lipll 
 
 GREEK BUILDINGS REPRESENTED BY 
 FRAGMENTS IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM 
 
 
 
 
 .'C'i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME 
 FROM THE ■ •' 
 
 SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 DiMtrg W. Sage 
 
 1S91 
 
 yf^z..y/.j,jr^. /^:^//o 
 
 a. 
 
 6896-1 
 
Cornell University Library 
 NA 270.L64 
 
 Greek buildings represented by fragments 
 
 3 1924 008 732 806 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924008732806 
 
GREEK BUILDINGS 
 
 REPRESENTED BY FRAGMENTS 
 JN THE BRITISH MUSEUM 
 
GREEK BUILDINGS 
 
 REPRESENTED BY FRAGMENTS 
 
 IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM 
 
 BY W. R. LETHABY 
 
 LONDON 
 B. T. BATSFORD, 94 HIGH HOLBORN 
 
 T 
 
Pfinted at The Darien Press, Edinburgh, 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The Introduction to the Ephesus section sets out the chief 
 purpose with which the papers now gathered into a volume 
 were undertaken. The author has tried, by a fresh examination 
 of the marbles in our great Museum, and by a discussion of the 
 opinions which have been held in regard to the Greek monu- 
 ments which they represent, to increase the interest taken in 
 them by students, for without some critical activity of mind the 
 mere looking at such things is nearly vain. At the same time 
 he has endeavoured to arrive at clear views as to the original 
 forms of the buildings of which the fragments formed part and 
 to put on record some fresh observations. 
 
 It is suggested that by questioning the actual stones a more 
 practical introduction is gained to the study of Greek Building 
 than ever may be through glossaries of terms, theories of pro- 
 portion, and talk of orders. Certainly in no place other than a 
 few Greek sites is there so much material available for such 
 study as in London, and the buildings dealt with include the 
 best known monuments of Greek art. 
 
 Many of the illustrations are diagrams and slight sketches 
 by the author of the nature of marginal notes on the text ; 
 others are taken from the works of Wood and Penrose, the 
 American " Dictionary of Architecture," the Museum Guides 
 and Catalogues, &c. ; several illustrations of the sculptures of 
 the Parthenon are from woodcuts in an old Handbook to the 
 Elgin Marbles. 
 
 Ill Inverness Terrace, 
 London, W., g/A October 1908. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 I. DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS i 
 
 Introduction — The Discovery — Theories of Recon- 
 struction — Further Excayations — The Old Temple — 
 The New Temple— The Order— The Plan— Sculpture 
 AND Colour— Methods of Workmanship— Dates and 
 Architects. 
 
 II. THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS - 37 
 
 Sources and the Site — The Peristyle — The Pyramid 
 — The Cella — Retrospect — Details of the Order — 
 Sculpture and Colour— Construction and the Archi- 
 tect. 
 
 III. THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES 71 
 
 Date, Plan, and Construction — Refinements and 
 Irregularities — Architects — Colour and Bronze — 
 Sculpture — The Frieze— The Metopes— The Pediments 
 — Restorations — Types of Athena. 
 
 IV. OTHER WORKS 147 
 
 The "Theseum" or Temple of Hephaistos — The 
 Propyl/ea — The Nike and Ilissus Temples — The Erech- 
 theum — Temples at Bass^e and Rhamnus — The Nereid 
 Monument from Xanthus — The Temple of Athena at 
 Priene— The Lion Tome at Cnydos — Temples at Miletus, 
 Salamis, and Naucratis ; at Teos and Magnesia— The 
 Choragic Monuments of Athens — The Lycian Tombs — 
 The Tomb at Mycenae- Appendix : The Ionic Volute— 
 The Acanthus Pillar — Architects in Antiquity. 
 
 INDEX 213 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 " London has long possessed the finest collection of both the lai-ger and 
 smaller works of art from Greece and Asia Minor, but Lord Elgin could not 
 carry off Homer' s sun, rocks, and seas. ^' — Baedeker's "Greece." 
 
 Introduction. 
 
 It i.s impossible to understand any architecture from books 
 alone, and this may be even especially true of the great works 
 of Greek art, for they are not so much seen immediately as 
 through a veil of traditional explanations, commentaries, and 
 theories which are probably in great part a formal grammar 
 applied long after the time when the architecture flourished 
 as a living language. The British Museum, which is the richest 
 collection of representative fragments of great classical buildings 
 in the world, "furnishes us with an invaluable means for looking 
 directly at, and measuring the very stones wrought by Greek 
 artists. In it are stored large and significant fragments of the 
 Parthenon, the Erechtheum, the Propylaea, the Temple of 
 Nik6 Apteros, and of that which once stood by the Ilissus — all 
 in Athens ; of the great Temple of Diana at Ephesus, and of 
 the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus, the two most famous build- 
 ings of Asia Minor ; also of the Temples of Bassae and Priene, 
 and of several important tombs, from the prehistoric work of 
 Mycenae to the late Nereid monument brought from Xanthus. 
 
 Of these, the Temple of Diana and the Mausoleum can only 
 be properly studied in the Museum, which contains practically 
 all the wrought stones of them which have ever been discovered. 
 I propose first to examine the Temple of Diana. 
 
 The several phases of architecture are usually classified as 
 Antique and Classical, or Mediseval and Gothic. We are apt 
 
 A 
 
2 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 to accept the idea that there is some opposition in these, but 
 this is not necessarily the case, although, of course, there is 
 diversity. In a large degree all architecture is one, in that 
 it is the work of men shaping materials according to their 
 powers and desires ; Greek and Gothic architecture resemble 
 one another in both being what I may call primary styles ; 
 while Roman art in much, and Renaissance art still more, were 
 consciously derived, and are secondary. 
 
 The Discovery. 
 
 Before the discovery by Mr Wood of the long-buried site, the 
 Temple of Diana was chiefly known by its reputation as one of 
 the Seven Wonders of the world, and from a few short notices b)- 
 ancient writers. According to Vitruvius, it was Ionic, dipteral, 
 octastyle, and had a cedar ceiling. Pliny says that it was of the 
 enormous and impossible size of 425 feet by 220 feet, that it 
 had 127 columns, the gifts of kings, and thirty-six which were 
 sculptured. 
 
 Falkener, by the publication of his work on Ephesus in 1862, 
 in which he brought together many of the references to the 
 temple contained in the ancient books and offered a conjectural 
 restoration, must have generated the interest which led to a 
 search for the site being undertaken in the following year by J. T. 
 Wood. It was not until 1870 that the site was identified, and 
 as the plain on which the temple was built had been covered b\- 
 some 15 feet of alluvial deposit, and not one stone remained 
 above-ground, the discovery was a triumph for what long seemed 
 a forlorn hope. He was helped by an inscription now in the 
 British Museum, which shows that the temple was outside the 
 Magnesian Gate. 
 
 In 1877 Mr Wood published his popular account, restoring 
 the plan from indications found, as having eight columns at the 
 ends, twenty on the flanks of the outer row, and one hundred 
 in all. In the accounts collected by Falkener the temple is 
 said to have been rebuilt many times, but in the main remnants 
 of only an earlier and a later building were discovered, and I 
 shall call them the Old and New Temples. Wood speaks of the 
 " last temple," " the last temple but one," and " the last temple 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 3 
 
 but two," but the only remains he assigned to the middle one 
 were those of a pavement intermediate between the higher and 
 the lower levels. As the site was very low, a raising of the floor 
 was quite likely to have taken place, and we need not infer from 
 it a rebuilding of the temple. The site was practically a marsh, 
 as had been remarked by Pliny. The Austrian survey referred 
 to below shows the floor of the Old Temple 2.70 metres above the 
 sea-level, the New Temple 5.42 metres, and the modern surface 
 9 metres. (Fig. i.) The remains of the Old Temple were of mid- 
 sixth century work, and, doubtless, belonged to the temple to 
 which Croesus contributed. The later temple was of the fourth 
 century, and probably was not completed until after the visit of 
 
 Fig. I. — Diagram of Levels. 
 
 Alexander to Ephesus in 334. We may call them the temples of 
 Croesus and of Alexander. The site was outside the city to the 
 east at the foot of a range of hills which rose near the back of 
 the east front. The west portico faced the city and the harbour, 
 and possibly for this reason became the chief entrance contrary 
 to the usual custom. It must have been the nature of the site 
 which led to the elevation of the New Temple upon a platform 
 reached by many steps. In building the new structure the old 
 work was only taken down to below the level of this platform ; 
 even the bases and stumps of the old columns were left. These 
 were built round about with new foundations, and the cella walls 
 were increased at the sides. The new foundations thus con- 
 tained a core of the old building, and both were discovered 
 
4 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 together. The two temples were identical in size and general 
 disposition of parts. 
 
 Tpieories of Reconstruction. 
 
 In 1884 Fergusson worked over Wood's materials,* which 
 had been inadequately published, with the object of showing that 
 places should be found for 127 columns as mentioned by Pliny ; 
 and, for this purpose, extended the plan by two or three bays. 
 He had already suggested, from an examination of the marbles 
 in the British Museum soon after they were received, that the 
 square sculptured blocks which Wood had thought were parts of 
 the frieze formed pedestals for the sculptured columns. (Fig. 3.) 
 As there were more than four angle pieces among these 
 blocks it was shown that they could not have belonged to the 
 frieze, f The best result of this paper was that it led to a reply 
 from Mr Wood in which he gave additional and much more 
 workmanlike data with a plan of what was actually found, and 
 sections of the steps and platform. (Figs. 2 and 14.+) This plan 
 also contained facts obtained in a further examination of the 
 site made in 1883-4. 
 
 The walls of the cella were here completely traced, with the 
 basis for the great image in the midst. The foundation of one 
 of the antJE and of one column on each side are accurately laid 
 down. Further, large portions of great retaining walls which 
 supported the platform are shown on both sides, with cross walls 
 exactly opposite the columns dividing the platform into a net- 
 work of walls (it was so also at Pergamos), and giving a colum- 
 niation of 17 feet i^ inch along the flanks. At one end, however, 
 two bays of 19 feet 4 inches were found, and at the other end, 
 and in the right place in regard to the antas, the first of a similar 
 pair of bays was found. It was evident that the two ba)-s at 
 each end were made wider in preparation for the very wide 
 columniation of the fronts. Long portions of the bottom step of 
 those which surrounded the platform were found in situ on one 
 
 * See R.I.B.A. Journal, 1883-4. 
 
 + Newton's "Essays," 1880; "Ionian Antiq.," vol. iv. ; and Dr Murray's 
 "Hist, of Sculpt." 
 
 X From R.I.B.A. Joitrna!, 1883-4. Reproduced by permission. 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 5 
 
 SECTION AT D ON PLANS. 
 
 " 4 
 
 ■ V!;- «-&'», I— 
 
 SECTION AT B. 
 
 side and one end.* The supplementary facts given in this paper 
 were enough to prove that there were twenty columns on the 
 flanks (outer row) and 
 eight at each of the 
 ends, and that a bot- 
 tom step surrounded 
 the outer row of 
 columns at a distance 
 of about 40 feet from 
 their centres, at least 
 on the sides and one 
 end, and presumably 
 the other. Some valu- 
 able detailed sections 
 were also given, but 
 in these what was 
 found and what was 
 conjectural interpreta- 
 tion were not suffi- 
 ciently distinguished. 
 (Fig. 2.) 
 
 Working over the 
 evidence has con- 
 vinced me that the 
 network of walls 
 spoken of supported 
 a raised platform 
 reached by continuous 
 flights of steps, sur- 
 rounding the colon- 
 nade. 
 
 Wood says that he 
 ascertained that the 
 inner row of columns 
 had no square plinths. 
 
 SECTION AT F. 
 
 F 
 
 t^^E3 
 
 ISEaiziE: 
 
 till, •■ wj^kiif ■ -:l?in. ^.,111/ 'vTa 
 
 \<( ,ii!.iftr ' '■Jc^ir'f.tai;' 
 
 FOUNDATION OF INNER COLUMN, 
 PEFIISTYLE. 
 
 Fig. 2. — Sections of Steps along Sides (com- 
 pare Plan, Fig. 14), from Wood. 
 
 * In his MS. letters at the British Museum, Wood, in 1873, says : 
 " We have come across a short length of step at the east end, of the same 
 width as the side step ... it is 116 feet from the centre of the column i7i 
 situ on the north side." 
 
6 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 " I found," he says, " a few inches of the front of the step which 
 was here substituted for the plinth. The step under the base 
 was also in two pieces." * 
 
 I here add a few points derived from the volume of 1 877. 
 The marble pavement of the Old Temple was about 7 feet 
 6 inches below the level of the peristyle, which itself was about 
 9 feet 6 inches above the court. The plinths of the first temple 
 were 7 feet 8i inches square, those of the New Temple were 
 8 feet 8 inches.f " The masonry which supported the steps, with 
 the piers which united the masonry with the foundation piers of 
 the columns, was of courses of limestone about 8 inches thick, 
 which was about the height of each step " (p. 191). The square 
 sculptured blocks were found at the west front. (Fig. 3.) Frag- 
 ments of marble roof-tiles were discovered, which showed that 
 they must have been of large size, as the rounded covering pieces 
 were about 10 inches wide. A fragment of an acroterion was also 
 found at one end. The temple rose in the middle of a paved 
 court, surrounded by a stoa or colonnade. In one place a por- 
 tion of the pavement remained against the outer step. In 
 November 1873, a plinth of the stoa was found on the south 
 side nearly 31 feet beyond the lowest step ; it was 25 feet wide. 
 Seventy feet away from the steps on the south side lay a Doric 
 building parallel to the stoa, parts of four of its columns were 
 found and of the wall beyond. The columns were 2 feet 
 
 6 inches in diameter, and 20 feet 6 inches apart, opposite the 
 alternate piers of the stoa, which were marble and square. Still 
 beyond was a high and strong parabolus wall enclosing the 
 whole precinct. 
 
 Some time before 1895, when the late Dr Murray read a 
 paper on the subject before the Institute of Architects, an essay 
 at piecing the fragments together had been made by him at the 
 British Museum. His main points were the following : — 
 
 I. He finally demonstrated that the sculptured blocks cer- 
 tainly made pedestals, each composed of four stones. 
 
 * Like the plinth of the outer columns he evidently means. I feel a 
 doubt as to this step instead of plinths. 
 
 t This dimension is, I think, slightly excessive. I should say 8 feet 
 
 7 inches bare. 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 Fig. 3. — Part of Sculptured Pedestal, from Wood. 
 
8 
 
 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 Fig. 4. — Plinth of Column. 
 
 2. Pointing out that a circular line on their upper sur- 
 faces would just take one of the sculptured drums with its 
 roll moulding at bottom, he endeavoured to prove that this 
 
 arrangement, which had been 
 suggested by Fergusson and 
 adopted at the Museum, was 
 the only possible one. " So 
 far as I can see, there is no 
 escape, much as it' may be 
 desired, from bringing the sculp- 
 tured drums directly down on 
 the sculptured pedestals as we 
 have done in the Museum." 
 
 3. He maintained that a low 
 square block made up of two 
 stones found beneath one of 
 the ordinary columns was cut 
 so as to show that it "joggled" 
 into other stones, and must have been part of a stylobate, 
 instead of, as Wood had said, a plinth block under the base. 
 "The [circular] base itself " (Dr Murray says), " directly above 
 the joggles, has been in a careful manner cut into as if to 
 receive a metal railing." According to Wood, he adds, this 
 was one of the 
 inner bases, but as 
 a railing here 
 would serve no 
 purpose, Dr Mur- 
 ray thought that 
 the base must 
 have belonged to 
 the outer row. 
 Figs. (4, 12, 13.) 
 
 4. Dr Murray 
 took over Wood's 
 general plan, 
 
 which gave a hundred columns, eighteen at each end, making 
 up the thirty-six sculptured columns of Pliny. He proposed, 
 however, a great modification of the steps and platform, in 
 
 Fig. 5.— Dr Murray's Restoration of Steps in 
 Portico, after Choisy. 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 Fig. 6. — Dr Murray's Restoration of Portico, from a drawing by Mr 
 Cromar Watt. From British Museum Catalogue, by permission. 
 
 order to find a place for the sculptured pedestals at a lower 
 level, beneath the sculptured drums. For this purpose he 
 pushed the steps into the porticoes behind the pedestals at 
 the two ends, and, doing away with steps altogether on the 
 
lO DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 flanks, he here substituted a continuous stylobate. (Figs. 
 
 S> 6, 7, II.) 
 
 S. One of the drums is in bolder relief, and is, he says, 3 inches 
 more in diameter than the rest. He placed it at the angle, and 
 said that the increase of diameter " implies a proportionate in- 
 crease of height." That is in the drum itself, I suppose. 
 
 Further Excavations. 
 
 In the spring of 1905, Mr D. G. Hogarth made a further 
 examination of the site, which is the property of the British 
 Museum, and gave some account of the results obtained in the 
 Times for 8th August of that year. He agrees that the Croesus 
 temple was exactly like its successor in size and arrangement. 
 Below its level were found remains of a still earlier temple, 
 small, in three divisions, and without any peristyle ; in the centre 
 was the basis of the cult statue. The site and the fragments 
 found were carefully measured by Mr Henderson. It is most 
 desirable that the publication of these should not be delayed.* 
 
 In 1906 was published a most careful Austrian survey of 
 the site by the Vienna Institute. This confirms Wood's plans 
 as to the position of the fixed points laid down on them, but 
 revises them by sweeping away the cross walls between the antse 
 and the door, and in carrying the columns right back in the 
 deep pronaos as at Miletus. This plan shows the retaining wall 
 with cross walls to carry the platform, and, as described by 
 Wood, the foundations of two more columns at the south-west 
 angle ; also indications of the foundation of one of the columns 
 in antis. (Fig. 7.) It confirms Wood as to the position of the 
 base now in the British Museum. The great foundation, about 
 20 feet square, for the statue is shown exactly in the middle 
 of the cella. A restoration is given of the west door, the jambs 
 of which were about 3 feet 6 inches wide, and inclined inwards. 
 An excavation was made directly to the west of the English 
 site on the axis of the temple, and several inscriptions and 
 tombs were found. 
 
 * Since writing this I find that a large work on the Old Temple is in the 
 press, and may appear before this short account, which has the New Temple 
 for its subject. 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 II 
 
 The Austrian Survey concerned itself principally with the 
 archaic temple of the sixth century. Of the Hellenistic temple 
 of the fourth, the authors report that only one stone still remains 
 in situ ; "its forn", however, could not have deviated in any im- 
 portant way from that of the Old Temple. One will not be 
 able to proceed thoroughly to reconstruct it, following the sug- 
 gestions of Murray, and the few of its architectural members 
 which are still to be found on the spot, until all the materials 
 gained in Wood's excavations have been properly drawn and 
 published." I wish I could make good this want, but for us, 
 
 f ( 
 
 / 
 
 A 
 
 WA 
 
 Fig. 7. — Data for West Front, a a shows line required by Dr Murray's 
 
 Scheme. 
 
 fortunately, the actual stones are published in the Ephesus 
 Gallery of the British Museum. 
 
 The Old Temple. 
 
 Chersiphron, the architect mentioned by Pliny, was one of the 
 architects of the sixth century temple, and when the writer says 
 that so many columns were the gift of kings, it is probable that 
 this also applied to the Old Temple, as we know that columns 
 were given to it by Croesus,* and the middle of the sixth century 
 
 Herodotus, i. 92. 
 
12 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 was more the age of kings than was the fourth. Its reputation 
 as a world's wonder must go back to the earlier date when it 
 was more without rival than at any other time. Herodotus, 
 speaking of the labyrinth of Egypt, says that all the works of 
 the Greeks cost less than it, " though the temple in Ephesus is 
 deserving of mention, and also that in Samos." It is probable, 
 therefore, that Pliny's whole account was a tradition as to the 
 Old Temple. As we have seen, it was exactly the same size as 
 the New Temple; like it, it had architraves of great span 
 and columns with sculptured drums and others with square 
 blocks. 
 
 The old cella walls. Wood says, were 6.4 thick, of marble, 
 and remarkable for their finish ; one block is shown at the 
 
 Figs. 8 and 9. (Not to the same scale.] 
 
 Museum (the masonry added at the sides for the New Temple 
 increased the foundations to 10 feet wide). The columns were 
 about S feet greatest diameter ; the shafts above the sculptured 
 drums were probably monolithic, and one of the purposes of 
 these drums was to shorten the length of the single stones. 
 There are restored capitals and bases at the Museum ; the 
 abacus is very long and narrow, not square as in later capitals ; 
 it is thus a corbel-capital. Amongst the debris of the temple 
 some ox heads were found. Dr Murray, writing to the authors 
 of the volume on Miletus, said, " they seem to me to belong in 
 some way to a capital of the Old Temple." The square attach- 
 ments suggest rather to me that they were engaged in square 
 piers, such as the antae. See Fig. 8, which, however, is doubt- 
 
DIANAS TEMPLE AT EPIIESUS. 
 
 13 
 
 ful, as I saw the fragment only for two minutes in the Museum 
 cellars. Another fragment is a ram's head, catalogued as be- 
 longing to the New Temple, but of similar work. (Fig. 9.) The 
 bases had various profiles in detail while agreeing in the larger 
 parts. Dr Murray, giving no plinth to the new order, has withheld 
 this feature from the old order too, but Wood found one in place 
 under a base, and the Austrian account gives its depth as 0.322 
 metre — about a foot. The two stones, side by side, of which it 
 was formed, were joined by dovetailed metal cramps. (Fig. 7.) 
 The most remarkable feature is the gutter front so ingeniously 
 restored by Dr Murray. It is so big as to be a parapet, slightly 
 inclined to the vertical plane, rather than a cymatium,* and the 
 surface is sculptured like a frieze between 
 the lion's-head spouts. There cannot have 
 been another frieze together with such a 
 feature, and the cornice probably approxi- 
 mated to the form of Fig. 10. As men- 
 tioned below, the archaic temple was fully 
 decorated with painting on the architectural 
 members and sculpture. This building is 
 of extraordinary historical interest, as in 
 many particulars it set the type for this 
 fully developed Ionic order — or perhaps 
 it would be better to say Ionian order 
 when speaking of the works found on 
 Asiatic soil. 
 
 Fig. 10. 
 
 The New Temple. 
 
 The weight of Dr Murray's case, summarised above, rests on 
 the assumption that the sculptured drums must have rested on 
 the sculptured pedestals, because on the top of the latter are 
 traces of a circular setting-line suitable in size. When we realise 
 that the ordinary fluted columns are of exactly the same 
 diameter, and have an exactly similar torus moulding at the 
 bottom, and ask why they may not have stood on the sculptured 
 pedestals, we open up an alternative solution which is simpler, 
 and, I think, more likely on its merits, apart from the fact that 
 
 * It probably derives from one of the archaic terra-cotta gutters. 
 
14 
 
 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 the former seems to be impossible having regard to the evidence. 
 Dr Murray discussed and dismissed the possibility of fluted 
 columns with deep bases standing on the pedestals, but did not 
 consider the obvious possibility of the same columns with the 
 torus only, being placed exactly like the drums. 
 
 Choisy, in adopting Dr Murray's scheme, allows that the 
 disposition was unusual to the Greeks. I must think that such 
 unnecessary complication was foreign to their ideals, and that 
 the irregularity on the flanks would have been most marked and 
 awkward in having three varieties of bases in succession. (Figs. 
 
 Fig. II. Proposed Restoration and Dr Murray's Scheme below, flank view 
 
 6, II.) It is very awkward also to have the steps sloping down 
 against the sculptured pedestals without any flat space between. 
 The primary idea of the platform seems, as we have seen, to have 
 been to lift the temple above the marshy site ; allowing the 
 principal columns to start from the lower level is opposed to this. 
 As only a part of the columns were sculptured, it seems unlikely 
 that some of them would be doubly decorated, making, indeed, a 
 total of fifty-two sculptured portions, which would have sufficed 
 exactly to surround the whole temple. There seem to have been 
 both square sculptured stones and drums in the ancient 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 IS 
 
 temple,* and Dr Murray would bring those also together—" the 
 old sculptured columns,'' he says, " may have rested on square 
 sculptured pedestals." But the Old Temple was not raised on a 
 high platform, and the different columns must have stood on the 
 same level. 
 
 Other later Ionian temples stand on platforms reached by 
 continuous steps. The Smintheium stood on a platform propor- 
 tionately higher than that of Ephesus. At Miletus was a 
 
 Fig. 12. — Base, as discovered by Wood (Fig. 14, c.) 
 
 temple which, in many respects, was a companion work to the 
 Artemision. The full account of the latest excavations on this 
 site, published in 1904, shows that it was almost the same size 
 and had a continuous flight of steps entirely surrounding it. The 
 columns at the two ends were different from the others in 
 having ornamental bases (not drums), t 
 
 * See B. M. Catalogue, Vol. I., No. 32. 
 
 t The height of the platform was about the same as at Ephesus. At the 
 Smintheium there were eleven steps, at Taos six. 
 
i6 
 
 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EI'HESUS. 
 
 Coming now to the crucial objections to Dr Murray's scheme 
 I would point out that it involves the implication that Wood, 
 who explored the site for four or five years, misread plain 
 evidence as to the steps and bases surrounding the temple. 
 He himself appears to be mistaken in saying that Wood had 
 stated that the Museum base and plinth came from the inner 
 row. In Wood's paper in the R.I.B.A. Journal, this base is 
 carefully drawn, and lettered "Foundation of Outer Column 
 
 of Peristyle " ; and in his 
 book he gives an accurate 
 lithograph of the base 
 stones as found and set 
 up in the British Museum, 
 and describes them pro- 
 perly as from the south 
 flank. (Figs. 12, 14.) 
 This point is of little con- 
 sequence, except that it 
 relieves Wood of having 
 made this mistake. Mur- 
 ray wanted the base to be 
 on the outer row, and 
 Wood had, in fact, stated 
 that it came from that 
 position. But the exigen- 
 cies of the heights, to 
 make it possible to get in 
 the sculptured pedestals 
 where Dr Murray sug- 
 gested, required that he 
 should get rid of any plinth blocks under these bases, and 
 prove that what \\^ood had said was such a plinth should 
 be part of a continuous stylobate. (Fig. 13.) Such a 
 view can in no way be brought into harmonj' with Wood's 
 detailed section,* which shows a rough stone foundation pier 
 under the bases projecting 2 feet beyond where Dr Murray's thesis 
 requires a continuous fair marble wall face. (Fig. 7.) That this 
 
 Fig. 13. — Section of Base. 
 
 * R.I.B.A. Journal, Fig. 163. 
 
"i!"ll- liilli^ ailMHIIIHI.III 
 
 ll' l | l | llli;l lllli .jil l l l ' li m ill ,i l ,lil.,i,:llM lli 
 
 -fio 9u 
 
 ~-<B- 
 
 -■^- 
 
 -^ --^ -0- - ^- -^-- (^- ^ f" O^ 
 
" '' " ■ ' ' i iiil M I N I H II IIlHi mil lili'l | l M ii B m i n i ,,«, j 
 
 .,., -i 
 
 -L 
 
 ." VJ 
 
 I j I I I I I \ i ' 
 
 -o- 
 
 -4>-|--^- 
 
 V) 
 
 z 
 o 
 
 I- 
 < 
 a 
 
 z 
 
 O 
 
 ■e-h^- 
 
 
 I i I 
 
 ■^- 
 
 z 
 < 
 
 Q 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 -(^ -4)- <!> - -O -<J> - - ^ - r-^- 
 I I I ' I I ■» I 
 
 --, , I I , I " ! 
 
 V 
 
 
 V. 
 
 ^ 
 
 o k 
 
 
 s 
 
DIANAS TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 17 
 
 Fig. 15.— Diagram of Steps. 
 
 was a rough square pier projecting, as said, is confirmed by the 
 accurate Austrian Survey, so that we may venture to say that 
 there was no con- 
 tinuous marble 
 stylobate such as 
 -suggested by Dr 
 Murray in opposi- 
 tion to Wood's data. 
 Secondly, the theory 
 requires the sweep- 
 ing away of the net- 
 work of foundations which supported the steps and platform 
 outside the columns, which are carefully shown on Wood's plan 
 
 and sections* (Figs. 2, 14), and con- 
 firmed by the Austrian Survey. 
 Thirdly, Wood found the bottom step 
 of those which surrounded the platform 
 about 40 feet out from the centres of 
 the columns on the north and east 
 sides. Ur Murray had no use for this, 
 and it became a single step in the 
 middle of the narrow space of court 
 which surrounded the temple, and be- 
 tween it and an enclosing colonnade. 
 Now, there are three portions of steps 
 actually at the British Museum, and 
 each one shows plainly that it was 
 followed by at least another step. 
 The only step that Wood speaks of 
 finding is the outer one, and one of 
 those at the Museum must be a part of 
 it; probably the widest one, which, how- 
 ever, shows by a fixing line that only the 
 normal size of S^ inches by 22 inches 
 was exposed. The others are 22 inches 
 wide and deeper than 8^ inches, but the 
 surplus was fitted into a notch in the step below each. (Fig. 15.) 
 
 Fig. 16. — Pedestals and 
 Drums of Columns 
 compared. 
 
 * R.I. B.A. Journal, Figs. 164, 165, 166. Our Fig. 2 above. 
 
1 8 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 We are thus compelled by evidence of the building itself 
 to look for another solution of the question of the distribution 
 of the sculptured drums and pedestals. Measurement of the 
 stones at the British Museum shows first, that the bottom of 
 the fluted columns are exactly the same size as the sculptured 
 drums (Wood says that both are 6 feet ^ inch) ; secondly, that 
 the pedestals and drums are of the same height (6 feet) ; and 
 thirdly, that the pedestals are about the same size across as the 
 diameter of the drums. (Fig. i6.) I say about, because there is 
 nothing which exactly fixes their size, and, as set up at the 
 Museum, they vary from 6 feet i inch to 6 feet 2 inches. 1 suggest, 
 therefore, that the outer row, at one end or both, had the square 
 blocks ranging at the same level with the sculptured drums. I 
 believe the blocks were all found at the west end. 
 
 On the supposition that we must provide for thirty-six 
 sculptured columns we get rid of any which were doubly sculp- 
 tured. As the returns would have square pedestals on the 
 outside row as well as the fronts, we get only two varieties 
 of bases on the flanks as shown by Fig. 1 1. 
 
 The Order. 
 
 I have carefully examined the base at the British Museum,, 
 and can see no sign that the stones which Wood called a plinth 
 made part of a continuous course.* Except the one plain face 
 in front all the rest is broken. Such internal data as can be 
 gathered are all in favour of the blocks having formed a plinth. 
 It was bolted to its foundation by four bolts, three of the 
 holes for which remain, and one of these touches the angle 
 of a fracture, which Dr Murray read as a joggled joint. Such 
 a bolt was, of course, put through the solid stone. (Fig. 4.) 
 
 These holes really conditioned the fracturing of the stone, or 
 rather the bolts did, for it is clear that the plinth has been 
 roughly yet purposely broken so that the metal might be 
 extracted — a usual phenomenon at ancient ruins. The question 
 of a railing as suggested by Dr Murray hardly touches the 
 point, and I do not doubt that there may have been a railing, 
 
 * The plinths of the Old Temple were also in two stones. 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 19 
 
 but the 8-inch by 4-inch cavity sunk about 10 inches into 
 one side of the base seems to me rather a mending of the lower 
 member than the fixing mark of such a railing. (Fig. 13.) 
 Reasons for the stones having formed a plinth, besides these, 
 and Wood's testimony, are the facts that the size, about 8 feet 
 7 inches, works out to half a columniation as at Priene and 
 Miletus, and the whole base resembles those of the companion 
 works just named. 
 
 With the plinth the height of the base is two-thirds of a 
 diameter, a fair proportion ; but, without it, it is impossibly low. 
 
 Fig. 17. — Capital of Column, from Wood. 
 
 Of the columns the bottom diameter is 6 feet J inch, and the top 
 diameter is 4 feet 9J inches, about four-fifths of the lower 
 dimension. Wood noticed that the columns decreased rapidly 
 towards the top, which is also a characteristic of the columns of 
 the Mausoleum. The distance from centre to centre on the 
 flanks was 17 feet i^ inches — this is nearly the same intercolum- 
 niation of i4 diameter,* used at Priene ; the Mausoleum seems 
 to have been about if, and Miletus was i|. The exact spacing 
 was settled by that of the old Temple of Diana, but the plinths 
 
 * Rayet and Thomas. Intercolumniation = the clear space. 
 
20 
 
 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 to the bases and the spaces between them seem to have been 
 equal squares as at Priene and Miletus.* 
 
 The noble capitals seem to be the parent examples of the whole 
 later Ionian group. (Fig. 17.) The extreme dimension is about 
 8 feet 7 inches — the same as the plinth block ; its height is about 
 half a diameter over the volutes as at the Mausoleum and Priene. 
 The faces of the volutes are not vertical, but lean outward toward 
 
 the top. The rolls of the 
 volutes at the sides are 
 divided into four large 
 flutes,f the bottoms of 
 which are filled by palm- 
 ettes. (Figs. 18, 19.) 
 Cockerell drew a capital 
 almost exactly similar at 
 Sardis which he said was 
 the most beautiful he had 
 ever seen. The abacus is 
 not square, but about 9 
 inches longer in the direc- 
 tion of the epistyle. In 
 front of the capital are three 
 enormous "eg 
 
 _gs" of an egg 
 and tongue moulding which 
 at Priene and the Mauso- 
 leum became continuous, 
 the eggs being the same 
 in number as the flutes of 
 the column. This is clearly 
 a development. 
 
 The columns of the 
 little less in diameter than 
 Wood says that the inner 
 
 Fig. 18. 
 
 Fig. 19. 
 Volutes of the Capitals. 
 
 inner row seem to 
 those outside. It 
 
 have been a 
 is true that 
 
 columns were of the same diameter 
 
 as the outer ones, but 
 
 * "This plinth," say Rayet and Thomas, "is characteristic of the Ionic 
 order of Asia Minor as found at Priene, Ephesus, the Mausoleum [this only 
 inferred], and at Miletus." 
 
 t This is derived from Old Temple. 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 21 
 
 on his section he figures it as 4.2 from the centre of one of 
 these columns to the face of the step or plinth which carried it, 
 that is 8.4 instead of 8.7 across. He also says that these inner 
 columns had thirty flutes instead of twenty-four, according to 
 a custom which Vitruvius mentions. Dr Murray says : " We 
 possess two capitals which differ in size, and have assumed that 
 the smaller belonged to the inner row." On the smaller capitals 
 there is also a variation in the design, the palmettes come be- 
 tween the ends of the flutes of the roll of the volute, instead 
 of at the ends of the flutes as in the larger capitals. (Fig. 18.) 
 
 Wood's account of the greater number of flutes on the 
 smaller columns is not borne out by the portion of the smaller 
 column erected in the Museum. The flutes are only about 
 -} inch less in width and were twenty-four in number. 
 
 As to Dr Murray's fifth point, the drum with higher relief, 
 which he suggested formed part of the angle column. Wood 
 measured it as 3 inches less in diameter than the rest. Murray, 
 in calling it larger, must, I think, have included the projection of 
 the sculpture. It is much inferior in style, and is bedded in its 
 height. I suggest that it formed part of the inner row between 
 the antje. 
 
 Of the entablature, Wood found several fragments. The 
 architrave was 3. 10 deep. What looks like a joggle-joint in the 
 Museum fragment is probably a saw cut made by Wood. There 
 is some difficulty as to this architrave. Its soffit is panelled, 
 and supposing, as we must, that this panel was central on the 
 surface, the total width would not have been less than 6.3. As 
 restored, the margins are narrowed so as to give a soffit of 
 about 5.3. On the evidence we must suppose that the archi- 
 trave overhung the abacus by 2 or 3 inches. The abacus 
 was so very narrow at the Old Temple that we may easily 
 suppose that the architrave projected over the capitals, and this 
 may have been carried over into the New Temple. There exist 
 also in the Museum portions of two separate rows of egg and 
 tongue mouldings and a length of the sculptured gutter, but no 
 part of a frieze was found.* As the Catalogue states : " Of the 
 
 * The eggs and tongues are 13^ inches from centres, and 12 inches high : 
 the gutter cyma was over 2 feet high. 
 
22 
 
 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 moulding above the architrave and of the frieze nothing 
 remains." I believe that they never existed, and that the 
 entablature was of the traditional Ionian form which Choisy 
 calls " the Architrave Order." 
 
 We must turn to the order of the Temple of Priene, which 
 obviously much resembled Ephesus, and where the carved gutter, 
 as will be shown, is a copy of that, to elucidate this point. When 
 it was explored by the Dilettanti Society we are told that here 
 again no moulding was found which would have occupied a place 
 above the architrave, and although the order had been restored 
 with a frieze until quite lately, the latest German researches show 
 that it, the great altar to the east of the temple, and the second 
 temple were all examples of the architrave order. The authors 
 
 of the work cited * say that 
 '• the temple, in fact, did not 
 have a frieze, but, instead, 
 directly above the egg and 
 tongue moulding, which 
 crowned the architrave, lay 
 the powerfully projecting 
 dentil course." These Priene 
 entablatures are now set up 
 the Persjamos Museum. 
 
 ^ 
 
 I 
 
 ^>»w 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 nnnf 
 
 € 
 
 te- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "1 
 
 MlRf 
 
 T*^^>- 
 
 
 
 ■ '^^^''ij^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 iiiH 
 
 "iiS 
 
 ^ 
 
 r^ 
 
 ^^^?^ -^^^^^ 
 
 s 
 
 p'?' 
 
 
 "*a* 
 
 fcpfc^ 
 
 "ifln^ 
 
 ^^^aa^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 " IrTR^^^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 '"■ iiTriFfw 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 »>s»5|/_""nfi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 % 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 r 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 sss 
 
 l*tt 
 
 V - "^ 
 
 ^ ' '. 
 
 
 
 L 
 
 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 Fig. 20. — Ionian Cornice. 
 
 The dentil course resting on 
 the architrave is the essential 
 part of the earlier Ionian en- 
 tablatures. A fragment of a cornice from Xanthus in the British 
 Museum consists of a representation of a row of round poles, set 
 close and far projecting, carrying a band. The two Lycian tombs 
 have cornices made up of an architrave, a row of projecting blocks, 
 representing ends of timbers, and a plate above of two facias. 
 This type of cornice, consisting of architrave, dentils, and corona, 
 is general in the Lycian rock tombs. (Fig. 20.) Choisy has 
 pointed out that this is the true Asiatic (Ionic) type. At Athens, 
 he says, dentils are only known at the Caryatide porch, and there, 
 again, there was no frieze.f At Miletus a frieze of sculptured 
 
 * Wiegand and Schrader, " Priene," 1904. 
 
 t Both exist on the small and late choragic monument. 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 23 
 
 scroll decoration appears, but it is of the Roman epoch. At an 
 earlier time the tradition of the architrave order was so firm in 
 Ionia that the Nereid monument in the British Museum, which 
 in much seems to derive from Athens, has figure sculptures on 
 the architrave but no frieze. The late colonnade of the Zeus altar 
 at Pergamos still has no frieze, nor have the Sidon sarcophagi. 
 
 Fig. 21. — Entablatures of Ephesus and Priene compared. 
 
 In Fig. 21 I have laid down the entablature of Priene and the 
 fragments from Ephesus to the same scale, following the pro- 
 portion of the former where we have no other guide. The 
 result gives an entablature of about 1 1 feet deep, and of practi- 
 cally the same proportion to the whole order as at Priene. At 
 
24 
 
 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 that temple the columns were at least 8f diameters high, the 
 dimension calculated by Cockerell, or nearly 9 diameters, the 
 height arrived at by the German explorers from the masonry 
 of the ant£E. The lesser proportion for Ephesus would give a 
 column of 52 feet 4 inches, the greater of about 54 feet, and a 
 total to the top of the cornice of about 65 feet. The greater 
 dimension may, I think, be accepted. Wood proposed 55 feet 
 for the column, and at Miletus the proportional height is still 
 greater. 
 
 The Mausoleum, a famous companion work to Ephesus and 
 Priene, has had its order restored at the Museum with a 
 
 sculptured frieze, 
 although here 
 again fragments 
 were found of 
 only the two usual 
 egg and tongue 
 mouldings, and 
 the whole makes 
 up the abnormal 
 depth of nearly a 
 third of the column, 
 instead of about a 
 fifth. I have no 
 doubt that here 
 again there should 
 be no frieze. 
 
 The sculptured gutter stone mentioned above is much 
 broken. (Fig. 22.) It is clear, however, that a lion's-head spout 
 occupied the centres of lengths of about 6 feet. The rest is 
 filled by elegant scrolls of acanthus, of which the upper 
 part is broken away. On comparing it with the Priene 
 gutter, also in the Museum, I find that the latter is a smaller 
 and comparatively poor copy of the Ephesus gutter, so that one 
 can be completed from the other with certainty. It is all the 
 more certain, therefore, that both entablatures were alike. (Fig. 
 23.)* 
 
 Fig. 22. — Gutter, fiom Wood. 
 
 The second temple at Priene had another copy of the same gutter. 
 
DIANAS TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 25 
 
 There are at the Museum two stones of the slabs, 8 inches 
 thick, which cased the pediment. In Dr Murray's restoration 
 he has given dentils to the raking cornice, but this is most 
 unusual, if not unexampled. At Priene they were omitted, and 
 the band which took their place was less in depth so as to 
 lighten the raking cornice. The " acroterion " found by Wood, 
 and now at the Museum (it is not set upright), is much too 
 small in scale to have surmounted the pediment. A series of 
 
 Fig. 23. — Restoration of Gutter. 
 
 them may have furnished antefixae along the top of the gutter,* 
 but it seems to me to be later in style than the rest. (Fig. 24.) 
 
 The Plan. 
 
 Wood's published plans refer to the New Temple. From 
 his text we find that he discovered the positions of at least two 
 of the ancient columns at the west end which are not laid down 
 on his plan. This is what he says : " At last we found part of 
 
 * As on the Sidon sarcophagi. 
 
26 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 the base of a column . . . and in position a large square block 
 of marble which proved afterwards to be the plinth stone of the 
 base belonging to the more ancient temple. . . . The size is 
 
 7 feet 8J inches, while that of the plinths of the last temple is 
 
 8 feet 8 inches, but the position appears to have been identical." 
 This was in December 1 870. On the following February : 
 
 " The fine base of one of the columns on the south flank was dis- 
 covered in position . . . this base is now re-erected in the British 
 Museum. I had now two certain points, viz., the plinth stone 
 of the base near the western end, and another near the centre of 
 the south flank." (Fig. 7.) * By reference to the recent Austrian 
 
 * Pp- 174, 176. 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 27 
 
 Survey it is clear that the plinth first found was that of the 
 second column back from the angle on the south side, an im- 
 portant point. Again, on p. 267, he says : " We found in the 
 west front the plinth of a column of the Old Temple as well as 
 part of the base of one of the inner columns, consisting of the 
 plinth and lowest circular stone." The former of these is prob- 
 ably that first mentioned, the latter is shown by the Austrian 
 Survey to be that directly to the south of the south-west anta. 
 " The position of these points," he, says, " corresponds as nearly 
 as I could ascertain with the columns of the last temple, giving 
 a satisfactory proof that the temples were built on the same 
 plan and of the same size." The Austrian Survey, in addition, 
 gives some slight indication of the position of one of the 
 columns between the antae. In another place Wood says : " In 
 January 1873 I obtained particulars relating to the position of 
 the columns at the west end." We can now see how he was 
 able to get the dimensions for the remarkable spacing of the 
 columns of the west front, which he gives as follows : From the 
 left to the centre, 19 feet 4 inches, 20 feet 6 inches, 23 feet 6| 
 inches, 28 feet 8J inches. This may be compared with the 
 Austrian Survey, which gives in metres, 6.16, 6.16, 7.20, 8.75. 
 These spans are immense ; the nearest parallel case was found 
 in the Temple of Sardis, where the openings, following the 
 same order, were 16 ft. 3 in., 17.8, 21.7, 25.4. Wood broke up 
 the cella with an opisthodomos to the east, but from the exactly 
 central position of the great basis for the statue, and from the 
 uniform disposition of certain rough masonry piers along the 
 foundations of the side walls, it seems more likely that the cella 
 was undivided in this way. Such an arrangement would further 
 allow of an eastern door, entering the cella, for even if we are 
 driven to suppose that the great altar and the principal door of 
 entrance were to the west, I can hardly think that there was no 
 central eastern door.* The Austrians endeavoured to find the 
 basis of the great altar to the west, but without success, never- 
 theless, they too consider it certain that the temple faced west. 
 Wood concluded that the piers spoken of above were Byzantine, 
 but as they contained fragments of the Old Temple, and were 
 
 * The temple of the Dioscuri at Naucratis, however, faced west . 
 
