No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Since the publication of Hartwig's epoch-making book there has been something of a lull in the study of Greek vase-painting of the best periods; at all events few further attempts have been made to deal with individual artists or schools, and their relation to the history of the subject in general. The time has perhaps come for a revival of our interest; and though it is not claimed for the present paper that it has such ambitious aims, it may yet serve to direct attention to a class of vases not treated by Hartwig, in fact hitherto largely neglected. In dealing with the work of the artist Hischylos, I cannot claim to rehabilitate him, as Hartwig has done with Phintias, Onesimos, and other artists, chiefly owing to the fact that, whatever the interest of the vases signed with his name, we have no certain ground for crediting him with the decoration of any single specimen.
1 On this question generally see Pottier, , Cat. des Vases die Louvre, iii. pp. 699 ffGoogle Scholar.
2 Euphronios, p. 42.
3 C. Smith, Cat. of Formali Coll. No. 305.
4 Jahrb. 1889, Pl. 10.
5 See Ath. Mitth.. iv. p. 41, where this stele is suggested as having given birth to the idea of R.F. vase-painting.
6 See Zahn in op. cit. 1898, p. 75, 1908, p. 178. His views as to the influence of Clazomenae on the new style seem to require some modification.
7 See generally Amer. Journ. of Arch. 1902, pp. 327 ff.; Berl. Phil. Woch. 1894, p. 112; Walters, , Ancient Pottery, i. p. 401Google Scholar.
8 Klein's theory that this Gorgoneion by its method of painting suggested the R.-F. technique has of course long been rejected.
9 Gardner, Cat. of Fitziciliiam Museum Vases, No. 60.
10 Jahrb. i. (1886), Pl. 12. In the Catalogue (1885) it is described as a ‘Teller’; but Dr. Zahn tells me it is certainly a kylix restored in that form, the interior design with the stem and foot alone being preserved.
11 Pottier, M. does not accept the view that this is an imitation of feminine headgear. He says it is ‘given to men of a certain age and analogous to our night-cap.’ But the subject of the Berlin vase has hardly reached the ‘certain age’ which he would suggest. See Cat. des Vases du Louvre, iii. p. 885Google Scholar, à propos of the vase G 4 bis, described below (p. 117), and Dar.-Sagi. Diet. s.v. Kekryphalos.
12 Micali, Storia, Pl. 100, Fig. 4.
13 See Smith's Dict, of Antiqs., s.v. Capistrum.
14 Cf. B. M. B. 693 and see Walters', Ancient Pottery, ii. p. 55Google Scholar.
15 As in this case both the signatures appear on the exterior, there is no doubt that all the decoration is by Epiktetos.
16 Helbig, (Bull.d.I. 1868, p. 73Google Scholar) in describing the Petersburg cup considers that the drawing shows signs of archaistic tendencies.
17 Arch. Zeit. 1885, p. 253.
18 Klein, , Meisiers. p. 104Google Scholar, No. 11.
19 Meisterschalen, p. 12.
20 According to Von Duhu (loc. cit.) the interior design here is of quite advanced style.
21 Designs on Gk. Vases, p. 3.
22 Euphronios, p. 26.
23 Meisterschalen, Pl. 70, 1, p. 642.
24 Cat. des Vases du Louvre, iii. p. 923.
25 Cf. Hartwig, , Meistersch. p. 7Google Scholar.
26 See Klein, , Lieblingsinschr. p. 54Google Scholar, No. 2. This vase is obviously identical with the one given by K. as No. 4 in his list of ‘Rotfigurige Schalen mit Augen, ’ (Euphronios, p. 297Google Scholar). He corrects his error in the later work.
27 See on the group generally Klein, , Euphronios, p. 22Google Scholar, who considers them mostly the work of Chelis.
28 Cf. F 126 in the Louvre (Table II. No. 7).
29 Jahn describes the drawing of the Munich vase as ‘sehr sauber und fein; noch streng aber anmutig.’