Sophilos' Vase Inscriptions and Cultural Literacy in Archaic Athens

39 Pages·2001·1.27 MB·English

by  Martin F. Kilmer and Robert Develin

Classical Association of Canada
Sophilos' Vase Inscriptions and Cultural Literacy in Archaic Athens
Author(s): Martin F. Kilmer and Robert Develin
Source: Phoenix, Vol. 55, No. 1/2 (Spring - Summer, 2001), pp. 9-43
Published by: Classical Association of Canada
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1089022 .
Accessed: 06/03/2011 14:55
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cac. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Classical Association of Canada is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Phoenix.
http://www.jstor.org
SOPHILOS' VASE INSCRIPTIONS AND CULTURAL LITERACY
IN ARCHAIC ATHENS
MARTIN F. KILMER AND ROBERT DEVELIN
I. INTRODUCTION
IN THIS ARTICLEI EXAMINET HE INSCRIPTIONoSn the extant vases and vase
fragmentso f the earlyA ttic black-figurep ainterS ophilos,w hosefloruiti s generally
thought to be 590-570 B.C.( 580-570, accordingt o Boardman 1974: 18). My
purpose in undertakingt his study was to discover whether Sophilos ought to
be considered literate, and if so, in what senses of that word. I find that he
was a competent and consistent speller; that he knew how to construct simple
sentences; that he was well in tune with his society'sm ythology; in short, that
he was literate both in the literal meaning of that word and in what we might
call "culturalli teracy."S ophilos was one of the first Attic painterst o paint letters
on his vases, and he wrote at a time when the Greek alphabetw as probablyl ess
than two hundredy ears old.l Under these circumstancesa, pplyingt he standards
of, for example, late twentieth-centuryw estern Europe or North America for
determinationo f "literacy"is anachronistic. Judging early archaic inscriptions
This paperi s one of a seriesw ritteni n the contexto f a long-termp rojectu ndertakenb y the two authors
named. In each case, the first-nameda uthor is the one most implicated in the article in question.
Kilmer has consulted Develin at every stage of the preparationo f this article, but has written this
articlei n the first person. Only the Conclusionss hould be consideredt o be of truej oint authorship.I
am particularlyg ratefult o Louis Kelly for his help in the linguisticp ortions of this paper;t o Eleanor
Dickey for useful commentaryo n linguistic questions and for putting me into contact with Rudolf
Wachter, whom I also thank for comments. To David Harveya nd John Was, my special thanks for
readinge arlyd raftsa nd for supporti n many guises. My thanks also to the two anonymousr eadersf or
Phoenix,m any of whose suggestionsI have incorporatedi nto this final version.A ny errorsr emaining
are my own.
Epigraphicaln ote: Sophilos' archaic letter forms (see Fig. 1) differed significantlyf rom those
used in later Ionic script. We have preservedh is spellings in transcriptiont o the lower-case system
in common use for archaicv ase inscriptions( see Immerwahr1 990; Jeffery 1990). Sophilos' "heta"
(replacede ventuallyb y the rough-breathingm ark)i s representedb y h, his "check-mark"la mbdab y X,
his lambda-shapedg amma by y, his sigma (almost alwayst hree-bar)b y a and S, his "plus"-shapedk hi
by X, and his pi with one short leg (easily confusedw ith the classicalu pper-casef orm of gamma) by
7. Almost all forms used on the vases are reservedl ater for upper-casel etters. We have thus chosen
not to "correct"th e spelling of words which in Classicalt imes were spelt with geminate consonants:
this was not the usual archaicf orm. "Correction"in publicationsi s one of the things which has led to
the general-and quite erroneous-perception that the archaicA ttic painterso f potteryh ad as a rule
a shakyc ontrol on the writing of Greek. For the most part, Sophilos uses letter forms similart o those
used by Kleitias,E xekias, and the Amasis Painter.
