¹ All acknowledgments there made on p. 226, n. 1 hold also for the present article. The photographs were here also taken either by Miss G. E. Holding or by the writers, and the coloured illustrations reproduced from water-colours by M. Gilliéron.

² See op. cit. p. 227, n. 1, and pp. 305–318.

³ For further projected articles see B.S.A. xiv. p. 228. Since that was written, Professor Burrows has excavated twenty more graves in the spring of 1909.

⁴ E.g. Fairbanks, , White Athenian Lekythoi, p. 4Google Scholar, ‘hardly older than the beginning of the 5th century’; McMahon, , A.J.A. 1907, pp. 16–17Google Scholar, B.C. 480–460. Fairbanks has perhaps overrated the influence of r.-f. on early outline lekythoi. The date of our vase points rather to a case of parallel development.

⁵ We have also to correct the account there given of the inscriptions: see below, p. 338, n. 97.

Further corrections may here be noticed.

(1) Mr. C. H. Hawes wishes us to state that further examination of the skull from Grave 26 (see B.S.A. xiv. p. 287) has led him to alter his opinion that it probably belonged to a male.

(2) On p. 295 n. 1, after ‘Boston Museum Report’ insert 1903.

(3) On Plate VIII, the words ‘scale 3 : 4’ do not refer to the vases at all. They are apparently a printer's direction which has been inserted. into the description of the Plate. The true scale would be 3 : 7.

(4) On p. 238, 1. 9, for ‘480’ read ‘490.’

(5) On p. 245, n. 3, 1. 3, for ‘60’ read ‘90.’

(6) On p. 247, 1. 18, for ‘three’ read ‘two.’

(7) On p. 273, Nos. 40–43 are skyphoi.

(8) On p. 312, n. 1, for ‘b’ read ‘l.’

⁶ As in all our graves where bones were sufficiently preserved to judge. To B.S.A. xiv. p. 265, should be added that fragments of skull in Grave 51 were ·61 m. from E.N.E. end.

⁷ A closer parallel is Grave 51, No. 27 (B.S.A. xiv. p. 266); the central part of the ‘tail’ is squarer and more pronounced than in ibid. Pl. XV. l.

⁸ Cp. also Boston Museum Report, 1899, p. 53, No. 4.

⁹ Cp. below, p. 345.

¹⁰ The only other B.K. vases from Rhitsóna with round-sectioned handles are Graves 50, No. 1; 51, Nos. 2, 18, 27; 49, No. 7; 31, Nos. 19, 20, and (less pronounced) 17, 18. The rest have handles of a deeper and flatter section. This difference in the shape of the handles seems to correspond in almost every case to the difference between Rhitsóna, and Thebes-Tanagra, ware drawn in B.S.A. xiv. pp. 311–316Google Scholar. Cp. e.g. handles of Brussels, Mus. du Cinquanténaire Nos. A36, A40, A1169, A1170, Thebes-Tanagra style, with ib. No. A37, Rhitsóna style: Bonn, Nos. 13, 1007, 1010, Thebes-Tanagra style, with ib. No. 13b (from Tanagra), Rhitsóna style: Würzburg, 5 vases, all Thebes-Tanagra style: Munich, No. 418, Thebes-Tanagra style: Schimatari ( = Tanagra), one Thebes-Tanagra style Kylix (with flying birds) with ib. four others, Rhitsóna style (Class II.). The names Thebes-Tanagra and Rhitsóna in this note refer to the predominant style of the B.K. ware from Thebes and Tanagra on the one hand, and Rhitsóna on the other, and not necessarily to provenance. The Bonn vase No. 13b and the four Rhitsóna-style vases in Schimatari Museum point to the difference between the two styles being to some extent one of time rather than locality. Cp. observations in B.S.A. xiv. pp. 312–314. The round-sectioned handle resembling that of the Corinthian skyphos would thus be the original shape, perhaps taken over, like much of the earliest B.K. ornament, from the Corinthian style.

¹¹ Cp. Nauplia Museum, No. 13.

¹² See B.S.A. xiv. Pl. IXc.

¹³ Cp. Dennis, , J.H.S. iv. p. 8Google Scholar.

¹⁴ See B.S.A. xiv. pp. 313, n. 2, 317, n. 1.

¹⁵ Moulded volute is probably part of headdress; see Jamot, , B.C.H. 1890, p. 206Google Scholar, and B.S.A. xiv. p. 255.

¹⁶ See B.S.A. xiv. pp. 309, 310.

¹⁷ At Brussels, Mus. du Cinq., there is a παπᾶς shaped like No. 129, but seemingly with traces of red on white colouring.

¹⁸ Cp. Grave 49, No. 445 (B.S.A. xiv. p. 256); Grave 31, No. 376 (ib. Pl. XII. d).

¹⁹ Cp. a similar vase but with vertical handles at Nauplia. Munich, No. 1048, similar to ours but black on ferruginous, may perhaps show how our vase was intended to look.

²⁰ For illustrations see B. S. A. xiv. Fig. 15, p. 274; Pernice, , Jahrb. 1899, p. 60Google Scholar.

²¹ Cp. Grave 31, Nos. 209–215, B.S.A. xiv. p. 278.

²² For posture cp. B. S. A. xiii. p. 97, Fig. 29 c, on a Spartan ivory.

²³ Nos. 43, 47, 48, and perhaps 44, 53, 56 have inside of handles buff, and a buff rectangle between the junctures of either handle.

²⁴ Cp. note ad loc. for Late Minoan analogies.

²⁵ Cp. Oxford, Ashmolean, 2. 20, middle shelf.

²⁶ Cp. B.S.A. xiv. Grave 49, No. 447.

²⁷ Cp. Nauplia Museum, No. 68 (an earlier vase).

²⁸ Cp. an unnumbered example, hgt. ·13 m., diam. ·21 m., in Schimatari (Tanagra) Museum.

²⁹ For figurines in this technique cp. Grave 40, No. 129 (Fig. 4), and Grave 49, Nos. 421–430 (B. S. A. xiv. p. 255); for four-handled cylix in this technique see Ath. Nat. Mus. No. 962; for history of type see below, p. 348, n. 178.

³⁰ For illustration of these and kothons see B.S.A. xiv. Fig. 15, p. 274; Pernice, , Jahrb. 1899, pp. 60, 68Google Scholar. A discussion of these vases will appear in the next volume of the Journal.

³¹ Cp. Grave 31, Nos. 189 to 215 (B.S.A. xiv. p. 277).

³² Cp. No. 80 and Grave 26, No. 86 (B.S.A. xiv. p. 283).

³³ Cp. Grave 31, No. 201, and reference ad loc.; also Louvre, F 531–537, Ath. Nat. Mus. Αἰθ. Α´, Case 13 (Marathon tomb); ibid. Case 20, Nos. 1095 (Megara) and 2316; Olympia Museum, one example; Eleusis Museum, several examples; Corneto, Museo Municipale, Stanza III.; Turin Museum, several examples; Bologna, Room 6, Case F; Orsi, Mon. Ant. i. ( Megara Hyblaea), p. 849, sep. cvi; ibid. p. 892, sep. ccxlvi.; Würzburg, Nos. H.I., 26 and 67; Trieste, Nos. 453 and 454, latter from Ephesus.

