¹ All subsequent dates in this article are BC.

² Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe Hamburg 1981.173. Schauenburg, K., ‘Εὐρυμέδον εἰμί’, AthMitt 90 (1975) 118Google Scholar attributed the vase to the circle of the Triptolemos Painter, a late Archaic painter. This oinochoe shape–Beazley's type 7–is commonly decorated with Greek v. Persian imagery at this time. See, for example, Raeck, W., Zum Barbarenbild in der Kunst Athens im 6. und 5. Jahrhundert v. Chr. (Bonn 1981) cat. P 573Google Scholar (in a private collection, published by Schauenburg, K. in Kunst der Antike. Schatze aus norddeutschen Privatbesitz (Mainz 1977) 344–46,Google Scholar no. 294) and P 602 (London, BM 1912.7-9.1, attributed to the Painter of the Brussels Oinochoai: ARV² 775.1; Add² 299), as well as Vatican 16536 (illustrated in Boardman, J., Athenian Red Figure Vases. The Classical Period (London 1989)Google Scholar fig. 220).

³ Schauenburg (n.2) 103. His argument is championed, most notably, by Dover, K.J., Greek Homosexuality (London 1978) 105Google Scholar.

⁴ The exact date of the battle is much debated. See, most recently, Badian, E., ‘The Peace of Callias’, in From Plataea to Potidaea. Studies in the History and Historiography of the Pentecontaetia (Baltimore 1993) 6–10Google Scholar (with previous references).

⁵ Pinney, G.F., ‘For the heroes are at hand’, JHS 104 (1984) 181CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Davidson, J.N., Courtesans and Fishcakes. The Consuming Passions of Classical Athens (New York 1998) 170–71Google Scholar agrees with Pinney that it is not a patriotic statement, although he does not comment on her reading of the inscription (but seems to accept that of Schauenburg).

⁶ Pinney (n.5) 182-83. I accept Pinney's reading of the inscription, which has also been accepted recently by Kilmer, M.F., ‘Rape in early red-figure pottery: violence and threat in homo-erotic and hetero-erotic contexts’, in Deacy, S. and Pierce, K.F. (eds.), Rape in Antiquity (London 1997) 137.Google Scholar I thank Andrew Stewart for bringing this collection of essays to my attention.

⁷ In Prot. 318e Plato uses this expression to contrast the affairs of the city with those of the home. Plato seeks a similar contrast in Ap. 20b, where Socrates asks τίς τῆς τοιαύτης άρετῆς, τῆς άνθρωπίνης τε καὶ πολιτικῆς, έπιστήμων έστίν; ‘Is there someone knowledgeable in both human and civic virtue?’

⁸ Paus. 5.18.1-2. This work is customarily dated to 600-590, on the basis of the lifetimes of Kypselos and his son.

⁹ On a black figured lekythos attributed to the Class of Athens 581 (490-480), in Eichenzell (Adolphseck), Schloß Fasanerie 12 (ABV 491.60; Add ² 122; Para 223; CVA Schloss Fasanerie 1, pl. 13.4-6); a pelike attributed to the Geras Painter (490-480), Louvre G 234 (ARV ² 286.16; Add² 209); a Nolan amphora attributed to the Charmides Painter (490-480), London, BM cat. E 290 (ARV ² 653.1; Add² 276; CVA British Museum 5, pl. 48.2); a pelike attributed to the Matsch Painter (480-470), Rome, Villa Giulia 48238 (ARV ² 284.1; Add² 208; CVA Villa Giulia 4, pl. 22); the latest example is preserved on skyphos fragments attributed to the Penthesilea Painter (450-440), Oxford, Ashmolean Museum 1943.79 (ARV ² 889.160; Add² 302; Para 428).

¹⁰ Shapiro, H.A., Personfications in Greek Art. The Representation of Abstract Concepts 600-400 BC (Zurich 1993) 95-109, 239–42Google Scholar.

¹¹ On a black-figure pinax fragment (570-560), Athens, NM 2526: Shapiro (n.10) 242 no. 52.

¹² On a fragmentary oinochoe attributed to Euthymides (510-500), New York, MMA 1981.11.9 (with other fragment[s] in a private collection): Add² 405; LIMC 7 (1994) 243 s.v. Peitho no.1 (N. Icard-Gianolio); and Makron's skyphos in Boston (mentioned in n.53).

