SonderDruck Aus:

BOREAS
Mnstersche Beitrge zur Archologie
Begrndet von Werner Fuchs

Herausgegeben von Hugo Brandenburg, Dieter Korol, Dieter Salzmann,

Magdalene Sldner, Klaus Sthler

Redaktion: Holger Schwarzer

Band 33 2010
 Diana Rodrguez Prez

Contextualizing Symbols: the Eagle and the Snake

in the Ancient Greek World

In the year 1939, Rudolf Wittkower began his article about the eagle and the serpent1 with an im-
portant remark on the methods of the diffusionist ethnologists. These scholars dealt with the
migration of symbols as such, regardless of the historical period in which they evolved and got
transformed. Wittkower rightly criticizes this approach because, for the good understanding of
a symbol, it is not enough to know where it comes from and where it leads, but also, and mainly,
it is of a great importance to understand how it works and worked in the different cultures and
historical periods in which it is present. Thus, the diffusionism must be supplemented by the
functional approach: the attempt to understand the meaning of a particular symbol in a given
context. This shall be the target of the present article: an approach to the significance of one of the
symbols with the strongest presence in the history of humankind: the eagle and the snake.

In the European world this group is always expressive of identical pairs of fundamental opposites.
It is a quasi universal symbol; the eagle and the snake are animals with a great potentiality, a great
capacity for meaning and thus they become symbols2 that embody the most sublime experiences
of the homo religiosus.

When dealing with this group it is common place to list the contraries (if they really are so) that
these two animals symbolise: height/depth, heaven/earth, light/shadow-twilight, to finish with
the foreseeable account of the struggle of the good and the evil adding the names of a god and its
foe correspondent to the period under analysis: Indra/Vritra, Ahura Mazda/Ahriman, Horus/Seth,
Odin/Jrmungandr or even Zeus/Typhon.

This article would not have taken its final form without the valuable and helpful suggestions of Professor Dr. Kai Tram-
pedach (University of Heidelberg), to whom I am indebted. I wish to thank Professor Dr. Tonio Hlscher (University of
Heidelberg), Professor Dr. Reinhard Stupperich (University of Heidelberg) and Professor Dr. Manuel-Antonio Marcos
Casquero (University of Len) for reading the first manuscript and commenting on it thoroughly. Special thanks go to
Geoff Morley (MOLES Archaeology UK) for considerably improving my English text.

1
R. Wittkower, Eagle and Serpent. A Study in the Migration of Symbols, JWCI 4, 1939, 293325. He examines the symbol, its
characteristics and development from its first appearances up to the modern world, especially in a European orbit.

2
Nevertheless, one must be circumspect when using the term symbolism for the ancient Greek world, since the very per-
sonality of the Greek divine impedes the application of the notion of symbolism stricto sensu.
2 Diana Rodrguez Prez

1. A very Greek point of view: the sign that came from the heaven

Nevertheless, when we approach the group from a Greek point of view a different and very specific
meaning becomes evident. As on many other occasions, the starting point for the research is Ho-
mer: here, a passage in the Iliad3 in which the Trojan army is about to attack the Achaeans, is the
first time in a Greek context that the eagle and the snake are joined.

1.1 The Homeric way of reading the signs

In these Homeric verses, the snake and the eagle first appear in Greek literature with a new mea-
ning: as a portentous sign4, an omen directly sent by Zeus5. The reading of the sign by Polydamas
announces the failure of the Trojan expedition. The snake and the eagle, by means of a figurative
analogy6, form a sign expressive of the bad luck that will accompany the Trojans on that occasion.

When Polydamas interprets the portent, he advises Hector not to go forward with the fight against
the Achaeans. He takes the eagle as symbolizing the Trojans, who, in the beginning of the fight,
would be able to break the gates and go against the Achaeans, but, in the end, would have to come
back from the ships in disarray. There is here an implicit identification of one army with the snake
and the other with the eagle. This figurative analogy is possible because there was also another
idea working behind: the ancients, like many other peoples, perceived that a deep and definitive
difference existed between both animals7; the old idea of an antagonistic fight of the opposites
then has a role to play in the Hellenic culture and, apparently, is taken by the writers to decode the

3
Hom. Il. 12, 200210: A bird had come upon them, as they were eager to cross over, an eagle of lofty flight, skirting the host
on the left, and in its talons it bore a blood-red monstrous snake, still alive as if struggling, nor was it yet forgetful of combat,
it writhed backward, and smote him that held it on the breast beside the neck, till the eagle, stung with pain cast it from him
to the ground, and let it fall in the midst of the throng, and himself with a loud cry sped away down the blasts of the wind.
And the Trojans shuddered when they saw the writhing snake lying in the midst of them, a portent of Zeus that beareth the
aegis.

4
The belief in the warning animals finds a base in the folklore and may be derived from sound observations. There are
some attested data about evolved domestic animals that have warned the owner about events that were to happen, which is
possible because of the skill of some animals to feel an impending physical danger unnoticed by humans. This is well-atte-
sted in the higher domestic animals especially in relation with earthquakes, whose vibrations are perceptible to cats, mice
or even smaller animals: A. Krappe, Warning Animals, Folklore 59, 1948, 815. See also, Ael. NA 6, 16. Among the Romans, the
eagle and the snake and the snake alone were also considered ominous animals: Ter. Phorm. 705; Hor. carm. 3, 27, 5; Cic. div.
2, 31; Val. Max. 1, 6. 45; 6, 8.

5
Although undoubtedly linked with Zeus, the eagle is not an embodiment of him. As Mylonas showed, in the Homeric poems,
Zeus is already established at the head of the Olympians, he already possesses the thunderbolt but the eagle does not seem
to be intimately associated with him [...] the eagle in the Homeric poems is the bird of omen, the surest of omens, often
sent by Zeus. Cf. G. Mylonas, The Eagle of Zeus, ClJ 41, 1946, 203.

6
Trampedach 2008, 216.

7
The relationship of the eagle with heights is obvious, it settles on high places because it is slow to be borne up from the
ground. It flies high in order to see over the greatest area; because of this men say that it is divine, alone among birds, Arist.
HA 619 b. Actually, the snake is also divine, but there is also a fundamental difference in their sacredness: the serpent is the
sacred animal of the depths, of the Earth and the shadow while the eagle is the sacred animal of the heights.
Contextualizing Symbols: the Eagle and the Snake in the Ancient Greek World 3

message conveyed by the symbol. It also presupposes knowledge of the symbolism of both animals
separately. This difference prevents Polydamas from taking the snake as an allusion to the Trojans.
Here arises again the everlasting duality referred to before between the good and the evil. Thus, it
is not possible for the Trojans to match themselves with the snake, that role belonged to the evil
Achaeans. However, this idea does not always work in every account by other writers and can neit-
her be taken as a code, as a review of other literary testimonies will help clarify.

