The Temple of Athena at Assos 9780198143826, 0198143826

Citation preview

I

O X F O R D MONOGRAPHS ON CLASSICAL A R C H A E O L O G Y Edited by JOHN BENNET

JOHN

J. J. C O U L T O N

DONNA

BOARDMAN

R. R. R. S M I T H

MARGARETA

KURTZ STEINBY

O X F O R D MONOGRAPHS ON CLASSICAL A R C H A E O L O G Y The series includes self-contained interpretative studies of the art and archaeology of the ancient Mediterranean world. Authoritative volumes cover subjects from the Bronze Age to late antiquity, with concentration on the central periods, areas, and material categories of the classical Greek and Roman world. Other titles in the series include: The Odrysian Kingdom of Thrace Orpheus Unmasked Ζ. H. Archibald Hellenistic Engraved Gems Dimitris Plantzos Naukratis Trade in Archaic Greece Astrid Möller The Late Mannerists in Athenian Vase-Painting Thomas Mannack Chryselephantine Statuary in the Ancient Mediterranean World Kenneth D. S. Lapatin Approaches to the Study of Attic Vases Beazley and Pottier Philippe Rouet The Protogeometric Aegean The Archaeology of the Late Eleventh and Tenth Centuries B C Irene S. Lemos Brickstamps of Constantinople Volume i: Text Volume 2: Illustrations Jonathan Bardili R o m a n Theatres A n Architectural Study Frank Sear Late Classical and Hellenistic Silver Plate from Macedonia Eleni Zimi Komast Dancers in Archaic Greek A r t Tyler Jo Smith

THE TEMPLE OF ATHENA AT ASSOS Bonna Daix Wescoat

I

OXFORD UNIVERSITY

PRESS

OXFORD U N I V E R S I T Y PRESS

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, 0x2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the U K and in certain other countries © Bonna Daix Wescoat 2012 The moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in 2012 Impression: 1 All rights reserved. N o part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available ISBN 978-0-19-814382-6 Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, C R o 4 Y Y Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website referenced in this work.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements List of Plates List of Figures Fold-out Figures List of Tables Technical Abbreviations

and Conventions

Bibliographic Abbreviations ι. Introduction 2. History of the Building, its Early Visitors, and its Excavation Descriptions of the temple by early travellers to Assos

vii ix xiii xvii xviii xix xxi ι 7 8

The American excavations, 1881-83

13

Subsequent research, 1896-2006

17

3. Building Materials and Technical Aspects of Construction

19

Materials

19

Technical aspects of construction

19

4. Description and Reconstruction of the Original Building

31

Access and orientation

31

Foundation and krepis

31

Restored plan

38

Elevation of the peristasis

40

Colonnade

41

Entablature

56

Geison and tympanon

75

Dimensions of the elevation in light of Clarke's proposed Assian foot measurement

82

Ceiling and roof

83

Elevation of the sekos

90

5. Major Repairs

100

Evidence for the repairs

100

Repairs to the colonnade and entablature

101

Repairs to the roof

122

6. Hellenistic Renovations

125

7. The Sculpture

127

Introduction Sculptured epistyle

127 133

Reliefs A i and A2: confronted sphinxes

133

Reliefs A 1 4 and A 1 5 : battle of rival bulls

138

Reliefs A 9 to Α 1 3 : lions savaging prey

141

Reliefs A 5 - A 8 : the rout of the centaurs on Mt Pholoe

151

Relief A3 : Herakles wrestling Triton

158

Relief A4: symposion

164

vi

TABLE OF

CONTENTS

Sculptured metopes

173

Metope M3: confronted sphinxes

173

Metope M4: boar

174

Metope M7: galloping centaur

175

Metope M5: Europe on the Zeus Bull

176

Metope M8: quarrelling heroes

179

Metope M i : chase scene

181

Metope M i o : supplication scene

184

Metope M2: runners

186

Metope M6: horse legs

188

Metope M9: horse and rider

188

Iconographie themes 8. Arrangement of the Sculpture

190 192

Placement of the sculptured epistyle blocks

192

Placement of the sculptured metopes

198

9. Significance of the Temple within the Development of Archaic Architecture and Architectural Decoration

201

Historical circumstances

201

Archaeological context

202

Doric architecture and northeast Greece

203

The temple within the context of archaic architecture

204

Anatolian, East Greek, and Aegean connections

225

Significant architectural features of the first major repair

231

Chronological and regional implications of the architectural sculpture

232

Reconciling the evidence

235

List of References for the Tables

267

APPENDICES I. Catalogue of Sculptured Blocks II. Concordance for Catalogue Numbers of Sculptured Blocks

270 277

III. Earlier Proposals for the Arrangement of the Sculptured Epistyle

278

IV. Catalogue of Other Important Architectural Material from the Akropolis

284

Works

293

Index

Cited

311

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to many colleagues, friends, and institutions for their support over the long history of this project on the Temple of Athena at Assos. M y interest in the temple began with a suggestion made by Sir John Boardman in passing, quite literally, a cast of the relief of symposiasts (our A4) in the O x f o r d Cast Gallery. I was fortunate in my early years at O x f o r d to work with both Sir John and Martin Robertson, but m y greatest debt, of course, remains to Jim Coulton, whose sharp, practical, and elegant mind was a strong guiding force both at the time I was writing my D.Phil, and in subsequent years. U m i t Serdaroglu kindly allowed me to participate in the renewed research and excavations at Assos in the 1980s and 1990s. Efforts in the region of the temple brought to light a great deal of material that I am grateful to be able to include here. The remains of the temple are now in four museums on three continents: Alain Pasquier of the Musée du Louvre, Nu§in Asgari of the Istanbul Archaeology Museums, and §akire Erkahnli of the Çanakkale Archaeological Museum kindly allowed me to study, measure, and photograph the sculptured reliefs in their collections. Hearty thanks go as well to Cornelius Vermeule III, John Herrmann, and Mary C o m s t o c k of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, w h o not only allowed me to study all the material from Assos, but also shared with me the original notes and drawings of Joseph Thacher Clarke and Francis Henry Bacon. A t Assos I benefitted from generous help. Mrs C e g d e m Turker of the Çanakkale Archaeological Museum kindly aided in measuring the temple and its blocks while serving as m y representative. Emory graduate students Lisa Burkhalter, Robert Thurlow, and D a w n Smith also helped to measure and record parts of the temple. I am especially indebted to Jenk Vural Yurdatap, then a student at K a d i k ö y Anadolu Lisesi, whose help was invaluable and whose company was delightful. A t Emory, graduate students A m y Sowder, Cecily Boles, Alison Hight, and D e v o n Stewart, and SIRE (Scholarly Inquiry and Research at Emory) students Desirée Gonzales, Alexandra Morrison, and Chase Jordan, as well as Rebecca Levitan helped with important aspects of completing the manuscript. Many colleagues were kind enough to serve as listeners, readers, and critiquers of drawings; I am especially grateful to Frederick Cooper, Robin Rhodes, Manolis Korres, Eric 0 s t b y , Klaus Nohlen, Wolf Koenigs, Margaret Miles, and N a n c y Klein for discussing aspects of the architecture with me; to Clemente Marconi, Judith Barringer, Jasper Gaunt, Rush Rehm, Sheramy Bundrick, John Oakley, and Thomas Carpenter for their insights on aspects of the sculpture; to Cynthia Patterson for her comments on historical circumstance; to Brian Rose for his observations on archaeological context; and to Alan Johnston for his w o r k on the inscribed capital. M y thanks also to friends and colleagues w h o helped and encouraged me along the way, including Thomas Lyman, Molly Michala Lyman, James R. McCredie, Sarah McPhee, James Meyer, Kathleen Carroll, Robert Ousterhout, C l a y t o n Spencer, Steven Holtzman, A n d r e w Robertson, and Ashton Carter. Needless to say, the peculiarities of interpretation remain the reflection of my o w n intellectual obstinacy, and the mistakes will be mine as well. I drew and inked the field drawings, block drawings, and reconstructions presented here, with contributions on some of the fold-out figures from Robert Wurtheimer (also responsible for drafting Figures 10, 12, 13, and 52), Brian E Jan, Y o n g K. Kim, Leah Solk, and H u g h H. W. Green. Claire Zimmerman helped me design the layout of the drawings,

Vili

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

and Carol Stein provided invaluable advice on the best translation from ink on mylar to digital file. Michael C . Page generously made the new map of the Troad. I also took the photographs; my thanks to Danny Smart for printing many of them and to Frank Jackson for key help with scanning negatives. A m y Benson Brown and Maggie Popkin reviewed the manuscript and provided innumerable suggestions that have improved it; Brian Hughes helped with proofreading. I owe a great deal to Hilary O'Shea, D o r o t h y McCarthy, Taryn Campbell, Kathleen Fearn, and Desirée Kellerman of O x f o r d University Press for their kind and diligent w o r k in seeing the manuscript to publication. Having had the good fortune to w o r k with Phyllis Williams Lehmann, William L. MacDonald, and Helen Searing as an undergraduate at Smith College, I was lucky enough to receive a Marshall Scholarship to continue study in England. I remain indebted to Smith College and the Marshall A i d Commemoration Commission for launching me on my way. A grant from the Craven Committee of O x f o r d University helped with my first trip to Assos. Subsequent summer research grants from the Meyerstein Fund, Brasenose College O x f o r d , the Jean Fine Spahr Scholarship for Graduates of Smith College, the American Research Institute in Turkey, the American Philosophical Society, and the American Council of Learned Societies, as well as E m o r y University Research C o m mittee funds, allowed me to w o r k at Assos over several summers in the 1980s and 1990s. A Getty Postdoctoral Fellowship in A r t History and the Humanities, taken at Harvard University, underwrote the generous gift of time to write. Some of the drawings were completed during a year as N E H Rome Prize Fellow at the American Academy in Rome. A grant from Emory's University Research Committee provided the subvention that allowed for the large-scale drawings in this volume. Much of this book revolves around measure and comparison. Its existence, however, relies on the immeasurable and the incomparable support I have received from m y family. The gentle encouragement of my parents, James and Bonna B. Wescoat; the creative discussions with my siblings, Jim, Martha, and Andrew; and the enduring interest, patience, and fortitude of my husband, Bailey Green, and our children, Hugh and Abigail, surpass all for which anyone could hope. Bonna D . Wescoat Palaiopolis, Samothrace 2009

LIST OF PLATES ι a.

View of Assos from the north, with Pa§akoy in the foreground and Lesbos in the background. Photograph by author.

ib. ic.

View of Assos from the west, with reconstructed columns from the Temple of Athena visible on the summit. Photograph by author. View of Assos from the sea, with reconstructed columns of the temple visible from the summit. Photograph by author.

id.

View of the akropolis from the south, with the theatre in the foreground and the agora in the middle ground. Photograph by author.

2.

Krepidoma of the temple from the north, as exposed in 1983, with remains of Byzantine houses in the middle ground. Photograph by author.

3a.

Northeast corner of the krepidoma, from the north, showing dressed-down bedrock foundation and first step. Photograph by author.

3b.

Southwest corner of the temple, showing rusticated masonry and paving flags. Photograph by author.

4.

Sounding made in the pteron at the southwest corner, October 1987. Photograph by author.

5.

Southern cliffs of the akropolis preserving quarry marks. Photograph by author.

6.

Bedrock directly north of temple, with remains of wedge-shaped cuttings. Photograph by author.

7.

Bedrock north of temple, with evidence of quarrying. Photograph by author.

8.

Modern quarrying on the south cliffs of the akropolis. Photograph by author.

9.

Tooling on the top of the first step course. Photograph by author.

10.

Tooling on the top surface of column drum C D 4 . Photograph by author.

11.

Marks of the drove on the echinus of capital C 1 7 . Photograph by author.

12.

Epistyle backer A B 7 ; point and tooth-head hammer marks. Photograph by author.

13.

Southeast corner of the euthynteria with pry marks for first step-course. Photograph by author.

14.

Clamp cutting on the euthynteria near the southwest corner. Photograph by author.

15.

Clamp cutting on stylobate block S66. Photograph by author.

16.

Northern first step course; clamp preserved in situ. Photograph by author.

17.

Northern first step course; clamp and protective fillets preserved in situ. Photograph by author.

18.

Northern first step course; clamp and wedge-shaped hole preserved in situ. Photograph by author.

19.

Column drum C D 6 4 with mason's mark. Photograph by author.

20.

C o l u m n drum C D 3 7 with mason's mark. Photograph by author.

21.

C o l u m n drum C D 59 with mason's mark. Photograph by author.

22.

Epistyle block A 1 6 with mason's mark, omikron. Photograph by author.

23.

Epistyle block A32 with mason's mark,psi. Photograph by author.

xii

LIST OF PLATES 24. 25.

Epistyle block A 3 6 w i t h mason's mark, iota. Photograph by author. Epistyle backing block A B 10 with mason's mark, upsilon, nu, or

lambda.

Photograph b y author. 26.

Epistyle backing block A B 16 with mason's mark, tau. Photograph b y author.

27.

V i e w of the switch-back road leading up to the akropolis f r o m the east. Photograph b y author.

28.

Detail of the foundations for the road leading toward the akropolis f r o m the east.

29.

Southwest corner of the krepis f r o m the west, showing rusticated masonry.

Photograph b y author. Photograph b y author. 30.

Southwest corner of the krepis f r o m the south, showing rusticated masonry. Photograph by author.

31a.

Detail of rusticated masonry along the south flank. Photograph b y author.

31b.

Detail of rusticated masonry and juncture with bedrock along south side.

31c.

Detail of rusticated masonry along the south flank. Photograph b y author.

32.

V i e w of the foundations for the south anta wall and pronaos column, f r o m

Photograph by author.

the south. Photograph b y author. 33.

C o l u m n drum C D 3 8 , showing the effect of erosion. Photograph by author.

34.

H o l l o w e d - o u t c o l u m n drum used as a mortar b y the villagers. Photograph

35.

Capital C i . Photograph b y author.

36.

Capital C 1 2 (right) and C 1 3 (left). Photograph by author.

b y author.

37.

Capital C 5 . Photograph by author.

38.

Capital C 3 1 . Photograph by author.

39.

Capital C 4 , with 18 flutes. Photograph b y author.

40.

Capital C24, s h o w i n g treatment of bed surface. Photograph by author.

41.

Capital C23, s h o w i n g treatment of top surface. Photograph b y author.

42.

Capital C 1 5 , showing treatment of top surface. Photograph by author.

43.

Capita] C 1 2 , with holes for metal attachment. Photograph b y author.

44a. 44b. 45.

Capital C 1 0 , w i t h inscription on abacus. Photograph by author. Capital C 1 0 , detail of inscription. Photograph by author. Fragments of several epistyle blocks recovered near the southwest corner of the temple. In the foreground, A36a and b. Photograph b y author.

46. 47a.

Epistyle block A42. Photograph by author. Epistyle block A28, showing stain mark left b y the capital on the bed surface. Photograph by author.

47b.

Epistyle block A 2 1 , showing treatment of back surface, including quarry marks. Photograph b y author.

48.

Triglyph block T8. Photograph b y author.

49.

Triglyph block T2, side view. Photograph b y author.

50.

Triglyph blocks T 1 2 and T 1 3 . Photograph b y author.

51.

Coi'ner epistyle backing block A B 12. Photograph by author.

52.

Epistyle backing block A B 2 . Photograph b y author.

53.

Southern geison block L G i , side view. Photograph b y author.

xii L I S T O F P L A T E S 54·

Southern geison block L G 1 2 . Photograph by author.

55·

Southern geison block L G 2 5 . Photograph by author.

5 6.

End of the southeast corner geison block. Photograph by author.

57·

Remains of an antefix. Photograph b y author.

a,b.

Fragment of sima tile. Photograph by author.

59·

Remains of ornamental eaves tile. Photograph by author.

6o.

Lion's head waterspout. C o u r t e s y M u s e u m of Fine Arts, Boston.

6i.

Fragment B23, possibly belonging to the anta capital. Photograph b y author.

6 2.

Wall block W 3 7 . Photograph by author.

63.

Wall block W50. Photograph b y author.

64.

Wall block W 1 5 . Photograph by author.

65.

Wall block W 5 . Photograph b y author.

66.

Fragment of the northwest corner geison block. Photograph b y author.

; 7 a.

Southwest corner geison block. Photograph b y author.

7b.

Southwest corner geison block, top surface. Photograph b y author.

68.

T w o fragments of horizontal geison block H G 9 , s h o w i n g U-shaped lifting channel and socket. Photograph b y author.

69.

T o p surface of horizontal geison block H G 7 . Photograph by author.

70.

T y m p a n o n block Tp3, front side. Photograph b y author.

71·

T y m p a n o n block Tp3, back side. Photograph b y author.

72.

T y m p a n o n blocks Tp6 and T p 7 , as rebuilt in the late fortification wall. Photograph b y author.

73·

T y m p a n o n block T p j , showing residual clamp cuttings and a nail hole f o r the roof tile. Photograph b y author.

74·

Raking geison block R G 2 . Photograph b y author.

75·

Raking geison block R G 1 3 , detail of the profile. Photograph by author.

76.

Relief A i : C o n f r o n t e d sphinxes. C o u r t e s y Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

77·

Relief A i : C o n f r o n t e d sphinxes. Original right fragment in Istanbul with cast of remains n o w in Boston. C o u r t e s y Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Istanbul.

78.

Relief A z : C o n f r o n t e d sphinxes. Fragments in Istanbul. C o u r t e s y Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Istanbul.

79·

Relief A2: C o n f r o n t e d sphinxes. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

80.

Relief Α 1 4 : T w o bulls locking horns. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

81.

Relief A 1 5 : T w o bulls locking horns. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

82.

Relief A9: Lioness bringing d o w n a bull. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

83.

Relief A n : Lioness attacking a deer. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

84.

Relief A i o : L i o n devouring supine deer. C o u r t e s y Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Istanbul.

85.

Relief A i o : L i o n and lioness devouring supine deer. Photograph by author.

86.

Relief A i o : detail. Photograph by author.

87.

Relief A 1 2 : L i o n attacking a stag. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

88.

Relief Α 1 2 : detail. Photograph by author.

89.

Relief A 1 3 : L i o n harassing a boar, w i t h metopes M 2 (left) and M5 (right). C o u r t e s y Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Istanbul.

xii

LIST OF PLATES 90.

Relief A i 3 a : detail. Photograph by author.

91.

Relief A i ß b : Lion squaring off w i t h boar. Photograph b y author.

92.

Relief A 5 : Herakles pursuing human-legged centaurs. C o u r t e s y M u s e u m of Fine Arts, Boston.

93.

Relief A6: Galloping centaurs, with metopes M8 (left) and M i (right). C o u r t e s y Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Istanbul.

94.

Relief A 7 : Galloping centaurs. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

95a.

Relief A8: Galloping centaurs. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

95 b.

Relief A8: detail of central centaur. Photograph b y author.

96.

Relief A48: Galloping centaurs. Photograph b y author.

97.

Relief A48: detail. Photograph by author.

98.

Relief A3: Herakles wrestling Triton. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

99.

Relief A 3 : Herakles wrestling Triton, oblique view. Photograph b y author.

100a.

Relief A 3 : detail of Herakles and Triton. Photograph by author.

100b.

Relief A 3 : detail of central Nereids, Triton's fishy body, and Herakles. Photograph by author.

100c. 101.

Relief A 3 : detail of fleeing Nereids. Photograph by author. Relief A4: Symposion. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

102a.

Relief A4: detail of symposiasts, right side. Photograph b y author.

102b.

Relief A4: detail of left t w o symposiasts. Photograph b y author.

102c.

Relief A4: detail of servant and left symposiast. Photograph b y author.

103.

M e t o p e M3: C o n f r o n t e d sphinxes. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

104.

M e t o p e M4: Boar. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

105a.

M e t o p e M 7 : Centaur. C o u r t e s y Musée du Louvre.

105b.

M e t o p e M 7 : Centaur, seen f r o m below. Photograph by author.

106.

M e t o p e M5: Europe on the Zeus Bull. Photograph by author.

107.

M e t o p e M8: Quarrelling heroes. Photograph by author.

108.

M e t o p e M r : Chase. Photograph by author.

109.

M e t o p e M2: Runners. Photograph b y author.

110a.

M e t o p e M i o : Three-figured composition. Photograph b y author,

nob.

M e t o p e M i o : Three-figured composition, seen frontally. Photograph by author.

HI.

M e t o p e M9: Rider on horseback. Photograph by author.

112.

M e t o p e M6: Equine hind hoofs. C o u r t e s y Istanbul Archaeological Museum.

LIST OF FIGURES ι.

Map of the Troad; Michael C . Page.

2

2.

Site plan after Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 139.

3

3.

C o i n image of Athena Polias, Waddington tetradrachm reverse, Cabinet

4.

East façade of the temple, proposed by Charles Texier; Texier 1849, pi. 112.

11

5.

Plan of the temple, based on J. T. Clarke's field drawing; after Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 141.

12

Reconstructed east elevation of the temple, proposed by J. T. Clarke; after Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey, p. 145.

13

des Médailles; after Babelon vol. 2, pi. 163,28.

6. 7.

7

Reconstruction of the temple, proposed by Felix Sartiaux; after Sartiaux 1915, p. 191, fig. 32.

14

8.

Detail of southwest corner of krepis showing area of excavation.

15

9.

Sections through excavated trench in southwest corner.

16

10.

Isometric reconstruction of setting the southern geison.

21

11.

Different types of cutting for the lifting hooks on the southern geison: a) L G 1 2 ; b) L G 4 ; c) LG36; d) L G 1 5 .

22

12.

Isometric reconstruction of setting the northern geison.

23

13.

Isometric reconstruction of setting the epistyle.

25

14.

First step, N 1 0 / 1 1 E , illustrating setting and clamping techniques.

26

15.

Clamp cuttings on the krepis: a) euthynteria, W i S ; b) S5; c) Si.

27

16.

Mason's marks on the column drums.

29

17.

Mason's marks on epistyle facers and backers.

30

18.

N e w l y recovered southern and western stylobate blocks S14, Si8, S62/S72, S2, and S61.

36

19.

N e w l y recovered eastern stylobate blocks S4, S36, S21, S69, Si 5, and S12.

37

20.

C o l u m n drums from the four different positions: C D 3 6 , C D 1 2 , C D 5 , and C D 4 .

42

21.

C o l u m n drums C D 4 2 and C D 4 3 , with cuttings, possibly for a screen.

43

22.

Column drum C D 10 and capital C4, belonging to a column with 18 flutes.

44

23.

Schematic diminution of column drums.

46

24.

Restored column.

47

Find-spots of the capitals.

48

25. 26a.

26b.

Representative capitals from the three groups: C18, C 5 , C i ; diminution of the flute width from the bottom of the shaft to the neck of the capital.

49

Inscribed capital C 1 0 .

50

27.

Profile of Group A capital, C24, overlain on the profile of Group C capital, C 3 .

51

28.

Graph of the ratio of C a p H t — A b H t to EchHt, showing different capital groups.

55

29.

Find-spots of epistyle blocks.

57

30.

Plain epistyle blocks A36, A31/32/35.

61

31.

Plain epistyle blocks A30/53, A28/29.

62

xiv

LIST OF FIGURES

32.

Plain epistyle blocks A 1 6 , A22, A25.

63

33.

Plain epistyle block A21/33.

64

34.

Find-spots of sculptured metopes.

66

35.

Triglyphs, T 6 , T 8 , T i .

68

36.

Backing blocks f o r the epistyle A B 5, A B ι.

70

37.

Backing blocks f o r the epistyle A B 6 , A B 3 , A B 16.

71

38.

Backing blocks f o r the epistyle A B 12, A B 18.

72

39.

Backing blocks for the epistyle A B 17, A B 10, A B 2 .

73

40.

Backing block for the epistyle A B 13; possible backing blocks for the frieze B i 5 , Β ι ι , B19.

41a.

U p p e r surfaces of corner capitals C24, C 2 , and C 9 , s h o w i n g the construction of the epistyle.

41b.

74 76

Plan oblique s h o w i n g the construction of the southwest corner of the epistyle.

77

42.

Find-spots of lateral geison blocks.

78

43.

Lateral geison block L G 2 1 , f r o m the southern side.

80

44.

Southeast corner geison block.

81

45.

Corinthian pan tiles R T i , RT2, RT5, RT9; Corinthian pan tiles RT3, RT4, R T 1 4 , R T 1 5 , R T 1 6 ; Corinthian cover tiles R T 1 2 , R T 1 1 , RT6; Lakonian cover tiles R T 7 , RT8.

84

46a.

Antefix: actual state, above; restored, below.

86

46b.

Fragment of raking sima; three possible restorations.

87

46c.

Eaves tile: actual state, above; restored, below.

88

47.

Restored central akroterion.

89

48.

Southern pronaos support, showing weather markings. T h e position of the rotated column drum is marked in grey. Dashed lines represent the position of the epistyle.

91

49.

B l o c k B23, so-called anta capital.

92

50.

Wall blocks W 5 , W 6 , W 2 7 , W 1 5 , W 1 8 , W50, W 3 7 .

95

51.

Large ashlar blocks Β 1 7 , W 3 2, W 3 3.

96

52.

Reconstruction of the threshold and door jambs.

98

53.

B l o c k B24, tuff repair to the hawksbeak c r o w n moulding of the horizontal geison.

101

54.

Undecorated epistyle block A42.

102

55.

Lateral geison block L G 2 4 , f r o m the northern side.

104

56.

Southwestern and northwestern corner geison blocks.

106

57.

Northeastern corner geison block.

107

58.

Find-spots of horizontal geison blocks.

109

59.

Horizontal geison blocks f r o m eastern side: H G i , H G 2 , H G 4 , H G 1 7 .

no

60.

Horizontal geison blocks from the western side: H G 6 , H G 7 , H G 9 .

HI

61.

Profiles of hawksbeak c r o w n on the geison: a) S E C G horizontal profile close to the corner; b) S E C G horizontal profile; c) N W C G profile along the flank; d) N W C G profile along flank close to the façade; e) N W C G profile of horizontal crown; f) R G i 1; g) R G 1 3 ; h) N W C G raking profile.

115

62.

Find-spots of t y m p a n o n blocks.

116

63.

T y m p a n o n blocks Τ ρ ί ο , T p i 3 , T p i 2 , Tp2.

117

xiv L I S T O F F I G U R E S 64·

T y m p a n o n blocks Tp3, T p 4 .

65-

T y m p a n o n blocks T p j , Tp8.

66.

Raking geison blocks R G 4 , R G 3 , R G 5 , and profiles of the hawksbeak on the soffit.

6γ.

A i : C o n f r o n t e d sphinxes.

68.

A i : C o n f r o n t e d sphinxes.

69-

Α 1 4 : T w o bulls locking horns.

7°·

A 1 5 : T w o bulls locking horns.

71·

A9: Lioness bringing d o w n a bull.

72·

A i o : Lion and lioness devouring a supine deer.

73·

A n : Seated lion; lioness attacking a deer.

74·

A 1 2 : L i o n bringing d o w n a stag.

75-

A 1 3 : T w o lions harassing a boar.

76-

Ay. Herakles pursuing human-legged centaurs.

77·

A 6 : Galloping centaurs.

78.

Ay: Galloping centaurs.

79·

A8/48: Galloping centaurs.

8ο.

A 3 : Herakles wrestling Triton.

8ι.

A4: F o u r men at symposion.

82.

M3: C o n f r o n t e d sphinxes.

83.

M4: Grazing boar.

84.

M 7 : Galloping centaur.

85·

M5: Europe on the Zeus Bull.

86.

M8: Quarrelling heroes.

87.

M i : Chase; Peleus Chasing Thetis (?)

88.

M i o : Supplication scene with three

§9-

M2: T w o runners.

9°·

M 6 and M9: M a n on horseback.

9ΐ.

C o m p a r i s o n of profiles of the hawksbeak geison c r o w n , after Shoe 1936, pis. L.7, LIII.I,

2, 4, 7, 8,

11;

figures.

Schwandner 1985, fig. 76; Schuller 1991, fig. 31:

1)

Temple of Artemis, K o r k y r a ; 2) Building A , Athens; 3) Peisistratid Telesterion, Eleusis; 4) Temple of A p o l l o , Eretria; 5) A k r o p o l i s M u s e u m , A t h e n s 7613; 6 and 7) Syracusan Treasury, O l y m p i a (called Selinuntine Treasury by Shoe); 8) Second Temple of Hera Akraia, Perachora; 9) Temple of Artemis, Paros; 10) Tegea M u s e u m (after Shoe, but not the Temple of Artemis Knakeatis, as listed b y Shoe). Below, profiles of hawksbeak c r o w n f r o m the temple at Assos: a) S E C G horizontal profile close to the corner; b) S E C G horizontal profile; c) N W C G profile along the flank; d) N W C G profile along flank close to the façade; e) N W C G profile of horizontal crown; f) R G i 1; g) R G 1 3 ; h) N W C G raking profile. 92.

C o m p a r i s o n of the restored elevations, scaled to the same w i d t h at the entablature and aligned at the level of the epistyle: a.) Η - T e m p l e in Athens (after Schuchhardt 1935, fig. 9); b.) Temple of A t h e n a at Assos; c.) O l d Temple of Athena, A t h e n s (after Riemann 1950, fig. 1); d.) Temple D at Selinous (after H u l o t and Fougères 1910, fig. 234); e.) Tavole Paladine at Metapontion (after Mertens 2006, fig. 364); f.) Temple of Athena at Makistos (after Nakasis 2004, pl. XII).

xiv 93.

LIST OF FIGURES Profiles of hawksbeaks on the soffit of the raking geison, after Shoe 1936, pi. L I I . i , 3, 4, 7, 8; and Schuller 1991, fig. 3 1 : 1 ) O l d Temple of Athena, Athens; 2) Second Temple of Hera Akraia, Perachora; 3) Temple of Athena, Assos; 4) Second Temple of Aphaia, Aegina; 5) Megarian Treasury, O l y m p i a ;

94.

6) Athenian Treasury, Delphi; 7) Temple of Artemis, Paros.

234

Clarke's proposal for the reconstruction of the sculptured epistyle.

279

95.

Sartiaux's first proposal for the reconstruction of the sculptured epistyle.

281

96.

Sartiaux's second proposal for the reconstruction of the sculptured epistyle.

282

97.

B l o c k Β ι, found east of the temple.

287

98.

B l o c k B2 (above), f o u n d east of the temple. B20 (below), originally belonging to the geison but reçut for a different purpose.

288

99.

Rusticated blocks B3, B i 8 , B21, B5, found east of the temple.

289

B l o c k B4 (above), possibly a door jamb. B l o c k B22 (lower left) and block B 1 6 (lower right), found east of the temple.

290

100. 101.

B l o c k B8 (above), possibly reworked. B l o c k B9 (middle), part of a w i n d o w frame? Block Β 1 4 (below) with lewis cutting, found on the akropolis but not belonging to the temple.

291

FOLD-OUT FIGURES ι.

Actual state plan, 1986.

2.

State elevation from the west (above) and from the south (below).

3.

Schematic state plan with dimensions of all blocks in situ, and evidence for setting the first step-course.

4.

Plan of the stylobate distinguishing blocks in situ, blocks in situ or known at the time of the American excavation, and newly discovered blocks that can be restored to their original positions.

5.

Restored plan.

6.

Profiles of the capitals.

7.

Plan view of capital tops showing position of epistyle blocks.

8.

Proposed position of blocks in the entablature of the façades.

9a.

Proposed position of blocks in the entablature of the flanks.

9b.

Alternative position of blocks in the entablature of the flanks at the east

10.

Proposed position of blocks in the entablature of the pronaos.

11.

Plan view of geison blocks.

12.

Proposed position of blocks in the tympana.

13.

Reconstructed east façade.

14.

Split lateral section through the pteron and cella showing the original

end of the building.

(south) and repaired (north) design of the pronaos and flanks. 15.

Reconstructed west façade.

16.

Reconstructed pronaos, three options.

17.

Reconstructed south elevation.

18.

Reconstructed north elevation.

LIST OF TABLES ι a.

Dimensions of stylobate blocks

34

ib.

Proposed plans for the axial spacing on the façades

39

Dimensions of column drums

45

Dimensions of capitals

52

2. 3a. 3 b.

Proportions of capitals

53

3c.

Features of epistyle indicated on capitals

54

4a.

Dimensions of epistyle blocks

58

4b.

Technical markings on epistyle blocks

59

4c.

Possible joins between decorated epistyle blocks

60

Dimensions of metopes

66

6.

Dimensions of triglyphs

67

7.

Dimensions of epistyle backers

75

8.

Dimensions of southern geison blocks

79

9.

Dimensions of wall blocks

5.

94

10.

Dimensions of northern geison blocks

105

11.

Dimensions of horizontal geison blocks

112

Dimensions of tympanon blocks

120

12a. 12b.

Original geison features preserved on tympanon blocks

120

Dimensions of raking geison blocks

122

14a.

Features of archaic doric temple plans, mainland and islands

241

14b.

Features of archaic doric temple plans, Magna Graecia and Sicily

243

13.

15 a.

Proportional relationships of archaic Doric temple plans, mainland and islands

245

15 b.

Proportional relationships of archaic Doric temple plans, Magna Graecia and Sicily

247

16a.

Proportions of archaic columns, mainland and islands

249

16b.

Proportions of archaic columns, Magna Graecia and Sicily

251

17a.

Proportions of archaic capitals, mainland and islands

252

17b.

Proportions of archaic capitals, Magna Graecia and Sicily

254

18a.

Features of the epistyle and frieze, mainland and islands

255

18b.

Features of the epistyle and frieze, Magna Graecia and Sicily

257

19a.

Proportions of the epistyle and frieze, mainland and islands

259

19b.

Proportions of the epistyle and frieze, Magna Graecia and Sicily

261

20a.

Features and proportions of the geison, mainland and islands

262

20b.

Features and proportions of the geison, Magna Graecia and Sicily

264

21 a.

Geison mouldings, mainland and islands

265

2ib.

Geison mouldings, Magna Graecia and Sicily

266

TECHNICAL ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVENTIONS

BLOCK

CODES

The following codes are used to classify blocks found on the akropolis: A AB Β C CD HG LG M RG RT S Τ Typ W

epistyle (architrave) facers epistyle (architrave) backers miscellaneous blocks found on the akropolis, some of which clearly do not belong to the temple, and others whose assignment remains in question capital column drum horizontal geison block lateral geison block metope raking geison block roof tile stylobate block triglyph tympanon wall block

ABBREVIATIONS

USED

IN T H E

TABLES

The following abbreviations and conventions are used in Tables 1 - 2 1 : Ab Ann Β b c. Cap col(s) Ech F Dim Ht L LD LT Ν

abacus annulets back buried approximately (within 0.005 capital column(s) echinus face rate of diminution height length lower diameter lower taenia neck

m·)

XX

T E C H N I C A L A B B R E V I A T I O N S AND

CONVENTIONS

>

not preserved projection from the vertical side thickness triglyph upper diameter upper taenia width indicates direction of construction based on positive evidence indicates direction of construction based on negative evidence for Tables 1 - 1 3 , indicates the dimension is inclusive of more than one measurement for Tables 14-21, indicates a restored dimension or feature, for which there is firm evidence dimension calculated across broken but joining fragments dimension incomplete

?

evidence uncertain

np Proj S Th Trig UD UT W L —• R [ L - >R]

[] [] 0

The find-spot of each block is located according to a grid overlaid on Clarke's site plan of the akropolis (see, e.g. Fig. 25). The grid serves to illustrate general relationships, bearing in mind that the ancient material was much moved about by the subsequent dwellers, even as late as the mid-twentieth century. The tables include the important dimensions and certain features of all identifiable temple blocks. Measurements are recorded to the third decimal except in instances where it would suggest a false accuracy, for example in the case of the projecting back surface of the epistyle blocks. While only representative examples from each course are included in full block drawings, drawings of virtually all the extant blocks on the akropolis are included in the fold-out plates of the reconstructed courses. The architectural material surviving on the akropolis indicates additional monuments. Appendix IV discusses other important andesite blocks found on the akropolis that are not part of the temple. The shorthand nomenclature for the restored position of a block or column first indicates the side, then the position from a particular direction; thus W2S indicates a position on the west side, second from the south. The site is described as it was until 1986, prior to the restoration campaigns, which have necessarily dramatically altered the site and access to the remains.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC ABBREVIATIONS References in the notes are given in the author-date-page format. For references in standard works such as ABV, ARV, and CorVP, I use the traditional form of citation with page number followed by object number. AA ABL ABV ARV2 ActaArchArtHist Agora AJA AM AMS AntK ArchCl Arch De It ArchEph ASAtene AttiCSMG A ttiMagna Grecia AvP AZ Babelon Β ABesch BCH BMMA BMFA BSA CAH C o o k , Zeus Corinth CorVP CVA DL

Archäologischer

Anzeiger.

C . Η. E. Haspels. Attic Black-figured Lekythoi, Paris, 1936. J. D . Beazley. Attic Black-figure Vase-painters, O x f o r d , 1956. J. D . Beazley. Attic Red-figure Vase-painters, 2nd edn, O x f o r d , 1963. Acta ad archaeologiam et artium historiam pertinentia. The Athenian Agora. Results of Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Princeton, from 1953. American Journal of Archaeology. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung. Asia Minor Studien. Antike Kunst. Archeologia Classica. Archaiologikon Deltion. Archaiologike Ephemeris. Annuario della Scuola archeologica di Atene e delle Missioni italiane in Oriente. Atti del convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia. Atti e memorie della Società Magna Grecia. Altertümer von Pergamon, Berlin, from 1885. Archäologische Zeitung. E. Babelon. Traité des monnaies grecques et romaines, vols. I-IV, Paris, 1901—32. Bulletin antieke beschaving. Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Annual of the British School at Athens. Cambridge Ancient History. A . B. C o o k . Zeus: A Study in Ancient Religion, 3 vols., Cambridge, 1914-40. Corinth. Results of Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Cambridge, Mass., from 1929. D . A m y x . Corinthian Vase-Painting of the Archaic Period, Berkeley, 1988. Corpus vasorum antiquorum. F. Brommer. Denkmälerlisten zur griechischen Heldensage, Übrige Helden, Marburg, 1976.

vol. III,

XXII

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

ABBREVIATIONS

EAD

Exploration archéologique de Délos d'Athènes, Paris, from 1909.

faite

par

l'École

française

EtThas EVP FdD FdXanthos

Etudes thasiennes, École française d'Athènes, Paris, from 1944. J. D . Beazley. Etruscan Vase-painting, O x f o r d , 1947. Fouilles de Delphes, École française d'Athènes, Paris, from 1908. Fouilles de Xanthos, Institut française d'archéologie d'Istanbul, Paris, from 1958.

FgrHist

F. Jakoby. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, 1926.

Leiden, from

Heldensage3

Β. Graef and E. Langlotz. Die Antiken Vasen von der Akropolis zu Athen, Berlin, 1925-33. F. Brommer. Vasenlisten zur griechischen Heldensage, 3rd edn, Marburg, 1973.

Hesperia

Hesperia. Journal Athens.

Graef-Langlotz

IstMitt JbBerlMus Jdl JHS Kerameikos Korkyra Larisa I Larisa II

of the American

School of Classical Studies at

Istanbuler Mitteilungen. Jahrbuch der Berliner Museen. Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Journal of Hellenic Studies. Kerameikos, Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen, Berlin, from 1939. G . Rodenwaldt et al. Korkyra, archaische Bauten und Bildwerke, vols. I and II, Berlin, 1939-40. J. Boehlau and K. Schefold, eds. Larisa am Hermos; Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen, 1902-1934, vol. I, Die Bauten, Stockholm, 1940. L. Kjellberg in J. Boehlau and K. Schefold, eds. Larisa am Hermos; Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen, 1902-1934, vol. II: Die Architektonischen Terrakotten, Stockholm, 1940.

LIMC LS AG2

Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae, Zurich, 1981-99. L. A . Jeffery. Local Scripts of Archaic Greece, rev. edn by Alan Johnston, O x f o r d , 1989.

Meded Milet

Mededeelingen van het Nederlands Historisch Instituut te Rome. Milet: Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen und Untersuchungen seit dem Jahre 1899, Berlin, from 1906.

MMAukt

Kunstwerke Basel. Monumenti

MonAnt MonPiot NumAntCl ÖJh OlForsch Olympia Olympiabericht OpAth OpRom Paralipomena

der Antique.

Auktion

Münzen

und Medaillen

A.

G.

antichi.

Monuments et mémoires. Fondation E. Piot. Numismatica e antichità classiche. Quaderni ticinesi. Jahreshefte des Österreichisch en archäologischen Instituts in Wien. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut. Olympische Forschungen, Berlin, from 1944. E. Curtius, F. Adler et al. Olympia. Die Ergebnisse der von dem Deutschen Reich veranstalteten Ausgrabung, 5 vols., Berlin, 1890-97. Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Olympia, Berlin, from 1937. Opuscula atheniensia. Opuscula romana. J. D . Beazley. Paralipomena: Additions to Attic Black-figure Painters and to Attic Red-figure Vase-Painters, O x f o r d , 1971.

Vase-

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

ABBREVIATIONS

XX111

PECS Prakt Preller-Robert 4

Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites, Princeton, 1976. Praktika tes en Athenais Arch aiolo gike s Etaireias. L. Preller and C . Robert. Griechische Mythologie, 4th edn, 4 vols., Berlin, 1894-1926.

RA RE

Revue archéologique. Pauly-Wissowa. Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Revue des études anciennes. W. H. Roscher, ed. Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie, 10 vols., Leipzig, 1884-1937. Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Römische Abteilung.

REA Roscher RM

Necropolis Excavations in the Necropolis of Salamis, London and Nicosia, from 1967. Samos Deutsches Archäologisches Institut. Samos, Bonn, from 1961. Archaeological Exploration of Sardis, Monograph, Cambridge, Mass., Sardis M from 1958. Salamis,

Sardis R

Archaeological from 1958.

SBMünchen

Sitzungsberichte, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften (München), Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Studi etruschi.

StEtr ThesCRA Troy

Exploration

of Sardis, Report, Cambridge, Mass.,

Thesaurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum, Los Angeles, 2004-06. Troy: Excavations Conducted by the University of Cincinnati, 19321938, ed. C . W. Biegen with the collaboration of J. L. Caskey and M. Rawson, Princeton, 1950- .

1

Introduction The ancient city of Assos rises from the sea to the summit of the finest natural citadel along the rugged coast of the southern Troad. The precipitous cliffs of the akropolis form a natural temenos for the archaic Doric temple that spectacularly crowns the summit, elevated and articulated within the landscape and the polis. The place commands panoramic vistas northward over the fertile valley of the Touzla River, westward along the southern coastline of the Troad and the Aegean Sea, eastward up the Gulf of Adramyttion and Kara D a g (Mount Ida), and southward across the Straits of Mytilene to the island of Lesbos. Here, one can make out the promontory of Methymna on Lesbos, mother city to Assos, and follow the coast of Asia Minor at least as far south as the modern town of Ayvalik (Fig. i). From these vantages on both land and far out to sea, the temple appears fully silhouetted against the sky and yet deeply rooted to its place, for it was constructed entirely of purplish-black andesite, quarried from the site on which it stands. Such a powerful union of nature and building goes to the heart and essence of ancient Greek architectural thinking (Pis. 1-2; Fig. 2). The harmony of the temple with its site, however, stands in marked contrast to the dissonance of its design within our perception of Greek architecture. The temple is an architectural hapax, the only k n o w n archaic Doric temple in Asia Minor. Moreover, its unrestrained design, especially the exceptional sculptured epistyle, has earned the temple nothing but notoriety. Because the design decisions chosen for this building are not the ones that weave the narrative of Greek architecture, the temple at Assos has found, at best, an uneasy place in the anti-narrative. Since its discovery, it has served mainly as a well-preserved foil for the paradigms of mainland Doric architecture, the negative exemplar against which good Doric style stands out. Even as he published new finds from the temple in 1897, Richard N o r t o n levelled the harshest criticisms against the building and in the process condemned all of Asia Minor: What the position of these sculptures does s h o w is that the Asiatic Greeks did not understand the use of sculpture for architectural decoration. The w o r k of the sculptors at Ephesus shows the same misconception, and from this early time d o w n to the very end, Asiatic

inimitable quality of the w o r k of Greece proper, showing, as only contrasts can show, the superb attainments of the Grecian sculptors and how widely-spread and civilizing their influence was. 1

We find such sweeping criticism misguided today, but even broad-minded scholars of the twentieth century, such as Gottfried Gruben and Martin Robertson, have dismissed the temple at Assos as a provincial building 'unverständig zusammengewürfelt' (thrown together without understanding), or as 'an experiment happily not often repeated'. 2 The temple does indeed clash violently with the Vitruvian notion of propriety (1.2.5-7); it cannot help but challenge modernist expectations. However, following the postmodern architectural environment of the late twentieth century, the temple generates new interest of the kind that brings to mind Robert Venturi's 'Gentle Manifesto' on the value and beauty of an 'unresolved' architecture: I like elements which are hybrid rather than 'pure,' compromising rather than 'clean,' accommodating rather than excluding, vestigial as well as innovating, inconsistent and equivocal rather than direct and clear. I am for messy vitality over obvious u n i t y . . . I am f o r richness of meaning rather than clarity of m e a n i n g ; . . . an architecture of complexity and c o n t r a d i c t i o n . . . must e m b o d y the difficult unity of inclusion rather than the easy unity of exclusion. M o r e is not less. 3

Precisely what makes the temple at Assos interesting is its 'messy vitality'. Its curiosities of form and ornament do not signal eccentric manipulations of established orders; rather, they are the outcome of a deliberate attempt to explore their possibilities. The so-called Vitruvian flaws of the temple constitute its historical importance and provide invaluable insight into early concepts of architectural order in an environment far less firmly fixed than the traditional narrative admits. The entire project is a bold experiment, conceived without the benefit or constraint of a strong local tradition and bearing no strict allegiance to a single external tradition. Those who designed the temple drew upon a full range of ideas current in the world of archaic Greek architecture and explored some of their possibilities. Architect, patron, and sculptor seem almost to be 'thinking out loud'. Thus our interest in this building lies

sculptors continued to make the same m i s t a k e . . . T h e sculptures are not beautiful; they are not even of very deep interest... T h e y are the work

of a provincial school in a country where the Fine Arts never

attained their noblest development. T h e y emphasize, however, the

N o r t o n 1897, p. 514. Gruben 2001, p. 402; C . M . Robertson 1975, pp. 81-2. See also Langlotz 197$, p. 120. 1

2

3

Venturi 1966, pp. 22-3.

27 I N T R O D U C T I O N

Ρ

'' T U

R A C K

IMBROS

•ilion

T B

Skepsis

&ε >* mmm Ε MI.

Ä LESBOS

I d a

mdros

yf

Adramyttio/i

,

i_m os

Phokaia

L Y D I A

CHIOS

Smyrna FIGURE I. M a p o f the T r o a d ; M i c h a e l C . P a g e .

Sardis

28 I N T R O D U C T I O N

VILLAGE

OF

DEH RAM

TURKISH HOUSES A

A.

MEDIAEVAL

W A L L IN WHICH S P H I N X E S

EASTERN FRONT B. C.

BOWMAN CENTAUR

D.

FOUND

WEHE

FOUND

Jlllf'n·

^ '

HERE

METOPE.

E.

SPHINX

FROM

WESTERN

LION A N D E O A R H I N D QUA R Τ ER 5

F. G . G .

MEDI/E.VAL

H.H.EARLY J . J . K.

RELIEF OF LION

TEMPLE TURKISH

FRONT

TURKISH

A N D THE.. RELIEF

_J

TOWERS

FORTI F I C A T I O N

POLYGONAL K.

OFTEMPLE

RELIEF"

FROM

WALLS

OF

MASONRY

CAPITALS WALL

BUILT MADE

INTO

WALL

OFTEMPLE

BLOCKS MEDI/CVAL TOWER. HELLENIC FOUN OATu

HOUSES"

MCDi^evAt. (SHAVE! CISTERNS;

LEDGE

TEMPL6

DEBRIS

MEDI/EVAL

•'vSy «"«Il rrs HIGHEST POI

REMAINS MEOILEVAL

, ROUGH MODCRN Ι

NCCOSlME. ^

M / ROCKY Cl

'V/l/l/J/n'iiii

hîST.tfllî

FIGURE 2. Site plan after Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 139.

ÎLOCKÎ'

INTRODUCTION

4

in issues far more significant than its novelty. The temple at

A further reason the Temple of Athena at Assos attracts our

Assos should be understood, in all its peculiarities, as an inte-

attention is its extraordinary state of preservation. A l t h o u g h

gral part of early G r e e k religious architecture, not as an isolated

not a single block above the stylobate survived in situ, the sheer

tangent off the path to classical design. Within its milieu, the

amount of material evidence that remains—albeit scattered

temple emerges at the very least as a pioneering attempt to graft

around the site and in museums on three continents—enables

indigenous East G r e e k decoration on to an imported D o r i c

us to have a better sense of this building than almost any other

superstructure. While the hybrid solution achieved at A s s o s is

archaic temple built outside the G r e e k West and before c.500

unique, the impetus behind it is symptomatic of the broadly

BC. Extensive evidence exists f o r virtually every part of the

creative period in G r e e k architectural design prior to the late

building; the challenge lies in making it w o r k coherently.

archaic period (advent, c.530), w h e n intraregionally

shared

T h u s far the temple has been k n o w n chiefly f r o m the w o r k

principles of design and decoration take root. 4 A n d , in fact,

of the nineteenth-century excavators and later scholars using

designers of this building initiate concerns of order and orna-

their record. In their excellent but brief excavation (1881-83),

ment that persist throughout the history of G r e e k architecture

Joseph Thacher C l a r k e and Francis H e n r y Bacon identified the

and manifest in such paradigmatic monuments as the Par-

major features of the temple but were unable to explore all the

thenon or the so-called T o m b of Philip II at Vergina. 5

material. T h e y drew and published only a fraction of the non-

T h e temple's 'messy vitality' extends perhaps even more to

sculptural blocks f r o m the temple. 6 Their reconstruction of the

its iconography than its architecture. T h e scenes that festooned

plan and the sculptured epistyle drew criticism, chiefly for its

at least part of the epistyle and frieze courses seem, on first

failure to resolve the a w k w a r d arrangement of sculpture carved

analysis, to be a similarly peculiar combination of the banal and

on blocks of w i d e l y varying lengths. In 1 9 1 3 - 1 4 , Felix Sartiaux

the unanticipated. T h e paratactic assemblage of fabulous crea-

attempted to respond to these difficulties, especially those

tures, animal combats, mythological scenes, and less specific

imposed b y the unequal lengths of the sculptured epistyle

depictions of human activity represents an especially w i d e

blocks, b y proposing a reconstruction based on graduated

range of subjects. T h e programme, if such a concept even

intercolumnar spacings across the façades. 7 His proposal has

applies, appears to be little more than an arbitrary gathering

had important implications for other archaic D o r i c monu-

of unrelated scenes f r o m the potpourri of current archaic im-

ments, but it lacked confirmation in the architectural record. 8

agery. T o do justice to the temple at Assos, however, w e must start

W h e n I began w o r k i n g on the temple, m y aim was to find confirmation of the plan, w h i c h could then lead to the recon-

f r o m the certainty that, as the principal civic and sacred monu-

structed sequence of sculpture. T h e

ment of a prosperous polis, both its design and sculptural

extended chiefly over seven seasons between 1979 and 1987

fieldwork

for this study

decoration were determined to fix the city's relationship to

and w a s aided b y the concurrent w o r k of the late D r U m i t

the deity and the larger G r e e k world. A s the city temple, it

Serdaroglu, w h o conducted excavations on the akropolis and

served not only as an expression of contemporary civic identity

generously allowed some of his results to be included here. The

and pride but also as a reflection of certain cultural values that,

f o l l o w i n g account includes all material that could be gathered

presumably, were intended to survive its builders. While dedi-

in advance of his project to restore the temple. We had the

cated to the divinity, it was meant to be seen b y human beings

pleasure of discovering several new fragments of sculpture:

w h o s e responses were obviously important. F r o m these cir-

D r Serdaroglu unearthed the fragments of lions joining reliefs

cumstances, w e can derive t w o very basic premises. First, the

A i o and A 1 3 , while I discovered the centaurs joining relief A 8

scenes depicted on the building served a purpose and thus had a

and a new metope, M i o . In the course of recording the archi-

meaning b e y o n d their decorative value. Secondly, the choice of

tectural remains in full detail, it soon became apparent that the

design features and imagery might have been naive but could

extensive remains reflected a complex and contradictory struc-

hardly have been haphazard. W h a t w e witness is a conscious

ture, w i t h the rhythm of the entablature (at least parts of it)

attempt not only to integrate architectural styles but also to

in serious conflict with the design of the plan. Moreover,

merge iconographie traditions as well. W h e n viewed in the

careful analysis of the surviving material revealed a more c o m -

light of archaic religious imagery, such disparate images do

plicated building history than previously supposed. T h e temple

f o r m a coherent iconographie corpus that aims to articulate

suffered serious damage soon after it had been completed;

the central relationships of the goddess to the polis and the

large parts of the surviving entablature, therefore, belong not

polis to the rest of the G r e e k world. Like the act of building the

to the original structure but to its restoration. This state of

temple, the appropriation of images f o r its decoration becomes a f o r m of self-definition. Clarke 1882; Clarke 1898; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, pp. 139-68. Sartiaux 1915. * Sartiaux's suggestion has been used to bolster the possibility of a similar arrangement in other archaic Doric temples, e.g. the Temple of Athena at Karthaia ( 0 s t b y 1980, pp. 218-23 a r , d n n · i o 8 - 9 ) , or the H - T e m p l c in Athens (1974, p. 650, fig. 10). 6

F o r this period in architectural sculpture, R i d g w a y 1993, pp. 273-415; Marconi 2007. 4

5 Yet another position for a frieze within Doric design appears in the recently discovered tomb at A g i o s Athanasios: Tsimbidou-Avloniti 2005, pp. 114-42, pis. 27, 30-1, 32-7.

7

INTRODUCTION

5

affairs explains in part w h y scholars have been unable to fit all

connection to each other or to the architecture. 1 0 Equally

of the blocks of the sculptured epistyle on to the building

central to the present study is h o w the reliefs fit on the building, and whether or not they belonged to the first or the second

simultaneously. M y first objective in the w o r k presented here has been to document the extensive remains of the building and f r o m them

phase, as described above. F r o m this basis w e m a y

then consider the temple in

to reconstruct as precisely as possible the design of the temple.

relation to early G r e e k architectural design, aiming to under-

The infelicities are highlighted rather than glossed. T o clarify

stand not only w h e n and under what influence it w a s built, but

the t w o important building phases, the material is segregated

also the multifaceted process b y w h i c h such an unusual design

into t w o chapters, 'Description and Reconstruction of the

emerged, as well as its implications for our understanding of

Original Building', and ' M a j o r Repairs'. These chapters intro-

early G r e e k architecture. Architectural monuments are usually

duce and interpret the material evidence; aspects of the restored

treated as finished products, f o r good reason. Reconstructing

design that require some degree of speculation are clearly

the process of designing a building must account f o r the elusive

indicated. Because the evidence for techniques of construction

and dynamic qualities of time, intention, and decision-making.

is rich and varied, that material has been set out in a separate

T h e design of the temple at Assos demands such an approach;

chapter preceding the description of the architecture, 'Building

its chief interest lies in the interaction of external influence and

Materials and Technical Aspects of Construction'.

local interpretation and innovation b y w h i c h the building came

In proposing a reconstruction for the architecture and sculp-

to include its various components. T h e p h e n o m e n o n forms a

ture, I have favoured the surviving architectural and technical

key aspect in our understanding of the political and cultural

evidence over compositional expectations, even w h e n the re-

dynamics of the region in the sixth century, and is explored in

sults seem

disquieting. 9

T h e inconsistencies must be a c k n o w -

ledged; it may be that they are not completely exceptional f o r

Chapter 9, 'Significance of the Temple within the Development of Archaic Architecture and Architectural D e c o r a t i o n ' .

Doric architecture preceding the final decades of the sixth

To investigate decisions concerning design and iconography

century BC. Furthermore, they dramatically reveal the kind of

means addressing the individuals w h o made them. But here,

difficulties encountered by designers and masons in trying to

not surprisingly, w e have imperfect knowledge even of w h o

build D o r i c f o r the first time. It seemed best to let the archi-

assumed w h i c h responsibilities. 1 1 Since the temple at Assos is a

tecture speak f o r itself and see w h a t emerged f r o m the process.

city temple, the programme must have been overseen by civic

O u r understanding of the design of the sculptured epistyle

and religious authorities acting o n behalf of the city. N o t h i n g is

is, of course, complicated b y the extensive repairs made to

k n o w n of the government of Assos in the Archaic period; civic

the upper building, repairs that surely required some replace-

authority m a y have rested with an individual ruler or a leading

ment reliefs. Segregating original f r o m new material, with

family or group of families, or, less likely, with a w i d e r group of

certain notable exceptions, can become highly subjective; in

citizens. Such persons w e r e responsible for the m a j o r decisions

Chapter 8, 'Arrangement of the Sculpture', I have favoured a

affecting the commission and

minimal approach. I could find no w a y to resolve all the

appointed the individual(s) w h o actually designed and oversaw

financing.

Presumably, they

inherent awkwardness in stringing together the scenes. Some

the construction of the temple. In this book, the term architect

creature's face will inevitably stare at another's backside. We

refers to the individual w h o made the major decisions affecting

k n o w very little about the w a y in w h i c h transitions f r o m one

the placement of the building and its design. T h o s e w h o actu-

subject to another were resolved in high archaic frieze sculp-

ally constructed the building are called masons. It is assumed

ture, and proposing a more extensive programme for the repair,

that civic or religious authorities planned the sculptural pro-

in order to resolve some of the difficulties, w o u l d mask the

gramme and a designer ( w h o may have been either the architect

problem rather than see it as a starting point for coming to

or one of the sculptors) composed and coordinated the series of

terms with aspects of high archaic composition.

scenes. Finally, the sculptors (one of w h o m may also have been

A second objective has been to interpret the iconography of

the designer) are those w h o carved the reliefs.

the sculptural decoration: to present n e w l y discovered sculp-

Tables w i t h the dimensions and features of identifiable

ture; to understand in some instances w h a t the images repre-

temple b l o c k s as well as drawings of several examples are

sent and in other cases to reconstruct the original composition;

included.

to determine where the ideas f o r the imagery might have come

blocks f o u n d on the akropolis but not part of the temple.

from; and, more broadly, to understand h o w scenes might gain

Measurements are recorded to the third decimal between all

An

appendix

(IV)

catalogues

other

important

in meaning by their association on the building. I therefore

sharply w o r k e d surfaces, and to the second decimal w h e n a

follow a somewhat different trajectory f r o m that of Ursula

preserved surface is intentionally r o u g h or variable. Clarke's

Finster-Hotz, w h o s e iconographie study presents a thorough account of the scenes individually, leaving open their potential Finster-Hotz 1984. Burford 1969; Scranton 1969, pp. 2-34; C o u l t o n 1977, pp. 15-29; Hellmann 2002, pp. 32-55, 70-81; Svenson-Evers 1996 (literary and epigraphic testimonia for k n o w n archaic and classical architccts). 10 11

N o t e Gruben's (1996, p. 62) w r y comments on restoration by 'canonical' analogy.

6

INTRODUCTION

site plan of the akropolis serves as the guide f o r establishing

dismantling rather than reconstructing the building, of elimin-

the grid locations to identify the positions w h e r e blocks w e r e

ating possible organizations rather than finding an overarching

found. A l l dates are BC unless otherwise indicated. T h e site is

solution that confirms the meaning of each mark and every

described as it w a s until 1986, prior to the reconstruction

block. While the present account does not answer all the ques-

project that has necessarily altered the site and access to the

tions raised by the building and its site, I hope it will engage the

remains.

temple at Assos more fully in the larger narrative of archaic

In attempting to come to terms with the Temple of A t h e n a at Assos, I have found myself more frequently in the position of

G r e e k architecture and provide a basis u p o n w h i c h further solutions may be formulated.

32

History of the Building, its Early Visitors, and its Excavation A b o u t the worship of Athena at Assos we are not in doubt. Her head appears on the obverse of Assian coinage from the Classical period, and the reverse of a classical silver tetradrachm bears a remarkable representation of an archaic statue of Athena in the attitude associated with Athena Ilias and the Palladion (Fig. 3).1 The columnar figure standing on a base wears a veil and a long robe with vertical pleats. Fillets hang over her extended left hand, and in her right hand she bears a spear that rests on her shoulder and points toward the ground. The hieratic pose suggests an archaic cult statue. To this numismatic evidence we can add the oath sworn by the Assians on the accession of Caligula, AD 37, and recorded on a bronze tablet found below the Bouleuterion in 1881: ομνυμ€ν Δία παρθενον

Σωτήρα

καί deòv Καίσαρα

Σεβαστόν

και την πάτριον

άγνήν

evvorjaeιν

We swear by Zeus Soter and the deity Caesar Augustus, and by the pure Virgin w h o m our fathers worshipped . . .

This inscription remains our best testimonium for Athena as the first and principal deity worshipped at Assos. 2 A second

inscription from the Street of the Tombs recording Lollia Arlegilla as την της /7oA[i]àSoç Αθηνάς ÎépeLav καί νεωκόρον, 'the Priestess of Athena Polias, and keeper of her temple', connects the cult to the city and to a temple. 3 It must be the temple on the akropolis, magnificently positioned at the top and centre of Assos, and the physical manifestation of the cult that ensured civic well-being. According to the archaeological record, the temple was the city's earliest monumental stone building and remained the principal religious monument throughout antiquity. Although it required major repairs soon after it was built, and certain renovations in the Hellenistic period, the temple stood for some nine centuries without fundamental alterations to its design. It suffered no final catastrophe, but seems simply to have been abandoned as popular confidence in Christianity surpassed the need for a patron deity of the polis. 4 Circumstantial evidence—the construction of a Christian basilica in the lower city and the name of Maximus, a bishop from Assos, in the lists of the Third Council of Ephesos, AD 431—suggests the transition was accomplished by the early fifth century AD.5 Time, nature, and later inhabitants conspired to shake the temple gradually to the ground over the course of the following 15 centuries. The successive Byzantine walls that encircle the akropolis in ever-tighter rings and incorporate increasing numbers of temple blocks document the piecemeal demolition. In the latest wall, made almost entirely of material from the temple, the blocks have been pulled from their original positions and simply piled upright. 6 Capitals formed the southern

FIGURE 3. C o i n image of Athena Polias, Waddington tetradrachm reverse, Cabinet des Médailles; after Babelon vol. 2, pi. 163,28.

1 C o i n s with head of Athena: Babelon II.2, cols. 1267-74, pi. 163.28-35, 164.1-7; Wroth 1964a, pp. xxxiv-xxxvi, 36-8, pi. 7. F o r the representation of the

archaic statue, see L a C r o i x 1949, pp. 122-3, p t 9-4! Babelon II.2, cols. 1267-8, no. 2302, pi. 163.28; the coin has been dated from the last third of the fifth century to the fourth century BC. For other representations of statues of Athena on the coinage of nearby Ilion and Pergamon, see also Lacroix 1949, pp. 101-12, 124-7, pis· 7, 9; Babelon II.2, no. 2398, pi. 166.19; Wroth 1964b, p. 110, no. 4, pi. 23.3-4. The Assos representation is most closely related to the representations from Troy, especially in the position of the figure and the spear. Athena Ilias carries a distaff and spindle rather than fillets, and she wears a kalathos rather than a veil. Clarke 1882, pp. 133-5, p'· T> Stcrrett 1883, pp. 50-3, no. 26; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 66, fig. 17; Merkelbach 1976, pp. 51-9, no. 26.

3 Sterrett 1883, pp. 32-4, no. 14; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 262; Merkclbach 1976, pp. 30-5, no. 16. Leaf 1923, p. 291, calls it a temple of Apollo, without explanation. His identification perhaps comes from Schliemann 1884, p. 318, where it is suggested that Assos is the ancient Chryse, w i t h its sanctuary of Sminthean A p o l l o .

Contra Tcxier 1849, p. 206, 'Tout porte à penser que le monument ί été démoli exprès' ('Everything leads one to think that the monument w a s intentionally demolished'); and later Clarke 1880, p. 157, 'The early change to Christianity accounts, without doubt, for the entire overthrow of the larger monuments and temples, many of which bear the marks of wilful destruction'. C o m p a r e with the Temple Zeus at Nemea: C o o p e r 1983, pp. 41, 52. Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, pp. 2-3. The first wall encompasses the entire akropolis and includes the round towers; see Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 139. The second wall runs between the large enceinte and the crude wall; only a small part of it is recorded on Bacon s plan of the akropolis (Bacon's plate 139, here Fig. 2), where it is labelled H and 5

6

IO

H I S T O R Y OF THE

BUILDING

side, while geison and t y m p a n o n blocks were fitted together to

ants permitted him to visit the agora, they kept him f r o m their

f o r m the western face (Fig. 2; wall labelled K K ) . A n epistyle

village near the akropolis, to Covel's severe disappointment:

block (A42) served as the threshold and t w o epistyle backers ( A B 5 , A B 6 ) became the jambs for the wall's western gate. Simple dwellings were built on and around the temple, some using w h o l e stylobate or epistyle blocks to form their foundation or walls (Pi. 2)/ O n e structure north of the temple's foundations re-employed t w o stylobate blocks f r o m the east end, S4 and S21, signalling the early destruction of that side of the building. T h e houses are not dated b y stratigraphie evidence, but the latest phases probably belong to the final Byzantine period under Machrames prior to

i3o6. H

T h e Turks

w h o subsequently occupied A s s o s did not live on the summit of the akropolis, but they continued to plunder the temple for construction material, or for making tools such as mortars and grinding stones. Early travellers' accounts that concentrate chiefly on the wreckage of the temple nevertheless indicate that at least part of the building still stood in the early nineteenth century. B y the time of the American excavation in the 18 80s, however, not a block above the stylobate remained in situ.

The Turks were horribly afraid of us by reason of Gerely's late prancks. They let us come up to ye town but would not let us walk about to see anything, which I much desired, because I have been certainly informed that many Grave stones and inscriptions are there. They brought us cold water and affronted us not after I had shew my Boyourdes; and we might have seen what we wanted had we had a dragoman yt understood to work them into good nature. 10

M o r e than a century later, Marie-Gabriel-Florent-Auguste de Choiseul Gouffier, French nobleman and ambassador to the Porte between 1784 and 1792, passed by Assos in 1785 while making a geographical survey of the western coast of Turkey. H e lingered at the site only long enough to experience the beauty of the landscape and to f o r m a poetic impression of the monuments. His imaginative plan and rendering of the site concoct three huge D o r i c temples in the agora but none on the akropolis. 1 1 T h e earliest brief but informative descriptions of the temple on the akropolis belong to the first quarter of the nineteenth century. T h e journal entry made b y the intrepid and erudite topographer C o l o n e l William Martin Leake in 1800 concisely summarizes the ancient remains, calling particular attention to

DESCRIPTIONS

OF T H E T E M P L E BY

TRAVELLERS TO

EARLY

ASSOS

A s s o s had lost all contemporary importance by the time the city came under the dominion of the O t t o m a n Empire around AD 1330. T h e Turkish cartographer Piri Re'is described and mapped the harbour of Assos in 1521, but he did not mention the remarkably well-preserved ancient monuments that stood

the peculiar architectural sculptures he found scattered on the akropolis: The ruins of Assos, at Behram Kalesi, opposite to Molivo, the antient Methymna in Mytilene. The ruins are extremely curious. There is a theatre in very perfect preservation; there are also the remains of several temples, at one of which are figures in low relief, in a very antient style of art, sculptured upon the hard granite of Mount Ida, which forms the materials of the buildings. O n the western side of the

fully visible in the virtually empty landscape of the upper city. 9

city the remains of wall and towers, with a gate, are in complete

T h e monuments were, however, k n o w n to European travellers

preservation; without the wall is seen the cemetery, with numerous

at least b y the seventeenth century. T h e Englishman John T.

sarcophagi, some of which are of gigantic dimensions, still standing in

C o v e l , then chaplain to Sir James Harvey, ambassador of

their places, and an antient causeway leading to the gate. The whole

Charles II to the Sublime Porte, stopped at Assos on his return

gives, perhaps, the most perfect idea of a Greek city that anywhere

in 1677 f r o m A t h o s to Constantinople. A l t h o u g h the inhabit-

exists. 12

A year later another Englishman, D r Leigh H u n t , described the temple and its sculpture in closer detail. H i s journal entry identified as an early fortification of polygonal masonry. Other sections of the wall are constructed of carefully fitted temple blocks and represent an intermediate phase of post-antique fortification. There is some confusion over the date of the third, more crudely constructed wall built almost exclusively of temple blocks, which runs between the t w o cisterns (G). Clarke (1882, p. 28) dates the wall to the Greek War of Independence, 1821-27, but later (Clarke 1898, pp. 46-7), he reassigns the wall and 'hovels' to the last Byzantine occupation between the Seljuk and O t t o m a n conquests, AD 1097-c. 1330. Unfortunately, neither Texier nor Clarke recorded datable material from the Byzantine structures that they removed from the temple's foundations. The latest fortification wall no longer survives, having been partially dismantled by Texier in 1835, further broken up by Clarke and Bacon in 1881-83, a n c ! completely disassembled by U m i t Serdaroglu in the 1980s and 1990s for his reconstruction project. 7 Clarke 1898, pp. 46-7, as well as Serdaroglu's excavation described in this chapter. 8 Pachymcnes v. 26; from J. M . C o o k 1973, pp. 247, 373-4. A l s o J. M. C o o k 1988, p. 13, for Greeks at Assos after the conquest. 9

Piri Re'is 1988, vol. 1, 71a, 74a (map), 313 (transi.).

indicates that some of the temple's columns were then in situ: . . . the columns are about three feet in diameter; parts of the shafts remain on their original site, so that a person conversant with ancient architecture might easily trace the plan and different details. 13

10 T h e C o v e l Papers, British Library, A d d . MS. 22914, ff. 5 χb— 5 3. For most of the text, sec Sartiaux 1915, A n n e x 1, pp. 149-50. H e omits the final paragraph concerning the akropolis, given here.

Choiseul G o u f f i e r 1809, pp. 86-8. Leake 1820, pp. 253-5; Leake 1824, pp. 128-9. O v e r the course of the nineteenth century, many travellers recorded their visits to Assos; only those whose accounts make a significant contribution toward our understanding of the history and remains of the archaic temple are discussed here. For additional accounts see Clarke 1882, pp. 5—15; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, pp. 3-5; Sartiaux 1915, pp. 4-8, and notes. 11

12

13

H u n t 1817, p. 127.

HISTORY OF THE In his d e s c r i p t i o n of the s c u l p t u r e , w e r e c o g n i z e the left half of relief A 3 as a p r o c e s s i o n to sacrifice w i t h three n a k e d

figures

m a r c h i n g in the same d i r e c t i o n w h i l e a n o t h e r l o o k s (Pi. 100c; F i g . 80). T w o bulls

fighting

back

m u s t be A 1 4 , w h i l e

three horses r u n n i n g c o u l d be A 7 (Pis. 80, 94; Figs. 69, 78). H i s d e s c r i p t i o n of ' t w o w i n g e d sphinxes, resting each of t h e m a f o o t o n a k i n d o f c a n d e l a b r u m p l a c e d b e t w e e n t h e m ' suggests that relief A 2 m a y h a v e b e e n c o m p l e t e at this time (Pis. 7 8 - 9 ; Fig· 68). 1 4 L a s t l y , he m e n t i o n s a s y m p o s i o n w i t h a y o u t h p r e senting a c u p t o a b e a r d e d m a n , i n d i c a t i n g the left side of relief A 4 (Ρ1· 102c; F i g . 81). A f e w y e a r s later the P o l i s h

Count

E d u a r d R a c z y h s k i l i k e n e d the site to a c o n s t r u c t i o n

zone,

w i t h all the b l o c k s of the t e m p l e laid o u t as if a b o u t t o be set up.

15

BUILDING

9

the south side I found in this stone quarry a relief representing a lion biting a deer in the back. S u r e l y the ' g r e a t granite p o s t s ' are the t w o u p r i g h t epistyle b a c k e r s that f o r m e d the gate near the n o r t h w e s t end of the t e m p l e d e s c r i b e d a b o v e , w h i c h w o u l d m e a n that v o n R i c h t e r s a w the l e f t f r a g m e n t of A 3 , d e s c r i b e d as

figures

with out-

stretched hands; p o s s i b l y a p a r t of A 4 in the figure h o l d i n g a cup; and, relief A 1 4 , t w o o x e n w i t h l o c k e d h o r n s , all built into this s t r u c t u r e near the n o r t h w e s t c o r n e r of the t e m p l e (Pis. i o o c , i o 2 c , 80; Figs. 8 0 - 1 , 69). T h e l i o n biting t h e b a c k of a stag m u s t be Α 1 2 , w h i c h he f o u n d to the s o u t h (PI. 87; F i g . 74). D u r i n g the n e x t t w o decades, several o t h e r antiquarians gave a c c o u n t s of the s c u l p t u r e . T h e m o s t t h o r o u g h w a s that of the G e r m a n aristocrat A n t o n P r o k e s c h v o n O s t e n , w h o in J u l y

T h e G e r m a n scholar O t t o Friedrich v o n Richter not only

1826 d e s c r i b e s 11 s u b j e c t s of the 20 s c u l p t u r e d reliefs (called

describes the s c u l p t u r e d reliefs he s a w d u r i n g his visit in June

m e t o p e s ) h e s a w w i t h i n the latest w a l l s and d o w n t h e southeast

1816, b u t also gives s o m e i n d i c a t i o n of their l o c a t i o n .

slope:

c o m m e n t s p r o v i d e vital i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the

find-spots

His

of the

sculptures n o w in the L o u v r e : . . . und oben auf dem Gipfel des Berges ein Thor, aus einem Paar großen Granit-Pfosten bestehend; darin finden sich zwei Steine mit Reliefs über einander. Das untere enthält drei vorschreitende Figuren, mit ausgestreckten Händen, denen eine vierte etwas, das einem Becher

Ich fand dieser Metopen theils innerhalb der Burg, theils herausgeworfen, unter dem südöstlichen Thurme an 20, worunter 11 noch nicht verstümmelt, folgende Gegenstände vorstellen: 1) Z w e i kämpfende Stiere; 2) Zwei Kentauren im Kampfe; 3) Vier Figuren, wovon die erste eine weibliche, diese winket, die anderen folgen; 4) Ein

und es also nicht zeichnen konnte, stellt zwei große Ochsen vor, die

Hirsch, den ein L ö w e so eben am Rücken erfaßt und niederreißet; 5) Zwei geflügelte Sphinxe, sich gegenüber ruhend; 6) Eine geflügelte Sphinx; 7) Drei Kentauren; 8) Ein sitzender Amor, der die Hand auf den Bogen stützt; 9) Ein Stier, das Haupt zur Erde neigend; 10) Ein

mit den Stirnen an einander stoßen. Daneben häufen sich cannelirte

Mahl. Zwei Männer sitzen gegen einander über auf Polstern; der links

Säulen und Fundamente des Tempels

sitzende reicht dem Gaste mit der Rechten eine A r t Kuchen, während er mit der linken die Schaale über die eigene rechte Seite zurückhält. Der andere legt die Rechte wie zur Versicherung auf die Brust, und hat in der Linken eine Vase; 11) Abermal ein Mahl. Zwei Männer ruhen,

ähnlich sieht, entgegen hält

Das darauf liegende Relief, unter

welches ich mich durch die Disteln auf dem Rücken schieben mußte,

A n der Südseite fand ich in

diesem Steinbruche ein Relief, einen L ö w e n darstellend, der einem Hirsch in den Rücken beißt. 1 6 . . . and above on the crest of the citadel stood a gate made from a pair of great granite posts; therein were found t w o stones with reliefs one above the other. The lower one includes three forward striding figures with outstretched hands, to w h o m a fourth holds out something that looks like a cup

The relief lying on top, under which I had to push

on my back through the thistles and therefore could not draw, represents two great oxen, butting each other with their foreheads. N e x t to it are piled up fluted columns and the foundation of the temple

On

die gehenkelten Becher in der Hand, sich gegenüber, den linken Arm auf Kissen gestützt. Dem vorderen naht ein Knabe, und gießt Getränk aus ähnlichem Gefäß in eine runde Schaale. Hinter dem Knaben sieht man eine große Vase. Die runde Schaale ist das noch heut zu Tage im ganzen Orient gebräuchliche Trinkgeschirr. A u c h die große Vase, ein Vorrathsgefäß, ist in Griechenland und Kleinasien noch häufig im Gebrauche. 1 7 I found some 20 metopes partly within the citadel and partly thrown

14 According to Clarke and Bacon, w e can rule out A i , for two of its three fragments were embedded in mortar in the Byzantine wall until dislodged by Clarke and Bacon in 1881; see below, Appendix I, A i . Clarke 1882, p. 33, suggests that Texier also knew of the centre, as well as the right fragment of A2, for he describes and draws the relief correctly; see Texier 1849, p. 207, pi. 112. There is, however, an important discrepancy introduced by the illustrations to Eduard Raczynski's 1814 Polish record of his travels. T h e German translation of Raczynski includes only an illustration of the theatre at Assos. I have not been able to examine the Polish manuscript. However, individual plates, also engraved by Fuhrmann but captioned in Polish, which I have seen, include not only the engraving of the theatre, but also a view of the Doric tomb, the right fragment of the sphinx on A2, n o w in the Louvre, and the left fragment of A i , n o w in Boston. We must therefore assume that Raczynski knew of the right fragment of A t , and that Clarke and Bacon have somehow confused their data. Possibly only one fragment (the central piece) of A i was embedded in the Byzantine wall, and the find-spots of the right portion of A i and one of the t w o remaining pieces of Az were confused.

Raczynski 1825, p. 203. von Richter 1822, pp. 466-7.

out, under the southeast tower, of which eleven are still not mutilated. They present the following subjects: 1) two fighting oxen; 2) two centaurs in a battle; 3) four figures, of which the first is a female who beckons the others to follow; 4) a deer, which a lion seizes on the back and tears down; 5) two winged sphinxes, stationary toward one another; 6) one winged sphinx; 7) three centaurs; 8) a seated Eros, who rests his hand on a bow; 9) an ox with its head toward the ground; 10) a feast. T w o men sit across from one another on cushions; the one sitting to the left presents with his right hand a kind of pastry to the guest, while he holds in his left a cup over his right side. The other puts his right hand to his breast as an assurance, and he has in his left hand a vase; and 11) yet again a feast. T w o men recline against one another, with handled cups in their hands, their left arms propped up on cushions. A youth approaches the man in front and pours drink from a similar vessel into a round cup. Behind the youth one sees a large 17

Prokesch von Osten 1837, pp. 400-1.

IO

H I S T O R Y OF T H E

vase. The round cup is still today a common drinking vessel in the whole Orient. Also the large vase, a storage vessel, is still often in use in Greece and Asia Minor.

In this series w e recognize the bulls of A 1 4 ; the middle fragment of A8; the left f o u r Nereids of relief A 3 ; relief A 1 2 ; the paired sphinxes of M3; the right side p r o b a b l y of A 2 ; the preserved fragment of Ay; possibly Herakles in the left fragment of A 5 ; the bull of relief A 1 5 ; and, the right and left sides of relief A 4 (Pis. 80, 95a, 100c, 87, 103, 79, 94, 92, 81, 102a, 102c; Figs. 69, 79, 80, 74, 82, 68, 78, 76, 70, 81). Prokesch von O s t e n also mentions foundations and other architectural members, including the unusual column drum with 18 flutes. T h e most imaginative account comes f r o m the French traveller, Jean Joseph François Poujoulat, w h o s e colourful account f r o m a visit to A s s o s on 22-3 O c t o b e r 1830, is more accurate than it first appears and contains m u c h valuable information, albeit highly

embroidered. 1 8

Poujoulat begins his description

BUILDING

breuvage' ( Ί have recognized in the middle of a heap of ruins, a family scene, representing a dropsical man with an enormous head and flanks, seated on an elevated bed; next to the bed is a man with a long beard, w h o offers the sick one a beverage'), which sounds like the right fragment of the symposion, A 4 (PL 102a; Fig. 81). However, Poujoulat continues, 'une femme couverte d'un vêtement semblable au costume des femmes d'Orient, est assise en face du lit; derrière elle se trouvent quatre femmes debout devant une grande urne; une d'elles est dépouillée de ses vêtements' ('a w o m a n covered in clothing resembling the costume of w o m e n of the Orient is seated facing the bed; behind her are four w o m e n standing in front of a great urn; one of them is casting off her clothing'). If w e eliminate the seated woman, this description appears to be a conflation of the left fragment of A 4 with the left end of A 3 , a mistake also made by the more discerning von Richter, and one that suggests that these fragments were found adjacent to one another.

of the iconography with the general comment, Έ η parcourant

T h e French architect Jean-Nicolas H u y o t , w h o examined

ces précieux débris, j'assistais tour-à-tour à des danses, à des

the ruins in M a y 1817) created the earliest surviving drawings

banquets, à des sacrifices.' ('In going over these precious re-

of the sculpture and architectural members. 1 9 H e sketched the

mains, I witnessed b y turns dances, banquets, and sacrifices.')

site in watercolour and made accurately measured drawings of

N e x t he describes a scene for w h i c h there is no evidence at all:

the temple, including a capital, triglyph, geison, and three

'Ici des femmes mollement étendues sur des lits ou des divans,

fragmentary reliefs that he assigned to the 'interior of the

présentent leurs coupes à des esclaves qui leur versent à boire,

portico'. In his drawings of centaurs, symposiasts, and a

tandis que leurs longs cheveux, qui sont leur seul vêtement,

sphinx, w e recognize A 7 , the left t w o fragments of A 4 , and

flottent négligemment sur leurs épaules' ('Here w o m e n indo-

the right side of A 2 (Pis. 94, 102c, 79; Figs. 78, 81, 68). H e also

lently outstretched on beds or divans, present their cups to

mentions 'une cérémonie avec des prêtres égyptiens' ('a cere-

slaves w h o p o u r drinks for them, while their long hair, w h i c h

m o n y w i t h Egyptian priests'), w h i c h p r o b a b l y is the left side of

is their only clothing, floats negligently on their shoulders').

A 3 , and bulls, w h i c h must be A 1 4 (Pis. 100c, 80; Figs. 80, 69).

T h e next description, 'là d'autres femmes s'avancent en ca-

H u y o t notes that he was unable to measure the height of the

dence, les unes derrière les autres, en battant des mains, ou

column because drums had been reused in the crude fortifica-

folâtrant ensemble sur des tapis ou sur le gazon' ('there other

tion walls discussed above, but he gives accurate measurements

w o m e n advance in step, one behind the other, clapping their

of the upper and l o w e r diameter. H u y o t did not mention the

hands or frolicking together on either carpets or grass') is

plan of the temple, and the fact that he sketched it w i t h a

recognizable as the left side of relief A 3 (Pi. 100c; Fig. 80).

southern orientation on his topographical plan of the site sug-

This description is f o l l o w e d by, 'plus loin sont des groupes

gests he did not have a good idea of its position.

entourés de coupes et d'urnes' ('further on are groups sur-

Encouraged by the accounts of H u y o t , the French architect

rounded b y cups and urns'), w h i c h could be a part of A 4 (PI.

Charles Texier undertook the first formal investigation of the

102c; Fig. 81). 'J'ai vu deux femmes, placées en face l'une de

temple in June 1835. 20 A t this time, some of the cella wall and

l'autre, dont la partie inférieure se termine en queue de poisson

perhaps a f e w of the lowest column drums w e r e still in place,

c o m m e la f e m m e dont parle Horace; près de là, deux boeufs

but the foundation was obscured b y accumulated earth as well

dont les têtes se touchent et qui entrelacent leurs cornes.' ( Ί

as late Byzantine structures built directly on the floor of the

saw t w o w o m e n , placed one facing the other, w h o s e lower part

temple. With the help of French sailors, Texier dislodged

terminated in a fishtail like the w o m a n of w h o m

the r o w of capitals that had been built into the southern stretch

Horace

speaks; near there, t w o oxen w h o s e heads are touching and

of the latest fortification wall. H e also exposed the stylobate

are crossing their horns.') This account surely indicates the

along one of the flanks (probably the southern), but not the

central section of A 3 and the entire relief A 1 4 (Pis. 100b, 80;

façade, w h i c h was apparently underneath more modern (that

Figs. 80, 69). Poujoulat goes on, 'J'ai reconnu au milieu d'un tas

is, Byzantine) construction. 2 1 His excavations also must have

de décombres, une scène de famille, représentant un hydropique, avec une tête et des flancs énormes, assis sur un lit élevé; à côté du lit est un h o m m e à longue barbe, qui offre au malade un

19 Bibliothèque Nationale, H u y o t notebook 664, pp. 47-52. The unpublished sketchbook and journal include accurate and comprehensive sketches and plans of all the major monuments, as well as several fine views.

Texier 1849, pp. 200-2, 205-7, pis. 108-15. Texier himself does not mention that any of the columns were in situ, but Clarac 1841, p. 1151 states that Texier based his plan on'l'emplacement et les traces 20 21

1S

Poujoulat 1834, pp. 218-19.

IO H I S T O R Y O F T H E

BUILDING

--l^rAl

FIGURE 4. East façade of the temple, proposed by Charles Texier; Texier 1849, pi. 112,

revealed several sculptures that had not been described by

The monument is utterly destroyed, but the construction of a Greek

earlier travellers, including A 9 , lion bringing d o w n a bull;

temple is so logical that when one possesses one part of it, the rest

A n , lion crushing a doe; the left fragment of a centaur on

follows naturally.

A8; M4, boar; and M 7 , galloping centaur (Pis. 82-3, 95a,

Paradoxically, the reconstruction he published in 1849 was the

i04~5a-b; Figs. 71, 73, 79, 83-4). Additionally, he must have

first to demonstrate the most illogical aspect of the temple's

exposed the right fragment of A 3 with Herakles and Triton,

design—that the large sculptured reliefs belonged to the epi-

w h i c h goes unmentioned in previous accounts but is drawn by

style (Fig. 4). This fact was so extraordinary to Texier that he

Charles Fellows three years later (Pi. 100a; Fig. 80). In his later

urged the A c a d é m i e des Beaux-arts to form a commission to

edition of Texier's account, R. Popplewell Pullan, w h o visited

examine the issue. 23 A s for the patron deity, Texier saw enough

Assos on 18 O c t o b e r 1861, only adds that Texier's digging

marine iconography in the sculpture to associate the temple

unearthed many fragments of tile. 22

with Poseidon.

Texier identified and drew various parts of the temple, but

F o l l o w i n g Texier, Sir Charles Fellows was one of the last

neither his measurements nor his rendering of architectural

antiquarians to see the impressive array of sculpture scattered

details reflect careful scrutiny of the evidence. His attitude

around the site during his visit in M a r c h 1838.

toward this and other ancient monuments is somewhat cavalier: O n every side lay columns, triglyphs, and friezes, of beautiful sculpC e monument est renversé de fond en comble; mais le construction

ture, every object speaking of the grandeur of this ancient city. In one

d'un temple grec est si logique, que lorsqu'on en possède une partie, le reste s'ensuit naturellement.

place I saw 30 Doric capitals placed up in a line for a f e n c e . . . T h e

de colonnes en partie debout' ('the placement and traces of columns, some of which are still upright')· For the foundations, sec Texier 1849, p. 206. 22

Pullan 1865, p. 38.

annexed plate will show one of the friezes, the subject of which 23 Leake 1824, p. 128, notes the feature but does not elaborate. Texier's reconstruction has had some life of its o w n , appearing in Durm 1892, pp. 109-10, fig. 83, and later in D . S. Robertson 1971, fig. 36.

Κ- — - (>9··ε)

k

Οθ ζ)

GS

ί

ì -a "ο ì4

1 g

CQ «Γ

3 u

-T3

U

ο

M

IO H I S T O R Y O F T H E

BUILDING

FIGURE 6. Reconstructed east elevation of the temple, proposed by J. T. Clarke; after Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey, p. 145.

I cannot understand or describe [A3]; others represented bulls fight-

further archaeological w o r k at the site. Fortunately, the temple

ing, sphinxes crouching, and a variety of animals, well executed,

escaped the systematic dismantling of monuments in the lower

although upon a coarse material. 24

city (theatre, gymnasium, and city gates) undertaken to provide

Six months later, the French scholar Désiré Raoul-Rochette

building material for the docks of the arsenal in Istanbul in

received permission f r o m Sultan M a h m u d II to remove one

1864. The French government managed to stop the plundering

capital and 13 sculptured blocks to the Musée du Louvre. 2 3 His

and to negotiate a claim to all further discoveries of ancient art

cache included, f r o m the epistyle: the right half of A2,

at Assos, but no one t o o k advantage of the opportunity. 2 6

con-

fronted sphinxes; A 3 , Herakles and Triton; A 4 , symposion; A 7 and A8, running centaurs; A 9 , A n , and A 1 2 , lions bringing d o w n herbivores; A 1 4 and A i 5, confronted bulls; and f r o m the

T H E

A M E R I C A N

E X C A V A T I O N S ,

1 8 8 1 - 3

frieze: M 3 , confronted sphinxes; M4, boar; and, M 7 , centaur. Unfortunately, these blocks were sawed off to a thickness of

W h e n the American architects Joseph Thacher C l a r k e and

0.15 m. to facilitate their installation in the walls of the Louvre,

Francis H e n r y Bacon examined the site 15 years later, in June

thus destroying architectural evidence crucial for the building's

1879, Assos had again become a forgotten city. D e e p l y im-

construction. N e i t h e r Raoul-Rochette nor Texier undertook

pressed b y the architectural significance and excellent state of

Fellows 1839, pp. 47-8. The 30 capitals are those exposed by Texier. Clarac 1841, pp. 1149-66, for an early account of the reliefs at the Louvre.

26

Sartiaux 1915, pp. 7-8. Sartiaux 191S, pp. 28-9.

IO

H I S T O R Y OF T H E

BUILDING

FIGURE 7. Reconstruction of the temple, proposed b y Felix Sartiaux; after Sartiaux 1915, p. 191, fig. 32,

the monuments, Clarke convinced the n e w l y formed A r c h a e o -

bedrock at levels between 0.60 and 0.80 m. b e l o w the upper

logical Institute of America to support a large-scale excavation

surface of the stylobate (approximately 0.05 to 0.25 m. b e l o w

of the entire city. 2 7 T w o years later, on 19 A p r i l 1881, he and

the bed of the first step). 30 Soundings were also made in the

Bacon inaugurated the first A m e r i c a n expedition to the Medi-

pronaos at places lacking paving slabs (labelled A A on Clarke's

terranean. In three intensive campaigns lasting until the sum-

first plan). 3 1 T h e excavators cut additional trenches from the

mer of 1883, they surveyed the entire site and excavated the

foundation outward toward the circuits of the Byzantine for-

akropolis, agora, theatre, and western nekropolis. 2 8 Investiga-

tifications, w h i c h they partially dismantled in search of sculp-

tion of the archaic D o r i c temple on the akropolis began on 6

tured

A u g u s t 1881, directed b y Clarke, with the first trench striking

fragments of six sculptured reliefs f r o m the epistyle and t w o

blocks.

During

this

first

season,

they

discovered

the then completely buried foundation of the temple. In the six

decorated metopes. 3 2 T h e y inventoried t w o fragments of A i

weeks devoted to excavating this area, the Americans cleared

and one fragment of Az, confronted sphinxes; t w o fragments

approximately 1.50 m. of accumulated debris f r o m the foun-

of A 5 , comprising the nearly complete relief of Herakles rout-

dation, removing bones, ashes, and 'other refuse'. T h e y also

ing centaurs; one fragment of A 6 , galloping centaurs; one

dismantled the late Byzantine structures that had been built

fragment of A i o , lion attacking supine deer; and, one fragment

directly on the krepis of the temple. 2 9 A trench was cut around

of A 1 3 , lion attacking a boar (Pis. 76, 78, 92-3, 84, 89;

the entire foundation d o w n to the top of the euthynteria and to

Figs. 67-8, 76, 72, 75). T h e y also discovered t w o important

the level of the first course of the foundation at the southwest

metopes: M i , man chasing y o u t h or maiden; M8, quarrelling

corner. Within the temple, the Americans dug at three positions

heroes (Pis. 93, 107-8; Figs. 87, 86). O t h e r architectural finds

along the northern and southern pteroma, reaching u n w o r k e d

included a fragment of an antefix, a piece of ornamental roof

Clarke 1880, pp. 145-63. For the first campaign, Clarke 1882, pp. 14-35; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, pp. 5-6; Mendel 1914, pp. 3-4; and Sartiaux 1915, pp. 9-10. For the first day of excavation, see Bacon's account in An Archaeological Expedition to Asia Minor, Letters and Journals of Francis H. Bacon. Unpublished manuscript, p. 17. I am grateful to D r Lenore Keene C o n g d o n for making her copy of the journal available to mc. For excerpts, see C o n g d o n 1974, pp. 83-95. F ° r tf 10 difficulties experienced by the team, see Allen 2002.

30 Clarke 1882, p. 82, in positions marked by daggers on pi. 7. Clarke did not define the level from which he measured the depth, but the dimensions he gives for the trench at the southwest corner suggest that he was w o r k i n g from the top surface of the stylobate. Clarke 1898, p. 56, states that bedrock was reached at levels 'not more than half a meter below the pavement of the naos'.

27

28

2 9 Clarke 1882, p. 30; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 6; Texier (1849, pp. 205-6) mentions the same structures.

3 1 See C l a r k e 1882, p. 83, pi. 7. These trenches, according to Clarke, revealed a lower foundation intended to support pedestals. However, pedestals would not require special foundations, particularly underneath the paving. The so-called foundations were probably dressed-down bedrock. >2

Clarke 1882, p. 83, pis. 2, 7. T h e position of their trenches is marked on pi. 2.

f IO

H I S T O R Y OF T H E

llllllllül ! I I I I

0

1

1

1

1

BUILDING

C

A

C

A

1

1

2

3

1

1

1

4

1

5m

FIGURE 8. Detail of southwest corner of krepis s h o w i n g area of excavation.

tiling, and a fragment of lion's head waterspout (Pis. 57, 59-60;

fication

Figs. 46a, c). The excavators convincingly identified the patron

fragments of architectural sculpture, including the remaining

walls and surrounding areas produced several more

deity of the temple as A t h e n a Polias, based on the repeated

fragment of A i , confronted sphinxes; t w o large fragments

occurrence of her image on the city's coinage and the discovery

completing A 6 , galloping centaurs; and, a fragment of a met-

of the t w o inscriptions cited at the beginning of this chapter. 33

ope, M6, with equine hoofs (Pis. 77, 93, 112; Figs. 67, 77, 90).

T h e results of the first campaign were published in a prelim-

Additional discoveries included a fragment of a terracotta sima,

inary report in 1882. T h e same year, C l a r k e undertook a second

a lion's p a w identified by the excavators as part of an akroter-

campaign, digging at the temple for three weeks in A p r i l and

ion in the f o r m of a griffin, and a fourth century BC inscription

May. G e r m a n architect Robert K o l d e w e y joined the exped-

listing items kept within the temple (PL 58a-b; Fig. 46b). 35

ition, and although he and Bacon focused chiefly on the agora

During the second campaign, C l a r k e uncovered

ceramic

and nekropolis respectively, they helped C l a r k e with his inves-

material f r o m sealed contexts beneath the floor of the pteroma,

tigation of the temple and contributed drawings to the final

w h i c h he described as 'a number of rude sherds of p o t t e r y . . . all

reports (Figs. 2, 5-6). 3 4 Further investigation of the late forti-

unglazed, several being of the lustrous, rubbed variety met with in the t w o oldest "cities " of Hissarlik'. 3 6 H e added that

3 j For coinage, see H . W. Bull in Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y PP· 2 95 - 3°4> nos. 35-47, 49-121» 135, 146.

1902-21,

34 For the second campaign, Clarke 1898, pp. 1-39; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldew e y 1902-21, pp. 6-9; Mendel 1914, pp. 3-4; Sartiaux 1915, pp. 10-14. Clarke drew the state plan and the restored elevation, which Bacon then redrew for the final folio volume. Bacon also drew the sculptures. K o l d e w e y drew the sections and the coffered ceiling blocks, even though he doubted they belonged to the temple.

3 5 Sterrett 1883, pp. 4-6, no. Ill; Clarke 1898, p. 48; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 168; Merkelbach 1976, pp. 3-5, no. 3. 3 6 Clarke 1898, pp. 72-3. For comparative material from Ilion, see Schliemann 1880, pp. 218-20; Schliemann 1884, pp. 30-8, 130-8; Biegen et al. 1950, pp. 52-3, 220-1.

IO

H I S T O R Y OF THE

BUILDING

5m

Γΐ ( , Ί

Earth with few working chips Packing of working chips Earth without working chips

FIGURE 9. Sections through excavated trench in southwest corner.

'nothing was brought to light w h i c h tended to contradict

of a black-glazed roof tile, and a bronze coin of Gargara struck

the opinion advanced by the writer in regard to the date of

in the first half of the fourth century BC. T h e last securely

the original construction', that is, mid-fifth century BC. U n f o r -

establishes a terminus post quem for renovations to the floor

tunately, the material was neither described nor illustrated,

and roof.

and none of it survives today. Explorations were also made

T h e results of the second A m e r i c a n campaign appeared in a

underneath the cement of the mosaic in the cella, where the

second excavation report by C l a r k e in 1898. T h e task of p u b -

excavators f o u n d fragments of a moulded vessel shaped as a

lishing the folio volume and finished drawings, however, fell

tragic mask, the handle of a 'delicately painted' vase, a fragment

entirely to Bacon. Sections of this w o r k , with an abbreviated

IO H I S T O R Y O F T H E

BUILDING

text on the temple based on Clarke's account, appeared f r o m

even though his co-excavators disagreed. Moreover, his recon-

1902-21. 3 7

struction failed to convince because it neglected the significant

T h e Americans did not excavate on the akropolis during their

differences in the lengths and intercolumnar spacings sug-

third and final campaign in 1883. A t the close of their investi-

gested by the sculptured blocks of the epistyle (Figs. 6, 94).

gations, two-thirds of the discoveries f r o m the temple, includ-

Felix Sartiaux soon challenged Clarke's publication, offering

ing f o u r reliefs (A2, A 6 , A i o , and A 1 3 ) and three metopes ( M i ,

in 1913 and 1914 a new arrangement of the sculpture. Sartiaux

M6, and M8) were taken to the Archaeological M u s e u m in

advanced a date for the temple in the third quarter of the

Istanbul. T h e excavators' awards included t w o reliefs f r o m the

sixth century BC, which has enjoyed general if not unanimous

epistyle ( A i and A5), the lion's head waterspout, and the frag-

acceptance. 4 2 In proposing that the temple had unequal col-

mentary terracotta antefix and sima, all of w h i c h were given by

umnar spacings

the Archaeological Institute of America to the M u s e u m of Fine

fundamental questions concerning the extent t o which the

across the façade, Sartiaux's w o r k

raised

Arts in Boston. Additional architectural members forming the

temple may have been influenced by Ionic architectural design

complete elevation of the temple were taken to the harbour and

(Figs. 7, 95-6). Sartiaux's hypothesis, however, lacked con-

crated for shipment to America, but permission to remove the

firmation

blocks was never granted. Ten years later, some of the objects,

site (see A p p e n d i x III).

in the larger architectural record preserved at the

including a raking geison block and a triglyph from the temple, were sent to the Archaeological M u s e u m in Istanbul. T h e handsome D o r i c capitals, column drums, and geison blocks were

SUBSEQUENT

abandoned at the harbour. O n his return to Assos in 1904,

RESEARCH,

1896-2006

Bacon lamented that the remains of the great Temple of A t h e n a

F o l l o w i n g the American excavation, full-scale archaeological

were ' n o w lying at the port half covered w i t h debris and trod-

research on the temple and at Assos in general ceased f o r nearly

den b y dogs and camels'. 3 8 T h e capitals remained at the harbour

a century. 4 3 Between the close of this w o r k and renewed efforts

for nearly a century; in 1982, t w o (C30 and C 3 1 ) w e r e at last

at the site, A s s o s languished in relative if not a l w a y s peaceful

returned to the akropolis. T h e other architectural members

obscurity. D u r i n g the Second World War, troops occupied the

have currently vanished. 3 9

temple platform; the elliptical depression in the centre of the

T h e American excavations p o w e r f u l l y documented Leake's

cella marks their foxhole. T h e temple was again commandeered

claim that Assos embodied the most perfect idea of a Greek

by the Turkish a r m y — r e p l e t e w i t h anti-aircraft artillery—dur-

city. Their sweeping investigation of the agora, nekropolis, and

ing the C y p r u s Crisis of 1974. M u c h has disappeared since the

city walls still remains the only significant record of these

time of the A m e r i c a n excavation: in the late 1940s most of the

monuments, and their efforts on the akropolis secured for the

northern and all of the southern stylobate was torn up to build

temple a prominent if not perfectly understood place in G r e e k

a windmill, n o w itself a ruin on the summit of the akropolis.

architectural history. Clarke's study not only included a close

O t h e r stylobate blocks were pillaged for use in the olive-oil

examination of the sculpture and its reconstruction but also

factories of nearby villages. O f

paid special attention to materials and techniques of construc-

k n o w n to the C l a r k e - B a c o n team, more than half the triglyphs,

tion. Joseph Silas Diller's geological survey and John H e n r y

many of the plain metopes, most of the paving of the pteroma,

the architectural

material

Haynes's photographic documentation that accompany the

and the entire mosaic f r o m the cella have also disappeared.

A m e r i c a n reports pioneered the more comprehensive method

Notwithstanding such damage, w h e n the present w o r k began

of archaeological research taken for granted today. 4 0

in 1979, the site appeared much as it was left b y the American

Clarke's interpretation of the temple proved less successful than his architectural description. Swayed b y the correlation

excavators, w h o s e trenches had themselves become topographical features of the w i n d s w e p t surface of the akropolis.

in absolute dimensions between the Athenian Hephaisteion

Despite the early A m e r i c a n excavators' intention 'to leave

and the Assian Temple of Athena, C l a r k e set his analysis

nothing henceforth to be done u p o n the site of A s s o s — e v e n

against the backdrop of

b y the most careful gleaner', their three years of research over

fifth-century

developments in A t h -

ens. 41 H e insisted on a mid-fifth century date for the temple, Clarke 1898; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21. Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 124. 3 9 Other material from the agora appears to have been built into buildings in the area, but I could not identify blocks specifically belonging to the temple. During the summer of 1987, a dredge working in the harbour retrieved t w o fluted column drums, probably from monuments built at the harbour or possibly the agora. I briefly accompanied M s Emcl Akalin, then student of Istanbul University, during her underwater survey of the mole in 1988; none of the many submerged ancient blocks appear to belong to the temple. 37

38

Clarke 1882, pp. 166-215; Clarke 1898, p. 3. For the early history of archaeological photography: Schubert and Grunaeur-von Hoerschelman 1978, pp. 11-26. 40

41

Clarke 1882, pp. 103-4; Clarke 1898, pp. 292-334.

the entire ancient city could not help but o v e r l o o k some important material. 4 4 D u r i n g his visit to the site in 1896, Wilhelm D ö r p f e l d f o u n d several architectural sculptures, including the right fragment of A i , confronted sphinxes, and metopes M2 and M5, runners and Europe on the Zeus bull (Pis. 79, 89, 109, 106; Figs. 67, 89, 85). A n o t h e r metope depicting an equestrian

Sartiaux 191 J. During the 1960s and early 1970s, restorations were made on the Greek and Byzantine city walls, the old mosque, and the Turkish bridge. 44 Clarke 1898, p. 20. 42 4j

IO

H I S T O R Y OF THE

BUILDING

(M9) was found in 1973 (PI. i n ; Fig. 90). 45 Such important but

fragments joined to complete relief A i o , lions devouring a doe,

isolated finds, however, could not supply the kind of additional

and the third established the design of A 1 3 as t w o lions attack-

information needed to understand the architectural design of

ing a boar (Pis. 85, 90; Figs. 72, 75). 48 Excavation along the

the temple, to clarify its building programme, and to determine

southern stretch of fortification disinterred the several capitals

its date.

first noted b y Texier.

With the hope of resolving some of these issues, I returned to

In subsequent seasons f r o m 1983 to 1987, I w o r k e d in con-

the site exactly a century after Clarke and Bacon had made their

junction w i t h D r Serdaroglu, compiling a catalogue of extant

first survey. A preliminary survey of the akropolis in A u g u s t

temple blocks, making measured drawings, and rendering a

1979 and a more extensive investigation in July 1980 revealed

new state plan and elevation (Fold-out Figs. 1-3). In 1983,

that the surviving architectural material was far more extensive

Serdaroglu dismantled the ruined windmill. Fie excavated the

than Clarke recorded. 4 6 We found yet another sculptured met-

covering of soil immediately north of the foundation d o w n to

ope, depicting three figures ( M i o ) , exposed in what remained of

bedrock in an area c. 0.0 to 8.6 m. f r o m the face of the northern

the latest fortification wall (PI. 1 i o a - b ; Fig. 88). F r o m the many

euthynteria and c.0.0 to 13 m. f r o m the northeast corner. D u r -

reçut blocks, it became clear that the temple had sustained major

ing the summer of 1985, he concentrated on the area near the

repairs to its entablature. Moreover, cuttings for foundations in

southwest corner of the temple, where excavation exposed

the bedrock north of the temple, and a wide range of isolated

the f o u r courses of the foundation that support this corner of

blocks found mainly to the east, proved that other ancient

the krepidoma and also revealed a hitherto unrecorded stone

structures once existed on the akropolis as well (Appendix IV).

platform (PI. 3b). W o r k continued at the southwest corner

That same year, excavations resumed under the direction of

in 1987, w h e n w e opened a small trench inside this corner of

D r U m i t Serdaroglu. D u r i n g campaigns in 1980-82, he re-

the temple's foundations between the outer krepis and toicho-

moved the earth that had accumulated on the krepidoma

bate (Pi. 4; Figs. 8-9). T h e sounding revealed the building's

(Pis. 2 - 3 a - b ) . Excavation along both flanks of the temple

internal construction, but the f e w sherds it produced did not

revealed more of the Byzantine houses partly uncovered by

provide diagnostic evidence for dating the temple. M y further

Clarke. O n e of the capitals built into the later fortification wall

surface investigation of the eastern slopes of the akropolis

south of the temple was discovered to have an archaic A c o l i c

in 1987 brought to light a large fragment of sculptured epistyle

inscription cut onto its abacus (PI. 44a-b; Fig. 26b). 47 T o the

with centaurs, w h i c h joins the part of relief A 8 taken to Paris

west, excavation exposing the lowest course of the latest forti-

nearly 150 years earlier (Pis. 96-7; Fig. 79). A f t e r 1988, Serdar-

fication wall brought to light three additional sculptured frag-

oglu focused w o r k on the akropolis towards his reconstruction

ments f r o m the epistyle, all part of the lion series and joining

of the building, a project that has continued under the direction

reliefs discovered b y Clarke and Bacon a century earlier. T w o

of D r Nurettin Arslan.

43 In a letter to Francis Bacon dated 16 January 1897 (now in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston), Wilhelm Dörpfeld and Paul Wolters include a plan that mentions a metope with a horse, suggesting they also may have been aware of the horse and rider on M9. 4 6 Wescoat 1981; 1982; 1986; 1987; 1988. 47 Johnston and Wescoat 1988.

48

Serdaroglu 1983; Serdaroglu 1990; Serdaroglu 1995, pp. 82-90.

44

Building Materials and Technical Aspects of Construction M A T E R I A L S

Except for the ceiling, roof work, and certain repairs, the entire temple at Assos was constructed of the same purplish-grey volcanic andesite porphyry that forms the promontory of the akropolis. 1 The choice to work in local andesite meant significant savings in the cost of material, transport, and labour; in fact, this excellent building stone has remained the material of choice at Assos throughout its history The intermediate igneous rock is comprised of large, glassy-white porphyritic crystals of feldspar set in a more finely grained purplish-grey ground-mass that often includes smaller crystals of mica and iron-bearing minerals.2 Its two sets of joint planes, one approximately horizontal and the other vertical, create the naturally rectilinear formations seen to best effect in the spectacular vertical cliffs on the southern side of the akropolis (Pi. 5). The feldspar crystals generally align parallel to each other and to the joint planes, making the stone easy to quarry and shape into ashlar blocks (PI. 8). The size and concentration of porphyritic crystals produce a rough surface along the lines of fracture, but the stone takes a sharp edge and achieves an excellent finish when smoothed with abrasives. It responds less well to the curved surfaces and decorative detail of relief sculpture. Intricate detail is impossible, but broadly modelled surfaces can be worked with a combination of drove and abrasives. The durable surface and uniform density of the stone do not require a final layer of protective plaster, and in fact none of the many surviving blocks bears evidence that a layer of plaster was applied. 3 The blocks protected beneath the soil maintain a remarkably fresh finish, but those exposed over the last century have suffered considerable weathering. Curved surfaces have been especially vulnerable to calving thick layers of surface stone

(Pi. 33). T w o types of lichen, greenish-grey endolithic (crustose) lichen on the summit of the akropolis and brilliant yellowish-orange foliose (parmelia) lichen on the eastern slopes, have also begun to decompose the exposed blocks and blur their originally fine finish. In addition to andesite, a softer, more finely grained and more easily worked volcanic tuff was used to carve one metope (Mio, Pl. 110), some of the smallest architectural members (tympanon T p i 3 , Fig. 63; hawksbeak repair, B24, Fig. 53), and the threedimensional sculptures associated with the roof (volute akroterion, lion's paw, and lion's head waterspout; PI. 60, Fig. 47). The nail hole running through the tuff hawksbeak suggests that it was a replacement piece. Since all the other metopes were carved from andesite, the tuff metope must be a replacement as well. Probably all of these tuff fragments belong to the extensive repair made to the building in the late Archaic period. The ceiling and roof tree were made of wood, as is clear from sockets cut into the geison. Certain elements that no longer survive, such as the epikranitis, might also have been of wood rather than stone; the regular and ornamental roof tiles were made of terracotta. The range in fabric and colour of the handful of surviving fragments attests to several ancient roofs, perhaps not all belonging to the temple. Most of the fabrics have a coarse-grained aggregate that often includes pulverized andesite. For the finer plastic w o r k on the face of the one surviving antefix, however, a veneer of purified, bright orange terracotta was fired on to the main coarse-grained body (PL 57). Metalwork in the building was confined to clamps and pins. The several surviving clamps in the krepis are of iron encased in lead. Presumably iron was also the material of choice for the nails used to secure the roof tiles.

T E C H N I C A L J. S. Dillcr, conducting the first geological survey, called the rock trachyte but later identified it as andesite; Clarke 1882, pp. 166-215, and Clarke 1898, pp. 50-4. For discussions of Assian stone in antiquity, see Gaiser 1985, pp. 28-36, 93-100.

A S P E C T S

O F

C O N S T R U C T I O N

1

Andesite p o r p h y r y contains little or no quartz and is comprised predominantly of plagioclasc phcnocrysts, hornblende, augite, and biotite; Blatt, Tracy, and O w e n s 2006, pp. 42-6, 83-4, figs. 2 - 1 9 B , 4-22, 4-23 (the last for an upheaved plug similar to the akropolis at Assos). Clarke 1882, p. 31, identifies greyish discolouration on the krepis as stains caused by the leaching lime of 'stucco priming'. T h e residue is more likely to be from a simple whitewash, as suggested under the discussion of colour.

Quarrying and stonework The masons quarried the stone directly from the acropolis, thus eliminating both the cost of the material and its transport.

4

Scranton 1969, pp. 14-16 (cost of transport); Korres 1995, 2000 (quarrying and

transport); Hellmann 2002, pp. 56-9 (generally).

20

B U I L D I N G M A T E R I A L S AND T E C H N I C A L

ASPECTS

T h e y w o r k e d especially in the area immediately north and west

sometimes slightly curved striations, indicative of the drove,

of the temple, w h i c h satisfied the double purpose of generating

appear on exposed surfaces such as the echinus of the capital

building material while making a level terrace f o r the structure.

and the soffit of the epistyle (Pis. 1 1 - 1 2 ) . 1 0 N o n e of the blocks

T h e exposed bedrock in this area bears several sets of the small

shows indications of having been w o r k e d with a small-toothed

(c.0.04 b y 0.1 ο m.), closely spaced rectangular slots made for

(claw) chisel. 1 1 O n some of the capitals, the masons used a drill

the metal or w o o d e n wedges used to split slabs of stone f r o m

to set off the echinus f r o m the abacus. Several capitals have

the native rock (PI. 6).5 Masons also quarried from the northern

shallow drill holes in the centre of each capital's bed surface,

side of the promontory, leaving artificial shelves in the bedrock

w h i c h secured the horizontal arm of an architectural compass

(PI. 7). T h e > - s h a p e d channels cut around blocks appearing o n

used to strike off the circumferences of the echinus, annulets,

the cliffs just b e l o w the temple s h o w further evidence of

and neck (Fig. 26a). T h e compass point was held in place by a

quarrying, although not necessarily for the temple (PL 5). T h e

rectangular plate fitted into a slight depression cut in the bed

convenience of the quarry m a y also have lessened the need to

surface of the capital (PL 40). 12

order blocks of more standardized dimension, for the masons

A l l blocks f r o m the temple have anathyrosis on their vertical

could quarry opportunistically and compensate as they w e n t

joint surfaces. In addition, the epistyle backers and wall blocks

along.

have anathyrosis on the top surface; the epistyle (facer and

M a n y of the blocks retain quarry-dressed surfaces where a tight join was unnecessary (for example, the inner faces of

backer) and capitals have anathyrosis on the bed surface; and, the column drums have anathyrosis on both joint surfaces.

epistyle or stylobate blocks or the tops of geison blocks), and several still bear the rectangular wedge-holes as well (for ex-

Lifting and setting

ample, A 2 1 / A 3 3 , PL 47b; Fig. 33; or L G 2 1 , Fig. 43). T o shape and prepare the blocks, the masons used the punch, facing

N o block below the level of the entablature bears evidence of

hammer, and drove (a broad flat chisel)—tools w i d e l y k n o w n

lifting with complex m a c h i n e r y 1 3 T h e blocks of the geison and

in the sixth

century. 6

The inner areas of anathyrosis on the

tympanon, however, have cuttings that show they were hoisted

vertical joint surfaces of the geison and epistyle blocks, and

b y three different but related systems, all of w h i c h imply the use

on the inner bed surfaces of capitals, bear pockmarks left by the

of the crane w i t h a c o m p o u n d pulley system and winch. 1 4 T h e

punch. L o n g , irregular furrows also made by the punch (also

geison blocks f r o m the southern flank, w h i c h I argue belong to

called a point) appear on the inner bed surfaces of the column

the original construction, were raised by ropes or chains con-

drums, the epistyle backers, and the upper surface of the first

nected to iron hooks set into tapered horizontal sockets with

step course where it has been roughly dressed to receive the

shallow vertical channels (Figs. 1 0 - 1 1 , 43-4). T h e cuttings vary

stylobate blocks (Pis. 9 - 1 0 , 12-13). 7 T h e rustication on the

in shape, even on the same block, but most of the sockets

southern euthynteria bears the mark of a punch used to accen-

penetrate the block to a depth between 0.09 and 0.125

tuate the irregular ridges left b y the broader blows of a mallet

channels are mostly between 0.05 and 0.06 m. deep, although

m

· The

(Pis. 29-31). T h e sculptors also used the punch to define the

they can be as shallow as 0.025

contour of figures, but other evidence of tooling on the sculp-

helped to secure the shaft of the h o o k against the block, but

ture has been erased with an abrasive, such as emery. 8

they also helped to brace the block during lifting.' 3 In several

T h e masons used the facing hammer f o r most of the finer

m

· These channels not only

but not all instances, the channels on adjacent blocks were

unexposed w o r k , including the outer bands of anathyrosis (and sometimes the inner area as well), the relieving margins on the top surfaces of the capitals, the upper surface of the geison where the tiles rested, and the unexposed areas of the first step course (Pis. 10, 12, 42). 9 T h e fine r o w s of parallel and 5 Quarrying, Martin 1965, pp. 146-51; Orlandos 1966.II, pp. 16-20; Kozelj 1988a, pp. 20-33; Bessac 1988, pp. 43-4, fig. 3; K o z e l j 1988b, pp. 31-9, figs. 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12; Waelkins, D e Paepe, and Moens 1988, pp. 17-18, fig. 5; Waelkins, D e Paepe, and Moens 1990, pp. 60-5; Chiotis and Papadimitriou 1995, pp. 8-9, figs. 3— 6; Hellmann 2002, pp. 73-81. Specific studies, Koenigs 1972, pp. 381-3, figs. 2-3 (Naxos); Sodini, Lambraki, and K o z e l j 1980, pp. 8 1 - 1 3 7 (Thasos); A m a n d r y 1981, pp. 714-21 (Delphi); Daux and Hansen 1987, pp. 25-32 (Siphnian Treasury, Delphi). b In general, Bessac 1986.

A vertical strike causes the pockmark; an oblique blow creates the furrow; Casson 1933, pp. 174-8; Martin 1965, p. 180; A d a m 1966, pp. 3 - 1 7 ; Bessac 1988, pp. 47-8, fig. 8. Working blocks generally, Daux and Hansen 1987, pp. 32-42. 8 Abrasives, A d a m 1966, pp. 78-9. 9 Orlandos 1966.II, fig. 41; Ginouvès and Martin 1985, p. 69, pis. 6.1, 36.8; Bessac 1988, p. 50, fig. 13 (diamond pointed hammer); N y l a n d e r 1970, p. 25, n . i o for the possible use of the edged hammer as well. 7

10 A d a m 1966, pp. 23-5; Bessac 1988, pp. 47-8, fig. 9; Richter τ 943, pp. 188-93. The drove continued in use into the fifth century, e.g., on the classical Temple of Poseidon at Isthmia (Broneer 1971, p. 58, pi. 16b) or the classical temple at Kalapodi (Felsch et al. 1980, p. 104, fig. 92). 1 1 Martin 1965, p. 182; A d a m 1966, pp. 18-22; Orlandos 1966.Π, pp. 50-2. T h e toothed chisel, introduced around the middle of the sixth century, was well suited for working marble or limestone but would have been less effective on the gritty crystalline andésite. 12 The holes are c.0.005 ni. in diameter and 0.003 1 0 ° - 0 0 5 m · deep. The rectangular cuttings, clearly visible on capitals C6, C 1 2 , C 1 3 , C 1 9 , C 2 1 , C22, C24, and C 3 1 , are c.0.045 by 0.075 m · C o m p a r e ICorres 1995, pp. 28-9, 50-1. O n the architectural compass, Martin 1965, p. 188; Orlandos 1966.II, pp. 65-6, fig. 60; Koenigs 1980a, p. 25, fig. 8 (idea on a larger scale). The capitals were not turned on a lathe, contra Clarke 1898, pp. 77-9. 13 Contra Clarke 1898, p. 63, fig. 6. T h e cuttings of triangular section on the first step are for shifting. 14 Lifting, C o u l t o n 1974a, pp. 1 - 1 9 ; Daux and Hansen 1987, p. 42, figs. 25-6. Clarke 1898, pp. 126-8, figs. 20, 25, restores coffered ceiling blocks with lewis cuttings to the temple, but they do not belong. O n the akropolis, a lewis cutting appears on only one block of undetermined function and provenance (see A p p e n dix IV, B14, Fig. 101). lD

M y thanks to J. J. C o u l t o n for this observation.

21 B U I L D I N G M A T E R I A L S A N D T E C H N I C A L

ASPECTS

aligned and together created a broad enough space to remove

stances, the blocks

the iron h o o k after the block w a s set flush against its neighbour.

sides. 1 7 H o w e v e r , the unusual combination of U - c h a n n e l and

F o r blocks having shallower channels, the h o o k w o u l d have to

socket makes good sense, especially when w o r k i n g with an-

be removed before the block was set flush. The final shifting

desite. T h e more fragile U - s h a p e d channel was o n l y necessary

w o u l d occur while the block was slightly raised at either end,

on the side of the block that had to be set next to a block

using the wedge-shaped cutting on the adjacent block and a side

already in place; on the clear side the lifting device was easily

have the U-shaped

channel

on

both

pry-hole on the joint face, and the bed shift-hole on the free

removable. T h e square socket and w o o d e n peg avoided the

face. It could then be lowered gently into place.

very real danger of shearing the weight-bearing stone inside

O n the other three sides, w h i c h I argue belong to a major

the U-shaped channel (as attested on both the northeast and

repair, the geison blocks were raised using a modified version of the U-shaped channel system. T h e lifting rope or chain was wrapped around a U - s h a p e d channel cut into the left joint face of the block and then looped around a w o o d e n peg set into a deep, square socket (c.0.07 m. to 0.09 m. square) on the opposite joint face (Figs. 12, 55-7, 59-60). 16 In most archaic in-

16 For archaic examples of lifting using sockets, Orlandos 1966.II, p. 96; add the Temple of Aphrodite at Akrai: Bernabò Brea 1986, pp. 39-40, fig. 35. Sockets

without release channels in the lateral face of cornice blocks have been interpreted in three ways: (1) for horizontal dowels ( D y g g v e 194S, p. 102, fig. 116; Orlandos

1966.II, p. 96); (2) for pegs to aid in transporting (Koldewey and Puchstein 1899, p. 120, fig. 98, epistyle blocks from Temple F at Selinous); and, (3) for different forms of lifting device, e.g., for (a) lifting tongs (Orlandos 1966.II, p. 96; Martin 1965, pp. 2x3-15, fig. 93); or (b) w o o d e n pegs to hold lifting ropes ( C o o p e r 1983, p. 5 j, Temple of Zeus at Nemea). A t Assos, interpretation (3b) makes best sense. For the U-shaped channel, Martin i965,pp. 2 i o - n , f i g s . 89-90, pi. 22.2; Orlandos 1966.II, p. 93, figs. 97.6 and 9.99; C o u l t o n 1974a, pp. 7-9, fig- 1; Bankel 1993, pp. 109-10, figs. 9, 10, 22, 35, 53, 57, pis. 22.2, 29.3, 78; Mertens 1993, fig· supplement 11. 1 7 K o l d e w e y and Puchstein (1899, p. 225) note that not all the blocks of the O l y m p i e i o n at Akragas have U-shaped channels on both sides; sometimes the opposite side has no cutting.

47 B U I L D I N G M A T E R I A L S A N D T E C H N I C A L

ASPECTS

23 B U I L D I N G M A T E R I A L S A N D T E C H N I C A L

ASPECTS

southwest corner blocks (Figs. 56-7). T h e risk seems to have

The masons pried the blocks of all courses into position with

been particularly acute for the thin blocks of the raking geison,

levers. M o s t commonly, they cut the pry-hole w i t h one vertical

where in both surviving instances ( R G 2 and R G 4 ) a broken

face and one slightly angled face. T h e shape and position of the

U - c h a n n e l has been overcut with a square socket (Fig. 66).

side pry-holes on the krepidoma, the pry-holes cut on the

T o hoist the t y m p a n o n blocks, the masons set w o o d e n pegs

capitals to set the epistyle, and those cut on the epistyle to set

into slightly angled sockets cut into each vertical joint face

the frieze, demonstrate that the masons pushed t o w a r d , rather

above the centre point of gravity (Figs. 63-5). T h e system

than away from, the vertical face. 1 8 T h e y pried f r o m a position

provided a secure and balanced lifting procedure but no

quite close to the final position of the block (usually between

method for removing the lifting device. Instead, the block

0.02 and 0.07 m.) and held the lever in an oblique rather than

had to be set at some distance from its neighbour and then pried into place, a procedure confirmed b y the number and wide spacing of the pry marks found on the horizontal geison (Figs. 59-60; F o l d - o u t Figs. 11-2).

18 See also Fraisse and Llinas 1995, figs. 830-1 (Delos); Wurster 1971, ρ· ι*4> η.59, fig. 10 (Temple of A p o l l o , Aegina). T h e technique of pushing toward the vertical face is clearly demonstrated in the fallen wall-courses of the Temple of Herakles at Akragas.

