^{page 201 note 1} NC, 160.

^{page 201 note 2} Scranton, R. L., Hesperia v, 1936, 236Google Scholar:—‘The straight iota occurs with increasing frequency after the middle of the (sixth) century, until at the beginning of the fifth century it becomes the standard form’; Rhomaios, K. A., Korkyra i, 1940, p. 123Google Scholar, (on the Calydon revetments): ‘Ein Zeichen der späteren Zeit (mid-sixth century) ist es, dass das Jota stets mit einem senkrechten Strich geschrieben wird, was erst in der zweiten Hälfte des VI Jhdt. durchgängig üblich wurde’; Smith, H. R. W., The Hearst Hydria (Univ. Cal. Pub. Class. Arch, i, no. 10), 1944, p. 260 and n. 137Google Scholar:— ‘On the inscription at Delphi, which was probably engraved soon after the fall of the Kypselids (Necrocorinthia 160, n. 2), the one iota which is still readable is straight. The straight iota is later than either of the crooked forms, a point stressed by Payne himself in his discussion of the kouros from Dodona … (op. cit. 238, n. 5). The argument is not altogether decisive, as there are a few sporadic examples of straight iota which are (or may be) earlier than the Amphiaraos krater (Payne, op. cit. 160)’; Kunze, JdI 1938, Olympiabericht II, 88 (on a bronze relief strip):— ‘Zwar ist I als iota nicht eigentlich korinthisch, gleichwohl erscheint es gelegentlich in sicher korinthischen Inschriften schon des sechsten Jahrhunderts an Stelle des sonst üblichen oder (Payne 160).’

^{page 201 note 3} Orchomenus, , BCH xix, 1895, 221Google Scholar; Delphi, , FD v, 123 f.Google Scholar, no. 674; Olympia, , Ol. iv, 101 ff.Google Scholar, nos. 699, 699a. Two other inscribed fragments from Olympia (no. 700a and an unnumbered fragment published with it) are, as Kunze points out (JdI, loc. cit.), replicas of the Aristodamos and Aias relief; 700b also appears to contain part of Aristodamos’ name.

^{page 202 note 1} The normal Corinthian form of Ion should in any case be Fἱων (cf. Payne, NC inscription-list, nos. 34 and 46; Fick-Bechtel, Griech. Personennamen, 129).

^{page 203 note 1} NC. 160, n. 1.

^{page 203 note 2} Examples in Payne's catalogue of and on the same vase are nos. 1408, 1410, 1412, 1443, 1446–7, 1471–2 (both assigned to the Amphiaraos painter), 1477, 1483; on the vases assigned to the Tydeus painter, we find both (1399), and (1436–7, 1481), but 1399 is a nonsense-inscription. Cf. further Lejeune, , REA xlvii, 1945, 106Google Scholar, n. 3.

^{page 203 note 3} AA 1923–4, 75 ff., figs. 14–15.

^{page 203 note 4} R. J. Hopper pointed out to me that no. 74 in Payne's inscription-list (krater-fragment in Bonn; not included in the vase-catalogue) was later published in AA 1936, 359 and fig. 15. In the badly-defaced names (Διομἑδες ΑἱFας) the iotas were read by Payhe as (a) and (b) defaced. In the AA drawing, they appear rather to be straight, but at an acute angle, like the lower stroke of a crooked iota.

^{page 203 note 5} Poulsen-Rhomaios, Erster Bericht, 22 ff; Dyggve-Poulsen-Rhomaios, Kalydon, 4; Payne, NC, 235 ff., 249 f., 255 f.; IG ix², i, 152; Rhomaiös, , Ἀρχ. Ἐφ. 1937, 301 and 314, n. 2Google Scholar; Rhomaios, , Korkyra i, 123.Google Scholar The revetments were dated by Payne in the first quarter of the sixth century, but Rhomaios now believes that they should be brought down to the middle of the century (see above, p. 201, n. 2).