1.1.1 On the nature of the Greek omina

Advancing further conclusions, it must be said that I do not believe that the negative aspect of the
future that the sign shows on this particular occasion can be taken as a rule of interpretation for all
the subsequent examples. In other words, I do not think that the meaning zero of the sign must
necessarily be bad omen but just omen, prophetic sign. Its surname, that is to say, the word
good or bad8, will depend, among others, on the direction of the flight of the eagle that holds
the snake in relation to some predicted and preestablished coordinates (which, as we will see, are
impossible to read in the 2D surface of the Greek vase painting). The eagle and the snake appeared
to the Greek in the same way that we find them in the visual arts, as a sign that requires an inter-
pretation, a simile which requires analysis9.

The Greek position towards it is not much different from ours on this occasion. The group appears
as a given sign on which they had to undertake semiotics. Nonetheless, for its decoding, they did
not apply any scientific method, but constructed the discourse on the basis of a figurative analo-
gy10. They did not use any established criteria that could be utilised by us to read the image in the
visual arts. On the contrary, every omen in which an eagle and a snake were concerned was given
a different and peculiar significance. This is the only sense in which we can follow the Greek way
of reading the sign: to take it as a unicum every time it appears. As Trampedach has correctly
put it, not only for the eagle and the snake, but for the entire prophetic phenomenon in the Greek
world, the interpretation follows no definite rule, but requires an ability to combine the figurative
content of the sign with the actual situation11. As it will be further clarified with examples from
the visual arts, for its deciphering, the sign must be contextualized, must be bound to a specific
situation in which it becomes meaningful. Prophetic omina are, then, situativ signs.

This situation does not only apply to the group eagle-snake and must be understood in the wider
frame of the Greek prophecies12. There was no such thing as technical expertise, or prophetic

8
Some authors thought this group is mainly negative: Schmidt 1983, 61. Nevertheless, she is also cautious and affirms (p.71)
that diese negative Bedeutung mu nicht in allen Epochen der Antike und auch nicht in allen Teilen der antiken Welt Gl-
tigkeit besessen haben.

9
Trampedach 2008, 213.
10
Trampedach 2008, 213227.
11
Trampedach 2008, 213.
12
This particular has been intensively studied by Kai Trampedach in his Habilitationsschrift: Politische Mantik. Studien zur
Kommunikation ber Gtterzeichen und Orakel im klassischen Griechenland (forthcoming).
4 Diana Rodrguez Prez

rofessionals bound together by a disciplina following a fixed written canon. The people in charge
p
of deciphering these signs of the heaven were the seers. For the above exposed, one can deduce
that the seer was somebody more keen on, if we want, dialectics, and psychology than on a non-exis-
tent technique. They had to correctly and convincingly contextualize the sign taking into account
the needs of the addressee. Since the signs were not objective realities, they were not considered
masters of the truth, but readers of signs and as such they play an important literary function in the
ancient narrative. Being a seer was not an easy thing, though, and they faced great dangers death
threats and public mockery due to their diagnoses, as some Homeric passages attest13.

1.2 The Rider Amphorae

It is important to remark that this prophetic sign appears in ominous situations, very often in the
prolegomena of a war or linked with battle episodes, and that is what makes it meaningful. In that
way, we see it appears in the Greek visual arts, especially in a class of vases known as rider ampho-
rae. In these vases the absence of rules to read the ominous signs comes again to light.

The Rider Amphorae, heirs of the horse-head amphorae, began to appear in the second quarter
of the 6th century BC in Attica in relation with the class of the Hippeis. Their characteristic is the
presence of several riders, most often just one, at walk, trot, canter or gallop. Very often the rider
is followed by an eagle that sometimes holds a snake in its beak. Dogs and hares are often depicted
under the horse, maybe to emphasize the speed of the rider.

One of the first examples is an attic funerary amphora by the Painter of the Acropolis 606 in Berlin
(570-560 BC)14 (Taf. 1, 1). On both faces there is a same motif, a rider with his squire15 departing, may-
be, to war. The main rider wears helm and greaves, a shield and a spear. Just the face and the front of
the helm of the second rider can be seen. Behind them, in face A of the Amphora, an eagle flies to the
left with a snake in its beak and below, a hare or a dog16. A similar scene is to be seen in face B.

Beazley affirmed that our group here is doubtless a good omen17. Grabow thinks it a negative
portent though, a sign used by the painter to allude to the future of the rider who was going to
war: death. Schmidt, more cautiously saw here a sign of the future, being the message barely de-
cipherable, though18. This vase marked a burial place, maybe of a rider or of a man interested in
horses. Could the painter have referred to the cause of the dead the defeat in the upcoming battle

Trampedach 2008, passim.

13

ABV2 81, 4; CVA Berlin (5) pl. 1, 2; Metzger van Berchem 1967, 155; Schmidt 1983, 64; Beazley 1986, 36; Scheibler 1987, 78.
14

So identified by Metzger van Berchem 1967, 155. Other authors simply speak of two riders.
15

Hare: Grabow 1998, 66; Beazley 1986, 38. Dog: CVA Berlin (5) 13.
16

Beazley 1986, 36.

17

Schmidt 1983, 64.

18
Contextualizing Symbols: the Eagle and the Snake in the Ancient Greek World 5

to which he rides of the man for whose tomb the vase was destined? Is the group eagle-snake
intended to show this future? The interpretation is not easy, we have one more vase with a very
similar scene by the same painter but the snake is lacking. How are we to explain the alternation?
Does the meaning change when the snake appears?

This puzzling alternation of the eagle alone and the eagle and the snake is, indeed, the main pro-
blem that the rider scenes entail for the theme we are bringing into discussion. Are we to take
both variations as signifying the same or are we to see a specific and conscious meaning in those
in which the eagle is accompanied by the snake? Do they mean different signs for the future? Or
is the eagle to be taken as a sign of the future in these vases? One possibility could be to relate the
group eagle and snake with an unfortunate resolution of the task, and the eagle with a positive
omen, but this does not seem to drive us much further, taking into account the oddity of such an
auspicious symbol in a funerary context. Yet, although the prophetic function of the eagle in the
ancient world is out of doubt19, it usually appears following the riders almost as a fixed pattern
and has been explained as alluding to the membership of the rider to the class of the Hippeis, who
would express their especial devotion to Zeus by means of his bird20.

In other vases, and thanks to comparisons with similar iconographies, the meaning of the group
seems more obvious. That is the case of a black-figured amphora signed by Andokides as potter21
and dated to 540 BC. On both sides there is a biga moving to the right (Taf. 1, 2). On the reverse, a
charioteer in his chariot moves to the right preceded by a small man carrying a wreath and a sprig,
which makes evident that the chariot depicted here is the victor of the competition22. Above the
chariot, an eagle flies to the left with a snake in its beak. To this victorious chariot the eagle with
the snake has come as a happy omen.

