HUNG . LI6RUM. 
 
 E . M U N l-FICEN T I A . SLADIANA. 
 
 O PER£ . IN . STUDIIS. 
 FELICITER . NAVAT/E. 
 
 PREMIUM . DEDIT. 
 
 COLLEGII . SANCTI . PETRI. 
 WESTMONASTERIENS1S. 
 
 ARCHIDI DASCALUS. 
 
 . Jt2>Ccc*CXK 
 
 V 
 
.x"" 
 
 Slwi 
 
 €4 Oh 
 
m 
 
 ■**** — 
 
THE 
 
 ANTIQUITIES OF ATHENS; 
 
 AND OTHER 
 
 fHomnmntS of ©mte ; 
 
 As measured and delineated by 
 
 JAMES STUART, F.R.S. andE.S.A. and NICHOLAS REYETT, 
 Painters and Architects. 
 
 SEVENTY PLATES. 
 
 SECOND EDITION. 
 
 LONDON : 
 
 TILT AND BOGUE, ELEET-STREET ; 
 
 JOHN S. CROSSLEY, LEICESTER AND RUGBY. 
 MDCCCXLI. 
 
 J. S. Crossley, Printer, Leicester. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2016 
 
 GETTY CENTER 
 iibrary 
 
 https://archive.org/details/antiquitiesofath00stua_0 
 
PREFACE 
 
 TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 We have not been disappointed in our expectation 
 that this little work would make its way. Inde- 
 pendently of all other considerations, it appeared that 
 some such manual was really wanted, not only for 
 popular information, but for ready and convenient 
 reference, in circumstances and situations where the 
 voluminous or costly publications which relate to 
 the general subject, must be altogether unattainable. 
 A steadily increasing sale has justified our anticipa- 
 tions, and at the same time enabled us in a new 
 edition to improve on the execution of the former. 
 
VI 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 The anxiety to compress had led to the exclusion 
 of matter not merely interesting but instructive, and 
 a somewhat extended reference to original authorities 
 has supplied materials which were before, either not 
 easily accessible, or passed over in the uncertainties 
 of a first experiment. Few corrections have been 
 found necessary, but considerable additions have been 
 made throughout: greater scope has been given to 
 description and explanation : where deficiencies have 
 been detected, the requisite details are supplied: — it 
 has, in brief, been our endeavour to render the body 
 of information ample and complete for all usual pur- 
 poses, whether practical or popular. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 With one paramount exception, Athens is peerless 
 among the existing monuments of the ancient civi- 
 lized world. The ruins of Rome may be more 
 gorgeous ; of Babylon more mysterious ; of Persepolis 
 more romantic ; of the Egyptian Thebes more vast ; 
 but in all that is interesting to thought and feeling ; 
 in memories and associations, deep, affecting, sub- 
 lime, Athens transcends them all. The beauty of 
 her landscape; the brightness of her sky; her olive 
 groves ; her mountains ; 
 
 - “ the gulf, the rock of Salamis ;»» 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 viii 
 
 these still adorn that famous plain of which the 
 Athenian Acropolis is the centre and the crown. 
 Yet these are not the attractions which bring the 
 scholar and the artist to these fair regions : lovely as 
 the face of nature is, there are still more impressive 
 objects of admiration, in the glorious wreck of those 
 master- works which have made the City of Minerva 
 the wonder of all ages. 
 
 It is most unfortunate that the annals of art should 
 so rarely commemorate its encouragement and con- 
 servation, so commonly tell the story of neglect and 
 destruction. The history of Athens, where Art w T as 
 carried forward by men such as the world has not 
 since owned, from the simple and severe forms of its 
 earlier efforts, to the perfect combination of highest 
 and purest elements, shows no exception to the uni- 
 versal rule. The two great devastators, tune and 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 IX 
 
 the conqueror, have done their work upon the noblest 
 monuments of human genius ; yet those unrivalled 
 constructions which, in their finished beauty and 
 grandeur, were the pride and marvel of antiquity, 
 might have remained nearly entire, but for the per- 
 severing encroachment of domestic and dilettante 
 depredation. The accidents of war, the conflagra- 
 tion, and the explosion, may have, once in a cen- 
 tury, shattered a temple ; but the dilapidator has 
 never ceased. From Sylla who exported an entire 
 colonnade, and Mummius who sent off by ship-loads 
 the treasures of Grecian art, to the Voivode who 
 worked friezes and inscriptions into the walls of the 
 citadel or of his own house, the mason who breaks 
 down some exquisitely carved marble into cement, 
 and the amateur who purchases or purloins whatever 
 may be of convenient portage,— from the wholesale 
 to the retail plunderer, all have made the curious and 
 
X 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the precious things of Greece their prey. Nor, so 
 far as the virtuosi are concerned, can we regret or 
 condemn the theft, for they have removed their spoil 
 from situations where it was exposed to neglect or 
 mutilation ; they have brought within our reach mo- 
 dels of an excellence until then unknown ; they have 
 contributed essentially to the increase of knowledge, 
 and to the refinement of the public taste. 
 
 The course of spoliation would furnish the sub- 
 ject of an interesting dissertation ; the limits of 
 this introduction allow of but a passing reference. 
 The Persian invader consigned to indiscriminate de- 
 struction all that was not given up to him with the 
 most abject submission. Cities and temples, villages 
 and olive groves, were burnt or demolished. But 
 these ravages were repaired : few and obscure are the 
 indications that can now be traced of these remoter 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 XI 
 
 visitations. The domestic wars of Greece, wretched 
 and suicidal as they were, left the sanctuaries of the 
 gods and the consecrated works of art untouched. 
 The Roman conquest swept from both European and 
 Asiatic Greece many of the finest productions of the 
 sculptor and the painter, yet with few exceptions 
 there was little wanton damage inflicted, and in 
 later times the Caesars seem to have taken a pride 
 in extending their patronage to their Helladic de- 
 pendencies. Caligula and Nero were exceptions to 
 this humane and enlightened character; the first 
 from insane vanity, the latter from something like 
 taste, made large demands on the remaining trea- 
 sures of art. The iconoclastic propensities of some 
 of the Christian emperors made fearful havoc among 
 temples and idols ; nor can the formidable inroads of 
 Alaric the Goth and Genseric the Vandal be omitted 
 even in this hasty recapitulation of the disasters by 
 
Xll 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 which Greece was irretrievabty despoiled of her best 
 possessions. The Crusades were another source of 
 evil; and the Turkish conquest completed what the 
 long train of previous inflictions had left undone. 
 
 After this brief exhibition of the disastrous fate 
 which has befallen the productions of the great artists 
 of Greece, instead of marveling that so few have 
 been preserved to the present time, it may well excite 
 our special wonder that so many have survived the 
 casualties to which they have been exposed. It is 
 hardly less a subject of astonishment that it should 
 have been reserved for the inquiries of so late a 
 period, to obtain anything approaching to an accurate 
 knowledge of the state of Greece, with respect to its 
 remaining antiquities. From time to time there had 
 been partial efforts in this way made by individuals, 
 but they seem to have terminated in nothing that was 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Xlll 
 
 satisfactory, until the latter part of the seventeenth 
 century, when several travellers, mostly invested 
 with a diplomatic character, visited Athens ; and the 
 nearly contemporary travels of Dr. Spon and Sir 
 George Wilder first gave authentic, though incom- 
 plete, information on the actual condition of Athens 
 and its ancient structures. 
 
 It was not, however, until the middle of the suc- 
 ceeding century that a clear, comprehensive, and 
 scientific survey of these glorious remains of classical 
 antiquity, was made by observers thoroughly qualified 
 by study and practice for an enterprise so bold and 
 arduous. It is to James Stuart that the world is 
 indebted for the first survey conducted upon scien- 
 tific principles, of the architectural antiquities of 
 Greece. It occurred to that eminent man, while 
 engaged at Rome in the pursuit of his professional 
 
Xll 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 which Greece was irretrievably despoiled of her best 
 possessions. The Crusades were another source of 
 evil; and the Turkish conquest completed what the 
 long train of previous inflictions had left undone. 
 
 After this brief exhibition of the disastrous fate 
 which has befallen the productions of the great artists 
 of Greece, instead of marveling that so few have 
 been preserved to the present time, it may well excite 
 our special wonder that so many have survived the 
 casualties to which they have been exposed. It is 
 hardly less a subject of astonishment that it should 
 have been reserved for the inquiries of so late a 
 period, to obtain anything approaching to an accurate 
 knowledge of the state of Greece, with respect to its 
 remaining antiquities. From time to time there had 
 been partial efforts in this way made by individuals, 
 but they seem to have terminated in nothing that was 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 .Xlli 
 
 satisfactory, until the latter part of the seventeenth 
 century, when several travellers, mostly invested 
 with a diplomatic character, visited Athens ; and the 
 nearly contemporary travels of Dr. Spon and Sir 
 George Wheler first gave authentic, though incom- 
 plete, information on the actual condition of Athens 
 and its ancient structures. 
 
 It was not, however, until the middle of the suc- 
 ceeding century that a clear, comprehensive, and 
 scientific survey of these glorious remains of classical 
 antiquity, was made by observers thoroughly qualified 
 by study and practice for an enterprise so bold and 
 arduous. It is to James Stuart that the world is 
 indebted for the first survey conducted upon scien- 
 tific principles, of the architectural antiquities of 
 Greece. It occurred to that eminent man, while 
 engaged at Rome in the pursuit of his professional 
 
XIV 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 studies, that he might prosecute them to greater 
 advantage, on ground more purely and primarily 
 classic, thus seeking knowledge at the very fountain- 
 head of art. Having associated in his enterprise, — 
 which was in part a commercial speculation, includ- 
 ing a scheme of extensive publication, — his fellow- 
 student, Nicholas Revett, they proceeded to Athens 
 in 1751, and their residence there included a term of 
 nearly three years, during which they were inde- 
 fatigably employed in exploring, measuring, and 
 drawing, the magnificent ruins by which they were 
 surrounded. In 1761 the first volume of their labours 
 was given to the world, and a new impulse was com- 
 municated to the study of ancient art. The Dilettanti 
 Society soon formed itself, and commenced a series 
 of spirited and skilfully-conducted researches, which 
 have completed and extended the investigations of 
 Stuart. Farther down than this it is unnecessary to 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 XY 
 
 continue these details : the important additions which 
 have since been made by travelers, both amateurs 
 and professional men, have not indeed exhausted 
 inquiry, but have materially enlarged the circle of 
 its enlightened and successful prosecution. 
 
 It would be foreign to the intent and scope of the 
 present manual, were this deduction of facts extended 
 to the wide range of architectural history ; but as an 
 introduction to the following pages, it may be expedi- 
 ent to give a brief exposition of their object, in order 
 to a perfect comprehension of the plan. The plates 
 are of French workmanship, from the graver of artists 
 long practised in this sort of reduction ; and the 
 selection has been carefully made from the great 
 work of Stuart, so as to include the largest possible 
 amount of instruction and exemplification. Eleva- 
 tions, plans, sections, details, are given profusely in 
 
XY1 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 a clear and expressive style of execution. This small 
 volume includes no less than seventy plates, exhibit- 
 ing an extensive illustration of the Greek orders in the 
 majestic simplicity of their earlier design, the pure 
 and pervading beauty which distinguished their pro- 
 gress and maturity, and the richness which marked 
 even their degradation by the Roman school. Exam- 
 ples are given of the Doric order, from the heavy 
 masses of the Temple at Corinth, to the perfect pro- 
 portions of the Parthenon— of the Ionic, from the 
 simple but admirable forms of the Temple on the 
 Ilissus, to the exquisite enrichments of the Erech- 
 theum — of the Corinthian, from the graceful luxuri- 
 ance of the Monument of Lysicrates, to the denser 
 but more common-place foliage of the Incantada. 
 Much scientific detail and correct measurement will 
 also be found in the plans and sections. 
 
INTHODXJ CTIOIT. Xvii 
 
 In the explanatory part of the volume, v it has 
 been the anxious endeavour of the editor to com- 
 municate as much information as might be com- 
 pressible within the limits of a hand-book. Is it 
 too presuming to hope, that in its present form 
 this small but comprehensive manual may be found 
 to supply a real deficiency ; that it may furnish 
 the student with a clear and intelligible introduc- 
 tion, the man of letters with a well-arranged and 
 fully-exemplified system, easy of recollection and 
 reference — and even the professor with a pleasant 
 and convenient vade mecum. 
 
 B 
 
THE 
 
 ANTIQUITIES OF ATHENS. 
 
 THE ACROPOLIS. 
 
 PLATES I. II. 
 
 Ik the greater number of instances the site of the 
 ancient cities of Greece appears to have been deter- 
 mined rather by the position of some insulated rock, 
 of which the platform might be surrounded with a 
 strong and uninterrupted wall, than by the usual cir- 
 cumstances of domestic or commercial accommoda- 
 tion. Even when, as in Athens, the neighbourhood 
 of a commodious haven may have formed one strong 
 
THE ACROPOLIS. 
 
 inducement to the choice of a particular locality, the 
 settlers rejected the obvious expediency of occu- 
 pying the shore, for the greater security of some 
 rugged elevation, though at an inconvenient distance. 
 Nothing can illustrate more expressively than this 
 simple fact, the unsettled and insecure condition of 
 Greece in the earlier times. Nor, in truth, did the 
 necessity for similar precautions ever wholly cease : 
 that miserable struggle for supremacy, which kept 
 the independent states in constant agitation, multi- 
 plied fortresses in every direction, and the effect of 
 this has been so far fortunate, that many relics of 
 antiquity were preserved from the destruction which 
 marked the course of invading armies or marauding 
 bands. 
 
 The Athenian Acropolis was fortified at a very 
 early period ; and historical tradition ascribes the 
 construction of its defences to the Pelasgi, that mys- 
 terious race, who seem to have been the great 
 masters of military architecture in those ancient and 
 uncertain ages. Thus secured against assault, it 
 became a consecrated precinct, filled with temples, 
 and absolutely crowded with the noblest productions 
 
THE ACXtOPOLXS. 
 
 3 
 
 of art. The account given by Pausanias of its sacred 
 buildings and commemorative statues, is “ a thing 
 to wonder at and the reader is tempted to ask if it 
 were possible that so much of beauty and magni- 
 ficence could be accumulated within so limited a 
 space. The temples of Diana, Venus, and Minerva 
 Polias, are, with the Parthenon and the “ Temple of 
 the Genius of Pious Men,” a mentioned by Pausa- 
 nias; and it is highly probable, from other autho- 
 rities, that his enumeration does not include the 
 whole. Of all this glorious show, nothing now 
 remains, but the Parthenon, the Erechtheum, and the 
 Propylsea, shattered indeed and deplorably mutilated, 
 but retaining enough of their original form to prove 
 how much of the beautiful and sublime they must 
 have exhibited in their perfect state. 
 
 a This is Colonel Leake’s rendering of 'BttovScucdv AcnpcdP % 
 it can, however, hardly be taken as a very satisfactory inter- 
 pretation. Taylor gives it — ■“ the Demon of Worthy Men 
 and Clavier evades the difficulty by keeping close to the 
 original , <e le Genie Spoudceon ” Schubart and Walz, in the 
 most recent critical edition of Pausanias, adopt the average 
 interpretation — 6 bonorum virorum genio 
 
4 
 
 THE ACROPOLIS. 
 
 / 
 
 Yet there is one circumstance, of comparatively 
 recent discovery, and still more recently ascertained 
 to its full extent, which gives a strange contradiction 
 to our cherished notions concerning the purity of 
 Grecian taste, and its antipathy to all coarseness 
 and exaggeration. It should seem that the Greeks 
 painted their temples , not merely in chiaroscuro, or 
 in subdued tints, for the purpose of giving relief 
 to projections or expressiveness to ornamental de- 
 tails ; but with glaring colours, reds and blues and 
 yellows ; with violent contrasts, the columns one 
 hue and the entablature another. Nay, there is 
 shrewd suspicion that the sculptures were painted, 
 like the figure-head of a man-of-war, and that the 
 pillars were striped ! — the flutings being left of the 
 unstained marble, while the rest was daubed with 
 villainous ochre. And unluckily the evidence for 
 these incredibilities, is most exasperatingly clear ; 
 the statements of the German architects employed 
 by King Otho, and the very interesting details given 
 by Mr. Bracebridge, leave no doubt whatever of the 
 facts. Still we have our doubts ; not indeed as to 
 the correctness of the testimony, but respecting the 
 
THE ACROPOLIS* 
 
 5 
 
 date of the practice. We cannot believe that the 
 architects of the best days of Greece, would so care- 
 fully select the purest materials, in the prospect of 
 their concealment by a mask of tawdry colour ; that 
 they would give such an anxious finish to their 
 carvings, knowing that their sharpness and delicacy 
 would be impaired by the brush of the 6 ornamental 
 painter.’ Neither is it probable that, if this vile 
 practice had existed in the olden time, no hint of 
 it should occur in Pausanias or Vitruvius. That the 
 Greeks used colour on the exterior of their temples, 
 at least that there are now to be found upon them 
 traces of colour, cannot be questioned ; but that 
 Ictinus and Callimachus, to say nothing of Phidias 
 and Praxiteles, practised these atrocities, while 
 Pericles approved and patronized, can only be be- 
 lieved — quia impossibile est 
 
 In the first edition, nothing more than this was 
 said in illustration of the Acropolis, considered as a 
 repository, surpassingly rich, of the noblest produc- 
 tions of art. It seems, however, to offer but a slight 
 and insufficient notice of objects which would require 
 volumes to describe fairly : and it may tend, in some 
 
6 
 
 THE ACROPOLIS. 
 
 degree, to supply this obvious deficiency, if we extract 
 from the 6 Attica’ of Pausanias, a few additional indica- 
 tions of that glorious scene as it existed in his day. 
 Deeply as we are indebted to this active and observant 
 traveler for the information which he has left us 
 on almost all subjects connected with Greek antiquity, 
 it is impossible not to regret that he should have 
 given it in so incomplete and disjointed a form. 
 We have in the ‘Periegesis’ hints of the greatest 
 importance, but of the most provoking brevity; — 
 scraps and shreds without coherence or sequence ; — 
 facts without the necessary comment, and comments 
 with imperfect facts. In one place he withholds in- 
 valuable explanations because he has been warned to 
 silence by a dream ; in another he contents himself 
 with a simple assurance that he is perfectly well 
 informed on the subject, but that he will not com- 
 municate. Even where no scruple, no prohibition 
 can possibly intervene, he contents himself with a 
 mere repetition of his traveling memoranda, and 
 thus leaves many an interesting point in hopeless 
 uncertainty. Yet we may well hold his memory in 
 grateful admiration for that which he has preserved, 
 
THE ACEOPOLIS. 
 
 7 
 
 and perhaps the very form and quality of his com- 
 munications may have aided in their conservation. A 
 larger work would have been less frequently copied, 
 and with more difficulty kept from injury ; nor ought 
 it to be overlooked, in our regret that such ample 
 materials have not been transmitted to us in a more 
 comprehensive and compact form, that after all it 
 must have been impossible to give any thing beyond 
 the mere outline of a subject so vast. The History, 
 the Mythology, the Topography of Greece, with all 
 that was incident to these in fact and fiction, and all 
 that might illustrate them in existing institutions, 
 public monuments, or living manners, lay before him to 
 observe and to describe : few men would have been 
 equal to such a task ; Pausanias most assuredly was not. 
 
