This pdf of your paper in Athenian Potters and Painters Volume III

belongs to the publishers Oxbow Books and it is their copyright.

As author you are licenced to make up to 50 offprints from it, but be-
yond that you may not publish it on the World Wide Web until three
years from publication (August 2017), unless the site is a limited
access intranet (password protected). If you have queries about this
please contact the editorial department at Oxbow Books (editorial@
oxbowbooks.com).
 An offprint from

Athenian Potters
and Painters
Volume III

edited by
John H. Oakley

Hardcover Edition: ISBN 978-1-78297-663-9

Digital Edition: ISBN 978-1-78297-664-6

© Oxbow Books 2014

Oxford & Philadelphia

www.oxbowbooks.com
Published in the United Kingdom in 2014 by
OXBOW BOOKS
10 Hythe Bridge Street, Oxford OX1 2EW

and in the United States by

OXBOW BOOKS
908 Darby Road, Havertown, PA 19083

© Oxbow Books and the individual authors 2014

Hardcover Edition: ISBN 978-1-78297-663-9

Digital Edition: ISBN 978-1-78297-664-6

A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Control Number: 2010290514

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any
means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage
and retrieval system, without permission from the publisher in writing.

Printed in the United Kingdom by Short Run Press, Exeter

For a complete list of Oxbow titles, please contact:

UNITED KINGDOM
Oxbow Books
Telephone (01865) 241249, Fax (01865) 794449
Email: oxbow@oxbowbooks.com
www.oxbowbooks.com

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Oxbow Books
Telephone (800) 791-9354, Fax (610) 853-9146
Email: queries@casemateacademic.com
www.casemateacademic.com/oxbow

Oxbow Books is part of the Casemate Group

Front cover: Attic black-figure amphora, Berlin F1685. Photo: bpk, Berlin/
Antikensammlung, Staatliche Museen, Berlin, Germany/Ingrid Gesk /Art Resource, NY.
Back cover: Attic white-ground lekythos attributed to the Thanatos Painter. Boston, Museum
of Fine Arts 01.8080, Henry Lillie Pierce Fund. Photo: © 2013 Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
 This volume is dedicated to H. A. Shapiro

The honoree at the conference

(Photo: William Kahlenberg)

Contents
Foreword........................................................................................................................................................................vii

1 Fallen Vessels and Risen Spirits: Conveying the Presence of the Dead on White-ground Lekythoi
Nathan T. Arrington.................................................................................................................................................. 1

2 Under the Tuscan Soil: Reuniting Attic Vases with an Etruscan Tomb
Sheramy D. Bundrick.............................................................................................................................................. 11

3 Regional Variation: Pelops and Chrysippos in Apulia

T. H. Carpenter....................................................................................................................................................... 22

4 Baskets, Nets and Cages: Indicia of Spatial Illusionism in Athenian Vase-painting

Beth Cohen.............................................................................................................................................................. 30

5 Red-figured Cups in the Kerameikos

Heide Frielinghaus................................................................................................................................................. 40

6 Smikros and Epilykos: Two Comic Inventions in Athenian Vase-painting

Guy Hedreen........................................................................................................................................................... 49

7 Facing West: Athenian Influence on Isolated Heads in Italian Red-figure Vase-painting

Keely Elizabeth Heuer............................................................................................................................................ 63

8 The Gigantomachy in Attic and Apulian Vase-Painting. A New Look at Similarities, Differences and Origins
Frank Hildebrandt.................................................................................................................................................. 72

9 Plates by Pasteas
Mario Iozzo............................................................................................................................................................. 80

0 Some Greek Vases in the Museum of Mediterranean Archaeology at Nir David (Gan Hashlosha) Israel
1
Sonia Klinger.......................................................................................................................................................... 98

1 Trade of Athenian Figured Pottery and the Effects of Connectivity

1
Kathleen Lynch and Stephen Matter..................................................................................................................... 107

2 Beautiful Men on Vases for the Dead

1
Thomas Mannack.................................................................................................................................................. 116

13 The View from Behind the Kline: Symposial Space and Beyond
 Contents v

Timothy McNiven.................................................................................................................................................. 125

14 Chariots in Black-figure Attic Vase-painting: Antecedents and Ramifications

Joan R. Mertens.................................................................................................................................................... 134

