The Parthenon Enigma (89 page)

144.
Euripides,
Erechtheus
F 370.107–8 Kannicht. For catasterized Erechtheids as Hyades, see scholiast to Aratus,
Phaenomena
172, 107.

145.
Kansas City, Mo., Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, Nelson Fund 34.289. By the Athena Painter. See Haspels,
ABL
257, no. 74;
Para.
260, no. 74; Neils,
Goddess and Polis
, 148–49n7.

146.
Ferrari suggested this in a talk given at the symposium “Parthenon and Panathenaia” at Princeton University, on September 18, 1993; see S. Peirce and A. Steiner,
Bryn Mawr Classical Review
, March 9, 1994. Ferrari made the case that owls appearing on Athenian coins, state stamps, owl
skyphoi, and other objects represent the daughters of Kekrops.

147.
Uppsala, Uppsala University 352. Douglas, “Owl of Athena”; Farnell,
Cults of the Greek States
, 1:290.

148.
See
note 119
.

149.
Paris, Musée du Louvre CA 2192.
ARV
²
983.14;
Addenda
²
311. Ca. 475–450
B.C
.

150.
For owl skyphoi, see
ARV
²
982–84 with bibliography; F. P. Johnson, “An Owl Skyphos,” in
Studies Presented to David Moore Robinson on His Seventieth Birthday
, ed. G. Mylonas and D. Raymond (St. Louis: Washington University, 1953), 96–105; F. P. Johnson, “A Note on Owl Skyphoi,”
AJA
59 (1955): 119–24.

151.
Bryn Mawr, Pa., Bryn Mawr College, Art and Artifact collection, T-182, ca. 300
B.C.
G. Ferrari Pinney and B. S. Ridgway, eds.,
Aspects of Ancient Greece
(Allentown, Pa.: Allentown Art Museum, 1979), 291n148; Neils,
Goddess and Polis
, 151n12; H. Herdejürgen,
Die Tarentinischen Terrakotten des 6. bis. 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. im Antikenmuseum Basel
(Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 1971), 73–74.

152. The image shown on
this page
is American Numismatic Society, 1977, 158.834. P. van Alfen, “The Coinage of Athens, Sixth to First Century
B.C.
,” in
The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman Coinage
, ed. W. E. Metcalf (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), 88–104, dates their beginning to around 515
B.C.
; Douglas, “Owl of Athena”; E. D. Tai, “ ‘Ancient Greenbacks’: Athenian Owls, the Law of Nikophon, and the Greek Economy,”
Historia
54 (2005): 359–81; Kroll and Waggoner, “Dating the Earliest Coins of Athens, Corinth, and Aegina.” I thank Dr. Peter van Alfen of the American Numismatic Society for providing the image.

153.
Aristophanes,
Birds
301.

154.
Davies, “Athenian Citizenship,” 106.

155.
Rosivach, “Autochthony,” 303.

156.
Davies, “Athenian Citizenship,” 106.

157.
Translation is my own.

158.
Euripides,
Erechtheus
F 359 Kannicht. Translation: Collard and Cropp,
Euripides VII: Fragments
, 375.

159.
Euripides,
Erechtheus
F 366 Kannicht. Translation: Collard and Cropp,
Euripides VII: Fragments
, 385.

160.
Rosivach, “Autochthony,” 302–3.

161.
Ibid.

162.
Fehr,
Becoming Good Democrats and Wives
, 145–49.

163.
N. Loraux,
The Invention of Athens: The Funeral Oration in the Classical City
(Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1986), 15–24.

164.
Euripides,
Erechtheus
F 360a Kannicht, and F 360.53–55 Kannicht.

165.
Thucydides,
Peloponnesian War
, trans. R. Crawley (New York: J. M. Dent, 1903).

8 THE WELL-SCRUBBED LEGACY

1.
R. Fry, “The Case of the Late Sir Lawrence Alma Tadema,” in
A Roger Fry Reader
, ed. C. Reed (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), 147–49, reprinted from
Nation
, January 18, 1913, 666–67.

