A Greek Goldsmith's Mould in the Ashmolean Museum

Author(s): H. Stuart Jones

Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 16 (1896), pp. 323-334
Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/623954 .
Accessed: 22/06/2011 07:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hellenic. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies.

http://www.jstor.org
 A GREEK GOLDSMITH'S
MOULD. 32.3

A GREEK GOLDSMITH'S
MOULDIN THE ASHMOl;FAN
MUSEUM.

THEmonumentrepresentedin the dimensionsof the originalby the

annexedfigure(Fig.l) wasacquiredbfrMr.ArthurEvansin Corf6,in 1895,

FIG. 1.

andis nowin the Ashmolean Museum. It is a piece of bronze,irregularly

oblongin shape)measuring4 in. in length by l to lA in. in breadth,andi
to -1 in. in thickness. Each of the four long surfacesis decorated witha
seriesof incisedpatternsseparatedby bandsof ornament.Therecanbe no
doubtas to the destinationof the object,whichwas evidentlyintendedto
serveas a mouldforthe manufacture of plaques,diadems,&c.,in epoql,ssd.
A seriesof goldplaques(Figs.2-5) have beenexecutedfromthe mouldby
Mr.Ready,andareexhibitedbesidethe originalin the Ashmolean Museum.
At the sametimeit maywellhave been usedforworkin othermetals,such
as the thin sheets of bronseused for the well-known'Argo-Corinthian'
plaqueswhichfurnishthe nearestanalogiesto the subjectsof ourmonument.
Theinterestof the mouldlies partlyin its technicalaspect,as givingus
an insight into the methodsof early industrialart, and partly in the
affinitiesof subjectwhich enablells to link it with the variousschoolsof
earlyGreekproduction.
Technically speaking,the mostrenlarkabIe featureof the mouldis the
close analogywhichit presentsto the productsof the earlygem-engraver
and die-sinker. The instrumentsemployedby artistsof this class are
32+ A GREEK GOLDSMITH'SMOULD
the bow and drill, the wheel, and the simple graving-tool,the last-named
being adaptedfor work oll the softer materials,such as steatite;which were
so largely used in early art.l Most noteworthyis the extensive use of the
drill, which is not only employedin blockingout the figures,the tracesof its
action being subsequentlyremovedas in later gem-engraving,but alsoserves
by meansof its circulardepressionsto accentuate the contoursand articula-
tions of the figure, as well as to furnish simple and effective forms of
ornament. For examplesof this sort of work,referencemay be made to the
followingearlygems :-
(Ol) For the use of large drill-holes in the articulationof limbs, &c.

Middleton,EngravectGerns,p. 110, Fig. 24, Bqt. Mq6s.Cat. P1. A, 1Q6,

'F.+. 'Ap%.1888, P1. X. passtrn,esp. 5 (note tlle use of the tm6Dqbtar
drill).
(b) For the use of small drill-holesto characterisea surface Middleton,
EngravedGeens,P1. I. 2 (eagle and serpent,cp. A.Z. 1883, P1. XVI. 23 a
later example and the early coins of Chalcis); Brit. Mq6s.Cat.P1.A, 82.
(c) For the free use of the wheel numerotlsexamples in A.Z. 1883,
P1. XVI. and Ath. lZz{th. 1886, P1. VI.; the network so common on
island-gemsseems to be thus produced,and wings are regularlytreated in
this way.
If we now comparewith these gems the subjectsof our snould,we cannot
fail to notice preciselythe same technicalpeculiarities.
(1) The larger drill-holesserve to accentuatesuch featuresas the knees
of the horses and other animals, and the heels, eyes, and breasts of the
humanfigure, while in sornecases they appear to remain as indicationsof
the generalstructure- as in the case of the hind-quartersof the horses and
ox-which the artist has not thought fit to obliterate in workingover the
surface.
-(2) Frequentuse is made of rows of smallerdrill-holes,e.g.in bringing
into relief the under surfaces of the hares and fish-god, and in giving
characterto hair, manes,tail, and outspreadwings, as well as to the feet of
the tripod.
(3) The 'rosette of points,' well known in other classes of work, such
as 'Proto-C:orinthian ' pottery, is a frequent and prominentelement in the
decoration. The origin is here clearly to be seen in the combinationfor
ornamentalpurposesof the large and small drill-holes.
(4) The features of early gem-engravingswhich owe their origin to
the use of the wheel, such as the fondnessof the artist for representing
birdswith outspreadwings, may be illustrated in severalinstances from our
mould.
While the mould thus enablesus to trace the art of the Inetal-worker
in early Greeceto its technical origin in the procedureof the gein-engraver,
it also helps us to detect remotertraces of the same influencein formsof