 Such, however, is our best, indeed our only direct 
 authority for the details of the Acropolis, and the 
 accuracy, as well as the incompleteness of his descrip- 
 tion, is sufficiently attested by the actual remains. 
 He commences with the triple port of Athens, and 
 after very summarily noticing the more striking 
 objects that presented themselves on the two roads 
 leading to the city, from Pirseus and Phalerum, he 
 
8 
 
 THE ACROPOLIS. 
 
 makes an irregular circuit before he enters the sacred 
 inclosure of the citadel. Like every other part of 
 this marvelous construction, the wall itself might 
 serve as the text of a lengthened yet interesting 
 disquisition. It was built or restored at different 
 periods; the earliest portion was on the northern 
 line, and tradition assigned its execution to the Pelasgi, 
 though it would seem that some of the peculiar forms 
 of those mysterious architects are not now to be 
 observed among the remains. Cimon, the son of 
 Miltiades, was the reputed builder of the southern 
 wall : this, however, is questioned by Dodwell, who 
 supposes that the Kl[movlov reixos was an interior 
 fortification, and that the entire peribolus was con- 
 structed by the Pelasgi. Among his authorities for 
 this most gratuitous supposition, he refers to Pau- 
 sanias, erroneously as it should seem, since, if we 
 may trust our own examination, that writer distinctly 
 excepts the part built under the superintendence of 
 Cimon. 
 
 In the arts, as in all else that related to intellectual 
 enjoyment, the Greeks turned every thing to account. 
 The rock on which the Athenian F ortress stood in all 
 
THE ACROPOLIS. 
 
 9 
 
 its pride of ornament and strength, was itself made 
 either the material or the mould of many a graceful 
 structure. Its recesses were consecrated either by 
 historical or religious associations, and decorated with 
 skilful adaptation to their especial character : the irre- 
 gularities of its circuit were shaped into theatres for 
 music and pantomime : columns, statues, and tripods, 
 occupied its minor projections. The wall itself of the 
 superior platform was, in various ways, charged with 
 adornment ; in some instances not altogether in har- 
 mony with the normal principle which inseparably 
 connects utility with beauty. To the face of the 
 southern wall, was attached an iEgis, bearing on its 
 centre the head of Medusa, gilt. On the eastern end 
 of the same line, stood several groupes of statuary : — 
 the war of the Giants — the battle of the Amazons and 
 the Athenians — the fight of Marathon — and the exter- 
 mination of the Gauls in Mysia. Of these the dedica- 
 tion is ascribed to Attalus. The height of the figures 
 (if indeed the words relate exclusively to height) ap- 
 pears not to have exceeded three feet. Nothing is said 
 of the execution of these statues, nor of their effect 
 when contemplated from below: it seems, however, 
 
10 
 
 THE ACROPOLIS. 
 
 difficult to imagine that it can have been good in 
 any position. Viewed from without they must have 
 looked like puppets, exciting no small wonder how 
 and why they were thus ranged, in a situation so awk- 
 wardly exposed to every casualty of weather, accident, 
 and mischief. It is, indeed, recorded, that the statue 
 of Bacchus, connected with the Gigantomachia, was 
 blown from its 6 pride of place, ’ during a violent 
 tempest. 
 
 To the terre-plein of the rampart, there is but one 
 approach, and that, in the days of old, was adequately 
 fortified against the modes of assault then in practice. 
 Of the system adopted in constructing the immediate 
 entrance to the Acropolis, the details will be found 
 under the proper head ; and nothing farther will be 
 said, in this place, of the Propylsea, than to suggest 
 that, when the architecture of Greece is censured for 
 restricted range, this most impressive group of build- 
 ings may be referred to, in evidence that the Greeks 
 themselves found no difficulty in adapting its elements 
 to every purpose of useful and ornamental structure. 
 
 Passing onward through this unrivalled avenue, 
 and standing beneath its eastern portico, the eye of 
 
THE ACROPOLIS. 
 
 11 
 
 the traveler would command the entire perspective of 
 the Acropolis, and in the distance the great mountain 
 ranges of Attica. On the right stood the Parthenon, 
 majestic in its height, and beautiful in its exact pro- 
 portions. To the left and in front, were the Erech- 
 theum, the Cecropium, and other structures of sacred 
 character ; while the intervals and vacant spaces of the 
 enclosure were filled up by statues, altars, and other 
 memorials of Gods, Heroes, Patriots, and Bards. Of 
 all these nothing but the wreck remains — the relics of 
 an age and people such as the world has not since 
 possessed. 
 
 Plates 1 and 2 are representations of the Athenian 
 Acropolis in a restored state. The first exhibits the 
 eastern aspect, where was the only approach to the 
 platform, and in this view the letters A, B, C, indicate 
 in succession the Propylsea, one of the flanking 
 temples, and the Parthenon. The second shews the 
 northern side, and the same letters refer to the same 
 structures ; D points out the Erechtheum. Of all 
 these structures, ample illustrations are given in the 
 following pages, which contain, in addition to an ex- 
 tensive collation of authorities, extracts, analytical 
 
12 
 
 THE ACROPOLIS. 
 
 and descriptive, from architects and travellers, 
 wherever it was thought that the language of actual 
 observation might give distinctness to complicated 
 details, or interest to an impressive object. 
 
DORIC PORTICO, 
 
 OR, 
 
 GATE OF THE AGORA. 
 
 PLATES III. IY. 
 
 The ruin of which the third and fourth plates give 
 the authentic restoration and the geometrical pro- 
 portions, had long been considered as the only re- 
 maining fragment of a temple dedicated to Rome 
 and Augustus. Stuart, however, on grounds far 
 more satisfactory than those which had given cur- 
 rency to this belief, suggested that these columns 
 might once have flanked the entrance to a public 
 market; and all subsequent research has tended to 
 
14 
 
 DORIC PORTICO. 
 
 confirm his opinion. In addition to peculiarities 
 of construction which have not been found in the 
 remains of sacred edifices, the testimony of in- 
 scriptions is decisive. Of these there are several 
 connected with the building; and one of them re- 
 cords the names of two ‘Prefects of the Market,’ 
 while another preserves an edict of the Emperor 
 Hadrian, regulating the sale of oils, and the duties 
 payable on that common article of traffic. There 
 were in Athens, two of these structures ; one of them, 
 probably that to which this portico belonged, was 
 distinguished as the New Agora ; it was founded by 
 the Caesars, Julius and Augustus, and among its 
 decorations were statues of the Caesarean family. 
 
 PRATE III. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan of the Portico, — on the jamb, to the 
 left of the spectator, marked A, is the inscription 
 containing Hadrian’s decree. The prolongation of 
 the wall connected with these jambs, beyond the 
 side walls B, is contrary to all usage in the construc- 
 tion of temples, and evidently indicates a structure 
 intended for other purposes. 
 

 
 F.i. 
 
 
 1 
 
 A i. s'rs A 
 
 
 
 : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' ’ T1 
 
 i : .. . H 
 
 | 1 
 
 - ' 
 
 . 
 

DORIC PORTICO. 
 
 15 
 
 Fig. 2. Geometrical elevation of the front of the 
 Portico. — ’The Acroterium on the summit of the 
 pediment probably supported an equestrian statue of 
 Lucius Csesar. 
 
 PLATE IV. 
 
 Fig. 1. Details of the capital and entablature. 
 
 There is a slight but marked distinction between 
 the proportions of these columns, and of those which 
 the Greeks attached to sacred edifices, in conformity 
 with the principle affirmed by Vitruvius in the re- 
 commendation that in buildings of secular character, 
 the proportions should be less massive and imposing 
 than those which were employed in the construction 
 of temples. It is suggested by the editor of Stuart, 
 that “ this example of the Doric order, authenticated 
 to be the latest of a purely Grecian character, affords 
 a greater facility of adaptation to the modern practice 
 of domestic architecture, than any antique model ex- 
 tant.” 
 
 The Greeks appear, indeed, to have been far from 
 solicitous for the strict maintenance of mere symmetry, 
 
 when important objects required its sacrifice, Where- 
 o 
 
16 
 
 DORIC PORTICO. 
 
 ever it was practicable to combine uniformity with use 
 and ornament, the Grecian artists adhered to it as one 
 of the surest elements of architectural effect ; but when 
 circumstances demanded a relaxation of the rule, they 
 seem to have felt neither scruple nor difficulty in avail- 
 ing themselves of the ample resources supplied by their 
 genius and skill. Of this there is clear illustration in 
 the Erectheum and the Propylsea. It would, proba- 
 bly, have been easy in both instances to maintain, if 
 not perfect regularity, something much more nearly 
 approximating to it than we find to have been the case. 
 The obstacles interposed by the irregularity and ab- 
 ruptness of the rocky surface might have been over- 
 come by leveling or substruction, and with respect to 
 merely technical difficulties, the resources of art were 
 fully equal to their removal. Local superstitions, 
 however, were a more unmanageable matter, and to 
 their influence must be mainly ascribed the departures 
 from symmetrical arrangement which occasionally pre- 
 sent themselves in the works of the Greek architect. 
 
 Fig. 2. Profile of the capital, on a larger scale. 
 
IONIC TEMPLE ON THE ILISSUS. 
 
 PLATES V, YI. VII. 
 
 Near the fountain of Callirrhoe, on the southern bank 
 of the Ilissus, stands a small temple, of the Ionic order, 
 but differing considerably in its details from all ordi- 
 nary example. The forms are simple but elegant, and 
 the execution is in all respects so perfect, that this 
 building may be considered as one of the most remark- 
 able productions of Grecian architecture. 
 
 At a period now uncertain, this temple was repaired 
 after a barbarous fashion, and converted into a church, 
 sacred to 4 Our Lady of the Hock,’ a name which it 
 retained in the time of Stuart, although deserted and 
 miserably shattered. Since then it has been entirely 
 destroyed. Much doubt exists respecting the original 
 dedication. Spon assigned it to Ceres ; Stuart, to the 
 
18 
 
 IONIC TEMPLE ON THE ILISSTJS. 
 
 hero Panops; but Colonel Leake and Sir William 
 Gell, with greater probability, suppose that it was the 
 Temple of Triptolemus. 
 
 PLATE Y. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan of the Temple, amphiprostyle. — A, 
 the portico ; B, the pronaos ; C, the naos, or cella of 
 the temple ; D, the posticum ; E, one of the antse. 
 The two middle columns of the portico no longer 
 exist ; but, on the place where they ought to stand, 
 there are traces of circles, exactly equal in diameter 
 to the remaining columns ; and these indications suf- 
 ficiently prove the intention of the architect. 
 
 At the time of Stuart’s visit, the capitals of the 
 antse of the posticum were in excellent preservation ; 
 in width they were of the same dimensions with those 
 of the portico, but they had only half the thickness ; 
 while in those of the pronaos, the faces E. F. were 
 equal. 
 
 Fig. 2. Elevation of the Portico in its perfect 
 state,— it is conjectured that the frieze was ornamented 
 with bas-reliefs. 
 

 
 ■ l* <4 
 

 
20 
 
 IONIC TEMPLE ON THE ILISSUS. 
 
 longed to the several parts of the temple. — The 
 mouldings of the capital and the base are carried 
 round the exterior of the building; but in the inte- 
 rior of the pronaos, the base only is continued. 
 
 Fig. 1. Architrave of the portico. 
 
 Fig. 2. Architrave of the pronaos. — The upper 
 fascia was enriched by a painted ornament. 
 
 Fig. 3. Architrave of the posticum. 
 
 It is deeply to be regretted that of this interesting 
 structure, so few particulars should have been pre- 
 served. Its simplicity and marvelous beauty made 
 it a sort of test of excellence in art ; and were it only 
 for what he has done in regard to this fine memorial 
 of Grecian taste, Stuart’s name would deserve grate- 
 ful remembrance : having done so much, it were 
 unreasonable to require what he was probably pre- 
 vented by circumstances from effecting. The hope 
 of farther illustration has, however, been altogether 
 destroyed by a series of disastrous events. Having 
 been converted to the uses of the Greek Church, this 
 would have insured its preservation; but in 1674 a 
 French embassador took it into his head to celebrate 
 mass within its precincts, and this desecration caused 
 
IONIC TEMPLE ON THE XLISSTTS. 
 
 21 
 
 it to be abandoned by the Greeks. Thus neglected 
 it became ruinous, and in 1780 was demolished by 
 order of the Turkish Voivode, and the materials used 
 in building. 
 
OCTAGONAL TOWER 
 
 OF 
 
 ANDRONICUS CYKRHESTES, 
 
 PLATES VIII. IX. X. XI. 
 
 This singular building, usually called ‘The Tower 
 of the Winds/ is constructed of marble, and bears 
 on each of its eight faces an allegorical figure in 
 relief ; the entire series representing the different 
 winds, according to the arrangement and nomen- 
 clature of the Greeks. In order, however, that the 
 reader may thoroughly understand the character and 
 object of this curious and complicated edifice, it may 
 be expedient to cite the clear description of Vitruvius, 
 as translated by Stuart : “ Some have chosen to 
 reckon only four winds ; the East, blowing from the 
 equinoctial sun-rise; the South, from the noon-day 
 
OCTAGONAL TOWER. 
 
 23 
 
 sun; the West, from the equinoctial sun-setting; 
 and the North, from the Polar stars. But those who 
 are more exact, have reckoned eight winds, particu- 
 larly Andronicus Cyrrhestes, who on this system 
 erected an octagon marble tower at Athens, and on 
 every side of the octagon he wrought a figure in re- 
 lievo, representing the wind which blows against 
 that side : the top of this tower he finished with a 
 conical marble, on which he placed a brazen Triton, 
 holding a wand in his right hand ; this Triton is so 
 contrived that he turns round with the wind, and 
 always stops when he directly faces it ; pointing with 
 his wand over the figure of the wind at that time 
 blowing.” 
 
 This description applies, with the utmost exact- 
 ness, to 4 The Tower of the Winds.’ Four of its 
 faces front the cardinal points : the part immediately 
 below the cornice bears on each of its eight divi- 
 sions a figure, skilfully designed and wrought, repre- 
 senting the supposed characteristics of the wind to 
 which it was inscribed. Beneath these figures are 
 traced solar dials, to the correctness of which the 
 celebrated Delambre bears testimony, and describes 
 
24 
 
 OCTAGONAL TOWEH OF 
 
 the series as “ the most curious existing monument 
 of the practical gnomonics of antiquity.” The roof 
 is of marble blocks, wrought into the form of tiles. 
 There are two entrances, facing respectively to the 
 north-east and north-west: each of these openings 
 has a portico, supported by two columns. When 
 Stuart explored this building, the lower part of the 
 interior was covered to a considerable depth by rub- 
 bish; and the Dervishes, who had taken possession 
 of the building, performed their religious rites on a 
 wooden platform which had been thrown over the 
 fragments. All this, however, he was permitted to 
 remove, and he found manifest traces of a clepsydra, 
 or water-clock, carefully channeled in the original 
 floor ; thus completely illustrating the term Horo- 
 logium, applied to the tower by Varro, and exhibit- 
 ing both the simple and the scientific mechanism em- 
 ployed by the ancients for the measurement of time. 
 Farther details will occur in the explanation of the 
 plates. 
 
 PLATE VIII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan of the Tower of the Winds.— The 
 attached circular portion, of which the general exte- 
 
ANDHONICUS CYKRHESTES. 
 
 25 
 
 rior appearance may be observed in the plate imme- 
 diately succeeding, probably contained the reservoir 
 which supplied the water to the clepsydra; and the 
 channels marked on the floor were, no doubt, con- 
 nected with the machinery, though in what way 
 cannot now be ascertained with precision. 
 
 Much is wanting to the history of this celebrated 
 Tower. Varro and Vitruvius both describe it, and 
 the probable period of its construction may be referred 
 to the second century before Christ, when Scipio 
 Nasica set up a similar building at Rome, of which 
 the architectural character does not appear to be now 
 ascertainable. The stream which gave motion to the 
 machinery of the Athenian time-piece had its spring 
 in the cave of Pan on the flank of the Acropolis, and 
 portions of the artificial channel by which it was con- 
 veyed, are still to be traced in the intermediate space. 
 
 An inspection of the plan and section will show 
 that the building is interiorly ornamented by cor- 
 nices at different heights, and that their projections 
 are indicated by simple lines, while the substance of 
 the wall is exhibited by a broad and shaded band. 
 The wall varies somewhat in thickness, and the vari- 
 
26 
 
 OCTAGONAL TOWER OE 
 
 ations are distinctly expressed in the figure, which 
 is a careful reduction from the original engraving. 
 That every advantage may be afforded for the com- 
 prehension of these details, we shall here give the 
 references and explanations from Stuart’s own text: 
 “Each external face of this octagon tower, consi- 
 dered without its ornaments, is one perpendicular 
 plane from top to bottom ; but on the inside it is 
 otherwise ; for that part of each face which is above 
 the second cornice, projects two inches over the part 
 which is between the said cornice and the pavement. 
 The lowest of the interior cornices is interrupted by 
 the two doors, and breaks off on each side of them in 
 a very obtuse angle : and the upper cornice or enta- 
 blature, supported by eight columns, as likewise the 
 fascia on which those columns stand, are circular. 
 So far, therefore, as the plan regards these particulars 
 which are on the inside of the tower, it is necessary 
 to divide it into four parts. The first part, from a to 
 b , is one-fourth of the interior surface of the wall 
 immediately above the pavement; the second, from 
 b to c, is one-fourth of the interior surface immedi- 
 ately above the lower comice ; here the greatest pro- 
 
ANDRONICUS CYRRHESTES. 
 
 27 
 
 jection of this cornice is marked by a single line, and 
 the manner of its breaking on each side of the door- 
 ways is also shown : the third part, from c to d , is 
 the interior surface of the wall above the second cor- 
 nice ; the projection of this cornice is also marked 
 with a single line : the last part, from d to a, is the 
 remaining fourth of the interior surface ; on this is 
 marked the circular band, or fascia, on which the 
 eight columns are placed, with the plans of two of 
 those columns.” 
 
 Fig. 2, exhibits the entire section of the tower ; 
 and an examination of this plate will make still 
 clearer the full explanation given above. The first 
 and second cornices,— the circular fascia, or plinth, 
 supporting the columns, which find room by occu- 
 pying the angles of the wall, — the entablature, or 
 upper cornice, — and the roof,— are distinctly marked. 
 
 PLATE IX. 
 
 Elevation of the Tower of the Winds.— This 
 restoration has been made on the authority of the 
 existing remains, and of fragments found on the spot. 
 The Triton is from the description of Vitruvius, and 
 
28 
 
 OCTAGONAL TOWER OF 
 
 has always appeared to us a singularly awkward 
 contrivance. It would, no doubt, be exceedingly 
 difficult to adapt a graceful form to the purposes and 
 conditions required in the present instance, but the 
 Greek architects were in the habit of overcoming 
 greater embarrassments than these, and it is hard to 
 believe that this strange merman, with his tail in one 
 hand and a stick in the other, can present a single 
 line or feature of the original design. 
 
 plate x. 
 
 Capital and Entablature of one of the Porticoes. — 
 It should be stated that the columns are much de- 
 faced, and that these members are delineated from 
 fragments which, although found on the spot, can 
 only be assigned to their respective places on highly 
 probable grounds. 
 
 There can, however, be little ground for hesitation 
 in this matter, since the character of the crowning 
 member, on which the 4 Triton ’ rested, and of which, 
 though not actually found in its proper position, the 
 authenticity cannot be for a moment questioned, is so 
 completely in harmony with other remaining frag- 
 
X. 
 
 3 mod. 
 

ANDRONICUS CYRRHESTES. 
 
