<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:P.polygnotus_2</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:P.polygnotus_2</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:base="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><body xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><div type="textpart" subtype="alphabetic_letter" n="P"><div type="textpart" subtype="entry" xml:id="polygnotus-bio-2" n="polygnotus_2"><head><persName xml:lang="la"><surname full="yes">Polygno'tus</surname></persName></head><p>1. <hi rend="ital">Paintings in the Temple of Theseus at Athens.</hi> -- It is true that the
      only authority for supposing him to have painted here at all is a conjectural emendationt of a
      passage of Harpocration; but the conjecture is so simple, arid agrees so well with what we
      know of the artist's history, and the only interpretation of the text as it stands is so
      forced, that we can hardly hesitate to admit the correction. Harpocration, followed by Suidas
      and Photius, says (<hi rend="ital">s. v.</hi>) that Polygnotus obtained the citizenship of
      Athens, either because he painted the <title>Stoa Poecile</title> gratuitously, or, as others
      say, the pictures <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐν τῷ Θησαυρῷ καὶ τῷ
       Ἀνακείῳ.</foreign> Now, we know that the <title>Anaceium</title> was the temple of the
      Dioscuri, but what was the <title>Thesaurus?</title> Böttiger (p. 270) replies, the
      public treasury in the Opisthodomus of the temple of Athena Polias. The objection, that it is
      strange that Polygnotus should have been employed to decorate the <hi rend="ital">secret
       cluimber</hi> of the temple, Böttiger endeavours to obviate by <pb n="466"/> referring
      to the paintings of Evanthes in the opisthodomus of the temple of Jupiter Casius, mentioned by
      Achilles Tatius (3.6), not a very good authority (see <hi rend="smallcaps">EVANTHES</hi>). It
      may also be objected that the name of Polygnotus is not mentioned in the extant inscription
      respecting the works of this temple. But it is perhaps enough to say that the conjecture is
      too violent to be admitted by itself; especially when it is contrasted vith the explanation of
      Reinesius, who, for <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐν τῷ Θησαυρῷ</foreign> would read
       <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐν τῷ Θησέως ἱερῷ.</foreign> Now, the temple of Theseus was
      built during the administration of Cimon, after the translation of the hero's remains from
      Scyros to Athens in <date when-custom="-468">B. C. 468</date>. If, therefore, as is almost certain,
      Cimon brought Polygnotus with him from Thasos in <date when-custom="-463">B. C. 463</date>, it would
      almost certainly be partly with a view to the decoration of this very temple. Pausanias,
      indeed, in his description of the temple (1.17.2), ascribes the paintings in it to Micon, but
      this is rather a confirmation of the argument than otherwise, for these two artists more than
      once assisted in decorating the same building. It is an obvious conjecture, from a comparison
      of the dates, that Micon was already employed upon the painting of the temple before the
      arrival of Polygnotus, who was then appointed to assist him. [Comp. <hi rend="smallcaps">MICON.</hi>]</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>