Among the favourite themes of the Affecter Painter were rider scenes (Taf. 1, 3). They appear up
to 31 times in his vases, sometimes in an almost ornamental way under the handles and sometimes
as the main character of the vase (facing right as it is the rule in the second half of the 6th centu-
ry BC)23. Behind it, an eagle flies, to the left when carrying the snake, to the right when alone. The

Concerning the eagle as oracular animal, see D. A. Thompson, A Glossary of Greek Birds (Oxford 1895) passim. On its relation-
19

ship, as portent, with the foundation of the Ptolemaic lineage, the Phrygian and Persian dynasty, Alexander the Greats birth,
its function as a presage of death or its role in the extispicy, especially p. 5. See also L. Hopf, Thierorakel und Orakelthiere
in alter und neuer Zeit (Stuttgart 1888) 8792. Also Hopf dealt with the snake (p. 182194), but, as it is usual in these early
publications, he makes just a general overview, although not for that less valuable, of some common places of this animal in
the ancient art and literature. Also in this way see O. Keller, Die Antike Tierwelt II (Hildesheim 1963 [Reprint]) 284205.
Metzger van Berchem 1967, 155159. 158. Payne held that the eagles that occur on innumerable Corinthian vases would be
20

destined to emphasize the forward movement and that often too they may be omens: H. Payne, Necrocorinthia: a Study
of Corinthian Art in the Archaic Period (Oxford 1931) 76.
von Bothmer 1961, 5152 n. 198; Vaerst 1980, 327328.
21

A similar man appears also in a Panathenaic Amphora from Nauplia (ABV2 260, 27).
22

Mommsen 1975, 60.

23
6 Diana Rodrguez Prez

eagle is lacking in only two rider scenes by this Painter. The snake is wanting in a few examples in
Mommsens group III and in the number 104B of her catalogue24. Also significant must be the diffe-
rence in the direction of the flight of the eagle when it carries the snake and when it appears alone.
When the second occurs, the eagle flies to the left of the scene, in opposite direction to the rider25, on
the contrary, when the snake is present the direction of the flight changes26. But this detail is neither
conclusive since its occurrence seems far from being a rule27. Also, especially when this scene occurs
under the handles, we cannot be sure either whether the eagle was thought together with the rider
that heads the opposite direction or whether they are different elements that must be considered in
different faces of the vase. Only an exhaustive analysis of the works by the Affecter Painter, which
is not my aim, would throw light on this particular detail. Nevertheless, Mommsen, who did study
these works, did not reach any definitive conclusion either28. Yet, an eagle with a snake appears once
without any relation to a rider, just flanking the handle (normally, this painter uses the eagle alone
for this aim), and other eagles appear also between figures with sometimes no relation to the riders.

Here, we have a similar problem to what we saw for the Painter of the Acropolis 606: did he want to
express anything with the absence or presence of the snake in the complex? This hypothesis that he
did is highly likely but again, the sense of the presage brought ahead by this sign must remain open.
Our riders are anonymous and so they were probably for the painter himself. Lacking inscriptions
that could name them bringing back snippets from their lives that could throw light on the signifi-
cance of our group in these scenes, the interpretation should not be pushed forward without limits.
Once more, what is lacking here is a situation, a specific context that would make the sign speak.

1.3 The group eagle and snake as a shield device

The obvious relationship of this complex with battle episodes makes it one of the most common
shield devices, if we are to judge by the depictions of shields on the Greek vases. The difficulties
when analyzing shield devices are huge but I am not going to go deeper into that here. A review of
the current bibliography29 about this particular makes it clear that, more than trying to find clues

Mommsen 1975, 6061.

24

Mommsens numbers 39 (Wrzburg 177), 40 (Mnchen 1443), 48 (New York 56.171.17), 49 (Philadelphia MS 4852), 50 (Tarent
25

117234), 52 (Kassel T 679), 53 (Louvre F21), 54 (Boston 99.516) (but in the same work, an eagle alone follows the riders direc-
tion).
Mommsens numbers 41 (Neapel, Bourguignon), 46 (Erlangen I385), 18 (Louvre F19) (but in the same work, under the
26

handles, the eagle alone follows the horse), 47 (New York, Dr. Blos), 51 (Tarent 117235), 74 (Florenz 3862).
For example, Mommsens numbers 47 (New York, Dr. Blos), 105 (Mnchen 1439), 18 (Louvre F19, under the handles), 22
27

(Kopenhagen NM 3630), 23 (Vatikan 340), 26 (Mnchen 8772), 36 (Florenz 94576).

For Mommsen sicher ist die Flugrichtung zur Deutung des Vorzeichens wichtig, denn andere Maler lassen den Adler grund-
28

stzlich als gnstiges Vorzeichen mit dem Reiter fliegen; der Affecter nimmt hierauf nur insofern Rcksicht, als die Adler, die
eine Schlange im Schnabel haben, in derselben Richtung fliegen, in der sich die Pferde bewegen: Mommsen 1975, 61.
G. H. Chase, The Shield Devices of the Greeks in Art and Literature (Cambrigde/Mass. 1902 [reprint Chicago 1979]); Vaerst
29

1980, passim; Lissarrague 2007, 152164.

Contextualizing Symbols: the Eagle and the Snake in the Ancient Greek World 7

of interpretation valid for all the Greek shield devices, it is more sensible to analyze every example
in its own and avoid extrapolating30.

In the third quarter of the 6th century BC we find the best depictions of shields on Greek vases, full
of detail and carefully executed. Now, the eagle and snake are shown together as a device in two
patterns: dead snake carried by the eagle, and a not yet beaten snake struggling with the eagle.
When trying to find a meaning for these depictions, a similar problem emerges. The first vase on
which this motif is depicted is a black-figured amphora by the E Group now in London dated to the
third quarter of the 6th century BC31. There Heracles battles a three-bodied Geryon while Eurytion
and Orthrus have been already overcome. As a shield device of one of Geryons shields, the group
eagle and snake appears. The next appearance occurs on an amphora in Zrich32 in which a warri-
or, between a woman and an old man with staff (the wife and the father probably), is getting ready
for departure. As shield device: the fight of eagle and snake. How should one look at these vases? Is
the device meant to bring forward the disastrous outcome of the adventure in which the warrior
is about to partake? Or should we identify the warrior with the eagle who will eventually overcome
the enemy, and foretell a happy return? Once more the interpretation needs to remain open33.

The analysis of works in which we know the identity of the main actor are not of much help to find
an interpretation rule. The central tondo of an Attic kylix in Berlin is interesting in this regard34
(Taf. 1, 4).

