Kufa, in Iraq, is one of the so-called “garrison cities” built to house the soldiers of the caliphate and their families in newly conquered territory. Like the other garrison cities, Kufa was built near existing settlements, during the reign of Umar and only 2 years after Muhammad’s death. Of the garrison cities, Kufa perhaps plays the biggest role in Islamic history, becoming a hotbed for what would become Shia Islam.
Samarra by Zohra Kolani
The city of Samarra was one of the most significant new cities built under the Abbasid caliphate. As the empire began to grow, the need to separate the Turkish troops from the everyday population, in addition to the growth and development of the original capital of Baghdad, led to the establishment of Samarra as the new capital of the empire.
The Propylaea (by Guo Wang)
Today, the Parthenon hogs all the glory on the Athenian Acropolis. Tourists flock to it every day, all but ignoring an equally-remarkable structure as they walk right through it. The Propylaea, part of Pericles’ grand construction plan, straddles the entrance to the Acropolis. Its construction was directed by Mnesikles, and began directly after the Parthenon was completed. Contemporary writers such as Pausanias and Demosthenes valued the Propylaea just as greatly as the Parthenon, naming it as one of Athens’ greatest monuments and going on at length about its marble roofs and gilt decorations.
Clearly, Mnesikles designed the Propylaea as more than a simple gatehouse – it was designed as a central hall with four wings projecting from it, two on each side. The building’s core consisted of a wide set of steps leading up to a gatewall, with its five openings of varying size. Interestingly, the threshold of the left-most entrance is much more worn than those of the other gateways. This strongly suggests that the other gates (three of which are larger and more centrally-located) were sealed off at some point (likely with doors, as evidence shows), with the left-most door left open as the only entrance. Taking this one step further, since the Acropolis was intended to double as fortified ground, the Propylaea was almost certainly intended to serve as the fully-sealable gate that barred access to the Acropolis in case the Athenian populace ever retreated there during a siege.
This utilitarian function does not explain why the Propylaea was so beautifully designed and well-decorated, however. For example, the Pinakotheke, the larger of the two constructed wings, was anything but a stark guardpost. It was suggested to be a hospitality area to accommodate pilgrims to the Acropolis, though others proposed that it was used as a formal banquet hall instead. Later on, it also displayed pictures within it, though that may not have been its original purpose. No matter whether the Pinakotheke served as a rest stop, a dining hall, or a gallery, it was almost certainly an ancillary component to the full structure, and is not indicative of its primary purpose.
The clue to the purpose of the Propylaea not only lies in its construction, but also in its location. An imposing structure such as this situated at the head of the Acropolis could hardly be missed from most points in the city, including the Agora to the northwest. In addition, it also lies at the end of the Panathenaic way, guarding the entrance to the most sacred ground in the region. Once a year, the Panathenaic Procession would pass down the Panathenaic way from the Dipylon Gate all the way to the Acropolis. Led by the wheeled ship bearing the robe of Athena (the peplos), the procession consisted of members of most walks of Athenian life: old generals, young athletes, women escorting the wheeled ship, metics (foreign residents in Athens) bearing gifts, and representatives from every deme in Attica. In Athens’ later imperial years, representatives from every allied state were also required to be present, bearing offerings. As the parade reached the foot of the Acropolis, the first of the offerings to Athena were made here, in the shadow of the towering Propylaea. Only citizens were permitted to pass beyond this, and escort the wheeled ship to the Erechtheion. Here, the Propylaea marked the boundary between the civil world of the city of Athens and the spiritual world of the Acropolis, in a suitably grand style.
The location of the Propylaea, in conjunction with the context of the historical environment in which it was built, gives us a real sense of what Propylaea was mainly designed to do. Yes, it was in essence a gate. But no gate needs to be so monumental and beautiful to fulfill its function of controlling access. Instead, we should consider it as part of Pericles’s grand construction project, which began soon after the Athenian victory over the Second Persian Invasion. Athens has just risen from its lowest point – the occupation and razing of the city – to its highest, after its singlehanded defeat of the force which brought the rest of the Hellenic world to its knees. Pericles’ building program was therefore symbolic of that bounce back from foreign destruction, stronger than ever. Like a phoenix rising from its own ashes, the Propylaea rose on top of an earlier structure (which served a similar function and was no doubt destroyed by the Persians) to light up the classical skyline. To Athenian citizens, this fortress of white marble and glowing bronze stokes the fires of patriotism in the grandest display of power the city has seen yet. To foreigners, including the “allies” of the Delian League, the same sight asserts the political, economic, and military might of Athens. No matter who stands at the foot of the Propylaea, gazing up in wonder, Mnesikles is sending a clear message: Athens has risen from its ashes stronger than it has ever been.
