Vickers, Persepolis, Vitruvius and The Erechtheum Caryatids. The Iconography of Medism

PERSEPOLIS, VITRUVIUS AND THE ERECHTHEUM CARYATIDS: THE ICONOGRAPHY OF MEDISM
AND SERVITUDE
Author(s): Michael Vickers
Source: Revue Archologique, Nouvelle Srie, Fasc. 1 (1985), pp. 3-28
Published by: Presses Universitaires de France
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41736230
Accessed: 22-03-2016 19:09 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41736230?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Presses Universitaires de France is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Revue Archologique.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 79.37.13.86 on Tue, 22 Mar 2016 19:09:54 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
PERSEPOLIS, VITRUVIUS
AND THE ERECHTHEUM CARYATIDS:
THE ICONOGRAPHY OF MEDISM
AND SERVITUDE
Vitruvius' account of the origin of Caryatids contains much of interest for students
of Graeco-Persian relations in the fifth century bc. It occurs close to the beginning of
his treatise, among the subjects Vitruvius thought necessary as part of an architect's
education: "the architect should be equipped with knowledge of many branches of study
and various kinds of learning... Let him be educated, skilled with the pencil, instructed in
geometry, know much history, have followed the philosophers with attention, understand
music, have some knowledge of medicine, know the opinions of jurists, and be acquainted
with astronomy and the theory of the heavens". He then proceeds to elaborate on these
various topics: "A wide knowledge of history is necessary", he says, "because architects
often incorporate many ornamental features in the designs of their works, of which they
must be able to give a reasoned account, when asked why they added them. For example,
if anyone erects marble statues of robed women, which are called Caryatids, instead of
columns on his building, and places mutules and crowning members above them, this is
how he will explain them to enquirers. Caryae, a city in the Peloponnese, allied herself with
the Persian enemy against Greece. Later the Greeks were rid of their war by a glorious
victory and made common cause and declared war on the Caryates. And so the town was
captured, the males were killed and the Caryan state publicly humiliated. The victors led
the matrons away into captivity, but did not allow them to lay aside their robes or matronly
Acknowledgements
Many thanks are due to Professor E. D. Francis, Dr. D. M. Lewis, Professor Dieter Metzler and Dr. P. R. S. Moorey
for drawing the writer's attention to works on Achaemenid matters he might otherwise have overlooked. Professor Francis
contributed to the paper in many other ways as well. Dr. Lewis, Dr. P. J. Rhodes and Professor Martin Robertson kindly
read an earlier draft and this version is the better for their comments. Fig. 5 was drawn by Mr Keith Bennett.
rev. arch., 1/1985
1. Lion and bull relief on the Apadana, Persepolis (after Schmidt).
ornaments. Their intention was not to lead them on one occasion in a triumph, but to ensure
that they exhibited a permanent picture of slavery, and that in the heavy mockery they
suffered they should be seen to pay the penalty for their city. So the architects of those
times designed images of them for public buildings specially placed to uphold a load, so
that a well-known punishment of the Caryates' wrongdoing might be handed down to
posterity.1
Vitruvius' testimony is now usually dismissed as a late fabrication, but it is instructive

to observe quite how this view came about. It can be traced directly to an essay on Caryatids
written by G. E. Lessing in the eighteenth century.2 J. J. Winckelmann had identified a

male statue in the courtyard of the Palazzo Farnese in Rome with a rudimentary Corinthian
capital on its head, as one of the Caryatids of Agrippa's Pantheon mentioned by Pliny.3
i. Vitr. I, 2-4. Translation based on those of M. H. Morgan, Vitruvius , the Ten Books on Architecture , Cambridge,
Mass., 1914, 5-7, and W. H. Plommer, Vitruvius and the origin of Caryatids, JHS, XCIX, 1979, 97.
2. G. E. Lessing, Karyatiden, in J. Petersen and w. von Olshausen (eds.), Lesstngs Werke 17. A. Schoene (ed.),
Schriften zur antiken Kunstgeschichte , Berlin, etc., n.d., 385-386.
3. J. J. Winckelmann, Geschichte der Kunst des Alterthums , Dresden, 1764, 387 ; Pliny, HN} XXXI, 37.
2. Gold lion/bull coin of the kind

placed in the Persepolis foundation
deposits (Ashmolean Museum).
Lessing drew the implausible conclusion that since Winckelmann's "Caryatid" was male,
then Vitruvius' account (referring as it did to female statues) must be fictitious. A slightly
stronger objection raised by Lessing was to ask how a tiny spot like Caryae could have
sided with the Persians, could have medised. The fact was, as Herodotus put it: "all the
cities of the Peloponnese [with certain exceptions which included the Spartans] stood aloof
from the war; and by so doing, if I may speak freely, they in fact took part with the Medes".4
Some Greek cities, indeed, had given earth and water, the traditional symbols of submission,5 when ambassadors came from the Great King of Persia in the months before
Xerxes' invasion in 48o,8 and, as G. L. Huxley has shown,7 there is no reason to believe
that Peloponnesian Caryae was not one of them. There is therefore no reason to doubt the
historical basis of Vitruvius' story. It can, however, only regain credence if it can be shown
to harmonise with the regular language of visual metaphor in Greece and the Levant in
the fifth century bc. The image with which Vitruvius is concerned is said to have been
invented as a reaction to Persian political and military activity during the previous two
decades or more. The memory of the Ionian Revolt and the campaigns of 490 and 480/79
will have been very much to the fore when Caryatids of the Vitruvian kind are supposed
to have been first employed in Greece. It is both legitimate and appropriate to investigate
the nature of Achaemenid Persian imagery during this period to see if it can throw any
light on the problem.
4. Hdt., VIII, 73- , ,
5. For a view of the significance - in Persian eyes - ot tne granting oy a vassal 01 eartn ana waier ,
see L. L. Orlin, Athens and Persia ca. 507 bc : a neglected perspective in L. L. Orlin (ed.), Michigan Oriental Studies
in honor of G. G. Cameron , Ann Arbor, 1976, 255-266 ; for an indication of how close even Athenian relations with the
Persians could normally be in the fifth and fourth centuries bc, see A. E. Raubitschek, The treaties between Persia and
Athens, GRBS, V, 1964, 151-159-
6. E.g. the Boeotians, Locrians, Malians and Thessalians (Hdt., IX, 31 ; on the Peloponnese, see Vili, 73).
7. G. L. Huxley, The medism of Caryae, GRBS, VIII, 1976, 29-32.
I. The Achaemenid background

The prevalent idea underlying the whole of Achaemenid public art is the expression
of the authority of the Great King.8 Whether it be the stylised battles between kings and
ferocious beasts, or those between lions and bulls, the power of the king is made clear in
explicit visual metaphors. The groups of struggling animals (e. g. fig. i) which punctuate
the rows of tribute-bearers from all over Darius' empire, irrespective of any possible astrological significance they may possess,9 are clearly intended to strike fear in the heart of any
potential rebel, a concern spelt out in some detail in the Behistun and Naksh-i-Rustam
inscriptions, as well as in Herodotus' narrative.10 The rationale of the lion and bull motif
has been explained by E. Porada in an earlier context than the Achaemenid empire. She
observed that: "the Assyrians regarded lions much like human enemies and were thus
eager to have their triumphs faithfully rendered; the image of the royal beast was then
transformed into the conqueror himself, which meant that the kings identified themselves
with the lion, be it in the metaphorical language of the historical accounts or visually, in
the form of a royal emblem".11 She believes the principle to be applicable to the Persepolis
reliefs,12 a view rightly shared by other scholars.13 M. C. Root has also made the
attractive suggestion that the lion and bull motif on the Apadana "seems to have played the
part of a royal seal on an important document".14

