National Gallery of Art
The Meaning of the Parthenon Frieze
Author(s): JEROME J. POLLITT
Source: Studies in the History of Art, Vol. 49, Symposium Papers XXIX: The
Interpretation of Architectural Sculpture in Greece and Rome (1997), pp. 50-65
Published by: National Gallery of Art
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/42622168
Accessed: 18-10-2016 11:51 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/42622168?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
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 [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
National Gallery of Art is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studies in
the History of Art
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
/';-=09
)(8*
=-0/']
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
JEROME J. POLLITT
Yale University
The Meaning of the Parthenon Frieze
views to those of a long line of scholars who
In views havehavethisdiscussed
discussed
the vexed
to paperquestion
thoseofI ofwhattheis would a vexed long like line question to of add scholars of my what who own is
represented on the frieze of the Parthenon.
What did its designers intend it to represent,
and is there a unifying theme, or idea, that
brings together its diverse elements?
the Panathenaic procession have put forward
a variety of speculative proposals. The frieze
has been held to depict a procession belong-
ing to mythical or earlier historical times
when the details preserved in the literary
sources would not necessarily be applicable.
It has been interpreted, for example, as a
The most widely held opinion about the
depiction of the first Panathenaia in the time
of Erechtheus,2 or as an evocation of the vansubject of the frieze (442-438 b.c.) is that it
ished monuments of the archaic acropolis,3
represents the procession that took place at
the time of the Greater Panathenaia. As has
destroyed by the Persians, or as an expression of the heroization of the Athenian sollong been recognized, however, what we see
diers who fell at Marathon.4 Another line of
represented on the frieze does not correlate
has been to resolve the discrepanvery well with what ancient authors tell approach
us
cies with the literary sources by the use of
about the components of the procession. The
topography rather than chronology. It has
figures who bear hydriai, for example, should
be women (not men, as they are on thebeen proposed, for example, that the frieze
shows us the procession before it has begun,
frieze) (fig. 1); the kanephoroi (basket bearers)
either in the Agora5 or spread out from the
are omitted; and most troubling of all, there
Acropolis to the Dipylon Gate,6 or alternais no trace of the Athenian infantry, the
tively, after its participants have reached the
hoplites, even though a contemporary source,
Acropolis, disbanded, and regrouped.7
Thucydides (6.58), implies that they should
be there.1 One could argue that the literaryRather than juggle or ignore existing evi-
dence in order to salvage the idea that the
sources, many of which are late lexicografrieze represents the, or at least a, Panathenaic
phers, are either inaccurate or reflect the
procession, I would like to ponder the meanprocession of post-Periklean times. Even late
ing of the imagery of the frieze without
sources, however, seem to be dependent on
assuming, a priori , that it has any special
the sober scholarship of Attic Attidographers,
and there is no obvious reason to dismiss
connection at all with the Panathenaia. This,
I should
them out of hand simply because they
do confess at the beginning, is not diffi-
cult for me to do, because my research has
not support our own preconceptions.
led me to the conclusion that the frieze has
To explain or resolve the disparity between
little
the literary sources and what is actually
on or nothing to do with the procession. I
the frieze, those who would like to seeacknowledge
it as
the possibility that it might be
51
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
i . Parthenon, north frieze,
slab vi, figures 16-19
Acropolis Museum, Athens;
photograph: Alison Frantz
connected in a general and somewhat loose
way with the Panathenaic festival, but even
could not remain mounted on a horse during
that conclusion seems to me open to some
There is no mention of the Panathenaia in
processions (note the plural) in the Agora.
doubt.
this passage, and since Xenophon and others
I begin with the largest single component
of the frieze, one that takes up about 47 percent of its surface, the cavalcade. Because
horsemen are so prominent on the Parthenon
frieze, and because the view that the frieze
frequently in Athens, there is no reason to
conclude that Demosthenes was thinking of
the Panathenaic procession. The second passage occurs in the First Philippic (26), where
tell us that cavalry processions took place
depicts the Panathenaic procession is so
Demosthenes castigates the Athenians for
widely accepted, almost all modern writers
allowing various military officers, including
the two hipparchs (the chief commanders of
on the Parthenon sculptures have been
inclined to assume that horsemen must have
the cavalry) and the phylarchs (the com-
taken part in the procession, and, if they have
manders of tribal squadrons), to remain in
examined the literary evidence at all, they
Athens helping the hieropoioi to organize pro-
have usually accepted two passages in the
cessions rather than sending them out to
speeches of Demosthenes as convincing evifight against the Macedonians. Once again,
dence that this was the case.8 Both of these
however, Demosthenes refers only in a very
passages, however, are at best inconclusive.
