FOOTNOTES
[1] Herod. VII. 140.
[2] Thucyd. II. 14 χαλεπῶς δὲ αὐτοῖς, διὰ τὸ ἀεὶ εἰωθέναι τοὺς πολλοὺς ἐν τοῖς ἀγροῖς διαιτᾶσθαι, ἡ ἀνάστασις ἐγίγνετο.
[3] Thucyd. I. 5, 10.
[4] Thucyd. II. 15 καὶ ξυνοίκια ἐξ ἐκείνου Ἀθηναῖοι ἔτι καὶ νῦν τῇ θεῷ ἑορτὴν δημοτελῆ ποιοῦσι.
[5] Thucyd. II. 15 τὸ δὲ πρὸ τούτου ἡ ἀκρόπολις ἡ νῦν οὖσα πόλις ἦν καὶ τὸ ὑπ’ αὐτὴν πρὸς νότον μάλιστα τετραμμένον· τεκμήριον δέ. τὰ γὰρ ἱερὰ ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ἀκροπόλει καὶ ἄλλων θεῶν ἐστί, καὶ τὰ ἔξω πρὸς τοῦτο τὸ μέρος τῆς πόλεως μᾶλλον ἵδρυται, τό τε τοῦ Διὸς τοῦ Ὀλυμπίου καὶ τὸ Πύθιον καὶ τὸ τῆς Γῆς καὶ τὸ ἐν Λίμναις Διονύσου (ᾧ τὰ ἀρχαιότερα Διονύσια τῇ δωδεκάτῃ ποιεῖται ἐν μηνὶ Ἀνθεστηριῶνι) ὥσπερ καὶ οἱ ἀπ’ Ἀθηναίων Ἴωνες ἔτι καὶ νῦν νομίζουσιν, ἵδρυται δὲ καὶ ἄλλα ἱερὰ ταύτῃ ἀρχαῖα. καὶ τῇ κρήνῃ τῇ νῦν μὲν τῶν τυράννων οὕτω σκευασάντων Ἐννεακρούνῳ καλουμένῃ, τὸ δὲ πάλαι φανερῶν τῶν πηγῶν οὐσῶν Καλλιῤῥόῃ ὠνομασμένῃ—ἐκείνῃ τε ἐγγὺς οὔσῃ τὰ πλείστου ἄξια ἐχρῶντο, καὶ νῦν ἔτι ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀρχαίου πρό τε γαμικῶν καὶ ἐς ἄλλα τῶν ἱερῶν νομίζεται τῷ ὕδατι χρῆσθαι. καλεῖται δὲ διὰ τὴν παλαιὰν ταύτῃ κατοίκησιν καὶ ἡ ἀκρόπολις μέχρι τοῦδε ἔτι ὑπ’ Ἀθηναίων πόλις.
[6] I keep the MS. reading; see Critical Note.
[7] See Dr A. W. Verrall, The Site of Primitive Athens. Thucydides II. 15 and recent explorations, Class. Rev. June 1900, p. 274. In the discussion of the actual text, I have throughout followed Dr Verrall.
[8] Plat. Kritias 112.
[9] Antigonos, Hist. Mirab. 12.
[10] W. Dörpfeld, “Ueber die Ausgrabungen auf der Akropolis,” Athen. Mitt. XI. 1886, p. 162.
[11] ap. Suidam, s.v. Ἄπεδα el. Ἠπέδιζον: ἄπεδα, τὰ ἰσόπεδα. Κλείδημος ‘καὶ ἠπέδιζον τὴν ἀκρόπολιν, περιέβαλλον δὲ ἐννεάπυλον τὸ Πελασγικόν.’
[12] Dörpfeld, “Die Propylaeen,” A. Mitt. X. 1885, p. 139 and see the plan of the Propylaea in my Myth. and Mon. Anc. Athens, p. 352.
[13] Dörpfeld, ‘Ausgrabungen auf der Akropolis,’ A. Mitt. XI. 1896, p. 167.
[14] Dr Kabbadias, Fouilles de l’Acropole, 1886, Pl. I. and descriptive text.
