The influence of the Berlin Painter on the Harrow Painter's work is undeniable, and one could point to other parallels besides the oinochoai in Tampa.[7] However, Robertson is surely correct that the Harrow Painter was neither a pupil of the Berlin Painter nor a member of his workshop.[8] This is supported by a comparison of similar vase shapes, such as neck-amphorae, which were clearly produced by different potters, and by the fact that each artist eschewed some shapes favored by the other. Rather, the Harrow Painter seems to have admired the Berlin Painter from a distance, perhaps, as Robertson has suggested, as the principal painter in an independent workshop.[9] He did not try to mimic the master's narrative style or transfer whole multi-figure compositions to his own works, but was impressed by individual figures and intimate groups. It is perhaps this influence which accounts for a certain affinity with another artist related to the Berlin Painter, the Tithonos Painter, some of whose works are quite close in style to the Harrow Painter.[10] The Syriskos Painter, another artist influenced by the Berlin Painter, also occasionally worked in a vein reminiscent of the Harrow Painter, although he was a better draughtsman and a more flattering imitator of the master. [11]

Illustration 4	Illustration 5	Illustration 6
Illustration 7	Illustration 8	Illustration 9

[8]M. Robertson, "Beazley and After," MJb 27 (1976) 29-46; Robertson 1992, 134.

[9]Robertson 1992, 127.

[10]E.g. Naples 3182 and Hamburg 1893.100 (ARV2, 309, 5 and 9).

[11]Some of his satyrs are especially close; e.g. Frankfurt, Liebieghaus L 116 and Heidelberg 125 (ARV2, 260, 3 and 262, 36). Cf. the himation folds on Munich 2407 and Frankfurt St. V 3, by the Harrow Painter (ARV2, 274, 35 and 37), to those on London E 161, by the Syriskos Painter (ARV2, 262, 41).

Next Section