC
MARITIMA SYBARIS
Settlement
TORRE MORDILLO
Tombs
Ann 60, 239
EPC MGII
SPG-LG
TOSCANOS
and environs
Settlements
SPG, MG II
MGII Hueloa Arqueologica 3 (Huelva, 1977), 397££ Phonizier im VVesten, ed. H.G. Niemeyer, EPC 338 nn. 1,2 (full refs.)
495
GENERAL INDEX
General Index Adamasteanu, D., 326n.5 Ad Group (Cycladic), 178-9 Aeolian Migration, 338 Ahab, king of Israel, 309 Aharoni, Y, 305-7, 309n·7, 310 Ahlberg, G., 72n.I Akerstrom, A., 19on.8, 202n.9, 37on.9 Akurgal, K, 297n'5, 377n.4, 378n.7, 379-80 Albright, WE, 307, 309n·9, 347n.2 Alexiou, S., 238n.7, 254n.6 Alishar Huyuk, painted Geometric pottery, 378-9 Alphabet, Greek: invention of, 358-g, 379-80; Cumaean, 371 Ameinocles of Corinth, 370 Amiran, Mrs R., 305-7, 310 Amos, Book of, 307n.4 Amphidamas of Chalcis, 370 Amuq plain, 3 10, 345, 354, 385 Analatos Painter, 53-4, 63-4, 86, lO9,III Anavysos Painter, 73, 74, 77, 33 1 Anderson, j.K., 97n.I, roon.a Andreiomenou, Miss A, 149, 19m.2, 195n.3 Apollonius Rhodius, 326n.4 Apulian Geometric, 370, 373 Aram, Aramaeans, 3°7, 309, 345, 348 Archers, 28n.l, 38, 143 Argos C 201, Master of, 139-40, 143-6 Arslan Tash, ivories, 347n.6 Ashdod, revolt of Iadna, 386 Ashurnasirpal, king of Assyria, 343 Asine, Atticizing work, 132-3, 141-2 Assyrians: annexation of Tell Halaf, 3II; armour, 363; bronze situla, 380; conquest of Cyprus, 318; conquest of Levant, 3II, 383-5; devastation of Levant, 3II, 343, 345; destruction of Tarsus, 321; opposed by Urartu, 3II, 354, 378; suppression of Cilician revolt, 385-6 Athens 7°6, Workshop of, 5 1-3, 66-7, 70, 174, 331
Athens 877, Painter of, 138 , 144 Athens 894, Painter and Workshop of, 53-6, 58-65, 67-8, 70, 79, 81, 86, 206-7, 329, 33 1 Athens 897, Painter and Workshop of, 54, 67, 70, 73-4, 77-8 1, 85, 87, 89, 317, 329, 33 1 Attic immigrants (?) to Asarlik (Caria), 339; to Vranesi Copaidos (Boeotia), 337 Axe, double, combined with horse, 174, 292 Baasha, king of Israel, 307 Baring Group, 32 Barnett, R.n, 347n.6, 384n.II Battle scenes, 28, 38, 40, 145, 350-1, 468 Bean, G.E., 381 Benaki Painter, 62n.3, 81-2, 331 Ben-hadad, king of Aram, 307 Benoit, E, 388n.7 Benson, j.L., 13n.3, 27, 95, 140, 248nn.2,4 Benton, Miss S., 5, 79, 96n.2, 97n.3, lO5n.3, lO6n.I, lO7nn·7-8, 13onn.2,4, 170n.9, 208n.9, 22mn-4-6, 225n.6, 227n.8, 229n. 8, 353n.8 Berossos, 385n.7 Bichrome technique at Al Mina, 193 Bird-and-Lozenge Painter, 71, 72, 331 Bird-and-Zigzag Painter, 280-1, 283-5 Bird-bowls, Rhodian, 298-301, 316, 320-1, 378n.6 Bird-kotyle Workshop, 277-9, 283, 285-6, 290-2, 298, 3 15-16, 320-1, 329, 376, 380, 479 Birds (see also Soldier-birds, Wirebirdsjr:Attic, 25, 27, 40, 44, 50, 62, 67-7 1, 74, 76, 304; Corinthian, 96, 103 (see also Herons); Argive, 124, 130-1, 133- 6, 138-9, 141, 143-5 (see also Bustards, Flamingoes); Cycladic, 173-5, 180, 184-5, 188, 314; Euboean, 191-5, 314, 374; Boeotian, 208; West Greek, 227-8, 231; Cretan, 238, 244, 248, 253-4; East Greek, 278-g, 280-1, 285, 29m.I2, 295-6, 298-301
