DOCSLIB.ORG

Roman Imperial Statue Bases from Augustus to Commodus

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Jakob Munk Højte Roman Imperial Statue Bases from Augustus to Commodus Aarhus Universit y Press Aarhus Studies in Mediterranean Antiquity (ASMA) VII ASMA is a series which will be published approximately once a year by Th e Centre for the Study of Antiquity, University of Aarhus, Denmark. The Centre is a network of cooperating departments: Greek and Latin, Classical Archaeology, History, and the Faculty of Th eology. The objective of the series is to advance the interdisciplinary study of Antiquity by publishing articles, e.g., conference papers, or independent monographs, which among other things reflect the current activities of the centre. JA KOB MUNK HØ JTE ROMAN IMPERIAL STATUE BASES FROM AUGUSTUS TO COMMODUS Acta Jutlandica LXXX:2 Humanities Series 78 a AARHUS UNIVERSITY PRESS Roman Imperial Statue Bases © Jakob Munk Højte and Aarhus University Press 2005 Cover: Lotte Bruun Rasmussen Photo: Jakob Munk Højte, Caserna dei Vigili, Ostia, Statue bases on a podium in the sacellum. Typeset with Trajan (cover) and Mignon (body) ISBN 87 7934 906 4 Aarhus University Press Langelandsgade 177 DK-8200 Aarhus N Fax: (+45) 8942 5380 73 Lime Walk Headington, Oxford OX3 7AD Fax: (+44) 1865 750 079 Box 511 Oakville, CT 06779 Fax: (+1) 860 945 9468 Preface This book is an altered and revised version of my PhD dissertation defended at the University of Aarhus in May 2001. Due to other obligations and a certain fatigue and nausea at the thought of taking another swing at the large corpora (they do tend to have a rather musty odour), the manuscript was put in the drawer. Earlier this year it would remain hidden no longer. Over the sum- mer and during a stay in Rome in the autumn, the tedious task of checking the entries in the catalogue and editing the text was carried out. Two major changes have been made. First of all, the three separate papers that formed part of the dissertation: The Epigraphic Evidence Concerning Portrait Statues of Hadrian’s Heir L. Aelius Caesar, Imperial Visits as Occasion for the Erection of Portrait Statues?, and The Statue Bases of Claudius. A Reassessment of Th e Portraiture of Claudius by M. Stuart have been published elsewhere, and are therefore not included here (see bibliography). This meant that a good number of cross-references had to be sorted out and text supplied where nec- essary. Secondly, the catalogue of statue bases has been revised and updated. A number of inscriptions included in the dissertation, as pointed out by the assessment committee, demonstrably did not belong to statue bases, and have consequently been excluded. In addition, a number of inscriptions that seemed too uncertain to include have also been removed. On the other hand, more material has been published in the intervening period. The catalogue has been updated to include the bases mentioned in Supplementum Epigraphicum Grae- cum 2000 and L’Année épigraphique 2001. In the dissertation only a minimum of information about the individual bases went on paper, while the bulk was stored on a CD-ROM. Here I have chosen to include more information in the printed text, which has resulted in a rather voluminous catalogue. It is Preface · 5 my hope that the expanded format will improve its usefulness and encourage others to make use of the collected data, which I believe holds potential far beyond what has been covered in this book. Since my interest in Roman imperial statue bases was first aroused by reading Meriwether Stuart’s dissertation from 1938 on the portraiture of Claudius, which includes the first attempt at systematically compiling and analysing the epigraphical evidence from statue bases, many friends and colleagues have commented and made valuable suggestions that have greatly improved the outcome. Some require particular mention: Ittai Gradel for inspiration and rewarding discussions. His encouragement is one of the primary reasons why the study has been brought to completion. Niels Hannestad and Lise Hanne- stad, my supervisor, for valuable help and advice both during and aft er my time as a PhD student. Niels’ interest in Roman sculpture and imperial por- traiture in particular initially got me started on this project. Robert Fleischer, my external supervisor, for making my much too short stay in Mainz pleasant and rewarding. More importantly for his comments on the part of my original project, which will unfortunately have to stay in the drawer for some time yet, namely an unfinished study of the statue bases for the Hellenistic kings. The external members of the assessment committee Geza Alföldy and Jane Fejfer, who gave precise criticism and good directions for both possible and required improvements far beyond the call of duty. I have tried as best I could to follow their recommendations. Finally and most dearly I want to thank my family, who have tirelessly accompanied me on countless journeys in (oft en futile) search of statue bases. The book was made possible by generous financial support from the Uni- versity of Aarhus, the University of Aarhus Research Foundation, Elizabeth Munksgaard Fonden, Landsdommer V. Gieses Legat, and the Danish Research Council for Humanities. Århus, December 2004 Jakob Munk Højte 6 · roman imperial statue bases Contents Preface ............................................................ 