Destruction and Memory on the Athenian Acropolis Rachel Kousser

Thc Parthenon, constructed between 447 and 432 BCE on This analysis of the Parthenon and its antecedents has also the Athenian Acropolis, stands as tile most lavish, technically a broader significance as part of the history of Orientalism, a refined, and Programmatically cohesive temple on the Greek topic of much recent interest for scholars of Classical Greece. inainland, a fitting commemoration of the Athenians' spec- Philologists have researched the use of Orientalist tropes in tacular and unex p ected victories in the Persian Wars (Fig. 1). various literary genres, while art historians have analyzed The immense, all-marble structure was designed around a such topics as the depiction of Persians in Greek art,' the colossal statue of Athena Parthenos, depicted by the sculptor reception of Achaemenid material culture in Athens,7 and Picidias fully armed, and with an image of the goddess of representations of the Persian Wars in public Athenian mon- victory, Nike, alighting on her left hand (Fig. 2). In its archi- uments., One hitherto neglected area of inquiry has been the tectural sculpture as well, the Parthenon repeatedly alluded interconnections between Orientalism and iconoclasm. The to theiGreeks' struggle against the Persians, for instance, destruction of an enemy's sanctuaries was commonplace in thri(gh famous mythological contests: battles between men ancient warfare, and had been practiced by Greeks as well as an(I centaurs, Athenians and Amazons, Greeks and Trojans, Persians. Yet following the Acropolis sack, such iconoclastic gods and giants. activity came to be seen as a paradigmatic example of "Ori- An intlriguing but rarely noted feature of these battle nar- ental" impiety and violence. This consistent and highly influ- ratives is that they combine images of effortless victory with ential theme of Orientalist discourse originated in the Early those of valiant but unmistakable defeat. The Parthenon's Classical period and culminated in the Periklean Parthenon. south nielopes, for example, included not only scenes of men The significance of this discourse is twofold. To begin with, triumphing over centaurs but also images of these human it is critical for oui interpretation of the Parthenon, which protagonists caught, wounded, or trampled to death by their must be understood as a response to the destruction-the bestial opponents (Fig. 3). So, too, on the west metopes and desecration-of the Archaic Acropolis sanctuary and its im- the shield of'Athena Parthenos, we see dead Athenians as well ages. In this way, it is connected to a series of Orientalist as dead Amazons (Figs. 4, 5). These scenes of loss, although monuments and texts from Early Classical Greece and adopts neglected by scholars, were in fact critical to the Parthenon's their previously established narrative strategies (for instance, visual program; they represented, through the distancing the use of mythological analogies for the Persians), albeit in guise of myth, the price paid in human suffering for the a more comprehensive and far-reaching manner. Seen from achievement of Gireek victory. an Orientalist perspective, the Parthenon therefore appears Scholars have often stressed the thematic importance of less as a unique, unprecedented monument than as part of a the lersian Wars of 490 and 480-479 BCE fbr the art of well-established tradition, in which works of art helped to Classical Athens, above all, for the Periklean building pro- preserve and transform the memory of the Persian sack for an grain on the Acropolis.' But they have not paid sufficient Athenian audience. This allows us to appreciate more fully attention to the Athenians' most direct experience of the the debts to history of this "timeless" monument.! wars: the destruction of their city's major sanctuaries by the The Athenians' extremely effective presentation of the 2 and the sack of the entire polis in 479. Ptersians in 1801BCE Acropolis sack as a typically barbaric act has also had signif The visual program of the Parthenon, shot through with icant long-term consequences for scholarship in the history scenes of suftering and loss, suggests the merit of reexamin- of art. As Zainab Bahrani has argued, "Aligning themselves ing ihe temple in these terms. So does the building's site, on with the ancient Greeks, [scholars] see the mutilation and the Ac ropolis-indeed, on the very foundations of an earlier theft of statues as a barbaric act of violence."") And their teiple (destroy'ed by the Persians. conclusions have been shaped bv Orientalist Greek texts and 11 is thus heuristically useful to consider the Parthenon as monuments, rather than relevant Near Eastern sources: a response to the ancient world's most fanlious-and notori- o(ls-act of iconoclasm. At the same time, it is important to not only have stereotypes been utilized in the interpreta- show how this response was neither inevitable nor easily tion of this [iconoclastic] practice, but a privileging of one achiewvd. It was instead the culmination of a lengthy process, type of ancient text over all others has also aided in its one that is rarely studied, but worth our attention, because it perception as a "senseless" act of violence, and thus serves helps to illuminate the end result. This process includes a the purposes of the Orientalist model by validating two of series of Athenian responses to the Persian sack, from the its main abstractions as defined by [Edward] Said: Orien- reuse of architecutral fragments in the citadel walls to the tal violence and Oriental despotism.t ' sculptural program of the Periklean Parthenon. As the dis- play of danaged objects gave way to reworkings of the story This has complicated the interpretation of Near Eastern icon- within the timeless world of myth, the memory of the sack oclasm, obscuring its connection to deep-seated beliefs re- becanie increasingly divorced from its historical foundation.' garding the close relation between image and prototype. 264 ARI BIL I IIN SEPI F.MBER 20109 V1OIA ME XCI NUMBER 3

1 Temple of Athena Parthenos, Acropolis, Athens, 447-432 BCE (photograph FA6523-0_2100006,1, provided by the Forschungsarchiv fuir Antike Plastik, K61n)

A like attitnute has had a similarly problematic effect oil topography of the Acropolis. This rocky outcrop south of the classical scholarship. It has discouraged the analysis of icon- Archaic city center had been inhabited from Mycenean times oclasnu in Helle,nic culthUe, although well-documented inci- onward, and by 480 BCE was both the site of the Athenians' dents such as the mutilation of the herms in Athens in 415 most important temples and dedications and a well-fortified BCE during the Peloponnesian Wars demonstrate its signifi- citadel."" On this prominent, highly visible site were located cance for the (.reeks. But the discourse on iconoclasm two major buildings. To the north stood the Late Archaic prescrved in Hlellenic literarv sources--in which it is always Temple of Athena Polias, which housed a revered olive-wood the work of barbarians or social deviants--has allowed schol- statue of the goddess, so old that the Athenians believed it ars to characterize the destruction of images in Greek culture had fallen from heaven."' To the south was an all-marble as a limited and marginal phenomenon, unworthy of study. temple (the so-called Older Parthenon), likely initiated after In so doing, historians of classical art have arbitrarily closed the first Persian War in 490 BCE, and still under construction; offa potentially fruitful avenue of approach to their topic. Yet at the time of the sack, the building reached only to the 5 the study of, Hellenic iconoclasm has important implications height of the third column drum.' Besides these major fo, the role of the image in (;reek society. temples, the site accommodated a number of more modest but still significant constructions: a monumental ramp and 7 The Acropolis in 480 BCE: Siege and Destruction gateway to the Acropolis,' a great altar,1 a shrine to Athena To understand the significance of the Persian sack for the Nike,'1 and a series of small-scale buildings generally identi- Athenians, it is necessary to consider first the functions and fied as sacred treasuries, whose architectural adornment has 1)F STRUC(T ON \N1 MEMORRY ON 11E ATFHENI AN A( ROPOI 1, 265 been preserved but whose foundations have not survived, due to later rebuilding on the site. 9 Comnplenmenting this architectural ensemble was an impres- Sive population of statues and other votive dedications. Best known are the korai, which numbered at least fifty at the time of the sack (Figs. 6, 8)):2 there were also a series of equestrian statues, like the Rampin Rider, as well as victory monuments, such as the dedication of Kallimachos, which likely commem- orated this military leader's role in the Athenian victory at Marathon in 490 BCE.21 Such costly marble statues were most (Iften set uip) by the wealthy, but we have as well more humble votives: bhlack- and red-figure vases, terracotta reliefs, bronze figurines, and cult equipment. 22 As even this brief list of monuments suggests, the maps and models of the Late Ar- chaic Acropolis are thus somewhat misleading. In addition to the ma•lor buildings they show, we have to imagine a space Craninied with objects of all sorts, everywhere; this was for the Athenians tihe best way to pay tribute to the numinous power that sutfitsed the entire site. These buildings and monuments offer abundant testimony to the sacred character of the Late Archaic Acropolis. Yet although the Athenians themselves, arid, subsequently, mod- crn scholars, have tended to focus on this aspect, the site's strategOic importance in 4801 BCE is also clear. In fact, this dual 2 nature of the Acropolis-as both citadel and sanctuary 3•- helps to explain the thoroughness of the Persians' destruc- tion of the site and, at the satne time, the vehemence of the Athenians' response to it. In 480, the Acropolis was fortified all around with ancient atnd imposing walls, constructed of immense, irregularly shaped boulders, which identifies them as Mycenean in ori- gin (Fig. 7) .24 Within these ancient walls, augmented at the top by new wooden palisades, the defenders of Athens made 2 Allen LeQuire, after Pheidias, reconstruction of Athena tieir last stand against the Persians. The story is given in Parthenos. Nashville Parthenon, Tennessee (photograph I let(rdotos, who provides our only extensive account of the copyright the Metropolitan Government of Nashville/Garv Persiatn sack; his description, moreover, can be corroborated Layda 2004) at nmany points by the archaeological evidence. 25 According to I lterodotos, the defenders of the citadel were few in num- ber, since most Athenians had agreed to abandon the city; be considered militarily useful. As the archaeological remains following the plan of' their general, Themistokles, they had testify, they not only destroyed the citadel's walls-which sailed to the nearby island of Salamis and staked their hopes were, from a strategic point of view, the logical target-but 21 o0l a naval victory. ' But those who remained in Athens put also burned the temples, tore down their architectural adorn- lit) a valiant defense, manring the walls and rolling down ment, attacked statues, overturned reliefs, smashed pots.:"" boulders onto the oncoming Persians.2 7 Their defenses failed Although recent scholars have correctly challenged the tra- at last only because the Persians came tip the difficult east ditional view (in which all damage to Archaic material was side of tIle Acropolis, which the Athenians had left unguard- automatically attributed to the vindictive Persians), enough 25 ed. T,hC defellders, overwhelined, threw themselves off the evidence remains to suggest that this was a quite impressivelN citadel walls or sought sanctuary in the Temple of Athena thoroughgoing and targeted effort. , 29 Polias, where they were massacred by the Persians. The new The damage wrought by the Persians can be clearly seen in masters of the citadel tore down the walls, then plundered their treatment of statues. To begin with, it is useful to and set fire to the buildings within. consider the monument of Kallimachos mentioned above, It is inmportant to stress that this was, in terms of wartime with an inscribed column topped by a sculpted figure of Nike strategy, atn eminently sensible decision by the Persians. The or possibly Iris, messenger of the gods.1 '2 About sixteen and a Acropolis had served as Athens's citadel from Mycenean half feet (five ineters) tall and set up in a prominent location tities onward; it was a well-fortified and defensible military northeast of the Older Parthenon, it was a highly visible site, not just a collection of temples. Given that the Persians celebration of the lopsided Athenian victory over the Persians did not intend toiuse it themselves, they were well advised to at Marathon; according to Herodotos, 6,400 Persians per- destioy it, lest it prove again a formidable base of operations ished in the battle to 192 Athenians.:' Kallimachos's monu- for the Athenians. ment appears to have attracted particular attention during I towever, the Persians in 480 went far beyond what might the Acropolis sack. The inscribed column was broken into 266 ARI BU! AIIIN SEP'I"EMBER 2009 VOI' ME XCI NUMBERI

3 South metope 28 of the Parthenon, Athens. British Museum, London (artwork in the public domain; photograph © The Trustees of the British Museum)

more than one hundred pieces, while the statue had its face seems to me unlikely.' 0 As close observation of the statues smashed and its body cut in two. shows, the damage follows predictable patterns, and the Elsewhere on the Acropolis, mutilated statues proliferate. marks of beheading are congruent with those observed on One kore had her head, feet, and arms broken off; her body sculptures clearly attacked by the Persians, as on the Acrop- was also cut ofl at the knees-modern restoration has left olis kore attacked with an axe (Fig. 8). They are also congru- traces of the ancient action visible-and the torso attacked, ent with material that can be associated with Persian attacks notably around the breasts and buttocks (Fig. 8). To judge on other cities, and more broadly with attacks on statues from the long, narrow scars, this was done with an ax.:) The elsewhere in the Ancient Near East.4' I would therefore see head of another kore was likewise attacked with an ax, whose the broken, battered, and beheaded statues of the Archaic marks are visible particularly in a long cut to the back of the Acropolis as predominantly Persian, not Athenian, handi- head, made as though to split the skull.'1 ,5 These are only the work. most obvious cases; other statues manifest traces of burning, An illuminating contrast may be drawn between the Acrop- their surfaces pitted with small black marks or signs of ther- olis statues injured by the Persians and the grave monuments mal fracture analogous to those seen in the columin drums of taken down and reused by the Athenians to rebuild their city the Older Parthenon. 36 Or the noses, cheeks, or chins have wall in 479 BCE.42 Some scholars have sought to read the been smashed with what looks like a hammer or mallet (Fig. reworking and reuse of these grave monuments as highly 6); on male statues, the same weapon seems often to have motivated, whether as the defacement of the images of the been turned against their genitalia.37 old aristocracy by the new postwar democrats or as the en- 4 Recently, scholars have argued that the destructiveness of listment of powerful heroic ancestors in defense of the city. 3 the Persian sack has been exaggerated, and that more allow- Catherine Keesling has suggested that in some cases, at least, ance should be made for accident and for later Athenian faces were obliterated in order to deprive the statues of their actions. It is, of course, reasonable to see some injuries as "power prior to incorporation in the wall.4' Close observa- accidental. The heads, artns, and feet of statues are necessar- tion of the sculptures, however, casts doubt on these theories. ily fragile and tend to break ofI, even without iconoclastic While the Acropolis statues were injured in a manner that effort. Other in juries are harder to explain in this way- might have been directed toward live human beings-throats breaks at the waist, one of the thickest and most solid parts of slit, hands and feet cut off-the grave monuments appear sculptures"--and many bear traces of human effort, such as more arbitrarily and pragmatically altered. For reliefs, pro- the ax and hammer marks described above. It has been jecting surfaces were smoothed down (such as National Mu- proposed that the Athenians themselves might have in jured seum, Athens, inv. nos. 5826, 2687), and monuments in the some Archaic sculptures to desacralize them before burial- round were lopped and trimmed to approximate, insofar as beheading them as a form of"quasi-ritual 'killing' "-bbut this possible, foursquare blocks (such as Kerameikos Museum, DESTRUCTION AND MEMORN ON IHE ATIIINIAN ACROPOLIS 267

