DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.8577#0036
II
THE LATE PROTOCORINTHIAN ORIENTALIZING STYLE1
THE end of the second Protocorinthian style brings us to the beginning of
the period which is the special subject of this study.
The changes which make it possible to distinguish the third period from
the second are mostly of an external character, for the actual differences in
the manner of drawing are not so pronounced as those which characterize the
transition from the first period to the second. That is, perhaps, not unnatural.
By the middle of the seventh century the style was already formed, and it is
obvious that later artists would find it hard to improve on vases like those
illustrated on pis. 3-6. It appears, indeed, that they rarely did so, though
the average standard was certainly maintained.
There can be little doubt that the vases here described as late Protocorin-
thian are the products of a relatively short period: this is a legitimate inference
from their homogeneous character, and a reasonable explanation of the small
number of existing pieces. But the proof lies in external evidence; as we
shall see when we come to discuss the chronology of the later seventh century,
the Protocorinthian style had disappeared by the end of the third quarter of
the century, and, what is more, a style deriving from the late Protocorinthian
and yet prior to the Corinthian, a style which I have therefore termed the
'Transitional', has also to be accounted for before we reach the years 625-620
B.C. It is obviously difficult to put the beginning of the late period before
650 B.C., and therefore natural to conclude that the late Protocorinthian
period covers about ten or fifteen years, from 650 to 640 or 635 B.C. I am
well aware that it will seem unwise, perhaps also unnecessary, to try to dis-
tinguish any group of vases as belonging to so short a period of time. In
defence of the attempt, I would point out that we have certain precise indica-
tions of absolute chronology for this period which enable us to draw definite
conclusions. Johansen has used these for the earlier Protocorinthian vases;
others, some of which were not available when he wrote, can be brought to
bear on the lower limit of the style (see p. 22 fit.). Secondly, that by a careful
comparison from all points of view, by a consideration of shapes and
secondary motives as well as of the principal decoration, the vases can be
arranged in stylistic groups with a considerable degree of exactitude. Further,
that the latter part of the seventh century saw a minor revolution in vase-
painting at Corinth; it is a period of rapid and decisive changes, and as such
is naturally more amenable to analysis than long periods of gradual progress
or decay. Who would deny that Attic vases can be dated more easily and
1 The vases discussed in this chapter cannot be ch. ii, and I would ask that judgement should not be
described, or understood, in isolation. Chapters iii passed on the one before all three have been con-
and iv contain much that is relevant to the subject of sidered.
THE LATE PROTOCORINTHIAN ORIENTALIZING STYLE1
THE end of the second Protocorinthian style brings us to the beginning of
the period which is the special subject of this study.
The changes which make it possible to distinguish the third period from
the second are mostly of an external character, for the actual differences in
the manner of drawing are not so pronounced as those which characterize the
transition from the first period to the second. That is, perhaps, not unnatural.
By the middle of the seventh century the style was already formed, and it is
obvious that later artists would find it hard to improve on vases like those
illustrated on pis. 3-6. It appears, indeed, that they rarely did so, though
the average standard was certainly maintained.
There can be little doubt that the vases here described as late Protocorin-
thian are the products of a relatively short period: this is a legitimate inference
from their homogeneous character, and a reasonable explanation of the small
number of existing pieces. But the proof lies in external evidence; as we
shall see when we come to discuss the chronology of the later seventh century,
the Protocorinthian style had disappeared by the end of the third quarter of
the century, and, what is more, a style deriving from the late Protocorinthian
and yet prior to the Corinthian, a style which I have therefore termed the
'Transitional', has also to be accounted for before we reach the years 625-620
B.C. It is obviously difficult to put the beginning of the late period before
650 B.C., and therefore natural to conclude that the late Protocorinthian
period covers about ten or fifteen years, from 650 to 640 or 635 B.C. I am
well aware that it will seem unwise, perhaps also unnecessary, to try to dis-
tinguish any group of vases as belonging to so short a period of time. In
defence of the attempt, I would point out that we have certain precise indica-
tions of absolute chronology for this period which enable us to draw definite
conclusions. Johansen has used these for the earlier Protocorinthian vases;
others, some of which were not available when he wrote, can be brought to
bear on the lower limit of the style (see p. 22 fit.). Secondly, that by a careful
comparison from all points of view, by a consideration of shapes and
secondary motives as well as of the principal decoration, the vases can be
arranged in stylistic groups with a considerable degree of exactitude. Further,
that the latter part of the seventh century saw a minor revolution in vase-
painting at Corinth; it is a period of rapid and decisive changes, and as such
is naturally more amenable to analysis than long periods of gradual progress
or decay. Who would deny that Attic vases can be dated more easily and
1 The vases discussed in this chapter cannot be ch. ii, and I would ask that judgement should not be
described, or understood, in isolation. Chapters iii passed on the one before all three have been con-
and iv contain much that is relevant to the subject of sidered.