DOCSLIB.ORG

Arcl0017 Greek Art and Architecture Ucl - Institute of Archaeology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ARCL0017 GREEK ART AND ARCHITECTURE UCL - INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY Coordinator: Dr. Eva Mol Office hours: weekly chat sessions Wed 12-1pm or by appointment between Mon-Wed 9-17pm. Email: [email protected]; Year 2/3 BA Module, 15 credits Please see the online IoA Student Handbook for instructions on coursework submission, IoA referencing guidelines and marking criteria, as well as UCL policies on penalties for late submission. ARCL0017 1. OVERVIEW&SCHEDULE Introduction This module introduces Greek art and architecture in the period 2500-50 BC. In the context of a broad chronological survey, the focus is on three main themes: (1) the relationship between Greek art and society (2) addressing current problems in Greek art history and contemporary society, and (3) extensive training in visual analysis and the different lenses to look at Greek art. This year, as the course will be taught remotely, it will consist of different modes of online teaching that contain individual creativity, group fun, and lively discussions using famous objects and buildings belonging to the so-called ‘Greek canon’, and lesser known or even excluded object categories that will expand our idea of what Greek art is. Normally, we would go to the British Museum together, and look at all the incredible objects up close. This is not possible for the semester, but that does not mean we cannot discuss or study them. In fact, teaching the module online will provide us with the great opportunity to look beyond the British Museum (or any museum for that matter) and the Classical canon, and discuss together what Greek Art is right now, and how make it more relevant in the future. Through images, videos and 3D models, but also through going outside to study public sculpture in our neighborhoods and our own ceramics at home, we will engage in detailed and in depth object analyses and discussions. Module Aims On successful completion of this module a student should: -have an overview of the development of Greek art and architecture from 2500-50 BC. -Understand the principles of visual analysis -Be familiar with the major iconographic themes of Greek art -Be able to analyse the major styles of Greek art -Be aware of contemporary issues with Classical art Learning Outcomes On successful completion of this module students should have developed: -Oral presentation skills -Skills for the critical analysis and interpretation of visual representations -Ability to find, organize, evaluate and communicate evidence and theories in relationship to specific research questions Teaching Methods Lectures The lectures will consist of pre-recorded sessions containing one or two short lectures of 15-20 minutes each; all will be addressing a specific theme in Greek art. The sessions will be accompanied with a few key objects and 2-4 pieces of reading that need to be studied at home. You need to watch the lectures before the seminar takes place, together with reading the material and studying the objects of the week. ARCL0017 Seminars The seminars will take place at Tuesday’s 9-11. The class will be split in two so you either have the 9-10 or the 10-11 slot. I will assign you, but if you have good reason for one or the other slot, please let me know. During the seminars, we will discuss the lectures, readings, and objects that you study each week and have practical tutorials which go deeper in how to study Greek art and its broader significance. The tutorials will focus on the practical aspects of looking at Greek art and visual analysis. Each student gives one presentation on an object. The last two tutorials will consist of a presentation of the group assignment and an art assignment. More information on these assignments can be found in section 2: assessment. Each session has a ‘seminar preparation’, which will indicate the issues and questions you need to focus on to prepare for the seminar discussion and/or tutorial. In a few instances, you need to post your answers and arguments on the moodle forum before the seminar takes place. All this will be further clarified in part 3 of the handbook. Methods of Assessment An object analysis containing a written report (50%) and a research essay (50%). These will be described in detail in part 2. Deadline for the object report is Nov 3; deadline for the research essay is Dec 18. Communications Moodle is the main hub for this course. Important information will be posted in the Announcements section of the Moodle page and you will automatically receive an email notification for these. Weekly chat sessions on Wednesdays 12-1pm on moodle will be scheduled during the course, where you can ask additional questions about the readings, deadlines and other module-related matters For personal queries and appointments, please contact the co-ordinator by email. [email protected] Useful links for this course, IoA teaching in