CHAPTER XVII

_INSCRIPTIONS ON GREEK VASES_

Importance of inscriptions on vases—Incised inscriptions—Names and prices incised underneath vases—Owners’ names and dedications—Painted inscriptions—Early Greek alphabets—Painted inscriptions on early vases—Corinthian, Ionic, Boeotian, and Chalcidian inscriptions—Inscriptions on Athenian vases—Dialect—Artists’ signatures—Inscriptions relating to the subjects—Exclamations—Καλός-names—The Attic alphabet and orthography—Chronology of Attic inscriptions—South Italian vases with inscriptions.

The practice of inscribing works of art with the names of persons and objects represented was one of some antiquity in Greece. The earliest instance of which we have historical record is the chest of Kypselos, which dated from the beginning of the sixth century B.C., and concerning which Pausanias[2058] tells us that “the majority of the figures on the chest have inscriptions written in the archaic characters; and some of them read straight, but other letters have the appearance called by the Greeks ‘backwards-and-forwards’ (βουστροφηδόν), which is like this: at the end of the verse the second line turns round again like a runner half through his course. And any way the inscriptions on the chest are written in a tortuous and hardly decipherable fashion.” There is, however, no mention of inscribed vases until a much later date; Athenaeus speaks of a cup with the name of Zeus Soter upon it, also of γραμματικὰ ἐκπώματα, or cups with letters on them.[2059]

Inscriptions on Greek vases are found in comparatively early times, even prior to the date to which the chest of Kypselos is attributed. This question will receive more attention subsequently; meanwhile, we may point out some of the ways in which they have proved important in the study of archaeology. In the first place, they were originally among the principal, perhaps the strongest, arguments in the hands of Winckelmann, Sir W. Hamilton, and the other upholders of the true origin of Greek vases against Gori and the other “Etruscans” (see Vol. I. p. 19). They are, in fact, if such were required, an incontestable proof of Greek manufacture. Secondly, in more modern times, they have been of inestimable value in enabling scholars to classify the early vases according to their different fabrics. The alphabets of the different cities and states being established by inscriptions obtained from trustworthy sources or found _in situ_, it was an easy matter to apply this knowledge to the vases. In Chapters VII.-VIII. numerous instances have been given of the value of this evidence (see also below, p. 247 ff.), perhaps the best being that of the Chalcidian class, for which the inscriptions have been a more important criterion even than style. Thirdly, the inscriptions are sometimes of considerable philological value. Those on Attic vases may fairly be said to represent the vernacular of the day; and thus we learn that the Greeks of the Peisistratid age spoke of Ὀλυττεύς, not Ὀδυσσεύς, and of Θῆσυς, not Θησεύς; that they used such forms as υἱύς for υἱός,[2060] and πίει for πίε (see below, p. 255). Traces of foreign influence in the inscriptions, as in the frequently occurring Doric forms, imply that many of the vase-painters were foreigners, probably of the metic class. We shall also see that one class of inscriptions gives some interesting information on the subject of the names and prices of vases in antiquity.

The whole subject has been treated exhaustively—especially from a philological point of view—in a valuable treatise by P. Kretschmer,[2061] to which we shall have occasion to make constant reference in the following pages. He classifies them under two main headings: (_a_) inscriptions incised with a sharp tool in the hard clay; (_b_) inscriptions painted with the brush after the final baking. They are also found in very rare instances impressed in the soft clay and varnished over.[2062] In later times inscriptions in relief are actually found, sometimes painted with thick white pigment, sometimes gilded.[2063] On the so-called Megarian bowls and on the Arretine and other wares of the Roman period they are stamped from the moulds. Lastly, there are the stamps imprinted on the handles of wine-amphorae, which have been discussed in Chapter IV.

The =incised inscriptions= are of three kinds: (1) those executed by the maker of the vase; (2) those scratched under the foot; (3) those incised by the owner. As these represent a much smaller class than the painted ones, they shall be dealt with first.

(1) Inscriptions incised by the maker before the final baking. These are found on the handles and feet, round the edge of a design, or interspersed therewith like the painted inscriptions. Generally they represent the signature of the potter, as in the case of the early Boeotian vase signed by Gamedes,[2064] the vases of the fifth-century artist Hieron,[2065] and those of Assteas, Python, and Lasimos in Southern Italy.[2066] On the vases of the latter class explanatory inscriptions seldom occur, but when they do (as on the vases of Assteas) they are always incised. Of their palaeographical peculiarities we will speak later. On a vase in the South Kensington Museum[2067] the words Βραχᾶς καλός are incised and painted red, and on the pottery found on the site of the Kabeirion at Thebes the same process is often adopted, except that the paint used is white.[2068]

(2) Of inscriptions scratched under the foot a considerable number remain, especially on B.F. vases. They are often difficult to decipher, being in the form of monograms, and frequently appear to be meaningless. In many cases they may have been private marks of the potter or his workmen; others, again, are evidently private memoranda made by the workman, relating to the number of forms of vases in his batch, or by the merchant respecting the price to be paid. Commonly they take the form of names of vases,[2069] such as [ΗVΔΡΙ] for ὑδρία (_hydria_), [ΛΗΚ] or [ΛΗΚV] for λήκυθος (_lekythos_), [ΣΚV] for σκύφος (_skyphos_),[2070] and so on. Many of the inscriptions give the words in full, with numbers and prices, and we may obtain from them some curious information.

Among the more elaborate examples given by Schöne in his valuable monograph is one from a krater in the Louvre[2071]:

[ΚΡΑΤΕΡΕΣ : ΠI] κρατῆρες ἑξ

[ΤΙΜΕ : ͰͰͰͰ ΟΞΙΔΕΣ : [Π]ΙΙΙ] τιμὴ τέσσαρες ὀξίδες ὀκτώ

[ΒΑΘΕΑ : ΔΔͰΙ] βαθέα εἰκόσι (at 1 _dr._ 1 _ob._)

That is, six kraters, value four drachmae; eight _oxides_; twenty _bathea_ (an unknown form), one drachma one obol. The _bathea_ were probably deep cups or ladles; the _oxides_ (_lit._ vinegar-cups) were small vessels, probably answering to our wine-glasses.

Another instance given by Schöne[2072] is:

[ΛΗΚΥΘΙΑ Δ] ληκύθια δέκα [ΟΙΝΟΧΟΑΙ ΙΙ] οἰνοχοαὶ δύο

or ten lekythi and two oinochoae.

Another good example is on a krater in the British Museum (E 504):

[ΚΡΑΤΕΡΕ [Π]Ι : ͰͰͰͰ] κρατῆρε(ς) ἑξ τέσσαρες

[ΠΕΛΛΙΝΙΑ : ΔΙΙ : ΙΙΙ] πελλίνια[2073] δώδεκα τρεῖς

[ΟΞΙΔΕΣ : ΔΔ : ΙΙΙ] ὀξίδες εἰκόσι τρεῖς

[ΟΞΥΒΑΦΑ : ΔΔͰI] ὀξύβαφα εἰκόσι (at 1 _dr._ 1 _ob._)

_i.e._ six kraters at four drachmae, twelve cups at three obols, twenty _oxides_ at three obols, twenty _oxybapha_ at one drachma one obol.

Another in Vienna[2074]:

[ΚΡΑΤΕΡΕ[Σ] : [Π]Ι : ΤΙΜΕ : κρατῆρες ἑξ τιμὴ τέσσαρες (4 _dr._) ͰͰͰͰ]

[ΒΑΘΕΑ : ΔΔ : ΤΙΜΕ : ͰΙ] βαθέα εἰκοσι τιμὴ ͰΙ (1 _dr._ 1 _ob._)

..[ΟΞΙΔΕ[Σ] : Δ] ὀξιδες δέκα

is to the same effect as the two preceding. On a hydria at Petersburg[2075] we find:

[ΥΔΤΡΙΔΡΑΧΠΟΙ ΑΝ]

ὑδ(ρίαι) τρ(ε)ῖ(ς) δραχ(μῶν) π(έντε) ὀ(βόλου) ἑνός

or three hydriae worth five drachmae one obol. The last example that need be mentioned is from a vase at Berlin[2076]:

[Α] · ΛΥΔΙΑ ΜΕΙΩ : Ι : Ε : ΛΕΠΑΣΤΙΔΕΣ : Κ : Ι

ὠά(?)· Λύδια με(ί)ξω ιέ λεπαστίδες κξ’

Here the letters probably stand for numerals of the ordinary kind, denoting the numbers of the batch (ιε’ = 15, κξ’ = 27).

The form of the letters in all these cases is that of the fifth century. In the case of the second, third, and fourth examples given, it will be noted that the shape of the vase itself corresponds with the first item. Jahn and Letronne originally held the view that these marks were made by the potter on the feet of the vases _before_ they were attached to their respective bodies.[2077] Schöne, in the light of the examples already quoted, makes the ingenious suggestion that each list represents a different “set” of so many vases of different forms, and used for different purposes, sold together in a batch, like a modern “dinner-set” or “toilet-set” of china. Thus we have in our fourth example a set of six mixing-bowls at four drachmae (3_s._) apiece, ten wine-glasses at (probably) three obols or 4½_d._ apiece, and twenty cups or ladles at about 10½_d._ apiece.

Some of the shorter inscriptions also throw light on the prices at which different vases were sold. For instance, 15[123]ΛΗΚV : ΛΔ : ΛΗ would denote thirty-four lekythi for thirty-seven obols, or roughly 1½_d._ apiece; 15[121]ΛΗΚV : ΙΓ : ΙΑ thirteen lekythi for eleven obols, at a slightly lower price.[2078] Aristophanes[2079] tells us that one obol would purchase quite a fine lekythos, just as elsewhere[2080] he mentions three drachmae as the cost of a κάδος or cask. This latter statement is borne out by the inscription on a vase, [[Π]·ΚΑΔΙΑ·ΔΙΙ], or five κάδια value twelve drachmae, _i.e._ at about 2½ _dr._ apiece.[2081] An inscription quoted below shows that the owner of a cup valued it at one drachma. Other examples of the same kind are collected by Schöne. The cup from Cerigo in the British Museum, on which is incised [[Ͱ]ΕΜΙΚΟΤVΛΙΟΝ] (ἡμικοτύλιον)[2082] does not strictly come into this category, but may be mentioned as having an inscription of the same class.

(3) Inscriptions incised by the owner, and subsequently to the completion of the vase. These usually take the form of the word [ΕΙΜΙ] ([ΕΜΙ]), with the owner’s name in the genitive, as [ΑΣΤΥΟΞΙΔΑ ΗΜΙ] (“I am Idamenes’”), or [ΑΣΤΥΟΞΙΔΑ ΗΜΙ] (“I am Astyochidas’”), on two B.F. cups from Rhodes.[2083] Sometimes this appears in an extended and metrical form, as on another B.F. kylix from the same site:

[ΦΙΛΤΟΣΗΜΙΤΑΣΚΑΛΑΣΑΚΥΛΙΞΣΑΠΟΙΚΙΛΑ]

Φιλτῶς ἠμὶ τᾶς καλᾶς ἁ κύλιξ ἁ ποικίλα

“I am the painted cup of the fair Philto.”[2084]

Another metrical inscription runs:

Κηφισοφῶντος ἡ κύλιξ· ἐὰν δέ τις κατάξη δραχμὴν ἀποτείσει· δῶρον ὄν παρὰ Ξενο....

“I am the cup of Kephisophon; if any one breaks me, let him pay a drachma; the gift of Xeno(krates).”[2085]

A yet more remarkable example is on an early lekythos from Cumae in the British Museum,[2086] which, in the manner favoured by modern schoolboys, invokes an imprecation on the head of a thief:

Ταταίης ἐμὶ λήϙυθος ὃς δ’ ἄν με κλέφσῃ θυφλὸς ἔσται “I am Tataie’s oil-flask, and he shall be struck blind who steals me.”

Others, again, record the gift of the vase, as: “Epainetos gave me to Charopos”[2087]; [ΤΕΝΔΙ[Σ]ΟΙ ΘΟΔΕΜΟ[Σ] ΔΙΔΟ[Σ]Ι[:]] “Lo, this Thoudemos gives to thee.”[2088] A boat-shaped vase (_kymbion_) in the British Museum has incised on it the exhortation [[Π]ΡΟ]Π]ΙΝΕ ΜΗ ΚΑΤΘΗΣ], “Drink, do not lay me down.”[2089] The owner’s name is found in the nominative on a vase from Carthage at Naples: [ΧΑΡΜΙΝΟΣ] [ΘΕΟΦΑΜΙΔΑ] [ΚΩΙΟΣ], “Charminos, son of Theophamidas, a Coan”[2090]; similarly in the genitive with the omission of εἰμί: [ΑΡΙϹΤΑΡΧΟ] [ΑΡΙΣΤΩΝΟϹ], Ἀριστάρχου Ἀρίστωνος; [ΑΛΕΞΙΔΑΜΩ] Ἀλεξιδάμου.[2091]

Under the same heading comes the class of votive or dedicatory inscriptions, found in such large numbers on the pottery of certain temple-sites, such as that of Aphrodite at Naukratis,[2092] and that of the Kabeiri at Thebes.[2093] The usual formula at Naukratis is ὁ δεῖνα ἀνέθηκε τῇ Ἀφροδίτη (or τῷ Ἀπόλλωνι)[2094]; but sometimes we find the formula Ἀπόλλωνος εἰμί, where the god as the recipient of the gift is regarded as the owner.

