No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Selected Vase-Fragments from the Acropolis of Athens.—I
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2013
Extract
The vase-fragments from the Acropolis of Athens, here published for the first time (Plates XI. and XII.), with the exception of one which appeared long ago in Benndorf's Griechische und Sicilische Vasenbilder (Pl. XI. 6), are of the greatest interest, not merely as problems of restoration difficult enough to satisfy the most ardent enthusiast for Greek ceramography, but because of the important position they occupy among the vase-finds of the Acropolis, which have already revolutionized vase chronology, and to the careful study of which we may look for much more light in the future. They are perhaps the most important fragments in the black-figured style which have hitherto remained unpublished, and as the majority of these older fragments are either hasty and careless productions or less interesting in subject than the less numerous but more uniformly important remains of red-figured works, it is the more desirable that they should become known to the learned world. Several of the fragments were drawn for the Hellenic Society some years ago, and when I had opportunity of access to the Museum of the Acropolis two years back, it was my pleasant duty to search for other portions of the original vases, with a view to a more complete publication. I was successful in bringing together several that are now published, the drawings being executed by the practised hand of M. Gilliéron, who had been commissioned with the earlier work.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1893
References
1 The remains of several b.f. kylikes of large dimensions have been found on the Acropolis, op. the one whose outside scenes are a chariotrace and a Gigantomachy, not yet completely published.
2 It has been somewhat absurdly suggested that the eyes of Dionysos on the François vase are intended to express the effect of wine. The double circle with or without indication of the corners is the conventional representation of the male eye at this period. One might as well suggest that a similar reason prompted the rendering of Dionysos' face here in red!
3 This expression should mean ‘splay-footed,’ i.e. with the feet twisted unnaturally apart. If so, the point is not illustrated by our vase.
4 In this context see the important remarks of Dr. Winter on the early cult of Aphrodite on the Acropolis in his paper on the ‘Acropolis Terra-cottas’ read before the Berlin Archaeologischo Gesellschaft, (Berl. Phil. Wochenschrift, Oct. 28, 1893)Google Scholar.
5 Scherer has pointed out (Roscher, 's Lexikon, p. 2400Google Scholar, s.v. Hermes) how this kind of boot worn by other gods and heroes beside Hermes (cp. Theseus on the vase of Taleides) probably suggested the wings on the ankles of the god, which are in later works more appropriately placed behind but on early vases appear in front (cp. Perseus, on the Aeginetan lebes, A.Z. 1882Google Scholar, pl. 9, and Hermes on the vase of Sophilos, Ath. Mitth. 1889Google Scholar.)
6 This is not intended to represent tattooing but merely decorative. Compare as an extreme instance of this the Ares on the vase of Cholchos.
7 For a discussion of the Pentathlon see Prof. Gardner's paper in the Hellenic Journal, ad loc. cit.
8 I do not think it possible that the name is really Φιλόνεως, a known Attie name (that of the archon for 527 B.C., as the Constitution of Athens tells us), as ΔΒΕϒΣ (Mon. ix. 55) hardly justifies the assumption of a confusion between Attie and Corinthian epsilon here. The name can hardly be Φιλόμβωι.
9 Cf. Mon. dell Inst. 1855, pl. 20.
10 As the second letter can hardly be a T, the restoration 
seems inadmissible. Perhaps 
11 In the continuation of his Probleme 926, Brunn complains that Robert rejects the probable conjecture of Boeckh on Paus. v. 9, 5, of 
for 
, because it will not fit the accepted vase-chronology. That difficulty must however be faced. If Boeckh is right, the archaism of the Amphiaraos vase is suspicious. If however other evidence seems to show the vase to be archaic, then the emendation loses its probability.