What is type of stone is used in the Parthenon?

In March 2011, archaeologists announced that they had discovered five metopes of the Parthenon in the south wall of the Acropolis, which had been extended when the Acropolis was used as a fortress. According to "Eleftherotypia" daily, the archaeologists claimed the metopes had been placed there in the 18th century when the Acropolis wall was being repaired. The experts discovered the metopes while processing 2,250 photos with modern photographic methods, as the white Pentelic marble they are made of differed from the other stone of the wall. It was previously presumed that the missing metopes were destroyed during the Morosini explosion of the Parthenon in 1687.

Parthenon

The Parthenon (; ;, "Parthenónas") is a former temple on the Athenian Acropolis, Greece, dedicated to the goddess Athena, whom the people of Athens considered their patron. Construction began in 447 BC when the Athenian Empire was at the peak of its power. It was completed in 438 BC, although decoration of the building continued until 432 BC. It is the most important surviving building of Classical Greece, generally considered the zenith of the Doric order. Its decorative sculptures are considered some of the high points of Greek art. The Parthenon is regarded as an enduring symbol of Ancient Greece, Athenian democracy and Western civilization, and one of the world's greatest cultural monuments. To the Athenians who built it, the Parthenon and other Periclean monuments of the Acropolis were seen fundamentally as a celebration of Hellenic victory over the Persian invaders and as a thanksgiving to the gods for that victory. As of 2007 the Greek Ministry of Culture was carrying out a programme of selective restoration and reconstruction to ensure the stability of the partially ruined structure.

The Parthenon itself replaced an older temple of Athena, which historians call the Pre-Parthenon or Older Parthenon, that was destroyed in the Persian invasion of 480 BC. The temple is archaeoastronomically aligned to the Hyades. Like most Greek temples, the Parthenon served a practical purpose as the city treasury. For a time, it served as the treasury of the Delian League, which later became the Athenian Empire. In the final decade of the sixth century AD, the Parthenon was converted into a Christian church dedicated to the Virgin Mary.

After the Ottoman conquest, it was turned into a mosque in the early 1460s. On 26 September 1687, an Ottoman ammunition dump inside the building was ignited by Venetian bombardment. The resulting explosion severely damaged the Parthenon and its sculptures. From 1800 to 1803, Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin removed some of the surviving sculptures with the alleged permission of the Turks of the Ottoman Empire. These sculptures, now known as the Elgin Marbles or the Parthenon Marbles, were sold in 1816 to the British Museum in London, where they are now displayed. Since 1983 (on the initiative of Culture Minister Melina Mercouri), the Greek government has been committed to the return of the sculptures to Greece.

The origin of the Parthenon's name is from the Greek word παρθενών ("parthenon"), which referred to the "unmarried women's apartments" in a house and in the Parthenon's case seems to have been used at first only for a particular room of the temple; it is debated which room this is and how the room acquired its name. The Liddell–Scott–Jones "Greek–English Lexicon" states that this room was the western cella of the Parthenon, as does J.B. Bury. Jamauri D. Green holds that the parthenon was the room in which the peplos presented to Athena at the Panathenaic Festival was woven by the "arrephoroi", a group of four young girls chosen to serve Athena each year. Christopher Pelling asserts that Athena Parthenos may have constituted a discrete cult of Athena, intimately connected with, but not identical to, that of Athena Polias. According to this theory, the name of the Parthenon means the "temple of the virgin goddess" and refers to the cult of Athena Parthenos that was associated with the temple. The epithet "parthénos" () meant "maiden, girl", but also "virgin, unmarried woman" and was especially used for Artemis, the goddess of wild animals, the hunt, and vegetation, and for Athena, the goddess of strategy and tactics, handicraft, and practical reason. It has also been suggested that the name of the temple alludes to the maidens ("parthenoi"), whose supreme sacrifice guaranteed the safety of the city. "Parthénos" has also been applied to the Virgin Mary, Parthénos Maria, and the Parthenon had been converted to a Christian church dedicated to the Virgin Mary in the final decade of the sixth century.

The first instance in which "Parthenon" definitely refers to the entire building is found in the writings of the 4th century BC orator Demosthenes. In 5th-century building accounts, the structure is simply called "ho naos" ("the temple"). The architects Iktinos and Callicrates are said to have called the building "Hekatompedos" ("the hundred footer") in their lost treatise on Athenian architecture, and, in the 4th century and later, the building was referred to as the "Hekatompedos" or the "Hekatompedon" as well as the Parthenon; the 1st-century-AD writer Plutarch referred to the building as the "Hekatompedos Parthenon".

Because the Parthenon was dedicated to the Greek goddess Athena, it has sometimes been referred to as the Temple of Minerva, the Roman name for Athena, particularly during the 19th century.

Although the Parthenon is architecturally a temple and is usually called so, it is not really one in the conventional sense of the word. A small shrine has been excavated within the building, on the site of an older sanctuary probably dedicated to Athena as a way to get closer to the goddess, but the Parthenon never hosted the cult of Athena Polias, patron of Athens: the cult image, which was bathed in the sea and to which was presented the "peplos", was an olivewood "xoanon", located at an older altar on the northern side of the Acropolis.

The colossal statue of Athena by Phidias was not related to any cult and is not known to have inspired any religious fervour. It did not seem to have any priestess, altar or cult name.
According to Thucydides, Pericles once referred to the statue as a gold reserve, stressing that it "contained forty talents of pure gold and it was all removable".
The Athenian statesman thus implies that the metal, obtained from contemporary coinage, could be used again without any impiety.
The Parthenon should then be viewed as a grand setting for Phidias' votive statue rather than a cult site. It is said in many writings of the Greeks that there were many treasures stored inside the temple, such as Persian swords and small statue figures made of precious metals.

Archaeologist Joan Breton Connelly has recently argued for the coherency of the Parthenon’s sculptural programme in presenting a succession of genealogical narratives that track Athenian identity back through the ages: from the birth of Athena, through cosmic and epic battles, to the final great event of the Athenian Bronze Age, the war of Erechtheus and Eumolpos. She argues a pedagogical function for the Parthenon’s sculptured decoration, one that establishes and perpetuates Athenian foundation myth, memory, values and identity. While some classicists, including Mary Beard, Peter Green, and Garry Wills have doubted or rejected Connelly's thesis, an increasing number of historians, archaeologists, and classical scholars support her work. They include: J.J. Pollitt, Brunilde Ridgway, Nigel Spivey, Caroline Alexander, A.E. Stallings.

The first endeavour to build a sanctuary for on the site of the present Parthenon was begun shortly after the Battle of Marathon (c. 490–488 BC) upon a solid limestone foundation that extended and levelled the southern part of the Acropolis summit. This building replaced a "hekatompedon" (meaning "hundred-footer") and would have stood beside the archaic temple dedicated to "Athena Polias" ("of the city"). The Older or Pre-Parthenon, as it is frequently referred to, was still under construction when the Persians sacked the city in 480 BC and razed the Acropolis.

The existence of both the proto-Parthenon and its destruction were known from Herodotus, and the drums of its columns were plainly visible built into the curtain wall north of the Erechtheion. Further physical evidence of this structure was revealed with the excavations of Panagiotis Kavvadias of 1885–90. The findings of this dig allowed Wilhelm Dörpfeld, then director of the German Archaeological Institute, to assert that there existed a distinct substructure to the original Parthenon, called Parthenon I by Dörpfeld, not immediately below the present edifice as had been previously assumed. Dörpfeld's observation was that the three steps of the first Parthenon consisted of two steps of Poros limestone, the same as the foundations, and a top step of Karrha limestone that was covered by the lowest step of the Periclean Parthenon. This platform was smaller and slightly to the north of the final Parthenon, indicating that it was built for a wholly different building, now completely covered over. This picture was somewhat complicated by the publication of the final report on the 1885–90 excavations, indicating that the substructure was contemporary with the Kimonian walls, and implying a later date for the first temple.
If the original Parthenon was indeed destroyed in 480, it invites the question of why the site was left a ruin for thirty-three years. One argument involves the oath sworn by the Greek allies before the Battle of Plataea in 479 BC declaring that the sanctuaries destroyed by the Persians would not be rebuilt, an oath from which the Athenians were only absolved with the Peace of Callias in 450. The mundane fact of the cost of reconstructing Athens after the Persian sack is at least as likely a cause. However, the excavations of Bert Hodge Hill led him to propose the existence of a second Parthenon, begun in the period of Kimon after 468 BC. Hill claimed that the Karrha limestone step Dörpfeld thought was the highest of Parthenon I was in fact the lowest of the three steps of Parthenon II, whose stylobate dimensions Hill calculated at.

One difficulty in dating the proto-Parthenon is that at the time of the 1885 excavation the archaeological method of seriation was not fully developed; the careless digging and refilling of the site led to a loss of much valuable information. An attempt to discuss and make sense of the potsherds found on the Acropolis came with the two-volume study by Graef and Langlotz published in 1925–33. This inspired American archaeologist William Bell Dinsmoor to attempt to supply limiting dates for the temple platform and the five walls hidden under the re-terracing of the Acropolis. Dinsmoor concluded that the latest possible date for Parthenon I was no earlier than 495 BC, contradicting the early date given by Dörpfeld. Further, Dinsmoor denied that there were two proto-Parthenons, and held that the only pre-Periclean temple was what Dörpfeld referred to as Parthenon II. Dinsmoor and Dörpfeld exchanged views in the "American Journal of Archaeology" in 1935.

In the mid-5th century BC, when the Athenian Acropolis became the seat of the Delian League and Athens was the greatest cultural centre of its time, Pericles initiated an ambitious building project that lasted the entire second half of the century. The most important buildings visible on the Acropolis today — the Parthenon, the Propylaia, the Erechtheion and the temple of Athena Nike — were erected during this period. The Parthenon was built under the general supervision of the artist Phidias, who also had charge of the sculptural decoration. The architects Ictinos and Callicrates began their work in 447 BC, and the building was substantially completed by 432, but work on the decorations continued until at least 431.

The Parthenon is a peripteral octastyle Doric temple with Ionic architectural features. It stands on a platform or stylobate of three steps. In common with other Greek temples, it is of post and lintel construction and is surrounded by columns ("peripteral") carrying an entablature. There are eight columns at either end ("octastyle") and seventeen on the sides. There is a double row of columns at either end. The colonnade surrounds an inner masonry structure, the "cella", which is divided into two compartments. At either end of the building the gable is finished with a triangular pediment originally occupied by sculpted figures. The columns are of the Doric order, with simple capitals, fluted shafts and no bases. Above the architrave of the entablature is a frieze of carved pictorial panels (metopes), separated by formal architectural triglyphs, typical of the Doric order. Around the cella and across the lintels of the inner columns runs a continuous sculptured frieze in low relief. This element of the architecture is Ionic in style rather than Doric.

Measured at the stylobate, the dimensions of the base of the Parthenon are. The cella was 29.8 metres long by 19.2 metres wide (97.8 × 63.0 ft). On the exterior, the Doric columns measure in diameter and are high. The corner columns are slightly larger in diameter. The Parthenon had 46 outer columns and 23 inner columns in total, each column containing 20 flutes. (A flute is the concave shaft carved into the column form.) The roof was covered with large overlapping marble tiles known as imbrices and tegulae.

The Parthenon is regarded as the finest example of Greek architecture. The temple, wrote John Julius Cooper, "enjoys the reputation of being the most perfect Doric temple ever built. Even in antiquity, its architectural refinements were legendary, especially the subtle correspondence between the curvature of the stylobate, the taper of the naos walls and the "entasis" of the columns." "Entasis" refers to the slight swelling, of, in the centre of the columns to counteract the appearance of columns having a waist, as the swelling makes them look straight from a distance. The stylobate is the platform on which the columns stand. As in many other classical Greek temples, it has a slight parabolic upward curvature intended to shed rainwater and reinforce the building against earthquakes. The columns might therefore be supposed to lean outwards, but they actually lean slightly inwards so that if they carried on, they would meet almost exactly a mile above the centre of the Parthenon; since they are all the same height, the curvature of the outer stylobate edge is transmitted to the architrave and roof above: "All follow the rule of being built to delicate curves", Gorham Stevens observed when pointing out that, in addition, the west front was built at a slightly higher level than that of the east front.

It is not universally agreed what the intended effect of these "optical refinements" was; they may serve as a sort of "reverse optical illusion". As the Greeks may have been aware, two parallel lines appear to bow, or curve outward, when intersected by converging lines. In this case, the ceiling and floor of the temple may seem to bow in the presence of the surrounding angles of the building. Striving for perfection, the designers may have added these curves, compensating for the illusion by creating their own curves, thus negating this effect and allowing the temple to be seen as they intended. It is also suggested that it was to enliven what might have appeared an inert mass in the case of a building without curves, but the comparison ought to be, according to Smithsonian historian Evan Hadingham, with the Parthenon's more obviously curved predecessors than with a notional rectilinear temple.

Some studies of the Acropolis, including of the Parthenon and its façade, have conjectured that many of its proportions approximate the golden ratio. However, such theories have been discredited by more recent studies, which have shown that the proportions of the Parthenon do not match the golden proportion.

The cella of the Parthenon housed the chryselephantine statue of Athena Parthenos sculpted by Phidias and dedicated in 439 or 438 BC. The appearance of this is known from other images. The decorative stonework was originally highly coloured. The temple was dedicated to Athena at that time, though construction continued until almost the beginning of the Peloponnesian War in 432. By the year 438, the sculptural decoration of the Doric metopes on the frieze above the exterior colonnade, and of the Ionic frieze around the upper portion of the walls of the cella, had been completed. In the "opisthodomus" (the back room of the cella) were stored the monetary contributions of the Delian League, of which Athens was the leading member.

Only a very small number of the sculptures remain "in situ"; most of the surviving sculptures are today (controversially) in the British Museum in London as the Elgin Marbles, and the Athens Acropolis Museum, but a few pieces are also in the Louvre, and museums in Rome, Vienna and Palermo.

The frieze of the Parthenon's entablature contained ninety-two metopes, fourteen each on the east and west sides, thirty-two each on the north and south sides. They were carved in high relief, a practice employed until then only in treasuries (buildings used to keep votive gifts to the gods). According to the building records, the metope sculptures date to the years 446–440 BC. The metopes of the east side of the Parthenon, above the main entrance, depict the Gigantomachy (the mythical battle between the Olympian gods and the Giants). The metopes of the west end show the Amazonomachy (the mythical battle of the Athenians against the Amazons). The metopes of the south side show the Thessalian Centauromachy (battle of the Lapiths aided by Theseus against the half-man, half-horse Centaurs). Metopes 13–21 are missing, but drawings from 1674 attributed to Jaques Carrey indicate a series of humans; these have been variously interpreted as scenes from the Lapith wedding, scenes from the early history of Athens and various myths. On the north side of the Parthenon, the metopes are poorly preserved, but the subject seems to be the sack of Troy.