1 Middleton would trace the use of the millan lekythos (protocorinthian) as thus pro^
diamond-point on the earliest gems and even duced; but this seems doubtful.
proposes to regard the incised lines of the Mac-
 MUSEUM.
IN THE ASHMOTJEAN 325

art not directlyaSectedby it in their technicalprocesses.For example,

the use of the ' rosetteof points' in earlyvase-paintingand the bordering
of draperies with rowsof smallwhitepoillts,as wellas the representation of
hairby raiseddotsof blackglasein r.f.painting,areseento be derivedfrom
the samesource.1
The conclusionto which the foregoingobservations point is that the
close interconnection betweenthe variousarts and craftsin early Glreece
which revealsitself so markedlyin their comlnonstock of types extends
also to their technicalmethods. Andwe mayjustlysee in this latterfact
one of the causesto whichfixityof type is due. Forbesidethe strength
of traditionin the schoolsof earlyhandicraftandthe povertyof inlrention
whichbelongsto the artisticinfancyof the GEreek stocks,we mustrecognise
as a factorin the fixing of typesthe circumstancethat the dominantarts in
the matterof technique were those distinguishedby their use of mechanical
reproductiorl the
frozn matrix.2
Vfe maynowpass on to considerthe placewhichourmouldclaimsin
early art by virtue of its subjects. In seeking for analogieswe ttlrn
naturallyto the productsof the minorarts,whichgroupthemselvesunder
the followingheads:
(1) Metal-work.It is herethat we expect to findthe closestparallels
to the subjectsof the mould,sincethe productsof similarmatriceshavecome
elownto tIS in no inconsiclerable number. Theymaybe classedaccording to
theirmaterialas follows:
(a) C;old.PlaquesanddiademsfromAthens(A.Z.1884,Pl. IX.),C:orinth
(zd. P1. VIII.), Rhodes (Salzmann,Nderqpolede Canttros I ), Eleusis
('E+. 'Ap%. 1885,Pl. IX.)
(b) Silver. Fragmentary reRieffromOlympia(iv. P1.XXXIX. No.710),
plaquesfrom(:yprus(Jahrb.1887, Pl. VIII.).
(c) Bronze. In this materialwe have(a) the seriesof plowzesusually
knownas the 'Argo-Corinthian' treatedespeciallyby Mr
bronze-reliefs,
A. G. Bather in this Joxrnal, vol.siii p. 249 ff. and by M.De iELidder in
Bq6lt.Corr. EEelt.1895, p. 218 , and his cataloguesof the Bronzesof
the Acropolis and of the Polytechnion; (,8) the small group -of
handles discussedby Furtwangler
frnq,rror in Zistorisch-phtlologtsche
Aqmfsatze
pp.181-193and De Ridderin the latterof the two
Ernst GMTrtZM6s gewq,drrwet,
cataloguesabovenamedp. 30: (y) the class of diadetms, foundespeci-ally in
Boeotiaandpublished'E0. 'Ap%. 1892.,P1. XXIT.andArch.Annzeq,ger, 1891,
p. 124 f. See De Ridderin the cataloguelast quoted,p. 67.
(2) GEem-engraving. In this branchwe mustpayspecialattentionto the
so-called' Inselsteine,'a classwhich,as is well known,bridges-thetransitions