^{page 204 note 1} Corinth iv, i, p. 8; ᾿Αρχ. ᾿Εφ 1937, 314, n. 2. This fact had not been realised when Payne made his remarks on the provenance of the revetment (NC, 250).

^{page 204 note 2} In the four other published archaic inscriptions from Calydon, the Troilos metope (7th c.;. IG ix², i, 153; Erster Bericht, pl. xxiv, fig. 30) shows half an iota, generally read as the boundary-stone of Apollo Laphrios (᾿Αρχ. Δελτ x, 1926, Παρἁρτ 39 and fig. 14; IG ix², i, 149) shows Ι = ι, Μ = σ, as on the revetments. The other two, both 5th c, show already the later forms Ι = ι, Σ = σ, Η and (Erster Bericht, pl. III, fig. 3 (= IG ix², i, 150) and Kalydon, fig. 3).

^{page 204 note 3} AD ii, pls. 49–53a; Rhomaios, ᾿Αρχ. Δελτ ii, 1916, 186 ff.; Payne, , NC, 96, n. 3, and 160 ff.Google Scholar; IG ix², i, 86. In spite of the usual interpretation of these metope-inscriptions as Corinthian, it seems at least possible that they are all good local Aetolian, i.e., in the Achaean alphabet. The Ε = ε, = ι, Μ = σ, ψ = χ, are all normal Achaean forms; the two non-Achaean letters would be the Β = ε, occurring once (᾿Αρχ. Δελτ ii, 1916, 188), and Χ = χ in Chelidon's name. Of these two, the first was read provisionally in the preliminary report, but I have seen no confirmation of the reading, or facsimile copy; the text copy of ᾿Αρχ. Δελτ loc. cit., was reproduced without comment in IG ix², i, 86, 5. In the second case, the first reproduction (᾿Εφ. ᾿Αρχ. 1903, pl. 5) appears to show the defaced form Ν, overpainted in the reproduction to Χ. The metopes are all of local clay (Koch, , AM xxxix, 1914, 238Google Scholar), and Payne admitted the local workmanship of the Charites painting (NC, 160 f., s.v. chi).

^{page 204 note 4} ᾿Αρχ. Δελτ ii, 1916, Παρἁρτ 46, fig. I; Klaffenbach, , Sitz. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 1935, 714 and n. 2.Google Scholar For a further discussion of the Aetolian alphabet, and list of examples, cf. Lejeune, , REA xlvii, 1945, 110 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 5} The archaic inscription from Stratos reported by Kirsten, (N. Jahrb. 1940, 304, Pl. XII, 6; AA 1941, 102)Google Scholar will, when fully published, provide valuable evidence for the early epichoric script of Acarnania. From the only illustration at present available (N. Jahrb., loc. cit.) it appears to be part of a stele, inscribed vertically but in such a way that the lines all read from left to right. The script is reported to be Corinthian; to draw different conclusions from the photograph alone would obviously be unjustified, but according to the latter it appears rather to be Achaean (Ε = ε, = ι, Μ = σ). The lost epitaph believed to be from N. Acarnania (Röhl, Imag. ³, p. 45, no. 14) shows according to the copy Μ = β, Β = ε, Ι = ι, Σ = σ, and appears to be early fifth century, its closest parallel being the Megarian alphabet.

^{page 205 note 1} For examples, see pp. 203, n. 2 and 207, n. 8.

^{page 205 note 2} BM. Inscr. iv, 117, no. 952.

^{page 205 note 3} Röhl, Imag. ³, p. 49, nos. 1–2; BCH lxi, 1937, 57 ff., Pl. VII; Payne, NC catalogue no. 1170 (Korkyra ii, 119 and fig. 106); cf. Lejeune, , REA xlv, 1943, 183 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 205 note 4} Hesperia v, 1936, 235 ff.

^{page 205 note 5} Nemea: Biegen, , AJA xxxi, 1927, 432 f.Google Scholar, fig. 10 (McGregor, , Tr. Am. Phil. Ass. lxxii, 1941, 275Google Scholar); Cleonae, : IG iv, 1607Google Scholar; Tiryns: Peek, , AM lxvi, 1941, 198 ff.Google Scholar, Pl. 70; cf. also the seventh-century cup from the Argive (Prosymna), Heraion, AJA xliii, 1939, 425Google Scholar, fig. 13, which bears a graffito in the same alphabet.