The catalogue numbersg iven in parenthesesa re based on Beazley 1956 and Beazley 1963 (B =
ABV, R = ARV). For furtherd etail, see the Appendix, below, 37.
1F or furtherd iscussion,s ee, e.g., Powell 1991; Robb 1994. This topic is controversial.
9
PHOENIX, VOL. 55 (2001) 1-2.
10 PHOENIX
on the basis of Attic spelling conventions of the Classical period, though less
spectacularlya nachronistic,p resents some of the same difficulties. The research
of Leslie Threatte on phonology (Threatte 1980) has laid the foundations for
establishingt he patternso f archaicA ttic spelling;a nd Henry Immerwahr'As ttic
Script (1990) presents a substantialb ody of transcribedi nscriptions, the great
majority of them from pottery, including many new readings. Allen's Vox
Graeca3(1 987), though focused on classicalG reek literaryl anguage,g ives useful
information on the development of the written language and its relations to
the spoken language after the period of direct interest here. In many cases,
extrapolationb ridging to the evidence for the earlierp eriod coveredb y Threatte
has led to unexpectedc onclusions.
In order to determine the "literacy"o f someone in Sophilos' circumstances,
we ought to look primarilya t two questions. First, when the painter writes
the same word on two (or more) vases, is his spelling consistent? We might
call this "internalc onsistency."S econd, when other vase paintersc ontemporary
or nearly contemporaryw ith Sophilos write these words, are their spellings the
same as his, or at least close enough that we should most reasonablya ssess them
as variants? I have cast my net rather wide within the range of archaicA ttic
painted pottery. The degree of consistency is significante nough overall that it
is clear that many painterso f archaicA ttic potteryh ad little difficultyi n writing
whatevert hey chose to write on a vase. Sophilos, as a pioneeri n this new venture,
might reasonablyb e expected to have considerabled ifficulty. In fact, as I hope
this paper demonstrates,h e exhibits a high degree of internal consistency, and
his consistency with other painters of the early Archaic period, and even with
paintersd own into the earlyf ifth century( at least for most words for which there
are later matches), is remarkablyh igh. I emphasize that-with one exception,
the "caption"i dentifying the (funeral)g ames of Patroklos-Sophilos has so far
revealedo nly two certain classes of inscriptions:" signatures"-all those that are
complete or near complete are "painter"-signaturesc,o nsisting of only two or
threew ords-and the names of heroes and divinities.T his restrictionr educest he
probabilityo f matches with other painters. We are fortunatet hat some of the
most crucialn ames-names with spelling that has appearedi diosyncratici n the
extremew hen comparedt o their classicalv ersions-prove to have enough exact
matches that we must accept them as normals pellingsf or Sophilos't ime.
Although we have remnants of many of Sophilos' vases, and several fully
or almost fully reconstructible,t here are relativelyf ew inscribedv ases extant in
his oeuvre. He is early among black-figurep ainters, belonging to the second
generationo f the style. His predecessorsin the developedm ediumw ere the Nettos
Painter,2t he Gorgon Painter (whose careerb egan while the Nettos painterw as
2The name of the centaurw hom he shows in conflictw ith Heraklesi n his most famousw ork, the
amphorai n Athens (B4/1), the painters pells N?TOSM. odern scholarsh ave regularizedt he spelling to
conformt o laterA ttic usage, doubling the tau. They have not calledh im the "NessosP ainter"-which
SOPHILOS' VASE INSCRIPTIONS 11
'
,
- rt- i l/ Fig. 1: Fragmentf rom the ErskineD i-
.-?..*? - t:; ^2a -In os (B40/16.1)il lustratinSgo philosn' ormal
letter-formisn his signaturae ndt he name
PeleusP. hoto:c ourtesyo f BritishM useum,
London,a fterW illiams1 983,f ig. 25 (por-
tions of break" removedb"y computere n-
hancement).
still active,a nd who mayw ell haveb een Sophilos't eachero r at the least the senior
member of the workshop in which he startedh is career:s ee Bakir 1981: 1-3;
Beazley 1986: 16), and a few other paintersw hose careersa re brieflyn oted in
Beazley'sA BV and at greaterl ength in his TheD evelopmenot fAtticB lack-Figure
(Beazley1 986: 12-16 and pls. 10-15).
