v. 99, Odysseus says he thinks they have dropped down on a city of

Bromios, so many are the satyrs whom he sees before the cave.

Footnote 256:

P. 23.

Footnote 257:

Pliny 35, 74. A _Cyclops dormiens_ so large that a number of satyrs were engaged in measuring his thumb with a thyrsos. I follow Robert (_Bild und Lied_, p. 35) and Winter (_Jahrbuch_, 1891, p. 272) in connecting this painting with Euripides.

Footnote 258:

The painting is on a krater in the possession of Sir Francis Cook, Richmond, England; pub. by Winter, _Jahrbuch_, 1891, pl. 6. He thinks the work Attic, but Furtwängler (_Masterpieces_, p. 109, note 8) is sure it is Lower Italy ware.

Footnote 259:

The three eyes are plainly visible. One huge eye alone in the centre of the forehead belongs to later times.

Footnote 260:

Furtwängler, _loc. cit._, remarks that the publication is not exactly correct, as fire is plainly noticeable on the wood that the youths are contributing.

Footnote 261:

Polyphemos here is strikingly like the figure on an Etruscan urn. Brunn, _I rilievi_, i. pl. 873. The Kyklops is in both cases stretched out upon his left side, and is on the point of being attacked.

Footnote 262:

The poet mentions the krater, and in the next breath the skyphos, neither of which is exactly found in the rough sketch in the painting. Besides these, Euripides names in this play the kylix, amphora, and pithos—a considerable vocabulary of ceramic terms.

Footnote 263:

My remark applies only to the extant monuments, for one finds that Pausanias saw the marriage of Jason and Medeia represented on the Kypselos Chest (5. 18. 3). This is in keeping with the Corinthian origin of the Chest. It is hardly to be expected that such domestic events in Medeia’s career would have found their place in any work of art that was not made in Corinth, or at least in a place essentially influenced by Corinthian legend.

Footnote 264:

Vid. _Arch. Ztg._ 1867, p. 58.

Footnote 265:

Benndorf und Schöne, _Die antiken Bildwerke des Lateranensischen Museums_, p. 61 ff.; F.-W. no. 1200. The Berlin copy of this relief, long supposed to be of Renaissance origin, has lately been proved to be antique; vid. Kekulé von Stradonitz in _Jahrbuch_, 1897, p. 96 ff.

Footnote 266:

Cf. Baumeister’s _Denkmäler_, i. p. 142; ii. p. 875; iii. p. 1852.

Footnote 267:

Kekulé’s _Die antiken Terracotten_, ii. p. 21.

Footnote 268:

Vid. Roscher’s _Lexikon_, ii. p. 2513.

Footnote 269:

Robert in _Die antiken Sarkophag-Reliefs_, ii. p. 205–217, gives all the literature; cf. also pl. 62–65. Vid. _Arch. Ztg._ 1866, p. 234 ff.; _Annali d. Inst._ 1869, p. 5 ff.; Urlichs’ _Würzburger Programm, ein Medea-Sarkophag_, 1888. (This fine sarcophagus is now in the Berlin museum.) Robert and Urlichs have, to my mind, shown conclusively that these reliefs go back to Euripides’ _Medeia_ for their literary source. Notwithstanding that they all date from about the second century A.D., and could thus be based on various Roman plays, the arrangement of the events on the reliefs bears a remarkable similarity to the scenes in Euripides. The reliefs on the long sides are taken up with exactly the scenes of the Greek poet. Those on the ends are but indifferently worked out, and often do not represent any events in the Medeia-Jason adventures.

Footnote 270:

A half-tone reproduction of the vase is shown in the _frontispiece_. The section with the painting is given separately in fig. 23. It is no. 810 in Jahn’s catalogue; pub. in Millin’s _Tombeaux de Canose_, 1816, pl. 7; _Arch. Ztg._ 1847, pl. 3; _Wiener Vorlegeblätter_, ser. i. pl. 12; Baumeister’s _Denkmäler_, ii. p. 903; Roscher’s _Lexikon_, ii. p. 2510; Inghirami, _Vasi fitt._ iv. pl. 388; Engelmann, _Bilderatlas zu Ovid_, pl. 13, 81. Discussed by Jahn, _Arch. Ztg._ 1847, p. 33 ff.; _ibid._ (by Dilthey) 1875, p. 68 f.; Robert, _Bild und Lied_, p. 37 ff., and _Hermes_, vol. 30, p. 567 note; Körte, _Ueber Personificationen psychologischer Affecte_, p. 38 ff.; Vogel, _Scenen eur. Trag._ p. 146 ff.; Seeliger in Roscher’s _Lexikon_, _loc. cit._; Bethe, _Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Theaters im Altertum_, p. 148, note 6.