One of the most interesting, and certainly the most ancient, of all incised inscriptions on Greek vases is that engraved on a jug of “Dipylon” ware found at Athens in 1880.[2095] It runs: ὃς νῦν ὀρχηστῶν παντων ἀταλώτατα παίζει, τῦυ τόδε.... “He who now sports most delicately of all the dancers,” etc. Though probably not contemporary with this eighth-century vase, it is still of great antiquity, and the earliest Athenian inscription known.

In studying these _graffiti_, it must always be borne in mind that they lend themselves easily to forgery, and that many are open to grave suspicion. Instances of these doubtful inscriptions are the Kleomenes vase in the Louvre[2096] and a late vase signed by Statios in the British Museum (F 594).

* * * * *

The =painted inscriptions= are practically limited to a period extending over two centuries, from the time at which the primitive methods of painting were slowly emerging into the black-figured style, down to the finest stage of red-figure vases. Rare at first, they rapidly spring into popularity, being constantly found on the sixth-century fabrics; but throughout the red-figure period they gradually become rarer and rarer, until they drop out almost entirely. In the vases of the Decadence they have for the most part fallen into disuse; at any rate, they are comparatively scarce. Some of the latest inscriptions are in the Oscan and Latin languages, showing the increasing influence of the Romans over Southern Italy, and especially Campania. The inscriptions always follow the laws of palaeography of the region and period to which they belong.

Generally speaking, it may be said that they have some reference to the design painted on the vase; at least, the majority are explanatory of the subject represented. Sometimes not only is every figure accompanied by its name, but even animals and inanimate objects, instances of which are given below. On the François vase there are no less than 115 such inscriptions. In almost all cases we can be certain that they are original, and contemporaneous with the vase itself.

The explanatory inscriptions are generally small in size, the letters averaging one-eighth of an inch in height. On B.F. vases they are painted in black; on R.F. vases of the “severe” style, in purple on the black ground, or in black on the red portions; on later R.F. vases, in white. There is no rule for their position, or indeed for their presence; but, as a general rule, it may be said that they are oftener found on the finer and larger vases, and that they are placed in close juxtaposition to the figures to which they refer. The direction in which they are written may be either from left to right or right to left (as generally on Corinthian or Chalcidian vases); on the Panathenaic amphorae are the only known examples of κιονηδόν inscriptions, in which the letters are placed vertically in relation to each other. They are occasionally found on the objects depicted, as on stelae or lavers (see pp. 260, 272), on shields,[2097] or even on the figures themselves.[2098] Signatures of artists are occasionally found on the handle or foot of a vase.[2099]

Kretschmer (p. 5) illustrates the practice of employing inscriptions on vases from the art of the Semitic nations. He instances clay vases from Cyprus with painted Phoenician inscriptions,[2100] for which the same pigment is used as for the decoration of the vases themselves. But none of these are likely to be earlier than the first Greek inscriptions, and it is more than probable that the Cypriote Phoenicians borrowed the practice from the Greeks. In order, therefore, to obtain information as to the date of these painted inscriptions, we are entirely dependent upon internal evidence.

The importance of these inscriptions may, perhaps, be best realised when it is pointed out that they are one of the chief guides to the age of the vases, and have contributed more than any other feature to the establishment of a scientific classification of the earlier fabrics, as will be fully indicated in the succeeding account.

The Greek alphabet, as is well known, is derived from the Phoenician, and this is attested not only by tradition, but by the known existing forms of the latter, the signs being twenty-two in number. The invention of the two double letters, and of the long η and ω, which are purely Greek, was attributed by popular tradition to various personages without any authority. With the question of the introduction of writing into Greece this is not the place to deal. Recent discoveries, especially in Crete, have greatly modified all preconceived notions on the subject, and for the present we are only immediately concerned with the earliest use of the Greek alphabet, as we know it.

This can be traced as far back as the seventh century B.C. on various grounds, and in all probability the traditional view which placed its introduction into Greece at about 660 B.C. is fairly correct. The earliest inscriptions on the vases are certainly not later, perhaps earlier than this (see below, p. 254). At Abou-Simbel in Egypt, Greek inscriptions have been found in which the name of Psammetichos occurs, and this king is generally supposed to be the second of that name (594–589).[2101] In Thera and other Aegean islands, and on the coast of Asia Minor, inscriptions are known which, for various reasons, have been placed even earlier than this, and the vase with Arkesilaos, the inscriptions on which are discussed below, is hardly later, as it can be shown to date between 580 and 550 B.C.

Before proceeding to discuss the early inscriptions, it may be as well to note, for the benefit of those to whom Greek Epigraphy is an unfamiliar subject, the chief peculiarities of the earlier alphabets.[2102] They fall into two principal groups, the Eastern and Western, each of which has many subdivisions. Certain forms, such as [Χ] for Χ, are characteristic of one or the other division; but the distinction is not so clearly marked on the vases, on which many alphabets, such as the Ionic and Island varieties, are scarcely represented. The vase-inscriptions fall mainly under three heads: Corinthian and Athenian in the Eastern group, Chalcidian in the Western. During the fifth century (or even earlier) there is a rapid tendency to unification in the Greek alphabet, which is chiefly brought about by the growing supremacy of Athens. This acted in two ways: firstly, by the fact that Attic became the literary and therefore the paramount language in Greece; secondly, by the fact of her artistic pre-eminence, which crushed out the other local fabrics. Finally, by the time of the archonship of Eukleides in 403 B.C., the alphabet, if not the language, had become entirely unified, and the Ionic forms universally adopted for public and official purposes. For private use they had, of course, long been known at Athens; but the official enactment of that year only set the seal to a long recognised practice. Throughout the fifth century the old Attic and the Ionic forms are found side by side on R.F. vases.[2103]

In the later archaic period the coins come in as an important source of evidence.[2104] None of the inscribed ones appear to be earlier than the sixth century, the oldest being perhaps the electrum stater usually attributed to Halikarnassos, with the name of Phanes(?). The only characteristic letter (the alphabet belonging to the Ionic group) is the sign [heta] in place of Η to denote _eta_, which has not been found on any vase with the Ionic alphabet, and therefore betokens a very early date. Next comes an Attic stater of about 560 B.C., with the legend [(Α)☉Ε], which may be fitly compared with the oldest Panathenaic amphora,[2105] on which the dotted [☉] is also found. The earliest coins of Haliartos in Boeotia have the curious form 15[8]curious asper for the _spiritus asper_ or Η, dating apparently before 550 B.C.; the succession can thence be traced through 14[10]asper2 14[9]asper3 and [heta], down to about 480 B.C., when it is dropped entirely. At Himera in Sicily [heta] occurs in the fifth century for the _spiritus asper_, and is followed by the HH form, which in the West is employed down to about 400 B.C. On the early coins of Poseidonia (Paestum) the [M] form of Σ is found (550–480 B.C.), being also characteristic of Corinthian vases of the sixth century; it also lingers on in Crete, but in Sicily and elsewhere the [Σ] form of Attic and other alphabets is more usual, until replaced in the fifth century by Σ. Of the specially Ionic letters, Η (= _eta_) is found generally at an early date, as at Teos (540–400 B.C.), and also Ω. At Corinth the _koppa_ Ϙ for Κ is in use from the earliest times down to the days of the Achaean League, and does not therefore afford evidence of date by itself, but only of a local peculiarity, being equally universal on vases. The digamma is only found on coins of Elis and Crete, whereas it often occurs on early Greek vases.[2106]

It may also be of interest to note that the [heta] form for the rough breathing occurs on the helmet of Hiero in the British Museum,[2107] which can be dated 480–470 B.C., and that the use of Η for _eta_ and of the four-lined [Σ] at Athens previous to the archonship of Eukleides can be deduced from the well-known fragment of Euripides[2108] in which the letters forming the name [ΘΗΣΕΥΣ] are carefully described.

In the following pages illustrations of the points above noted will be fully detailed where occurring on the vases. The annexed scheme of alphabets used on vases (Fig. 173) will serve to give a general idea of the variations of form in different fabrics.

The painted inscriptions on vases first appear, as already noted, about the beginning of the seventh century B.C. The earlier fabrics—Mycenaean, Cretan, and Cycladic—generally belong to an epoch when writing, if not unknown, was at any rate little practised[2109]; nor have any inscriptions been found on the Dipylon or Geometrical vases, except the incised one which we have already discussed. The oldest known painted inscriptions are found on a Proto-Corinthian lekythos (see p. 254), the Euphorbos pinax from Kameiros (B.M. A 749), and the krater signed by Aristonoös, which is perhaps of Ionic origin, strongly influenced by Mycenaean art.

SCHEME OF ALPHABETS USED ON GREEK VASES

With the great impulse given to vase-painting at the beginning of the sixth century by the development of the art in Corinth, Chalkis, and Athens (especially in Corinth), the number of inscribed vases rapidly increases. Among the earliest examples are those remarkable painted pinakes found at Corinth (Vol. I. p. 316), nearly all of which have dedicatory inscriptions, while in most cases the names are given of the deities, Poseidon and Amphitrite, to whom they were dedicated, and whose figures appear on them. They may be dated 600–550 B.C. The custom of inscribing names on works of art is illustrated by other products of this period, as we have already noted in the case of the chest of Kypselos; and they occur on the early bronze reliefs from Olympia,[2110] the Samothrace relief in the Louvre,[2111] the archaic reliefs at Delphi, and the newly found painted metopes at Thermon,[2112] as well as later on the paintings of Polygnotos.

On the Euphorbos pinax already mentioned[2113] appear the names of Menelaos ([ΜΕΝΕΛΑΣ]), Hector ([ΡΟΤΚΕ]), and Euphorbos ([ΙΥΦΟΡΒΟΣ]). Although found in Rhodes, it is proved to be of Argive origin by the characteristic form [Λ] of the Λ in Menelaos.[2114] Although its date cannot be exactly ascertained, it is probably about 620–600 B.C. It is a vase important in more than one respect, as it may be said to foreshadow the beginnings of the black-figure style.

The vase of Aristonoös[2115] was found at Cervetri, and bears the artist’s signature,

[ΝΕΣΙΟΠΕΣΟΦΟΝΟΤΣΙΡΑ], Ἀριστόνο<φ>ος ἐποί[η]σεν,

in an alphabet from which, unfortunately, all characteristic letters are wanting, so that its origin is uncertain. It is, however, as we have said, probably a seventh-century product of an Ionian fabric, on the coast of Asia Minor. The 14[13]halved circle has been taken by several scholars[2116] to denote [F] as in the Phrygian alphabet, but Kretschmer (p. 11) prefers to read it as ϑ 14[13]halved circle = 14[13]quartered circle We have, however, already seen that it is most probably a superfluous letter.

Early in the sixth century must be placed another remarkable vase, the Arkesilaos cup of Cyrenaean fabric.[2117] The inscribed names on this vase are as remarkable as its subject; there are nine in all, two only fragmentary. The only proper name is that of Arkesilas ([ΑΡΚΕΣΙΛΑΣ]), who was king of Kyrene 580–550 B.C.; the others seem to be titles, such as [ΙΟΦΟΡΤΟΣ], Ἰόφορτος or Σώφορτος, “Keeper of the burdens”; [ΣΛΙΦΟΜΑΧΟΣ], Σλιφόμαχος, a word having some reference to silphium, the subject of the vase; [ΦΥΛΑΚΟΣ], “Guardian”; [ΙΡΜΟΦΟΡΟΣ], and [ΟΞΥΡΟ], ὀρυξό[ς. One word, [ΣΟΜΘΑ], στ]αθμός, refers to an inanimate object (a balance). The dialect is Doric, Kyrene having been colonised by that race.