Before Sophilos,A ttic paintingg ives little in the way of inscriptionsa partf rom
the names of a few divinities and some heroes and their opponents.3 Sophilos
may be the first Attic potteryp aintert o give his name with the verb eypaaoev,
meaning "drew"o r "painted"(F ig. 1): later Attic orthographyw ould make this
Eypavev; but the spellingw ith cri s standardf or the time in question( see below,
wouldc onformto laters pellingin mosto f the Greekw orld-perhaptso avoidc onfusionw ith the
proto-Atti"c Painteorf theN ewY orkN essos."I haveo ftenw onderewd hys cholarhs aven ota dopted
the sensiblee xpedienotf callingt hise arlyb lack-figuraer tistt heN etosP ainteru, singt he spellingw e
knowh imt o haveu sed.T hreattree port(s1 980:5 40),i n discussintgh en ame'O Suoaacaen dv ariants,
occurrencoef the spellingN Eaooo n a Tyrrheniaanm phor(aB 96/13)a ttributetdo the Prometheus
PainterT. yrrheniaanm phoraair eg enerallcyo nsideretdo be of Atticm anufacturaen, dt hiss pelling
remaines xceptionalT. he heroO dysseuiss foundw ith the spellingO Xur8u(;r etr.,O lyteus)o n a
fragmentarvya seb y Kleitias(B 76/A)f romE gypt,a s well as on the FrancoiVs ase( B76/1),i n the
chariot-racsec eneW: achter1 991:8 9, no. 50. In anothere xamplea, kantharobsy t he SoklesP ainter,
OXuTeu<;>i s in attendancef or the armingo f Akhilles (B173/1).
3 See Immerwahr1 990: 20-21 for examples.
12 PHOENIX
32-33). He is thus the first Attic potteryp ainterk nown to have signed his work
(Beazley 1986: 16).4 He is much more generousi n his use of labelledh uman and
divine figurest han was the norm with his predecessors;a nd he has left us many
more inscriptionst han have they, and he used the inscriptions, it would seem,
primarilyi n ordert o identify these mythologicalf iguresf or his audience.
II. FRAGMENTARY VASES: SIGNATURES
(a) Fragmentsfromth eA thensW eddingD inos (B39/15): MythicalW edding
We may begin with the painter'ss igned vases, though they are not numbered
among his earliest. His fragmentaryd inos in Athens has preservedc omplete on
fragmentc the retrogradev erticali nscriptionE o4tiXoqc5y pacasv (Sophilos drew
[this]; Plate 1). All of the sigmas in this painter-inscriptiona re in the form
normal for orthogrades igma in later inscriptions( that is to say, their direction
reversedf rom that of the standardr etrogrades igma:t hus their first down-strokes
slope down towards the left).6 The alpha is of the closed type,7 the nu of the
high-swung earlyt ype;a nd, in short, all of the lettersa reo f formsu nexceptionable
for their period.
Sophilos has chosen a prominent position for the inscription. It is written
vertically,r etrogradet, o our right side of the bronze-decoratedd oor of a building.
4At least one of his inscribedv ases, the Athens Wedding Dinos (B39/15) was dedicatedo n the
Akropolisa t Athens. It was large and ornate (on the same scale as the ErskineD inos), and was most
probablym ade specificallyf or dedication. If so, it probablyc arrieda painted dedication inscription
(Sophilos left no graffito inscriptions),w hich has not survived. It will certainlyb e worth the effort
to study the remainso f early dedicationso n pottery-and particularlyth ose of the sixth century-as
a corpus. It can usuallyb e determinedw ith considerablep robabilityw hich graffitoi nscriptionsw ere
done before firing (thus belonging to the manufacturingp rocess)a nd which were incised afterf iring.