28 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 spaced pretty regularly opposite the columns outside, it seems 
 
 more likely that they were internal buttresses to stay the walls 
 
 against the raised peristyle. The cella was about 70 feet wide ; 
 
 if it were roofed it must have been subdivided. Wood found a 
 
 curious Corinthian capital " near the cella," and supposed that 
 
 it represented internal rows of columns. It is described as 
 
 elliptic on plan, but it is really made up of a pier and two 
 
 attached half-rounds. (Fig. 25.) It is only 2.6 high, and is of 
 
 quite late Roman work. Such a capital might 
 
 belong to an external stoa, or possibly to some 
 
 small erection about the great image, but it 
 
 can hardly have formed part of the structure 
 
 of the cella. I am no believer in much which 
 
 Pi„ 2, has been written on hypaethral lighting, but 
 
 the evidence in this case seems to suggest that 
 
 the cella was open as at Miletus. The lack of internal foundations, 
 
 and the immense size of the great basis in the midst (20 feet 
 
 square, which would well have supported a covered shrine as 
 
 well as the statue), seem to support this view. Wood also found 
 
 a drain in the foundations of this basis, which he called an altar 
 
 — " probably for carrying away the water used in washing the 
 
 surface after sacrifice." There would be plenty of room in the 
 
 pronaos, treasury, and other parts for the cedar 
 
 roof mentioned by Vitruvius.* Save for the 
 
 seeming need of having a treasury at one end 
 
 or the other of the cella, I had come to think 
 
 that columns would be disposed in the space 
 
 between the antae walls as at Miletus, and I 
 
 find that the Austrian plan has set forth this 
 
 view. With the inscriptions at the Museum are Fig. 26. 
 
 several walling stones. 
 
 We have seen that the temple court was surrounded by a 
 colonnade ; the plan of this is shown b\' Wood. Of the 
 Doric building which stood beyond it on the south side there is 
 
 * In the MS. letters at the B.M., however, Wood speaks, in 1871, 
 of finding parts of an " internal " column with flutings at upper diameter of 
 5^ inches. He thought that the lower diameter might be about 4 feet 
 10 inches. "This is the second fragment I have found of internal columns.'' 
 Both were about 45 feet north of the column in situ on south side. 
 
DIANA S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 29 
 
 a remnant at the British Museum of the triglyph frieze 
 (No. 2,562), 18 inches high. Outside all was the great precinct 
 wall, about 12 feet high, of which Wood gives a diagram. 
 Amongst the fragments are a base of a column 5.6 in diameter 
 (Fig. 26), and a piece of guilloche moulding (Fig. 27). 
 
 Sculpture and Colour. 
 
 A skilful restoration of one of the sculptured drums of the 
 archaic temple set up by Dr Murray is shown in the Ephesus 
 Gallery. Of the later temple, portions of four pedestals have 
 been pieced together, and on these are set the sculptured tam- 
 bours of the columns. 
 
 The merits of the sculptures are 
 hardly sufficiently recognised. Reliefs 
 so noble in style are indeed difficult to 
 find. The standing figures of one of 
 the columns are obviously inspired by 
 the " Magistrates " of the Parthenon. 
 The seated figures, on the drum of 
 which I have attempted a restoration 
 (Fig. 28), recall the goddesses of the 
 same frieze, and the style of all has 
 affinity with the finest Attic sepulchral 
 reliefs.* The gracious forms, severe 
 while sweet, and at once broad and 
 ■detailed in their treatment, follow the 
 
 high traditions of the fifth century. Their scale is that of nature, 
 and taking this exceptional fact into account, they hold a place 
 amongst the few most perfect architectural sculptures of Greek 
 art. The Hermes has been found copied, as Dr Waldstein has 
 shown, on the silver patera of Bernay. The sculptures of the 
 square pedestals, in higher relief and more violent action, seem 
 to belong to a more advanced school. I suppose that they 
 held the most important place in the front rank of the por- 
 tico, and that here we find the work or direct influence of Scopas. 
 •(Fig. 3.) 
 
 Fig. 27. 
 
 * See Figure in Anderson and Spiers' " Greek and Roman Architecture." 
 
30 
 
 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 The most perfect group has been explained in several ways 
 but I do not know if its striking resemblance to the group of 
 Hermes, Eurydice, and Orpheus (Collignon * Fig. 69) has been 
 pointed out. The latter is said to be a late fifth century work. 
 The Hermes may be compared with that on the grave relief in 
 the British Museum (No. 627), which itself seems to be a copy 
 
 Fig. 28. — Sketch of Column, Restored. 
 
 of the Hermes of Andros (Collignon, Fig. 201). The noble 
 woman's figure, indicated on my sketch (Fig. 29), slightly 
 restored, appears to me to be so close an adaptation of the 
 famous Eirene of Kephisodotos that we may speak of it as a 
 
 * " Hist, de la Sculpt. Grecque." 
 
DIANAS TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 31 
 
 copy of that work. The pose is similar, and the draping is 
 almost identical. The Eirene was wrought about 370 ; in 
 turn it derived from the Maidens of the Erechtheum (c. 420). 
 Further to the right is the lower part of a seated male figure in 
 the attitude of one of the gods of the Parthenon frieze, and of a 
 figure of ^sculapius from a coin of Epidaurus. This last is a 
 
 Fig. 29.— Sketch of Column, Restored. 
 
 small point, were it not that the coin represents the famous cult 
 statue ; and a bas-relief of a similar figure (see Collignon) from 
 the same place has open-work shoes, which are identical with 
 those on our column. On the left of the Hermes are two superb 
 figures almost complete, and a small fragment of a third which 
 was like one of the magistrates of the Parthenon who lean on 
 
32 DIANAS TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 their staves. The parallels to the Hermes mentioned above 
 have been likened to the Hermes of Praxiteles, but our figure 
 has quite sufficient earlier sources (see Nos. 22, 23, 25, and 30 of 
 the west frieze of the Parthenon). Our sculptures, then, are of 
 the Attic school of the transitional period of the first half of the 
 fourth century. Are the seated women three of the Muses ? 
 The perfection of modelling and finish may best be judged from 
 an exquisite fragment, being the cheek and side of the head of a 
 female figure (No. 1,239). This lies neglected in a case, and has 
 never, I believe, been photographed. It deserves setting against 
 a background in a glass case. 
 
 The remains in the Museum show that the archaic temple 
 was fully painted. The throat of one of the volutes is still 
 coloured bright red, and a leaf pattern around the top of the 
 flutes of the column is painted. In one of the volutes a part 
 of a gilt lead fillet was found. The sculptures of the gutter 
 front and of the bottom drums of the columns were decorated. 
 The hair, lips, and eyes of the figures were painted, and the 
 dresses had bands of palmctte and key patterns. 
 
 Sufficient was found to show that the New Temple was also 
 painted, even to the bases, one of which was found coloured red 
 in the scotia ; and Wood illustrates a small fragment of egg 
 and tongue moulding (Plate X., Fig. 6), which had the ground 
 coloured blue. The use of these colours, bright blue and red, 
 picking out the grounds of reliefs, was the traditional method 
 of coloration in works of this school, and is also found at the 
 Mausoleum and at Priene. Near the temple a fragment of 
 Doric cornice was discovered, showing vestiges of colour, " blue, 
 vermilion, and gold." This probably belonged to the building 
 which stood to the south of the temple court. 
 
 Methods of Workmanship. 
 
 Several of the volutes of the capitals in the Museum have never 
 been completed. One of the capitals is nearly finished on one 
 half, while the other half is only roughed out. It is evident that 
 the capitals were fixed in an unfinished state, and a comparison 
 with other examples shows that this was a general method of 
 procedure. Choisy speaks of the " ravalciiicnt" Ahcr fixing as 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 33 
 
 general. At the moment of setting, the faces were left rough 
 {d'ebaucke), only the reliefs were fully sculptured in advance, the 
 rest was finished in place. For a column they marked in the 
 shops the extremity of the flutes at the top and bottom, and 
 the remainder was wrought after fixing.* The most remarkable 
 example of this procedure is the Temple of Miletus, where un- 
 fluted columns, unmoulded bases, and half-finished carvings 
 were found. There is considerable freedom in the Ephesus 
 work. The large capital from the outer row is wrought 
 together with the top of the shaft, the bed being just below the 
 rounded termination of the flutes. The smaller shafts rose to 
 the underside of the eggs and tongues of the capitals, includ- 
 ing the astragalos moulding in the more usual way. Neither of 
 these carved mouldings space equally with the flutes, and the 
 latter varies in spacing from 5A to 6\ centres under the 
 same capital. 
 
 The Lesbian leaf moulding on the pedestals varies in spacing 
 from 4|- to 5^ inches, and is quite sketchy in parts. In the Old 
 Temple intentional variation of parts is as marked as in a Gothic 
 building. 
 
 Dates and Architects. 
 
 There are two records which bear on the date of the earlier 
 temple. We are told that the famous artist Theodorus advised 
 that a bed of charcoal should be laid over the site — a well- 
 known and here very necessary precaution against damp — and 
 that Croesus gave some columns to the structure. These facts 
 would date the foundation as about 580, and the erection of the 
 columns as about 560. 
 
 The building of the New Temple is usually dated by the 
 story given by Plutarch and others that the old one was burnt on 
 the night in which Alexander was born in 356. This story, on 
 its face, seems to bear the character of a myth. Falkener pointed 
 out that another date, at the beginning of the fourth century, is 
 given in the Chronography of Eusebius, which contains valuable 
 old material. He accepted both burnings, but it seems more 
 likely that the true date was 395, not 356.t The earlier year 
 
 * " Hist. Arch.," vol. i., p. 276. 
 t See a long Appendix in the Austrian volume. 
 C 
 
34 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 agrees much better with the architectural facts. The Mausoleum, 
 which was begun about 353 (+ or — ), seems to be consider- 
 ably later in its style. At Priene, which it is held was begun 
 about 345 and finished about 334, the order is copied even to 
 the gutter, so that the whole height of the immense mass of 
 Ephesus was finished before Priene. The carving of the 
 gutter at the latter is poor, and seems much later than its fine 
 prototype. 
 
 According to Vitruvius the temple was begun by Chersi- 
 phron of Cnossus and his son Metagenes, and was completed by 
 Demetrius, a servant of Diana {Diance Servus), and Paeonius, the 
 Ephesian, who, he says, also built the Miletus temple in associa- 
 tion with Daphnis. It is generally agreed that Chersiphron 
 must have been a master at the erection of the early temple. 
 Vitruvius speaks of him as contriving machinery for bringing 
 the columns to the site, and of his writing a book, with his son 
 Metagenes, on the order of the temple. Pliny tells a story of 
 his setting the great epistyle.. This last certainly could not 
 have been reached in one generation, and it is much more prob- 
 able that the temple was planned by the master who advised 
 as to the foundations. It is somewhat astonishing to find that 
 the archaic temple was so advanced in style, and so immense in 
 scale. We have seen that Herodotus mentions it along with 
 the temple of Hera in Samos, and the remains of the latter, 
 which have been measured, show that, while in many respects it 
 was similar, it was even larger by a few feet. Indeed, Herodotus 
 himself says in another place : " The Samians have three works 
 the greatest of all that have been wrought by the Greeks. The 
 first the aqueduct, the second the harbour, the third a temple, 
 the largest ever seen, and its architect was Rhoecus, son of 
 Phileus, a native." 
 
 Dr Murray has remarked that the resemblance between the 
 early Ephesus capitals and those of the Hera temple is " par- 
 ticularly striking and interesting," because of a recorded con- 
 nection between the artists who worked at both — RhcECUS, the 
 architect of the Samian temple, and the Theodorus who is 
 associated with him by ancient writers. 
 
 According to Collignon, Rhcecus began the Hera temple 
 about 600. Theodorus, who appears to have been younger and 
 
DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 35 
 
 perhaps his pupil, was in full activity about the middle of the 
 sixth century. His work at the Artemision was probably about 
 580. Rhcecus himself cast for Ephesus the most ancient bronze 
 statue of which there is record ; it was called " Night," and was 
 placed at the altar of Artemis. Theodorus was an architect, 
 sculptor, and writer who '' possessed all the technical knowledge 
 of his time." The signatures of both Rhoecus and of Theodorus 
 have actually been found on votive works.* 
 
 Recalling again the likeness of the two greatest temples of 
 antiquity, the relation of the two cities, the fame of Samos as 
 the chief art centre of Ionia, it seems more than probable that 
 both temples were planned by those great early masters. 
 Indeed, we may almost say that from no other centre and by 
 no other artists could a work in which sculpture is so intpgral 
 have originated. We have seen that Vitruvius gives the names 
 of Demetrius and Pseonius as having completed the temple, 
 and this might mean, as has been supposed, that they were the 
 chief architects for the later structure. Strabo, however, says 
 that Deinocrates, the celebrated architect of Alexander — the 
 master who planned the new city of Alexandria — was its builder. 
 It might be held that the conqueror called the master from his 
 great work at Ephesus ; but Vitruvius tells another story of his 
 introduction to Alexander, and says that he followed the latter 
 from Macedonia to propose the scheme of cutting Mount Athos 
 into the form of a statue. This itself is perhaps not a very 
 certain story, but if we consider the dates, it becomes certain 
 that Strabo's account is an instance of a big reputation spread- 
 . ing too far. 
 
 As to Paeonius, it is said by the last writers on the subject 
 that the Miletus temple, which he is stated to have built, may 
 have been begun as early as 332, but all which remains seems to 
 me much later in style, and taking into account what Vitruvius 
 also says as to the erection of an altar of Apollo (at Miletus) by 
 Paeonius, it seems more likely that the architect of Ephesus is 
 not the same as he of Miletus. Certainly if the New Temple of 
 Diana was begun soon after 395 one master could not have 
 planned the two structures. An inscription found at Miletus, 
 
 * " Hist, de la Sculpt. Grecque.'' 
 
36 DIANA'S TEMPLE AT EPHESUS. 
 
 with phrases parallel to the Servus Diance quoted above, clears 
 up one point, and shows by analogy that the Demetrius men- 
 tioned above was a slave attached by purchase to Diana's 
 Temple, and proves that a master builder might be of servile 
 condition.* 
 
 * Pontremoli et Haussoullier • " Didymes." 
 
 Printed at The Darien Press, Edinhn-'yh. 
 
II. THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 " My eyes have looked on the Wall of Babylon and on the Zeics by the 
 Alpheus \Olympia\ and oji the Hanging Gardens, and the colossal Helios 
 \Rhodes\ and on the high Pyra/nids, and the gigantic monument of Mausohis, 
 but when I saw the vast Temple of Artemis \Ephesus\ soaring to the clouds, 
 the others were all dimmed, for except in Heave?i the Sun has never looked 
 on like." — Antipater of Sidon {c. ioo b.c.) on the Seven Wonders. 
 
 Sources and the Site. 
 
 In the British Museum Catalogue of Greek Sculpture, vol. ii., 
 pp. 66 and 6^, are set out small prints of eight various restaura- 
 tions which have been suggested for the world-famous Mausoleum 
 at Halicarnassus, together with a good bibliography of the subject. 
 Having been interested in the noble remnants of this puzzling 
 monument preserved in the Museum, I was drawn on to read 
 what had been written on the subject with the hope of discovering 
 that which had been proved in regard to it and what is mere 
 embroidery of conjecture. I propose to review the evidence of 
 the stones themselves, and to bring out the points in what has 
 been written which seem to me most in accordance with the 
 facts. 
 
 The main sources of evidence are three — the marbles in the 
 Museum, Newton and Pullan's account of their discovery,* and 
 a short description by Pliny. As shown by the surveys, the city 
 of Halicarnassus was built around a deep, almost circular 
 natural harbour. It was rebuilt by Mausolus, and his great 
 monument has such a prominent position in the centre of the 
 scheme that Adier is probably right in arguing that it was 
 begun by himself before his death, in 353 B.C. The city is so 
 
 * Cited below as Newton for text and Pullan for plates. 
 D 
 
3S 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 accurately described by Vitruvius that it almost seems that he 
 might have visited the Mausoleum, which it is clear that he 
 regarded as supreme among buildings. " The site of the 
 city is like a theatre in form. On the lowest part by the harbour 
 is the Forum, on the curve, higher up, about the middle, was 
 a broad street or precinct, in the centre of which stood the 
 Mausoleum, a work so marvellous that it was counted among the 
 seven wonders of the world. In the centre of the highest part of 
 the cit}' was the Temple of Mars, with a colossal akrolithic 
 statue. At the right hand point of the curve was the Temple 
 of Venus and Mercury and the Fountain of Salmacis. On 
 the left horn stood the Royal Palace, planned by Mausolus 
 himself" * 
 
 Fig. 30. — The Foundation. 
 
 The explorations of Sir C. Newton laid bare the platform of 
 the Mausoleum, which was "cut like a step in the side of the rising 
 hill. ... It is probable that it was connected with the Agora, 
 which was on the shore of the harbour below, by a series of 
 terraces." The monument stood in a temenos, apparently over 
 three hundred feet square, and within this space, on the south 
 and east at least, there were also terraces. Towards the northern 
 peribolus wall the actual foundations were discovered, in an area 
 which had been excavated out of the rocky platform to various 
 depths, but always with level surfaces. The depth averaged 
 about 10 feet. This space was rectangular, 108 feet north and 
 south by 127 feet east and west. There were some extensions 
 
 * In an account of the site by Covel (c. 1675) he mentions the walls and 
 the fountain (B.M. MSS.). 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 39 
 
 beyond the general form, and to the west a rock-cut flight of 
 steps descended to the bottom. " The whole of this area had 
 been filled up with the courses of the foundation, consisting of 
 slabs of a coarse green stone, strongly bound together with iron 
 cramps, and generally about 4 feet square by i foot thick. In 
 some places as many as three courses of those foundation slabs 
 remained." (Fig. 30.) A still better account of the great founda- 
 tion is given by Lieutenant Smith in a Government paper 
 describing the excavations. " The cavity appeared like a bed 
 cut out to receive the foundations. The whole of this quadrangle 
 is cut out of the rock to depths varying from 2 to 16 feet below 
 the surface. Where the rock has failed at the sides the line of 
 cutting is continued as a wall. Throughout the area the rock is 
 cut in beds or levels at different depths, caused by the irregularity 
 of the ground." The site seems to have been originally a quarry. 
 This accounts for the irregularities of depth and the extensions 
 beyond the square. 
 
 Besides this immensely strong basis, fragments of marble 
 columns and entablature were found sufficient to give data for 
 a complete restoration of an " order,'' also many fine sculptures, 
 including friezes, and a quantity of wide step-like stones suitable 
 for roofing. The sculptures and architectural fragments are now 
 exhibited in the Mausoleum Room of the British Museum. 
 
 The description of the Mausoleum given by Pliny also 
 furnishes important data. It is to this effect : — It was 63 feet on 
 the north and south sides, and shorter on the front. Its entire 
 circuit was 411 (or 440) feet, and the height [of this part?] was 
 25 cubits (37I feet), around the pteron (peristyle) were 36 columns. 
 Four famous artists wrought the sculptures on the several fronts. 
 A pyramid equal to the lower part in height surmounted the 
 pteron, diminishing in 24 steps to a meta (generally a steep 
 cone or pyramid). On the summit was a marble chariot the 
 work of Fythis (Pythios, the architect), the total height being 
 140 feet. 
 
 Falkener, in an article in the " Museum of Classical Art," 
 brought together one or two other notices. Lucian says : " Nothing 
 is equal to it either in size or beauty. It is enriched with the 
 most perfect works of art, with statues of men and horses of 
 costly marble, such as can hardly be found in temples, so that it 
 
40 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 is the perfect model for all tombs." Pausanias also says that its 
 size was great and its decorations magnificent. 
 
 It is easy from these accounts to get some general idea of 
 the monument, and before the site had been explored many 
 
 
 A 
 
 Fig. 31.— Types of Proposed Restorations. 
 
 restorations had been suggested. The finds fully confirmed 
 the general good faith and accuracy of the descriptions. One 
 main difficulty of interpretation arose in that sides of 63 feet 
 and shorter fronts will not make up a circuit of 41 1 or 440 feet, 
 and the restorations fall into two groups— (a) the small plan. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 4I 
 
 type, and (b) the large plan type. In the type A the 36 columns 
 are arranged in two rows, in the type B in a single row. (See 
 Fig- 3I-) 
 
 The Peristyle. 
 
 I have felt that it might be possible, by a detailed examina- 
 tion of the order, to obtain data which should offer proofs of 
 one or the other types of restoration proposed ; for in the order 
 of the Mausoleum, if anywhere, we may expect an example 
 of systematic relation of parts. Vitruvius tells us how 
 Pythios, its architect, with other contemporaries, gave up the 
 Doric order because of the incongruous arrangements which 
 arose in its use, and how Pythios wrote commentaries on 
 architecture and a special description of the Temple of Athene 
 at Priene, of which he was also the architect, at a later time. 
 Moreover, " Satyrus and Phyteus,* who were very fortunate," 
 wrote on the Mausoleum itself The beautiful order of the 
 Mausoleum, says Laloux, was considered to have " particularly 
 happy proportions, and they were copied in the principal pro- 
 ductions of the school of Pythios." Adler speaks with less 
 than enthusiasm of the order, but he judged only from poor, 
 dry, and inaccurate prints. The actual stones at the Museum 
 are surely very beautiful. 
 
 It is most difficult to get any statement of accurate dimen- 
 sions of the order. PuUan's measurements, figured on his 
 plates, are acknowledged to be untrustworthy, and the Museum 
 should publish an amended account of the remains. For 
 instance, Pullan gives the small top diameter as 2, 9.65.-]- The 
 Museum Catalogue says that "the diameter at the top of the 
 flutes is 36xV" H^e gives a flute at the bottom as 4.5 inches ; in 
 fact, it is over 5.5. The large diameter he gives as 3, 5.35.! In 
 the Museum Catalogue the bottom diameter is not given, but 
 only the sizes of the two top drums. 
 
 I have had the advantage of consulting a set of careful, full- 
 sized drawings of this order, made by students of the Archi- 
 
 * This same Pythios. 
 
 t Feet and inches are here written thus : " 2, 9." 
 
 + The mistake must be, I think, that Pullan intended 3.535 feet. 
 
42 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 ■;,y;;^^;v 
 
 tectural School at the Royal College of Art, under the 
 direction of Professor Pite, and, further, I have found in the 
 British Museum Lieutenant Smith's original measurements of 
 all the drums found on the site, and on which Penrose based 
 his calculation of the height of the order.* The former gives 
 3 feet bare for the top diameter, and the latter 3 feet. The 
 lower diameter I find given from 3, 5 to 3, 7|-. I estimate it 
 as 3, 6J. These diversities as to the sizes of parts of the column 
 which are actually in the Museum, may be taken as an example 
 going to show on how unsubstantial a basis rest most of the 
 calculations as to the proportions and refinements of Greek 
 architecture. Watkiss Lloyd's most able tract on the proportions 
 of Priene, in the fourth volume of the " Antiquities of Athens," 
 for instance, is worked out with the minuteness of a problem in 
 
 pure mathematics, and the 
 only inaccuracy seems to 
 be in the data on which 
 the calculations are based. 
 The latest German re- 
 searches show that esti- 
 mates of the diameters at 
 Priene vary from 1.25 to 
 1.29 metres, that the height 
 of the column was probabh- 
 greater than had been 
 thought, and yet that the 
 whole order was much less 
 than was supposed, because it had no frieze. All this ma\- 
 seem a little confusing on one hand, but on the other it should, 
 I think, relieve the mind of the practical student, who, being 
 accustomed to the rough approximations of modern building, 
 cannot understand these interrelations worked out to the 
 thousandth of an inch. 
 
 We come now to the important question of the inter- 
 columniation. At Ephesus, which I look on as the type of a 
 series of works which included the Mausoleum, the inter- 
 columnar space was i j diameters ; at Priene it is o-iven as 
 
 Fig. 32. — Part of Lacunar Margin. 
 
 * The former will be referred to as " R.C.A. Survey," the latter as "the 
 Memorandum." 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 43 
 
 if by Pullan, and as i4 by Rayet and Thomas ; at Miletus, 
 the latest built, it was ih. In all, the spaces between the 
 square plinth blocks were approximately square, and this 
 stands out as the most certain criterion. Further, the capitals 
 spread about half a columniation, that is, they are about as 
 much on the face as the dimension of the plinth block, and 
 this seems also to approximate to a rule. At Ephesus the 
 abacus is about 7 inches longer on the face than on the returns. 
 At Priene it is nearer square. At the Mausoleum the abacus is 
 square. This fact shows that the intercolumniation in this case 
 was probably less than in the other two. Twice the size that 
 the plinth must have been gives us 9, 9, or i| diameters. This 
 dimension has already been arrived at at the Museum as result- 
 ing from the length of some stones of the lacunaria. As to this, 
 it might be contended that the bays were not necessarily square 
 on plan, and this, indeed, was the case at Priene, where square 
 lacunar panels were fitted to oblong bays by means of additional 
 shallow strips of panels. Now, at the Mausoleum there were 
 similar narrow sinkings on the marginal stones of the lacunars^ 
 but three or four fragments of mitres of these sinkings have 
 been found which show that here they ran all round, and not on 
 two sides only. (Fig. 32.) The compartments were thus certainly 
 square, as in the Museum restoration. This being settled, we 
 have the fact that the margin -stone of one of the lacunaria 
 gives the size of the square panel, and adding to this its own 
 width twice over we again get the same dimension for the 
 columniation (exactly 9, 9^). It is now, I suggest, proved that 
 the columns stood about 9, gfrom centre to centre. (Fig. 33.) 
 
 In trying to determine the size of the lacunaria we again 
 come up against mistake upon mistake. In Newton's text the 
 lacunar stone is said to show that " the exact size " of the panel 
 was 4, of. On the plate, however, it is figured as 4.285, which is 
 about 4, 3|. In the Museum Catalogue the dimension is correctly 
 given from the stone, but it is said that Pullan's plate is wrong 
 instead of the text. I speak of this as some revenge for the 
 awe I used to feel for these elaborately figured dimensions. The 
 bases of the columns, as set up in the Museum, from the indica- 
 tions of the setting lines, gives a projection quite different from 
 Pullan's version, and the bottom diameter is about 4 feet \o\ 
 
44 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 inches, or, as has been said, the plinth would have been one-half the 
 columniation.* There is a final proof of the dimension obtained 
 for the columniation. According to Pliny the ends of the struc- 
 ture were shorter than the sides. It is manifest that this means 
 that they had one or twocolumniations less. Now, the difference 
 between io8 feet and 127 feet, the size of the foundation, almost 
 
 2 ^ I — 4 — y. 
 
 -2-^ 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 -^-^^ 
 
 Fig. 33. — Dimensions of Columniation. 
 
 exactly equals two bays of 9, 9. It may now further be stated 
 that the flanks were two bays longer tlian the front. 
 
 The 36 columns mentioned by Pliny can only be arranged 
 in the two simple ways described above — either with 9 columns 
 on the fronts and 1 1 on the flanks, or, less obviously, in two 
 rows, the outside ranks being 6 columns on the front and 7 on 
 
 * Centre to centre. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 45 
 
 the sides. (Fig. 31.) But only the former has the proper difference 
 of two bays, and this disposition exactly suits the size of the 
 foundation. In this we have a proof that Pliny's number, 36, is 
 trustworthy.* 
 
 The Pyramid. 
 
 The facts known in regard to the Pyramid give further proofs 
 as to the dimension arrived at for the intercolumniation and for 
 the size of the whole peristyle. Many of the " steps " which 
 finished the roof or pyramid of the structure were found. These 
 steps were of two dimensions on the "tread" — 17 inches and 
 nearly 21^. From 40 to 50 steps were found. " In all cases but 
 two the treads measured i, 9 or i, S ;" the two exceptions had 
 treads of 9 and loA inches. It is evident from this that most of 
 the steps were wide. Two angle stones in the Museum show 
 the dimension of 21^ inches in one direction and 17 inches in the 
 other. If there had been a continuous pyramid of such steps 
 its base must have had the proportion of about 34 to 43 on plan. 
 
 It has been computed from the actual sculptures of the chariot 
 group which stood on the summit that it required a platform of 
 about 20 by 35 feet. This proportion is again practically the 
 same, and we may now state that tlie whole base of the pyramid 
 had sides in the ratio of about 34 to 43. This agrees almost 
 exactly with the ratio of eight bays to ten required by the peri- 
 style, and, as will be seen on the diagram (Fig. 34), the columnia- 
 tion of eight and ten bays must have governed the proportion 
 of the pyramid base. 
 
 * Falkener dealt with objections to central columns. Where conditions 
 were free, as in the flanks of temples, an odd number of columns seems to 
 have been preferred. An interesting fact has recently been discovered in 
 regard to the temple of Samos. It was dipteral, with 8 columns on the east 
 front, 24 on the flanks, and with prostyles in front of each end of the cella, 
 giving three rows of columns at the ends. At the west etid thfre were 9 
 columtis instead 0/ S to lessen the spans. With the columns as described, 
 and four more in the pronaos, we obtain a total of 127, the number Phny 
 said there were at EPHESUS. Fergusson pointed out that at the latter the 
 seven very wide spans of the principal front equalled eight of the medium 
 spans, and it seems very probable that at Ephesus, too, the back portico had 
 9 columns like Samos. 
 
46 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 Fig. 34.— Setting Out of Plan. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 47 
 
 We can again prove this result and arrive at the actual size 
 of the base of the pyramid in another way. The great founda- 
 tion had a ratio of io8 to 127 feet. This, although still oblong, 
 approximates more to the square form than does the base of 
 
 Fig. 35- 
 
 Fig. 37- 
 
 Fig. 36. Fig. 38. 
 
 Various Restorations of the Mausoleum. 
 
 the pyramid, just as it should, for the plinths and steps on the 
 gfround level would be the same at both the fronts and the sides. 
 Indeed, if from the centre of the foundation rectangle of 108 by 
 127 feet we draw lines representing the diagonals of the pyramid 
 
48 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 having a base of the proportion 34 to nearly 43 (17 inches by 
 nearly 21 A inches) and now intersect these with true 45 degree 
 mitre lines drawn from the angles of the foundation rectangle, 
 we obtain geometrically the proper base of the pyramid. (Fig. 34.) 
 
 As some of Pliny's dimensions are corrupt and different 
 in the different MSS., and others are difficult to reconcile with 
 each other, and are therefore doubtful, even the number of 
 columns he gives is subject to the same doubt ; but from the 
 three facts made known to us by the actual remains (i. The 
 size of the columniation ; 2. The size of the foundation ; 3. 
 The proportion of the base of the pyramid) zve may arrive 
 independently at the number of bays, eight on the front and ten 
 on the side, by spacing up bays of about 9, 9 as close to the 
 limit of the base of the pyramid as possible. When it is found 
 that the line so found for the centres of the columns agrees 
 exactly with the line of the basis of the pyramid, the demonstra- 
 tion is surely complete. 
 
 In the diagram, Fig. 34, A B are the angles of a rectangle of 
 17 inches by nearly 21 i inches, which was drawn full size. C D 
 are angles of the foundation to scale. At E and F the diagonals 
 and the mitres intersect. This gives the base of the pyramid, and 
 it is found that the peristyle divides up accurately on the same 
 line, giving 36 columns. 
 
 Besides the wide steps which have been mentioned, others, 
 but not so many, were found, having treads of loi, 9, and less, 
 as may be seen at the British Museum. A few such narrower 
 steps are required to get in the full number of twenty-four 
 around the pedestal of the chariot group. About sixteen or 
 eighteen wide steps and six or eight narrower ones would suit our 
 dimensions. At the base the first step or attic was doubtless 
 much deeper than the rest. 
 
 The Cella. 
 
 The name pteron requires a cella to which it is added.* 
 Newton pointed out that a fragment of a cross beam which was 
 discovered must have rested on the cella wall, for it was rough 
 for 2 feet at the end. He also writes, " One stone of the cella 
 
 * See passages cited by Newton, p. 190. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 49 
 
 wall was discovered." It had an inclination from the perpen- 
 dicular of I in lOO. Dr Murray agreed that the existence 
 of a cella was shown by the marble beam — " this beam 
 has one of its ends roughened to the extent of 2 feet, for the 
 evident purpose of being let into a wall. Had that end rested on 
 
 Fig. 39. — Adler's Restoration. 
 
 an inner architrave, as does the other end, then it certainly would 
 not have been roughened as it is." 
 
 Retrospect. 
 
 I must now quickly review what has been written on the 
 question, and try to separate results from unverifiable conjectures. 
 
50 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 In the first half of last century, Professor Donaldson had 
 observed many fragments of shafts, capitals, and other orna- 
 ments of a "superb Ionic edifice" on the site of Halicarnassus, 
 which he seems to have identified as having belonged to the 
 Mausoleum. In publishing an engraving of a pilaster capital 
 he said: "In general character it is similar to the pilaster 
 capitals of the Temple of Priene and of the Temple of Apollo 
 near Miletus, but the rosettes and torches are additional orna- 
 ments, in allusion probably to the rites of the edifice of which the 
 fragment formed a part."* (Fig. 40.) 
 
 In 1846 thirteen slabs of the sculptured frieze were brought 
 to the Museum. 
 
 1. With these evidences in addition to the texts, Cockerell 
 made a restoration, and he doubtless obtained from Donaldson 
 some idea of the scale of the Ionic order he had noted. He 
 arranged the columns in a double rank, showing 7 and 6 to the 
 outside (a. Fig. 31), and surrounding a very small cella.f 
 
 2. After the e.xcavations Newton and Pullan published in 1862 
 their results, together with a restoration. While they arrived, 
 as I consider, at the general form of the monument, thes- did so 
 in rather an inconclusive way. They presented their facts most 
 inaccurately, and made little distinction between them and 
 their own suggestions. The order is not properly worked out. 
 No pedestal is set on the pyramid. The wide span between the 
 cella and the peristyle at the ends is impossible as construction. 
 The pteron, with its cornice about 100 above the ground, is far 
 too elevated for so delicate a work. (Fig. 35.) 
 
 3. Fergusson, in the same year, published a study of the 
 monument, in the main following Newton. He put a basis for 
 the chariot group as Cockerell had done, and after the analogy 
 of the Lion Tomb at Cnidus, but introduced many errors and 
 fancies of his own. 
 
 4. In 1888 Mr J. E. Goodchild, who had been an assistant 
 to Cockerell, issued a pamphlet, which attempted to show that 
 the discoveries were compatible with Cockerell's " small plan " 
 
 * " Ant. of Athens," vol. iv. 
 
 t Watkiss Lloyd made a slight amendment to the scheme, and this is 
 embodied in the fine coloured drawing- of Cockerell's restoration shown at 
 the Museum. This drawing was made by Mr F. Pepys Cockerell. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 51 
 
 scheme. He pointed out that some of the beams postulated by 
 Pullan "would not bear their own weight, much less the 
 superstructure." He noticed that beside the wide steps there 
 were others having treads of 9 inches, and of those he proposed 
 to form the pyramid. He worked out the intercolumniation 
 from the margin stone of the lacunar, and showed that was if 
 diameters. He had Newton and Pullan's wrong dimensions 
 for both the margin-stone and for the diameter, but those hap- 
 
 ) ll 1 11 m II ' "' "' '" "■ "' '" '" "' "' '" III m m m ni in m »| iti ill ill iii til in in iir r iii 
 
 I III HI III III m 111 in n 
 
 Fig. 40. — Pilaster Capital. 
 
 pened to compensate one another in giving a columniation of 
 9, 6^, a result right in principle although wrong in fact. 
 
 5. About 1893 the order was pieced together in the Museum, 
 the arrangement following Goodchild rather than Pullan, with 
 some further variations. From the lacunar stones the right 
 columniation, stated to be 9, g}, was arrived at. Dr Murray 
 used certain square sculptured slabs as panels for the lacunaria. 
 An objection may be raised to this on the ground that the 
 panels have not equal margins all round, the margins above the 
 heads of the figures are twice as wide as the others, and the 
 
52 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 sculptures are so delicate that they can hardly be seen. The 
 sculptured frieze was inserted in the order. On this see below 
 and Figs. 51 and 52. 
 
 6. A German restoration by Petersen and a French one by 
 Bernier have few special points. Both are of the large plan type. 
 The former puts pilasters to the lower storey (Fig. 36), and it is just 
 possible that some such arrangement did obtain, see 1 1 below. 
 In the French scheme a possible disposition of the lions is sug- 
 gested, as some method of pairing them seems called for, as 
 pointed out by Collignon, who published this restoration 
 (published later and fully by D'Espouy). Petersen's scheme is 
 illustrated in Mr Walter's " Greek Art," 1906. 
 
 7. In 1894 Mr Oldfield rediscussed the problem, following 
 Newton's big plan type in the main, but he broke up the peristyle 
 i-nto porticoes, and was thus able to obtain short fronts while 
 retaining the total dimension of 411 feet. If all Pliny's measure- 
 ments are to be reconciled, this seems the best suggestion of 
 dealing with them, although the attempt in this case was mixed 
 up with many visionary features. (Fig. 37.) Mr Oldfield's 
 scheme was adopted by Professor Percy Gardner in his " Sculp- 
 tured Tombs of Hellas." 
 
 8. In 1896 Mr Stevenson also published a restoration 
 {Builder, August and September 1899), i" which he reverted to 
 Cockerell's small type plan. He adopted both sizes of steps for 
 the pyramid, and proposed for it a spire-like arrangement, con- 
 sisting mainly of the steep steps. He swept away the cella, and 
 supported the pyramid wholly on the columns. (Fig. 38.) 
 
 9. In the same year Mr Arnold pointed out that some founda- 
 tions of isolated piers which appear in Pullan's surve}' offer some 
 confirmation of the large type of plan. 
 
 10. In 1900 Mr Arthur Smith published drawings of the 
 order, and surveyed the whole problem in the " Catalogue of 
 Greek Sculpture," vol. ii. 
 
 11. In the same year Prof Adler of Berlin published a mono- 
 graph on the subject. He follows Newton and Pullan, not only 
 in the general form they arrived at, but in their method of obtain- 
 ing the size of the plan, by setting twenty-four wide steps around 
 the area where the chariot stood. He adopts Cockerell's and 
 Fergusson's idea of the '' meta," and thus lowers the peristyle. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 53 
 
 Indeed there is practically a consensus on this point. He 
 re-engraves Pullan's faulty plates of the order, and indeed does 
 not seem to have seen the original stones. His best points seem 
 to be an exhaustive history (in the main again following 
 Newton), suggestions for setting the sculptures, and the pre- 
 sentation of what I must, from what has gone before, consider 
 the best general view of the monument which has been produced. 
 (Fig- 39-) He shows that the doubtful 440 of Pliny is to be pre- 
 ferred to 411 and better agrees with the foundations. His most 
 original contributions are in the disposition of the sculpture, and 
 in recalling that Donaldson had illustrated the pilaster capital as 
 coming from the Mausoleum, (Fig. 40.) He sets such capitals 
 on pilasters around the cella. Cockerell also had used this 
 capital, but he placed it on square angle piers, which, now we 
 have an angle capital, we know did not exist. Adler suggests 
 that this may be the earliest Ionic pilaster capital of this type, 
 but Inwood engraved an example from Athens on Plate 28 of 
 his " Erechtheum," which is clearly of still earlier form. 
 
 12. In 1905 Dr J. Six published an article in the Hellenic 
 Journal, suggesting that many of the sculptures were grouped in 
 pediments over the two " fronts." He followed Adler generally, 
 but increased the attics to receive these features. The existence 
 of two actual angle pieces of the gutter precludes the possibility 
 of pediments filling the fronts as he suggested, and the great 
 horse and rider seem altogether too big to have rested on the 
 thin shelf of such a delicate entablature. Moreover the square 
 support under the middle of the horse shows that it was isolated.* 
 This learned article goes on to discuss the proportions of the 
 structure, but as Pullan's faulty measurements are used the 
 results cannot be accurate. Dr Six also suggests that Pliny's 
 perimeter of 440 feet should be broken up into sides of 1 20 and 
 100 feet. I had come independently to this last probability or 
 possibility as likely dimensions for the top step of the plat- 
 form. It is also suggested that the columniation may have 
 been set out at 10 Greek feet from centre to centre, but the true 
 dimension is 3 or 4 inches short of this. The whole flank, 
 
 * There were no sculptures in the pediments at Ephesus or Priene, and 
 Rayet and Thomas point out that they were generally plain in Asia Minor. 
 
 E 
 
54 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 however, would appear to have been exactly lOO Greek feet, for 
 lo X 9,9i = 97, 8i, and adding two half columns, 3,6|, we get 
 loi, 3 English. 
 
 As said above, attempts have been made to reconcile Pliny's 
 dimensions in all kinds of ways. Mr Pullan supposed that the 
 63 feet applied to the cella, and the 411 feet to the peristyle. 
 Mr Oldfield's plan was broken into the form of a cross with very 
 short arms, which gave narrow fronts. This variety we may 
 call the "broken type." Mr Stevenson suggested an inner 
 building small and high, and an outer enclosing building low 
 and large. If I must put forward a possible reading, I would 
 say that as the measure about the exterior was 440 feet, 63 
 feet was the interior length of the cella, obviously ! Professor 
 Gardner suggests that cxiii. should be read for Ixiii., and this 
 
 Figs. 41 and 42. — Rejected Plans. 
 
 would do very well for the top step of the platform. But none 
 of these reconciliations are so simple in the supposition of that 
 easiest thing a mistake. As Furtwangler says on another subject, 
 " It seems to me better to set aside Pliny's information than to 
 try to combine it with the known facts." In the parallel case of 
 Ephesus, Pliny's dimensions have had to be abandoned. For the 
 Mausoleum he gives the measure of the long sides as 63 feet, 
 while his estimate of the total measure round about is either 
 411 or 440 feet, according to different texts. Which of these 
 last shall be accepted as right? It would not matter much 
 which it was, except that another writer says that it was 1 340 ! 
 However, this last could be made to apply to an outer court, 
 although it is rather like measuring a field for the size of a 
 haystack, and other reconcilers think it is in mistake for 440. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 55 
 
 But, again, there are three estimates of height by as many 
 authors — i8o, 140, and 80 feet. Shall we reconcile all these 
 by supposing that the first is to the top of a flag-staff, the 
 second to the chariot, and the third to the cornice ? Nothing 
 final can be done with dimensions like these, all sorts of con- 
 jectural restorations are possible, and unless we proceed inde- 
 pendently the problem is insoluble. For instance, Fergusson 
 
 Fig. 43. — Rejected Restoration. 
 
 grouped his columns at the angles into threes. Another might 
 suppose that the angle columns, as is so frequently the case, 
 were counted twice over, or another, again, that the 63 feet should 
 be cubits like the dimension of height. On these lines I put 
 on record a rejected hypothesis (Figs. 41,42,43) which combines 
 many advantages. The long front has seven bays which at 
 9 feet each make up the desired dimensions (inter-columniations 
 of i^ diameters were quite possible, and the lacunaria need not 
 
S6 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 have been square except for our proofs). We get pediments 
 at the " fronts '' (without sacrificing the gutter returning at the 
 angles, as we know it did). We get the pyramid firmly based 
 on the cella walls. (" Hanging in void air " is rhetoric for high. 
 The dome of Sta. Sophia, although it seemed to be suspended 
 by a golden chain from the heavens rested on very substantial 
 piers and arches.) The measure of 440 feet comes at the edge 
 of a reasonable terrace. We get the proportion of two bays 
 longer than wide to suit the foundations. A central pillar on 
 the front is avoided, and there is room enough for a pyramid 
 made up mostly of the wider steps. Yet the sufificiency of 
 the proof for the simple solution following the large type of 
 plan B (Fig. 31) drives me from such a desirable scheme, and I 
 cannot doubt that the main facts as to the exterior have been 
 established from the data made known by the excavations as 
 above set out. 
 
 A great point has been made of Pliny's description of the 
 apex of the monument as like a meta, but I have not seen the 
 parallel case of the Tower of the Winds at Athens cited in this 
 relation. This building had a very flat pyramidal roof of marble, 
 and at the centre a finial like a capital, yet Vitruvius describes 
 it as a tower finished with a meta of marble ("metam marmoream 
 perfecit "). 
 
 Again, those who would sweep away the cella point to the 
 tomb at Mylasa ; but this is very small, of late Roman work, 
 and the form of the columns suggest, that there was a screen 
 between them forming the whole into a cella. The columns were 
 of the shape shown by Fig. 25 in our Ephesus section, and Pars' 
 original drawings show that there were dowel holes in the vertical 
 strips by which it is probable slabs were attached. 
 
 The small type of plan seems to me to be an impossible 
 solution for the following reasons : — 
 
 1. The pyramid has to be designed as made up mainly oi steep 
 steps. The discoveries showed that it was mainly of wide steps. 
 
 2. The monument would have occupied such a small part of 
 the immense foundation. 
 
 3. It would not have been the right proportion of plan to 
 suit a rectangle 108 by 127 feet and to give two bays longer on 
 the flanks than on the front. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 57 
 
 4. It would hardly have been " a gigantic monument." 
 
 5. The small scheme had its origin before the site had been 
 explored. It is against the views of Lieut. Smith, Newton, 
 and Pullan, whose conclusions were based on their knowledge of 
 the site, of the positions of the stones found, and, in a word, 
 their total impression derived from months of study of the 
 excavations. 
 
