Representations of Herakles' combat with Kyknos on Attic blackand early red-figure vases depend more closely on the pseudo-Hesiodic Shield of Herakles than has previously been recognized. Lydos had a major role in shaping the iconography of the myth. The great popularity of the scene in Attica, despite the relative unimportance of the story in Herakles' career, is ascribed both to the literary source and to the conspicuous part played by Athena as warrior goddess. The unusual version of the myth on a recently published calyx-krater by Euphronios is reconsidered within the context of the iconographic development of the story. The recent publication of a calyx-krater by Euphronios has called attention to a myth which has received little interpretive study, despite its enormous popularity in Attic vase-painting: Herakles' combat with the Thessalian brigand and son of Ares, Kyknos.' The vase provides a salutary reminder that in the iconography of Greek art there are no strict rules, and a new example of an old and familiar theme may contain a surprise or two. Euphronios was almost always innovative in his iconography. For this krater, instead of introducing a subject new to vase-painting, as he did on the Sarpedon krater in New York,2 he chose a myth popular in Athens for half a century and recast it in his own inimitable style. In so doing he introduced several elements which are either unique among all extant versions of the myth or quite rare and puzzling, although not unparalleled. At the same time, Euphronios shares with several earlier interpreters of this myth, especially Lydos, a dependence on a well known literary source which I believe is closer than has previously been recognized. Thus Herakles and Kyknos illustrate two principles of iconography which have too often been treated as incompatible: a known literary model can, in the first instance, be helpful in elucidating the details of a painted scene, yet still leave room for the creative reworkings of an individual artist. To date, over 100 representations of Herakles and Kyknos are known in Attic vase-painting, making this one of the most popular Herakles scenes in the Archaic period.3 The subject also occurs once in each of six non-Attic fabrics,4 of which one example-a Corinthian fragment (pl. 68, fig. 1)"is contemporary with the earliest Attic scenes; but it is clearly most at home in Athens. Black-figured versions outnumber red by about eight to one, and about three-quarters of all these vases fall into the second half of the sixth century, when almost all episodes involving Herakles are most popular. The frequency of the scene tapers off after 500; the cup by the Kleophrades Painter in the British Museum, classed by Beazley with the artist's later works and dated a little after 480,6 is perhaps the latest extant example. In a careful study of the iconography of Herakles and Kyknos, now out of date, Vian grouped the vases according to the presence or absence of certain figures or other elements.' Thus, the "complete scene" includes Herakles and Kyknos, assisted by Athena and Ares, respectively, with Zeus intervening in the cen* A brief version of this paper was delivered at the Annual Meeting of the AIA in Vancouver, December 1978. For suggestions and bibliographical help, I would like to thank J.R. Guy and R.D. Lamberton. The following special abbreviation is used: Vian F. Vian, "Le combat d'Hbraklas et de Kyknos d'aprbs les documents figures du VIe et du Ve siicle," REA 47 (1945) 5-32. SThe most recent publication of this vase, now in the Hunt Collection in Dallas, is in Wealth of the Ancient World (Fort Worth 1983) cat. no. 6 (J. Cody). The vase was previously on loan to the J. Paul Getty Museum: M. Robertson, "Euphronios at the Getty," GettyMusJ 9 (1981) 29-34. Details about the acquisition of the vase are not known, and so its archaeological value is minimal. 2 New York 1972.11.10: BullMMA Fall 1972, cover and passim. 3 F. Brommer, Vasenlisten zur griechischen Heldensage3 (Marburg 1973) 102-107, lists a total of 122 Attic vases, of which two almost certainly do not depict Kyknos: 103, A14 above (Tarquinia RC 979) and 104, A22 (Leningrad St. 59). 103, A14 and 15 below are the same vase, and 107, B1 and 7 are the same vase. 4 Brommer (supra n. 3) 107. 