general way to processions (Tàs iro^irás), as
The first is in Against Meidias (171), where
Xenophon does in the third chapter of the
Hipparchikos when he refers to the role
Demosthenes condemns the hipparch Meidias
for being in such sad physical shape that of
he the cavalry in Athenian ceremonial life,
52 POLLITT
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
and there is no specific mention of the
not simply an escort for a procession but a
force that was arguably the most important
to assume that Demosthenes must have
single innovation in Athenian military life
in the Classical period and one that was parbeen thinking of the Panathenaic procession
ticularly associated with the government
despite the fact that he does not specifically
Perikles: the regular, standing corps of
refer to it, the passage would still notof
comAthenian
pel us to conclude that the whole corps
of combat cavalry. The importance of
the
cavalry in the military and cultural life
cavalry participated in the Panathenaia.
All
Panathenaia. Furthermore, even if one chose
of Athens in the mid-fifth century has
Demosthenes says is that various military
officers who had a lot of time on their hands
recently been laid out for us with admirable
provided organizational assistance to the
vividness in Glen Bugh's The Horsemen of
Athens .n In the Archaic period it seems
official organizers of religious festivals.
It has also sometimes been assumed that
that, although the Athenians may have used
a sort of pick-up cavalry from time to time because a corps of mounted ephebes accomthat is, soldiers who thought of themselves
panied the procession from Athens to Eleusis
primarily as hoplites may at times have
at the beginning of the Eleusinian mysteries,
mounted their horses as part of a limited
and that the ephebes similarly accompanied
maneuver or for reconnaissance - they had
a procession to Phaleron in the festival called
the Plynteria, that an escort of ephebes must
no regular cavalry corps. At the battle of
Marathon, it will be remembered, the
also have accompanied the Panathenaic proAthenian
army had no cavalry at all. After
cession.9 Once again, however, there is
no
the Persian Wars the Athenians at first relied
direct evidence for this, and it is perhaps
doubtful that such an escort would have
for cavalry support on their Thessalian
allies, who had long been famed for their
been necessary for the Panathenaic proces-
skill as cavalrymen. At the battle of Tanagra
sion. The processions to Eleusis and Phaleron
in 458/457 b.c., however, the Thessalian cavwere relatively long and involved passing
outside the gates of the city with sacred
alry had deserted the Athenians in favor of
objects. This was not the case with the
the Spartans and perfidiously attacked an
Panathenaia. It is noteworthy that the one Athenian supply train (Diodoros 11. 80. 1-6).
inscription (dating from 100/99 b.c.) some-
It was probably the shock of this betrayal,
as Bugh has proposed, and the realization
that a reliable force of cavalry was necessary
ephebes rode in the Panathenaic procession
to discourage Spartan and Boeotian incurdoes not mention that procession, although
times cited as evidence for the fact that the
sions into Attica, that led the Athenians to
it does mention pompai of Artemis Agrotera
and Iacchos.10 Furthermore, it is not clear
create a regular standing, year-round cavalry
corps.12 The size of this new corps was at
that these pompai were equestrian processions,- they may have been processions first
on set at three hundred men, but after
what seems to have been a short time, it was
foot. In any case, even if one assumes that
the cavalcade of the Parthenon frieze does
expanded to one thousand! It was, in other
words, a major administrative and financial
represent the corps of ephebes, one would
still have to ask why the designers of the
undertaking for the Athenian government,
Parthenon frieze would have devoted about
and that government, of course, was under
the overall direction of Perikles. There can
47 percent of it to what is assumed to have
be no doubt that Perikles endorsed and put
been simply an escort.