Next we have to deal with a very important class of inscriptions—those found on Corinthian vases.[2118] They are too numerous to be dealt with in detail; Kretschmer mentions nearly fifty inscribed vases, exclusive of the pinakes. Wilisch attributes the earliest to the latter half of the seventh century, the latest to the middle of the sixth century; but they certainly do not become common before the sixth.[2119] They include several artists’ signatures—viz. Chares, Milonidas, and Timonidas (Vol. I. p. 315). One of the most famous of the inscribed vases is the Dodwell pyxis at Munich,[2120] representing a boar-hunt. The figures are inscribed with fanciful names, such as [ΑΓΑΜΕΜΝΟΝ] (Agamemnon), [ΔΟΡΙΜΑΧΟΣ] (Dorimachos, or “spearman”), [ΠΑϘΟΝ] (Pakon), and so on. A krater in the British Museum (Plate XXI.) represents a similar scene, also with fancy names, such as Polydas and Antiphatas. Another famous vase is the Amphiaraos krater in Berlin,[2121] representing the setting out of Amphiaraos and the funeral games of Pelias; no less than twenty names are inscribed. Of these, [ΒΑΤΟΝ] (Baton) and [ἹΠΠΑΛϘΜΟΣ] (Hippalk(i)mos) illustrate other palaeo graphical peculiarities. Other good examples are the vase by Chares,[2122] another in the British Museum with the name of the owner ([ΑΣΝΒΤΑ ΒΜΣ], Αἰινετα ἐμίἐ),[2123] and that by Timonidas representing Achilles lying in wait for Troilos.[2124] A study of the pinakes in Berlin is also instructive in this respect. One is signed by Timonidas, another by Milonidas, while others bear interesting inscriptions, such as Fig. 174:

Πειραείοθεν ἵκομες, “We have come from Peiraeus”[2125]; [ΤΥΔΕΔΟΣΧΑΡΙΕΣΑΝ ΑΦΟΡΜΑΝ] τὲ δὲ δὸς χαρίες(ς)αν ἀφορμάν, “And do thou make a graceful repayment”[2126];

and so on. The majority have only the names of Poseidon and Amphitrite, or (ὁ δεῖνα) ἀνέθηκεν,

In view of the palaeographical importance of these inscriptions, it may be worth while to dwell briefly on their peculiarities. The dialect is of course Doric, and consequently the names often differ widely from the forms to which we are accustomed; and this is increased by divergencies of spelling, which produce many anomalous results. For instance, ([ΚΕΣΑΝΔΡΑ]) (Κεσάνδρα) appears for Kassandra on a vase in the Louvre.[2127] ΑΕ is used for ΑΙ, as in [ΑΕΘΟΝ] (Ἀέθων = Αἴθων) on the Chares pyxis, and in [ΠΕΡΑΕΟΘΕΝ] (Περαεόθεν for Πε(ι)ραιόθεν) on the pinax already quoted. A nasal is dropped before a consonant, as in the names of Amphiaraos ([ΑΦΙΑΡΕΟΣ]) and Amphitrite ([ΑΦΕΤΡΙΤΑ]) The digamma lingers as a medial (more rarely as initial) in many words, such as ϝαχύς, Δαμοϝάνασσα, Ποτειδαϝων, and Διδαίϝων; its written form is 15[9]Ϝ or 15[9]ϝ The use of [heta] for the rough breathing is invariable.[2128]

One or two vases have been recognised as of Sicyonian fabric by the use in inscriptions of the unique 15[16]E for Ε, peculiar to that place (Vol. I. p. 321). The only certain example, however, is a krater in Berlin (_Cat._ 1147), with the names of Achilles ([ΣΥΕΛΙΞΑ]) and Memnon ([Μ[Ε]ΜΝΟΝ]). It may also be noted that an Athenian sixth-century vase, signed by Exekias, has a Sicyonian inscription _incised_ upon it by its owner[2129]:

[ΕΠΑΙΝΕΤΟΣ Μ ΕΔΟΚΕΝ ΧΑΡΟΠΟΙ]

Ἐπαίνετός μ’ ἔδωκεν Χαρόπω.

Boeotian vases never attained to the importance of the Corinthian fabrics, though, on the other hand, the manufacture lasted longer; but there are several instances of early signed vases from this district. Two, of which one is in the British Museum, are by Gamedes, the others by Theozotos, Gryton, Iphitadas, Mnasalkes, and Menaidas.[2130] They are recognised as Boeotian by the use of typical letters, as well as by origin, style, and dialect; such are the [Boeotian A] for A, [Boeotian Χ] for Χ, and so on. There is also a fifth-century vase with the Boeotian alphabet.[2131] The Kabeirion vases have inscriptions in the local alphabet, with a few exceptions, which are Ionic.[2132]

A unique vase, from the epigraphical point of view, is E 732 in the Louvre, found at Cervetri, to which allusion has been made elsewhere (Vol. I. p. 357, and see Fig. 111). It bears eleven names (of gods and giants) in an alphabet which has been recognised as Ionian, and is according to Kretschmer most probably that of the island of Keos. The great uncertainty as to the Ε sounds presented by this vase finds parallels in the stone inscriptions found on that island, while in the use of Β for Ϲ (the older form of that letter), the four-stroke [Fourline Σ] and [☉], with a central dot, this attribution finds further support. The only other islands that would fit the conditions are Naxos and Amorgos. As instances of the confused use of Ε, we have [ΖΗΥΣ] for Ζεύς, but [ΠΟΛΥΒΟΤΕ] for Πολυβώτη[ς, while again Ἐφιάλτης appears as [ΕΙΠΙΑΛΤΕΣ]! But this confusion does not occur in Naxos or Amorgos.

Other vases are undoubtedly of Ionic origin, but their actual home is uncertain; they are usually assigned to the coast of Asia Minor. For some reason, however, it is very rare for these vases to bear inscriptions; in all the numerous instances now collected, only some half-dozen with inscriptions can be found.[2133] One of these is the well-known Würzburg kylix with Phineus and the Harpies (see Vol. I. p. 357); another is a vase from Vulci, published by Gerhard,[2134] which has since disappeared. On both of these we find the characteristic Ionic letters Ω for ω, Η for η, Χ for χ, Λ for λ, and [Σ] with four strokes. Both vases are of the sixth century, and other details attest their Ionic origin.

We now come to a very important but somewhat puzzling class of inscriptions, those in the Chalcidian alphabet.[2135] The number of these is hardly more than a dozen, but such as they are they have enabled archaeologists to establish a Chalcidian school of painting by comparisons with other uninscribed vases. In all cases the inscriptions relate exclusively to the figures in the designs. Among the characteristic Chalcidian letters are the Ϙ for Κ, as in [ΣΙΟΤΥΛϘ] (Κλύτιος); the curved Ϲ for Γ, as in [ΣΕΝΟϜΥΡΑϹ] (Γαρυϝόνες=Γηρυόνης); [Ξ] for Λ and [Ξ] for Χ, as in [ΑΧΙΛΛΕΥΣ]; (Ἀχιλλεύς); [Ξ] for [Ξ], as in [ΣΟΘΝΑΞ] (Ξάνθος); and the abnormal form of the digamma [Ϝ], as in [ΣΥΧΑϜ] (Ϝαχύς). [Ψ] is represented by [ΦΣ] in one instance ([ΜΠΟΦΣΟΣ] = Μ<π>όψος).

Kretschmer has compiled a list of twelve vases with inscriptions in this alphabet, to which one or two may be added, but for a fuller treatment of the questions involved in studying this group the reader is referred to Chapter VII. This, however, may be a more suitable place for a few remarks relating to the inscriptions alone.

In one or two instances the dialect alone is peculiarly Chalcidian, as the characteristic letters happen to be wanting. In some instances, as Kretschmer points out, the Aeolic fondness for the vowel υ is to be traced, as in [ΣΥΝϘΥϘ], for Κύκνος, which finds parallels in the Chalcidian colony of Cumae, and probably influenced the Latin language through that means. Hence, too, the preference for the Q sound of the Ϙ, as in English and other languages when υ is preceded by a guttural. On the British Museum Geryon vase (B 155) there is a curious mixture of dialect in the forms Γαρυόνης, Νηίδες.

It must be borne in mind, in speaking of the Chalcidian alphabet, that it really extended over a wide area, including not only Chalkis in Euboea, but Chalkidike in Northern Greece, and the colonies on the coast of Italy, such as Cumae, and this may partly account for the mixed character of the dialect on some of these Chalcidian vases. But although an attempt has been made to connect them with Cumae, it cannot be said at present that any certainty has been attained as to the place of their manufacture.

Though not belonging to the Chalcidian group, there is a vase which must be mentioned here, on account of its inscription, which is partly in the alphabet of the Chalcidian colonies. The vase is of the “Proto-Corinthian” class (see Vol. I. p. 308), and dates about 700–650 B.C.; it bears the name of the maker, Pyrrhos[2136]:

[ΠΥΡΟΣΜΕΠΟΙΕΣΕΝΑΓΑΣΙΛΕϜ] Πυρ(ρ)ος μ’ εποιησεν Αγασιλεϝου

and is therefore one of the oldest existing signatures.

ATHENIAN VASES

Under this heading are included all remaining vase-inscriptions, except a few from Italy. Their value to us, as Kretschmer points out, is not to be measured only by the mythological information they provide, or by the list of Athenian craftsmen and popular favourites which can be drawn up from them, but it is also largely philological. In other words, they illustrate for us the vernacular of Athens in the sixth and fifth centuries, just as the Egyptian papyri have thrown light on the Hellenistic vernacular of the second. In countless small details the language of the vase-painters varies from the official language of state documents and the literary standard of Thucydides, Sophocles, and even Aristophanes. The reason is, of course, a simple one—namely, that the vase-artists occupied a subordinate position in the Athenian state; they were mere craftsmen, of little education, and in all probability their spelling was purely phonetic.[2137] Hence we constantly find such forms as πίει for πίε, υἱύς for υἱός, or Θῆσυς for Θησεύς (see above, p. 237); and even the rich potter Hyperbolos is ridiculed by the comic poet Plato[2138] for saying ὀλίον (_sc. oliyon_) for ὀλίγον, and δῃτώμην for διῃτώμην.

Another interesting point is that many of the artists who have signed their vases were obviously not Athenians by birth. Thus we find such names as Phintias, Amasis, Brygos, Cholkos, Sikanos, Thrax,[2139] and even such signatures as ὁ Λυδός (or ὁ Σκύθης) ἔγραψεν. It is, then, evident that many of them were μέτοικοι or resident aliens, and consequently occupied but a humble rank in the social order of the city.[2140] One name, indeed, that of Epiktetos, is actually a slave’s name (Ἐπίκτητος = “acquired”).

We need not, then, be surprised at meeting with many un-Attic forms or spellings in the vase-inscriptions, which sometimes give a clue to the origin of the artist, and of which it may be interesting to give some specimens. Kretschmer notes that these variations are always Doric, never Ionic.

The commonest Doricism on Attic vases is the use of Α for H, of which there are many instances, such as [ΔΑΙΑΝΕΙΡΑ], Δαιάνειρα for Δηιάνειρα[2141]; [ΗΙΜΕΡΟΠΑ] for Ἱμερόπη (B.M. E 440); [ΟΙΔΙΠΟΔΑΣ] for the Attic Οἰδιπούς.[2142] Such forms as Ὀλυσσεύς and Φερρέφασσα are also clearly un-Attic. On the other hand, the names Menelaos and Iolaos always appear in their Attic form Μενελέως, Ἰολέως. The above instances are all from proper names; but there are other remarkable instances, such as the use of καλά for καλή in [ΠΑΝΤΟΞΕΝΑ] [ΚΑΛΑ] [ΚΟΡΙΝΘΩΙ].[2143] On one of his signed vases Exekias uses the un-Attic form [ΤΕΣΑΡΑ], τέσ(σ)αρα, but, as Kretschmer notes, he also uses Ἰόλαος for Ἰολέως, and was probably not an Athenian. On a B.F. amphora in Rome (see below, p. 263) occurs the form παρβέβακεν.

Perhaps the most remarkable use of non-Attic Greek on a vase is in the case of the artist Brygos, who, as we have already pointed out, was of foreign origin. On a kylix in his style (B.M. E 69) we find the forms Δίπιλος, Νικοπίλη, Πίλων, and Πίλιππος. These were at one time referred to a Macedonian origin,[2144] but Kretschmer points out that that people used Β, not Π, for Φ. He aptly quotes the Scythian in the _Thesmophoriasusae_,[2145] with his πιλήσει, παίνεται, and κεπαλή, as giving a likely clue to the home of this dropping of the aspirate.[2146]

The painted inscriptions on the Attic vases may be divided into three classes: (1) those relating to the whole vase and its purpose, such as artists’ signatures; (2) those relating to the designs on the vase, _i.e._ explanatory inscriptions, and those found on Panathenaic amphorae; (3) those which stand in no direct relation to the vase, such as the so-called “love-names” or “pet-names,” and interjections such as “hail,” “drink deep,” etc. The incised inscriptions have already been discussed.

The artists’ signatures first call for consideration. In relation to their works they are fully discussed elsewhere (Chapters IX., X.), but the present may be regarded as a convenient opportunity for some general outline of the style and palaeography of these inscriptions.

Klein in his _Meistersignaturen_ (2nd edn.) reckons a total of ninety-five signatures, a number which has probably been largely increased since he wrote in 1887. These names he finds distributed over some 424 vases, one name, that of Nikosthenes, occurring on no fewer than seventy-seven; he divides them into four classes, as follows: (1) masters in the B.F. method; (2) masters combining the two methods; (3) masters in the R.F. method (including S. Italy vases); (4) masters whose names appear on vases without subjects. These four classes are not mutually exclusive, as names in (1) and (3) appear again in (2) and (4).

The form which the signature takes is usually (1)—

ὁ δεῖνα ἐποίησεν (of the potter);

or (2)—

ἔγραψεν (of the painter);

or (3), the two combined, either under one name, as—

Ἐξηκίας ἔγραψε κἀποιησέ με;

or (4), with separate names, as on the François vase—

Κλίτιας μ’ ἔγραψεν Ἐργότιμός μ’ ἐποίησεν.