general, and for rules, penalties, policies and tips: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/current-students. The general IoA Handbook can be found here: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/current-students/ioa-student-handbook and an IoA Study Skills Guide can be found here: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/current-students/ioa-study-skills-guide. ARCL0017 Week by week summary Week Date Topic 1 Oct 6 Session 1: Introduction Lecture 1: module overview Lecture 2: The art of looking and Issues in Greek art: whose history? Seminar: Discussion- what is Greek art? Tutorial: Practicing looking and visual analysis 2 Oct 13 Session 2 Greek art in prehistory Lecture 3: Crete and the Cyclades: Early and Middle Bronze Age Art Lecture 4: The art of Troy, Mycenae, and the Iliad Seminar: Discussion- The art of Troy: myth, matter and reality 3 Oct 19 Session 3 (lectures 5 and 6): How dark was the dark age? Lecture 5. Geometric to Orientalising Lecture 6. Early Archaic Architecture and sculpture Seminar: Greek Art Tutorial: practicing multisensorial description: Ekphrasis 4 Oct 22 Session 4 (lecture 7) Vase painting in context Lecture 7. Making and reading Greek vases Seminar: discussion on Greek art and the symposium 5 Oct 27 Session 5 (lecture 8) The Greeks and the others Lecture 8. The Greeks and the others Seminar: Greek Art Tutorial: student presentations Nov 3 Deadline object report READING WEEK NO CLASS 6 Nov 10 Session 6 (lectures 9 and 10) Classical Greece: the art of democracy Lecture 9. Art in Classical Greece after the Persian Wars 7 Lecture 10. The Parthenon and the Elgin Marbles Seminar: discussion- losing one’s Marbles: looting, restitution, and museums Nov 17 Session 7 (lectures 11 and 12): Living and dying Classical Greece Lecture 11. The Greek house 8 Lecture 12. The art of death Seminar: discussion on the Greek Classical house and burial customs as reflection of society Nov 24 Session 8 (lectures 13 and 14) Late Classical Greece into Hellenism Lecture 13. Royal power 9 Lecture 14. The first female nude and the ideal body Seminar: The nereid monument and the female nude. Discussion on group assignment Dec 1 Session 9 (lectures 15 and 16) The Hellenistic world: royal changes Lecture 15. The art of the monarchs from to Alexandria to Commagene 10 Lecture 16. Hellenistic decorum: the baroque, the bad and the ugly Seminar: discussion on changes in the Hellenistic world; tutorial on stylistic analysis Dec 8 Session 10: The end of Greek art? 11 Seminar: Final discussion on Greek art and Architecture, Joint tutorial group assignment classical past and current issues. Dec 18 Deadline research essay ARCL0017 WORKLOAD There will be 16 pre-recorded lectures for this module and a 1 hour seminar each week which take up 20 hours. Students will be expected to undertake around 60 hours of reading and preparing for the module, plus 70 hours preparing for and producing the assessed work and assignments. This adds up to a total workload of 150 hours for the module. 20 hours Staff-led teaching sessions (lectures, seminars, tutorials, discussion-board sessions) 60 hours Self-guided session preparation (reading, listening, note-taking and online activities), about 6 hours a week 30 hours Reading for, and writing, object essay 40 hours Reading for, and writing, the research essay 2. ASSIGNMENTS AND ASSESSMENT Each assignment and possible approaches to it will be discussed in class, in advance of the submission deadline. You will receive feedback on your written coursework via Moodle, and have the opportunity to discuss your marks and feedback with the coordinator in their office hours. For more details see the ‘Assessment’ section on Moodle. The marking criteria and IoA writing guidelines are useful guides when writing your essay. Penalties for late submission: see guidance in UCL Student Handbook. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/current-students/ioa-student-handbook Aside from the weekly readings and seminar discussions, this module has three assignments, two of which are assessed for the final mark, and one meant to give you different way of applying your knowledge on – and thinking about- ancient Greek art and architecture. Each assignment is discussed below. 1. Visual Object Analysis – (50% total mark): written ‘object analysis form’ 2000 words 2. Research Paper – (50% total mark): essay assignment 2000 words 3. Group Assignment: compulsory but does not count for final grade. Group project is to make an artwork together about the relation between the Greek past and current issues. 1. Visual Object Analysis. The assignment is in two parts: a presentation and a written form based on the presentation for which you will be assessed. This means the presentation is a form of practice. You have to select an object from the object list (on moodle) that you will analyse.
Recommended publications
  • Classical Nakedness in British Sculpture and Historical Painting 1798-1840 Cora Hatshepsut Gilroy-Ware Ph.D Univ

