¹ I am indebted to Mr. J. M. Cook for some of the photographs. Professor Sir John Beazley has confirmed and contributed attributions and I have greatly profited from his comments. The hospitality of the staff of the American Excavations in the Agora at Athens and the free access to their shelves and experience with Attic pottery which I have enjoyed have been invaluable. All the drawings and profiles, except for Figs. 1 and 2 which are by Mrs. Neriman Tezcan, are by Mrs. G. U. S. Corbett.

² See pp. 31f.

³ Twenty-three on Fig. 1.

⁴ In the vase as it is at present restored three pieces have not been incorporated. They appear in the drawings published here and are the centre part of the hairy panther (Fig. 6c), the tail of the panther (Fig. 6a), and the back of the head and wing of the siren at the top right of Fig. 2.

⁵ Sir John Beazley tells me that he prefers not to dissociate it from the other vases attributed to Sophilos.

⁶ Beazley, , ABV 37 ff.Google Scholar, lists his work. Mme Karouzou assigned to his hand also much of the work of painters now identified as the Painter, Gorgon and Painter, KX (ABV 8 ff., 23 ff.)Google Scholar, many of the former's vases being listed by her as of Sophilos' First (archaisch) Period, and the latter's his Second ‘strenger Stil’ (AM lxii (1937) 132 f.). I follow Beazley here but her analysis of the group is invaluable. On Beazley's nos. 21 and 36 see below, n. 10; and nos. 38–40 see BSA l (1955) 59. Add a neck amphora, Warsaw 138537, Michalowski, Sztuka Starożytna 99, fig. 52. See notes 7 and 14 for Sophilean fragments from Gortyn and Naucratis.

⁷ Beazley, (Development 17)Google Scholar puts his mythological scenes late in his career while Mme Karouzou, (AM lxii (1937) 133 f.Google Scholar; she intends the list to be approximately chronological) places them early among the Sophilos vases. I would put the Akropolis fragments, ABV 39, no. 15, early in his career with nos. 17, 18, 24. The delicate treatment of features and the full curving members of the lotus (the triple line below petals in his later work is straight, cf. AM lxii (1937) pl. 51 with pl. 59, 2) suggest this. The plaques, nos. 38–40 (AM lxii (1937) pl. 48 ff.), and Lindos sherd, no. 37, are later, and with them the Pharsalos lebes, no. 16 (ibid, pls. 52, 53), where the coarsening of his animal style begins to become apparent. ABV 38 ff., nos. 5, 7, 12, 13, 27 are of this period and still show some fine animal drawing. The Menidi fragments, nos. 21, 36, may be later with the Marathon neck amphora (AM lxii (1937) pls. 61, 62). The last phase is that of the Vurva vase (no. 1; ibid. pl. 60), the chalice (no. 11; ibid. pl. 59, 2), Akr. 757 (no. 10; Graef, pl. 48), and the lekanai (nos. 28–30). His earliest work may be of soon after 590 and he seems to have painted nothing after 570. The Sophilean dinos from Gortyn, (Ann xvii/xviii (1955–1956) 45 ff., figs. 1–3Google Scholar) is later than the vases signed by or attributed to the artist. It differs from them in renouncing the Attic double shoulder lines, and the boar pricks his ears.

⁸ The Pharsalos fragments illustrate this well. The treatment of the lion's head on the body (AM lxii (1937) pl. 53) compared with that on the rim (ibid. pl. 52) shows how much detail and precision can be sacrificed in less important parts of the vase. Contrast too the facing sirens from the same vase (MP xxxiii (1933) 46 f.), and compare the muzzle of the panther from the body (ibid. 47) with that of the panther on the rim (AM lxii (1937) pl. 52).