The form (3) may possibly indicate the priority of the artist, but it is more probable that it was adopted as forming an iambic trimeter. When ἐποίησεν only occurs on a painted vase, it is generally to be assumed that the potter is also the painter.

The older artists avoided, as a rule, the imperfect ἔγραφε or ἐποίει, but its use came into fashion for a short time among the early R.F. artists, such as Andokides, Chelis, and Psiax, who use ἐποίει (Vol. I. p. 430); it was again adopted by the Paestum and Apulian schools, as a modest affectation that their work was as yet unfinished.[2147] But the majority preferred the more decided aorist, indicating completeness. The word με or ἐμέ is usually added by the earlier artists, as in the instance already quoted from Exekias. Generally speaking, ἔγραψεν rarely occurs on B.F. vases, ἐποίησεν being the rule. A rare form of inscription is the formula ἔργον (τοῦ δεῖνα), as in the doubtful signature of Statios[2148]; and even more unique is the use of the word κεραμεύειν by the early Attic potter Oikopheles,[2149] as a synonym for ποιεῖν. Other peculiarities of signature are to be seen on the works of Lykinos (ἠργάσατο), Paseas (Πασέου τῶν γραμμάτων), and Therinos (Θερίνου ποίημα).[2150]

The potter sometimes added the name of his father, either as being that of a well-known man, or to distinguish himself from others of the same name. Thus Timonidas of Corinth signs [ΤΙΜΟΝΙΔΑΣ ΕΓΡΑΨΙΑ] Τιμωνίδας ἔγραψε Βία (_sc._ son of Bias); Tleson, Τλήσων ὁ Νεάρχου; Eucheiros, Ὁργοτίμου υίυς (the son of Ergotimos); Euthymides, [ὉΠΟΛΙΟΥ], ὁ Πολίου. The latter in one instance not only gives his patronymic, but challenges comparison with his great rival Euphronios, in the following terms: [ὉΣ ΟΥΔΕ ΠΟΤ ΕΥΦΡΟΝΙΟΣ], ὁς οὐδέποτ(ε) Εὐφρόνιος, _i.e._, “Euphronios never made anything like this.”[2151] Other peculiarities are: the omission of the verb, as was sometimes done by R.F. artists (_e.g._ Psiax); or, on the contrary, the simple ἐποίησεν, without a name, sometimes found on R.F. kylikes of the Epictetan school[2152]; or the addition by the artist of his tribe or nationality. Among the latter we have Kleomenes, Teisias, and Xenophantos, who style themselves Ἀθηναῖος, and Nikias, who not only gives his father’s name, but also his deme in Attica:

Νικίας Ἑ[ρ]μοκλέους Ἀναφλύστιος ἐποίησεν.

Two other artists call themselves ὁ Λυδός (the Lydian) and ὁ Σκύθης (the Scythian). Smikros signs one of his vases in the Louvre[2153] ΔΟΚΕΙΣΜΙΚΡΩΕΙΝΑΙ, “It seems to be Smikros’ work.” There are also frequent vagaries of spelling, as in Φιτίας for Φιντίας, Πάνφαιος or Πάνθαιος for Πάμφαιος, and Ἱέπων for Ἱέρων. Sakonides once spells his name Ζακωνίδης, and Nikosthenes once uses the koppa Ϙ for Κ. Fuller information in regard to this subject may be found in Klein’s admirable work; there is also much of interest relating to the R.F. cup-painters in Hartwig’s exhaustive treatise. A complete list of all known artists’ names is given at the end of this chapter.

* * * * *

We now come to the inscriptions which have relation to the subjects depicted on the vases. These are seldom of a general kind, having reference to the whole composition; but on a Panathenaic amphora in Naples a boxing scene is entitled [ΠΑΝΚΡΑΤΙΟΝ], “general maul,”[2154] and on another in Munich over a foot-race is written, [ΣΤΑΔΙΟ ΑΝΔΡΟΝ ΝΙΚΕ], σταδίου ἀνδρῶν νίκη,[2155] while B.F. lekythos in the same collection with Dionysos and dancing Maenads is inscribed [ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΑ(Κ)Α].[2156] On a vase with a Homeric subject is [ΠΑΤΡΟΚΛΙΑ], and on one with a scene from Theban legend [ΚΡΕΟΝΤΕΙΑ].[2157] Localities are sometimes hinted at by the use of such words as [ΚΡΕΝΕ] (κρήνη) on the François vase, where Polyxena goes to the fountain, or by the [ΚΑΛΙΡΕΚΡΕΝΕ] Καλλιρρ(ό)η κρήνη on the British Museum hydria (B 331) with girls drawing water at the fountain of Kallirrhoë. More often names are given to inanimate objects like the θᾶκος (seat) and ὑδρία (pitcher) on the François vase, σταθμός on the Arkesilas cup, the βῶμος (altar) on a vase in Munich (_Cat._ 124), λύρα (lyre) on a cup in Munich (333), and θρονός (throne) on an amphora in the Louvre.[2158] On a washing-basin on a R.F. vase published by Tischbein appears the word [ΔΗΜΟΣΙΑ], _i.e._ “public baths.”[2159] The word τέρμων sometimes appears on a _stele_ on later vases.[2160] Animals are also occasionally named, such as the ὗς on the Munich vase already quoted (333).[2161]

But the greater majority of these inscriptions refer to the names of persons, deities, and mythological figures, the name being usually in the nominative, but occasionally in the genitive, with εἶδος or εἰκων understood.[2162] Sometimes generic names or nicknames are given to ordinary figures in _genre_ scenes, as Ἀρχεναύτης, “the ship’s captain”; Κώμαρχος, “leader of the revels”; or, again, Πλήξιππος for a horseman, Τόξαμις and Κιμμέριος for a Scythian bowman.[2163] Names of real contemporary persons are occasionally introduced, as on a hydria by Phintias, on which his comrade Euthymides and the “minor artist” Tlenpolemos are represented, with names inscribed[2164]; and on a stamnos by Smikros at Brussels the artist introduces himself and the potter Pheidiades at a banquet.[2165] Although proper names usually stand alone, they are sometimes accompanied by some interjection, as ὁδὶ Μενεσθεύς, “Here is Menestheus,”[2166] Σφίγξ ἥδε χαῖρε, “This is the Sphinx; hail!”[2167] or in the form of a phrase, as Ἑρμῆς εἰμὶ Κυλλήνιος.[2168] So also we find [ΗΑΛΙΟΣ ΓΕΡΩΝ] Ἅλιος γέρων, “the old man of the sea,” for Nereus[2169]; [ΝΕΣΤΟΡ ΠΥΛΙΟΣ] “Nestor of Pylos”[2170]; [ΔΙΟΣ ΦΟΣ] Διὸς φῶς, for Dionysos[2171]; [ΔΙΟΣ ΠΑΙΣ], “the son of Zeus,” for Herakles[2172]; ταῦρος φορβάς, “the grazing bull,” for the metamorphosed Zeus (a doubtful instance).[2173]

Besides the names of figures and objects, words and exclamations are sometimes represented as proceeding from the mouths of the figures themselves, in the same manner as on the labels affixed to the figures of saints in the Middle Ages. They vary in length and purport, but in some cases they appear to be extracts from poems or songs, or expressions familiar at the time, but now unintelligible or lost in the wreck of Hellenic literature. They are found on both B.F. and R.F. vases, but more commonly on the former, and generally read according to the direction of the figure, as if issuing from the mouth.

Thus a boy pouring wine out of an amphora cries, [ΕΝΧΕ ΗΔ . . ΟΙΝΟΝ], ἔ(γ)χει ἡδ[ὺν] οἶνον, “Pour in sweet wine”[2174]; over the first of three runners in a race appears νικᾷς, Πολυμένων, “Polymenon, you win”[2175]; again, Amphiaraos is exhorted to mount his chariot with the word ἀνάβα,[2176] or one personage says to another, χαἶρε or πῖνε καὶ σύ.[2177] Sometimes the words are evidently those of a song, as on a R.F. kylix at Athens, where a man lying on a couch sings an elegy of Theognis beginning ὦ παίδων κάλλιστε, “Fairest of boys!”[2178] Another sings [ΜΑΜΕΚΑΙΠΟΤΕΟ], which has been recognised as an inaccurate version of an Aeolic line, καὶ ποθήω καὶ μάομαι.[2179] On a red-figured vase in the British Museum (E 270) a man accompanied by a flute-player has an inscription proceeding from his open mouth, which runs, [ΕΟΠΟΔΕΡΟΤΕΝΤΥΡΙΝΘΙ], ὡδέ ποτ’ ἐν Τύρινθι; evidently the beginning of a song, “Here once in Tiryns....” On a stamnos in the British Museum (E 439) the letters ΝΟΝ appear before the mouth of a Seilenos, and evidently represent notes of music.[2180]

On a psykter by Euphronios[2181] a courtesan playing at kottabos casts the drops out of a cup with the words [·ΡΓΑΕΛΟΣΣΑΤΑΛΕΔΝΑΤΝΙΤ], τὶν τάνδε λατάσσω Λέαγρ(ε), “To thee, Leagros, I dash these drops.” Another kylix (Munich 371) represents a surfeited drinker on a couch, saying, οὐ δύναμ’ οὔ, “I can no more!”

To turn to another class of these expressions, we have a Panathenaic amphora in the British Museum (B 144), on which a herald proclaims a victor in the horse-race as follows: [ΔΥΝΕΙΚΕΤΥ : ΗΙΠΟΣ : ΝΙΚΑΙ], Δυ(σ)νείκητου ἵππος νικᾷ, “The horse of Dysneiketos[2182] wins.” On another of the same class[2183] is an acrobat on horseback before judges, of whom one cries, [ΚΑΛΟΣΤΟΙΚΥΒΙΣΤΕΙΤΟΙ], καλῶς τῷ κυβιοτῇ[2184] τοι, “Bravo, then, to the acrobat.” A boy walking with his dog calls to it, [ΜΕΛΙΤΑΙΕ], Μελιταῖε (_i.e._ “Maltese (?) dog”).[2185] A charioteer calls to his horses, ἔλα, ἔλα, “Gee up!”[2186] Women weeping over a corpse cry, οἴμοι, “Woe is me!”[2187] In a representation of Oedipus and the Sphinx on a R.F. vase in Rome the words [ΚΑΙΤΡΙ[ΠΟΥΝ]], καὶ τρίπουν, occur, evidently with reference to the well-known riddle.[2188]

An interesting bit of dialogue appears on a B.F. vase,[2189] which represents boys and men watching a swallow, evidently the first of the returning spring; one boy says, ἰδοὺ χελιδών, “See, the swallow”; to which a man replies, νὴ τὸν Ἡρακλέα, “Yes, by Herakles!” Another boy joins in with αὑτηί, “There she is,” and ἔαρ ἤδη, “It is already spring.” Another good instance is on a B.F. vase in the Vatican.[2190] On one side we see the proprietor of an olive garden extracting oil from the olives, with the prayer, [ΟΖΕΥΠΑΤΕΡΑΙΘΕΠΛΟΥΣΙΟΣΓΕΝ] ὦ Ζεῦ πάτερ, αἴθε πλούσιος γέν[οιμ’ ἄν, “O Father Zeus, may I be rich!” while on the other he sits over a full vessel, and cries to the purchaser, [ΕΔΕΜΕΝΕΔΕ ΠΛΕΟΙ ΠΑΡΒΕΒΑΚΕΝ], ἤδη μέν, ἤδη πλέο(ν) παρβέβακεν, “Already, already it has gone far beyond my needs.”[2191]

To conclude with a few miscellaneous and unique inscriptions, we have firstly, on a vase in the British Museum (E 298), a tripod, on the base of which are the words Ἀκαμαντὶς ἐνίκα φυλή, showing that it is intended for a monument in honour of a choragic victory, with the name of the victorious tribe. On a sepulchral stele on a B.F. funeral amphora at Athens[2192] are the words (now nearly obliterated) ἀνδρὸς ἀπ[οφθιμ]ένοιο ῥάκ[ος] κα[κ]ὸν [ἐν]θάδε κεῖμα[ι, “Here lie I, a vile rag of a dead man.” Similarly, on a sepulchral plaque at Athens are the words, [SÊMATODESTIN : AREIOU], “This is the grave of Areios.”[2193] In a representation of Sappho reading from her poems, she holds an open roll, on which are visible the words Θεοί, ἠερίων ἐπἐων ἄρχομαι ἄλλ[ων] ... ἔπεα πτερόεντα[2194]; and in the well-known school-scene on the Duris vase in Berlin[2195] a teacher holds a roll, on which are the words (in Aeolic dialect, and combined from the openings of two distinct hymns):

[ΜΟΙΣΑΜΟΙ] Μοῖσά μοι [ΑΦΙΣΚΑΜΑΝΔΡΟΝ] ἀ(μ)φὶ Σκάμανδρον [ΕΥΡΩΝΑΡΧΟΜΑΙ] ἐύρ(ρ)ων ἄρχομαι [ΑΕΙΝΔΕΝ] ἀεί<ν>δειν.[2196]

A small fragment of a red-figure kylix (?) of fine style, found at Naukratis in 1899 (and now in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford),[2197] has a similar scene of a dictation lesson. A seated figure unrolls an inscribed scroll, on which is the _boustrophedon_ legend, στησίχορον ὕμνον ἄγοισαι, while another figure, of which the right hand alone remains, is writing on a tablet (Fig. 177).