¹³ On a black-figure dinos signed by Sophilos (580-570), London, British Museum 1971.11-1 (ARV ² 40.16bis; Add² 10-11; Para 19; Shapiro (n.10) 253 no. 141). She is also labelled on the north frieze of the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi (530-520): For the label see Brinkman, V., ‘Die aufgemalten Namenbeischriften an Nord- und Ostfries des Siphnierschatzhauses’, BCH 109 (1985) 77–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁴ The only other known Archaic personification, Oknos (Sloth), was said by Pausanias (10.29.1) to have been shown in the Classical period (470-460) on the Nekyia painting by Polygnotos in the Lesche of the Knidians at Delphi. Shapiro (n.10) 257 no. 116 suggests that Oknos may also be present on an unlabelled black-figure lekythos (500-490) in Palermo, Museo Archeologico 996. Other non-Attic art works, particularly coins, of course, illustrate personifications, but these are all Classical or later.

¹⁵ It is interesting to note also that three of these ‘political ideas’ are the only labelled personifications in the Archaic period to appear as participants in standard mythological stories: Harmonia discovered by her future husband, Kadmos; Peitho at the judgment of Paris; and Themis at the wedding of Peleus and Thetis.

¹⁶ On a fragment of an unattributed black figured eye cup (520-510), Basel, Coll. Herbert Cahn HC 826 (Shapiro (n.10) 39-44; 231 no. 7, fig. 6; LIMC 3 (1986) 389 s.v. Dike no. 1 (H.A. Shapiro)); on an unattributed bilingual Nikosthenic neck amphora (520-510), Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum 3722 (ARV ² 11.3,1618; ARV 320; Add² 151; Para 321; CVA Vienna 2, pl. 51). Despite Dike's popularity in the literature of fifth century Athens, she never appears in Classical Athenian art.

¹⁷ Isler-Kerenyi, C., Nike. Der Typus der laufenden Flügelfrau in archaischer Zeit (Stuttgart 1969)Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Such representations of Nike are particularly apparent on Nolan amphorae, for which see Beazley's chapter 37 in ARV ². As she appears earlier than most, and is intimately connected with Athena in Classical Athens, but rarely with other political personifications, Nike warrants special attention, which she has now begun to receive. See Gulaki, A., Klassische und Klassizistische Nikedarstellungen. Untersuchung zur Typologie und zum Bedeutungswander (Diss. Bonn 1981),Google Scholar and LIMC 7 (1994) 850–904Google Scholar s.v. Nike (A. Moustaka, A. Goulaki-Voutira, and U. Grote).

¹⁹ C. 460-450. Boston, Museum of Fine Arts 20.187: ARV ² 857.2; Add² 298; Para 425.

²⁰ Anangke has no mythology, except for brief euhemeristic appearances, as the mother of Aphrodite (Hymn. Orph. 55.3), and the mother of Moira (Pl. Pit. 10.617b-e). See, most recently, LIMC 1 (1981) 757-58 s.v. Anangke (E. Simon).

²¹ C. 470-460, thought to be in the style of the Providence Painter. Moscow, The Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts II 16 117. O. Tugusheva, CVA Moscow 5 (forthcoming); Sidorova, N.A., Tugusheva, O.V., and Zabelina, V.S., Antique Painted Pottery in the Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, Moscow (Moscow 1985) no. 43,Google Scholar fig. 83; Lossewa, N.M., ‘Attische rotfigurige Vasen des 5. Jhs. v. U.Z. in der Sammlung des Museums der Bildenden Künste (Puschkin Museum) in Moskau’, Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Universität Rostock 16 (1967)Google ScholarGesellschafts und Sprachwisenschaftliche Reihe 7/8, 9/10, 481-82, pl. 47.1; Гοс удас твеннь ій мусей иэобраэите ль нь іх ис кусс тв им А.С. Лушкина Античноε ис кусство каталог (Moscow 1963) no. 31; Blavatsky, V., ‘К вопорсу об иэобкражении Ананки. Трудьі Секции искусствоэнания Инстита археологии и искусствоэнанияб’, РАНИОН 4 (1928) 70–74,Google Scholar pl. 7.1.