³⁴ The only example from this grave of a Group A Black-Figure shape; see B.S.A. xiv. p. 306.

³⁵ Cp. Eleusis Museum fragment with maenad (?) crowning Dionysus (?).

³⁶ Cp. Grave 18, No. 50, note (B.S.A. xiv. p. 288).

³⁷ Also Würzburg, H. III. 284, which has purple moulding round short stem, and, inside, a R.-F. Gorgoneion.

³⁸ See above, p. 309. For main figure see Bologna Museum, Pellegrini, Cat. No. 357 (Fairbanks, , Ath. Lek. p. 86, Class III. c)Google Scholar; for other close parallels, Fairbanks, ib. Class III. a, with which subdivision of Fairbanks' classification it corresponds most closely on the whole. Cp. also, not mentioned by Fairbanks, Nauplia, No. 41.

³⁹ For white ivy garland and thin red lines on black cp. Louvre, A. M. 107, low three-handled pyxis from Rhodes; a degenerate variety of same ivy branch in black on handles of a Nikos-thenes amphora, Vatican, room beyond crescent.

⁴⁰ Cp. perhaps J.H.S. xix. Pl. V. (the kantharos, black with white details, represented as carried by Dionysos on a B.-F. amphora, now at Würzburg).

⁴¹ For coloured illustration of vase like ours see Perrot and Chipiez, iii. Pl. VIII. 3 (provenance not stated). To references given in B.S.A. xiv. p. 285 add Furtwängler, , Aegina, p. 426Google Scholar; Fouilles de Delphes, tome v. fasc. 3, p. 216; Waldstein, , Heraeum, p. 353Google Scholar.

⁴² See references ad loc.; and further, Louvre, B, Central Case, Nos. 382–387 ( Myrina); Kekule, Tonfig. aus Tanagra, Pl. XV.; Gr. Terrak. aus Tanagra u. Ephesus in Berl. Mus. Pl. V.; Ath. Nat. Mus. No. 1769 (white lekythos), a girl offering a caged bird at a (funeral) stele.

⁴³ For hair and head-dress cp. B.C.H. 1897, Pl. VII., marble head from Sanctuary of Apollo Ptoos; also Louvre, B, Window Case nearest A, row nearest wall, second head from corner nearest door into A, larger than rest, with a label not written on, don de M. Haussoullier.

⁴⁴ See notes on Grave 18, Nos. 266 and 267 (B.S.A. xiv. pp. 296, 297).

⁴⁵ Cp. Haussoullier, , Quomodo Tanagraei, p. 89Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ Due to rust (?).

⁴⁷ See B. S. A. xiv. Fig. 1, p. 230.

⁴⁸ Τυμβωρύχοι naturally prefer to dig at a distance from the roadside. Hence the undisturbed condition of our main line of graves from 40–22.

⁴⁹ Cp. Bonn, No. 359; Munich, No. 3051; latter catalogued as Boeotian B.-F. under Attic influence; Louvre, F 432: also a similar skyphos in Ancona Museum.

⁵⁰ Cp. Athens, Nat. Museum, Αἰθ. Β´Πηλίνων case 108, bottora shelf; Louvre, H 83; Lausanne Museum, Nos, 505 and 504 (Cyrenaica), 503 (Nola), 502 (Eleusis), unnumbered (Athens). All Lausanne examples except 505 and 502 differ from ours in having a sort of stand, from which the legs do not detach themselves.

⁵¹ Cp. Orsi, , Mon. Ant. xvii., Gela, p. 594Google Scholar, Fig. 402 (also only bottom part, but of stone); Winter, , Ant. Terrak. iii. 1, pp. 71–75 and 48–51Google Scholar (none quite like ours); Louvre, , Salle B case L, bottom shelf; Arch. Anz. 1907, pp. 144–5Google Scholar, from Berezani near Olbia (‘terracottas like famous Milesian statues’).

⁵² See B.S.A. xiv. p. 261.

⁵³ See Naukratis i, Pl. X. 1 to 3. Gardner, E., J.H.S. viii. p. 120Google Scholar, thinks that his Pl. LXXIX. two bottom fragments would make a vase ·365 m. in diam at the mouth.

⁵⁴ And also Louvre A 330 (1) (= Salzmann, Pl. XXXVIII.), A 330 (2), and Brit. Mus. A 1000.

⁵⁵ Nauk. ii. p. 51. He quotes, however, the two Louvre vases referred to in the preceding note. So Petrie, W. F., Nauk. i. p. 19Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ Klio, Funde aus Naukratis, 1908, p. 89.

⁵⁷ So Furtwängler calls a vase smaller than ours, and apparently of our style (Berlin Cat. No. 1646), a ‘Becher,’ though he refers to a vase-shape in his Pl. V. (No. 123) which is more similar to Nauk. i. Pl. X. 1 to 3 than to ours. The foot, however, of his vase is apparently lacking. The Vourva vase (Ath. Nat. Mus. No. 995), of Naukratis shape, but not, of course, of Naukratis style, though smaller than ours (·15 m. hgt. ·11 m. diam.), is more like the larger examples referred to above, and is called both by Collignon-Couve (Cat. p. 160) and by Stais (Ath. Mitt. xv. Taf. XII. 1 and p. 327) a crater, though the latter says ῾ἡ κάτω ζώνη μετὰ τῆς βάσες ἔχουσι τὸ σχῆμα κύλικος ἀφ᾿ ἦς ἐκφύεται, οὔτως είπεῖν, τὸ ἄνω μέρος τοῦ ὰγγείου᾿

⁵⁸ C. Smith in Nauk. i. p. 51; E. Gardner, ib. ii. pp. 39, 42, 44. C. Smith, op. cit., also uses the portrayal of negroes as an argument; cp. the similar point in the Cyrene-Sparta controversy, for which see below. It would be tempting to find an argument for Naukratite local origin in the idea that the peculiar shape of our cups, scarcely paralleled except in the Vourva vase referred to in note 57, was borrowed from an Egyptian prototype. Faience cups, now yellow, but originally, it would seem, blue, such as Louvre, Salle B, centre case, No. 558, are curiously similar in shape, except for the fact that they are without handles, and give a similar effect of design with their horizontal frieze of open and shut lotus buds. We are informed, however, by Mr. H. R. Hall, that they were not made later than the eighteenth Dynasty, and could not possibly be known to the twenty-sixth. Was there some connecting link?

⁵⁹ Aus ion. Nekropolen, pp. 74–5, 79, 86, 89. Löschcke (quoted p. 75) was the first to suggest Miletus as the home of the style.

⁶⁰ Op. cit. pp. 91–97. Furtwängler, , it may be noticed (Aegina, pp. 478–80)Google Scholar, lays stress on the inscription argument, and seems to have accepted Naukratite origin without qualification.

⁶¹ Op. cit. pp. 15–39. For the name see Gardner, Nauk. ii. p. 45.

⁶² Op. cit. pp. 57–63, and Böhlau, pp. 89–124.