A similar motif, the forepart of a ravening lion confronting a bull protome, occurs
on gold coins (cf. fig. 2, from the same series) placed in fours in the foundation deposits
at the north-east and south-east of the Apadana at Persepolis, together with some Greek
silver coins of Cyprus, Aegina and Abdera.15 These deposits are of crucial importance in
judging the date at which the Apadana was begun. Most scholars have regarded them as
providing termini ante quem for the coins found in them of whenever it was that Darius
8. E.g. M. C. Root, The King and Kingship in Achaemenid Art. Essays on the Creation of an Iconography of an Empire,
Acta Iranica, 3e srie : Textes et Mmoires, 1979 ; C. Nylander, Achaemenid imperial art, in M. T. Larsen (ed.), Power and
Propaganda , a Symposium on Ancient Empires , Copenhagen, 1979, 345"359j esp. 349 : Persepolis... an elaborate statement
of kingship and empire.
9. E.g. E. Herzfeld, Iran in the Ancient East , New York, 1 941, 251 ; R. Ghirshman, Notes iraniennes, Vil : a propos
de Perspolis, Artibus Asiae , XX, 1949, 265-278 ; H. P. L'Orange, Studies on the Iconography of Cosmic Kingship in the
Ancient World , Oslo, 1953, 80 if. ; A. U. Pope, Persepolis as a ritual city, Archaeology X, 1957, 123-130 ; H. Erdemann,
Persepolis, Daten und Deutungen, MDOG XCII, i960, 43-47 ; W. Hartner in W. Hartner and R. Ettinghausen, The
conquering lion, the life-cycle of a symbol, Oriens XVII, 19645 161-164.
10. R. G. Kent, Old Persian Grammar , Texts , Lexicon , New Haven, 1950, 1 16-134 CDB; ; 137-141 CDN).
u.E. Porada, An Assyrian bronze disc, BullMFA XLVIII, 1950, 2-8, as succinctly reported by R. Ettinghausen
in Hartner-Ettinghausen (n. 9), 168.
12. E. Porada, Iran ancien , Paris, 1963, 156-157.
13. E.g. R. Ettinghausen in Hartner-Ettinghausen (n. 9), 168 ; C. Nylander, Al-Beruni and ersepons, Acta iranica 1,
1974, 145-146.
14. Root (n. 8), 236 ; cf. Nylander (n. 8), 348 : 1 he age-old lion and Dull sympiegma wnicn, as a Kind 01 oadge
of Persepolis, occurs in monumental scale 28 times on its faades.
15. E. F. Schmidt, Persepolis II, Chicago, 1957, no, 113-114.
incorporated Thrace into the Persian empire.16 This was linked with Darius' Scythian
expedition, but in all likelihood its date is not relevant to the problem, for Darius' empire
is described on the foundation tablets in the most general terms,17 and the expression
"from India to Sardis" rather than implying that the empire stopped at the latter city may
simply have referred to the most important centre on its western extremity.18 The latest
scholar to have made a detailed study of the sculpture at Persepolis, M. Roaf, thinks that
the "omission [of the Thracians] is not conclusive" and plausibly suggests that "the Apadana
reliefs and the East Door of the Central Building were probably designed and started a
few years before Darius' death in 486".19
This view is wholly correct, in the view of the present writer, but it creates intolerable
tensions in the currently prevailing chronology of ancient coinage, for the lion/bull issues
in the foundation deposits are of a type which is generally supposed to have been first
issued by Croesus of Lydia, a monarch who fell from power in c. 547. They were described
as such by the excavator E. Herzfeld who, however, adds a significant piece of information:
"[the gold coins from the foundation deposits at Persepolis] were all of the same type,
the well-known Croesus coins with heads of lion and bull opposed on the obverse... They
all belong to the lighter series... The only other Croesus coin which I have observed [in
Iran]... also of the light series, came from Hamadan-Agbatana and was probably found
together with another foundation document of Darius".20
The Greek coins included early issues of Aegina and Abdera at the north-east corner,
and Cypriot, of which only a coin of Paphos is identifiable by city, in the south-east.21
These coins have always been considered to possess the haphazard quality of a hoard,22
and no special significance beyond their use as potential chronological guides has ever
been attached to them. It is possible, though, given the highly regular and controlled way
in which Persepolis is planned and decorated,23 that careful thought went into the choice
of the contents of the foundation deposits. Indeed, it is probably the case that careful
thought goes into the foundation deposits of any period.24 The Greek coins are surely
those of states which, like the tribute-bearers on the reliefs, were subject to the Great King
at the time of burial, and the lion/bull coins placed with them serve as warnings against
16. E.g. E. F. Schmidt, Persepolis I, Chicago, 1953, 39 > E. Herzfeld, Notes on the Achaemenid coinage and some
Sasanian mint-names, Transactions of the International Numismatic Congress 1936) London, 1938, 4 > Price and M. Waggoner, Archaic Greek Silver Coinage : the Asyut Hoard, London, 1975, 16 ; H. A. Cahn, Asiut : kritische Bemerkungen zu
einer Schatzfundpublikation, Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau :, LVI, I977j 281-182.
17. Kent (n. 10), 136-137 (DPh).

18. Cf. P. Calmeyer, Zur Genese altiranischer Motive VIII. Die statistische Landcharte des erserreicnes - 1,
Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran , XV, 1982, 124.

19. M. Roaf, The subject peoples on the base 01 the statue 01 JJarius, L/Ursii, lv, 1974a 90-91.
20. E. Herzfeld (n. 16), 414-415.
21. Schmidt (n. 15), no, 113-114 ; iCrC, no. 1789.
22. E.g. both E. S. G. Robinson, l he beginnings ot Acnaemema coinage, i'um. l ,nron.s oui series, avui, y^o,
190, and C. M. Kraay, Archaic and Classical Greek Coins , London, 1976, 32, refer to miscellaneous Greek coins.
23. E.g. Root (n. 8), passim ; M. Roaf, Sculptures and sculptors at Fersepolis, Iran, i, 1983, 1-104.
24. E.g. R. S. Ellis, Foundation Deposits in Ancient Mesopotamia , New Haven, 1968, passim.
rebellion. E. Herzfeld, characteristically, invoked a magical explanation,26 but it is more

likely that practical politics were involved and the states whose coins were included in the
deposits duly informed of the fact.28 The presence of Cypriot coins will perhaps have been
meant to recall the firm and uncompromising way in which the Persians put down revolt in
the island between 499 and 496.27 The Aeginetans were, according to Herodotus, the most
notable28 of the Greek states to give Darius earth and water in 491, which will give a terminus
post for the deposit in which the Aeginetan coin was found, and also provide a date close
to that proposed by M. Roaf.

The coin of Abdera is of interest because its presence provides the claim to Persian
suzerainty over Thrace which was thought to have been lacking in the foundation deposits.
The lion/bull coins no longer have anything to do with Croesus,29 and it makes for a more
satisfactory explanation of the evidence if we attribute all of the lion/bull coins to Darius
and Xerxes. In this way, for example, we can account for the "astonishment" of the excavators of Persepolis at not finding "a single example" of the kind of coin they expected to
find on a Persian site, namely those issues bearing a Persian archer.30 They claimed to
have found no "Achaemenid imperial Darics";31 in fact 17 of the 39 coins they found were
Darics if we allow lion/bull coins such a denomination.32 These gold coins, and the
concomitant silver issues, were made at S ardis; this being the case we can both understand
why Herodotus attributes the invention of a gold and silver coinage to the Lydians,33 and
also explain the change in the weight of the coins from "heavy" to "light" as well as the
change in the ratio of gold to silver from 1:13 to 1:13 1/3. If the "heavy" series represents
the earliest issues of Darius34 then the change to the "light" series must have occurred
between the early teens of the sixth century and c. 490. It was probably introduced as a
25. Herzfeld (n. 16), 413 ; cf. C. Nylander's amusing account of the circumstances surrounding the genesis of
Herzfeld's Now Ruz explanation for the sculptural decoration at Persepolis (n. 8), 348-349.
26. Representatives of the states concerned may even have been present : cf. the presence of 22 subject kings at
the laying of the foundations of Esarhaddon's palace at Nineveh, D. D. Luckenbill, Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia ,
Chicago, 1927, no. 689.

27. Hdt., V, 108-116 : Thus the Cypnots, having been free for one year, were again reduced to servitude.
28. Hdt., VI, 49 : xai xai AivivyjTat .
29. As M. J. Price has already seen in Festschrift Leo Mildenberg, Wetteren, 1984, 21 1-221 . The view that such coins are
Croeseids goes back to E. M. Cousinry (in T. E. Mionnet, Description des mdailles antiques grecques et romaines , suppl. VI,
Paris, 1833, 405, note a) and H. P. Borrell, An inquiry into the early Lydian money, and an attempt to fix the classification
of certain coins to Croesus, Num. Chron.3 II, 1840, 216-223, and its persistence has much to do with the belief, now universally discarded, that the Athos hoard ( IGCH , no. 362) was connected with the digging of the canal in 480 and contained
Darics of Darius or Xerxes (H. P. Borrell, Unedited autonomous and imperial Greek coins, Num. Chron ., VI, 1843-1844,
153 ; E. Babelon, Les Perses achmnides , les satrapes , et les dynastes tributaires de leur empire , Paris, 1893, 1-III ; H. H. Howarth,
The history and coinage of Artaxerxes III, his satraps and dependents, Num. Chron., 4th ser., Ill, 1903, 30-31). The Athenian
coins in the Athos hoard are dated by C. G. Starr to after 400 (Athenian Coinage 480-449 BC , Oxford, 1970, 87).
30. Schmidt (n. 15), no.
31. Ibid.
32. Cf. Herzfeld's observation ([n. 16J, 414-415) regarding the Croesus coin... of the light series probably found
with another foundation tablet of Darius at Ecbatana.
33. Hdt., I, 94.