⁹ On this see Beazley, , Development 19Google Scholar; ABV 43; Rumpf, A., Gnomon xxv (1953) 469.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Closest are on the Menidi fragment NM 2035, JdI xiii (1898) pl. 1, 1. Payne (NC 200 n. 1, and cf. ABV 40) objects to the attribution of all the fragments on JdI xiii (1898) pl. 1 to one vase. But the difference in thickness of the ground line to the main scene means nothing in vases of this type (cf. that above the rays on our vase Plate 31, and those on the Louvre dinos CVA ii, pl. 63, 1–2). His second objection is that the frieze with the signature would be narrower than the frieze with animals below, which is ‘Obviously impossible’. But the centaur frieze on fr. 1 is narrower than the animal friezes below it, and the signature frieze fr. 3 seems likely to have been the same height as the centaur frieze. Curvature, slight variations in the thickness, and the colour and quality of the paint match on all fragments. What is perhaps more remarkable is that one vase in this style should bear two major scenes. Photographs of the two main fragments appear in CVA Athens, i, pl. 9, 1–2; the signed fragment is now inventoried NM 15918 (AM lxii (1937) 134. no. 32)

¹¹ Contrast, AM lxii (1937) pls. 60–62.Google Scholar

¹² Cf. ibid. pl. 60 and Louvre, CVA ii, pl. 63, 1Google Scholar; Gorgon Painter and KX Painter consistently set their boars' ears higher and farther forward (cf. Louvre, CVA ii, pl. 64, 2Google Scholar, AM lxii (1937) pl. 45).

¹³ Cf. JdI xiii (1898) pl. 1, 2.

¹⁴ Cf. ibid. pl. 1, 1; Lindos i pls. 126–7, 2629; Bielefeld, E., Zur griechischen Vasenmalerei pl. 2Google Scholar; AM lxii (1937) pl. 62 (note too the dotted panther). A sherd from Naucratis in Oxford (G. 128. 27) has part of the body of a feline incised like the Smyrna panther, and must be Sophilean.

¹⁵ Cf. ibid. pls. 64, 65.

¹⁶ E 819, CVA i, pl. 31, 6, 12; Bielefeld, op. cit.

¹⁷ Cf. Louvre E 873 (CVA ii, pl. 63, 2; Sophilos) and Akr. 474 (Graef pl. 17; Gorgon Painter).

¹⁸ Contrast Akr. 587, AM lxii (1937) pl. 51.

¹⁹ NM 1036, AM lxii (1937) pl. 61 (Sophilos), cf. the midget sphinx on his Louvre E 819, CVA i, pl. 31, 6. Cf. too Louvre E 817, ibid. pl. 31, 10 (Gorgon Painter); Boston F 347.6, Fairbanks pl. 38, and Akr. 472 (AM lxii (1937) pl. 56), the latter two both perhaps by the Painter, KX (ABV 27).Google Scholar For some forerunners cf. Kübler, K., Allattische Malerei pls. 10, 70.Google Scholar

²⁰ Sophilos' chariot scenes on Akr. 587 (AM lxii (1937) pl. 51), NM 15499 (ibid. pls. 52, 53), Akr. 585, NM 15918 (JdI xiii (1898) pl. 1, 3; Athens CVA i, pl. 9, 1).

²¹ A single rosette behind the siren in the second frieze (Plate 31 right).

²² Beazley, , Development 19.Google Scholar

²³ On these scenes see Boardman, J., BSA xlvii (1952) 34 f., 39Google Scholar; Heidenreich, M., MdI v (1952) 134 ff.Google Scholar

²⁴ Karouzos, C., JdI lii (1937) 166 ff.Google Scholar (cf. BSA xlvii (1952) 26 n. 141).

²⁵ BSA xlvii (1952) 31 n. 174.

²⁶ Kraiker, W., Aigina no. 267, pls. 19 and c.Google Scholar

²⁷ Payne, , NC 318, no. 1187, pl 33, 5Google Scholar; cf. no. 1188.

²⁸ e.g. Berlin F 495, AD i, pl. 7, 1, Neugebauer, K. A., Führer pl. 15.Google Scholar

²⁹ A detailed study of these scenes appears in L. B. GhaliKahil, Les Enlèvements et le retour d'Hélène; and see Beazley, , Boston Vases ii. 43 f.Google Scholar

³⁰ BSA xlvii (1952) 34 n. 218; ours may be perched on a tendril, cf. Buschor, E., Die Musen des Jenseits 31, fig. 21.Google Scholar

³¹ Which are accurate, unlike most of Sophilos'. Note too the use of the four-stroke sigma where Sophilos used the three-stroke.