⁶³ Op. cit. pp. 87–99. Group B differs from Group A (an example of which is figured J.H.S. viii. Pl. LXXIX. two lower fragments) in the fact of having incisions. His Group C includes Gardner's Class B, b bowls (Nauk. ii. p. 42), an example of which is figured in J.H.S. viii. Pl. LXXIX. top fragment. His Group D are the ‘eyebowls,’ Gardner's Class B, a (Nauk. ii. p. 41).

⁶⁴ See B.S.A. xiv. pp. 236–7.

⁶⁵ See B.S.A. xiv. pp. 44–6.

⁶⁶ In letter dated May 8, 1909.

⁶⁷ B. S. A. xiv. pp. 306–7.

⁶⁸ In letter dated June 26, 1909.

⁶⁹ By Gardner, E., Nauk. ii. pp. 38–9, 51–3Google Scholar.

⁷⁰ Only preserved on (part of) the side not reproduced.

⁷¹ Nauk. i. Pl. VI. 1 and ib. ii. Pl. X. 1 are not, of course, of the ‘local Naukratite’ style. For a discussion of the presence of cocks on early Greek vases see Six, , Gaz. Arch. 1888, p. 202Google Scholar.

⁷² The former has incisions and belongs to Prinz's Group B, like our vase; Dr. Wiegand has not mentioned the point in regard to his fragment.

⁷³ B.S.A. xiv. p. 294.

⁷⁴ Mr. O. A. Rhousopoulos, who kindly stereochromatized the vase for us, finds traces of mercury in it, as well as of an oxide of iron. This means that it contains cinnabar or vermilion (sulphide of mercury). The red of the Cook Figurine from Grave 18 (B.S.A. xiv. Pl. VII. B) and of a typical Boeotian kylix, Class II. (ib. p. 309), as also analysed by Mr. Rhousopoulos, showed only an oxide of iron (Fe₂O₃).

⁷⁵ This applies to the armpits even though the χιτών may well have been sleeveless, as in, e.g. B.-F. Oenochoe of Cholchos, Berlin 1732, B.-F. Krater of Nikosthenes, Brit. Mus. B. 364 ( Wien. Vorleg. 1889, Taf. I. 1890–1, Taf. VI. 1.) and R.-F. Hydria of Hypsis at Munich (Furtwängler-Reichhold, Plate 82). The fold running down to a point behind the warrior's back shows that he wore also another garment. If it were an ἱμάτιον we should expect it to be marked off in front from the χιτών (as in B.-F. Kelebe, Brit. Mus. B. 363), unless here again the darker lines have faded. It might conceivably be a skin, such as girds the waist and hangs in a fold running to a point down the back of the charioteer on the B.-F. Amphora, Brit. Mus. B. 176.

⁷⁶ For many examples of Winged Horses as Shield Blazons see Chase, G. H. in Harvard Studies, xiii. p. 109Google Scholar.

⁷⁷ E.g. Brit. Mus. B 212 (Amphora from Vulci); Ath. Mitt. iv. Pl. XVIII.

⁷⁸ The patch of brown shows that there were four horses. Undoubted examples of trigae on vases seem late, as on a late r.-f. oenochoe, Benndorf, , Gr. u. Sic. Vas. Pl. XXXII. 5Google Scholar. See Furtwängler, , Berlin Cat. p. 476Google Scholarap. no. 2154. But note Boeotian figurine (Brussels, Mus. du Cinq. A 107), man driving waggon with three red on white horses.

⁷⁹ It has been stereochromatized by Mr. O. A. Rhousopoulos, so that we may hope its design and colours will decay no further.

⁸⁰ With one odd slip that in the sketch of the whole vase the lower strip of tooth pattern is made to point upwards, when it really points downwards.

⁸¹ The oval eye is reserved in white with faded black ball.

⁸² Pp. 193–210, 281–294. Good examples are Louvre F 114 signed by Nikosthenes, F 195, 196, 197. Brit. Mus. B 688. For discussion see Pottier, , Cat. vol. iii. pp. 748Google Scholar, 776, 778 and Rhomaios, in Ath. Mitt. 1906, p. 204Google Scholar.

⁸³ It is interesting to notice that Wolters and Six thought from hearsay descriptions that there might be a resemblance between some of the vases published by the latter (e.g. his Pl. 28 D) and the Naukratite ware, but that they were soon shown by E. Gardner that the white slip made all the difference. See Six, op. cit. p. 282.

⁸⁴ Nos. 250, 251. See B.S.A. xiv. p. 294.

⁸⁵ See above, p. 333.

⁸⁶ For an interesting discussion of this see Prinz, H. in Klio. Funde aus Naukratis, 1908, pp. 31–3, 68Google Scholar.

⁸⁷ The flaky white slip is the only point in common.

⁸⁸ E.g. the Eleusis fragment published by Rhomaios, , Ath. Mitt. 1906Google Scholar, Pl. XVII. 1.

⁸⁹ See B.S.A. xiv. Pls. VII and VIII.

⁹⁰ Nikosthenes and the black on yellow artists, another school that aimed at a whitish ground, were at least sounder craftsmen, though their style was limited by black-figure traditions and inferior to the freer red-figure. The painters of white lekythoi and kylikes, one of whom our artist may later have become, alone succeeded in combining permanence of medium with freedom of drawing on a light ground. An unpublished kantharos in the collection of Mr. Glumenopoulos, now in the Nauplia museum, kindly brought to our notice by Mr. Keramopoulos and Dr. G. Karo, has a black on white design in the style of early white lekythoi, the white slip being laid directly on the buff clay. It may well be Boeotian, and may possibly be taken as a connecting link between our vase and white lekythoi, though differing from it in its most individual features. The fact that cinnabar was used on the polychrome lekythoi (Rhousopolos in Diergart, Beiträge aus der Geschichte der Chemie, p. 181) as well as on our vase may suggest that their painters inherited the traditions of men like our artist.

⁹¹ See above p. 335, n. 74.

⁹² It is possible that this criticism may not prove justified. It is not improbable that a remarkable series of early pinakes, painted in the same four colours, represent Boeotian work, and it is possible that their red, which does not give the same impression as that of Boeotian Kylix vases and figurines, would prove on analysis to contain cinnabar. The antecedents of these vases and their relation to other polychrome ware are obscure. The two Würzburg examples (H. 1607) were obtained from Exarcho (Abae) in Phocis, on the borders of Boeotia, and are called in the Museum inventory an imitation of the style of Exekias; that from the Sammlung Arndt, now in the Museum at Munich, is stated to be from Boeotia, and to be parallel to the strong red-figure style. Notice the early eye with central ball of one of the Würzburg examples; see Pottier, Louvre, Cat. III. p. 855, Fig. 3, Walters-Birch i. p. 408, Fig. 99. That in the British Museum (Second vase Room, Case 25) was bought from an Athenian dealer with provenance unknown; the clay is browny buff, and on this is laid a pure white slip. For the centre figure, which is a dancing girl, this is reserved for flesh and dress, with details painted over in black and bright red; but on the field round her it is itself covered with black, on which details are painted in yellow and white; on the rim of the plate it is covered with red, on which a white wave pattern is painted. The colours are all matt and opaque. On three unpublished pinakes from Thymbra in the Troad (B 683, 684 and unmarked, in same case) the colour effect is similar, but there seems to be no white slip, and the composition is simpler and leaves a dominant impression of bright red.

