Discussion Forum: Quiz 1
Patroklos on Tue Jan 26 22:43:17 1999 wrote:
Good rally, everyone! Thanks for everyone's input. I'll be more involved next time.
Azriel on Tue Jan 26 11:34:02 1999 wrote:
Does anyone happen to know the exact tapering dimensions of a proper Doric column?
Is it a 12:7 ratio (bottom:top)? That seems to ring a bell for some reason.
Bacchus on Tue Jan 26 10:25:43 1999 wrote:
#1,1
Polis is a state or small size, due to the fact that political particularim was common because of:(1) natural division of the country into many seperate districts, islands, and penisulas (2) further division into tribes, and with religion additional division into local cults. Several hundred Poleis existed, and their territory included both town and country with citizens living in both. However, the government of the state was concentrated in the town. The Polis was identical to the totality of its citizens, and the name of a polis infact came from its citizens, not from the territory. Citizens were the ruling class. To be a citizen meant: male, 18+, and born of a citizen. But it also meant adherence to the cults of the gods of that polis, military and economic service, and obedience of the laws.
Liberty, autonomy and autarky were the ideals of the polis. Moreover, the chief claim was to be ruled by law. The government was generally carried out by three bodies: Assembly; Council; and magistracies. Athenian democracy reached (went beyond?) the highest standard of the polis. In the end, however, the sheer number of independent and self-centered States was the chief reason for the endless wars, and the weakness of any form of pan-Hellenism.
Astyóóthe urban nucleus of a polis
Akropolis--the citadel of the polis
Kome and Chorion--agricultural centers of a polis
Demos--the entire male citizenry, elected its governing officials
(for all those crammers, this is an excellent question and I look forward to seeing it on the quiz.)
Aristophanes on Tue Jan 26 01:48:15 1999 wrote:
Concerning the public education question, I think that participation as a juror in the lawcourts constituted a form of public education. Also, performances of drama in the theater of Dionysos were part of a public education; both comedy and tragedy often dealt with problems facing the citizen and the state.
Patroklos on Tue Jan 26 01:45:47 1999 wrote:
I took Greek 20: The Iliad last term, so I have studied Homer fairly intensely. There is much debate over how the epics were composed; however, it is almost certain that there was a definite form for them. When Homer (or whoever) composed them, there was no cannon for what to include, but once composed and written down I'm pretty certain that they did not change significantly. They are indeed quite formulaic, which made them easier to memorize. Poets like Homer could recite stories many different ways by improvising as they sang, relying on the formulaic phrases they used to keep them within the all important meter of the poetry.
Sorry to just go off on this, but this is something I know fairly well :)
Xenophon on Tue Jan 26 00:54:35 1999 wrote:
I'm just wondering whether someone perhaps read a line somewhere stating that this was what public education in Classical Athens was like... As for memorizing Homer as an act of education- most of Homer is extremely formulaic. The intro to the translation I read (I think it was Fagles) stated that there was no official canon to what the Odyssey or the Illiad contained, hence each bard could recite what he pleased as long as it fit within certain limits of content and style.
Aphrodite on Tue Jan 26 00:47:46 1999 wrote:
that all sounds good to me...but I'm not sure whether or not that's an official public education. Certainly the folks who went around reciting Homer were educated in some way to be able to memorize all of it. I would say that the mythology counts as public education since almost every monument and piece of art incorporates mythological themes.
Aphrodite on Tue Jan 26 00:44:24 1999 wrote:
In response to Xerxes' question on Sunday about far away gov't buildings, the Ekklesias met in 3 different places: the Pnyx, the Theater of Dionysis, and **a theater in Piraeas (that would be at least one far away gov't building...)
Xenophon on Tue Jan 26 00:39:38 1999 wrote:
Could shared common experiences as a member of the political life of Athens (military service, attending the assembly, etc...) constitute a "public education?" Could one argue that the public displayes of mythology, history, legal and governmental decisions through sculptures, buildings, inscriptions constituted a "public education?" Finally, does anyone know off-hand to what extent the recitation of Homer was practiced in this period? My understanding from what I have read on the subject that the general dissemanation of the tales of Homer created a common cultural/ educational reference point of Greeks. Can anyone help on this matter?
meriones on Tue Jan 26 00:20:51 1999 wrote:
In response to Aphrodite, the inscriptions put in retrograde expressly for the Spartans were not on boundary markers but on a funerary monument commemorating the fallen Spartan soldiers buried in the cemetery along the road entering Athens. Presumably the Spartans were the ones coming from outside the city, and so these inscriptions targeted them (although many other people, including Athenians at times) would also be entering the city.