[15] The discussion and interpretation of these figures is reserved for p. 51.
[16] Ἐφήμερις Ἀρχαιολογική, 1866, p. 78.
[17] Eph. Arch. 1887, pl. 4.
[18] Eph. Arch. 1887, pl. 8.
[19] Dörpfeld, ‘Die Zeit des älteren Parthenon,’ A. Mitt. 1902, p. 410.
[20] A. Mitt. 3892, p. 158, pl. VIII. and IX.
[21] Plut. Vit. Cim. 13.
[22] Unfortunately at the actual time of the excavations the chronology of the various retaining walls was not clearly evident and the precise place where many of the fragments excavated were found was not noted with adequate precision.
[24] F. Hauser, Strena Helbigiana, p. 115. The reverse was first correctly explained thro’ the identification of the σταφύλη by Dr O. Rossbach, ‘Verschollene Sagen und Kulten,’ Neue Jahrbücher f. Kl. Altertumswissenschaft, 1901, p. 390.
[25] Il. II. 765 ... ἵπποι σταφύλῃ ἐπὶ νῶτον ἔϊσαι.
[26] See Roscher, Lex. s.v.
[27] Paus. II. 25. 7.
[28] Paus. II. 16. 5.
[29] Paus. IX. 5. 6.
[30] Apoll. Rhod. I. 736.
[31] Strabo, VIII. 21 § 379. See my Prolegomena, p. 609.
[32] Od. XI. 594. Mr Salomon Reinach in his “Sisyphe aux enfers et quelques autres damnés,” Rev. Arch. 1903, has established beyond doubt the true interpretation of the stone of Sisyphos.
[33] Paus. I. 28. 3.
[34] Dr Rendel Harris, The Dioscuri, p. 8.
[35] Plin. Nat. Hist. VII. 57.
[36] For Euryalos see Eph. Arch. 1885, Taf. v. 2 and 3. For Hyperbios, Mon. d. Inst. VI. and VII.
[37] Herod. VI. 137 μισθὸν τοῦ τείχεος τοῦ περὶ τὴν ἀκρόπολίν ποτε ἐληλαμένου.
[38] Herod. V. 64 ἐπολιόρκεε τοὺς τυράννους ἀπεργμένους ἐν τῷ Πελασγικῷ τείχει. All the MSS. except Z have Πελασγικῷ: Z has been corrected to Πελαργικῷ.
[39] C.I.A. IV. 2. 27. 6 ... ἐν τῷ Πελαργικῷ ... ἐκ τοῦ Πελαργικοῦ.
[40] In the best MS. (Laur. C).
[41] For details of this temple, see my Myth. and Mon. Anc. Athens, p. 496. For its ground-plan, see below p. 40, Fig. 18.
[42] Wiegand-Schrader-Dörpfeld, Poros-Architektur der Akropolis. For any realization of pre-Periclean architecture a study of the coloured plates of this work is essential.
[43] Typhon and Tritons appear together on the throne of Apollo at Amyclae. The artistic motives of this Ionian work are largely Oriental. The conjunction of Typhon and the Tritons is not, I think, a mere decorative chance. Attention has not, I think, been called, in connection with this pediment, to the fact that in Plutarch’s Isis and Osiris (XXXII.) Typhon is the sea into which the Nile flows (Τυφῶνα δὲ τὴν θάλασσαν, εἰς ἣν ὁ Νεῖλος ἐμπίπτων ἀφανίζεται). The Egyptian inspiration of the Isis and Osiris no one will deny, and on this Egyptianized pediment with its lotus-flowers the Egyptian sea-god Typhon is well in place. His name is doubtless, as Muss Arnolt Semitic Words in Greek and Latin, p. 59 points out, connected with Heb. צָפוֹן hidden, dark, northern. The sea was north of Egypt.
[44] Ar. Av. 1139
[45] Eur. Ion 154, trans. by Dr Verrall.
[46] See Lechat, Au Musée de l’Acropole d’Athènes, p. 215.
[47] Any learned blunderer might write Πελασγικόν for Πελαργικόν, but if Πελασγικόν were the original form it would be little likely to be changed to Πελαργικόν.
