DOI article:
Crow, John; Clarke, Joseph Thacher: The Athenian Pnyx
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.8561#0261
246
THE ATHENIAN PNYX.
dedicated to Zeus the Highest. The religious character is to be seen
in the structure itself. Its unchangeable and monumental nature
favors the idea that the supposed bema is an altar. It is a sur-
prising fact that we find here three altars almost in a line, one on top
of the hill, one at the upper side of the enclosure (the so-called
bema), and one in the middle of it. It is probable that we have
before us here a OcSiv ayopa., such as are mentioned in Greek writers.
If we take into consideration the great antiquity of this double
terrace, its suitable situation for uniting the different districts of city
and country, its unmistakable connection with the old rock city of
the KpavaoL, the adaptability of the place for a common religious
service, the inscriptions which testify to the antiquity of the service
of Zeus in this place, the traces of different altars, the tradition of an
ayopa 6eS>v in Cyzicus, Eleusis, and Athens, we shall probably be
justified in assuming, Curtius concludes, that this is the ayopa. 8ewv of
Athens, in whose midst Zeus was worshipped as the Highest.
As to the site of the real Pnyx, Curtius supposes that it was on
the north side of the Museum Hill. Here he made excavations, but
without material result.
Of the articles published since 1862 that of Christensen is by far
the most important. He concludes that the Pnyx could not have
been situated in any other place than on the ridge of hills on which,
the quarter of the city called Melite lay, i.e. the Pnyx Hills; and:
further that it must have been on the eastern slope of one of these
hills. Then he presents the usual arguments against Chandler's,
theory. The age, the size, the slope of the hill, the north wind, the
unfitness of the bema for a speaker's stage, the impossibility of turn-
ing it around, and the inscriptions, are all considered, and a conclu-
sion is reached, that " neither the upper nor the lower terrace can
have been, in historical times, the well-known place of popular
assembly on the Pnyx." This leads naturally to an inquiry about the
use of the place. As to this Christensen agrees, except in one point,
with Curtius and Welcker. The name of the hill, he thinks, could
well be changed to Altar Hill. He then criticises the advocates of
the ajtar theory for claiming that the place was sacred to Zeus. He
questions the consistency of assuming the worship of Zeus here in the
most ancient times on the uncertain evidence of inscriptions which, as
all admit, were set up in Roman times. He cannot understand why a
THE ATHENIAN PNYX.
dedicated to Zeus the Highest. The religious character is to be seen
in the structure itself. Its unchangeable and monumental nature
favors the idea that the supposed bema is an altar. It is a sur-
prising fact that we find here three altars almost in a line, one on top
of the hill, one at the upper side of the enclosure (the so-called
bema), and one in the middle of it. It is probable that we have
before us here a OcSiv ayopa., such as are mentioned in Greek writers.
If we take into consideration the great antiquity of this double
terrace, its suitable situation for uniting the different districts of city
and country, its unmistakable connection with the old rock city of
the KpavaoL, the adaptability of the place for a common religious
service, the inscriptions which testify to the antiquity of the service
of Zeus in this place, the traces of different altars, the tradition of an
ayopa 6eS>v in Cyzicus, Eleusis, and Athens, we shall probably be
justified in assuming, Curtius concludes, that this is the ayopa. 8ewv of
Athens, in whose midst Zeus was worshipped as the Highest.
As to the site of the real Pnyx, Curtius supposes that it was on
the north side of the Museum Hill. Here he made excavations, but
without material result.
Of the articles published since 1862 that of Christensen is by far
the most important. He concludes that the Pnyx could not have
been situated in any other place than on the ridge of hills on which,
the quarter of the city called Melite lay, i.e. the Pnyx Hills; and:
further that it must have been on the eastern slope of one of these
hills. Then he presents the usual arguments against Chandler's,
theory. The age, the size, the slope of the hill, the north wind, the
unfitness of the bema for a speaker's stage, the impossibility of turn-
ing it around, and the inscriptions, are all considered, and a conclu-
sion is reached, that " neither the upper nor the lower terrace can
have been, in historical times, the well-known place of popular
assembly on the Pnyx." This leads naturally to an inquiry about the
use of the place. As to this Christensen agrees, except in one point,
with Curtius and Welcker. The name of the hill, he thinks, could
well be changed to Altar Hill. He then criticises the advocates of
the ajtar theory for claiming that the place was sacred to Zeus. He
questions the consistency of assuming the worship of Zeus here in the
most ancient times on the uncertain evidence of inscriptions which, as
all admit, were set up in Roman times. He cannot understand why a