DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.2533#0200
NESSOS AND DEIANEIRA
163
The chief interest of the vase lies in the two main friezes, hut owing to the fragmentary condi-
tion of the vase their arrangement is extremely doubtful. It is perfectly plain that the subject of
the lower frieze was the combat over some fallen warrior, and if we place 5 below 1, and transfer
2 to a position directly over 4, we shall obtain six warriors on the left and four (or perhaps only
two, if 2 forms the head of the two warriors to the right of 4) on the right. How many warriors
were represented, or whether the two sides of the base represented different scenes, we cannot say.
Less clear is the arrangement of the upper frieze. We have the figures of a horse, man, two
women, and a centaur, and as it is certain that the subject of 3 had no connection with 1, both
fragments were probably on opposite sides of the base. That the horse on 1 was harnessed to a
chariot seems certain. Although we have only one horse, we know the single teams were com-
mon during the Archaic period.1 As three reins are certainly represented, it is possible that a
pair of horses was intended (which would be more appropriate to the period of the vase). If a
wagon be supplied, then the object to which the reins are fastened must be the top of the pole.
Although it is placed just over the flank, we find it set as far back on the shoulder of a black figure
hydria (Gerhard, Aus. Vas. pi. 253). It cannot possibly be the avrvi of a chariot, as it is far too
close to the body of the horse. That the diagonal line which begins at the end of the pole is a
goad held in the driver's hand, a comparison of Aiis. Vas. pi. 251 shows clearly. Not enough of
the scene is preserved to warrant an identification.
With 3 the subject is plain. Deianeira and the centaur Nessos are represented. The round
object at the back of the woman's head is probably the sword of Herakles: at least it is precisely
similar to the sword on the lower frieze, and on a Chalcidian vase in the Louvre we find Herakles
attacking the centaur with a sword (Aus. Vas. 117-118, 1). The attitude of the centaur is par-
alleled by another centaur on the Argive lekythos in Berlin (Arch. Zcit. 1883, pi. x.), who,
pierced by an arrow, is flying to right while looking back over his shoulder. Deianeira is repre-
sented in a rather singular fashion ; she seems to lie clinging to the centaur's body with one hand
while stretching out her right hand as if to call for assistance. Such a treatment of the scene is,
as far as I know, unique.
This rejtresentation of Herakles's encounter with Nessos (if such it be) seems to be the earliest
instance we have where Deianeira is represented (cf. Roscher's Lex. II. p. 2194).
Several points in the matter of detail must be noticed. The type of helmet is peculiar: for the
simple helmet, that worn by the warrior on the Melian vase (Conze, Melische Vasen, pi. iii.), offers
the nearest resemblance, but the tall helmet differs from any I have yet seen. The female figure
on 3 wears her hair in a ribbed band behind, an extremely common form during the late Argive
and Corinthian periods. The treatment of the eye varies in the two principal friezes ; in the
lower we have a pear-shaped space for the nose in white with the eye as a small dot; in the upper we
have the usual type on Melian or Ehodian vases,2 the dotted circle. The shields are the round form
which is found in the Geometric style, but the addition of a device is characteristic of a later period.
In spite of its many peculiarities, I see no reason to doubt that the vase is of Argive fabrication
and belongs to the early stage of Class III. of the Argive. Of purely^ Geometrical motives we find
no trace, except the water bird on 1, but all the various motives, the swastika, guilloche, birds,
etc., can be traced to earlier examples. The arrangement of the figures savors of a Mycenaean
prototype, but the animal frieze shows a certain amount of Oriental influence. The application of
color is probably, as we have seen, an Argive peculiarity. At the same time the general execution
is primitive in its character, in spite of the advanced tendency of the composition, and shows little
trace of the technical skill so characteristic of the later Argive vases.
It is of course possible that this may be a foreign product, imported into Argos, and if such
were the case we should expect to find analogous vases in other places, which, with one exception,
the Aristonothos vase,3 are not forthcoming. Melian, Rhodian, and Ionian vases which belong to
the same period as our vase (perhaps a trifle later) seem to offer some slight resemblance, but it
may be easily seen, if their styles be analyzed, that there is no connection between them.
The Aristonothos vase, though
treating
a c
lifferent subject from ours, is the only vase which
1 Cf. the Mycenaean grave stelae and Geometric Vases,
Ilelbig, Epos2, p. 139, fig. 33.
Also on the Mycenaean ' Warrior ' Vase.
