Some of the white-ground kylikes are only partially so; the exterior is

painted in the ordinary R.F. manner, of the “strong” style, as in the

case of the Anesidora cup in the British Museum. On the other hand, a

fine cup at Gotha has a red-figured interior and polychrome

exterior.[1420] In the Munich collection there are three very beautiful

cups of this kind.[1421] The interior subjects are respectively Europa

on the bull, a frenzied Maenad, and Hera. The cup with the Maenad is

attributed by Furtwaengler to the style of Brygos, and may therefore be

dated about 470–460 B.C. It is rare to find a large vase decorated in

this method, but there is a very fine krater of the calyx type in the

Museo Gregoriano at Rome,[1422] which has been attributed to the middle

of the fifth century (contemporary with Euphronios’ later manner); the

subject is the delivery of the infant Dionysos to the nymphs of Nysa,

and is painted throughout in polychrome on a white ground. Of late

years some very fine pyxides in this style have been found in

Greece,[1423] often decorated with marriage scenes, the style of the

painting being contemporary with Duris and Brygos. But for beauty and

delicacy all are surpassed by some of the smaller cups, above all the

Aphrodite cup from Kameiros in the British Museum,[1424] in which

refinement and grace are combined with boldness of conception and

accuracy of drawing in a marvellous degree. Or, again, the group of

cups and bowls by Sotades (see above, p. 445),[1425] some with

mythological or other subjects painted in minute and graceful style,

others of fantastic or unusual shape and decoration, form a unique

series among the white-ground vases.[1426]

To sum up in the words of A. S. Murray the characteristics of these

vases[1427]: “There was thus in the white vases an exceptional

opportunity for purity of outline in the drawing, and it is not without

reason that they are regarded as the best representatives we yet

possess of the great age of Greek fresco-painting, in which also purity

and sweep of outline on a white ground, simplicity of composition, and

a limited scale of brilliant colours, were the chief characteristics.”

It remains now to speak of the funeral lekythi as a distinct class,

their subjects and method of treatment.[1428] Although it was formerly

customary to speak of “vases of Locri” or “vases of Gela” in speaking

of examples found on those sites, it is almost certain that they are

all really of Athenian origin.[1429] Apart from the fact that the great

majority have been found at Athens, there are no special peculiarities

about those from other sites which would justify any such distinction

of fabrics. The same remarks apply to the numerous examples which have

been found of late years at Eretria in Euboea, and have caused some

recrudescence of the theory of non-Attic origin.[1430] But Eretria was

so near to Athens that importation must have been quite a simple

matter. In regard to the Locri vases, it has been noted by M.

Pottier[1431] that they seem to represent an _inferior_, though still

Athenian fabric, in which the white is more lustrous and less flaky

than in the better examples, and the outlines are in black exclusively.

Black silhouettes are occasionally found, and the subjects are not

necessarily funerary.

The funerary subjects fall into four classes; they will be enumerated

in Chapter XV., where examples of each class are given, but may be

briefly recapitulated here, in order to note some artistic

considerations.

(1) The _Prothesis_, or laying-out of the corpse (Plate LV.).

(2) The _Depositio_, or laying of the body in the tomb: chiefly in the

Thanatos and Hypnos type (see Fig. 123, Chapter XIII.).

(3) _The Journey to Hades_; Charon in his bark (see Fig. 122, Chapter

XIII.).

(4) _The Cult of the Tomb_, this being by far the most common of the

four classes (see Plate LV. and Fig. 19, p. 143).

The _Prothesis_ type is an old one, occurring not infrequently on

black-figured vases, especially on the slim “prothesis-amphorae” which

are sometimes found at Athens. M. Pottier reckons ten examples, to

which may be added a fine specimen now in the British Museum (Plate

LV., fig. 1). The _Depositio_ type is somewhat rare; it is occasionally

found in B.F. vases,[1432] but is usually idealised, the body being

carried by winged genii, to whom the names of Thanatos and Hypnos are

usually given. The type, as has been pointed out elsewhere, is

originally mythological, being derived from that of the burial of

Memnon. Some half-dozen examples are known (see Chapters XIII., XV.).

Of the Charon vases M. Pottier reckons twenty-one, which he classifies

under three heads: (1) Charon on the left in a boat, which two or three

persons enter. (2) Charon on the right in a boat; persons ready to

enter. (3) The deceased is seated on a stele at which women make

offerings; Charon approaches in his boat.[1433] The conception is

essentially a pictorial one, and it may reasonably be inferred that it

is a reflection of Polygnotos. The same subdued pathos and the same

style of composition are characteristic of his paintings. Pausanias, in

describing his _Nekyia_ in the Lesche at Delphi, says: “There is water,

which seems intended for a river, evidently the Acheron, and reeds

growing therein ... and there is a boat on the river, and the ferryman

at the oar.”[1434]

In the vases representing the Cult of the Tomb (Plate LV. and Fig. 19),

the normal type is that of two or three persons bringing offerings,

wreaths, vases, etc., to a stele[1435] ornamented with coloured sashes,

or engaged in conversation thereat; sometimes one sits on the steps of

the stele. The persons with offerings are usually feminine; where men

occur, they are either attired as warriors, or stand leaning on a spear

or staff, conversing with the women. The correspondence of some of

these compositions to the “type” of Orestes and Electra meeting at the

tomb of Agamemnon has more than once been noticed, but it does not seem

here to be a case of borrowing the heroic “type,” as in the Thanatos

and Hypnos instance. Where such scenes can be identified on

vases,[1436] they are all of late date and mostly of South Italian

manufacture; and we may rather suppose that the contrary was the case,

and that the lekythos “type” was idealised and borrowed for the Orestes

scene. Moreover, the popularity of the latter subject is probably

largely due to its treatment by the tragic poets.

Among other details of interest in these scenes may be noted the

appearance of the εἴδωλα or ghosts of the deceased, represented as tiny

hovering winged creatures. M. Pottier has noted eighteen instances, and

the number has since then been greatly increased.[1437] The invariable

youthfulness of the figures—which, it may be remarked, are always

purely impersonal; and mere _types_ of mourners—is noteworthy as a

characteristic of later fifth-century art, which tended to create

ideals of youth and beauty.[1438] This, of course, is everywhere

apparent in sculpture, as in the Parthenon frieze and the works of

Polykleitos; and reminiscences of Pheidian youthful types may be

suggested by some of the figures on the lekythi.[1439] In the figures

of deities the same change was going on, as in the case of Hermes, and

even the aged and grim figure of Charon is toned down on the funeral

vases to a more humane conception. It has also been suggested that the

choice of youthful figures is due to the thought that youth is the

period when bereavement produces its simplest and most natural effects.

The influence of the sepulchral stelae of the fifth and fourth

centuries soon begins to be apparent in the lekythi, especially in the

scenes of tomb-offerings.[1440] Like the vases, the stelae always

varied in merit, some being refined and artistic compositions, others

poor and commonplace. The choice of subjects, indeed, differs in some

degree, the subjects on the stelae relating chiefly to the previous

life of the deceased, those of the vases to the actual death and

burial. But there are many lekythi, the subjects on which are more like

those of the stelae, not being strictly funerary.[1441] Thus we see the

deceased as a warrior charging with a spear or on horseback, like the

Dexileos of the Kerameikos; the young hunter pursuing a hare; the lady

at her toilet with mirror or jewellery in hand, attended by her

maidens, like the charming Hegeso (Plate XLIII.); or the warrior

parting from his spouse.

Regarding the funeral lekythi in their artistic aspect, we note, as M.

Pottier points out, two main characteristics—restraint and uniformity

of composition. The space for the decoration being limited to about

two-thirds of the whole circumference, the figures are necessarily few

in number, varying from one to three, but very rarely more. Emotion and

pathos are produced by the simplest means. Murray instances the

prothesis lekythos in the British Museum (Plate LV. fig. 1) as an

example of deep pathos expressed in a simple, yet strong and rapid

manner, and two others (D 70 = Plate LV. fig. 2, and D 71) as showing

almost tragic emotion expressed only by a few outlines. Uniformity of

composition is manifested in the repetition of types, often copied from

familiar models, yet with an infinite variety of detail (as, for

instance, in the form of the stelae) which does not affect the

constancy of the main idea. In this respect they may be compared with

the terracotta Tanagra figures, of which many are turned out from the

same mould; yet by varying the pose of the head or position of the arms

the artist was able to avoid the absolute identity of any two figures.

The lekythi can hardly be classified chronologically; we cannot say to

what extent the rougher examples may be earlier, and _vice versa_; but

even in the poorest examples skill and lightness of touch are always

discernible. The classification given by M. Pottier,[1442] however, may

serve as a general indication of chronological succession and

development. He collects them under three heads, as follows:

(1) The paste is of a light red colour, the walls thin, and the white

slip unpolished; the main design is first sketched, then painted, the

outlines being usually in red. The ornaments are palmettes and

maeander, in black and red, the subjects almost exclusively funerary.

The slip and colours are delicate, the style fine, and the polychromy

restrained.[1443]

(2) The paste is grey, the walls thicker; the white is sometimes

polished, and the outlines black or brown. The ornaments are palmettes

and maeander, with crosses or stars, in black only. The subjects are

funerary or from daily life, with figures of deities; the style is

still fine, but the polychromy is more varied.[1444]

(3) The clay is red and light, the white unpolished, the outlines

yellow. The slip is not extended to the shoulder, on which is a

tongue-pattern in black; the maeander is careless. The subjects are

either funerary or from daily life, the style negligent; the designs

are almost entirely monochrome.[1445]

§ 2. THE DECADENCE OF GREEK VASE-PAINTING

We have now reached the point at which the centre of ceramic industry

is no longer to be found at Athens, but must be sought in distant

colonies in various parts of the Mediterranean. The extinction of

vase-painting as a decorative art at Athens was brought about as much

by political events as by sheer artistic decadence at the end of the

fifth century. It had until recent years been customary to assume that

red-figured vases continued to be made at Athens through the greater

part of the fourth century; but the evidence of excavations on many

sites has been too decisive for the maintenance of such a view. That

certain classes of ceramic products, such as the Panathenaic amphorae

and the funeral lekythi, still continued to be made we have already

seen; but these are only exceptions, and due entirely to their

religious associations.

The evidence for the revised chronology has been summarised by

Milchhoefer in a paper already referred to,[1446] in which he pointed

out the importance of historical considerations. Even during the

Peloponnesian War the manufacture and export of painted vases must have

been much crippled, and the absence of the later Athenian wares from

the tombs of Etruria clearly shows that commercial relations between

the two countries had ceased.[1447] Similarly intercourse with Campania

largely ceased after the Samnite invasion of 440 B.C., and relations

with Sicily must have been entirely broken off after the outbreak of

hostilities with Syracuse in 427.

Again, in the city of Rhodes, which was founded in B.C. 408, no Attic

vases have been found, while all those from Kameiros must be earlier

than that date.[1448] In Athens itself no R.F. vases of any importance

have been found in fourth-century tombs, although some fragments of

fine style are reported from the tomb of Dexileos, which is not earlier

in date than 394 B.C.[1449] Hence the conclusion is irresistible that

no good Attic R.F. vases can be assigned to the fourth century, which

is only represented at Athens by the funeral lekythi, the Panathenaic

amphorae, and a few isolated, generally inferior, R.F. specimens.

The new centres of vase-painting, from about 400 B.C. onwards, are

three in number—the Crimea, the Cyrenaica in North Africa, and Southern

Italy. Among the vases from the Crimea[1450] are some of the most

magnificent that we possess, which in spite of their florid style and

careless technique are really of considerable merit. They can, however,

hardly be considered to rank more highly than the best of the products

of Southern Italy, which we are now about to consider; in other words,

they belong to a later stage of development than the “late fine” style

of Attic R.F. vases, as represented by the Rhodian “pelike” with Peleus

and Thetis in the British Museum, and the Gigantomachia vase from Melos

in the Louvre. The fine krater with the contest of Athena and Poseidon

at Petersburg (Plate L.) is clearly a reminiscence of the Parthenon

pediment, and, allowing for the difference of style, cannot be earlier

than the closing years of the fifth century. Again, there is the vase

signed by Xenophantos,[1451] who, as we have seen, expressly calls

himself an Athenian, and on this ground has been regarded as a resident

in Panticapaeum (Kertch). The reliefs with which this vase is partly

decorated are examples of a tendency which hardly came into existence

before the fourth century; the subject also is more suggestive of local

taste.

It may be an open question whether these vases were imported from

Athens, but at least the vase of Xenophantos testifies to the existence

of a local fabric at Panticapaeum, and it is not at all unlikely that

the general upheaval brought about by the Peloponnesian War led to a

dispersion of Athenian artists, and thus to the continuance of their

art in other lands, but not in Athens itself. We shall see that this

largely accounts for the origin of the fabrics of Southern Italy. In

any case Panticapaeum was a place of considerable importance in the

fourth century, being the chief place whence the Athenians obtained

their supplies of grain, as we learn from the orations of Demosthenes,

such as the _Contra Phormionem_.

With the Cyrenaica circumstances were no doubt little different. But

the vases from this site, though similar to those of the Crimea, are

mostly inferior, of small size, and often of very rough character. Like

the former they exhibit a preference for polychromy and gilding.

Similar fabrics are also found in the Greek islands, such as Karpathos

and Telos, in the Troad, and elsewhere,[1452] but for the most part of

a very inferior character.

In the tombs of Southern Italy many vases are found representing the

same stage of development as those of the Crimea and Cyrenaica, varying

from large kraters with fine if florid designs, often enhanced by a

lavish use of white pigment, to inferior and almost worthless

specimens. Inasmuch as these vases are not distinguished by any

stylising tendencies such as enable us to classify the other fabrics of

Southern Italy and assign them to particular districts, and on the

other hand bear the same relation to the later R.F. vases of Athens as

do those of the Eastern Mediterranean, it is evident either that all

these fabrics were imported from Athens or that Athenian artists had

been driven to settle in these respective regions. And since it is

exceedingly unlikely that the exportation of pottery from Athens can

have gone on to any extent in the fourth century, it seems, on the

whole, most probable that the latter is the true version.