The fact is, then, that no source, literary
his personal prestige behind the creation of
this new, prominent, and probably controor epigraphical, confirms that horsemen parversial military unit. There is some eviticipated in the Panathenaic procession. We
moreover, that the expansion of the
ought to feel free, therefore, to put asidedence,
the
idea that this large section of the frieze must
cavalry from three hundred to one thousand
be connected with the Panathenaia and sim-
men might have taken place after the
Athenian campaign in Euboea in 446 b.c.,
ply to ask what it is likely to have called to
the strategos for which was none other than
mind among the Athenians who first saw it.
To me it seems quite plausible, even proba-Perikles himself (Thucydides 1.114). By this
ble, that what the cavalcade alludes to is time, of course, Pheidias, at Perikles' behest
POLLITT 53
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
2. Parthenon, south frieze,
slabs X and xi, figures 26-31
British Museum, London
3. Parthenon, north frieze,
slabs XXXVII and xxxvin,
figures 1 1 4-1 19
British Museum, London
54 POLLITT
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
and presumably sensitive to Perikles' concerns, was already at work overseeing the
design of the sculptures of the Parthenon. En-
listing citizens into a large corps of cavalry
organized to protect the land, the shrines,
and the institutions of Athens was, in short,
to make the figure come out, he has to count
two figures from the north side as if they
were on the west, and since he really gets a
total of fourteen groups, he has to discount
two of the groups on the west as recapitula-
tions. As much as I admire Beschi's work
and agree with his overall assessment of the
an undertaking that must have had an
impact on the Athenian population which frieze's meaning, I do find that in the case
rivaled Perikles' steps to enhance Athenian of the north cavalcade the evidence that he
cultural life.
We know that the new Athenian cavalry
was divided into ten squadrons, each of
adduces simply does not support the theory
that he attempts to demonstrate. In fact,
Beschi's analysis suggests that on the north
which was recruited from one of the ten
frieze there were, once again, ten groups of
The attributes of these groups tribes of Classical Athens and commandedcavalrymen.
by
long-sleeved chitons, for example, and the
a tribal officer, the phylarch. In her important article on the Parthenon frieze in the
combination of crested helmets with body
armor - are admittedly different from those
proceedings of the Basel Parthenon congress,
that we encountered in the groups on the
Evelyn B. Harrison has made a convincing
south side (fig. 3). There is no obvious explacase that the cavalrymen on the south frieze
nation for this, but I wonder if we might not
of the Parthenon are depicted in ten separate
have, throughout the frieze, the ten tribal
groups, each distinguished by a particular
squadrons of the Periklean cavalry arrayed in
assemblage of apparel or equipment, that can
the varieties of armor and apparel (or the
be correlated with the ten tribes (fig. 2); this
valuable observation reinforces the view that
lack of it) that were appropriate for the difwhat we have represented on the Parthenon ferent sorts of cavalry displays, reviews, and
frieze is the new Athenian cavalry.13 The parades that Xenophon ( Hipparchikos 3)
arrangement of the riders on the north frieze
of the Parthenon is more difficult to read.
describes.
The west frieze shows groups of cavalry-
Harrison has detected a tendency in themen, punctuated by figures of marshals,
preparing to form a procession. Some are
design of the north frieze to arrange figures
in groups of four, or in larger numbers divisi-already mounted and in the process of falling
into formation, while others are still donble by four, and suggests a possible connection with the four Ionian tribes, and twelve
ning equipment and preparing to mount. It
may be that we are supposed to understand
phratries, into which the Athenian citizenry
had been divided before the creation of the
this part of the frieze as immediately precedten Kleisthenean tribes; her idea has been
ing in time the cavalcades that we see fully
launched on the north and south sides, but I
enthusiastically embraced by Luigi Beschi,
can see no compelling reason for interpreting
who detects a factor of four everywhere in
the north frieze.14 While the factor of four
it as belonging to a completely different conmay have some significance in the sacrificial ceptual dimension, such as mythological
procession at the east end of the north frieze,time. Two of the cavalrymen on the west
its applicability to the cavalcade or the char-frieze (iv.8 and vm.15) (figs. 4, 5) are bearded,
iots of the north frieze is beset, it seems the only two such figures in the entire cavalto me, with grave difficulties. Beschi counts cade, and this certainly must be an indicatwelve chariots, but much of this part of thetion of seniority and important status. Figure
frieze is lost, and to get this number he has15, the man who restrains a magnificent
to assume that there were chariots in what
rearing horse, is such an impressive creation
are now absolute lacunae. Combining thethat some have been inclined to interpret
him as one of the great mythical kings or
evidence of the drawings made by Jacques
heroes of Athens such as Theseus.15 He has,
Carrey with what survives, it seems more
however, no distinguishing attributes that
probable that there were eleven chariots, as
would make such an identity obvious, and
Harrison has suggested. Beschi also identisplendid though he is, I see no reason not to
fies twelve groups of riders in the combined
cavalcades of the north and west sides, butassume that he belongs to the same world as
pollitt 55
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
4- Parthenon, west frieze,
slab IV, figure 8
Until recently in situ, now in
the Acropolis Museum, Athens,photograph: Alison Frantz
5 . Parthenon, west frieze,
slab vili, figure 1 5
Until recently in situ, now in
the Acropolis Museum, Athens;
photograph: Alison Frantz
56 POLLITT
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
6. Parthenon, west frieze,
slab XII, figures 22-24
Until recently in situ, now in
the Acropolis Museum, Athens;
photograph: Alison Frantz
the riders on the south and north cavalcades.