2.
R. Ash,
Alma-Tadema
(Aylesbury: Shire, 1973); V. Swanson,
Alma-Tadema: The Painter of the Victorian Vision of the Ancient World
(London: Ash & Grant, 1977); R. Ash,
Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema
(London: Pavilion Books, 1989; New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1990); V. Swanson,
The Biography and Catalogue Raisonné of the Paintings of Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema
(London: Garton, 1990); J. G. Lovett and W. R. Johnston,
Empires Restored, Elysium Revisited: The Art of Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema
(Williamstown, Mass.: Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute, 1995), exhibition catalog; E. Becker and E. Prettejohn,
Sir Lawrence Alma Tadema
(Amsterdam: Van Gogh Museum, 1996), exhibition catalog.

3.
Barrow,
Lawrence Alma-Tadema
, 192; E. Swinglehurst,
Lawrence Alma-Tadema
(San Diego: Thunder Bay Press, 2001); R. Tomlinson,
The Athens of Alma Tadema
(Stroud: Sutton, 1991).

4.
Buying-in reported in G. Reitlinger,
The Economics of Taste
, vol. 1:
The Rise and Fall of Picture Prices, 1760–1960
(London: Barrie and Rockliffe, 1961), 243–44.

5.
Barrow,
Lawrence Alma-Tadema
, 43–44.

6.
Athenaeum
, December 8, 1882, 779.

7.
Newton and Pullan,
Halicarnassus, Cnidus, and Branchidae
, 72–264 (description of monument), 78 (as one of the seven wonders of the ancient world), 185 (colors on its architectural members), and 238–39 (colors on the reliefs). See I. Jenkins, C. Gratziu, and A. Middleton, “The Polychromy of the Mausoleum,” in
Sculptors and Sculpture of Caria and the Dodecanese
, ed. I. Jenkins and G. Waywell (London: British Museum, 1997).

8.
Newton and Pullan,
Halicarnassus, Cnidus, and Branchidae
, 238–39.

9. This continued straight to the end of the nineteenth century. See R. R. R. Smith and R. Frederiksen,
The Cast Gallery of the Ashmolean Museum: Catalogue of Plaster Casts of Greek and Roman Sculptures
(Oxford: Ashmolean Museum, 2013); R. Frederiksen, ed.,
Plaster Casts: Making, Collecting, and Displaying from Classical Antiquity to the Present
, Transformationen der Antike (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010); D. C. Kurtz,
The Reception of Classical Art in Britain: An Oxford Story of Plaster Casts from the Antique
(Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, 2000); Yalouri,
Acropolis
, 176–83.

10.
Winckelmann,
Geschichte der Kunst des Alterthums
, 147–48.

11.
Stuart and Revett,
Antiquities of Athens
, 2: plate 6; 3: plate 9. For metal attachments on the Parthenon frieze, see Stuart and Revett’s
Antiquities of Athens
, 2:14.

12.
M. J. Vickers and D. Gill,
Artful Crafts: Ancient Greek Silverware and Pottery
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), 1–32; M. J. Vickers, “Value and Simplicity: Eighteenth-Century Taste and the Study of Greek Vases,”
Past and Present
116 (1987): 98–104.

13.
J.-I. Hittorff,
Restitution du Temple d’Empédocle à Sélinonte
(Paris: Firmin Didot Frères, 1851).

14.
M. Fehlmann, “Casts and Connoisseurs: The Early Reception of the Elgin Marbles,”
Apollo
544 (2007): 44–51. In 1811, the sculptor John Henning objected when the marbles were about to be cleaned with dilute sulfuric acid by Joseph Nollekens’s men. See Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 4.

15.
Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 16–19; Jenkins, “Casts of the Parthenon Sculptures”; Jenkins and Middleton, “Paint on the Parthenon Sculptures,” 202–5.

16.
Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 16; Jenkins and Middleton, “Paint on the Parthenon Sculptures,” 185–86.

17.
Faraday’s findings are questioned by Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 4–5, 16–17.

18.
Ibid., 4.

19.
J. Goury and O. Jones,
Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra
(London: Jones, 1836–1845).

20.
O. Jones, “An Apology for the Colouring of the Greek Court in the Crystal Palace,”
Papers Read at the Royal Institute of British Architects
(1854): 7. For a useful overview of early scholarship on the Parthenon’s polychromy, see Vlassopoulou, “New Investigations into the Polychromy of the Parthenon,” 219–20; Jenkins and Middleton, “Paint on the Parthenon Sculptures.”