We may, then, establish a class of vases intermediate between the R.F.

fabrics proper and the local Italian fabrics, which represents the

manner in which Athenian artists carried on their traditions under new

circumstances, and serves to explain how the new Italian schools came

into being.[1453]

These vases are often characterised by a refinement of drawing and

simplicity of conception which recall the earlier R.F. period, and in

such cases accessory colours, elaborate draperies, and the filling-in

of the field with miscellaneous objects are studiously avoided. Even

the decorative patterns show considerable restraint. It is probable

that some of these belong to the latter part of the fifth century, even

if they are not actually imported from Athens. But there are others of

a distinctly florid kind, in which we may trace the influence of

Meidias and his school. The compositions are crowded with figures,

often placed at different levels (without indication of ground-lines),

and there is a general tendency to elaborate decoration, both by means

of white pigment and by richly embroidered draperies. As examples may

be cited two fine kraters in the British Museum, one with a scene from

the lesser Mysteries at Agra (F 68), another with Thetis and the

Nereids bearing the arms of Achilles (F 69). The bell-shaped krater is

by far the most favourite form, although practically a new one in Greek

ceramics; contrary to the usual rule, the reverse often has a definite

subject, in which accessories are used, although the tendency had begun

some time before the end of the fifth century to neglect the decoration

of the reverse in kraters and other large vases.

In its new home in Southern Italy this branch of Greek art had lighted

on a very favourable soil. The great colonies such as Tarentum, Capua,

Cumae, and Poseidonia, founded almost in the dawn of Greek history,

were not only as completely Hellenic as Athens and Corinth, but in

luxury and splendour even surpassed them at this period. Hence, art

flourished in such towns far more readily than in the distant and

comparatively barbarous regions of South Russia and North Africa. In

the character of their productions we shall see the nature and

condition of the inhabitants of Southern Italy reflected. The chief aim

is splendour and general effect; and both the size and colouring of the

vases indicate to some extent the luxury and magnificence in which the

people lived.

It must not, however, be supposed that vase-painting was a new art

introduced to this region by Athenians in the earlier part of the

fourth century. In another chapter we shall speak of the early attempts

at imitation of Greek vases on the part of the semi-barbarian natives

of the peninsula, and reminiscences of these early attempts crop up

from time to time under circumstances of greater development, as will

be seen. Moreover, a constant stream of importations from Athens (small

indeed as compared with that to Etruria, but still steady) had been

finding its way to the Greek colonies of Southern Italy and Sicily;

special fabrics were made for export to Nola, Gela, and other places;

and thus the local artists had all along been undergoing an unconscious

training which enabled them to take up the industry at the point where

the Athenian artists left off.[1454]

The local fabrics of Southern Italy fall into three main classes,

corresponding to the geographical divisions of Apulia, Lucania, and

Campania, which three, with some modifications, include all that come

under discussion in the present section. Before, however, entering upon

the question of the criteria on which this classification is based, a

few general considerations may be touched upon by way of preface.

The study of South Italy fabrics is to some extent a new one. At the

beginning of the last century, when scarcely any vases had been found

outside Italy, the majority of both public and private collections

consisted of vases of this period. Of those now exhibited in the Fourth

Vase Room of the British Museum, at least one-fifth are from the

collections of Sir William Hamilton, Charles Towneley, and Richard

Payne Knight; and in such publications as those of D'Hancarville,

Tischbein, Inghirami, and Millin, a great majority of the plates are

devoted to them. Hence their importance was much over-estimated; but,

on the other hand, no attention was paid to questions of style or

provenance, and they were only regarded as pretty pictures.

Subsequently to the discoveries at Vulci, and the gradual growth of the

scientific study of vase-painting, the later vases suffered greatly

from neglect, as yielding less interest than the early fabrics and the

products of the best Athenian artists, and even at the present day it

is rare to find them made the subject of serious study. The only

writer, in fact, who has attempted in recent years to apply to them the

critical methods of modern archaeology is Signor G. Patroni of the

Naples Museum, who has availed himself of the opportunities afforded by

the extensive series under his care.[1455]

The vases from Southern Italy, which from their style may be regarded

as undoubtedly local non-Attic fabrics, are all distinguished by

certain common features. In all there is seen a perpetual striving

after effect rather than beauty, manifested in the size and splendid

appearance of the earlier Apulian products, in the largeness of style

and bold drawing of Lucanian artists, especially the school of Paestum,

and in the gaudy colouring of the Campanian vases. The later Apulian

wares are chiefly remarkable for varied and exaggerated shapes.

Common to all vases alike is the fondness for ornamental patterns, such

as the egg-pattern, wave-pattern, maeander, palmettes, and wreaths of

laurel, myrtle, or ivy; though even these are guided by certain rules,

much as on the black-figured vases. On the large bell-shaped kraters

the decoration almost invariably consists of a laurel-wreath round the

lip, maeander below the designs, and palmette patterns under the

handles; and every shape of vase has its characteristic decoration. The

Campanian vases show the least tendency to formal ornament, and the

Lucanian run to the opposite extreme. The column-handled kraters are

almost alone in retaining the archaic scheme of decoration in panels

with borders of ornament, to which they adhere throughout the R.F.

period; but the panels are occasionally employed for hydriae or

oinochoae. In most cases, however, the luxuriant palmette patterns

under the handles form an adequate frame for the design with the

maeander band below. A female head frequently occurs as a decorative

motive, especially in the Apulian vases; either forming the main

decoration, or placed under the handles, or adorning the neck,

encircled with foliage. So too the figure of Eros is employed on the

later Apulian vases purely as a decorative motive.

The shapes of the vases present a very great variety, as compared with

the Athenian fabrics.[1456] The bell-shaped krater enjoyed a short

vogue, and is only found in the earlier examples; but besides the

column-handled type already mentioned, the calyx-krater (_vaso a

calice_) and the volute-handled (_a rotelle_) form occur from time to

time. Among the early Apulian vases a variety of the latter, with

medallions (_mascherone_) in place of the volutes, frequently occurs;

these are often of gigantic size, decorated with several rows of

figures, and nearly all the finest existing specimens are of this form.

It is also the usual type for the sepulchral vases (see below). The

medallions are ornamented with Gorgons’ masks and other devices,

coloured on a white slip. A peculiar local variety of the krater, with

four handles, is found in Lucania only (see p. 172).

Other vases for holding liquids are the situla, lebes, amphora, and

hydria, forms which are more or less familiar. The amphora is slender,

with more or less elliptical body; in Campania it is small and

squat-shouldered, the body almost cylindrical, but in Apulia it is

usually very tall and elegant (cf. Plate XLV.). An occasional variant

has a cylindrical flat-topped body, with elaborate handles in the form

of scrolls; the so-called _pelike_ is a more common type, but somewhat

inelegant. The hydria is usually a degenerate version of the R.F.

_kalpis_, but at Paestum the Attic type still obtains. A new form is

that known as the _lekane_, a jar for holding sweetmeats; it has

vertical handles and a cover of elaborate form, often surmounted by a

small vase. Of similar type is the so-called _lepaste_, a circular

covered dish on a high stem.

Among the smaller vases may be mentioned the oinochoë, of which there

are one or two varieties, notably the graceful _prochoos_, with its

high handle and foot, and the equally ungraceful _epichysis_, with its

long beak-like mouth and pyxis-shaped body; both of these are confined

to Apulia. The lekythos retains the bulbous body and low foot of the

later R.F. period; the askos in various forms is fairly common. Two new

varieties are a sort of alabastron without a handle but with flat base,

and a jar with a handle over the mouth. Of drinking-cups the kantharos

and rhyton are popular among the later Apulian wares; the kotyle is

rare, and the kylix has almost entirely disappeared, its place being

taken by a gigantic circular dish, elaborately decorated inside and

out. These are obviously designed with a view to general effect, and

seem to have been intended for hanging up against a wall.

In regard to the technique the general method is that of the later R.F.

vases; but in the majority all idea of simplicity and refinement is

lost, and the tendency to exaggeration and showiness is manifested both

in drawing and colouring. Throughout there is a fondness for large

masses of white, and this pigment is used not only for the flesh of

women and of Eros, but for architectural details and other objects,

such as temples, shrines, and lavers. Yellow is largely employed for

details, especially for features or hair, and for picking out the

ornamental patterns; purple, too, is not uncommon. Attempts at shading

are occasionally found.[1457] Accessory colours are, however, seldom

found on the reverses of the vases, which are always drawn and painted

with the greatest carelessness.

The drawing is entirely free, and in fact errs on the other side,

becoming careless and faulty; the forms are soft, and the male figures

often effeminate. An extreme facility of hand has indeed proved the

ruin of the vase-painter. The love of the far-fetched betrays itself in

variety of posture and elaborate foreshortening; and in the richly

embroidered draperies and studied settings of some scenes the influence

of the theatre is obviously to be traced. Frequent attempts are made at

perspective, especially in buildings of which the insides are shown,

but the attempts are seldom successful. As a rule the artist is content

to indicate figures in the background by placing them on a higher

level, or only showing the upper half of the figure. On many vases with

mythological subjects, especially those of Apulia, a row of deities is

thus represented, as if seated on the θεολογεῖον of the stage.

Landscape is represented by rocks, stones, and flowers scattered about,

trees and buildings; but in most cases the painter prefers the old

system of merely giving a clue to the scene, representing the palaestra

by jumping-weights or oil-flasks suspended, women’s apartments by

sashes, toilet-boxes, or small windows, and so on.

The pictorial effect of the scenes on many vases naturally gives rise

to the question to what extent the artists were indebted to the great

painters of the fifth and fourth centuries. In some cases the paintings

seem to be more naturally adapted for large canvases than for the

limited surface of a vase; but more than this, in others the subjects

actually lead our thoughts directly back to the works of great masters

of which we have record. The influence of Polygnotos and his school has

indeed died out, but the emotional tendencies of the fourth-century

painters and their fondness for new and difficult subjects found a

ready echo in the conceptions of the Apulian vase-painters. It may

suffice to quote a few instances from the British Museum collection.

Thus on one vase (F 479) we find a representation of the infant

Herakles strangling the snakes, a theme selected by the great Zeuxis,

and also to be seen in one of the paintings from the house of the

Vettii at Pompeii. Or, again, the famous sacrifice of Iphigeneia and

the death of Hippolytos, subjects which employed the brushes of

Timanthes and Antiphilos respectively, are depicted in a truly

pictorial manner on two kraters (F 160, F 279). In each case we are

able to note a correspondence with the description of the pictures

given by Pliny; in the last-named, also, with a picture described by

Philostratos. Were more known of ancient pictures, it is possible that

other examples would be readily found; but that some such influence was

exerted can hardly be questioned.

Again, in the later vases with opaque designs on black grounds (see p.

488), most of which are merely decorated with wreaths, festoons, or

masks, we are at once reminded of the Pompeian wall-paintings, or

rather of their predecessors in the Hellenistic Age, since the vases

must be earlier than most of the pictures of Pompeii. There is a vase

of late date in the British Museum (F 542) which, with its elaborate

treatment of light and shade effects and its border of arabesques, not

only in its subject (a young shepherd and his dog), but also in method,

suggests a close connection with the Pompeian frescoes.[1458]

Another influence at work on the vases of the period besides that of

the great painters was that of the stage, in which both tragedy and

comedy play their part. The influence of tragedy as represented on the

Greek stage is seen not only in the choice of subjects, but in the

composition of the scenes and the costumes of the figures. This is

especially the case with the large Apulian vases with mythological

subjects. The architectural arrangements, with a temple, altar, or

statue in the centre, the embroidered draperies and gorgeous tiaras

worn by the principal personages, and the abundance of dramatic or even

passionate action, can only be due to the influence of the stage. But

it is only to Euripides that we can ascribe this influence. There

appears to have been a great revival of his plays towards the end of

the fourth century, especially in Magna Graecia, and the extent of the

effect of this revival on the vase-paintings has been discussed by

several writers. The tendency of the age to passion and pathos, seen in

the Pergamene sculptures and other great works of art, as well as in

the paintings of a Parrhasios or a Timanthes, would naturally find an

echo in the subjects treated of by Euripides. Of the existing dramas,

we find scenes drawn more or less directly from the _Hecuba_, the

_Hercules Furens_, the _Hippolytos_, the two _Iphigeneias_, the

_Medeia_, and the _Phoenissae_. Many others can be traced to the lost

dramas, as for instance (to quote only from examples in the British

Museum) the _Alkmena_, the _Oineus_, the _Antigone_, the _Andromeda_,

the _Oinomaos_, and the _Lykourgos_.[1459]

It has been observed that on many vases of this period on which

mythological subjects are represented, although the theme is

essentially tragic, yet the treatment has a somewhat grotesque, not to

say burlesque effect. A notable instance is the well-known vase of

Assteas in Madrid, with Herakles destroying his children (Fig. 107).

This quasi-comic element, which appears to be quite unintentional, is

often accompanied by considerable largeness of scale, exemplified in

the size of the figures, the expression of the features, and the

drawing generally. It may be that a certain element of exaggeration

attended the revival of tragedy in Southern Italy,[1460] caused by

unsuccessful attempts to retain the lofty manner and large style of the

old productions. Hence too, perhaps, the fondness for burlesques of

tragedies among the comic writers of the period, reflected in another

class of vases.

In the vases with comic subjects it is not necessary to have recourse

to the Attic Comedy, New, Middle, or Old, to account for their

introduction; an explanation lies nearer at hand. It is true that the

costumes worn by the actors are closely related to those of the Old

Comedy,[1461] and that one or two subjects may possibly be traced to

the _Frogs_ of Aristophanes (see Chapter XV.). But it is not likely

that these plays were ever revived in Southern Italy, as were those of

Euripides. They were essentially topical, and their political and

social satire would have been lost on a later generation. On the other

hand, we know that a kind of farce, known as the φλύαξ was especially

popular with the people of Tarentum and other towns of Southern Italy

in the fourth century, either dealing with subjects of daily life or

burlesquing mythology and heroic legends. It was during the performance

of one of these in the theatre at Tarentum that the spectators saw the

Roman fleets entering their harbour in 302 B.C.[1462] The best-known

writer of _phlyakes_ was Rhinthon, whose _Amphitruo_ was the original

of Plautus’ play of that name; a scene from this may be portrayed in a

vase in the Museo Gregoriano at Rome.[1463] His plays, to judge from

the titles, were mainly burlesques; but all literary remains have

perished, and we can only form an idea of them from the vases.