5 List of Figures and Tables .............................. 11 Introduction................................................... 13 Types of Monuments ........................................ 19 Identification of statue bases........................................ 19 The language of the inscriptions .................................... 25 Types of statue base................................................. 27 Literary testimony for imperial statue bases and inscriptions ....... 40 Statue types and materials used for imperial statues ................ 43 The cost of imperial statues ......................................... 52 Damnatio memoriae and the reuse of statue bases.................. 56 Dating the Inscriptions from Imperial Statue Bases ............................. 65 Imperial nomenclature and honorifi c titles ......................... 65 Other dating criteria................................................ 70 Dating by negative evidence ........................................ 72 Reliability of the dating criteria ..................................... 74 Dating accuracy .................................................... 77 Dates chosen for dedicating imperial statues ....................... 78 Contents · 7 The Applicability of the Evidence of the Statue Bases to the Extant Portraits . 81 The Geographical Distribution of Imperial Portrait Statues .......................... 85 The geographical distribution of extant imperial portraits .......... 86 The geographical distribution of statue bases ....................... 88 The number of sites and the number of bases per site............... 103 Context ............................................................. 109 Statues Dedicated Before and After a Reign . 125 Pre-accessional dedications......................................... 125 Posthumous dedications............................................ 132 Occasions for Erecting Imperial Statues ....... 143 Accession ........................................................... 144 Jubilees (decennalia and vicennalia) ................................ 157 Imperial visits ...................................................... 159 Patterns of chronological distribution during a reign ............... 165 Dedicators of Roman Imperial Statues........... 167 Statues dedicated by communities or their executive bodies ........ 168 Private dedicators................................................... 171 Public or private? ................................................... 179 Corporations as dedicators ......................................... 181 Military units as dedicators ......................................... 182 Statue bases without dedicators..................................... 184 Regional differences and developments............................. 185 Conclusion ...................................................... 189 Bibliography ................................................... 195 8 · roman imperial statue bases Catalogue ................................................... 215 Introduction to the Catalogue ..................... 217 What is included? .................................................. 217 Sorting system ...................................................... 218 Geography.......................................................... 218 Chronology......................................................... 222 Distribution maps .................................................. 222 Histograms ......................................................... 222 Abbreviations and Bibliography for Catalogue ................................................. 225 Catalogue of Statue Bases Arranged According to Emperor ........................ 229 Augustus 229 · Tiberius 263 · Caligula 288 · Claudius 294 · Nero 319 · Galba 319 · Otho 330 · Vitellius 330 · Vespasian 330 · Titus 344 · Domitian 354 · Nerva 365 · Trajan 373 · Hadrian 404 · Antoninus Pius 466 · Lucius Verus 509 · Marcus Aurelius 531 · Marcus Aurelius or Lucius Verus 569 · Avidius Cassius 571 · Commodus 571 Statistical Analysis, Emperors (Tables SE -) . 591 Augustus 591 · Tiberius 592 · Caligula 593 · Claudius 594 · Nero 595 · Galba · Otho · and Vitellius 596 · Vespasian 597 · Titus 508 · Domitian 509 · Nerva 600 · Trajan 601 · Hadrian
Recommended publications
  • Negotiating Identity in the Ancient Mediterranean: the Archaic and Classical Greek Multiethnic Emporia Denise Demetriou Index More Information