 6. Such a building would, I think, be historically impossible. 
 The basis of the true design seems to be the tumulus developed, 
 consisting of a basement, a 
 
 pyramid, and a trophy. It 
 may best be compared with 
 the Cnidus monument ; 
 
 but in later times the great 
 tomb at Adamkilissi, and 
 the " mausolea" of Augus- 
 tus and Hadrian in Rome 
 followed the same tradition. 
 The marvel must have con- 
 sisted in setting over a 
 temple - like structure a 
 pyramid hanging high in 
 the air. 
 
 The one point that 
 may be claimed for the 
 small scheme — that it 
 satisfies Pliny's dimension 
 of 63 feet — is neutralised 
 by the fact that the large 
 scheme satisfies the 440-feet dimension. And if we are told 
 that this was the size of something exterior to the monument 
 proper, we can say that the 63 feet is just as likely to be of 
 something interior like the cella. 
 
 Fig. 44. — Back of Angle Volute. 
 
 Details of the Order. 
 
 The shafts have twenty-four flutes over 5 inches wide, which 
 are nearly semicircular in form. The projecting hollow mould- 
 ing at the top and bottom of the shaft is not a quadrant, but 
 
58 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 a long, elliptical curve, and the flutes are set into' this in a 
 beautiful way. The entasis of the column seems to be quicker 
 toward the top, and Penrose considered that it formed a part of 
 a long hyperbola with its focus some distance above the top 
 of the shaft. The top diameter seems to be one-seventh less 
 than the bottom. 
 
 The capitals must be carefully examined at the Museum to 
 
 be appreciated. They are 
 almost exactly like those 
 at Priene, of which an ex- 
 ample is also exhibited. 
 The height of the cap from 
 the bottom of the volutes 
 is half a diameter. One 
 of the capitals is from an 
 angle, and shows a dia- 
 gonal volute. It should 
 be noticed that this angle 
 volute is not thrown 
 quickly out from a general 
 square form, but the whole 
 of the two external sides 
 curve outwards, both the 
 cushion and the abacus. 
 The eyes of the volute 
 were sunk out about 
 2 inches, here and at 
 Priene and Ephesus, and 
 were filled again with 
 marble studs, some of 
 which remain. 
 
 Often the studs pro- 
 jected beyond the general face of the volute, and this doubtless 
 furnished the reason why they were separately inserted. The 
 eye space was made use of also, and might be slightly injured 
 in tracing the curve of the volute. At Ephesus the fluted 
 rolls of the volutes were adorned with palmettes. An almost 
 exactly similar ornament is found at the back of the angle 
 volutes at the Mausoleum and at Priene. (Fig. 44.) Doubtless 
 
 Fig. 45. — Ordinary Capital and Angle 
 Capital compared. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 59 
 
 the angle volutes at Ephesus were exactly similar. The 
 inner angle of the Mausoleum capital was recessed, as a separate 
 fragment shows, so to allow room for the bringing of two 
 volutes together at right angles. At Priene the two volutes of 
 the inner angle were complete. There was not room enough for 
 this on the Mausoleum capitals where the outer revolution of the 
 volute was lost at the mitre. Even to get this much the length 
 of the side rolls had to be reduced on the angle capitals. See 
 Fig. 45, which shows the relative sizes of the two capitals. Figs. 
 46 and 47 show the 
 mitring of the volutes 
 against the inner angle. 
 Fig. 48 is a restoration 
 of the abacus at this 
 point. Fig. 50 shows 
 the ordinary capital. 
 
 As to the height of 
 the column at the 
 Mausoleum, we are 
 told that " Mr Penrose, 
 after a most careful dis- 
 cussion of the dimen- 
 sions of twenty-six 
 drums measured by 
 Mr Newton at Hali- 
 carnassus, and by 
 those which are at the 
 Museum, came to the 
 conclusion, from the 
 
 entasis, that the pillars were 8J diameters in height, and 
 consequently within a small fraction of 28 feet 6 inches in 
 height."* The diameter here accepted is Pullan's wrong 
 value of 3, 5.35. With a more correct value, we get about 
 eight diameters. The memorandum spoken of above is a 
 sheet (in MS. 31980, by Lieutenant Smith?), giving the sizes 
 of all the drums discovered. On it a series of six drums, 
 which agreed most nearly with one another as they diminished 
 
 Fig. 46.— Mitred Volutes of Angle Capitals. 
 
 * "Antiq. of Ionia," vol. iv., p. 18. 
 
6o 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 upwards, are superimposed, giving a total height for the shaft only 
 of 26, 1 1 J. This furnishes a maximum dimension, for the drums 
 
 Fig. 47. — Sketch of the 
 Cast. 
 
 Fig. 48. — Restored Abacus of 
 the Cast. 
 
 of the several columns would have varied in their heights, and in 
 the series of drums brought together the 
 upper ones, for the most part, overlapped 
 those next below by a quarter of an inch or 
 so. Making allowance for these differences, 
 I estimate the height of the shaft at about 
 24, 9. The capital and the base add 2, 6, and 
 the plinth, following the analogy of Priene, 
 would have been 9 inches. This gives a total 
 of 28, o, nearly 8 diameters, or, accepting 
 Penrose's calculation of 28, 6, we get 8 dia- 
 meters exactly. I am satisfied that the 
 columns were, at most, not higher than this. 
 A reason for the abnormally stout proportion 
 is furnished by the great burden these pillars 
 bore. 
 
 We have see«i that Wood remarked that 
 the columns of Ephesus diminished rapidly 
 towards the top. Mr Penrose, in his discus- 
 sion of the columns of Priene, says, " The 
 principal amount of curvature is found to- 
 wards the top of the shaft, whereas in the 
 Attic examples it occurs near the base (at 
 the Parthenon it is below) or the middle. If 
 an hyperbola were chosen to represent the 
 curvature its vertex would be above the capital." On plotting 
 the dimensions of the memorandum to an exaggerated scale 
 
 Fig. 49. — Diagram 
 of Entasis of 
 Column : 24 
 horizontal to 
 I vertical. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 6l 
 
 (24 to i), I find that the Mausoleum shaft followed the same 
 rule, the lower half was very straight, but not upright, the upper 
 part curves swiftly so that the vertex would be 10 or 12 feet 
 above the capital. (Fig. 49.) 
 
 It has long been discussed whether the sculptured frieze 
 belonged to the order, and Furtwangler and others have 
 applied it to the podium. Following the analogy of Priene and 
 Ephesus, I have shown that there could have been no frieze 
 
 Fig. 50. — Capital reduced from Royal College of Art Survey. 
 
 of the order. This is proved so far as the Mausoleum is con- 
 cerned by the way in which the cross beams are notched down 
 for the full depth into the epistyle. If there had been a frieze 
 the cross beams of course would have rested on the epistyle. 
 Combining our entablature of architrave, egg and tongue course, 
 dentil course, egg and tongue course, corona and cymatium we 
 get a depth of S, 11. Now at Priene the depth of entablature 
 was three-fifths of a columniation, the arrangement proposed for 
 
62 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 the Mausoleum gives the same. At Priene the intercolumnia- 
 tion was a little more open in proportion and much greater in 
 absolute span, so that the advantage of strength is with our 
 entablature. 
 
 At the Museum there appear to be fragments of all these 
 parts of the entablature. The dentils are blocks lO by 7 inches 
 
 BASE 
 
 Fig. 51. — Restored entablature reduced from Royal College of Art Survey. 
 Faces of Architrave and Cornice are not vertical. X is doubtful. 
 
 and 5 inches apart. Following Ephesus and Priene I have put 
 an egg and tongue moulding and a cavetto beneath the corona, 
 and this takes the place of the shallow bed mould of the Museum 
 restoration for which there is no evidence, I believe. (See Fig. 
 51.) In the Museum restoration the projection which has been 
 given to the cornice is much more than in Pullan's plates, the 
 front of the corona being 1,9 in advance of the bed mould below. 
 (Fig. 52.) The under side of the marble was finely dressed to 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 63 
 
 this distance, "where there is a slight rise as if for a bed." As 
 this gives a projection much greater than in other examples, I 
 would suggest that it should be pushed back 4 inches or so, the 
 dressing having been so wide in order to relieve the bed mould 
 from the weight, and this, I see, is how Pullan has shown it. On 
 the top of the gutter "a line is marked "1,10 back from its nosing. 
 Newton says that this line marked the commencement of the 
 pyramid. In the Museum Catalogue it is called a "weather line 
 which is supposed to indicate the position of the lowest step of 
 
 Fig. 52. — Museum Restoration of the Entablature. 
 
 the pyramid." This entirely impossible arrangement would give 
 no back to the gutter. It brings the weight of the pyramid not 
 only on to a 4-inch gutter stone, but about 3, O in front of the 
 architrave, resting on the thin corona of the cornice. There are 
 several yards of the gutter set up in the Museum. (Fig. 53-) It is 
 divided into stones 42 inches long, with a lion's head spout in the 
 centre of each. As before mentioned, remnants of two angles 
 exist ; both show that the palmette carving came up to the mitre, 
 and one gives just enough evidence to show that the first head was 
 
64 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 about half a stone back from the angle. The law of the distri- 
 bution of the heads was to have as much carving between them, 
 bending around the corner, as there was on the straight. The 
 proportion of the cornice as above corrected was such as to 
 throw the second lion's head about 6 inches behind the centre of 
 the angle column as seen in elevation. We may find here some 
 check on the dimensions already obtained, because the distance 
 between the lion's heads should, on one side at least, be a 
 multiple of 3, 6. Now as eight bays of the short side at 9, 9|, 
 equals 78, 4, and deducting I3 inches for the eccentricity of the 
 
 Fig. 53. — Detail of Carved Gutter. 
 
 heads nearest over the centres of the columns, we get a total of 
 yj, 4, which is 4 inches more than 22 times 3, 6. On the other front 
 we get 97, 8^, which is 3I inches less than 28 times 3,6. That is 
 3, 6 was the best possible mean for the dimensions of the two 
 fronts. In other words the gutter stones would have averaged 
 about \ inch more, and \ inch less than 3, 6 on the two fronts. 
 
 Fig. 54 is an enlarged detail of the base. Fig. 57 is part of 
 an inscription, which is probably of the sixteenth century, cut 
 into the shield borne by one of the figures of the frieze.* 
 
 * See Newton's article in " The Classical Museum." 
 
T?IE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 65 
 
 There appear to be several fragments of the Mausoleum 
 built into the walls of the Turkish fortress of Budrum. I cannot 
 find that they have ever been described. 
 
 Some interesting observations on the peristyle by Mr 
 Marshall were published in the Builders' Journal, August 1 899. 
 He pointed out that the top bed of the angle capital was 
 countersunk, and that half the top of another capital was 
 similar, while another has no sinking, and suggested that corre- 
 sponding Beatings must have been left on the architrave blocks, 
 which thus at the angles set into the caps and resisted displacement. 
 He also gives a good sketch of the ceiling over the peristyle. 
 
 It is probable that the columns all leaned inwards, at least 
 one in the hundred following the inclination of the cella wall. 
 
 Sculpture and Colour. 
 
 The principal sculptures could not have been in pediments, 
 as has been shown, yet Dr Six is probably right in grouping 
 them after the model of the 
 Sidon Sarcophagus. The de- 
 scription calls for an equal dis- 
 tribution on all four sides. 
 Adler's disposition of groups 
 aeainst the basement seems to 
 best suit the evidence. 
 
 The great chariot group 
 which stood on the summit is 
 particularly noble ; it might be 
 nominated for a place amongst 
 the most " universal " pieces of 
 sculpture in the world, for that 
 master of medisevalism, Viollet 
 le Due, has rightly picked out 
 the figure of Mausolus as having 
 a character comparable with the 
 best mediaeval sculptures. I 
 only know one other figure which 
 has the same " feeling," the slen- 
 der draped girl's figure from Priene, which I should like to think 
 of as by the same artist, Pythios. It might have come from Rheims 
 
 Fig. 54.- 
 
 -Enlarged Details of 
 Bases. 
 
66 
 
 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 or Chartres. The lions are comparatively poor ; from the position 
 in which they were found it seems likely that they occupied a 
 high situation. Lions appear as guardians of the tomb at Cnidus, 
 Xanthus, Miletus,*on the Lycian tomb in the British Museum, and 
 the Sidon Sarcophagus at Constantinople, and many other places. 
 From the fact that they all turn their heads at right angles, 
 alternately to the right and left, it is certain, I think, that they 
 presented a side view, and could not have been set end-on as by 
 Adler. If they were above the cornice they may have formed 
 
 Fig. 55. — Sketch of part of Frieze, restored. 
 
 a procession approaching the centre of the front along both 
 sides. 
 
 The frieze is an extraordinarily delicate work. It most pro- 
 bably surrounded the basement at no great height, like a 
 similar frieze on the Nereid monument. It was decorated 
 with many additions of bronze, doubtless gilt, and with colour. 
 Newton says that "the bridles of the horses, as in the frieze 
 
 * See Rayet and Thomas. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 67 
 
 of the Parthenon, were of metal " ; but there was much more. 
 For example, I find by examining the positions of many drilled 
 holes that the warrior on slab 1007 had a bronze crest in his 
 helmet; an Amazon on slab 1006 carried a sword strongly 
 pinned to her hand ; another, mounted on horseback, held a 
 bronze bridle; another, in 1013, thrust a spear into a man's 
 side; another, in 1015, grasped a shaft of bronze, which was 
 inserted into an axe-head which formed part of the marble 
 relief; on 1016 was an Amazon riding spear in hand. The 
 figures are all in most violent action falling into a series of 
 
 Fig. 56. — Sketches of two wounded Amazons. 
 
 diagonal lines, but the composition in its continuity and easy 
 variety is very wonderful, and the execution is most masterly. 
 The tense and slender figures have " the accent of bronze." It 
 is an extraordinary chef-d'oeuvre, but it does not satisfy like 
 the Parthenon frieze. One or two of the fallen Amazons are 
 charming in design and feeling. (Figs. 55, 56.) 
 
 " The whole frieze was coloured, the ground of the relief was 
 ultramarine, the flesh a dun red, and the drapery and armour 
 were picked out with colours." The ground of the chariot frieze 
 was likewise blue, and the plain moulding below had a painted 
 
68 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 leaf moulding, traces of which may still be seen in one place. A 
 note on the memorandum in the Museum shows that the small 
 square panels also had blue backgrounds. Indeed, this treat- 
 ment of relief was customary. The principal sculptures and the 
 lions also showed vestiges of colour. Newton reported that 
 on its discovery the colossal seated figure plainly showed two 
 colours. All the carved architectural members were painted. 
 The colours were ultramarine and vermilion, " or pigments equal 
 to them in intensity." Newton says that " the system adopted 
 seems to have been to tone down the whole of the marble with 
 a coat of varnish and wax, to paint all grounds of sculpture and 
 ornament blue, and to pick out the mouldings with red." A 
 lacunar margin -stone was found with bright blue upon it. 
 This was doubtless in the recessed channel of it. At Priene, 
 where exactly the same system of architectural coloration was 
 followed, the recess on the soffit of the main architrave was 
 blue, and the leaf moulding around it was picked out in red. 
 The capital there had a red ground to its egg-and-tongue, and 
 blue to the leaf moulding of the abacus. 
 
 The eyes of the volutes were doubtless gilt. In the account 
 for building the Erechtheum gold leaf for gilding the eyes of 
 the columns is mentioned. Newton 
 ''iTOlF-*!! IR** '^^^^ be right, I think, in speaking of 
 I h \J' h L^tJ the ground of wax. The most perfect 
 
 Fig. 57.— Part of an In- ancient painted work I have ever seen, 
 scription on one of the so-called Sarcophagus of Alexander, 
 the Shields. is brightly coloured, yet the whole is 
 
 harmonised and softened into waxy 
 texture and hues. " The Greeks," says Choisy, " did not con- 
 ceive of form without the association of colour. At all epochs 
 colour was present, and even the statues were painted." 
 
 Construction and the Architect. 
 
 The type of construction of which the Mausoleum is an 
 example is remarkable from the way in which the marble is 
 handled. As usual in Greek works it is put together without 
 mortar, the joints being polished so as to sit very close. An 
 abundance of bronze cramps was used to link stone to stone. 
 
THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 69 
 
 In the columns were fine bronze dowels, some of which are 
 preserved at the Museum. The steps of the Pyramid have a 
 raised fillet along the back and at the two ends. The latter, with 
 those on the adjoining stones, make rolls which throw the water 
 away from the actual joints. These fillets fit into cavities cut in 
 the next course above. The scheme is derived from tiling, and 
 I think it probable that the exposed joints were covered by 
 a marble A piece. The entablature is, as we should think, care- 
 lessly constructed, being broken up into many pieces, and with 
 fragile ornamental members inserted in rebates (Fig. 53). These 
 points, and the use of mitre joints for the lacunar margins and 
 carved mouldings, make one think of a sort of " marble joinery" 
 rather than masonry. The workers must have been skilful in 
 an extreme degree, and the whole outlook is very advanced and 
 even doubtful. Adler suggests that the insertion of the delicate 
 mouldings in rebated ledges was done with me object of hasten- 
 ing the works. The same custom is followed at Priene ; and 
 another reason, I think, is, that these parts are wrought in a 
 much finer quality of marble. 
 
 The architrave is wrought in two beds, one i, 6 deep with 
 two facias, and the upper i foot deep with one. The heading 
 joints of both come together over the columns, and at the back 
 cavities are formed to receive the ends of the cross beams. The 
 facias of the architrave are not in vertical planes, but incline 
 outwards at the top. (Fig. 51.) 
 
 Pythios, the sculptor of the noble chariot group, may only 
 have been a younger associate of Satyrus, with whom he is 
 mentioned at the Mausoleum, as he was architect of the Priene 
 temple, which was probably begun about 345 and was not com- 
 pleted until about 334.* He belongs to a class of sculptor 
 architects who shaped the course of Greek architecture. Pheidias, 
 who himself was general master of works for Pericles, was 
 followed by Kallimachos, Scopas, Polyclitos the younger, and 
 Pythios. The roles of sculptor and architect seem to have been 
 interchangeable as in the Middle Ages ; the Greek sculptor was a 
 " stone-cutter." After seeing the chariot group we can under- 
 
 * Vitruvius gives the name in more than one form, but see Rayet and 
 Thomas. 
 
 F 
 
70 THE TOMB OF MAUSOLUS. 
 
 stand Vitruvius when he says : " Those who are initiated in dif- 
 ferent branches of knowledge have facility in acquiring all, from 
 their connection with each other. On this account Pythios, one of 
 the ancients, architect of the noble Temple of Minerva in Priene, 
 says in his Commentaries that an architect should have that 
 perfect knowledge of each art and science, which is not even 
 acquired by the professors of any one in particular." A large 
 claim, but I am at least convinced that in all great times 
 architects have been stone-cutters. 
 
 Printed at The Darikn Pkess, EJiiibnrgli. 
 
III. THE PARTHENON AND ITS 
 SCULPTURES. 
 
 " It was observed of Phidias, that as a statuary he excelled more in 
 forming gods than men ; a short encomium containing the substance of a 
 /aw^^rzV."— Chandler. 
 
 Date, Plan, and Construction. 
 
 The Parthenon, until comparatively modern days, seems to have 
 existed as an almost perfect monument. In 1632 it was described 
 as a temple " entire, and little injured by time." * 
 
 Randolph, an English writer, about 1675, speaks of it as entire 
 and one of the most glorious buildings in Europe, being of 
 white marble. "The body is 168 feet long by 71 wide ; its total 
 length is 230 feet, and it has 17 pillars on the sides, by 8 at the 
 ends, each 19I feet round about. It is very dark, having only 
 some lights at the east." About this same time valuable drawings 
 ■of the sculptures were made for Nointel, a French ambassador. 
 From the date of these records the destruction has been con- 
 tinuous, until at the beginning of the last century the temple 
 was but a shattered wreck. (Figs. 58, 59.) It was begun in 447 
 B.C., and was practically completed ten years later. In 438 the 
 great interior ivory and gold statue of Athena was consecrated. 
 Some fragments of building inscriptions, discovered in 1888, show 
 that in 434-3, "the fourteenth year," the works were still in 
 progress, but it is thought that these would only be details of 
 •completion, such as channelling the columns, painting, waxing, 
 
 * Courmenin. Tavernier speaks of columns of porphyry and black 
 marble : he must refer to the interior of the church. 
 
 G 
 
72 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 and polishing. In 437 Phidias, banished from Athens, probably 
 began his great Zeus of Olympia.* 
 
 The size of the Parthenon, measured at the top step, was 
 101.4 by 228.3. Good plans, according to recent opinion, have 
 been published by Penrose, Uorpfeld, L. Magne, and Middleton. 
 (Fig. 60.) The superstructure rests on a colossal foundation ; 
 as it was built in part over the sloping sides of the Acropolis 
 rock, its southern foundation is built up from a depth of about 
 50 feet. There are continuous walls under the internal columns, 
 and underneath the floor solid courses of masonry are extended 
 over the whole area many feet in depth. The foundations in 
 part belong to an older temple. The inner rows of six columns 
 at the two ends of the temple stand above the level of the 
 
 Fig. 58. — The Acropolis a century ago. 
 
 peristyle on two steps, and are less in scale than the outer ones. 
 (Figs. 60, 62.) The positions of the columns which divided 
 up the chief cella are clearly marked in some places upon the 
 pavement. They had a diameter of about 3 feet 7 inches, 
 and from the size it is obvious that there must have been two 
 stages, as at Olympia and other places. Penrose speaks of pieces 
 of the upper architrave found on the site. A portion of one of 
 the eastern responds of the internal colonnade still remains by 
 the entrance door. At the other end the colonnade returned 
 behind the great statue. In the smaller cella, or opisthodomos, 
 were four columns which divided the ceiling into nine equal 
 
 * Lechat. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 73 
 
 compartments, the size of which was not too great for them to 
 be roofed with stone, and as this was a treasury it is probable 
 that it was so covered. Traces in the walls showed that the 
 beams of this part were 3 feet wide, and this is evidence for their 
 having been of marble.* 
 
 Some writers have supposed that the columns in the opis- 
 thodomos would have been Ionic, but the stone squares on 
 which they rested are of the same size as those of the inner 
 external order, and Penrose is probably right in showing columns 
 of the same diameter also. 
 
 After long dispute it is now generally agreed that the great 
 cella was lighted only through the open door-way, although an 
 
 Fig- 59- — The Parthenon in its present shape. 
 
 elaborate French restoration, only just published, follows the 
 hypaethral heresy and allows the ivory statue to stand in the 
 open air. As long ago as Chandler the view to which Dorp- 
 feld has returned was expressed, and Wilkins in his " Pro- 
 lusiones," writes : " Where is the authority for assuming the 
 Parthenon to have been hypaethral ? No such authority exists, 
 and the speculations of Stuart originated in error. . . . No 
 provision was made, or contemplated, for the admission of light 
 otherwise than by the doorway and by artificial light." 
 
 The construction of the marble work is not only of mar- 
 
 * Penrose, p. 14, Plate V. 
 
74 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 vellous accuracy but methods of workmanship were developed 
 in marble building suitable only to this fine material. For 
 instance, mitre-joints are used for the moulded members of 
 the beams of the peristyle, and the pediment is cased with slab- 
 work which is in ten large pieces. The architrave is made up of 
 three pieces side by side, as we sometimes use timbers. The 
 frieze above consists of a facing and backing only, allowing a 
 free space in the middle almost big enough for a passage. The 
 slabs of the pediment were hollowed away at the back and the 
 lacunar stones were pared away on the top so as to lighten 
 them as much as possible — a method which was carried further 
 
 :ii 
 
 10 20 30 40 50 
 
 Fig. 6o. — Ground Plan : from Dorpfeld. 
 
 at Bassse, where some of the marble beams were channelled out 
 in the middle and became of this shape U. (Fig. 63.) Iron 
 dowels and H-cramps were used plentifully in attaching stone to 
 stone, and strong iron bars, or cantilevers, from 6 to 10 inches 
 wide, and about 4 feet long, were placed above the end cornices 
 apparently to relieve the weight of the greater figures. These 
 were only set a little way into the masonry of the pediment, 
 but as the tympanum face was considerably behind that of the 
 architrave the relief to the overhanging cornice must have been 
 sufficient if this was indeed the purpose of the bars. The pedi- 
 ment slabs were attached to the backing by curiously modern- 
 looking holdfasts. (Fig. 64.) 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 75 
 
 " The joints of the marble fit so closely that it is frequently 
 difficult to perceive them, and it is almost impossible to imagine 
 a finer line than they show. This can hardly have been pro- 
 duced by other means than that of the stones having been 
 rubbed upon one another." Penrose goes on to say, following 
 an observation of Stuart's, that some of the stones had grown 
 together : " May not the attraction of cohesion taking place 
 between the two surfaces in almost absolute contact be sufficient 
 to account for it ? " 
 
 " Difficulty occurs in explaining how the vertical joints of the 
 architrave could be 
 brought to such 
 exquisite fineness. 
 Some light has been 
 thrown on this ques- 
 tion by an inscrip- 
 tion reciting the 
 method to be used 
 for building a temple 
 at Lebadea — ver- 
 milion and olive oil 
 were to be applied 
 in some unexplained 
 manner, and a stone 
 canon, or rule, was to 
 be used."* Choisy, 
 commenting on this 
 passage, observes 
 that the method in question must have been that called by 
 French masons "dressage au rouge," where the red powder, 
 Jiaving been applied to a true plane, the newly wrought stone 
 is brought in contact with it until it takes up the red equally 
 all over, thus proving that it also has been brought to a plane. 
 An inscription regarding the works at the Erechtheumf also 
 mentions polishing a canon. Doubtless a true vertical was also 
 set up by the side of the plane table so that perfect right angles 
 could be obtained. 
 
 n^ 
 
 Fig. 6oA. — Diagram of Portico : after Choisy. 
 
 * Penrose. 
 
 + Penrose, pp. 25 and 124. 
 
16 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 According to Penrose the capitals were turned in a lathe, and 
 they are so true that it is clear that they were finished by rotary 
 
 action, but as there 
 is no sufficient means 
 in the top bed where- 
 by such immense 
 blocks could be at- 
 tached to a lathe, it 
 seems to me much 
 more probable that 
 they were finished 
 by some revolving 
 trammel. 
 
 Penrose thought 
 that the drums of 
 the columns were 
 ground together by 
 rotating on their cen- 
 tral pins which were 
 of wood. Magne says 
 this idea is ruled out 
 by the fact that in 
 consequence of the 
 inclination of the 
 columns the horizon- 
 tal beds are not sur- 
 faces of revolution. 
 I cannot see that this 
 remark is justified : if 
 a point in the circum- 
 ference was finally 
 brought back to its 
 proper position the fact that the axis of a drum would lie in 
 different directions as' it revolved would be immaterial.* 
 
 * Penrose distinctly says moved " through a small arc." However, wood 
 dowels and even wood cramps were not uncommon, and altogether I con- 
 sider it most likely that the 3-inch wood pins in 4-inch square blocks of the 
 Parthenon were simply dowels. It seems to have been usual to put even 
 bronze dowels into " boxes," some of which were square. 
 
 Fig. 61. — Diagram of the Angle : Pediment 
 omitted ; Small steps only suggest the 
 height of stylobate. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 17 
 
 The lowest course of the cella wall was, following the 
 general tradition, built of great blocks. 
 
 The mouldings are few and simple although of slight and 
 
 Fig. 62. — Section of Portico : from Penrose. 
 
 subtle curvature. The only carvings other than the sculpture 
 were simple &%^ and tongue, and bead and reel mouldings at 
 the antse ; the latter is repeated above the metopes. (Fig. 65.) 
 In the roofing there are several curious adjustments. The 
 
78 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 lowest course from which the marble tiling starts has its upper 
 surface slanting in the same plane, the lower surface being level- 
 bedded on the cornice beneath. On the upper slanting face are 
 worked stops for the cover-pieces of the tiling, keeping them from 
 slipping. Along its edge antifixffi are attached, one over each 
 metope and triglyph. The marble tiles space up three to every 
 two antifixse, which are thus purely " ornamental." The tiles 
 against the edge of the gables curve upwards forming a cyma- 
 tium to the pediment. At the bottom of the gable the cymatium 
 returns a little way on the flanks, forming blocks from which 
 project fine lions' heads, like spouts, but these also are orna- 
 mental. (Fig. 66.) At the bottom of the row of marble tiles 
 which turns up to form the cymatium is affixed on the slant a 
 stone which for about 8 feet up the roof rises flush with the top 
 of the cymatium, and on it, towards the bottom, is worked a 
 
 level seating for the base of an acro- 
 
 terion. This stone is partly caught at 
 
 J the bottom by the block on which is 
 
 Fig. 63.— Lacunaria. carved the lion's head. All this is 
 
 best understood from Penrose's minute 
 
 analysis, but I give a plan from the Stuart papers at the British 
 
 Museum. (See Fig. 67 ; A, B, C, D, is the slab bedded on the 
 
 tiles.) 
 
 Refinements and Irregularities. 
 
 The lines and planes of the Parthenon are adjusted and 
 modified in many ways from what we are apt to think should 
 be the normal procedure in building. The stylobate on which 
 the columns rest rises in a curve about four inches at the centre 
 of the flanks while at the fronts it rises about three inches. 
 The architrave follows a similar curve. All the columns have a 
 delicate entasis, that is, in diminishing from the base to the 
 capital they follow a curved profile instead of a straight one. 
 The outer columns of the peristyle lean inwards about three 
 inches, being an angle of about i in 50. " Vertical " parts of 
 the entablature lean still more ; the abaci of the capitals and the 
 faces of the cornice, and other small parts, incline outwards. 
 Perpendicular faces are the exception and not the rule. The 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 79 
 
 " vertical " axes of the capitals are not in the same line as those 
 of the shafts, they are said to lean forward in a contrary 
 direction.* 
 
 The angle columns are 
 larger than the rest, and the 
 inter-columniations next to 
 the angle are considerably less 
 than the others. The inner 
 external order of columns 
 is of more slender proportions than the outer order. 
 
 All these adjustments are, we may suppose, entirely inten- 
 tional, but, notwithstanding the exquisite precision of the work- 
 
 Fig. 64. — Iron Cramps. 
 
 Fig. 65. — Profiles of Mouldings. 
 
 manship, there are many other in-egularities which appear to be 
 accidental or made necessary by circumstances. The columnia- 
 
 * A level seating is worked on the stylobate for each column to stand on. 
 The beds of the several drums are level except the top ones, which are 
 worked to the general curve the architrave is to follow, the capitals being 
 of equal depth. 
 
8o THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 tions along the flanks vary among themselves, following no 
 apparent law ; the probable reason being that their exact dimen- 
 sions were taken from the stones intended for the epistyle, 
 which were quarried of slightly varied lengths. The metopes 
 of the fronts vary by two or three inches. At one of the angles 
 the architrave projects more than four inches further on the 
 abacus on one side than the other. The abaci of the columns 
 are largest at the east, and smaller at the south and west. At 
 the north and south they diminish from east to west, but not 
 regularly. To whatever motive, says Penrose, we may attribute 
 these irregularities, we learn that the Greek architects " did depart 
 
 "^1 
 
 Fig. 66. — Lions' Heads : They are turned a little towards 
 the Angles of the Building. 
 
 somewhat from that strict regularity of proportion of which 
 abundant examples may be found in the plan and elevation of 
 the temple." The idea of proportion here referred to was that 
 of making adjacent parts bear some simple ratio to each other ; 
 thus, for example, the sides of the rectangle formed by the upper 
 step of the stylobate were exactly as 9 to 4, and the heights and 
 diameters of the columns, the widths of the abaci, and other 
 parts, seem to have been designed so as to have dimensional 
 relations each with the other. 
 
 In regard to the adjustments by inclination and curvature 
 first spoken of, it has been usual to consider them as being 
 intended to correct certain optical defects which it is supposed 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 8 1 
 
 the truly horizontal and vertical lines would have presented to 
 the eye, and that by these adjustments they were made to 
 appear perfectly level and perpendicular. This is too much of a 
 " front elevation " idea, for from other points of view the curva- 
 ture of the stylobate is perfectly visible. The real reason would 
 seem rather to be a desire to sweeten the transitions, and to 
 
 Fig. 67. — Plan of Angle of Roof: A, B, C, D, Stone fixed on Tiles ; 
 L, Lion's Head ; x, Antefix ; R, Cymatiuni of Pediment. 
 
 create a unity out of the many similar parts. Also, as Penrose 
 has seen, delicate effects of light and shade must have resulted 
 from slight changes in the direction of the surfaces. 
 
 Architects. 
 
 The rebuilding of the Parthenon was only part of Pericles' 
 great scheme for the architectural adornment of the Acropolis 
 after the close of the Persian wars in 449 B.C. The Nike temple 
 by the Propylaea may have been the first actually begun. An 
 
82 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 inscription has recently been found whereon is ordered the 
 construction of a temple, a gateway, and an altar of marble, 
 according to the direction of Callicrates the architect ; and a 
 guard-house was also ordered to be built about 447 on the Aero- 
 
 liomanail viav of th& J W a/igU^. marly vl i£s pruuu itatx' 
 
 Fig. 68. — Perspective View of the Angle of Roof: from Penrose. 
 
 polis by the same architect. As early as 460 we hear of this same 
 Callicrates in connection with the building of the Long Walls at 
 Athens. Now the Parthenon was begun in 447, and we are told 
 that the architects were Callicrates and Ictinus, working under the 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 83 
 
 supreme direction of Phidias. We hear of Ictinus again as having, 
 according to Pausanias, built the temple of Apollo at Bassae, and 
 the Great Hall at Eleusis. The work at Bassae seems consider- 
 ably later than the Parthenon, and it seems open to question 
 whether we may not suppose that Callicrates was the first master 
 at the Parthenon, and Ictinus a younger man. Plutarch, who is the 
 best authority, says : " Phidias was appointed by Pericles the super- 
 intendent of all public edifices, although there were other eminent 
 architects and excellent workmen amongst the Athenians.* The 
 Parthenon, which had been 100 feet long, was rebuilt by Calli- 
 crates and Ictinus. The Long Wall was also built by Callicrates. 
 The golden statue of the goddess was the work of Phidias. 
 Through the friend- 
 ship of Pericles he 
 had the direction of 
 everything, and all 
 the artists received 
 his orders." " Works 
 of great magnitude 
 and inimitable per- 
 fection were raised, 
 while every architect 
 was striving to sur- 
 pass the magnificence 
 of the design by the 
 beauty of the execu- 
 tion. But the most wonderful circumstance was the speed with 
 which they were completed, for edifices which might seem to 
 have required the labour of generations were finished during the 
 administration of one man. While it is generally true that time 
 expended in labour is paid for by the duration of the work, yet 
 the structures of Pericles built in so short a time were yet built 
 for ages. Each, as soon as it was finished, had the venerable air 
 of antiquity, so now that they are old they have the freshness 
 of a modern building, as if they were animated by the spirit of 
 eternal youth." 
 
 Fig. 69. — Painting on Cymatium : 
 after Vulliamy. 
 
 * This seems to mean to the office of city architect. Ictinus may have 
 swallowed up the fame of Callicrates as he wrote a book on the Parthenon. 
 
84 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 The work was carried on amidst considerable political ob- 
 struction, and Plutarch has quite an interesting essay on the 
 political economy of art in the city, which he gives us to under- 
 stand expresses the opinions of Pericles. That which was the 
 delight of the Athenians and the wonder of strangers, he says, 
 was the magnificence of the temples and public edifices. The 
 opposition, asserting that Pericles wasted the public treasure, 
 urged that it must be considered an act of tyranny when the 
 money which had been contributed toward the war was lavished 
 on adorning Athens with temples that cost i,ooo talents. 
 
 Fig. 70.— Frieze : Angle Group, getting ready. 
 
 Pericles answered that superfluous wealth was best expended 
 on works which would be eternal monuments of its glory, and 
 which during their execution would diffuse wealth — for all kinds 
 of labour and materials being required, every art would be exer- 
 cised and every hand employed, so that almost the whole city 
 would gain while it was being adorned. Even the mechanics 
 and common people would have their share of public money, 
 while they would not be supported in idleness ; for the different 
 materials such as stone, bronze, ivory, gold, ebony, and cypress, 
 furnished employment to carpenters, masons, metal-workers, and 
 others, and their transport employed sailors, carriers, paviors, 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 85 
 
 and the like. Thus by the exercise of their different trades was 
 plenty diffused amongst persons of every condition. 
 
 The Propylaea, whose architect was Mnesicles, was begun 
 directly after the practical completion of the Parthenon, about 
 437, and was probably completed about 432 together with 
 the temple of Nike. 
 
 The Erechtheum was begun about 421, and was still in 
 progress in 408, when an inquiry was held in regard to the 
 works necessary for its completion. The results of the inquiry 
 are recorded on an inscription in the British Museum. These 
 
 itCm^ 
 
 
 Fig. 71. — Frieze : Horsemen. 
 
 building accounts show that there was a commission appointed 
 for carrying on the works, and that an architect Philocles was, 
 in 408, a member of it. In the erection of public buildings in 
 Greece it was usual to have such a board to supervise the 
 progress and arrange contracts. That there was a board of this 
 kind for the works at the Parthenon appears likely from a frag- 
 ment of papyrus at Strassburg.* It seems very much like the 
 mediaeval custom as to building. 
 
 * Murray's " Parthenon," p. 8. 
 
86 the rarthenon and its sculptures. 
 
 Colour and Bronze. 
 
 The structure and the sculptures were decorated by painting 
 and by many accessories of bronze, which were doubtless gilt. 
 One of the fullest accounts of the painting is given by Penrose, 
 although his harsh colour prints must not be held to represent 
 the original hues. Like Hittorff and others, he thought that 
 the whole surface of the marble had first been given a general 
 tint to reduce its high, hard lights, to an ivory tone. Probably 
 this priming was of wax — " patinage a la cire " (Lechat). This 
 treatment was found to have been used already when the 
 
 Fig. 72. — Frieze : Waiting Magistrates. 
 
 archaic statues discovered some twenty years ago on the 
 Acropolis were wrought. 
 
 Some of the smaller architectural members, and the back- 
 grounds of the sculptures, were painted in plain, bright colours. 
 The triglyphs and the mutules above them were coloured blue, 
 the spaces between the latter were red, the guttse (according to 
 L. Magne) were also red. The field of the pediment was pro- 
 bably blue or red. At ^gina it was blue. The bands above and 
 beneath the triglyphs had fret patterns ; the guttse band beneath 
 each triglyph has a small palmette pattern. The cymatium 
 had a larger palmette pattern. (Fig. 69.) In the squares at the 
 angles of the cornice, between neighbouring mutules, were com- 
 positions like the ornaments used by vase painters, one of which 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 87 
 
 is carefully drawn in Laborde's fine book. All the mouldings, 
 both outside and within the peristyle, had painted patterns, 
 with the exception of the large swelling mouldings of the 
 capitals, on which no trace has been found. I should think it 
 likely that the succession of small fillets and hollows beneath 
 the capitals were coloured and gilded. Within the peristyle, 
 the band above the frieze, the antse capitals, and the coffered 
 ceiling, were fully decorated. The blue is said to have been 
 deep, the green was of verdigris, and the red bright. No 
 actual gilding was found, but " there can be little doubt that 
 the gilding is necessary to complete the harmony of the colour- 
 ing" (Penrose). Two or three fragments in the Museum still 
 
 Fig. 73. — Frieze : Hermes, Dionysos, Demeter, and Ares. 
 
 bear traces of the painted pattern-work ; one length of the 
 band above the frieze shows the double fret, and a similar band 
 from the Propylaea is decorated with Lesbian leaves. Many 
 writers remark that the outlines of the patterns were first traced 
 with a sharp tool. The colouring at the Parthenon followed 
 an almost fixed tradition. At the Theseum, for instance, Sauer 
 found that the triglyphs and mutules were blue, the drops and 
 other small surfaces red, the background of metopes red, and 
 of the frieze blue, while all the mouldings were patterned. " No 
 doubt all the Greek temples were ornamented. The temples 
 of ^gina and of Apollo in Arcadia (Basss), are enriched with 
 a profusion of painted ornaments. The statues found in the 
 
 H 
 
88 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 temple of .^Egina were all painted, and the attributes were of 
 bronze and lead." * 
 
 At .^gina the scheme of colouring was practically the same 
 as at the Parthenon. The metopes and mutules were blue, the 
 spaces between the latter were red, the only other colour was 
 an "apple-green." At Rhamnus, again, the pattern on the 
 cymatium was red, the lacunaria were blue with gilt stars, the 
 mouldings around them had painted eggs and tongues ; some 
 green remained in places. The same blue triglyphs and mutules 
 with red bands and spaces have been found on early fragments 
 discovered on the Acropolis.f 
 
 The late examination of the western metopes of the 
 
 Fig. 74. — Frieze : Iris, Hera, and Zeus. 
 
 Parthenon by Mr Ebersole revealed many traces of colour, as 
 well as of bronze bridles and swords. The upper left field of 
 No. 14 shows some remains of red. Spots of blue were 
 observed on the triglyphs, painted patterns were plainly visible 
 on the corona and taenia, on the strip beneath the triglyphs 
 were little palmettes, which still remain on No. 15. 
 
 In regard to the sculptures, almost all direct evidence is 
 lost; but there cannot be any doubt that they were richly 
 coloured. In " Museum Marbles," a description is quoted from 
 M. Mellin, of the slab of the frieze, now in the Louvre. " This 
 
 * Dodwell. 
 
 t See Theo. Weigand, " Archaic Poros Architecture," 1904. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 89 
 
 marble, before it was cleaned, preserved traces not only of the 
 encaustic colour (i.e., the waxing), with which according to the 
 custom the Greeks covered their sculptures, but also of the 
 real painting of some parts. . . . The ground was blue, the 
 hair, and some parts of the body, were gilt." * 
 
 This agrees very closely with Dodwell's description of the 
 frieze of the Theseum, where, he says, "the colours are still 
 perceptible on a close inspection. The armour and accessories 
 have been gilt, the drapery is generally green, blue, or red ; 
 which seem to have been the favourite colours of the Greeks. 
 The open air \i.e., the background] is painted blue." 
 
 Penrose thought he saw " a slight trace " of colour on one 
 metope. Beul6 says of one, that "the drapery of the woman 
 was green, the ground being 
 red." ■ 
 
 Not only the reliefs, but 
 the great sculptures were 
 finished with colour and addi- 
 tions of gilt bronze. Leake 
 says, " We found proof in 
 many traces that the statues 
 and reliefs, as well as the 
 members of the architecture, 
 were enriched with various 
 colours, rendering them pic- 
 tures as well as groups of 
 statuary." Cockerell pointed out the remains of a coating on 
 parts of the " Ilissus," and Murray says, " It appears that originally 
 the sculptures had been covered with a thin wash or size of lime." 
 He referred to the remains of bright colour on the pediment 
 sculptures of Olympia, and concluded that there was no doubt 
 that the Parthenon groups had been similarly decorated. The 
 Laborde head in Paris, which is accepted as having come from 
 the Parthenon, still shows traces of red in the hair, as do many 
 other antique heads. The thought of coloured statuary is apt 
 
 Fig. 75. — Frieze : 
 Athena and Hephaistos. 
 
 * Cockerell, in the jCgina volume, says gold is observed in many parts 
 of the Parthenon. This, perhaps, should read — some traces of what might 
 be gold. 
 
go 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 to offend people, but I do not think the statues themselves 
 would leave any room for doubt. The general tradition, down 
 to the Renaissance, was to colour all sculpture ; at that time, I 
 believe, finding remains of antiques from which the colour had 
 disappeared, it was thought to be " classical " to do without 
 colour, and thus the modern incomplete sculpture arose. 
 
 Bronze was largely used in the structure. The columns of 
 the pronaos and posticum had metal screens set between them, 
 as traces still show. (Fig. 62.) The doors were probably of 
 bronze, the jambs were " probably cased with bronze, fixed on 
 wooden framing, for which a shallow rebate is provided * in 
 the stonework.'' The jambs were very slightly inclined. 
 
 Fig. 76. — Frieze : Central Panel. 
 
 The bronze accessories mentioned before were profusely 
 used. The horses of the sculptures had bridles. Some of the 
 figures doubtless held symbols, and probably the chariots of the 
 west gable were of bronze. Dionysos had sandals, the goddesses 
 had bracelets, clasps on their shoulders, and even earrings. The 
 serpents of Athena's segis were bronze, and along the ridge of the 
 mane of one of Selene's horses are many holes, in which small 
 objects must have been attached, possibly stars, or little balls to 
 shine like sea spray. 
 