In a very puzzling scene on a R.F. vase of fine style, generally supposed to have some reference to the Argonautic expedition, one figure holds up an object inscribed with the name [ΣΙΣΥΦΟΣ].[2198] This object has generally been interpreted as a _tessera hospitalis_, or “letter of introduction,” as we should say.

Lastly, there is the class of Panathenaic vases with their inscriptions.[2199] They fall into two groups: (1) the words [ΤΟΝ ΑΘΕΝΕΘΕΝ ΑΘΛΟΝ], to which [ΕΜΙ] is sometimes added, “(I am) from the games at Athens”; (2) the names of archons, which only occur on the fourth-century examples. They form a unique instance of inscriptions which give direct information as to the date of a vase, and range from 367 to 313 B.C. (see Vol. I. p. 390).

Sometimes vases (especially in the B.F. period) are covered with meaningless collocations of letters, either separate or in the form of words. Some ingenious explanations of these have been propounded, but none are very satisfactory. They are often found on the class known as “Corintho-Attic” or “Tyrrhenian amphorae,” and it is just possible that in this case they are attempts by an Athenian workman to copy the unfamiliar Corinthian alphabet.

* * * * *

The third class of inscriptions on Attic vases is composed of those which have no direct relation to the vase itself. They include invocations to deities such as were used in making libations, _e.g._ Διὸς Σωτῆρος, “To Zeus the Saviour”[2200]; or, again, the exhortations so frequently found on B.F. kylikes of the “Minor Artists’” school, of which the commonest is χαῖρε καὶ πίει εὖ, “Hail, and drink deep!”[2201] or χαῖρε καὶ πίει τήνδε, “Hail, and drink this!”[2202] On a number of R.F. kylikes appears the word προσαγορεύω, “I salute you.”[2203]

But the most numerous and important inscriptions of this class are those conveniently named by German archaeologists “Lieblingsnamen,” or “Lieblingsinschriften,” for which we have no satisfactory equivalent in English, though “pet-name” and “love-name” have been suggested, and latterly “καλός-name.” The latter title has been adopted from the fact that the usual form which these inscriptions take is that of a proper name in the nominative case, generally masculine, with the word καλός attached. Sometimes, but not so frequently, the name is feminine, with καλή[2204]; the superlative form κάλλιστος is also found.[2205] In other cases ὁ or ἑ παῖς appears in place of the proper name, or the word δοκεῖ is added, and sometimes also ναί or ναιχί, emphasising the statement. The most remarkable instance is a B.F. jug at Munich, round the shoulder of which is the inscription καλός Νικόλα Δωρόθεος καλὸς κἀμοὶ δοκεῆ, ναί· χἄτερος παῖς καλὸς, Μέμνων κἀμοὶ καλὸς φιλός.[2206] It is not quite certain how far the word καλὸς should be interpreted in a physical sense as “handsome” or “fair,” or in an ethical sense as “good” or “noble”; but having regard to the manners and customs of fifth-century Athens,[2207] it is more likely that the physical meaning of the word is to be inferred.

These inscriptions are often found on B.F. vases, but far more frequently in the succeeding period, and generally in more or less direct connection with artists’ signatures, from which fact interesting results have been obtained. Special attention has been drawn to them of late years, from the fact that many of the names are those borne by historical personages, such as Miltiades, Megakles, Glaukon, and so on, and attempts have been made to connect them with those characters (see Vol. I. p. 403).

Klein, the chief writer on this subject, has collected in the second edition of his valuable work no less than 558 instances of these καλὸς-inscriptions,[2208] as against 424 signatures of artists; and there are besides these the numerous instances in which no proper name is given.

The chief question which calls for consideration in regard to these inscriptions is their purport, and the reason why they occur exclusively on vases, and of these exclusively on Attic vases covering a period of not more than one hundred years. The custom was not, of course, an unfamiliar one at Athens, as two references in Aristophanes indicate. In the _Acharnians_[2209] he describes the Thracian Sitalkes as being such a “lover” of the Athenians that he wrote on the walls, “The Athenians are fair”; and, again, the slave Xanthias, in the _Wasps_, speaking of his master’s litigious proclivities, says that if ever he saw Δῆμος καλός written on a door he promptly wrote by the side κημὸς καλός.[2210] But the most interesting and apposite instance recorded is that of Pheidias, who scratched on the finger of his statue of the Olympian Zeus, Παντάρκης καλός.[2211] Generally speaking, the word was no doubt intended to refer to the personal beauty of boys (as indicated by the use of ὁ παῖς), or at any rate of young athletes, and was applied to popular favourites of the day,[2212] whose occupations in the gymnasium, at the banquet, and elsewhere were matters of every-day talk.

These names may have been placed on the vases with the view of attracting the public to purchase them, or may even have been the subject of special orders from customers. Some light seems to be thrown on the matter by a cup signed by the painter Phintias,[2213] which represents a young man, purse in hand, making purchases of vases in a potter’s workshop. This vase has the inscription Χαιρίας καλός, but whether it is intended as a representation of Chairias or his admirer it is impossible to say. The names, however, are not always those of every-day life. They may have relation to the figures on the vase, as [ΗΕΚΤΟΡ ΚΑΛΟΣ].[2214]

We have already noted that historical names frequently occur in this series, and it is obvious that if they can be identified with the actual historical owners of such names much valuable information in regard to the chronology of Greek vases will be gained. The question has already been discussed in a previous chapter (Vol. I. p. 403), and the principles there laid down need not be repeated. It is sufficient to say that so far only two or three names have been identified with those of historical personages, though more results may yet be obtained. Of these one is Stesileos, occurring on two vases in Berlin, and identified with a _strategos_ who fell at Marathon in 490.[2215] On two lekythi (one late B.F., the other R.F.) the name of Glaukon son of Leagros[2216] appears, and these two names have also been identified with Athenian _strategi_, Leagros having fallen in battle against the Edones in 467, while Glaukon commanded at Kerkyra in 433–432 B.C. It may be roughly inferred that Leagros was a boy (παῖς) about 510 B.C., and his son Glaukon about 470 B.C., which gives an approximate date (within ten years or so) for these two groups of vases. It is, however, obvious that much at present only rests on hypothesis.

It is curious to note that nearly all these names have an aristocratic sound: thus we have Alcibiades, Alkmaeon, Hipparchos, and Megakles, besides those already quoted. Miltiades καλός occurs on a R.F. plate at Oxford,[2217] but there seems hardly sufficient evidence for referring it to the youth of the conqueror of Marathon (cf. Vol. I. p. 403). The table at the end of this chapter may be found useful as giving a _conspectus_ of the principal names and their relation to the artists.

* * * * *

It is now necessary to discuss some of the principal peculiarities of the Attic vase-inscriptions, in regard to palaeography, orthography, and grammar.[2218] The variety in the forms and uses of the letters is somewhat surprising at first sight, but it must be remembered that non-Attic influences were always strong, as has indeed already been pointed out.

Α usually appears either in that form or as [Corinthian Α], [Sicyonian Α]; but such variations as 15[14]RF Attic alpha 15[14]RF Attic alpha 15[13]RF Attic alpha are found on R.F. vases, while at a later period even 15[13]RF Attic alpha occurs. Δ on the vases of Duris generally appears as 15[13]RF Attic alpha [Attic lambda2] is found for [Attic lambda], the Attic form of Λ. Σ varies between [sigma] and [fourline sigma], while such abnormal forms as 15[11]rounded S (Oikopheles), and 15[11]E-shaped sigma are not unknown. The minor artist Xenokles uses a sort of cursive handwriting for his signature. Η is used for ἑ and ἡ, as in [HΡΜΕΣ] for [ΗΕΡΜΕΣ], [ΗΡΑΚΛΕΣ] for [ΗΕΡΑKΛΕΣ], which seems to be a confusion of ideas resulting from its use for _eta_ in Ionic, and for _h_ in Chalcidian (_i.e._ Western) alphabets.[2219] The sign for the aspirate occurs first as [heta], afterwards as Η, and is sometimes introduced without apparent reason, as in [ΗΙΛΕΙΘΙΑ] for Εἰλείθυια, and [HΑΦΡΟΔΙΤΕ] for Ἀφροδίτη. The digamma is unknown on Attic vases, but the François vase and the allied 'Tyrrhenian' group give some interesting examples of the use of Ϙ for Κ. Thus we find [ϘORAΞΣ] for Κόραξ, [ΕΤΕΟϘΛΟΣ] for Ἐτέοκλος, [ΧARIϘΛO] for Χαπικλώ. On the Corintho-Attic vase in Berlin (1704) are two curious instances of dittography, due no doubt to Corinthian influence, Κυλλήνιος being written [ΚϘYΕNIOΣ] (Κϙυελνιος) and Ζεύς as [ΔΒΕYΣ], where the Corinthian and Attic forms of Κ and Ε stand side by side. So on a vase in the Louvre (E 852) we have [ΖDEYΣ] = Ζδεύς.[2220]

As a result no doubt of the unsettled state of the alphabet in the fifth century, a confusion in the use of ε and η, and ο and ω respectively, often arises, and we find Ἀλκιμάχως κάλως for Ἀλκίμαχος καλός, [ΚΥΜΟΔΩΚΕ] for Κυμοδόκη, [ΘΗΤΙΣ] for Θέτις, and similar forms.[2221] The diphthong ει is sometimes rendered by ΕΙ, sometimes by Ε, as in [ΚΑΛΕΔΟΚΕΣ] for καλὴ δοκεῖς; αι and ει are also rendered by Ε, as in the name [ΑΛΚΜΕΟΝ] for Ἀλκμαίων and [ΠΕΝΘΕΣΙΛΕΑ] for Πενθεσίλεια, or αι by Α, as in [ΑΘΕΝΑΑ] for Ἀθηναία. In a few words, such as [ΧΙΡΟΝ] (Χείρων) and [ΣΙΛΕΝΟΣ] (Σείληνος), the diphthong ει is represented by its other member Ι. On the other hand, we find [ΕΙΟΛΕΟΣ] for Ἰολέως (B.M. B 301). The general vagueness of the Attic craftsmen’s orthography is well illustrated by Kretschmer in the word Ὀδυσσεύς, which is not only invariably spelled with a Λ, reminding us of the Latin form _Ulixes_, but occurs in the following different forms[2222]:— 15[86]ΟΛΥΤΕΥΣ 15[79]ΟΛΥΤΕΥ 15[99]ΟΛΛΥΤΕΥΣ 15[103]ΟΛΥΤΤΕΥΣ 15[73]ΟΛΥΤΕΣ 15[81]ΟΛΥΣΕΥΣ 15[91]ΩΛΥΣΣΕΥΣ this order being roughly chronological. The ordinary δ-form is, however, found.[2223]

A tendency to assimilation of aspirated consonants, always avoided in literary Greek, is seen in such forms as [ΘΑΛΘΥΒΙΟΣ] for Ταλθύβιος, [ΧΑΧΡΥΛΙΟΝ] for Καχρυλίων, and [ΦΑΝΦΑΙΟΣ] for Πάμφαιος. The reverse tendency is curiously illustrated in [ΚΑΡΙΘΑΙΟΣ] for Χαριταῖος. Unassimilated forms occur, as in the case of [ΑΝΧΙΠΟΣ] for Ἄγχιππος.[2224] Another peculiarity is the omission of nasals before consonants, as in [ΑΤΑΛΑΤΕ] for Ἀταλά(ν)τη, [ΤΥΤΑΡΕΟΣ] for Τυ(ν)δαρέως,[2225] [ΙΑΦΥΙ] for Νύ(μ)φαι, [ΛΑΠΟΝ] for Λά(μ)πων, and [ΕΚΕΛΑΔΟΣ] for Ἐ(γ)κέλαδος. There is also a tendency to avoid double consonants, as in [ΜΕΣΙΛΑ] for Μνήσιλλα, [ΑΡΙΑΝΕ] for Ἀριάδνη, [ΚΛΥΤΑΙΜΕΣΤΡΑ] for Κλυταίμνηστρα, [ΠΕΡΟΦΑΤΑ] for Περσέφαττα[2226]; this is especially common in the case of double Λ or double Σ, as in [ΟΛΥΤΕΥΣ] and [ΜΕΣΙΛΑ] just quoted. On the other hand, on later vases consonants are often doubled without reason, as in [ΚΑΣΣΤΟΡ] for Κάστωρ,[2227] [ΤΡΙΠΠΤΟΛΕΜΟΣ] for Τριπτόλεμος, [ΜΕΜΜΝΟΝ] for Μέμνων, this being commonest with [fourline Σ] and [Π]. [Χ] and [Chalcidian Χ], originally absent from the Attic alphabet, are represented usually by [ΞΣ] and [ΘΣ], exceptionally by [ΚΣ] and [ΠΣ], as in [ΧΑΡΟΠΣ], [ΚΣΕΝΟΚΛΕΣ][2228]; also occasionally by metathesis, as [ΕΛΡΑΣΦΕΝ], [ΣΧΑΝΘΟΣ], [ΠΙΣΤΟΣΧΕΝΟΣ].[2229] Attic contractions, such as [ΧΑΤΕΡΟΣ] for καὶ ἕτερος and [ΚΑΜΟΙ] for καὶἐμοί, are also found.[2230]

Among peculiarities of inflection (some of which may of course be mere misspellings) may be mentioned [ΗΥΙΥΣ] = υἱύς for υἱός, [ΠΑΥΣ] for paῖs, [ΘΕΣΥΣ] for Θησεύς, and [ΠΕΡΣΕΣ] for Περσεύς; also the open form -εες for -hς, as in [ΗΕΡΑΚΛΕΕΣ], [ΧΣΕΝΟΚΛΕΕΣ], and the form πίει for πίε; to some of these allusion has already been made.

