¹ U. Knigge uses the figure of the youth on the Akropolis lekythos in her argument that Aison should be identified with the young Meidias Painter, but does not offer an interpretation of the whole scene: ‘Aison, der Meidiasmaler? Zu einer rotfiguren Oinochoe aus dem Kerameikos’, AM 90 (1975) 123–43Google Scholar, pl. 51. For a summary of this argument and points against it see Burn, L., The Meidias painter (Oxford 1987) 12–13Google Scholar.

² Berlin inv.30036. Kahil (n.5) pl.8.2-3.

³ Shapiro, H.A., ‘The origins of allegory in Greek art’, Boreas 9 (1986) 11 n.42. He takes this to be a ‘preparation of a bride’ scene, and the Berlin amphoriskos to be an adaptation of the genre.Google Scholar

⁴ Oakley, J.H. and Sinos, R.H., The wedding in ancient Athens (Wisconsin 1993).Google Scholar

⁵ The lekythos was not found until after the publication of Ghali-Kahil's, L.B.Les enlèvements et le retour d'Hélène (Paris 1955)Google Scholar which supplies many of my parallels (henceforth ‘Kahil’).

⁶ Kahil pls.34.1 (Naples relief 6682) and 2 (Conservatori krater 39G), 35.4 (Vatican relief, Cortile del Belvedere 58d), 37.1 (Pompeii mural, Casa di Amantes, Casa Reg. I 7.7). Cf. Alkibiades on Nemea's lap, (Athen. xii 534d, Plut. Alk. xvi 199; cf. Pind. Isthm. 2.25-6). On the lap-sitting motif, see Robertson, M., The art of vase-painting in Classical Athens (Cambridge 1992) 237Google Scholar and n.9 (Alkibiades and Nemea), 239 (Paidia and Hygieia on a hydria by the Meidias Painter, ARV² 1322, 1), and 146-7 (Berlin amphoriskos).

⁷ Il. iii 421-47; this is a reminiscence of Paris' original seduction of Helen. On the elements of wedding imagery in the scene, see Constantinidou, S., ‘Evidence for marriage ritual in Iliad iii’, Dodona, 1990.2, 47–59Google Scholar: ‘the details mentioned above present the couple's sexual union as an actual wedding’ (57).

⁸ Athens NM 1454; Oakley and Sinos (n.4) 18, figs. 28-9.

⁹ Brouskari describes her as ‘pointing at’ Eros, but if so no one is paying any attention.

¹⁰ Apoll. iii 4.2 and 6.2, Diod. Sik. iv 65.5 and v 49.1, Paus. v 17.7; the bribing is depicted on a pelike by the Chicago Painter, ARV ² 629,23. Eriphyle's necklace was originally a wedding gift to Harmonia from the gods, specifically her mother Aphrodite in Diodoros' version. The seated figure on our lekythos bears a strong resemblance to the seated Aphrodite on the Eretria Painter's contemporary epinetron, who is apparently examining a necklace she holds in her hands, in a scene representing the preparation of the bride Harmonia (Athens NM 1629, Oakley and Sinos (n.4) fig. 128). For divine gifts of necklaces with subversive import, cf. Pandora, decked in golden necklaces by the Charites and Peitho and garlanded with flowers by the Horai, before being sent as a punishment to men (Hes. Op. 73-4).

¹¹ Vatican H 525, ARV ² 1173, Kahil no.72 pl.66, c. 430-425 BC. Cf. a lekythos by the Painter of Leningrad 702 in the Hermitage (ex-Botkin) for a similar scene, where Eros hovers with a phiale, instead of a necklace, from which he is pouring the contents on to Menelaos (ARV ² 1194, 7, Kahil no.70 pl.62, 3). On the name-vase of the Painter of Berlin 2536, in a Judgement of Paris scene, Aphrodite holds Eros in her hand, who again reaches out towards Paris with a taenia, as if to bind him to the goddess' will, although Hermes stands in the way (ARV ² 1287, 1).

¹² In a wedding context the bride or groom is often indicated by an Eros holding out a wreath above their heads: Oakley and Sinos (n.4) 12, e.g. figs. 2, 24, 28, 37, 60, 72, 74, 106.