Birdseed Painter and Workshop, 45, 54, 65n·4, 67-'7 0 , 73, 77, 79n·3, 82, 86-8, 19m. lO, 325, 331 Bird Workshop (Cretan), 246-9, 251-2, 254 Birmingham, Mrs j., 242n.5, 250n.I2, 276n.4, 318-20, 327, 347n. I2, 377n·9, 378n'5, 384n·3 Black-on-Red, Cypriot pottery, 275- 6, 346-7, 357, 382 Black Sea, Greek colonies, 377 Blakeway, A, 172n.3, 334ll.I, 37mn.2,5, 372n.2, 373-4 Blazons, 56, 58, 61, 82 Boardman, j., 5, 72, 148n.2, 157nn.I-2, 17m. 2, 172nn.I,9, 189-94, 202n·7, 214n.4, 24m.2, 25m.I, 275n.6, 278n.2, 290n·3, 294n·4, 3 14, 321, 328n.2, 342n.2, 354n·4, 357n'5, 359n·4, 364ll·3, 365n. I, 367-g, 37m. lO, 374n. I, 376n.6, 378n-4, 382n'9,
384-6 Boars, 208 Bocchoris, Pharaoh, scarab of, 104, 316-17, 327; situla, faience, 317, 389 Bosticco, S., 316n.2 Bouzek, j., 8n.I, 23n·3, 39n.3, 48n. I, 51, 79 Boxers, 143, 205 Braidwood, Rj., 3II Brann, Miss E.T.H., 4, 55, 60, 79, 85n.I, 2II, 3lOn.2, 36 m'9 Brea, L. Bernabo, 374 Brock, j.K., 5, 172n.I, 179n·4, 233, 235n.I, 242-6, 251, 254n·9, 255n. I, 334n. I, 347, 357n·5 Brokaw, Miss C., lO7n.7 Brown, WL., 362n'5, 380n.3, 389n.I Bucchero (grey monochrome) pottery, 155n.3, 262, 297, 338, 377 Buchner, G., 19m·3, 194-5, 37on·3, 37m·7, 373n.3, 376n. I, 382n·5 Bulls, 64n.6, 69n.I, 208 Buschor, E., 172, 18m'3 Bustards, Great, 130, 135, 208 Byvanck, AW, 322n.4 Calaurian Amphictyony, 337, 343 Callipolitis-Feytmans, Mrs 0., lO2n.7, lO8n'5 Cambitoglou, A, 26 Canciani, E, 202-5, 207 Carter, Miss T.H., 390 Catling, H.W, 15n.I Centaurs, 63 Cesnola Painter and Workshop, 172-4, 175-6, 195, 206, 210, 292, 316; 463-4 (Euboean) Chalices, Chiot, precursor of, 294
.
497
Chamber tombs, 181, 186, 223, 233, 268 Chamoux, E, 33, 38n·7, 44 n. I, 35 m. 2 Chariots, charioteers, 37-8, 56, 61, 63, 67, 69, 172, 206-7; chariot burials in Cyprus, 384; charioteers' robes, 39, 56, 62n-4 Charitonides, S., 95n.3 Cilicia, dating evidence, 320-1; revolt against Assyria, 385-6 Cimmerians, 376-80 Cintas, P., 386-8 City-states, rise of, 3, 333 Clairmont, C., 303 Clay, fabric: Attic, provincial, 196; Corinthian, 91, 103; Aeginetan, 103; Argive, 112; Asinaean, II2; Thessalian, 158; Naxian, 168, 172; Parian, 172n. I, 176; Tenian, 177n.I; Thasian, 172n.2; Melian, 181; Theran, 185-6, 366; Euboean, 190; Boeotian, 196; Laconian, 214-15; Rhodian, 276 (imitations of Levantine fabric), 279; Coan, 287; Samian, 289; Chiot, 294, 298 Close-Brooks, Miss j., 355nn.9-lO, 389n.2 Cocks, 208 Coinage, invention of, 362 Concentric Circle Group, 34, 74-6, 133, 145, 3 13 Cook, J.M., 4, 53-4, 56n. I, 57nn·3-4, 60-4, 72n. I, 73n.2, 79-81, IIon.I, 132, 145n.5, 206n.3, 2II, 297nn-4,I4, 329n.I, 338, 349 n.8, 376nn.2-3, 