34. ut. M. V Ickers, 1 he role 01 Darius tne Crreat in the construction 01 the Artemisium at Ephesus, in the Proceedings
of the British Museum Colloquium The archaic temple of Artemis at Ephesus : a reconsideration of the earliest finds , March 1984
(forthcoming).
consequence of the damage wrought by the combined Athenian and Eretrian attack on
Sardis in 499. The mint at Sardis would have had to be re-equipped after the fire, and the
trans-Aegean Greeks, whose economy was based in effect on a silver standard, would be
forced to pay more for their gold. The creation under Darius of what some would regard
as the first real coinage was presumably intended to facilitate the raising and collection of
tribute in the western most parts of his empire.86
2. The " Siphnian " Treasury
When, against all the odds, those Greeks who had not medised in 480 defeated the
might of the Persian empire, they employed some of the imagery the Persians had used,
though with completely different objects in view, namely to demonstrate their escape from
the threat of enslavement and to celebrate their triumph. One of the first monuments to
be built in Greece after the successful repulse of the Persian invasion in 480/479 was the
building generally known as the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi.36 This monument possessed
a continuous frieze after the manner of those at Persepolis, the imagery of which is eminently
suitable as a celebration of Greek victories over the Persians, and in the Gigantomachy
scene the sculptor has placed lions beneath the yoke of one of the gods (fig. 3):37 the symbol
of Persian power is thus neatly represented as itself enslaved. We might well compare here
the two women in Atossa's dream in Aeschylus' Persae (also of the 470s), the one in Persian,
the other in Doric dress, both of whom Xerxes "harnessed to the yoke and put the collar
straps on their necks".38 The animal beneath the yoke in the "Siphnian" Treasury Gigantomachy is a lion, a fact which vividly recalls both the sacrifice of the first Greek captive
taken by the Persians in 480 and Herodotus' explanation: "the man who was slain in this
way was called Leo; and it may be that the name he bore helped him to his fate in some
measure".39 It may be relevant, moreover, to note that the engagement in question took
35. Ibid. ; cf. Id., Early Greek coinage, a reassessment, Num. Chron ., 1985 (forthcoming). On the connection
between coinage and tribute in the Achaemenid empire, see D. Metzler, Ziele und Formen kniglicher Innenpolitik im vorislamischen Iran , Habil.-schr. Mnster, 1977, 12-13.
36. Cf. E. D. Francis and M. Vickers, Signa priscae artis : Eretria and Siphnos, JHS , CHI, 1983, 49-67. It was
assumed there that Herodotus' description of the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi as a match for the richest (fjioia togi
TuXouaicTccTOicjt, : iii, 57) necessarily refers to the external decoration of the building in question, and that the identification
of the most elaborately decorated archaic treasury to have been found at Delphi with Herodotus' Siphnian Treasury is correct.
Ancient values (as opposed to those of the Arts and Crafts movement) being what they were, Herodotus will undoubtedly
have been referring to the bullion value of the contents of the building to which he referred. Notwithstanding the fact that
the ex-Cnidian, and currently the Siphnian Treasury, is the most ornate building to have been found at Delphi, it is only
wishful thinking which necessarily associates it with the building Herodotus describes. Elsewhere (e.g. I, 50-51 ; 92)
Herodotus expatiates on the truly rich holdings at Delphi, but he is primarily concerned with the weight and volume of
objects in gold, electrum and silver. Marble sculpture whould have come very low down in his system of values. Paus., X, 11,
it is true, indicates the approximate location of the actual Siphnian Treasury, but we can be reasonably certain that the
building which has borne that name for the past few decades was the treasury of some other city.
37. PdD , IV/i, pls. 13-14.

38. Aesch. Pers.y 174 if. with Broadhead's commentary.
39. Hdt., VII, 180.
3. Yoked lion attack-
ing a Giant on the
north frieze of the
'Siphnian' Treasury
at Delphi (after FdD).
place between the Thessalian coast40 and the legendary site of the Gigantomachy,41 the
peninsula of Pallene, all the inhabitants of which medised on Xerxes' arrival in the area.42
The Rape of the Tripod by Heracles on the east pediment is probably a reference to the
medism of the Thessalians, who claimed descent from the hero43 (the earliest attested use
of the motif occurred at Delphi and Abae in the later 480s to commemorate the successful
repulse of a Thessalian attack on Delphi).44 The acroterta , in the form of goddesses of Victory,45
are an eminently appropriate post-war ornament, but the most prominent feature of the
building was the presence on the faade of a pair of Caryatids: women supporting architraves - references to the disgrace, in Greek eyes, attendant on medising, on throwing in
one's lot with the Persians rather than fighting for the freedom of Greece.
Although, as C. Nylander has recently emphasised, the Persian yoke was imposed
on subject peoples in a more gentle maimer than were those of their Near Eastern prede40. The engagement involved three Greek ships sailing out of Sciathus and ten Persian from Therma (Hdt., VII,
179-180). It ended when the Athenian ship was beached at the mouth of the Peneus (Hdt, VII, 182).
41. Paus., VIII, 29, i ; Strab., VII, 330, 25, 27.
42. Hdt., VII, 123.
43. E.g. Pind., Pyth.j X, 1 if.
44. Hdt., VIII, 27 ; Paus., X, 13, 4. J. Boardman has seen an earlier representation of the Rape of the Tripod in
Pliny's reference to Scyllis and Dipoenus' group of Apollo, Artemis, Heracles and Athena at Sicyon (Pliny, HN, XXXVI, 9 ;
H. Parke and J. Boardman, The Struggle for the Tripod and the first Sacred War, JHS , LXXVII, 1957, 276-282), but since
Pliny makes no reference to a tripod, it would be unwise to insist on this interpretation.
45. FdD , IV/i, 163-164, pls. 16-17 ; M. Y. Goldberg, Archaic Greek akroteria, AJA, LXXXVI, 1982, 199, 212-213,
has assembled a phalanx of Nike acroteria contemporary with those of the Siphnian Treasury ; they presumably refer to the
pan-Hellenic celebration of victory over the Persians.
10
4. Bull impost-block from Susa,

Louvre (after Rutten and Vagneau).
cessors,46 Achaemenid architectural imagery provides many examples of symbols of subjects
or of defeated enemies being put to work. The impost-blocks of the numerous and lofty
columns in Achaemenid palaces were frequently zoomorphic, and carry a good deal of
metaphorical significance as well as simply supporting the roof. The most common variety
consists of a pair of bull protomes back to back (e.g. fig. 4).47 The bull protomes in question
closely resemble those on the coins attributed above to Darius. If bulls in Achaemenid
imagery really were intended to symbolise subject peoples who had to be kept under control,
then they were an eminently suitable vehicle for expressing the values of the Achaemenid
rgime. Another creature which is employed for impost-blocks is the winged, horned
feline48 which is also, like the bull,49 to be seen being defeated by "Royal heroes" in the
doorways of the Palace of Darius or the Harem of Xerxes at Persepolis.60 Whatever the
precise significance of this creature, it is clear that it is an enemy that requires subjugation.
Impost-blocks exist, too, in the form of conjoined griffins.61 These were creatures which
were the legendary guardians of the Central Asiatic goldfields.52 To represent griffins
enslaved was a graphic way of demonstrating control of the sources of the most precious
46. Nylander (n. 8), 354-35547. E.g. E. von Mercklin, Antike Figuralkapitelle, Berlin, 1962, 27-30, figs. 109, left, no, 114, 120, 127-128 ;
R. Ghirshman, Persia from the Origins to Alexander the Great , London, 1964, figs. 261, 264, 266 ; M. Rutten and A. Vagneau,
Encyclopdie photographique de Vart , ii (Paris, 1936), 49 (whence fig. 4).
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
Von Mercklin (n. 47), loc. cit., fig. 125.

E.g. G. Walser, Persepolis , Fnbourg, 1981, figs. 90, 92.
Walser (n. 49), fig. 93, cf. Root (n. 8), pls. 16 a and 28 a.
Von Mercklin (n. 47), loc. cit., fig. 126 ; Ghirshman (n. 47), fig. 267.
L. I. Albaum and B. Brentjes, Wchter des Goldes , Berlin, 1972 ; cf. [Aesch.], PV, 803-806.
11
of metals. It goes without saying that gold figured large in the Persian empire. Achaemenid
gold jewellery in the form of griffins is still extant: notably the bracelets from the Oxus
Treasure now in the British Museum.58 It is interesting to note that similar bracelets are
being carried by members of the Lydian delegation on the Persepolis frieze.54 Lydia too
was an important Persian source of gold;58 hence, no doubt, the griffins on the finials of the
Lydians' bracelets. The "Royal hero", moreover is also to be seen in conflict with griffins
on Achaemenid palace reliefs.56 Although all this may seem to be somewhat removed from
Caryatids, the basic point should be clear: the employment of Caryatids in post-Persian
War architecture such as the "Siphnian" Treasury is a conscious continuation of an
Achaemenid Persian tradition, but with the values expressed wholly reversed. Not only
are the women of Caryae made to stand in eternal disgrace, but the echinus of the one
extant capital is carved with lions attacking a stag, another Achaemenid image of power.57
Its employment in a conspicuously servile position can only have been intended to be ironic.
3. Post-war wealth and anti-Persian propaganda