* * * * *

From this mass of detail it is possible to deduce certain chronological results,[2231] which are not without their value for the dating of the various Athenian fabrics. Excluding the doubtful Dipylon vase, the inscriptions extend from the seventh century[2232] down to the time of Xenophantos and the late Panathenaic amphorae, a period of over three hundred years.

In the François vase we meet with the closed [asper] for the aspirate, the Ϙ and Κ together, and the two forms [Θ] and [Θ] of Θ; as the [Θ] form dropped out of private use earlier than out of official documents, and is found in the latter down to 520 B.C., we can date the François vase about the middle of the sixth century (not later, as the closed [asper] shows); the same date will also apply to the earliest Panathenaic amphora (B.M. B 130), and the cup of Oikopheles. The fact that Eucheiros, a “minor artist,” calls himself the son of Ergotimos, who made the François vase, permits us to place him some thirty years later, about 520 B.C., and this point may be regarded as the zenith of the B.F. period. In the later B.F. vases the H and Ω for Ε and Ο begin to make their appearance[2233]; but the conservative Panathenaic amphorae, like the coins, adhere to the original spelling right down to the end.

The existence of the R.F. style for some time previous to 480 B.C. has now been established by the discoveries on the Athenian Acropolis. This is also borne out by the appearance on vases by Euthymides of the [Θ] form for [Θ], and the complete absence in the earlier vases of the H and Ω forms, which are not found among the Acropolis fragments. The hydria of Meidias (B.M. B 224), which marks the zenith of the “fine” period, has a purely Ionic alphabet. The Ionic forms seem to have come in with the “fine” R.F. style after 480 B.C., and for some time we find a mixed alphabet on the vases.[2234] It is also interesting to note the appearance in some cases of the Thasian alphabet, with its use of Ω for Ο (as in Ἀλκιμάχως καλώς, B.M. E 318), which has been traced to the influence of Polygnotos.[2235]

* * * * *

We conclude our account of inscriptions on Greek vases with a brief survey of those found on the vases of Southern Italy[2236]; it will be seen that they are neither numerous nor specially interesting.

The inscriptions are for the most part in the Doric dialect and Ionic alphabet, with the addition of the Doric sign [doric asper] for the aspirate. Generally speaking, these Doric forms are found on the Apulian vases, whereas on the products of Paestum they are mainly Ionic, with admixtures of Doric. Attic forms also occur. It seems probable that the Doric tendencies of the Apulian inscriptions are due to the influence of the great Laconian colony of Tarentum (although the vases were not made there), while Paestum was influenced, on the other hand, by the neighbouring Ionic colonies, such as Cumae.

The latter, being for the most part of earlier date, will first occupy our attention. They include two artists’ signatures, which appear in the form [ΑΣΣΤΕΑΣ] [ΕΓΡΑΦΕ] and [ΠΥΘΩΝ] [ΕΓΡΑΦΕ]. We have already remarked on the use of the imperfect tense (p. 258); there are five vases by Assteas and one by Python, on all of which the figures also have their names inscribed.[2237] The Ionic forms appear in [ΜΕΓΑΡΗ], Μεγάρη, [ΑΛΚΜΗΝΗ], Ἀλκμήνη, and so on; on the other hand, Python uses the Doric form [ΑΩΣ], Ἀώς = Ἠώς, and Assteas the Doric [Doric heta] in [ἙΣΣΠΕΡΙΑΣ] = Ἑ<σ>σπεριάς. Ionic forms are also found on a few Apulian vases, as for instance Berlin 3257 (from Ceglie), which has [Ε]ΥΘΥΜΙΗ] and [ΕΥΝΟΜΙΗ] for Εὐθυμία and Εὐνομία, or Naples 2296 with [ΝΗΣΑΙΗ] for Νησαία.

Some of the inscribed Apulian vases are not without interest, as for instance that in the Louvre, which bears the signature of Lasimos: [ΛΑΣΙΜΟΣ ΕΓΡΑΨΕ], Λάσιμος ἔγραψε.[2238] He was probably not a Greek, but of Messapian origin. On the great Dareios vase in Naples (No. 3253) several names are inscribed, such as [ἙΛΛΑΣ] forἝλλας, [ΑΣΙΑ], [ΔΑΡΕΙΟΣ], and the general title of the scene, [ΠΕΡΣΑΙ]. On a well-known burlesque scene in the British Museum (F 269) the characters are inscribed [ΗΕΡΑ] (Ἥρα), [ΔΑΙΔΑΛΟΣ] (Δαίδαλος = Hephaistos), and [ΕΝΕΥΑΛΙΟΣ] (Ἐν<ε>υάλιος = Ares); and on the fine amphora F 331, representing Pelops at Olympia, are numerous incised inscriptions: [ΠΕΛΟΨ], Πέλοψ; [ΟΙΝΟΜΑΟΣ], Οἰνόμαος; [ἹΠΠΟΔΑΜΕΙΑ], Ἱπποδάμεια, etc. On the altar is painted [ΔΙΟΣ], Διός, _sc._ “the altar of Zeus.”

A curious inscription is that on a krater in Naples (No. 2872), which represents Eros and a woman playing at ball; the latter leans on a stele on which is inscribed [ἹΗΣΑΝΜΟΙΤΑΝΣΦΙΡΑΝ] which was interpreted by Cavedoni, probably correctly, as ἵης ἄν μοι τὰν σφ(α)ῖραν, “You might send me the ball.” The [Sicyonian Χ] is an error for [Doric heta], the [heta reversed] for Η. This inscription, be it noted, is painted, contrary to the general rule in these vases, as they are generally incised; but an exception seems to be made in favour of inscriptions on _stelae_ and similar objects, which are not uncommon, though many are open to suspicion. In the British Museum there are several examples,[2239] but by far the most curious is on an amphora in Naples (No. 2868), where a _stele_ is inscribed:

A curious and unique inscription is found engraved on a kotyle from Chiusi: οὗτος τὸν δᾶμον ἔφα ποναρόν, “This fellow said that the people were a depraved lot.”[2241] The η of πονηρόν was first written Ε, and then corrected into Α, the Doric form. It may be supposed that the inscription is due to a workman who did not approve of the democracy under which he lived.

On an amphora from Gnatia (Fasano), with a goose and a cock, in white on the black ground, is the quaint dialogue:

[ΑΝΗΧΝΟΤΙΑ, ΟΤΟΝΕΛΕΤΡΥΓΟΝΑ] αἴ τὸν χῆνα, ὦ τὸν ἐλετρυγόνα, or, “What, the goose?” “Oh, the cock!”[2242]

Etruscan inscriptions do not come within the scope of this chapter, but an Oscan inscription should be mentioned here, which is incised on a vase in the British Museum (F 233), over an actor: [ΑΙΤΝΑΣ] = _Santia_, the Oscan form of Ξανθίας, which was a common name for the slave of comedy.

LIST OF ARTISTS’ SIGNATURES FOUND ON GREEK VASES

I. EARLY FABRICS (CHAPTER VII.)

Aristonoös ἐποίησε Uncertain fabric See Vol. I. p. 297

Pyrrhos ἐποίησε Proto-Corinthian _Rev. Arch._ xl. (1902), p. 41

Chares ἔγραψε Corinthian Klein, _Meistersig._ p. 29

Milonidas ἔγραψε do. _Wiener Vorl._ 1888, pl. 1, fig. 4

Timonidas ἔγραψε do. Klein, p. 28

Gamedes ἐποίησε Boeotian _Ibid._ p. 31

Gryton ἐποίησε do. _Boston Mus. Report_, 1898, p. 54

Iphitadas ἐποίησε Boeotian _Röm. Mitth._ 1897, p. 105

Menaidas ἐποίησε do. _Wiener Vorl._ 1889, pl. 1, fig. 1

Mnasalkes ἐποίησε do. _Boston Mus. Report_, 1899, p. 56

Theozotos ἐποίησε do. Louvre F 69

II. ATTIC BLACK-FIGURED VASES (Vol. I. p. 379).

Amasis ἐποίησε Amphorae and Klein, p. 43; Vol. I. p. oinochoae 383

Anakles ἐποίησε[2243] Minor artist _Ibid._ p. 75

Antidoros ἐποίει Minor artist _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1897, p. 231

Archikles ἐποίησε Minor artist Klein, p. 76

Charitaios ἐποίησε Hydria and kylix _Ibid._ p. 51

Cheiron ἐποίησε Minor artist _Ibid._ p. 79

Epitimos ἐποίησε Minor artist _Ibid._ p. 84

Ergoteles ἐποίησε Minor artist Berlin 1758

Ergotimos ἐποίησε Potter of François Klein, p. 37 vase; kylix

Eucheiros ἐποίησε Minor artist _Ibid._ p. 72

Euphiletos ἔγραψε Pinax _Ibid._ p. 49

Exekias {ἔγραψε } Amphorae and kylikes _Ibid._ p. 38

{ἐποίησε}

Glaukytes ἐποίησε Minor artist (with _Ibid._ p. 77 Archikles)

Hermogenes ἐποίησε Minor artist _Ibid._ p. 82

Kaulos ἐποίησε Potter for Sakonides _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1903, p. 35

Kittos ἐποίησε Panathen. amph. (4th B.M. B 604 cent.)

Kleisophos ἔγραψε Oinochoë (Xenokles Athens 691 as potter)

Klitias ἔγραψε François vase Klein, p. 32; B.M. B (painter) 601_{4–5}

Kolchos ἐποίησε Oinochoë Berlin 1732

Mnesikleides ἔγραψε Aryballos Athens 669

Myspios ἐποίησε Minor artist Klein, p. 84

Neandros ἐποίησε Minor artist _Ibid._ p. 79

Nearchos ἐγρ. κ. ἐπ. Situla _Ibid._ p. 38

Nikosthenes ἐποίησε About eighty vases _Ibid._ p. 51

Oikopheles ἐκεράμευσε Kylix Oxford 189

Paseas γράμμα Pinax Klein, p. 49

Phrynos ἐποίησε Minor artist B.M. B 424 and Boston

Priapos ἐποίησε Doubtful B.M. B 395

Psoieas ἐποίησε(?) Minor artist B.M. B 600_{40}

Sakonides ἔγραψε Minor artist Klein, p. 85

Sikelos ἔγραψε Panathen. amphora _Ibid._ p. 86

Skythes ἔγραψε Pinax _Ibid._ p. 48

Sokles ἐποίησε Minor artist _Ibid._ p. 79

Sondros ἐποίησε Minor artist B.M. B 601_{6}

Sophilos ἔγραψε Fragment _Ath. Mitth._ 1889, pl. 1

Taleides ἐποίησε Various shapes Klein, p. 46

Thrax ἐποίησε Minor artist _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1903, p. 36

Timagoras ἐποίησε Hydriae Klein, p. 50

Tlenpolemos ἐποίησε Minor artist; potter _Ibid._ p. 84 for Sakonides

Tleson ἐποίησε Minor artist _Ibid._ p. 73

Tychios ἐποίησε Hydria _Ibid._ p. 50

Xenokles ἐποίησε Minor artist; potter _Ibid._ p. 80 for Kleisophos

III. TRANSITIONAL OR “MIXED TECHNIQUE”

Andokides { ἐποίησε } Amphorae, etc. See Vol. I. p. 386

{ ἐποίει }

Chelis See below

Epiktetos See below

Epilykos See below

Hischylos ἐποίησε Potter for Klein, p. 97 Epiktetos, Sakonides, Pheidippos

Nikosthenes See above; two mixed; three R.F.[2244]

Pamphaios ἐποίησε Various shapes _Ibid._ p. 87

Pasiades ἐποίησε White-ground B.M. B 668

Thypheithide ἐποίησε Doubtful See B.M. E 4 s

IV. ATTIC RED-FIGURED VASES (see Vol. I. p. 420 ff.)

Aeson ἔγραψε Kylix _Ant. Denkm._ ii. pl. 1

Amasis II (ἔγραψε) Kylix Bibl. Nat. 535; Hartwig, _Meistersch._ chap. xvi.

