^{page 165 note 2} Four works publishing important masses of material are Graef-Langlotz Vasen von der Akropolis, Pelekidis, S., ‘Ἀgνασκφὴ (Δελτ 1916)Google Scholar, K. Kübier Ausgrabungen im Kerameikos (A.A. 1932 to 1935) and Dorothy Burr, A Geometric House and Proto-attic Votive Deposit (Hesperia ii, 4 (1933)).Google Scholar Throughout this article vases and fragments published in Vasen von der Akropolis and A Geometric House and Proto-attic Votive Deposit are referred to simply by their numbers in the inventory, preceded by the name Graef or Burr; similarly, museum catalogues are frequently referred to simply by the name of the author. References will be found in the footnotes of this article to other publications which have contributed to the study of Protoattic; almost all the pre-war references have been collected by Pfuhl, (Malerei und Zeichnung i, 125).Google Scholar

^{page 166 note 1} The term ‘Phaleron,’ frequently used loosely to cover the earlier phases of Attic Orientalizing pottery, is only serviceable if it is applied to the minor works of this period, which have been found at Phaleron in large quantities and were probably made there (cf. Burr, p. 625).

^{page 166 note 2} This does not imply that it is wrong to call works of this period ‘Early Black Figure’: the definition of Black Figure is technical, that of Protoattic chronological: as a matter of fact the black figure technique goes well back into Middle Protoattic, and on some vases occurs together with the earlier technique, but it is convenient to reserve the connotation ‘Black Figure’ for the ware which succeeds Protoattic.

^{page 166 note 3} Specimens of recent finds of this period appear in Society of the Friends of the National Archaeological Museum of Athens (Athens, Hestia, 1936), 10 Figs. 8–9a.

^{page 166 note 4} Mus. no. 313. J.d.I. 1887, 34, pl. 3. pl 39 from Institute Photos N.M. 3188 and 3189.

^{page 167 note 1} J.d.I. 1899, 197 Fig. 61, Nicole Peinture des Vases grecques, pl. 3, 2; details AZ 1885, 131 and 139.

^{page 167 note 2} Inv. 3203. A.A. 1892, 100 no. 4.

^{page 167 note 3} Pennsylvania University Museum Journal 1917, 16. It is smaller than the Berlin amphora (h. 0·435 m.); the shape is nearer to Protoattic, but from the drawing it seems to be slightly earlier, if anything. Another amphora in the same museum, of which Mrs. J. M. Dohan kindly sent me photographs and notes, is a coarse imitation of such vases, probably not from the same workshop.

^{page 167 note 4} 1903, 13 Fig. 7.

^{page 167 note 5} 810 A.M. 1892, 205, pl. 10.

^{page 167 note 6} Fragment not illustrated in A.M. 1892.

^{page 167 note 7} Particularly the four-leaved pattern; Mr. Vlasto's amphora has a variety of devices including a whirligig of horse protomes.

^{page 168 note 1} The Eretria krater has shields with black centres, on one of which a bird is still visible painted in white. Cf. also the Philadelphia amphora and an amphora in the Benaki Museum, Athens ( 100 no. 559), where the devices include horses, birds, crescents and Boeotian shields.

^{page 168 note 2} On the neck of the Berlin amphora. It is not true either that red paint was used on this vase, as was stated by Furtwängler, or that red and white paint were used on an amphora from Phaleron (pls. 48, 49 a, b), as stated by Kourouniotis, (Ἐφημ. 1911, 249).Google Scholar The action of firing and the soil on the varnish has not infrequently been mistaken for the artist's design. I doubt whether red paint occurs on any Late Geometric or Early Protoattic vase: white is rare outside this group; cf. the group of vases discussed on pp. 179 f. the oinochoe J.d.I. 1899, 205 Fig. 71 (= Pfuhl, M.u.Z. iii 11Google Scholar) on the diamond pattern on the body, the sherds A.M. 1892, 215 Fig. 4, Graef, pl. 9 no. 283, pl. 11 no. 303, amphorae in Eleusis (Mus. no. 674) and Würzburg (Langlotz 65, pl. 8) and numerous imitation Proto-corinthian kotylai (e.g. 1911, 120 nos. 15 and 16), etc. White paint survives also on one or two insignificant Phaleron vases.

^{page 168 note 3} An earlier example of the latter type appears on a large fragment Tübingen 1465.

^{page 168 note 4} Cf. n. 1, above.

^{page 168 note 5} I. L. N. 19 Oct. 1935, Hesperia v 1936, 28 Fig. 26.