 On the epistyle were placed round shields of bronze, nearly 
 4 feet in diameter, one over each column on the western front, 
 
 * Penrose. At Olyrapia, Pausanias says, the doors were of bronze. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 91 
 
 and one under* each metope on the east. On the north and 
 south fronts there were single shields at each end.f Between the 
 shields of the east front are traces of rows of lettering. " There 
 are five rows, with nine holes in each," says Dodwell. The 
 shields, it is generally said, were fixed " long after " | the comple- 
 tion of the building. Penrose says that they were fixed "at 
 some uncertain period. They are said to have been fixed by 
 Alexander the Great— they were attached more rudely than is 
 likely to have been the case at the time of building." The idea 
 of their being late may have arisen from what Pausanias says 
 of shields having been affixed to the temple of Olympia by 
 Mummius, the Roman conqueror of 
 Achaia, 146 B.C. He also says, however, 
 that there was another shield beneath 
 the Victory on the pediment ; this was 
 probably placed there in the fifth cen- 
 tury along with the Victory. Again, 
 there were shields at the temple of 
 Delphi, those on the east and north 
 having been given by the Athenians in 
 memory of Marathon, and those on the 
 west and south having been given by 
 the ^tolians in memory of their victory 
 over the Gauls. The temple at Delphi 
 was built in the fourth century, and the 
 recent discoveries have shown that the 
 shields were fixed in the metopes, which 
 were unsculptured. We may fairly suppose that the Athenians 
 hung up their memorial shields on their own temple before 
 they sent them to Delphi.§ As I shall show that the metopes 
 of the west front of the Parthenon had reference to the 
 Persian war, we may conclude that the shields there were in 
 
 Fig. 77. — Frieze : Head of 
 Hera, restored. 
 
 * Not exactly, they seem to have been drawn nearer together in pairs 
 over the columns. 
 
 + Also, in some places at least, objects under the triglyphs attached with 
 three pins, thus, . ' . 
 
 J Leake. § " The Athenians dedicated shields at Delphi after the 
 
 battle of Platsea" (Furtwangler, p. 446). An examination lately made by 
 an American student suggests that shields were put up at four times. 
 
92 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 memory of the Athenian victories, and that they formed part of 
 the original bronze adornment of the temple. The architectural 
 use of memorial shields represented in marble is found on the 
 monument at Cnidus and other works, some of which must be 
 earlier than the time of Alexander. Bronze shields must have 
 been used before they were copied in this way. As there is a 
 difference in size and distribution between the shields of the east 
 and the west fronts, there may be a difference of age. The in- 
 scription on the east architrave is of the time of Nero. 
 
 On the apex and two lower angles of the pediment acroteria 
 were set, following ancient tradition 
 much older than the Parthenon. The 
 blocks for the pairs at the lowest angles 
 still exist, having sunk spaces, 2.7 square 
 on the upper surface, in which they were 
 inserted. (Fig. 6"]^ As Cockerell says, 
 " the existing remains show that very 
 considerable ornaments were originally 
 placed at the angles of the pediments ; 
 and it cannot be doubted that, conform- 
 ably to the general practice, the apex of 
 the temple was also similarly adorned."* 
 At the lower angles of the temples 
 of yEgina and Rhamnus (one earlier and 
 the other later than the Parthenon) 
 were sphynxes. At Olympia were, ac- 
 cording to Pausanias, vessels of gilt 
 bronze. It is said that such bowls on the pediments of the 
 Parthenon are casually mentioned in an epigram, to which I 
 cannot find a reference. Bohn adopted them in his restoration ; 
 Magne, without giving reasons, says that the acroteria were 
 certainly of metal. 
 
 Fig. 78. 
 Hands of Athena. 
 
 Sculptures — The Frieze. 
 
 In describing the sculptures of the Parthenon it may be best 
 to begin with the frieze, the best known and most complete of 
 the three great divisions — frieze, metopes, and pediments. 
 
 " Museum Marbles." 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 93 
 
 All the sculptures relate to Athena and the dependence of 
 the Athenians upon her. The east pediment represents her 
 birth, the west her taking the city and the land under her pro- 
 tection. The eastern metopes show her amongst the gods 
 battling with the powers of dark and ill, the other metopes con- 
 tain the acts of the heroes done by her assistance. The pediments 
 were stone books of Genesis and the Covenant, the metopes were 
 chapters from the Books of Kings and Chronicles ; the frieze, 
 representing the present relation of the gods to the chosen city 
 at the great feast of Athena, was a sort of Psalm of rejoicing. 
 
 On this band 524 feet long which surrounds and surmounts the 
 cella walls, is sculptured a procession in honour of Athena, which 
 progresses, in two streams, from the west front, to the middle of 
 the east front where it is received by a 
 group of gods assembled over the east 
 door. On the west front is shown the 
 preparation for the start. Both the 
 north and the south sides have a general 
 resemblance in the succession of groups 
 of horsemen, chariots, and maidens, as if 
 it were intended to represent the right 
 and left flanks of the same advancing 
 body, although there are considerable 
 differences in the details. The eastern Fig. 79.— Frieze ; 
 
 frieze falls into seven parts : i and 7 are Head of Apollo. 
 
 the heads of the procession overlapping 
 
 from both sides ; 2 and 6 are groups of magistrates who wait to 
 receive them (Fig. 72); 3 and 5 consist of dignified seated figures 
 of larger scale, obviously the gods, waiting and looking outwards 
 (Fig. 73) ; 4 is a central group quiet and detached, which appears 
 an anti- climax to the rest of the scene, beyond or outside. 
 (Fig. 76). It is so completely divided off from the general 
 action by the two groups of gods who turn their backs on it, and 
 by being isolated in a bare space such as we find nowhere else 
 on the frieze, that it seems probable that this part was thought 
 of as within the temple itself There seem to be slight indica- 
 tions of lines dividing off this group, as if this central panel had 
 a background of a different colour from the rest. The general 
 balance of the whole composition, and the isolation of the central 
 
94 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 scene, exactly above the entrance door, can be best seen on 
 Lucas's fine model in the Gallery. The middle figure of all is 
 that of a priestess who is approached on her right by two female 
 attendants bearing seats. On her left a man and a boy are 
 folding a large square of cloth which we can see is doubled over 
 and over again. As it is difficult to think that this can represent 
 the delivery of the new Peplos — for the procession has not yet 
 reached the temple — it seems more likely that the action is that 
 of folding up the old one preparatory to replacing it.* (Fig. ^6?) 
 The watching gods and waiting magistrates must mark the 
 reception of the troop at the temple. On each side there are 
 four magistrates standing nearest the centre, who are as yet 
 
 Fig. 80. — Frieze : Diagram showing mass and background. 
 
 unconscious of the approaching throng, and two who turn to- 
 ward it. One of these, on the right, signals to the inner group. 
 
 The identification of the gods has been discussed for a 
 hundred years, but is now practically fixed. The assembly con- 
 sists of twelve chief personages and two minor ones ("Iris and 
 Eros), seven on each side. The first on the left is certainly 
 Hermes, a youth nearly nude, leaning forward in eager attitude. 
 (Fig- 73-) He is shod, and rests his characteristic hat on his knee, 
 while a drilled hole shows that he held the caduceus, of bronze, 
 in his hand. The last figure of this group (7) is also sure. It is 
 Zeus enthroned and holding a sceptre in his right hand. In 
 
 * Since writing this I see that this explanation has been suo-gested by 
 Mr G. F. Hill. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 95 
 
 conversation with him is a noble goddess (6). On her forehead 
 there seems to be some trace of a diadem (Fig. 77). Dr Murray 
 says it is of willow, an earlier writer says olive ; and close to her 
 elbow stands Iris (5) the messenger. This is clearly Hera.* The 
 third figure is a goddess, who leans forward against her raised 
 right hand in an attitude that became typical for mourners. She 
 has a veil falling on her shoulders exactly like a Demeter at 
 Berlin, and held in her left hand a long torch formed of reeds 
 bound together. This is certainly Demeter.f On either hand 
 of her is another god. The one between her and Hermes (2) sits 
 backward leaning listlessly against Hermes. He is the only 
 one who sits upon a cushion and is probably Dionysos. In his 
 raised left hand he may have held a thyrsus. On the other side, 
 towards Hera, is Ares (4). 
 By his foot appears the end 
 of the shaft of his spear which 
 would have been completed 
 above in painting. The atti- 
 tude in which he sits with his 
 hands clasped around his 
 knee is repeated in a well- 
 known statue of Ares in Fig. 81.— Frieze : Incised Drapery. 
 Rome.t (Fig. 73.) 
 
 Passing across the central panel and coming to the corre- 
 sponding group of seven gods on the right, the first pair (8 
 and 9) are on the same long slab as the central subject, and 
 the Zeus and Hera of the left hand group, the slab being 14 feet 
 ■6 inches long. The first figure (8) is a slender girl who can be 
 no other than Athena. (Fig. 75.) In her right hand she held 
 
 * Cf. 3. relief of Hera and Zeus in the Mausoleum Annexe, also the pedi- 
 ment of the Nereid monument and a metope of Selinus (Collignon, fig. 
 213). "A breath of Homeric poesy animates this scene.'' The first and the 
 last are very much alike. 
 
 t The attitude of mourning passed on into Christian art. St John a 
 the Crucifixion is figured with hand uplifted to his cheek. The well-known 
 Penelope statue is one example of the same gesture. May I suggest here 
 that the painted vase (Fig. 272) does not represent Pheedra but the return of 
 Ulysses? there are the idle handmaids, the well-wrought bed, and at the door 
 Ulysses talking with the nurse. Cf. Darem. and Saglio, s.v. Mendicaiio. 
 
 X Ludovisi Mars. 
 
96 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 a spear of bronze, the holes for attaching which occur in a straight 
 line slanting across her body. Around her left wrist is a snake 
 which it has been said was merely a bracelet. If it is a bracelet 
 (Fig. 78), there cannot be a doubt, I think, that this snake was 
 thought of as alive or at least as significant of Athena. The 
 arrangement is not stiff enough to represent metal, and the 
 great gold and ivory statue in the interior of the temple had, 
 besides the snakes of the aegis, others around both wrists, and 
 still others knotted around the waist.* This slim, dignified, 
 girlish figure is exquisitely imagined. The head is boyish in 
 its simplicity. The bearded god in conversation with her (9) is 
 probably Hephaistos. (Fig. 75.) " It is supposed that his lame- 
 ness may be indicated by the awkward pose of his right foot 
 and by the staff on which he leans." I 
 cannot see anything awkward in the foot, 
 but the staff may serve to indicate the 
 lame god. The last chief figure on the 
 right (13) with Eros (14) beyond her, 
 must, all agree, be Aphrodite. We now 
 have three figures remaining between 
 Hephaistos and Aphrodite. The bearded 
 male figure (10) must be Poseidon, the 
 only suitable name which remains. In 
 his lifted hand he may have held a trident. 
 The younger, radiant-faced god (11) must 
 be Apollo (Fig. 79), and the goddess next 
 to him (12) is probably Artemis, the most important name 
 which remains, although she is often called Peitho, from her 
 close association with Aphrodite. Apollo seems to have had 
 a wreath. 
 
 The identification of this assembly of gods has taken a 
 hundred years of discussion, but, after every possible combina- 
 tion has been suggested, it is now practically decided. These 
 attributions were made in the following order: — Stuart, 1789 : S> 
 Iris; 6, Hera; 9, Poseidon. Visconti : 3, Demeter ; 7, Zeus. 
 
 Fig. 82. — Frieze : 
 Sculpture and Joints. 
 
 * The bracelet idea seems now to be given up, and it is said that she 
 holds her a;gis under her left hand. This is very doubtful ; all that can be 
 said with certainty is that serpents play about her hand. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 9/ 
 
 Leake was the first to name the six principal figures correctly : 
 
 I, Hermes; 2, Dionysos ; 3, Demeter ; 4, Ares; 6, Hera; 7, 
 
 Zeus. Hawkins suggested 8 for Hephaistos. The German 
 
 Gerhard then named lO Apollo, 11 Artemis, 12 Aphrodite, 13 
 
 Eros. Michaelis was the first to name the 
 
 whole of the second group with substantial 
 
 accuracy, calling 11 Peitho instead of Artemis. 
 
 C. Robert was the first who named the whole 
 
 assembly correctly. The attributions were 
 
 still argued about when Furtwangler said a ^^%- 83- 
 
 few words which very much settled dispute, ^ Hand. 
 
 although no new identifications remained for 
 
 him to make. Some English writers would still keep the 
 
 question open in regard to one or two points, but I have no 
 
 doubt that the names assigned by Robert, Overbeck, and 
 
 Furtwangler will prevail.* 
 
 Doubts have been expressed as to how far the immense mass 
 of sculptures, some 50 pedimental figures and 
 horses, 92 metopes, and 524 feet of frieze, can 
 properly be assigned to Phidias at all. On this 
 point we must take into consideration the differ- 
 ence between one man working alone — even though 
 it be Michael Angelo, as is said, on the Sistine — 
 and the master of a school. The metopes in this 
 respect need hardly to be considered ; a few words, 
 a few sketches, and the great traditional technique, 
 would soon settle all but a dozen or so of them. 
 " In certain details of slight importance the assist- 
 ants may have gone beyond the master's orders [or 
 ^■. ^' have dragged behind them], but in all essentials the 
 design is his very own ; that dominant personality 
 which governed the frieze and the pediments, can, 
 on the evidence of style and tradition, be none other than that 
 of Phidias." f Again, it is said that these " mere architectural 
 
 * The new British Museum Catalogue, May 1908, now accepts the identi- 
 fications fully. 
 
 t Furtwangler. S. Reinach has also written to this effect. Phidias was 
 chief of a school, like Raphael in the Vatican. Pediments, metopes, and 
 frieze were all works of the same school. 
 
98 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 Fig. 85. — Lyre 
 from Frieze. 
 
 sculptures " were in antiquity of little account as compared with 
 the temple statues and bronzes of Phidias. Why then did 
 Aristotle in a passage quoted by Visconti call Phidias a wise 
 stonecutter? And may we not take this to be an allusion to 
 the sculptures of the Parthenon? 
 
 As to the frieze, the more I have studied it, 
 the more I see that as a matter of design it is 
 less sculpture than relief painting, if I may make 
 use of such a term. The method of composi- 
 tion, the rhythm of the lines, the heraldic pattern 
 made by the horses' legs, the rapid sweep of the 
 forms, have the closest affinity with vase-paint- 
 ing. (Fig. 80.) The frieze must have been cut 
 from drawings made, " swift as a hawk's flight," 
 on the marble slabs set together like a long roll 
 of canvas — bold brush drawings putting down 
 the forms like a herald and not by " outlines." 
 To speak of models for such work, either small 
 or big, is beside the point. The relief is all 
 chisel work and chisel thought, not " a marble model of a clay 
 model." The drawing (and Phidias was a painter) was the 
 master's. For the rest a pattern panel or two struck off by such 
 a " stonecutter," with inconceivable rapidity, some touches and 
 talks — that is all that was required. All this need only fill the 
 chinks of time, while the ivory statue and the 
 pediments were in progress. On the production 
 of the frieze hear Ruskin : " A great sculptor uses 
 his tool exactly as a painter his pencil, and you 
 may recognise the decision of his thought and the 
 glow of his temper no less in the workmanship than 
 in the design. . . . The sculptor [now] thinks in 
 clay instead of marble, and loses his instinctive 
 sense of the proper treatment of a brittle sub- 
 stance." On the Parthenon frieze the horses are 
 in low relief, " yet by mere drawing you see the sculptor has got 
 them to appear to recede in due order, and by a soft rounding 
 of the flesh surfaces and modulation of the veins, he has taken 
 away the look of flatness. He has drawn the eyes and nostrils 
 with dark incision, careful as the finest touch of a painter's 
 
 Fig. 86. 
 A Vessel. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 99 
 
 Fig. 87. — Incense Burner : 
 from the Frieze and 
 from a Vase. 
 
 pencil ; and then, at last, when he comes to the manes he has let 
 fly hand and chisel with their full force ; and where a base 
 workman (above all if he had modelled the thing in clay first) 
 would have lost himself in laborious imitation, the Greek has 
 
 struck the tresses out with angular 
 incisions deep driven." 
 
 It followed from the true method 
 
 ^^^^^ of marble relief that the original sur- 
 
 Ij y/fl^B^^H ^^^^ plane is made to take as much 
 
 Fll vv (HC^^B as it will; this precious surface is 
 J^^'^^^HII^B indeed carefully preserved throughout 
 III U^H^^H as a fine water-colour painter will 
 
 preserve the light in his work. The 
 furthest plane or background is found 
 anywhere in the thickness of the 
 material where it is wanted, and does 
 not occur at a constant depth. There 
 are broad passages which are little 
 more than incised on a flat surface. 
 (Fig. 81.) The forms are, as it were, 
 seen through a plane, they are not attached to a plane. The 
 system was, as Dr Murray has well expressed it, to " broaden the 
 nearest plane," but he seems to have regarded it as a choice of 
 taste not as a law of fine craftsmanship. Marble relief tends 
 
 properly to this type of section 1 \, 
 
 modelled relief to this other A. One is 
 left from a level surface, the other is added 
 on a level surface. 
 
 Several years ago Dr Waldstein brought 
 into prominence some fragments of small 
 terra-cottas which had on them parts of 
 some of the figures of the assembly of 
 gods, and put forward the view, although 
 cautiously, that they might have been parts 
 of original models for the frieze. Furtwangler, amongst others, 
 accepted them as at least of ancient work ; but they are now 
 considered to be taken from a cast made for Choiseul Gouffier 
 about 1787. It happens that the original slab which these terra- 
 cottas represent has been much injured, and the early plaster 
 
 Fig. 
 
lOO 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 casts taken from it have been lost. Now the heads and other 
 details on the terra-cottas are remarkably good, and it seems to 
 be held that the slabs from which they were taken must then 
 have been far more perfect* I cannot, however, agree with this 
 view, and I see no difficulty in thinking that a skilful modeller 
 
 Fig. 89. — W. Metopes, No. i . Restored. 
 
 working on casts of the slabs as now in the Museum could, from 
 their indications, make as true a restoration. In the text of the 
 " Museum Worsleyanum " we are told that this particular slab 
 was lying on the ground outside the west front in 1786. The 
 slab itself shows that it has been subjected to treatment different 
 
 * Collignon. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 lOI 
 
 Fig. 90. — W. Metope, 2 : 
 from Ebersole. 
 
 from the others. The features and forms are destroyed, not by 
 decay, not by sudden violence, but by long-continued petty 
 injury. When Pars drew it in 1765 it was already in the state 
 that it is in at present. It follows that the terra-cottas, good as 
 they are, have no record value. 
 
 A study of the jointing suggests 
 some ideas as to the procedure in 
 the production of the frieze. While 
 it seems plain that the subject must 
 have been generally settled before 
 the slabs were cut, yet the detailed 
 design certainly follows the slabs, and 
 I cannot doubt that it was drawn on 
 them in place. In regard to the first 
 point, the slabs of the east front are 
 longer than the rest, the central 
 stone being over 14 feet in length. 
 
 Although the composition of this front is regular, the slabs them- 
 selves are irregular in size. At the ends, and also at the ends of 
 the west frieze, there are narrow panels, and three of them take 
 only single figures, for which we may suppose they were intended. 
 
 Each slab on the west front con- 
 tains a separate group, and the size 
 suits them so perfectly that we must 
 think that the subjects were settled 
 before the stones were cut. 
 
 That there was revision of design 
 to suit the jointing is, however, even 
 more certain, and several of the 
 horses' heads and legs were clearly 
 spaced so as to avoid the joints, as, 
 indeed, every part which they passed 
 through has been specially con- 
 sidered. (Fig. 82.) In two or three 
 cases the divisions cut through a man's head, or a horse's hoof, 
 but exactly in the middle, and with evident adjustment. Along 
 the south side there are generally two and three horses' heads 
 and necks to each slab until the chariots are reached, and then 
 nine or ten successive slabs are occupied by as many chariots. 
 
 mrscnramncm 
 
 vntBKiKwt w uu a.u«i, 
 
 Fig. 91. — W. Metope, 3 ; 
 from Pars. 
 
102 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 The marble was finished to a polished surface. This is best 
 seen on the slab at the Louvre, which is perfectly lighted. The 
 details are wonderfully true and minute. The hands all seem 
 separately observed ; the veins, creases, and nails are indicated. 
 (Fig. 83.) The sticks on which the magistrates lean are knotted. 
 (Fig. 84.) By comparing two or three slabs, the forms of the 
 chariots, lyres (Fig. 85), vessels (Fig. 86), and incense burners 
 
 (Fig. 87) can be made out. How 
 one of the latter was carried appears 
 better in Stuart than on the slab at 
 present. 
 
 It has been remarked that the 
 compositions of the pediments have 
 centres of action of which the re- 
 moter figures are unconscious, and 
 that between them is a growing 
 movement of interest. In the frieze 
 we find much the same principle. 
 First, there are standing figures, then 
 rapid movement towards the centres 
 of the long fronts. At the east end 
 the waiting figures are partly uncon- 
 scious of the procession, and be- 
 tween them and it is a waking of 
 interest. In the group of gods, 
 again, we have the interest of some 
 engaged, while the inner ones are 
 as yet unconcerned. In the frieze 
 there are nearly 200 horses in all 
 varieties of action, which are ob- 
 served with the keenness of sight 
 of a Japanese, and set down without " the smallest symptom of 
 constraint ; for no less attention has been paid to the beautiful 
 realities of life than to ideal beauty." * 
 
 None but " the horse-loving Greeks " could 
 
 Figs. 92 and 93. — W. Metopes, 
 4 and 8 : from Pars. 
 
 through such a work. 
 
 have carried 
 The mere following and keeping account 
 
 of the number and directions of the men's and horses' legs is 
 
 * Dodwell. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 103 
 
 bewildering* The crossing of the legs at different angles con- 
 fuses the eyes, so that an illusion is given which recalls the very 
 effect of the march of cavalry. The troop of horse seems to go 
 by with a clatter. 
 
 The Metopes. 
 
 The metopes were 92 panels, approximately 4 feet square, 
 set above the stone beam of the outer order, 14 at each end, and 
 32 at each side. These sculptures are 
 in the highest relief, some of the 
 figures, indeed, are almost detached. 
 There are fifteen originals from the 
 south side, and two casts from the 
 north-west corner, in the Museum. 
 Many of those once at the middle of 
 the north flank are entirely lost, and 
 about as many on the south side are 
 only known through Carrey's draw- 
 ings. Those which still remain on 
 the building are much decayed, and, 
 indeed, there was considerable loss 
 from exposure during the last cen- 
 tury. 
 
 The Western Metopes are 
 now always described as a battle of 
 Greeks and Amazons, but BeuM long 
 ago suggested that the subject was a 
 battle of Greeks and Persians, and 
 Leake described them cautiously in a 
 way that would admit of this inter- 
 pretation. He says : " The long dress of the vanquished in 14 
 and the shield in 10 are barbaric, and apparently Oriental. It 
 
 Figs. 94 and 95. — 
 Metopes, 9 and 
 from Pars. 
 
 W. 
 II : 
 
 * Dr Murray has found some faults in regard to this. Of the last horse- 
 man on the north side he says: "We see how possible it is to get into 
 difficulty ; the man's leg ought to have been visible across the belly of his 
 horse." But on the marble the rider's leg is plainly to be traced, as may be 
 seen in Plate XXL, " Museum Marbles." He also complains that some tails 
 are omitted, but this is only so where the tails of neighbouring horses are 
 held so high that they, too, would be hidden in the same position. 
 
 I 
 
I04 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 Fig. 96. — W. Metope, 
 10 : from Ebersole, 
 with Persian shields 
 from Vases. 
 
 »j-^^oigift> :>.iKfc. j;tjiBj3(iy ivoian^faygj 
 
 is probable that the whole front related to the warlike exploits 
 of the Athenians." The idea that the foes were Amazons arose, 
 doubtless, from the fact that the Persian 
 warriors wore skirts, but this inference 
 applied at first only to two of the panels, 
 10 and 14, which in " Museum Marbles " are 
 said to represent Greeks and Amazons. 
 In Cockerell's restoration only the last 
 figure of all is shown as female. The 
 general arrangement of the series put a 
 horseman, usually with a fallen antagonist, 
 in each alternate panel, the others having 
 pairs of war- 
 riors on foot. 
 
 They have 
 been recently 
 examined from 
 a scaffolding by 
 Mr Ebersole.* He considers that 
 the subject is most probably the 
 Amazonomachia, although his de- 
 tailed description in no way sub- 
 stantiates his opinion. A large 
 number of the figures are certainly 
 men, not one is obviously a woman, 
 nor, curiously enough, does he sug- 
 gest of any one that it is a woman. 
 According to custom it should be 
 the Amazons who ride, yet several 
 of the riders were almost nude, and 
 the wounded antagonists are also 
 nude, or nearly so. Not one rider 
 seems to have been getting the worst 
 of the combat, indeed, all the horse 
 groups were of the usual victory for- 
 mula where a warrior rides down a 
 
 foe. Surely all this can only be explained by supposing that 
 these metopes did not represent a battle of Greeks and Amazons, 
 
 * Am. Journ. ArchaoL, 1S9S-99. 
 
 Figs. 97 and 98.- 
 topes, 13 and 
 Ebersole. 
 
 ■W. Me- 
 4 : from 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 105 
 
 
 / 
 
 and the probability is that the foes were Persians. Professor 
 Gardner has remarked generally of the sculptures: "By their 
 choice of all these subjects there is little doubt that the Athenians 
 intended to depict to the glory of their goddess the mythical 
 prototypes of their own vic- 
 tories over the Persians which ^'"^ -^ 
 were still fresh in their me- 
 mory, and such a theme was 
 ^appropriate to the Parthenon, 
 built as it was from the funds 
 subscribed by the Greeks 
 against the common foe, but 
 no longer necessary.* Yes, 
 but would not these allusions 
 best be gathered up by a 
 sculptured battle with the 
 Persians themselves ? It was 
 only fitting that, on the Par- 
 thenon itself, as on the Temple 
 of Nike, the triumph over the 
 Persians should be celebrated 
 amongst the acts of the 
 Greeks. Taken in relation to 
 the subject of the pediment 
 
 above, which showed how Athena took charge of the land, 
 these metopes suggested how, by her help, it was retained. 
 
 I have found, in some drawings of these metopes, made by 
 Pars in 1765, when they were in much 
 better condition, some further confir- 
 mation of this view. The metope i, 
 by the north corner, is a magnificent 
 Greek horseman (in the Museum Cata- 
 logue called an Amazon with a ?). 
 (Fig. 89.) It is found practically copied 
 in the tomb-relief of Dexileos(B.C. 394).t 
 2 is a combat on foot (Fig. 90), 3 is a noble group of a mounted 
 'Greek and a fallen Persian, of which Pars gives a valuable drawing 
 
 Fig. 99. — W. 
 Cast at 
 restored. 
 
 Metope, I : from the 
 the Museum, slightly 
 
 Fig. 100. — Amazon : from 
 Athena's Shield. 
 
 * E. A. Gardner's " Athens." 
 
 t Collignon, ii., fig. 
 
io6 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 (Fig. 91) inscribed "West front, 3 from northern end" ; 4, com- 
 bat on foot, of which Pars also has a drawing (Fig. 92) ; 5, very 
 like 3 ; 6, 7, and 8 are very decayed, but there is no doubt that 6 
 had a fo"ot combat. Mr Ebersole thinks that there was alterna- 
 tion between rider and foot groups throughout, and thus as the 
 next, 7, contained a rider, although the subject of 8 could not 
 be made out, he decided that there could not have been a horse, 
 and he suggested two warriors and a rock in the middle. This 
 does not agree with the evidence of Pars' sketches, which show 
 that 8 did contain a rider and fallen foe, although the subject 
 was, even when he drew it, much defaced. (Fig. 93.) If 7, 8, 
 and 9 formed a strong centre, all having horse-groups, the reason 
 for reversing 11 becomes apparent, as it formed a pendant to 5, 
 and the scheme from 4 to 12 becomes a balanced composition. 
 
 Fig. loi. — Greeks and Persians : from Nike Temple. 
 
 10 is a combat on foot (Fig. 96). Of this one Leake remarked 
 that the shield seems to be Persian, and Mr Ebersole's photo- 
 graph shows the Persian " perme." 1 1 is a horseman facing to 
 the left and a fallen foe. Pars gives a sketch of this. (Fig. 95.) 
 12 is nearly effaced, but enough remains to show that it followed 
 2. 13 is, again, like 3. 14 is a combat on foot, Beul^ properly 
 described it as a Persian on his knees before an Athenian. Pars 
 has a drawing of it. Mr Ebersole mistakes, I think, the action, 
 in supposing that the arms of the fallen foe followed around the 
 rim of the Greek's shield. The hands really caught at the arm 
 of the Greek just above his own head. (Fig. 98.) This com- 
 position is found repeated again and again on the Phigalean 
 frieze, and on the vases. 
 
 Since getting so far I have examined the two casts of the 
 metopes against the north-west angle, and am confirmed in the 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 107 
 
 Fig. 102. — S. Metope ; Centaur Battle. 
 
 view set out above. In the last panel of the north side the 
 
 majestic figure, seated on the rock, clothed in a beautiful fleecy 
 
 chiton,and with arm upraised 
 
 as if it held a spear, must 
 
 be Athena. (Fig. 11 1.) The 
 
 other hand may have held 
 
 her helmet, for she is here 
 
 unarmed, "in peaceful posses- 
 sion, tranquilly watching 
 
 over the beloved city." 
 
 Compare the Athena of the 
 
 frieze of the Theseum, where 
 
 she is also watching a battle 
 
 from her rock. The girl who 
 
 quickly advances from the 
 
 left is clearly a messenger. 
 
 It is a magnificent sculpture, 
 
 and 'tis pity it cannot be 
 
 better seen. The rider i of the west front is certainly no Amazon ; 
 
 the bony and muscular forms and strong hand and foot show that 
 
 it is a man. Both shoulders 
 were covered, and the dress 
 is the ordinary short men's 
 tunic and a mantle flying 
 from the shoulder. (Fig. 
 99.) We know from 
 Athena's shield and from 
 the copy of the Amazon 
 of Phidias how the sculptor 
 of the Parthenon marbles 
 represents Amazons. (Fig. 
 100.) A still further con- 
 firmation as to Persians 
 being represented on these 
 metopes is offered by the 
 sculptures of the Temple of 
 
 Nike, where several of the groups figuring combats of Greeks 
 
 and Persians obviously follow the western metopes and furnish 
 
 the closest parallel with them that can be found. (Fig. loi.) 
 
 Fig. 103. — S. Metope : Centaur Battle. 
 
io8 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 The Southern Metopes for the most part contain sculp- 
 tures of the legendary combat of Theseus and the Lapiths with 
 the Centaurs. (Figs. 102, 103, 104.) The first twelve and the last 
 eleven or twelve deal with this subject, while in the centre there 
 is a separate group of eight or nine, according as its end one is 
 read to go with one or the other series. These seem to relate to 
 the early legends of Athens. In the Museum Catalogue we read : 
 " The nine intervening metopes have been ingeniously interpreted 
 as relating to the story of Erichthonios, the mythical founder of 
 the Panathenaic procession." (See Pernice, 1895.) Bronsted long 
 ago suggested a similar reading of the central group. The panel, 
 
 which is the last of these or 
 y • ■. T-ni^wnrmt-nnM iyiiii, , ■ w-,uKA the first of the twelve which 
 
 form the third group, con- 
 tains two women on either 
 side of an archaic statue. 
 Pernice reads this subject as 
 two maidens adorning the 
 Xoanon of Athena, and makes 
 it the last of the central set. 
 The sculptures of the third 
 group, as already said, formed 
 a continuation of the Centaur 
 battle, the chief incident of 
 which was an attack on 
 women. A frieze from Bassae, 
 also at the Museum, which in 
 the Parthenon, gives a pro- 
 Two women, who have taken 
 
 Fig. 104. — S. Metope : Centaur Battle. 
 
 much admittedly derives from 
 minent place to a similar episode, 
 sanctuary at a sacred image, are attacked by a Centaur, who 
 is himself attacked by a Greek (Theseus ?), while a goddess, in 
 this case Artemis, gallops up to the rescue, with Apollo in her 
 stag-drawn chariot. The panel at the Parthenon must, it seems 
 to me, belong to the Centaur series, and must be the first of a 
 second group of twelve. It furnishes, in fact, the episode around 
 which the action develops. On either hand, in the separated 
 groups, are two panels of Centaurs carrying away women, while 
 further towards the angles there are no women. The southern 
 metopes were thus divided up into groups of 12:8:12; and we 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 109 
 
 Fig. 105.- 
 zon : 
 
 -Greek and Ama- 
 from a Vase. 
 
 may suppose that the central series had a background of a 
 different colour to distinguish it from the rest. 
 
 The subject of the end groups would not have been a mere 
 struggle between Lapiths and Centaurs, but the result of the 
 intervention of the goddess for those who appealed to her image. 
 The subject is — in general terms — 
 sacrilege or violation of hospitality, 
 and what followed. The best version 
 of the subject which occurs on a vase 
 is figured by Miss Harrison ; * here 
 the struggle at the domestic altar by 
 the door to the inner palace is again 
 the chief episode ; while in Ovid the 
 tearing down of the altar also comes 
 in. The panel in question on the 
 Parthenon must represent the bride 
 and her mother appealing to an image 
 
 of Athena, and thus was the story brought into relation with the 
 goddess. Similar subjects often occur on vases, it may be called 
 the Palladium formula. 
 
 The notes of the compositions of the 
 central group given by Carrey are 
 enough to show that they must have 
 been of great beauty. On 19 was a 
 stately woman's figure which looks like 
 one of the " maidens " of the Erechtheum, 
 and a figure in 20 looks as if it might 
 have been the original of the beautiful 
 Lansdowne grave slab.t 
 The Eastern Metopes have not, so far as I know, been 
 re-examined since Michaelis published his unsatisfactory repre- 
 sentations. Leake I and Cockerell had assigned meanings to 
 some of the panels which are concerned with the deeds of the 
 gods, and especially of Athena ; Petersen and Robert have 
 
 Fig. 106. — Mercury and 
 Argos : from a Vase. 
 
 * " Athens," fig. 37. 
 
 t " Burlington Club Catalogue," No. 50. 
 
 J Leake's description is full and valuable if it is independent of the Elgin 
 drawing mentioned below. 
 
no 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 Fig. 107. 
 Metopes, No. 12 
 
 sought to identify all the subjects, and the latter proposes a 
 series in which the gods occur in the following order : Hermes, 
 Dionysos, Ares, Hera, Zeus, Athena, Heracles, Apollo, Artemis, 
 and Poseidon ; while the four chariots belong to as many 
 of the gods. He bases this reading largely on the order of the 
 gods on the frieze within, so it is in great 
 part an assumption. The only new, or old, 
 fact I can bring forward is that Cockerell's 
 scheme is taken over from the restoration 
 of the east front made by Lord Elgin's 
 artist on a large drawing at the Museum 
 made about 1801. Although there must 
 be a good deal of conjecture in these re- 
 stored panels, they were based on careful 
 observation, probably made from a scaffold, 
 and give data when the panels were in a much better state than 
 when the drawings published by Michaelis were made. No. i 
 has two struggling figures, one of whom cowers beneath the 
 victor. Designs of this type are so frequent that no interpreta- 
 tion can be certain. (Fig. 105.) Hermes 
 and Argos are sometimes so represented, 
 as on a vase at Oxford. (See Fig. 106.) 
 No. 2 does appear to represent Dionysos, 
 at least there is a panther on it. No. 6, 
 as figured by Laborde and Michaelis, is 
 in the attitude of the man restraining a 
 bull on the frieze, but prostrate in front ; 
 according to the Elgin drawing there 
 was another figure.* 
 
 No. 7 looks as if it might be Athena 
 and Pegasus. Athena driving winged 
 
 horses appears on the Cnidos Treasury at Delphi. No. 9 seems 
 to have had a Hercules, and may well be Hercules and Apollo 
 struggling for the tripod. As restored on the Elgin drawings 
 
 Fig. 1 08. • 
 E. Metopes, No. 14. 
 
 * If from these indications and divergencies we might assume that a bull 
 attacking a man was being held back, no subject would probably suit so 
 well as one on a vase published in the Hellenic Journal for 1889, where 
 ' Athena is rescuing Theseus from a bull. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 Ill 
 
 it is almost exactly like this scene as represented on early 
 vases, and it occurred in the pediment of the Delphi Treasury. 
 No. 12 seems to have contained Athena. (Fig. 107.) No. 14 repre- 
 sented a chariot rising from the sea. (Fig. 108.) The Elgin draw- 
 ing is clearly very accurate in some points, which can be tested. 
 
 Fig. 109. — Metopes at N.E. angle. 
 
 This seems a direct rendering 
 
 Thus, on the last, some small fish are shown, which also appear in 
 Michaelis, and to the left is a water bird which is only a shapeless 
 form in the drawing of the latter. Both of these points are 
 omitted in " Museum Marbles." 
 of the passage in Homer (Iliad, 13), where 
 Poseidon drives his swift flying gold-maned 
 horses over the sea, while dolphins sported 
 beside the chariot. These eastern metopes 
 cannot be profitably discussed until every 
 trace of what actually remains can be 
 brought into comparison with these restora- 
 tions made more than a century ago.* Fig. 
 109 shows the last metope on the east, seen 
 in relation to the first on the north. 
 
 The Northern Metopes are so greatly 
 decayed, and so many of them are lost, that it would seem hope- 
 less to make anything of them. Michaelis, however, had the good 
 fortune to find the subject of two which adjoin, Nos. 24 and 25, 
 apparently represented on a vase painting, which figured a scene 
 at the fall of Troy. Helen is shown before a sacred image, while 
 Aphrodite sends Eros towards Menelaus, who, according to the 
 
 * The composition of 2 and 12 may be compared with two Selinus 
 metopes (Collignon). 
 
 Fig. no. 
 N. Metopes, No. 29. 
 
112 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 Story, was thus restrained from killing his wife. This interpreta- 
 tion Dr Murray would not accept (" Parthenon Sculptures," 1903). 
 He proposed a battle of Centaurs for this side too, remarking that 
 " there were too many women about for the Troy war." But the 
 subject suggested was not a Troy battle, but incidents after 
 taking the city. On a vase in the Museum * we have Menelaus 
 and Helen again, Ajax and Cassandra, and other similar groups. 
 
 Fig. III. — N. Metopes, No. 32 : Slightly restored ; 
 from Drawing in Elgin Collection. 
 
 The figure from the vase which Michaelis gave seems to me 
 entirely convincing. 
 
 With this clue it is easy to suggest that 29 must be a 
 fugitive from Troy, and Dr Robert, comparing it with the descrip- 
 tion of the painting by Polygnotos of the fall of Tro)-, reads it 
 as representing two Trojans who were escaping on one horse 
 
 * F. 278. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 "3 
 
 when they were killed by Neoptolemus.* It was the last act of 
 
 war, and so would appropriately come here. I do not feel sure 
 
 of the two riders on one horse, as shown by 
 
 Michaelis, but of the action of the falling horse 
 
 there seems to be no doubt, it is rendered 
 
 clearly on Lucas' model at the Museum made 
 
 before 1845. (Fig. no.) Compare the vase 
 
 figured by Reinach,t where a Greek, called by 
 
 him Achilles, encounters two Trojans, one of 
 
 whom rode a horse which has fallen. 
 
 I have found a similar group on a vase 
 figured in the Berlin Jahrhuch of Archaeo- 
 logy, ^ which again shows a Greek attacking 
 two Trojans, one of whom is on a falling 
 
 horse 
 
 RFrTO<:H 
 
 Fig. 112. 
 ctorious Athena : 
 from a Vase. 
 
 whose action is 
 singularly like that on 
 metope 29. 
 
 The first panel of all 
 on the north side con- 
 tains a chariot apparently 
 driven by a woman. (Fig. 
 109.) Possibly this may 
 be Athena setting off to 
 witness the fall of Troy. 
 The last metope, No. 32, 
 has a dignified woman's 
 figure sitting on a rock, 
 while a messenger runs 
 up to her. (Fig. in.) 
 Compare this beautiful 
 panel, of which we for- 
 tunately have an old cast 
 in the Museum, with the 
 panel at Olympia of Athena seated on the Acropolis. § I give 
 also a sketch from a vase || in the Museum where she sits apart 
 
 Fig. 113. — Athena on the Acropolis : from 
 a Vase at the British Museum. 
 
 * "Die Iliupersis des Polygnot" (1893), and Fraser's "Pausanias." 
 t Repertoire, i. 411. % 1905. Plate 7. 
 
 § CoUignon, i., fig. 223. || Pedestal 13. 
 
114 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 on the Acropolis, as indicated by an olive tree and a pillar, watch- 
 ing from afar the fall of Troy. " She has laid aside her helmet, 
 and rests triumphant at the conclusion of the war." (Fig. 113.) 
 The figure itself, on the vase, almost seems to be drawn from 
 the Athena of the eastern frieze. Compare also the figure of 
 Athena seated on a rock watching a battle on the frieze of the 
 Theseum, which I find that Sauer has restored as holding her 
 helmet in her hand. Before seeing this, I had come to the con- 
 clusion that this was probably the action of the Athena of the 
 Parthenon metope. (See Fig. 1 12, from a vase.) The messenger 
 on this metope resembles a figure on the Theseum, from the last 
 of the series representing the Labours of Hercules. 
 
 If we accept it that the last metope on the north represents the 
 rock of the Acropolis, then the warrior on No. i west, who never 
 
 •^^»>fc^ 
 
 X Y 
 
 Fig. 114. — W. Pediment : from Carrey's sketch ; 
 and Suggestion as to Right-hand Group. 
 
 seems to have been opposed to an enemy, may be supposed to be 
 riding out from Athens to join the battle. It is worth some 
 tiresome concern with minute points, to bring out the result that 
 the western metopes which were first seen on approaching the 
 temple were a memorial of the victory over the Persians, and that 
 those on the north, which were passed in reaching the entrance, 
 recalled the War of Troy, while the less seen south side cele- 
 brated the primitive legendary battle of Athenians and Centaurs. 
 Those of the east were the deeds of the gods themselves. 
 
 The Pediments. 
 
 Most of the surviving sculptures of those which once filled 
 the pediments are now in the British Museum. They are, by 
 common admission, the noblest images wrought in all time. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. II5 
 
 They are at once severe and sweet, great yet graceful ; they are 
 large in absolute scale and in design, but simple in conception, 
 and most masterful and energetic in handiwork. 
 
 We all know that the figures are wonderful, but it is only 
 necessary to see them from some unaccustomed point of view to 
 feel it again as a fresh surprise. To examine them from steps is 
 a revelation, the muscular back and shoulders of the Theseus, 
 the soft rounded arms of the Demeter and the Wife of Cecrops — 
 strong, yet almost flowing, in extraordinarily beautiful curves — 
 the bare shoulder of one of the Fates, the startled horses of the 
 Sun, the perfect pose of the Ilissus, the variety of texture and 
 fold in the draperies of the goddesses, the dainty buttoning of 
 the sleeve, the big folds of skirts and mantles, the great, restful 
 forms, and the resistless energy of the cutting are all wonderful 
 and lovely. Most wonderful of all is the great spirit which fills 
 out and transcends the forms. They are not mere statues, they 
 
 Fig. 115. — W. Pediment in 1749 : from Dalton's Sketch. 
 
 are creatures proper to temples born in marble. The Fates are 
 as majestic as mountains. 
 
 " Those three serene, beautiful figures — Fates they must be — 
 have the quietude of fate. They fill the background of my mind 
 constantly and wonderfully with their passionless power. They 
 make me feel that fate is neither cruel nor kind, only the inexor- 
 able law fulfilling itself." 
 
 The general meaning of the compositions in the pediments 
 are known from a few lines of Pausanias, where he says that the 
 Birth of Athena occupied the eastern front, and that the Dispute 
 of Athena and Poseidon for supremacy in the land of Attica, 
 filled the western. Valuable data in regard to the now lost 
 figures are contained in some careful drawings made about 1674, 
 and usually called Caney's drawings. Other details have been 
 made known by a minute examination of the remnants and 
 marks on the pediments themselves, and some further light may 
 
ii6 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 be gained by comparison with the lately discovered sculptures 
 of Olympia, which, although they are more archaic in style, 
 have much in common as compositions with the pediments of 
 the Parthenon. The relation of the two works is not settled, 
 but undoubtedly one of them derived much from the other. 
 
 It is usual to describe first the western gable of the Parthenon, 
 as it is the first seen and more is known of it, especially through 
 Carrey's drawing (Fig. 114), best published by Omont. 
 
 This drawing, notwithstanding a quality in some degree 
 repellant, proves to be remarkably trustworthy, and, after one 
 has got accustomed to its style, truth is evident in every touch. 
 Other drawings by Dalton, 1749, and Pars, 1765, are helpful ; 
 and analogy with vase paintings and marble reliefs has re- 
 flected a light on the design. (Fig. 115.) 
 
 An introduction to the 
 subject is best gained, I 
 think, by a comparison of 
 the statues in the Museum 
 with the model made by 
 the sculptor Lucas, about 
 1844, where the facts are 
 rendered with much feeling 
 and fidelity. Useful collec- 
 tions of illustrations, includ- 
 ing reproductions of Carrey's drawings, are contained in Dr 
 Murray's volume, 1903, and in the excellent Museum Guide. 
 (The last edition. May 1908, is just published.) 
 
 In the middle of the western pediment, under its peak, stood 
 Athena and Poseidon, in energetic attitudes of protest and 
 surprise. Between them was probably seen the olive tree which 
 she had just called into existence. Right and left of this pair 
 were their chariots, with rearing, frightened horses. The heads 
 of the right-hand pair, and the place they occupied, were identified 
 by Sauer. Under Poseidon's chariot both Carrey and Dalton 
 show a fish, probably a dolphin, the recognised symbol of the sea.* 
 Behind the chariots on each side were groups of spectators. 
 