 29 
 
 ments, as to set the question entirely at rest. The 
 Capital is commonly assigned to the Corinthian order, 
 though deficient in several of its leading features. 
 The Corinthian acanthus leaves rising tier over tier, 
 with their scrolls and other ornamental adjuncts, are 
 represented by a single wreath of enriched foliage, 
 and above it a course of flat and nearly plain water- 
 leaves, Egyptian rather than European in their ex- 
 pression, while the abacus is altogether unadorned. 
 Still, taken without reference to systematic arrange- 
 ment, this capital is pleasing in form and effect, and 
 from its simplicity readily applicable to domestic 
 architecture. With the Choragic Monument, it has 
 absolutely nothing in common, and when they are 
 placed in connexion as the earliest and latest examples 
 of the Greek Corinthian, the arrangement is wholly 
 at variance both with fact and sound principle. 
 
 PLATE XI. 
 
 Fig. 1. Profile of the exterior cornice. — The 
 lion’s head, which ornaments the cymatium, is per- 
 forated, and serves as a gutter to carry off the 
 rain-water. 
 
30 
 
 OCTAGONAL TOWER OF 
 
 Fig. 2. A fourth part of the roof, — the cavity in 
 the centre, marked A, was probably the socket of 
 the capital, or ornamental base, which supported the 
 Triton. 
 
 Fig. 3. Section of half the roof,- — the dotted pro- 
 longation of the line of the roof, is intended to show 
 how deeply the capital was engaged before this part 
 of the building was damaged. 
 
 The circumstances connected with this extraor- 
 dinary structure have not received sufficient investiga- 
 tion. It might serve as the text to many an important 
 enquiry ; and its position, both local and chronological, 
 suggests a series of questions much less easy to 
 answer than to propose. The whole aspect and 
 proportions of the building have no alliance, it would 
 seem, with Greek taste and feeling. The execution of 
 the emblematic figures is, indeed, highly praised by 
 Stuart, but it appears to be essentially Homan, and 
 reminds us far more of the Trajan Column than of 
 the pediment and metopes of the Parthenon. The 
 roof is skilfully constructed ; and it has been already 
 stated, on the high authority of Delambre, that the 
 dialing of the different faces displays admirable 
 
ASTDRONICTTS CYRKHESTES. 
 
 31 
 
 science. It is much to be desired, that some one of 
 thorough qualification, both as architect and archaio- 
 logist, would give his leisure to the investigation of 
 this instructive monument. 
 
 D 
 
THE CHORAGIC MONUMENT 
 OF LYSICRATES. 
 
 PLATES XII. XIII. XIV. XV. XVI. XVII. 
 
 There was in Athens — we adopt the words of Mr. 
 Wordsworth (Athens and Attica) as brief and com- 
 prehensive — “ a series of temples forming a street. 
 These temples were surmounted by finials which 
 supported the tripods gamed by victorious Choragi 
 in the neighbouring theatre of Bacchus, and here 
 dedicated by them to that deity, the patron of dra- 
 matic representation. Hence the line formed by 
 these temples was called the Street of Tripods. 
 From the inscriptions engraved on the architraves of 
 these temples, recording the names of the victorious 
 parties, and the year in which the victory was gained, 
 
CHOKAGIC MONUMENT OE EYSICEATES. 33 
 
 the dramatic chronicles, or Didascalise, were mainly 
 compiled. Thus these small fabrics served the 
 purposes at the same time of fasti, trophies, and 
 temples.” 
 
 Of these structures this monument must have 
 been one, and surely the most beautiful. Exqui- 
 sitely wrought, graceful in its proportions, rich in 
 decoration, it only required for its perfection that the 
 material should not disgrace the design and execu- 
 tion. Fortunately this was close at hand : the fine- 
 grained marble of the Pentelic quarries enabled the 
 Athenian architects, not only to produce the happiest 
 effects, but to maintain throughout that faultless 
 elaboration which distinguishes the purest examples 
 of Grecian art. In this edifice, the roof, the base of 
 the colonnade, and the shafts of the columns, are 
 each of one block. The frieze and architrave are 
 also, unitedly, of one piece, and the masses of stone 
 which form the steps of the stylobate, are entire. 
 The whole building consists of a quadrangular base- 
 ment, supporting a circular temple, crowned with a 
 tholus, or cupola, terminating with an ornament, on 
 which stood the tripod, of which an inscription re- 
 
34 CHOEAGIC MONUMENT OE EYSICEATES. 
 
 corded the dedication. As there are peculiarities of 
 construction in this edifice which deserve distinct 
 specification, we shall give in explanation, the de- 
 scription of Stuart himself, since in all cases of diffi- 
 culty or complication, the definitions of an actual 
 observer have the best chance of being intelligible. 
 44 The colonnade was constructed in the following 
 manner ; six equal panels of white marble, placed 
 contiguous to each other on a circular plan, formed 
 a continued cylindrical wall, which of course w^as 
 divided from top to bottom into six equal parts, by 
 the junctures of the panels. On the whole length of 
 each juncture was cut a semi-circular groove, in 
 which a Corinthian column was fitted with great 
 exactness, and effectually concealed the junctures of 
 the panels. These columns projected somewhat 
 more than half their diameters from the surface of 
 the cylindrical wall, and the wall entirely closed up 
 the intercolumniation. Over this was placed the 
 entablature and the cupola, in neither of which 
 any aperture was made, so that there was no ad- 
 mission to the inside of this monument, and it 
 quite dark.” 
 
 was 
 
xn. 
 
 
 
 
CHORAGIC MONUMENT OE LYSICRATES. 35 
 
 Yet have the ingenious men of Athens been pleased, 
 in modern times at least, to call this dark inclosure 
 the 66 Lantern of Demosthenes ,” — lucas a non lucendo 
 —and to suppose that this lantern without light, this 
 six-feet- wide closet without window or entrance, was 
 actually the study of that great statesman. 
 
 PLATE XII. 
 
 Elevation of the Choragic Monument. — Neither 
 here, nor in the following illustrations, has any thing 
 been restored without authority. 
 
 The comparatively high state of preservation in 
 which this admirable production of an unrivaled 
 school was found by Stuart, appears to have been 
 the result of circumstances which could not easily 
 have happened elsewhere. There were in Athens, 
 while it yet remained the city of Minerva, a great 
 number of these edifices ; so many in fact, as to 
 form an entire street. Every Choragus, when he 
 retired from office, placed the consecrated tripod, 
 which was given as an honorary reward for his heavy 
 expenditure, in a temple, of small dimensions but 
 costly decoration, inscribed with the name of the 
 
36 CHORAGIC MONUMENT OE LYSICRATES. 
 
 founder and the particulars of the contest. Structures 
 like these, beautiful as they might be, and even in 
 proportion to their beauty, were ill-suited to the fierce 
 and vindictive spirit which too often prevailed among 
 the polities of Greece. The lofty and strongly-built 
 constructions which sheltered the worshippers of Zeus 
 and Athene, might withstand the casualties of civil 
 broil, or the more deliberate injuries of an invading 
 enemy, but the slender and fragile members of these 
 gems of architecture could offer but weak resistance, 
 and have yielded altogether to the various forms of 
 spoliation or destruction by which they were assailed. 
 Two only remain, and these owe their preservation to 
 the peculiar circumstances of their position. The 
 memorial of Thrasyllus is attached to a cave in the 
 solid rock, and its partial security is due to the 
 occupation of the recess by a shrine of the Panaghia. 
 The monument of Lysicrates has escaped destruction 
 from a different cause : it is built up in the wall of a 
 Capuchin convent or hospice , where it seems to have 
 served the various purposes of closet, oratory, and 
 library. For this, as for other services to the cause 
 of art and learning, gratitude is due to the monastic 
 
m. 
 

CH0EAGIC MONUMENT OF LYSICRATES, 37 
 
 brotherhoods, and while arrested in admiration before 
 this faultless relic of Attic genius, let it not be for- 
 gotten that we owe its conservation to the good taste 
 and right feeling of a Franciscan recluse. 
 
 PLATE XIII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan of the Monument.— The parts more 
 darkly shaded show the existing portions of the 
 edifice, including three panels and the whole of the 
 columns. The columns are fluted only on the exterior 
 half-circle ; the inner semi-diameters are less in radius 
 by half an inch. 
 
 Fig. 2. Section of the Monument.— In the interior, 
 the capitals are only blocked out. 
 
 3. Profiles of the base of the columns, and the 
 cornice of the basement. 
 
 PLATE XIV. 
 
 The Entablature ; the exterior face of the capital ; 
 and the half of one of the tripods, which are wrought 
 in relief on the upper part of the intercolumniations, 
 immediately below the architrave.— Although none of 
 the capitals were complete, a careful collation enabled 
 
38 CH0RAGIC MONUMENT OF LYSICRATES. 
 
 Stuart to give the whole with minute accuracy : so 
 scrupulous was he in this respect that, as may be seen 
 in the following plate, he abstained from the resto- 
 ration of a fragment of foliage, not having been able 
 to trace with entire exactness the original form. The 
 annular channel between the shaft and the capital, is 
 supposed to have contained an astragal, or colla- 
 rino, of bronze. The small figure on the left repre- 
 sents the profile of the fascia and moulding, below 
 the tripods. 
 
 plate xv. 
 
 Fig. 1. The ‘flower/ or crowning ornament, on 
 the top of the tholus. — The letter A, at the side, refers 
 to an arrangement of foliage so much injured as to 
 baffle all attempts at restoration. 
 
 Fig. 2. Plan of the upper surface of the 6 flower.’ 
 — A, A, A, cavities formed to retain the feet of the 
 tripod. B, socket of the central support of the 
 tripod. 
 
 Fig. 3. L, perpendicular section of so much of 
 the upper part of the flower, as may serve to show 
 the depth of the cavities at A and B, in the pre- 
 ceding figure. 
 

 
 
 

 
3 4 S_ 
 
 — 
 
CHOPAGIC MONUMENT OE LYSICRATES. 39 
 
 PLATE XVI. 
 
 Fig. 1. A fourth part of the upper surface of the 
 roof. — This beautiful exterior is worked with great 
 delicacy in the form of a sort of thatch of laurel 
 leaves, surrounded by an ornamental edge, usually 
 termed a Vitruvian scroll. A, one of the three 
 helices, caulicoli, or scrolls, which form the triple 
 division of the roof. B, a cavity which probably 
 held some bronze ornament. 
 
 Fig. 2. Section on the line C D, of fig. 1. 
 
 Fig. 3. Partial section of the cupola on the line 
 E F, showing the arrangement of the leaves. 
 
 Fig. 4. Section of the helix, or scroll, marked A, 
 in fig. 1. This section is on the line a b , fig. 2. 
 
 Fig. 5. Examples of the Vitruvian scroll, which 
 surrounds the tholus ; and of the antefixse, which 
 ornament the cornice. 
 
 PLATE XVII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan of the Capital. — The segments C D, 
 represent the interior half. The letters E, F, G, H, 
 refer to the outer division. C is an horizontal sec- 
 
40 CHORAGIC MONUMENT OF LYSICRATES. 
 
 tion at the line indicated by the same letter, fig. 2. 
 
 D, a similar section at D of the same figure. 
 
 E, F, G, exhibit different plans, expressing sections 
 marked by corresponding letters attached to fig. 4. 
 
 Fig. 2. Elevation of half the internal unfinished 
 face of the capital. 
 
 Fig. 3. Vertical section through the axis of the 
 unfinished inner half. 
 
 Fig. 4. Vertical section through the centre of the 
 finished exterior half. 
 
 The frieze is ornamented by figures, of which a 
 specimen is given in Plate XIV. representing the 
 punishment of the Tyrrhenian pirates by command 
 of Bacchus. Nothing can be more spirited than the 
 execution of these groupes, nor more expressive than 
 the way in which the story is told. 
 
 The beautiful modification of the Corinthian ca- 
 pital, which distinguishes this monument, has been 
 supposed to be the earliest known example of that 
 order. This, however, is in some degree doubtful ; 
 though there can be no question of its great antiquity. 
 The profusion with which embellishment was 
 
CHOKAGIC MONUMENT OF LYSICBATES. 41 
 
 lavished on this beautiful structure, is nowhere more 
 remarkable than in the highly ornamented junction 
 of the shaft with the capital. Instead of the com- 
 mon termination of the fluting, it is finished off 
 into a sort of leaf ; while the interval between the 
 annular channel and the proper commencement of the 
 capital, is filled up with a circlet of simple but grace- 
 ful foliage. 
 
PANTHEON OF HADRJAN. 
 
 PLATES XYIII. XIX. XX. XXI. XXII. 
 
 This wreck of a magnificent structure, passed among 
 the modern Athenians, as the palace either of Pericles 
 or of Themistocles, a guess only resorted to in the 
 utter ignorance of genuine tradition and architectural 
 appropriation. Wheler and Spon supposed these 
 ruins to have belonged to the temple of Jupiter 
 Oiympius ; an obvious error, since the ascertained 
 remains of that gorgeous edifice occupy a different 
 locality. Stuart, by an exceedingly ingenious de- 
 duction, made it appear highly probable that the 
 Poikile Stoa, or painted portico, occupied this site ; 
 and he accounted for certain incongruities in the 
 architecture by the supposition that extensive repairs 
 had interfered with the original design. Dodwell 
 
PANTHEON OF HADRIAN. 
 
 43 
 
 adopted the same opinion. Dr. E. D. Clarke thought 
 that these remains might have belonged to the Old 
 Forum of the Inner Cerameicus. Mr. Wilkins ap- 
 pears to have been the first to suggest that on this 
 extensive platform stood the I Her on ^ or 6 Sanctuary 
 common to all the Gods/ built by the orders of 
 Hadrian ; and this opinion has the sanction of the 
 late Sir William Gell. The most complete exposition, 
 however, of the facts connected with this difficult 
 inquiry, is to be found in the notes appended by Mr. 
 Kinnaird to the second edition of Stuart and Revett’s 
 great work ; and it seems to be there fairly shewn, 
 from the language — -though not quite free from obscu- 
 rity — of Pausanias, and from the results of recent 
 examination, that these shattered walls and broken 
 columns formed part, as maintained by Wilkins and 
 Gell, of the splendid Pantheon of Hadrian. 
 
 These ruins were, to cite the description of Mr. 
 Wilkins, ( Atheniensia ) “ the peribolus of a sacred 
 building. The walls next the street are adorned with 
 Corinthian columns advanced before them : in the 
 centre is a portico of four columns, through which the 
 area within is approached. The line of the walls is 
 
44 
 
 PANTHEON OF HADRIAN. 
 
 interrupted by several projections forming celke, or 
 chapels, some circular, and some rectangular. Around 
 the walls within was a cloister, or portico, formed by 
 a continued row of columns twenty-three feet distant 
 from them.” 
 
 All this sufficiently agrees with the description of 
 Pausanias, who speaks of it as 4 most admirable,’ with 
 its hundred and twenty columns of Phrygian marble ; 
 its splendid halls with ceilings and ornaments of gold 
 and alabaster ; its pictures and statues ; and, better 
 even than these, its library. A singularly fortunate 
 verification of its identity was obtained, long subse- 
 quent to the visit of Stuart, through the interference 
 of the Earl of Guildford. That enlightened and mu- 
 nificent nobleman obtained permission to excavate 
 within the enclosure, although it had been appropri- 
 ated to the domestic uses of a Turkish officer, and 
 this decisive experiment at once ascertained the local 
 identity by a discovery of the very 6 Phrygian stone’ 
 described by the ancient traveler. Before these in- 
 teresting ruins could be reached, it was necessary to 
 remove an accumulation of soil and rubbish covering 
 the original level to a depth of thirty feet. 
 
F. 3. 
 
 
-£vm. 
 
PANTHEON OF HADRIAN, 
 
 45 
 
 This structure, however, with all its richness, is 
 characterised by the degraded taste of the Roman 
 architecture. The proportions depart from those of 
 the pure Greek models : the columns are raised on 
 pedestals: the details, of the Corinthian architrave 
 are altered for the worse ; and that unerring sign of 
 degraded taste, the broken entablature, everywhere 
 prevails. 
 
 PEATE XVIII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan of the Pantheon.— The parts still 
 remaining are shaded; the restorations are merely 
 traced. The walls indicated in the centre, mark 
 ancient foundations, on which has been built a church 
 dedicated to the Panaghia. 
 
 Fig. 2 and 3. Parts of the front, drawn to a larger 
 scale, to shew more accurately the construction of 
 the side walls. 
 
 PLATE XIX. 
 
 Fig. 1. Half of the general elevation, exhibiting 
 the portal and one division of the front. — At the 
 termination on the left hand may be seen one of the 
 
46 
 
 PANTHEON OF HADRIAN. 
 
 circular projections, exhedrse, cellee, or chapels, by 
 each of which names they have been designated, as 
 one or other theory prevailed. Nearly the whole of 
 this restoration is sanctioned by existing masses, or 
 fragments. It deserves notice that the abacus 
 of the capital is continued throughout beneath the 
 architrave. 
 
 Fig. 2. Section of the front wall, showing the pro- 
 file of the portal, and of the southern pteroma, with 
 one of the columns which stand between the portal 
 and the northern pteroma. 
 
 Fig. 3. Section of the portal, and of the entrance 
 before which it stands. — The interior varies from the 
 exterior architrave. 
 
 Fig. 4. Part of the external face of a lateral wall.. 
 plate xx. 
 
 Capital and entablature of the columns of the 
 front. — The angle of the abacus is acute, like that of 
 the Temple of Vesta, at Rome. 
 
 PLATE XXI. 
 
 Profiles of the base and pediment of the columns. 
 

 
 
 
XXL 
 

 f 
 
 


 
PANTHEON OE HADRIAN. 
 
 47 
 
 PLATE XXII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan of the capital. 
 
 Fig. 2. Angular view of the capital. 
 
 These details are altogether insufficient for practical 
 purposes, and leave much to be desired even for ge- 
 neral illustration. It does not, indeed, appear that, 
 surrounded as it is by structures of purer taste and 
 more easy access, this splendid monument of Homan 
 magnificence, has attracted in a due degree, the atten- 
 tion of architectural travelers. Stuart’s description is 
 exceedingly meagre, and under the circumstances, it 
 was hardly possible for him to make it more complete ; 
 it may, however, be hoped that more assiduous exami- 
 nation under better auspices will enable modern ex- 
 plorers to supply satisfactory information respecting 
 an edifice of which the character and arrangement are 
 still so imperfectly understood. 
 
 E 
 
THE PARTHENON. 
 
 PLATES XXIII. XXIY. XXY. XXYI. XXYII. XXYIIX. 
 
 “ The Temple of Minerva Parthenos,” says Sir 
 William Gell, “is on the right, after passing the 
 Propylsea, and is, without exception, the most mag- 
 nificent ruin in the world, both for execution and 
 design. Though an entire museum has been trans- 
 ported to England from the spoils of this temple, it 
 still remains without a rival.” Of this glorious edi- 
 fice, built under the auspices of Pericles, Phidias 
 was the designer; Callicrates and Ictinus were the 
 architects. 
 
 Respecting the arrangement of this marvelous 
 structure, in its original state, there exists, even 
 among those best qualified to judge, considerable 
 difference of opinion. It seems to be agreed that 
 
THE PARTHENON. 
 
