The Meaning Of The Parthenon Frieze By Joan B. Connelly

There is one issue that all ancient Greek art historians and archeologist agree on, and that issue is that the reason why the Parthenon frieze cannot be correctly solved is that there is no ancient literature or sources that appropriately documents the context of the frieze. Without contextual evidence, the intertextuality of the subject matter corresponding to the Parthenon frieze becomes ambiguous to the modern viewer. Therefore, modern academics can only conceptualize and speculate about what the Parthenon frieze is conveying. This issue is mentioned in the majority of articles relating to Parthenon frieze including “Parthenon and Parthenon: A Mythological Interpretation of the Parthenon Frieze,” by Joan B. Connelly, Jenifer Neil’s article

This argument strikingly contrasts the previous arguments, which seamlessly integrates the frieze and procession together. the previous arguments were adamant that the eastern frieze and the procession scenes were connected. This contrasts Pollit’s argument, because he is holistically viewing the Parthenon on a larger scale compared to the other authors who are just interested in the eastern frieze. This makes Pollit thesis superior compared to the other authors because he is looking at the whole picture rather than a small snippet of the

By not comparing other images and other Greek art to Parthenon frieze, Pollit is cunningly and subversively proving his point that the frieze is the epitome and combination of “everything” Greek. Additionally, by dismissing previous scholarship from other studies the author’s argument became clear and compelling. The augment was convincing, because paying homage to city of Athens and the goddess Athena by celebrating everything Athens and Greek aligns with why the Parthenon was built. To prove that his thesis is true, Pollit dismiss previous scholarship, focuses on the cultural iconography of Greece, and focusses on the original purpose and thought behind the architecture. The use of a counter –thesis is another literary device that Pollit employs to further perpetuate the truth of his argument. Additionally, the article was structurally organized, and linear in approach. Neil’s thesis contrasts the case of Neil’s argument. Because Neil’s argument is superficial, in the terms that she is merely describing what is going on with in the compositional framework of the Parthenon frieze. However, the description of the frieze is articulately detailed, and t could help scholars build on the other arguments for solving the mysteries of the