Although there is no evidence that the
Most probably, as a number of scholars have cavalrymen on the frieze took part in the
suggested, these two men are the hipparchs, Panathenaic procession, it is possible that
the two elected commanders-in-chief of the
they were intended to call to mind, among
Athenian cavalry.16 It is possible that otherother things, one of the equestrian contests
officials of the "real" world of Periklean
of the Panathenaic festival, the Anthippasia.
Xenophon ( Hipparchikos 3.1 1) describes this
Athens were also depicted here. Figure xii.23
event as a mock battle in which two rival
has, for example, been interpreted by Beschi
as the keryx, the state herald, on the
units drawn from the ten squadrons of
man who is raising his hand in protest
there is a substantial body of evidence to
connect this contest with the Panathenaia,
assumption that a herald's wand was painted Athenian cavalry charged each other and
in his left hand (fig. 6). 17 Others, however, rode through each other's ranks. Modern
have seen this figure as an ordinary cavalry- writers sometimes give the impression that
because he or his horse has been found defi-
cient during the official inspection, the doki-but the connection rests, in fact, on the evimasia of the cavalry, and the adjacent figure dence of one inscription, a list of winners dat(xii.22) is in the process of recording this facting from c. 280 b.c.20 Xenophon, it should be
on a tablet.18 In any case, far from arguing for noted, does not mention a particular festival
a mythological interpretation, it seems toin his description of the Anthippasia, nor do
me that the imagery of the west frieze rein-the inscriptions on votive reliefs connected
forces the view that the riders on the
with the event, such as the well-known
Bryaxis
Parthenon frieze are intended to depict
the base.21 Furthermore, we know from
newly formed Athenian cavalry.19
the inscription just mentioned that the
POLLITT 57
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
7- Parthenon, north frieze,
slab XVII, figures 5 6-5 8
Acropolis Museum, Athens;
photograph: Alison Frantz
Anthippasia also took place at another festi-
val, the Olympieia, held in honor of Zeus.
So, even if the cavalcade on the frieze does
allude to the Anthippasia, we could still rea-
Parthenon frieze itself to support this claim.
There is evidence that the contest of the
apobatai formed part of the Panathenaic
nial and festival life of Periklean Athens and
games, but the documentation even for this
conclusion is surprisingly scanty: one brief
sentence in Plutarch's Life of Phocion and
three Hellenistic inscriptions from the sec-
not the Panathenaia alone.
ond century b.c. that record the award of
sonably conclude that it was intended to
evoke, in a general way, the entire ceremo-
Let us now turn for a moment to the proprizes to victorious apobatai and their charicession of chariots that precedes the caval-oteers.22 Dionysios of Halikarnassos, who
cade on the north and south sides of the
frieze. Most commentators on the frieze
gives the most explicit description of the
contest ( Roman Antiquities 77.73.3), does not
the Panathenaia, nor do our other
agree that this section of it depicts the mention
apo-
batai, armed warriors who competed literary
in a
sources. Other writers, especially
Theophrastos as quoted by Harpokration,
contest in which they leaped from a moving
make
chariot and engaged in a footrace (fig. 7).