1.3.1 Becoming modern seers

In this vase, Thetis has gone to Hephaestus to have some arms fashioned for her son Achilles;
on the shield, the eagle and the snake could be safely taken as a warning sign of the ill-fated de-
stiny that awaits the hero in Troy. Like this there is also an Attic amphora in the Louvre by the
Berlin Painter representing a gigantomachy with just two figures35: Zeus and a giant. Because we

Die Ergebnisse sollen jedoch als gattungspezifisch verstanden werden und sind nicht allgemein [...] anwendbar: Vaerst
30

1980, 8.
CVA British Museum (3) III H, pl. 37, 1; Badn 310316; Vaerst 1980, 410.
31

CVA Zrich III H, 20 f. pl. 12. 13.

32

Vaerst 1980, 327328; Grabow 1998, 68.

33

Berlin, Antikensammlung F2294.

34

Badn 201898; Vaerst 1980, 409; Arafat 1990, pl. 1. Although such explanations of the shield device may sound arbitrary, a si-
35

milar case is to be found with the image of the centaur in the comprehensive article by Lissarrague 2007, 152164. Analyzing
this image in several vases a specific and distinctive meaning arises in each of them. The centaur as shield device would not
be at all used to frighten the enemy. For example, in one vase Hercules fights an Amazon who carries the centaur as shield
device. Lissarrague sums it up in this way: if the Amazon takes centaurs violence, she will have a similar destiny. On the
other hand, in a pelice in which a warrior is depicted in front of an altar, the quiet centaur of his device would give the clue
to name the first as Achilles, the hero brought up by Chiron, the Centaur. So, the shield device here goes back to the previous
history of the carrier and constructs his biography.
8 Diana Rodrguez Prez

r ecognize the actors and the outcome of the venture it is possible to go further in the reading of
the symbol and put the giants shield device into relation with the story surrounding the battle of
the giants and the gods. We have a context in which to contextualize the sign. We know that Zeus
and the Olympians will be the victors and we are also aware of the relation of Zeus with the eagle
and of the Giants with the snake, and we know that Zeus the eagle will destroy the snaky giants.
Becoming modern seers we are allowed to suggest that the painter, with the choice of this group as
the shield device for the giant, is clearly advancing the outcome of the fight.

However, if we try applying the results found in these two examples to a, once more, unknown
warrior characterized with such shield device, as in the tondo of a cup by Douris in which a hel-
meted man with himation and shield where an eagle and snake are depicted36, the question arises
again whether it is possible to infer that we are in front of a negative omen. We do not think so,
indeed. Although it can be argued that the group here can be one of the numerous shield devices
used to strike fear into the enemy by matching its owner with a proud animal who leaves no survi-
vors behind it37, iconologists pretensions to find such a meaning in those devices is not so far from
the attitude of the Greeks themselves as we learn from Aeschylus in his play the Seven against
Thebes, a great example of semiotics applied to shield devices. Aeschylus gave different devices
to the Argive chieftains; he describes them and interprets them in the context of the war, taking
into account the outcome and the individual fate of each warrior in it. The several shield devices
of the chiefs refer to their future38.

2. The fight as a narrative element

2.1 Setting the animals in motion: the eagle-snake imaginery in the Libitation Bearers

If we saw before that, for the interpretation of the grouping when it appeared in the heaven as a
spontaneous sign on the occasion of a military venture, the old symbolism of the battle as a cosmo-
gonical event was used, sometimes there are other complementary and derived ideas working be-
hind. In this way, the eagle, the best of the birds, seems to be the most suitable animal to exemplify,
for example, the qualities of a king (especially the Achaean kings)39.

D. Buitron-Oliver, Douris. A Master-Painting of Athenian Red-Figure Vases (Mainz o. Rh. 1995) 26 (Tarquinia, Museo Nazio-
36

nale RC5771).
Chase considered in this way the devices in which a strong animal devours its pray. Also Pekridou pointed on this regard.
37

Ein weiterer Grund fr die Verwendung von Adler und Schlange als Schildzeichen oder ihr Erscheinen auf anderen Waffen
ist vermutlich darin zu sehen, da die siegbringende Kraft des Adlers auf die Trger entsprechender Waffen bergehen
sollte.: Pekridou 1986, 99.
A research on this topic was undertaken by Froma Zeitlin in 1982. We could not consult this work. See reference in Lis-
38

sarrague 2007, 152164. Vaerst also expressed her opinion on this respect. She thinks that these interpretations, although
possible, are complicated: Vaerst 1980, 327328.
A. A. 104120: I have the power to proclaim the augury of triumph given on their way to princely men since my age still
39

breathes Persuasion upon me from the gods, the strength of song how the twin-throned command of the Achaeans, the
Contextualizing Symbols: the Eagle and the Snake in the Ancient Greek World 9

It was Aeschylus who extensively used the natural symbolism of the eagle and the snake. His tri-
logy, especially the Libation Bearers, is one of the most important sources for the symbolism of
the eagle and the snake40. Aeschylus intensively uses the figurative analogy to develop his literary
point: displaying all the problems concerning Orestes matricide and its justification. In Libation
Bearers 248249, within the oration to Zeus, Orestes first introduces his parents using the simile
of the eagle and the snake. The natural order has been inverted; the poisonous and maleficent
snake has killed the eagle, which perished in the coils of a fierce viper41; Orestes and Electra, the
eaglets, the brood of a father eagle42, were orphaned. Through this construction, he is denying
the consanguinity between Clytemnestra and the sons: a viper43 cannot be the mother of the sons
of the eagle44. Furthermore he is showing Clytemnestra as the foe to beat45.

Later in the text, the chorus explains Clytemnestras dream46, which is the reason for her sending
libations to Agamemnons tomb. She dreamt that she had brought forth a snake that she laid to rest
in swaddling clothes, as if a child. And then, she offered it her breast, and it sucked, but with the
milk it sucked a curd of blood47. Then Orestes interprets the dream; whereas some verses before
(249) he had equated his mother with the victorious serpent, now it is he who identifies himself
with the animal when he comes to decipher his mothers dream. As other scholars have explained
before, through this identification, Clytemnestras serpentine condition is emphasized: what but a
serpent can bring forth another snake? Nevertheless, this image has long intrigued the scholars48.
Some of them (Lattimore and Fowler) understood it as a reiteration of the philios-ephilos motive in
the frame of the contexts of the struggles within the oikos. Goheen and Petrounias take the image

single-minded captains of Hellas youth, with avenging spear and arm against the Teucrian land, was sent off by the inspi-
ring omen appearing to the kings of the ships kingly birds, one black, one white of tail, near the palace, on the spear-hand,
in a conspicuous place, devouring a hare with offspring unborn caught in the last effort to escape.
Alan Prez 1982, passim; K. ONeil, Aeschylus, Homer, and the Serpent at the Breast, Phoenix 52, 1998, 216229; A. Lill, Dream
40

Symbols in Greek Tragedy: The Case of Clytemnestra, Interlitteraria 8, 2003, 178196; M. Bock, Die Schlange im Traum der
Klytaimnestra, Hermes 71, 1936, 230236; W. Whallon, The serpent at the breast, TransactAmPhilAss 89, 1958, 271275;
M. L. West, The Parodos of the Agamemnon, ClQ 29, 1979, 16.
A. Ch. 249.
41