Footnote 271:

The latter name is found in schol. Eur. _Med._ v. 19, and in Hyginus. _fab._ 25.

Footnote 272:

Diod. Sic. iv. 55. 5, calls Kreusa’s brother Hippotes.

Footnote 273:

The reading Κ ... ΩΝ in Millin’s publication, followed also by Conze in the _Vorlegeblätter_ and by Baumeister, is incorrect as Jahn (vid. cat. no. 810, note) expressly stated, and as is plainly proved by a glance at the original. Hence the useless conjectures that have been made to fill up the space between the first and last letters. There is absolutely no trace of the Κ, but there are faint remains of letters preceding ΩΝ, and the correct reading is without question, ΚΡΕ]ΩΝ.

Footnote 274:

Cf. p. 152, and note 3.

Footnote 275:

This inscription, which is very distinct, does not appear in Conze’s publication. All the inscriptions occurring on the palace are painted in white. All others are incised.

Footnote 276:

This moment is shown on another vase (vid. fig. 24), and so, too, on the sarcophagi Kreusa is always represented in the moment of falling or springing from the κλίνη.

Footnote 277:

In spite of this, Vogel, p. 149, asks, _Warum zeigt uns der Vasenmaler den Kreon nicht in dem Augenblicke, wo er seine Tochter von den unheilvollen Brautgeschenken der Medeia befreien will, sondern in dem, wo er überwältigt von dem Unglücke das Scepter seinen Händen entfallen lässt und starr und seiner selbst nicht mehr mächtig seine Blicke auf die herbeieilende Merope lenkt?_ i. e. why did the vase painter not paint another scene instead of the one he did?

Footnote 278:

Cf. note 7, p. 145. On fragment no. 197, Robert, _op. cit._, the arms of Kreon are incorrectly restored, and his hands are represented as clasped. On all the reliefs Kreon is turned towards Kreusa and not away, as on the vase. I refuse, however, to believe with Jahn and others that Kreon is staring at Merope. He sees nothing and nobody.

Footnote 279:

Apollod. I. 9. 3.

Footnote 280:

Soph. _Oed. Rex_, v. 775, the wife of Πόλυβος Κορίνθιος.

Footnote 281:

Supposing the word to be a pure invention of the painter, there are still in Euripides suggestions of the name if one were seeking such for the figure. In v. 404, Medeia declares she ‘will not be a laughing-stock to the race of _Sisyphos_ and Jason’s new alliances’; and in v. 1381, γη δε τηδε Σισύφου, the former queens would be suggested with the name Merope. It is but natural that the vase painter took the name thus suggested by Euripides.

Footnote 282:

P. 149.

Footnote 283:

Suidas refers to a _Medeia_ by Neophron. Ennius’ _Medea_ was, according to Cicero, _De Fin._ 1. 2. 4, a literal translation from Euripides. The _Medea exul_ by the same poet has generally been held to be a version of Euripides’ _Aigeus_.

Footnote 284:

_Hermes_, vol. 31, p. 567 note.

Footnote 285:

_Bild und Lied_, p. 42.

Footnote 286:

_Zeichnungen von Sandro Botticelli zu Dantes Goettlicher Komoedie nach den Originalen im König. Kupferstichkabinet zu Berlin_, von Dr. F. Lippmann.

Footnote 287:

In _canto_ iii, Charon is an old man; Botticelli drew him as the devil. In the second plate to this same _canto_ the souls are swimming out to Charon’s boat, a fact which Dante does not mention. The illustration to _canto_ xx has only two persons identical with those of the poet, and in _Purgatorio_ iii the souls on the shore and in the boat are additions of the artist.

Footnote 288:

Cf. Dilthey in _Annali d. Inst._ 1876, p. 294, and pl. 35 in _Mon. d. Inst._ x.

Footnote 289:

Vid. Klein’s _Euphronios_, p. 89, and Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, _Her. Fur._ vol. ii, ed. 1, p. 214.

Footnote 290:

Cf. fig. 24, where the female figure on the left is none other than a nurse.

Footnote 291:

_Bild und Lied_, p. 38.

Footnote 292:

Cf. figs. 24 and 25 and Baumeister’s _Denkmäler_, i. p. 142.

Footnote 293:

It will be observed that the writer does not share the view of Bethe, _Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Theaters im Altertum_, p. 142 ff., that the _Flugmaschine_ was not in use in the Greek theatre before 425 B.C. Robert, _Hermes_, vol. 31, p. 530–577, has conclusively shown the incorrectness of Bethe’s arguments, and not only proved the use of the _Flugmaschine_ for the _Medeia_, 431 B.C., but also for a much earlier date. Bethe’s remark, _Demnach ist für die erste Aufführung der Medea im Jahre 431 ihr Erscheinen in der Höhe, also auch die Anwendung der Flugmaschine, nicht möglich_ (p. 146), is based upon a false conception of the resources at hand in that period of Athenian architectural activity.