Mon. dell' Inst. IX. pi. iv.
163
The chief interest of the vase lies in the two main friezes, hut owing to the fragmentary condi-
tion of the vase their arrangement is extremely doubtful. It is perfectly plain that the subject of
the lower frieze was the combat over some fallen warrior, and if we place 5 below 1, and transfer
2 to a position directly over 4, we shall obtain six warriors on the left and four (or perhaps only
two, if 2 forms the head of the two warriors to the right of 4) on the right. How many warriors
were represented, or whether the two sides of the base represented different scenes, we cannot say.
Less clear is the arrangement of the upper frieze. We have the figures of a horse, man, two
women, and a centaur, and as it is certain that the subject of 3 had no connection with 1, both
fragments were probably on opposite sides of the base. That the horse on 1 was harnessed to a
chariot seems certain. Although we have only one horse, we know the single teams were com-
mon during the Archaic period.1 As three reins are certainly represented, it is possible that a
pair of horses was intended (which would be more appropriate to the period of the vase). If a
wagon be supplied, then the object to which the reins are fastened must be the top of the pole.
Although it is placed just over the flank, we find it set as far back on the shoulder of a black figure
hydria (Gerhard, Aus. Vas. pi. 253). It cannot possibly be the avrvi of a chariot, as it is far too
close to the body of the horse. That the diagonal line which begins at the end of the pole is a
goad held in the driver's hand, a comparison of Aiis. Vas. pi. 251 shows clearly. Not enough of
the scene is preserved to warrant an identification.
With 3 the subject is plain. Deianeira and the centaur Nessos are represented. The round
object at the back of the woman's head is probably the sword of Herakles: at least it is precisely
similar to the sword on the lower frieze, and on a Chalcidian vase in the Louvre we find Herakles
attacking the centaur with a sword (Aus. Vas. 117-118, 1). The attitude of the centaur is par-
alleled by another centaur on the Argive lekythos in Berlin (Arch. Zcit. 1883, pi. x.), who,
pierced by an arrow, is flying to right while looking back over his shoulder. Deianeira is repre-
sented in a rather singular fashion ; she seems to lie clinging to the centaur's body with one hand
while stretching out her right hand as if to call for assistance. Such a treatment of the scene is,
as far as I know, unique.
This rejtresentation of Herakles's encounter with Nessos (if such it be) seems to be the earliest
instance we have where Deianeira is represented (cf. Roscher's Lex. II. p. 2194).
Several points in the matter of detail must be noticed. The type of helmet is peculiar: for the
simple helmet, that worn by the warrior on the Melian vase (Conze, Melische Vasen, pi. iii.), offers
the nearest resemblance, but the tall helmet differs from any I have yet seen. The female figure
on 3 wears her hair in a ribbed band behind, an extremely common form during the late Argive
and Corinthian periods. The treatment of the eye varies in the two principal friezes ; in the
lower we have a pear-shaped space for the nose in white with the eye as a small dot; in the upper we
have the usual type on Melian or Ehodian vases,2 the dotted circle. The shields are the round form
which is found in the Geometric style, but the addition of a device is characteristic of a later period.
In spite of its many peculiarities, I see no reason to doubt that the vase is of Argive fabrication
and belongs to the early stage of Class III. of the Argive. Of purely^ Geometrical motives we find
no trace, except the water bird on 1, but all the various motives, the swastika, guilloche, birds,
etc., can be traced to earlier examples. The arrangement of the figures savors of a Mycenaean
prototype, but the animal frieze shows a certain amount of Oriental influence. The application of
color is probably, as we have seen, an Argive peculiarity. At the same time the general execution
is primitive in its character, in spite of the advanced tendency of the composition, and shows little
trace of the technical skill so characteristic of the later Argive vases.
It is of course possible that this may be a foreign product, imported into Argos, and if such
were the case we should expect to find analogous vases in other places, which, with one exception,
the Aristonothos vase,3 are not forthcoming. Melian, Rhodian, and Ionian vases which belong to
the same period as our vase (perhaps a trifle later) seem to offer some slight resemblance, but it
may be easily seen, if their styles be analyzed, that there is no connection between them.
The Aristonothos vase, though
treating
a c
lifferent subject from ours, is the only vase which
1 Cf. the Mycenaean grave stelae and Geometric Vases,
Ilelbig, Epos2, p. 139, fig. 33.
Also on the Mycenaean ' Warrior ' Vase.
Mon. dell' Inst. IX. pi. iv.