[48] Thucyd. II. 17 τό τε Πελαργικὸν καλούμενον τὸ ὑπὸ τὴν ἀκρόπολιν, ὃ καὶ ἐπάρατόν τε ἦν μὴ οἰκεῖν καί τι καὶ Πυθικοῦ μαντείου ἀκροτελεύτιον τοιόνδε διεκώλυε, λέγον ὡς τὸ Πελαργικὸν ἀργὸν ἄμεινον, ὅμως ὑπὸ τῆς παραχρῆμα ἀνάγκης ἐξῳκήθη. Thucydides calls ‘τὸ Πελαργικὸν ἀργὸν ἀμείνον’ a final hemistich. Mr A. B. Cook kindly points out to me that it is in fact a complete line of the ancient metrical form preceding the hexameter and known as paroimiac.
[49] καὶ τὸ ὑπ’ αὐτὴν μάλιστα πρὸς νότον τετραμμένον.
[50] Lucian, Piscator, 46.
[51] C.I.A. IV. 2. 27. 6.
[52] Poll. On. VIII. 101.
[53] Dörpfeld, ‘Die Propyläen 1 und 2,’ A. Mitt. X. 1885, pp. 38 and 131 and see my Mon. and Myth. Ancient Athens, p. 353.
[54] Dörpfeld, A. Mitt. XXVII. 1902, p. 405.
[55] The number of these gates is of course purely conjectural. The sketch in Fig. 15 which I owe to the kindness of Prof. Dörpfeld gives five only on the western slope. The line of the walls HJK is suggested by remains of the 6th century B.C. which probably occupy the site of still earlier Pelasgic fortifications (see p. 35 note 2). Of the remaining gates one would probably be near where the Asklepieion was later built and one or more on the north slope.
[56] Lucian, Bis Accus. 9 μικρὸν ὑπὲρ τοῦ Πελασγικοῦ.
[57] Herod. VIII. 52.
[58] Lucian, Piscator 42.
[59] See Mon. and Myth. Ancient Athens, p. 299.
[60] Op. cit. p. 152.
[61] Polem. ap. Schol. Oed. Col. 489 καθάπερ Πολέμων ἐν τοῖς πρὸς Ἐρατοσθένην φησίν, οὕτω ... κριὸν Ἡσύχῳ ἱερὸν ἥρω ... οὗ τὸ ἱερόν ἐστι παρὰ τὸ Κυλώνειον, ἐκτὸς τῶν ἐννέα πυλῶν. The MS. has Κυδώνιον, the emendation, which seems certain, is due to C. O. Mueller.
[62] Plut. Vit. Solon. XII. and Thucyd. I. 126.
[63] For these details about the date of the various walls I am indebted to Professor Dörpfeld. Dr F. Noack holds that the nine-gated Pelargikon was not of Mycenaean date but was built by Peisistratos, the earlier Pelargikon being a much simpler structure. Prof. Dörpfeld also holds that there was no nine-gated Pelargikon in Mycenaean days, but he believes that the Peisistratids only strengthened an already existing fortification, building perhaps some additional gates. The Enneapylon would then have its contemporary analogy in the Enneakrounos. See F. Noack, Arne, A. Mitt. 1894, p. 418.
[64] A protest was raised against the building of the Asklepieion after it was begun; possibly this was because of its encroachment on the Pelargikon. See A. Koerte, A. Mitt. 1896, pp. 318-331.
[65] See Critical Note.
[66] See throughout Prof. Dörpfeld, ‘Der ursprüngliche Plan des Erechtheion,’ A. Mitt. 1904, p. 101, Taf. VI.
[67] See Dörpfeld, A. Mitt. XXVIII. 1903, p. 468.
[68] ο]ντος Αθηνων Κεκροπος, ἐτη ΧΗΗΔ.
[69] Thucyd. II. 15.
[70] Apollod. III. 14.
[71] Herod. VIII. 44.
[72] Harp. in voc.; Poll. On. IX. 109.
[73] Paus. I. 3. 6.
[74] Hom. Il. II. 547 δῆμον Ἐρεχθῆος μεγαλητόρος.