    Classical Nakedness in British Sculpture and Historical Painting 1798-1840 Cora Hatshepsut Gilroy-Ware Ph.D Univ

    MARMOREALITIES: CLASSICAL NAKEDNESS IN BRITISH SCULPTURE AND HISTORICAL PAINTING 1798-1840 CORA HATSHEPSUT GILROY-WARE PH.D UNIVERSITY OF YORK HISTORY OF ART SEPTEMBER 2013 ABSTRACT Exploring the fortunes of naked Graeco-Roman corporealities in British art achieved between 1798 and 1840, this study looks at the ideal body’s evolution from a site of ideological significance to a form designed consciously to evade political meaning. While the ways in which the incorporation of antiquity into the French Revolutionary project forged a new kind of investment in the classical world have been well-documented, the drastic effects of the Revolution in terms of this particular cultural formation have remained largely unexamined in the context of British sculpture and historical painting. By 1820, a reaction against ideal forms and their ubiquitous presence during the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wartime becomes commonplace in British cultural criticism. Taking shape in a series of chronological case-studies each centring on some of the nation’s most conspicuous artists during the period, this thesis navigates the causes and effects of this backlash, beginning with a state-funded marble monument to a fallen naval captain produced in 1798-1803 by the actively radical sculptor Thomas Banks. The next four chapters focus on distinct manifestations of classical nakedness by Benjamin West, Benjamin Robert Haydon, Thomas Stothard together with Richard Westall, and Henry Howard together with John Gibson and Richard James Wyatt, mapping what I identify as
  • Lord Elgin and the Ottomans: the Question of Permission

    Lord Elgin and the Ottomans: the Question of Permission

    Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law LARC @ Cardozo Law Articles Faculty 2002 Lord Elgin and the Ottomans: The Question of Permission David Rudenstine Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-articles Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation David Rudenstine, Lord Elgin and the Ottomans: The Question of Permission, 23 Cardozo Law Review 449 (2002). Available at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-articles/167 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty at LARC @ Cardozo Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of LARC @ Cardozo Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. LORD ELGIN AND THE OTTOMANS: THE QUESTION OF PERMISSION David Rudenstine* In the early morning light on July 31, 1801, a ship-carpenter, five crew members, and twenty Athenian laborers "mounted the walls" of the Parthenon and with the aid of ropes and pulleys detached and lowered a sculptured marble block depicting a youth and centaur in combatJ The next day the group lowered a second sculptured marble from the magnificent templet Within months, the workers had lowered dozens of additional marble sculptures, and within a few years, most of the rest of the Parthenon's priceless marbles were removed.^ These fabulous marbles, sculptured during the age of Pericles'' under the guiding hand of Phidias' out of fine white Pentelic marble quarried ten miles from Athens and hauled by ox-cart to the Acropolis,® had remained on the Parthenon for 2,200 years before being removed.
  • Naming the Extrasolar Planets