 49 
 
 Stuart relied too much upon the authority of Wheler 
 and Spon, who, indeed, saw it when in a condition of 
 much greater completeness than it exhibited at the 
 date of his visit, but with many inferior advantages 
 in point of architectural science. Subsequently to 
 the investigations of Stuart and Revett, these ma- 
 jestic ruins have been subjected to strict examination 
 by individuals from whose decision there can be no 
 appeal, and among these Mr. Cockerell stands emi- 
 nently distinguished. Colonel Leake, in his 44 To- 
 pography of Athens,” expressly refers to this gen- 
 tleman as an ultimate authority in cases of doubt; 
 and since the statements of the Colonel have thus 
 the double sanction of his personal observation, and 
 the results of Mr. C.’s more recent and minute ex- 
 ploration, they shall be given in his own words : — 
 
 44 The Parthenon, or great Temple of Minerva, 
 stood upon the highest platform of the Acropolis, 
 which was so far elevated above its western entrance, 
 that the pavement of the peristyle of the Parthenon 
 was upon the same level as the capitals of the co- 
 lumns of the eastern portico of the Propylsea. The 
 Parthenon was constructed entirely of white marble 
 
50 
 
 THE PARTHENON. 
 
 from Mount Pentelicum. It consisted of a cell, sur- 
 rounded with a peristyle, which had eight Doric 
 columns in the fronts, and seventeen in the sides. 
 These forty-six columns were six feet' two inches in 
 diameter at the base, and thirty-four feet in height, 
 standing upon a pavement, to which there was an 
 ascent of three steps. The total height of the temple 
 above its platform was about sixty-five feet. Within 
 the peristyle, at either end, there was an interior 
 range of six columns, of five feet and a half in dia- 
 meter, standing before the end of the cell, and form- 
 ing a vestibule to its door ; there was an ascent of 
 two steps into these vestibules from the peristyle. 
 The cell, which was sixty- two feet and a half broad 
 within, was divided into two unequal chambers, of 
 which the western was forty-three feet ten inches 
 long, and the eastern ninety-eight feet seven inches. 
 The ceiling of the former was supported by four 
 columns, of about four feet in diameter, and that of 
 the latter by sixteen columns, of about three feet. 
 It is not known of what order were the interior co- 
 lumns of either chamber. Those of the western 
 having been thirty-six feet in height, then* proportion 
 
THE PARTHENON. 
 
 51 
 
 must have been nearly the same as that of the Ionic 
 columns of the vestibule of the Propylsea ; whence it 
 seems highly probable that the same order was used 
 in the interior of both these contemporary buildings. 
 In the eastern chamber of the Parthenon the small- 
 ness of the diameter of the columns leaves little doubt 
 that there was an upper range, as in the temples of 
 Psestum and iEgina.” b 
 
 b In addition to these valuable details, we shall take the 
 liberty of inserting a highly interesting extract from Mr. 
 Kinnaird’s elaborate comment. “ Commenced about the 
 eighty-third Olympiad, or about 448 b. c. the rapidity of the 
 execution of this fabric is recorded by the historian, and by 
 the comparison of historic dates and events, sixteen years is 
 the utmost extent of time that can be possibly supposed to 
 have been occupied in the performance of the entire works of 
 this edifice, 101 feet in front, 227 in length, and 65 in height, 
 wrought in the most durable marble, and with the exquisite 
 finish of a cameo ; enshrining the chryselephantine colossus 
 with all its gorgeous adjuncts, and comprising sculptural de- 
 coration alone for one edifice, exceeding in quantity that of 
 all our recent national monuments ; consisting of a range 
 of eleven hundred feet of sculpture, and containing on calcu- 
 lation upwards of six hundred figures, a portion of which 
 were colossal, enriched by painting and probably golden orna- 
 
52 
 
 THE PARTHENON. 
 
 It is a most unfortunate circumstance that Pau- 
 sanias, the main authority for all that relates to the 
 great monuments of Grecian art, completely deserts 
 the inquirer at this important point. He despatches 
 the Parthenon in brief and insignificant phrase, so 
 far as the building and its peculiarities are con- 
 cerned, while he describes, in considerable detail, the 
 parts which are merely ornamental, and without ne- 
 cessary connexion with the architectural forms. 
 Hence the yet unsettled questions respecting the 
 Naos and its covering. Stuart inferred, from various 
 circumstances, that the temple was hypsethral, “ that 
 is, with two interior ranges of columns dividing the 
 cella into three aisles ; of these, the two next the 
 walls alone were roofed, and that in the centre ex- 
 posed to the heavens.” On the contrary, Mr. Wilkins, 
 whose words we have adopted in the brief explana- 
 tion just given, contends that there are no adequate 
 
 ments. Here has been really verified the prediction of Peri- 
 cles that, when the edifices of rival states would be moulder- 
 ing in oblivion, the splendour of his city would be still para- 
 mount and triumphant.” 
 
THE PARTHENON 
 
 53 
 
 grounds for Stuart’s inference. Colonel Leake again, 
 apparently supported by the investigations of Mr, 
 Cockerell, inclines to the former opinion, which is 
 also supported by the recent editor of “ The Anti- 
 quities of Athens.” The plates in the present work 
 are in accordance with the hypothesis which classes 
 the Parthenon among hypsethral temples. 0 
 
 The decorations of this sumptuous edifice were of 
 the richest and most perfect design and execution. 
 Both pediments were charged with sculpture of un- 
 rivalled excellence : the metopes of the exterior 
 entablature exhibited a succession of ninety-two 
 
 c Mr. Wilkins, in his latest publication, the Prolusiones 
 Architectonics , has done us the honour of commenting on 
 this paragraph. After speaking in complimentary terms of 
 our 66 Epitome,” he goes on to reassert his opinion, though 
 without repeating or reinforcing his previous reasoning on 
 the subject. His intention seems to have been, by showing 
 that Colonel Leake and Mr. Cockerell had, in other cases , 
 given up positions maintained by them conjointly, to intimate 
 that they were, therefore, likely to be wrong in this. We 
 cannot think that the inference is quite legitimate, but as we 
 have not, by any means, a tenacious feeling in the matter, 
 we are content to leave it without controversy. 
 
54 
 
 THE PARTHENON. 
 
 groupes in high relief : and the frieze, which sur- 
 rounded the cell and vestibules, was adorned in its 
 entire length of more than five hundred feet, by a 
 representation in low relief of the Panathenaic pro- 
 cession. But the great ornament of the temple was 
 the chryselephantine statue of the goddess, which 
 stood in the cella : framed of the most costly mate- 
 rials, and wrought by the very hand of Phidias, this 
 wondrous work had but one rival, and that was by 
 the same master, and of the same materials. 
 
 This structure is sometimes called the Hecatom- 
 pedon, either from its actual dimensions, or from the 
 distinctive name of an ancient temple which formerly 
 occupied the same site. 
 
 PLATE XXIII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan of the Parthenon. — In the western 
 front, marked A, A, was the principal entrance. B is 
 the pronaos ; and it may be well, in this place, to 
 point out a peculiarity in its arrangement. In the 
 common construction it was usual to prolong the 
 pteromata, or lateral walls, until the antse were on 
 the same alignment as the intervening columns : in 
 
3xm. 
 
THE PARTHENON. 
 
 55 
 
 this instance, however, the colonnade is complete, 
 covering the antse by the exterior column on either 
 flank ; the general proportions being preserved by 
 reducing the pteroma from its usual extent, to some- 
 thing of little larger dimensions than a buttress* 
 
 C, the cell, cella, or naos, where stood the statue of 
 Pallas. As this plan is strictly a reduction of that of 
 Stuart, it is necessary to remark that the columns 
 indicated as supporting the central portion of the 
 cella, are of uncertain origin. It will be observed 
 that they are of a diameter much less than that of 
 the colonnade of the pronaos, although this has a 
 slenderer shaft than that which belongs to the pillars 
 of the portico. Stuart supposed that the interior 
 parallelogram was composed of a double range, the 
 lower supporting an entablature, as a sort of stylobate 
 to an upper and shorter tier, on which rested the 
 roof of the aisles, the centre being hypsethral. It 
 does not, however, appear that the columns thus in- 
 dicated belonged to the original building ; F auvel 
 believed that they were of the Lower Empire, and 
 the entire question may be considered as yet open. 
 
 D, opisthodomus, represented in Stuart’s plan as 
 
56 
 
 THE PARTHENON. 
 
 having been supported by six columns : a more re- 
 cent and minute examination by Mr. Cockerell gives 
 but four. It will not appear surprising that all these 
 uncertainties should present themselves, when it is 
 recollected that a new mosque was built by the 
 Turks, within the walls and with the very materials 
 of the temple itself ; and that farther dilapidations 
 have been committed to a great extent. The ravages 
 of war have combined their devastation with these 
 larcenies of peace : in 1687, when the Acropolis was 
 besieged by the Venetians under Morosini, a shell 
 fired a powder-magazine which occupied the interior 
 of the temple, and the principal mischief done to the 
 ornamental parts seems to have been the effect of 
 this explosion. 
 
 Fig. 2. Transverse section of the portico, of which 
 the columns are removed, for the purpose of showing 
 those of the pronaos, which stand on a platform raised 
 two steps above that of the portico. — They support 
 an architrave, surmounted by the Panathenaic frieze, 
 which is continued round the temple. 
 

 
 
 ' 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 

 F. st* 
 
 
 
THE PARTHENON. 
 
 57 
 
 PLATE XXIY. 
 
 Elevation of the Parthenon, with the sculpture of 
 the frieze and pediment restored. 
 
 The architrave is ornamented with shields, of 
 which one is suspended over each column; in the 
 intermediate spaces are inscriptions. It should be 
 observed that this arrangement is, in a great degree, 
 arbitrary. 
 
 plate xxv. 
 
 Side view, combining the advantages of an eleva- 
 tion and a section. — The wall is broken away from 
 the central portion, so as to exhibit the opistho- 
 domus, and the hypgethral cella, with its double 
 range of columns and the Phidian statue of Minerva 
 Parthenos. ' 
 
 PLATE XXVI. 
 
 Fig. 1. Capital and entablature of the columns of 
 the portico. 
 
 Fig. 2. Mouldings of the capital, on a larger scale. 
 

 I 
 
 n t 
 
 * ♦ 
 
 i 
 
 m. 4 
 

 
 
 m 
 
 
 
 
 l. ■■ w w .f fft — — - 
 
 
 
 
 
THE PARTHENON. 
 
 59 
 
 violence to sound principles, suggested to the artist 
 Lusieri, the singular and somewhat whimsical notion 
 that the Greek masons were knaves, and that Pericles 
 had been cheated by his workmen. 
 
 The subject of colour in its application to architec- 
 tural effect, has already been slightly touched, and it 
 would involve too great an extent both of detail and 
 discussion, to follow it out in this place. It has, how- 
 ever, evidently been so much employed by the Greek 
 architects as a legitimate resource, that it would be 
 inexpedient to pass it by altogether. The marks of 
 paint are still clearly visible on many of the orna- 
 mental parts of the Parthenon. The capitals of the 
 antse ; the members of the architrave and frieze ; the 
 mouldings of the pediments ; were severally adorned 
 with the designs usually distinguished as the Fret — 
 the Palmette — the Egg-and-dart. One portion of 
 the frieze was marked with zig-zag stripes ; and the 
 lacunaria were doubtless enriched with colours and 
 gilding. The sculpture was probably, perhaps ad- 
 vantageously, relieved by a light-blue ground, and the 
 figures, draped or nude, might possibly be distin- 
 guished by appropriate tints. 
 
THE ERECHTHEUM. 
 
 PLATES XXIX. XXX. XXXI. XXXII. XXXII. Us. 
 
 XXXIII. XXXIY. XXXV. XXXVI. XXXVII. 
 
 XXXVIII. XXXIX. 
 
 “ To the north of the Parthenon, at the distance of 
 about one hundred and fifty feet, are the remains of 
 three contiguous temples. That towards the east 
 was called the Erechtheum ; to the westward of this, 
 but under the same roof, was the Temple of Minerva, 
 with the title Polias, as protectress of the city; ad- 
 joining to which, on the south side, is the Pandro- 
 sium, so named because it was dedicated to the 
 nymph Pandrosus, one of the daughters of Cecrops.’' 
 — Stuart . 
 
 The passage in Pausanias on which Stuart founded 
 his opinion that this beautiful but irregular structure 
 had a three-fold dedication, scarcely sanctions the 
 
THE ERECHTHEITM. 
 
 61 
 
 conjecture : in fact, the rambling and discursive 
 manner of the Greek traveler requires, here as else- 
 where, the aid of exact local investigation, before it 
 can be made to support any thing in the shape of 
 definite result. Subsequent examination has brought 
 to light important circumstances, which were not 
 accessible in the time of Stuart. Mr. Inwood de- 
 voted much skilful labour to a personal inspection, 
 and Mr. Wilkins has made proof of admirable scho- 
 larship in his examination of one of the most singular 
 and instructive among the remaining inscriptions of 
 antiquity. It is not the least of the many peculi- 
 arities of this temple, that it never received the last 
 finish, and the inscription in question, contains the 
 particulars of a minute professional survey of the 
 unfinished parts, conducted under the direction of a 
 regular architect, (Philocles), employed by the local 
 authorities. 
 
 From all these sources of information it appears, 
 in the judgment of the ablest paleeologists, that the 
 entire building was a double temple, of which the 
 eastern division was consecrated to the worship of 
 Minerva ; and the western, including the northern 
 
62 
 
 THE EEECHTHEUM. 
 
 and southern porticoes, was sacred to the deified 
 daughter of Cecrops. On the same site had for- 
 merly stood the Temple of Erechtheus ; and from 
 this circumstance, as well as from the fact that his 
 altar still remained, the entire building retained the 
 name of the Erechtheum. Within the sacred enclo- 
 sure were preserved the holiest objects of Athenian 
 veneration, among which the most precious were the 
 olive of Minerva, and the fountain of Neptune, both 
 which sprung up at the bidding of those divinities, 
 when there was contention among the Gods, con- 
 cerning the guardianship of Athens. 
 
 Here, too, was the oldest and most deeply vene- 
 rated of the three famous statues of the Athenian 
 Goddess. The 6 Great Minerva,’ — the Minerva Pro- 
 machus, so called from its martial bearing — was 
 of bronze, the work of Phidias. This colossal figure 
 was in part visible to the navigator who neared the 
 port of Athens ; and it was the first object that met 
 the eye on entering the Acropolis. The second of 
 these celebrated statues was the Minerva of the Par- 
 thenon, also by Phidias, wrought in ivory and gold, 
 the noblest example of the toreutic art. But the ad- 
 
THE EKECHTHETJM. 
 
 63 
 
 miration awakened by these sublime productions of 
 human genius and skill, was a mixed and imperfect 
 feeling, compared with the religious awe which im- 
 pressed the worshipper who bowed before the Minerva 
 of the Erechtheum, a figure carved in olive wood, 
 probably of inferior workmanship, but of which the 
 legend affirmed that it fell from heaven. “ This,” in 
 the eloquent language of Mr. Wordsworth, “ was the 
 Minerva Polias : the original Minerva of Athens ; 
 the Minerva who had contested the soil of Attica with 
 Neptune, and had triumphed in the contest: the Mi- 
 nerva of the Acropolis, and of the temple now before 
 us. Inferior to the other two in value of material and 
 beauty of execution, she was regarded with greater 
 reverence. Her’s was emphatically the ancient 
 statue : to the Minerva Polias it was, and not to the 
 Minerva of the Parthenon , that the Panathenaic 
 peplus — the embroidered fasti of Athenian glory — 
 was periodically dedicated.” 
 
 It may serve to simplify the somewhat compli- 
 cated form of this temple, if the porticoes on the 
 flanks be for the moment discarded. In that case, it 
 is well observed by Mr. Wilkins that “the plan 
 
 E 
 
64 
 
 THE ERECHTHETJM. 
 
 would be simply that of the kind of temple termed 
 by Vitruvius, prostyle ; that is, with a portico in the 
 principal front only, and no peristyle. If to a temple 
 of this description two porticoes be added at the 
 western extremities of the flanks, a general idea of 
 the plan of the building may be formed.” It will, 
 however, be better to leave all farther ichnographical 
 detail to the explanation of the plates, where the 
 description and the exemplification may stand side 
 by side. 
 
 Nothing can go beyond the workmanship of this 
 temple. The ornaments, throughout, are of the most 
 finished execution, and the sculptors seem to have 
 derived all possible advantage that was afforded them 
 by a material which admitted of being wrought with 
 “ the delicacy of an ivory cabinet.” “ In this beau- 
 tiful specimen of the Ionic order,” observes Colonel 
 Leake, u the Athenians seem to have been ambitious 
 of excelling their Asiatic brethren in their own pecu- 
 liar order of architecture, by the addition of new 
 and elaborate ornaments, imagined with the utmost 
 ingenuity and elegance of taste, and executed with a 
 sharpness and perfection, which it could hardly have 
 
THE ERECHTHETJM. 
 
 65 
 
 been supposed that marble was capable of receiving.’ 5 
 The sculptured necking of the columns is said by Mr. 
 Wilkins to have been “ observed in no other known 
 instance of the Ionic order : the volutes are beau- 
 tiful in design, and most exquisitely wrought.” It 
 has been said of the volutes, that they were not 
 struck from centres. This temple supplies an ad- 
 ditional example of the rule which obtained among 
 the architects of Greece, that there should be no 
 similarity between the capital of the column and that 
 of the antse ; contrary to the practice of the Roman 
 builders, whose system it was to harmonize the re- 
 spective features as far as possible. In the present 
 instance the antse present no trace of the volute. It 
 deserves notice, too, as a peculiarity in the construc- 
 tion of this edifice, that the frieze and part of the 
 pediment is faced with thin slabs of a grey lime- 
 stone, which is, in the inscription already referred to, 
 called “Eleusinian stone.” d 
 
 d Mr. Woods, in the u Letters of an Architect/’ describes 
 this 6 Elensinian stone’ as a Mach marble, and its present 
 grey tint as the effect of weathering. He suggests that it 
 was probably enriched by ornaments of gilt bronze. 
 
66 
 
 THE ERECHTHETJM. 
 
 Thus far the former publication, and this abstract, 
 brief as it is, was the result of somewhat more 
 research than would be anticipated by readers inex- 
 perienced in the difficulties which beset the archi- 
 tectural student in his efforts to combine and interpret 
 the 6 rich relics ’ of antiquity. He has to correct the 
 careless and inadequate draughts of the mere describer ; 
 to search out the casual references of the historian 
 and the poet ; to repair the errors with which time 
 and negligent transcription have marred the record ; 
 and to extract from these imperfect and sometimes 
 conflicting elements, a clear and harmonizing expla- 
 nation of mutilated and scattered fragments. A task, 
 this, never easy, sometimes impracticable, and, if not 
 positively hopeless in the present instance, requiring 
 it should seem yet farther investigation before it can 
 be considered as satisfactorily completed. A careful 
 review of the facts and authorities has appeared to 
 justify a repetition of the statements and citations as 
 given in the first edition. With the view, however, 
 of rendering the details more complete, the passages 
 
THE EEECHTHEUM. 
 
 67 
 
 in Pausanias which relate to this splendid but singular 
 structure, may be advantageously laid before the 
 reader, in free hut fair translation ; and in addition to 
 this, it is due to the learned and laborious investigations 
 of Mr. Wilkins, that their latest results should be 
 recorded here. 
 
 “ Before the vestibule of the Erechtheum, stands 
 an altar to Jupiter Hypatus, (Highest) on which they 
 sacrifice nothing that has life, but placing cakes, they 
 do not sanction even the use of wine. In the very 
 entrance are altars ; one to Neptune, on which also 
 offerings are, by command of an oracle, made to 
 Erechtheus : another is consecrated to the hero Butes : 
 the third to Yulcan. On the walls are paintings 
 referring to the descendants of Butes. The edifice 
 is double, and there is in it sea-water in a well, (or 
 
 reservoir) .when the south wind blows, a sound 
 
 is heard as of waves. On the rock is impressed the 
 form of a trident. These things, it is said, are testi- 
 monials of Neptune’s contest concerning Attica, with 
 Minerva. 
 
 u Sacred to Minerva indeed are the city and the 
 entire region ; for even in those communities where 
 
68 
 
 THE ERECHTHEUM. 
 
 other deities are held in special honour, none the less 
 is Minerva revered.” 
 
