DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.8577#0201
XIII
LOCAL IMITATIONS AND DISTRIBUTION OF
CORINTHIAN POTTERY
TJTITHERTO we have taken it for granted that 'Corinthian' vases were
-1 A actually made at Corinth. We must now ask how this assumption can
be substantiated; whether it is certain that Corinth was really the centre of
the Corinthian industry; and whether, even if this be granted, the'Corinthian'
style is not really a particular phase of Greek art common to many places at
one time; whether, in other words, many of the vases which we call Corinth-
ian were not produced by imitative schools, such as we should expect to find
in the colonies of Corinth and elsewhere.
Long ago the oriental character of Corinthian decoration lead to the
belief that 'Corinthian vases' were really products of some oriental school.
Some authorities in the early nineteenth century thought of them as Egyp-
tian, others argued that they were Phoenician or Babylonian. But even at
that time there was a body of opinion in favour of the view that they were
Greek, and further, that they were made in or near Corinth. And that
opinion may be said to have held the field unchallenged for a good deal more
than half a century.1
It is founded in the first place on the inscriptions which are painted in the
Corinthian alphabet on many of the vases. It need hardly be said that we
know the Corinthian alphabet as such from the discovery of stone inscriptions
at Corinth, and from the great find of clay pinakes, many of them bearing
votive inscriptions, at a temenos of Poseidon a short way south-west of
the ancient citadel. Quite apart from all this, the fine pale clay of which
Corinthian vases are made is a distinctive feature of the landscape in the
1 Cf. however, p. 38, note 1. Orientalizing vases
(by which was meant for the most part Corinthian
and Italo-Corinthian) were commonly spoken of as
Egyptian throughout the first half of the nineteenth
century (cf. for example, Kramer, Styl u. Herkunft
(1837), 46: Ussing, De Nominibus (1847), 15),
though in the second quarter of the century it began
generally to be realized that they were Greek. Even
then, however, some authorities clung to other
theories (cf. De Witte, Cab. Durand, 280; and Bergk,
Zeitschr. f. Alt.-Wiss. 1847,168 who suggested Gaza
as their home). Gerhard, as is well known, devised
a number of groups under such names as Nolano-
Egyptian and Tyrrheno-Egyptian, thinking that they
were made in Italy under oriental influence (Rapp.
Volcente, Annali 1831, 14 ff.). Later he suggested
Egyptianizing as a general name, to avoid misunder-
standing (Annali 1847, 411 ff.). Among others
Bunsen (Annali 1834, 64 ff.) and Kramer (op. cit.)
argued that they were Greek; Corinth was consi-
dered a likely home, but the term Dorian was pre-
ferred as safer. The connexion with Corinth (which
rested on the discoveries at Corinth, on the corre-
spondence between the inscriptions on the vases and
those from Corfu, and on the tradition of the mer-
cantile importance of the city) was placed on a firmer
basis by Raoul-Rochette in his article Annali 1847,
23 ff., where the Asiatic, as opposed to the Egyptian
origin of the style was stressed in the light of recent
discoveries in Mesopotamia. Surveys of the subject,
and many references to further literature, will be
found in this article and in Jahn's introduction to
his catalogue of the vases in Munich (p. cxlv and ff.).
Jahn, writing in 1854, regarded Corinth as a strong
but not absolutely certain candidate. At that time
no stone inscriptions were known from Corinth.
LOCAL IMITATIONS AND DISTRIBUTION OF
CORINTHIAN POTTERY
TJTITHERTO we have taken it for granted that 'Corinthian' vases were
-1 A actually made at Corinth. We must now ask how this assumption can
be substantiated; whether it is certain that Corinth was really the centre of
the Corinthian industry; and whether, even if this be granted, the'Corinthian'
style is not really a particular phase of Greek art common to many places at
one time; whether, in other words, many of the vases which we call Corinth-
ian were not produced by imitative schools, such as we should expect to find
in the colonies of Corinth and elsewhere.
Long ago the oriental character of Corinthian decoration lead to the
belief that 'Corinthian vases' were really products of some oriental school.
Some authorities in the early nineteenth century thought of them as Egyp-
tian, others argued that they were Phoenician or Babylonian. But even at
that time there was a body of opinion in favour of the view that they were
Greek, and further, that they were made in or near Corinth. And that
opinion may be said to have held the field unchallenged for a good deal more
than half a century.1
It is founded in the first place on the inscriptions which are painted in the
Corinthian alphabet on many of the vases. It need hardly be said that we
know the Corinthian alphabet as such from the discovery of stone inscriptions
at Corinth, and from the great find of clay pinakes, many of them bearing
votive inscriptions, at a temenos of Poseidon a short way south-west of
the ancient citadel. Quite apart from all this, the fine pale clay of which
Corinthian vases are made is a distinctive feature of the landscape in the
1 Cf. however, p. 38, note 1. Orientalizing vases
(by which was meant for the most part Corinthian
and Italo-Corinthian) were commonly spoken of as
Egyptian throughout the first half of the nineteenth
century (cf. for example, Kramer, Styl u. Herkunft
(1837), 46: Ussing, De Nominibus (1847), 15),
though in the second quarter of the century it began
generally to be realized that they were Greek. Even
then, however, some authorities clung to other
theories (cf. De Witte, Cab. Durand, 280; and Bergk,
Zeitschr. f. Alt.-Wiss. 1847,168 who suggested Gaza
as their home). Gerhard, as is well known, devised
a number of groups under such names as Nolano-
Egyptian and Tyrrheno-Egyptian, thinking that they
were made in Italy under oriental influence (Rapp.
Volcente, Annali 1831, 14 ff.). Later he suggested
Egyptianizing as a general name, to avoid misunder-
standing (Annali 1847, 411 ff.). Among others
Bunsen (Annali 1834, 64 ff.) and Kramer (op. cit.)
argued that they were Greek; Corinth was consi-
dered a likely home, but the term Dorian was pre-
ferred as safer. The connexion with Corinth (which
rested on the discoveries at Corinth, on the corre-
spondence between the inscriptions on the vases and
those from Corfu, and on the tradition of the mer-
cantile importance of the city) was placed on a firmer
basis by Raoul-Rochette in his article Annali 1847,
23 ff., where the Asiatic, as opposed to the Egyptian
origin of the style was stressed in the light of recent
discoveries in Mesopotamia. Surveys of the subject,
and many references to further literature, will be
found in this article and in Jahn's introduction to
his catalogue of the vases in Munich (p. cxlv and ff.).
Jahn, writing in 1854, regarded Corinth as a strong
but not absolutely certain candidate. At that time
no stone inscriptions were known from Corinth.