^{page 168 note 6} Robinson, Harcum and Iliffe, 274 no. 630, pl. 101.

^{page 168 note 7} As that on the upper neck-band of the Analatos hydria.

^{page 169 note 1} C.V.A. Copenhagen ii, pl. 74, 3; detail, Johansen Les Vases Sicyoniens, 146 Fig. 110. For an earlier (winged) centaur see A.M. 1893, 113 Fig. 10.

^{page 169 note 2} 1935. 19. From a Museum photograph. From Attica. Ht. 0·51 m.

^{page 169 note 3} Examples of the commoner Late Geometric shapes are quoted in the Select Inventory at the end of this paper.

^{page 170 note 1} Since some of these shapes reappear in Middle Protoattic it may be that they con tinued through Early Protoattic, but it is clear that they were not so popular as before; knowledge of the Early Protoattic smaller vases is almost entirely dependent on the finds from Phaleron, among which there is not much variety (see 1916, 13 ff.).

^{page 170 note 2} Two probably Middle Protoattic examples of this shape recently dug up in the Agora bear their owner's name (Hesperia v 1936, 34 Fig. 34 and A.J.A. 1936, 194 Fig. 10; the former shews that the shape was called ).

^{page 170 note 3} See A.A. 1933, 274 Fig. 10, 275 Fig. 11, A.A. 1934, 211 Fig. 9.

^{page 170 note 4} C.V.A. Cambridge i, pl. 2, 7. To be added are two newly published specimens, in the Agora, (Hesperia v 1936, 35 Fig. 35)Google Scholar and Bonn, (A.A. 1935, 411 Figs. 2–4).Google Scholar The latter may be Boeotian.

^{page 171 note 1} 1916, 29 Figs. 15 and 16.

^{page 171 note 2} Graef, pls. 11 and 12 no. 345, a fragment pl. 54 e. See Johansen, 110.

^{page 171 note 3} Pp. 173, 177. Incision was used in Geometric, but only on ornament (see Burr, p. 564, 1911, 126). I know of one published example on a figure in Geometric, on the eye of the steersman on the sherd A.M. 1892, 298 Fig. 6.

^{page 171 note 4} This process, alien to Geometric where figure-panels are part of the decorative design, is developed throughout Protoattic. It is retarded, under Corinthian influence, in the period from the Gorgon painter to the C painter.

^{page 171 note 5} Boehlau calls them ‘situationlos.’ Actually, there are in some Geometric figurescenes representations of action which are livelier than any that appear in Early Protoattic (e.g. Pottier Vases Antiques du Louvre, pl. 20 A 519, C.V.A. Copenhagen ii, pl 74, Metropolitan Museum Bulletin 1934, 170 Figs. 1 and 2); but in the generation which precedes Protoattic the figure-scenes were much more sober.

^{page 172 note 1} In Geometric, branches were generally held only by the mourners immediately adjoining the bier (see Zschietzschmann, A.M. 1928, 20Google Scholar).

^{page 172 note 2} Also for stationary figures (e.g. the horses J.H.S. 1912, pls. 11–12). In Late Protoattic length of stride is an indication of speed.

^{page 172 note 3} 1936. 599

^{page 172 note 4} Museum no. 1089. 1912, 5.

^{page 173 note 1} From Inst. Phot. N.M. 3588. 1917, 209.

^{page 173 note 2} Munich 1351. J.d.I. 1907, 78, Schaal Bilderhefte iii nos. 4 and 5, Pfuhl, M.u.Z. iii 84. pl. 41Google Scholar is from a photograph kindly sent me by Prof. G. Weickert.

^{page 173 note 3} Bulletin des Musées de France March 1936, 34.

^{page 173 note 4} Cf. the projecting chest with the steersman's on the Sunium plaque. The treatment of the kolpos of the chiton at the waist is unique in Early Protoattic.

^{page 173 note 5} The incision shews that the two nearer legs of each horse are drawn on the outside, as frequently in Cycladic and East Greek, but rarely in Middle and Late Protoattic and the vase-painting of Corinth.

^{page 174 note 1} Athens 238. J.d.I. 1887, 39, pl. 4. Sestieri, P. G.Rendiconti dei Lincei 1935, 428Google Scholar gives photographs of this vase taken from six different points.

^{page 174 note 2} Hairpin-shaped ornaments with a hatched core occur frequently in Geometric; the black core appears first on the rosettes on the middle neck-band of the Paris amphora (p. 173).

