DOCSLIB.ORG

First Civilizations: Cities and Public Space

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
First Civilizations: Cities and Public Space Arch 150: Appreciation of Architecture I First Civilizations: Cities and Public Space First test opens Tuesday at 6:00 pm • 30 questions, 40 minutes • covers the first 5 lectures and associated readings • available until Thursday at 6:00 pm • study guide available on Canvas 3000 bce (Stonehenge) 4000 bce (Jomon) 7000 bce (Çatal HüyüK) 4000 bce (Ggantija) Early settled cultures 1600 bce 1800 bce 3000 bce 3000 bce 2400 bce Early literate, urban cultures 3000 bc 2400 bc 3500 3000 2000 1000 500 bc ad Uruk, Sumer Ur, Sumer Khorsabad Babylon Jerusalem UruK Ur Persepolis Jerusalem, Canaan Khorsabad, Assyria Babylon, Babylonia Persepolis, Persia (Iran) 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 bc ad 500 Mohenjo-Daro Mohenjo-Daro, Pakistan Jerusalem Ur Northern Persian Gulf and the “Fertile Crescent” (ca. 3000 bce) Sumer 3000 bce UruK Ur Akkad 2200 bce Sumer UruK Ur Assyria 700 bce Khorsabad Babylon Jerusalem Ur Khorsabad Babylon Jerusalem Babylonian Empire 560 bce Ur Khorsabad Persian Empire 480 bc Babylon Jerusalem Ur Persepolis City: • large, dense population • ritual centers • system of laws • social classes • excess agricultural production • trade (and weights and measures) • fortifications • sanitation Mari, Sumer (ca. 3000 bce) Writing (Sumer (ca. 3000 bce)) Production (mass-produced pottery, Sumer (ca. 3000 bce)) Artworks, Sumer (ca. 3500 bce) Monumental building (Uruk, Sumer (ca. 3300-3000 bce)) Uruk, Sumer (ca. 3500-500 bce) White Temple, Uruk, Sumer (ca. 3300-3000 bce) White Temple, Uruk, Sumer (ca. 3300-3000 bce) Cone mosaics, Uruk, Sumer (ca. 3000 bce) Ur, Sumer (ca. 2000 bce) Ur, Sumer (ca. 2000 bce) Ur, Sumer (ca. 2000 bce) Ur, Sumer, residential area Ur, Sumer (ca. 2000 bce) Ziggurat of Ur-Nammu, Ur Ziggurat of Ur-Nammu, Ur (ca. 2100 bce) Jerusalem Temple of Jerusalem Ur 1000 bc Exodus ca. 1250 bc (Ramesses II) Tabernacle during the Exodus (ca. 1250 bce) Solomon’s Temple, Jerusalem (ca. 1000 bce) Temple and Temple Mount, Jerusalem, Israel (ca. 20 bce) Jerusalem, Western Wall of Temple Mount Assyria 700 bce Khorsabad Babylon Jerusalem Ur Khorsabad, Assyria (City of Sargon II) (717-706 bce) Citadel of Sargon II, Khorsabad, Assyria (717-706 bce) Palace Sargon II, Khorsabad, Assyria (717-706 bce) Palace Sargon II, Khorsabad, Assyria (717-706 bce) Khorsabad Babylon Jerusalem Babylonian Empire 560 bce Ur Babylon (ca. 600 bce) Babylon, ziggurat (tower of Babel) (ca. 600 bce) Babylon, Ishtar Gate and Palace of Nebuchadnezzar (ca. 600 bce) Assyrian vs. Babylonian artwork Khorsabad Persian Empire 480 bc Babylon Jerusalem Ur Persepolis Palace of Darius I and Xerxes, Persepolis (518 – 460 bce) Palace of Darius I and Xerxes, Persepolis (518 – 460 bce) Palace of Darius I and Xerxes, Persepolis (518 – 460 bce) Palace of Darius I and Xerxes, Persepolis (518 – 460 bce) Palace of Darius I and Xerxes, Persepolis (518 – 460 bce) Palace of Darius I and Xerxes, Persepolis (518 – 460 bce) Palace of Darius I and Xerxes, Persepolis (518 – 460 bce) Palace of Darius I and Xerxes, Persepolis (518 – 460 bce) Hall of 100 columns (Xerxes), Persepolis (518 – 460 bce) Hall of 100 columns (Xerxes), Persepolis Indus Valley Civilization 2400-1700 bc Harappa Mohenjo-Daro Mohenjo-Daro (ca. 2500 bce) Mohenjo-Daro Mohenjo-Daro (ca. 2500 bce. Reconstruction by Stanley Melzoff) Mohenjo-Daro streets 30 feet Mohenjo-Daro houses Mohenjo-Daro houses Mohenjo-Daro bath Mohenjo-Daro bath Mohenjo-Daro granary .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SUMERIAN LITERATURE and SUMERIAN IDENTITY My Title Puts