    Naming the Extrasolar Planets

    Naming the extrasolar planets W. Lyra Max Planck Institute for Astronomy, K¨onigstuhl 17, 69177, Heidelberg, Germany [email protected] Abstract and OGLE-TR-182 b, which does not help educators convey the message that these planets are quite similar to Jupiter. Extrasolar planets are not named and are referred to only In stark contrast, the sentence“planet Apollo is a gas giant by their assigned scientific designation. The reason given like Jupiter” is heavily - yet invisibly - coated with Coper- by the IAU to not name the planets is that it is consid- nicanism. ered impractical as planets are expected to be common. I One reason given by the IAU for not considering naming advance some reasons as to why this logic is flawed, and sug- the extrasolar planets is that it is a task deemed impractical. gest names for the 403 extrasolar planet candidates known One source is quoted as having said “if planets are found to as of Oct 2009. The names follow a scheme of association occur very frequently in the Universe, a system of individual with the constellation that the host star pertains to, and names for planets might well rapidly be found equally im- therefore are mostly drawn from Roman-Greek mythology. practicable as it is for stars, as planet discoveries progress.” Other mythologies may also be used given that a suitable 1. This leads to a second argument. It is indeed impractical association is established. to name all stars. But some stars are named nonetheless. In fact, all other classes of astronomical bodies are named.
  • The Parthenon Sculptures Sarah Pepin

    The Parthenon Sculptures Sarah Pepin

    BRIEFING PAPER Number 02075, 9 June 2017 By John Woodhouse and Sarah Pepin The Parthenon Sculptures Contents: 1. What are the Parthenon Sculptures? 2. How did the British Museum acquire them? 3. Ongoing controversy 4. Further reading www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary 2 The Parthenon Sculptures Contents Summary 3 1. What are the Parthenon Sculptures? 5 1.1 Early history 5 2. How did the British Museum acquire them? 6 3. Ongoing controversy 7 3.1 Campaign groups in the UK 9 3.2 UK Government position 10 3.3 British Museum position 11 3.4 Greek Government action 14 3.5 UNESCO mediation 14 3.6 Parliamentary interest 15 4. Further reading 20 Contributing Authors: Diana Perks Attribution: Parthenon Sculptures, British Museum by Carole Radatto. Licenced under CC BY-SA 2.0 / image cropped. 3 Commons Library Briefing, 9 June 2017 Summary This paper gives an outline of the more recent history of the Parthenon sculptures, their acquisition by the British Museum and the long-running debate about suggestions they be removed from the British Museum and returned to Athens. The Parthenon sculptures consist of marble, architecture and architectural sculpture from the Parthenon in Athens, acquired by Lord Elgin between 1799 and 1810. Often referred to as both the Elgin Marbles and the Parthenon marbles, “Parthenon sculptures” is the British Museum’s preferred term.1 Lord Elgin’s authority to obtain the sculptures was the subject of a Select Committee inquiry in 1816. It found they were legitimately acquired, and Parliament then voted the funds needed for the British Museum to acquire them later that year.
  • And KEEPING up with the PERSIANS Some Reflections on Cultural Links in the Persian Empire

    And KEEPING up with the PERSIANS Some Reflections on Cultural Links in the Persian Empire

    Working draft, not for distribution without permission of the author 1 ‘MANNERS MAKYTH MAN’ and KEEPING UP WITH THE PERSIANS Some reflections on cultural links in the Persian Empire Christopher Tuplin (University of Liverpool) Revised version: 9 June 2008 The purpose of the meeting (according to the web site) is to explore how ancient peoples expressed their identities by establishing, constructing, or inventing links with other societies that crossed traditional ethnic and geographic lines. These cross-cultural links complicates, undermine, or give nuance to conventional dichotomies such as self/other, Greek/barbarian, and Jew/gentile In the Achaemenid imperial context this offers a fairly wide remit. But it is a remit limited – or distorted – by the evidence. For in this, as in all aspects of Achaemenid history, we face a set of sources that spreads unevenly across the temporal, spatial and analytical space of the empire. For what might count as an unmediated means of access to a specifically Persian viewpoint we are pretty much confined to iconographically decorated monuments and associated royal inscriptions at Behistun, Persepolis and Susa (which are at least, on the face of it, intended to broach ideological topics) and the Persepolis Fortification and Treasury archives (which emphatically are not). This material is not formally or (to a large extent) chronologically commensurate with the voluminous, but unevenly distributed, Greek discourse that provides so much of the narrative of Achaemenid imperial history. Some of it may appear more commensurate with the substantial body of iconographically decorated monuments (most not associated with inscriptions) derived from western Anatolia that provides much of the material in the two papers under discussion.
  • American Journal of Contemporary Hellenic Issues