Also, I think slave manumissions were private inscriptions on public display; i.e., like tombstones, they involve private citizens, but are on display to be read by the general public. The same can be said of other inscriptions which we called private, such as artist signatures....
Patroklos on Tue Jan 26 00:16:37 1999 wrote:
The boundary markers of the Agora were written right to left and left to right depending on their position- the text showed the boundary side of the marker. The text that was written for the Spartans, who would first see it coming into the city, was on the memorial stone showing the names of the soldiers in the Spartan garrison of Athens who had been killed by the Athenians
Aphrodite on Tue Jan 26 00:08:12 1999 wrote:
In class today, Prof Rutter said that the boundary markers of the Agora may have been right to left for the Spartans, but no one lives in the Agora, so the first encounter ANYONE had with the boundary markers would have been on the way in, no? Or were those boundary markers of Athens, and I'm just missing something?
Aphrodite on Tue Jan 26 00:01:50 1999 wrote:
i agree that the answers will definitely NOT take half an hour, but i think the point may be to make your answers as thorough as possible while fudging in extra little facts that you know about related topics. for example, in the ethos/pathos question, we could give examples of the temple of zeus, the niobid krater (athena, herakles and warriors with ethos on one side, and the death of niobe's children by diana and apollo as pathos on the other side), and the 12 labors of herakles (how he matures throughout his labors and gains experience--ethos v. his struggle to endure the labors and his exhaustion--pathos)
Aphrodite on Mon Jan 25 23:53:25 1999 wrote:
8.1
In my notes from 1/22, I have that slave freeing texts are private, but today we discussed the inscriptions of slave manumissions on the back of the stoa in Delphi. Obviously, either way they require literacy for effectiveness, but are slave manumissions public or private?
catherine on Mon Jan 25 23:23:41 1999 wrote:
In short, "ethos" is character as formed by inheritance, habit and self discipline. "Pathos" is a spontaneous reaction to experiences in the external world. Early classical artists were very concerned with representing these two qualities in their art, Pollit goes into it a lot with Polygnotos and the sculpture from the Temple at Olympia.
Is anyone else struggling with the fact that the answers they are coming up with for a lot of these questions are going to take a lot less time than a 1/2 hour to write? I'm starting to get a little concerned...
Xenophon on Mon Jan 25 23:06:07 1999 wrote:
In what basic ways does J. Ober differentiate the political organization of the Athenian radical democracy of the later 5th century B.C. from that of a modern democracy such as the American one? --- Without specifically mentioning the United States, Ober outlines several ways in which the two styles of democracy differ. The prominent ones include the distinctions drawn in modern democracy between the state, the citizenry, and the government whereas such distinctions were either blurred or altogether non-existant in Athenian democracy. A second major distinction includes the presence of elections and electoral processes in modern, representative government. To quote Ober, "most government officials were selected by lot." Furthermore, governmental posts were annual, collegiate, and "subject to judicial scrutiny." [In light of the advent of the Ind. Council perhaps some closer similarities in this regard could be discerned.] The final two major differences concerns the determination of citizenship and the rights/ responsibilities citizenship entailed. Whereas the modern liberal ideal grants citizenship to all people, in Athens this was not the case due to the fact that foreigners and women were excluded. Citizenship was extended to "freeborn males of Athenian ancestry" only. With citizenship came the right [duty!] to participate in the political life of the polis through the Assembly or other institutions if chosen by lot (ex. the boule or juries). The idea of citizenship presupposed the willingness to subordinate oneself to the better of the state. This is notion that is perhaps rarely held by many Americans. Citizenship contained the notion of political equality- equality of any other sort was not to be expected.