Footnote 294:

It has already been pointed out above, p. 159, that Medeia entered the palace to slay the boys, and that they might or might not have been alone. At any rate it was not allowable to represent them in art without some older companion. Robert’s remark, _Bild und Lied_, p. 39, _Den Kindern die bereits bei der Mutter angelangt sind, muss aber jetzt noch ein anderer Begleiter zugestellt werden_, is inexplicable. Where had the children gone to reach their mother? Was it not just the reverse, viz. that the mother had gone to them?

Footnote 295:

iv. 54. 7.

Footnote 296:

One must remember that Diodorus gathered his excerpts together at least 300 years after the date of our vase, during all of which time the mythographers had been busy helping to straighten out the family affairs that the tragedians of the fifth century had treated imperfectly!

Footnote 297:

As a matter of fact this reference, although brought in under another φασί than the first remark, where three sons are named, τοὺς μὲν πρεσβυτάτους δίο διδύμους Θετταλόν τε καὶ Ἀλκιμένην, τὸν δὲ τρίτον πολυνεώτερον τούτων Τίσανδρον, iv. 54. 1, seems to me to speak of a common origin, and I hold both as coming from the same authority, under whose influence our vase painter certainly never stood.

Footnote 298:

Eur. _Orest._ v. 791.

Footnote 299:

As in the _Medeia_, nothing is said to indicate how the chariot was drawn. It is only from the monuments and later literary references (vid. Argum. to the _Medeia_ and schol. on v. 1320) that one learns of the dragons; or is the utterance of Jason, vs. 1297 f., ἢ πτηνὸν ἆραι σῶμ’ ες αἰθέρος βάθος | εἰ μὴ τυράννων δώμασιν δώσειν δίκην | πέποιθ’, an intimation of the strange escape of the sorceress? How was Lyssa’s chariot drawn? Why not also by dragons?

Footnote 300:

Cf. fig. 26, where the figure that stands beside the dragons has been identified as Οἶστρος or Λύσσα. That the latter is the child of night harmonizes well with the night escape indicated by Selene and the stars on this vase.

Footnote 301:

On a vase of Assteas, vid. p. 179 below, which shows Herakles in the act of murdering his sons, the painter calls the personification of Lyssa, _mania_.

Footnote 302:

Mention should be made here of the Parian inscription, which gives us the curious information that there was a society of _hetairai_ established under the patronage of the goddess Οἰστρώ; cf. Pernice, _Athen. Mitth._ 1893, p. 16. 2, and Maass, _ibid._ p. 25 f. There is, of course, a wide distinction between the personification and the cult use of οἶστρος, but it is worth while to point out that Eur. _Hipp._ vs. 1300 ff., gives the same notion that Maass suggests and supports by a quotation from Paullus Silentiarius (_Anth. Plan._ v. 234), where οἰστροφόρου Παφίης occurs. Artemis, speaking to Theseus of Hippolytos’ death and its cause, says, ἀλλ’ ἐς τόδ’ ἦλθον, παιδὸς ἐκδεῖξαι φρένα | τοῦ σοῦ δικαίαν, ὁς ὑπ’ εὐκλείας θάνῃ | καὶ σῦς γυναικὸς οἶστρον, ἢ τρόπον τινὰ | γενναιότητα, where we may suppose Euripides to have thought of Phaidra as possessed with οἶστρος, which means τῆς ἐχθίστης θεῶν (v. 1301), i.e. τῆς Κύπριδος (v. 1304).

Footnote 303:

Cf. Aisch. _Pers._ vs. 681–842, where the εἴδωλον of Dareios is one of the _dramatis personae_. Also Eur. _Hek._, where the prologue is spoken by the εἴδωλον of Polydoros.

Footnote 304:

Dilthey, _Arch._ 219, 1875, p. 71, followed also by Vogel, _Scen. eur. Trag._ p. 151. How do these scholars account for the appearance of Megara and her sons upon the ‘under-world’ vases where Herakles is also represented in his last labour of capturing Kerberos? This latter must have been finished and Herakles must have returned to the upper world before Megara and the boys _could be thought of as in fact in the under-world_.

Footnote 305:

_Bild und Lied_, p. 39 f.

Footnote 306:

P. 156 above.

Footnote 307:

Cp. among other places in the _Medeia_, vs. 133, 328, 405, 475 ff., 536 ff., 550, 1330.

Footnote 308:

Cf. the Dareios vase in Naples, also found in Canosa; pub. Baumeister’s _Denkmäler_, i. no. 449; also the costume of the judges on the so-called ‘under-world’ vases, pub. _Wiener Vorlegeblätter_, ser. E. 1–3.