^{page 174 note 3} From a photograph by Dr. E. Kunze.

^{page 175 note 1} Museum no. 841. From the lower part of the neck of an amphora or hydria. The figures are too small (2 cm. from the groin to the soles of the feet) to come from a main neck-frieze.

^{page 175 note 2} Burr 162.

^{page 175 note 3} Fr 29.

^{page 175 note 4} CA 1960. Johansen, 117 Fig. 61, Pottier Le Dessin chez les Grecs, pl. 9, 4.

^{page 175 note 5} Museum no. 8988.

^{page 175 note 6} J.d.I. 1907, 99 Fig. 12. The reconstruction Welter Bausteine zur Archäologie, pl. i is misleading: owing to bad preservation it is in fact impossible to tell how much of the rider's face was reserved; he was represented carrying a square shield which hides his body.

^{page 176 note 1} Inv. 31312. Neugebauer, pl. 7.

^{page 176 note 2} The Berlin hydria is 0·41 m. high; the other three vary between 0·43–0·44 m.

^{page 176 note 3} From A.M. 1895, pl. 3, 1.

^{page 177 note 1} Description: 1, neck four sphinxes r., body floral system, three horses r., under sidehandles hook; 2, neck eight women r., shoulder eight and a half deer l., body two sphinxes r., two centaurs r., under side-handles bird; 3, neck three sphinxes r., body two lions r., under sidehandles linear ornament.

^{page 177 note 2} Sphinxes occur on all these hydriae, and have one curious feature in common, the representation of the wing above and below the body. This stylization was occasionally used for the wings of standing birds in Attic Geometric (e.g. a mug on loan in Manchester, here Fig. 3), Linear Cycladic (Dragendorff, Thera ii, 204 Fig. 411bGoogle Scholar) and Cretan Orientalizing (see Payne, B.S.A. xxix, 290Google Scholar, Hartley, Mr.B.S.A. xxxi, 102, Fig. 30Google Scholar, and Annuario x–xii, 111 Fig. 89): in accordance with this usage the Berlin hydria and an amphora in Würzburg (Langlotz 79, see p. 179) shew a clearly indicated wing above and below the body; but on the hydriae of the Mesogeia painter the lower wing is obsolescent. A later Protocorinthian example is the winged lion on a shield on the Macmillan aryballos, Payne Necrocorinthia pl. 1, 7, where the front and back halves of the animal are represented in different planes. On the fragment Fig. 2 there is an excrescence springing from the fork of the front legs, which from the drawing looks as though it were thought of rather as a tuft of hair than as a wing. It is not inconceivable that these representations arise from a misunderstanding of the apron between the forelegs of Egyptian sphinxes, which is imitated on metalwork imported to Greek lands at this period. Kunze (Kretische Bronzereliefs, 250) has drawn attention to a class of Cycladic vases (e.g. Délos xvii, pl. 5, 7a and 8a) in which sphinxes are represented with palmettes hanging between their forelegs.

^{page 178 note 1} For the pattern on the mane cf. the wing of a sphinx on the krater-fragment A.M. 1907, pl. 25.

^{page 178 note 2} Langlotz 80, pl. 7.

^{page 178 note 3} Unusual in Early Protoattic, except for figures in certain positions (e.g. charioteers and flautists) where both arms are held in front of the body.

^{page 179 note 1} Inv. 31006. Die Antike 1932, 170 Fig. 2, Rostowzew History of the Ancient World, pl. 57, 3.

^{page 179 note 2} Langlotz 79, pl. 7.

^{page 179 note 3} 10. 210. 8. From a Museum photograph. Metropolitan Museum Bulletin Feb. 1911, 33 Fig. 7.

^{page 179 note 4} I am indebted to Mr. Vlasto and Prof. Beazley for my knowledge of this vase. Prof. Beazley has allowed me to describe a photograph made while it was in the dealer's hands. It appears to have been much restored. Mr. R. M. Cook informs me that he believes this vase to be Ny Carlsberg 2761.

^{page 180 note 1} Cf. Metr. Mus. Bull. 1911, 35 Figs. 8 and 9.

^{page 180 note 2} Cf. especially Délos xv, pl. 20 and ff.

^{page 181 note 1} Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art June 1927, 99: almost certainly by the painter of Athens 897, but distinctly later.

^{page 181 note 2} 1935. 18. Ashmolean Museum Annual Report 1935, pl. 1. From a Museum photograph. By the same hand an amphora recently acquired by the British Museum, B.M.Q. xi, 56Google Scholar, pls. xviii, xixa.