[75] Aristoph. Vesp. 438 ὧ Κέκροψ ἥρως ἄναξ τὰ πρὸς ποδῶν δρακοντίδη.
[76] Tzetzes, Chil. V. 19.
[77] Only once so far as I know is Kekrops definitely called a snake, in the Hekale of Callimachus; speaking of the decision in favour of Athene as against Poseidon he says (V. 9)
See Gomperz, Rainer Papyrus VI. 1897, p. 9.
[78] Prof. Dörpfeld kindly suggests to me that the type of the Cretan Snake-Goddess recently brought to light by Dr Evans and Miss Boyd may have had its influence on the goddess of Athens. I agree (see my Prolegomena, p. 307 note 3) and hope to return to this question on another occasion.
[79] Herod. VIII. 41. The snake was of course at first imaginary and Herodotus seems to doubt its existence.
[80] Paus. I. 24. 7.
[81] Hesiod, ap. Strab. IX. 9. § 393.
[82] Soph. Philoct. 1327.
[83] Paus. VI. 20. 2-4.
[84] Clem. Al. Protr. III. 45, p. 39.
[85] Theod. Graec. affect. cur. VIII. 30, p. 908 καὶ γὰρ Ἀθήνησιν, ὡς Ἀντίοχος ἐν τῇ ἐνάτῃ γέγραφεν ἱστορίᾳ ἄνω γε ἐν τῇ ἀκροπόλει Κέκροπός ἐστι τάφος παρὰ τὴν Πολιοῦχον αὐτήν.
[86] Δελτ. Αρχ. 1889, p. 10, fig. No. 3 ἐν τῷ τοῦ Κέκροπος ἱε[ρῷ.
[87] C.I.A. III. 1276 ἱε[ρ]εὺς Κέκρο[π]ος Ἀρίστων Σωσιστράτου Ἀθμονεύς.
[88] Brit. Mus. I. xxxv.; C.I.A. I. 322. The inscription is engraved on two slabs of Pentelic marble.
[89] loc. cit. line 83
[90] For the name Caryatid as explained by Vitruvius see my Mon. and Myth. Anc. Athens, p. 489.
[91] Dörpfeld, ‘Der ursprüngliche Plan des Erechtheion,’ A. Mitt. XXIX. p. 104, 1904.
[92] Wiegand, Die archäische Poros-Architektur der Akropolis zu Athen (1904), p. 106; and see also M. H. Lechat, La sculpture Attique avant Pheidias, p. 53.
[93] Herod. VII. 41 λέγουσι Ἀθηναῖοι ὄφιν μέγαν φύλακα τῆς ἀκροπόλιος ἐνδιαιτᾶσθαι ἐν τῷ ἱρῷ.
[94] Eur. Ion 21-26, trans. Dr Verrall.
[95] Brit. Mus. Cat. E 418. See my Myth. and Mon. Anc. Athens, p. xxxi. Two snakes also appear as Dr Wiegand op. cit. points out in the Atthis attributed to Amelesagoras; see Westermann Paradoxogr. XII. 63 Ἀμελησαγόρας δὲ ὁ Ἀθηναῖος ὁ τὴν Ἀτθίδα συγγράφων ... φησὶ τὰς δὲ Κέκροπος θυγατέρας τὰς δύω Ἄγραυλον καὶ Πάνδροσον τὴν κίστην ἀνοῖξαι καὶ ἰδεῖν δράκοντας δύω περὶ τὸν Ἐριχθόνιον. Hesychius s.v. οἰκουρὸς ὄφις says ... οἱ μὲν ἕνα φασὶν οἳ δὲ δύο ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ τοῦ Ἐρεχθέως.
[96] C.I.A. I. 322, line 44
and in C.I.A. IV. 321, III. line 32
[97] Δελτ. Αρχ. 1888, p. 87, fig. 1 B, lines 27 and 41
[98] P. I. 27. 2 τῷ ναῷ δὲ τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς Πανδρόσου ναὸς συνεχής ἐστι.
[99] Paus. I. 18. 2. For the vase-paintings that illustrate the story see my Myth. and Mon. Anc. Athens, p. xxiii.