377n. I, 381 Cook, R.M., 79, 180, 294n. lO, 333, 337, 37m. 8, 377nn·3,7 Corcyra, foundation of, 228, 367, 370, 474 Corslet, Argos, 363 Courbin, P., 3n.l, 5, lO8n'3, II2nn.I,3, II6, II8, 12m.5, 125, 136-40, 142n.I6, 264n.9, 362n.6, 363llll.4,6,10 Crowfoot, j.W, 304, 307 Culican, W, 347n.I, 387, 388n.4 Cumae Group (Corinthian), 105, 231, 366 CyproGeometric, influence from Greek Geometric, 320, 384nn.2-4; influence on Greek Geometric, 75, 88, 101, 208, 242, 244, 250, 252-3, 256, 264, 266, 269, 275-7, 281-2, 287, 346, 356-7, 380-1 Cyprus, Attic exports, 21, 319, 349, 361, 384; Euboean exports, 192n·5, 3 19-20, 354, 384; Cycladic exports, 157, 319-20, 337, 354, 384; dating evidence, 318-20; Phoenician colonization and commerce, 347, 38 1, 390 Dance Painter, 140-1, 144-5 Dancers: Attic, 56, 63, 64n.6; Argive, 140-1, 143,
498 .
GENERAL INDEX
GENERAL INDEX
146; Boeotian, 205; Laconian, 217-18; East Greek, 296 Daniel, ].E, 318n.3 Davison, Miss ].M., 2, 29n·3, 30nn.I,3,5, 33, 42, 52n.I, 53-5, 60-4, 67n. I, 68, 70n.I, 72n.2, 73n. 2, 77n.2, 79n.3, 80n.I, 81, 3IOn.2 Dedalic style, 2Il, 383 Deer: Attic, 40, 52n.I, 62-3, 64ll.6, 75; Argive, 143; Cycladic, 173-4; Boeotian, 207; West Greek, 229, 232; Cretan, 254, 261 Delphic oracle and colonization, 373 Demargne, P., 386-7 Desborough, Y.R.d'A., 4, 7, rr, Il3, 148-50, 212, 221-2, 234n.2, 264n.8, 305n.3, 3IOn.3, 318n.I, 328n·3, 333n. I, 335, 338-40 Dikaios, P., 384n-4 Diodorus Siculus, 381 Dionysios of Halicarnassus, 386n.5 Dionysos.ia
Dipylon, grave monuments, 30-4, 177, 349-51; their precursors, 18, 20, 23, 26-8, 350 Dipylon Master and Workshop, I, 29-41,43-5, 48-g, 50n.6, 52, 54-6, 61-2, 65n.2, 72, 75-6, 127-8, 174, 200-I, 205-6, 2IO, 244, 281, 286, 328-g, 331, 349-5 1, 358 Does, 207 Dogs: Attic, 62, 73, 76-7, 79-80, 89, I09, 329; Boeotian, 208; West Greek, 229, 231 Dohan, Mrs E.H., 316-17 Dontas, G., 364ll.8 Dorians: in Caria, 339; in Crete, 339-40; in the Dodecanese, 339, 341 Dragendorff, H., 171, 186 Droop, ].P., 212, 214-16 Ducat,]., 322n.I, 324n.3 Dugas, C., 186, 188n.3, 189n-4 Dunbabin, TJ., 9m.I, 98, I05n.2, 302n.l, 317n.8, 322, 324n·3, 343n.6, 352n·7, 353n.8, 354ll·5, 36m. IO, 362n.l, 372n-4, 374, 38m. 2, 382n. IO, 384n . I Egypt, dating evidence, 316-17, 327; scarabs, 317, 327, 37° Eilmann, R., 289-90 Elba, as source of iron, 371 Elgin, Lord, jewellery, 349 Eliot, C.WJ., 360n.2 Empedocles Painter, 77-81, 83, 89, IOO, 331 Ephoros, 363n.I Epidaurians, colonizers of Cos, 339