4 West Melope 13 of the Parthenon, showing an Amazon (on horseback) attacking a fallen Athenian (drawing by Marion (ox, artwork © John Boardman)

5 Shield of Athena Partlheinos showing a battle between 6 Kore from the Athenian Acropolis, ca. 520-510 BCE, found Atlhenians and Amazons, with a (lead Athenian and a dead in a cache of 14 statues near the Erechtheion. Acropolis Aimazon a( the base of the shield (drawing by E. B. Harrison, Museum, Athens, 670 (artwork in the public domain; arlwork © E. B. Harrison) photograph provided by Werner Forman/Art Resource)

Athens, iiv. no. P 1052)."ý' In both cases, the sculptures were On the Acropolis, the attacks on sculptures, and the de- trcaled in a manner designed to enhance their usefulness struction of the sanctuarv more broadly, must have de- withiun their new setting: the Themistoklean wall, rebuilt in manded lengthy and painstaking effort. Why was it necessarv? haste by the Athenians just after the conclusion of the Persian To answer this question, one should begin by stressing that Wars."'ý The grave monuments from the lower city of Athens Athens was not the only city to suffer such an attack at the thus furnishi a useful example of the pragmatic despoliation hands of the Persians. Their invading armies had destroyed as and reuse of images, whereas the Acropolis sculptures exem- well, for example, temples of Apollo at Eretria, Abae, and plif• the programmatic mutilation of works of art.4 7 Didyma.41 So, too, we know that the Persians attacked or 268 ARI BLIL I.EI+N S TLNEI BEMR 2009 N\i01tiMV XCI N\ -l BERt

7 A stretch of Mycenaean wall incorporated into that of the Classical Propylaea, late 13th centuly BCE. Acropolis, Athens (photograph provided by.]. M. Hurwit)

abducted images in a number of cities: the statue of Artemis Braurnonia from Brauron, of Apollo fr om Didyma, and of 8 Kore attacked by the Persians, with ax marks on the torso. Mardcukk frnom Babylon; ý"from Athens itself, they took the first Acropolis Musetunm, Athens, 595 (artwork in the public version of the Tyrannicides monument, subsequently re- domain; photograph provided by the Acropolis Museum) turned fi-om Susa to its place in the Athenian Agora by Alexander the Great or one of the Seleucids.50 The Persian activity in Athens could be taken to be part of a broader cultural practice, which has been documented as well for Troy; only then can the city be taken. This popular myth other ancient Near Eastern cultures, such as the Medes, indicates that the Greeks also found a powerful connection Babylonians, and Elanrites.'5 As Bahrani has pointed out, between the physical form of the statue and the god it rep- these incidents were by no means random.' Rather, they resented.) So does the Greek practice of chaining down testiFy to the widespread ancient Near Eastern belief that the potentially wayward statues, regularly attested in the literary image could function as a substitute, an uncanny double, for sources, as well as the frequent resort to dolls inhabited by the person or god represented; therefore, damage to the spirits in magic rites.55 And historical incidents-such as the image could injure the prototype also, even beyond the minutilation of the herms during the Peloponnesian Wars, 56 or grave. the destruction of the portraits of Philip V and his ancestors Although such convictions were denigrated, or even re- in 200 BCE 57V-demonstrate that later Athenians at least were jected, in Greek philosophical speculation, they can fre- well aware of the powerful effects such iconoclastic acts could quently be discerned in Panhellenic myth as well as local have, for good or ill. What is distinctive in Greek attitudes religious practices.5' They appear, for example, in the myth toward iconoclasm seems to be the manner in which it was of the Abduction of the Palladion, in which Odysseus and both practiced and problematized--often typed as barbaric Diomedes abduct the statue of Pallas Athena that protects or deviant, yet recurrent in Hellenic culture. DESTRI CTION AND MEMORY ON itHE AIHEN1IAN ACROPOLIS 269

1t consequently seems reasonable to assume that the attention to the architecturalremains, whether left in ruins or Greeks recognized and understood the motivations behind used as spolia. At the same time, I have concentrated on those lie Persian sack of the Acropolis. Indeed, their own previous monuments that are demonstrably Archaic in date and that aclions may have constituted a concrete historical precedent were therefore available to the Persians at the time of the tor it. According to I lerodotos (5.102), the Persians justified sack.62 They seem to me to offer the clearest and most thein attack as retaliation For Athens's involvement in the sack concrete evidence for what the Athenians did in response to of the Persian plrovincial capital Sa dis, including the destruc- the Persians' actions. tion of the temple of Cybele there, in 499.'8 Notoriety has Let us begin with what was, significantly, not done, that is, attached itself to the Persian sack of the Athenian Acropolis, with the temples left in ruins. Taken together, the literary, rather than, say, Sardis or Eretria, not because it was unusual epigraphic, and archaeological evidence suggests that the at the time hot because of the extraordinary ways in which the temples on the Acropolis remained virtually as tie Persians Alhenians chose to commemorate it; their actions thus merit had left them, with the possible exception of some shoring up scrutiny next. of the Temple of Athena Polias."" The treatment of the ruined temples constituted the most notable of the commem- Initial Athenian Responses, 479-447 BCE: Ruins, Relics, orative practices adopted by the Athenians and must have and Ritual Burial had the most far-reaching impact on the inhabitants' lived Following their final victory over the Persians at the Battle of experience. After all, in the Archaic period, these had been Plataia in 479, the Athenians returned to their city to con- the preeminent religious buildings of Athens and the culmi- front a desolate landscape of hbroken statues and smoke- nation of the most important festival, the Panathenaia."4 scarred temp)les. As is well known, they did not undertake a They continued to preside over acts of worship-the very day large-scale rebuilding of the temples on the Acropolis until after the sack, the Persian King Xerxes had his Athenian the initiation of the Parthenon in 447, some thirty years followers carry out sacrifices on the Acr opolis65'-and it must later."'9 In the interval, they were by no means inactive. have been quite striking for the Athenians to conduct their Rathiir, they engaged in a number of commemorative prac- obsequies among ruins, for a period of thirty years.""(• Even for tic'es-creating, in cssence, ruins, relics, and ritual burials- those who rarely ventured to the citadel, there wotld have whose' traces in the landscape were significant for the devel- been indications of the destruction in Athens's skyline. The opin(rit of the citadel latcr on. These practices have also their Archaic temples of the Acropolis were substantial, promi- own inherent interest, as a series of attempts by the Athenians nently placed buildings, and the largest among them, the to (oitic to terins with, to represent, and sometimes to con- Temple of Athena Polias, must have been visible from afar, ccal the trannma of the Persian sack. In this way, they help to just as the Parthenon is today. And then they were gone. illustrate the workings of the collective memory of the Athe- Especially in the immediate aftermath of the sack, the ab- nians in the Early Classical period. The commemorative ac- sence of these familiar landmarks must itself have repre- tiots took two forms: practices involving the damaged terrain sented a kind of presence, a constant reminder of what was of the Acriopolis itself, and Early Classical representations of no longer there. the Persian Wars in literature and art. Taken together, they Such reminders were, it should be said, by no means show the nianner in which the destruction of monuments restricted to Athens. Even in the second century CE (that is, began to be depictcd by the Greeks as exclusively, and char- some six hundred years after the Persian Wars), the Greek actcristically, barbaric-a paradigmatic example of the Per- travel writer Pausanias claimed he saw temples scarred by the sians' capacity for senseless violence. Typed as something Persians: the Temple of Hera on Samos, of Athena at Pho- G;reeks did not do, iconoclasm became "other," a develop- caea, of Hera on the road to Phaleron, of Demeter at nicut with important consecquences for the future. Phaleron, of Apollo at Abae, and all the temples in the In recent years, scholars have paid particular attention to territory of Haliartus."77 the question of which monuments, precisely, were destroyed Later literary sources, and most modern scholars, have by the Persians.ý"" Beginning with Jeffrey Hurwit in 1989, explained these ruined temples with reference to oaths sworn ihese scholars have reexamined the evidence for the destruc- by the Greeks, most famously, in the case of Athens, the much lion layer on the Acropolis (the so-called Perserschutt); the debated "Oath of Plataia." According to the late-fourth-cen- emphasis has been on using archaeological evidence to iden- tury Athenian orator Lykourgos, the Greeks fighting at the fily which deposits consisted solely of Archaic material and Battle of Plataia in 479 BCE promised that "of all the temples which were mixed, incorporating sculptures of later date also. burned and thrown down by the barbarians I will rebuild The goal has been to elucidate, with greater precision, the none, but I will leave them as a memorial for future genera- chrlonological development of Greek sculpture; this has been tions of the impiety of the barbarians" (Against Leokrates 81 ). b most recently and thoroughly carried out by Andrew Stew- A similar oath was sworn by the lonians, according to Isokrates, an earlier-fourth-century orator (Panegvricus 155- While my research is much indebted to these scholars, my 57). The Plataia Oath is also given, with some alterations, by appro)ach and aims are difierent. I draw on a wider range of the first-century BCE historian Diodorus Siculus (11.29.3-4), cvidetice (including historical and epigraphic sources as well and Pausanias (10.35.2) explains the ruined temples at Abae as archacolohgy) to analyze the Athenians' interventions on and Phaleron in analogous terms during the Roman period. the Acrtopolis during the Early Classical period; my focus is on There thus arose in the fourth century, if not earlier, a very the varied strategies they adopted in order to come to terms consistent and frequently replicated literary discourse linking with the Persian sack. In consequence, I have paid more the ruins to memorN, with each smoke-scarred temple func- 27() AR I BUltIA I IN SE PTIEM BE R 2009 X 0[ 1I XCI N UMISE R :

9 View of a section of wall northwest of the Erechtheion, containing parts of the entablature of the Temple of Athena Polias, Acropolis, Athens (photograph by the author)

tioning as a memorial (hYpomriema) to Oriental violence and destroyed temples before acting unilaterally. However, the impiety. authenticity of the Congress Decree, like that of the Plataia These oaths, although convenient explanations for the Oath, has frequently been questioned; as it is preserved in ruined temples, are problematic, the "Oath of Plataia" pat - only one source, written over five hundred years after the ticularly so. It does not appear in contemporary fifth-centtirv event, skepticism is perhaps in order.;' sources; its absence in I-lerodotos, with his very full account of Therefore, rather than placing stress on a formal Panhel- the Battle of Plataia, is particularly striking. So, too, the lenic oath or decree, the existence of which is difficult to Plataia Oath is given differently on the only other fourth- prove, I would emphasize instead how the Athenians acted- century source for it, an inscribed stela set up in Acharnae, leaving the temples in ruins for the first thirty years, and then where the "temples clause" is left out;' ') Athenian accounts of gradually beginning the process of reconstruction, with the it were attacked as "falsified" by the fourth-century historian Parthenon first, then the other temples on the Acropolis, and Theopompos:71 and Lykourgos is demonstrably inaccurate continuing even into the fourth century with sanctuaries such on historical questions elsewhere in his speech.7' Finally, in as that of Apollo Patroos in the Agora. 76 Moreover, it is the case of Athens, at least, the oath was conspicuously vio- noteworthy that these temples, set up to replace the ones lated by the construction of a series of temples from the destroyed by the Persians, still coexisted with Monuments mid-fifth century BCE on, including not only the Parthenon more visibly connected to the sack. Herodotos, for instance, but also the Temple of Poseidon at Sounion, Nemesis at saw walls scarred by the fires of the Persian sack on the Rhamnous, and Athena at Pallene, all on the sites of Attic Acropolis, and Pausanias recorded blackened and battered 72 sanctuaries destroyed by the Persians. statues of Athena there as well.7' It is even possible that the Clearly, the written sources on the Plataia Oath are in back room of the Temple of Athena Polias survived the sack tension with one another, as well as with the archaeological and was shored up enough to be used until the Erechtheion, evidence. Scholars have struggled to reconcile them, propos- a small Ionic temple, was completed at the end of the fifth ing, for example, that the oath may have been abrogated century BCE; this, at any rate, is suggested by inscriptions that after the conclusion in about 450 BCE of a final peace treaty refer to precious offerings stored in the "Opisthodomos" (the with Persia. 73 In support of this theory, some have cited a Greek term for the back room of a temple), and Xenophon's passage in Plutarch's Poikles (17), describing what is known notice that the "ancient temple of Athena Polias" burned to modern scholars as the Congress Decree. 7 According to down only in 406/5 BCE.78 Plutarch, this decree of about 450 BCE invited the Greek Fragments of the ruined temples were also preserved and cities to a meeting in Athens, to discuss, among other mat- displayed as part of the rebuilt walls of the citadel (Figs. 9, ters, "the Greek temples which the barbarians had burnt"; 10). Here we are on more secure ground than with the when the Spartans refuised to attend, the idea was dropped. "Opisthodomos," since besides literary sources putting the The account in Plutarch, if' accurate, could help to justify rebuilt walls in the Early Classical period, we have the archae- Athenian rebuilding at this time; the Athenians could claitn ological evidence of the walls themselves and of the excava- to have sought a Panhellenic solution to the issue of the tions conducted in association with them. There are two DESTRUCTION ANI) MEMORN ON TlHE ATIHNIAN ACROI'Ol IS 271

10 View ol a section of wall northeast off he Ercchtleiion, containing coltilin druils front tile ()lder Parteiinon, Acropolis, Althens (photograph by the author)