Xenophon on Mon Jan 25 21:48:26 1999 wrote:
7.2: Does anyone have a good response for the Ober article?
Xenophon on Mon Jan 25 21:45:10 1999 wrote:
Sorry, I meant for the last couple of entries to be combined... Could someone distinguish between "ethos" and "pathos" for me?
Xenophon on Mon Jan 25 21:42:45 1999 wrote:
The answers for 4.1 should all be clear on the arch. terminology handout.
Xenophon on Mon Jan 25 21:36:56 1999 wrote:
We shouldn't be held responsible for 9.2 or 10.1/10.2, correct? We hadn't gotten to either of these if my memory serves...
BACCHUS on Mon Jan 25 21:35:27 1999 wrote:
to minerva, regarding 1.1, the polis as a state, and thus the kome and chorion are parts of that state...
Minerva on Mon Jan 25 21:23:07 1999 wrote:
#1.1
I am still mixed up with the kome and chorion. according to the class note, they are an agricultural village. Are they located outside of the polis?
Nausikaa on Mon Jan 25 18:56:51 1999 wrote:
#8-1 Citizens needed to read laws to be corrected or annulled by Assembly, to qualify if not override the power of the aristocracy with their literacy; to read lawsuits, death notices, decrees, treaties, mobilization orders posted at the Monument of the Eponymous Heroes; to read boundary markers; to prevent the abuse of the ostracism process (a required quorom of 6,000). There was the ever-present possibility of serving 1 yr. on civic committees to regulate trade, etc. and they therefore needed to know how to make and keep records. They also needed to identify their bronze allotment tokens which indicated their full title (name, dadís name, deme) and were reused in assigning jurors to courts.
Boys were educated by a tutor, or grammatisteis (?), but this did not constitute a public education. At 18, boys entered military training as ephebes. Can anyone shed some light on this aspect of the question or add to the above list?
Nausikaa on Mon Jan 25 16:29:35 1999 wrote:
#1-1 I defer to Politt on the use of the word "classical":
"Classical archaeology" = stylistic
"Classical pd. of Grk. arch." = historical
"Classical moment" = qualitative
Nausikaa on Mon Jan 25 08:22:51 1999 wrote:
#6-1 Also consider the fact that Polygnotos's painted wooden panels must have gone through some battering by time and by exposure to the elements in the centuries leading to Pausanias's commentary.
Aphrodite on Mon Jan 25 00:32:43 1999 wrote:
3.2 Another important archaeological aspect of the reconstruction is that the damage was so complete that the ruins could very readily be put to use in the walls.
Xenophon on Sun Jan 24 23:41:51 1999 wrote:
All I can figure out is that they immediately rebuilt the walls of the city and the walls of the Acropolis (using in a visible manner pieces of archaic sculpture), but they refused to rebuild the temples or to build anything on top of the destroyed temples. Is this what he is driving at or am I missing something?
---
Well, think about the situation... Your city has just gotten trashed, quite of few people- some, most likely, fairly prominent- got killed trying to defend the acropolis. The enemy still hasn't left Greece and is laying low in the north... The priority would be to get some defensive measures up ASAP. Hence the Themosticlean Walls. As for the religious structures, well, first they are property of the gods so they need to be treated with a degree of respect. Therefore they are buried. Second, you just don't toss up a little wooden temple to a god, you make an effort for it to look nice. Since all the good stuff- precious metals,etc..- was taken by those damned Persians, that means you have to wait to get money to get that stuff. Due to the fact that you are in a state of war, it may take some time before much the budget can be diverted to that type of construction. So, yes, the walls were rebuilt first and they waited on the temples.
catherine on Sun Jan 24 22:58:34 1999 wrote:
The problem with relying on vase painting to reconstruct the work of Polygnotos is that a vase has very different dimensions and a very different form than a huge wooden wall panel. A painter is looking to create two very different artistic solutions on objects that are so different. Though paintings on these two works can be stylistically similar I think you can only draw the comparison so far. The vases are a help in trying to figure out what poses in the wall paintings looked like, or how far Polygnotos came in creating depth through over-lapping and different ground planes.But they are certainly far from an exact replica.