The metopes present examples of the Severe Style in the anatomy of the figures' heads, in the limitation of the corporal movements to the contours and not to the muscles, and in the presence of pronounced veins in the figures of the Centauromachy. Several of the metopes still remain on the building, but, with the exception of those on the northern side, they are severely damaged. Some of them are located at the Acropolis Museum, others are in the British Museum, and one is at the Louvre museum.

In March 2011, archaeologists announced that they had discovered five metopes of the Parthenon in the south wall of the Acropolis, which had been extended when the Acropolis was used as a fortress. According to "Eleftherotypia" daily, the archaeologists claimed the metopes had been placed there in the 18th century when the Acropolis wall was being repaired. The experts discovered the metopes while processing 2,250 photos with modern photographic methods, as the white Pentelic marble they are made of differed from the other stone of the wall. It was previously presumed that the missing metopes were destroyed during the Morosini explosion of the Parthenon in 1687.

The most characteristic feature in the architecture and decoration of the temple is the Ionic frieze running around the exterior walls of the cella, which is the inside structure of the Parthenon. The bas-relief frieze was carved in situ; it is dated to 442 BC-438 BC.

One interpretation is that it depicts an idealized version of the Panathenaic procession from the Dipylon Gate in the Kerameikos to the Acropolis. In this procession held every year, with a special procession taking place every four years, Athenians and foreigners were participating to honour the goddess Athena, offering sacrifices and a new peplos (dress woven by selected noble Athenian girls called "ergastines").

Joan Breton Connelly offers a mythological interpretation for the frieze, one that is in harmony with the rest of the temple’s sculptural programme which shows Athenian genealogy through a series of succession myths set in the remote past. She identifies the central panel above the door of the Parthenon as the pre-battle sacrifice of the daughter of King Erechtheus, a sacrifice that ensured Athenian victory over Eumolpos and his Thracian army. The great procession marching toward the east end of the Parthenon shows the post-battle thanksgiving sacrifice of cattle and sheep, honey and water, followed by the triumphant army of Erechtheus returning from their victory. This represents the very first Panathenaia set in mythical times, the model on which historic Panathenaic processions was based.

The traveller Pausanias, when he visited the Acropolis at the end of the 2nd century AD, only mentioned briefly the sculptures of the pediments (gable ends) of the temple, reserving the majority of his description for the gold and ivory statue of the goddess inside.

The figures on the corners of the pediment depict the passage of time over the course of a full day. Tethrippa of Helios and Selene are located on the left and right corners of the pediment respectively. The horses of Helios's chariot are shown with livid expressions as they ascend into the sky at the start of the day; whereas the Selene's horses struggle to stay on the pediment scene as the day comes to an end.

The supporters of Athena are extensively illustrated at the back of the left chariot, while the defenders of Poseidon are shown trailing behind the right chariot. It is believed that the corners of the pediment are filled by Athenian water deities, such as Kephisos river, Ilissos river and nymph Callirhoe. This belief merges from the fluid character of the sculptures' body position which represents the effort of the artist to give the impression of a flowing river., Next to the left river god, there are the sculptures of the mythical king of Athens (Kekrops) with his daughters (Aglauros, Pandrosos, Herse). The statue of Poseidon was the largest sculpture in the pediment until it broke into pieces during Francesco Morosini's effort to remove it in 1688. The posterior piece of the torso was found by Lusieri in the groundwork of a Turkish house in 1801 and is currently held in British Museum. The anterior portion was revealed by Ross in 1835 and is now held in the Acropolis Museum of Athens.

Every statue in the west pediment has a fully completed back, which would have been impossible to see when the sculpture was on the temple; this indicates that the sculptors put great effort into accurately portraying the human body.

The only piece of sculpture from the Parthenon known to be from the hand of Phidias was the statue of Athena housed in the "naos". This massive chryselephantine sculpture is now lost and known only from copies, vase painting, gems, literary descriptions and coins.

A major fire broke out in the Parthenon shortly after the middle of the third century AD which destroyed the Parthenon's roof and much of the sanctuary's interior. Heruli pirates are also credited with sacking Athens in 276, and destroying most of the public buildings there, including the Parthenon. Repairs were made in the fourth century AD, possibly during the reign of Julian the Apostate. A new wooden roof overlaid with clay tiles was installed to cover the sanctuary. It sloped at a greater incline than the original roof and left the building's wings exposed.

The Parthenon survived as a temple dedicated to Athena for nearly one thousand years until Theodosius II, during the Persecution of pagans in the late Roman Empire, decreed in 435 AD that all pagan temples in the Eastern Roman Empire be closed.
However, it is debated exactly when during the 5th-century that the closure of the Parthenon as a temple was actually put in practice. It is suggested to have occurred in c. 481–484, in the instructions against the remaining temples by order of Emperor Zeno, because the temple had been the focus of Pagan Hellenic opposition against Zeno in Athens in support of Illus, who had promised to restore Hellenic rites to the temples that were still standing.

At some point in the fifth century, Athena's great cult image was looted by one of the emperors and taken to Constantinople, where it was later destroyed, possibly during the siege and sack of Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade in 1204 AD.

The Parthenon was converted into a Christian church in the final decade of the sixth century AD to become the Church of the Parthenos Maria (Virgin Mary), or the Church of the Theotokos (Mother of God). The orientation of the building was changed to face towards the east; the main entrance was placed at the building's western end, and the Christian altar and iconostasis were situated towards the building's eastern side adjacent to an apse built where the temple's pronaos was formerly located. A large central portal with surrounding side-doors was made in the wall dividing the cella, which became the church's nave, from the rear chamber, the church's narthex. The spaces between the columns of the "opisthodomus" and the peristyle were walled up, though a number of doorways still permitted access. Icons were painted on the walls and many Christian inscriptions were carved into the Parthenon's columns. These renovations inevitably led to the removal and dispersal of some of the sculptures. Those depicting gods were either possibly re-interpreted according to a Christian theme, or removed.

The Parthenon became the fourth most important Christian pilgrimage destination in the Eastern Roman Empire after Constantinople, Ephesos, and Thessalonica. In 1018, the emperor Basil II went on a pilgrimage to Athens directly after his final victory over the Bulgarians for the sole purpose of worshipping at the Parthenon. In medieval Greek accounts it is called the Temple of Theotokos Atheniotissa and often indirectly referred to as famous without explaining exactly which temple they were referring to, thus establishing that it was indeed well known.

At the time of the Latin occupation, it became for about 250 years a Roman Catholic church of Our Lady. During this period a tower, used either as a watchtower or bell tower and containing a spiral staircase, was constructed at the southwest corner of the cella, and vaulted tombs were built beneath the Parthenon's floor.

In 1456, Ottoman Turkish forces invaded Athens and laid siege to a Florentine army defending the Acropolis until June 1458, when it surrendered to the Turks. The Turks may have briefly restored the Parthenon to the Greek Orthodox Christians for continued use as a church. Some time before the close of the fifteenth century, the Parthenon became a mosque.

The precise circumstances under which the Turks appropriated it for use as a mosque are unclear; one account states that Mehmed II ordered its conversion as punishment for an Athenian plot against Ottoman rule. The apse became a mihrab, the tower previously constructed during the Roman Catholic occupation of the Parthenon was extended upwards to become a minaret, a minbar was installed, the Christian altar and iconostasis were removed, and the walls were whitewashed to cover icons of Christian saints and other Christian imagery.

Despite the alterations accompanying the Parthenon's conversion into a church and subsequently a mosque, its structure had remained basically intact. In 1667 the Turkish traveller Evliya Çelebi expressed marvel at the Parthenon's sculptures and figuratively described the building as "like some impregnable fortress not made by human agency". He composed a poetic supplication that it, as "a work less of human hands than of Heaven itself, should remain standing for all time". The French artist Jacques Carrey in 1674 visited the Acropolis and sketched the Parthenon's sculptural decorations. Early in 1687, an engineer named Plantier sketched the Parthenon for the Frenchman Graviers d’Ortières. These depictions, particularly those made by Carrey, provide important, and sometimes the only, evidence of the condition of the Parthenon and its various sculptures prior to the devastation it suffered in late 1687 and the subsequent looting of its art objects.

In 1687, the Parthenon was extensively damaged in the greatest catastrophe to befall it in its long history. As part of the Great Turkish War (1683–1699), the Venetians sent an expedition led by Francesco Morosini to attack Athens and capture the Acropolis. The Ottoman Turks fortified the Acropolis and used the Parthenon as a gunpowder magazine – despite having been forewarned of the dangers of this use by the 1656 explosion that severely damaged the Propylaea – and as a shelter for members of the local Turkish community. On 26 September a Venetian mortar round, fired from the Hill of Philopappus, blew up the magazine, and the building was partly destroyed. The explosion blew out the building's central portion and caused the cella's walls to crumble into rubble. Greek architect and archaeologist Kornilia Chatziaslani writes that "...three of the sanctuary’s four walls nearly collapsed and three-fifths of the sculptures from the frieze fell. Nothing of the roof apparently remained in place. Six columns from the south side fell, eight from the north, as well as whatever remained from eastern porch, except for one column. The columns brought down with them the enormous marble architraves, triglyphs and metopes." About three hundred people were killed in the explosion, which showered marble fragments over nearby Turkish defenders and caused large fires that burned until the following day and consumed many homes.

Accounts written at the time conflict over whether this destruction was deliberate or accidental; one such account, written by the German officer Sobievolski, states that a Turkish deserter revealed to Morosini the use to which the Turks had put the Parthenon; expecting that the Venetians would not target a building of such historic importance. Morosini was said to have responded by directing his artillery to aim at the Parthenon. Subsequently, Morosini sought to loot sculptures from the ruin and caused further damage in the process. Sculptures of Poseidon and Athena's horses fell to the ground and smashed as his soldiers tried to detach them from the building's west pediment.

The following year, the Venetians abandoned Athens to avoid a confrontation with a large force the Turks had assembled at Chalcis; at that time, the Venetians had considered blowing up what remained of the Parthenon along with the rest of the Acropolis to deny its further use as a fortification to the Turks, but that idea was not pursued.

After the Turks had recaptured the Acropolis they used some of the rubble produced by this explosion to erect a smaller mosque within the shell of the ruined Parthenon. For the next century and a half, portions of the remaining structure were looted for building material and any remaining objects of value.

The 18th century was a period of Ottoman stagnation; as a result, many more Europeans found access to Athens, and the picturesque ruins of the Parthenon were much drawn and painted, spurring a rise in philhellenism and helping to arouse sympathy in Britain and France for Greek independence. Amongst those early travellers and archaeologists were James Stuart and Nicholas Revett, who were commissioned by the Society of Dilettanti to survey the ruins of classical Athens. What they produced was the first measured drawings of the Parthenon published in 1787 in the second volume of "Antiquities of Athens Measured and Delineated". In 1801, the British Ambassador at Constantinople, the Earl of Elgin, obtained a questionable "firman" (edict) from the Sultan, whose existence or legitimacy has not been proved until today, to make casts and drawings of the antiquities on the Acropolis, to demolish recent buildings if this was necessary to view the antiquities, and to remove sculptures from them.

When independent Greece gained control of Athens in 1832, the visible section of the minaret was demolished; only its base and spiral staircase up to the level of the architrave remain intact. Soon all the medieval and Ottoman buildings on the Acropolis were destroyed. However, the image of the small mosque within the Parthenon's cella has been preserved in Joly de Lotbinière's photograph, published in Lerebours's "Excursions Daguerriennes" in 1842: the first photograph of the Acropolis. The area became a historical precinct controlled by the Greek government. Today it attracts millions of tourists every year, who travel up the path at the western end of the Acropolis, through the restored Propylaea, and up the Panathenaic Way to the Parthenon, which is surrounded by a low fence to prevent damage.

The dispute centres around the Parthenon Marbles removed by Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin, from 1801 to 1803, which are in the British Museum. A few sculptures from the Parthenon are also in the Louvre in Paris, in Copenhagen, and elsewhere, but more than half are in the Acropolis Museum in Athens. A few can still be seen on the building itself. The Greek government has campaigned since 1983 for the British Museum to return the sculptures to Greece. The British Museum has steadfastly refused to return the sculptures, and successive British governments have been unwilling to force the Museum to do so (which would require legislation). Nevertheless, talks between senior representatives from Greek and British cultural ministries and their legal advisors took place in London on 4 May 2007. These were the first serious negotiations for several years, and there were hopes that the two sides may move a step closer to a resolution.

In 1975, the Greek government began a concerted effort to restore the Parthenon and other Acropolis structures. After some delay, a Committee for the Conservation of the Acropolis Monuments was established in 1983. The project later attracted funding and technical assistance from the European Union. An archaeological committee thoroughly documented every artifact remaining on the site, and architects assisted with computer models to determine their original locations. Particularly important and fragile sculptures were transferred to the Acropolis Museum. A crane was installed for moving marble blocks; the crane was designed to fold away beneath the roofline when not in use. In some cases, prior re-constructions were found to be incorrect. These were dismantled, and a careful process of restoration began. Originally, various blocks were held together by elongated iron H pins that were completely coated in lead, which protected the iron from corrosion. Stabilizing pins added in the 19th century were not so coated, and corroded. Since the corrosion product (rust) is expansive, the expansion caused further damage by cracking the marble.

The metopes of the Parthenon are the surviving set of what were originally 92 square carved plaques of Pentelic marble originally located above the columns of the Parthenon peristyle on the Acropolis of Athens. If they were made by several artists, the master builder was certainly Phidias. They were carved between 447 or 446 BC. or at the latest 438 BC, with 442 BC as the probable date of completion. Most of them are very damaged. Typically, they represent two characters per metope either in action or repose.

Metopes of the Parthenon

The interpretations of these metopes are only conjectures, starting from mere silhouettes of figures, sometimes barely discernible, and comparing them to other contemporary representations (mainly vases). There is one theme per side of the building, representing a fight each time: Amazonomachy in the west, fall of Troy in the north, gigantomachy in the east and fight of Centaurs and Lapiths in the south. The metopes have a purely warlike theme, like the decoration of the chryselephantine statue of Athena Parthenos housed in the Parthenon. It seems to be an evocation of the opposition between order and chaos, between the human and the animal (sometimes animal tendencies in the human), between civilization and barbarism, even the West and the East. This general theme is considered to be a metaphor for the Median wars and thus the triumph of the city of Athens.