⁹³ This criticism may partly be discounted if we feel entitled to postulate the disappearance in certain places of darker lines that originally embroidered the red; see above p. 335.

⁹⁴ Rhousopoulos, op. cit. p. 180.

⁹⁵ The question is not so simple as is assumed by Fairbanks, (Athenian Lekythoi p. 18)Google Scholar. For instance, as was first shown by Loeschcke, (Ath. Mitt. iv. pp. 36–41Google Scholar, 289–306), the present red on white appearance of the horseman of the Lyseas stele is due to the disintegration of the marble, and does not represent the original colour effect. There is, however, no reason to assume, as is generally done (op. cit. and Conze, Att. Grabreliefs i. pp. 3–4Google Scholar, Lermann, W.Altgriech. Plastik, p. 179Google Scholar, notel, Dragendorff, H., Jahrb. xii. 1897, pp. 1–8)Google Scholar, that the reddish tone that probably marked the ground colour in most of such stelai was darker than the design as a whole. Although three of these writers compare the technique of these stelai with Early Red Figure, and claim them as a parallel example of light on dark, they curiously ignore the fact that neither in Red Figure, nor indeed in any other classical vase style, was red used for a dark background. On the Lyseas stele the only actual remains of the colour of the design is in fact a purple patch, distinctly darker than any red could have been, and there is no reason to think that white was dominant. The terracotta Metopes from Thermos, (Antike Denkmäler, Bd. ii. Heft. v. 1908, Plates 49 to 53 and Text p. 5)Google Scholar, with their red and black on an orange ground, are an interesting analogy, and show that, at least in the sphere of Corinthian influence, a dark on light colour effect was already known for large surfaces and architectural designs.

⁹⁶ Furtwängler-Reichhold, Plate 82, and Text p. 112. In this, it may be noticed, as in most of such scenes, the man mounting is the inferior, the charioteer, while the warrior stands by; e.g. the Brit. Mus. Clazomenae Sarcophagoi, and B.-F. vases such as B. 176, 185, 344, 324, 325, 360. On our vase a later moment is chosen) when the charioteer has already mounted. So on Caeretan Amphora, Berlin 1655, and the Kylix of Oltos and Euxitheos, Berlin 1767 (Wien. Vorleg. 1889, Taf. X. and 1884, Series D Taf. II.).

⁹⁷ The final mending (see B.S.A. xiv. p. 228, n. 1) of the 130 plain black glaze vases from Grave 31 has proved that the Inscriptions were not, as we stated (ib. p. 281), all on separate vases. Ἀμι (Fig. 12, 17) is on the same vase as E (ib. 22), on the opposite side of the upper part of the body; P (ib. 24) is on the lower part of the same side of the vase on which Μνα (ib. 9) is on the upper part; Δα (ib. 8) and Α (ib. 25) are in corresponding positions on two handles of the same vase; Σϵ (ib. 15) is on the bottom of the foot of the vase that has on the same side of the upper part of the body both Ἁγν (ib. 16) and -νιος (ib. 10). Fresh letters or groups of letters have also been found. The fragment that fits on to the right of -νιος is inscribed ἐμι, so that the whole Inscription runs Ἁγν … νιός ἐμι; ΒΕ (Ἑ) appears on the upper part of the body of the vase which has Ε (ib. 23) on the bottom of the foot; Σμ (ib. 19) is completed to Σμι, and is on the same vase as Ν (ib. 14), on the opposite side of the upper part of the body; Ε (ib. 21) is on one of the handles of its vase, and not the foot. Further in Grave 18, in which the plain ware is now also finally mended, Πυ should be read instead of Γυ (ib. 34).

⁹⁸ A photograph of the vase showing the Inscription will be published later. There is room in the missing fragment for four letters, and the whole may with some probability be completed as Ἁγν[οσθϵ]νιος ϵἰμι See I. G. xii. 3, 330₈₅, 491, etc. (Thera). This would be a regular Boeotian Genitive of an -ϵς stem (Meister. Gr. Dial. i. p. 245). There is another alternative, that this may be an example of the extension of the use of the patronymic adjective in Boeotian so that it becomes an adjective of the possessor (see Rolfe, J. C., Harv. Stud. Class. Phil. ii. pp. 91–2)Google Scholar. This, though not impossible (cp. Meister. op. cit. p. 229, Ἀργῖος for Ἀργϵῖος), is rendered improbable from the analogy of the patronymics Καλλισθένϵιος, Ϝοικοσθένϵιος, Μϵνϵσθένϵιος (op. cit. pp. 224, 268, 229), in which seems never to be written for ϵι.

⁹⁹ Grave 50, Δάπης, Και. Grave 31, Μνα, Ν, Ἄμι, Σμι, Ε, P Ἑ. Grave 26, Γυρ-. Grave 18, Πυ. Grave 12, Κ, Ετ- or Εγ- or Εζ-, Φα or Φο, Α. Grave 46, Κλ.

¹⁰⁰ Grave 49, Δα, Α Grave 50, Λεύκων Grave 31, Γυ, Γυ, ᾿Εγιγ or ᾿Εγιπ or Γιγε or Πιγε, Σε Πτ, Ε, Χ Grave 26, Ε, Σωσα(ν)δρι, Γυ Grave 12, ᾿Αχ or Χα

¹⁰¹ Grave 31, Δα, Ε, Α, Ε.

¹⁰² Γυρ-.

¹⁰³ Nos. 21 and 20 of B. S. A. Fig 12.

¹⁰⁴ No. 23 ib.

¹⁰⁵ No. 22 ib.

¹⁰⁶ Ἀμι and Ἐ, Μνα and Π, Σμι and Ν.

¹⁰⁷ ῾Αγν[οσοθέ]νιός ἐμι and Σε

¹⁰⁸ Ἑ and Ε.

¹⁰⁹ Δα and Α.

¹¹⁰ Treated by Schoene, , Comm. Phil. in hon. Mommseni p. 658Google Scholar, and (much more fully) by Hackl, R. in Münch. Arch. Stud. dem. And. A. Furtwängler gewidmet, 1909Google Scholar.

¹¹¹ For examples of these see Smith, C., J.H.S. vi. pp. 371–7Google Scholar; Rolfe, J. C. in Harvard Studies in Class. Phil. ii. pp. 89–101Google Scholar; Walters-Birch, , Hist. Anc. Pott. ii. p. 242Google Scholar; I.G.A. 247(a), etc.

¹¹² Walters-Birch, for instance (ii. p. 238), regards all Mercantile Inscriptions as ‘scratched under the foot.’ Hackl, too (op. cit. pp. 57,59), notices that nearly all which obviously belong to his type are under the foot of the vase, and that the few exceptions are in inconspicuous positions. One of the reasons for which, with praiseworthy moderation, he rejects (ib. p. 90) the letters on the krater handles from the Temple of Aphaia is because of ‘der gut sichtbaren Lage.’