I have a question about #3.2-
There are only a few significant things I can think of about the manner in which the Athenians initially rebuilt their city, but they really don't seem to make up a complete answer. All I can figure out is that they immediately rebuilt the walls of the city and the walls of the Acropolis (using in a visible manner pieces of archaic sculpture), but they refused to rebuild the temples or to build anything on top of the destroyed temples. Is this what he is driving at or am I missing something?
Minerva on Sun Jan 24 21:23:25 1999 wrote:
#6-1 reconstruction of the wall painting of Polygnotos:
There are mainly 2 sources to reconstruct the missing murals of the classical painters like Polygnotos.
One is Pausanius' guide to Greece. In this book, he describes those paintings very clearly: as Glynnis Fawkes refers in his web page, (i have posted it on the web page before) Pausanius describes the paintings in detail: he mentions who each figure is, and locates the figures in the paintings.
the other source is vase painting. one of the examples is the krater by Niobid painter. the painting on the vase can be explained by Pausanius description about one of Polygnotos painting. for example, the composition or the action of each figure is the same as those seen in the Polygnotos painting.( Pollit mentions this well. )
but i am not quite sure about the problems that these sources contain. i think one reason is that Pausanius did not mention the color very much, and according to Fawkes, P paid more attention to the mythological narrative than to stylistic elements. also in the class the prof. said something about the problems of the vase painting, but i could not catch it. is that something about the scale or dimension?
in the Fawkes' web page, he points out Etruscan tomb painting as the source of what the color of the greek paintings was like. but i am not quite sure if i can add this element to the important sources of the reconstruction.
anyone has more idea about the problems?
Minerva on Sun Jan 24 20:54:01 1999 wrote:
proposal:
how about mentioning the quiz number at first, which we are going to discuss here? i think it is easier to find the specific discussion, which we are looking for.
xerxes on Sun Jan 24 19:56:09 1999 wrote:
for question 7, the prison and the open meeting structures at the pnyx are government buildings immediately around the agora. can anyone tell me what government buildings are far from the agora?
Poseidon on Sun Jan 24 17:29:36 1999 wrote:
Quiz#5.2: First had to decide where in the temple they wanted architectural sculpture. This is a question of both cost and aesthetic appeal. Decided both pediments and only interior metopes would have sculpture. Second, they needed to decide on the material. Local shelly limestone was utilized in the building of the temple, but would not have served well for the sculptures. Marble was decided to be used for the entire sculpture, rather than just faces or hands as could have been done to save money. Chose marble from Paros becuase of its fine grain, warm white color and lustre, and quarries there were easily accessable from the sea. Sculptor had to be in Paros to choose the right blocks, and then begin the initial carvings so as to save money on the transportation of the marble blocks, as transportation costs were ten times greater than quarrying costs. Also by doing this initial carving, possible flaws in the blocks could be discovered before transporting them to Olympia. The sculptures must have been done by a team of sculptors led by one or two masters in order for the works to all have been completed between 468 and 456BC. The sculptors must also have been imported from Paros as since there was no local marble near Olympia, there would have been no local artisans capable of working in the marble medium. The subjects of the sculptures must have been decided based on the history of the region and of the god that was to be housed in the temple, so that the sculptors would have necessarily needed to consult with local leaders. Decided that the sculptures would depict Zeus and his children in situations that were appropriate for the region's history: Zeus presiding over the start of the race between Oenomaus and Pelops, Apollo aiding in the battle between Lapiths and Centaurs, and the twelve metopes of Heracles's labors aided by Athena and Hermes.
catherine on Sun Jan 24 17:14:15 1999 wrote:
An asty is the urban nucleus of a polis.It's significant because the common misconception is that a polis in itself is an urban entity (hence the translated term city-state). In actuality, some polis did not have an urban center and were made up of mostly kome, or small agricultural towns. Or at least that is what I wrote in my notes. I hope that helps!
Amphitrite on Sun Jan 24 16:41:58 1999 wrote:
In a lecture, Professor Rutter mentioned the connection between a wedding and the Olympic Games. Remember that the Heraion Games were also held in Olympia. Here women competed in the honor of Hera. The spectators of these games were unmarried males, attending the games to "check out" the females and find a wife. For the Olypic Games, unmarried females were allowed into the stadium (married females were not allowed in the stadium) to watch the males compete in the nude. Now it was the females' turn to "check out" the males.