³² Helena 1664 f.: σωτῆρε δ᾿ ὴμεῖς σὼ κασλγυὴτω διπλῶ πὸντον παριππεὶοντε πὲμψομεν πὰτραν

³³ RE s.v. ‘Dioskuren’ 1117 f.

³⁴ As they are so recorded by some, cf. Roscher, Lexikon s.v. ‘Helena’ 1937 ff.

³⁵ Haspels, E., BCH liv (1930) 442Google Scholar.

³⁶ Cf. Dugas, C., BCH lx (1936) 158 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁷ In a chariot on Tarentine clay relief plaques, RM xv (1900) 23. See ABV 10 no. 28 for two youths again perhaps in a chariot.

³⁸ Studniczka, F., Beiträge zur Geschichte der altgriechischen Tracht 125 f.Google Scholar The gestures with the cloak held forward from the shoulder or over the head probably both suggest veiling—appropriate both for sorrow and for occasions on which the ‘evil eye’ was most to be avoided, quite apart from any motives of modesty or coquetry. Johansen, F., Attic Grave Reliefs 41Google Scholar, suggests exposure, or rather the disclosure of a beauty to be admired or mourned; this would be awkward when the cloak is drawn over the head, and beauties appreciate well enough the enhancement lent by partial veiling.

³⁹ Cf. AM lxii (1937) pl. 51.

⁴⁰ CVA i, pl. 79.

⁴¹ For references see Robinson, D. M. in AJA xl (1936) 516 ff.Google Scholar and Olynthus xiii. 109; also Boardman, J., BSA xlvii (1952) 30 ff.Google Scholar, where there is a brief discussion of the shape, its use, and black-figure examples (ibid. n. 177). Withdraw thence Akr. 1220, whose decoration is not appropriate and of whose profile not enough is left to admit the vase as an exception to the usual decoration of lebetes gamikoi, and the Menidi fragments, whose scale suggests an independent stand or, on the analogy of other finds there, a louterion (ÖJh xxix (1935) 130 f.); Louvre MNB 2042 is now published in Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek v (1954) 128 f. (ABV 400, 696) and is better omitted also as it lacks a foot. Add Agora frr. P 6106, Akr. 474 (Graef pl. 17); one from Andreas, H. in Attica (JHS lxxiv (1954) 148)Google Scholar; Houston 34. 129, ABV 125, no. 32; a Swan Group miniature in Eleusis; and cf. ABV 80, no. 2. Of the same shape is a miniature in Reading, not Attic, and three Eretrian miniatures in Athens which have no figured decoration (BSA 52 (1958) pl. 7a–c). Kenner discusses the shape and its predecessors in ÖJh xxix (1935) 119 ff., and the Menidi louteria ibid. 130 ff. For the name compare further the λεβετὶσκοι γαμυικοὶ of IG ii².1424a. 147 and note the κανᾶ νυμφικὰ ibid. 144; these, with the λὲβης γαμικὸς and νυμφικὸς of other inscriptions are surely the standless lebetes and flat baskets so commonly carried in wedding scenes (BSA xlvii (1952) 31 n. 178, 39). The name remains appropriate, though probably inaccurate, for the clay vases.

⁴² Cf. CVA Berlin i passim; AA 1943, 412 f.; the Nessos Painter skyphos-crater from Vari, , BCH lxiii (1939) pls. 49, 51Google Scholar; the Gorgon Painter fragments Akr. 474, Graef pl. 17,where the scene is of a frontal chariot as on a fragmentary ‘lebes gamikos’ in Eleusis (ABV 87 no. 20), and cf. Akr. 472 (AM lxii (1937) pl. 56) in his manner, and the KX Painter's Athens NM 16183 (JdI xviii (1903) 137, Fig. 9).

⁴³ On black-figured lebetes gamikoi they are usually triangular or tear-shaped, not round, cf. the Vlasto vase, Agora P 7897, AJA xl (1936) 412; London B 298, Richter and Milne, Shapes and Names Fig. 72; EADélos x pl. 48, 594; Akr. 1213.