    Negotiating Identity in the Ancient Mediterranean: the Archaic and Classical Greek Multiethnic Emporia Denise Demetriou Index More Information

    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-01944-7 - Negotiating Identity in the Ancient Mediterranean: The Archaic and Classical Greek Multiethnic Emporia Denise Demetriou Index More information Index Abu Simbel, 112n, 149 emporia, importance of in, 91–2, 94, 103 Adjiyska Vodenitza, 159n, 158–60, 160n Epaktia, 93 Adonia, 222 Epilimenia, 91, 92 Adonis, 84, 222 Euploia, 93, 218 Aegean Galenaia, 93 North, 155, 159–60, 168.SeealsoPistiros, Gravisca, worship of in, 77, 83, 86n, 88–90, trade network 102, 103, 139, 235 Sea, 19–21, 106, 130, 178, 188, 199 Hellenion and, 144, 234 Aeolians, 12–13, 110, 146–7, 236 Kition, worship of at, 222, 237 Aeschylus, 101, 167–8 Kos, worship of at, 92–3, 141 Africa, North, 4, 68, 106 kourotrophos, 101–2, 139 Agathe, 22, 24, 29–30, 37–8, 38n Naukratis, worship of in, 81, 89, 114, 138, Agde.SeeAgathe 139–42, 235 Aigina, 64, 80, 91, 92–3, 103, 145n.Seealso navigation, patron of, 91–5, 234 Gravisca Ourania, 93, 220–1 Athens and, 184, 197 Pandemos, 93, 140, 141 Naukratis and, 80, 110, 129, 135, 142, Peiraieus, worship of in, 92, 218–22, 228 237 Pontia, 93, 141 script of, 64, 78, 80 Pontia kai Limenia, 93 temple of Aphaia in, 68 prostitutes and, 140–1 Aiginetan(s), 80–1, 129, 138–9, 237.Seealso sacred prostitution and, 82, 90–1 Sostratos of Aigina traders and, 93–5 Gravisca, 64, 83, 103 Turan and, 90, 97–8, 102, 103–4, 233 Alexander, 119, 155, 216n Apollo, 70, 89.Seealsocity-ethnic, Apollo Amadokos II, 163, 164, 165n, 182, 183, 185 Aigina and, 64, 80, 83, 103, 211, 237 Amasis, Pharaoh, 7, 148, 150–1 archegetes, 57, 59,
  • Greece • Crete • Turkey May 28 - June 22, 2021

    Greece • Crete • Turkey May 28 - June 22, 2021

    GREECE • CRETE • TURKEY MAY 28 - JUNE 22, 2021 Tour Hosts: Dr. Scott Moore Dr. Jason Whitlark organized by GREECE - CRETE - TURKEY / May 28 - June 22, 2021 May 31 Mon ATHENS - CORINTH CANAL - CORINTH – ACROCORINTH - NAFPLION At 8:30a.m. depart from Athens and drive along the coastal highway of Saronic Gulf. Arrive at the Corinth Canal for a brief stop and then continue on to the Acropolis of Corinth. Acro-corinth is the citadel of Corinth. It is situated to the southwest of the ancient city and rises to an elevation of 1883 ft. [574 m.]. Today it is surrounded by walls that are about 1.85 mi. [3 km.] long. The foundations of the fortifications are ancient—going back to the Hellenistic Period. The current walls were built and rebuilt by the Byzantines, Franks, Venetians, and Ottoman Turks. Climb up and visit the fortress. Then proceed to the Ancient city of Corinth. It was to this megalopolis where the apostle Paul came and worked, established a thriving church, subsequently sending two of his epistles now part of the New Testament. Here, we see all of the sites associated with his ministry: the Agora, the Temple of Apollo, the Roman Odeon, the Bema and Gallio’s Seat. The small local archaeological museum here is an absolute must! In Romans 16:23 Paul mentions his friend Erastus and • • we will see an inscription to him at the site. In the afternoon we will drive to GREECE CRETE TURKEY Nafplion for check-in at hotel followed by dinner and overnight. (B,D) MAY 28 - JUNE 22, 2021 June 1 Tue EPIDAURAUS - MYCENAE - NAFPLION Morning visit to Mycenae where we see the remains of the prehistoric citadel Parthenon, fortified with the Cyclopean Walls, the Lionesses’ Gate, the remains of the Athens Mycenaean Palace and the Tomb of King Agamemnon in which we will actually enter.
  • Spies (Kataskopoi, Otakoustai)