¹¹³ Whether artist, καλός, or scene-descriptive inscriptions, they are generally more prominent than would seem natural to our taste. For the doubtful point of so-called ‘nonsense’ inscriptions see B.S.A. xiv., notes to Grave 49, no. 264 and Grave 22, no. 8 (fin.).

¹¹⁴ See B.S.A. xiv. Fig. 18, p. 293.

¹¹⁵ E.g. Και, Σμι, etc. Hackl, as we have already noticed, does not press his point unduly. He professedly deals with Attic vases alone, and even thus only includes inscriptions of which there are examples enough to warrant an application of his methods. What is now needed is full details of intermediate cases, such as those from Rhitsóna, which do not obviously fall under one of the main classes. It should never be said, as it was of the mass of inscriptions from Naukratis, (Nauk. i. p. 54Google Scholar), that they were ‘only monograms or unintelligible fragments,’ which could ‘hardly be used for any scientific purpose.’ Hackl (pp. 17, 88) is justified in complaining that it is not the character of these Naukratite inscriptions, but the method of publishing them, that has made them useless for his purposes.

¹¹⁶ See I.G. vii. Index passim. The only exceptions besides those mentioned in the text are Γυρ- and Σε We have, however, Γύρων a Chalcidian, (I.G. vii. 368Google Scholar), and Γυρίδας on a non-Attic Inscription found in the Peiraeus, (I.G.A. 562Google Scholar). Σείπομπος from Thebes, (I.G. vii. 2440Google Scholar) is very late, but we have Σημωνίδης on an ancient inscription found at Olympia, (I.G.A. 1Google Scholar), Σήραμβος an Aeginetan, (Refs. ad ib. 355Google Scholar), and Σῆμος on one of the better attested lead tablets from Styra (ib. 372, ₃₄₀), as well as Σήμων and Σεύρων on ib. 372₃₄₁, 372₃₃₉.

¹¹⁷ For the termination (not -ϵις or -ϵι, as usual in Boeotian), cp. Χάρϵς (Meister, . Gr. Dial. i. p. 272Google Scholar). The name can perhaps be paralleled by the ΗΑΠΑΔ inscribed on a Corinthian Hydria from Vulci (Collitz-Bechtel, iii. 2, No. 3156, Kretschmer, , Vaseninsch. p. 26Google Scholar). Furtwängler (Berlin Cat. 1657) here finds the name Δάπας. The only other mention of the name we know is Etymolog. Mag. (Gaisford) under δάπτω, which reads ἐξ οὗ … καὶ Δάπης, ὄνομα. Hesychius gives the form δάπης for τάπης, which might be presented to S. Reinach (see below p. 341, n. 126) for his memoranda theory, or to a less moderate Hackl as a simultaneous order for carpets.

¹¹⁸ I.G. vii. 2038, Kirchner, Prosop. Att. vol. ii. Nos. 9065–9. To the apparently accidental strokes mentioned in B.S.A. xiv. p. 264 and shown ib. Fig. 12, 7 must be added a distinct line running through the circle of the fourth letter, so that epigraphically it might well be a Phi, not a Koppa. Neither Λϵυφον (or -φαν) nor Λϵκφον (or -φαν), however, is probable, unless the latter, taken as parts of separate words, could be regarded as referring to consignments of λήκυθοι or λϵκάναι (Hackl, op. cit. pp. 50, 71, 96–7).

¹¹⁹ In Rhodes, (J.H.S. vi. p. 376Google Scholar) there were three vases bearing the name Age, two in the same tomb. ᾿´Αγης εἰμι shows the class to which they belong.

¹²⁰ Nos. 11 and 12 (B.S.A. xiv. Fig. 12) are exactly the same hand. No. 29 is half-way between them and No. 30, in which the gamma approximates more to the Attic type.

¹²¹ A certain name, though apparently not actually appearing.

¹²² Sosandros, is a common name (I.G. vii. 2649Google Scholar, etc., and Fick, op. cit. p. 59), but Anticharos by the side of Antichares shows that a parallel -ης (-ϵις or -ϵι) form developed as a short form from a patronymic Sosandridas is not impossible. For their frequency in Boeotia and their datives in -ι see Blass, , Rhein. Mus. 1881, pp. 604–7Google Scholar. For other datives of the man to whom a vase was given see I.G.A. 219, and cp. also Boeckh, , C.I.G. 545Google Scholar.

¹²³ Nauk. ii. Nos. 717, 795.

¹²⁴ I.G. ii. 444, 68 (1), 751 d. 15.

¹²⁵ Op. cit. p. 42.

¹²⁶ It is possible that this may be one of the cases where a vase, like our rough notebooks, and odd half-sheets, was a corpus vile for the memoranda of the moment. Reinach, S. (Epig. Gr. p. 451Google Scholar) makes this alternative of more general application than is probable.

¹²⁷ Cp. Foat, F. W. on abbreviations in Greek Papyri in J.H.S. xxii. pp. 136Google Scholar, 138.

¹²⁸ Mon. Ant. xvii. pp. 62–3.

¹²⁹ See Fick, op. cit. p. 85. Though the second consonant from the left may be a Pi, the first cannot be. Otherwise we migh have conjectured the letters to be the beginning of an ἐπί with the genitive or dative, such as we find on Boeotian tombstones, e.g. I.G.A. 127, 131, 132, 135, etc., or of a name such as Ἐπιγϵνής (I.G.A. 40, I.G. vii. 1747).

¹³⁰ Cp. p. 340, n. 115, and Klein, , Lieblingsinschrift.² p. 122Google Scholar. For Smikros, an artist's signature, see ib. pp. 126–7.

¹³¹ Op. cit. pp. 105, 32, 33.

¹³² Walters-Birch, ii. p. 242; I.G.A. 524.

¹³³ As suggested by Smith, C. in Naukratis i. p. 48Google Scholar. Cp. B.S.A. xiv. p. 298, note on Grave 18, No. 269.

¹³⁴ B.C.H. 1895. Face C, line 23 and pp. 1, 17, 23, 32. The point is of course not certain except for the given locality and date. The inscription has, so far as we know, not been noticed for this special point, but only as another example of a sumptuary law for funerals, such as those known for Athens (Plut., Solon 21Google Scholar) and for Iulis (I.G.A. 395). The chief interest of these sumptuary laws is that they illustrate the general tendency to funerary extravagance, and show us that the huge number of vases found in some of the Rhitsóna, graves (B.S.A. xiv. p 245Google Scholar, n. 3) should not strike us as odd.

¹³⁵ Sosandri, of course, even if a dative, may have been the gift of the man to whom the vase was originally given. Cp. I. G. A. 205 and 219, and above, p. 341, n. 122. It might, however, conceivably refer to the dead man, and so, on the analogy of the Ἀπόλλωνός ϵἰμι of Naukratis i. p. 54, etc., might Ὀνασίδαό ϵἰμι. But the view obviously could not be extended to many of our inscriptions, unless we were to postulate repeated interments.

¹³⁶ We may notice that the Aphrodite dedications were incised indifferently on body of vase and foot. Cp. Naukratis ii. Nos. 706–738 with ib. Nos 748–761.