Ina tjorstretlches of the rebuilt walls with temple fragments: fragments on display were powerftl because of their direct I liefirsl northwest of the present-day Erechtheion, contain- connection to the Persian sack, because of their, as it were, ing parts of the entablature of the Temple of Athena Polias participation in Athens's suffering. But without denying the (Fig. 9), and the second northeast of the Erechtheion, incor- sorrowful and commemorative function of the reused mate- porating martle colunn drumns of the Older Parthenon (Fig. rials, I feel it is also important to stress that their incorpora- I0). tion within the walls of the citadel-strong, high, well built- It has been argued that tile reuse of these fragments was made them equally emblems of power and pride. After all, pragmatic, anl economical choice in the aftermath of a costly the war they comimemorated brought suffering to Athens but war,'79 11F11 do nIot find this convincing. The fragments are also, eventually, victory. too carefully arranged; the stretch northwest of the Erech- The kind of commemoration displayed in the citadel walls heion, ort example, included the architrave, triglyph- was appropriate to the period in which they were created, metope frieze, and cornice fronm tile Temple of Athena Po- soon after the conclusion of the Persian Wars. Although we lias, the blocks arranged just as they would have been on the cannot pin down the chronology of every section of the walls ulieple itself. In addition, the fragments appear too unwieldy with absolute certainty, we have archaeological and architec- lot- ust' oIl purely pragmatic grounds; the column drums, for tural evidence setting the construction of the relevant sec- example, weigh seven tons each, and there are twenty-nine of tions of the north wall shortly after the war.14 The building of theem."' Not are the fragments selected those that were best the wall came in conjunction with broader efforts to reshape adapted to building a wall; plenty of plain rectangular blocks the landscape of the Acropolis, as terracing helped to pro- iii tile temples were available, but these were not the ones duce a more level and larger surface area. Interestingly, it is chosenl.l Ihistead, what we see are the most distinctively in the fill of these terraces that we find the great Archaic Icttplelike architectural fragments, arranged in a manner sculptures of the Acropolis: the pediments of' the Athena that seems insistently to recall their fbrmer purpose-the Polias Temple, the freestanding equestrians, and, especially, coltmn drunis lined tp in a row, the entablature extended to the korai., 5 Best documented is a cache of at least nine a distance very close to the length of the original temple. statues damaged in the Persian sack, which were found di- From significant viewing locations within the lower city, such rectly behind the section of the north wall containing the 8 as the Agora, they are even now highly visible; for Early ruins of the Athena Polias Temple. 6 It is clear that the Classical viewers, they would have been yet more striking, as statues were buried and the wall constructed at the same 2 they originally would have been brightly painted." time; this can be dated soon after the wars on the 8 7 basis of Suich an arrangement, I believe, was not accidental. It was, numismatic evidence. atlher, a carefully calculated form of commemoration, al- The two actions-the burial of statues and the display of though its meaning for the Athenians is disputed. It has architectural fragments-show interrelated but differing re- recently eetn interpreted by Hurwit as "a moving display of sponses to material damaged in the sack of the Acropolis. ruins high above the city of Athens, looming testimony to Whereas the damaged architectural fragments were con- Persian sacrilege, all eternal lament."": It is true that the verted, through reuse in the citadel walls, into a svmbol of 272 ART BUI I. Yi IN SI"I" BIkM R 2009 VOL U N F XCI NU MBIER 3

it served to evoke prouder, more triumphant memories; the goddess looked toward Salamis, site of Athens's great naval victory over the Persians.7 ' 3 In later literary sources, at least, the colossal statue commemorated Athens's military success in a very direct and specific way; according to Pausanias, it was "a tithe from the Persians who landed at Marathon," while Demosthenes declared it "dedicated by the city as a memorial of the war against the barbarians, the Greeks giving the 4 money for it."'9' The siting and funding for the statue are relatively well documented, but its appearance can be reconstructed only in a very schematic, hypothetical manner. Fabricated from an exceptionally valuable and easily recyclable material, bronze, it was melted down, and it left scant traces in the artistic record.95 A few points can, however, be made. The first 11 G. P. Stevens, drawing of the Classical Acropolis, looking concerns its colossal scale, so immense, according to Pausa- from the Propylaea toward the Bronze Athena by Pheidias, nias (1.28.2), that sailors coming into port could see the sun ca. 467-447 BCE. American School of Classical Studies at glinting off the tip of the statue's spear. The statue was also Athens, Gorham P. Stevens Papers (artwork © and photograph provided by the American School of Classical Studies at tremendously expensive, as the fragmentarily preserved Athens) building accounts for it testify; constructed over a period of nine years, it is estimated to have cost about 83 talents." At a time when the annual tribute from the Athenian Empire equaled about 400 talents, this was an extraordinary sunm to strength, the same could not be done for the sculptures. be spending on a single work of arty! The bronze Athena Although, as Parisanias (1.27.6) tells us, a few were displayed therefore stands as the largest, most ambitious statue known in their ruined state, the vast majority were simply buried. to us in the Early Classical period; particularly in the years Perhaps the corporeal form of the statues made their appear- preceding the construction of the Parthenon, it must have ance too distressing for viewers; even today, there is some- domninated the Acropolis and provided an eye-catching land- thing viscerally upsetting about seeing their faces smashed, mark tor the entire city. In this way, it offered a striking and their throats slit, and their hands and feet broken off. As unsubtle assertion of Athens's resurgence after the Persian religious votives, though, they could not simply be thrown Wars. out.88 So the sculptures were assembled together and care- The statue's visual program may likewise have alluded to fully buried within the sacred space of the Acropolis, where the wars, albeit in a more oblique and metaphoric manner. they remainedc-in a remarkable state of preservation, even According to Pausanias (1.28.2), the statue's shield was dec- their paint still firesh-until disinterred at the end of the orated with images of the battle between men and centaurs. nineteenth century.89 This choice of decoration was highly significant; it was the Thus, in the years following the Persian destruction of the Athenians' first attempt, on the Acropolis, to represent the Acropolis, we can observe the Athenians experimenting with Persian Wars through myth. The statue's decoration can be a range of different responses to the sack. One response was seen to foreshadow the more elaborate mythological pro- simply to leave things as they were, memorializing the de- gram of the Parthenon, with its centaurs, Amazons, Trojans, struction through the ruins it created; this was the course and giants. That such a representation was indeed plausible followed with the major temples. A second option was to for the Early Classical period is best demonstrated by other reuse the damaged artifacts so as to recall, in programmatic works of art and literature from the era. fashion, both the attack itself and the eventual Athenian victory, as architectural fragments from the destroyed tem- The Persian Wars in the Greek Imagination: Inventing the ples were used to build the new walls of the citadel. And a Myth of Oriental Violence in the Early Classical Era third option was to erase, insofar as possible, the memory of' After the decisive Hellenic victory at Plataia in 479 BCE, the destruction, by burying the statues that so viscerally re- Greek artists, poets, and orators began almost immediately to called it. produce works inspired by the Persian Wars. Whether osten- In addition to these commemorative strategies, closely con- sibly "historical" in nature or of a more allusive, mythological nected to the ruins themselves, we have evidence for a few character, these artistic productions all aimed to highlight monuments of a more distanced and creative character.9) the broader resonances of the wars for a Greek audience Most significant among them was the colossal bronze Athena seeking to understand their extraordinary and unexpected by Pheidias, set up on the Acropolis in about 467-447 BCE military success. These poems, speeches, and artworks of the (Fig. 11).2 Facing the sanctuary's entrance, it was placed on Early Classical period presented the wars as a struggle be- axis with the ruined Temple of Athena Polias, as is demon- tween polar opposites: pious, self-controlled, freedom-loving strated by the foundations of the statue's immense base, Greeks versus impious, uncontrollably violent Persians ruled preserved in situi.9 Like the north wall, and the (still-stand- by an autocratic monarch. Furthermore, these works often ing?) ruins themselves, the statue perhaps served to remind treated the desecration of temples and images as a paradig- viewers of the traumas of the Persian sack. At the same time, matic example of Persian impiety and violence, as discussed DESTRUCTION AND MEMORY ON 1li1 A1IFiNIAN A(CROPOiLIS 273

above. The representations of the Persian Wars in Early Classical literature and art, mythological as well as more historical treatments, reveal interconnections between Orien- talism and iconoclasm that anticipated the treatment of the sarne themes in the Parthenon. Among the most prominent and influential Orientalist monuments of Early Classical Athens was the Stoa Poikile.'"a (;ommissioned by Peisianax, the brother-in-law of the impor- tant politician Kimon, this multifunctional civic structure was erected in the northwest corner of the Athenian Agora in about 470-60 B( E.',ý The building's foundations are pre- served and have recently been excavated; long gone, how- ever, are the paintings that were its most distinctive and significant feature.")( These included depictions of the Tro- jan Wat and its aftermath, the fight between Athenians and Amazons, and the Athenian victory over the Persians at Mar- athon in 490 BCE (Pausanias 1.15.1-16.1). The paintings thus juxtaposed mythological with historical wars, suggesting analogies between them. This proved a useful, and very in- fluential, narrative strategy. Through this juxtaposition, the victors at Marathon were placed on par with the great Hel- lenic heroes, whereas the Persians were characterized as anal- ogous to their impious and womanly opponents. Set up in the Athenian civic center, commissioned by a close relative of the era's leading politician, and executed by major artists,'10 the Stoa Poikile brought myth and history together into a highly etff•etive synthesis; its significance is demonstrated by its re- fleciion in later artworks, as well as by the numerous refer- ences to it in literary texts. 1"2 Elsewhere in Athens as well, paintings on mythological themes were deployed allusively to commemorate recent his- tory. O(ne such is a shrine to the Athenian hero Theseus, feat uring as its decoration scenes from the hero's life, includ- ing his battles with centaurs and Amazons. The shrine also held Theseus's bones, providentially discovered by Kimon on 1 Skyros, exhumed, and brought to Athens in 475 BCE. 113Like the Stoa Poikile, then, the shrine to Theseus had a clear connection to contemporary politics, particularly those of Kimnon; its paintings were also executed by some of the same artists.,4 It consequently seems reasonable to assume that 12 Attributed to the Group of Polygnotos, red-figure here as well the paintings were intended to commemorate dinos, depicting the battle between Theseus and the Amazons, the Persian Wars, with the centaurs and Amazons standing in ca. 450 BCE, height 10112 in. British Museum, London, ft-t !he bestial and effeminate Persians. 99.7.21.5 (artwork in the public domain; photograph C The This hypothesis is strengthened by an analysis of contem- Trustees of the British Museum) porary vase paintings. In the Early Classical period, vases decorated with Amazons strikingly emphasized both the Athenian protagonists in the battle--with Theseus to the Orientalized costume. Similar scenes recur elsewhere, espe- feO-and the "Oriental" character of the warrior women, cially in the works of the vase painter Polygnotos and his who wear the soft, floppy headgear and brightly patterned circle, working in Athens in about 450 BCE. They provide costumes of Persians and fight, like them, with bow and arrow abundant testimony to the assimilation of Amiazons and Per- or on horseback. On a red-figure dinos (a large mixing bowl) sians (a practice already visible from the Late Archaic era"),"), attiributed to the Group of Polygnotos, for example, a nude and to the denigration of the latter, as the Amazons are Theses hinges forward to attack the fallen Amazon Andro- depicted as ungallant, ineffective warriors. mache; both are identified by inscriptions (Fig. 12). While In literary texts, similar analogies between mythological Andromache herself wears the costume of a Greek hoplite, and historical foes were drawn, likewise to the detriiment of she is armed with a bow and empty quiver as well as a small the Persians. In newly discovered fragments, the Keian poet ax, likewise popular in Persian scenes; her comrades riding in Simonides exalted the Greeks who died at Plataia by compar- on horseback sport a mix of Persian and Hellenic dress and ing them to the Homeric heroes Achilles and Patroklos; the weaponry. Another Amazon, on the reverse, stabs a Greek Persians, by contrast, were implicitly equated with the Tro- frtom behind-a cowardly action associated with her highly jans, including the "evil-minded" (kakophron) Paris.'140 The 274 ART BU[LLElTIN SEPV.IM\uR 2009 VOILUME XCI NU_MIBER 3 fragments also mentioned a "chariot of Justice," perhaps but also the ostensibly less polemical historians. Herodotos fighting on the Greek side; this, too, appears to iniject a furnished a very extensive catalog of the Persian destruction moralizing tone into the depiction of the war.'1)7 of temples and statues; besides Xerxes' attack (In the Athe- A colmparably moralizing tone sounds even more clearly in nian Acropolis, he listed Cambyses' burning of the statues of Hlellenic oratory. According to Herodotos (9.27), the Athe- the Kabeiroi at Memphis in Egypt (3.37), Darius's plundering nians gained the honor of leading the left wing at the Battle arid burning of the Temple of Apollo at Didynma (6.19), the of Plataia by means of a speech they made in which they same king's sack of the sanctuaries of Eretria (6.101), Xerxes' enumerated all their great deeds from heroic times to the destruction of the Temple of Apollo at Abae (8.33), and his present. In their speech, the Athenians described themselves desecration of the cult statue of Poseidon at Potidaea (8.129). as the defenders of the weak and unjustly treated- having For Herodotos, then, iconoclasm appeared as a long-standing aided the children of Herakles against the proud and tyran- and fiequently repeated tactic of Persian war making, de- nical Eurystheus and ensured the pious burial of the Seven ployed against other foreigners (the Egyptians, for one) as against Thebes-as well as the upholders of a tradition of well as Greeks. Greek victory stretching finon the battle against the Amazons Later historians echoed Herodotos's conclusions. In his to Troy and Marathon. So, too, the epitaphioi logoi (annual history of the Peloponnesian Wars, Thucydicles rarely men- funerary orations for Athens's war dead, buried at public tioned the destruction of temples and images; in an account expense) presented the city's great deeds as both glorious of battles between Greeks, it ought not to have occurred. In anid morally righteous; characteristic examples included Mar- the exceptional instance when it happened-when the Athe- alhon, very regularly, as well as the defeat of the Amazons and nians occupied and fortified a Boeotian sanctuary at De- the battle for the burial of the Seven against Thebes. ') Thus, lium-it was condemned in speeches as contrary to "universal in these poetic and oratorical texts, as in the monumental custom" and "the law of the Hellenes" (4.97), thus bolstering paintings and decorated pots of the period, we can see the Herodotos's point by arguing its converse. For Polybius, by beginnings of a consistent, repetitive, and rhetorically pow- contrast, the desecration of temples and cult statues signaled ertul discourse in which the Greeks always fought on the the hubristic overreaching and barbaric-indeed, mentally "right" side, against foes who were by turns bestial, effemi- deranged-character of the Macedonian King Philip V; in nate, impious, proud, tyrannical. the pragmatic author's words, "the excessive destroying of Given the negative 10oral character attributed, by implica- temples and statues and all their furnishings, which neither tion, to the Persians, it is perhaps not surprising that violence offers aid to one's own affairs in preparing resistance, nor toward images should have been added to the catalog of their cripples the enemy going in to battle- how can one riot say misdeeds. It was in fact presented as the particularly offensive that this is the act of a maddened mind and attitude?" outgrowth of two of their leading negative characteristics: (5.11.4-5). Philip, in Polybius's view, would have done better their impiety and their capacity for senseless violence. As to follow the example of his predecessor Alexander the such, the destruction of images was highlighted by Aeschylus Great, who in his conquest of Persia "spared the things in the Persians, produced in 472 BCE. At the climax of the dedicated to the gods, although it was in this way that the play, Aeschylus has the Persian King Darius-come back as a Persians had most erred when in Greece" (5.10.8). in ghost to advise his wife and son after the catastrophic defeats Given the importance accorded to Persian iconoclasm at Salamis and Plataia--declare that it was this destruction literary texts, we might ft-utifully inquire whether it figured in that brought on divine vengeance: "For coming to the land of Greek art as well. Here the evidence is more limited, and less Hellas [the Persians] were not restrained by religious awe explicit. Greek vase paintings occasionally depicted Persians, from looting the statues of the gods nor froom burning tem- but they were most commonly shown in battle scenes, not ples. But altars were destroyed, the statues of the gods over- sacking cities or destroying temples.Il°) We do, however, have turned froom their bases in utter confusion" (Aeschylus, Per- numerous Early Classical images of a city sacked, its sanctu- siants 809-12). In Herodotos (8.109), Themistokles in a aries violated, and its inhabitants killed. The city in question for in- speech after Salamis described Xerxes as "one who acts in the is Troy. Scholars have suggested that these scenes, same way toward temples and private property, burning and stance, on the famous Vivenzio hydria (water jug) in Naples, throwing down the statues of the gods, who evet) scourged were inspired by the Athenian artists' experiences during the the sea atid sank shackles in it." And in rejecting the Persian Persian Wars.'11+ To speculate further, one might say that the Mardonios's offer of an alliance in 479 BCE, the Athenians images of the violation of sanctuary in particular-Priam claimed, according to Herodotos (8.144), that there were killed while seated on an altar, Kassandra torn by Ajax from matry obstacles to collaboration, "first and most importantly, a statue of Athena-ireferenced the Acropolis sack, universal- myth. If there is the firing and burning of thre statues of the gods and ized through the invocation of canonical Hellenic their dwellings, and we must avenge them to tile utmost this hypothesis is correct, then the scenes provided a way of rather than making a treaty with those who have done such representing the Persian destruction of the Acropolis that things." was very different in character from the ruins and relics These judgments-and perhaps others, no longer pre- discussed above. Here not just the aftereffects but the sack served-were highly influential, as is demonstrated by later itself was shown, its violent and impious slaughter placed texts that commemorated the Persian destruction of the center stage. At the same time, it was distanced through the Acropolis and characterized iconoclasm as an un-Greek, "bar- use of myth, with the real Athenians killed in 480 BCE barian" activity. These included not only the fourth-century replaced by the suffering Trojans. I " This narrative strategy, orators discussed above in relation to the "Oath of Plataia" in which myth served to exalt history arid simultaneously to DFIS-TRt (:TION ANI) MEMORY ON TiE AFIHIENIAN W( ROPOL IS 275

