chapter 1 The Parthenon’s North Colonnade: Comments on Its Construction

Lena Lambrinou

1 Introduction peristyle . Plant roots have also left patterns on the lower joint faces of the architraves where they rested The north colonnade of the Parthenon stood intact for on the capitals; this telltale indication was used by the more than two millennia until 1687, when the middle author to identify the sequence of the architrave blocks eight columns were blown outward by an enormous ex- on the north side of the Parthenon (Fig. 1.2) (Lambrinou plosion, triggered by a Venetian artillery shell which was 2005: 114–17). Likewise, manmade features on the upper- fired into the temple and ignited an ammunition dump surfaces of the capitals and under-surfaces of the stored there by the Ottoman Turks.1 This major injury to architraves, which consist of scars on the marble left by the was not completely repaired until the resto- metal pins or rollers that were used during construction to ration of Nikolaos Balanos in 1923–1931 (Fig. 1.1) (Balanos facilitate the placement of architrave blocks in their final 1940). Mistakes in the choice of materials and in the repo- position on the capitals, indicate the original associations sitioning of the ancient architectural members made dur- between and positions of certain blocks (Lambrinou 2002: ing this early 20th century project led the Greek Ministry 201; Lambrinou 2005: 113–14). of Culture to consider a new intervention that could rem- This chapter presents a series of new observations edy these problems for the sake of the long-term preserva- about the design and execution of the columns in the tion of the building. The resulting for the restoration north colonnade resulting from the restoration work. of the north colonnade, originally prepared in 1998 by Changes in the plan are evident at the stylobate level, civil engineer Kostas Zambas, was updated by the pres- ent author for the columns and architraves in 2001–2002 (Zambas 2002b; Lambrinou 2005). The new intervention began in 2001 and was completed in 2009. The architectural solution proposed in the new study involved identifying the original column positions, which was based on various criteria that were either “construc- tional” or “archaeological/historical”. Constructional criteria refer to the differences between architectural members dictated by the positions that they occupied in the original structure—such as the diameters of individ- ual column drums, which vary according to the columns’ entasis along their vertical axis; or variations in height and inclination along the sides of the architraves due to the curvature of the colonnade’s . Archaeological/historical criteria include differences or similarities between architectural members that have resulted from their positions on the monument and from the effects of time. An example is the distinctive traces of weathering that consistently appears on the north-facing column flutes, which is attributable to their exposure to the harsh northern winds. Another criterion which can demonstrate the location of adjacent drums is the traces left by later structures that were built against the

1 This chapter expands upon the author’s article in Greek published in electronic format in 2013: Lambrinou 2013a. figure 1.1 North pteron and colonnade author

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004416659_003 22 Lambrinou

figure 1.2 Imprints of plant roots on the upper surface of the north NC14130 (Tenth north column) drawing by author while the variations in the undersides of the lowest col- long history of the use of the building, we see the perfectly umn drums reveal techniques attributable to separate smoothed surface that the temple would have possessed teams of masons. Next, this chapter explores the surpris- when it was finished. Furthermore, the tooth of an iron ingly high degree of irregularity in the diameters of the chisel was found on the stylobate beneath the tenth col- Parthenon column drums, which is best explained by the umn, when its first drum, still in situ until the most recent inclination of the columns and the technique for execut- intervention, was removed. ing the entasis. The organisation of the workers finishing Traces of the lowest drums were eroded into the sty- the columns are considered in the conclusion. lobate by the penetration of water into recesses that had been cut around the base of the lowest drums to protect their lower edges from harm during setting (Fig. 1.3a–c). 2 Design Changes in the North Colonnade at the In addition, incised circles were discovered on the top Stylobate Level surface of the stylobate. It appears that these circles were intended to mark the positions of the columns prior to During the new restoration, the lowest drums of the seven their installation. These circles vary in size, however, from middle columns on the Parthenon’s north side, which had column to column (despite the columns having almost never before been moved from their original positions identical diameters). The diameter of the circles is usually (with the exception of the fourth and sixth columns), bigger than, and in one case equal to, that of the recesses were removed for structural and analytical purposes. Only around the base of the lowest drum (Table 1.1). They were six drums of the eleventh column were dismantled (i.e., incised on the pavement with large compasses, both ends down to the fifth drum). While the stylobate around the of which apparently had sharp metal tips. The small holes columns was given a careful final carving with a straight- at the centre of these circles left by the compass tip were edged chisel (lamaki), the invisible area inside the incised found exactly on the joints between the stylobate blocks circle on the stylobate under the columns alternatively beneath the columns (Fig. 1.3d). These holes have been in- exhibits a rough treatment, consistent with tooth-edged valuable in helping us to determine precisely the dimen- chisels (chontrodonti xoida) or more likely with toothed sion and accuracy with which each incision describes a hammers (thrapina) of various sizes (Figs. 1.3–1.4). In true circle, although the stylobate at the position of the those areas where the diameter of the lower drum exceed- sixth column does not preserve any trace of an incised ed that of the circle incised in the stylobate, the extremely circle. fine original finish of the stylobate surface is preserved— Of the six positions on the stylobate that preserve appearing just as it would have at the time of its comple- circles, the centre does not coincide with that of the re- tion. In these areas protected from damage during the cesses around the perimeter of the lowest drum or the