There is a subset of pots with dedicatoryi nscriptions" painted"o n them-some found far from their
places of manufacture( for example, Ionian pottery found at Graviscaei n Etruria: Various 1993),
others, such as those from the Akropolisa t Athens, very dose to home. Dedicated manufactureo, ften
asa lapXe "firstf ruit,"d enotes a specialr elationshipb etween potter and/or paintera nd the divinitys o
honoured-or may reflect the intentions of a patron. Such dedicationsm ay begin as earlya s the late
eighth century.T hey certainlyc ontinue to the end of the sixth century.S ophilos'f ine dinos was likely
the potter/painter'sd edicationo n the Akropolis to Athena, patronesso f craftsmen( especiallyp otters)
and patronesso f Athens.
5Vowel values in this name are not known; nor can we know whether later Attic usage would
have doubled the lambda or not. Beazley (1956: 37) says it is "impossiblet o say whether the name
S
is c6thtXoSlo, 4iXoqSo, r l64tXXo."T hese three forms of the name are attested;b ut they are not the
only possibilities. Immerwahr( 1990: 21) transcribest he painter'sn ame as though it were E6jtkoS,
without discussion. So also does Threatte (1980: Index). I retain the archaics pelling, and add no
accent becauseI am not convincedt hat we know where the accento ught to go. See Pape and Benseler
1959: nos. 1430-78; Kirchner1 966: nos. 261, 299.
6Immerwahr( 1990: 21) refers to these as "reversed."E ither the "direction"o f sigma had not
as yet been fixed, or Sophilos was interestedi n letters for their decorativeq ualitiesa s well as for the
additionalm eaning they could give his figures.
7Beazley 1956: 39, no. 15 gives (in a rares lip) the open alphaf orm.
SOPHILOSV' ASEI NSCRIPTIONS 13
This building is generallyt aken to be the house of the bridegroom( Peleus?),t he
place towards which the procession (the vase's principal subject) moves. This
suggestion is supportedb y the similarb uilding on the Erskine Dinos in London
(B40/16.1; Fig. 1), which we shall discuss later (below, 14, 28-30); and, at a
slightly later date, by the building Kleitiasu ses on the FrancoisV ase (B76/1) for
the starting-pointa nd ending-point of the same scene.8 The border below the
buildingi s similart o that preservedi n fragmentsb , f, and g of the samev ase.9A lso
parallelt o the door, and thus flankingt he inscription,a rea Doric column (painted
white, and with what may be intended as a narrowb ase-a feature not known
in large-scaleD oric architecturei n stone of the Archaic and Classicalp eriods) to
our right and an anta in black,w ith incision markingi ts base. The column capital
is broad and shallow, set off by a convex necking-bandw hich somewhat recalls
the shallow hawk's-beakm ouldings of some capitalso f the so-called "basilica"a t
Paestum.0lO n fragmentb is found the lower portion of the left anta of the house
along with one foot of an individualw ho must be facing awayf rom the building.
On the analogy of the Erskine Dinos, this would be the bridegroom:t he minor
detail of horizontali ncised lines decoratingt he anklep ortion of the boots of both
individualsg ives some slight furthers upportt o this hypothesis. On the Erskine
Dinos, unfortunatelyo, nly two pairso f male feet arep reservedo ther than those of
the bridegroom:t hose of Dionysos and the human forefeeto f the centaurK hiron,
both of whom are barefoot.
Other fragmentsp rovide some of the guests in processiono n their way to the
celebration.O n fragmentg , the names Acro (Leto) and Xapt9ko (Khariklo)a re
written orthogradev erticallyb efore the two female figures, without interpunct,
but with a space left between the words largert han that between other pairs of
letters. The names are written free-hand,w ith irregularlyp laced bases, not along
the base-line (usuallye ither not drawn in, or meant to be invisible after firing)
used often by laterp ainters,a nd occasionallyu sed by Sophilos. Leto is the mother
of Artemis and Apollo; Khariklo( much less well known to us) the wife of the
centaurK hiron.