A. Ch. 247.
42

Alan Prez (p. 38) quotes also a fragment by Teognis from Megara in which the snake in used likewise to characterize human
43

treachery. A friend is blamed for treachery and accused of hiding a snake in his chest.
Alan Prez 1982, 9.
44

It is worth noting that in these kind of literary similes, and also in the fables, the snake is the animal negatively characteri-
45

sed. To some extent, writers forgot to look on the bright (though not less disturbing) side of the snake, that side in which
it appeared as giver (and also thief) of life, immortality, fertility and owner of the ancestral knowledge, as vicarious of the
Mother Goddess, that, although wiped off by the new generation of gods, still stayed on as the background, basement and
fundament upon which the new civilized world could arise, as I have analysed elsewhere: D. Rodrguez Prez, Serpientes,
dioses y hroes. El combate contra el monstruo en el arte y la literatura griega antigua (Len 2008).
A. Ch. 539.
46

A. Ch. 530.
47

See references in Alan Prez 1982, 47.

48
10 Diana Rodrguez Prez

as symbolic of the antinatural relationship between mother and son, the abnormality of matrici-
de. Peradotto suggests it helps illustrate the Tindarean element in Orestes ethos. Knox, followed
by Lebeck, highlights the similarity between father and son: Clytemnestra, the snake, gives birth
to Orestes, the snake. Like the cub in the parable, he reveals his fathers nature while still wholly
being son of the mother.

Actually, since the snake has been used before in relation with treachery, it is not strange that
Orestes uses it to define himself, he is going to betray his mother, he is about to commit a ma-
tricide. Hence, it is totally normal for Clytemnestra to be a viper when she betrays her husband,
Agamemnon, king of kings, to whom the symbol of the eagle fits, then, perfectly. After that, and
following our argument, it is urgent that Orestes becomes a snake to commit the worst treachery:
killing the mother to avenge the father. For this dire act to be carried out, Orestes must first be-
come the mother, the snake, to avenge the eagle, the father.

Also remarkable is the choice of a particular kind of snake to characterize Clytemnestra: the vi-
per. This animal was the focus of much interest by the ancient naturalists because of its peculiar
way of giving birth to its offspring. The viper is ovoviviparous, it lays eggs but these break inside
it; the young, while still in the womb, gnaw at her mother and eat her bowels to make their way
out. Herodotus takes it as a revenge for the cruel death of the father during the act of the copula:
when they copulate, while the male is in the act of procreation and as soon as he has ejaculated
his seed, the female seizes him by the neck, and does not let it go until she has bitten through49.
Here, Orestes, like the sons of the viper, avenges his father. Nevertheless, there is only one snake,
Clytemnestra; Orestes becomes one in obeying Loxias oracle but he is not one50. Actually this rich
imagery in the Oresteia clearly reflects the contradictory problems that the lex talionis entails.

2.2 The fight in the visual arts and der agonale Geist of the Greek culture

The antagonistic character of the fight between the two animals comes to the stage also in the vi-
sual sources, beginning in the 7th century BC, before the group was linked with riders in the above
commented rider scenes. They first appeared as the only motif in the vases at the end of the 7th
century, according to the following scheme: an eagle flying to the left or to the right of the scene
gripping the neck of a snake in its beak and clutching the serpents long, undulating body.

2.2.1 The eagle-snake complex as the only motif in the vase

In an early Corinthian aryballos dated to 600 BC and coming from the temple of Apollo Maleatas
in Epidauros, the only motif on the vase is an eagle flying to the left carrying an already dead
snake51. This pattern appears especially on cups, as the only decoration of the tondo. In this

Hdt. 3, 109.
49

References in Alan Prez 1982, 100; K. ONeil, Aeschylus, Homer, and the Serpent at the Breast, Phoenix 52, 1998, 219.
50

H. Gallet de Santerre, Chronique des fouilles et dcouvertes archologiques en Grce en 1949, BCH 74, 1950, 304 fig. 15.
51
Contextualizing Symbols: the Eagle and the Snake in the Ancient Greek World 11

way it appears in the central tondo of a black-figured lekanis in Basel from around the year 590
BC by the KX-Painter52. The exterior of the cup is divided in two bands and the stem framed by
concentric rays. In the band there are friezes of animals among rosettes. Siren, panther, deer and
lion above, and panther, lions, goats and deer below. In the tondo, an eagle flies to the right with
a living snake in its beak. Also to this group belongs a Laconian cup by the Allard Pierson Painter
in the Paul Getty Museum coming from the art market of New York and dated to the year 530 BC53.
The painter filled the interior with an eagle flying to the left, gripping the neck of the snake and
clutching its body. On the exterior of the cup are stylized leaves and rays between bands. Also in
the tondo of a Laconian Siana cup in the H. Cahn Collection in Basel a similar motif is displayed54.
In these vases, the group seems to play a decorative role. Animals and monsters in Laconian vases
are of Corinthian stock55 and do not seem to have been used in any other sense than the decorative
one. Nevertheless, from this assertion it must not be followed that the eagle and the snake in such
cases become something meaningless. Their presence (and not of another animal) in these vases
cannot have been at random.

To this category belongs also the black-figured Attic cup S99 in the University of Heidelberg,
known as Preyss cup after his former owner56 (Taf. 2, 5. 6). In the central tondo an eagle proudly
flies to the right clutching its prey. Entwined with the tail of the eagle, the serpent raises up its
body undulating until over passing the head of the eagle. There are no visible signs of struggle; the
snake appears to have been easily overcome. This vase comes from Boeotia and, dated to the years
490480 BC, has been attributed to the Haimon Painter by Beazley. The body of the eagle and the
head of the snake are in plan view while the head of the first and the body of its prey are seen in
profile. The images on faces A and B are quite similar and run between the upper black lip band and
the concentric lines that frame the birth of the stem. Both of them represent two chariot races. The
prize is the dinos-like vase depicted under the handles of the cup. On face A there are two chariots
at full gallop, the one to the right is hidden by the horses of the following chariot and only part
of the back and the head of the charioteer (maybe bearded) can be seen. To the left stands a man,
the referee of the competition, dressed in himation and holding a staff with his left hand. To the
right, a column marks the finishing line that the legs of the horses of the first chariot are about to
cross. The eagle and the snake have been taken with reservations as a good omen for the winner of
the race57. There is no indication of whom this winner will be, though.

ABV2 680.3BIS; Badn 306498; Grabow 1998, 63; Schmidt 1983, pl. 8.
52

Paul Getty Museum 87.AE.31: J. Walsh, Acquisitions/1987, GettyMusJ 16, 1988, 133199; C. M. Stibbe, Lakonische Vasenmaler
53

des sechsten Jahrhunderts v. Chr. Suppl. (Mainz o. Rh. 2004) 240.