1 5 “Whom are You Calling a Barbarian?”A Column Krater by the Suessula Painter
J. Michael Padgett................................................................................................................................................ 146

1 6 Good Dog, Bad Dog: A Cup by the Triptolemos Painter and Aspects of Canine Behavior on Athenian Vases
Seth D. Pevnick..................................................................................................................................................... 155

1 7 A Scorpion and a Smile: Two Vases in the Kemper Museum of Art in St. Louis
Susan I. Rotroff..................................................................................................................................................... 165

1 8 Demographics and Productivity in the Ancient Athenian Pottery Industry

Philip Saperstein................................................................................................................................................... 175

1 9 An Amazonomachy Attributed to the Syleus Painter

David Saunders..................................................................................................................................................... 187

2 0 Democratic Vessels? The Changing Shape of Athenian Vases in Late Archaic and Early Classical Times
Stefan Schmidt....................................................................................................................................................... 197

2 1 A Kantharos in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston and the Reception of Athenian Red-figure in Boeotia
Phoebe Segal......................................................................................................................................................... 206

2 2 Oikos and Hetairoi: Black-figure Departure Scenes Reconsidered

Martina Seifert...................................................................................................................................................... 215

2 3 The Robinson Group of Panathenaic Amphorae

H. A. Shapiro......................................................................................................................................................... 221

2 4 Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner? Red-figure Komasts and the Performance Culture of Athens
Tyler Jo Smith....................................................................................................................................................... 231

2 5 Menelaos and Helen in Attic Vase Painting

Mark D. Stansbury-O’Donnell.............................................................................................................................. 242

2 6 Attic Black-figure and Red-figure Fragments from the Sanctuary of Apollo at Mandra on Despotiko
Robert F. Sutton and Yannos Kourayos................................................................................................................ 253

2 7 The Attic Phiale in Context. The Late Archaic Red-figure and Coral-red Workshops
Athena Tsingarida................................................................................................................................................. 263

Color Plates 1–32......................................................................................................................................................... 273

22  Oikos and Hetairoi: Black-figure Departure
Scenes Reconsidered
Martina Seifert
An Attic black-figure belly amphora in Karlsruhe (Fig. 1)
attributed to the Painter of Munich 1410 and conventionally
dated soon after 530 BC1 shows in the central part of side
A a scene comprising fifteen figures and one quadriga. On
the left, two bearded men looking to the right are depicted:
the one in front, who is dressed in a long garment (xystis),
stands in the carriage holding the reins with both hands,
while the man in the back, who is clad in a warrior’s
armor stands with one leg on the ground, the other in the
chariot box. Directly in front of and looking at both men
is a woman dressed in a richly decorated garment and
mantle. She balances a small naked child on her shoulders.
The child raises its right hand towards the warrior’s face.
Looking in the same direction und partly covered by the
backs of the horses are another warrior, a white haired
bearded man – the opaque white has flaked off – , and a
woman, each with a child on their shoulders. Next, two
naked, short-haired boys are attending the horses. A third
warrior with a lance turned towards a bearded man clad
in a mantle and a woman with a child conclude the scene.
The picture lacks inscriptions.
A very similar scene, although composed of fewer
figures, is displayed on an Attic black-figured belly
amphora in Rome, Vatican Museums 1770 (Fig. 2)2 which
is dated to the middle of the sixth century BC. There are 9
figures: To the left, an armed warrior stands in the chariot
box accompanied by a bearded man, both of whom face a
woman carrying a child. Next to her a second warrior with
two lances and a white-haired man are depicted; both are
half-covered by the backs of one white and three black
horses constituting the quadriga. In front of the horses’
forelegs there stands a small male figure with drapery
over one arm. Another woman with a child completes the
group on the right half of the image. On this vase, too,
there are no inscriptions.
Both scenes belong to a group of images commonly
denoted by scholars as a “warrior’s departure, warrior’s
farewell” or in German “Kriegerabschied”. The theme
is represented in various ways: departing on horseback,
arming, departing on foot, or performing a libation or
hepatoscopy.3 The various types of scenes appear at
different times and have a different duration of use. The
departing warrior in a chariot (see Mertens in this volume),
as shown on both belly amphorai, probably emerges in
the seventh century BC on Corinthian vessels, followed
by the Attic ones. The Attic black-figured scenes are
mainly painted on amphorai, hydriai, lekythoi, kylikes
and column kraters. In red-figure vase painting the subject
is rare.4 Usually the warrior in the chariot is joined by
other heavily-armed men and appears in the middle of a
group of figures of different sexes and ages facing him.
The latter are characterized as non-warriors.5
In the following discussion particular attention will be
paid to the non-warriors, who to my mind play a key role
for the interpretation of the images. By no means minor
characters, they contribute essentially to the image’s
message by differentiating the formulaic rendering of the
main theme and putting it in a wider context. In this paper
I shall focus on the analysis of the function and meaning
of the figures of women and children examining the
development of the ‘warrior’s departure’ and investigating
also the relation between words and images.
The anonymous departure scenes decorating the two
amphorae in Karlsruhe and the Vatican – there are several
others similar to these two – must be discussed in the
context of the so-called mythical warrior’s departures.
From the beginning of the seventh century BC, the
departure of Amphiaraos is arguably the most famous
subject on Corinthian and Tyrhennian vessels (Figs. 36
and 47).8 Induced by his wife Eriphyle, according to the
myth, and at his brother-in-law Adrastos’ (King of Argos)
urging, Amphiaraos goes to war with Thebes, although he
foresaw the unfortunate outcome of the campaign and his
own death. Part of the figurative stock of the later pictorial
transformations of the myth are the warrior entering or
standing in the chariot, a charioteer, a woman carrying a
216 Martina Seifert