The label for this character is ΑΝΑΝΑΗ, which is usually interpreted as a misspelling of ΑΝΑΓΚΗ. Although a misspelled inscription is inconclusive, it is likely that a personification was intended, as this winged figure is comparable in form and function to the contemporary images of Nikai; the artist would have added the label to distinguish Anangke from the more popular Nike. The label (in red dipinti) is sloppily written (as well as misspelled, if Anangke was indeed intended to have been represented); it may even have been a nonsense inscription. On the basis of the inscription, the attribution of this vase to the Providence Painter is unlikely, because that artist generally wrote quite neatly, as also noted by Immerwahr, H.R., Attic Script. A Survey (Oxford 1990) 104Google Scholar.

²² Hdt. 8.111. This may be the first explicitly political use of a personified abstract in Greek literature. A variant story was told by Plutarch (Vit. Them. 21), that the Greek deities were Peitho and Bia (Strength), and that the Andrian deities were Penia and Aporia (Resourcelessness). It is impossible to determine which story was correct, although I am inclined to favour Herodotos, for Bia, a masculine deity, was commonly paired with Kratos in Archaic art, as noted by Shapiro (n.10) 166-67, 189. Bia and anangke are, however, related concepts, paired in Gorgias' Encomium of Helen: ἢ γὰρ Τύχης βουλήμασι καὶ θεῶν βουλεύμασι καὶ Ἀνάγκης Ψηφ ίσμαιν ἔπραξεν ἂ ἔπραξεν, ἢ βίαι άρπασθεῖσα, ἢ λόγοις πεισθεῖσα, <ἢ ἔρωτι άλοῦσα> (82 B 11.6 DK).

²³ Pollitt, J.J., ‘Pots, politics, and personifications in early Classical Athens’, YaleBull 40 (1987) 14,Google Scholar suggests that they are ‘quasi-personifications’.

²⁴ C. 480-470, attributed to the Aegisthus Painter. New Haven, Yale 1985.4.1: Matheson, S.B., ‘A red-figure krater by the Aegisthus Painter’, YaleBull 40 (1987) 2–7Google Scholar.

²⁵ Hdt. 7.189-92. See Pollitt (n.23) 10.

²⁶ It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss whether Kimon, a well known patron of the arts, directly commissioned vase painters to illustrate Theseus and Poseidon in reference to himself and his accomplishments. Certainly the association of Kimon with Theseus has been well documented elsewhere. For an overview of Kimon's use of Theseus, see Shapiro, H.A., ‘Theseus in Kimonian Athens: the iconography of Empire’, Mediterranean Historical Review 7 (1992) 29–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Kimon's visit, in 474, to Skyros, the legendary burial site of Theseus, to recover the bones of the great hero, as described in Plut. Vit. Thes. 36 and Vit. Cim. 8.5-6, see Podlecki, A.J., ‘Cimon, Skyros and “Theseus' Bones”’, JHS 91 (1971) 141–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar and, more recently, Mills, S., Theseus, Tragedy and the Athenian Empire (Oxford 1997) 35–36Google Scholar. For Kimon's patronage of the arts see Plut. Vit. Cim. 4; Kimon probably also commissioned the cycle of paintings that decorated the Stoa Poikile, c. 470-460, which prominently illustrated Theseus. These wall paintings, painted by Mikon and Panainos (both of Athens), are mentioned in Paus. 1.15.3, 5.11.6, and Plin. HN 35.57; for modern sources see, most recently, LIMC 6 (1992) 357Google Scholar s.v. Marathon no. 1 (X. Arapojanni) (with previous bibliography). For political influence on the artists' choices of particular subjects see J. Boardman's series of articles regarding the tyrant Peisistratos and the iconography of Herakles, most recently ‘The sixth century potters and painters of Athens and their public’, in Rasmussen, T. and Spivey, N. (eds.), Looking at Greek Vases (Cambridge 1991) 79–102,Google Scholar and ‘Herakles, Peisistratos, and the unconvinced’, JHS 109 (1989) 158–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁷ C. 470-460. New Haven, Yale 1913.143 (ARV ² 503.25; Add² 251). Pollitt (n.23) 9-11.

²⁸ See Shapiro, H.A., ‘Local personifications in Greek vase painting’, in Πρακτικά του XII Διεθνούς συνεδρίου κλασικής αρχαιλογίας 1983 B' (Athens 1988) 205–8,Google Scholar for an apolitical treatment of local personifications.