1 It is instructive to compare the surface of to the same phenomenon in Boeotian work.

the fish-god on the island-gem Brit. MqhS.Clat.
P1. A, 82withthe similarfigures on the Castle
Ashbyvase(A.v. 318), with their dotted bodies.
On the rows of dots in Tyrrhenian sases see
Hauser, Jahrb. 1893 p. 102 n. 21, who points
a The mould also e:2rplainsthe phenomenon
noticedby De Ridder, Bqmll.Corr. Hell. 1895
p. 220, ' les bordures sont estampdes C l'aide de
matrices dont la grandeur ne dEpasse pas un
champ.'
326 A GREEK GOLDSMITH'SMOULD
which lead from Mycenaeanart down to that of historicalGreece. The
latest discoveredof these gems, publishedin Ath. Mitth.1896, P1. V.
(Pollak),will furnishanalogiesto the mould. XArchaic'gems are also
availablefor comparison. s
(3) Pottery(a) stamped,(b)painted. The formerclass,whichfromthe
similaritsrof its techniquehasthe closestaffinitywith ourmonument, is only
represented by a few examplesfromGreeceproper,so that our conception of
it is mainlyderivedthroughthe mediumof the Etruscan' buccheri,' which
imitateits types. The Glreekexamplesare treatedby Pottierin Bqmll. (7orr.
IIell. 1888, pp. 491-509, and Monqbnwents G/recs,ii. l4-16, P1. VIII., and
recentadditionsto their numberare publishedin Ath. Mitth. 1896, P1.V.
(Pollak)VI. (Dummler)
Amongthe variousstylesof paintedpotterythe ' Proto-CorinthianX is
that which is most valuablefor our purpose. For the most recentand
valuablediscussionof this class see Orsi in ffiotq,z?>e deglq,Scazvi,1895
pp. 109 ff.
It will be foundthat in its ornamentand subjectsourmouldpresents
SUC}1 close analopes to all these groupsthat all areclearlyseento be the
productsof the sameartisticimpulsein variousstages.
A. ORNAMENT.-The ornamentsof the mould may be groupedas
follows:-
(1) Decorativebands.
(a) The 'guilloche' or plait. This is almostthe commonestmotive
thus appliedon early bronze-reliefs-Olvmpia, iv P1. XXXTX.699-702,
Ath. Mitth. 189S, xiv. I-4 (Acropolis),De Ridder Bronzesd'XthEnes, 797
(1311) (Eleutherae),BisGl.Corr. BelZ. 189S, P1. X. (Ptoion) Carapanos
l)odone,xvi. 2, 3.
(b) The primitivemaeander,not continuous,but in short sections
perpendicular to the line of the -band. It shouldbe noted that the form
hereadoptedstandsmidwaybetweenthe simplervarietyof the ' Phaleron'
vase,Jahrb.1887, p 46, Fig. 5, and the moreelaborateBoeotianpattern
Jahrb. 1888, p. 341, Fig. 23 (cp. also the 'Phaleron' vase Jahrb. 1887
p. 57, Fig. 23).
(c) The row of points. Also extremelycommonon early bronze-
work. See De Ridder,BqbGl. Corr. IIeGl.1895, p. 219, andcp. Op.ctt.1892
P1.XI. XIV.XV.(Ptoion),Arch.Anzetger,1894)p. 1] 7,Figs.7-9 (Aklokorinth),
zd.1891,p. 125,No. 12 b,c (Thebes),andmanyotherexamples.
(d) Bandsdivided by vertical lines into squarescontainingpoints.
A redcedformof the commontype,Olympia.iv. P1. XXXIx. 703, 704,
BuGl.Car: IleGl.1892 P1. X., Arch. Anzetgerv1894, p. 118, Fig. 12, &c.,
&c. (the squaresleft empty, Olympia,loc. ctt. 699, CarapanosDodone,
xvi. 3, &c.)
(2) Miscellaneous ornaments.
(a) The rosette. This appearsin two forms,(a) the elaboraterosettes
whichoccupythe spaceon the extremeleft of Fig. 4> for which the best
parallelsmay be found in the Boeotiandiadems,Arch. Anzetger,1891,
 IN THE ASHMOTjFjANMUSEUM. 327

p. 125, No. 12 b,d,f, 'E+. 'Ap%.1892, X. XII.; (,B)the 'rosette of points,'