child (Eriphyle, Eriphyle with Amphilochos/Alkmaion) Sinos12 and Stansbury-OʼDonnell13 have put forward
and a second heavily-armed man, a hoplite. Inscriptions an interpretation of the minor characters on the non-
on the vases help to identify most of those figures in the inscribed vases as family or clan members, accompanied
scenes with Amphiaraos in the chariot. In addition to by unnamed members at the warrior’s farewell. Therefore,
the persistence of the Amphiaraos episode on vases, the the figures should be understood as representations of
warrior’s departure from home and taking leave of his wife standardized types with a certain meaning, for example
and parents remained an established literary topos: for warrior or wife.14 As regards the composition of the image
example Hector taking leave of Andromache as narrated this would mean – in my words – that the multiplication
in the sixth book of the Iliad (6.399ff.). Bearing in mind of figure types (inter alia here: woman and child) would
such literary traditions and the mythical figures in the be an artistic means to visualize the extended family – in
image, scholars have occasionally seen on some vases contrast to the depiction of just the nuclear family on the
a relationship between the anonymous and the mythical Vatican amphora (Fig. 2).
departure scenes regarding form and content. According Is this a correct interpretation? Maybe, but maybe it is
to Spieß, anonymous departure scenes generally appear possible to devise a more differentiated approach. That’s
one or two decades after the inscribed images. At the why I will now focus on an analysis of the meaning and
beginning, there were the mythical scenes which are the function of the women and children in the images.
clearly recognizable by the inscribed names of the figures; Reichardt15 stresses that Eriphyle in the mythical scenes
in the course of time the mythical scenes then would have represents the figurative type of a woman who – by the
been replaced by the anonymous scenes.9 infant – is characterized as mother and at the same time as
If we accept this line of argumentation, we would have
to assume that the scene on the Vatican amphora (Fig. 2)
is a pictorial set-piece derived from the Amphiaraos-theme
and can be interpreted as showing Amphiaraos’ departure,
even if it lacks inscriptions: In this case, it would implicitly
refer to the departure of the armed Amphiaraos standing
in the chariot, joined by a charioteer as well as fellow
warriors and taking leave of his wife Eriphyle, his sons
Amphilochos and Alkmaion, his parents, and a slave.
However, it is the prevailing opinion in scholarship that
the image does not show the myth but depicts a generally
understandable episode of exemplary nature through
unnamed figures: The farewell of the “heroic” warrior
from his family members.10 This main theme is connected
with the basic iconographic pattern, which can generally
be linked to mythical themes by the use of inscriptions,
but remains comprehensible even without them.
The whole setting, that is the composition of the scene,
indicates a distinctive hierarchy between the figures. The
warrior with his charioteer standing in the carriage with the
centrally positioned team of horses is the leading character.
As indicated by the orientation of the bodies and the lines
of view connecting the figures, the whole group’s attention
concentrates on the warrior. The woman standing to the
left with child, for example, is directly correlated to him
by physical closeness. Through composition, context is
established, which dictates the placement of the figures.
It is clear that this basic iconographic scheme originally
created for images of Amphiaraos is used for the scene
on the amphora in Karlsruhe (Fig. 1), even if the scene
is expanded by six figures. Once again, the composition
of the image reveals a hierarchy between the figures
expressed by the arrangement, proportions, habitus, and
clothing of the figures. Interaction is indicated by gestures.
Nevertheless, the composition as a whole is clearly
focused on the warrior in the chariot. Fig. 1 Attic black-figure amphora, Painter of Munich 1410.
In analogy with the departure scenes of mythical Karlsruhe, Badisches, Landesmuseum 61.89. Photo: after CVA
warriors, scholars like Wrede11 or in recent years Oakley/ Karlsruhe 3 Germany 60 pl. 12,1.
 22  Oikos and Hetairoi: Black-figure Departure Scenes Reconsidered 217