Apollodoros ἔγραψε Kylikes _Ibid._ chap. xxii.

Aristophanes ἔγραψε Kylikes Berlin 2531; _Boston Mus. Report_, 1900, p. 49 ff.

Brygos ἐποίησε Kylikes Hartwig, chap. xiii.

Chachrylion ἐποίησε Kylikes _Ibid._ chap iv.

Chelis { ἐποίησε} Kylikes (one Klein, _Meistersig._ p. “mixed”) 116

{ ἐποίει }

Deiniades ἐποίησε Potter for Phintias

Duris ἔγραψε Various shapes Hartwig, chaps. x., xxi.

Epigenes ἐποίησε Kantharos Klein, p. 186

Epiktetos ἔγραψε Kylikes and plates _Ibid._ p. 100

Epilykos ἔγραψε Kylikes _Ibid._ p. 114: see _Monuments Piot_, ix. p. 135 ff.

Erginos ἐποίησε Potter for Aristophanes

Euergides ἐποίησε Kylikes Klein, p. 99

Euphronios { ἔγραψε } Various shapes Hartwig, chaps. vii., xviii.

{ἐποίησε }

Euthymides ἔγραψε Various shapes Hoppin, _Euthymides_

Euxitheos ἐποίησε Amphora; potter for Klein, p. 135 Oltos

Hegesiboulos ἐποίησε White-ground cup _Branteghem Cat._, No. 167

Hegias ἔγραψε Kylix Klein, p. 186

Hermaios ἐποίησε Kylikes See Vol. I. p. 424

Hermonax ἔγραψε Stamni and “pelikae” Klein, p. 200

Hieron ἐποίησε Kylikes and kotylae; Hartwig, chap. xii. potter for Makron

Hilinos ἐποίησε Potter for Psiax

Hischylos ἐποίησε See above

Hypsis ἔγραψε Hydria Klein, p. 198

Kalliades ἐποίησε Potter for Duris: see Table V.

Kleophrades ἐποίησε Potter for Duris and Amasis II.

Makron ἔγραψε (With Hieron)

Maurion ἐποίει Pyxis B.M. E 770; _Class. Rev._ 1894, p. 419

Megakles ἐποίησε Pyxis Klein, p. 205

Meidias ἐποίησε Hydria B.M. E 224 = Plate XLI.

Mys ἐποίησε Lekythos Athens 1362

Nikias ἐποίησε Krater in B.M See p. 259 above

Oltos ἔγραψε Kylikes Hartwig, chap. v.

Onesimos ἔγραψε Kylikes (Euphronios _Ibid._ chap. xix. as potter)

Peithinos ἔγραψε Kylikes _Ibid._ chap. xi.

Pheidippos ἔγραψε Kylix B.M. E 6

Phintias ἔγραψε Various shapes Hartwig, chap. ix.

Pistoxenos ἐποίησε Kotylae; potter for _Ibid._ chap. xiv. Euphronios

Polygnotos ἔγραψε Amphorae; stamni _Mon. Antichi_, ix. p. 1 ff.

Praxias ἔγραψε (Non-Athenian?) Klein, p. 31

Psiax ἔγραψε Kylix and alabastron _Amer. Journ. of Arch._ 1895, p. 485

Python I. ἐποίησε Potter for Epiktetos and Duris

Sikanos ἐποίησε Plate Klein, p. 116

Smikros ἔγραψε[2245] Stamni _Monuments Piot_, ix. p. 15 ff.

Sosias ἐποίησε Kylix Berlin 2278; Klein, p. 147

Sotades { ἐποίησε } White-ground vases { _Branteghem Cat._ 159–166

{ ἐποίει } { Klein, p. 187

Syriskos ἐποίησε Astragalos vase Hartwig, chap. xxiv.

Xenophantos ἐποίησε Lekythos Petersburg 1790

Xenotimos ἐποίησε Kylikes _Branteghem Cat._ 84–85

V. UNFIGURED AND MODELLED VASES

Charinos ἐποίησε Modelled vases Klein, p. 215; _Röm. Mitth._ 1890, p. 316

Kalliades ἐποίησε Modelled vases; Klein, p. 216 potter for Duris

Kleomenes ἐποίησε Modelled vase in _Mon. Grecs_, 1897, pls. Louvre 16–17

Kriton ἐποίησε Jug; no subject Klein, p. 213

Lydos ἐποίησε Fragment; painter’s _Ibid._ p. 217 name lost

Lykinos ἠργάσατο Pyxis _Ibid._ p. 213

Lysias ἐποίησε Jug; no subject _Ibid._ p. 213

Myson ἐγρ. κ. ἐπ. Fragment _Ibid._ p. 217

Prokles ἐποίησε Modelled lekythos Berlin 2202

Teisias ἐποίησε Vases without Klein, p. 212 subject

Therinos ποίημα Chytra _Ibid._ p. 214

VI. SOUTH ITALIAN (see Vol. I. p. 478)

Assteas ἔγραψε Kraters, etc. See Vol. I. p. 478

Lasimos ἔγραψε Krater Klein, p. 210

Python ἔγραφε Krater B.M. F 149

Statios ἔργον Doubtful See B.M. F 594

LIST OF ΚΑΛΟΣ-NAMES ON GREEK VASES

_Names in parentheses denote the artists with whom they are associated_

I. BLACK-FIGURED VASES

Aischis Myia

Andokides (Timagoras) Mys

Anthylle Neokleides (Taleides)

Automenes Onetor

Chairaia? (Nikosthenes) Onetorides (Exekias)

Chares Pyles

Dorotheos (Charinos? also Pythokles I. R.F.)

Eresilla Rhodon

Euphiletos Rhodopis

Hippokrates (also R.F.) Sibon (Kabeirion vase: see Vol. I. p. 218)

Hippokritos (Glaukytes) Sime

Hippon I. Sostratos

Kallias I. (Taleides) Stesias (Exekias)

Kallippe Stesileos

Klitarchos (Taleides) Stroibos

Leagros (Exekias; also R.F.) Timotheos

Lysippides Xenodoke (Charinos)

Mnesilla

II. RED-FIGURED VASES

Aisimides Antimachos

Akestor Antiphon

Akestorides Aphrodisia

Alexomenos Archinos II.

Alkides Aristagoras (Duris)

Alkimachos Aristarchos

Antias Aristeides

Athenodotos (Peithinos; with Lichas Leagros)

Brachas Lyandros

Chairestratos Lykopis

Chairias (Phintias) Lykos (Euphronios, Duris, Onesimos)

Chairippos Lysis (Hartwig, chap. xxiii.)

Charmides Megakles I. (Phintias, Euthymides)

Damas Megakles II.

Diogenes (see Hartwig, chap. Memnon (Chelis, Chachrylion) xv.)

Diokles Midas

Dion Mikion II.

Dionokles Miltiades

Diphilos Naukleia (Hieron)

Dorotheos (also B.F.) Nikodemos

Dromippos Nikon

Elpinikos Nikophile

Epidromos (Chachrylion?) Nikostratos II. (Hartwig, chap. xx.)

Epileios Oinanthe

Epimedes Olympiodoros (also one B.F.)

Erosantheo Panaitios (Euphronios, Duris)

Erothemis (Euphronios and Pedieus Onesimos)

Euaion Perses

Eurymachos Phayllos

Euryptolemos (Apollodoros) Pheidiades

Glaukon (Euphronios) Pheidon

Heras Philon

Hermogenes (Duris) Praxiteles

Hiketes Sekline (Euphronios)

Hipparchos (Epiktetos) Sikinnos

Hippodamas (Duris and Hieron) Simiades

Hippon II. Smikythos (Euthymides)

Hygiainon Sokrates

Kallias II. Solon

Kallides Sophanes

Kallikles Sostratos

Kallisto (Hieron) Thaleia

Karton Theodoros

Kephisios Thero (Oltos)

Kephisophon Timarchos

Kleinias Timokrates

Kleophon (with Megakles I.) Timoxenos or Timaxenos

Krates Tleson

Laches (see Hartwig, chap. Xenon xx.)

Leagros (Chachrylion, Xenophon. Euphronios, Euxitheos)

[The foregoing list is not exhaustive, but only gives the more frequently occurring names; reference should be made throughout to Klein’s _Lieblingsinschriften_, 1898 edition.]

Footnote 2058:

v. 17, 6.

Footnote 2059:

xi. 466 D-E.

Footnote 2060:

Hence the oblique cases υἱεῖ, υἱεῖς, etc., of classical usage.

Footnote 2061:

_Die griechischen Vaseninschriften_, Gütersloh, 1894.

Footnote 2062:

See Berlin 2891; _Arch. Zeit._ 1879, p. 96.

Footnote 2063:

Cf. Berlin 2866 and the vase of Xenophantos (Reinach, i. 23).

Footnote 2064:

B.M. A 189* = Plate XVII. fig. 6.

Footnote 2065:

Vol. I. p. 436; Klein, _Meistersig._ p. 162 ff.

Footnote 2066:

Vol. I. p. 478; Klein, _ibid._ p. 206 ff.

Footnote 2067:

Klein, _Lieblingsinschr._^2 p. 118.

Footnote 2068:

_Ath. Mitth._ 1890, p. 396.

Footnote 2069:

For the explanation of these names see Chapter IV.

Footnote 2070:

B.M. E 497; Schöne in _Comm. Phil. in hon. Mommseni_, p. 658, Nos. 29–32.

Footnote 2071:

_Op. cit._ p. 651, No. 5. In this and the other examples it will be understood that [Δ] denotes 10 (δέκα), [Π] 5 (πέντε), and so on; [Ͱ] being the sign for a drachma.

Footnote 2072:

_Op. cit._ No. 17.

Footnote 2073:

A diminutive of πέλλα, a large deep cup or bowl (see Vol. I. p. 186).

Footnote 2074:

Schöne, _op. cit._ p. 650, No. 3.

Footnote 2075:

_Ibid._ No. 7 = _Cat._ 1206.

Footnote 2076:

_Cat._ 2188; Schöne’s No. 8. The meaning of Λύδια μείζω is uncertain.

Footnote 2077:

_Ber. d. sächs. Gesellsch._ 1854, p. 36.

Footnote 2078:

B.M. B 310; Munich 693. See Jahn in _Ber. d. Sächs. Gesellsch._ 1854, p. 37.

Footnote 2079:

_Ran._ 1236.

Footnote 2080:

_Pac._ 1202.

Footnote 2081:

Schöne, _op. cit._ p. 655, No. 13.

Footnote 2082:

F 595: see Vol. I. p. 135.

Footnote 2083:

B.M. B 451; _J.H.S._ vi. p. 374 ff.

Footnote 2084:

B.M. B 450 = _J.H.S._ vi. p. 372.

Footnote 2085:

Boeckh, _C.I.G._ i. 545.

Footnote 2086:

A 1054 = Roehl, _I.G.A._ 524, p. 151. See also Kretschmer, pp. 3–4.

Footnote 2087:

_I.G.A._ 22: see below, p. 252.

Footnote 2088:

_Ibid._ 2 = B.M. A 1512.

Footnote 2089:

B.M. F 596: see Vol. I. p. 186.

Footnote 2090:

Heydemann’s _Cat._ 1212.

Footnote 2091:

B.M. F 605–6.

Footnote 2092:

_Naukratis I._, pls. 32–4, p. 54 ff.; _Naukratis II._, pl. 21, p. 62 ff.; _Brit. Sch. Annual_, 1898–99, p. 53.

Footnote 2093:

_Ath. Mitth._ xv. p. 395 ff.

Footnote 2094:

See Vol. I. pp. 139, 345.

Footnote 2095:

_Ath. Mitth._ 1881, p. 107; 1893, p. 225; Kretschmer, p. 110; also Vol. I. p. 291.

Footnote 2096:

_Mon. Grecs_, 1897, pls. 16–7, p. 55; and see Vol. I. p. 493.

Footnote 2097:

B.M. B 134; Urlichs, _Beiträge_, pl. 14.

Footnote 2098:

Berlin 2314.

Footnote 2099:

Examples in the B.M. are E 12 and E 457 (Pamphaios), E 61 (Hieron), E 65 (Brygos), E 258 (Euxitheos); and cf. Fig. 129.

Footnote 2100:

Perrot, _Hist. de l’Art_, iii. p. 670. They have been found at Larnaka, Paphos, Dali, and Amathus.

Footnote 2101:

Roberts, _Gk. Epigraphy_, i. p. 154.

Footnote 2102:

On the subject generally see Roberts, _Greek Epigraphy_, vol. i. (Cambridge Press).

Footnote 2103:

See the table given by Kretschmer, p. 105.

Footnote 2104:

See Hill, _Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins_, p. 208 ff.

Footnote 2105:

B.M. B 130.

Footnote 2106:

See for other details of coin-inscriptions Hill, _op. cit._

Footnote 2107:

_Cat. of Bronzes_, No. 250.

Footnote 2108:

No. 385 (Didot).

Footnote 2109:

It should be borne in mind that Mycenaean vases have been found in Argolis, Cyprus, and elsewhere, with characters _incised_ on the handles, of contemporaneous execution, and forming parallels to the Cretan script and the later Cypriote syllabary.