Things and people
Migrants do not just travel; they also carry stuff or use objects to travel on; they do that today and they did so in the past. Ships are the obvious case in point but not all migrants travel light either…
This raises critical questions about the relationships between people and their material culture. This week’s class explored notions such as ‘Thing Theory’ and other key concepts put forward by thinkers like Bruno Latour and Daniel Miller.
Networking Archaeology
This week was dedicated to a major upcoming theme in Archaeology, which is networks, more properly spelled out as Social Networks Analysis or SNA. We read and discussed key paper by Carl Knappett and Tom Brughmans, which both provide generic overviews, before we turned to Irad Malkin’s A Small Greek World. (CUP, 2011).
While the connections between networks and migration seems all too obvious in the case of the ancient Greek colonial world, we struggled to pinpoint how and where such links may be made. Another case study discussed concerned ancient road systems, which we examined in Roman Egypt and in late Roman Andalusia (Spain) through papers by Gates-Foster and Isaksen.
In the end, we remain to be convinced of the usefulness of networks for studying migrants, although we may come back to them.
Using concept maps to discuss Mycenaean collapse
by Grace Cinderella
Our in-class workshop on Friday, February 7th 2014 focused on the explanations of the Mycenaean collapse. After reading literature pertaining to theories of Mycenaean collapse, each group made concept maps to visualize the relationships among the factors that they deemed the most important.
Historically, when we say “Mycenaen collapse,” we refer to the destruction of several of the more populated palaces in the region circa 1200 BCE. The aftermath of this included severely reduced literacy (and the loss of Linear B, the written language of Mycenaean administration), interrupted trade routes, a much smaller population, and an end (or severe weakening of) the palatial system. “Mycenaean society” itself did not perish at this time, however. A much less populated Mycenae continued to subsist, if not thrive, until the (likely accidental) Granary fire of around 1100 BCE.
My group’s concept map divided the factors we saw troubling for the Mycenaean civilization into three main categories: internal/societal struggles, external conflict, and the ancient Greek environment. In the “internal” category, we included an idea that kept recurring in the readings. This was the argument that the Mycenaean society had become overly complex and the political system was thus too large, inefficient and bureaucracy-heavy. Conant’s “Citadel to City-State, the Transformation of Greece” in particular stressed the argument that the palatial system had started as merely a means for farmers to store their surpluses. As the populations, territories, and bureaucracy of the government expanded, the palatial system did not adapt sufficiently. The already stressed administration was unable to deal with issues it may have otherwise been able to solve (or at least endure). This argument appealed to our group as a holistic approach to the collapse. Our general idea was that this burdensome bureaucracy was the root of the problem; the other struggles that arose (whatever they might have been) were each exacerbated or caused by the failing administrative system.
Another point that we found critical to the collapse was the idea of ecocide. This theory states that as civilizations grow and become more complex they cause environmental degradation, which in turn can bring an entire civilization to its end. The expansion and large populations of the Mycenaean states would have meant increasing demands from the agricultural industry (which was the base of the palatial system’s power, as they had no currency). The resulting erosion of top soil, salinization of groundwater, and soil fatigue could have easily caused famine and social unrest.
Finally, a key idea is that the Mycenaean collapse was not unique. Several surrounding civilizations exhibited signs of struggle at this time. This led some scholars to suggest that a series of natural disasters (e.g..”Earthquake Storm”), felt throughout the area, could have contributed to the Mycenaean collapse. Earthquakes are common in this area so this seems likely. One could argue that since they are common, these civilizations ought to have been able to deal with them. However, if one follows the overtaxed political system theory, it seems likely that such a crisis could have been the end of an already struggling system.
All three groups read the same papers on the collapse, yet we had slightly different takes on what actually may have caused it. Group 1 seemed to focus on the “external factors” like wars and raids that would have weakened the Mycenaeans. Our perception of the Mycenaeans from surviving works of art and classical pieces is that they were often often at war, or at least had several types of daggers and ornamentations associated with fighting. Group 2 favored the concept of ecocide of growingly complex societies. One interesting aspect of the discussion is that we all seemed to agree on what could have possibly happened but there was some debate about the relevance of each issue. Different groups had different opinions on what may have been the root of the Mycenaean issue.