pcrniiit ai contemlplative distance from it, would subsequently metaphoric connection to past history, as the conflict between he deployed to great advantage by the sculptors of tile Par- Athens and Persia was retold and reconfigured through Ihe1lionl. myth. Taken together, these differing but complementary commemorative strategies helped to create a temple bal- Victory Monument and War Memorial: The Construction of anced between opposing tensions, both victory monument the Parthenon, 447-432 BCE and war memorial. In this way, they contributed to the sense By ,447 B(CE, tile Athenians inhabited a very different city of balance, and of the reconciliation of opposites, that is so froln the one dlestroyed by the Persians. They had scored a characteristic a feature of the Parthenon. series of mnililary successes against their old enemnies, most In their "recycling" of building materials, the architects of prominitinly the Battle of the Eurymedon of about 466, and the Parthenon were particularly ingenious but by no means their city had become by far the preeminent naval power in unique. The builders of a Classical wall and footbridge at (;reece., 12 Athens's internal politics were radically demo- Eleusis likewise reused materials from the Archaic sanctuary, crafic, its foreign policy, imperialistic; tile conjunction of the as their epigraphic accounts describe in detail.' 7 Elsewhere two encouraged massive spending on public works projects on the Acropolis we have evidence for recycling, for instance, sulch aIs the Paarthenon, overseen by a committee and com- the flight of steps west of the Parthenon, constructed from plee(d in the remanrkably brief span of fifteen years.'' " In its blocks of the Temple of Athena Polias. i" Still, the Parthenon visual fortn-abovc all, in its costly materials, complex icon- stands out in this respect for the extent of material recycled ographic program, and technically sophisticated style of ex- and the limitations this placed oil the design of the new ecutionI-the great temple constituted both document and temple.' 'To begin with, the building occupied the footprint celebration of these achievements; as such, it functioned as a of its ruined predecessor, a massive limestone podium some victory nlonillnen|, as noted by many scholars.' 14 But this thirty-six feet (eleven meters) high on its southern side (Fig. triumphal rhetoric, so ably communicated by the Parthenon, 13). i21 The only change was a sixteen-and-a-half-foot (five- should not obscure the building's debt to the past and its role meter) extension of the platform to the north, made to in commemorating past suffering. In fact, it was only through accommodate the broader cella of the new temple; this was tdi evotcation of this suffering that the achievements of the required because of the colossal statue of Athena Parthenos presenlt took on nieaning-Ide glittering triumphs of the new to be housed in its interior. 12 1 The extension brought a small Athenian Empire thrown into sharp relief, as it were, against preexisting shrine, perhaps that of Athena Ergane, men- fli' background of a darker and more difficult history. tioned by Pausanias, 122 within the walls of the Classical Par- Iii dih Parthenon, this history was made manifest in a thenon. The location and architectural components of the numbter of different ways. As Andrew Stewart has recently shrine were carefully maintained, its height raised, and the demonstrated, the tuilding's proportions related it to tile northern colonnade of the new temple designed so that (lestroved Tenplt of Athena Polias; tile width of tile Parthe- the shrine fit comfortably within it. Thus, as the sanctuary was non's cella equaled that of the platftmn of the earlier temple, renewed and expanded, the old cults were maintained; the almost 70 feet (21.3 meters), or 72 Attic feet.1" The same effort this entailed suggests the continued importance to the 72-fooit module was used throughout the Periklean building Athenians of the established sacred topography of the site.'1. program, determining as well The Parthenon also incorporated within its architectural form all tile remaining blocks of its ruined predecessor; the the Propylaia's east and west porches, the Erechtheion's only exceptions were those too damaged by thermal fracture entire western side, and the length of its celia. Moreover, to be useful, such as the column drums built into the citadel's tlie Frechtheiou and Parthenon are twoimodules apart at north wall. 12" This, too, was a decision that had considerable ieitr nearest point; the Parthenon's western terrace lies implications for the design of the new building. The diameter otite module to the east of the Propylaia's projected central of the column drums, for example, was critical in determin- axis; and the shrine of Kekrops (an extension of the ing proportional relations throughout the temple.' 25 At the FIrelchI lieiot i's western side) is four modules distant from same time, the reused blocks had to be deployed very care- heIi opylaia's cast porch., fully, due to the refinements-the subtle departures from a monotonous, mathematically determined sameness-seen in Tit pervasive uste 1 2 of this module canmnot be chance; rather, it both the Classical building and its predecessor. " The Older must rtelect the architect's intention to incorporate within Parthenon had already incorporated into its foundations the tie new building program a trace of the past, by this means upward curvature, bowing toward the center of each side, to make the destroyed temple live again. These elements that is so vivid and effective a feature of the Classical tem- indicate the 27 careful coomprehensiveness with which the ple.' Because of this feature, the blocks used to construct Perikleanmbuilding program was planned, as each building the Archaic building were not of uniform dimensions, but was at oticte connected to its fellows and to its rttined ante- varied slightly depending on their placement within the tem- (edent. ple, as they accommodated and extended the curvature seen For tlhose without tllhe architect's advanced technical knowl- in the foundations. Recycled for the Classical Parthenon, they edge, however, other connections to the past would have had to be measured carefully, placed selectively, and in some 2 8 been tiorc striking. Two seem particularly significant here. cases reworked for new locations within the building.1 Onc wits the Parthenon's direct phy-1,sical connection to the As with the reused fragments in the citadel walls, so, too, past, as the building occupied the site, and utilized the ma- the recvcled materials deployed in the Parthenon have some- terials, of its ruined predecessor. The second was the temple's times been explained in pragmatic, economic terms. It is 276 ARY Bt I.I.EFIN SEPIEMBER 2009 VO(II/UME XCI NUMBER 3

13 Foundations from the Older Parthenon visible beneath the Classical temple, Acropolis, Athens (photograph provided by the Archaeological Photographic Collection, American School of Classical Studies at Athens)

certainly true that these precut, readily available blocks would That price is figured very explicitly on the Parthenon's have saved the Athenians money-estimated at about one- metopes. South metope 28 depicts one of the scenes of battle quarter of the construction budget for the temple'2 9-_since between men and centaurs; on it, the centaur's victory is clear quarrying and transport figured hugely in the cost of' any (Fig. 3). The centaur dominates the metope, his body cutting stone building. But the reused blocks had a significance that a great diagonal swath across it, from his left arm, raised in a went beyond the purely economic. As the Athenians con- commanding gesture, to his triumphantly waving tail. Rear- structed their new temple on the site of the Older Parthenon, ing on his hind legs, he is poised to come crashing down on using materials derived from it, they could imagine that the the chest of his unfortunate victim. Even the animal skin he ruined sanctuary had been reborn, larger in scale, more wears seems to have taken on his aggressive, victorious char- elaborate in its sculptural decoration, but also physically con- acter, as itsjaws and claws point directly down at the defeated nected to the past.' I enemy. By contrast, the centaur's victim has no hope. While It is worth highlighting the difference between this reuse of his knees (and once, perhaps, his arms also) arc upward in a architectural fragments and that seen earlier on the citadel semblance of resistance, it can end only in futility. His body, walls. On the walls, the damaged materials stand out; they crumpled on the ground, already has the appearance of a visually assert their separation from their surroundings and corpse. their connection to the past. The recycled fragments in the This metope, with its clear and deliberate depiction of the Parthenon, by contrast, are integrated into their architectural man's defeat, is by no means unique. Useful comparisons are setting, often indistinguishable from new materials. The aim metope I (where the man seems about to be lifted off the here was to create a unified impression, so that one saw the ground and strangled), metope 4 (where he is being bashed building as an organic whole, not as a collection of frag- on the head by a wine jug), and metope 30 (where he is ments. The memory of destruction was effaced-or, at any thrust down to the ground, flailing, with the centaur about to rate, covered over, in the manner of a palimpsest-with a new attack from above). Indeed, of the eighteen metopes with the creation. theme of men fighting centaurs, fully a third of them display Yet the architectural ensemble does not tell the whole the men in mortal danger, and a number of others are story. In the Parthenon, the memory of the Persian sack was equivocal. There are, of course, images where the men are preserved not so much through concrete reference to the successful, as in metope 27.13' But as an ensemble, the Par- historical past as symbolically, through myth. As noted above, thenon south metopes highlight the price of victory, not its the battles displayed in the metopes and on the Athena effortless achievement. Parthenos statue are critical here. They connected the Per- Nor are the south metopes unique; their emphasis on the sians with negative mythological exemplars such as the cen- price of victory is typical for the other contests depicted on taurs and Amazons, perhaps inspired by the Orientalist mon- the Parthenon. The west metopes, for example, present the uments discussed above, such as the Stoa Poikile. At the same battle between men and Amazons. They are poorly preserved, time, by depicting defeated and dying Greeks, the images but through close analysis of the fragments and comparison testified to the formidable qualities of the Greeks' opponents with similar imagery on contemporary vase paintings, we can and the high price paid to secure victory against them. reconstruct them in part. About half the metopes appear to DESTRUCTION AND MEMORY ON TtHE ATlHENIAN ACROPOILIS 277

