DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.8577#0371
APPENDIX III 351
the Zeus of beaten gold which was unanimously connected with Cypselus or his sons,1 and the 'chest
of Cypselus'.2 Studniczka has suggested that the statue stood upon the chest;3 this would certainly
account for our hearing nothing of the chest so long as the statue was there, but is, of course, an
unprovable conjecture. As the two do not certainly belong together we have no means of gauging
the exact date of the statue; the chest must belong to the first quarter of the sixth century.4
1 Overbeck, Schriftquellen pp. 50-1.
2 v. Massow, A.M. 1916, 1 ff.
3 v. Massow, op. cit. 15.
4 Cf. v. Massow, op. cit. 13. It is impossible to say
whether the chest is earlier or later than the Amphiaraos
vase: the presence of boustrophedon inscriptions on the
chest does not mean that it was earlier than red-ground
Corinthian vases (on which such inscriptions do not occur);
for there are no long inscriptions on these vases such as
there were on the chest, and the problem of fitting the
letters into a very limited space did not arise in the same
way. As v. Massow says, the chest was probably dedicated
by Periander, and unless one accepts the later chronology
for the Cypselids, this would place it some little while
before the end of the first quarter of the century, and thus
rather before the vase.
the Zeus of beaten gold which was unanimously connected with Cypselus or his sons,1 and the 'chest
of Cypselus'.2 Studniczka has suggested that the statue stood upon the chest;3 this would certainly
account for our hearing nothing of the chest so long as the statue was there, but is, of course, an
unprovable conjecture. As the two do not certainly belong together we have no means of gauging
the exact date of the statue; the chest must belong to the first quarter of the sixth century.4
1 Overbeck, Schriftquellen pp. 50-1.
2 v. Massow, A.M. 1916, 1 ff.
3 v. Massow, op. cit. 15.
4 Cf. v. Massow, op. cit. 13. It is impossible to say
whether the chest is earlier or later than the Amphiaraos
vase: the presence of boustrophedon inscriptions on the
chest does not mean that it was earlier than red-ground
Corinthian vases (on which such inscriptions do not occur);
for there are no long inscriptions on these vases such as
there were on the chest, and the problem of fitting the
letters into a very limited space did not arise in the same
way. As v. Massow says, the chest was probably dedicated
by Periander, and unless one accepts the later chronology
for the Cypselids, this would place it some little while
before the end of the first quarter of the century, and thus
rather before the vase.