Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:15:27.631Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Four Lekythoi in Chalcis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

A. D. Ure
Affiliation:
University of Reading

Extract

There are in Chalcis Museum four black-figured lekythoi of sixth-century date. Two, nos. 567 and 569, were mentioned by Professor Haspels in Attic Black-figured Lekythoi 28 f., but the others have not, as far as I am aware, been noticed. None of them fits neatly into any Attic group, though three can be loosely connected with the Dolphin class. One is certainly from Styra. The finding-place of the others is not recorded, but there can be no doubt that they are from sites in Euboea. The close resemblance between Attic and Eretrian vase-painting makes it difficult to distinguish Atticising work made in Eretria from Attic imports, while so far black-figured vases of the archaic period from workshops in Chalcis have not been recognised. Nevertheless a study of the four lekythoi now in Chalcis reveals affinities with the few vases that are already known to be of Euboean origin and indicates that they should be classed with them rather than with Attic.

The first, no. 960 (ht. 19·5 cm.) is seen on plate IX. 1–3 (2 is from the same negative as 1 with the red and white retouched). The shape of the vase can be seen in the illustrations and needs no comment. On the shoulder opening flowers, black with a central petal in applied white, alternate with red buds. On the body a panther faces a grazing stag with one group of four fine dots between them and another beneath the body of the stag. Though the general appearance of the vase is not noticeably unlike Attic some unusual features can be observed. First, the three gently curving brush strokes which emphasise and embellish the ribs of the panther are not accompanied by incised lines. Though it is common enough to find incision and no paint on this part of an animal, it is only very rarely that we find paint with no incision. For parallels we have to turn to two of the Eretrian grave amphorae in Athens. Both the Wedding and the Herakles amphorae show important vestiges of an earlier unincised style of painting, for on the first the whole of the back of the vase lacks incision, on the second the whole of the foot. Some scenes show a compromise between the incised and the unincised, part of the scene, or even part of a figure, lacking the usual incisions. So here, in the case of our panther, though incision is used on the head, legs and hindquarters, the ribs are merely painted, without the incised lines to which the painting is normally only an adjunct. See plate IX.2 and compare the ribs of the panther with those of the completely unincised lions on the back of the neck of the Eretrian Wedding amphora, BICS vi pl. 1.1. Further, as has already been pointed out in this Journal, the markings in red that brighten up the bodies of Eretrian animals are shapely and ornamental, generally tapering downwards. Between the incised lines on the hindquarters of both the panther and the stag we have decorative markings of this kind, broader at the top, making a gentle curve and tapering to a point at the base, while the three on the ribs of the panther, though smaller, are also well shaped.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 I am indebted to Dr J. Papademetriou for permission to work in Chalcis Museum and to publish the vases here discussed; to Mrs S. Karouzou for permission to publish a lekythos in Athens and details from the Peleus amphora, Athens 12076; and to Mr John Boardman for the photographs used for plates IX. 1–3, X.1, 2.

2 A fifth, decorated only with ivy leaves and chevrons, is figured in BSA lv (1960) pl. 55.4.

2a For 569 see BSA xlvii (1952) 46, n. 309 and AJA xlv (1941) 64, n. 4.

3 We are not here concerned with the question of the vases generally known as ‘Chalcidian’.

4 1004: CC667 (Wedding) and 12075: N889 (Herakles). See Boardman, BSA xlvii (1952) 30 ff.Google Scholar

5 BICS vi (1959) 1 f.

6 Cf. the Judgment of Paris on the Wedding amphora, ibid., 1 f., pl. 2.3.

7 JHS lxxx (1960) 162.

8 JHS lxxx (i960) 165 and n. 26.

9 The fountain basin on the neck-amphora by the painter of London B 76 with Troilos, and Polyxena, , CV Brit. Mus. iii pl. 35.1Google Scholar, is equally small.

10 Pace Cook, R. M., Greek Painted Pottery 104Google Scholar, referring to Eretria.

11 Soobshcheniya (Hermitage) xvi (1959) 48 f.

12 Cf. the Euboean fourth-century vase with palmette decoration in Oxford which is said to have come from South Russia, BSA lv (i960) pl. 56.6, 8; CV i pl. 48.18.

13 Four of the birds on 3c are painted up.

14 Athens 12076: N890. See Boardman, , BSA xlvii (1952) 38 f.Google Scholar, pl. 9c.

15 Inv. 41.162.36. See Beazley, , ABV 458.Google Scholar

16 JHS lxxx (1960) 164. I propose to deal more fully with this group later.