have carried the image of a mounted Amazon attacking a a distancing effect for viewers. Finally, mythology offered the fallen Greek soldier; this visual formula indicated that the opportunity to, as it were, rewrite history, to memorialize Greek would die (Fig. 4). Here, then, even more than on the initial defeats as the natural concomitant of eventual victory. south side of the Parthenon, the battle was hard fought, and After all, in the mythological battles depicted on the Parthe- frequently the Amazons-mythological analogues for the non, the Greeks always win; on the Acropolis in 480 BCE, the Persians for at least a generation-were shown triumphant. reality was otherwise. In this way, the mythological images The other contests depicted on the Parthenon metopes are that decorated the Parthenon can be understood as central even harder to read; the scenes were hacked away by later to its commemorative purpose; as they retold history through 2 occupants of the building, most likely early Christians.' 3 In myth, they served the selective process of memorializing and 1 the case of the gigantomnachy (battle between gods and gi- forgetting necessary to collective memory. 39 ants) ott the east tietopes, at least, we should probably imag- Looking back, we find that patterns of commemoration on ine that scenes of failure were absent; the gods could not have the Athenian Acropolis seen just after the Persian sack differ been pictured losing. Nonetheless, the metopes' focus on radically from those found in the Periklean Parthenon. Re- defeat as well as victory is significant. And it was reiterated sponses to the sack in its immediate aftermath were elsewhere ott the Parthenon, most notably on a series of grounded in the concrete historical circumstances of the sculptures from the chryselephantine statue of Athena Par- event, commemorating it with ruins, relics, and the ritual thenos. burial of damaged sculptures. In the Parthenon, however, the The colossal statue of Athena has not been preserved; it history of the sack was, quite literally, fundamental to the was likely destroyed by a fire that struck the Parthenon in the building, as the temple made use of the footprint and archi- third century CE.":1: However, we know from replicas of it as tectural remains of its destroyed predecessor. But the Parthe- well as literary accounts that the same mythological cycles non's relation to the past was at the same time obscured, as seen otn the metopes ornamented the statue; the centauro- these elements were integrated into a new architectural cre- miachy figured on Athena's sandals, the Amazonomachy on ation, which appeared as an organic whole. In its sculptural the exterior of her shield, and the battle between gods and decoration, this connection to the past was thoroughly trans- giants otn the interior of the shield.""ii The Amazonomachy is formed, as history was retold through myth. particularly well documented, both in statuettes, such as the These perceptions yield an enhanced understanding of the Patras Athena, and in a series of full-scale copies known as the Parthenon and its relation to the past, as well as some illu- Piraets reliefs. 135 What the copies make clear, through their minating broader implications concerning the role of the depiction of a fortified citadel as the setting, is that we have image in Greek society. Scholars have often interpreted mon- here the Athenian Amazonomachy, that is, the Amazons' uments such as the Parthenon simply as sophisticated works attack ott the Athenian Acropolis after their leader, Hip- of art, focusing on issues of connoisseurship (chronolopy, polyta, was abducted by Theseus.• • The parallels with the attribution, workshop style) or, more recently, semiotics. Al- Persian attack are highlighted, for instance, through scenes though such scholarly approaches have added much to our of the Amazons scaling the walls and bringing torches to set insight of Greek art, they have at the same time tended to 3 7 fire to the citadel,just as the Persians did.t So, too, the fight obscure some key aspects of it. In particular, they have sub- is set within a rocky landscape, and the defeated, such as the ordinated its 'functional qualities to its aesthetic effect; in so figure known as the "death leap" Amazon, throw themselves doing, they have deprived Greek images of some of their down from the heights (Fig. 5, at lower right). This focus on affective power. the Acropolis setting for the battle is very unusual within the The balance can be redressed by focusing particularly on context of Classical Amazononiachies, and it did not emerge, the functions of images and on emotive rather than aesthetic at least in preserved rmonutments, prior to the building of the responses to them. As I have shown, objects such as the Parthenon."8 Its use here is significant; it serves to enhance Acropolis korai were intended to evoke a powerful reaction the historical resonances of this exemplary myth, to make the from viewers-so powerful that they were burned and hacked connections clearer for contemporary viewers. to pieces, and then buried to hide the traces of such an At the same time, the Athenians' use of myth, in the attack. And monuments like the architectural fragments in Parthenos Armazonomachy as elsewhere, had a number of the Acropolis north wall or, in later years, the Parthenon advantages over the direct representation of contemporary itself were not created simply to delight the eves, and satisfy events. To begin with, it gave the Persian Wars a heroic, even the pride, of their Athenian viewers. They were instead in- cosmological significance, recasting the historical events as tended to memorialize collective experience and to shape the part of a transcendental struggle between good and evil, Athenians' memories of their traumatic, but ultimately victo- civilization and barbarism. As the Athenians were pictured as rious, past history. This powerful and, indeed, generative heroes and the Persians beasts or women, the moral com- function for monuments is best expressed by Demosthenes, plexities of the events in question were smoothed away and who once urged his Athenian audience, "Reflect, then, that their paradigmatic character heightened; they became easier, your ancestors set up those trophies, not that you may gaze at more comfortable, to renmember. Similarly, the trauma of them in wonder, but that you may also imitate the virtues of these events was lessened through the rtse of myth. While the the men who set them up."'140 battered korai had proved too painful to endure (too vivid a reminder, perhaps, of the sufferings of the actual Athenians killed in the sack), the defeat and death of Greeks was easier Rachel Kousser is an associate proftssor at Brooklyn College and to accept when refracted through the lens of myth; this had member o] the doctoralfacult'y at the CUNY Graduate (enter, where 278 AR I IL IJ I IN SFP I E MI FR 20W) VOlI.t1 MF X\CI N MBI ER I

she teaches the historv oj (;reek and Roman art. She is the author of 11. Ibid., 364; if. Edward Said. Orientalistm (New XYok: Vintage Books, 1978), 4. Hellenistic and Roman Ideal Sculpture: The Allure of the 12. Oil the mutilation of tile berms, see Douglas MacDowell. ed., On tlhe Classical (Cambridge University Press, 2008) [l)epartment of Art, A1vsterie': Anldokides (1962; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 19891): J. L. Marr, Brooklyn College, 2900 Bedford Avenue, BrooklYn, N.Y. 11210, "Xlndocides' Part in lltle MsteriIs and I lerniae Affairs of 415 B.C.," 21, no. 2 (1971): 326-38K Robin Oshorne, "The, rkousser-@brookl''n.- iuny.edui. O.assual Quarirtv' Erection and Mutilation ofIthe Herniae," Pyoceeding. 1olthe Camrnidge Philologi'al Sooiety 31 (1985): 17-73; and S. G, Todd, "Resisiting tile Hernis and the Mvsteries,- in L aw1, Rhetorir, and Cornmed ill (ClassialAth- en%. ed. D. 1. Cairns and R. A, Kliox (Swansea: Classical Press of' Notes Wales. 2004), 87-102. A fiew scholars have examined cases of the de- This project has henleited from tile generosity of many scholars and institti- struction of images in (i reece; tbese include Caroline Houser, "Slain tiIls. Thanks are (file to Richard Powell, Marianne Wardle, and the three Statues: Classical Murder Mysteries," in Praklika ton XII Dliethnoes anonymultis readers of fhe Alt Bull,tin; to andiences at Columbia University, Sunedriou Klasikes Archaiologiai (Athens, 1988), 112-15; and Catherine tie Universitv of Toronto, and Winthrop College; to Andrew Stewart and Keesling, "Endoios's Painting fro1n the Themistoklean Wall: A Recon- Clatherine Keesling tlr making thein forthcoming work available to ntie'and to struction," Htesperia 6i8, no. 4 (1999): 509-48. Andreas(e('issler of tile Forschttngsarchi% fiir Antike Plastik, Cologne; wy(;, 13. For the Mscenvati Acropolis, see Spyros E. lakovidis. An' (lvenaean IL.ada of(the Mitropolitan (Government of Nashville; Meghan Mazella of tile Arropoliv of'Athens, trans. Miriam Casket (Athens: Archaeological Soci- British Museninj;ohn Boardinan; Tricia Smith on Art Resourte;J. M. HiL-W,it; etv at Athens, 2006): tile best historical survey is.jeflrev Hturwit, The Ilte stall of the Act opolis MInseUiliW; Eelyn tHarison: and Natalia Vogeikoff- Athenian Acropioli: 11istoly. AfNthologi, and ,lnhaeolo,gI /rinl the Neolithia Biogan oftlice American School of Classical Studies ait Athens, For assistance Era to the Present (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1999). with photographs. This pro)ject was made possible throgh tilie financial 14. On the olive-wood stat'e, see Patisanias 1.26.6, For tile Temple of support of tile dean of (',raduale Studies, Brooklyn (Ciolege, ilth New Factlity Athena Polias, see William Childs, -rhe Date of the Old Temple of Fund, the Whiting Fonldation, and the PS-CUINY Research Fotndation. To oIl Eveli I larrison, who has taught ime so miuch about the Parthenon, this ar ticle Athena the Athenian Acropolis." in TI/e Ahaeolo(N of Athens and ed. William Coulson et al. (Oxford: Oxbow is loviigly dedicated. Attiree, under the Demora(N', Books, 1994), 1-6, arguing tio a (tite aftei the establishment of the 1. See, lte example, l)avid Casiriota, 1INth, Ethos, and ActualitY: Qfficial democract, in 510 BCE; and Manolis Korres, "Athenian Classical Ar-i Art in Eifth Comoat B-C. Athens (Madison: Unihersitv of'"Wisconsiri chitecture," liI Athens: Fr1ne the Classical Period /o the Ivesent fDaY, ed. Priss, 1992) ; Jeffrev Hurwit, The Arrolneli, in/ the Age n/ Pei'kles (Cailn- Korres et al. (New Castle. DO'.: Oak Knoll Press, 200(3), 7, reiterating iridge: Caunhi idgc L.nivtrsitv Press, 2004), esp. chap. 2, "Landscape a date during the reign iii the Peisistratid I-i-ants, about 525 BCE. lilthe and.J. J. Pol- of McnioiN: The Past ot Classical Aciopolis," 49-86; 15. While a date prior to the Persian Wars ior the Older Parthenon has lit, "C(osciousness and Conscience," chap. 2 of A it and Axpelienence in sometimes been disputed-for example, by.J. A. Bundgaard, P'arthenon Classl G(reece' .Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1972), 15-63. ( and tlhe Al ((cenranCit('/T on the HeIf'hts (Coplenhagen: National Museum 2. These sanctuaries includedl not onld those of till' Acropolis, which are of Denmark, 1976), esp. 48-53, 61-70; and Rhys C(arpentei, The Archi- the foculs of attention here, bill also many, in the Agora, among therr tects o/ the P iarhenon(Harniondsworth, U.K.: Penguin Books, 1970). liltMi1roon and Temple of Apollo PaioIs, as well ats the sallt1ar% esp. 66-67-it has now been given additional support fi1on tiie e%i- of Poscidon at Sorunion, and likely tile sarictuai% ot" Denieter at Elet, dence of thermnal cracking inl the bUilding'S column drums. presurn- sis. Onl the Agora sanctuaries, see T. Leslie Shear.Jr., "The Persian ably caused by fire (hiring thel Persian sack of the Acropolis. A helpful Destruction of Athens: Evidence from the Agora Depostas(," Hesperia disCUSsito that makes use of new archaeological ex%idence from1 the 62, no. 4 ( 1993): 383-482; and Hoier Thonipson, "Athens Faces Ad- recent reconstruction of' the buiiling is in Manolis Korres. "Die versitv," llespeiia 50 (1981): 344-46; on1 Solution, see 1.Shear, entiy Atheia-Tenipt-i atif der Akropolis," in Kult andKultbaulen auf0 er Ak- in tile Prinfelon Enrv-fipedia of Class•ital Siles (Princeton: Princeton Uni- rapolis, ed. Wotiiram Hoepfnier (Berlin: Schrifiten des Seminars foir versiiv Press. 1976), s.N. "Sounion," 854; and oIl Eleusis, see Deborah Klassische Archiaologie der Freien Uniiversitit Berlin, 19971, 218-43: Boedeckcr, "'Fie View from Elcusis: Demeter in the Persian Wais," inl oIlthe coniroversv, see Hurwit. The Acropolis in the Age o/' Perikh,', 67- Colootel IResponvý,, It the Pov•an Wars,: ed. Enina Bridges, Edith Hall. 75. and P.,i. Rhodes (Oxlord: Oxfiord University Press, 2007), 70-71. 16. (On the ramp and gateway, see W. B. Iinsmoor Jr., The Protoylaia to the 3. Htrodotos 9.13. Athenian Arroliolis. 2 vols. (Princeton: American School of Classical 4. lin iy emphasis onl memory, I have beer) inspired above all by the StUdies at Athens, 1980-20041), so. 1, 38-514, arguing for tile exis- research of Maurice H alwachs, On1Col,e/tive Metors, rnansi.Lewis A. tence of ini "Older Propylon" initiated under the detlocracy and, like Cosei ((C,hi ago: University of Chicago Press, 1992): and Pierre Nora, the Older Parthenon, never finished; and Htarrison Eiteljorlg II, The ed., Reatens ol Ae,nio?y: The Con.siriction let the Perriceh Pos•t, trans. Arthur Entrance to the Athenian Acropolis before AMnesu les (Dubiqtie. Ia.: Ken- (Golhaininer, 3 vols, (New York: Columhia Universit% Press, 1i96-). dall/Hi urt. 1995), 85-86, who disputes the existence of tile Older Fot Ilhe anlcienlt world, tischill contributions have been mlade by Susan Propylon and sees only an earlier Mycenean gatewaN.