21.
G. H. Lewes, “Historical Evidence,”
Papers Read at the Royal Institute of British Architects
(1854): 19.

22.
F. C. Penrose,
An Investigation of the Principles of Athenian Architecture; or, The Results of a Recent Survey Conducted Chiefly with Reference to the Optical Refinements Exhibited in the Constructions of the Ancient Buildings of Athens
(London: Society of the Dilettanti, 1851), 55. See Jenkins and Middleton, “Paint on the Parthenon Sculptures,” where they argue for ancient base coatings on the sculptures applied in advance of the application of color.

23.
On June 18, 1858, a writer who signed as “Marmor” railed, “Sir, they are scrubbing the Elgin Marbles!” Westmacott’s method of cleaning with fuller’s earth was contrary to the advice of the keeper of antiquities, Edward Hawkins (employed in the post since 1826), who had advised a gentler cleaning with “clay water.” See Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 5–6.

24.
Ibid., 6; Officers Report: The Reports of the Keepers of the Antiquities Departments to the Trustees, June 25, 1868 (British Museum).

25.
Newton recommended that the pedimental sculptures be similarly protected. See Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 6; Officers Report: The Reports of the Keepers of the Antiquities Departments to the Trustees, October 8, 1873 (British Museum).

26. Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 6.

27.
Ibid.; Officers Report: The Reports of the Keepers of the Antiquities Departments to the Trustees, January 23, 1933 (British Museum).

28.
David Lindsay, Earl of Crawford,
The Crawford Papers: The Journals of David Lindsay, Twenty-Seventh Earl of Crawford and Tenth Earl of Balcarres, 1871–1940, During the Years 1892 to 1940
, ed. J. Vincent (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1984). See Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 6.

29.
Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 8, 37–39, gives the First Interim Report to the Trustees, November 7, 1938, in which Lord Duveen’s foreman, a man named Daniel, is said to have “expressed Lord Duveen’s desire that the sculptures be made as clean and white as possible.”

30.
The Second Interim Report, December 8, 1938, contains the testimony of two laborers who had used copper tools in cleaning from June 1937 on. See Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 46–47, 24–25, and plate 10, for discussion and illustration of tools used in the cleaning. Dr. R. D. Barnett, retired keeper of Western Asiatic antiquities at the museum, stated in a letter to the museum’s director (February 9, 1984) that he had been puzzled as to why an elderly laborer had been allowed to sit “day after day using hammer and chisel and wire brushes” on the Parthenon’s metopes and frieze slabs. See Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 7, for background context to this document, which Jenkins sees as “artfully designed” to discredit all but Barnett himself. The full document (marked “Strictly Private and Confidential”) is published in Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, as app. 5, 45.

31.
Letter of Plenderleith, dated September 26, 1938, published in Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 36.

32.
Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, app. 2; First Interim Report, 27, 37–39.

33.
All press clippings are published in Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, 9, 57–65.

34.
St. Clair,
Lord Elgin and the Marbles
, 280–313; W. St. Clair, “The Elgin Marbles: Questions of Stewardship and Accountability,”
International Journal of Cultural Property
8 (1999): 397–521. Jenkins,
Cleaning and Controversy
, presents a wonderfully thorough account of the history of the cleaning of the Parthenon sculptures with all relevant documentation and archival materials.

35.
Vlassopoulou, “New Investigations into the Polychromy of the Parthenon”; C. Vlassopoulou, “Η πολυχρωμία στον Παρθενώνα,” in Πολύχρωμοι Θεοί: Χρώματα στα αρχαία γλυπτά, ed. V. Brinkmann, N. Kaltsas, and R. Wünsche (Athens: National Archaeological Museum, 2007), 98–101. I thank Christina Vlassopoulou for her kindness in sharing this information with me.

36.
Blue pigment has been found on the fillet of the metopes and triglyphs and on the three vertical bars (
meroi
) of the triglyphs themselves. X-ray diffraction analysis and electron beam microanalysis shows that the blue paint is “Egyptian blue” (CaCuSi
₄
O
₁₀
) and the red is ferric oxide (hematite, Fe
₂
O
₃
). See Vlassopoulou, “Η πολυχρωμία στον Παρθενώνα” (note 35, above), who cites K. Kouzeli et al., “Monochromatic layers with and without oxalates on the Parthenon,” in
The Oxalate Films: Origins and Significance in the Conservation of Works of Art
(Milan: Centro CNR Gino Bozza, 1989), 198–202, esp. 199, figs. 30–32.