Ixvii 
Although these splendid remains have acquired an 
appellation to which they appear to have no just claim, it 
may be right here to ascribe to its real author an Athenian 
building, of the Corinthian order, which possesses all the 
characteristics of the age of this munificent prince, but to 
which Stuart has erroneously attributed a Grecian origin. 
From his authority it has generally been called the Poikile 
Stoa; but when we observe the appearance of the whole 
work, the columns placed on pedestals, the foliage of the 
capitals, the angles of the abacus, the epistylia composed of 
two fasciae, all corresponding with the Roman practice, and 
more particularly with the gate of Hadrian in the same city, 
authenticated by the inscription which it bears, there is no 
reason to entertain any doubt of its real date and origin. In 
truth Pausanias, in his description, seems clearly to allude to 
a striking peculiarity of this building; by which it appears to 
have been a kind of atrium, surrounded by a portico open to 
the interior, enclosing a museum, or building, for the reception 
of statues and pictures'. 
Having shortly enumerated the most striking vestiges of 
Grecian architecture, and having indicated the sources from 
whence an accurate knowledge of all their details may be 
derived, it is scarcely necessary even to allude to what has 
indeed been called the Tuscan style, but which, in fact, seems 
merely to have been a corrupt imitation of the Doric: nor is 
1 Pausan. Att. 18. rerolyrai dà val rais croais nard rà avra oi roixo. The appearance 
of the ruin fully explains this passage. 
Compare this building given by Stuart, vol. i. c. 5. with the arch of Hadrian, 
vol. iii. c. 3.