    American Journal of Contemporary Hellenic Issues

    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF Volume 11 Spring 2020 CONTEMPORARY HELLENIC ISSUES Unifying the Parthenon Sculptures George Vardas Still it survives Ruin’d but in its ruins beautiful William Haygarth.1 The English Romantic poet John Keats first encountered the Parthenon Sculptures in 1817 and through them saw a vision of a lost Hellenic world. In “awe-struck deference,” Keats proceeded to pen a sonnet, On Seeing the Elgin Marbles, his mind dizzy with swirling ideas and an “indescribable feud” within his soul as he wrestled with the “dim-conceived glories of the brain.” Keats contrasted his own mortality to "each imagined pinnacle and steep/Of godlike hardship", the great artistic achievement of immortal "Grecian grandeur" and a certain "magnitude" projected by the sculptures. In Ode on a Grecian Urn Keats’ sylvan historian could but only inquire, “What men or gods are these?" Commencing in 1801 workers engaged by the British Ambassador to Constantinople, the 7th Earl of Elgin, Thomas Bruce, by a combination of bribery of local Ottoman authorities in Athens and a dubious authorization (“firman”), began stripping more than one hundred sculptures and significant fragments consisting of pedimental figures, metope reliefs, and panels from the frieze from the Parthenon temple atop the Acropolis. Originally intended for his own private collection, Lord Elgin was forced under financial pressure to sell the sculptures to the British government, and in 1816 the Elgin Collection of Parthenon Sculptures became an exhibit at the British Museum in London where
  • London Top Attractions

    London Top Attractions

    LONDON TOP ATTRACTIONS Westminster Abbey Steeped in history, the pillars of this great vaulted hall stand on the final resting place of the men and women who built Britain. Its great Gothic hall continues to play a part in the formation of the kingdom, having hosted nearly every coronation since 1308. Buckingham Palace Not the prettiest royal residence, but a must-see for the glimpse it affords of the modern life of the monarchy. The opulence of the state rooms open to the public provides plenty of wow factor, and don’t forget the collection of china and carriages at the Queen’s Gallery and Royal Mews next door. St. Paul’s Cathedral No matter how many times you have been before, the scale and elegance of Sir Christopher Wren’s masterpiece never fail to take the breath away. Climb the enormous dome, one of the world’s largest, to experience the freaky acoustics of the Whispering Gallery, and higher still for fantastic views across London. Tower of London The Tower is London at its majestic, idiosyncratic best. This is truly the heart of the kingdom—with foundations dating back nine centuries, every brick tells a story, and the ax-blows and fortunes that have risen and fallen within this turreted mini-city provide an inexhaustible supply of intrigue. British Museum If you want to journey through time and space without leaving the confines of Bloomsbury, a visit to the British Museum holds hours of eye-catching artifacts from the world’s greatest civilizations, including the Elgin Marbles, the Rosetta Stone, and the Sutton Hoo treasure.
  • The Parthenon and Its Sculptures