²⁹ The use of overtly political personifications of place and abstract ideas, in the late fifth century and fourth century, on document and votive reliefs and free-standing statues, as well as paintings, is surveyed in Smith, A.C., Political Personifications in Classical Athenian Art (Diss. New Haven 1997)Google Scholar chs. 3-4.

³⁰ C. 490-480. London, British Museum 1873.8-20.375 (cat. no. E 140): ARV ² 459.3, 481, 1654; Add² 243. Although Eleusis is a feminine personification here, Panyassis (in Apollod. 1.5.2) called Eleusis the father of Triptolemos (Hyg. Fab. 147; Servius (ad Verg. G. 1.19), however, calls ‘him’ Eleusinos). For more on Eleusis, see LIMC 3 (1986) 720 s.v. Eleusis (D. Gondicas).

³¹ Clinton, K., Myth and Cult. The Iconography of the Eleusinian Mysteries (Stockholm 1992) 124Google Scholar. For a broader view of the political significance of Triptolemos, see Matheson, S.B., ‘The mission of Triptolemos and the politics of Athens’, GRBS 35 (1994) 345–75Google Scholar.

³² C. 470-460. The J. Paul Getty Museum 89.AE.73 H.0.368m, attributed to the Syleus Painter by J.R. Guy. See Matheson (n.31) 355; Clinton (n.31) 106, figs. 43-46; ‘Acquisitions/1989. Antiquities’, GettyMusJ 18 (1990) 167Google Scholar no. 5 (ill.). Neither Hippothon nor Kalamites may be regarded as true personifications in this context as their names are related to, but not identical to, the names of the tribe/event that each of them represents.

³³ Both Okeanos and Tethys were children of Earth and Heaven (Ge and Ouranos) (Hes. Theog. 136) and parents of the Okeanids and the rivers (Hes. Theog. 337-69; Hom. Il. 14.201). For Okeanos see LIMC 7 (1994) 31-33 s.v. Okeanos (H.A. Calm). Tethys (Τηθύς) was initially the consort of Okeanos (Horn. Il. 14.201, 302; Hes. Theog. 136, 337), and later came to mean the sea itself: Anth. Pal. 7.214.6; Lycophr. 109; Nonnus, Dion. 31.187; Orph. Argonautica 335. It is difficult to decide whether the plethora of sons and daughters of Okeanos and Tethys, the eponymous heroes and heroines of rivers, fountains, and springs–themselves progenitors of islands and towns should be regarded as true personifications. Their names are certainly old, and some are mentioned by Hesiod–Neilos, Alpheios, and Strymon, to name a few of the rivers (Hes. Theog. 338-39). Anthropomorphic representations of rivers and springs, whose identities are confirmed by labels, however, function like personifications, and are thus treated as such in this discussion.

³⁴ See a black-figure dinos, British Museum 1971.11-1.1 (LIMC 7 (1992) 32Google Scholar no. 1, pl. 22 (H.A. Cahn)), for perhaps the earliest inscribed example of Archaic Okeanos.

³⁵ For river iconography see the discussion of Okeanos and his sons on the pointed amphora, above, as well as Weiss, C., Griechische Flußgottheiten in vorhellenistischer Zeit (Berlin 1985),Google Scholar as well as relevant entries in LIMC.

³⁶ The Syriskos Painter was known as the Copenhagen Painter until the discovery of his signature on the Getty krater mentioned below (n.37).

³⁷ C. 480-470. The J. Paul Getty Museum 92.AE.6. See LIMC 7 (1994) 32 s.v. Okeanos no.6 (H.A. Cahn); Shapiro (n.10) 219-20, 263 no. 145, fig. 181; ‘Acquisitions/1992. Antiquities’, GettyMusJ 21 (1993) 107Google Scholar no. 10 (ill.).