In many of these scenes the actual stage is represented; in others we

have merely the figure of a comic actor, sometimes in a grotesque

attitude. The figures almost invariably wear masks and padded stomachs,

their dress consisting of a close-fitting leather garment with sleeves

and tight trousers, over which is a short loose tunic (see Fig. 105);

on their feet are the traditional _socci_ or low shoes of comedy, and

there is one instance of an actor wearing gloves. The subjects of these

vases have been dealt with elsewhere,[1464] and need not be

recapitulated here; the example given in Fig. 105, a burlesque of

Herakles and Auge,[1465] may serve as typical. They have a peculiar

style of their own, and can hardly be classed with any of the known

fabrics, though found all over Southern Italy. One is signed by the

painter Assteas of Paestum, but we look in vain for evidence of his

usual style thereon. They may all be regarded as belonging to the

fourth century.

[Illustration:

From _Jahrbuch_, i.

FIG. 105. BURLESQUE SCENE: HERAKLES AND AUGE.

]

Turning to the subjects in general on these vases, we note the

systematic supplanting of the old heroic myths by new subjects of a

dramatic and emotional nature. As in the case of the gods Zeus and

Athena are replaced by Apollo, Aphrodite, and Dionysos, so instead of

the labours of Herakles and Theseus we find themes drawn from the

stories of Troy and Thebes, or the legends of Pelops, Hippolytos,

Pentheus, and Lykourgos. The taking of Troy in particular is a popular

subject on the large vases, as are single episodes, such as Ajax

seizing Kassandra. Among entirely new subjects, introduced from the

tragedies, are those relating to Alkmena, Pelops, Oedipus, and the

later Theban heroes.

Cosmogonic myths such as the Gigantomachia and the Birth of Athena

entirely disappear, as do many of the myths connected with the gods; on

the other hand, such subjects as the contest of Apollo and Marsyas, the

Judgment of Paris, Triptolemos, or Europa and the bull, retain their

popularity. Herakles is conveyed to Olympos by Nike instead of Athena;

but his labours and combats are seldom represented. The typically Attic

subjects, Theseus, Eos and Kephalos, and the Birth of Erichthonios,

disappear as might have been expected, as does the wrestling of Peleus

and Thetis. Combats of Greeks with Centaurs and Amazons are favourite

subjects, but often little more than decorative.

Dionysiac scenes are very frequent, but usually in the form of groups

of figures without any particular meaning; Aphrodite, and even Apollo,

similarly occur in the midst of Nymphs and attendants, without special

characterising of the figures. A peculiar feature of the period is the

almost universal presence of Eros. Whether the scene be mythological,

Dionysiac, or from daily life, he is an almost invariable participant,

and on the later Apulian vases frequently occurs as a single decorative

figure.

Scenes from daily life are, if anything, more common than mythological

subjects. Banquet-scenes and revels are very popular, and the kottabos

is sometimes introduced (see Chapter XV.). A departing warrior is

sometimes represented on Lucanian and Campanian vases (see Fig. 108 and

Plate XLIV.), but chariot and battle scenes are comparatively rare.

Among the Apulian vases occur a large class of subjects formerly

characterised on insufficient grounds as “toilet scenes” of Aphrodite

or Helen. Many no doubt actually represent scenes from women’s daily

life; but the commonest type is that of a seated woman and a standing

youth exchanging presents of fruit, mirrors, sashes, or toilet-boxes.

The presence of Eros in most cases suggests scenes of courting and the

offerings of lovers; but as a rule they are purely fanciful, like the

designs on Dresden and Sèvres china.

Athletic scenes, in which a race or contest, is going on, are

practically non-existent; but groups of athletes, or rather of

_ephebi_, usually wrapped in mantles and conversing together, furnish

the stock decoration of the reverse of the kraters and other

double-sided vases, a practice already begun in the Athenian R.F.

vases, and now become invariable.

Two classes of subjects to which allusion has not yet been made, and

which are almost confined to the large Apulian vases, have an important

bearing on the purpose for which these vases were made—namely, for use

at funerals. The first class includes scenes from the under-world, and

in this series are some of the most magnificent of existing vases (see

Plate LII.). The subjects and the manner of their representation have

been fully discussed elsewhere (Chapter XIII.); they are treated in the

same theatrical style as the mythological scenes already discussed.

The second class is confined to scenes representing offerings at the

tombs of the departed, which may take two forms. In the simpler, which

is characteristic of Lucania and Campania, and especially of the hydria

form, the tomb is a stele, like those of the Athenian lekythi, at which

the relatives of the deceased meet to mourn or make offerings (Fig.

20). The “type” is that of Orestes and Electra at the tomb of

Agamemnon, but only in one or two cases is it possible to suggest this

interpretation. On the Apulian vases, almost exclusively on the large

kraters and amphorae, but sometimes also on the hydriae, a more

elaborate treatment of the subject is employed. The centre of the scene

is occupied by an Ionic distyle building representing a ἡρῷον or shrine

devoted to the worship of an ancestor or family “hero.” In the entrance

of this building (which is painted white to denote marble) stands or

sits the figure of a young man or a woman holding some attribute—a cup

or piece of armour—or standing by a horse. These figures are usually

painted white throughout like the building, which seems to imply that a

statue or relief is represented rather than an actual human

figure.[1466] On either side of the shrine figures are represented

bringing libations. Sometimes the actual tomb of the deceased is

represented with a plant growing in it; or, again, a lady is

represented at her toilet with her maid, as in the Athenian sepulchral

reliefs (Fig. 106). Each person is represented with his appropriate

costume or attributes—the warrior with horse or armour, the hunter with

dog, the lady with articles of toilet.

[Illustration: FIG. 106. APULIAN VASE WITH SEPULCHRAL SCENE (BRITISH

MUSEUM).]

In spite of the absence of “banquet” or “greeting” scenes, the

parallelism with the Attic reliefs is very marked, and the sepulchral

character of these vases is indubitable. It is, further, natural to

suppose that there is some reference to the worship of a ἥρως or

deceased ancestor, such as is known to have been a universal custom

among the Greeks.[1467] Reliefs have been found at Tarentum with

subjects which obviously have this reference. Apart from these two

classes, however, the majority of the vases of Southern Italy seem to

have been made originally for ornamental purposes, such as the

decoration of a house, as is implied by the distinction in the artistic

merit of the two sides.

Artists’ signatures in this period are exceedingly rare; only three, in

fact, are known. Of these one may be briefly dismissed—Lasimos,[1468]

who signed a fine Apulian vase in the Louvre, with sepulchral and other

scenes; his style is hardly distinctive enough to admit of identifying

any others as his work. But in the other two names, those of =Assteas=

and =Python=, we find more interest. Five vases exist with the

signature of Assteas, and one with that of Python, and it is

interesting to note that they both use the form ἔγραψε (see Chapter

XVII.). The list is as follows:

ASSTEAS. (1) Krater from Paestum in Madrid. Reinach, i. 168 =

Baumeister, i. p. 665, fig. 732 = Fig. 107. Herakles

destroying his children.

(2) Krater from Paestum in Naples (3412). _Wiener Vorl._ B. 2.

Phrixos and Helle.

(3) Krater from S. Agata dei Goti in Naples (3226). Millingen,

_Anc. Uned. Mon._ i. 27. Kadmos slaying the dragon.

(4) Krater from S. Agata dei Goti in Berlin (3044). _Wiener

Vorl._ B. 3, 1. Scene from farce (parody of Prokrustes?).

(5) Lekythos from Paestum in Naples (2873). Millin-Reinach, i.

pl. 3. The garden of the Hesperides.

PYTHON. Krater from S. Agata dei Goti in the British Museum (F 149).

_J.H.S._ xi. pl. 6. Alkmena on the funeral pyre.

The characteristics of Assteas’ work are very marked, and, curiously

enough, Python’s differs little from it. Both are essentially pictorial

artists, trained in Greek traditions, and inheriting from Attic

painters like Meidias the love of elaborate and minutely rendered

draperies and picturesque grouping of figures at different levels. In

the latter detail we also seem to see signs of the influence of

Polygnotos.

There are many other vases in our museums which present the same

features of style and treatment as these.[1469] Besides those already

mentioned, the fondness for half-figures in the background, the large

heads, pronounced features, and heavy masses of hair in the figures on

these vases connect them unmistakably with the school represented by

the two artists. It is not the style of Lucania or of Campania, still

less that of Apulia; and yet it is clearly an Italian fabric. Some

previous writers have maintained that Assteas came from (or was

resident at) Tarentum, arguing thus partly on epigraphical grounds,

partly on the ground of his employment of scenes from the farces,[1470]

which, as we have seen, were popular in that city. But having regard to

the fact that three out of five of Assteas’ vases were found at

Paestum, and that he combines certain characteristics of Lucanian and

Campanian fabrics, we may fairly assume that he (and therefore also

Python) resided in that city, which lay on the border of the two

districts.

We are thus enabled to establish a =style of Paestum= distinct from the

other Italian fabrics—a conclusion at which the present writer and

Signor Patroni arrived independently some years back. The latter has

pointed out that several small details also point to that city—such as

the gaily plumed helmet worn by Herakles on the Madrid vase, which

resembles those worn by local warriors on paintings found in that

city.[1471] And in the Naples Museum there are several other vases in

the style of Assteas from Paestum.[1472] Signor Patroni dates Assteas

about 350–320 B.C., Python a little later.

[Illustration:

From _Baumeister_.

FIG. 107. VASE BY ASSTEAS IN MADRID: HERAKLES DESTROYING HIS CHILDREN.

]

The Madrid vase and the Python krater are in their way masterpieces,

and form almost the finest examples we possess of South Italian

vase-painting. Both are extraordinarily rich in colouring as well as in

detail. The former (Fig. 107) represents, as has been said, Herakles

destroying his children the subject being treated in a manner which to

us appears almost grotesque, not to say comic. But it is probable that

this is due partly to the element of exaggeration which has been

ascribed to the revival of tragedy (see p. 472). The whole conception

is obviously theatrical, with the setting of Herakles and his child,

the principal figures, against a background formed, after theatrical

models, by the front of the palace, through openings in which appear

the horrified faces of Alkmena and Iolaos, and that of Mania, the

goddess of madness. Herakles has already set fire to a confused pile of

household furniture—tables, chairs, and wool-baskets—and a child clings

to him in agony, while Megara tears her dishevelled hair; but their

pleadings have no effect. In the Python krater the action is less

violent and theatrical, but there is the same gaudiness of colouring

and richness of embroidered costume. Alkmena is seated on the pyre, to

which Amphitryon and Antenor are about to set light, and raises her

hand in supplication to Zeus, whose bust is seen above. In answer to

her prayer the Hyades or rain-nymphs pour down water from their

pitchers to extinguish the flames. It should be noted that in this

painting we have several successive stages of time combined in one (cf.

Vol. II. p. 10); the pyre is not yet lighted, but the water is already

descending to extinguish it.

We now proceed to describe in detail the characteristics of the three

principal fabrics, beginning with that of =Lucania=, as the earliest in

character, if not necessarily in point of time. Lucanian vases stand

nearer to the latest Attic fabrics than do those of the other

districts, and do not present the same local peculiarities; nor do they

sink like the others into a state of decadence and barbarism, but are

very conservative in their style.

We note in them a much greater unity of style than in the vases of

Campania, and everything points to one centre of fabrication. This is

most probably Anzi, where the largest number have been found.

Information as to provenance is unfortunately often vague, but few

other places are given as sources (see p. 83), almost the only other

names being those of Pisticci and Pomarico. But the number of vases

that it is possible to attribute to Lucania is not large in any case.

The designs are usually somewhat severe and restrained, and

characterised by a certain stiffness of drawing and largeness of scale.

The heads of figures are abnormally large, with great staring eyes and

masses of hair rendered without detail. The draperies are comparatively

free from ornamentation, only broad black borders and patterns of small

dots being admitted. The clay is of a rich red colour, but accessory

colours are exceedingly rare. Hence they present a great contrast to

the Apulian and Campanian, with their masses of white and generally

gaudy appearance. Another peculiarity is that fillets in the hair are

rendered simply by leaving a narrow band across the head in the colour

of the clay. The figures often stand in the air without the usual

dotted ground-lines, but sometimes the ground is represented by a heap

of loose stones. A favourite device is that of a half-shield seen in

the upper part of the scene, as a sort of indication of locality or

action.[1473] Fig. 108 gives a typical example of Lucanian

vase-painting.

Among the favourite shapes are the bell-shaped krater and the amphora,

also the hydria and column-handled krater. The hydria is generally

employed, as in Campania, for sepulchral subjects. The vases are mostly

of large size, whence a corresponding largeness of the figures; whereas

Campanian vases are generally small, and make up for the absence of

imposing figures by their colouring. An entirely new shape, peculiar to

this style, is the four-handled krater, to which the name of _nestoris_

has been somewhat absurdly given[1474]; it is undoubtedly a local form,

being found in the indigenous pottery of the district.[1475] There are

two varieties, one with a high neck, the other with sloping shoulder

and no neck. The handles are usually ornamented with discs painted with

rosettes, and the designs are in panels surrounded by ornament,

sometimes on the second variety with a lower frieze of figures.

Generally speaking, secondary ornamentation is largely employed on

these vases, especially on the last-named shape. The palmette patterns

under the handles are usually very luxuriant.

[Illustration: FIG. 108. DEPARTURE OF WARRIOR, FROM A LUCANIAN KRATER

(BRITISH MUSEUM).]

The vases of =Campania= present in many ways a striking contrast to

those of Lucania. Their chief characteristic is, as has been noted,

love of picturesque effect and variety of colour, even to the extent of

introducing attempts at shading (see above, p. 471). The vases are

mostly small, and none of the large kraters or amphorae belong to this

class. The favourite shapes are the hydria, lekythos with bulbous body,

and amphora; the latter is clearly an imitation of the Attic “Nolan”

amphorae, which were so largely imported into the district, but the

body is usually more symmetrical. The clay is usually of a buff or dull

yellow ochre tone, and red and yellow washes are frequently used, as

well as large masses of white; these tints are laid on very carelessly,

and the white is of a kind that is apt to flake off and disappear.