 Pausanias then goes on to speak of the wooden 
 image to which we have already referred as of 
 peculiar sanctity, and which was consecrated and 
 placed in the Acropolis by the common consent of the 
 Attic Demi ; an act that appears to have been the 
 solemn and religious recognition of their national 
 union under the supremacy of Athens. He next 
 mentions the Golden Lamp, the master- work of 
 Callimachus, burning night and day, yet requiring to 
 be replenished with oil only once in the year, the 
 unconsumable wick made of Carpasian flax, and the 
 brazen Palm-tree rising to the roof and carrying ofl* 
 the smoke of the Lamp. There, too, was the ancient 
 Hermes, the gift of Cecrops, hidden in myrtle leaves, 
 — a folding seat, 6 the work of Daedalus — the cuirass of 
 Masistius, and the scymitar of Mardonius. Concerning 
 the identity of these barbarian trophies, however, 
 Pausanias intimates some doubt. The armour of 
 Masistius, he thinks, may be taken as genuine, since 
 that gallant officer was cut down in the act of charging 
 e Perhaps a kind of chariot. 
 
THE EKECHTHETJM. 
 
 69 
 
 the Athenian horsemen ; but he is puzzled to know 
 how the sabre of the commander-in-chief, who was 
 slain in fight with the Lacedsemonian division, could 
 find its way to the Acropolis of Athens. The difficulty 
 does not seem formidable : though the Spartans were 
 victorious in the field, they failed before the fortified 
 camp of the Persians ; and the Athenians, who carried 
 it gallantly by assault, would probably find the weapon 
 in the richly furnished tent of Mardonius. 
 
 In this temple, moreover, is preserved the sacred 
 Olive, the memorial of Minerva’s victory over Neptune 
 when contending for Attica. Concerning it they hold 
 the tradition that when the Persians fired the city, 
 this tree was consumed ; but that in the course of the 
 same day, it threw out a fresh shoot to the height of 
 two cubits. Near the temple stands a statue of an 
 aged female, a priestess of Minerva, well executed : 
 and at short distance are two large bronze figures of 
 men in combat: one of Erechtheus, the other of 
 Immaradus, who was slain in the fight. There are 
 in the citadel several ancient statues of Minerva, still 
 unmutilated, but so black and burnt as to be incapable 
 of resisting the slightest violence. In their present 
 
70 
 
 THE ERECHTHEXJM. 
 
 state they are most impressive memorials of the con- 
 flagration in which all that was in Athens perished 
 when the Persians took possession of the city. 
 
 Mr. Wilkins, to whom this work has been already 
 much indebted, and whose close and critical observa- 
 tion is quite otherwise instructive than the vague and 
 discursive manner of Pausanias, made this temple the 
 object of long and successful examination. His com- 
 mentary on the curious inscription to which reference 
 has been already made, gave a new direction to the 
 study of architectural antiquity ; and a dextrous 
 application of conjectural criticism gave, in one im- 
 portant instance at least, consistency to the shattered 
 text of Vitruvius. In 1837 he published his Prolusi- 
 ones Architectonics : here he resumed his favorite 
 subject, and the larger portion of a thin quarto is 
 taken up by elucidations of the Erechtheum and its 
 inscribed marble. With this last we have nothing to do, 
 since it is quite foreign from our subject to discuss the 
 technicalities of art ; but the earlier part, as expressing 
 the ultimate opinion of an eminent man, claims from 
 us a brief notice. After an ingenious manipulation 
 of a stubborn passage in Xenophon, followed by a 
 

THE EEECHTHEUM. 
 
 71 
 
 brief description of the Acropolis, he goes on to detail 
 the ichnography of the building. With Stuart and 
 others, he divides the edifice into three parts, of which 
 that which was entered from the eastern or hexastyle 
 portico was the cella of the temple of Minerva Polias. 
 This was separated by a massive wall from the Pan- 
 droseum and its pronaos, to which the tetrastyle por- 
 tico on the flank, or rather shoulder, of the structure, 
 afforded the only access. To the opposite humerus 
 was attached the famous Caryatid 4 prostasis, ’ con- 
 structed, as generally supposed, for the purpose of 
 affording light and air to the sacred Olive which grew 
 within it. This theory is disputed by Mr. Wilkins, 
 who supposes the Neptunian spring to have occupied 
 this part of the building, and the tree of Pallas to have 
 flourished in perpetual verdure within the pronaos it- 
 self, access of light and circulation of air being obtained 
 from the windows in the intervals of the engaged 
 columns in the western front. 
 
 PLATE XXIX. 
 
 Perspective view of the Erechtheum, reduced 
 from the large and elaborate restoration by Mr. 
 
72 
 
 THE ERECHTHETJM. 
 
 Inwood/ In this draught there is much detail for 
 which no direct authority can be given, though there 
 is probably none for which plausible reasons might 
 not be assigned. 
 
 PLATE XXX. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan. — A, “ Temple of Erechtheus, or of 
 Neptune, in which was the well of salt-water, and 
 the altars of Neptune, of Vulcan, and of the hero 
 Butes; before it stood the altar of Jupiter the Su- 
 preme. B, The temple of Minerva Polias, perhaps 
 the Cecropium of the Dilettanti inscription. C, The 
 temple of Pandrosus, in which was the olive pro- 
 duced by Minerva, and the altar of Jupiter Herceus. 
 D, The portico, common to the temple of Minerva, 
 and to that of Pandrosus.” 
 
 As already intimated, this arrangement, which is 
 given in Stuart’s own words, has been considerably 
 modified by the results of subsequent research. It 
 appears nearly certain that the eastern division, 
 
 ? We are indebted to the liberal courtesy of this gentleman 
 for permission to copy his plate. 
 
TOOL 
 
 
THE EKECHTHEUM. 
 
 73 
 
 marked A, is to be taken as the cella of the temple 
 of Minerva Polias, while the remainder, including 
 the tetrastyle portico and that of the Caryatides, was 
 known as the Pandroseum. The Cecropium is, with 
 the highest probability, supposed to have been a 
 building near, but separate from, the stylagalmatic 
 entrance. 
 
 Among the singularities of this structure, is to be 
 noted the difference of level, both within and without. 
 The chamber, marked A, has for its floor, a platform 
 higher by ten feet than that of the other division, and, 
 if the suggestion of Mr. Wilkins be correct, this 
 arrangement was made for the purpose of constructing 
 a sepulchral chamber beneath, containing, probably, 
 the tomb of Erechtheus. 
 
 Fig. 2. Elevation of the tetrastyle, or northern 
 portico. 
 
 It is remarkable that in each of the three ranges 
 of Ionic columns which are comiected with this 
 temple, the intercolumniations differ. The engaged 
 columns of the western front are nearly eustyle, 
 standing apart something less than two diameters 
 and a fourth : this, according to Vitruvius, is, as the 
 
74 
 
 THE EKECHTHEUM. 
 
 term imports, the most perfect of all the columnar 
 systems, for beauty and strength. The columns of 
 the eastern or hexastyle portico may be considered 
 as sy style, having an interval of little more than two 
 diameters. The northern portico is diastyle, with an 
 intercolumniation of nearly three diameters. 
 
 The wall separating the western chamber from 
 the tetrastyle and caryatid porticoes, was ascertained 
 by Mr. Inwood to be of later construction than the 
 rest of the building. 
 
 PLATE XXXI. 
 
 Entablature, capital, and base, of the tetrastyle 
 portico. These columns are in several respects more 
 highly ornamented than those of the other fronts. 
 
 PLATE XXXII. 
 
 Doorway to the tetrastyle portico. — The details of 
 this magnificent entrance appear to have been chiefly 
 taken from Inwood (Ereclitheion.) It still exists in 
 a state “nearly perfect,” though in Stuart’s time it 
 was not accessible ; the portico having been walled 
 up by the Turks, and made to serve the purpose of a 
 


 
THE EBECHTHEUM. 
 
 75 
 
 powder magazine. Mr. Wilkins was not more for- 
 tunate than Stuart, but Mr. Inwood’s visit was under 
 better auspices. Mr. Donaldson, in his elaborate and 
 useful work on i Ancient Doorways,’ has bestowed 
 great and apparently successful pains on this 6 beauti- 
 ful gate.’ His draught does not exhibit the rich 
 crowning ornament of the Hyper thy rum. 
 
 plate xxxii. (Us.) 
 
 Front, side-view, and section of the consoles sup- 
 porting the hyperthyrum of the preceding doorway. 
 
 plate xxxiii. 
 
 Elevation of the Erechtheum, showing the eastern 
 or hexastyle portico, with its pediment; the side 
 elevation of the northern or tetrastyle portico ; and 
 the stylagalmatic g portico of the Caryatides. By the 
 
 g This rather formidable compound was first applied to 
 the Figure-column by Mr. Wilkins, and was adopted in this 
 work as having at least the merit of being accurately de- 
 scriptive. The German critics, however, object to it as 
 ( barbarous.’ Mr. Wilkins sarcastically alludes to this as a 
 6 kind of Chinese refinement’ on the part of Teutonic philo- 
 
76 
 
 THE ERECHTHEUM. 
 
 mismanagement of the engraver, the relative positions 
 of these porticoes are reversed. 
 
 PLATE XXXIV. 
 
 Fig. 1. Base, capital, and entablature of the 
 eastern portico. 
 
 Fig. 2. Capital of the antse to the western front. 
 
 Fig. 3. Base of the same. 
 
 The reader for scientific or practical purposes is 
 referred to the plates of Mr. Inwood’s great work. 
 They are boldly sketched, drawn to scale, and of 
 large proportions. Many particulars too, of con- 
 siderable value, are inserted. We do not recollect 
 whether he was the first to observe the insertion of 
 coloured stones or glass in the platband of the base, 
 but they do not appear to have been noticed by Stuart, 
 and we are not aware of any previous authority for 
 the fact. 
 
 logers, but expresses his perfect willingness to accept , c for the 
 sake of euphony,’ the term Corseatic, from K open — virgins or 
 young females — a word specifically applied, in the Erechthean 
 Inscription, to the statue-pillars (Bild-saulen) of the Caryatid 
 Prostasis. 
 


XXXVL 
 
THE ERECHTHEUM. 
 
 77 
 
 PLATE XXXT. 
 
 Plan of the above, in reverse, with sections of the 
 capital, and contour of the volute. 
 
 PLATE XXXVI. 
 
 Capital and base of the columns of the western 
 front : outline of the volute. 
 
 PLATE XXXVII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Section, shewing the interior of the west- 
 ern wall, connecting the tetrastyle and caryatid por- 
 ticoes. In the windows are indications which lead 
 to the supposition that they were closed with some- 
 what of transparent material. 
 
 Fig. 2. Section of the wall of the western front. 
 
 Fig. 3. Elevation of the caryatid portico. 
 
 PLATE XXXVIII. 
 
 Details of the entablature, capital, and stylobate, 
 of the portico of the Caryatides, with portions of the 
 figure. 
 
78 THE ERECHTHEUM. 
 
 PLATE XXXIX. 
 
 Fig. 1 . Capital of the antse of the same portico, 
 with section of the ceiling or soffit. 
 
 Fig. 2. Plan of the soffit. 
 
XXXIX 
 


 
ODEUM OF REGILLA, 
 
 OR, 
 
 THEATRE OF HERODES ATTICUS. 
 
 PLATE XL. 
 
 Wheler, Pococke, Stuart, and more recently Mr. 
 Haygarth, have assigned these ruins to the Theatre 
 of Bacchus. Nothing, however, can be more com- 
 plete than the chain of evidence and argument, by 
 which Leake, Wilkins, and Kinnaird, have established 
 their claim to be considered as the remains of the 
 Odeum, or Music Theatre, erected by the wealthy 
 and munificent Herodes Atticus, in memory of his 
 wife Regilla. h It is probable that the removal of the 
 
 h This generous patron of the Arts, appears to have been 
 one of the fairest characters of ancient times. So far as 
 public records may be trusted iii attestation of private and 
 
 Gr 
 
80 
 
 ODEUM OE REGILLA. 
 
 rubbish which has fallen from the higher ranges of 
 the circle, and accumulated in front of the prosce- 
 nium, would bring to light many an interesting and 
 illustrative fragment ; but Stuart was hindered in his 
 examination by the jealousy of the Turks, and the 
 researches of succeeding visitants have not penetrated 
 below the surface. 
 
 This theatre, which is said by Pausanias to have 
 excelled all similar structures in Greece, was hol- 
 lowed out of the rock on which stood the Acropolis ; 
 the seats were also part of the solid mass, but 
 the whole was cased with marble, as were also the 
 walls and ornamental portions of the proscenium. 
 Hence it was not practicable to form those numerous 
 
 patriotic excellence, his life was of unimpeached integrity. 
 Asa friend and citizen, his kind and liberal disposition has the 
 testimony of an inscribed marble which remains to our own 
 day; that his domestic affections were strong and lasting, 
 may be inferred from the splendid memorial of conjugal 
 tenderness which he consecrated to the name of his deceased 
 wife. The inscription is in the usual terse and expressive 
 style of classic eulogy, “ To the High Priest of the Caesars 
 "-Tiberius Claudius Herodes, the Marathonian — on account 
 of his goodwill and beneficence toward his country 
 
ODEXJM OF REGILLA. 
 
 81 
 
 corridors and vomitoria which gave such free access 
 to all parts of a Roman theatre. “ There appears,” 
 says Mr. Wilkins, “ to have been only two ranges 
 of seats ; the prsecinction, or passage separating them, 
 may be still distinguished. The only approaches to 
 the theatre were at the horns of the auditory, where 
 the staircases communicating with the prsecinctions 
 are remaining.” 
 
 The general dimensions are given on the same 
 authority, as follows : u The cavea is the greater 
 segment of a circle, whose radius is one hundred and 
 
 twenty-four feet the front of the scene recedes 
 
 twenty-five feet from the chord line the extent 
 
 of the scene, exclusive of the two returns, is one 
 hundred and seventeen feet.” 
 
 A reference to the diagram (Plate xl.) will, how- 
 ever, make the forms and arrangement much clearer 
 than pages of vague description, and the plan will be 
 found to show with perfect distinctness, both the 
 particulars of the Odeum of Regilla, and the general 
 disposition of a Greek theatre ; the proscenium, 
 with its connected apartments ; the orchestra, im- 
 
82 
 
 ODEUM OF KEGILLA. 
 
 mediately in its front ; and the cavea, or coilon, with 
 its prsecinction and staircase. 
 
 The principles which regulated the construction of 
 the Greek Theatres, have obtained much and skilful 
 elucidation from the antiquarian and the architect ; 
 and it is a matter of no small regret that the intention 
 of furnishing the reader of this volume with a general 
 view of the subject, has been unavoidably laid aside. 
 The truth is, however, that mere summary has been 
 found so vague, partial explanation so unsatisfactory, 
 and the necessity for multiplying diagrams so in- 
 evitable, that the design has been abandoned. The 
 student, whether amateur or professional, is referred 
 to the Vitruvius of Mr. Wilkins for an able digest of 
 whatever has been ascertained or suggested on this 
 important section of architectural science, illustrated 
 by plans and sections. 
 
 Mr. W.’s restoration of the Theatre of Herodes 
 Atticus differs considerably from the more partial 
 exhibition of Stuart ; and the insertion here of his 
 analysis will add materially to the value and interest 
 of this sketch. 44 There are no traces,” he states, 44 of 
 staircases between the cunei to be discovered in the 
 
ODEUM OF RECrlLLA. 
 
 83 
 
 ruins of this theatre ; but in the wall which surrounds 
 the upper precinction there are remains of niches., or 
 recesses, which, like the real doorways in other 
 theatres, were probably opposite to the ascents. Upon 
 this supposition, their disposition would correspond 
 very nearly with that which we are desired by Vitruvius 
 to adopt ; for the ascents would begin from the angles of 
 the squares inscribed in the circle of the orchestra . . . 
 The cunei on the right and left of the scene were of 
 greater extent than the others; a similar inequality 
 is likewise apparent in the plan of the theatre at 
 Tauromenium ; and seems to have been dictated by 
 the propriety of giving the same facility of access to 
 all the cunei. The staircases at the extremities of the 
 cavea afford access to the seats of the two cunei only 
 contiguous to them ; whereas each of the others com- 
 municates with those of the two cunei which it 
 separates : so that were the cunei of equal extent, 
 the facility of approaching the seats of those next the 
 extremities would be greater than what was afforded 
 to the others.” 
 
 “ The theatre having been excavated in the side of 
 the rock of the Acropolis, there were no other ap- 
 
84 
 
 ODEUM OF REGrlLLA. 
 
 proaches to the precinctions than those at the back of 
 the scene.” 
 
 44 The orchestra is the segment of a circle greater 
 than a semicircle. It is probable that Vitruvius had 
 a theatre similar to this in view when he represented 
 the orchestra of the Greek theatres as formed by arcs 
 described from three several centres. The form of 
 the orchestra in the theatres at Stratonicea, Miletus, 
 Laodicea, and Iassus, was a considerable portion of a 
 circle.” 
 
THE CHORAGIC MONUMENT OF 
 THRASYLLUS. 
 
 PLATES XLI. XLII. 
 
 This singular building dates a century lower than 
 the Periclean age, and exhibits much that is im- 
 pressive and well adapted to the purposes of the 
 architect and sculptor. The lower portion of the 
 edifice has evidently been considered as strictly 
 subordinate to the entablature and attic ; and these 
 have been disposed with specific regard to the great 
 feature of the entire arrangement, the noble statue 
 which occupied the centre of the crowning platform. 
 This statue, now in the British Museum, has lost the 
 head and arms ; but enough remains to leave it little 
 doubtful that it represented Bacchus in some of his 
 various aspects. Stuart supposed it to represent a 
 
86 CHORAGIC MONUMENT OF THRASYLLTJS. 
 
 female, Dr. Chandler guessed that it might be a 
 Niobe, and Mr. Wilkins describes it as “ a colossal 
 figure of the female Bacchus in a sitting posture.” 
 Dr. Clarke imagined that he could trace sufficient 
 indications to justify him in assigning the statue to 
 the u bearded” or Indian Bacchus. Amid all these 
 variations, the balance of evidence is decidedly in 
 favour of the son of Semele, though in which of his 
 manifold disguises, may admit a question. 
 
 The whole structure forms an architectural front 
 to a cave of small extent, now dedicated as a chapel 
 to Our Lady of the Grotto, Panaghia Speliotissa . 1 
 This cavern stood immediately above the Dionysiac 
 Theatre, and now serves as an important indication 
 of the site of that celebrated scene of Choragic com- 
 petition. The plan and restored elevation (Plate xli.) 
 
 * As an open cave was ill adapted to the ritual of the 
 Virgin, the front has been walled up, and a view of the 
 interior may be seen in the first volume of Dodwell’s ‘Clas- 
 sical and Topographical Tour in Greece.' The effect is pictu- 
 resque enough, but the contrast between the mean furniture of 
 the Chapel, and the noble character of the Monument, is 
 singularly impressive. 
 
CHORAGIC MONUMENT OE THRASYLLUS. 87 
 
 show distinctly the general aspect of the building, 
 and the way in which it is connected with the recess. 
 The design consists of an attic, broken in the centre 
 by steps leading to the platform ; the two wings, or 
 flanking members, thus formed, present the appear- 
 ance of a pedestal, or stylobate, with cornice, die, and 
 plinth. This superstructure rests upon an entabla- 
 ture supported by two antse and a central pillar or 
 pier, quadrangular like the antse, but differing from 
 them in its proportions, and in the profile of its 
 mouldings. The first view of all this suggests the 
 idea of irregularity, and makes it probable that there 
 has been some alteration of the original design : this 
 probability is strengthened by the fact that the attic 
 is made up of a different marble from the pure Pen- 
 telic of the entablature and its supports. It might, 
 too, be supposed from the unusual and rather awk- 
 ward appearance of the middle prop that it had been 
 an after-introduction, for the purpose of meeting the 
 additional pressure of the statue : this inference, how- 
 ever, is disproved by the fact that the architrave is 
 not of one continuous stone, but is jointed immediately 
 over the pier. 
 