Fig. 2 Attic black-figure amphora. Attributed to Near Group E. Rome, Vatican 1770. Photo: after Wrede 1916 pl. XVII.

Fig. 3 Corinthian column-krater. Lost, Berlin Antikensammlung F 1655. Photo: after A. Furtwängler – K. Reichhold, Griechische
Vasenmalerei III (1932) pl. 121.

wife. In the anonymous images – which she terms pictures
of the world of life or Lebenswelt16 – the woman generally
signifies the family left behind. According to Reichert a
figurative type in a mythical context produces a specific,
in a non-mythical context a generalizing, message of the
image. In contrast, I think that the same abstract concepts
of representation constitute the basis of both pictorial
groups, the mythical and the non-mythical, and that
those concepts represent the form of social organization
of Athenian society relating to the categories of age, sex
and status.
To support this theory, we must take a closer look at
the iconographical characterization of the figures. Those in
the Karlsruhe departure scene (Fig. 1) are distinguished in
relation to sex, status and – if necessary for the message –
age. Size, habitus and clothing or nakedness are a further
means of differentiating the figures. The female figures
apparently represent upper class women without specific
physiognomy of age (signifiers are again habitus, clothing,
hair dress and the homogenous rendering of their faces).
The naked children carried by the women are little boys
– girls are always shown clothed in Athenian art of this
time. By being carried, the boys are denoted as dependent
on the women’s care. In the anonymous scenes a kinship
relation between the depicted women and children (like
mother/child, grandmother/grandchild, sister/brother) or a
218 Martina Seifert
Fig. 4 Attic black-figure amphora. Chiusi, Museo Etusco 1794. Photo: after Wrede 1916 pl. XXVII.
kind of caring relationship between the two (like mother
or nurse) is not indicated in how the figures are drawn.
Therefore, a fixed interpretation of the group showing
woman and child as denoting the female figure as wife
and mother in mythological scenes and as the family
in non-mythical scenes seems to be too narrow or even
misleading. The Amphiaraos-scenes indicate kinship
relations between warrior and woman by the identification
of the figures through inscriptions. So the interpretation
as mother/wife results from the inscribed names and the
viewer’s implicit knowledge of the myth, not from an
inscribed term like ‘family’.
In ancient Greek there is no word for family as we
understand it nowadays, be it the nuclear family or the
extended family consisting of blood relatives of different
degrees. The Greek word “oikos” means household and
designates an economic entity comprising all persons as
members, regardless of age, status and assets. According to
my analysis the pictorial elements “woman” and “carried
infant” are a pictorial code which as pars pro toto stands
for the social organizational form “oikos”, both in mythical
and non-mythical scenes, as well as in specific contexts.
A further differentiation, for example, of the status of the
woman within the oikos or her gender role, is subject to
the pictorial context.
With this in mind, I shall now outline the preliminary
conclusions that may be drawn from my analysis as
regards interpretation of anonymous departure scenes
in looking again at the amphora in Karlsruhe (Fig. 1).
Understanding each woman in the Karlsruhe scene
carrying a child as a separate element of the picture and
assuming that each refers to an oikos, the repetition of
this code serves to visualize different households and
not to visualize the extended family as has been assumed
by scholars. The three women wear nearly identically
decorated cloths which lead to the conclusion that they
represent persons of equal rank within the oikos, but not
servants or nurses.
This interpretation corresponds with historical tradition.