H. A. Cahn Collection 358.
54

R. M. Cook, Greek Painted Pottery (London 1972) 94.

55

Badn 331612; CVA Heidelberg (4), 36 f. pl. 158; ABV2 560, 516; G. Baumgart, Aus der Heidelberger Sammlung, AA 31, 1916,
56

171175; K. Tancke, Wagenrennen. Ein Friesthema der aristokratischen Reprsentationskunst sptklassisch-frhhellenis-

tischer Zeit, JdI 105, 1990, 107.
Grabow 1998, 65.
57
12 Diana Rodrguez Prez

Whether this interpretation is possible, the fact that the group does not appear in relation with
any specific figure in the main scene but just as something relatively isolated, although themati-
cally linked to it, in the central tondo poses some doubts about this interpretation. I would ra-
ther suggest another reading: we may have here an example of the occurrence of the agon both
among animals and among humans58; a competition in which only the strongest will be the winner,
a significance that arises several times in vases belonging to the next group. Although the motive
is similar to that of the above referred cups, the presence of the mentioned scene in the band of
the vase allows this significance and prevents us from taking the eagle and the snake just as deco-
rative filling ornament. There is a thematic unity in both images: combat, in the special form of
the agon. The agon between humans is what the spectator would see in a first approach to the
cup. After drinking the content of the vase, another combat appeared to them, the one which takes
place in the natural world. Hence, the cup would show one of the governing rules and unavoidable
principles of life: confrontation.

2.2.2 Antithetic pattern

Pointing to this same character, the placement of the group in a triad eagle-snake-eagle is linked
with other scenes of confrontation in other vases. That is the case with a tripod-kothon attribut-
ed to an imitator of the KX-Painter59. On the feet of the tripod there are three scenes: a goose or
a duck between two cocks, two confronted sphinxes and two antithetic eagles holding a snake in
their beaks. It turns its mouth wide open to the head of the eagle on the right. The convex frieze of
the vase receives a decoration consisting of three sirens between two lions and two sport compe-
titions: an exciting chariot race among four young men and a wrestling match. The prize, a tripod,
stands in the same frieze. The wrestling scene between two men takes place in front of a third man,
the referee, who, seated, watches the action. Also the placement of this scene over the representa-
tion of the eagle-snake complex let us think of a thematic relationship. According to the German
scholar, both scenes can be read metaphorically, they show again the struggles that take place both
among humans and among animals. Nevertheless, as she points out also, we have to be cautious
because the erwiesenermaen botische Darstellungen hufig von Zuflligkeiten stark geprgt
sind60. The rational program of the Attic vases is missing in these Boeotian productions. For the
same reason, we prefer ruling out the second possibility of interpretation pointed out by Grabow
of a possible good omen, and be consistent with our previous interpretations.

This triadic, antithetic pattern was in force also in the 7th6th centuries (625575 BC). An early
example appears in a black-figured column crater from Attica by the Quimera Painter found in

On der agonale Geist of the ancient Greek culture in general: W. Burkert, Religin griega arcaica y clsica (Madrid 2007) 145.
58

The agonistic character of the group in this vase was already mentioned by Gertrud Baumgart in her publication of some
of the pieces from the collection of the Antikenmuseum of the University of Heidelberg: G. Baumgart, Aus der Heidelberger
Sammlung, AA 31, 1916, 171175.
Mnchen, Museum Antiker Kleinkunst 6199: Beazley 1965, 90121; Grabow 1998, 65; CVA Mnchen (3), pl. 147.
59

Grabow 1998, 65.

60
Contextualizing Symbols: the Eagle and the Snake in the Ancient Greek World 13

Vari. On the reverse, among rosettes, are two symmetrical sirens and on the obverse two majestic
eagles clutch a lively snake coiled in on itself. The pressure of the beaks on its body is so hard that
it bleeds. On the contrary to the above mentioned example, here the motif seems to be stripped of
any symbolic meaning, shaping a heraldic group (nonetheless, this point must be always approa-
ched with circumspection). That is also the case of a Boeotian alabastron also in Heidelberg from
the first third of the 6th century BC and attributed to the Horse-Bird Painter (a painter of Athenian
origin)61, a successful imitation of the Corinthian Style62 (Taf. 2, 7). Here, a menacing snake with
its mouth wide open is flanked by two eagles and is executed with comparatively little skill. They
do not seem to pay much attention to the snake and the complex is explained in the CVA as or-
namental decoration63, since the animals do not have any contact, do not interact, looking like
filling elements. They form a heraldic group, not alien at all to the Corinthian style that this vase
imitates64, a very common composition from 550 BC onwards.

2.3 Switching roles: subversion of a non-existent code

Going back to the literary sources, the simile of two enemy armies with the fight of the snake and
the eagle is to be found in a chorus of the Antigona, but now every attempt to find a unitary code
that could explain what is going on with our group is heavily challenged. We are in the context of
the war of the seven Argive chiefs against Thebes and the bird is not put in relation to the victori-
ous side but with Polinices who like a screaming eagle flew over into our land65 but he left before
his jaws were ever glutted with our gore, or before the Fire-gods pine-fed flame had seized our
crown of towers. So fierce was the crash of battle swelling about his back, a match too hard to win
for the rival of the dragon66. Hence, the Thebans, although they will be the victors, are delibera-
tely identified with the snake. While this role switch can seem unusual, it is not random. In the
combat of the eagle and the snake, it is always the first who wins. Among the natural historians,
the stories concerning eagle and snake are many times collected, and the victory of the eagle is
always stressed. Aristotle refers that eagle and dragon snake are at war: for the eagle takes snakes
for food67 and Aelian stresses that aquilae alarum crepitum simulac draco ferarum intrepidissi-
mus auribus perceperit, statim se libenter abscondit, atque in latebras abdit68.

Kilinski 1990, 3.
61

Kilinski 1990, 9; Grabow 1998, 65.

62

CVA Heidelberg (1), p. 39 pl. 22, 2.