Eratos, king of Argos, 286, 363 Eretria, Old, 354 Eridanos, river, cemetery, 336, 349 Etruria, Etruscans, 2, 9 1, 355, 370-I, 376, 383; fibulae, 355; Greek metoikoi, 370-1, 381; impasto pottery, 370; mineral wealth, 371; Orientalizing movement, 389 Eusebius, 322-3, 326, 372n·4, 377 Fabric, see Clay Faience, 340, 349, 355, 381 Fence Workshop, 134-5, 140n.2, 142n.I4, 144, 217 Fenestrations, 61, 71, 86, 183, 202, 225, 249 Fibulae: Attic, 344, 349; Thessalian, 347n·5; Boeotian, 200, 206n.3, 367; Etruscan, 355 Figurines: clay, attached to vases, 61, 276 (faces); bronze, 366n.2, 383 (Syrian); ivory, 361 Filling ornament: Attic, 28, 41, 44, 67, 70, 76,80; Argive, 124, 130, 134-6, I38-g, 144; Cycladic, 173, 176; Boeotian, 208, 2IO; Cretan, 248; East Greek, 279; Alishar IV ware, 379 Fish: Corinthian, I06; Argive, 124, 130, 134-8, 144; Boeotian, 195; West Greek, 232; East Greek, 292, 297 Flamingoes, 130, 140, 144, 217 Forrer, E., 387n.6 Forrest, WG., 353n.7, 369n.I Fortifications, Old Smyrna, 376 Foxes, 76 Fretwork, 60 Frezouls, E., 387n.6 Furtwangler, A., 212 Fusco type kraters, 141-2, 146 --'7, 375n.7 Gadrooning, 18, 20n.7, 50-I, 272 Gela, colonial pottery: Cretan, 257n·4, 375, 382; Rhodian, 329, 375 Gezer, 307 Girdle strings, 141 Gjerstad, E., 276n.4, 304n.3, 318-20, 347n.2, 384ll.3, 386,390n.2 Glass, Phoenician gem, 349 Goats: Attic, 40, 44, 63 (winged), 69; Argive, 143; Cycladic, 173-4, 184, 254; Boeotian, 207; Cretan, 261; Chiot, 295 Gold: Attic bands, zon.j, 21, 47, 52, 344, 350n.I; Attic earrings and fibulae, 349; Eretrian bands, 368; Cretan jewellery, 254ll.I, 382; Rhodian bands, 380; Rhodian discs, 38m.3; Ephesian jewellery, 284n.I2
Grace, E, 206n.7 Graffiti, 358-g Graham, AJ., 357n.6, 367n.2, 377n.6 Granulation on goldwork, 349 Grey monochrome ware (bucchero): Aeolian, 155n.3, 262, 297, 338, 377; Phrygian, 378 Griffins (?), 3I7 Guarducci, Miss M., 358n.4, 359n.6 Gunn, B., 316n.I Hagg, R., 132n.I Hahland, W, 72n.I Hamilton, R.W, 303 Hammond, N.G.L., 338n'3, 353n.2 Hampe, R., 6In.I, 200, 207, 351 Handmade pottery, 3n.I; Corinthian, IOI; Argive, Il9, 142; Thessalian, 159; Macedonian, 159 Hanfmann, G.M.A., 297n.IO, 298n.I, 320-1, 385n.I, 386n'3 Harden, D.B., 386n.6 Hares, 76, 208 Hazael, king of Syria, 305, 480 Hazor (Israel), chronology, 305-g, 318 Hekatompedos at Heraion, Samos, 289, 478n.7 Helbig, W, 317 Helmets, 58, 6m'3, 81, 143, 206, 363 (Kegelhelm), 379 (Corinthian) Hencken, H., 382n.Il Hens, 208 Hera Akraia (Perachora), 98, 352-3 Hera Limenia (Perachora), 353 Heraldic Group (Naxian), I74 Herodotus, 338n.8, 339n.4, 343n.6, 352, 361 Herons: Attic, 82; Corinthian, 99-IOO, I03, I05, I07, IlO, 324-5; Argive, 131, 143, 145; Euboean, 194-5; Laconian, 218; West Greek, 227, 231; East Greek, 286 Herrmann, H-Y., 366n.2 Hesiod, 367, 370 Higgins, R.A., 20n.6, 344n.2, 349nn.2-3 Himmelmann-Wildschutz, N., 21, 50n·7, 55, 57, 59-60, 62n.5, 68 Hirschfeld Painter and Workshop, 38n'5, 41-4, 45, 48, 54, 69, 76, 79n·3, 80-1, 130n. I, 173n·5, 174, 177, 184, 206-7, 2IO, 218, 331, 360-1 Hittite lions, 253 Homer, 390 Hooked Swastikas, Workshop of, 65, 66-7, 80-1, 133, 331 Hope Simpson, R., 336n.I
.