Footnote 2110:

_Olympia_, iv. pl. 39, p. 102.

Footnote 2111:

Roehl, _I.G.A._ 377.

Footnote 2112:

$1$2 1903, pls. 2–6: see Vol. I. p. 92.

Footnote 2113:

See also Vol. I. p. 335.

Footnote 2114:

_Jahrbuch_, 1891, p. 263; Kretschmer, p. 7.

Footnote 2115:

Vol. I. p. 297 and Plate XVI.; for the latest interpretation of the name, as here adopted, see _Class. Review_, 1900, p. 264.

Footnote 2116:

_E.g._ Ramsay in _J.H.S._ x. p. 187.

Footnote 2117:

Studniczka, _Kyrene_, p. 11 ff.; Vol. I. p. 342.

Footnote 2118:

Collected by Blass, _Dialektinschr._ iii. 3120 ff., and Wilisch, _Altkorinthische Thonindustrie_, p. 156.

Footnote 2119:

Roberts (_Gk. Epigraphy_, i. p. 134) distinguishes three periods in the Corinthian alphabet from 700 to 400 B.C., but the vases seem to belong almost entirely to the first, down to 550 B.C.

Footnote 2120:

Vol. I. p. 316, Fig. 90.

Footnote 2121:

_Cat._ 1655: see Vol. I. p. 319.

Footnote 2122:

Louvre E 600 = Reinach, i. 395.

Footnote 2123:

B.M. A 1080 = Reinach, i. 306.

Footnote 2124:

Athens 620 = Reinach, i. 394.

Footnote 2125:

Roehl, _I.G.A._ 20, 5.

Footnote 2126:

_Ibid._ 20, 63.

Footnote 2127:

E 638 = _Mon. dell’ Inst._ 1855, pl. 20. It has been suggested that the name is originally a corruption of _Alexandra_ = Xandra = Ksandra = Kesandra (Kretschmer, p. 28).

Footnote 2128:

The general peculiarities of the Corinthian alphabet are not touched on here, as examples have been given of all characteristic letters. See Roberts, _Gk. Epigraphy_, i. p. 134.

Footnote 2129:

Kretschmer, p. 51; Roehl, _I.G.A._ p. 14, No. 22.

Footnote 2130:

See Vol. I. p. 300; Klein, _Meisters._ p. 30; _Boston Mus. Report_, 1898, p. 54, 1899, p. 56; _Röm. Mitth._ 1897, p. 105.

Footnote 2131:

_Ath. Mitth._ 1892, pl. 6, p. 101.

Footnote 2132:

_Ath. Mitth._ 1890, p. 411.

Footnote 2133:

See Vol. I. p. 357; Karo in _J.H.S._ xix. p. 156; _Ath. Mitth._ 1900, p. 93, note.

Footnote 2134:

_Auserl. Vasenb._ 205, 3, 4: see Vol. I. p. 357.

Footnote 2135:

See Vol. I. p. 322 and Kretschmer, p. 62.

Footnote 2136:

_Rev. Arch._ xl. (1902), p. 41.

Footnote 2137:

As is often the case with English seventeenth-century inscriptions.

Footnote 2138:

_Frag. Com. Gr._ (_Script. Gr. Bibl._, xlii.), p. 248.

Footnote 2139:

_Notizie degli Scavi_, 1903, p. 34.

Footnote 2140:

For the language spoken by the μέτοικοι cf. Kretschmer, p. 76, and Philostratus, _Vit. Soph._ ii. 1, 14; also Plat. Lys. 223_a_, ὑποβαρβαρίζοντες παιδαγωγοί.

Footnote 2141:

Naples 3089 = Millingen-Reinach, 33–4.

Footnote 2142:

Bibl. Nat. 372 = Reinach, i. 92.

Footnote 2143:

Bibl. Nat. 846 = Klein, _Lieblingsinschr._^2 p. 129.

Footnote 2144:

Hartwig, _Meistersch._ p. 320; Dümmler in _Berl. Phil. Woch._ 1888, p. 20; Kretschmer, p. 81.

Footnote 2145:

Ar. _Thesm._ 1084–1225.

Footnote 2146:

Kretschmer also hints that it seems to indicate the pronunciation of Φ by the Athenians as PH in “hap-hazard,” not as F.

Footnote 2147:

There are also isolated instances of ἔγραφε; Timonidas of Corinth, Pheidippos, Euthymides, and Aristophanes. See Klein, _Meisters._ p. 13.

Footnote 2148:

B.M. F 594.

Footnote 2149:

Gardner, _Ashmolean Vases_, No. 189, pl. 26: Εκεράμευσεν ἐμὲ Οἰκυφέλης. We are reminded of the jest about Chairestratos made by the comic poet Phrynichos, who speaks of “Chairestratos soberly pottering (κεραμεύων) at home” (Athen. xi. 474 B).

Footnote 2150:

See list at end of chapter, and Klein, _op. cit._ pp. 49, 213, 214.

Footnote 2151:

Munich 378 = Furtwaengler and Reichhold, pl. 14. See Vol. I. p. 428.

Footnote 2152:

Klein, _Meistersig._ p. 111.

Footnote 2153:

G 107: see _Monuments Piot_, ix. p. 33.

Footnote 2154:

Naples 3415.

Footnote 2155:

Munich 498 = Reinach, i. 215.

Footnote 2156:

_Cat._ 1152.

Footnote 2157:

Munich 380, 810 = Reinach, ii. 115, i. 363.

Footnote 2158:

Louvre E 852 = Reinach, i. 156.

Footnote 2159:

Reinach, ii. 292.

Footnote 2160:

_E.g._ B.M. F 62.

Footnote 2161:

See also Kretschmer, p. 84.

Footnote 2162:

_E.g._ B.M. B 164, B 254; Louvre F 297 = Reinach, ii. 26.

Footnote 2163:

Kretschmer, p. 85: see p 92.

Footnote 2164:

Munich 6: see Vol. I. p. 428, and Hoppin, _Euthymides_, p. 18.

Footnote 2165:

_Monuments Piot_, ix. pl. 2.

Footnote 2166:

Berlin 1737.

Footnote 2167:

Munich 333 = Reinach, ii. 119.

Footnote 2168:

Berlin 1704 = Reinach, i. 198; Vol. I. p. 326.

Footnote 2169:

Berlin 1732 = Reinach, ii. 66.

Footnote 2170:

Plate XXIII.: see Vol. I. p. 326.

Footnote 2171:

Bibl. Nat. 219.

Footnote 2172:

Louvre F 385 = Millingen, _Anc. Uned. Mon._ pl. 38.

Footnote 2173:

Reinach, ii. 49.

Footnote 2174:

Kretschmer, p. 86.

Footnote 2175:

Reinach, ii. 128.

Footnote 2176:

Kretschmer, pp. 86, 197.

Footnote 2177:

See Kretschmer, p. 86.

Footnote 2178:

_Cat._ 1158 = _Ath. Mitth._ 1884, pl. 1.

Footnote 2179:

Kretschmer, _loc. cit._: cf. Bergk, _Poet. lyr. Gr._ iii.^4 p. 97, frag. 23.

Footnote 2180:

See Hartwig, _Meistersch._ p. 255.

Footnote 2181:

Petersburg 1670. The Doric dialect is explained by Kretschmer as due to the Sicilian origin of the game.

Footnote 2182:

_Sc._ “hard to beat.”

Footnote 2183:

Kretschmer, p. 88.

Footnote 2184:

_I.e._ κυβιστητῆρι.

Footnote 2185:

Reinach, i. 294. Probably, as Kretschmer points out, a dog of Melita off Illyricum, not of Malta.

Footnote 2186:

Kretschmer, p. 91.

Footnote 2187:

Benndorf, _Gr. u. sic. Vasenb._ pl. 1.

Footnote 2188:

Helbig, 186 = _Wiener Vorl._ 1889, pl. 8, 6.

Footnote 2189:

Reinach, i. 96.

Footnote 2190:

Reinach, i. 106.

Footnote 2191:

This translation is somewhat doubtful: see Reinach, _loc. cit._

Footnote 2192:

_Cat._ 688 = Reinach, i. 164.

Footnote 2193:

Reinach, i. 513.

Footnote 2194:

Athens 1241 = Dumont-Pottier, i. pl. 6.

Footnote 2195:

Plate XXXIX.

Footnote 2196:

On the form of the Δ see below, p. 268.

Footnote 2197:

_Brit. Sch. Annual_, 1898–99, p. 65.

Footnote 2198:

Reinach, i. 277: see on the subject, _Hermes_, 1898, p. 640; _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1895, 86 ff.; and above, pp. 115, 137.

Footnote 2199:

See on this subject, Urlichs, _Beiträge_, p. 33 ff., and Vol. I. p. 389.

Footnote 2200:

Athen. xi. 466 D; not found on Attic vases, but cf. B.M. F 548.

Footnote 2201:

B.M. B 415, 422; Berlin 1775–76.

Footnote 2202:

Berlin 1764; Munich 37. For variations see Kretschmer, p. 195.

Footnote 2203:

See Klein, _Meisters._ p. 110; Kretschmer, p. 82.

Footnote 2204:

Instances are B.M. B 330, B 339, B 631, E 182, E 718.

Footnote 2205:

_E.g._ B.M. B 400.

Footnote 2206:

_Cat._ 334 = Reinach, i. 79. The vase is probably by Charinos.

Footnote 2207:

Cf. the story of Pericles and Sophocles told by Cicero, _De Offic._ i. 40, 144.

Footnote 2208:

_Vasen mit Lieblingsinschriften_, 2nd edn., 1898. Of these, 528 are masculine names, and only 30 feminine.

Footnote 2209:

143 ff. There is, of course, a play here on the word ἐραστής.

Footnote 2210:

97 ff. Demos is here a proper name; κημός means the ballot-box, in which the juries recorded their votes.

Footnote 2211:

Cf. Frazer’s note on Paus. vi. 10, 6 (vol. iv. p. 37).

Footnote 2212:

Such as the Laches καλός on Berlin 2314, a name which recalls the Platonic dialogue with that title.

Footnote 2213:

Hartwig, _Meistersch._ pl. 17, 1.

Footnote 2214:

Reinach, ii. 94.

Footnote 2215:

Hartwig in _Mélanges d’Arch._ 1894, p. 10 note.

Footnote 2216:

The name of Leagros occurs on many vases by Euphronios and other artists: see Klein, _Lieblingsinschr._^2 p. 70 ff.

Footnote 2217:

Klein, _Lieblingsinschr._^2 p. 87 = _Ashmolean Vases_, No. 310.

Footnote 2218:

See for this section, Kretschmer, p. 94 ff.

Footnote 2219:

See Kretschmer, p. 98.

Footnote 2220:

See Vol. I. p. 326.

Footnote 2221:

But see p. 271 for the probable explanation of this use of ω.

Footnote 2222:

Kretschmer, p. 146.

Footnote 2223:

Naples 2899; B.M. E 156.

Footnote 2224:

Louvre F 53 = Reinach, ii. 59 (Exekias).

Footnote 2225:

Berlin 2291.

Footnote 2226:

Munich 340 = _C.I.G._ 7433.

Footnote 2227:

B.M. E 224; Karlsruhe 209: cf. Berlin 2184 ([ΟΡΕΣΣΤΕΣ]) and 1906 ([ΤΡΙΤΟΝΝΟΣ]).

Footnote 2228:

Kretschmer, p. 179.

Footnote 2229:

_Ibid._ p. 180.

Footnote 2230:

Munich 334.

Footnote 2231:

See generally Kretschmer, p. 110 ff.

Footnote 2232:

The two Proto-Attic inscribed vases (Berlin 1682 and _Art. Denkm._ i. 57: see Vol. I. p. 293).

Footnote 2233:

Berlin 2008; _Röm. Mitth._ 1886, p. 21.

Footnote 2234:

See the table given by Kretschmer, p. 105.

Footnote 2235:

See Vol. I. p. 443, and Dümmler’s article in _Jahrbuch_, 1887, p. 168 ff.

Footnote 2236:

See Kretschmer, p. 211 ff.

Footnote 2237:

For the proof that Assteas and Python worked at Paestum, see Vol. I. p. 479.

Footnote 2238:

The name is perhaps a by-form of Dasimos (see Vol. I. p. 478). The correspondence of D and L is not uncommon, as in δακρύς = _lacrima_.

Footnote 2239:

F 62, [ΤΕΡΜΩΝ]; F 92, [ΟΡΕΣΣΤΑΣ]. See also Millingen-Reinach, pls. 14, 17, 18.

Footnote 2240:

Cf. the version given by Eustathius _ad Odyss._ p. 1698, 25.

Footnote 2241:

Kretschmer, p. 218; _Rev. Arch._ xii. (1888), p. 344.

Footnote 2242:

Rayet and Collignon, p. 330 (in Louvre): see above, p. 186; also Vol. I. p. 488.

Footnote 2243:

One kylix in partnership with Nikosthenes.

Footnote 2244:

In one case as potter for Epiktetos.

Footnote 2245:

See also Vol. I. p. 440.