    Spies (Kataskopoi, Otakoustai)

    ch3.qxd 10/18/1999 2:12 PM Page 103 Chapter 3 Beyond the Pale: Spies (Kataskopoi, Otakoustai) It is almost as dif‹cult to de‹ne a spy as to catch one. The most common word among the Greeks for spies was kataskopoi, but throughout the classical era they did not use this term for spies alone: an author might employ it in one context where we would say “spy,” in another where we would understand “scout,” in a third where we would have dif‹culty translating it at all.1 Otakoustai were consistently used as covert agents, but they were rarely sent abroad.2 Is it then anachronistic to distinguish spies from other agents? The answer to this problem can perhaps be found in a distinction in the social perception of different types of kataskopoi (et al.). Some kataskopoi (i.e., spies) were perceived by their victims as treacherous and seem to have been subject to legislation concerning treachery; others (i.e., scouts et al.) were not.3 Whereas spies were normally interrogated under 1. Thucydides, e.g., used kataskopoi for spies at 6.45.1 (they were not named but were distinguished from other sources reporting to the Syracusans) and 8.6.4 (the perioikos Phry- nis, discussed shortly); mounted scouts at 6.63.3; and of‹cial investigators at 4.27.3–4 (Cleon and Theagenes, chosen by the Athenians to investigate matters at Pylos) and 8.41.1 (men appointed to oversee the Spartan navarch Astyochus). The word kataskopos is not found in Homer—he instead used episkopos or skopos indiscriminately for spies, scouts, watchers, and overseers.
  • Troas Filipos Tesalónica Berea Atenas

    Troas Filipos Tesalónica Berea Atenas

    Lección 15 © Copyright Basado en material de W. Mark Lanier. Usado con permiso. Europa Asia Europa Asia Filipos Tesalónica Berea Troas Atenas Tesalónica 70 millas (5 días a pie) Tesalónica 70 millas (5 días a pie) Tesalónica 70 millas (5 días a pie) Filipos Tesalónica Berea Troas Atenas Berea 45-50 millas (3 días a pie) Filipos Tesalónica Berea Troas Atenas Éstos eran de sentimientos más nobles que los de Tesalónica, de modo que recibieron el mensaje con toda avidez y todos los días examinaban las Escrituras para ver si era verdad lo que se les anunciaba. (Hechos 17:11 ) Filipos Tesalónica Berea Troas Atenas Los Bereanos ayudan a Pablo a llegar a Atenas Filipos Tesalónica Berea Troas Atenas 1. Unfinished Temple of Zeus 2. Unfinished law courts 3. Painted Stoa 4. Stoa of Hermes 5. Altar of the Twelve Gods 6. Stoa of Zeus with his statue 7. Temple of Hephaestus (Theseion) 8. Bouleyterion 9. Monument of the Eponymous Heroes 10. Tholos 11. Strategeion 12. Southwest Fountain House 13. Heliaia law courts 14. South Stoa 15. Southeast Fountain House 16. Mint 17. Panathenaic festival procession 18. Pnyx (Demosthenes delivered his Third Philippic here.) 19. Areopagus 20. Temple of Athena Nike 21. Propylaia 22. Statue of Athena Promachos 23. Erechtheum 24. Parthenon 25. Royal Stoa 1. Unfinished Temple of Zeus 2. Unfinished law courts 3. Painted Stoa 4. Stoa of Hermes 5. Altar of the Twelve Gods 6. Stoa of Zeus with his statue 7. Temple of Hephaestus (Theseion) 8. Bouleyterion 9. Monument of the Eponymous Heroes 10. Tholos 11.
  • DEMOCRACY in ATHENS 30 000 Slaves Athens Was the City-State in Which Citizens Had the Most Involvement in the Government

    DEMOCRACY in ATHENS 30 000 Slaves Athens Was the City-State in Which Citizens Had the Most Involvement in the Government