Cohen believes that at least during the sixth century BC
Athenian society consisted of different households which
stood in an indirect, communicative relationship to each
other.17 The clear division of the elite into single, largely
autonomous oikoi independent of each other, which were
not connected by nature, that is kinsman-like relationships,
necessarily implies that the oikos as a social unit was the
reference point for the actions of the individual aristoi.
On the Vatican amphora (Fig. 2) the departing warrior’s
status is stressed by the demonstration of his role as head
of the oikos and the richness of his household. Material
wealth is denoted by his armor, the chariot with one white
and three black horses, and the presence of fellows, maybe
a hetairos, as well as a boy attending the horses and a
slave. The continuity of his family line is denoted by the
old man and the women carrying children.
The image on the amphora in Karlsruhe (Fig. 1) not
only represents the dominating economic strength of the
departing warrior – the horses cover the complete centre
of the image and screen a good portion of the figures
behind – but it also reflects that fellows from separate
households go to war jointly. The warrior in the chariot
is set apart from the others not the least by the formal
 22  Oikos and Hetairoi: Black-figure Departure Scenes Reconsidered
composition of the image, for the scene represents the
individual superiority of the chariot’s owner within a
specific hierarchy of the upper class18 (a model oikos
versus a clan or extended family).
The images presented in this paper illustrate the concept
of a competitively structured society. It is no coincidence
that the series of depictions of a warrior’s departure by
chariot – explicitly connected to the aristoi – comes to
an end in the later sixth century BC. The sociopolitical
changes induced by the Kleisthenic reforms also affected
forms of social organization which are then reflected by
the images.
Conclusion
The theory which I have suggested is transferrable to other
pictorial themes of the sixth and fifth centuries BC. It also
can be applied to other media, like Attic votive reliefs.
However, a precondition for this would be to take these
depictions as constructs in a specific historical context.
The language of the images can only be understood within
the narrative and the composition of the individual scene.
A knowledge of the forms of social organization and the
terms used to identify them, as well as literary evidence
constitutes an important basis for the understanding of
the images.
Abbreviations
Spieß 1992 A. B. Spieß, Der Kriegerabschied auf
attischen Vasen der archaischen Zeit
(1992)
Killet 1996 H. Killet, Zur Ikonographie der Frau
auf attischen Vasen archaischer und
klassischer Zeit, 2nd ed. (1996)
Siurla-
Theodoridou 1989 V. Siurla-Theodoridou, Die Familie in
der griechischen Kunst und Literatur
des 8. bis 6. Jhs. v. Chr. (1989)
Wrede 1916 W. Wrede, AM 41, 1916, 221–377
Notes
1 Black-figure belly amphora, attributed to the Painter of
Munich 1410, Karlsruhe, Badisches Landesmuseum 61.89;
Para 135,1bis; BAdd2 84; CVA Karlsruhe 3 Germany 60
(pl. 12,1; 13,1; 14,1. 2. 3. – Cf. Spieß 1992, 239 B 295.
302 fig. 33. 303 fig. 34.
2 Black-figure belly amphora, Rome, Vatican Museums
1770, near Group E, middle of sixth century BC, ABV
138,2. – See Killet 1996 67. sf. Vasen 3, 13; Wrede 1916
no. 34 pl. XVII; Spieß 1992 247 B 347. 305 fig. 38.
3 For some images it is hard to decide whether it shows a
warrior’s departure or arrival; see Siurla-Theodoridou 1989
280. I am sure that an ambiguous reading can be assumed
219
here, see M. Seifert, Dazugehören. Kinder in Kulten und
Festen von Oikos und Phratrie. Bildanalysen zu attischen
Sozialisationsstufen des 6. bis 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.
(2011) 62–70.