499
Hoplite armour, 363 Horses, painted: Attic, 13, 21, 25, 27-8, 39-40, 43-4, 56, 58, 61-4, 66-7, 69, 73-7, 79-82, 304; Argive, 124, 129- 3° , 133-4 1, 143-6; Cycladic, 173-4, 184; Euboean, 195; Boeotian, 206-7; West Greek, 232; Cretan, 241; Samian, 292-3, 379 Horses, plastic, on pyxis lids: Attic, 22-3, 48; Boeotian, 203 Human figures: see Men, Women Hunt Group, 76-7, 295n.6, 331 Hunting scenes, 76-7, 205, 207-8 Huxley, G.L., 214ll.4, 338n.3, 352nn.3-4, 362-4 Hyblon, Sicel king, 373 "Hydria Hand", 6m.4, 80 Iapyges, Iapygian Geometric, 372-3, 375 Iaubi'di, king of Hama, 385 Ida, Mount, votive shields, 249, 382 Imbrasos, river, inundation of, 289, 293 Impasto pottery, Etruscan, 370, 372 Incision, 146, 293, 461 Inlay technique in goldwork, 349 Ionian capture of Smyrna, 338, 376 "Ionian cups", 290, 32In.I Ionian Migration, 338-9, 341 Iron foundry at Pithecusae, 371 Isis Grave, Eleusis, 21, 249 Israel, kingdom of, 305ff. Isserlin, B.SJ., 388n.4 Italo-Corinthian pottery, 371 Ivories: Arslan Tash, 347; Attic korai, 361; duck's head, 344; Idaean Cave, 347-8, 357; influence on pottery, 275, 285, 347, 38m·3; Lindos, 346, 38m·3; tusks at Al Mina, 384 Jeffery, Miss L.H., 358, 37m'5, 380nn.I,5 Jehu, king of Israel, 305-9 Jenkins, RJ.H., 2Il Jeroboam 11, king of Israel, 307, 359, 482 Johannowski, W, 37m.I2 Johansen, K. Friis, 5, 75n.4, I07n.I, 179n.IO, 243n.9, 285n·5 I02n.6, I05n.2, I06, 275, 281, 284ll.II, 285n·5 Kahane, P., 4-6, 8, 29n.I, 33, 36n.2, 40n·3, 44, 51, 53, 73n. 2, 3 IOn. I Kahil, Mrs L., 172n.2 Karageorghis, Y., 208n·3, 384n.4 Karkar, battle of, 385 Karouzos, C., 172n.9
500 . GENERAL INDEX
Kenyon, Miss K.M., 304, 307-IO, 313 Kings, Books of, 307nn.3,5 Kirk, G.S., 28n.5 Kition, Tyrian colony, 347-8 "Knickerbocker Workshop", 52n. I Kondoleon, N., 168; 172, 180n.7, 18m'5, 368n.3 Kourouniotis, K., 189 Kraiker, I03n.8, 350n.2 Kiibler, K., 8, II, zon.j, 73n.I, 303n.2, 322n.3, 325n·9 Kunze, E., 29n.2, 3on·4, 3 1, 33, 4 1-2, 44 n. I, 53, 55, 73n.2, 79, 165n·3, 167, 200-1, 205n·5, 347nn·5-6, 357n·4, 382n·7 Lamb, Miss W, 294n.3 Lambros Workshop, 34ll·3, 44-5, 70, 331 Lamis, founder of Thapsos, 322 Lane, E.A., 212, 215-17 Lawrence, Miss P., 93n.2, 95n.I Lelantine War, 368-70, 376 Lelegians, 296 Lion Painter, 53-4, 65n.6, 67, 70, 73-4, 80, 89, IIO, 329, 331 Lions: Attic, 63-4, 74; Argive (?), 143n.I4; Cycladic, 184; Boeotian, 207; West Greek, 229, 232; Cretan, 253, 383; East Greek, 295-6; on fibula, 349 Livy, 325n.l3, 355 Lo Porto, G., 373n.6 Lorimer, Miss H., 206n.5 Lotus flowers, 246, 253 Lullies, R., 79 Luristan, type of pendant, 383 Lyres, 143, 285, 297 Maisler (now Mazar), B., 307, 309 Malea, Cape, 346, 352 Mangers, 139, 144, 207 Mannheim Painter, 8I, 331 Marwitz, H., 75 Massow, W von, 215 Matz, E, 53n.6, 89n.4 Maxwell-Hyslop, Mrs K.R., 383n.5 Mellaart, 377n·9, 378n.7 Mellink, Miss MJ., 379 Men: Attic, 27-8, 37---g, 43, 56, 58, 62, 66, 69, 72-3, 75, 76-7, 81-2; Argive, 129, 136-40, 14$ Cycladic, 173n.8, 184; Euboean, 195; Boeotian, 205-6,2IO; Laconian, 217-18; West Greek, 232; Cretan, 253, 261; East Greek, 285, 292, 295, 297
GENERAL INDEX