a featureof tProto-Corinthian' potterye.g., A.Z. 1883, P1. X. 1, 2, (cp.
p. 162, Arch.Anzetger, 1888, p. 947, Lotzzzedegti Scavt, 1895, p. 156.
Fig. 43), but also foundon Dipylon(A.Z., 1885, P1. VIII. 2), Boeotian
(Jahq7b.1888, pp. 33.S,Figv7, 341, Fig. 24), and early Attic (A.Z, 1882,
P1.IX. X., AntzkeI)en7urnaler,i. 57, Griechische
?6ndSictlischeVasenbtlder, liv.)
ware. It is noteworthythat we also findit not ouly on early metal-work
(Olympia, iv. P1.XXXVIII.)but alsoon gems(Ath. Mtfth.1896, P1.V. 11,
Brtt. Xqxs.Cat.,P1.B, 113,the centralpointworkedwiththe tql,bqxlar drill).
(b) Simple plant-formsconfinedto the foliatedbranchand its com-
binations. Thismotiveis avainwidelyspreadin earlyart. A few examples
maybenoted; (a) bronze-relieMs Bt6gZ.Corr.EEeZZ. 1892, P1. XIV. (Ptoion),
zd.1895,p. 218,Fig. 23, 24, Xrch.Anzetger, 1894 p. 117, No. 7, zd. 1881,
p. 124; (,8) island-gems-Ath. Mttth. 1896, P1.V. 2, zd.1886,P1.VI. 7 a,
X.Z.,1883,P1.XVI.2, 3, Brtt. 11[t6s. Cat. P1.B 113; (y) painting Corinthian
vase,Rayet et (::ollignon,ltstotre de la Cdrantgqte Srecgqte,Fig. 33, sarco-
phagusfromClazomenae, Rev.Arch.-1896,p. 121; (8) stampedpottery,Ath.
Mttth.1896,p. 230, Fig. 1, P1. VI. (branches in handsof centaurs,practi-
cally an ornamentalapplicationof this motive),Etruscan' bucchero,' Micali,
Mon.Ined. P1. XXXTV.2. This exampleservesto connectthe various
branchesof art in whichwe maytracethe style to whichourmouldbelongs.
The samelessonmaybe drawnfromthe consideration of the sxbjectsrepre-
sented.
B. SUBJECTS.--COnSidering theseas a whole,we cannotfailto noticethat
they areof the simplestpossibledescription.Settlngaside-$hecorupositions
forinedbyanimalsX thereis onlyonecase in whichmorethana singlehuman
figureoccurs,andherethe composition is almostpurelydecorative.Thetypes
appearreducedto their simplestform the mere letters of that artistic
alphabetintowhichwe haveto readthe meaningderivedfromtheirlaterand
betterknowncombinations.It will be convenientto groupthem according
to the formof the fieldwhichthey occupy.
(1) The squarefield. The importannof this in earlyart is well-known.
Withinits limitswe can trace the evolutionof the best knowptypesfrom
decorativesymbolsto expressivegroups. In the gold plaquesof Cyprus,
Rhodes,and Corinthin the Argo-Corinthian reliefsand the mirror-handles
which go closely with these we see the schoolin which the types were
created. Evenin the dimensions of the fieldwe findbut little variationj
from
4 to 5 centimetres beingthe usuallengthof the side. Theywereborrowed
by artistsworkingin differentmaterials,e.g. the sculptorsof Etruscantomb-
doors(onwhichsee Milaniin NottzzedegDiScavi, 1892. pp.472 i.) andthe
paintersof the sarcophagiof Clazomenaewhere the longersides of the
lid lent themselvesto this principleof divisionof the type foundon the
matrix. Thebridledhorsecallsforno specialcommentXl butthe centralgroup
of Fig. 2 deservescarefulattention.
1 For a parallelsee the BoeotiaIlcasket (geometrical)fromThebes(Jcohrb.1888 p. 357).
 A GREEK GOLDSMITH'SMOULD
328
We see twonudemalefigures,whoseproportions recallth.oseof Pelopoll
nesianworkin bronseand other lllaterials(see J.X.S. xiii.^p.249) sym-
metricallygrouped.abouta tripod; each has one foot advancedandfirmly'
plantedon the sole,the otherwithdrawnand restingon tiptoe. Similarly
eachhas onearmbentandrestingon the smallof the backabovethe hip7
the otherextendedandbent at the elbowin readinessto delivera blow,the
fistsalmostmeetingabovethe centreof the tripod It has been suggested
that we haveherea primitiveformot the ' contestfor the tripod'between
ApolloandEerakles,commonly representedin b.f.andearlierr.f.vase-painting.
It is no doubtthe case that the familiarschemein whichApolloseeks to
recoverthe tripodalreadycarriedoWby Heraklesdoes not representthe
earliesteSortsof G-reekartiststo dealwith this subject. On a b.f.vaseat
Nap'les(CollesioneSalltangelo120) a priorFtageof the conflictis depicted.
Apolloand Heraklesapproach the tripodfromoppositequarters7 and each

_l FIG. 2.

layshandsuponit simultaneously.Buthere7apart*om thefactthat neither

figureis characterised by attributes,it seems clearthat the attitudesare
thoseof boxersaboutto engage,whilethe tripodindicatesthe prizeof the
contest. The tripodas Skor is employednot only by the artist of the
Corinthian Amphiaraos vase(X.d.I. X 4!but alsoon oneof the finestof the
' Proto-Corinthian Cclass,at presentunpublishednin the Museumat Taranto
{:p. the chest of Eypselosn Paus.v. 17 ll. We must not howeverrest
contentwiththusexplainingthe scenebeforeus,but pointout that it is after
all bllta variantwitha specialisedmeaningof the symmetrical pairof figures
abouta centralobjectwhichoccursin manyformsmoreor less meaningless
in earlyindustrialart. Instancesmight.bemultipliedfromEtruscanbuccheri
(cp.Micali,Storta,P1.XX.passtm),but the mostinstructiveparallelsarethe
Argo-C:orinthian bronze-relieffromPtoion,Bxll. Cmrr. Zell. 1892P1.XI. and
the fragm.ent of a stampedjar fromRhodesAth.Mttth.1896p. 230. In the
light of t.heseexampleswe maysaythat the wholetruthdoesnot lie in the
simplerejectionof the theorywhichseesthe contestof Apolloand Herakles
forthe tripodhererepresented. Oursceneis a tme precursor of the earliest
schemeappliedto thatsukject; it represents the firststagein the specialisa-
 IN THE ASHMOT,RANMUSEUM. 329