5 Amsterdam, Allard.Pierson Museum 3410: H. Payne, Necrocorinthia (Oxford 1931) 131; 330, no. 1472; fig. 45bis. 6 J. Boardman, "The Kleophrades Painter's Cup in London," GettyMusJ 1(1974) 12. 7 Vian. 5-32. Earlier discussions of Herakles and Kyknos, with catalogues of representations, are those by R. Engelmann, "Herakles und Erginos," AZ 37 (1879) 186-96; H. Heydemann, "Tazza cornetana di Pamphaios," Adl 52 (1880) 78-100; A. Balsamo, in Studi di Filologia Greca 1 (1899) 12. Of discussions more recent than Vian's, the fullest is that of S. Karouzou, "Fragments d'un cratbre i volutes provenant de la collection H1Plne Stathatos," BCH 79 (1955) 177-204. American Journal of Archaeology 88 (1984) 523 This content downloaded from 157.55.39.148 on Sun, 12 Jun 2016 05:14:02 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 524 H.A. SHAPIRO [AJA 88 ter. A second type has the same composition, but without the central Zeus. In one variant, the chariots of the two combatants flank the scene; in another, the duel is framed by female onlookers. Either Athena or Ares may be absent, and there is, finally, the monomachy: Herakles and Kyknos alone. There is no need here to rehearse Vian's findings in greater detail, except to suggest that one of his conclusions regarding the iconographical development of the scene should probably be modified in the light of several examples that were not known to him. Vian believed that the "complete scene" was the earliest version, with the single combat beginning only by about 540.8 But a Siana cup in Basel9 and a lip-cup recently excavated at Lavinium,'o both dating well before 550, prove that the monomachy occurs as early as the fuller scene and possibly a bit earlier.11 At the other end of the chronological spectrum, in late black-figure and in red-figure, we again find instances of both the "complete scene"12 and the single combat,13 as well as most intermediary variants. These occurrences support Vian's thesis14 that in all periods we find, side by side, painted scenes reflecting two distinct literary traditions: one (the fuller version) represented by the pseudo-Hesiodic Shield of Herakles as well as, much later, Apollodorus (2.5.11) and Hyginus (31); the other, the monomachy, deriving from Stesichoros and echoed by Pindar (Olympian 10.15), Euripides (Herakles 389-98), Diodoros (4.37), Pausanias (1.27.6) and a second passage in Apollodorus (2.7.7). The literary tradition about Herakles and Kyknos is unfortunately not as full and varied as this list of authors might suggest. The late writers, as well as Euripides and Pindar, make only passing references to the story. The content of Stesichoros' poem Kyknos is known to us only from a brief summary in a scholiast to Pindar,'15 although we may be fairly certain that, like Stesichoros' other works, the poem had an important influence on Archaic artists.'6 It narrated the encounter in two episodes: in the first, Herakles was obliged to retreat when confronted by both Kyknos and Ares (a story that does not seem to be reflected in any of the vase paintings); then the single combat between Kyknos and Herakles, in which Kyknos was slain, took place. The latter episode, then, should lie behind not only the long series of vases with the single combat, but also three well known works of Archaic sculpture at Athens,17 Delphi'18 and Amyklai in Lakonia.19 Thus, the Shield ofHerakles is the only extant literary source, early or late, which tells the Kyknos story in detail. And, within the context of preserved literary accounts of Herakles' career, the poem is very early indeed. It is remarkable that of the dozens of Herakles' deeds that were depicted in Archaic art, the encounter with Kyknos is the only one for which we have a good and complete early Archaic literary source. This fact alone should justify giving more careful attention to the iconography of this myth than it has received. Whether the Shield is not actually a work of Hesiod, as the consensus of modern scholarship maintains, is a problem primarily for philological inquiry. For our purposes it is sufficient to note that no scholar has placed the composition of the poem later than the early sixth century.20 Thus, we may presume that it was known to the vase-painters, and several of their scenes prove that it was. A geographically widespread familiarity with the Shield of Herakles is suggested by the fact that most