¹³ LIMC II s.v. ‘Aphrodite’ 185-224.

¹⁴ Beazley and Knigge (n. 1): the youth is ‘pouring oil into his palm’. Brouskari: the bridegroom is ‘pouring out a libation’.

¹⁵ See Oakley and Sinos (n.4) 16 and n.42 for myrrh as usual perfume for bridegroom, and figs. 10-3 for a rare example of the groom's pre-wedding ablutions. Synchronicity: ibid. 8, and see 39 on conflation of bridal preparation with epaulia scenes; see fig. 44 for a naked youth included in what is clearly a wedding-preparation scene, identified by the authors as the ‘future son-in-law’ (23).

¹⁶ Kahil 176; Shapiro 1993 (n.10) 195, with n.441. On the literary portrayal of Paris and Helen's adulterous union as a marriage, see Constantinidou (n.8) and Seaford, R., ‘The tragic wedding’, JHS cvii (1987) 123–7.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Anakalypteria: Oakley and Sinos (n.4) 25, with nn. 17-18. They do not include ‘the visit to the gynaikon’ in their catalogue of wedding imagery.

¹⁸ See Nevett, L., ‘Separation or seclusion? Towards an archaeological approach to investigating women in the Greek household in the fifth to third centuries BC’, in Pearson, M. Parker and Richards, C., Architecture and order: approaches to social space (London and New York 1994) with bibliography.Google Scholar

¹⁹ See e.g. the Dema House at Ano Liossia for a courtyard which must have been crossed by ‘outsider’ men on their way to the andron: Walker, S., ‘Women and housing in Classical Greece: the archaeological evidence’, in Cameron, A. and Kuhrt, A., Images of women in antiquity², (London and New York 1993)Google Scholar, fig. 6.3. Cf. Demosthenes 47.52-61 for the reluctance of a respectable male neighbour to intrude on the women and children of a household, who are lunching in the courtyard while the master of the house is away.

²⁰ E.g. Xen. Oec. 7.30; Blundell, S., ‘In and out of the gynaikeion: women's spaces in Attic vase-painting’, unpublished paper, Classical Association AGM (Nottingham 1996).Google Scholar

²¹ See LIMC I s.v. ‘Adonis’ 45-9 for possible representations of the Adonia. See Oakley and Sinos (n.4) 39-40, with nn.7-8, on ladders in a wedding context, perhaps indicative of a bridal chamber on the first floor.

²² Red-figure lekythos, Karlsruhe, Bad. Landesmuseum B39 (287), circle of the Meidias Painter, c. 390 BC; LIMC I s.v. ‘Adonis’ 47.

²³ Aristoph. Lys. 389-96, Plut. Nik. xiii 7. The vase representations are all late fifth- or early fourth-century: LIMC I s.v. ‘Adonis’. Adonis himself appears on a squat lekythos attributed to Aison (Louvre MNB 2109, ABV ² 1175, 7).

²⁴ Menand. Samia 38-48; see Gomme, A.W. and Sandbach, F.H., Menander: a commentary (Oxford 1973) ad 39–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Bain, D.M. comments ad loc.: ‘The generally relaxed conditions of an orgiastic rite and a lack of the usual protection of the maiden would have given the young man his opportunities’ (Menander: Samia, Warminster 1983)Google Scholar. On gardens of Adonis see Winkler, J.J., The Constraints of Desire (New York 1990) ch.7, esp. 189–93Google Scholar, where he lists the literary evidence.

²⁵ See Burn (n.l) 12-3 on the possible master-pupil relationship between Aison and the Meidias Painter, and ibid. 32-44 on romantic escapism in the latter's depiction of personifications, Adonis and Phaon.

²⁶ On vase-painting as reflecting ‘the attitudes and preoccupations’ of Athenian society c. 430-400, see L. Burn, ‘The art of the state in late fifth-century Athens’, in M.M. Mackenzie and C. Roueché (eds.), Images of Authority, PCPS suppl. 16 (1989) 62-81.