24

BUILDING

MATERIALS

vertical position. The system risked slippage but had the advantage of applying horizontal and upward pressure, thus minimizing friction. A different but equally well-known technique was employed for setting the blocks in the first step course and the southern geison. The masons cut a wedge-shaped shift-hole on the upper joint face of the block already in position and a corresponding pry-hole on the vertical face of contact of the adjoining block. A lever inserted through the shift-hole on the block already in place held one end of the adjoining block in a raised position. A second lever, inserted into a rectangular shift-hole on the bed surface at the opposite end, and a third lever, working against the projecting boss on its face, held the block raised on the other sides. From this position the block could be manoeuvred easily into place by masons using a simple pry-hole as purchase (Fig. io). 1 ' When guiding the block was more important than moving it, for example in positioning the face of the epistyle, the masons used a slightly different system. They cut wedge-shaped side pry-holes, c.o.io to o.i 5 m. from the face of the block, with the vertical face away from the direction in which they were pushing. Using the face of the pry as a purchase, they held their levers vertically and, using a wooden chock, exerted a gentle pressure higher up on the block. Given the top-heavy shape of the epistyle blocks, this system provided the safest means of directing the block into position (Fig. 13). The masons also used the projecting bosses on the first step to shift the blocks back into position. In some instances, one mason raised the block by setting the lever against the base of the boss while two other masons pushed the block back into position using levers secured in side pry-holes near either end of the raised face. In other examples, they used the boss as a form of upomochlia, with the side pry-hole set directly beneath it (see plan, Fold-out Fig. i). 20 To set the stylobate blocks, masons used levers secured in shallow, rectangular shift-holes cut on the bed surface of one end. When shift-holes appear on both sides, they must have been used to help guide the block into position.21 Occasionally, the stylobate blocks have larger, wedge-shaped cuttings similar to those found on krepis blocks from other archaic temples 19 For shift-holes cut into the top surface of the block in place, with corresponding pry-hole in the joint face of the block in motion, note also Korres and Bouras 1983, p. 106; Bundgaard 1976, p. 63, fig. 36 (Parthenon); Paton and Stevens 1927, pp. 1 9 1 - 2 , fig. 1 1 7 (Erechthcion); Dinsmoor, Jr. 1976, p. 226, ill. 2 (Hephaisteion); Fraisse and Llinas 1995, figs. 825-7 (prostoon of the Oikos of the Naxians); Daux and Hansen 1987, pp. 42-7, figs. 27-34 (Siphnian Treasury, Delphi); Charbonneaux 1925, pp. 25-7, fig. 37, pis. 1 7 - 1 8 , fig. 37 (Marmaria tholos, Delphi). Shifting from the bottom of the block, Mertens 1984, p. 36, pi. 34 (Segesta); Hansen 1991, pp. 72-9. Generally, Martin 1965, pp. 234-8, figs. 1 1 0 - 1 1 ; Orlandos 1966.II, pp. 57-9, fig. 49; Nylander 1970, pp. 4 1 - 2 , 62-3, figs. 8-9 (Achaemenid parallels). 20 For bosses as shifting rather than lifting devices, Coulton 1974a, n. 24; Mertens 1984, p. 36, fig. 34. A similar system of side pry-holes appears in the Dörpfeld Foundation; Bundgaard 1974, pi. 69; Beyer 1977, p. 47, n. 9. 21 Koenigs 1972, p. 385, fig. 6, for the Hekatompedon at Naxos, where the marks are interpreted as cutting for levers to help balance the block as it was moved into position. Compare marks on the stylobate blocks from the temple at Segesta: Mertens 1984, p. 36, fig. 4b, pis. 20.3, 34.

AND

TECHNICAL

ASPECTS

(Si 8, Fig. 18),22 but the first step course does not have the long, rectangular depressions that would identify these marks as cuttings for a preliminary dowel. They must be larger versions of the flat, rectangular shift-holes, and, like them, used to manoeuvre the block into place. Flat, rectangular shift-holes regularly were cut into the bed surface of epistyle facers and backers (e.g., AB 17; Fig. 39).23 The number of shift-holes near both ends and on either side of each block suggests that lateral shifting was accomplished while the masons held the block in a slightly raised position, in order to reduce any friction that might tip the epistyle or topple the column. In some instances, the masons used this technique of controlling the bed surface of the block together with a lever controlling the upper joint face of the block. The same combination was used for the southern geison blocks (with greater emphasis on suspending the block at the top, Fig. 10), and occasionally in the frieze and binding wall courses (W37, Fig. 50).

Clamping, dowelling, and nailing Iron hook clamps of square section were used throughout the building (Pis. 16-8; Fig. 14).24 Hook clamps concealed by the superposed course were leaded into simple rectangular cuttings; five on the northern first step remain in situ in their original lead casing.25 Clamps on the stylobate and euthynteria that were meant to be seen, however, were leaded into various forms of decorative swallowtailed cuttings.26 Some of the cuttings have narrow waists and boldly flaring tails, others are of deep trapezoidal shape, and still others have a shallow flaring frame cut for only a thin layer of lead (Pis. 14-15; Fig. 15). In all instances, the deeper cutting for the crossbar confirms the use 22 For example, the Dörpfeld Foundation, the Old Temple of Dionysos in Athens, the Peisistratid Olympieion, and the second Temple of Aphaia at Aegina, as well as later in the wall-courses of the Parthenon, Propylaia, and the Temple of Arcs; Martin 1965, pp. 282-3, figs· I 2 4 - S · 23 Note similar although higher shift-hole cuttings on the sculptured reliefs from the tympanon of the Temple of Artemis on Korkyra: Korkyra II, figs. 1, 30, 44, 46b, 68, 75, 86, and pis. 9b, 20. 24 The temple has no simple swallowtailed clamps, contra Martin i965,pp. 246-7. 25 A rare but not unprecedented type in the Archaic period; note Temple of Athena at Poseidonia (Krauss 1959, pp. 24, 35, pis. 1 0 - 1 1 ) , Building C, Athens (Wiegand 1904, pp. 165-6, fig. 159), Old Temple of Dionysos in Athens (Weickert 1929, p. 93), and the Temple of Artemis in the Delion on Paros, where hook clamps in plain cuttings are combined with those in swallowtailed cuttings (Schuller 1991a, fig. 8, pis. 74-5). Kienast (1992, p. 35, n. 23, supplement 2, pis. 1 0 - 1 1 , 14) assigns the exposed hook clamps on the Genelaos monument to the original construction, but he demonstrates that they were not originally exposed on the top course of the monument. 26 Exposed clamps, often hook clamps set in swallowtailed cuttings, appear more frequently in the islands and western Anatolia than other areas; see Martin 1965, p. 240, n. 2; Hellström and Thieme 1982, pp. 1 8 - 1 9 , 2 4· Note also Grand Temple of Apollo at Delos: Courby 1931, pp. 90, 1 0 1 , figs. 108-12. Additional archaic examples from Asia Minor include: the inner threshold from the newly discovered Panionion at Mykale (Büsing 2007, pp. 157, 164-5, 49); the monument platform from Karaburun (Mcllink 1975, p. 350, ills. 2-3); Bin Tepe Chamber Tomb BT62.4 (Ratté 1989a, no. 3, pp. 1 3 - 1 4 , 169-76, figs. 45-6); late archaic Altar at Sardis (Hanfmann and Waldbaum 1975, pp. 93-5, figs. 204-7; Ratté 1989a, pp. 1 7 - 1 8 , 2 1 6 - 1 8 , no. 15, figs, H I , 115).

24

BUILDING

MATERIALS

vertical position. The system risked slippage but had the advantage of applying horizontal and upward pressure, thus minimizing friction. A different but equally well-known technique was employed for setting the blocks in the first step course and the southern geison. The masons cut a wedge-shaped shift-hole on the upper joint face of the block already in position and a corresponding pry-hole on the vertical face of contact of the adjoining block. A lever inserted through the shift-hole on the block already in place held one end of the adjoining block in a raised position. A second lever, inserted into a rectangular shift-hole on the bed surface at the opposite end, and a third lever, working against the projecting boss on its face, held the block raised on the other sides. From this position the block could be manoeuvred easily into place by masons using a simple pry-hole as purchase (Fig. io). 1 ' When guiding the block was more important than moving it, for example in positioning the face of the epistyle, the masons used a slightly different system. They cut wedge-shaped side pry-holes, c.o.io to o.i 5 m. from the face of the block, with the vertical face away from the direction in which they were pushing. Using the face of the pry as a purchase, they held their levers vertically and, using a wooden chock, exerted a gentle pressure higher up on the block. Given the top-heavy shape of the epistyle blocks, this system provided the safest means of directing the block into position (Fig. 13). The masons also used the projecting bosses on the first step to shift the blocks back into position. In some instances, one mason raised the block by setting the lever against the base of the boss while two other masons pushed the block back into position using levers secured in side pry-holes near either end of the raised face. In other examples, they used the boss as a form of upomochlia, with the side pry-hole set directly beneath it (see plan, Fold-out Fig. i). 20 To set the stylobate blocks, masons used levers secured in shallow, rectangular shift-holes cut on the bed surface of one end. When shift-holes appear on both sides, they must have been used to help guide the block into position.21 Occasionally, the stylobate blocks have larger, wedge-shaped cuttings similar to those found on krepis blocks from other archaic temples 19 For shift-holes cut into the top surface of the block in place, with corresponding pry-hole in the joint face of the block in motion, note also Korres and Bouras 1983, p. 106; Bundgaard 1976, p. 63, fig. 36 (Parthenon); Paton and Stevens 1927, pp. 1 9 1 - 2 , fig. 1 1 7 (Erechthcion); Dinsmoor, Jr. 1976, p. 226, ill. 2 (Hephaisteion); Fraisse and Llinas 1995, figs. 825-7 (prostoon of the Oikos of the Naxians); Daux and Hansen 1987, pp. 42-7, figs. 27-34 (Siphnian Treasury, Delphi); Charbonneaux 1925, pp. 25-7, fig. 37, pis. 1 7 - 1 8 , fig. 37 (Marmaria tholos, Delphi). Shifting from the bottom of the block, Mertens 1984, p. 36, pi. 34 (Segesta); Hansen 1991, pp. 72-9. Generally, Martin 1965, pp. 234-8, figs. 1 1 0 - 1 1 ; Orlandos 1966.II, pp. 57-9, fig. 49; Nylander 1970, pp. 4 1 - 2 , 62-3, figs. 8-9 (Achaemenid parallels). 20 For bosses as shifting rather than lifting devices, Coulton 1974a, n. 24; Mertens 1984, p. 36, fig. 34. A similar system of side pry-holes appears in the Dörpfeld Foundation; Bundgaard 1974, pi. 69; Beyer 1977, p. 47, n. 9. 21 Koenigs 1972, p. 385, fig. 6, for the Hekatompedon at Naxos, where the marks are interpreted as cutting for levers to help balance the block as it was moved into position. Compare marks on the stylobate blocks from the temple at Segesta: Mertens 1984, p. 36, fig. 4b, pis. 20.3, 34.

AND

TECHNICAL

ASPECTS

(Si 8, Fig. 18),22 but the first step course does not have the long, rectangular depressions that would identify these marks as cuttings for a preliminary dowel. They must be larger versions of the flat, rectangular shift-holes, and, like them, used to manoeuvre the block into place. Flat, rectangular shift-holes regularly were cut into the bed surface of epistyle facers and backers (e.g., AB 17; Fig. 39).23 The number of shift-holes near both ends and on either side of each block suggests that lateral shifting was accomplished while the masons held the block in a slightly raised position, in order to reduce any friction that might tip the epistyle or topple the column. In some instances, the masons used this technique of controlling the bed surface of the block together with a lever controlling the upper joint face of the block. The same combination was used for the southern geison blocks (with greater emphasis on suspending the block at the top, Fig. 10), and occasionally in the frieze and binding wall courses (W37, Fig. 50).

Clamping, dowelling, and nailing Iron hook clamps of square section were used throughout the building (Pis. 16-8; Fig. 14).24 Hook clamps concealed by the superposed course were leaded into simple rectangular cuttings; five on the northern first step remain in situ in their original lead casing.25 Clamps on the stylobate and euthynteria that were meant to be seen, however, were leaded into various forms of decorative swallowtailed cuttings.26 Some of the cuttings have narrow waists and boldly flaring tails, others are of deep trapezoidal shape, and still others have a shallow flaring frame cut for only a thin layer of lead (Pis. 14-15; Fig. 15). In all instances, the deeper cutting for the crossbar confirms the use 22 For example, the Dörpfeld Foundation, the Old Temple of Dionysos in Athens, the Peisistratid Olympieion, and the second Temple of Aphaia at Aegina, as well as later in the wall-courses of the Parthenon, Propylaia, and the Temple of Arcs; Martin 1965, pp. 282-3, figs· I 2 4 - S · 23 Note similar although higher shift-hole cuttings on the sculptured reliefs from the tympanon of the Temple of Artemis on Korkyra: Korkyra II, figs. 1, 30, 44, 46b, 68, 75, 86, and pis. 9b, 20. 24 The temple has no simple swallowtailed clamps, contra Martin i965,pp. 246-7. 25 A rare but not unprecedented type in the Archaic period; note Temple of Athena at Poseidonia (Krauss 1959, pp. 24, 35, pis. 1 0 - 1 1 ) , Building C, Athens (Wiegand 1904, pp. 165-6, fig. 159), Old Temple of Dionysos in Athens (Weickert 1929, p. 93), and the Temple of Artemis in the Delion on Paros, where hook clamps in plain cuttings are combined with those in swallowtailed cuttings (Schuller 1991a, fig. 8, pis. 74-5). Kienast (1992, p. 35, n. 23, supplement 2, pis. 1 0 - 1 1 , 14) assigns the exposed hook clamps on the Genelaos monument to the original construction, but he demonstrates that they were not originally exposed on the top course of the monument. 26 Exposed clamps, often hook clamps set in swallowtailed cuttings, appear more frequently in the islands and western Anatolia than other areas; see Martin 1965, p. 240, n. 2; Hellström and Thieme 1982, pp. 1 8 - 1 9 , 2 4· Note also Grand Temple of Apollo at Delos: Courby 1931, pp. 90, 1 0 1 , figs. 108-12. Additional archaic examples from Asia Minor include: the inner threshold from the newly discovered Panionion at Mykale (Büsing 2007, pp. 157, 164-5, 49); the monument platform from Karaburun (Mcllink 1975, p. 350, ills. 2-3); Bin Tepe Chamber Tomb BT62.4 (Ratté 1989a, no. 3, pp. 1 3 - 1 4 , 169-76, figs. 45-6); late archaic Altar at Sardis (Hanfmann and Waldbaum 1975, pp. 93-5, figs. 204-7; Ratté 1989a, pp. 1 7 - 1 8 , 2 1 6 - 1 8 , no. 15, figs, H I , 115).

lem 0

50 B U I L D I N G

M A T E R I A L S AND T E C H N I C A L

1

1

1

1

1

1 5

1

1

1

1 1 10

1

1

1

1 1 15

1

1

1

ASPECTS

1 1 20

1

1

1 1 25cm

FIGURE 14. First step, N i o / n E , illustrating setting and clamping techniques.

27 B U I L D I N G M A T E R I A L S A N D T E C H N I C A L

H

Ο

1

1

5

h

H

1

1

1-

10

ASPECTS

4—I—Ι-

15

20

25cm

FIGURE 15. Clamp cuttings on the krepis: a) euthynteria, WiS; b) S5; C) Si.

of full h o o k clamps rather than separate pegs held together b y

0.27 m. long, set in cuttings 0.25 to 0.29 m. long. A l o n g the

poured lead. 27 T h e exposed swallowtail cuttings appear for

epistyle and southern geison, the cuttings, on average 0.325 m.

their decorative value. T h e plain cuttings did not hold a differ-

long, suggest a larger clamp. 2 8 C l a m p i n g was more extensive in

ent type of clamp but were a simplified form relegated to the

the original than in the repaired areas of the building.

unexposed courses. M o s t of the clamps are between 0.22 and

T h e c o l u m n drums w e r e secured to each other b y wooden dowels set in round sockets, with a larger socket cut in the bed

1 7 Orlandos 1966.II,pp. 104-5,fig. 114;Martin 1965, pp. 248-55, 260,figs. 1 1 3 14 and pi. 24; also, D i n s m o o r 1913, pp. 8-10 and especially n. 1; N y l a n d c r 1966, pp. 130-46; Nylander 1970, pp. 63-7; Gruben 1972a, pp. 18-19. Additions to Martin and Orlandos include Kardaki temple on Korkyra (Johnson 1936, pp. 46-7); Massiliot Treasury, Delphi (Daux 1923, p. 76 and figs. 58, 59, 60, 61); Doric Treasury, Delphi (Daux 1923, p. 104 and figs. 80-2, 88-93, '03, 107); temple at Palati, N a x o s ('Hekatompedon', Gruben and Koenigs 1968, p. 703, figs. 12-13); Building B, Paros (Gruben 1972b, pp. 370-1, fig. 30a,b); Temple of Artemis in the Delion, Paros (Schuller 1991a, fig. 24, pis. 74-5); South Building at Aliki, Thasos (Servais 1980, p. 62, fig. 76); Heraion B, Delos (Plassart 1928, pp. 184-205,

surface and a smaller one on the top to allow for adjustment as

figs. 167, 201); Ionic temple at the Harbour Sanctuary, Emporio, C h i o s (Boardman 1967, pp. 64-9, pis. 13-14); Monuments H and F, Histria (Zimmermann 1991, pp. 149-51, pis. 42.b, 43.b); archaic A p o l l o temple, D i d y m a (Gruben 1963, pp. 143-4, fig. 41). 28 Calculated by measuring the distances of each socket from the joint face and taking the average.

28

B U I L D I N G M A T E R I A L S AND T E C H N I C A L

ASPECTS

the superposed drum was set in place (Pis. 10, 19; Figs. 20-1). 2 9

block of the epistyle kept that block in position while blocks

Generally, the sockets are small and shallow, suggesting that

were set adjacent to and on top of it. A f t e r construction was

their main purpose was to help centre the drums during the

completed, these dowels could be removed and the cuttings

setting process. j 0 While neither the top nor bottom drum was

w o u l d not be visible f r o m below.

dowelled to the capital or stylobate respectively, they have the

T h e masons used nails to mount decorative metal attach-

sockets nonetheless, presumably to receive a plug to aid in final

ments on the capitals ( C i , C 1 2 ) , triglyphs (T8), and epistyle

working. 3 1 T w o drums ( C D 2 and C D 2 4 ) , probably f r o m the

blocks ( A B 6 ) (Pis. 43, 48-50; Figs. 26a, 35, 37). Additionally,

same column, have larger rectangular sockets for a regular polos

nails of three different types (square, round, and rectangular)

and empolion; another drum ( C D 3 ) has a square socket on top

were used to secure the roof tiles to the geison. T h e y document

and a round one on the bed.

three successive terracotta roof systems for the building (Pis.

T h e only instance of dowelling between courses occurred at

54-5; Figs. 43-4, 55-7; F o l d - o u t Fig. 11). R o u n d pins secured

the corners of the pediment, where dowels braced and secured

the akroteria to the corner geison blocks in the original build-

the first block of the raking geison to the horizontal geison

ing (see southeast corner geison, PI. 56; Fig. 44).

(note the dowel hole on H G i and the corresponding slot cut in the bed of R G 5 , Figs. 59, 66). 32 In addition, t w o fragmentary raking geison blocks have d o w e l holes, probably to secure the central akroterion. In setting the epistyle, the masons may have w o r k e d with a

Setting lines and masons' marks The only preserved setting line on the temple defines the position of the sekos walls on the toichobate. 3 s Here, a sharp,

fox*m of preliminary dowel. T h e evidence consists of shallow,

clear line marks the outer face of the southern cella wall, all

wedge-shaped cuttings (in addition to conventional pry-holes)

faces of the southern anta, and the front face of the door wall

in the top surfaces of the capitals, 0.05-0.11 m. from the face of

(PI. 32; F o l d - o u t Fig. 1). N o incised setting lines survive on

the abacus, with their vertical face a w a y f r o m the epistyle.

blocks f r o m the entablature.

T h e y appear consistently (in twos and sometimes threes) on

Mason's marks survive on at least eight column drums and

the surface in front of the epistyle, and less consistently but

several blocks from the epistyle (Pis. 1 9-26; Figs. 16-17). 3 6 O n

fairly frequently behind the epistyle (Fig. 13, 26a; F o l d - o u t

the epistyle, they take the form of a letter or simple sign set on the

Fig. 7). 33 T h e marks are set perpendicular to, and on either

bed surface near the lateral joint. In this position, the marks

side of, the p r y - m a r k that signals the joint between adjacent

would have been of little value once the blocks were set. T h e y

epistyle blocks. These cuttings probably were used in levering

therefore must have functioned while the block was being pre-

(see above), but their flat, wedge-like shape seems unnecessary

pared and moved to the construction area. In t w o instances, the

for that purpose alone; their distance f r o m the face of the

same letter survives on both a facer and a backer, 37 suggesting that

epistyle suggests that they m a y have held temporary w o o d e n

the primary purpose of these letters was to match the t w o blocks

struts that w o u l d fit into the cutting and against the vertical

of the course, an especially important task since the thickness of

face of the epistyle. 3 4 Here, the struts w o u l d serve the purely

each facing block differed. T h e marks may have acted as some

temporary function of preventing an epistyle block f r o m shift-

form of numeration related to the assembly of the epistyle as well.

ing horizontally while the other blocks were being laid adja-

However, not enough survive to be certain of the series, and it is

cent to it. T h e preliminary d o w e l holes are more numerous in

difficult to k n o w h o w to integrate the unmarked blocks (e.g.,

front of the epistyle because the facing blocks were most

A42) or those with symbols within the possible order of the

frequently laid first. Preliminary dowels securing the backing

letters. 38 Unfortunately, only t w o of the sculptured blocks retain

2 9 The sockets on the upper surface are c.0.032-0.040 m. in diameter and c.0.023-0.045 m. deep. Sockets on the bed surface are c.0.04-0.05 m. in diameter and c.0.045-0.052 m. deep. The scale and configuration are not that of the standard poloi and empolia.

3 5 In contrast to the elaborate use of setting and measuring lines found, e.g., on the first Temple of Aphaia at Aegina: Schwandner 1985, p. 9, n. 25, 131, fig. 80; or the temple at Segesta: Mertens 1984, pp. 31-5, figs. 9-10, pis. 32-3.

Clarke 1882, p. 87, suggests the cutting held a peg for turning the drum on a lathe, but see Orlandos 1966.II, p. 66. For another instance where a base has a socket but was not dowelled to the stylobate, see the Stoa of the Athenians at Delphi: A m a n d r y 1953, pp. 40-4, pis. 24, 25.1, 2, 3, 6; 26.1, 2, 5. Sockets cut on the top of the abacus of Doric capitals from the Temple of Zeus at Nemea have no corresponding sockct on the bed surface of the epistyle; see Hill 1966, pp. 39-40, for a similar interpretation for these cuttings. T h e sockets are too shallow to secure a wooden axle for moving the drum.

36 There may have been more marks on the column drums; the best preserved blocks were incorporated into the reconstruction before the feature could be fully recorded. F o r earlier observations of mason's marks, Clarke 1898, pp. 92-5, fig. 13; Mendel 1914, pp. 14,16; Sartiaux 1915, p. 136, fig. 58. For mason's marks generally, Martin 1965, pp. 221-31; Orlandos 1966.II, pp. 84-7; Guarducci 1975, pp. 377-93; Hcllmann 2002, pp. 88-91. A d d O l y m p i a (Herrmann 1991, pp. 83-9); Temple of A p o l l o at Metapontion ( K o l d e w e y and Puchstein 1899, p. 38); first Temple of Aphaia at Aegina (Schwandner 1985, pp. 131-2, fig. 78, pi. 34); Temple of A p o l l o at C y r c n e (Pernier 1935, fig. 33).

C o m p a r e Temple of Artemis, Korkyra: Korkyra I, p. 28, figs. 10, 45. T h e cuttings are c.0.06-0.08 m. wide, c.0.045-0.075 m. long, and c.0.0050.015 m · deep.

37 The backer block with the letter φ (psi) recorded in Clarke 1898, fig. 13, could not be found at the site. The surviving letter on A31 is less rounded than Clarke's drawing of the letter on the backer.

34 For preliminary dowels, see Orlandos 191 j , pp. 175-8; Tschira i 9 4 i , p p . 1669; Martin 1965, pp. 282-3 and figs. 124-5; Orlandos 1966.II, pp. 121-2, fig. 139; N y l a n d e r 1970, p. 46, fig. 12. Clarke 1898, p. 90 interprets the cuttings as pry marks later used to support scaffolding.

38 O n the epistyle, the t w o marks bearing little relationship to a letter form are the curious paisley-like shape illustrated in Clarke 1898, fig. 13, and the mark on A i recorded in Mendel 1914, p. 14. The mark on A i is blocked by the museum installation, and the plain block could not be located at the site.

30

Martin 1965, pp. 291-6; Orlandos 1966.II, pp. 1 1 3 - 1 5 .

31

32 33

29 B U I L D I N G M A T E R I A L S A N D T E C H N I C A L

ASPECTS

CD37

CD42

CD46

CD73

CD59

CD64

CD70

CD10

H

1 h 5

H—I

1—I

1—I 10

h

1—Ι—Ι—I—I

15

1

I—

20

H—I—I 25cm

FIGURE 16. Mason's marks on the c o l u m n drums.

marks ( A i and A2), so they are not useful in reconstructing the

helped to guide the masons w h e n setting the adjacent block. 3 9

sculptured frieze. From the only block that preserves both ends

T h e fillets were dressed off only w h e r e they interfered with

and carries a mason's mark (A28/A29), it w o u l d appear that the

a superposed b l o c k or c o l u m n drum. O t h e r w i s e , they were

marks were set at one end only. In the t w o surviving pairs, the

left in place and, like the shifting bosses, assumed an orna-

letters appear at different ends of each block. Either it was unim-

mental role. Similar fillets remain on several of the plain

portant which side of the block was marked, or the system was

and sculptured epistyle blocks (Pis. 46, 92-3, 98; Figs. 33,

more complex, with blocks carrying marks matched on adjacent

54, 7 6 - 7 , 80; F o l d - o u t Figs. 8-9). M u c h rougher, boss-like

blocks. The first option seems more likely.

fillets appear near the b o t t o m of each joint face o n the tym-

T h e mason's marks on some of the top surfaces of the

panon b l o c k s (Pi. 70; Figs. 63-4). T h e s e fillets also provided

column drums are either simple letters or symbols set near

protection during the setting process, but because they were

the edge of the flute. T w o of the surviving symbols recur in

not visible f r o m b e l o w t h e y w e r e neither dressed up nor

drums of different size; most likely they identify drums desig-

cleaned o f f .

nated for the same column. T h e marks also may have indicated w h i c h side of the drum was to be set outward.

Direction of construction T h e position and shape of lifting marks, shift-holes, pry-holes,

Protective fillets T h e blocks of the stylobate and first step were given

and bevelled edges suggest that the masons only occasionally fillets

f o l l o w e d the standard procedure of w o r k i n g f r o m the corners

along the edges bordering the lateral joints in order to protect the b l o c k as it was set. O n the free side of each block, the vertical edge of the fillet was bevelled back to mark the plane of the course (Figs. 14, 18-19; F o l d - o u t Figs. 1 - 3 ) . It thus

3 9 For the role of the bevelled edge in determining the direction of lay, Hodge 1975, pp. 334-47; Ratté 1989a, pp. 47-8, 62-6, 77-82.

B U I L D I N G M A T E R I A L S AND T E C H N I C A L

3°

TTo( V ΤΔν G A2

A16

A18

•

AB10

A1 (not to scale) 0

H 1 h

5

H

Clarke 1898, fig. 13 1

1

1

t

A22

AB13

AB16

ASPECTS

1 1 10

1

1

1 h 15

A36

AB2

Clarke 1898, fig. 13 H 1 1 h 20

25cm

FIGURE 17. Mason's marks on epistyle facers and backers.

toward the centre of each side. 40 Each course was set in a

relief, such as Herakles' arrows on relief A 5 , were surely added

slightly different fashion, but on the w h o l e the masons w o r k e d

in paint, and it seems likely that other areas were delineated in

f r o m left to right, especially w h e n setting the upper entabla-

colour as well (PI. 92; Fig. 76). Today, traces of red pigment can

ture, or north to south, as in the case of the tympanon. Evi-

be found on the viae of several geison blocks, inside the

dence for the procedure is set out below under the description

mason's marks, and on the tuff hawksbeak. T h e first excavators

of each course. T h e method has implications for the w a y in

also f o u n d traces of the same colour on the annulets. 41 N o n e of

w h i c h the masons used their crane. Rather than set it up near

the coloured areas bear traces of plaster, but paint was often

the centre of the course, they w o u l d have to set it consistently

applied directly to stone in the Archaic period. 4 2 In addition,

to the right of all construction. T h e technique may account for

traces of white pigment at the joint where the stylobate once

some of the peculiar misalignments w e witness in coordinating

rested on the first step course suggest that at least parts of the

the spacing of the frieze with the colonnade.

building might, at one time, have been whitewashed (Pi. 9, upper left corner; PI. 18, lower left corner). Such a wash o n

Colour While neither plaster nor paint survives o n any of the architec-

the architectural sculpture w o u l d have allowed the painted sculptural detail to be much more visible.

tural sculpture, certain crucial features that are not carved in C o n t r a the theory that courses generally were laid from corners to centres, or that w o r k began at one corner and met at the one diagonally opposite, cf. Martin 1965, pp. 235-8; Orlandos 1966.II, pp. 95-6; H o d g e 1975, pp. 333-47; Daux and Hansen 1987, fig. 33. For starting in the middle of a course, note the classical Temple of Poseidon at Isthmia, Broneer 1971, pp. 57-8. 4υ

41 Clarke 1898, p. 83; note also the use of red on the annulets of the H-Temple: Wiegand 1904, p. 58. 12 Pfaff 2003b, p. 185, nn. 2 and 4. F o r a discussion of colour and further references; also Hoepfner 2002. F o r the well preserved evidence of colour on the architecture of the first and second temples of Aphaia at Aegina, Schwandner 1985, p. 130, frontispiece; Bankel 1993, pp. 1 1 1 - 1 2 , frontispiece; Bankel 2004, pp. 71-83.

55

Description and Reconstruction of the Original Building ACCESS AND

ORIENTATION

southwest of the temple. N o excavation was made below the pavement,

The archaic city of Assos remains to be found, and with it

and no date has been established

for its

construction. J

the original routes leading to the temple. Vertical cliffs define the akropolis on all but its northern side. The sheer drops to the south and west preclude easy access from these directions,

FOUNDATION

while ascent from the east is equally precipitous (Pis. i c - d ; Fig. 2). Foundations for a switchback road of undetermined date lead from the eastern terraces to the eastern face of the akropolis but end abruptly well below the summit, leaving a barely manageable climb (Pis. id, 27-8). 1 T h e route from the north circling westward around the highest outcropping to arrive at the southwest corner of the temple offers a gentler ascent, especially near the top of the akropolis. It must have served as one of the main approaches to the temple. F r o m this vantage, viewers could appreciate the entire building as they made their w a y towards its the eastern entrance.

AND

KREPIS

T h e temple at Assos belongs to the group of sacred buildings roughly 100 feet long (hekatompeda), a size that has importance already in the Geometric period. A t Assos the idea finds expression as one of the fully developed, smaller scale peripteral D o r i c temples, c.40-50 feet wide by c.90-100 feet long, here with a hexastyle peripteral colonnade with 13 columns on the flanks, resting on a krepidoma composed of euthynteria, one step, and the stylobate. T h e distyle in antis pronaos is axially aligned with the third column from the east on the flank, thus

coordinating

the cella with

the

pteron.

The

T o take maximum advantage of the site and provide the most

'pseudo-dipteral' arrangement at the eastern end creates a

rewarding views, the designers set the temple on a gently

deep pteroma, which together w i t h the lack of an opisthodo-

sloping area of bedrock south of and c.4.40 m. below the high-

mos, the marginally narrower width of the western end (see

est rock outcropping on the akropolis (c.234 m. above sea level;

below), and the wider intercolumniations of the façades, spa-

Pi. 2). It stands roughly 1 5 - 1 7 m. f r o m the face of the steep

tially and visually accentuates the eastern end of the building.

eastern cliffs, oriented slightly south of the east/west axis (15 0 14' 40" south of east). 2 For 4.00-6.40 m. north of the temple, the bedrock was quarried and rough-picked to create a level

Foundation

platform; outcrops to the west were similarly dressed d o w n

A good part of the krepis rests directly on levelled bedrock,

(PI. 3a). To the south, the terrain drops off significantly. A t the southwest corner of the temple, a paved area made of large, irregularly shaped flags loosely fitted together in a bedding of earth follows the natural slope of the bedrock to mark out the original ground level (PI. 3 b; Fold-out Fig. 1). The paving continues to c.4.25 m. west of the temple, where the last preserved flags rest on a shelf of bedrock at a level c.1.00 m. lower than the temple's euthynteria. The pavement is visible for C.1.80 m. south of the temple's foundations, where it enters a scarp of unexcavated earth. T h e region is much disturbed by post-antique construction, and several paving flags lie scattered ' N o t recorded on the site plan in Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 139 (our Fig. 5). 2 Clarke (1898, pp. 5 5-6) calculated off the N o r t h Star. H e indicates magnetic north 5 degrees west of true north.

especially along the northern side, the northern part of the western side, and in the middle section of the southern side (marked with asterisks on Fold-out Fig. 3; see also Pis. 2~3a, 30, 31b; Figs. 8-9; Fold-out Figs. 1-2). A single course of squared blocks with quarry-dressed faces forms the 0.256 m. high euthynteria for the eastern, and parts of the northern, sides.4 The more irregular terrain along the southern side and southwest corner, however, required more construction between the outcrops of bedrock. Quarry-dressed blocks, c.0.36 m. high, 3 It may be compared, however, co the polygonally paved stone road at Old Smyrna; Akurgal 2007, p. 134, pi. 14.1, dated b y the excavators to the second half of the seventh cencury. 4 Furcher excavacion may reveal a more complex configuration; only the top surface of the euthynteria has been exposed on much of the eastern side and on che norchern side from c.13.10 to 26.58 m. from the eastern first step.

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF T H E O R I G I N A L

32

support the fully exposed euthynteria f o r the eastern section of

BUILDING

temple and returned to its original position; only the t w o

the course. A t the southwest corner, where the akropolis slopes

adjacent eastern blocks are lost. C a r e f u l measuring of the

most sharply, the krepis stands on a platform of four courses

course reveals that the temple narrows slightly f r o m east to

(including the euthynteria), w h i c h continue along each side of

west to define a platform 30.875 m. long by 14.590 m. wide at

the foundation until they abut bedrock. F r o m the bottom to

the eastern end and 14.565 m. w i d e at the western end. 6 T h e

top, the courses measure 0.350 m., 0.295 m., 0.246 m., and

step height measures 0.282 m. along the western and southwest

0.256 m. high. 5

sides but diminishes to 0.275

m

·

at

the eastern end of the

T h e southern euthynteria and at least t w o of the additional

building; the tread width ranges between 0.278 and 0.281 m.

courses of the southwest corner foundation have richly decor-

T h e course bears no evidence of curvature, but the entire

ated faces. Clearly, these courses were meant to be fully ex-

platform

posed (Pis. 3b, 2 9 - 3 i a - c ; F o l d - o u t Fig. 2). T h e masons used

northwest to the southeast corners (elevations marked

slopes diagonally

downward

0.020 m. f r o m

t w o techniques to create three different kinds of pattern. M o s t

Fold-out Fig. i). 7

the on

commonly, they w o r k e d back into the face of the block, leaving

The first step course consists of rectangular facers of variable

raised edges to form a smooth margin defining the ashlar block.

length (0.928 to 3.101 m.) backed b y blocks with squared-off

H a m m e r blows created rough, circular cavities on the face of

front and side faces but rough and often irregular backs (0.755

many of the blocks. H o w e v e r , several blocks bear more intri-

to 1.923 m. long). A relatively straight joint runs lengthwise

cate workmanship, in w h i c h quasi-geometric patterns, includ-

through the façades and for the most part through the flanks, s

ing triangular, star, and h o n e y c o m b - l i k e motifs, were chiselled

but no attempt was made to have the facers break joints evenly

into the face of the stone. O n several blocks, the masons

with the backers or with the blocks of the stylobate. Excluding

w o r k e d in reverse technique, cutting a w a y the background to

the east side, almost all the facers are connected to the adjacent

make ridges that form triangular and star patterns as well as

block at either end by a single iron-hook clamp leaded into a

honeycomb-like motifs. In t w o places the bedrock abutting

purely rectangular cutting (Pis. 16-18; Fig. 14; F o l d - o u t Figs.

masonry is also dressed to appear as decorated ashlar (e.g.,

1,3). The backers are not clamped. A l l of the risers of the first

the l o w e r right corner of Pi. 31b). It is tempting to see the

step have projecting bosses of pyramidal, cylindrical, or conical

hands of different masons in the styles of rustication; their

shape, the number ranging from one to f o u r independently of

arbitrary combination suggests that the decoration may have

the block's length (Pis. 3a, 3 0 - 3 i a - c ; F o l d - o u t Figs. 1-2). T h e

been cut before the blocks were set in place.

risers and treads of the first step also retain the narrow fillets

T h e exposed foundation created an imposing sense of height

that protect the edge next to the joint surface f r o m damage

for the approaching viewer, and its treatment established an

during setting operations. T h e fillet at the free end of the block

emphatic distinction between the purely architectonic form of

is bevelled to mark the front plane of the course. The bosses

the building proper and the natural rock from w h i c h it

and fillets are clearly part of the construction process; scholars

emerged. T h e hammer-dressed patterning evoked the rustica-

assume that such aids were meant to be dressed off completely

tion of bedrock even in ashlar format; the technique had cur-

during the final stages of construction. H o w e v e r , their survival

rency especially in polygonal masonry elsewhere (see below,

in this (twice) fully completed building suggests that at the least

pp. 228-9). T h e decorative patterns are more sophisticated but

they did not offend, and more positively, that they were inten-

have the same effect of blending with the bedrock to create a

tionally left in place f o r their decorative value. 9

sharp visual contrast between the smoothly dressed krepis and rough-hewn

foundation.

Similar

patterns

appear

on

the

Setting the first step

temple's wall blocks as well, suggesting that the masons or

T h e direction of the wedge-shaped shift-holes cut along the top

designer sought to establish a strong textural distinction be-

joint face of most facing and backing blocks and the position of

tween the specific elements of the D o r i c order and those elem-

the bevelled fillet s h o w that the masons w o r k e d in several

ents that were generic, such as the foundation and walls.

crews, setting the outer course before the backing blocks

A t the southwest corner, the blocks of the euthynteria were connected to one another by fully exposed iron h o o k clamps leaded into swallowtailed cuttings (PI. 14; Fig. 15).

First step A single step and the stylobate complete the krepis. N e a r l y the entire first step course remains in situ (Fold-out Figs. 1-3). T h e bi'oken southeast corner block was recovered north of the

The lowest course was measured b y Clarke; the excavation of 1987 did not extend to the bottom of this course. 5

6 These measurements are closest to Clarke's first set, Clarke 1882, pp. 96-7, which give the length of the first step as 30.885 m. and of the stylobate as 30.335 m., rather than 30.86 and 30.31 m. as in Clarke 1898, p. 139, and Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 141. Clarke notes a discrepancy of 0.054 m - in the length of the north and south flanks, but he does not identify the smaller side. Repeated measuring in 1984 yielded equal lengths but a slight diminution in width. 7 The southwest corner of the first step was established as level 0.0 m. T h e northwest corner is + 0.005 m · ! the northeast corner, 4- 0.001 m.; the southeast corner, — 0.015 m. s The joint between facers and backers on the northern flank breaks once at the eleventh block from the east. T h e joining on the southern flank varies. 9

Kalpaxis 1986, pp. 22-83.

33 D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L (Fold-out Fig. 3; outer arrows s h o w the direction f o r setting the

outer

course;

inner

arrows

show

the

direction

BUILDING

f r o m boldly flaring to trapezoidal; the shallow cavity for the

for

lead shows that they were meant to be ornamental (PL 15;

setting the backing blocks). T w o crews w o r k e d outward f r o m

Fig. 15). T h e different shapes could reflect the hands of differ-

the northeast corner, while t w o more crews began w i t h the

ent masons engaged to w o r k on certain sections of the course.

block N i i E and also w o r k e d outward in both directions. The

T h e various types of clamp cuttings f o u n d o n the krepis do not

t w o crews w o r k i n g toward each other rapidly met between

represent different building phases, nor is there reason to sus-

the seventh and eighth blocks on the northern side. T h e west-

pect that the exposed swallowtailed clamps are later reworking,

ward moving crew continued around the northwest corner,

because clamps also appear beneath the columns o n the stylo-

d o w n the western side, and around onto the southern side,

bate. T h e masons laid the krepidoma without interruption, and

eventually meeting the crew that w o r k e d d o w n the eastern

it stood without repair. 11

side at the block S 1 1 E . 1 0 T o lay the backing course, crews began w o r k f r o m the northern corners and proceeded in both

S e t t i n g the s t y l o b a t e

directions. T h e t w o crews w o r k i n g toward the centre of the

T h e shape and placement of the pry marks on the first step,

northern side met between blocks N 1 3 E and N 1 4 E . W o r k

coupled with the bevelled edges on the stylobate blocks, indi-

also started outwardly along the southern flank, with crews

cate that the masons set the stylobate b y w o r k i n g outward in

meeting at blocks S5E and S12W.

both directions f r o m both southern corners and f r o m the middle on the northern side, starting at the block N 9 E (note directional arrows, F o l d - o u t Fig. 4). T h e crews w o r k i n g from

Sty lob ate

the north then turned southward onto the façades to meet the

A t the time of the American excavation most of the flank

other crews near the southeast and northwest corners. The

stylobate was in situ, but after the Second World War the

several pry marks for the blocks N 2 E and N 3 E cut in opposite

villagers broke many blocks to build a windmill and reçut

directions suggest that masons had to reset these blocks. 1 2

others for use in olive-oil factories in neighbouring villages. Three blocks crudely hacked into circular forms were left on

Restored stylobate

the first step course (S8, S9, and S10). Today, only f o u r blocks

In the course of reassigning many of the dislodged and broken

of the northern side remain in place ( N 4 W to N 7 W ; compare

stylobate

Fig. 5 with the actual-state plan, Fold-out F i g . i ) .

Clarke's plan, 1 3 w e uncovered several additional blocks un-

blocks

to their

original positions

indicated

on

T h e stylobate consists of a single series of andesite blocks set

k n o w n to C l a r k e and Bacon that n o w clarify the plan of the

back 0.278-0.281 m. f r o m the riser of the first step to define a

façades. O n the flanks, the spacing of the pry marks on the first

platform 30.320 m. long and tapering in w i d t h f r o m 14.030 m.

step course corresponds within c.0.05 m. to the length of the

at the east end to 14.005 m. at the west end. T h e lengths of the

superposed stylobate blocks drawn on Clarke and Bacon's plan.

blocks range substantially and bear no specific relationship to

B y analogy, the pry marks at either end of the building should

the colonnade (Table ia; Figs. 5, 18-19; F o l d - o u t Figs. 1, 3-5).

also mark out the relative position of each stylobate block.

T h e blocks also vary in thickness and, on the southern flank, in

A l o n g with dressed d o w n surfaces and weather marks, these

shape as well. T h e lateral joints appear to have been intention-

pries indicate there were ten stylobate blocks at the eastern end

ally cut slightly out of square, so that the blocks w o u l d lock

and nine at the west (Fig. 5; F o l d - o u t Figs. 1,4). Several hitherto

together (note stylobate in situ, Fold-out Figs. 1, 3). T h e range

unrecorded blocks n o w can be assigned to the façades; together

is

they shed light on the arrangement of the colonnade. A t the

not f o r curvature, w h i c h C l a r k e and Bacon tested for and could

west end, block S61 (Fig. 18) probably belongs to the southwest

not detect, but instead partially compensates for the slope in

corner near where it was found. B o t h its length and the position

the first step course, with the tallest blocks belonging around

of the t w o clamps along its right side indicate that S14, discov-

the southeast corner.

ered south of the temple in area N / 9 , must be restored to the

in their height (from 0.275-0.294 m., with most 0.285

m·)

T h e raised fillet that protects the edges of each stylobate block was dressed off the top surface only where it coincided w i t h the placement of the column. A s on the first step blocks, the edge of the fillet on the free side of the block was bevelled back to the plane of the course. A d j a c e n t blocks near the corners were secured with pairs of clamps at either end; the other blocks were adjoined w i t h a single clamp or none at all. M o s t of the clamps on this course were f u l l y exposed, for the joints between blocks fell beneath the columns only b y chance. T h e swallowtailed cuttings are of several distinctive shapes Blocks S8E and S9E may have been set out of sequence.

" Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 141, for the position of clamps underneath columns on the northern and southern stylobate. M o s t of these cuttings are badly damaged today. 12 The explanation of final setting offered by Hansen 1991, pp. 72-9, might apply here. 13 Certain errors in Clarke and Bacon's plans bear mention: 1) the position of the anta is drawn 4.88 m. rather than 4.95 m. from the face of the stylobate, with the result that the stylobate block S4E mistakenly appears to be aligned with the anta; 2) the plan is too wide at the western end; the first step block W i S is recorded as 3.25 m. rather than 3.042 m. long, and the pry mark is consequently placed c.o.i j m. north of its proper position. O n the w o r k i n g plan n o w in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, the architects record a single clamp cutting on the block N3W, which was inadvertently omitted in the final versions.

D E S C R I P T I O N

TABLE

A N D

R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

OF

T H E

O R I G I N A L

B U I L D I N G

ia. Dimensions of stylobate blocks

i

2

3

Number

Location

Position

4

5

Length

Height

2.000

0.278

6

Thickness

S1/S6/S66

SE of temple

S2W

S2

O/io

S8E

>0.93

0.294

s4 S5

M/io

E3N

temple

S3W

1-393 >0.65

0.285

S7 S8

temple

W3S?

>0.44

0.276

>0.86

N/9

S3W

>0.96

0.284

>0.96

S9

N/9

S7W

>1.04

0.284

>1.04

Sio

N/10

S8W

>0.98

0.290

>0.98

Sii

M/11

S3E

1.464

0.291

0.885

S12

K/12

E5N

1.272

0.287

0.982/1.040

S13 S14

O/lI

s4e

0.872/1.080

W2S

i-745 1.414

0.294

N/9

S15

O-P/10-11

E3S/W5S

>0.43

0.296

>0.42/0.47

S16

temple

S5E

>0.84

0.285

>0.85

S18

O/9-10

S9E

S19

temple

W4S

>0.42

0.285

>0.65/0.67

S20

temple

n3w?

>0.60

0.285

>0.645/0.67

S21

M/10-11

E2N

>0.771

0.290

S22a/b

temple

N9W

>0.786

0.280

S23

temple

0.280

>0.605

temple

S6W? ?

>0.77

S24

>0.668

0.284

>0.34

1.183

0.285

0.284

0.290

1.094 >0.94 0.915/0.935 1.130

1.032/1.070

I.II0/I.I60

1.100 >0.57

S26

temple

stylo?

>0.565

0.275

>0.83

S27 S28

windmill

S5W

>0.57

c.0.27

>0.66

temple

N3W

>0.63

0.285

>0.36

S29

temple

N2E/S2E

>0.39

0.288

>0.60

S30

temple

stylo?

0.273

>0.53

S31 S32

temple

stylo?

>0.69

temple

N 3 W?

>0.66

0.284

temple

W3S?

>0.55

0.282

N/9

S4W

>0.86

c.0.27

>0.64/0.67

S3 5

temple

S5E

>0.51

0.294

>0.523/0.573

S36

M/11

EIN(E4N,E6N)

>0.985

0.285

>0.895/0.915

S37 S38

windmill

N9E?

>0.70

0.275

>0.28/0.30

windmill

N9W

>0.79

0.285

>0.83

S39/S40

windmill

N8W

S41

windmill

N9E

S42

windmill

S43

windmill

S44

windmill

S45

windmill

S33 S34

0.645

c.i.23

>0.22

>0.50 >0.33 0.820/0.831

0.280

>0.86/0.90

>0.89

0.287

>0.83

n4e

>0.93

0.281

>0.86

N2E

>0.66

0.285

>0.86

N5E

>0.425

0.283

>0.805

>0.71

0.283

>0.79

>0.70

0.285

>0.81

>0.98

0.282

>0.80

>0.55

0.275

>0.80

S46a/b

windmill

S47

windmill

S48

windmill

S49

windmill

n3e? n4e n3e n4e n4e

S50

windmill

N2E

>0.43

0.280

>0.81

S51 S52

windmill

N8E

>0.73

0.285

>0.62

windmill

N7E?

>0.69

0.287

>0.81

S53

windmill

N5E

>0.385

0.287

>0.55/0.59

S54

windmill

N9E

>0.48

0.283

>0.81

S55

windmill

N9E?

>0.485

0.275

>0.82/0.855

S56

windmill

N9E?

>0.57

0.278

>0.78

S57

windmill

N6E

>0.55

0.281

>0.82

S58/S77

windmill

N2E

>0.43

0.280

>0.80

Sj9

N/8

S6W

>0.79

0.284

>0.64

>0.863

>0.16

>0.67

35 D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

S 60 S6I

windmill

N6E

M/8

SWcorner?

S62/S72

L/ 3

S9W

S63

O/12

S64

O/12

N3E N3W?

>0.67

S65

M/12

N2E

>0.69

0.283

>0.27/0.31

S 67 S68

O/io

S2E

>0.77

0.295

>0.65

>0.83 >0.69 1.580 >0.43

0.285

>0.27

0.277 0.280

>1.00 >0.64/0.68

0.284

>0.31

0.285

>0.40

M/15

stylo?

>0.55

0.282

>0.61

S 69 S70

P-Q/io

E4N?

0.285

temple

?

>0.65 >0.28

>0.61 >0.15

S71 S73/S74

P/11 windmill

S5E

S75 S 76

windmill

N6E N6E

windmill

S78

O/12

S 79 S80

>0.09

>0.435 >0.84

0.294

>0.53

0.280 0.277 0.294

>0.75/0.80 >0.27

S7E

>0.41 >0.31

?

>0.40

0.281

windmill

N8E

>0.34

in situ

N4W

1.403/1.397

0.284

S81 S82

in situ

N5W

2.280/2.288

0.287

I.I3I 1.055

in situ

N6W

I.182/1.178

0.285

1.055

S83

in situ

N7W

1.814/1.827

0.284

I . I 10

c.0.28

>0.51 >0.41 >0.85

position W 2 S . 1 4 T h e dislodged stylobate block that C l a r k e

In addition, three other n e w l y found blocks, S2, S18, and

found west of the temple no longer survives, but on the basis

S62/72 (Fig. 18) can be assigned to three of the f o u r open

of its recorded dimensions, 1.72 m. long b y 1.15 m. wide, it can

positions on the southern side of the temple, S8E, S9E, and

be restored to the position W 3 N .

S 1 1 E , respectively. 1 7

F o r the eastern façade, the evidence is even stronger. B l o c k S4 (Fig. 19), built into a Byzantine house wall in area M / i o ,

To ich ο bate

takes a position on the eastern façade, E 3 N , with fragment S21 (Fig. 19), found in the same Byzantine building, adjacent in the

O n l y the toichobate today defines the temple's internal struc-

position E 2 N . T h e length and columnar depression of block

ture, w h i c h consisted of a distyle in antis pronaos and long,

S i 2 (Fig. 19), w h i c h had fallen d o w n the steep slope northeast

unobstructed cella. A t the time of Clarke and Bacon's excav-

of the temple (K/12), indicate that it can o n l y be restored to the

ation, all but t w o blocks near the northwest corner remained

position E 5 N . It has a shifting boss more characteristic of the

in situ (Fig. 5). Today, the t w o blocks north of the threshold

first step course, but w h i c h here may have been used in con-

and the three small blocks of the northern toichobate east of

junction with the channel cut through the first step course

the door wall are also gone (Fold-out Fig. 1). Constructed

b e l o w it (Fold-out Fig. 5; restored plan). 1 5 Blocks S4 and S i 2

independently of the stylobate, the toichobate rests on levelled

have small holes in the centre top surfaces, as does fragment

bedrock or on large, irregular foundation slabs fitted against

S36 (Fig. 19), w h i c h was f o u n d in the recent excavations north-

bedrock outcrops (see section, southwest corner, Fig. 9). A t the

east of the temple (Μ/11). It probably should be restored to the

antae ends, the juncture with the northern door wall, and again

eastern façade as well, and could belong to position Ε ι Ν , E 4 N ,

at the ninth block f r o m the northwest corner, the bedrock rises

E 6 N , or E 9 N . B l o c k Si 5, a small fragment with a columnar

high enough to form the toichobate itself (see asterisks on

marking found southeast of the temple ( O - P / 1 0 - 1 1 ) , can find a

Fold-out Fig. 3). Otherwise, the course consists of irregularly

position on either façade; its find-spot suggests it belonged to

shaped and u n d a m p e d blocks; their vertical joint faces fre-

the eastern façade in the position E 8 N . B l o c k S69, f o u n d south

quently are not set perpendicular to the course. T h e upper

of the temple, also appears to belong to the eastern side, E 7 N .

surface roughly corresponds to the level of the stylobate but,

T h e n o w - l o s t block that C l a r k e records as measuring 2.245

m·

b y 0.93 m. fits c o m f o r t a b l y in the position E 4 N . 1 6

like the first step course, it slopes diagonally f r o m the northwest to the southeast end, leaving the base of the northern anta 0.086 m. higher than that of the southern anta (note levels

14 The only other possible position for this block, N2W, must be eliminated because the adjoining block does not have two clamp cuttings. Clarke 1898, p. 68, identifies a different block for the western position, but its dimensions, 1.15 m. wide by 1.72 m. long, cannot fit next to the southwest corner block, as demonstrated by the position of the pry mark; see note above. 15 For the channel, see Clarke 1898, p. 67, fig. 8. Another fragment from the stylobate, S79, also has a projecting boss. 16 N o t E3S, contra Clarke 1898, p. 68.

on F o l d - o u t Fig. 1). T h e masons rectified the differences by adjusting the wall courses and levelling the paving stones (PI. 32).

17 The only possible join for Si 5 on the flank is with S59 at S j W . Although S18 is the correct length for the block N 3 E , the length of its partial fillet and the special cutting for a paving stone on its back face exclude it from that position.

60 D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

OF THE O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

„1.032

S 62/72

.284

1

S14

S2

Ο

H—I—I—h

.5

H—I 1

1—I

1—I

1 1 1.5

1—I—h

2

H—\

I 1 2.5

1

1 Ι-

3m

FIGURE I8. N e w l y recovered southern and western stylobate blocks S14, S18, S62/S72, S2, and S61.

61 D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E ORIGINAL Ml'i'i

1

•I 1iß-y 11 ι\V:i

i Ä

^v'ViV

BUILDING

S69

•vi Λ·»!.!" l v'i'l-l I
but the extremes were not on opposite sides, nor did the height increase and decrease consistently. T h e differences in vertical dimensions reflect slight variations, in part owing to present condition; they are not of sufficient consistency to document inclination. However, further research may reveal greater subtlety than I was able to record. 42 If anything, the column drums would seem to diminish slightly more rapidly at the bottom than at the top. There are, however, too few upper drums to make a reliable determination.

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

First drum: Second drum:

CD36 CD12

1.163

Third drum:

CD 5 CD4

0.804

Top drum:

OF T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

1.237

0.914

Shaft Capital C5

4.118 0.462

Total

4.580

First drum:

CD7

Second drum:

CD59

1.225

Third drum:

CD 3

0.813

Top drum:

CD6

0.956

4.118 Capital C 6

0.486 4.604

1.098

Shaft

4.092

Capital C31

0.488

4.092 Capital C8

4*092

0.497

Capital C i

0.506

1.163

A

CD36

CD12 ι*—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I 0 .5 1 1.5

A /V

CD5 1

1 2

1—I

CD4 1—I

1 1 2.5

1

1—ι

FIGURE 20. Column drums from the four different positions: C D 3 6 , C D 1 2 , C D 5 , and C D 4 .

1 3m

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L

CD42

BUILDING

CD43

.818

0

Η—I—I—l·

.5

-I—ί—l· 1

Η—I—I—h 1.5

2

H—I—I—h

2.5

3m

FIGURE Z I . C o l u m n d r u m s C D 4 2 and C D 4 3 , w i t h c u t t i n g s , p o s s i b l y f o r a screen.

T h e range f o r the shaft, between 4.08 and 4.12 m., accords well with the height suggested by the sum of the average size of the drums for each position. C o m b i n e d with the range in height of the capitals, 0.447-0.52 m., the column w o u l d have stood between 4.567 m. and 4.60 m., or approximately

five

lower diameters high (4.57 m.). 43 43 This figure is significantly lower than the 4.78 m. height calculated by Clarke; see Clarke 1898, pp. 76-7, 139. His report does not specify the number of column drums he measured, nor h o w many he used to construct a single column. Although he does not say so, it appears that he restored the column to equal 15 of his proposed feet of 0.319 m. H e calculated the height of the shaft by determining an average rate of diminution of 1 in 15, which he then applied to his average lower and upper diameters (on arrises) of the shaft. The resulting shaft height of 4.30 m. is not a good fit with the extant evidence; the surviving drums w o u l d be too tall for shafts composed of five drums (average drum height, 0.86 m.)

Capital A remarkable 32 of the required 36 capitals survive today, many still lined in a r o w south of the temple w h e r e they once formed part of the latest fortification wall (Pis. 3 5~44a-b; Figs. 25-7; F o l d - o u t Fig. 6; Tables 3a-c). Clarke k n e w of and drew a

and too short for shafts composed of four drums (average drum height, 1.075 m.). Today, the drums are not well enough preserved to calculate the rate of diminution on arris for more than 20 drums and on flute for 32 drums. The best evidence in the bottom drums suggests an average rate of diminution on the flute of 14.765 and on the arris of 14.01. If applied to the difference between the upper and lower diameters of 0.298 m. on arris and 0.272 m. on flute, the calculated height of the shaft without the capital w o u l d be between 4.016 and 4.17 m.

46

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

OF T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

CD10

1.256

h160H

I*—I 0 .215

1—I

1

W22-H027M—1.011

! II I I I II II II II I I IÌ II i I I I; I II II I I I 10 20 30 40cm FIGURE 22. Column drum C D 10 and capital C4, belonging to a column with 18 flutes.

1—I—I—I—I—I .5

D E S C R I P T I O N

TABLE

A N D

R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

OF

T H E

O R I G I N A L

B U I L D I N G

45

2. Dimensions of column drums 2

I

Number

Location

4

3

7 UD,

II

12

UD,

9 Flute L ,

10

LD,

Flute L ,

Dim,

Dim,

Arris

Flute

Arris

LD

UD

Flute

Arris

0.745 c 0.79

Position

Height

Flute

6

8

5 LD,

CD ι

M/8

2/3

0.963

0.733

0.805

0.677

CD 2

M/8

2

1.006

0.794

0.866

0.726

CD3

M/8

3

0.815

co.705

c.0.754

np

np

np

CD4

N/7-8

4

0.914

0.628

0.685

0.576

0.632

0.135

0.123/0.128

CD5

M/8

3

0.804

0.677

0.628

0.683

0.141

0.135

CD6

M/8

4?

0.956

np

0-733 np

CD/

M/8

I

1.098

0.851

0.913

CD8

M-N/8

I

0.912

0.852

0.914

CD9

N/8

?

c.0.505

np

np

0.851

0.913

>o.533 0.770

0.846

0.712 0.680

°-735 b

0.162

CD10

N/7

I

1.256

C D 11

M/ 7

2

1.204

CD12

M/7W

2

1.163

0.787 0.751

CD13

village

I

>0.450

0.841

c.0.77

CD14

village

2

CD15

L/6

2

CD16

L/6

CD17

Κ/7

CD18

village

CD19

J/12

4 2

CD21

I-J/io

CD22

L/12

ia ?

>0.58

CD23

F/z,village

3?

>0.62

CD24

2/3

CD25

Ρ/Ι Ι P/IX

CD26

>0.81 0.898

co.575 0-773 0.790

b b

np np

0.150

0.138/0.142

17.19

16.05

0.165

0.155/0.160

14.79

I3.24

17-57 16.4

17.245

CO. I

C.0.14

3

o.x8o

np

14.07

0.175/0.180

np

14.70

14.25

np

np

np

0.819

0.15 5/0.161

0.146/0.149

0.764

0.160/0.165

0.150/0.155

15-7 16.05

!3-5 14.68

co.85

0.172

>0.145

16.33

b

c 0.746

np

np

np

1.007

>0.745

np

>0.708

np

np

4

0.924

c 0.62 5

>0.66

co.575

np

0.130

0.122

4

b

np

c.0.57

b

b

b

c.0.145 18.5

b

b

>0.593

0.645

np

0.614

np

np

np

19.0

0.941

0.763

0.829

0.705

0.149

0.158

16.2

0.592

b

0.177/0.179

b

np

np

np

np

>0.545

C0.90

b

0.773 b

np

np

np

τ 3·5

np

np

0.710

0.762

I

ι.601

b

P/8

3?

0.837

np

np

>0.66

CD27

M/J

3

0.732

C0.68

co.73

co.63

CD28

O/lI

I

1.258

CD29

N/8

>0.653

J/12

3/4 2

0.788

CD30

1.350

>0.76

np

CD3I

P/6

3

c.0.69

c 0.75

b

b

CD32

O/7

4(?)

0.881

np

np

>0.55

np

np

np

CD33 CD34

O/8

3 2

I.IOO

0.687

0.740

0.625

0.677

0.145

0.135

τ7·7

17.46

C-D/9,mosque

0.788

0.790

0.858

0.738

0.807

0.165

0.160

15.15

15-45

CD35 CD36

K/IO

lb

0.729

0.811

>0.849

0.817

0.165

0.160

13.01

c.0.808

0.180

np

12.88

CD37

temple ?

0.721

0.150

0.135

I6.3

-

-

-

-

-

-

CD38

M/7

>0.63

0.851

0.915 >0.69

b 0.742

1.237

0.855

0.912

0.728

0.785

0.671

3? 2?

[0.750]

[0.698]

-

[0.600]

[1.060]

[0.770]

-

[0.720]

I

0.930

c o . 8 47

0.908

CD41

I/14 +

3

0.606

c 0.675

np

CD42

J-K/14

I

1.148

0.857

0.920

CD43

M14 +

I

1.234

0.840

1.065

C.0.13

14.64

0.157

15.15

np

np

14.87

np

0.150

0.140

CO.135

I3-°7

b

14.8

0.170 13.46

0.784

0.842

0.179

0.161

15.72

14.717

0.903

0.756

0.8x8

0.176

0.162

14.69

14.517

0.847

0.915

0.178

0.161/0.165

14-79

12.53

np

0-775 np

0.825

0.858

np

np

I

>0.83 >0.42

>0.64

np

>0.62 np

CD48

G/ 4

CD54

N/14 +

CD55

N/14 +

?

>0.42

np

np

>0.41

0.745

c 0.789

CD56

O/5

?

b

b

CD57

F/7

ia

°-579

0.851

0.913

CD58

N-O/8

I

I.3IO

0.851

0.912-0.9x5

CD59

N-O/8

2

1.225

b

b

C D 60

N/8

CD61

H-I/12

2/3 2

0.875

CD62

A/10

CD63

SE/temple

0.821

14.8

np

l(?) 2? ?

2

np

np

SE/temple

CO.892

np

np

co.63

SE/temple

ι or i b ?

np

0.180

CD47

1.027

b

0.180

0.175 0.131

co.85

CD46

>0.705

c.0.145

0.674 c o . 1 4

0.600

0.948

?

np

>0.640

I

I/14 +

c.0.775

>0.81

2/3

CD40

b

0.767

0.757 0.759

CD39

np

16.5

b

>0.865

>0.655

16.28

c 0.12 5

>0.666 NP

c o . 70 5

CO. 64 5

co.75

C.0.155

CO. I

c.0.145

np

np

>0.460

np

np

c.0.69

0.135/0.140

b

np

5

0.812

0.875

0.180

0.169

14.846

ΐ5· 2 3

0-775 0.694

co.835

0.180

0.170

I7.23

14-55

CO. 160

>0.127

c.0.75

np

0.638

np

np

np

>0.690

np

0.157

0.147

0.175

c 0.167

0.160

0.150

b

>0.864

0.781

0.788

co.855

np

>0.825 np

np

(icontinued)

4 6

D E S C R I P T I O N

T A B L E 2.

Continued

CD64

SE/temple

CD65

SE/temple

CD66 C D 67

AND

R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

ORIGINAL

B U I L D I N G

1.081

>0.725

>0.770

>0.660

>0.70

0.150

>0.67

c.0.72

c.0.615

0.665

0.145

temple

3 I

0.885 c o . 766

0.845

0.918

0.790

np

0.175

np

υ/ι

I

>0.340

np

np

np

np

0.175

np

ϋ

CD68

C/7

I

0.904

0.842

village

2

>0.957

0.793

CD70

SE/temple

c.0.58

>0.63

CD71

SE/temple

4? ?

>0.410

>0.74

CD72

SE/temple

?

>0.510

>0.68

CD

temple

3 3?

0.682

CD74

THE

2/3?

CD69

7 3

OF

Pashakoy

>0.904

0.140

0.830 np

np

CO.16

CO.61

c.0.64

np

np

np

np

np

np

np

np

np

np

np

np

c. 0.66 5

0.625

4.1 m - r 4.0-

c. O.I 7 7

0.165

0.140

0.664

16.09 13.92

0.783 0730

np

160

c.0.135

15.32 15.19

0.135

faces, w h i c h give this part of the capital a s t e p p e d The

flutes

begin

at t h e

base

of

a third

vertical

appearance. offset;

the

b e v e l l e d j o i n t b e t w e e n t h e c a p i t a l a n d t h e s h a f t s e r v e s as t h e o n l y n e c k i n g ring.45 In general, the flute stops are s q u a r e d - o f f

3.5--

o r s l i g h t l y b e v e l l e d . M i n o r d i f f e r e n c e s in detail, f o r

example

the treatment of the annulets or the n e c k i n g g r o o v e , appear in 3.0

the

-

specific

groups

of

capitals

identified

below.

Within

general design, h o w e v e r , there are o n l y three significant ations. O n e 2.5 -

while (drawn 2.0

capital, C 1 7 ,

diameter, short

-

another by

neck

and

capital,

Clarke

has f o u r annulets,

a smaller

abacus,

shallow

C4,

and n o w

has

and 18

quite

flutes.

The

the devi-

upper fluting,

third,

C33

lost), has a b u l b o u s p r o f i l e

and

very short neck. A fourth capital of standard shape, C 1 0 , bears a n a r c h a i c A e o l i c r e t r o g r a d e i n s c r i p t i o n a c r o s s its a b a c u s .

Technical treatment

1 . 5 --

T h e t e c h n i c a l t r e a t m e n t o f e a c h c a p i t a l is i d e n t i c a l , d e s p i t e t h e differences 1.0

-

in their p r o f i l e s

outlined

below.

The

top

lateral

edges of the abacus and the bed surface of the neck have

been

slightly b e v e l l e d t o set o f f the capital f r o m the e p i s t y l e a b o v e a n d the .50 Height

λ .50

.60

.70

.80

,90m

Diameter FIGURE 23. S c h e m a t i c d i m i n u t i o n o f c o l u m n d r u m s .

t h i r t y - t h i r d c a p i t a l as w e l l . 4 4 T h e y d i s p l a y a b o l d l y echinus

at

the an-

that

a sharply pronounced

project

in

slightly

V-shaped

spreading

shoulder, followed b y a broadly sweeping curve into t w o nulets

with

shaft below,

thus

protecting

the

vulnerable

edge

of

the

abacus a n d r e d u c i n g the w e i g h t of the epistyle that fell o n the

undercut

rings

cutting

with

vertical

44 Thirty-one capitals are now on the akropolis and one in the Louvre (inv. 2824). The American excavators recorded 20 capitals, Clarke 1882, pp. 86-9; Clarke 1898, pp. 77-84, fig. 10; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, pp. 159, 164. Bacon (Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 159) illustrates four profiles (without the abacus). Two (capitals Β and C ) are nearly identical, and the third (capital A ) is larger but of similar profile. The fourth (capital D) has a significantly more bulbous echinus, distinctive annulets, and a very short neck. Four profiles are also illustrated in Clarke 1898, fig. 10, 1-4, without scale or measurements. Fortu-

nately, the original drawings for both sets, done at 1:1 scale, are preserved in the papers of the excavation now in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. The capitals labelled 2 and 4 in the report correspond to capitals Β and D in the final folio. Since capital A corresponds to capital 1 in all respects except the height of the neck, it probably is the same capital; the change in the neck must be a correction. Capitals C and 3 are clearly different. The original drawings show that the peculiar angle at which the bed of the neck was drawn in the publications was meant as a bevelled edge, which does not exist in this form and which may have led to a certain distortion of the profile. The original drawings include the abacus of the capitals, and it is therefore possible to match the drawings with capitals now at the site. Capital A may be our C31 (labelled on the drawing, 'best preserved'). Capital Β is probably our C3. Capital C , labelled 'as N E of plan' must be C16. Capital 3 in the report is closest in form and dimensions to our C28 or C29. Capital D matches nothing visible at the site today. O n the original drawing, it is annotated as 'SW of plan'; the profile matches the capital illustrated in Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 165, fig. ι. A s it was very well preserved, it may have been the third capital taken to the harbour, intended for transport to America. According to local residents, the third capital was imbedded in the concrete paving near the end of the quay in the 1980s. It is included here as C33. 45 The bevelled edge extends between 0.012 to 0.018 m. from the outer surface (following the curve of the flutes) and opens the joint by 0.003 1 0 °-°°4 m ·» contra Clarke 1898, p. 77. Other rings could have been added in paint.

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

OF T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

C6

CD4

CD5

CD12

CD36

Η—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—I .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3m FIGURE 24. Restored column.

46

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF T H E O R I G I N A L

5 Ο

Group A

Ο

Group Β

• / \

BUILDING

7.

6

(30)

Group C Profile damaged or buried

F I G U R E 25. F i n d - s p o t s o f t h e c a p i t a l s .

portion of the capital overhanging the shaft. The masons used an

distinguish the face f r o m the back of each capital b y the relative

architectural compass secured in a small hole on the bed surface

position of the pry marks used in shifting the epistyle and its

of the neck to strike off the circumference of the echinus,

backer into position. 4 7

annulets, and neck. T h e consistency in the curve of the echinus of each capital suggests that the masons used templates as well to

Decorative attachments

help define the profile. T w o forms, one to determine the profile

Several of the capitals preserve the holes for, and in some

of the echinus near the abacus, and a second to determine the

instances still have the ends of, metal pins that once secured

neck, annulets, and beginning of the echinus, could be rigged to

decorative attachments. Capital C 1 2 has holes for a three-

fit the length of the quarried block. Certain peculiarities of

pronged metal attaching instrument, one p r o n g set on the

execution, for example on capital C 5 , which has its echinus

lateral face of the abacus and the other t w o into the joint

offset (to one side) from the abacus by 0.005

meeting the echinus (Pi. 43). Capitals C i , C 1 0 , and C 2 1 have

m-> anc ^

C18,

which is completed with a high relieving margin, coupled with the markings from the compass, suggest that the capitals were measured and most likely carved upside-down.

6

We can

46 Normally, w e assume that the masons defined the abacus first and then apportioned the neck and echinus; C o u l t o n 1979, p. 93. However, the random

variation in the height of the abacus implies that here this clement was carefully defined only in the last stages of execution, to achieve the required height of the column. 47 The pry for the epistyle (on centre) is c.0.30-0.35 m. from the front face, while the pry for the epistyle backer is c.0.50 m. from the back face.

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

-1.232

Τ

OF T H E O R I G I N A L

1.184

1.184

FRONT

FRONT

,-V··

.192

g f m

.462I .175

j / r I

.620-

\\ \ I

C18

BUILDING

ι .624

r 1

C5 Η

1—I—h —ι—ι—ι—ι—I—I .5 1m

CD21

Η—I—I—I—I—I 5 10cm FIGURE 26a.

Representative capitals from the three groups: C18, C5, C i ; diminution of the flute width from the bottom of the shaft to the neck of

the capital.

holes for pins on the lateral face of the abacus. Capital C 1 8 has a

diameter of the shaft (Tables 3a and 3b). 48 These relationships

dowel hole on its top surface in front of the epistyle, and C i has

give the impression that the masons quarried blocks roughly

a clamp-like cutting behind the epistyle; both presumably se-

two-and-one-half times wider than high and carved capitals

cured metal attachments as well (Fig. 26a). Iron stains preserved

from them w i t h an eye chiefly toward completing the necessary

on the upper surface of several capitals (Fig. 26a; Fold-out Fig. 7), usually near the edge of the epistyle backer, suggest

4S

Range in length of abacus: 1.150 to 1.249 m. R a n g e in capital height: 0.456 to

nails in these positions as well, although their function here is

0.5195 m. R a n g e in U D on arris: 0.584 to 0.635

uncertain.

variations result f r o m m i n o r imprecision in carving and often d o n o t affect all

m

· S o m e of the measurable

sides of the capital uniformly. T h e length and w i d t h of the abacus are n o t always equal ( C 5 , C 7 , C 2 0 , C 2 7 , C30). In s o m e instances the abacus is angled slightly

Capital groups and variations

o u t w a r d ( C 6 , C 8 , C i ò , C 2 0 , C 2 7 ) ; i n others slightly inward ( C 3 , C 1 3 ) . Sometimes the abacus overhangs the echinus o n one or m o r e sides ( C 2 , C 4 , C 5 , C 7 , C 2 1 , C22, C 2 6 , C 2 7 ) ; m o r e rarely, the echinus projects b e y o n d the abacus ( C 1 7 ) . In one

A l t h o u g h the capitals form a stylistically coherent group, their

capital ( C 5 ) the echinus is o f f s e t to one side of the abacus b y 0.005

dimensions s h o w considerable range, especially in the length of

( C 1 5 ) , the abacus overhangs the echinus t h r o u g h the length but falls short of its

the abacus relative to the height of the capital and to the upper

projection t h r o u g h the thickness. R e c o r d e d here is the profile o n the best preserved side.

m·!

' n another

46

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF T H E O R I G I N A L

C10

BUILDING

G r o u p C capitals The most distinctive group of capitals are those of broadest dimension, labelled G r o u p C (capitals C 3 , C 1 2 , C 1 3 , C 1 6 , and C 1 8 ; Pis. 36, 43; Figs. 26a, 27; F o l d - o u t Fig. 6; note ratio of C a p W to ( C a p H t — N H t ) , Table 3 b, col. 8). Generally, they are the shortest overall, with the shortest echinus, narrowest annulets, and tallest neck. Their flute stops are sharp and square.

1.204

T h e proportional formulae for the height of the echinus and annulets f o l l o w exactly the general archaic rule proposed by J. J. C o u l t o n : 5 0 EchHt =

3/5(CapHt

- AbHt)

EchHt + A n n H t = 2/3(CapHt - A b H t )

N H t = i/3(CapHt - AbHt)

T h e proportion allocated to the height of the abacus varies randomly; the masons made adjustments in this element to complete the necessary height of the column. Differences in the length of the abacus (as great as 0.067

m·)

are

absorbed

mainly b y the projection of the echinus and to a lesser extent b y the annulets (compare C 1 2 and C 1 8 w i t h C 3 , C 1 3 , and C16).

.574

A

gentle

levelling

off

near

the

annulets

reduces

the angle of inclination in C 1 2 and C 1 8 to approximately 13 Ο

Η—I—I—Ι.5

degrees; the angle of others is approximately 18 degrees. 5 1

1m

G r o u p A capitals

FIGURE 26b. Inscribed capital C I O .

Capitals that belong to the G r o u p A ( C i , C 1 9 , C20, and C24; Pis. 35, 40; Figs. 26a, 27; F o l d - o u t Fig. 6; Table 3b) are equally height of the column. There are, however, more subtle distinc-

recognizable, in this instance by their greater total height, a

tions that are not simply the result of casual execution. 4 9 In fact,

more steeply sloped echinus, and a tall neck. Moreover, the

there are three core dimensions for the height of the echinus

underside of the first annulet is flattened to f o r m a fillet, and

(0.155, 0.181, and 0.200 m.), and each is correlated with one of

the bed surface does not have a bevelled edge. Capitals C i ,

t w o specific neck heights (eight capitals with a mean of 0.089

·

C 1 9 , and C 2 4 are extremely close in profile and proportion;

and sixteen with a mean of 0.071 m.; Fig. 28). It is significant that

C 2 0 has slightly different proportions o w i n g to its shorter neck

the height of the capital does not dictate the height of the neck,

and taller abacus, but it nonetheless belongs best with this

m

which w o u l d have been the least conspicuous and easiest elem-

group. T h e inclination of the echinus is between 24 and 26

ent to adjust if visual uniformity were the desired aim. O n the

degrees. There is slightly more play in the vertical dimensions

contrary, the capitals that are shortest overall have the tallest

of G r o u p A than G r o u p C , but the general relationship of parts

necks (Fig. 26a; Fold-out Fig. 6), and for one of these capitals,

shows a clear departure f r o m the proportions of capitals in

C 1 8 , the mason chose to complete the requisite height with a

Group

high relieving surface rather than change the proportional

( C a p H t — A b H t ) . T h e combined height of the annulets and

scheme of the three main elements.

neck is roughly 1/3 ( C a p H t — A b H t ) . T h e ratio of echinus to

These differences represent intentional changes to certain vertical

dimensions.

They

demonstrate

that

the

C.

The

height

of

the

echinus

is

roughly

2/3

abacus height (now roughly 1:1), as well as the height of the

capitals

echinus to its projection (again roughly 1:1), also reflects a clear

belong to three distinct groups according to the inclination of

change in specifications. T h e difference in the length of the

the echinus and the proportional relationship of the neck

abacus is here only 0.030 m.; it is absorbed at the base of the

and echinus. The fact that the height of the abacus does not

echinus and in the projection of the annulets.

c o n f o r m to a particular pattern within these otherwise discernable groups probably has to do with the w a y in w h i c h the

G r o u p Β capitals

capitals w e r e carved. Even so, its proportional relationship

T h e differences between G r o u p s A and C are striking (Fig. 27).

to the echinus suggests the same groupings outlined b e l o w (Table 3 b).

49

Wescoat 1987, pp. 553-68.

T h e 18 surviving intermediate capitals belong to G r o u p Β (Pis.

^ C o u l t o n 1979, Tables 9 and 10. 31 Measurements arc based on the main inclination, i.e., where the slope of the profile is most continuous.

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

OF THE O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

FIGURE 27. Profile of Group A capital, C24, overlain on the profile of Group C capital, C3.

φ m «-ι -φ φ φ O d d d d d d d O

Ή Ο Ο D Ν Ν

_

Ο

—

- • Ν

Ά

· η O Λ Λ O rî Oή Ori Ori O

ΟΟ

ON ON Ο NC NO >t Ν Ο ON ON ΟΟ •Η Οφ Φ Φ Φ -Φ "Φ Φ Φ Φ Φ Φ Ά Φ Φ Φ Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο ο" Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο _ο

00 N Φ IS NO NO Φ NO m NO OO O OO O ON OO ON OO Φ tv Oφ ^ NO w tV Ο 1-1 is I-I w t-l M M IS M IS •-j IS w HH HH ** •H H H M M M Μ M t-4 W M A Λ Λ d 0 Λ Λ

00

is Ο φ 0IS0 IS φ OO O^O l\ ON Ν Ν Ν Ν IS Ν IS Ν OH 0 3 Ο Ο Ο Ο 0 Ο 0 Ο

(S

Η IS IS Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν Ν ο- Η"Η Ν ΗΗ IS Η α ο Ο ο d d d d d - Q o d d d d d d d

η \û 00 Ν NO ^ IV Ο Φ NO tv Λ Ν Κ \0 ΟΟ ΟΟ ΟΝΟΝΝΟΝΟ NO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

tv Ν

Ο Ν ΟΟ \0

OO

O - Ι Η Η Η Η Η Η

Γ^ Κ 0\ Μ >-1 Ν Μ Μ OH

I V OO

Ο^Ι^ΟΟ

-S

3 Ο 1-,

Ο

w Κ iT S Ο v"> ^

£

Χ
R?

dressed-down, 0.67/0.53 m. R of centre, 0.05 m.

d o w n surface Cu

?

no p r y

either

no p r y

either

none

C12

C

no p r y

either

no p r y

either

dressed d o w n , 0.73/0.50 m. R of centre, 0.115 m.

no p r y

either

no p r y

either

wedge-shaped cuttings to

C13

c

R of centre

far right C14

?

p r y shape, dressed-

R-*L

C15

Bi

position of p r y ?

dressed d o w n , 0.70/0.51 m. R of centre, 0.095

R—>L?

p r y shape vs.

M

·

position

d o w n surface R—>L?

p r y position, dressed

R—>L

centred?

d o w n surface Ci 6

C

pry shape, position

R—>L

p r y position

R—>L

pry, wedges, 0.45/0.74 m.

L of centre, 0.09 m.

C17

B?

p r y shape vs. position;

L—>R

pry, dressed d o w n

R—>L

pry, wedges

L of centre, 0.09 m.

dressed-down surfaces

surface

C18

C

pry shape?

either

p r y shape, position

R—

none

C19

A

p r y shape, position

R—>L

p r y shape, position

R->L

pry, wedges, 0.68/0.52 m.

C20

A?

p r y shape, position,

L—>R

p r y on top of dressed

either

dressed d o w n , 0.60/0.61 m. centred?

C21

Bi

p r y shape, position

L—>R

p r y shape, position

L-^R

pry, wedges

R of centre

C22

BI

p r y position

L—>R?

p r y shape, position

L^R

pry, wedges

centred?

C23

?

p r y shape, position

L—>R

pry shape, position

L^R

pry, w e d g e s

R of centre

C24

corner

C25

A-NW ? np

np

np

C26

B2

no p r y

either

p r y shape vs. position L—>R?

stain for joint

L of centre

C27

BI

p r y shape, position

R—>L

pry shape vs. position R—>L

side pries

centred

C28

B3

p r y position

L—>R?

p r y position

L—>R?

C29

B3

p r y shape, position

L—>R

p r y shape

L—>R

?dressed d o w n ,

R of centre?, 0.125

R of centre, 0.05 m.

d o w n surface

surface

corner np

np

M

0.74/0.49 m . C30

BI

pry position

L—>R?

p r y position

either

C31

BI

p r y position

L—R

p r y position

either

wedges, 0.68/0.50 m.

R of centre, 0.10 m.

C32

BI

pry shape, position

L—>R

p r y position

L^R

pry

centred?

c33

?

3 7 - 8 , 4 1 - 2 ; F i g . 26a; F o l d - o u t F i g . 6; T a b l e 3 b). T h e y are b a s e d

graphically

o n y e t a t h i r d set o f s p e c i f i c a t i o n s : t h e i r n e c k s a r e

length of the abacus affects the inclination of the

shorter

( m e a n of 0.071 m.), a n d the h e i g h t of the e c h i n u s falls b e t w e e n that of G r o u p s A and C ( m e a n of 0.181 m., T a b l e 3a).52 T h e c a p i t a l s o f G r o u p Β c l u s t e r t i g h t l y w h e n t h e e c h i n u s h e i g h t is

compared

with

the n e c k

height

There are a few exceptions. In C28 and C29, a slightly taller neck compensates a slightly smaller echinus. C5 and C26 have slightly shorter echinuses and average neck heights.

28).

The

echinus;

t h o s e o f a v e r a g e l e n g t h h a v e an i n c l i n a t i o n o f a b o u t 20 d e g r e e s . G r o u p Β m a y be divided into sub-groups. In G r o u p Capitals

C6,

C7,

and C 2 1

are v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l , t h e

m i n o r differences being slight adjustments to 52

(Fig.

Bi, only

accommodate

the d i f f e r i n g lengths of the abacus. C a p i t a l s C 4 , C 2 2 , C 3 1 , and C 3 2 share their p r o p o r t i o n a l s c h e m e , and C 8

C27, and

·

D E S C R I P T I O N

A N D

R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

OF

T H E

O R I G I N A L

B U I L D I N G

55

31.0cm-r

30.5

--

30.0

--

29.5

--

29.0

--

28.5

--

28.0

--

27.5

--

27.0

--

26.5

--

26.0

--

25.5

--

25.0

--

24.5

--

• J - ?

BUILDING

ι .230 1 Μ 1

.

3

/

.385

.44

1

.445

1

.46

Ρ .64

1

A -

" λI ζ*""

;

2.615AB6

I- .19 Η

0 ',"//'1.83

0.390

0.545

R—>L

M/6

>1.49

0.381

0.522

AB3 ΑΒ4

L/6

>1.71

0.388

0.528

K/13

>1.112

0.385

AB5

K/13

2 -355

AB6

L/io

2.6I 5

Pins

R—>L

R: alpha

i, soffit near inside face

0.532

(R—>L) (R-»L)

np np

ι, soffit near inside face np

0.385

0.503

R—>L

np

0.372

0.541

b 2, soffit near inside face

np b

AB7

L/io

>1.964

0.386

0.523

AB8

M / T

>1.558

0.354

0.521

b

ΑΒ9

o/8a

>1.115

0.389

0.539

L—>R

no

AB10

0/8b

>1.42

0-395

0.540

L^R

R: lambda

4

8

Mason's Mark

A B 11

0/8c

>0.605

0.394

0.540

AB12

M/7-8

>Ι·775

0.382

0-535

A B 13 AB 1 4

P/8-9

>o.8O

0.382

0.522

M/13

>1.65

c.0.380

0.587

ABi 5

O-P/IO

>0.91

0.385

AB16

P/9

>1.915

°-395

0.504

L-M/8

>2.24

0.378

0.504

ι, soffit near inside face np

no R—>L

L: delta

ι, soffit near inside face

np L—>R

np R: tau

np

R—>L R—>L

b

b np

(R—>L) np

no np

np np

L—>R

np np

b

b

b

np

np

ι, soffit near inside face

c.0.51

A B 17a,b

2, soffit near inside face

b

AB18

P/9

>1.64

0.384-0.390

AB19

M/13

>1.11

b

A B 20

SE of Temple

>0.60

0.381

AB21

L/12

>0.77

0.371

0.481-0.490

AB22

L/15

>1.275

0.396

0.540

AB23/AB29

P/16

>2.41

0.394

0.528

A B 24

L/12

>1.194

0-375

AB25

Q/6

>1.04

0.388

0-555

AB27

P/j

>1.01

0.389

0-537

AB28

S/9

>0.995

0.392

0.490

L—>R

AB26

Q-R/io

>1.29

0.389

0.548

(L-R)

0.540

c.0.51 0.512

np

c.0.50

L—>R

Direction of setting calculated from the exterior of the building.

marks o n its upper surface marked on the drawing a, a' indicate

both ends of the temple. Both the stylistic and technical aspects

that the non-projecting block was laid first. T h e facer was then

of the replacement blocks indicate these repairs w e r e accom-

held in place with a preliminary strut at a". Its backer was

plished in the Archaic period. T h e reworked material follows

positioned using p r y marks b and d. T h e projecting facer was

the original closely, except at the northwest corner, where the

then set in place and secured with struts at c, c', and c".

damage appears to have been more severe. T h e general charac-

T h e design of B 1 1 (Fig. 40) suggests that the intermediate

ter of the geison and the material belonging to the original

corner backing courses had slightly bevelled joints. F o r the top

structure are described here; the evidence for the rebuilding,

backing course, however, the joint was p r o b a b l y a simple one,

along with the new and reworked material belonging to that

w i t h one of the blocks clamped diagonally to the corner tri-

phase, is presented in Chapter 5, ' M a j o r Repairs'.

glyph.

Lateral geison G E I S O N

A N D

T Y M P A N O N

O f the 50 lateral geison blocks, 39, including 3 of the 4 corners, survive to complete length; large fragments represent the

T h e extensive r e - w o r k i n g of architectural material f r o m the

fourth corner and several other blocks (Pis. 53-6, 66-7a-b;

geison and tympanon is the strongest indication that the temple

Figs. 43-4, 55-7; F o l d - o u t Fig. i i ) . 7 4 Collectively, they consti-

sustained major damage soon after it was completed. T h e entire

tute more than four-fifths of the course. T h e blocks are of two

northern, eastern, and western geison course had to be rebuilt,

types, distinguished b y design, technical treatment, and slight

and parts of the southern geison course may have been reset.

differences in the profile of the c r o w n i n g hawksbeak. Many of

Some of the discarded blocks f r o m the original course were salvaged and reçut to become major blocks of the tympanon at

74 Earlier descriptions, Clarke 1882, p. 93; Clarke 1898, pp. 97-106, 128, figs. 15-17; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 155, figs. 4-6, 157, figs. 4, 5.

46

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

1.194

ι

1.194

C 2 4

WEST

WEST

C 2

C9

0

Η—I—I—I—I—h .5

1

1.5

H

1—I—h

2

H—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I 2.5 3m

FIGURE 41a. U p p e r surfaces of corner capitals C 2 4 , C 2 , and C 9 , s h o w i n g the construction of the epistyle.

the blocks were built into the later fortifications, but, even

c.o.i 5 - 0 . 2 3 m. f r o m the face of the corona, presumably to

so, the t w o types today are segregated either directly to the

receive a flange on the underside of the eaves tile. In front of

west of the temple or mainly to its south (Fig. 42). Each of

the groove, the block is smoothly dressed to receive the eaves

the corner blocks was found near its respective position; on the

tile; behind, the roughly w o r k e d surface varies considerably in

basis of their design w e can assign the lateral blocks found

section.

south of the temple to the southern flank and those found west of the temple to the northern flank. Within the t w o groups the individual blocks vary, but on the

The geison blocks fall short of the full thickness of the entablature, w i t h the bed surface (c.0.5 5 m.) o n l y slightly deeper than the entire overhang f r o m the nosing of the c r o w n

whole, they share t w o characteristics of the flat form of gei-

hawksbeak to soffit ( 0 . 4 7 8 m.); the projection f r o m corona to

son. 7 5 T h e top surface of each block is dressed flat at the back

soffit equals 0.439

to a height of c.0.43 m. to receive the roof rafters. N e a r the

c r o w n is 0.40 m., 7 6 and the total height of the overhanging face

corona, the surface is cut at an angle that terminates in a rough

f r o m the c r o w n to the soffit of the mutule is only slightly less at

groove (c.0.03-0.08 m. wide and c.0.02-0.035 m. deep) set

0.375

75 Hodge i960, pp. 77-91. Two exceptional blocks, L G 2 and L G 7 , have sloping upper surfaces that match the pitch of the roof.

76

m

· T h e height of each block f r o m soffit to

m. T h e c r o w n moulding near the corners has a cavetto-

Clarke 1898, p. 328, records the height at 0.42 m., but see Tables 8,10, and 11.

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

HfflW—ι—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3m FIGURE 41b. Plan oblique showing the construction of the southwest corner of the epistyle.

like profile, but over the rest of the course it becomes a rudi-

A s with the stylobate, the lateral faces of the geison are cut at

mentary hawksbeak with a deep upper curve and a shallow

slight angles to interlock w i t h the adjacent blocks. T h e lateral

l o w e r curve that does not reverse at the bottom and has no

joint faces of each block have anathyrosis, but the backs are left

terminating notch (Figs. 43, 61). It merges directly into the face

rough. Some blocks have sockets f o r ceiling beams and cuttings

of the corona, w h i c h is cut back slightly f r o m the vertical plane

for rafters (Fold-out Fig. 11).

and recessed at the bottom to a depth of c.0.065 m. to create a fascia, c.0.065 m. high. O n most blocks the drip is undercut by 0.005 m. to f o r m a slightly acute angle. O n all the geison blocks, the boldly accentuated mutules alternate in length. 7 7

South geison blocks from the original building T o d a y there are 23 identifiable blocks belonging to the south-

T h e spacing of the frieze, at least on the flanks, requires this

ern geison, 21 of w h i c h preserve their complete length (Table 8;

alternation, but the distinction is exaggerated by making the

Pis. 53-5; Fig. 43; F o l d - o u t Figs. 9, 11). T h e y are easily distin-

viae roughly one-third the w i d t h of the triglyph. 7 8 T h e mutules

guished b y their design, jointing, proportions, and shared tech-

are recessed slightly f r o m the fascia and undercut at 10 to 11

nical features. With f e w exceptions, the top surface of these

degrees f r o m horizontal. L i k e the regulae, they have no guttae.

blocks is aligned with the surface cut in front of the tile groove, to a depth of c.0.55 m. f r o m the face of the corona. A l t h o u g h

77 Pace Dinsmoor 1975, p. 88. Equal mutules over triglyph and metopes would produce viae c.0.09 m. wide, considerably narrower than one-quarter the width of the triglyph. 78 Clarke 1882, p. 93, suggests that on the flank the metope-mutulc was made three-fifths the width of the triglyph, c.0.31 m., but the surviving metope-mutules are almost all wider.

the degree of inclination varies, it is usually less than the 1:4 slope of the roof. Behind, the surface is roughly dressed flat at a height of c.0.40 to 0.45 m. T h e crowning hawksbeak is generally smaller than that on the northern blocks and has a deep top curve, o v o l o face, and sharply pointed beak.

46

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

FIGURE 42. Find-spots of lateral geison blocks. T h e most distinctive aspect of these blocks is their jointing.

T h e wide range in the length of the metopal spaces (from 0.644

T h e blocks are designed to span roughly one-half an interaxial

to 0.794

m·)

space divided through the triglyph-mutule, so that each block

triglyph frieze at the corner requires. We must conclude that

reflects more variation than accommodating the

covers one complete metopal space and part of each adjacent

the frieze on this side did not f o l l o w the interaxial spacing

triglyph. This method of division allows enormous flexibility

rigorously. M o s t of the metopal spaces do, however, fall be-

in the length of each block, especially since there are no guttae.

tween 0.685

F e w of the preserved blocks closely approximate the length of

and viae over the metopes vary significantly. M o s t of the time,

one-half of an intercolumnar space (1.224 m.). Instead, they fall

the t w o viae surmounting a metope are nearly equal, but there

into four complementary groups:

are exceptions. 7 9 In about half the measurable instances, the

and

0.740 m. (Table 8). T h e lengths of the mutules

viae are one-half the w i d t h of the mutule they flank, but in as Group A: blocks over 1.320 m. long Group B: blocks c.1.28 m. long Group C: blocks between 1.160-1.210 m.

Group D: blocks under 1.100 m.

L G i , LG3, LG8, LG16, LG25 LG7, LG9, LG21, LG37

many cases there is no discernible system f o r apportioning the elements. Because it was composed in t w o segments, the w i d t h of the triglyph-mutule must be calculated f r o m the partial regulae; the combined mean (0.51 m.) and the combined

LG15, LG26/LG34, LG27, LG3 5/LG50, LG46/LG54 LG2, LG4, LG12, LG36, LG45

7 9 Fourteen of the 19 preserved metopal spaces have viae, of w h i c h the widths are within 0.01 m. The largest discrepancy is 0.024 m ·

r

ON M NO

U

o d o

Ν Φ ->

Φ Φ

ο ιν NO NO c-i Ο Ο

οο «S Γ""» NO Ο Ν οο ON IV ΟΟ NO ON ΟΟ Ο ο ο Ο Ο Ο Ο

HJ

S

φ ON ο f i Ν Ν φ ON Ν Φ Ν ο Ο Ο ο Ο

-G υ bß es 'S «

u

"S

UH

6X1 RT

ΙΛ ON Ν οο ιν Ν Ο ON Ν ONNO N NO φ O «Ν Ν α- r«"\ Ο ο ο ο ιο) ο Ο Ο π ^ Ο Λ

IV ιν ο ο"

Ν IV NO ΓΛ IV Φ Ο Ο ο ιν ΟΟ tv NO OO Ο tv ^ ON ON (S Ν Ο ο ο ο ο ο Ο ο ο Ο ο

Ν

φ fi ιν Ο Ν ο ο Φ Ν ιν N O ON -< Ο ο Ι-Ί IH ο ο Λ Λ A Λ

NO

υ jo _Q G Ο W •s txD

H

f | f i ο ΟΟ CN Ν ON ON ΟΟ fi Ο Φ Ο Ν 1-1 ΗΗ li 1-1 Μ

G

Ι^Ν Μ

^ NO οο οο Ν Ο Ν οο Ν Μ Ο •Η

«Λ rr\ ο φ οο φ ON Ν •Η ο Μ

NO Η-Ι Ι-

IS ^ Ν NO ο tv IV ON ΟΟ ι-; Μ «S ο Ν W M HH li

Ο

but the

column itself was also placed west of centre by 0.036 m., thus creating an overall misalignment of c.0.205 m. N o r was the distortion fully absorbed in the second bay, where the columnar triglyph continues to fall short of axis b y 0.111 m. T h e next geison blocks, LG35/50 and L G 7 , absorb most of the remaining displacement over the third, slightly narrower intercolumniation. Thereafter, the frieze was roughly on track.

Today there are at least 12 large fragments of the raking geison on the akropolis at Assos; a thirteenth block is in the depot of the Istanbul Archaeological Museum. 8 1 M o s t of the surviving raking geison blocks, including R G i , R G 2 , and R G 4 , have the sockets and U-shaped lifting channels associated with the repaired building (Fig. 66 and Table 13). O n e block, R G 3 , has the socket w i t h release channel found on the southern geison and associated w i t h the original building; in all other surviving features, this block closely resembles the raking geison blocks f r o m the repair. Probably, R G 3 was reçut f r o m a discarded horizontal geison block, in the same manner as several tympa-

Original northern geison

non blocks. T h e bed and mutules w o u l d have been cut d o w n

T h e northern geison blocks extant today all belong to the

retain the lifting holes, although in a slightly lower position.

repaired building. H o w e v e r , in their original state, t y m p a n o n

Raking geison block R G 1 1 may belong to the original geison,

and the soffit reshaped into a hawksbeak, but the sides w o u l d

blocks Tp2, Tp3, T p 5 , and T p j (and possibly T p i / 9 ) belonged

as it has a taller corona than the other blocks (o. 245-0.252 m.

to the northern flank. T h e y have the mutular spacing appro-

rather than 0.235

priate for the flank, and several bear the traces of the square nail

ing, at least as compared to R G 1 3 (Pi. 75; Fig. 61). H o w e v e r ,

holes used to secure the original roof seen today on the south-

the hawksbeak c r o w n moulding varies so dramatically on the

ern side (Pis. 70-3; Figs. 63-5; F o l d - o u t Fig. 12).

northwest corner geison (a repair) that the differences do not

m·) and a

cruder hawksbeak c r o w n mould-

appear to be chronologically significant. O n balance it seems

Original horizontal geison A l l of the blocks today identifiable as the horizontal geison

best to consider all surviving blocks of the raking geison part of the repair.

belong to the repaired building. H o w e v e r , at least four of the blocks reçut to form the t y m p a n o n belonged to the original horizontal geison: Tp4, Tp6, Tp8, and T p i 2 , and possibly T p i / 9 (Pi. 72; Figs. 63-5; F o l d - o u t Fig. 12; Table 12b). In its original capacity, T p 4 joined the southeast corner, as its obsolete mut-

DIMENSIONS OF THE ELEVATION IN LIGHT OF c l a r k e ' s proposed assian f o o t MEASUREMENT

ules fall in the requisite positions; the residual traces of t w o clamp holes match those preserved on the southeast corner

Clarke was well aware of the significance of his proposed foot

block, and the residual lifting socket aligns with the release

measurement of 0.319 m. (with a dactyl of 0.01994 dimensioning the elevation as well as the

channel on the corner block.

plan. 8 2

m·)

in

While the

Block B20 was also originally a horizontal geison block, later

evidence for Clarke's f o o t is generally compelling, some of his

reçut for another purpose (see Appendix IV, Fig. 98). Like the

conclusions are open to question. O u r investigation of the col-

southern geison, it had one clamp on each side. However, it is

umn drums, f o r example, led to a calculated shaft lower than the

shorter than the other blocks and does not cover a full half-inter-

15 ft proposed b y Clarke; w e have also noted that w o r k i n g with

columniation. O n e side was divided over the triglyph-mutule,

an average capital height (of 1.5 ft, or 0.4785 m.) masks the

while the other side is complete in a long metope-mutule. Origin-

subtle differences that distinguish the capitals of G r o u p s A and

ally, the block may have taken a position near the northwest corner.

C . While the dimension corresponds reasonably well with the average height of G r o u p Β capitals, the real variation (from 0.429

Original

tympanon

to 0.520 m.) argues against this measurement as a fixed unit.

A l l of the surviving t y m p a n o n blocks belong to the repaired building. It is not possible to identify, either in the fragments at

81 82

Mendel 1914, pp. 23-4, no. 268; Clarke 1898, pp. 109-10. Clarke 1898, table on p. 328.

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L T h e f o o t and dactyl unit do have strong application in the

BUILDING

an additional c r o w n i n g element (thranos), either in w o o d or

entablature. Together, the epistyle, frieze, and geison courses

stone,

are 100 dactyls high, or 6.25 of Clarke's Assian feet. T h e

(c.0.25 m.) and provided the main support f o r these ceiling

that

completed

the

thickness

of

the

entablature

combined epistyle and frieze equal 5 of Clarke's Assian feet;

beams. 88 T h e extant horizontal geison blocks do not have

their proportional relationship was determined b y taking 1 dac-

shallow sockets, but the vertical joint face of the northeast

tyl f r o m the frieze and adding it to the epistyle, so that the frieze

corner block has been hollowed out to a height of 0.253

was 39 dactyls high (0.778 m.) and the epistyle 41 dactyls high

receive the thranos (Fig. 57). A ceiling with beams resting at a

m

· to

(0.818 m.). T h e horizontal geison was set out at 20 dactyls or

level above the bed of the cornice is normal in late archaic and

1.25 ft high (0.399

i t s projection f r o m the soffit to the

early classical D o r i c temples on the mainland 8 9 and here fur-

corona equalled 22 dactyls (0.439 m-)> with a further 2 dactyls

ther confirms that the height of the pronaos order matched that

m·);

added f o r the nosing of the hawksbeak (0.479

m)·

T h e height of

of the pteroma. T h e spacing of the ceiling beams remains

the raking geison was set at 12 dactyls (or three palms;

uncertain, because none of the geison blocks has t w o sockets,

0.2393 m.). The w i d t h of the flank triglyph may also have been

and several have none at all. T h e sockets do not appear to be

calculated as 26 dactyls, or 0.518 m. The w i d t h of the triglyph

coordinated with the spacing of the frieze.

used for the fronts (0.565 m.), however, does not bear a close

N o physical evidence survives f o r the construction of the

relationship to the dactyl. S 3 T h e thickness of the entablature

ceiling over the pronaos or cella. In all probability it, too, was a

without the lower taenia equals 2.5 ft or 40 dactyls (0.798 m.).

simple w o o d e n ceiling composed of cross beams supporting w o o d e n planks. T h e free span of the cella (c.6.62-6.64

m·)

is

well within the limits of this type of construction. 9 0 C E I L I N G

A N D

R O O F

Archaic wooden ceiling

Woodwork of the roof T h e evidence for the w o o d e n structure of the roof survives

A l t h o u g h C l a r k e restored a coffered stone ceiling to the pter-

chiefly on the blocks belonging to the repaired building, and

oma, it is certain that the building originally—and probably

therefore is described in the next chapter. T h e evidence surviv-

throughout its entire h i s t o r y — h a d a simple w o o d e n ceiling. 84

ing on the southern geison suggests that the w o o d w o r k for

Shallow rectangular sockets cut on the back of the geison

both the original and the second roof were much the same.

supported the ceiling beams. T h e y could belong to the original structure, but they certainly are part of the repaired building because they appear on the north as well as the south geison. 8 3

Roof tiling and akroteria

These shallow rectangular sockets, preserved on at least 12

The roof of the temple was at all times covered w i t h terracotta

lateral geison blocks, are set c.0.235 m. above the bed surface

tiling, most of w h i c h has n o w vanished f r o m the site. 9 1 Clarke

and held the w o o d e n beams that supported the cross boards

and Bacon unearthed a handful of plain roof tiles, as well as one

(Fig. 43; Fold-out Fig. 11). T h e height of the closed sockets is

terracotta antefix, a fragment of terracotta sima, t w o fragmen-

only c.0.13 m.; most are c.0.17 m. wide. 8 6 A l l of the sockets are

tary ornamental eaves tiles, and some sculptured fragments of

too shallow (from 0.03 to 0.105

m-

deep) to do more than

tuff, most of w h i c h they assigned to the same roof. N o add-

anchor the ceiling beams. 8 7 Originally, there must have been

itional decorated members came to light in the investigations of the 1980s and 1990s. O f the many fragments of plain roof tiles

28 χ 0.01994 = 0.558 m.; 29 x 0.01994 = 0.578 m. The sample of triglyphs from w h i c h the mean is derived is very small, but the triglyph-mutules and regulae provide a substantive body of evidence. 83

C f . Clarke 1898, pp. 111-28; note the objections of Bacon, Koldewey, and Dörpfeld, noted in Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 167, n., and Chapter 6, 'Hellenistic Renovations', pp. 125-6. A coffered stone ceiling for an Archaic D o r i c structure is highly unlikely; the earliest certain examples are the mid-fifthcentury Hephaisteion and Parthenon in Athens. T h e soffits of the raking and lateral geison of the temple of Athena at Poseidonia are the earliest preserved examples of stone coffers, but they do not function as part of the ceiling, which was made of w o o d ; H o d g e i960, p. 104. Surviving evidence from the Archaic period points to w o o d e n ceilings for Doric buildings, even in the Cyclades, where stone ceilings were introduced into Ionic buildings by the mid-sixth century; note Sangri, Gruben 1972a, p. 28; Gruben 1985; Gruben 2001, p. 368, fig. 276, 278-9. 84

S5 From the southern side: L G 9 , L G 1 5 , L G 1 6 , L G 2 1 , L G 3 6 , and L G 3 7 . From the northern side: L G 1 1 / 3 3 , L G 1 3 , LG19/56, L G 2 2 , LG30/40/51, and L G 4 1 . Range in the position of the sockets: 0.18-0.26 m. from the bed surface.

T w o are nearly twice that: 0.29 and c.0.31 m. N o t e shallow sockets for ceiling beams of the First Heraion at F o c e del Sele: Zancani M o n t u o r o and Zanotti-Bianco 1954, pis. 17, 18, and 96, with the area beneath each socket dressed smooth for an additional supporting element. 86 87

scattered on the surface of the akropolis and built into postantique structures, only a f e w could belong to the temple, and even these vary in shape, fabric, and glazing. F e w roof tiles were f o u n d during excavation and none in stratified contexts. 9 2 s s e.g., second Temple of Aphaia at Aegina (Furrwängler 1906, pl. 36; Bankel 1993, pp. 30-1, fig. 10, pi. 69); Temple of Zeus at O l y m p i a {Olympia I, pl. 10). 89 C o u l t o n 1975, pp. 1 5 - 1 7 . 9υ H o d g e i960, p. 39, table 1; Coulton 1977, p. 157. 91 Supposedly Texier unearthed great quantities of tiles, but w e d o not know what kind (See Chapter II, 'History of the Building', n. 22). The slow destruction of the temple, the high disturbance of Byzantine occupation, and the bedrock surface of much of the akropolis may account for the virtual disappearance of the tiles. 92 A pan tile sealed beneath the mosaic floor is the one exception; Clarke 1898, p. 72. The three fragments of pan tile described and illustrated in Clarke 1898, pp. 132-3, fig. 29, have been de-accessioned from the Boston Museum of Fine Arts (formerly Boston inv. P4175, P4180, P4186). N o dimensions are given. According to Clarke, the pieces were black-glazed terracotta of coarse aggregate; P4186 differed slightly in having a yellowish colour w i t h a touch of purple in the glaze. P4175 and P4186 had curved lips; P4180 had squared lips. C l a r k e explains the

46

RT3

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF T H E O R I G I N A L

RT14

BUILDING

RT15

mm I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I 0 10 20 30 40 50cm FIGURE 45. Corinthian pan tiles RTI, RT2, RT5, RT9; Corinthian pan tiles RT3, RT4, RT14, RTI 5, RT16; Corinthian cover tiles RT12, RTI 1, RT6; Lakonian cover tiles RT7, RT8.

T h e pan tile fragments collected between 1985 and 1987 are all

Martin assign (Fig. 4j). 9 3 T h e evidence f o r a Corinthian-style

of the flat type. T h e y were found along with several fragments

roof is stronger.

of Corinthian-style cover tiles. Some very small fragments that

The several types of roof tile distinguished by shape, fabric,

could belong to Lakonian cover tiles are the only possible

and glaze attest to nearly as m a n y roofs; in these fragments w e

evidence f o r a ' h y b r i d ' style roof, w h i c h both A k e r s t r ö m and

may have representatives of the original roof, as well as the t w o

differences in the shape and fabric of these tiles as either varieties of contemporary manufacture or results of local repairs.

93 Akerström 1966, p. 203, and Martin 1965, p. 70; they do not cite specific evidence. For the hybrid system, Martin 1965, p. 70, fig. 26; Akerström 1966, pp. 196-8, 202-4; N . Winter 1993, pp. 252-4.

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

major and frequent minor repairs. A l l the tiles are made with a

face of the rougher core. 9 6 T h e back and sides of the antefix

coarse aggregate; the fabrics range in colour f r o m greyish-green

are given a slip composed of the same fine material to disguise

and deep red, to brownish-yellow. G l a z i n g ranges f r o m shiny

the rougher core. U n l i k e most antefixes, the face of this one

black to matte red. O n most of the extant pan tiles, the flanges

was set at an obtuse rather than acute angle to the bed surface,

meet the b o d y of the tile in a slight curve. T h o s e preserving the

so that it originally projected f r o m the roof at an angle of 19

back edge have a raised astragal running across the top surface,

degrees f r o m the vertical. Its original width at the base must

against w h i c h the superposed tile w o u l d have rested (e.g., RT4).

have been c.0.295 m.

Several Corinthian cover tiles have the streaky black glaze

T h e antefix has a plastic silhouette, w i t h boldly shaped forms

( R T 1 1 , R T 1 2 , R T 1 3 ) , but there is also one fragment w i t h a

projecting in convex relief and highlighted in black and red. A t

rich, shiny black glaze (RT52), and another with red matte

the base, t w o tendrils spring f r o m either corner to form a single

glaze (RT6). T h e f e w small Lakonian cover tile fragments have

pair of volutes that are connected by a three-part crossbar and

a shiny black glaze and coarse fabric (RT7, RT8).

crowned b y a five-leaved palmette. T w o three-leaved palmettes

T o these remains w e can add the cuttings and nail holes on

fill the interstices between the springing of the stem and the

the lateral geison, w h i c h document three separate roofs. T h e

spiral; another hangs pendant between the tendrils below the

earliest roof is represented b y the square nail holes found only

crossbar. T h e palmette leaves are painted alternately red and

on the southern geison blocks. T h e y were set c.0.06-0.13 m.

black, the tendrils of the volutes are black and the eyes red, and

f r o m the face of the corona at irregular intervals of between

the outer fillets of the crossbar are red and the centre black. T h e

0.55 and 0.75 m.; the standard is around 0.64 m. (about t w o of

palmettes spring f r o m red, pear-shaped hearts w i t h black bor-

Clarke's Assian feet), suggesting an approximate tile-length.

ders. T h e c r o w n i n g palmette is diminutive in comparison to the

T h e y are not coordinated w i t h the spacing of the frieze. We

volutes. T h e preserved contour of the lowest leaf indicates that

cannot be certain that they secured a system with antefixes

these leaves, like the l o w e r ones, had rounded tips. C o m p a r i s o n

rather than one with a continuous sima. T h e other sets of nail

with other anthemia of this type suggests that the central leaf

holes, one round, the other rectangular, f o u n d on both the

did not rise appreciably above the curve formed b y the other

southern and the northern geison blocks, represent t w o add-

leaves (see Chapter 9, 'Significance of the Temple', pp. 221,228).

itional roof systems, spaced at slightly different intervals. T h e

Unlike most antefixes w h o s e shape and width reflect that of

tile groove cut on the top of the geison appears on both the

the attached cover tile, the antefix tapers significantly (from

southern and northern geison, and therefore must have been

0.295

used in both the original and repaired roof systems. A flange on

has a slight ridge that suggests but does not accomplish the

the underside of the eaves tile was secured in this groove (c.0.15

transition into a cover tile, even though the fragment survives

to 0.23 m. f r o m the face of the corona, c.0.03-0.08 m. wide, and

to a depth of 0.135

0.02-0.03

to form the cover tile, but instead has a kind of anathyrosis

m

· deep). 9 4

m

·

at

the base to c.0.21 m. at the break); its sloping back

m

· T h e existing bed was not hollowed out

A l t h o u g h f e w in number, the decorated roof elements belong

around the border and d o w n the centre to fit snugly against the

to more than one roof. A l l of the surviving elements are de-

upper surface of the eaves tile. A round hole, 0.04-0.05 m. from

scribed here, along with their possible distribution.

the face, held a pin to secure the antefix to the eaves tile. The hole is set too close to the face to correspond to the round nail

Antefix

holes f o u n d on the top of the lateral geison, w h i c h are 0.06-

T h e single fragmentary terracotta antefix was discovered by

0.13 m. f r o m the face of the corona, i.e., 0.10-0.17 m. from the

C l a r k e deeply buried near the southeast corner of the temple

crowning hawksbeak. These technical features a l l o w three de-

(Pi. 57; Fig. 46a). 95 A l l but its face is made f r o m a coarse red

signs for the tiling, given here in order of probability: (1) the

aggregate composed in part of andesite granules. T h e hand-

antefix was fired independently of the eaves tile, w h i c h was

some plastic decoration, however, is fashioned f r o m a thin

secured near the tile groove with the square or rectangular

layer of very fine reddish-yellow terracotta fired onto the

dowels; the flanges on the sides of the eaves tile were cut back substantially to provide a flat resting surface at least 0.14 m. deep for the antefix, w h i c h w a s do welled to the eaves

94 Clarke 1898, p. 129, figs. 12, 30, restores the eaves tile as ending in this groove, mainly because he thought these tiles were 1.5 times longer (east to west) than the pan tiles, and therefore had to be completely covered by a final pan tile. Since there

is no evidence that the eaves tiles were longer than the regular tile-intervals, the arrangement is redundant. Surely the eaves tile was a complete although specially adapted pan tile. Eaves tiles from the South Stoa at the Argive Heraion, as well as Archaic tiles from Perachora, have a similar flange to secure the tile on the geison; Waldstein 1902,1, p. 130, pi. 22; Pfaff 2001, p. 274 and n. 21, fig. 11. The full-length marble sima tiles of the Siphnian Treasury and the Building with Peristyle C o u r t on Delos also have flanges on the bed surface; Ohnesorg 1993, pp. 83-7, pis. 20-1; 32. 9d Boston, inv. 4149. Clarke 1882, pp. 34,96; Clarke 1898, pp. 129-32, figs. 27-8; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, pp. 161, 167.

tile; (2) the antefix is a pseudo-antefix, and as such did not need to make the transition to a cover tile; or, (3) the antefix was fired attached to the eaves tile o n its right side, w h i c h would explain its flat b o t t o m and the 'anathyrosis'. T h e antefix was clearly not rampant, as Sartiaux restores it. 97

96 The colour of the core corresponds to Munsell i O R 5/6. T h e fine terracotta layer is c.o.oi m. thick at its greatest projection; its colour corresponds to Munsell 7.5YR6/6. 97 C f . Sartiaux 1915, fig. 32.

46

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF T H E O R I G I N A L

.10

II I Ì : I I I I I I I I I M

0

10

BUILDING

ΚΟΪΗ

I I I I I I I : I I I I I I I M

20

30

; I I I I I I I I I II I I I I II I I

40

50cm

FIGURE 46a. Antefix: actual state, above; restored, below.

Sima

sima is a T y p e I, variant 3b raking sima, w i t h other parallels in

T h e small fragment of a terracotta sima, n o w broken on both

Asia Minor. 1 0 0 White, rectangular beads separated by pairs of

sides and across the top, has a vertical face with plastic orna-

red reels decorate the base astragal. All that remains of the

mentation (PL 58; Fig.

46b). 98

B o t h the applied decoration and

ornament above is a plastically applied diamond-shaped red

the tile are made of the same dark coarse fabric containing an

dart that is not entirely closed at the break, flanked by t w o

aggregate of andesite granules. A finer cream-coloured slip

rounded tendrils that curve d o w n and a w a y f r o m the dart.

covers the front, and a thin layer of w h i t i s h - y e l l o w stucco

Clarke assumes the relief was part of a tightly constructed

covers the b a c k . " A c c o r d i n g to N a n c y Winter's typology, the

anthemion, but A k e r s t r ö m has pointed out the problems with this restoration and proposes instead to restore the tendril as

98 Boston inv. P4152; find-spot on the akropolis not recorded. Clarke 1898, pp. 133-5, figs· 3 1 - 2 ! Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 159; Sartiaux 1915, p. 21.

Munsell 5YR 4/2; called very dark reddish-gray. Neither the colour nor the fabric is identical to that of the antefix. 99

the border of an egg in an egg-and-dart pattern. 1 0 1 While the fragment can be restored as part of an archaic anthemion 100 101

N . Winter 1993, p. 240. Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 145; Akerström 1966, pp. 14-15.

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L

M

BUILDING

s®

I ai mI ΓΓΠΠ Ï I IIi T S i T Î i : Il I il II II (Il11 Η 0

1 10

1 20

1 30

1 40

1 50

1 60

1 70

1 80

1 90

1 100cm

FIGURE 46b. Fragment of raking sima; three possible restorations. composed of tall palmettes and lotus flowers (based on similar

again as the raking geison. T h e restored height of an egg-and-

patterns of w i d e l y spaced lotus and palmette found on simas

dart moulding allows f o r a sima of approximately the same

f r o m Sardis 1 0 2 ), its reconstructed height w o u l d be half as high

height as the raking geison. 1 0 3 T h e fragment as preserved does

102 A k e r s t r ö m 1966, p. 76, nos. 10-16, pis. 46-7, 50.3; Ramage 1978, p. 28, nos. 56-8, fig. 95. Anthemia surmounting a bead and reel astragal appear elsewhere during the Archaic period, e.g., the geison fragment from the Massiliot Treasury at Delphi: Langlotz 1975, pi. 7.7; D a u x 1923, pi. 23. C o m p a r e also lotus and palmette

on the soffits of the Siphnian Treasury and an anonymous treasury: Daux and Hansen 1987, fig. 115, pis. 55-8, 88-101. 103 Compare, e.g., Akerström 1966, figs. 72.4,6. The egg-and-dart surmounting bead and reel is a favourite arrangement for crown mouldings of East Greek

46

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF T H E O R I G I N A L

nel 0

1

1

1

1

1 5

1

1

1

1

1 1 10

1

1

1

1 1 15

1

1

1

1 1 20

1

BUILDING

1

1 1 25cm

FIGURE 46c. Eaves tile: actual state, above; restored, below.

not have an o v o l o profile, but a projecting egg could have

eaves tile mentioned above; its find-spot on the akropolis was

created it. Either pattern has precedents in Asia M i n o r during

not recorded, and its location today is u n k n o w n . T h e descrip-

the Archaic period and w o u l d be compatible with the other

tion in the excavation report is too brief to determine whether or not the piece should be assigned to the temple and, if so, to

regional traits found in this building. T h e face of the sima was aligned with the nosing of the

what period. T h e composition of the aggregate, described as

hawksbeak on the geison, as indicated b y the undecorated

porous and light-coloured, is not closely related to the aggre-

bed surface, w h i c h is slightly dressed d o w n at c.0.04 m. f r o m

gate of any of the other pieces.

the face to rest securely on the geison. C l a r k e assumed that this fragment belonged to a raking sima, but if dissociated f r o m the

Tuff sculpture: lion's head, volute, and paw

antefix described above, it could just as well belong to a lateral

In addition to the terracotta fragments, three tuff pieces also

sima.

have been associated with the temple's roof. O n l y the fragment

Ornamental eaves tiles

to the north of the temple, survives today (PI. 60). 107 T h e lower

O n l y one of the t w o decorated eaves tiles f o u n d by Clarke

jaw, part of the right side of the head, and all traces of the block

survives today (PL 59; Fig. 46c). 1 0 4 Its relief decoration—a

b y which the head may have been affixed to the corner geison

of a lion's head, thought to be a waterspout, f o u n d in deep soil

running, crossing meander enclosing a starburst pattern—has

are missing. Because there is no evidence for a spout hole in the

close parallels with Hellenistic eaves tiles f r o m the lower city

fragment and the mouth shows no signs of erosion by water,

at Assos and surely belongs to the Hellenistic roof (see Chapter

the lion's head could have been a false sima spout. 1 0 8 Alterna-

T h e second fragment of

tively, the lack of wear could mean the head was in service for a

ornamental eaves tile, n o w lost, apparently was decorated with

very short period. Despite exterior erosion, the rounded, rather

a w a v e pattern only on the portion directly below the ante-

blunt-nosed head retains sensitive modelling around the snout

fix.106

and cheekbones: repeated wrinkles wrap around the muzzle,

6, 'Hellenistic Renovations', p. 12

5). 103

C l a r k e describes it as 'about the same thickness' as the

sharp incisions delineate the shallow eyes, veins run f r o m the terracotta revetments; Akerström 1966, pis. 19.1, 20.3, 29, 30.1, 32.1 (Larisa); pi. 60.7 (Sinope); fig. 4, pi. 1 (Chersonesos); pi. 1.1,2 (Olbia); fig. 24.1, pis. 42, 51.3 (Sardis); pi. 9.4 (Pergamon). Full profile used as sima on temple at Kalabaktepc, Miletos (von Gerkan 1925, pp. 20-3, figs. 11, 15, supplement II; Akerström 1966, pp. 103-4, pi. 54-1, 2; Zimmermann 2007, p. 633, pi. 80.1) sima from Histria (Theodorescu 1970, pp. 38-40, figs. 10-11; Zimmermann 1990, pp. 230-1, pi. 31.a, b, d; Zimmermann 2007, p. 633, pi. 80.3); sima from O l b i a (Zimmermann 2007, ρ. 633, pl. 81.2). See Ν . Winter 1993, p. 240, for her discussion of raking sima Type I, variant 3b, to which she assigns the fragment from Assos. 104 Boston inv. P4258; find-spot on the akropolis not recorded. Clarke 1898, p. 129, fig. 26; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 167 fig. 1. Sartiaux 1915, p. 84, fig. 33, offers an unusual reconstruction of the fragment. 105 Akerström 1966, pp. 1$, 19, pi. 7.1, 3; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 190221, p. 105, fig. 3. Said to belong to the South Stoa. 106

Clarke 1898, p. 129; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 167.

eyes to the ears, and sharp, shallow ridges define the roof of the mouth. T h e rounded teeth, short snout, pressed-back ears, and

107 Boston, Museum of Fine Arts inv. 84.71. Dimensions: preserved length: 0.267 m.; preserved height: 0.199 m · ; restored width: c.0.22 m.; dowel holes in the back and bottom modern. Clarke 1882, pp. 34, 94-5, pi. 12; Clarke 1898, p. 135; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, pp. 168-9, C a s k e y 1925, no. 9, pp. 14-15; C o m s t o c k and Vermeule 1976, p. 14. no. 21. 108 Compare false animal head spouts from the O l d Athena Temple in Athens (Wiegand 1904, pp. 124-5, fig. 120-2); Peisistratid Telesterion at Eleusis (Dinsmoor 1975, pp. 90, 113); second Temple of Aphaia at Aegina (Furtwängler 1906, pp. 31, 279, pis. 3 j, 40,47; described by Cockerell but mostly destroyed before the German excavation); Temple of Artemis on Paros (Oknesorg 1993, pp. 26-7, fig. 2).