¹³⁷ Furtwängler, (Aegina, pp. 456Google Scholar, 479–80) notices that the Naukratite potters who painted on their vases, before firing, the names of their Aeginetan customers who wished to take them home to dedicate to Aphaia, naturally used Ionic dialect and alphabet. Hackľs interesting point (pp.92–5) that Ionian letters are found on Early Attic vases and prove an Ionian carrying trade, does not affect this argument, as they would, according to his view, if we understand him right, be incised in such cases by the Ionian traders themselves on pattern vases, etc. that formed part of their order.

¹³⁸ If we think that even the earliest of his signatures are more regular than those we are considering; cp. B.S.A. xiv. Fig. 18 and pp. 245, 305, and below, p. 348.

¹³⁹ Klein, , Lieblingsinschrift.² p. 24Google Scholar, notices that καλός names, like artists' signatures, are not found on white ground sepulchral Lekythoi, and remarks that they appear to be foreign ‘der sepulchralen Gattung.’ Another unusual καλός inscription is the Ἐπίλυκος καλός of Klein, , Meistersig.² p. 115Google Scholar, Lieblingsinsch.² p. 5. Cp. also Orsi's interesting discussion in Mon. Ant. xix. pp. 96, 102–15; there, however, it is surely more natural to suppose that, while Ἀνακρέων is scene-descriptive of the lyre-player, ὁ παῖς καλός is only a case, to use Klein's words (Lieb.² p. 1) ‘des ungezähltemal vorkommenden ὁ παῖς καλός, ἡ παῖς καλή and not, as Orsi suggests, appropriate, and ‘alludente alle tendenze del poeta,’ as well as ‘alla modo della pittura vascolare.’ Besides the doubtful case alluded to above (p. 316), there are only four καλός inscriptions mentioned as incised by Klein, (Lieb. ² pp. 61Google Scholar, 81, 137, 118), and of these the last is filled in with red paint. Ἀβαιοδορς καλς however, as stated above (p. 316), is also almost certainly incised, and is perhaps the example most like our own that exists. It is possible, however, that Klein has not noticed the point in other cases, as (op. cit. p. 53) he has not in this.

¹⁴⁰ Gönnt' Alles seinem Erben,

Den Becher nicht zugleich.

¹⁴¹ In the spirit of II. Samuel i. 23.

¹⁴² Or Eleon; the modern Dritsa, the nearest station to Rhitsóna on the Athens-Thebes line. See Frazer, , Pausanias v. pp. 62–5Google Scholar.

¹⁴³ V. 43; for the date see Macan, , Herodotus, vol. ii. p. 84Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁴ See Klein, , Lieblingsinsch. p. 6Google Scholar, etc. The word συνεβούλευσε looks as if Antichares was a private individual travelling in Peloponnesos, who happened to know some of the oracles of his own country-side. If, however, he were a professional μάντις he would still probably be of a distinguished family, and a leading man in his own city; cp. Scholia ad Aristoph. Pac. 1071, Βάκιδες δὲ τρεῖς, ὧν ὁ πρεσβύτατος ἐξ ᾿Ελεῶνος τῆς Βοιωτίας. So the two Eleans who were the μάντεις on each side before Plataea have their family carefully given by Herodotus (ix. 33–7); compare too the leading part played by Theaenetus, son of Tolmides, in the escape of the Plataeans (Thuc. iii. 20). In the sixth century we should expect a μάντις to belong still more certainly to one of the old priestly families.

¹⁴⁵ See Walters-Birch, i. pp. 403–4, ii. p. 267.

¹⁴⁶ Inconsistencies in names are not uncommon in literary tradition itself: e.g. the Anchimolios of Hdt. v. 63, is the Anchimolos, of Ath. Pol. 19Google Scholar. 5.

¹⁴⁷ See above, p. 315. In Fick, , Griech. Personennamen ², pp. 287–8Google Scholar, there are compounded from the root χαρ- thirty-two examples of proper names ending in -χάρης as against one ending in -χάρης Roehl, indeed, thought this one (᾿Αγλώχαρος I.G.A. 389) so odd, that he wrongly (see Collitz and Bechtel, , D.I. iii. 2Google Scholar, 5, p. 552) read it as genitive ( = -ους for -εος).

¹⁴⁸ In spite of slips in vase inscriptions, such as those given in Kretschmer, , Vaseninsch. p. 185Google Scholar, Klein, , Meist. ² p. 47Google Scholar, we can hardly imagine that in such a case the writer made a mistake, either from casualness or ignorance. But it is possible that both forms were used indifferently of the same man, in the way in which Fick shows that the same man could be called either by his short or his full name (op. cit. pp. 35–6). If we could find an example where the same man had his name spelt in -εος and -ει (see Meister, , Griech. Dial. i. p. 272Google Scholar), it would not really be parallel. The alternative short-names Βαυκίς and Βαυκώ in Erinna (Fick, loc. cit.) are nearer.

¹⁴⁹ Whether we regard the variation as accidental, or as a deliberate attempt at differentiation.

¹⁵⁰ Pp. 332–4 and Plate XXV.

¹⁵¹ Grave 46, No. 157 (Fig. 11), and Graves 31, No. 361, and 26, No. 235 (B.S.A. xiv. pp. 279, 285, and Pl. XII. b).

¹⁵² From the graves already published we have 819 round-bodied aryballoi with floral ornament, 687 black glaze kantharoi.

¹⁵³ All the vases published here and in B.S.A. xiv. are now exhibited grave by grave in the Museum at Thebes.

¹⁵⁴ Cp. Böhlau, , Jahrb. 1888, p. 340Google Scholar, Fig. 17, and remarks on p. 339 before No. 56.

¹⁵⁵ Contrast the series of Boeotian oinochoai discussed p. 348, n. 178: the distinctive shape of that series might be used as an argument against our Grave 31, No. 23 being Boeotian; but on the other hand it does show that Boeotian potters made oinochoai, and that they used Corinthian models.

¹⁵⁶ Louvre, L 199, suggests a connexion with the skyphos series Nos. 28–32 of Grave 51, which have Proto-Corinthian features: cp. also Graef, Die ant. Vasen von der Akrop., No. 415, Taf. 15.

¹⁵⁷ Böhlau, , Jahrb., 1888, p. 333Google Scholar, has no hesitation in ascribing his No. 21 to Boeotia. [Ganze Schale mit braunschwarzem Firnis überzogen: darauf einige rote Streifen gemalt, und ringsumlaufend weisse Punktrosetten.]

¹⁵⁸ Between Nos. 21 and 22 may be placed Grave 26, No. 37.

¹⁵⁹ Cp. Grave 18, No. 22.

¹⁶⁰ Their close connexion with the series intermediary between Proto-Corinthian and Black-Figure is also obvious, and again illustrates the difficulty of assigning some of these vases to any single class, even transitional.

¹⁶¹ Cp. also our Grave 18, Nos. 233 and 234, with Ath. Nat. Mus. Nos. 1118 and 623 (Collignon and Couve No. 630, Pl. XXVI). Their peculiar hexagonal-sectioned handles seem to group them together. The first three are black glaze kantharoi, the fourth a b.-f. kantharos very much like Grave 50, No. 265.

¹⁶² For a direct connexion between Nos. 12 and 251 cp. the band of rough black dots just below shoulder of 251 with similar band round top of outside of No. 12. The connexion between 12, 14, and 251 is best seen if 12 and 14 are inverted.