    The Parthenon and Its Sculptures

    P1: FCH/J-SPH P2: FCH/J-SPH QC: FCH/J-SPH T1: FCH CB720-FM CB720-Cosmopoulos-v1 July 2, 2004 15:49 The Parthenon and its Sculptures Edited by Michael B. Cosmopoulos University of Missouri–St. Louis iii P1: FCH/J-SPH P2: FCH/J-SPH QC: FCH/J-SPH T1: FCH CB720-FM CB720-Cosmopoulos-v1 July 2, 2004 15:49 published by the press syndicate of the university of cambridge The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom cambridge university press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, uk 40 West 20th Street, New York, ny 10011-4211, usa 477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, vic 3207, Australia Ruiz de Alarcon´ 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa http://www.cambridge.org C Cambridge University Press 2004 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2004 Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge Typefaces Adobe Garamond 11.25/15 pt. and Lithos System LATEX 2ε [tb] A catalog record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data is available. isbn 0 521 83673 5 hardback iv P1: FCH/J-SPH P2: FCH/J-SPH QC: FCH/J-SPH T1: FCH CB720-FM CB720-Cosmopoulos-v1 July 2, 2004 15:49 Contents List of Figures page vii On Abbreviations and Transliteration xiii List of Contributors xv Introduction: The Methodological Framework of Parthenon Studies 1 Michael B.
  • Chapter 5 Th a F a I G E Art of Ancient Greece (Iron Age)

    Chapter 5 Th a F a I G E Art of Ancient Greece (Iron Age)

    Chapter 5 The Art of A nci ent G reece (Iron Age) Famous Greeks: Playwriters: Aeschylus (“father of Greek tragedy”), Sophocles (Antigone, Oedipus), Euripides, Aristophanes (Comedies. Lysistrata) Philosophers: Heraclitus (“You can never step into the same river twice”) Plato,,, Socrates, Aristotles Mathematicians and scientists: Archimedes, Pythagoras, Aristotles, Euclid Authors and poets: Homer (Odyssey and Iliad), Sappho of Lesbos, Aesop Historians: Herodotus ("The Father of History,"). Thucydides The Greek World GtiPid(9Geometric Period (9-8th c. BCE) Early Geometric Krater. C. 800 BCE Krater A bowl for mixing wine and water Greek key or Meander An ornament consisting of interlocking geometric motifs. An ornamental pattern of contiguous straight lines joined usually at right angles. Geometric krater, from the Dipylon cemetery, Athens, Greece, ca. 740 BCE. Approx. 3’ 4 1/2” high. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Geometric krater, from the Dipylon cemetery. Detail. Hero and Centaur (Herakles and Nessos? Achilles and Chiron?) ca. 750–730 BCE. Bron ze, a pprox. 4 1/2” high. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Geometric krater, from the Dipylon cemetery, Athens, Greece, ca. 740 BCE. Approx. 3’ 4 1/2” high. Hero and Centaur (Herakles and Nessos? Achilles and Chiron?) ca. 750–730 BCE. Bronze, approx. 4 1/2” high. Greek Vase Painting Orientalizing Period (7th c. BCE) Pitcher (olpe) Corinth, c. 600 BCE Ceramic with black-figure decoration, height 11½ " British Mus . London Rosette: A round or oval ornament resembling a rose Comppyarison: Assyrian.. Lamassu, ca. 720–705 BCE. Pitcher (olpe) Corinth, c. 600 BCE Ceramic with black-figure decoration, height 11½" British Mus.
  • A Reappraisal of J. Paul Getty's Ancient Art Collecting by Kirsten Gabrielle Desperrier a Thesis Subm

    A Reappraisal of J. Paul Getty's Ancient Art Collecting by Kirsten Gabrielle Desperrier a Thesis Subm