^{page 181 note 3} Museum no. 882. From a photograph which Herr P. Kahane has allowed me to use.

^{page 181 note 4} From a photograph by R. M. Cook.

^{page 181 note 5} J.d.I. 1887, 48 Fig. 8.

^{page 181 note 6} J. 221. J.d.I. 1907, 100 Figs. 13 and 14.

^{page 181 note 7} Burr 331.

^{page 181 note 8} Protoattic collars closely resemble those worn by Egyptian dogs and cats. For sixth century collars cf. B.S.A. xxxiv, 62.

^{page 183 note 1} It is doubtful whether intentional caricature occurs in Geometric or Protoattic; a possible instance is a little jug, Athens 304 (J.d.I. 1887, 46, Figs. 6 and 7, Pfuhl, , M.u.Z. iii, 80.Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 2} Fairbanks 262, pl. 21.

^{page 184 note 1} From Inst. Phot. N.M. 3820–3822. 1911, 249. Cf. p. 168, n. 2.

^{page 184 note 2} 21. 88. 18. From a Museum photograph. Metropolitan Museum Bulletin 1923, 176 Fig. 7.

^{page 184 note 3} Thuc. i. 6. (The application is Beazley's.)

^{page 185 note 1} That the dress hanging over the shoulders here and on the fragments from Phaleron is the mantle can hardly be disputed. It cannot be the chiton because of the position and the tassels; the was not an article of archaic Greek dress. Also, on the Phaleron fragments the full dress of the other figures is contrasted with the simple chiton of the charioteer. Ornamental designs, though infrequently, do occur on mantles else where in Orientalizing art (cf. the Boeotian pithos, Hampe Frühe Griechische Sagenbilder pl. 37, and the Menelaos stand, p. 189). The convention by which the mantle is shewn as though carried over the shoulders is analogous to that whereby the is shewn suspended over the corpse in Geometric prothesis scenes. A more developed but similar treatment of the mantle is found on a plaque in New York (see p. 195, n. 3) and an amphora in Boston (Fairbanks 556).

^{page 185 note 2} Its meaning is uncertain; on the little jug in Munich and a Late Geometric oinochoe which I saw in a dealer's shop it is represented as a single looped thread issuing from the sphinx's head. In Middle Protoattic and Protocorinthian it was certainly treated as a floral ornament: it may nevertheless be by origin a helmet crest. Cf. helmeted sphinxes on contemporary metalwork and later on Cretan Orientalizing vases.

^{page 185 note 3} 1898, 91, pl. 3, 2.

^{page 185 note 4} Graef, pls. 11 and 12 no. 345; a fragment here pl. 54 e.

^{page 185 note 5} 1915, 38.

^{page 185 note 6} Athens 222, B.C.H. 1893, pls. 2 and 3.

^{page 186 note 1} Annali 1872, 137.

^{page 186 note 2} Inv. 31007. Neugebauer, p. 8.

^{page 186 note 3} 1916, 29 Figs. 15 and 16. Cf. p. 170.

^{page 186 note 4} Museum no. 823. 1912, 33 Fig. 14.

^{page 186 note 5} Good examples in Eleusis, (J.d.I. 1903, 146Google Scholar Figs. 12–13) and Boston (Fairbanks 556, pl. lxv).

^{page 186 note 6} A.A. 1910, 57 Fig. 9.

^{page 187 note 1} J.H.S. 1912, pl. 10.

^{page 187 note 2} Graef 361.

^{page 187 note 3} Graef 300 and 365 (pl. 54 d) and A.J.A. 1936,194 Fig. 10. An interesting Geometric example is Lullies Antike Kleinkunst in Königsberg, pl. 2, 7.

^{page 187 note 4} Cf. the ornament growing from the ground on the Cretan fragment, B.S.A. xxxi, pl. 17, 1.

^{page 187 note 5} A.A. 1932, 201 Fig. 7.

^{page 187 note 6} Graef 376.

^{page 188 note 1} From Inst. Phot. Eleusis 357.

^{page 188 note 2} F. 56. J.d.I. 1887, 43, pl. 5.

^{page 188 note 3} The actual colour is nearer to milk chocolate.

^{page 188 note 4} Cf. the shield devices of the Benaki amphora (p. 168): for the survival of the Boeotian shield in the ornament of Protoattic cf. a little jug in New York (Metropolitan Museum Handbook, 61 Fig. 35 (ed. 1, 50 Fig. 27)).

^{page 188 note 5} Burr 210.

^{page 189 note 1} The shape occurs in fabrics of Corinth, Crete and East Greece, and was most popular in the third quarter of the seventh century: in East Greece it continued longer. See Payne, J.H.S. 1926, 208 n. 25Google Scholar, and Rumpf, J.d.I. 1933, 69, 70Google Scholar and 75 (‘Kanne platter Form,’ 17 East-Greek examples).

^{page 189 note 2} As long ago noted by H. B. Walters and G. M. A. Richter.

^{page 189 note 3} From Inst. Phot. N.M. 2612, by permission of ProfWelter, G.. It is of course only supplementary to the drawings in A.M. 1897Google Scholar, and part of the shoulder including the greater part of the head and trunk of a third man has been omitted in the photograph. White paint was used on the men's flesh and on each human head for three or four wavy lines painted on the varnish longitudinally dividing the hair on the neck.

^{page 189 note 4} A.M. 1897, 324, Figs. 40 and 41, pl. 8. Pallat argued that, since there was not room on the shoulder for three rams of the size of the one whose whole length is pre served, the back half of one of them must have been missing, and it must therefore have been represented as half in the cave: but it is clear that the group on the left in the photo graph was painted on a smaller scale than the central one. If, as seems probable, the group on the right was also painted on a smaller scale, the three groups could have been fitted into the available space, and the disproportion can be explained not only by carelessness but by a very proper desire to mark out Odysseus and his monster ram

^{page 189 note 5} A.A. 1934, 211 Figs. 9, 10 and 11, J.H.S. 1934, pl. 10, 2. For the plastic figure on the handle of the Warrior mug cf. two late Geometric mugs in the Louvre.

^{page 189 note 6} A good connecting piece is a sphinx sherd in Aegina, to be published by Welter.

^{page 189 note 7} Karo Menelaos auf einer frühattischen Vase (Sechsundzwanzigstes Hallisches Winckelmannsprogramm, 1928). Cf. Hampe, , Frühe Griechische Sagenbilder, 57, 70, 80Google Scholar, and Fig. 30. Inscriptions labelling heroes are rare in Protoattic. They become more common in the first half of the sixth century, when the introduction of conventional attributes was lessening the need for them. To the sixth-century painter the recognition of the scenes he portrayed was more important than optical plausibility. Nonsense inscriptions and the supererogatory etc. (cf. the François vase) shew that by the second quarter of the sixth century the use of inscriptions was largely otiose.

^{page 191 note 1} C.V.A. Cambridge i, pl. 2, 7. Cf. an egg-shaped krater in the Agora, , Hesperia v 1936, 35 Fig. 35.Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 2} A.A. 1934, 215 Fig. 12, J.H.S. 1934, pl. 10, 1. The facing lion or leopard is not very common before Late Protoattic; once or twice it is expressly marked as a leopard by the addition of rings on the body. The earliest facing lion or leopard occurs on a Late Geometric skyphos in Edinburgh; the face is a reserved square containing a St. Andrew's cross; in the resulting side triangles are painted dots for the eyes, and inside the bottom triangle is a smaller triangle representing the mouth. There are other examples in the Kerameikos Museum among the finds from ‘Opferrinnen’ 1 and 2, on the New York Nessos amphora (p. 192) and on fragments (e.g. Graef 385, pl. 14).

^{page 191 note 3} Waldstein, The Argive Heraeum ii, 161, pl 67.Google Scholar I am informed that Payne has pronounced that these fragments are Attic. Argive Orientalizing has always been a home from home for orphans, and from it I have redeemed the amphora in Würzburg (Langlotz 79) and sherds from the Acropolis (Graef 411,412 and 414): but that it is not simply a myth is indicated by such pieces as the Aristonophos krater (Wiener Vorlegeblätter 1888 pl. 1) and perhaps a fragmentary amphora in Aegina, (A.M. 1897, 308 Fig. 31).Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 4} It is of course possible that a mythological meaning was attached to the fight between a man and a centaur represented on the neck of the Late Geometric amphora in Copenhagen (see p. 169, C.V.A. Copenhagen ii, pl. 74, 3) and in contemporary plastic art (A.M. 1930, Beil. 38) and the farewell or abduction scene on a Late Geometric krater in the British Museum (J.H.S. 1899, pl. 8).Google Scholar Protocorinthian provides the closest parallels to the mythological representations of the ‘Black and White’ style; Mr. T. J. Dunbabin has kindly informed me that some are earlier than the Heraeum fragments. The Aristonophos krater and the Cretan pithos B.S.A. xxix, pl. 12, on whose shoulder is represented what looks like a scene from the Choephorae, can hardly be earlier than the Heraeum fragments, and the plate fragment from Praisos (Pfuhl, M.u.Z. iii 57)Google Scholar is considerably later. See also Appendix A.