Mercenaries, Greek, in Phrygia, 379, 386 Mermnad dynasty, 378 Mesha, king of Moab, stele, 359 Mesogeia Painter, 54, 64n.6, I09, 2IO Metalwork, influence on pottery: bronze horses, 174; cauldrons, 61, 361; Cretan Orientalizing reliefs, 253-4, 347; Rhodian gold bands, 273 Metopal systems of decoration: Attic, 24-5, 36-7, 49-50, 52, 65-7, 70-2, 74, 80-1, 89---g0, 360; Corinthian, 74, 99-IOO, I05-6; Argive, 123-5, 127-8, 131, 133, 137, 139, 362; Thessalian, 161, 163; Cycladic, 171, 174-5, 178, 180, 183, 185, 188, 367; Euboean, 192-3; Boeotian, 208---g, Laconian, 213, 217; Cretan, 241, 243, 247, 251-2, 260; East Greek, 278-80, 283-6, 288, 291-3, 295, 297-8; Etruscan, 370-1 Midas, king of Phrygia, 378-80, 386 Miniature style (Argive), I35-6, 144 Minyan ware, 161 Molione twins, 351 Morricone, L., 38m.4 Mould for terracotta figurines, 383 Mourners: Attic, 21, 26-7, 38, 43, 56, 61-3, 69, 79n·3, 350, 382; Argive, 14$ Boeotian, 2II; Samian, 291-2 Multiple brush, use for concentric circles, 335-6. Use freehand: Attic, 24, 64n.6, 88; Corinthian, 96, 99; Argive, II2, 121, 124ll.6, 128-9, 13r6, 139-40, 144; Thessalian, 162; Laconian, 217; East Greek, 273 Mycenaean IlIb pottery, 2, 333, 336 Neleids at Athens, 351 Neleus, founder of Miletus, 338 Neo-Hittites, 3Io-II Nestor, 351 Nestor inscription, Pithecusae, I04, 278, 286, 358n-4 Nottbohm, Mrs G., 2, 33, 42, 55 N-Painter, 286 Octopus, 254 Ohly, D, 36m.8 "Oinochoe Group", 33 Omri, king of Israel, 305---g Opificius, Miss R., 379 Orlandini, P., 326n.5 Orsi, P., 374 Palestine, dating evidence, 302-IO, 480-1 Palm-trees, 285, 288
Panoply grave at Argos, 131, 362-4 Paris CA 3283, Painter of, 82 Passas Painter, 207 Pausanias, 338nn.I,8, 352, 36m.IO, 362-4 Payne, H.G.G., I05n.2, I06, 233, 323, 326 Pelasgians in Skyros, 342 Pelicans, 130, 208 Pfuhl, E., 97n.I, 171, 179, 186 Pheidon, king of Argos, 36m.IO, 362 Philadelphia Painter, 54, 56, 57-8, 60-1, 62n.I, 82, 295n.6, 329, 331 Phoenicians, 333, 345-6, 348, 357-8, 38$ imitations of Greek pottery, 333, 387-9; influence on Greek pottery, 179, 191, 250, 275-6; masonry, 309; in Odyssey, 390; settlement in Cyprus, 347; in Rhodes, 381, 390; in West, 2, 333, 386-9°; writing and inscriptions, 3Im.I, 347n.2, 358-9, 379-80; trade with Etruscans, 389. For pottery, see also Red Slip, Black-on-Red Phrygian pottery, 378-9; metalwork, 378; writing, 379-80 Pigs, 27 Piraino, M., 322n. I Plutarch, 353n.I, 367, 37on.2 Polos headdress, 238 Polybius, 385n.8 Potters, as distinct from painters, 73, 79, 280; travelling, 71, 147, 175, 334 Propontis, Greek colonization, 377 "Protocorinthian Geometric", 9m.2, 98 Protogeometric pottery: Attic, 8-IO; Corinthian, 9 2-3, 197; Argive, I 13; Thessalo-Cycladic, 149-5 1; Boeotian, 196-8; Laconian, 212-14; West Greek, 220-3; Cretan, 234-5; East Greek, 263-5; historical significance, 335ff. Protomes, clay, 254n.l, 291; bronze "Assurattaschen", 370, 378 Pseudo-Skymnos, 342 Punic pottery, 333, 387-9 Ramath Rahel, "Phoenician" masonry, 309 Rattle Group, 7I-2, 292, 331 Red Slip, Phoenician pottery, 275, 345, 370 Relief pithoi, In 368 Rhys Carpenter, E., 359n.3, 386n.6, 389n.3 Richter, Miss G.M.A., 350 Riders: Attic, 56, 63, 66; Argive, 143; Chiot, 295; Phrygian ivory, 379 Ridgway, n, 355n.8 Riis, PJ., 3 II-12, 333, 345n·3
.
