DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.8577#0069
THE EARLY CORINTHIAN ORIENTALIZING STYLE 49
good deal more complicated than Protocorinthian; more complicated, even,
than that of most Transitional vases. We have only to compare animals of the
same type, to see how much the Corinthian draughtsman indicates which
earlier artists leave to the imagination. Many details which were formerly
indicated only on the most elaborate vases are now regularly shown; and
a certain number of renderings are quite new.1 It will be remembered that
the Transitional group as a whole showed a similar advance on the Proto-
corinthian; the Corinthian style thus again gives evidence of its later date.
But tangible evidence of this kind is not by any means the most important:
at the root of the contrast between Protocorinthian and Corinthian lies a
difference of temperament which is clear evidence of a difference in time.
For the Corinthian style has little of the youthful freshness and vivacity
which is the peculiar charm of Protocorinthian painting. It has other quali-
ties, and good qualities, which the Protocorinthian lacked; but those at least
it cannot claim. And that, after all, is not surprising, for in the earlier seventh
century as a whole, it is the Protocorinthian spirit, not the Corinthian, which
we find predominant. Witness the earlier Rhodian vases, many of the
Ephesus ivories and Cretan vases like the lion from Afrati, the various
groups of early Island vases2 and Attic vases like the Burgon crater,3—works
1 The following examples must suffice: compare
the boars of pi. 17 with the Protocorinthian and
Transitional of pis. 9, 14, and see how many more
incised lines there are on the Corinthian vases: or
again, those of nos. 489,806 (pi. 31), and 991: again
the bull, pi. 25,4, with earlier examples, pis. 6,9, and
the panthers of the types seen in pis. 10, 20, 24;
still more obviously, lions like those of pis. 10 and
19,2. The lion's mane is rarely indicated on Proto-
corinthian vases (cf. Johansen, p.i 51), and is regularly
shown only in the late Transitional period (pi. 15):
now it is normally indicated by cross-hatching, as
in pi. 19, 2 &c, though the old type survives by
the side of the new (the two are found on the same
vase: e.g. nos. 770, 887). The cross-hatching is
evidently simply a shorthand version of the
elaborate form seen in pi. 15. The form shown in
pi. 4, 5 does not occur on Corinthian vases. The long
side-whiskers are another characteristic feature
(contrast the Chigi lion, no. 39), which we find on
a few Transitional vases (see p. 29 note 2 where the
Corinthian stylization of the eye is described). Note
the complex drawing of the shoulder in pis. 19,20;
in Protocorinthian vases the shoulder is invariably
indicated by a single curve, which stops short some-
where in the centre of the body or near the upper
contour of the back (pi. 9, &c.): this formula is
the regular one in the Transitional period, but on
3575
one or two vases the whole muscular complex is
circumscribed by an incised line (see pp. 29-30,
note 2). This is the regular Corinthian motive, but
it may now have an elaboration (pis. 19, 2; 25, 3)
which we do not find even on the late Transitional
vases just referred to. The incised belly stripe, ribs,
and thighs are hall-marks of the Corinthian style.
These can all be found on Protocorinthian and Tran-
sitional vases, but commonly only on the latter.
Corinthian artists as a rule lay a good deal of emphasis
on rib and thigh marks, in addition to picking them
out with touches of red (cf. supra). Contrast the in-
organic rendering of the ribs seen in the chimaera of
pi. 4,1 with the regular Corinthian renderings. The
tripartite division of the wings which is found occa-
sionally on Protocorinthian vases (cf. p. 18, note 2),
and not uncommonly on Transitional, is now the rule,
though of course the old form survives (cf. pi. 28, 7).
The elaboration of detail which we find in vases
of the white dot style, pis. 18, 1-2, 5 ; 23,2, is quite
extraordinary, and unlike anything previously seen.
2 For instance: J.H.S. 1926 pis. 9 (1), 10; Jarhbuch
1897 pi. 7 (Buschor2 fig. 51) ; Dugas, Cer. des
Cyclades pi. 14, 1 &c, and many vases at Mykonos.
With the first two cited, cf. the Protocorinthian lion,
pi. 8, 9.
3 J.H.S. 1926, p. 207 fig. 1 : cf. the Protocorinthian
pi. 1, 6, and the kotyle pi. 5.