 Fig. 116. — Hercules Relief : Paris. 
 
 * On a vase in the Museum Poseidon and Ampliitrite carry dolphins, and 
 a fish is often shown under the bull which bears off Europa. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. I IJ 
 
 amongst whom were children. The figures nearer the chariots 
 were mostly seated, in the angles were reclining figures, on the 
 left a nude male, on the right a draped female. Throughout is 
 variety of incident, yet balance is maintained. On either hand 
 Carrey's drawing shows a space which seems to interrupt the 
 series of figures, (x and y, Fig. 1 14.) 
 
 The evidence given by the marks on the pediment as to the 
 two gaps is not conclusive. Sauer put a figure on the left but 
 not on the right. Furtwangler argued from the same traces 
 that figures were called for in both places. Dr Murray rejected 
 both.* More lately still, Schwerzek has again rejected the 
 
 Fig. 117. — E. Pediment: Horses of the Sun. 
 
 -figure on the right. The question needs to be approached apart 
 from theories of interpretation, which are apt to bias the judgment. 
 The figure on the left is now generally accepted, and on the 
 broad grounds of the architectural balance of the lines and 
 quantities in both halves of the pediment, it seems to me that 
 a figure should be assumed on the right side. With the exception 
 •of these spaces the figures are set close together, even over- 
 lapping one another, as if the intention had been to cover up 
 the whole field of the pediment. Leake accepted both the 
 proposed figures. Cockerell, in his restoration, rejected the one 
 
 * He speaks of them as "corresponding gaps." If they corresponded, 
 hardly a doubt would remain, but they did not. 
 
Il8 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 on the right, but spread the leg of the next figure beyond the 
 space on the right, so as to partly fill up the gap. But the 
 actual figure since found shows that its leg was gathered close 
 under the body; and this compactness calls for a figure closely 
 adjoining. 
 
 I have tried to test the question by comparing the known 
 position of figures on the right and left of the pediment. In the 
 diagram, fig. 114, the figures v and w, were traced in their 
 proper situation from Sauer's Survey. The tracing paper was 
 
 Fig. 118. — E. Pediment : Dionysos. 
 
 reversed, and the two figures, B and C, were then traced from 
 their proper positions on the left, as measured from both the 
 centre line and the angle. The figure C, on the left, which 
 corresponds with that postulated on the right, fits exactly where 
 it should. Surely, if there had been no such figure in the space 
 on the right, the two known figures next the angle would have 
 been spread a little towards the centre. Again, reasoning from 
 the balance of the composition, it would seem that there must 
 have been a pair of reclining and crouching figures in each 
 remote angle — that there must then have been a pair of seated 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. II9 
 
 and rising figures on each side ; on either side, nearing the 
 centre, a group made up of a woman, a nude figure, and a 
 second woman followed, then came the chariot groups. Or, 
 reckoning inversely from the centre, point by point, there would 
 seem to have been balance. The nude figure on the left side 
 surely must have been a pendant to the other on the right, and 
 so of the next figure it rests on. Then there is a similar 
 woman's figure on each side. Then, on the left, is an important 
 male figure, and on the right a space. Beyond these is a figure 
 
 Fig. 119. — E. Pediment : Demeter and Persephone. 
 
 on the right, and on the left a space ; and finally, on both sides, 
 are similarly reclining figures. Altogether, it seems to me, that 
 there must have been a series which we may represent thus : — ■ 
 I. X. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. Y. 2. I. 
 of which (2) on the left, and (3) on the right, have fallen out. 
 
 Accepting the empty space on the right, there would be only 
 nine figures on that side, while there were ten on the left. From 
 Dalton's drawing of 1749 (Fig. 115), we may see that the falling 
 of blocks of the pediment probably destroyed figures on both 
 the right and the left ; the floor of the pediment is also broken 
 
 K 
 
I20 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 away at these points. Further, from Dalton's drawing, we know 
 that the figure 4, next to the right hand gap, had fallen before 
 he made his drawing. Clearly this was a point of weakness. 
 The question is complicated by the fact that the great woman's 
 figure, next behind the right chariot, had two nude children 
 
 associated with her. It may 
 be claimed, and with this 
 view I am disposed to agree, 
 that they were only emblems 
 too small to count amongst 
 the figures ; on the other 
 hand, it may be held that 
 these two compensated for 
 one larger figure on the left. 
 Taking this view, Schwerzek 
 has minimised the import- 
 ance of the left nude figure, 
 but other difficulties spring 
 up regarding such a solution. 
 I feel that the gleaming 
 bodies of the nude figures 
 must have been most im- 
 portant points in the com- 
 position, and we should 
 naturally expect that one 
 on the left balanced one on 
 the right. 1 must leave this 
 tedious question without 
 having found anything which 
 I can consider a proof, but I 
 incline to the view that the 
 evidence points to there 
 having been figures in both 
 the gaps shown in Carrey's drawings. 
 
 The figure of " Victory," so named because the mortice- 
 holes in the shoulders, showed that it had had wings, has 
 usually been described as having belonged to the east 
 pediment, although many writers have raised objections. 
 The reasons advanced in the last edition of the Museum 
 
 Fig. 120. — E. Pediment : " Iris' 
 (Ilithyia?). 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 121 
 
 Catalogue, shows that this theory has entirely broken down, 
 and it is now admitted that the figure is that represented on 
 Carrey's sketch, close by Poseidon's charioteer. In the Hellenic 
 Journal, November 1907, Dr Cecil Smith writes, that accord- 
 ing to the letters of Lord Elgin's agents, the figure was found 
 under the west front. It is suggested that the figure cannot be 
 a Victory, as it is on the side of Poseidon, and Discord is 
 proposed.* However, Furtwangler, seeing the Victory diffi- 
 culty, had said, that, as Athena had Hermes for a supporter, 
 so Poseidon had Iris, and he gave instances of this parallelism 
 between Iris and Hermes.f 
 
 The interpretation of the scheme of the sculptures by 
 Furtwangler, which accepts and restores figures in both the 
 gaps of the pediment, seems to me the most consistent and 
 dramatic. Both gods claim the same land, and both are 
 standing as nearly as possible on the same spot. Both produce 
 their tokens of power, and both draw back. Difficulty of 
 interpretation arises in respect to the side figures, the spectators 
 of the main action. According to Furtwangler, as it was 
 done in the sight of men, the side figures represent the wit- 
 nesses — the primitive dwellers on the Acropolis. The germ 
 of this theory is already found in Visconti, who conjectured 
 that the figure near the car of the goddess might be Cecrops, 
 " the native hero of the Athenians, whom they revered as a god, 
 and who bore witness to the prodigy." Leake, who, after all, 
 may be found to have been the observer who made the most 
 identifications of the whole mass of Parthenon sculptures, 
 extended and, to a large degree, rightly applied this theory. 
 He named the man's figure next to the left hand gap, Cecrops ; 
 and the women between him and the chariot, his daughters. 
 " According to one version of the fable," he writes, " Cecrops 
 testified that he had seen the olive planted by Athena; accord- 
 ing to another version, not only Cecrops but his successors, 
 Cranaus and Erechtheus, were present. It is this last form 
 of the story which Phidias had represented." As he accepted 
 
 * The only late Discord I know is not winged (Furtwangler's 
 " Vases," 30). 
 
 t That the figure is probably Iris is allowed in the last edition of the 
 Museum Catalogue. 
 
122 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 Visconti's suggestions as to the figures on the right half of the 
 pediment — Latona and the rest — he named the statue on the 
 left half, and next to the car of Athena (now Hermes), Erech- 
 theus. With the exception of this, the Cecrops and family 
 identification is now generally accepted, and the present British 
 Museum scheme is practically that of Leake. Furtwangler, 
 starting from the Cecrops identification, would make both the 
 right and the left hand groups " the original dwellers on the 
 citadel rock who witnessed the visit of the two deities, and who 
 
 first instituted their worship, 
 and it is they who have the 
 best right to be represented 
 here as witnesses." As behind 
 the chariot on one side were 
 Cecrops and his family, so on 
 the other were Erechtheus and 
 his daughters ; he having occu- 
 pied the position of the right 
 hand gap on Carrey's drawing. 
 One of the daughters of Erech- 
 theus has a nude figure on her 
 lap, " her son Ion, father of the 
 lonians,'' the two forming a 
 group like another, which has 
 been found from the frieze of 
 the Erechtheum.* 
 
 We come now to the angle 
 figures, the one of which to the 
 left has usually been taken for 
 a river-god, Ilissos or another. 
 When we find that Pausanias described one of the pediments at 
 Olympia as being bounded by two rivers, there seems to be 
 little room for doubt, and when, further, we note how later river- 
 god statues have followed this type — the "Nile" (at Rome), for 
 instance, is very much a traditional copy of it — the identification 
 
 Fig. 121. — E. Pediment : A Fate. 
 
 * This nude figure has been discussed, see Miss Harrison's "Athens." 
 Bauer claims to have identified parts of it, and that it was a male figure. The 
 new B.M, Guide rather overstates that it was most Ukely female. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 1 23 
 
 seems complete. My only doubt had been in regard to the 
 figures at the right hand angle, where the outer figure is a female 
 turning back and conversing with a male. He is said to repre- 
 sent a river, and she the fountain Callirrhoe. 
 
 This difference between the two angle figures prevents our 
 calling them "river-gods" ; and "a river-god and fountain nymph" 
 is perhaps over elaborate. Furtwangler takes them to represent 
 other primitive spectators. That such reclining figures need not 
 represent Rivers is shown by Fig. 116, which seems to be 
 founded on the Parthenon statue. Taking Furtwangler's scheme 
 altogether, the reply of Dr Murray that the whole right hand 
 
 Fig, 122. — E. Pediment : Other Two Fates. 
 
 group of spectators might reasonably be taken " as nymphs or 
 such like on the coasts of Attica " is not convincing. 
 
 The strength of Furtwangler's interpretation is that the 
 sculptures do not according to it represent the strife of Athena 
 and Poseidon as a mere episode, with spectators accidentally 
 drawn together, but it is the story of the Acropolis itself, of the 
 Fathers of the people and of the covenant Athena made with 
 them, the token of which was the sacred olive tree. " Phidias 
 gave form to that which was in the heart of every Athenian." 
 
 The subject which filled the eastern pediment, the birth of 
 Athena, has been more irrecoverably destroyed in regard to the 
 central statues than that of the western pediment, although the 
 most perfect of all the remaining figures come from the angles 
 
124 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 of this composition. The comparison, with certain reliefs, and 
 Sauer's careful examination of the pediment itself, seem to show 
 that at the left of the centre was Zeus, enthroned in profile, and 
 in front of him Athena. Furtwangler suggests that the Medici 
 torso represents the goddess of this pediment* At the two 
 extremities were the rising Sun and the setting Moon. 
 (Fig. 117.) These last, and the three and four next figures 
 on either hand, are in the Museum. The three colossal figures 
 
 on the right were called the 
 Fates by Visconti a century 
 ago, and the relief at Madrid 
 which, it is allowed, derived 
 from the pediment, also has 
 three figures which are 
 shown by their emblems to 
 be the Fates. (Figs. 121, 
 122.) This, we may be sure, 
 would be held by Visconti 
 to be a striking proof of the 
 truth of his ascription, which 
 has been accepted and re- 
 inforced by Furtwangler. 
 Sauer, however, and others 
 have made various objec- 
 tions. About the latest 
 theory is that of Studniczka.f 
 who, starting from the as- 
 sembly of gods of the eastern 
 frieze — to which, as we have 
 seen, Robert had already 
 related the sequence of the acts of the gods in the eastern 
 metopes — considers that the twelve great gods were represented 
 in this pediment. He also goes back to the old ascriptions, 
 Dionysos, Persephone, and Demeter, for the three figures on the 
 left, who follow the rising Sun, and whom Furtwangler called 
 Kephalos and the Horae. Two of the "Fates" (Fig. 122) are, 
 according to him, Dione and Aphrodite. 
 
 Fig. 123. — E. Pediment : 
 Selene's Horse. 
 
 ' Intermezzi." 
 
 + Berlin Arch. Inst., xix., 1904. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 125 
 
 It may be recalled that Falkener, writing about 1850, in the 
 "Classical Museum," suggested that a relief of Zeus and 
 Hephaistos at Rome represented the left hand part of the 
 central group. This was a remarkable intuition, for a 
 similar pair of figures are on the larger relief at Madrid, which is 
 now generally accepted as an authority for the pedimental 
 figures. The best starting point for the interpretation of the 
 sculptures of the eastern gable would seem to be other repre- 
 sentations of the birth scene. Reinach, in his " Repertoire " of 
 painted vases, 1899, gives eight versions, and another, still more 
 important, is on the just-mentioned marble relief at Madrid. 
 This last selects the moment when Athena of full stature con- 
 fronts Zeus, and it probably not only 
 represents the Parthenon form of the story 
 but derives from it. All versions agree in 
 having Zeus seated facing to the right ; 
 all, except the marble, agree in having 
 Ilithyia present, the goddess who attends 
 at births (Fig. 124) ; one vase has her only 
 besides Zeus and Athena. Most, except 
 the marble, have several gods attendant 
 on the scene — ^ApoUo, Poseidon, Hermes, 
 Hera, Hephaistos, Ares, Dionysos, De- 
 meter. On the marble and one vase 
 appear the three Fates. We gather from 
 this that the birth of Athena was a great 
 traditional subject, for most of the vases 
 are earlier than the Parthenon. Phidias might cast it into a 
 classical form, but he might hardly vary outside a limited range. 
 The existing figures may be conjectured to be anything, but 
 the evidence should compel us to take the identifications which 
 agree best with the tradition. 
 
 Zeus must have been enthroned to the left of the centre 
 facing to the right ; next to him must have been Athena and 
 Hephaistos. The existing noble triad of goddesses to the right 
 should be the Fates, as proposed by Visconti. The pair to the 
 left should be Demeter and (probably) Persephone, as many 
 have thought. (Fig. 119.) The reclining god still further to 
 the left must be Dionysos. (Fig. 118.) He jni£-/i£ he Theseus, 
 
 Fig. 124. — Zeus and 
 Ilithyia ; from a 
 Vase at the British 
 Museutn. 
 
126 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 Hercules, Kephalos, or Pan {cf. the coin of Pandosia), but if 
 we are to rest on evidence he must for the present be known 
 as Dionysos, and should be so called. The figure comes over 
 the exploit of that god in the metope. He comes next to 
 Demeter as on the frieze. The attitude is repeated by the 
 Dionysos of the monument of Lysicrates, on a relief from 
 the Piraeus and on a vase (/. H. 5., vol. 25, plates). Furtwangler 
 claims that it should be Kephalos, because it was shod, but the 
 Dionysos of the Kertsch vase is also shod. The frightened girl 
 near the centre may be a subordinate figure, like Hebe, attendant 
 
 on Hera, but if she is to be 
 regarded as one of the chief 
 actors, and to this view I 
 incline, it can hardly be any 
 other than Ilithyia. (Fig. 
 120.) On the latest of the 
 vases referred to she is figured 
 in a way which closely re- 
 sembles this statue. (Fig. 
 124.) The motive would be 
 that she is startled at the 
 extraordinary birth, and flies 
 from the scene. This figure 
 on the vase, like that of the 
 pediment, is youthful. Dr 
 Murray, who proposed this 
 identification, withdrew it 
 later, but it is the one most supported by evidence. If not 
 Ilithyia, it should, by analogy with other figures, be a Nereid, 
 possibly a messenger to Athens. 
 
 Fig. 125. — Seat of Demeter and 
 Suggested Interpretation. 
 
 Restorations. 
 
 It is by minute observations on the separate figures, made 
 with the object of discovering their gestures, accessories, and 
 character when they were complete, and also by comparison of 
 them with other works which deal with similar subjects, or seem 
 to derive in some degree from the sculptures, that we can most 
 fully enter into their meaning. This is the method of " restora- 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 127 
 
 tion" which has been used so suggestively by many foreign 
 experts. For this purpose we want the fullest possible apparatus 
 of casts, copies, and photographs of works which are at all 
 germane, ready to hand. The excellent British Museum 
 Guide to the Marbles, which is frequently brought up to date 
 is quite perfect for a work of so small a compass ; but the 
 Parthenon room itself, which at present is a little empty, might 
 be made the best possible centre for Phidian research. Even 
 the observations which have been made are not fully scheduled, 
 and theories of interpretation blow here and there, under the 
 impulse of taste and eloquence, often unrestrained by facts 
 discovered a century or more ago by Visconti, Leake, and 
 others. 
 
 I. The Helios and Selene of the 
 east pediment seem to have inspired a 
 vase painting, on which, however, the 
 entire chariots, figures, and horses are 
 shown,* and not merely segments of 
 them. The idea this painting gives of 
 the action of the groups, and the acces- 
 sories such as reins, is most life-giving. 
 On the back of the statue of Selene is 
 part of a scarf which evidently passed 
 over her shoulders and helped to sup- 
 port her extended arms ; a point of technical design which will 
 again be referred to. 
 
 II. Dionysos ("Theseus") is the only figure which still 
 retains its head. There is a roughly cut indentation across the 
 back of it above the neck, which Dr Murray thought indicated 
 plaited hair ; but to me it rather suggests that a metal wreath 
 had been adjusted there. The modelling of the forearm shows 
 that the hand was turned inwards toward the shoulder and 
 probably held the shaft of a spear or thyrsus. A pin-hole 
 above the ankle suggests that the feet were shod with bronze. 
 The figure reclines on the skin of a panther or lion.f 
 
 Fig. 126. — Seat of Cnidus 
 Demeter. 
 
 * Figured in Revue ArMoL, 1903, p. 373, and Sauer's " Theseum." 
 t Do the flaps at the side of the jaw (Fig. 103) indicate a Hen's skin ? If 
 so, this should be a panther. 
 
128 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 III. The Demeterand Persephone are, except for their heads, 
 
 almost complete. They were in much the same state as at 
 
 present when Carrey drew them. A learned German has claimed 
 
 that they sit on closed boxes. But on comparing their seats 
 
 with that on which the Demeter of Cnidus rests, and with others, 
 
 represented on reliefs, it seems possible that these seats were 
 
 meant for stools framed with uprights and rails of wood. The 
 
 moulding at the back, C, might not be a hinge, but, as the top of 
 
 the stool was not allowed to project at the back, a bead covering 
 
 the flush joint was attached. (Figs. 125 and 126 ; A is from the 
 
 marble, B is a suggested interpretation.) 
 
 I do not feel certain of this, however, as it 
 
 must be allowed the seats are very like the 
 
 chests which appear on vases. In any case, 
 
 the)- would have been commonly used as 
 
 seats, and need have no special significance.* 
 
 IV. The figure usually called Iris (Ili- 
 
 thyia?) may be completely restored as to its 
 
 general lines. As it stands, it at first seems 
 
 the least interesting figure of the pediment, 
 
 but close study reveals extraordinary beauties 
 
 in the design and adjustments of the figure. 
 
 Against the back is a slab-like area of what 
 
 1^ was clearly a mantle flying free from the 
 
 figure. It is very skilfully supported by a 
 
 fig. 127. — Section a'^^^ . ^- r ^, \. ■ u- u 
 
 of Drapery over Auttermg portion of the upper tunic, which 
 
 Letr of Demeter. projects between the body and the mantle. 
 The extremities were obviously supported by 
 the extended arms. What makes this certain is the similar 
 design of several figures from the Nereid monument from 
 Xanthus, where the fundamental idea is the same, and which 
 must derive, directly or indirectly, from the " Iris," of which they 
 are but copies with differences. (Figs. 120, 128.) 
 
 V. The Fates, when Carrey's drawing was made, had heads 
 on the first and third figures.^ The first looked back toward the 
 
 * Cf. the tomb furniture, Ephemeris, 1899, plate n. 
 t These had probably disappeared by 1750, as Pococke speaks of the 
 right-hand group as " only three broken figures." 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 129 
 
 centre, the third forward to the Selene. A small point of restora- 
 tion can be made out with certainty in regard to the middle figure. 
 Working from the marbles, I observed that over the right 
 shoulder there is a tiny remnant of the under side of a piece of 
 the mantle which rose above it. This could only mean that it 
 was supported by the right hand bent over near the shoulder. 
 From the indications the accompanying restoration was made 
 (Fig. 129), and afterwards, turning to the Museum Catalogue, I 
 found the following : " The 
 right arm, according to 
 Carrey's drawing, was bent 
 towards the right shoulder, 
 as if the action had been 
 that of drawing up the 
 edge of the mantle from 
 behind the shoulder with 
 the right hand." It may 
 be, of course, that the slight 
 indication of the under side 
 of the mantle has been ob- 
 served before, but in any 
 case the after-confirmation 
 of Carrey's sketch forms 
 good proof On the left 
 shoulder the mantle passes 
 under the reclining head 
 of the third figure ; it falls 
 down the back, and is 
 
 gathered in big folds across the right thigh and over the lap. 
 After J had made my restoration, I found a parallel treat- 
 ment of this action, and that an interesting one. A statue in 
 the Louvre, which has been identified by Furtwangler as a copy 
 of the Venus in the Gardens, by Alkamenes, the pupil of Phidias, 
 follows it so closely that the derivation must be direct.* In some 
 respects it appears as if one of the Fates had risen erect. Of 
 
 Fig. 128. — E. Pediment : Restoration 
 of Figure (Ilithyia ?). 
 
 * See Fig. 129. The Louvre Venus is distinctly of Phidian type ; one 
 characteristic detail is the fluted selvage to the garment which appears on the 
 pediment sculptures and on the frieze. Reinach assigns it to Kallimachos. 
 
I30 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 this Venus Collignon remarks that the drapery slipping from the 
 shoulder recalls that of another one of the Fates, and the lifting 
 of the corner of the mantle resembles the gesture of Hera on 
 the frieze; the head, "calm and dreaming," above all reminds 
 one of the beautiful Laborde head, which is certainly a work of 
 Phidias. The head (Collignon, figs. 57 and 58) is indeed so 
 like the Phidian type that the suggestion may be made that it, 
 too, is taken over from the statue which inspired the gesture. 
 The origin of this movement technically is to be found in 
 
 constructive necessity. The 
 drapery forms a stay to the 
 otherwise free arm, turning 
 what would be ■< into «a: . 
 
 Similar drapery was made 
 use of for support frequently 
 in the pediment figures. The 
 sleeve of the reclining Fate 
 falls against the body far 
 enough to give the otherwise 
 free left arm great support.* 
 The flying mantle of the 
 "Iris" sustains the extended 
 arms. In the " Ilissos " of the 
 west pediment the drapery 
 which falls detached from the 
 arm forms really a support- 
 ing slab. The scarf which 
 appears over the left arm of the "Victory," in Carrey's sketch, 
 was attached to the body at the back, and must have passed 
 on to support the other free arm. Other unidentified .fragments 
 in the Museum indicate how large a use was made of these webs 
 of marble, detached for the greater part from the body. Fig. 
 130 suggests a part completion of one of these.f 
 
 A small statuette of Aphrodite, at Berlin, which Furtwangler 
 
 Fig. 129. — E, Pediment : Action of 
 One of the Fates. 
 
 * The forearm was evidently extended and the hand caught at the end of 
 the mantle, which was held above the left thigh in a bunch. The same action 
 as the Ilissos. 
 
 t The further arm of this figure might be an arm with drapery over it 
 in the Museum, No. 331. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 131 
 
 Fig. 130. — Restoration 
 of 339-7 Fragment. 
 
 also assigns to Phidias ("Masterpieces," fig. 27), shows a wonder- 
 fully perfect and powerful use of the connecting drapery. This, 
 indeed, forms part of the proper constructive tradition for statues 
 by competent stone-cutters. Great confusion has been intro- 
 duced into the technique of modern sculpture by following 
 Roman copies in marble of bronze originals. 
 To this cause we may attribute many fra- 
 gile and uncomfortable jutting forms, from 
 which it requires the insight of an Alfred 
 Stevens to abstain. 
 
 In drawing a restoration of the last two 
 goddesses from the eastern frieze, I ha\-e 
 observed so many points of resemblance 
 to the two Fates furthest to the right, that 
 I cannot but conclude that the frieze figures 
 are adapted from the great statues. The 
 chief distinction is that one of the latter 
 reclines much more to fill the angle of the 
 gable. This, the right hand figure, rests 
 
 with her right arm on the lap of the next figure, in the frieze as 
 in the pediment. The left arm in each was extended horizon- 
 tally, with the sleeve falling against the body ; the drapery was 
 caught up around the right thigh and turned into the lap ; 
 beneath the figure it falls like a valence. 
 In both, the feet were crossed over one 
 another. The second figure in each had 
 its right hand raised against the shoulder, 
 and again the mantle is drawn over the 
 right thigh into the lap. If this is so, it 
 follows, of course, that the frieze was done 
 later than the pediment. 
 
 The action of the right arm of the first 
 
 of the three statues is shown by Carrey. 
 
 Altogether a practically complete restored 
 
 drawing of this group could be made. Between the first and 
 
 second figures there is at the back room cut away for some 
 
 object. 
 
 VI. An interesting and valuable addition to the Athena of 
 the west gable has recently been fitted into its place. This is the 
 
 Fig. 131. — Two 01 
 Selene's Horses : 
 from Indications 
 on the Pediment. 
 
132 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 neck and the back of the head, including a complete ear, and 
 sufficient of the helmet to indicate its general character, and it 
 may be completed from the helmet on the head of an Athena 
 at Dresden, which Furtwangler has already singled out as of 
 Phidian type. It had a volute above the ear, and was in fact 
 the distinctive Attic helmet. It is singular, however, in having 
 no neck-piece, but some holes in the neck suggest that this 
 may have been applied in bronze. On the right of Fig. 132 is 
 
 Fig. 132. — Athena's Helmet: Restoration. 
 
 the Dresden head, and above a helmet by Scopas. In the 
 Bronze Room there is an original helmet of this type from 
 Vulci. 
 
 The head, as restored from these indications, has much in 
 common with the colossal head. No. 1,572, of late work in the 
 Museum, which is admitted to be a copy of an earlier one. 
 
 VII. The rearing horses of Poseidon, the heads of which 
 have recently been identified, approach him so closely that 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 1 33 
 
 there can hardly be a doubt that Cockerell was right in making 
 him grasp at their bridles. The Kertsch vase shows the same 
 motive in representing the scene. At the back of the shoulders 
 of the marble fragment of Poseidon in the British Museum, 
 there is a curious rough patch. Can a small flying mantle have 
 been attached, like that shown on the vase ? 
 
 VIII. Turning to the figure on the extreme left, the " Ilissos," 
 we can see from a portion of the drapery above the knee that 
 the right arm was outstretched and grasped it at this point. 
 And this is confirmed by the early drawings made when a part 
 of the forearm remained. The head must have been turned 
 over the left shoulder, regarding the action at the centre — and 
 this is shown by the corresponding figure on the right of the 
 pediment, which retained its head when Carrey made his 
 drawing. (Fig. 133.) 
 
 IX. The next two 
 figures are now usually 
 called Cecrops and his 
 wife or daughter, although 
 I know of no proof which 
 has yet been offered, 
 which necessitates the Fig. i33._w. Pediment : Restoration 
 abandonment of Brunn's of First Figure. 
 
 " animated map " idea, 
 
 which Dr Waldstein supported so lately as 1885. Both seem to 
 have been seated, but she with a startled action rises to her 
 knees, throwing a magnificent matronly arm, weighty yet soft, 
 over his shoulders. He also draws his legs back to rise. It is 
 always said that by his side is a serpent. Thus, in the cata- 
 logue we read : " On the ground between the pair is a convex 
 mass, which has been recognised to be part of the coil of a 
 large serpent. The association of the serpent with the male 
 figure led Michaelis to recognise in him Asclepios. The rela- 
 tion, however, of a serpent to the kneeling figure, rather suggests 
 the type of the earth-born Cecrops."* And Furtwangler says, 
 " Cecrops, the snake-man, was properly conceived as ending 
 
 * In the new Guide, 1908, the question is still open : " If we adopt this 
 attribution ... If B and C are Cecrops and one of his daughters," &c. 
 
134 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 below in the form of a snake, but here Phidias represented him 
 merely resting on his snake." 
 
 Not so ; the figure is here undoubtedly a snake-man. The 
 strong coil continues from the spine, twists under the body, and 
 makes two turns. The hand of the figure rests near the tip of 
 the tail, and behind his hand is a tenon-hole where the end 
 of the tail must have been attached in a separate piece. Com- 
 paring my sketch (Fig. 134) with the figure taken from a vase 
 given with it (Fig. 135), there can be no doubt of the intention. 
 Phidias gave his Cecrops legs, and made the tail less grotesquely 
 obtrusive ; but he is a snake-man, and this raises the identifica- 
 
 Fig. 134. — W. Pediment : Cecrop's Tail ; A, back ; B, from front. 
 
 tion from good conjecture to proof Notice that his drapery, 
 which is rather full in front, does not pass under the body. It 
 falls, like a skirt, over the beginning of the tail. The figure 
 on the Kertsch vase, which is later, has lost his tail entirely. 
 Here he holds a wand or sceptre in his raised hand, as the 
 sculptured figure would also have done. (Fig. 136.) 
 
 X. The female figure at the side of Cecrops in the pediment 
 which I shall call his wife,* is also somewhat inadequately 
 
 * From her mature character — because she wore some sort of diadem, 
 it is said, and because the third daughter might have been in the gap to the 
 left of Cecrops. See also Miss Harrison. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 I3S 
 
 Fig. 135. — Ce- 
 crops : from 
 a Vase. 
 
 described — " She wears a long chiton, and over it an apoptygma, 
 
 which has slipped from the left shoulder." In fact, she is 
 
 dressed in a girded chiton, open on the left side down to the 
 
 girdle, so that the left shoulder and breast were nude, except 
 
 for a piece of the drapery which passed over 
 
 the shoulder, but entirely undercut and relieved 
 
 from the body. (Fig. 137.) The opening of 
 
 the garment under the left arm is extended so 
 
 to uncover the side, and the edges are turned 
 
 over as if it were violently blown aside by a 
 
 wind, and that this is the thought is proved by 
 
 a similar detail in the wind-blown garments of 
 
 one of the Xanthus Nereids, although even there 
 
 the tunic is not blown clear of the surface of the 
 
 body. Over the right thigh a piece of a mantle 
 
 appears in front ; this must at the back have 
 
 passed to the left shoulder and then have formed a support to 
 
 the extended left arm, like the drapery of the Demeter(?) of 
 
 the east gable is treated. See Fig. 138 ; B is the mantle below, 
 
 C and D show its completion above, restored. 
 
 The heads of Cecrops and 
 his wife remained intact until 
 about a century ago. The 
 group was drawn beautifully 
 by Pars in 1765, and a repro- 
 duction of his drawing hangs 
 on the wall. It might be 
 enlarged photographically, 
 and be made the basis of a 
 careful restored drawing. 
 Probably if some of the 
 educational bodies were ap- 
 proached they would give the 
 help of trained students for 
 such a purpose. If we do not attempt such work ourselves, 
 again it will be done for us. 
 
 About 1802 the "head of the Sabina [the name at the 
 moment of the woman's figure] being very mutilated and having 
 fallen [with help I expect] was brought to Fauvel. On it one 
 
 L 
 
 Fig. 136. — Cecrops and Wife : 
 Restoration. 
 
136 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 could see the holes by which a crown [?] had been fixed. The 
 male head still remains." * The head of Cecrops was taken 
 down about 1803. Dodwell says that the head, " which is said 
 to have been knocked off by a Turk, is in my possession. I re- 
 ceived it four years afterwards.'' These heads in the possession 
 of scholars only a hundred years ago have completely dis- 
 appeared. When Carrey made his drawings fourteen figures 
 
 retained their heads, now 
 there is only one with a 
 head. In Paris there is a 
 noble female head which 
 almost certainly came from 
 the Parthenon. A cast of 
 this is shown at the Museum, 
 and casts of two other im- 
 perfect heads are in the 
 cellars. Of one of these I 
 give a sketch (Fig. 139), it 
 may be compared with a 
 fine head at Oxford and a 
 head called "Sappho" at the 
 British Museum, both of 
 Phidian type.f 
 
 XI. Turning to the figure 
 on the extreme right, which 
 has been terribly injured 
 since Carrey made his draw- 
 ing, we can, by a careful 
 consideration of the drapery, 
 arrive at a few suggestions 
 as to the complete figure. 
 A mantle which covers the whole back was brought to the front 
 over the knees and lower legs ; while at the other end it must 
 have been wrapped round the right arm, on which the figure 
 
 * "Antiq. Athens," iv. p. 22. 
 
 t The Oxford head, Reinach says, is of his time, and must have been 
 executed under his influence. Much remains to be worked out in regard to 
 these heads. We need full-sized photos of all the heads of the frieze, &c., 
 as a beginning. 
 
 Fig. 137. — Cecrop's Wife : 
 Wind-blown Garment. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 137 
 
 rests. The indications suggest that the left shoulder and side 
 were bare. The figure on the left of the Kertsch vase recalls 
 this one, and I suggest that it derives from it. There the upper 
 part of the body is wholly uncovered. Carrey's sketch is incon- 
 clusive as to the pediment figure, and a rough note of Cell's is 
 against the uncovering of the side. (Fig. 141.) 
 
 Fig. 138. — Cecrop's Wife : Restoration ; 
 B, c, D, Mantle ; a, Serpent's Tail. 
 
 XII. As before said, the so-called " Victory,'' for long assigned 
 to the east front, now takes its place just in advance of Poseidon's 
 charioteer. It was a winged figure, as is shown by the strong 
 mortice holes in the shoulders, and it is best called Iris. 
 
 This figure shows in a high degree a characteristic which is 
 shared by other figures of this pediment. A gust of wind seems 
 to sweep through the composition from the centre of action. 
 
138 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 This is, of course, obvious in regard to the drapery of the 
 " Victory," which is driven forcibly against the body and flies out 
 behind. It might be supposed, however, that this figure was in 
 flight, but the effect of the wind is almost as apparent on the 
 
 Fig. 139. — Sketch of Cast of Head. 
 
 Fig. 140. — Metope : Head ; 
 from a Cast. 
 
 robes of Poseidon's charioteer, or even more apparent in Carrey's 
 .drawing, where the skirt of the chiton is blown out behind so to 
 uncover the leg. So also was it with Athena's charioteer. Are 
 
 these also to be thought 
 of as in motion, although 
 their horses are halted 
 and rearing? Were the 
 chariots still coming up 
 while the action took 
 place, or had not the 
 gods themselves come 
 in them ? Furtwangler 
 has already noticed that 
 the garments of the next 
 figure to the chariot on the right, who is seated, are agitated by 
 the wind. " The drapery appears in the most striking manner 
 seized by the wind, which troubles its folds." Far away on the 
 left the tunic of the wife of Cecrops is wind-driven almost as 
 much as that of the Victory, and is blown away from her 
 
 Fig. 141. — W. Gable : Restoration of 
 Last Figure. 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 139 
 
 shoulder. Even the mantle of the reclining Ilissus seems to flap 
 against his arm, but perhaps this requires " good will " to see. 
 Putting all these indications together, it would seem that 
 Poseidon's stroke was accompanied by a great blast from the 
 sea, which this front faces, the effects of which carried the action 
 over the whole composition. 
 
 Fig. 142. — Part of a Wing : and Suggested Restoration, B. 
 
 At the Museum there are several casts of fragments of wings, 
 and I have tried whether I could gain any light as to their form. 
 One is quite large, and retains the tenon by which it was attached 
 to its figure. It is part of an expanded left wing. (Fig. 142.) As 
 other fragments are also from another left wing, and as the large 
 fragment is said not to fit on to the " Victory," it is clear that there 
 
I40 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 were at least two winged figures. The large fragment is the ex- 
 panded part of the wing which was nearest the shoulder attach- 
 ment, and the completed form must have been somewhat as in B. 
 The portion which clasps over the collar bone has a parallel in 
 the Victory of Olympia, and the wings of Greek figures generally 
 spring from the collar bones. The form of the wing demands 
 considerable extension backwards, and if the figure to which it 
 was attached was in the pediment it could only have been placed 
 in profile ; but it is possible that it belonged to an acroterion. 
 
 Several writers, among \\hom are Miss Harrison and Dr 
 
 Cecil Smith, have suggested that there were Victories in the 
 
 centres of the fields of both pediments between Zeus and Athena, 
 
 and Athena and Poseidon. In the latter case, at least, judging 
 
 from Carrey's drawing, there would surely have hardly been 
 
 room for this. Is it not probable that the desired 
 
 Victories were on the acroteria of the pediments 
 
 as at Olympia, Epidaurus, and other places? 
 
 Bohn so restored the summits of the fronts, 
 
 setting scroll-work, of which some remnants 
 
 have been found, by the sides of the figure. 
 
 Fig. 143. This scroll-work, however, which is usually con- 
 
 Acroteria : sidered to come from the Parthenon, and cer- 
 
 from Vase. tainly came from the Acropolis,* seems to be 
 
 more in the style of the fourth than of the fifth 
 
 century, as it contains acanthus foliage, which Furtwangler 
 
 thought was first adopted at the Erechtheum. There is no 
 
 doubt at all as to there having been acroteria of some sort on 
 
 the pediments, as the bases for the lower ones still exist. 
 
 Now on the Kertsch vase, which has been so often referred 
 to, one corner of the composition is occupied by a tiny sketch of 
 a temple, which it is generally agreed probably stands for the 
 Parthenon, from which the figure design was derived. (Fig. 143.) 
 On this Victories are shown over all the angles of the pediments. 
 The Parthenon was the temple of the victorious Athena, who had 
 shown her power and favour in the struggle with the Persians. 
 The Victory type, we know, was designed by Phidias to be borne 
 
 * Invvood thought they were parts of a Corinthian capital : were they not 
 from the acroteria of the Erechtheum? 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 141 
 
 on the hand of the Parthenos within ; is it not probable that 
 Victories also surmounted the temple without ? The whole com- 
 position of the west front would thus represent — -in the pediment 
 Athena taking Athens under her protection of old time; her 
 present help in the Persian War on the metopes ; the votive 
 shields on the architrave ; a Victory as acroterion. 
 
 Types ok Athena. 
 
 The colcjssal statue of the interior must have been amazing in 
 its glorious beauty, and yet severely restrained dignity. " The 
 sweet white of the face and naked arms, set in the gold of hair 
 and peplos, formed a vision of supernatural splendour." * It 
 stood, with its pedestal, nearly 40 feet high ; several 
 copies, though for the most part small and late, 
 agree so closely together that the main facts are 
 certainly known. The finest is now at Berlin ; it 
 was found at Pergamos, is about 10 feet high, and 
 dates probably from the second century B.C. At 
 Berlin is also a coloured copy of the head. The 
 goddess stood erect, gazing along the axis of the 
 temple to the eastern door and the sky beyond. 
 Her left leg was slightly bent, giving delightful 
 diversity to the folds of her long peplos. Her e.x- 
 tended right hand supported a winged Victory ; 
 the left held her round shield edge-ways and rest- 
 ing on the ground. On her breast was the Jegis, and her tower- 
 ing helmet was magnificently crested with sphinx and horses.-f 
 
 * Lechat. 
 
 t -Some coins show a chariot and horses conducted by a Nike on each 
 side. Other representations show projecting horses along the front. These 
 are possibly the sources of the horses on some ornamental vases of the third 
 <:cntury from Southern Italy; and proceeding from this it seems likely that 
 there are many echoes of the Parthenos on these vases. .Some have fine 
 heads of Athena with a Nike above, others have a Gorgon's head encircled 
 by winged snakes set in front. The design of this is so fine that we may 
 suppose the head on Athena's shield or a3gis was of this type. One vase in 
 the Museum besides the horses has Hippocamps painted on the sides, and 
 the rest of the body is covered with an interesting scale pattern, which last 
 with the Gorgon may recall the pattern of .'Vthena's regis. 
 
 Fig. 144- 
 Athena. 
 
142 
 
 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 ..^s;^^^^'^^^ 
 
 
 Fig. 145.-E. Frieze : Head of Athena ; restored by comparison 
 with " Lemnian Athena." 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 143 
 
 Tresses of hair fell on her shoulders and back. The " Maidens " 
 of the Erechtheum are practically copied from this figure ; there 
 is the same axial pose and fall of the drapery, and the same bare 
 arms, long dresses, and sandalled feet. The chief difference is 
 in a new fashion of girding the peplos. 
 
 It has been argued whether the pillar beneath the Victory- 
 carrying hand of the goddess can be original. Miss Harrison 
 says : " The pillar must be thought away. It is inconceivable 
 that Phidias should have introduced this 
 clumsy, obtrusive support . . . quite un- 
 thinkable." Drs Murray and Waldstein 
 agree. May I suggest that this, even on 
 ?esthetic grounds, may be too hasty a 
 decision? This column is not neces- 
 sarily a makeshift post, such as is seen 
 in some later statues, but it may be 
 thought of as part of the ideal com- 
 position. If Athena indeed had stood 
 there, bearing a Victory 6 feet high on 
 her extended hand, would she not have 
 been glad to rest her arm on a con- 
 venient support? I declare that when 
 I think it away, as I am told, I get quite 
 tired with feeling the strain. We may 
 suppose, too, that the pillar was the 
 proper pedestal of the Victory, and that 
 " when we were not looking " Athena 
 replaced it there. The evidence for the 
 column is surely quite conclusive. It 
 appears copied on the statuette, on a 
 
 relief now at Berlin, and on some coins of Athens. Finally, 
 the arm itself is not in a position of balance, and were it 
 not for the pillar the Victory would be held much higher. 
 The shield, which must have been full 10 feet in diameter, 
 was adorned with reliefs of the battle with the Amazons, 
 the design of which is best known from a small late copy in 
 the British Museum. The spear probably rested against the left 
 shoulder, as shown on a relief at the British Museum (Fig. 144), 
 and on a medallion in the Hermitage. Murray, following a gem, 
 
 M 
 
 Fig. 146. — Athena : 
 from Bronze Cista. 
 
144 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 says she held it in her left hand, which also supported the shield. 
 The gem in question seems to me to be only a copy of a coin of 
 Athens, where the spear is given this position for sake of clear 
 definition. From the British Museum relief, which might with 
 advantage be brought into the circle of Phidian material in the 
 Parthenon room, and several others of the same class in which 
 the goddess is shown conferring a wreath on some person, we 
 may infer that the Victory-bearing Athena was conceived of as 
 Giver of Victory to the Athenians. On the Berlin relief it is the 
 Victory she holds which crowns a man.* The glowing gold of 
 the garments and of her hair, which were doubtless of wrought 
 goldsmith's work in tresses, the tinted ivory of her flesh, and 
 her jewelled eyes, must not be thought as merely costly and 
 splendid, they were that, but the gold had radiance, the ivory 
 was flesh-like, the eyes actually flashed. 
 
 Furtwangler, by an almost clairvoyant exercise of critical 
 insight, sought in his " Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture " to- 
 gather out from later copies those which derived from originals 
 by Phidias. One of these, a figure at Dresden, he identified 
 with the Lemnian Athena, a much-praised early work of the 
 master's, which also occupied a place on the Acropolis. His 
 reconstruction of the Lemnia is now widely accepted, although 
 some writers are still unsatisfied, and one of the latest — Pottier 
 — urges that the type of head is unlike any known work by 
 Phidias. A close examination, however, of the seated Athena 
 of the east frieze, has convinced me that in the design of the 
 head and bust, and in general " feeling," this figure might be 
 called a translation into relief of the statue which, Furtwangler 
 claims, represents the Lemnian Athena. He remarks of the 
 statue that it typified the Athena of Peace as a slim, young 
 girl, almost boyish. The striking characteristics of the head 
 were, the absence of the helmet, and "the short hair combed up 
 at the back . . . wavy and curly, and tied with a fillet." This 
 describes the head on the frieze perfectly, the outline of which, 
 although the surface is badly injured, can be surely traced. 
 
 * The Parthenon was the true Temple of Victory, and why another 
 specifically called that was built on the Acropolis is puzzling. Was it a_ 
 symbol of the reaction ? 
 
THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. I45 
 
 Some of the modelling, like the position of the ear, is still also 
 indicated. She is Athena with her own people, and on her own 
 rock ; so exquisitely fresh and bright, that only Ruskin could 
 have described her in his " Queen of the Air," had he known 
 her. " She is the queen of maidenhood, stainless as the air of 
 heaven." Helmet and segis are put away, and she holds a spear 
 only as a plaything. The whole figure is a seated version of 
 the same ideal type as the Lemnian Athena. The head, neck, 
 and the fall of the drapery over the slight, shapely shoulder, 
 may be described as identical. In my Fig. 145, I have filled up 
 an outline of the head taken from the frieze, with the details 
 from the statue, and how narrow is the margin for doubt may 
 be seen by comparing it with the photograph of what I suppose 
 to be a modern Italian restoration, from the indications of the 
 frieze alone, published from a terra-cotta by Dr Waldstein. 
 
 Of the " Promachos " there is no large copy which can be 
 identified with certainty, although there are dozens of figures 
 on vases, and small bronzes which, doubtless, owe their inspira- 
 tion to it. 
 
