The Corinthian style did not long retain the metallic clearness and precision of its predecessor, neither in its shapes, which for the most part it takes over (Figs. [35], [38], [39], [43],), nor in its decoration, which exhibits the final triumph of the ornamental style. The dark ground technique becomes rarer; the scaly fields continue for a time, white rosettes painted on the black neck and edge are in favour to the end; the indispensable tongue ornament on the shoulder gradually comes to be rendered by the brush. The animal-frieze vases, which are quite in the forefront of the interest, link on to the later Protocorinthian in decoration and in the style of the figures, but soon alter the types in the sense of a broader rendering of form, and the rosettes in the field also show this change. On the common ware, which was turned out along with the good, one gets as a result coarse animals and filling patterns like mere blots; but even technically perfect vases show a strong inclination to overfill the field, which one might bring into causal connexion with the Corinthian textile art famed in antiquity, if the vase picture repudiated the brush technique more than it does.
The composition shows the same intrusion of a strongly decorative element. The heraldic scheme is more prominent than ever. We owe to it the invention of a new ornament, a combination of lotus-flower and palmettes (Fig. [39]), which like the old volute-tree (Fig. [34]) is flanked by two animals. In particular the wineskin-shaped and globular unguent-pots (Figs. [39] and [40]) (Alabastron and Aryballos), the successors of the Protocorinthian unguent-pots, are decorated with it; but even in the stripes, which have not got the ‘palmette and lotus cross,’ there are groups of three animals at a time inspired by the heraldic scheme (Fig. [41]). The list of types grows: beside the quadrupeds appear many birds (e.g. geese, swans, eagles, cocks and owls,) fishes and serpents; a motley series of hybrids, bearded sphinxes, winged lions, winged panthers, tritons and other fabulous creatures are side by side with the favourite winged demons, sphinxes, sirens and griffins. The place of the central ornament is often taken by purely human beings, especially the runner with bent knee, and the goddess of beasts (πὁτνια θἡρων) which in the Oriental patterns are flanked by animals; but also non-ornamental figures, women, riders, grotesque dancers (Figs. [40] and [43]) are found in this place. Thus arises a co-ordination of man and decorative animal similar to that of Protocorinthian art; anyone who has followed on the vases this process, which is characteristic of the 7th century, is not surprised, when in the archaic Corinthian pediment at Corfu mythological scenes appear side by side with the Gorgon flanked by panthers, and when in the representation of the central animal the myth begins to be active.
The non-ornamental human figures in the animal compositions are of course not invented for this purpose, but borrowed from other contexts, scenes of human life, which existed beside the decorative representations and followed the lead of the Protocorinthian precursors. They are certainly more intimately connected with the animal figures. The male figure ([p. 38]) has finally discarded the old outline drawing with brown filling for the animal-frieze technique, black silhouette with incised interior details.
PLATE XXI.
[Fig. 43]. CORINTHIAN SKYPHOS.
[Fig. 44]. ACHILLES AND TROILOS: FROM THE LATE CORINTHIAN FLASK BY TIMONIDAS.