    Chapter 3 ANCIENT ATHENS In ancient times, several civilisations developed in the area we now know as Greece. Over time, city-states developed. The most influential of the city-states was Athens, especially in the period that became known as the Classical Age, from the fifth to the fourth century BC. During this period, the Athenians developed the form of government known as democracy, succeeded in fighting off their enemies and developed a rich culture. Pericles was the influential leader at the centre of many of the achievements of this time, which is also known as the ‘Golden Age’ of Athens. Historical knowledge and understanding • Learn about change and its impact on the lives of ancient Athenians. • Learn about the continuity in our own time of the democratic traditions that originated in ancient Athens. • Learn about the contributions of ancient Athenians to the identity of their city and the world beyond it. • Learn about cause and effect by evaluating the role of key individuals and events in ancient Athens. • Learn about sources of information on the ancient Athenian and Greek world. Historical reasoning and interpretation • Frame questions and plan investigations based on your knowledge of ancient Athens. • Develop skills in gathering and documenting A photograph of part of the Erechtheum, Athens, today evidence from sources to analyse what they reveal about the culture and values of ancient Athens. Dark Age • Know and use key words and conventions in the Bronze Age language of history. • Communicate your understanding of history 3000 BC 2000 BC 1000 BC 900 BC 800 BC 700 BC through a variety of presentations.
  • Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion

    Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion

    Kernos Revue internationale et pluridisciplinaire de religion grecque antique 8 | 1995 Varia Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion Angelos Chaniotis and Eftychia Stavrianopoulou Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/kernos/605 DOI: 10.4000/kernos.605 ISSN: 2034-7871 Publisher Centre international d'étude de la religion grecque antique Printed version Date of publication: 1 January 1995 Number of pages: 205-266 ISSN: 0776-3824 Electronic reference Angelos Chaniotis and Eftychia Stavrianopoulou, « Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion », Kernos [Online], 8 | 1995, Online since 11 April 2011, connection on 16 September 2020. URL : http:// journals.openedition.org/kernos/605 Kernos Kernos, 8 (1995), p, 205-266. EpigrapWc Bulletin for Greek Religion 1991 (EBGR) This fifth issue of BEGR presents the publications of 1991 along with several addenda to BEGR 1987-1990. The division of the work between New York and Heidelberg, for the first time this year, caused certain logistical prablems, which can be seen in several gaps; some publications of 1991 could not be considered for this issue and will be included in the next BEGR, together with the publications of 1992. We are optimistic that in the future we will be able to accelerate the presentation of epigraphic publications. The principles explained in Kernos, 4 (991), p. 287-288 and Kernos, 7 (994), p. 287 apply also to this issue, The abbreviations used are those of L'Année Philologique and the Supplementum Bpigraphicum Graecum. We remind our readers that the bulletin is not a general bibliography on Greek religion; works devoted exclusively to religious matters (marked here with an asterisk) are presented very briefly, even if they make extensive use of inscriptions, In exceptional cases (see n° 87) we include in our bulletin studies on the Linear B tablets.
  • Rhetoric and the Architecture of Empire in the Athenian Agora

    Rhetoric and the Architecture of Empire in the Athenian Agora

    Rhetoric and the Architecture of Empire inthe Athenian Agora Submitted by John Vandenbergh Lewis B.Arch., University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona May, 1992 Submitted to the Department of Architecture in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Architecture Studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June, 1995 John Vandenbergh Lewis, 1995. All rights reserved. The author hereby grants to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part. I A A Signature of the Author Jo Vandenbergh Lewis Depa* ent of Architecture, May 12, 1995 Certified by IrP u Julian Beinarl Professor of Architecture I Accepted by I I Roy Strickland Chairman, Department of Architecture Committee on Graduate Students MASSACHUSETTS INSTJTUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JUL 251995 4ROtd Rhetoric and the Architecture of Empire inthe Athenian Agora by John Vandenbergh Lewis Submitted to the Department of Architecture May 12, 1995 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science inArchitecture Studies Abstract The various political regimes of ancient Athens established and legitimated their power through civic architecture and public rhetoric in the agora. A study of the parallel developments of architectural and rhetorical form, supported by previously published archaeological evidence and the well documented history of classical rhetoric, demonstrates that both served to propel democracy and, later, to euphemize the asymmetrical power structures of the Hellenistic and Roman empires. In addition, civic architecture and rhetoric worked in unison following analogous patterns of presentation in civic space. Civic imperial architecture in the agora may be thus understood to function as the stageset and legitimator of imperial political rhetoric in the agora.
  • 6°OIB Athens Handout