88 CH0RAGIC MONUMENT OE THRASYLLUS. 
 
 Some light may be thrown on these difficulties by 
 a reference to the history of the monument, as pre- 
 served in the three inscriptions still clearly legible on 
 the architrave and attic. Of these, the most ancient 
 is that on the centre of the architrave, recording the 
 choragic victory of Thrasyllus of Deceleia, in the 
 archonship of Nesechmus. The second shall be given 
 entire, as a specimen of the style of these memorials, 
 and as an illustration of the manner in which the per- 
 formances themselves were got up. 
 
 The people gave the games : Pytharatus was Archon : 
 Thrasycles, son of Thrasyllus, a Decelian, was Agonothetes : 
 The Youths of the tribe of Hippothoon gained the victory : 
 Theon, the Theban, played the flute : 
 
 Pronomus, the Theban, composed the piece. 
 
 The other inscription records a contemporaneous 
 triumph achieved by the same individual. Mr. 
 Wilkins, in his valuable but somewhat paradoxical 
 Atheniensia , has read these documents strangely. 
 He affirms the double victory to have been gained in 
 the earlier archonship of Nesechmus ; whereas the 
 inscriptions assign the first only — that of Thrasyllus — 
 to his magistracy, and the two subsequent victories 
 of Thrasycles to the much later archonship of Pytha- 
 
CHORAGIC MONUMENT OE THRASYLLUS. 89 
 
 ratus. In addition to this error, Mr. W. gives 328 
 as the date of the presidency of Neaechmus, whereas 
 the table of Olympiads, as published by Playfair, 
 places it in 320, and this is followed by Leake and 
 GelL Pytharatus presided 271 B. C. Indepen- 
 dently, however, of all discussion respecting dates, 
 the mere fact that these inscriptions relate to more 
 than one ^victorious Choragus, may assist in explain- 
 ing some of the irregularities in the construction of 
 the monument, and make it probable that the upper 
 portion, with the statue, was an addition to the 
 primary design. 
 
 The execution, although not to be compared with 
 the exquisite workmanship of the monument of 
 Lysicrates, is good, and the statue is “the work of 
 an excellent sculptor.” 
 
 The cave is described by Dodwell, in the work to 
 which reference has been made in a foregoing page, 
 as having been “ originally formed by nature,” and 
 subsequently “ enlarged by art.” “ It penetrates about 
 thirty-four feet under the rock, and its general breadth 
 is twenty feet. The only antiquities that it contains 
 are a few blocks of marble, a small columnar pedestal , 
 
90 CHORAGIC MONUMENT OF THRASYLLUS. 
 
 perhaps for a tripod, and a fluted columnar altar .... 
 Here is also an Ionic capital of small proportions and 
 coarse workmanship, with some appropriate paintings 
 of the Virgin of the Cave. It receives a dim and 
 mysterious light, through two small apertures in the 
 modern wall, by which a singular and picturesque 
 effect is produced.” 
 
 PLATE XLI. 
 
 Plan and elevation of the Choragic monument of 
 Thrasyllus. 
 
 PLATE XLII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Details of the entablature and capital. 
 
 Fig. 2. Vertical section of the entablature. 
 
 Fig. 3. Profile of the attic. 
 
j.8 mod- 
 

THE PROPYLiEA. 
 
 PLATES XLIIX. XLIY. XLY. XLYL XLYII, 
 
 This splendid structure may be considered as the 
 most thoroughly characteristic of all the existing 
 examples of Athenian magnificence. It was, when 
 in its perfect state, the admiration of Greece; and 
 Epaminondas — whether in menace or in metaphor 
 may be doubtful — proposed its forcible removal to 
 the Cadmean citadel of Thebes. “ This work,” says 
 Colonel Leake, “ the greatest production of civil ar- 
 chitecture in Athens, which equalled the Parthenon 
 in felicity of execution, and surpassed it in boldness 
 and originality of design, was begun in the archon- 
 ship of Euthymenes, in the year before Christ 437. 
 . . . . . It was built under the directions of the archi- 
 tect Mnesicles, who completed it in a few years.” 
 
96 
 
 THE PEOPYLJSA. 
 
 if this portal had been spared in order that our ima- 
 gination might send through it, as through a tri- 
 umphal arch, all the glories of Athenian antiquity in 
 
 visible parade It was this particular point in the 
 
 localities of Athens which was most admired by the 
 Athenians themselves : nor is this surprising : let us 
 conceive such a restitution of this fabric as its sur- 
 viving fragments will suggest, — let us imagine it re- 
 stored to its pristine beauty, — let it rise once more 
 in the full dignity of its youthful nature, — let all its 
 architectural decorations he fresh and perfect, — let 
 their mouldings be again brilliant with their glowing 
 tints of red and blue, — let the coffers of its soffits be 
 again spangled with stars, and the marble antse be 
 fringed over as they were once with their delicate 
 
 embroidery of ivy-leaf and then let the bronze 
 
 valves of these five gates of the Propylsea be sud- 
 denly flung open, and all the splendours of the in- 
 terior of the Acropolis burst upon the view.” 
 
 PLATE XLIII. 
 
 Fig. 1 . Plan of the Propylsea. — A, the Propylsea, 
 properly so termed. B, chamber, ornamented by 
 
SUK. 
 

 
 1 
 
 •ft . 
 ••• 
 
THE PROPYEJEA. 
 
 97 
 
 the paintings of Polygnotus. C, temple of Wing- 
 less Victory. It will be seen by the inspection of 
 this diagram, aided by a reference to the longitudinal 
 section which is given, fig. 2, on the same plate, that 
 the Propylsea (or rather, in strict application to the 
 central structure, the Propyheum) consisted of a 
 portico, a vestibule, and a posticum, or back portico, 
 facing the platform of the Acropolis. These porticoes 
 were Doric, and hexastyle ; the vestibule, or interior 
 portion of the building, had its roof supported by six 
 Ionic columns ; but the pedestals, as represented in 
 the plate, never existed: Pevett’s error was occa- 
 sioned by misconception respecting the proportions 
 of the shaft, and he had no opportunity of ascer- 
 taining the real circumstances by excavation. The 
 marble beams which supported the ceiling and roof 
 were from seventeen to twenty-two feet in length, and 
 of proportionate solidity. The ceiling was richly 
 carved and painted. Immediately behind the ranges 
 of Ionic columns stood the terminal wall with five 
 gates, diminishing in width and height as they re- 
 ceded from the centre opening, which was of suffi- 
 cient dimensions to allow the passage of carriages ; 
 

 ■ 
 
 
 9 * 
 
 •M 
 
 


 XCVU". 
 
 3o mod ■ 
 

 
 xLvr. 
 
 4 ■’■/’• 
 
 3 mott . 
 

 
 J .4 S i> 
 
 
THE PEOPYLiEA. 
 
 99 
 
 PLATE XLY. 
 
 Fig. 1. Capital, architrave, and frieze of the cen- 
 tral portico. 
 
 Fig. 2. Upper part of the shaft of the Ionic 
 columns of the vestibule. 
 
 Fig. 3. Section of the external cornice. 
 
 PLATE XLVI. 
 
 View and section of the entablature and capital of 
 one of the antse of the Temple of Victory. 
 
 PLATE XLYII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Profile of the capital of the central portico. 
 
 Fig. 2. Section, on a larger scale, of the four 
 annulets. 
 
 Fig. 3. Capital of one of the antse. 
 
 This description of one of the most impressive 
 productions of Athenian genius and liberality, cannot 
 be more usefully terminated than by a paragraph of 
 severe but judicious criticism from an article supple- 
 mentary to Stuart, by Mr. Kinnaird. 
 
100 
 
 THE PROPYLiEA. 
 
 4 4 Whether the design of the Propylsea, if viewed 
 in concurrence with our modem opinions, founded on 
 the experience of a greater variety of architectural 
 composition, were conducted upon the principles of 
 a correct taste, may he questionable, particularly as 
 regards the juxtaposition of columns of different 
 orders and altitude. It is, however, very evident 
 that at the entrance to the sacred peribolus of the 
 Acropolis, the ancient pictorial effect of this fabric, 
 from its perspective combination as a foreground with 
 the first distinct view of the surpassing Parthenon, 
 must have excited equal admiration with the daring 
 magnificence of its construction. Of the force of 
 this impression on the imagination, the full influence 
 is made known to us by the recorded envy which 
 threatened the removal of the edifice to the Cadmean 
 citadel, during the Theban ascendancy, as well as by 
 the existing proof of the imitation of its principal 
 mass, both in form and dimensions, at the conse- 
 crated precinct of the mystic temple of Eleusinian 
 Ceres.” 
 
THE PPOPYLJEA. 
 
 10 ! 
 
 In a former page will be found a cursory reference 
 to the dimensions of the materials used in this struc- 
 ture. As this, in all inquiries connected with archi- 
 tectural practice, is a matter of considerable interest, 
 the following supplemental particulars, collected with 
 characteristic diligence by Dodwell, though only in 
 part relating to Greek construction, may be advanta- 
 geously inserted here. 
 
 “ The lintel over the middle gate is one of the 
 largest masses of marble I have seen, being twenty- 
 two feet and a half in length, four feet in thickness, 
 and three feet three inches in breadth. It must ac- 
 cordingly, weigh at least twenty-two tons. That of 
 the second gate is sixteen feet ten inches in length, 
 and three feet in thickness. That of the smaller gate 
 is nine feet and a half in length, and three feet in 
 thickness. The largest masses which remain in Greece 
 are the beams of the Propylsean portico, the archi- 
 traves of the Parthenon, the beams of the Erech- 
 theion, of the Olympeion, and a block at the Pnyx 
 at Athens, the lintels of the treasuries of Atreus at 
 
102 
 
 THE PROPYLiEA. 
 
 Mycenae, and of Minyas at Orchomenos, and some 
 stones in the walls of Tiryns and Messene. 
 
 “ Some blocks of white marble are found in Italy, 
 which vie with those of Greece ; particularly two 
 in the Colonna garden at Rome, which are sup- 
 posed to have belonged to the Temple of the Sun. 
 The largest is sixteen feet three inches in length, and 
 nine feet and a half in thickness. Nor must I omit 
 the architraves of the Pantheon, and of the temple of 
 Antonine. The granite columns of the baths of Dio- 
 clesian, and of the forum of Trajan, as well as the 
 Egyptian obelisks at Rome, are also examples of these 
 stupendous masses. The architraves of the Temple 
 at Selinus in Sicily are twenty- two feet in length. 
 Tavernier mentions some blocks of an amazing size 
 in a Pagoda at Golconda or Bagnagar. 
 
 “ Chardin asserts that most of the stones of one of 
 the temples at Persepolis are between thirty and fifty 
 feet in length, and from four to six in height; and 
 some of them are stated to be fifty-two feet in length 
 
 u The columns of the famous temple at Cyzicum 
 in Mysia, of one piece, were fifty cubits in height ; 
 but the largest mass that was ever moved by human 
 
THE PKOPYLiEA. 
 
 103 
 
 means was the monolithal temple of Latona, at Butos 
 in Egypt, which was a solid cube of sixty feet ! There 
 was another monolithe at Sais, of thirty- one feet and a 
 half in length, twenty-one in breadth, and twelve in 
 height. Wood informs us that in a wall at Balbec, 
 three continuous stones measure one hundred and 
 ninety feet in length; the longest being sixty- four 
 feet. 
 
 “ The architectural remains of Egypt, which supply 
 numerous examples of this colossal style, are too well 
 
 known to require particular enumeration. 
 
 Among these gigantic masses our own Stonehenge 
 must not be forgotten.” 
 
106 
 
 THE TEMPLE OE THESEUS. 
 
 honor of that hero, and in expiation of the charac- 
 teristic ingratitude with which the Athenians had 
 repaid his eminent services and heroic deeds. Cen- 
 turies rolled away before their hereditary guilt was 
 thus atoned for ; and the misdeeds of the olden time 
 might yet have passed unrecognized, but for the 
 miraculous appearance of a mighty vision, the armed 
 spectre of Theseus, scattering on the plain of Mara- 
 thon the enemies of his ungrateful country. The 
 Delphic oracle directed the recovery of his remains, 
 and their honorable burial. This pious duty was per- 
 formed by the son of Miltiades, who found the hero’s 
 bones and armour in the island of Scyros, and brought 
 them back to Athens, where they were welcomed 
 with sacrifices and festivals : games were instituted 
 and temples built, in honor of him dead, who, living, 
 had been persecuted and driven forth to die by vio- 
 lence in a foreign land. His temple was not less 
 revered than those of Pallas and Demeter : as a sanc- 
 tuary it protected those who fled from the pursuit of 
 law ; and its peribolus was large enough to hold the 
 military assemblies. Its erection dates thirty years 
 earlier than the Parthenon. 
 
THE TEMPLE OE THESEUS. 
 
 107 
 
 Unlike the lavish decoration of the temple of 
 Minerva, the Theseium was ornamented with a 
 sparing hand, though the arrangement of the sculp- 
 ture was so judiciously managed, as to produce the 
 greatest possible effect. Only the eastern or prin- 
 cipal front of the temple appears to have been charged 
 with figures : the posticum, indeed, had on the inner 
 frieze a lively representation of the Feast of the 
 Lapithse, in which Theseus bore a distinguished 
 part ; but the entablature and pediment of the west- 
 ern portico exhibit no indications of similar adorn- 
 ment. The grand front, on the contrary, was filled 
 with admirable sculpture ; that of the tympanum has 
 disappeared, but the frieze of the pronaos is covered 
 with groupes, part of which are engaged in fierce 
 conflict, while others seem to represent deities. The 
 eastern portico exhibits the labours of Hercules on 
 the ten metopes of the front, while four others im- 
 mediately consecutive on either flank, apparently 
 refer to Theseus, whose friendly alliance with the 
 son of Alcmena is thus commemorated. It is by 
 no means unlikely that these subjects were designed, 
 if not executed, by the celebrated Micon. The re- 
 
108 
 
 THE TEMPLE OF THESEUS. 
 
 maining metopes of the sides have never been adorned 
 with sculpture. 
 
 As the singular beauty of this temple is, in a great 
 degree, the expression of its exact proportions, a de- 
 ficiency in the foregoing illustrations may be advan- 
 tageously supplied by the insertion of more ample 
 details respecting the measurement of the principal 
 parts. F or this purpose a surer authority than that 
 of Colonel Leake can hardly be found, and from him 
 we learn that “ the depth of the pronaos is greater 
 than that of the posticum, and the depth of the portico 
 of the pronaos is greater than that of the portico at the 
 back of the temple ; the two former measure together 
 thirty-three feet, the two latter twenty-seven feet. The 
 side porticoes of the temple are only six feet in breadth. 
 The thirty-four columns of the peristyle, as well as the 
 four in the two vestibules, are near three feet four 
 inches in diameter at the base, and near nineteen feet 
 high, with an intercolumniation of five feet four 
 inches, except at the angles, where, as usual in the 
 Doric order, the interval is made smaller, in order to 
 bring the triglyphs to the angle, and at the same time 
 not to offend the eye by the inequality of the metopes. 
 

THE TEMPLE OE THESEUS. 
 
 109 
 
 The stylobate is formed of only two steps. The height 
 of the temple, from the bottom of the stylobate to the 
 summit of the pediment, is thirty-three feet and a 
 half.” 
 
 PLATE XLVIII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan of the temple. It presents an exact 
 illustration of the Vitruvian arrangement of a peri- 
 pteral temple. A A, the two fronts. B, the pronaos. 
 C, the cella, or nave. D, the posticum. E E, the 
 pteromata, or wings. 
 
 Fig. 2. Transverse section of the eastern portico, 
 the front columns being removed to exhibit the 
 columns, antse, and lacunaria, of the pronaos, with 
 the bas-relief which adorns the frieze. 
 
 PLATE XLIX. 
 
 Elevation of the eastern front. 
 
 PLATE L. 
 
 Fig. 1. Longitudinal section of the eastern portico 
 and pronaos. 
 
 Fig. 2. Half the flank and half the longitudinal 
 
110 
 
 THE TEMPLE OF THESEUS. 
 
 section of the temple, exhibiting the masonry, and the 
 arrangement of the lacunaria. 
 
 PLATE LI. 
 
 Fig. 1. Section of the entablature over the co- 
 lumns of the portico, with details of the mouldings 
 and lacunaria. 
 
 Fig. 2. Plan of the soffit of the architrave, and of 
 the lacunaria. 
 
 PLATE LII. 
 
 Entablature and capital of the columns of the 
 fagade. 
 
 PLATE LIII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Details of the capital, on a larger scale. 
 
 Fig. 2. Plan of the hutings. 
 
 Fig. 3. Details of the four annulets of the capital. 
 
 The figures at the lower part of the plate, are 
 representations of ornaments painted in the soffit of 
 the lacunaria. 
 



THE TEMPLE OE THESEUS. 
 
 Ill 
 
 This system, of which so much has been recently 
 written, but to which it is yet hardly possible to recon- 
 cile our habits of taste and feeling, seems to have been 
 applied extensively in the decorations of this temple. 
 Not only have simple ornaments been painted in, but 
 cornices, capitals, ceilings, and back-grounds were thus 
 distinguished. The carved metopes and friezes were, 
 to all appearance, almost as completely subjected to 
 the processes of colouring, as if they had been regu- 
 larly elaborated by the painter on a plain surface : 
 nothing seems to have been trusted to the relief \ but 
 the effects of light and shadow. The armour was 
 touched with bronze and gold ; the draperies were of 
 various hues, among which blue, green, and red may 
 yet be distinguished ; the sky still bears the traces of 
 its proper tint, and every thing appears to indicate 
 that the Greeks either did not know— or, knowing, 
 deliberately rejected — what would now be considered 
 as an essential distinction between painting and sculp- 
 ture. Without, however, attempting to decide, or 
 even to discuss, this vexed and vexatious question, we 
 may be assured that all this was executed, not by mere 
 workmen but by artists ; that it was carefully studied 
 
 i 
 
112 
 
 THE TEMPLE OE THESEUS. 
 
 and judiciously applied ; and it would, at least, follow 
 that very striking effects must have been produced by 
 the varying shadows of the day, and by the accidents 
 of the atmosphere : the play of light and shade, shift- 
 ing from hour to hour, would almost suggest the idea 
 of life and motion ; giving a character of reality to the 
 groupes, not attainable by any other process. It will, 
 however, still remain to determine whether this be art 
 or artifice ; and whether, in our estimate of these matters, 
 we do not often suffer conventionalities and preoccu- 
 pation to interfere with our reasonings concerning the 
 legitimate objects and limits of Art. 
 
 A reference to Egyptian example, while it leaves 
 the principle untouched, tends but little to relieve 
 the historical difficulties, or even to illustrate the 
 mere facts of the inquiry. If it be granted that 
 the elements of Greek construction were derived im- 
 mediately from Egypt — an hypothesis liable to many 
 objections both circumstantial and theoretic — there 
 still remains to be explained how the Greeks, reject- 
 ing so extensively and selecting with such fine dis- 
 crimination, came to retain one of the most barbarous 
 features of Egyptian architecture. If the transmission 
 
THE TEMPLE OF THESElTS. 
 