Although scholars of the Achaemenid world are aware of the fact that we only possess
the detritus of antiquity - ruined buildings, scraps of bronze, broken statues, and pottery,
for the most part - this is not as yet a commonplace for scholars who work on the material
remains of ancient Greece. It is accepted that the Achaemenid empire was enormously
wealthy, but that the material evidence has long since gone into the melting-pot. The low
status of pottery in the Achaemenid empire, moreover, is acknowledged; it was a mark of
the displeasure of the Great King to be forced to drink from earthenware vessels.58 The
common view of Greece after the Persian Wars is that it was not a wealthy place; the great
days of Athens had been before the war.59 Life was supposedly lived on a pottery, not a
silver or gold, standard; indeed, we are told that "it is unlikely that any plate was made in
Greece for domestic use throughout the fifth century".60 Such views are not borne out by
the ancient sources which are unanimous in declaring that Greece, and especially Athens,
enjoyed immense prosperity in the years following the Persian Wars.61 In addition to
53. O. M. Dalton, The Treasure of the Oxus , 3rd edn., London, 1964, 32-34, no. 116; British Museum, Jewellery
Through 7,000 Years , London, 1976, 87, no. 109, colour pl. 8.
54. = Delegation VI ; ci. K. JJ. Barnett, rersepoiis, Iraq , AIA, 1957, 60-69 ; Koai ;n. 19;, 126-127 Cn* 23)> 53
55. E.g. Soph. Phil., 409 ; Ant., 1036, where electrum from Sardis is coupled with gold from India - which in
turn recalls the Foundation Charter from Susa (Kent [n. 10], 142-144 [ DSf ]) on which Darius states that gold for the building
came from Sardis and Bactria. An extensive metallurgical complex has been found at Sardis : G. M. A. Hanfmann and
J. C. Waldbaum, The nth and 12th campaigns at Sardis (1968, 1969), BASOR, CXCIX, 1970, 16-28.
56. Walser (n. 49), figs. 94-96.
57. FdD, IV/i, pl. 20.
58. Ath., XII, 464 a, citing Ctesias.
59. E.g. C. G. Starr, Athenian Coinage 480-449 BC, Oxford, 1970, 81 : Athens was not a wealthy state in the 470s
and 460s repeated, ibid. ; New specimens of Athenian coinage 480-449 bc, Num. Chron., CXLII, 1982, 133.
60. D. E. Strong, Greek and Roman Gold and Silver Plate, London, 1966, 74.
61. E.g. Ar. Equ ., 814 : Themistocles filled the city to the brim, though he had found her empty ; DS, XII, 3-4 :
[after the Persian Wars] every Greek city was filled with such abundance that everyone was amazed at the change for
12
native silver mines, there were vast amounts of booty won from the Persians at Marathon,
Salamis, Plataea, Mycale, and especially the Eurymedon. While the acceptance of Persian
gold as a bribe would quickly lay a Greek open to a charge of medising, no such taint was
attached to booty won on the field of battle, or simply washed ashore.62 In post-war Athens
the wealthy had lavish silver and gold dinner services made by fashionable silversmiths;
all we have are the cheap down-market surrogates made by potters to satisfy a less wealthy
clientele. The forms and the colour schemes63 of the extant pots appear to repeat those of the
silver and gold (and ivory)64 vessels made for wealthy patrons. The same is true of the imagery
employed; many of the scenes designed in the immediate post-war period as well as for
decades thereafter strike a constant and consistent note of triumph. The defeat of the Persians
at Marathon came to be regarded as Athens' finest hour and just as Athenian orators never
ceased to dwell on their city's military achievements, whether explicitly or by means of
mythical analogies,65 so too the silver designers, a pale shadow of whose work has survived
on pottery,66 proclaimed their city's victories in the imagery - frequently mythical - which
they created for their aristocratic customers.

The worst insult that could be directed at a Persian was to call him a woman;67 hence
battles against Amazons. The Persians had acted with impiety in destroying the Athenians'
most sacred shrines: show them as Giants who had defied the gods and were punished by
them. The Persians had behaved in an utterly uncivilised way in destroying the olive trees,
the staple crop of Attica: show them as Centaurs, creatures to which the Persians are supposed
to have likened themselves,68 preferably as Centaurs being bested by Greeks. The Persians
were orientals, and so were the Trojans. Both had been defeated after wars which had
lasted, give or take a few months, ten years. Recall the fact in Trojan War scenes on vases,
whether metal or fictile. Heracles was the hero of Marathon par excellence ,69 and was
celebrated as such in Athenian art,70 although in the 470s he came to share an anti-Persian
role with Theseus.71
the better. For the next fifty years, Greece enjoyed great progress towards prosperity, and the greatest artists are mentioned
as having flourished at that time... ; cf. Ath., XII, 553 e ; [Arist.] Ath. Pol ., XXIV, 1 ; Aristid., Panath ., 143-144.
62. Cf. the fortune thus collected by Ameinocles the Magnesian : Hdt., VII, 190.
63. M. Vickers, Les vases peints : image ou mirage ?, in F. Lissarague and F. Thelamon, Image et cramique grecque.
Actes du Colloque de Rouen , 25-26 novembre 1982 , Rouen, 1983, 29-42 ; Id., Artful crafts : the influence of metalwork on
Athenian painted pottery, JHS , CV, 1985, forthcoming.
64. Id. The influence of exotic materials on Attic white-ground pottery, in H. A. G. Brijder (ed.), Proceedings of the
Symposium Ancient Greek and related pottery , Amsterdam 1984 (forthcoming).
65. Cf. N. Loraux, L'invention d'Athnes. Histoire de V oraison funbre dans la cit classique , Paris, 1981.
66. Vickers (nn. 63 and 64).
67. E.g. Hdt., IX, 107 ; cf. VIII, 88 and IX, 20.
68. Cf. Xen., Cyr . IV, 3, 17-22.
69. E.g. Hdt., VI, 108, 113 ; Paus., I, 15, 3 ; Vickers, 1983 (n. 63), 29-30.
70. Id., Dates, methods and icons, in C. Brard (ed.), Actes du Colloque international Images et socits en Grce
ancienne : V iconographie comme mthode d'analyse , Lausanne, 1984 (forthcoming).
71. Cf. E. D. Francis and M. Vickers, review of F. Brommer, Theseuss die Taten des griechischen Helden in der
antiken Kunst und Literatur , Darmstadt, 1982, in JHSy CIV, 1984, 267-268 ; E. D. Francis, The Waynflete Lectures 1983:
Reflections of Persia in Greek Art and Literature (forthcoming).
13
5. The throne of Zeus on the
east frieze of the 'Siphnian'
Treasury at Delphi (after FdD).
To employ Dionysian scenes was another way of saying "we beat the Persians".
The Dionysian metaphor can be found, and is explained, in writers later than the fifth
century. The most telling passage occurs near the beginning of Plutarch's life of Demetrius
Poliorcetes: "[Demetrius was] in his hours of leisure a most agreeable companion; at his
table, and every species of entertainment, of all princes the most delicate; and yet, when
business called, nothing could equal his activity, his diligence and despatch. In this respect
he tried to resemble Dionysus most of all the gods, since he was not only terrible in war,
but knew how to terminate war with peace, and turn it with the happiest address to the joys
and pleasures which that inspires".72 This well encapsulates, and goes a long way towards
explaining the "deux tats contradictoires",78 the "ambiguous nature of Dionysus",74 the
ambivalence which commentators have noted in the image of Dionysus and his attendants
72. Plut., Dem. 2.
73. P. Vidal-Naquetj Le chasseur noir , Paris, 1983, 367.

74. A. Heinrichs, Greek and Roman glimpses of Dionysos, in C. Houser, Dionysos and his Circle , Cambridge, Mass.,
1979* 3.
14
6. The throne of Darius I at
Naksh-i-Rustam (after Schmidt).
that we receive in Athenian art and literature. In the Bibliotheca attributed to Apollodorus
we learn that Dionysus is supposed to have rendered mad the women of Argos and Thebes.76
These are the two most important Greek cities to have medisd in 480 (or, in the case of
Argos, remained neutral - which, however, was regarded as being tantamount to medism).78
It is likely that whenever we see maenads, women or even goddesses being insulted by satyrs,
that reference is being made to the unhellenic behaviour of the two cities which allowed
Athens to suffer so much during the Persian invasion. That Dionysus was indeed considered
to have played a part in the events of 480/479 is clear from Xenophon's Symposium where
Demeter and Kore are said to have marched with Dionysus against the barbarians.77 It is
presumably for reasons such as these that satyrs - Dionysus' henchpersons - are shown
attacking females on the "Siphnian" Treasury. They do so on the drum above the head of
the extant Caryatid78 and also on the arm of the throne of Zeus in the Assembly of the Gods
on the east frieze (fig. 5).79 The arm of Zeus' throne is in fact supported by the female who
is the object of the satyr's attentions. The gesture she employs: bearing the weight on her
75. Apoll., Bibi. III, 5, 2.
76. Cf. Hdt>, VIII, 73.
77. Xen., Symp., VIII, 40 ; cf. Hdt., VIII, 65 ; Plut., Them., 15 ; Polyaen., III, 11, 2. A useful corpus of relevant
images has been assembled by F. Lissarague (Dionysos s'en va-t-en guerre, in Brard [n. 70]). The combination of Dionysiac,
military and mystic elements in the Grand Procession of Ptolemy Philadelphus coupled with the close association apparent
there between Dionysus and Alexander the Great (Athen., V, 197 c-203 b ; E. E. Rice, The Grand Procession of Ptolemy
Philadelphus , Oxford, 1983, esp. p. 45-115) suggests the employment of the same kind of imagery.
78. FdDs IV/i, pl. 19.
79. Ibid., pl. hors texte 9, 4, pls. 11-12 ; cf. Homolle's observation (p. 100) : [la mnade] joue presque le rle d'une
Caryatide . This throne is not mentioned by A. Schmidt-Colinet, Antike Sttzfiguren, Diss. Cologne, 1977, or E. Schmidt,
Geschichte der Karyatide , Wrzburg, 1982, who do, however, have useful overviews of Near Eastern examples, p. 11-18
and 33-47 respectively. The Caryatid on Zeus' throne recalls the allusion to Caryatids supporting a roof with their hands
recorded by Athenaeus (VI, 241 d-e), a motif to be seen on a relief in Naples (N.M. inv. 6715). The inscriptions on this
relief are now usually dismissed as forgeries (cf. Schmidt, 203, n. 608) on the odd grounds that they confirm Virtruvius'
testimony.
15
head and on the tips of the fingers of her outstretched hand, recalls those of the "decidedly
political representation [s]"80 of differentiated subject peoples who bear up the platforms
on the Tombs of Darius (fig. 6) and Xerxes.81 Darius had declared on his tomb inscription:
"the man who co-operates, him according to his co-operative action, him thus do I reward";82
the imagery of the "Siphnian" Treasury declares in effect: "the man (or woman) who
collaborates, him (or her) thus do I hold up to eternal disgrace".
The one idea which appears to underlie all human and animal figures used to support
architectural members is service. This may be the service of a slave, of a serf, or simply of a
servant. It is frequently impossible to be wholly certain of the precise status of the figures
employed, although the meaning of Near Eastern examples, from Tell-Halaf83 onwards, is
reasonably clear. In the Graeco-Roman world, there are many examples of Caryatids whose
rle is evidently that of temple-servants. The figures supporting archaic perirrhanteria, for
example, seem to carry a purely religious connotation, as presumably do the figures which
once played an architectural rle at Eleusis. These have rightly been interpreted as kanephoroi
in the service of the Eleusinian cult.84 Some literary references to Caryatids, moreover,
make it clear that the word was used in a non-Vitruvian sense to describe Laconian girls
dancing in the service of Artemis Caryatis,85 and W. H. Plommer has attempted to read
Vitruvius' aetiology in this sense.86 This aspect of Caryatids will be discussed below (p. 27).
Vitruvius followed his story of the origin of Caryatids with a description of the Persian
Stoa erected at Sparta from the proceeds of the booty from Plataea. Although this building
is no longer visible, its existence in antiquity is not in doubt for Pausanias the periegete
saw it in the second century ad.87 The roof of this building appeared to be supported by
"likenesses of their prisoners, dressed in rich, barbaric clothes".88 The metaphor is obvious,
but Vitruvius spells it out: "both to make enemies tremble for fear of what Spartan bravery
could achieve, and to cause their fellow-citizens, catching sight of this example of valour,
to hold their heads high and remain ready to defend their freedom".89 Even the Spartans
and Athenians, however, behaved correctly towards the Persians when it suited them to do
so90. Nevertheless, the prevalent ideology in Greece through the rest of the fifth century
remained anti-Persian to the extent that a charge of medism was a serious reflection on an
individual's or a state's Hellenic credentials.91
80. Root (n. 8), 152.
81. Ibid., pls. 13 and 14.