Alcock, Archaeohogies o/ the Cieek Pa.t: LanislapIe, Alonmioents, (tidMemo- 17. 1Huiwit. The Athenian A(.rofpolis. 192. rir%(Canihiidge: Cambridge Universit,y Press, 2002); Caila Antonac- cio, .4n Ailhaeolq* oAne Totn:bb (Cultand Heto Cult in Earlý Gr,eet 18. Iha Mark, T'he San/tuam / 4IAthena Nike in A4hens: Archilec/ural .Stagi and (L,anliani, Md.: Rowinan and Littlefield, 1995); and Nicole Lotaux, Chronolo/gy' (Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Divided Ciri: Oil Afeinory (tied Pinbgciling in Ancient Athens, nrans. C'orinne 1993). 31-35, 125.-28; and lone MIlonas Shear, "Tile Western Ap- Pache withl Jeff Fort (New York: Zone Books. 2002). So far, however, proach to the Atlenian Acropotlis, Journal o/ Hel/'nic Studiis 119 archaeological ap•proaches 14 the study (if memlory in Classical Athens (1999): 86-127, esp. 120-25. have not beenl cssaved. 19. Hurwit., TheAthenian Acrorelii/. 112-15. Recently. Tonio1161Hscher has 5. Foi example, ot-etiagcdy, Edith Hfall, Inventing the Barbarian:Gieek Self- identified these buildings as spaces fol ri11al dining, perhaps in totI- Junction with the Panathenaic Festival. I 161scher, "Sclhatzhi5user--Bani- Dlhinitioa thlrogh TralI eldl(Oxfoird: Clarendon l'ress. 19891); and Thonlas illirisen, The Eolplinevs o Asia: Amhl-vius ' "Perslians" and thei kenihaiuser'" in fthake: Plesisrhn/t ficr,]irg Schiilrr zone 75 Geburtstagant 25 llistorv o/tk Ifi(,Flh Centaley (l.ondoll: DUckworlth, 2000); for histors, April 2001, ed. Stephanie B6hil and Klaus-Vahtin von it kstehd (WinIz- Pericles (Georges, Batbarian A'sia arnd the (Creek Ex'lerienreIotn the Archaon burg: Ergon Verlag. 2001), 143-52. Period it) the Age o/ Xeno/lhon (Balimore: .iohns Hopkins U niversity 20. Katerina Kairakasi, Arrhaic Korai, trans. J. Paul Gettl Tlrust (los Ange- Picss, 199-4); and lor. fullerary orations, Nicole L.oratix, Ihnvention• les: Getty Puhlit al(iols. 2003), 115-41: Catherine M. Keesling, The Vi- o/ Athens: The /lunerl Oiation Ii1 the Clalssiral City. trans. Alan Sheridan /i'e statues o/ theAlhenian Acro5olis (Cambridge: Cambridge U.niversits (Cambridge, Mass.: l lrvard Uni%crsitv Press. 1986), esp. 155-71. Press, 2003), 97-161; Ernst Langlotz, "Die Koren," in Die ArnhaiNchen 6. Wtilf Raeck, Zii n Beerbarenbild in der Kunst Athens in1 6. unll 5. .tahrhun- Afanotriildwerke der Akropolis, 2 vtls., ed. Hans Scht ader (Frankfurt: de/t v. (hi. (Born: Rutioi Habel, 1981). Vittorio Klosterniann, 1939), vol. 1. 13-184; and Marv Stieber, The Poet- ins qJ'A/IIarneive in the Attie Korai (,A'stin:iU.'niversii v of Texas Press, 7. Margaret Miller, Athens and Ps1ia in the 'l/th('entu.) B.C.: A StudY/i1 2004). The kore front the Athenian Acropolis (Fig. 6) was utind in a Cultural Rbef'/eivity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997). cache of fourteen statties near the Ereclitheion. 8. Castriota, Atyth. Ethos, and Arfunli/Y'. 21. Evelyn Harrison, "The Victors of KaMliniachos," (;reek, Roman, and BViz- 9. The Parthenon's tepulation its a timeless molnument goes back to tile antine Studies 12, noi. 1 (1971 )i: 1-24; Catheritie Keesling, "The Kalli- ancient welllId itscIt:see Plutarch, Perikles 13.1-5. machos Monument on the Athenian Acropolis (1,61 256) and AtIle- 10. Zailnab Bahrain, "A¥ssault and Abduction: 'Fie Fate of the Royal Image nian Commemoration of the Persian Wars," in Aidelo Techneessa Lithou: in thie Ancient Neaw East," Art History 18, no. 3 (1995): 363-82, at Ar4hair and Classical Greek Effigauon, ed. Marinel Baumbach, Anditej 372. Petrovic, and Ivaria Petrovic (Cambridge: Carmbridge University Press, DESTRUCTION AND MEMORY ON HIiE ATHIENIAN ACROPOLIS 279

Iti t htoning); Konstantin Kissa, D/ic Afimlttiwn Statuen- und Sclepnbeoen 40. Huisst, "The Kritios BoN," 62; and Keesling, The ilotive Statues. 49-50. A4rehaischre 1x,it (Bonn: Rudolf I labelt, 2101)0), 195-98, no. 54; Manolis For examples of post-Persian mitontimental bronze sculptures that have Korits, "Retenit)tDisiovcris ol ilthAtropolis," in Atropolis Restoration: been decapitated, see Houser, "Slain Statues"; for Severe Style nmarble 'lo, CCAM lIntementions, ed. Rirhaid Econornakis (ltondon: Academny statues that have sutifered a similar fate, see Stewart, "hite Persian and Editions, 191941, 174-79, esp. 178; Antony Raubitsrlick, Deditations Carthaginian Invasions," 388, 407. Itrm the Athenian Akroptolis (Cambridge, Mass.: Archaeological InistitUe 41. On Persian destruction layers elsewhere. see Marv Boyce. "Persian Re- of Anriiia, 1949), 18-20, til). 13; and ideni, "Two Monutments E"lec'tedr allcr Ire VictorN of Maratlhon," Aneericanjournmal ol[An'haeoltokq ligion in the Achenienid Age," in Introd ion: The Pet ian Period. ed. W. Davies and Lotis Finkelstein, Cambridge Ilistors oftJudaisnl (Caii- 41t, no. I 119i40t): 5.-59i (0I] thle' inscription, see also P. A. Hlansen, bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 279-307, esp. 293-94 Careinait Flngraje'hi a (umaeta, 2 vols. (Berlin: Waaler dcleGriyter, 1983- (Babylon); Lindenlatf, "Der Perserscrttt der Athener Akropolis," 84- 89), iol. I, 256 (lictcariti, C) C),);and lnst etiones (;raerae, 3rd ed. (Betr[lin: Waller dc G;ruvtct, 19181 -), vol. 1, 784 (hereafter, 1G;).For tihe 85; T. 1. Shear, "The Persian Destruction of Athens" (Athenian Ag- ora): K. Tucheli. "Die Perserzerst6rung von Branchidai-l)idvina und oittl Aichitic sculplures of tit'e Acropolis, see (;uiy Dickins, Arthaui ihire Folgen--ArclhiohtgisclI Betrachtet," Archdfologischer A4nzir,ger 103, S, ullture, vol. I, Catalguae o /the, Aet polms Museim ((Canmbridge: Carn- no. 3 (1988): 427-38 (Didvryna): and Volkniar son (Graeve, "Grahtig bridge U niwi't sits Press, 19121; artd Sthrader, Mie Archaischen Maroot hildiorrke deo Akrololi•.s aLlf deni Kalabaktepe," Istanbuh,7 Alitteilungen 36 (1986): 37-51 (Mile- 22. Fell an oveivim/ of tle tange ot'dedications seen on tile Acropolis, tos). Ott attacks ott statues in the ancient Near East, see Bahrati, "As- sault and Abduction"; T. Beran, "Leben tnr Tod der Bilder," in Ad seit I lIIrwit, The Athenian Ae roIttolit/,57- 6 1. Been et FidliterSeminandum: emtgoabc fitKatlheinz I)elleri,el. Gerlinde 23. CL. ibid., 98. Matter arnd Ursula Magen (Keselaer: Verlag Bltzon und Bercker, 1988), 55-60; and Prudence Harper arid Piere Ainiet, "Tlie Meso- 24. Ibid., 71-78, potainian Presence: Mesopotanmian MoVtILInents Found at Susa," ini 25. 1Ihctodolos 8.51-53. At(liacologicill corroboration of' Hercedorces's ac- The Royal City oleSusa, ed. Harper, Joan Artz, and Franrroise Tallori (oltitliimhalles the material evidence of' tlbe fire- set by (fie Persians, (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1992), 159-82. onl whinh] see Manolis Korrcs, "Onl the North Aciopolis Wall," in FExca- vating Clavwi•at Cutlture: Reeent Atehaeological Dis(ovenies in (,reece, ed. 42. Balbina BKiblei, "Die archaischen attischen Grals-rlen in drlr thernis- Minria Stallalopouhol and Marina Yerouhurou, BAR Intelrnational Se- tokleischen Stadtunrater: GrabscUrihding oder Apotropation?" Philolo- gus 145. no. 1 (20011: 3 -15: and Keesling, "Endoios's Painting from rits (O)xtrd: AiNtcoprcss, 2002), 179-86, esp. 184. There is also the the Thernistoklean Wall." rl(ti'tit disioverT of iltn shrite ot Aglaturos otilite east side oft tile' A(Iropolis, where ilhe historian (Hetrodotos 8,53) asserts that tile Per- 43. Against aristocrats: I,ambert Schneider anrd Christoph 116cker, (Gtie- sians scaled the walls. George IDontas, "The True Aglaurion," Hesperia chistievc est land: Antik und Byzanz, Islam und Klassizionus :zuimlien Korea- 52, no. 1 (1983): 4t8-63. this(hem Golf nd nordtrgienhisihenBergland (Cologne: DuMont Bucitviri lag, 1996), 123; and enlisting ancestors: Klaus StA;ibler, lotm und 26. 1 Itltditlos 7.143. hainktion: Kunstwerke als politisches Atusdiutkshittel (Miirster: L(,,ARII- 27. I ci odotlos 8.52. Verlag, 1993), 18-23. 28. I lcrodIols 8,53, 44. Keesling, "Enrloios's Painting fIiom the Therilistoklean Wall," 518. 29. Ibit. 45. A te•w examples exist of ironurnents ft(om the Theriistoklean wall 311. 1lin-wit, The ,AthenianAclopoim, 135-36. where the sculptures' faces appeal to hase been targeted: it is not 31. F'oi s( holin ly c hallengcs to the tnaditional view, see,Jelf'ey tt1uT-wit, clear, however, that this was necessarily done at tire titmte of the incor poration of these images into the will rather than earlier, fnt exxat]- "li'he Kxitios Boity: Disiovsr\, Re(onstrsction, and D)ate," Arneriian Jour- nal olA r(harolok7,93 ( 19189): 4 1- 80; Astrid Lindenlatif, "Der Perser- pie, bh the Persians. For one suci sCUilpItr, see Keesling, "Endoios's Painting front the Thernistoklean Wall." Surveying the sculptures fiiot s thull dci Aditner Akropolis," in Hoepft'ner, Kult tnd Kultbaueutn at the wall as at group, however, one's oveiall impression is oft pragroatic It'rAkrolltit, 46-115, esp. 86-92; Martin Steskal, Der Z'iTt6rungsbefund alteration to fit the 4180/79 die /thei A/itkro/tolitElo' l'nelst/die ztm rtablierten Cho( nologie- requirements of the wall. geeilt (I limburg: Verlag D)r. Kovac. 2004), csp. 165-811; arid Andrew 46. Thucrdides 1.93.3. ,S(cwarlI, "The Persian arid Cardilaginian Invasions of 480 B.C.E. and 47. 1 thank Dr. Jutta Stroszeck of the Kerairreikos Museum frt discussing the B•eginning of the( Classical Style," pl. 1, "Tire Stratigraphy, Chro- these issues withtlte. urology, and Signitfiancc ftIhe Acropolis Deposits," Ame'ricanjouJtrtal 48. Herodotos 6.101 (Fretria), 8.33 (Abae), 6.19 (Didcvirra). o"liA ottaeelgII 2, no. 31 (2008): 377-412. Htowever, comparison with Wthet, betlet-docnneriited sites, snthIis the Athenian Agira, clearly 49. Pausanias 8.46 (Brauron arid Didrlial; Herodotos 1.183 (BabIsltr; illusnfates tihe destium-fw,encss of tile Persian sack, oin which see T. I,. Herodrotos names this god Zeus). 8he;tr, "The IPersian Destruction of'Athens." And Steskal's approach 50. Pausanrias 1.8.5: Pliny, Natural Hnislwor 34.70; arid Arrian, Analeasis in parmi ular has beef) critiqued, lot' instance, by Maria Chiara Mo- 3.16.7- 8. timo, "L.a (Cohnata Pcrsiana: Appunti still'esistenza e la definizione di 51. See n. 41 above; cf. also Paul-Alain BeaulieCt. "An Episode in the Fall ina lintasinit," Annnatltio della S, uola Artheologica tit Atene 82 (2004): of Babylon to tbe Petsians,"Jiournal ol ,Neitt Easteln Studies 52, no. 4 187-95. (1993): 241-6]1, describing tie first attack by the Persians ott Babyoht, 32. ()it the Nike. see ii. 21 above. Ott itspossible identification as Iris, see when tile defenders gathered tip all tile cult stattes of tihe surround- Keesling, "The Kallin7achos Monument ing territories arid brought them inside the citY for protection. 33. 1lfeeodolos 6. 117. 52. Balraini, "Assault arid Abduction." 34. ILindcnlaul, "lDer Perserschun der Athener Akropolis," 90-92. 53. Deborah Steiner, Image,i it Afind: Statues in Artaii and Classical (Greek 35. Acropolis Ninscurn, Athens, iriv. no. 303. Liteiature atnd Thouttght (Princeton: Princeton Uniiersits Press, 2(11). 36. Inditdtlauf, "i)ei Pcistischuu der Adictner Akropolis," 86-89. Lin- 54. Christopher Faraone, ITlismans and Trojn HorMes: (GuardianStatues in dclikint's is tlti' most Iottough ietent discussion of evidence for fire Ancient Greek Alyth and Ritual (Oxtord: Oxtord UniversniN Press, 1992), daunagc. although site disputes tire idea that all marks of"fire are ricc- 94-112. cssaiily Itroni ttle Persian saik. AXcording to her, arnong the sculp- 55. Chained statutes: Pausanias 3.15.7-10: arid G eorgios Despinis, "Fin lines most clearly injuled by fine ait Acropol s Museurm inv. nos. 293, Geliesseltes G6tterbild," 7 i in MAsuteion: Beitrige zur antiken Plavli/,- 152, 588, 655, 6;58, 665, 672, 6i 3, 676, 680, 6r86t,687, 690, 6478. Ott Eestschit/fl Iuhren yon Peter Comelis Bol, ed. Hans son Steuiben, G,6tz lhe evidence olthi)rtllila fractu.re in the Older Parthenon material, Lahusen, and Haritini Kotsidu (Mhriesee: Bibliopolis, 21107), 235-45; see Koirres, "O(Inthe North Acropolis Wall." voodoo dolls: Christopher Faraone, "Binding and BuPting tre Forces 37. tFor the kotai with inimned faces found Iin a cache by the Erechtlicion, of Evil: T1ie Detfisive LUTseof 'Voodoo Dolls' in Ancient Greece," Cla( - see L,indenlaulf, "lDer Perserschumt der Atherier Akropolis," 79. To tie, Vical Antiquity 101,no. 2 (1991): 165-205. Ilest kmrai look most likely damaged by a harnmer or niallet, sittce 56. See it. 12 above. Ihe marks ate small and discrete in character, when comtpared to the 57. Livs 31.44.4-9; Harriet Flower, The Art of Ftrgetting:Distgrace and Obliz- broad, ltrg strokes of axes seen elsewhere (Fig. 8). For inale figures, one( might considei also, lot- examtple, Acropolis Mulseurln, irnv. nos. i in.tonP Roman Political ulfture (Chapel Hill: tTniversits of North Caro- 5991, 624 (the( Calf'Beartcr), 6$92, 3719t. lina Press, 2(106), 34-41: Caroline Htuser, "'(reek Monumental Bronze Sculpture of the Fifth and Fourth Centuries B.C." (PhD diss., 38. Iii . it,"hIrw Ktitios Boy,Pi esp. 6!-61; 1,inderilaurf, "Der Perserschutt Harvard Unisersitv, 1975), 255-81; and T. leslie SrearJr., "TIre Athe- 7 der Athencr Akropolis," 75-92; Steskal, Doe Zrektirungtbefudit 480179 nian Agora: Excavations ofi 1971," Hesperia 42 (1973): 121- 9, esp. der Athearp Akioloolis, 16(5-80t. 130-34, 165-68. 39. Foi example, AX iopolis Museum, inv, nos. 601, 602, 626, 684, 1685, 58. George Hantinann, "TIre Fourth Campaign at Sardis (1961)," Bulletin 686. of the American Schools ol Oriental Resiarch 166, no. 1 (1962): 1-57, esp. 28() ARI IW. IAiAIN SHP'IENIRFR 2009 VUII iF XCI Nu MBER 3