    CNI Publicati ons 43 SUMERIAN LITERATURE AND SUMERIAN IDENTITY JERROLD S. COOPER PROBLEMS OF C..\NONlCl'TY AND IDENTITY FORMATION IN A NCIENT EGYPT AND MESOPOTAMIA There is evidence of a regional identity in early Babylonia, but it does not seem to be of the Sumerian ethno-lingusitic sort. Sumerian Edited by identity as such appears only as an artifact of the scribal literary KIM RYHOLT curriculum once the Sumerian language had to be acquired through GOJKO B AR .I AMOVIC educati on rather than as a mother tongue. By the late second millennium, it appears there was no notion that a separate Sumerian ethno-lingui stic population had ever existed. My title puts Sumerian literature before Sumerian identity, and in so doing anticipates my conclusion, which will be that there was little or no Sumerian identity as such - in the sense of "We are all Sumerians!" ­ outside of Sumerian literature and the scribal milieu that composed and transmitted it. By "Sumerian literature," I mean the corpus of compositions in Sumerian known from manuscripts that date primarily 1 to the first half of the 18 h century BC. With a few notable exceptions, the compositions themselves originated in the preceding three centuries, that is, in what Assyriologists call the Ur III and Isin-Larsa (or Early Old Babylonian) periods. I purposely eschew the too fraught and contested term "canon," preferring the very neutral "corpus" instead, while recognizing that because nearly all of our manuscripts were produced by students, the term "curriculum" is apt as well. 1 The geographic designation "Babylonia" is used here for the region to the south of present day Baghdad, the territory the ancients would have called "Sumer and Akkad." I will argue that there is indeed evidence for a 3rd millennium pan-Babylonian regional identity, but little or no evidence that it was bound to a Sumerian mother-tongue community.
    [Show full text]
  • The Limits of Middle Babylonian Archives1
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by OpenstarTs The Limits of Middle Babylonian Archives1 susanne paulus Middle Babylonian Archives Archives and archival records are one of the most important sources for the un- derstanding of the Babylonian culture.2 The definition of “archive” used for this article is the one proposed by Pedersén: «The term “archive” here, as in some other studies, refers to a collection of texts, each text documenting a message or a statement, for example, letters, legal, economic, and administrative documents. In an archive there is usually just one copy of each text, although occasionally a few copies may exist.»3 The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the archives of the Middle Babylonian Period (ca. 1500-1000 BC),4 which are often 1 All kudurrus are quoted according to Paulus 2012a. For a quick reference on the texts see the list of kudurrus in table 1. 2 For an introduction into Babylonian archives see Veenhof 1986b; for an overview of differ- ent archives of different periods see Veenhof 1986a and Brosius 2003a. 3 Pedersén 1998; problems connected to this definition are shown by Brosius 2003b, 4-13. 4 This includes the time of the Kassite dynasty (ca. 1499-1150) and the following Isin-II-pe- riod (ca. 1157-1026). All following dates are BC, the chronology follows – willingly ignoring all linked problems – Gasche et. al. 1998. the limits of middle babylonian archives 87 left out in general studies,5 highlighting changes in respect to the preceding Old Babylonian period and problems linked with the material.