82. Kent (n. 10), 140 (DNb).
83. For a full bibliography, see Schmidt-Colinet (n. 79), 101, n. 51.
84. Schmidt (n. 79), 102.
85. Ibid ., 15-16, nos. 5-7.

86. Plommer (n. 1), 97-102.
87. Paus., III, li, 3- ,
88. Vitr., I, i, 6 ; cf. J. J. Coulton, The Architectural Development of the Cr reek toa, uxiora, 1970, 39.
89. Vitr., I, 5.
90. Cf. Raubitschek (n. 5).
91. Cf. J. L. Myres, JVlTjeiv, (jltjkjjjlc; , in Creek roetry ana L.ije : assays presented iu kjuucl
his. 70th Birthday , Oxford, 1936, 97-105.
16
4- The Erechtheum: date of construction

It is against such a background that we should see the Caryatids of the Erechtheum
on the Athenian Acropolis. The Erechtheum was erected at a time when the Athenians
had been at war with the Spartans for many years. In former times the Spartans had been
the Athenians' allies against the Persians, but the two states gradually became estranged to
the extent that war between them broke out in 43 1 . Although the Caryatids of theErechtheum
have never in modern times been interpreted in political terms,92 they do in fact constitute
forthright Athenian criticism of their Spartan enemy, criticism which is, moreover, couched
in terms which are wholly in keeping with the tradition regarding the architectural use of
Caryatids recorded by Vitruvius. If this is correct, then it will also be possible to pin-point
the date of the construction of the Erechtheum within narrower limits than has hitherto
been possible.
There is considerable uncertainty at present regarding the precise dates within which
the Erechtheum was constructed. A long inscription, dated beyond question to 409/8 bc,
describes in detail how much of the building had been completed by that date, and how
much needed to be done. It was reported that "on the porch adjoining the Cecropium the
upper surfaces of the ceiling blocks over the maidens, 13 feet long, 5 feet wide, needed to
be dressed".93 In other words, the Caryatids were in position by then, and we know for
certain that the Erechtheum was completed before the end of the fifth century.94 The date
at which the building was begun is, however, far more problematical. At the end of the most
exhaustive discussion to date, J. M. Paton had to conclude that "in the light of our present
knowledge the year in which the Erechtheum was begun cannot be definitely determined".95
A major problem has been that there is no indubitable reference in the surviving
literary or epigraphic record to the Erechtheum before 409/8, so that any proposal for a
starting date has had to be based on circumstantial arguments. W. Drpfeld believed that
the Erechtheum was begun before 431 on the grounds that it was unlikely that the Athenians
undertook any new work during the Peloponnesian War.96 A. Michaelis' proposal for work
having commenced after the Peace of Nicias in 421 has, however, been widely adopted,97
92. For a recent discussion of modern interpretations, see Schmidt (n. 79), 82-84.
93. IG Ia 372 (= IG Ia 474), 83-92, tr. G. P. Stevens and J. M. Paton, The Erechtheum3 Cambridge, Mass., 1972, 290.
Plommer (n. 1), 101 has suggested that the description of the Erechtheum figures as korai is enough to prevent any connection
with Vitruvius' Caryatids. Compare, however, the way in which the figures in the Erechtheum frieze are, as P. Wolters
saw Zeitschrift fr bildenden Kunst , NF VI, 1895, 37 ' cf. H. Drerup, Zur Bezeichnung Karyatide , MWPr , 1975-1976, 12 ;
Schmidt (n. 79), 194, n. 463, only described in the most general way : The man near the altar, the woman with the child, etc.
The inscriptions in question were legal documents, not religious or artistic treatises.
94. Stevens-Paton (n. 93), 278.
95. Stevens-Paton (n. 93), 455.
96. W. Drpfeld, Der ursprngliche Plan des Erechtheions, AM, XXIX, 1904, 101-107 ; for references to other relevant articles, see Stevens-Paton (n. 93), 455, n. 1.
97. A. Michaelis, Die Zeit des Neubaus des Foliastempels in Athen, AMS XIV, 1889, 362-363 ; W. Judeich, Topo-
graphie von Athen3 2nd edn., Munich, 1931, 272 ; W. B. Dinsmoor, The Architecture of Ancient Greece , 3rd edn., London,
1950, 188 ; J. Travlos, Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Athens , London, 1971, 213.
17
2
so that H. Lauter could recently speak of the Caryatids having been designed around or
soon after 420, and completed at the latest by 415.98 For the assumption is always made
that the 409/8 inscriptions imply that work was resumed after a break." There is, however,
no evidence for this and the assumption is only sustained by the belief that work began after
the Peace of Nicias and of necessity came to an end after the Spartan occupation of Decelea
in the spring of 413 or the Sicilian disaster in the autumn of the same year.100
Another body of evidence which has been adduced to support a starting date of soon
after 421 is what remains of Euripides' play Erectheus. The discovery of new fragments in
the 1960s gave rise to a series of studies in which arguments were put forward in support
of "421 or slightly earlier",101 423, 102 and 422103 for the year in which the Erectheus was
performed. Athena seems to allude in the play to the construction of the Erechtheum,104
but scholars have disagreed as to whether the reference is to a building on which construction
has already begun105 or on which construction is still imminent.106 The usual view that the
Erechtheum was probably begun soon after 421 was partly responsible for directing
scholars' attentions to a date in the late 20s for the Erectheus. Another contributory factor
was the belief that a quotation from the Erectheus made by Plutarch in the context of an
account of foreign visitors to the City Dionysia in 422 necessarily implies that the play
was performed then. The words which Plutarch quotes are of a proverbial nature,107 and
what positive evidence there is combines to suggest that the performance of the Erectheus
took place rather later than 422/1. Aristophanes makes two references by way of parody
to the Erectheus in plays which were performed in 411: the Lysistrata 108 and the
Thesmophoriazusae.109 As W. M. Calder has observed: "in 412 Aristophanes had apparently
been reading Erectheus ".110 May Aristophanes not have heard the play for the first time in
that year? If a case can be made for the construction of the Erechtheum having started
about that time, then a later date than currently accepted for the Erectheus seems to be called
for.
It is possible that the plot of the Erectheus , which dealt with the repulse of a Thracian
98. H. Lauter, Die Koren des Erechtheion, Antike Plastik , XVI, 1976, 40.
99. E.g. Patn in Stevens-Paton (n. 93), 453.
100. Paton (n. 93), 453-454101. C. Austin, De nouveaux fragments de FErechthe d'Euripide, Recherches de papyrologie IV, 1967, 17.
102. C. Austin, Nova fragmenta Euripidea in papyris reperta , Berlin, 1968, 22 ; M. Treu, Der Euripideische
Erechtheus als Zeugnis seiner Zeit, Chiron , I, 1971, 115-131.
103. W. M. Calder III, The date of Euripides Erectheus , GRBS , X, 1969, 147-156 ; C. W. Clairmont, Euripides
Erectheus and the Erechtheum, GRBS , XII, 1971, 485-495.
104. Pap. Sorb. 2328 (= Austin [n. 102], no. 65), 90-91.
105. Austin (n. 101), 59.

