Which temple is more impressive, the Parthenon or the Temple of Zeus? (8 marks)

The Parthenon, built between 447-432 BC on the Athenian Acropolis, is more impressive than the Temple of Zeus, built earlier between 470-457 BC at the pan-Hellenic sanctuary of Olympia which hosted the Olympic Games every four years. In location, size and building materials the Parthenon superseded the Temple of Zeus in the impression of grandeur and imposing structure emitted to the ancient viewer, ergo making it more impressive. The Parthenon is made entirely of Pentellic marble, quarried from Mount Pentelicus in Athens, while the Temple of Zeus is made mainly from local shelly limestone which was then coated in stucco, with only Parian marble used for the sculpture, tiles and gutters. While the temple of Zeus is 27 metres by 64 metres with 6 columns at the front flanked by 13, the Parthenon is on a much larger scale measuring 30 by 69 metres with an octastyle front with 17 flanking columns. This increased size of the Parthenon allowed larger and more detailed pedimental sculpture than that of the Temple of Zeus. Further, the Parthenon’s location – raised above the city of Athens on the Acropolis – meant that it was able to be viewed from multiple viewpoints, whether on the Acropolis or within the city below, thereby creating an imposing, dominating and impressive temple which defined the landscape in Athens. The Temple of Zeus at Olympia however is located on a flat plain, which later allow other monuments and structures to obstruct and diminish its important physical location and status, for example the two-column monument to Ptolemy II and Arsinoe II. Therefore, the Parthenon was more impressive than the Temple of Zeus through its impressive, extensive and expensive use of marble, its grand scale, and its prominent location which defined the landscape. These factors, when compared to the Temple of Zeus, meant that the Parthenon to the ancient visitor would have been far more impressive. 
Further, the Parthenon is more impressive in its mixing of the orders, which shows the temple was more innovative and advantaged than that of the Temple of Zeus. The Parthenon has Doric features (including columns and metopes) as well as Ionic feature (including continuous frieze and four Ionic columns in the opisthodomos) while the Temple of Zeus only has Doric features. In addition, the Parthenon decoration is on a grander scale than the Temple of Zeus, with the sculpture being carried out in much higher detail. For example, the Pedimental sculpture on the Parthenon is carved in the round even though it wouldn’t have been viewable from behind, while the pedimental sculpture from Olympia was only executed in rough from behind and doesn’t have a frieze. Further, the Parthenon acted as an impressive statement to both the Athenians and on a wider level to Greece as a whole. To the Athenians it answered a local need with its sculpture reflecting this, with the east pediment showing the birth of Athena and the west showing the contest of Athena and Poseidon to be patron of Athens. In addition, the frieze potentially shows the Panathenaic procession which would be carried out on the acropolis. To Greece as a whole, the decoration of the metopes – for example the ones showing a centauromachy – acted as an allegory of civilisation over barbarianism which alluded to the Greeks victory over the Persians who had invaded and in 480 had sacked the Acropolis. The Temple of Zeus’s decoration and iconography fails to have as versatile a manner as the Parthenon. Finally, the Parthenon became a sign of Athens’ dominance and cultural and military victory over Greece as it came to be used as the treasury for the wealth of the Delian league.