Yellow, purple, and white are largely used as accessories, and the

drawing has a tendency to become very careless. The lines of the ground

are indicated by occasional strokes of white, or by rocks strewn with

flowers. Ornamental patterns are not so popular as in Lucania; the

favourite is the wave, and the palmettes under the handles are thick

and ugly, with angular leaves. Some decorative motives seem to be

derived directly from nature.

The subjects are often interesting and uncommon, introducing recondite

or unusual myths; many of the vases with comic scenes appear to belong

to this class, and one in the British Museum has an Oscan inscription.

Local peculiarities of costume and armour, which Signor Patroni calls

Osco-Samnite, are often found; for instance, warriors wear a very short

chiton with broad girdle, a helmet with waving crest and tall

side-plumes of Italian type,[1476] and a remarkable breast-plate formed

of three circular plates of metal arranged in a triangle.[1477] These

same peculiarities are found on the wall-paintings at Paestum, and

there are indications that Virgil was familiar with them.[1478]

Signor Patroni, by dint of an exhaustive study of the Naples

collection, has made a tentative classification of Campanian vases

according to fabric; he distinguishes those of Cumae, Saticula (Santa

Agata dei Goti), and Abella; but those of Capua, Nola, and Neapolis

appear to have no distinctive style. The Cumae fabric, for studying

which the _Raccolta Cumana_ in Naples gives exceptional facilities, is

represented by the long, straight-bodied amphorae, the hydriae with

female heads under the handles, and kraters on which the design is

framed by stylised floral patterns or heavy palmettes. Among the

characteristic patterns are the wave, large flowers in profile, and

ground-ornaments generally, such as ivy-leaves, branches, and small

windows. The strong tendency to polychromy seems to be the result of

using the late Attic polychrome vases as models. In the colouring a new

feature is the use of a carmine red, which, according to Patroni, is

only found in the Cumae fabrics.[1479] Mythological subjects are

rare,[1480] sepulchral common, and shrines are found on these alone;

but the majority have scenes from daily life,[1481] banquets, return of

warriors, etc. It is on these that the local costumes are usually found.

The Saticula fabrics are very uniform,[1482] practically all

bell-shaped kraters with red clay; colours are sparingly used, and then

only white; a maeander takes the place of the wave-pattern as a border;

ground-lines are usually indicated. Of subjects Dionysiac have the

preference. The vases of Abella are of late date, chiefly hydriae of

very pale clay with accessory colours; among the typical patterns are

arabesques ending in white daisies. They sometimes show reminiscences

of the Paestum style.[1483]

------------------------------------------------------

PLATE XLIV

[Illustration:

SOUTH ITALIAN VASES (BRITISH MUSEUM).

1, 2, APULIAN VASES; 3, CAMPANIAN.

]

------------------------------------

There are a few peculiar fabrics which we may also attribute to a

Campanian origin, including rude imitations of the B.F. style, chiefly

small amphorae with single figures; imitations of Nolan amphorae,

reproducing both their form and their scheme of decoration[1484]; and

bell-shaped kraters imitating the Attic style, which Signor Patroni has

associated with Saticula. The imitations of Nolan amphorae have a slim

body, twisted handles, and a sharply set-off shoulder forming a right

angle with the neck instead of a graceful curve. As in their

prototypes, the subjects are confined to one or two figures each side.

The lustrous black glaze of the Attic vases is admirably reproduced.

There is also a class of vases with designs painted in opaque red on

the black ground, reproducing the method of the transitional vases

described on p. 393.[1485] They are very rude in character, with

roughly incised details and subjects of a simple kind; the red pigment

appears to have been made from fragments of pounded pottery (_testa

trita_). There is, however, one remarkable exception—a small phiale in

the British Museum,[1486] dating from the third century, with the

subject of a shepherd-boy with his dog. The design is carefully painted

in opaque red and white in the style of the Pompeian wall-paintings,

and the effect of light and shade produced by hatched lines is both

remarkable and unique. A krater found at Civita Castellana

(Falerii),[1487] the paintings on which are in Campanian style, is

unique in having Latin inscriptions over the figures, a group

consisting of Zeus (... SPATER, _Die_]_spater_), Ganymede, Eros

(CVPIDO), and Athena (MENERVA). The subject is conceived rather in the

style of the Etruscan mirrors than that of the painted vases, and is

obviously under local influence. As Falerii was destroyed in 243 B.C.,

a _terminus ante quem_ may be obtained for the date of the vase, as for

others found on this site (see p. 75).

The vases of =Apulia= are not only more numerous, but of more merit and

greater interest than those of the other two classes. In them may be

observed two or three stages of development, beginning with a fifth- or

early fourth-century group of Attic type, consisting of large amphorae

with two friezes of figures.[1488] Both in shape and method of

decoration these form the prototype of the large kraters and amphorae

which comprise the second class; they are distinguished from the latter

by severity of treatment and absence of colour. The second class

includes the large vases with mythological and tragic subjects, the

Under-world vases, and those with sepulchral scenes; they are all

richly decorated from head to foot, with two main rows of figures,

smaller subjects on the neck, and ornamentation over every available

space. The theatrical characteristics of which we have spoken above (p.

472) are best illustrated by some of this series.

The third class includes some large vases, such as the so-called

_pelikae_ and the large phialae, and the smaller forms, the oinochoë

and its varieties, and kanthari, rhyta, and other kinds of

drinking-cups. Some shapes are peculiar to this class. In spite of the

great variety of shape, there is a remarkable poverty of conception in

the subjects, which show a tendency to become purely decorative, and

are mainly confined to the vague “courting” scenes or “toilet” scenes,

or to single figures of Eros and Nike. On the smallest vases the

commonest subject is often that of a female head covered with a cap,

sometimes of a relatively colossal size, and this also occurs,

surrounded by foliage, on the necks of the large vases. The shapes, as

in the case of the _epichysis_ (p. 179), often tend to ugliness and

over-refinement.

The conception of Eros on the later Apulian vases is one of their chief

characteristics (cf. Plate XLIV.). An almost invariable participant in

every scene, his form assumes an androgynous character; his hair is

arranged in feminine fashion, and his person adorned with necklaces,

earrings, and other jewellery. Among other peculiarities we may note

the double line of white or yellow dots for ground-lines; the

characterising of Oriental figures by tiaras and cross-belts; the

general treatment of the hair of women, at first long, thick, and

wig-like, but later gathered up in a cap, from which the ends float out

behind; the thick but effeminate proportions of the men; and the small

heads of the horses.

------------------------------------------------------

PLATE XLV

_To face page 486._

[Illustration:

APULIAN AMPHORA.

PERSEPHONE IN HADES.

(BRITISH MUSEUM).

]

------------------------------------

There does not seem to be any possibility of distinguishing different

centres of fabric in Apulia. Nor can Tarentum have been a centre of

vase-fabrics, although Lenormant stoutly upheld its claims, as the

chief centre of Greek civilisation in that region. But Tarentum has

been the scene of much excavation, and results do not point to that

conclusion; most of the vases found there are purely Greek. On the

other hand, enormous numbers have been found at Ruvo, and this was

undoubtedly the chief centre, though without a distinguishing style of

its own. Ruvo was famous for its red clay, and remains of furnaces and

potteries have been found there. Other sites where vases have been

found are Bari, Canosa, and Ceglie. At Canosa there was a preference

for the tall amphora with scroll-handles, the large phiale, and the

prochoös,[1489] and purple accessories were largely used here. It is

also interesting to recall that Canosa seems to have been the centre

for the large ornamental vases of terracotta painted in _tempera_ (p.

119).

On some of the column-handled kraters[1490] local costumes appear,

probably representing the Peucetians, and having some affinities with

those of Lucania; the principal features are the tall pointed cap and

short striped chiton worn by both sexes. Another group peculiar to

Apulia is formed by the fish-plates[1491]—a peculiar form of plate,

with low stem, a sinking in the centre, and edge turned over, all being

painted with fish of various kinds (Plate XLIV.). They were no doubt

used for eating fish, the sinking being for the sauce; but they may

also have been hung up as votive offerings in the temple of some marine

deity.

* * * * *

The last efforts of vase-painting on the soil of Magna Graecia date

from the latter half of the third century B.C. By this time

vase-painting had reached a stage of complete decadence, devoid of

style or taste, and rapidly verging on barbarism, as shown in some

specimens, which seem to be the efforts of local craftsmen to copy the

better examples, but with the same want of success as the

Etruscans.[1492]

Another direction which vase-painting took before it finally

disappeared is illustrated by a group of vases mostly found at Egnazia

(Gnathia) in Apulia, which clearly form a final stage in the evolution

of the local fabric just discussed. Originally known from the place

where the majority was found as _vasi di Egnazia_ or Gnathia vases,

they were in the view of Lenormant more probably made at

Tarentum.[1493] But we have seen that there is slight evidence of local

fabric there,[1494] and their connection with the fabrics of Ruvo and

Canosa makes it more likely that they came from that neighbourhood. It

is therefore probable that the old name is the correct one.

The characteristics of this group are: (1) the black varnish with which

the _whole_ vase is covered; (2) the designs painted in opaque

colours—white, purple, and yellow; (3) the tendency to imitate vases of

metal, as seen in the vertically ribbed bodies and other details of

form. The important _rôle_ played by the black varnish is interesting,

as showing the increasing tendency to reduce the painter’s labour to a

minimum, combined with a striving after novelty and the rejuvenation of

the art. The practice, no doubt, arose from the discovery of the

painter that it was easier to paint the figures on the black in opaque

colour than to trace them out in the clay and work round them with the

varnish, especially in the case of the elaborate foliage patterns which

played so important a part in Apulian vases.

The subjects are usually confined to the shoulder or neck, at least of

the larger vases; but figures are comparatively rare. One krater in the

British Museum (F 543) which belongs to the comic series is a notable

exception; and there is a pleasing subject on a skyphos in the

Louvre[1495]—a cock and goose confronted, and greeting one another with

the respective salutations, “Ah, the goose!” “Oh, the cock!” But in the

majority of cases the only designs are female heads, Erotes (Fig. 118),

birds, comic and tragic masks suspended from wreaths, and simple

foliage patterns. The reverse of the two-sided vases is often

undecorated.

[Illustration:

FIG. 109. HYDRIA WITH OPAQUE PAINTING ON BLACK GROUND, FROM CURIUM

(BRITISH MUSEUM).

]

It is interesting to note that specimens of this ware are sometimes

found on Greek sites, such as Athens, Myrina in Asia Minor, Melos, and

Cyprus. At Curium in the latter island a fine hydria in this style,

with figures on the shoulder (Fig. 109), was found in 1895.[1496]

Whether these were imported from Italy or made elsewhere is quite

uncertain.[1497]

[Illustration:

FIG. 110. PHIALE WITH LATIN INSCRIPTION: “THE CUP OF AEQUITIA”

(BRITISH MUSEUM).

]

Another interesting but much smaller class which belongs to the latter

half of the third century is formed by a group of vases, mostly small

phialae, which are distinguished by bearing painted Latin

inscriptions.[1498] Some also have figures (Eros, a female head, etc.),

which are treated in the same manner as the Gnatia vases. It is

probable that Rome was the place of origin of this class, in spite of

the fact that most of them were found in Etruria.[1499] But the Latin

language at that time was more at home in Campania than anywhere else

outside Rome. The inscriptions take the form: AECETIAI POCOLOM,

_Aequitiae poculum_ (B.M. F 604 = Fig. 110); IVNONENES POCOLOM,

_Junonis poculum_; and so on,—Saturn, Mercury, and other Roman deities

being included in the list. Reasons have been given for dating this

series in the First Punic War, 260–240 B.C.

* * * * *

Formerly it was universally supposed that the art of vase-painting was

brought to an end in 186 B.C. by the action of the Roman Senate when

they issued their edict against Bacchanalian ceremonies, which

undoubtedly affected Southern Italy. But this was only a natural view

to be taken by writers who associated the painted vases with the

Eleusinian mysteries and similar ideas; on other grounds it is hardly

tenable. Especially in regard to the general putting back of the

chronology of the art, it is impossible to suppose that painted vases

with mythological subjects were still made in the second century. The

character of the mid-third-century vases just described is sufficient

to indicate that they represent the last stage to which Greek painting

could ever have reached.

§ 3. FIGURE-VASES AND VASES WITH RELIEFS

We propose to conclude this sketch of the history of Greek

vase-painting with a few words on a principle which, while always

present in Greek pottery, yet at all times lay in the background, until

the latest stages of the art, when it entered on a phase of increased

popularity. This is the principle of combining the ceramic with the

plastic art—in other words, the manufacture of vases in the form of

human or animal figures or heads.

It has already been noted, in discussing the primitive pottery of Troy

(p. 257), that the idea of associating the vase form and the human form

is a very old one. At Troy it is of course seen in its most rudimentary

stage, when correct modelling was a thing quite beyond the potter’s

scope, and he could only roughly indicate features and limbs on the

surface of the vase, which thus always remained a vase, and the figure

idea never gained, as in later times, the predominance. In the

Mycenaean period the advance in modelling was great, but only reached a

high level in Crete. It is only since the discoveries at Knossos that

we have been able to account for the astounding group of porcelain

_rhyta_ from the Enkomi tombs in Cyprus (see Plate X., fig. 4),[1500]

which at first sight seem to have been made by a sixth-century artist,

so admirable and lifelike are they. Although the rams’ heads bear the

palm, the female heads are, for the period, a _tour de force_, so

advanced in type that it would be pardonable to argue—apart from the

circumstances of their discovery—that they must belong to a later stage

of art.

Apart from these, however, the principle did not find its way into

Greece before the seventh century B.C., and then its origin is

indubitably Oriental. It is best exemplified by the discoveries in

Rhodes, especially at Kameiros,[1501] where vases of porcelain and

terracotta are found modelled in the form of helmeted heads or heads of

animals (see Plate XLVI., fig. 1, and p. 127). The type adopted is that

of the aryballos (p. 197); it was no doubt a comparatively easy matter

to model its spherical body into the form required, applying paint

where necessary to bring out the details as on the vases. In the

Western Mediterranean the _alabastron_ form seems to have been more

popular.[1502] It is often adopted for the Canopic vases of Etruria

(see Chapter XVIII.). Many of these are unpainted, or rather are

covered with a white slip and then painted in _tempera_ like the

ordinary terracotta figures; they are, in fact, figurines in essence,

vases by accident; whereas in the first-named group the vase idea

retains the predominance. But it is almost impossible to draw the line.