H
good deal more complicated than Protocorinthian; more complicated, even,
than that of most Transitional vases. We have only to compare animals of the
same type, to see how much the Corinthian draughtsman indicates which
earlier artists leave to the imagination. Many details which were formerly
indicated only on the most elaborate vases are now regularly shown; and
a certain number of renderings are quite new.1 It will be remembered that
the Transitional group as a whole showed a similar advance on the Proto-
corinthian; the Corinthian style thus again gives evidence of its later date.
But tangible evidence of this kind is not by any means the most important:
at the root of the contrast between Protocorinthian and Corinthian lies a
difference of temperament which is clear evidence of a difference in time.
For the Corinthian style has little of the youthful freshness and vivacity
which is the peculiar charm of Protocorinthian painting. It has other quali-
ties, and good qualities, which the Protocorinthian lacked; but those at least
it cannot claim. And that, after all, is not surprising, for in the earlier seventh
century as a whole, it is the Protocorinthian spirit, not the Corinthian, which
we find predominant. Witness the earlier Rhodian vases, many of the
Ephesus ivories and Cretan vases like the lion from Afrati, the various
groups of early Island vases2 and Attic vases like the Burgon crater,3—works
1 The following examples must suffice: compare
the boars of pi. 17 with the Protocorinthian and
Transitional of pis. 9, 14, and see how many more
incised lines there are on the Corinthian vases: or
again, those of nos. 489,806 (pi. 31), and 991: again
the bull, pi. 25,4, with earlier examples, pis. 6,9, and
the panthers of the types seen in pis. 10, 20, 24;
still more obviously, lions like those of pis. 10 and
19,2. The lion's mane is rarely indicated on Proto-
corinthian vases (cf. Johansen, p.i 51), and is regularly
shown only in the late Transitional period (pi. 15):
now it is normally indicated by cross-hatching, as
in pi. 19, 2 &c, though the old type survives by
the side of the new (the two are found on the same
vase: e.g. nos. 770, 887). The cross-hatching is
evidently simply a shorthand version of the
elaborate form seen in pi. 15. The form shown in
pi. 4, 5 does not occur on Corinthian vases. The long
side-whiskers are another characteristic feature
(contrast the Chigi lion, no. 39), which we find on
a few Transitional vases (see p. 29 note 2 where the
Corinthian stylization of the eye is described). Note
the complex drawing of the shoulder in pis. 19,20;
in Protocorinthian vases the shoulder is invariably
indicated by a single curve, which stops short some-
where in the centre of the body or near the upper
contour of the back (pi. 9, &c.): this formula is
the regular one in the Transitional period, but on
3575
one or two vases the whole muscular complex is
circumscribed by an incised line (see pp. 29-30,
note 2). This is the regular Corinthian motive, but
it may now have an elaboration (pis. 19, 2; 25, 3)
which we do not find even on the late Transitional
vases just referred to. The incised belly stripe, ribs,
and thighs are hall-marks of the Corinthian style.
These can all be found on Protocorinthian and Tran-
sitional vases, but commonly only on the latter.
Corinthian artists as a rule lay a good deal of emphasis
on rib and thigh marks, in addition to picking them
out with touches of red (cf. supra). Contrast the in-
organic rendering of the ribs seen in the chimaera of
pi. 4,1 with the regular Corinthian renderings. The
tripartite division of the wings which is found occa-
sionally on Protocorinthian vases (cf. p. 18, note 2),
and not uncommonly on Transitional, is now the rule,
though of course the old form survives (cf. pi. 28, 7).
The elaboration of detail which we find in vases
of the white dot style, pis. 18, 1-2, 5 ; 23,2, is quite
extraordinary, and unlike anything previously seen.
2 For instance: J.H.S. 1926 pis. 9 (1), 10; Jarhbuch
1897 pi. 7 (Buschor2 fig. 51) ; Dugas, Cer. des
Cyclades pi. 14, 1 &c, and many vases at Mykonos.
With the first two cited, cf. the Protocorinthian lion,
pi. 8, 9.
3 J.H.S. 1926, p. 207 fig. 1 : cf. the Protocorinthian
pi. 1, 6, and the kotyle pi. 5.
H