[100] Paus. I. 21. 4 see Myth. and Mon. Anc. Athens, p. 299.
[101] P. I. 22. 5.
[102] P. I. 18. 2.
[103] See my ‘Mythological Studies—the three daughters of Kekrops,’ Journ. Hell. Soc. XII. p. 351, 1891.
[104] For a fuller discussion of the Arrephoria in relation to the Thesmophoria, see my Prolegomena, p. 131; and for the child in the mystery liknon, p. 525.
[105] C.I.A. II. 481, 58.
[106] s.v. ἐπίβοιον.
[107] C.I.A. I. 322 (Brit. Mus. I. 35. 571), l. 83 ἐπὶ τε͂ι προστάσει τε͂ι πρὸς το͂[ι] Κεκροπίοι ἔδει τὸς λίθος τὸς ὀροφιαίος τὸς ἐπὶ το͂ν κορο͂ν ἐπεργάσασθαι ἄνοθεν, see p. 46.
[108] Anth. Pal. VI. 280
see my Prolegomena, p. 301.
[109] C.I.A. I. 141 κορὴ χρυσῆ ἐπὶ στήλης, v. Lolling, Cat. des inscr. de l’Acropole, No. 267 τήνδε κόρην ἀνέθηκεν ἀπαρχήν.
[110] Jahrbuch d. Inst. II. 1887, p. 219.
[111] C.I.A. IV. suppl. 373 and Eph. Arch. 1886, p. 81, l. 6.
[112] Paus. II. 5. 1, III. 15. 10.
[113] Paus. III. 21. 10.
[114] Paus. I. 26. 5.
[115] Paus. VIII. 2. 3.
[116] Athen. XIII. 2. § 555 and Tzetzes, Chil. V. 19. v. 650.
[117] S. Aug. de civitat. Dei, 18. 9 ut nullus nascentium maternum nomen acciperet.
[118] Apollod. III. 14. 2 μετὰ δὲ τοῦτον ἧκεν Ἀθηνᾶ, καὶ ποιησαμένη τῆς καταλήψεως Κέκροπα μάρτυρα ἐφύτευσεν ἐλαίαν ἣ νῦν ἐν τῷ Πανδροσείῳ δείκνυται.
[119] Herod. VIII. 55.
[120] Hesych. Fig. 146 ἀστὴ ἐλαία, ἡ ἐν ἀκροπόλει ἡ καλουμένη παγκύφος διὰ χθαμαλότητα.
[121] For full discussion of the fragments see Dr Th. Wiegand, Die archäische Poros-Architektur der Akropolis zu Athen, p. 97; Das älteste Erechtheion und der heilige Oelbaum, Taf. XIV. on which the restoration in Fig. 20 is based. The door really at the end of the building is, perhaps by a not uncommon convention, brought into view at the side. Cf. the temple of Janus on a coin of Nero.
[122] Unfortunately the site of the ‘sea’ has never been systematically excavated and examined. Professor Dörpfeld tells me that the cistern now visible is of mediaeval date. Until the mediaeval masonry is removed the precise character of the ‘sea’ cannot be determined. There was certainly no spring, the geological character of the Acropolis plateau forbids that, but a well may exist.
[123] Paus. I. 26. 5 ταῦτα δὲ λέγεται Ποσειδῶνι μαρτύρια ἐς τὴν ἀμφισβήτησιν τῆς χώρας φανῆναι.
[124] Apollod. III. 14. 1.
[125] Paus. I. 26. 5. The sea well at Caria was sacred to a foreign god called Osogoa, see Paus. VIII. 10. 4. It is worth noting that Semitic gods have ‘seas’ in their sanctuaries; Solomon’s temple had a brazen ‘sea’ and Marduk at Babylon had a tamtu or sea, and curiously enough it was associated with the great serpent. See King, Babylonian Religion, p. 105.
[126] Ovid Fasti, II. 667
[127] Serv. ad Aen. IX. 448.
[128] Varro L. L. V. 66.
[129] Vitr. I. 2. 5.
[130] Paus. V. 14. 10.