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L

Distribution

BUILDING

of the surviving roof elements

It is unlikely that all of the decorated fragments belonged to the same roof, as restored b y Clarke. While the tuff lion head and paw could be separated f r o m the temple a l t o g e t h e r — f o r there is no absolute evidence that they are architectural sculptures rather than parts of votive m o n u m e n t s — t h e fragment of the volute surely belongs to the temple because of its scale. Since it was once attached to an antithetically posed companion volute, it must belong to the central akroterion. G i v e n its

firmly

established context, w e can reasonably conclude that the other tuff fragments belong with it as part of one roof system. In the major rebuilding of the temple, several repairs to the frieze, geison, and tympanon were made with tuff. It makes sense to assign the tuff roof sculptures to the repaired roof of

mm—ι—ι—ι—ι—1—1—1—1—1—1 0

.5

1m

FIGURE 47. R e s t o r e d central a k r o t e r i o n .

the building as well. A s f o r the terracotta fragments, the chief consideration is w h e t h e r or not the antefix and the sima should be assigned to the same roof. A l t h o u g h their ornamentation is stylistically compatible, they are made of different fabrics and in

flat band forming the mane resemble the same features of the lions on the epistyle.

different manners. T h e antefix is undeniably high archaic in style and must go to an early roof. T h e sima c o u l d go either

T h e second tuff fragment, a large scroll f r o m a volute, is

way. If it belonged to the original roof, it w o u l d w o r k well

n o w lost (Fig. 47). 1 0 9 D e e p incisions on both sides of the

w i t h a small terracotta akroteria, perhaps a central anthe-

block define the channels of the helix and mark off the

m i o n and corner v o l u t e s . 1 1 4 If it belonged to the repaired

crossbar connected to the companion volute. T h e fragment

roof, it w o u l d have to be specially integrated w i t h tuff

preserves t w o turns of the helix. T h e eye of the scroll, w h i c h

blocks at the corners and apex. T h e c o m b i n a t i o n w o u l d be

was bored completely through the stone, may originally have

unusual; generally, roof tiles and roof sculpture are con-

been inlaid with another material. 1 1 0 T h e piece must have

structed of the same material. 1 1 5 T h e narrow,

been part of an akroterion, although it is unusual in having

w o r k e d raking surfaces on the corner geison, h o w e v e r , also

both the front and the back carved. 1 1 1 T h e fragment is best

d o not suggest the typical f o r m of construction, w i t h the

restored as the l o w e r left scroll of a lyre-shaped central akro-

lion head part of a corner b l o c k containing the end of the

terion, c.i.00 m. wide, consisting of a pair of opposed double

raking sima, the base for the akroterion, and part of a pan

volutes supporting a large crowning palmette and perhaps a

tile extending to the first antefix. 1 1 6 (The platforms on the

small internal o n e . 1 1 2

southeast and northwest corners are very narrow; the northeast

irregularly

C l a r k e identified the third fragment, a piece of a base w i t h

corner has no platform at all; and the southwest corner has a

part of a lion's paw, as part of the lateral akroterion with a

depression c.0.36-0.57 m. from the face of the corona into

heraldic griffin. 1 1 3 A sphinx w o u l d be more likely (see Chapter

which something, possibly an akroterion, was set.) Although

9, 'Significance of the Temple', p. 228). Unfortunately, Clarke

the reconstruction drawings feature the repaired temple, I

does not give the dimensions of the fragment, and it is no

include both terracotta elements for lack of other evidence

longer in the collection of the M u s e u m of Fine Arts.

(Fold-out Figs. 13, 15, 17-18).

109 T h e piece may have been in the crates forbidden to leave Assos; no specific find-spot was recorded. T h e dimensions given by Clarke are a preserved width of c . o . j j m., preserved height of c.0.40 m., and thickness of 0.18 m. Clarke 1898, pp. 136, 270, n . i , figs. 33, 63; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, pp. 145, 155 fig. 7, 163 fig. 1,168.

C o m p a r e Aeolic capitals, Betancourt 1977, pis. 41, 50. ' T h e piece cannot belong to an Aeolic capital, for the tendrils spring in the w r o n g direction. The only other alternative, a lyre-shaped capital surmounting a stele, can be ruled out on account of the scale. 110 11

1 1 2 A s drawn in Clarke 1898, fig. 63, or Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 145, but not as described in text (called upper scroll), Clarke 1898, p. 136, or Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 168. 1 1 3 Formerly Boston, M F A Si 105; de-accessioned in 1940. Dimensions and specific find-spot not recorded. Clarke 1898, pp. 137-8, fig. 34; Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 168.

e.g., temple at Kalabaktepe: von Gerkan 1925, fig. 13. The Temple of Zeus at O l y m p i a is exceptional in having bronze akroteria; Dinsmoor 1975, p. 152. It was acceptable to combine a marble sima, antefixes, and eaves tiles w i t h regular terracotta tiles (e.g., second Temple of A p h a i a at Aegina, Temple of A p o l l o at Aegina, and Temple of Athena at Karthaia); O h n e s o r g 1993, pp. 1 1 7 - 1 8 . 114

115

1 1 6 Ohnesorg 1993; e.g., second Temple of Aphaia at Aegina, O l d Temple of Athena in Athens, Peisistratid Telesterion at Eleusis, Alkmeonid Temple of Apollo at Delphi; and several Naxian, Parian, Delian, Melian, and Kean roofs; terracotta sima X I I from the Athenian Akropolis: Buschor 1929, figs. 26-8; S23 from Delphi: L e R o y 1967, pp. 96-9, figs. 7-8, pi. 36; related Classical examples, Dinsmoor Jr. 1974, p. 222, ill. 13; D i n s m o o r Jr. 1976, p. 233, ill. 7.

4

6

D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I ON O F T H E O R I G I N A L E L E V A T I O N

OF

T H E

S E K O S

BUILDING

structure. T h e y place the column in front of the axis of the entablature (indicated by the anta) and suggest the flute n o w

Pronaos order

comes on axis. While the latter is standard in D o r i c design, this

T h e columnar supports for the pronaos indicate that the distyle in antis pronaos was aligned on the axis of the third column on the flanks of the peristyle. T h e pronaos columns rested on roughly the same level as the peristyle and had the same lower diameter; surely they rose to the same height as the peristyle, carried capitals of similar size, and bore an entablature of similar dimension. A m o n g the numerous surviving capitals or blocks of the epistyle and frieze courses, none reflects a difference in height that might signal a different proportion for the pronaos. The bed of the epikranitis must have been level w i t h the cornice bed, c.6.20 m. above the stylobate. The sockets f o r the ceiling beams on the lateral geison determine the height of the entablature c r o w n and epikranitis to be c.o. 24 m., but no recognizable remains of this member have been recovered. Because the pronaos f o l l o w e d the proportions of the peristyle, it is difficult to distinguish w h i c h blocks belonged to it. Clarke restored the pronaos with the 18-fluted column drum he found, setting its arris on the frontal axis so that a screen could be socketed into the flute on the lateral axis. 1 1 7 H o w e v e r , the arrangement does not w o r k . T h e n e w l y identified capital with 18 flutes, C 4 , shows just the opposite arrangement for the fluting f r o m that w h i c h Clarke proposed (PI. 39; Fig. 22). T h e extant 18-fluted drum, C D 1 0 , and the capital were both found near the southwest corner of the temple. M o s t importantly, an 18-fluted column drum does not match the markings preserved on the southern columnar support, w h i c h include a circular field of very shallow bedding, as well as weathering traces of three flutes and partial evidence of others (PI. 32; Fig. 48). 1 1 8 These weather marks, w i t h arrises set c.o. 17-0.175 m. apart, correspond to the unbevelled bed surface of the bottom drum and indicate a column drum of 16

flutes. 1 1 9

W h e n they differ in

other buildings, the pronaos columns have fewer, not more, flutes than the columns of the

peristyle. 1 2 0

O u r column with 18

flutes must find a place on the peristyle. 1 2 1 T h e position and orientation of the weather markings on the southern support are out of alignment w i t h the rest of the Clarke 1898, pp. 208-3. Clarke (1898, pp. 280-1) decided that the marks on the pronaos supports were too indistinct to calculate. 117

118

1 1 9 In a column with 16 flutes, the chord between arrises is 0.178 m., and the chord across the unbevelled surface is 0.172 m. For a column with 18 flutes, the chord between arrises is 0.159 m · a n d A l e chord across the unbevelled surface is 0.153 m · To confirm the data, w e cut a template for a column with 18 flutes and one with 16 flutes and placed it over the markings. The one with 16 flutes fit best.

e.g., Temple D at Selinous, with 20 flutes on the peristyle and 16 flutes on the pronaos (Koldewey and Puchstein 1899, p. 108); Temple F at Selinous, with 20 flutes in the peristyle and 16 in the inner row of columns ( K o l d e w e y and Puchstein 1899, p. 119-20). G . Pesce states that the Temple of Zeus at C y r e n e had 24 flutes in the peristyle and 20 in the pronaos (repeated by D i n s m o o r 197$, pp. 86-8), but the drawings show only 20 flutes; cf. Pesce 1947-8, p. 324, pis. LVI-LVIII; corrected in Stucchi 1975, p. 23. 120

Temple C at Selinous has columns with both 16 and 20 flutes on the peristyle; K o l d e w e y and Puchstein 1899, p. 99. 121

arrangement is not represented in any of the 27 completely legible capitals preserved at Assos. M o s t likely the markings reflect a post-antique situation in w h i c h the column has rotated out of its original alignment. T h e weathering, in any case, had to occur after the roof of the structure was destroyed. A postantique date w o u l d also explain the peculiar placement of the wide, shallow cutting on the southern side of the pronaos support, w h i c h appears to be f o r the base of a w o o d e n screen or structure; it does not meet the column on axis, but one flute in advance. T w o bottom drums ( C D 4 2 and C D 4 3 ) found east of the temple have large sockets cut into the shafts at approximately the same height and in a configuration matching the position of the cutting on the support (i.e., one flute in advance of the axis; Fig. 21). 1 2 2 It is hard to imagine that the original designers w o u l d have wanted to enclose the pronaos in a fashion that w o u l d so obscure the shape of the columns. 1 2 3 A post-antique r e w o r k i n g of the pronaos, on the other hand, seems entirely likely given the evidence for later structures built directly on the stylobate of the temple. Assuming this was the case, w e can restore the pronaos columns to a roughly central position on the supports, with a central interaxial of c.2.86 m. T h e distance between the axis of the column and the outer face of the cella wall, w o u l d be c.2.55 m. (Fold-out Figs. 10, 16). Triglyphs centred over the columns w o u l d require metopes c.o. 8 7-0.91 m. w i d e (depending on a broad or a narrow triglyph, respectively) in the centre and c.o.575-0.625 m. w i d e at each side. If the frieze was unif o r m l y spaced w i t h o u t regard for the interaxial spacing of the columns, then the metopes w o u l d be c.o.675-0.72 m. wide, or roughly the equivalent of those on the flank. 1 2 4 G i v e n the number of surviving sculptured epistyle blocks, it is v e r y likely that the pronaos carried sculpture. There are sculptured blocks that support either design (see Chapter 8, 'Arrangement of the Sculpture', p. 197). Since the pronaos columns are aligned with those on the flank, it is tempting to restore the pronaos order extending across the flank ptera, as in the pronaos of the Hephaisteion. A schematic drawing by C l a r k e suggests just this possibility. 1 2 5 While the arrangement w o u l d open several options for the organization of the sculpture, w e have no evidence for it. N o n e of the capitals has markings that w o u l d indicate the 122 The sockets are rough, but not much rougher than those cut for a w o o d e n screen in the Hellenistic Ship Monument on Samothrace: Lehmann 1998, figs. 49-51. 123 Compare the opposite situation in the second Temple of Aphaia at Aegina, where the metal grill is set one flute behind the axis; Furtwängler 1906, pis. 36, 45; Bankel 1993, pis. 54, 81. T h e wall between the columns of Temple F is also set behind the axis of the columns; K o l d e w e y and Puchstein 1899, pl. 16. For the small sockets cut for metal grills, see also the Athenian Treasury at Delphi (Audiat 1933, p. 21, fig. 6), or the first Temple of Athena Pronaia at Delphi (Demangel 1923, pp. 29-30, pis. ι i.I, II, III, V, VI; 12). 124 For triglyphs not centred over columns in antis, note the Athenian Treasury, Delphi ( C o u l t o n 1977, pp. 88-90) or the Heraion at Delos (Plassart 1928, fig. 165). 125

Clarke 1898, fig. 78.

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

-.230 - I 1.255

FIGURE 48. Southern pronaos support, with the weather markings. T h e position of the rotated column drum is marked in grey. Dashed lines represent the position of the epistyle.

placement of a perpendicular block and none has a dressed-

the inner respond of a D o r i c anta. Areas dressed d o w n to

d o w n edge on the inner side of the top surface. N o n e of the

receive the supports f o r monuments in front and to the south

surviving epistyle blocks, plain or decorated, bears evidence of

of the northern anta leave no r o o m for projecting anta responds

being bonded into the entablature perpendicularly; and, none

on that side, either. There is no evidence to suggest w o o d e n

of the epistyle blocks bears the remarkably narrow frieze

responds were revetted onto the antae.

spacing that w o u l d result over the pteron. 1 2 6 G i v e n the large percentage of surviving material, w e should be able to see some

So-called anta capital

evidence of this arrangement, if it existed. We can only conclude

Clarke identified the anta capital in a fragmentary, 0.26 m.-

that it did not.

high corner block with a k y m a reversa moulding surmounted by a splayed fascia (B23, Pi. 61; Fig. 49). 1 2 7 The b l o c k survives

Antae

and in its present condition has no markings on the top or bed

Both faces of the anta walls were composed of ashlar masonry.

surfaces. T h e undifferentiated anta walls might suggest a capital

T h e toichobate east of the d o o r wall was evenly dressed across

other than one of standard D o r i c design with a hawksbeak

its entire surface to receive the wall blocks. Setting lines mark

surmounted by a cavetto or fascia. 1 2 8 There are archaic parallels

the position of the anta at 4.942 m. f r o m the face of the eastern

for an anta capital composed of a bold k y m a reversa sur-

stylobate and give its thickness as c.0.66 m. A l t h o u g h finely

mounted b y a fascia, most notably in the Massiliot and Siph-

constructed, the antae did not have responds. The position of

nian Treasuries at Delphi, the temple at Sangri, and the Doric

the setting lines on the toichobate exclude them. T h e toicho-

temple at Koressia on K e a . 1 2 9 T h e moulded block f r o m Assos

bate on the southern side also is not w i d e enough to support

is closest to the K e a n anta capital, w h i c h has a fascia surmount-

126

In such an arrangement, w e assume that the frieze ended w i t h a full triglyph,

in the manner of the internal frieze restored to the first temple of A p h a i a at Aegina.

127

C l a r k e 1898, p. 84, fig. 10a; C l a r k e , B a c o n , and K o l d e w c y 1902-21, p. 159;

our drawing differs slightly. A chord connecting the upper and l o w e r points of the

A m o n g the epistyle blocks, only A 1 2 could possibly g o o v e r the pteron, because it

k y m a reversa divides the curve into t w o distinct segments and demonstrates that

has a complete régula on its left end, and its side face appears roughened (weath-

w h i l e neither as round nor as deep as the upper curve, the l o w e r curve is slightly

ering or anathyrosis?). H o w e v e r , the shift-hole on its bed surface (0.405 f r o m the

cut back f r o m the face. C o m p a r e Shoe 1936, p. 54, and fig. E.

end of the block) makes the placement impossible. T h e r e are problems with this

128

Standard mainland D o r i c h a w k s b e a k anta capital, Shoe 1936, pp. 174-5;

arrangement generally. Since there is no evidence for bonding, the perpendicular

D o r i c cavetto capital found in Sparta or West G r e e c e , Shoe 1936, p. 75; Dinsmoor

block w o u l d have o n l y c.0.20 m. resting surface. In addition, the distance f r o m the

1975, pp. 85-6, fig. 32.

inner face of the entablature to the centre of the cella wall w o u l d be c.2.48 m., resulting in metopes o n l y 0.59 m. w i d e .

129

A l t e k a m p 1991, pp. 89-90, 92-3, 125-6, 1 4 1 - 2 , figs. 7 4 - 5 , 80, 1 1 5 . Siphnian

Treasury ( D a u x and Hansen 1987, p. 153, pis. 70-1); Massiliot Treasury (Shoe

46

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

B23 mm—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι 0

5

10

15

20

25cm

FIGURE 49. B l o c k B23, so-called anta capital.

ing a k y m a reversa that does not have a sharp reverse curve and

gone w h e n C l a r k e and Bacon began their w o r k . 1 3 1 T h e treat-

does not end with an astragal. T h e plane of the wall forming the

ment of the toichobate, however, clearly indicates the wall

third part of the block is simply set back f r o m the face of the

construction. Behind the setting line marking the outer face

k y m a reversa. T o achieve the same effect, the block f r o m Assos

of the cella and door walls, the toichobate was

could have slightly overhung the anta wall; the exaggerated

dressed for c.0.33-0.38 m. to receive ashlar wall blocks (Fold-

smoothly

proportions of the moulding might simply reflect a local inter-

out Figs, ι , 14). T h e inner surface of the toichobate (and that of

pretation. T h e fit is not perfect, but other possibilities (e.g., D o r i c sima, c r o w n or wall-base moulding of a large monument, part of a bench) are not more convincing. 1 3 0

Cella and door walls Part of the cella wall, probably along the southern side, was in place at the time Texier made his sondage, but all traces were 1936, pp. 56, 64, 175, pi. 21.7). Shoe describes that moulding as appropriately slender for an anta capital, the depth of the curve being less than half the height and the upper curve being greater than the lower. For the Koressia anta capital, see Schuller 1985, pp. 364-7, figs. 32-3. Anta capital heights, excluding any wall portion: Siphnian Treasury (0.31 m. restored); Massiliot Treasury (0.264 m · re ~ stored); temple at Koressia (0.19 m.); Sangri (0.28 m.). T h e moulding resembles the profile of the sima from the Temple of Athena at Karthaia on Kea, but the projection of both the upper curve and the splayed 130

fascia are more pronounced on the block from Assos, and the proportional relationships differ; see 0 s t b y 1980, pp. 206-210 and n. 12, 212 and n. 76, figs. 17-21; in general, Shoe 1936, pp. 34-5, pi. 18. A similar profile (although with a cavetto) forms a wall-base moulding at Larisa; Larisa I, p. 129, pi. 2 j f - h ; dated by the excavators to the middle of the sixth century but by Boardman 1959, pp. 179-80, to the first half of the fifth century. Compare also the c r o w n moulding from the Great Chian Altar at Delphi and a C h i o t altar from Phanai, which combine the splayed fascia with a bold k y m a reversa, w h i c h does not end in an astragal or apophygc; Boardman 1959, p. 179, nos. 22, 23, fig. 3; Boardman 1967, pp. 78-9; Shoe 1936, pi. 2 j.12. The same type of moulding is found as a wall crown on the T o m b of C y r u s at Pasargadae; N y l a n d e r 1970, pp. 91-6. T h e exaggerated profile also has parallels in the mouldings for later benches and funerary monuments found in the nekropolis at Assos; compare seat mouldings, Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, pp. 247, 265, 269; or bold k y m a reversa of Exedra 11, Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 241. 131 Texier 1849, p. 201, states, ' L e mur de la cella, dont on aperçoit a peine quelques vestiges, était lisse et sans refends.' ('The wall of the cella, of which one notices scarcely any remains, was smooth and without partitions').

46D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF T H E O R I G I N A L B U I L D I N G the only surviving binding block, W37), however, was left rough and raised; it must have supported rougher, smaller blocks and rubble secured by binding courses, perhaps covered with plaster. In buildings with this type of construction, the inner face of the wall can be made with inferior material, but at Assos it was probably of the same local andesite as the ashlar courses. The setting line and dressed-down surface mark the outer face of the wall exactly, but because the surface supporting the inner face was rough, the thickness of the main cella wall is difficult to determine precisely. The toichobate could not have supported a wall thicker than c.0.77 m. The one certain binding block (W37; Pi. 62; Fig. 50) is 0.662 m. thick; we do not know to what course it belonged or whether the wall tapered. It does seem likely, however, that the cella wall was roughly the same thickness as the antae, c.0.66 m. 132 The spacing of the pry marks along the southern toichobate suggest a probable length for the wall blocks of between c.0.60 and 1.10 m. Most of the toichobate of the door wall is wide enough to support a wall of the same thickness as the antae (c.0.66 m.), but the under-threshold is only 0.615 m · thick. Clarke proposed that the jambs were rebated to this narrower dimension in order to accommodate the doorposts, but it seems equally possible that the door wall was simply narrower than the antae. 133 O f the door itself, only the under-threshold remains in place, 2.010 m. long by 0.615 m - wide and approximately level with the top of the stylobate. It has anathyrosis on the inner side of its top surface.

Wall blocks Numerous wall blocks remain in the vicinity of the temple. Many more have been built into the Byzantine buildings and fortifications, the square tower, and the O l d Mosque. Still others are scattered far down the slopes of the akropolis, particularly to the east (Table 9; Pis. 62-5; Fig. 50).134 The blocks that are presently found on the akropolis directly in the area of the temple have the best chance of belonging to it; they alone are included here. Large ashlar blocks called orthostates by Clarke Clarke assigned four large blocks (0.76-0.82 m. high by 0.971.58 m. long) as orthostates to the cella wall, but he restored 132 The dimension is not unusually thin for a cella wall; see Martin 1965, pp. 448-51 and 395. 133 A s , e.g., the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi (Daux and Hansen 1987, pp. 137-8, figs. 59, 75, 83) or the temple at Sangri (Gruben 1982a, pp. 194-5). 134 M a n y of the blocks on the akropolis remain half-buried in the steep slide of earth to the east of the temple; those built into the Byzantine buildings have been badly broken up. Because the O l d Mosque has only one block that certainly belongs to the temple (triglyph T28) but many blocks from other monuments, it

is likely that akropolis (or square tower to have come temple.

much of the material used in this building did not come from the at least not from the temple). Similarly, none of the blocks in the definitely belongs to the temple; those that can be identified appear from the city wall. I have included blocks in close proximity to the

the same blocks to the back of the entablature as well. 1 3 5 Today, there are at least five blocks on the akropolis corresponding to these dimensions (W2, W22, W29, W32, and W33; Fig. 51). They have smooth tops and front faces, anathyrosis on the vertical joint faces, rough bottoms, and quarry-faced backs. Some have pry marks on their upper surfaces, and two (W29 and W33) have clamp cuttings. These blocks are the right size for orthostates generally, but they are definitely longer than the spaces (c.0.60 to 1.10 m.) set out by the pry marks on the southern toichobate. 136 These blocks are therefore not likely to be orthostates for the temple. We have already suggested that they could serve as an intermediate backing course for the repaired entablature (Fold-out Fig. 14). Alternatively, these blocks might belong to another monument, since most of them are found on the steep slope directly east of the temple, where blocks belonging to another monument (the altar?) have also been found (note blocks B3, Β5, B21, Appendix IV). Rusticated wall blocks Many of the wall blocks found on the akropolis have rusticated faces (Pis. 62-5; Fig. 50; Table 9). Several have the same patterns of diamonds, triangles, and starbursts found on the foundation of the temple. Others simply have an intentionally roughened face; here erosion may have erased a more decorative surface. The only monuments with this kind of rustication known at Assos are the temple and a second monument (its altar?) whose euthynteria blocks have been found to the east of the temple. These wall blocks must belong to one or both of these monuments. Most of the surviving rusticated blocks are c.0.46-0.50 m. high, c.o.65-1.125 m. long, and c.0.18-0.31 m. wide. In addition, there are slightly taller blocks (0.570-0.664 m. high), of comparable length and thickness. Clearly, these blocks formed a thin, decorative skin masking a core wall. They have anathyrosis on their vertical joint faces, and some have it on the top surface as well. Many of these blocks have pry marks on their upper surface, but none has clamp cuttings. Smoothly dressed wall blocks Some wall blocks in the vicinity of the temple have smoothly worked faces (Table 9). Since the dimensions of these blocks match the dimensions of the rusticated blocks, it is possible that the two types were in some way combined, but of this we cannot be certain. To these ashlar blocks, we may add a corner block, visible in a photograph published in the folio report of

1 3 5 Clarke 1898, p. 75. Bacon does not, however, use the blocks in his reconstructed elevation, but instead restores an orthostate c.1.14 m. high, with eight superposed courses of wall blocks, c.0.45 m. high; cf. Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 145. I could find no blocks corresponding to this size of orthostate. 1 3 6 T h e y could be assigned to the long stretches along the northern toichobate lacking pry marks, but it would be peculiar to have smaller blocks on one side and larger ones on the other.

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N TABLE

Location

Wi W2

Ο/χ 2

W4

M/8-9 M-N/8

W6 W7

BUILDING

9. Dimensions of wall blocks

number

W5

OF THE O R I G I N A L

M/8-9

L-M/8 L/8

Type

Length

Height

Thick

Treatment of Face

Backer/Altar orthostate? Backer/Altar orthostate?

0.860-0.878

0.380

smoothish

>1.40

0.800

smooth

Short stretcher

>0.97

0.503

0.312 0.240

Short stretcher Short stretcher

>0.65

0.480

>0.48

0.478

0.195 0.200

Binder?

>1.02

0.383

0.522-0.530

1.490

smoothish delicate rustication delicate rustication

W8

L-M/ 7

Binder?

1.100

°-379

0.503

W9 Wio

M-N/8

Short stretcher

0.930

0.308

N/8

Short stretcher

0.736

0.502 0.422

0.261

delicate rustication

W11

0/8

Tall stretcher

0.685

0.570

0.231

very smooth

W12

N-O/ 7 N-O/ 7

Tall stretcher Wall block?

1.181

0.580

0.208

very smooth

0.825

0.605

0.153

rough boss

O/8

Short stretcher

0.480

0.235

b

Tall stretcher

0.620

0.248

delicate rustication

W16

O/ii M/8

Short stretcher

>0.58

delicate rustication

M/11

Short stretcher

>0.73

0.470 0.515

0.201

W17

0.162

very smooth

W18

L/12 N/12

Tall stretcher Backer/Altar orthostate?

>0.705

0.595

0.210

1.360

Tall stretcher

0.372 0.243-0.2 79

delicate rustication roughish

W21

Ο/13 Ο/13

0.915 0.650

>0.74

0.500

0.247

weathered

W22

0/i3e

0.816 b

very smooth

P/12

0.255

b

W24

R/2

Binder?

c. 0.995 c.i.i 5 >0.97

0.374

W23

Short stretcher Backer/Altar orthostate? ?

0-355

0.560

rough

W25

Q/x3 P/13

Short stretcher

0.222

rustication?

Short stretcher

>0.685 >0.43

0.475

W 26

0.524

0.347

np

W27

P/13

Short stretcher

0.945

0.440

0.268

delicate rustication

W28 W29

Q/13

Short stretcher

1.030

0.445

Q/14

Backer/Altar orthostate?

W30

T/12

Binder?

W31

Short stretcher?

W32

N/14 N-M/14

W33 W34

N-M/14 K-L/12

W35 W36

W37 W38

W13 W14 W15

W19 W20

Β acker/Altar orthostate? Backer/Altar orthostate?

>0.36 0.870

1.178

>1.11

1.530 C. 1 . 1 1

5

>0.20

delicate rustication

smoothish

b very smooth

0.815 >0.20

0.372 0.588

>0.50

0.345

rough

2 dressed surfaces

1.495

0.800

0.318

very smooth

1.950

0.795

0.312

0.480

0.185

very smooth delicate rustication delicate rustication

Short stretcher

>0.77

windmill

Short stretcher

>0.64

0.463

0.263

K/7

>0.66

0.495

0.255

delicate rustication

O/II

Short stretcher Binder

0.362

0.662

weathered

P/14 L/12

String course?

>0.71

Frieze backer?

>1.01

b 0.603

0.655

W39

0.319

smooth

W40

O/11-12

Stretcher?

>1.029

b

roughish

1.146

W41

P-Q/12-13

Clarke's ceiling beam?

>1.154

0.256

0.243 0.343

W42

P/12

0.340

roughish

4 3

M-N/I4

0.852 c.0.91

0.424

W

Frieze backer? Tall stretcher

0.578

W

4 4

R/14

Short stretcher?

0.863

0.387

b 0.215

smoothish smoothish

W

4 5

P-Q/9-10

Short stretcher

0.973

0.500

0.233

K/io

Short stretcher

1.125

0.460

0.212

smoothish smoothish

0.508 >0.47

0.211

ornamental rustication

0.174

ornamental rustication

0.465 0.664

0.250

ornamental rustication

0.209

ornamental rustication

W46 W47a,b

L/IO

Short stretcher

C.I.08

W48 W49

N/6-7

Stretcher

windmill

Short stretcher

>0.53 >0.64

W50

village

Tall stretcher

0.944

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

τ

Τ

.195

i

BUILDING

^ ι ^ ί ' ίιν'ι,ι ν '^ Λ ι ,'t'J' /Jjy'/t·

.200

>.·•> >.) ' 1 I •»/· » I·' /•>/"»· 'J Π J\

OF T H E O R I G I N A L

1

.65-

-.945-

.478

·>>·

v

·

/ ^

'

"

:—'-

'

1

M ^

W27

W5

" " ' , r . ' i ' ' ι ί ' '.',«···' ' '

Τ I W ^ W ^ •2j0 ^ f ' t ' M · ΐ ί ω ' Λ Ϊ ) ΓΛ

Τ

.210

-.944 '*'·

"

"_·. ••y.l

' . V-

'

Κ

-

.·.' -

' ν

620

/

-c."

··';

•

* ·•'··. "

·-"·•.· '" · -y '*".··'

.595

•

;

Η/Y .

... >i . . / · < / . . - ί

;

; ?

\

.664

;

7

W15

W50

W18

W37

"j

u

•r "

u / s ^

υ

υ

M

Γ ì V

3

.662

-1.146·

Η—I—I

Η .5 F I G U R E JO.

Η—I—I 1

1—I—I—I

Wall blocks

h 1.5

W 5 , W6, W 2 7 ,

Η—I

1 2

W15, W18,

h

-I

W50, W37.

1 1—I 2.5

h

3m

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

1.647

i ' ^ l M i o , ' n o jV) ι

0' v SV v ·

ν ; V ^ - l

.800

1.495

W33

.795

-"j'jf-

Δ

t—ι—t—\—ι—+—ι—ι—ι—»

1

H—I—I—h 1.5

2

FIGURE JI. Large ashlar blocks B17, W32, W33.

H

1 1 H 2.5

3m

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N O F T H E O R I G I N A L

Restored design of the door and door wall

C l a r k e and Bacon's excavation but not recorded in the text and n o w lost. 1 3 7

BUILDING

We can have a good idea of the design of the d o o r by combining the existing evidence with that w h i c h can be culled from the

B i n d i n g blocks There are several rusticated binding blocks (B18, B25), but the o n l y binding block that can be assigned to the temple with certainty is W 3 7 , w h o s e face is too badly weathered to k n o w if it was once rusticated (PL 62; Fig. 50). Its thickness, 0.626 m., matches that of the cella wall, and its upper surface is treated in the same fashion as the toichobate. T h e block was joined to adjacent binding blocks b y a single h o o k clamp at either end. A p r y mark cut into one of the vertical joint faces indicates that the binders were set in position b y the same

technique

e m p l o y e d for the southern geison and first step courses. T h e dressed-down surface designed to receive the superposed ashlar block of the outer wall face is narrow, as are many of the rusticated wall blocks. B y contrast, the rougher, slightly raised inner surface retains six wedge-shaped marks left by quarrying, as do many large rubble blocks scattered on the surface around the temple. These rubble blocks may represent in part w h a t is left of the inner core of the temple's wall.

American state-plan (Fig. 5; F o l d - o u t Fig. 1). T h e surviving under-threshold consists of a block 2.025

m

· l° n g> w h o s e cen-

tral section

rises

-I- 0.283

B o t h ends of the block have been dressed down.

m·)·

to the level of the stylobate

(elevation

O n the southern end, the block is cut d o w n 0.075 m- for a length of 0.18 m. to become flush with the southern toichobate ( + 0.215

m·)·

T h e northern end is dressed d o w n 0.151 m.

( + 0.132 m.), also f o r a length of 0.18 m. A c c o r d i n g to the American state-plan, the adjacent block to the north was dressed-down for c.0.21 m. to become flush w i t h the lower surface of the under-threshold; the rest of the b l o c k is level with the bedrock to the north ( + 0.298 m.). Together, the dressed d o w n surfaces create a space c.39 m. w i d e . O n the southern side, five pry-holes, set 0.43 to 0.48 m. f r o m the raised edge of the under-threshold (along w i t h a sixth f o r p r y i n g from west to east), indicate that the masons w o r k e d a large jamb block into place against the higher under-threshold.

The

dressed-down areas mark off the width of the d o o r jambs at C.0.39-0.40 m., in effect ruling out jambs formed b y wall

Restored design of the cella wall It seems most likely that the larger of the rusticated blocks ( W 1 5 , W 1 8 , W20, and W50) formed the temple's first wall course. Since ashlar blocks of the outer face are thin, the wall must have been strengthened b y several binding courses. 1 3 8 T h e substantial difference between the level of the northern and southern toichobate w o u l d have to be made good somewhere in the wall coursing. It could have been made up mainly in the first wall course, f o r the large rusticated blocks vary in height f r o m 0.59-0.664 m. T h e rest of the courses might have been relatively uniform, w i t h binding courses c.0.28-0.36 m. high and stretching courses 0.46-0.50 m. high. T h e exact coursing of the wall remains entirely hypothetical. If the construction was coordinated with the elevation of the pronaos and pteron, then the wall w o u l d have risen to 6.43 5 m. above the stylobate (the height of the order f r o m the stylobate to the bottom of the ceiling beams). T h e wall might have been completed with an epikranitis 0.235-0.24 m. high to match the c r o w n backing the geison blocks. N o block of this sort survives, nor is there any wall block w i t h sockets f o r ceiling beams. T h e ceiling beams could simply rest on the epikranitis and be held in place b y struts. Nailing the cross slats of the ceiling to the b o t t o m face of the ceiling beams w o u l d cover over any unsightly gaps between the beams. 1 3 9

blocks, as in mainland D o r i c construction. 1 4 0 Possibly, block B4 formed one of the jambs (Figs. 52, 100; A p p e n d i x IV). The southern jamb w o u l d have to be 0.083

m

· taller than the north-

ern one to accommodate the difference in elevation at the level of the toichobate. There is evidence for the threshold as well. T h e underthreshold has anathyrosis on its inner top edge but not on the outer. In addition, Clarke's drawing illustrates (both in plan and section) a dressed-down channel, c.o.io m. w i d e and C.0.08 m. deep, running in front of the threshold support and extending c.0.17 m. to either side. T h e channel is apparently cut into the paving stones, w h i c h bear p r y marks in f r o n t of it. This feature is curious in its design and dimensions, but the fact that it was drawn in plan and section in all three reports suggests that it did exist. It w o u l d indicate the length and thickness of the threshold block, w h o s e front face w o u l d project c.o.io m. beyond the door wall to respond to the channel cut into the paving stones. T h e construction could account f o r the lack of anathyrosis on the front of the threshold support. T h e channel, however, extends c.0.17 m. along the jambs, suggesting that the threshold overlapped roughly half of the jamb. T o clear the cella f l o o r (c.0.135 m. above the level of the stylobate 1 4 1 ) and provide a margin against w h i c h the door could stop, the threshold w o u l d have been at least 0.150.17 m. high. N o evidence survives f o r the design of the door mechanism. In the proposed reconstruction (Fold-out Fig. 5) the pivots for the leaves are anchored o n independent blocks in

1 3 7 Clarke, Bacon, and K o l d e w e y 1902-21, p. 143 fig. 2; surface treatment uncertain. 13S T h e surface of the toichobate was not smoothed to carry headers, but that does not preclude the use of headers in the upper courses. The header belongs, however, to a later type of construction and is less essential to this type of wall. 139

A s proposed for the Athenian Treasury: Audiat 1933, pp. 47-8, fig. 15.

the cella f l o o r and affixed to a w o o d e n frame set against the jambs, with the threshold block acting as the d o o r stop. 140

D o r i c door construction, Biising-Kolbe 1978.

141

Clarke 1898, p. 69.

4

6

D E S C R I P T I O N AND R E C O N S T R U C T I O N

OF T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

46D E S C R I P T I O N A N D R E C O N S T R U C T I O N T h e jambs define a narrow door with a clear opening

OF T H E O R I G I N A L

BUILDING

99

the temple of A t h e n a was probably within these t w o

figures.

c.i.6 5 m. wide, approximately one-quarter of the width of the

G i v e n the lack of refinements elsewhere, a tapered opening is

door wall. The proportion is narrow compared to the doors of

unlikely. 1 4 4 T h e design, if coordinated with the wall coursing,

similarly sized temples but not to the doors of smaller, non-

w o u l d require a lintel approximately 2.40 m. long, c.0.62 m.

peripteral monuments. 1 4 2 Again, the solution seems a local one

thick, and 0.50 m. high (Fold-out Figs. 14, 16).

based on a simple proportional relationship rather than an

A s for the d o o r wall, the difference of 0.083

architectural precedent. T h e height of the door remains purely hypothetical. T h e

m

· in the level

of the toichobate to either side of the entrance had to be absorbed in the wall coursing; the easiest place to make the

proportions for D o r i c doors suggest a free opening rising

correction w o u l d be in the first course. Pry-holes o n the toi-

about t w o times the lower width, or c.3.3ο m. here, while the

chobate c.i.18 m. to either side of the proposed d o o r frame

proportions for Ionic doors can be one and a half times

indicate that wall blocks of similar length flanked the jambs.

the l o w e r width, or c.2.50 m. here. 1 4 3 T h e door opening for

T h e first course of the door wall was completed by a second wall block c.0.97 m. long w h i c h , as the pry-hole on the southern side indicates, was not bonded to the cella wall at this level.

C o m p a r e the door of the nearby temple at Neandria: K o l d e w e y 1891, p. 25, figs· 53' 55· F ° r a n e w reconstruction with a peristyle but the same narrow door, see Wiegartz 1994, pp. 126-32, fig. 4. 1 4 3 For Doric, note buildings of similar scale, e.g., the Temple of Athena Pronaia at Delphi, Hephaistcion in Athens, or Temple of Athena at Poseidonia, Athenian 142

Treasury and the Doric Treasury at Delphi. For Ionic, Büsing-Kolbe 1978, p. 138, Table ι .

144 N o t every archaic Doric door tapered, even on highly refined buildings, e.g., the Heraion at O l y m p i a or the Athenian Treasury at Delphi. See Büsing-Kolbe 1978, pp. 172-4 and, for Ionic, p. 138, table 1.

5

Major Repairs The temple at Assos sustained serious damage soon after it was completed. The colonnade at the northwest corner was knocked down. The roof, both tympana, and the geison on the eastern, western, and northern sides were so severely damaged that they needed to be replaced completely. O n l y the southern side remained intact. The architectural repairs were carefully grafted on to the surviving structure so that the restored design did not differ substantially from the original. Changes in techniques of construction, certain stylistic differences, and a slightly greater degree of metric consistency help to distinguish the new material. The general continuity in architectural style and technical construction between the original and repaired building suggests that the damage occurred soon after the building was completed and that the restoration began immediately. We can only speculate on the kind of event that would require the extensive repairs identified in full below. The frequent earthquakes in the region offer the most plausible explanation, especially for the peculiar configuration of the destruction. 1 There is no evidence of fire. We cannot rule out human interference, although the most likely perpetrators, the Persians, bypassed Assos on their march westward. If the cause of the repairs remains enigmatic, the evidence for them is nevertheless certain. In the following sections, the evidence proving the repair is argued first; the new material and design follow.

E V I D E N C E

F O R

T H E

R E P A I R S

The impact of the disaster can be most clearly traced from the top of the building downward. To begin with, all but one of the surviving andesite tympanon blocks are reçut geison blocks. 2 The surviving traces of lifting sockets, clamp cuttings, and nail holes for roof tiles originally cut in these reworked blocks prove that they served their original function on a completed building. Their reuse, therefore, represents a major repair and not a later phase in the original construction. 1 We w o u l d expect the southern side to have the greatest chance of survival because it has the least contact with bedrock. For the configuration of damage to masonry structures during an earthquake, see Stiros 1996, pp. 129-52. 2 Clarke identified one such block, which he attributed to incidental damage; Clarke 1898, pp. 108-109, fig· Block B20 (see A p p e n d i x IV) is also a reworked geison block.

The reçut blocks retain vestigial technical cuttings that match features of the southern geison, which must therefore belong to the original building (Pis. 70-3; Figs. 63-5). All of the reçut blocks preserve part of a tapered lifting socket (sometimes with its release channel) on at least one of the original joint faces. Most bear residual traces of a clamp hole (and sometimes its channel, as on T p i 2 ) cut into what became the face, usually near the bed surface of the block, where it would not have been visible from below. Blocks Tp2, Tp3, and T p j have small square holes that correspond with the nail holes made for the roof tiles found only on the southern geison. Also, the manner in which the original mutules are divided through the triglyph-mutule on most of the reçut blocks matches the design used on the southern flank. We can be sure, for two additional reasons, that the southern geison belongs to the original building: it shares several technical features in common with the lower courses, especially setting and clamping, and it has three different sets of nail holes for the roof, while the northern geison has only two. The reçut blocks that retain nail holes for roof tiles or have the narrow frieze spacing therefore must have belonged to the original northern side (for example, Tp2, Tp3, T p j , and Tp7). In sum, the extant northern and southern geison document two distinct periods in the construction of the building, with the northern geison blocks belonging to the repair. Once w e establish that the northern geison is the later replacement, it follows that the technically similar horizontal geison blocks at both ends of the building must also belong to the repair. Fortunately, we have independent evidence to verify this as well. N o n e of the extant horizontal geison blocks were lifted into place by hooks set into sockets with release channels, but the southeast corner geison block has a release channel cut into its eastern joint face (Fig. 44). The release channel bears no relation to the lifting technique (U-shaped channel) used for the extant horizontal geison; it must be an obsolete feature belonging to the earlier construction, when the horizontal geison blocks were lifted with hooks. The original adjacent block was, in fact, reçut block Tp4 (Fig. 64), for its mutules fall in the requisite positions, the residual traces of two clamp holes match those preserved on the southeast corner block, and the residual lifting socket aligns with the release channel on the corner block. The wide metopal spaces marked out on Tp6 and Tp8 suggest that these blocks also originally belonged to

MAJOR

REPAIRS

ΙΟΙ

one of the façades, while T p i / 9 and T p i 2 could belong either to

Fig. 54), the module changes abruptly f r o m the narrow tri-

the façade or the flank.

glyph of 0.52 m., to the wider one of 0.56 m. We can assign this

O f the corners, only the southeast block belongs to the

material to the five western bays on the north flank, based on

original construction. It has sockets w i t h release channels cut

find-spots

on the flank joint face and directly into the face of the eastern

Here, the frieze blocks were laid right to left rather than left

and the position of the nail holes o n the geison.

corona, as well as the obsolete release channel on the eastern

to right, as on the rest of the building. Clearly, not only the

joint face (Fig. 44). B y contrast, the northeast and southwest

geison, but also the frieze and epistyle, were rebuilt in this part

corner blocks were lifted into position b y the U-channel and

of the building. In light of this, w e may again consider the

socket system used on the northern geison, placing them in the

capitals of G r o u p A , including corner capital C 2 4 , w h i c h were

second period of construction. In sum, the repair at this level

found in exactly this region. T h e y likely belong to the repair,

included rebuilding the geison course on three sides of the

too, and signal that the damage at the northwest corner also

building, as well as rebuilding the pediments, the raking geison,

affected the colonnade. Since the corner capital of the western

and the roof. Small repairs appear to have been made in tuff,

façade had to be replaced, the epistyle and frieze above it on

such as the hawksbeak B24 (Fig. 53), and the same material was

the west required replacing as well. T h e damage to the western

also used to fill in the smaller blocks of the pediment.

side may have been even more serious; capital C i

from

G i v e n the extent of repairs to the uppermost part of the

G r o u p A must belong on the western side, and capital C20

entablature, it w o u l d be remarkable if the courses below sur-

probably does as well (Fold-out Figs. 7,9). Extensive repairs to

vived completely unscathed. In fact, w e have good evidence

the west w o u l d make sense of the change to the large triglyph

that the damage penetrated into the colonnade at the northwest

module on the flank. F o r the sake of simplicity, the masons

corner of the building. O v e r much of the northern course, the

decided to continue the façade proportion on to the flank. The

mutules reflect the narrower triglyph characteristic of the ori-

tuff metope, M i o , w h i c h was found near the northwest corner

ginal construction f o r the flanks. T h e entablature beneath

of the building, w o u l d belong to this second phase of the

could therefore belong to the original construction. H o w e v e r ,

building, along w i t h the other tuff repair pieces.

on several geison blocks ( L G i 1/33, L G 2 2 , LG28/17/43, L G 2 9 /

A repair of this magnitude has p r o f o u n d ramifications for

44, L G 3 8 , L G 4 1 ; Table 10, col. 13; F o l d - o u t Figs. 9, 18) and at

our understanding of the sculptured epistyle. T h e collapse at

least t w o epistyle blocks (A42 and A 4 6 ; Table 4a; PI. 46;

the northwest corner means that at least one relief, and possibly more, f r o m the epistyle had to be replaced. D a m a g e d material, being consecrated, may not have been removed f r o m the site, as happened on the Athenian A k r o p o l i s or at the sanctuary of Aphaia at Aegina. T h e surviving sculpture, therefore, could represent not one but t w o phases in the life of this building, with some reliefs being replacements for damaged originals. O u r new understanding of the situation helps to explain w h y it has been so difficult to reconstruct satisfactorily the sculptured epistyle using all the surviving material. H o w e v e r , it vastly complicates any attempt to do so, because differentiating between original and replacement sculpture must rely on the more subjective criteria of style and iconography (see Chapter 8, 'Arrangement of the Sculpture, p. 196).

R E P A I R S

T O

T H E

C O L O N N A D E

A N D

E N T A B L A T U R E

Group

A capitals

and

columns

A t least four surviving capitals ( C i , C 1 9 , C20, and C 2 4 ; Pis. 35, 40; Figs. 26a, 27; F o l d - o u t Fig. 6) are replacements f o r those of the original building that were damaged. G i v e n their greater overall height compared to the other capitals, it is clear that netti—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι 0 5 10cm FIGURE 53. B24, tuff repair to the hawksbeak crown moulding of the horizontal geison.

part, if not all, of the column shafts also had to be replaced. All four capitals were found near the northwest corner of the building, and C 2 4 belongs to the corner.

io 6

MAJOR

Η—ι—I

1—I—I .5

REPAIRS

1—I—I—I—I—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—\—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—I 1 1.5 2 2.5 3m

FIGURE 54. Undecorated epistyle block A42.

MAJOR

The spacing of the mutules and viae over the metopes are slightly

Epistyle Based o n the size of the central régula or the direction of construction (and sometimes both), blocks A 3 4 , A42, and A 4 6 belong to the new epistyle built for the northwest flank (Pi. 45; Fig. 54). T h e geison blocks confirm that new material was needed at least for the first five bays f r o m the west on this side. M o r e importantly, the fact that the corner column was replaced means that the epistyle on the western façade also had to be replaced. This block, almost certainly, carried sculpture. Frieze

R E P A I R S ΙΟΙ

course

different and more regular (median of 0.372 m. and 0.168 m., for a median metope-space of 0.708 m.) than those over the southern metopes, although there is still a fairly wide range. T h e spacing suggests that at this part of the building, the epistyle and probably the frieze remained mostly intact and the masons were only required to rebuild the geison course. F o r the five western intercolumniations, the masons significantly altered the spacing of the frieze by changing to a wide triglyph, c.0.565 m., and, consequently, substantially narrower metopes. T h e surviving metope-mutules here have a wide range of lengths (0.322 to 0.381 m.) that m a y include accommodation

It has already been suggested that the tuff metope, M i o , belongs

at the corner, but the mean, 0.34 m., is decidedly smaller than the

to the repaired building. It is difficult, however, to distinguish

mutules on the southern side and the rest of the northern side.

w h i c h of the remaining andesite triglyphs and metopes belong

The viae also vary considerably in length (0.136 to 0.193

m-)>

to the later repairs. T h e majority of the surviving triglyphs have

but, again, the mean of o. 161 m. is smaller than o n the rest of the

pry-holes on their top surfaces, as w e should expect if the entire

flanks. Together, the viae and mutules create metopal spaces

original geison f o l l o w e d the southern design of joining over the

roughly 0.66 m. wide. A t this end, there seems to have been

triglyph. T h e y must belong to the original building. Several

less interest in having the viae flanking each metope-mutule

(e.g., T2, Τ 7 , Τ ι 3, and T25) lack pry-holes, w h i c h w e w o u l d

approximately equal, at least f o r the irregular joining sequence

expect f o r the replacements, but three of them belong to the

of blocks L G 2 2 , L G 2 9 / L G 4 4 , and L G i 1, where the largest and

narrow type assigned to the original design of the flanks. L a c k

smallest viae are paired to create the metopal spaces.

of a p r y mark does not automatically mean the block must be a replacement (the masons did not pry all blocks), but it raises the possibility that the repairs to the northern side extended bey o n d the five bays in w h i c h the triglyph module was changed.

O n the smoothly dressed top surface in front of the tile groove, the northern geison blocks have both the rectangular and the small round nail holes to secure the roof tiling. T h e y have none of the square holes f o u n d on the southern geison

A s f o r the metopes, in every preserved instance, the top

blocks that belong to the original roof. The rectangular and

surface has a p r y mark indicative of the repaired building, in

round holes presumably belong to t w o subsequent roofs, one

w h i c h the joints between geison blocks occurred between the

belonging to the major repair and the other to the Hellenistic

metope-mutule and via (Table 5, col. 11). A l l of the surviving

renovation (see Chapter 6, 'Hellenistic Renovations', pp. 123-4).

metopes therefore were on the repaired building. M a n y of them could have survived f r o m the original building. Northern

geison

S e t t i n g t h e n o r t h e r n geison The northern geison blocks have a U-shaped channel for a lifting rope cut into the left joint face and a deep square socket

O f the geison blocks assigned to the northern flank, ten are

for a w o o d e n peg (around w h i c h a rope could be fitted) cut into

essentially complete, six can be recomposed f r o m several frag-

the right face (Fig. 12). T h e system suggests that the entire

ments, and large fragments represent several others (Figs. 12,

course was also set f r o m left to right (east to west). N o n e of

42, 55-7; F o l d - o u t Figs. 9, 11; Table 10). O n these blocks, the

the blocks were joined together b y clamps and none bears any

top surface f r o m the hawksbeak to the tile groove is set at an

setting or shifting marks.

angle, but the surface behind the tile groove is rough and basically horizontal (with a f e w exceptions, such as L G 14, L G 19, and L G 2 4 ) . T h e crowning hawksbeak is generally large and flattened; compared to the hawksbeak on the south-

Corner

geison

O f the three replacement corners, the northeast and southwest

ern geison, it has a top curve of less depth, a flatter o v o l o face,

blocks are essentially complete, and the northwest block sur-

and a more rounded beak (compare Fig. 43 to Fig. 55). In

vives in a small but important fragment (Pis. 66-7; Figs. 56-7;

contrast to the southern geison blocks, most of these blocks

Table 11). A l t h o u g h each corner is slightly different, collectively

are cut to a length approximately one-half an interaxial space,

they demonstrate the transition f r o m the flank to the horizontal

1.225

· Moreover, the joints do not fall within the triglyph-

and raking geison of the repaired building. O n b o t h northern

mutule. Each standard block begins w i t h a complete metope-

corners (the southwest corner is damaged here), the start of

mutule and ends with the complete via to the left of the

the raking geison is carved as part of the block, although each

triglyph-mutule. T h e exceptions, in length and division, belong

in a slightly different manner. T h e southwest corner has two

m

near the corners.

irregularly shaped shallow sockets cut into the raised platform

A s w e have noted, for the eight eastern bays on the north side,

facing on to the flank. A t c.o.3 7-0.5 6 m. f r o m the face of the

the mutules reflect the length of the narrower triglyph, c.o. 516 m.

western corona, they seem to be set too far from the façade to be

M A J O R R E P A I R S ΙΟΙ

_ —

r

- -JI_

•

J

L _

J .384

--

L

H .162 Η

-J .524

—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—I—I—I—I—I—h H—I—I—t.5 1.5

4 H .157 H

-I—I

1—I

1 H 2.5

H

3m

1—f—l·

H

1—I—I

1 10cm

FIGURE 55. Lateral geison block LG24, from the northern side. bedding sockets f o r a lateral akroterion base. T h e smaller cutting

entire portion of the block that overhung the flank. These

may have secured a w o o d e n block to brace the raking geison, but

corners were joined only to the adjacent horizontal geison

a purpose f o r the larger one is not immediately apparent. T h e

block, with t w o h o o k clamps.

corner akroteria must have been part of the corner sima tile.

R e c o n s t r u c t e d sequence of the n o r t h e r n geison

Setting the corners

O n l y the size of the triglyph-mutules, the spacing of the nail

T h e masons seem to have experienced difficulties setting these

holes for the roof tiling, and their coordination w i t h the south-

large and u n w i e l d y blocks. T h e southwest block has a U -

ern side provide a reliable guide in reconstructing the original

shaped channel cut into its western vertical joint face and a

sequence

small U - s h a p e d channel cut into the overhanging part of the

c.0.565 m. in length belong to the western part of the building,

of

blocks.

The

blocks

with

triglyph-mutules

geison o n the vertical joint face of the flank. O n the latter, the

because they reflect the wider spacing between the round and

inner boss around w h i c h the rope was looped apparently broke

the rectangular nail holes, w h i c h is matched on the southern

prior to or during lifting, for a deep socket is cut into the centre

geison blocks at the western end of the building as well. A d d -

of the channel. T h e northeast corner also had on its eastern face

itional but less secure factors f o r placement include the treat-

a U-shaped channel that has been overcut w i t h a square socket.

ment of the upper surface of each block (on the assumption

There are no lifting marks on the flank joint face or on the

that blocks w i t h a similarly designed upper surface belong in

corona; the second rope must have been wrapped around the

sequence) and the position of the f e w surviving sockets for

£u> 3ρ 2 S Φ - bß S ^ et 3 >

IS ON Ο |V NO οο •-ι OH " LH 6 C Ο 6

1Λ I—I ΚΝ NC NO οο IV ΚΝ IV IV NοO Κ 1-1 ΗΗ ΗΗ LH 1-1 ΗΗ Μ LH Ο Ο Ò Ο Ο 6 Ο ό

1Λ tv οο tv ΚΝ NO IV NO 1-1 DL. 'Ι ο* >-. LH DL. '"Ί Ο ρ ο C Ο Ό Ρ Ο Ό

( ι οο Ν Ν Ν •φ "φ ο ο tv ο φ NO £ Ν NO IV IV NO ο φ NO α, NO £ Ω- £ ο ο |Ό| C ò ο Ο Ο ο ο ο ο ό Ο Ο Ο Ο

NO

Λ

M

_l^ >

tv O Ν NO NO φ κι ο οο ΟΝ. ΚΝ ΚΝ N ^ οο IV NO Φ iv N O O N IV •Φ •Η LH Μ >-Η Ι-* LH 1-1 ι-. •Η 1-1 IH Μ Η-· 1-1 Ο ο Ο Ο ό ό Ο ό ό ο Ο Ο ο ό ό

Jp ο bß rt 'S eQ HH MH t«

6

Dl, c

Ο ΚΝ Φ Ο

ΚΝ ι Ο ο ΚΝ Φ ΚΝ Ο IS -φ φ Φ φ ο ό Ò Ò Ò

ο co φ ο

ο φ φ ό

G

Ρ

OH

Ρ

ΚΝ Ο Μ Ο φ ΟΟ tv ΝΟ N O κν κι OH OH Ό Ol, κ ν α, Τ1 OL, Ό Ò Ο Ρ C Ο Ρ ο c ο C ο

VN Ν Φ «S Ο Ν φ ο ΟΟ |V ΟΟ Ιν NO ΚΝ κ ν κ ν κ ν κ•φι κ ν κ ν κ ν Ο Ο Ο Ο ο ο Ο ο

Ο NO •φ κ"\ "Φ Φ Ò Ο Ò

CL,

ο NO DM »H Ρ ο

ο 'S Ν DL. rT φ ο ό Ο Ρ Λ Λ οο ΚΝ tv IV IV CL, Μ DL, '"Ί ό Ρ ό G Ο

DL, LO

Ν ο Κ ο ο IS*.φ ΚΝ Ο ΚΝ ΚΝ Ο ΚΝ Ο ΚΝ Ο ΚΝ

w h e n combined with

the

is too fragmentary, the

MAJOR

ΙΟΙ

REPAIRS

Ψ*>

·' . ·;,< ν ν '

"7-7--VX—?—7—7-7

I-

.27 —I

.397

K163-f

'

'

)

Ι105Κ1001

NECG

Η—I—I—I—I—h .5 1

Η—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—h 1.5 2

FIGURE 57· Northeastern corner geison block.

Η

1 1 2.5

1—Η—I—I 3m

io 6

MAJOR

REPAIRS

absorbed within the first t w o intercolumniations. T h e adjacent

The replacement northwest corner differs slightly from the ori-

three blocks, L G 2 2 , L G 2 9 / L G 4 4 , and L G 1 1 / 3 3 , exceptional in

ginal southeast corner block in being more rounded at the start.

both length and division, compensate each other and belong in sequence straddling the second and third intercolumniations.

Technical features and setting

T h e reconstructed sequence creates the f o l l o w i n g interaxial

Like the blocks of the northern geison, the horizontal blocks were

spacings:

lifted into position using a U-shaped channel and socket; they

Murales |—2.791—|

|—2.446—|—2.427—|—2.486—|—[2.82]—|

Columns |—2.847—I

|—2.447—|—2.447—|—2.447—|—2.847—|

NE

ι

2 9

10

H

12

13NW

were laid from left to right at both ends of the building. Some of them were clamped. T w o hook clamps on either side joined the corners and adjacent blocks. The pattern of clamping is clear on the eastern side, but there are several possible arrangements for the geison on the western side (Fold-out Figs. 8, 11). T o receive the tympanon, the top surface of each block is smoothly dressed

Horizontal

geison

beginning c.0.39-0.43 5 m. from the face of the corona, for a depth

In addition to the corner blocks, ten horizontal geison blocks, complete or nearly so, survive, along with several smaller fragments (Pis. 68-9; Figs. 58-60; F o l d - o u t Figs. 8, 11; Table 11). T h e present locations of these blocks fall neatly to either end of the temple; four blocks belong to the eastern pediment and six to the western pediment. T h e horizontal geison blocks rise to a height of 0.399 m. and have roughly the same vertical dimensions as the lateral geison. 3 T h e lengths vary substantially (from 1.270 m. to 1.455

m -)> a n d

the joints do not always respect the

borders of the mutules and viae. A l t h o u g h the blocks are divided in at least three different ways, several have t w o mutules and t w o viae, the equivalent of one-half an interaxial space. T h e 12 preserved triglyph-mutules indicate that the wider triglyphs were used internally. T h e narrower triglyphs appeared at the corners, except at the northwest corner, where presumably the larger triglyph was used in the repair. T h e spacing of the frieze on the façade is considerably wider than on the flank, but the choice of wider triglyphs and the preference f o r wide viae (very roughly one-third the w i d t h of the triglyph) meant that the mutules over the metopes had to be significantly smaller than those surmounting the triglyphs. Clarke states that the mutules over the metopes are seven-eighths the length of those over the triglyph, or c.o.49 m. H e m a y have had b l o c k H G 9 in mind; otherwise, the mutules are considerably

shorter. 4

Because of the

w a y in w h i c h the blocks are divided, it is hard to fix on the precise relationship of via to metope-mutule; w e do not even k n o w if viae over the same metope were approximately equal. The hawksbeak moulding that crowns the horizontal geison, rare in the Archaic period, was part of both the original and the repaired building (Figs. 44, 61). The northwest corner block belonging to the repaired building demonstrates the w a y in which the moulding merges at the corner with the crown of the raking and lateral blocks (PI. 66; Fig. 56). Today the profile survives on one fragmentary internal horizontal block, H G 1 7 , as well as the northwest and southeast corners (Figs. 56, 59, 61). Total height of the projecting face from crown to the soffit of the mutule: 0.375 mHeight of the corona: 0.245 m ·; °f the fascia: 0.063 m ·; mutules: 0.065 m. Thickness of the bed: o. 547 m.; projection: 0.437 m · F° r earlier description, see Clarke 1898, p. 106. The block with the raised surface described in the excavation report does not match any horizontal geison block at the site today, but Clarke could have mistaken lateral geison LG 14, whichfitshis description, for a horizontal geison block. 4 Clarke 1882, p. 93. 3

of c.0.37-0.40 m. There are no sockets for ceiling beams preserved on any of the surviving horizontal geison blocks. Reconstructed sequence of eastern horizontal geison blocks A t the eastern end, both corners, f o u r intermediate blocks, and t w o fragments of the horizontal geison survive

(Fold-out

Figs. 8, 11). T h e northeast corner geison has its greater length on the façade and the southeast has its greater length on the flank, so that combined they are approximately one via short of completing half an interaxial span, plus the necessary extension to the corner. A small segment of the additional via survives on the southeast corner block. T h e rest of the course was c o m pleted with nine internal blocks. T h e idiosyncratic placement of clamps indicates that the southeast corner block, H G i and H G 2 , were originally joined together. B o t h internal blocks are longer than one-half an intercolumniation, H G i to a c c o m m o date the rest of the via joining the southeast corner, and H G 2 to absorb the extra length of the frieze at the corner. T h e remains of an iron d o w e l on block H G i , w h i c h secured the final raking geison block, R G 5 , provides further confirmation of their position (Figs. 59, 66). T h e t w o other surviving blocks f r o m the eastern end, H G 3 / 1 5 and H G 4 , equal approximately onehalf an intercolumniation (c.1.30 m.), beginning with a metope-mutule, including a triglyph-mutule, and ending with a via. T h e y have neither clamps nor special divisions that w o u l d help determine their placement within the course. N e i t h e r block can join w i t h the northeast corner, w h i c h was clamped and dressed to join a block only c.o.90 m. thick. T h e p r y marks for the t y m p a n o n on their upper surfaces limit the other possibilities. B l o c k H G 3 / 1 5 w o r k s best in positions E 3 N but could also fit in E 2 N or E 5 N ; block H G 4 could take positions E 4 N , E4S, or E5S. T h e sequence set out in F o l d - o u t Figure 8 and in the schematic below places FIG3/15 in the position E 3 N , and H G 4 in position E5S, with the smaller fragments H G i 6 and H G 1 7 filling the gaps: 5 5 The position of the pry mark on HG2 relative to tympanon block Τρίο is not ideal, but Τρίο is much thinner than the other blocks, and it is possible that it may have been the last set in place. The only other viable reconstruction causes more problems than it solves. If we disengage HGi from the southeast corner, the sequence HG1/HG2 could be placed E5N and E4N. The pry marks are then more easily explained, but not the dowel hole on HG2, and such an arrangement would require at least two blocks of unusual division to compensate for the southeast corner and the left side of HGi.

M A J O R R E P A I R S ΙΟΙ

T130® FIGURE 58. Find-spots of horizontal geison blocks.

Blocks

SECGHGi

Units

T

HG2

M

0.525 0.844

T

M

T

[0.56] 0.806 0.552

Mutules I

3·°°7

Column |

2.957/3.02

SEi

HG17 M ?

HG4 T

M

? T

? [c. 0.75] 0.563

M ?

?

HG16 T

M

?

?

T ?

HG3/15

Μ

Τ

M

?

?

?

Τ

?

0.566 Μ ?

1 1 2

2.66/2.615

1 3

2.66/2.615

1 4

2.66/2.615

1 5

NECG Τ

Μ

Τ

P c . 0.80 0.514 2.957/3.02

1 6

io

6

MAJOR

REPAIRS

.396

+• .200 —I

HG17

mm—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι 0 5

I - .205 —I

.405

10cm

1— .200

HG1

FIGURE 59. Horizontal geison blocks from eastern side: H G i , HG2, HG4, HG17.

MAJOR

ΙΟΙ

REPAIRS

in"* Is- 00 gH gl g l 1.431

+ .159 -I

1.018

1.006

-1.270-

.404

HTTL—Ι

0

1—Ι—I

1

.5

1

1—I—I—I

1

1—I—I—Ι

1—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I

1.5

2

1—I—I—Ι—I

2.5

FIGURE 6o. Horizontal geison blocks from the western side: H G 6 , H G 7 , H G 9 .

3m

pi

Pi PS Pi Pi Pi Pi PÜ PCS Î τ r Î î î Τ τ Τ ì Ο. H-L 1-1 .-I J 1-1 J 1—1 G H-J 3 bJO 3 S S ^

t>ß ns

S

>

οο Ο ο Ο Ο ο «s hv Ν < s ο Ο ο ο

Ν so os l\ ΟΟ οο so ο" Ο ο ο

Ο Ο Ο Ο

ο ο ο ο

00

Ν

Ν.

Ν

Ο "SO co SO ri Ν « ι - M w ο Ο Ο Ο Ο Ο

ο Ο Ν

ο ο Ν ο

cm α, ο α, αα α Λ c c

Ο - φ •Φ Φ 4 Μ M Μ Ι-, Μ ο" ο ο Ο ο M ο Ο 1-, Λ

οο co ta Μ Ν.

ε

3

Ζ

Λ

Λ Λ Λ Λ Λ Λ

Λ

σ

ο χ Μ Ν ΓΛ Tt- Λ VO 1\ οο Ο, Μ ·η Μ ι-, 1—, Η (1 y Χ Π Ü Ü Ü Ü O Ü Ü Ü Ü O Ü O Ü Ü Ü P J ^ ^ [IC ΡΠ i^C kC HC SH i-i—i ÜC HE c/^ on

io6M A J O R

REPAIRS

The position of the mutules over the reconstructed southeast

southwest corner follows the same arrangement. B l o c k H G 1 0

corner bay indicates an interaxial space of c.z.6o m. reflecting, at

and H G 5 may complement each other to achieve a similar

the eastern façade at least, the equal spacing of the columns

arrangement. However, blocks H G 6 and H G 7 , and probably

(roughly 2.615

fragment H G 1 2 , end with the metope-mutule on the right side

m

·

o n

centres) suggested by stylobate block S12.

A t the southern end, the final t w o metopes absorbed most of the

The spacing of the mutules on the southwest corner geison

distortion caused by the triglyph frieze at the corner. The mutule

indicates that the final metope at that end was not enlarged to

and via (0.41 m. and 0.196 m. long) on the northeast corner block

absorb the distortion caused b y the frieze. In fact, only the

suggest that the final metope on that side was c.0.80 m. long. Here,

largest possible adjacent via w o u l d create a metopal space that

too, it appears that the distortion was remedied within the first bay.

was not less than the normal interval (0.75 m.). Possibly the

The other internal metopes may have varied in size, but the space

mutule was continued on the adjacent block, but for this w e

between columnar triglyphs for the three central intercolumnia-

have no evidence. O n the other hand, the evidence for recutting

tions should approximate the combined length of t w o average

the clamps on both H G 9 and H G 1 0 strongly suggests that these

metopes, c.0.75 m., and one wide triglyph of 0.56 m., or 2.06 m.

blocks originally joined; together they create a very long metopal space, 0.916 m. There are several possible arrangements for

Reconstructed sequence of western horizontal geison blocks

the blocks because w e lack the position of the mutules on the

T h e situation on the western side is different, possibly owing to

northwester corner block. In addition, pry marks suggest that

the greater damage here. The five complete blocks and four large

some of the tympanon blocks either in the centre or at the

fragments that survive represent a more complicated construc-

corners were narrower than the surviving intermediate blocks.

tion, with unusual divisions requiring further unusually divided

The possibilities offered here w o r k with various arrangements of

blocks. Blocks H G 8 and H G 9 each f o r m one-half of an inter-

the sculptured epistyle (see Chapter 8, 'Arrangement of the

axial, beginning with the metope-mutule on the left side; the

Sculpture').

(1) F o l l o w s

the analogy of the eastern side in placing

clamped blocks near the corner. Joining H G 1 0 to H G 9 creates the especially large metopal space: Blocks: NWCG HG5 Units: Τ [0.56]

HG10

M

Μ

?

Column I

0.53

HG9

Τ

?

Μ

0.568

2.957/3·02

?

Τ

0.916

1

0.557

Μ

Τ

?

?

2.66/2.615

NW ι

?

HG 7

M

Τ

HG6 M

HG8 Μ

Τ

θ·57 °·725 °·56Ι

1

2.66/2.615

2

1

SWCG

Μ

Τ

Μ

Τ

?

0.564

?

?

2.66/2.615

3

?

1

4

Μ

Τ

[c.0.75]

0.527

2·957/3·°2

5

6SW

(2) Places some of the clamped blocks in the centre of the course but keeps blocks H G 1 0 and H G 9 together: Blocks: N W C G HG6 Units: T [0.56]

M

T

?

Column |

HG7 M

0.561 0.686 2.957/3.02

?

T

M

ο·57

T ?

1

NW ι

HG5,i2 M ?

HG10

T ?

2.66/2.615

M ? 1

2

T ?

HG9 M 0.568

HG8 T

ο. 9 ι6

M

0.556

2.66/2.615

T 0.830

1

SWCG

(HG18) M

Τ

0.564 ?

?

2.66/2.615

M

Μ

?

?

(3) A t t e m p t s to create a better alignment of the frieze with

0.527 1 6SW

5

the colonnade b y having metopal spaces more equal in size.

Τ

-2.957/3.02

l·-'

3

Τ

northwest corner block that has an additional small mutule on its end face, w h i c h might be represented by fragment H G 1 2 :

B l o c k H G 9 is separated from H G 1 0 , w h i c h is joined to the southwest corner. In this instance, w e w o u l d have to dismiss the highly suggestive r e w o r k i n g of the clamp cuttings o n these blocks as mere coincidence. T h e arrangement requires a large Blocks: NWCG/i2 Units: Τ [ο. 5 6]

Column I NWi

HG7

HG6

Μ

Τ

Μ

Τ

?

?

?

ο·57

2.957/3.02

1 2

Μ

Τ

M

0.725 0.561 2.66/2.615-

Τ

M

M

HGio

HG8

HG5

HG9

Τ

M

Μ ?

0-557 0-779 0.53 2.66/2.615

-2.66/2.615 — 4

Τ 0.564 f~ 5

Μ

SWCG Τ

Μ

Τ

(Ο·773) 0.568 ο·73 0.527 —-2.957Λ· 02

1 6SW

io 6

MAJOR

REPAIRS

In all of the suggested arrangements for the western side, the

Their angled face marks out the slope of the t y m p a n o n as one

distortion caused b y the frieze is not absorbed in the final

in four ( 14 degrees), rising to a height of c. 1.5 8 m. at the centre,

metopes, but within the internal intercolumniations. Such a

which is quite close to five Assian feet (1.595 m.). 8 A l l but one

solution, in w h i c h the frieze near the corners is completely

of the andesite blocks are reçut geison blocks, set on what

out of alignment with the colonnade, even if the corner inter-

originally had been a vertical joint face. T h e opposite side has

axial space were 2.55 m. rather than 2.615 m., demonstrates the

been trimmed to form the slope of the pediment, and the

same lack of coordination with the colonnade witnessed on the

original top surface has been dressed d o w n to become the

southern side. This system of spacing is the only one that can

face of the tympanon. T h e hawksbeak is dressed off the corona

explain the one extraordinarily long relief (A3), which, as w e

to make a vertical joint face and the rough back trimmed to

shall see, can find no other convenient position on the peristyle

become the opposite joint face. T h e thickness and length vary

(see Chapter 8, 'Arrangement of the Sculpture', pp. 197-8).

according to the original purpose and position of each block.

Scheme 2 is chosen for the order of blocks s h o w n in F o l d - o u t

T h e holes f o u n d on the front face of the t y m p a n o n are not for

Figures 8 and 15.

the attachment of objects. T h e y are all obsolete clamp cuttings

T h e restored geison vividly demonstrates that the architect and masons were either unprepared for the complexities of the triglyph frieze at the corners, or they simply did not

or nail holes left over from their original function in the geison course.

regard vertical alignment as the highest priority. Both are

Setting the tympanon

p r o b a b l y true. H o r i z o n t a l variation in dimensions was ac-

Each large andesite block was raised by ropes wrapped around

ceptable to them, and a certain amount of flexibility in

wooden pegs set in sockets cut at a slight angle to each vertical

vertical alignment even within the entablature was admitted.

joint face above the centre of gravity. The sockets have no release

W h e n they reached the entablature, the architect and masons

channels. Therefore, the block being lifted had to be set well

were undecided h o w best to handle the corner problem and

away from the adjoining block and then pried into final position,

chose, in effect, t w o different solutions: (1) spread the dis-

a procedure confirmed by the number and wide spacing of the

tortion over the final t w o or three metopes, as on the east

pry marks found on the horizontal geison (see especially H G 6

and north sides; or, (2) attempt to disguise it, b y making the

and H G 7 , where the pry marks are c.0.30 m. apart; Fig. 60).

last metopes

Several of the blocks, particularly from the eastern tympanon,

slightly

smaller

than average

and

enlarging the

have a small, fillet-like boss set next to the vertical joint faces near

south and west sides. These various solutions are reflected

the bottom of the block, which protected the front face but also

in the curious spacing of the regulae o n the epistyle and are

could be used in manoeuvring the block into position.

those

in the

subsequent

intercolumniation(s),

as on

of paramount importance in understanding the arrangement Reconstructed tympanon

of the sculpture.

O f the large andesite blocks, seven are scattered d o w n the steep slope east of the temple's foundation and four are n o w

Tympanon

built into the latest fortification wall directly west of the

T h e beginning of the t y m p a n o n is cut directly on to the upper

temple (Fig. 62). Each block filled the entire height of the

surface of the northeast and southwest corner geison blocks,

tympanon and, therefore, can be assigned to its original pos-

c.i.04 and 1.036 m., respectively, f r o m the face of the flank

ition. A l l the surviving andesite blocks belong to intermediate

corona, and c.0.435 m. from the end corona (Pi. 67b; Figs.

positions. Blocks T p 3 , Tp4, Tp6, and Tp8, the largest pre-

56-7; F o l d - o u t Fig. 12). 6 These triangular bosses mark out

served, are c.1.33 m. high on the east and c.1.29 m. high on

the length of the t y m p a n o n at 12.685

the west. B l o c k s T p i / 9 , T p n , T p 5 , and T p 7 take the next

m

·

at

the

east

end

and

12.66 m. at the west. A l o n g with the dressed-down top surfaces

descending position, blocks T p 2 and T p i 2 the f o l l o w i n g pos-

on the horizontal geison, they s h o w that the face of the t y m -

ition, and b l o c k Τ ρ ί ο the next (Fold-out Fig. 12). T h e masons

panon was flush with the entablature. Today, there are 11 extant andesite blocks and 2 fragmentary tuff blocks belonging to the tympanon ( T p i - i 3 , P l s . 70-3; Figs. 62-5; Tables i2a-b). 7 6 For a similar construction, see the Great Temple of Apollo or the Temple of the Athenians at Delos: Courby 1931, pp. 32-5,129-31, figs. 43-8, 140-2; Coulton 1967, p. 209, n. 13. 7 Clarke records three blocks of the tympanon (here called TpCi-TpC3), but only identifies the largest as a reçut geison block; cf. Clarke 1898, pp. 100-9, 2 7° nι, fig. 18. The blocks are first assigned to the northern side of the western tympanon, and then reassigned to the southern side of the eastern tympanon. No find-spots arc noted. Our Tp3 does not exactly match Clarke's largest block (TpC3), but he could not have known the half-buried Tp8 from the western tympanon. The dimensions of the intermediate-sized block Clarke cites (TpC2)

are close to those of Tp5, but they also could belong to the now broken Tpi/9. The dimensions of Clarke's smaller block (TpCi) do not accord very well with the dimensions of our Tp2, which not only is a reçut geison but also has a large beam cutting. Possibly the block described in the excavation report belonged to the western tympanon and no longer survives. s Clarke 1898, p. 107, cites a slope of 15 degrees, based on the three blocks he uncovered. His measurements, however, appear schematic. From my measurements, the tangent of the slope is between 0.2459 anc l 0.2606, with most of the blocks around 0.2497, o r 1 ' n 4· The height of the tympanon is therefore c.0.115 m. less than calculated by Clarke (1.695 m ·)· For tympana with a similar slope, see Lapalus 1947, pp. 234-6. Add the Karthaia temple at Kea: 0stby 1980, pp. 206-7 and n. 64. For the steeper inclination of West Greek pediments, see Gàbrici 1933-5, cols. 181-2.

M A J O R R E P A I R S ΙΟΙ

FIGURE 61. Profiles of hawksbeak crown on the geison: a) SECG horizontal profile close to the corner; b) SECG horizontal profile; c) N W C G profile along the flank; d) N W C G profile along flank close to the façade; e) N W C G profile of horizontal crown; f) R G N ; g) R G 1 3 ; h) N W C G raking profile.

used the finer-grained tuff to complete the smallest blocks next

reconstruction ( R G i , R G z , R G 4 , R G 5 , and p r o b a b l y R G 3 ;

to the triangular bosses cut on to the corner geison blocks to

Pis. 74-5; Fig. 66; Table 13). T h e height of the course through

form the corners of the t y m p a n o n (for example, T p i 3 ; Fig. 63).

the bed is a slim 0.240 m., with the face of the corona only

A t the southeast corner, the corner of the t y m p a n o n was likely

slightly less, 0.23 5 m. T h e thickness of the only b l o c k that fully

made of tuff as well. T h e tuff is easier to w o r k on this small

preserves the dimension is 0.998 m.; the overhanging portion

scale, and in the dark corner of the tympanon, the difference in

of the block (without crowning hawksbeak) projects 0.415 m.

material w o u l d not stand out. N o n e of the central blocks f r o m

to the tip of the corona. T h e thickness of the bed, as preserved,

either side survives today. O n the eastern side, t w o blocks,

varies between 0.505 and 0.605

approximately

m

·

1.00 m. w i d e and 1.58 m. to 1.33 m. high,

The raking geison has a simple yet striking profile consisting

could fill the central area of the pediment. O n the western

of a slightly splayed corona crowned with a rudimentary

side, the distance between the preserved blocks is greater—a

hawksbeak, undercut at a strong slope of one to five and ter-

different organization m a y have been necessary.

minating in a soffit hawksbeak moulding. O n l y t w o fragments, R G 1 1 and R G 1 3 , and the northwest corner preserve the crown

Raking

geison

moulding. B o t h the profiles and the treatment of the upper surface on the t w o blocks are slightly different. T h e profile

Collectively, the several large, fragmentary blocks belonging to

preserved on the northwest corner is rough and cavetto- like,

the repaired raking geison retain enough features to allow for a

suggesting that R G 1 1 , which also has a cavetto-like crown

io 6

MAJOR

REPAIRS

FIGURE 6z. Find-spots of tympanon blocks.

moulding, could belong near a corner. T h e c r o w n moulding on

was only c.o.42 m., compared to the c.o.44 m. of the horizontal

R G 1 3 is slightly more refined, with a fairly deep top curve,

and lateral geison. T h e soffit must, therefore, have overhung

o v o l o face, flattened beak, and steeper undercutting.

the t y m p a n o n b y c.0.02 m.

This

moulding represents the full transition to the hawksbeak f r o m the corner cavetto. Unfortunately, neither fragment preserves

Reconstructed raking geison

the soffit hawksbeak, so the relationship of the t w o different

Enough fragments survive to illustrate the construction of the

c r o w n profiles to the remarkably consistent soffit profile can-

raking geison. Each corner was different. O n l y at the north-

not be established. T h e hawksbeak on the soffit survives in

west corner is the raking geison carved as a substantial part of

excellent condition on several blocks. 9 T h e moulding has a

the corner block. A t the northeast corner of the building, the

nearly vertical o v o l o face with the top depth slightly exceeding

beginning of the raking geison w a s formed b y continuing the

the lower depth, a flattened beak, and a wide, rather shallow

sloping surface on the flank right to the front of the block;

undercutting; the minimal reverse curve terminates in the bed.

today, the surface is m u c h w o r n . A t the southeast corner, the

T h e projection of the geison f r o m the soffit to the corona

end of the raking geison was fitted onto a narrow, dressedd o w n ledge across the front of the block, as a small, separate

Clarke 1882, p. 94, mistakenly identifies the moulding as a Lesbian kyma. Possibly he formed that impression from RGi, on which the soffit moulding is so badly chipped that it could be mistaken for a kyma reversa. 9

piece, p r o b a b l y a repair or r e w o r k i n g of the original. T h e first complete raking geison block at the southeast corner was R G 5 , w h i c h was bevelled along its soffit to rest o n

MAJOR

ΙΟΙ

REPAIRS

τ

TP10

.205

1 ΤΡ13

k

Λ

ΤΡ12

0 .046 Η

.383

1

1—I 1—ι 20 30cm

1-

— .180

10

.659

J -

It .383

ΤΡ2

1

.483

1

I

.539

1

Τ .145

±

.124

t .222

1 .928 ?

ψβΤ —

U

d

I .700

H—I—1—h „ .5

.

1

lA 3

1

-ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—I—h1 1.5 2 2.5

FIGURE 63. Tympanon blocks Τρίο, Tpi3, Tpi2, Tp2.

H—I—I—I 3m

M A J O R R E P A I R S ΙΟΙ

MAJOR

REPAIRS

II9

.3

ΤΡ5

Λ

J .165

+

.150

I

.364

.578

1

.540

7. .199

TP8

1 I

X

.485

1

)

Τ .206

I 1

» .460

.194

+

.204

1 1

.375

Η—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—\—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—I .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3m

ι

FIGURE 65. Tympanon blocks T p j , Tp8.

io

M A J O R

6

TABLE

12a. Dimensions of tympanon blocks

I Number NECG SWCG TP ι/TP 9 TP 2 TP 3 TP4 TP 5 TP6 TP7 TPS TP10 TP11 TP12 TP13

TABLE

REPAIRS

8 Thickness

2 Location

3 Façade

4 Side

5 Length

6 Height Lower

7 Height Upper

K/14 N/8 P/i2;windmill O-P/12 O-P/12 P/13 M/8 N-M/8 N/8 L/8 P/14

E W E E E E W

S S S S S Ν Ν S S Ν S Ν Ν S

°·3 5 5 0.255 C.O-92 0.928 0.925

0 0 c.0.87 0.645 1.104 1.105 0.848 1.035 0.809 1.077 0.420 0.876 0.659 >0.098

>0.09 >0.045 >0.995 0.873 1.330 1.330 1.077 1.272 1.034 1.295 0.648 >0.975 0.879 >0.12

7 Metope Unit

8 Residual Lifting Sockets

9 Residual Clamp

10 Residual Nail Holes

>0.638 >0.668 >0.641 >0.750 0.665 0.857 >0.712 0.895

left side (bed) left side (bed) left side (bed) left side (bed) left (bed); right (top) left side (bed) right side (bed) left (top); right (bed) right side (side)

left side left side no left side left; right left side right side left side no

np

none

façade or flank flank flank façade, E2S flank façade flank façade façade or flank

left side (bed)

left side

none

façade or flank

left; right

left; right

none

façade

W w w E E E E?

Q/15 M/i 6 surface

0.895 0.927 0.944 0.855 0.875 0.886 >0.615 0.889 >0.19

c.0.20 c.0.36 0.385 0.390 0.370 0.370 0-393 0.345-0.390 0.371 0.324 0.205 0.389 0.366 >0.185

9 Slope 0.2535 np 0.2489 0.2478 0.2486 0.2514 0.245 9 0.2510 0.2632 0.2478 0.2573 0.2507 0.2475 c.0.25

12b. Original geison features preserved on t y m p a n o n blocks 2 Left Mutule

I

Number NECG SWCG TP1/TP9 TP2 TP 3 TP4 TP 5 TP6 TP7 TP 8 TP10 TP11 TP12

0.394 0.206

4 Centre Mutule

3 Left Via

>0.076 np

0.168 0.171 0.169 >0.132 0.165 0.202 >0.19 0.195 np

0.181

0.200

0-375

0.22

0.152 0.250

0.380 0-355 0.520 0-393 0.342 0.458 0.347 0.506 np

5 Right Via

>0.09 >0.142 0.171 0.225 0.158 0.197 0.175 0.194 np

6 Right Mutule

0.370 >0.447 >0.161 >0.035 0.273 0.204 np

>0.39

I

2 none I

none none I?

II

Original Position

T1 P 1 1Τ3 1

B20

0.396

(0.88)

the horizontal geison. Its southern joint face w o u l d

end

The raking geison blocks were then set sequentially toward

c.0.05 m. north of the angled platform on the corner block.

the centre of the pediment, using the lifting system indicative of

Originally,

and

the northern and horizontal geison, with a U-shaped channel

was fixed w i t h a d o w e l at hole 'a'; an intermediate member,

the

block

abutted

on the side adjacent to the previously laid block and a socket on

probably of w o o d , filled the gap (Fig. 44). A dowel anchored

the free side. 1 1 H o w e v e r , because the blocks are quite thin, the

in the horizontal geison block H G i slotted into the groove

inner boss of the U-shaped channel was in great danger of

cut in the bed of

splitting off, which, in fact, happened in at least t w o instances

RG5,

the

angled

platform

to help the corner block

the pressure of the other raking geison blocks. 1 0 O n

bear the

( R G 2 and R G 4 ) . O n l y one of the fragments ( R G i 1) has a fully

southwest corner, a shallow socket cut into the top surface

preserved width, and its narrowness, 0.525 m., indicates that it

may also have held a large w o o d e n d o w e l to secure the first

was intended to fill a small gap in the course near the apex

block of the raking geison.

block. O n the upper surface of the western t y m p a n o n blocks,

10

For a similar construction, the Temple of Artemis at Korkyra: Schleif in

Korkyra I, 1940, fig. 4$; Temple of Zeus at Olympia: Olympia II, 8, fig. 2.

11 On the basis offind-spot,we can assign RGi, RG2, and RG5 to the eastern, and RG3 to the western side. By the placement of the socket, it is clear that RGi and RG2 belong to the southeast side, while RG4 and RGi 2 belong to the northeast side.

M A J O R R E P A I R S ΙΟΙ

RG4

.

«

Ä

^

J

" Έ I r .335

RG5

-130 Τ

ir

μ 051

RG3

.125 } -L

I

.145 I hi .65

H—I—I

Ο

1m

RG3 H—I—!—h 5

l· I

1—I—h .5

RG4

EL

RG2

RG5 10

H—I—I—I—Ι-

20cm

FIGURE 66. Raking geison blocks RG4, RG3, RG5, and profiles of the hawksbeak on the soffit.

.15 H .565

1

io

6

TABLE

MAJOR

13. Dimensions of raking geison blocks

1

2

3

4

5

6

Number

Location

Side

Length

Height Bed

RG ι RG2 RG3 RG4 RG5 RG6 RG7 RG8 RG9 RG10 RGI ι RG12

O/12 O/13 N/8 Istanbul O/10—11 M/9 windmill windmill M-N/7 N/8 0/12-13 windmill

E E W ?

W W E ?

RGI

O/LI

E

>0.89 >0.895 >1.06 >1.12 >0.88 >0.34 >0.42 >0.58 >0.34 >0.17 0.525 >0.32 >0.51

0.240 0.243 0.241 0.240 0.240 0.242 NP np 0.240 >0.11 np 0.241 np

3

REPAIRS

E } } }

7 Height Soffit

Height Corona np 0.232 np 0.235 np np >0.22 >0.215 np np 0.245-0.252 np 0.235

8 Thickness

0.150 0.152 0.150-0.154 0.151 0.152 0.152 np np np 0.181 np 0.158

9 Thickness Bed 0.605 0.581 0.505 >0. 44 0.565 np np np np np np np np

>0.92 0.998 >0.565 >0.855 >0.63 >0.22 >0.40 >0.40 >0.46 >0.16 >0.42 >0.42 >0.37

10 Projection np 0.41/np np 0.42/np np np np np np np >0.382/0.421 np >0.37/0.418

the spacings of pry marks used for shifting the raking geison

would have provided additional support. 1 3 T h e available resting

into p o s i t i o n — c.1.15 m. between T p 6 and T p 7 and c.1.05 m.

surface, c.o. 16 m., is narrow for a full backing course, and the

between T p j and T p 8 — g i v e a reliable approximation of the

surface of the horizontal geison in this region is rough. Alterna-

larger-sized blocks used in the course. Between 12 and 14

tively, a w o o d e n prop could be set behind the tympanon beneath

blocks w o u l d have been needed to complete each side. T h e

each w o o d e n beam. I favour this latter solution, which w o u l d

apex block itself m a y be represented by the small fragments

explain both the rough surface of the horizontal geison behind

R G 7 and R G 8 , w h i c h have large d o w e l holes that may have

the extant tympanon blocks, and the nail hole cut into the back

been used to secure the central akroterion. T h e top surface of

surface of T p 4 (Fig. 64).

the raking geison is smoothly dressed to receive the raking

In addition to the main timbers, the ends of the building had

sima. T w o different kinds of nail hole for securing the raking

subsidiary purlins set into shallower closed sockets cut in the

sima, one round, the other rectangular, correspond to the

raking geison, c.0.325 to 0.335

round and rectangular nail holes on the flank geison. Like the

non ( R G 4 , Fig. 66; F o l d - o u t Fig. 14). 1 4 T h e closed sockets

nail holes on the flank geison, one set of the raking geison nail

s h o w that the subsidiary timbers were set c.o. 13 m. b e l o w the

holes represents the second archaic roof, and the other set

top of the raking geison, were thinner than the major purlins

belongs to the Hellenistic roof.

m

· f r o m the face of the tympa-

(c.o. 17 m. wide), and rested partly on the upper surface of the tympanon but mostly on a backer or prop. Their total height was surely greater than the 0.11 m. high cutting. T h e surviving

REPAIRS TO THE Woodwork

and

ROOF

structure

raking geison blocks are too fragmentary to determine the spacing of the subsidiary purlins; the preserved length of R G 3 suggests the spacing w o u l d have been at least c.o.6 5 m. The distance along the top of the t y m p a n o n f r o m the centre of

A t both ends of the temple, three primary timbers—the ridge

the beam cutting on T p 2 to the apex of the

beam and t w o major purlins—supported the roof over the

c.3.75 m., w o u l d allow for:

pteroma. A n open socket cut into tympanon block Tp2 indicates that the t w o major purlins were aligned over the cella wall and were set in a tilted position (Fig. 63; Fold-out Figs. 12, 14). 12 The socket, c.0.30 m. wide but only 0.145

m-

high, must have been

completed on the raking geison. It is also rather shallow (0.14 m. deep) to support the purlin alone; smaller blocks or w o o d e n props, which in all probability backed the tympanon wall,

12 Tilted purlins arc common in Gaggera-style roofs and are also found in, e.g., the Parthenon and the Temple of Poseidon at Sounion: Hodge i960, p. 48.

ι subsidiary 2 " 3 " 4 "

purlin purlins purlins purlins

tympanon,

axially spaced at c. 1.875 m. " 1.25 m. " 0.94 m. " 0.75 m.

13 Compare equally shallow sockets listed in Hodge i960, p. 46, table 2, for the Athenian Treasury, Delphi (0.13 m. deep), Athena Temple, Poseidonia (0.09 m. deep), and the Kardaki Temple, Korkyra (0.115 m. deep). Later, note also shallow sockets in the tympanon of the Temple of Zeus at Labraunda: Hellström and Thieme 1982, p. 36, fig. 42, pi. 21.5. 14 Although not identical, compare the combination of large and small purlins in the Temple of Concord, Akragas: Hodge i960, pp. 25-32, fig. 9.

M A J O R

BLJAIKB

J23

Roof

Since the subsidiary purlins were set c.0.13 m. below the top surface of the raking geison, light c o m m o n rafters or semi-continuous planking of about that thickness, running north-south, must have rested on top of the purlins at each end of the building. T h e rafters or planking continued along the flank, with the ends resting on the top surface of the geison block. O n the southern side, w h i c h represents the first roof, the rafter ends abutted the end of the angled platform, c.0.50-0.55

m.

f r o m the face of the corona; some were bedded into shallow cuttings

in

this

platform,

c.0.25 m.

wide

and

beginning

c.0.35 m. f r o m the face of the corona (for example, on L G 2 , L G 7 , L G 8 , or L G 2 5 ) . T h e rafters were probably secured with a w o o d e n roof rail running along the angled platform. T h e northern side demonstrates a slightly different construction f o r the second roof. T h e rafters ran directly on to the flat top surface of these geison blocks, w i t h o u t any apparent means of bracing. 1 5 A l t h o u g h m a n y of the blocks have a dressedd o w n area at the back of the upper surface, it is set too far back to act as an anchor f o r the rafters. T h e uniform level of the dressed-down surface is consistent enough, however, to suggest it had a purpose related to the roofing system. Possibly it held wedge-shaped w o o d e n chocks that w o u l d help support and secure the rafter (Fold-out Fig. 14). There are very f e w preserved rafter cuttings, but most of them are aligned with the round nail holes that approximately mark the joins between tiles. 1 6 T h e lack of deep cuttings on the geison might suggest that semi-continuous planking acted in place of rafters. 1 7 This construction w o u l d provide greater contact w i t h the pan tiles and eliminate the need for battens. T h e maximum available free space f o r secondary

timbers,

c.0.13 m., argues against including battens on top of the planking or rafters. 1 8 T h e design of the roof over the pronaos and cella most likely was a simple prop and lintel system supporting the ridge beam and purlins, w h i c h carried the same arrangement of rafters described above. T h e purlins w o u l d be straightened at the

tiling and

sculpture

A l l of the decorated roof elements in both terracotta and tuff were presented in the description of the original building, where it w a s argued that the tuff elements, including the lion's head waterspout, the sphinx akroterion, and the central volute akroterion, likely belong to the repaired roof. T h e terracotta sima may also belong to the repair. The tiles themselves are very fragmentary and it is impossible to k n o w w h i c h may have belonged to the repaired roof. T h e best evidence for the tiling of the repaired roofs remains the nail holes cut in the geison. T h e square nail holes described above belong t o the original building. T h e other sets of nail h o l e s — o n e round, the other rectangular—represent t w o additional roof systems, spaced at slightly different intervals. We cannot prove w h i c h set represents the second archaic roof, but the round nail holes are more regularly placed than the rectangular ones and m a y be more consistent with the full rebuilding rather than the Hellenistic renovation. Roof fixed with round nails T h e small round nail holes, c.0.015 m. in diameter, are set 0.050.09 m. f r o m the face of the corona (c.0.10-0.13 m. from the end of the eaves tile). Occasionally, t w o round holes appear quite close to each other (Fold-out Fig. 11), but these are not for pairs of dowels to secure the antefix on either side of the join between the eaves tiles, as C l a r k e suggested. 2 0 T h e pairs are too infrequent and often t o o close together. Instead, the second

hole

represents

an isolated

repair or

adjustment.

T h e round holes received nails securing the corner of the flat pan tiles, w h i c h were spaced an average of 0.687

m

· apart. The

roof was thus composed of 43 interior columns of tiles, c.0.687 m. wide, with sima tiles c.0.745 m. l o n g (measured east to west). This dimension is w i d e but not unprecedented. 2 1 Clearly, under this system, the tiling was not coordinated with

cross wall so that they could be supported b y normal props, w h i c h were set on the cross beams of the ceiling. T h e internal span of the cella of the temple (6.620 to 6.642 m.) is well within the limits of this type of construction. 1 9 15 Compare flat and roughly dressed top surface of geison on Athenian Treasury, and related, but not as rough, geison from a second Doric building at Delphi, and Treasury I (Sikyonian) at Olympia: Hodge i960, p. 82, fig. 18. 16 Block LG25 is the exception; its cutting probably belongs to the first roof. 17 Compare roof tree for the second Temple of Aphaia at Acgina proposed in Bankel 1991, pp. 14-16; Bankel 1993, p- 103, pis. 78, 81. 18 Because the rafters would be fairly thin even at 0.13 m., it also seems unlikely that battens were inset in them, as W. B. Dinsmoor Jr. restores in the roofs of the Hephaisteion and the Temple of Poseidon at Sounion, Dinsmoor Jr. 1974, ill. 6; Dinsmoor Jr. 1976, ill. 4. Hodge (i960, pp. 70-2) restores only rafters in buildings with a similarly available space, i.e., second Temple of Aphaia (ο. 13 m.), treasury of Cyrene at Delphi (0.10 m.), Sikyonian treasury at Olympia (c.0.13 m.), Kardaki temple on Korkyra (0.125 m-)> Temple of Nemesis at Rhamnous (c.0.09 m). Cf. Wurster 1971, pp. 70-2, for alternative reconstructions of the roof of the second Temple of Aphaia and the Temple of Apollo on Aegina that include rafters and battens. 19 Hodge i960, p. 39, table 1; Coulton 1977, p. 157.

20 Clarke's design for the roof system (Clarke 1898, pp. 105-6, 129-32, figs. 17, 30; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 157 fig. 5) must be discarded. He based his analysis on the southeast corner geison only, and did not identify any square nail holes. He thought pairs of round dowels (RR' and S,S') secured antefixes on either side of the joint between pan tiles; their spacing would indicate the approximate width of the pan tiles as 0.635 m ·· conveniently the equivalent of two Assian feet. However, his S' is not evident and the area near R is now broken. No other geison block has nail holes approximating this sequence. Further, Clarke believed the rectangular dowels (Q,Q') secured an ornamental eaves tile that terminated in the tile groove and extended for one and one-half tile spacings. The disposition of the rectangular dowel holes on other geison blocks disproves this theory. Clarke restored the last pan tile to cover the ornamental tile, with the antefix dowclled through both of these tiles (a thickness of c.0.105 m.) onto the lateral geison. The holes in the geison itself are c.0.07 m. deep; the nails, therefore, would have to be about 0.20 m. long. Clarke suggested that the dimensions of the tiles were based on the Corinthian pan tile set out in the tile standard found in the lower city (0.608 m. wide), but the spacing of the nail holes is in fact greater. None of the fragments of pan tile from the akropolis match the dimensions given on the standard. 21 Compare tiles from the Rhoikos temple at Samos: Buschor 1930, pp. 87-8, figs. 41-2; tiles from the Greek Bath and Prytaneion at Olympia: Heiden 1995, pp. 37-42.

io 6

MAJOR

the D o r i c frieze, w h i c h w o u l d have required tiles spaced 0.6125

REPAIRS

holes c.0.39 f r o m the nosing, but w e do not k n o w if they

· apart. T h e shift in the position of the nail hole

belong to the west side, and in any case, the position of the

f r o m the west corner of the tile on the eastern half of the

holes may have been influenced by the position of the akroter-

m

building to the east corner of the tile on the western half

ion. B l o c k R G 3 has a cluster of three nail holes between 0.65

shows that the roofers w o r k e d f r o m the ends of the building

and 0.845

toward the centre. T h e roof w o u l d require columns of between

angular d o w e l holes on R G 2 , 0.54 m., suggests an approximate

10 to 13 pan tiles to reach the ridge.

m

· from the nosing. T h e interval between the rect-

exposed length for each sima tile (measured north to south). 2 4

T h e appearance of both round and rectangular dowel holes

The position of the dowel hole that held the second sima tile

on the raking geison documents the separate sets of raking

in place on R G 5 , c.1.07 m. from the nosing of the hawksbeak on

simas that the second archaic and Hellenistic roofs required.

the southern flank, confirms the approximate exposed length.

T h e round holes are f o u n d 0.07-0.12 m. f r o m the face of the

These tiles, therefore, may have been roughly square in shape.

corona. Unfortunately, they do not survive well enough to be

The rectangular dowels set in these holes w o u l d have been

able to determine the length of the sima tiles (measured north to

too small and too irregularly spaced to have secured both edges

south). T w o fragments of raking geison ( R G 7 and R G 8 ) also

of adjacent pan tiles, in the manner of the larger rectangular

have much larger rectangular dowels, w h i c h must have been

dowels f o u n d in a similar position o n the Temple of Aphaia at

related to securing the base of the central akroterion. T h e frag-

Aegina. T h e y could, however, have functioned in conjunction

mentary tuff volute may well have belonged to this archaic roof.

with the tile groove in order to help anchor the pan tile (Fold-

Fold-out Figures 17 and 18 offer a reconstruction of the basic

out Fig. 11).

design of this roof using tiles c.0.687 m. wide b y 0.85 m. long. Roof fixed with rectangular nails

The repaired

building

T h e rectangular nail holes (roughly 0.01 m. wide by 0.02 m.

The effort invested in repairing the temple was enormous. The

long) present a somewhat more complicated configuration.

cost of material was, as before, negligible, but the significant

T h e y are set close to the tile groove, c.0.14 m. f r o m the face

investment of energy in labour and c o m m u n i t y commitment

of the corona. 2 2 O n the eastern half of the building, their

underscores the importance of the temple to the people of

spacing is fairly close to the round holes, running roughly

Assos. It is quite possible that some of the

0.685

(masons, sculptors, designer, architect?) w h o w o r k e d on the

m

· apart. O v e r the western f o u r intercolumniations, the

participants

spacing changes to c.0.674 m., so that the t w o types of hole

original building were also involved in its repair. Clearly, the

gradually become further apart.2j> T h e rectangular holes on the

Assians w e r e satisfied with the several design decisions they

northern side are set 0.07-0.15 m. to the west of those on the

originally reached, because they made o n l y a f e w stylistic

southern side.

changes in the repair. T h e y kept sculpture on the epistyle;

T h e shift in spacing suggests that over the western four

they maintained the decorated metopes. T h e y retained mutules

intercolumniations the roofers used a slightly narrower tile,

of alternating length and c h u n k y proportion. T h e profile of the

or that they set the tiles rather more tightly than the crew

geison c r o w n - m o u l d i n g

w o r k i n g f r o m the east. T h e roof w o u l d have had 44 rather

remained the same. T h e capitals of G r o u p A were given a

differs only

marginally; the

drip

than the original 43 columns of tiles. T h e peculiar result, h o w -

slightly steeper profile but the basic shape was not altered.

ever, is that the sima tiles at either end of the building w o u l d

The new triglyphs on the flanks n o w matched in w i d t h those

not have been the same length (c.0.50 m. on the west compared

of the façades. T h e soffit moulding on the raking geison may

to c.0.65 m. on the east). T h e positions of the rectangular nail

have been n e w l y added. We cannot k n o w h o w the extant tuff

holes on the raking geison are too erratic to shed light on this

roof elements relate to the original roof sculptures, but here the

problem. O n blocks belonging to the eastern side, several holes

designer had more freedom, because everything had to be

appearing c.o. 57-0.67 m. from the nosing of the hawksbeak

replaced. T h e appearance of the temple in its repaired state is

could secure the sima tile. T h e t w o fragments with larger

presented in F o l d - o u t Figs. 13-18; the original w o u l d have had

dowels to secure the akroterion ( R G 7 and R G 8 ) have nail

much the same character. 25

22 Range from 0.11-0.17 m., with one exceptional block, LG12, on which they are only 0.08 and 0.05 m. from the face of the corona. 23 The change may have begun on the southern side over the fifth intercolumniation.

24 Clarke (1898, p. 135) also measured one interval at 0.53 m., but we do not know if it was for the round or rectangular holes, or a combination of the two. 25 The one anachronistic feature is the antefix, which surely belongs to the original design. No other was found.

Hellenistic Renovations O n c e rebuilt, the temple was not significantly altered. We can

akropolis, the third roof was Hellenistic. T h e

trace a f e w renovations to the Hellenistic period, including the

greyish-brown

new mosaic floor installed in the front section of the cella. T h e

coarse reddish aggregate of the raking sima and antefix dis-

temple probably received its third roof at this time.

cussed in conjunction with the archaic building. 4 T h e eaves tile

aggregate is completely

fine-grained

different from the

bears, in relief decoration, a running, crossing meander enclosThe Hellenistic

cella

ing a starburst pattern (Pi. 59; Fig. 46c). 3 A l t h o u g h the crossing

floor

W h e n Clarke and Bacon uncovered the front section of the cella floor, it was partially covered b y a mosaic composed chiefly of black and white marble tesserae of irregular shape (Fig. 5).1 Its purely geometric design consisted of t w o black bands framing a black w a v e pattern that formed the border f o r the main field, w h i c h w a s decorated with alternating rows of black-framed

white

rhomboids

and

white-framed

black

rhomboids. Clarke and Bacon found y e l l o w marble tesserae in the area, as well as some made of terracotta; these may have formed a border marking off the rhomboid

field.

meander motif appears in other media during the Archaic period and on painted architectural terracottas, mostly from the second half of the fifth and fourth centuries, 6 the eaves tile decorated w i t h a crossing meander in relief, w h i c h was especially popular in Asia M i n o r and the Black Sea region, generally dates to after the mid-fourth century. 7 T h e composition has close parallels with patterns f o u n d on Hellenistic eaves tiles f r o m the l o w e r city at Assos. s T h e fragmentary eaves tile from the akropolis surely belongs to the Hellenistic corpus.

Today, Against

patches of the cement into w h i c h the mosaic was set is all that remains near the eastern end of the cella (Fold-out Fig. 1). T h e material that Clarke and Bacon f o u n d sealed beneath the cement of the mosaic f l o o r — i n c l u d i n g glazed sherds, part of a moulded vessel representing a tragic mask, the handle of what they called a delicately painted vessel, a back-glazed roof tile,

the stone ceiling proposed

by

Clarke

T h e fact that the temple had a w o o d e n ceiling in the Archaic period does not exclude the possibility that a stone ceiling could have been installed at the same time the f l o o r of the cella was refurbished and the roof replaced. 9 E v e n so, the

and a coin of Gargara f r o m the first half of the fourth century BC—led them to associate the renovation with the mie of Hermias, tyrant of Assos during the mid-fourth century BC.2 In fact, the evidence only establishes a terminus post quem. A c c o r d i n g to Dieter Salzmann, a date later in the Hellenistic period, around the second half of the third century, is stylistically more consistent with other examples of this sort of mosaic design. 3

The third

roof, using the eaves tile decorated meander

in

with

relief

T h e nail holes in the geison attest to at least three roofs for the temple. Judging f r o m an eaves tile C l a r k e found on the 1 Clarke 1882, p. 83; Clarke 1898, pp. 69-73, figs. 4, 9; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, pp. 139, 164, fig. 1. According to the excavators, the tesserae were around 0.005-0.015 wide, 0.01-0.035 long, and about 0.05 m. deep. 2 Clarke 1898, pp. 72-3. Only the coin survives; Boston, Museum of Fine Arts no. A.C.64. The fifth-century date suggested for the mosaic elsewhere is based on the mistaken assumption that it was made of pebbles, cf. Blake 1930, p. 68, and Ovadiah 1980, pp. 30-1. 3 Salzmann 1982, pp. 67, 120-1, no. 150, pi. 84.3-4. Note two similar mosaics found at Ilion: Salzmann 1982, p. 68, 126, no. 172, pi. 84.2; Rose 1995, pp. 94—5.

The grayish-brown designation corresponds to Munsell 10YR 5/1-2. Boston, Museum of Fine Arts inv. P4258; find-spot on the akropolis not recorded. Clarke 1898, p. 129, fig. 26; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 167, fig. ι. Sartiaux 1915, p. 84, fig. 33, offers a rather unusual reconstruction of this fragment. 6 Sec Klazomenian sarcophagi for the appearance of the crossed meander on textiles: R. M. Cook 1981, p. 85 and nn. 23-6. For West Greek revetments: Van Buren 1923, figs. 8-9, 11-14,16, 18, 28, 40-1. For the crossing meander enclosing a checkerboard on a late sixth-century geison from Delphi, see LeRoy, FdD II. 12, 1967, G16, pp. 86-7, pi. 29. Patterns of this type were not unknown in thefirsthalf of the fifth century, e.g., an eaves tile from the Athenian Akropolis (Buschor 1929, eaves tile X) or a lateral sima from Athens and one from Halae (Van Buren 1926, pp. 93-4, fig. 40). For mainland tiles painted with the crossing meander from the second half of the fifth century and the fourth century, see LcRoy, FdD II. 12,1967, S33, S58, S63, S71, R19, S73, S34, S38, S48, S74, S90, S93, S94, R25, S51, and S53. See also Buschor 1929, Sima XXIII, XXIV, eaves tiles XXIV, XXV, XXVIb, and XXVII. For a marble example of the pattern from the Cyciades, sec the cella wall of the Temple of Apollo Pythios on Paros, dated to the first half of the fourth century: Schüller 1982, p. 261, no. M137, fig. 12. 4

5

7 Äkerström 1966, pl. 1.7 (Olbia); pl. 1.4 (Chersonesos); pl. 17.4-5 (fragments now in Izmir); Zimmermann 1994, pp. 221-51, pl. 79 (Histria); Kästner 1994, pp. 254-5, pl. 80b,c (Pergamon). 8 Cf. Äkerström 1966, pp. 15, 19, pl. 7.1, 3; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey, p. 105, fig. 3. Assigned by the excavators to belong to the South Stoa. 9 Sartiaux 1915, pp. 23, 141, raises the possibility but does not pursue it. For Clarke's argument, Clarke 1898, pp. 111-28.

126

HELLENISTIC

evidence for a stone ceiling is not compelling. The three different sizes of coffered block assigned to the ceiling by Clarke come from four disparate sources: (i) five from a structure southeast of the bouleuterion; (2) seven in a portico west of the South Stoa; (3) two built into the wall of the mosque on the northern promontory of the akropolis; and, (4) small fragments of two beams apparently found near the temple, although the excavators do not state their exact context. Clarke never identified the requisite transverse ceiling beams, and no block answering that description exists on the akropolis today. N o n e of the fragments supposedly found on the akropolis have come to light in more recent explorations. The fact that two of the coffered blocks were built into the wall of the mosque does not prove they came from the akropolis, for

RENOVATIONS

andesite frieze blocks surely belonging to monuments in the lower city were also built into the mosque. 1 0 The other coffered blocks probably belong to the ancient buildings near which they were found. The familiar shift-holes found on the smaller sizes of block reflect the continued use of the technique by the local school of masons. The lewis-holes found on the largest coffered blocks do not appear on any of the blocks from the temple, but such cuttings appear frequently on the blocks from structures in the lower city. While it is likely that the temple required additional repairs over the next several centuries, we cannot track them today. e.g., a monument in the agora; cf. Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewcy 1902-21, pp. 169-70.

7

The Sculpture imagery and position at a height of c.4.5-5.3

INTRODUCTION

m. above eye level,

w o u l d have been scarcely less so. 3 Plates 88, 99, and 105b, taken T h e sculptural assembly of the temple at A s s o s is unquestion-

w h e n the reliefs were mounted high o n the wall in the Louvre,

ably ambitious. There is no precedent f o r combining decorated

give some impression of h o w the reliefs w o u l d have been seen

metopes with a series of sculptured epistyle blocks running

f r o m below.

across both ends, partly d o w n the flanks, and possibly across

T h e choice of imagery matched the importance of its place-

the pronaos of a D o r i c temple, and only one small Hellenistic

ment. The epistyle includes t w o blocks w i t h pairs of reclining

derivative. 1 Such an arrangement, however, appears extraordin-

sphinxes w i t h their paws set heraldically upon an A e o l i c floral

ary in hindsight. A t this time in western Anatolia, the design is

( A i and A2); t w o blocks with confronted bulls l o c k i n g horns

remarkable not so much f o r its profusion of sculptural orna-

( A 1 4 - A 1 5 ) ; five blocks of lions bringing d o w n various herbi-

ment as f o r its application to the Doric order. Having chosen

vores, including a deer, a doe, a bull, and a boar ( A 9 - A 1 3 ) ; four

the D o r i c order, the designer and patrons must have judged the

blocks associated with the story of Herakles routing centaurs

traditional metopal spaces insufficient f o r the desired sculp-

(A5-A8/48); one block of Herakles wrestling Triton (A3); and,

tural decoration. T h e y chose not to pursue decorated pedi-

one block s h o w i n g a symposion (A4). The metopes display a

ments, perhaps because of the challenges of w o r k i n g the

similar range of monsters, animals, and humans, including

gritty, friable andesite, perhaps because of the awkwardness

scenes of confronted sphinxes (M3), a galloping centaur (M7),

of the triangular field, or perhaps because of the preference

a grazing boar (M4), Europe on the Zeus Bull (M5), quarrelling

for horizontality demonstrated in the building's architectural

heroes (M8), an equestrian (M9), a pair of runners (M2), one

aspects. Nevertheless, some of the subjects, as well as the

figure chasing another ( M i ) , and a confrontation ( M i o ) . The

emphasis o n both ends of the building, seem a direct response

many surviving sculptured blocks allow for a m o r e precise

to sculptured D o r i c pediments elsewhere. Certain other as-

sense of the iconographie programme of this m o n u m e n t than

pects of the composition reflect ideas more typical of Ionic

for almost any other archaic East G r e e k building. T h e ensem-

frieze decoration, e.g., repetitious imagery or heraldic sphinxes.

ble of fabulous creatures, animal combats, m y t h o l o g i c a l scenes,

It is tempting to think the designers consciously sought to fuse

and less specific depictions of heroic or human activity appears

the t w o forms on the largest, most immediately visible, u n o b -

at first to be little more than an arbitrary juxtaposition of

structed surface that ordered architecture had to o f f e r — t h e

generally popular but largely unrelated scenes. Such an evalu-

epistyle. In any case, they did not feel constrained b y an

ation is not entirely unfair. L a c k i n g a regional iconographie

architectural rule barring decoration f r o m such

tradition, the designers of the temple at Assos w e r e obliged to

structural

elements. T h e aesthetic effect of the tiered decoration

in

turn elsewhere for inspiration. F r o m their r o c k y promontory

the entablature is entirely consistent w i t h early and high

at the southern tip of the Troad, they were well positioned to

archaic

look southward to Ionia, eastward to Anatolia, and westward

smaller

arts,

where

decorating

in

superposed

registers with reduplicated motifs is the norm rather than the

across the Aegean. A n d surely they were not the first commu-

exception. T h e Sardis shrine monument provides a strong in-

nity to w a n t it all. In the temple, w e witness a striking attempt

dication that similar aesthetics were at w o r k elsewhere in a

to take advantage of diverse iconographie trajectories: emblem-

quasi-architectural context. 2 A t roughly 3.5-4.5 m. above the

atic, confrontational, and narrative scenes connected with the

viewer's eyes, the sculpture on the epistyle w o u l d have been eminently legible, and the metopes, despite their smaller-scale 1 The Temple of Dionysos Bresaios on Lesbos: Koldewey 1890, pp. 63-4, pi. 28; Webb 1996, p. 152. The two other instances, the Temple of Apollo at Didyma and the Nereid Monument at Xanthos, are both Ionic. The sculptured frieze that H. Schliemann attributed to the Temple of Athena at Ilion does not belong; cf. Schliemann 1884, pp. 199-207, figs. 113-15. 2 Hanfmann and Ramage 1978, pp. 43-51, no. 7, figs. 20-50; Ridgway 1993, p. 386.

3 The approximation assumes a viewer standing at the level of the euthynteria with an eye height of c.1.50 m. Eye level to the bottom of the epistyle, c.5.16-1.50 = 3.66 m. Eye level to the top of the epistyle, c.5.98-1.5 = 4.48 m. Eye level to the top of the frieze; c.6.76-1.5 = 5.26 m. As a point of comparison, the frieze of the Siphnian Treasury would be between c.3.5 and 4.10 m. above eye level, and it was considerably shorter (0.64 m., compared to 0.82 m. high). The metopes of the Athenian Treasury at Delphi would be roughly 4.20-4.90 m. above eye level, and they, too, were considerably smaller. The metopes of the Hephaisteion are about the same size, but placed at a higher elevation, c.6.10-6.90 m. above eye level.

THE

128

SCULPTURE

Doric order and heraldic or processional compositions characteristically associated with Ionic frieze decoration. The scene of Herakles wrestling Triton appears to have been translated from the pediments of the Athenian Akropolis; the symposiasts seem to have been invited from Ionian sanctuaries. The heraldic sphinxes look as if they migrated from East Greek altars, while the battling bulls—the most ancient of all imagery on the building—hail from even further afield—Lydia, Phrygia, and Cyprus. The combination and deployment of monsters, animals, and animal fights has a strong Anatolian ring to it. The dominant impression is hybrid, as if the Assians, having achieved critical mass, wanted to become contenders in the larger dialogue of monumental temple building by knitting together—and transforming—the several contemporary (and older) trends they observed across the eastern Mediterranean. Did the patrons choose the images for their discrete value alone, or were the scenes (or at least some of them) meant to w o r k together? Certainly, the bold imagery can be taken in at a glance, but the people of Assos had a lifetime to contemplate the sculpture, and there was little competition for their attention. The sculpture on the temple was the dominant visual stimulus local viewers, at any rate, were likely to experience. Brunhilde S. Ridgway, in discussing key issues concerning the premise of archaic sculptural programmes, leans toward the conclusion that the elements of the sculptural decoration were meant to be read independently. 4 While not entirely disagreeing with her, I argue that the designers and many viewers had time to consider the connections between the images, both in the planning stages and in the centuries that followed the temple's construction. I therefore seek an interpretation that does not isolate individual motifs but instead makes sense of their combination in a meaningful w a y within a sacred context. We encounter difficulties, however, when we attempt to apply the traditionally defined concept of programme—the subordination of individual themes to an overarching and unifying idea— to the temple at Assos and, in fact, to archaic architectural sculpture in general. Early and high archaic ensembles of architectural sculpture on sacred buildings bear all the promise of Classical designs and were surely no less central to the societies from which they emerge. Nevertheless, almost all avoid the more overt programmatic unity found in such buildings as the Parthenon or the Temple of Zeus at Olympia, favouring instead paratactic assemblages of animals, monsters, and heroes. For the high archaic monuments, coherence of organization and comprehensive meaning must be defined differently. Archaic iconography was put to hard and versatile work, with images having not only their literal meaning, but also the potential for cultic, emblematic, apotropaic, allegorical, or symbolic significance. Disparate scenes might gain meaning in association with others on a given monument; context and scale likewise significantly affect meaning. Scholars looking for 4

Ridgway 1999, pp. 82-94.

programmatic coherence in early and high archaic temples (those built prior to 530-525 BC) have examined connections with the cult and honoured deity, with political or historical circumstances, and with regional or ethnic affiliations, finding layers of elegant and often not mutually exclusive meaning. These approaches provide valuable insight into the choice of individual motifs but often fall short of a comprehensive explanation of programme. Other monuments, especially those influencing the choice of particular scenes at Assos, would be of value in helping us to understand some of the guiding principles that shaped the programme at Assos. Ironically, the 25 surviving sculptured blocks from the temple at Assos allow for a more precise sense of its iconographie ensemble than for any other archaic East Greek building. O n l y scraps remain of the huge decorative programmes (mainly friezes) in Ionian sanctuaries. O u r understanding of the temple at Assos is necessarily the less for that. But the combination of subjects on the temple does reflect the better preserved early to mid-sixth-century Doric pediments that also juxtapose non-narrative, confrontational animal imagery and mythological scenes with abrupt changes of scale and sudden transitions; we think first of the Temple of Artemis on Korkyra or the poros pediments from the Athenian A k r o p o lis. 5 Both types of scene were essential components of the sculptural ensemble, with the non-narrative power imagery taking centre stage. O n l y in the late Archaic period do the gods displace the great animal or monster representations in the centre of the temple pediment (e.g., on the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi or the Alkmeonid Temple of A p o l l o at Delphi, and on at least one side of the O l d Temple of Athena in Athens). But it is not until the turn of the century that pedimental animals are largely abandoned in favour of a fully mythological composition and an overall thematic unity that would ultimately become the Classical aim (e.g., Temple of Aphaia at Aegina or the Athenian Treasury at Delphi). In other words, in high archaic pedimental design, the well attested combination of power-imagery (either natural or monstrous) and mythological scenes strongly suggests that the idea of programme was rooted in their combination, and that the sculptures gained meaning in their association and in relation to the deity. In fact, archaic iconographie programmes were composed of a series of visual axioms articulating the relationship of humans to each other, the supernatural, and the divine. The goal was not to express a single idea but to interweave the key themes of natural and supernatural power with exemplars of heroic and human values, mainly shown through the medium of myth or aristocratic activities, all under the authority and in the service of the presiding deity. Each image builds toward

3 Korkyra: Korkyra II; Benson 1967, pp. 48-60. Athenian poros pediments: Brouskari 1974, pp. 25-9, 33-7, 39-40, 42-3,46-7. nos. 2-4, 9, 35-41,52, 6508, figs. 14, 25, 27-9, 44, 46-7, 54-6, 74, 80-1; Beyer 1974, pp. 639-56, fig. 10; Knell 1990, pp. 1-17; Ridgway 1993, pp. 276-87; Korres 1994a, p. 21; Korres 1997a.