¹⁶³ Vases that would fall easily into our (d) series seem to have been found in various parts of the Greek world: e.g. into Grave 49 series, Ath. Nat. Mus., No. 768 (=Cat. No. 365) from Kerameikos; Brussels, Mus. du Cinq., A 1679, from Keos; into Grave 51 series, Brussels, Mus. du Cinq. A 44, boxight at Corinth; Bari, No 780, from Ruvo.

The small vases with swimming birds and fill ornament seem particularly wide spread: see Böhlau, , Aus ion. Nekr. pp. 44Google Scholar and 135 and Taf. V. 5–7; Graef, , Vasen der Akrop., pp. 61Google Scholar fol.: Böhlau, on the strength of two examples found by him in Samos and the occurrence of swimming birds (with a quite different fill ornament) on a spät-milesisch fragment (loc. cit. Taf. XII. 6) assigned the type to Ionia. Graef (loc. cit.) on the ground of 15 examples found in Attica claims it ‘provisionally’ as Attic. Graef's argument is certainly 7½ times as cogent as Böhlau's.

¹⁶⁴ See also Orsi, , Mon. Ant. xix. Nuove Ant. di Gela, p. 98Google Scholar.

¹⁶⁵ They have also some slight but striking details the same, e.g. the ray pattern round the inner rim of No. 263 and the foot of No. 265.

¹⁶⁶ For the rough white cable pattern of Grave 31, No. 42 (same pattern in black round top and bottom of top zone of Grave 26, No. 38) cp. B.C.H. 1897, p. 451, Fig. 6, a kantharos from Thebes with floral pattern much like that on our Grave 50, No. 273 (=B.S.A. xiv. Pl. X. i) and, perhaps, Arch. Anz. 1889. p. 156, a παπᾶς now in Dresden, apparently in the colours of our class I (B.S.A. xiv. p. 308). The ornament seems characteristic of Boeotia, but not confined to it, cp. e.g. Mon. Ant. xvii. Gela, p. 200, Fig. 155.

¹⁶⁷ See especially the vases just quoted as combining elements of several styles.

¹⁶⁸ For corrections of B.S.A. account, see above p. 338, n. 97.

¹⁶⁹ See above, §5. In the cases especially where one vase has two inscriptions in different hands, it seems unlikely that both were put on by the maker.

¹⁷⁰ See Gardner, E., Greek Sculpture, p. 147Google Scholar, n. 1; I.G.A. Nos. 126, 150, 168, 258.

¹⁷¹ For references see B.S.A. xiv. p. 305, note 2. See also above, §5, pp. 342–3.

¹⁷² See Klein, , Meistersig. ² p. 212Google Scholar. So long of course as no Teisias vases are found outside Boeotia, every new one found in Boeotia increases the probability of a Boeotian workshop. A workshop in Boeotia does not of course exclude the possibility of others elsewhere. It may be only a curious coincidence that a Black Glaze kylix (Ath. Nat. Mus., No. 2492), said to have come from Corinth, of our Graves 26, 18, 12, 46 style, is inscribed in Corinthian letters with a name that would perhaps naturally be read Τιμέας (so Kretschmer, , Vaseninsch. p. 18Google Scholar); but the third letter has a longer stroke than Corinthian mu generally has, and could possibly be an example of ‘τὸ σὰν κίβδηλον ἀνθρώποις.’ See Kretschmer, op. cit. p. 20 No. 19, p. 25 No. 35, and pp. 148–9 of Prof. Rhys Roberts' forthcoming edition of Dion. Hal. De Comp. Verb. For ι instead of ϵι in first syllable cp. Kretschmer p. 18, on a Corinthian aryballos, Φιδίας, where, as Kretschmer says, p. 36, ‘steht wirklich ι für ϵι, wohl nur Verschreibung’. For ϵ instead of ι in second syllable cp. ib. p. 36, Ἀφιτρϵταν for Ἀμφιτρίταν. We know that Teisias varied the length, the spelling, and the handwriting of his inscriptions. Is it possible that he had a branch at Corinth where his name appeared in this much altered form ?

¹⁷³ E.g. sign of a shop at Casablanca (Aug. 1909), ‘Old England, Articles pour hommes. B. Nahun and Co.’

¹⁷⁴ The descriptions of previously known Teisias vases were published 30 years ago, and are very inadequate. The only one we have been able to see, Ath. Nat. Mus., No. 2239, has all the distinguishing features of the Rhitsóna vases.

¹⁷⁵ Walters-Birch, Pl. XVII. 6; Dumont and Chaplain, i. p. 290, Fig. 53; Heydemann, Gr. Vasenb. Pl. X. Fig. 7; Wiener Vorl. 1888, Pl. I. 5 and 6; de Witte, , B.C.H. 1878, pp. 550–551Google Scholar and Fig. on p. 549; Klein, , Meistersig.² p. 31Google Scholar, No. 2.

¹⁷⁶ To be remembered when reading Pottier, , Rev. Arch. 1899, p. 7Google Scholar, ‘Mais les Béotiens en (i.e. des aryballoi) ont fabriqué aussi, comme il est prouvé par ľaryballe de Gamédès.’ Cp. ibid. Fig. 3, a quatrefoil aryballos of our Group A type with a Corinthian inscription.

¹⁷⁷ Dumont and Chaplain, p. 287, Fig. 52; Rayet and Collignon, pp. 81 fol. and Fig. 42; Wiener Vorl. 1888, Taf. I. 2 and 7; de Witte, , B.C.H. 1878, pp. 548–550Google Scholar; Rev. Arch. xxix. 1875, pp. 172–173; Gaz. des Beaux-Arts, 1875, i. p. 303; Klein, , Meistersig.² p. 31Google Scholar, No. 1.

¹⁷⁸ Couve, , B. C. H. 1897, pp. 444–449Google Scholar. Couve regards his Figs. 1 aud 2 as earliest, anterior to all Corinthian influence; the Gamedes oinochoe as coming next and representing the developed Boeotian type, still uninfluenced by Corinthian; his Fig. 3 as latest, and under direct Corinthian influence. Note, however, that his Fig. 1 is much like our Grave 46, No. 32 (= Fig. 10). This suggests that it represents the latest stage of the group, when Corinthian influence was already dying, not still to begin. His Fig. 2, which we would follow him in classing with his Fig. 1 and in making contemporary with the developed B.K. style (cp. Jahrb. 1888, p. 343, Fig. 27, reversed S pattern: ibid. p. 338, Fig. 14, egg(?) pattern; B.S.A. xiv. Pl. XV. d, chevrons) must also be dated later than both his Fig. 3 and the Gamedes oinochoe. Fig. 3 we would ascribe, as did Couve himself, to direct Corinthian influence; but whereas he dates it latest in the series, we are inclined to put it earliest and anterior (at least in type) to the B.K. style. The Gamedes oinochoe remains in the middle of the inverted series, but is brought into the period of Corinthian influence, a position which is confirmed by the report that two Corinthian vases with animal friezes were found in the same grave with it (Dumont and Chaplain, i. 287, n. 2, quoting Rayet's catalogue of his own collection). This chronological re-arrangement of the Boeotian oinochoai not only accords better with our evidence for the absolute dating both of vases and inscriptions, but is also supported by the analogy of the Boeotian kylikes (see B.S.A. xiv. pp. 308–318, and cp. Brussels, A 36 (B. K. with aryballos daisy pattern) and the Boston kylix discussed just below), since we thus have both kylikes and oinochoai deriving some of their chief elements from the developed Corinthian style.