tion of a generaland meaningless decorativescheme a contestfora tripod

which was afterwards to be yet further and filled with a
individualisecl
mythological content.
(2) Smallersquaresand oblongfields. With the exceptionof two
' heraldic' groups the lionandox,the cockand hen (?) these arefilledby
singlefigures,in all but twocasesthose of animals. Theselatterexceptions
mustbe speciallyconsidered:-
(a) Chesutcideof Ajaz (Fig. 3, right). This belongsto the limited
repertory of scenesdrawnfromthe tale of Troywhichis employedby the
andmirrors. C:uriously
artistsof the earlybronze-reliefs enough,all but onel
aretakenfroma briefcycleof eventsfollowingthe deathof Hector. Theran-
somingofthecorpseformsthesubjectofthewell-known mirror-handle at Berlin
(Furtwangler, . cit.P1.IV.),the bronze-relieffromOlympia(iv.P1.XXXTX.
No. 699),anda bronze-relief fromthe Acropolis(Ath.M3tth.1895P1.XIV. 1
De Ridder,Matalogqhe, No. 349); the 0'7rkr xpsvs is in a11probability
indicatedin the adjoining fieldof the last-namedrelief; whilethe last act-
the suicide-besidesbeingrepresented on the uppermost extantfieldof the

= FIG. 3.

samemonument, whichthusenjoysthe distinctionof presentingthe cyclein

its entirety,alsoappearson a relief identicalin style andorigin,Ath.Mttth.
189S,P1.XIV. 4, De Ridder,C<atalogue, No. 350,and on our mould. Here
however,it is reducedto its verysimplestform,the prostratefigurebeingun-
attendedby the two(in onecasethree)additionalfiguresof the laterbronze-
reliefs. Parallelsfor the extremereductionmay howeverbe foundin the
fragmentary Corinthianaryballos,Arch.Anzeier,l891, p. 116, 5, wherethe
name AIFASis scratchedon the figure,and the tomb-doorfromC:orneto,
NotqaiyedegltScavt1881 p. 377, cp. Schneider,Proleyorrtena zuyeiyner neqben
&c.,p. 35. It is noteworthy
Go/,leriye, that the figureoccurs(withoutanyclear
connectionwith the otherfiguresof the scene) on the 'Proto-C:orinthian'
lekythos,Ach. Anzetge,1895,p. 33 Fig 5. Theintroduction of the sword,
bymakingthe actof stlicideunmistakable, clearlyimportsa mythicalmeaning
intothe scene)forwe canscarcelybelievethat suicidein the abstractwould
be represented by earlyartists: but the (reduced'type pointsbackto the

(Olympia,705),
1 Aja2:Oileusand Cassandra
330 A GREER GOLDSMITHiS MOULD

sourcein such conventionalfigtlresof the slain as the Eurytionof the

Geryoneia(A.V 105, 106, Chalcidian)
(b) ZheOldManof theSea.-(Fig. 3, nextthe above.) Besidethe opic
mythology,the subsi.diary pantheonof popularbelief, with its fantastic
creations,furnisheda numberof types to earlyalztists, here assistedby the
productso Orientalmanufacture, whichreadilylent themselveswitlllittle,if
any, modification to the expressionof Greekconceptions.Amongstthese
the type of the fishtaileddeityworshipped undervarioustitles in the East
did duty for the creationsopopularAncy to whicha varietyof names-
Ploteus Triton&c.- wereassignedin differentplaces. As the aXl,oS eyep6ov
par eaGcellence
he was worshipped on the Bosphorus, andlocallegendascribed
to himthe officeof guideto the Argonauts(DionysiusByz.p. 20, Wescher,
referredto by Furtwangler, Goldfundvon Vettersfelde, p 25); andthe same
nameis appliedto himby the inscription on the bronze-relief fromOlympia
(iV.PLNXXTX.NQ.699) While)however., the singlefigureoccurson such
earlyproductsas the island-gem,Ath.Jlfitth.1886)P1.VI. 10, the specimenof