I think this aspect of the sports competitions has something to do with the marriage theme connecting the east and west pediments. What does everybody else think?
Minerva on Sun Jan 24 15:23:46 1999 wrote:
quiz#3.1
To sum up, the difference b/w the late archaic sculpture and early classical sculpture is that the latter is more realistic? For example, the archaic kouros has the unreal stance. or while the classical statue shows more subtle expression ( severe, pout etc.) , the archaic one always has its peculiar smile.
Aphrodite and Meriones on Sun Jan 24 15:11:50 1999 wrote:
We think the demos is the citizen body of the polis (i.e. males over 18, born of Athenian parents), whereas the polis includes all people affected by that gov't (i.e. women, children, slaves, foreigners in the area, and dogs)
Oh, and what the heck is an "asty"?
We know the west pediment is a good contrast to the east pediment showing pathos, rather than ethos (not really since there's no emotion in the faces), and we know that the Battles of the Lapiths and the Centaurs represents man's triumph over bestiality, but is this particular story chosen simply b/c it shares the wedding theme with the e. pediment? and if so, what the hell does a wedding have to do with the olympic games and fair judgment?
please respond in either boustrophedon or stoichedon.
W
Meriones on Wed Jan 20 16:51:35 1999 wrote:
The distinctions drawn by Ober between the ancient Athenian democracy and that of modern America amount most simply to the extent of the average citizen's participation; while Americans participate only insofar as they choose (and can afford) to run for office or lobby politicians, the Classical Athenians were expected to participate. Each citizen was a member of the Assembly and a potential juror, and so while citizenship was certainly more restricted (to the sons of citizens, 18 and older), once a citizen, one was an active member of the democracy.
kalos Bert on Wed Jan 20 08:53:01 1999 wrote:
in agreement with Atalanta's posting about demos and polis, i think that demos means the group of people in the polis, and the polis is the physical/geographical place where they all live.
kalos Bert on Tue Jan 19 23:27:14 1999 wrote:
east ped. temple of zeus- i still don't think that just becuase pelops is pictured with a shield means that he didnt drive the chariot. prof. Rutter tried to convince me again after class today, and i still wasnt sold. my opinion is that the pediment depicts all the "players" in the story, and doesnt make any attempt to imply how the actual action of the event progressed.... none of them are doing any actions really, they are all just standing there. the action takes place AFTER the scene in the sculpture, right? cause they sure aint racing their chariots as depicted in the sculpture. besides, isnt oinoamaos holding a spear? well according to Rutter's argument, then oinomaos couldnt race the chariot either, because he's holding a spear! and this is obviously wrong. i think the shield is just to signify that the figure is pelops, b/c he is a warrior (along with no beard). even the several versions of the myth say that pelops drove the chariot, besides thats the whole point of the story, that pelops outraces oinomaos! yeah, Rutter has warned against inferring too much from the literary evidence, but still, the fact that pelops is carrying a shield in that scene just doesnt conclusively prove to me that he didnt drive the chariot. a minor point,... but i think maybe we should just say that the evidence is inconclusive instead of deciding from his shield that he didnt drive the chariot. any body got an opinion?
Aphrodite on Tue Jan 19 18:42:09 1999 wrote:
To reconstruct the east and west pediments, archaeologists may use literary references (i.e. Pausanius), the location of the statues on the ground when they were discovered (since they most likely fell in a similar order to that of their placement on the pediment), the size of the sculptures (although height makes a difference, one cannot tell right from left placement based on height), and positioning of the characters in art copies of sections of the pediments (the placement of Pelops next to Hippodameia with similar poses in a vase painting may indicate such placement on the pediment--if such a vase existed).
To identify the subjects, one can look for signs of age, actions (i.e. Theseus with the ax), or an attribute.
The problem with Pausanius' account of the east pediment is that we do not know whether he meant the viewer's right or the proper right when he referred to direction. He also misidentified at least one of the female figures as Myrtilos, so we do not know to what extent his accounts are accurate.