 There is on a bronze cista from South Italy, in the British 
 Museum, decorated with magnificent Greek incised drawings 
 of what appears to be a grotesque portrayal of an assemblage 
 of the gods on the Acropolis, a figure representing a great 
 external statue of Athena, which, I think, may be inspired 
 by the great external Athena of the Acropolis. It is clearly 
 of Phidian type, with the same Attic helmet as the Athena 
 of the west gable, and with head sharply turned over the 
 right shoulder, as hers was.* Her leg is bent in an attitude 
 of rest, and her shield rests on the ground — a detail which seems 
 desirable constructively in a colossal statue. (Fig. 146.) The 
 small bronze No. 1035 with glittering diamond eyes also pro- 
 bably derives from one of the Athenas of Phidias. 
 
 The Parthenon marbles form a great treasure which is well 
 cared for, and well understood by a narrow circle of experts, but 
 we miss much by there being so little active curiosity about 
 
 * I have just seen at Lyons another cista, also from Prffineste, with a 
 sdmewhat similar subject, and apparently by the same artist. 
 
146 THE PARTHENON AND ITS SCULPTURES. 
 
 them. Perhaps the possibiHty of improvement might be con- 
 sidered in respect to the Hghting and the accessibility of some 
 select panels. The fragment of frieze at Paris seems to be of 
 exceptional value from its place and lighting, but it is really 
 not so. Its top is only about six feet from the floor, and every 
 inch can be minutely examined. Could not a few pieces, 
 including some of the metopes, be brought down on screens 
 and their places be taken by casts ? The metopes, where they 
 are, are largely out of sight, and might as well be plasters. 
 Although, in the reports on the acquisition of the marbles, 
 much was said as to their educational value, insufficient use 
 is made of them. " Restoring " a figure from the Parthenon 
 should be an incident in every sculptor's training; if it were, 
 we should soon know more about them and more about sculp- 
 ture. Young architects should also measure and "restore" 
 the building fragments. Finally an attempt should be made 
 to collect all material relating to the school of Phidias. 
 
IV. THE THESEUM, THE ERECHTHEUM, 
 AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 " The Greeks were the first people that were born into C07nplete humanity. 
 The nations before them had been, and all around them still were, partly 
 savage. But the power of a new spirit came upon the Greeks, and the stones 
 were filled with breath" — RuSKIN. 
 
 The "Theseum," or Temple of Hephaistos. 
 
 Of the Theseum the only actual fragments in the Museum are 
 those belonging to the ceiling of the peristyle. One is a thick 
 marble slab pierced with six holes 7 inches square, as much 
 being left between ; the others are little covering panels which 
 fitted into rebates on the upper side, being very thin and light. 
 There are also valuable casts of the frieze taken a hundred years 
 ago. This frieze has many points of resemblance to that of the 
 Parthenon, and to its metopes. The central group was again an 
 assembly of gods watching a battle — a subject found also at the 
 temple of Nike, and earlier at Delphi. The building throughout, 
 although much smaller,* recalls in its details the Parthenon to 
 such a degree that the question of priority is of some historical 
 importance. It is almost as " harmonious in its proportions, and 
 as refined and perfect in its construction." f The inclination of 
 its columns is exactly similar, their entasis is more delicate, and 
 even the inclined lines of the pediment are said to have a slight 
 vertical curvature. With all the many points of likeness to the 
 Parthenon, there are also differences which bring it into relation 
 with other Doric buildings. 
 
 Though the date of the Parthenon is accurately known, its 
 place in the sequence of development is hardly yet established. 
 
 * Its size may best be remembered as c. 100x40 feet to the centre lines of 
 the columns, and 30 feet from the platform to the top of the pediment, 
 t Penrose. 
 
 N 
 
148 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 A few years ago it was always assumed that the Theseum pre- 
 dated the Parthenon, but Dr Dorpfeld has shown good reason 
 for supposing that it followed it. On comparing the friezes 
 around the cells he observed that at the Parthenon regulae and 
 guttse are placed at intervals beneath the sculptured procession 
 as they would be beneath a triglyph frieze. The architect of 
 the Theseum, however, has omitted them. At Sunium not 
 only are the guttae absent, but the columns are all equally spaced. 
 He therefore puts the buildings in the following order : — The 
 Parthenon, the Theseum, the temple at Sunium. 
 
 In regard to this, I do not think that it has been noticed 
 that the temple of Rhamnus, exhaustively illustrated by the 
 
 Dilettanti Society, is so 
 like the Theseum that 
 one must be a copy of 
 the other,* and this in 
 points so minute that 
 the likeness cannot be a 
 mere coincidence. Now, 
 the cult statue of Rham- 
 nus, of which there are 
 fragments at the British 
 Museum, was the work 
 of a pupil of Phidias, and 
 there cannot be a doubt 
 that this temple is later than the Parthenon. The Theseum is 
 remarkable for a difference between the roofing of the portico and 
 the posticum. The frieze over the inner columns of the former 
 runs on right and left of the antse until it joins the main order, 
 while in the latter the frieze returns. At Rhamnus this arrange- 
 ment is repeated, and the disposition of the transverse ceiling 
 beams and lacunaria are almost identical in both temples. The 
 cymatium of the pediment at Rhamnus was continued along the 
 flanks as a gutter, but at the Parthenon there was no gutter. It 
 is interesting to recall that Penrose found a fragment of a gutter 
 at the Theseum which he concluded came from the flanks of 
 that temple. In one respect, at least, Rhamnus is intermediate 
 
 Fig. 147. — Theseum, East Front. 
 
 * Uned. " Antiq. of Attica.' 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. I49 
 
 between the Parthenon and the Theseum, as its inner plain 
 friezes have blocks and gutts at intervals. The drums of its 
 columns were connected by wooden blocks and pins like the 
 columns of the Parthenon, and the painted decoration was 
 similar. The painting at the Theseum was described a century 
 ago by Dodwell : " Some elegant painted foliage and a meander 
 resembling that of the Parthenon are remarked on the interior 
 cornice. The lacunaria are adorned with square compartments, 
 on each of which is painted a radiated ornament or a star." 
 His full and clear account of the painting on the sculptures 
 has been quoted on p. 89. It is fully corroborated by what 
 Leake saw about twenty years later. "All the sculptures of the 
 Theseum, both those of the metopes and of the friezes of the 
 vestibules, preserve the remains of 
 
 the colours with which they were 7" 
 
 painted. Vestiges of bronze and \f^ W ^f^ W <^j 
 golden-coloured arms, of a blue sky !J^ wl ^|/^ w ^J 
 [background], and of blue, green, f(g^^'^^(^^^^s^ 
 and red drapery are very apparent. 
 The custom was brought from Egypt, 
 that country to which the Greeks were 
 indebted for so large a share of their 
 architecture and other arts." Many 
 writers have observed that the orna- p- ,4g_painted 
 
 mental painting was outlined by a Decoration, 
 
 scratched line. Chandler says that 
 
 at the Theseum " Mr Pars found out the method used in 
 drawing the echinus or eggs and anchors from the marks of 
 the compasses on the walls." This note seems to embody 
 a slight mistake, for in one of Stuart's plates of the temple 
 the construction of a painted dead decoration is shown by 
 circles drawn by compasses. It is probable that the orna- 
 ment generally was outlined by means of a " templet." The 
 elegant painted scrolls and palmettes of the Theseum are much 
 more elaborate than the patterns at the Parthenon, and this 
 again speaks of later date. 
 
 For all that concerns the sculptures and other details see the 
 monograph of Bruno Sauer (1899), who restores even the 
 pedimental composition from the slight indications in the fabric 
 
 
ISO THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 of which those to the west were first pointed out by Penrose. 
 Of the six watching gods in the frieze those on the right cannot 
 be identified with certainty. The one on the extreme right Sauer 
 restores as Hephaistos. Those on the left all agree are Athena, 
 Hera, and Zeus ; the Athena he restores as holding her helmet 
 (see above, p. 113). This is a very noble group, the gestures 
 inspired by the Parthenon figures, but the drapery is more 
 voluminous and later in style. In the Elgin Collection there are 
 good drawings of this frieze, and from them I have sketched the 
 Athena and Hera. (Fig. 149.) Athena wore a girded chiton with 
 a deep turn-over — this is a characteristic of Athens fashions c. 
 
 Fig. 149. — Sketch of Athena and Hera from the Frieze : cf. Fig. 75. 
 
 430-420. Her right arm falling by her side evidently held her 
 spear as at the Parthenon. Hera is enveloped by a large mantle 
 over the chiton ; it is drawn over the head, covers the left arm 
 and hand, and falls on the lap over the rest of the garment which 
 is brought from the back over the right thigh. This would be a 
 magnificent subject for a restoration essay. 
 
 The metopes are also very fine. The Museum possesses the 
 original drawings of these made by Pars c. 1765. The designs 
 seem to be copied on a vase in the Museum, and on another at 
 Madrid (see Miss Harrison's " Athens,'' p. cxv.). Altogether the 
 architecture, painting, and sculpture agree in dating the work, 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS.' IJI 
 
 c. 430-420. Now a record has been found that a cult statue 
 of Hephaistos was set up in 421 B.C., and this date agrees 
 perfectly with the time when we may suppose the " Theseum " 
 was dedicated. 
 
 I have called it by its traditional name, but it has been shown 
 by Dorpfeld, whose arguments have been summarised by Miss 
 Harrison, that it was most probably the temple of Hephaistos. 
 Wordsworth came very near to the same conclusion seventy 
 years ago, and the points he mentions give additional proof. 
 
 At that time, when it stood on the outskirts of the city with 
 ploughed fields close by, and when " the ruins were the least 
 ruinous buildings in Athens," it must have been wonderfully im- 
 pressive. " Such is the integrity of its structure that it requires 
 no description. Its beauty defies all. The loveliness of its 
 colouring is such, from the rich hue which the marble has 
 assumed, that it looks as if it had been quarried from the golden 
 light of an Athenian sunset." 
 
 The beauty of these marble pillared Greek buildings when 
 the shafts reflect the setting sun is almost surpassed by the mid- 
 day glory when the sky, brighter than the glass of Chartres and 
 Bourges, seems to be set in between the columns of the peristyle. 
 More even than others this was an architecture to be completed 
 by broad flooding light, delicately modelled shades, trenchant 
 sharp-edged shadows, and points of gold and colour. Whatever 
 were the origins of triglyphs, mutules, and guttae, their develop- 
 ment and persistence may be understood when they are seen in 
 sunlight and shadow, the deep shadow of the cornice over- 
 hanging like a pent roof, the alternate lights and darks of the 
 triglyphs, and the long fingers of shadows from the guttae. 
 
 The Propyl^.a. 
 
 The Acropolis is entered through five gates, sheltered under 
 a building having Doric porticoes and interior rows of Ionic 
 columns. (Fig. 150.) This middle building is flanked by wings 
 on either side, thrown forward and rising above strong basement 
 walls, which continue to form bastions, on one of which stands the 
 little temple of Nike Apteros. After the Parthenon the Propylzea 
 formed the most famous structure in Athens. It was part of the 
 
IS2 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 work of Pericles, and the lower works may even have been built 
 before the Parthenon was begun.* 
 
 It was, of course, a fortified entrance into a citadel, and the 
 wings flanked the steeply ascending road to the gates. In the 
 wings, approached from within, were picture galleries and other 
 halls, some of which were never completed. Stuart inferred part 
 of the original intention and restored the south wing on his plan, 
 but the entire scheme has been much more fully worked out by 
 Dorpfeld, and a good summary of his results, with a plan, is given 
 in Miss Harrison's " Athens." f 
 
 Fig. 150. — The Propylasa : Perspective Section. 
 
 We have in the Museum one of the Doric capitals, a drum 
 of one of the Ionic shafts, and a length of the moulded band 
 under the lacunaria. These stones, better than any others in 
 the Museum, display the most characteristic points of Greek 
 construction in marble. The bed of the drum of the column is 
 wrought exactly like those of the Parthenon, with zones of 
 polished and chiselled face. In the middle is a square hole about 
 4x4x4 which took the wooden box-dowel, and one of the actual 
 
 * Parts of a simpler earlier gate still remain. American J. Aixh., 1904. 
 t See also The Builder^ 23nd February 1890. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 153 
 
 cypress dowels is preserved upstairs in the Bronze Room. It is 
 needless to describe the procedure — the thing is before us. 
 
 In the top bed of the capital is still a metal dowel which 
 connected the capital and the epistyle. The length of moulded 
 band is even more instructive. We have the heading joints, 
 polished around the margin and rough picked within, and on 
 the top bed there are six sinkings of three different kinds. Two 
 were for metal dowels, 3^ x ^-. Two others at the lateral edges 
 are of I- form. They are the halves of the matrices of H -shaped 
 cramps which linked stone to stone. Further in are two pits 
 sunk into the bed, inclined at an angle ; these were prepared 
 for the forceps, which grasped the stone so that it might be lifted 
 by a pulley. This same stone furnishes beautiful examples of 
 
 4/ 0^^ 
 
 w 5? 'i: ■,^:S 'J~ 
 
 ■4 j^a 
 
 %/%l;i 
 
 i 
 
 9 
 
 S'. « 
 
 f f I 
 
 Fig. 151. — The Propytea : Painted Decoration. 
 
 Greek moulding profiles of the best time. On one of the mould- 
 ings may be traced a leaf pattern, the shadow of the bright 
 colour decoration which once adorned it. (Fig. 151.) Like all 
 other Greek buildings it was fully decorated with colour. The 
 mutules, and therefore the triglyphs, were blue ; the spaces 
 between the mutules were red, and had a rich palmette ornament 
 in each ; the cymatium had large " eggs and tongues " painted 
 on it. 
 
 The Nhce and Ilissus Temples. 
 
 Four slabs of the frieze and an angle capital in the Museum 
 are described as having belonged to the Nike temple.* An 
 
 * The wingless Victory — more properly Athena Nike. At Megara there 
 was also a temple to Athena Nike (Pausanias). 
 
1 54 
 
 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 Fig. 152. — Nike Temple : 
 Anta Capital in the British Museum. 
 
 anta capital is assigned to the little temple, now entirely de- 
 stroyed, which stood by the Ilissus river, but this I shall show 
 also belonged to the Nike building. (Fig. 152.) Both these small 
 temples were very much alike, both had " prostyles " of four Ionic 
 columns at each end and no columns along the sides. The temple 
 
 of Nike, although smaller, was 
 richer than the other. Its sculp- 
 tured frieze is clearly of later 
 date than the Parthenon, and 
 may hardly be dated before 
 430. On the other hand, an 
 inscription of about the year 
 450 — which was found in 1897 
 — orders that a temple to 
 Athena Nike should be built 
 by the architect Callicrates. 
 It would appear that it and the 
 Propylaea were begun or con- 
 templated with the earliest of the new works on the Acropolis, 
 and that they were then delayed so that the Parthenon might 
 be pressed forward to completion. 
 
 Besides their general resemblance some of the details are 
 identical in the two temples, and if one was designed by 
 Callicrates we may assign the other to 
 him also. One little point at the Ilissus 
 temple may be pointed to as showing 
 that it was of the age of the Parthenon. 
 Stuart and Revett, who give valuable 
 illustrations of the lost building, figure 
 a palmette ornament which was painted 
 on its architrave ; now this is identical 
 with that of the Parthenon as engraved 
 by an independent observer. (Fig. 69.) 
 had no marble architrave, but there was a sunk band around 
 it for a bronze-covered wood frame.* The doorway of the 
 Parthenon was similar, so also were the doors of the Propyla;a 
 
 Fig. 153. — Ilissus Tem- 
 ple : Sketch of Capital, 
 by Pars. 
 
 Again the doorway 
 
 * I have seen this type called the Doric, and the marble frame the Ionic, 
 but the Ilissus temple was Ionic. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 155 
 
 and of the temple of Bassse. This kind of doorway may be 
 taken as a general rule to show that a building is earlier 
 than the Erechtheum. 
 
 The capitals of our two little temples and those of the interior 
 order of the Propylaea are all similar, and must be practically 
 contemporary, and this indicates a date round about 435. The 
 Ilissus temple may be safely dated c. 440. 
 
 It is described by Pococke as " built of very white marble, 
 the walls one stone thick, the fluted roll of the base was con- 
 tinued around the temple and inside the portico." He gives a 
 view of the interior of the portico which shows the recessed 
 band around the doorway, and he also shows remains of the 
 stone ceiling of the portico, and a diagram of the entablature 
 which indicates that the architrave was plain. In one of the 
 views engraved in the 
 "Antiquities of Athens" 
 this temple appears in the 
 foreground. Pars' ex- 
 quisitely accurate draw- 
 ing of this (1765) is in 
 the Print Room of the 
 Museum, and this too 
 serves to confirm the 
 entire accuracy of Stuart's 
 drawings as to the form 
 
 of the capitals, the plain architrave and frieze, the moulding 
 along the wall of the cella in continuation of the anta^ capitals, 
 the base moulding and steps, and the walls with the raised 
 surface showing that they had never been cleaned off. I give 
 here a sketch of the capital taken from one which appears 
 lying in the foreground of Pars' drawing, and also a sketch 
 showing the mitring of the inner angle volutes from a figure in 
 Stuart's text. (Figs. 153, 154.) 
 
 The capital of the Nike temple at the British Museum has 
 only recently been identified by a German scholar. It is an 
 angle capital. Here the inner volutes were not mitred through the 
 centre, but they were thrown out far enough to clear the eyes. 
 (Fig. 155.) In the external eyes of the volutes there are small holes. 
 In the catalogue it is suggested that these are " perhaps intended 
 
 Fig. 154. — Ilissus Temple : Intersecting 
 Volutes. 
 
156 
 
 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 F'gf- '55- — Nike Temple : 
 Intersecting Volutes. 
 
 for the insertion of the cone employed to generate the curve of 
 the volute." I shall show below that the use of such cones is 
 most unlikely, and Inwood's suggestion that these holes were 
 for metal fastenings to which festoons might be suspended is 
 much more probable. Compare what is said as to the Erech- 
 
 theum on p. 169. The well-known relief 
 of Icarus and Dionysos at the Museum 
 shows such festoons. Notice that the 
 egg and tongue moulding is only indi- 
 cated under the volute ; it is so at the 
 Propyla;a also. Inwood's drawing of 
 this capital (plate 23) is not correct, for 
 in modifying it into an ordinary (not 
 angular) cap he has got into trouble with 
 the eggs and tongues, showing 22 instead of 24. Coming now 
 to the anta capital (fragment, No. 436), the profiles of the 
 mouldings and their height at the two temples were so exactly 
 alike that it would be impossible from these alone to decide to 
 which of the two the stone belonged, and it has in fact been 
 assigned to the wrong one by the Museum 
 authorities. (Fig. 152.) Stuart, however, 
 figures the width of the Ilissus antse as 20.5, 
 and as the lowest part of the capital projected 
 beyond the pilaster making a " facia " this 
 was nearly 21 inches wide. Ross gives the 
 similar dimension at the Nike temple as 
 .495 m. Now the width of the cap at the 
 Museum, which is 19J, agrees with the latter, 
 and the stone consequently comes from the 
 Nike temple. It agrees with this that the 
 order of the Ilissus temple was about 1.6 
 higher than that of the other. I think I can 
 show further that our stone was obtained with 
 the other fragments of the Nike temple 
 brought away by Lord Elgin. We are told that when the temple 
 was broken up, its materials were used for building a bastion, 
 and later, " the friezes which had been built into a wall by the 
 Propylaea were removed b)- Lord Elgin.'' Now amongst the 
 Stuart papers in the MSS. Room there is a careful drawing of 
 
 Fig. 156. — Winged 
 Nike, South Ken- 
 sington Museum. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 157 
 
 Fig. 157. — Nike Temple : Painted Decoration. 
 
 an anta capital 
 exactly like ours 
 and figured 19.SS 
 wide. A note with 
 it says "the capital 
 of a pilaster in the 
 wall of a bastion 
 fronting the Propy- 
 Iffia . . . (?) 
 with the frieze with 
 basso relievos. In 
 a book with a 
 marbled cover said to be the capital of an anta of the Temple 
 of Victory without Wings." We thus have at the Museum the 
 anta capital, the angle cap which stood in front of it, and lengths 
 of the frieze. It 
 would be easy 
 to associate 
 these together 
 in their proper 
 relation and 
 thus make an 
 important spe- 
 cimen of Greek 
 architecture. It 
 is evident that 
 Lord Elgin set 
 himself to "col- 
 lect " represen- 
 tative details of 
 the chief build- 
 ings of the 
 Acropolis. 
 
 Around the 
 platform of the 
 Nike temple 
 was a balus- 
 trade of sculp- 
 tured slabs. Fig. 158.— Nike Temple : Painted Decoration. 
 
158 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 One of the figures is the well-known Victory adjusting her 
 sandal, a cast of which is found in every art school. Amongst 
 the few Greek rings at South Kensington is one engraved with 
 the same subject, and probably copied from the balustrade. 
 (Fig. 156.) 
 
 The Nike temple was as usual completed with painting, and 
 amongst the drawings recently given to the Museum by Mr 
 Halsey Ricardo, and made by his father in Athens about 1844, 
 are accurate copies of the patterns on the anta capital and an 
 ovolo moulding. This anta cap thus completed may be said to 
 be exactly like the antae caps of the Erechtheum, save that one 
 was painted, the other sculptured. How far do the calyces of 
 the anthemions. Figs. 1 57, 158, represent the acanthus of Fig. 166? 
 
 The Erechtheum. 
 
 We have in the Museum specimens of almost all the charac- 
 teristic details of the Erechtheum. First of all there is the best 
 preserved of the Maidens from the " Caryatid Porch.'' Then one 
 entire column from the north-east angle of the eastern portico, 
 the anta capital which corresponded to it, and lengths of the 
 decorated moulding in continuation of it along the wall, lengths of 
 the main cornice and architrave, a part of a richly carved window 
 architrave from the east portico, coffers from both porticoes, &c. 
 There is also a cast from the console of the north door. It 
 would be worth while to obtain casts of the few other details, 
 such as the cymatium of this door, so that we should have a 
 complete collection of details from this building. A few years 
 ago there was at South Kensington a cast of the frieze sculptures 
 affixed to a black marble backing like the original. This might 
 be put in its place in the entablature. I was about to say that 
 the whole angle of the building might be erected from the 
 Museum fragments, but unless this is done with casts it banishes 
 some details (like the capital at present) to a height where they 
 cannot be studied. I would like indeed to suggest that the 
 original capital should be brought within reach. 
 
 The Erechtheum consisted of a body or cella divided into 
 two or three parts. (Fig. 159.) To the east was a hexastyle 
 portico ; on the north was a four-pillared portico ; and opposite 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 159 
 
 to the south was the prostasis of the maidens (the Caryatid 
 Porch). (Fig. 160.) The north portico and west wall were at 
 a lower level than the east end and south side ; this difference 
 of level was occasioned by its being built on the brow of 
 the Acropolis. (See the model at the Museum.) The irregu- 
 larity of the plan seems to have been conditioned by various 
 sacred sites which were to be sheltered by the building. 
 Dorpfeld considered that this irregularity was the result of 
 
 Fig. 159. — The Erechtheum : Plan showing different levels. 
 
 a change of scheme, and that the body was originally in- 
 tended to be continued westward until the north porch became 
 central. Petersen, in the most recent study of the subject, does 
 not accept this view, and acutely observes that any irregular 
 plan may be made symmetrical by doubling it over from some 
 imaginary central line. I can see no reason for supposing that 
 the building was not planned as it has come down to us, together 
 with the west wall and its columns. As to the last, Prof 
 
l6o THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 Gardner has argued that attached columns were not in use at 
 the time when the Erechtheum was built, but we find them in 
 the temples at Agrigentum and at Bassae, as well as in later 
 works, like the Philippion at Olympia. 
 
 The late works have shown that a large scheme of repairs was 
 carried out in early Roman days which included work not only 
 on the west wall but to the doorway, roof, and architrave of the 
 north porch. Penrose considered that the west wall originally 
 had the columns but no windows. Furtwangler thought that both 
 were original. The later columns of the west wall fell in 1852. 
 " My attention," says Penrose, " was called to the fragments as 
 we}l as to the manner in which they had been fixed to the 
 
 Fig. 160. — The Erechtheum, East Front. 
 
 undoubtedly genuine work they rested on, which included the 
 string and the bases of the half columns. The workmanship of 
 the columns and capitals and the mouldings of the windows was 
 of a very inferior character." 
 
 It has generally been accepted that "the columns on the wall 
 by the Pandroseion" mentioned in the accounts are the attached 
 columns of the west front, and Choisy translates an entry in 
 those accounts of a payment "to those who put four closures 
 between the columns by the Pandroseion," and applies it to these 
 columns on this wall. (Fig. 1 61.) It seems to confirm this view, 
 that the windows were indeed in a thin screen wall set in between 
 the columns. We are usually told that the west wall, with its 
 attached columns, was blown down in 1852 But in 1839, when 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 l6l 
 
 a drawing by E. Flandin, now in the library at South Kensington, 
 was made, the western wall and its windows was already destroyed, 
 only three columns and two pieces of architrave resting upon 
 them being left In 1832-33 it was in this same state, as appears 
 from the description given by Wordsworth, who says, further, 
 that the adjoining north porch was much injured in the siege of 
 1827. It was almost certainly at this time that the screen wall 
 was destroyed, leaving only the three columns standing. Eight 
 j'ears before, when it was drawn by Inwood, it was very much in 
 the state it was in at the middle of the eighteenth century. (See 
 view in Pococke's travels.) By what has been said, the con- 
 struction of the wall is plainly re- 
 vealed ; the columns were first erected, 
 and then the screen wall was built. 
 Even now the antse at each end, re- 
 bated to take the screen wall, are of 
 the original work. The north anta 
 is formed on stones which are part 
 of the main walling blocks which 
 show in the north porch. Since writ- 
 ing the above a valuable contribution 
 to the history of the west wall has been 
 published in the A merican Journal of 
 Archeology (June 1908). It is there 
 shown by a comparison of the ac- 
 counts with the building that the 
 present west wall represents the 
 original external wall, and that in 
 
 the southern bay there was a curious recess. It is stated that 
 the screens between the columns were of wood, this follows from 
 the fact that Comon of Melite, who fixed them, also prepared 
 rafters for the roof 
 
 The tetrastyle (north) porch was greatly injured in the siege 
 of 1827 ; before that time the spaces between the pillars had been 
 walled up to form part of a house. There is a good drawing of 
 it in this state c. 1802, by R. Smirke, in the library of the Institute 
 of Architects. The fallen portions have recently been re- erected. 
 In the Museum we have a lacunar stone and a cast of the door 
 ■console, which, as said above, is not actually part of the original 
 
 Fig. i6t.— A, Plan of At 
 tached Column ; B, Sec- 
 tion of Lacunaria. 
 
l62 
 
 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 Fig. 162. — Moulding after Penrose. 
 
 work, although it may be a copy. An open space is left in the 
 lacunaria, which was repeated in the roof above, so that the 
 prints of Poseidon's trident, above which this porch was erected, 
 should be open to the sky. These lacunaria are a remarkable 
 instance of the paring away of all surplus stone for the sake of 
 lightness. In the middle of each coffer is a hole, where doubt- 
 less a rosette of bronze 
 was attached, as Penrose 
 remarks. (Fig. 161.) 
 
 The drawing of the 
 west front by Stuart, at 
 the Institute of Architects, 
 shows the starting stone 
 of the part of the pedi- 
 ment which sloped up 
 against the west front, and 
 Inwood shows the spring- 
 ing stones of the front, 
 finishing above with an egg and tongue. The height of the 
 tympanum was about 3.6 ; its three stones, Inwood says, were 
 in position in his time. No part of the cymatium, however, 
 had then been found. Penrose gave a woodcut of a fragment 
 found on the Acropolis, of which he remarks, " there cannot be 
 a doubt but that it is part of the cymatium of the north 
 portico, . . . the carving 
 is unsurpassed by any 
 details of the temple." 
 The whole, shown on 
 Fig. 162, was about I2i 
 inches high. The pattern 
 figured by Penrose ap- 
 pears also at the Heraeum 
 of Argos after 420, as Dr 
 
 Waldstein has pointed out. (Fig. 163.) The birds in both are 
 extremely interesting, as perhaps the first appearance of the 
 picturesque variet)- and naturalism which was slowly to creep 
 into classical art. Dr Waldstein thinks that the Argos example 
 was at least ten years the earlier, but this is very doubtful. 
 
 I find amongst the Stuart Papers in the MSS. Room (22152-3) 
 
 Fig. 163. — Moulding from Argos. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 163 
 
 a minutely accurate drawing of a moulding very similar in de- 
 coration, profile, and size. It is without a title except for the 
 query "Erechtheus?" but it certainly was a companion moulding 
 to the other. (Fig. 164.) This explains a small fragment drawn 
 full size by In wood on his plate 11. Again, in the restoration of 
 the Erechtheum by the French student, M. Genain, made many 
 years ago, but only recently published,* a short note reads : 
 " M. Genain found a fragment which adapted itself so well to 
 the mutilated cornice that he could do no other than recognise 
 the old 'doucine,' and has made use of it in his restoration." 
 
 Fig. 164. — Moulding from a Drawing in the Stuart Collection. 
 
 The piece of which we have the drawing had a return end, but 
 nothing is noted, unfortunately, as to its section. 
 
 It is possible that the piece in question was the cymatium of 
 the eastern portico ; but it might, however, be the original cornice 
 of one of the doors. The cymatium over the north doorway at 
 present is practically a copy of it in ruder workmanship.f 
 
 * D'Espouy. 
 
 t In making the comparison with Inwood, plate 11, note that it is there 
 drawn much enlarged. M. Genain's fragment was the same pattern as 
 Fig. 164. 
 
 O 
 
1 64 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 Although the cornice of this door is certainly part of a re- 
 storation, the resemblance to this original fragment goes to prove 
 that the original decoration was recopied on it. The same is, i 
 think, true of the consoles, for we know from the building inscrip- 
 tion that the east door at least had consoles. 
 
 A detailed examination of this doorway was published by Mr 
 Schultz in the Hellenic Journal, vol. xii. (i 901), in which he proved 
 that the present lintel was a restoration. (Fig. 165.) Even the holes 
 where the work was " needled up " remain above the cymatium. 
 From this account, and a further note by Mr Barnsley, we gather 
 that the jambs are original, and held in position by I- clamps of 
 metal fixed with the walling. The eyes of the rosettes on these 
 jamb stones are deeply drilled out, and contain remains of wooden 
 plugs, to the ends of which were probably attached little bronze 
 caps, one of which is figured by Inwood.* Certain door slabs, 
 8 X 2^ feet, of marble inlaid with black, which are mentioned in 
 the inscription, were probably the doors to the openings, 5 feet 
 wide, between the west passage and the cella.f On this it may 
 be observed that a fragment of a sixth century (B.C.) stone door at 
 Argos has recently been described, and a similar door of about 
 the second century (B.C.) is in the Louvre. In the. East, marble 
 doors continued long in use. At the Leeds Museum there are 
 two or three fragments of marble doors. 
 
 At the east end is the "hexastyle portico." It was com- 
 paratively perfect when Stuart made the beautiful view now in 
 the library of the Institute of Architects (engraved in Stuart and 
 Revett). Of this we have in the Museum the entire right-hand 
 column, the anta capital behind it, and parts of the carved band 
 in continuation. This band becomes richer at the anta, where it 
 resembles the ornamentation under the capitals of the columns. 
 This is a point against Choisy's contention that this eastern 
 portico is of later work than the northern one. It is the bringing 
 of the anta band on to the column which makes "the . chief 
 singularity of the Erechtheum capitals, and allies them with the 
 Corinthian. The resemblance of this band of vertical foliage, of 
 which acanthus is already a part, to the lower part of a Corinthian 
 capital, makes it, I suggest, a step towards Corinthian. 
 
 * R. W. .Schultz. + S. Barnsley. 
 
TUIWEUM, EKI'CIII'IIDUM, AND OTIIICR WORKS. 165 
 
 Fig. 165. — The ICrcclillicum, North Door, from :i Drawing 
 by Mr K. W. SchuUz. 
 
1 66 
 
 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 We have in the Museum a length of richly carved jamb- 
 mould. In the recent excavations other fragments were found 
 under the eastern wall, and 21 pieces are now known, some of 
 which clearly belonged to a lintel or lintels. It has been shown 
 that they all belonged to two windows in the eastern wall of the 
 cella, one on either side of the east door.* 
 
 The order of the Erechtheum is extremely rich and refined. 
 The slender fluted columns diminish in what Penrose says is 
 " the most delicate line which had probably ever been applied in 
 architecture," being about .02 in 21.12. There is a curious irregu- 
 larity in the spacing of the palmette band relatively to the 
 twenty-four flutes below on the shaft, there being eighteen 
 palmettes, nine of each alternate pattern. The curious flat side 
 
 to the angle volute 
 at the Museum is, I 
 suppose, the result of 
 a repair. There are 
 several such splicings 
 even on the Museum 
 fragments (see Cata- 
 logue). The inner 
 volutes of the angle 
 capitals were mitred 
 together, so as to show 
 only two halves, and were plain {cf. Fig. IS 5). 
 
 We also possess a slab of the lacunaria of this portico. 
 Under the Parthenon I have ventured to suggest (p. 140) that 
 the fragments of what appears to have been an acroterion may 
 have belonged to the Erechtheum instead of to the Parthenon. 
 
 In the Museum there is a fragment of a volute (No. 445) 
 which has a double spiral like the portico capitals, but it is 
 smaller in scale, and the eye is carved into a flower. It is figured 
 by Inwood (plate 20), who describes it in his chapter on the 
 Erechtheum as found in a wall in the lower city not far from 
 the Erechtheum on the north side — that is under the Erech- 
 theum. " It is an ancient copy of the capitals of the Erechtheum 
 with a small additional projecting rose carved on the centre of 
 
 Fig. 166. — The Erechtheum, Details. 
 
 * Am. Jour. Archaol., 1906, and Fig. i6o. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 167 
 
 the volute, from whence it might be supposed that the centres of 
 the volutes of the Erechtheum might have formed a rose." Now, 
 turning to Puchstein we find figured (No. 18) a capital with an 
 exactly similar volute. This is also described with the capitals 
 of the Erechtheum, although Puchstein considered it to be 
 later chiefly on account of the '' unbeautiful " line of the cushion. 
 It is a half capital and was found in the Erechtheum in 1862. 
 I should have supposed that these portions of half capitals (see 
 the restoration of the Museum fragment, Fig. 169) belonged 
 to original attached columns of the west front, but they seem 
 too small in scale. It is possible that these caps, however, 
 belonged to attached columns in the interior. The wall between 
 the western and central chambers had two doors best shown by 
 Penrose and described by Inwood. Between these Furtwangler 
 says it was probably divided into bays by pillars. 
 
 There is a further reason for thinking that these caps came 
 from the Erechtheum itself This is that its caps are so much 
 like those of the Nereid monument that there cannot be a doubt 
 that the capitals of one were copied from the other. Now the 
 Nereid monument is assigned to the fifth century, or the early 
 part of the fourth, and no one will put it later than 370-360 B.C. 
 Yet the capitals of this building have the same " ugly line " for 
 the cushions. The rose in the eye seems to be an early feature, 
 cf. another figure given by Puchstein, and another small Ionic 
 capital in the Museum figured by Inwood. 
 
 One of the great treasures of our Museum is the " Maiden " 
 from the south prostasis. As it served as an architectural 
 member it has been a little passed over, I think, as an example 
 of pure sculpture. But after the Parthenon works it is one of 
 the most perfect and best authenticated statues which have come 
 down to us. It is of the school of Phidias, wrought while his 
 influence was paramount. 
 
 A few years ago it was thought that such " caryatides " were 
 an innovation at the Erechtheum, but similar figures fully a 
 century earlier and about the same size have been found at 
 Delphi. The casts of those at the Louvre show that these 
 archaic figures were remarkably like those of the Erechtheum in 
 gesture. An archaic relief found in the Acropolis also shows a 
 figure which it is thought represents a caryatid (see Petersen). 
 
l68 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 Probably the idea of pillar figures came from Egypt. In the 
 Museum there are also fragments of the anta (No. 411) and of 
 the inner architrave of the prostasis of the maidens. 
 
 One of the most singular characteristics of this peculiar 
 building was the use of coloured materials other than painting. 
 At Olympia a black marble pavement was laid in front of 
 the statue, and in the Propylsea the lowest course of the wall 
 was in dark Eleusinian marble. At the Erechtheum this same 
 stone was used for the fields of the pediment and for the friezes. 
 To the latter, figures of small scale of white marble were pinned 
 so that they appeared on a nearly black background. The 
 figures themselves must have been brightly painted and gilt. 
 Gold for the eyes of the volutes and for certain flowers — pro- 
 
 Fig. 167. — The Erechtheum Capitals. 
 
 bably of bronze in the coffers of the lacunaria — appears in the 
 accounts. 
 
 The capitals have a guilloche band under the cushion. The 
 eyes of this plait are drilled out and set, Inwood says, " with 
 different coloured stones or glass " — black and very light blue in 
 the first row, yellow and dark blue in the second, and black and 
 light blue again in the third. This seems so extraordinary for 
 Greek work that I have been glad to find an independent 
 account with a coloured drawing of this decoration in the Greek 
 and Roman Department. 
 
 This is a copy of a memorandum by Donaldson, entitled 
 " Disposition of the Coloured Glass Beads in the Interlacing 
 Ornament in the Capitals of the Tetrastyle Portico : Copy of 
 F. L. D. The base was ornamented in the same manner.' The 
 careful drawing shows purple and bright blue in the first and 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 169 
 
 third rows, and yellow and purple in the middle. (Fig. 168.) 
 Donaldson extracted some of these glass beads and brought 
 them to England. 
 
 The note goes on to say of the capitals that, " The sinking 
 round the volute was painted red. Yet this is supposed to have 
 received an ornament of bronze. The iron nails still remain 
 which " [were inserted in the volute]. 
 
 Donaldson's remark about the deep spiral groove refers to 
 Inwood, who found in them "bronze nails inserted with lead, 
 forking out as shown [Y], and others on the plait ornament, by 
 which some additional decoration of bronze was fixed." This 
 has been amplified into the statement that there was a bronze 
 fillet ending in a palmette, filling the spandrel between the volute 
 and the cushion. Comparison with the other cap found in the 
 Erechtheum (Fig. 169), the 
 capital of the Nereid monument 
 (Fig. 178), and above all with 
 the capitals of the late temple of 
 Augustus and Rome,* which are 
 an exact copy of those of the 
 Erechtheum, shows that absence 
 of a palmette is characteristic Fig. 168.— Detail of Plait inlaid 
 of all of them, as has been re- with Glass, 
 
 marked by Puchstein. Watkiss 
 
 Lloyd noticed red paint in the deep groove of the capitals of the 
 Nereid monument such as Donaldson observed on the Erechtheum 
 capital. This was, I doubt not, the original decoration, and " the 
 bronze nails " were probably for suspending garlands. 
 
 Besides this use of coloured material, the usual painted 
 decoration was added. Traces of red colour remain on the back- 
 ground of the anta and course of palmette ornamentation. The 
 sofifit of the lacunaria was decorated with frets (Inwood, plate 20), 
 and Donaldson says that the mouldings had painted eggs and 
 tongues, and that the faces of the beams also appeared to be 
 coloured. It is said that paint has been found also in the flutes 
 of the columns. {^&q Journal of the R.I.B.A., vols. i. and ii.) 
 
 One or two points in the design and construction may be 
 
 * Is the drum of a column at the Museum, No. 446, from this temple ? 
 
I70 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 further referred to. The prostasis of the maidens was and is covered 
 by large thick marble slabs, lightened with deep coffers excavated 
 in the lower side, the upper surface being slightly sloped all 
 round, and finished at the edge with a raised moulding with large 
 egg and tongue, a small part of which is shown as remaining in 
 the early drawings. The water escaped through a series of holes 
 about II inches apart, as shown by Inwood (plate 15), which 
 were pierced, I suppose, between the "eggs." The slabs are 
 described in the accounts of 408, the discs on the architrave are 
 also mentioned as unfinished — they are unfinished to-day. 
 
 The roofs and ceilings were 
 of wood (cypress). According 
 to Choisy's analysis of the 
 building accounts the roof was 
 in part open, and moulded and 
 painted ; in other parts there 
 were coffered ceilings, the 
 panels being covered with 
 terra-cotta slabs. 
 
 The carved band which sur- 
 mounts the cella walls in con- 
 tinuation of the anta; capitals 
 has been more than once men- 
 tioned. (Fig. 166.) Not only 
 at the Erechtheum, but at the 
 temples of Nike and the Ilissus, 
 this capping of the cella wall 
 directly under the entablature 
 was used. The base moulding 
 of the antEE also ran round continuously, and on it rested the 
 course of big blocks — the orthostatae. 
 
 Detailed building accounts of the Erechtheum have been 
 preserved on some slabs, one of which is in the Inscription Hall 
 of the Museum by the door to the library. They have been 
 published and analysed by Choisy and others. Other small 
 fragments were found in 1901. They form the records of a 
 Building Board in the year 408. The architect was at this time 
 Philocles. What was done, and what remained to finish, are 
 noted, also wages and prices, all curiously like a mediaeval fabric 
 
 Fig. i6g.— Fragment of Capital in 
 the British Museum, restored by 
 comparison with a capital pub- 
 hshed by Puchstein. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 171 
 
 roll. The master actually in charge was Archilocos, called the 
 architect. He was paid thirty-six drachmas for as many days, 
 while the clerk received thirty drachmas. A drachma a day 
 seems to have been common wages. Sawyers and carpenters 
 appear in the accounts as getting as much. Choisy interprets 
 these facts by saying that the works were under the direction of 
 an architect [Philocles], and an assistant architect [Archilocos], 
 and that the latter was paid a drachma for a daily survey. I do 
 not think that this explanation can be bettered, except that I 
 suppose the assistant architect was present all the time. The 
 contract for Lebadea, also edited by Choisy, provides that the 
 laying of the stones should be approved by the architect, and all 
 the joints and beds should be tested in oil (red dressing) in the 
 presence of the assistant architect. 
 
 If an otherwise unknown architect, Philocles, was in charge 
 in 408, we need not suppose that he was the original architect 
 when it was begun, many — possibly twenty or twenty-five — 
 years before. As Pausanias tells us that Kallimachos, who was 
 especially celebrated for his delicate mode of workmanship, 
 wrought the bronze palm-tree, which is spoken of together with 
 the great lamp of the interior, Furtwangler has suggested that he 
 was probably the designer of this remarkable building and the 
 sculptor of the maidens, which we know were in place before 408. 
 Petersen gives reasons for thinking that the bronze " palm-tree " 
 was not a mere column-like chimney to the lamp, but that it 
 actually resembled a palm-tree rising from the floor to the 
 ceiling. 
 
 Bass^ and Rhamnus. 
 
 The temple of Apollo at Bassse, near Phigalia, was discovered 
 by M. Bocher, a French architect working at Zante in 1765, 
 while he was on his way to another site. It stands high in 
 noble, mountainous, wooded country, not far from the sea. It 
 was visited by R. Smirke about 1803, who made two excellent 
 drawings, one of which is at the British Museum, and the other 
 at the Institute of Architects. In 181 2 it was excavated by 
 Cockerell and others, and its sculptures and representative 
 details of its architecture were obtained for the British Museum. 
 
172 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 The ruins have recently been again explored by Cavvadias, 
 and partially restored — I hope in the good sense of that most 
 distorted word. 
 
 The temple was described by Pausanias, who says that it 
 was the fairest temple in the Peloponnesos excepting that at 
 Tegea, that the architect was Ictinus, and that the roof was 
 of marble. 
 
 Contrary to custom, this temple stood north and south, but 
 a chamber at the south end, the adytum, had a separate door 
 facing the east. Along the interior of the larger cella were 
 attached Ionic columns, reducing the clear space to about 
 14 ft. 6 in., and above them ran a sculptured frieze. As a 
 
 t o g o IP 20 30 i° peet 
 
 Fig. 170. — The Temple at Basste. 
 
 matter of planning it would seem that this reduction of the space 
 was either a provision for a roof of stone or else that the midde 
 part was left entirely open, the recesses between the attached 
 columns only being sheltered. Points in favour of this latter 
 solution are that no fragments of a cella roof have been found, 
 although parts of the covering of the recesses have been ; that 
 the central area was sunk a step from the rest of the floors ; that 
 the sculptured frieze seems more explicable on this supposition ; 
 that there was a separate sanctuary for the image, which, of 
 course, was covered ; and, finally, the analogy with another 
 Apollo temple at Miletus, where the cella was open, with 
 attached Ionic pilasters around the walls. This question of the 
 roof has been much argued over. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 173 
 
 Pausanias' remark might very well refer to the tiling only, 
 for here at Bassae the marble tiles were, Cockerell says, finer 
 even than those at the Parthenon. At ^gina, again, marble 
 tiles were only used at the eaves and up the verges, and Pau- 
 sanias himself, when describing Olympia, remarks that the tiles 
 were not clay, but marble. Moreover, the marble ceiling of the 
 portico at Bassae, with a bearing of 1 3 feet, was especially fine 
 and it may have been this also, which, as Cockerell says, excited 
 the admiration of Pausanias. We are thus thrown back on the 
 evidence of the structure itself. Choisy, who accepts the open 
 cella, says that an internal cymatium was found by the French 
 expedition to the Morea, but the cymatium in question seems to 
 be that of the external pediments, and the 
 writer of the text appears to be rather 
 opposed to the idea of an open cella. 
 