A fine early instance of imitation of metal in early Greek pottery is

the British Museum jug from Aegina (A 457) terminating in the head of a

Gryphon.

------------------------------------------------------

PLATE XLVI

[Illustration:

GREEK VASES MODELLED IN VARIOUS FORMS (BRITISH MUSEUM).

1, 6, SIXTH CENTURY; 2, 4, 5, FIFTH CENTURY; 3, FOURTH CENTURY.

]

------------------------------------

During the sixth century painted figurine vases are rare, though there

are not wanting various examples of the class just described, which

belong to this period; but at all events hardly any examples can be

traced to Athenian manufacture during the age of B.F. vase-painting.

Towards the end of the century, however, the fashion was reintroduced

by the potter Charinos, who belongs to the transitional period (about

525–500 B.C.). A vase signed by him, which was found at Corneto, is in

the form of a female head surmounted by a _kalathos_.[1503] It was made

in a mould like the terracotta figures, but the painted decoration,

which is remarkably elaborate and minute, is entirely B.F. in

character. The patterns on the head-dress include maeander, stars,

ivy-leaves, lozenge and net patterns, and a minute frieze of animals,

painted in black on the clay ground. A similar vase, but later in date,

is in the Berlin Museum[1504]; in this example we may note the

introduction of R.F. ornamentation, in the palmettes and diapering

round the top.

These two stand at the head of a series of similar vases extending

throughout the succeeding periods down to the end of the age of painted

vases. They compare for style with the heads of the female statues

found on the Acropolis, which belong to the same period. Two other

potters, Kaliades and Prokles, made similar vases.[1505]

The fashion started by Charinos continued throughout the fifth century,

but the plastic conception tended to become subordinate to the ceramic,

and it became more and more customary to decorate the non-plastic

portions in the manner of the vases. Of this development the most

noteworthy example is the beautiful rhyton in the British Museum in the

form of a Sphinx (E 788), the upper or vase part of which is ornamented

with the subject of Kekrops and Erichthonios. The body of the Sphinx is

covered with a fine white slip, and the details are picked out with red

and gilding. This vase dates from about the middle of the century.

There also exist many examples of rhyta or kanthari, formed of a head

or two heads back to back, usually a Maenad and a Seilenos.[1506]

Another favourite type is that of a jug in the form of a negro’s or

Aethiopian’s head[1507]; and there are also rhyta which terminate in

the head of a lion, mule, or other animal finely modelled (Plate XLVI.,

figs. 2, 5).

Towards the end of the fifth century there is a reversion to the purely

plastic figure-vase, usually in the form of a lekythos with spherical

body, to the front of which the figure is attached (Plate XLVI., fig.

4). The vase is usually covered with black glaze, and the figure with a

white slip like the terracottas, with polychrome colouring. Examples of

this class are the series of lekythi representing Aphrodite Anadyomene

in a scallop-shell, of which there are examples at Athens and

Petersburg,[1508] and the fine vase in the British Museum (E 716) with

the bust of Athena Parthenos. A series of smaller lekythi, of which the

British Museum possesses examples (G 2–7), represents Eros on a

dolphin, the young Dionysos in a sort of canopy, Europa on the bull, a

boy with a dog, and other subjects; the technique is similar to that of

the larger specimens, with pink and green colouring. They form charming

little objects, and are often well executed.[1509]

In Southern Italy many of these types are continued, the most popular

being that of the rhyton ending in an animal’s head (p. 193), of which

many examples have been found in Apulia. They usually have some simple

design painted on the upper part, such as a figure of Eros. There are

also numerous examples of vases in the form of animals or human figures

(Plate XLVI., fig. 3), some of which are in black glazed ware with

patterns in white like the vases of Egnazia, others being covered with

white slip like the terracottas. With the decay of painted decoration

the plastic element gradually predominates more and more, until the

vase form becomes, so to speak, purely accidental. Thus in the third

century the fabrics of Canosa, of which we have spoken in a previous

chapter (p. 118), entirely hold the field, and the vases pass out of

the sphere of the history of vase-painting.

In all or nearly all of the vases just described we observe the same

principle at work—namely, the tendency to imitate metal in terracotta.

It is one that is constantly recurring throughout the whole history of

Greek ceramics, with more or less persistency and prominence.

Sometimes, as in the Melian, Proto-Attic, and other fabrics, the

imitation is limited to the form of the handles, which is, strictly

speaking, inappropriate in terracotta, though frequently found in early

bronze vessels.[1510] It is seldom found in Ionia, but in Western

Greece there are many examples during the seventh and sixth centuries,

as in some of the Proto-Corinthian and early Corinthian wares,[1511]

This is doubtless in a large measure due to the influence of the great

centres of metal-work at that time, Corinth and Chalkis. We are not,

therefore, surprised to find the tendency exemplified in the pottery

fabrics of those two centres, and at Chalkis, as has already been noted

(p. 321), it is especially conspicuous in the form and minor details of

the vases. At Athens examples are rare, with the exception of the vases

of Nikosthenes, who not only copies complete vases in metal, as in his

peculiarly-shaped amphorae and in a small _phiale mesomphalos_ in the

British Museum,[1512] but is also addicted to adorning the handles of

jugs with female heads in relief, as on specimens in the Louvre and

elsewhere.[1513] After the sixth century the tendency is far less

conspicuous, owing to the high esteem in which vase-painting was then

held, and little is seen of attempts at imitating metal until the

revival of the plastic element in pottery in the fourth century. An

almost unique exception is the Berlin krater from Corinth (2882), which

must date from the fifth century. It is of black ware, with designs in

relief round the body.[1514]

The tendency also manifests itself in a marked degree in another

direction in early Greek art—namely, in that of ornamenting vases with

reliefs. So much evidence of this has been yielded by discoveries on

Greek soil that it is now certain that this method of decoration had

its origin in Greece, and not in Etruria, although the close

resemblance between early relief-wares from Rhodes and the large πίθοι

of Cervetri (see p. 153) had led archaeologists in the past to regard

Etruria as its original home. The Etruscans always preferred modelled

vases or relief decoration to painted ware, as their _bucchero_ fabrics

show; but we know that they had no inventive power, and even in this

they have proved to be only imitators.[1515]

Turning to details of the early Greek vases with reliefs, we may note

that there are two varieties: firstly, those in which the reliefs are

made by rolling a cylinder round the vase, the design being repeated

over again; secondly, those in which the reliefs are made from separate

moulds, and attached with some kind of cement.[1516] In both classes

the shape usually affected is that of a large πίθος (cf. p. 151), of a

somewhat coarse red clay. It is the first variety which so closely

resemble the πίθοι found at Cervetri, and which are now known to be the

prototypes, not imitations, of the Etruscan examples.[1517]

------------------------------------------------------

PLATE XLVII

[Illustration:

From Ἐφ. Ἀρχ.

ARCHAIC PITHOS WITH RELIEFS FROM BOEOTIA (ATHENS MUS.).

]

------------------------------------

In Greece fragments of the first class have been found on the Acropolis

at Athens, the recurring design being a two-horse chariot which a

warrior mounts, with a scorpion in the field. The similarity in the

clay, the shape, and the technique of the reliefs with the Cervetri

vases is remarkable; the subject is one common on Corinthian vases.

Other fragments have been found at Tanagra, and there is a good example

in the Louvre with a series of figures, representing a dance of women,

all of similar types, yet not from the same stamp, but different

moulds.[1518] The variations of detail in dress and hair show

conclusively that the cylinder process is not employed here, but that

the figures are freely modelled from a single type. The costume is that

typical of the women on early B.F. vases (cf. p. 372). Some very fine

examples of πίθοι with reliefs, dating from the end of the seventh

century, have been published by De Ridder.[1519] They are all from

Boeotia, and are similar to those made in Rhodes, but with the

characteristic ornamental handles of metallic form. Here again the

figures are freely modelled with variations of detail, and they afford

interesting points of comparison with the painted vases and with the

early bronze reliefs which are variously attributed to Corinth and

Chalkis.[1520] One in Athens (_Cat._ 462) has the interesting subject

of Artemis Diktynna; another (_Cat._ 466 = Plate XLVII.), an

accouchement scene. Similar finds have been made in Kythnos, Tenos,

Crete, and Rhodes,[1521] the ornamentation being for the most part

purely geometrical, but sometimes with Centaurs or human figures.[1522]

In none of these examples is there any peculiarly Etruscan feature; all

is purely Hellenic, presenting close analogies not only with metal-work

in relief, but also with the Oriental art to which the Greek work of

that age was so much indebted, as in the case of the cylinder

process.[1523]

A new method of decorating vases, which first makes its appearance

towards the end of the fifth century, is by means of _appliqué_

reliefs. It is doubtless due to the influence of sculpture, and perhaps

more especially to that of the bronze reliefs which on vases and

mirror-cases were now becoming popular. The former influence is clearly

at work in the great Kertch vase with the contest of Athena and

Poseidon (Plate L.), where we may see in the two central figures, which

are modelled in relief and applied to the surface of the vase, an

undoubted reminiscence of the western Parthenon pediment. There are

also vases from Athens, Kertch, the Cyrenaica, and Southern

Italy,[1524] in which the figures are either partially or wholly

modelled in relief, like the vase of Xenophantos or a fine lekythos in

the British Museum (G 23) representing the rape of Kassandra by Ajax.

Another fine specimen, found at Cumae and now at Petersburg, has a

group of Eleusinian deities in relief on the shoulder.[1525] Yet

another example, recently found at Lampsakos, has the Calydonian

boar-hunt as its subject; the figures are in relief on a gilded

ground.[1526]

The imitation of metal technique[1527] is even more marked in the vases

of Southern Italy than in those from other parts. At Capua, Cumae, and

Metapontum amphorae, hydriae, and oinochoae are found, covered with a

very brilliant black varnish, but without any painted decoration; the

only ornament is in the form of gilded wreaths and other simple

patterns, or designs in relief. The British Museum has a fine series

from Capua with garlands of foliage and ornaments in the form of

festoons and pendants, the whole forming, as M. Collignon says, “a

brilliant and luxurious system of decoration which contrasts with the

sober taste of the Attic potters.” Some of the hydriae are clearly of

local fabric, imitations of the Campanian hydriae of bronze.[1528] The

forms are often very elaborate, with ornamental handles, ribbed bodies,

and moulded stems. An oinochoë has been found with an inscription which

gives the names of leῖa for smooth-surfaced vases, ῥαβδωτά for those

ribbed or fluted. Heavy imitations of the gilt and relief wares have

often been found at Alexandria,[1529] and isolated specimens occur in

Attica, Rhodes, and the Cyrenaica.

The growing fashion of using only vases of chased gold and silver in

preference to painted pottery made itself more and more felt both in

Greece and Italy during the Alexandrine period. The same tendency which

we have already noted, to reproduce as far as possible the

characteristics and appearance of metal, may be observed in all the

pottery of this period. Not only do the subjects moulded in relief

reproduce the appearance of the chased and _repoussé_ designs, but the

shapes are those of the metal vases, and even in the black glaze there

are attempts to produce a metallic effect. It is clear that the pottery

of this period presents throughout the effect of a striving after

outward show on the part of those who were unable to afford the more

precious metal for their household utensils, and were forced to be

content with imitating it to the best of their ability in the humbler

material.

In Greece this tendency is best illustrated by a series of vases known

as Megarian or Homeric bowls, of hemispherical form,[1530] without

handles. The former name was given to them by Dumont[1531] and

Benndorf,[1532] but with little authority beyond the fact that several

were found at Megara. But they might on equally good grounds be called

Boeotian, others having been found at Thebes and elsewhere in the

neighbourhood. They have also been found in Kalymnos, Crete, and

Cyprus, but the majority are from Thebes, Tanagra, and Anthedon.

Professor Robert thinks they may be identified with the _vasa Samia_ so

often mentioned by ancient writers (see Chapter XXII.), and refers to

the μαστοί dedicated at Oropos and Paphos.[1533] All are of red clay,

with a thin metallic black glaze giving a quasi-metallic appearance;

the hemispherical form is only departed from in one or two

instances.[1534]

The other name, Homeric, has been applied to them by Professor Robert

with reference to the well-known passage of Suetonius, which describes

Nero as using bowls (_scyphi_) called Homeric because they were chased

with subjects from Homer’s poems.[1535] Our clay examples would then be

reproductions of the chased metal vases, used by those who could not

afford originals, and corresponding in some degree to modern plaster

casts. It is true that only five of the examples we possess have

subjects from Homer; but most of the others may be so called as

belonging to the Epic cycle. They thus differ from most relief-vases of

the period, in that the designs are not purely decorative or

repetitions of simple motives, but are, so to speak, “illustrations of

the classics.”

Professor Robert distinguishes two classes: (1) those with figures made

from separate stamps, attached to the vase after it was made, and often

repeated; (2) vases made wholly, figures and all, in a mould, like the

Arretine wares.[1536] In the latter case they were doubtless made from

the same moulds as the metal vases, and of this we have an undoubted

example, not indeed among the “Megarian” bowls, but in analogous

specimens from Italy. It has already been noted (p. 134) that in the

British Museum there are two examples of a silver bowl with _repoussé_

designs, representing round the interior four deities in chariots,

which form part of a silver treasure found at Èze in the south of

France; and that in the same collection there is also a clay bowl

(_Cat._ G 118 = Plate XLVIII., fig. 5) which exactly reproduces the

silver vase in shape, size, and decoration.

Among the subjects we have the rape of Persephone[1537]; the sacrifice

of Iphigeneia; Achilles and Priam[1538]; the flight to the ships (from

the _Iliad_), the sack of Troy and the sacrifice of Polyxena; the

destruction of the suitors (from the _Odyssey_). From the Theban legend

we have the stories of Oedipus’s childhood and the Seven against

Thebes[1539]; other vases give the labours of Herakles or his rape of

Auge (Plate XLVIII., fig. 2)[1540]; and a jug made by Dionysios has the

interesting subject of Autolykos and Sisyphos.[1541] The British Museum

possesses a very interesting bowl with scenes taken directly from the

_Phoenissae_ of Euripides,[1542] and other comparisons with that author

may be made in the case of the bowls with Iphigeneia and Polyxena.