63

The snakes in the Corinthian style appeared often as the central motif of heraldic groups, between cocks, sphinxes, eagles,
64

sirens: H. Payne, Necrocorinthia: a Study of Corinthian Art in the Archaic Period (Oxford 1931) 74 n. 9 pl. 15, 1. 3. Boeotian ar-
tists adapted Corinthian base shapes, subsidiary decoration, and methods of applying added white and purple to the figured
subjects in their vases together with the black figure technique received from Athens: Kilinski 1990, 9.
S. Ant. 110.
65

S. Ant. 120126.
66

Arist. HA 609 a.
67

Ael. NA 2, 26.
68
14 Diana Rodrguez Prez

So, in this fragment in the Antigona it becomes clear that there was no such thing as a preestablish-
ed set of ideas about the eagle and the snake and, that, although most of the times, the symbolism
is stable, some variations in the code may occur and different armies (not necessary the victor)
could be equated with the eagle as far as it was necessary for the literary purpose. Nevertheless,
it may be that if a standard Greek were asked about who was to be the winner in such a fight, they
would immediately think of the eagle. The reason why in the Antigona the roles switch and the
snake comes to symbolise the victorious army, the Theban, must be found in the very history of the
Theban lineage itself: we have seen elsewhere69 how closely related with Thebes the snake was since
its very foundation; nobody but them could be rightly called sons of the dragon70. There is also a na-
tural explanation for that, because, although inferior to the eagle, the snake was considered intre-
pidissimus, not easy to beat and always dangerous. Last but not least, Herodotus refers to an omen
in which this subversion of roles emerges again: a number of snakes swarming at the border of
the city of Sardis and being devoured by horses71. Croesus, king of Lydia, had his messengers sent to
the Telmessians to inquire about the significance of the omen. This was interpreted as a sign of the
upcoming ruin of the city, since the snakes, offspring of the land, are the autochthonous element,
wiped off by the foreigner, the horse, role that, in our case, corresponds to the eagle.

3. The sign becomes a symbol

We have seen in the previous pages how the Greek Weltanschauung shaped a very peculiar pro-
phetic significance for the group eagle-snake and how this idea was also transferred to the visual
arts72. Its relation with divination was such that it is not odd that it becomes the symbol of the very

D. Rodrguez Prez, Serpientes, dioses y hroes. El combate contra el monstruo en el arte y la literatura griega antigua (Len
69

2008) 203245.
The Thebans are offspring of the dragon of Ares that had been settled next to the Theban fountain to which Cadmus com-
70

panions had gone to fill their jugs up with water for the sacrifice. From the teeth of the dragon the Spartoi, the sown men,
were set forth. No sooner had they been brought forth than they began to fight killing themselves in a fratricidal war. The
misfortunes of the Theban lineage are also frequently put into relation with its violent origin. Even Cadmus, at the end of
his life, weary and saddened, realised that his misfortunes could be due to the murder of the sacred snake and wondered
Was that a sacred snake that my spear impaled...?, Ov. met. 4, 571. In E. Ph. 830945 we are told how the resentful Ares
demands revenge for the slaughtering of his dragon; thus, Menoeceus, Kreons son will be sacrificed. In Nonnos Dionysiaca
(IV) Kadmos must appease the Earth and Ares through a libation with the blood of the sown men mixed with dust. Again on
the wild and dangerous origin of the Theban people and especially of Pentheus: E. Ba. 539545. Let us remember also Kadmos
daughters misfortunes: Semele, Zeus lover and Dionysos mother, all perished, consumed in the lightning-ignited flame of
Zeus after demanding him to reveal himself in all his glory as proof of his godhood. Ino, victim of Heras anger was also stri-
cken with insanity and killed Melikertes, her son, by boiling him in a cauldron. Afterwards she jumped with the cauldron into
the sea. Agave married one of the Spartoi, Echion and gave birth to Pentheus who will be mutilated by his mother. Aristaeus
engendered Actaion who metamorphosed into a deer and is eaten by his own dogs. The misfortunes of the Theban lineage are
attributed to its unfortunate origin and the miasma will be present through out the years until its last descendant has died.
Seneca (Sen. Oed. 709) writes non tu tantis causa periclis, non haec Labdacidas petunt fata, sed uteres deum irae secuntur.
Hdt. 1, 781.
71

This character was not reduced to the Homeric epic, and a funny remark in Ar. Eq. 197 proves that in the 5th century BC, the
72

idea of the ominous character of this symbol was wholly in force.

Contextualizing Symbols: the Eagle and the Snake in the Ancient Greek World 15

profession of the seer. This, so described by Karusos as supervolante aquila draconem complexa73
decorates Clebulos stele (4th century BC) (Taf. 2, 8). It is 93 centimeters high and 42 centimeters
wide and appeared in Acharnas. The inscription informs of the name of the deceased, Cleobulos
from Acharnas. Below, a majestic eagle clutches a snake looking to the right. Under it, an epigram
sings the glory of the dead.

Cleobulos (maybe the painter Philochares uncle) was a mantis, as it is attested by the inscripti-
on, and the complex is used to symbolize this job. Pars pro toto, the prophetic sign becomes the
symbol of the augural art, in the same way that Asclepios staff and the snake become the symbol
of medicine and pharmacopeia.

Also in a funerary context the eagle and the snake appear in Arketas tomb in Termessos, a monu-
ment studied by Anastasia Pekridou75. She dedicates a chapter (to which we refer) to discuss the
symbol, providing several examples of the appearance of the symbol in other visual arts both in
Greek and Roman orbit and also an abundant bibliography.

Finally, the eagle and the snake also had a role to play in the program put forward by Augustus to
decorate the Curia, as it was narrated by Pliny76. The Emperor had disposed of two Greek paintings
there, from which what interests us here is the second one, the work of some Philochares. So says
Pliny: the second picture is remarkable for displaying the close family likeness between a son in
the prime of life and an elderly father, allowing for the difference of age; above them soars an eagle
with a snake in its claws.

Both designs have been studied by Hlscher, especially the meaning of these images and the in-
tentions lying behind their reuse by Augustus to convey political messages. In our image there is
a son and a father who bear a great resemblance with each other, a political theme under Augus-
tus intended to match Octavius (the divi filius) with Caesar, his adoptive father. By means of a
physical resemblance the similarity of politics was expressed and it would be also perceived so by
the spectators, the educated senators seated there. Above the figures flies an eagle and a snake. If
Cleobulus was Philochares uncle, it can be thought that the figures there depicted would be some
seers from their family, whose profession would be characterized by the seers sign. That being just
a hypothesis, mu auf dem Bild ein glckverheiendes Zeichen gemeint gewesen sein77, not only
in the Greek sense but in the Roman, in which the combat of both animals was the symbol of the
victory over a malevolent force. It is not likely that the group here has a negative meaning.

Karusos 1960, 113123.

73

Pekridou 1986, passim.

74

Plin. nat. 35, 10.

75

Hlscher 1989, 327333; about our group, especially p. 329 and n. 31 with bibliography and discussion.
76

Hlscher 1989, 239.

77
16 Diana Rodrguez Prez

4. Conclusions

Having got this far, and after the review of the most significant sources for the symbolism of the
eagle-snake complex in the ancient Greek world, it is time to draw some conclusions.

The discourse about this group follows two different but sometimes complementary paths. On the
one hand, taking into account the biological features of the two animals and a moralizing vision
of the nature, the eagle and the snake are used to characterize human behaviour; moreover, the
struggles among humans are metaphorically expressed in terms of the fight between these two
animals.

