DOI Kapitel:
Divison D: The Acropolis, from the Propylaea to the statue of Athene Lemnia
DOI Kapitel:Section XVII
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.61302#0591
SEC. XVII
OF ANCIENT A THENS
4‘7
of the Ge inscription ; they are included in the view (fig. 32) to the
right :—
Κόνων T(ja.[o]#€ou TtjCio^eos Κόνω[ΐΌ$].
(“ Konon, son of Timotheos ; Timotheos, son of Konon.”)
Pausanias then, almost immediately after his mention of the
“ temple,” stands probably close to the spot of the Ge inscription ;
between the two there is only the statue by Kleoitas. On the
other hand, between his mention of the sanctuary of Artemis
Brauronia and the temple are a long list of monuments, some of
which stood opposite (ττεραν) to the others, suggesting an avenue
lined on either side. Between the Propylaea and the Parthenon
there was one regular, broad road. On either side of this would
stand statues, shrines, votive offerings, and the like. Of the places
hollowed in the rock to receive such monuments, there are
abundant traces. It seems probable, though not certain, that, as
Dr. Dorpfeld supposes, Pausanias described first all the monu-
ments on one—?>., the right—side, and then turned back and
described those on his left, which, of course, were opposite to the
other series (tovtow TrepaN).
Of this state of the case Dr. Dorpfeld avails himself to plead
for his “ old temple.” But it should be distinctly noted that
though the Ge monument is not far from the south side of the
“ old temple,” Pausanias on coming out from the temple would
not naturally find himself at the monument ; Dr. Dorpfeld in his
plan has to make him double back to reach it. Pausanias
usually went in at the principal entrance of a place, and he
would far more naturally have cleared off all the monuments
between the Parthenon and it before beginning his account of the
“ old temple.” Therefore, as regards the route of Pausanias it
seems to me that neither the Ergane nor the “old temple” theory
fits in comfortably. There are, however, other and more positive
reasons for rejecting the Ergane theory, and these must be stated
at once to set that alternative entirely out of the question :—
First, the existence of a temple to Athene Ergane is pure
hypothesis. I would guard against misunderstanding. Ergane
was a title of Athene ; that admits of no question ; but the title
Athene Ergane no more presupposes a temple to Athene Ergane
than does the title Hygieia a temple to Athene Hygieia. Indeed
not so much : Athene Hygieia had an altar, and hence a cult ;
of Athene Ergane not even so much can be certainly said. Five
inscriptions are known in which the title occurs ; three of them
2 E
OF ANCIENT A THENS
4‘7
of the Ge inscription ; they are included in the view (fig. 32) to the
right :—
Κόνων T(ja.[o]#€ou TtjCio^eos Κόνω[ΐΌ$].
(“ Konon, son of Timotheos ; Timotheos, son of Konon.”)
Pausanias then, almost immediately after his mention of the
“ temple,” stands probably close to the spot of the Ge inscription ;
between the two there is only the statue by Kleoitas. On the
other hand, between his mention of the sanctuary of Artemis
Brauronia and the temple are a long list of monuments, some of
which stood opposite (ττεραν) to the others, suggesting an avenue
lined on either side. Between the Propylaea and the Parthenon
there was one regular, broad road. On either side of this would
stand statues, shrines, votive offerings, and the like. Of the places
hollowed in the rock to receive such monuments, there are
abundant traces. It seems probable, though not certain, that, as
Dr. Dorpfeld supposes, Pausanias described first all the monu-
ments on one—?>., the right—side, and then turned back and
described those on his left, which, of course, were opposite to the
other series (tovtow TrepaN).
Of this state of the case Dr. Dorpfeld avails himself to plead
for his “ old temple.” But it should be distinctly noted that
though the Ge monument is not far from the south side of the
“ old temple,” Pausanias on coming out from the temple would
not naturally find himself at the monument ; Dr. Dorpfeld in his
plan has to make him double back to reach it. Pausanias
usually went in at the principal entrance of a place, and he
would far more naturally have cleared off all the monuments
between the Parthenon and it before beginning his account of the
“ old temple.” Therefore, as regards the route of Pausanias it
seems to me that neither the Ergane nor the “old temple” theory
fits in comfortably. There are, however, other and more positive
reasons for rejecting the Ergane theory, and these must be stated
at once to set that alternative entirely out of the question :—
First, the existence of a temple to Athene Ergane is pure
hypothesis. I would guard against misunderstanding. Ergane
was a title of Athene ; that admits of no question ; but the title
Athene Ergane no more presupposes a temple to Athene Ergane
than does the title Hygieia a temple to Athene Hygieia. Indeed
not so much : Athene Hygieia had an altar, and hence a cult ;
of Athene Ergane not even so much can be certainly said. Five
inscriptions are known in which the title occurs ; three of them
2 E