I personally had never used a website to make a concept map before this assignment. One aspect that I appreciated is that (with wisemapping.com) I was able to make my group members (Gabrielle, Guo, Abigail, and Logan) contributors to the map. This way they were able to view it throughout the process and make changes to it. I think this facilitated our collaborated effort, especially since we at no point met in person to work on this is the same room. Our discussion was fully online. I also liked that I was able to draw relationship arrows between points in different categories to show when we thought the ideas were closely related.
Prehistoric Migrations
Snow, sleet, hail and slippery roads notwithstanding, the whole class was present to discuss migrations in prehistory. We had read the introductory chapter of Gordon Childe’s Prehistoric Migrations in Europe (1950) and discussed his views on culture, cultural change and migration, which he sets out with remarkable clarity of argument. We were then treated to a guest lecture by JIAAW graduate Tom Leppard, who explained how paleontological evidence and biogeographical theories can be used to gauge the level of intensity and impact of early prehistoric migrations of Mediterranean islands, without actually having to find the precise sites, where these early hominins and hominids stayed and worked.
Tom’s lecture and Leach et al.’s paper on ‘the Lady of York’ (Antiquity 2010) led to a discussion of how new theories and techniques (e.g. dna and isotope analysis) from other disciplines may or had better not be used to investigate ancient migration.
Early Cycladic Figurines
By Gaby Hick
This week in class we focused on the sculptures found in the Cycladic Islands of the southern Aegean: the collection of art known as Early Cycladic figures. After reading several analyses that hypothesize about the figures’ form, context, and overall meaning, we discussed in our small group sections our observations and our own theories about the works. Why are there a vast number of figures understood to be female, and so few depictions of the male form? Perhaps, as was suggested in my section, women had a significant role in the mourning rituals during the Early Cycladic era, a view supported by the vast majority of the figures found in graveyards. Why, of the five figures depicting red lines on the face, are four significantly larger in size? We discussed in my section that, if the red lines are meant to be a pictorial representation of the historically controversial practice of women scratching their cheeks until they bleed as a symbol of grief, perhaps the larger figures depict more important women. Maybe we are analyzing sculptures of dead queens.
Despite the significant guesswork about the figures and the role they would have played in the early Cycladic culture, it is almost impossible to prove any of these theories, considering the lack of writing from the time period. But the very existence of the sculptures does indicate certain possibilities about the Cycladic culture: some kind of social stratification, some kind of necessity or desire to depict the human form, an artistic cohesion across the islands, a society peaceful and economically stable enough to enable the creation of art and sculpture. Even though we may never be completely certain why and for what purpose the figures were made in the Early Cycladic time, their influence on our modern artistic aesthetics is definitive. Nowadays we would classify the figures’ design as minimalist: a stripped down delineation of form, dependent on geometric stability rather than ornamentation. The artistic influence of the figures on modern sculpture is apparent in, for example, the sculpture of Amedeo Modigliani and Constantin Brâncuşi. Modigliani’s “Woman’s Head” of 1912 is an abstracted, elongated form that recalls the facial features visible on the Cycladic figures. Brâncuşi’s “The Kiss” from 1916 evokes the consistent feature of the sculptures in the position of the arms, although it presents two figures in an embrace rather than an individual. The consistent abstract and minimalist portrayal of individuals is, however, what unifies the aesthetic style of these works, be they from thousands of years before our time or a little over one hundred years ago. Or, one could simply say that, since we have been able, art is about the expression of the self. Humans have been depicting the human form since they have been able to use the power of art as a form of expression.
Amedeo Modigliani.
Constantin Brâncuşi.
This class was the first time I encountered the Cycladic figures, despite having already learned about the art they’ve influenced. For a reason I can’t quite completely explain, the figures make me sad in some way, perhaps because they meant so much to an entire culture and we don’t know why they decided to make them. Were they depictions of the dead – objects made out of grief and sorrow? Were they representations of life, carried through time until they found their way into graves? Were they objects of ritual – dark and powerful talismans? I don’t know. Although we discovered these artifacts that once belonged to people who must have had some of the same fears and dreams and loves we did, the people of these figures seem so far away. I advocate for the continued investigation into what the figures meant to the cultures that made them, so we can find out what they mean to us.