106. Clairmont (n. 103), 490. Calder (n. 103) judges it inadvisable to decide one way or the other.
107. He speaks of cobwebs growing on a spear : Plut., Mc., IX, 7 (= Eur., Fr., 369 [Nauck2]) ; cf. Austin (n. 102),
no. 60. For the proverb, cf. Theoc., XVI, 96-97. Austin (n. 101), 17, n. 1 is not altogether confident that Plutarch's quotation
enforces a date c. 421.
108. Ar., Lys., 1135 (= Eur., Fr., 363 [Nauck2]) ; cf. Austin (n. 102), 30, n. ad no. 54.
109. Ar., Thesm., 120 parodies Eur., Fr., 370 (Nauck2) ; cf. Austin (n. 102), 32, n. ad no. 64.
no. Calder (n. 103), 151.
18
invasion of Attica, may have had a particular relevance in 412. If tragic performances
really were intended "to purge the emotions by means of pity and fear",111 then such a
plot may well be associated with the atrocity carried out at Mycalessus in Boeotia by a band
of Thracian mercenaries the Athenians had decided not to employ for reasons of economy.
On their way home, these Thracians had acted with the utmost brutality, even killing children
in a school.112 "No calamity more deplorable occurred during the war", according to
Thucydides;113 if the Athenians wished to distance themselves from an event for which
they were indirectly responsible, to represent the Thracians as traditional enemies might
have been a very effective dramatic device. A reference to xaxoi in the Erectheus ( ap . fr. 362
[Nauck2] 29 if.) has been taken to allude to Cleon (d. 422);114 there was, however, no shortage
of xaxoi at Athens in 412.

Whatever the precise date at which work on the Caryatids of the Erechtheum was
begun, it is a cause for no little surprise that hardly anyone in modern times has ever associated them with the Lysistrata .U5 Whether Caryatids were to be seen on the Acropolis from
before 431, from c. 420, or only from 412, they will surely have given Aristophanes the ida
for a play whose central theme is the occupation by women of the Acropolis; and if
Aristophanes preferred new jokes to old, then 412 would appear to be the most appropriate
candidate of the three. Before they were raised into position, the Erechtheum Caryatids
will have stood around on the Acropolis in public view and will doubtless have been the
objects of precisely the kind of crude remark addressed to the Spartan, Corinthian and
Theban women early in Aristophanes' play: "and here's our lovely Spartan. Hello, Lampito
dear. Why darling, you're simply ravishing! Such a blemishless complexion - so clean, so
out-of-doors! And will you look at that figure - the pink of perfection" - and "what unbe-
lievably beautiful bosoms . . Ismenia the Theban is referred to with knowing nudges
in the context of "picturesque Boiotia: her verdant meadows, her fruited plain ... her
sunken garden where no grass grows. A cultivated country", while the Corinthian is said
to "hail from over by Corinth, but her kinfolk's quality, mighty big back there" - to which
the answer comes, "she's mighty by back here".116 Jocking apart, the Caryatids share one
characteristic which is distinctly un-Athenian, namely their hair-styles. This, strangely,
has never been the subject of comment for, given their position, no one has ever thought
of these ladies as anything other than Athenian. And yet their coiffures, consisting of thick
braids above and massive tresses below (fig. 7), 117 are quite unlike those of Athenian women
hi. Arist., Poet. , VI, 2.
112. Thuc.j VII, 27 ; 29-30.
113. Thuc., VII, 30, ad fin.
114. Treu (n. 102), 130-131.
115. I he only scholar to do so seems to be Douglass rarker who, when translating the scene {Lys., 422 n.; where
the Proboulos encourages his men to use crowbars to break into the Acropolis, makes him say : I'll jack these women
back on their pedestals. Lysistrata's response (431) : ^px0^1 Y<*P auTO(i.dcT7) conjures up an image of the kind of automata described by Homer (//., XVIII, 376).
116. Ar., Lys.y 78 if. (trans. Douglass Parker).
117. E.g. Lauter (n. 98), pls.
19
7. The hair of an Erechtheum
Caryatid (after Lauter).
we see on vase-paintings. Even the kanephoroi of the Parthenon frieze who are sometimes
compared to the Caryatids118 have their hair arranged differently. The closest parallels are
to be found outside Athens, notably on bronzes thought to be of Peloponnesian origin

(fig. 8).ua Other contemporary references in the Lysistrata are well known. D. M. Lewis
has argued persuasively that Lysistrata herself is based on Lysimache, the Priestess of
Athena Polias, a redoubtable lady who held the position for more than sixty years.120
Myrrhine was the name not only of Lysistrata's accomplice, but of the Priestess of Nike
at the time the play was performed.1*1 It has also been noted that the name of Lampito, the
Spartan woman in the play, is the same as the mother of the Spartan king Agis who in 411
was in command of the allied occupation force at Decelea.122

The occupation of Decelea in the spring of 413 was, indeed, the most serious setback
the Athenians had received during the whole course of the Peloponnesian War. All the
results which Alcibades had foretold to the Spartans came true: "the whole stock of the
country will fall into your hands. The slaves will come over to you of their own accord;
what there is besides will be seized by you. The Athenians will be deprived of the revenues
which they obtain from the silver mines of Laurium, and of all the profits which they make
by the land or by the law courts: above all, the customary tribute will fail; for their allies,
118. E.g. by M. Robertson, A History of Greek Art, Cambridge, 1975, 346.
119. E.g. L. O. Congdon, Caryatid Mirrors of Ancient Greece , Mainz, 1981, n08 19, 31, 34. On Spartan conservatism
in general, see Thuc., I, 70. Cf. Tim., Pers ., 206-240 Page.
120. D. M. Lewis, Notes on Attic inscriptions (II), ABSA , L, 1955, 1-12 ; cf. J. K. Davies, Athenian Propertied
Families , Oxford, 1971, 170 (4549).
121. Lewis (n. 120), loc. cit.
122. Cf. H. J. Newiger, War and peace in the comedy of Aristophanes, YCS, XXVI, 1980, 235, n. 24 ; RE, XII,
1925, 580 s.v. Lampito (Lenschau).
20
8. Back view of a Peloponne-
sian bronze mirror stand,
Boston MFA (after Congdon).
when they see that you are now carrying on the war in earnest, will not mind them".128
In the event, "more than 20,000 slaves escaped, some of them artisans",124 and everything
had to be imported at great cost. To compound the Athenians' difficulties, news came later
in 413 of the disastrous fate of the expedition to Syracuse. A programme of drastic public
spending cuts was instituted, and a board of ten probouloi set up.125 The proboulos in the
Lysistrata was one of the council of ten to whom the constitution had been surrendered.
The probouloi were doubtless chosen with regard to their general trustworthiness, and they
do not appear to have been obliged to make a permanent record of their actions (or perhaps
they were, but rendered their accounts on less expensive wooden panels). At all events their
brief rgime, like the "hidden life" of the Erechtheum, is remarkable for an almost complete
lack of any epigraphic evidence.

Although the probouloi were committed to cutting down on public spending, their
period of office witnessed the expenditure of the 1,000 talents which had been put
aside in 431 against the day when Athens should be beset by the kind of dangers which
123. Thuc., VI, 91.
124. Thuc., VII, 27.
125. Thuc., VIII, I.
21
threatened in 412.126 Chios had revolted and Athens' remaining allies were likely to
rise as well; as a direct result a decree was passed allowing the 1,000 talents to be used.
The only items on which we hear money being spent are ships, but is it no too much to
assume that the goddess was given her share - a tithe - if only as a thank-offering for having
kept the money safe for so long? The cost of the Parthenon has been estimated as somewhere
between 500 and 800 talents,127 and in view of temple costs elsewhere,128 100 talents is not
a surprising figure for the Erechtheum.
If the Erechtheum was begun in 412, then several problems- not least Vitruvius'
explanation of the origin of Caryatids- can be resolved. It is clear that a major preoccupation
of the Athenians in 412 and succeeding years was the danger that the Persians might be
encouraged once more to take an active interest in Greek afais. This was no idle fear,
and was fuelled in no small way by the fact that in 412/11 the Spartans made three treaties
with the Barbarian,129 in the second of which explicit reference is made to its solemnisation
by means of libations, spondcd. D. Al. Lewis has observed in this context that spondoi
generally implies the termination of hostilities, and it is possible that someone has woken
up to the fact that Sparta and Persia have been at war with one another for seventy years".130
Although the Spartans had only medised in order to gain a temporary financial advantage
over the Athenians, voices were raised in criticism even on their own side. Lichas, son of
Arcesilaus, took great exception to the two treaties which had been made at the time he
spoke: "for the Great King ... to claim power over the countries which [the Spartans']
ancestors had formerly held was monstrous. If either treaty was carried out, the inhabitants
of all the islands, of Thessaly, of Locris, and of all Hellas, as far as Boeotia, would again
be reduced to slavery; instead of giving the Hellenes freedom, the Lacedaemonians would
be imposing upon them the yoke of Persia".131 The prospect of their two traditional enemies
acting in concert was a cause of great concern at Athens, a concern which was manifested
in a graphic way in the persons of the Caryatids of the Erechtheum. Vitruvius explanation-that Caryatids were employed by architects in order to recall the punishment meted
out to the womenfolk of a Peloponnesian city which had medised - now makes good sense.
The Erechtheum Caryatids will have carried a powerful political message, to the effect that
the Spartans were behaving in a manner which betrayed everything a Greek should stand
for.132
126. Thuc., VIII, 15 ; Philoch., FGrH , III, F 138.