On the other hand, the group of the eagle and the snake appears in the Greek sources as a given
sign that usually shows up in the context of a war, more specifically in the prolegomena of the
battle, a spontaneous and ominous event perceived as something extraordinary and thought to
convey a meaning allusive to the outcome of the upcoming event. For the interpretation of the
sign, (a priori or most often a posteriori) the old symbolism of the battle between the two animals
was often at work, although this is not a given thing and should not be taken for granted. We have
to understand the group in the background of the Greek prophetic phenomenon, where omina
are just signs that require a thoughtful interpretation; similes that require a further explanation
that usually follows the lines of the figurative analogy. They are situativ signs completely depen-
dent on a context to become meaningful.

Obviously, this situation leaves us in a poor place to analyze the sign when it appears in the visual
sources, since the lack of a context makes it extremely difficult to suggest a possible sense for the
sign in a given image. Together with the puzzling alternation of snake and eagle, and eagle alone in
identical scenes by the same painter, another added problem inherent to the pictorial art itself at
that time is the barely developed third dimension, which hinders the reading of the sign in depth,
that is to say, it impedes us from knowing to which side of the main actor in the group it is flying.
Even though, if an omen similar to that found and described in the Iliad is intended, there is no
way of knowing on which side the eagle will let the snake fall. As it has already been suggested, also
meaningful could be the fact that the snake seems to be alive in some works and dead in others,
which may be expressive of different aspects of the future.

The iconographical research seems to bring no definitive conclusions on this topic. We may as well
just point out that the group of the eagle and the snake works in these vases just as a warning sign,
an exclamation mark that introduces an uncertain future into the scene, it warns us that some-
thing is going to happen. Good or bad? That, we cannot say.

The same applies for the group as a shield device, we do not have inscriptions to name our warri-
ors and this lack of interest by the painter of the vase in the depiction of an individual destiny, his
lucubration about the choice of device may not have gone necessarily that way, although in some
Contextualizing Symbols: the Eagle and the Snake in the Ancient Greek World 17

specific and limited cases, in which we encounter a more detailed context of what is happening on
the vase, it is possible, indeed, to find such relationship.

We must accept that if vase painters tried to introduce the future in their works by the means of
the eagle-snake grouping, we have not discovered the code yet, perhaps because no code for the
deciphering of the prophetic signs ever existed in the Greek world.

Actually, our situation in regard to the signs of the future, the kind of signs that can only be proven
when they are fulfilled, is not so far asunder from that of the ancient Greeks themselves. And, later
in time, Cicero was right indeed when he affirmed that there is nothing remarkable about the so
called portents of the kind just mentioned; but after they have happened they are brought within
the field of prophecy by some interpretation78.

Abbreviations

ABV J. D. Beazley, Attic Black-figure Vase-Painters 2(Oxford 1963).

Alan Prez 1982 R. Alan Prez, The serpent image in the Choephorae. A Study of Imagery in Action (January 1, 1982),
ETD Collection for Fordham University. Paper AAI8213253. <http://fordham.bepress.com/disserta-
tions/AAI8213253> (16.03.2011).
Arafat 1990 K. Arafat, Classical Zeus. A Study in Art and Literature (Oxford 1990).
Badn Beazley Archive Database Number, www.beazley.ox.ac.uk.
Beazley 1986 J. D. Beazley, The Development of Attic Black-Figure (Berkeley 1986 [rev. Edition]).
von Bothmer 1961 D. von Bothmer, Ancient Art from New York private Collections. Catalogue of an Exhibition held at
the Metropolitan Museum of Art. December 17, 1959 February 28, 1960 (New York 1961).
CVA Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum.
Grabow 1998 E. Grabow, Schlangenbilder in der griechischen schwarzfigurigen Vasenkunst (Paderborn 1998).
Hlscher 1989 T. Hlscher, Griechische Bilder fr den rmischen Senat, in: Hans-Ulrich Cain (ed.), Festschrift fr
Nikolaus Himmelmann. Beitrge zur Ikonographie und Hermeneutik (Mainz o. Rh. 1989) 327333.
Karusos 1960 Ch. Karusos, Phrontismata, in: F. Eckstein (ed.), Theoria. Festschrift fr W.-H. Schuchhardt (Baden-
Baden 1960) 113122.
Kilinski 1974 K. Kilinski, Boeotian Black Figure Vase Painting of the Archaic Period 2(Mainz o. Rh. 1990).
Lissarrague 2007 F. Lissarrague, Looking at Shield Devices: Tragedy and Vase Painting, in: C. Kraus (ed.), Visualizing
the Tragic. Drama, Myth, and Ritual in Greek Art and Literature. Essays in Honour of Froma Zeitlin
(Oxford 2007) 152164.
Metzger
van Berchem 1967 H. Metzger D. van Berchem, Hippeis, in: M. Rohde-Liegle et al. (ed.), Gestalt und Geschichte. Fest-
schrift Karl Schefold zu seinem 60. Geburtstag am 26. Januar 1965 (Bern 1967) 155159.

Cic. div. 2, 31.

78
18 Diana Rodrguez Prez

Mommsen 1975 H. Mommsen, Der Affecter (Mainz o. Rh. 1975).

Pekridou 1986 A. Pekridou, Das Alketas-Grab in Termessos (Tbingen 1986).
Scheibler 1987 I. Scheibler, Bild und Gef. Zur ikonographischen und funktionalen Bedeutung der attischen Bild-
feldamphoren, JdI 102, 1987, 57118.
Schmidt 1983 M. Schmidt, Adler und Schlange. Ein griechisches Bildzeichen fr die Dimension der Zukunft, Boreas
6, 1983, 6171.
Trampedach 2008 K. Trampedach, Authority Disputed. The seer in Homeric Epic, in: B. Dignas K. Trampedach (eds.),
Practitioners of the Divine. Greek priests and religious officials from Homer to Heliodorus (Washing-
ton 2008) 207230.
Vaerst 1980 A. Vaerst, Griechische Schildzeichen vom 8. bis zum ausgehenden 6. Jh. (PhD Thesis, Salzburg 1980).
Tafeln
 Diana Rodrguez Prez Tafel 1

1. Attic black-figured Amphora, Face A.

Berlin, Antikensammlung V.I.4823
(after Scheibler 1987, 78).

2. Black-figured Amphora by Andokides. New York,

private collection (after von Bothmer 1961, 51).

3. Black-figured Neck Amphora, Affecter Painter. 4. Red-figured Attic Kylix. Berlin, Antikensammlung
Paris, Muse du Louvre F19 (D. Rodrguez Prez). F2294 (after Arafat 1990, pl. 1).
Tafel 2 Diana Rodrguez Prez

6. Black-figured cup from Boeotia. Heidelberg,

Antikenmuseum S99 (D. Rodrguez Prez).

5. Black-figured cup from Boeotia. Heidelberg,

Antikenmuseum S99 (D. Rodrguez Prez).

7. Boeotian Black-figured Alabastron. Heidelberg, 8. Funerary stele of Cleobulos from Acarnas.

Antikenmuseum 161 (D. Rodrguez Prez). Athens, National Museum 4951
(after Karusos 1960, 115 fig. 1).