Footnote 309:

Apoll. Rhod. 1. 122 and 341 ff.; Hyg. _fab._ 14; Diod. Sic. iv. 53. 4.

Footnote 310:

Apoll. Rhod. 1. 108 ff.; Apollod. 1. 9. 16; Hyg. _fab._ 14.

Footnote 311:

Apoll. Rhod. 1. 146 ff.; Paus., 1. 18. 1, relates that in the temple of the Dioskouroi in Athens, known also as the Anakeion, Mikon painted events from the Argonautic expedition.

Footnote 312:

Fig. 24. Heydemann, _cat. Mus. Santangelo_, no. 526. Pub. in Raoul-Rochette’s _Choiseaux de Peintures_, p. 263. Discussed by Jahn, _Arch. Ztg._ 1867, p. 59, and referred to by Vogel, _Scen. eur. Trag._ p. 151.

Footnote 313:

Fig. 25; pub. Raoul-Rochette, _Choiseaux de Peintures_, p. 277. Described by Jahn, _Arch. Ztg._ 1867, p. 60; cf. Vogel, _op. cit._ p. 79.

Footnote 314:

Fig. 26. Heydemann, no. 3221, A. Cf. _Arch. Ztg._ 1867, p. 62 and pl. 224. 1.

Footnote 315:

The Theban Cycle was handled in the Θηβαΐς and the Οἰδιπόδεια, from which the tragedians probably drew their material. For the subject in the fifth century B.C. vid. Benndorfs _Heroon von Gjölbaschi_, p. 187 ff. and pl. 24. A1–A5. Kapaneus’ catastrophe in attempting to storm the walls was often shown. Cf. _Wiener Vorlegeblätter_, 1889, pl. 11, nos. 13, 14, 16, 17. The death of Amphiaraos was another popular story. Cf. _Wiener Vorlegeblätter_, 1889, pl. 11. 8. 15. There are many interesting monuments which represent the conference of the chiefs before the assault. Cf. especially the famous Etruscan gem with inscriptions naming Polyneikes, Amphiaraos, Adrastos, Tydeus, and Parthenopaios; pub. _Wiener Vorlegeblätter_, 1889, pl. 11. 5; Baumeister, _Denkmäler_, iii. no. 1839, no. 369 in _Bilderheft_. An Etruscan mirror, Gerhard, _Etruskische Spiegel_, ii. pl. 178, gives Adrastos, Amphiaraos, and Tydeus.

Footnote 316:

Brit. Mus., vase cat. vol. iv. G 104. Pub. _ibid._ pl. 16. Cf. _Class. Review_, 1894, p. 325.

Footnote 317:

The fratricide, so common on the Etruscan urns, is rare on Greek monuments. (1) The group was on the Kypselos Chest (Paus. 5. 19, 6). (2) Pythagoras worked the brothers in marble (vid. Overbeck, _Schriftquellen_, no. 501). (3) One group on the Heroön from Gjölbaschi, cf. Benndorf, _op. cit._ pl. 24. A. 3. There are thirty urns representing the scene: vid. Körte, _I rilievi delle urne etrusche_, ii. pl. 8–20, and 36, and supplement. p. 261 ff. Cf. further Overbeck’s _Bildwerke_, pl. 5 and 6. An Etruscan mirror, which shows a composition remarkably like that in the inside of the Penthesileia kylix (Munich, no. 370, pub. Overbeck, _Bildwerke_, pl. 17. 3), and must be from a fifth century pattern, is perhaps the oldest of the extant representations. Vid. Gerhard, _Etruskische Spiegel_, v. pl. 95.

Footnote 318:

Brit. Mus., cat. iv. G 105_{1}; pub. _Wiener Vorlegeblätter_, 1889, pl. 9. 13; Robert, _Homerische Becher_, p. 59; first correctly interpreted by Murray, _Class. Rev._ 1888, p. 328.

OXFORD: HORACE HART PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES

1. P. xx, changed “Scenen euripideisher Tragödien in griechischen Vasengemälden” to “Scenen euripideischer Tragödien in griechischen Vasengemälden”. 2. P. 128, changed “In her left close by her side” to “In her left hand close by her side”. 3. Silently corrected typographical errors and variations in spelling. 4. Archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings retained as printed. 5. Footnotes were re-indexed using numbers and collected together at the end of the last chapter. 6. Enclosed italics font in _underscores_. 7. Superscripts are denoted by a caret before a single superscript character or a series of superscripted characters enclosed in curly braces, e.g. M^r. or M^{ister}. 8. Subscripts are denoted by an underscore before a series of subscripted characters enclosed in curly braces, e.g. H_{2}O.