Sometimes the scenes are inscribed with verses from the poems or plays

illustrated, or with a prose description of the scene,[1543] or merely

with the names of the figures. The letters in all cases are raised. It

is clear that all these bowls belong to the same period and fabric, and

many small details point to the third century as their date. We may

bear in mind that this was the time of the great revival of Homeric

study at Alexandria.

------------------------------------------------------

PLATE XLVIII

[Illustration: GREEK VASES OF HELLENISTIC PERIOD: BLACK WARE WITH

RELIEFS (BRITISH MUSEUM).]

------------------------------------

In Italy the introduction of relief wares became general as painting

was abandoned, but did so gradually, not suddenly. In the third century

both existed side by side. The principle of a purely mechanical process

in pottery, which now first appears in the manufacture from a mould,

was not, strictly speaking, a new one in Italy, nor yet in Greece. It

is first seen in the early Etruscan and Rhodian vases (see p. 496) with

stamped and rolled-out designs repeated in long friezes. And we shall

see later how for several centuries moulded vases, in the form of

_bucchero_ ware, formed the national pottery of Etruria. There was

always in Etruscan, as also in Greek pottery,[1544] a tendency towards

the imitation of metal, and this tendency about the fourth century

seems to have spread over the rest of Italy, even to the Iapygian

Peninsula. Thus it is that the vases of Gnatia (p. 488) are largely

metallic in form and treatment, with their ribbed bodies and other

details. To the same cause is mainly due the series of Capua and Cumae

vases which has already been discussed, with its brilliant varnish and

gilding. Signor Gamurrini actually gave to the Italian black glaze

wares the name of “Etrusco-Campanian.”[1545] After the disappearance of

_bucchero_ ware similar vases came to be made at Cervetri, Chiusi,

Corneto, and Bolsena, the principal art centres of Etruria. At Bolsena

in particular they have been found in considerable numbers; and as this

city (_Volsinium novum_) was only founded in 264 B.C., a _terminus post

quem_ for their date is afforded.

A group of vases found chiefly at the last-named place[1546] does not

appear to have been covered with black varnish, but with a metallic

preparation of gold or silver, which has now mostly disappeared, and

they are left with the plain glazed clay. Some of these are not without

merit. In the general arrangement of the designs, usually in friezes

round the shoulder, there is obviously a reminiscence of _bucchero_

ware. The metallic preparation with which they were covered may have

been something of the kind which Athenaeus[1547] describes in speaking

of certain drinking-cups made at Naukratis, which “were dipped [in some

preparation] so as to appear silver.”

In Italy the manufacture of vases of black ware with reliefs appears to

have centred at Cales in Campania during the third century.[1548] The

principal type is that of a bowl, not of the hemispherical form, but

shallow, with the designs in the interior, either in the form of a

frieze or of a central medallion. These are usually called Calene

phialae, but it is not certain whether the majority were really made at

Cales. At all events, it is, like “Megarian bowl,” a convenient name

for the class. The British Museum bowl G 118, with the frieze of

chariots (see above), is a good example of the frieze type of design.

The subject, which is treated in a very spirited manner, is the

apotheosis of Herakles, who is conducted by Athena, Ares, and Artemis

to Olympos, accompanied by Victories. There is also a good specimen in

Berlin (_Cat._ 3882) with Odysseus and the Sirens. Another with

decorative patterns only, bears the signature of the potter, L.

Canoleios of Cales, in Latin letters.[1549] Examples are also given in

Plate XLVIII., figs. 3, 5, 6.

Of the type with central medallions comparatively few complete examples

exist, but the British Museum possesses a series of fragments on which

the medallions have been preserved.[1550] The subjects are usually

those characteristic of the Alexandrine period: Aphrodite, Adonis, and

Erotes; Herakles and Hylas, and others familiar from Theocritus; or

Trojan scenes, such as Thetis with the arms of Achilles or Paris

attacked by Deiphobos. A unique instance is that of Romulus and Remus

suckled by the wolf (G 125). Two names of potters occur—K. Atilius and

G. Gabinius. The date of these phialae is probably that of the Second

Punic War (about 230–200 B.C.). The designs, being taken from

moulds[1551] and inserted separately, are frequently repeated. The

fashion—obviously another instance of imitation of metal[1552]—of

adorning bowls with central designs also takes other forms at this

period. Simple heads of deities or Satyrs are found, and there are also

instances of facsimiles of Syracusan coins. Two bowls in the British

Museum (G 121–22) have in the centre copies of a decadrachm with the

head of Persephone (Plate XLVIII., fig. 4: cf. p. 210).[1553]

Analogous to these in character and technique are the series of small

lamp-feeders or _gutti_, a variation of the _askos_ form, which are

found chiefly in Southern Italy, but also in North Africa and the

Eastern Mediterranean.[1554] In the latter case they are usually

distinguished by having an arched handle over the back instead of the

usual ring-handle at the side, and the body is flatter. The Italian

type has a deep ribbed body, with a flat circular space on the top

containing a design in relief, made separately and inserted in the vase

(Plate XLVIII., fig. 1). The range of subjects is wide, but the

majority are mythological: heads or masks of a Dionysiac character or

of Medusa form a large proportion of the whole.

Larger vases of black ware with reliefs inserted or attached are

sometimes found, but are not common. The British Museum possesses two

good specimens—a krater (G 29) with panels inserted bearing

mythological designs,[1555] and a large covered jar (G 28) with the

inscription BASSVS in Roman letters, presumably the potter’s name. The

subjects, in two friezes, represent Erotes and festoons of vine-leaves,

and Poseidon and Victory, five times repeated.

* * * * *

The series of vases which we have been discussing are clearly paving

the way for the new development of pottery which prevailed throughout

the Roman period—that of the ware formerly known as Samian, but now

usually spoken of as Arretine or (a more comprehensive term) _Terra

sigillata_. This will of course be more appropriately dealt with in a

subsequent chapter under the heading of Roman Pottery. In the course of

the second century the Roman dominion spread over most of the Greek

lands, and Greek art as an independent entity almost ceased to exist.

It is, however, not a little remarkable at what a late date some forms

of distinctively Greek pottery lingered on in Hellenic regions, such as

Attica, Egypt, and Southern Russia. The subject has hitherto received

but little attention, and the materials have hardly been collected with

sufficient completeness to admit of adequate discussion and

classification.[1556]

-----

Footnote 1409:

See Hesych. _s.v._ πινάκιον; Athenag. _Leg. pro Christo_, 17, p. 293;

also p. 316.

Footnote 1410:

See Loeschcke in _Ath. Mitth._ 1879, p. 289 ff. The revision of

chronology since his article was written has only served to give

additional support to his view, bringing the white vases nearer in

date to the painted stelae.

Footnote 1411:

_Brut._ xviii. 70: see also Plut. _de defect. orac._ 47, 436 C;

Pliny, _H.N._ xxxv. 50.

Footnote 1412:

See _B.M. Cat. of Vases_, ii. B 613 ff.

Footnote 1413:

Winter in _Arch. Zeit._ 1885, p. 195 ff.

Footnote 1414:

_Ibid._ p. 187 ff.: cf. also Hartwig in _Jahrbuch_, 1899, p. 160.

Footnote 1415:

_Arch. Zeit._ 1885, pl. 12. Cf. B.M. D 22, 32; Dumont-Pottier, i. pl.

11; Rayet and Collignon, pl. 10, 1. The severe type of face should be

compared with Attic coins of the fifth century.

Footnote 1416:

Cf. _Arch. Zeit._ 1881, p. 35.

Footnote 1417:

Cf. B.M. D 65 and Fig. 19, p. 143.

Footnote 1418:

_E.g._ B.M. D 21, 33.

Footnote 1419:

As on the Anesidora cup in the British Museum (D 4) and the

Euphronios cup in Berlin (2282).

Footnote 1420:

_Mon. dell’ Inst._ x. 37 _a_; _Annali_, 1877, p. 287.

Footnote 1421:

_Cat._ 208, 332, 336; published in Jahn, _Entführ. d. Europa_, pl. 7;

Furtwaengler and Reichhold, pl. 49 (Fig. 121); and Overbeck,

_Kunstmythol. Atlas_, pl. 9, No. 19.

Footnote 1422:

Rayet and Collignon, p. 223: see _Anzeiger_, 1891, p. 69, where it is

attributed to Sotades.

Footnote 1423:

_E.g._ B.M. D 11 = Plate XLIII. fig. 1; _Mon. Grecs_, 1878, pl. 2 (in

Louvre).

Footnote 1424:

Also attributed by Furtwaengler to Sotades (_Anzeiger_, _loc. cit._).

Footnote 1425:

Formerly in the collection of M. van Branteghem: see his Sale Cat.

Nos. 159–66, and Plate XL.

Footnote 1426:

A complete list of white-ground cups is given by Hartwig,

_Meistersch._ p. 499. Among signed examples are the Euphronios cup in

Berlin (2282); those by Sotades and Hegesiboulos (p. 445), and also

_Mon. dell’ Inst._ x. 37_a_ (—νις ἔποιησεν).

Footnote 1427:

_White Athenian Vases_, p. 5.

Footnote 1428:

See generally Pottier, _Les Lécythes Blancs_.

Footnote 1429:

In the B.M. collection, D 52 is from Locri, D 28, 47, 63, 87 from

Gela.

Footnote 1430:

_E.g._ B.M. D 33, 54–7, 62; Athens 1625 ff.

Footnote 1431:

See Dumont-Pottier, ii. pp. 50, 53.

Footnote 1432:

Notably Athens 688 = Reinach, i. p. 164 (_Mon. dell’ Inst._ viii. pl.

4).

Footnote 1433:

For references to this subject on the lekythi see Chapter XIII., and

for a typical example, _ibid._, Fig. 122. For the different types see

(1) Athens 1662–63; (2) B.M. D 61; (3) Berlin 2680–81, Athens 1661.

Footnote 1434:

x. 28, 1.

Footnote 1435:

On the forms of the stele see Brueckner, _Ornament und Form der

attischen Grabstelen_.

Footnote 1436:

As for instance Naples 1755 = Baumeister, iii. p. 1848, fig. 1939.

See also Roscher, iii. p. 967; B.M. F 57.

Footnote 1437:

Cf. also B.M. D 54; Pottier, pls. 2, 4; and see Chapter XIII.

Footnote 1438:

We may recall the _dictum_ of Aristotle (_Poet._ 2) that Polygnotos

painted men better (or more beautiful) than reality.

Footnote 1439:

_E.g._ B.M. D 54, D 56; and another with horsemen unpublished.

Footnote 1440:

It may be noted conversely that Attic tombstones were often in the

form of lekythi (e.g. _B.M. Cat. of Sculpt._ i. Nos. 681–82, 687 ff.).

Footnote 1441:

See the list of non-funerary subjects given by Pottier, _op. cit._ p.

5. Cf. also B.M. D 21, 51, 57, D 19 and 24 (Nike), 31 (Iris), and 23

(priestess of Athena).

Footnote 1442:

_Lécythes Blancs_, p. 103.

Footnote 1443:

Examples are: Benndorf, _Gr. u. Sic. Vasenb._ pls. 26, 33.

Footnote 1444:

_E.g._ Athens 1626; Benndorf, pl. 18, fig. 2, pl. 20, fig. 2.

Footnote 1445:

_E.g._ Benndorf, pl. 24, figs. 1, 3.

Footnote 1446:

_Jahrbuch_, ix. (1894), p. 57 ff.

Footnote 1447:

Milchhoefer attributes this to Hiero’s victory in 474; but the date

seems too early compared with other evidence.

Footnote 1448:

The latest R.F. vase from Kameiros is the polychrome “pelike” E 424

in the British Museum. Furtwaengler (_Gr. Vasenmalerei_, p. 205)

gives reasons for dating it in the third century; but the

circumstances of its discovery at Kameiros render so late a date

improbable, apart from considerations of style.

Footnote 1449:

Hartwig in _Mélanges d’Arch._ 1894, p. 11.

Footnote 1450:

See above, p. 60, for the sites on which they have been found; also

the plates of the Atlas to Stephani’s _Compte-Rendu_ and of the _Ant.

du Bosph. Cimmérien_.

Footnote 1451:

See above, p. 447.

Footnote 1452:

_E.g._ B.M. F 4–7, 23, 27–9.

Footnote 1453:

See on this group of vases some very illuminating remarks by

Furtwaengler in his _Meisterwerke_, p. 149.

Footnote 1454:

See also what is said below (p. 485) on early Apulian fabrics.

Footnote 1455:

See his _Ceramica Antica_, _passim_.

Footnote 1456:

See generally Chapter IV., p. 162 ff.

Footnote 1457:

Cf. B.M. F 193, F 210, F 542.

Footnote 1458:

See also below, p. 485.

Footnote 1459:

The subject has been fully treated by Vogel, _Scenen Eurip.

Tragödien_; Huddilston, _Gk. Tragedy in Vase-paintings_; and

Engelmann, _Arch. Studien zu den Tragikern_: see also _B.M. Cat. of

Vases_, iv. p. 10.

Footnote 1460:

See _J.H.S._ xi. p. 228.

Footnote 1461:

See Körte in _Jahrbuch_, viii. (1893), p. 61 ff.

Footnote 1462:

Dio Cassius, _frag._ 39, _ed._ Bekker.

Footnote 1463:

Helbig, ii. p.314, No. 121 = Schreiber-Anderson, _Atlas_, pl. 5, fig.

8: see also B.M. F 150.

Footnote 1464:

See Chapter XV. § 3. They are also fully discussed by Heydemann in

_Jahrbuch_, i. p. 260 ff.

Footnote 1465:

See also Vol. II. Fig. 134.

Footnote 1466:

Cf. a tomb with paintings at Tritaea in Achaia described by

Pausanias, vii. 22, 4.

Footnote 1467:

Cf. Roscher, _Lexikon_, i. p. 2441 ff. (_s.v._ Heros); _J.H.S._ v. p.

105 ff.; _Brit. Mus. Cat. of Sculpt._ i. p. 293 ff.; Furtwaengler,

_Coll. Sabouroff_, i. p. 17 ff.

Footnote 1468:

Possibly a mistake for, or variation of, the name Dasimos, which

occurs on a fourth-century bronze votive helmet from Southern Italy

in the British Museum (_Cat._ 317).