Sophilos uses 9 (qoppa)i n a numbero f placesw here laterA ttic spellingw ould
use K (kappa). He uses it, in preservedi nscriptions,o nly precedingk (lambda),
as here, on the Athens Dinos fragment from Pharsalos (B39/16), and on the
ErskineD inos (Fig. 3). On the other hand, Kleitias,w orking most likely no more
than ten yearsa fter this, spells Khariklow ith kappas( Wachter 1991: 90, no. 82).
Kleitiasd oes use qoppa once on the FrancoisV ase, for the dog 9opaX; (Qorakhs,
"raven")in the KalydonianB oar scene (Wachter 1991: 87, no. 16). This is a
"speakingn ame":g utturalq oppa perfectst he imitation of the raven'sc ry. Kleitias'
8For the many inscriptions on the Erskine Dinos, see Bakir 1981: Al, pls. 1-2, figs. 1-4.
Williams (1983: 13-34) gives additional fragments and transcriptionso f the inscriptions. For the
building on the ErskineD inos, see Williams 1983: figs. 25-26.
9Numbering as in Bakir 1981: pi. 3.
1 See, for example, Lawrence1 983: 156, fig. 121.
14 PHOENIX
use here confirms,f or me, that he used qoppa for the gutturals top corresponding
to kappa.
Sophilos' use of qoppa preceding lambda suggests a strongly gutturalised
pronunciation. X following K forces K into the guttural. (For a concrete
demonstrationo f this, try speaking the words "capital"a nd "closet"a loud, and
feel the positions of those consonants in your mouth and upper throat.) Jeffery
(1990: 33-34) describesq oppa as "theg utturalk before the vowels u and o."T his
descriptionw orks well with the earlyi nscriptions( of the seventh and the earliest
sixth centuries)a s she reportst hem (1990: 70); and with the single preservedu se
of qoppa by Kleitiaso n the FrancoisV ase. Sophilos'p reservedi nscriptionsn ever
show 9 immediatelyp receding a vowel, nor do we have any case, in his oeuvre,
of K immediately preceding o or u. We do not know what his choice would
have been for this combination.T hreatte comments (1980: 21) that "(Qoppa)i s
regularlyu sed before o-vowels, even when 1 intervenes."I n this context he may
see qoppa as a spellingv ariant,r athert han as a letter indicatinga differents ound.
It is certainly also true that Sophilos' and Kleitias'k nowledge of letters is not
based solely on the Attic tradition (see Immerwahr1 990: 155; Threatte 1980:
21-23). The animal friezes of both paintersh ave strong Corinthiant ies; and the
Corinthian paintersc ontemporaryw ith these two Attic paintersw ere becoming
adept at supplyingn ames for their mythologicalc haracters.L ike Sophilos, these
painters regularlyu se qoppa before lambda: see, for example, neptQ9uuevo;
(Periklymenos)o n the amphoraf rom Cerveteri( Paris E640: Amyx 1989: 270,
no. 6; Carpenter1 991: 269). Sophilos'r etrograded ipinto InarpoQ9uSia;t ka (see
Plate 2) providesa notherp arallel.1l
Khiron may also have been shown on this dinos, as he is on both the Erskine
Dinos and the FranpoisV ase. As in both of those, he would apparentlyh ave been
shown separatef rom his wife, not beside her-otherwise we ought to see at least
traceso f his figureo r of his name on this fragment.B oth Leto and Kharildow ear
complex dressesw ith polychromea nimalsr eminiscento f the Corinthianp ainted
creaturesw ho serve as models for so much in Sophilos' animal parades.12T o
our right, walking in front of these two figures,i s anotherp air of female figures:
Ae[!]ETcp (Demeter) is written retrogradet op-to-bottom along the line of her
back, letter-basest owardsh er (the first two epsilons and the tau partial),h accta
(Hestia) orthogradec urvingd ownwardb efore the face of the woman in the lead
(with closed heta, c in the form later normal for retrogradei nscriptions): the
name Hestia clearlyg oes with the figure fartherf rom the viewer. The placement
of Demeter's name, written as it is along the back of the nearerf igure,r einforces
that. Next to our right is a figure only partiallyp reserved,p robablyI ris. No
inscriptionr emains;b ut comparisono f her apparentp osition at the head of the
11T hreatte (1980: 22) transcribest his fIaTpoQxu;w ith Ki n placeo f 9, and cites it as an exception
to Sophilos'u sage in Xaptl9o. Immerwahr( 1990: 21, no. 62) transcribest he hero's name correctly,
but does not comment on the qoppa. See below, 20.