⁴⁴ Metal influence in hydria lips, Payne, , NC 212 ff.Google Scholar For the profile cf. Boll. d'Arte 1951, 101 ff. (Sophilos, ), Hesperia xiii (1944) pl. 8Google Scholar, 1 (near Sophilos) and Eleusis 767 (JDI xviii (1903) 148 Fig. 14, ABV 21). Decoration and profile appear in Attic on Hesperia xv (1946) pl. 17, 1, and mid-sixth-century Eretrian burial amphorae whose shape and decoration reflect those of the Attic lebetes gamikoi, BSA xlvii (1952) pls. 9, 10.

⁴⁵ e.g. Petit Palais 309, CVA pl. 649, 1–4.

⁴⁶ e.g. EADélos x, pl. 48, 594. Cf. Athens NM 913, Collignon-Couve no. 654, pl. 27.

⁴⁷ EADélos loc. cit., and cf. red-figured examples AM xxxii (1907) 96, Fig. 10

⁴⁸ Kenner, H., ÖJh xxix (1935) 152.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ JdI lxi/lxii (1946–7) pl. 23, 78–79. The distraught women are not actually tearing their hair as is usual, but grief rather than joy seems the keynote. Red-figure lebetes gamikoi are found in graves in Attica (cf. Robinson, D. M.AJA xxxvi (1932) 407, xl 507 n. 3Google Scholar but note Beazley, , JHS lviii (1938) 267Google Scholar), but they bear marriage scenes and their connexion with the dead may have been suggested by the loutrophoroi whose dual role Kenner explains, op. cit. 147 ff.; their primary purpose in this case is not funerary.

⁵⁰ Akr. 1206, 1207, 1209–11, 1213, 1214. Eleusis, PAE 1937, 51, and unpublished fragments.

⁵¹ Cf. Richter, G. M. A., BSA xi (1904–1905) 230 ff.Google Scholar One lebes gamikos in the Delos Heraion (above n. 46; of about 510 and without any figure decoration).

⁵² Trench C: Burnt House.

⁵³ Thuc. ii. 15.

⁵⁴ Athens NM 1252 (ARV 706, AM xxxii (1907) 98 n. 2); no published illustration.

⁵⁵ The excavators noted traces of a matting impression on the earth adhering to the sherds of this vase; most likely from some floor covering.

⁵⁶ Noack, F., JdI xxx (1915) 136 f.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Beazley, , ARV 418 ff.Google Scholar; T. B. L. Webster, Der Niobidenmaler (10 nn. 7 and 17 on dating); Rumpf, A., MuZ 93 f.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Webster, op. cit. 11 f. Cf. the figures on his pls. 6, 8, 12, 19b, 24a. For the himation of the girl next to the pursuing youth on B cf. MonIned i, pl. 37; ix, p. 17, 2, and her hair style Webster, op. cit. pl. 9a, 11a, and British Museum CVA iii, pl. 172, 2. For the wings cf. Roulez, J., Vases peints de Leide pl. 6Google Scholar; Webster, op. cit. pl. 11b.

⁵⁹ Webster, op. cit. pls. 3, 4.

⁶⁰ BMFA xl. (1942) 12.

⁶¹ Webster, op. cit. pls. 12d, 23.

⁶² Cf. Webster, op. cit. pl. 23; Würzburg, Langlotz, pl. 180; MonIned i, pl. 37.

⁶³ MonIned ix, pl. 17, 2 (Niobid Painter), but cf. the pursuit on CVA Umbri, i, pl. 788, 7.

⁶⁴ Cf. Webster, op. cit. pl. 13a (note the dropped flower), BMFA xl (1942) 12 (where the column, altar, and palm may suggest Apollo, but cf. Webster, op. cit. pl. 20) and Louvre G 427, CVA ix, pl. 637, 3 (Geneva Painter); New York, Richter and Hall, pls. 104–5 (Chicago Painter).