501
Robertson, C.M., 5, 28n'4, 96n.2, I05n.2, 226-7, 232n.8, 298n. I, 353n.IO, 382n.6 Rope handles, 17, 95, 121, 199 Rottiers Painter and Workshop, 182-5 Round field~ of decoration, 20, 26, 51, 291 Rubensohn, 0., 172n.3, 176n.I Saflund, G., 372n.8, 373 Sargon Il, king of Assyria, 3°6-8, 3Il, 380, 383, 385-6 Scarabs, 46, 316-17, 327, 355n.9, 36m.7, 365, 370, 39° Schafen ]., 187n.6, 368n.3 Schefold, K., 354n-4 Schliemann Painter and Workshop, I37-8, 139, 142n ·5 Schweitzer, B., 2,46, 75, 182n.3, 184n.3 Seals, North Syrian, 370, 383 Selinus, dating evidence, 324n.3 Sennacherib, king of Assyria, 385-6 Shabaka, Pharaoh, 316 Shalmaneser Ill, king of Assyria, 3II-12, 343, 345 Shefton, B., 363n.IO Sheshonq I, Pharaoh, 305, 3°7-8, 309n-4 Shields: Dipylon type, 28, 38, 69, 72-3, 143; round, 56, 58, 61, 143, 206n·4, 295; square, 143; terracotta models, 28, 143, 249n.I4 Ships: Attic, 28, 56, 77, I03, 143n.I4; West Greek, 23m. IO; Chiot, 295; on fibulae, 344, 349-50 Shipwrecks, 76 no. 3, 195 Siamese Twins, 30n.I, 143, 351 Siceliot Geometric, 375-6, 388 Sicels, Sicel Geometric, 373-6 Sicilian colonies, dating evidence from foundations, 9 1, 302, 322-7, 332-3 Skeat, TC., I02n.6, 153n.I2, 16m'3 Smith, R.R.W, 183n.5 Smithson, Mrs E.L., 14, 29n.3, 32, 239n.I, 264n.I3, 336n.5, 360n. I Snakes, plastic: Attic, 44, 56-7, 60, 67n.2, 68, 79, 82; Boeotian, 201, 204; Laconian, 216; Rhodian, 280 Snodgrass, A.M., 58n.2, 363nn·7---g, 379n.4 Soldier-birds: Attic, 40, 57, 65; Corinthian, I05, I07-8, IlO; Argive, 134-5, 138, 144; Euboean, 193-5, 315-16, 369; Laconian, 217 Soldier-bird Workshop, 64-5, 81, rro, 331 Soloi, Greek colony, 385-6 Solomon, king, 306-8 Sparring Horses, Painter of, I33-4, 135, 144-5 Spear, thrusting, 206
502 . GENERAL INDEX
Sphinxes, 63, 103, 143 Spits, 13 I, 362 Stags: Attic, 27; Argive, 124; Melian, 184; Boeotian, 207; fr. at Syracuse, 326 Stathatou Painter, 62-4 Strabo, 325, 326n.l, 338n.l, 342, 354-5, 363n. l, 365, 367n·3, 373n·7, 381, 385n·9 . Strem, Miss I., 17m.2, 176, 202n.8, 379n.2 Stubbings, EH., 336n.1 Sub-Dipylon Group, 54, 55-'7, 61, 67-9, 89, 210, 331 Subminoan pottery, 234, 259n. lO, 339-40 Submycenaean pottery, 338 Swan Painter, 70-1 Sword-belts, 206n.1 Syria, North: bronze bowl in Athens, 344; dating evidence, 310-16; local pottery in Greek Geometric style, 189, 193, 310, 314-15, 384; resident Greeks, 189, 228, 310-16, 333, 345-6, 348, 357~, 384-5 Table, votive, 285n.6 Tanith, sanctuary at Carthage, 386-7 "Tapestry Hand and Workshop", 33, 55, 65n.2, 