As it clear that apobatai contests were
in the case of the cavalcade, many modern
also held at other times and in other places,
writers have assumed that the apobatai,
at Oropos, for example, and also in Boeotia.23
their chariots, and their charioteers formed
So, although there is no reason to doubt that
part of the Panathenaic procession, but the
onceapobatai played a role in the Panathenaic
we are not obliged to conclude that
again, there is no evidence outside of games,
the
58 POLLITT
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
this was the sole association that they would
men who carried branches in the Panathenaic
have had in the minds of the Athenians who
procession, but, as Erika Simon has rightly
emphasized, there is no trace of these objects
Adding these chariot sections to the cav- on the frieze, and on some of the figures it
alcade of the west, north, and south friezes, would have been impossible to paint them
we find that we have already traversed 68in.24 After these, on the north side, we have,
percent of the space of the frieze, more thanin succession, kitharists and flutists, youths
two-thirds of it, without finding any certifi-bearing pitchers of water (fig. i), tray bearers,
viewed the frieze of the Parthenon.
able connection with the Panathenaic pro-and sacrificial victims, here heifers and
cession and only a tenuous connection with sheep (figs. 9, 10). Because the sacrificial prothe games that followed it. The procession ofcession on the south side was badly damaged
figures on foot, which precedes the chariots,in the explosion of 1687, it has gaps and is
completes the north and south sides, and more difficult to reconstruct. Carrey's drawculminates on the east, looks, however, muchings show a group of men carrying squarish
more promising. For convenience I refer to objects that may have been musical instruthis portion of the frieze as the sacrificial pro- ments, although some identify them as
cession. On the north and south sides, readingpinakes (writing tablets) and interpret these
from west to east, we come first to a groupfigures as more officials.25 One fragment
of bearded men, who, although endowed (xxxvii*) seems to preserve a tray bearer, and
with that idealized youthfulness that per-there is again a full complement of sacrifivades all the figures of the Parthenon frieze,cial animals and their attendants, although
are intended to represent mature citizens,here only heifers and not sheep are shown.
probably various state officials such as piyHow closely do these figures correlate
tanes and hieropoioi (fig. 8). They have some-with what we know about the Panathenaic
times been identified as the thallophoroi,procession? Kitharists and flutists, we know,
8. Parthenon, north frieze,
slab X, figures 38-43
Acropolis Museum, Athens;
photograph: Alison Frantz
POLLITT 59
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
9- Parthenon, north frieze,
slab II, figures 3-5
Acropolis Museum, Athens;
photograph: Alison Frantz
10. Parthenon, north frieze,
slab IV, figures 10-12
Acropolis Museum, Athens;
photograph: Alison Frantz
60 POLLITT
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
competed in the Panathenaic games, but
whether or not contestants marched in the
in form and conception from the rest of the
composition. Its figures are not part of a pro-
cessional scheme, and the gods turn their
procession is not known. It is clear from
back to it as if it is not a part of the matter at
Athenian vase painting, however, that musiIt functions more like an independent
cians were participants in a wide variety hand.
of
sacrificial rites.26 The water bearers in the
emblem or symbol than as a part of the procession (fig. 1 1 ).
Panathenaic procession, as already noted,
should be women according to our sources, Aside from the peplos scene, however, the
figures of the east frieze again seem to point
not men as they are here. Simon has suga general, eclectic vision of Athenian religested that the four figures shown here to
are
gion, one that subsumes the Panathenaia but
the winners of the torch race that preceded
is not limited to it. The procession here
the procession and that they are carrying
approaches all the major gods and goddesses
their prize hydriai.27 If this is the case, howof Athens. Athena is among them, but she is
ever, it is surprising that they do not wear
given no special prominence. Whether the
victors' garlands. It is also possible that there
were water bearers on the lost sections of the
male figures who flank the gods are the
south frieze. The tray bearers could be the eponymous heroes, or the archons, or athloskaphephoroi of the Panathenaic procession, thetai, or some other officials, they would
metic youths who carried cakes and honey, seem to be appropriate for all Athenian relibut Harpokration's definition of skaphe- gious rites; and the same can be said, I think,
phoroi implies that they marched in other for the figures of women who carry phialai,
processions as well.28 Perhaps the most oinochoai, and thymiateria. Some of them
appealing argument for a close connection may have been intended to represent the
arrephoroi or the ergastinai, but it is unlikely
between this part of the frieze and the
Panathenaic procession is the suggestion of that all of them were.