12O n such dressesw ith "story-friezes"a nd the techniquesn eeded to make them in the absenceo f
true tapestry,s ee Barber1 992: esp. 112-117.
SOPHILOSV' ASEI NSCRIPTIONS 15
procession,h er costume, and her attributest o those of the figurel abelled" Iris"o n
the Erskine Dinos can leave little doubt. There is the same white flesh, similar
short-sleeved and short-skirtedk hitoniskos,1a3n d the lower end of the herald's
staff (complete on the Erskine Dinos) which shows the goddess'so ffice. For this
occasion, she may be imagined to act as a sort of travellingb utler,i ntroducingt he
divinitiest o the bridegrooma s they arrive,a s well as announcingt he arrivalo f the
processiona s a whole.
On the analogy of both the Erskine Dinos and the parallel scene on the
Francois Vase, this fragment ought to represent the leading figures of the
wedding procession (those closest to the bridegroom'sh ouse), although on the
Francois Vase Iris walks beside Khiron the centaur, whose human foreparts
actuallys lightly precede her. Kleitiash as not felt bound to follow every detail of
any earlierv ersion known to us:14f or instance, his Iris' short chiton is decorated
in a form of plaid rather than the solid colour of both Sophilan examples;a nd
Khiront akes Peleus'h and above an altarw hich Sophilos certainlyd id not include
on the ErskineD inos, and cannot be shown to have used here.
Fragmentjg ives us the head of noac[i5ov] (Poseidon),h is name sloping down
retrogradeb ehind his head, the c partial. Partly obscuredb y him and a touch
ahead is his wife Av[ItTptpT(cA] mphitrite),w ritten orthogradet o the right from
her forehead (v partial).15T hough her name is poorly preserved,t he reading is
highly probable:t he couple appeart ogether on the ErskineD inos, the goddess's
name spelt with initial Av as here, and also on the FrancoisV ase, with the same
spelling (Wachter 1991: 90, no. 68; 99). On the latter two vases, the divine
couple are mounted on a chariot. Here, although it would be consonant with
their riding in a chariot that their heads almost touch the upper border of the
scene (we can compare the figures of fragmentc , for whom the reins and whip
or goad are partiallyp reserved),t he heads of others who are not chariot-borne
come almost into contact with that border;a nd the walking Iris' head must have
touched.
Fragment d shows a serpentine creaturew ho (again on the analogy of the
ErskineD inos and-though less completely-the FrancoisV ase [Wachter 1991:
89, no. 91; 99]) could be Okeanos.16T he drapedm ale figurew alking on the far
side of the sea-serpentb ody, however, has no equivalento n the Erskine Dinos,
where the space behind Okeanos' human torso is taken up by two female figures
(see below, 30).17 Beazley had alreadys uggested (1986: 27) for the equivalent
13Thoughh eret he hem/selvagies markedb y shortv erticailn cisionsr, athert hant he "painted"
maeandeorf the figureo n the ErskineD inos.