    [Show full text]
  • Neo-Assyrian Treaties As a Source for the Historian: Bonds of Friendship, the Vigilant Subject and the Vengeful KingS Treaty
    WRITING NEO-ASSYRIAN HISTORY Sources, Problems, and Approaches Proceedings of an International Conference Held at the University of Helsinki on September 22-25, 2014 Edited by G.B. Lanfranchi, R. Mattila and R. Rollinger THE NEO-ASSYRIAN TEXT CORPUS PROJECT 2019 STATE ARCHIVES OF ASSYRIA STUDIES Published by the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, Helsinki in association with the Foundation for Finnish Assyriological Research Project Director Simo Parpola VOLUME XXX G.B. Lanfranchi, R. Mattila and R. Rollinger (eds.) WRITING NEO-ASSYRIAN HISTORY SOURCES, PROBLEMS, AND APPROACHES THE NEO- ASSYRIAN TEXT CORPUS PROJECT State Archives of Assyria Studies is a series of monographic studies relating to and supplementing the text editions published in the SAA series. Manuscripts are accepted in English, French and German. The responsibility for the contents of the volumes rests entirely with the authors. © 2019 by the Neo-Assyrian Text Corpus Project, Helsinki and the Foundation for Finnish Assyriological Research All Rights Reserved Published with the support of the Foundation for Finnish Assyriological Research Set in Times The Assyrian Royal Seal emblem drawn by Dominique Collon from original Seventh Century B.C. impressions (BM 84672 and 84677) in the British Museum Cover: Assyrian scribes recording spoils of war. Wall painting in the palace of Til-Barsip. After A. Parrot, Nineveh and Babylon (Paris, 1961), fig. 348. Typesetting by G.B. Lanfranchi Cover typography by Teemu Lipasti and Mikko Heikkinen Printed in the USA ISBN-13 978-952-10-9503-0 (Volume 30) ISSN 1235-1032 (SAAS) ISSN 1798-7431 (PFFAR) CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................. vii Giovanni Battista Lanfranchi, Raija Mattila, Robert Rollinger, Introduction ..............................
    [Show full text]
  • Indo-Iranian Personal Names in Mitanni: a Source for Cultural Reconstruction DOI: 10.34158/ONOMA.54/2019/8
    Onoma 54 Journal of the International Council of Onomastic Sciences ISSN: 0078-463X; e-ISSN: 1783-1644 Journal homepage: https://onomajournal.org/ Indo-Iranian personal names in Mitanni: A source for cultural reconstruction DOI: 10.34158/ONOMA.54/2019/8 Simone Gentile Università degli Studi di Roma Tre Dipartimento di Filosofia, Comunicazione e Spettacolo via Ostiense, 234˗236 00146 Roma (RM) Italy [email protected] To cite this article: Gentile, Simone. 2019. Indo-Iranian personal names in Mitanni: A source for cultural reconstruction. Onoma 54, 137–159. DOI: 10.34158/ONOMA.54/2019/8 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.34158/ONOMA.54/2019/8 © Onoma and the author. Indo-Iranian personal names in Mitanni: A source for cultural reconstruction Abstract: As is known, some Indo˗Aryan (or Iranian) proper names and glosses are attested in documents from Egypt, Northern Mesopotamia, and Syria, related to the ancient kingdom of Mitanni (2nd millennium BC). The discovery of these Aryan archaic forms in Hittite and Hurrian sources was of particular interest for comparative philology. Indeed, some names can be readily compared to Indo˗Iranian anthroponyms and theonyms: for instance, Aššuzzana can likely be related with OPers. Aspačanā ‘delighting in horses’, probably of Median origin; Indaratti ‘having Indra as his guest’ clearly recalls Indra, a theonym which occurs both in R̥ gveda and Avesta. This paper aims at investigating the relationship between Aryan personal names preserved in Near Eastern documents and the Indo˗Iranian cultural milieu. After a thorough collection of these names, their 138 SIMONE GENTILE morphological and semantic structures are analysed in depth and the most relevant results are showed here.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Sumerians
    Ancient Sumerians Reviving a civilization from the past Megan Frisella, Joy Lim, Sriya Pidatala, Tony Vuolo Who were the Sumerians? ➔ A civilization that populated land in southern Mesopotamia (modern day Iraq and Kuwait) ➔ The Sumerians are known for the first cities and innovation in writing, governance, and technology. ➔ Sumer existed from around 4000 BCE to 2000 BCE. Origin of the Sumerians ➔ 4500-4000 BCE (in Mesopotamia) ◆ Ubaid people - civilization built around farming communities ➔ 3000 BCE - Sumerians took over the region and controlled it until 2000 BCE Sumerian City-States ➔ Sumerian city-states were walled in communities surrounded by agricultural villages ➔ Governed by a king/priest who