    6°OIB Athens Handout

    History Theme II: Founders, Beliefs and Citizenship in the Mediterranean during the Millennium Before Christ Chapter 4: The World of Greek City States This chapter is about Ancient Greece and in particular the city-state of Athens where the first democracy in the world developed. The word used to describe a city-state was a polis and the city-states or polis operated independently of each other and often fought wars against each other. For example, the Peloponnesian War famously opposed Athens against Sparta at the end of the 5th century BC. However, the Greek people were united by their language and literature. Everyone knew Homer’s poems and shared the same way of life, cultivating wheat (blé), wines and olives The Greeks were polytheist and believed in the existence of gods and heroes. They constructed temples and organised games in honour of their gods such as the Olympic Games. These were held in the sanctuary city (a neutral city where no wars or battles were allowed between other city-states) of Olympia and were open to all Greeks. From the 8th century BC onwards, the Greeks established colonies around the Aegean Sea and traded with other places. This allowed some of them, such as Athens, to become very rich. During the 5th century BC, the city of Athens invented an original form of government called a democracy. Citizens met and debated at the Ecclesia and voted on laws. Magistrates were also designated to lead the city. Citizens had various duties to perform: obey the laws, fight for the city and participate in religious festivals.
  • Academy, 19, 95, 105, 181 Acamas, 128, 129, 130, 142, 146. See Also

    Academy, 19, 95, 105, 181 Acamas, 128, 129, 130, 142, 146. See Also

    INDEX Academy, , , , Mycenean bastion, , ; Mycenean Acamas, , , , , . See also palace, ; oike–mata, , , , ; Phylai, Cleisthenic Palladion statuettes, ; Parthenon, , Acharnae, , , , ; Persian sack, , , ; Achilles, , Propylaia, , ; ramp, , , , Acropolis, , , , , , , , , , ; Salamis decree, –, , ; siege , –, , , , , , –, of /, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ; spring house, ; stele condemning –, , , , , , ; ar- followers of Isagoras, ; stele con- chaic cistern, ; Arkhaios Neos (Old demning Peisistratids, , ; Theseus Athena Temple), , , –, , , and Prokrustes (?) group, , , ; , , , ; artisan dedications, victory monument for battles of , –; Asklepieion, ; Athena Nike, , , –, ; western entrance, precinct and temple of, , , ; , , , Athena Polias, seventh-century temple Aegeus, , , , –. See also Phy- of, –, –, –, , , ; lai, Cleisthenic “Bluebeard temple,” –, , , , Aegina, ; Brauroneion (see Brauroneion); Aelius Aristides, Callimachus dedication, ; circuit Aeschylus, walls, , , ; dogs, sculptures of, Agariste of Sikyon, ; Eleusinion (see Eleusinion, City); Agora, , , , , –, , , , Erechtheion, , ; Erinyes, shrine of, –, , , , , , , , , ; Great Altar, ; Hekatompedon , , , –, –; Altar of the precinct, ; hero shrines, ; korai (see Twelve Gods, , , , –, ; Korai); kouros-types (see Kouroi); Aphrodite Ourania, altar of, ; Build- Marathonian Bull dedication, , ; ing A, ; Building C, , ; Building 299 300 I index Agora (continued) Aphidna, , , D, , ; Buildings F, G, H, and I, , Aphlaston, –, , ; Building J, ; commer- Aphrodite, , cial structures,

  • Sara Jacobs Mycenaeans Were Warriors Their War-Like Civilization That Required Fortified Architecture