 Cockerell was in favour of a roof with a 
 sky-light opening in it, and brought into 
 evidence a small fragment of a roof tile 
 with a margin which showed that it edged 
 an opening. The size of this, however, is 
 uncertain, and Papworth brought forward 
 some evidence to show that the opening 
 was only in the middle of a tile of the 
 ordinary size, or rather that there was niore 
 than one.* Such openings might have 
 been mere smoke vents in the adytum, serving a similar purpose 
 to the palm-tree chimney at the Erechtheum, or there may have 
 been a light in the slope of the roof opposite to the statue 
 for its illumination. From Haller's account it appears that 
 only two small fragments of this kind were found, and they 
 were discovered in the adytum. Papworth further suggested 
 that the rafters might have been marble, but their size and the 
 manner of fixing hardly allows of this interpretation, for the 
 outer parts of the roof over the recesses at least, and Cockerell 
 speaks of " the ascertained structure of the wooden roof" of the 
 portico. 
 
 Much has been made of Cockerell's showing an interior view 
 
 Fig. 171. — From 
 Athens. 
 
 R.I.B.A. Joicrjial, 1865, and Anderson and Spiers. 
 
174 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 with a flat segmental ceiling, and " arch-stones " have even been 
 looked for, but the segment is but a slight variation from the 
 flat pitch shown on the sections ; the size of the sky-light and 
 the disposition of the coffering remains the same. It was a 
 mere slight alternative suggestion as to the wooden casing of 
 the ceiling. Altogether, I consider it probable that the entire 
 centre part of the cella was open, and how small this was may 
 be seen on the plan. 
 
 French plans omit the eastern door to the adytum, but 
 Cockerel 1 is conclusive on this point ; it was of " scarcely 
 
 secondary importance " to 
 the principal entrance, and 
 by it " the first rays of the 
 dawn fell upon the image 
 . . . the remains of which 
 we found there." 
 
 The most remarkable 
 feature of the temple was 
 the Corinthian column 
 which stood in the middle 
 of the opening between the 
 adytum and the cella. This 
 column was wholly of 
 marble, unlike the others, 
 which were partly of stone. 
 The carving of its capital 
 was very sharp and elegant, 
 yet simple. Some have 
 argued that it must be more recent than the rest, but this 
 view has passed away with fuller knowledge, although it is 
 the earliest Corinthian capital known. Cockerell, who had no 
 doubts on the matter, pointed to the central column in the 
 internal range of the cella of the Parthenon as an analogy with 
 the position of this one. 
 
 This Corinthian capital is an extremely interesting example 
 of transition, which well shows how the new form derived 
 from the Ionic. We have, as precedent conditions — i, the old 
 Ionic with the angle volute ; 2, the Erechtheum capital with a 
 band of foliage in which acanthus leafage appears, which con- 
 
 Fig. 172.— Corinthian Capital at 
 Epidaurus. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 175 
 
 verts a low capital into a high capital (a similar feature occurs 
 under the archaic Naucratis capital, and on the top drum of an 
 Ionic shaft from Halicarnassus in the Museum) ; 3, the Ionic 
 capitals of Bassa; itself with volutes at all the angles ; 4, 
 there was the concurrent growth of scroll and foliage decoration 
 generally as at the Erechtheum and on the steles. (Fig. 171.) 
 
 There is no reason, it seems to me, to call in aid metal-work 
 technique, as Choisy and others have done, although Kalli- 
 machos, the author of the bronze palm tree of the Erechtheum, 
 may very well, as according to the tradition of Vitruvius he did, 
 have made the actual step in the development which, as it did 
 happen, we may call inevitable. The Bassae capital is so simple, 
 and the Ionic volute is so marked a feature in it, that we might 
 almost as well call it ornate Ionic as early Corinthian, indeed, 
 Leake did call it Ionic. Cockerell in his 
 restoration was biassed a little too much 
 in the " Corinthian " direction. He seems 
 to have exaggerated the rows of acanthus 
 leaves around the bottom, and especially 
 to have minimised the angle volutes. By 
 comparison with the later, and more lately 
 found Epidaurus capital, we may say that 
 these last were large and distinct. (Fig. 
 172.) Fig. 173. — Antefix. 
 
 At Bassae, then, all " three orders " were 
 used, although the newest one was represented by only one 
 central and precious column. At Tegea, in the temple built 
 by Scopas, c. 395, and also in the Peloponnesos, the exterior was 
 again Doric and the interior Ionic, but the inner row of external 
 columns at the ends was Corinthian. 
 
 Another evidence of the new spirit of variation in Greek art 
 is to be found in the lacunaria of Bassae, where we find lozenge- 
 shaped coffers as well as square ones. Similar coffers are found 
 again at the still later rotunda at Olympia, c. 330. 
 
 Another variation is the coming of carved decoration in the 
 place of merely painted ornament. The antefixae of the roof have 
 carved palmettes with acanthus leaves at the base. (Fig. 173.) 
 Furtwangler considered that the acanthus was first adopted into 
 ornament at the Erechtheum, and that the temple of Bassffi by 
 
176 
 
 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 Fig. 174.— Cymatium 
 of Pediment. 
 
 this mark must be later than the Athenian building. The 
 cymatium of the pediment has a carved palmette ornamentation 
 so much like that of the Erechtheum, and on a moulding of 
 similar profile, that it seems plain one was influenced by the 
 other. (Fig. 174.) That one we may reasonably suppose was 
 the remote Bassae, unless both derived from a common ancestor 
 not yet determined. Notwithstanding the tradition as to Ictinus 
 being the architect, which may have nothing 
 more solid to rest on than like stories as to 
 Sir C. Wren in England, I am inclined to 
 think that this building may be placed very 
 late in the fifth century. A remarkable 
 feature of the construction is the ceiling of 
 the ends of the peristyle, which had a clear 
 bearing of 13 feet. This was entirely of 
 marble, but cut away to the slightest pos- 
 sible substance. (Fig. 175.) It was highly adorned with painted 
 decoration, and the whole temple was finished with painting in 
 the usual way. The external metopes were plain, but sculp- 
 tured metopes were set over the inner row of columns, stopping 
 over the antae with one return triglyph at each end. This is a 
 good deal like the arrangement of the frieze at the posticum 
 of the Theseum. There are broken fragments of these metopes 
 in the Museum,* as well as 
 almost the entire frieze of the 
 interior. (Fig. 176.) Of archi- 
 tectural numbers there are 
 specimens of the Doric and 
 Ionic capitals, of the carved 
 cymatium, and of the ridge 
 and eaves tiles with their ante- 
 fixae. In fact these last fragments present to our study the 
 complete roofing system of a Greek temple. 
 
 The temple at Rhamnus has been incidentally compared 
 with the Theseum on page 148. The temple was excavated by 
 a British expedition, but we have in the Museum only small 
 pieces of the colossal statue of Nemesis. One of these is a 
 
 Fig. 175. — The Temple of Bass<E : 
 Lacunaria. 
 
 * On the subjects see Aihen. Mi/t/i., xxi., p. 333. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 177 
 
 noble fragment of the upper part of a head. Placed as it is on a 
 bare shelf below the sight line, it seems comparatively valueless 
 and neglected, but seen in a photograph the great style of the 
 Phidean tradition shines out. Our Museum is so superb, and 
 all that is done for us there is so liberal that it almost appears 
 
 Fig. 176. — Part of Sculptured Frieze, Basss. 
 
 like insolence to have any individual views on such points, but 
 I do feel that this fragment would be better shown in almost 
 any museum in the world. Like the Ephesus fragment (p. 32) 
 it should be placed in a glass wall-case.* It would form a fine 
 
 * See Athen. Mitth., 1890, p. 64. 
 
1/8 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 subject for an exercise in restoration by comparison with the 
 Laborde head and others. Small as the fragment is, it suggests 
 " a something '' of that mysterious work the Venus of Melos. 
 
 The Nereid Monument from Xanthus. 
 
 This tomb building was discovered and excavated by Sir C. 
 Fellows. A note-book by Scharf in the MSS. Room includes 
 a diary of the finds, thus : " Dec. 12, 1843. — At the excavations 
 several sculptures were found : a slab from the city series 
 showing the walls in three horizontal tiers, with soldiers between 
 the battlements ; a portion of the small frieze, with broad 
 mouldings, and a figure on horseback ; a fine statue of a draped 
 female. Dec. 14. — Some architectural sofifites [lacunars], with 
 remains of colour in the centre of each, the ornaments being 
 traced in fine lines of vermilion," &c. Scharf drew this orna- 
 ment from the lacunars, and his drawing, together with many 
 others, of Lycian monuments, are preserved in the Department 
 of Greek and Roman Antiquities. His view of the basement 
 and the site of the monument is published in the Museum 
 Catalogue. 
 
 Fellows discovered a great number of sculptures and archi- 
 tectural members, most of which are now at the Museum. He 
 found seven capitals, and a fragment of an angle volute, one 
 whole shaft, large portions of others, and several bases, some 
 cornice stones, showing traces of dentils on the lower side, 
 pieces of gutter with lion's head spout, pieces of the raking 
 cornice with evidence of marble tiling, the sculptured tympana 
 of the pediments, the sculptured epistyle, with marks where it 
 bore on the capitals, the egg and tongue moulding which sur- 
 mounted the basement, with traces of the bases of the columns 
 which rested on it and also of the sculptured Nereids which 
 stood in the intercolumniations, some fine lions, fragments of 
 a doorway with consoles, lacunar stones, antae capitals, sculp- 
 tured acroteria, and a large number of sculptured slabs, which 
 were easily sorted into three series, which must have formed as 
 many bands or friezes. 
 
 The style of the monument was in many respects different 
 from other Lycian works ; the marble was from Paros, the 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 179 
 
 blocks were put together with bronze cramps, and the sculptures 
 had bronze additions. 
 
 All this material is sufficient to allow of a restoration being 
 made, which shall be accurate within narrow limits, and the 
 
 Fig. I77.- 
 
 -Nereid Monument. View amended from 
 British Museum Guide. 
 
 model at the Museum which shows Sir C. Fellows' view, while 
 it is the least satisfactory of all the schemes in detail, well 
 enough represents the general character of the structure. 
 
 At the same time, although we have practically the whole 
 monument in the Museum, a final restoration of the little build- 
 
 P 
 
l80 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 ^v 
 
 ujimuMj 
 
 ing has never been published. The principal data are : — A, 
 the dimensions of the basement, given as 22 ft. wide and 33 ft. 
 long, by Hawkins and Fellows, and as 22 ft. 3f in. wide and 
 33 ft. i^ in. long by Benndorff ; B, the size of the pediment as 
 put together at the Museum gives an extent of 25.8 from point 
 to point of the cymatium ; C, the lengths of the epistyle 
 blocks, of which two are about 6.9 long and two about 6.5 ; one 
 other, which is nearly 7.6 long, must have come next the corner, 
 thus overlapping the angle capital. 
 
 There is some discussion in the Museum Catalogue as to 
 whether the pediment dimension (B) may not be excessive, as 
 the sculptured tympanum may have been set in a rebate. 
 
 This would, I think, be 
 impossible, except for a 
 small fraction of an inch 
 along the top edge. There 
 is very little room round 
 about the sculpture, and 
 to set the lower part in a 
 rebate would hide it all 
 the more behind the pro- 
 jecting cornice ; moreover, 
 it would " let the wet in." 
 The total projection of the 
 cornice, allowing for the 
 bold dentils, which can 
 just be traced on the under 
 side of the corona, looks about 1.9, and twice this taken from 
 25.8 leaves 22.2 across the epistyle, which agrees very exactly 
 with the dimension of the basement (A). 
 
 It is true there seems to have been some plinth or set back 
 in the basement. In one place Hawkins speaks of i| in., 
 in another of s in. This last was only inferred, because the 
 marble slabs of the sculptured band were 1.4 thick, and the top 
 course of the basement as found seemed to allow 1.9 for the 
 casing stones. A space may have been left at the back, or there 
 may have been a course of thicker marble below the sculptured 
 band. Hawkins himself, in a sketch in the Museum, figures the 
 width of the front at the architrave as 22 feet. 
 
 Fig. 178. — Nereid Monument, Capital. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 ISI 
 
 now 
 
 Fig. 179. — Nereid Monu- 
 ment, detail from Frieze. 
 
 Again, three of the cohimniations of 6.9 and 10 in. at each 
 end for lapping over the column gives practically the same 
 dimension.* 
 
 All this is perfectly direct and obvious, and we can 
 apply a proof, for five columniations 
 along the flanks at 6.5 gives 31.1, and 
 adding 1.8 for the epistyles 32.9, 
 which perfectly fits the basement of 
 33.0. It is certain, then, that the 
 peristyle had four columns in front 
 and six on the flanks. 
 
 The lacunar stones at the Museum 
 show that they were spaced about 
 i.ii^ from centre to centre, and that 
 about 3.2 showed between the peri- 
 style and the cella. Allowing for a 
 moulding on which they would have 
 rested, this defines the width of the 
 
 cella, the antse capitals of which are preserved in the Museum. 
 Falkener put two columns between the antse, and this is quite a 
 possible arrangement, as we find a pair of Ionic columns in antis 
 at Cnidos (" Ionian Antiq.," vol. iii.). Falkener has also preserved 
 
 a record of longer lacunar stones, each 
 containing three coffers, which he 
 puts at the two ends. He also shows 
 the architrave and cornice of the door 
 to the cella ; to this the console frag- 
 1 3 ' T '^^'Sy . 'J.^ ment 937 doubtless belonged. 
 "V 1 I ^/^ "■ After all this discussion we come 
 
 back to the restoration, proposed by 
 R. Hawkins in 1845, as being most in 
 accordance with the prime facts. He 
 acted as architect to the expedition, 
 and his scheme showed four columns on the front and six at the 
 sides. His drawing has been allowed to disappear, but it was 
 described in the Civil Engineer for 1845, and there is a partial 
 draft of the front amongst the papers in the Greek and Roman 
 
 * If on careful measurement and plotting i or 2 inches more are wanted • 
 for this dimension it may be given to the central intercolumniation. 
 
 Fig. 180. — Nereid Monument, 
 detail from Frieze. 
 
1 82 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 department, which shows that he made the width of the front at 
 the epistyle under the cornice 22 feet and the front columnia- 
 tions 6.9. 
 
 Fellows published his restoration in 1848. He did not 
 fully appreciate the architectural evidence, and on finding that 
 he had recovered all four angle pieces of one of the sculptured 
 bands he proceeded on the assumption that he had found the 
 whole of the slabs of that frieze, and that by adding up their 
 collective length he might obtain the total perimeter of the 
 upper part of the monument. The resulting dimensions were a 
 good deal smaller than the basement, and to make the archi- 
 tectural members fit he put four columns with short epistyles on 
 the fronts, and orAy five columns with the long 
 epistyles on the flanks. 
 
 Falkener, in the " Museum of Classical Anti- 
 quities," worked over the evidence again, and 
 showed that there were probably six columns 
 on the flanks, and that the wider columniation 
 were in front, but apparently fearing to increase 
 the size too much more than Fellows, he made 
 the curious proposition that the epistyle stones 
 PINARA we have were longer than the columniations, 
 Fiff. 181.— Sculp- which he suggested were cut only 6.5I and 6.2, 
 tured Architrave, and not the total length of the stones. He 
 thought he found a confirmation of this in 
 the spacing of the lacunar stones, and assumed that three were 
 intended to cover each bay. As he thus narrowed his front, 
 he was driven to narrowing his pediment also, and thus arose 
 the suggestion that the tympanum may have been lessened 
 through being fitted into rebates. 
 
 Further, he objected to figures standing on the lower angles 
 of the pediment as acroteria, but the evidence here again is 
 against him. 
 
 The actual restoration of the front set up by Dr Murray 
 at the Museum must approximate closely to the facts, but 
 it is a pity that it was not placed where the height would 
 allow the entablature and pediment to be placed over the 
 columns. This is one of the completest Greek buildings known, 
 certainly the most perfect in Western Europe, and an endeavour 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 183 
 
 Museum, was 
 was one figured 
 
 also of this type, 
 in Texier's " Asia 
 
 might be made in some future rearrangement to re-erect it as a 
 
 whole. 
 
 The column at the left is entirely ancient, but the proper 
 
 capital, of course, had an angle volute. Fragment 938 is a part of 
 
 the cymatium with a lion's head ; 935 and 936 are the antse 
 
 capitals ; 637 is part of the console from the entrance, it may be 
 
 combined with the door architrave figured by Falkener. The 
 
 capitals are, as remarked on page 167, derived from the Erech- 
 
 theum. (Fig. 178.) There was no frieze, but the epistyle was 
 
 sculptured, and on it rested the bold dentils of the cornice. A 
 
 tomb at Pinara, of which a drawing by Scharf is in the 
 
 Lycian Portfolio at the 
 
 (Fig. 181.) So also 
 
 Minor," and the early 
 
 Doric temple of 
 
 Assos. The friezeless 
 
 entablature, as has 
 
 been said, is an Asiatic 
 
 characteristic. 
 
 A good deal of 
 
 painting can be traced 
 
 on the lacunar stones. 
 
 On the panel of one 
 
 is a head, in others 
 
 there were palmette 
 
 ornaments. Fig. 182 
 
 shows the patterns on the margins of the lacunaria. 
 
 The date of the Nereid monument is still discussed. Furt- 
 wangler claims that it and the Hereon of Gjolbaschi belong to 
 the fifth century, are of original Ionic style, and do not imitate 
 Attic models ; " the Dioskouros of the Acroterion, of which the 
 head is extant, can hardly be placed later than 440, as it re- 
 sembles the style of the metopes of the Parthenon." Kekule, in 
 the official German handbook on Greek sculpture, still maintains 
 this view, and discusses our monument before the Parthenon 
 itself. On the other hand, Dr Six argues that it should be 
 dated about 375 to 360 B.C. For this view he gives several 
 reasons, including two points which have independently con- 
 vinced me — the resemblance of the acroteria to those of Delos, 
 
 Fig. 182.- 
 
 -Nereid Monument, painted 
 Decoration. 
 
1 84 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 and a comparison of the capitals with those of the Erechtheum, 
 " such is the similitude that it goes near to proving the direct 
 connection." 
 
 German weight seems to be impressing itself on the 
 
 guardians of the Museum, for in 
 the last Guide (1908) we read, 
 " The date and occasion of the 
 building have been much dis- 
 cussed, but it is usually assigned 
 to the end of the fifth century, 
 and to sculptors greatly in- 
 fluenced by Athenian work." 
 
 As to the latter point, the 
 " Nereids " are evidently inspired 
 by the " Ilithyia " of the Parthe- 
 non pediment {ante, p. 129), and 
 passages in the friezes are as 
 evidently influenced by Athenian 
 works. The group Fig. 183, 
 for instance, is an echo of the 
 Parthenon frieze. In regard to 
 the date, I would reinforce Dr 
 Six's argument regarding the 
 Erechtheum by pointing to the fragment of the door console 
 (937), which also has its prototype in the Athenian building. 
 The capitals are practically copies of that 
 described on page 170, except that they are 
 shown to be later by the leaf pattern of the 
 central bands on the rolls, which resemble the 
 capitals of the Mausoleum and Priene. Notice 
 the double volutes, the guilloche under the 
 cushion, and the moulding interposed between 
 the rolls and the abacus on each side. 
 
 The statues of the " Nereids " are rather 
 unhappily described as running ; they all rest 
 on marine creatures, fish, swimming bird, crab, 
 &c., and seem to glide on the wind. They are best described 
 and most poetically explained by Dr Six as Aurae, personifi- 
 cations of the Breezes surrounding the Isle of the Blessed, 
 
 Fig. 183. — Nereid Monument, 
 Group from Frieze. 
 
 Fig. 184. — Bronze 
 at B. M. Cf. 
 with Acroterion. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 185 
 
 where the dead rest. They are "young maidens, clad in the 
 thinnest garments, sailing by the aid of their mantles over 
 sea and shore, indicated by a fish, a dolphin, a water- fowl, 
 a crab, and a shell ; they hover over the water without touching 
 it, as is especially to be seen by the swimming water-fowl 
 beneath one of them." * The carrying off of the daughters of 
 Leukippos by the Dioscuri on the acroteria symbolises death. 
 
 PRIENE. 
 
 Many fragments of the temple of Athena are gathered in the 
 British Museum. It was first examined by a British expedition 
 in 1768, and there is in the Print Room an exquisite drawing by 
 Pars, made at that time, 
 of the ruins on a height 
 above a wide plain, 
 through which winds the 
 Meander, and some of 
 the original memoranda 
 are preserved in the 
 
 '.ANEG)BfcE-T-DNNA'QN i.v 
 
 Greek Department. It. Y\g. i8s.-Priene, Dedication Stone, with 
 was excavated so lately name of Alexander, 
 
 as 1870, and the stones 
 
 were brought to England at the cost of Mr Ruskin. There are 
 capitals of the order and of the anta;, one of which is set up in 
 the Inscription Hall above a large part of one of the antae. 
 There are also portions of the cornice and gutter, of the raking 
 cornice, and of the lacunars. Three or four small fragments are 
 also in the Louvre, the material result, I suppose, of the explora- 
 tion of Rayet and Thomas, which was described in an excellent 
 volume. 
 
 Still more lately, and, it must be admitted, more thoroughly, 
 it has been explored by a German expedition. Many char- 
 acteristic parts have been set up in the Pergamon Museum at 
 Berlin, and it has been described by Wiegand. These inquiries 
 have in much modified our knowledge of the order. 
 
 * A note of my own, made before I had read this, reads, " One at least 
 is flying over sea, see the dolphin and sea under it." 
 
Z86 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 1 
 
 
 I 
 
 ^k..,7.a;:# ^^^^^ ^V:^^^gi 
 
 Fig. 1 86. — Priene, members 
 of Entablature. 
 
 In the English text we are told that in "' all the restorations 
 hitherto published the height of the column has been assumed 
 
 to be nine diameters ; but it having 
 been ascertained from the exhaustive 
 inquiry by Mr Penrose that the real 
 height was not less than ten diameters, 
 the temple in these plates assumes 
 a more elegant form.'' Penrose's cal- 
 culations resulted in giving a height 
 of 42.30 and 42.95 feet to the column, 
 without the plinths, while Rayet and 
 Thomas estimated it at 1 1.75 metres. 
 Penrose had very inadequate data ; 
 the measurements on which he based 
 were taken within the flutes, as the 
 fillets were so broken, and Pullan gave 
 the full bottom diameter as 4.230, 
 which is about an inch in excess of 
 the French and German estimates. 
 Penrose's total height therefore works 
 out to nearly loj diameters, while Miletus, the later and other- 
 wise tallest known column, is gf, or 9J, and we saw that the 
 Mausoleum, another work of the 
 same architect, Pytheos, had a 
 height of only eight diameters. 
 
 The Germans proceeded by 
 another method, taking the top 
 courses of the antse as restored in 
 our Museum, and the bottom ones 
 left on the site, and allowing for 
 what seems to be missing they 
 estimated the height as 11.40 
 metres, or less than 9 diameters. 
 An American, Mr Dinsmoor, work- 
 ing by the same method, gives the 
 proportion as exactly 8 . 814. An 
 .error of i \ diameters or about 6.0 is 
 rather serious in the minute engravings of the English volume. 
 If the column at Miletus, which seems to be the only one 
 
 87. — Priene, the Capitals. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 1 87 
 
 Fig. 188. — Priene, the Capitals, from " Ionian 
 Antiquities." 
 
 whose height is perfectly sure, has a height of about 9I, and 
 Priene had probably a height of about 8|, there is very slender 
 basis for the theory of proportional measurement. 
 
 The composition and height of the entablature has already 
 been spoken of on 
 page 23. The Ger- 
 man restoration 
 showing how the 
 stones fitted into 
 one another leaves 
 no room for doubt 
 of its correctness, 
 and that the order 
 had no frieze. If 
 it had not been for 
 the compelling 
 
 force of a preconceived idea, the first English account would 
 have set forth the true form. I find amongst the original 
 notes the members of the entablature associated as in 
 "Fig. 186, where it is plain that the cornice notched down 
 
 over the outer stone 
 of the architrave. 
 
 By correcting the 
 height of both the 
 columns and of the 
 entablature we make 
 a reduction of 8 or 9 
 feet on the whole 
 order. It is on such a 
 basis that elaborate 
 calculations of pro- 
 portions rest ! Mr 
 Dinsmoor, wishing 
 to compare Priene 
 with other works, 
 says the frieze at Priene "is actually omitted, but to bring 
 it into relation with contemporary examples, I have restored a 
 frieze." He then gives friezes to Ephesus, and the Mausoleum 
 as well. Since I first discussed this point the results of 
 
 Fig. 189. — Priene, Palmette from Capital restored. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 Fig. 190. — Priene, detail from 
 Lacunaria. 
 
 the last explorations at Ephesus have been published, and 
 the early temple is restored without a frieze. Now, the early 
 and later temples at Ephesus, the Mausoleum, and Priene form 
 a series, of which the first and the last are admittted to have had 
 no friezes. The facts in regard to the other two point in the 
 
 same direction, the analogy 
 with the others, together with 
 a general Ionian tradition, are 
 sufficient grounds for our ac- 
 cepting it as proved that all 
 four had no friezes.* 
 
 The Priene capitals at the 
 Museum are almost exactly 
 like those of the Mausoleum. 
 1 give a restoration of the 
 palmette ornaments, which 
 were largely undercut as the>' 
 passed over the eggs and 
 tongues. At Berlin there is 
 an angle volute with a palmette ornament at the back like those 
 of the Mausoleum. (Fig. 44.) 
 
 At the inner angle the volutes were complete, as shown by 
 the engraving in " Antiquities of Ionia," and in a sketch by Huyot 
 given in " Didymes." The finished eyes of the volutes were 
 marble studs inserted 
 into sunk circles. One 
 of the unfinished eyes 
 shows slight indica- 
 tions of lines and the 
 centres from which 
 the curve was struck. 
 Some of the frag- 
 ments of carved 
 mouldings are picked out in colour. (See coloured plate in 
 Rayet and Thomas' work.) 
 
 At the angle of the cornice in the square space between the 
 
 * Dinsmoor in American Jour. Arch!., 1908 : a valuable article on the 
 Mausoleum which, except in regard to the details of the order, agrees with 
 the scheme set out above in Part II. 
 
 Fig. 191. — Priene, Capitals of Propylrea. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 189 
 
 dentils was a large palmette. The gutter (as shown in Figs. 
 
 22 and 23) was copied from Ephesus. The coffers of the 
 
 lacunaria were very rich and deep, having 
 
 three recesses with carved mouldings ; the 
 
 lowest a fine egg and tongue, and the upper 
 
 two, as shown in the sketch from the Museum. 
 
 (Fig. 190.) 
 
 Several large pilaster-like caps from square 
 piers were found on the site. Some are in 
 the Museum. They seem to have supported 
 statues, and they are later than the temple 
 Some are shown in VuUiamy's etchings and 
 also in Donaldson's sketches at the In- 
 stitute of Architects. A smaller one at the 
 Museum is described as a pilaster cap, but 
 it seems to be the anta of a small building 
 — the Propylaea? It agrees well with the 
 size of one of the ordinary capitals of the 
 Propylaea. (Fig. 191.) Fig. 192 shows a 
 naturalistic element in the carving of the antae of the temple 
 
 Fig. 192. — Priene, 
 Lilies from carving. 
 
 The Lion Tomb at Cnydos. 
 
 Of this noble work only the recumbent lion which sur- 
 mounted the pyramid was brought away. Details of the 
 structure were published by Newton and 
 Pullan, and the original sketches are in the 
 MSS. Room at the Museum. Sir C. Newton 
 thought it commemorated a naval victory of 
 the year 394. The monument stood on a 
 rocky promontory 200 feet above the sea, and 
 was about 40 feet high, the length of the lion 
 is nearly 10 feet. "The eyes now wanting 
 were probably of vitreous paste or perhaps 
 of precious stones. Pliny tells of a marble 
 lion on the tomb of a prince in Cyprus with 
 emerald eyes." From the sketches I give a 
 detail of one of the stone shields about 3.6 
 diameter, which were set between the columns of the base- 
 ment. (Fig. 193.) This monumental use of shields has been 
 
 Fig. 193. — Lion 
 Tomb, detail of 
 Shields. 
 
igo THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 before referred to under the Parthenon. An example of a 
 memorial inscription written on such a shield may be seen in 
 the Inscription Hall. Fellows illustrates a tower from a city 
 wall in Lycia with a similar shield 
 upon it. Pausanias tells of a hall at 
 Elis decorated with shields "not made 
 for war." 
 
 With the tomb I must mention the 
 statue of Demeter, also from Cnydos, 
 one of the most delightful works in the 
 Museum. Its style seems to me to be 
 remarkably like that of the head of 
 " Apollo ' found at Delphi, of which 
 there is a cast in the Louvre. Is it 
 only a coincidence that it was found at 
 the treasury of the Cnidians ? The De- 
 meter follows a traditional type, see 
 Fig. 194, from Athen. Mitth., 1895, and 
 with that compare a similar figure on the Harpy tomb, which 
 by this analogy should also be Demeter. 
 
 Fig. 194. — Archaic 
 Demeter. 
 
 Miletus, Salamis, and Naucratis. 
 
 The temple of Apollo Branchidae, near Miletus, was prob- 
 ably in its mass the greatest temple ever erected, but the temple 
 of Samos may have been still larger in area.* It is represented 
 in the British Museum only by some archaic sculptures brought 
 from its sacred way. Important fragments of this temple, how- 
 ever, form the greatest architectural possession of the Louvre, 
 where are exhibited five or six large capitals from the pilasters 
 of the open cella, parts of the frieze of griffins which ran between 
 them, and some colossal highly ornamented, bases from the 
 portico, of which the plinth blocks are about 9 ft, square. (Fig. 
 195.) The lowest diameter of the columns was 6 ft. 6 in., and 
 their height was nearly 65 ft. 
 
 In the most recent work on this temple, MM. Pontremoli 
 
 * See Pontremoli, " Didymes.'' As a result of the recent excavation at 
 Samos the size is given as 11 1.95 m. by 56.25 m. Cf. above, p. 45 
 {Athen. Mitth., 1903, p. 471). 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 191 
 
 and Haussoullier * have sought to collect every slightest reference 
 to it. I shall only here note one or two points from English 
 sources unknown to them. 
 
 There is in the British Museum MSS. Room an account of 
 a visit to the temple in 1679 by Dr Covel, once chaplain to 
 the Levant Company. This, the earliest modern description, is 
 accompanied by a sketch, of which a poor rendering is given in 
 an engraving in the account of Spon and Wheler's travels. They 
 did not visit the site but obtained the view from Dr Pickering, 
 physician to the Company, who, with Mr Salter, visited the 
 temple in 1673. Wheler, Pickering, and Covel all met in Con- 
 stantinople, and travelled thence to Smyrna together. 
 
 Fig. 195. — Miletus, Capitals of Pilasters. 
 
 Covel's account of his visit in 1679 is as follows: — "This 
 morning, not long after five, pitch our tent near ye Temple of 
 Apollo Didymeus, called by the Turks Yoran. The remains 
 of this building shows ye greatest pomp and magnificence of all 
 I have seen in Asia. The stones are all pure white marble, 
 most of them very large. On many of them a few letters are 
 cut, particularly in one place. On certain of them are certain 
 figures, carved most curiously, such as images of griffins, in some 
 defaced, in others remaining almost entire. On a large chapter 
 is a fair image of an angel [a winged figure, now in the Louvre]. 
 
 * See Anderson and Spiers for abstract. This site was cleared further 
 last year, and much light has been thrown on the destruction of the 
 temple. 
 
192 
 
 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 One chapter is 8 feet broad. One entire piece of marble is 
 17 ft. 4 in. long, 3.9J broad, 3. 2 J thick. Of this great structure 
 remain standing only three pillars. Two of them, which 
 are fairer than the others, are joined at top with a tran- 
 some (architrave) of marble. Each of them are made up of 
 about 16 or 17 pieces of marble, very evenly laid, one upon 
 another, and are of channelled work. The compass of one of 
 them is 19 ft. 6 in. ... In the inscription on the other side 
 of the pillar is also found ... so that it is not to be doubted 
 but that these ruins are all that remain of that most magni- 
 
 Fig. 196. — Naucratis, part of Ionic Capital. 
 
 ficent temple which the idolatrous Milesians erected to Apollo 
 Didymeus.'' 
 
 It appears from this that Covel saw a dedicatory inscription, 
 probably on the anta, which, as the sketch which accompanies 
 the description shows, was still standing to its full height. This 
 sketch also indicates a number of short inscriptions on the 
 stones of the cella ; they have been corrupted by the draughts- 
 man, and still more by the engraver, who prepared the similar 
 view for Wheler and Spon. 
 
 According to Pontremoli, many of the blocks of the walls 
 still bear quarry marks, usually IE or lEP, signifying that they 
 were for the temple works, together with other variable letters, 
 representing proper names. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 1 93 
 
 In 1820 several drawings were made of the fragments on the 
 site by the French architect, Huyot, who was in the company of 
 Donaldson, as appears from some sketches made at Priene and 
 Miletus by the latter, now in the Library of the Institute of 
 Architects, on one of which the presence of Huyot is mentioned. 
 
 Vulliamy etched several of the capitals of the pilasters, and 
 also the griffin frieze. 
 
 I may associate with Miletus the fine bull-headed capital 
 from Cyprus in the British Museum. The ornamental female 
 figure at the side is almost exactly like the '' angel " of the 
 Miletus capital. Other bull-headed 
 capitals have been found at Delos, 
 Ephesus, and other places. A gold 
 pin in the Museum, with a head in 
 the form of such a capital, is the 
 finest design of all of them. The 
 comparison with Miletus goes to 
 show that the Salamis capital is 
 later than it is catalogued. I should 
 date it c. 250-200. It must derive 
 from the Persepolitan capitals. 
 
 With these may also be men- 
 tioned some fragments from the later Apollo temple built by 
 the Greek colony at Naucratis. These comprise a part of an 
 Ionic capital {c. 250), of which Fig. 196 is a partial restoration ; 
 some fragments of an egg and tongue moulding, with an 
 interesting termination against the angle, which I have put 
 together in the restored Fig. 197 ; also a knot ornament which 
 appears also on a capital recently found at Delos. There are 
 also some still more interesting fragments from an early 
 temple {c. 550-500), being parts of an Ionic column which are 
 to be compared with the archaic order from Ephesus. 
 
 Fig. 197. — Naucratis, Egg and 
 Tongue Moulding restored. 
 
 Teos and Magnesia. 
 
 The Ionic temple at Teos, excavated by Pullan, was pub- 
 lished in the fourth volume of " Ionian Antiquities." There are 
 in the Museum only two slabs of sculptured frieze which were 
 brought away from it, but they are so entirely bad, and fallen 
 
194 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 again into barbarism, that it is difficult to understand why this 
 temple had any reputation. 
 
 The temple of Dionysos at Taos and the temple at Magnesia 
 on the Meander were according to Vitruvius the work of one archi- 
 tect, Hermogenes, who, he says, wrote a description of the Ionic 
 pseudodipteral temple of Diana at Magnesia and of the 
 monopteral * temple of Bacchus at Teos. The pseudo-dipteros, 
 he explains, has a single row of columns at the distance of two 
 intercolumniations and a diameter from the cella. The temple 
 at Teos was eustylos ; that is, its intercolumniations were of 2j 
 diameter. " Its proportions were discovered by Hermogenes, 
 who was also the inventor of the octastylos or pseudodipteral f 
 formation ; he omitted the intermediate columns in number 38, 
 and thus great space was obtained around the cella." It is 
 difficult to say what all this means, a monopteros as wide as a 
 dipteros is found in one of the early Doric temples of Paestum, 
 indeed it is selected to illustrate the word pseudodipteral in the 
 American " Dictionary of Architecture." The Ionic temple of 
 Messa on Lesbos, described by Koldeway, and dated by him 
 about 400, is also of this formation, which, as shown below, is 
 about two centuries earlier than the temples of Magnesia and 
 Teos. The temple at Magnesia was excavated by the French 
 about 1842, and large parts of the sculptured frieze and the 
 carved cymatium of the cornice are in the Louvre. It was a 
 large Ionic structure about 190 by 100 feet, the columns were 40 
 feet high. The site has been recently re-examined by a German 
 expedition, and part of the order has been set up in the Per- 
 gamon Museum at Berlin. Foundations of an earlier building 
 of the dipteral formation were found. In the rebuilding the 
 intermediate row of columns was omitted. This seems to be the 
 true basis of the confused account in Vitruvius. The entire 
 frieze was occupied with an Amazon battle — very poor, coarse,, 
 and ineffective. The figures are only so much space-filling in- 
 stead of important stories. Although the " architrave order " of 
 Ephesus, Priene, and the rest has here been given up, it is 
 
 * Notice this use of the word. In his general description of temple types 
 he seems to limit it to circular buildings without a cella, but it must mean 
 properly what it means here, a temple with one row of columns. 
 
 t Omit " or," and read '' octastyle-pseudodipteral " ? 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. I9S 
 
 interesting to observe that " under the mighty dentil course the 
 frieze shrinks to almost an unimportant band of decoration." 
 Including the mouldings along the margins it is only about 2.8 
 deep. The cymatium alone must be fully half as deep, it is in 
 short lengths of about 4 feet, carved with a lion's head in the 
 middle of each, but very poor and dull. The whole entablature 
 was about 10 feet deep. Diameter of columns was c. 4.7. The 
 bases were carved after the model of Miletus.* 
 
 The Germans date this work as built in fourteen years, 
 from 221 B.C. In the English account of Teos we read, "It 
 seems probable, as Dr Hirschfeld suggests [from the inscrip- 
 tions], that the temple, of which Hermogenes was the archi- 
 tect, was planned if not completed between B.C. 193 and 133. 
 On the other hand the temple may have been restored or 
 rebuilt in Roman times." 
 
 Another Ionic temple, the Smintheium, excavated and 
 described by Pullan, may be briefly mentioned here as one of 
 the most elegant later works. Its date has never been accurately 
 settled. One of the most definite criteria is a comparison of the 
 capitals with those of the Ptolemaion at Samothrace made by 
 O. Puchstein in his work on the Ionic capital, Figs. 34, 35. 
 Both have an almost identical scroll ornament on the cushion of 
 the volute, and both must be of about the same age. 
 
 The Choragic Monuments of Athens. 
 
 Of the famous monument of Lysikrates our Museum pos- 
 sesses only casts, but casts which are most valuable records, as 
 they were taken more than a century ago, when the sculptures 
 were in a much better state. In the Elgin Room is the frieze, and 
 in the basement one of the Corinthian capitals. There are also 
 many valuable drawings in the Greek and Roman Department, 
 and with the Stuart Papers in the MSS. Room. The monu- 
 ment is known, from an inscription which it bore, to have been 
 erected in 335. This elegant little Corinthian structure is too 
 well known to need description. Two or three points only may 
 
 * The great sculptured altar was found to the west of the temple : cf. 
 Ephesus ; also, I think, Samos. 
 
 Q 
 
196 
 
 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 be mentioned, The columns are really complete, the closures of 
 
 the small round cell being set between them, so that the columns 
 stand in half round channels at the joints, 
 and covering them. The architrave and 
 frieze are in single circular blocks, and 
 the roof is in another. It is really de- 
 signed as a jointless fabric, that is, no joint 
 occurs except behind the columns and at 
 a moulding. 
 
 The marble roof-stone Stuart calls a 
 cupola, but this raises a false idea, although 
 it is hollowed out inside for lightness. 
 Outside it approximates to a very flat 
 cone, but having a slight curvature, exactly 
 the curvature of the cover of a vase or one 
 of the turned marble toilet boxes. It fits 
 on and into the circular cornice-stone like 
 a lid. We know little about the develop- 
 ment of circular buildings, but this one 
 seems to have been designed as a pyxis, 
 with a lid and a knop on the top. The 
 low-sloping cone or pyramid is the classi- 
 cal form for a round or polygonal structure. 
 The octagonal " Tower of the Winds " was 
 
 roofed with a low-pitch pyramid. The rotundas at Olympia, 
 
 Epidaurus, and Samothrace must have been covered by low 
 
 cones. So must the Odeon and the Skias at Athens. It is a 
 
 mistake to think of the cupola, especially as 
 
 seen from the outside, as a classical form. 
 
 The ornament carved on the roof-stone, we 
 
 are told, represents tiles, but it is rather a leaf 
 
 pattern. We find it first, so far as I know, 
 
 on the volute rolls of the capitals of the 
 
 Nereid monument, but as a painted pattern 
 
 it appeared on the Ionic capitals of the pjg. inn—pian 
 
 Propylsea {R.I.B.A. Jour., vol. i.). On the top 
 
 is a very handsome finial with three branches, which supported 
 
 a tripod. (Fig. 200.) Traces of painted decoration have been 
 
 found on this monument. Fig. 201 is the capital. 
 
 Fig. 198. — Monument 
 of Lysikrates. 
 
 # 
 
 % 
 
 
 J 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 197 
 
 
 Fig. 200. — Detail of the Finial. 
 
 We possess also the statue from the choragic monu- 
 ment of Thrasyllos, which was placed above the front to a 
 small, rock-hewn cella, the statue being 
 seated, and probably holding a tripod in 
 its lap. It was built in 320, and altered 
 later. The entablature of the front was 
 supported in the middle by one pier, 
 square, or rather oblong on plan, the narrow 
 face fronting outwards. There are similar 
 square piers, like detached antse, at the 
 Propylsea and the Temple of Victory. In 
 Rome such marble piers presenting their 
 narrow sides to the front are to be found on the Palatine. 
 
 The Lycian Tombs. 
 
 A series of tombs, more or less complete, and several frag- 
 ments, well represent the sepulchral monuments of Lycia ex- 
 plored by Fellows. There are three principal types of those 
 tombs — (i) Rock-hewn chambers with temple-like fronts; (2) 
 chest or sarcophagus-like tombs, raised high on stone shafts or 
 basements ; (3) ark-like tombs, imitating small wooden shrines 
 set on basements. 
 
 Fig. 201. — The 
 Capital. 
 
198 
 
 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 Of the rock-cut tombs there is a valuable series of drawings 
 by Scharf preserved in the Lycian Portfolio in the Greek 
 Department. Fig. 181, taken from one of these, is like the 
 sculptured epistyle of the Nereid monument. Several show 
 other varieties of the characteristic Ionian cornice of these 
 monuments. 
 
 The " Lion tomb " at the Museum is of the second or " chest 
 type.'' The slabs in the Museum were elevated on a tall base 
 about 10 feet high. On the top of the sculptured sarcophagus 
 would have been a heavy, widely-projecting cover. This tomb is 
 generally dated as of the seventh century, but there is a general 
 tendency, it seems to me, to give too early a date to all these 
 Ionian monuments, including the Nereid monument. 
 
 The Harpy tomb from Xanthus rested on a shaft 17 feet 
 high. Its projecting cap-stone remained. With a high plinth 
 
 below the shaft, it looked like a 
 p^^^^^^.!;!;^!;::;::^^::^:^^::^ little turret with a deep sculp- 
 
 \^\ '■ ^~"^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ tured frieze. This "frieze" was 
 
 ^-^ V-;! ■ !^^iv*;^^\\'«&.^^S fully painted, the background, 
 
 as usual, being blue. It is now 
 dated soon after the middle of 
 the sixth century, but compar- 
 ing it with the "ark tombs," 
 which, in some respects, seem so 
 primitive, and yet belong to the fourth century, I cannot see 
 why it might not be nearly a century later. The bottom 
 moulding with its painted decoration, traces of which can still 
 be seen, surely points to the fifth century. No. 86 is a noble 
 procession, I should say of the fifth century ; 82 is a delightful 
 frieze of cocks and hens, bright and natureful. (Fig. 202.) This 
 can hardly be earlier than the fourth century. The two " ark 
 tombs " are in the Mausoleum Room. One of them is dated 
 by an inscription as wrought c. 370. 
 
 All these monuments appear to have been painted ; there are 
 plain traces of colour on a slab with a sphynx in the Museum, 
 and on the Harpy tomb some patterns may be discerned where 
 the painting has protected the surface. 
 
 Memoranda in Scharf's note-books refer to the colour of 
 these Xanthian monuments. On January 22, 1844, was found 
 
 Fig. 302.— From Xanthus. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. I99 
 
 the relief of the sphynx ; the wings were patterned with feathers, 
 the hair yellow, the background blue—" intensely bright blue." 
 On February 2, 1844, was discovered the pedimental slab, now 
 in the Museum, with a harpy above an Ionic column ; it was 
 " richly coloured." The slabs with cocks and hens were found 
 at the same time. 
 