THE

SCULPTURE

I29

that end. T h e choice of each image, therefore, may not have

metopes has been identified satisfactorily, and none is among

arisen f r o m the same particular motivation, nor may the asso-

the readily recognized compositions that appear on other ar-

ciations between images be consistent (or at least predictively

chaic buildings. T h e recent discovery of t w o more cryptic

consistent to us). T h e ensemble

figurai

is w h a t is important. Thus no

one method of analysis—social,

geopolitical, religious,

or

metopes (M9 and M i o ) emphasizes the need to re-

evaluate all the scenes.

structural—gets to the heart of the sculptural programme of a

Ultimately, identifying the subjects and establishing the

building such as the temple at Assos. I aim to explore w h a t

iconographie models for the sculpture is critical f o r under-

sense w e might make of the iconography if w e start our analy-

standing the w a y in w h i c h the sculptural decoration of the

sis at basics, identifying the essential act represented in each

temple was f o r m u l a t e d — a n d f o r establishing its date. Inter-

scene and then look for a pattern of relationships between

preting enigmatic scenes on an isolated monument set in a

the acts and participants that might have had meaning in an

region lacking an established iconographie tradition is an ad-

archaic religious context. This approach is not so much struc-

mittedly risky business. Nonetheless, although the specific

tural as functional, operating on t w o levels: the microcosm of

identification of scenes is not always obvious to us, the design-

the image and the macrocosm of the building within its social

ers surely did not engage in intentional ambiguity, as has some-

and cultural context. 6 T h e entire temple exterior functioned to

times

define the most sacred interior, to represent the authority of the

painting. 7 Inscriptions could, of course, transform a generic

been

proposed

for

generic

imagery

in

Attic

vase

deity, to be the face of the polis, and to awe and transport the

pair of runners into a local story not elsewhere represented in

viewer. T h e temple concretized the relation that the polis of

art. 8 Thus far, none have come to light, and lacking other

Assos defined for itself to its goddess and to the larger w o r l d of

written accounts as well as a strong local visual tradition, our

the eastern Mediterranean. While not the o n l y valid perspective

best recourse is to turn to visual comparanda f r o m other re-

on to these scenes, this w a y of thinking provides a set of

gions and in other media. That is, after all, what w e suspect the

plausible connections that bring further meaning to the build-

original designers did as well. T h e fact that certain scenes do

ing as a w h o l e . T h e scenes w o r k paratactically, yet collectively

have parallels encourages us to search for others and suggests

(either directly or by analogy) they present a more encompass-

that the

ing vision of some of the prime forces that governed a mean-

f e c t l y — i n a comparative context.

figurai

scenes can be understood b e s t — i f

imper-

ingful existence in the archaic world: the averting powers f r o m

Three w o r k i n g principles, therefore, govern the following

the unseen w o r l d expressed in the heraldic sphinxes; the forces

iconographie analyses. T o engage in the act of comparison, w e

of the natural w o r l d expressed in the animal combats; the

must assume that the scenes at Assos illustrate subjects belong-

conflict between the natural versus the civilizing forces within

ing to a repertoire of scenes represented elsewhere in the

human beings, expressed in their bestial half-selves, the cen-

archaic visual arts. T h e corollary of this assumption—that

taurs; and, the role of philoxenia

in distinguishing the human

f r o m the bestial expressed by the symposion.

similar compositions must represent similar stories—is far f r o m secure, but it is all w e have. A second principle is that

A full iconographie and iconological analysis of the individ-

the idea f o r including a particular subject may have derived

ual reliefs and metopes f o l l o w s in subsequent sections. Some

independently of the source for the specific motif. T h a t is, the

ideas pertinent to the sculptural ensemble as a w h o l e are set out

designer(s) seems to have looked first to other architectural

here to give context to the material and to establish a method of

monuments to determine what subjects made generally appro-

approach.

priate architectural decoration, and then turned to specific visual examples, not necessarily architectural, to guide them The iconography:

working

in depicting these subjects. Thirdly, w e cannot assume that

premises

similar subjects necessarily carried similar meanings: context

To understand the principles that shape the iconographie pro-

is critical. 9 W h e n several interpretations are possible, the one

gramme, w e must first make sense of the scenes individually.

having stronger connections w i t h the deity, w i t h other elem-

M o s t scenes f r o m the epistyle are familiar in sacred sculpture:

ents of the iconography, or with local geography or politics,

lion combats ( A 9 - A 1 3 ) , a centauromachy ( A 5 - A 8 ) , heraldic

takes precedence.

pairs of sphinxes ( A 1 - A 2 ) , battling bulls ( A 1 4 - A 1 5 ) , Herakles

Given the surviving number of plain epistyle blocks and the

wrestling Triton (A3). T h e scene of men at symposion (A4)

fact that recent excavations produced no new sculptured scenes

stands apart and is, I think, the fulcrum upon w h i c h the ac-

(just additional fragments of existing ones), it is unlikely that

c o m p a n y i n g scenes f r o m the epistyle are balanced. T h e met-

w e are missing much of the sculptured epistyle. In fact, w e may

opes also portray monsters, animals, and humans. H o w e v e r ,

have too much. W h e n the temple was repaired (as will be

with the exception of E u r o p e on the Zeus Bull (M5; and even its identification raises doubts for some), none of the

figurai

Bcrard in Bérard et al. 1989, pp. 167-8; Neer 2002, pp. 2-3, 185. e.g., inscriptions have transformed our interpretation of the cast and north friezes of the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi: Brinkmann 1985, pp. 77-130; Brinkmann 1994, pp. 95-7, figs. 107-119, fold-out pis. 9-11. 9 For a contextual approach, see Barringer 2005, 2008. 7

8

6 For the importance of a functional approach, see Holloway 1988; Faraone 1992, pp. 3-12; Marconi 2007.

154

THE

SCULPTURE

argued below), some of the epistyle reliefs were p r o b a b l y

here, for, unlike many D o r i c buildings of the mainland or

damaged and new ones were p r o b a b l y created, but no technical

Magna Graecia, there is no certainty that any part of the temple

features help distinguish original f r o m replacement material, as

at Assos, including its sculpture, was covered w i t h plaster. 11

they do for the geison and tympanon. Sculptural style and

Part of the krepis bears a white residue suggesting that at some

iconographie considerations, while precarious criteria, offer

time they may have been whitewashed. While this evidence

some help in determining to w h i c h phase the relief might

does not extend to the sculptured courses, it opens the possi-

belong.

bility. Certainly some of the details on the reliefs were picked

T h e situation with the decorated metopes is somewhat dif-

out in colour.

ferent. T h e ten surviving metopal reliefs were found at both

T h e decision to w o r k in andesite had a p r o f o u n d effect on

ends of the temple, but predominantly to the west and north-

the sculpture. Possessing neither the translucence of marble

west (Appendix I; Fig. 34). M o s t of these find-spots represent

nor the subtle tonality of limestone, andesite cannot achieve

secondary deposition, but the general reliability of

brilliant highlights; even shadows lose their sharpness against

find-spots

reflected in the other architectural elements argues f o r their

the dull blackness of the stone. T h e large, gritty crystals and

general value here. If the situation were the opposite, that is,

perpendicular planes of cleavage make it ill-suited to the

with

curved surfaces, subtle modelling, and sharp, linear detail of

find-spots

predominantly in the east, an argument in

favour of metopes across only the façade w o u l d be viable; it

relief sculpture. Instead, the physical properties of the stone

is impossible, however, to imagine decorated metopes across

favour broad, flattish relief with bold distinctions between the

only the back side of the building. It makes best sense that the

raised sculpture and background; the larger and simpler the

sculptured metopes decorated both ends and that w e have half

image, the more effectively it could be b o t h rendered and

of them. This rate of survival is far l o w e r than that for the

perceived. T h e sculptors at Assos blocked

decorated epistyle and, in fact, is l o w e r than the survival rate

roughly w i t h hammer, point, and flat chisel, but they had to

out the relief

f o r almost every other course. H o w e v e r , even fewer plain

rely heavily on abrasives to shape and burnish the rough crys-

metopes survive, and there are not many triglyphs, either. A s

tals; w e see this process b y comparing the finished relief to the

the smallest blocks f r o m the temple, the metopes and triglyphs

unfinished relief of butting bulls ( A 1 4 , A 1 5 ; Pis. 80-1). In

were the most easily pillaged. T h e point is, that if in fact w e

general, the isolation of the figures and their rounded contours

lack at least half the decorated metopes, then in coming to

most closely resemble archaic relief in materials other than

terms with their iconography, w e have freedom to consider

stone, such as bronze repoussé or terracotta relief. Despite

larger compositions combining t w o or three metopes to form

the authority of historical development over material in the

an extended sequence, as can be found, e.g., on the Temple of

emergence of style, 1 2 there remains something in the nature of

A p o l l o at Thermon, the Monopteros and the Athenian Treas-

these images that seems more moulded than sculpted, an im-

u r y at Delphi, the first and second Heraions at Foce del Sele,

pression created in part b y the material that looks (and in some sense was) as much hammered and rubbed as it was carved.

and Temple F at Selinous. T h e f o l l o w i n g comments on material and technique, com-

Sculptors carved most of the reliefs in one major plane angled

position, and style, apply to the sculpture in general and are

slightly outward f r o m bottom to top (see especially A 3 and

intended to set the context for the more detailed discussion of

M 7 ; Pis. 9 8 - i o o a - c , 105b). H o w e v e r , the front plane does not

the individual reliefs.

have the characteristic flatness of much archaic relief sculpture in stone. In some areas, the surface projects substantially (up to

Material

and technique

of

carving

0.085 m.), but the visual emphasis remains on the contours, w h i c h are treated in t w o w a y s indicative of shallower archaic

With the exception of one metope ( M i o ; here argued to be a

relief sculpture. A r o u n d the profiles of the human faces, the

repair; Pis. 1 ioa-b), the designer chose to execute the sculpture

sculptors cut the relief sharply perpendicular to the back-

in the same indigenous purplish-black andesite used f o r the rest

ground plane (e.g., centaur on A48, head of Herakles on A 3 ,

of the structure. T h e choice was economical and, to a certain

symposiasts of A 4 , Pis. 97, 100a, 102a). F o r other areas of the

extent, necessary. Because the epistyle forms a continuous

human or animal bodies, the relief curves steeply off the back-

structural band around the building that physically supports

ground plane (e.g., the backs of animals, including lions, bulls,

and visually unifies the entablature, using the same material f o r

and centaurs, Pis. 80-97; r h e l e g s

the entire course creates continuity both within the course

ioob; or, the bodies of the symposiasts, Pis. 101-2). T h e latter

(which was only partially decorated) and within the entire

technique creates an effect reminiscent of terracotta relief writ

building. 1 0 Such continuity of material is of some importance

large, w h i c h is not surprising. Large-scale terracotta reliefs

Using a finer material such as marble for architectural sculpture in Doric buildings did not, in any case, become widespread until the end of the sixth century (e.g., Alkmeonid Temple of Apollo at Delphi, Old Athena Temple at Athens, the temples of Apollo and Aphaia II at Aegina, Apollo at Eretria, Athena at Karthaia);

the earlier Η-Temple in Athens, with its marble appliqué felines and gorgon, is an exception. For specific buildings, see Bookidis 1967.

10

11 12

the fleeing Nereids, PI.

Pace Langlotz 197$, p. 120. Sec 'Techniques of Construction', p. 30. Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 7-9.

155 T H E

SCULPTURE

were important in the region and certain similarities of icono-

T h e designer favoured large-scale images with minimal overlap-

graphie expression (discussed below) indicate they served as

ping, isolated against a broad background. M o s t of the com-

one of the models for the sculptors at Assos. 1 3 F o r internal

positions have a strongly architectonic structure consisting of

features, the sculptors made more attempts to model surfaces

austere geometric arrangements, such as the interlocking tri-

and render anatomical details than first meet the eye (for

angles formed by the legs of the lions and doe o n A i o . Other

example, the shoulder muscles and taut flanks of the bulls on

compositions rely on repeated parallel figures associated by

relief A 1 4 , the modelling of muscles on the left arm of the

simple p r o x i m i t y — o n e centaur after the next, one male facing

centaur on relief A48, or the tendons in the forelegs of the

another, one figure chasing another. Stiff, emphatic gestures

lions o n relief A i o ) . Such efforts w o u l d have given the essen-

u n i f y the compositions and give character t o the scenes.

tially flat images a slightly greater plasticity in the raking light

Some of the compositions are cleverly interwoven (especially

that fell on the reliefs in situ. Paint w o u l d have helped to define

Herakles and Triton on A 3 , or the symposiasts on A 4 ) with

the main compositional elements and must have completed

monumental, overlapping, reclining figures and small-scale an-

roughly outlined or uncarved attributes, for example Herakles'

cillary figures combined to fill the full length and height of the

arrows on A 5 or the centaurs' clubs on A 5 - A 8 .

field. The principle of isocephaly is not, however, enforced rigorously throughout the reliefs. T h e little lion on A n falls

Composition,

primarily

of reliefs

on the

short; some of the attacking lions do not rise to the full height of

epistyle

the field (for example the lions on A 1 2 or A 1 3 ) ; the sphinxes'

The shape of the epistyle governed the design of both the indi-

bodies, even w i t h their tails, fill only half the available height.

vidual reliefs and the overall programme. T h e field presented

N o n e of the compositions exceeds its architectural frame. 1 6

several peculiar difficulties. First, each block carried not only the

T h e scale of figures is not consistent. The sphinxes, bulls, and

epistyle's upper taenia but also the traditional regulae. T h e latter

certain lions ( A 1 - A 2 , A 1 4 - A 1 5 , A i o , and A 1 3 ) are signifi-

repeatedly intruded into the sculptured area. The designers

cantly larger than the lions and prey on the other reliefs (A9,

eliminated the guttae and reduced the height of the regulae to

A n , and A 1 2 ) . T h e symposion and tritonomachy (A3, A4)

help lessen the tension between architecture and ornament.

have large-scale protagonists, but on the reliefs of the centaur-

Second, unlike other sculptured friezes, the epistyle had to

omachy ( A 5), both Herakles and the centaurs are carved on a

serve the primary structural function of spanning the columns,

much smaller scale. T h e differences suggest an inexperience

with the length of each block determined b y its position on the

that the designer surely must have felt in adapting (as w e shall

building. Since the designer chose to design each block as a self-

see) images f r o m other contexts to suit the peculiar field of the

contained unit (whether or not it formed part of a series), each

entablature. T h e metopes, too, reflect a certain lack of practice

composition had to be tailored to fit a long narrow field that

at making images fit an architectural frame. The right runner on

could differ in length by as much as o. 5 ο m. N o t surprisingly, the

M 2 has lost part of his hand to the overlapping edge of the

elongated sphinxes and lions resemble animals w h o s e trunks

triglyph, and the fleeing figure on M i seems squashed into the

have been stretched to fill the registers of Corinthian and Wild

right side of the relief.

G o a t pottery or the borders of Klazomenian

sarcophagi. 1 4

Third, as the uninterrupted horizontal course in the entablature,

Figurai

the epistyle provided no architectural means of terminating a

style

composition or subject mid course, especially once the decor-

Clearly, several hands were at w o r k on the sculpture of

ation was carried partially along the flanks. This peculiarity may

the temple.

account f o r the closed composition of many reliefs, as well as the

several reliefs, but also occasionally

repetition of scenes (in matching reliefs such as A i and A 2 , or

f r o m another o n the same block. Nevertheless, the general

A 1 4 and Α 1 5 ) and certain motifs, such as the leaping lion, the

style of the figures has fairly consistent ties w i t h northeast

galloping centaur, or the fleeing Nereid. Once

the

patrons

and

designer(s)

Idiosyncrasies

of

style

not

only

separate

distinguish one

animal

G r e e k art. T h e well-preserved, large-scale symposiasts demhad

the

onstrate the style most effectively (A4, Pis.

fill

Their gently rounded bodies appear poured into position,

field.15

the heads settle into the V-shaped saddle created b y the shoul-

selected

subjects, the designer had to adapt them not only to the b l o c k but also to cover large sections of the chosen

ioi-io2a-c).17

ders, and the torsos curve into gently swelling hips. T h e men 13 e.g., especially horses on a revetment in Paris (Akerström 1966, pl. 16.2); those from Larisa on the Hermos (Akerström 1966, pis. 22-3); or several figures and animals on revetments from Sardis (Akerström 1966, pis. 38-43). See also Ramage 1978; Hostetter 1994. 14 e.g., Corinthian (R. Cook 1997, pp. 54-7, pl. 11B; CorVP pis. 59.2, 77.1, 102.2, 103.2); Wild Goat (Walter-Karydi 1970, pis. 1-3; R. Cook 1997, pp. 111-19, pl. 30B; Cook and Dupont 1998, pp. 39-40); Klazomenian sarcophagi (R. Cook 1981, pis. 5, 30.2, 31.1). 15 Decorative potential of archaic East Greek friezes: Ridgway 1966, pp. 188-95; Ridgway 1993, pp. 383-5.

are not completely devoid of b o n y structure and muscular articulation (note the biceps of the first and second symposiasts and Herakles' calves on A3); only the last symposiast

Borders and closed imagery in architectural sculpture: Hurwit 1977. Other discussions of style: Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 107-19; Langlotz 1975, pp. 119-20; C. M. Robertson 1975, pp. 81-2. For East Greek figurai style reflected in painting, and its connections with Anatolia and the West, sec Lemos 2000. 16

17

132

THE

SCULPTURE

approximates the voluptuousness of Ionian monumental recliners. l s The central two symposiasts' heads have ovoid crowns, and their sharply pointed noses emerge smoothly from the receding profile of their low foreheads in a manner particular to northeast Greece. 1 9 A l s o indigenous are the large almond-shaped eyes (left as flat raised surfaces), the slight overbite, and the puckered lips that fail to join at the corners. 20 Large ears, joined inorganically to the head, serve to mask the juncture between beard, front-curls, and the bundle of hair at the nape of the neck. A l l of these features indicate local northeastern Greek sculptors at work. The variations in hairstyles reflect the hands of individual sculptors, the character of certain figures, or the particularities of a borrowed source. All human and anthropomorphic figures have a thick-raised band above the forehead that is meant to approximate front curls. Behind, the hair smoothly covers the crown of the head and is gathered at the back as if tied with a fillet. Most of the men wear their hair neatly bundled at the nape of the neck, which could represent short curls or longer hair rolled up in a fillet.21 The hairdo owes nothing to the swept-back coiffures of Ionian men, but it is at home elsewhere in the Greek world from the middle of the sixth century and especially the last quarter. 22 The men and centaurs sport thick, pointed beards that do not turn downward at the point in the Anatolian manner (but they do have shaved upper lips). 23 Although the relief is damaged in this area, the servant b o y on A 4 appears to have the close-cropped

18 e.g., reclining figure from the Genelaos dedication (Walter-Karydi 1985, pp. 91-104, pi. 27.1; Freyer-Schauenburg 1974, nos. 63, 116-23, p' s · 51—3); recliner (=70) from Samos (Freyer-Schauenburg 1974, nos. 70, 148-9, pl. 58); reclining figures from Didyma, inv. S105-S106 (Tuchelt 1976, pp. 56-60, figs. 1-9). 19 Langlotz 1975, pi. 34, and pp. 119-20 for similarity of the profiles to images on coins from Kyzikos and Mcthymna. Compare also the female figures on the left side of the main panel of the Polyxena sarcophagus: Sevinç 1996, fig. 10. Note head of a kore from Kyzikos, Berlin, Staatliche Museen 1851 (Bliimel 1963, no. 31, figs. 85-6); Didyma kouros, Berlin, Staatliche Museen 1710 (Bliimel 1963, no. 60, figs. 171-3, 176). A comparison with the figure style of Etruscan wall painting cannot be avoided; see especially man with a cup on the rear wall of the Tomb of the Baron; Steingräber 1985, pis. 27-9. 20 Terracotta figurines from Assos follow the same conventions; Langlotz 1975, pi. 24.5-9. Compare also terracotta relief from Larisa; Langlotz 1975, pi. 18.7. 21 For short curls in relief sculpture, note youth on grave stele, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 11.185 (Richter 1961, pp. 27-9, no. 37, fig. 190) or New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 42.11.36 (Richter 1961, pp. 35-6, no. 52, fig· n j ) · free-standing sculpture, note, e.g., kouroi in Richter 1970, figs. 393-4, 402-3, 411-12, 413-14, 489. For a more summary treatment of the hair in a fashion similar to the Assos males, note the head in the Fauvel Collection, Paris, Louvre 2718 (Langlotz 1975, pi. 41.8). For the effect of hair rolled around a fillet, compare kouros from Ptoon, Athens National Museum no. 20 (Richter 1970, p. 134, figs. 455-7) or Berlin Staatliche Museen no. 536 (Richter 1970, p. 141, figs. 507-8). 22 Archaic hair in general: Ridgway 1993, pp. 67-8, 77-9, 84. 2"' For the Anatolian style beard, note the charioteer from Larisa frieze VIII, no. 49 (Langlotz 1975, pi. 63.2); so-called Lydian 'dandy' from Sardis (Ramage 1978, pp. 15-16, no. 2, frontispiece, fig. 33; Hostetter 1994, fig. 14.1); 'Bluebeard,' pcdimental group, Athens Akropolis Museum 35.36 (Brouskari 1974, pp. 39-40, fig· 55); o r the men on two Aeolian amphorae, one from Myrina, Paris Louvre B561, and another from Pitane, Istanbul Archaeological Museum (Akurgal 1962, p. 378, pi. 103, figs. 30, 32). No moustache: Lydian 'dandy' and Aeolian amphorae noted above; also older charioteer, banqueter, or Herakles on the terracotta panels from Larisa on the Hermos (Akerström 1966, pis. 22, 25.1, 26.2, 27.2, 29.2-3).

haircut favoured for servants and athletes. 24 Most of the centaurs wear their hair and beards longer and shaggier than the men, although on A8, the centaurs' hairstyle closely matches the human type. Women and sphinxes wear their hair gathered in a fillet and hanging in a mass d o w n the back (Nereids on A3, sphinxes on Α ι , A2, M3). Each sphinx (and Pholos) has a thick braid running from the ear down to the shoulders, and one sphinx wears horizontally layered tresses. This early hairstyle stands in sharp contrast to the shorter male cuts and probably reflects the style of the image's source. 25 While clothes do not figure prominently in the sculptures, there are more dressed figures than first meet the eye. Broad areas of painted colour would have made all the difference. The undefined lower torso and blurred inner contours of the first symposiast's legs on relief A 4 suggest the long, form-fitting garments characteristic of Cypriote and East Greek reclining figures.26 O n relief A3, the Nereids wear long, foldless chitons that cling in a diaphanous manner to reveal their legs. The chitons are belted at the waist to overhang in a schematic kolpos with a rectangular window, centred regardless of whether the figure faces frontally (left-hand Nereid) or stands in profile (the next three Nereids). This form of kolpos shows up in sculpture and painting of northeast Greece, for example, in korai f r o m C h i o s and Erythrai, a columna

caelata

from

K y z i k o s , and vase painting from Klazomenai, where the garment is also depicted with few folds. 2 7 The manner in which the skirts cling to the figures' legs, blurring the inner contours, also has strong regional parallels in the diaphanous skirts worn by the dancing maidens on a relief from Karaköy and, later, on the spectacular Polyxena sarcophagus. 2S Europe on metope M5

24 For mid-sixth century examples of the short cut, note the marble head of a bearded man, Berlin, Staatliche Museen 308 (Bliimel 1963, no. 6; C. M. Robertson 1975, pi. 25b), boxer grave stele, Kerameikos Museum (C. M. Robertson 1975, pi. 30b; Boardman 1978, fig. 233), or the figures on an Attic black-figure tomb plaque from Spata attributed to I.ydos, Athens National Museum, Vlastos Collection (C. M. Robertson 1975, pi. 37b); and slightly later, the painted wooden plaque from the cave of the nymphs at Pitsa, Athens National Museum 16464 (C. M. Robertson 1975, pi. 34d). The style becomes typical at the end of the sixth century, e.g., the boys playing ball on a kouros base, Athens National Museum 3476 (Boardman 1978, fig. 242). ^ The style belongs to the seventh century (e.g., ivory sphinx from Perachora, Athens National Museum 16519: C. M. Robertson 1975, pi. 7d), but it continues to the end of the sixth century for sphinxes on shieldband reliefs (Kunze 1950, Form XVII, pi. 44). 26 Fehr (1971, n. 727, nos. 492-4) makes the same connection. Sartiaux (1915, p. 29) suggests the men are nude to the waist, but there is no evidence for a dropped himation. For East Greek clothing: Fehr 1971, pp. 46, 204, n. 292. For clothing worn by symposiasts: Dentzer 1982, p. 146; Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 56-61. Compare clothed recliners in stone (Dentzer 1982, S21-S23; Langlotz 1975, pi. 49.4-5); in terracotta (Fehr 1971, nos. 496-505); in bronze (Fehr 1971, nos. 526-33); and, from Cyprus (Dentzer 1982, pp.157-61, S1-S8, figs. 123-5). 27 Pedley (1982, pp. 183-91) associates a group of monumental korai having this feature with a Chian workshop; Karakasi (2003, pp. 100-1, pis. 54b, 93c, 94) supports a Chian origin for the feature, which then spreads to Paros and Kyrene. For the detail in painting, see Klazomenian black-figure of the Tübingen group: CVA British Museum 8, pi. 594.4; CVA Tübingen 1, pis. 13-15; Cook and Dupont 1998, pp. 95-8. Note also Caeretan hydria, Louvre E702: Hemelrijk 1984, pp. 10-12, 81 and n. 91, no. 3, pi. 31a (although male). 25 Relief from Karaköy near Didyma: Pryce 1928, pp. 116-17, B285, pi. 17; Tuchelt 1970, pp. 111-14, K86, pis. 79-81. Polyxena sarchophagus: Sevinç 1996, pis. 10-13.

THE

SCULPTURE

*33

wears a similar garment, although only the l o w e r hem survives

SCULPTURED

EPISTYLE

today. T h e small servant on relief A 4 is dressed in a short tunic, and the quarrelling warrior on metope M8 wears one as well. T h e dress on metopes M i and M i o is harder to make out, but I argue that the blurred inner contours of the legs on the right figure in metope M i indicate that this runner wears a hiked-up chiton. T h e right figure on metope M i o is clearly clothed in a more voluminous chiton, and there is some suggestion that the central figure wears a himation. The details are discussed in the sections o n each relief. T h e finest of the animal representations, including the bulls on A 1 4 , the lions on A i o , or the boar on A 1 3 , have taut, vigorous contours and a sense of internal structure (Pis. 80, 84-6, 89, 90a). O n the weaker reliefs, however, the animals degenerate into ineffectual, rubbery forms w i t h soft contours; here Martin Robertson's adjective 'tame' seems painfully fair. 29 The sex of the animals, even in the most accomplished reliefs, is not always fully represented. Lionesses appear to be those felines w i t h o u t genitalia; the difference seems intentional, at least on relief A i o . Curiously, boars and bulls have pizzles but not testicles on reliefs A 1 3 , M4, and A 1 4 , and testicles but not pizzle on relief A 1 4 . Certainly bulls and boars, rather than oxen and sows, are intended. The centaurs, too, are not unif o r m l y endowed. We are left to w o n d e r h o w much detail may have been added in paint. T h e several lions on the temple f o r m a distinctive group, and while they do not belong to a particular regional type f o u n d in sculpture, they seem, as will be argued below, most at home in East Greece and western Anatolia. The s t o c k y boar w i t h interrupted spinal bristles on A 1 3 fits best within the East G r e e k tradition as well. T h e f o l l o w i n g sections treat the reliefs according to subject, starting w i t h heraldic monsters and ending with heroes. Each section begins with a description of the relief(s) and includes

Reliefs

Αι

and Ai:

confronted

sphinxes

A l t h o u g h the Temple of A t h e n a at Assos lacked the most prominent

female

apotropaion,

the

gorgon,

it was

well

equipped w i t h the second most prominent, the sphinx, four of which appear on the epistyle. Reliefs A i and A 2 both bear confronted, recumbent sphinxes s h o w n in profile, w i t h inner forepaws set heraldically o n a diminutive floral motif; their outer forelegs rest flat on the ground, while their hindquarters are set in a crouch (Pis. 76-9; Figs. 67-8). Each sphinx has an upwardly curled w i n g decorated w i t h a reverse-curved rib. B o t h w i n g and breast are smooth, but details could have been brightly highlighted in paint, with feathers decorating the area behind the w i n g rib and scales adorning the breast. 30 The S-curved tails ending in tufted plumes complete the symmetrical composition. T h e sphinxes have large facial features, with deeply outlined, triangularly shaped eyes, and ears formed by flat raised surfaces. T h e y wear their hair long d o w n the back and framed b y a raised braid emerging from the schematic band of hair curls across the forehead, as does Pholos o n relief A 5 and the Nereids on relief A 3 . 3 1 T h e floral object o n w h i c h each sphinx rests a p a w consists of a tapering shaft surmounted b y vertically springing volutes flanking a triangular crown. O n A 2 , the spiral of the volute is outlined by thinly incised guidelines for painting. T h e centrepiece looks rather more like the so-called Sacred Tree (sometimes called Tree-of-Life) than it does an Aeolic column, for it has an organically curving stalk and lacks the pendant girdle of leaves. 32 M o r e elaborate versions, themselves stylizations of the palm tree, appear repeatedly in similar heraldic compositions derived f r o m N e a r Eastern prototypes. 3 3

stylistic comparison with other reliefs w h e n an association seems apparent. Here the purpose is not so much to distinguish artistic personalities, but to sort out the history of construction and repair so clearly demonstrated in the other architectural members. A proposed reconstruction for fragmentary reliefs is f o l l o w e d by an examination of iconographie

comparanda,

aimed at locating the artistic influences at w o r k . Lastly, an exploration of possible meanings sets each image within the context of G r e e k sacred architecture in general and the larger sculptural programme of the temple in particular. These ideas are brought together in a final section on

'Iconographie

T h e m e s ' and in Chapter 9, 'Significance of the Temple'. A reconstruction of the sculptures on the building is presented in C h a p t e r 8, 'Arrangement of the Sculpture'. T h e present condition and architectural features of the sculptured blocks are described in A p p e n d i x I.

29

C. M. Robertson 1975, p. 81.

30 Compare painted cast of New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 11.185, Richter 1961, no. 37, fig. 103b. 3! Note a similarly articulated lock on the Kyzikos charioteer, Istanbul 23·5· See also bull on the Europe metope from Temple Y at Selinous: Giuliani 1979, pi. 10; Tusa 1983, pis. 24, 26; Marconi 2007, fig. 37. For East Greek bulls note: Wild Goat oinochoe (Walter 1968, no. 261, pi. 127); Klazomenian sarcophagi (R. Cook 1981, p. 16, no. C2A, pi. 10; C2, pi. 11.1); Chian chalices (Lemos 1991, no. 643, pis. 81-3, as well as nos. 441-7, pl. 60).

62 In painted pottery, see Buchholz 1993, with references. In architectural contexts, examples include: a wall painting from Residence K, Room 12, at Khorsabad (Frankfort 1996, figs. 181, 196); an orthostate relief from Carchemish (Frankfort 1996, fig. 353b); an orthostate relief from Karatepe (Frankfort 1996, fig. 362). Other examples show bulls in procession or flanking an entrance. Artistic representations include: a Hittite ivory plaque from Megiddo, probably the side of a casket (Frankfort 1996, fig. 274); a Cypriote silver bowl from Kourion (New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 74.51.4554) and especially the gold bowl from Rash Shamra (Markoe 1985, pp. 39, 256 and comp, χ; von Bothmer 1984, p. 7). Paired bulls also have a place in the architecture of Bronze Age Greece, e.g., decorating the entrance of the so-called Treasury of Atreus (exact disposition uncertain), London British Museum A56, A57 (Pryce 1928, pp. 27-30, figs. 25-6). Additional examples of bulls in relief in Near Eastern architecture include orthostate reliefs from Carchemish (Frankfort 1996, fig. 353B); the glazed brick monumental wall and Ishtar Gate from Babylon (Frankfort 1996, fig. 233); the walls of Sargon IPs palace at Khorsabad (Frankfort 1996, figs. 181, 196). As capitals: Audience Hall of Darius and Xerxes at Persepolis (Frankfort 1996, figs. 424-5). As winged guardian monsters with human heads: Gate A to the citadel at Khorsabad (Frankfort 1996, figs. 179-80); Throne Room at Khorsabad (Frankfort 1996, figs. 168, 178); gates of Carchemish (Frankfort 1996, fig. 348); gate at Persepolis (Frankfort 1996, fig. 415). 63 Examples include: bulls from Ephesos, London, British Museum B141-4 (Pryce 1928, pp. 64-5, figs. 72-5; Muss 1994, p. 16, figs. 22-3); bull from the podium frieze of Building G at Xanthos, London, British Museum B297 (Pryce 1928, p. 137, pi. 28; Jenkins 2006, pp. 168-72); sixth-century revetment from Sardis with the hindquarters of a walking bull (Akerström 1966, p. 70, no. 3, pi. 38.2 (now lost)); terracotta sima, provenance unknown (Akerström 1966, fig. 66.2).

THE

SCULPTURE

'H

I

Η

.523

H

H

A14

.372 •

.814

LM ,040N

.350-

-2.510-

«I—I—I—I—I—I—l· .5

1

Η—I—I—I—I—I—I—l· 1.5 2

Η—I

1 1 2.5

1

1

1—I 3m

FIGURE 69. A14: Two bulls locking horns.

A15 -.882-

H15H

H

.522-

I — . 2 5 0 — Η .045

I

.54?-

ti)—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—h .5 1

1.5

H

1—I—I—I—I 1 l· 2.5 2

FIGURE 70. A15: Two bulls locking horns.

3m

THE

140

SCULPTURE

same kind of developed regional tradition as witnessed f o r

whole, however, the bovine connections are not especially

confronted sphinxes, but the Lydian connection is intriguing.

relevant, and the bull has stronger cultic associations with

T h e image of confronted bulls on a Lydian Wild G o a t krater

Artemis, Poseidon, Hera, D i o n y s o s , or Zeus than it does

matches the demeanour and scale (in relation to visual field) of

with Athena. 7 1

our bulls, although the beasts do not lock horns. 6 4 Even closer

Bulls need not play an explicitly cultic role in the worship of

to the Assos reliefs is a contemporary composition by Lydos

Athena in order for the scenes on reliefs A 1 4 and A 1 5 to

on an A t t i c black-figure column krater, in w h i c h t w o bulls

possess significance beyond the purely decorative. The bull

square off, heads lowered and horns locked. 6 5 A specific con-

has

nection with Assos via Sardis is suggestive even if not suscep-

p o w e r i m a g e r y — t h e bull was the best in the herd. 7 2 A s the

important

connotations

within

the

array

of

archaic

tible of pi'oof. T h e Lydian Wild G o a t krater, the imagery of the

domesticated counterpart of the wild lion and boar, the bull,

Attic vase painter, L y d o s ('the Lydian'), and the tantalizingly

too, can rage b e y o n d control and challenge the bravest her-

fragmentary and n o w - l o s t terracotta revetment f r o m Sardis,

o e s — H e r a k l e s , Theseus, and Jason. 7 3 Unlike the lion and boar,

point toward a special regional interest in the theme of sparring

however, the bull prospers under human management. B y pull-

bulls that could have made its w a y to

ing the plough, the bull or ox becomes the beast most intim-

Assos.

ately connected to the earth and its fertility. Even

more

Significance

importantly, the bull, as the chief sacrificial victim, is distin-

Since the image of the bull forms a significant part of the

guished absolutely f r o m the wild beasts and monsters. 7 4 A bull

temple's iconographie programme, scholars have looked for

was the most precious and p o w e r f u l live offering the Greeks

an appropriate

Thacher

could make to a god, and its image made a splendid votive

connection

with

Athena. Joseph

C l a r k e first proposed that bulls might have a special meaning

offering as well. 7 5 C o u l d there have been, f o r the Assians, a

for the cult of 'Trojan and Assian A t h e n a ' , because the c o w

special resonance between the p o w e r f u l butting bulls repre-

figured

sented on the stone frieze and bovine victims led to sacrifice, 7 6

prominently in the foundation m y t h of Troy. 6 6 Felix

Sartiaux also notes the role of the c o w in festivals of A t h e n a at

as there certainly was a century later for the viewers of the

Ilion, Eleusis, and Ephesos (considering cows, w e might also

Parthenon frieze? Later, boukrania and boukephalia become

add the Panathenaia in Athens); he concedes that the bull

the architectural shorthand for the idea that is spelled out in full

p r o b a b l y had cultic significance, but he finds the image of

on the Parthenon. The bulls at Assos are not sacrificial victims,

confronted bulls on the temple to be decorative. 6 7 Fernande

but their scale, power, and rage underscore the qualities that

Hölscher explores a specific connection with the goddess via

make the bull the most precious victim. In this connection, w e

her Andrian epithet, Tauropolos, determining that bulls, like

may see the generative idea of linking architectural representa-

lions, stand in close connection with the goddess. 6 8 Ursula

tions of sacrificial animals and the victims themselves.

Finster-Hotz

suggests

an indigenous

tradition

connecting

Important as they are, the qualities w e have just outlined

bulls and goddesses in Asia Minor. 6 9 It is some measure of

could all be communicated by the more typical scene of bulls

the affiliation between the bull and A t h e n a at Assos that Late

alone, in procession, or heraldically paired. T h e u n c o m m o n

Classical/Early Hellenistic coins have on the obverse the head

motif of sparring, raging bulls privileges another k e y c o m p o n -

of A t h e n a and on the reverse a bull's head, facing. 7 0 O n the

ent of the bull's significance: procreative fertility. 7 7 T h e bull

64 From Rhodes, Istanbul, Archaeological Museum 2894: Mendel 1914, p. 6; also Sartiaux 1915, p. 57; Akurgal 1961, p. 152, figs. 102-3; Buchholz 1993, p. 91, fig. i.b. 65 R. Guy in Leipen 1984, no. 4, pp. 7-8; see also Buchholz 1993, p. 100, fig. 3.d. Finster-Hotz (1984, pp. 80-9) has gathered other examples in Greek art that demonstrate the sporadic but not unprecedented appearance of the confronted bull motif. In most instances, bulls face but do not lock horns. To her list, add transitional Corinthian olpe, Syracuse, Museo Archeologico Paolo Orsi 13580 (CorVP 48, A i , pl. 15); possibly a krater by Sophilos, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 1977.11.2 (von Bothmer 1986, pp. 108-9, fig· 2)ί East Greek oinochoe from Saqqara, Cairo, Egyptian Museum 26135 (Boardman 1998, fig. 305); Eretrian hydria, Reading, Ure Museum of Greek Archaeology 51.1.2 (Boardman 1998, fig. 460). For Cypriote examples, see Karageorghis 1965. 66 Clarke 1898, p. 283. Foundation story in Apollodoros, Library 3.12.3, and

obverse head of Athena and a reverse showing two bull protomes facing off (Wroth 1964b, pp. 110-11, pi. 23.2,5).

Tzetes, Commentary

on the Alexandra

of Lykophron

29.

Sartiaux 1915, pp. 57-8. 68 For examples in art where Athena and bulls are combined: Hölscher 1972, pp. 93-4. Note also the several Attic images gathered by Hölscher (1997, pis. 18-19) suggestive of sacrificial victims. 69 Finster-Hotz 1984, p. 89. 70 Assian coins with a facing bull's head: Babelon II.2, cols. 1269-72, nos. 2305, 2307-13, pl. 163; or Wroth 1964a, pp. 36-7, pl. 7.10-12. For a pertinent variation, note also the late Classical and early Hellenistic coinage of Pergamon, with an 67

71 For the distribution of cattle representations and dedications at sanctuaries of Olympian divinities: Bevan 1986, pp. 82-99, 3 72 Homer, Iliad 2.480-3. 73 Herakles subduing the Cretan bull: LIMC 5 (1990), pp. 59-67, nos. 2306-413, s.v. 'Herakles', (L. Todisco); Schefold 1992, pp. 109-11. Theseus fighting the Marathonian bull: Schefold 1992, pp. 175-83; LIMC 7 (1994), pp. 936-9, nos. 176-216, s.v. 'Theseus', (J. Neils). Jason yoking fire-breathing, bronze-hoofed bulls: Apollonios of Rhodes, Argonautica 3.1278-339; LIMC 5 (1990), pp. 629, 631-2, nos. 15-17, s.v. 'Iason', (J. Neils). 74 Bull sacrifice: RE 2nd ser. Ill (1929) cols. 2512-15 s.v. 'Stier'. Although traditionally assumed that only cows were offered to Athena, Hölscher (1997, pp. 155-6, pis. 18-19) c i t e s Attic imagery of Athena accompanied by bulls, most likely offerings, discussed in the context of bull sacrifice on the Athena Nike parapet. 75 Note, e.g., silver bull at Delphi (Amandry 1977, pp. 273-93); Eretrian bull at Olympia (Bol 1978, no. 134, pp. 31,112, pis. 24-6); cow from the Heraion at Samos (Freyer-Schauenburg 1974, no. 85, pi. 71). Bronze bulls mentioned by Pausanias include the Kerkyran bull at Delphi (10.9.3), t ' l e bull on the Athenian Akropolis (1.24.2), and another in the Eleusinion (1.14.4). 76 Compare Homer, Iliad 20.403-6. 77 Fertility of the bull in the ancient world: Conrad 1957; Rice 1998.

THE

SCULPTURE

*33

combat, a duel between equals, has a specific meaning funda-

doe lies prostrate. Overall, the series of animal combats pro-

mentally different f r o m the fatal encounters of lions and prey.

duces a richer visual impression than the m o n o t o n o u s row of

T h e bulls are locked in violent competition, not for survival in

galloping centaurs (described below).

the food-chain but for possession of the heifer and leadership

T h e lions on each relief are of the same distinctive type.

of the herd. T o the victor goes the right of progeny. This idea is

Their small, heart-shaped faces have broad j o w l s and widely

made explicit in certain painted versions in w h i c h the bulls

spaced, diagonally slanting eyes. 8 3 Flat, pointed ears emerge

ejaculate as they lock horns. 7 S In G r e e k myth this p o w e r f u l

behind a single narrow strip of d o u g h y locks that form the

s y m b o l of sexual energy becomes Zeus' guise w h e n abducting

stylized ruff of the mane. O n l y the little lion on A n has the

Europe and the object of Pasiphae's unnatural lust; it is not

more conventional hood-like mane. Their bodies are slender,

insignificant that Zeus turns Io into his cow. 7 9 A n d , in later

their chests shallow, and their necks just thick enough to avoid

literature, the image of the bulls' angry contest becomes a

confusion with the 'panther'. T h e y turn to face the viewer, like

metaphor for sexual passion and possession and a simile f o r

most architectural representations of lions attacking prey. The

men w h o fight over a woman. 8 0 A t its most basic, then, the

recently recovered fragments of lions on A i o s h o w the finest

scene at Assos represents the primal force of procreation,

style of carving: sharp incisions mark the ridge of the snout and

which, like all valued things, must be asserted. T h e bull's

the wrinkles around the muzzle, more deeply cut contours

p o t e n c y is strongly apotropaic, a talisman against sterility,

define the eyes and the locks of the mane, and a sharp ridge

w h i c h here protects the well-being of the polis. 81

indicates the border of the rib cage. T h e bodies are set out in broad, undifferentiated surfaces, but the tendons of the forelegs

Reliefs

Ay to A i j : lions savaging

and the b o n y structure of the paws reflect a concerted effort

prey

toward modelling the difficult stone.

Five reliefs from the epistyle portray lions savaging weaker

The lions do not clearly belong to a regional sculptural

animals, an ancient Mediterranean theme to w h i c h archaic

group, but they seem most at h o m e in western Asia Minor.

G r e e k artists brought new vigour and eloquence (Pis. 82-91;

Their bodies resemble the slender, flat-headed East G r e e k lions

Figs. 71-5). 8 2 A t Assos, the subject forms an essential part

found on W i l d G o a t and Fikellura pottery, on early K l a z o m e -

of the sculptural programme. Despite significant changes in

nian sarcophagi, and on certain late archaic reliefs. 8 4 More-

scale and composition f r o m reliefs A 9 , A n , and A 1 2 to reliefs

over, the shape of the lions' heads and the mildness of their

A i o and A 1 3 , the lion reliefs have a greater stylistic coherence

expressions recall the colossal lion's head waterspout from

than the series of centaurs (reliefs A 5 - A 8 ) . T h e attacking lions

Ephesos and the smaller terracotta examples f r o m Larisa. 85

(with the exception of those on A 1 3 ) aggressively leap upon or

Their short-fringed manes share something with the ruffs that

crush their prey, biting deeply into the flesh and tearing at the

frame the faces of Lydian archaic lions. 86 O n several of the

victims' flanks with their claws. Their hump-backed shoulders

Lydian lions, linear patterns indicate the rest of the mane; paint

taper into sleek, rubbery trunks ending in striding hindquarters

could have been used to communicate a similar effect on the

curiously detached f r o m the main action. O n e has the impres-

reliefs at Assos. H o w e v e r , the Assian lions, even those on

sion that the lions' bodies, like the sphinxes' on A i and A 2 ,

reliefs A i o and A 1 3 , have slender, rubbery bodies and rather

have been stretched to fill the required length of the

field.

A c r o s s the several reliefs, the lion motif becomes a stock convention that gives a u n i f y i n g rhythm to the compositions, but the sensitive rendering of the several types of prey compensates for the lapses in vigour of the repeated lions. Different stages of combat express the particular nature of each victim: the lion and violent boar face off; the startled stag is captured in flight; a bull and a deer are brought to the ground head-on; a helpless Buchholz 1993, p. 98, figs, zf and 3e (Cypriote), 3b (Attic Late Geometric). For the several connections of Zeus with the bull: Cook, Zeus I, pp. 430-718. 80 Battle of rival bulls: Virgil, Georgia 3.209-41. As a simile for the battle of Aeneas and Turnus: Aeneid 12.715-17. For Herakles and Acheloos battling over Deianeira: Sophokles, Women of Trachis 507-30; Ovid, Metamorphoses 9.46-8. Also Amykos and Polydeukes: Apollonios of Rhodes, Argonautica 2.88-9. For discussion of literary references to rival bulls, see Börner 1974; Briggs 1980, pp. 46-50; Thomas 1988, vol. 2, pp. 79-86. 81 For the imagery of bulls and the Evil Eye in the Tomb of the Bulls at Tarquinia: Holloway 1986, pp. 447-52. 82 In general: Hölscher 1972, pp. 76-7 (Assos); Müller 1978, pp. 42-9, 119-23, 167-80, and catalogue; Vermeule 1979, pp. 84-93; Markoe 1989; von Hoisten 2007. For Near Eastern connections: Erlenmeyer and Erlenmeyer 1953, pp. 53-67; Markoe 1985, p. 39; Markoe 1989, pp. 90-1, 103-9; von Hoisten 2007, pp. 30-45. 78

79

83 The feature can serve as an indication of date (Harrison 1965, pp. 33-5), but note that the seated lion on A n has horizontally set eyes and the lion on A13 has one horizontal and one slanted eye. 84 Stylistic analysis of archaic lions: Gabelmann 1965. Wild Goat-style lions: oinochoe, Athens, once Vlasto (Boardman 1998, fig. 286); oinochoe, St. Petersburg, Hermitage (Boardman 1998, fig. 285). Fikellura lions: London British Museum B118 (R. Cook 1933-4, pis. if, 2c), London British Museum B119 (R. Cook 1933-4, pi. 3b), Samos, Vathy Museum (R. Cook 1933-4, pi. 14a). Lions on Klazomcnian sarcophagi by the Borelli Painter: R. Cook 1981, pp. 8-13, nos. B3A, B5, B8, and B9, pis. 3.2, 4.3, 5.1-2, 7.1-2, 9.2; see also pp. 98-101 for discussion of the lion and 'panther'. See also Chian chalice from Naukratis, London, British Museum 1888.6-1.465 (Boardman 1998, fig. 317). Note certain Parian lions in relief, including: the lion in the pediment of a sarcophagus (Schilardi 1986); and the lion on the relief from the so-called Heroon of Archilochos on Paros (Kontoleon 1965, pp. 348-418, pis. 5-8; Hölscher 1972, pp. 31-6, no. 4, pi. 5.2; Clay 2004, p. 119, pi. 14). 85 Lion from Ephesos, London, British Museum B140: Pryce 1928, p. 64,fig.71; Gabelmann 1965, no. 132, pi. 27.3. Waterspouts from Larisa, Sima VIII: MertensHorn 1988, pp. 49-50, pl. 9b. 86 Compare the manes of archaic lions from Sardis: Hanfmann and Ramage 1978, nos. 26-9, figs. 102-17, and even no. 31, figs. 119-22, when viewed from the front. See also Ratté 1989b, pp. 379-93, especially no. 2 when viewed from the front. A recumbent lion like those found at Sardis was recently discovered in the vicinity of Assos (unpublished).

THE

142

I

1

SCULPTURE

I

1

J ΤΛ/SK

\ \

\/

IOJG>

ßy\

/

/

Η—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—Ϊ—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—h .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 FIGURE 71. A$>: Lioness bringing down a bull.

• (.84)

1 I

.433

1—1.062

1

.573

1

.733

1- . 2 0 0 H

.0501

.240—I

—ι—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3m FIGURE 72. Aio: Lion and lioness devouring a supine deer.

THE

SCULPTURE

*33

A11

delicate legs that differ f r o m the generally beefier form of

locks of its mane curve around a similar central tuft. The

East Greek/western Anatolian lions; the Assian pride is clearly

sculptor w h o carved A n

a local species.

A 1 3 as well. T h e head of the lion on A 9 is modelled with

and A 1 2 m a y have carved A i o and

slightly more depth; it is broader across the cranium, and the Sculptors

locks of the mane frame it more completely. T h e claws digging

Certain stylistic distinctions reflect the hands of different

into the bull's flesh are spread and pointed, in contrast to the

sculptors. F o r example, the small-scale lions on A n and A 1 2

blunt paws of the lions on A i o , Α ι ι, and A 1 2 . Such differences

clearly share the same style of squarish heads, p u d g y jowls,

suggest the w o r k of another sculptor.

w i d e crania, narrow ruffs of mane f r o m w h i c h the ears hardly protrude, and stiff forelegs with

finger-like

claws. A l t h o u g h

carved on a bolder scale, the lions on the n e w l y discovered

Reconstruction of the animal combats A l l the reliefs, as preserved, begin or end w i t h a complete

fragments of A i o possess similarly dull claws, blunt noses, and

animal. We may assume, therefore, that the fragmentary reliefs

whipping, S-curved tails. T h e head of the left lion on A 1 3 has

were

the same shape as the lions' heads on A i o , and the d o u g h y

are thus limited to either t w o lions attacking a victim from

similarly

self-contained.

The

possible

arrangements

THE

144

SCULPTURE

A12 Ι

.522

.052 M

.405 .75

.5

H—I—I—h 1

H—I

t 1 1.5

1

1 1

1—l·

2

H—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I 2.5 3m

FIGURE 74. A 1 2 : Lion bringing down a stag.

opposite sides, or t w o lions each attacking their o w n prey. F o r

as the lioness does against a deer on relief A n . This more

the latter, the pairs can either face one another to make a closed

detached composition was probably required to fill the length

composition, move in the same direction to f o r m a procession,

of the epistyle block. T h e surviving lion on the relief is carved

or move in opposite directions to create an outwardly facing

at the same scale as the left lion on A 1 3 (i.e., c.1.00 m. long;

composition. T h e demurely seated lion on Α ι 1 is a space-filler,

smaller than the lions of A i o but significantly larger than those

and there may have been others.

on A n and A 1 2 ) . F r o m the remains of the bull's back one sees

The surviving fragment of relief A 9 depicts one of the

that its hindquarters were at least partially upright. In this

oldest and most popular forms of lion-fighting in archaic

position, the restored bull, f r o m front hoof to tail, would

G r e e k art: a left-facing lioness attacks f r o m the front, leaping

occupy c.i.00 m. of the relief. A two-figured

onto a bull and forcing it to its knees (Pi. 82; Fig. 71). 8 7

with the single lion attacking the bull w o u l d be c. 1.55 m.

composition

T h e scene is atypical only in that the lioness does not use

long. Based on the position of the central régula,

her hind p a w to drive the collapsing bull's head to the ground,

half of the block survives. There is insufficient space for a

Boardman 1968, Scheme C, p. 123, and n. 12; von Hoisten 2007, Scheme A, pp. 14-18. For early painted examples, see Late Protocorinthian olpe, Villa Giulia 55400 (CorVP 27,5, pi. 7.1; von Hoisten 2007, no. Pc, pi. 1.3); Protocorinthian aryballos, Messinia 6680 (CorVP 24, D-i; Benson 1989, pi. 17.4; von Hoisten 2007, no. Pc4, pi. i.x); Late Protocorinthian kyathos from Ithaca (Stavros) (CorVP 34,2; Benson 1989, pi. 16.2; von Hoisten 2007, no. Pc6, pi. 1.2); Wild Goat oinochoe (Jacopi 1931, pp. 47-8, no. 13, fig. 19); Vari krater A, Athens, National Museum 16382 (Karouzou 1963, pp. 5-9, pi. A), which depicts a lion and a panther mauling a prostrate calf. For additional early examples, see also Shear 1914, p. 291.

if block A 9 belonged to the corner on the façade (see Chapter 8,

about

second set of lion and prey carved at the same scale, even 87

'Arrangement of the Sculpture'). A three-figured composition with the second lion either approaching or attacking f r o m the left creates a balanced composition and completes a relief c.2.50 m. long, w h i c h is about the same length if w e restored the blocks symmetrically around the central régula c.2.52-2.56 m.). T h e size of the block and the spacing of the

THE

Η

1—I

1

1 .5

*33

SCULPTURE

1—I—h

1.5

Η—I

1

1

1

1—l·

2.5

Η—I—I—I 3m

FIGURE γ y A13: T w o lions harassing a boar.

regulae indicate that the relief belongs o n the flank of the temple. R e n e w e d excavations in 1981 brought to light t w o adjoining

(Fig. 29). O n the now-complete relief, a lion (left) and a lioness (right) close over the supine carcass of a doe, turning t o face the viewer as they devour its soft underbelly. Predators and victim

fragments of a relief, A i o , w h i c h depicts t w o lions devouring

are locked together in an architectonic composition that uses

the supine carcass of a doe (Pis. 84-6; Fig. 72). 88 The new pieces

the long narrow field of the epistyle to full advantage. 8 9 The

join a third fragment preserving the hindquarters of a lion and

doe's t h r o w n - b a c k head and flattened b o d y echo the bold

the leg of a herbivore discovered by C l a r k e a century earlier.

horizontal trunks of the lions above. H e r splayed legs, together

A l l three fragments were uncovered directly west of the

with the f o r w a r d l y thrust forelegs of the lions, frame and

temple's foundation in or near the latest fortification wall

accentuate the lions' out-turned faces. The lions' symmetrical

88 The scale of the prey and lack of antlers might suggest an equid, but the shape of the ear and the delicacy of the legs suggest a doe. For attacks on equids, some in supine position, see von Hoisten 2007, pl. 15.

89 Compare a less successful adaptation of a similar scheme to a rectangular field on a tomb at Xanthos: Demargne 1974, Si, pp. 46-60, pis. 21.2-3, 22.

THE

146

SCULPTURE

stride and S-curved tails whipping between the legs close the

Excavations in the 1980s west of the temple also produced a

scene. The animals are carved in the largest scale on the temple;

small fragment with the head and forequarters of a lion crouch-

the size and spacing of the regulae indicate that the relief

ing left. It joins a large fragment with a lion and boar, A 1 3 ,

belongs on a façade.

discovered b y the first excavators in the late fortification wall

Clarke proposed that the fragmentary reliefs with lions savaging deer, A n

and A 1 2 , in which the imagery is consistent

west of the temple (Pis. 89-91; Fig. 75). O n the large fragment, a lion with all four paws planted firmly on the ground bites the

in scale and style, formed a single block (Pis. 83, 87-8; Figs.

rump of a boar. Ignoring this attack, the boar stands at bay

73-4). 9 0

Relief Α 1 2 ends at the right side with the fairly com-

facing right, its forelegs stiffly thrust forward and snout held

mon scene of a lion leaping on to the back of a fleeing stag. 91

close to the ground. A l o n g the break on the right side, a clear

The rest of the block must be restored with a second set of lion

contour line and slight indication of relief signal the position of

and prey. Completing the lion on relief A 1 2 to match the size

a third animal, which w e n o w k n o w to be a lion, for here the

the duelling pair w o u l d be

new fragment joins the larger piece. It completes the head and

c.i.25 m. long. O n A n , a lion attacks from the front, leaping

forequarters of a lion crouching with rump in the air, preparing

of the complete lion on A n ,

on to the deer's back while crushing its head to the ground with

to spring at the boar. T h e tip of the boar's snout survives on the

a hind leg. 92 Restoring the victim on relief A n

new fragment.

in a semi-

collapsed position, the relief w o u l d be c.1.75 m. The t w o frag-

The new addition confirms the inwardly facing, three-fig-

ments could join to form a block c.3.00 m. long, and thus

ured composition suggested by the larger portion of the relief

w o u l d have to take a corner position on one of the façades.

discovered more than a century ago. The rather diffident rear

T h e architectural evidence, however, does not assure this precise arrangement. The central régula on A n

marks the

attack and the boar's lack of response are n o w explained by the dramatic squaring off between lion and boar to the right. The

smallest size triglyph better suited to the flank; the large adja-

newly discovered lion's head is drawn so l o w that its jaw

cent metope-interval suggests a position on the façade or the

touches the forepaw. H e roars, baring both upper and lower

corner of the flank. There are tool marks that suggest the

fangs at his opponent. The pair make w o r t h y adversaries; there

central régula of this relief may have been reçut. Relief A 1 2

is more drama in the incipient attack than in the defeat of the

appears to belong to a corner, because the relief ends with a

helpless doe on A i o , even though the outcome will be the

complete régula, but its outer end-face is rough, and there is

same. T h e boar is fleshy rather than muscular, with a projecting

even a suggestion of anathyrosis. 93

rump, pointed upright ear, pizzle, and interrupted crest, all

If the t w o reliefs do not join, then A 1 2 , at least, must still be restored with a second set of animal duels. A n could have a

c o m m o n features of East Greek representations of boars from the middle and second half of the sixth century. 9 5

second combat as well, but it would make for yet another long

A l t h o u g h the new fragment does not complete the relief, it

block. A closed composition is an option. While no evidence

does allow us to reconstruct the entire scene and to approxi-

survives of a second lion attacking f r o m behind, the scene can be

mate the length of the block. If the t w o predators were about

completed with a lion similar to the one on the left side of A 1 3

the same size with hindquarters rising to about the same level,

(see below). O n A n , the seated lion, which does no more than

then the crouching lion w o u l d be c.0.70 to 0.90 m. long. The

complete the field in a thematically suitable way, may have had a

length of the completed relief w o u l d run between c.2.60 m. and

pendant at the other end of the block, or perhaps on A 1 2 . 9 4

2.80 m. Symmetrical regulae and metope-intervals suggest a length of c.2.70 m. T h e scale of the animals, as well as the size

Clarke 1898, pp. 274-7, 65-9. Saniaux 1915, pp. 99-102, rejects the combination on the grounds that the restored length would be too long, but his argument presupposes that Ai2 belongs to the corner on the flank. 91 Boardman 1968, Scheme A, p. 123 and n. 9. For an early example, see the Protoattic amphora by the New York Nessos Painter, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 11.210.1 (Beazley 1986, pi. 5.2; Boardman 1998, p. 106, fig. 210; Rocco 2008, pp. 125-8, no. NYi). In architectural sculpture, see the Alkmeonid Temple of Apollo at Delphi (Hölscher 1972, G8, pp. 74-5; La Coste-Messelière 1931, pp. 34-6, figs. 8-10); relief from the podium frieze of Building G, Xanthos, British Museum B295 (Hölscher 1972, pp. 23-31, pi. 3.2; Jenkins 2006, pp. 168-71, fig. 162); antefix found near the 'Little Temple' at Klopedi, Lesbos, dated c.500 BC (Akerström 1966, p. 29, pi. 11.5). For a discussion of the type: Budde 1963, pp. 59—62. 92 Boardman (1968, p. 138, n. 13) calls the herbivore a mule or horse, but the size of the body and delicacy of the limbs suggest a deer. For examples of the type, Boardman 1968, Scheme C, p. 123 and n. 12. According to Hölscher 1972, p. 77, the head-stomping gesture is rare for attacks on deer. 93 Clarke 1898, p. 273. Sartiaux (1915, p. 107, n. 3) assumes that this side is simply damaged. 94 The seated position recalls freestanding funerary lions of the mainland, rather than East Greek forms. For the rare examples of seated East Greek lions, see Ridgway 1993, p. 384, and additional freestanding examples published by Strocka 9j

1 9 7 7 , PP· 5 0 7 - 1 1 . figs· 3 4 - 9 ·

figs·

and spacing of the regulae, indicate that this block belonged to the façade or a corner on the flank. In sum, most of the scenes w i t h lions and prey form closed symmetrical compositions, but at least relief A 1 2 may have had

9d Interrupted crests do not feature in Corinthian representations or in Attic art in the first half of the sixth century. See Payne 1931, p. 70, n. 3; R. Cook 1981, pp. 102-3; Boardman 1968, p. 152 and notes; La Coste-Messelière 1936, p. 127. In East Greek (and later Attic) art, there are three different forms of interrupted crests: (a) a simple gap, as on the boar on metope M4, (b) a V-shaped break or curving dip, like that on the boar on relief A13, and (c) the late sixth-century sophisticated form, where the high mane ends in a wave-like curve that dips low and then rises to form the lower spinal bristles. For other examples of the V-shaped break (b), see the boar on the predella of a stele from Syme, Istanbul, Archaeological Museum 507 (Pfuhl and Möbius 1977, p. 11, no. 8, pi. 3); podium frieze from Building G at Xanthos, London, British Museum B293 (Pryce 1928, pp. 134-7, pi. 28; Jenkins 2006, pp. 168-72); Attic oinochoe, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 46.11.7 (ABV 434.3; Boardman 1974, fig. 230); Etruscan bronze relief, Munich, Staatliche Antikensammlungen 47 WAF (Höckmann 1982, pl. 24.1, fig. 39).

THE

*33

SCULPTURE

possibly

c e n t u r y , 9 9 and this g r o u p has c o n n e c t i o n s w i t h t h e C y c l a d e s ,

d e p e n d e d o n the p o s i t i o n of the relief o n the t e m p l e — c l o s e d

especially t w o important examples f r o m Paros.100 T h e occa-

c o m p o s i t i o n s f o r the internal p o s i t i o n s o v e r the c o l o n n a d e , a

sional a p p e a r a n c e of the ' i n t e r l o c k i n g lion a t t a c k ' i m a g e else-

a

processional

arrangement.

The

choice

quite

p r o c e s s i o n a l s e q u e n c e near the corners. T h e s e c o m b a t s are as

w h e r e in a r c h i t e c t u r e of the L a t e A r c h a i c p e r i o d , f o r e x a m p l e

s e l f - c o n t a i n e d as the heraldic s p h i n x e s a n d the battling bulls.

in p e d i m e n t a l s c u l p t u r e in Sicily o r p a i n t i n g in E t r u r i a , results

F i g h t i n g g r o u p s and heraldic animals are r e g u l a r l y c o m b i n e d in

f r o m the w i d e s p r e a d d i f f u s i o n o f the successful f o r m . 1 0 1

animal f r i e z e s in o t h e r m e d i a , and it is h i g h l y l i k e l y that t h e y

In A s i a t i c G r e e c e , a g g r e s s i v e l y i n t e r l o c k i n g a n i m a l c o m b a t s

w e r e interspersed o n the t e m p l e as w e l l .

similar to the t y p e f o u n d o n reliefs A 9 , A 1 1 , and A 1 2 appear in

Iconography

A s s o s and later o n m o n u m e n t s at o r near X a n t h o s . 1 0 2 Such

A l r e a d y an i m p o r t a n t i m a g e in the B r o n z e A g e , the m o t i f of

c o m p o s i t i o n s are rare in t e r r a c o t t a r e v e t m e n t s a n d d e c o r a t e d

l i o n s a t t a c k i n g p r e y re-enters G r e e k art, f r o m the East, t o w a r d

simas; the a n t e f i x f r o m L e s b o s , w i t h a lion b r i n g i n g d o w n a

the m i n o r arts b u t o n l y f o r m a c o h e r e n t a r c h i t e c t u r a l g r o u p at

groups

deer, m a y w e l l h a v e b e e n i n s p i r e d b y relief A 1 2 f r o m A s s o s . 1 0 3

w i t h the l i o n l e a p i n g o n to its p r e y exist b u t are not a b u n d a n t

B y contrast, the p r e d a t o r s o n the R h o i k o s A l t a r b e l o n g to the

the end o f the e i g h t h c e n t u r y . T i g h t l y i n t e r l o c k i n g

until the s e c o n d q u a r t e r of the sixth c e n t u r y , w h e n the m o t i f

earlier couchant

r a p i d l y b e c o m e s the p r e f e r r e d t y p e in A t t i c art, in vase p a i n t i n g

part h e r a l d i c . 1 0 4 A late archaic m o n u m e n t (statue base, altar

t y p e , and o t h e r c o m p o s i t i o n s are f o r the m o s t

n o r t h of A t t i k a , o n g e m s , and in E t r u s c a n art. 9 6 L e a p i n g attacks in m o n u m e n t a l a r c h i t e c t u r e can be traced to the m a i n l a n d , e s p e c i a l l y A t h e n s , w h e r e the i m a g e r y first appears and achieves its finest e x p r e s s i o n . T h e p o r o s p e d i m e n t s f r o m the A k r o p o l i s d e m o n s t r a t e the transition f r o m the earlier p r e d a t o r y t y p e , a c o u c h a n t lioness t e a r i n g a b u l l o c k gathered c o m p l e t e l y b e n e a t h h e r ( A k r o p o l i s n o . 4), to the s y m m e t r i c a l l y i n t e r l o c k i n g c o m p o s i t i o n of a lion and lioness m a u l i n g a c r u s h e d bull ( A k r o p o l i s n o . 3). 9 7 A t least three s u b s e q u e n t p e d i m e n t s in A t h e n s are d e v o t e d p a r t i a l l y o r c o m p l e t e l y to this s u b j e c t , and the L a t e archaic p e d i m e n t f r o m K a r y s t o s in E u b o i a appears to be an A t h e n i a n o f f s p r i n g as w e l l . 9 S A t D e l p h i , the l e a p i n g t y p e , w i t h either the bull o r d e e r as v i c t i m , b e c o m e s an i m p o r t a n t i m a g e o n t e m p l e s and treasuries d u r i n g the s e c o n d half of the sixth

96 Supra n. 82 and Boardman 1968, pp. 121-4, especially n. 3 for early examples and nn. 9-14 for examples in Boeotian, Chalkidian, Caeretan, Pontic, and Etruscan art. In Attic black-figure vases: Buschor 1922a, pp. 92-105; Boardman 1974, p. 204; Müller 1978, nos. 228-56; Markoe 1989, pp. 93-5. 97 Akropolis no. 4: Heberdey 1919, VII, pp. 77-87; Hölscher 1972, Gì, pp. 69-72; Brouskari 1974, p. 28, no. 4, fig. 14. Akropolis no. 3: Heberdey 1919, VIII, pp. 87-100; Hölscher 1972, G2, pp. 69-72; Brouskari 1974, p. 46, no. 3, figs. 80-1. The dating and reconstruction of the building(s) to which these sculptures belonged is controversial. Akropolis no. 3 is generally dated slightly later than Akropolis no. 4, but several scholars assign the two pieces to opposite sides of the same building (Dinsmoor 1947, pp. 145-7; Harrison 1965, pp. 31-3, and notes; Ridgway 1993, pp. 285-7). Beyer 1974, pp. 639-51, fig. 10 (followed by Boardman i978, pp. 153-4), does not include them on the same building. Markoe 1989, p. 107, suggests that the new scheme may be the work of an Ionian artist, but his antecedents do not necessarily predate the pediment. 98 Marble pediment from Old Temple of Athena: Heberdey 1919, pp. 163-9; Payne and Young 1936, p. 54, pi. 17,3; Schräder 1939, pp. 377-87, figs. 469-95; Hölscher 1972, G4, pp. 72-3. Sec Marszal 1998 for a new reconstruction with a single lion attacking the bull in a composition close to the compostion on relief A9. Marble pediment from the Olympieion: Hölscher 1972, G5, p. 73; Kaltsas 2002, pp. 69-70, no. 98. Poros pediment from the Athenian Agora: Harrison 1965, no. 95, pis. 15-16; Hölscher 1972, pp. 73-4, G6. Sec also the painted pediment with lioness from the Athenian Akropolis (Wiegand 1904, no. 12, pp. 230-1, pi. 6.3); lion head from the Athenian Agora, thought to belong to a pediment (Harrison 1965, no. 94 (=inv. S1222), pp. 31-3, pi. 14); Karystos pediment, Chalkis, Archaeological Museum 102 (Sakellaraki 1995, p. 71, fig. 40; Hölscher 1972: Gio, pp. 75-6). A badly mutilated fragment from Tanagra with a bull torso and lion paw may also belong to this type: RA, 1908, pp. 193-4, 3! Gabelmann 1965, no. 160, n. 393; Müller 1978, no. 223.

99 Examples at Delphi include: lion vs. deer (supra n. 91) and lion vs. bull on the east pediment of the Alkmeonid Temple of Apollo (La Coste-Messelière 1931, figs. 11-13, pi. 33.1, text pi. 5 (no. XII)); capital of the Siphnian Treasury caryatid, with two lions devouring a deer (Picard and La Coste-Messelièrc 1928, pp. 64-5, fig. 31, pi. 20; Daux and Hansen 1987, fig. 136); probably the second Temple of Athena Pronaia, the remains of which include a lion head and a fragment of a bull's leg (Hölscher 1972, G9, p. 75; La Coste-Messelière i93i,p. 8, nos. 29-30); possibly the Treasury of the Knidians (association tentative; remains include outstretched body of a lion and the body of a fleeing animal, perhaps a deer) (Hölscher 1972, G7, p. 74; Picard and La Coste-Messelière 1928, pp. 180-1, fig. 66). 100 e.g., the relief from the so-called Heroon of Archilochos on Paros. For connections between Delphic and Cycladic lions, see Kontoleon 1965, pp. 40710. Fragment of sarcophagus lid, the pediment of which is adorned with a lioness (possibly two) attacking a bull, dated to the first half of the fifth century: Schilardi 1986, pp. 13-26, pis. 86-7. 101 Terracotta pedimental fragments from Himera: Himera I, pp. 174-7, p's· XLVI.2, XLVIII, XLIX.3,5. Pedimental group of two lions bringing down a bull from Motya: Pace 1938, pp. JX4-16, fig. 106. Etruscan wall painting, see especially Tomb of the Master of the Olympic Games, Tarquinia (Steingräber 1986, p. 321, no. 83, pis. 113-14) or the Tomb of the Old Man (Steingräber 1986, p. 355, no. 124, figs.^346-7). 102 Xanthos podium frieze, Building G (early fifth century) London, British Museum B292-8: Pryce 1928, pp. 134-7, pi. 28; Hölscher 1972, pp. 23-31, no. 3; Metzger 1963, p. 50, pi. 37.1. Lions: Coupel and Metzger 1969, pp. 229-31, figs. 4-7; Jenkins 2006, pp. i68~7i,figs. 160,162-3. Lory ma monument base, Izmir, Archaeological Museum, no. 904: Hölscher 1972, pp. 21-3, no. 2, pi. 2.2; Pfuhl and Möbius 1977, p. 17, no. 25, fig. 8. The composition on a later tomb relief from Xanthos (supra n. 89), the lion and prey carved on the rock-cut tombs at Kalekape (von Gall 1966, pp. 37-8, fig. 1 ) and Myra (tomb 69: Fedak, 1990, pp. 98-9, fig. 122), and a freestanding group of lions attacking a deer from Sinope (Budde 1963, pp. 5 5-73) attest to the continued popularity of this theme in Asia Minor. 103 e.g., sima, once Art Dealer: Summa Galleries, Inc. Auction I (Beverly Hills, Cal. 1981) no. 57 (provenance unknown; said to be from East Greece). Antefix from Lesbos, supra n. 91. 104 For the couchant type, note Roman copy of the Rhoikos Altar (FreyerSchauenburg 1974, pp. 188-92, nos. 106-12, pl. 79); south side of mid-sixthcentury Lion Tomb from Xanthos, London, British Museum B286 (Pryce 1928, pp. 118-20, pi. 18, fig. 176; Hölscher 1972, no. 1, pp. 14-20 (only the head of the bull is carved); Jenkins 2006, pp. 161-2, figs. 152-3). The non-aggressive lions and gorgons on the epistyle of the Temple of Apollo at Didyma probably did not form a continuous sequence (Ridgway 1993, pp. 389-90 and n. 9.24), but for both arguments, see Gruben 1963, p. 144, n. 113; and Tuchelt 1970, pp. 104-7, K82, pi. 76, K84, fig. 21. More recent discoveries from Didyma include a relief with the hindquarters of a lion, thought to be architectural (Tuchelt 1973-4, p. 161, no. P13, pi. 66.4). The lions and bulls on terracotta revetments from Gordion are heraldic (Äkerström 1966, pp. 149, 151, pi. 86.1,3), a °d on the Pazarli revetments they simply stride toward each other (Äkerström 1966, pp. 181-3, pi· 89); other animals on a terracotta sima of unknown provenance face off and snarl but do not attack (Äkerström 1966, pp. 205-6, fig. 66.1-4).

148

T H E SC

barrier, 01* throne support?) from K y z i k o s creates an interesting synthesis of the couchant and leaping types: two addorsed lions attack bull protomes. 1 0 3 The general inspiration to introduce the tightly interwoven leaping/crushing animal combats into the sculptural programme at Assos may well have come from contact with Athens or Delphi, in particular with the series of pedimental compositions initiated by Akropolis no. 3. The pedimental sculptures do not, however, appear to have provided the specific compositional prototypes, for none of the scenes on the temple at Assos closely replicates the mainland sculptures. 106 The continuous and differently shaped field of the epistyle demanded animal combats more extensive and varied than the mainland pediments allowed. Having selected the theme of animal combats, the designer could draw on a variety of sources—and his own ingenuity—to compose the frieze. B y the mid-sixth century, compositions similar to the scenes on reliefs A9, A n , and A 1 2 were current on a full range of smaller objects, including vases, bronze reliefs, and gems circulating throughout the Mediterranean, and may have provided more immediate references. Reliefs A i o and A 1 3 are decidedly different in scale and are compositionally more innovative than reliefs A9, A n , and Α 1 2 . The scene of two inwardly facing lions devouring a supine carcass ( A i o ) has no counterparts in surviving archaic architectural sculpture. It can be found on smaller objects during the Archaic period, although far less frequently than the motif of lions leaping upon their prey or devouring a prone victim. 1 0 7 The single lion attacking supine equid appears on mould-made arulae in the third quarter of the sixth century in Magna Graecia and Sicily in a powerful horizontal composition. Later examples depict t w o felines attacking supine victim (bull or deer) while turning to face the viewer, although their long necks and arched backs are unlike the felines on A i o . 1 0 8 O u t side of this group, examples are occasional and scattered. 109 In

103 Müller 1978, no. 224bis; Mendel 1914, pp. 42-3, no. 284. Laubscher (1963-4, p. 74, n. 6, pi. 42,2) suggests it is an akroterion. However, the sculpture is carved on both sides and therefore belongs with the two-sided reliefs discussed by Hanfmann 1984, pp. 88-9. 106 One possible restoration for A9 comes close to a later poros pediment found in the Athenian Agora, on which two lions fell a bull whose hind legs are at least partially upright. The composition for the lion vs. bull on the Old Temple of Athena proposed by Marszal 1998, fig. 19.5 matches the existing composition of A9, but A9 must be completed with another lion. The single lion mauling a deer on Α12 recalls but does not duplicate a similar composition on the Alkmeonid Temple of Apollo at Delphi, i.e., the lion does not crush the legs of the deer with its hind paw, the deer does not look round, and the composition docs not have the same diagonal thrust. 107 The motif appears earlier in the ancient Near East, e.g., the supine body of a stag beneath a lion in the portico of the Palace of Kaparu at Tell Halaf (Frankfort 1996, p. 293, fig. 341). For examples in Greek art: Boardman 1968, Scheme D, p. 123 and n. 13; Hcmclrijk 1984, p. 180; von Hoisten 2007, Scheme E, pp. 16-17. 108 Arulac with single lion attacking equus: von Hoisten 2007, pp. 86-7, nos. Ta49-59, pi. 15.6. Arulac with two felines attaching supine prey: von Hoisten 2007, p. 89, nos. Tai77-8j, pi. 19.22-2 (bull); pp. 88, 90-1, nos. 130-1, 217-18, 225, pl. 22.14 (deer). I0'; For an early example of a beast devouring (not dragging) a supine carcass, see the bronze blinkers from Tomb 79 at Salamis, dated to the end of the eighth

general, supine victims are more popular in East Greek, Caeretan, and Etruscan art than on the mainland. The arulae make an interesting parallel, but on the whole the extant representations do not suggest a particular source for our scene, and they cannot account for the force that the sculptor has invested in the monumental, architectonic composition. The composition on A 1 3 also lacks full parallel in archaic architectural sculpture. Parts of the scene can, however, be found in architecture, painting, relief, and metalwork. 1 1 0 The motif of a boar facing off against a lion appears in Greek vase painting as early as the second quarter of the seventh century, and an extended composition with a boar flanked by two facing lions is a common theme in East Greek and Corinthian animal processions. 1 1 1 In most of these scenes, the threat is understated; the boar walks or grazes while the lions stride rather than crouch to spring. Sometimes, though, the scene can turn quite nasty, with the walking boar bitten fore and aft. 1 1 2 The representation closest to our composition appears on a Lakonian volute krater by the Hunt Painter, c. 56ο. 113 The boar stands with front and hind legs forcefully planted, facing a crouching lion that raises a paw in attack, while a lioness, head turned 90 degrees to its body, bites the rump of the boar from behind. The figures are not equally weighted; the facing pair is made primary by their larger scale and centred position, while the smaller lioness is matched by another to the far left. Nevertheless, this composition remains our best parallel for the whole composition on the Assian relief. Looking at the individual pairings of boar and lion on A 1 3 considerably expands the comparable imagery. The face-off between lion and boar enters Attic vase painting in the benign form, but by the second quarter of the sixth century the boar assumes a rigidly defensive posture with its forelegs stiffened and its head lowered, a change that may well be influenced by century: Salamis, Necropolis III, nos. 141, 158, pis. 88, 267. In pottery, note: Corinthian alabastron, Paris, Bibliothèque National 128 (von Hoisten 2007, no. C2, pi. 19.18; CorVP 59, Bi; 664, 5); hydria (von Hoisten 2007, no. C u ) ; Attic black-figure skyphos, Athens National Museum 14905 (von Hoisten 2007, no. Ab68, pi. 24.ro); East Greek situi?. iragment irom Tell Deienneh, London British Museum 88.2-8.29 ( v o n Hoisten 2007, no. EG19, pi. 12.8); Klazomcnian sarcophagus, Boston, Museum oi Fine Arts 04.285 (R. Cook 1981, pp. 36-7, no. G9, pi. 50); Caeretan hydria, New York, Metropolitan Museum oi Art 64.11.1 (Hemelrijk 1984, no. 18, p. 145, pi. 75; von Hoisten 2007, no. Ca2, pi. 19.21). For seals: Boardman 1968, p. 123, Scheme D (and E), nos. 381, 398-9, 436, 441; von Hoisten 2007, no. S12, pi. 19.19; nos. S26-7, S35, S43-4, pl. 9.1-3, 14.7-8; no. Is3, pi. 14.9. 110 The closest comparison is the badly preserved small poros pediment from the Athenian Akropolis (Akropolis nos. 4547, 4541, 45 5° and one unnumbered piece), c.570 BO, which probably has a leaping lion bringing a boar to its knees (Heberdey 1919, pp. 113-15, figs. 109-13). 111 Early examples include: a Samian krater from the Heraion (Walter 1968, pp. 54-5, no. 377, pis. 66-8); an East Greek lebes, c.650 BC (Cook 1999, p. 80, no. 5, p. 85, figs 6-7); Protoattic amphora from Eleusis, Eleusis Museum 2630 (Morris 1984, pi. 6; Boardman 1998, fig. 208.2; Rocco 2008, pp. 130-40, pi. 19.5). For discussion: Müller 1978, pp. 47-9. For East Greek and Corinthian examples: Kunze 1967, pp. 128-9, n n · 15-16. For Chian open bowl: Lemos 1991, no. 252, pis. 24-7. 112 For example, Middle Corinthian lekanoid bowl, c.570 BC, London, British Museum 1861.4-25.45: CorVP 195,6; Amyx 1961, pi. 8. 113 Stibbe 1989, p. 26, no. Bi 1, pi. 3.

T H E SC representations of boar hunting, especially the Kalydonian

the sixth century. T h e rump bite is a rarer, and predominantly

h u n t . " 4 T h e stance m a y also have had an impact on East

earlier, motif. T h e physical aspect of the animals on this relief

G r e e k art, as R. M . C o o k has suggested for a three-figured

seems more closely allied with the East G r e e k artistic tradition

scene on a Fikellura amphora in w h i c h a defensive boar squares

than with any other.

off against a crouching lion. 1 1 5 The incipient attack in w h i c h

M o s t importantly, reliefs A i o and A 1 3 reflect the ability of

both lion and boar sink d o w n on their forelegs gains popularity

the local designer to develop n e w compositions to meet the

in A t t i c black-figure vase painting and o n Klazomenian sar-

programmatic and architectural requirements of the project.

cophagi in the second half of the sixth century, especially the

T h e difference between the t w o sets of lion reliefs may be

last quarter. 1 1 6 It also appears in decorative metalwork, on a

related to their placement on different parts of the building,

monument base f r o m the Kerameikos, possibly on an East

or it could document the t w o different construction periods of

G r e e k terracotta sima, above a monumental d o o r w a y at Stage-

the building w e have seen demonstrated in other architectural

ira, and later on the p o d i u m frieze of Building G at X a n t h o s . 1 1 7

elements (see Chapter 8, 'Arrangement of the Sculpture').

T h e crouching lion with rump in the air becomes popular f o r monumental sculpture during the Late Archaic period as

Significance

w e l l . 1 1 8 B y contrast, the left half of the scene, in w h i c h the

Lions that turn to face the viewer as they savage w e a k e r ani-

lion nibbles the boar f r o m behind, recalls scenes of animal

mals appear repeatedly in the monumental

processions that occasionally

archaic Greece, especially in buildings dedicated to Athena or

turn violent on

Corinthian,

sacred art of

Chian, and Fikellura pottery, and later on Klazomenian sar-

A p o l l o . T h e theme clearly is of paramount importance begin-

cophagi. 1 1 9 T h e position of this lion's head, turned 90 degrees

ning around the second quarter of the sixth century, and it

to its body, is u n c o m m o n but not unprecedented. 1 2 0

remains current, if less vigorous, through the turn of the cen-

O n balance, the Lakonian vase painting stands as a very

tury. The significance of lions and lion combats in sacred and

important parallel and signals the availability of the scene

funerary contexts has been repeatedly explored in an effort to

c.560. T h e position of the boar and facing lion become w i d e l y

attach specific meaning to such powerful and pervasive im-

current in monumental and smaller arts in the second half of

agery. Central issues involve whether the lion is a daimon of death, an expression of life force, an apotropaic image, a guard-

114 LIMC 6 (1992), pp. 415-18, 430, nos. 6-35, s.v. 'Meleagros' (S. Woodford). Sec also LIMC 2 (1984), pp. 940-2, nos. 1-16, s.v. 'Atalante' (J. Boardman), and, earlier, La Coste-Messelière 1936, pp. 120-52, pis. 3-7. For the boar hunt generally: Schnapp 1979 (although some early versions have a striding boar); Schnapp 1997, pp. 278-309; Barringer 2001, pp. 15-63, 147-61, 172-3. 115 Fikellura amphora, C.560 BC, by the Altenburg Painter, London, British Museum 88.2-8.54: Cook and Dupont 1998, pp. 78-9, fig. 10.1. The second lion, also crouching, turns to face. 116 Willemsen 1963, p. 132 and nn. 100, 102, 104-5; R· Cook 1981, p. 98 and n. 18. On a lekythos by the Providence Painter, Toledo Museum of Art 69.369, the composition appears as furniture applique: CVA Toledo 1, p. 29, pi. 44.1-2. Klazomenian sarcophagi can depict a boar standing at bay before a crouching lion (R. Cook 1981, nos. E5, G27, G42); a boar between two crouching lions (R. Cook 1981, nos. E4(?), E6(?), Gi5a, G15, G23, G55); a boar between striding lions (R. Cook 1981, nos. B5, F7, F17, G17, G34, G39, G57). 117 See, e.g., bronze helmets from Olympia, Β5316 (Kunze 1967, no. 44, pp. 125, 127-9, fig· 43» pl· 66) or Trebcnishte (AA 1930, col. 296, no. 11, figs. 11-12). Kerameikos monument base, P1002: Willemsen 1963, pp. 130-2, fig. 3, supplement 64.2. For the architectural friezes, we cannot be certain whether the separate panels with crouching lions and a boar were contiguous. Xanthos frieze from Building G, London, British Museum B292-8: Pryce 1928, pp. 134-7, pl· Jenkins 2006, pp. 168-72, figs. 160-3. Add panther (Metzger 1963, p. 50, pl. 37.1) and lion reliefs (Coupel and Metzger 1969, pp. 229-32, figs. 4-7). Terracotta revetments: Akcrström 1966, pp. 205-6, fig. 66.1-4. The relief from Stageira lacks the central section, but most of the body of the lion (right) and the hindquarters of the boar (left) survive: Sismanides 1996, p. 282, figs. 6-7. l l s Mertens-Horn 1986, fig. 2. 119 For Chian chalice from Naukratis, London, British Museum 1888.6-1.466d, f,e: Lemos 1991, no. 439, pl. 58. For Klazomenian sarcophagus: R. Cook 1981, p. 44, no. G23, pl. 62.2. A slightly nastier version appears on the Etruscan bronze relief, Munich, Staatliche Antikensammlungen 47 WAF: Höckmann 1982, pl. 24.1, fig. 39. On another Klazomenian sarcophagus (R. Cook 1981, p. 28, no. Fi ι, pl. 32), a lion bites the rump of a goat. 120 See, e.g., Lakonian volute krater (supra n. 113); bronze shield fragment from Crete (Kunze 1931, no. 45a, pl. 40); Early Corinthian kotyle, Paris, Louvre MNC 167 (CorVP 664,8; Payne 1931, no. 701, pl. 22.4); Klazomenian sarcophagi (R. Cook 1981, pp. 36-7, no. G9, pl. 50.2; no. G35, pl. 82); 'panther' in the painted gable of the Tomb of the Augurs, Tarquinia (Steingräber 1986, p. 283, no. 42, pl. 13).

ι

ian (Tempelwächter), a signifier of sacred space, o r an agent of the god. T h e lion combat has been understood as presenting an intensified narrative f o r m of the lion, as signifying the balance between cosmic oppositions such as order and chaos or life and death, as denoting a hierarchy within the natural world, as serving as an emblem of bloody sacrifice, as representing divine triumph, or as e m b o d y i n g daimonic powers in a chthonic universe filled with terrifying forces beyond human grasp. T h e p o w e r of the lion combat resides in its multivalence. N o t every viewer brought the same set of interpretive experiences to bear in confronting the imagery, nor w o u l d the animal combat have elicited identical responses across regions, in various contexts, in a w i d e range of scales, and over the course of its long life in early G r e e k art. We are concerned here with the monumentalization of the lion combat in sacred architecture f r o m the second quarter of the sixth century onward and its potential loss of meaning (or at least banalization) through repetition in a monument such as the Temple of A t h e n a at Assos. We understand the association of the lion w i t h Athena chiefly on the strength of the visual evidence, in particular the appearance of the lion combat on temples dedicated to Athena. Both Fernande Hölscher and Brunhilde S. R i d g w a y identify 121 Hölscher 1972, pp. 77-104; Markoe 1989, pp. 86-115; Mertens-Horn 1986, pp. 18-28; Müller 1978, pp. 167-73; Woysch-Méautis 1982, pp. 73-7 (all the above cite earlier opinion on the image of the lion combat). Interpretation of the image in ancient Near Eastern art also ranges widely, including astrological meanings (Hartner 1965); a symbol of cosmic oppositions such as order and chaos, upper and lower worlds, present and future, or cyclical changes such as day and night or summer and winter (Erlenmeyer and Erlenmeyer 1953, pp· 53-67; Dentzer 1982, pp. 442-4); and, a symbol of royalty (Markoe 1989, pp. 103-9).

150

T H E SC

the image of the lion savaging prey as the badge of Athena Polias, and Hölscher demonstrates that its association with Athena continued long after the Akropolis pediments were no longer on view. 1 " 2 The connection of Athena and the lion is confirmed at Assos not only by the sacred imagery on her temple but also by the city coinage that in the fifth century, displays the head of Athena on the obverse and a lion on the reverse. 123 In high archaic pedimental sculpture, the predatory lion, a natural creature whose strength, agility, speed, and lethalness approach supernatural dimension, physically takes the central position. The boundary established between the exterior of the building and the interior space where the honoured god is manifest in the cult statue, is not yet iconographically permeable. O n l y later will the central position become the prerogative of the god(s). The absence of the god on the exterior of the building strengthened the viewer's awareness that all the outwardly directed sacred imagery on the exterior existed in the sheltered divinity's service. O n the Athenian Akropolis, the pedimental lions of Athena, conceived on a staggering scale, their explicitly brutal actions heightened by the vivid colouration of torn flesh and gushing blood, embody the wild, dynamic forces in nature, over which Athena takes ownership by virtue of the appearance of the lions on her temples. B y demonstrating the goddess's power as they lock their gaze on the approaching suppliant, the triumphant lions guarantee Athena's sacred space. In this respect they can be called guardians, watching over and emphatically announcing the distinction between the outer world and the sacred interior. 124 Their powers are directed toward their human audience. 125 To function effectively, the representation of the lion combat must be understood as equal to that represented (that is, very much alive), a w a y of seeing that operated with particular consequence in the Archaic period. 1 2 6 Could the rubbery lions of Assos have elicited the same responses? Taken as a whole, the several scenes of lions savaging prey on the temple at Assos appear far less forceful and 122 Hölscher 1972, pp. 82-94, 100-4; Ridgway 1972, pp. 32-3, no. 10. More cautiously, Harrison 1964, pp. 35-6. Against elaborate interpretation, at least on Klazomenian sarcophagi, see R. Cook 1981, pp. 108-9. 123 Hölscher 1972, p. 88. The earliest coins from Assos, c.479-450, have a lion's head on the reverse and a griffin on the obverse; coins with the head of Athena on the obverse and a lion's head on the reverse appear c.420. See Babelon II.2, cols. 1265-74, pi. 163.25-29; Wroth 1964a, pp. xxxiv-vi, 36-9, pi. 7.9. 124 Müller 1978, pp.167-73, 218-19, rejects the idea of guardianship, seeing in animal combats before the second quarter of the sixth century a demonic, deathly power, and in compositions from the second quarter of the century to its end, a less terrifying predator whose considerable power has been brought into orbit around the dominant Olympian god. Markoe 1989, pp. 87-8, also rejects the idea of guardianship on the grounds that in the Near East, the combat differs fundamentally from the often-cited paired lions flanking entranceways. To guard and to be a guardian can, however, encompass a range of meanings including: to protect, maintain, care for, and watch over. For a thoughtful interpretation concerning grave lions, see Mertens-Horn 1986, p. 21. 125 Apotropaic content in architectural sculpture: Benson 1967, pp. 48-51, especially p. 51; Hölscher 1972, pp. 77-82. Both favour the view that apotropaia were directed toward potential human malefactors. 126 Hölscher 1972, pp. 100-1; Mertens-Horn 1986, pp. 25-6.

terrifying than the isolated images on the pediments of the mainland. The energy of the frieze instead resides in the rhythmic interplay of the repeated image of the lion and the creative variations in the form, plight, and attitude of the victim. Moreover, the pair of lions devouring the doe carcass as they directly engage the gaze of the viewer ( A i o ) has significant visual impact, particularly if it belongs in the central position on the western façade. Their scale and placement on the entablature signify that these combats were meant to demarcate, in the same way as pedimental lions, the boundary between exterior, vulnerable space, and interior, protected space. The lion combats of the temple at Assos also gain meaning in relation to the larger sculptural programme. The lion combat is more than an intensified narrative version of the lion alone; both the act and the victim are significant. 127 Lions do not simply slaughter. They hunt to eat; they are hungry. 1 2 8 The confrontation of predator and victim remains at base a vivid emblem of primitive and complementary, if unequal, forces in nature. Each confrontation and each victim invite reflection on the degree of inequality. The gentle, timid deer is no match even in flight for the lion, which can catch (A12), crush ( Α ι 1), and devour ( A i o ) the herbivore. The boar, on the other hand, stands second only to the lion in strength and is equally dangerous when cornered ( A i 3). 129 Even so, the lions represent survival and mastery in the food chain. The image embodies, without moral overtones, the powerful yet arbitrary natural hierarchy that creates sure winners and born losers. The force of the deity is expressed in the life-controlling winner. In this regard, these scenes differ fundamentally from the other scenes of conflict on the temple, the battle of rival bulls or the centauromachy, in which the outcome hangs more in the balance. Even within a sacred context, it is impossible to suppress the association of the lion attack with Homeric simile, in which the dominance of one hero over another is expressed with similar clarity and comparable imagery. 130 Through this hierarchy, Contra Hölscher 1972, pp. 79-81. For the lion's hunger, see, e.g., Homer, Iliad 3.23-6, 11.113-19, 11.172-6, 11.480-4, 11.547-54, 12.298-307, 15.630-6, 16.756-8, 17.61-5, 17.540-2, 17.657-62, 18.161-4, 18.579-86. 129 Lion or boar at bay: Homer, Iliad 12.41-6, 146-53. Hektor the lion to Patroklos the boar: Homer, Iliad 16.823-9. Adrastos recognizes his future sonsin-law (prophesied to be a boar and lion) when the heroes Tydeus and Polyneikes fight before his palace door (Hölscher 1972, p. 12). For their battle appearing like that of a lion and boar: Euripides, Suppliants, 139-46, and Phoenician Women 408-21. For the two heroes having these animals as shield blazons: Apollodoros, Library 3.6.1. For the heroes wearing these animals' skins: Schol. Phoenican Women 409; Statius, Thebaid 1.482-90. The lion and wild boar decorate Herakles' belt (Homer, Odyssey 11.609-12) and pull Admetos' chariot (Throne of Apollo at Amyklai, Pausanias 3.18.16). For the device as shield blazon: Chase 1902, p. 98; Boardman 1968, pp. 146-7; Schcfold 1992, n. 332; Philipp 2004, p. 346. 127

I2S

130 Hölscher 1972, pp. 59-60, 103-4; Vermeule 1979, pp. 84-93; SchnappGourbcillon 1981 (who makes an important distinction between heroes likened to animals and those who don animal skins); Lonsdale 1990. Markoe (1989, pp. 88-90, 115) lists similes of animal combat and suggests that the imagery in sacred art is directly connected with its literary meaning of divinely sanctioned victory. Von Hoisten (2007, pp. 46-9) rejects the association on the very limited methodological basis that a connection between scenes of the lion fight and Homeric simile can only be substantiated when the image is paired with a scene of warriors that directly reflects the precise circumstances of the simile.

175 T H E

SCULPTURE

poet and artist explore the instinctive, p o w e r f u l , heroic, and

arrows while Pholos, standing behind Herakles and still hold-

divinely sanctioned strength in victory, as well

ing the cup of wine, watches the rout in helpless distress. The

as—some-

times—a compelling dignity in defeat. T h e lion combat has a

other three reliefs, A 6 , Ay, and A8, depict galloping, horse-

double reference and thus a double function; neither the divine

legged centaurs, all moving right. Despite the barrage of arrows

nor the human connection w o u l d have been missed in the

released by Herakles, none of the centaurs has y e t collapsed;

cultural

instead, they gallop in the same manner and direction to form a

models, as Annie Schnapp-Gourbeillon suggests, and become

rhythmic but repetitive procession across the epistyle. Archaic

Archaic period. T h e lion, boar, and deer e m b o d y

the mirror in w h i c h a hero looks at himself. 1 3 1 A s E m i l y

G r e e k artists rarely combine human-legged and fully equine

Vermeule reminds us, the lion was 'the representative of male

centaurs—and the t w o types are not mixed together on the

ambitions to be courageous, dangerous, intelligent and success-

different reliefs at A s s o s . 1 3 5 The distinctive aspects of relief A 5

ful' 1 3 2 —qualities,

w e might add, possessed by Athena as well.

clearly derive f r o m a particular prototype, w h i l e the other

Between the deity and her familiar stands the one hero w h o

three reliefs have been designed to satisfy the broader demands

possesses all these qualities, the hero w h o s e strength surpasses

of the architectural programme.

that of the lion: Herakles. It is therefore no surprise to find him portrayed twice within the same course on the temple at Assos.

Reconstruction of the reliefs Relief A 5 contains all the narrative elements: a naked Herakles

Reliefs

Af-A8:

the rout of the centaurs

on Mt

Pholoe

strides f o r w a r d while drawing a short Scythian b o w (loaded with, w e assume, a painted arrow) at three retreating centaurs

T h e centauromachy embodies w h a t the G r e e k s loved best in

(PL 92; Fig. 76). In contrast to the larger protagonists on reliefs

architectural sculpture: the heroic and monstrous locked in a

A 3 and on A 4 , Herakles is represented at the same scale as the

physical struggle e m b o d y i n g the metaphysical conflict between

centaurs. T h e two-scale system of reliefs A3 and A 4 could have

the forces of civilization and chaos (Pis. 92-7; Figs. 7 6 - 9 ) . I j 3

been matched by having Herakles kneel, as he does on reliefs

Herakles' encounter with the centaurs on M t Pholoe is the

from Thasos or Akalan. 1 3 6 In choosing the smaller scale, the

favoured centauromachy in archaic art. T h e episode is the

designer stuck fairly closely to his prototype, as w e will explore

only mythological sequence on the epistyle that has a secure

below. Herakles' short hair, tied in a fillet w i t h o u t hanging

place in ancient literature. O n his w a y to catch the Erymanthian

ends, f o l l o w s the general style f o r males on the frieze, but the

boar or on his return f r o m fetching the cattle f r o m G e r y o n ,

w a v y locks framing the face appear only 011 this relief. A

Herakles stops for refreshment at the cave of Pholos. T h e good

distinct ridge running across his cheek marks the remains of a

centaur cooks meat for the hero and, at Herakles' insistence,

closely cropped beard similar to the short, pointed beard w o r n

serves wine from a special supply that was either the communal

by Herakles on relief A 3 . 1 3 7

property of the centaurs or had been entrusted to Pholos b y

A l l three of the fleeing centaurs to the right of Herakles have

D i o n y s o s specifically f o r the arrival of Herakles. 1 3 4 A r o u s e d b y

completely human bodies to w h i c h are attached the hindquar-

the potent aroma released f r o m the opened pithos, the other

ters of a horse. Their human running stride is not entirely freed

centaurs rush to commandeer the wine; Herakles has to drive

from the knielauf tradition, but their equine gallop matches the

them off, chasing them southward to Malea. D u r i n g the rout,

stiff thrust of the other centaurs o n reliefs A 6 , A 7 , and A8.

Pholos accidentally drops a poisoned arrow on his foot, and

T h e first centaur looks back at Herakles as he tries to pull out

C h e i r o n is mistakenly w o u n d e d . B o t h good centaurs die and

the (painted) arrow that has struck his back. 1 3 8 T h e middle

are buried by Herakles.

centaur runs with arms outstretched and head f o r w a r d , while

W h i l e at least four epistyle blocks and one metope are de-

the centaur furthest right shoulders a club and glances round.

voted to the rout, relief A 5 contains all the narrative elements.

Behind Plerakles stands the good centaur Pholos, still hold-

Here, centaurs w i t h human forelegs flee Herakles' shower of

ing the fateful cup of wine; his alarmed gesture anticipates the

Schnapp-Gourbeillon 1981, p. 195. 132 Vermeule 1979, pp. 85-6; see also Mertens-Horn 1986, pp. 22-3. 133 Generally: Kirk 1970, pp. 152-62; Polliti 1972, pp. 35-6, 80-2; LIMC 8 (1997), pp. 671-710, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides', (M. Leventopoulou); Brill's New Pauly 3 (2003), pp. 111-14, s.v. 'Centaurs', (L. Marangou); Padgett 2003, pp. 3-27. For the Pholos story: LIMC 8 (1997), pp. 672, 691-6, 706-10, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'; and earlier studies, including Schefold 1968, pp. 39, 73-4; von Steuben 1968, pp. 26-8; Heldensage3 pp. 84-90, 178-82; DL pp. 86-91, 140; Schiffler 1976, pp. 100-1 and n. 351, nos. O-S10 (for Assos); Holtzmann 1979, pp. 1-9; Brize 1980, pp. 52-4, 146-50; Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 12-33; Brommer 19^4, pp. 54-8; Schefold 1992, pp. i34-8;Gantz 1993, pp. 390-2. 134 Common property: Apollodoros, Library 2.5-4. Left by Dionysos four generations earlier: Diodorus Siculus 4.12.3-8; Pausanias 6.21.5. Reference to Pholos serving Herakles wine appears in a fragment of Stesichoros' Geryoneis: Brize 1980; Gantz 1993, p. 390.

135 Exceptions, excluding Pholos or Cheiron, include a geometric gold band, Berlin, Antiquarium G.I. 310 (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 680, no. 109, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); Lakonian dinos, Paris, Louvre E662 (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 693, no. 254, s.v. 'Kcntauroi et Kentaurides'). The latter may represent Pholos and Cheiron, although Pipili (1987, pp. 7-10) argues that the second centaur with human legs is simply a youth whom the artist transformed to a centaur as an afterthought. 136 Note kneeling Herakles as archer on the Gate of Herakles and Dionysos on Thasos (Launey, ÉtThas I, 1944, p. 140, fig. 78; Holtzmann, ÉtThas XV, 1994, pp. 19-22, pis. ι, 3) or on the relief from Akalan, Istanbul, Archaeological Museum nos. 4592-5, 4597 (Akerström 1966, pp. 123-4, fig. 37, pis. 64, 65). 137 Finster-Hotz 1984, p. 13, n. 17, concurs. Described as beardless by Clarke 1898, p. 155; Caskey 1925, pp. 10-11, no. 7; Comstock and Vermeule 1976, p. 13. 138 Finster-Hotz 1984, p. 13, concurs. Clarke 1882, p. 110, suggests the centaur hurls a rock at Herakles. Comstock and Vermeule 1976, p. 13, suggest that he carries a club.

131

152

THE

SCULPTURE I

.795

H .175 H

2.48

.50

H

1—I—H

.5

1 .042 ÈTRI 45H

I—.294

—I

1

H—I—I—I—h 1

H—I—I—I—h H 1.5 2

1—I

l·

2.5

H—I—I—I 3m

FIGURE 76. Ay. Herakles pursuing human-legged centaurs.

disastrous outcome of his hospitality. In Stesichoros' descrip-

painting

tion, the cup holds at least three flagons and is 'skyphos-like' in

kantharos; it may be that the stemless variety was generally

shape. 1 3 9 T h e vessel Pholos holds here is a kind of skyphoid

associated w i t h Herakles. 1 4 2

Herakles

often

holds

a round-bodied,

stemless

kantharos, with round body, flaring lip, ring foot, and vertical

Pholos has long hair gathered b y a fillet, a thick braid run-

handles attached to the outside in the manner of a metal ves-

ning along the side of his face, w a v y front curls, and a sharply

sei. 1 4 0 H e carries an early version of the type on a Middle

pointed beard. T h e block is broken through his body, leaving

Protocorinthian pyxis lid from Perachora illustrating the cen-

only the upper human b o d y and part of a leg. T h e rest of the

tauromachy. 1 4 1 John Boardman has s h o w n that in A t t i c vase

figure should be restored with human legs and equine hindquarters; he p r o b a b l y led w i t h the background leg, as do all the

Stesichoros' Geryoneis (Davies 1991, 19 = frag. 181; Ath. 11.499). 140 Archaic metal parallels (although with narrower lip and decorated handles) include a cup from Olympia (Olympia IV, pl. 35.671); cup and two sets of handles from the Argive Heraion (Waldstein 1902, nos. 2033-5, Ρ'· 118). A similarly shaped vessel is depicted between two karchesia on a fragmentary Chian chalice, London, British Museum 1888.6-1.515 and 516 (Lemos 1991, no. 742, pis. Ill, 98). The shape has an early history in clay, e.g., in Attika (Courbin 1953, pp. 322-45) and in East Greece (Walter 1968, pp. 36-9, fig. 21, pis. 16, 26, 28, 30). 141 From Perachora. Athens, National Museum: Payne 1962, no. 1114a, pi. 48; CorVP 25,C2; Ahlberg-Cornell 1992, no. 101, fig. 179; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 709, no. 365, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'; Splitter 2000, no. 9. 139

other figures.143 With Pholos' missing hindquarters restored at the same length as the other centaurs' (c.0.30-0.38 m., measured f r o m the small of the back to the d o c k of the tail), the block w o u l d be at least 2.80 m. long. Since the sequence of

142 Boardman 1979a, pp. 149-51. Herakles and the kantharos: Wolf 1993, pp. 88-91. 143 Contra Clarke 1898, figs. 55, 62, where Pholos is restored leading with the foreground (i.e., proper right) leg.

177 T H E

SCULPTURE

Σ53

A6

Η

.540

1

.675

1

.330

WÌ^Ìr

-2.605 .367

-

1— . 2 7 6 —|

M .038

· . JL- IV·.' > •'.-Λ-'-··-.

Η—I

1

1—I—I .5

h

H—I—I—I—I—h 1 1.5

H

1—I 2

h

H

1 1 h 2.5

3m

FIGURE 77. A6: Galloping centaurs.

geison blocks proves that A 5 belongs to the southeast corner,

taurs gallop to the right; three have their arms outstretched, and

w e k n o w that originally it must have measured c.2.95 m.

one shoulders a tree branch. T h e three to the right l o o k for-

(see Chapter 8, 'Arrangement of the Sculpture'). T h e extra

ward, but the last on the left turns to l o o k behind. T h e length of

area may have been filled with an additional iconographie

the block, 2.605

element such as the wine pithos or Pholos' cave, both of

the façade, but the metopal spaces are very different in size

w h i c h appear in other scenes of the m y t h . 1 4 4 F u l l y equine centaurs decorate the three additional reliefs,

m·'

(0.810 m. and 0.675

reflects the standard intercolumniation of m-)j

a

block such as this c o u l d take a

corner position on the flank as well.

A 6 , A 7 , and A 8 , and at least one metope, M 7 (Pis. 93-7, 105a-

O n l y three centaurs survive on relief A 7 , but their position

b; Figs. 77-9, 84). T h e y s h o w their monstrosity b y having

allows f o r four, as on the complete relief A6. From chest to croup

longer hair and thicker beards than the humans depicted on

the centaur bodies are c.0.3 8-0.40 m. long; with the tail, they are

the temple, but none of them has the snub nose, animal ears, or

0.50-0.55 m. long. The addition of a fourth centaur of approxi-

bald pate that generally characterize the breed. Each of the

mately the same size as, and equally spaced from, the other three,

blocks has at least f o u r centaurs galloping to the right in a

w o u l d restore the relief to a length of c.2.60 m. w i t h the central

stiff-legged, springy stride. Changes in glance and gesture

régula significantly off axis (that is, c.1.16 m. f r o m the left edge

break the m o n o t o n y of the cavalcade. Some centaurs run with

compared to 0.96 m. f r o m the right; Fig. 78). T h e asymmetry

outstretched arms, while others shoulder tree branches in their

may well result f r o m the position of the relief o n the building,

left arms and keep their right close to the side. A t least three

but there are other reliefs that have the discrepancy, such as A i o

centaurs glance back over their shoulders, t w o turn to face the

(see Chapter 8, 'Arrangement of the Sculpture'). It is also con-

viewer, and the rest l o o k ahead.

ceivable that relief A 7 could have only three centaurs, with the

Relief A 6 alone preserves the complete composition and

left side of the block completed b y a small filler motif deter-

major dimensions of the blocks in this series. Here, four cen-

mined by the position of the block in the sequence.

Architectural examples that show the pithos include: frieze from Akalan (supra n. 136); plaques from Praisos, Paris, Louvre AM842 {LIMC 8 [1997], p.708, no. 3 j8, 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); restored in the metope of Pholos from Foce del Sele (Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1954, pi. 19). The pithos frequently figures on vases; see LI MC 8 (1997), pp. 691-3, 708, nos. 237-240, 244, 250, 252, 254, 262-3, 355> 359_i>2, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides', and additional examples in Heldensage3 pp. 90, 178-82.

sequence of fleeing centaurs. T h e fragment, b r o k e n left, pre-

Relief A48, discovered in 1987, adds a substantial piece to the 144

serves t w o centaurs galloping right; the left one runs with arms outstretched, facing in the direction he flees, w h i l e the right one turns full face to the viewer and shoulders a large tree club. T h e roots are visible near his hand, and the trunk extends as a

«ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—I 0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3m FIGURE 78. Ay: Galloping centaurs.

flat-raised surface behind his head. T h e left centaur has a ribbed

and Pl. 97, upper right) and continues across to the upper right

beard and forelocks; the right one w h o faces out wears Iiis hair

side of A 8 , where it is visible on the sawed-off back of the relief.

cut straight across the back just b e l o w the ear. 145 A raised band

N o other decorated blocks f r o m the temple, as far as w e can see,

runs diagonally f r o m the foreleg to the chest, emphasizing the

have this kind of flaw. T h e t w o fragments must join.

leg muscles. T h e hairstyle is not identical to the smooth coiffure of the

A 8 and A48 combined f o r m a cavalcade of five centaurs. 1 4 6 The restored composition has an internal s y m m e t r y based on

centaurs on A 8 , but there are good reasons to join these t w o

gesture and glance, w i t h the t w o end centaurs turning to face,

fragments. The position of the bodies, especially the heads

the next t w o looking forward, and the middle one glancing

relative to the shoulders, are distinctive among the centaur

back over his shoulder. T h e frontal faces are almost completely

reliefs; so too, the shape of the horsy part (although the crisp-

destroyed, but the centaur on M 7 gives some idea of their

ness of the foreleg muscle has been eroded in A8). A s for the

character (Fig. 84). T h e left side of the relief should end in a

difference in hairstyles, the sphinxes on relief A 2 s h o w the

complete centaur with equine parts roughly the same size as

same diversity. T h e t w o fragments have not been physically

the others (c.050 m. f r o m chest to tail). 1 4 7 Restoring the block

joined, but the break is a good fit. A n d perhaps most convincingly, a large volcanic inclusion runs through both fragments. The flaw appears between the t w o centaurs on relief A48 (Pi. 96 145 Compare to the frontal wrestler on a belly amphora by the Andokides Painter, Berlin, Staatliche Museen F2159: ABV253.1, ARV2 3.1, Para 320; Korshak 1987, pl. 42.

146 As the composition of A8 suggests: Clarke 1898, p. 266; Sartiaux 1915, p. 33, fig. 44; Finster-Hotz 1984, p. 15. 147 Contra Clarke (1898, pp. 264-6, fig. 59), who describes relief A8 as complete to the left and restores the hindquarters of the left-hand centaur on the contiguous block. In the folio report (Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 151), the relief is shown as broken left, but the hindquarters of the centaur are again restored on the contiguous block.

179 T H E

SCULPTURE

A8/48

2.505

1 Ν -=ΜΠ L J Ä ^ J S I I ~T~!f \

1

ίΛ

Ο

~~— Ύ ^Λ

/

.5

Η—I—I—I—h 1

H

1 1 1.5

h

H—I—I—I—h 2

—I—I—I—I—h 2.5 3m

FIGURE 79. A8/48: Galloping centaurs.

to a length of c.2.73 m. w i t h a left partial régula c.0.33 m. long

between the right sphinx on A i

provides adequate space for the final centaur's hindquarters.

including the tubular bodies, Pholos' hair style, the groove

and the

figures

on A 5 ,

A l t h o u g h the right partial régula has broken away, the position

encircling the entire socket of Herakles' eye, and his flat,

of the pry mark on the upper surface sets the approximate

scroll-like ear, suggest that these reliefs are the w o r k of the

length of the metopal space at a maximum of 0.79 m. and a

same sculptor.

probable length of c.0.75 m. These dimensions suggest a pos-

T h e style of the figures in relief A 6 has no ready parallels on

ition on the façade.

other reliefs f r o m the temple. These centaurs, w i t h their strag-

Sculptors

have a wilder appearance; one even bellows. T h e y lack a

gly beards and unkempt hair pinned back b y small round ears, composition

sharply defined fold of skin joining the hind h o c k to the

indicate the centauromachy reliefs were designed as a group,

trunk, as w e l l as genitalia; their human parts f l o w smoothly

but the distinctive carving of each relief suggests the hands

into their equine bodies.

The

reduplication

of different

of pose and the repeated

artists. 148

in anatomical

Differences appear in facial features,

details, and in the shapes of the

B y contrast, the centaurs on A8/A48 have stockier equine

centaurs'

trunks, pectorals carved in high relief, and distinctive ' V ' -

weapons. The human forelegs, triangular chests, and long,

shaped clavicles. T h e y also carry tree trunks w i t h articulated

tubular horse-bodies of the centaurs on A j , rendered in flattish

roots, w h i c h do not appear in the other reliefs, w i t h the pos-

relief, immediately set them apart f r o m the others. Similarities

sible exception of metope My. Sartiaux connected the centaurs on relief Ay w i t h the one on metope My, but there is in fact a

Contra Sartiaux 1915, pp. 46, 71, and Baur 1912, p. 69. Sartiaux sees a resemblance between the horse bodies of the centaurs on A6 and those on A8/ A48 and connects the centaurs on relief A7 and metope M7. Clarke 1898, p. 169, distinguishes only the sculptor of relief A 5 and the sculptor of the other reliefs, A6-A8/A4S. 148

closer similarity of the centaur furthest right o n the newly discovered A48 with the centaur on My. B o t h assume the same pose, turn full face to the viewer, have short hair squarely cut off just above the shoulder, and carry roughly blocked-out

180

THE

SCULPTURE

tree trunks resembling cricket bats. 1 4 9 It seems likely that the

representations in architectural sculpture, suggests that the

same sculptor w o r k e d on A8/A48 and on M 7 . If so, the con-

theme had some regional importance. T h e idea f o r including

nection between A 7 and M 7 suggested b y Sartiaux is broken,

the Pholos legend on the temple at Assos may have been inspired

because it is difficult to see a close stylistic relationship be-

by such programmes; certainly the urge to create a cavalcade of

tween reliefs A 7 and A8. T h e A 7 centaurs' longer hair and their

centaurs across several reliefs must have been encouraged b y the

sway-backed equine trunks mark the w o r k of yet another

familiar repetitive designs of local terracotta revetments.

sculptor; the similarly shaped tree trunks may reflect the hand of the designer.

However, these architectural w o r k s do not provide the closest parallels for the general composition or the specific detail of

T h e heads of the centaurs o n A8/A48 resemble the heads of

relief A 5 . O n l y the frieze f r o m Akalan definitely depicts the

the symposiasts on A 4 : they have similarly domed crania,

encounter at the cave of Pholos. Moreover, the only type of

almond-shaped

eyes, and profiles with receding forehead,

centaur that does not appear on the temple at Assos is the one

sharp nose, and pursed lips. Their beards taper to thick points

favoured in Aeolia, northern Ionia, and their dependants during

after smoothly covering the chin. These centaurs alone have

the second half of the sixth century—the centaur with a Silenos-

hair that curls under at a point just above the nape of the neck.

type face, including snub nose and animal ears, and human

Possibly the same sculptor is at w o r k on these t w o reliefs.

forelegs ending in horse's hooves. 1 5 3 The scenes also differ. O n the terracotta revetment f r o m Larisa, Herakles knocks an attack-

Iconography

ing centaur on the head with his club; on the antefix f r o m

Scenes of Herakles putting centaurs to rout appear frequently in

Mytilene, he kneels as an archer, but the centaur attacks. The

architectural contexts during the Archaic period, mainly on the

composition from distant A k a l a n shows Herakles clad in a lion

small-scale friezes of East Greece and western Anatolia, where

skin, kneeling next to an unburied pithos as he draws his b o w

the composition could be tailored to fill a narrow field of virtu-

against several fully equine centaurs fleeing right, but Pholos is

ally any length. 1 5 0 We find the rout certainly on terracotta

missing. T h e remains from Neandria, A m y z o n , and Thasos are

revetments from Larisa and Akalan, and possibly on similar

too fragmentary for comparison, but the implications are clear.

decorations found at Thasos, A m y z o n , Neandria, Mytilene,

While the general theme was popular in the architectural sculp-

and Sardis. 1 5 1 It may have appeared on the parapet f r o m the

ture of western Anatolia, none of the surviving examples directly

Temple of Artemis at Ephesos as well. 1 3 2 G i v e n the strong

inspired or were themselves inspired by the design of relief A 5 .

connection between Lakonia and East Greece in the Archaic

In fact, Corinthian representations provide the closest par-

period, w e note here its appearance on the T h r o n e of A p o l l o at

allels f o r the design and specific details of relief A 5 , including a

A m y k l a i and possibly the Temple of Athena

Chalkioikos

startled Pholos watching a nude Herakles draw his b o w on

as well. 1 5 3 B y comparison, the story has more limited appeal

retreating, human-legged centaurs w h o carry tree branches for

elsewhere,

Sele

weapons. Corinthian painters regularly depict Herakles as a

(see below). 1 5 4 T h e popularity of Herakles battling centaurs in

nude archer (or wearing a short tunic, but no lion skin) shoot-

with

the

famous

exception

of

Foce

del

western Anatolia, an area not generally given to mythological

ing at retreating, human-legged centaurs w h o brandish tree clubs. The centaurs can be hairy and bushy-bearded but are

Compare branches carried by centaurs on the First Heraion at Foce del Sele: Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1954, pp. nos. 3-5, pp. 121-40, pis. 26-7, 54-7· „ 150 Akerström 1966, pp. 234-5; Holtzmann 1979, pp. 5-7; Brize 1980, pp. 52-4, 146-50; Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 21-8. 151 From western Anatolian and northeast Aegean islands: Larisa (Akerström 1966, pp. 48-9, 55-7, pis. 26-7; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 695, no. 284, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); Akalan (supra n. 136); terracotta relief from Thasos (Holtzmann 1979, pp. 1-9); terracotta relief from Amyzon (Akerström 1966, p. 117, pi. 59.2); terracotta relief from Neandria (Akerström 1966, pp. 10—r 1, pi. 4.4,5); antefix from Mytilene, Archaeological Museum no. 1472 (Akerström 1966, p. 26, pi. 12.1). Herakles as archer from Sardis (excerpt from the rout?): Akerström 1966, p. 8, pi. 38. Centaurs from Pazarli (again an excerpt?): Akerström 1966, p. 167, no. 5, p. 179, pi. 94.1. Slightly earlier stage on clay plaques from Praisos, Paris, Louvre AM842 and other fragments: LIMC 8 (1997), p. 708, no. 358, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'. 152 London, British Museum B208-13: Pryce 1928, pp. 84-5, figs. 127-30; Muss 1994, pp. 81-2, 85, fig. 57 (possibly the Thessalian centauromachy). 153 Throne of Apollo, Amyklai: Pausanias 3.18.10; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 693, no. 257, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'. Temple of Athena Chalkioikos: Pausanias 3.17.3. 154 Possibly a metope from Thermon inscribed [Ph]olo[s], Athens National Museum: LIMC 8 (1997), p. 709, no. 368, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'. Metope from the Athenian Treasury at Delphi, probably Nessos or Eurytion: La CosteMesselière 1957, pp. 108-12, no. 16, pis. 46-8, although called an excerpt from Pholoe centauromachy by Pipili 1987, p. 81; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 695, no. 283, s.v. 1+9

not otherwise monstrous. 1 5 6 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'. First Heraion at Foce del Sele: Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1954, nos. 1-6, pp. 111-40, pis. 26, 52-7; Van Keuren 1989, pp.147-9; Junker 1993, pp. 48-55, pi. 10; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 695, no. 281, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'. 153 Cf., e.g., centaurs on friezes from Larisa and Thasos (supra n. 151; also Launey, EtThas I, 1944, p. 150, fig. 86); on Klazomenian sarcophagi (R. Cook 1981, nos. G23, G35, G40); on Klazomenian pottery, Berlin, Staatliche Museen 453iAc-d (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 683, no. 138, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); on a Fikellura amphora from Histria, Museum Inv. V19996 (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 698, no. 316, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); on Caeretan hydriai (Hemelrijk 1984, nos. 7, 16, 17, 20, 25, 27; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 692, no. 247, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); on Campana Group pottery, including: hydria, Bonn, Akademisches Kunstmuseum V2674 {LIMC 8 (1997), p. 684, no. 157, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); dinos, Copenhagen, National Museum 13443 (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 680, no. 101, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'). See also gems: onyx scarab, London, British Museum 470 (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 683, no. 143, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); agate scaraboid, London, British Museum 519 (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 683, no. 144, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'). 156 von Steuben 1968, pp. 26-8; Ahlberg-Cornell 1992, pp. 102-5; Splitter 2000, pp. 49-50, and catalogue. Note, e.g., Middle Protocorinthian kotyle, Richmond, Virginia Museum of Fine Arts 80.27 (Splitter 2000, no. 8; Padgett 2003, pp. 177-81, no. 30); Late Protocorinthian aryballos, Berlin, Staatliche Museen F336 (Payne 1931, p. 129, no. 1; CorVP 37,1; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 691, no. 235, s.v.

THE

SCULPTURE

T w o extant Corinthian depictions of the rout include Pholos

*33

taurs converging aggressively on Herakles, w h o uses both b o w

as well. O n an early sixth-century Corinthian kotyle, Pholos

and club, or only a sword, to drive them off. Herakles usually

stands before his cave b y the half-sunk pithos, holding the cup

wears a lion skin; the centaurs always have equine forequarters

of wine in one hand while raising the other in a gesture identical to that of Pholos on relief

A5.137

O n the fragmentary

and Silenos-style heads; and the pithos and Pholos rarely appear. The iconography produced in other mainland centres is

Protocorinthian pyxis lid mentioned above, a bearded Pholos

no closer to that of A 5 . Herakles can appear as an archer, but

holding a huge, vertically handled cup anxiously follows Hera-

the centaurs have equine forequarters and Pholos is ex-

kles, w h o strides to the right after a fleeing, club-wielding,

cluded. 1 6 3 O n e exception, itself possibly derived from C o r -

human-legged centaur. 158 A l t h o u g h Herakles' upper torso is

inthian prototypes, is a Lakonian dinos n o w

missing, the quiver on his back and the bent right elbow

Maria Pipili has highlighted the iconographie ambiguities of

suggest that he draws a bow.

the scene, in w h i c h a nude Herakles, club in hand, may either

in Paris. 164

A Corinthian prototype for the scene on A 5 becomes all the

greet or attack human-legged Pholos as a second human-legged

more apparent in comparison to the iconography of the rout

centaur runs away and other equine centaurs gallop or collapse

elsewhere. Early sixth-century Attic scenes of the rout are not

in disarray.

conventionalized, 1 3 9 but the more frequent representations in

The other certain example of this myth in stone architectural

the second and third quarters of the sixth century show cen-

decoration appears in Magna Graecia on a sequence of met-

taurs with equine forequarters favouring stones over branches

opes decorating the first Heraion at Foce del Sele. There are

as weapons. Herakles often wears a short tunic and lion skin;

certain important similarities with the scene at Assos, including

he rarely uses his bow, preferring instead the sword or club. liKJ

the attitude of Pholos and his relation to Herakles, as well as

Pholos does not appear. O n Tyrrhenian amphorae, Herakles,

Herakles' stance, dress, and weapon. These features, however,

dressed in the lion skin, wields club, sword, or b o w against

probably derive from a shared Corinthian prototype. 1 6 5 The

fully equine centaurs; again the scenes lack Pholos. 1 6 1 In the

significant differences—the centaurs are equine-legged and at-

Late Archaic period, Attic vase painters shift from the rout

tack rather than flee—argue against any closer connection.

(without Pholos) to quieter scenes of Herakles and Pholos

Other West Greek and Etruscan representations of Pholos

lifting the lid of the pithos or reclining to enjoy a drink. 1 6 2

usually show him seated before his cave or the pithos; the

O n the infrequent scenes of the rout, painters depict the cen-

centaurs attack. 1 6 6

'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'; Splitter 2000, no. 11); Late Protocorinthian sack alabastron, Florence, Museo Archeologico 79252 (CorVP 630; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 691, no. 236, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'; Splitter 2000, no. 10); Early Corinthian skyphos, London, British Museum 1892.3-8.1 (Payne 1931, no. 693; Schiffler 1976, Κ 17, pl. 6; CorVP 630; Splitter 2000, no. 53); Middle Corinthian column krater, Corinth, Archaeological Museum C-1930.103 ( L I M C 8 (1997), p. 692, no. 251, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'; Boardman 1998, fig. 397; Splitter 2000, no. 103); Late Corinthian aryballos, London, British Museum 1935.5-18.2 (Schiffler 1976, Κ 19; CorVP 631; Splitter 2000, no. 167); other examples listed in CorVP, pp. 630-1. Corinthian parallels suggest to me that the centauromachy on the Chest of Kypselos (Pausanias 5-19.9) had a composition with fleeing rather than attacking centaurs, but Splitter 2000, fig. 39 and reconstruction, retains the composition of advancing centaurs originally proposed by von Massow (1916, pp. 101-2, fig. 25, pi. 1).

Corinthian imagery strongly suggest that the designer of this

The several features of relief A 5 that find parallel only in

13:7 Paris, Louvre M N C 677: Payne 1931, no. 941, pl. 31.9-10; CorVP 184,1, pi. 70.1; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 693, no. 252, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'; Splitter 2000, no. 102. Herakles fights with firebrands rather than a bow, as in Apollodoros, Library 2.5.4. 138 Supra n. 141. 139 Closest to our A5 is an early Attic skyphos fragment with Herakles as archer pursuing a centaur, Athens, National Museum 16400: A A, 1939, col. 227, fig. 1; Schiffler 1976, A 26; Ahlberg-Cornell 1992, p. 105, no. 103, fig. 181. 160 The rare exceptions include a louterion by Sophilos, Athens, National Museum 15918, 15942 (ABV 40,21; Para 18; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 692, no. 242, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); column krater by Painter of Vatican 309, Athens, National Museum 635 (ABV 122,24; Graef-Langlotz I, no. 635C-e, pi. 41). 161 Note especially Tyrrhenian amphora in a private collection (Padgett 2003, pp. 186-9, n o · 33)· See also Hobart, University of Tasmania 59 ( L I M C 4 (1988), p. 115, no. 50, s.v. 'Eurytion', (E. Zervoudaki)); and possibly Paris, Louvre E849 {LIMC 5 (1990), p. 890, no. 81, s.v. 'Kaineus', (E. Laufer)). 162 Luce 1924, pp. 300-6; ABL 137-9, ΡΡ· 1M~% Schauenburg 1971, pp. 43-54; Schiffler 1976, pp. 37-41, nos. A/Ph 1-38; Verbanck-Piérard 1982, pp. 143-54; Noël 1983, pp. 141-50; Brammer 1984, pp. 54-8; Schefold 1992, pp. 135-7, figs· 159, 161; Wolf 1993, pp. 41-2; LIMC 8 (1997), pp. 691-3, 709-10, nos. 237-41, 261-3, 3 51—64 s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'.

relief w o r k e d from a Corinthian or Corinthian-inspired prototype. M o s t of the Corinthian examples belong to the seventh century, with the latest dating to the first quarter of the sixth century. Their production is thus significantly earlier than even the earliest date proposed for the temple at Assos. However, the Corinthian legacy was strong and may have lingered in East

163 e.g., 'Pseudo-Chalkidian' neck amphora, Berlin, Staatliche Museen F1670 {LIMC 8 (1997), p. 693, no. 255, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); 'Pseudo-Chalkidian' neck amphora on which Herakles uses a club against fully equine centaurs, Paris, Louvre CA10532 (Vallet 1956, no. 2, pis. 4-5); Boeotian kantharos, Munich, Staatliche Antikensammlungen 7740 {LIMC 8 (1997), p. 693, no. 253, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); Euboian amphora, Eretria, Archaeological Museum (Schiffler 1976, no. EU 1 (Herakles uses a sword)); relief pithos fragments from Melos, Athens, British School {LIMC 8 (1997), p. 694, no. 272, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'; Simantoni-Bournia 2004, fig. 162); relief pithos fragment from Argive Heraion that show Herakles as kneeling archer against fully equine centaurs, Athens, National Museum 14209 {LIMC 8 (1997), p. 694, no. 273, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'; Waldstein 1902.II, pp. 180-1, pi. 63.1-3). 164 Paris, Louvre E662: Stibbe 1972, no. 313, pis. 110.4, 111.2; Pipili 1987, pp. 7-10, no. 15; LIMC 8 (1997), p- 693, no. 254, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'. 163 Supra n. 156; Brize 1980, p. 53. ,6ft Etruscan scenes: LIMC 5 (1990), pp. 227-8, nos. 277-9, 282-3, 285-7, s.v. 'Herakles/Herde', (S. Schwarz); Banti 1966, pp. 371-9; Krauskopf 1974, pp. 20-2; Schiffler 1976, pp. 136-9; Hemelrijk 1984, p. 178 and η. 745· From Magna Graecia, note a silver relief with a kneeling archer attacking a human-legged centaur across two metopes, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 1927.122.23 {LIMC 8 (1997), p. 695, no. 279, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides;' Padgett 2003, pp. 184-6, no. 32); relief vessel, Croton, Museo Archeologico Nazionale 1224 {LIMC 8 (!997)> Ρ· 695, no. 277, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides;' Krauskopf 1974. fig· 8); arula, Croton {LIMC 8 (1997), p. 694, no. 275, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides').