One peculiar feature appearing on almost all of the Cycladic figures is the pose of the crossed arms. Some argued that this pose was meant to represent the crossed arms of a corpse. Some say it was an ingenious decision by the designers to keep the arms intact. Others looked at the arms and imagined a mother cradling a child. When I look at the figures and their arms, I imagine them holding their secrets inside of themselves, safe and strong.
Conceptualizing Migration
What is migration, how can we define it and most of all how can we approach it? These were the key questions pursued in the second seminar. Broad-sweep discussions of ‘migration in world history’ were found to be less than helpful, eve if they do recognize and demonstrate that migration is a phenomenon of all times and all places. As a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, migration is most usefully approached through a range of disciplines as Brettell and Hollifield’s book on Migration Theory (2008) argues and demonstrates.
While archaeology, material culture studies and the past are notably absent from the disciplines covered, we explored how the ancient Mediterranean similarly offers abundant evidence for complex perceptions, representations and activities. The abundant archaeological evidence and rich literary accounts of Greek colonization make this field particularly suited for exploration in this regard – we started by examining Carol Dougherty’s (1993) claim that it is murder to found a colony!
For a most interesting archaeological approach to migration, we turned to Jason De León’s studies of undocumented migrants in the Arizonan deserts (http://undocumentedmigrationproject.com/).
Why should one take a class on Greek Archaeology?
I have asked archaeology concentrators and non-concentrators to comment on why should a student take a Greek Archaeology class? What does one hope to take away from such a course and how learning about the Greek past is relevant to our students’ lives? Tom and Sophie are taking the class this Spring and share their thoughts.
Tom Pettengill:
Every academic subject has something unique to offer, and archaeology is no exception. Studying archaeology challenges you to look beyond what you see and urges you to make connections to see the bigger picture – to go beyond merely memorizing details. It forces you to look at objects or events not only from your perspective, but from the perspectives of those who created, used, and experienced it. You learn to ask why and how, but you also learn to imagine the lives and stories behind things that are now past their time. Archaeology teaches you how to analyze, but it also teaches you to use your imagination and to recreate a world that once was. For me, studying Greek archaeology will allow me to pursue all of the important benefits of archaeology, all the while learning about one of the most influential and interesting ancient cultures of all time.
(http://www.ely.anglican.org/education/schools/collective_worship/ideas/Epiphany5A.html)
The image I chose is the lighthouse of Alexandria. I took a course on Egyptology last semester, and this is one monument that really stuck in my mind. It depicts the melding of both Roman and Egyptian cultures and was a major landmark of the city. It demonstrates a civilization’s ability to grow and innovate into a more complex society. Also, lighthouses (to me anyway) have always symbolized a sort of mystery, knowledge, and fortitude – something that I’m sure we will all find within this class!
Sophie Cohen:
Homer’s tales, Plato’s teaching, Phidias’s architectural feats are just a few of the many notable examples from the Greek past. As an archaeology concentrator, a class on archaeologies of Greece is imperative. Looking at the history of archaeology, it is hard to ignore this awe-inspiring branch of Classical Archaeology that has captured the minds of scholars, artists, poets, and authors alike. Not only are the civilizations and cultures of the Greek past still admired today, but also they were respected in their time as some of the most advanced and well connected people. Some civilizations like the Mycenaeans had elaborate fortifications and burial sites while others like the Minoans had strong seafaring capabilities and far-reaching trade routes. Regardless of what their strengths were, they solidified themselves as powerful and influential people in their respective times.
As Brown students, we are constantly presented with architecture, sculpture, and customs in our lives that are influenced by these ancient civilizations. Whether it is the columns on some of our university’s buildings, or the upcoming Olympics, we are reminded of the archaeologies of the Greek past every day. Furthermore, a good archaeologist should not be exclusive – not choosing to study Greek history, in my opinion, would give an archaeologist an incomplete depiction of archaeology as a whole.
(http://www.ancient.eu.com/article/390/)
This picture shows a Minoan fresco found in the palace of Knossos. This further illustrates their seafaring ways and their knowledge of the Mediterranean aquatic life. The immense detail of this piece gives us, as archaeologists and students, a glimpse of the lavish palace and its artistic style.
If you want to visit the original post and read the comments on the entry, visit: http://blogs.brown.edu/arch-0420-2014-spring-s01/2014/01/27/why-should-one-take-a-class-on-greek-archaeology/