serves as a political and religious leader ◆ Each city is dedicated to a Sumerian deity who is worshiped by the city’s inhabitants ➔ The first cities in the world were in the Sumerian civilization ◆ Uruk : The first city in the world and the capital of the Sumerian empire Government ➔ Government could levy taxes; allowed them to have public works like large canals and monuments ➔ A record of kings was found inscribed on a tablet ➔ Lugalzagesi was the last ruler before Sumer came under the control of another nation ➔ Captured by the Akkadians Language ➔ One of the first writing systems was cuneiform ◆ Cuneiform uses pictographs, written with a reed stylus on a wet clay tile ➔ Employed scribes to keep records in government or religious settings ◆ Stamps with symbols that indicate what is being traded ◆ Detailed trade reports (for taxes, etc.) Social Structure 1. King/Priest 2. Subordinate Priests (religious leaders and healers) 3. Upper Class (self-employed, high in the military, scribes) 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Households and the Emergence of Cities in Ancient Mesopotamia
    Households and the Emergence of Cities in Ancient Mesopotamia The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Ur, Jason. 2014. “Households and the Emergence of Cities in Ancient Mesopotamia.” Cambridge Archaeological Journal 24 (02) (June): 249–268. doi:10.1017/s095977431400047x. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1017/S095977431400047X. Published Version doi:10.1017/S095977431400047X Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:12490321 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#OAP Post-print of Households and the Emergence of Cities in Ancient Mesopotamia Cambridge Archaeological Journal 26:2 (2014) CAJ-AR-2013-0011 Jason Ur Professor of Anthropology Department of Anthropology Harvard University [email protected] http://scholar.harvard.edu/jasonur Abstract The world’s first cities emerged on the plains of Mesopotamia (modern Iraq and Syria) in the fourth millennium BC. Attempts to understand this settlement process have assumed revolutionary social change, the disappearance of kinship as a structuring principle, and the appearance of a rational bureaucracy. Most assume cities and state-level social organization were deliberate functional adaptations to meet the goals of elite members of society, or society as a whole. This study proposes an alternative model. By reviewing indigenous terminology from later historical periods, it proposes that urbanism evolved in the context of a metaphorical extension of the household that represented a creative transformation of a familiar structure.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mortal Kings of Ur: a Short Century of Divine
    3 THE MORTAL KINGS OF UR: A SHORT CENTURY OF DIVINE RULE IN ANCIENT MESOPOTAMIA PIOTR MICHALOWSKI, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN Assyriologists are at a disadvantage whenever the subject of divine kingship comes up. The issue is not an old one, but it has its lingering ghosts, James Frazer and Edward Evans­ Prichard, and it has its favorite haunting ground, the continent of Africa and the island of Mad­ agascar. Ever since Frazer delineated the problem in 1890, the focus of investigation has been on Africa, and the definition has encompassed three central components: duality, regicide, and the mediating role of the king. Of the three, regicide has been the most contentious issue, but it is one that is hardly important outside of the Africanist debates. Moreover, as Kasja Ekholm Friedman (1985: 250) has written, some have viewed divine kingship as "an autonomous sym­ bolic structure that can only be understood in terms of its own internal symbolic structure." Writing about the Lower Congo (Friedman 1985: 251), she undertook to demonstrate that "it is a historical product which has undergone transformations connected to the general structural change that has turned Africa into an underdeveloped periphery of the West." Here, I follow her example and attempt to locate the eruptions of early Mesopotamian divine kingship as historically defined phenomena, rather than as moments in a developmental trajectory of an autonomous symbolic structure. Most studies of the early history of Mesopotamian kingship concentrate on the develop­ ment of a specific figure in text and art; the underlying notions are social evolutionary, and the methodology is philological, often relying on etymology and the study of the occurrence and history of lexical labels, as summarized well in a recent article by Nicole Brisch (forth­ coming).