^{page 205 note 6} Röhl, Imag. ³ 52 f.; Peek, , AM lix, 1934, 52 ff.Google Scholar, no. 10, Beil. IV, 3 (end of the sixth or early fifth century). For an undoubtedly sixth-century example, cf. the graffito on a sherd from the Athenian Agora, to be published in Hesperia.

^{page 205 note 7} FD III, 3, p. 128, no. 153, fig. 16: de Miré and de La Coste-Messelière, Delphes, p. 28, fig. 18, and p. 312.

^{page 205 note 8} NC, 160, n. 2.

^{page 205 note 9} Cf. H. R. W. Smith, The Hearst Hydria, Part II, passim; Lenschau, , Philologus xci, 1936–1937, 278 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 10} NC, 160, s.v. rho, where Payne noted it once on a Late Corinthian vase together with the usual form P. It also occurs on the bronze weight no. 4, and on a bronze bowl-fragment from Corinth (p. 208), both of which are here assigned to the fifth century. The Delphi inscription was probably cut by a local stonemason, as the forms would be normal in Phocian.

^{page 206 note 1} Lamb, Greek and Roman Bronzes, 88; Neugebauer, Cat. Bronz. Berlin, 107, 111; Langlotz, , Frühgriech. Bild, i, 82Google Scholar, pl. 42a (inscription described opp. eilt. as Corinthian); Payne, NC, 238, n. 5 (straight iota noted as sign of late date), and 245, pl. 46, 2.

^{page 206 note 2} Carapanos, , Dodone i, 68 ff.Google Scholar; Hoffmann, GDI, 1557–1598; Evangelides, , Πρακτικά 1929, 104ff.Google Scholar; 1930, 52ff.; 1931, 83ff.; 1935, 252ff.

^{page 206 note 3} 1931, 8g f.

^{page 206 note 4} loc. cit., 257, no 22.

^{page 206 note 5} Cf. Röhl, Imag. ³ p. 45, no. 15 (IGA 77, no. 332); loc.cit., 253 ff., nos. 10, 12, 16–17, 19, 33, 35 (where the vacillation between Β and Ε occurs, as in the kouros inscription), and 40.

^{page 206 note 6} The origin of the statuette itself is, of course, another matter. It may still be Corinthian, if it can be proved so by appearance and technique; but the inscription should not be used to support the claim for a Corinthian origin.

^{page 207 note 1} AD i, pl. 7, 25 and 28; ii, pl. 24,9, pl. 29, 22 and 23, pl. 39, 12; NC 112 ff. and 160.

^{page 207 note 2} AD ii, pl. 29, 23; NC, 113. This pinax has on the other side a gigantomachy fragment which is to be dated c. 510–500 (NC, loc. cit.), or even the beginning of the fifth century (Rumpf, , Chalk. Vasen i, 149Google Scholar). Pfuhl, (MuZ i 212Google Scholar) and Payne both regarded the two pictures as contemporary, though the chariot-scene with the inscription is the more archaic in general appearance.

^{page 207 note 3} AD i, pl. 7, 25; last quarter of the sixth century? (shows the influence of early Attic red-figure, Rumpf, op. cit. 148 f.; Payne, NC 112). In this connexion, it may also be observed that on one of the wooden pinakes from Pitsa (unpublished; preliminary notices in AJA xxxix, 1935, 5 and 134), the iota where it occurs is the type; T. J. Dunbabin informs me that stylistically it can hardly antedate the last decade of the sixth century. A reproduction by M. Gilliéron fils of the pinax was displayed in the National Museum in September 1947, and I am indebted to Ch. Karouzos and A. Orlandos for permission to mention it here.

