The Judgment of Animals in Classical Greece: Animal Sculpture and ...

considerable importance is the phrase pro&j w{i, whose translation as “against this stone,”
suggests that zw~ia, whose position it defines, were some type of decoration separated
from, and therefore, not carved out of the same blocks that formed the background of the
frieze. 549 That this was actually the case is confirmed by the surviving material, which
refers to the blocks of the frieze, fragmentary sculpture, and also technical details
preserved on both types of evidence.
1999) 118 and 128, where she states that the use of such dark stone “had the primary architectural function
not only of connecting prostyle columns and cella, but also of establishing specific levels in a building
unusual for its irregular plan, both internal and external.” For an illustration of the position of the frieze of
the Erechtheion that emphasizes the dark color of its background blocks, see Jenkins, Greek Architecture
and Its Sculpture (Cambridge, Mass., 2006) 122, fig. 109.
According to H. N. Fowler, “The Sculptures,” in Paton, ed., The Erechtheum 232, a frieze ran around all
sides of the cella, except for a portion of the northern wall, where it was interrupted by the roof of the north
porch. A frieze covered also all the exterior walls of the north portico including its peculiar southern side,
which corresponded to a short section that projected to the west of the main building. These essentially two
friezes were not identical in terms of size. As Fowler, 239, states “the height of the blocks of the
Eleusinian stone which formed the frieze about the cella is 0.617m., that of the frieze of the north portico
0.683m.” Regarding the blocks of the frieze over the cella only small sections of them survive today.
According to Fowler, 240, the most complete section is that of the eastern side and a short distance of the
eastern part of the southern side, both of which sum up to a total length of about 14 m. Similarly, J. M.
Paton et al., “Description of the Erechtheum,” in Paton, ed., The Erechtheum 54, point out that only two
blocks are now in place at the southeast corner, whereas “the frieze from both [the] north and south walls
has wholly disappeared.” As for the original blocks of the frieze at the western end of the building, they
were damaged by fire in the first century B.C., and subsequently replaced with reused statue bases also
made of Eleusinian stone. As Fowler, 240, n. 1, explains, these replacements “are old statue bases, with the
tops turned toward the interior of the building. These tops show the foot marks of the statues which once
stood on them, but the outer surfaces are plain.” For a recent illustration of these bases forming a section of
the frieze of the western wall of the building, see O. Palagia, “Classical Athens,” in O. Palagia ed., Greek
Sculpture: Function, Materials, Techniques in the Archaic and Classical Periods (Cambridge, 2006) 143,
fig. 47. As for the background blocks of the frieze over the north porch, Fowler, 241, explains that “the
entire length of the frieze of the North Portico was about 25 m., and about 21 m. of the dark blocks now
exist. Those blocks are now, with the exception of a few fragments, secured in their proper places on the
building.” He also clarifies, 241, n. 1, that “the place of the missing blocks is supplied by blocks of bluish
“upper Pentelic” marble.” Pictures of the latest restoration (1976-1986) of the Erechtheion, which aimed at
a wide-ranging correction of an earlier erroneous one (1902-1909), show no changes in the arrangement of
the architectural members of the frieze as discussed by Fowler and Paton et al. For a discussion of this
restoration and accompanying illustrations, see C. Bouras and K. Zambas, The Works of the Committee for
the Preservation of the Acropolis Monuments on the Acropolis of Athens (Athens, 2002) 24-27, figs. 34-41.
549 This technique had been used earlier for the decoration of the frieze on the base—made also of
Eleusinian stone—of the cult statues of Athena and Hephaistos at the Hephaisteion made by Alkamenes
and completed around 415 B.C.: For a discussion of this base, see O. Palagia, “Meaning and Narrative
Techniques in Statue-Bases of the Pheidian Circle,” in N. K. Rutter and B. A. Sparkes, eds., Word and
Image in Ancient Greece (Edinburgh, 2000) 53 and 55, where the similarity with the Erechtheion frieze is
pointed out; also 55, fig. 4.1 for an illustration of a block of Eleusinian limestone that has been attributed to
the front of the base of this statue and carries five dowel holes for the attachment of figures.
278