__
__
FIG. 4*

(rsd ware}Micali,A!oqtIned 34n-3> and the gold Ssh of ATettersfeldeand

survivesas a coin-typeat C?trsicus(B. Mv3.Cat.hfysia,P1.IV. 8) it wasat a
areryearlyperioddrawnintothe circleof s closedtypes>> the wrestling-bout
of
Herakleswiththe aXlovfyspevbeingalmostif not quitethe firstinstanceOI
the specialisedwrestlingscheme It occurson the island-gem, B. MqbS.
82 and
on the Olympian bronze-relief
abovereferredto. Thetypewasborrowed by
monumentalsculpturein the case of the frieze of Assos and the poros
pedimentfromthe Acropolis.
The oth.ersubjectsbelongingto this groupmayreceivea moresummary
treatment. We Snd representeda seriesof animalfigures-griffin)boara
stag lion,ox, swan,owlscock,hen, and dolphinwhich are all partof the
stock-in-trade of the Corinthianvase-painter)and have withinrecentyears
appearedalso on the productsof the kindredart of metal-work.The
excavations at the sanctllaryof ApolloPtous have broughtto light a series
of reliefs which correspond closelyto the subjectsof the mould,published
Bt11.Coqr.Zel/. 1892>P] XIV. XV. TIomollejustlypointeflout that the
 IN THE ASHMOTjT<.AN
MUSEUM. 331

styleof thesereliefsis not homogeneous: the bandsrepresented onP1.XIV.

areof muchcoarserworkmanship, andshowcomparative povertyof invention.
He is disposedto attributethemto an earlierperiodthanthe morefinished
productsof P1.XV.,wherethe verticaldivisionsmark the finaladoptionof
the ' metope' style to which the heraldicgroupsof the earlierclassforma
transition,and (as appearsfromthe topmostband)the humanfigurewas
introducedto vary the successionof fabulousand animalsubjects;but a
comparison of ourmouldwouldseem to showthat the difference lies in the
skill withwhichthe respectiveartistshandletheir techniqueratherthanin
the dateofthemonuments. For example,the employmentof smalldrill-
holes to characterise a surfaceis employedboth forthe sphinxesof P1.XV.
and the bird-grifEns of P1.XIV., but in the formercasewith a muchmore
certainhand; andwhilethe artist of the matrixapproaches the carefuland
preciseworkmanship of the forlner,he presentsthe moststrikinganalogies
to the birdsofthe lowerbandon P1. XIV. (especiallyin his owl,swans,and
the groupof cock andhen),and to the use of the foliatedbranchas the
centreof a symmetrical group(twiceon P1.XIV.).
It will be clearfromthe foregoingcomparison that the animalsubjects
confirmthe positionassignedto the mouldon othergrounds:a few notes
maybe appendedon someindividualtypes:-
(a) ThegriWnappearsseated:De Ridder(Bv611. Corr.:Eell.189S,p. 221)
sees in this featurea distinctivemarkof C:orinthian as distinguished from
Ionianart; but apartfromthe fact(noticedby him)that the grifEnappears
' passant' on the Olympiabronze(iv. P1.XsXsXVII1.), this observation seems
contradicted by the circumstance that the nearestanalogyto ourtype is to
be seenin the earlycoinsof Teos(Brtt.Mxs.Cat. Ionza,P1.XXX.)
(b) Thegrazingstag is describedby Dummler(Jahrb.1887, p. 18) as
rarein Greekart andforeignto Corinthian vase-painting.Theincorrectness
of the latter remarkllas been pointedout by Wilisch,Dtealfkoernthtsche
p. 42 n. 153; but it Inaybe worthwhileto addthat it belongs
Zhontndqbstrq,e,
to the Proto-Corinthian (Wottzze degl1,Scav1,,1895,p. 137,Fig. 14),Boeotian
('E+. 'Ap%.IS92,P1.VIII.), Dipylon(Ath. Mttth. 1892, P1. X.), and early
Attic (Ath. Mttth.1895,P1.III.) styles.
(c) The owl,a relativelyrarebirdin earlyart,maybe paralleled fromthe
silverrelief,Olymnpta, iv. P1.XXXTX.No. 710,(whichFurtwangler datestoo
low)andthe earlyAttic vase,AntzkeDen7cgnaler, i. 57.
(d) Thedolphtnis a commoner figurein metal-work andgeln-engraving
thanin the otherarts. Instancesare the gold-findof Vettersfeldeandthe
gems, Ath. Mtth. 1886, P1. VI. 5. ap. the early Attic vase mentioned
under(c).
(3) The frieze. Of this we havebut a single example;it is, however,
an extreinelyimportantone-the representation of a dogpursuingharesin
woodedcountry,indicatedby a free use of the ' foliated branch.' It is
unnecessary here to repeat Loschoke's demonstration that the type,repre-
sentedby the Hesiodic'Av7rs's and the Etruscans buccheri,' is the productof
earlymetal-work;what is more importantis to note(a) that it foundits
332 A GREEE GOLDSMITH'S
MOULD
way into potteryas earlyas the Dipylonperiod(A.Z.,188S,P1.VIII. I) and
was especiallyaffectedby the ' Proto-Corinthian ' potters (J.]1.S. 1890,
P1. II., Jahrb. 1888, p. 247, Notitte deyli, Scavt, 1895, p. 157, Fig. 44, td.
1893, p. 47l, A.Z. 1883, P1. X. 2); (b) that since Loschoke'sarticlewas
writtentwo very similar examplesin metal have appeared the diadem
fromThebes,Arch. Anzeiger,1891, p. 124, and our mould. Theformeris
executedin the style of the coarserbronze-reliefs of the Ptoion above
referredto; it presentsan analogyto our example in the use of the
foliatedbranch,although as mightbe expectedfromthe inferiorworkman-
ship-in a mostunintelligent application,and a still moreimportantone in
the factthat the scene is curtailedandrobbedof muchof its picturesque-
nessby the absenceof an importantpart,namelythe net withthe crouching
hunterconcealedbehindit, so carefullyrenderedin the microscopic scene
of the Macmillan lekythos.
Our review of the ornamentsand subjectsof the mouldhasrevealed
afEnitieswhichleaveno dotlbtas to the placeto be assignedto it in early
GEreek art. It remainsto endeavour, if possible,to date the objectapproxi-