182

THE

SCULPTURE

Greece. B y the second half of the sixth century, most ordinary

necessity and benevolence of her support. Herakles is also

G r e e k centaurs have horse legs, but human-legged centaurs

intimately connected with centaurs; he has at least three serious

have a somewhat longer history in East G r e e k art. 1 6 7 Still, w e

encounters w i t h these half-humans, one of w h i c h ultimately

w o u l d be hard-pressed to place a scene such as this one m u c h

causes his death. 1 6 9 Wine or sex lies at the root of each con-

beyond the middle of the sixth century.

frontation, w i t h the centaurs abandoning all civilized behaviour for the acquisition of either. In the battle on M t Pholoe,

Significance of the iconography

the chief element of the s y m p o s i o n — w i n e — s e r v e s to distin-

Despite its potential monotony, the extended composition of

guish the hero f r o m the half-beasts. M a d with desire either to

Herakles putting centaurs to rout fits the long narrow field and

hoard the w i n e or drink it themselves, the inhospitable centaurs

carries the eye across the building more effectively than any of

thwart the efforts of Pholos to honour Herakles as a guest. 1 7 0

the other scenes on the epistyle. A l t h o u g h the overall impres-

T h e y assault Herakles w h e n he attempts to drink the wine, a

sion is highly decorative, the m y t h was not arbitrarily selected

flagrant violation of xenia. T h e m y t h represents a failed s y m -

for its compositional opportunities. Wilhelm Roscher and,

posion. Herakles alexikakos,

later, Bernard H o l t z m a n n have suggested that the centauroma-

bestial and barbarous, must set the centaurs to rout. 1 7 1 C e n -

chy may have been intended to reference the Thessalian origins

taurs serve as metaphors for the negative potential in human

defender of the civilized f r o m the

of the A e o l i c people, a relationship that seems subtle but not

behaviour, revealed, in this case, b y wine. Herakles cannot

impossible, given at least some confusion over the location of

entirely destroy these creatures (they are expressions of the

the episode on M t Pholoe. 1 6 8

potent natural forces partly embodied in the G r e e k s ' favourite

M o r e immediately accessible to the viewer, however, w o u l d

animal, the horse), but he can put them in disarray and thereby

have been the basic meaning of the m y t h itself, made all the

diminish their negative force. T h e price is high, for the well-

more striking given the broader ideas embodied in the sculp-

intentioned and civil Pholos, still clutching the cup of wine,

tural programme. A t h e n a is the great patron of Herakles; his

will be destroyed in the conflict.

appearance on her temple serves as a reminder of both the

O n e cannot dismiss the admonitory tone of this m y t h w h e n set in the broader context of the scenes on the epistyle. T h e

e.g., a kneeling Herakles draws his bow against a fleeing, human-legged centaur in afineexample of the rout on an East Greek bronze relief from Olympia, Athens, National Museum 6444 (Brize 1985, pp. 76-80, pi. 23.2). Compare landscape elements to Mytilene antefix (supra n. 151). For the legs of East Greek centaurs, see Schiffler 1976, pp. 91-106. East Greek centaurs with human forelegs from the mid-sixth century appear on, e.g., the following: situla, Cairo, Egyptian Museum 32377 (Schiffler 1976, Ο 4, pl. 9; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 680, no. 98, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'); relief pithoi, Athens, National Museum nos. 5604, 5607, and Mariemont Museum B82 (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 683, no. 134, s.v. 'Kentauroi et Kentaurides'; Simantoni-Bournia 2004, p. 58, fig. 38). Representations of human-legged centaurs from the third quarter of the sixth century include: Ionic cup, Langlotz Collection (Samos VI.1, p. 129, no. 446, pi. 51); Campana dinos, Rome, Villa Giulia, Inv. 25134 {CVA Villa Giulia 3, pl. 1.6). From the early fifth century, see: Klazomenian sarcophagi (R. Cook 1981, pp. 31-2, no. Gì, pi. 42,3; G20, pi. 84, 3; G25, fig. 31). The centaur on fragment B209 from the Temple of Artemis at Ephesos (supra n. 152) has a human leg, but the foot (or hoof?) is not preserved. Centaurs with human forelegs linger particularly in other outlying areas such as Boeotia and Etruria; cf. Schiffler 1976, p. 103 and n. 363; LIMC 8 (1997), pp. 72χ—7, s.v. 'Kentauroi (in Etruria)', (C. Weber-Lehmann). 107

Roscher II. 1, col. 1088, s.v. 'Kentauren'; Holtzmann 1979, p. 6; Finster-Hotz 1984, p. 28, n. 54. For reassessment of the Aeolian migration, see Rose (2008), who argues against population movements in the Iron Age and sees a vested interest in the migration stories chiefly during the Classical and Hellenistic periods in response to the Persian wars. The myth, if not the reality, of a Thessalian ancestry was, however, part of the poetics by the later seventh century, for in the Homeric Hymn to Apollo, Makar, king of Lesbos, is son of Aiolos, king of Thessaly (although other genealogies are offered). Other founders include Lesbos, son of Lapithes, son of Aiolos; or Orestes and the Penthelids. There arc connections between Thessaly and Arkadia on the one hand, and Thessaly and Mt Pholoe and Lesbos on the other. Centaurs inhabit both Thessaly and Arkadia. Later authors leave no doubt that Herakles meets Pholos and the centaurs in the Peloponnese, but Euripides has Herakles fight them in Thessaly, too (Herakles 182, 364-74; see commentary, Bond 1981, pp. 115, 156-7). There may have been a Mt Pholoe in Thessaly; see Statius, Achilleid 1.168-70 and Lucan, Pharsalia 3.198, 7.449,827. A papyrus text establishes a link between Mt Pholoe and the foundation story of Lesbos involving Makar. For text and commentary, Haslam 1986, pp. 115, 119-21, no. 3711 (commentary on lines 2iff.). For Aiolos, see Preller-Robert4 II. 1, pp. 51-4; Roscher I.i, cols. 192-5. I am grateful to George Huxley for discussing these issues with me. 168

centauromachy is purposefully juxtaposed with its purely natural and fully civilized counterparts, represented on the one hand b y lions savaging prey (reliefs A 9 - A 1 3 ) and on the other by the congenial s y m p o s i o n (relief A4). T h e basic actions of eating and drinking connect these reliefs in clear polarity. Powerful, amoral images of natural strength frame demonstrations of proper and improper human behaviour; the consequences of half-human, failed civility are directly opposed to the fully human expression of civility, of w h i c h w e will say more below.

Relief

A3: Herakles

wrestling

Triton

O n relief A 3 , Herakles wrestles w i t h Triton in the presence of six excited Nereids (Pis. 9 8 - i o o a - c ; Fig. 80). T h e superior quality of this relief and its iconographie dependence

on

Athenian pedimental sculpture has justly made it the bestk n o w n scene f r o m the temple. T h e relief is carved o n several shallow planes, with figures set one behind another to suggest their spatial relationship. T h e wrestling pair is depicted on a monumental scale well composed to fit the long narrow field, with hero and monster nearly equal in size. Herakles, naked

169 In addition to the Mt Pholoe episode, Herakles dispatches Eurytion and Nessos (LIMC 6 (1992), pp. 838-47, s.v. 'Nessos', (F. Diez de Valasco)). According to Pausanias (3.18.16), he fights the centaur Oreios on the Throne of Apollo at Amyklai as well. 170 duBois 1982, pp. 28-32; Noël 1983, pp. 141-50; Detienne 1986, pp. 64-6. For xenia, see Adkins 1963, pp. 30-45; Murray 1980, pp. 49-52; Scott 1982, pp. 1-19. 171 Segal 1974, p. 300. Herakles is not above violating xenia, but that is not relevant here; see Galinsky 1972, pp. 11-17.

THE

SCULPTURE

l5

9

A3 .345

1-

H

.574

.818

Η

1—I

h

.5

H

1

1—l· 1

H

1—I

h 1.5

H

1 2

1—I

1—I

1 1 2.5

1—I

1 1 3m

FIGURE 8O. A3: Herakles wrestling Triton.

but armed with a tubular quiver of arrows slung over his back,

portionally large heads, long hair, and accentuated limbs. Each

lunges beside Triton, encircling his arms around the wriggling

Nereid wears a foldless chiton belted at the waist to overhang

sea deity to grasp his human wrists. Triton's fishy b o d y undu-

in a schematic kolpos w i t h a rectangular w i n d o w . T h e style, as

lates across the relief, issuing small dorsal and ventral fins and

w e have noted, is at home in the region. 1 7 6 The sculptor went to

ending in a double-pronged tail fin. 1 7 2 H e is smooth and pos-

some trouble to shape the inner contours of the legs beneath

sibly scaleless in the East G r e e k manner of representing mer-

the clinging skirts, surely in order to help emphasize the move-

men, although such details, w h i c h w o u l d have been difficult to

ment of the

carve in the gritty andesite, could have been picked out in

figures.177

Unlike the closed or processional compositions o n the other

paint. 1 7 3 H i s right arm, poised across his chest, conveniently

reliefs f r o m the temple, the action here w o r k s in opposite

disguises the juncture between his fishy and human parts. T h e

directions, w i t h Herakles and Triton moving right and the

fragmentary object in Triton's raised left hand has been called a

Nereids

conch, but it looks more like a thin, sickle-shaped fish with a

ations—either requiring or generated by the extraordinary

small triangular tail; parallels in other media suggest the

length of the b l o c k — m a y have dictated the unusual placement

processing

left.

Specific

architectural

consider-

same. 1 7 4 T h e thin object projecting f r o m the top of Herakles'

of the four Nereids to the left. T h e axial spacings indicate that

quiver may be a bundle of arrows or the end of a short bow, the

the relief can take a position only on a façade or over the central

preferred weapon in this struggle. 1 7 5

intercolumniation of the pronaos.

T h e agitated Nereids m o v e away f r o m the wrestlers. F o u r fill the left side of the block, while t w o more stand behind the

Sculptor

wrestlers, effectively tying together the t w o parts of the com-

T h e Triton and symposion (A4) reliefs are similar in design and

position. These isocephalic females are stout figures w i t h pro-

style; they look like the w o r k of the same sculptor. Both combine monumental protagonists w i t h isocephalic ancillary

For fishy bodies: Shepard 1940, pp. 10-30; LIMC 8 (1997), pp. 83-5, s.v. 'Tritones' (N. Icard-Gianolio). 173 Compare Triton on the Northampton Amphora (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 73, no. 3, s.v. 'Tritones') or on a Klazomenian oinochoe, Museumslandschaft Hessen Kassel T438 (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 73, no. 2, s.v. 'Tritones'). 174 Contra Clarke 1898, pp. 221-2; Sartiaux 1915, p. 30. On 15 Attic blackfigure examples of this scene, Triton clutches a dolphin or fish by the tail; otherwise, he holds nothing; see Glynn 1977, catalogue; Brommer 1984, p. 91; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 72, s.v. 'Triton' {N. Icard-Gianolio). 175 Glynn (1977, catalogue, pp. 85-95) c i t e s 35 instances where Herakles wears a quiver and/or bow when he wrestles Triton, compared to the 15 representations where he holds a sword and the 19 representations where he carries a club. 172

figures. Triton's slightly puckered lips that fail to meet at the corners, sharp nose that ends in a flaring wing, full beard, and ovoid head are especially close to the features of the centreright symposiast on relief A 4 . Herakles' long, schematic ear with squarish lobe compares best w i t h those of the symposiasts. A l l these figures wear their hair tightly rolled under at the

176 177

Supra n. 27. Compare the Karaköy relief or the Polyxena sarcophagus, supra n. 28.

184 T H E

SCULPTURE

nape of the neck; only Triton's now-damaged coiffure is

century, depicting Herakles wrestling a sea deity (Akropolis

slightly longer. Herakles' taut physique, especially his swelling

no. 2 and A k r o p o l i s no. 36). 185 The iconography is distinctive:

biceps and pectorals, matches the upper torsos of the first t w o

a naked Herakles moves alongside the sea daimon rather than

symposiasts; the curve of Triton's human chest is reflected in

straddling him. 1 8 6 T h e merman's fishy b o d y f l o w s in t w o gen-

the curving bodies of the reclining drinkers. Certainly the main

tle undulations, not the single, enormous

figures on these t w o reliefs are b y the same hand. Relief A8/48

popular on vase painting. His docility is typical of representa-

may belong to this group as w e l l . 1 7 8 A stylistic comparison of

tions belonging

the Nereids is less valuable, given their damaged state. N e v e r -

painted versions feature a more aggressive daimon that strug-

to the A k r o p o l i s

whiplash-curve

iconography;

canonical

theless, their stiff gestures and schematic poses stand in marked

gles violently against Herakles' wrestling holds. G i v e n that

contrast to the more fluidly represented protagonists on the

both hero and merman face the same direction in w h i c h their

same relief. Some explanation of the difference is required,

bodies m o v e on the Assian relief, related vases, and Sicilian

resting either in the challenges of the material, the skill of the

arulae, such may originally have been the case for one or both

sculptor, or the source of the image. T h e fact that a similar

of the A k r o p o l i s pediments. 1 8 7 While in front of and roughly

discrepancy appears between the symposiasts and their servant

parallel to the sea daimon, Herakles' lunge accentuates the

on relief A 3 suggests that w o r k i n g the difficult material at t w o

thrust f r o m the corner to the centre of the pedimental

different scales was a significant factor.

on the Athenian sculptures. T h e special force of this arrange-

field

ment is diminished but not entirely lost in the rectangular field Iconography

of the relief f r o m Assos.

A s early as 1842, J. de Witte noted the similarity of the Assos

A shared conception, scale, and composition suggest that the

scene to depictions on A t t i c vases and suggested identifying the

designer of the Assos relief was familiar with the Athenian

image as Herakles wrestling either Nereus or Triton. O t h e r

pediments. T h e Assian relief most closely resembles the larger

early efforts to interpret the iconography privileged H o m e r i c

and slightly later pediment, A k r o p o l i s no. 36, b o r r o w i n g f r o m

or Troadic connections. 1 7 9 Charles Texier recognized in the

it the gently undulating b o d y of Triton, the lunging position of

scene the struggle between Menelaos and Proteus recounted

Herakles, and probably the fish.188 T h e position of Herakles'

in the Odyssey (4.435-80), with the fleeing females represent-

legs (compressed inner left w i t h thrusting outer right) takes

ing Helen and her companions. 1 8 0 Frédéric de Clarac f o l l o w e d

something f r o m both of the pediments: the thrust f r o m A k r o -

in this vein, seeing in the symposion (A4) the peaceful reso-

polis no. 36, but the lifted knee f r o m A k r o p o l i s no. 2. T h e

lution of their wrestle. 1 8 1 In an attempt to connect the iconog-

Assos relief introduces some important innovations as well.

raphy more closely w i t h the geography of the Troad, C l a r k e

T h e clever grasp Herakles lays on Triton, reaching around

chose instead to identify the scene as Herakles freeing Hesione

Triton's shoulders to pin his wrists, appears new at Assos. 1 8 9

f r o m the sea

monster. 1 8 2

Sartiaux f o u n d Clarke's connection

compelling, even suggesting that the Nereids are j o y o u s Trojan w o m e n , cheering. 1 8 j Such stories, however, lie largely outside the archaic visual tradition. Herakles wrestling a sea deity, on the other hand, was enormously popular in archaic art, as de Witte first noted. In vase painting and shieldband reliefs, the sea deity is called Halios Geron, Nereus, or Triton; the latter t w o have a distinctive (although occasionally overlapping) iconography. 1 8 4 T o d a y it is obvious that the scene on the Assos relief is closely connected with the t w o important poros pediments f r o m the Athenian A k r o p o l i s , dated to the second quarter of the sixth 178 Clarke 1882, p. i n , groups A3 with A 5 and assigns A4 to a different sculptor. However, the figures of Herakles and the centaurs on A 5 lack the boldness of form and specific detail that distinguish the work on A3, A4, and AS/48. Sartiaux 1915, pp. 31 and 34, compares the heads on A3, A4, and A8 but does not attribute the reliefs to specific hands. 179 de Witte 1842, pp. 317-20. 1S" Texier 1849, p. 202, pi. 114. 181 Clarac 1841, pp. 1157-9. 182 Clarke 1882, p. 106; Clarke 1898, pp. 209-25. 183 Sartiaux 1915, pp. 50-2. 184 For bibliography, see LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 409-10, sv. 'Halios Geron', (R. Glynn); LIMC 6 (1992), p. 824, s.v. 'Nereus' (M. Pipili); LIMC 8 (ι997), p. 69, s.v. 'Triton'). See also Boardman in Rasmussen and Spivey 1991, pp. 91-3; Mommsen 2002.

185 Akropolis no. 2: Brouskari 1974, p. 37, no. 2, fig. 47; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 70, no. 16, s.v. 'Triton'. Akropolis no. 36: Brouskari 1974, pp. 39-40, no. 36, fig. 54; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 70, no. 17 s.v. 'Triton' (where surely Akropolis no. 36 is meant). 186 Group distinguished by Glynn 1981, nos. 2oa-4, pp. 127-30. Glynn's no. 24 is now Atlanta, Michael C. Carlos Museum no. 2000.2. J. Gaunt in Padgett 2003, pp. 343-6, no. 96, notes that the merman is clothed and therefore should be Nereus. Sicilian arulae share this composition, with the difference that both sea deity and Herakles are clothed; see van der Meijden 1993, pp. 83-7, 332-4, nos. MY24-6; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 70, no. 2oa-b, s.v. 'Triton'. 187 LIMC 8 (1997), p. 70, nos. 11, 18, 2oa-b, s.v. 'Triton'. On the Red Triton pediment, the sea deity faces forward; Herakles' head is lost. On the larger pediment, Akropolis no. 36, the direction in which both protagonists face is disputed. Early restorations show Herakles in profile with Triton turning full face: Heberdey 1919, p. 49; Buschor 1924, fig. 6; Schuchhardt 1935-6, figs. 14, 16. Dickens 1912, p. 83, suggests a three-quarter view for Triton. Broneer 1939, pp. 95-7, n. 2, figs. 4-5, pi. facing p. 95, restores the head of a young man found on the north slope of the Akropolis to Herakles, who would then be in three-quarter view, with Triton looking 'very slightly toward the spectator's left', in the manner of the popular type. The head of Herakles has been removed, opening the question once again. Triton's collarbone, often used as evidence that he faces frontally or in three-quarter view, is more part of the chest than the head, which is free—in archaic anatomy—to turn as suits the composition; compare Triton's frontal clavicle on relief A3. 188 Five of the fifteen painted instances in which Triton holds a dolphin occur on vases with the Akropolis iconography. If the limestone pediments inspired this group of paintings, then we are justified in restoring a dolphin in the now-lost right hand of the large Triton. See Buschor 1924, fig. 6; Schuchhardt 1935-6, figs. 14, 16. 189 On the Red Triton, Herakles locks his arms around the merman's body, grasping his right wrist with his left hand. On the big Triton pediment, the arms of

THE

SCULPTURE

*33

Triton's smooth b o d y f o l l o w s East G r e e k conventions. These

expresses fear or alarm. Such emotions w o u l d suit our Nereids.

differences notwithstanding, the A k r o p o l i s pediments have

If they w e r e once in a dance, it has been interrupted.

more in c o m m o n w i t h the Assos relief than any other sculp-

Archaic G r e e k art shows many fleeing or dancing Nereids

tured or painted version of the scene. 1 9 0 T h e close visual asso-

but none quite the equal of these. In most other representations

ciation

pediments,

of Herakles and Triton that include additional figures, a f e w

coupled w i t h their marked difference f r o m the typical scheme

symmetrically arranged Nereids either dance or flee in both

between

relief A 3

and the A k r o p o l i s

in the smaller arts, stands against Ursula Finster-Hotz's claim

directions. T h e y may cast a glance over their shoulders or stand

that the scene emerged at Assos f r o m the '"international"

passively observing the wrestlers. T h e 17 dancing Nereids

schemata of the Archaic G r e e k repertoire'. 1 9 1 N o r is it likely

encircling the X e n o k l e s cup are exceptional. 1 9 7 In their group-

that the artist relied on a verbal description of a scene f o r w h i c h

ing and stride, our Nereids have more in c o m m o n with the

w e have no surviving literary source and w h i c h may well have

stiff-legged Nereids w h o flee f r o m Peleus' ambush or pursuit

been an A t t i c invention. T h e connection is immediate and goes

of Thetis on Corinthian and A t t i c pottery of the second quarter

to the heart of our understanding of the temple (see Chapter 9,

of the sixth century. 1 9 8 Their hand gestures are closest to those

and 'Significance of the Temple', pp. 207, 232-4).

on a late seventh-century bronze tripod leg s h o w i n g the am-

Before turning to this larger issue, w e must consider the

bush. 1 9 9 In scale and relationship to the protagonists, the Ner-

Nereids. H a v i n g based the main part of the scene on the

eids are not so far removed f r o m the surprised w o m e n on

A k r o p o l i s pediments, the designer was left to devise his o w n

Euphronios' calyx krater with Herakles wrestling Antaios, 2 0 0

scheme f o r balancing the composition and filling the rest of the

but stylistically they are at least a generation (if not t w o ) earlier.

block. 1 9 2 H e did so with six Nereids w h o have an appropriate

Such diffuse parallels point up the difficulty of fixing on a

place in the iconography. 1 9 3 T h e sisters move away in stiff-

consistent chronological f r a m e w o r k w h e n using external im-

legged strides, with their w e i g h t balanced on the back leg.

agery to account for local adaptation. O n the w h o l e , however,

Their alternating f o r w a r d and backward glances and matching

both Herakles and Triton, and the Nereids, seem to me

gestures establish a dance-like rhythm, and Judith Barringer

strongly connected to their counterparts f r o m the second quar-

has suggested they represent dancing, not fleeing Nereids. 1 9 4

ter of the sixth century.

H o w e v e r , the Nereids do not assume typical dancing moves, such as holding hands or having outstretched arms, one up and

Significance

one d o w n . 1 9 5 Instead, they appear to clap their hands, a gesture

T o our current knowledge, Herakles wrestling a sea deity

that signifies neither j o y nor terror, but instead indicates the

appears in monumental architectural sculpture o n l y in Athens

surprise, dismay, or general agitation expressed by a bystander

and at Assos. B y choosing this particular scene, the Assians

w h o does not or cannot intervene in the event. 1 9 6 T h e

final

clearly meant to connect their Temple of A t h e n a with the

N e r e i d closes the scene by making a frontal turn to l o o k back,

Athenian counterparts; they must have had some idea of the

throwing her hands in the air in a gesture that generally

importance of the scene to the Athenians. It is unlikely (although not impossible) that they chose this highly specific iconography to represent a story entirely of their o w n . With

both Herakles and the merman are not well preserved, but what remains suggests that Herakles used the same hold, but with the hands reversed. Triton grasped Herakles' right forearm with his left hand and held a fish in his right. These holds are well attested in painted versions. For preserved fragments of the hands and arms belonging to this group, see Dickens 1912, pp. 82-3, no. 36. 190 Closest is a Sicilian arula in Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 3278, on which Herakles and Triton move in the same manner but both are clothed; cf. LIMC 8 (1997), p. 70, no. 20b, s.v. 'Triton'. Other examples in relief with Herakles in front of the sea monster include a shieldband relief, Olympia, Archaeological Museum inv. 1881 (inscribed Halios Geron) (Kunze 1950, pl. 54; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 410, no. 2 s.v. 'Halios Geron'); an island gem, London, British Museum 74.3-5.1 (Brize 1980, pi. 13.2; LIMC 6 (1992), p. 827, no. 33, s.v. 'Nereus'); another Sicilian arula, although here Herakles swims above Triton {LIMC 8 (1997), p. 70, no. 20a, s.v. 'Triton'). 191 Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 39-40. 192 Some configuration of Nereids has been proposed for both Athenian pediments. Cf. von Steuben 1968, p. 31, for Nereids in the centre of the Red Triton (Akropolis no. 2) pediment. Dörig 1984, p. 94 (citing Buschor, 1922b, p. 58), identifies the figure to the left of 'Bluebeard' as a Nereid. 193 Glynn 1981, p. 129, n. 69; LIMC 6 (1992), pp. 803-4, n o s · 2 5 4 s - v · 'Nereides' (N. Icard-Gianolio and A.-V. Szabados); Barringer 1995, pp. 158-9, 161-2. 194 Barringer 1995, p. 232, no. 373. 195 Compare to other scenes discussed by Barringer 1995, pp. 83-7. 196 Contra Sartiaux 1915, pp. Ji-i, who calls the gesture happy applause. For raised hands in art: Demisch 1984. On agitated gesture common for females: Neumann 1965, p. 10 and references.

correlation in imagery must have come some correlation in content. O f course, w e w o u l d be better able to test this basic hypothesis if the subject and its significance on the Athenian A k r o p o l i s were clear, but they are anything but. A brief review of the issues helps set the parameters f o r our understanding the scene and the degree to w h i c h its meanings at A t h e n s and Assos may intertwine. Herakles wrestling Triton, a predominantly A t t i c iconographie motif with no surviving literary source, derives from 197 Tarquinia, Museo Nazionale RC4194: LIMC 6 (1992), p. 804, no. 264 s.v. 'Nereides'. 19S Especially the Nereids on a Corinthian krater depicting the ambush of Thetis, Paris, Louvre E639 (CorVP 266, Bi; LIMC 6 (1992), p. 804, no. 271, s.v. 'Nereides'). See also a C Painter Siana cup with Peleus chasing at least six Nereids in a single direction, Taranto, Museo Nazionale IG4442 (ABV 53,48; LIMC 7 (1994), p. 256, no. 62, s.v. 'Peleus' (R. Vollkommer)). 199 New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 58.11.6/59.11.1; LIMC 6 (1992), p. 806, no. 291, s.v. 'Nereides'. 200 Paris, Louvre G103: ARV2 14,1; Boardman 1974, p. 32, fig. 23; LIMC 1 (1981), p. 803, no. 24, s.v. 'Antaios Γ (R. Olmos and L. Balmaseda); Schefold 1992, fig. 170. Boardman states that the composition is new; perhaps the women derive from fleeing Nereids.

186

THE

SCULPTURE

earlier representations of Herakles wrestling the sea deity,

W h y Triton replaces Nereus, w h y this struggle became the

Nereus, in order to learn the w a y to the Garden of the Hesper-

subject of monumental sculpture on sacred buildings in the

ides in the far West. 201 This O l d Man of the Sea' possesses

second quarter of the sixth century, and w h y it appealed chiefly

knowledge unattainable by most humans, but the half-divine

to Athenians during the second half of the sixth century are not

hero Herakles wins the information through physical strength

obvious, for Triton has no relevant story in surviving literature.

and perseverance. In the early artistic versions, Nereus usually

Both the abrupt emergence and decline of the scene and its

appears as a tunic-clad, bald, or white-haired merman with a

potentially non-literary basis have led to considerable specula-

demonstrated capacity to produce threatening mutations that

tion about possible geographical, allegorical, political, reli-

distract Herakles' gaze. 2 0 2 In the visual arts 0.565, Triton re-

gious, or artistic motives and significance.

places the

fish-tailed

Nereus, w h o continues to encounter

In considering the pedimental sculptures, one solution is to

Herakles but in a fully human form. 2 0 3 His stand-in, Triton

come to terms with the story only in the context of Nereus,

(identified b y inscription), is younger, naked, and lacks muta-

whose place in ancient literature is assured. 208 B y side-stepping

tions; the n o w much-larger Herakles faces forward. 2 0 4 The

the conscious shift in the iconography documented in the

powerful Herakles struggling with a young, naked, non-mu-

smaller arts, one can, as José D ö r i g has, focus on the important

tating merman on the large A k r o p o l i s pediment no. 36 most

themes of strength, acquisition of knowledge, and ultimate

closely matches the iconography of Herakles wrestling Triton,

apotheosis of the hero, while at the same time finding a related

son of Poseidon, on Attic vase painting. A n d while some

role for the infamous Bluebeard. But if we are to interpret the

scholars have seen the struggle between Herakles and Nereus

architectural fish-men as Nereus, a stronger case needs to be

in the earlier 'Red Triton' pediment, A k r o p o l i s no. 2, none of

made for separating the monumental sculptures from the very

the decisive factors of that iconography (a sure mutation

real shift witnessed in the smaller arts.

sprouting from a clothed merman, or the backward turn of

Foregrounding this shift, John Boardman developed an in-

Herakles' head) are indicated; more likely, A k r o p o l i s no. 2 is

terpretive strategy immensely popular throughout the 1970s

among the earliest of the Triton i m a g e s . O n c e introduced,

and 1980s, centred on the hypothesis that archaic Greeks

the wrestling match between Herakles and Triton takes hold

manipulated mythological representations to serve as political

with only a f e w variations, reaching its greatest popularity in

allegories reflecting contemporary events. In this instance, he

Attic vase painting c.530-510 and rapidly declining there-

proposes that the new iconography of Herakles wrestling Tri-

after. 206 There are only a handful of archaic non-Attic repre-

ton served as a mythological allegory created to reference

sentations of Herakles wrestling Triton, most (excluding the

Athens' amphibious victory over the Megarians for possession

relief from Assos) produced in the West. 2 0 7

of Salamis, for the founder of that city, Megaros, was Triton's half-brother. 2 0 9 Ruth G l y n n , also supporting a political inter-

Pherekydes, FGrHist Pherekydes Fi6a; Apollodoros, Library 2.5.11. Stesichoros is said to have described the transformations of Nereus; Brize suggests he did so in the Geryoneis. For discussion: Brize 1980, pp. 66-80; Glynn 1981, pp. 121-2; LIMC 6 (1992), p. 824, s.v. 'Nereus'. 202 LIMC 6 (1992), pp. 826-7, n o s · xi>-25, s.v. 'Nereus'. 203 Brommer (1983a, pp. 104-5, ar>d Γ9^4, p. 92) argues that scenes of Herakles and Triton are equally early, but the fragment in question shows Nereus. See Boardman 1989, p. 193; LIMC 6 (1992), p. 826, no. 23, s.v. 'Nereus'. Scenes with Herakles wrestling a fully human Nereus include LIMC 6 (1992), pp. 827-8, nos. 34-48. 204 Herakles wrestles Triton while Nereus watches: LIMC 6 (1992), p. 833-4, nos. 107-24, and nos. 23, 31, s.v. 'Nereus'. All three characters are identified by inscription on no. 107, neck amphora, London, British Museum B223. See also LIMC 8 (1997), pp. 69-70, nos. 3-20, s.v. 'Triton'. 203 Generally, both pediments are thought to represent Triton, but Buschor 1941, pp. 18-19, an d Kunze 1950, p. 109, interpret the merman on Akropolis no. 2 ('Red Triton') as Nereus, and the one on Akropolis no. 36 as Triton. Ahlberg-Cornell 1984, p. 103, questions the iconographie certainty of Triton over Nereus on both pediments. Dörig (19S4), followed by Stewart (1990, p. 114), favours Nereus in Akropolis no. 36 for narrative reasons. Akropolis no. 2 is listed as uncertain Nereus or Triton in LIMC 6 (1992), p. 827, no. 32, s.v. 'Nereus'; both pediments are included in LIMC 8 (1997), p. 70, nos. 16-17 (where surely Akropolis no. 36 is meant), s.v. 'Triton'. 206 Boardman 1972, pp. 59-60; Brize 1980, pp. 87-93; Glynn 1981, pp. 127-30; LI MC 6 (1992), pp. 835-6, s.v. 'Nereus'; LIMC S (1997), pp. 72-3, s.v. 'Triton'. For the possibility that Exekias created the interlocking form that became especially popular in the second half of the sixth century: Mommsen 2002, pp. 231-2. 207 e.g., Sicilian terracotta arulae (supra n. 190); Etruscan hydria, Paris, Louvre CA2515 (EVP 16,2); Etruscan (?) cornelian scarab, London, British Museum 91.6-25.5 (LIMC 8 (1997), p. 70, no. 19, s.v. 'Triton'). See also a Corinthian plate: CorVP 629; BCH 102 (1978) p. 663, fig. 49. There are more non-Attic 201

pretation, argues that the iconography celebrates Athenian control of the Hellespont, in particular Sigeion, previously held b y Mytilene. Given the historical connection of the Peisistratids w i t h the northern Troad and Herakles' famous activities against T r o y and the sea monster in the same region, she argues that aspects of the Hesione story and the Herakles and Nereus iconography were synthesized into a new form of Herakles wrestling Triton. 2 1 0 A s Clarke and Sartiaux had tried to prove earlier, b y suggesting the Hesione story, the m y t h - s y m b o l w o u l d be meaningful on the temple at Assos because of its special geographic significance to the Troad. Less compellingly, G u d r u n A h l b e r g - C o r n e l l sees the origin of the Herakles and Nereus motif in the general social tensions of Solonian Athens, with the sea monster becoming a 'pictorial symbol of the social unrest, and Herakles being the mythical equivalent of Solon, or his political and social acts'.

11

Those

w h o argue against the approach of Boardman, G l y n n , and

examples of Herakles wrestling Nereus, e.g., LIMC 6 (1992), pp. 826-7, nos. 23-5, 28-9, 33, s.v. 'Nereus'. z'"s Especially Dörig and Stewart (supra n. 205). 209 Boardman 1972, pp. 59-60; Boardman, 1975b, p. 10; Boardman 1989, p. 193; Boardman in Rasmussen and Spivey 1991, pp. 91-3. 210 Glynn 1981, pp. 130-2. 211 Ahlberg-Cornell 1984, p. 103 and 1992, p. 106.

187 T H E

*33

SCULPTURE

A h l b e r g - C o r n e l l e i t h e r feel t h a t s u c h m a n i p u l a t i o n o f m y t h s is

Ideal

i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the cultural f r a m e w o r k o f the p e r i o d , o r

find

τέχνη z u r Ü b e r w i n d u n g der r o h e n N a t u r g e w a l t befähigen.')215

the p r o p o s e d a s s o c i a t i o n s i n s u f f i c i e n t l y transparent o r c o n v i n -

I n this assessment, S c h e f o l d agrees.216 F i n s t e r - H o t z focuses o n

cing.

212

W h i l e t h e a g e n c y o f P e i s i s t r a t o s h a s b e e n o v e r s t a t e d , it

des

athletisch

geschulten

Aristokraten, den

Aóyo?

und

the e c o n o m i c p o s s i b i l i t i e s , c i t i n g the p o p u l a r i t y a n d s u i t a b i l i t y

is w o r t h b e a r i n g i n m i n d t h a t f o r a c u l t u r e t h a t h a d n o d i f f i -

o f scenes o f H e r a k l e s f o r t e m p l e s o f A t h e n a , a n d the i m p o r t -

c u l t y a f e w g e n e r a t i o n s later i n e x p l o i t i n g the

a n c e o f s e a - f a r i n g t r a d e t o c i t i e s s u c h as A t h e n s

Amazonomachy

as a n a l l e g o r y f o r t h e i r b a t t l e w i t h t h e P e r s i a n s ,

manipulating

m y t h s for political messages w a s n o t entirely remote.

c o n n e c t i o n w i t h A t h e n a , g i v e n that H e r a k l e s wrestling T r i t o n on

religious

architecture

dedicated

to

the

Assos.

c i e n t c o n d i t i o n s f o r t h e c h o i c e o f t h i s s p e c i f i c i m a g e e i t h e r at

A n o t h e r interpretive strategy has been to identify a specific

appears

and

B o t h a r g u m e n t s m a k e g o o d sense, b u t t h e y d o n o t s e e m suffi-

goddess.

( A d m i t t e d l y , w e d o not k n o w to w h i c h specific b u i l d i n g

the

' R e d T r i t o n ' , A k r o p o l i s n o . 2, b e l o n g e d . ) T h e i m p o r t a n c e

of

Athens or Assos.217 The

range

of

these theories

underscores

the

difficulty

locating the principles g o v e r n i n g archaic i c o n o g r a p h y

in

within

its m o s t s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t e x t , t h e p o l i s t e m p l e . A t A s s o s , t o a d d t o t h e c h a l l e n g e , w e see t h e i d e a o n c e - r e m o v e d . C l e a r l y

Ath-

H e r a k l e s to A t h e n a stands w i t h o u t further elaboration, but a

e n s — a significant political p o w e r a n d h i g h l y f a s h i o n a b l e artis-

persuasive connection between A t h e n a

not

tic centre w h o s e w o r s h i p c e n t r e d o n the c u l t o f

ap-

a n i m p o r t a n t s o u r c e o f i d e a s f o r t h e b u i l d e r s o f t h e t e m p l e at

and Triton does

e m e r g e . E x p l a n a t i o n s o f h e r H o m e r i c e p i t h e t , Tpiroyeveta, p e a r to be r e t r o s p e c t i v e a n d the artistic e v i d e n c e T h a l i a P. H o w e

minimal.213

interprets the wrestle b e t w e e n A t h e n a ' s

tégé a n d P o s e i d o n ' s

s o n as a n a n a l o g u e f o r t h e

pro-

competition

I t is less

Assos.

counterparts

between A t h e n a and P o s e i d o n for patronage of Athens. T h u s ,

imum

west pediment

thematic

predecessors

actively

the A t h e n i a n s

(or

at S i g e i o n ) w e r e i n v o l v e d i n p r o m o t i n g

their

the

li-

aison. G l y n n offers the m o s t persuasive e x p l a n a t i o n f o r m a x -

the archaic p e d i m e n t s

become

clear h o w

Athena—was

involvement:

having

established

control

of

Sigeion,

of

the

A t h e n i a n s m o v e to secure the s o u t h e r n coast o f the T r o a d

o f the P a r t h e n o n , a s u g g e s t i o n of w h i c h

the

e n c o u r a g i n g t h e A s s i a n s t o b u i l d a D o r i c t e m p l e a n d d e c o r a t e it

p o t e n t i a l a t t r a c t i o n s f o r A t h e n s h a v e , o f c o u r s e , less r e l e v a n c e

with an A t h e n i a n p o w e r - s y m b o l

at A s s o s . 2 1 4

n o t fail to n o t i c e e v e r y t i m e t h e y sailed f r o m A c h i l l e i o n

I n a f o u r t h a p p r o a c h , P h i l i p B r i z e explores h o w the artistic

t h a t the M y t i l e n i a n s

by

could to

M y t i l e n e . H o w e v e r , the w i d e r a n g e o f i m a g e r y f o u n d o n the

a n d social e n v i r o n m e n t m i g h t have c o n t r i b u t e d to the c r e a t i o n

t e m p l e dilutes the force o f this a r g u m e n t . T h e e n s e m b l e

and popularity of Herakles wrestling Triton in Athens.

Brize

g e s t s t h a t t h e a r t i s t i c c o n n e c t i o n s w e r e f o r g e d b y t h e A s s i a n s as

sug-

c h o o s e s n o t to reject e n t i r e l y the p o t e n t i a l f o r a literary b a s i s

a c t i v e s e e k e r s r a t h e r t h a n as p a s s i v e r e c i p i e n t s ( s e e C h a p t e r 9,

in

' S i g n i f i c a n c e o f the T e m p l e ' ) . T h i s d y n a m i c d o e s n o t exclude a

the intersection o f the early v e r s i o n s o f H e r a k l e s ' search f o r

p o l i t i c a l c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n the cities, b u t it d o e s s u g g e s t that

the G a r d e n of the H e s p e r i d e s i n L i b y a , o n the o n e h a n d , a n d

Assos

the A r g o n a u t story, i n w h i c h T r i t o n assists i n the f o u n d a t i o n o f

politics entered into the choice, the A s s i a n s ' m o t i v e s f o r estab-

for

the

change

from

Nereus

to

Triton.

He

notes

that

was

not

simply

a satellite o f A t h e n s

(or

Sigeion).

If

C y r e n e a n d h a s a c u l t at L a k e T r i t o n i s , o n the other, l a y ' t h e

l i s h i n g the i c o n o g r a p h i e affiliation c o u l d have b e e n

p r e c o n d i t i o n s for a literary refashioning

f r o m the A t h e n i a n s ' m o t i v e s f o r c r e a t i n g the i m a g e r y in the

final

analysis,

Brize

prefers to

o f the subject'.

understand

the c h a n g e

O n from

H e r a k l e s struggling w i t h N e r e u s to H e r a k l e s wrestling Triton

first

different

place.

F r a m i n g t h e r o l e o f t h e H e r a k l e s a n d T r i t o n r e l i e f at A s s o s

p r i m a r i l y as a n a r t i s t i c d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t r e f l e c t s t h e c h a n g i n g

within

self-perception

b r o a d e r s i g n i f i c a n c e o f b o t h sea d a i m o n a n d h e r o , a l l o w s

ations—from

of archaic

narrative

Athenian

society. T h e

event to athletic contest

transform(wrestling),

f r o m supernatural

s h a p e - s h i f t e r to s i m p l e sea d a i m o n ,

small hero versus

big

size—are

all l i n k e d

superiority

mirrors

m o n s t e r to adversaries

to a d e v e l o p i n g the n e w

more

confidence:

self c o n f i d e n c e

from

equal

in

'Herakles's

o f the

Archaic

the

larger

ideas

explored

on

the

epistyle,

and

the us

t o interpret h o w the i c o n o g r a p h y m i g h t h a v e m a d e m o s t sense f o r t h o s e v i e w i n g t h e t e m p l e as a w h o l e a n d o v e r t i m e . H e r e , the

approaches

of

Brize

and

Finster-Hotz

offer

a

starting p o i n t . T r i t o n has three i m p o r t a n t aspects: his

valuable aquatic

ambience, his monstrosity, a n d his prophetic power. I f one goal

p e o p l e ; the ideal o f the athletically trained aristocrat, w h o

by

o f t h e i c o n o g r a p h y w a s t o c r e a t e a k i n d o f c o s m i c f r a m e f o r the

r e a s o n a n d craft, m a n a g e s

of

polis

to overcome

the crude forces

nature.' ( ' I n der Ü b e r l e g e n h e i t des H e r a k l e s spiegelt sich d a g e g e n das neue S e l b s t b e w u s s t s e i n des archaischen M e n s c h e n , das

t e m p l e , t h e n the sea c o n t e s t s e r v e d

taurs.

In

choosing

these

scenes,

the

Assians

physical w o r l d of h u m a n a n d heroic action. For example, Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 41-5; C o o k 1987, pp. 167-9; Schefold 1992, p. 246; but see Boardman in Rasmussen and Spivey 1991, pp. 91—3. 2 1 3 Brize 1980, pp. 103-4; Finster-Hotz 1984, p. 45. 2 1 4 H o w e 1955, pp. 287-9. See Brize 1980, p. 104, for criticisms, although I do not think it must follow that in using heroic counterparts to reference the struggle between gods, the story must have the same outcome as other encounters between Athena's heroes vs. Poseidon's offspring.

as t h e

geographic

c o u n t e r p a r t to the m o u n t a i n battle o f H e r a k l e s a n d the cenaddressed

the

Morphologically,

T r i t o n is t h e m a r i n e c o u n t e r p a r t o f t h e c e n t a u r , a h a l f - h u m a n

212

2 1 5 Brize 1980, pp. 99, 102-5. H e a ' s o proposes that Stesichoros, in the Geryoneis, may have been responsible for the introduction of the fully human Nereus. 2 1 6 Schefold 1993, pp. 244-7. 2 1 7 Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 44-5.

THE SCULPTURE

164

w h o s e l o w e r p a r t takes the f o r m o f the m o s t p o w e r f u l a n d agile

an

creature w i t h i n its e n v i r o n m e n t . A s s u c h , h e m a k e s a f a m i l i a r

mother-city

and formidable

c a r i n g f o r t h e g i r l w h o w a s t h r o w n i n t o t h e s e a as a n o f f e r i n g

opponent.

important

role

in

the

foundation

story

of

Methymna,

o f A s s o s , i n just this capacity, b e f r i e n d i n g

and

with

t o P o s e i d o n . 2 2 0 T h e y are a k i n d l y , h e l p i n g f o r c e o f n a t u r e ; their

the sea m o r e v i v i d l y t h a n that o f H e r a k l e s w r e s t l i n g

Triton.

g o o d w i l l b r i n g s g o o d f o r t u n e to sea v e n t u r e s . 2 2 1 D e s p i t e their

W i t h o u t the s u p e r n a t u r a l c a p a c i t y to shift shape a n d

become

a g i t a t i o n , the N e r e i d s ' p r e s e n c e o n relief A 3 s i g n a l s the p o s i t i v e

f u l l y h u m a n , as N e r e u s o r P r o t e u s c o u l d , T r i t o n i s l e s s a d i v i n i t y

o u t c o m e o f the wrestle. T h e i r d i v i n e i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the f o u n d -

t h a n a m o n s t e r , a l t h o u g h n o t quite the m a r i n e e q u i v a l e n t o f the

i n g of M e t h y m n a a u g u r s w e l l f o r the A s s i a n s . T h e N e r e i d s m a y

centaur herd. T h e m o r a l overtones present in the c e n t a u r o m a -

a l s o s e r v e , o n t h e t e m p l e at A s s o s , t o tie t h i s s c e n e o n

c h y c a n n o t be attached to the s t r u g g l e b e t w e e n H e r a k l e s

and

epistyle w i t h several stories r e c o u n t e d i n the m e t o p e s . I n the

T r i t o n . T r i t o n d o e s n o t (as f a r as w e k n o w ) m a n i f e s t t h e n e g a t i v e

T r o a d , the N e r e i d s m a y h a v e b e e n best k n o w n f o r their crucial

aspects

role i n the a r m i n g a n d r e a r m i n g

N o

contemporary image conveyed man's engagement

of h u m a n

behaviour,

Herakles

never

kills h i m ,

and

T r i t o n c a u s e s little h a r m t o o t h e r s . T o H e s i o d , h o w e v e r , h e is terrible

(Theogony

930-3),

and

so,

on

one

level,

w r e s t l i n g T r i t o n p o r t r a y s t h e h e r o i n h i s r o l e as

Herakles

alexikakos.21 4^> 49, 5i)> Tomb of the Small Pediment (p. 306, no. 66, pi. 72), Tomb of the Lioness (pp. 316-17, no. 77, pis. 101-2), Tomb of the Leopards (p. 319, no. 81, pi. 105), Tomb of the Triclinium (p. 352, no. 121, pi. 166), Tomb of the Painted Vases (pp. 353-4, no. 122), and Tomb of the O l d Man (p. 355, no. 124, fig. 346). See also in funerary reliefs from Chiusi: Florence, Museo Archeologico 5501; Chiusi, Museo Archeologico Nazionale 2275; London, British Museum D18; Florence Museo Archeologico 86508 (Jannot 1984, p. 366, figs. 93, 181, 355, 554-5). 230 Athenaios, Deipnosophists i^.éy^c-d, iy6ySd, citing Anakreon, Alkaios, and Sappho; Poulsen 1922, p. 37 and n. 2. Supra η. 229, for the scene in the Tomb of the Old Man, a similar scene in the Tomb of Hunting and Fishing, and an exchange between two young men in the Tomb of the Leopards.

238 Column krater from Assos: Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 293, fig. ι. Handle fragment from Assos: Utili 1999, no. 759. From Sardis: Ramage 1978, fig. 132. For Ionian column kraters: J. M. C o o k 1965, pp. 122-8; Samos VI.1, nos. 701-2, pl. 93, nos. 968-75, pis. 118-19. P ° r a Chian workshop, possibly in Thracc: Lemos 1991, pp. 212-18, pis. 221-3.

232

239 Filow 1927, nos. 64-7, pp. 47-50, figs. 40-8, as well as two unnumbered examples. Finds are generally dated to the second half of the sixth century, but the Lakonian material, at least, is thought to be earlier (see Stibbe 2000, pp. 99-101). For an additional column krater, see Sotheby's Auction Catalogue, May 31, 1997, no. 85.

234

243 For the shape in Corinthian ware, see Payne 1931, pp. 300-1; T. Bakir 1974, pp. 55-60 (note especially his Group Three). For Attic development, see Moore and Philippides 1986, pp. 23-5. Compare column kraters painted by Lydos, formerly Borowski Collection (R. G u y in Leipen 1984, no. 4, pp. 7-8) and N e w York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 31.11.11 (von Bothmer 1987, no 10).

Blech 1982, pp. 35-46, 71-2, fig. 5. Xenophanes fr. 1.2; Delight 1943, pp. 28-9. 23j> Dentzer 1982, p. 236, calls the gesture rare in Greek banquet scenes, but it appears fairly commonly on Attic scenes of symposia after C.530 BC (e.g., Fehr 1971, nos. 176-8, 205, 212, 274, 277, 295, 297, 301, 302, 304) and earlier in Corinthian scenes (e.g., Fehr 1971, nos. 9, 12, 13). 231

See above n. 26.

THE

SCULPTURE The

w h i c h tapers s h a r p l y to a p o i n t resting o n a delicate foot, surely derives f r o m a metal prototype.241

167

kantharoi

held

by

the

first

two

symposiasts

do

precisely replicate typical s u r v i v i n g f o r m s , p r o b a b l y

not

because

bowl,

the s c u l p t o r based t h e m l o o s e l y o n r e g i o n a l m e t a l v e r s i o n s f o r

g r a s p i n g t h e r i m w i t h h i s t h u m b . I t a l s o l o o k s as if h e s e c u r e s

w h i c h w e have n o further evidence today. T h e k a n t h a r o s held

The

first

symposiast holds out a shallow, handleless

the b o t t o m b y l o c k i n g his

fingers

in an omphalos. Broader than

o r d i n a r y s h a l l o w b o w l s , t h e f o r m is c l o s e s t t o a s m a l l o m p a l o s

by

the

second

symposiast

has

a

globular

body,

inset

rim,

s h a r p l y c o n i c a l f o o t , a n d s t r a p h a n d l e s t h a t rise a b o v e the r i m

b o w l , a shape often w r o u g h t in b r o n z e and precious metal.242

a n d a t t a c h t o t h e b o d y at its w i d e s t p o i n t . A l l b u t t h e c o n i c a l

M o r e t h a n a d o z e n b r o n z e examples, dated f r o m the

foot

half o f the s e v e n t h to the

first

half o f the sixth century, h a v e

b e e n f o u n d i n t h e w e s t e r n n e k r o p o l i s at A s s o s . 2 4 3 a r y quantities o f s u c h vessels, called o m p h a l o s excavators

second

a n d s e e n as t h e p r e d e c e s s o r

Extraordin-

bowls by

o f the G r e e k

the

phiale

find

some

parallel

in

the

early

development

of

kantharos, both in painted Attic examples and in G 2 - 3

the ware

p r o d u c e d in the n o r t h e a s t A e g e a n . 2 4 8 T h e f o o t s e e m s u n c a n n i l y close to P r o t o g e o m e t r i c f o r m s , but a similar v e r s i o n appears o n a terracotta

hero-relief f r o m

Sparta, a n d taller

and

broader

m e s o m p h a l o s , h a v e b e e n f o u n d in the great t u m u l i o f P h r y g i a ,

c o n i c a l feet are a l s o f o u n d o n C h i a n chalices a n d s o m e

w h e r e the context suggests that they w e r e d r i n k i n g vessels.244

otian black-glaze kantharoi."

M o r e t h a n 2 0 0 f o u n d i n a s a c r e d p o n d at t h e s a n c t u a r y o f H e r a

w i t h l o n g s t e m s that the reveller i n v a r i a b l y grasps, appear o n a

at P e r a c h o r a , as w e l l as t h e n u m e r o u s

dedications f o u n d

in

sanctuaries a n d k n o w n f r o m ancient texts, testify to the ritual nature a n d votive significance of this vessel in a G r e e k text.245

Greek

representations

indicate that w h i l e

the

convessel

c o u l d b e u s e d as a d r i n k i n g c u p , i t w a s m o r e c o m m o n l y

used

for offering a libation, a subject to w h i c h w e shall return.

group

of Archaic

gems

done

in East

Greek

signalling a regional popularity unmatched The

cup held by

kantharos,

but

the

almost

ready parallel. T h e

first none

symposiast of

its

style,

The outwardly

possibly

elsewhere.250

clearly represents

particular

vertical w a l l o f the b o d y

features does

o u t w a r d i n the m a n n e r of other straight-walled

T h e r o u n d - b o t t o m e d b o w l w i t h flaring, offset lip h e l d b y the

Boe-

R o u n d - b o d i e d k a n t h a r o i , albeit

not

a

find flare

kantharoi.251

t u r n e d l i p is m a t c h e d i n s o m e o f t h e

cruder

conventionally

E a s t G r e e k face k a n t h a r o i b u t o t h e r w i s e is n o t a f e a t u r e o f the

s h o w n i n A t t i c o r E a s t G r e e k s y m p o s i a , b u t it c l o s e l y r e s e m -

k a n t h a r o s . 2 5 2 T h e h a n d l e s are a t t a c h e d to the i n s i d e o f the r i m

third

symposiast

is

deeper

than

the

bowls

bles certain b r o n z e b o w l s , o n e f o u n d near M i l e t o s a n d a n o t h e r

a n d rise e l e g a n t l y a b o v e the b o d y o f the vessel. T h e

p r o b a b l y f r o m K a r i a , as it b e a r s a K a r i a n i n s c r i p t i o n . 2 4 6

c u r v e t h e y m a k e to a t t a c h t o the e x t e r i o r o f the b o d y

The

s h a p e a p p r o x i m a t e s s e v e r a l s i l v e r b o w l s f r o m A n a t o l i a , as w e l l

riveted

as t h e s l i g h t l y l a t e r A c h a e m e n i d

some

round-bottomed

bowl,

al-

terminals

better d o c u m e n t e d

representations

in

Lakonian

in larger metal

reliefs

and

on

reverse suggests vessels;

Lakonian

t h o u g h the latter t e n d s t o h a v e a d e e p e r a n d m o r e p r o n o u n c e d

vase paintings have r o u g h l y similar terminals, also

indicating

everted lip.247 S u c h metal vessels c o u l d easily have f o u n d their

metal kantharoi.233 T h e inverted conical stem w i t h

diminutive

w a y to A s s o s .

' Compare archaic silver oinochoai from western Anatolia (von Bothmer 1984, pp. 29-33, n o s · 35—6; Ozgen and Oztürk 1996, p. 76, no. 13, pp. 150-1, no. 106) or a bronze oinochoe, Paris, Petit Palais, no. 1560 (Vokotopoulou 1997, p. 247, fig. n o ) . Note also the pointy oinochoe held by a youth on a gem (Boardman 1968, no. 97). 242 For archaic silver phialai: Strong 1966, pp. 55-8; von Bothmer 1984, p. 21, no. 12; Luschey 1939 (on the development of the shape). Although not held in the same manner, note the similarity of shape to the phialai represented in the LykianPersian tomb at Karaburun: Ozgen and Oztürk 1996, p. 47, figs. 88-9. 243 Util: 1999,pp. 107-8, nos. 981-1000 for the bronze vessels, and no. n 8 f o r a clay example. See also Stupperich 1990a, p. 21, pi. 6.2; Stupperich 1992, p. 28, pi. 8.6. 244 Young 1981, pp. 14-17, 130-47, 204-6, 233-6, pis. 9 - D - G , IO.A-J, 44, 45A, 48B, 49, 68-73, 89G, 90. 243 Payne 1940, pp. 148-56, pis. 51-6, 134-5. For function: Payne 1940, p. 121; Young 1981, p. 236. 246 Pfrommer 1986, pp. 34-6, fig. 15. Bowl with Karian inscription: Antiquities from the Collection of Ckrìstos G. Bastis (New York 1987) no. 89; now Atlanta, Michael C . Carlos Museum 2000.1.4. 247 N o t e especially the profile of the vessel in a private collection (cited by Pfrommer 1986, p. 35, fig. 15e); vessel from Sardis (Waldbaum 1983, nos. 964,974); vessel from Sardis, N e w York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 26.164.r3 (von Bothmer 1984, p. 22, no. 14); vessel from Cyprus, N e w York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 74.51.4562 (von Bothmer 1984, p. 22, no. 13); vessel from Ikiztepe, formerly N e w York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 67.11.17 (von Bothmer 1984, p. 26, no. 23; O z g e n and O z t ü r k 1996, p. 101, no. 49). Further silver examples include O z g e n and Oztürk 1996, p. 88b, no. 34; p. 96, no. 44, pp. 98-101, nos. 46-8, 50. For Achaemenid terracotta bowls at Sardis: Dusinberre 1999, pp. 73-102; Dusinberre 2003, pp. 172-95, especially pp. 176-8. 24

248 Attic examples: Courbin 1953, p. 329, and especially fig. 9. See also a kantharos found at Kicion, Larnaca Archaeological Museum 1498: Coldstream 1994, pp. 155-9· Northeast Aegean and western Anatolian course ware: e.g., Moore 1982, pp. 336-47, nos. 18-25. 249 Protogeometric: Courbin 1953, fig. 1. Spartan relief from Amyklai: Stibbe 1991, p. 43, no. ai4, fig. 41. Chian: e.g. Lcmos i 9 9 i , p l s . V, 67, 109, i n , 124-36, 139-41, 205-11. Boeotian: Ure 1913, p. 5, Group A, pis. 1-2, and diagram of feet, p. 7. l y " Boardman 1968, nos. 93, 94, 97, 109, p. 58, and note also no. 242; Boardman 1970, pi. 309. 251 The vessel of choice for Dionysos, the form is closely related to the Etruscan kantharos, although there is strong evidence for an independent Boeotian invention (Courbin 1953, pp. 339-43; Kilinski II 1990, p. 58). Some Boeotian blackfigure kantharoi, as well as later metal and clay versions of the type, have nearly vertical walls, but neither the offset lip nor handles make a reverse curve to attach to the body; see Boeotian black-figure kantharoi (Kilinski II 1990, pis. 6.1, 16.1-2, 17.3, 32.2) and Boeotian black-glaze kantharoi (Ure 1913, pi. 9-7-8). Compare also the handsome example on the Anakles gem (Boardman 1968, no. 333). Classical kantharoi in both clay and silver can have nearly vertical walls; note a Boeotian red figure kantharos and a silver kantharos from Duvanli (Vickers 1986, pi. 4) or a silver kantharos in Baltimore, Walters Art Museum, 57.934 (Oliver 1977, pp. 28-9, nos. 4 and 4a). 252 Manser 1987, p. 165, pi. 23.6-7; Samos VI. 1, no. 478, pi. 61 for examples with small, out-turned lip, and nos. 480-5, pis. 55-7, for more elegant examples with taller lip. 253 Larger metal vessels: Vokotopoulou 1975. C u p offered to Polyphemos on Lakonian cup, Paris, Cabinet des Médailles 190: Pipili 1987, fig. 47. Representations of metal kantharoi with embellished handle-ends on Lakonian hero reliefs: Stibbe 1991, no. A i , fig. 5; no. A6, fig. 8; no. A 1 3 , fig. 10; no. B2, fig. 11; no. B6, fig. 14.

168

THE

SCULPTURE

f o o t stands apart f r o m typical c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d here c o u l d be

a n d a s s o c i a t e it f i r m l y

a n artistic e l a b o r a t i o n , f u s i n g the l o w e r b o d y w i t h the s t e m to

symposion.259 T h e distinction between banquet and

m a k e it m o r e v i s i b l e . 2 3 4 A n

s i o n is o f t e n b l u r r e d i n art, b u t h e r e t h e p r o m i n e n t p o s i t i o n o f

e l a b o r a t e m e t a l v e s s e l is

clearly

i n d i c a t e d , w h e t h e r it r e f l e c t s a n o w - l o s t l o c a l f o r m o r is

an

The

amphora-like

rimless which

mouth tapers

and

tankard held

to

the

by

vessel depicted

tall n e c k ring

the f o u r t h

The

symposiast

o n t h e relief. I t h a s

that w i d e n s

foot.

the krater, the lack o f f o o d o n

communal

banquet-

into

a high

metallic-style

a

belly,

handles,

sympo-

tables, a n d the p a s s i n g o f

wreath suggest d r i n k i n g m o r e than feasting.260 T h e

intentionally embellished shape.

is t h e r a r e s t d r i n k i n g

w i t h the G r e e k

a

decision

to e l i m i n a t e f u r n i t u r e a n d f o o d is n o t s i m p l y a c o n c e s s i o n m a d e to suit the l o n g , n a r r o w

field

o f the epistyle; r e c l i n i n g o n the

g r o u n d to d r i n k h a s a special s i g n i f i c a n c e that affects the m e a n i n g o f the scene, a n d deserves o u r c o n s i d e r a t i o n . 2 6 1

w h i c h d o n o t rise a b o v e the s m o o t h lip, d e s c e n d vertically to

W i t h respect to parallels i n architectural sculpture, the re-

c o n n e c t t o t h e b e l l y at its w i d e s t p o i n t . I t h a s b e e n c a l l e d a k i n d

s u l t s f o r t h e s y m p o s i o n a r e m u c h t h e s a m e as t h o s e f o r

o f p e l i k e , b u t it l a c k s t h e s a g g i n g b o d y . 2 5 5 T h e v e s s e l h a s b e e n

centauromachy

c o m p a r e d , o n the o n e h a n d , to g r e y - w a r e k a n t h a r o i d i s c o v e r e d

m o r e at h o m e i n E a s t G r e e c e a n d w e s t e r n A n a t o l i a t h a n a n y -

at A n t i s s a o n L e s b o s a n d , o n the other, t o

w h e r e else ( e x c e p t E t r u r i a 2 6 2 ) , t h e d e s i g n o f r e l i e f A 4 o w e s l i t t l e

Achaemenid-style

s i l v e r v e s s e l s t h a t s e e m t o h a v e s e r v e d b o t h as c u p s a n d

am-

to

local

on

A5:

architectural

while

the

examples.

subject

The

of

the

banqueting

terracotta

reliefs

is

from

p h o r a e . N e i t h e r is a p e r f e c t fit. N o n e o f t h e L e s b i a n g r e y - w a r e

Larisa

k a n t h a r o i ( a n d related G 2 - 3 w a r e karchesia of n o r t h w e s t A n a -

badly preserved

tolia, T h r a c e , a n d the islands o f the n o r t h e r n A e g e a n )

i d e n t i f i e d b y s y m p o t i c f u r n i t u r e . 2 6 3 A r e l i e f f r o m K o s is m o r e

follow

t h e p r o f i l e i n all its p a r t s , a n d all o f t h e m h a v e m u c h e m p h a t i c h a n d l e s . 2 5 6 T h e m e t a l p r o t o t y p e is m o r e but a key

characteristic

more

suggestive,

of this t y p e of v e s s e l — f a n c y ,

often

and

Kebren

depict

elaborate

stone friezes f r o m

banquets Samos

o n klinai;

the

and Ephesos

are

of a s y m p l e g m a than s y m p o s i o n , and, again, furniture prominently.264

Representations

of symposia in

figures

architectural

c o n t e x t s are r a r e r still i n o t h e r areas o f t h e G r e e k w o r l d , a n d

a n i m a l - s h a p e d h a n d l e s that s w i n g w i d e l y a w a y f r o m the n e c k

t h e y are n o c l o s e r c o m p o s i t i o n a l l y t o t h e A s s o s r e l i e f . 2 6 5

a n d b o d y — i s n o t i n d i c a t e d b y the vertical, close-fitting h a n d l e s

o n e f r a g m e n t a r y S i c i l i a n terracotta relief w i t h t w o s y m p o s i a s t s

Only

o f the vessel r e p r e s e n t e d o n the A s s i a n relief.257 M o r e o v e r , the

m a y p r o v i d e a n architectural parallel i n relief f o r a s y m p o s i o n

distinctly offset n e c k o r u p p e r b o d y of A c h a e m e n i d - s t y l e ves-

without

s e l s i s n o t m a d e e x p l i c i t at A s s o s . T h e s e o b j e c t i o n s

explanation. East G r e e k silversmiths w o r k e d for L y d i a n

and

t h e n P e r s i a n p a t r o n s d u r i n g the s i x t h century, a n d the artistic interchange, especially i n l u x u r y items, b e t w e e n the

capitals

a n d the c o a s t is d o c u m e n t e d i n s i l v e r v e s s e l s o f P e r s i a n s h a p e w i t h G r e e k ornament, or of G r e e k shape w i t h Persian

orna-

ment.238 A n eastern vessel of this k i n d c o u l d have been

known

at A s s o s

luxury

a n d its f o r m a d a p t e d t o b e c o m e o n e o f t h e

vessels r e p r e s e n t e d o n relief A 4 .

Iconography T h e A s s o s s y m p o s i o n represents a convivial gathering of m a t u r e m e n , e q u a l i n r a n k a n d a g e , w h o r e c l i n e t o d r i n k as t h e y are s e r v e d b y o n e m a l e a t t e n d a n t . T h e s e f e a t u r e s set the relief apart f r o m

Greek

or Anatolian

representations of single diners a t t e n d e d b y several

While

a second

terracotta

panel

with

notwith-

s t a n d i n g , a n E a s t e r n metal p r o t o t y p e p r o b a b l y r e m a i n s the best

fundamentally

furniture.266

Totenmahl— servants—

234 Compare Boeotian shallow-bottomed kantharoi (supra n. 251) and some of the kantharoi represented on the hero reliefs noted above, n. 253. 235 Sartiaux 1915, p. 29; Fehr i 9 7 i , p . 116. O n l y the fourth-century shape comes close (cf. Richter and Milne 1935, fig. 39). 256 Langlotz 1975, pp. 182-3, p'· 61.1; Finster-Hotz 1984, p. 65; Lamb 1931-2, p. 54, pi. 20.1-5; n o w Bayne 2000, pp. 200-1, figs. 57-8. For similar subgeometric G2-3 ware kantharoi/karchesia, see, e.g., Moore 1982, pp. 351-5, nos. 32-4. 257 Compared by Dentzer to the vessel held by the servant in the banqueting scene in the tomb at Karaburun (Dentzer 1982, p. 235, n. 79, fig. 224). Paspalas 2000, pp. 154-8, closely connects the shape to the Persian form. 25h For Greek artists working for Lydian kings: Herodotos 1.25, 51. Artistic and cultural exchange, specifically in metalwork: Boardman 2000, pp. 184-94; Paspalas 2000, pp. 158-63. More generally, note also Miller (1997, pp. 1—133) for the Classical period.

239 For banqueting in Near Eastern and Greek art generally: Thönges-Stringaris 1965; Dentzer 1969,1971,1982; Fehr 1971; Murray 1990; Schmitt Pantel 1990a. Anatolian scenes in architectural contexts include the painted tombs from Kizilbel and Karaburun (Dentzer 1982, pp. 224-30, 265-79, 283-95; Fehr 1971, nos. 470-2; Mellink 1974, pp. 537-47; Mellink 1998, pp. 59-60: Building G (Heroon?) from Xanthos, London, British Museum B310 (Pryce 1928, pp. 143-4, p'· z % Dentzer 1982, pp. 23840, R48, fig. 285, Jenkins 2006, pp. 168-72); and later the Nereid Monument (Childs and Demargne 1989, pp. 202-9, n o s · BM898-903, pis. 130-4, LVTI-LXI); and Heroon at Gjolbaschi-Trysa (Oberleitner 1994, pp. 48-51, figs. 105-6, 112-13; Barringer 2008, pp. 171-202). Oriental prototypes: Fehr 1971, pp. 7-18; Dentzer 1971, pp. 215-44; Dentzer 1982, pp. 51-69; Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 66-74. Scenes of the Greek symposion with several reclining figures appear first in Corinthian painting by the end of the seventh century and from there spread to Attika, Lakonia, Boeotia, and the Chalkidike: Fehr 1971, pp. 26-61; Dentzer 1982, pp. 76-128, 143-53. F ° r East Greek influence on Lakonian symposia: Pipili 1998, pp. 84-5, 89-90. 260 Importance of the krater: Lissarrague 1990a, pp. 19-46; Lissarrague 1990b, pp. 196-209. Conflation of banquet and symposion in Attic scenes: Schmitt Pantel 1990a, pp. 14-33. 261 Contra Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 61-3. 262 N o t e terracotta revetments from Poggio Civitate and Acquarossa: Small 1971 and 1994; Sprenger and Bartolom 1983, pp. 93-4, 97, pis. 57, 66; Rathje 1994, with references to earlier work. The banquet in Etruscan funerary art: de Marinis 1961; Jannot 1984, pp. 62-8; Weber-Lehmann 1985. 263 Terracotta frieze from Larisa (three surviving variations): Larisa II, pis. 2233; Äkerström 1966, pp. 56-8, pis. 28-9; Dentzer 1982, R64, figs. 320-8. Terracotta frieze from Kebren (two variations based on the Larisa molds): Äkerström 1966, p. 7, fig. 1.2; Dentzer 1982, R67, fig. 331. North Building, Samos (certain fragments originally assigned to the Heraion): Buschor 1933a, p. 16, supplement 7; FreyerSchauenburg 1974, nos. 123-6, pl. 83; Furtwängler and Kienast 1989, p. 156, nos. 29-32. Possibly the sima from the Temple of Artemis at Ephesos, London, British Museum B203: Muss 1994, p. 81. 264 Dentzer 1982, pp. 262-4, &293> fig· 545· 265 The fragmentary pediment from Korkyra is Dionysiac; the youth and older male recline on ldinai (Boardman 1978, fig. 207a; Dentzer 1982, pp. 248—51, R331, fig· 573)· 266 N e w York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 13.227.11: Dentzer 1982, pp. 251-2, R501, fig. 721.

THE k l i n a i set b e n e a t h the s u r v i v i n g relief is a s s u m e d

SCULPTURE

to m a k e

a

m e t o p e , the relief c o u l d b e l o n g to a n a r r o w frieze, o r p e r h a p s

O n the other hand, i m a g e s in other E a s t G r e e k m e d i a f r o m and

third

quarters

o f the s i x t h c e n t u r y

better evidence f o r a s y m p o s i o n w i t h o u t

provide

furniture. I n

most

instances, reclining o n the g r o u n d indicates a n o u t d o o r often sacred setting. E s p e c i a l l y

the

banqueters

with

wreaths,

suggesting

scenes represent cult meals of m o r t a l s in a sacred

that

these

setting.274

L a k o n i a n f r a g m e n t s b y the A r k e s i l a s Painter, f o u n d o n S a m o s ,

a p e d i m e n t . I t s c o n t e x t is u n k n o w n .

the s e c o n d

crown

169

and

i m p o r t a n t i n this regard

are

s h o w w o m e n a n d m e n r e c l i n i n g o n t h e g r o u n d ; t h e tree a n d altar establish a n o u t d o o r , sacred setting. M a r i a P i p i l i c o n n e c t s b o t h s c e n e s w i t h the c u l t w o r s h i p o f S a m i a n H e r a . T h e ments of a Fikellura a m p h o r a s h o w a s y m p o s i o n of

frag-

clothed

m e n reclining o n fancy mattresses w i t h small p i l l o w s ,

enter-

the several f r e e - s t a n d i n g r e c l i n i n g figures i n stone f o u n d exclu-

tained b y a small isocephalic servant. T h e i n c l u s i o n of flora a n d

sively

the

f a u n a o n a n o t h e r F i k e l l u r a f r a g m e n t , as w e l l as i n a s y m p o s i o n

s e c o n d half of the sixth century.267 I n these sculptures, a f u l l y

o n a C y p r i o t e a m p h o r a , i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e s e s c e n e s , t o o , are s e t

c l o t h e d male figure reclines, legs closed, o n a thick

outside.

in East

Greek

sanctuaries f r o m

c . 5 6 0 BC t h r o u g h

mattress

o r a p l a n k - l i k e s u r f a c e , w i t h h i s e l b o w r e s t i n g o n flat,

(στι,βάς)

The

examples

enumerated

above,

chiefly

connected

with

stiff p i l l o w s . 2 6 8 T h e m o s t f a m o u s e x a m p l e b e l o n g s to the G e n -

eastern Greece, establish a n o u t d o o r , often sacred, context in

elaos

w h i c h to place the c o u c h l e s s c o m p o s i t i o n o n relief A 4 . S i m i l a r

dedication

from

Samos,

which

probably

represents

f a m i l y at a c u l t feast, a h i g h l y a t t r a c t i v e i d e a t h a t m a y

a

furnish

couchless

compositions

with

several

overlapping

symposi-

c l u e s t o t h e s e t t i n g o f the s c e n e at A s s o s . 2 6 9 M o s t o f t h e free-

a s t s — a n d w i t h the s a m e o u t d o o r v e n u e i m p l i e d — a l s o

standing

in Attic black-figure vase painting and Etruscan wall painting

recliners

appear

alone

o r as p a r t o f

g r o u p s ; their v o t i v e nature suggests individual

heterogeneous

that they stand for

the

donor(s).270

Painted pottery provides examples of g r o u p gatherings s o m e further indications several

symposiasts

mattresses

appear

third quarters tery,271

twice

and

of their setting. R e p r e s e n t a t i o n s

reclining in

directly

non-Attic

on

the

or

and

L a k o n i a n c u p b y the N a u k r a t i s

recline directly o n the

East

Greek

scenes. I n

under

most

the

of

the

A t t i c examples, y o u n g m e n recline directly o n a thick, black g r o u n d l i n e i n a frieze-like a r r a n g e m e n t , their feet h i d d e n figure

be-

i n front; a s m a l l i s o c e p h a l i c b o y serves.27:> F l o r a

a n d f a u n a set the scene o u t d o o r s . 2 7 6 R e c l i n i n g o n the

ground

o u t d o o r s also becomes a p r i m a r y scheme for p o r t r a y i n g

gods

on

o r h e r o e s at s y m p o s i a , a n e w t h e m e i n A t t i c art at t h i s time.

Painter

D i o n y s o s , H e r a k l e s , a n d H e r m e s especially, a l o n e o r together,

once

s h a r e s several features i n c o m m o n w i t h relief A 4 : all o f d i n e r s are m a t u r e m a l e s w h o

the s i x t h century, p e r h a p s

h i n d the

pot-

vases,272

of

the earlier

on

o f the s i x t h century, t w i c e o n L a k o n i a n (Fikellura)

of

ground

and

on Milesian

pottery

the

of

of

second

C y p r i o t e ware.273 A

of the last quarter influence

appear

the

ground

e n j o y the m o m e n t s of r e l a x a t i o n o w e d to a peripatetic g o d or hero.277 T h e

scenes d o n o t relate s p e c i f i c a l l y t o e p i s o d e s

in

w i t h their bodies slightly overlapping; the isocephalic servant

m y t h b u t t o r e s t f u l m o m e n t s i n b e t w e e n a n d after. F i n a l l y , i n

creates the s a m e c o n t r a s t i n scale. F l y i n g s i r e n s a n d

E t r u s c a n f u n e r a r y reliefs a n d t o m b p a i n t i n g o f the L a t e

daimons

Ar-

chaic p e r i o d , the s y m p o s i a s t s o f t e n recline i n c l o s e - k n i t g r o u p s o n the g r o u n d o r o n t h i c k mattresses.278 O u t d o o r floral elemTuchelt 1976; Dentzer 1982, pp. 161-3, S19-S25, figs. 133-8; Ridgway 1993, pp. 198-9. 268 Fehr 1971, pp. 16-7, 22-4, 120, 126, identifies the mattress as the Persian grass mat or στιβάς; Dentzer 1982, p. 148, disagrees. See also Goldstein 1978, pp. 26-7; Kron 1988, p. 138 and n. 14. 267

269 Walter-Karydi 1985, pp. 98-101; for the Didyma figures, see Tuchelt 1976, pp. 63-6. 270 O n the aristocratic nature of these dedications: Baughan 2006. Most statuettes also depict single recliners or couples; a limestone statuette from Cyprus is the exception, N e w York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 74.51 (Fehr 1971, no. 489; Dentzer 1982, S18, figs. 129-32). 2 7 1 Dentzer 1982, pp. 87-95; Pipili J 998, pp. 89-90. Naukratis Painter cup, Paris, Louvre E667: Fehr 1971, no. 32; Stibbe 1972, no. 13, pl. 6.1; Dentzer 1982, no. V L a i , fig. 107; Pipili 1987, no. 194, fig. 103; Boardman 1998, fig. 413. Fragments of a cup by the Arkesilas Painter, Berlin, Charlottenburg 478X, 460X, Samos K1203, K1541, K2402: Fehr 1971, no. 37/39; Stibbe 1972, no. 191, pis. 58-9; Dentzer 1982, no. VLa5; Pipili 1987, no. 196, fig. 104a,b; Boardman 1998, fig. 421. 2 7 2 Amphora fragments from Amathus, Nicosia Museum, and amphora, Rhodes 12396: Fehr 1971, nos. 42-3; Samos VI.1, p. 118, no. 109, pl. 13; Dentzer 1982, pp. 128-30, nos. V G e i , V G e 3 ; Boardman 1998, figs. 337.1-2, 338. 2 7 3 Cypriote black-figure belly amphora, London, British Museum C855: Fehr 1971, no. 48; Dentzer 1982, V G e 7 , fig. 118. For reclining on the ground or on mattresses, Fehr (1971) suggests oriental influence via Cyprus. Compare Cypriote silver bowl with recliners on mats (Fehr 1971, no. 4; Dentzer 1982, fig. 104), Cypriote stone statuettes (Fehr 1971, nos. 484-90), and Cypriote funerary stelai (Dentzer 1982, R i o , R16-R26, figs. 192, 197-207). According to Dentzer (1982, p. 148), however, the elimination of klinai (at least in vase painting) only indicates a more simplified banquet, perhaps in a rustic outdoor setting.

e n t s a g a i n fill t h e

field.

Pipili 1987, pp. 71-5; for the cult feast of Samian Hera, Pipili 1998, pp. 89-90. Fehr 1971, nos. 301-5. A d d cup in the Manner of Andokides Painter, Oxford, Ashmolean Museum 1974.344: Boardman 1976a, pp. 281-90, figs. 1-8. 274 275

276 Fehr 1971, nos. 211-21; Dentzer 1982, p. 148. In red-figure painting the scene appears to move indoors; cups, baskets, and fillets hang on the backfield; see Fehr 1971, nos. 389-99. See also cup, Manner of Tarquinia Painter, Aberdeen, University, 748 ( A R V 2 871,9; Boardman 1979b, pp. 35-7, pis. 8-9); cup, Painter of the Paris Gigantomachy, Atlanta, Michael C . Carlos Museum 1998.8; column krater, Circle of Nikoxenos Painter (Schauenburg 1982). 2 7 7 Dionysos: Fehr 1971, nos. 114-58, 164, 269-74; LIMC 3 (1986), p. 456, no.363, s.v. 'Dionysos', (C. Gasparri); Tuchelt 1976, pp. 64-5 (for the possibility that the recliner from Didyma holding grapes may be connected with Dionysos). Note also Pausanias' description of the reclining Dionysos on the Chest of Kypselos (5.19.6) and analysis by Splitter (2000, pp. 45-6). Herakles: Fehr 1971, nos. 182-93; LIMC 4(1988),p. 817, nos. 1484-5, p. 8x9, nos. 1511-12, s.v. 'Herakles', (J. Boardman); Wolf 1993, pp. 53-107, Type 1. Hermes: Fehr 1971, nos. 165-71. Herakles and Iolaos: Fehr 1971, nos. 276-82; Wolf 1993, pp. 137-45, Type 4. Herakles and Dionysos: Fehr 1971, pp. 69-72, nos. 262-8; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 818-19, n o s · 1 5 0 0 _ 5 > s.v. 'Herakles'; Wolf 1993, pp. 107-37, Type 2. Herakles and Hermes: Fehr 1971, nos. 283-4; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 818, nos. 1495-9, s.v. 'Herakles'; LIMC 5 (199°). pp. 331-2, nos. 548-50, s.v. 'Hermes', (G. Siebert); Wolf 1993, pp. 137-45, Type 3. 278 Jannot 1984, figs. 143, 162, 165, 181, 220, 213, 300, 301-2, 305-8, 360, and p. 363 for banquets without klinai indicating an outdoor setting with specific significance in Etruscan funerary art. In Etruscan wall painting: Tomb of Hunting and Fishing (Steingräber 1986, p. 293, no. 50, pl. 41; de Marinis 1961, no. 36);

THE

170

SCULPTURE

W h i l e n o n e of the c o m p a r a t i v e material p r o v i d e s a precise

Significance

p a r a l l e l f o r t h e s c e n e o n A 4 , c o l l e c t i v e l y it m a k e s c l e a r t h a t , i n

D e s p i t e the o b v i o u s i m p o r t a n c e o f the scene, a t t e m p t s to attach

a r c h a i c art, t h e c o n v e n t i o n o f p l a c i n g

specific m e a n i n g

connects

them with

an o u t d o o r

structures in o u t d o o r

figures

o n the

setting, o r w i t h

ground

temporary

s e t t i n g s s u c h as t e n t s (σκηνή),

for

the

b a n q u e t o r s y m p o s i o n . S e v e r a l o f the scenes s u g g e s t that the c o n t e x t is n o t s i m p l y the g r e a t o u t d o o r s , b u t a m o r e

sacred

to the s y m p o s i o n o n the

Assos

relief

have

been frustrated b y the s a m e l a c k o f descriptive detail

charac-

t e r i s t i c o f t h e t e m p l e ' s s c u l p t u r e as a w h o l e . I f r e l i e f A 4

origin-

a l l y h a d i n s c r i p t i o n s s u c h as t h o s e t h a t i d e n t i f y t h e b a n q u e t e r s o n the E u r y t o s

krater or those o n the T r i p t o l e m o s

Painter's

space. I t h i n k the c o n v e n t i o n c o u l d a l s o s i g n a l the b u i l t d i n i n g

r h y t o n in Virginia, they have l o n g since vanished.284 W e

p l a t f o r m s i n s a n c t u a r i e s , w h i c h are t y p i c a l l y l o w t o the g r o u n d

o n l y the i c o n o g r a p h y

(c.o.30-40 m . h i g h o n average) a n d plank-like, i n contrast

to

w h i c h i t is s e t t o h e l p e s t a b l i s h a m e a n i n g . C e r t a i n s c h o l a r s see

the elaborate, tall f u r n i t u r e o f d o m e s t i c s y m p o s i a . 2 7 9 W h e n the

i n the relief m y t h o l o g i c a l c o n t e n t f r o m the life o f H e r a k l e s (see

i m a g e o f recliners o n the g r o u n d decorates a sacred object, f o r

below). O t h e r scholars discard m y t h o l o g i c a l , cultic, religious,

e x a m p l e the paired recliners depicted o n a n arula f r o m

Seli-

n o u s , o r D i o n y s o s r e c l i n i n g o n a t h i n m a t o n the base o f altar o r p e r i r r h a n t e r i o n , a sacred c o n t e x t s e e m s likely."

an We

o r ritual i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , p r e f e r r i n g i n s t e a d t o v i e w t h e s c e n e as

line b e l o w , the i m p e t u s f o r interpreting the scene in c o n n e c t i o n t o H e r a k l e s is s t r o n g e r t h a n t h e e v i d e n c e b e a r s o u t . T h e

object, the relief m u s t d e p i c t s a c r e d space, b u t the b a l a n c e o f

promising

portance

of

dining

and

drinking

question

mythological

B o t h l i t e r a r y a n d a r c h a e o l o g i c a l e v i d e n c e attests t o the i m in temporary

or

open-air

into

d r a w n f r o m everyday, albeit aristocratic, life.285 A s I w i l l o u t -

c a n n o t g o s o f a r as t o s a y t h a t b e c a u s e t h e t e m p l e is a s a c r e d

evidence overall f a v o u r s a sacred setting.

have

o f the scene a n d the p r o g r a m m e

programme

or

to

ask, therefore,

not, w a s

i n the

first

chosen

place. T h e

is w h y

as p a r t

of

a

more

symposion,

the

sculptural

central role that

feasting

a n d d r i n k i n g p l a y e d i n archaic G r e e k s o c i e t y m u s t be s i g n i f i -

s e t t i n g s at s a n c t u a r i e s . 2 8 1 U s u a l l y s u c h s e t t i n g s are t h o u g h t t o

cant, e s p e c i a l l y in r e l a t i o n t o the o t h e r scenes o n the

be rural o r o t h e r w i s e d i s t a n t sanctuaries, w h i c h w o u l d n o t h a v e

c o n n e c t e d w i t h f o o d o r d r i n k ; n a m e l y , the l i o n s s a v a g i n g p r e y

temple

p a r t i c u l a r r e l e v a n c e t o a p o l i s t e m p l e s u c h as t h e o n e at A s s o s .

a n d H e r a k l e s battling the centaurs. B e f o r e e x p l o r i n g this rela-

However,

tionship, however, we

purposes

temporary

outdoor

structures

w e r e a l s o b u i l t c l o s e at h a n d

suggested

by

erected

for

sacred

w i t h i n the polis,

the evidence f o r t e m p o r a r y

structures

as

erected

n e a r t h e f o u n t a i n at C o r i n t h o r n e a r t h e P o m p e i o n i n A t h e n s , where

the

meat

from

uted.282 I n p l a c i n g the

the P a n a t h e n a i c figures

festival

was

distrib-

o n the g r o u n d i n relief A 4 , t h e y

are n o t n e c e s s a r i l y r e m o v e d f r o m t h e p o l i s . T h e y are, h o w e v e r , t a k e n o u t o f the a n d r o n a n d set i n a c o m m u n a l

atmosphere

w i t h sacred overtones.283

curing a mythological

first

m u s t address the p r o b l e m s in se-

meaning.

T h e earliest m y t h o l o g i c a l interpretations o f the scene c a n be discarded.

Clarac's

identification

of

Menelaos

and

Proteus

pourparler a n d d'accord r e l i e s o n a m i s t a k e n r e s t o r a t i o n j o i n i n g o p p o s i t e e n d s of the b l o c k . T h e d i s c o v e r y o f relief A 5 ates T e x i e r ' s s u g g e s t i o n t o c r e a t e t h e w e d d i n g

elimin-

feast o f

Peir-

i t h o o s b y c o m b i n i n g the recliners o n A 4 w i t h the c e n t a u r s o n reliefs A 7 a n d A 8 . 2 8 6 C l a r k e , d e t e r m i n e d to l i n k the scene n o t o n l y w i t h H e r a k l e s b u t a l s o w i t h r e g i o n a l m y t h - h i s t o r y , sees

Tarantola Tomb (Steingräber 1986, p. 345, no. 114, fig. 313; de Marinis 1961, no. 39); Tomb of the Small Pediment (Steingräber 1986, p. 306, no. 66, pi. 72); Tomb of Olympic Games (Steingräber 1986, pp. 328-9, no. 92, pi. 121; de Marinis 1961, no. 40); Tomb of the Funeral Bed (Steingräber 1986, pp. 319-20, no. 82, pi. 111; de Marinis 1961, no. 44); Tomb of Orpheus and Eurydike (Steingräber 1986, pp. 269-70, no. 18, fig. 28; de Marinis 1961, no. 51); Poggio al Moro tomb, Chuisi (Steingräber 1986, p. 271, no. 22, pi. 192; de Marinis 1961, no. 53); Poggio Gaiella tomb (Steingräber 1986, p. 272, no. 23, fig. 31). Weber-Lehmann (1985, pp. 41-4) argues that reclining on the ground has Dionysiac associations. For tents: Hollow a y 1965, pp. 343-5. For dining platforms in sanctuaries, see Goldstein 1978, pp. 299-301, 356; Bookidis and Stroud 1997, pp. 396-400, appendix I, table 2. For domestic sympotic furniture, see Boardman 1990a, with references to other work. 279

Arula: Dentzer 1982, p. 211, figs. 167-8. Lakonian base: supra n. 225. Goldstein 1978, pp. 8ff., with discussion of Euripides' Ion 1122-95; Kron 1988. Outdoor dining: Burkert 1991, p. 18; Dunbabin 1991, pp. 121-48. For the serpentine inscription from Tiryns that mentions ritual dining, Jameson and Papachristodoulou 1972. 282 Post-holes interpreted as skenai supports: Kron 1988, pp. 142-3 and notes. 283 Scenes identified as cult meals usually lack specificity yet seem one step removed, either by context or feature, from genre, e.g., by the appearance of an altar or flying daimons: Pipili 1987, pp. 71-5; Kron 1988, pp. 141-3. Archaeological evidence for eating and drinking generally in a sacred context is extensive, and, if Euripides' Ion ( 1 1 6 5 - 9 5 ) c a n l>e taken as an accurate reflection, the sequence of eating followed by drinking could apply to sacred meals as well. Against a sharp distinction between the sacred and secular feasting in the Archaic period, see Goldstein 1978, pp. 1-4; Walter-Karydi 1985, p. 99. 21,0 281

Herakles

(third f r o m

left) g i v i n g

Eurystheus

(far r i g h t )

girdle of H i p p o l y t e . H i s narrative sequence depends o n i d e n t i f y i n g r e l i e f A 3 as H e r a k l e s to d e v o u r

fighting

the mis-

the sea m o n s t e r sent

Hesione.287

Although

rejecting C l a r k e ' s

proposal,

subsequent

mytho-

logical interpretations also focus o n Herakles. Sartiaux

inter-

p r e t s r e l i e f A 4 as H e r a k l e s ' a p o t h e o s i s a n d r e c e p t i o n o n M o u n t Olympos.288 Fernande Hölscher, following Carl Robert, sugg e s t s a l e s s d r a m a t i c m o m e n t , s u c h as H e r a k l e s a t t h e h o u s e o f E u r y t o s . 2 8 9 U r s u l a F i n s t e r - P I o t z favours a m y t h o l o g i c a l interp r e t a t i o n , rejecting the a p o t h e o s i s b u t l e a v i n g o p e n the o p t i o n of a feast w i t h E u r y t o s a n d also r a i s i n g the p o s s i b i l i t y that the

284 Eurytos krater, Paris, Louvre E635: CorVP 147,1; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 118, no. ι, s.v. 'Eurytos' (R. Olmos); Wolf 1993, pp. 11-12, figs. 1-4. Triptolemos Painter's rhyton: J. Neils in Shapiro 1981, no. 32, pp. 84-6. 285 Mendel 1914, p. 7; Demangel 1932, p. 437; Fehr 1971, pp. 116-17; Dentzer 1982, p. 237. 286 Clarac 1841, pp. 1157-9, pi. n6a,b; Texier 1849, pp. 203-5, ρ'· Ι Γ 4· F ° r discussion, see also Clarke 1898, p. 246; Sartiaux 1915, p. 53; Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 74-8. 287 Clarke 1898, pp. 240-7, 288. 288 Sartiaux 1915, p. 53. 289 Hölscher 1972, p. 94.

THE scene

may

represent

a local

hero

in the

company

of

S C U L195 PTURE

other

heroes.290

attribute, a n d A p o l l o a n d H e r a k l e s b y haircut a n d inscription. T h e context seems intentionally vague, e m p h a s i z i n g the hero's

T o m y eye, the scale o f the

figures

a n d the suggested sacred

special relation to the g o d s rather t h a n h i g h l i g h t i n g a specific

context o f the scene have h e r o i c o v e r t o n e s that t r a n s c e n d e v e r y -

episode in m y t h . T h e

d a y life. I f r e l i e f A 4 r e p r e s e n t s a p a r t i c u l a r m y t h o l o g i c a l

h o w e v e r , is t h a t n o e f f o r t is m a d e t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e t h e

hero

figures

real d i f f e r e n c e w i t h the s c e n e o n

other than a local o n e f o r w h o m w e have neither n a m e n o r story,

male

t h e o n l y v i a b l e c h o i c e is H e r a k l e s , w h o s e r e p u t a t i o n a s a d r i n k e r

would

equals his r e n o w n f o r great deeds.291 T h e s y m p o s i a s t to the right

symposiasts seem intentionally homogeneous. W i t h o u t

A4, three

t h r o u g h attribute, age, o r hairstyle, i n a w a y that

allow

the v i e w e r to r e c o g n i z e

the g o d s . I n s t e a d ,

the

being

s e e m s t h e m o s t l i k e l y c a n d i d a t e f o r H e r a k l e s , f o r h e is d i s t i n -

a b l e t o fix o n t h e g o d s , i t is i m p o s s i b l e t o m a k e f u r t h e r d i s t i n c -

g u i s h e d f r o m the o t h e r three b y his greater girth, the

tions regarding apotheosis or

double

p i l l o w o n w h i c h he reclines, his u n u s u a l c u p , a n d the o f f e r i n g he

Perhaps

the m o r e

theoxenia

important

involving

Herakles.

consideration in

interpreting

receives. H i s a m p h o r a - l i k e t a n k a r d m a y s i g n a l the hero's special

t h i s s c e n e is n o t the s p e c i f i c i d e n t i t y o f the

interest i n g r a n d d r i n k i n g vessels.292 H e lacks attributes, b u t o n

c h o i c e o f t h e b a s i c s u b j e c t . W h o e v e r t h e y are, t h e y a r e m o s t

the t w o o t h e r reliefs f r o m the t e m p l e that u n d e n i a b l y

portray

i m p o r t a n t l y m a l e s r e c l i n i n g t o d r i n k t o g e t h e r . I f at f a c e v a l u e

H e r a k l e s , h e is r e c o g n i z e d c h i e f l y b y c o n t e x t . T h e s c e n e m a k e s

the s c e n e d o e s n o t f a v o u r a n e x p l a n a t i o n i n m y t h , it d o e s h a v e

an appropriate sequel to his violent r o u t of the centaurs w r e s t l e w i t h T r i t o n . A n d t h e reference is n o t u n i q u e . A

and

similar

c o m b i n a t i o n appears o n a m o n u m e n t base f r o m L a m p t r a i A t t i k a : H e r a k l e s g r a p p l e s w i t h the N e m e a n l i o n o n o n e

in

side

figures

but

the

e l e m e n t s t h a t s u g g e s t it h a s a m e a n i n g b e y o n d t h e g e n e r i c . T h e scene takes

on

heightened

meaning

t e m p l e n o t a b l e f o r t h e omission charioteers, h u n t

scenes, o r

in the p r o g r a m m e

of

o f the s t a n d a r d p a n o p l y

battles

that characterize

a of

friezes

a n d extracts K e r b e r o s f r o m H a d e s o n another; o n the t h i r d side,

depicting scenes of aristocratic virtue. T h e A s s o s

h e r e l a x e s w i t h a c u p i n o n e h a n d , c l u b i n t h e other. 2 9 "' I n c u l t ,

is as s o b e r as X e n o p h a n e s '

H e r a k l e s especially w a s h o n o u r e d w i t h

d r u n k a r d s , n o ecstatic s i n g i n g , n o p i p e s , n o w o m e n , a n d n o sex:

theoxeniaP4

M o r e p r o b l e m a t i c are the c o m p a n i o n s . I f w e a l l o w t h a t the r i g h t s y m p o s i a s t is H e r a k l e s , w h e r e a n d w i t h w h o m d o e s drink?

I

exclude

Herakles

dining

at the

House

of

χρή δε πρώτον

he

Eurytos

εύφήμοις 15

d e s c r i p t i o n o f the event, w i t h

μεν θεόν ύμνεΐν

εύφρονας

μύθοι,ς καί καθαροίσι

λόγοι.ς-

δε καί εύξαμένους

τα δίκαια

σπείσαντας

b e c a u s e the rare r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s i n c l u d e the h i g h k l i n a i a p p r o -

πρήσσειν—ταύτα

priate f o r a d o m e s t i c setting, a n d w e have n o evidence of Iole.295

ούχ ύβρις ττίνειν οιτόσον κ€ν εχων

It also seems

οί'καδ aveu προπόλου

incongruous

defender a n d the v i o l a t o r o f course. I n

to p o r t r a y

xenia

Herakles

as b o t h

w i t h i n the same

late a r c h a i c A t t i c s c e n e s o f H e r a k l e s

the

on

γαρ ών εστί

20

ώς οί μνημοσύνη

the g r o u n d i n m a l e c o m p a n y , h i s m o s t f r e q u e n t c o m p a n i o n is

ούτε μάχας

ούδε < τ ι > Κενταύρων,

on

drinking

vessels;

the

outdoor,

ή στάσιας

terrestrial

a n e n v i r o n m e n t for relaxation rather t h a n apotheosis.

Some-

t i m e s H e r m e s j o i n s H e r a k l e s , as o n a b l a c k - f i g u r e c u p b y t h e T h e s e u s Painter.297 O n the early r e d - f i g u r e c u p b y the A m b r o sius Painter, H e r a k l e s appears again w i t h H e r m e s , joined

by

P o s e i d o n a n d A p o l l o o n the reverse.298 T h e y recline directly o n p i l l o w s o n t h e g r o u n d ; H e r m e s a n d P o s e i d o n are i d e n t i f i e d b y

Finstcr-Hotz Fr. 181 of the drinker; Athenaios, see especially Wolf 290 29J

1984, pp. 77-8. Geryoneis by Stesichoros already identifies Herakles as a great Deipnosophists 11.499. For the image of the reclining Herakles, 1993; also LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 817-21, s.v. 'Herakles'.

292 Boardman 1979a; Athenaios, Deipnosophists 11.498-500, for Flerakles' various skyphoi. 293 Athens, National Museum 42 + 3579: Boardman 1978, fig. 261; Kaltsas 2002, p. 77, no. 120. 29'! Jameson 1994, especially pp. 42-3, 47-50 and n. 45. 2 9 5 Eurytos krater: supra n. 284. For Attic representations, see Wolf (1993, pp. 42-5, figs. 32-3, 131-4) w h o also finds this scene unlikely for Assos.

Supra n. 277. 297 Herakles reclines with Dionysos on one side and Hermes on the other on the cup in London, British Museum B446: ABV 520,32; Fehr 1971, no. 262; Wolf 1993, no. sf. 43, figs. 39, 59. 298 Ambrosius Painter's cup in Florence, Museo Archeologico 73127: ARV2 296

173,4; Fehr 1971, nos. 284-5; Wolf 1993, no. rf. 2, fig. 57.

Τιτήνων

προμηθείην

άνδρας δύνασθαι

άφίκοιο γηραλεος. άναφαίνη,

αρετής-

ούτε

πλασματα

σφεδανάς• τοις

θεών

setting a t t e n d e d b y satyrs, w o m e n , o r d o m e s t i c a n i m a l s creates

διέπει

no

προχειρότερον—

δς εσθλά πίών

καί τόνος άμφ

D i o n y s o s . 2 9 6 T h e r e n o w n e d d r i n k e r a n d the g o d of w i n e m i n g l e appropriately

μη πάνυ

ανδρών δ' aiveîv τούτον,

sculptured relaxing

symposion

Γιγάντων, τών

ούδεν χρηστόν

αΐεν εχειν

προτέρων, ενεστι-

αγαθόν.

But first glad-hearted men must hymn the god with reverent words and pure speech. And having poured a libation and prayed to be able to do what is right—for these are obvious— it is not wrong to drink as much as allows any but an aged man to reach his home without a servant's aid. Praise the man who when he has taken drink brings noble deeds to light, as memory and a striving for virtue bring to him. He deals neither with the battles of Titans nor Giants nor Centaurs, fictions of old, nor furious conflicts—for there is no use in these. But it is good always to hold the gods in high regard.299 In

archaic

poetry

and

practice,

the

symposion

heart o f g o o d social, religious, a n d civic life.300 T o

lies

at

the

participate

299 Xenophanes fr. 1, from Athenaios, Deipnosophists 1 i.4é2C-f. Trans. Lesher 1992, pp. 10-13, with commentary pp. 47-54. For discussion: Frankel 1975, pp. 325-8; Marcovich 1978, pp. 1 - 1 6 , esp. bibliography n. 2. 300 Murray 1980, pp. 197-202; Murray 1983b, pp. 257-72; Murray 1983c, pp. 47-52; Murray 1990, pp. 3-13, with bibliography; Dentzer 1982, pp. 434-6; Schmitt Pantel 1985; Schmitt Pantel 1990a, pp. 20-6; Schmitt Pantel 1990b, pp. 199-213; Schmitt Pantel 1992, passim.

196

THE

SCULPTURE

i n t h e s y m p o s i o n d e f i n e s t h e b e s t o f w h a t it i s t o b e h u m a n : t o

gift

b e l o n g t o a n d b e p a r t o f a c o m m u n i t y , t o b e at ease, t o s h a r e

Sigeion.307 Pauline Schmitt Pantel reminds us again of Solon's

h o s p i t a l i t y , t o d r i n k w i n e r e s p o n s i b l y , t o b e a m a n . I t is a r i t u a l

use of c o m m u n a l

m e a n s o f e x p r e s s i n g f r i e n d s h i p (φιλία)

and hospitality

Eunomia,

and

among

establishes

an

exclusive

equality

(ξένια),

those w h o

are

k r a t e r is a k e y

element i n the event a n d thus

in

a

krater,

stand,

and

strainer

to

the

Prytaneion

d i n i n g as a m e t a p h o r f o r t h e p o l i s i n

of

the

i n w h i c h h e c h a r a c t e r i z e s c i v i l u n r e s t as a n i n a b i l i t y

t o a p p r e c i a t e the feast:

i n c l u d e d i n the gathering.301 The

of

5

its

αυτοί δε φθείρειν

μεγάλην

άστοί βούλονται

representation. A s F r a n ç o i s L i s s a r r a g u e p o i n t s o u t , the k r a t e r

δήμου

i s t h e c o m m u n a l c u p o f t h e s y m p o s i o n ; as t h e s o u r c e o f t h e s h a r e d w i n e , i t b e c o m e s t h e s y m b o l o f h o s p i t a l i t y . 3 0 2 I t is a l s o

πάλιν

χρήμασι

άφραδίησιν

πειθόμενοι,

θ -ηγεμόνων άδικος

νόος, οίσιν

ΰβριος εκ μεγάλης

άλγεα

πολλά

ού γαρ επίστανται

κατεχειν

έτοιμον

παθείν-

κόρον ούδε

παρούσας

the vessel f o r m i x i n g the w i n e w i t h water, a n act that separates

ΙΟ

the c i v i l i z e d b e h a v i o u r o f m e n f r o m the u n c i v i l i z e d actions o f

It is the citizens themselves who, in their folly, wish to destroy the great city in yielding to the lure of riches, and likewise the unjust mind of the chiefs of the people, who prepare great evils for themselves by their great excess. They do not know how to restrain their greed or how to order their present happiness in the calm of a feast.308

b a r b a r i a n s a n d b a r b a r o u s c r e a t u r e s , s u c h as c e n t a u r s w h o d r i n k their w i n e

unmixed.

P r e p a r a t i o n s f o r the s y m p o s i o n itself i n v o l v e certain establ i s h e d rituals, of w h i c h o f f e r i n g a l i b a t i o n m a k e s the best visual e x p r e s s i o n o f piety. T h e act serves t o a c k n o w l e d g e a n d

punc-

t u a t e c h a n g e s i n life, s u c h as a r r i v a l s o r d e p a r t u r e s , a n d c a r r i e s w i t h it t h e p r o p h y l a c t i c f u n c t i o n o f w a r d i n g o f f evil a n d couraging

g o o d fortune b y honouring

the g o d s . I n the

enban-

εύφροσύνας

otherwise joyous and often boisterous

T h e libation rarely appears in scenes of e v e r y d a y

finds

Φοίβε

Totenmahl r e l i e f s

elevates

t h e s c e n e t o a s o l e m n a n d p e r h a p s h e r o i c l e v e l as w e l l .

The

p o s s i b i l i t y is s t r e n g t h e n e d b y t h e u s e o f t h e k a n t h a r o s , a c u p heroic

overtones, rather t h a n the m o r e absence

of couches

alludes

local

drinking

to a p u b l i c

setting

w i t h sacred ambience. The

archaic

symposion

tends

to

be

considered

an

event

centred i n the private sphere, b u t the m a n y occasions for d i n i n g a n d d r i n k i n g in civic a n d sacred contexts surely c o n f i r m that

δε στρατόν

τερπόμενοι παιάνων 780

ΰβριστήν

καί. στάσιν ϊλαος

πάλιν

άκρην,

χαριζόμενος· Μήδων

άπερυκε

εύφροσύνη

κλειτας πέμπωσ

έκατομβας

Ιαχησί

δεδοικ'

'Ελλήνων

ήμετερην

τε σον περί

άφραδίην

λαοφθόρον·

τήνδε φύλασσε

βωμόν.

εσορών άλλα συ

Φοίβε

πάλιν.

Lord Phoibos, you yourself have founded the citadel of the polis, giving kharis to Alkathoos, Pelops' son. Now keep away from this polis the hubris-filled army of the Medes, so that in euphrosunë the people at the coming of spring might send you kleos-worthy hecatombs, having terpsis in the kithara and in the lovely banquet and in dancing the paian and in shouts of joy around your altar. For indeed I fear the lack of phrenes and people-destroying stasis of the Hellenes when I see it. But you, Phoibos, being gracious, protect this our polis. 309

the values expressed in the s y m p o s i o n extended far b e y o n d the

A

andron-306

G o l d e n A g e ; a n d the s y m p o s i o n r e m a i n s a central

T h e i m p o r t a n c e a n d prestige o f p u b l i c d i n i n g i n the

s i x t h - c e n t u r y T r o a d is a t t e s t e d b y P h a n o d i k o s o f P r o k o n n e s o s '

j 0 ! Adkins 1963; Murray 1980, pp. 50-2; Scott 1982, pp. 1-19; Herman 1987, pp. 22-9. 302 Lissarrague 1990a, pp. 23, 36, 44-5; Lissarrague 1990b. 303 See Delight 1943; Dentzer 1982, pp. 514-15; Lissarrague 1990a, pp. 25-6. The evidence is not all archaic. The libation offered at the start of the symposion honored Agathos daimon, the first krater was dedicated to Zeus Olympios, the second to the heroes, especially Herakles, and the third to Zeus Soter. 304 In general: Thönges-Stringaris 1965; Dentzer 1969; Dentzer 1982, pp. 25262, 301-427. For images: supra n. 226. 305 A s seems to be the case in the oversized kantharoi in Lakonian hero reliefs, with connections to Dionysos: Stibbe 1978, p. 36, pi. 10.1-4. 306 Schmitt Pantel 1980, pp. 55-68; Murray 1983b, p. 267; Schmitt Pantel 1985, pp. 145-8; Schmitt Pantel 1990a, pp. 24-6; Schmitt Pantel 1990b; Schmitt Pantel

by also

κιθάρη και ερατη θαλίττ]

τε χοροΐς

η γαρ εγωγε

παίδι

ίνα σοι λαοί εν

ηρος επερχομέωου

from

i n all b u t t h e g e s t u r e o f r a i s i n g

a p h i a l e . 3 0 4 T h e g e s t u r e o f t h e first s y m p o s i a s t o n A 4

horn.303 T h e

ούτος

Πέλοπος

τήσδε πάλευς,

a place in m o r e sober representations, often w i t h heroic

later s o - c a l l e d

with

775

an

the scenes o f a s i n g l e r e c l i n i n g m a l e o n a r c h a i c reliefs a n d the

άναξ, αυτός μεν επύργωσας

Άλκαθόω

symposia,

overtones. T h e s y m p o s i o n o n A 4 differs f u n d a m e n t a l l y

ήσυχίη.

sees t h e h a r m o n i o u s f e a s t as e m b l e m a t i c o f t h e p e a c e f u l c i t y :

occasion.303

b u t the gesture of r a i s i n g a phiale (the s u g g e s t i o n of a l i b a t i o n ? )

εν

e x t e n s i o n , s o t o o s h o u l d b e the city. T h e o g n i s o f M e g a r a

q u e t - s y m p o s i o n , a l i b a t i o n w a s m a d e to s i g n i f y the e n d o f the

T h e act t h u s p r o v i d e d a m o m e n t o f s o l e m n r e f l e c t i o n i n

δαιτός

T h e s y m p o s i o n i s a p l a c e o f h a r m o n i o u s o r d e r (ευνομία);

b a n q u e t a n d the b e g i n n i n g o f the s y m p o s i o n , and, d u r i n g the s y m p o s i o n , a l i b a t i o n w a s o f f e r e d at t h e s t a r t o f e a c h k r a t e r .

κοσμείν

s i m i l a r i d e a is i m p o r t a n t t o H e s i o d i n h i s r e f l e c t i o n s o n t h e metaphor

f o r the peaceful city i n C l a s s i c a l literature a n d p h i l o s o p h y . 3 1 0

1992; ThesCRA 2 (2004), pp. 218-20, 239-41, s.v. 'Banquet', (P. Schmitt Pantel). Civic dining: Miller 1978, pp. 4—13; Rotroff and Oakley 1992, pp. 36-46. Sacred dining: Goldstein 1978; Kron 1988. Sacred, civic, and later palatial dining rooms: Bergquist 1990. j 0 7 M. Guarducci in Richter 1961, no. 53, pp. 165-8, figs. 205-7; Lissarrague 1990a, p. 46; Rotroff and O a k l e y 1992, p. 44. 30S Solon fr. 4.5-10; trans. Schmitt Pantel 1990a, p. 21. For further discussion: Murray 1983b, pp. 262-3; Slater 1981. 3C9 fheognis, Elegies 773-82; trans. Levine 1985, pp. 191-2. 3J0 Hesiod, Works and Days, lines 109-20. Also pseudo-Hesiod S^/eW, 270-319, for the city of peace and festivity. Levine 1985, pp. 176-96, for the symposion as metaphor for the polis in Aristophanes and Plato as well as Theognis.

THE

197

SCULPTURE

I t is i n t h i s c o n t e x t t h a t the s c e n e o f s y m p o s i o n w a s c h o s e n t o

i c o n o g r a p h y o f the d e c o r a t e d m e t o p e s in close detail, a i m i n g

d e c o r a t e t h e t e m p l e at A s s o s . I f t h e s c e n e s o f h u n t i n g

first

v i v i d l y represent a natural order, then the s y m p o s i o n the civilized counterpart. T h e scene of c o n v i v i a l

lions

embodies symposion

r e d e e m s the scene o f H e r a k l e s r o u t i n g the centaurs, v i n d i c a t i n g the failed s y m p o s i o n o f H e r a k l e s a n d P h o l o s .

311

T h e agent in

b o t h s c e n e s is w i n e , t h a t ' a m b i g u o u s d r i n k . . . d a n g e r o u s beneficial... halfway functioning

as

between

mediation

the

between

savage

and

the

these

two

polar

and

civilized, oppos-

to locate their t h e m a t i c parallels w i t h i n the

architectural

tradition, a n d then their c o m p o s i t i o n a l and i c o n o g r a p h i e

cor-

relates w i t h i n the b r o a d e r artistic m i l i e u . T h e s t r o n g case f o r identifying

metope

M8

(quarrel o v e r the a r m s favour

Trojan

themes

with

a story

of Achilles) in

some

from

the

Trojan

saga

provides the impetus

of

the

other

scenes.

In

i n t r o d u c t i o n to the sculpture, I d i s c u s s e d the g e n e r a l

to the

aspects

o f the m e t o p e s , n o t i n g the l i k e l i h o o d that t h e y d e c o r a t e d b o t h

i t e s ' . 3 1 2 P u t b o l d l y , w i n e r e v e a l s character. F o r the c e n t a u r s , it

e n d s o f the temple. T h e r e f o r e , o n l y a b o u t half survive.

Some

unleashes their bestial p a s s i o n a n d d e m o n s t r a t e s their inability

m a y have been part of a larger c o m p o s i t i o n stretching

across

t o a c t as a c o m m u n i t y , t o o f f e r h o s p i t a l i t y , t o s h a r e w i n e f r o m

several metopes.

the krater. B y

c o n t r a s t , m e n at t h e s y m p o s i o n

are at p e a c e ,

m a s t e r s o f their p a s s i o n a t e side. T h e y c a n act i n d i v i d u a l l y heroes, a n d collectively

as a c o m m u n i t y ,

demonstrating

as

c a p a c i t y t o be g e n e r o u s .

T h e confronted sphinxes o n M 3 f o r m an abbreviated version of

X e n o p h a n e s m a k e s explicit the d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the v i o lence o f centaurs, e m b l e m a t i c o f civic strife (στάσις), a n d behaviour of h u m a n s

Metope Mj: confronted sphinxes

the

i n the w e l l - f u n c t i o n i n g city. T h e

the

same

c o m p a r i s o n i n f o r m s t h e s c u l p t u r a l p r o g r a m m e at A s s o s .

Ex-

the c o m p o s i t i o n w i t h antithetical s p h i n x e s f o u n d t w i c e o n the epistyle ( P L

central floral m o t i f has

been

eliminated, a n d the s p h i n x e s c r o u c h o n their h a u n c h e s ,

103; F i g . 8 2 ) . T h e

with

upright forelegs the

set t o g e t h e r a n d h i n d l e g s flat o n the

manner

of

ground

the o n l y n o n c o m p e t i t i v e scene o n the epistyle. T h e

a r r a n g e m e n t suits the s h a p e o f the m e t o p e ; i n themselves, a n d

tions take place in the d o m a i n of animals, monsters, a n d heroes,

as a p a i r , t h e f e l i n e b o d i e s

w h e r e a s the s y m p o s i o n b e l o n g s s q u a r e l y i n the civilized w o r l d

outwardly

of

o f the s q u a r e

the polis. T h e

prophylactic

function

of

the l i b a t i o n ,

a p p e a l t o d i v i n e p r o t e c t i v e p o w e r s , is t h e r e l i g i o u s

an

analogue

as

projecting wings

those

of

field. the

bulls. T h e s e

expressed

in

the

images

last qualities

are w e l l from

and

t e m p l e ' s d e s i g n e r , h o w e v e r , f o u n d it

anything

but

human

terms.

In

this

context,

and

A2

or

of

a l t h o u g h o n t h e m e t o p e t h e t a i l s are

These

sphinxes

lack

a rib

separating

the

even

f o r h a i r - c u r l s a c r o s s the f o r e h e a d a n d a raised l o c k m a r k i n g the b o r d e r o f t h e h a i r b e l o w t h e ear. T h e s u r v i v i n g s t y l i s t i c d e t a i l s

con-

impossible

t o e x p r e s s q u a l i t i e s s u c h as c o m m u n i t y , f r i e n d s h i p , a n d p i e t y in

A i

fantastical

w o r l d s , t o w h i c h the a r c h a i c G r e e k felt h i m s e l f c l o s e l y nected. T h e

on

breast f r o m the w i n g , b u t t h e y h a v e the t y p i c a l raised

expressed, perhaps

the natural

compressed.

sphinxes

fill

rival

h e r b i v o r e s , a n d the battle o f

best expressed, i n i m a g e r y

of

unfurl to

the

S-curve

very

potency

stable triangles, w h i l e

T h e s p h i n x e s ' tails f o r m the s a m e reclining

strength,

sexual

compact

corners

the seated l i o n o n A n ,

and

make

The

the u p p e r

to the a p o t r o p a i c i m a g e s o f s u p e r n a t u r a l g u a r d i a n s h i p , p h y s i c a l

sphinxes, lions devouring

votive

sphinxes.31''

c l u d i n g the h e r a l d i c s p h i n x e s , the s c e n e o f s y m p o s i o n o n A 4 is competi-

in

firmly

the

sober

band

are n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o a s s o c i a t e t h i s r e l i e f w i t h i n a c l e a r l y d e f i n e d group. I n d i s c u s s i n g reliefs A i

a n d A 2 , w e c o n s i d e r e d the c o m p o s -

i t i o n o f c o n f r o n t e d s p h i n x e s a n d its i m p o r t a n c e i n a r c h i t e c t u r a l

a n d s e m i - s a c r e d c h a r a c t e r o f t h i s s y m p o s i o n f i t s p e r f e c t l y its

decoration f r o m

location o n a temple dedicated to A t h e n a Polias. W e m a y even

rangement

go

e m i n e n t l y s u i t e d to the m e t o p a l s h a p e , b u t i n architecture the

s o f a r as t o s a y

divinely

sanctioned

that the i c o n o g r a p h y human

achievement

evokes a sense and,

by

of

extension,

p r e s e n t s t h e t e m p l e i t s e l f as a c o n c r e t e m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f

that

achievement.

of

composition Sphinxes

may

Ionia

and

Lykia. The

seated, antithetical

appears

to have

slightly

sphinxes

been taken

different

found

up

on

only

at

have decorated metopes f r o m several

M3

aris

Assos. temples

in A i t o l i a a n d W e s t Greece, b u t the o n l y certain e x a m p l e comes f r o m T e m p l e Y at S e l i n o u s , w i t h its s i n g l e s p h i n x . 3 1 4 A s f a r as w e c a n tell, n o n e o f t h e o t h e r , l e s s - c e r t a i n e x a m p l e s , a d o p t s t h e

SCULPTURED

a n t i t h e t i c a l , s e a t e d c o m p o s i t i o n o f m e t o p e M 3 . O n l y t h e relief

METOPES

f r o m C a l t a g i r o n e offers a c o m p a r a b l y large-scale version, but

T h e t e n s u r v i v i n g m e t o p e s e x h i b i t t h e s a m e t h e m a t i c r a n g e as the reliefs o n the epistyle: m o n s t e r s , p o w e r - a n i m a l s n o t certainly in c o m b a t ) , a n d h u m a n narratives. O f

(although t h e last,

with addorsed sphinxes.315 O n the other hand, the c o m p o s i t i o n of M 3 edly

in

smaller

decorative

arts,

particularly

a p p e a r s repeatin

metalwork,

s o m e s c e n e s a r e s u r e l y m y t h o l o g i c a l a n d o t h e r s are t a n t a l i z i n g l y a m b i g u o u s , at l e a s t t o u s . I n t h i s c h a p t e r , I c o n s i d e r t h e Ridgway 1993, p. 227. Giuliani 1979, pi. 12.1, or Tusa 1983, pi. 27; Marconi 2007, p. 90, no. SMi, fig. 36. Sphinxes also have been suggested on metopes from the Temple of Apollo at Thermon (Typhon?), Kalydon, series 1 (lion?), and Mcgara Hyblaia: supra n. 36. 313

3,4

3 1 1 Wcscoat 1995; ThesCRA Pantel). 3 1 2 Lissarrague 1990a, p. 5.

2 (2004), p. 239, no. 239, s.v. 'Banquet' (P. Schmitt

315

Giuliani 1979, pi. 12.2.

THE

174

SCULPTURE

M3

the o r b i t o f the E a s t G r e e k p a i n t e d e x a m p l e s f o u n d o n

Klazo-

menian, C h i o t , W i l d G o a t , or R h o d i a n pottery.319 A l t h o u g h e s s e n t i a l l y t h e s a m e s u b j e c t as t h e l a r g e r r e l i e f s

A i

a n d A 2 , the c o n f r o n t e d s p h i n x e s o n M 3 l a c k the critical gesture of

guarding

the

sacred

tree; t h e y

are r e d u c e d

i n scale

relegated to a less p r o m i n e n t p l a c e o n the b u i l d i n g . T h e

and motif

nevertheless serves the i m p o r t a n t u n i f y i n g f u n c t i o n v i s u a l l y b y repeating a m a j o r m o t i f f r o m the epistyle. M e t o p e s M 4 , w i t h a boar, a n d M 7 , w i t h a centaur, also repeat motifs, thus f o r m i n g a visual refrain to the large-scale scenes b e l o w that helps together

the

two

sculptured

courses.

In

the

case

of

bind the

s p h i n x e s , t h e t h e m e is c a r r i e d i n t o t h e r o o f d e c o r a t i o n as w e l l .

-t—Η

Η—I—I—l·

.5 Η

Metope

1—I—1 1m

Boar

M e t o p e M 4 i l l u s t r a t e s a b o a r w a l k i n g t o t h e r i g h t i n a n a t u r a l gait,

1—I—I

w i t h its n o s e

5cm FIGURE

M4:

to

the g r o u n d

as if s n i f f i n g f o r f o o d

(PI.

104;

F i g . 83).320 T h e boar's rather slender p h y s i q u e , w i t h sleek b o d y ,

82. M3: Confronted sphinxes.

m u s c u l a r s h o u l d e r s , l o n g legs, a n d n o genitalia, resembles the early E a s t G r e e k type o f b o a r f o u n d o n C h i o t a n d Fikellura pottery.321

especially s h i e l d b a n d reliefs.316 T h e i m a g e o n the

shieldband

series r e m a i n s r e m a r k a b l y c o n s i s t e n t f r o m the last q u a r t e r

of

M4

/ Vs

t h e s e v e n t h c e n t u r y t o t h e l a s t q u a r t e r o f t h e s i x t h ; its c o m p o s ition, w i t h c o n f r o n t e d s p h i n x e s c r o u c h i n g o n their h a u n c h e s , front

in

S-curves,

m a t c h e s the m e t o p e exactly. M o s t often, in the m a n y

legs

vertical,

wings

unfurled,

and

tails

Pelopon-

n e s i a n e x a m p l e s o f these reliefs, the s p h i n x e s h a v e h a i r - s p i r a l s , b u t several versions

( b o t h e a r l y a n d late) e l i m i n a t e this

ture.317 T h e similar-shaped correspondence

fields

fea-

m a y a c c o u n t f o r s o m e o f the

b e t w e e n the m i n i a t u r e

bronze

metopes

t h e a r c h i t e c t u r a l r e l i e f at A s s o s , a l t h o u g h it is w o r t h

and

noting

that the m e t o p e f r o m T e m p l e Y f o l l o w s a c o m p l e t e l y different f o r m ; its s i n g l e s p h i n x h a s t h e s t r i d i n g f r o n t l e g s a n d c r o u c h i n g hind quarters favoured image of confronted connection

with

in East

sphinxes

metalwork

Greek

pottery.318 W h i l e

the

is a n a r c h a i c c o m m o n p l a c e ,

seems

the fact that the c o m p o s i t i o n o f M 3

further

substantiated

does not belong

.815

a by

within

For the composition generally: LIMC 8 (1997), pp. 1155-7, n o s · 78-116, s.v. 'Sphinx' (N. Kourou). From Olympia: Kunze 1950, forms I-V, XVII, X X V I I I , X X X I I , pp. 58-60, pis. 5, i l , 16, 19, 21, 44, 52-3, 60; Bol 1989, pp. 43-4, form C X I X , fig. 5, pi. 67. From the Athenian Akropolis: Payne 1931, pi. 45.8; Touloupa 1991, pp. 262, 268, no. D i l i . ι , figs. 34-6. Bronze reliefs from Ptoion: BCH 16 (1892) pi. 15. Bronze mirror plaque from Corinth: Payne 1931, pp. 225-6, fig. 102, pi. 45.8. O n some shieldband reliefs, seated confronted sphinxes can have a diminutive floral between them, but they do not raise a paw heraldically upon it.

ml—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I

0

.5

1m H—I—I—I 5cm

316

e.g., Kunze, 1950, forms X X V I I I or X V I I . Mirror plaque: supra n. 316. Giuliani 1979, pp. 50-2. The position is especially common on Klazomenian sarcophagi: e.g., R. M. C o o k 1981, pis. 16 (D2), 18 (D3), 29 (F3), 34 (F16), 50 (G9), 51.2 (Gio), 61.ι (G27), 70.2 (G16), 72 (G24), 81.1 (G41), 99.1 (H2). Paired sphinxes can move in this fashion in Corinthian vase painting: CorVP 127,6; Payne 1931, pis. 3.1, 22.5. Compare also single sphinx on Loeb tripod A (Chase 1908, p. 292, pi. 9); terracotta sphinx from Delphi (LeRoy 1967, pp. 90-1, no. Α.185, pi. 31); ivory plaque from Sparta (Dawkins 1929, pl. 107.2). Even the antithetically paired sphinxes on Loeb tripods Β and C adopt a different scheme for the forelegs; cf. Höckmann 1982, pis. 64-5; Chase 1908, pp. 301, 309-10, pis. 317

318

14, 18.

FIGURE

83. M4: Grazing boar.

3 , 9 Supra n. 44. Walter-Karydi 1973, no. 37, pi. 8 (Samian), no. 516, pi. 62 (Rhodian), no. 528, pi. 67 (Rhodian), no. 559, pi. 65 (Rhodian). Chiot sphinxes can sit antithetically but tend to have horizontal backs: Lemos (supra 'Epistyle', n. 44). See also Chian chalices found at Anthemousia: Poulaki 2001, pp. 59, 71, 81. Klazomenian examples: supra n. 6. 320 For quadruped locomotion: L. Brown, 'The Right Way to Walk FourLegged', Natural History 77.9 (1968), pp. 32-9, 84-5. 321 Compare slender boars represented on a Chiot bowl, London, British Museum 88.6-1.456 (Lemos 1991, no. 252, pi. 27); on Chiot fragments, London, British Museum 1888.6-1.466 (Lemos 1991, no. 439, pi. 58); on a Fikellura amphora, London, British Museum 88.2-8.54 ( C o o k and Dupont 1998, pp. 78-9, fig. 10.1); on an East Greek dinos, Basel, Antikenmuseum BS452 (Walter-Karydi 1970, pis. 1-2); and, more unusually, on a Klazomenian sarcophagus, Athens, National Museum 13939 (R· M. C o o k 1981, no. B5, pi. 5.1). In bronze silhouette, note the similarly shaped boar from Olympia (without interrupted crest): Philipp 2004, pp. 344-6, pi. 78.