    [Show full text]
  • KARUS on the FRONTIERS of the NEO-ASSYRIAN EMPIRE I Shigeo
    KARUS ON THE FRONTIERS OF THE NEO-ASSYRIAN EMPIRE I Shigeo YAMADA * The paper discusses the evidence for the harbors, trading posts, and/or administrative centers called karu in Neo-Assyrian documentary sources, especially those constructed on the frontiers of the Assyrian empire during the ninth to seventh centuries Be. New Assyrian cities on the frontiers were often given names that stress the glory and strength of Assyrian kings and gods. Kar-X, i.e., "Quay of X" (X = a royal/divine name), is one of the main types. Names of this sort, given to cities of administrative significance, were probably chosen to show that the Assyrians were ready to enhance the local economy. An exhaustive examination of the evidence relating to cities named Kar-X and those called karu or bit-kar; on the western frontiers illustrates the advance of Assyrian colonization and trade control, which eventually spread over the entire region of the eastern Mediterranean. The Assyrian kiirus on the frontiers served to secure local trading activities according to agreements between the Assyrian king and local rulers and traders, while representing first and foremost the interest of the former party. The official in charge of the kiiru(s), the rab-kari, appears to have worked as a royal deputy, directly responsible for the revenue of the royal house from two main sources: (1) taxes imposed on merchandise and merchants passing through the trade center(s) under his control, and (2) tribute exacted from countries of vassal status. He thus played a significant role in Assyrian exploitation of economic resources from areas beyond the jurisdiction of the Assyrian provincial government.
    [Show full text]
  • THE KUSHITE ORIGINS of SU~Ier and ELAM by Runoko Rashidi Ancient Sumer, the Biblical Land of Shinar, Modern Lower Mesopotamia, F
    THE KUSHITE ORIGINS OF SU~iER AND ELAM By Runoko Rashidi And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord: wherefore it is said, even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel ••. in the land of Shinar. 1 Ancient Sumer, the biblical land of Shinar, modern lower Mesopotamia, flourished in the third millenium B.C. covering the territorial expanse of the Tigris/Euphrates River Valley. Embracing the shores of the Persian Gulf, Sumer extended north to Akkad, a distance of about 320 miles, thus constituting Southern Babylonia. The appellation Chaldea, frequently applied to the region, appears to have been introduced by the Assyrians in the ninth century B.c.2 The designations Babylon, Babylonia and Chaldea have been used extensively, particularly by nine­ teenth century scholars, in reference to the area now almost exclusively known as Sumer. Sumer appears to be the first major high-culture of western Asia. She bequeathed to her successor states a tradi­ tion of great achievement. Her many contributions to civili­ zation are well known. Brilliant agriculturalists, the Sumerians built very sophisticated canals and reservoirs to irrigate their fields. They possessed both an advanced legal system and a well developed knowledge of medicine and were perhaps the ancient world's greatest astronomers.3 While these salient facts regarding Sumer's obvious cultural genius are well known, the important question of the racial composition of its population is generally glossed over. This apparent cloud concerning race, however, is very thin and there is a substantial body of evidence in support of the position that the civilization of Sumer was the product of Black migrations from Africa's Nile Valley.