=
FIG. 5.

matelyandto determinethe place of its manufacture.We haveseenthat

in the classof ornaments to whichit belongsit occupies(relativelyspeaking)
an earlyplace. The hutnanfigureis but rarelyemployed;the typesselected
belongto the earliestphaseof GreekartunderOrientalinfluence,or even,
as in the caseof the harehunt,point to the closeof the ' Dipylon' period;
andthey appearin theirsimplestforms,decorativecapacitybeing clearlyof
moreimportanceto the artistthanfulnessof meaning. Moreover, not onlT
areour analogiesdrawnmainlyfrom the carliestbronze-reliefs, suchas lie
nearestto the periodof stamped'red ware' and similarproducts,butthe
monuments whichcomenext to thesein their affinityto ourmouldarethe
island-gems andCProto-C:orinthian' vases. Of the formerit maybe saidthat
the latermembersofthe class,whichpresentthefeaturesof likehesswiththe
mould,belongin all likelihoodto the seventhcenturyB.C:.,givingplaceto
the ' archaic' gemsin the sixthcentury;whilethe latterclass,firstappearin
in the eighthcentury,certainlyproducedits finestexamplesin the seventh
Muchlight has beenthrownupon' Proto-C:orinthian' wareas it appearsin
the Westby the researches of Orsiin the ' Necropolidel Fusco' at Syracuse
 IN THE ASHMOT.RANMUSEUM. 333
his results are published in the Nottzzedeplt Ncavis1895, pp. Il3 S. The
periods which he distinguishes in the history of the fabric are purely
geometric (725-700 B.C:.); with animal forms (700-650 B.C.); with animal
forms,developed(6a0-580 B.C.) The latter date he regards as that of the
introductionof the specifically <Corinthian' ware; it is probably,however,
too low. It seems necessaryhere to reopen the question as to the originof
this class of ware. Our point of departuremust be the fact that the earliest
depositsin the gravesof Syracuse and Cumae the first a colonyof Corinth,
the second of Chalcis are identical in character. The typical vase is the
small,almost globularlekythos with geometricaldecorationon the shoulder
(rarelyanimals), and parallellines coveringthe belly of the vase. Instances
are, NottzzedegltScavt,1893, pp. 451, 473, zd. 189o, p. 138, Fig.15,16, p.151,
Fig. 37, p. 179, Fig. 71, p. 190, Fig. 91 (all fromSyracuse. Orsi states
that two examplesfromMegaraare the only others foundin Sicily). I have
in my possession two preciselysimilarlekythi discoveredat C:umaein May,
1S,92. Having in view the part played by C:orinthand Chalcis in early
colonial enterprise,and the similarity between C:orinthianand Chalcidian
vase-paintingat a later period,we need not be surprisedto find the potters
of both cities employing a common style in the last quarterof the eighth
century B.C. That some at least of the Proto-Corinthian' pottery is of
Corinthianmanufactureis rendered certain by the fact that a lekythos in
the museumat Syracuse,marked as coming from Megara lIyblaea, bearsas
its decoration the meaningless combination of letters, among which the
Corinthiansymbolfor beta occurs. A feature,however,which seems rather
to point to Chalcisas the earliest home of the style is the decorationof the
belly of the vase with concentric stripes. This is found not only in the
globularlekythi above referredto, but in vases of other forms (flat-bottomed
oenochoewith long neck, NotizzedegLiScavt,1895, p. 132, Fig. 10, seyphi,
vasi a colonnette, &c., zd. 1893, pp. 457, 474, 477, and others). Now this
feature seems to be especiallycharacteristicof what may be called 'Proto-
Boeotian' pottery; see the examples fromThebes,Jahrb.1888, pp. 248, 340
Figs. 19, 20, 352, Fig. 30, 353, Fig. 32.1 When we find that Boeotia is a
fruitful source both of the more finished Proto-Corinthianvases and the
products of early metal-work,the close vicinity of Chalcismakes it seem
probablethat that city played an important part in the artistic activity to
which these objectsowe their existence.2
Setting aside the findsof Sicily and MagnaGraecia,we find that of the
most perfect specimensof Proto-Corinthianlekythi with advancedcomposi-
tions, two (the Macmillanlekythos, which is the finest exanlple known,and
that figured Jahrb. 1888, p. 247) were found at Thebes,whi]e the third