If the Parthenon frieze does not simply
Simon, following Ludwig Deubner, that the
difference between the sacrificial animals on
the north and south sides is an allusion to
represent the Panathenaic procession but
portrays instead a more general and collective picture of certain cultural institutions
two separate sacrifices that took place after
in Classical Athens, does it contain any unithe Panathenaic procession reached the
Acropolis: sheep were offered, according fying idea? Or is it an aggregate of essentially
to an ancient custom, to Pandrossos in the independent sections loosely linked together
"old temple/7 that is, the site of the later by the motif of a procession? I would like to
Erechtheion, while cattle were offered to propose that there is a unifying principle
behind the organization of the frieze and
occasion on which sheep were offered in that this principle may derive from the cul-
Athena.29 This was, however, not the only
Athens as sacrificial victims in Athenian
tural ideology that is set forth in the public
funeral oration of 430 b.c. that Thucydides
religion. So, although there are possibly
some allusions to the Panathenaia in the
(2.35-46) ascribes to Perikles. There is, it
sacrificial procession on the north andseems
southto me, a structural analogy between
the components
of the frieze and the distincsides of the frieze, it is equally possible,
and
features of Athenian society that Perikles
in some respects less problematical, to tive
interdelineates in this famous speech.
pret them as general images of the sacrificial
Perikles begins, rather remarkably, by saycomponents of all Athenian religious festivals and not the Panathenaia alone, as a
ing that he is not going to dwell on his councomposite image, in other words, designed trymen's military exploits, which must have
been what his audience was expecting, but
that he will dwell instead on the emrriSerelieved to hear, I do not doubt that the pep- wBis, the studies and practices that helped
to evoke the spirit of the city's religious life.
On the east frieze, the reader may be
los scene in the center alludes to one of the
to develop the character of Athens' citizens
and were the source of the city's greatness
culminating rites of the Panathenaic proces(section 36). The Athens of his time, as he
sion. I would point out, however, that in the
describes it, was a free and open society in
overall design of the frieze this scene occurs
which anyone who clearly excelled in a paras an isolated semantic unit, quite distinct
POLLITT 6l
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ticular form of endeavor would have a
1 1 . Parthenon, east frieze,
toward what is best for the community were
chance to demonstrate that excellence and
most effectively expressed: crycovss, contests;
composition
restoration of total
From Bernhard Schweitzer, "Zur
0wiai, sacrificial rites; and ttoXeixikoi
be recognized for it; moreover, the Athenians
Kunst des Parthenon-Meisters, II,
|xe'8Tai, the systems of military trainingDer Entwurf und der Parthenonhad a tradition of viewing the achievements
Meister," fahrbuch des Deutschen
that made the Athenians superior to theirArchäologischen
of their fellow citizens with generosity and
Instituts 54 (1939),
adversaries.
Beilage (foldout) 1
respect rather than with envy and suspicion.
(Here he is clearly drawing a contrast with It is a striking fact, at least to me, that the
three institutions that Perikles praises as disSpartan society.) Self-assertion and ambition
tinctive of Athens are also the major compoamong the Athenians were tempered, hownents of the Parthenon frieze: processions
ever, by a sense of 8eos, reverence for just
connected with (hxriai occupy the east frieze
authority, which assured voluntary adherand the eastern ends of the north and south
ence to laws and moral standards, both written and unwritten (section 37). Periklesfriezes,- beyond these come àyãves, embodied by the contest of the apobatai ; and
elaborates on this line of thought in the folafter them we have a vivid, recent, and no
lowing sections of the speech (38-39) by citdoubt much discussed, example of Athenian
ing three institutions in the life of the city in
TToXsixiKTj |xe'£TTi, the cavalry. All of the parwhich this spirit of freedom, fellow feeling,
ticipants in these activities seem to be perself-restraint, and voluntary commitment
62 POLLITT
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
vaded by that sense of reverence, ôéos, here
expressed as reverence for the gods, that
Perikles saw as the underlying spirit of his
ideal community.