³⁸ C. 470-460. See Weiss, C. in Simon, E., Mythen und Menschen. Griechische Vasenkunst aus einer deutschen Privatsammlung (Mainz am Rhein 1997) 104–10Google Scholar no. 30; LIMC 7 (1994) 32Google Scholar s.v. Okeanos no. 4, pl. 22 (H.A. Cahn), 815 s.v. Strymon no. 1, pl. 577 (C. Weiss); s.v. Herakles no. 2631 or 2681 (J. Boardman et al.), s.v. Hesperides no. 72a (I. McPhee); LIMC 6 (1992) 177Google Scholar s.v. Ladon 1 no. 1, pl. 81 (I. McPhee); 725 s.v. Neilos no. 68 (M.-O. Jentel); Tiverios, M.A., ‘Ikonographie und Geschichte’, AthMitt 106 (1991) 129–36Google Scholar pls. 22-25; Cahn, H.A., ‘Okeanos, Strymon und Atlas auf einer rotfiguren Spitzamphora’, Ancient Greek and Related Pottery (Copenhagen 1988) 107–16,Google Scholar figs. 1-7.

³⁹ Weiss (n.38) 106 has now read the label of the man behind Strymon as [ΣΚ]—Α—ΜΑΝΔ[Ρ]ΟΣ (Skamander) and that of the youth behind Okeanos as Μ[ΑΙ]—ΑΔΡΟ—Σ (Maeander?).

⁴⁰ Tiverios (n.38) 123.

⁴¹ This genealogy is provided by Diod. Sic. 4.27.2. Alternatively, the Hesperides are daughters of Nyx and Erebos (Hes. Theog. 215). Okeanos is also shown with the Hesperides on a later representation on a pelike attributed to the Pasithea Painter (400-390) in New York, MMA 08.258.20 (ARV ² 1472.2), where he appears as a horned man.

⁴² This vase, painted in a style near the Lewis Painter, is dated to c. 460-450. See LIMC 7 (1994) 652Google Scholar s.v. Salamis no. 2, pl. 498 (E. Manakidou), 915 s.v. Thebe (c) (C. Vlassopoulou); Schefold, K. and Jung, F., Die Sagen von den Argonauten, von Theben und Troia in der klassischen und hellenistischen Kunst (Basel 1989) 86–87,Google Scholar figs. 68-69; MuM 56 (1980) no. 104Google Scholar pl. 46.

⁴³ Salamis, a daughter of Asopos and Metope, gave birth with Poseidon to Ky(n)chreus, the eponymous hero of the Corinthian harbour, according to Apollod. 3.12.7 and Tzetz. Lycophron 110, 175,451. For modern and ancient sources see LIMC 7 (1994) 652–53Google Scholar s.v. Salamis (E. Manakidou).

⁴⁴ For Thebe in a variety of contexts see, most recently, LIMC 7 (1994) 914–16Google Scholar s.v. Thebe (C. Vlassopoulou).

⁴⁵ Schefold and Jung (n.42) 87.

⁴⁶ According to Hymn Horn. Cer., Demeter roamed the earth in search of her daughter, teaching agricultural techniques to all, before she came to settle at Athens.

⁴⁷ Arafat, K.W., ‘State of the art–art of the State’, in Deacy, S. and Pierce, K.F. (eds.), Rape in Antiquity (London 1997) 110–15Google Scholar. Arafat frames his arguments as an answer to John Boardman's query whether this ‘otherwise important’ scene was popularized by anything political or military: Boardman, J., Athenian Red Figure Vases. The Archaic Period (London 1975) 224Google Scholar. There are more examples of the scene on early Classical vases, but only two are labelled: a column krater attributed to the Boreas Painter (460-450), New York, MMA 96.19.1 (ARV ² 536.5; LIMC 1 (1981) 368Google Scholar s.v. Aigina no. 15, pl. 282 (S. Kaempf-Dimitriadou)) and a hydria by Polygnotos (450-440), Brussels, Musées Royaux R 226 (ARV ² 1032.65; CVA Brussels 3,3 1d pl. 9 (78) 1).

⁴⁸ For the controversy regarding the date of the surrender of Aigina see CAH V² 501 and Figueira, T.J., Athens and Aigina in the Age of Imperial Colonization (Baltimore 1991) 115–20Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ Arafat (n.47) 114-15 argues more convincingly against Alan Shapiro's association of the popularity of this scene with the establishment of the cult of Aiakos, for which see H.A. Shapiro, rev. of K.W. Arafat, Classical Zeus (1990), in AJA 95 (1991) 747–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar. As Arafat points out (115), the popularity of this cult does not decline in the middle of the fifth century, when the depiction of Aigina's pursuit ceases to be depicted on Athenian vases.

⁵⁰ Amymone, the eponymous heroine and nymph of a spring at Lerna, in the Argolid, and a daughter of Danaos had a brief period of popularity in the mid-fifth century, when Attic vase painters depicted Poseidon's pursuit and rape of the heroine: see LIMC 1 (1981) 742–52Google Scholar s.v. Amymone (E. Simon).

⁵¹ Schauenburg (n.2) 103. Schauenburg's interpretation has been reasserted most recently by Miller, M.C., Athens and Persia in the Fifth Century BC. A Study in Cultural Receptivity (Cambridge 1997) 13Google Scholar. In Die unheimliche Klassik der Griechen (Bamberg 1989) 19,Google Scholar T. Hölscher accepts Schauenburg's overall interpretation, without specifying which character he takes to be Eurymedon.

⁵² One might argue that, although neither the river nor the area around it were ever considered Greek, they too came under Greek control as a result of the battle: see Badian (n.4) 4.

⁵³ As suggested by Pinney (n.5). Up to the high Classical period dipinti labelling characters usually originated near the head of the characters, progressing forward if they were on the right side, and retrograde if they were on the left. For a clear example see the Makron skyphos in London (see n.30). For an interesting counter-example, however, see Makron's skyphos in Boston (490-480), on which two of the left-side red dipinti are not retrograde (Peitho on side A, and Kriseis on side B): Museum of Fine Arts 13.186 (ex Spinelli Coll.); ARV ² 458.1, 481; Add² 243; Para 377. Boardman, J. makes the same observation in ‘Kaloi and Other Names on Euphronios' Vases’, in Cygielman, M. et al. (eds.), Euphronios. Atti del Seminario Internazionale di Studi. Arezzo 27-28 Maggio 1990 (Florence 1992) 45, pl. 56,Google Scholar where he discusses another counter-example: Hypnos, on a cup formerly in the Hunt Collection (LIMC 7 (1994), pl.- 520)Google Scholar. I thank H.A. Shapiro for bringing this article to my attention.

⁵⁴ Nor does the image of the archer correspond to the appearance of river personifications. See n.41 and the discussion of Okeanos and his sons on Syriskos' pointed amphora (PLATE 10a-b).

⁵⁵ Pinney (n.5) 181. This cape is much more rectangular and schematic than those worn by Thracians found elsewhere in Attic vase painting. See, e.g. A. Lezzi-Hafter, ‘Offerings made to measure: two special commissions by the Eretria painter for Apollonia Pontica’, in Oakley, J.H., Coulson, W.D.E. and Palagia, O., Athenian Potters and Painters (Oxbow Monographs 67, Oxford 1997)Google Scholar figs. 12-18.

⁵⁶ Antikenmuseum Basel und Sammlung Ludwig, BS 480, c. 460. See Hölscher, T., ‘Ein Kelchkrater mit Perserkampf’, AK 17 (1974) 78–85Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ Kilmer, M.F., Greek Erotica on Attic Red-Figure Vases (London 1993) 128Google Scholar takes it to be a sign of youth, in an interpretation that is likewise unsubstantiated. For comparable Thracian beards see Lezzi-Hafter (n.55) figs. 12-18.

⁵⁸ Pinney (n.5) 182. If one insists on the Thracian origins of this cloak and beard (which I shall not) they could be taken as an allusion to Kimon, who concentrated his efforts on Thrace immediately after the Battle of the Eurymedon. For more on the circumstances surrounding this battle see Badian (n.4) 2-6.

⁵⁹ London, BM D 7: ARV ² 763.3; Add² 286. For this identification of the hunter see A. Griffith, ‘“What leaf-fringed legend…”: A cup by the Sotades painter in London’, JHS 106 (1986) 58-70. Alternative interpretations have been made recently by Hoffmann, H., Sotades. Symbols of Immortality on Greek Vases (Oxford 1997) 134–39Google Scholar (reworked from an earlier article, Hoffmann, H., ‘Aletheia. The iconography of death/rebirth in three cups by the Sotades painter’, RES 17–18 (1989) 67–88),Google Scholar and Burn, L., ‘Honey pots: three white-ground cups by the Sotades painter’, AK 38 (1985) 93–105Google Scholar. The traditional interpretation, that the hunter represented Hippomedon, at the death of Opheltes/Archemoros, was made by Smith, C.H. in Catalogue of the Greek and Etruscan Vases in the British Museum 3. Vases of the Finest Period (London 1896) 392Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ It is perhaps worth noting that the pilos–another form of headgear common to labourers–is worn by the Greek battling the Persian on the Basel krater (PLATE 11a).