Footnote 1469:

_E.g._ B.M. F 150–6; Naples 1778, 1779, 1782, 1787, 3248; and others

given by Patroni, _Ceramica Antica_, p. 77. A vase published by

Inghirami (_Vasi Fitt._ 1–3) is thought by Engelmann to be the work

of Python (_Ann. dell’ Inst._ 1874, p. 35). But this hardly seems

likely. The B.M. vase F 155 is much more after his style.

Footnote 1470:

Two of these vases in the British Museum (F 150–51) are in the style

of Assteas. Furtwaengler assigns all, including that signed by A., to

Campania. It is, however, more likely that they were mostly made at

Paestum. The one in Rome with Zeus and Alkmena (see p. 473) may be by

Python.

Footnote 1471:

_Mon. dell’ Inst._ viii. pl. 21.

Footnote 1472:

See note above and Patroni, p. 71.

Footnote 1473:

_E.g._ B.M. B 159, 160, 174.

Footnote 1474:

See above, p. 172.

Footnote 1475:

See Patroni, _op. cit._ p. 25, and Chapter XVIII. It appears in the

vase-painting given in Fig. 108.

Footnote 1476:

Cf. that worn by Herakles on the Assteas vase, Fig. 107.

Footnote 1477:

See Plate XLIV. and _B.M. Cat. of Bronzes_, No. 2845.

Footnote 1478:

_Mon. dell’ Inst._ viii. pl. 21 and _Annali_, 1865, p. 262 ff.: cf.

Virg. _Aen._ vii. 785; ix. 365. See also _B.M. Cat. of Vases_, p. 20.

Footnote 1479:

Naples 856; B.M. F 213 (?).

Footnote 1480:

Naples 2293 and R.C. 141 = Reinach, i. 387; Berlin 3023.

Footnote 1481:

B.M. F 191 ff.; Naples 871, 2855, 3368.

Footnote 1482:

Patroni thinks that such vases as Jatta 1498 (= Reinach, i. 110, 4)

have formed the model for these Saticula vases.

Footnote 1483:

_E.g._ Naples 2852.

Footnote 1484:

_E.g._ B.M. F 143–148; Naples 3093, 3129: see _Arch. Anzeiger_, 1893,

p. 93.

Footnote 1485:

_B.M. Cat. of Vases_, iv., F 523 ff.

Footnote 1486:

F 542: see above, p. 471.

Footnote 1487:

_Röm. Mitth._ 1887, pl. 10, p. 231.

Footnote 1488:

_E.g._ Reinach, i. 448 = _Arch. Zeit._ 1883, pl. 7; Dubois

Maisonneuve, _Introd._ pl. 69; Naples 3241 = Reinach, i. 384, 1–3;

Naples 2416, 2418, 2894, 2918, 3247; see Patroni, _Ceram. Antica_, p.

33, and Furtwaengler, _Meisterwerke_, p. 149.

Footnote 1489:

_E.g._ B.M. F 237, 238 (wrongly attributed to Campania in Catalogue).

Footnote 1490:

See B.M. F 297, 301, and _Ann. dell’ Inst._ 1852, pls. M, N, P, p.

316 ff.

Footnote 1491:

B.M. F 254–68; Berlin 3607–19; Naples 2542–61; Petersburg 1693–1710.

Cf. _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1894, p. 107, and _Ath. Mitth._ 1901, pl.

2 (an example from the Acropolis at Athens); also a plate inscribed

underneath [ΙΧΘVΑΙ] (Schöne in _Comm. Phil. in hon. Mommseni_, p.

653). See also p. 194 and Chapter XV.

Footnote 1492:

See Chapter XVIII. For examples of these degenerate vases see _B.M.

Cat._ iv. F 490 ff.

Footnote 1493:

In this he is followed by Rayet and Collignon (p. 328).

Footnote 1494:

Lenormant, however, states that they have been found at Tarentum, as

also in the neighbourhood of Lecce and Bari (_Gaz. Arch._ 1881–82, p.

103).

Footnote 1495:

Rayet and Collignon, pl. 13, p. 330.

Footnote 1496:

_Excavations in Cyprus_, p. 77, fig. 140.

Footnote 1497:

See also B.M. F 553; _Ath. Mitth._ 1901, pls. 3, 4, p. 70 ff.;

Pottier, _Louvre Cat._ ii. p. 276.

Footnote 1498:

See _Ann. dell’ Inst._ 1884, p. 5 ff.; Rayet and Collignon, p. 332.

Fourteen or fifteen examples are known.

Footnote 1499:

One was found by Lord Savile at Civita Lavinia (Lanuvium) in recent

years (_Notizie degli Scavi_, 1895, p. 45). They have also been found

on the Esquiline (see _Röm. Mitth._ 1887, p. 233).

Footnote 1500:

_Excavations in Cyprus_, pl. 3.

Footnote 1501:

For terracotta examples painted in _tempera_ see _B.M. Cat. of

Terracottas_, B 281–91; and compare B 286 with an example from

Cyprus, Perrot, _Hist. de l’Art_, iii. p. 697. See also Berlin 1292

ff.

Footnote 1502:

See for a terracotta example B 460 in B.M.; also B 203–4 from Rhodes.

Cf. Dumont-Pottier, i. chap. xiii.

Footnote 1503:

_Röm. Mitth._ v. (1890), pl. 11, p. 313 ff.

Footnote 1504:

_Cat._ 2190: cf. _Röm. Mitth._ 1890, p. 316.

Footnote 1505:

Klein, _Meistersig._^2 p. 216; Berlin 2202. A vase in the Louvre

with the καλός-name Epilykos is probably by Prokles (see _Monuments

Piot_, ix. p. 142).

Footnote 1506:

See Rayet and Collignon, p. 261: for other examples, B.M. E 786, 792,

793; Berlin 4044 = _Coll. Sabouroff_, pl. 69; _Mus. Greg._ ii. 89, 1;

and the Kleomenes vase in the Louvre (if genuine). See on this vase

_Mon. Grecs_, 1897, pls. 16–7, p. 53; Furtwaengler, _Neuere

Falschungen_, p. 21; _Rev. Arch._ xxxvii. (1900), p. 181; _Monuments

Piot_, ix. p. 138.

Footnote 1507:

See Hartwig in Ἐφ. Ἀρχ. 1894, pl. 6, p. 121.

Footnote 1508:

Stephani, _Compte-Rendu_, 1870–71, pl. 1; _Ber. d. sächs. Gesellsch._

1853, pls. 1–2 (with Eros, dove, and swan): cf. the B.M. terracottas,

D 89–91.

Footnote 1509:

See Rayet and Collignon, p. 275, and for other examples Stackelberg,

_Gräber der Hell._ pls. 49–52; Treu, _Gr. Thongef._ pl. 1; _Cab.

Pourtalès_, pl. 28.

Footnote 1510:

Cf. the Proto-Attic vases, Athens 468 and 657, with the B.M. bronze

vase-handles, Nos. 258, 383.

Footnote 1511:

Cf. the Aegina jug mentioned above, B.M. A 1369 and the vase given in

Rayet and Collignon, p. 68; also the Tanagra tripod, Berlin No. 1727,

and Louvre A 396 from Rhodes.

Footnote 1512:

See B.M. B 295, 296, 382.

Footnote 1513:

Louvre F 116–17; B.M. B 620. See _Arch. Zeit._ 1881, p. 36, and p.

385 above.

Footnote 1514:

Cf. _Coll. Sabouroff_, pl. 74, 3: see also _Ath. Mitth._ 1880, pl.

10; Ἐφ. Ἀρχ. 1885, pl. 9, 11; B.M. G 22–3; Berlin 2704, 2884;

Raoul-Rochette, _Mon. Inéd._ pl. 49, 3.

Footnote 1515:

Cf. _Röm. Mitth._ 1897, p. 253 ff.; _Mon. Grecs_, 1885–88, p. 43 ff.;

Rayet and Collignon, p. 341; _Bull. de Corr. Hell._ 1888, p. 491.

Footnote 1516:

Cf. Dumont-Pottier, i. p. 186 ff.

Footnote 1517:

See _Bull. de Corr. Hell._ 1888, p. 491 (Pottier).

Footnote 1518:

_Ibid._ p. 497; also _Mon. Grecs_, 1885–88, pl. 8, p. 44: cf. the

Etruscan _bucchero_ vases, _e.g._ Pottier, _Louvre Cat._ ii. p. 316

ff.

Footnote 1519:

_Bull. de Corr. Hell._ 1898, pp. 439, 497.

Footnote 1520:

De Ridder, _De ectypis aeneis_, _passim_.

Footnote 1521:

_Bull. de Corr. Hell._ 1888, p. 500; _Ath. Mitth._ 1886, pl. 4

(Crete).

Footnote 1522:

_E.g._ B.M. A 587, 597 ff.

Footnote 1523:

For a complete list of early vases with reliefs see _Mon. Grecs_,

1885–88, p. 54 ff.

Footnote 1524:

For examples see Rayet and Collignon, p. 266; _Jahrbuch_ 1894, p. 62.

Footnote 1525:

_Cat._ 525 = Reinach, i. 11.

Footnote 1526:

_Monuments Piot_, x. pls. 6–7.

Footnote 1527:

On the later development of imitation of metal in vases see Rizzo in

_Röm. Mitth._ xii. (1897), p. 253 ff.

Footnote 1528:

See also on these vases _Gaz. Arch._ 1879, pl. 6, p. 38 ff., and

Martha, _L'Art Étrusque_, p. 488. They are styled by Gamurrini

“Etrusco-Campanian.”

Footnote 1529:

_Amer. Journ. of Arch._ 1885, pl. 1.

Footnote 1530:

To this the name μαστός has been given: cf. p. 186.

Footnote 1531:

_Céramiques_, i. p. 393.

Footnote 1532:

_Gr. u. sic. Vasenb._ p. 117.

Footnote 1533:

_Homerische Becher_, in _50^{tes} Winckelmannsfestprogr._ (1890).

Footnote 1534:

G 104 in B.M. and the jug by Dionysios (Robert, _op. cit._ p. 90).

Footnote 1535:

_Op. cit._ p. 1 ff.: cf. Suet. _Ner._ 47.

Footnote 1536:

Clay moulds for these bowls have been found at Athens, suggesting

that there was a fabric there. But they were probably not confined to

one centre. See _Ath. Mitth._ 1901, p. 67, note.

Footnote 1537:

_J.H.S._ xxii. p. 3.

Footnote 1538:

_Arch. Anzeiger_, 1904, p. 191 (in Oxford).

Footnote 1539:

Cf. _Mon. Grecs_, 1885–88, p. 48.

Footnote 1540:

Berlin 2891, from Crete.

Footnote 1541:

See Robert, _op. cit._ p. 90. In the same work will be found full

descriptions of most of the other bowls.

Footnote 1542:

See _Class. Review_, 1894, p. 325.

Footnote 1543:

_E.g._ G 105, in B.M.

Footnote 1544:

See above, p. 495.

Footnote 1545:

See above, p. 498.

Footnote 1546:

B.M. G 179 ff.: see _Ann. dell’ Inst._ 1871, p. 5 ff.; _Röm. Mitth._

1897, p. 260; _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1897, p. 390.

Footnote 1547:

xi. 480 E: see above, pp. 73, 189.

Footnote 1548:

_Gaz. Arch._ 1879, p. 43. Recent writers have maintained that

“Calene” ware is Greek in origin, and not confined to this site. See

Dragendorff in _Bonner Jahrbücher_, xcvi. p. 25, and Rizzo in _Röm.

Mitth._ 1897, p. 259: cf. Berlin 3882.

Footnote 1549:

Benndorf, _Gr. u. sic. Vasenb._ pl. 56.

Footnote 1550:

_Ibid._ pls. 57–8.

Footnote 1551:

For instances of moulds for these medallions see _B.M. Cat. of

Terracottas_, E 72–4.

Footnote 1552:

See _Röm. Mitth._ 1897, p. 260.

Footnote 1553:

See Evans, _Syracusan Medallions_, in _Num. Chron._ 3rd Ser. xi. p.

319; also _Rev. Arch._ xxiv. (1894). p. 173.

Footnote 1554:

See _B.M. Cat. of Vases_, iv., G 37 ff., and above, pp. 200, 211.

Footnote 1555:

A similar example is in the Athens Museum, from Crete (_Invent._ No.

2141).

Footnote 1556:

Reference may be made generally to important articles by Watzinger in

_Ath. Mitth._ 1901, p. 50 ff., and Dragendorff in _Bonner

Jahrbücher_, ci. p. 140 ff.; also (for Egypt) to _Amer. Journ. of

Arch._ 1885, p. 18 ff., and Furtwaengler in _Gr. Vasenm._ p. 205 ff.

See also Chapter XXII., and XXI. _init._

END OF VOL. I.

_Printed by Hazell, Watson & Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury._

Mr. Murray’s Standard Works

=Berenson=, Bernhard. THE DRAWINGS OF THE FLORENTINE PAINTERS.

Classified, Criticised, and Studied as Documents in the History

and Appreciation of Tuscan Art. With a Copious Catalogue

Raisonné, and 180 Facsimile Illustrations. 2 Vols. Folio. £21 net.

=Borgia=, Lucretia, THE LIFE OF. According to Original Documents and

Correspondence of her Day. By FERDINAND GREGOROVIUS. Translated

by JOHN LESLIE GARNER. With Illustrations. Large Crown 8vo.

10_s._ 6_d._ net.

=Brown=, Prof. G. Baldwin. THE FINE ARTS. The Origin, Aims, and

Conditions of Artistic Work as applied to Painting, Sculpture,

and Architecture. _New and Enlarged Edition._ With Illustrations.

Crown 8vo. 6_s._ net.

—— THE ARTS IN EARLY ENGLAND. With Illustrations. 3 Vols. Royal 8vo.

16_s._ net. each.

Vol. I. THE LIFE OF SAXON ENGLAND IN ITS RELATION TO THE ARTS.

Vol. II. ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND FROM THE CONVERSION

OF THE SAXONS TO THE NORMAN CONQUEST.

Vol. III. THE DECORATIVE ARTS OF THE ANGLO-SAXON PERIOD.

=Brugsch=, Professor. EGYPT UNDER THE PHARAOHS. History derived

entirely from the Monuments. _Third Edition._ Revised by M.