It does not seem implausible to me that
Pheidias designed the frieze to celebrate each
of the cultural institutions that his patron
liked to single out as distinctive of the
Athenian democracy. If this is so, we should
sent living Athenians, the Athenians of the
time when the Parthenon was being built.30
Others have insisted that the frieze ought to
exhibit a unity of time and space.31 There are
counterarguments to such objections, but a
full discussion of them would carry us
beyond the scope of this paper. I would like
to conclude simply by stressing one point
that often seems to become submerged when
understand the frieze not as a kind of docuscholarly arguments of this sort are carried
mentary picture of a single event but as an on. The Parthenon frieze is a unique monuevocation of all the ceremonies, contests, ment. In size and complexity it has no parallel
and forms of training that made up the cul- in Archaic or Classical Greek relief sculp-
tural and religious life of Classical Athens. ture. It was also created in one of the most
Such an interpretation means, of course, that original and expansive periods in the entire
far from being a repository of ambiguous history of European art. Does it make sense
myth or a veiled vision of history, the to conclude that its designers were incapable
Parthenon frieze represents contemporary of representing something that had never
Athenians and is one of the most explicit been represented before? To say this is like
expressions that we have of the cultural ide- saying that a drama of Sophokles could not
ology of Perikles.
contain anything that was not found in the
I realize that there are objections to such an
early dramas of Thespis or Phrynichos. I pre-
interpretation. For example, some scholars fer to believe that the frieze, like the dramas
maintain that only myth, or at most, mythol- of Sophokles and the history of Thucydides,
ogized history, could be represented in Greek was a product of its time, and it explores the
architectural sculpture and find it "unthink- issues of that time with the same mixture of
able" that the Parthenon frieze might repre- idealism and originality.
POLLITT 63
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
NOTES
i . The sources are given by L. Ziehen 10.
in Inscriptiones
Pauly- Graecae (Berlin, 1873-) (hereafter
Wissowa, Real-Encyclopädie der classischen
IG) IF1028,Alterlines 5-14. Lines 49 and 100 do mention
tumswissenschaft, rev. ed. (Stuttgart, 1893-)
(hereafter
ephebic participation
in gymnastic competitions at
RE), 18.3 (1949), under Panathenaia, 463-470.
the Panathenaic
Texts
games as well as at Eleusinian and
for some of the more obscure lexical references are
Ptolemaic games, but these lines do not mention
given in Ludwig Deubner, Attische Feste (Berlin,
processions.
1932), 25-30.
h. Glen Richard Bugh, The Horsemen of Athens
(Princeton, 1988).
2. Chrysoula Kardara, TXauKcoms, 4 O 'Apxcãos
vacs Kai tò 0TÍ|xa tt¡<s £ax|>ópov tou Ilapôevâjvoç,
12. Bugh 1988, 41-52.
' ApxaioXoyiKri 'E</>rniepí<; 1961, 61-158. A more
13. Evelyn B. Harrison, "Time in the Parthenon
recent mythological interpretation of the frieze sees it
Frieze," in Parthenon-Kongress 1984, 230-234.
not as the Panathenaia but as a procession in connection with the sacrifice of the daughters of Erechtheus
and Praxithea; see Joan B. Connelly, "Parthenon and
Parthenoi: A Mythological Interpretation of the
Parthenon Frieze/' American Journal of Archaeology
100 (1996), 53-80.
3. R. Ross Holloway, "The Archaic Acropolis and the
Parthenon Frieze/7 Art Bulletin 48 (1966), 223-227.
4. John Boardman, "The Parthenon Frieze - Another
View/' in Festschrift für Frank Brommer, ed. U.
Höckmann and A. Krug (Mainz, 1977), 39-49.
5. For example, page 212 in John Boardman, "The
Parthenon Frieze," in Parthenon-Kongress Basel, ed.
Ernst Berger (Mainz, 1984), 210-215; page 107 in
Margaret Cool Root, "The Parthenon Frieze and the
Apadana Reliefs at Persepolis: Reassessing a Programmatic Relationship," American Journal of Archaeology
89 (1985), 103-120.
6. For example, pages 8-9 in Philipp Fehl, "Rocks on
the Parthenon Frieze," Journal of the Warburg and
Courtauld Institutes 24 (1961), 1-44.