^{page 192 note 1} pl 55 c, from a photograph by Mr. R. M. Cook.

^{page 192 note 2} Richter, J.H.S. 1912, 370, pls. 10–12.Google Scholar

^{page 192 note 3} For the wilful archaism in detail, though not of course in general form, of the horses on the shoulder cf. remarks on p. 172. On Attic vases the shoulder-field did not generally receive so much attention as on Cycladic and East Greek; Attic vase-painters preferred the more rectangular fields on the neck and belly. On the Hymettus amphora also the figures on the shoulder are less advanced than those on the neck and belly; and on the Kynosarges amphora (see p. 196 ff.) the figures on the shoulder are painted in a less honoured technique than the others: but the differentiation of a monumental and a decorative type of figures is rare before the sixth century.

^{page 192 note 4} Pottier Vases Antiques du Louvre, pl 20, A 519; C.V.A. Copenhagen ii, pl 74, 4; Metropolitan Museum Bulletin 1934, 170 Figs. 1 and 2.

^{page 192 note 5} A.A. 1934, 217 Fig. 13.

^{page 192 note 6} Graef 364. Similar jockeys, mounted on horses similar to but more primitive than those of the Menelaos stand, appear on a Protocorinthian kotyle, Hampe, Frühe Griechische Sagenbilder, pl 40.

^{page 192 note 7} Py 29.

^{page 193 note 1} A.A. 1910, 57 Fig. 9.

^{page 193 note 2} I know of this vase from the references Boehlau Aus Ionischen und Italischen Necropolen, 107 n. ^** and Smith, J.H.S. 1902, 41 n. 1Google Scholar, and from old prints in the German Institute.

^{page 193 note 3} Cf. also pp. 184, 185, n. 1.

^{page 193 note 4} A.A. 1934, 211 Figs. 9, 10 and 11.

^{page 193 note 5} A.A. 1934, 211.

^{page 193 note 6} C.V.A. Scheurleer ii, pl. 73, 4.

^{page 193 note 7} A.A. 1932, 196 Figs. 6 and 7.

^{page 193 note 8} From A.M. 1895, pl. 3, 2.

^{page 193 note 9} Pfuhl, M.u.Z. iii 82Google Scholar; a lion J.H.S. 1926, 207 Fig. 1. White was applied in thin lines on the shoulders and paws and on alternate teeth of the lions. The loop pattern on the reverse of the main zone takes the form of standing 8's with a small circle inside both circles and another between each 8.

^{page 194 note 1} J.d.I. 1887, 52 Fig. 14, Pfuhl, M.u.Z. iii 83.Google Scholar

^{page 194 note 2} Graef 367a; cf. also 347.

^{page 194 note 3} Graef 370.

^{page 194 note 4} Burr 215, Graef 357 and 375, and several unpublished sherds in Aegina Museum.

^{page 194 note 5} Burr 214.

^{page 194 note 6} J.d.I. 1899, 125 Fig. 8. The lion has the massive proportions of the animals of the Kynosarges painter.

^{page 194 note 7} Graef 351.

^{page 194 note 8} Graef 411 (a fragment pl. 55 d), 368 (cf. pl 54 b) etc.

^{page 195 note 1} Occasionally for naturalistic detail, as for blood in Late Protoattic (cf. Johansen, 144 for the earliest Protocorinthian example). Red is not used for fire, rouge, etc., in Protoattic. White is used by the Nessos painter on eyeballs.

^{page 195 note 2} A.A. 1934, 208.

^{page 195 note 3} The prothesis scene on the oenochoe A.A. 1933, 273 is paralleled on a relief plaque from Olympos in Attica, now in New York (Metropolitan Museum Handbook (1917), 56 Fig. 32, J.H.S. 1922, 217 Fig. 13).

^{page 195 note 4} For plaques see Burr, p. 606 and particularly no. 277; for shields see Burr, p. 609.

^{page 195 note 5} Burr 133.

^{page 195 note 6} Graef 369. The colour on the chariot-box on the sherd pl. 54 b (Graef 368 b) seems to be a dilution of the varnish.

^{page 195 note 7} Graef 414.

^{page 195 note 8} See A.A. 1933, 270, Fig. 10.