The majority of metopes were systematically destroyed by Christians at the time of the transformation of the Parthenon into a church towards the sixth or the seventh century AD. A powder magazine installed in the building by the Ottomans exploded during the siege of Athens by the Venetians in September 1687, continuing the destruction. The southern metopes are the best preserved. Fourteen of them are in the British Museum in London and one is in the Louvre Those of the other sides, very damaged, are in Athens, sometimes even still in place on the building.

In 480 BC, the Persians ransacked the Acropolis of Athens including the "pre-Parthenon" then under construction. After their victories at Salamis and Plataea the Athenians had sworn not to restore the destroyed temples, but to leave them as they are, in memory of the Persian "barbarism".

The power of Athens then grew gradually, mainly within the league of Delos which it controlled more and more hegemonically. Eventually, in 454 BC., the treasure of the league was transferred from Delos to Athens. A vast program of construction was then launched, financed by this treasure; among these, the Parthenon. This new building was not intended to become a temple, but a treasury to accommodate the colossal chryselephantine statue of Athena Parthenos.

The Parthenon was erected between 447 and 438 BC. The "pre-Parthenon" (little known) was hexastyle. Its successor, which was much larger, was octastyle (eight columns in front and seventeen on the sides of the peristyle) and measured 30.88 meters wide and 69.50 meters long. The sekos (closed part surrounded by the peristyle) in itself had a width of 19 meters. Thus, two large rooms could be created: one, to the east, to accommodate the statue of a dozen meters high; the other, to the west, to shelter the treasure of the league of Delos. The construction site was entrusted to Ictinos, Callicrates and Phidias The decor project was both traditional in its form (pediments and metopes) albeit unprecedented in scale. The pediments were bigger and more complex than what had been done before. The number of metopes (92), all carved, was unprecedented and never repeated. Finally, while the temple was of the Doric order, the decoration around the sekos (normally composed of metopes and triglyphs ) was replaced by a frieze of the ionic order.

On Doric marble buildings, the metopes decorated the entablature above the architrave alternating with the triglyphs. These were a reminiscence of the wooden beams that supported the roof. The part between the triglyphs, at first a simple unadorned stone space, was quickly used to receive a carved decoration.

The Parthenon numbered ninety-two polychrome metopes: fourteen on each of the east and west facades, and thirty-two on each of the north and south sides. To designate them, scholars usually number them from left to right with Roman numerals. They were carved on practically square Pentelic marble slabs: 1.20 meters high for a variable width, but averaging 1.25 meters. Originally, the block of marble measured 35 centimeters thick: the sculptures were made in high relief, even in very high relief at the edge of the round-bump, standing out about 25 centimeters. The metopes were a dozen meters high and had an average of two characters each.

No ancient Greek building has ever been adorned with so many metopes, neither before nor after the construction of the Parthenon. On the Temple of Zeus at Olympia, which pre-dates the Parthenon, only those of the interior porch were carved; on the Temple of Hephaestus, contemporary with it, only those of the east facade, and the last four (towards the east) on the north and south sides, have been carved.

There is no ancient description of metopes that could give a definitive interpretation. The first literary evocation of the carved decoration of the Parthenon was written by Pausanias in the second century AD.; however, he only describes the pediments. Nevertheless, a comparison with the themes of contemporary Attic ceramics can suggest possible interpretations.

The general theme of the ninety-two metopes is purely warlike, as with the chryselephantine statue of Athena but in contrast to the pediments and the frieze. It seems to be an opposition between order and chaos, between the human and the animal (sometimes between the different animal tendencies in the human), between civilization and barbarism, even between the West and the East. The whole is often considered as a metaphor for the Persian war. An underlying theme could be that of marriage and the fact that the breakup of its harmony leads to chaos. From then on, as elsewhere on the Parthenon, there would be the celebration of the civic values whose marriage between citizens and daughters of citizens were its foundation.

The metopes on the east, north, and west sides have suffered chiefly from a systematic destruction by Christians around the sixth or the seventh century: it is therefore difficult to know exactly what they represented. To the east, the most religiously important side, the theme of the metopes would be the gigantomachy. Zeus and Hera (or Athena) would be represented on the central metopes, the fights being organized symmetrically around them. To the west, they represented Greeks fighting opponents in oriental costume. The most common interpretation is that it is amazonomachy; however, the metopes have suffered such damage that it is difficult to now know if the opponents of the Greeks are male or female. If it were men, then they could be Persians; however, there are few representations of Persians on horseback. During the siege of Athens by the Venetians of Francesco Morosini in 1687, the metopes on the north side were badly damaged by the explosion of the powder reserve housed in the Parthenon. However, identifications have been proposed: one of the metopes would represent Menelaus and his neighbour Helen; another one Aeneas and Anchises. The general theme of this side could therefore be the fall of Troy. Finally, the southern metopes were not damaged by Christian iconoclasm, but suffered from the explosion of 1687. The last remaining, located at each end of the Parthenon, represent the fight of the Centaurs and Lapiths, but the Central metopes, known only by drawings attributed to Jacques Carrey give rise to controversies of interpretation. Some archaeologists consider that it could be a purely Athenian fight between humans and centaurs.

The metopes of the Parthenon were carved in several stages. The artist began by drawing the contours of his characters; he then removed the marble outside the drawing, to the "bottom" of the metope; he went on detaching the figure from the bottom; he finished by refining the characters themselves. It is possible that several sculptors, each specialized in one of these stages, could have collaborated. The sculpture work had to be done on the ground, before the metopes were put in place, at the top of the walls. The sculptors, necessarily many, surely began to work from 447 or 446 BC to complete their work before 438 BC, when the work for the roof began; 442 BC or shortly thereafter is a likely completion date. Moreover, if the carved decoration had to be finished, it was not the same for painting or metal ornaments that could be added later. Some artists might have worked on several metopes. Thus, for the metope east VI, Poseidon is in the same position as the Lapith on the southern metope II, while the falling giant is very close to the Lapith on the southern metope VIII, which could mean that they are from the same hand; unless this is only inspiration and imitation.

No sculptor's name has been preserved. However, since there are great differences in quality and style between the metopes, it is very likely that they were made by several hands. Some of them appear "old", seeming due to older or more conservative artists; but they could also have been done first. Those whose quality is not at the level of others also suggest that in view of the size of the site, it was necessary to employ all the sculptors available. The last hypothesis synthesizes all the others: at the beginning of the construction, many artists were hired; but as the work progressed, the incompetents were gradually discarded, not without having already produced the first metopes, of lower quality. Several southern metopes are of such quality that it has been concluded that they must have been carved among the last; in some cases, names of sculptors like Myron, Alcamenes or Phidias himself have been mentioned. Robert Spenser Stanier proposed in 1953 an estimate of a total cost of 10 talents for the realization of metopes.

The metopes of the Parthenon were, like the rest of the scenery, polychrome. The background was certainly red, in contrast with triglyphs in medium or dark blue. The cornice above the metope also had to be coloured. The characters were painted, with eyes, hair, lips, jewels and draperies raised. The skins of the male figures were to be darker than those of the female characters. Some metopes included landscape features, perhaps painted as well. The decor was finished with the addition of elements (weapons, wheels or harness) in bronze or gilded bronze, as evidenced by the many fixing holes: there are more than 120 on the south metopes, the best-preserved ones. These decorative elements could also be used to identify the characters more quickly. There are very strong links between the subjects of the metopes and the chryselephantine statue of Athena preserved in the Parthenon. This could mean that Phidias was the site's prime contractor.

The Parthenon was ravaged by a fire on an ill-determined date during late antiquity, causing serious damage including the destruction of the roof. The intense heat cracked many marble elements, including entablatures and consequently metopes. An extensive restoration was carried out: the roof was redone but covered only the interior; the metopes were therefore more exposed (front and rear faces) to the weather. Until the Edict of Thessalonica in 380, the Parthenon retained its "pagan" religious role. It seems to have known then a more or less long period of abandonment. Somewhere between the sixth century and the seventh century, the building was turned into a church.

Until then, the ninety-two metopes had remained almost intact. Those on the east, west and north sides were then systematically damaged by the Christians, who wanted to erase the ancient gods. Only one northern metope, with two female figures, has survived, perhaps because interpreted as an Annunciation (the seated figure on the right interpreted as the Virgin Mary and the figure standing on the left as the Archangel Gabriel). The southern metopes have escaped, perhaps because this side of the Parthenon was too close to the edge of the Acropolis; perhaps because Physiologus includes the centaurs in his symbolic bestiary. The building, however, suffered no damage during the conversion of the Parthenon-church to a mosque in the fifteenth century, nor during the two centuries that followed. In 1674, an artist in the service of the Marquis de Nointel (French ambassador to the Porte), perhaps Jacques Carrey, drew a large part of the metopes which remained, unfortunately only on the south side. Much of the metopes were destroyed during the siege of Athens by the Venetians commanded by Francesco Morosini on 26 September 1687 during the explosion of the Parthenon powder reserve. After the departure of the Venetians in 1688, and the return of the Ottomans, the building again housed a mosque. The pieces of marble scattered around the ruins, including fragments of metopes, were reduced to lime or reused as building material, in the wall of the Acropolis, for example. In the eighteenth century, Western travellers, more and more numerous, seized pieces of sculpture as souvenirs.

Fifteen of the South Metopes are in the British Museum as a result of the work of Lord Elgin's agents. The metope south VI arrived there by another way. It had fallen in a storm and had broken in three; members probably disappeared at the same time. In 1788, it was "stolen" by Louis-François-Sébastien Fauvel with the complicity of a Turk: it was dropped from the top of the walls of the Acropolis on to a pile of manure below. However, it was not shipped until 1803 when it was dispatched aboard the corvette L'Arabe. This ship was boarded by the British when the war resumed after the rupture of the peace of Amiens The marbles it was carrying ended up in London where they were acquired by Lord Elgin. This metope is now in the British Museum.

After their purchase by the British Museum in 1817, the marbles were displayed in a temporary room, until the wing designed by Robert Smirke called "Elgin Room" was completed in 1832. In the 1930s, Joseph Duveen offered a new wing named the "Duveen Gallery", designed by John Russell Pope Completed in 1938, the marbles could not be placed there until after the Second World War. During the conflict, the metopes were sheltered in the tunnels of the London Underground which proved relevant since the Duveen Gallery was completely destroyed by bombing. They left their underground shelter in 1948-1949 to be relocated to the "Elgin Room", along with the rest of the marbles. They found their present location in 1962, at the end of the reconstruction of the new wing.

The southern metope X was bought at the beginning of the year 1788 from the Ottoman authorities. The acquisition was made by Louis-François-Sébastien Fauvel on behalf of his employer, the French ambassador to Constantinople, the Comte de Choiseul-Gouffier. It was the French vice-consul in Athens, Gaspari, who took charge of the negotiations. The metope was despatched in March 1788 and arrived in France the following month. However, in the summer of 1793, Choiseul-Gouffier had emigrated to Russia. He was struck by the decree of 10 October 1792 confiscating the property of the emigrants. The metope is therefore in the Louvre Museum.

Those that remained in situ throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries suffered the onslaught of weather and especially pollution. The metopes were removed from the building in 1988-1989 and deposited at the Acropolis Museum of Athens, along with southern XII. They have been replaced by cement mouldings on the Parthenon. South I, XXIV, XXV and XXVII to north XXXII and the fourteen metopes of the west facade are still in place, sometimes in very bad condition (West VI and VII have lost all their decor), sometimes intact (South I and North XXXII). Many fragments are in various European museums: Rome, Munich, Copenhagen (National Museum of Denmark), Wurzburg (Martin von Wagner Museum), Paris, etc. Other pieces that had been used to strengthen the southern fortification of the Acropolis in the eighteenth century have been removed since the 1980s and 1990s. These could be just as well fragments of southern metopes as north ones.

Skulpturhalle Basel offers the castings of all known metopes.

The fourteen metopes of the west facade are still all in place on the building. However, they have suffered much damage, mainly destruction by Christians, such that it is difficult to determine what they represent. Thus, West VI and VII are so damaged that it is not even possible to discern anything. The painter William Pars appointed by the Society of Dilettanti to accompany Richard Chandler and Nicholas Revett during the second archaeological expedition financed by the Society, drew around 1765-1766 the western metopes I, III, IV, V, VIII to XI and XIV. His drawings show that they were in the second half of the century in a state of disrepair very close to the one we currently know.

These metopes were the ones that visitors to the Acropolis saw first: the choice of their theme was therefore essential. The most common interpretation is that it was the Amazonomachy, most probably the Athenian episode of these battles between the Greeks and the warrior women. It concerned Theseus and the Amazon Queen Antiope (sometimes called Hippolyte who, according to various accounts, would have been abducted or would have followed the Athenian hero voluntarily. The Amazons would have crossed the Bosphorus and invaded Attica to recover their sovereign. The Athenian army, led by Theseus, would have succeeded in repelling the eastern invader.

However, the subject remains controversial, largely because of the poor condition of the sculpture. Another hypothesis is that it could be a fight against the Persians. The argument has centered on the clothes of the opponents of the Greeks. Amazons are usually represented wearing a short chiton with open shoulders. But here, some wear a chlamys a hat, boots and a shield. On the other hand, these opponents of the Greeks do not wear either the trousers characteristic of the representations of the Persians. The Greeks, meanwhile, are naked (two have a chlamys, mostly fallen), with sword and shield 80,26. Whatever the hypothesis adopted, for the Athenian citizen or the foreign visitor, the obvious interpretation of this western setting was the failure of the invasion of Attica by the Persian army during the Persian war.

Two frescoes representing the Amazonomachy already existed in Athens at the time: one in the heroon of Theseus (not yet found) and the other in the Stoa Poikile attributed to Micon who included in his work Amazons on horseback. These frescoes served as an inspiration to artists for the metopes of the Parthenon, but also for the shield of the chryselephantine statue.

Each metope represents a duel between a Greek and an Amazon, around Theseus, the central figure. The Amazons were represented alternately on horseback (metopes west I, III, V, VII (?), IX, XI, XIII) victorious, and on foot (metopes west II, IV, VI (?), VIII, X, XII, XIV) vanquished. There are however three exceptions to this alternation. The western metope I only has an Amazon on horseback; on the western metope II, it seems that it is the walking Amazon who is victorious and not the Greek; on the western metope VIII, the Amazon is on horseback, but she seems to be defeated.

The Amazon in western metope I is on horseback, without an adversary. This could represent the arrival of reinforcements or the rearguard. She may have had a spear, in which case her potential victim has disappeared. Margarete Bieber speculates that it could be Hippolyte herself coming to fight with the Greeks. And symmetrically, according to the American archaeologist, Theseus would find himself in West XIV. From the west metope II remains only the very damaged hips and torso of the Greek warrior on the left. He is identifiable with his round shield on his left arm. His opponent had to be dressed in a short chiton. There is a left leg and upper body left. It is possible to consider that she must have had a sword over her head, preparing to strike the Greek. The composition of the western metopes III, V, IX and XIII is similar, West V being a little more damaged, West XIII being the best preserved. An Amazon turned to the right is on horseback. Her mount tramples the naked Greek lying on the ground. The gesture she makes could be that of thrusting her spear into the body of her victim. She wears a short chiton whose hem is still discernible on West III. The defeated Greek is leaning on the left arm in west III, V and IX, and on the right arm in the west XIII. West XIII metope recalls the back of a volute krater, attributed to the Painter of the Woolly Satyrs and preserved in New York. The fallen Athenian is also found on a statue base of the fourth century BC. In both these two cases, vase and base of statue, the Athenian holds a shield: it could thus have one also on the metope west XIII, in marble or in bronze.

The Greek on the left on the western metope IV would have grabbed the Amazon by the hair before giving her the fatal blow, in a gesture reminiscent of that of Harmodios in the group of the Tyrannicides. Only the right leg of the Greek remains, while the other leg and his left arm can be guessed at on the bottom of the metope. There remains the hips and the bust of the Amazon, bent to the right. West metopes VI and VII are completely destroyed. At most, a ponytail can be guessed on West VII. The western metope VIII is hardly more legible; what remains has been reconstructed by Praschniker, for instance an Amazon on the left of a prancing horse; she would wear a short chiton and a floating cloak behind her. She would try to pierce with a spear her opponent. On the right, the Greek advances towards her. In the left arm, he holds a round shield that allows him to protect himself from the attack of the Amazon. Above his head, in the right hand, he holds a weapon (spear?) with which he is about to strike his enemy. This metope is almost central and does not correspond to the alternation Amazon on horse / Amazon on foot, it has been proposed to read this as the duel between Theseus and the (new) queen of the Amazons.

The western metope X is badly damaged. A silhouette can be seen on the left; she has her right knee on the ground. She seems to lift her shield, held on her left arm, to protect herself. The shape of this shield seems to be that of a pelta. It would be an Amazon on foot, defeated by a Greek. This one has totally disappeared. The horse of the Amazon on the metope west XI goes in the opposite direction (from the right to the left) of that of the equivalent metopes (west III, V, IX and XIII). He leaps over the body of the dead Greek warrior (whereas on West III, V, IX and XIII, the Athenian is going to be completed). The coat of the rider flies behind her. On the western metope XII, the Greek is identified with the trace of his round shield, to the left of the metope. There remains only one silhouette. The Amazon on the right has totally disappeared; it is only possible to guess that she is on foot.

On the western metope XIV, the fight between an Athenian on the left and an Amazon on the right seems to have come to an end. From the Greek, of which remains the hips and torso, the trace of a round shield and behind his head a fragment of marble that suggests that he could have worn a Corinthian helmet (even if he is naked elsewhere). He is sometimes identified with Theseus. The Amazon fell to her knees, perhaps held on the shoulder by her opponent. She tries to escape a fatal blow. She has her right hand resting on the belly of her enemy (gesture of supplication?); his left-hand grasps the left elbow of the Greek. The front of his short chiton was perfectly preserved in the lower right corner of the metope. A fragment above her shoulder suggests that she could wear a Phrygian helmet or cap. This metope could mean the end of the whole fight and the Athenian victory.

Thirteen of the thirty-two north metopes survived the explosion of 1687, but had already been severely damaged by the destruction of Christians. The nineteen others have disappeared, but the found fragments allow us to make assumptions about their scenery. Six are still in place on the building. Because of their state of preservation, it has long been difficult to determine their theme. Adolf Michaelis, in the second half of the nineteenth century suggested that the warrior on the right side of North XXIV could be Menelaus chasing Helena depicted on North XXV. On the latter, besides Helen on the right, he identified as Aphrodite the figure on the left, the two female figures being framed by a little Eros in flight on the left and a statue of Athena on the right. He based his interpretation on two texts of the seventh century BC. The Sack of Troy of Arctinos of Miletus and the Little Iliad of Lesches of Pyrrha. This hypothesis of Michaelis has suggested that the theme of metopes on the north side could be the capture of Troy, even if this theme is not taken up on the statue of Athena Parthenos. However, the fall of Troy could constitute a logical continuation to the Amazonomachy on the western metopes. The visitor to the Acropolis walks along the Parthenon on the north side, on the most obvious and easiest way (that of the Panathenae elsewhere). The two battles would then be symbolically linked, with the mythological reminder that the Amazons had chosen the Trojan camp. Moreover, the choice to situate this nocturnal episode on the north facade was to play on the light of day that touched these metopes that rarely depending on the seasons. There would then be symbolic obscurity.

The fall of Troy was the theme of two frescoes by Polygnotos which could have served as an inspiration to the sculptors of metopes: one was in Stoa Poikile and the other was in the Lesche of the Knidians at Delphi. In the latter, the number of characters mentioned by Pausanias, sixty-four, corresponds to what could be found on thirty-two metopes with two figures by metope.

Very few descriptions and identifications are certain. If all the experts seem to accept the identifications of Menelaus (north of XXIV), Helen (north of XXV) and Selene (north of XXIX), then opinions diverge for the other metopes and the whole remains the object of intense debate. The first point of contention is the ship on North II. Although everyone agrees that this is a ship, one question remains unresolved: Is it launching from the shore or mooring? In fact, everything depends on the "sense of reading" of these metopes. If they are read from left to right, from east to west (from north to north, XXXII), then they tell of the arrival of the Greeks and the taking of Troy. If they are read in the sense that visitors to the Acropolis read them along the Parthenon from the Propylaea from west to east (from North XXXII to North I), then they tell of the fall of Troy and the departure of the Greeks.

In the same way, the interpretations do not agree either on the episode narrated in the hypothesis where north II would represent the arrival of the Greeks at Troy. The metopes north I, II, III and A may represent the arrival of the Greeks at night, or the arrival of Philoctetes, or the arrival of the Myrmidons (according to the Iliad, 19, 349-424 ). The North metopes XXX to XXXII could tell of the last meeting of the gods about the fall of Troy on Mount Ida or to designate the gods as spectators of the capture of Troy, or the meeting between Zeus and Thetis on Olympus or even the birth of Pandora (in the account given by Hesiod, in his Theogony, 570-584 and The Works and Days, 54-82).

The Metope North I represents on the left a very damaged human figure: there remains a bottom of a peplos; the feet are missing and the torso is very damaged. A chariot can be seen at the knees. On the right, a horse's body without a head is clearly visible. His two left legs are still present at the bottom of the metope. It answers the metope east XIV on which is another chariot and at the end of the east pediment with the chariot of Selene. On the other hand, the deity aboard the chariot on north I is variously identified. Proponents of a story of the arrival of the Achaeans in Troy see it most often Nyx but also Eos, sometimes Selena orAthena. Proponents of a departure from the Greeks all see Helios, with the shade Hemera.

On the metope north II, do not see more than the traces of the feet of two characters and a fragment of marble suggesting their torsos. A bow and a rudder can be guessed diagonally between the two figures. Interpretations then vary: the arrival of the Greeks in Troy return of the Achaeans after their false start and their concealment behind Tenedos arrival of Myrmidons departure of the Greeks.

The North Metope III is about in the same state. We can guess at two figures: traces of the bust and an arm for the character in chiton in profile on the left; bust and round shield for the character of face to the right and nude. If all agree that these are soldiers, the identifications vary: Philoctetes and a hoplite; Philoctetes and Neoptolemus; Philoctetes without identification of the second figure; Achilles or Neoptolemus without identification of the second figure; taking up arms; Ulysses and Diomedes if we consider that the Metopes North III and IV are the story of the incursion of Dolon in the Achaean camp; disarming the Greeks before re-embarking.

Of the following metopes, only fragments of more or less importance remain, the largest ones being designated by letters denoting a "quasi" -metope. Thus, the metope designated by the letter "A" (potentially north V) represents a rearing horse in the background with a human figure whose only torso and upper thighs remain in the foreground. It has therefore sometimes been confused with a southern metope belonging to the cycle of the Centauromachy. Ernst Berger, in his synthesis of the metopes of the Parthenon 78 following the great symposium of 1984 summarizes for all these metopes the different hypotheses proposed from the multiple interpretations of the fragments. The episode of the Trojan horse certainly could not be represented, for lack of space on a metope. For Metopes North IV to North VIII: the Laocoön and the Palladium Flight or a scene of sacrifice and advice of the Greeks before their departure. For north IX to north XII: around the Achilles' tomb with North IX of the Troyes or Elsewhere; in North X Polyxene and Acamas or Talthybios north XI Briseis and Agamemnon or Phoenix in the north XII Philoctetes and a Trojan hero killed by him (named Admetus or Diopeithes according to the versions of the story). Metopes North XIII to North XVI would unfold around the statue of Athena with North XIII Corèbe and Diomede; in North XIV sacrilege of Ajax (Cassandra and Ajax); in North XV of Troyennes and North XVI Hecuba. Those of North XVII to North XX would unfold around the altar of Zeus with in North XVII the death of Priam in north XVIII Astyanax and Neoptolemus in north XIX Andromache and Polites; in north XX Agenor and Lycomede or Elephenor. The following metopes would have for general theme the goddess Aphrodite with in northern XXI DEiphobe and Teucros; in the north XXII Clymene (one of Helena's maids) and Menestheus or Acamas; in North XXIII (or metope designated by the letter "D") liberation of Ethra, with Éthra and Demophon and the "reunion" between Meneleas and Helen in North XXIV and XXV114.

The north metope XXIII is most often identified with the metope designated by the letter "D". Two figures face each other. On the left, the bust (damaged), the hips and the upper thighs of a man are visible. He is naked, with a carved cloak on the bottom of the metope. He may have held a spear in his right hand. His left arm is stretched out to the right arm of the female figure on the right, who wears a peplos and has often been identified with Ethra, the mother of Theseus slave of Helen and released by Demophon son of Theseus (or his brother Acamas son of Theseus). It is also the means to insist in the setting of the Parthenon on a purely Athenian episode of the Trojan War. Another identification proposes Polyxene and Acamas or Polyxene and anonymous Greek.

Metopes North XXIV and XXV form an ensemble. On Metope North XXIV, two male profile figures walk to the right. There remains only the trunk and the upper thigh of the left warrior, naked with a cloak. Of the one on the right, also naked, there remain only the trunk and the left forearm with a shield. Menelaus (the identification accepted by all since Michaelis) advances towards the next metope from which it is separated by the triglyph. The transition marked by this purely architectural element is also a sign of the passage from outside to inside. The female figure to the left of North XXV was identified with Aphrodite by the Eros over her left shoulder. She wears a chiton and a himation. The following female figure is in peplos. She is veiled. She seems to run to the statue on the right to take refuge under her protection. Indeed, Menelaus pursued his wife to kill her, considering her responsible for the war and the death of his friends. This incident represented is the moment when Aphrodite will use his power to save his protege. She is about to open her himation to reveal her charms and her divine power. In parallel, Eros flies to Menelaus with either a phiale or a crown. The combined power of love and beauty will change the mind of Menelaus who will put down his sword and forgive his wife. This theme is very present in ceramics. The identification of the divinity completely to the right beside the statue from which Helene comes to take refuge is more difficult. An oinochoe preserved in the Vatican Museum (Etruscan Gregorian Museum) and attributed to the Painter of Heimarmene proposes an equivalent scene. On this one, Helene seeks the protection of an Athena in arms. The choice of this tutelary deity of Athens could make sense on this civic building. In addition, Athens was one of the cities claiming to have inherited the Palladium after the fall of Troy.

Metope North XXVI is totally unknown. On the north XXVII, there are two profile figures: a female, without a head, probably in peplos on the left and a male, naked with a chlamys, of which there remains only the bust, on the right. The characters walk and look to the right. The man may have carried a petasus, perhaps a shield. He may also have held the woman by the hand. The theme of this metope may remain related to Aphrodite, like the previous ones. Some interpretations propose here the issue of Ethra by her grandchildren, or a scene with Polyxena or a Trojan captive. It could also be the priestess of Athena, Theano. The fresco of Polygnotus in the Lesche of the Knidians represented her holding two of her sons by the hand, accompanied by Antenor holding one of her daughters. It could be here this family, before the Anchises family on the next metope. If this north metope XXVIII (towards which the characters walk) was the flight of Aeneas, then the female figure of north XXVII could also be Creusa.

Metope North XXVIII is one of the most "charged", with no less than four characters. To the far left, in the foreground, is a motionless figure from the front, probably a woman: only her (missing) feet protruded from her long mantle. It is impossible to determine the gesture of his arms. At his immediate right and a little behind, another figure, considered an old man, is in profile turned to the male figure on his right. He wears a short-sleeved garment and a coat that leaves his right shoulder unobstructed. His two hands are resting on the shoulders of the next figure on the right. This is a naked man in a coat that goes down his back and between the legs. In the left arm, he carries a large round shield that protrudes above his head. The man walks to the right. In front of him, a last figure, probably male, smaller, in a coat. The most common interpretation for the three male figures is Anchises on the shoulders of his son Aeneas, himself preceded by his own son Ascagne. The female figure is therefore most often considered as Aphrodite (general theme of this series of metopes, but also mother of Aeneas). Sometimes she is identified as Cretace, the wife of Aeneas.

A rider can be discerned on the Metope North XXIX, also marked by a decoration of rocks. The horse, perhaps a mare, is turned to the right, head down. The rider, rather a rider, seems to ride "amazon"?, the left arm resting on the neck of the mare. The rider is facing to the right. She has to wear a chiton. His right hand was to hold his veil. In the upper right corner is a slightly curved relief fragment, interpreted as a crescent moon. The rider would then be Selene. However, as it is not represented on horseback, it could also be the Pleiade Electre.

There is almost nothing left of the metope north XXX, except on the bottom two traces of busts, perhaps two male figures. If we consider their location, between a celestial deity in North XXIX and Zeus and Hera in North XXXI and XXXII, then it could be gods, perhaps Apollo and Ares or Hermes; the three were, in effect, absent until then metopes north. Metope North XXXI is better preserved. The figure on the left is a man in a nude profile in a long coat?, sitting on a rock, an elbow resting on a thigh. The figure on the right is more in the foreground, from the front. It is thin with very visible wings down to the ground. The two figures are identified, in connection with the next metope, to Zeus and Iris, sometimes Eris or Nike.

The only well preserved, and still in situ, metope on this north side is North XXXII. In 1933, Gerhart Rodenwaldt suggested that it could have been read by Christians as an Annunciation and thus preserved while its position in the northwest made it very visible. Two female figures face each other. One on the right is seated and the other on the left is walking towards her. The female figure on the left wears an "Attic" peplos and makes the gesture of removing her cloak, with the left arm above the head and right along the thigh: the movement of the garment is very well made. It is found on a depiction of Apollo on a white-tailed skyphos preserved at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. The seated figure is in chiton, covered with a long mantle, which allows a work of sculpture on the drapes bunk. The right elbow is supported on the right knee; the legs are shifted: the left lower than the right. The left hand (disappeared, like the whole arm) was leaning behind, on the rock, placing the figure of three-quarters. It is possible that the left arm was added after carving, as suggested by the fixation hole.

The most common interpretation for this Metope North XXXII is that to the left is Athena and to the right of Hera or sometimes Themis, Aphrodite, Cybele, or even another unidentified female deity. Kristian Jeppesen in 1963 suggests that it could be Pandora on the left and Aphrodite on the right. Katherine A. Schwab disputes in an article of 2005 the identification of Athena on the left. One of the main arguments in favour of Athena is that she is not or perhaps not identified elsewhere on this side unless, according to K. Schwab, she is on the metope North I, aboard the chariot. Indeed, this one seems to be braking, it can not be the chariot of one of the two stars. The second argument in favour of an identification of Athena is that she would carry the aegis on the chest. The counter-argument of K. A. Schwab is that what is interpreted as the aegis would in fact be a very damaged place of the metope. Finally, for K. Schwab, in her movement, her peplos open and revealing her bare leg, something impossible for a virgin goddess like Athena. It could then be Hebe, from the moment she is put in relation with the seated female figure?. This one is considered as Aphrodite or Hera. However, as Aphrodite is prominently on north XXV, she can not be as far north as XXXII. Moreover, on north XXXI, the male figure sitting would be Zeus. Therefore, in North XXXII, could be Hera, in a symbolic hierogamy. The winged figure next to Zeus in northern XXXI would be Iris, so the female figure walking north XXXII would be Hebe. The latter being linked to marriage and renewal, these two North Metopes XXXI and XXXII could mean the renewal of their vows by the divine couple Zeus-Hera, just as the marriage Menelaus-Helen is renewed in the North XXIV and XXV.

Since these metopes have been almost completely destroyed by Christians, it is difficult to know what they represented. However, in the nineteenth century, Adolf Michaelis suggested that the character on east II could be a Dionysus (identified thanks to the panther and snake that accompany him) attacking a giant on the run. Michaelis then made the hypothesis that the metopes on this facade could represent Gigantomachy. Therefore, the identification of other figures was possible, even if some are still debated. The work was done by comparison with other representations of gigantomachy: Athenian vases of the fifth century BC., the Siphnian Treasury or the Pergamon Altar However, these metopes were a turning point in the representation of the giants. Until the middle of the fifth century BC, they were represented as hoplites. Here, and in later representations, as in Pergamum, they are naked or simply dressed in animal skins.

The figures of the metopes east V, VII, X and XIV are not opposed to a giant, but stand in a chariot. For this reason, they are sometimes identified not with a deity but with the charioteer of the chariot of divinity. The vehicle is turned towards the center of the facade. The east metopes are organized symmetrically around a central axis, the same as for the eastern frieze and the as with the east pediment; moreover, the identifications are sometimes made by comparison with the divinities present in parallel on these two other decorative elements of the Parthenon. The four central metopes (east VI, VII, VIII and IX) are framed by two metopes with a chariot (east V and X) then the two metopes with three characters (east IV and XI). This composition would evoke the end of the fight and the imminent victory of the Olympians; the place of the confrontation would no longer be the plain of Phlegra but already the slopes of Olympus.

Two male figures are on the metope east I. The one on the left carries a chlamys; with her right hand, she seems to hold the right figure with her knees on the ground. With her left hand, she is about to strike a fatal blow. His sword was, given the fixing hole, to be a bronze object. The figure on the right bears a skin of animal and has the right hand resting on the hip of his adversary, perhaps to ask for grace. Thus Hermes is represented on the amphora of the Gigantomachy by the Suessula Painter conserved in the Louvre. Moreover, on the frieze of the Parthenon, on the east side, it is Hermes which is also completely on the left. On the metope east II, the divine figure of Dionysus is quite easily identifiable. In the foreground, an animal leaps between the figure on the left that is attacking and the one on the right that is leaking. The hind legs of the animal are feline legs. Fixing holes could also mean the presence of a bronze snake. Moreover, on the Parthenon frieze, on the east side, Dionysus is immediately to the right of Hermes. Finally, it is also on the left side of the eastern pediment. On the metope east III, very damaged, is guessed a round shield, between two figures of which there are only a few traces. The shield deity is most often identified with Ares: it is the third male deity on the east side of the frieze and is present on the left side of the eastern pediment.

The general shape of the characters on east IV is still discernible. It has three figures. On the left, a fallen figure protects himself with his shield from the attack of a female figure. Behind it, to the far right is a smaller figure in flight. It seems that Athena is the central figure; she would walk to the left, her left arm protected from her shield with the aegis. In the right hand, she would hold a spear (added bronze object) which she would hit a giant, already on the ground and protecting himself with his own shield. At the top right, there is the little figure of Nike crowning the goddess. An equivalent composition is visible on the amphora attributed to the painter of Suessula preserved in the Louvre. The Athena crowned by Nike is the sign of the upcoming victory of the gods, but also a tribute and a glorification of the city of Athens and its citizens, as on the entire building.

On the metope east V can be seen a chariot, turned to the right and pulled by two horses. The two main interpretations are Demeter or Amphitrite. It is the latter that is most often suggested since it is considered that Poseidon appears on the next metope 144. The essential element of the metope east VI is a huge rock, both landscape element and weapon used by Poseidon against a giant: it would be the episode taking place between the god and Polybotes, in which the rock ripped off. on the island of Cos would have given birth to the new island of Nisyros?. The outlines of the characters are barely discernible. The giant would protect himself from his shield while Poseidon would crush his head with Nisyros. The composition is reminiscent of a crater fragment preserved in Ferrara. and attributed to the Pélée painter who was inspired by the metope, as well as an attic bas-relief from the fourth century BC. now at the Metropolitan Museum of Art,

The metope east VII again represents a chariot, pulled by two winged horses. The most common interpretation is Hera, since Zeus is identified on the next metope. Moreover, the divine couple is represented together in the centre of the frieze as well as the pediment. The metope is VIII is extremely damaged: a bust is guessed on the left and a shield is discerned in the upper right quarter. The bottom of a chiton is engraved on the bottom of the metope under the bust. The identification of Zeus is justified by the central place of the metope on the east facade. At the same time, the god is also in the centre of the frieze and pediment. On the metope east IX, the figure on the left is probably a giant, holding in his right hand a club or a bronze torch (added given the hole of fixation). His right arm is protected from an animal skin. His opponent enters his right knee in the thigh?. The position of the god's right arm, which would hold a sword, is not unlike that of Harmodios in the group of Tyrannicides. The identification of Apollo is again related to the frieze and pediment where the god is on the right side. The metope east X again shows a chariot pulled by two horses. On the frieze, the neighbours of Apollo are Artemis and Aphrodite, the two main propositions for the charioteer of this chariot. If one is identified as X, then the other is suggested for east XII, and vice versa. On the metope east XII, a female figure on the left walks to the right. She wears a peplos and her coat hangs from her left arm. There is too little of the giant (bust and head fragment) to determine anything. Here again, Artemis and Aphrodite are proposed, without being able to decide, especially since Eros is identified on the metope east XI, between the two. Finally, these two goddesses are sitting next to Apollo on the frieze. If Artemis is immediately on the right of his brother, Eros is also on the right of his mother, thus depriving us of a decisive rubric.

The other metope with three characters is located in XI. On the right, a giant fell to his knees. The central figure was so high in relief that it disappeared. The identification of this central character is still debated. On the left is a smaller figure (a youth?). The fixing holes on his shoulder and hip are reminiscent of the presence of a quiver, which would identify him as Eros. His presence is linked to that of Aphrodite (on the previous metope or the next). Tiverios then makes the link Eros-Aphrodite to propose Ares as identification of the central figure. Another identification proposed is Apollo, in connection with IX: if Heracles is present in IX, then Apollo is on XI, and vice versa. Indeed, Heracles is also suggested: he is regularly associated with Eros which he was the "pedagogue". Another argument is the symmetry between this metope and the metope is IV. If Athena is present in is IV, then her protege Heracles is certainly in is XI. There remains almost nothing of the metope is XIII: on the left a shoulder, a bust and the hips of a figure visibly fallen to the ground; on the right one shoulder, the bust and the traces of one thigh and one leg of a figure dominating the other, probably preparing to crush it with a rock. It is most often Héphaïstos that is proposed.

Two horses leap diagonally from right to left on the metope east XIV. In the bottom right corner, next to a calf, a fish is very clearly visible, hence the suggestion that sometimes the god of the chariot would be Poseidon. However, Helios is a more common proposition. According to the account of Pseudo-Apollodorus, Zeus stopped the march of the Sun and the Moon to allow Athena to go to Heracles to Hades, the presence of the hero being necessary for the victory. This episode would be according to Katherine A. Schwab in east IV and east XI, the only metopes with three characters and not two. East XIV, with the chariot of Helios coming out of the ocean, would be the expression of the resumption of the march of time. Moreover, it responds to the metope north I, on which is represented a chariot, perhaps that of Athena, and at the end of the eastern pediment with the chariot of Selene.

On this side of the Parthenon, the preserved metopes represent the fight of the Centaurs and Lapiths probably at the time of the marriage of the king of Thessaly Pirithoos with Hippodamia. Centaurs and Lapiths are cousins (Lapiths and Centaurs were half-brothers, sons of Apollo), hence the invitation of the Centaurs who descended from Pelion for the occasion. The effects of alcohol being felt, the Centaurs attacked the women and young men present. The Lapiths came to their aid, seizing all that was within their reach could serve as weapons, and the fight took such proportions that it continued outside. It is the fact that women are present in this centauromachy (as also on the west pediment of the temple of Zeus in Olympia) that identifies this specific episode, although it seems that some guests came with their shield, even throw them at the wedding. The presence of this theme on an Athenian building celebrating the city is however not surprising: Theseus was the best friend of Pirithoos and was present at the ceremony and during the fight. According to Pausanias, a fresco by Mikon, in the hero of Theseus (not yet found), dating back to around 470 BC., already evoked this episode. This fresco greatly influenced the painters on vases, and certainly the sculptors of the metopes of the Parthenon. Unlike the other sides, the Centaurs are not barbarians: they are from the Greek world. In addition, the sculptors of metopes have renewed the way of representing them. They made sure to remove the strangeness of the double nature, as it had been the case until then. The animal and human parts are not autonomous, but are well connected and functional. This is therefore a fight between Greeks; between humans and centaurs who are also closer to the human than the monster. The metopes could be a metaphor for the conflicts that then pitted the Greeks against each other. This theme of the centauromachy can be read at another level for Athenian citizens. The behavior of the centaurs who do not respect the sanctity of the wedding ceremony could echo the sacrilege of the Persians when they destroyed the shrines of the Acropolis.

These metopes are both the best preserved and the most fully destroyed. The best preserved are those ends that were taken to London by Lord Elgin, which preserved them completely, in comparison with those of the other sides remained on the building. However, the central metopes (South XIII to XXI) have also completely disappeared in the explosion of the powder magazine in 1687. Only the drawings attributed to Jacques Carrey, dating from 1674, remain. On these drawings there is no Centaur, which leads to a problem of interpretation of the general theme on this side. Fragments found during recent excavations on the Acropolis illuminated a little more.

The metope south I was one of the last to be still in place on the Parthenon, in the southwest corner, it was removed in 2013 and it is now in the Acropolis museum, it was replaced by a copy on site. A rearing Centaur, on the right, strangles with his left arm a Lapith in a mantle, on the left. He is about to deliver a fatal blow to his human adversary with an object held in his right hand, perhaps a tree trunk that would have been painted on the bottom of the metope. The right arm of Lapith has disappeared. However, a hole in Centaur's groin could give indications. The Lapithe would be piercing his opponent with a long metal object: lance or spit roasting. If it is a spear and we accept the hypothesis of the tree trunk, then this metope would be proof that the fight has moved outside. The next metope (south II) has a reverse setting. A Centaur, in the background, has the knees of the front legs on the ground while a Lapith, in the foreground, strangles her left arm while pushing her left knee in the back. On the southern metope III, a Lapith in a mantle, on the right, attacks a Centaur from behind. He jumps on his back and takes it to his throat. The belts and sheath of Lapithe were to be in bronze: the fixing holes are still visible.

On the southern metope IV, a Centaur, on the right, is about to trample on a Lapith fallen to the ground on the left. This one protects itself from a shield (the only armour element of the set of South metopes preserved). The Centaur takes the opportunity to try to knock him out with a hydria. This one is used to determine the chronology of the events told by the metopes south: one would still be in the room of the banquet. The South IV Metope is at the British Museum. The heads were removed in 1688 by a Dane in the service of Francesco Morosini and the Venetian army. They are kept at the National Museum of Denmark in Copenhagen. The drawing of 1674 attributed to Jacques Carrey shows that the members
still existed then: the general composition is thus better known.

On the southern metope V remains only the Centaur, on the left, but the Lapith is known thanks to the drawing attributed to Carrey (the heads had already disappeared by then). The centaur is pitched up and has grabbed the Lapith by the upper body: he pulls his opponent violently backwards, trying to flee.

On the southern metope VI, an old man (apparent wrinkles, flaccid skin and drooping tail) Centaur, on the right is opposed to a young Lapith wearing a cloak. On the drawing attributed to Carrey, the Lapith gives a blow with the right fist to the Centaur. The composition is unimaginative. It seems that the sculptor has insisted more on the difference of age than on the action. The head of the Centaur, present on the drawing attributed to Carrey, has since disappeared. On the other hand, the head of Lapitha, in place in 1674, was found in 1913 near the Varvakeio therefore at the foot of the Acropolis. She is now at the Acropolis Museum of Athens, while the Metope is at the British Museum.

On the metope south VII, with the left hand, a Lapith, sometimes identified with Pirithoos, on the left, diagonally assault, a punch in the face of a Centaur who rears himself under the effect of the blow and is pushed on the right edge of the metope; his head even protruded from the upper edge. In the right hand, the Lapith had to hold a sword (metal object disappeared since). The Centaur does not wear a skin like the others, but a kind of fluid tissue that flies behind his back. The metope is at the British Museum. The heads are kept separately: that of Lapith is in the Louvre; that of the Centaur at the Acropolis Museum.
The metope south VIII was badly damaged during the Parthenon explosion in 1687. On the left, a curled Lapith seeks to protect himself from the attack of the Centaur; he might even beg for mercy. The right arm of Lapith has completely disappeared and his gesture is unknown. He remains the Lapith's cloak, descending from his left shoulder to his thigh and the bottom of the beast's skin (perhaps of panther) which the Centaur wore on his right arm. The drawing attributed to Carrey shows that the Centaur had both arms raised; he might be wielding a tree trunk. The abdominal muscles of Lapith are very well marked, but the style remains very fixed, not unlike the severe style of the early fifth century BC. As a result, the sculptor who made this metope might have been older or more conservative, or both, than his colleagues.

The southern metope IX is preserved in the British Museum, but the heads of Lapith and Centaurs, which Carrey's drawing still shows, are preserved in the Acropolis Museum, as well as fragments of the shoulder and arms. The Centaur, on the right, with his left hand caught Lapithe's thigh, which he thus unbalanced. He's about to knock him out with something he's holding over his head. The Lapithe falls on a hydria or a dinos. He tries to recover by grabbing his opponent's hair with his left hand and placing the right (as Carrey's drawing shows) on the ground.

The metope South X, considered as little successful, represents the cause of the fight: a woman carried away by a Centaur. This one is bald if one believes the drawing attributed to Carrey. He squeezes Lapithe between the thighs of his front legs; the right leg lifting the woman's peplos. He also uses the left arm to grip it. In his right hand, he also holds the Lapith's right wrist (this movement is gone). She tries to flee, without success. In her desperate gesture, she discovers her left thigh and shoulder as well as her chest. The woman is sometimes identified with Hippodamia or her "maid of honor". From the South XI metope remain only fragments and the drawing attributed to Carrey. On the latter, a Centaur to the left is pitched up and getting ready to hit a Lapith. This one, naked, wears only a cloak. In the right arm, he has a big round shield. He is sometimes identified with Theseus.

The southern metope XII is also one of five where a Centaur attacks a Lapith. The woman, on the left, tries to free herself from the grip of the Centaur, but her feet already touch the ground only toes. She is sometimes identified with Hippodamia, kidnapped by Eurytion. Indeed, the composition of the metope is inversely symmetrical with respect to the South X metope. The three southern metopes X, XI and XII are then sometimes read together: Centaur and Bridesmaid; Centaur and Theseus; Hippodamia and Eurytion.

The following metopes, from south XIII to south XXV, are known only from the drawings attributed to Carrey. Some fragments have been found allowing reconstitution. As these metopes do not represent only Lapithe-Centaur duels, only present on south XXII to south XXV, various other interpretations have been proposed for metopes south XIII to XXI, sometimes without any connection with the episode of the marriage of Hippodamia and Pirithoos. Erich Pernice and Frantz Studniczka read the myth of Erichthonios and the erection of the cult statue of Athena Polias. Charles Picard shares the opinion that this is the same myth of Erichthonios but he rather suggests the creation of Panathenae. Erika Simon sees the story of another Lapith, Ixion, the father of Pirithoos. Martin Robertson prefers the myth of Daedalus, with traveling geographical locations (South XIII to XVI in Athens, South XVII and XVIII in Knossos, return to Athens for South XIX to XXI). Burkhard Fehr wants to read the opposition between the "good" wife Alceste (wife of Admetus) and the "bad" wife Phaedrus (wife of Theseus). According to Hilda Westervelt in her thesis defended at Harvard in 2004, this might not be a punctual event, but an account of the entire marriage of Hippodamia and Pirithoos. In the center is represented the moment when at the wedding the bride leaves the paternal house for that of her husband; the procession would then be disturbed by centaurs already drunk; the fight then extends to the outer metopes.

The metope south XXVI could have been sculpted by one of the least competent artists. Movements are unlikely; the face of the Centaur is frozen and the style of sculpture (severe) is old-fashioned for this second half of the fifth century BC.; the head of the Centaur is placed directly on the shoulders: he has no neck. Finally, a part of Lapith's garment drape did not hold and fell at a very old date. The Lapith on the left gives a shot of his left foot in the chest of the Centaur; in his left hand he also grabs his right elbow. The Centaur seems to carry over the head a heavy object (block of stone or altar) that he is about to launch on his opponent. It seems that a well was present under the legs of the two characters. This element of scenery could mean (like the hypothetical tree trunk on South I) that the fight has moved outside.

On the metope south XXVII, the Centaur, wounded, tries to flee at a gallop. He put his right hand on the wound he received in the back, unless he used both hands to try to extract the object that hurt him. The Lapithe, who could also be the hero Theseus, tries to prevent him from fleeing, gripping his neck, with his left hand. His right hand is backward, catching up with a new blow, probably fatal with either a spear or a roasting spit. His coat is sliding from his shoulders to the ground. The faces of the two characters were turned towards the centre of the metope. The heads have disappeared since the drawings attributed to Carrey. However, if the metope is in the British Museum, the Lapith's head is kept at the Acropolis Museum in Athens. This head is however also considered as being able to come from metope south IX. "Carrey" drew a beardless Centaur. Several hypotheses are then advanced: the designer would not have seen that the beard had been broken; the ancient sculptor created with this metope a new canon of representation of the Centaurs as much younger. This metope south XXVII is considered one of the most successful. The rendering of the anatomy is perfect. The tension of the movement is visible in the sculpture of the muscles of Lapith's leg and torso. The drape, perfect, of the mantle is in such high relief that it is detached almost completely from the bottom. The tail of the Centaur is part of the continuity of one of the folds of the coat: it had to be painted in different colours to bring out. This movement of the mantle recalls that of figure M of the pediment of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia, traditionally identified with Theseus, hence the identification here. The composition is subtle: the two tensions in two opposite directions recall those characteristic of the central group of a pediment, similar to the movement that animates Athena and Poseidon on the west pediment. Finally, it also recalls the western metope IV of the temple of Zeus in Olympia (Heracles and the bull of Crete). We also find this motif on the neck of a volute krater attributed to the painter of the Woolly Satyrs and preserved in New York. If the sculptor is not known, he must however be one of the most gifted to have worked on the Parthenon.

The southern metope XXVIII is by its style quite similar to its neighbour south XXVII. A Centaur rears over a Lapithe on the ground. On the left arm, he has a skin of animal, perhaps of panther, which he had to use to protect himself. In the right hand he holds a large vase. If the arm and the vase have disappeared, however, there remains a fragment above the Centaur's shoulder. Martin Robertson suggests that the man the Centaur is about to kill could be Daedalus. The metope south XXIX is one of the five preserved that does not represent the fight, but the cause of the fight: a bald Centaur takes a Lapith woman. He encloses her with his left arm. The drawing attributed to Carrey shows that he held his right wrist with his right hand. The quality of the sculpture is very heterogeneous. The face of the Centaur is frozen and inexpressive; Lapith's position is improbable. In contrast, the drapery of the chiton is of very high quality, the level of that of the Iris of the western pediment; it is the same for the border of the Centaur's mantle, the level of what is on the frieze.

On the metope south XXX, Lapith on the right is kneeling. The Centaur plunges the hooves of the front legs into the thighs. The movement is still visible to the right limbs; the left limbs were broken. The metope south XXXI is also carved in a style a little old (severe) for this second half of the fifth century BC. The Centaur, on the left, seized the Lapith by the throat. Between his front legs, he holds the right leg of his opponent who enters his knee in the chest. The Lapithe tries to pull the shaggy hair of the Centaur. The positions are frozen; the anatomy is little rendered. The face of the Centaur is more grotesque than expressive. The very quality of the work left something to be desired: the right arm of the Centaur broke in antiquity and was replaced by a new one attached by ankles.

On the metope south XXXII, the Lapith on the right advances in a determined manner towards the Centaur on the left. He is pitched as if to protect himself. On the drawing attributed to Carrey, the right arm of Centaurus and left Lapithe were still present. The head of Lapithe also existed in 1674. A detail on the front made it possible to hypothesize that the Lapithe could have worn a Corinthian helmet. The position of Lapith's body and arms is reminiscent of those of Harmodios in the Tyrannonos group. In addition, this metope is the last in the southeast corner (near the most sacred facade). Therefore, this man is sometimes identified as Theseus, founder of Athenian democracy.

The entire monument is made of Pentelic marble, from Mt. Pentelikon, 18.2 km northeast of the arch. Pentelic marble was used for the Parthenon and many other notable structures in Athens, although its quality can vary significantly. The marble used for the arch is of a lower grade that had more inclusions than that used in the best Athenian buildings. The arch was constructed without cement or mortar from solid marble, using clamps to connect the cut stones. It is 18m high, 13.5m wide, and 2.3m in depth. Its design is fully symmetrical from front to back and side to side.

Arch of Hadrian (Athens)

The Arch of Hadrian (), most commonly known in Greek as Hadrian's Gate (), is a monumental gateway resembling – in some respects – a Roman triumphal arch. It spanned an ancient road from the center of Athens, Greece, to the complex of structures on the eastern side of the city that included the Temple of Olympian Zeus. It has been proposed that the arch was built to celebrate the "adventus" (arrival) of the Roman Emperor Hadrian and to honor him for his many benefactions to the city, on the occasion of the dedication of the nearby temple complex in 131 or 132 AD. It is not certain who commissioned the arch, although it is probable that the citizens of Athens or another Greek group were responsible for its construction and design. There were two inscriptions on the arch, facing in opposite directions, naming both Theseus and Hadrian as founders of Athens. While it is clear that the inscriptions honor Hadrian, it is uncertain whether they refer to the city as a whole or to the city in two parts: one old and one new. The early idea, however, that the arch marked the line of the ancient city wall, and thus the division between the old and the new regions of the city, has been shown to be false by further excavation. The arch is located 325m southeast of the Acropolis.

The single arched passageway of the lower level is 6.5m wide and was supported by pilasters crowned with Corinthian capitals. Similar, but taller, pilasters flank the outer corners of the lower level. The space between the outer pilasters and the arched opening was filled in with squared stones with drafted edges to emphasize the design. On either side of the central passageway was a Corinthian column on a rectangular, raised base projecting from the center of the wall. The lower level was crowned with an Ionic architrave capped with dentils and a projecting geison.

The upper level of the arch (the attic) was composed of a series of Corinthian columns and pilasters dividing the space into three rectangular openings. Each of the outer openings was crowned with an Ionic architrave capped with dentils and a projecting geison, in the manner of the lower level. The central opening, however, was flanked by antae with engaged Corinthian half-columns that supported a projecting triangular pediment, which rested above the dentils, "geison", and sima that joined to those of the two wings. At the peak of the pediment, there was a small vegetal "acroterion". The central opening of the upper level was originally closed off by a thin screen of stone, c. 7 cm thick. Only the slots for its mounting are now preserved. The design of this central "aediculum"-like, niche of the upper level is similar to the architecture of the "scaenae frons" (façade of ancient stage buildings) and highly evocative of the representations of "aedicula" in wall painting of the 2nd Pompeian style.

Even a casual examination of this arch, with a few of the many preserved Roman triumphal arches in mind, reveals the significant design variation between the two structures. The number of arched passageways of the lower level of Roman triumphal arches was variable as was the presence of a secondary passageway along the long axis of the structure; as a dipylon arch with a single passageway, the lower level of the Arch of Hadrian falls within the gamut of the architectural genre. Roman triumphal arches, however, typically have a massive, solid attic (upper level), often filled with a dedicatory inscription and sculptural decoration. In addition, Roman arches typically supported major stone or bronze statuary, often including a quadriga (four-horse chariot) or similar at top center. As Willers notes, the design of the Arch of Hadrian has a very refined upper level that does not allow the mounting of major decoration on top of the attic.

It has been proposed that there were statues positioned on top of the lower level, on either side of the central, "aediculum"-like, niche of the upper level, as was common for this architectural form; Theseus and Hadrian are the most commonly advanced candidates for these two statues, based on the inscriptions. Ward-Perkins has proposed that the attic held additional multiple statues, located over the projecting Corinthian columns of the lower level. In stark opposition to these proposals, Willers states that there is no evidence of the type of doweling needed to mount statuary on the top of the lower level and that the stone is far too roughly worked on the upper surface for statues to rest on it. Although Willers has done an excellent study of the lower level of the arch, permission was not granted for close study of the upper level, so his statements concerning the upper level are based on previously published measurements and images. A complete investigation of the monument, perhaps with limited excavation of the foundations as Willers suggests, remains to be done.

Two inscriptions are carved on the architrave of the arch’s lower level, one centered over the arched opening on either side. On the northwest side (towards the Acropolis), the inscription was:
The inscription on the southeast side (facing the Olympeion) reads:

Adams has proposed that the inscriptions, rather than dividing Athens into an old city of Theseus and a new city of Hadrian ("Hadrianopolis"), claim the entire city as a refoundation by the emperor. In this view, the inscriptions should be read: this is Athens, once the city of Theseus; this is the city of Hadrian, and not of Theseus. One option claims a part and the other the whole of Athens for the emperor. Adams has also challenged the idea that the arch was on the line of the Themistocleian wall, and this position has now been generally accepted. A gate of the Themistocleian wall has been excavated c. 140m east of the arch, which has settled the question. Stuart and Revett, who did the earliest and only complete architectural study of the arch in 1751-53 CE, were perplexed by the fact that the arch is not aligned with the Temple of Olympian Zeus, despite the fact that it is only c. 20m from the "peribolos" wall (boundary wall) of that complex. Excavations in the intervening time have shown that the arch is aligned with an ancient road that was roughly on the same course as modern Lysikrates street. The arch faces the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates 207m to the northwest along this street.

At the time that it was recorded architecturally by Stuart and Revett in the mid-18th century, the base of the arch was buried in earth only to the level of around three feet. Given that it was thus never protected by being buried during its nearly nineteen centuries of existence, the arch entered the modern era in extraordinary condition. Although the columns of the lower level are missing, the arch is preserved to its full height and towers over modern Amalias Avenue. In recent decades, atmospheric pollution has damaged the monument. There is extensive discoloration of the stone and degradation of the inscriptions.

Patronage of the arch has been attributed to either the Athenian state or to the "Panhellenes", a newly formed association of all the Greek cities, based in Athens. Early scholarship held that the Athenians were responsible for its creation, on the argument that the quality of material and execution did not equal the other known buildings of Hadrian in Athens, and on the assumption that an emperor who loved Athens so much could not have been so arrogant as to put such an inscription on a structure of his own making. Two arches of the same scale and design were constructed at the sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at Eleusis later in the 2nd century CE and dedicated to an emperor (perhaps Marcus Aurelius) by the Panhellenes. These arches flanked the propylon into the sanctuary and stood at the ends of roads to Megara and to a harbor respectively. The southeastern arch had an inscription that read:
The use of the same design to honor two emperors within the space of a few decades and a few kilometers has prompted the idea that the "Panhellenes" were responsible for the arches in both locations.

The Parthenon Marbles (Greek: Γλυπτά του Παρθενώνα), also known as the Elgin Marbles (), are a collection of Classical Greek marble sculptures made under the supervision of the architect and sculptor Phidias and his assistants. They were originally part of the temple of the Parthenon and other buildings on the Acropolis of Athens.

Elgin Marbles

From 1801 to 1812, agents of Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin removed about half of the surviving sculptures of the Parthenon, as well as sculptures from the Propylaea and Erechtheum. The Marbles were transported by sea to Britain. Elgin later claimed to have obtained in 1801 an official decree (a firman) from the Sublime Porte, the central government of the Ottoman Empire which were then the rulers of Greece. This firman has not been found in the Ottoman archives despite its wealth of documents from the same period and its veracity is disputed. The half not removed by Elgin is now displayed in the Acropolis Museum, aligned in orientation and within sight of the Parthenon, with the position of the missing elements clearly marked and space left should they be returned to Athens.

In Britain, the acquisition of the collection was supported by some, while some others, such as Lord Byron, likened the Earl's actions to vandalism or looting. Following a public debate in Parliament and its subsequent exoneration of Elgin, he sold the Marbles to the British government in 1816. They were then passed to the British Museum, where they are now on display in the purpose-built Duveen Gallery.

After gaining its independence from the Ottoman Empire in 1832, the newly found Greek state began a series of projects to restore its monuments and retrieve looted art. It has expressed its disapproval of Elgin's removal of the Marbles from the Acropolis and the Parthenon, which is regarded as one of the world's greatest cultural monuments. International efforts to repatriate the Marbles to Greece were intensified in the 1980s by then Greek Minister of Culture Melina Mercouri, and there are now many organisations actively campaigning for the Marbles' return, several united as part of the International Association for the Reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures. The Greek government itself continues to urge the return of the marbles to Athens so as to be unified with the remaining marbles and for the complete Parthenon frieze sequence to be restored, through diplomatic, political and legal means.

In 2014, UNESCO offered to mediate between Greece and the United Kingdom to resolve the dispute, although this was later turned down by the British Museum on the basis that UNESCO works with government bodies, not trustees of museums.

Built in the ancient era, the Parthenon was extensively damaged during the Great Turkish War (1683–1699) against the Republic of Venice. The defending Turks fortified the Acropolis and used the Parthenon as a gunpowder magazine. On 26 September 1687, a Venetian artillery round, fired from the Hill of Philopappus, blew up the magazine, and the building was partly destroyed. The explosion blew out the building's central portion and caused the cella's walls to crumble into rubble. Three of the four walls collapsed, or nearly so, and about three-fifths of the sculptures from the frieze fell. About three hundred people were killed in the explosion, which showered marble fragments over a significant area. For the next century and a half, portions of the remaining structure were scavenged for building material and looted of any remaining objects of value.

In November 1798 the Earl of Elgin was appointed as "Ambassador Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Britannic Majesty to the Sublime Porte of Selim III, Sultan of Turkey" (Greece was then part of the Ottoman Empire). Before his departure to take up the post he had approached officials of the British government to inquire if they would be interested in employing artists to take casts and drawings of the sculptured portions of the Parthenon. According to Lord Elgin, "the answer of the Government ... was entirely negative."

Lord Elgin decided to carry out the work himself, and employed artists to take casts and drawings under the supervision of the Neapolitan court painter, Giovani Lusieri. According to a Turkish local, marble sculptures that fell were being burned to obtain lime for building. Although his original intention was only to document the sculptures, in 1801 Lord Elgin began to remove material from the Parthenon and its surrounding structures under the supervision of Lusieri. Pieces were also removed from the Erechtheion, the Propylaia, and the Temple of Athena Nike, all inside the Acropolis.

The excavation and removal was completed in 1812 at a personal cost to Elgin of around £70,000. Elgin intended to use the marbles to decorate Broomhall House, his private home near Dunfermline in Scotland, but a costly divorce suit forced him to sell them to settle his debts. Elgin sold the Parthenon Marbles to the British government for less than it cost him to procure them, declining higher offers from other potential buyers, including Napoleon.

The Parthenon Marbles acquired by Elgin include some 21 figures from the statuary from the east and west pediments, 15 of an original 92 metope panels depicting battles between the Lapiths and the Centaurs, as well as 75 meters of the Parthenon Frieze which decorated the horizontal course set above the interior architrave of the temple. As such, they represent more than half of what now remains of the surviving sculptural decoration of the Parthenon.

Elgin's acquisitions also included objects from other buildings on the Athenian Acropolis: a Caryatid from Erechtheum; four slabs from the parapet frieze of the Temple of Athena Nike; and a number of other architectural fragments of the Parthenon, Propylaia, Erechtheum, the Temple of Athene Nike, and the Treasury of Atreus.

The Acropolis was at that time an Ottoman military fort, so Elgin required special permission to enter the site, the Parthenon, and the surrounding buildings. He stated that he had obtained a firman from the Sultan which allowed his artists to access the site, but he was unable to produce the original documentation. However, Elgin presented a document claimed to be an English translation of an Italian copy made at the time. This document is now kept in the British Museum. Its authenticity has been questioned, as it lacked the formalities characterising edicts from the sultan. Vassilis Demetriades, Professor of Turkish Studies at the University of Crete, has argued that "any expert in Ottoman diplomatic language can easily ascertain that the original of the document which has survived was not a firman". The document was recorded in an appendix of an 1816 parliamentary committee report. 'The committee permission' had convened to examine a request by Elgin asking the British government to purchase the Marbles. The report said that the document in the appendix was an accurate translation, in English, of an Ottoman firman dated July 1801. In Elgin's view it amounted to an Ottoman authorisation to remove the marbles. The committee was told that the original document was given to Ottoman officials in Athens in 1801. Researchers have so far failed to locate it despite the fact that the Ottoman archives in Istanbul still hold a number of similar documents dating from the same period.

The parliamentary record shows that the Italian copy of the firman was not presented to the committee by Elgin himself but by one of his associates, the clergyman Rev. Philip Hunt. Hunt, who at the time resided in Bedford, was the last witness to appear before the committee and stated that he had in his possession an Italian translation of the Ottoman original. He went on to explain that he had not brought the document, because, upon leaving Bedford, he was not aware that he was to testify as a witness. The English document in the parliamentary report was filed by Hunt, but the committee was not presented with the Italian translation in Hunt's possession. William St. Clair, a contemporary biographer of Lord Elgin, said he possessed Hunt's Italian document and "vouches for the accuracy of the English translation". The committee report states on page 69 "(Signed with a signet.) Seged Abdullah Kaimacan" - however, the document presented to the committee was "an English translation of this purported translation into Italian of the original "firman"", and had neither signet nor signature on it, a fact corroborated by St. Clair. The 1967 study by British historian William St. Clair, "Lord Elgin and the Marbles," stated the sultan did not allow the removal of statues and reliefs from the Parthenon. The study judged a clause authorizing the British to take stones “with old inscriptions and figures” probably meant items in the excavations the site, not the art decorating the temples.

The document allowed Elgin and his team to erect scaffolding so as to make drawings and mouldings in chalk or gypsum, as well as to measure the remains of the ruined buildings and excavate the foundations which may have become covered in the ["ghiaja" (meaning gravel, debris)]; and "...that when they wish to take away ["qualche" (meaning'some' or 'a few')] pieces of stone with old inscriptions or figures thereon, that no opposition be made thereto". The interpretation of these lines has been questioned even by non-restitutionalists, particularly the word "qualche", which in modern language should be translated as "a few" but can also mean "any". According to non-restitutionalists, further evidence that the removal of the sculptures by Elgin was approved by the Ottoman authorities is shown by a second firman which was required for the shipping of the marbles from Piraeus.

Many have questioned the legality of Elgin's actions, including the legitimacy of the documentation purportedly authorising them. A study by Professor David Rudenstine of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law concluded that the premise that Elgin obtained legal title to the marbles, which he then transferred to the British government, "is certainly not established and may well be false". Rudenstine's argumentation is partly based on a translation discrepancy he noticed between the surviving Italian document and the English text submitted by Hunt to the parliamentary committee. The text from the committee report reads "We therefore have written this Letter to you, and expedited it by Mr. Philip Hunt, an English Gentleman, Secretary of the aforesaid Ambassador" but according to the St. Clair Italian document the actual wording is "We therefore have written this letter to you and expedited it by N.N.". In Rudenstine's view, this substitution of "Mr. Philip Hunt" with the initials "N.N." can hardly be a simple mistake. He further argues that the document was presented after the committee's insistence that some form of Ottoman written authorisation for the removal of the marbles be provided, a fact known to Hunt by the time he testified. Thus, according to Rudenstine, "Hunt put himself in a position in which he could simultaneously vouch for the authenticity of the document and explain why he alone had a copy of it fifteen years after he surrendered the original to Ottoman officials in Athens". On two earlier occasions, Elgin stated that the Ottomans gave him written permissions more than once, but that he had "retained none of them." Hunt testified on March 13, and one of the questions asked was "Did you ever see any of the written permissions which were granted [to Lord Elgin] for removing the Marbles from the Temple of Minerva?" to which Hunt answered "yes", adding that he possessed an Italian translation of the original firman. Nonetheless, he did not explain why he had retained the translation for 15 years, whereas Elgin, who had testified two weeks earlier, knew nothing about the existence of any such document.

English travel writer Edward Daniel Clarke, an eyewitness, wrote that the Dizdar, the Ottoman fortress commander on the scene, attempted to stop the removal of the metopes but was bribed to allow it to continue.
In contrast, John Merryman, Sweitzer Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and also Professor of Art at Stanford University, putting aside the discrepancy presented by Rudenstine, argues that since the Ottomans had controlled Athens since 1460, their claims to the artefacts were legal and recognisable. The Ottoman sultan was grateful to the British for repelling Napoleonic expansion, and the Parthenon marbles had no sentimental value to him. Further, that written permission exists in the form of the firman, which is the most formal kind of permission available from that government, and that Elgin had further permission to export the marbles, legalises his (and therefore the British Museum's) claim to the Marbles. He does note, though, that the clause concerning the extent of Ottoman authorisation to remove the marbles "is at best ambiguous", adding that the document "provides slender authority for the massive removals from the Parthenon ... The reference to 'taking away any pieces of stone' seems incidental, intended to apply to objects found while excavating. That was certainly the interpretation privately placed on the firman by several of the Elgin party, including Lady Elgin. Publicly, however, a different attitude was taken, and the work of dismantling the sculptures on the Parthenon and packing them for shipment to England began in earnest. In the process, Elgin's party damaged the structure, leaving the Parthenon not only denuded of its sculptures but further ruined by the process of removal. It is certainly arguable that Elgin exceeded the authority granted in the firman in both respects".

The issue of firmans of this nature, along with universally required bribes, was not unusual at this time: In 1801 for example, Edward Clarke and his assistant Cripps, obtained an authorisation from the governor of Athens for the removal of a statue of the goddess Demeter which was at Eleusis, with the intervention of Italian artist Giovanni Battista Lusieri who was Lord Elgin's assistant at the time. Prior to Clarke, the statue had been discovered in 1676 by the traveller George Wheler, and since then several ambassadors had submitted unsuccessful applications for its removal, but Clarke had been the one to remove the statue by force, after bribing the "waiwode" of Athens and obtaining a firman, despite the objections and a riot, of the local population who unofficially, and against the traditions of the iconoclastic Church, worshiped the statue as the uncanonised Saint Demetra (Greek: Αγία Δήμητρα). The people would adorn the statue with garlands, and believed that the goddess was able to bring fertility to their fields and that the removal of the statue would cause that benefit to disappear. Clarke also removed other marbles from Greece such as a statue of Pan, a figure of Eros, a comic mask, various reliefs and funerary steles, amongst others. Clarke donated these to the University of Cambridge and subsequently in 1803 the statue of Demeter was displayed at the university library. The collection was later moved to the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge where it formed one of the two main collections of the institution.

When the marbles were shipped to England, they were "an instant success among many" who admired the sculptures and supported their arrival, but both the sculptures and Elgin also received criticism from detractors. Lord Elgin began negotiations for the sale of the collection to the British Museum in 1811, but negotiations failed despite the support of British artists after the government showed little interest. Many Britons opposed purchase of the statues because they were in bad condition and therefore did not display the "ideal beauty" found in other sculpture collections. The following years marked an increased interest in classical Greece, and in June 1816, after parliamentary hearings, the House of Commons offered £35,000 in exchange for the sculptures. Even at the time the acquisition inspired much debate, although it was supported by "many persuasive calls" for the purchase.

Lord Byron strongly objected to the removal of the marbles from Greece, denouncing Elgin as a vandal. His point of view about the removal of the Marbles from Athens is also mentioned in his narrative poem "Childe Harold's Pilgrimage", published in 1812, which itself was largely inspired by Byron's travels around the Mediterranean and the Aegean Sea between 1809 and 1811:

Byron was not the only one to protest against the removal at the time:

Edward Daniel Clarke witnessed the removal of the metopes and called the action a "spoliation", writing that "thus the form of the temple has sustained a greater injury than it had already experienced from the Venetian artillery," and that "neither was there a workman employed in the undertaking... who did not express his concern that such havoc should be deemed necessary, after moulds and casts had been already made of all the sculpture which it was designed to remove." When Sir Francis Ronalds visited Athens and Giovanni Battista Lusieri in 1820, he wrote that "If Lord Elgin had possessed real taste in lieu of a covetous spirit he would have done just the reverse of what he has, he would have removed the rubbish and left the antiquities."