14Whethetrh at" modelw" asv isual,p oetic,o r basedm oreo n his own imaginationw, hateveirt s
originali nspiration.
15F orv in placeo f the laters tandarpd beforep losivess, eeT hreatte1 980:5 95-596. AvIvrptpIiTs
the standardsp ellingo n the manyC orinthianp inakesin the BerlinC harlottenbucrogl lectionw hich
presentth eseg ods( vidi).
16B uts ee Beazley1 986:2 7 andb elow,n . 18.
17Therem ayb e twow alkingf iguresr atherth ano ne. The darks egmento f clothingo n the right,
howeverl,o oks-even in enlargedc olourp hotographs-juslti ke the insideo f the sleevet o ourl eft.
16 PHOENIX
figures (poorly preserved)o n the Franfois Vase that the human-bodiedf igure
must be Okeanos, and the serpent/compositec ompanion perhaps one of the
Tritons.18 This seems also the best interpretationh ere, with Okeanos (human
in body; nothing remains of his head) in charge of the sea-creature.T he fact
that the human figure walks aft of the forepartso f the sea-creaturem akes good
sense. After all, people on Greek vases (and in real life) herd cattle like this; and
literarym etaphorsf or Okeanos and other marined ivinitiesm aket hem herdsmen
of various underwaterb easts.19 No part of either name is preserved,l eaving
speculationl ittle to grasp. Stewart'ss uggestion (1983: 59) that this is Okeanos
with Hephaistos walking beside, is problematic. Early images of Hephaistos,
which generallyg o out of their way to show the deformityo f his leg(s), make this
improbable.F or Sophilos on the ErskineD inos, as later for Kleitias,H ephaistos
is too badly crippledt o walk or to stand in a chariot,a nd must ride his mule or
donkey side-saddle.
Fig. 2: Fragmenit of AthensW eddingD inos (B39/15)w ith
inscriptionn amingt he NyssaiP. hoto:M . Kilmer.
Fragmenti preserveso ne frontalf emalef ace andt wo moref emalef acesa t right,
turned to our left. The frontal female plays the syrinx. The inscriptions loping
down to the right of the two profileh eads (orthogradet, hough the a is written as
laterr etrogrades igmasw ill be) is the word Nuaat (Nyssai;F ig. 2). Stewart( 1983:
59) and Beazley (1986: 17) take the two profile women as Nyssai, "Dionysos'
companions,"s o also does Immerwahr( 1990: 186). These nymphs of Mount
Nyssa, though minor charactersf or us moderns, are also known from myth as
nurseso f Dionysos.20D espite this simple interpretationt,h e inscriptionh as given
(and continues to give) rise to an inordinatea mounto f difficulty,c auseda t least
The incisedl inew hichm eetst he curvedb acko f the seam onsterm akess ensea s the undersidoef the
leftf orearmof the samef iguret:h e armi s stretchedou tb eforeh im,a ndh is cloakm ustt ravewl ithi t.
The cosed handt o ourl eft is bestt akena s a dosedr ighth and:t he shorts traighlti neb elowt he base
of the thumbis not parto f the painter'isn tention.
18Okeanoosn the FrancoiVs aseh as" ah umanb odyb ut the heada ndn ecko f a bull"( Beazley
1986:2 7). We maya lsoc ompareth e figureo f Nereus( perhaprsa ther" aT riton"s)h ownp erhaps
in combatw ith Herakles(? ) on Sophilosc' olumn-kratienr Athens( B40/24).T he bellyp atternis
somewhasti mplerb; utt hiss ea-monstehra sa beardedse rpengt rowingfr omh isb ack.S eea lsob elow,
25-26.
19Fora n extended scene enlargingt he metaphor,o f Proteus,s ee Hom. Od.4 .400-570.