199

THE SCULPTURE A

s i m p l e g a p s e p a r a t i n g the s p i n a l bristles, a l s o characteristic o f

E a s t G r e e k r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s , h e r e a p p e a r s i n its e a r l y f o r m .

322

The

b o a r h a s a r o u n d e d ear, a s a u c e r - l i k e e y e p l a c e d w e l l a l o n g t h e snout,

a curving

tusk

that protrudes

from

the closed

chops,

The

image

e m b l e m of

o f the b o a r can, also, s t a n d o n its

fierce

own

as

an

t e n a c i t y a n d as a s y m b o l o f the s t r e n g t h a n d

b r a v e r y m a n i f e s t i n its h u n t (see a b o v e , A 1 3 ) . 3 2 7 T o H o m e r , the boar was

second

only

to the l i o n

(Iliad

in strength,

and

equally

a n d a c u r l y tail e n d i n g i n a t w i s t e d p l u m e . T h i s b o a r is f u n d a m e n -

dangerous w h e n cornered

12.41-6, 146-53). T h e i m p o r t -

tally different i n posture, p h y s i q u e , a n d details f r o m the o n e o n

a n c e o f the b o a r at A s s o s rests n o t o n a n i n t i m a t e c u l t i c

relief A 1 3 d i s c u s s e d earlier. T h e latter d e r i v e s f r o m a d i f f e r e n t

mythological connection w i t h Athena, but more

prototype—the

or

immediately

fat p i g p r e f e r r e d b y E a s t G r e e k artists o f

the

w i t h a d e m o n s t r a t i o n of vitality that conjures u p heroic behav-

s e c o n d half o f the sixth c e n t u r y — a n d p r o b a b l y represents

the

i o u r . I n life, t h e b o a r m u s t h a v e c a r r i e d g r e a t p o t e n c y f o r b e i n g the

w o r k o f a different sculptor. Of

the three characteristic p o s t u r e s

f o r the b o a r i n

art—

fiercest

animal

the h u n t e r s

confront; even today, w i l d

a t t a c k i n g , at b a y , a n d f o r a g i n g f o r f o o d — t h e l a s t is g e n e r a l l y

countryside

reserved f o r scenes w h e n

the p a t r o n g o d d e s s A t h e n a

the b o a r appears

alone

in

benign

a n i m a l friezes, o r i n scenes w h e r e a n u n s e e n l i o n a p p r o a c h e s . 3 2 3 Early

o n , the h u n t e d b o a r i n C o r i n t h i a n

(c.éoo-575) can take o n the f o r a g i n g aggressive

postures

soon

become

and Attic

painting

attitude, b u t the

the n o r m

for boar

more hunts,

surrounding

of the T r o a d

boars

were

likely

live a n d are h u n t e d

Assos.

The

connection

a n d the boar (and b y

to

i n the

between extension,

t h e m e n w h o h u n t it) is m a d e e x p l i c i t o n the a r c h a i c s i l v e r c o i n s o f M e t h y m n a , the m o t h e r c i t y o f A s s o s , w h i c h c o m b i n e a head o f A t h e n a a n d a p o w e r f u l b o a r w i t h l o w e r e d h e a d . 3 2 8 I t is i n this c o n t e x t — s i m u l t a n e o u s l y

real, s y m b o l i c , a p o t r o p a i c ,

and

d e c o r a t i v e — t h a t the b o a r a p p e a r s a l o n e o n E a s t G r e e k

gems

t h e s t r i d i n g b o a r i n c l u d e w e a p o n s o r d o g s , w h i c h c o u l d h a v e fit

and

from

o n o u r m e t o p e if t h a t s u b j e c t w e r e i n t e n d e d . T h e b o a r o n

S y m e . It w o u l d have h a d equal p o w e r w r i t large o n the temple

b o t h generic a n d m y t h o l o g i c a l . 3 2 4 E v e n the h u n t scenes

c a n n o t be c o m b i n e d w i t h a n y o f the s u r v i v i n g

figurai

with

M4

metopes

coins, K l a z o m e n i a n

sarcophagi,

and a grave

stele

at A s s o s , w i t h o r w i t h o u t a t t e n d a n t l i o n s . A n d i f i t w e r e p o s i -

to m a k e a credible m y t h o l o g i c a l composition.323 It could, h o w -

tioned

depicting

animal

ever, b e p a r t o f a n a n i m a l f r i e z e , f a c e d o r f r a m e d b y l i o n ( s ) o n

c o m b a t s , it w o u l d h a v e s e r v e d t o i n t e r w e a v e t h e k e y

in p r o x i m i t y

to

the

epistyle

relief

themes

the adjacent metope(s). I n architectural sculpture n o t represent-

o f n a t u r a l s t r e n g t h a n d p o w e r b e t w e e n the t w o

courses.

ing a mythical encounter, boars usually appear faced b y preda t o r s , as i n r e l i e f A 1 3 . O n t w o E a s t G r e e k a r c h i t e c t u r a l f r i e z e s ,

Metope My: galloping

the p o d i u m f r i e z e o f B u i l d i n g G at X a n t h o s a n d f r a g m e n t s o f a terracotta sima, a b o a r o c c u p i e s an entire b l o c k o r panel

and

centaur

T h e third i m a g e to connect directly w i t h subjects explored o n

was, presumably, faced or flanked b y lions or panthers.326

t h e e p i s t y l e is t h e c e n t a u r o n m e t o p e M 7 , w h o t u r n s f u l l face w h i l e g a l l o p i n g r i g h t ( P I . 1 0 5 a - b ; F i g . 84). T h e s i m i l a r i t i e s

of

For the interrupted crest: supra n. 95. Examples of the simple gap: supra n. 3 21. Later representations of the type appear on an Etruscan bronze relief from a chariot, Munich, Staatliche Antikensammlungen 720p W A F (Höckmann 1982, pis. 1-3); on a Cypriote sarcophagus, N e w York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 74.51.2451, C.500 BC (Dcntzer 1982, R6, fig. 186); and on gems (e.g., Boardman 1968, nos. 537-8, 546, 549, pis. 36-7; Boardman 1970, pis. 292, 402-3). O n East Greek coins the more sophisticated break is favoured, but see Babelon II. 1, no. 765, pi. 20.11 (Ialysos) and no. 829, pi. 22.11 (Lykia). In Attic art, cup by Skythes, Rome, Villa Guilia 20760: ARV2 83,14; Schefold 1992, fig. 216.

this centaur

in

322

For the isolated image on gems: Boardman 1968, nos. 497, 537-8, 540, 542, 546-7, 549, 554; on coins: Babelon II.1, nos. 615-16, pl. 15.19-20 (Methymna), no. 765, pi. 20.11 (Ialysos), nos. 1838-41, pl. 59.2,3,4 (Thrace). For the boar faced or flanked by lions, helmet B5316 from Olympia: Kunze 1967, pp. 128-9, nos. 15-16. N o t e also Early Corinthian amphora, Athens, National Museum 303: CorVP 143,2; Payne 1931, no. 771, pi. 24.4. The motif is a favourite for the predella of Lcagran hydriai, e.g., Boardman 1974, figs. 222-4, 230. Chiot boars (supra n. 321) are attacked while foraging. Klazomenian sarcophagi: R. M. C o o k 1981, pis. 5.1 (B 5 ), 30.1 (F 7 ), 76 (G39), 84.1 (G43), 86.1 (G44). 323

LIMC 6 (1992), pp. 415-18, 430, nos. 6-35, s.v. 'Meleagros', (S. Woodford); LIMC 2 (1984), pp. 940-1, nos. 1-16, s.v. 'Atalante', (J. Boardman); Schnapp 1979; Schnapp 1997, pp. 278-317; Barringer 2001, pp. 15-63, 147-61, 172-3. Boars outside the hunt but in aggressive posture include the Treeing of Peleus: LIMC 7 (1994), p. 253, no. 9, s.v. 'Peleus', (R. Vollkommer); the Cybele Shrine, Sardis (Hanfmann and Ramage 1978, p. 48, no. 7, fig. 46). In contemporary architectural sculpture, the Kalydonian boar may be represented on a metope from the Monopteros at Delphi: La Coste-Messelière 1936, pp. 120-52, pi. 3; Bookidis 1967, pp. 183-8, M43; Ridgway 1993, pp. 339-43. 324

325 Clarke 1898, pp. 285-6, saw enough in the boars of M4 and A 1 3 to propose a now lost scene of Herakles and the Erymanthian boar, but the two types of scene are completely unrelated. 326 Building G at Xanthos, London, British Museum B293: Pryce 1928, p. 134— 7, pi. 28; Jenkins 2006, pp. 168-72. Terracotta sima from East Greece, art market:

to

the o n e furthest r i g h t o n

relief A 8 / A 4 8 ,

p h y s i q u e a n d h a i r s t y l e , as w e l l as i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e a r m s a n d t h e s h o u l d e r e d t r e e t r u n k , i n d i c a t e t h a t b o t h r e l i e f s are the w o r k o f the s a m e d e s i g n e r a n d p o s s i b l y the s a m e s c u l p t o r .

On

M 7, t h e c e n t a u r ' s b e t t e r - p r e s e r v e d f a c e g i v e s s o m e i n d i c a t i o n o f w h a t the f r o n t a l l y facing centaurs o n A 8 / 4 8 m u s t have l o o k e d l i k e ; it is o n t h i s b a s i s t h a t t h e y a r e r e s t o r e d i n F i g u r e 7 9 . T u r n i n g at least t h r e e o f t h e c e n t a u r s ( t w o o n t h e e p i s t y l e a n d o n e i n the t r i g l y p h frieze) t o face the v i e w e r e n l i v e n s the rather m o n o t o n o u s centaur cavalcade in an iconologically

significant

w a y . T h e f r o n t a l face b r e a k s the spatial b o u n d a r y o f the narrat i v e p l a n e t o e n g a g e t h e v i e w e r d i r e c t l y . C r e a t u r e s s u c h as the g o r g o n h a v e frontal faces that s h o c k a n d quite literally petrify the viewer; the visceral c o n f r o n t a t i o n of m o n s t e r a n d completes

the

image

and

gives

it

power.

Frontally

viewer facing

l i o n s r e n d i n g p r e y l o c k eyes o n the p i l g r i m to m a k e the raw

Äkerström 1966, p. 206, no. 3, fig. 66.3. Kontoleon 1970, p. 12, suggests the boar on a stele from Syme is an abbreviated version of this type. A fragmentary terracotta relief with a boar from Sardis is architectural but of uncertain composition; cf. Ramage 1978, no. 12, figs. 43-4. 327 For heroes likened to the boar or using boar imagery, supra n. 129. Hunt as expression of aristocratic valour: Barringer 2001, pp. 42-6. Boar power: Hölscher 1972, pp. 56-63; Vermeule 1979, pp. 88-91; Woysch-Méautis 1982, pp. 77-9· 328 Wroth 1964a, pi. 36.6-7.

THE

176

SCULPTURE t h e e p i s t y l e , t o w h i c h it i s a l l i e d b y g e s t u r e a n d s t y l e . 3 3 1

M7

The

v i e w e r w o u l d associate the g a l l o p i n g centaur o n M 7 w i t h the c a v a l c a d e o f c e n t a u r s o n t h e e p i s t y l e (a k i n d o f l e i t m o t i f ) , a n d i n d e e d it c a n b e r e s t o r e d t o a p o s i t i o n d i r e c t l y a b o v e t h e r i g h t side o f either relief A 6 o r A 8 . D i v o r c e d f r o m the m a i n

battle

a n d isolated b y the architectural f r a m e o f the D o r i c frieze, the i m a g e s e r v e s as a v i s u a l r e f r a i n ; n a r r a t i v e m e a n i n g c o m e s

sec-

o n d t o t h e d e c o r a t i v e effect.

Metope

My. Europe

on the Zeus

T h e t w o joining fragments of metope M 5

preserve the l o w e r

part of a female seated side-saddle o n a striding bull;

HT.035 Ι

.735

—

1

1

1—I—I—I

.5

action

m o v e s t o t h e r i g h t ( P i s . 89, 106; F i g . 85). T h e b u l l ' s f o r e g r o u n d

1

legs rest o n Η—I

Bull

the l o w e r

edge

o f the s h a r p l y

bevelled

taenia,

w h i l e t h o s e b e h i n d tread o n the u p p e r edge, c r e a t i n g a n i l l u s i o n

1

1m

of

depth

when

viewed

from

below.

The

bull's

stiff

gait

a n d w o o d e n f o r m are u n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f the l i v e l y a n d s o m e -

5cm FIGURE

84. M7: Galloping centaur.

w h a t r u b b e r y a n i m a l s o n the o t h e r reliefs, a n d the

awkward

p r o p o r t i o n s — n o d o u b t i n f l u e n c e d b y the s h a p e o f the

field—

differ m a r k e d l y f r o m those o f the bulls o n reliefs A 9 o r A 1 4 . d i s p l a y o f p o w e r b o t h i m m e d i a t e a n d specific. I n a d d i t i o n to the a p o t r o p a i c p o w e r d i s p l a y s , the f r o n t a l face also c a n serve to demonstrate barbarity or grotesqueness, imitate or

signal

defeat

and

enlist

the

sympathy

of

drunkenness, the

imminent

to

suggest

demise,

and,

their

drunkenness,

above

all, t o

to

draw

allude

s k i n o v e r t h e h i n d q u a r t e r s . I n its p o o r c o n d i t i o n w e c a n n o t a l l y this sculpture w i t h a n y specific g r o u p .

viewer."129

A t A s s o s , the centaurs a d o p t the p o s e to s i g n i f y their strousness,

D e t a i l s v a r y as w e l l , e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e t a i l , t e s t i c l e s , a n d f o l d o f

raon-

to

M5

their

the v i e w e r

into

their d r a m a . C e n t a u r s rarely appear alone or outside m y t h in

architec-

tural contexts.330 T h e centaur o n M 7 , w h i c h does n o t

appear

t o h a v e its o w n s t o r y , s u r e l y b e l o n g s t o the c e n t a u r o m a c h y

on

.292-

In architectural sculpture, the most dramatic example of frontality is the pedimental gorgon and gorgoneion, about which much has been written: Osborne 2000, pp. 231-2; Marconi 2007, pp. 214-22, with accompanying bibliography on the gorgon face. Frontality is also an aspect of the chariot epiphany, e.g., on the east façade of the Alkmeonid Temple of Apollo at Delphi (La Coste-Messelière 1931, pp. 33-62). N o t e the recent suggestion of epiphany for the east pediment of the Old Temple of Athena in Athens as well (Marszal 1998). Frontal faces with different meaning include defeated giants, e.g., on the pediment of the Temple of Artemis at Korkyra (Korkyra II, figs. 75, 83, 86, 88, 90-3, pis. 28-9, 31, 32); dead warriors, e.g., Antilokhos on the east frieze (no. E18) and the dead giant Astarias on the north frieze (no. N36) of the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi (Brinkmann 1994, pl. 26, Supplements χ, 2, j, 6, 9, 10); dying warrior on the west pediment from the second Temple of Aphaia at Aegina (Boardman 1978, fig. 206.4; Rolley 1994, pp. 202-4, fig- ^ 7 ; O h l y 2001, vol. II, foldouts F - H , K, pis. 115-18). The frontality of figures on the metopes from Temples Y and C has been widely interpreted: C . M. Robertson 1975, pp. 118-20; Giuliani 1979; Tusa 1983, pis. 2, 4-8, 28-34; Marconi 2007, pp. 218-22. For the frontal face in Attic vase painting, see Korshak 1987, and on shieldbands, Kunze 1950, p. 135 and n. 2. 329

The several centaurs depicted on the First Heraion at Foce del Sele arc all connected with myth: Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1951, nos. 1, 3-6, 11, 17, pis. 25-8, 33, 37, 52, 54-60, 65, 76; Van Keuren 1989, pp. 81-90. The centaur on a fragmentary metope from Thermon, inscribed [Ph]olo[s] (supra n. 154) must be part of a larger composition. Centaur cavalcades on several terracotta revetments lack Herakles, but I agree with Holtzmann 1979, p. 5, that most could be excerpts of the myth. Confronted centaurs on the revetment from Pazarh are the exception: Akerström 1966, p. 167, pi. 94.1. 330

-I—I—I—I

0 FIGURE

.5

1m

85. M5: Europe on the Zeus Bull.

331 There is no evidence that the centaur is Nessos or Eurytion. If we accept M i as Peleus chasing Thetis, then Cheiron, mentor of Peleus and assistant in the capture, might seem a possibility (cf. Pindar, Isthmian 8. 45-9; Euripides, Iphigeneia in Aulis 705; Apollodoros, Library 3.13.5), but he should have human legs like Pholos on A 5 and should attend, not gallop away.

THE

SCULPTURE

O n l y the l o w e r legs o f the rider survive, c o v e r e d b y a l o n g t u n i c ; h e r feet p o k e s t r a i g h t o u t b e l o w . F r o m the p o s i t i o n

of

177

p o p u l a r in architectural sculpture of the A r c h a i c period.338 T h e a b d u c t i o n a p p e a r s o n m e t o p e s f r o m t h e M o n o p t e r o s at D e l p h i

h e r l e g s , s h e a p p e a r s t o s i t s q u a r e l y u p r i g h t , as d o t h e f e m a l e

a n d T e m p l e Y at S e l i n o u s , a n d i n as y e t u n i d e n t i f i e d

architec-

b u l l - r i d e r s i n archaic terracotta statuettes a n d s o m e s m a l l

t u r a l c o n t e x t s at P o s e i d o n i a a n d P e r g a m o n . 3 3 9 M o s t

o f these

a n d metal reliefs.

332

T h e preserved

line o f the bull's

clay

mouth

s h o w s t h a t its h e a d a p p e a r e d i n p r o f i l e , w i t h t h e h o r n ,

now

reliefs p o s s e s s a g o o d deal m o r e i c o n o g r a p h i e c h a r a c t e r the m e t o p e f r o m A s s o s . I n the u n m i s t a k a b l e visual

than

narrative,

lost, p o i n t i n g f o r w a r d . G i v e n the b u l l ' s l o n g f o r e q u a r t e r s , it

the bull g a l l o p s or s w i m s in a k i n d of d o g paddle, w h i l e E u r o p e

w o u l d h a v e b e e n i m p o s s i b l e f o r t h e r i d e r t o g r a s p its h o r n , a n d

c l i n g s f o r h e r life, o n e h a n d c l a s p e d r o u n d t h e b u l l ' s h o r n

the s u r v i v i n g c o n t o u r o f the bull's n e c k indicates that she d i d

neck, the o t h e r

not

i n c l u d e e v i d e n c e o f t h e sea, s u c h as w a v e s ,

fish,

dolphins,

or

o t h e r sea c r e a t u r e s , a n d e x c l u d e references

to land, s u c h

as

hold

on

there, either. I c o n o g r a p h i e

parallels

offer

five

p o s s i b l e a r r a n g e m e n t s f o r the u p p e r b o d y o f the rider:

grasping

its f l a n k . T h e

vines, branches, or flowers. T h e (a)

firmly

g r i p p i n g t h e b u l l ' s f l a n k f o r e a n d aft ( a r c h a i c t e r r a -

cotta statuettes a n d s o m e A t t i c b l a c k - f i g u r e scenes333); (b)

g r i p p i n g the bull's f l a n k w i t h her r i g h t h a n d w h i l e extend-

Temple Y

at

S e l i n o u s ( a n d a f e w o t h e r a r c h a i c w o r k s ) s a t i s f i e s all t h e c r i -

well, f o r E u r o p e c l i n g s to the bull, w h o s e u p t u r n e d n o s e a n d g a t h e r e d f o r e l e g s i n d i c a t e t h a t h e is s w i m m i n g . H o w e v e r ,

f r o m P o s e i d o n i a a n d a terracotta statuette334);

o n e c a n o n i c a l feature ( s w i m m i n g bull, c l i n g i n g girl, seascape)

fully extending b o t h a r m s (Attic black-figure scenes336); or

(e) s i t t i n g c o m p l e t e l y f r o n t a l , w i t h h e r h a n d s t h r o w n u p metrically to either side of her h e a d ( p o s s i b l y relief f r o m

sym-

i n (e) s h e c o u l d a l s o face the v i e w e r ( c o m p a r e E u r o p e o n the

body. The

composition

of other sculptures

temple suggests that o p t i o n (b) ( c o m p a r e N e r e i d s

from

the

on A3

s y m p o s i a s t s o f A 4 ) , (d) ( c o m p a r e c e n t a u r s o n reliefs A 6

or and

A 8 / 4 8 ) , o r (e) ( c o m p a r e f a r - l e f t N e r e i d o n r e l i e f A 3 ) is l i k e l y . fully

riding bull

suffi-

ciently identifies the m y t h / 4 1 T h e w a y i n w h i c h E u r o p e clings d e s p e r a t e l y t o t h e b u l l o n t h e m e t o p e f r o m t h e M o n o p t e r o s at D e l p h i l e a v e s n o d o u b t t h a t s h e is b e i n g a b d u c t e d , e v e n t h o u g h the b u l l has all f o u r h o o f s

firmly

set o n the g r o u n d line.342 I n

Perachora337).

m e t o p e f r o m P o s e i d o n i a ) . T h e latter suits the d i s p o s i t i o n o f h e r lower

c o m b i n e d w i t h the basic m o t i f o f w o m a n

any

shieldband

I n all o f t h e s e p o s t u r e s , t h e r i d e r ' s h e a d c o u l d b e i n p r o f i l e , a n d

clothed

woman

riding

side-saddle

on

a

bull

i m m e d i a t e l y b r i n g s to m i n d the rape o f E u r o p e , a m y t h w i d e l y

332 Statuettes: Winter 1903, p. 163, nos. 2-5; Technau 1937, fig. 7; Zahn 1983, pp. 58-61, nos. 81-9; LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 82-3, nos. 113-15, s.v. 'Europe Γ (M. Robertson). Relief from Akragas: LIMC 4 (1988), p. 81, no. 88, s.v. 'Europe I'; Marconi 2007, p. 93, fig. 39. Shieldband relief from Perachora: Payne 1940, pi. 49.2-3; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 82, no. 97, s.v. 'Europe I'. 333 Several of the terracotta statuettes cited supra, n. 332. Black-figure oinochoe, Cleveland, Museum of Art 29.978: ABV 422,4; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 78, no. 29, s.v. 'Europe P. Caeretan hydria, Rome, Villa Guilia 50643: Hemelrijk 1984, no. 13, pis. 61-3; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 78, no. 24, s.v. 'Europe Γ. 334 Metope from Poseidonia: Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1951, fig. 39; Zahn 1983, no. 8; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 81, no. 79, s.v. 'Europe I'. Terracotta, Athens, National Museum: Zahn 1983, no. 81. 3 3 5 The females may be nymphs or maenads. See neck amphora, Berlin, Staatliche Museen F1881 (LIMC 4 (1988), p. 78, no. 32, s.v. 'Europe P); neck amphora by the Edinburgh Painter, Boston, Museum of Fine Arts 76.42 ( L I M C 4 (1988), p. 78, no. 31, s.v. 'Europe 1'). 336 N e c k amphora, Würzburg, Martin von Wagner Museum 193: Zahn 1983, no. 17, pi. 5.1; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 78, no. 27, s.v. 'Europe P. N e c k amphora, Vatican, Museo Gregoriano Etrusco 17796: Zahn 1983, no. 18, pl. 3. Lekythos, Providence, Rhode Island School of Design Museum of Art 22.216: Zahn 1983, no. 19; CVA RISD 1, pi. 12.1; LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 78-9, no. 33, s.v. 'Europe I'. Lekythos, Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale RC218: La Coste-Messelière l 9 p ' · 9»i; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 79, no. 35, s.v. 'Europe I'. Oinochoe, Leipzig, Antikenmuseum der Universität T4400,02,06: CVA Leipzig 2, pl. 35.3. 337

from

or

scenes

i n g h e r l e f t h a n d f o r w a r d o r h o l d i n g it t o h e r c h e s t ( m e t o p e

other f o r w a r d (Attic black-figure scenes of bull-riders335);

A

metope

explicit

t e r i a / 4 0 T h e f r a g m e n t a r y r e l i e f f r o m P e r g a m o n m a y h a v e as

(c) h o l d i n g o n e h a n d to h e r chest o r side w h i l e e x t e n d i n g the

(d)

most

Supra η. 33 2 ! only one arm survives.

3 j 8 For the myth: La Coste-Messelière 1936, pp. 153-68; Technau 1937, pp. 76103; Bühler 1968; Heldensage3 pp. 515-18; Schefold 1981, pp. 234-9; Zahn 1983; Villanueva Puig 1987, pp. 131-42; LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 76-92, s.v. 'Europe Γ; Gantz 1993, pp. 208-11. Earlier discussions include Jahn 1870, pp. 1-54; Overbeck 1871, vol. I, pp. 420-65; Preller-Robert 4 II, pp. 352-61; Roscher I.i, cols. 1409-18; RE VI.ι (1907), cols. 1287-98, s.v. 'Europe'; C o o k , Zeus I, pp. 542-7, and III, pp. 61528. 339 Metope from the Delphi Monopteros, no. 1321: La Coste-Messelière 1936, pp. 92-4,153-68, pi. 8; Zahn 1983, pp. 105-6, no. 4; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 81, no. 77, s. v. 'Europe I'. Temple Y at Selinous: Giuliani 1979, pp. 43-50, pi. 10; Tusa 1983, p. 113, pis. 24-6; Zahn 1983, no. 5; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 81, no. 78, s.v. 'Europe I'; Marconi 2007, pp. 90-6, 209-12, no. SM2, fig. 37. Relief from Pergamon, Berlin, Staatliche Museum 1709: Blümcl 1963, p. 39, no. 29, fig. 81; Zahn 1983, no. 6, pi. 2; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 81, no. 81, s.v. 'Europe I'. The metope from Poseidonia (supra n. 334) preserves only the upper part of a female seated side-saddle, but the identification with Europe is very likely, especially in light of the large terracotta preserving a bull's head and a female leg also from Poseidonia ( L I M C 4 (1988), p. 82, no. 113, s.v. 'Europe I'). 340 See also Caeretan hydria, c.530 (supra n. 333); agate scaraboid, c.480-470, Oxford, Ashmolean 1966.596 ( L I M C 4 (1988), p. 81, no. 84, s.v. 'Europe I'); slightly later, Attic bobbin by the Sotheby Painter, Athens, National Museum, 2350 ( A R V 2 775,3; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 79, no. 45, s.v. 'Europe I'); staters from Gortyn and Phaistos (LIMC 4 (1988), p. 82, nos. 107-8, s.v. 'Europe I'). A blackfigure oinochoe (Oxford, Miss., University of Mississippi Museum 77.3.73) could be included, as the artist has ingeniously portrayed the waves with a rough wash, and the background branch may signify abandoned Phoenicia (LIMC 4 (1988), p. 79, no. 34, s.v. 'Europe I'). 341 For example, the Naples lekythos (supra n. 336), which depicts a seascape and a swimming bull. A swimming/galloping bull and a clinging Europe without further aquatic reference characterizes the scene on a fragment of a Boeotian relief pithos (c.640 BC), Paris, Cabinet des Médailles 3003 (LIMC 4 (1988), p. 81, no. 91, s.v. 'Europe I'; Simantoni-Bournia 2004, p. 86, fig. 104). Also, black-figure plate fragment, Athens, National Museum 2451, in which Europe holds a basket (LIMC 4 (1988), p. 79, no. 36, s.v. 'Europe I'); and, a few Attic red-figure scenes, e.g., hydria by the Berlin Painter, Oxford, Ashmolean 1927.4502 ( C V A O x f o r d 1, pi. 64.1; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 79, no. 41, s.v. 'Europe I'). 342 The upper corner may have had a fish or bird: La Coste-Messelière 1936, pp. 155-6; Marconi 2007, p. 93. Other examples showing Europe less frantic but still securing her hold include a clay relief from Akragas (supra n. 332) and possibly a fragmentary metope from Poseidonia (supra n. 334).

202

THE

SCULPTURE

s o m e later v e r s i o n s o f the m y t h ( L u c i a n ' s a n d O v i d ' s ) , the Z e u s

m a d e the trees o f the G o r t y n g r o v e e x t r e m e l y fertile.34* W h i l e

B u l l m u s t b r i n g E u r o p e d o w n t o the sea b e f o r e he c a n

n o t as e v o c a t i v e

swim

as c l i n g i n g ,

gestures

can sufficiently

signal

a w a y w i t h h e r . 3 4 3 S o m e t i m e s , a w o m a n w h o is n e i t h e r f r i g h t -

distress. O n

e n e d n o r c l i n g i n g f o r her life m a y ride a n u n m i s t a k a b l y

late a r c h a i c A t t i c b l a c k - f i g u r e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s , the f e m a l e o n a

ming

bull; w e

do

not

doubt

the s t o r y

is t h e

swim-

abduction

of

Europe.344

iconographie

markers

that c o n f i r m

context, such lack of specificity w o u l d

Europe.

In

another

have been associated w i t h other m y t h o l o g i c a l

because

o f the

they

(clinging

lack

more

amorphous

specific

girl, s w i m m i n g

Nature

aspects central

figures

on

media

either

as t o w h o m

are

inscribed

line

while

ΕΥΡΟΠΕΙΑ

[ΤΑΥ]ΡΟΣ

the

a

of

bull

throws

scenes

ground

b o t h sides

in W ü r z b u r g , 3 4 9

above);

Ε[Υ]ΡΟΠΕΙΑ

the

amphora

rider

and

ΤΑΥΡΟΣ

ΑΝΙΑΔΕΣ,

ΦΟΡΒΑΣ

leaving no

doubt

t h e a r t i s t m e a n t t o p o r t r a y , at l e a s t o n t h i s v a s e .

Terracotta statuettes d e p i c t i n g the full E u r o p e

iconography—

story

o f c l i n g i n g g i r l o n a s w i m m i n g b u l l set o n a w a v y b a s e — d o n o t

because

appear before the C l a s s i c a l period.330 A r c h a i c terracotta statu-

to E u r o p e ' s

bull, aquatic reference) o r

firmly

neck

of

o n e h a n d f o r w a r d a n d the o t h e r b a c k ( o u r t y p e [d] the

or per-

Goddess,

strides

black-figure

in

raise s o m e d o u b t

the identification. C e r t a i n generic b u l l - r i d e r s i n other

mutations

striding bull w a v e s her a r m s dramatically. O n an Attic

T h e s c e n e o n M 5 d o e s n o t , i n its c u r r e n t c o n d i t i o n , p o s s e s s the

a s h i e l d b a n d f r o m P e r a c h o r a a n d o n a series

they include elements irrelevant to her a b d u c t i o n (florals, k r o -

ettes a r e o f t e n

tala, o r s a t y r s ) . 3 4 3 I n A t t i c b l a c k - f i g u r e , s c e n e s w i t h

b e c a u s e the b u l l is s t a t i o n a r y a n d the f e m a l e d o e s n o t g e s t u r e

Dionysiac back

from

obvious

references d i s t i n g u i s h the m a n y m a e n a d s o n the

smaller

group

of

certain

H o w e v e r , scenes i n w h i c h branches

fill

Europe

the

field

bull-

images.346 o r the

rider carries b r a n c h e s o r a w r e a t h m a y also be directly

bull con-

nected w i t h the fertility/earth g o d d e s s aspect of E u r o p e .

347

H e r s t o r y is p u n c t u a t e d w i t h f l o r a ; t h e b r a n c h e s m a y r e f e r t o the c l i m a x of this episode, f o r the u n i o n o f E u r o p e a n d

Zeus

wildly.331

excluded f r o m

the c o r p u s

of E u r o p e

It seems unlikely, however, that E u r o p e ' s

scenes

first

ap-

pearance in this m e d i u m w o u l d w a i t until the C l a s s i c a l period, w h e n s h e is w e l l k n o w n i n o t h e r art f o r m s d u r i n g the A r c h a i c p e r i o d . C l e a r l y , the a r c h a i c statuettes are the p r e d e c e s s o r s

of

w h a t d e v e l o p e d i n t o a m o r e d e s c r i p t i v e v e r s i o n o f the rape. I n light o f this, E u r o p e r e m a i n s the best c h o i c e f o r the female o n relief M 5 . S h e c a n be r e s t o r e d w i t h her a r m s i n o n e o f the several evocative gestures that m i g h t s u g g e s t a flailing E u r o p e .

Ovid, Metamorphoses 2.833-75; Lucian, Dialogues of the Sea Gods 15.2. Also, Moschos, Europa, and Horace, Odes 3.27. Her myth appeared earlier in the work of Homer, Hesiod, Eumelos, Stesichoros, Simonides, Bakchylides, and Aischylos, but none of these accounts survive beyond a skeletal version of the plot: Bühler i960, pp. 17-29; Preller-Robert 4 II, pp. 352-61; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 76, s.v. 'Europe I*. j43

O n an amphora by the Painter of the Munich Amphora, she quietly holds a basket of flowers, Saint Petersburg, Hermitage B1564 (811637): Zahn 1983, no. 30, pi. 8.1; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 79, no. 38, s.v. 'Europe P. O n a Caeretan hydria (Paris, Louvre E696) she demurely sniffs a flower. Here, the painter provides a panorama, with a dolphin in the sea and an island representing Crete, complete with three trees and a hare—provocative references to the climax of this journey: LIMC 4 (1988), p. 78, no. 23, 'Europe Γ. Compare flower to one on a Classical white ground kylix, Munich, Staatliche Antikensammlungen 2686: LIMC 4 (1988), p. 79, no. 44, s.v. 'Europe I'. The flower Europe sniffs suggests fertility and reminds one of the crocus, which according to Hesiod and Bakchylides, the Zeus Bull breathed forth to attract Europe (Homeric Scholiast, I, 62.292). The flower also recalls those of the meadow in which Europe was playing when the Zeus Bull saw her, as well as the garland of flowers she placed on his horns. 344

Compare, e.g., female bull-rider on a bronze helmet from Delphi: Blome 1982, pp. 75-6, fig. 12. O n the debate: La Coste-Messelierc 1936, pp. 156-68; Technau 1937, pp. 76-103; Kunze 1950, pp. 90-1; Bühler 1968, pp. 51-3, n. 39; C . Isler-Kerényi's review of Zahn 1983, Gnomon 57 (1985), pp. 163-6; LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 78, 90, nos. 30-3, s.v. 'Europe'. The evidence cited by Technau 1937, pp. 93-8, for other nature goddesses w h o might be the bull-rider (including Demeter, Artemis, Leto, Themis, Aphrodite, Astarte, Hellotis, or Ariadne) does not belong to the high Archaic period. 345

346 Zahn 1983, pp. 25-37, 179-81, includes 11 Attic black-figure scenes with bull-riders (nos. 16-26) but excludes 49 that she considers maenads on bull-back (M1-M49). Villanueva Puig 1987, pp. 131-42, identifies 5 scenes as Europe and a further 107 scenes as a maenad on a bull. Brommer, Heldensage3 p. 515, includes 6. O f Robertson's selection of 11 Attic black-figure vases in LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 78-9, nos. 26-36, s.v. 'Europe I', 4 are listed as doubtful.

e.g., Villanueva Puig's (1987) nos. 26-7, 44-6, 58, 71-96. Branches appear on two vases that certainly show Europe crossing the sea, the Naples lekythos (supra n. 336) and the Mississippi oinochoe (supra n. 340). Note also, e.g., the Providence Leagros Group lekythos (supra n. 336), called Europe by Beazley and Brommer, and the Boston neck amphora (supra n. 335). The female on bull-back on the Perachora shieldband relief (supra n. 332) may also carry a plant. 347

E v e n if she d i d n o t

flap her a r m s

probably would think

first

in distress, h o w e v e r ,

of Europe. T h e Zeus Bull

w i t h a d i g n i f i e d stride i n other securely identified

we

walks

abduction

scenes, s o it s h o u l d n o t c o u n t a g a i n s t h i m here. S i n c e n o n e o f t h e s c u l p t u r e o n t h e t e m p l e at A s s o s is g i v e n t o d e s c r i p t i v e o r p i c t o r i a l i n f o r m a t i o n , it is n o s u r p r i s e t h a t the p r e s e r v e d p a r t o f this m e t o p e lacks m a r i n e references. A n d

while our

metope

l a c k s p o s i t i v e i c o n o g r a p h i e d e t a i l , it d o e s n o t h a v e t h e c o n f u s i n g elements that p l a g u e the identification o f scenes o n certain A t t i c b l a c k - f i g u r e vases related to the a m p h o r a i n W ü r z b u r g . T h e s e v e r a l o t h e r a r c h i t e c t u r a l r e l i e f s i d e n t i f i e d as E u r o p e

on

t h e Z e u s B u l l a r e all q u i t e d i f f e r e n t , d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e i m p o r t ance o f the t h e m e a n d its r a n g e o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . B y

contrast,

t h e r e are n o m a e n a d s o r o t h e r n a t u r e g o d d e s s e s o n b u l l - b a c k i n the

repertoire

of

archaic

architectural

sculpture.

Within

a

m o n u m e n t a l context a n d f r a m e d b y other m y t h o l o g i c a l scenes, a w o m a n r i d i n g a bull w o u l d be E u r o p e to m o s t viewers.

348 Theophrastos, Enquiry into Plants 1.9.5; C o o k , Zeus I, p. 526, n. 4. Branches could also be general symbols of springtime fertility or references to the abandoned Phoenician meadow. See Overbeck 1871, vol. I, pp. 421-2, for branches in archaic and flowers in classical representations of Europe. To both Jahn (1870, p. 23) and C o o k (Zeus I, p.531, nn. 1-3, p. 532, n.2), the flower basket Europe carries on the Saint Petersburg amphora, Hermitage B1564 (Sti637) (Zahn 1983, no. 30, pi. 8.1; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 79, no. 38, s.v. 'Europe I') reinforces her fertility role; note Moschos, Europa 237-62. 349 Würzburg, Martin von Wagner Museum 193: LIMC 4 (1988), p. 78, no. 27, s.v. 'Europe I'. 350 Bühler 1968, figs. 1-2; Zahn 1983, no. 90.1-11; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 83, nos. 116-18, s.v. 'Europe I'. 351 Excluded by Technau 1937, p. 88, and Bühler 1968, p. 51; included by Zahn 1983, nos. 80-90. N o t e also the large, late sixth-century statuette from Poseidonia: LIMC 4 (1988), p. 82, no. 113, s.v. 'Europe I'.

THE Europe's

abduction

is

a popular

subject

in

203

SCULPTURE

architectural

sculpture of the A r c h a i c p e r i o d across the G r e e k w o r l d , f r o m

M8

S e l i n o u s a n d P o s e i d o n i a in the w e s t to D e l p h i o n the m a i n l a n d a n d A s s o s a n d P e r g a m o n i n t h e east. I n S i c i l y , t h e e x p l o i t s her s o n M i n o s a n d the f o u n d a t i o n of H e r a k l a i a M i n o a

of

secure -.72-

m y t h o l o g i c a l and p o s s i b l y political connections for Europe.352 J u l i e t t e d e la G e n i è r e a s s o c i a t e s t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e m y t h i n the W e s t w i t h the a p p e a r a n c e o f S t e s i c h o r o s ' p o e m , Brunhilde

S. R i d g w a y ,

representations,

argues

also chiefly concerned that

travel

myths

such

Europeia.

with as

western Europe's

s t o r y w o u l d have h a d special significance in distant 353

colonial

regions. A t D e l p h i , there m a y be a cultic reason f o r her i n c l u s i o n o n the

Monopteros,

if

in

fact

it

belonged

Demeter-Europe was worshipped.354 N o

to

Sikyon,

where

s t r o n g cultic or g e o -

g r a p h i c c o n n e c t i o n s p e r t a i n t o E u r o p e at A s s o s . S h e d o e s pass

by

the T r o a d

connection mother

with

city, s o

o n her w a y

Athena. the

353

appeal

to Crete,

Assos of

lies

the s t o r y

and

within

she has sight

of

as a m e t a p h o r

c o l o n i a l j o u r n e y i s n o t p a r t i c u l a r l y r e l e v a n t , either. p e r s o n a l m y t h o l o g y does n o t s e e m to be intimately

not H—I—I—H

little

1m

its

-I—I 5cm

for

Europe's connected

w i t h t h e o t h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o n t h e t e m p l e at A s s o s , b u t w e can d r a w a few general associations. E u r o p e ' s abduction, along w i t h H e r a k l e s w r e s t l i n g T r i t o n , a n d Peleus c h a s i n g the N e r e i d T h e t i s (to be p r o p o s e d f o r m e t o p e M i ) , is o n e o f three scenes o f c o n q u e s t t h a t i n v o l v e t h e sea, w h i c h m u s t h a v e h a d a s p e c i a l m e a n i n g i n this coastal t o w n . T h e p a i r i n g of T r i t o n a n d

the

flight of E u r o p e also appears o n a delightful Little M a s t e r cup b y the T l e s o n P a i n t e r . 3 5 6 O n a different level, the scene c a n be

FIGURE

86. M8: Quarrelling heroes.

tied t o the reliefs o f the e p i s t y l e t h r o u g h the t h e m e o f sexual m a s t e r y . Z e u s as b u l l i s a m y t h o l o g i c a l a n a l o g u e o f t h e s e x u a l p o w e r expressed i n s p a r r i n g bulls o n reliefs A 1 4 a n d A 1 5 . T h e s c e n e o n M 5 t h u s f u n c t i o n s as a m o r e s o p h i s t i c a t e d v e r s i o n o f the m e t o p a l scenes that reiterate a n d r e i n f o r c e t h e m e s f r o m the epistyle.

hair, the u n b r o k e n c u r v e o f the p r o f i l e f r o m f o r e h e a d t o n o s e , a n d the s o l i d b u t n o t d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y s t o c k y p h y s i q u e . T h e s a m e s c u l p t o r m a y b e at w o r k . L a c k i n g a n o b v i o u s m y t h o l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , the scene has s i m p l y been called t w o that the

Metope MS: quarrelling heroes right, a bearded m a n dressed in a s h o r t t u n i c strides f o r w a r d to t h e l e f t as h e d r a w s a s w o r d f r o m a s c a b b a r d h e l d i n h i s l e f t figure

survives. A l t h o u g h his

facial features are e r o d e d , his s l i g h t l y l o n g e r b e a r d a n d l a r g e r h e a d m a k e h i m a p p e a r the o l d e r o f the t w o . T h e

fighting

warriors. C l a r k e

suggests

to the right m a y be H e r a k l e s , b u t h e specifies n o

particular occasion. F i n s t e r - H o t z , seeing s o m e t h i n g m o n s t r o u s

O n m e t o p e M 8 , t w o m e n f a c e o f f ( P i s . 9 3 , 107; F i g . 8 6 ) . O n t h e

h a n d . O n l y the h e a d of the other

figure

figures

several stylistic characteristics w i t h the s y m p o s i a s t s o n

share relief

A 4 a n d H e r a k l e s o n relief A 3 , i n c l u d i n g the r e n d e r i n g o f the

i n the l o n g e r b e a r d a n d l a r g e r h e a d o f the left three

possible

identifications:

Herakles

figure,

offers

fighting

Nessos,

A p o l l o punishing Tityos, and Neoptolemos killing

Priam.357

H o w e v e r , t h e field c a n n o t a c c o m m o d a t e a c e n t a u r ' s b o d y ; t h e scene l a c k s the a t t r i b u t e s a n d k e y c h a r a c t e r s t h a t i d e n t i f y the punishment

of Tityos;

and, the r i g h t - h a n d

figure

makes

an

unlikely N e o p t o l e m o s , w h o s h o u l d be fully a r m e d a n d aggress i v e l y a t t a c k i n g , u s i n g e i t h e r a s p e a r o r t h e b o d y o f A s t y a n a x as weapon.358

The

left

figure's

substantial

beard

is

not

much

larger t h a n s o m e of the s y m p o s i a s t s ' ; he need n o t be a giant 332 Giuliani 1979, pp. 49-50, also notes that Selinous was once friendly with Carthage, which was founded by settlers from Europe's hometown, Tyre. 353 La Genière 1983, pp. 158-71; Ridgway 1991, pp. 95-112, esp. 104 ; Marconi 2007, pp. 90-6, 209-12. 354 La Coste-Messclière 1936, pp. 92-5; cult also in Boeotia. 3 5 5 Although she is connected with the cult of Athena at Corinth: C o o k , Zeus I, p. 525. 3 5 6 N e w York, Steinhardt collection: J. Gaunt in Padgett 2003, pp. 340-3, no. 95.

or monster.

3 5 7 Clarke 1898, p. 287; Sartiaux 1915, p. 46; Kunze 1950, p. 173, n. 1; FinsterH o t z 1984, pp. 100-2. 358 Tityos: LIMC 2 (1984), pp. 310-11, nos. 1066-76, s.v. 'Apollon', (V. Lambrinudakis); Schefold 1992, pp. 68-70. Neopotolemos: Wiencke 1954, pp. 285-306; LIMC 7 (1994), pp. 516-20, s.v. 'Priamos', 0. Neils).

T H E S C U L P T U R E 204 G e s t u r e p r o v i d e s the best evidence f o r i d e n t i f y i n g the scene. T h e r i g h t - h a n d m a n d r a w s rather t h a n wields his s w o r d . grasps

the

scabbard

rather

than wears

it; t h e

d a n g l e s i n f r o n t as i f h e h a s s e i z e d t h e w e a p o n M o r e o v e r , he w e a r s n o

slack

He

baldric

spontaneously.

o t h e r a r m o u r , as if u n r e a d y f o r

the

other, f o r m i n g a c l o s e d c o m p o s i t i o n . 3 6 3 B y a n a l o g y , o u r lefthand

figure

most likely moves

right, l e a d i n g w i t h the

back-

g r o u n d l e g as o n t h e o t h e r s c u l p t u r e s f r o m t h e t e m p l e . I n t h e c o m p a r a b l e e x a m p l e s , b o t h quarrellers c a r r y a s w o r d ; the lefthand

figure

was probably so equipped.

c o n f r o n t a t i o n . T h i s s i t u a t i o n is n o t the i c o n o g r a p h y o f a n o r -

T h e r e are several p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r the p o s i t i o n o f the s e c o n d

mal single combat, H o m e r i c or otherwise, in w h i c h fully a r m e d

s w o r d ( F i g . 86). T h e s i m p l e s t w o u l d b e f o r t h e l e f t - h a n d m a n t o

w a r r i o r s attack w i t h w e a p o n s held i n m e n a c i n g positions. D u r -

d r a w h i s s w o r d as w e l l , u s i n g t h e p r o p e r r i g h t h a n d s o t h a t h i s

i n g the A r c h a i c p e r i o d , the m o t i f of a m a n d r a w i n g his s w o r d

scabbard w o u l d have to point outward. A t t i c black- and red-

a p p e a r s i n a n u m b e r o f contexts, a n d i n e a c h case the gesture

figure

embodies

dishing an e m p t y scabbard w i t h loose baldric, a gesture

an

element

of

surprise

or

threat.

It

t h e a n t i c i p a t o r y m o m e n t b e f o r e a c t i o n a n d serves mounting

anger;

there

is

an

unpreparedness

represents to indicate

distinct

scenes of quarrelling heroes also s h o w one

figure

branthat

i m p l i e s a threat e r u p t i n g f r o m f r u s t r a t i o n a n d anger. T h e s c a b -

from

b a r d m a y be t h r u s t i n t o the face o f the a d v e r s a r y o r h e l d h i g h to

the c o n f r o n t a t i o n o f e s t a b l i s h e d e n e m i e s . 3 5 9 T h e l e f t - h a n d f i g -

the chest of the defendant; the s w o r d s e e m s a l m o s t s e c o n d a r y .

ure c o u l d be seated b u t m o r e likely stands, g i v e n the fact that n o

I n m o s t instances, A t t i c b l a c k - f i g u r e artists prefer a s y m m e t -

trace o f h i s legs o r a t h r o n e s u r v i v e s o n the l o w e r f r a g m e n t . 3 6 0

rically

A

man who

hastily

draws

his s w o r d

in front of

another

their

balanced scabbards

composition and

waving

with their

both

quarrellers

swords;

enhance the i m p r e s s i o n

between quarrelling compatriots.361

d r a w his s w o r d w h i l e the o t h e r threatens w i t h his s c a b b a r d . 3 6 4

pear m a i n l y in A t t i c vase painting and o n A r g i v e reliefs, take t w o

f o r m s : (a) a f a c e - t o - f a c e

ap-

shieldband

confrontation

be-

A

second possible arrangement for M 8

by

having

artists

s t a n d i n g m a n describes the sort o f a n g r y c o n f r o n t a t i o n t y p i c a l T h e s e scenes, w h i c h

of spontaneity

shaking

red-figure one

hero

w o u l d h a v e the left-

h a n d q u a r r e l l e r h o l d a n u n s h e a t h e d s w o r d p o i s e d at h i s w a i s t

t w e e n t w o quarrellers, o r (b) a m o r e c o m p l e x scene, in w h i c h

w h i l e c l u t c h i n g the s c a b b a r d to his chest. T h e o t h e r

additional heroes restrain m e n w h o r u s h to attack one another.

t i v e s — t h e s c a b b a r d b r a n d i s h e d i n the face of the adversary, the

C i v i l i a n attire f o r either o r b o t h o f the quarrellers

s w o r d raised b e h i n d a n d over the h e a d or d r a m a t i c a l l y

e o u s l y e m p h a s i z e s the i m p r o m p t u sets the s c e n e o f f the battlefield.362 most

painted

examples,

the

simultan-

nature of the dispute O n

quarrellers

the s h i e l d b a n d s stride

toward

and and each

alterna-

thrown

b a c k f r o m the s c a b b a r d — c a n n o t be a c c o m m o d a t e d w i t h i n the field

o f the m e t o p e . N o r are a n y o f the ' r e s t r a i n e d '

positions

viable unless the scene c o n t i n u e d o n a f l a n k i n g m e t o p e . I n this case, the p r e s e r v e d m e t o p e w o u l d r e p r e s e n t t h e r i g h t h a l f o f a

e.g., Aigisthos defending himself against Orestes, Herakles liberating Theseus and Peirithoos or unsheathing his sword against satyrs attacking Hera, Menelaos threatening Helen, Odysseus challenging Kirke, or Theseus displaying his courage to Aithra. Aigisthos: LIMC ι (1981), p. 372, nos. 2-3, 39-40, s.v. 'Aigisthos' (R. M. Gais). Herakles liberating Theseus and Peirithoos on shieldband reliefs: Kunze 1950, pp. 110-13, Form XXIX^/s, supplement 7.4; Bol 1989, p. 161, H86, pi. 82; LIMC 7 (1994), p. 238, no. 84, s.v. 'Peirithoos'. Herakles defending Hera on a metope from the First Heraion at Foce del Sele: Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1954, no. 7, pp. 141—5, pi. 61 (called Elektra and Orestes by Van Keuren 1989, pp. 57-63). Menelaos on a skyphos, Boston, Museum of Fine Arts 13.186: ARV2 458,1; Ghali-Kahil 1955, pi. 48; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 530, no. 166, s.v. 'Helene'. Odysseus on a 'Pseudo-Chalkidian' black-figure neck amphora from Vulci: LIMC 6 (1992), p. 53, no. 19, s.v. 'Kirke' (F. Canciani). Theseus on a cup, St Petersburg, Hermitage B649 (St83o): LIMC 1 (1981), pp. 422-3, no. 25, s.v. 'Aithra Γ, (U. Kron). In the tondo of a cup by the Painter of the O x f o r d Brygos, two kneeling men also draw their swords, but the context is unclear: Barrett and Vickers (1978, p. 23, pi. 2a) review several views including the spirits of Marathonian warriors; add Hemelrijk (1984, n. 856), w h o raises the possibility that the pair stand watch. 3yj

360 The iconographie choices involving a man seated on a throne or high platform (altar or bema) are limited. O n a shieldband relief, R. M. Gais ( L I M C 1 (1981), p. 372, no. 5, s.v. 'Aigisthos') identifies the scene of a man drawing his sword on an enthroned, supplicating figure as Orestes and Aigisthos, but Bol (supra n. 359) sees instead two seated figures and identifies the scene as Theseus and Peirithoos in the Underworld. Generally, Orestes grabs the seated Aigisthos by the forelock or neck as he plunges his sword: LIMC 1 (1981), pp. 372-4, nos. 1 - 1 3 , s.v. 'Aigisthos'; Prag 1985, pp. 10-32. Archaic scenes of Herakles liberating Theseus from the Underworld require Peirithoos (supra n. 359). 361 Robert 1881, pp. 213-21; Beazley 1950, pp. 312-13, fig. 2; Kunze 1950, pp. 172-5; Heldensage3,, pp. 418-23; Mcnnenga 1976, pp. 103-12; D. Williams 1980, p. 141, n. 35; LIMC ι (1981), pp. 325-6, nos. 71-8, s.v. 'Aias Γ (Ο. Touchfeu); Pipili 1987, pp. 25-6. >62 Rarely, one man wears armour; cf. cup by Douris, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum 3695: LIMC 1 (1981), p. 325, no. 71, s.v. 'Aias I'.

scene, w i t h the l e f t - h a n d

figure

restraining the a n g r y h e r o f r o m

a t t a c k i n g a s e c o n d quarreller d e p i c t e d o n the adjacent m e t o p e to the left.365 T h e s i m p l e r c h o i c e s e e m s m o r e likely.

363 Shieldband, Athens, National Museum 6962: Wolters 1895, pp. 477-8, pi. 14.1; Kunze 1950, p. 173; Touloupa 1991, p. 264, figs. 37-9. Kunze (1950) and Sartiaux (1915) also note the connection with M8. 364 Scabbard thrust in the face of the adversary: fragments of a cup by Oltos, Florence, Archaeological Museum 3923 ( C V A Florence 3, pi. 73.1); lekythos by the Edinburgh Painter, Paris, Louvre C A 5 4 5 ( A B L 217,24; ABV 476); neck amphora by the Berlin Painter, Madrid, National Archaeological Museum L185 (CVA Madrid 2, pi. 22.ia-b); lekythos from Taranto (Heldensage 3 4 1 9 ^ 3 ; Q . Quagliati, Il Museo Nazionale di Taranto (Rome 1932), p. 54,4). Scabbard held high to the chest of the defendant: lekythos by the Athena Painter, Berlin, Antikcnsammlung F2000 ( L I M C 1 (1981), p. 326, no. 75, s.v. 'Aias I'); oinochoe by the Taleides Painter, Paris, Louvre F340 ( L I M C 1 (1981), p. 326, no. 77, s.v. 'Aias I'). Scabbard thrust at adversary: cup by the Penthesilea Painter, Ferrara, Museo Nazionale di Spina T i 8 e {ARV2 882,35; N · Alfieri and P. E. Arias, Spina (Munich 1958), pl. 31); early Mannerist column krater from Padula, Museo Archeologico di Lucania occidentale (ARV2 584,19^5); possibly Brygos Painter cup, Malibu, J. Paul Getty Museum ( L I M C ι (1982), p. 325, no. 72, s.v. 'Aias I'; D. Williams 1980, pi. 36,1). Scabbard held to chest: cup by Douris, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum 3695 (supra n. 362); cup by the Brygos Painter, London, British Museum E69 ( L I M C ι (1981), p. 325, no. 73, s.v. 'Aias I'; D. Williams 1980, pi. 35,1). Combination: Leagros Group hydria, London, British Museum B327 ( A B V 363,38; Beazley 1986, p. 75, pi. 84.1; CVA British Museum 6, pi. 86.3); fragments of cup by Oltos, Florence, Museo Archeologico Etrusco 1B20, 3B16-18, 12B70 (Beazley Archive no. 200448). To these groups may belong fragmentary cup by Makron, Paris, Louvre C 1 1 2 7 1 (D. Williams 1980, pi. 34,3.4) and fragments of a cup by Douris, Paris, Cabinet des Médailles 675, 600, 597, γιγ(ραη), 774, L.224, 586(parts) ( A R V 2 428,14; D . Williams 1980, p. 139, n. 18). 36""' Compare Lakonian cup fragment (Pipili 1987, pp. 25-6, no. 78, fig. 36) and shieldband plate (Kunze 1950, supplement 13,1). See also Attic black-figure neck

THE

205

SCULPTURE

T h e s c e n e , t h e n , i s b e s t r e s t o r e d as a q u a r r e l o n t h e p o i n t o f

p o t t e r y are o f t e n i d e n t i f i e d as O d y s s e u s a n d A j a x , e v e n w i t h o u t

c o m i n g t o b l o w s b e t w e e n h e r o e s w h o are o t h e r w i s e allies. I t

the pile o f a r m s . 3 7 2 B y contrast, the definite r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s

r e m a i n s to c h o o s e specific heroes a m o n g the m a n y w h o

Amphiaraos

quar-

rel, h o l d g r u d g e s , a n d c o m e t o b l o w s i n b o t h t h e T r o j a n a n d t h e T h e b a n stories. T h e

Iliad

Aethiopis

and

Little

Iliad

feature the quarrel b e t w e e n A j a x a n d O d y s s e u s o v e r the a r m s of Achilles. T h e

Odyssey

Lykourgos

of N e m e a

of are

f o u n d i n P e l o p o n n e s i a n art a n d a r e s o i d e n t i f i e d b y i n s c r i p t i o n . 3 7 3

d w e l l s o n the w r a t h of A c h i l l e s o v e r

A g a m e m n o n ' s seizure of Briseis. T h e

quarrelling w i t h K i n g

I f the interpretation o f the scene o n the m e t o p e M 8 hinges o n geographic

significance,

then

the

location

of

Assos

in

the

southern T r o a d favours a representation of H o m e r i c Ajax and

( i 1.543-7) m e n t i o n s this quarrel a n d

O d y s s e u s q u a r r e l l i n g o v e r the a r m s o f A c h i l l e s . T h e s t o r y a n d

alludes to a f a m o u s altercation between O d y s s e u s a n d A c h i l l e s

the h e r o e s b e a r d i r e c t l y o n the m y t h i c a l h i s t o r y o f this region,

( 8 . 7 5 ) ; O d y s s e u s q u a r r e l s w i t h D i o m e d e s o v e r t h e P a l l a d i o n as

f o r the q u a r r e l h a p p e n e d at T r o y . A j a x h a d a c u l t i n the T r o a d ,

well.366 A c c o r d i n g to A i s c h y l o s , A p o l l o d o r o s , a n d others, the

a n d his t u m u l u s , a l o n g w i t h a shrine a n d a statue o f the hero,

S e v e n a g a i n s t T h e b e s g e t o n n o better. T y d e u s a l t e r n a t e l y q u a r -

s t o o d near R h o i t e i o n / 7 4 T h e T r o j a n episode also m a k e s sense

rels

with

Amphiaraos,

Amphiaraos dispute these

with

many

pictorial

bears

the d i s p u t e

a grudge

against

Lykourgas.367

King quarrels

tradition:

Polyneikes,

find

certain

King

Tydeus

However, expression over

and

Lykourgas;

o f the age difference r e p r e s e n t e d i n the t w o

also

would

only in

the a r m s

has

three

the

a of

archaic

of

Achilles,

o v e r the P a l l a d i o n , a n d the altercation

between

Amphiaraos and

the a r g u m e n t

or

be the y o u n g e r

figures

on M8: Ajax

m a n t o the right, a n d O d y s s e u s ,

the

o l d e r m a n t o t h e left. B y c o n t r a s t , t h e s t o r y o f t h e S e v e n a g a i n s t Thebes

h a s little r e l e v a n c e to t h e r e g i o n a n d e v e n less to a

t e m p l e d e d i c a t e d to A t h e n a .

Lykourgos.368

Metope

T h e q u a r r e l s are d i f f i c u l t t o d i s t i n g u i s h w i t h o u t i n s c r i p t i o n s

Mi:

chase

scene

o r specific i c o n o g r a p h i e details.369 T h e q u a r r e l o v e r the P a l l a -

O n metope M i , one

d i o n r e q u i r e s t h e s t a t u e ; w h i l e n o t i m p o s s i b l e , it is u n l i k e l y t o

108; F i g . 8 7 ) . T h e n u d e , b e a r d e d m a l e o n t h e l e f t a g g r e s s i v e l y

h a v e b e e n part o f the A s s i a n c o m p o s i t i o n . F o r the o t h e r

strides f o r w a r d to g r a s p the e l b o w o f the f l e e i n g

quarrels, the scene m a y regional

significance.370

have The

two

been interpreted according few

certain

representations

figure

c h a s e s a n o t h e r t o t h e r i g h t ( P i s . 93,

figure,

who

to

glances r o u n d a n d raises o n e h a n d i n a l a r m . T h e latter b a r e l y

of

fits

the s c u l p t u r a l

field:

the h e a d b r u s h e s the u p p e r taenia, the

t h e q u a r r e l o v e r t h e a r m s o f A c h i l l e s ( t h a t is, t h o s e t h a t i l l u s -

l e f t a r m h u g s t h e e d g e o f t h e r e l i e f , a n d p a r t o f t h e l e f t f o o t is

t r a t e t h e a r m s as w e l l as t h e q u a r r e l ) b e l o n g t o A t t i c a r t ; s e v e r a l

cut o f f i n the rebated r i g h t edge. I n b r e a k i n g t h o u g h the right

r e d - f i g u r e e x a m p l e s i n c l u d e the v o t i n g scene o n the

border, the s c u l p t o r sacrifices b a l a n c e f o r the a p p e a r a n c e

side of the vase.371

O n

this basis, s i m i l a r quarrels

opposite on

Attic

of

a c t i o n , b u t t h e o f f - c e n t r e a r r a n g e m e n t d o e s n o t a p p e a r to be i c o n o g r a p h i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t ; there are n o r e m a i n s o f a step o r

amphora, University of Chicago ( A B V 318,6; AJA 47 (1943) pp. 386-7, fig. i A ) ; cup by Douris in Vienna (supra n. 362); cup by the Brygos Painter in the Getty (supra n. 364); early Mannerist column krater, Padula (supra n. 364). Note also cup potted by Kachrylion, London, British Museum E13 ( A R V 2 109; LIMC 1 (1981), p. 326, no. 78, s.v. 'Aias I*. A shieldband relief from Olympia (Β 1896), on which two nude men restrain a third from drawing his sword, may be one half of a quarrel: Kunze 1950, pp. 20, 22, 171—3, pi. 45. Kunze compares the scene to one on a Chalkidian amphora (St Petersburg, Hermitage 1479: Rumpf 1927, pis. 109, i n ) but feels it cannot be associated conclusively with scenes of the Trojan quarrel. 366 Quarrel over the Palladion: Heldensage3 419. Note cup by Makron, Saint Petersburg, Hermitage B649(St83o): ARV2 460,13; LIMC 1 (1981), p. 437, no. 6, s.v. 'Akamas et Demophon', (U. Kron). 367 Tydeus vs. Amphiaraos: Aischylos, Seven against Thebes 570-5; Apollodoros, Library 3.6.8. Tydeus vs. Polyneikes: Apollodoros, Library 3.6.1. Tydeus vs. Lykourgos: Statius, Thebaid 5.660. Amphiaraos vs. King Lykourgos: Pausanias 3.18.12 (Throne of Apollo, Amyklai). 368 Classical representations include the quarrel between Adrastos and Amphiaraos, Attic red-figure column krater, Naples, Museo di Capodimonte 958 ( L I M C ι (1981), pp. 702-3, no. 69, s.v. Amphiaraos'. (I. Krauskopf)), or Achilles' quarrel with Agamemnon (fourth-century scenes now preserved in Roman wall painting and mosaics) ( L I M C 1 (1981), pp. 104-6, nos. 428-34, s.v. 'Achilleus'.

For difficulties, see Beazley 1950, p. 312; D. Williams 1980, p. 141, n. 38; Blatter 1983, pp. 17-22; Beazley 1986, p. 75; Pipili 1987, p. 26. 37 " Mennenga 1976, p. 112. 371 LIMC ι (1981), pp. 325-6, nos. 71-3, 81, 83-4, s.v. 'Aias I', i.e., cup by Douris in Vienna and cups by the Brygos Painter in the Getty and British Museum. For additional instances of the vote, sec D. Williams 1980, p. 142 and n. 39; LIMC ι (1981), pp. 326-7, nos. 80, 82, 85, 86, s.v. 'Aias Γ. Possibly fragments by the Kleophrades Painter: see Boardman 1976b, pp. 6-7, pi. 2.2. 369

p o r t a l in the l o w e r r i g h t c o r n e r , w h i c h m i g h t s u g g e s t that the figure

r u n s i n s i d e a b u i l d i n g o r m o u n t s a n altar. A l t h o u g h t h e

figures

are stiff a n d the c o m p o s i t i o n c l u m s y , the s c u l p t o r d o e s

m a k e a n effort to d i s t i n g u i s h the p h y s i q u e a n d m o v e m e n t the t w o characters. T h e e m p h a t i c a l l y s t r i d i n g m a l e w h o

of

gives

chase has m u s c u l a r thighs, a l o n g p o i n t e d beard, a n d a head nearly one-quarter of his total height. T h e s l i m l y p r o p o r t i o n e d right-hand

figure

m o v e s s o m e w h a t m o r e g r a c e f u l l y a n d has a

y o u n g e r , m o r e delicate p h y s i q u e . T h e

figures

have s o m e styl-

istic features i n c o m m o n w i t h H e r a k l e s o n A 5 ( c o m p a r e ankle b o n e s , t e n d o n s i n the b a c k o f the t h i g h , a n d s q u a t n e s s o f the figures

generally), b u t n o t e n o u g h to assure the s a m e sculptor

at w o r k . T h e pursuit can h a r d l y be a n o n y m o u s , but f o r lack of ident i f y i n g a t t r i b u t e s , it h a s b e e n c a l l e d s i m p l y ' m a n c h a s i n g

an

3 7 2 For the Akropolis shieldband, Touloupa 1991, p. 264, suggests Ajax and Diomedes in single combat for the sword taken from Sarpedon as prize (Homer, Iliad 23), but that combat should appear as a full monomachy, not a quarrel. 3 7 3 Throne of Apollo at A m y k l a i (Pausanias 3.18.12); inscribed shieldband plate (Kunze 1950, supplement 13.1); inscribed Lakonian cup fragment (Pipili 1987, pp. 25-6, no. 78, fig. 36); Chalkidian hydria (Blatter 1983, fig. ia-d). Quarrel possibly part of Statius' poem, Thebaid 5.660; see Mennenga 1976, p. 108; also Gantz 1993, pp. 511-2. 374 Pausanias 1.35.3; Philostratos, Heroikos 668; Strabo 13.595-30- Farneil 1921, p. 309; J. C o o k 1973, p. 88.

206

THE (· —

—,

=40

»

Ì

Throne of Apollo at Amyklai: Pausanias 3.18.15. Foce del Scic: Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1954, pp. 325-9, pis. 48, 92-3; Boardman 1968, pp. 52-3, nos. 90-2; LIMC 2 (1984), pp. 310-11, nos. 1066-76, s.v. 'Apollon', (Ο. Palagia). Loeb Tripod Β, Munich, Staatliches Antikensammlung SL66: LIMC 2 (1984), p. 338, no. 2, 'Apollon/Aplu', (I. Krauskopf); Schefold 1992, pp. 68-70; LIMC 8 (1997), pp. 37-41, s.v. 'Tityos', (R. Vollkommer). 38f> The fact that both figures are unarmed eliminates the rape of Kassandra, all Amazon chase/abductions, Achilles chasing Polyxcna, and Menelaos pursuing Helen. 387 For literary references and objects: Ghali-Kahil 1955, pp. 305-13, (type III is the chase); also LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 507-12, nos. 28-54, s - v · 'Helene.' First rape of Helen as the possible subject for metopes 30, 31, and 33 from the First Heraion at Foce del Sele: Simon 1967, pp. 294-5. Fifth-century scenes of Theseus chasing women: LIMC 7 (1994), p. 945, nos. 286-90, s.v. 'Theseus'.

Pausanias 3.18.15 (rape on the Throne of Apollo, Amyklai); 5.19.2 (rescue by Dioskouroi on Chest of Kypselos); 2.22.7 (Stesichoros); 1.41.5 (Pindar). 388

or gestures t h a n those present o n

correctly,

l a y s h o l d o f the N e r e i d as she tries t o escape h i m b y

attributes.384

has n o n e o f the a p p r o p r i a t e

figures

i n g . 3 8 9 I n Nemian

mutat-

3.32-6, the earliest s u r v i v i n g literary a c c o u n t

o f t h e e v e n t , P i n d a r s u g g e s t s t h a t P e l e u s h a s t o c a t c h T h e t i s as w e l l as w r e s t l e her: παλαιαίσι γεγαθε

δ εν aperçus

Πηλεύς

άναξ, ύπε ραλλον

os και Ίωλκον εΐλε μόνος άνευ και ποντιαν

Θετιν

αίχμάν

ταμών

στρατιάς,

κατεμαρφεν

εγκονητί.

Among the tales of the brave deeds of old King Peleus, how he rejoiced when he cut his allsurpassing spear, And how he captured Iolkos single-handed without a host of men, And caught the Sea-goddess Thetis in swift pursuit.390 Scenes of Peleus e m e r g i n g f r o m his a m b u s h or i n h o t pursuit of the fleeing N e r e i d

find

f a v o u r i n the

first

half o f the

sixth

century, a n d they r e m a i n an i m p o r t a n t w a y

of

the m y t h w e l l i n t o the

century.391

first

m o m e n t c h o s e n varies. O n ian?)

and

three

Siana cups

h a l f o f the

fifth

a b r o n z e t r i p o d leg by

Thetis and other Nereids.392 O n

the C

representing

Painter, P e l e u s

a n d a plate b y L y d o s , he has just c a u g h t h o l d of her.393 A kothon shows

ment."94 N o n e

chases

a M e l i a n a m p h o r a , a shield-

b a n d relief, a n o t h e r s l i g h t l y later S i a n a c u p b y t h e C

figure

The

(Peloponnes-

Painter, black-

a B o e o t i a n variation o n the same

e x c e p t the s h i e l d b a n d relief i l l u s t r a t e s

mo-

Thetis

s h i f t i n g s h a p e at t h i s s t a g e i n t h e s t o r y . 3 9 5 E a r l y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s

389 Schefold 1968, pp. 42-3, 85, pi. 70; Heldensage3 321-9; Krieger 1973; DL III, pp. 365-7; Schefold 1992, pp. 207-11; LIMC 7 (1994), pp. 255-64, 268-9, nos. 47-190, s.v. 'Peleus'; Barringer 199 5, pp. 69-77; LIMC 8 (1997), pp. 7-9, s.v. 'Thetis', (R. Vollkommer). Although uncommon in architectural sculpture, Marconi also proposes this scene for Temple E at Selinous: Marconi 1994, pp. 128-9, 2 4 0 - 1 , W j .

Translation: Farnell 1930, p. 167. For discussion of the ambush, see Krieger 1973; Pipili 1987, pp. 26-7; LIMC 7 (1994), pp. 268-9, s - v · 'Peleus'; Barringer 1995, pp. 71-3; LIMC 8 (1997), pp. 13-14, s.v. 'Thetis'. 390 391

392 Bronze tripod leg, N e w York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 5 8.11.6,59.11.1 : LIMC 6 (1992), p. 806, no. 29T, s.v. 'Nereides'. The tripod leg is dated c.660-625 but considered by some a forgery: cf. von Steuben 1968, p. 102, n. 188; Pipili 1987, p. 92, n. 252. Siana cups, Munich, Staatliches Antikensammlung 8966, and Saint Petersburg, Hermitage B351: LIMC 7 (1994), pp. 255-6, nos. 51-2, s.v. 'Peleus'. Fragment by the C Painter, private collection: LIMC 8 (1997), p. 7, no. 6 ( = 'Peleus' no. 53), s.v. 'Thetis.' For fleeing Nereids by Kleitias that may have shown this scene, Akropolis 594: Beazley 1986, pi. 29.5; LIMC 6 (1992), p. 788, no. ι, s.v. 'Nereides'. 393 Melian amphora, Kavalla, Archaeological Museum A1086: LIMC 8 (1997), p. 8, no. 8, s.v. 'Thetis'; LIMC 7 (1994), p. 256, no. 61, s.v. 'Peleus'. Shieldband relief: LIMC 7 (1994), pp. 256-7, no. 71, s.v. 'Peleus'; Bol 1989, H62, pl. 75. Siana cup, Taranto, National Museum IG4442: LIMC 7 (1994), p. 256, no. 62, s.v. 'Peleus'. Plate fragment by Lydos, Florence, Archaeological Museum 102b, d: LIMC 7 (1994), p. 256, no. 63, s.v. 'Peleus'; Krieger 1973, no. 80, pi. 2a; Callipolitis-Feytmans 1974, pi. 21.3. 394 F. Brommer suggests the pair may represent Odysseus and Nausicaa (Brammer 1980; Brommer 1983b, pp. 95-6, n. 1), but J. Boardman maintains Peleus and Thetis (Boardman 1981; Boardman 1985b, p. 208; also Kilinski 1990, p. 50). 395 For the scene on the Chest of Kypselos, Pausanias does not describe the precise moment, but the fact that Thetis produced a snake mutation suggests it was the wrestle (Pausanias 5.18.5; Splitter 2000, pp. 36-7).

THE

184

SCULPTURE

m o s t often s h o w Peleus bearded; A t t i c black-figure scenes of

w i t h o u t c o n n e c t i o n s i n t h e T r o a d : P e l e u s is s a i d t o h a v e

the chase c l u s t e r i n g a r o u n d the e n d o f the s i x t h c e n t u r y reflect

c o m p a n i e d H e r a k l e s i n his sack of Troy, a n d Thetis w a s

the general trend f a v o u r i n g y o u t h f u l heroes b y s h o w i n g P e l e u s without

a beard

and

Thetis

with

or

without

mutations.396

Peleus often w e a r s a tunic o r sash, b u t he c a n also

confront

the N e r e i d n a k e d . 3 9 7 Scenes of Peleus

oured

in

Minor.402

various

ways

along

the

M o r e o v e r , the e p i s o d e

northwest

fits

coast

ac-

hon-

of

Asia

w e l l w i t h t h e sea

story

i n v o l v i n g H e r a k l e s a n d T r i t o n o n relief A 3 , i n w h i c h

Thetis'

N e r e i d sisters p l a y a s u p p o r t i n g role.403

chasing Thetis

also appear o n three

late

archaic tripods and a chariot f o u n d in Etruria.398 A l l represent

Metope

the m o m e n t w h e n P e l e u s has laid h o l d of T h e t i s , either b y the

Mio:

supplication

scene

a r m , shoulder, o r chest. H e r gestures m a t c h t h o s e of the fleeing

I n v e s t i g a t i o n s o n the a k r o p o l i s o f A s s o s i n 1980 b r o u g h t

figure

l i g h t a large, f r a g m e n t a r y relief b e l o n g i n g to the u p p e r

o n the m e t o p e f r o m A s s o s ; o n T r i p o d A

she also l o o k s

b a c k at h e r a g g r e s s o r , a n d o n T r i p o d s Β a n d C , h e r t u n i c s l o p e s

thirds

a p p r o p r i a t e l y . W h i l e n o t identical w i t h the relief f r o m

Assos,

l o w e s t c o u r s e o f the late f o r t i f i c a t i o n w a l l d i r e c t l y w e s t o f the

these scenes p o i n t u p the p o p u l a r i t y o f this particular

motif

t e m p l e ' s f o u n d a t i o n ( P i . n o a - b ; F i g . 88). T h e g r e a t e r p a r t o f

over others for representing Peleus and Thetis.

of a sculptured

metope

that had

been built

to

two-

into

the

t h e r e l i e f h a d b e e n e x p o s e d a n d is, t h e r e f o r e , b a d l y w o r n . I t s compos-

d i m e n s i o n s a n d f o r m p r o v e w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n that the m e t o p e

itional parallels place the scene o n o u r m e t o p e w i t h i n a w e l l -

b e l o n g s t o t h e f r i e z e c o u r s e o f t h e t e m p l e , e v e n t h o u g h it i s

established archaic iconographie tradition of Peleus

c a r v e d o u t o f a soft tuff. I t m u s t be p a r t o f the extensive repairs

I f w e accept that the c h a s e d

figure

is f e m a l e , t h e n

pursuing

T h e t i s . I n gesture a n d dress, the f e m a l e suits T h e t i s , a n d o t h e r

m a d e to the w e s t e n d o f the t e m p l e i n the L a t e A r c h a i c p e r i o d ,

scenes

w h e n tuff w a s

of

the chase

prove

that

a mutation

is n o t

essential,

p a r t i c u l a r l y at this m o m e n t i n t h e e n c o u n t e r . 3 9 9 O t h e r f l e e i n g N e r e i d s are n o t c r u c i a l t o the i c o n o g r a p h y . T h e the n u m b e r of a n c i l l a r y the m e t o p e iconographie and

can accommodate parallels—general

widespread

portance

figures,

in geographic

of the t h e m e

field

also used for small architectural patches

and

s m a l l e l e m e n t s ( s e e C h a p t e r 5, ' M a j o r r e p a i r s ' ) .

dictates

A b o u t s t y l e w e c a n s a y little, b u t w e c a n d e c i p h e r c e r t a i n k e y

a n d , like the s h i e l d b a n d reliefs,

i c o n o g r a p h i e features of the t h r e e - f i g u r e d c o m p o s i t i o n . T o the

the p r o t a g o n i s t s . 4 0 0

only

i n nature, diverse

in

origin—demonstrate

in archaic

art

but

do

not

The

media, the

im-

suggest

a

s p e c i f i c s o u r c e f o r t h e s c e n e at A s s o s .

left, a b e a r d e d m a l e

a n t i c o n o g r a p h i e r o l e at A s s o s b e c a u s e o f its p l a c e i n t h e T r o j a n

l o o k s t o w a r d the central

w h i c h are p a r t l y p r e s e r v e d i n f r o n t o f the c e n t r a l

figure.

In

figure.

His

r i g h t s h o u l d e r is s l i g h t l y r a i s e d ; t h e r i g h t a r m h a s b r o k e n a w a y . A

A scene w i t h Peleus c a p t u r i n g Thetis w o u l d p l a y an i m p o r t -

figure

h i s left h a n d , h e h o l d s a n u p r i g h t s p e a r , t h e h e a d a n d s h a f t o f

triangular p r o t r u s i o n a b o v e his w a i s t o n the right c o u l d be

the right directed

hand

or

toward

the p o i n t e d

the

central

tip figure.

of

a scabbard Both

legs

or

are

sword broken

saga. T h e u n i o n of Peleus a n d T h e t i s b r i n g s f o r t h A c h i l l e s , w h o travels t h r o u g h

the r e g i o n near A s s o s

on

his w a y

to

Troy.

T h e t i s b r i n g s to A c h i l l e s the m a g n i f i c e n t set o f a r m o u r

over

w h i c h A j a x and O d y s s e u s eventually quarrel o n metope M 8 .

401

T o g e t h e r , t h e t w o s c e n e s f r a m e the life o f A c h i l l e s . W h i l e

the

p u r s u i t d o e s n o t o c c u r i n the v i c i n i t y o f A s s o s , the p a i r is n o t

M10

f—.254

396 e.g., LIMC 7 (1994), p. 256, nos. 64-8, s.v. 'Peleus' (on no. 67, Peleus is bearded). 397 Peleus naked: Krieger 1973, pp. 55-6. Note shieldband reliefs from Perachora (Payne 1940, p. 147, pi. 49.2-3; LIMC 7 (1994), p. 255, no. 49, s.v. 'Peleus') and from Olympia, Archaeological Museum B8062 and B5116 (Bol 1989, H54, pl. 72 (ambush), H62, pl. 75 (pursuit), dated 560-550 BC; LIMC 7 (1994), pp. 255-6, nos. 50, 71, s.v. 'Peleus'). See also a Boeotian plate, Paris, Louvre CA2569 (Krieger 1973, no. 167, pi. 2b (last quarter of the sixth century)). 398 Loeb tripods, Munich, Staatliches Antikensammlung SL66, SL67, SL68: LIMC 7 (1994), p. 257, nos. 74-6, s.v. 'Peleus'; Sprenger and Bartoloni 1983, pp. 107-8, pis. 101, 103. Chariot, Perugia National Museum: LIMC 7 (1994), p. 257, no. 77, s.v. 'Peleus'; Höckmann 1982, pp. 111-14, fig. 71, pi. 28. 399 Even scenes of the struggle frequently do not illustrate mutations: e.g., LIMC 7 (1994), pp. 258-64, nos. 80-1, 84, 86, 109, i n , 113, 115-16, 119, 120, 122-5, I 2 7 - 3 2 > J3$> I 37 - ^> I 4° _ 3> 147~%> TJ°> 1 S^j 154, 156, 158, 173-4, 187, s.v. 'Peleus'; LIMC 8 (1997), p. 8, nos. 9-10, s.v. 'Thetis'.

Additional examples: Krieger 1973, pp. 81-8. 401 According to Homer (Iliad 20.92), Achilles sacked the town of Pedasos on his way to Troy. Strabo (13.1.57) states that Pedasos was deserted in his time but could be clearly seen from the akropolis at Assos. Some scholars (e.g., Leaf 1923, pp. 251-8, 289-95, an s - v · 'Helene'. Supplication scenes with Klytaimnestra exist as well, but they are not as compelling, because Klytaimnestra usually sits on the usurped throne and the attack against her is murderous; cf. Vermeule 1966, pp. 1-22; Giuliani 1979, pp. 67-71 and notes; Prag 1985, pp. 35-43; LIMC 6 (1992), p. 77, no. 30, s.v. 'Klytaimnestra', (Y. Morizot). 4 1 4 Menelaos holding only the sword: Spartan base (Ghali-Kahil 1955, no. 24, pi. 42; LIMC 4 (1988), p. 539, no. 230, s.v. 'Helene)'. Menelaos holding only sword and scabbard: Mykonos pithos 2240 ( L I M C 4 (1988), p. 538, no. 225, s.v. 'Helene');

186

THE

While

not identically

repeated i n other scenes of

SCULPTURE

Menelaos

r e l i e f A 3 . 1 p r e f e r t o see t h e s c e n e as t h e r a n s o m o f H e k t o r , b u t

c o n f r o n t i n g H e l e n , the g e s t u r e o f s u p p l i c a t i o n fits the

tenor

the m o s t w e c a n s a y w i t h c o n v i c t i o n is t h a t the

o f t h e i r r e u n i o n . I n s e v e r a l i n s t a n c e s i n late a r c h a i c a n d

early

favours a Trojan theme.

c l a s s i c a l art, e s p e c i a l l y i n s c e n e s o f p u r s u i t , H e l e n m a k e s

sup-

plicating

gestures

toward

Menelaos,

although

she

does

not

Metope M2: runners

directly t o u c h his chin.415 T h e i m p l o r i n g t o u c h can also be an act o f w o o i n g o r a s i g n o f deference w h e n b e g g i n g a f a v o u r . S u c h a g e s t u r e f r o m H e l e n t o M e n e l a o s c o u l d h o l d all

416

three

meanings: deference to her rightful h u s b a n d , supplication

to

p a c i f y his threat, a n d s u g g e s t i o n o f sexual appeal. T h e third

figure

sentations

o f the

secondary

figures

recovery

of

o n Attic black-figure

Helen,

although

repre-

most

of

the

are w a r r i o r s , y o u t h s , o r o l d m e n . 4 1 7 B e c a u s e

the f e m a l e o n o u r m e t o p e s e e m s to be d r a w i n g the c o u p l e , she w o u l d

m o r e l i k e l y be a fleeing

The two nude men on M 2

r u n as a l o o s e l y o v e r l a p p i n g

t o r s o s a n g l e d f o r w a r d , b a c k legs stiff, f r o n t legs raised, a r m s o u t s t r e t c h e d ( P i s . 89, 109; F i g . 89). A s

in m o s t

pair, and

archaic

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s , the r u n n e r s m o v e w i t h p r o p e r left a r m a n d leg

o n the m e t o p e m a y be s i m i l a r to the ancil-

lary females f o u n d occasionally

iconography

away

from

maidservant

t h a n the d i v i n e A p h r o d i t e w h o intercedes o n H e l e n ' s

behalf.

l e a d i n g t o g e t h e r . 4 2 0 T h e s c u l p t o r c a r v e d t h e m as a t i g h t l y i n t e g r a t e d pair; the r e s u l t i n g d o u b l e d a n d c r o s s e d d i a g o n a l s create o n e o f the m o r e v i s u a l l y c o m p l e x a n d energetic

compositions

i n the frieze c o u r s e . F i e also i n t e n t i o n a l l y differentiated b e a r d s a n d h a i r s t y l e s to create s o m e

their

c o n t r a s t in age.421

p r e s e r v e d facial p r o f i l e o f the l e f t - h a n d

figure

The

s h o w s that he

w o r e a l o n g , p o i n t e d beard. A s f o r the r i g h t - h a n d

figure,

the

A s she t u r n s a w a y , she raises her h a n d in a startled gesture o f

outline o f the c h i n s u g g e s t s that he w a s either s m o o t h - c h e e k e d

surprise, perhaps fear.4is

o r h a d a s h o r t b e a r d s i m i l a r to that o f H e r a k l e s o n relief A 5 .

W e h a v e l i m i t e d o u r d i s c u s s i o n to subjects that a d m i t artistic p a r a l l e l s , b u t it r e m a i n s p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e s c e n e o n t h i s m e t o p e represents a story that w o u l d

be recognized

locally,419 or

a

B o t h w e a r s h o u l d e r - l e n g t h hair, b u t the b e a r d l e s s ( o r

short-

b e a r d e d ) m a n ' s h a i r c u r l s u n d e r m o r e c r i s p l y at t h e b a c k . T h e runners'

large

heads,

small,

rounded

buttocks,

c h a i c p e r i o d . F i r s t a m o n g the latter c o u l d be the scene f r o m the

pieces, the

Iliad

t h a n m o s t o f the o t h e r s c u l p t u r e s . T h e reliefs c o u l d be the w o r k

honour

her s o n A c h i l l e s . T h e t i s w o u l d t h e n be i n the centre, t o u c h i n g Z e u s ' c h i n as H o m e r d e s c r i b e s . T h e s t a f f h e l d b y t h e l e f t w o u l d be a sceptre rather t h a n a spear, a n d the f e m a l e

figure

figure

the far r i g h t c o u l d be H e r a , r a i s i n g her h a n d i n protest.

to

figures'

of F l e r a k l e s o n relief A 5 . O n

and

s w a y b a c k s recall the

(1.498-527) in w h i c h Thetis supplicates Z e u s to

figure

tightly

s t o r y n o t o t h e r w i s e r e p r e s e n t e d i n s u r v i v i n g art f r o m the A r -

both

t o r s o s a n d legs are c a r v e d i n flatter relief

of the s a m e sculptor. W h e n M 2 w a s d i s c o v e r e d , the p a i r w a s s i m p l y called r u n n e r s and, w i t h o u t m u c h discussion, attached to genre rather

than

The

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n offers a n attractive p o s s i b i l i t y that, like the r a n s o m of H e k t o r o r the r e c o v e r y of H e l e n , w o u l d be a p p r o p r i a t e

M2

A

d e c o r a t i o n f o r a t e m p l e i n t h e T r o a d . T h i s s c e n e w o u l d a l s o fit h a n d s o m e l y w i t h t w o other scenes that also m a y involve Thetis and Achilles on M i

a n d M 8 , n o t to m e n t i o n the N e r e i d s

on -.231-

Paris cup, Louvre Camp. 10268 ( L I M C 4 (1988), p. 539, no. 235, s.v. 'Helene'). Without helmet: Etruscan clay vases, Paris, Louvre C618 (Ghali-Kahil 1955, no. 40, pi. 75.2); Paris, Louvre C641 (Ghali-Kahil 1955, no. 41, pi. 44.3). For variation with spears: Ghali-Kahil 1955, pp. 106-10. Included by Brommer in his list of Menelaos leading Helen away (Heldensage 3 409, A3, A8, A9, Α ι 5 , A16, A17; p. 410, A24, A27, A36) although they are sometimes interpreted as the departure of a warrior; cf. Clement 1958, pp. 55, 71-2. 4 1 5 Helen extends her right hand toward Menelaos' chin on the earliest extant pursuit scene, a Nikosthenic amphora by Oltos, Paris, Louvre G3 ( L I M C 4 (1988), p. 540, no. 237, s.v. 'Helene'), as well as on several other examples, including LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 540-1, no. 238-41, 245-6, 24S, s.v. 'Helene'.

Neumann i965,pp. 67-72. O n a black-figure hydria (Art Dealer: Hesperia Art Bulletin 2 (1957) no. 64) and a painted tripod, Paris, Louvre F151 ( L I M C 4 (1988), p. 548, no. 319, s.v. 'Helene'), a woman sometimes called Aphrodite faces the couple, holding a wreath, in mirror image of the Helen figure. O n several Attic red-figure vases belonging to the first half of the fifth century, females rather than males dominate, e.g., LIMC 4 (1988) pp. 540-3, nos. 243-4, 247> 2 4^, 22, 264-70, s.v. 'Helene'. 416 417

4 i s Aithra remains a possibility; see Plutarch, Theseus 34. For Helen and Aithra in later art: LIMC 1 (1981), pp. 425-6, nos. 55-8, s.v. 'Aithra I'. 4 1 9 A s may be the case for the three-figured scene on the Kybele Monument from Sardis, in which a female supplicates a male, probably seated, at the right, while a second male approaches from the left, brandishing a sword: Hanfmann and Ramage 1978, no. 7, panel R, pp. 49-50, fig. 50.

PWtttf—I—I—I—I

0 FIGURE

1

1—I

.5

1—I

1

1m

89. M2: Two runners.

420 In contrast to natural gait, in which the opposite arm is coordinated with the leading leg; cf. Gründe! 1934, pp. 24-6. 421 Compare three runners who all have different beards in the Tomb of the Olympic Athletes, Tarquinia: Akerström 1981, pp. 7 - 1 1 , figs. 1.2, 2.2; Steingräber 1986, pp. 333-4, pi. 125.

T H E SCUL myth.422 T h e subsequent discovery of a metope with similarly

211

PTURE T h e v i s u a l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e b e t w e e n the m e t o p e f r o m

Assos

p a i r e d m a l e r u n n e r s f r o m the f i r s t H e r a i o n at F o c e del Sele,

a n d the o n e f r o m F o c e del Sele s u g g e s t s that b o t h c o u l d illus-

h o w e v e r , raises the p o s s i b i l i t y that m e t o p e M 2 m a y h a v e m e a n -

trate the s a m e event. T h e t w o s u b j e c t s p r o p o s e d f o r the F o c e

i n g b e y o n d t h e p a l a i s t r a as w e l l . T h e m e t o p e f r o m F o c e d e l S e l e

d e l S e l e m e t o p e i n v o l v e t h e h e r o e s m e n t i o n e d a b o v e : (a) t h e

g a i n s m y t h o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e as p a r t o f a l a r g e r c o m p o s i t i o n

Dioskouroi

w i t h m a l e s c h a s i n g f e m a l e s , 4 2 ' ' a n d t h e r e i n lies the

Peirithoos abducting Helen.429 A t

difficulty

w i t h the r u n n i n g pair f r o m A s s o s . A l t h o u g h the scene seems to

pursuing

the L e u k i p p i d a i ,

a n d (b)

Theseus

F o c e del Sele, b o t h

and inter-

p r e t a t i o n s r e l y o n t h e j u x t a p o s i t i o n o f at l e a s t t w o m e t o p e s ( 3 0

w a n t c o m p l e t i n g , it c a n n o t b e c o n v i n c i n g l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a n y

a n d 3 1 f o r t h e D i o s k o u r o i a n d t h e L e u k i p p i d a i ; 3 0 , 3 1 , a n d 33

o t h e r extant m e t o p e f r o m the temple. W e h a v e a l r e a d y rejected

f o r t h e a b d u c t i o n o f H e l e n at t h e c u l t d a n c e o f H e r a ) a n d t h e

the c o m b i n a t i o n w i t h M i

p a i r i n g o f f e m a l e as w e l l as m a l e

and

her

rescue

by

the

(chase) to illustrate the rape o f H e l e n Dioskouroi.

Since

the p a i r

carry

no

figures.

E r i k a S i m o n identifies

the a b d u c t i o n o f H e l e n b y c o n t e x t rather t h a n

composition.

w e a p o n s , the s c e n e c a n n o t j o i n w i t h t h e c e n t a u r o n M 7 t o d e p i c t

C o m p a r a b l e c h a s e s c e n e s d o n o t a p p e a r i n art u n t i l w e l l i n t o

T h e s e u s a n d P e i r i t h o o s ' battle w i t h centaurs, w h i c h i n a n y case

t h e fifth c e n t u r y , a n d e v e n t h e n it is u n c e r t a i n t h a t H e l e n is t h e

is n o t d e p i c t e d as a c h a s e . 4 2 4 A K a l y d o n i a n b o a r h u n t u s i n g

M4

victim.

is e q u a l l y

ap-

rape

unsatisfactory.

Occasionally

unarmed

runners

p r o a c h the hunt, b u t a r m e d hunters, a n agitated boar, a t t a c k i n g h o u n d s , o r the d e a d A n k a i o s d e f i n e the scene.425

was

continued

on

another, n o w - l o s t

identified

chariots,

archaic

absent

representations

both

at

Assos

and

of

metope.

Several

Sele.430 A n d w h i l e the s t o r y of T h e s e u s a n d H e l e n m a y

thematic

o f the T r o a d , o r the rest o f the i c o n o g r a p h i e p r o g r a m m e o f the t e m p l e at A s s o s , as f a r as w e k n o w . W i t h o u t a p a i r o f

m a l e s w h o m a y be c o m p e t i t o r s b u t are n o t a d v e r s a r i e s .

m a i d e n s , w e are b a c k t o s q u a r e one.

d o n o t flee f r o m a n a g g r e s s o r ( n e i t h e r m a n l o o k s b a c k o v e r h i s shoulder), but they c o u l d pursue characters depicted o n

(an)

I f w e c a n m a k e n o h e a d w a y t h r o u g h a n a l o g y w i t h F o c e del

most look

u n i s o n s e e m e q u a l l y a p p r o p r i a t e : the D i o s k o u r o i o r

longs

and Peirithoos.426 U s u a l l y the inseparable D i o s k o u r o i

appear

fleeing

Sele, are w e left t o c o n c l u d e that the m e n are s i m p l y w h a t t h e y

a d j a c e n t m e t o p e ( s ) t o the r i g h t . T w o sets o f h e r o e s w h o act i n Theseus

del have

c o n n e c t i o n f o r either s t o r y w i t h the cult o f A t h e n a , the r e g i o n

m y t h o l o g i c a l e p i s o d e s d e p i c t e d i n art i n v o l v e a p a i r o f r u n n i n g They

either

Foce

a special m e a n i n g i n a s a n c t u a r y o f H e r a , there is n o

T h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s e x p a n d c o n s i d e r a b l y if w e a s s u m e that the scene

Securely

involve

to

like—runners—and, athletic

genre?

Foot

therefore, that the scene

be-

racing

and

was

the

earliest

r e m a i n e d o n e of the m o s t p r e s t i g i o u s events i n G r e e k

athlet-

as s m o o t h - c h e e k e d y o u t h s , b u t o c c a s i o n a l l y t h e y a r e b e a r d e d

ics.4"1 T h e scene of b a n q u e t i n g ( A 4 ) and p o s s i b l y the eques-

i n a r c h a i c art, a n d P a u s a n i a s

trian

specially m e n t i o n s that o n

the

C h e s t of K y p s e l o s o n e of the D i o s k o u r o i rescuing H e l e n w a s

(M9)

raise

the

possibility

that

representations

aristocratic good-life c o u l d well have a place in the

of

the

iconog-

b e a r d e d w h i l e the o t h e r w a s n o t (5.19.2).427 T h e s e u s a n d P e i r -

r a p h y o f t h e t e m p l e at A s s o s . M o s t c o m m o n l y , h o w e v e r , t h e s e

i t h o o s act together w h e n t h e y r o u t centaurs, a b d u c t H e l e n , o r

t h e m e s find r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n c h a r i o t o r h o r s e r a c i n g , a n d t h e i r

are t r a p p e d i n t h e U n d e r w o r l d

abduct

c o r o l l a r y , h u n t i n g . I n a n a r c h i t e c t u r a l c o n t e x t , t h e f o o t r a c e as a

P e r s e p h o n e . T h e s e u s a p p e a r s b o t h as a y o u t h a n d as a b e a r d e d

g e n e r i c e x e m p l a r o f a r i s t o c r a t i c v i r t u e is a m o r e u n u s u a l c h o i c e .

while

m a n i n the A r c h a i c p e r i o d ; P e i r i t h o o s

attempting

more

to

often plays

the

older part.428

The

foot

race f r a m e d

within

a mythological

context

games

of

Pelias

or

Patroklos

appear

in

art

just

before

the s e c o n d q u a r t e r o f the s i x t h c e n t u r y . 4 3 2 C h a r i o t races Norton 1897, p. 509; Mendel 1914, p. 21; Sartiaux 1915, p. 44. 423 Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1954, pp. 330-S, pis. 20, 49, 94-5; Van Keuren 1989, pp. 133—9. 424 For centauromachy with Theseus, Peirithoos, and usually others: LIMC 7 (1994), pp. 943-5, s.v. 'Theseus', (J. Neils). Very occasionally heroes chase or are chased by centaurs; Baur 1912, pp. 138-9, no. 177. 422

4 2 s Supra n. 114, and supra n. 324. For runners coming up to a boar hunt, note Corinthian hydria, Vatican 124: CorVP 268,6; La Coste-Messelière 1936, pl. 4g. 426 For other heroic pairs the iconography is unsuitable. The duo lacks the attributes of Herakles and Iolaos, the wings of the Boreads, and the armour of Homeric warriors. The sons of Theseus, Akamas and Demophon, act together but mainly when they rescue their grandmother Aithra; they are always the same age (LIMC ι (1981), pp. 426-8, nos. 59-78, s.v. 'Aithra Γ, (U. Kron). 427 The Dioskouroi have horses and frequently carry lances, but these attributes are not always represented during the Archaic period. O n the Dioskouroi in general: LIMC 3 (1986), pp. 567-93, s.v. 'Dioskouroi', (A. Hermary). O n their attributes: Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1954, p. 336. For Polydeukes bearded: Chalkidian fragment, Reggio, National Museum 1027-1028 (LIMC 3 (1986), p. 583, no. 194, s.v. 'Dioskouroi'). The pair usually appears bearded when they participate in the Kalydonian boar hunt, as on the François Vase. 428 Theseus and Peirithoos: LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 507-10, nos. 27-42, s.v. 'Helene', (L. Kahil); LIMC 7 (1994), p. 233, no. 3 (François krater = Theseus

has

g r e a t e r t r a c t i o n . A t h l e t i c e v e n t s s u c h as t h e c e l e b r a t e d f u n e r a l

w r e s t l i n g c o n t e s t s are f a v o u r e d , b u t , a c c o r d i n g t o

and

Pausanias

(5.17.9-11), the funeral g a m e s of Pelias illustrated o n the C h e s t o f K y p s e l o s i n c l u d e d the f o o t race w i t h n a m e d

contestants—

M e l a n i o n , Neitheus, Phalareus, Argeios, and I p h i k l o s — a s well no. 279), pp. 235-9, s.v. 'Peirithoos', (E. Manakidou). Smooth-cheeked Theseus and bearded Peirithoos, e.g., Euthymides amphora, Munich, Staatliches Antikensammlung 2309: LIMC 4 (1988), p. 510, no. 41, s.v. 'Helene'. 429 Dioskouroi: Zancani Montuoro and Zanotti-Bianco 1954, pp. 33°-8. Theseus and Peirithoos: Simon 1967, pp. 294-5. Van Keuren 1989, pp. 133-9, follows Simon but assigns only one metope with fleeing females to the scene. 430 LIMC 3 (1986), pp. 583, 585, nos. 194 and probably 207 (Siphnian Treasury south frieze), s.v. 'Dioskouroi'; LIMC 4 (1988), pp. 508-10, nos. 30-8, s.v. 'Helene' (some late archaic examples (p. 510, nos. 41-2) do not have the chariot, but Helen is being carried off in the identical manner to those scenes that do include the chariot). 431 Pausanias 5.8.6; Xenophancs fr. 2 (from Athenaios, Deipnosophists 413^)· Footrace: K y l e 1987, pp. 178-80; Miller 2004, pp. 31-46. Footraces in honour of a deity: Pemberton 1978, pp. 30-1, 33; Pemberton 2000. 432 Roller 1 9 8 1 ; LIMC 1 ( 1 9 8 1 ) , p . 1 1 9 , nos. 4 9 1 - 4 , s.v.'Achilleus', (A. KossatzDeissmann); LIMC 7 ( 1 9 9 4 ) , p. 277-80, s.v. 'Peliou athla', (R. Blatter).

THE

188

SCULPTURE

as b o x i n g , d i s c u s t h r o w i n g , a n d c h a r i o t r a c i n g . O n t h e b a s i s o f the i n s c r i p t i o n

Phal[areus]

o n an Attic black-figure

fragment

f r o m the a k r o p o l i s that illustrates t w o nude, r u n n i n g

males,

fragment M 6

m a y join M 9

to c o m p l e t e the horse's h i n d

legs.

T h e d i m e n s i o n s o f the t w o f r a g m e n t s are c o m p a t i b l e , b u t the b r e a k s are n o w w e a t h e r e d , m a k i n g a p r e c i s e j o i n u n l i k e l y . T h e

B e a z l e y i d e n t i f i e s t h e s c e n e a s t h e f u n e r a l g a m e s o f P e l i a s as

condition of metope M 9

m a k e s it i m p o s s i b l e t o a s s i g n it t o a

well.433

clearly defined sculpture

group.

I n each instance, an i n s c r i p t i o n t r a n s f o r m s

genre

to

epic; s u c h m i g h t also h a v e b e e n the case f o r the scene o n M 2 .

A

single pair o f r u n n e r s c o u l d s i g n i f y the contest.434 O r the f o o t race c o u l d

be c o n t i n u e d

o v e r several a d d i t i o n a l

metopes

c o m b i n e d w i t h other metopes representing additional

or

games,

The horse's

rider o n the m e t o p e withers,

other, either

with

gripping

both the

sits b o l d l y hands

horse's

upright

clenched, mane

or

close to

one

above

holding

the the

painted

reins a n d p e r h a p s a s m a l l painted g o a d . 4 3 7 T h e p r o p e r

right

judges, o r prizes. T h e other general m y t h o l o g i c a l category, the

f o o t d a n g l e s f r e e b e n e a t h t h e h o r s e ' s b e l l y ; t h e left f o o t i s n o t

foot

s h o w n . T h e f a c i a l f e a t u r e s are b a d l y w e a t h e r e d . T h e

r a c e as t h e c o m p e t i t i o n

to w i n

a bride or a

kingdom,

features in m y t h b u t n o t i n archaic art.435 As

receding

c h i n that recalls an E a s t G r e e k profile m a y be accidental, but,

it s t a n d s , w e c a n d o l i t t l e m o r e t h a n l i m i t t h e

possible

as p r e s e r v e d , b o t h t h e h o r s e a n d r i d e r b e a r a s t r i k i n g s i m i l a r i t y

interpretations of this scene to a chase o r contest. I f a chase, the

t o a late a r c h a i c t e r r a c o t t a

r o m a n t i c exploits o f the D i o s k o u r o i o r T h e s e u s a n d P e i r i t h o o s

d i s c o v e r e d i n the n e k r o p o l i s at A s s o s . 4 3 8 T h e stiff a n d

figurine

of an equestrian

are the m o s t p r o m i s i n g p o s s i b i l i t i e s , b u t l a c k i n g a d d i t i o n a l re-

h i g h o u t l i n e o f the s h o u l d e r m a y

include l o n g hair

recently rather

hanging

liefs, w e c a n t a k e the s u g g e s t i o n n o further. N e i t h e r p a i r b r i n g s a persuasive cultic connection. I f a contest, heroic funeral g a m e s a r e p o s s i b l e , a n d t h o s e f o r P a t r o k l o s are m o s t c o m p e l l i n g , w i t h

M9

the o l d e r m a n O d y s s e u s a n d the y o u n g e r the L e s s e r A j a x , p r o p erly in front o f O d y s s e u s until he trips ( H o m e r ,

Iliad

23.778-9).

T h e identification w o u l d d e p e n d o n inscriptions or related i c o n ography

o n adjacent metopes. S h o u l d w e

metope M i

be r i g h t i n

.65-

.225—I

seeing

as P e l e u s a n d T h e t i s , a n d m e t o p e M 8 as t h e q u a r r e l

b e t w e e n A j a x a n d O d y s s e u s f o r t h e a r m s o f A c h i l l e s , t h e n it is q u i t e p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e r u n n e r s o n M 2 a l s o d e p i c t a n e v e n t s u c h as funeral g a m e s c o n n e c t e d w i t h the T r o j a n saga.

Metope M6: horse legs T h e e q u i n e h i n d legs depicted o n the f r a g m e n t a r y m e t o p e

M 6

have a l w a y s been t h o u g h t to be p a r t o f a centaur s i m i l a r to the o n e o n M 7 , e v e n t h o u g h t h e y are set s l i g h t l y f u r t h e r a p a r t t h a n t h e c e n t a u r s ' l e g s 4 3 6 ( P i . 112; F i g . 9 0 ) . T h e d i s c o v e r y o f

M6

the

h o r s e a n d rider o n m e t o p e M 9 raises the m o r e l i k e l y p o s s i b i l i t y that these h i n d legs b e l o n g to a regular horse. T h e t w o mentary metopes M 6

and M 9

frag-

m a y w e l l j o i n to c o m p l e t e the

rear p a r t o f that g a l l o p i n g h o r s e . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , the b r e a k s

on

b o t h a r e w o r n , as is t h e f r o n t s u r f a c e o f M 9 i n t h i s a r e a ; s h o r t o f b r i n g i n g t h e t w o t o g e t h e r ( M 6 is i n I s t a n b u l ; M 9

in

Çanak-

kale), the j o i n c a n n o t be p r o v e d . I f M 6 represents an a d d i t i o n a l m e t o p e , t h e n there m u s t h a v e b e e n a s e q u e n c e of riders

(or

c e n t a u r s ) o n the frieze c o u r s e .

Metope My: horse and rider The

fragmentary

metope

M9,

discovered in

K»t)—I—I—I 1973, d e p i c t s

a

rider o n a g a l l o p i n g h o r s e m o v i n g r i g h t (PI. h i ; F i g . 90). T h e

4 j 3 Akropolis 2209: LIMC 7 (1994), p. 278, no. 3, s.v. 'Peliou athla'; Splitter 2000, p. 28. 434 In Homer, Iliad 23.778-9, three heroes run in the footrace at the games for Patroklos, but Homer concentrates on Odysseus and the lesser Ajax. 435 E M. Cornford in Harrison 1962, pp. 231-3. 436 Clarke 1898, p. 171; Sartiaux 1915, pp. 46-7; Finster-Hotz 1984, p. 104.

0 FIGURE

1

1

.5

1—I—I—I

1

1m

90. M6 and M9: Man on horseback.

4j>7 Generally, galloping riders hold the reins higher or with one hand, but see rider on a tile with stamped relief from Delphi (LeRoy 1967, pp. 9 2 - j , no. S122, pi. 32) or riders on the Eurytos Krater, Paris, Louvre E63 j ( C o r V P 147,1; Schefold 1968, pi. 3). 438 Stupperich 1992, p. 16, pi. 9.1.

THE d o w n the b a c k , b u t here, a g a i n , the s u r f a c e is b a d l y

SCULPTURE

chipped.

equestrian

189 kalypter

from

Kamarina.444

A

similarly

draped

T h e f i g u r e d o e s n o t h a v e a b e a r d , b u t n e i t h e r is there a n y s i g n

c l o t h w o r n o n a rider a p p l i q u é i n the L o u v r e h a s been called

o f b r e a s t s ; t h e r i d e r is p r o b a b l y a y o u n g

a s h o r t m a n t e l , w h i c h w o u l d h e l p to e x p l a i n the p o i n t e d cor-

man. through

the

ner.443 T h e c h i t o n i s k o i w o r n b y A m a z o n s are c o m p a r a b l e , b u t

A r c h a i c p e r i o d , w i t h b a c k legs t h r u s t i n g o f f the g r o u n d

and

not

The

horse

gallops

in

the

forelegs raised in a half-rear.

439

manner

favoured

I t s l i g h t b u i l d has the lines o f a

racehorse rather than a p o n y . 4 4 0 T h e l o n g , cylindrical

trunk

quite

as

long

and without

the

quasi-pointed

corner.446

S a d d l e c l o t h s are rare i n m a i n l a n d G r e e k art d u r i n g the A r c h a i c p e r i o d , 4 4 7 b u t t h e y are c o m m o n i n the E a s t (first f o r A s s y r i a n s ,

tapers t o w a r d the h i n d q u a r t e r w i t h the c r o u p r i s i n g a b o v e the

t h e n f o r P e r s i a n s ) a n d enter E a s t G r e e k art a n d t h e I o n i c i z i n g

l o i n i n a n a l m o s t s t r a i g h t a s c e n t . T h e h o r s e ' s h e a d is

W e s t d u r i n g the s e c o n d half of the sixth century.448 R e p r e s e n -

drawn

b a c k to the chest in an o v e r b e n t arch; a dilated nostril p u n c t u -

tations d o n o t s u g g e s t a s t a n d a r d shape; s o m e are larger

ates the b r o a d m u z z l e i n a s l i g h t b u l b . 4 4 1 T h e m o u t h is o p e n f o r

m o r e r e c t a n g u l a r t h a n the c l o t h o n the A s s o s m e t o p e ,

b r e a t h i n g , a n d the l i p s are p a r t e d to receive a bit that,

have crenellated o r tessellated borders, and o n e v a r i e t y consists

along

w i t h the reins, w a s p r o b a b l y painted. T h e t w o holes a l o n g the

o f a series o f d e c o r a t e d triangles f o l l o w i n g the rider's leg

line o f the c h e e k s t r a p are t o o s h a l l o w t o h o l d a n a t t a c h e d m e t a l

A

bit a n d harnessing. A

evidence c a n be read b o t h w a y s .

g r o o v e b e h i n d the cheek f o r m s a n e c k

f o l d , a n d a n eye c a n just be m a d e o u t a l o n g the r i d g e o f the face.

and

many

449

d r a p i n g m a n t e l m a y r e m a i n the m o s t l i k e l y c h o i c e , but the

A

fillet-like

b a n d set o f f f r o m the f o o t i n h i g h e r relief just

A p o i n t e d , u p r i g h t e a r rises f r o m t h e p o l l j u s t b e h i n d t h e b u s h y

a b o v e his right ankle suggests a s e c o n d aspect o f the

f o r e l o c k . 4 4 2 T h e m a n e is n o t s e t o u t i n r e l i e f , b u t t h e c o n t o u r o f

a c c o u t r e m e n t . I t c o u l d be the t o p e d g e o f a p a i r o f s o f t shoes o r

the n e c k b e h i n d the f o r e l o c k

l o w b o o t s , the h e m t o a p a i r o f t r o u s e r s o r l e g g i n g s , o r the

o t h e r reliefs f r o m

is p u r p o s e f u l l y

the t e m p l e w h e r e

b l u r r e d , as

such blurring

on

indicates

d e m a r c a t i o n b e t w e e n the t w o . T h i s k i n d o f a p p a r e l

rider's

associated

the p a s s a g e b e t w e e n s o l i d a n d v o i d b e n e a t h c l o t h i n g (note the

w i t h t h e e a s t e r n e q u e s t r i a n d r e s s c a n b e f o u n d i n t h e art o f

N e r e i d s o n A 3 ) . H e r e it p r o b a b l y s i g n a l s t h e b e g i n n i n g s o f a n

w e s t e r n A n a t o l i a d u r i n g the s e c o n d half of the s i x t h century.430

u p r i g h t p a i n t e d c r e s t . B o t h l e g s are b r o k e n o f f a t t h e k n e e , b u t

T h e s a m e attire a p p e a r s i n the L a t e A r c h a i c p e r i o d i n sculpture,

e n o u g h o f the left f o r e l e g s u r v i v e s t o i n d i c a t e a n a s y m m e t r y i n t h e n o w - l o s t c a n n o n s a n d h o o f s . A r e c o n s t r u c t i o n is s u g g e s t e d i n F i g u r e 90. Two

s u r v i v i n g details in the m u c h - w e a t h e r e d surface

scrutiny. T h e

first

bear

is a p i e c e o f f a b r i c s e e n i n relief a g a i n s t the

horse. I t c o u l d be the s p r e a d i n g skirt of a c h i t o n i s k o s , a s h o r t mantel, o r p o s s i b l y a saddlecloth. Its outline appears just beh i n d the rider's knee, curves

downward,

comes

to a

gently

p o i n t e d corner, a n d t h e n a s c e n d s to the j u n c t u r e b e t w e e n the horse's l o i n a n d c r o u p . T h e shape of the c l o t h m o s t r e s e m b l e s the o n e a p p e a r i n g panel w i t h t w o

figures,

o n an E t r u s c a n silver

possibly Amazons,

closely repoussé

on horseback;

it

t o o has b e e n called b o t h a s a d d l e c l o t h a n d the trailing e n d of an extended

chitoniskos.443

The

s a m e c o n f u s i o n arises w i t h

an

Anderson 1961, p. 32; Farkas 1969, pp. 58-66. For proportions: Richter 1930, p. 14; Markman 1943, pp. 148-68, fig. 4. From the point of the shoulder to the top of the withers is slightly less than one head; from back to abdomen is much less than one head. 439

440

441 Contrast the horse's rectangular head to the pointed snouts of horses on Klazomenian sarcophagi (e.g., R. M. C o o k 1981, pis. 6-7 (B8), 16 (D2), 19 (E2a), 40-2 (GÌ), 52 ( G i i ) , 74 (G32)); or the curving Roman noses of Persian horses (Anderson 1961, pis. 8, 39) on the frieze from Building G from Xanthos, London, British Museum B 3 1 1 - B 3 1 3 (Pryce 1928, vol. 1.1, pp. 144-6, pl. X X X ; Jenkins 2006, pp. 168-72, fig. 165) and at Xanthos, no. 3532 (Coupel and Metzger 1969, pp. 225 8, figs. 2-3).

broken edge of the border originally came to a sharp, arrow-like point approximating the kind of tassel often found on saddlecloths. Arguing against this interpretation is the fact that there is not a clear demarcation between the buttocks of the rider and the back of the cloth. Szeliga 1983, p. 545; Szeliga 1986, pi. 18.4. Hitzl 1983, pp. 9-10, fig. 7. Compare similar effect created by the short mantle Hephaistos wears on an Attic black-figure kantharos, Dresden ZV1466: LIMC 4 (1988), p. 640, no. 142a, s.v. 'Hephaistos', (A. Hermary). Other types of clothing can drape across a horse's rump, e.g., the long Persian jacket (cf. Klazomenian sarcophagus, Izmir, Basmahane Museum 3493: R. M. C o o k 1981, G i i , pi. 52, fig. 22) or the Thracian cloak (cf. riders on the Loeb tripods: Höckmann 1982, pl. 65); these garments usually appear in combination with a chiton. 444

445

446 Cf. Chalkidian amphora, Saint Petersburg, Hermitage Museum 1479 (Rumpf 1927, pl. 109); and later examples (e.g., von Bothmer 1957, pis. 77.5, 78.1-6). 447 Hephaistos's mule on the François vase is an exception: Brommer 1978, pi. 1.2. 448 Assyrian, Persian, and East Greek saddlecloths: Anderson 1961, pis. 3b, 4a, ja, 5b, 6a, 6b, 1 ia; Farkas 1969, pp. 64-6; Akurgal 1976, pp. 198-9, fig. 5. 449 Large rectangular cloths: Klazomenian sarcophagus, London, British Museum 86.3-26.1 and Istanbul Archaeological Museumi427 (R. M . C o o k 1981, p.9, no. B8, pis. 6-7; possibly G14, pi. 55.1 as well); Rhodian amphora, London, British Museum 67.5-6.44 ( C V A British Museum 8, misc. East Greek, pi. 1.2); frieze from Building G, Xanthos (supra n. 441); parapet frieze, Temple of Artemis at Ephesos (Pryce 1928, B168, fig. 97). Smaller cloths with tessellated or fringed borders appear in East Greek pottery, for example: Klazomenian slim amphora (supra n. 442); Klazomenian broad amphora fragment, London, British Museum

442 For hairstyle, compare relief from Athens, Akropolis no. 1340 (Brouskari 1974, fig. 92); right trace horse in chariot procession on the Vix krater (C. M. Robertson 1975, pi. 45, 46b). For examples on painted pottery, see Klazomenian slim amphora by the Petrie Painter, London British Museum 88.2-8.69a and b ( C V A British Museum 8, pi. 4.1).

88.2-8.70d ( C V A British Museum 8, Clazbf, pi. 12.1); Ionian dinos, Würzburg, Martin von Wagner Museum H 5352 (Brommer 1978, pi. 11.3); Ionian dinos in Paris, Louvre 10.233 (MonPiot 43 (194S) pp. 33-7, pi. 5); Klazomenian sarcophagus, Leipzig University Museum T.3340 (R. M. C o o k 1981, p. 38, no. G12, pi. 53)· For triangles, see Düver revetments (Akerström 1966, figs. 70, 75) and right horse on Klazomenian sarcophagus, London, British Museum 86.3-26.2 (R. M. Cook 1981, p, 18, no. E2a, pi. 18, fig. 12).

443 London, British Museum: LIMC 1 (1981), pp. 655-6, no. 7, s.v. 'Amazones Etruscae', (P. Devambez); Sprenger and Bartolini 1983, pp. 109-10, pi. H I . The electrum border seems to pass underneath the pleated border of the chiton, and a trace of what could be the front edge of a saddlecloth appears just in front of the rider. Incised marks near the lower left corner of the cloth indicate that the now

450 Trousers: Bovon 1963, pp. 579-602; Vos 1963, pp. 40-1; Greenewalt 1971, p. 40, n. 29, pis. 8-15. Shoes: Greenewalt 1 9 7 1 ^ . 4 1 and references; Bonfante 1975, p. 203; Morrow 1985, p. 38. See also equestrian costume on the Düver revetments (Akerström 1966, figs. 70, 75) and costumes on the Temple of Artemis at Ephesos (Pryce 1928, B132, p. 61; B193, p. 82, fig. 118; B231, p. 90, fig. 146).

190

THE

SCULPTURE

o n the s o - c a l l e d P e r s i a n rider f r o m the A k r o p o l i s , a n d i n A t t i c vase painting, w h e r e Skythians, Persians, a n d A m a z o n s

wear

various f o r m s of trousers and shoes.431

excerpted f r o m a larger c o m p o s i t i o n . W i t h o u t k n o w i n g o f this m e t o p e , C l a r k e r e s t o r e d the epistyle o f the east façade w i t h a h o r s e r a c e ( F i g . 6). I n s u c h a d e s i g n , t h e r i d e r o n M 9

would

T h e scene o n this m e t o p e is n o t o b v i o u s l y m y t h o l o g i c a l . T h e

s e r v e , l i k e t h e s p h i n x e s , c e n t a u r , o r b o a r , as a v i s u a l r e f r a i n o f

r i d e r is n o t a n A m a z o n , n o r n e e d he b e a P e r s i a n o r a S k y t h i a n , f o r

the m o r e d e v e l o p e d scene. W e n o w k n o w , h o w e v e r , that the

s a d d l e c l o t h , l e g g i n g s , a n d s h o e s are p e r f e c t l y at h o m e i n w e s t e r n

epistyle

A n a t o l i a . S o m e painted scenes s h o w T r o i l o s g a l l o p i n g off w i t h -

b l o c k s w i t h n e w t h e m e s are u n l i k e l y . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , h a l f

o u t l o o k i n g b a c k at his attacker,452 b u t o u r scene lacks i d e n t i f y i n g

the d e c o r a t e d m e t o p e s are m i s s i n g ; s o m e o f t h e m c o u l d

have

a t t r i b u t e s ( s u c h as P o l y x e n a ' s d r o p p e d h y d r i a , w h i c h c o u l d , a d -

b o r n a d d i t i o n a l riders to m a k e a race o r cavalcade ( a n d w e

may

mittedly, have b e e n in the n o w - l o s t l o w e r r i g h t section o f the

h a v e at l e a s t o n e , if t h e f r a g m e n t o f h i n d h o o f s ( M 6 ) d o e s n o t i n

relief). O t h e r k e y

fact j o i n w i t h m e t o p e M 9 ) . I n c o m b i n a t i o n w i t h the

figures,

A c h i l l e s i n a m b u s h o r chase, a n d a

is

better

preserved

the rider(s) c o u l d

than

f l e e i n g P o l y x e n a , w o u l d h a v e t o be a s s i g n e d t o n o w - l o s t m e t o p e s .

on M2,

V i e w e r s m a y h a v e b e e n r e m i n d e d o f t h e l i f e o f P e l e u s , if t h e

a s s o c i a t i o n s are a g a i n s u g g e s t i v e .

Clarke

knew;

be part of funeral

additional

runners

games.