One further problem is in the portrayal of the myths. There are many different versions of the Oinomaos and Pelops myth, so reconstruction cannot be based on just any single version. Since the artist and the architect who designed the Temple of Zeus took into account the purpose for the Temple (to glorify Zeus as a fair and just judge and god) and the location (in Olympia, where the Olympic games were held--cheating had severe punishments), the myth had to be adjusted accordingly to suit the glorification of Zeus.
Aphrodite on Tue Jan 19 18:07:39 1999 wrote:
Going back to the "classical moment," this may be in reference to the characteristic great works from that time frame, both in art and in writing. For example, the completion or display of Praxitiles' sculptures or Polygnotos' paintings could be seen as classical moments both in their mastery and in the way they influenced the direction of art (in terms of copying).
Atalanta on Tue Jan 19 08:51:11 1999 wrote:
The most distinguishable elements of the Doric order are the columns and the the frieze course. Characterized by stout proportions and a plain capital, the doric column does not rest on a base; rather, it sits directly on the stylobate. The capital, comprised of the echinus and the abacus, does not have the ram's head design of its Ionic counterpart. The column tapers up towards the architrave (or epistyle), the space just below the frieze course. Rather than display a continuous frieze around the sides of the building, a Doric temple has triglyphs and metopes. The metopes are collectively a space in which different scenes may be etched in relief, sometimes all related to a common theme (such as the twelve labors of Herakles), and sometimes not. Guttae and Mutules are part of the frieze course and serve to separate the triglyphs and metopes from the cornice above, which is in turn made up of the geison and the raking geison (these frame the pediment), and the raking sima at the very top. The space from the Architrave to the cornice is collectively known as the Entablature. The entablature, the column, and the stylobate all rest atop the stereobate, or series of steps leading up to the temple.
Poseidon on Mon Jan 18 13:37:54 1999 wrote:
The major differences between the styles of sculpture are that Severe style moved towards depicting more movement and emotion, while trying to create a more realistic depiction of the subject as compared to the Archaic. Frontality is not rigid anymore, there is freer motion and more varied poses, musculature is depicted as masses rather than suggestive incisions, and there was an exploring of the effects of movement upon the appearance of these muscles. Female clothing similarly became more massive, and moved away from the symmetry and ornamentation of Archaic style. The face took on a 'pouting' expression with full lips, heavy chin, ridged eyes, and shorter but still elaborate hair. The Orientalizing look of the Archaic style was gone. According to Pollitt, Severe style explored emotion in a dramatic setting by relating more to the viewer than the Archaic. The characters seem to think and to be more animate, while instilling thought into the viewer as well. It was a move away from the Archaic search for universality of subjects. It seems to strive to show the individual Ethos of its subject. Rhythmos was also very important in the study of shape and pattern of a subject frozen from completing his actions, and is more natural and less diagrammatic than Archaic style. However, the Severe style was still not completely realistic in its depictions of form and movement.
atalanta on Mon Jan 18 13:35:13 1999 wrote:
I have from my notes that the 'demos' is a "political subdivision of the polis," and of the Athenian polis in particular. I am not sure what this means in the greater context of things, but I do think that the demos is more of the political unit within the geographical polis. But I think it is important to remember that, while the polis is defined as a group of independent people living within defined boundaries, these boundaries could remain through destruction and desertion by the people (as in the case of Athens, when it was sacked and when its people fled). The polis did not disappear after such destruction, which leads me to believe the heart of the definition of the term 'polis' lies both in the geographical location of the city-state and in the political and cultural aspects of its peoples; the demos is a political entity, whereas the polis is the whole package, if that makes sense.
Poseidon on Mon Jan 18 13:23:40 1999 wrote:
The Oath of Plataea was when Athenians and their allies supposedly swore to exact a tithe on all people that had surrendered to the Persians instead of resisting as Athens had done. Also they swore never to rebuild the temples on the Athenian Acropolis as a reminder to all the future of the impiety of the barbarians in 479BC.