 113 
 
 were indirect ; if, in quitting Africa, the system took 
 the Asiatic coasts and islands in its way, then the 
 question derives no illustration from the mere reference 
 to Memphis or Thebes, but requires for its solution a 
 wider range of collocation than can be admitted here. 
 
TEMPLE OF JUPITER OLYMPIUS. 
 
 PLATE LIT. 
 
 u In a south-eastern direction from the Acropolis, at 
 the distance of about five hundred yards from the 
 foot of the rock, stand sixteen gigantic columns, of 
 the Corinthian order of architecture. They are the 
 remains of a temple which formerly boasted of an 
 hundred and twenty; (124?) so disposed as to pre- 
 sent a triple row of ten in each front, and a double 
 row of twenty in the flanks. The length of the 
 temple, measured upon the upper step, was three 
 hundred and fifty-four feet ; its breadth, one hundred 
 and seventy-one. The columns of this stupendous 
 edifice were six feet and a half in diameter, and more 
 
TEMPLE OF JUPITEE OLYMPIUS. 
 
 115 
 
 than sixty feet high. The entire building was con- 
 structed with the marble from the quarries of Pen- 
 telicus.” — (Wilkins, Atheniensia.J 
 
 u The cluster of magnificent columns of Pentelic 
 marble, at the south-east end of the city, near the 
 Ilissus, belonged to the temple of Jupiter Olympius. 
 They are of the Corinthian order, sixteen in number, 
 six feet and a half in diameter, and above sixty feet 
 high, standing upon an artificial platform, supported 
 by a wall, the remains of which show that the entire 
 circuit of the platform was two thousand three hun- 
 dred feet. It appears from the existing remains that 
 the temple consisted of a cell, surrounded by a peri- 
 style, which had ten columns in front, and twenty on 
 the sides ; that the peristyle, being double on the 
 sides, and quadruple at the posticum and pronaos, 
 consisted altogether of one hundred and twenty (?) 
 columns, and that the whole length of the building 
 was three hundred and fifty-four feet, and its breadth 
 one hundred and seventy-one. Such vast dimensions 
 would alone be sufficient to prove these columns to 
 have belonged to that temple, which was the largest 
 ever built in honor of the supreme pagan deity, and 
 
116 
 
 TEMPLE OE JUPITER OLYMPIUS. 
 
 one of the four most magnificent ever erected by the 
 ancients.” k — (Leake, Topography of Athens.) 
 
 k We cite from Vitruvius, as translated by Gwilt, that 
 portion of the Proem to his seventh book, where he touches 
 incidentally on this subject. 
 
 “This work ’’—the temple of Jupiter Olympius — “is not 
 only universally esteemed, but is accounted one of the rarest 
 specimens of magnificence. For in four places only are the 
 temples embellished with work in marble, and from that 
 circumstance the places are very celebrated, and their ex- 
 cellence and admirable contrivance is pleasing to the gods 
 themselves. The first is the temple of Diana at Ephesus, 
 of the Ionic order, built by Ctesiphon of Gnosus, and 
 his son Metagenes, afterwards completed by Demetrius, a 
 priest of Diana, and Pseonius, the Ephesian. The second 
 is the temple of Apollo, at Miletus, also of the Ionic 
 order, built by the above-named Paeonius, and Daphnis, 
 the Milesian. The third is the Doric temple of Ceres and 
 Proserpine, at Eleusis, the cell of which was built by Ictinus, 
 of extraordinary dimensions, for the greater convenience of 
 the sacrifices, and without an exterior colonnade. This 
 structure, when Demetrius Phalereus governed Athens, was 
 turned by Philus into a prostyle temple, with columns in 
 front, and by thus enlarging the vestibule, he not only 
 provided accommodation for the noviciates, but gave great 
 dignity to its appearance. Lastly, in Athens it is said that 
 Cossutius was the architect of the temple of Jupiter 
 
TEMPLE OP JUPITER OLYMPIUS. 
 
 117 
 
 Sir William Gell gives fifty-eight feet as the height 
 of the columns, including the architrave ; and de- 
 scribes the exterior columns as having plinths under 
 their bases, but the inner range as standing upon a 
 continuous 6 step,’ one foot eight inches in height. 
 The walls of the peribolus are built of materials taken 
 from more ancient edifices, and exhibit many an 
 interesting fragment of antique inscriptions. 
 
 The history of this gorgeous structure is too 
 curious to be passed over. That the original Olym- 
 pieum was one of the most ancient of the Athenian 
 temples, may be inferred from the accredited legend 
 which referred its foundation to Deucalion. Pisis- 
 tratus, about 530 B. C. projected a new and more 
 magnificent erection, but the names of his architects 
 have been better preserved than the works which 
 they superintended. Vitruvius informs us that 66 the 
 foundations of the temple of Jupiter Olympius at 
 Athens were prepared by Antistates, Callseschrus, 
 Antimachides, and Porinus, architects employed by 
 
 Olympius, which was of large dimensions, and of the 
 Corinthian order and proportions.” 
 
118 
 
 TEMPLE OF JXJPITEP OLTMPITJS. 
 
 Pisistratus, after whose death, on account of the 
 troubles which affected the republic, the work was 
 abandoned. About two hundred (350 ?) years after- 
 wards, King Antiochus (Epiphanes) haying agreed to 
 supply the money for the work, a Roman citizen, 
 named Cossutius, designed with great skill and taste, 
 the cell, the dipteral arrangement of the columns, the 
 cornices, and other ornaments. This work is not 
 only universally esteemed, but is accounted one of 
 the rarest specimens of magnificence.” — ( Gwilfs 
 translation. ) Notwithstanding this promising com- 
 mencement, the work was again interrupted by the 
 death of the Syrian monarch ; and after the lapse of 
 nearly a century Sylla laid unceremonious hands 
 upon the columns of the unfinished building, and 
 carried them off to Rome, for the purpose of orna- 
 menting the temple of Capitoline Jove. In the time 
 of Augustus, a sort of joint-stock company of kings, 
 states, and wealthy individuals, undertook the com- 
 pletion of the building; but the spell was not yet 
 broken, and the work remained unfinished until the 
 munificence of Hadrian, under happier auspices, 
 finished and dedicated the temple, and set up in it 
 

 
 
US'. 
 
TEMPLE OE JTTPITEE OLYMPITTS. 
 
 119 
 
 the statue of the god, nearly seven centuries after its 
 foundation by Pisistratus. 
 
 It is to be regretted that these interesting ruins 
 have not yet been thoroughly examined. The height 
 of the columns prevented Stuart from ascertaining 
 the details of the capital and entablature ; and it was 
 not until 1820 that Mr. Yulliamy succeeded in ascer- 
 taining, by means of a projected line and a rope- 
 ladder, the details and dimensions of those members. 
 
 “It is hardly possible to conceive where and how 
 the enormous masses have disappeared of which this 
 temple was built. Its remains are now reduced to a 
 few columns which stand together at the south-east 
 angle of the great platform which was once planted, 
 as it were, by the long files of its pillars. To com- 
 pare great things with small, they there look like the 
 few remaining chessmen, which are drawn into the 
 corner of a nearly vacant chess-board, at the conclu- 
 sion of a game.” — (Wordsworth, Athens and Attica.) 
 
 PLATE LIY. 
 
 Plan of the temple and peribolus. The darker 
 portions show the still existing fragments. 
 
120 
 
 TEMPLE OE JXJPITEP OLYMPIUS. 
 
 It must be admitted that these are but meagre 
 particulars of an edifice admired in its own time, not 
 only for its singular magnificence, but as one of the 
 most successful attempts of a later and inferior school, 
 in emulation of the illustrious men who flourished in 
 the palmy days of Greece. The original article in 
 Stuart’s great work is brief and unsatisfactory, while 
 his diagrams are few and incomplete. It appears, in 
 fact, that his investigations were so far interrupted, as 
 to leave undetermined the precise length of the temple 
 and the number of columns on its flank. The re- 
 searches of Mr. Vulliamy have not, that we recollect, 
 been published. In the absence, therefore, of more 
 distinct and technical details, the following fragmen- 
 tary excerpts from Dodwell may be found to add 
 something to the amount of our information. 
 
 “ Not a tenth part of the original edifice remains. 
 
 It stands upon a foundation of the soft Pirsean 
 
 stone, like the Parthenon The capitals are 
 
 not all exactly similar in their ornaments ; and are so 
 
 large that they are composed of two blocks The 
 
 shafts of the columns consist of several frusta 
 
 Part of the peribolus of the Olympieion remains on the 
 
TEMPLE OF JUPITER OLYMPIUS. 121 
 
 south side, facing the Ilissus, and on the eastern end, 
 opposite Hymettus ; and a small part of it is visible 
 near the arch of Hadrian ; it is composed, in the most 
 perfect part, of eleven layers of stone regularly 
 constructed, and fortified by projecting buttresses, 
 similar to the peribolus of a temple at Delphi.” 
 
 This instructive, but somewhat indefinite describer, 
 goes on to cite the authority of Pausanias in justifica- 
 tion of the statement that the temple was 4 dipteral and 
 hypsethral.’ Now Pausanias does not precisely say 
 this, nor is it particularly easy to ascertain what he 
 really does say. It seems never to have occurred to 
 that pleasant but whimsical traveler, that the time 
 might come, and that his sketches en route might last 
 until that time, when information such as he could 
 give, would be invaluable. He was evidently capable 
 of something better than might be inferred from what 
 he has actually done ; and the subjoined extracts, 
 freely rendered from his 44 Attica,” if they do not show 
 what the Olympieum itself was, will, at least, give 
 some idea of its magnificent accompaniments. 
 
 44 The emperor Hadrian not only raised the temple 
 of the Olympian Jupiter, but placed in it the colossal 
 
122 
 
 TEMPLE OE JUPITER OLYMPIUS. 
 
 and chryselephantine statue of the god, admirable, not 
 only for its magnitude, but for its excellent workman- 
 ship. Before you enter the temple, you observe four 
 statues of the emperor Hadrian, two in Thasian, and 
 two in Egyptian, marble. Before the columns, are 
 statues of brass, erected by the colonial cities. The 
 entire peribolus is filled with votive statues, in honour 
 of the emperor Hadrian. Within the same space are 
 ancient monuments worthy of note ; a bronze Jupiter, 
 the temple of Saturn and Bhea, and an enclosed 
 space (rc/ievos) dedicated to the Olympian region. 
 There too is an opening in the ground, of about a 
 cubit’s width, where they say the waters of Deuca- 
 lion’s deluge drained off. Into this chasm are annu- 
 ally thrown cakes of wheaten flour kneaded with honey. 
 There are, moreover, a column on which stands the 
 statue of Isocrates, and a tripod of bronze supported by 
 statues in Phrygian marble.” 
 
 To these discursive illustrations the critical com- 
 ment of Lord Aberdeen may supply an appropriate 
 close. u The Homan conquest,” he observes, “ spread 
 the Corinthian style throughout Greece, almost to the 
 exclusion of the other orders. Although the buildings 
 
TEMPLE OE JUPITER OLYMPIUS. 
 
 123 
 
 of this period are often more splendid and costly than 
 those of preceding times, yet the pure taste and cor- 
 rect design of the latter ages of the art are generally 
 wanting. From this remark, however, must be ex- 
 empted some of the works of Hadrian, the liberal 
 benefactor of Greece ; especially if the columns at 
 Athens, which are called by his name, and which are 
 in reality the ruins of the temple of Jupiter Olympius, 
 owe their origin to this emperor. These display the 
 utmost beauty and propriety, with perhaps the greatest 
 degree of magnificence and grandeur, ever attained to 
 by the architectural exertions of the emperors of the 
 
 Roman world Whenever, or by whomsoever, 
 
 finished, these columns bear the indications of a pure 
 age of Grecian art ; and indeed the remains of such a 
 temple with columns composed of the purest marble, 
 more than six feet and a half in diameter, and sixty 
 feet in height, cannot be described in any terms com- 
 mensurate with the sensations excited by the view of 
 the original.” 
 
THE ARCH OF HADRIAN. 
 
 PLATES LY. LYI. LYII. LYIII. LIX. 
 
 Two circumstances connected with this structure 
 have furnished materials for a controversy, chiefly 
 remarkable for the readiness with which hypotheses 
 are framed, and the ease with which they are de- 
 molished. The first difficulty that presents itself to 
 the archseologist, when endeavouring to ascertain the 
 object of this insulated monument, is suggested by 
 its very singular position, awkwardly close to the 
 precinct of the Olympieum, and forming an angle 
 with it of very considerable obliquity. Sir William 
 Gell, indeed, states that this arch is actually included 
 within the line of the peribolus ; but that this is not 
 the fact is put in the clearest evidence by other au- 
 
THE ARCH OP HADRIAN. 
 
 125 
 
 thorities, and may be illustrated by a reference to 
 the preceding plate, (liv.) where the situation of the 
 two buildings is satisfactorily shown, by the intro- 
 duction of the monument in its relative position. 
 It stands “ within a few yards of the north-east 
 angle of the peribolus and the complete finish of 
 all its parts makes it evident that it was never at- 
 tached to any other construction, while the absence 
 of every mark that might indicate the former ex- 
 istence of a door or gate, proves that it was simply 
 an ornamental erection, probably standing athwart 
 the street leading from the new Agora to the temple 
 of Jupiter, and having its obliquity to the latter de- 
 termined by the direction of the road. It is farther 
 suggested by Colonel Leake, that such a position was 
 in strict accordance with the practice of the Greeks, 
 who usually managed the line of access to their 
 temples, so as to throw them into angular per- 
 spective, exhibiting at once the front and flank to 
 the eye of the approaching observer. 
 
 A second difficulty has been raised by a suffi- 
 ciently strange accommodation of certain inscriptions 
 on the entablature, and has afforded opportunity for 
 
126 
 
 THE ARCH OE HADRIAN. 
 
 sundry untenable speculations touching the topo- 
 graphy of Athens. Into these, however, it is not 
 expedient to enter here ; the discussion would an- 
 swer no purpose of illustration, to say nothing of its 
 interference with the proper object of a work which 
 professes to deal only with facts and their expla- 
 nations. 
 
 It seems not improbable that the arch of Hadrian 
 was built on the site of a more ancient building, 
 known as the gate of Egeus, though altogether on a 
 different plan. The order is Corinthian, and the 
 material is the Pentelic marble : no cement was used 
 in the construction, but the blocks were held to- 
 gether by metal cramps. Both fronts are precisely 
 similar. 
 
 PRATE LV. 
 
 Fig. 1. Ground plan of the arch of Hadrian. 
 The pedestals traced in outline are not now in ex- 
 istence, and the columns have been removed from 
 their places both in front and rear. 
 
 Fig. 2. Plan of the upper range : the portions 
 still existing are in shade. 
 
IV. 
 
LV1I. 
 
 

 
LVL 
 
 'l 
 
THE ARCH OF HADRIAN. 
 
 127 
 
 Fig. 3. Section of the building, through the 
 centre of the arch. 
 
 PLATE LYI. 
 
 Elevation, restored, of the south-eastern front. 
 
 PLATE LVII. 
 
 Entablature, capital, and base of the antse of the 
 lower range. 
 
 PLATE LVIII. 
 
 Entablature, capital, and base of the upper 
 columns. 
 
 PLATE LIX. 
 
 Fig. 1. Capital and base of the pilasters of the 
 upper range. 
 
 Fig. 2. Section of the above capital. 
 
 Fig. 3. Section of the soffit and lacunaria under 
 the pediment. It will be observed by an inspection 
 of the plan, (Plate lv. fig. 2,) that this central com- 
 partment is divided by a thin slab of marble into two 
 recesses, or niches. 
 
 K 
 
128 
 
 THE ARCH OF HADRIAN. 
 
 Fig. 4. Fragment of the ornament which crowns 
 the apex of the pediment. 
 
 In the editorial notes to the new edition of Stuart, 
 there occurs a brief and instructive criticism on these 
 details, which shall be given in Mr. Kinnaird’s own 
 words, and which could not be inserted any where so 
 appropriately as in this place. “ It will be ob- 
 served,”. he says, “ that the antse at this building 
 have a very sensible diminution, while in struc- 
 tures of the age of Pericles they were never per- 
 ceptibly diminished. The abaci of all the capitals 
 are painted at the angles, as are those of the Olym- 
 pieum, of the Pantheon of Hadrian, and of the 
 Incantada at Salonicha. No inference as to style, 
 however, can be drawn from this circumstance, as 
 the abaci of the Corinthian capitals at the ancient 
 temples of Phigalia and Apollo Didymseus, appear to 
 have been also painted. The introduction of the 
 Ionic echini beneath the foliage of the capitals of the 
 antse, savours of the declension of pure Grecian art.” 
 
 It is hardly within the range of this matter-of-fact 
 manual, to venture on general criticism. It may, 
 
THE AECH OF HADBIAN. 
 
 129 
 
 however, be permitted us to hazard the opinion, that 
 this ornamental structure does but add one to the 
 already numerous instances that might be produced, 
 to illustrate the impracticability of harmonizing 
 the arch and impost with the column and epistylia. 
 The attempt to combine them with good effect has 
 failed in every instance — in the colossal magnificence 
 of the Flavian Amphitheatre — in the crowded deco- 
 rations of the triumphal arch — in the whimsical assem- 
 blage of discordant features which distinguishes the 
 6 Arch of Hadrian.’ We admit, however, that in the 
 present instance, the principle is not fairly brought to 
 the test : the archivolt breaking in upon the entabla- 
 ture, and the insignificant pediment perched on the 
 centre of the upper story, are inexcusable faults, at 
 variance with all sound theory, and destructive of all 
 legitimate effect. 
 
THE AQUEDUCT OF HADRIAN. 
 
 PLATES LX. LXI. 
 
 That magnificence in public structures does not 
 necessarily imply convenience in common domestic 
 architecture might be proved clearly enough from 
 the examples of Greece and Rome. It is equally 
 remarkable that one of the least dispensable sources 
 of health and comfort, a free command of good water, 
 appears to have been deficient in many of the cities 
 of Greece. Even in the fortresses, the wells or 
 springs seem to have been generally without the 
 walls ; nor does it appear that tanks were constructed 
 within the circuit of the fortifications. The orna- 
 mental edifice now under consideration is a proof 
 both of a scanty supply of potable water, and of the 
 
THE AQUEDUCT OE HADRIAN. 
 
 131 
 
 liberality exercised by the munificent Hadrian to- 
 wards his good city of Athens. Commencing an 
 aqueduct at Cephissia, a 6 delightful village,’ even 
 now abounding in springs, he brought a copious 
 stream of wholesome water from a distance of nearly 
 seven miles, to a capacious receptacle at the foot of 
 Mount Anchesmus, and of this reservoir the Ionic 
 building exhibited at Plate lx. in a state of partial 
 restoration, was probably the most conspicuous de- 
 coration. A brief inscription on the frieze and archi- 
 trave recorded the commencement of the under- 
 taking by Hadrian, and its completion by Antoninus 
 Pius. 
 
 This building no longer exists, even as a ruin, 
 nor is its site to be traced without difficulty. 
 
 PLATE LX. 
 
 Plan, elevation, and section, of the 4 frontispiece.’ 
 The arch, instead of supporting the entablature, 
 divides it ; and the archivolt, instead of springing 
 from a regular impost, or from the cymatium of the 
 frieze, rests immediately on the architrave. 
 
132 
 
 THE AQUEDUCT OE HADRIAN. 
 
 PLATE LXI. 
 
 Base, capital, and entablature. These have more 
 of the Roman than the Greek character ; yet, though 
 not exhibiting the exquisite finish of the Periclean 
 structures, they are probably superior to any of the 
 existing examples in Rome itself. 
 
LXI. 
 
 
 
THE MONUMENT OF PHILOPAPPUS. 
 
