1	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	This joint shows the change from the second to the third phase. In the second, the prepared joint at the edge of the smooth band was the joint. In the third phase, the stone was re- shaped to permit a vertical joint with the parastas blocks which were added to buttress the revetment blocks which were, by that time, leaning.	Eiteljorg	N1	MPREWVBP-0478-0437
2	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	The plaster here consists of three layers, with gravel mixed in and with red color showing. The amount of plaster has diminished over time, with a visible reduction between 1975 and 1989.	Eiteljorg	N2	MPREWVBP-0478-0437
3	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	The blocks of the parastas are apparently dowelled, since they lean as a group. The bottom surface of the lowermost block does not lie on the step; only its northern edge still touches the step. The southern edge of that block is lifted off the step by the lean of the group.	Eiteljorg	N3	MMREWPBO-0459-0437
4	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	The upper anta block has been knocked askew. Apparently the two blocks were not connected in antiquity.	Eiteljorg	N3	MPREWABP-0459-0437
5	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	The lower anta block, like the lower parastas block, rests entirely on its northern edge because it has been pushed out of plumb by pressure from behind. Note, however, that it appears to rest also on its southwestern corner but does not. Since the block has cracked just above the corner, the lower piece of the block has separated and has consequently slipped down onto the step. Were the block still whole, the southwest corner would not touch the step. This is not clear in the model. Photos show it.	Eiteljorg	N3	MPREWABP-0459-0437
6	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	The smooth bands which form the edges of the faces of these anta blocks - surrounding the stippled interiors of the blocks - are not uniform, suggesting alterations. The dimensions of the smooth bands may be obtained from the model.	Eiteljorg	N4	MPREWABP-0459-0437
7	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	This cutting is probably for a stele. A Herm would havea more square-shaped base. Note that the west face of a stele placed here would not have been visible once the parastas blocks were erected.	Eiteljorg	N4	MIRESSBP-0489-0437
8	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	This is the second position for the anta blocks. They were first installed against the revetment block in the corner, where the joint surface can still be seen.	Eiteljorg	N5	MPREWABP-0459-0437
9	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	These rough blocks of the Mycenaean Wall have been surveyed with photogrammetry so that their precise positions could be determined. Note that those nearer the parastas wall do not fit together well, but those further away do. The blocks closer to the parastas wall are also not aligned with the others and bulge out (in plan view). These blocks were knocked down by the Persians at the time of the invasion of Athens and rebuilt by the Athenians, but they have not stayed in place well.	Eiteljorg	N5	MMMFWSRL-1299-0437; MIMFWSRL-1299-0437
10	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	The upper block of the tri-pod base is marble; it sits in (not on) the poros block below. That poros block has a socket into which the marble block has been let.	Eiteljorg	N6	MIPCMBBO-0489-0437; MIPCMBBP-0489-0437
11	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	This joint shows the gap of anathyrosis after the original finished surface was trimmed away. This is one of the reasons for assuming that the first two courses originally formed benches.	Eiteljorg	N1	MMRESNBP-0459-0437
12	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	These two courses, now trimmed so that the upper is flush with the super-posed revetment blocks but the lower is still protruding, were once two benches, with the lower protruding further than the upper.	Eiteljorg	N1	MMRESNBP-0459-0437
13	W. B. Dinsmoor, Jr.	11/19/93	There are broken edges on the northern face of this block. Those edges show that the block once protruded further to the north.	Eiteljorg	N2	MMRESNBP-0459-0437
14	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	This cutting is presumably for a stele or some other standing item which would have been placed close to the wall. However, it is not in line with the cutting in the "floor" below.	Eiteljorg	N6	MMRESNBP-0459-0437
15	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	This cutting is presumably for a stele, but it is not in line with the cutting on the wall blocks above.	Eiteljorg	N6	MMRESNBP-0459-0437
16	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	This revetment cap is of marble, and it is not truly in situ today. It was moved even during the course of C. H. Weller's 1904 excavation.	Eiteljorg	N5	MPREWSBP-0478-0437
17	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	This block, as it stands with its eastern end trimmed by Mnesicles' work- men, is more than 3 meters long. It is irregular in thickness. Its length and irregular thickness make it inappropriate for a wall and indicate that it is re- used here and must be a revetment. Its material (marble) and its unusual length leave only one possible source for the block, the older Parthenon.	Eiteljorg	N5	MPREWVBP-0478-0437
18	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	These poros backer blocks do not bond with one another or with the marble revetment blocks. They must actually be the blocks which mark the shift from the Mycenaean Wall with its rough stones to the revetment with its well-finished marble.	Eiteljorg	N5	MMREWCBO-0478-0437
19	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	This revetment block, another from the Hekatompedon, has been broken off.	Eiteljorg	N1	MPPCWVBP-0489-0437
20	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	These three revetment blocks were originally metopes in the Hekatompedon. Their reuse here gives the terminus post quem of 489 B.C.	Eiteljorg	N7	MPPCWVBP-0489-0437
21	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	This is another of the metopes from the Hekatompedon. It has been cut down to be flush with the top step. It surely would not have been cut so short for its full length had that not been necessary, because it cannot, as trimmed, serve to hide the rough stonwork of the Mycenaean Wall which is behind it. It was probably damaged first in the course of the Persian sack of the Acropolis and then trimmed to be flush with the step when repairs were made.	Eiteljorg	N7	MPPCWVBP-0489-0437
22	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	These anta blocks were placed here in the first post-Persian phase and moved to their current positions after the buttress of the parastas was added.           	Eiteljorg	N8	MPREWVBP-0478-0437
23	Eiteljorg	11/19/93	The joint surface prepared here on the revetment block, if used as the joint for positioning the lower anta block, fits precisely with the shape of that block and causes it to rest in the middle of the top step.	Eiteljorg	N7	MPREWVBP-0478-0437
24	W. B. Dinsmoor, Jr.	11/20/93	This block is part of a "string course." Above would be masonry, though neither masonry nor mud- brick seems appropriate.	Eiteljorg	N9	MPREWSBP-0478-0437