The Erechtheum

Author(s): A. S. Murray
Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 1 (1880), pp. 224-227
Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/623621 .
Accessed: 08/02/2015 11:10
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.

The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 89.34.228.69 on Sun, 8 Feb 2015 11:10:51 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

224

THE ERECHTHEUM.

THE ERECHTHEUM.
does not appear to me to be altogether right when
MICHAELIS
he describes 1 the Caryatid Porch at the south-west corner of The
Erechtheum (B on the plan), as serving solely to cover the stair
leading down from it to the western division of the temple (C).
Further, I think he is wrong when he makes an entrance to the
temple through the opening (A) in this porch. The mouldings
at the sides show clearly that this opening was an original
2
part of the construction; but they do not show that it was
an entrance. For in the first place the step up to it from the
outside-if it is a step-measures twenty inches ; and in the
second place, the delicate mouldings which run round the base of
the building and are continued under this opening would be worn
by almost every step that was taken up to it or down from it,
as in fact they are now being worn by visitors who, with an effort,
get up to the opening. Had there been an entrance at this
point, these mouldings would have been discontinued, and a
step placed to render the ascent fairly comfortable. Michaelis
must then be wrong in making Pausanias first enter the
temple at this opening. Perhaps it was here that the famous
dog mentioned by Philochorus entered and descendedinto the
Pandroseum!
It would seem from the way in which the stair leading up
from the western division C, to the Caryatid Porch B, turns
1 Mittheil. d. deutsch.Inst. Athen,
He calls the in,
II. p. 19.
porch a
Treppenhaus.
Boetticher, Untersuchungen,p. 203,
recognised this and proposed to account
for the simplicity of the opening as
an entrance to the temple by means

of an enclosure or peribolos in front

of it.
8 This extraordinaryheight was first
pointed out as fatal to its being an
entrance, by Miss Reece in January this
year. At least I am not aware of its
being noticed before.

This content downloaded from 89.34.228.69 on Sun, 8 Feb 2015 11:10:51 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

225

THE ERECHTHEUM.

towards the opening in question (A), that it had in fact been so

constructed to culminate in this opening. On the other hand, it
is to be observed that if the stair had risen straight up it would
have broken the floor of the porch into two small and useless

G
rr

\
\

r..

F?
s

\\
\\
\ \
ii

spaces, whereas by turning as it does, it leaves the floor to form

one unbroken space, on which I think it possible there had stood
an altar. The stair would then be a means of ascending to sacrifice at it, and the narrow opening (A) may have served as a
window closed by vertical metal bars.
H. S.-VOL. I.

This content downloaded from 89.34.228.69 on Sun, 8 Feb 2015 11:10:51 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

226

THE ERECHTHEUM.

Another of the difficulties connected with the Erechtheum

is the abrupt precipice, if I may so call it, which extends westward from the Caryatid Porch, and there forms the edge of the
broad platform extending between the Parthenon and the
Erechtheum. It is marked 0 on the plan. How many modern
travellers standing on the edge of this precipice must have
wished, instead of the circuitous path now available, some
rapid means of descent by which the somewhat unpleasant view
of the temple seen from the height might be exchanged for the
finer aspect when seen from the ground below! Possibly the
ancients had no such difficulty. For I think it extremely
probable that where the precipice is now there was originally a
flight of steps extending from the Caryatid Porch westward
to the end of the present platform, and turning round the
western edge of it. I have drawn in these steps on Michaelis'
plan and marked them P. At the top, one step and the
setting off of a second are visible still. At the south-west
angle of the temple, this flight of steps would naturally have
been tailed into the wall, and it may well have been the
removal of them which had caused the gap in the west wall at
this point, now filled up by modern masonry.' At all events,
since thinking of this first at Athens in January of the present
year, I have found a certain degree of confirmation in the fact
that Inwood (the Erechtheion, pl. 3) placed a staircase at this
south-west angle, so as to account for the gap in the wall, and
to obtain access to and from the higher platform. What I
propose is not a narrow stair, but a flight of steps extending
westward about eighty feet.
Mr. Fergusson 2 has placed here a stoa, and speaks of what
I have just called a precipice as the inside of a ' retaining wall
which here extends to about eighty feet, and is so rough and
rude that it is impossible that any wall could be allowed to be
seen on the Acropolis in such a state. It must have been
covered up.' Yes, but by a flight of steps, as I think. These
steps would descend to the level of the door in the west wall of
the temple, and would leave as available for the Pandroseum
the space marked L, where Michaelis and Fergusson (both
1 See pl. 2 of the Praktika for the
best representation of this gap and its
filling up.

2
Transactions of the Royal Inst. of
British Architects, 1876, p. 9.

This content downloaded from 89.34.228.69 on Sun, 8 Feb 2015 11:10:51 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE ERECHTHEUM.

227

working independently) have placed the olive-tree, and where

there has been a building contiguous (ovveX'rj) to the
Erechtheum, as may be seen plainly from the present condition
of the north portico at this point. This building must have
been the Pandroseum.
Neither Fergusson nor Michaelis has made quite clear to me
how it comes that in the south wall of the temple the broad
lowermost course of masonry, as seen from the outside, does not
in the western half extend through the whole thickness of the
wall, but as seen from the lower level of the interior presents a
sinking1 of some inches. At first sight it would seem as if
the purpose had been to face this sinking with stones of the
same dimensions as in the other courses of the wall, so that
when looked at from within, the wall would present a uniform
appearance, in which case it would be inferred that the wall had
not been covered with stucco 2 and painted over, since this
process would have rendered the facing stones an unnecessary
device. On the other hand, it seemed to me possible, from the
broken condition of the course of masonry in the interior just
below the broad course in question, that a stone floor had set
off there, extending across the south-west aisle. No doubt
there may be more serious obstacles to this than I am aware of.
It would seem, however, from the fact of the lintel of the doorway leading up from the west division (C) to the Caryatid Porch,
being also left in the interior with a similar sinking, that the
purpose in both places had more probably been to face the
sinkings with stones of the same external dimensions as in the
other courses, for the sake of uniformity.
A. S. MURRAY.
1 This sinking will be seen in the
Praktika, pl. 5, but in that plate the
narrow course underneath is not correctly given to indicate the breakage
all the way along it.

2 In some parts of the interior

Boetticher (Untersuchungen,pp. 204-5)
found remains of stucco on the walls
which he considered to be part of the
original preparation.

Q2

This content downloaded from 89.34.228.69 on Sun, 8 Feb 2015 11:10:51 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions