¹ Burkert, W., Structure and History in Greek Mythology and Ritual (Berkeley/L.A./London 1979) 39–41Google Scholar.

² Schauenburg, K., AthMitt xc (1975) 97–121, pl. 25Google Scholar. The vase is now in Hamburg, Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe, inv. 1981.173. For the photographs and permission to publish them I thank W. Hornbostel.

³ Schauenburg (n. 2) 104 n. 38a.

⁴ Dover, K.J., Greek Homosexuality (London 1978) 105Google Scholar.

⁵ Schauenburg (n. 2) 103 acknowledges that normally an inscription refers to the nearest figure, and notes exceptions.

⁶ See the references given by Schauenburg (n. 2) 104, and Davies, J. K., Athenian Propertied Families (Oxford 1971) 334Google Scholar.

⁷ On the Thracian mantle, and the alleged adoption of Thracian costume in Athens from 550 BC onwards, see Cahn, H., RA 1973, 13–15Google Scholar, and W. Raeck, Zum Barbarenbild in der Kunst Athens im 6. und 5. Jahrhundert v. Chr. (Bonn 1981) 69–70. The form of the beard is characteristic of eastern barbarians; for Scythians see Vos, M., Scythian Archers in Archaic Attic Vase-painting (Groningen 1963) 56Google Scholar, and Pinney, G. F. in Moon, W. G., ed., Ancient Greek Art and Iconography (Madison, Wisc. 1983) 127–9Google Scholar; for Thracians see Raeck 70. Raeck does not challenge Schauenburg's identification of the figures on the Hamburg oinochoe as Greek and Persian respectively, but is obviously troubled by the ‘Greek's’ beard; ‘Möglicherweise verbirgt sich hinter den individuell anmutenden Merkmalen des Griechen (sorgfältig frisiertes Haar, Haarbüschel unter dem Ohr, Bocksbart) eine Pointe, die auf einen aktuellen Sachverhalt anspielt, etwa in dem Sinne, dass der Dargestellte es bekanntermassen mit Orientalen trieb (nach dem Sieg am Eurymedon?)’ (285 n. 574).

⁸ On the state of preservation of the oinochoe, see Schauenburg (n. 2) 97. It is notoriously difficult to distinguish Scythians from Persians in the vase-paintings, unless the action gives specific clues; on this point see Raeck (n. 7) 102–3 and 28. Of the items that he lists as generally more appropriate for Persians—scimitar, pelta, cuirass, chiton, shoes, full beard–our archer has only the shoes, and those are worn by Scythians on fifth-century representations, as Schauenburg himself notes, 108. Schauenburg's strongest argument for identifying the figure as Persian is the date he assigns to the vase: the late 460s. It is true that after 490 BC pictures of Scythians are extremely rare (see Vos [n. 7] 81–4); there exist, however, early classical ones, e.g. on the skyphos by the Pan Painter, ARV ² 559.148; Vos 126 no. 416. Moreover, our oinochoe is early in the series of oinochoai of type VII, if it belongs next to the Boehringer piece (ARV ² 363.26) by the Triptolemos Painter. This is dated around 480 BC by Schefold, K., Meisterweke griechischer Kunst (Basel/Stuttgart 1960) 198 no. 214Google Scholar. The Hamburg oinochoe should be dated after 480, perhaps as low as 470, but it is far from obvious that it was painted after the battle at the Eurymedon.

⁹ ARV ² 554.82.

¹⁰ Rhode Island 25.087; ARV ² 363.29 bis. Hamanaka, B. K. in Aspects of Ancient Greece (Allentown, Pa. 1979) 80–1Google Scholar. Note that Schauenburg (n. 2) 102, places the oinochoe in the circle of the Triptolemos Painter.

¹¹ See Vos (n. 7) 6–39, and Raeck (n. 7) 41–63, 319–22, giving a supplementary list of representations.

¹² Vos (n. 7) 61–80. Her views are adopted, with few modifications, by Raeck.

¹³ Welwei, K.-W., Unfreie in antiken Kriegsdienst (Wiesbaden 1974) 9–32Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Pinney(n.7) 127–46; for Scythians in mythical and heroic scenes see Vos (n. 7) 34–9, and Raeck (n. 7) 62–3.

¹⁵ Epic figures, such as Paris, Troilus, and, at the time of our oinochoe, even Achilles, are sometimes given barbarian traits and dress, see Schauenburg, K., AuA xx (1974) 88 ff.Google Scholar, and Raeck (n. 7) 65.

¹⁶ Puns and double entendres of this sort are frequent in comedy; see e.g. Ar. Wasps 84, the pun on Philoxenos' name. At Eccl. 1021 the youth despairs: ‘οἴμοι Προκρούστης γενήσομαι’, punning on the obscene sense of προκρούειν; see Henderson, J., The Maculate Muse (New Haven/London 1975) 171Google Scholar. Later, Anth. Pal. xii 174 is entirely built around obscene puns on proper names; on these see Vorberg, G., Glossarium Eroticum (Stuttgart 1932) 284, 352Google Scholar. εὐρύς seems to have been often understood in an obscene sense (see LSJ s.v. Εὐρώτας, II), particularly in an homosexual meaning. See e.g. Ar. Knights 719–20, and Henderson 210–11. On εὐρυπρωκτία see also Dover (n. 4) 140–3.

¹⁷ CAF i 648 no. 174; Henderson (n. 16) 178–80.

¹⁸ Parodies of names of barbarian archers, according to the scholiast, followed by modern scholars, e.g. Stanford, W. B., ed., Aristophanes, Frogs (London 1958)Google Scholar. For name endings in -ᾶς, good for foreigners and scurrilous nicknames (both conditions apply here), see Peppier, C. W., Comic Terminations in Aristophanes and the Comic Fragments (Baltimore 1902) 41Google Scholar.

¹⁹ Hunter, R. L., Eubulus: The Fragments (Cambridge 1983) 24Google Scholar. The possibility that the picture on the oinochoe was inspired by a comedy is brought up by Schauenburg (n. 2) 121.

²⁰ Among the earliest titles preserved is Heroes by Chionides, active eight years before the Persian War (Suda X 318); on fifth-century mythological comedy see now Hunter (n. 19) 22–30, with references.

²¹ Stanford (n. 18).

²² Hunter (n. 19) 75 no. 120.