Classical Studies
http://hdl.handle.net/10012/9872
2024-03-29T11:45:02ZPhantoms of the Sea: Phokaian Colonies of the Far Western Mediterranean
http://hdl.handle.net/10012/18971
Phantoms of the Sea: Phokaian Colonies of the Far Western Mediterranean
Chen, Stone
Phokaian settlement and expansion in the western Mediterranean constitute an integral and distinctive part of the broader phenomenon of Greek colonization in the Archaic period, yet many aspects of Phokaian colonization in this region remain relatively understudied. In particular, the question of exceptionality continues to attract debate and controversy: did the colonial practices of the Phokaians in the west significantly differ from all other Greek metropoleis? This thesis looks first and foremost at the conceptual problem of applying colonial terminologies, shaped by the early modern experience, to the ancient phenomenon. A fresh analysis of the problem suggests that their usage is still advised, though with caution and acknowledgement of their inherent vulnerability to be misused and misunderstood. Next, a general survey of Phokaia and its history of colonial endeavours is followed by case studies of two of the most important Phokaian sites: Massalia and Velia. Through a close analysis of both literary accounts (e.g., founding legends) and archaeological evidence, it is possible to delineate a clearer picture of the process of foundation and identify a more coherent paradigm of conflicts, interactions, adoptions, and exchanges between the Phokaians and their indigenous neighbours. In doing so, the question of Phokaian exceptionality is rendered partially irrelevant owing to the observation that commonality and uniqueness were simultaneously present both among Phokaian colonies and between Phokaian and other Greek settlements.
2022-12-20T00:00:00ZFemale Sex-Workers in Rome: Agency and Self-Representation
http://hdl.handle.net/10012/18908
Female Sex-Workers in Rome: Agency and Self-Representation
Hill, Rachel Esther Fey
This project addresses the notion that female sex-workers at Rome wore the toga. The toga was a symbol of masculine responsibility, authority, political involvement, and citizenship. Focusing on legal, literary, and material evidence from Rome’s late Republic to early Imperial period, this investigation primarily uses an intersectional feminist lens to examine the ways in which female sex-workers exercised agency. We examine first the legal climate in which sex-worker and clothing existed during this period, and discuss avenues of agency available to sex-workers in the realm of Rome’s legal constraints. We also consider the Ars Amatoria and other Latin literary sources for evidence of the toga as a symbol which changes meaning based on its wearer, and the wearer as being perceived differently based on their clothing. In the literature we encounter diametrically opposed archetypes of matron and whore, and understand that sex-workers were able to manage their appearance and behaviour agentively to defy or align themselves with these identities. Finally, the Lupanar, or Purpose-Built Brothel of Pompeii will be examined as well, since it boasts an enormous amount of evidence for a sex-worker’s daily life, and through graffiti demonstrates evidence of self-narration, reclamation of identity and sexual agency. We conclude by discussing how toga-wearing asserted personal identity, action, and group affiliation, and is therefore consistent with other agentive avenues used by sex-workers.
2022-10-31T00:00:00ZDynamis in Rome? Revisiting the South Frieze of the Ara Pacis Augustae
http://hdl.handle.net/10012/18883
Dynamis in Rome? Revisiting the South Frieze of the Ara Pacis Augustae
Coskun, Altay; Stern, Gaius
The Senate voted to build the Ara Pacis to welcome home Augustus after restoring order in the western provinces, while Agrippa pursued a similar mission in the East. Agrippa had settled the turmoil in the Bosporus by arranging for Queen Dynamis to marry King Polemon of Pontos, thereby uniting the two realms. Brian Rose (1990) explained that two boys on the Ara Pacis who do not wear togas are foreign princes in Rome in 13 BC exactly when Augustus and Agrippa returned from their foreign tours. Rose considered the older boy on the south frieze an eastern prince, probably Aspurgos, the future king of the Bosporus. He speculated that Queen Dynamis had come to Rome with Agrippa, and that she is the woman who puts her hand on the boy’s head. Rose exposed the frailty of Giuseppe Moretti’s theory, who regarded the two boys as Gaius and Lucius Caesar dressed as Trojans. We agree with Ann
Kuttner, Gaius Stern, John Pollini, Ilaria Romeo that the boys are barbarians, not Romans, but
cannot accept the identifications with Dynamis and Aspurgos, (1) on prosopographical lines,
because the placement of Dynamis on the Ara Pacis relies upon identifying her as the mother
of Aspurgos, which claim the ancient sources do not support; (2) on practical terms, since
Dynamis should have stayed in her kingdom to help Polemon consolidate his new throne (not
speculation but positive evidence would be needed to counter this view); (3) iconographical ly, as the woman on the Ara Pacis does not closely resemble the image of Dynamis; (4) be cause Dynamis was a mature, middle-aged queen by 13 BC, as her portrait on two gold staters indicate, whereas the Ara Pacis teenager is far too young. She is actually Agrippa’s least famous daughter, wearing not a diadem, but a brill appropriate for a Roman teenage girl close to marrying age. Her hand is resting on the head of a Parthian prince, a ‘guest’ in Rome, hosted by the family of Agrippa.
2020-12-01T00:00:00ZDeiotaros Philorhomaios, Pontos und Kolchis
http://hdl.handle.net/10012/18882
Deiotaros Philorhomaios, Pontos und Kolchis
Coskun, Altay
Towards the end of the Third Mithradatic War (64 BC), Pompey promoted the Tolistobogian tetrarch Deiotaros to become the
most powerful king of Asia Minor. Strabo describes his new territories as follows (Geogr.
12.3.13 [547C]): ‘the other (part of the Gadilonitis) Pompey gave to Deiotaros, such as the
areas around Pharnakeia and Trapezus, up to Kolchis and Armenia Minor (μέχρι Κολχίδος
καὶ τῆς μικρᾶς ᾿Αρμενίας)’. One can precisely specify these territories. A first argument addresses the chora of the exclave Amisos, which was likely limited by the Iris River before
Actium. A second argument suggests that there was a land bridge between Galatia and the
Gadilonitis along the Halys, as well as an inland connection between the latter and the major
parts of the Pontic realm. Scholars are divided regarding the meaning of μέχρι: most consider
it exclusive, assuming that Kolchis never belonged to Deiotaros’ kingdom (where Pompey
appointed a certain Aristarchos), whereas Armenia Minor was supposedly given to him only
later in 59 BC. Others try to overcome the difficulties by emending the text to μέχρι Κολχίδος
καὶ τ<ὴν> μικρ<ὰν> ᾿Αρμενία<ν>, thus accepting Armenia Minor as granted by Pompey,
while denying Kolchis. However, neither solution is convincing, because a comparison with
the description of the territories conquered by Mithradates VI Eupator (Geogr. 12.3.1 [541C])
or granted to Polemon I and Pythodoris (Geogr. 11.2.18 [499C]) firmly proves that Strabo
considered Kolchis a part of Deiotaros’ assignment. The Galatian king hence appears to have
held at least a supervisory function over Kolchis, possibly resulting in some tension with
Aristarchos. The latter’s role as a vassal was probably like that of the Tektosagian Kastor Tar kondarios, the Trokmian Brogitaros and the Paphlagonian dynasts Pylaimenes and Attalos.
2020-12-01T00:00:00Z