Trojan

m e t o p e w i t h a b o a r ( M 4 ) w e r e a d j a c e n t , o r o f f u n e r a l g a m e s , if the equestrian w e r e next to the m e t o p e w i t h r u n n e r s

(M2).453

H e r e again, i n s c r i p t i o n s m a y h a v e m a d e the scene. O n

I C O N O G R A P H I C

its o w n , t h e i m a g e o f h o r s e a n d r i d e r c a n s e r v e as

T H E M E S

an

e m b l e m of aristocratic wealth, valour, a n d social position, tak-

In

argued

that

ing o n heroic overtones.434 Cavalcades have a place in archaic

m e a n i n g f u l relationships c a n o b t a i n b e t w e e n the v a r i o u s

and

a r c h i t e c t u r a l s c u l p t u r e as e a r l y as t h e s e v e n t h c e n t u r y . 4 5 5

s e e m i n g l y d i s p a r a t e s c e n e s o n t h e e p i s t y l e if w e l o o k

Gal-

l o p i n g r i d e r s b e l o n g to g r o u p s e n g a g e d i n the h u n t , the race, o r the cavalcade ( b o t h m i l i t a r y a n d civilian); t h e y m a y h a v e been integral

members

of

more varied processions

as w e l l . 4 3 6

In

discussing

the architectural

sculpture, I

have

first

to

the basic f u n c t i o n of each image. W h i l e m o s t o f the individual scenes appear in archaic architectural sculpture elsewhere, their c o m b i n a t i o n at A s s o s i s t h u s f a r u n i q u e , i n p a r t b e c a u s e

the

c o n t r a s t to the general a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s o f the cavalcade f o r a

d e s i g n e r s o f the t e m p l e d r e w o n s u c h a w i d e a r r a y o f s o u r c e s —

c o n t i n u o u s frieze, the single g a l l o p i n g m o u n t ( A m a z o n s

m a i n l a n d , E a s t G r e e k , a n d A n a t o l i a n — a n d r e - c r a f t e d t h e m t o fit

cluded)

remains

unknown

in

ours.437 I n other media, square

archaic fields

metopes

other

exthan

u s u a l l y are r e s e r v e d f o r

the scale, v i s u a l

field,

a n d p u r p o s e o f the temple. A n

overtly

unified p r o g r a m m e g o v e r n e d b y one idea does n o t emerge be-

the p r a n c i n g or w a l k i n g m o u n t . 4 3 S T h e visual c o n t r a d i c t i o n of

c a u s e , as f a r as w e c a n tell, t h a t w a s n o t a g o a l o f s a c r e d a r t i n t h e

a g a l l o p i n g m o u n t i n a c o n s t r i c t e d field s u g g e s t s t h e s c e n e w a s

Archaic period. L a c k of an overarching p r o g r a m m e ,

however,

d o e s n o t m e a n that the subjects d i s p l a y e d o n the temple represent a s i m p l e g a t h e r i n g o f d i s c o n n e c t e d , if v a g u e l y Persian rider, Akropolis no. 606: Brouskari 1974, pp. 59-60, fig. 106; Eaverly 1995, pp. 100-6, no. 9, pis. 15-16. Dress of Amazons, Thracians, and Skythians: Shapiro 1983. Skythian body stockings and shoes depicted in Attic vase painting: Vos 1963, pp. 40-51; Barringer 2004. Representations of Persians wearing trousers and shoes: G o w 1928, pp. 142-52; Bovon 1963, pp. 579-602; Vos 1963, p. 44 and nos. 5-9. A m a z o n dress: von Bothmer 1957; LIMC 1 (1981), pp. 586-653, s.v. 'Amazones', (P. Devambez). 4,1

e.g., LIMC ι (1981), pp. 80-5, nos. 282, 287, 288, 292, 297, 301, 303, 307, 308, 310, 313, 316, 333, 342, s.v. 'Achilleus', (A. Kossatz-Deissmann). 453 For Peleus, see Willemsen 1963, p. 132. 454 Dentzer 1982, pp. 438-41; Woysch-Méautis 1982, pp. 27-39; LIMC 6 (1992), pp.1019-81, s.v. Heros equitans', (H. Koukouli-Chrysanthaki et al.); Barringer 2001, for the aristocratic hunter on horseback. Later, the numerous horse and rider plaques from Ilion attest to an important regional hero cult in the Hellenistic period; Barr 1996, pp. 133-57. 452

Frieze from Temple A , Prinias: Pernier 1914, pp. 48-54, fig. 19. 456 Hunt or cavalcade, revetment from Thasos (Launey, EtThas I, 1944, pi. 7); sima plaques from Larisa (Akerström 1966, pis. 26.1, 27.1); revetment from Düver (Akerström 1966, p. 219, fig. 70); stamped tile from Delphi (supra n. 437). Fragments of mounted horses (not surely galloping) are associated with the frieze from the Massiliot treasury at Delphi (Picard and La Coste-Messelière 1928, p. 44, nos. 81-3, fig. 23; Bookidis 1967, p. 326, F73) and possibly the anonymous Aeolic treasury at Delphi (Picard and La Coste-Messelière 1928, p. 177, no. 10, fig. 65; Bookidis i and relief from Velletri, Museo Nazionale, Naples: Andrén 1940, no. 446, pl. 127. 455

457 Galloping Amazons can form part of a larger sequence of metopes, e.g., on the Athenian Treasury at Delphi: La Coste-Messelière 1957, no. 10, pp. 84-7, pis. 34, 35. 458 There are a few exceptions, e.g., the rider on the predella of the stele of Lyseas, Athens, National Museum 30 (Richter 1961, no. 70, figs. 159-60; further bibliography in Kaltsas 2002, p. 73, no. 105); or the rider on a Klazomenian

apposite,

m o t i f s . I f w e c a n s p e a k o f a p r o g r a m m e , i t is i n t h e a g g r e g a t e o f specially

chosen

images,

myths,

and

cycles,

designed

v i e w e d b o t h separately a n d i n juxtaposition, the

to

be

connections

b e t w e e n t h e m f o r g e d t h r o u g h the v i e w e r s ' k n o w l e d g e , experience, a n d w i l l i n g n e s s t o e n g a g e their r e l a t i o n s h i p s — i n

short,

their h o r i z o n of expectations. E a c h scene w a s selected f o r the w a y i n w h i c h it w o u l d c o v e r a n i m p o r t a n t b a s i s t h a t m i g h t b u i l d t o w a r d a c o m p l e t e e n s e m b l e (as o p p o s e d t o u n i f i e d p r o g r a m m e ) , including apotropaic images, p o w e r symbols, and mythological a n d social e x e m p l a r s o f h u m a n values. C o l l e c t i v e l y , the i m a g e s h e l p to create the c o n d i t i o n s o f s a c r e d space. W h i l e n o t the later trajectory o f m a i n l a n d G r e e k architectural sculpture, the b r o a d c o m b i n a t i o n c o n t i n u e d t o r e s o n a t e o n a f u n d a m e n t a l level i n the east, i n p l a c e s s u c h as X a n t h o s i n L y k i a . 4 5 9

sarcophagus, Berlin University (R. M. C o o k 1981, pp. 45-6, no. G24, pi. 72). O n l y in the Classical period and then under the influence of the Parthenon does a galloping rider become fashionable in the square field of grave and votive reliefs; cf. Woysch-Méautis 1982, pis. 4.11-12, 5.16-20. 439 Jenkins 2006, pp. 151-85. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the same medley of heraldic sphinxes, lion combats, striding bull, and banqueting appears on a spectacular silver belt from Grave 24 at Vani in Kolchis, dated to the second half of the fourth century BC, Georgian National Museum 24-2006/28: Chi 2008, PP· I75~97> % 17, pis. 47-8·

THE I n t h e t e m p l e at

Assos,

SCULPTURE

m a n y o f the scenes w o r k t o g e t h e r to

191

sibilities—the recovery of H e l e n b y Menelaos, Priam's ransom

f o r m a c o h e r e n t e x p r e s s i o n o f the p o w e r s of, a n d r e l a t i o n s h i p

o f H e k t o r ' s b o d y , o r T h e t i s ' appeal to Z e u s — a r e all part of the

between, the civilized a n d natural w o r l d s o v e r w h i c h the g o d -

T r o j a n saga. T h r e e of the ' T r o j a n ' m e t o p e s ( Μ ι , M 2 , a n d

dess o f the p o l i s presides. T h e s e t h e m e s establish b r o a d

w e r e f o u n d t o the w e s t o f the t e m p l e , r a i s i n g the

but

Mio)

possibility

i m p o r t a n t p a r a m e t e r s . M u c h o f t h e i m a g e r y o n t h e e p i s t y l e is

t h a t t h e y f o r m e d a s e r i e s o n t h e w e s t f a ç a d e ( S e e C h a p t e r 8,

strongly

' A r r a n g e m e n t o f the S c u l p t u r e ' , p p .

apotropaic. T h e

half-animal—belong

confronted

sphinxes—half-woman,

in a liminal realm; paired and

t h e s e m y t h i c a l c r e a t u r e s a r e p r e s e n t as g u a r d i a n s , n o t o n l y

of

t h e o t h e r i m a g e r y o n the e p i s t y l e b u t a l s o o f the t e m p l e itself. The

b u t t i n g b u l l s a n d l i o n s d e v o u r i n g p r e y are v i s u a l

meta-

198-200).

Trojan themes resonate appropriately o n a temple

heraldic,

south

of

Troy,

and

indeed,

the

principal

located

characters

d e p i c t e d i n the p r o p o s e d s e q u e n c e w e r e v e n e r a t e d i n the r e g i o n . A c h i l l e s w a s h e l d in great e s t e e m i n the T r o a d ; a c c o r d i n g

p h o r s r e p r e s e n t i n g the natural a n d elemental p o w e r s o f sexual

to H o m e r , he e v e n p a s s e d t h r o u g h the v i c i n i t y o f A s s o s

p o t e n c y a n d p h y s i c a l s u p r e m a c y . W h i l e b e l o n g i n g to the nat-

his

u r a l w o r l d , the l i o n a n d the b u l l are a l s o i m m a n e n t in the hearts

of A s s o s

o f m e n , w h o c a n i m a g i n e b e i n g as s t r o n g as t h e l i o n o r as v i r i l e

antiquity.461 A j a x also h a d a cult in the Troad, near R h o i t e i o n ,

as t h e b u l l . M o s t s i g n i f i c a n t , h o w e v e r , is t h e c o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e

as

s y m p o s i o n w i t h the c e n t a u r o m a c h y . T h e achieved

centuries

symposion

i n v o l v e s m e n w h o r e s t at ease, w h i l e t h e f l a w e d o n e

involves

half-men, half-beasts in w i l d disarray a n d conflict. T h e

cen-

t a u r o m a c h y h a p p e n s in m o u n t a i n territory; the s y m p o s i o n has its p l a c e i n t h e p o l i s . T o g e t h e r , t h e s e s c e n e s b e a r w i t n e s s t o t h e successful

and failed expression of

xenia

and

pbilotes,

ideas

a r o u n d w h i c h m u c h of archaic G r e e k society w a s structured. H e r a k l e s , n o t o n l y as

alexikakos

b u t a l s o as t h e h e r o c l o s e s t

to Troy.46"

way

we

A

tumulus

near Sigeion, served

noted

in

after

temple

with

him,

as a n i m p o r t a n t

conjunction

the

associated

with

at

metope

Assos

was

on

north

landmark

M8.462

built,

in

Some

the

Trojan

columnae caelatae

t h e m e a g a i n f o u n d a place o n the frieze a n d

at the T e m p l e o f A p o l l o S m i n t h e u s , t h e c l o s e s t m a j o r

monu-

m e n t to A s s o s . 4 6 3 A

s e c o n d t h e m e in the d e c o r a t e d m e t o p e s centres o n sexual

c o n f l i c t a n d i n c l u d e s the rape o f E u r o p e ( M 5 ) , either chasing Thetis ( M i )

or a n extended scene w i t h the

and recovery of H e l e n ( M i

and M 2 ) , and perhaps

Peleus

first

rape

Menelaos

to the natural w o r l d , p l a y s a p i v o t a l role i n the d e c o r a t i o n of

c o n f r o n t i n g H e l e n ( M i o ) . I n t h i s seqtience, there is n o p l a c e f o r

the temple. H e drives o f f the v i o l a t i n g centaurs i n the centaur-

the quarrel o v e r the a r m s o f A c h i l l e s ( M 8 ) , unless o n e i m a g i n e s

o m a c h y , a n d h i s c h a r a c t e r p e r m e a t e s the s y m p o s i o n , if o n l y b y

that the scene represents, instead, A c h i l l e s

association. Herakles wrestling Triton, a story about w h i c h w e

quarrelling over Briseis. T h a t a single, all-embracing

are i g n o r a n t ,

fits less

c a n n o t be f o u n d to u n i f y the v a r i o u s i m a g e s i n the D o r i c frieze

expressed

terms

obviously

into

a hierarchy

so

clearly

and

Agamemnon concept

and

d o e s n o t i n itself w e a k e n the case either f o r a T r o j a n sequence

p u r e l y n a t u r a l f e a s t i n g . A l t h o u g h there are r e a s o n s t o s u s p e c t

o r for o n e that explores p o w e r p l a y s i n v o l v i n g sexual mastery.

in

of

proper

and

improper

A t t i c a f f i l i a t i o n s i n its i n c l u s i o n a t A s s o s , t h i s

drinking,

agon

essentially

I n p r o g r a m m e s c o m p r i s e d o f m a n y i m a g e s , archaic artists often

p i t s h e r o a g a i n s t h a l f - m a n , h a l f - b e a s t as w e l l . T h e c e n t a u r o m a -

depict several thematically

c h y is a t e r r e s t r i a l e n g a g e m e n t ; t h e s t r u g g l e w i t h T r i t o n e n g a g e s

s u s t a i n a s i n g l e s t o r y l i n e w h e n t h e o p p o r t u n i t y e x i s t s t o tell

the o t h e r great p a r t o f the w o r l d h u m a n s

several. E x a m p l e s i n c l u d e s o m e o f the m o s t celebrated

must

successfully

c o n f r o n t : t h e sea. H e r a k l e s a c t s i n h i s r o l e o f m o n s t e r - f i g h t e r , conquering

beasts

that

straddle

the

boundary

between

h u m a n , natural, a n d supernatural w o r l d s . A d d i t i o n a l l y ,

the

Hera-

related scenes but c h o o s e

the F r a n ç o i s Throne

of

Vase, the

Apollo

Chest

of

at A m y k l a i ,

Kypselos the

Temple C

Sele, to n a m e a few. T h e square, i s o l a t e d

link

the

sculptured

at

the

Delphi,

a t S e l i n o u s , o r t h e first T e m p l e o f H e r a a t F o c e d e l fields

of the

Doric

frieze e n c o u r a g e d i v e r s e e x p r e s s i o n as p o w e r f u l l y as the c o n -

ical k i n g o f M y s i a , o f w h i c h the T r o a d w a s part. associations

works

at O l y m p i a ,

Monopteros

the fact that his s o n , T e l e p h o s , w a s the m o s t i m p o r t a n t

Secondary

to

o f a r c h a i c G r e e k art a n d a r c h i t e c t u r e , i n c l u d i n g t h e C h i g i Vase,

kles c o u l d c l a i m s o m e a u t h o r i t y i n the t e r r i t o r y o f A s s o s , g i v e n myth-

not

Doric

frieze

t i n u o u s f r i e z e a n d t r i a n g u l a r p e d i m e n t d i s c o u r a g e it. I n d e e d ,

course w i t h scenes o n the epistyle. Several i m a g e s that appear

one

b e l o w — a g a l l o p i n g centaur, c o n f r o n t e d sphinxes, a n i m a l s — a r e

ture, b u t a l s o i n the s e p a r a t e d scenes o n s h i e l d b a n d reliefs a n d

repeated

v a s e s . T o t a l n a r r a t i v e u n i t y is r a r e a n d c o m e s late. P a r t i a l u n i t y ,

in abbreviated

f a s h i o n i n the frieze c o u r s e

above,

finds

b i n d i n g the t w o c o u r s e s v i s u a l l y a n d a d d i n g coherence to the

with

overall sculptural p r o g r a m m e of the temple.

explained

I n the metopes, events in the T r o j a n cycle p r o v i d e the m o s t likely e x p l a n a t i o n for several narrative scenes a n d even for a

s u c h o v e r l a p p i n g p r o g r a m m e s n o t o n l y in architec-

some

scenes

standing

on

their

in sequence, characterizes

o f discrete yet repeated

fields.

own

and

others

archaic G r e e k

best

handling

T h e frieze d e c o r a t i o n o n

the

t e m p l e at A s s o s is n o e x c e p t i o n .

s e q u e n c e . T h e identifiable e p i s o d e s r a n g e f r o m the q u a r r e l o v e r the a r m s o f A c h i l l e s ( M 8 ) to the chase a n d capture o f T h e t i s (Mi)

a n d the funeral g a m e s o f P a t r o k l o s ( M a , p o s s i b l y

M9).

A f o u r t h m e t o p e , M i o , a l t h o u g h a later r e p l a c e m e n t , p r o b a b l y also

b e l o n g s to the T r o j a n cycle

as w e l l . T h e

scene here

s u s c e p t i b l e to different i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , b u t the s t r o n g e s t

is

pos-

460

c

Supra n. 401. 461 For the importance of the cult of Achilles in historical times and the difficulty of pin-pointing the location of the tomb, see Shaw 2001, pp. 164-81; Burgess 2005; Burgess 2009, pp. 1 1 1 - 1 6 . 462 Supra n. 374. 463 Özgünel 2001.

8

Arrangement of the Sculpture P L A C E M E N T OF T H E EPISTYLE

SCULPTURED

o n e has satisfactorily b e e n able to r e c o n s t r u c t the epistyle

BLOCKS

using

all the p i e c e s ,

and

it g r e a t l y

sculptured

complicates

any

attempt to d o so.

T h e n e w l y discovered sculpture a n d the fresh observations

on

the architecture o f the t e m p l e have n o t o n l y u n d e r m i n e d

the

Evidence for distinguishing original f r o m replacement sculpture

is far m o r e

subjective

than

it is f o r

distinguishing

the

reconstructions proposed b y Joseph Thacher Clarke and Felix

capitals, geison, a n d t y m p a n o n . T h e f e w criteria that can

Sartiaux

p r o p o s e d t e n d n o t to resolve the basic p r o b l e m that t o o

(see

Appendix

III),

but

they

have

also

introduced

s i g n i f i c a n t p r o b l e m s f o r a n y n e w p r o p o s a l as w e l l . M o s t portantly,

the

(galloping

centaurs),

(lions

new

threatening

restored

fragments

a

A i o

that

(lions

boar)

savaging

prove

to the façades, n o t

complete

that

reliefs

a deer),

these

to the flanks

reliefs

appear

to belong

assigned to positions

to the façades

and

too

few

at t h e c o r n e r s . I n t h e c a s e o f

A13

damage, w e

are

best

o n e d e c o r a t e d epistyle b l o c k o v e r the n o r t h w e s t corner,

had

been

have to a c c o u n t f o r the r e p l a c e m e n t

can

be

minimal

and

reliefs

as t h e y

im-

A8/A48

be

many

o f at

least and

several p l a i n b l o c k s a l o n g the n o r t h w e s t flank. I n the case

of

previously. T h e undecorated epistyle b l o c k A 3 6 demonstrates

extensive d a m a g e , w e c o u l d c o n s i d e r the entire r e p l a c e m e n t o f

t h a t t h e s c u l p t u r e d i d n o t w r a p a r o u n d t h e c o r n e r at t h e s o u t h -

s c u l p t u r e at t h e w e s t e n d o f t h e b u i l d i n g a n d p o s s i b l e

w e s t ( a n d t h e r e f o r e p r e s u m a b l y n o t at the n o r t h w e s t

t o the n o r t h e a s t c o r n e r as w e l l .

either).

T h e p r y m a r k s o n c o r n e r capitals C 2 a n d C 2 4 indicate that o n

W i t h i n several potentially c o m p e t i n g f o r m s o f evidence

t h e w e s t c o r n e r s , at least, t h e b l o c k s o n t h e f a ç a d e p r o j e c t e d t h e

the restored

full length of the entablature. T h e

distinguish

reconstructed sequence

of

g e i s o n has f u r t h e r l i m i t e d the p o s s i b l e a r r a n g e m e n t s f o r s c u l p t u r e a l o n g t h e f l a n k s at the s o u t h e a s t e n d . The

most important

n e t r e s u l t is t h a t t h e r e are t o o

many

r e l i e f s t h a t n e e d t o find a p l a c e o n t h e f a ç a d e a n d n o w c a n n o t b e restored

to

the

that the partial

corners.

This

destruction

the A r c h a i c p e r i o d

may

situation

and

is t h e

rebuilding

have had a more

best

damage

others

are

sequence certain

real

of

decorated

parameters; the

some

building,

are

predictable

while

o f D o r i c a r c h i t e c t u r e as w e k n o w

it. T h e y a r e s e t o u t

below,

reconstructed

the

outside

for can

in advance

for

if

we

norms

arguments

even

blocks,

the

of

to

epistyle

sequence

of

reliefs.

evidence

of the temple serious impact

in

Extent of decoration and eastern emphasis

on

the s c u l p t u r e d epistyle that w e c a n necessarily r e c o g n i z e o n the

O f t h e 15 s u r v i v i n g s c u l p t u r e d e p i s t y l e b l o c k s , o n e r e l i e f e x i s t s

basis

intact ( A 1 4 ) a n d six o t h e r s are f u l l y r e c o n s t r u c t e d f r o m

of

style

or

technical

features.

Clearly,

the

colonnade

frag-

a r o u n d t h e n o r t h w e s t c o r n e r fell, t a k i n g w i t h it s e v e r a l e p i s t y l e

ments ( Α ι , A 2 , A 3 , A 4 , A 6 , and A i o ) . T h e composition of

blocks.

additional

Sculptured

reliefs

would

have

to

be

replaced

or

reliefs c a n be restored c o n f i d e n t l y , a l t h o u g h

five their

r e w o r k e d , at least o n t h e w e s t e n d . Q u i t e p o s s i b l y the d e s t r u c -

exact lengths r e m a i n conjectural ( A 5 , A 7 , A 8 , A 1 3 , a n d

tion was

F o r the r e m a i n i n g t h r e e f r a g m e n t a r y reliefs, all w i t h the s m a l l e r

greater. D a m a g e d

material, being consecrated,

may

n o t h a v e b e e n r e m o v e d f r o m t h e site, as w a s t h e c a s e i n o t h e r

scale a n i m a l c o m b a t s

archaic sanctuaries, f o r e x a m p l e the earlier p e d i m e n t s f r o m the

p o s i t i o n is less certain. T h e d i m e n s i o n s o f relief A 9 f a v o u r

s e c o n d T e m p l e o f A p h a i a at A e g i n a , o r t h e c a c h e o f

three-figured c o m p o s i t i o n . Relief A 1 2 m u s t be completed w i t h

architec-

tural material f r o m the Η - T e m p l e a n d O l d T e m p l e o f

Athena

(A9, A n ,

a second pair of animals. Reliefs A n

o n the A t h e n i a n A k r o p o l i s . W e t h u s c a n n o t b e c e r t a i n t h a t all

the h i n d legs o f the deer o n A n

o f t h e s u r v i v i n g p i e c e s b e l o n g e d o n t h e b u i l d i n g at t h e

same

probably

time, o r that s o m e reliefs a l w a y s s t o o d i n their o r i g i n a l

posi-

t i o n s . M o r e r e l i e f s t h a n c a n fit h a v e d i m e n s i o n s a p p r o p r i a t e t o the façades; the o n l y relief that s e e m s

t o b e l o n g at a

corner

a n d A 1 2 ) , the original

A15).

At

coma

a n d A 1 2 c o u l d join, b u t

a n d the l i o n o n A 1 2

would

overlap.

least

eight

of

the

sculptured

blocks

have

the

longer

axial spacing, w i t h large m e t o p e - s p a c e s a n d large regulae chara c t e r i s t i c o f t h e f a ç a d e s ( Α ι , Αι,

A3, A4, A5, A8, Aio,

A13;

( Α 12) m a y h a v e b e e n w o r k e d o n w h a t s h o u l d b e its

exposed

T a b l e 4 a ) . T h r e e r e l i e f s ( A 6 , A 7 , A i 1) c o m b i n e l o n g a n d s h o r t

face. T h e e x t a n t s c u l p t u r e i n all l i k e l i h o o d r e p r e s e n t s

original

elements that l o o k a w k w a r d o n the façade but m a k e sense for

and replacement material. T h i s situation helps explain w h y

no

reliefs

on

or

near

the

flank

corners.

One

relief

(A9)

fits

a

A R R A N G E M E N T OF THE standard

flank

intercolumniation.

c.o.io m .

short

for

the

flanks

Another

and

would

relief fit

(A14),

better

on

is the

p r o n a o s w i t h its partner, A 1 5 . 1

SCULPTURE

together

I93

in a continuous

decorative

arrangement

that

must

h a v e h a d , at c e r t a i n j u n c t u r e s , a w k w a r d t r a n s i t i o n s i n

terms

o f scale, c o m p o s i t i o n , a n d subject.

I n a d d i t i o n , 18 s u r v i v i n g p l a i n e p i s t y l e b l o c k s , five o f w h i c h

Reconciling

these

different

visual

strategies—series,

pen-

c a n be f u l l y reconstructed, indicate that a large part o f the f l a n k

dants, directional, a n d closed c o m p o s i t i o n s — r e m a i n s

central

w a s u n d e c o r a t e d , i n c l u d i n g the s o u t h w e s t corner. P r e s u m a b l y ,

t o r e c o n s t r u c t i n g the s e q u e n c e o f reliefs. O t h e r a r c h a i c m o n u -

t h e n o r t h w e s t c o r n e r w a s p l a i n as w e l l . T h e s c u l p t u r e t h e r e f o r e

m e n t s are n o t e s p e c i a l l y h e l p f u l i n e s t a b l i s h i n g g u i d i n g

m u s t h a v e b e e n c o n c e n t r a t e d a t t h e e a s t e n d o f t h e b u i l d i n g , as

p r i n c i p l e s . W e k n o w little a b o u t the w a y t r a n s i t i o n s f r o m o n e

w e w o u l d expect g i v e n the o r i e n t a t i o n o f the plan. T h e

subject

alignment

of the third

column

with

the p r o n a o s ,

axial

found

at

to

another

were

accomplished

G r e e k frieze. T h e reliefs f r o m A s s o s

the

high

archaic

relationship

A s s o s , l a t e r o b t a i n s i n t h e H e p h a i s t e i o n , w h e r e it is i n t e n t i o n -

to pedimental

ally c o o r d i n a t e d w i t h the sculptural p r o g r a m m e

drastic c h a n g e s o f scale w e r e entirely acceptable. M o s t

exterior a n d a c r o s s the p r o n a o s . A

b o t h o n the

similar concept appears to

scale

sculptures, where

in

bear s o m e

design

continuous

friezes

are

paratactic o r g a n i z a t i o n

too

fragmentary

to

and large

determine

b e a t w o r k at A s s o s . H o w e v e r , t h e e n t a b l a t u r e o f t h e p r o n a o s

w h e t h e r o r not, in a frieze w i t h several subjects, o n e

d i d n o t c r o s s t h e p t e r o m a t o j o i n w i t h t h e flank p e r i s t y l e i n t h e

w a s c o n t i n u e d a r o u n d a corner. T h e g o r g o n s a n d

subject

m a n n e r o f t h e H e p h a i s t e i o n , t h e s e c o n d T e m p l e o f P o s e i d o n at

l i o n s w r a p the c o r n e r s o f the epistyle o n the T e m p l e o f A p o l l o

recumbent

S o u n i o n , o r t h e T e m p l e o f N e m e s i s at R h a m n o u s . 2 N o r d i d it

at D i d y m a , w h i l e o n t h e S i p h n i a n T r e a s u r y , t h e c o r n e r w a s a

w r a p the i n t e r i o r o f the east p t e r o m a .

c o n v e n i e n t p l a c e f o r c h a n g i n g t h e s u b j e c t . E i t h e r s t r a t e g y is

In

s u m , the p l a n o f the b u i l d i n g — a s

well

as t h e

number,

length, and regulae-spacing of surviving decorated (and undec-

v i a b l e i n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n at A s s o s . As

modern

viewers,

we

are s t r o n g l y

conditioned

to

use

o r a t e d ) b l o c k s — p o i n t s t o a s c u l p t u r a l a r r a n g e m e n t w i t h reliefs

sculpture

a c r o s s b o t h f a ç a d e s , a l o n g t h e first t w o i n t e r c o l u m n i a t i o n s

d r a w u s a r o u n d the structure, to g u i d e us to the entrance, to

of

to navigate

a building. W e

e x p e c t it

to

instruct o u r behaviour a n d condition our expectations.3 Struc-

the eastern f l a n k s , a n d a c r o s s the p r o n a o s .

turally,

Compositional

as a w a y

considerations

we

are

strongly

predisposed

toward

centrality,

bi-

lateral s y m m e t r y , a n d t i g h t t h e m a t i c g r o u p i n g . H i g h

archaic

vase

ancient

painting

our

best

how

A 4 8 ) ; (2) p a i r s o f b l o c k s w i t h antithetical s p h i n x e s o r b u l l s

(Ai

sphinxes—or

the s t r o n g l y

composition,

the

n o t s o s t r i c t l y b o u n d . T h e m o d e r n e y e b a l k s at s e e i n g h e r a l d i c

(A5-A8/

frieze

of

f o u r g r o u p s : (1) the c e n t a u r o m a c h y

Pholoe

approached

evidence

Greek

on M t

artist

offers

O n the basis o f s u b j e c t a n d c o m p o s i t i o n , the reliefs d i v i d e i n t o

and

centred c o m p o s i t i o n s

they

are

s u c h as t h e

a n d A 2 , A 1 4 a n d A 1 5 ) ; (3) l i o n s s a v a g i n g p r e y ( A 9 - A 1 3 ) ; a n d ,

Aio

(4) t w o reliefs w i t h h u m a n

t a c t i c a l l y m i n d e d a n c i e n t d e s i g n e r m a y n o t h a v e f o u n d it t o

figures

carved on a

monumental

l i o n s — o f f axis o r w i t h o u t p e n d a n t . H o w e v e r , the para-

be unsettling. T h e

s a m e c a n be said for the a n c i e n t

A 4 ) . T h e c e n t a u r reliefs f o r m a series c a r v e d at a u n i f o r m s m a l l

whose

around

scale w i t h a c t i o n m o v i n g f r o m left to r i g h t . T h e felines s a v a g i n g

strictly linear a n d w h o , i n a n y case, n e v e r v i e w e d the t e m p l e

p r e y m a y a l s o f o r m a s e r i e s , b u t t h e s c e n e s are c o n c e i v e d

through

scale, H e r a k l e s w r e s t l i n g T r i t o n , a n d the S y m p o s i o n ( A 3

and

on

t w o different scales. R e l i e f s A i o a n d A 1 3 , d e s i g n e d w i t h larger i m a g e r y , h a v e c l o s e d c o m p o s i t i o n s ; the d e s i g n s o f f r a g m e n t a r y reliefs A 9 , A n , a n d A 1 2 , w i t h the s m a l l e r l i o n s , c o m b i n e o p e n a n d closed c o m p o s i t i o n s . T h e antithetical beasts ( A 1 - A 2 ,

A14-

A 1 5 ) appear to be p e n d a n t s , s u g g e s t i n g a n a r r a n g e m e n t

based

o n bilateral s y m m e t r y . T h e

monumental

figurai

scenes

(A3—

A 4 ) , related in scale a n d style, also s e e m to be v i s u a l l y

con-

movements

the

medium

of

the b u i l d i n g

may

a comprehensive,

not

viewer,

have

been

scaled

elevation

epistyle,

however

drawing. Any

reconstruction

of

the

sculptured

a w k w a r d , m u s t fit t h e a r c h i t e c t u r a l f r a m e a n d f o l l o w t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n a l f e a t u r e s s u g g e s t e d b y the e x t e n s i v e t e c h n i c a l data. The

architectural

parameters

that

must

be m e t

include

the

following. New

evidence for the p l a n eliminates Sartiaux's

idea of a

n e c t e d , b u t it is d i f f i c u l t , as w e s h a l l see, t o r e s t o r e t h e m t o t h e

graduated

s a m e side o f the b u i l d i n g . N o n e o f the

d e n c e r e g a r d i n g t h e m u t u l a r s p a c i n g o n t h e g e i s o n l e s s e n s the

figures

b r i d g e s the joints

b e t w e e n o n e b l o c k a n d another. T h e reliefs thus g i v e the p r e s s i o n o f h a v i n g b e e n c o n c e i v e d as i n d i v i d u a l u n i t s

intercolumniation

(Table

ib). H o w e v e r ,

new

evi-

im-

v a l u e o f t h e p l a n as a g u i d i n g f a c t o r , a t l e a s t f o r t h e s o u t h a n d

strung

w e s t sides w h e r e the f r i e z e d i v e r g e d m a r k e d l y f r o m t h e axes o f the c o l u m n s . A s a p o i n t o f reference, e s p e c i a l l y f o r t h e east a n d n o r t h , the ideal axial l e n g t h s o f e p i s t y l e b l o c k s i n d i c a t e d b y the

Relief A 1 4 (bulls) marks an interaxial space of 2.346 m., virtually the same as the undecorated epistyle block, A28/A29 (Table 4a). There is only one place on the flank where the geison suggest this arrangement, and since it is in the middle of the south side and A28/A29 cannot be restored to the pronaos (the markings on the bed surface exclude it), it makes best sense to place the plain block on the flank and restore the two reliefs with bulls to the pronaos. 1

2 Contra Clarke 1898, fig. 78; see Chapter 4, 'Description and Reconstruction of the Original Building', pp. 90-1, and nn. 125-6.

p l a n are as f o l l o w s :

3

Osborne 2000.

A R R A N G E M E N T OF T H E

194

SCULPTURE

Plan II (alignment of penultimate column with wall)

Plan I (equal intercolumniations) 2.614 2.754/3.014 2.447 2.587/2.847* c.2.86

Façade normal Façade corner Flank Flank corner Pronaos, centre Pronaos, sides

2.656 2.694/2.954" 2.447 2.587/2.847* c.2.86

Façade Façade corner Flank Flank corner Pronaos, centre Pronaos, sides

C.2.29/C.2.55

C.2.29/C.2.55

First dimension measures to the centre of the corner triglyph; second dimension includes the full corner triglyph.

New

data

Sartiaux

or

information

regarding

the

unrecognized

spacing

of

the

by

regulae

Clarke

or

includes

the

following. 1) T h e d i m e n s i o n s o f r e l i e f A i o are n o w c o m p l e t e . T h e l e n g t h of

central

(c.0.84 m .

régula and

m

(0.573

0.73 m . )

·)

an
S 7—71 ; tomb at Agios Athanasios, Tsimbidou-Avloniti 2005, pp. 114-42, pis. 27, 30-1, 32-7.

-σ α

"G C rt 4-> G E O O iH ÌH

ω -O G g S -4—(

μΗ μΗ

E C ο ο υ u

A, C

Jï-3

«Γ -σ Η " r t

„

b< Γ3

ο -σ Ι-.

~ο

ο ο

1

O

Ή X ιΌι

M M

X VD

Ζ U

•H

•H

X

X

>Ti PO "S £

;

n £ tG (Λ Sπ! T> -H 'χ euu — Ο υ G £ £ < υ Υ t>ß > 4-1 -, -a I-, ci PO 'Srt

C

Υ

FS -a CJ "Ο ' X 1H U (Λ PO

t/5

Ii

-a PO

"G u

£ —

rt

u «ι* ω rt cj λ ω "δ £ G υ ß -λ M—ι ~ 'Γ!Ξ M-, 3D 3 C G G S G G W> G G ο G ro ΟT \

W

Ooo

Ν ve

»^Tt-I^ro

0\ Κ ιλ G\ Η rj-t\oo N K K K K N K K 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ν

Ν

Ν

Ν

ο ο ο •ΊI ο οο

ο ON Ο σ\ Φ- ^ Ι ο Ο Ο ΟI ο οο ο 2s ο ο (J

c?

c £ ω J2 _C ·. -< ^ N

OL

Ν (s C\ O

ri ΓΛ N

Υ

Ν

Ν

pH RS CQ

Ν oo O NO ΓΛ CO L\ Φ O ON Ν Ν Ν ΗΗ Ν

NO 1Λ O\ R\

O

υ

co

Ο

ci

OO Ι-1

no

-φ

^

«ν

ri Ν

co

Ο ΟΟ

ν

on

w

Ν

Ν

N

H

H

UH

>N cs

pq M NO

ON «Ν R*-* Ν NO CO M Ν ON

Ν

NO" oo NO Φ

ΊΓ

Q I 5

Ο

Ν

N

Ο ON m CO

οο

-Φ

I-

«

ON OO L-< ON ^O TF T-I O ON «S W

ÛÛÛÛ

CL,

ε

α

I

r X Χ! X χ χχ χ IH U IH L, 3 3 3 3 IT Ά ΊΛ ΙΛ rt VJ

3 w; bc ÇT 'C "C

'C

'

öb

-3

OH OH

bp tiß 1 00 £ -C ω S « / ε 4-» ON Ω — rt Si -ο Μ 3 "ο *° 13 < J? UÌ β CL, _rt

ω .2rt L, rt u, 3 -C «

Ο

* J

< «F

k

ε -Β

FAD ο

s 2 Χ

Κ 'Ν Ο «

ο fad S fad fad

b 3

T . G

>

^

b-3 3

S

X

OH

Ο

RT

G Οi to Si — «υ ï Ώ Ë .y H

Γ3

G

>

^ ΓΛ OO CO ΟΟ IV

d o d o

IV tv Ο fi ON Ο Ν

^ Q1 c •r "- ο £ n Js l-> ΟΟ ΓΛ ΟΟ Γν η σ\ CA oc NO IV NO VO L-s NO ο ο ο ο ο

—

Ω

Ρ S t, ^ g*

οο ^

IH fi Ν Ν ΟΟ IVNO Γν Ο

tH S P-, .À> S

£ J Ö

FI ON

Ν ΙΛ ON NO

^ •d ^q S Η Η

fi Ν Ο

a,

'Sh JC tì H

fi σ\

Ο Ο Ο IH

'on ι Ot

Ο οο Ιν Ο

ON fi Ο M

υ -G

Ο Ο Ο Ν φ 0 Ν

c

c ω JC 4 bß & £ h es 3 3 es Ο -σ υ υ C Ο OH Ο < OH Ω Ü L > O. '-Γ OH - C bß rt C rt Oh .2 J J2 , no. 7; Hamiaux 1992, no. 68, p. 74. Condition: Length complete in one fragment broken along bottom edge; only a small part of lower taenia survives beneath right-hand sphinx. Both upper corners badly damaged and vertical joint faces

APPENDIX roughly chipped, leaving no signs of original anathyrosis. Right edge of relief surface may have been rebated along upper taenia; left side was not. Preserved on top surface: hole for left clamp and one pry mark (other cutting modern). A small moulding, now badly chipped, crowns upper taenia. Back surface sawed off. Surface of relief chipped and weathered. Left sphinx lacks hindquarters, forepaws, tail, and chin. Right sphinx lacks its face, much of the wing, lower haunch, and forepaws. A bridge of stone had been left between the noses of the two sphinxes, but otherwise the sculpture appears finished. Tops of wings curl outward for a maximum projection of c.0.04 m. M4 Grazing Boar (PI. 104; Fig. 83) Louvre inv. no. 2827 Find-spot: Not recorded; removed from akropolis in 1838. Bibliography: Clarac 1841, pp. 1162-3, ηο·7> pi· n 6 B ; Texier 1849, p. 207, pi. 114; Clarke 1898, pp. 284-5, fig· 735 Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 151, fig. 19; Sartiaux 1915, pp. 47-8, no. X X I ; Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 105-6, 147, no. 8, fig. 39; Hamiaux 1992, p. 75, no. 70. Condition: Nearly complete in one piece. Both upper corners, surface of lower taenia, and most of the crown moulding broken away. Preserved on upper surface: hole for left clamp, possible pry mark (other cutting modern). Both vertical edges of front face badly chipped; neither appears to have been rebated. Both joint faces have anathyrosis. Bed surface covered by museum installation. Back surface sawed off. Condition of the relief surface fair. Parts of the snout, tusk, and bristles chipped along right edge of block; hoofs and proper left legs chipped along the lower taenia. Relief low and flat, with a maximum projection of c.0.03 m. Mj

Europe on the Zeus Bull (Pis. 89, 106; Fig. 85) Istanbul inv. no. 780

Find-spot: Discovered by Dörpfeld and Wolters in 1896 on the northwest slope of the akropolis. Bibliography: Norton 1897, pp. 507-14, fig. 1 (called fragment of the epistyle); Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, pp. 147, fig. 9, 151, fig. 20; Sartiaux 1915, p. 48, no. X X I I , fig. 28; Mendel 1914, p. 22, no. 265; Zahn 1983, no. 7; Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 99, 143, no. 1, fig. 33; LIMC 4 (1988) p. 81, no. 80, s.v. 'Europe I', (C. M. Robertson). Condition: Incomplete in two fragments, joined roughly through the centre of the metope; broken right and above. Upper taenia and C.0.12 m. of upper relief surface lost. Both lower corners broken away; lower taenia chipped where preserved. Left joint face has anathyrosis. Right face lost, but the scene to this side roughly complete; the greatest preserved dimension, c.0.85 m., probably approximates the full length of the metope. Lower taenia sharply bevelled. Top and left lower corner filled in plaster. Bed surface covered by museum installation. Sculptured surface in very poor condition, especially the right-hand fragment. Bull lacks horn, part of ear, proper left front hoof, top of back haunches, and parts of knotty tail. Proper right fore- and hind legs chipped, and most facial features, except the line of the mouth, now erased. Rider, seated side-saddle on the bull, broken off just below the knees. Relief, as preserved, projects c.0.05 m.

M6

I

275

Equine Hoofs (PI. 112; Fig. 90) Istanbul inv. no. 242

Find-spot: Discovered by Clarke and Bacon in 1882 near the southeast corner of the temple's foundation (Figs. 2, 34). Bibliography: Clarke 1898, pp. 142, 170, 171, fig. 39, 286, fig. 75; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 151, fig. 21; Mendel 1914, p. 22, no. 266; Sartiaux 1915, pp. 46-7, no. X X ; Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 104, 145-6, n o . 5.

Condition: Incomplete to right, top, and back. A small part of left and bed surfaces survive. Block rebated along left front edge. Surface of relief in fair condition. Preserved are a horse's hind hoofs, fetlocks, part of a leg, and end of the tail. The greatest projection of relief, as preserved, is c.0.027 m. Could join M9. M7

Galloping Centaur (PI. I05a-b; F i g . 84)

Louvre inv. no. 2826 Find-spot: Not recorded; removed from the akropolis in 1838. Bibliography: Clarac 1841, pp. 1159-60, no. 3, pl. 116A; Texier 1849, p. 207, pi. ii4ter.2; Clarke 1898, p. 285, fig. 72; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 151, fig. 22; Sartiaux 1915, p. 46, 110. X I X ; Finster-Hotz 1984, pp. 104, 146, no. 6, fig. 37; Hamiaux 1992, p. 74, no. 69. Condition: Complete in one piece; corners and parts of lower taenia badly chipped. Upper taenia has crown moulding; lower taenia slightly bevelled. Holes for both clamps survive on upper surface. Left edge of relief surface rebated, cutting right through the centaur's tail. Right edge chipped, rebate unlikely (contra Clarke and Sartiaux). Both lateral joint faces have anathyrosis. Surface of relief partially eroded. Centaur's face, arms, and forelegs weathered; tail blurred behind joint of the hock and cut down in rebate. Most facial features appear to have been carved. Remains of a large right eye, full nose, and rounded cheeks barely distinguishable on the weathered surface. Hair, at least on the left-hand side of the face, cut to shoulder length. Centaur's head angled outward from the plane of the relief (compare to wings of the sphinxes on Ai, A2, and M3) for a maximum projection of c.0.03 5 m · M8

Quarrelling Heroes (Pis. 93, 107; Fig. 86) Istanbul inv. no. 248

Find-spot: Discovered by Clarke and Bacon in 1881; two different find-spots recorded: near AA in the Byzantine wall or above the stylobate of the temple (Fig. 2, AA). Although Clarke states otherwise, the implication is that the fragments were discovered separately. Bibliography: Clarke 1882, pp. 33, 117, pi. 22; Clarke 1898, p. 287, fig. 77; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, pp. 147, fig. 6, 151, fig. 23; Mendel 1914, pp. 20-1, no. 263; Sartiaux 1915, pp. 45-6, no. XVIII; F i n s t e r - H o t z 1984, pp. 100-2, 144, no. 3, fig. 35.

Condition: Incomplete in two non-adjoining fragments. Upper fragment preserves part of top and right sides; lower fragment retains part of bed and right side. Left side lost. A gap of c.0.08 m., running through the thorax of the right-hand figure, separates the face of the two fragments (now restored in plaster). Upper right corner damaged; right joint face has anathyrosis; hole for right clamp preserved on top surface. Small crown moulding has a half-round profile. Very little of

28ο

A P P E N D I X III

the lower taenia (which must have been quite narrow) remains. Bed surface covered by museum installation. Surface of relief worn and pitted; details obscured but general elements clear enough. Right figure lacks arms between shoulder and wrist, much of chest, and most of feet. Shallow relief lines preserved at the neck and mid-thigh outline a short tunic. Only the head of the lefthand figure survives. Maximum projection of relief, c.0.03 m. M9

Horse and Rider (PI. i n ; Fig. 90) Çanakkale inv. no. 3782

Find-spot: Not recorded; discovered in 1973. Bibliography: Unpublished. Condition: Incomplete in one large fragment broken left, bottom, and at upper right corner. Part of top surface, right joint face, and upper taenia with crown moulding survive. Extant right face does not retain anathyrosis. Traces of left clamp hole survives in the break. Surface worn and pitted. Rider lacks back of the head. Horse lacks forelegs below forearm, hindlegs below the stifle, and the tail; back haunches and thigh badly worn. Relief has a maximum projection of c.o.036 m. Could join M6.

Mio

Supplication Scene with Three Figures (PL n o a - b ; Fig. 88) Assos depot

Find-spot: Discovered by Wescoat on 30 July 1980, in the late fortification wall, in the region 5-6 m. west of the western foundation, and 5-6 m. south of the southern foundation (Fig. 34). Bibliography: Stupperich 1996, pp. 39-40, fig. 4. Condition: Only upper part survives but to roughly complete length; top corners and edges severely battered. Neither lateral joint face preserves anathyrosis. Surviving part of upper taenia has beginning of a crown moulding. Preserved on top surface: remains of holes for both clamps, two pry marks. Entire lower part of the block (to a height of c.0.20 m.) lost. Block carved in soft, porous, tuff rather than andesite. Relief surface extremely worn and pitted on c.o.30 m. part of the block exposed above the surface of the earth. In certain areas, all trace of sculpture erased. Part of relief protected beneath the soil only slightly better preserved. The surviving relief has a maximum projection of c.0.03 5 m.

APPENDIX II

Concordance For Catalogue Numbers of Sculptured Blocks The table below correlates the number assigned to each sculptured relief in this volume with those assigned by Felix Sartiaux (1915) and Ursula Finster-Hotz ( 1 9 8 4 ) .

No.

Description

Sartiaux

Finster-Hotz

AI

Confronted sphinxes Confronted sphinxes Herakles wrestling Triton Symposion Herakles pursuing human-legged centaurs Four centaurs galloping right Four centaurs galloping right Five centaurs galloping right Lioness bringing down a bull Lion and lioness devouring a deer Seated lion; lioness attacking a deer Lion savaging a stag Two lions harassing a boar Battle of rival bulls Battle of rival bulls Chase scene Two runners Confronted sphinxes Grazing boar Europe on the Zeus Bull Equine hoofs Galloping centaur Quarrelling heroes Horse and rider Supplication scene

VIII VII II I III IV V VI XI XII XIV XIII XV IX X XVII XVI XXI XXIII XXII XX XIX XVIII

7

A 2 A3 A

4

A5 A A

6 7

A8/48 A9 AIO A N

Α12 A13 A14

Aij MI M2 M3

M4 M5 M6 My M8 M9

MIO

8

6 I 2

3 4 15 12 13

Η II

9 10

4 2

7 8 I

5 6 3

APPENDIX III

Earlier Proposals for the Arrangement of the Sculptured Epistyle Texier's reconstruction (Hg- 4) Charles Texier offered the first reconstructed elevation of the temple, incorrect in nearly every detail save the placement of relief sculpture across the epistyle and metopes.1 Texier only offered an elevation of the eastern façade, working with the reliefs of bulls, which he placed over either corner, because they are significantly shorter than the other reliefs. He then positioned pairs of lions savaging prey ( A n and A9) to frame one pair of sphinxes (A2). Despite Texier's lack of interest in actual dimensions and faithful rendering of architectural forms, which both Clarke and Sartiaux criticized bitterly, his proposal contains the principle element around which Clarke organized his reconstruction, i.e., the central placement of the heraldic sphinxes, and a decisive aspect of Sartiaux's second reconstruction, i.e., corner placement of the confronted bulls. Clarke's reconstruction (Table ib, Plan I; Figs. 5-6, 94) The original excavator, Joseph Thacher Clarke, based his reconstruction of the architectural sculpture on the premise that the columns of the façade (like those of the flank he had uncovered) were equally spaced, at axial intervals of 2.614 m-~ He interpreted the differences in the axial lengths of the epistyle blocks (Table 4a) as unintentional variations around the standard. The discovery of the relief with Herakles and centaurs (A5) near the southeast corner of the temple provided the basis for his disposition of the scenes. Despite differences in figurai scale, he classed relief A5 with reliefs A3 and A4 (Herakles and Triton, Symposion). Because of the importance of their iconography and their greater length, Clarke restored these reliefs to the corners of the façades. He assigned the relief with Herakles and Pholos (A5) to the southeast corner near where it was found; he then restored Herakles wrestling Triton (A3) to the northeast corner because he regarded it as superior in style to the Symposion (A4) and the best compositional complement to the relief with Herakles and Pholos (A5). The Symposion (A4) he placed over the southwest corner. Lacking information on the way in which the corner of the epistyle was constructed, Clarke saw no difficulty in restoring the blocks from the flank projecting on to the façade. On the analogy of the three reliefs with fleeing centaurs (A6, A7, and A8) that obviously belonged with the main scene of Herakles and Pholos (A5), Clarke assumed that the other two figurai reliefs were also part of larger narratives extending over several blocks. In this

Texier 1849, pp. 200-2, 206, pi. 112. Clarke 1898, pp. 247-91; Clarke, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-2, p. 153, fig. 1. For Sartiaux's criticisms, see Sartiaux 1915, pp. 84-9, 95-103. 1

2

programme, the reliefs with mythological compositions (that is A3, A4, and A5) would be framed on the façade and flanked by the secondary reliefs. At the southeast corner, Clarke placed centauromachy A6 in the second position on the façade, and assigned A8 to the first position on the southern flank. Because his reconstruction would not allow A7 to join the left side of A8, he proposed an additional relief and placed A7 over the third intercolumniation on the flank. To balance the arrangement of centaurs, Clarke proposed a similar scheme for framing the relief of Herakles and Triton (his Hesione) with three mythological reliefs on the flank and one on the façade. He did not specify what the proposed reliefs on the flank might look like; the relief he envisaged for the façade appears to be a horse race, perhaps a competition during funeral games. Clarke held to this format at the western end of the building as well, restoring two reliefs on the flank and one on the façade to frame the Symposion (A4; Clarke's Hippolyte sequence). He assigned A13 (lions attacking a boar) to the western façade and combined the rest of the lion groups (A9-A12) into two reliefs restored to the northwest flank. These animal scenes would act as the frame for a hypothetical fourth mythological relief at the northwest corner, for which Clarke proposed the theme of Herakles hunting the Erymanthian boar. Clarke assigned the sphinxes (Αι, A2) to the central intercolumniations of both façades to separate the four mythological sequences. He placed the bulls (A14, A15) in the side intercolumniations of the pronaos. Clarke's reconstruction offers a practical solution to the problem of reconciling the different groups of reliefs. By placing the visual emphasis on the four corners, he gives each mythological scene an equally important position and uses the central axis marked by the pairs of sphinxes to separate the four proposed mythological sequences. In wrapping each series around the corners of the temple, the reconstruction accentuates the important oblique view (comparable, for example, to the sculpture on the archaic Temple of Apollo at Didyma). Moreover, the scheme takes account of key archaeological information, such as find-spots, and the architectural data, for example the fact that some of the reliefs with centaurs had large metope-spaces and regulae while others had small ones. There are, however, fundamental problems with the reconstruction. Some sculptured blocks are surely lost today, but not as many as ten; the number of surviving plain epistyle blocks is too great. While a scene such as the symposion might be repeated in the manner of the reduplicated centaurs, the relief of Herakles wrestling Triton can be expanded to nothing much more than a stream of fleeing Nereids. The existing Nereids already look like an attempt to stretch the scene to fill the field; four more blocks are unimaginable. Scenes of Herakles hunting the Erymanthian boar have no connection with animal combats of the nature shown on reliefs A9-A13. Relief A i o does not join relief A9; and, joining A n and A12 still leaves at least four full reliefs of lions bringing down prey. Two of them (Aio and A13) have

A P P E N D I X I I I 303 .52,

.98

1

.53 , .74 , .56 , .81

1

1

1

1

, .54

1

1

.68 , .56 , .75

1

1

1

.56

.76 , .55 , .70 , .55 , .70 , .55 ,

1

1

1

—Η

1

1

.90

1

i

.57

.85

!

52

1 1

Clarke East

.52

|

.86

|

.56

|

.81

|

.56

.74

|

|

.57

|

.73

|

.56 , .76

|

.56 , .78

t

.56 , .775 ^ .56 | .775

|

.56 , .76

|

.56 | .80

|

.52

Clarke West

.52 , .685 , .52 , .75 , .52 , .725 , .52 , .852 , .52 , .63 , .52

.675 .52

Clarke Pronaos ^52 , .755

48 | -70

52

|

.70 ,-52

|

.70

52

|

-765

575 .737

52

.52

|

1

.70 , .52 . .70 , .52 , .69 , .52 , .69

1

1

i

!

1

1

ι J [2.435] 2.447

[2.61] 2.447

'

.485 .835

2.447

H 0 FIGURE

1

.48 , .83

1

H (—

2.447

2.447

h 5

94. Clarke's proposal for the reconstruction of the sculptured epistyle.

L [2.86]

[2.52]

Clarke NW Flank

Clarke SE Flank

1

W^.

L

[2.71] 2.447

1

10m

1

.52

28ο

APPENDIX

spacings characteristic of the façade rather than the flank. While Clarke is right in principle that the standard unit was interpreted flexibly, we would have to allow for a greater margin of error than Clarke himself does (0.05 m.) in order to accommodate the sequence of reliefs he suggests.3 A further problem is that Clarke restores all four corners with the block from the flank projecting onto the façade, in a range of thicknesses designed to complete the different lengths of the partial regulae. This form of construction was surely not used at the western end of the building; the symposion cannot be restored to the southwest corner. Moreover, the plain epistyle block A36 belongs over the southwest corner of the flank, proving that at least this end of the flank did not carry sculpture. If we allow for a different manner of corner construction on the east than is demonstrated at the west, then the general design presented by Clarke for the eastern side could work. Relief A8/48 must go to the façade in place of A6, for we now know it is too large for the flank. Relief A3 (Herakles and Triton) can fit the northeast corner with the flank block presenting its full thickness to the façade. The capital C16, which has pries left of axis by 0.15 m., could take the position E2N. Geison block HG3/15 could go above the right side of A i . 4 If we assume the minimum allowable length for the régula on the right side of relief A3 and the maximum on the right side of A i , then the missing block between the two reliefs, c.2.515 m. long, could accommodate metopes c.0.705 m. long and a triglyph c.o. 56 m. long. No surviving block fits this description. The chief problem with this reconstruction for the east façade is that it causes problems elsewhere. Relief A7 can take the first position on the southern flank, but A6 can only take the second position if we allow the internal régula and mutule to be slightly misaligned. Sartiaux's reconstructions (Table ib, Plans III and IV; Figs. 7, 95-6) In contrast to the basic assumption made by the American excavators, French archaeologist Felix Sartiaux interpreted the variations in the axial length indicated by each epistyle block as intentional adjustments responding to a complex system of intercolumniation across the façades of the temple.3 The influence of Ionic architecture evident in a

3 Clarke (1898, pp. 85-6,94-5) states twice that the tooling on the bed surface of the epistyle proved that the triglyphs were aligned with the axes of the column within 0.05 m. However, the triglyph over the penultimate column marked by A3 would be off-axis by at least + 0.096 m.; the triglyph marked by A4 would fall short of the axis by — 0.075 m. Clarke's calculations for the axial length of A3 are not consistent; cf. measurements set out on pages 251 and 259. He contracted the amount by which the triglyph was off-axis by expanding the thickness of the epistyle (0.84 m. rather than 0.80 m.), by shrinking the size of the columnar triglyph (0.54 m. rather than the more likely 0.56 m.), and by proposing that the right metope-space was smaller than it is (0.81 m. rather than >0.82 m.). His calculation earlier in the text suggested 0.855 m · Bacon follows the smaller dimension in the final folio drawing, p. 145, here, Fig. 6. Similar contradictions appear in calculations for A5 on pp. 254-5. If the restored length of the block to the outer face of the frieze was equal to 3.085 m., and the right metope was 0.74 m., and the central régula 0.53 m., then the left metope could not have been 0.93 m., as stated on p. 287, but would have to have been 0.98 m. Rather than attempt to adjust his calculations in Figure 94, I have simply remediated the final metope. The restored metope-lengths of 0.76 m. listed on p. 287 arc too large. 4 The mctope-space indicated by the mutule and via on HG3/15 could easily be C.0.80 m. (0.41 + 0.212 + >0.165 = >0 -7%7 m ·)· D Sartiaux I9i5,pp. 89-95, 103-26, figs. 42-8.

III

continuously sculptured course and the widely spaced columns of the pronaos suggested to him a coordinated system derived from the Ionic principle of a wide central intercolumniation flanked by ever-diminishing spans between the columns. He offered two possible arrangements based on this principle, with their dimensions derived from Clarke's Assian foot of 0.319 m. (see Table ib, Plans III and IV). In the first proposal, he took the central interaxial space as equal to that of the pronaos, calculated at 9 Assian feet (2.871 m.), with the other axial spacings successively diminishing in size from 8.5 Assian feet (2.7115 m.) to 7.5 Assian feet (2.392 m.). His second proposal again had the central interaxial space of the fronts equal to that of the pronaos, with the rest of the interaxial spaces equal to 8 Assian feet (2.552 m.). Sartiaux then outlined four structural criteria and one visual condition for assigning each relief to a position: ι The displacement of the epistyle joint from the axis of the column which it surmounts was not more than 0.10 m. 2 The triglyphs fell on the axes of the columns. 3 The length of the régula reflected the length of the triglyph that it underlay. 4 At the corner, the flank block projected onto the façade to complete the corner régula. 5 The sequence was acceptable from a decorative point of view. For both his plans, Sartiaux placed the centauromachy across the eastern façade, with the relief of Herakles and Pholos (A5) in the central position. In his first proposal, A8 went to the left of centre, A7 over the left corner, and A6 over the right corner (Fig. 93). In the corresponding arrangement for the western façade, Herakles and Triton (A3) received the central position, with the symposion (A4) to the right of centre and the sphinxes, Ai and A2, over the right and left corners respectively. The reliefs of lions with prey (A9-A13) were arranged along the flanks near the west end. For the reliefs of bulls (Α14 and Ai 5), Sartiaux favoured the first of three options: a) over the pronaos; b) terminating the scenes of animals along the flanks; or c) exchanged with the sphinxes (Ai and A2), which would then go to the pronaos. In his second proposal for the centauromachy, A8 went over the left corner, followed by A7, with A6 over the inner right space (Fig. 95). In the second plan for the western façade, Herakles and Triton (A3) remained in the centre and the symposion (A4) moved to the southwest corner. The sphinxes (Ai and A2) are eliminated from the façade but not reassigned to another position (except possibly the pronaos, with the bulls going to the flanks). Sartiaux's proposals are elegant and ingenious; they give logic to the idiosyncrasies of the design, allow the most important reliefs to take pride of place on the façades, and require a minimum number of now-lost reliefs to fill gaps in the sequence. Unfortunately, neither proposa', works, even if we discard all his premises.6 Firstly, the discovery of stylobate block Si2 proves the eastern colonnade did not follow the spacing of the pronaos columns. In most Doric instances of the double contraction and its Ionic correlate, the arrangement is predicated on the principle of aligning the cella wall 6 In any case the premises are not valid. The western corner capitals demonstrate the façade blocks projected onto the flank, at least at that end (premise 4); the spacing of mutules near the corners of the southeastern flank proves that the triglyph could be significantly off the axis of the column (premise 2); there is reason to believe that certain regulae may have been shorter than the triglyph they underlay (premise 3); and the stain marks on the soffit of the epistyle blocks and the pry mirks on the tops of the capitals indeed show that the joints of the epistyle blocks can be off-axis by more than 0.10 m. (premise 1).

APPENDIX III .56,

.83

—ι

,.48, .70 , .55 , .765

1—ι

1—ι

.575,

.83

1—ι

,.57,

1—I

.93

281

,.53,.815

,.54

.57

|

1—I

1—I

.776 , .55

1—I

.78

.56

.81

1—I

.535.675

1

1——I

56

1

Sartiaux I East

.54

|

.77

[

.56

|

-775

|

.54

.73

|

|

.56

|

.735

|

.56

|

.90

|

|

.91

.56

|

.76

|

.56

|

.83

|

.56

.79

|

|

.56

|

.64

|

.52

|

Sartiaux I West

.52

.685

.52

.75

.52

.725

.52

.852

.52

.63

.52 .675

.52

A15 •325,

,

[2.40]

.48 , .83

,.48 , .705 , .53 , .68 , .50 , .685 , .50 , .805 , .52 , .805 , .52

!—I

i—ι

J A11

1—I

1

1

JÂÏÔ

[2.41]

[2.485]

2.447

2.447

1

1

.145

2.86

I h Sartiaux Pronaos

—I

2.51

[2.58]

2.55

|.52|

1

ÂÏ2I

:

.83

.54

.695

.52

.54

|

.75

Ä9T

[2.86]

J

[2.875]

2.447

1 FIGURE

1

2.447

1

1

1 5

.74

57

L

1

1

1

JA13

[2.465]

[2.41]

2.447

2.447

Sartiaux SW Flank

0

52

Jj

c

Sartiaux NW Flank

-745

1

95. Sartiaux's first proposal for the reconstruction of the sculptured epistyle.

1 10m

.64

.48

APPENDIX III

28ο .52,

.80

.575, .80

,.56,

.84

.48,-70

,.56,

.93

,.53, .80

,.50,

.81

,535, .675 , .56 , .83 ,.56,

.84

,.52

.83

,.56

Sartiaux II East

.52,

.81 ,.56,

.82 ..56.

.71 ..56.

.72 , .56 . .902

..574.

.82

.56

.72

56

.71

.56

.76

.555,

Sartiaux II West

I FIGURE

I 0

1

1

1

1

1 5

1

1

1

1

1 10m

96. Sartiaux's second proposal for the reconstruction of the sculptured epistyle.

with the penultimate column: in Doric, the outer face of the wall with the axis of the column; in Ionic, the axis of the wall with the axis of the column. In Sartiaux's first plan, the outer face of the cella wall would be 0.15 m. inside the axis of the penultimate column. It is unlikely that an architect would adopt a complex system of intercolumniation without the principle that underlay it. Second, his solution for handling the corner of the epistyle is incorrect, at least on the western side. Third, in both his schemes, Sartiaux is obliged to restore some of the corner triglyphs as 0.5 6 m., but we know that at least three of the four were only c.0.52 m.7 Fourth, the newly discovered fragments for animal reliefs Aio and A13 demonstrate that these blocks belong to the façade rather than the flank. We turn to details of Sartiaux's first proposal for the east. The architectural information preserved on the relief of Herakles and the centaurs (A5), especially the anathyrosis on the bed surface, the remains of the left partial régula (which marks the metope as c.0.83 m.), and the position of the pry for the right metope (which indicates a

7 Sartiaux restores the frieze course as 0.04 m. longer than the plane face of the epistyle, i.e., 13.93 m · rather than 13.89 m. (by his measurements). Markings on the upper surface of the epistyle blocks, however, prove that the frieze was aligned with the plane face of the epistyle. One could subtract 0.02 m. from each end and adjust some of Iiis restored measurements to create a system with the proper frieze length and correct triglyph length, but the fundamental problems still remain.

metope 0.855 m ·) do not allow for A5 to be placed in the central position in any plan. The wider the central intercolumniation, the worse off-axis it would be to the left. The spacing of the mutules over the southeast intercolumniation requires both metopes to be at least 0.80 m. and the triglyph to be 0.56 m., as opposed to Sartiaux's arrangement of 0.83 m., 0.48 m., and 0.70 m. At the northeast corner, the geison marks the first metope as roughly 0.80 m.; 0.64 m. is impossible.8 Both corner triglyphs are 0.52 m., not 0.56 m. On the west, Sartiaux's first proposal has certain attractions, for there are geison blocks (HG9/HG10) with a metope-space c.0.90 m. long that could accommodate the Triton relief (A3). The arrangement works with the anathyrosis and stain marks on the bed surfaces of the reliefs. There are two fundamental problems, however. Placing the sphinxes (Ai) next to the symposion (A4) creates a régula 0.607 m · long, and in any case the southwest corner block of the façade must complete the length of the frieze. In his second proposal, Sartiaux aligns the axis of the penultimate column of the façade with the outer face of the cella wall, satisfying at least that aspect of Doric design. On the east, however, the reconstructed geison blocks show that the southeast corner metope was 8 The combined length of via and mutule on the northwest corner block is 0.606 m. Adding a second via of between 0.16-0.22 m. would produce a metopespace of 0.766-0.826 m.

APPENDIX c.0.840 m., not 0.765 m.; the centaurs (A8/48) cannot fit there. Again for the west, the symposion (A4) cannot surmount the southwest corner, but perhaps most problematic is the fact that the scheme can only accommodate two reliefs, leaving unaccounted both sphinx reliefs (Αι, A2). Itier's reconstruction Sartiaux published another reconstruction of the façades proposed by P. J . Itier, based on the architectural principle of graduated intercolumniations and the design principle that the closed compositions of bulls and sphinxes framed the narrative scenes on each façade.9 On 9

Sartiaux 1915, pp. 115-17, figs. 50-3.

III

283

the east, sphinxes flank three blocks of centaurs, with A5 in the centre. On the west, the bulls flank the symposion and Triton reliefs. Sartiaux remarks on the degree to which this scheme causes the frieze to depart from the alignment of the colonnade, even with graduated intercolumniations, but acknowledges that lack of alignment may have been a real possibility (as we know it was for the southeast flank). More fundamental are the problems with the construction of the corners, with the placement of the fourth relief of centaurs {Ay), and with the assignment of the large-scale animal reliefs A i o and A13.

A P P E N D I X IV

Catalogue of Other Important Architectural Material from the Akropolis Several blocks scattered on the surface of the akropolis have features in common with material from the temple but do not appear to belong to the monument as we know it. Collectively, this material attests to significant additional building activity on the akropolis, for which we also have the rock-cut foundations north of the temple. Only blocks of unusual form or specific feature are included here. Many more remain, half buried and scattered down the slopes. Most of the blocks included here were found to the east of the temple, raising the possibility that at least some belong to a monumental altar. Although no remains of a foundation for an altar are visible today, the area has never been fully excavated and the Byzantine structure east of the temple may well rest on or have obliterated much of the original structure. The scale of the krepis blocks Βι, Β2, and possibly Β13, suggests a monumental structure, perhaps even with steps in the Ionian fashion.1 If so, we may need to rethink the function of the so-called anta capital B23, which could possibly form a crown or wall-base moulding. Several blocks, including B3, B4, B5, Β6, Bi8, and B21, have the same distinctive ornamental rustication found on the temple krepis and some of the wall blocks. They, too, were found chiefly to the east of the temple. Their technical features and other tooling match the blocks from the temple, but most of them cannot fit on it. The through blocks B3, B5, and B21 are similar in height and in clamping; they probably belong to the same course of the same monument. The upright block B4 may belong with this group, but it possibly could be a jamb from the temple. Fragmentary block Β18, a through block with linear rustication, could belong with this group, but it may also have a place on the temple. Several blocks included here ( B u , B15, B16, B17, B19, B22, and B29) may belong to the temple as entablature backers set behind the frieze or the upper part of the epistyle. We do not have secure evidence for the handling of that zone. It is possible that some of this material could be part of the temple wall, but none of these blocks is exactly like the material that clearly belongs to the wall. The blocks could also belong to an altar.

1 The size of such a structure could hardly equal the great monuments i.e. the Rhoikos Altar at Samos, the Altar of Poseidon at Monodendri, the Altar of Apollo at Cyrene, or that proposed for the Kroisos Temple at Sardis, but it could be similar in scale to, e.g., the Altar of Aphrodite at Naucratis (c.3.8om. χ 3.35m.), the Altar of Hera at Olympia (5.90m. χ 3.80m.), the Altar of Ge at Olympia (5.40m. χ . 5.40m.), the Altar of the Chians at Delphi (8.5m. χ 2.2m.), the stepped Altar at Delos (3.02m. χ 3.395m.), or the later stepped Altar of Zeus Agoraios in the Athenian Agora (8.76m. χ 5.43m.). For monumental stepped altars, Yavis 1949; Hoffmann 1953; Sahin 1972; Ohnesorg 2005b.

At least one block (B20) belonged to the original temple and was later reçut, but not to become part of the tympanon. Blocks B8 and Bio may be reworked as well. Other blocks with interesting features include a possible window frame (B9), door jamb (B4), two long, thin blocks that could be a thranos or wall crown (B12, B27), a block with lewis cutting (B14), and two stele bases (B25, B26). Βι

Corner krepis block (Fig. 97). Find-spot: East of the temple, south of the Byzantine structure in quadrant O/12. Dimensions: H: 0.285 m · L: 2465 m. W: 0.846 m.

One corner broken. The block is finely worked on the top surface and two adjacent vertical faces. The bed surface has anathyrosis; the inner long face is roughly worked. The one lateral joint (now worn) has a corner cut out, and while the cutting is not worked to a fine finish, it appears to be more than a break. The block has similar characteristics to blocks of the first step from the temple (i.e., height of 0.285 m-> projecting boss on the face, and a pry mark on the lateral joint face ), but it does not fit the one remaining position in that course, which is no longer than 1.765 m. and no wider than 0.79 m. The block is too narrow to belong to the stylobate of the temple and too wide to be a through block from the cella wall. It must belong to another substantial structure that once stood east of the temple. The top surface has two large, shallow sockets, set c.1.17 m. apart on centres, whose function is not immediately apparent. The two pry marks on the top surface, indicate that a long narrow blocks, c.1.525 m. rested on top of this block. B2

Corner krepis block (Fig. 98). Find-spot: East of the temple, south of the Byzantine structure in quadrant O/12. Dimensions: H: 0.42/0.38 m. L: 1.46 m. W: 1.004/0.76 m.

Complete. Corner through block with lifting boss on longer face; short end has pry hold cut in bed. The lateral joint face has anathyrosis and two pry marks cut near the top of the face; the back face has been cut on a broken diagonal to the main face. The bed surface is worked roughly at an angle, so that the block tapers from one side to the other, suggesting that it was bedded on irregular ground (compare to a similar treatment of B 3 ). The upper surface is worked to an even finish, but is not as smooth as the finished surfaces; it has no features. The system of pry marks and the lifting boss match features found on the temple, but this block does not belong. B3

Corner through block with ornamental rustication (Fig. 99). Find-spot: East of the temple, P/12; south of the Byzantine structure in quadrant O/12.

A P P E N D I X III Dimensions: H: c.o.347 _ 0 4 0 5 1.075 m.

m·

L: 1.021/1.055 m. W: 0.99/

Complete. Two of the vertical faces are decorated with ornamental rustication formed by a pattern of raised ridges and rough depressions. The other two sides have been dressed down to join with blocks c.0.48 m. and 0.705 m. thick. On side A, the adjacent block is fastened by a hook clamp, but near side Β there is only the round socket for a dowel to secure the superimposed course. The upper surface of B3 is smoothly dressed to a depth of c.0.45 m. by c.0.70 m. to carry the next course. The markings on the block suggest a toichobate with orthostates, but not for the temple. The height and technical treatment of the block is close to Β 5 and B21; all probably belong to the same course of the same monument. B4

Large ashlar block with ornamental rustication; jamb? (Fig. 100). Find-spot: North of the temple near the windmill, Μ/11. D i m e n s i o n s : 1.945 m. χ 0.626 m. χ 0.314 m.

Complete. One of the large faces has ornamental rustication; the opposite side is roughly finished and at one end is dressed down twice. The long narrow sides are very smoothly worked. One bears an irregular dowel cutting, the other side is rough along one edge. The consistency of the surface suggests that it may have been partly worked to this finish. One small side has four pry marks cut parallel to the large face. The function of the block is unclear. The ornamental rustication must decorate a vertical face, and the fine treatment of the long narrow sides suggests that they, too, were exposed. The block is approximately the same thickness as the under-threshold. Possibly it formed part of a jamb. In itself, it is not tall enough to complete the door jamb. Β5

Ashlar through block with ornamental rustication (Fig. 99). Find-spot: East of the temple, P/12; south of the Byzantine building in quadrant 0/12. D i m e n s i o n s : H : 0.378 m. L: 0.981 m. W : 0.71/0.68 m.

Complete. A through block, but too wide for the cella wall of the temple. The face was dressed with linear ornamental rustication. The bed surface and back face are roughly worked. Each lateral joint face has anathyrosis and was attached to the adjacent block with a hook clamp. A pry mark on one of the short vertical faces indicates that the block was set into position by the same setting method used for the first step course of the temple. The upper surface has been smoothly dressed and bears several sets of pry marks which indicate that the blocks of the next course were shifted in at least two directions. The left side of Β 5 may join the right side of B21. The approximate size of the blocks in the next course, as indicated by the pry marks, is c.0.45 m. The height of the block is close to Β3 and B21; all probably belong to the same course of the same monument. B6

Small fragment with ornamental rustication. Find-spot: Southeast of the temple, O/11. D i m e n s i o n s : > 0.41 m. χ >0.405 m. W : >0.25 m.

Broken on all sides. The fragment has a face dressed to two surfaces: ornamental rustication, with a band (presumably above) dressed down 0.008m. to a smooth surface. B7

Ashlar block. Find-spot: East of the temple. Dimensions: H: 0.37 m. L: 0.69 m. W: 0.82 m.

Complete. A through block with three pry marks on the upper surface, suggesting a toichobate surmounted by orthostates. The position of the pry marks (i.e., perpendicular to the length) identify the length of the block as 0.69 m. The width of the block, 0.82 m., makes it too wide for

285

the wall of the temple, and it does not belong to the corner of the intersection of the door wall. Compare height to blocks Β 5 and B21. B8

Reworked block? (Fig. 101). Find-spot: East of temple, O-P/12. Dimensions: 0.53 m. x (o .29 m. on one side, 0.348 m. on the other) χ > 0.88 m.

Broken at both ends. The narrow sides of the block are both smoothly worked, and each bears a rectangular cutting similar in size and position to the lifting sockets on the tympanon blocks. One socket, however, cuts through the side of the block and could not, in its current position, have been very useful. One surface, presumably the back, is dressed to two different levels, but both are roughly worked. On the dresseddown surface, a shallow socket ending in the break may be a vestige from the original function of the block. The opposite face has no features; its surface is roughly worked. B9 Ashlar block; part of a window sill or jamb? (Fig. 101). Find-spot: Partly buried west of temple; M/8. D i m e n s i o n s : 0.867 m. χ 0.514 m. χ 0.24 m.

Complete. The main face is very smoothly worked; it bears two dowel holes, c.o.03 m. square, one of which preserves the lead casing. Both of the long sides are cut at slightly less than a 900 angle to this main face; one is very smoothly worked and the other is rough. One short end clearly has anathyrosis; the other is rough, with no preserved evidence of anathyrosis. The back face is worked to two different surfaces, both rough, and bears two small dowel holes, one rounded, one more rectangular, and both c.o.02 m. in greatest dimension. The dowel holes in the main face are centred longitudinally and look like dowels for a metal grill. The block could belong to a window jamb or sill. If it belonged to the temple, it would have to be completed by an additional narrow block, which seems unlikely. Bio

Thin block with bevelled edge; possibly reçut? Find-spot: Lying on the temple, N/10. D i m e n s i o n s : 0.515 χ 0.15 χ >0.52 m.

Broken on both sides. The preserved dimensions are consistent with the paving stones, but there are cuttings on what would be the top and bed surfaces. One face has the remains of a shallow dowel hole; the other face has a very finely worked bevelled portion, and a less wellworked horizontal area, but the rest of this surface has a slightly raised, undressed surface. The bevelled edge could be related to the tympanon, but the slope of 15.60 is too steep. B11

Ashlar block; entablature backer? Find-spot: East of temple. D i m e n s i o n s : H : 0.273 m. L: >1.09 m. W: 0.488 m .

Broken at one end. The top and bed surfaces have anathyrosis. One pry cutting on top surface. The preserved short end is cut at an angle and has a shift-hole cut in the bed similar to those found on blocks from the temple. One vertical face is very smoothly worked, while the other remains quarry-dressed, with long, linear groves left by the pick. The block has the dimensions and workmanship to belong to the temple as the third backing course for the entablature (i.e., behind the lower part of the triglyph). Compare to Β15. Β12

Ashlar block. Find-spot: South of temple. D i m e n s i o n s : 0.297 m. x 1.356 m. χ 0.182 m.

Complete. The block is very thin for its length, but not wide enough to be a paving stone. Possibly thranos or epikranitis? Compare to block B27.

28ο B13

A P P E N D I X III Fragment of a large through block; krepis? Find-spot: East of temple, O/14. Dimensions: H: 0.35 m. L: >1.23 m. W: >1.13 m.

Broken to side and back. Part of the front and the left joint faces survive. The fragment originally must have belonged to a large block. Compare height to blocks Β3 and B5. Β14

Block with lewis cutting (Fig. 101). Find-spot: West of the temple, M-N/6. Dimensions: H: 0.38 m. L: 1.05 m. bottom W: 0.388 m. top W: 0.418 m.

Complete. Trapezoidal-shaped block with smooth surfaces on all sides but the top, which is rough and retains the quarry marks of the pick and also the splitting wedges. The top surface has a lewis cutting. No other block from the temple or found on the akropolis has a lewis cutting, although there are examples in the lower city; see Clark, Bacon, and Koldewey 1902-21, p. 57 (bouleuterion); p. 63, fig. 9 (west agora gateway); p. 91, fig. 2, p. 95 ('bazaar'); p. 275 (column tomb no. XXI). The smooth surfaces are not as finely worked as material from the temple. The block does not belong to the temple, and its function is not readily apparent. B15

Ashlar block; entablature backer? Find-spot: North of the temple in the windmill, M/10-11. Dimensions: H: 0.28 m. L: >1.28 m. W: 0.495 m ·

Broken at one end. Top surface has anathyrosis and five pry marks clustered in two groups, c.0.50 m. apart. The bed surface and one vertical face are smoothly worked; the other vertical face is rough and broken. A cutting c.0.14 m. wide encircling the block was probably made when the block served in the windmill. The block has the dimensions and workmanship to belong to the temple as the third backing course for the entablature (i.e., behind the lower part of the triglyph). Compare with B11. The numerous pry marks suggest it supported a course of much smaller blocks. Β16

Ashlar block; entablature backer? (Fig. 100). Find-spot: East of the temple, P/13. Dimensions: H: 0.461 m. L: 1.292 m. W: 0.355

m-

Complete. Surfaces smooth but not to the finest finish. Two pry marks on top surface. The dimensions would suit an entablature backer, but the finish is not to the same level as other blocks assigned to this position. B17

Ashlar block. Find-spot: East of temple, P/13. Dimensions: H: 0.586 m. L: 1.647 m. W: c.0.36 m.

Complete. Front face bears a very fine finish; bottom surface and sides have anathyrosis. Top face bears three pry marks at irregular intervals (0.79 m. and 0.39 m. apart), as well as a very small hole near one end, possibly for a clamp. The back surface is extremely rough and irregular. Given the fine finish of the face, this block could belong to a backing course of the entablature, but it is taller than the blocks currently assigned to those courses. B18

Ashlar through block with ornamental rustication (Fig. 99). Find-spot: East of temple. Dimensions: H: 0.285 m - L ; >1.215 m · W: 0498 m.

Broken at both ends. Linear rustication pattern on vertical face. Back face is rough and possibly broken. Bed surface has anathyrosis. In current condition, the block is too narrow to belong to the wall of the temple. Compare to blocks B3-B5, although it is neither as tall nor as wide. B19

Ashlar block; entablature backer? Find-spot: North of temple in the windmill. Dimensions: H: 0.441 m. L: 1.315 m. W: 0.365 m.

Complete. The ends, bed, and top surface have anathyrosis. Three pries on the top surface. A cutting c.0.12 m. wide encircling the block was probably made when the block was used in the windmill. The block has the dimensions and workmanship to belong to the temple as the top backing course for the entablature, but the assignment is not certain. B20

Reçut geison block (Fig. 98). Find-spot: South of SW corner of the temple; O/8. Dimensions: H: 0.348 m. L: 0.990 m. W: 0.852 m.

Complete, although severely worn along one edge. Geison block from the original construction of the temple, re-cut for uncertain secondary purpose. The block bears vestigial traces of the original mutules, lifting sockets, and clamp cuttings. To judge from the shallowness of the lifting sockets, the position of the clamp holes and the treatment of the lateral faces, both original lateral faces have been trimmed (the left by c.o.ii m., and the right by c.0.07 m.). The size and spacing of the mutules suggests that the block originally belonged to one of the façades. Neither original mutule (even compensating for the amount that has been trimmed) equals a full triglyph-mutule, which suggests that the block was divided through the triglyph-mutule, as the original southern geison blocks demonstrate. However, the block does not cover an entire half-intercolumniation. Instead, it ends with the metope-mutule. The hybrid manner of division as well as the wide metope-space indicated (c.0.88 m.) suggests that the block belonged near one of the corners. The pry marks set perpendicular to the original geison face are in about the same position as the pries on the replacement horizontal geison used to shift the tympanon into position. The two pry marks set parallel to the face are c.0.61-0.63 m. from what would have been the face of original corona. There are no pry marks in this position on the replacement horizontal geison. These pry marks could relate to the later use of the block. Alternatively, they were used to set a thin tympanon block (similar to Τρίο) from the back. To reuse the block, masons trimmed off the corona, cut down the bed and top surface, and trimmed both sides. B21

Ashlar through block with ornamental rustication (Fig. 99). Find-spot: East of temple, M/13. Dimensions: H: 0.39 m. L: 0.945 m - W: 0.582 m.

Complete. Similar in treatment and technique to blocks from the temple, but too narrow to belong to the wall of the temple. The vertical face bears incised, linear rustication pattern similar to that on block Β5, which may join on the right. The back and bed surfaces are roughly worked. The smooth top surface has clamp cuttings at both ends to secure the adjacent lateral blocks. Blocks B3, Β5, and B21 probably belong to the same course of the same monument. B22

Ashlar block. Frieze backer? (Fig. 100). Find-spot: Q/9-10 (partially buried). Dimensions: H: 0.355 m · L ; 1-192 m. W: > 0.45 m.

Complete. Block with two pries cut in the top surface, c.0.67 m. apart. B23

Block with kyma reversa moulding; identified as an anta capital by the original excavators (PI. 61; Fig. 49). Find-spot: Near northeast corner of temple, M/11. Dimensions: H: 0.26 m.

Corner fragment preserving splayed fascia and cyma reversa moulding, identified by Clarke as the anta capital of the temple. As preserved there are no features on the top or bed surfaces. The block does not necessarily belong to the temple. Other possible functions include wall base or crown, or possible corner of a raking sima. For discussion, see Chapter 4, 'Description and Reconstruction of the Original Building', pp. 91-2.

A P P E N D I X III B24

B27

Fragment of hawksbeak moulding (Fig. 53). Find-spot: West of temple. Dimensions: >0.075 m - x >0-087 m · x >0-082 m.

B28

Ashlar block. Find-spot: Inside Byzantine structure northwest of the temple, K/ 7 . Dimensions: 0.33 m. χ 0.41 m. χ >0.785 m.

Stele base. Find-spot: Southeast of temple, O/12. Dimensions: H: 0.32 m. L: 0.804 m. W: 0.505m.

Broken at one end. Remains of a channel c.0.06 m. wide and 0.043 deep runs along one face.

Complete. Block supported a ste'e set in a socket c.0.60 m. long, 0.17 m. wide, and 0.125 m · deep, open on one side. Possibly the base was completed by a second block, or it was set against another structure that helped to secure the stele. B26

Ashlar block. Find-spot: West of temple in Byzantine wall. Dimensions: 0.30 m. x 1.35 m. χ 0.17 m.

Complete. The block is very thin for its length, but not wide enough to be a paving stone. Possibly thranos or epikranitis? Compare to Β12.

Small section of crowning hawksbeak carved in tuff, with the remains of a nail hole in the break. Presumably the piece served as a patch and was held in place by the nail. The upper section of the hawksbeak profile is especially well preserved. The flat top surface indicates the piece belongs to the horizontal or raking geison. B25

287

B29

Ashlar block. Find-spot: South of temple, S/io. Dimensions: H: 0.427 m. L: 0.891 m. W : 0.363 m.

Complete. The block has a shift-hole on its bed surface like those found on the temple. Possibly an entablature backer or wall block.

Stele base. Find-spot: Byzantine wall south of the temple, O/io Dimensions: H: ? L: 0.70 m. W: 0.33 m.

B30

Ashlar block. Find-spot: Southeast of the temple, Q/14. Dimensions: 0.505 m. χ 1.314 m. χ 0.333 m · Complete. Possibly an entablature backer or wall block.

Inbedded in Byzantine wall. The stele was set in a cutting 0.45 m. long by 0.17 m. wide. B1

.34

-+-.17-

1—.16-4-

r

r1

?r J 0

.846

ίν

Τ

.245

1 i l -I

.675-

J J

2.465

Η—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—I—I .5 1 1.5 2 FIGURE 97. Block B i , found east of the temple.

I 1—ι—ι—Η—ι 2.5 3m

ύ

>

il

'-s)

28ο

A P P E N D I X III

IlHllliill

0

ι—ι—ι—ι—+—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—I—I—I—I—I—I—I

.5

1

1.5

2

1

2.5

1—1—I—ι

1

3m

FIGURE 98. Block B2 (above), found east of the temple. B20 (below), originally belonging to the geison but reçut for a different purpose.

APPENDIX

IV

2 .405-

-Τ—τ-·

( \

α

f

Γ

ì

} )

! 1

ν

'>

' - -

. Λ

imi

-

ν',.νν,'ΛΠ Pi V i V 1 · I

. ' . ι' > , ι ι V

: , IJ I I I H I V ) „•'

ft

ç

>*

.285

.369 X · '·

B18

!

X j J v j

B21

B5 - W

.680

Η

h

t

-\—ι—ι—t—h

H—I

1—I

1.5

1—h

H—I—I—I—I—I

2.5

FIGURE 99. Rusticated blocks B3, Β18, B U , Β 5, found east of the temple.

3m

APPENDIX

290

IV

.330

ψ.

'·

,

'

' ' "'ν

- ·

1: 1.

• . '

· ;

-

·•"

• · '

"r

... ' V.

».

' ;

Λ

.622

•

· Ι · 1 ' • Ίt •. I

B4

.·

.'

-

• X '

r.·

. •

•

;

.626

t.

· ·

.26

r

u

f—,.

^ ··—---. — _

-1.292-

.461

B22

B16

m—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι

0

.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3m

FIGURE 100. Block Β4 (above), possibly a door jamb. Block B22 (lower left) and block Β i6 (lower right), found east of the temple

A P P E N D I X III

291

.418

wm—I—ι—ι—ι—ι—ι—I—ι

0

.5

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1.5

1

1

1

.388

1

1

2

1—I

1—I—I

2.5

1

1

1

1—I

3m

FIGURE IOI. Block B8 (above), possibly reworked. Block B9 (middle), part of a window frame? Block Β14 (below) with lewis cutting, found on the akropolis but not belonging to the temple.

WORKS CITED Adam, S. 1966. The Technique of Greek Sculpture, Oxford. Adkins, A . W. H. 1963. ' "Friendship" and "Self-Sufficiency" in Homer and Aristotle', Classical Quarterly ns. 13, pp. 30-45. Ahlberg-Cornell, G. 1984. Herakles and the Sea-Monster in Attic Black-Figure Vase Painting, Swedish Institute in Athens, series 4, vol. 33, Stockholm. . 1992. Myth and Epos in Early Greek Art; Representation

and

Interpretation, Jonsered.

Arapogianni, X. 2002. 'The Doric Temple of Athena at Prasidaki', in Excavating Classical Culture, ed. M. Stamatopoulou and M. Yeroulanou, Oxford, pp. 225-8. Auberson, P. 1968. Eretria; fouilles et recherches, I, Temple Daphnéphoros; architecture, Bern.

d'Apollon

Audiat, J. 1933. FdD II.6. Le Trésor des Athéniens, Paris.

Akerström, A. 1966. Die architektonischen Terrakotten Swedish Institute in Athens, series 4, vol. i r , Lund.

Kleinasiens,

. 1978. 'The Figured Architectural Terracotta Frieze: Its Penetration and Transformation in the East and in the West in the Archaic Period', in The Proceedings of the Xth International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Ankara-Izmir 1973, Ankara, vol. 1, pp. 319-27. . 1981. 'Etruscan tomb painting, an art of many faces', OpRom 13» PP· 7-34-

Akurgal, E. 1961. Die Kunst Anatoliens, Berlin. . 1962. 'The early period and the golden age of Ionia', A]A 66, pp. 369-79. . 1965. 'Zwei archaische Bildwerke aus Kyzikos', AntK 8, pp. 99-103. . 1976. 'Fragments de figurines en terre cuite de style phrygien récent', RA, pp. 195-204. . 1983. Alt-Smyrna, vol. I, Ankara. Akurgal, M. 2007. 'Hellenic Architecture in Smyrna, 650-546 B.C.', in Frühes Ionien; Eine Bestandsaufnahme. Panionion-Symposion Gûzelçamli, 26. September-i. Oktober 1999, ed. J. Cobet, V. von Graeve, W.-D. Niemeier, and Κ. Zimmermann, Mainz, pp. 125-36. Allen, S. H. 2002. ' "Americans in the East": Francis Henry Bacon, Joseph Thacher Clarke, and the AIA's Investigations at Assos', in Excavating our Past. Perspectives on the History of the Archaeological Institute of America, ed. S. H. Allen, Boston, pp. 63-92. Altekamp, S. 1991. Zu griechischer Architekturornamentik im sechsten und fünften Jahrhundert v. Chr.: exemplarische archäologische Auswertung der nicht-dorischen Blattornamentik. Europäische Hochschulschriften, vol. 37, Mainz. Amandry, P. 1952. 'Observations sur les monuments de l'Héraion d'Argos', Hesperia 21, pp. 222-74. . 1953. FdD II.8. La Colonne

des naxiens et le Portique

athéniens, Paris. . 1977. 'Statue de taureau en argent', Etudes delphiques.

des

Bakir, T. 1974. Der Kolonettenkrater 625 und 550 v. Chr., Würzburg. Bammer, A. Cologne.

1985. Architektur

Keramikforschun-

in Korinth und Attika

und

Gesellschaft

zwischen

in der

Antike,

Bancroft, S. 1979. 'Problems concerning the Archaic Acropolis at Athens' (diss. Princeton). Bankel, H. 1991. 'Ein griechischer Dachstuhl aus H o l z und Stein', in Bautechnik der Antike. Diskussionen zur archäologischen Bauforschung 5, ed. A. Hoffmann, E.-L. Schwandner, W. Hoepfner, and G. Brands, Mainz, pp. 14-16. . 1993. Der spätarchaische Tempel der Aphaia auf Aegina. mäler antiker Architektur 19, Berlin.

Denk-

. 2004. 'Farbmodelle des spätarchaischen Aphaia-Tempels von Agina', in Bunte Götter. Die Farbigkeit antiker Skulptur, Munich, pp. 70-83. Banti, L. 1966. 'Eracle e Pholos in Etruria', StEtr 34, pp. 371-9. Barletta, Β. 1983. Ionic Influence in Archaic Sicily: The Monumental Art, Gothenburg. . 1990. ' A n "Ionian Sea" Style in Archaic Doric Architecture', AJA 94, pp. 45-72. . 2000. 'Ionic Influence in Western Greek Architecture: Towards a Definition and Explanation', in Die Ägäis und das westliche Mittelmeer; Beziehungen und Wechselwirkungen 8. bis y Jh. v. Chr. Akten des Symposions, Wien, 24. bis 2j März 1999, ed. F. Krinzinger, Vienna, pp. 203-16. .

2001.

The

Origins

of

the

Greek

Architectural

Orders,

Cambridge. . 2005. 'The Architecture

and Architects of

Parthenon', in The Parthenon from Antiquity J. Neils, N e w York.

the

Classical

to the Present, ed.

Barnett, R. D. 1957. Ά Syrian Silver Vase', Syria 34, pp. 243-8.

105,

2nd edn, London. Barr, A . 1996. 'Horse and rider plaques at Ilion. A preliminary study of the hellenistic hero cult in Asia Minor', Studia Troica 6, pp. 133—57.

. 197 5. A Catalogue of the Nimrud Ivories in the British Museum,

delphique,

1970-1981',

BCH

. 1984. 'Notes de topographie et d'architecture delphiques', BCH 108, pp. 177-98. A m y x , D. 1961. 'The Medallion Painter', AJA 65, pp. 1-15. Anderson, J. Κ. 1961. Ancient Greek Horsemanship, Andrén, A . 1940. Architectural Temples, Leipzig.

Aupert, P. 1979. FdD II.14. Le Stade, Paris. Bakir, G. 1981. Sophilos. Ein Beitrag zu seinem Stil, gen IV, Mainz.

BCH

Supplément IV, Paris, pp. 272-93. . 1981. 'Chronique pp.673-769.

Andronicos, M. 1984. Vergina: The Royal Tombs and the Ancient City, Athens.

Berkeley.

Terracottas from

Etrusco-Italic

Barrett A . and M. Vickers. 1978. 'The Oxford Brygos C u p Reconsidered,' JHS 98, pp. 17-24. Barringer, J. M. 1995. Divine Escorts; Nereids in Archaic and Classical Greek Art, Ann Arbor. . 2001. The Hunt in Ancient Greece, Baltimore.

294

WORKS

Barringer, J. M. 2004. 'Skythian Hunters on Attic Vases', in Greek Vases: Images, Contexts, and Controversies, ed. C. Marconi, Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition, vol. 25, Leiden. . 2005. 'The Temple of Zeus at Olympia; heroes and Athletes', Hesperia 74, pp. 211-41. . 2008. Art, Myth, and Ritual in Classical Greece, N e w York. Ba§aran, S. 2000. 'Aeolische Kapitelle aus Ainos (Enez)', IstMitt 50, pp. 157-70. Baughan E. 2006. 'The Image of the Reclining Banqueter in the Archaic Sculpture of Ionia', AIA Abstracts, Montreal, http://www. archaeological.org/webinfo.php ?page= 10248&searchtype=abstract& ytable=20o6&sessionid=2H&paperid=696 (accessed 10 December 2010). Baur, P. V. C. 1912. Centaurs in Ancient Art, Berlin. Bayne, N. 2000. The Grey Wares of North-West Anatolia, AMS 37, Bonn. Beazley, J. D. 1950. 'Some Inscriptions on Vases: V', AJA 54, pp. 310-22. . 1986. The Development of Attic Black-Figure, rev. edn, Berkeley. Benndorf. Ο. 1873. Die Metopen von Selinunt, Berlin. Benson, J. 1967. 'The Central Group of the Corfu Pediment', in Gestalt und Geschichte; Festschrift Karl Schefold zu seinem 60. Geburtstag am 26. Januar 1965, AntK Beiheft 4, ed. M. Rohde-Liegle, H. A. Cahn and H. C. Ackermann, Bern, pp. 48-60. . 1989. Earlier Corinthian Workshops, Allard Pierson series, Scripta Minora 1, Amsterdam. . 1995. 'Human Figures and Narrative in Later Protocorinthian Vase Painting', Hesperia 64, pp. 163-77. Bérard, C., C. Bron, J.-L. Durand, F. Frontisi-Ducroux, F. Lissarrague, A . Schnapp, and J.-P. Vernant. 1989. A City of Images: Iconography and Society in Ancient Greece, trans. Deborah Lyons, Princeton. Bergquist, Β. 1990· 'Sympotic Space', in Sympotica; A Symposium on the Symposion, ed. Ο . Murray, Oxford, pp. 37-65. Bernabò Brea, L. 1949-51. 'L'Athenaion di Gela e le sue terrecotte architettoniche', ASAtene ns. 11-13, pp. 12-19. . 1986. Il tempio di Afrodite di Akrai, Cahiers du Centre Jean Bérard 10, Naples. Bessac, J.-C. 1986. L'outillage traditionnel du tailleur de pierre de l'Antiquité à nos jours, Paris. . 1988. 'Problems of identification and interpretation of tool marks on ancient marbles and decorative stones', in Herz and Waelkins 1988, pp. 41-53. Betancourt, P. P. 1977. The Aeolic Style in Architecture, Princeton. Bevan, E. 1986. Representations of Animals in Sanctuaries of Artemis and Other Olympian Deities, Oxford. Beyer, I. 1974. 'Die Reliefgiebel des alten Athena-Tempels der Akropolis', AA, pp. 639-51. . 1976. Die Tempel von Dreros und Prinias A und die Chronologie der kretischen Kunst des 8. und 7. Jhs. V. Chr., Freiburg. . 1977. 'Die Datierung der grossen Reliefgiebel des alten Athenatempels der Akropolis', AA, pp. 44-74. Bischop. D. 2006. 'Gefässe aus Metall', Ausgrabungen in .Assos 1993, AMS 57, pp. 215-26. Blake, M. 1930. 'The Pavements of the Roman Buildings of the Republic and Early Empire', Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 8, pp. 7-159.

CITED Blatt, FI., R. Tracy, and B. Owens. 2006. Petrology: Igneous, Sedimentary and Metamorphic, 3rd edn, N e w York. Blatter, R. 1983. 'Adrastos als Friedensstifter', AA, pp. 17-22. Blech, M. 1982. Studien zum Kranz bei den Griechen, Berlin. Biegen, C . W., J. L. Caskey, M. Rawson, and J. Sperling. 1950. Troy I, General Introduction: The First and Second Settlements, Princeton. Blome, P. 1982, Die figürliche Bildwelt Kretas in der geometrischen und früh archaisch en Periode, Mainz. Blümel, C. 1963. Die archaisch griechischen Skulpturen der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, Berlin. Boardman, J. 1959. 'Chian and Early Ionic Architecture', Antiquaries Journal 39, pp.170-218. . 1967. Chios: Greek Emporio. BSA Supplementary Papers 6, London. . 1968. Archaic Greek Gems, London. . 1970. Greek Gems and Finger Rings, London. . 1972. 'Herakles, Peisistratos and Sons', RA, pp. 57-72. . 1974. Attic Black Figure Vases: A Handbook, London. . 1975. Athenian Red Figure Vases, the Archaic Period: A Handbook, London. . 1975b. 'Herakles, Peisistratos and Eleusis', JHS 95, pp. 1-12. . 1976a. Ά Curious Eye Cup', A A , pp. 281-90. . 1976b. 'The Kleophrades Painter at Troy', AntK 19, pp. 3-18. . 1978. Greek Sculpture of the Archaic Period, London. . 1979a. 'The Karchesion of Herakles', JHS 99, pp. 149-51. . 1979b. Ά Symposium in Aberdeen', in Studies in honour of Arthur Dale Trendall, Sydney, pp. 3 5-7. . 1981. 'No, N o , Nausicaa \ Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 39, p. 38. . 1984. 'Signa tabulae priscae artis', JHS 104, pp. 161-3. . 1985. Greek Sculpture. The Classical Period, London. . 1985b. Rev. of F. Brommer, Odysseus. Die Taten und Leiden des Helden in antiker kunst und Literatur, in Classical Review ns. 35, p. 208 . 1989. 'Herakles at Sea', in Festschrift für Nikolaus Himmelmann, ed. H.-U. Cain, Η. Gabelmann, and D. Salzmann, Mainz, pp. 191-5. . 1990a. 'Symposion Furniture', in Sympotica; A Symposium on the Symposion, ed. O. Murray, Oxford, pp. 122-31. . 1990b. 'The Greek Art of Narrative', in Eumousia; Ceramic and Iconographie Studies in honour of Alexander Cambitoglou, ed. J.-P. Descoeudres, Sydney, pp. 57-62. . 1998. Early Greek Vase Painting, London. . 2000. Persia and the West: An Archaeological Investigation of the Genesis of Achaemenid Art, London. Boersma, J. S. 1970. Athenian Building Policy from 56 i/o to 405/4 BC, Groningen. Bohn, R. and C. Schuchhardt. 1889. Altertümer von Aegae, Berlin. Bol, P. 1978. Grossplastik aus Bronze in Olympia. OlForsch IX, Berlin. . 1989. Argivische Schilde. OlForsch XVII, Berlin. Börner, F. 1974. 'Der Kampf der Stiere', Gymnasium 81, pp. 503-13. Bond, G. 1981. Euripides: Herakles; with introduction and commentary, Oxford. Bonfante, L. 1975. Etruscan Dress, Baltimore. Bookidis, N . 1967. Ά Study of the Use and Geogi'aphic Distribution of Architectural Sculpture in the Archaic Period' (diss. Bryn Mawr College).

319 W O R K S . 1990. 'Ritual Dining in the Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at Corinth: Some Questions', in Sympotica; A Symposium on the Symposion, ed. Ο . Murray, Oxford, pp. 86-94. Bookidis, N . and R. Stroud. 1997. Corinth 18.3. The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore: Topography and Architecture, Princeton. Borchhardt, J. and E. Bleibtreu. 2008. 'Wildschweinjagd zwischen Ost und West', in Vom Euphrat bis zum Bosporus. Kleinasien in der Antike. Festschrift für Elmar Schwertheim zum 6y Geburtstag, ed. E. Winter et al., AMS 65, Bonn, pp. 61-101. Borrel, B. and D. Rittig. 1998. OlForsch X X V I . Orientalische griechische Bronzereleifs aus Olympia. Der Fundkomplex Brunnen 77, Berlin.

und aus

Brouskari, M. S. 1974. The Acropolis Museum: A Descriptive logue, Athens.

Cata-

Brown, W. L. i960. Etruscan Lion, Oxford. Buchholz, H . - G . 1993. 'Kämpfende Stiere', in Aspects of Art and Iconography: Anatolia and Its Neighbors. Studies in Honour of Nimet Özgüc, ed. M. J. Mellink, E. Porada, and T. Ö z g ü c , Ankara, pp. 91-106. Budde, L. 1963. Eine Tierkampf group e aus Sinope. Antike Plastik 2, Berlin. Bühler, W. i960. Die Europa des Moschos. Hermes Einzelschriften no. 13, Wiesbaden. . 1968. Europa; ein Uberblick über die Zeugnisse des Mythos in

Bothmer D. von. 1957. Amazons in Greek Art, Oxford.

der antiken Literatur und Kunst, Munich.

. 1984. Ά Greek and Roman Treasury', B M M A 42, pp. 5-72. . 1986. Observation on proto-volute kraters', in Corinthiaca: Studies in Honor of Darreil A. Amyx, ed. M. del Chiaro, Columbia, Mo., pp. 107-16. . 1987. Greek Vase Painting, Metropolitan Museum of Art, N e w York. Bovon, A . 1963. La representation des guerriers perses et la notion de barbare dans la 1ère moité du Ve siècle', BCH 87, pp. 579-602. Brendel, Ο . 1978. Etruscan Art, Harmondsworth. Briggs, W. 1980. Narrative and Simile from the Georgics in the Aeneid, Leiden. Brijder, H. A . G . 1983. Siana Cups I and Komast Cups, Amsterdam. Brinkmann, V. 1985. 'Die aufgemalten Namensbeischriften an N o r d - und Ostfries des Siphnierschatzhauses', BCH 109, pp. 77-130. . 1994. Beobachtung zum formalen Aufbau und zum Sinngehalt der Friese des Siphnierschatzhauses,

CITED

Munich.

Bundgaard, J. 1974. Excavation of the Athenian Akropolis Copenhagen.

1882-1890,

. 1976. Parthenon and the Mycenaean City on the Heights, C o p enhagen. Burford, A . 1969. Greek Temple Builders at Epidauros, Toronto. Burgess, J. 2005. 'Tumuli of Achilles' in The Homerizon: Conceptual interrogations in Homeric Studies, June 27-July 1, 2005, online: http://chs.harvard.edu/wa/pageR?tn=ArticleWrapper&bdc= 12& m n = i 8 2 o (accessed 10 December 2010). . 2009. The Death and Afterlife of Achilles, Baltimore. Burkert, W. 1991. 'Oriental Symposia. Contrasts and Parallels', in Dining in a Classical Context, ed. W. Slater, Ann Arbor, pp. 7-24. Buschor, E. 1922a. 'Burglöwen', AM 47, pp. 92-106. . 1922b. 'Der Dreileibige', AM 47, pp. 53-60. . 1924. Grössenverhältnisse attischer Porosgiebel: zum fünfzigjährigen Bestehen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Athen, Athens.

Brinkmann, V. ed. 2004. Bunte Götter: die Farbigkeit antiker Skulptur, Munich.

. 1929. Die Tondächer der Akropolis. Simen, Berlin.

Brize, P. 1980. Die Geryoneis des Stesichoros und die frühe griechische Kunst. Beiträge zur Archäologie no. 12, Würzburg.

. 1933a. 'Heraion von Samos: Porosfriese', AM 58, pp. 1-21.

. 1985. 'Samos und Stesichoros. Zu einem früharchaischen Bronzeblech', AM 100, pp. 53-90. Brockmann, A. D. 1968. Die griechische Ante: Eine Untersuchung, Marburg.

Typologische

Brommer, F. 1977. Der Parthenonfries, Mainz. . 1978. Hephaistos.

Der Schmiedegott

in der antiken

Kunst,

Mainz. . 1980. 'Theseus and Nausicaa',/o«??M/ of the Walters Art Gallery

. 1930. 'LIeraion von Samos, frühe Bauten', AM 55, pp. 1-99. . 1933b. 'Altsamische Grabstelen', AM 58, pp. 22-46. . 1941. 'Meermänner', SBMünchen 2, pp. 3-43. . 1957. 'Altsamischer Bauschmuck', AM 72, pp. 1-34. Buschor E. and W. von Massow. 1927. 'Vom Amyklaion', AM 52, pp. 1-85. Büsing, H. 2006. 'Ionische Kapitelle aus dem archaischen Panionion', in Maiandros. Festschrift für Volkmar von Graeve, ed. R. Biering, V. Brinkmann, U. Schlotzauer, and B. F. Weber, Munich, pp. 55-60. . 2007. 'Forschungen und Ausgrabungen in der Mykale 20012006. Die Architekturglieder des Tempels', IstMitt 57, pp. 157-67.

38, pp. 109-12. . 1983a. 'Herakles und Nereus', in Image et céramique grecque.

Büsing-Kolbe, A . 1978. 'Frühe griechische Türen', Jdl 93, pp. 66-174.

Actes du Collogue de Rouen 25-26 novembre 1982, ed. F. Lissarrague and F. Thelamon, Rouen, pp. 103-9.

Callipolitis-Feytmans, D. 1974. Les Plats attiques à figures noires, Paris.

. 1983b. Odysseus, Die Taten und Leiden des Heldens in antiker Kunst und Literatur, Darmstadt. . 1984. Herakles 2. Die unkanonische stadt.

Taten des Helden,

Darm-

. 1985. 'Herakles und Theseus auf Vasen in Malibu', in Greek Vases in the f. Paul Getty Museum. Occasional Papers on Antiquities 3, pp. 183-228. . 1986. Herakles, N e w Rochelle.

translated and enlarged by Shirley Schwarz,

Broneer, O . 1939. 'The Head of Herakles in the Pediment of the Old Athena Temple', Hesperia 8, pp. 91-100. . 1971. Isthmia. I. The Temple of Poseidon, Princeton.

Camp, J. M. 1986. The Athenian Agora. Updated edn, N e w York. Caskey, L. D. 1925. Catalogue of Greek and Roman Sculpture, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Cambridge, Mass. Casson, S. 1933. Technology of Early Greek Sculpture, Oxford. Charbonneaux, J. 1963. La Sculpture grecque et romaine au Musée du Louvre, Paris. Chase, G. H. 1902. 'The Shield Devices of the Greeks', Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 13, pp. 61-127. . 1908. 'Three Bronze Tripods Belonging to James Loeb, Esq', AJA 12, pp. 287-323. Chi, J. ed. 2008. Wine, Worship and Sacrifice: the Golden Ancient Vani, N e w York.

Graves of

296

WORKS

CITED

Childs, W. A. P. 1993. 'Herodotos, archaic chronology, and the temple of Apollo at Delphi', Jdl 108, pp. 399-441. . 1994. 'The Date of the Old Temple of Athena on the Athenian Acropolis', in The Archaeology of Athens and Attica under the Democracy. Proceedings of an International Conference held at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, December 4-6, 1992, Oxford, pp. 1-6. Childs, W. A. P. and P. Demargne. 1989. FdXanthos V i l i . Le Monument des Néréides. Le Décor sculpté, Paris. Chiotis, E. and G. Papadimitriou 1995. 'Quarrying of Dimensional Stones in the Hellenistic Period at Kefalos Bay on the Island of Kos', in The Study of Marble and other Stones Used in Antiquity. Asmosia III Athens, ed. Y. Maniatis, Ν . Herz, and Y. Basiakos, London, pp. 7 - 1 1 .

. 1989. 'The Francis-Vickers Chronology', JHS 109, pp. 164-70. . 1997. Greek Painted Pottery, 3rd edn, N e w York. . 1999. Ά List of Carian Orientalizing Pottery', Oxford Journal of Archaeology 18.1, pp. 79-93. Cook, R. M. and P. Dupont. 1998. East Greek Pottery, New York. Cooper, F. A . 1978. The Temple of Apollo at Bassai: a Preliminary Study, N e w York. . 1983. 'The Reconstruction Project: 1980-1983', in The Temple of Zeus at Nemea: Perspectives and Prospects, ed. F. Cooper, et al., Athens, pp. 50-79. . 1996. The Temple of Apollo Bassitas. The Architecture, vols. I, III, IV, Princeton. Cooper, N . K. 1990. 'Archaic Architectural Terracottas from Halieis and Bassai', Hesperia 59, pp. 65-93.

Choiseul Gouffier, M.-G.-A.-F. de. 1809. Voyage pittoresque de la Grèce, vol. 2, Paris. Clarac, Comte Frédéric de. 1841. Musée de sculpture antique et moderne; ou Description historique et graphique du Louvre et de toutes ses parties, etc., vol. 2.2, Paris. Clarke, J. T. 1880. 'Notes on Greek Shores', First Annual Report of the Archaeological Institute of America, pp. 145-63. . 1882. Preliminary Report of the Investigations at Assos during the year 1881. Papers of the Archaeological Institute of America, Classical Series I, Boston. . 1898. Report on the Investigations at Assos, 1882,1883. Papers of the Archaeological Institute of America, Classical Series II, Part 1, N e w York. Clarke, J. T., F. Bacon, and R. Koldewey. 1902-21. Investigations at Assos, Cambridge, Mass. Clay, D. 2004. Archilochos Heros: the Cult of Poets in the Greek Polis. Center for Hellenic Studies vol. 6, Washington. Clement, P. 1958. 'The Recovery of Helen', Hesperia i j , pp. 47-73. Coldstream, N. 1994. Ά Figured Attic Geometric Kantharos from Kition', in Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus, pp. 155-9.

Coulton, J. J. 1967. Ά tympanum fragment at Perachora', BSA 62, pp. 207-10. . 1968. 'The Stoa at the Amphiaraion, Oropos', BSA 63, pp. 146-83. . 1973. 'The Columns and Roof of the South Stoa at the Argive Heraion', BSA 68, pp. 66-85. . 1974a. 'Lifting in Early Greek Architecture', JHS 94, pp. 1-19. . 1974b. 'Towards Understanding Doric Design: The Stylobate and Intercolumniations', BSA 69, pp. 61-86. . 1975. 'The Second Temple of Hera at Paestum and the Pronaos Problem', JHS 95, pp. 13-24. . 1977. Ancient Greek Architects at Work; Problems of Structure and Design, London. . 1979. 'Doric Capitals: A Proportional Analysis', BSA 74, pp.81-153. . 1983. 'Greek Architects and the Transmission of Design', in Architecture et société de l'archaïsme grec à la fin de la république romaine. Actes du Colloque international organisé par le Centre national de la recherche scientifique et l'École française de Rome, Rome 2-4 décembre 1980, Collection de l'École française de Rome, vol. 66, ed. P. Gros, Paris, pp. 453-68.

Comstock, M. and C . C. Vermeule. 1976. Sculpture in Stone: The Greek, Roman and Etruscan Collections in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Boston. Congdon, L. K. 1974. 'The Assos Journals of Francis H. Bacon', Archaeology 27, pp. 83-95. Conrad, J. R. 1957. The Horn and the Sword: The History of the Bull as Symbol of Power and Fertility, N e w York. Conti, M. C. 1994. Il più antico fregio dallo Heraion del Sele. Scultura architettonica e comunicazione visiva, Florence. Cook, J. M. 1965. 'Old Smyrna: Ionic Black Figure, and other SixthCentury Figured Wares', BSA 60, pp. 114-42. . 1973. The Troad, Oxford. . 1988. 'Cities around the Troad', BSA 83, pp. 7-19. Cook, J. M. and R. V. Nicholls. 1998. Old Smyrna Excavations: The Temples of Athena, The British School at Athens, Supplementary vol. 30, Athens. Cook, R. M. 1933-4. 'Fikellura Pottery', BSA 34, pp. 1-98. . 1981. Clazomenian Sarcophagi, Mainz. . 1983. The Persian Empire, London. . 1987. 'Pots and Propaganda', JHS 107, pp. 167-9.

. 1984. 'The Parthenon and Periklean Doric', in Parthenon-Kongress Basel. Referate und Berichte, 4. bis 8. April 1982, ed. E. Berger, Mainz, pp. 40-4. . 2000. 'Fitting Friezes. Architecture and sculpture', in Periplous. Papers on Classical Art and Archaeology Presented to Sir John Boardman, ed. Ο . Palagia, London, pp. 70-9. Coupel, P. and H. Metzger. 1969. 'Reliefs inédits de l'acropole de Xanthos', RA, pp. 225-32. Courbin, P. 1953. 'Les Origines du canthare attique archaïque', BCH 77, pp. 322-45. . 1980. EAD XXXIII. L'Oikos des Naxiens, Paris. Courby, F. 1927. FdD II.2. Le Sanctuaire d'Apollon. La Terrasse du temple, Paris. . 1931. EAD XII. Les Temples d'Apollon, Paris. Crowley, J. 1989. The Aegean and the East: An Investigation into the Transference of Artistic Motifs between the Aegean, Egypt, and the Near East in the Bronze Age, Jonsered. D'Acunto, M. 1995. Ί cavalieri di Priniàs ed il tempio A', AnnAStorAnt 2, pp. 15-55. Daltrop, G. 1966. Die Kalydonische Jagd in der Antike, Hamburg and Berlin.

WORKS Danner, P. 1989. Griechische Akrotere der archaischen und klassischen Zeit, Rome. Daux, G. 1923. FdD II.3. Sanctuaire d'Athèna Pronaia. Les Deux trésors, Paris. Daux, G. and E. Hansen. 1987. FdD II.16. Le Trésor de Siphnos, Paris. Davies, M. 1991. Poetarum melicorum Graecorum fragmenta, I, O x ford. Dawkins, R. M. 1929. Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at Sparta, London. Delight, T. 1943. 'The Banquet-Libations of the Greeks' (diss. Bryn Mawr). Demangel, R. 1923. FdD II.3. Sanctuaire d'Athèna Pronaia. Les Temples de tuf, Paris. . 1932. La Frise ionique, Bibliothèque des Ecoles françaises d'Athènes et de Rome, vol. 136, Paris. Demargne, P. 1974. FdXanthos V. Tomhe-maisions, tombes rupestres et sarcophages. Les épitaphes lyciennes, Paris. Demisch, H. 1977. Die Sphinx, Stuttgart. . 1984. Erhobene Hände; Geschichte eine Gebärde in der bildenden Kunst, Stuttgart. Dentzer, J.-M. 1969. 'Reliefs au banquet dans l'Asie Mineure du V e siècle av. J.C.', RA, pp. 195-224. . 197T. 'Aux origines de l'iconographie du banquet couché', RA, pp. 215-58.

. 1982. Le Motif du banquet couché dans le Proche-Orient et le monde grec du VIIeau IVesiècle avant J. C., Bibliothèque des Écoles françaises d'Athènes et de Rome, vol. 246, Rome.

CITED

297

Durm J. 1892. Handbuch der Architektur, Part 2.1, Die Baustile. Historische und technische Entwicklung. Die Baukunst der Griechen, Darmstadt. Dusinberre, E. 1999. 'Satrapal Sardis: Achaemenid Bowls in an Achaemenid Capital', AJA 103, pp. 73-102. . 2003. Aspects of Empire in Achaemenid Sardis, Cambridge. Dyggve, E. 1948. Das Laphrion, der Tempelbezirk von Kalydon, Copenhagen. . i960. Lindos. Fouilles et recherches; 1902-1914 et 1952. III.I. Le Sanctuaire d'Athana Lindia et l'architecture lindienne, Copenhagen. Eaverly, Μ. Α . 1995. Archaic Greek Equestrian Sculpture, A n n Arbor. Eldredge Ν . and S. J. Gould. 1972. 'Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism', in Models in Paleobiology, ed. T. J. M. Schopf, San Francisco, pp. 82-115. Ellinghaus, C. 1990. 'Korinthische und attische Keramik', Ausgrabungen in Assos, AMS 2, pp. 63-6. Erlenmeyer, M.-L. and H. Erlenmeyer. 1953. 'Über griechische und altorientalische Tierkampfgruppen', AntK 1, pp. 53-67. Étienne, R. and M.-T. Le Dinahet. eds. 1991. L'espace sacrificiel dans les civilisations Méditerranéennes de l'antiquité. Actes du Colloque tenu à la Maison de l'Orient, 4-6 juin 1988, Paris. Fagerström, Κ. 1988. Greek Iron Age architecture: Developments through changing times. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology, vol. 81, Goteborg. Fairbanks, A. 1928. Catalogue of the Greek and Etruscan Vases in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Cambridge, Mass.

Dessenne, A . 1957. Le Sphinx, Etude iconographique, Bibliothèque des Écoles françaises d'Athènes et de Rome, vol. 186, Paris.

Faraone, C. 1992. Talismans and Trojan Horses; Guardian statues in ancient Greek Myth and Ritual, Oxford.

Detienne, M. 1986. The Creation Chicago.

of Mythology, trans. M. Cook,

Farkas, A. 1969. 'The Horse and Rider in Achaemenid Art', Persica 4,

Dickens, G. 1912. Catalogue of the Acropolis Museum, vol. 1, Archaic Sculpture, Cambridge.

. 1974. 'The Temple of Poseidon: A Missing Sima and Other

Farnell, L. R. 1921. Greek Hero Cults and Ideas of Immortality, Oxford. . 1930. The Works of Pindar, London. Faustoferri, A . 1993. 'The Throne of Apollo at Amyklai: its Significance and Chronology', in Sculpture from Arcadia and Laconia, ed. Ο. Palagia and W. Coulsen, Oxford, pp. 159-66. . 1996. Il trono du Amyklai e Sparta: Bathykles al servizio del potere, Naples. Fedak, J. 1990. Monumental Tombs of the Hellenistic Age, Toronto. Fehr, Β. 1971. Orientalische und griechische Gelage, Bonn. Fellows, C. 1839. A Journal written during an excursion in Asia Minor, London. Felsch, R. C. S., K. Braun, M. Jacob-Felsch, G. Hübner, A . Nitsche, M. Salta, and P. Ellinger. 1987. 'Kalapodi Bericht über die Grabungen der Artemis Elaphebolos und des Apollon von Hyampolis

Matters,' AJA 78, pp. 211-38. . 1976. 'The Roof of the Hephaisteion', AJA 80, pp. 223-46. Dörig, J. 1984. 'Der Dreileibige', AM 99, pp. 89-95. Dörpfeld, W. 1884. 'Der Tempel von Sunion', AM 9, pp. 324-37. . 1914.'Die Ausgrabungen a u f K o r f u i m Frühjahre 1914, AM 39,

Felsch, R. C . S., H. J. Kienast, and H. Schuler. 1980. 'Apollon und Artemis oder Artemis und Apollon? Bericht von den Grabungen im neu endeckten Heiligtum bei Kalapodi', AA, pp. 38-118. Ferrari, G. 2002. 'The Ancient Temple on the Acropolis at Athens',

Dinsmoor, W. Β. 1913. 'Studies of the Delphian Treasuries', BCH 37, pp. 5-83.

. 1947. 'The Hekatompedon on the Athenian Acropolis', A]A 51, pp. 109-51.

. 1961. 'The Basis of Greek Temple Design: Asia Minor, Greece, Italy', Atti del settimo Congresso internazionale di archeologia classica, Roma-Napoli 1959, Rome, pp. 355-68. . 1975. The Architecture of Ancient Greece, 3rd edn, London. Dinsmoor, W. B. and W. B. Dinsmoor, Jr. 2004. The Propylaia to the Athenian Akropolis. vol. II. The Classical Building, Princeton, 2004. Dinsmoor Jr., W. B. 1973. 'The Kardaki Temple Re-examined', AM 88, pp. 165-74.

pp. 161-76.

ΡΡ· 57-77-

1978-1982', AA, pp. 1-99.

AJA 106, pp. 11-35.

duBois, P. 1982. Centaurs and Amazons, Women and the Pre-History of the Great Chain of Being, Ann Arbor.

Fiechter, E. 1918. 'Amyklae. Der Thron des Apollon', Jdl

33,

Dugas, C . 1928. EAD X. Les Vases de l'Héraion, Paris. Dunbabin, Κ. M. D. 1991. 'Triclinium and stibadium', in Dining in a Classical Context, ed. W. Slater, Ann Arbor, pp. 121-48.

Filges, A. 1992. 'Korinthische und attische Keramik der archaischen und klassischen Zeit', Ausgrabungen in Assos 1990, AMS 5,

pp.107-245.

pp.109-40.

298

WORKS

CITED

Filges, Α . 1993. 'Korinthische und attische Keramik der archaischen und klassischen Zeit II', Ausgrabungen in Assos 1991, AMS 10, pp. 101-33.

Ghali-Kahil, L. 1955. Les Enlèvements et le retour d'Hélène textes et les documents figurés, Paris.

Filow, B. D. 1927. Die Archaische Nekropole Ochrida-See, Berlin.

von Trebenischte am

Gill, D. W. J. 1988. 'The Temple of Aphaia on Aegina. The Date of the Reconstruction', BSA 83, pp. 169-77.

Finster-Hotz, U. 1984. Der Bauschmuck des Athenatempels von Assos. Studien zur Ikonographie, Rome. Fittschen, K. 1969. Untersuchungen zum Beginn der Sagendarstellungen bei den Griechen, Berlin.

Ginouvès, R. and R. Martin. 1985, 1992. Dictionnaire méthodique de l'architecture grecque et romaine, Collection de l'École française de Rome, vol. 84, Rome.

Floren, J. 1987. Die griechische Plastik, vol. 1, Die geometrische archaische Plastik, Munich. Fol, Α., Β. Nikolov, and R. F. Hoddinott 1986. The New Treasure from Rogozen, Bulgaria, London.

und

Thracian

Fol, A . and N . G. L. Hammond. 1988. 'Persia in Europe, Apart from Greece', CAH~, Cambridge, pp. 234-53. Forsen, J., B. Forsen, and E. 0 s t b y 1999. 'The sanctuary of Agios Elias. Its significance, and its relations to surrounding sanctuaries and settlements', in Defining ancient Arkadia. Symposium, April 14, 1998, Copenhagen, pp. 169-91. Fougères, G. and J. Hulot. 1910. Sélinonte, la ville, l'acropole et les temples; relevés et restaurations par Jean Hulot, architecte... texte par Gustave Fougères, Paris. Fraisse, P. and C. Llinas. 1995. E AD X X X V I . Documents ture hellénique et hellénistique, Paris.

d'architec-

Francis, E. D. and M. Vickers. 1981. 'Leagros Kalos', Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 207, pp. 97-136. . 1983. 'Signapriscae artis. Eretria and Siphnos',//fS 103, pp. 43-67. Fränkel, H. 1975. Early Greek Poetry and Philosophy, Oxford. Frankfort, H. 1996. The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient, 4th rev. edn, London.

dans les

Giovino, M. 2007. The Assyrian Sacred Tree. A History of Interpretations, Göttingen. Giuliani, L. 1979. Die archaischen Metopen von Selinunt, Mainz. Glynn, R. 1977. ' A n Iconographie Study of Herakles' Struggles with the Sea Deities Nereus and Triton on Attic Black Figure Vases' (M.Phil, thesis, Oxford). . 1981. 'Herakles, Nereus and Triton: A Study of Iconography in Sixth Century Athens', A]A 85, pp. 121-32. Goethart, F. and H. Schleif. 1962. Der Athenatempel

von Ilion, Berlin.

Goldberg, M. 1982. 'Archaic Greek Akroteria', AJA 86, pp. 193-217. Goldstein, M. S. 1978. 'The Setting of the Ritual Meal in Greek Sanctuaries, 600-300 B.C.' (diss. Berkeley). Gould, J. 1973. 'Hiketeia', JHS 93, pp. 74-103. Gow, A . S. F. 1928. 'Notes on the Persae of Aeschylus', JHS 48, 133-58. Graef, B., and E. Langlotz. 1909-33. Die antiken Akropolis zu Athen, Berlin.

Vasen von der

Grandjean, Y. and F. Salviat. 2000. Guide de Thasos, 2nd edn, Athens. Greenewalt, Jr. C . 1971. ' A n Exhibitionist from Sardis', in Studies presented to George M. A. Flanfmann, ed. D. G. Mitten, J. G. Pedley, and J. A. Scott, Mainz, pp. 29-46. Gruben, G. 1963. 'Das archaische Didymaion', Jdl 78, pp. 78-177.

Freydank, J. 2006. 'Korinthische, attische, und einheimische Keramik der archaischen und klassischen Zeit', Ausgrabungen in Assos 1993, AMS 57, pp. 69-101.

. 1972a. 'Kykladische Architektur', Münchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst 23, pp. 6-36.

Freyer-Schauenburg, B. 1974. Samos XI. Bildwerke Zeit und des strengen Stils, Bonn.

Forschungskampagnen 1970 und 1971', AA, pp. 319-79. . 1982a. 'Naxos und Paros. Vierter vorläufiger Bericht über die

der archaischen

Friedländer, P. 1948. Epigrammata. Greek Inscriptions in Verse from the Beginnings to the Persian Wars, Bekeley. Fuchs, W. 1979. Die Skulptur der Griechen, 2nd edn, Munich.

. 1972b. 'Naxos und Paros. Dritter vorläufiger Bericht über die

Forschungskampagnen pp.159-95.

1972-1980,

1. Archaische Bauten',

AA,

. 1982b. 'Der Burgtempel A von Paros. Naxos-Paros. Vierter

Furtwängler, Α . 1906. Aigina das Heiligtum der Aphaia, Munich. Furtwängler, Α . and Η. Kienast. 1989. Samos III. Der Nordbau im Heraion von Samos, Bonn.

vorläufiger Bericht', AA, pp. 197-229.

Gabelmann, H. 1965. Studien zum frügriechischen

. 1991. 'Anfänge des Monumentabaus auf Naxos', in Bautechnik der Antike. Diskussionen zur archäologischen Bauforschung 5, edn A. Hoffmann, E.-L. Schwandner, W. Hoepfner, and G. Brands, Mainz, pp. 63-71.