4 In red-figure vase-painting the farewell scenes concentrate
mostly on departures on foot, cf. H. Luschey, Rechts
und Links. Untersuchungen über Bewegungsrichtung,
Seitenanordnung und Höhenanordnung als Elemente der
antiken Bildsprache (2002) 42.
5 The material has been treated in many publications, see
Spieß 1992 with an overview on the scholarship. Critical
of Spieß 1992 is Killet 1996 64–65; on warrior departures
in general, see Killet 1996 64–90. – See also Wrede 1916
221–377; K. Dahmen, Boreas 19, 1996, 235–240. – On
hepatoscopy: J.  Durand  –  F.  Lissarague, Hephaistos 1,
1979, 92–108; A. Kossatz-Deissmann, AA 96, 1981,
562–576. – So-called “Persian farewell”: M. F. Vos,
Scythian Archers in Archaic Attic Vase-Painting (1963)
31–33; W. Raeck, Zum Barbarenbild in der Kunst Athens
im 6. und 5.  Jh. v.  Chr. (1981) 47–52 – Interpretation
of content: H. A. Shapiro, Metis 5, 1990, 113–126; H.
Hoffmann, Hephaistos 2, 1980, 142–154; I. Scheibler,
JdI 102, 1987, 75–118. – Gender relations: R. F. Sutton,
The Interaction between Men and Women Portrayed on
Attic Red-figure Pottery, Ph.D. diss. (University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1981) 226–232. For fighting
warriors see C. Ellinghaus, Aristokratische Leitbilder
– Demokratische Leitbilder. Kampfdarstellungen auf
athenischen Vasen in archaischer und frühklassischer Zeit
(1997). – Social context: R. T. Ridley, AntCl 48, 1979,
508–548; V. D. Hanson (ed), Hoplites. The Classical Greek
Battle Experience (1991).
6 Lost late Corinthian Krater (Berlin, Antikensammlungen
F 1655), cf. A. Furtwängler – K. Reichold, Griechische
Vasenmalerei III (1932) 1–2 pl. 121; H. Luschey, Rechts
und Links. Untersuchungen über Bewegungsrichtung,
Seitenanordnung und Höhenanordnung als Elemente der
antiken Bildsprache (2002) 42 pl. 10,2.
7 Belly amphora Chiusi, Museo Etrusco 1794; cf. Wrede
1916 42 pl. 27; Killet 1992, 3,23.
8 See P. Sineux, Amphiaraos. Guerrier, devin et guérisseur
(2007); J. H. Oakley, in: Akten des 13. Internationalen
Kongresses für Archäologie, Berlin 1988 (1990) 527–529;
I. Krauskopf, Die Ausfahrt des Amphiaraos auf Amphoren
der tyrrhenischen Gruppe, in: Tainia. Roland Hampe zum
70. Geburtstag am 2. Dezember 1978 (1980) 105–116; P.
Vicaires, BAssBudé 1979, 2–49.
9 Spiess 1992 2–25. 85–89.
10 Also in early vase-painting so-called Lebensbilder without
any mythological connotation are depicted, cf. K. Fittschen,
Untersuchungen zum Beginn der Sagendarstellungen bei
den Griechen (1969) 201; L. Giuliani, Bild und Mythos.
Geschichte der Bilderzählung in der griechischen Kunst
(2003) 63–64. 133–134.
11 Wrede 1916, 221–377.
12 J. H. Oakley – R. H. Sinos, The Wedding in Ancient Athens
(1993).
13 M. Stansbury-O’Donnell, Vase Painting, Gender, and
Social Identity in Archaic Athens (2006) 1–3.
14 Cf. C. Ellinghaus, Aristokratische Leitbilder – Demokratische
Leitbilder. Kampfdarstellungen auf athenischen Vasen in
archaischer und frühklassischer Zeit (1997) 255.
220 Martina Seifert
15 B. Reichardt, in: M. Meyer (ed.), Besorgte Mütter und
sorglose Zecher. Mythische Exempel in der Bilderwelt
Athens (2007) 13–93.
16 See B. Reichardt, in: Meyer (supra n. 15) 21 n. 55. 27
refering to A. Möller in: H. J. Gehrke – A. Möller (ed.),
Vergangenheit und Lebenswelt (1996) 5–8.
17 E. E. Cohen, The Athenian Nation (2001) 9. With this
assumption he argues against scholars who deduce the
development of Athenian society from a “face-to-face-
society”, like H.-J. Hölkeskamp, in: H.-J. Gehrke (ed.),
Rechtskodifizierung und soziale Normen im interkulturellen
Vergleich (1994) 140. 142 who concurs with M. I. Finley,
Past and Present 21, 1962, 3–24; see also J. Ober, Mass
and Elite in Democratic Athens (1989) 31–33.
18 The social and economic position of the warrior as a
member of the “elite” is stressed by the chariot, cf. P.
Schollmeyer, Antike Gespanndenkmäler (2001) 117. See
also Ellinghaus (supra n. 5) 250–251. 252.