67n.2, 252 Tataie's lekythos, 4 Taylor, Miss J. du Plat, 287n.4, 312-13, 318-20, 345n.2, 347n.2, 384n·5, 385n.6, 388n·4 Taylour, Lord W, 372nn.8-1O, 373nn.2,6 Technau, W, 290 Temenos, Lot of, united by Pheidon, 363 Thapsos class (Corinthian), 97, 99, 102-4, 107, 140, 209, 226-7, 23m. I1, 317, 322-5, 375, 387 Theocles, founder of Leontini, 374 Tholos tombs, 158, 255, 258 Thucydides, 2, 302, 322-7, 338n.l, 369-70, 373nn.8~, 374 Tiglath-Pileser III, king of Assyria, 306-8, 3I1, 383 Timaeus, 386-7 Tolle, Miss R., 59, 210 Trees: Attic, 63; West Greek, 232; Cretan, 246, 253 Trees of Life, flanked by heraldic animals: Attic, 63, 81 (no animals); Cycladic, 174, 189 (with birds); Boeotian, 207-8 Trigger handles, 153-4, 159, 162, 198 Tripods, representations of, 66, 143 Tripod stands: clay, 15; Cypriot bronze, 46, 340 Tufnell, Miss 0., 309nn.7,9 Tumulus, Great, at Gordion, 380 Unguents, trade in, 346-7, 380-1,
388~0
Urartu, Urartians, 3 I1, 354; cauldrons, 370, 378; helmets, 363; see also Assyria Ure, P.N., 350n.2, 36m.lO, 362n.3 Uzziah, king of Judah, 307 Vallet, G., 99, 324-5, 355n. 13, 37m. 2, 374-5 Verdelis, N.M., I13n-4, 133, 136, 159n.6, 16m.3 Verdelis Painter, 135-6, 138~, 144 Verhoogen, Miss v., 57 Villard, E, 30nn·3,5, 31-3, 38n.8, 42, 44n. l, 53, 54nn. I - 2, 57n.2, fion.r, 79, 99, 324-5, 374-5, 388n·7 Villard's Group, 3 1 - 2 , 43, 45 Vulture-Wurzburg Group, 60, 86 Wade-Gery, H.T., 362n.3 Walter, H., 28gff. Wars: against Melia, 376; Argos v. Sparta, 363-4; Athens v. Aegina, 343, 36m.lO, 366; Chalcis v. Eretria (Lelantine), 368-70, 376; Sparta v. Messenia (First Messenian), 364-5 Webster, T.B.L., 28n·4, 351 Weinberg, S., 5, gmn.I-2, 98, 103 Wells, Attic, in Agora, 360n.1 Welter, G., 343n.3 Wheel Group ("Parian"), 180 White paint, added: Attic, 57-8; Corinthian, 97, 100, 106, 315; Argive, 140-1, 143, 146; Euboean, 194; Cretan, 247, 252, 256-7; East Greek, 295n.6 Wigs, layer, 2I I Will, E., 353nn.12,14 Willemsen, E, 238n.8, 254n.I1 Wirebirds: Corinthian, 105, 107; Argive, 134-5, 141, 144-5 Wohkere: see Bocchoris Women: Attic, 21, 39, 43, 56, 58, 62n·4, 69, 72, 79, 82; Argive, 140-1, 143, 145-6; Laconian, 218; Cretan, 238, 261; East Greek, 2g1-2 Woodwork, influence of, on pyxis lids, 17 Woolley, Sir L., 3840.7 Workshop, definition, 2gn.3 Wrestlers, 129 Wright, G.E., 305n.6, 307 Wiirzburg (Vulture-) Group, 206, 21 I Yadin, Y, 307 Young, R.S., 55, 6m.1, 62n.4, 75, 85n.l, gm.l, 140, 363n. lO, 378n'5, 380 Zapheiropoulos, N., 23on.13 Zechariah, Book of, 307n-4