5-153 and Joinl Pedlev, A nientl,iterary Sourres on Snidis, Arrhaeologiral 73. For example, Hurwit, The Athenian Acrot5olis, 157-58; Korres, "Athe- E/Apnoration o.Santis (Carrinhiidge, Mass.: Harvaid Universitv Press, iian Classical Arihitecture," 10: arid Pollitt, Art and Experience in Classi- 1972), 48-49. 74. cal Creece, 65-66. 59. I(; If. '36-51. W. B. Dinsmnoor, "Atic Building Accounts," pt. 1, "The 74. On the Congress Decree, see E. F. Bloedow, " 'Olysipian' Thoughts: Parthenon," AIleimaao Journal ol Iiehae/olaj 17, no. 1 (1913): 53-80; l)t. Plutarch on Pericles' Congress Decree," Q/iu.scula Atheniensia 21 5, "Suppieviientar Notes." 25. no. 3 (1921): 233-47: and B. D. Me- (1996): 7-12; Brian MacDonald, "The Authenticit of the Congress rin, "Fiagientis of Attic Building Accounns," Ainriaitjoui•al oA/Arihae- Decree," PlstOnmia 31, no. 1 (1982): 120-23; and Meiggs. Thie Athenian ologv, 36. no. 4 (1932): 472-76, "tipire. 152-53. 60. Hlurwil. "The Kritios BON"; Lindenlaut, "Der PerserschUtt der Athenrer 75. The most extensive and convincing stateluent of the skeptical position Akliopolis"; Steskal, Do /i,'rtOirungsbejnond 480179 der -Ithener Akropolis; is that of Robin Seager, "The Congress Decree: Some Doubts and a and Siewart "The Peisian and Carthagiinian Invasions." Hypothesis," Htstoria 18, no. 2 (1969): 129-41. 61. Stewart, "TIh Pei sian.i and Carthaginian Invasions." Steskal, Do-Zeri 76. On the slow process of Athenian rebuilding, see Mark, The Stintuaty %i/iung,%belioid480/79 d.eiAthener. kropolis. has looked also at vase of Alhena Nike in Athe'is, 101-2. paintitg, in order to aigue that the invention of red-figure postdates 77. Herodotos 5.77; and Pausanias 1.27.6. the Persian sack. Foir criticisiis of his iietliod and conclusinns, see in. 311abo%c. 78. Inscriptions: IG 1. 52A, lines 15-18 (first Kallias decree), Ix V. 52B, lines 24-25 (second Kallias dectee); and Xenophon, Hellanira 1.6.1. 62. It is cleai Ihat given thie extraordinarily large amonunt of fill needed Oti the mintch vexed question of the connection between the for terracing-solile 13,000 Cubic vards (10,000 cubic nieters) for the "Opisthtociomnos" mentioned in inscriptions and litertai sources antd northi viaal, and 52,000-59,000 cubii vards (40,000-45,000 Cubic the Archaic Temple of Athena Polias, see the jUiciCicils summars in Inters) fioi the south wall--nuch was brought up fioun the lowet city Jeffrey Hurwit, "Space arid Theme: The Setting of the Parthenon." in (Stewnat, "Tlhe Persian anid Carthiaginian Inhasiins," 389); we cannot, The Pnir/henon from Antiqtuity to the Present, cd. Jenifer Neils (Cambridge: thcrefote. be certain that evetything found on the Acropolis was origi- Cambridge University Press, 2005), 9-33, esp. 22-25. nalh set iupi there. In Insyanalysis, I hase conseqieniV foctlused oi 79. For example, Steskal, Do A-ers/mntbngsbund 480/79 der Athener Akroiol/. tliose lnlonninents that cai most plausibly be associated with the Acropolis, liir example, the architectural fIragments and statues stch 210-11. as the korai and the Nike of Kalliniachos. The Nike's base was found 80. Hurwit, The Athenian Atroj)olis, 142. in still, as were those of some korai. 81. It is true that, due to Greek huilding methods, the cotlnin drums of' 63. Flu',ITemple of Aheria Polias is discussed below. Liteuarssoutces, the the Olter Parthenon were tiie major materials available tor use friom most detailed ofwhich is Plutarch (Po'ikhes 12-14), make clear that that temple; such drimis were the first components laid down in any ilit temples set e not rehuilt umii tile age of Perikles. We are also fori new building. However, if the builders of the north wall had simply tiunate in having dated inscriptional evidence, most significanly, fi- wished to build in a burry with whatever came to hand, they might nancial aiconiis of' the bfilding process, on which see ti. 59 above. also have made use of material from the podium arnd floor of the Final.hi there is archaeological evidence from ithe exca'ations carried temiple. both composed of large rectilinear blocks that might have out oinlthe Aropolis, although the most significant are from hlie late been thought convenient tor erecting a wall. nineteenth ccti'uv anid imperlecti l * recorded. Nonetheless, they show 82. I thank Linda Saflran fto pointing this out to tile. ciearIs that the rie'a arolind tiie Parttlhnon was reterraced in associa- 83. Hturnit, The Arrotiolis in the Age of Peri/les, 70. tion with the ionstruction oi the tericple: this can be dated to tile nid-tfifhtitentur by mieans of finds in the fill (Flurwi|t, "The Kritios 84. The most abundant evidence for dating comes froin the stretch of' the Bos,- 62-63). Fori the possible sin•sival into the Early Classical period north wall that contains fragments of the Temple of Athena Polias. of parti of the Temple of Athena Polias, see in. 78 behlw. An excavation of the area behind it in 1886 by P. K•ivvadias arid G. 64. ()In the Pariatheriaiia. see .1enifer Neils, ed., IlornhippingAthena: Pana- ILrwerau brought to light chips from building the wall, Archaic statues and inscriptions, and a hoard of Late Archaic coins. For the excava- lhenaia tnd P'arthenon (Madison: U'niversitsl of Wisconsin Press, 1996). tion, see Kavvadias, "Anaskaphai en tei Akropolei," Arch/tiologike Ethe- 65. IHerodottos 8.54. mners, 1886, 73-82: Kassadias and Kawerau, Diepugra7bung mier Akrolpo- A 66. Fori lithkind of actiitis ihat took plac' oin ithi ciopolis. see luirwit, I/ itsnoahre 1885 bis iahre 189/i (Athens: Hestia, 1906), 24-32: ard "The Aciopolis in Athenian Life" arid L,itetatul-c," chap. 3 of The,Athe- Stewart, "The Persian and Carthaginian Invasions," 381-85. Onl the nian Acroi/otis, 35-63. coins, see Chester G. Star-r, Athenian Coinage, 480-449 B.C. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 19701), 3-7; and Stewart, 383-85. Additional infot 67. Pausailias 7.5A,t (Sarios and Phoiaea), 10.35.2-3 (Phaleron, Abac, Hilalialtus). ilation oii the dating of the north wall comes froni the stidy of its architectural construction (Korres, "On the North Acropolis Wall"). 68. Major recent discissions ofo the oath frion a historical perspective'il- Some scholars have dated the construnction of the north wall to the clude Peter Siewcit, Doe Eid von tMalmoa (Munich: C. H. Beck'sche Ver- Kinionian period, some ten years after Theiiistokles, including Vassi- lagsbuchfiandhlng, 1972) (affirlning its historicity but denlying that of fis Lambrinoudakis, "Le mtoI de I'enceinte classique d'Acropole hlie "te-iples clause"); Russell Meiggs, The Athenian E'ipire (Oxford: d'Ath&nes et son r6le de p6ribole," Cont/ves Rendus de' IAcadcmie des Oxford Uniisrsity Press. 1999), 152-56, 504-7 (affirming its historic- hIscriptions el Bel/es-Leutres, 1999, 551-61; and Steskal, Der Zerstcn'ungsbe- itsy); P.A . Rhodes arid Robin Osborne, (irek Historical ln.sc•pi n/ins, 404- fund 480/79 der Athener Akroutolis, 210-11. lin so doing, they rely on 323 B.C. (Oxford: Oxford Universitv Press, 2003), 440-49 (declaring literary evidence linking the south wall to Kimon (Plutarch, Kimnion no secure decision can he that with lthe evidence currently available, 13.6-7; Nepos, Cinzon 5.2). Buit since the south wall alone is specifi- itached); rI-ans and ,anllWees, " 'The Oath of the Sworn Bands': The call' mentioned in the literary sources, this is not necessarily convinc- Achatnae Stela, the Oath of' Plataea, and Archaic Spartan Warfare," in ing. 0)a1s IJ i/ti Sparta, edt Mischa M'ier, Andreas Luther, and Lukas Thorn- 85. For the findspots of the sculptures, see Schrader, Die Archais(hen Mar- nien (Muni(ith: Frank Steiner Veilag, 2006), 124-64 (arguing fill at kcirncl )f histo[rical truth11,hnt also mulch totnrth-cen t irv invention, es- inthildiverke der Akropolis. pec ially including tile "temples clause"). 86. The number of statues found in this cache has been debated. Lan- glotz, "Die Koren," 8, 33 n. 4, in his fundamental publication oil the 69. Peter Kienz, "The Oath of Marathon, Not Plata|iia?" ftvetia 76, no. 4 Acropolis korai, identified fourteen statues from this location, but (2007): 731-42: arid Lotis Robert, lE'lud's eigratphiques et philologiques (Paris: LhibieiI Ancienne lIIonot Champion, 1938), 302-16: the Stewart, "The Persian and Carthaginian Invasions," 382 n. 21, has re- cently demonstrated that this was based on a misinderstanding, that foillnev ai-get's that time Atclharriae stela aottally preserves all earlier only inle are securely identifiable now. The identifiable scrulptures oiith sworn at Maratholn. are the korai in the Acropolis MuseUrm, ins. nos. 670, 672, 673. 677, 70. "TheI llcnic oath whit ii the Athenians say the Hellenes swore be- 678. 680-82. antd the Nike. Acropolis Musetnm ins. no. 690. tiol het'hattle at Plataia is talsified as is it'etreaty of the Athenians and ou, Helencs with King Darius. Arid furtlicruiore. lie says the bat- 87. For the excavation arid the numismnatic evidence. see n. 84 above. Finds from the cache inclided at least nile sculptures as well as five t' it iMaraiion was not what evetrone keeps repeating it was, and 'all Archaic inscriptions, building materials, a colnmin drunt of the Tem- the other things that flie cir' of the Athenians brags abott and uses to) (fil)( Ihe 11clienes., " TheV0pouipos, quote-d in Theon, 1Prog.,ninOt-- ple of Athena Polias, and various statue bases, sherds, and ashes. For the inscriptions, see Rauhitscliek, Dedirationsfiorin the Athenian Akrop/o- niata 2, trans, W. Robert (Connor, 'heOpioipus and Flifth-Centurt,A/thens its, nos. 6, 13, 14, 197, 217. (Washinglton, D.C: Centel for HIellenic Studies, 1968), 78: oin the pas- 88. On the widespread sage, see C 1onnor,78-89. belief, in Classical antiquity, that religious votives could not be discarded bit reqtired burial within a sancttary, see 71. Rhodes arid Osborne, (Greek Historical lnsritvtiins, ,144-45. Michael Doriderer, "Irreversible Deponierung von..Grosspiastik bIe 72. Oni the temples in the Attic countryside, see Korres, "Athenian Classi- Griechien, Etruskern ind R6mern," Jahreshefte des 0sti"rchis/then Ar- cal Architecture," 21-TI. chdiologischen Institutes in Wien 61 (1991-92): 192-275, esp. 203-7. D)ESTRUcrION AND MEMORY ON THE ATHIENIAN ACROPOIIS 281