Löwenbild,

Berlin.

Gàbrici, E. 1927. 'Il sanetuario della Malophoros a Selinunte', MonAnt 32, Rome. • Ι 933~5· 'Per la storia dell'architettura dorica in Sicilia', MonAnt 35, cols. 137-262. Gaiser, K. 1985. Theophrast in Assos, Heidelberg. Galinsky, G . K. 1972. The Herakles Theme, Oxford. Gall, H. von. 1966. Die paphlagonischen Felsgräber. Istanbuler Mitteilungen, Beihefte 1, Tübingen. Gantz, T. 1993. Early Greek Myth. A Guide to Artistic and Literary Sources, Baltimore. Gebauer, J. 1992. 'Die archaische geglättete graue Keramik', Ausgrabungen in Assos 1990, AMS 5, Bonn, pp. 65-101. . 1993. 'Verschiedene graue Waren', Ausgrabungen in Assos 1991, AMS 10, Bonn, pp. 73-100. Gerkan, A . von. 1925. Milet 1.8, Kalabaktepe, Athenatempel und Umgebung, Berlin.

. 1985. 'Weitgespannte Marmordecken in der griechischen Architektur', Architectura 15, pp. 105-16.

. 1996. 'Griechische Un-Ordnungen', in Säule und Gebälk. Struktur und Wandlungprozess griechisch-römischer ed. E-.L. Schwandner, Mainz, pp. 61-77.

Zu

Architektur,

. 1997. 'Naxos und Delos. Studien zur archaischen Architektur der K y k a d e n ' , J d I 112, pp. 261-416. . 2001. Griechische

Tempel und Heiligtümer,

rev. edn of Die

Tempel der Griechen (1966, 1986) Munich. Gruben, G. and W. Koenigs. 1968. 'Der "Hekatompedos" von Naxos', AA, pp. 693-717. Gründel, L. 1934. Die Darstellung Kunst, Würzburg.

des Laufens in der griechischen

Guarducci, M. 1975. Epigrafia greca, vol. III, Epigrafi di carattere privato, Rome.

323 W O R K S Gullini, G. 1974. 'Sull'origine del fregio dorico', Memorie dell'Accademia delle Scienze di Torino 4a-3i, pp. 1-73. . 1981. 'Origini dell'architettura greca in Occidente', ASAtene ns. 43, pp. 97-126. Hahland, W. 1964. 'Didyma im 5. Jahrhundert ν. Chr.', J d l 79, pp. 142-240. Hamiaux, M. 1992. Musée du Louvre. Département des antiquités grecques, étrusques, et romaines. Les Sculptures grecques I. Des Origines à la fin du IVesiècle avant J.C., Paris. Hampe, R. i960. Ein früh attisch er Grabfund, Mainz. Hanfmann, G. M. A. 1975.From Croesus to Constantine. The Cities of Western Asia Minor, Ann Arbor. . 1976. O n Lydian and Eastern Greek anthemion stelai', RA, pp. 35-44. . 1984. 'The Double Lion from Hypaepa', Festschrift für Leo Mildenburg; Numismatik, Kunstgeschichte, Archäologie, ed. Α. Houghton et al., Wettern, pp. 85-9. Hanfmann, G. M. A. and N. Ramage. 1978. Sculpture from Sardis. The Finds through 1975, Sardis R2, Cambridge, Mass. Hanfmann, G. M. A. and J. Waldbaum. 1975. A Survey of Sardis and the Major Monuments outside the City Walls, Sardis Ri, Cambridge, Mass. Hansen, E. 1991. 'Versetzen von Baugliedern am griechischen Tempel', in Bautechnik der Antike. Diskussionen zur archäologischen Bauforschung 5, ed. A. Hoffmann, E.-L. Schwandner, W. Hoepfner, and G. Brands, Mainz, pp. 72-9. Harl-Schaller, F. 1972-3. 'Die archaischen "Metopen" aus Mykene', ÖJh 50, pp. 94-116. Harrison, Ε. Β. 1965· The Athenian Agora XI. Archaic and Archaistic Sculpture, Princeton. Harrison, J. E. 1962. Epilegomena to the Study of Greek Religion and Themis, New York. Hartner, W. 1965. 'The Earliest History of the Constellations in the near East and the Motif of the Lion-Bull Combat', Journal of Near Eastern Studies 24, pp. 1-16. Haslam, M. W. 1986. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, vol. 53, London. Heberdey, R. 1919. Altattische Porosskulptur, ein beitrag zur geschichte der archaischen griechischen Kunst, Vienna. Heiden, J. 1995. Die Tondächer von Olympia, OlForsch 24, Berlin. Hellmann, M.-C. 2002. L'architecture grecque, vol. ι, Les principes de la construction, Paris. . 2006. L'architecture grecque, vol. 2, Architecture religieuse et funéraire, Paris. Hellmann, M.-C. and P. Fraisse. 1979. EAD XXXII. Le Monument aux hexagones et le portique des Naxiens, Paris. Hellner, N. 2006. 'Bedeutungstragende Steinbearbeitung am Athenatempel von Assos', Ausgrabungen in Assos 1993, AMS 57, pp. 227-34. Hellström, P. and T. Thieme. 1982. Labraunda I.3, The Temple of Zeus, Stockholm. Hemelrijk, J. M. 1963. 'Some Ear Ornaments in Archaic Cypriot and East Greek Art', BABesch 38, pp. 28-51. . 1984. The Caeretan Hydriae, Kerameus 5, Mainz. Herfort-Koch, M. 1986. Archaische Bronzeplastik Lakoniens, Münster. Herman, G. 1987. Ritualised Friendship and the Greek City, Cambridge. Herrmann, J. and A. van den Hoek. 2005. 'The Sphinx: Sculpture as a Theological Symbol in Plutarch and Clement of Alexandria', in The

CITED

Wisdom of Egypt: Jewish, Early Christian, and Gnostic Essays in Honour of Gerard P. Luttikhuizen. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des Axntiken Judentums und des Urchristentums, vol. 59, ed. A. Hilhorst and G. Van Kooten, Leiden, pp. 285-310. Herrmann, K. 1976. 'Beobachtungen zur Schatzhaus-Architektur Olympias', in Neue Forschungen in griechischen Heiligtümern: Internationales Symposion in Olympia vom το. bis 12. Oktober 1974, ed. U. Jantzen, Tübingen, pp. 321-50. . 1991. 'Versatzmarken und Steinmetzzeichen aus Olympia', in Bautechnik der Antike. Diskussionen zur archäologischen Bauforschung 5, cd. A. Hoffmann, E.-L. Schwandner, W. Hoepfner, and G. Brands, Mainz, pp. 83-9. Herz, N. and M. Waelkins, eds. 1988. Classical Marble: Geochemistry, Technology, Trade. Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Marble in ancient Greece and Rome, Boston. Hill, Β. Η. 1912. 'The Older Parthenon', AJA 16, pp. 535-58. . 1966. The Temple of Zeus at Nemea, Princeton. Hitzl, I. 1991. Die griechischen Sarkophage der archaischen und klassichen Zeit, Jonsered. Hitzl, K. 1983. 'Bronzene Applik vom Hals eines Volutenkraters in Mainz', A A , pp. 5-11. Höckmann, U. 1982. Die Bronzen aus dem Fürstengrab von Castel San Mariano bei Perugia, vol. 1, Munich. Hodge, A. T. i960. The Woodwork of Greek Roofs, Cambridge. . 1975. 'Bevelled Joints and the Direction of Laying in Greek Architecture', AJA 79, pp. 333-47. Hoepfner, W. 1997. 'The Architecture of Pergamon', in Pergamon. The Telephos Frieze from the Great Altar, ed. R. Dreyfus and E. Schraudolph, San Francisco, pp. 23-57. . 2002. 'Farbe in der griechischen Architektur', in Color in ancient Greece. The role of color in ancient Greek art and architecture, 700-31 B.C. Proceedings of the conference held in Thessaloniki, i2th-i6th April 2000, ed. M. Tiverios and D. Tsiaphake, Thessaloniki, pp. 37-45. Hoffelner, K. 1988. 'Die Metopen des Athener-Schatzhauses. Ein neuer Rekonstruktionsversuch', AM 103, pp. 77-117. . 1999. Alt-Ägina I.3. Das Apollon-Heiligtum. Tempel, Altäre, Temenosmauer, Thearion, Mainz. Hoffmann, H. 1953. 'Foreign Influence and Native Invention in Archaic Greek Altars', AJA 57, pp. 189-95. . 1997. Sotades. Symbols of Immortality on Greek Vases, Oxford. Hoisten, S. von. 2007. The Feline-Prey Theme in Archaic greek Art. Classification—Distribution—Origin—Iconographical context. Stockholm Studies in Classcial Archaeology 13, Stockholm. Hogarth, D. G. 1908. Excavations at Ephesus. The Archaic Artemision, London. Hollinshead, M. 1999. ' "Adyton," "Opisthodomos," and the Inner Room of the Greek Temple', Hesperia 68, pp. 189-218. Holloway, R. R. 1965. 'Conventions of Etruscan painting in the Tomb of Hunting and Fishing at Tarquinii', AJA 69, pp. 341-7· . 1966. 'Architettura sacra e matematica pitagorica a Paestum', Parola del Passato 21, pp. 60-4. . 1973. A View of Greek Art, Providence. . 1986. 'The bulls in the "Tomb of the Bulls" at Tarquinia', AJA 90, pp. 447-52. . 1988. 'Early Greek Architectural Decoration as Functional Art', AJA 92, pp. 177-83·

300

WORKS

Hölscher, F. 1972. Die Bedeutung archaischer Tierkampfbilder. Beitrage zur Archäologie, vol. 5, Würzburg. Hölscher, T. 1997. 'Ritual und Bildsprache; Zur Deutung der Reliefs an der Brüstung um das Heiligtum der Athena Nike in Athen', AM 112, pp. 143-63. Holtzmann, B. 1979. 'Une nouvelle sima archaïque de Thasos', Thasiaca BCH Supplément V, Paris, pp. 1-9. . 1986. 'Deux reliefs orientalisants de Thasos', in Archaische und klassische griechische Plastik. Akten des internationalen Kolloquiums von 22.-2y April 1985 in Athen, ed. H. Kyrieleis, vol. 1, Mainz, pp. 73-8. . 1994. EtThas XV. La Sculpture de Thasos. Corpus des reliefs I. Reliefs à theme divin, Paris. Homolle, T. 1896. 'Le temple de Delphes. Son histoire', BCH 20, pp.641-54. Hostetter, E. 1994. Lydian Architectural Terracottas: a Study in Tile Replication, Display, and Technique, Atlanta. Howe, T. P. 1955. 'Zeus Herkeios; Thematic Unity in the Hekatompedon Sculptures', AJA 59, pp. 287-301. Hunt, L. 1817. D r Hunt and Professor Carlyle, in Memoirs relating to European and Asiatic Turkey, edited from manuscript journals. No. VI, ed. R. Walpole, London. Hurwit, J. 1977. 'Image and frame in Greek art', A]A 81, pp. 1-30. . 1985. The Art and Culture of Early Greece, 1100-480 B.C., Ithaca. . 1999. The Athenian Acropolis, N e w York. Huxley, G. 1966. The Early Ionians, London. Huyot, J.-N. Notes d'un voyage de Paris à Smyrne, ι8ιγ-2ΐ, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, M.N.F. 664, 691, 1080-1081. Intzesiloglou, B. 2002. 'The Archaic Temple of Apollo at ancient Metropolis (Thessaly)', in Excavating Classical Culture: Recent archaeological discoveries in Greece, ed. M. Stamatopoulou and M. Yeroulanou, Oxford, pp. 109-13. Isler, H. P. 1978. 'The Meaning of the Animal Frieze in Archaic Greek Art', NumAntCl 7, pp. 7-28. Jacopi, G. 1931. Clara Rhodos, vol. IV : Esplorazione archeologica di Camiro; Scavi nelle necropoli Camiresi, 1929-1930, Rhodes. Jahn, Ο . 1870. Die Entfuhrung der Europa, Vienna. Jameson, M. 1994. 'Theoxenia', in Ancient Greek Cult Practice from the Epigraphical Evidence. Proceedings of the Second International Seminar on Ancient Greek Cult, organized by the Swedish Institute at Athens, 22-24 November 1991, ed. R. Hägg, Stockholm, PP· 35-57· Jameson, M. and J. Papachristodoulou. 1972. 'Die archaischen Inschriften von Tiryns', Vestiga 17, Akten des VI Internationalen Kongresses für Griechische und Lateinische Epigraphik, Munich, pp. 421-5. Jannot, J.-R. 1984. Les Reliefs archaïques de Chiusi. Collection de l'École française de Rome, vol. 71, Rome. Jantzen, U. 1972. Samos VIII. Ägyptische und orientalische Bronzen aus dem Heraion von Samos, Bonn. Jeffery, L. H. 1976. Archaic Greece. The City States, c./oo-joo, London. Jenkins, I. 2006. Greek Architecture and its Sculpture, Cambridge, Mass. Johansen, F. K. 1967. The Iliad in Early Greek Art, Copenhagen. Johnson, F. P. 1936. 'The Kardaki Temple', AJA 40, pp. 46-54. Johnston, A. and B. D. Wescoat. 1988. 'An Inscribed Capital From the Temple of Athena at Assos', Anatolica Epigraphica 11, pp. 1-8.

CITED Junker, K. 1993. Der ältere Tempel im Heraion am Sele. Verzierte Metopen im architektonischen Kontext, Böhlau. Kaempf-Dimitriadu, S. 1979. Die Liebe der Götter in der attischen Kunst des j . Jahrhunderts v. Chr., Basel. Kähler, H. 1949. Das griechische Metopenbild, Munich. Kalpaxis, A. E. 1976. Früharchaische Baukunst in Griechenland und Kleinasien, Athens. Kalpaxis, T. E. 1986. Hemiteles. Akzidentelle Unfertigkeit und 'Bossen— Stil' in der griechischen Baukunst, Mainz. Kaltsas, N. 2002. Sculpture in the National Museum, Athens, Los Angeles. Karageorghis, V. 1965. 'Some Cypriote Painters of Bulls in the Archaic Period', Jdl 80, pp. 1-17. Karakasi, K. 2003. Archaic Korai, Los Angeles. Karouzou, S. 1963. Αγγεία του Αναγυρούντος, Athens. Kästner, V. 1994. 'Kleinasien und Griechenland Dachterrakotten nacharchaischer Zeit aus Pergamon', in Proceedings of the International Conference on Greek Architectural Terracottas of the Classical and Hellenistic Periods, December 12-1j, 1991, Hesperia Supplement 27, ed. Ν . Winter, Princeton, pp. 253-68. Katterfeld, E. 1911. Die griechischen Metopenbilder, Strassburg. Kienast. H. 1992. 'Die Basis der Geneleos-Gruppe', AM 107, pp. 29-42. Kilinski II, K. 1990. Boeotian Black Figure Vase Painting of the Archaic Period, Mainz. Kirk, G. 1970. Myth. Its Meaning and Function in Ancient and Other Cultures, Berkeley. Kissas, K. 2008. Archaische Architektur der Athener Akropolis: Dachziegel, Metopen, Geisa, Akroterbasen, Wiesbaden. Klein, N . L. 1991. 'The Origin of the Doric Order on the Mainland of Greece. Form and Function of the Geison in the Archaic Period' (diss. Bryn Mawr). . 1997. 'Excavations of the Greek Temples at Mycenae by the British School at Athens', BSA 92, pp. 247-322. Kleine J. 1973. Untersuchungen zur Chronologie der attischen Kunst von Peisistratos bis Themistokles, IstMitt Beihefte 8, Wiesbaden. Knell, H. 1972. 'Eretra: Zur Grundkrissrekonstruktion des älteren und des jüngeren Apollontempels', AntK 15, pp. 40-8. . 1990. Mythos und Polis. Bildprogramme griechischer Bauskulptur, Darmstadt. Koldewey, R. 1890. Die antiken Baureste der Insel Lesbos, Berlin. . 1891. Neandria. Programm zum Winkelmannsfeste der archaeologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin, vol. 51, Berlin. Koldewey, R. and O . Puchstein. 1899. Die griechischen Tempel in Unteritalien und Sicilien, Berlin. Koch, H. 1955. Studien zum Theseustempel in Athen, Berlin. Koenigs, W. 1972. 'Beobachtungen zur Steintechnik am ApollonTempel von Naxos', AA, pp. 380-5. . 1980a. 'Ein archaischer Rundbau', in Kerameikos XII, Berlin. . 1980b. 'Milet 1978-1979: Bauglieder aus Milet II', IstMitt 30, pp. 56-91. K o n t o l e o n , N . M . 1965. Αρχαϊκή

Ζωφόρος

εκ Πάρου',

in

Χαρίστηριον

eis Αναστάσιον Κ. Ορλάνδον, vol. I, Athens, pp. 34^-4 τ 8· . 197°· Aspects de la Grèce préclassique, Paris. Korres, M. 1993. 'Wilhelm Dörpfelds Forschungen zum Vorparthenon und Parthenon', AM 108, pp. 59-78. . 1994a. 'The History of the Acropolis Monuments', in Acropolis Restoration. The CCAM Interventions, ed. R. Economakis, London, pp. 35-51.

WORKS . 1994b. 'Der Plan des Parthenon', RM 109, pp. 53-120. . 1995. From Pentelicon to Parthenon, Athens. . 1997a. 'Die Athena-Tempel auf der Akropolis', in Kult und Kultbauten auf der Akropolis. Internationales Symposion vom 7. Bis 9. Juli 1995 in Berlin, ed. W. Hoepfner, Berlin, pp. 218-43. . 1997b. 'An early Attic Ionic capital and the Kekropion on the Athenian Acropolis', in Greek Offerings; Essays on Greek art in honour of John Boardman, Oxbow Monograph 89, ed. Ο. Palagia, pp. 95-107. . 2000. The Stones of the Parthenon, Athens. Korres, M. and X. Bouras. 1983. Μελέτη αποκαταστάσιμης του Παρθενώνος I, Athens. Korshak, Y. 1987. Frontal Faces in Attic Vase Painting of the Archaic Period, Chicago. Kourou, N. 1989. 'Aegean Orientalizing versus Oriental Art: The Evidence of Monsters', in The civilizations of the Aegean and their diffusion in Cyprus and the eastern Mediterranean, 2000-600 B.C. Proceedings of an international symposium, [Larnaca] 18-24 September 1989, ed. V. Karageorghis, pp. 111-23. . 2001. 'The Sacred Tree in Greek Art. Mycenaean versus Near Eastern Tradition', in La Questione delle influenze vicino-orientali sulla religione greca. Stato degli studi e prospettive della ricerca. Atti del colloquio internazionale, Roma 20-22 maggio 1999, ed. S. Ribichini, M. Rocchi, and P. Xella, Rome, pp. 31-53. Kozelj. T. 1988a. 'Les carrières de marbre dans l'Antiquité', in Marbres Helléniques, Brussels, pp. 20-33. . 1988b. 'Extraction of Blocks in Antiquity: Special Methods of Analysis', in Herz and Waelkins 1988, pp. 31-9. Krauskopf, I. 1974. Der Thebanische Sagenkreis und andere griechische Sagen in der etruskischen Kunst, Mainz. Krauss, F. 1957. 'Die Säulen des Zeustempel von Olympia', in Robert Boehringer, eine Freundesgabe, ed. E. Boehringer and W. Hoffmann, Tübingen, pp. 365-87. . 1959. Die Tempel von Paestum I. Der Athenatempel. Denkmäler antiker Architektur 9, Berlin. Krieger, X. 1973. Der Kampf zwischen Peleus und Thetis in der griechischen Vasenmalerei. Eine typologische Untersuchung, Erlangen. Krön, U. 1988. 'Kultmahle im Heraion von Samos archaischer Zeit. Versuch einer Rekonstruktion', in Early Greek Cult Practice. Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, ed. R. Hägg, Stockholm, pp. 135-47. Kunze, E. 1931. Kretische Bronzereliefs, Stuttgart. . 1950. OlForsch II. Archaische Schildbänder, ein Beitrag zur frühgriechischen Bildgeschichte und Sagenüberlieferung, Berlin. . 1967. 'Helme', Olympiabericht VIII, pp. 111-83. Kyle, D. G. 1987. Athletics in Ancient Athens, Leiden. Kyrieleis, H. 1981. Führer durch das Heraion von Samos, Athens. La Coste-Messelière, P. Frotier de. 1931. FdD IV.3. Art archaïque (fin). Sculptures des temples, Paris. . 1936. Au Musée de Delphes. Recherches sur quelques monuments archaïques et leur décor sculpté, Bibliothèque des Écoles françaises d'Athènes et de Rome, vol. 138, Paris. . 1942. 'Chapiteaux doriques de Delphes', BCH 66-7, pp. 22-65. . 1957. FdD IV.4. Sculptures du trésor des Athéniens, Paris. . 1963. 'Chapiteaux doriques du haut archaïsme', BCH 87, pp. 639-52.

CITED

301

Lacroix, L. 1949. Les Reproductions de statues sur les monnaies grecques; la statuaire archaïque et classique. Bibliothèque de la Faculté de philosophie et lettres de l'Université de Liège, fase. 116, Liège. La Genière, J. de. 1983. 'A propos des métopes du monoptère de Sicyone à Delphes', Comptes rendues des séances de l'Académie des inscriptions et belle-lettres, pp. 158-71. . 2003. Ά la recherche du "temple des métopes archaïques" du Sele' , in Sanctuaires et sources dans l'antiquité: les sources documentaires et leurs limites dans la description des lieux de culte, Naples, pp. 97-102. La Genière, J. de, G. Greco, and R. Donnarumna, 1997. 'L'Héraion de Foce del Sele. Découvertes récentes', CRAI, pp. 333-49. . 1999. 'L'Héraion du Sele. Nouvelles découvertes', CRAI, pp. 501-8. Lamb, W. 1931-2. 'Antissa', BSA 32, pp. 41-67. Lambrinoudakis, V., et al. 2002. 'Naxos—Das Heiligtum von Gyroula bei Sangri. Eine neugefundene, drei Jahrtausende alte Kultstätte der Demeter', A W 33, pp. 387-406. Langlotz, E. 1920. Zur Zeitbestimmung der strengrotfigurigen Vasenmaleri und der gleichzeitigen Plastik, Leipzig. . 1932. Griechische Vasen in Würzburg, Munich. . 1975. Studien zur nordostgriechischen Kunst, Mainz. Lapalus, E. 1947. Le Fronton sculpté en Grèce; des origines à la fin du IY siècle. Etude sur les origines, l'évolution, la technique, et les thèmes du décor tympanal. Bibliothèque des Écoles française d'Athènes et de Rome, vol. 165, Paris. Laroche, D. and M.-D. Nenna. 1990. 'Le Trésor de Sicyone et ses fondations', BCH 114, pp. 241-84. Laubscher, H. O. 1963-4. 'Zwei neue Kuroi aus Kleinasien', IstMitt 13-14, pp. 73-87. Launey, M. 1944. EtThas I. Le Sanctuaire et le culte d'Héraklès à Thasos, Paris. Lauter, H. 1979. 'Bemerkungen zum archaischen Tempel von Koressia', AA, pp. 6-16. Laviosa, C. 1972-3. 'Un rilievo arcaico di Iasos e il problema del fregio nei tempie ionici', ASAtene, ns. 34-5, pp. 397-481. Lawrence, A. W. 1996. Greek Architecture, 5 th rev. edn, R. A. Tomlinson, N e w Haven. Leaf, W. 1923. Strabo on the Troad. Book XIII, Cap. 1. Cambridge. Leake, W. M. 'Journey through some provinces of Asia Minor, in the year 1800 communicated by Lieut. Col. Leake', in Travels in Various Countries of the East; Being a Continuation of Memoirs Relating to European and Asiatic Turkey, ed. R. Walpole, London. . 1824. Journal of a tour in Asia Minor, with comparative remarks on the ancient and modern geography ofthat country, London. Lehmann, Κ. 1998. Samothrace. A Guide to the Excavations and the Museum, 6th edn, rev. J. R. McCredie, Thessaloniki. Leipen, N. ed. 1984. Glimpses of Excellence, A Selection of Greek Vases and Bronzes from the Elie Borowski Collection, Toronto. Lemos, Α. Α. 1991. Archaic Pottery of Chios: The Decorated Styles, Oxford. . 2000. 'Aspects of East Greek Pottery and Vase Painting', in Die Ägäis und das westliche Mittelmeer, ed. F. Krinzinger, Vienna,

ΡΡ· 377-91· LeRoy, C. 1967. FdD II. 12. Les Terres cuites architecturales. La Sculpture décorative en terre cuite, Paris. Lesher, J. H. 1992. Xenophanes of Colophon; fragments; a text and translation with commentary, Toronto.

302

WORKS

Levine D. 1985. 'Symposium and the Polis', in Theognis of Megara. Poetry and the Polis, ed. T. Figueira and G. Nagy, Baltimore. Lissarrague, F. 1990a. The Aesthetics of the Greek Banquet: Images of Wine and Ritual, trans. A. Szegedy-Maszek, Princeton. . 1990b. 'Around the Krater. An Aspect of Banquet Imagery', in Sympotica. A Symposium on the Symposion, ed. Ο . Murray, Oxford, pp. 196-209. Lohmann, H. 2006. 'The discovery and excavation of the archaic Panionion in the Mycale (Dilek Daglan)', Kazi sonuçlari toplantisi 28.2, pp. 575-90. Lohmann, H., H. Büsing, F. Hulek, et al. 2007. 'Forschungen und Ausgrabungen in der Mykale 2001-2006', IstMitt 57, pp. 59-193. Lonsdale, S. 1990. Creatures of Speech: Lion, Herding, and Hunting Similes in the Iliad, Stuttgart. Lucas, G. 2005. The Archaeology of Time, London. Luce, S. B. 1924. 'Studies of the Exploits of Heracles on Vases. I. Heracles and the Erymanthian Boar', AJA 28, pp. 296-325. Luni, M. 2001. 'Le temple dorique hexastyle dans le sanctuaire découvert hors de la porte sud à Cyrène', Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Comptes Rendus, pp. 1533-52. . 2003. 'Sfìnge e acroterio de nuovo tempio dorico esastilo di Cirene', RendLinc 14, pp. 423-48. . 2006. 'Un nuovo tempio per Cirene', Archeo 22, No. 7, pp. 4 ^ 5 3 .

Luschey, H. 1939. Die Phiale, Bleicherode. McAllister, M. 1969. Ά Temple at Hermione, Hesperia 38, pp. 169-73. McGlade, J. 1999. 'The times of history: archaeology, narrative, and non-linear causality', in Time and Archaeology, ed. T. Murray, London, pp. 139-63. McGowan, E. 1995. 'Tomb Marker and Turning Post: Funerary Columns in the Archaic Period', AJA 99, pp. 615-32. Madigan, B. 1992. The Temple of Apollo Bassitas, vol. 2, The Sculpture, Princeton. Mallwitz, A. 1961. 'Architektur eines Schatzhauses', Olympiabericht VII, Berlin, pp. 29-55. . 1972. Olympia und seine Bauten, Munich. Manser, J. 1987. Zwei Ostgriechische Gesichtskantharoi', AntK 30, pp. 162-8. Marconi, C. 1994. Le Metope dell'Heraion, Modena. . 2007. Temple Decoration and Cultural Identity in the Archaic Greek World, N e w York. Marconi, P. 1931. Himera: lo scava del tempio della Vittoria e del Temenos, Rome. Marconi Bovio, J. 1958. 'Rilievi inediti Selinuntini', ArchCl 10, pp. 55-9. Marcovich, M. 1978. 'Xenophanes on Drinking-Parties and Olympic Games', Illinois Classical Studies 3, pp. 1-26. Markman, S. D. 1943. The Horse in Greek Art, Baltimore. Markoe, G. 1985. Phoenician Bronze and Silver Bowls from Cyprus and the Mediterranean, Berkeley. . 1989. 'The Lion Attack in Archaic Greek Art: Heroic Triumph', Classical Antiquity 8.1, pp. 86-115. Marinis, S. de. 1961. Tipologia del banchetto nell'arte etrusca arcaica, Rome. Marszal, J. R. 1998. 'An Epiphany for Athena: the Eastern Pediment of the Old Athena Temple at Athens', in ΣΤΕΦΑΝΟΣ. Studies in Honor of Brunhilde Sismondo Ridgway, ed. Κ. Hartswick and M. Sturgeon, Philadelphia, pp. 173-80.

CITED Martin, R. 1965. Manuel d'architecture grecque, ι. Matériaux et techniques, Paris. . 1976. 'Bathyclès de Magnésie et le Thrône d'Apollon à A m y k lae', RA, pp. 205-18. Massow, W. von 1916. 'Die Kypseloslade', AM 41, pp. 1-117. Mazarakis Ainian, A. 1997. From Rulers' Dwellings to Temples: Architecture, Religion and Society in Early Iron Age Greece (c.noo-yoo B.C.), Jonsered. Mellink, M. J. 1974. 'Notes on Anatolian Wall Painting', in Mélanges Mansel, vol. 1, Ankara, pp. 537-47. . 1975. 'Excavations at Karata§-Semayük and Elmali, Lycia, 1974', AJA 79, pp. 349-55·

. 1988. 'Anatolia', CAH2, Cambridge, pp. 211-33. . 1998. Kizilbel: An Archaic Painted Tomb Chamber in Northern Lycia, Philadelphia. Mendel, G. 1914. Catalogue des sculptures des Musées Ottomans, vol. II, Constantinople. Mennenga, I. 1976. 'Untersuchungen zur Komposition und Deutung homerischer Zweikampfszenen in der griechischen Vasenmalerei' (diss. Berlin). Merkelbach, R. 1976. Die Inschriften von ./Issos, Bonn. Merritt, B. D., H. T. Wade-Gery, and M. F. McGregor. 1939-54. The Athenian Tribute Lists, 4 vols., Cambridge, Mass. Mertens, D. 1974. 'L'architettura', in Metaponto. AttiCSMG 13, Taranto, 14-19 October 1973, Naples, pp. 187-235. . 1976. 'Zur archaischen Architektur der achäischen Kolonien in Unteritalien', in Neue Forschungen in griechischen Heiligtümern: Internationales Symposion in Olympia vom 10. bis 12. Oktober 1974, e d· U. Jantzen, Tübingen, pp. 167-96. . 1979. 'Der ionische Tempel von Metapont. Ein Zwischenbericht', RM 86, pp. 103-39. . 1983. 'Per l'urbanistica e l'architettura della Magna Grecia', in Megàle Hellas. Nome e immagine. AttiCSMG 21, Taranto 2-5 October 1981, pp. 97-141. . 1984. Der Tempel von Segesta und die dorische Tempelbaukunst des griechischen Westens in klassischer Zeit, Mainz. . 1988. 'Zur Entstehung der Entasis griechischer Säulen', in Bathron. Beiträge zur Architektur und verwandten Künsten für Heinrich Drerup zu seinem 80. Geburtstag von seinem Schülern und Freunden, ed. F. Hiller, Saarbrucken, pp. 307-18. . 1989. 'Die Mauern von Selinunt. Vorbericht der Arbeiten des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Rom 1971-75 und 1985-87', RM 96, pp. 87-154. . 1993. Der alte Heratempel in Paestum und die archaische Baukunst in Unteritalien, Mainz. . 1996. 'Die Entstehung des Steintempels in Sizilien', in Säule und Gebälk. Zu Struktur und Wandlungsprozess griechisch-römischer Architektur, ed. E.-L. Schwandner, Mainz, pp. 25-38. . 2000. 'Lo ionico nell'architettura dell'Occidente. Problemi e questioni', in Magna Grecia e Oriente mediterraneo prima dell'età ellenistica. Atti del Trentanovesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 1-5 ottobre 1999, Taranto, pp. 519-56. . 2006. Città e monumenti dei Greci d'Occidente. Dalla colonizzazione alla crisi di fine V secolo a.C., Rome. Mertens-Horn, M. 1986. 'Studien zur griechischen Löwenbildern', RM 93, pp. 1-61. . 1988. Die Löwenkopf-Wasserspeier des griechischen Westens im 6. und Jahrhundert v. Chr., Mainz.

WORKS . 1992. 'Die archaischen Baufriese aus Metapont', RM

99,

pp. 1-122. . 1996. 'In der Obhut der Dioskuren. Zur Deutung des Monop-

CITED

303

Noël, D. 1983. ' D u vin pour Héraklès', in Image et céramique grecque. Acts du Colloque de Rouen 25-26 novembre 1982, ed. F. Lissarrague and F. Thelamon, Rouen, pp. 141-50. Norton, R. 1897. 'Two Reliefs from Assos', AJA, pp. 507-14.

teros der Sikyonier in Delphi', IstMitt 46, pp. 123-30. Metzger, H. 1963. FdXanthos II. L'Acropole lycienne, Paris. Miller, M. C . 1997. Athens and Persia in the Fifth Century B.C.: A Study in Cultural Receptivity, Cambridge. Miller, S. G. 1978. The Prytaneion, Its Function and Architectural Form, Berkeley. . 1981. 'Excavations in Nemea', Hesperia 50, pp. 45-67. . 2004. Ancient Greek Athletics, N e w Haven. Mommsen, H. 2002. 'Das Tritonabenteuer bei Exekias', in Essays in Honor of Dietrich von Bothmer ed. A . Clark and J. Gaunt, Amsterdam, pp. 225-32. Moore, M. B. 1982. 'Ceramics', in Samothrace. Excavations Conducted by the Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, vol. 5, The Temenos, ed. P. W. Lehmann, Princeton, pp. 317-94. Moore, Μ. B. and M. Z. P. Philippides. 1986. Agora XXIII, Attic Black-figured Pottery, Princeton. Moret, J.-M. 1984. Oedipe, la Sphinx, et les Thébains. Essai de mythologie iconographique, Geneva.

Nylander, C . 1966. 'Clamps and Chronology. Achaemenian problems, 2', Iranica Antiqua 6, pp. 130-46. . 1970. Ionians in Pasargadae, Studies in Old Persian architecture, Uppsala. Oberleitner, W. 1994. Das Heroon von Try sa; ein lykisches Furstengrab des 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr., Mainz. Ohly, D. 1976, 2001. Die Aegineten, vols. I, II—III, Munich. Ohnesorg, A . 1990. 'Archaic Roof Tiles from the Heraion on Samos', Hesperia 59, pp. 181-92. . 1993. Inselionische Marmordächer. Denkmäler tektur, vol. 18.2, Berlin.

antiker

Archi-

. 2005. 'Naxian and Parian Architecture: General Features and N e w Discoveries', in Architecture des, ed. M. Yeroulanou and

and Archaeology in the CyclaM. Stamatopoulou, Oxford,

pp. 135-52.

. 2005 b. Ionische Altäre. Formen und Varianten einer turgattung aus Insel-und Ostionien, Berlin.

Architek-

Morgan, C . 1962. 'The Sculptures of the Hephaisteion: I', Hesperia 31, pp.2x0-19.

Oliver, A. 1977. Silver for the Gods: 800 Years of Greek and Roman Silver, Toledo.

Morris, S. 1984. The Black and White Style, N e w Haven. Morrow, K. D. 1985. Greek Footwear and the Dating of Sculpture, Madison.

Oppermann, M. 1990. Vom Medusabild zur Athenageburt; Bildprogramme griechischer Tempelgiebel archaischer und klassischer Zeit, Leipzig.

Mrogenda, U. 1990. 'Die Figürlichen Terrakotten', Ausgrabungen in Assos, AMS 2, pp. 35-53.

Orlandini, P. 1968. 'Gela, topografia dei santuari e documentazione archeologica dei culti', RivIstArch 15, pp. 20-66.

Müller, P. 1978. Löwen und Mischwesen in der archaischen griechischen Kunst. Eine Untersuchung über ihre Bedeutung, Zürich.

Orlandos, Α . Κ. 1915· 'Preliminary Dowels', AJA 19, pp. 175-8. . 1966. Les Matériaux de construction et la technique architecturale des anciens grecs, 2 vols, Paris.

Müller-Wiener, W. 1982. 'Neue Weihgeschenke aus dem Athena-Heiligtum in Priene', AA, pp. 691-702. Murray, O . 1980. Early Greece, Brighton. . 1983a. 'The Symposion as Social Organization', in The Greek Renaissance of the Eighth Century BC: Tradition and ed. R. Hägg, Stockholm, pp. 195-9.

Innovation,

. 1983b. 'The Greek Symposion in History', in Tria Corda: Scritti in onore di Arnaldo Momigliano, ed. E. Gabba, Como, pp. 257-72. . 1983c. 'Symposium and Männerbund', in Consilium Eirene 16. Proceedings of the 16th International Eirene P. Oliva and A . Frolikóva, Prague, pp. 47-52.

Conference,

ed.

. ed. 1990. Sympotica. A Symposium on the Symposion, Oxford. Muss, U. 1983. Studien zur Bauplastik des archaischen Artemisions von Ephesos (diss. Bonn). . 1994. Die Bauplastik des archaischen Artemisions von Ephesos. Sonderschriften des vol. 25, Vienna.

Osterreichischen

Archäologischen

Instituts,

'Αρχαιολογικού

Αρχαιολογικής

Αλίφειρα Εταιρείας,

. 1976—8. FI Αρχιτεκτονική

και τα μνημεία

της. Βιβλιοθήκη

της

v o l . 58, A t h e n s .

του Παρθενώνος,

Athens.

Osborne, R. 2000. 'Archaic and Classical Greek Temple Sculpture and the Viewer', in Word and Image in Ancient Greece, ed. Ν . Κ. Rutter and Β. A . Sparkes, Edinburgh, pp. 228-46. 0stby, E. 1978. 'The temple of Casa Marafioti at Locri and some related buildings', ActaArchArtHist 1.8, pp. 25-47. . 1980. 'The Athenaion of Karthaia', OpAth XIII 14, pp. 189-223. . 1987. 'Osservazioni sui templi di Locri Epizefirii', ActaArchArtHist 2.6, pp. r—58. . 1992. 'Der dorische Tempel von Pherai', OpAth, pp. 85-113. . 1995a. 'Scavi di Pallantion. Templi di Pallantion e dell'Arcadia. Confronti e sviluppi', ASAtene vols. 68-9, n.s. 51-2 (1990-1) pp. 285-391. . 1995b. 'Chronological Problems of Archaic Selinus', in Ancient

Nabers, N . and S. F. Wiltshire. 1980. 'The Athena Temple at Paestum and Pythagorean Theory', Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies 21, pp. 207-15. N a k a s i s , A . 2004. 0

. 1967—8. H αρκαδική εν Αθήναις

ναός

Δελτίου',

της Αθηνάς

Μακίστου.

Δημοσιεύματα

του

vol. 87. Athens.

Neer, R. 2001. 'Framing the Gift: The Politics of the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi', CA 20, pp. 273-336. . 2002. Style and Politics in Athenian Vase-Painting: The Craft of Democracy, ca. 530-460 B.C.E., N e w York. Neumann, G. 1965. Gesten und Gebärden in der griechischen Berlin.

Kunst,

Sicily. ActaHyp 6, pp. 83-101. . 2000. 'Delphi and Archaic Doric Architecture in the Peloponnese', in Delphes. Cent ans après la grande fouille. Essai de bilan. Actes du colloque international, Athènes-Delphes, 17-20 septembre 1992, BCH suppl. 36, ed. A . Jacquemin, pp. 239-62. . 2005. 'Archaic Temple Architecture in Arcadia', in Ancient Arcadia: Papers from the Third International Seminar on ancient Arcadia held at the Norwegian Institute at Athens, γ-jo May 2002, ed. E. 0stby, Athens, pp. 493-506. . 2006. 'Continuatio, renovatio and innovatio. The birth of the Doric temple', ActaAArtHist

20, pp. 9-38.

WORKS

304

Ovadiah, A. 1980. Geometric and Floral Patterns in Ancient Mosaics, Rome. Overbeck, J. 1871. Griechische Kunstmythologie, Leipzig. Özgen, I., and J. Öztürk. 1996. Heritage Recovered: The Lydian Treasure, Istanbul. Özgünel, C. 2001. Smintheion. Troas'da Kutsal Bir Alan, Giilpinar'daki Apollon Smintheis Tapinagi, Ankara. Özyigit, Ö . 1994. 'The City Walls of Phokaia', REA 96, pp. 77-109. Pace, B. 1938. Arte e civiltà della Sicilia antica, 2 vols, Rome. Padgett, J. M. 2003. The Centaur's Smile. The Human Animal in Early Greek Art, Princeton. P a p a n i k o l a o u , A . 1998a. Ή της ακροπόλεως

οικοδομική

της Καρθαίας

κατά

δραστηριότητα τον 6Ο και

στην νότια

50 αι. π.Χ.

, in

κλιτύ Kea-

Kythnos. History and archaeology. Proceedings of an international symposium, Kea-Kythnos 22-25 June 1994, Athens, pp. 555-82. . 1998b. Ή

στέγη

του

ναού

της

Αθηνάς

στην

Καρθαία',

in

Kea-

Kythnos. History and archaeology. Proceedings of an international symposium, Kea-Kythnos 22-25 June 1994, Athens, pp. 583-608. Parisi Presicce, C. 1984. 'La funzione delle aree sacre nell'organizzazione urbanistica primitiva delle colonie greche alle luce della scopterta di un nuovo santuario periferico di Selinunte', Arch Ci 36, pp. 19-132. Paritida, E. C. 2000. The Treasuries of Delphi, Jonsered. Paspalas, S. A . 2000. Ά Persianizing cup from Lydia', OJA

19,

PP·135-74·

Paton, J. M. and G. P. Stevens. 1927. The Erechtheum, Cambridge, Mass. Payne, Η. 1931. Necrocorinthia: A Study of Corinthian Art in the Archaic Period, Oxford. . 1940, 1962. Perachora: the Sanctuaries of Hera Akraia and Limenia. Excavations of the British School of Archaeology at Athens, 1930-33, 2 vols., Oxford. Payne, H. and G. M. Young. 1936. Archaic Marble Sculpture from the Acropolis, London. Pedley, J. 1982. Ά Group of Early Sixth century Korai and the Workshop on Chios', A]A 86, pp. 183-91. Pedley, J. and M. Torelli. 1993. The Sanctuary of Santa Venera at Paestum, Rome. Pemberton, E. 1978. 'Vase Painting in Ancient Corinth', Archaeology 31.6, pp. 27-33. . 2000. 'Agones Hieroi. Greek Athletic Contests in their Religious Context', Nikephoros 13, pp. 111-23. Penrose, E C. 1888. An Investigation of the Principles of Athenian Architecture, 2nd edn, N e w York. Perni er, L. 1914. 'Templi arcaici sulla Patela di Prinias in Creta', ASAtene 1, pp. 18-111. . 1935. Il Tempio e l'altare di Apollo a Cirene, Bergamo. Pesce, G. 1947-48. 'Il "GranTempio" in Cyrene', BCH 71-2, pp. 307-58. Pfaff, C. A. 200χ. Ά Re-evaluation of the Roof of the South Stoa at the Argive Heraion', BSA 96 pp. 261-79. . 2003a. 'Archaic Corinthian Architecture; ca. 600-480 B.C.', in Corinth, the Centenary, ed. C. K. Williams and N . Bookidis, Princeton, pp. 95-140. . 2003b. The Argive Heraion I. The Architecture of the Classical Temple of Hera, Princeton. Pfrommer, M. 1986. 'Milet 1985. Ein Bronzebecher des 6. Jahrhunderts aus Milet', IstMitt 36, pp. 34-6.

CITED Pfuhl, E. and H. Möbius. 1977. Die ostgriechischen Grabreliefs, Mainz. Philipp, H. 2004. Archaische Silhouettenbleche und Schildzeichen in Olympia, OlForsch X X X , Berlin. Picard, C. 1941. 'Une Cimaise thasienne archaïque', MonPiot 38, pp. 55-92. Picard, C. and P. Frotier de La Coste-Messelière. 1928. FdD IV.2, Art archaïque: Les Trésors 'ioniques', Paris. Pipili, M. 1987. Laconian Iconography of the Sixth Century B.C., Oxford. . 1998. 'Archaic Laconian vase-painting: some iconographie considerations', in Sparta in Laconia: proceedings of the 19th British Museum Classical Colloquium held with the British School at Athens and King's and University Colleges, London 6-8 December 1995, ed. W. G. Cavanagh and S. E. C. Walker, London, pp. 82-96. Piri Re'is (Hadji Muhiddin Piri Ibn Hadji Mehmed). 1988. Kitab-I Bahriye Piri Reis, ed. E. Zekâi Okte, English trans. R. Bragner, Istanbul. Plassart, A. 1928. EAD XI. Les Sanctuaires et les cultes du Mont Cynthe, Paris. Plommer, H. 1970. 'Vitruvian Studies', BSA 65, pp. 179-90. Polliti, J. J. 1972. Art and Experience in Classical Greece, Cambridge, Mass. Pompeo, L. 1999. Il complesso archiettonico del tempio M di Selinunte. Analisi tecnica e storia edel monumento, Florence. Pomtow, H. 1911. 'Die beiden Tholoi zu Delphi', Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Architektur 4, pp. 171-214. Popham, M. R. with I. S. Lemos. 1996. Lefkandi III: the Toumba Cemetery. The Excavations of 1981, 1984, 1986 and 1992-4, BSA Suppl. vol. 29, Oxford. Poujoulat, J. J. F. 1834. In Joseph François Michaud and Jean Joseph François Poujoulat, Correspondance d'Orient, vol. iii, letter 69, Paris, pp. 218-19. Poulaki, E. 2001. Χία και Άνθεμούσια, Katerini. Poulsen, F. 1922. Etruscan Tomb Paintings, their Subjects and Significance, Oxford. Prag, A. J. N. W. 1985. The Oresteia. Iconographie and Narrative Tradition, Chicago. Prokesch von Osten, A . 1837. Denkwürdigkeiten und Erinnerungen aus dem Orient. Aus Julius Schnellers Nachlass herausgegeben von Dr. Ernst Münch III, Stuttgart. Pryce, F. N . 1928. Catalogue of sculpture in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities of the British Museum, I.x, Prehellenic and Early Greek, London. Pullan, R. Popplewell 1865. The Principal Ruins of Asia Minor, London. Raczyriski, E. 1825. Malerische Reise in einigen Provinzen des Osmanischen Reichs. Aus dem Polnischen des Herrn Grafen Eduard Raczyriski übersetzt, Breslau. Ramage, Α. 1978. Sardis M5. Lydian Houses and Architectural Terracottas, Cambridge, Mass. Rasmussen, T. and N . Spivey. eds. 1991. Looking at Greek Vases, Cambridge. Rathje, A. 1994. 'Banquet and Ideology. Some N e w Considerations about Banqueting at Poggio Civitate', in Murlo and the Etruscans. Art and Society in Ancient Etruria, ed. R. D. De Puma and J. P. Small, Madison, pp. 95-9. Ratté, C. J. 1989a. 'Lydian Masonry and Monumental Architecture at Sardis' (diss. University of California, Berkeley).

WORKS . 1989b. 'Five Lydian felines', AJA 93, pp. 379-93. . 1993. 'Lydian Contributions to Archaic East Greek Architecture', in Les Grands ateliers d'architecture dans le monde égéen du VIesiècle av. J.C., ed. J. des Courtils and J.-C. Moretti, Paris, pp. 1-12. Raubitschek, A . 1949. Dedications from the Athenian Akropolis: A Catalogue of the Inscriptions of the Sixth and Fifth Centuries BC, Cambridge. Raubitschek, I. 1950. 'Ionicizing-Doric Architecture. A Stylistic Study of Greek Doric Architecture of the Sixth and Fifth Centuries B.C.' (diss. Columbia University, University Microfilms, 1980). R h o m a i o s , K . A . 191 5. 'Περί τών év Κέρκυρα αρχαιολογικής Αρχαιολογικού •

.

1952·

Σχολής Δελτίου,

αναφέρει AD

'Τεγεατικόν

ανασκαφών

ò έφορος αρχαιοτήτων',

της

Γερμανικής

'Αρτέμιδος

Κνακεάτιδος',

Ασέαν',

Ιερόν Αθηνάς Σωτείρας

ArchEph,

pp.

και Ποσειδώνος

κατά την

. 1985. 'The Parthenon frieze and the Apadana reliefs at Persepolis. Reassessing a programmatic relationship 5 , AJA pp. 103-20.

89,

Rose C . Β. 1991. 'The theater of Ilion', Studia Troica ι, pp. 69-77. . 1995. 'The 1994 Post-Bronze Age Excavations at Troia', Studia Troica 5, pp. 81-105. . 1997. 'The 1996 Post-Bronze Age Excavations at Troia', Studia Troica 7, pp. 73-110. . 2003. 'The Temple of Athena at Ilion', Studia

Troica 13,

pp. 27-88. . 2008. 'Separating Fact from Fiction in the Aeolian Migration', Hesperia 77, pp. 399-430. Rose, H. J. 1974. A Handbook of Greek Mythology, 6th edn, London.

ArchEph,

Rotroff, S. and J. Oakley. 1992. Debris from a Public Dining Place in the Athenian Agora, Hesperia Supplement XXV, Princeton.

pp. 1-31. 1957·

305

τοΰ

Παράρτημα

I, pp. ~J~J—84·

'ιερόν

CITED

Αρκαδικήν

Roux, G. 1961. L'Architecture de l'Argolide aux IYet J.-C., Paris. Rumpf, A . 1927. Chalkidische

114-63.

Rice, Μ. 1998· The Power of the Bull, N e w York. Richter, G. Μ. Α . ΐ93°· Animals in Greek Sculpture, London. . 1943. 'The Drove', AJA 47, pp. 188-93.

avant

Vasen, Berlin.

Rykwert, J. 1996. The Dancing Column. Cambridge, Mass. Sahin, M. S. 1972. Die Entwicklung täre, Bonn.

. 1961. The Archaic Gravestones of Attica, London.

IIFsiècles

On Order in

der griechischen

Architecture,

Monumentalal-

. 1970. Kouroi, Archaic Greek Youths. A Study of the Development of the Kouros type in Greek sculpture, 3rd edn, London.

Sakellaraki, E. 1995. Chalkis; History, Topography and Museum, Athens.

Richter, G . M. A . and Μ. Milne. 1935. Shapes and Names of Athenian Vases, N e w York.

Salzmann, D . 1982. Untersuchungen zur den antiken Kieselmosaiken von den Anfängen bis zum Beginn der Tesseratechnik, Berlin.

Richter, Ο . F. von. 1822. Otto Friedrichs von Richter Wallfahrten im Morganlande. Aus seinem Tagebüchern und Briefen dargestellt von J. P. G. Ewers, Berlin, pp. 466-7.

Santangelo, M. 1961. Selinunte, Rome. Sartiaux, F. 1915. Les Sculptures et la restauration du temple d'Assos en Troade, from RA 22 (1913) and 23 (1914), Paris.

Ridgway, B. S. 1966. 'Notes on the Development of the Greek Frieze', Hesperia 35, pp. 188-95. . 1970. The Severe Style in Greek Sculpture, Princeton. . 1972. Catalogue of the Classical Collection

of the Museum of

Art, Rhode Island School of Design, Providence. . 1981. Fifth Century Styles in Greek Sculpture, Princeton. . 1991. 'Archaic Architectural Sculpture and Travel Myths', Dialogues d'histoire ancienne 17.2, pp. 95-112.

. 1918. 'L'Archéologie française en Asie Mineure et l'expansion allemande', Paris. Schattner, T. 1996. 'Architrav und Fries des archaischen Apollontempels von Didyma',/^/ n i , pp. 1-23. Schauenburg, Κ. 1971. 'Herakles bei Pholos', AM 86, pp. 43-54. . 1982. 'Zu einem spätarchaischen Kolonettenkrater in Lugano', Numismatica ed antichità classica, Quaderni Ticinesi 11, pp. 9-31.

. 1993. The Archaic Style in Greek Sculpture, rev. edn, Chicago, 1993.

Schede, M.1928. Meisterwerke der türkischen Museen zu Konstantinopel. Griechische und römische Skulpturen des Antikenmuseums, Berlin.

. 1999. Prayers in Stone. 600-100 B.C.E., Berkeley.

Schefold, K. 1951. 'Das Dämonische in der griechischen Kunst', Hermeneia; Festschrift O. Regenbogen, Heidelberg, pp. 28-39.

Greek

Architectural

Sculpture, ca.

Riemann, H. 1935. Zum griechischen Peripteraltempel; seine Planidee und ihre Entwicklung bis zum Ende des 5 Jhds., Düren. . 1943. 'Zum Artemistempel von Korkyra', Jdl 58, pp. 32-8. . 1950. 'Der peisistratidische Athenatempel auf der Akropolis zu

. 1981. Die

Göttersage

in der klassischen und

. 1964. 'Zum Olympieion von Syrakus', RM 71, pp. 229-37. Robert, C . 1881. Bild und Leid, Berlin. of Greek and Roman

Architecture,

. 1992. Gods and Heroes in Late Archaic Greek Art, Cambridge. der Griechen in der Früh-und

Hocharchaischen Kunst, Munich. Scheibler, I. i960. Die symetrische Bildform in der Flächenkunst, Kallmümz über Regensberg.

frühgriechischen

. 1961. 'Olpen und amphoren des Gorgonmaler',/ä?/ 76, pp. 1-47·

Robertson, C . M. 1975. History of Greek Art, Cambridge. Rocco, G. 2008. La Ceramografia protoattica; Pittori e (710-630 a.C.), Rahden/Westf.

hellenistischen

Kunst, Munich. . 1993. Götter- und Heldensagen

Athen', M dl 3, pp. 7-39.

Robertson, D. S. 1971. Handbook 2nd edn, Cambridge.

. 1968. Myth and Legend in Early Greek Art, London.

botteghe

Schiffler, B. 1976. Die Typologie des Kentauren in der antiken Kunst vom 10. bis zum Ende des 4. Jhs. v. Chr., Frankfurt and Berlin.

Rolley, C . 1994. La sculpture grecque, vol. ι, Des origins au milieu du Vsiècle, Paris.

Schilardi, D . 1986. Ά Fragment of a Marble Relief-Sarcophagus from Paros', in Archaische und klassische griechische Plastik. Akten des internationalen Kolloquiums von 22.-25. April 1985 in Athen, ed. H. Kyrieleis, vol 2, Mainz, pp. 13-26.

Root, M. C . 1973. ' A n Etruscan Horse Race from Poggio Civitate', AJA 77, pp. 121-37.

Schleif, H. 1933. 'Der grosser Altar der Hera von Samos', AM 58, pp. 174-210.

Roller, L. 1981. 'Funeral Games in Greek Art', AJA 85, pp. 107-19.

330 W O R K S Schliemann, Η. ι88ο. Ihos: The City and Country London.

of the Trojans,

. 1884. Troja. Results of the latest researches and discoveries on the site of Homer's Troy and in the heroic tumuli and other sites, made in the year 1882. And a narrative of a journey in the Troad in 1881, London. Schmitt Pantel, P. 1980. 'Les repas au prytanée et à la tholos dans

CITED

Seiler, F. 1986. Die griechische Tholos. Untersuchungen zur Entwicklung, Typologie und Funktion kunstmässiger Rundbauten, Mainz. Serdaroglu, Ü. 1983. '1981 Y1I1 Assos Çah§malari', IV Καζι Toplantisi 1982, Ankara, pp. 181-2.

Sonuçlan

. 1990. 'Zur Geschichte der Stadt Assos und ihrer Ausgrabungen', Ausgrabungen

in Assos, AMS 2, pp. 1-4.

. 1995. Assos, Istanbul, 1995.

l'Athènes classique. Sitesis, trophé, misthos: réflexions sur le mode de nourriture démocratique', Annali del'istituto universitario orientale di Napoli, seminario di studi del mondo classico 2, pp. 55-68.

Servais, J., J. P. Sodini, A . Lambraki, et al. 1980. EtThas IX. Aliki I. Les Deux sanctuaires. Les carrières de marbre a l'époque paléochrétienne, Paris.

. 1985. 'Banquet et cité grecque. Quelques questions suscitées par

Sevinç, N . 1996. Ά N e w Sarcophagus of Polyxena from the Salvage Excavations at Gûmûççay', Studia Troica 6, pp. 251-64.

les recherches récentes', Mélanges de l'Ecole française de Rome 97, pp. 135-58. . 1990a. 'Sacrificial Meal and Symposion. Two Models of Civic Institutions in the Archaic City?', in Sympotica; A Symposium on the Symposion, ed. Ο . Murray, Oxford, pp. 14-23. . 1990b. 'Collective Activities and the Political in the Greek

. 1992. La Cité au banquet. Histoire des repas publics dans les cités grecques, Collection de l'École française de Rome vol. 157, Rome. Schnapp, A. 1979. 'Images et programmes: Les figurations archaïques de la chasse au sanglier', RA, pp. 195-218. . 1997. Le Chasseur et la cité; Chasse et érotique dans la Grèce ancienne, Paris. Schnapp-Gourbeillon, A . 1981. Lions, héros, masques; les représentations de l'animal chez homere, Paris. der

Schubert, F. and S. Grunaeur-von Hoerschelman. 1978. und Photographie: fünfzig Mainz.

Beispiele zur Geschichte

Akropolis, Archäologie

und

Method,

Schuchhardt, W.-H. 1935-6. 'Die Sima des alten Athenatempels der Akropolis', AM 60-1, pp. 1 - 1 1 1 .

Southern Collections, N e w Orleans. . 1983. 'Amazons, Thracians, and Scythians', Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 24, pp. 105-14. Shear, T. L. 1914. Ά pp. 285-96.

Sculptured Basis from Loryma', AJA

18,

Shear, T. L. Jr. 1971. 'The Athenian Agora: Excavations of 1970', Hesperia 40, pp. 241-79. . 1994. Ίσονόμους

τ Αθήνας έποιησάτην.

T h e A g o r a and the D e m -

ocracy', in The Archaeology of Athens and Attica under the Democracy, ed. W. D. E. Coulson, O . Palagia, T. L. Shear, Jr., H. A. Shapiro, and J. Frost, Oxford, pp. 225-48. Shepard, K. 1940. The Fish-tailed Monster in Greek and Etruscan Art, N e w York. Shoe, L. T. 1936. Profiles of Greek Mouldings, Cambridge, Mass. . 1952. Profiles of Western Greek Mouldings, Rome. Simantoni-Bournia, E. 2004. La Céramique grecque à reliefs; ateliers insulaires du VIIIeau V'csiècle avant J.-C., D r o z . Simon, E. 1967. 'Die Vier Büsser von Foce del S e l e ' , j d l 82, pp. 275-95.

. 1963. 'Archaische Bauten der Akropolis von Athen', AA, cols.

Sinn, U . 1981. 'Das Heiligtum der Artemis Limnatis bei K o m bothekra', AM 96, pp. 25-71.

797-824. Schuller, M. 1982. 'Der dorische Tempel des Apollon Pythios auf Paros', AA, pp. 245-64. . 1985. 'Die dorische Architektur der Kykladen in spätarchaischer Z e i t \ J d I 100, pp. 319-98. . 1991a. Der Artemistempel antiker Architektur

Sider, N e w York, pp. 164-81. Shapiro, H . A. ed. 1981. Art, Myth and Culture; Greek Vases from

City', in The Greek City from Homer to Alexander, ed. Ο . Murray and S. Price, Oxford, pp. 199-213.

Schräder, H. 1939. Die archaischen Marmorbildwerke Frankfort.

Shaw, J.-P 2001. 'Lords of Hellas, O l d Men of the Sea', in The New Simonides; Contexts of Praise and Desire, ed. D . Boedeker and D.

im Delion

auf Paros.

Denkmäler

vol. 18.1, Berlin.

. 1991b 'Die Wandkonstruktion dorischer Tempel auf den K y k laden', in Bautechnik der Antike. Diskussionen zur archäologischen Bauforschung 5, ed. A . Hoffmann, E.-L. Schwandner, W. Hoepfner, and G . Brands, Mainz, pp. 208-15. Schwandner, E.-L. 1976. 'Der ältere Aphaiatempel auf Aegina', in Neue Forschungen in griechischen Heiligtümern. Internationales Symposion in Olympia vom 10. bis 12. Oktober 1974, e d· U- Jantzen, Tübingen, pp. 103-20.

. 1984. Εκτυπον.

Der sog. Hera-Kopf aus Olympia', AM

99,

pp. 77-87. Sismanides, K . 1996. 'Αρχαία Μακίδονία

και Θράκη

Στάγ€ΐρα'.

To Αρχαιολογικό

Εργο

στη

loa, pp. 279-95·

Slater, W. J. 1981. 'Peace, the Symposium, and the Poet', Classical Studies 6.2, pp. 205-14.

Illinois

Small, J. P. 1971. 'The Banquet Frieze from Poggio Civitate', StEtr 39, pp. 25-61. . 1994 'Eat Drink and Be Merry: Etruscan Banquets', in M urlo and the Etruscans. Art and society in ancient Etruria, ed. R. D. D e Puma and J. P. Small, Madison, pp. 85-94. Sodini, J.-P., A . Lambraki, and T. Kozelj. 1980. EtThas IX. Aliki,1. Carrières de marbre a l'époque paléochrétienne, Paris, 1980. Spawforth, A . 2006. The Complete

Les

Greek Temple, London.

Denkmäler

Splitter, R. 2000. Die Kypseloslade in Olympia. Form, Funktion, und Bildschmuck: Eine Archäologische Rekonstruktion mit einem Kata-

Scott, M. 1982. 'Philos, Philotês and Xenia , Acta Classica: Proceedings of the Classical Association of South Africa 25, pp. 1-19.

log der Sagenbilder in der korinthischen Vasenmalerei und einem Anhang zur Forschungsgeschichte, Mainz.

Scranton, R. 1969. 'Greek Building', in The Muses at Work, ed. C .

Sprenger, M . and G. Bartoloni. 1983. The Etruscans; their History, Art,

. 1985. Der ältere Porostempel der Aphaia aufAegina. antiker Architektur

16, Berlin.

Roebuck, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 2-35. Segal, C . 1974. 'The Raw and the C o o k e d in Greek Literature. Structure, Values, Metaphor', Classical Journal 69.4, pp. 289-308.

and Architecture,

N e w York.

Stähler, Κ. 1972. 'Zur Rekonstruktion und Datierung des Gigantomachiegiebels von der Akropolis', in Antike und Universalgeschichte.

WORKS Festschrift Η.E. Stier zum 70. Geburtstag am 25.5.1972, ed. R. Stiehl and G. A . Lehmann, Münster, pp. 88-112. Steingräber, S. 1986. Etruscan Painting: Catalogue Raisonné of Etruscan Wall Paintings, English edn D. and F. Ridgway, N e w York. Sterrett, J. R. S. 1883. 'Inscriptions of Assos', Papers of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1, pp. 1-90. Steuben, H . von 1968. Frühe Sagendarstellungen Athen, Berlin.

307

. 1996b. 'Neue Reliefs vom Athena-Tempel von Assos', Ausgrabungen in Assos 1992, AMS 21, pp. 33-42. . 1996c. 'Grabungen in der Nekropole von Assos 1989-1994', Thetis 3, pp. 49-70. Svenson-Evers, H. 1996. Die griechischen Architekten archaischer und klassischer Zeit, Frankfurt.

in Korinth

und

Szeliga, G. 1983. Ά Representation of an Archaic Greek Saddle Cloth from Sicily', A]A 87, pp. 545-7.

Stewart, A . 1990. Greek Sculpture: An Exploration, N e w Haven. . 2008a. 'The Persian and Carthaginian Invasions of 480 B.C.E. and the Beginning of the Classical Style, 1. The Stratigraphy, Chronology and Significance of the Acropolis Deposits', A]A 112,

. 1986. 'The Composition of the A r g o Metopes f r o m the Monopteros at Delphi', AJA 90, pp. 297-305. Technau, W. 1937. 'Die Göttin auf dem Stier', Jdl, pp. 76-103. Texier, C . 1849. Description

de L'Asie

Mineure faite par ordre du

gouvernement français de 1833 à 183-/, vol. II, Paris.

pp· 3 7 7 - 4 1 2 ·

. 2008b. 'The Persian and Carthaginian Invasions of 480 B.C.E. and the Beginning of the Classical Style, 2. The Finds from Other Sites in Athens, Attica, Elsewhere in Greece, and on Sicily, 3. The Severe Style. Motivations and Meaning', A]A 112, pp. 581-615. Stibbe, C . M. 1972. Lakonische Vasenmaler des sechsten Jahrhunderts v. Chr., London. . 1978. 'Lakonische Kantharoi', Meded 5, pp. 23-42. . 1989. Laconian Mixing Bowls: A History of the krater Lakonikos from the Seventh to the Fifth Century B.C., Part 1, Amsterdam. . 1991. 'Dionysos in Sparta', BABesch 66, pp. 1-44. . 1994. Laconian Drinking Vessels and Other Open Shapes, A m sterdam. . 2000. The Sons of Hephaistos: Aspects of the Archaic

Greek

Bronze Industry, Rome. . 2004. Lakonische Vasenmaler des sechsten Jahrhunderts ν. Chr. Supplement,

CITED

Mainz.

Stillwell, R. 1932. Corinth Ι,ι, Introduction: topography,

architecture,

Cambridge, Mass. Stiros, S. C . 1996. 'Identification of Earthquakes from Archaeological Data', in Archaeoseismology, pp. 129-52.

ed. S. Stiros and R. E. Jones, Athens,

Thomas, R. F. 1988. Virgil's Georgics, Cambridge. Thompson, H . 1990. The Athenian Agora: A Guide to the Excavation and Museum, 4th edn, Athens. Thönges-Stringaris, R. M. 1965. 'Das griechische Totenmahl', AM 80, p p . 1-99. T i v e r i o s , M . 1976. 0 Λυδό? κ α ι το εργο αττικής

μελανόμορφης

αγγειογραφίας,

του. Συμβολή

στην

ερευνά

της

Athens.

Tölle-Kastenbein, R. 1983· 'Bemerkungen zur absoluten Chronologie spätarchaischer und frühklassicher Denkmäler Athens', AA,

1983,

573-84· Tomlinson, R. A. 1963. 'The Doric Order. Hellenistic Critics and Criticism', JHS 83, pp. 133-45. Touchais, G. 1980. 'Chronique des fouilles et découvertes archéologiques en Grèce en 1979', BCH 104, pp. 581-688. Touloupa, E. 1991. 'Early Bronze Sheets with Figured Scenes from the Acropolis', in New Perspectives in Early Greek Art. Studies in the History of Art, vol. 32, ed. D . Buitron-Oliver, Hannover, pp.241-71. Travlos, J. 1971. Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Athens, N e w York. Tschira, A . 1941. 'Keildübel', AM 66, pp. 166-9.

Strocka, V. M. 1977. 'Neue archaische Löwen in Anatolien', pp. 481-512.

AA,

Strong, D . 1966. Greek and Roman Silver Plate, London. Stucchi, S. 1961. 'Le fasi costruttive dell'Apollonion di Cirene', Quaderni di Archeologia della Libia IV, pp. 55-81. . 1975. Monografìe di Archeologia naica, Rome.

Theodorescu, D. 1970. 'Notes histriennes', RA, pp. 29-54.

Cire-

Stupperich, R. 1990a. 'Vorbericht über die Grabung in der WesttorNekropole von Assos im Sommer 1989', Ausgrabungen in ylssos, AMS 2, p p . 7-22. . 1990b. 'Kurzer Vorbericht über die Grabungen in der WesttorNekropole von Assos im Sommer 1989 und 1990', Boreas pp. 27-36.

13,

. 1992. 'Zweiter Vorbericht über die Grabung in der Westtorin Assos

1990, AMS 5, pp. 1 - 3 1 . . 1993. 'Dritter Vorbericht über die Grabung in der WesttorNekropole von Assos im Sommer 1991', Ausgrabungen

in Assos

1991, AMS 10, p p . 1 - 3 5 . . 1995. 'Ein archaisches Kriegerrelief aus Gagara', Studien

zum

antiken Kleinasien 3, pp. 127-38. . 1996a. 'Vierter Vorbericht über die Grabung in der WesttorNekropole von Assos im Sommer 1992', Ausgrabungen 1992, AMS 21, p p . 1 - 3 1 .

T s i m b i d o u - A v l o n i t i , M . 2005. Μακεδονικοι Αγιο Αθανάσιο

Libica IX. Architettura

Nekropole von Assos im Sommer 1990', Ausgrabungen

Tsiafakis, D . 2003. ' " Π Ε ΑΩΡΑ": Fabulous Creatures and/or Demons of Death?', in The Centaur's Smile: The Human Animal in Early Greek Art, ed. J. M. Padgett, Princeton, pp. 73-104.

in Assos

των ταφικών

Θεσσαλονίκης. μνημείων

Συμβολή

της Μακεδονίας,

τάφοι

στον Φοίνικα

στη μελέτη

της

και

στον

εικονογραφίας

Athens.

Tuchelt, Κ. 197°· L)ie archaischen Skulpturen von Didyma. Beiträge zur frühgriechischen Plastik in Kleinasien. Istanbuler Forschungen vol. 27, Berlin. · 1973_4· 'Didyma 1972/73', IstMitt 23-4, pp. 139-68. . 1976. 'Zwei gelagerte Gewandfiguren aus D i d y m a ' , pp. 55-66.

RA,

Tusa, V. 1983. La Scultura in pietra di Selinunte, Palermo. Utili, F. 1992. 'Früh-und hocharchaische bemalte Schalen', Ausgrabungen in Assos 1990, AMS 5, pp. 33-63. . 1993. 'Ostgriechische Teller', Ausgrabungen in Assos 1991, AMS 10, pp. 53-72. . 1996a. 'Archaische ostgriechische Lekanai', Ausgrabungen Assos 1992, AMS 21, pp. 59-70.

in

. 1996b. 'Die archaischen Gräber aus E' IV", Ausgrabungen

in

/4s50s 1992, AMS

21, p p . 4 3 - 5 7 .

. 1999. Die archaische Nekropole von Assos, AMS 31, Bonn. . 2006a. 'Archaische Ostgriechische Amphoren und Kannen', Ausgrabungen

in Assos 1993, AMS 57, pp. 49-60.

WORKS

3Ο8

Utili, F. 2006b. 'Chiotischer Kelch', Ausgrabungen in Assos 1993, AMS 57, pp. 61-3. . 2006c. 'Ein Aryballos des "Malers von Berlin F1090" Ausgrabungen in Assos 1993, AMS 57, pp. 65-8. Ure, P. N. 1913. Black Glaze Pottery from Rhitsona in Boeotia, Oxford, 19T3. . 1927. Sixth and Fifth Century Pottery from Rhitsona, Oxford. Vallet, G. 1956. 'Le Group de Polyphème et la céramique "Chalcidienne" ', REA 58, pp. 42-50, Vallois, R. 1944-78. VArchitecture hellénique et hellénistique à Délos jusqu'à l'éviction des Déliens 166 av. J.C. Bibliothèque des Ecoles françaises d'Athènes et de Rome vol. 157, Paris. Van Buren, Mrs E. D. 1923. Archaic Fictile Revetments in Sicily and Magna Graecia, London. . 1926. Greek Fictile Revetments in the Archaic Period, London. Van der Meijden, H. 1993. Terrakotta-Arulae aus Sizilien und Unteritalien, Amsterdam. Vanderpool, E. 1938. 'The Rectangular Rock Cut Shaft', Hesperia 7, pp. 363-411. Van Keuren, F. 1989. The Frìeze from the Hera I Temple at Foce del Sele, Rome. Venturi, R. 1966. 'Nonstraightforward Architecture: A Gentle Manifesto', in Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture, N e w York. Verbanck-Piérard, A . 1982. 'La rencontre d'PIéraklès et de Pholos: Variantes iconographiques du Peintre d'Antiménès', in Rayonnement Grec. Hommages à Charles Delovoye, ed. L. HadermannMisquich and G. Raepsaet, Brussels, pp. 143-54. Vermeule, E. D. T. 1966. 'The Boston Oresteia Krater', A]A 70, pp. 1-22. . 1979. Aspects of Death in Early Greek Art and Poetry, Sather Classical Lectures 46, Berkeley. Vickers, M. 1986. From Silver to Ceramic, Oxford. Villanueva Puig, M.-C. 1987. 'Sur l'identité de la figure féminine assise sur un taureau dans la céramique attique à figures noires', in C. Bérard, ed. Images et sociétés en Grèce ancienne. L'iconographie comme méthode d'analyse, Lausanne, pp. 131-42. Vlassopoulou, C. and E. Touloupa. 1990. 'Decorated Architectural Terracottas from the Athenian Acropolis: Catalogue of Exhibition', Hesperia 59, pp. i-xxxi. V o k o t o p o u l o u , I. 1 9 7 5 . Χαλκαι μελέτην

της αρχαίας

. 1997·

Αργυρά

ελληνικής «rat χάλκινα

κορινθιουργείς Χαλκουργίας, έργα

τέχνης

ττρόχοι:

συμβολή

εις

την

Athens. στην αρχαιότητα,

Athens.

Vollkommer, R. 199 1 · 'Zur Deutung der Löwenfrau in der frühgriechischen Kunst', AM 106, pp. 47-64. Vos, M. F. 1963. Scythian Archers in Archaic Attic Vase-Painting, Groningen. Waelkins, M., P. De Paepe, and L. Moens. 1988. 'Quarries and the Marble Trade in Antiquity', in Herz and Waelkins, pp. 11-28. . 1990. 'The Quarrying Techniques of the Greek World', in Marble. Art historical and scientific perspectives on ancient sculpture. Papers of the symposium Malibu April 28-30, 1988, Malibu, p p · 47-72·

Waldbaum, J. 1983. The Archaeological Exploration of Sardis. vol. M4: Metalwork from Sardis. The Finds through 1974, Cambridge, Mass. Waldstein, C. 1902. The Argive Heraeum, 2 vols., Boston. Walter, H. 1960. 'Sphingen', Antike und Abendland 9, pp. 63-71. 1968. Samos V. Frühe samische Gefässe: Chronologie und Landschaftsstile ostgriechischer Gefässe, Bonn.

CITED Walter-Karydi, E. 1970. Studien zur griechischen Vasenmalerei, AntK Beiheft 7, Bern. . 1973. Samos VI.i. Samische Gefässe des 6. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.-, Landschaftsstile ostgriechischer Gefässe, Bonn. . 1985. 'Genelaos', AM 100, pp. 91-104. Wati'ous, L. V. 1998. 'Crete and Egypt in the Seventh Century BC: Temple A at Prinias', in Post Minoan Crete. Proceedings of the First Colloquium on Post-Minoan Crete held by the British School at Athens and the Institute of Archaeology, University College London, 10-11 November 199s, ed. W. G. Cavanagh, M. Curtis, J. N . Coldstream, and A . W. Johnston, London, pp. 75-9. Webb, P. 1996. Hellenistic architectural sculpture: figurai motifs in western Anatolia and the Aegean Islands, Madison, Wise. Weber, B. 2002. 'Die Saulenordnung des archaischen Dionysostempels von Myus', IstMitt 52, pp. 221-71. Weber, H. 1965. 'Myus. Grabung 1964', IstMitt 15, pp. 43-64. . 1967. 'Myus. Grabung 1966', IstMitt 17, pp. 128-43. Weber-Lehmann, C. 1985. 'Spätarchaische Gelagebilder in Tarquinia', RM 92, pp. 19-44. Weickert, C. 1929. Typen der archaischen Architektur in Griechenland und Kleinasien, Augsburg. Welter, G. 1941. Troizen und Kalaureia, Berlin. Wescoat, B. D. 1981. 'The Temple of Athena at Assos: Recent Investigations', A]A 85, pp. 223-4. . 1982. 'The Temple of Athena at Assos: Style and Date', AJA 86, pp.289-90. . 1986. 'The Temple of Athena, Assos: 1982-1985', AJA 90, pp. 194-5. . 1987. 'Designing the Temple of Athena at Assos; Some Evidence from the Capitals', AJA 91, pp. 553-68. . 1988. 'Some Architectural Evidence for the Sources and Program of the Athena Temple at Assos', Πρακτικά του XII Διεθνούς Συνεδρίου

Κλασικής

Αρχαιολογίας,

Αθήνα

4—ΙΟ

Σεπτεμβρίουΐ983,

vol. 4> Athens, pp. 205-21. . 1995· 'Wining and Dining on the Temple of Athena at Assos', in The Art of Interpreting. Papers in the History of Art from The Pennsylvania State University, vol. IX, ed. S. Scott, pp. 293-320. Wesenberg, Β. 1983. 'Parthenongebälk und Siidmetopenproblem', Jdl 98, pp. 57-86. Wide, S. and L. Kjellberg. 1895. 'Ausgrabungen auf Kalaureia', AM 20, PP-267-326. Wiegand, T. 1904. Die archaische Poros-architektur der AkropoIis zu Athen, Cassel and Leipzig. Wiegartz, H. 1994. 'Aolische Kapitelle', AMS 11, pp. 117-32. Wiencke, M. 1954. 'An Epic Theme in Greek Art', AJA 58, pp. 285-306. Willemsen, F. 1963. 'Archaische Grabmalbasen aus der Athener Stadtmauer', AM 78, pp. 104-53. Williams, C. and H. Williams. 1990. 'Excavations at Mytilene, 1989', Classical Views n.s. 9, pp. 181-93. . 1991. 'Excavations at Mytilene, 1990', Classical Views n.s. 10, pp.175-91. Williams II, C. K. 1984. 'Doric Architecture and Early Capitals in Corinth', AM 99, pp. 67-75. Williams, D. 1980. 'Ajax, Odysseus, and the Arms of Achilles', AntK 23, p p . 1 3 7 - 4 5 -

Williams, H. 1993. 'Archaic architectural fragments from Mytilene', in Les Grands ateliers d'architecture dans le monde égéen du VIesiècle av. J.-C., ed. J. des Courtils and J.-C. Moretti, Paris, pp. 83-7.

333 W O R K S Winter, F. 1903. Die Typen der figürlichen Terracotten, I, Berlin. Winter, F. E. 1976. 'Tradition and Innovation in Doric Design I: Western Greek Temples', A]A 80, pp. 139-45. . 1978. 'Tradition and Innovation in Doric Design II: Archaic and Classical Doric East of the Adriatic', A]A 82, pp. 151-61. . 1991. 'Early Doric Temples in Arkadia', Classical Views n.s. 10, pp. 193-220. . 2005. 'Arkadian temple-designs', in Ancient Arcadia: Papers from the Third International Seminar on Ancient Arcadia held at the Norwegian Institute at Athens, 7-/0 May 2002, ed. E. 0stby, Athens, pp. 483-92. Winter, N. 1993. Greek Architectural Terracottas from the Prehistoric to the End of the Archaic Period, Oxford. Witte, J. de. 1842. 'Bas-reliefs d'Assos', Annali dell'Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica 13, pp. 317-20. Wolf, S. R. 1993. Herakles beim Gelage; Eine motiv- und bedeutungsgeschichtliche Untersuchung des Bildes in der archaisch-frühklassischen Vasenmalerei, Böhlau. Wolters, P. 1895. 'Bronzereliefs von der Akropolis zu Athen', AM 20, pp. 473-82. Woysch-Méautis, D. 1982. La Représentation des animaux et des êtres fabuleux sur les monuments funéraire grecs. De l'époque archaïque à la fin du IVe siècle av. J.C., Lausanne. Wroth, W. [1894] 1964a. Catalogue of the Greek Coins ofTroas, Aeolis, and Lesbos, repr. Bologna. . [1892] 1964b. Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Mysia, repr. Bologna. Wurster, W. 1971. Alt-Àgina I.r. Der Apollontempel, Mainz.

CITED . 1973. 'Dorische Peripteraltempel mit gedrungenem Grundriss', AA, p p . 200-11.

Yavis, C. G. 1949. Greek Altars, St Louis, Mo. Yeroulanou, M. 1998. 'Metopes and Architecture: The Flephaisteion and the Parthenon', BSA 93, pp. 401-25. Young, R. S. 1981. The Gordion Excavations Final Reports, vol. I: Three Great Early Tumuli, University Museum Monograph 43, Philadelphia. Zahn, E. 1983. Europa und der Stier, Würzburg. Zancani Montuoro, P. and U. Zanotti-Bianco. 1951. Heraion alla Foce delSele I. Ilsantuano. Il tempio della Dea. Rilievi figurati vani, Rome. . 1954. Heraion alla Foce del Sele II. 'Ilprimo thesauros', Rome. Zancani Montuoro, P. and D. Mertens. 1972-3. 'Divinità e templi di Sibari e Thurii', AttiMagnaGrecia, n.s. 13-14, pp. 57-68. Ziegenaus, Ο . 1957. 'Der Südbau; Ergänzende Untersuchungen', AM 72, pp. 65-76. Zimmermann, K. 1990. 'Archaische Dachterrakotten aus Histria', Hesperia 59, pp. 223-3. . 1991. 'Griechische Altäre in der Tempelzone von Histria', in L'espace sacrificiel dans les civilisations Méditerranéennes de l'antiquité. Actes du Colloque tenu a la Maison de l'Orient, 4-6 juin 1988, ed. R. Etienne and M.-T. Le Dinahet, Paris, pp. 147-54. . 1994. 'Traufziegel mit Reliefmäander aus dem Schwarzmeergebiet', Hesperia Supplement X X V I I , pp. 221-51. . 2007. 'Frühe Dachterrakotten aus Milet und dem Pontosgebiet', in Frühes Ionien. Eine Bestandsaufnahme. Panionion-Symposion Gûzelçamli 26. September-i. Oktober 1999, ed. J. Cobet, V. von Graeve, W.-D. Niemeier, and K. Zimmermann, pp. 631-6.

INDEX Achaemenid-style silver vessels 168 'Achaian' Doric 213, 214, 215, 220, 222, 223, 224, 225, 235, 236 Achilles 164, 181, 182, 184, 185-6, 188, 190, 191 Adramyttion, Gulf of ι, 201, 238 adyton 208-9, 23^> 2 4 I - 4 Aegean 1, 127, 167, 168, 211, 225-31, 232, 233, 240; see also Cyclades Aegina Temple of Aphaia I 57, 215, 220, 221, 238, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265 Temple of Aphaia II 101, 124, 128, 192, 209, 212, 221, 228, 232, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265, Fig. 93.4 Temple of Apollo II 221 Temple of Apollo III 223, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265 Aeolia 156, 166, 202, 203, 225, 228, 229, 231, 232 Aethiopis 181 Agamemnon 181, 191 Agios Athanasios, Macedonian Tomb at 240 Ahlberg-Cornell, Gudrun 162-3 Aigisthos 185 Ainos 203 Aischylos 181 Aitolia 173 Ajax 181, 184, 188, 191, 234 Akalan, architectural terracottas from 151, 156 Akerström, Ake 84, 86, 237 Akragas Temple of Athena 217, 232, 243, 247, 251, 257, 261, 264, 266 Temple of Demeter 243, 247, 251, 257, 266 Temple of Hera Lakinia 243, 251, 254, 257, 261 Temple of Herakles 214, 215, 217, 222, 232, 236, 244, 247, 251, 254, 257, 261, 264, 266 Temple of Zeus 215, 217, 232, 244, 247, 251, 254, 257, 261, 264, 266 Akrai, Temple of Aphrodite 209, 244, 248, 251, 254, 257, 261, 264, 266 allegory, mythological 128, 162-3 Alipheira, Temple of Athena 212, 215, 222, 223, 224, 237, 239, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265 Alyattes, sack of 229 Amphiaraos 181 Amyzon 156 Amyklai, Throne of Apollo 156, 191, 203, 205, 222, 226, 245, 249, 252, 255, 262, 265 Anatolia 127, 128, 132, 133, 135, 136, 143, 156, 166, 167, 168, 189, 190, 202, 203, 204, 211, 214, 225-31, 233, 235, 238, 239, see also Aeolia, Asia Minor, East Greece, Ionia, Mysia, Troad andesite 19 impact on sculpture 130 animal combat 4, 127, 129, 141-151, 175, 192-198, 233, 278, see also bulls, lions Ankaios 187 Antaios 161 Antandros 202 Antiope 182 Apollo 149, 171, 179, 183 Apollodoros 181 Apollonios 164 apotropaic imagery 128, 133, 141, 149, 173, 175, 176, 190, 191 Argos 209-10 Capitals C, D, and E 213, 252, 255, 262, 265

Temple of Hera I 241, 245, 259 Temple of Hera II 216-7, 22 ^ aristocratic valour, scenes of 128, 170, 171, 187, 190 Arkadia 204, 209-10, 213, 217, 223-4, 238-9 Artemis 140, 183 Asea: Temple of Athena Soteira and Poseidon 209, 223, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265 Temple at Hagios Elias 223, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265 Asia Minor 1, 10, 86, 88, 125, 136, 140, 141, 147, 184, 202-3, 22 7-8, see also Aeolia, Anatolia, Ionia, Mysia, Troad Assos akropolis, other architectural material from 284-91, Figs. 97-101 coinage 7, Fig. 3 history 7-8, 201-3 lower city 7, 13, 88, 125, 126, 286 nekropolis, 14, 15, 17, 202-3 archaic finds from 166-7, I88, 202-3, 233> 235 post-antique fortification walls 7-8, 9, 10, 15, 18, 43, 56, 114, 145, 146, 184, 195 Temple of Athena: architectural elements of akroteria 15, 19, 28, 88-9, 104, 122, 123-4, I37> 22 7~8, 232, Fig. 47 anta 28, 35, 40, 91-2, 227, Fig. 48, Pi. 32 anta capital? 91-2, 227, 284, 286, Fig. 49, PI. 61 antefix 14, 17, 85-6, 88, 89, 123, 125, 221, 228, 232, 237-8, 239, Fig. 46a, PI. 57 ceiling 19, 77, 83, 90, 97, 105-6, 108, 123, 125-6, 232 cella 16, 17, 31, 35, 38, 40, 56, 83, 92-3, 97, 123, 125, 208-9 colonnade 30, 31, 33, 39, 41-56, 81, 100,101, 113, 114, 147, 192,195, 198, 207-10, 211—14, 219-20, 225,235, 238, 241-4, 280, 283 column 10, 17, 24, 31, 33, 38-9, 41-56, 82, 90, 101, 194, 201, 206, 207, 222, 223, 224-5, 227> 2 36-8, 249-51, Fig. 24 capital 7, 10, ix, 13, 17, 18, 20, 23, 28, 30, 41, 43-56, 57, 64-5, 72-5, 82, 90, 101, 124, 192, 194, 195, 198, 204, 212-4, 22I > 222, 225, 231, 235, 237-8, 252-4, 270, Figs. 22, 25-28, 4ia-b, Pis. 35—44b shaft 8, 10, 20, 27, 28-9, 38, 41-3, 45-6, 82, 90, 101, 212-14, 222, 227, 235, 237, Figs. 16, 20-3, 26a, Pis. 33-4 door and doorframe 40, 93, 97-9, 206, 227, 284, 285, Figs. 52, 100, see also door wall, threshold entablature 4, 18, 20, 28, 30, 40, 56-75, 90, 91, 93, 101-3, 114, 127, 130, 131, 150, 192, 195, 200, 206-7, 2 I I > 2 14 —2 1 222_ 4> 225~6> 227, 235, 237, 239, Fold-out figs. 8-10 entablature, backing courses of 69-72, Figs. 36-40, Pis. 51-2 epikranitis 19,90,97,285,287 epistyle 1, 4, 5, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 20, 23-4, 28, 29, 39, 41, 46, 47-8, 49, 54, 56-65, 67, 69, 72-4, 83, 90, 91, 101, 103, 114, 124, 127-173, 174, 175, 176, 179, 190, 191, 192-198, 214-5, 216, 219-226, 231, 234, 235, 238, 255-61, 278-83, Figs. 13,17, 29-33, 4ia-b, 48, 54, 68-81, Pis. 45~47b, 76-102C regula(e) 39, 58, 60, 64-5, 69, 72, 78, 103, 114, 131, 135, 1 53J 155» 165, 192, 193-8, 214, 215, 219-20, 238 144-5, sculptured blocks of, see sculpture taenia 60, 63-4, 72, 83, 131, 164, 215 facade 31, 33, 35, 38-40, 41, 64-5, 67, 72, 101, 103, 108, 113, 124, 130, 144, 146, 153, 155, 159, 165, 190, 191, 192-5, 196-8, 207-8, 210, 214, 219, 220, 221, 223-5, 23^> 2 4°

312

INDEX frieze course 4, 13, 23, 24, 29, 30, 64, 65-9, 78, 81-2, 83, 85, 89, 90-1, 100-3, I0(>~7> 113-14, 123-4, 173-90, 191, 194-5, l97i 198-200, 214, 215-17, 219-21, 222-4, 234> 236-8, 255-61 metope 4, 9, 14, 17, 18, 19, 64, 65-69, 78, 82, 90, 101, 103, 108, 113, 114, 124, 127-33, I53) 155J 164, 173-91, 198-200, 204, 206, 215-7, 220-1, 223, 234-6, 238, Figs. 34, 82-90, Pis. 89, 93, ι03-1ι2 sculptured metopes, see sculpture taenia 67, 69, 176, 181, 215-16, 221, 235-6, 237-8 triglyph 10, 11, 17, 28, 65, 67-9, 82, 83, 90, 101,103, 108, 113,124, 130, 131, 146, 194-9, 2I4> 215—16, 217, 219, 221, 223-4, 225J 231, 235, 236, 237, Fig. 35, Pis. 48-50 geison, horizontal and lateral 8, 10, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27-8, 30, 41, 65, 69, 75-82, 83, 85, 88, 89, 90, 100-1, 103-4, 120, 122-3, 125, 152-3, 192, 195, 196, 197, 19S, 211, 217-19, 224, 225, 229, 231, 232, 235, 236, 237, 239, 262-6, Figs. 10-12,42-4, 53,55-61, Pis. 53-6, 66-9 corona 77, 80, 82, 101, 104, 114, 115 mutule 65, 69, 77, 78, 81, 82, 100, 101, 103, 104, 106, 108, 109, 113, 124, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 199, 214, 217, 219, 220, 225, 235-8 drip 77, 124, 217, 225, 235, 237 via 30, 65, 77, 78, 79, 103, 105, 106, 108, 112, 113, 120, 217, 236, 262, 264 geison, raking 17, 23, 28, 81, 82, 87, 101, 103, 104, 108, 115-22, 123, 124, 217, 231-2, 234, Figs. 66, 91, 93, Pis. 74-5 krepis 14, 18-9, 23, 24, 31-8, 130, 211-12, 226, 238, Fig. 8, Pis. 2, 3a-b, 29-3ic, Fold-out fig. 2 euthynteria, 18, 20, 24, 31-2, 211, 228, 229 steps 20, 24, 29, 30, 31, 32-3, 35, 40, 81, 97, 210, 211-12, 229, 241-4 stylobate, 8, 20, 24, 30, 33, 38-9, 40, 97, 113, 209, 210, 211-12, 221, 223, 224, 225, 229, Figs. 18-9 lion's head waterspout 15, 17, 19, 88, 123, 141, 228, 232, PI. 60 mouldings astragal 69, 85, 86, 204, 216, 228, 234, 238 cavetto 76, 81, 91, 115-16, 217 hawksbeak, geison crown 19, 30, 75, 76, 77, 81, 82, 83, 85,91, 101, 103, 108, 115, 116, 217-9, 2 3 I - 2 , 235, 236, 238, 265-6, Figs. 53, 61, 91 hawksbeak, geison soffit 115, 116, 124, 232, 265-6, Figs. 66, 93 kyma reversa 91-2, 286 peristasis, see colonnade peristyle, see colonnade pronaos 14, 31, 35, 38, 39-40, 41, 56, 57, 83, 90-1, 97, 123, 127, 138, 159, 193-4, 196, 197, 199, 206, 207-11, 212, 226, 236, 237, 238, 240, 241-4, Fig. 48, PI. 32 pteroma (pteron) 14, 15, 17, 31, 38, 39-40, 56, 57, 83, 90-1, 97, 122, 193, 201, 203, 207-9, 211, 226, 227, 235-6, 240, PI. 4 roof 16, 28, 80, 82, 83-89, 100, 122-4, I25> s e e antefix, sima, lion's head waterspout tiling 14-15, 16, 19, 83, 85, 88, 103, 104, 123-4, I25> 2 2 7 - 8, Figs. 45, 46c, PI. 59 woodwork 19, 76, 83, 122-3 sekos 28, 39-40, 90-9, 207-208, 210, 227, 229, 235, 239, 245-49 sima 15, 17, 81, 83, 85, 86-8, 89, 104, 122, 123, 124, 125, 149, 175, 221, 227-8, 231, Fig. 46b, PI. 58a-b thranos 83, 284, 285,287 threshold 35, 93, 97-9, 227 toichobate 18, 28, 35, 38, 91, 92, 93, 97, 99, 285, Fold-out Fig. 1 tympanon 8, 19, 20, 23, 29, 30, 75, 82, 89,100, 108, 113, 114-22, 130, 195, 284, 285, 286, Figs. 62-5, Pis. 70-3, Fold-out Fig. 12

wall 10, 24, 28, 35, 38, 39-40, 57, 91, 92-9, 122, 227, 229, 241-4, 280-2, 284 blocks 20, 32, 93-7, 287, Fig. 50, Pis. 62-5 orthostates? 70, 93, 94, 229, 285, Fig. 51 date of 7-8, 201-40 design alignment 31, 39-40, 65, 82, 90, 113-14, 193,194, 195, 197,198, 206, 207, 208-11, 214, 215, 219-20, 226, 235-6, 237-8, 240, 241-4, 280, 282 contraction 39, 40, 206, 210-11, 223, 236, 238, 241-4, 280 interaxial spacing 38-9, 41, 64, 78, 81, 90, 108, 113-14, 209, 212, 219, 236,280 plan 4, 14, 18, 33, 38-40, 193-4, 201, 204, 206-11, 223, 224, 225, 226-7, 235-40, Fold-out figs, ι, 3-5 proportions 40, 50-5, 56, 65, 77, 83, 90, 90-2, 99, 101, 204, 206, 208-10, 211, 213, 214, 217, 221-5, 227> 23J» 232> 235~~4°> 245~54, 2 59~ é 4 scale, architectural 31, 201, 204, 206, 207, 208-13, 2I9> 222> 223> 225, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240 earlier reconstructions of 8-17, 278-83, Figs. 4-7, 94-6 sculpture 127-201 clothing 132-133, 159, 166, 169, 185, 189-90, 233 hairstyle 10,132,133, 135, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 159, 162, 171, 173, 174, 175, 179, 182, 186, 188, 232, 233, 234, 235 isocephaly 131, 159, 165, 169 iconography, see individual reliefs, subjects, and themes narrative strategies 127-8, 149-50, 151, 163, 164, 170, 173, 175, 176, 191, 278 scale of imagery 127, 128, 131, 138, 140, 141, 143, 144, 146, 148, 149, 150, 151, 156, 158, 160, 161, 164, 169, 171, 173, 174, 190, 192, 193, 196, 197, 198, 225-6, 232, 233 sculptured epistyle A i and A2—confronted sphinxes 9,10, 13, 14,17, 28, 29, 65,127, 129, 131, 132, 133-8, 141, 154, 173, 174, 192-8, 232-3, 270-1, 278-83, Figs. 67-8, Pis. 76-9 A3—Herakles wrestling Triton 9, 10, 11, 13, 64, 114, 127, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 151, 158-64, 165, 166, 170, 177, 179, 182, 184, 185, 186, 189, 192-8, 206, 232, 234, 238, 271, 278-83, Fig. 80, Pis. 98100c A4—symposion 9, 10, 13, 127, 129, 130, 131, 133, 151, 156, 158, 159, 160, 164-73, J77> I79> 187, 192-8, 232-4, 271, 278-83, Fig. 8l, Pis. I0O-I02C A5, A6, A7, and A8—centauromachy on Mt. Pholoe 4, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 30, 64, 127, 129, 131, 132, 133, 135, 141, 151-8, 160, 168, 170, 175-6, 177, 181, 182, 185, 186, 192-9, 233-4, 271-2, 278-83, Figs. 76-9, Pis. 92-7 A9, Aio, A n , A12, and A13 - lions savaging prey 4, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 64, 91, 127, 129, 131, 133, 138, 141-51, 154> *73> *75> !76, 192-8, 233, 272-4, 278-83, Figs. 71-5, Pis. 82-91 A14 and A i 5—battle of rival bulls 9, 10, 13, 15, 30, 127, 129, 130, 131, 133, 138-41,176,179, 192-8, 233, 274, 278-83, Figs. 69-70, Pis. 80-1 sculptured metopes Mi—chase scene 181-4, Fig. 87, PI. 108 M2—runners 17 186-8, Fig. 89, PI. 109 M3—confronted sphinxes 173-4, Fig. 82, Pi. 103 M4—boar 174-5, Fig. 83, Pi. 104 M5—Europe on the Zeus Bull 17, 176-9, Fig. 85, PI. 106 M6—horse legs 15, 188, Fig. 90, PI. 112 M7—galloping centaur 175-6, Fig. 84, PI. io5a-b M8—quarrelling heroes 179-81, Fig. 86, PI. 107 M9—horse and rider 17-8, 188, Fig. 90, Pi. 111

INDEX Mio—supplication scene 4, 18, 19, ιοί, 103, 184-6, Fig. 88, Pis. iioa-b style of 8, 130-133, 135, 141, 143, 151, 155, 159, 176, 184, 193, 196, 198, 206, 217, 232-5 vessels depicted on 165-8, 171 technical features anathyrosis 20, 41, 57, 65, 69, 77, 85, 93, 97, 146, 196, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 282, 284, 285, 286 clamps and clamp cuttings 19, 24-7, 32, 33, 49, 67, 69, 72, 75, 81, 82, 93, 97, 100, 103, 104, 108,113, 114, 194, 197, 198, 211, 229, 231, 271, 273, 274,285 plain cutting 24-7, 32, 229-31, Fig. 14; Pis. 16-8 swallowtailed cutting 24, 27, 32-3, 211, 229, Fig. 15, Pis. 14-5 colour and painted details 30, 85, 125, 130, 131, 132, 133, 138, 141, 151, 159, 166, 188, 189, 217 direction of construction 29-30 dowels 27-8, 38, 41, 49, 81, 85, 108, 120, 122, 123, 124, 285 preliminary 24, 28, 194 foot unit 40, 82-3, 85, 204 lifting, shifting, and setting 20-4 lifting sockets with vertical channel 20-1, 81-2, 100, 101, 114, 231-2, Figs. 10-1 prying and pry marks 21, 23-4, 28, 29, 33, 38, 48, 56, 57, 64-5, 67, 69, 70, 72, 75, 81, 93, 97,99, 103,108,113,114,122,155,192,194, 220-1, 270, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276, 280, 282, 284, 285, 286, Pi. 13 setting lines 28, 39-40, 91, 92, 93 shifting and shift-holes 20-4, 29, 32-3, 48, 65, 69, 81, 122, 126, 194, 229, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274, 285, 286, 287, Fig. 13, PI. 13 U-shaped lifting channel 21-3, 82, 100, 103, 104, 108, 120, 231-2, Fig. 12 mason's marks 28-9, 30, 41, 60, 64, 65, 69, 75, 270, 271, Figs. 16-7, Pis. 19-26 nails and nail holes 19, 24, 28, 49, 80, 81, 82, 85, 97, 100, 101, 103, 104, 114, 122-4, I25> 22I > 2^7 quarrying 19-20, Pis. 5-8 rustication 20, 32, 93-4, 97, 228-9, 2^4> 2.85, 286, Figs. 50, 99-100, Pis. 29-3 ic, 63-5 tool marks 19-20, Pis. 9-12 Athena 7, 137-8, 140, 149-50, 151, 158, 163, 164, 173, 175, 179, 181, 183, 187 Athens 17, 140, 147-8, 161-3, ^4, 199-200, 201, 203, 205, 207, 213, 214, 215, 216, 221, 223-4, 233, 234, 235, 239 Agora Doric capital 252 Hephaisteion 17, 90, 193, 207, 232, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265 Stoa Basileus / Royal Stoa 222, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262 Akropolis Building A 215, 217, 223, 237, 238, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265, Fig. 91.2 Building Β 25 5, 259, 262, 265 Building C 255, 259, 262, 265 Building D 255, 259, 262, 265 Building E 255, 259, 262, 265 Dörpfeld foundation, see Old Athena Temple H-Temple 192, 200, 204, 205, 207, 210, 211, 213, 214, 215, 216, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 234, 237, 238, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265, Fig. 92a Old Athena Temple 128, 192, 205, 207, 210, 217, 219, 221, 222, 224, 225, 231, 232, 234, 237, 238, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265, Figs. 92c, 93.1 Parthenon 4, 57, 128, 140, 163, 199, 207, 216, 219, 226, 228 Athena Parthenos, helmet 137 Persian rider 190 Persian sack of 207

313

Poros pediments 128,147,148,150,158,160,161,162,163,206-7,233—4 Pre-Parthenon 207, 241, 245, 249 Propylaia 216, 228 Temple of Athena Nike 228 Kerameikos monument base 149 Round Building 223, 255, 259, 262 Pompeion, temporary structures near 140 Temple of Dionysos I 255 Attic pottery and vase painting 129, 147, 148, 149, 152, 157, 160, 161, 162, 165, 166, 167, 169, 171, 175, 177, 178, 180, 181, 182, 183-4, 185, 186, 188, 190, 202, 233, 234 Ambrosius Painter cup 171 C Painter Siana cup 183 Euphronios calyx krater 161 Gorgon Painter 233 Kleitias and Ergotimos, François vase 191 Lydos column krater, plate 140, 183, 233 Sophilos 233 Swan Group 202 Theseus Painter cup 171 Tleson Painter cup 179 Triptolemos Painter rhyton 170 Tyrrhenian amphorae 157 Würzburg, black-figure amphora with Europe inscribed 178 Attika 147, 171, 191, 201, 203, 204, 207, 208, 209, 235 base, from Lamptrai 171 Bacon, Francis Henry 4, 13-8, 33, 38, 67, 83, 92, 125, 202, 270 Bankel, Hansgeorg 209 Barringer, Judith 161, 164 Bassai, Temple of Apollo 216-7 Bathykles of Magnesia 203 Beazley, Sir John 188 Beyer, Immo 205, 264 Black Sea 125, 203, 228 boar i l , 13, 14, 18, 127, 133, 140, 141, 145, 146, 148-51, 174-5, 190, 192, 196, 198, 199, 233, 234, 273-4, 275, 278, Figs. 75, 83 Boardman, Sir John 152,162 Boeotian pottery 167, 183 Boston, Museum of Fine Arts 17, 89, 194 Calvert Stele 228 reliefs from the Temple of Athena at Assos, see Assos, Temple of Athena, sculpture, A i and A5 roof elements from the Temple of Athena at Assos, see Assos, Temple of Athena, architecture, antefix, lion's head water-spout, sima boxing 188 Briseis 181, 185, 191 Brize, Philip 163 Bronze Age 147, see also Mycenaean bull(s) 9, 10, i l , 13, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 133, 137, 138-41, 143-4, 147) 150, 173, 176, 179, 191, 193, 196, 197, 233, 272-3, 274, Figs. 6971, see also animal combat, Zeus Bull Caltagirone, sphinx relief from 173 Çanakkale, Archaeological Museum 188 metope from the Temple of Athena at Assos, see Assos, Temple of Athena, sculpture, M9 Polyxena Sarcophagus 132 cavalcade, see horse and rider centaur(s) and centauromachy 4, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 18, 57, 127, 129, 130-1, 132, 133, 135, 141, 150, 151-8, 164, 168, 170-3, 175-6, 179, 187, 188, 190-1, 192-3, 195, 196-9, 233-4, 235, 236, 239, 271-2, 275, 278, 280

314

INDEX

chariot race 171, 187, 188, 226 Cheiron 151 Chersonesos 228 Chest of Kypselos 187, 191 Chios, Emporio 203 Chian mouldings 227 pottery 149, 167, 202 sculpture 132 Choiseul Gouffier, Marie-Gabriel-Florent-Auguste de 8 chronology, challenges in establishing archaic architectural 204-7, 222-3, 232-40 Chryse, Temple of Apollo Smintheus 191 Ciro (Krimissa), Temple of Apollo I (Alaios) 208, 243, 247 civilised order over chaos and barbarity 129, 149, 151, 158, 164, 171-3, 191 Clarac, Frédéric de 160, 170 Clarke, Joseph Thacher 4, 5-6, 13-8, 33, 35, 38, 39, 40, 43, 46, 67, 70, 82-3, 85, 86, 88-93, 97, 108, 123, 125-6, 140, 145-6, 160, 162, 170, 179, 181-2, 190, 192, 194, 197, 198, 202, 207, 270, 278-80 Cook, R. M. 149 Corinth 203, 209-10, 238 Apsidal Building 215 capitals 02-10 213, 252 late archaic temple 2ion.73 Temple of Apollo II 204, 209-10, 213, 214, 223, 224, 237, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265 temporary structures at 170 Corinthian pottery 131, 138, 148, 149, 202 ambush of Thetis 161 boar hunt 175 centauromachy with Pholos 152, 156-7, 233, 235 sphinx and Athena 152 column krater, shape of 166 Chigi vase 191 Eurytos krater 170-1 Coulton, J. J. 50,204,210,213,232 Covel, John T. 8 Cyclades 147, 203, 217, 227, 229, 238, 239 Cypriote pottery 138, 169, 233 Cypriote sculpture 132, 166 Cyprus 128 Crisis of 1974 17 Cyrene 163,210,211,228 Temple of Apollo (archaic) 220, 222, 224, 241, 245, 249, 255, 259, 262, 265 Temple of Zeus 210, 217, 220, 223, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265

Corinthian Treasury (formerly) 262, 265 Doric Treasury, Marmarla 245, 249, 252, 255, 260, 262, 265 Massiliot Treasury 91,227 Monopteros 177, 179, 191, 214, 215, 216, 219, 220, 223, 232, 234, 245, 249, 253, 255, 260, 262, 265 Old Tholos 213, 215, 217, 219, 232, 238, 245, 249, 253, 255, 260, 262, 265 Sikyonian Treasury 245, 249, 253, 256 Siphnian Treasury 91, 128, 228, 229, 231 Stadion Fountain(?) 222, 223, 249, 253, 256, 260 Temple of Apollo IV (pre 548) 204, 249, 256, 262 Temple of Apollo V (Alkmeonid) 128, 199, 216, 224, 237, 238, 241, 245, 249, 253, 256, 260, 262, 265 Temple of Athena Pronaia I 212, 227, 241, 249, 253, 260, 262 Temple of Athena Pronaia II 211, 216, 224, 241, 245, 249, 253, 256, 260, 262, 265 Demeter 182-3 Demisch, Heinz 137 Didyma altar with sphinx 136 Temple of Apollo (archaic) 193, 211, 226, 278 Dinsmoor, William Bell Sr 40, 206 Diomedes 181 Dionysos 140, 151, 169, 170, 171 Dioskouroi 182,183, 187, 188 Doric peripteros (oi) 31, 201, 203, 205, 206, 207-8, 209-10, 211, 223, 236, 238, 239, 240 Dörig, José 162 Dörpfeld, Wilhelm 17

Dardanelles 201-2 Delian League 202 Delos 210, 229 Grand Temple of Apollo 209, 241, 245, 249, 252, 255, 259, 262, 265 Building with Peristyle Court 231 Heraion 219, 227, 229, 241, 245, 249, 255, 259, 262, 265 Letoon 229 Monument of the Hexagons 229 Treasury 5 249, 252 Delphi 147, 148, 179, 205, 211, 212, 213, 214, 217, 220, 226, 229, 232, 235 Athenian Treasury 128, 130, 199, 200, 216, 219, 220, 232, 249, 255, 259, 262, 265, Fig. 93.6

feasting 170-3, see also symposion Fellows, Charles 11-3, 195 Fikellura pottery 141, 149, 169, 174, 233, 235 Finster-Hotz, Ursula 5, 140, 161, 163, 170, 179, 182, 270, 277 Foce del Sele Temple of Hera I 130, 156, 157, 183, 187, 191, 199, 214, 234, 235, 243, 247, 251, 254, 257, 261 Temple of Hera II 130, 199, 208, 209, 210, 212, 214, 223, 243, 247, 251, 254, 257, 261 footrace 187-8 Melanion, Neitheus, Phalareus, Argeios, Iphiklos (named contestants) 187-8 Francis, E. David 205 funeral games 187-8, 190-1, 278

East Greece 132-3, 135-6, 156, 168, 202, 203, 226, 228, 233, 235, 240 see also Anatolia, Asia Minor Egypt 137, 138 Eleusis, 140 Telesterion, archaic Fig. 91.3 entasis 41, 206, 212, 213, 236 Ephesos 140, 202 Temple of Artemis, archaic 138, 141, 156, 168, 169, 211, 226 Third Council of 8 equestrian, see horse and rider Eretria, Temple of Apollo II 204, 205, 208, 209, 213, 236, 237, 238, 242, 245, 249, 253, 256, 260, Fig. 91.4 Erythrai, sculpture 132 Etruria 147, 168, 169 Loeb archaic tripods from 184 silver repoussé panel from 189 Europe 17,127, 129,132-3,141,164, 176-9,191, 198, 216, 217, 234, 236, 275 Eurytos, house of 170-1

INDEX Ganymede 182 Gargara Aeolic capital 203 coin from 16,125 warrior relief from 226 Gela, Temple of Athena (B) 207, 219, 244, 248, 257 Geometric Period 31 Gergithes 202 Glynn, Ruth 162-3 Gordion 203, see also Phrygia gorgon 133,136,175, 193, 226 griffin 15, 89 Gruben, Gottfried 1 Gullini, Giorgio 205 guttae 60, 77, 78, 131, 206, 214-5, 2I7> 2 37' 23^> 2.55—8, 262, 264 Gyges 202 Halikarnassos, Maussolleion 226 Halios Geron 160 Hegesistratos 204 hekatompedon (a) 31,207 Hektor, ransom of 185-6, 191, 234 Helen 160, 182, 183, 185-7, 191 Hera 140, 169, 183, 186, 187 Heraklaia Minoa 179 Herakles 131, 137, 140, 151, 170-1, 179, 181-2, 184 alexikakos 158, 164, 191 and centaurs 14, 127, 131, 151-8, 173, 233, 235, 239 and Triton 11, 13, 127, 128, 129, 131, 158-64, 171, 179, 184, 191, 193, 206-7, 2 1 1 > 2 3 4 > 2 3 7 > 2 3 ^ ) 2 3 9 > 2 7 * apotheosis of 162, 170, 171 at the house of Eurytos 170-1 banqueting and drinking 131-2, 171,234 Hermes 169, 171, 185 Hermione, Temple of Poseidon 242, 246, 256 Herodotos 201, 202, 203 Hesiod 164, 172 Hesperides, garden of 162, 163 Himera, Temple of Victory 217, 236, 244, 248, 251, 254, 257, 261, 264, 266 Histria, architectural terracottas 228 Hoffman, Herbert 137 Hölscher, Fernande 140, 149, 150, 170 Holtzmann, Bernard 15 8 Homer 160, 163, 175, 180, 181, 186, 188, 191 Iliad 175, 181, 186, 188 Odyssey 160, 181 Homeric simile 150-1 horse and rider 17, 187-90 Howe, Thalia P. 163 Hunt, Leigh 8-9, 195 hunting 148-9, 171, 175, 187, 190, 278, see also Kalydonian boar hunt Huyot, Jean-Nicholas 10, 195 hybridity 128, 238-9 Iasos, charioteer frieze 226 Ilion 140, 202, 203 Temple of Athena 203 Imbros 201 Ionia 127, 128, 132, 136, 156, 166, 173, 202, 203, 204, 214, 221, 227, 228, 229, 231, 233, 235, 238, 239, see also Anatolia, Asia Minor Ionian Revolt 202, 207, 239 Istanbul 13 Archaeological Museum 17, 82, 194, see also Assos, Temple of Athena, sculpture, Α ι , A2, A6, Aio, A13, Μι, M2, M5, M6, M8

Italo-Corinthian pottery 202 Itier, P.J. 283 Jason 140 Johnston, Alan 56 Junker, Klaus 216 Kalabaktepe near Miletos, sima 228 Kalapodi, South Temple II: 207, 208, 210, 211, 213, 236, 238, 242, 246, 249, 253, 256 Kalaureia, Temple of Poseidon 242, 246, 256 Kalydon, Temple of Artemis 216, 234 Kalydonian boar hunt 148-9, 187 kantharos 152, 165, 167-8, 172 Karaköy, near Didyma, relief from 132, 226 Karia, metal bowl from 167 Karystos, Euboia, pediment 147 Kea 229 Karthaia Temple of Apollo 219 Temple of Athena 211, 222, 229, 232, 242,246, 249, 2

53>

2

5 24^, 25°> 253> 25^> 26o, 263, 265 Treasury II Syrakousai? 231, 246, 253, 256, 260, 263, 265, Fig. 91.6-7 Treasury III 'Rope-Hole Bldg'? 2178, 222, 256, 260, 263, 266 Treasury IV Epidamnos 246, 253, 256, 260, 263, 266 Treasury IX Selinous 215, 246, 253, 256, 260, 263, 266 Treasury Older Sikyonian? 256, 260, 263, 266 Treasury X Metapontion 246 Treasury XI Megara 222, 223, 232, 246, 250, 253, 256, 260, 263, 266, Fig· 93-5 Treasury XII Gela Forehall 215, 224, 246, 250, 253, 256, 260, 263, 266 omphalos bowl 167, 203, 233 opisthodomos 31,208-9,210 Orchomenos (Arkadia), temple 205, 209, 210, 213, 214, 238, 242, 246, 2jo, 253, 256 Orestes 185 0stby, Erik 209, 219 Ovid 178 Palladion 7, 181 palmette(s) 85, 87, 89, 221, 228, 238 Paris, Musée du Louvre 9, 13, 127, 194, 195, 270, see also Assos, Temple of Athena, sculpture, A2-A4, A7-A9, A11-A12, A14-A15, M3-M4, M7 Paros 211,229 capital S26/27 253 reliefs 147 Temple of Artemis 219, 228, 242, 246, 250, 256, 260, 263, 266, Figs. 91.9, 93.7 Parzarh, architectural terracotta from 135 Pausanias 182, 183, 187, 226 Peisistratos 163, 204, 205 Peleus 161, 164, 179, 183-4, 188, 190, 191, 234, 274 pelike :68

INDEX Peloponnese, architecture in 207, 208, 209, 214, 217, 224, 235, 238, see also mainland Greece and individual sites Peloponnese, art and metalwork 174, 181, 183, 185, see also individual regions and cities Peirithoos 170, 183, 187, 188 Perachora omphalos bowls from 167 shieldband relief from 177, 178 tiles 231 Temple of Hera Akraia II 232, 242, 246, 256, 260, 263, 266, Figs. 91.8, 93.2 perirrhanterion 170 Persia, Persians 100, 163, 168, 189, 190, 202, 207, 239 personnel 5 phiale 165, 172 mesomphalos 167, see also omphalos bowl philotes 191 philoxenia 129 Phokaia 229 Mt Pholoe 151,158, 193 Pholos 132, 133, 135, 151-8, 173, 196, 235, 239, 271-2, 278, 280, see also centaur(s) and centauromachy, Herakles and centaurs Phrygia 128 Phrygian: fibulae 202-3 omphalos bowls 167 pottery 138 tumuli 167 Pindar 183 Pipili, Maria 157, 169 Piri Re'is 8 Polyneikes 181 Polyxena 132, 190 Pompeii, archaic temple 212, 243, 247, 254, 257 Poseidon 11, 140, 162, 163, 164, 171 Poseidonia 179,208,211,216,232 Europe metope 177, 179, 204, 216, 234, 238 Temple of Athena 209, 210, 211, 222, 236, 239, 243, 247, 251, 254, 257, 261

Temple of Hera I 214, 220-1, 223, 236, 243, 247, 251, 254, 257, 261 Temple of Hera II 215, 216, 220, 223, 243, 247, 251, 254, 257, 261, 264, 266

Poujoulet, Jean Joseph François 10 Prasidaki, Temple of Athena 209, 242, 246, 250, 260 Priam 179, 185, 191 Prinias, Temple A, sphinx 135 programme 4, 5, 18, 128-9, I3I> !33> i4°> M 1 , j48> 149, 150, 151, 156, 158, 170, 171, 173, 187, 190-1, 193, 196, 237

Prokesch von Osten, Anton, 9-10, 195 Proteus 160, 164, 170 'pseudo-dipteral' 31,208 Psilikorfi, Temple of Artemis Knakeatis 205, 210, 212, 213, 215, 217, 220, 223, 224, 238, 242, 246, 250, 253, 256, 260, 263, 266

punctuated equilibrium 204-5 Raczyfiski, Eduard 9 Raoul-Rochette, Désiré 13 Rhamnous, Temple of Nemesis 193 Rhodes 202-3 Rhodian pottery 174,202 Rhoiteion 181, 191 Richter, Otto Friedrich von 9, 10, 195, 271, 273, 274 Ridgway, Brunhilde Sismondo 128, 149-50, 179 Riemann, Hans 40

317

Robert, Carl 170 Robertson, C. Martin 1, 133 Roscher, Wilhelm 158 rosette(s) 69, 136, 221 runners 127, 129, 183, 186-8, 190, 234, 274, see also footrace sacrifice 9, 10, 140, 149, 203 Salamis 162 Samos 202, 203 altar, Rhoikos 136,228 altar, archaistic 136,211 Genelaos monument 169 Hekatompedon II: 226 North Building 168, 226 South Building 136,211 Temple of Hera, Polykratean 136 Temple of Hera, Rhoikos 211 Sardis 140, 201 sphinx from 136 Kybele shrine 127,226 architectural terracottas from 87, 138, 140, 156, 228 Sartiaux, Felix 4, 17, 38, 39, 85, 140, 155-6, 160, 162, 170, 192-4, 196, 270, 277, 278, 280-3, Figs. 7, 95-6 satyrs 171, 178, 182 Schmitt Pantel, Pauline 172 Schnapp-Gourbeillon, Annie 151 Schuchhardt, Walter 222, 225 scotia 213, 236 Selinous 179, 205, 208, 216, 232, 235 Temple A 236, 244, 248, 251, 254, 257, 261, 264, 266 Temple C 191, 209, 213, 215, 217, 219, 220, 244, 248, 251, 254, 257, 261, 264,266

Temple D 209, 214, 217, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 236, 244, 248, 251, 254, 257, 261, 264, 266, Fig. 92d Temple Ell 215, 217, 220, 223, 244, 248, 251, 254, 257, 261, 264, 266

Temple F 130, 199, 204, 214, 215-16, 220, 222, 223, 244, 248, 251, 254, 258, 261, 264, 266

Temple G 210, 214, 220, 224, 244, 248, 251, 254, 258, 261, 264, 266

Temple M 217, 258, 261, 264, 266 Temple Y 177, 199, 204, 207, 213, 216, 217, 220, 223, 234, 244, 248, 251, 254, 258, 261, 264, 266

Europe metope 177 sphinx metope 135 Serdaroglu, Ümit 4, 18, 202 Seven Against Thebes 181 sexual potency and fertility 140-141, 178 shieldband reliefs 160, 174, 177, 178, 180, 183, 184, 185, 191, 234-5 Shoe, Lucy 232 Sicily 147, 148, 179, 204, 208, 209, 210, 212, 213-4, 215-7, 23

2 2 ° ' 22I > 23x>

5-7 Sigeion 162, 163, 172, 191 Temple of Athena Glaukopis 203-4 Simon, Erika 187 Skepsis 231 Solon 162, 172 Sounion Temple of Poseidon I 201, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 236, 239, 242, 246, 250, 256, 260, 263, 266

Temple of Poseidon II 57, 193, 207 Sparta hero relief 167 Temple of Athena Chalkioikos 156

3

ι8

INDEX

sphinx 9, io, 13, 14, 15, 17, 65, 89, 123, 127, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133-8, 140, 141, 147, 154, 155, 173-4, !9°> 191, !93> !95> !9 6 -7, I98> l99, 228, 232-4, 236, 270-1, 274-5 Stageira, sculptured doorway 149, 233 Stesichoros 152, 179, 183 Stewart, Andrew 205 Strabo 201, 202, 203, 204 Stupperich, Reinhard 202 supplication 184-6, 198 Syme, grave stele 175 symposion 9, 10, 13, 127, 128, 129, 158, 159, 160, 164-73, I9I> '93> 196-8, 233-4, 271 Syrakousai Temple of Apollo 205, 213, 215, 219, 227, 244, 248, 251, 254, 258, 261, 264 Temple of Athena 215, 216, 244, 248, 251, 254, 258, 261, 264, 266 Temple of Zeus 244, 248, 251, 258, 264 Taras, Temple of Poseidon 243, 247, 251, 254, 257 Tegea, capitals A and Β 213, 253 Telephos 191 Tenedos 201, 202 Teos 203 Texier, Charles 10-1, 13, 18, 92, 160, 170, 278, Fig. 4 Thasos Aliki, South Building 227, 229, 241, 245, 249, 255, 259, 262 architectural terracottas from 151, 156 relief with Charités 165-6 wall construction and patterned wall blocks 229 Theognis of Megara 172 theoxenia 171 Thermon 210, 216 Temple of Apollo C 130, 234, 242, 246 Theseus 140, 182-3, 187-8 Thetis 161, 164, 179, 181-4, l 8 6, '88, 191, 234, 274, Fig. 87 Tiryns, capital 212, 253 Tityos 179, 183 Tokra 202

Trebenishte, bronze kraters from 166 Tree, sacred (Tree of Life) 133, 174 Triton i l , 13, 127, 128, 129, 131, 158-64, 166, 171, 179, 184, 191, 193, 196, 197, 198, 206-7, 2 I I > 234> 235> 237> 238> 2

39>

2

7*

Troad 1, 127, 160, 162, 163, 164, 172, 175, 179, 181, 184, 186, 187, 191, 201, 202, 203, 225, 228, 229, 231, 238, 240 Troilos 182, 190 Troy 140, 162, 181, 184, 185, 191 Trysa, Heroon 226 tuff 19, 30, 83, 88-9, 101, 103, 114-15, 123, 124, 184, 199, 276, 287 Tydeus 181 Utili, Frederico 202 Venturi, Robert 1 Vergina, Tomb II 4, 240 Vermeule, Emily 151 visual axiom 128 Vitruvius ι, 203, 219 West Greece see Magna Graecia, Sicily Wiegand, Theodor 231 Wild Goat pottery 131, 140, 141, 174 Winter, Frederick 209,214 Winter, Nancy 86 World War II 17,33,38 wrestling contest 183, 187, see also Herakles and Triton Xanthos 147, 190, 205, 238 Building G 138, 175, 233 Building H 136 Nereid Monument 226 xenia 158, 171, 191 Xenophanes 171, 173 Xerxes 202, 203, 239 Zeus 7, 140, 141, 182, 186, 191 Zeus bull 17, 127, 129, 141, 164, 176-9, 275

PLATES

I a - i b

PLATE Ι a. View of Assos from the north, with Pa§akoy in the foreground and Lesbos in the background. Photograph by author.

PLATE i b . View of Assos from the west, with reconstructed columns from the temple of Athena visible on the summit. Photograph by author.

PLATES

IC-ld

PLATE i c . View of Assos from the sea, with reconstructed columns of the temple visible from the summit. Photograph by author.

plate

i d . View of the akropolis from the south, with the theatre in the foreground and the agora in the middle ground.

P L A T E S 2-109

PLATE 2. Krepidoma of the temple from the north, as exposed in 1983, with remains of Byzantine houses in the middle g r o u n d . Photograph by author.

P L A T E S 3 b— 5

PLATE 3 b. Southwest corner of the temple showing rusticated masonry and paving flags.

PLATE 4. Sounding made in the pteroma at the southwest corner, October 1987. Photograph by author.

PLATE 5. Southern cliffs of the akropolis preserving quarry marks. Photograph by author.

P L A T E S 7-109

PLATE 6. Bedrock directly north of temple, with remains of wedge-shaped cuttings. Photograph by author.

P L A T E S 8-109

PLATE 8. Modern quarrying in the southern cliffs of the akropolis. Photograph by author.

PLATES

IO-I 2

clockwise from top left: PLATE το. Tooling on the top surface of column d r u m CD4. Photograph by author.

PLATE 1 1 . Mai'ks of the drove on the echinus o f c a p i t a l C I 7 . Photograph by author.

PLATE 12. Epistyle backer AB7; point and tooth-head hammer marks. Photograph by author.

PLATES

I 3 - I 4

PLATE 13. Southeast corner of the euthynteria with pry marks for first Step c o u r s e . Photograph by author.

fi*

•

PLATE 14. Clamp cutting on the euthynteria near the southwest c o r n e r . Photograph by author.

P L A T E S 18109

-α

ο t

OH

-ϋ c