BRODRICK. Maps, Plans, and Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 18_s._

=Burton-Brown=, E. RECENT EXCAVATIONS IN THE ROMAN FORUM, 1898–1905.

A Handbook. Illustrations and Plans. Fcap 8vo. 2_s._ net.

=Cartwright=, Julia (Mrs. Ady). THE PAINTERS OF FLORENCE. From the

13th to the 16th Centuries. Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 6_s._ net.

=Cripps=, Wilfrid. OLD ENGLISH PLATE: Ecclesiastical, Decorative, and

Domestic: Its Makers and Marks. _Eighth Edition._ Revised and

Enlarged. With 123 Illustrations and 2,600 Facsimile Plate Marks.

8vo. 21_s._ net.

⁂ Tables of the Date-Letters and Marks sold separately. 5_s._

—— OLD FRENCH PLATE: Its Makers and Marks. With Tables of Makers’

Marks, in addition to the Plate Marks. 8vo. 10_s._ 6_d._

=Crowe=, Sir J. A., and =Cavalcaselle=, G. B. A HISTORY OF PAINTING

in Italy, Umbria, Florence, and Siena, from the 2nd to the 16th

Century. A New Edition, with Editorial Notes by LANGTON DOUGLAS,

with upwards of 200 Illustrations. Large Demy 8vo. 6 Vols. 21_s._

net each.

Vol. I. EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Vol. II. GIOTTO AND THE GIOTTESQUES.

—— —— RAPHAEL: His Life and Works. Demy 8vo. Vol. I., 15_s._

=Cust=, Lionel. NOTES ON THE AUTHENTIC PORTRAITS OF MARY QUEEN OF

SCOTS. Based on the Researches of the late Sir George Scharf,

Director of the National Portrait Gallery—Re-written in the light

of new information. With many Illustrations. Small 4to. £3 3_s._

net.

=Douglas=, Langton. SIENA, HER HISTORY AND ART. With Maps and

numerous Illustrations. Medium 8vo. 25_s._ net.

=Fanshawe=, H. C. DELHI: PAST AND PRESENT. With Maps and

Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 15_s._ net.

=Fergusson=, James. HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE IN ALL COUNTRIES FROM THE

EARLIEST TIMES. With 1,700 Illustrations. 5 Vols. Medium 8vo. £6

6_s._

Vols. I. and II. ANCIENT AND MEDIÆVAL. 63_s._

Vol. III. INDIAN AND EASTERN. 31_s._ 6_d._

Vols. IV. and V. MODERN. 31_s._ 6_d._

[Arrangements have been made with Booksellers enabling them to offer

special terms for the above work complete.]

=Hodgson=, J. E., and =Eaton=, F. A. THE ROYAL ACADEMY AND ITS

MEMBERS. A History from 1768 to 1830. With Portraits. Large Demy

8vo. 21_s._ net.

=Hogarth=, D. G., Edited by. AUTHORITY AND ARCHÆOLOGY, SACRED AND

PROFANE. Essays on the Relation of Monuments to Biblical and

Classical Literature. By VARIOUS WRITERS. _Second Edition._ Demy

8vo. 16_s._

=Jameson=, Mrs. LIVES OF THE EARLY ITALIAN PAINTERS—AND THE PROGRESS

OF PAINTING IN ITALY—CIMABUE TO BASSANO. With 50 Portraits. Post

8vo. 12_s._

=Kugler’s = HANDBOOK OF PAINTING. The Italian Schools of Painting.

_Sixth Edition_, revised. By Sir _Henry Layard_, G.C.B. With

nearly 250 Illustrations. 2 Vols. Demy 8vo. 30_s._

—— The German, Flemish, and Dutch Schools. _Third Edition_, revised.

By Sir J. A. CROWE. With 60 Illustrations. 2 Vols. Crown 8vo.

24_s._

=Layard=, Sir A. Henry. NINEVEH AND ITS REMAINS. With Illustrations.

Crown 8vo. 7_s._ 6_d._

—— NINEVEH AND BABYLON. Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 7_s._ 6_d._

—— EARLY ADVENTURES IN PERSIA, BABYLONIA, AND SUSIANA. Portrait,

Illustrations, and Maps. 2 Vols. Crown 8vo. 24_s._ _Popular

Edition_ in 1 Vol. Crown 8vo. 7_s._ 6_d._

—— AUTOBIOGRAPHY AND LETTERS, from his Childhood until his

Appointment as H.M. Ambassador at Madrid. With an additional

Chapter on his Parliamentary Career by the Right Hon. Sir ARTHUR

OTWAY. Edited by the Hon. WILLIAM NAPIER BRUCE. With Portraits

and Illustrations. 2 Vols. Demy 8vo. 25_s._ net.

=Mariette=, Auguste. OUTLINES OF ANCIENT EGYPTIAN HISTORY. _Second

Edition._ Edited, with Notes, by MARY BRODRICK. Crown 8vo. With

Map. 5_s._

=Marillier=, H. C. THE LIVERPOOL SCHOOL OF PAINTERS. An Account of

the Liverpool Academy, from 1810 to 1867. With Memoirs of the

Leading Artists. With Illustrations. Square Demy 8vo. 10_s._

6_d._ net.

=Maudslay=, A. P. and A. C. A GLIMPSE AT GUATEMALA. Some Notes on the

Ancient Monuments of Central America. With Maps, Plans, 74

Photogravures, and other Illustrations. 4to. £4 4_s._ net.

=Morelli=, Giovanni. ITALIAN PAINTERS. Critical Studies of their

Works. With an Introductory Notice by Sir HENRY LAYARD, G.C.B.

With numerous Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 2 Vols. 15_s._ each.

Vol. I. THE BORGHESE AND DORIA PAMPHILI GALLERIES IN ROME.

Vol. II. THE GALLERIES OF MUNICH AND DRESDEN.

=Murray=, A. S. A HISTORY OF GREEK SCULPTURE FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES.

With 130 Illustrations. 2 Vols. Medium 8vo. 36_s._

—— HANDBOOK OF GREEK ARCHÆOLOGY. Sculpture, Vases, Bronzes, Gems,

Terra-cottas, Architecture, Mural Paintings, etc. Many

Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 18_s._

—— THE SCULPTURES OF THE PARTHENON. With Illustrations of the whole

Remains. Medium 8vo. 21_s._ net.

=Okakura=, Kakuzo. THE IDEALS OF THE EAST, with special reference to

the Art of Japan. Crown 8vo. 5_s._ net.

=Phillipps=, Evelyn March. THE FRESCOES IN THE SIXTINE CHAPEL IN

ROME. With 24 Illustrations and a Photogravure Frontispiece.

Crown 8vo. 6_s._ net.

=Smith=, Sir Wm., =Dictionaries=:—

DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE; Comprising its Antiquities, Biography,

Geography, and Natural History. By VARIOUS WRITERS. With

Illustrations. 3 Vols. _Enlarged and Revised Edition._ Medium

8vo. £4 4_s._

[Complete sets of the above work may be purchased through any

Bookseller at reduced rates.]

CONCISE DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE. Medium 8vo. 21_s._

SMALLER DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE. Crown 8vo. 7_s._ 6_d._

DICTIONARY OF CHRISTIAN ANTIQUITIES. The History, Institutions,

and Antiquities of the Christian Church. Edited by Sir W.

SMITH, D.C.L., and Archdeacon CHEETHAM, D.D. With

Illustrations. 2 Vols. Medium 8vo. £3 13_s._ 6_d._ each.

DICTIONARY OF CHRISTIAN BIOGRAPHY, LITERATURE, SECTS, AND

DOCTRINES. Edited by Sir WM. SMITH, D.C.L., and HENRY WACE,

D.D. 4 Vols. Medium 8vo. £6 16_s._ 6_d._

DICTIONARY OF GREEK AND ROMAN ANTIQUITIES. Including the Laws,

Institutions, Domestic Usages, Painting, Sculpture, Music, the

Drama,τύμπανα etc. Edited by Sir WM. SMITH, WILLIAM WAYTE,

M.A., G. E. MARINDIN, M.A. _Third Revised and Enlarged

Edition._ With 900 Illustrations, 2 Vols. Medium 8vo. 31s.

6_d._ each.

CONCISE DICTIONARY OF GREEK AND ROMAN ANTIQUITIES. Edited by F.

WARRE CORNISH, M.A. With over 1,100 Illustrations taken from

the best examples of Ancient Art. Medium 8vo. 21_s._

SMALLER DICTIONARY OF GREEK AND ROMAN ANTIQUITIES. With 200

Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 7_s._ 6_d._

DICTIONARY OF GREEK AND ROMAN BIOGRAPHY AND MYTHOLOGY.

Illustrated by 564 Engravings on Wood. In 3 Vols. Medium 8vo.

£4 4_s._

CLASSICAL DICTIONARY OF BIOGRAPHY, MYTHOLOGY, AND GEOGRAPHY.

_Thoroughly Revised Edition._ By G. E. MARINDIN, M.A. With over

800 Woodcuts. 8vo. 18_s._

SMALLER CLASSICAL DICTIONARY OF BIOGRAPHY, MYTHOLOGY, AND

GEOGRAPHY. With 200 Woodcuts. In great part re-written by G. E.

MARINDIN, M. A. Crown 8vo. 7_s._ 6_d._

DICTIONARY OF GREEK AND ROMAN GEOGRAPHY. Illustrated by 534

Engravings on Wood. 2 Vols. Medium 8vo. 56_s._

COMPLETE LATIN-ENGLISH DICTIONARY. With Tables of the Roman

Calendar, Measures, Weights, Money, and a Dictionary of Proper

Names. Medium 8vo. 16_s._

SMALLER LATIN-ENGLISH DICTIONARY. By Sir WM. SMITH and T. D.

HALL, M.A. Square 12mo. 7_s._ 6_d._

COPIOUS AND CRITICAL ENGLISH-LATIN DICTIONARY. By Sir WM. SMITH,

D.C.L., and T. D. HALL, M.A. Medium 8vo. 16_s._

SMALLER ENGLISH-LATIN DICTIONARY. By Sir WM. SMITH and T. D.

HALL, M.A. Square 12mo. 7_s._ 6_d._

=Van Millingen=, A. THE WALLS OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Studies of the

Topography of the Byzantine City and adjacent objects of

interest. Plans and Illustrations. 4to. 21_s._ net.

=Wakeman’s= HANDBOOK OF IRISH ANTIQUITIES. Edited by JOHN COOKE, M.A.

With numerous Illustrations. _Third Edition._ Crown 8vo. 10_s._

6_d._ net.

=Ward=, John. THE SACRED BEETLE. Egyptian Scarabs in Art and History.

Illustrated. Demy 8vo. 10_s._ 6_d._ net.

—— GREEK COINS AND THEIR PARENT CITIES. With 22 Autotype Plates and

upwards of 500 Illustrations. Crown 4to. 25_s._ net.

—— OUR SOUDAN: ITS PYRAMIDS AND ITS PROGRESS. Dedicated by request to

Lord Kitchener of Khartoum. Crown 4to. 400 Pages, 720

Illustrations. 21_s._ net. Including Maps and many Portraits.

=Watt=, Sir George. INDIAN ART AT DELHI, 1903. Being the Official

Catalogue of the Delhi Exhibition, 1902–3. The Illustrative part

by PERCY BROWN, A.R.C.A., Assistant-Director. Medium 8vo. 12_s._

net.

=Welbeck Catalogue.= A CATALOGUE OF LETTERS AND OTHER HISTORICAL

DOCUMENTS IN THE LIBRARY AT WELBECK. Compiled by S. ARTHUR

STRONG. With Portraits and numerous Facsimiles of Manuscripts in

the possession of the Duke of Portland. 4to. £2 2_s._ net.

=Wilkinson=, Sir J. G. THE MANNERS AND CUSTOMS OF THE ANCIENT

EGYPTIANS. With numerous Illustrations. 3 Vols. Demy 8vo. £4 4_s._

—— POPULAR ACCOUNT OF THE ANCIENT EGYPTIANS. Abridged from the above

work. With 500 Woodcuts. 2 Vols. Crown 8vo. 12_s._

London: JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, W.

Transcriber’s Note:

Errors which can be attributed to printer’s mistakes have been

corrected, as noted below. Lapses in punctuation are corrected with no

further mention.

In Volume II, the author has included as Fig. 173 a table of alphabets

used on Greek vases.

Inscriptions are presented in archaic Greek script, which more or less

follows that table. For instance, the character for pi (Π) resembles

the modern gamma (Γ). All inscriptions are given using modern Greek

characters. References to individual characters may appear with very

brief descriptions, derived where possible from that table. The

character upsilon (Υ) frequently appears as a modern Roman V. On

occasion, sigma appears in the form of a modern C (the lunate sigma Ϲ).

Footnotes, which were numbered sequentially on each page, have been

resequenced to be unique across the text. Cross-references to those

numbers in the text have been changed to reflect this. The notes

themselves have been moved to the end of each chapter.

Each plate was followed by a blank page on its verso, which have been

removed here. The position of each plate, as well as that of all other

figures, has been adjusted slightly to avoid falling in mid-paragraph.

The pages devoted to plates were not counted in pagination.

* * * * *

The following anomalies regarding footnotes were observed:

On p. 153, the reference to the third footnote (521), referring the

reader to “Pottier _Louvre Cat._, p. 381 ff.” does not appear in the

text. The section discusses “Les vases à reliefs de style archaique en

Italie et en Sicile”. The reference has been added following the

paragraph ending with “designs of Oriental character”.

On p. 158, the reference to footnote (531) is missing from the text.

The reference has been added at the end of the sentence beginning

“Falkner found at Pompeii...”.

On p. 210, the sole footnote is missing its number, which is added here

as 770.

On p. 214, the reference to the first footnote (775), referring the

reader to Alexandre Brongniart’s _Traité des arts céramiques: ou des

poteries_, i., p 552, does not appear in the text. The passage

discusses the analysis of the glaze, and it seems appropriate to add

the reference at the end of the paragraph beginning “This lustrous

glaze...”.

On p. 427, footnote 1314 refers to a series of items, the last of which

(‘270’) seems either out of order, or a misprint for ‘470’.

The following table contains those textual issues which are readily

attributed to printer’s errors:

p. 96 which[,] were so light Removed

p. 204 It has been noted by J[o/a]hn Corrected.