7. Susan Rotroff, "The Parthenon Frieze and the
Sacrifice to Athena," American Journal of Archaeology
81 (1977), 379-382.
8. For example, page 187 in Luigi Beschi, "Il fregio del
Partenone: Una proposta di lettura," Atti dell'Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rendiconti, series
8.39 (1984), 173-195; Ziehen 1949, 468.
9. Erika Simon, Festivals of Attica (Madison, Wise.,
1983), 59-
14. Beschi 1984.
15. Harrison 1984, 234; Kardara 1961 identifies w xv.29
as Theseus.
16. Martin Robertson and Alison Frantz, The
Parthenon Frieze (New York, 1975), commentary
on w vra.15. Beschi 1984, 187-188; Bugh 1988, 78
note 135 speculates that they might be phylarchs.
17. Beschi 1984, 187.
18. Robertson and Frantz 1975, pl. 9, caption,- Bugh
1988, 18.
19. Except for w vi.12, who definitely has a sword,
and w m.4, who possibly has one, the riders on the
frieze do not carry weapons. This might seem to con-
tradict the idea that the riders on the frieze are caval-
rymen, but I would note that weapons are also absent
on Athenian votive reliefs that depict, and were dedicated by, cavalrymen (see note 21 below). It is true
that Xenophon, Hipparchikos 3.3, proposes a procession in which riders equipped with spears would gallop through the center of Athens at high speed, but it
is not clear that he is describing a normal practice
(and, in fact, in 3.5 he seems to imply that he is not).
Contests like the Anthippasia would certainly have
been dangerous if conducted with weapons, and it
may be that spears and javelins were not normally
carried in parades and displays within the city.
20. IG IP3079.
21 .IG IF3130; well illustrated in John Travlos, Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Athens (London, 1971),
64 POLLITT
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
1 8; for other reliefs and inscriptions, see T. Leslie
Shear, "The Athenian Agora: Excavations of 1970/'
Hesperia 40 (197 1), 272, pl. 57c; Eugene Vanderpool,
"Victories in the Anthippasia, " Hesperia 43 (1974),
3 1 1-3 1 3; andTravlos 1971, 19.
22. Life of Phocion, 20, • IG U/HL2 2314, lines 36,
67-70; 2316, lines 17-20 and 40; and 2317, line 48
(aiToßctTTis is restored, but the fact that a charioteer's name follows makes the restoration probable).
23. Harpokration, under apobates. In general on the
sources, see Reisch, in RE, under apobates-, Roberto
Patrucco, Lo sport nella Grecia antica (Florence,
1972), 382-385; Donald Kyle, Athletics in Ancient
Athens (Leiden, 1987), 188-189. N. B. Crowther, "The
Apobates Reconsidered (Demosthenes lxi 23-9)/'
Journal of Hellenic Studies in (1991), 174-176, makes
a useful contribution to the subject, but his reason
for concluding that the apobates was "limited to
(Athenian) citizens" is not clear.
24. Simon 1983, 62.
25. For references see Frank Brammer, Der Parthenon-
Fries (Mainz, 1977), 220; Nikolaus Himmelmann,
"Planung und Verdingung der Parthenon-Skulpturen,"
Bathron: Beiträge zur Architektur und verwandten
Künsten für Heinrich Drerup (Saarbrücken, 1988),
213-224.
26. Some examples are illustrated in Jean-Louis
Durand, Sacrifice et labour en grèce ancienne (Paris
and Rome, 1986), 129, 132; N. Alfieri and Paolo E.
Arias, Spina (Munich, 1958), pl. 75 ; Simon 1983, pls.
16.2 and 17.2 and page 63; and citations in T.B.L.
Webster, Potter and Patron in Classical Athens
(London, 1972), 50 and 147-148.
27. Simon 1983, 64.
28. He refers to "processions" in general: èv Taís
7TO|xirai<; oùtoùs |xèv aKác|>a<; <|)8peiv.
29. Simon 1983, 6i; Deubner 1932, 26-27.
30. Boardman 1977, 43 and Boardman 1984, 214.
31. Holloway 1966, 223 and Root 1985, 105 and 107;
against this view see Brammer 1977, 148.
POLLITT 65
This content downloaded from 193.255.6.112 on Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:51:59 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms