In the official decrees the Ionic building is referred to as "... το͂ νεὸ το͂ ἐμ πόλει ἐν ο͂ι τὸ ἀρχαῖον ἄγαλμα" (the temple on the Acropolis within which is the ancient statue).

[9] The joint cult of Athena and Poseidon-Erechtheus appears to have been established on the Acropolis at a very early period, and they were even worshipped in the same temple as may, according to the traditional view, be inferred from two passages in Homer and also from later Greek texts.

The temple was nonetheless a seminal example of the classical Ionic style and was highly influential on later Hellenistic,[15] Roman,[16] and Greek Revival[17] architecture.

The classical Erechtheion is the last in a series of buildings approximately on the mid-north site of the Acropolis of Athens, the earliest of which dates back to the late Bronze Age Mycenaean period.

From the remainder of the shaft-grave period, there is nothing from LHII-LH IIIA, only from LH IIIB is there evidence of habitation in the form of terracing, children's graves, and a limestone column base.

Examination of the remains of the north edge of this temple by Korres might suggest the boundaries of the pre-Ionic Erechtheion site and therefore determine the shape of the classical temenos.

[31] The latter is broadly the consensus view, the rationale being that this lull in the long Peloponnesian War would have been the most convenient time to begin a major construction project and that there was a likely hiatus in building during the Sicilian disaster of 413.

The Erechtheion along with the Parthenon suffered a further major destruction at some point in the 3rd or 4th century AD; whether this was due to Herulian or Visigoth attack or a natural disaster is unclear.

In the post-classical period, the Erechtheion was subject to a number of structural changes that must be assumed to have been prompted by the building's adaptation to Christian worship.

[44] This final period of the building's use also witnessed the beginning of traveller's accounts and architectural recording of the structure along with its despoliation by antique collectors, including Elgin.

[4] At one moment, Perhaps the greatest damage to the edifice came with the siege of 1826–1827, when the Maiden Porch and west facade were felled by cannon fire and the masonry joints were scavenged for lead.

The naos is apparently divided in two, with the floor of the western part of the building three meters lower than the eastern section but with identical ceiling height.

On the north of the western naos is a great door and step leading to the lower Ionic prostyle, dipteral tetrastyle porch of six columns, with a distinctive double anta at the north-west corner.

On the west end of the north elevation of the western naos, a further door and step lead to a walled temenos, the Sanctuary of Pandrosos, where the Pandroseion, tomb of Kekrops, altar of Zeus Herkeios and the sacred olive tree of Athena would have been.

The entablature of the naos and north porch has a frieze of blue Eleusinian limestone that was decorated with white Pentelic marble figures attached by means of iron dowels.

[53] Other suggestions for aspects of the narrative of the frieze include the story of Ion,[54] the sacrifice of Erectheus' daughters to save Athens[55] and the departure of Erechtheus for the battle with Eumolpos.

For Shear the architectural supports are derived from the bases of the columns of the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus and are typical of the miniaturization of elements of the Ionic style when it was imported from Asia Minor to the Greek mainland.

[62] Nor was the use of korai as an architectural support element a novelty, as they were used before in the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi and perhaps the Kore of Lyons and therefore represent the classical expression of an established archaic tradition.

Lesk argues that they may have been intended as a replacement for the (highly individuated) Acropolis korai that were destroyed by the Persians and in this capacity represent the servants of Athena who stood ready to make libation to the cult statue housed inside.

[65] Vickers suggests not only a later date for the construction of the Erechtheion but that the korai are actually Vitruvian caryatids and represent a memorial to Athens's humiliation in the Peloponnesian War.

Additionally, egg-and-dart, egg and leaf, bead and reel, lesbian cyma, guilloches, and rosettes are liberally placed around the entablature, door and window frames, and the coffering of the ceilings.

For many years, the accepted scholarly opinion has been that the Erechtheion fulfilled a triplicate purpose in its interior design: to "replace the Old Temple [of Athena], to house the old image, and to unite in an organized building several shrines and places of religious significance.

Continuing inside in the eastern chamber of the naos would have been the altars to Poseidon and Erechtheus, Hephaistos and Boutes, and thrones of the temple priests.

[79] Moreover, the building north of the Parthenon was not identified with Pausanias' description of the Temple of Athena Polias until Spon and Wheler's account of the topography of the acropolis published in 1682.

[82] Gell's period of study in 1800–1801 coincided with the activity of Lord Elgin, whose despoliation of the Maiden Porch was, at the time, more controversial than his removal of the Parthenon sculptures.

[83] In the post-revolutionary period, ambitious plans were drawn up to clear the Acropolis and build a royal palace for the newly installed Bavarian king.

Dissatisfaction with Balanos's haphazard placement of the ashlar blocks and his use of steel joints that caused additional damage led to the creation of the interdisciplinary Acropolis Restoration Service in 1975, whose conservation work is ongoing.