Ernst Langlotz, in his fundamental study on the chronology of archaic vase-painting and sculpture, argued that the Leagros, son of Glaukon, named on vases, provided a fixed chronological point in the development of red-figure painting.[2] Leagros was a contemporary of Themistokles who was strategos in 465 B.C., so if Themistokles was sixty years old when he was strategos, as Langlotz calculates, his Ephebic years, when he would have been kalos, fall between 510 and 505 B.C. Vases praising his contemporary Leagros would therefore date to this period. E.D. Francis and Michael Vickers drew attention to some of the problems raised by Langlotz' conclusions, not the least of which is the likelihood that Leagros, presumably a youth of exceptional beauty, might have been called kalos for a much longer period than five years.[3] Although the traditional dating is therefore less than certain, it does perhaps provide a general indication of the period in which Douris was active. Langlotz' method of dating with the help of kalos names does not contradict what we know of the careers of the named individuals. For example, if Hermolykos was kalos at age 18 or so, between 495-490 B.C., he would have been thirty when he fought at Mykale; and if Hippodamas was kalos between 490-480, he would have been strategos in his mid to late forties. For Hippodamas there is additional evidence in the form of a cup fragment from the Persian debris on the Acropolis on which he is praised (Athens, Acr. 311, ARV2, 478, 314). We can extrapolate that the career of Douris probably began before 500 and his Middle Period style was reached by 490/485.