    Collection and Identity: A Reappraisal of J. Paul Getty’s Ancient Art Collecting by Kirsten Gabrielle Desperrier A Thesis submitted to Sonoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in History Dr. Steve Estes, Jr. Dr. Michelle Jolly Dr. Samuel Cohen Copyright 2018 By Kirsten Gabrielle Desperrier Authorization for Reproduction of Master’s Thesis I grant permission for the print or digital reproduction of this thesis in its entirety, without further authorization from me, on the condition that the person or agency requesting reproduction absorb the cost and provide proper acknowledgment of authorship. iii Collection and Identity: A Reappraisal of J. Paul Getty’s Ancient Art Collecting Thesis by Kirsten Gabrielle Desperrier ABSTRACT Purpose of Study: To examine J. Paul Getty’s ancient art collection that he acquired within in his life-time. The motivation behind Getty’s art collecting and philanthropy are examined and reassessed, as well as his inspiration for the founding of his museum the Getty Villa. The history of ancient Greco-Roman art collectors from ancient Rome, 17th- 19th century Britain, and 20th century American collectors are analyzed in relation to Getty’s place in the history of ancient art collectors. The influence of the Getty Villa on the intellectual identity of Los Angeles is explored, as is Getty’s lasting legacy on the museum landscape of the area. Procedure: To assess J. Paul Getty as a collector and philanthropist by using his autobiographies and personal journals from 1938-1976. The Getty Family Papers include the history of Getty’s ancient art collecting, and provided documents, such as receipts, customs documents, inventory lists and correspondence between Getty and art dealers.
  • Early Mythology Ancestry

    Early Mythology Ancestry

    GRANHOLM GENEALOGY EARLY MYTHOLOGY ANCESTRY 1 INTRODUCTION This book covers the earliest history of man and the mythology in some countries. The beginning from Adam and Eve and their descendants is from the Old Testament, but also by several authors and genealogy programs. The age of the persons in the lineages in Genesis is expressed in their “years”, which has little to do with the reality of our 365-day years. I have chosen one such program as a starting point for this book. Several others have been used, and as can be expected, there are a lot of conflicting information, from which I have had to choose as best I can. It is fairly well laid out so the specific information is suitable for print. In addition, the lineage information shown covers the biblical information, fairly close to the Genesis, and it also leads to both to mythical and historical persons in several countries. Where myth turns into history is up to the reader’s imagination. This book lists individuals from Adam and Eve to King Alfred the Great of England. Between these are some mythical figures on which the Greek (similar to Roman) mythology is based beginning with Zeus and the Nordic (Anglo-Saxon) mythology beginning with Odin (Woden). These persons, in their national mythologies, have different ancestors than the biblical ones. More about the Nordic mythology is covered in the “Swedish Royal Ancestry, Book 1”. Of additional interest is the similarity of the initial creation between the Greek and the Finnish mythology in its national Kalevala epos, from which a couple of samples are included here.
  • The Nereid Monument

    The Nereid Monument

    XA NTHI A N MA RBLE S T H E N E R E I D M O N U M E N T ; AN HISTORICAL AND MYTHOLOG ICAL Y ESSA . B Y WI L LIAM WATKI SS LLOYD . A L D I LON D O N W I LLI A M P I C K E RI N G . 1 845 . l l l l l Den Zusamm nhan und G ist des alten G laubens e g e , Dichwns und Bildens zu erforschen und in den W rk n dos Alterthums den reli iosen Mitwl unkt e e g p , w orin sie sich vereini en nacbzuw eisen . g , F n . C B E U Z ER . S I R C H A R L S F L L O W S E E , H E S E P E S E I N S B D T A G A R C RI E , H I S O B L I G E D F R I E N D , WI LLI A M WA TK I SS LLOYD . N E R E I D M O N U M E N T. THA OOEN EK ATKI HZ E AN OOT AI I O I E TO , A N H N E . X A N TH I A N M A R B L E S I T THE NERE D MONUMEN . N the course of a review of the relics and records of n n a o n ou n of m n a cie t Lyci , the heter ge e s ess the ele e ts that encountered w ithin its bo undaries is very striking n mo so om n on w a s om eve re , the c pact ati ality that c patible w —if not u f om — m u u n u n ith, it did res lt r , their t al i fl e ces a nd reactions .