    LARC 352 History of Landscape Architecture Autumn Quarter, 2016 Instructor: Thaïsa Way PhD T.A.: Sara Jacobs Mycenaeans were warriors their war-like civilization that required fortified architecture Mycenae a powerfully fortified city on a hilltop called an acropolis acro = high polis = city aerial view of Mycenae today Fortifications were built with enormous blocks called cyclopean walls DEMOS: the populace as a polical unit, especially in a democracy. POLIS: inially, a communal center for refuge and religious pracce, then a city state, especially as considered in its ideal form for philosophical purposes. TWO URBAN SETTLEMENT PATTERNS Greece-the Peloponnesus, the Aegean archipelago of islands and the western coast of Anatolia. Greece and the Classical Landscape • Classical: aesthec values embodied in Greek and Roman art, architecture, and culture • Simplicity of form, harmonious proporon and ornament • Expression of structure • Symmetry over eccentricity • City as locus for the good life • Landscape: culture and nature united in a bond • Humanism: thought centered upon capacies and values of humans/ individuals, raonal and ordered thought and living Genius Loci • the protecve spirit of a place. It was oen depicted in religious iconography as a figure holding a Cornucopia, snake, or other protecve and/ or producve symbol • the spirit or character of a site- inherent to a place Greece-the Peloponnesus, the Aegean archipelago of islands and the western coast of Anatolia. Homer, the Iliad and the Odyssey c. 8th century BCE Sacred Grove of Zeus, Olympia 5th century BCE Classical Greece School of Athens, by Raphael, c. 1511 Plato, holding the Timaeus and poinng to the heavens, speaks with Aristotle, holding the Ethics and gesturing towards the earth.
  • The Citizen in Athens in the 5Th Century BC

    The Citizen in Athens in the 5Th Century BC

    Theme 2: Invention of the citizenship in the ancient world Chapter 1: th th Citizenship and democracy in Athens (5 – 4 BC) 1. Unfinished Temple of Zeus 2. Unfinished law courts 3. Painted Stoa 5. Altart of the Twelve Gods 6. Stoa of Zeus with his statue 7. Temple of Hephaestus (Theseion) 8. Bouleyterion 10. Tholos 11. Strategeion 13. Heliaia law courts 14. South Stoa 15. Southeast Fountain House 17. Panathenaic festival procession 18. Pnyx 19. Areopagus 20. Temple of Athena Nike 21. Propylaia 22. Statue of Athena Promachos 23. Erectheum 24. Parthenon 25. Royal Stoa Greek cities & colonies circa 550 BC I - Greece and Athens 1.1. The city states or polis In the 5th century BC, Greece consisted of various city states as Athens, Sparta, Corinth… They were all independent from each other because of the mountains. Athens is the most important one, it has the leadership over a large part of Greece, such as Crete and Thrace for example. Each of them had its own government, laws and army, and this is why they were called city states or polis. Nevertheless, all of them belonged to the same civilization, since they shared a common language, religion and culture. 1.2.Athens, a powerful city state . The two main city-states in Greece were Sparta and Athens. The greatest of these was Athens. Which were the strengths of Athens in the 5th century ? Read the documents and answer the question. In the 5th century, Athens was a very rich and powerful city in the Mediterranean because of geographical and economical factors.
  • Dura-Europos: the Site and the Excavationse

    Dura-Europos: the Site and the Excavationse

    Eintroduction 1 dura-europos: the site and the excavationsE Modern exploration of the site of Dura-Europos began with the discovery by one Captain Murphy of the British army of the paintings in the Temple of Bel. On the basis of a short visit, James Henry Breasted of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago published these paintings.1 Franz Cumont carried out excavations in 1922–23, with the aid of French soldiers. The major excavations were conducted by Yale University and the French Academy from 1928 to 1937.2 Since 1986, a French-Syrian mission under the direction of Pierre Leriche has undertaken a program of excavation and conservation of the site.3 Dura-Europos, located in a commanding position on the cliffs above the Euphrates in modern Syria, was founded as a military settlement by a certain Nicanor, probably a general of Seleukos Nicator, and given the Macedonian name Europos.4 A few objects predating the Hellenistic pe- riod have been found on the site. The most significant of these is a Babylonian tablet used in the mudbrick of the Temple of Atargatis. Dated to the reign of Hammurabi, king of Khana, whose capital is at modern Ashara, approximately thirty kilometers north of Dura, it probably gives the name of the site in the second millennium: Damara (ϭ Dawara), 1. J.H. Breasted, Oriental Forerunners of Byzantine Painting, Oriental Institute Publications 1 (Chicago, 1924). 2. The history of the discovery and early excavations of Dura-Europos has been told many times. See, e.g., M.I. Rostovtzeff, Dura-Europos and Its Art (Oxford, 1938); A.