⁶¹ ARV ² 624.77, 1662; Add² 271. This character has been identified as Diktys, the fisherman who found Danae in Aischylos' Diktyoulkoi: Luschey, H., ‘Danae auf Seriphos’, BABesch 24–26 (1949-1951) 28,Google Scholar n.15. (John Oakley now tells me that he believes this fragment might actually represent another boatman, Charon). In comparable representations of the Danae story the fisherman does wear the conical fur hat, but not the ‘goatee’: see Oakley, J., ‘Danae and Perseus on Seriphos’, AJA 86 (1982) 114CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶² Barringer, J.M., ‘The aristocratic response to democracy as evidenced by Attic vase painting images of the hunt’, American Philological Association 130th Annual Meeting. Abstracts (Washington, D.C. 1998) 91Google Scholar. A full discussion and list of relevant vases are forthcoming in J.M. Barringer, Manhood, Myth, and Valor: The Hunt in Ancient Greece (forthcoming 1999).

⁶³ Arafat (n.47) 103.

⁶⁴ For the power of the phallos see Reinsberg, C., Ehe, Hetärentum und Knabenliebe im Antiken Griechenland (Munich 1989) 177Google Scholar. Davidson (n.5) 169-82 argues convincingly that Athens' phallocratic nature has been overstated, although he admits (170) that the Hamburg oinochoe ‘seems to demonstrate unequivocally a connection between penetration and power’.

⁶⁵ Kilmer (n.57) 107 explains that it is the only clear homosexual example of the use of the penis as a weapon. He compares this scene to that on a cup in Florence by the Antiphon Painter (ARV ² 339.54), in which a balding, bearded man prepares to mount a nude woman a tergo: ‘his right (hand) grasps his erect phallos as though it were a weapon: the four finger grip is not required for guidance’.

⁶⁶ Miller, M.C., ‘Persians: the Oriental other’, Source. Notes in the History of Art 15 (1995) 40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶⁷ Schauenburg (n.2) 105; see also Schauenburg, K., ‘Siegreiche Barbaren’, AthMitt 92 (1977) 91–100, pls. 40–41Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ Pinney (n.5) 181.

⁶⁹ Arafat (n.47) 102.

⁷⁰ Raeck (n.2) 102-03. This is also discussed in Bovon, A., ‘La représentation des guerriers Perses et la notion de Barbare dans la lre moitié du Ve siècle’, BCH 137 (1963) 587Google Scholar. In Die Darstellung der Perser in der griechischen Kunst bis zum Beginn des Hellenismus (Coburg 1933) 28,Google Scholar H. Schoppa also noted that the representation of Persian battles is a new phenomenon in the early fifth century, for which new iconographic types were evolving.

⁷¹ For more on these slippers see Bovon (n.70) 594.

⁷² Munich, Antikenmuseum 2308 (J 374): ARV ² 26.2, 1620; Add² 156 (signed by Euthymides).

⁷³ These are the salient physical features that distinguish Greek archers in oriental costume from Persian archers, according to Bovon (n.70) 592.

⁷⁴ Hdt. 4.1.1. The Scythian was probably the most common eastern ‘type’ encountered in fifth century Athens, as the Scythian archers served as a police force. For the Scythian in fifth century Athens see Jacob, O., Les Esclaves publics à Athènes (Paris 1928) 53–78Google Scholar. For written sources see Ar. Acharn., and particularly Sch. Ar. Acharn. 54, as well as Andoc. 3.5; Etym. Magn. 761; Poll. Onom. 8.104, 132; Suda s.v. τοξόται. For depictions of archers in vase painting see Vos, M.F., Scythian Archers in Archaic Attic Vase-Painting (Groningen 1963)Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ For this gesture in the context of rape see Zeitlin, F., ‘Configurations of rape in Greek myth’, in Tomaselli, S. and Porter, R. (eds.), Rape (Oxford 1986) 128Google Scholar. This gesture has been read also as an indication that he is supporting himself on an invisible window: Pinney (n.5) 181. It has been discussed at length by J. Rusten, ‘“I am Eurymedon”: comparative obscenity and the birth of comedy’, lecture at Yale University, 17 April 1997, and Fehling, D., Ethologische Untersuchungen auf dem Geburt der Altertumskunde (Munich 1974) 103–4Google Scholar.