127. ML, p. 165.
128. Cf. J. J. Coulton, Greek Architects at Work , London, 1977, 12.
129. Thuc., VIII, 18 ; 37 ; 58. See further, P. J. Rhodes, A Commentary on tne Aristotelian siinenaion rouwu,
Oxford, 1981, 369.
130. D. M. Lewis, Sparta and Persia , Leiden, 1977, 93 gating Ln. 50j, iva. /'mii, t' peace ireaiy uctwccu oF<uia an
Persia, Rivista storica dell'antichit IV, 1974 55-63)-
131. Thuc., VIII, 43. /a

132. It is now possible to understand another Aristophanic parody o Eurpides urectneus : Tp lo ou au v ^.,
Fr ., 576 Kock) for euyo -rpiroxpOevov (Eur., Fr., 357 Nauck2 [= Austin (n. 102), no. 47]), and consequently to narrow
down ., the date of the performance of the Horae ( 420-411 , Calder [n. 103], 151). For an example of the explicitly symbolical
use of sculpture in classical Athens, see the description of I so crates' tomb at [Plut.] Mor., 838 c.
22
Faithful, and more complete, copies of the Erechtheum Caryatids exist which show
that the latter once carried phialai ,133 the implements necessary for pouring libations,
without which a treaty was not complete. These libation bowls are adorned with a series
of acorns, a motif which can be paralleled on extant phialai . There may be a pun on the
word xpoov which can mean "any kind of nut", and there is probably a reference to their
presence in the sexual banter about acorns in the Lysistrata.1M It is, moreover, likely that
reference is being made to the fact that the inhabitants of Caryae were of Arcadian stock:
"[Caryae] lay in the marches of Arcadia in land over which for centuries Sparta was hardpressed to exert her authority".135 The eating of acorns was proverbially associated with
the simplest imaginable way of life, and from the earliest times the practice was ascribed to
the Arcadians in particular.136 The presence of acorns on what were doubtless intended to
be gold phialai may have been intended to provide an extravagant contrast with the Great
King's well-known luxurious habits (which included the consumption of oil made from a
fruit known as the Persian nut - xpuoc T Ilspcrix - apparently, however, a walnut rather
than an acorn).137 It is possible, too, that the symbolism is connected with that of the series
of heads of Scythians and blacks - both participants in the Persian armies which invaded
Greece - known from phialai elsewhere.138 It may even be possible to associate the six
Erechtheum Caryatids with the six Spartan invasions of Attica, of which the occupation
of Decelea under Lampito's son was the latest and most damaging.139 Numerology may
not be welcome academic fare today, but it had its place in ancient Greece.140 The very
position of the Caryatids, too, actually standing within the ruins of a building destroyed by
the Persians141 can scarcely have been unintentional. Indeed, not very much later Sophocles
was to link the severity of the Persian and Spartan invasions of Attica in the dipus
Coloneus ,142
The appropriate imagery of the Caryatids is not the only reason for believing that
the Erechtheum was begun in 412. The building displays certain features which suggest
that it was both designed and built at a time of economic stringency, the 100 talents notwith133. E. Schmidt, Die Kopien der Erechtheionkoren, Antike Plastik , XIII, 1973, pls. 19-21, 26.
134. LSJ s. v. xapuov ; cf. Ath., II, 52 a, Attic and other writers agree in calling all hard-shelled fruits carya ,
and the [cpiXa]... xpaa xapucoT, Inscr. Dlos , 298 A 138 (and Athen., XI, 502 b). Acorn banter : Ar., Lys., 407-413 ;
cf. M. Vickers, Scythian Treasures in Oxford , Oxford, 1979, 42.
135. Huxley (n. 7), 31.

136. Proverb : Zenob., II, 4. Arcadians : Hdt., I, 66 ; Apoll., Rhod., IV, 264 ; Aelian, VH III, 39 ; cf. B. Gatz,
Weltalter , goldene Zeit und sinnverwandte Vorstellungen , Spudasmata , XVI, Hildesheim, 1967, 162.
137. Ath., II, 67 a.

138. For a well-illustrated discussion, see D. von Bothmer, A gold libation bowl, BullMMA , n.s. XXI, 1962-1963,
154-166.
139. The first, in 431 : Thuc., II, 18-23 i the second, in 430 : Thuc., II, 47, 55, 57, 59 ; the third, in 429 : Thuc.,
II* 93-94 i the fourth, in 428 : Thuc., Ill, 1 ; the fifth, in 425 : Thuc., IV, 2 ; the sixth, in 413 : Thuc., VII, 19, 27-28,
VIII, 4, 69-71, 98. Dr. Lewis compares Hdt., V, 76 for similar score-keeping.
140. Two examples from among many : Horn., II. II, 311-329 ; Philostr. VA 1, 22.
141. See e.g. Travlos (n. 97), 146, fig. 198. Cf. the view that Alexander burnt Persepolis in revenge for Xerxes
destruction of the Athenian Acropolis : Arrian III, 18, 11-12.
142. Soph., OC, 694-706.
23
9. Plan of the Erechtheum
and the opisthodomus
of the Temple of Athena
Polias (after Dinsmoor).
standing. The first and most obvious indications are the plan and the scale. The building
of which it was the successor and substitute was the Temple of Athena Polias, largely
destroyed by the Persians in 480. Normally, a new temple would have been built over the
foundations of an earlier one, but the decision appears to have been taken to preserve the
surviving portion of the Athena Polias temple and to build a smaller temple to the north
(fig 9).143 This looks like a decision taken in the interests of economy. The older building
still served a useful purpose - as a Treasury - and it would have been wasteful to demolish
it. In real estate terms, the older temple covered about 990 m2, the new one about 370 m2.
The new building will thus have been more than 21/2 times smaller in plan than the old,
and the volumetric discrepancy will have been even greater.

There are signs that economies were made in the materials employed on the building.
Only the east door, which led to the principal shrine, was given a bronze frame.144 The
details of the other doors and windows are metallic in appearance, but were rendered in
143. Cf. Dinsmoor (n. 97), 190.
144. Stevens-Paton (n. 93), 43-44> "8- 29-
24
carved and painted marble. It has recently been observed, too, that certain details of the
Caryatids appear to copy the characteristics of bronze sculpture.145 Had the Caryatids
actually been of bronze we might have expected Pausanias to have taken note of them;146
as it was, they were of marble and so we can understand why they were overlooked.
In the Athens of Pericles, when sculptural reliefs were painted, the blue pigment
employed for their background was imported, doubtless at no little expense, from Egypt.147
In the Erechtheum, the decision was taken to give the relief sculpture of the frieze a blue
background by more economic means, for instead of the reliefs being carved on slabs of
Pentelic marble and then coloured, they consisted of separately carved Pentelic marble figures
fastened by means of dowels on to a blue-grey background of Eleusinian limestone.148

Again., this will have proved somewhat cheaper, and was probably quicker, than the
traditional method.
If the Erechtheum were begun in 412, then these economies of scale and material
can be explained, as will the decision not to demolish the still functioning remains of the
older temple. Another reason for building in 412 a smaller temple than may have originally
been envisaged is that in 413 most of the slaves who might otherwise have done the heavy
labouring jobs on the site had escaped.149 The craftsmen who did remain, however, would
have been highly skilled and doubtless able to work quickly. It is in fact easier to postulate a
continuous construction of the Erechtheum from 412 onwards than to explain the resumption
of work after a break which has always been assumed in the past. It has been suggested
(quite correctly) that the construction of the Erechtheum at this period will have provided
employment for artisans,160 but it is surely proper to ask how these artisans had been employed
during the previous few years. If there was no break in work on the Erechtheum, then the
first inscription, rather than being an assessment drawn up after a long gap, could have
been a reflection of a constitutional change as a consequence of which detailed accounts

had once more to be given. The timetable envisaged is a tight one, but far from impossible.
The decree allowing the 1,000 talents to be used was passed not long before the first Spartan
peace treaty with the Persians, in the summer of 412. The news of the latter will have
reached Athens in days rather than weeks, and so, even assuming that the Athenians had
no foreknowledge of the Spartans' medism, the Erechtheum could have been designed and
well under way by the autumn of 412. The Athenians were, after all, "equally quick in the
145. Lauter (n. 98), 33.

146. The only certainly marble sculptures that Pausanias notes on the Acropolis are the iartnenon pediments
(I, 24, 5), some statues of Athena that had been burnt by the Persians (I, 27, 7), and perhaps (as Professor Robertson reminds
me) Procne and Itys (I, 24, 3).
147. H. Blmner, Technologie und Terminologie der Gewerbe und Knste bei Griechen una Romern , IV, .Leipzig, 1007,
499 if. ; cf. the chemical analysis of some Aegyptisch-blau pigment from one of the Parthenon metopes conducted on
behalf of F. Brommer, Die Metopen des Parthenon , Mainz, 1967, 161.
148. P. N. Boulter, The frieze of the Erechtheion, Antike Plastik , X, 1970, 7-28, pls. 1-30.
149. Cf. Thuc., VII, 27.
150. V. Ehrenberg, From Solon to Socrates , 2nd edn., London, 1973, 323.
25
10. Caryatid from the Tomb of Pericles
of Limyra, Lycia (after Borchhardt).
conception and in the execution of every new plan".151 The anti-Spartan manifesto of the
Erechtheum's principal sculptural ornament will have ensured continuity of the building
programme during successive Athenian rgimes, and the anti-Persian message was reinforced
in 410 with the public performance at Athens of Timotheus' Persae ,162