    [Show full text]
  • The Uruk Period
    I palace. Each city was an independent state under the protection of its own god. The Uruk Period Such is the picture of the first establishment of the Sumerians in southern Mesopotamia as revealed by the German excavations at Uruk (Warka) when resumed in 1928 under the direction of Dr. Julius Jordan. This venerable city (the Erech of the Bible), fifty miles northwest of Ur, has a long history. It was the second royal city after the Deluge, where ruled Gilgamesh, the legendary hero of the national epic. It was still a great centre of learning at the end of the first millennium, under King Antiochus IV (175-64 B.C.) when the temples of Anu and Antum were rebuilt by the local governor. Close by, the massive mud brick tower of Eanna still stands over thirty-six metres high. It is a construction of King Ur-Nammu of the Third Ur Dynasty (2120 B.C.) to Innina•lshtar, the goddess of Uruk. In the following centuries it was in turn restored by the Cassite, Babylonian and Assyrian kings. While the graves of al-'Ubaid had been early forgotten and its painted pottery was almost exposed on the surface of the desert, in the ruins of larger cities like Uruk, Ur, Kish, Nippur, Fara, Adab, they were buried below the ac- cumulated debris left by successive generations of town dwellers, from the original Sumerian or pre-Sumerian down to the Greek, Parthian and even Arab periods of occupation. An artificial hill was thus formed, in certain cases more than sixty feet over the virgin soil, and the early levels could be reached only by deep pits and trenches exposing the various layers in historic sequence.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Third Dynasty of Ur
    ON THE THIRD DYNASTY OF UR Journal of Cuneiform Studies Supplemental Series Piotr Michalowski Series Editor AssociateAssociate EditorsEditors Gary Beckman, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Gary Beckman,Elizabeth Carter, University University ofof California, Michigan, Los AngelesAnn Arbor Elizabeth Carter,Piotr UniversitySteinkeller, Harvard of California, University Los Angeles MatthewP iotrW. Stolper, Steinkeller, The Oriental Harvard Institute, University of Chicago Matthew W. Stolper, The OrientalManaging EditorInstitute, University of Chicago Billie Jean Collins, Emory University Managing Editor Billie Jean Collins, Emory University Number 1 ON THE THIRD DYNASTY OF UR ON THE THIRD DYNASTY OF UR STUDIES IN HONOR OF MARCEL SIGRIST Edited by Piotr Michalowski American Schools of Oriental Research ∑ Boston 2008 ON THE THIRD DYNASTY OF UR Copyright ç 2008 by the American Schools of Oriental Research All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions O¯ce, American Schools of Oriental Research, 656 Beacon Street, Boston, MA 02215-2010 USA. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data On the Third Dynasty of Ur : studies in honor of Marcel Sigrist / edited by Piotr Michalowski. — 1st ed. p. cm. — (Journal of cuneiform studies. Supplemental series ; v. 1) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-89757-080-0 (alk. paper) 1. Babylonia—History. 2. Ur (Extinct city) 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Sennacherib, Archimedes, and the Water Screw the Context of Invention in the Ancient World
    Sennacherib, Archimedes, and the Water Screw The Context of Invention in the Ancient World STEPHANIE DALLEY and JOHN PETER OLESON This article will present the cases for and against Archimedes as the origi- nal inventor of the most striking and famous device attributed to him, the water screw. It takes the form of a case study that focuses as much on the context and motives for the invention as on the possible inventor himself. In brief, an Archimedean water screw consists of a cylinder containing sev- eral continuous helical walls that, when the entire cylinder is rotated on its longitudinal axis, scoop up water at the open lower end and dump it out the upper end. Both Aage Drachmann and John Oleson have summarized the literary and archaeological evidence from the classical world suggesting that Archimedes (287–212 B.C.) was the first person to design and construct a mechanical water-raising screw, and they accept him as the inventor.1 Stephanie Dalley, on the other hand, reinterpreting a passage of cuneiform Akkadian and a statement by Strabo, has proposed that the water screw was Dr. Dalley is Shillito Research Fellow in Assyriology at the Oriental Institute and Somerville College, University of Oxford. She has published primary editions of cunei- form texts from excavations in Iraq and Syria and from museums in Britain, as well as specialized studies and more general books. She has translated all the Assyrian texts used in this article. Dr. Oleson is professor of Greek and Roman Studies at the University of Victoria, British Columbia. His areas of fieldwork and research include ancient hydraulic technology, Roman harbors and their construction, and the Roman Near East.
    [Show full text]