⁷⁶ The Persian on the Basel krater (PLATE 11b) is also shown in a frontal pose and Miller (n.66) notes that his frontal face ‘expresses his lack of control’.

⁷⁷ Lissarrague, F., L'Autre Guerrier. Archers, Peltastes, Cavaliers dans l'imagerie Attique (Paris 1990) 48–49Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ While the anticipated sexual act suggested in this context (between males) is anal penetration, one must accept Boardman's note (in Boardman, J., rev. of Dover, K., Greek Homosexuality (London 1978),Google Scholar in JHS 100 (1980) 245)CrossRefGoogle Scholar that the a tergo approach in images that depict female passive partners does not necessarily imply anal copulation. Hölscher (n.51) 18-20 emphasizes that on early Classical (pre-Periklean) monuments, Persians, as foes of the Greeks, are often shown in particularly humiliating circumstances, unprecedented in Greek art, and that this was an important step in building the collective identity of the Greeks.

⁷⁹ Kilmer (n.57) 22.

⁸⁰ Arafat (n.47) 114 has discussed this ‘explicit’ use of rape as a metaphor for victory in connection with similar implicit uses of the rape metaphor, as in the rape of Aigina (by Zeus) or Oreithyia (by Boreas).

⁸¹ See especially Plut. Kim 12.1.

⁸² Eurymedon's distance from the archer, who symbolizes the (peoples of the) East, could also serve as an ironic comment on Kimon's notorious inaction in the aftermath of the battle. See Badian's summary of the events following the battle: Badian (n.4) 4.

⁸³ LSJ s.v. προσωποποιἲα.

⁸⁴ The modern Greek equivalent, προσωποποίησις, refers to artistic, as well as literary personifications.

⁸⁵ Demetr. Eloc. 265. This text is traditionally (but probably wrongly) ascribed to Demetrios of Phaleron, but has been dated as late as the early Roman period. See Kennedy, G.A., A New History of Classical Rhetoric (Princeton 1994) 88–90Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ Aesch. PV 1-88. Kratos and Bia were also paired, as attendants to Zeus in Hes. Theog. 383-85. Kratos appears alone in Aesch. Eum. 244. For Bia paired with Peitho, see n.22.

⁸⁷ 82 B 6 DK. Regarding whether Gorgias' Epitaphios could have corresponded to an actual event, see Buchheim, T., Gorgias von Leontinoi. Reden, Fragmente und Testimonien (Hamburg 1989) 190 n.2Google Scholar.

⁸⁸ 37 B 1-10 DK, esp. B 2.

⁸⁹ 86 A 9 DK.

⁹⁰ See also the end of the messenger's speech in Eur. Medea 1225-30, where the complaint against intellectuals is irrelevant to the play.

⁹¹ Davidson (n.5) 181 suggests that the attribution of the name, Eurymedon, to this figure, might be a literary allusion, as it was the name of several historical and mythological figures.

⁹² Rusten (n.75) has also discussed this vase in relation to Old Comèdy.

⁹³ Hall, E., ‘The archer scene in Aristophanes' Thesmophoriazusae’, Philologus 133 (1990) 38–54Google Scholar.

⁹⁴ E. Simon has specifically discussed the fishermen-scenes as echoes of Aischylos' Diktyoulkoi: Simon, E., ‘Satyr-plays on vases in the time of Aeschylus’, in Kurtz, D. and Sparkes, B. (eds.), The Eye of Greece. Studies in the Art of Athens (Cambridge 1982) 139Google Scholar.

⁹⁵ I. Worthington and E.L. Brown have argued similarly for a theatrical Attic influence on the (Corinthian) painters of the ‘Sam Wide Group’ vessels that caricature Kleon and Brasidas or Demosthenes the Athenian politicians of the 420s–in a sexually explicit manner: see Worthington, I., ‘Aristophanic caricature and the Sam Wide group cups’, Eranos 88 (1990) 1–8;Google ScholarBrown, E.L., ‘Cleon caricatured on a Corinthian cup’, JHS 94 (1974) 166–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar.