Erechtheion › Ereshkigal › Cuneiform Lexical Lists » Origins and History

Articles and Definitions › Contents

  • Erechtheion › Ancient History
  • Ereshkigal › Who Was
  • Cuneiform Lexical Lists › Antique Origins

Ancient civilizations › Historical places, and their characters

Erechtheion › Ancient History

Definition and Origins

by Mark Cartwright
published on 03 December 2012
Erechtheion ()
The Erechtheion (or Erechtheum) is an ancient Greek temple constructed on the acropolis of Athens between 421 and 406 BCE in the Golden Age of the city in order to house the ancient wooden cult statue of Athena and generally glorify the great city at the height of its power and influence. The Erechtheion has suffered a troubled history of misuse and neglect, but with its prominent position above the city and porch of six Caryatids, it remains one of the most distinctive buildings from antiquity.


The project to replace the damaged buildings of the acropolis following the Persian attack on the city in 480 BCE was begun in 447 BCE, instigated by Pericles, supervised by Pheidias, and funded by surplus from the war treasury of the Delian League.The results would include the Parthenon and new Propylaea on the Acropolis itself and an Odeion and the Temple of Hephaistos. The final piece to complete the magnificent complex of temples on the acropolis was the Erechtheion, begun in 421 BCE during the so-called Peace of Nikias. However, the project was interrupted by resumption of hostilities between Athens and Sparta (the Sicilian expedition), and the temple was not finally completed until 406 BCE under the supervision of the architect Philocles.


The Erechtheion, named after the demi-god Erechtheus, the mythical Athenian king, was conceived as a suitable structure to house the ancient wooden cult statue of Athena, which maintained its religious significance despite the arrival of the gigantic chryselephantine statue within the nearby Parthenon. The building also had other functions, though, notably as the shrine centre for other more ancient cults: to Erechtheus, his brother Boutes - the Ploughman, Pandrosos, the mythical first Athenian king Kekrops (or Cecrops) - half-man, half-snake, and the gods Hephaistos and Poseidon.
As with the other new buildings on the acropolis, the Erechtheion was built from Pentelic marble which came from the nearby Mt. Pentelicus and was celebrated for its pure white appearance and fine grain. It also contains traces of iron which over time have oxidised, giving the marble a soft honey colour, a quality particularly evident at sunrise and sunset.
Erechtheion Floor Plan

Erechtheion Floor Plan


The precise original plan of the building has been difficult to reconstruct due to the changes made to it over the centuries. In any case, the asymmetrical nature of the building also presents a rather confused architectural assembly in stark contrast to the precise symmetry of its neighbour the Parthenon. The situation is not helped by the markedly uneven slope of the foundation rock; indeed the floor of the building is over three metres lower at the northern end in respect to the eastern side.However, certain elements are agreed upon by scholars. The cella measures some 22.22 mx 11.16 m and is divided into four chambers, of which the most eastern and largest chamber housed the diiepetes, the olivewood statue of Athena Polias (of the city-state ), clothed in the specially woven robe which was carried in the Panathenaic procession, held in the city every four years. In front of the statue stood a gold lamp designed by Kallimachos which had a bronze palm shaped chimney and an asbestos wick which burned continuously. The sacred serpent ( oikouros ophis ), which was believed to be an incarnation of Erechtheus, dwelt in one of the western chambers and acted as guardian to the city. Well looked after, it was regularly fed with honey cakes.
The other chambers of the building housed various religious and historical paraphernalia such as a wooden statue of Hermes, a chair said to be made by the great architect Daedalus - he of the Labyrinth of Minos fame - and various relics from the Persian wars. Six Ionic columns on the eastern facade (6.58 m tall including base and capital) present the principal entrance (4.88 mx 2.42 m). On the north side is the porch sacred to Poseidon Erechtheus (a local version of the god) and site of the trident strike which tapped the god's salt spring (the Erechthian Sea). Here also was an altar and precinct sacred to ZeusHypatos, as it was also believed to be the spot where Zeus struck down Erechtheus with a thunderbolt (in revenge for killing Poseidon's son Eumolpos), hence the ceiling has an aperture. Around the precinct there are another six Ionic columns (7.63m tall) which, as with the Parthenon columns, incorporate the feature of entasis - that is, thicker bases which taper as the column rises - giving the effect that the columns stand absolutely straight. The Caryatid porch is on the south side.
The Erechtheion, Athens

The Erechtheion, Athens


The whole building was originally surrounded by a 63 cm high Ionic frieze, but this has been so badly damaged that it has been impossible to determine even the general theme of the piece. What is known is that it was carved from Paros marble and attached to a dark blue (or grey) background of Eleusinian marble. Pediment roofs of wood and tiles protected the cella and north porch, while the south Caryatid porch had a flat roof. To the south-west of the building stood the sacred olive tree, a gift from Athena, for which she became the patron deity of the city.
The real stars of the Erechtheion are without doubt the Caryatids or korai as they were known to the ancient Greeks. The finely-sculptured figures are not unique to the building as other examples exist in the architecture of the Archaic period, particularly in Treasury buildings at sacred sites such as Delphi and Olympia. Their clinging Doric clothes ( peplos and himation ) and intricately plaited hair are rendered in fine detail. Their bold stance and the firm set of the straight standing leg give the impression that the task of bearing the weight of the porch entablature and roof is effortless. Rather cleverly, the straight leg also creates folds in their clothing remarkably similar to the flutes on an ordinary Ionic column. Originally, the figures raised slightly their robe with one hand and held shallow libation vessels ( phialai ) with the other. This may have been in reference to the fact that it was believed that the tomb of the mythical King Kekrops lay under the building, and perhaps the libations poured by the Caryatids replicate the practice of pouring libations into the ground as an offering to the dead. The Caryatids now on the acropolis are exact copies; five of the originals reside in the Acropolis Museum of Athens and the other is in the British Museum, London.
Erechtheion Roof Detail

Erechtheion Roof Detail


Like many classical buildings, the Erechtheion has suffered a chequered history. Damaged by fire only ten years or so after its completion, it was repaired in 395 BCE. In the 6th century CE it was converted into a Christian church, the Franks made it into a small palace, and in c. 1460 CE the Erechtheion suffered the indignity of being used as a harem for the pleasure of the Turkish governor. In 1801 CE Lord Elgin gained permission from the Turkish authorities to remove any sculpture or carvings that took his fancy, and amongst his booty was one of the Caryatids and one of the eastern columns. However, in 1833 CE systematic excavations began on the acropolis, and from 1836 until 1842 CE the Erechtheion was partially reconstructed.Further excavations and restorations were carried out in 1885 CE and throughout the late 20th century CE.

Ereshkigal › Who Was

Definition and Origins

by Joshua J. Mark
published on 11 January 2017
Queen of the Night (Trustees of the British Museum)


There is no known iconography for Ereshkigal or, at least, none universally agreed on. The Burney Relief (also known as The Queen of the Night, dating from Hammurabi 's reign of 1792-1750 BCE) is often interpreted as representing Ereshkigal. The terracotta relief depicts a naked woman with downward-pointing wings standing on the backs of two lions and flanked by owls.She holds symbols of power and, beneath the lions, are images of mountains. This iconography strongly suggests a depiction of Ereshkigal but scholars have also interpreted the work as honoring Inanna or the demon Lilith.




Ishtar's Descent into the Underworld Inscription

Ishtar's Descent into the Underworld Inscription

The annuna, the judges of the underworld, surrounded her
They passed judgment against her.
Then Ereshkigal fastened on Inanna the eye of death
She spoke against her the word of wrath
She uttered against her the cry of guilt
She struck her.
Inanna was turned into a corpse
A piece of rotting meat
And was hung from a hook on the wall
(Wolkstein and Kramer, 60)
Inanna is judged and executed for her crime, but she has obviously foreseen this possibility and left instructions with her servant Ninshubur. After three days and three nights waiting for Inanna, Ninshubur follows the commands of the goddess, goes to Inanna's father-god Enki for help, and receives two galla (androgynous demons) to help her in returning Inanna to the earth. The galla enter the underworld "like flies" and, following Enki's specific instructions, attach themselves closely to Ereshkigal. The Queen of the Dead is seen in distress:
No linen was spread over her body
Her breasts were uncovered
Her hair swirled around her head like leeks
(Wolkstein and Kramer, 63-66).
Marriage of Inanna and Dumuzi

Marriage of Inanna and Dumuzi

Holy Ereshkigal! Great is your renown!
Holy Ereshkigal! I sing your praises!
(Wolkstein and Kramer, 89)


The Queen of the Night Reconstruction
The Queen of the Night Reconstruction


Ereshkigal, as with all the gods of Mesopotamia, maintained order and stood against the forces of chaos. Those souls who had left the world of the living were not supposed to return, and Ereshkigal made certain they remained where they belonged.If a ghost should come back to haunt the living, one could be sure it was for a good reason and with Ereshkigal's permission.As in other cultures, the main reasons for a haunting were improper burial of the dead or impious acts which had gone unpunished. As queen and guardian of the dead, Ereshkigal stood as a potent reminder to the living to observe the proper rites and rituals in their lives and to act in the best interests of their immediate and larger communities.

Cuneiform Lexical Lists › Antique Origins

Ancient Civilizations

by William Brown
published on 05 May 2016
Lexical lists are compilations of cuneiform signs and word readings written on clay tablets throughout Mesopotamia. From the late 4th millennium BCE up to the 1st century CE, scribal communities copied, modified, and passed on these cuneiform lexical lists and preserved them for as knowledge for a variety of purposes. Just as today people pass on and embrace the knowledge of scientific discoveries, lexical lists were the knowledge and intellectual material of the day when cuneiform writing emerged in the 4th millennium BCE. Including unpublished lexical lists, over 15,000 tablets exist. For the duration of the cuneiform lexical tradition, the meaning, purpose, and significance between world lists was in flux and development.
Cuneiform Clay Tablet

Cuneiform Clay Tablet


In the simplest form, lexical lists may be divided into two categories: sign lists and word lists. The first primarily presents an inventory of signs along with their proper use. The second organizes cuneiform by semantics, which is the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning, and is typically written in a thematic organization. Of course, some contain elements of both sign lists and word lists, indicative that we must permit a certain amount of fluidity when attempting to define lexical lists.Over time and with greater cultural interactions, they were further added upon with two columns, and sometimes three, in different languages in order to operate as transmitters of language for future generations. Although this description makes lexical lists seem mundane and pointless, they, in reality, can be used to understand historical developments and reconstruct the cultural landscape and ideas of the ancient Near East.


In c. 3200 BCE, archaic writing of cuneiform was developed. During this period, the technology of writing was novel. Niek Veldhuis comments on the historical significance of archaic lexical lists: "The invention of a writing system is to be seen in the context of the development of standardized mass production and organized labor" (27). Consequently, a new class of society emerged, namely the scribal class, and lexical lists became a tool for constructing social identity within early scribal communities.
Moving into the 3rd millennium BCE, cuneiform lexical lists spread unevenly, which prevents strong conclusions from being made. Up to the Old Akkadian and Ur III periods (c. 2230 – 2004 BCE), lexical lists were primarily based in single locations, though not spread across Mesopotamia. In the Old Akkadian and Ur III periods, "the lexical material is reduced to a trickle" (Veldhuis, 142). Thus, for the duration of the 3rd millennium BCE, we only have evidence that lexical lists were primarily tools of authority, power, and leadership, not teaching within scribal communities. Importantly, in both the archaic lexical lists and those within the third millennium, there is great conservativeness, with many of the same texts being copied and written, with minor adjustments.


At the dawning of the second millennium, the Old Babylonian period (ca. 2000 – 1600 BCE), traditional texts from the archaic period and third millennium began to dwindle and new word lists and sign lists began to emerge. This period is extremely important in reconstructing the development of scribal practices and lexical lists because we see the establishment of an Old Babylonian scribal curriculum. Many of the texts from the archaic period became "teaching texts that introduced pupils to the invented tradition of a glorious Sumerian past" (Veldhuis, 218). Additionally, the new lexical lists, such as grammatical lists, found association with divinatory and mathematical literature rather than the scribal school. Third, we see the emergence of lexical lists oriented towards speculative philology, or the isolation of Sumerian symbols to translate them into Akkadian. This third category for usage of lexical lists is important because it marks the foundation of the social class of scholars. All in all, the developments during this period fit within the broader societal changes, namely the emergence of Babylonian elites.
Transitioning into the International period (c. 1600 – 1000 BCE), the late 2nd millennium, also known as the Late Bronze Age, Middle Babylonian, Kassite, Amarna, or Middle Assyrian periods, "saw an unprecedented spread of cuneiform writing and Babylonian written culture over the entire ancient Near East" (Veldhuis, 226). Reception of lexical lists during the period varied diversely because of different attitudes towards the cuneiform and the lexical tradition. During the International period, lexical lists began to splinter into various traditions, meaning that one could place two of the same lexical lists side by side and find variations. Most significant in terms of reception of lexical lists is Assyria ’s, who reacted with conservatism and embraced their Babylonian cultural heritage.
Overlapping with the International period, the early history of Assur, the heart of ancient Assyria, treated the Babylonian cultural heritage like holy writ, thereby redefining the character of scribal practice. With the acquisition and high value of this intellectual tradition, lexical lists became the literary technology in the Middle Assyrian period, which justified and cemented Assyria into a respected and ancient tradition. The fluidity of lexical lists during this period decreased and became objectified, frozen in time as a sort of canon. They were considered so because, to a certain extent, lexical lists symbolized primordial knowledge and "came to play a role in the management of power and legitimation of a world empire " (Veldhuis, 391).
Cuneiform Clay Tablet

Cuneiform Clay Tablet

Finally, in the Neo- and Late Babylonian period, scholarship, and thereby lexical lists, became the property and responsibility of temples and elite families in charge. Many of these late lexical lists include dedication prayers, indicative that writing and education were closely associated with temples and political leadership. Additionally, unlike the Old Babylonian period, lexical traditions ceased becoming the primary focus of scholarship; rather they became integral to further other areas of scholarship, such as celestial sciences and horoscopy.
Unfortunately, many lexical lists which possibly existed in the 1st century CE are now absent because the scribes chose to write with a different cultural medium brought by Hellenization, namely writing on parchment or other surfaces rather than clay tablets.


From the archaic period up to the 1st century CE, roughly 3,300 years, the tradition of lexical lists developed into a source of knowledge and a political legitimation tool. Yet, during this long period of time, lexical lists maintained an important position within the cultural landscape because they represented the increasingly valuable technology of writing, a technology which eventually became associated with primordial knowledge. Through a lengthy reception history, many of the lexical lists from the archaic period were still utilized in the 1st century CE, a remarkable time for any literature to be remembered and well-received. In a world that takes writing and reading for granted, though, we would do well to remember that scribal practice, writing, and reading are all technologies and potential mediums for social, political, and religious change.


Article based on information obtained from these sources:
with permission from the Website Ancient History Encyclopedia

See other Related Content for Ancient History ››

Recommended content