DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4921#0021
INTRODUCTION.
natural and not conventionalized as are the sacred trees. Besides, the motive itself is perfectly
consistent with what is known of the Dipylon period of art. Apart from this question there is
little need at this time of day to describe in detail this well-known vase. It will be sufficient to
call attention to what seems to us an important element of decoration on it, viz., the existence
of a long narrow band of animals running continuously round the vase like the frieze of a temple,
while immediately above this frieze is a series of isolated groups resembling again the metopes of
a temple ; in short a combination of frieze and metopes identical in principle with the temple at
Assos in the Troad. The temple of Assos to all appearance may date back to the seventh
century B.C., and when we remember that the Dipylon style of vase painting is also known to
have been practised down to that century, we have not much difficulty in believing that the
painter of our vase had made use of a principle of frieze and metopes which had originated in
architecture and had thence become the property of decorative artists, such as the vase painters
not to mention the artist of the famous Larnax or chest of Kypselos the tyrant of Corinth in the
seventh century B.C. We do not say that the great Cyprus vase had actually been a work of
the seventh century. What we say is that the principle of decoration followed on it continued
in use to that time, and that the finding of a fragment of a similar vase in the British Museum
excavations at Amathus would speak for this date if we must accept as conclusive the opinion
founded on excavations, that the tombs of Amathus yielded nothing which can be positively
called older than 600 B.C.
We now pass to one of the strangest classes of vases in all Cyprus, those on Plate CVL*
Here there is no question of importation. The vases are purely of Cyprus origin, possibly a
local fabric in Citium, where the Phoenician element in the population was apparently stronger
than elsewhere in the island. Probably " Cypro-Phcenician " would be the best designation of
them. For, although a Phoenician character is conspicuous enough in the painted designs, with
their borrowings from Assyrian and from Egyptian arts, yet there is much else in them which for
the present can only be classed as Cypriote. We are prepared to accept as purely Phoenician in
* See also Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 55, and pi. xlii., figs. 2, 3 ; Perrot and Chipiez, Histoire d I'Art, iii., pp. 708, 709.
natural and not conventionalized as are the sacred trees. Besides, the motive itself is perfectly
consistent with what is known of the Dipylon period of art. Apart from this question there is
little need at this time of day to describe in detail this well-known vase. It will be sufficient to
call attention to what seems to us an important element of decoration on it, viz., the existence
of a long narrow band of animals running continuously round the vase like the frieze of a temple,
while immediately above this frieze is a series of isolated groups resembling again the metopes of
a temple ; in short a combination of frieze and metopes identical in principle with the temple at
Assos in the Troad. The temple of Assos to all appearance may date back to the seventh
century B.C., and when we remember that the Dipylon style of vase painting is also known to
have been practised down to that century, we have not much difficulty in believing that the
painter of our vase had made use of a principle of frieze and metopes which had originated in
architecture and had thence become the property of decorative artists, such as the vase painters
not to mention the artist of the famous Larnax or chest of Kypselos the tyrant of Corinth in the
seventh century B.C. We do not say that the great Cyprus vase had actually been a work of
the seventh century. What we say is that the principle of decoration followed on it continued
in use to that time, and that the finding of a fragment of a similar vase in the British Museum
excavations at Amathus would speak for this date if we must accept as conclusive the opinion
founded on excavations, that the tombs of Amathus yielded nothing which can be positively
called older than 600 B.C.
We now pass to one of the strangest classes of vases in all Cyprus, those on Plate CVL*
Here there is no question of importation. The vases are purely of Cyprus origin, possibly a
local fabric in Citium, where the Phoenician element in the population was apparently stronger
than elsewhere in the island. Probably " Cypro-Phcenician " would be the best designation of
them. For, although a Phoenician character is conspicuous enough in the painted designs, with
their borrowings from Assyrian and from Egyptian arts, yet there is much else in them which for
the present can only be classed as Cypriote. We are prepared to accept as purely Phoenician in
* See also Cesnola, Cyprus, p. 55, and pi. xlii., figs. 2, 3 ; Perrot and Chipiez, Histoire d I'Art, iii., pp. 708, 709.