^{page 195 note 9} See Appendix B.

^{page 196 note 1} Benndorf Griechische und Sicilische Vasenbilder, pl 54, 1 (in colours). As a pendant to Menelaos on the stand from Aegina Beazley has suggested that the dignitary on this fragment is Agamemnon, (A.J.A. 1935, 475).Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 2} J.H.S. 1936, 141 Fig. 4, A.J.A. 1936, 544 Figs. 4 and 5. This piece is transitional to Late Protoattic.

^{page 197 note 1} The hand extended palm upwards probably represents intercession for mercy from a relative or friend of the loser, as on the neck of the Nessos vase the extended hand represents the victim's own plea. But this interpretation can hardly be applied to the ‘Klagefrauen’ on the Kerameikos mug A.A. 1934, 213 Fig. 11, and it is doubtful whether it is to be applied to the fallen warrior on pl. 52 a. On pl. 52 ƒ the hand raised in a Fascist salute may be an appeal for help or jubilation at deliverance. There are practically no conventional attitudes in Protoattic except in the Würzburg group; the Attic painter of the seventh century was reluctant to compromise his freedom. The attitudes representing generalizations of action (as the ‘Knielaufschema’ of running) or transient moods (e.g. both hands upraised in terror or clasped in suspense, or one raised to the head in distress or melancholy) were little affected by the Protoattic artist: he preferred a photographic treatment, action rather than attitude. The representation of moods is in any case commoner in sixth- than in seventh-century art.

^{page 198 note 1} The suggestion that this scene represents the dead man setting out on his last journey has little to commend it, unless the vase-painter was deliberately repudiating mythological tradition (cf. Homer ω init.). The full beard marks the central figure as elderly in contrast to the wrestler on the neck—the more precise marks of old age such as wrinkles and white hair do not so far as I know appear in Attic until after the beginning of the sixth century—and the winged horses suggest that he is setting out under divine escort. Possibly he is Tantalos about to return from the celestial dinner-party, or a hero already familiar in Attic art who was promised divine guidance in his last journey (Homer δ 561–4)

If this scene is an allegory of death, I can suggest another for the neck: Heracles, Thanatos, Alkestis.

^{page 198 note 2} Burr 194.

^{page 198 note 3} Athens 1002, Antike Denkmäler i, pl. 57.

^{page 198 note 4} M.u.Z. I, 123.

^{page 198 note 5} Athens 353, Ἐφημ. 1897, 67, pls. 5, 6.

^{page 198 note 6} A.A. 1935, 293 Fig. 19.

^{page 199 note 1} I am much indebted to the late Mr. Vlasto for allowing me to see material from Vari in the magazines of the National Museum and to publish a photograph of the sherd pl. 59 a. He christened this painter the Lion painter.

^{page 199 note 2} Inv. 31333. From a Museum photograph. Cf. the fragment Graef 387.

^{page 199 note 3} The older filling-ornament appears to a limited extent in Late Protoattic; a notable example of its survival is the amphora London A 1531, B.C.H. 1898, 285 Fig. 5, Jacobsthal Ornamente griechischer Vasen, pl. 7.

^{page 199 note 4} The fragment pl. and the Kerameikos kotyle-krater with sphinxes.

^{page 199 note 5} J.d.I. 1899, no Fig. 16.

^{page 199 note 6} A.A. 1933, 264 Fig. 5.

^{page 199 note 7} Burr 337, not from the votive deposit.

^{page 199 note 8} A.M. 1890, 323, pl. 10. This type of kotyle-krater with birds on the front, loopor spiral-patterns on the back, and sometimes a millsail pattern under the handles, became popular in this period. Cf. a fragment in the Kerameikos (A.A. 1934, 209 Fig. 8) and a later piece in Leipzig (A.A. 1923, 51 Fig. 3) which has birds of Late Protoattic type.

^{page 199 note 9} B.C.H. 1898, 283 Fig. 4. This shape of amphora had appeared rather earlier. It was specially adapted for a single large panel representation, and was taken over by the painters of the horsehead amphorae. Although no surviving horsehead amphorae are as early as this the horse protome was already familiar; whirligigs of horse protomes appear on the Late Geometric amphora fragments in Mr. Vlasto's collection (p. 167) and on the plate in the Kerameikos from ‘Opferrinne’ 2; horse protomes also appear on a little stand from Liopesi in Mr. Vlasto's collection (see p. 201) and elsewhere.

^{page 200 note 1} Hesperia ii 2 (1933), 457.