1 The 'proto-boeotian'vase ilrch. ilnzeiger,
1895, p. 33, fig. 2 is also velCy
instructivein its
resemblanceto 'proto-corinthian'work. See
Furtwangler's remarks.
2 That the proto-corinthian vases owe their
inspirationto Oriental metal-workhas been
H.S.-VOL. XVI.
shown by Mr. Cecil Smithin J.g.S. 1890, p.
179, with the aid of an e2rample obviouslyin-
debted to Phoenicianmodels. But the form
and decorationof the vases leave no doubt of
theaffinityofthis style with thegoldsmith'sart.
A A
334 A GREEK GOLDSMITH'S MOULD.
whose provenienceis given came {'rolaCorinth,accordingto the dealer's
assertion(A.Z.1883,P1.XI.). The origino{'ArcA.Anzeiger,1895,p. 33 f.
Nos. 14,1;) is uncertain. In the case of the metal-work whichseems to
continuethe sametraditionsof workmanship we find that,excltldingAthens
and Olympia,Boeotiais distinguishedby the numberof its finds viz.,at
Orchomenos, Eleutllelae,and the Ptoion to which may be adziedthe
Thebandiadelasluorethanoncereferredto above;as a set-of we canpoint
to the bandsfromCorinth(Arch.Anzeiger,1894,'p. 124 f.) and the mirror-
handlefrornthe same source.- In the sixth century,however,apartfrom
the testimonyof inscriptionsin the Argive alphabet,the evidencefor a
Peloponnesian manufacture of these reliefsseemssufficient. But it seems
difficultto resist the convictionthat in the industrialart of the seventh
centuryChalcis the ' city of bronze' playedan importantpart,especially
in trainil^,a school of craftsmendistinguishedby the minutenessand
accuracyof their technicalskill. It is hardto accountfor the transition
zfromthe extraordinary finish of the finestProto-Corinthian lekythi to the
coarsenessof the Corinthian aryballi,&c.,which succeedthemtowardsthe
endcf the century,if botharesupposedto be productsof the same fabric,
althoughthe commonerexamplesof the class leay without difficultybe
attributedto Corinth.
Again,we have to providea satisfactory accountof the permeationof
tne workshops of ContinentalGreeceby Ionictypes and conceptions:andit
appearsmostreasonableto believe that the Ioniansof Chalciswerein'this
casethe intermediaries.Chalcidian influencewouldextend'firstto Boeotia,
andthence,in two divergentstreams,to Attica andCorinth;andthat this
wasactuallythe case is an impression whichgathersstrengthon repeated
consideration of the monumentsassignableto the severaldistrictsnamed.
Ourmouldwasfoundin CorctTra; and it waspreciselyherethat Corinthian
at1dChalcidian influencemingledin a commonstreamtending westward.
Thelegendsas to the colonisation of the islandspeakof an earlysettlenlent
fromEretria,the neighbourandfoe of Chalcis;the settlerswereexpelledby
Corinth,no doubt if the traditionbe worthanything with the approvalof
the Chalcidians.Distincttracesof Ionic influenceare few; the griffinand
the OldMan of the Sea have been seen to remindus of analogiesof Asia
Minor; but the monumentis certainlyanteriorto the expansionof
' mythographic'art which was to result, about the closeof the seventh
century,in suchcompositions as thoseof the chest of Kypselos. We shall,
therefore,not be farwrongain attributingthe matrixto the middleof the
seventhcentury,if not earlier,and regardingit as the productof the
schoolwhosecentreswereCorinthand Chalcis,and whose functionit was
to elaborateandapplyto freshfieldsthe technicalmethodsproperly belonging
tothe ' gem-engraver,' but dominating at the periodreferredto the industrial
centresof Greeceproper.
- H. STUART JONES