^{page 207 note 4} Hesperia vii, 1938, 584, no. 63, fig. 11. The iota is not clear in the photograph, but an examination of the oinochoe itself confirmed it as

^{page 207 note 5} For examples of fifth-century and later inscriptions on local stone, cf. Corinth VIII, i, nos. 7, 22, 28, 32, 35, 69, 128, 224, 225, 242 (?—possibly earlier).

^{page 207 note 6} Perachora i, 256 ff., nos. 1–3 (spit dedications); IG iv, 358 (Deinias grave-stele).

^{page 207 note 7} Corinth VIII, i, 1 ff., no. 1 (fragment of a sacral calendar, found on the terrace of the temple of Apollo, 25 m. SE of the SE corner of the temple, and usually dated on general grounds to the first half of the sixth century. This is possible only if it can be assigned to an earlier temple than the existing one, which is now dated to the third quarter of the sixth century; cf. Hesperia viii, 1939, i ff.); 34 f., nos. 26–7; 49, no. 61; AM 1934, 44 f., fig. 1 and Beil, IV, 4. The script in all these examples is considerably more advanced than that of the Deinias stele.

^{page 207 note 8} type, IG iv, 358; Corinth VIII, 1, nos. 26 and 61; AM iix, loc. cit.; Perachora i, 262, no. 2 (?—reading uncertain; cf. ibid., n. 6). type, Corinth VIII, I, no. 1; Perachora i, 261 ff., nos. 1 and 3.

^{page 207 note 9} IG I², 927. The same late forms of iota, rho and upsilon occur on a bronze mirror-handle from the temenos of Hera Limenia at Perachora, (Perachora i, 180, pl. 80, 13)Google Scholar; T. J. Dunbabin informs me that the shape is not early, and may well be fifth century.

^{page 208 note 1} IG iv, 352–3, and the Tanagra inscription at Olympia (01. v, no. 253). The traditional view of the latter as Corinthian script (Kirchhoff, Studien ⁱ, 105) would imply the loss of the characteristic Β = ε by the mid-fifth century. It has been suggested that it is more likely to be in a form of koine, deliberately used in this offering at ‘international’ Olympia in preference to the epichoric Laconian or Corinthian (Wolters, , Philologus lxxxiv, 1928, 134).Google Scholar

^{page 208 note 2} AJA xxxv, 1931, if., fig. 1 (dated there to the first half of the sixth century, which would make it a near contemporary of the Cypselid bowl (Bull. Mus. Boston xxiv, 1926, 50; cf. Smith, The Hearst Hydria, 258 f.); but the wide spacing of the letters, the almost tailless Ε, tailed ( and straight iota all point to a later date).

^{page 208 note 3} IG iv, 351.

^{page 208 note 4} Corinth VIII, i, 30 f., no. 22. This example may be slightly later than the rest (mid-fifth century?), since the epichoric Μ has given way to sigma but the Β = ε is still used. Cf. with this the inscription on a bronze statuette of Polycleitan type found at Bologna, now in the Bibliothèque Nationale (Babelon-Blanchet, Cat. des Bronzes, pp. 45 f., no. 98; Thraemer in RE s.v. Asklepios, col. 1642; Jantzen, , Bronzewerkstätten in Grossgriechenland u. Sizilien, 1937, 64Google Scholar, no. 9, pl. XVII, 67–8; Lehmann, , Statues on Coins, 1946, 21Google Scholar, pl. IV, fig. 7). The statuette is attributed to Tarentum by Jantzen, and to Selinus by Miss Lehmann. As the latter points out (loc. cit.), there is nothing Tarentine about the inscription. It partly corresponds with examples of fifth-century Selinuntine, the exceptions being the and where the Selinus examples show and (cf. the victory inscription, Röhl Imag. ³ p. 55, no. 12; the defixiones from the Malophoros, sanctuary, MA xxxii, 1927, 385 ff.Google Scholar and SEG iv, 37–8; the stelai from the same area, MA ibid., 379 ff., nos. 2, 6 and 7; no. 3, an exception, has P). On the whole, therefore, it seems most likely to be Corinthian.