[464]. Suppl. 463.
[465]. E.g. B.M. E 494. See also Chapter [XV].
[466]. See Schol. in Ar. Ran. 218, and J.H.S. xx. p. 110 ff.
[467]. For explanation and parallels see Frazer, Golden Bough, ii. p. 119 ff.
[468]. Raoul-Rochette in Revue Archéol. viii. (1851), p. 112: see also Theocr. xv. 113 ff.
[469]. Revue Archéol. l.c. p. 118; Mart. xi. 19; Pliny, H.N. xix. 59.
[470]. Hist. Plant. vi. 7.
[471]. Pernice in Jahrbuch, 1899, p. 60 ff. He would also regard the so-called σμηματοθήκη (see p. [198]) as a vase of this class; but this seems much more doubtful. See also p. [167], under πλημοχόη.
[472]. Cf. Böhlau, Ion. u. Ital. Nekrop. p. 39; Berlin 1108.
[473]. Pernice’s arguments have been directly impugned by Kouroniotes in Ἐφ. Ἀρχ. 1899, p. 233, and by Robinson in Boston Mus. Report, p. 73; and it certainly seems more probable that metal vessels would have been used for this purpose; moreover, the form of the θυμιατήριον is well known. But he has personally assured the present writer that the clay κώθωνες show traces internally of the use of fire.