 We have had evidence enough that painted decoration on 
 external marble work was regarded as a necessary completion 
 from the earliest days of Greek art to the latest. 
 
 Mycen^. 
 
 In the Lycian Room of the Museum has lately been erected 
 a reconstruction of the greater part of the pillared gate of the 
 " Treasury of Athens " at Mycenae. It is made up of parts 
 brought to this country by collectors at various times. Some 
 belong to the Elgin Collection, others transferred from the 
 Institute of Architects belonged to Donaldson, and the most 
 important fragments of the pillars recently obtained were 
 brought from Greece nearly a century ago by the Marquis of 
 
 Fig. 203. — Mycenas, part of Frieze. 
 
 Sligo. One of the fragments (Fig. 203) I had the fortune to find 
 standing unrecognised in the porch of a collector's house in 
 London. On my calling Dr Murray's attention to it, he 
 obtained it as a gift from the proprietor. 
 
 The gateway, and the fragments which were found round 
 about it, have often been described and figured by Dodwell, Gell, 
 Donaldson, and others, and several restorations have been put 
 forward, the latest and best being that of Mr Phene Spiers, now 
 placed with the fragments in the Museum. In one respect, 
 
200 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 sm^^^^^mma 
 
 w^^^^mmmm 
 
 Fig. 204. — Mycense, 
 Fragments. 
 
 however, I think a former more extravagant restoration by 
 Perrot and Chipiez is to be preferred. This is the suggested 
 fining of the triangular opening above the doorway. Perrot and 
 Chipiez place here certain slabs of dark red marble (sometimes 
 
 mistakenly called porphyry), which 
 are decorated by bands of spiral orna- 
 ments, some of which have sunk eyes, 
 in which studs of coloured glass must 
 have been set. Mr Spiers, on the 
 other hand, takes these slabs to case 
 the adjoining pieces of wall, the 
 slanting edges of which framed the 
 opening. It is clear that the slabs 
 did occupy one or other position, 
 for they have joints which rake at 
 the required angle. (Fig. 205.) 
 
 Portions of the slabs covered with spiral ornaments have been 
 drawn several times, but often so inaccurately that it is not 
 possible to say how many separate stones have been found at 
 different times. Perrot gives i, 2, and 3, all of which have slant- 
 ing ends, and of which i forms, in- 
 deed, the apex of a triangle. (Fig. 
 204.) He also gives another long 
 piece, without slanting ends, as from 
 the British Museum, but this is a 
 mistake. The British Museum piece 
 has one slanting end and a broken 
 end, and it is a question whether 
 Perrot's 3 is not a restoration of this. 
 In the " Expedition a la Morde " a 
 piece with a slant end is given much 
 shorter in proportion than the British 
 Museum fragment, and one might 
 suppose it to be different were it not 
 that a plainer piece with one row of 
 
 spirals and some circles is figured, and this seems to be the 
 same as a stone illustration by Dodwell, and now in the British 
 Museum. 
 
 There are only three pieces, then, with slant ends of which 
 
 Fig. 205.— Mycenae, Apex of 
 opening above Door of 
 Tomb. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 201 
 
 I feel certain, i, 2, and the British Museum piece, which 
 
 may be 3. 
 
 The triangular piece i was found in 1878, and it is de- 
 scribed by F. Thiersch* It accurately fitted 
 
 the apex of the opening, and this, to me, 
 
 seems to settle the question. (Fig. 205.) 
 
 There is, however, the contributory evidence 
 
 that, out of so few known slabs, so many as 
 
 three have sloping ends, for it is obvious that 
 
 the proportion of slanting ends required is 
 
 greater to fill the triangular space than would 
 
 be required to fill the two side spaces, the 
 
 outer boundaries of which were necessarily 
 
 upright. That is, allowing for some inter- 
 mediate joints, there would have been more 
 
 uprights than slants at the sides, and more 
 
 slants and less uprights in the triangle. 
 
 The restoration at the Museum has cor- 
 rected a mistake in regard to the capitals 
 
 which appears in almost all illustrations of 
 
 them. They are 
 adorned by a series 
 of chevrons, which 
 in illustrations are shown as ar- 
 ranged, so as to oppose one another 
 .symmetrically at the central line. 
 They really all pass around in one 
 direction : < <, not > <. 
 
 The best early sketch I know 
 of the capital is a drawing in one 
 of Gell's sketch books in the Print 
 Room of the British Museum. He 
 was the first, also, I believe, to re- 
 cognise that it was a capital and not 
 a base. He says, " Near the door 
 
 observe a semicircular pilaster and its capital very curiously 
 
 carved in spiral and zigzag lines." (Fig. 207.) 
 
 Fig. 206. — My- 
 cense. Column 
 and Capital. 
 
 Fig. 207. — Mycente, from 
 sketches by Gell. 
 
 * Athen. Mitth., 1879. See also 1896. 
 
202 THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS 
 
 Fig. 208. — Gem 
 from Mycenae. 
 
 Another slight sketch is of a piece of Mycenaean frieze, which 
 he notes was "in a church near the Treasury," and of red 
 material. This, I think, from the size which 
 is figured on the sketch, may be the very 
 piece described above which was found in 
 London, and is now in the British Museum. 
 (Fig. 207 B.) 
 
 A few words may be added on the noble 
 Lion Gate, so well known to us by the 
 descriptions of English travellers of a cen- 
 tury ago. The best general view I know 
 is the coloured print of Dodwell, who also 
 mentions that " the block of the lions is of 
 a compact limestone of a green hue re- 
 sembling in appearance the green basalt of 
 Egypt." The examination of it by Thiersch 
 showed that the heads of the lions had been 
 pinned on in separate pieces, and that they 
 faced outwards. Similar compositions are 
 frequently found on early gems. (Figs. 
 208, 209.) Dr Evans has shown that the 
 
 composition was a sacred pillar standing on 
 an altar, or rather two altars, guarded by 
 lions, which are the companions of a pillar- 
 idol, " the pillar of the House," the pillar of 
 Mycenze. 
 
 It was a symbol of the stability of the 
 fortified city. " The scheme of the pillar and 
 guardian monsters, as it appears on the Lion 
 Gate, is essentially of Egyptian deriv-ation." * 
 There is in the Early Vase Room at the 
 Museum a cast of a fragment of a small 
 Mycenaean shaft decorated in a very similar 
 way to the pillars of the Treasury of Athens. 
 (Fig. 210.) It was found by the English 
 exploring party at Enkomi, Cyprus, and 
 comparisons show that it must be a portion 
 Dr Evans found at Knossos such a large 
 
 Fig. 209. — Gem at 
 South Kensington. 
 
 Fig. 210. — Fragment 
 from Cyprus. 
 
 of a marble lamp. 
 
 * J. H. S., 1901. 
 
THESEUM, ERECHTHEUM, AND OTHER WORKS. 
 
 203 
 
 lamp made of similar rose-coloured marble ; the top is an 
 imitation of an Egyptian capital, with lotus-flowers and papyrus 
 leaves. A similar lamp was found at Palaicastro, and resembles 
 lamps still in situ at Hagiatrida.* The Palaicastro lamp has 
 a band of ornamentation almost exactly similar to the Enkomi 
 shaft. This ornament seems, although the transformation cannot 
 here be followed, to derive from the papyrus blossom. Amongst 
 the many extraordinary fragments recently discovered at Knossos 
 and other sites, not the least interesting is a painting showing a 
 temple front with pillars like those of the Lion Gate. The 
 horned objects by the pillars are altars within the cellas. (Fig. 
 211.) 
 
 * Angelo Mosso. 
 
 Fig. 211 A Temple Front, from a Pamting at Knossos. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 The Ionic Volute. 
 
 The traditional explanation of the manner in which the Greeks 
 set out the volute is given to us by Vitruvius, according to 
 whom it was drawn by a series of arcs of circles gradually 
 increasing in radius. The details of his scheme have been much 
 discussed ; one of the latest theories of interpretation is that of 
 Choisy, as given by M. Pontremoli in the volume " Didymes." 
 
 The late Mr Penrose, feeling as 
 a mathematician that such a 
 method was only an approxima- 
 tion to a true theoretic spiral, set 
 out the theory that the volute 
 was in fact drawn by means of a 
 cord unwound from a central 
 helix.* If the cord is unwound 
 from a cylinder a spiral having 
 equal intervals is produced, but 
 this differs from the volute in 
 starting quickly from the eye, 
 and in having succeeding revolu- 
 tions what we may call parallel to 
 one another. If, however, the 
 cord is unwound from a spiral or 
 a cone an expanding volute results, which is almost exactly like 
 the Ionic volute. Penrose thought further that the sunk eyes in 
 the volutes were made to contain the helix from which the cord 
 was unwound. 
 
 Other reasons for the excavation of the eye have been given. 
 
 Fig. 212. — Eyes of Volutes. 
 A, Priene ; B, Ephesus. 
 
 * R.I. B.A. Jour., 1903, p. 21. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 205 
 
 and many fine capitals exist which have their volutes complete 
 while the eyes are still unfinished. Amongst these is one of the 
 Ephesus capitals, where the eyes are not only nearly 5 inches 
 across but show lines of construction and compass marks which 
 have often been pointed out. The late Prof Middleton drew 
 attention to the fact that similar lines might be traced on one of 
 the Priene capitals. These are now very dim, and only under the 
 electric light have I been able to verify the statement (Fig. 212 A). 
 Chandler reports that at Athens " we found an Ionic capital 
 with marks of the compasses used in forming the volute." 
 
 We may bring Penrose's theory to bear on the elucidation of 
 the marks on the Ephesus capital. On examination it will be 
 found that many of the 
 centre points on the 
 eye fall into the course 
 of a spiral, as suggested 
 on Fig. 212 B. And 
 if from the . centres 
 thus obtained arcs are 
 successively struck, a 
 spiral results which, I 
 believe, agrees with the 
 actual volute. I sug- 
 gest, then, that * the 
 Greek method of con- 
 structing the volute was 
 to draw four intersect- 
 ing lines on the eye, then to sketch on it a rough spiral according 
 to the number of revolutions required. The centres for successive 
 arcs of circles were found at the intersection of this small and 
 rude spiral with the eight radii. If the dimensions of a perfect 
 spiral of this type are laid down on ordinates they should give 
 a smooth parabolic curve. (Fig. 2 13 A.) As a matter of fact, at the 
 Erechtheum the points do not give a smooth curve. (Fig. 2 1 3 B.)* 
 Probably the best way of designing a volute would be to sketch 
 it as required, then to set out the dimensions on ordinates, then 
 to " smoothe the curve," and from it to correct the volute. 
 
 * I owe this observation to Mr P. Rodeck. On the diagram the points 
 do not fall on the curve. 
 
 Fig. 213. — Dimensions ofVolutes set out on 
 Ordinates from circumference of eye. 
 
2o6 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 The Acanthus Pillar. 
 
 Soon after the Corinthian capital came into use, a further 
 development was made in the " acanthus pillar," an example 
 of which has recently been found at Delphi. In Donaldson's 
 
 *'A) 
 
 Fig. 214. — Acanthus 
 Column, from a 
 drawing by Don- 
 aldson. 
 
 Fig. 215. — Detail of 
 the Top of Shaft, 
 Monument of Ly- 
 sikrates. 
 
 sketches at the Institute of Architects, I find & drawing of a part 
 of a similar pillar which was in a church at Athens. This was 
 1.3 in greatest diameter. (Fig. 214.) Now, one of the fragments 
 
 assigned by Michaelis to the 
 acroterion of the Parthenon, 
 of which there is a cast in 
 the basement of the British 
 Museum, is also of the same 
 pattern, but smaller. It can- 
 not, I think, by any possibility 
 be so early as the Parthenon. 
 The flutings of the acanthus 
 pillar of Delphi finish under 
 each acanthus band in a series of leaf-like terminations, exactly 
 like those of the Corinthian columns of the monument of 
 Lysikrates, built in 335 B.C. (Fig 215.) The flutings of the 
 
 Delphi Column 
 
 fragment 
 
 said to be from Parthenon. 
 
APPENDIX. 207 
 
 Delphi pillar are also of an elaborate section. (Fig. 216, A.)' 
 This section may be compared with that of the curved frag- 
 ments assigned to the acroterion of the Parthenon. (Fig. 216, B.) 
 
 Architects in Antiquity. 
 
 Large collections of material are available from which to 
 draw an account of ancient architects.* But I can only here deal 
 broadly with the general facts of their training and standing. 
 The Greek master may seem to have approximated more to the 
 modern idea of an architect than did a master-mason of the 
 Middle Ages in being a man of science and culture. It is all the 
 more necessary to distinguish and ask what are the essential 
 qualities of an architect ? The training of the Greek must have 
 been practical, and the architect must have begun as a mechanician, 
 a mason, or a sculptor. The foundation craft was most generally, 
 I believe, the last, although it is significant that in the list of the 
 seven great architects is included Archimedes, the mathematician 
 and military engineer. The modern conditions which make the 
 modern architect are unique. Before the invention of penny 
 posts, telegraphs, telephones, and copying presses, he could not 
 be trained to their use, that is, to office-work ; but it is evident 
 that he must have had a training. The Greek architect could 
 not have been what we call a professional man. Phidias, the 
 sculptor, was, according to Plutarch, " director of all the public 
 buildings, although the Athenians had other excellent architects. 
 . . . He had the superintendence of everything, and all the 
 artists received his orders." That is, as has been suggested, and 
 as will appear more likely by what we shall see below, he was 
 the city architect of Athens. Theodorus of Samos, the most 
 famous sculptor of the archaic period, was architect of the 
 Skias at Sparta and other works. His contemporary, Rhoecus, 
 was architect of the temple of Hera at Samos. Bupalus of 
 Chios, c. 500, was also a sculptor and architect. According to 
 Furtwangler, Kallemachos was probably at once the architect 
 and the sculptor of the Erechtheum. Polycleitos the younger 
 
 * See Brunn, " Gesch. d. Griech. Kiinstler"; Choisy's Essays on Greek 
 Building Accounts ; Daremberg and Saglio, vol. i. ; Durm, vol. i. ; the 
 American Architectural Record, 1908. 
 
208 APPENDIX. 
 
 was both architect and sculptor at Epidaurus. Scopas built the 
 temple at Tegea, as well as sculpturing the splendid pedimental 
 groups. The most famous architect at the middle of the fourth 
 century, Pythios, the master at Priene and Halicarnassus, was 
 the sculptor of the magnificent chariot group which surmounted 
 the Mausoleum. 
 
 The more ancient and the great classical architects were, I 
 should say, primarily sculptors. Later architects were primarily 
 engineers. In Athens, Philon, the architect of the arsenal at the 
 Pirsus, of which practically a complete specification has come 
 down to us, was classed in later times as one of the seven great 
 architects, and we have seen that Archimedes was also named as 
 one of them. Earlier, Hippodamus, architect of the fortified 
 town of Piraeus for Pericles and of the city of Rhodes, must have 
 been an engineer. Later, Deinocrates, who laid out Alexandria, 
 must also have been of this type.* 
 
 As to their critical aspect toward their art we hear from 
 Vitruvius how they wrote descriptions of their works and com- 
 mentaries on architecture. Chersiphron, architect of the temple of 
 Diana at Ephesus, wrote on it. Ictinos wrote on the Parthenon, 
 and Pythios on the Mausoleum. Notwithstanding all this, 
 Aristotle would not allow that architecture was a Fine Art — it 
 was too much subject to mere need to come within his definition. 
 
 For the Roman period Vitruvius himself has left an invalu- 
 able document, although it is evident that the most essential 
 commonplaces of procedure are assumed. He begins, indeed, by 
 saying that architecture is a science based on practice and theory, 
 but he neglects to say how practical knowledge was attained. 
 He talks of studying philosophy, and of music and grammar, but 
 never of learning building. On the other hand, he gives such 
 sound advice that he must have been an excellent practical 
 builder himself In one crucial passage he says that architecture 
 has three branches, building, dialling, and mechanics, the latter 
 being the construction of war-engines and other machines, in 
 which he seems to have been an expert, as he was keeper of 
 
 * See long lists of sculptor-architects and engineer-architects in Darem- 
 berg and Saglio, vol. i., p. 377. From a phrase cited from Plato, it appears 
 that an architect might cost ten times as much as an ordinary workman. 
 As to plans, see Darem. and Sag., s.v. Forma. 
 
APPENDIX. 209 
 
 war-engines to the emperor. There is no doubt that there was a 
 close association between the " engineer " and the architect. The 
 " Ten Books of Architecture " falls into the three divisions just 
 named. The first eight books are on building, including one on 
 water supply, the ninth is on dialling, and the tenth is on 
 machines. Apparently he was the author of only one important 
 building. His vision was retrospective, and, for him, architecture 
 was based on Greek precedents. 
 
 Whence came the change from the classical spirit which 
 sought to realise perfect types, to the Roman spirit of adventure 
 and aggrandisement ? The change, of course, was general, and 
 " in the air,'' but that which best qualified the architect to deal 
 with it was his association with military engineering. 
 
 Vitruvius in his last chapter happens quite accidentally to 
 mention three Greek architects who were concerned in the siege 
 of Rhodes — Diognetus, architect of the city (who had a fixed 
 annual salary), Callias, a rival, and Epimachus, a celebrated 
 architect of Athens, who acted with the besiegers. He also 
 mentions Trypho of Alexandria, architect of the city of Apol- 
 lonia, who, he says, saved that city by his devices. Further, we 
 know that the most famous master of the most celebrated group 
 of buildings in Rome, Apollodorus of Damascus, the favourite 
 architect of Trajan, was also his military engineer, who devised 
 the wonderful bridge over the Danube, and who wrote a book 
 on war-engines for Hadrian. A second great architect con- 
 temporary, or a little later, Decrianus, who removed the Colossus 
 of the Sun to another position and built the bridge and Mau- 
 soleum of Hadrian, must also have been an engineer. 
 
 At a still later time, as the records show, Anthemius of 
 Tralles, the architect of St Sophia, and other building masters 
 of the Lower Empire were mechanicians and engineers. 
 Anthemius is called mechanikos. " He was an inventor of 
 machines," we are told, and excelled in mechanical knowledge. 
 He was employed on the fortifications of Dara. 
 
 Architects for public works were public servants (not the 
 same thing as public servants calling themselves architects !). 
 As late as the time of St Augustine, he mentions the city 
 architect of Carthage, and Cassiodorus gives the form for 
 appointing the Architectus publicorum of Rome. 
 
210 appendix. 
 
 Origins and Conclusion. 
 
 On our page 196 has been mentioned the late entry into 
 sanctioned " architecture " of that noblest building form, the 
 dome. It is a commonplace that the arch and vault were not 
 recognised in Greek " architecture." Yet these menial coverings 
 of drains and stores were to become the master forces of a new 
 architecture. It is a lesson for us that the dome, which 
 originated in mud huts and beehive tombs, and was used in well 
 coverings, kilns, and baths, and the like common necessities, 
 only slowly came into higher structures, and then only as an 
 interior form. Even in Roman architecture the conical exterior 
 to the dome was general. The Pantheon is so much banked up 
 at the springing that the external dome hardly counts. 
 
 It is the same whatever " features " we examine. That which 
 is now " Esthetic architecture " was once organic building. How 
 long do past and cast-off needs remain in consciousness as taste ? 
 Take the great typical moulding, the cornice. It was once, as 
 Mr Flinders Petrie has shown, the spreading top of a fence of 
 Egyptian reeds, plastered over with mud. Or it was the Doric 
 eaves, made up of wall plate (bed mould), projecting rafter ends 
 (mutules and corona), and terra-cotta gutter (cymatium). Again, 
 Dr Dorpfeld has shown how that mysterious entity the Doric 
 temple arose out of mud brick walls on a stone base course 
 (orthostatae), with wooden frames (antae) and a surrounding 
 protecting verandah (the peristyle), and so on. 
 
 Many years ago Champollion pointed out the resemblance 
 between the Doric order of columns and some pillars found in 
 Egypt, and the argument was carried further by Falkener in 
 the " Museum of Classical Antiquities." Actual relation has 
 been alternately asserted and denied ; one of the grounds for 
 the denial being the wide gap of time between early Doric 
 architecture and the period of these Egyptian columns. The 
 whole question is entirely altered by the establishment of 
 Mycenaean art between the two. Certainly much of this art is 
 of Egyptian derivation, and certainly also much of the Mycenaean 
 was handed on in the Doric, as has been shown by Dorpfeld and 
 others. There can be no doubt, I think, that the Doric order 
 was in a large degree ultimately of Egyptian extraction, and 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 211 
 
 that the Ionic is Egypto-Assyrian. Their power is in this — 
 that they were never " designed," but developed slowly from a 
 far ancestry. The essence of Greek art is not in these mere 
 shapes accidentally derived, but in the spirit of clearness, order, 
 and exquisiteness in which they were dealt with. 
 
 The normal course of architectural development has been 
 through need, local possibilities, experiment — that is the period 
 of infancy : to custom, mastery, expansion, and maturity : into 
 rules, and then intentional variations, redundance, sestheticism, 
 incoherence, and decline. 
 
 While Greek " sanctioned architecture," the ideal of Vitruvius, 
 was declining, the Roman building art arose. Later architecture 
 was again and again renewed in Byzantine, Romanesque, and 
 mediaeval building adventure, as in modern days it is being 
 renewed outside the realm of "taste" by fresh needs and 
 engineering experiment — the basis of the architecture of to- 
 morrow. 
 
 My study of the old has had for its object the discovery of 
 the conditions of the new. 
 
 " Nothing comes of its own accord to men, but all things by 
 experiment." * 
 
 * Herodotus. 
 
 Fig. 217.— Fragment of Slab with Lattice Pattern, from 
 Athens, in South Kensington Museum. 
 
 Printed at The Dakien Press, Edittburgh. 
 R 
 
INDEX. 
 
 Acanthus, 140 
 
 Acanthus pillar, 206, 207 
 
 Achilles, 113 
 
 Acropolis, the, 81, 82, 123, 151, 152 
 
 Acroteria, 6, 25, 26, 92, 140, 183, 184, 
 
 206, 207 
 Adamkilissi, tomb at, 57 
 Adler, 37, 41, 49, 52, 53, 65, 66, 69 
 Mgma., temple at, 86-88, 92, 173 
 ^sculapius, 31, 133 
 Agrigentum, temple at, 160 
 Ajax, 112 
 
 Alexander, 3, 33, 35, 68, 91, 98 
 Alexandria, 35, 208, 209 
 Alkamenes, sculptor, 129 
 Amazonamachia, the, 104 
 A merican Jourjial of A rchceology, 1 6 1 
 Amphitrite, 116 note 
 Anderson and Spiers, see Spiers 
 Anthemius, architect, 209 
 Aphrodite, 38, 96, 97, 124, 129, 130 
 Apollo, 93, 96, 97, no, 125, 190; his 
 
 temples, see Bassje, Miletus, Nau- 
 
 cratis 
 Apollodorus, architect, 209 
 Apollonia, 209 
 Arch, the, 210 
 Archilocos, 171 
 Archimedes, architect-engineer, 207, 
 
 208 
 Architects, 69, 70, 207-209 
 Architraves, see Entablatures 
 Ares, 38,87,95,97, no, 12? 
 Argos, 109, no, 162, 164 
 Artemis, see Diana 
 
 Artemision, the, 15 
 
 Asclepios, see ^sculapius 
 
 Assos, temple of, 183 
 
 Athena, in the Parthenon, 71, 83, 89, 
 90, 93, 96, no, in, n3-n5, 121, 
 122-125, 131, 132, 140-145 ; her 
 shield, 107 ; her Xoanon, 108 ; her 
 olive, 120, 121 ; her charioteer, 138; 
 and Athens, 141 ; her types, 141- 
 146 ; at Lemnos, 141, 144, 145 ; at 
 the Theseum, 1 50 ; and see Priene 
 
 Athena Nike, temples to, 153 
 
 Athens, i, 22, 23, 53, 56, 72, 84, 141, 
 143, 144, 151, 195-197, 206, 208, 209, 
 2n ; its walls, 82, 83; treasury of, 
 see Mycenas 
 
 Augustus, 57, 169 
 
 Bacchus, see Dionysos 
 
 Bassse, temple of Apollo at, i, 74, 83, 
 
 87, 106, 108, 155, 160; account of, 
 
 171-178 
 Berlin, see Pergamon 
 Bernay, silver patera at, 29 
 Bernier, 52 
 Beul^, 89, 103, 106 
 Bocher, M., at Bassse, 171 
 Bohn, 92, 140 
 Brunn, 133, 207 note 
 Budrum, 65 
 
 Building boards, 85, 170 
 Bull-headed capitals, 193 
 Bupalus, architect-sculptor, 207 
 
214 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Callias, architect, 209 
 
 Caliicrates, architect, 82, 83, 154 
 
 CaUirhoe, 123 
 
 Capitals, 19, 20, 51, 58, 59, 61, 76, 152, 
 
 154-156, 158, 164, 168-170, 173, 174, 
 
 180, 183-188, 192, 193, 197, 201, 206 
 Carrey's drawings, 103, 109, 114-117, 
 
 120-122, 128, 129, 131, 133, 136-138, 
 
 140 
 Caryatides, 22, 143, 158, 159, 167, 168 
 Cassandra, 112 
 Cavvadias, at Bassae, 172 
 Cecrops and his wife, 115, 121, 122, 
 
 133-138 
 Ceilings, 2, 170, 173, 174 
 Centaurs, 108, 109, 112 
 Chandler, 71, 73, 149, 205 
 Chersiphron, architect, 11, 34, 208 
 Chipiez, 200 
 Choisy, 14, 22, 32, 33, 68, 75, 160, 164, 
 
 170, 171, 173, 175, 204, 207 note 
 Cnidos, lion tomb at, 50, 57, 66, 92, 
 
 127, 128, 181, 189, 190, 198; treasury 
 
 at Delphi, no, in 
 Cnossos, 34, 202, 203 
 Cockerell, 20, 24, 50, 52, 53, 89, 92, 
 
 104, 109, no, 117, 133, 171, 174, 175 
 Colhgnon, 30, 31, 34, 35, 52, 95 note, 
 
 105, ni note, 113 note, 130 
 Colour, see Painting 
 Colossus of the Sun, the, 209 
 Columns and colonnades, 4-6, 14-17, 
 
 19-21, 23, 24, 26-28, 30, 31, 42-45, 51, 
 S3, 56-60, 62, 65, 71, 72, 76, 79, 152, 
 159-161, 174, 181, 186, 187, 194-196, 
 201, 202, 206 
 
 Comon of Melite, 161 
 
 Cornices, see Mouldings 
 
 Covel, Dr, 38, 191, 192 
 
 Croesus, 3, 10, n, 33 
 
 Cupolas, 195, 210 
 
 Cymatium, 13, 21, 22, 24, 25, 32, 63, 
 64, 83, 176, 188, 189, 210 
 
 Cyprus, 189, 202, 203 
 
 Dalton's drawings, n5, u6, n9, 120 
 Daphnis, architect, 34 
 
 Dara, 209 
 
 Daremberg and Saglio, 207 note, 208 
 
 note 
 Decrianus, architect-engineer, 209 
 Deinocrates, architect-engineer, 35, 
 
 208 
 Delos, 183, 193 
 Delphi, 91, no, 147, 167, 190, 206, 
 
 207 
 Demeter, 87, 95-97, U5, ng, 124-128, 
 
 135, 190 
 Demetrius, architect, 34-36 
 Dexileos, tomb of, 105 
 Diana, her Temple at Ephesus, 1-37, 
 
 53 note, 54, 56, 58, 59, 177, 187, 188, 
 
 193-195, 205, 208 ; figures of, 96, 97, 
 
 108, no; and see Magnesia 
 Uinsmoor, Mr, quoted, 186-188 
 Diognetus, architect, 209 
 Dione, 124 
 Dionysos, 87, 90, 95, 97, no, n8, 124- 
 
 127, 156; andseeTeos 
 Dioscuri, 27 note, 183, 185 
 Discord, figure of, 121 
 Dodwell, quoted, 88, 89, 91, 102, 136, 
 
 149, 199, 200, 202 
 Dome, the, 210 
 Donaldson, Professor, 50, 53, 168, 169, 
 
 189, 193, 199, 206 
 Doorways, 154, 155, 163-165, 174, 
 
 200 
 Doric temples, 28, 183, 210 
 Dorpfeld, Dr, 72-74, 148, 151, 152, 159, 
 
 210 
 Drapery, 127-13 1 
 
 Ebersole, Mr, quoted, 88, 104, 106 
 Egypt, art of, 202, 210 
 Eirene of Kephisodotus, 30, 31 
 Elgin, Lord, 109 note, no-n2, 121, 
 
 150, 156, 157, 199 
 Entablatures, 21-25, 61-63, 182, 183, 
 
 186, 187, 197 
 Epidaurus, 31, 140, 175, 196, 208 
 Epimachus, architect, 209 
 Erechtheum, the, i, 31, 75, 85, 109, 
 
 122, 140, 143, 155, 156, 171, 175, 176; 
 
 account of, 158-171 
 Erectheus, 121, 122 
 Erichthonios, 108 
 
INDEX. 
 
 215 
 
 Eros, 94, 96, 97, 1 1 1 
 Europa, 116 note 
 Eurydice, 30 
 Eusebius, 33 
 Evans, Dr, 202 
 
 Falkener, 2, 33, 39, 45 note, 124, 181- 
 
 183, 210 
 Fates, 115, 122-125, 128-131 
 Fellows, Sir C, 178-180, 182, 190, 197- 
 
 199 
 Fergusson, 4, 45 note, 50, 53, 55 
 Finial, a, 197 
 Friezes, 4, 22, 66, 67, 84-99, i°6, 126- 
 
 128, 150, 154, 176, 177, 181, 184, 199 
 Fiirtwangler, 54, 91 note, 97, 99, 117, 
 
 121-124, 126, 129, 130, 132, 133, 138, 
 
 140, 144, 160, 167, 171, I7S, 183, 207 
 
 Gardner, Professor, 52, 54, 105, 160 
 Gall's sketches, 137, 195, 201 
 Gems, 202 
 Genain, M., 163 
 Gerhard, 97 
 
 Glass beads, 168, 169, 200 
 Goodchild, J. E., 50, 51 
 Gorgons' heads, 141 note 
 Gutter, see Cymatium 
 
 H 
 
 Hadrian, 57, 209 
 Hagiatrida, 203 
 Halicarnassus, see Mausoleum 
 Harpy Tomb, the, 190, 198 
 Harrison, Miss, 109, 122 note, \2i/i,7iote, 
 
 140, 143, 150, 152 
 Hawkins, quoted, 97, 180, 181 
 Hebe, 126 
 Helen, in, 112 
 Helios, 124, 127 
 Hephaistos, 89, 96, 97, 124, 125, 151 ; 
 
 and see Theseum 
 Hera, 88, 91, 95-97, iio> 125, 126, 150 ; 
 
 and see Argos, Samos 
 Heracles, or Hercules, 110, 114, 116, 
 
 126 
 
 Hermes, 29-32, 38, 87, 94, 95, 97, 109, 
 
 no, 121, 122, 125 
 Hermogenes, architect, 194, 195 
 Herodotus, 11, 12, 34, 2n 
 Hippocamps, 141 
 
 Hippodarus, architect-engineer, 208 
 Hirschfeld, Dr, 195 
 Hogarth, Mr D. G., 10 
 Homer's Iliad, in 
 Horee, the, 124 
 Horses, 102, 104, 106, 115, 117, 125, 
 
 127, 131-133, 141 
 Huyot's sketches, 188, 193 
 Hypasthral lighting, 28, 73 
 
 I 
 
 Icarus, 156 
 
 Ictinos, architect, 82, 83, 172, 176, 208 
 
 Ilissos, the, 115, 122, 130, 133, 139; 
 
 temple of, i, 89, 153-158, 170 
 Ilithyia, 120, 125, 126, 128, 184 
 Inwood's drawings, 53, 156, 161-164, 
 
 166-170 
 Ion, 122 
 Ionia, 20, 22, 23, 53, 183, 192, 195, 204,_ 
 
 205, 211 
 Iris, 88, 94-96, 120, 121, 128, 130, 137, 
 
 138 
 
 K 
 
 Kallimachos, sculptor-architect, 69, 
 
 124 note, 171, 175, 207 
 Kekule, 183 
 Kephalos, 124, 126 
 Kephisodotus, 30, 31 
 Kirsch Vase, the, 126, 133, 134, 317, 
 
 140 
 Knossos, see Cnossos 
 Koldeway, 194 
 
 Laborde, 87, 89, no, 130, 178 
 Laloux, quoted, 41 
 Lamps, 202, 203 
 Lapiths, 108, 109 
 Latona, 122 
 
 Leake, 89, 91, 97, 103, 104, 106, 109, 
 117, 122, 127, 149, 175 
 
2l6 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Lebadea, 75, 171 
 
 Lechat, quoted, 72, 86, 141 
 
 Leukippos, daughters of, 185 
 
 Lighting, 28, 71, 73, 173, 174 
 
 Lion Gate at Mycenae, the, 202 
 
 Lion Tomb, see Cnidos 
 
 Lions, 66, 68, 80, 178 
 
 Lloyd, Watkiss, 42, 50 ?iote, 169 
 
 Louvre, the, 102, 129, 136, 146, 167, 
 
 185, 190, 191, 194 
 Lucas, 94, 113, 116 
 Lucian, 39, 40 
 Lycia, tombs of, 22, 66, 178, 190, 197- 
 
 199 
 Lysicrates, his monument, 126, 195, 
 
 205, 206 
 
 M 
 
 Madrid, 124, 125, 150 
 
 " Magistrates, the," 29, 31, 86, 94 
 
 Magne, L., 72, 76, 86, 92 
 
 Magnesia, temple of Diana at, 193- 
 
 195 
 Magnesian Gate at Ephesus, 2 
 Maidens, see Caryatides 
 Mars, see Ares 
 Marshall, Mr, 65 
 Matagenes, architect, 34 
 Mausoleum, the, i, 19, 20, 24, 32, 34, 
 
 184, 186-188; account of, 37-70; 
 
 and see Augustus, Hadrian 
 Mausolus, 37 ; his tomb, see Mau- 
 soleum 
 Mellin, M., quoted, 88, 89 
 Menelaus, 11, 112 
 Mercury, see Hermes 
 Messa, temple at, 194 
 Metal work on sculpture, 66, 67, 79, 
 
 86-90, 149, 179 
 Metopes, 100-105, 107, 108, 110-112, 
 
 138, 139, 176 
 Michaelis, 97, 1 09- 11 3, 133, 206 
 Middleton, Professor, 72, 205 
 Miletus, Apollo's temple at, 10, 12, 15, 
 
 19,22,28, 33-35, 50, 172, 186, 187, 
 
 190-193, 194 ; tomb at, 66 
 Minerva, see Athena 
 Mnesicles, architect, 85 
 Monopteral temples, 194 
 Moon, the, see Selene 
 Mouldings, 20-22, 25, 29, 33, 42, 60, 61, 
 
 77,79, 140, 156, 162, 163, 166, 170, 
 
 173, 175, 188, 189, 193, 200, 201 
 
 Mourning, attitude of, 95 note 
 
 Mummius, 91 
 
 Murray, Dr, 4, 6, 8, 11-18, 20, 25-29, 
 34, 49, 51, 85, 89, 95, 99, 103 note, 
 112, 116, 117, 126, 127, 143, 144, 182, 
 199 
 
 " Museum Marbles,'' 92, 102, 104, in 
 
 Mycenas, i, 199-203, 210 
 
 Mylasa, tomb at, 56 
 
 N 
 
 Naucratis, temple of Apollo at, 27 note, 
 
 175, 190-193 
 Nemesis, 176 
 Neoptolemus, 113 
 Nereid Monument, I, 23, 66, 95 note, 
 
 128, 167, 169, ig6, 198 ; account of, 
 
 178-185 
 Nereids, 126, 135, 178, 184, 185 
 Newton, Sir C, and PuUan, 4, 37, 38, 
 
 41, 43, 48, 50-54, 57, 59, 62-64, 66-68, 
 
 186, 189, 193, 195 
 Nike, 91, 120, 121, 130, 137-141, 143, 
 
 144 
 Nike Apteros, temple of, i, 81, 85, 105- 
 
 107, 147, 151, 153-158, 170, 197 
 Nile, statue of, 122 
 
 o 
 
 Octastyle-pseudodipteral temples, 194 
 Odeon, the, 196 
 Oldfield, Mr, quoted, 52, 54 
 Olympia, temple of Zeus at, 37, 89, 91, 
 92, 113, 116, 122, 160, 173, 175, 196 
 Orientation, 27 
 Orpheus, 30 
 Ovid, 109 
 Oxford, no, 136 
 
 Psonius, architect, 34, 35 
 
 Passtum, temple at, 194 
 
 Painted sculpture, 29, 32, 66-68, 86-90, 
 
 149. 153, 157, 168, 169, 183, 196, 19S, 
 
 199 
 Palaicaistro, 203 
 Palatine, the, 197 
 
INDEX. 
 
 217 
 
 Pan, 126 
 
 Pandosia, coin of, 126 
 
 Pantheon, the, 210 
 
 Pap worth, on Bassie, 173 
 
 Pares marble, 178 
 
 Pars, his drawings, 56, loi, 103, 105, 
 
 106, ii5, 135, 149, 155, 185 
 Parthenon, the, i, 60, 67, 147-149, 152, 
 
 154, 166, 167, 173, !74, 206, 207; 
 
 account of, 71-146 
 Pausanius, 40, 83, 90 note, 92, 115, 122, 
 
 153 note, 171-173, 190 
 Pediments, 114120, 122-124, 129-137 
 Pegasus, no 
 Peitho, 96, 97 
 Penelope, 95 note 
 Penrose, Mr, 42, 58-60, 72, 73, 75-78, 
 
 80, 81, 86, 89, 91, 147, 148, 150, 160, 
 162, 1 86, 204, 205 
 
 Pergamon collection, Berlin, 22, 93, 
 130, 141, 143, 144, 185, 194 
 
 Pergamos, 4, 23, 141 
 
 Pericles, 69, 81-85, 152, 208 
 
 Perrot and Chipiez, 200 
 
 Persephone, 119, 124, 128 
 
 Petersen, 52, 109, 159, 167, 171 
 
 Petrie, Mr Flinders, 210 
 
 Phaedra, 95 note 
 
 Phidias, sculptor-architect, 69, 71, 72, 
 83,97-99, i°7, 121, 123, 125, 130, 131, 
 134, 140, 141, 143, 207 ; school of,. 
 129, 136, 144, 146, 148, 167, 177 
 
 Philocles, architect, 85, 170, 171 
 
 Philippion at Olympia, the, 160 
 
 Philon, architect-engineer, 208 
 
 Phyteus, see Pythios 
 
 Pickering, Dr, 191 
 
 Pinara, tomb at, 1S2, 183 
 
 Pile, Professor, 42 
 
 Plans, 8, 1 1, 16-18, 25-29, 40, 46, 74, 75, 
 
 81, 159, 161, 172, 196 
 
 Pliny, 2-4, 8, 11, 12, 34, 37, 39, 44, 45, 
 48, 53-54, 56, 57, 189 
 
 Plutarch, 33, 83, 84, 207 
 
 Pococke, 128 note, 155 
 
 PolycHtos, sculptor-architect, 69, 207, 
 208 
 
 Pontremoli, 36 note, 190, 191, 204 
 
 Porticoes, 3, 8, 9, 22, 75, 77, 148, 158, 
 160 
 
 Poseidon, 96, no, ni, n5, n6, 125, 
 132, 133, 139, 140, 162 ; his chario- 
 teer, 138 
 
 Pettier, 144 
 
 Priene, temple of Athena at, i, 19, 20, 
 22, 32, 34, 41-43, 53 note, 58, 60-62, 
 65, 69, 70, 184, 193, 205 ; account 
 of, 185-189 
 
 Propylasa, the, i, 85, 87, 151-156, 189, 
 196 
 
 Ptolemaion, the, 195 
 
 Puchstein, O., 167, 169, 195 
 
 PuUan, see Newton 
 
 Pythios, sculptor-architect, 39, 41, 65, 
 69, 70, 186, 208 
 
 R 
 
 Randolph, 71 
 
 Rayet and Thomas, 20 note, 53 note, 
 
 185, 186, 188 
 Reinach, S., 97 note, 113, 125, 129 note, 
 
 136 note 
 Revett and Stuart, 154, 164 
 Rhamnus, temple, 88, 92, 148, 176 
 Rhoecus, architect, 34, 35, 207 
 Ricardo's drawings, 158 
 Robert, Dr, 97, 109, no, n2, n3, 124 
 Rodeck, ^Ir P., 205 note 
 Rome, 95, 122, 125, 209 
 Roofing, 6, 28, 78, 81, 82, 170, 172-176, 
 
 178 
 Ross, 156 
 Rotundas, 195-197 
 Ruskin, 98, 99, 145, I47, 185 
 
 Sabina, 135 
 
 Saglio, see Daremberg 
 
 Salamis, 190-193 
 
 Samos, temple of Hera at, 12, 34, 35, 
 
 45 note, 190, 195 note 
 Samothrace, 195, 196 
 Sappho, 136 
 Sardis, 20 
 
 Satyrus, architect, 41, 69 
 Sauer, Bruno, 87, n4, n7, n8, 122 
 
 note, 124, 127 note, 149, 150 . 
 Scharfs drawings, 178, r83, 198 
 Schultz, Mr, 164, 165 
 Schwerzek, 117, 120 
 
2IS 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Scopas, sculptor-architect, 29, 69, 132, 
 
 17s, 208 
 Scrolls, 21, 24, 25, 63, 64, 86, 140, 149, 
 
 175 
 Selene, or the Moon, 124, 127 
 Selinus, 95 note, 1 1 1 note 
 " Seven Wonders of the World," 37 
 Shields, 90-92, 143, 189 
 Sidon Sarcophagi, 23, 25 note, 65, 66 
 Six, Dr, 53, 65, 183, 184 
 Skias, the, 196, 207 
 Sligo, Marquis of, 199 
 Smintheium, the, 15, 195 
 Smirke, R., 161, 171 
 Smith, Mr Arthur, 52 
 Smith, Dr Cecil, 121, 140 
 Smith, Lieutenant, 39, 57, 59 
 Sophia, Sta., 56, 209 
 Sphinxes, 92, 198, 199 
 Spiers, Phene, 29 7tote, 173 note, 191 
 
 note, 199 
 Spon and Wheler, 191, 192 
 Steps, 4-6, 9, 14, 17 
 Stevenson, Mr, 52, 54 
 Strabo, 35 
 
 Strassburg papyrus, 85 
 Stuart Papers, 73, 75, 78, 96, 102, 149, 
 
 152, 154, 156, 162-164, 195. 196 
 Studniczka, 124 
 Sun, see Helios 
 Sunium, 148 
 
 Tavernier, 71 note 
 
 Tegea, temple at, 172, 175, 208 
 
 Teos, temple of Dionysos at, 15 note, 
 
 193-195 
 Texier's "Asia Minor," 183 
 Theodorus, sculptor-architect, 33-35, 
 
 207 
 Theseum, or temple of Hephaistos, 87, 
 
 89, 107, 114, i47->5i> 176 
 Theseus, 108, no note, 115, 125 
 Thiersch, F., 201, 202 
 Thomas, see Rayet 
 Thrasyllos monument, 197 
 Tiles, see Roofing 
 
 Tombs, see Cnidos, Lycia, Mausoleum 
 Tower of the Winds, the, 56, 196 
 Troy, fall of, 111-114 
 Trypho, architect, 209 
 
 u 
 
 Ulysses, 95 note 
 
 V 
 
 Vases, 99, 109, 113, 125, 135, 140 
 
 Venus of Melos, 178, and see Aphro- 
 dite 
 
 Viollet-le-Duc, 65 
 
 Visconti, 96, 98, 121, 122, 124, 125, 127 
 
 Vitruvius, 2, 21, 28, 34, 35, 38, 56, 69 
 note, 70, 175, 194, 204, 208, 209, 211 
 
 Volutes, 57, 59, 15s. 156, 204, 205 
 
 Vulci, 132 
 
 VuUiamy's drawings, 189, 193 
 
 w 
 
 Wages, 171 
 
 Waldstein, Dr, 29, 99, 133 143, 145, 
 
 162 
 Walter's " Greek Art," 52 
 Watt, Mr Cromar, 9 
 Weigand, Theo., 22, 88, 185 
 Wheler, 191, 192 
 Wilkins' " Prolusiones," 73 
 Wings, 137, 139, 140 
 Wood, 170, 173 
 Wood, Mr, and Diana's Temple, 2> 
 
 4-8, 10-13, 15-20, 24-29, 32, 60 
 Wordsworth, 151, 161 
 
 X 
 
 Xanthus, sec Nereid 
 
 Yoran (Apollo's Temple), 191 
 
 Zeus, 23, 72, 88, 94-96, 1 10, 124, '25> 
 140, 150 
 
 J'rititeii at The Darie 
 
 N Pkess, Edhilmr^h. 
 
|||||j|||{||lj:f 
 
 
 :;j?!!?7 
 
 iiiiiiiip: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 i 
 
 mm 
 
 i*fr'iWj