¹⁷⁹ Cp. B.S.A. xiv. p. 227, n. 1 and above p. 323, where we have catalogued one of them as belonging to the Boeotian-Kylix style.

¹⁸⁰ Fairbanks, , Boston Museum Report, 1898, p. 22Google Scholar, No. 5, hgt. ·13 m., diam. ·288 m.

¹⁸¹ Note especially the band of dots as on early Corinthian aryballoi, and cp. B.S.A. xiv. p. 315.

¹⁸² Fairbanks, loc. cit. ‘The drawing of all the figures is evidently imitative.’ The incisions are against an early Proto-Corinthian model, see Wilisch, , Altkor. Tonind. pp. 6Google Scholar fol.

¹⁸³ Arch. Zeit. 1881, Taf. IV.

¹⁸⁴ The mere fact of great quantities of any ware being found at any place is of course no argument for a local production, if such ware is known to have been made at some other centre. With plain and presumably cheap ware like the Rhitsóna aryballoi and black kantharoi, importation on a large scale is quite conceivable. Such ware could indeed be imported into Boeotia from a distance only if the Boeotians were prepared to buy by the cartload. (For Corinthian pottery being conveyed in shiploads cp. Wilisch, , Altk. Tonind, p. 14Google Scholar.)

¹⁸⁵ A three-handled kothon at Würzburg with main zone of animals as on Grave 51, No. 33 has inside a red band on which is painted a thin white zigzag line. Cp. Graves 49, No. 3, and 31, No. 1.

¹⁸⁶ E.g. Böhlau, , Aus ion. Nekr. p. 75Google Scholar. ‘Das Verhältnis ist ähnlich dem der in böotischen Werkstätten gefertigten und bemalten Vasen zu den korinthischen und protokorinthischen Originalen. Wären uns nur die böotischen Funde, die dort importierten Stücke und die Masse der Nachbildungen, bekannt, so müssten wir aus deren Ungleichheit auf ausserhalb Böotiens gelegene Fabriken schliessen, denen die guten Stücke entstammen.’ Böhlau's allusion is vague. He seems to be alluding to all Corinthian ware found in Boeotia that is not of first-class quality, and to be assuming that the inferior quality cannot have been an import. Cp. above, p. 350, n. 184, and Winter, . Ant. Terrak. iii. 1Google Scholar, p. xv. on coarse figurines made for cheap market.

¹⁸⁷ On Gamedes aryballos, see p. 348, n. 176.

¹⁸⁸ B.C.H. 1897, p. 445. See above, p. 348, n. 178.

¹⁸⁹ A fully developed tongue pattern in black and purple, but of rough execution, occurs on a Boeotian παπᾶς Ath. Nat. Mus., No. 4305.

¹⁹⁰ Cp. Furtwängler, , Arch. Anz. 1891, p. 116Google Scholar. Couve, , B.C.H. 1897, pp. 450–461Google Scholar confidently claimed the whole series as Boeotian. Nine out of the ten that he quotes (p. 451) from Berlin Museum were found in Boeotia. The fact that the tenth was found at Vulci does, perhaps, weaken his case more than he admitted (see p. 352, n. 200). So with the single example (Ath. Nat. Mus., No. 499) found at Phaleron (as opposed to four trom Boeotia, two of unknown provenance) in the series he records (p. 452) from Ath. Nat. Mus. Cp. also a number of unpublished kantharoi and other vases of similar style in Louvre, Salle L.

¹⁹¹ E.g. also, most of Couve's Nat. Mus. series (including, however, No. 499, see last note); Bonn, No. 334 (Boeotia); Nauplia, Nos. 2 and 72; Munich, No. 427.

¹⁹² Cp. also Grave 49, Nos. 13 and 14, and Grave 31, No. 43, skyphoi that can be connected by a long intermediary series with Grave 36, No. 2; but see above, p. 346, n. 163.

¹⁹³ See B.S.A. xiv. p. 269. The vase has duplicates, e.g. Ath. Nat. Mus., No. 12847 (Tanagra), Munich, No. 2258 (labelled Attica); we have not yet obtained details as to provenance of other examples.

¹⁹⁴ See B.S.A. xiv. p. 306.

¹⁹⁵ Cp. Grave 18, Nos. 133–135, Catalogue, , B.S.A. xiv. p. 292Google Scholar; note also No. 217 of grave referred to (Grave 31) and cp. Klein, , Meistersig.² p. 212Google Scholar (Teisias Krater mit Oelkranz-ornament am Rande).

¹⁹⁶ See B.S. A. xiv. pp. 305–308.

¹⁹⁷ A b.-f. skyphos at Bonn (No. 304) of distinctly our Group B style should perhaps be ascribed on internal evidence to Boeotia: main zone is divided into panels (3 on each side), a typical Boeotian-Kylix arrangement; four of the panels have down-turned palmettes with petals black and purple alternately, a favourite Boeotian-Kylix ornament.

¹⁹⁸ See above pp. 346–7.

¹⁹⁹ E.g. the occurrence of practically the same colour scheme on such different objects from a single Grave (18) as a Boeotian kylix (No. 1), the Cook figurine (No. 267), and the polychrome kantharos (No. 248). The red of No. 248 is, however, of a different shade and contains mercury.

²⁰⁰ E.g. the careless b.-f. types of the late B.K. graves have been found in Sicily (Orsi, , Mon. Ant. xvii. Gela, p. 105Google Scholar, Fig. 66, and p. 286, Fig. 209; Röm. Mitt. 1898, p. 316). Boeotian pottery, however, got to Eretrin, and from there it may of course have travelled far: cp. Hutton, , Ἐφ. Ἀρχ. 1899, pp. 25–27Google Scholar, on Boeotian παπᾶς and horseman found at Eretria.

²⁰¹ See, e.g. the useful statistics drawn up by MissRichter, G. M. A., B.S.A. xi. pp. 224–241Google Scholar; there are 26 b.-f. skyphoi, 15 kylikes and 3 kantharoi from Boeotia in the Athens Museum to 3 skyphoi, 7 kylikes and no kantharoi from Attica. Miss Richter's statistics do not support the assumption, made by her without question, that all the Boeotian vases must be Attic export. Unfortunately, the vases that illustrate this point are generally not of striking individual interest. They are not well represented in museums (see G.M.A. Richter, op. cit. p. 228), and information of any value about them is only obtainable from more recent excavations. (See e.g. Kinch, , Explor. Arch. de Rhodes, p. 114Google Scholar.) Some results might be possibly arrived at by comparing the history of other arts in Boeotia: see, e.g. Robert, C., Arch. Zeit. 33, 1875, p. 152Google Scholar, on local and imported Boeotian sculpture (or perhaps sculptors).