89. ti)ii painting of Archaic sculptures, see Vinzeliz Britickinann and no. 1 (1976): 3-18, esp. 14-15; and Margaret Miller. "Priam, King of Rainnind Winische, 'ds., Bunte Giitter: Die Farhigkeit antikei Sku/ptur Troy," in The Ages o• Homer: A Tribute to Emil)y ovonsend 1erme,le, ed. (Munich: Staatliche Antikensairminihig tnd Glyptothek, 2004). Jane Cartel and Sarah Morris (Austin: University of Texas Press, 90. For example, the "Mourning Athena" stela described by Pierce De- 1995), 449-65, esp. 460. inargne ii 1,exitot ironog,raphicum mythologiar dassicate (Zurich: Artemis 111. The fact that the Trojans were here depicted sympathetically, and Verlag, 1981), s.v. "AIhena," 10)15, no. 625; and the Athena Leninia, elsewhere (as in the Stoa Poikile and Simonides) in a polemical and dest ribed in Pausanias 1.28.2 and by Detaiargne, s.v. "Athena," 976, unsympathetic manner, is testimony to the malleability of myth in io. 1917. Classical Greek culture. 91. The slatue is often tefetrred to in the scholarly literature ias tile 112. For Greek military history in the Early Classical period, particularly Atlhta IcniPoiafhos. Since this title is attested only in one, verv late, Athens, see P. J. Rhodes, "The Delian League to 449 B.C.," in The soiiiiic-a scholiut to D)emosthenes' Against Andtrtion (597.5)-1 Iifth Century B.C., ed. D. M. Lewis et al., Cambridge Ancient HistomN hait,ie avoidedtiltl me here. For tile dating of the statue, see Evelyn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 34-61. Ilart ison, "Pheidias," in P'eymonal Styl^'s in Greek Sculpture, ed. J. j. Pollitt 113. For committee oversight of expenditures relating to the Parthenon, and Olga Palagia, •',le Classical Studies (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- see the financial accounts discussed in in.59 above. As to the speed of vcisitv ptess, 1996), 16-65, esp. 30. Other useful discussions of the building, Manolis Korres has calculated that with the stoneworking stanti include I lurwit, The Athenian Atropolis, 151-52; and Carol Mat- tools available today, and using the same number of masons and iusth, Class.ial IBronuez: The Art and ('ralt o/Greek and Roman Statuary sculptors, construction on the Parthenon wosld take at least twice as (Ithaca, N.Y, Cornell University t'ress, 1996), 125-28; ftor literary long. Korres, From Pentelicon to the Parthenon (Athens: Melissa Publish- soulccs, we have descriptions in Pausanias (1.28) and Demosthenes ing House, 1995), 7. (/)ei laa l'egatione I9.272), alldt inscriptional evidence for the construc- tion of thi statue and its cost (/(; 1V.435, lines 427-31). For a restora- 114. For example, Hurwit, The Athenian Acropolis, esp. 228-32; Jenifer lion and inteliepctation of the inscription, see W. B. Dinsinoor, "Attic Neils, The Parthenon Frieze (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Buihling Aicounts," pli. 4, "'h Statue of Athena Protlachos," Amen- 2001), 173'-201: Alexia Petsalis-Diomidis, "Twerty-First Cenmnr Pert eauot rnti/alo/ Anrehaeol'gy 25, no. 2 (1921): 118-29. spectives on the Parthenon," Journal of Helleni Studies 123 (2003): 191-96; Pollitt, Art 92. lht wit. The Athenian Atropolis, 152. and Expernence in Classical Greece, 80-82; and Katherine Schwab, "Celebrations of Victory: The Metopes of the Pat- 93. Ibid., 151-53. thenon," in Neils, The Parthenon, 159-97. 94. Pausanlias 1.28.2: and Demosthenes, l)e ilaso legatione 19.272. 115. Stewart, Classial Greece and the Birth of Wuestern Art, 132-33. 95. The only (I ltain t cfites-ltuations of it are oit Ronian-cria Athenian 116. Ibid., 133. i oins, which depicm, in abbii eiated and schematic fiorm, somtie of the majiol monuments onl the( Acropolis. Hiarrison, "Plicidias," 32-34. 117. IfG IV. 81, lines 5-9. T. Leslie ShearJr., "The Demolished Temple at Eleusis," in Studies in Athenian Architecture, Stulpture, and Topographiy 96. Dinsilloor, "The Stntue of fAtena Prounachos," 126. (Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1982), 97. Andrew Stewart, Clissical G,ree(e and the Birth o/IWestern Art (Cam- 128-40. Itidge: Canibfidge University Press, 2008), 7. 118. Hturit, "The Setting of the Parthenon." 26. 98. ()t tilhe Stoa Poikile, see Mark Stansbury-O'Donnell, "The Painting 119. Barbara Barletta, "The Architecture and Architects of the Classical P'rogram in thft' Stoa P'oikile," in Ppneldean Athens and Its Legao', ed. ,Ju- Parthenon," in Neils, The Parthenon, 67-99, esp. 68-72. (hitll Baltinger and jeffiey Iltfurit (Austin: University of Texas Press, 200}5), 73-87, with abundant ptevious bibliography. 120. The recent reconstruction of the huilding histors on the site of the Parthenon by Manolis Korres ("Die AthenaITenmpel atif der Akropo- 99. For tleiati nig of tile iniument, determined through pottery front lis") includes not one but a series of predecessors: an "Ur-Parthenon" its fioundations, see ibid., 81. dating to the early to mid-sixth century, followed by two Late Archaic 100. O)n the ixitaation, see T. Leslie Shear Jr., "The Athenian Agora: Ex- building phases, one in poros (a soft stone), the other marble. Most cavations of 198()-1982," Itespoia 53, no. 1 (1984): 1-57, esp. 13-16, significant, however, is the marble predecessor dated to abott 490 18. BCE and destroyed by the Persians, Out focus here. 101. The paintings were exiecuted fy sonme of the nlost fatmous artists of 121. Hurwit, The Athenian Acrapolis, 166. ile Eal1vIClassical cra. Polygnotos is said to have done the Tro'tjan 122. For the shrine, see especially Korres, "Die Athena-Tempel ant der Ak- "WaIs(cu's (fPlutaich, Kinion 4.5-6), Mikon, ilit'Aniazions (Aristo- ropolis," 227; and for its identification with Athena Ergane, see Hur- phaelis, Lvm/atta 677-79), while Marathon is variously ascribed to wit, The Acropolis in the Age qf PeYk1rs, 74-76; and Pausanias 1.24.3. I'olygnots, Mikon, or a third candidate, Panainos, brothel of Iheidias. Aelian, De natura animalium 7.38 (Polygnotos or Mikon); 123. For analogous examples of this kind of "historic preservation," see Pausanias 5.11.6 (Panaiuos); Pitny, Nettural Ilistor' 35.57 (Paninaos). Hu,rwit, "Landscape of Metnors: The Presence of the Past on the Athenian Acropolis," chap. 2 of The Acropolis in the Age of Petikles, 49- 102. Fot possible riflections in later art, see Evelyn Harrison, "The South 86. FIie/e oftile Nike Temple And the Marathon Paintiing in the Painted Stoa," Ametnian outrnal ol Arehaeolottg 76 (1972): 353-78; the article 124. Korres, "On the North Acropolis Wall," 184. also piovides a utsef'ul catalog off tfie most relevant literary sources for 125. On the proportional relations within the Classical Parthenon, see Bait- hlc(-paintings, which should be supplemented by the more broad- letta, "The Architecture and Architects of the Classical Parthenon," 1anging sele4 tion on tlhe huilding in R F.EWycherley, Literary and Epi 72-74; and Manolis Korres, "The Architecture of the Parthenon," in pal/phtial Tesitiptnia, vol. 3, The Athenian Agora: Resultsit /'tIxcentations The Parthenon and Its Impact in Modemr Times, ed. Panavotis Tourniki- I'n tt/ndudted the Amenican School qi/Classical Studies at Athens (Princeton: otis (Athens: Melissa Publishing Hotse, 1994), 55-97, esp. 88-90. Tife American Scltool of Classical Studies at Athens, 1957), 31-45. cohtion drums were recut, reducing their diameter about 8 inches (20 103. Vausanias 1.17.2-6; flit other literary reftirences to the Thescion, see centimeters). Korres, From Pentelinon to the Parthenon, 56, 60 n. 37. W hiett lIy, I,iterurv and E'pIgiaphirat Iestinonia, 113-19; the shrine's 126. Lothar Haselberger, "Bending the Trith: Ctrvature and Other Re- decoiation is discussed ill Castriota, Mth, E'thos, and Actuality, 33-63. finements in the Parthenon," in Neils, The Parthenon, 100-157. 104. V'olvgnotos is mentioned fy liarpokration (Wycherley, Literarytand 127. For the curvature of the Older Parthenon, see ibid., 119. It should be I]n/tVrPd a! "lretimonia,114); and Mikon Iy Paitsanias (1.17.3). noted that, due to the extension of the podium and the different 105. Pittite D)evatinez and Aliki Kauflnmann-Satnaras, entry in Lexiron icono- plan of the new building, the curvature had to be reworked, on which giaphitun rtitholog•iae Hassiaee, s.v. "Aniazones," 637. see Francis Cranmer Penrose, An Investigation of the PIriniples of Athe- 106. I'he O.etrh/ rhuýs Papitlri, ed. and trans. Bernard P. Grenfell and Arthiur nian Architeeture (1888; Washington, D.C.: McGrath, 1973), 20, 29-35. S. limit. 72 sils. ( lotdon: Egypt Exploration Fund, 1898-), 3965 and 128. 1 thank Francesco Benelli for pointing out the challenges involved in 2327 (lit'iahter PO)'s), trans. D)ehorah Boedecket and D1avid Sider, this to me. Ot the reuse of materials, see Korres, FromoPentelicon to the ,.ds., The Neiv Simonides: Contexts of Maise and Desire (Oxftrd: Oxford Panhenon, 56. Bundgaard, Parthenon and the Mlyenean Cit'V, 61-67, dis- University Ptess, 2001(), 25, 28-29; the whlume also contains ai selec- cusses reused material fitom the Older Parthenon, although his con- tuin otf ssays oil Sinonides lisefitl here. clusion-that the entire building was essentially taken apart, altered 107. /'Ox'. 23127, lines 11-12: iranis. Boedeckc' and Sider, Th'e Ne7v Sirno- very minimallv, and put together again--cannot stand in light of nide%, 28. C'f Eta Stehle, "A Bard of the Iron Age and His Auxiliary more recent discoveries, on which see especially Korres, "Recent Dis- Muse," it) Boedecker and Sider, 106-19, esp. 113. coveries on the Acropolis." 108. L,otaux, Thi Invention o/ Athen.s, 132-71, 129. Spencer A. Pope, "Financing the Design: The Development of the Parthenon Program and tie Parthenon Building Accounts," in Aliso,l- 109. Athens. Ract k, Zomtn Barharnbih/ in demKunst lanea Aleditt'rranea, ed. Ross Holloway, Archaeologica Transatlantica 110. ,John Boardman, "The Kleophrades Painter at Troy," Antike Kunst 19, (Providence: Brown Universitv, 2000), 61-69, esp. 65-66. 282 ART tt I ILAIN SItPIEMBIER 2009 VOLU ME XCI NiMBER 3

130. As argued by, iorexample, Hurwit, The Acropohi% in t(h Age ojPerikles, 135. On the A.nazonornachiv, see Evelyn Harrison, "The Composition of' 72-76. the Aniazoniotnachy oin the Shield of Athena Parthenos," Iesi/enia 35. 131. Andrew Stewatt. Greek Srulpture: An Explorahion (New Haven: Yale Uni- no. 2 (1966): 107-33; idem, "Motifs of the City-Siege on the Shield of 1 versity Press. 1990), pl 320. Athena Parthenos." American Journal ofArchaeolopg 85, tan. 3 (1981): 281-317; and V. M. Strocka, Pirdusrclid.s und Parthenosshild (Bochuln: 132. (. Rodeinvaidt, "Interpretatio Cristiana." Atchiiologiseher Anzeiger 3-4 Buchhandltng WasotUth, 1967). (1933). 401-5. 136. The Athenian AniazonomachN is described in Aesilsitis (Eumenides 133. Mary Beard. The Parthenon (Cambridge, Mass.: Hlarvard University 688), Plutarch (Theseus 26-27), and Pausanias (1.2. I6). For the argu- Press, 2003). 54. ment in favor of the Athenian Ainazorionomachy. see especiallY lHarri- 134. Literary descriptions of the statue ate preseivsed in Pliny (Natural IHis- soil. "Motifs of the City-Siege." tory 36. 18-19) and Patsanias (1 .24.5-7). Of Motdern stUdies, particu- 137. Harrison, -Motifs of the City-Siege," 295-96. latrl tseitfid are Milette Gaitmian. "Statue, CIlt and Rept(oduction," Apt 138. Devambez and Katiffimann-Samaras, Lexicon iqgnwaiphi,ion mythnlhgiae IItIA1t1V 29, no. 2 (2006): 258-79; Kenneth Lapatin, "The Statue of dca,sicae, s.v. "Amazones," 601-3, nos. 232-47. Athena and Other Treasures in the Parthenon," in Neils, The Parthe- non, 260-91; Neda ILeipen, Athena Parthenos: A IReomnirurtion (Toron- 139. On collective inemorv, see it. 4 above. to: Royal Ontario Museunt, 1971): and Gaabriele Nick, Die Athena Pat- 140. Demosthenes, Fwothe liberty qj the Rhodiam 35, in Demosuthmnes, trans. theros: Studien zum Griothi.mhen KAtdbild und seiner Rreultion (Maini: J. H. Vince (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1930), vol. 1, Vetlag Philipp yot Zabern. 2002). 432. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

TITLE: Destruction and Memory on the Athenian Acropolis SOURCE: Art Bull 91 no3 S 2009

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it is reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article in violation of the copyright is prohibited. To contact the publisher: http://www.collegeart.org/caa/news/index.html