20See Threatte 1980: 260-261; Immerwahr1 990: 21, no. 61. Henrichs( 1987: 116, n. 41) follows
West (1978: 373-374) in identifying the Nyssai as tree-nymphs. Immerwahr( 1990: 186 Add. et
corr.)s upportst his. For the Nysai (or Nyssai) as nurseso f Dionysos, see Graves 1960: 104; for this
SOPHILOSV' ASEI NSCRIPTIONS 17
in partb y scholars'a ssumptiont hat what is difficultt o understandi n inscriptions
is likely to be ancient error. Vanderpool (1953: 322) offered the suggestion
that the word should be read as <M>uacL (i.e., Moiotai, Muses) "althoughi t
involves a rare case of v for p." This reading also requiresa n unusual use of
upsilon, rathert han omikron,f or the ou of laterA ttic.21S ophilosm ay use upsilon
to represent the spurious diphthong later written ou in the name FIarpo9Xu;
(probablyf or the laterg enitive form l-aTpoKoo6;)o n the Athens Dinos fragment
from Pharsalos( B39/16; see Plate 2). Considerablyla ter( ca 540), a parallelw hose
implicationsa re much clearert han in our text, is the inscriptiono n an amphora
of Panathenaics hape in London (B307/59): AUVEIKEC. Uht no; . vtKat ("theh orse
of Dy(s)niketos is the winner"),w here the final u of the owner'sn ame is clearly
intended to be the Attic ou genitive ending. The preservedt ext of Sophilos'
inscription, however, makes good sense as it stands. If we were dealing here
with a manuscript,r athert han with an inscriptiono n a pot, few scholarsw ould
argue in favour of an emendation which does not improve on the manuscript
reading for sense or for context. Most scholarsw ould be doubly cautious about
an emendationw hich additionallyr equiresc hangesw hich go againstt he normal
usage of the author( and of the "manuscript"-thati s, the preservedi nscriptions)
in question. The emendation requiresu s to accept that Sophilos here wrote v
where he ought to have written lp (here and nowhere else). It requiresu s to
acceptt hat Sophilos here made a hash of writing a word (Mooaat) which in other
places gives him no difficulty at all. This is not reasonable. These women are
Nyssai.
The syrinx-playerS tewartt akes to be the Muse Kalliope,t hough this requires
a somewhat difficult logic. Kleitias names as Kalliope, among the Muses in
the wedding procession, the frontal syrinx-player. Because of Kleitias' special
treatmento f Kalliope, Stewart (1983: 57-58) takes her to be, for Kleitias, chief
of the Muses.22O n this basis, the syrinx-playingf emale whom Sophilos grouped
with the two women clearly named as Nysai, Stewartb elieves to be the Muse
Kalliope. On the Erskine Dinos, in the first group of Motsa (Muses; Williams
1983: fig. 31) Stewart (1983: 61) once again identifies the frontal syrinx-player
as Kalliope (with rather more probability, as the painter calls these women
Muses). On the Athens fragment, she could be simply a Nyssa playing the
syrinx-nymphs, after all, are expected to be musical. Kleitias, however, names
theyw erel atert o be honoureda s the constellatioonf the Hyades.T he Nyssaia ret o be treatedin
a supplementto LIMC,a longw ith "Kentauroai"n da ssortedo thers.O n this matterI alignm yself
with BeazleyS, tewarta, ndI mmerwahrra thert hanw ith Vanderpooaln d( thoughm oret entatively)
ThreatteE. itherg roupm akesa formidablael ly.
21O n u foro u, seeT hreatte1 980:2 60-261;I mmerwah1r9 90:1 62.F ort hes tandarodr thography
of thisp eriodo, mikronr epresentinwgh atl aterA tticG reekw ritesa s the spuriouds iphthongo u, see,
fore xampleB, uck1 955 [1933]:3 0.
22S o alsoW achter1 991: 107-108,s tressingth e similaritoyf mosto f KleitiasM' uses'n amest o
thosei n Hesiod.