Vitruvius' explanation of the origin of Caryatids seems also to apply to the Caryatid
porch on what has been recognised as the tomb of Pericles of Limyra in Lycia.168 Pericles
was a dynast who ruled from c. 380 to c. 360 bc, but we know very little else about him
except that he was involved in a revolt from the Persians in the 360s.154 His tomb has
been rightly seen to have derived its Caryatid amphiprostyle porch from the Erechtheum
at Athens.165 There is one feature which occurs on the Lycian Caryatids, but which does
not appear on the Athenian ones, namely the elaborate rhyta which they hold in their left
hands (fig. 10). These particular rhyta have been identified by J. Borchhardt as rhyta of a
151. Thuc., i, 70.
152. See S. E. Bassett, On the place and date of the first performance of the Persians of Timotheus, Classical Philology XXVIj 1931, 153-165 ; E. D. Francis, Greeks and Persians, the art of hazard and triumph in D. Schmandt-Besserat,
Ancient Persia , the Art of an Empirei Malibu, 1980, 53 if.
153. J. Borchhardt, Die Bauskulptur des Heroons von Limyra : Das Grabmal des lykischen Knigs r eri kles, 1st. ror sen. y
XXXII, 1976 ; J. Zahle, Lykische Felsgrber mit Reliefs aus dem 4. Jahrhunderts, Jdl, XCIV, 19795 342> no- 56.
154. W. A. P. Childs, Lycian relations with Persians and Greeks m the fitfh and fourth centuries re-examined,
Anatolian Studies , XXXI, 1981, 73-80, esp. 79 : during the Satraps' Revolt it would seem reasonable that Pericles of
Limyra was in touch with the Athenians and other movers in the rebellion .
155. Ibid., 77-
26
typically Persian type,156 but no explanation has been forthcoming for this unexpected
feature. If, however, we take into account Pericles of Limyra's known antipathy towards
the Persians157 together with the tradition that the architectural use of Caryatids frequently
bore a special meaning - that they were intended to recall those who had betrayed their
country to the Persians - then perhaps we may begin to understand the reason for Caryatids
on Pericles' tomb.
Reference was made above (p. 16) to the likelihood that many female figures employed
in architectural contexts were intended to represent temple servants. The Eleusinian

"Caryatids" clearly come into this category, and a similar case can be made for those thought
to come from a. second century ad. shrine of Demeter on the Via Appia outside Rome.158
The Graces and Seasons which apparently supported part of the Throne of Apollo at
Amyclae159 ought perhaps to be seen in such a light. The political connotations of Caryatids
should not, however, be forgotten and the possibility that they are being used in Vitruvius'
sense should always be borne in mind.160 The word "Caryatid", as we have already seen,
can mean two different things: a Laconian traitor or a dancer in the service of Artemis
Caryatis.161 The earliest recorded instance of the latter usage occurs at the very end of the
fifth century, when in 401 the Spartan Clearchus gave a ring to the Cnidian Ctesias then
resident at the court of Artaxerxes II. The intaglio bore "dancing Caryatids" and the gift
was made "as a symbol of [Ctesias'] friendship towards his kith and kin in Lacedaemon".162
It is even possible that this Spartan image was created as a direct response to the way in
which Athenians had recently employed Caryatids as vehicles for anti-Spartan propaganda.
Clearchus had served at Decelea,163 and was presumably aware of the significance with
which Caryatids might be endowed.
Even if this is so much speculation, Vitruvius on Caryatids is vindicated. It is salutary,
however, to reflect on how it has come to pass that in modern times the Erechtheum
Caryatids (fig. 11) in particular have been so misunderstood and have been endowed with
benign rather than hostile characteristics. The reason seems to lie in the fact that in the
early nineteenth century they became in effect the patron saints of philhellenism, and the
romantic tale, which recurs in many travellers' accounts of early nineteenth century Athens,
that when Lord Elgin had a Caryatid removed from the Erechtheum, "the whole town
156. Borchhardt (n. 152), 40-41 (though he associates these vessels [p. 120] with a cult for the dead).
157. E. Kalinka, Ti tuli Asiae Minoris I (Vienna, 1901), no. 104 : ese pericle tebete arttumpari - a reference I
owe to the kindness of Dr. David Hawkins.
158. Cf. A. H. Smith, A Catalogue of Sculpture in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities III, London, 1904,,
100.
159. Paus., III, 18, 10. For a recent discussion of the Throne, see Francis-Vickers (n. 36), 64, n. 125.
160. The presence of satyrs on either side of the Caryatids at Hadrian's Villa at Tivoli (S. Aurigemma, Villa Adriana ,
Rome, 1961, 109, figs. 94-99), raises interesting questions.
161. Cf. Francis-Vickers (n. 36), 61-62.
162. Plut., Artax. 18 ; Cnidus was a Spartan colony (Hdt., I, 174, cf. L. H. Jeffery, Archaic Greece , the City-States,
c. 700-500 BC , London, 1976, 199).
163. Thuc., VIII, 8, 2.
27
11. The Caryatid porch of the Erechtheum (after Stuart and Revett).
was filled with doleful sighs and lamentations as the remaining Caryatids mourned "their
ravished sister",164 will only have encouraged a sympathetic view. The fact that Vitruvius'
testimony had been challenged by a scholar of Lessing's stature was of itself enough to
ensure that most of educated Europe would continue to disregard it even when arguments
were brought in its defence. 186 More seriouslyj to accept the Vitruvian story would have
resulted in the Caryatids being shown to be philo-Persians, from which it would be a very
short step to declaring them to be symbols of Turkish oppression rather than "Maids of
Greece" who might one day "still be free". Once they are shorn of their mystery, however,
the Erechtheum Caryatids are revealed as collaborators and quislings, ready to place Greece
beneath a Persian yoke.

Michael Vickers.
164. W. St. Clair, Lord Elgin and the Marbles, London, 1967, 212 and 298, n. 22.
165. Only R. Walpole appears to have defended Vitruvius, and ineffectually at that : Memoirs Relating to European
and Asiatic Turkey , 2nd edn., London, 18 18, 602 ; cf. Francis-Vickers (n. 36), 60. Otherwise, the story has been generally
dismissed as worthless : e.g. C. A. Bttiger, Ueber die sogenannten Caryatiden am Pandroseum in Athen und ueber den
Missbrauch der Benennung Caryatiden, Amalthea III, 1825, 138-167 ; C. J. Blomfield, Some remarks on the Caryatides
of ancient architecture, Museum Criticum VII, 1826, 400-2 ; A. Meineke, Analecta alexandrina , Berlin, 1843, 360-363 ;
L. Preller, De caussa nominis Caryatidum, Annali dell9 Instituto archeologico XV, 1843, 396-406 (= Ausgewhlte Aufstze ,
Berlin, 1864, 136-144) ; J. G. Frazer, Pausamos , III, London, 1913, 320 ; Drerup (n. 93), 11 ; Borchhardt (n. 152), 44,
n. 100 ; Lauter (n. 98), 14-15, n. 47 ; Schmidt (n. 79), 26 ; J. Boardman, Signa tabalae priscae artis, JHS CIV, 1984, 161-163.
28

Vickers, Persepolis, Vitruvius and The Erechtheum Caryatids. The Iconography of Medism

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Vickers, Persepolis, Vitruvius and The Erechtheum Caryatids. The Iconography of Medism

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

PERSEPOLIS, VITRUVIUS AND THE ERECHTHEUM CARYATIDS: THE ICONOGRAPHY OF MEDISM

rev. arch., 1/1985

1. Lion and bull relief on the Apadana, Persepolis (after Schmidt).

Vitruvius' testimony is now usually dismissed as a late fabrication, but it is instructive

written by G. E. Lessing in the eighteenth century.2 J. J. Winckelmann had identified a

2. Gold lion/bull coin of the kind

deposits (Ashmolean Museum).

I. The Achaemenid background

part of a royal seal on an important document".14

17. Kent (n. 10), 136-137 (DPh).

Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran , XV, 1982, 124.

rebellion. E. Herzfeld, characteristically, invoked a magical explanation,26 but it is more

to that proposed by M. Roaf.

Chicago, 1927, no. 689.

28. Hdt., VI, 49 : xai xai AivivyjTat .

30. Schmidt (n. 15), no.

with another foundation tablet of Darius at Ecbatana.

33. Hdt., I, 94.

2. The " Siphnian " Treasury

37. PdD , IV/i, pls. 13-14.

3. Yoked lion attack-

ing a Giant on the

north frieze of the

at Delphi (after FdD).

pan-Hellenic celebration of victory over the Persians.

4. Bull impost-block from Susa,

cessors,46 Achaemenid architectural imagery provides many examples of symbols of subjects

Von Mercklin (n. 47), loc. cit., fig. 125.

3. Post-war wealth and anti-Persian propaganda

they created for their aristocratic customers.

5. The throne of Zeus on the

east frieze of the 'Siphnian'

Treasury at Delphi (after FdD).

73. P. Vidal-Naquetj Le chasseur noir , Paris, 1983, 367.

6. The throne of Darius I at

Naksh-i-Rustam (after Schmidt).

81. Ibid., pls. 13 and 14.

84. Schmidt (n. 79), 102.

85. Ibid ., 15-16, nos. 5-7.

4- The Erechtheum: date of construction

99. E.g. Patn in Stevens-Paton (n. 93), 453.

105. Austin (n. 101), 59.

of xaxoi at Athens in 412.

7. The hair of an Erechtheum

Caryatid (after Lauter).

to be found outside Athens, notably on bronzes thought to be of Peloponnesian origin

was in command of the allied occupation force at Decelea.122

8. Back view of a Peloponne-

sian bronze mirror stand,

Boston MFA (after Congdon).

lack of any epigraphic evidence.

126. Thuc., VIII, 15 ; Philoch., FGrH , III, F 138.

128. Cf. J. J. Coulton, Greek Architects at Work , London, 1977, 12.

131. Thuc., VIII, 43. /a

cf. M. Vickers, Scythian Treasures in Oxford , Oxford, 1979, 42.

135. Huxley (n. 7), 31.

137. Ath., II, 67 a.

9. Plan of the Erechtheum

and the opisthodomus

of the Temple of Athena

Polias (after Dinsmoor).

and the volumetric discrepancy will have been even greater.

fastened by means of dowels on to a blue-grey background of Eleusinian limestone.148