 PLATES LXIIe LXIIL LXIV. 
 
 This curious relic of antiquity crowns the summit of 
 the Museum, a considerable elevation, lying to the 
 south-west of the Acropolis. The entire construction 
 is crowded and complicated, but the general form is 
 simple, and ingeniously enough adapted to the ad- 
 vantageous display of sculpture, evidently the great 
 purpose of the erection. The main edifice consists 
 of a mass of masonry, presenting a semicircular front, 
 profusely decorated with pilasters, entablature, niches, 
 statues, and groupes in relief. There may be, in all 
 this, somewhat of overdoing, not in strict accordance 
 with the pure and perfect taste of earlier times ; yet 
 is the effect rich and impressive, and a partial alter- 
 ation in some of the lines, with a little abatement of 
 
134 THE MONUMENT OF PHILOPAPPUS. 
 
 the prevalent redundancy, might have made of this 
 magnificent monument a model for similar structures. 
 It consists of a pilastrade, supported by a basement ; 
 and the divisions thus formed are made the frame- 
 work of three niches, each containing, when entire, 
 a sitting statue ; and of three recesses, exhibiting in 
 a continued series of grouped figures, the triumphal 
 procession of a Roman emperor. This distribution 
 will be more clearly understood by a reference to the 
 sixty- third plate, where the vacant spaces indicate 
 the disappearance of one entire flank of the building. 
 
 It appears, from inscriptions, that this monument 
 was erected by a descendant of the kings of Syria, 
 Caius Julius Antiochus Philopappus, who, in the 
 decay of the fortunes of his family, had been patron- 
 ized by Trajan, and after attaining the Consular 
 dignity, retired to Greece, and enrolled himself 
 among the citizens of Athens. That this mausoleum 
 was set up in his own life-time is not, however, 
 absolutely certain ; and it may be the more probable 
 opinion that his kindred raised it as a lasting 
 memorial of a character eminent for moral and 
 intellectual qualities. The central statue is that of 
 

 
 
 <r 
 
 
 

 
 
lxih. 
 

 
THE MONUMENT OF PHILOPAPPUS. 
 
 135 
 
 Philopappus ; the two other figures represented the 
 first and the last monarchs of the royal dynasty from 
 which he was descended. The sculptures on the 
 basement were in honour of the emperor Trajan. 
 The monument, of Pentelic marble, stands on a 
 platform of Pirsean stone. 
 
 PLATE LXII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan of the basement. 
 
 Fig. 2. Plan of the upper story, showing the 
 form and arrangement of the niches. 
 
 Fig. 3. Perpendicular section, through the centre 
 of the principal niche. 
 
 PLATE LXIII. 
 
 Elevation of the front. 
 
 PLATE LXIV. 
 
 * 
 
 Capital and entablature of one of the pilasters. 
 
TEMPLE AT CORINTH. 
 
 PLATE LXY. 
 
 It is to be regretted that so little is known, and, 
 probably, so little knowledge attainable, of these 
 most interesting remains. The description in Stuart 
 is exceedingly meagre, and he does not appear to 
 have had opportunity for minute examination. Even 
 by wdiat name to designate the temple is mere matter 
 of guess ; and if a judgment may be formed from 
 the attempts in this way that have been made up to 
 the present time, much is .not likely to be done by 
 guessing. Something may, however, be reasonably 
 hoped from that more leisurely and accurate survey 
 which Stuart and Revett were prevented from car- 
 rying into effect, and which is peculiarly demanded 
 by the circumstances of this impressive ruin. All 
 
TEMPLE AT CORINTH. 
 
 137 
 
 that can at present be taken for granted seems to be, 
 that it is the most ancient existing specimen of the 
 Doric order: its massive proportions, the simplicity 
 of its forms, the character of its workmanship, and 
 the coarseness of the material, are sufficient indi- 
 cations of its antiquity. Of the twelve columns 
 marked in the plan, seven only now remain, the re- 
 mainder having suited the convenience of some 
 Turkish governor, who broke them into fragments, 
 and worked them up in the walls of his own house. 
 It is somewhat singular that at Corinth no specimen 
 should occur of the order to which that once flou- 
 rishing city gave a name ; nor has it been observed, 
 that the acanthus is to be found among the plants of 
 the vicinity. 
 
 PLATE LXY. 
 
 Exhibits the plan and flank elevation of the 
 temple, as it stood in the time of Stuart. 
 
RUIN AT SALONICA, 
 
 USUALLY CALLED 
 
 THE INCANTADA. 
 
 PLATES LXYI. LXYII. 
 
 This remarkable 'structure, of which the history 
 and the object are alike unknown, stands in the 
 Jews’ quarter of the city, and, probably from some 
 superstitious fancy, has obtained from the local 
 residents, who are of Spanish descent, the current 
 designation of las Incantadas — “ the Enchanted 
 Figures.” That the most learned antiquarians have 
 failed in ascertaining the real character of this 
 building, may be inferred from the marked variation 
 in their speculations on that subject. A triumphal 
 monument — the entrance to a theatre — the propylaea 
 
RUIN AT SALONICA. 
 
 139 
 
 of a forum — have been suggested and rejected in 
 their turns. Mr. Kinnaird, in a very instructive 
 note to the new edition of Stuart, has directed 
 attention to a similar edifice formerly existing in 
 the city of Bordeaux, and barbarously destroyed, 
 so late as the reign of Louis XIY. by the orders of 
 Vauban, to make way for the bastions and ravelins 
 of a new fortification. This is quite enough to 
 awaken the indignation of artists and antiquarians ; 
 yet in this case an engineer might plead the stern 
 dictates of official duty: but what can be urged in 
 extenuation of the gross negligence, on the part 
 both of government and of the local authorities, 
 which could suffer a building so 6 rich and rare,’ 
 to be razed to the foundation, without securing 
 draughts and measurements of all its details. Nei- 
 ther can architects or lovers of art be acquitted 
 of negligence, since a comparatively slight effort 
 on their part might have effected the object, and 
 laid posterity under lasting obligations. Perrault 
 has done most in this way, and from his repre- 
 sentations a sufficient idea of the general form and 
 construction may be obtained, to show that the 
 
140 
 
 RUIN AT SALONICA. 
 
 character, and probably the uses of the building, 
 were similar to those of the Incantadas. The high 
 authorities of Perrault and Durand (Parallele des 
 Edifices) are in favour of classing these structures 
 with Basilicee, and this may be considered as the 
 most probable conjecture, though Mr. Kinnaird is 
 inclined to the opinion that this relic of ancient 
 Thessalonica was a ‘ sepulchral monument/ The 
 French ruin was known on the spot as ‘ les Tutelles ,’ 
 or 4 le Palais Tutele ,’ a designation from which 
 no decided inference can be made. A similar 
 building is said by Vinet, to have been, toward the 
 close of the sixteenth century, still in existence at 
 Evora, in Portugal. 
 
 The Greeks of Salonica solve the puzzling ques- 
 tion concerning the origin of this monument, by a 
 tale of enchantment, mixed up with an amour be- 
 tween Alexander the Great and a queen of Thrace. 
 In this whimsical legend, Aristotle is made to enact 
 the part of a victorious conjuror, confounding the 
 vindictive machinations of the injured husband, and 
 making the spells of a rival magician 4 return to plague 
 the inventor.’ 
 

 
 
LXVU. 
 
 
 
 


RUIN AT SALONICA. 
 
 141 
 
 A glance at the plate will show that this monu- 
 ment, as now standing, consists of a Corinthian 
 colonnade, with an entablature, supporting a double 
 row of figures attached to the front and rear of a 
 series of short square pillars, on which rests a sort 
 of architrave, crowned by a cornice. The columns 
 stand on pedestals : the sculpture which adorns the 
 attic is in high relief, and of execution varying from 
 4 inferior ’ to 4 masterly.’ The personation of the 
 figures is uncertain. 
 
 PLATE LX VI. 
 
 Plan, elevation, and section, of the Incantada. 
 
 PLATE LXVII. 
 
 Entablature and capital of the colonnade. The 
 frieze offers peculiarities which ought not to be over- 
 looked ; it is ornamented with fluting, and the profile 
 is carved. 
 
 It is probable that further examination, both direct 
 and comparative, might place in clearer fight the 
 character and object of this building. One instance 
 
142 
 
 RUIN AT SALONICA. 
 
 of comparison has been cited, and another, less 
 specific indeed, but perhaps not the less important, 
 may be found in the recently explored Temple of 
 Jupiter Olympius at Agrigentum, which displays, 
 though in a different style, and far more in the spirit 
 of antiquity, the same marking feature. But little 
 was known of this colossal structure, till the researches 
 of Mr. Cockerell made its details and proportions 
 familiar to the student of architecture, and exhibited a 
 new illustration of the ingenious artifices and con- 
 summate skill in adaptation, exercised by the Greek 
 builders. The wealth and splendor of Agrigentum 
 may be inferred from the impressive ruins which yet 
 crown the beautiful eminences whence the ancient 
 city looked forth on the richly cultivated plain beneath, 
 and the broad ocean beyond . 1 * The temple of Jupiter, 
 or of 4 the Giants/ as it is popularly designated, was, 
 when entire, distinguished by several remarkable 
 peculiarities. The interior partitions presented a 
 range of lofty and massive pilasters, supporting a 
 
 1 See the admirably selected view of this striking scenery 
 
 in the 4 Magna Grsecia’ of Wilkins. 
 
RUIN AT SALONICA. 
 
 143 
 
 heavy and continued entablature, upon which stood 
 a series of gigantic Telamones, supporting on their 
 heads and bent arms, an upper and broken epistylium 
 and cornice .” 1 In these figures there was no variation : 
 they were, unlike those of the Incantada but in strict 
 conformity with Greek principle, repetitions of each 
 other. It is no improbable conjecture that these 
 Telamones or Atlantes, or by whatsoever epithet they 
 may be distinguished, were intended to represent the 
 rebellious and conquered Titans, thus condemned to 
 emblematic servitude in the fane of the victorious god. 
 The temple itself has, for ages, served as an almost 
 inexhaustible quarry of materials for modern buildings, 
 and its few remaining ruins lie scattered about, or 
 confusedly heaped together; among these are to be 
 found the “ disjointed parts’’ of several ‘ giants,’ but 
 not, as we understand the statement, of one absolutely 
 entire figure : enough, however, was collected to enable 
 the scientific eye of Mr. Cockerell to trace the con- 
 tinuous line that determined the form and altitude. 
 
 m It does not appear that the precise character of this 
 member, or its connexion with the roof, has been ascertained 
 The temple was probably hypsethral 
 L 
 
144 
 
 RUIN AT SALONICA. 
 
 These colossal statues were built in regular courses, 
 exactly following the lines of the masonry against 
 which they were placed. 6 4 The head alone is 3' 10" 
 high, and 3' 0" wide ; the chest is upward of six feet 
 across ; and the whole height could not have been 
 less than twenty- five feet The sculpture resem- 
 
 bles the archaic manner, observed in the Eginetan 
 statues and those works commonly called Etruscan. 
 Their forms are angular and energetic ; and seem to 
 be better suited to the architectural purposes to which 
 they are applied, than the more elegant forms of 
 which the pediments are composed.” 
 
 The temple itself, contrary to the usual practice in 
 the arrangement of Greek architecture, was divided 
 longitudinally into three distinct enclosures, the inter- 
 vals between the pilasters as well as those between 
 the exterior columns being walled up, a precaution 
 apparently suggested by the loose texture of the stone, 
 and the consequent difficulty of managing it in suffi- 
 ciently large masses to form epistylia of the requisite 
 strength. The central inclosure is termed by Mr. 
 Cockerell, the Celia ; the side aisles formed the Porti- 
 coes. The whole interior colonnade, if such it may 
 
RUIN AT SALONICA. 
 
 145 
 
 be termed, consisted only of pilasters, while the 
 exterior exhibited a series of engaged columns, of 
 little more than half-diameter, but of extraordinary 
 proportions, each of the fluted recesses having width 
 and depth enough to hold an armed man, and the 
 semi-column measuring thirteen feet in full diameter, 
 “ the largest, it is presumed, ever executed. In each 
 of the fronts there were seven columns, and double 
 that number in the flanks, the angles included.”. . . . 
 “ The width of the cella between the pilasters is two 
 feet two inches more than the nave of St. Paul’s, and 
 the height exceeds it by eighteen feet.” From the 
 rocky platform to the central angle of the pediment 
 were, in round numbers, 120 feet; the length was 
 369 ; the width 182. 
 
THE ISLAND OF DELOS. 
 
 PLATES LXYIII. LXIX. LXX. 
 
 No contrast can be more striking than that which 
 exists between the descriptions of the Sacred Isle 
 in its ancient state, and the miserable aspect of 
 barrenness and dilapidation which it actually pre- 
 sents. Delos, the mythologic birth-place of Apollo 
 and Diana, was enriched by commerce and super- 
 stition ; temples and consecrated monuments adorned 
 its rugged and unproductive surface ; and so awful 
 was its sanctity, that even the Persian ravager re- 
 spected the hallowed soil. Of all this, nothing now 
 remains but an indiscriminate wreck ; what the de- 
 vastation of barbarian warfare had spared, has been 
 swept away by the rapacity of modern 6 destructives 
 
THE ISLAND OF DELOS. 
 
 147 
 
 and even the few columns which were standing in the 
 time of Stuart, have disappeared, either carried off by 
 Levantine voyagers, or mutilated by Turkish masons 
 for their own wretched purposes. 
 
 The only distinct and connected remains that were 
 observed by Stuart and Revett, are represented in 
 the illustrations ; subsequent travelers have, how- 
 ever, discovered amid the wreck which covers the 
 island, still more interesting fragments — part of the 
 foot of the Naxian Apollo, and indications of the 
 Mithratic worship, in the ugliest of all imaginable 
 capitals, formed by the head and shoulders of a bull 
 couchant. 
 
 PLATE LXVIII. 
 
 Fig. 1. Plan and elevation of three Doric columns, 
 assigned by Stuart to the Temple of Apollo. The 
 fluting occupies only a narrow circle at the base and 
 at the necking, and is generally supposed to have 
 been left unfinished : it should seem to be quite as 
 probable that this peculiarity was the result of some 
 fantastic aim at novelty, especially as this is not the 
 only instance of the kind. 
 
148 
 
 THE ISLAND OF DELOS. 
 
 Fig. 2. Plan and elevation of the ‘ Portico of 
 Philip,’ a designation given on the authority of an 
 inscription, but liable to considerable uncertainty 
 respecting its precise definition. Stuart seems to 
 have been highly gratified by the ‘ lightness of its 
 proportions,’ and by its greater suitableness to 6 com- 
 mon use.’ It may, however, be permitted to suggest 
 that whatever may have been gained in this respect, 
 is at the expense of all that is characteristic in the 
 Doric shaft, and that the straight profile of the echinus 
 is mean and ineffective, while the capital altogether 
 is rendered insignificant by deficiency in size .and 
 mass. 
 
 PLATE LXIX. 
 
 Entablature, capital, and shaft, of the Temple of 
 Apollo ; with details of the capital, on a larger scale. 
 
 PLATE LXX. 
 
 Entablature, capital, and shaft, of the Portico of 
 Philip ; with details of the capital, on a larger scale. 
 
3 4 p 
 
 3 mod ■ 
 

 TXX. 
 
 
154 
 
 EXPLANATION OF 
 
 Eustyle — An interval between two columns of two dia- 
 meters and a half. 
 
 Exhedra — A recess, or small side-apartment. 
 
 Fascia — A band, or broad fillet. The architrave of the 
 more enriched orders is divided longitudinally into 
 two or more fasciae. 
 
 Fluting — The vertical channelling of the shafts of co- 
 lumns. 
 
 Frieze — The central member of the entablature. 
 
 Helix — See Caulicoli. 
 
 Hexa style — Having a front range of six columns. 
 
 Hypjithral — Without a roof. 
 
 Hyperthyrum — The upper member of a doorway. 
 
 Impost — The member on which the arch immediately 
 rests. 
 
 Intercolumn i ati on — The space between two columns. 
 
 Jambs — The side supports of a doorway. 
 
 Lacunaria — Ornamental compartments in ceilings. 
 
 Metope — The interval between the Doric triglyphs. 
 
 Naos — The central chamber of a temple. 
 
 Necking — The space between the astragal of the shaft 
 and the annulet of the capital. 
 
 Opisthodomus — The chamber behind the cella. 
 
TECHNICAL TERMS. 
 
 155 
 
 Pediment — T he triangular termination of the roof of a 
 temple, resting upon the entablature which surrounds 
 the building. 
 
 Peribolus — The enclosure within which a temple stood. 
 
 Peristyle — A range of columns within a court or temple. 
 
 Pilaster — A square engaged pillar. 
 
 Plinth— The low square step on which a column is 
 placed. 
 
 Portico —The covered space in front of a temple. 
 
 Posticum — The covered space behind a temple. 
 
 Precinctions — The landings or gang-ways which sepa- 
 rated and gave access to the ranges of seats in the 
 ancient theatres. 
 
 Pronaos — Often used convertibly with Portico. The 
 part of the temple in front of the Naos. 
 
 Pteroma — -Has frequently a more extended application, 
 but in the present work it is used to distinguish the 
 continuation of the side walls from the transverse 
 partition of the cella to the antae. 
 
 Soffit— Ceiling : applied to the underside of arches, and 
 of other architectural members. 
 
 Stylagalmatic — Supported by figure-columns . — See 
 Caryatid . 
 
156 
 
 TECHNICAL TERMS. 
 
 Stylobate — The basis or substructure on which a co- 
 lonnade is placed. 
 
 Systyle— An intercolumniation of two diameters. 
 
 Tetrastyle — Having four columns in front. 
 
 Tholus — Employed in this volume to designate the cir- 
 cular roof of the monument of Lysicrates. 
 
 Toreutic — Carving, embossing, working in metals. 
 
 Tri glyph — The distinguishing ornament of the Doric 
 entablature. 
 
 Tympanum — The triangular space within the cornices of 
 a pediment. 
 
 Volute — The Ionic scroll. Those of the Corinthian 
 capital are smaller, and of distinct character. 
 
 Vomitoria — Passages facilitating egress from a theatre. 
 
CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 13 Doric Portico, or Gate of the Agora about the 
 
 time of Augustus. 
 
 1 7 Ionic Temple on the Ilissus .... of uncertain date. 
 
 22 Tower of Andronicus Cyrrhestes 159 B. C. 
 
 32 Choragic Monument of Lysicrates 335 B. C. 
 
 42 Pantheon of Hadrian ...... the reign of Hadrian. 
 
 48 Parthenon 440 B. C. 
 
 60 Erechtheum 393 B. C. 
 
 79 Odeum of Regilla, or Theatre of Herodes 
 
 Atticus time of the Antonines. 
 
 85 Choragic Monument of Thrasyllus .... 320 B. C. 
 
 91 Propylsea 432 B. C. 
 
 104 Temple of Theseus 465 B.C. 
 
 114 Temple of Jupiter Olympius. . the reign of Hadrian. 
 
 124 Arch and Aqueduct of Hadrian ditto. 
 
 133 Monument of Philopappus .... the reign of Trajan. 
 
 136 Temple at Corinth of uncertain date. 
 
 138 Incantada. . . . date and object altogether unknown. 
 
 146 Ruins of the Isle of Delos of uncertain date. 
 
 149 Pnyx. 
 
 PRINTED BY J. S. CROSSLEY, LEICESTER. 
 

I 
 
 
 
 
 
; 
 
 
 
 SPBGiM. 
 
 8s-& 
 
 z}m°\ 
 
 THE GETTY CENTFR 
 
iflffiflf ftif rlMtfrtMfP rfl