^{page 200 note 2} A list of the published works of the Nessos painter has been made by Beazley (A.B.F., 11 note); the Hamburg fragment is now published (A.A. 1928, 297 Fig. 22, and in von Mercklin's guide pl. 6 no. 60). To be added are some fragments in the Kerameikos Museum (A.A. 1934, 218)Google Scholar and from Vari including fragments of a krater in Mr. Vlasto's collection with the deliverance of Prometheus; probably also a sherd with a man's head and an owl standing on a twig, which is exhibited among Acropolis fragments in the National Museum in Athens, and another sherd shewing part of the head and shoulders of two unkempt male figures and an inscription, which I believe to be in Vienna.

^{page 200 note 3} Inst. Phot. Eleusis 359 (the two on the right) and 361 (the upper piece mentioned Payne Necrocorinthia 344).

^{page 200 note 4} Society of the Friends of the National Archaeological Museum of Athens 1934–5, 10 Figs. 8 and 8a. Beazley notes the connection with these of London A 1531 (p. 199, n. 3).

^{page 201 note 1} It would be rash at present to fix a date for the end of Late Protoattic: I cannot go further than saying that to me the Gorgon painter (NC. 191 ff., 344, 346) is no longer a Protoattic painter.

^{page 201 note 2} E.g. the use of red on the human face, the lean arched body of seated lions and sphinxes, and the mixture of occasional solid rosettes with the usual dot-rosettes and of motives of the new style with those of the old.

^{page 201 note 3} The sherds from the ‘Gang’ at Menidi, which include pl. 54 g and J.d.I. 1899, 110 Figs. 16 and 17, were found on a lower level than a pear-shaped aryballos and much Corinthian. The finds from the tomb at Vourva (A.M. 1890, 318) are of no use for the chronology of this period.

^{page 201 note 4} Hesperia ii 4 (1933), 636.

^{page 201 note 5} C.V.A. Oxford ii, III c, pl. 1, 384, 18.

^{page 202 note 1} Room L (Céramique Grecque), Case A no. 458. See Johansen, 21, 23.

^{page 202 note 2} Berlin F. 57. J.d.I. 1887, 51, no. 7, Fig. 12.

^{page 202 note 3} 1916, 39 Fig. 38, 2.

^{page 202 note 4} 1916, 35 Fig. 29; Johansen, pl. 24, 1. I have used Johansen's chronology, as it is more explicit than that advanced by Payne in Protokorinthische Vasenmalerei; the chronology which I am advancing seems to me to correspond closely with that of Payne.

^{page 202 note 5} 1916, 29 Figs. 15, 16.

^{page 202 note 6} 1916, 38 Fig. 36; Johansen, pl. 21, i, p. 83.

^{page 202 note 7} 1916, 21. Cf. tomb 29, where an ‘aryballe intermédiaire’ was found with an Early Protoattic krater.

^{page 203 note 1} Museum no. 882. See p. 181.

^{page 203 note 2} 1912, 37 (tomb 62), Johansen, pl. 4, 7. The other grave groups at Eleusis are not much use, and the stratification is not trustworthy.

^{page 203 note 3} Another argument is that Attic imitations of Protocorinthian globular aryballoi have usually Orientalizing ornament.

^{page 203 note 4} By this I mean that whereas previous works of Late Geometric had been made in Late Geometric workshops, subsequent works which look Geometric are to be classed as subgeometric products of Orientalizing workshops.

^{page 204 note 1} E.g. the early Protoattic amphora in the Louvre CA 1960 and the Thebes krater.

^{page 204 note 2} In Aegina the finds belonging to the end of Geometric and the beginning of the Orientalizing phase of all fabrics are few; there is a little Attic ware of this period.

^{page 204 note 3} The fragments of the stand pl. 52 and other sherds Waldstein, A.H. II pl. 62Google Scholar, 1 and perhaps 2, and one fine unpublished sherd in the Argive Heraeum room in the National Museum.

^{page 204 note 4} Museum no. 8673. I am indebted to Prof. P. Fossing for this information. This vase is also referred to J.H.S. 1936, 171 n. 92.

^{page 204 note 5} In Leipzig A.A. 1923, 46 Fig. 1. Since writing the above paragraph I have noted a small late Geometric bowl-pyxis in the Villa Giulia (Veio t. 815, 21). I was not able to take the vase out of the case, but can see no reason for doubting that it is Attic.

^{page 204 note 6} J.H.S. 1929, 253 Fig. 1.