A parliamentary committee investigating the situation concluded that the monuments were best given "asylum" under a "free government" such as the British one. In 1810, Elgin published a defence of his actions, but the subject remained controversial. John Keats viewed them in 1817 when they were exhibited in the British Museum, hence his famous sonnet about the marbles titled "On Seeing the Elgin Marbles". Notable supporters of Elgin included the painter Benjamin Robert Haydon.

A public debate in Parliament followed Elgin's publication, and Parliament again exonerated Elgin's actions. Parliament decided to purchase the marbles for the "British nation" in 1816 by a vote of 82–30 for £35,000. They were deposited in the British Museum, where they were displayed in the Elgin Saloon (constructed in 1832), until the Duveen Gallery was completed in 1939. Crowds packed the British Museum to view the sculptures, setting attendance records for the museum. William Wordsworth viewed the marbles at the museum and commented favourably on their aesthetics.

Prior damage to the marbles was sustained during successive wars, and it was during such conflicts that the Parthenon and its artwork sustained, by far, the most extensive damage. In particular, an explosion ignited by Venetian gun and cannon-fire bombardment in 1687, whilst the Parthenon was used as a munitions store during the Ottoman rule, destroyed or damaged many pieces of Parthenon art, including some of that later taken by Lord Elgin. It was this explosion that sent the marble roof, most of the cella walls, 14 columns from the north and south peristyles, and carved metopes and frieze blocks flying and crashing to the ground, destroying much of the artwork. Further damage to the Parthenon's artwork occurred when the Venetian general Francesco Morosini looted the site of its larger sculptures. The tackle he was using to remove the sculptures proved to be faulty and snapped, dropping an over-life-sized sculpture of Poseidon and the horses of Athena's chariot from the west pediment on to the rock of the Acropolis below.

The Erechtheion was used as a munitions store by the Ottomans during the Greek War of Independence (1821–1833) which ended the 355-year Ottoman rule of Athens. The Acropolis was besieged twice during the war, first by the Greeks in 1821–22 and then by the Ottoman forces in 1826–27. During the first siege the besieged Ottoman forces attempted to melt the lead in the columns to cast bullets, even prompting the Greeks to offer their own bullets to the Ottomans in order to minimize damage.

Elgin consulted with Italian sculptor Antonio Canova in 1803 about how best to restore the marbles. Canova was considered by some to be the world's best sculptural restorer of the time; Elgin wrote that Canova declined to work on the marbles for fear of damaging them further.

To facilitate transport by Elgin, the columns' capitals and many metopes and frieze slabs were either hacked off the main structure or sawn and sliced into smaller sections, causing irreparable damage to the Parthenon itself. One shipload of marbles on board the British brig "Mentor" was caught in a storm off Cape Matapan in southern Greece and sank near Kythera, but was salvaged at the Earl's personal expense; it took two years to bring them to the surface.

The artefacts held in London suffered from 19th-century pollution which persisted until the mid-20th century and have suffered irreparable damage by previous cleaning methods employed by British Museum staff.

As early as 1838, scientist Michael Faraday was asked to provide a solution to the problem of the deteriorating surface of the marbles. The outcome is described in the following excerpt from the letter he sent to Henry Milman, a commissioner for the National Gallery.

The marbles generally were very dirty ... from a deposit of dust and soot. ... I found the body of the marble beneath the surface white. ... The application of water, applied by a sponge or soft cloth, removed the coarsest dirt. ... The use of fine, gritty powder, with the water and rubbing, though it more quickly removed the upper dirt, left much embedded in the cellular surface of the marble. I then applied alkalies, both carbonated and caustic; these quickened the loosening of the surface dirt ... but they fell far short of restoring the marble surface to its proper hue and state of cleanliness. I finally used dilute nitric acid, and even this failed. ... The examination has made me despair of the possibility of presenting the marbles in the British Museum in that state of purity and whiteness which they originally possessed.

A further effort to clean the marbles ensued in 1858. Richard Westmacott, who was appointed superintendent of the "moving and cleaning the sculptures" in 1857, in a letter approved by the British Museum Standing Committee on 13 March 1858 concluded

I think it my duty to say that some of the works are much damaged by ignorant or careless moulding – with oil and lard – and by restorations in wax and resin. These mistakes have caused discolouration. I shall endeavour to remedy this without, however, having recourse to any composition that can injure the surface of the marble.
Yet another effort to clean the marbles occurred in 1937–38. This time the incentive was provided by the construction of a new Gallery to house the collection. The Pentelic marble mined from Mount Pentelicus north of Athens, from which the sculptures are made, naturally acquires a tan colour similar to honey when exposed to air; this colouring is often known as the marble's "patina" but Lord Duveen, who financed the whole undertaking, acting under the misconception that the marbles were originally white probably arranged for the team of masons working in the project to remove discolouration from some of the sculptures. The tools used were seven scrapers, one chisel and a piece of carborundum stone. They are now deposited in the British Museum's Department of Preservation. The cleaning process scraped away some of the detailed tone of many carvings. According to Harold Plenderleith, the surface removed in some places may have been as much as one-tenth of an inch (2.5 mm).

The British Museum has responded with the statement that "mistakes were made at that time." On another occasion it was said that "the damage had been exaggerated for political reasons" and that "the Greeks were guilty of excessive cleaning of the marbles before they were brought to Britain." During the international symposium on the cleaning of the marbles, organised by the British Museum in 1999, curator Ian Jenkins, deputy keeper of Greek and Roman antiquities, remarked that "The British Museum is not infallible, it is not the Pope. Its history has been a series of good intentions marred by the occasional cock-up, and the 1930s cleaning was such a cock-up". Nonetheless, he claimed that the prime cause for the damage inflicted upon the marbles was the 2000-year-long weathering on the Acropolis.

American archeologist Dorothy King, in a newspaper article, wrote that techniques similar to the ones used in 1937–38 were applied by Greeks as well in more recent decades than the British, and maintained that Italians still find them acceptable. The British Museum said that a similar cleaning of the Temple of Hephaestus in the Athenian Agora was carried out by the conservation team of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens in 1953 using steel chisels and brass wire. According to the Greek ministry of Culture, the cleaning was carefully limited to surface salt crusts. The 1953 American report concluded that the techniques applied were aimed at removing the black deposit formed by rain-water and "brought out the high technical quality of the carving" revealing at the same time "a few surviving particles of colour".

Documents released by the British Museum under the Freedom of Information Act revealed that a series of minor accidents, thefts and acts of vandalism by visitors have inflicted further damage to the sculptures. This includes an incident in 1961 when two schoolboys knocked off a part of a centaur's leg. In June 1981, a west pediment figure was slightly chipped by a falling glass skylight, and in 1966 four shallow lines were scratched on the back of one of the figures by vandals. In 1970 letters were scratched on to the upper right thigh of another figure. Four years later, the dowel hole in a centaur's hoof was damaged by thieves trying to extract pieces of lead.

Air pollution and acid rain have damaged the marble and stonework. The last remaining slabs from the western section of the Parthenon frieze were removed from the monument in 1993 for fear of further damage. They have now been transported to the New Acropolis Museum.

Until cleaning of the remaining marbles was completed in 2005, black crusts and coatings were present on the marble surface. The laser technique applied on the 14 slabs that Elgin did not remove revealed a surprising array of original details, such as the original chisel marks and the veins on the horses' bellies. Similar features in the British Museum collection have been scraped and scrubbed with chisels to make the marbles look white. Between January 20 and the end of March 2008, 4200 items (sculptures, inscriptions small terracotta objects), including some 80 artefacts dismantled from the monuments in recent years, were removed from the old museum on the Acropolis to the new Parthenon Museum. Natural disasters have also affected the Parthenon. In 1981, an earthquake caused damage to the east façade.

Since 1975, Greece has been restoring the Acropolis. This restoration has included replacing the thousands of rusting iron clamps and supports that had previously been used, with non-corrosive titanium rods; removing surviving artwork from the building into storage and subsequently into a new museum built specifically for the display of the Parthenon art; and replacing the artwork with high-quality replicas. This process has come under fire from some groups as some buildings have been completely dismantled, including the dismantling of the Temple of Athena Nike and for the unsightly nature of the site due to the necessary cranes and scaffolding. But the hope is to restore the site to some of its former glory, which may take another 20 years and 70 million euros, though the prospect of the Acropolis being "able to withstand the most extreme weather conditions – earthquakes" is "little consolation to the tourists visiting the Acropolis" according to "The Guardian". Under continuous international pressure, Directors of the British Museum have not ruled out agreeing to what they call a "temporary" loan to the new museum, but state that it would be under the condition of Greece acknowledging the British Museum's claims to ownership.

Those arguing for the Marbles' return claim legal, moral and artistic grounds. Their arguments include:A range of different arguments have been presented by scholars, British political leaders and British Museum spokespersons over the years in defence of retention of the Elgin Marbles by the British Museum. The main points include:
The last was tested in the English High Court in May 2005 in relation to Nazi-looted Old Master artworks held at the British Museum, which the Museum's Trustees wished to return to the family of the original owner; the Court found that due to the British Museum Act 1963 these works could not be returned without further legislation. The judge, Mr Justice Morritt, found that the Act, which protects the collections for posterity, could not be overridden by a "moral obligation" to return works, even if they are believed to have been plundered. It has been argued, however, that the case was not directly relevant to the Elgin Marbles, as it was about a transfer of ownership, and not the loan of artefacts for public exhibition overseas, which is provided for in the 1963 Act.

Another argument for keeping the Elgin Marbles within the UK has been made by J. H. Merryman, Sweitzer Professor of Law at Stanford University and co-operating professor in the Stanford Art Department. He has argued that
the Marbles are now established as a significant element of Britain's own cultural history, as "the Elgin Marbles have been in England since 1821 and in that time have become a part of the British cultural heritage."
He has also argued that if the Parthenon were actually being restored, there would be a moral argument for returning the Marbles to the temple whence they came, and thus restoring its integrity. "The Guardian" has written that many among those who support repatriation imply that the marbles would be displayed in their original position on the Parthenon. However, the Greek plan is to transfer them from a museum in London to one in Athens. These arguments are perhaps complicated a little by the completion of the new Acropolis Museum in 2009, where the
half not removed by Elgin is now displayed, aligned in orientation and within sight of the Parthenon,
with the position of the missing elements clearly marked and space left should they be returned to Athens.

The Trustees of the British Museum make the following statement on the Museum website in response to arguments for the relocation of the Elgin Marbles to the Acropolis Museum: "The Acropolis Museum allows the Parthenon sculptures that are in Athens to be appreciated against the backdrop of ancient Greek and Athenian history. This display does not alter the Trustees’ view that the sculptures are part of everyone’s shared heritage and transcend cultural boundaries. The Trustees remain convinced that the current division allows different and complementary stories to be told about the surviving sculptures, highlighting their significance for world culture and affirming the universal legacy of ancient Greece."

Outside Greece a campaign for the Return of the Marbles began in 1981 with the formation of the "International Organising Committee - Australia - for the Restitution of the Parthenon Marbles, and in 1983 with the formation of the ""British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles". International organisations such as UNESCO and the International Association for the Reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures, as well as campaign groups such as, Marbles Reunited, and stars of Hollywood, such as George Clooney and Matt Damon, as well as Human Rights activists, lawyers, and the people of the arts, voiced their strong support for the return of the Elgin Marbles to Greece.

American actor George Clooney voiced his support for the return by the United Kingdom and reunification of the Parthenon Marbles in Greece, during his promotional campaign for his 2014 film "The Monuments Men" which retells the story of Allied efforts to save important masterpieces of art and other culturally important items before their destruction by Hitler and the Nazis during World War II. His remarks regarding the Marbles reignited the debate in the United Kingdom about their return to their home country. Public polls were also carried out by newspapers in response to Clooney's stance on this matter.

An internet campaign site, in part sponsored by Metaxa, aims to consolidate support for the return of the Elgin Marbles to the New Acropolis Museum in Athens.

Noted public intellectual Christopher Hitchens had, at numerous times, argued for their repatriation.

In BBC TV Series "QI" (S12E07XL), host Stephen Fry provided his support for the return of the Elgin Marbles while recounting the story of the Greeks giving lead shot to their Ottoman Empire enemies, as the Ottomans were running out of ammunition, in order to prevent damage to the Acropolis. Fry had previously written a blog post along much the same lines in December 2011 entitled "A Modest Proposal", signing off with "It's time we lost our marbles".

A YouGov poll in 2014 suggested that more British people (37%) supported the marbles' restoration to Greece than opposed it (23%).

In older polls, Ipsos MORI asked in 1998, "If there were a referendum on whether or not the Elgin Marbles should be returned to Greece, how would you vote?" This returned these values from the British general adult population:

Another opinion poll in 2002 (again carried out by MORI) showed similar results, with 40% of the British public in favour of returning the marbles to Greece, 16% in favour of keeping them within Britain and the remainder either having no opinion or would not vote. When asked how they would vote if a number of conditions were met (including, but not limited to, a long-term loan whereby the British maintained ownership and joint control over maintenance) the number responding in favour of return increased to 56% and those in favour of keeping them dropped to 7%.

Both MORI poll results have been characterised by proponents of the return of the Marbles to Greece as representing a groundswell of public opinion supporting return, since the proportion explicitly supporting return to Greece significantly exceeds the number who are explicitly in favour of keeping the Marbles at the British Museum.

The remainder of the surviving sculptures that are not in museums or storerooms in Athens are held in museums in various locations across Europe. The British Museum also holds additional fragments from the Parthenon sculptures acquired from various collections that have no connection with Lord Elgin.

The collection held in the British Museum includes the following material from the Acropolis:

The British Museum lent the figure of a river-god, possibly the river Ilissos,
to the State Hermitage Museum in Saint Petersburg to celebrate its 250th
anniversary. It was on display there from Saturday 6 December 2014 until Sunday 18 January 2015.
This was the first time the British Museum had lent part of its Elgin Marbles collection and it caused considerable
controversy.

In a 2018 interview to the Athens newspaper Ta Nea, quoted later in The Independent, the British Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn did not rule out returning the Marbles to Greece, stating

"As with anything stolen or taken from occupied or colonial possession – including artefacts looted from other countries in the past – we should be engaged in constructive talks with the Greek government about returning the sculptures."

Following the 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, it has been suggested that the United Kingdom may be forced to return the marbles to Greece as a precondition for an agreement on Brexit, as any agreement between the European Union and the United Kingdom has to be approved by European Union member Greece.