⁶⁵ On the identification see Beazley, , Boston Vases ii. 81Google Scholar; Brommer, F., Vasenlisten zur griechischen Heldensage 130Google Scholar; Robinson, D. M., AJA xl (1936) 511 ff.Google Scholar (CVA Robinson Collection, ii, pls. 293–4c; Beazley, op. cit.) identifies an Apollo by his wreath, but a wreath is commonly worn by heroes so dressed and Apollo pursuing Daphne carries a laurel branch to distinguish him (AJA xl (1936) 511 nn. 4 and 5; Metzger, H., Les Représentations 156).Google Scholar The scene cannot be called ‘everyday life’ but, becoming a commonplace on vases, it may have lost any specific mythological explanation.

⁶⁶ e.g. CVA Florence, ii, pl. 641, 4, Villa Giulia, i, pl. 28.

⁶⁷ Thus always on the Niobid Painter's vases, Webster, op. cit. pl. 11a, MonIned ix, pl. 17, 2.

⁶⁸ e.g. CVA Madrid, ii, pl. 95, 1a; Louvre, v, pl. 375, 9; British Museum vi, pl. 364, 9; Bonn, i, pl. 15, 1, 3; Lenormant et de Witte, iv, pl. 58; Bologna, Pellegrini, G., Vasi Greci pl. 1Google Scholar; Tillyard, E. M. W., The Hope Vases, pl. 29, 207Google Scholar; Leningrad St. 1627, Compte Rendu 1872, 143; Hesperia xx (1951) pl. 79, 5a; and see Beazley, , Raccolta Guglielmi 89.Google Scholar A name for the girl pursued is not easy to suggest.

⁶⁹ RE s.v. ‘Eros’ 498; Roscher, Lexikon s.v. ‘Eros’ 1357; Metzger, H., Les Représentations 49 ff.Google Scholar; Beazley, , CVA Oxford, i. 10.Google Scholar On the New York gem with Eros carrying a girl see Beazley, , Lewes House Gems 28Google Scholar, Richter, , Catalogue of Engraved Gems in New York 11 f.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ The red-figured plaque Akr. 1042 (Graef-Langlotz pl. 82) with its added fragment North Slope S–5–1 (Hesperia iv (1935) 238, no. 27, Fig. 12). Other exceptions (unless they are well-groomed Boreads) are on the pelike AZ 1845, pl. 31, 2 (JHS lxxi (1951) 190, no. 106) and London E 360 (ARV 391). On some vases Eros carries a mantle over his arm, e.g. Greifenhagen, A., Griechische Eroten 15, Fig. 8, 17, fig. 10, 19, fig. 12Google Scholar; Oxford 1931. 39 (ARV 883, no. 1); Piraeus Museum (ARV 747, no. 84); and cf. Seltman, C. T., BSA xxvi (1923–1925) 94, Fig. 4, pl. 13Google Scholar, and Richter, op. cit. pl. 16, 92.

⁷¹ Cf. Webster, op. cit. pl. 3a; CVA Louvre, iii, pl. 166, 3; BMFA xl (1942) 13. On departure scenes Beazley, , Boston Vases ii. 77 ff.Google Scholar

⁷² MonIned xi, pl. 14 (right); Webster, op. cit. pl. 10a.

⁷³ But cf. the hair of the Amazons on the Naples volute crater, FR pl. 28. The arming of Achilles on Skyros is another possibility, but the figures and the moment depicted are not canonical for the scene so far as it is known from later paintings, and the representation too fragmentary here.

⁷⁴ The later type as Webster, op. cit. pl. 1 (Altamura Painter) and the Niobid Painter's later vases, Louvre G 343, CVA iii, pl. 166, 3. Cf. Beazley, , Boston Vases ii. 80.Google Scholar The painted moulding below the floral chain which appears on our fragments seems to mark the transition to the later, more complex profile.

⁷⁵ Seta, A. Della, Italia antiqua ¹101 B.Google Scholar The chain on the Altamura Painter's vase in Ferrara, Aurigemma, S., Il. R. Museo di Spina (ed. 1) 151, 153, is very similar.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Cf. Webster, op. cit. pls. 6, 13, 23.