Positive evidence= Acropolis temples were not rebuilt after the sack. In fact the walls of the city were rebuilt first, and then the walls of the Acropolis were repaired using some of the remains of the destroyed temples to be seen from the Agora below as a perpetual symbol of the Persian desecration of their city and gods. Also, the temple of Athena Polias was not rebuilt, but instead a new temple was built later with a porch looking out over the ruins of the old temple, to serve as a further reminder of this event.
Negative evidence= The sources are from authors writing hundreds of years later and many versions of the oath are significantly different. Some authors admit to the oath as being a fake and its use was for propaganda after the fact. And why would non-Athenians swear to something about the Athenian Acropolis?
Poseidon on Mon Jan 18 13:14:53 1999 wrote:
The capture and sacks of Athens in 480 and 479 B.C. was an historical point of sudden destruction in Athens that left the city's monuments and buildings competely destroyed. After this point, everything had to be rebuilt, and from the acrheaological remains, one can discover the startification line where the rubble remains of the sack can be dated to 479BC. Then all material that is discovered directly above this line would be dated as built later, and everything discovered below this line would be dated as built prior to the sack. Also, much of the sacred monuments and dedications were not reused, but ritually buried so that there is an abundance of finds from this two year period. This event is better for archeaologists than gradual decay of a city, as their was no chance for these objects to be torn down for use elsewhere or destroyed over time.
Poseidon on Mon Jan 18 13:11:33 1999 wrote:
Classical archaeology= study of physical remains of a civilization during a period in which it has been labeled the pinnacle of cultural advancement in that society.
Classical period of Greece= Between 480BC (sack of Athens) and 323BC (Alexander the Great's death after conquering vast territory). This was the period in which Greek culture achieved its greatest accomplishments and was led through most of this period by Athens.
Classical moment= Anyone have any ideas about this one?
Aphrodite on Thu Jan 14 01:05:58 1999 wrote:
I know this response is coming a few days after the fact, but I have in my notes that chorion and kome have something to do with being agricultural villages. Core (or however it's spelled) is a perennial flow of water. So, I'm wondering if perhaps chorion differs from demos in that chorion is a community in the agricultural sense whereas demos is a community in the political sense. But corrections on that are welcome!
Also, I'm still a little unclear on the meaning of asty.
black rabbit on Sun Jan 10 19:06:30 1999 wrote:
To get technical, kome is a Doric word which can mean an unwalled village, or a quarter, ward, or district and seems to be comparable to the Attic demos, when that word is taken to mean the outlying districts rather than the population. I think chorion must have a much more general sense, perhaps the geographical location of the city without the political baggage which comes with polis or demos. It can also refer to fortified posts and towns. Liddell and Scott also mentioned that when polis and asty are used together, polis refers to the "the body of citizens" while asty means "their dwellings". Interestingly, according to L & S, Athens called their acropolis the "polis" and the rest of the city "astu". I wonder if the more specific meanings of all these terms might not change significantly as they are used in different regions of Greece. What does everyone else think?
Artemis on Sun Jan 10 13:49:15 1999 wrote:
The polis of Athens contains more than just the urban area. It also includes the rural area that surrounds Athens. Remember that Athens lies within Attica.
Athens does have demes. It is divided into 10 demes or areas (geographically for a political reason--the demes replaced a kinship basis/requirement in the democracy) that sort of parallel modern voting districts. For example, a state is divided into districts, and representatives are elected from those districts. As in Athens, the polis (including the area beyond the city walls) is divided into districts or demes. However, representatives are not elected from each deme, but selected by lot to represent that deme in the senate (50 people, demoi, are chosen from each deme; thus, there are 500 people in the senate). Also worthy to note, a change in residence does not change your deme. ??? Makes me wonder. This is most likely due to the previous kinship qualification.
From my notes, I assume that a kome and chorion are similar, but I have a feeling that is incorrect. Anyone else?
single on Sat Jan 9 16:38:54 1999 wrote:
Does anyone know the difference between polis and demos? We're thinking that the boundaries constituting a polis is determined geographically-historically, while those of demes are determined politically. Then, could a polis like Athens contain demes?
Also, is there any differences between kome and chorion?
Copyright 1998, Trustees of Dartmouth College
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~grs22/forum/quiz1/discussion.html
Last updated 18 Dec 1998