神圣景观中的城市仪式

Christina G. Williamson
{"title":"神圣景观中的城市仪式","authors":"Christina G. Williamson","doi":"10.1163/9789004461277_008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this book, I have asked the question why autochthonous, local or regional sanctuaries were so vital to the development of poleis in Hellenistic Asia Minor even though they were located at great distances from the urban center. Although I have focused this research on a few case studies, the phenomenon was fairly common, as discussed in the introduction with the list of cities whose major sanctuaries were situated at a distance, sometimes even in faraway places (Table 1.1). In examining current approaches from archaeological and historical studies, it soon becomes apparent that available models are tailored to answer very different questions, regarding either the rural setting of urban sanctuaries in the context of Archaic and Classical Greece, or the degree of autonomy and economic, social or political dimensions of sanctuaries in Asia Minor. While both approaches have informed the framework of analysis applied here, they nonetheless leave a gap in interpreting the urban roles of major sanctuaries in the chora of poleis in Hellenistic Asia Minor, particularly regarding the dynamics of change that many of these local or regional shrines underwent as they were drawn into the orbit of the polis to become its primary sanctuary. The difference between the two main approaches lies not only in the nature of the disciplines of archaeology and history, but also in the different kinds of material or epigraphic data. I have attempted a synthesis, but have also noticed that the major studies in this area are largely informed by dualistic paradigms, with core-periphery, urban-rural, civilized-wild, and even Greek-non-Greek polarities that are more reflective of modern concerns than ancient realities. Since such biases will inevitably steer the results, I took a step back to look to other disciplines in order to gain a broader perspective on some of the fundamental issues at hand. Perceptions of space and landscape, ritual, cross-community contact, and identity are often taken at face value in studies of antiquity, yet are central concerns to the cognitive, social and spatial sciences. These disciplines help problematize these issues from very different angles, even if they require some tweaking before being applicable to the ancient world. This current study incorporates relevant issues drawn from these various approaches that should be taken into account. The resulting framework of analysis, discussed in Chapter 2, provides a holistic tool that can help assess the multifarious contexts of sanctuaries in Asia Minor in the Hellenistic period. No two sanctuaries were alike, nor were their relationships with their","PeriodicalId":351732,"journal":{"name":"Urban Rituals in Sacred Landscapes in Hellenistic Asia Minor","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Urban Rituals in Sacred Landscapes\",\"authors\":\"Christina G. Williamson\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/9789004461277_008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this book, I have asked the question why autochthonous, local or regional sanctuaries were so vital to the development of poleis in Hellenistic Asia Minor even though they were located at great distances from the urban center. Although I have focused this research on a few case studies, the phenomenon was fairly common, as discussed in the introduction with the list of cities whose major sanctuaries were situated at a distance, sometimes even in faraway places (Table 1.1). In examining current approaches from archaeological and historical studies, it soon becomes apparent that available models are tailored to answer very different questions, regarding either the rural setting of urban sanctuaries in the context of Archaic and Classical Greece, or the degree of autonomy and economic, social or political dimensions of sanctuaries in Asia Minor. While both approaches have informed the framework of analysis applied here, they nonetheless leave a gap in interpreting the urban roles of major sanctuaries in the chora of poleis in Hellenistic Asia Minor, particularly regarding the dynamics of change that many of these local or regional shrines underwent as they were drawn into the orbit of the polis to become its primary sanctuary. The difference between the two main approaches lies not only in the nature of the disciplines of archaeology and history, but also in the different kinds of material or epigraphic data. I have attempted a synthesis, but have also noticed that the major studies in this area are largely informed by dualistic paradigms, with core-periphery, urban-rural, civilized-wild, and even Greek-non-Greek polarities that are more reflective of modern concerns than ancient realities. Since such biases will inevitably steer the results, I took a step back to look to other disciplines in order to gain a broader perspective on some of the fundamental issues at hand. Perceptions of space and landscape, ritual, cross-community contact, and identity are often taken at face value in studies of antiquity, yet are central concerns to the cognitive, social and spatial sciences. These disciplines help problematize these issues from very different angles, even if they require some tweaking before being applicable to the ancient world. This current study incorporates relevant issues drawn from these various approaches that should be taken into account. The resulting framework of analysis, discussed in Chapter 2, provides a holistic tool that can help assess the multifarious contexts of sanctuaries in Asia Minor in the Hellenistic period. No two sanctuaries were alike, nor were their relationships with their\",\"PeriodicalId\":351732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urban Rituals in Sacred Landscapes in Hellenistic Asia Minor\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urban Rituals in Sacred Landscapes in Hellenistic Asia Minor\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004461277_008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Rituals in Sacred Landscapes in Hellenistic Asia Minor","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004461277_008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这本书中,我提出了一个问题,为什么在希腊化的小亚细亚,本土的、当地的或区域性的避难所对城市的发展如此重要,尽管它们离城市中心很远。虽然我的研究集中在几个案例研究上,但这种现象相当普遍,正如引言中所讨论的,这些城市的主要避难所位于很远的地方,有时甚至在很远的地方(表1.1)。在考察考古和历史研究的当前方法时,很快就会发现,现有的模型是为回答非常不同的问题而量身定制的,这些问题要么是关于古代和古典希腊背景下城市避难所的农村环境,要么是关于小亚细亚避难所的自治程度和经济、社会或政治层面。虽然这两种方法都为本文应用的分析框架提供了信息,但它们在解释希腊化的小亚细亚城邦中主要圣殿的城市角色方面仍然存在差距,特别是关于许多这些地方或区域神殿在被纳入城邦轨道并成为其主要圣殿时所经历的变化动态。这两种主要方法的区别不仅在于考古学和历史学学科的性质,还在于材料或铭文资料的种类不同。我尝试了一个综合,但也注意到,这一领域的主要研究在很大程度上是由二元范式提供的,核心-边缘,城乡,文明-野生,甚至希腊-非希腊的两极,更多地反映了现代的担忧,而不是古代的现实。由于这样的偏见将不可避免地影响结果,我退一步去看其他学科,以便对手头的一些基本问题获得更广泛的视角。在古代研究中,对空间和景观、仪式、跨社区接触和身份的感知往往被视为表面价值,但却是认知、社会和空间科学的核心关注点。这些学科有助于从不同的角度解决这些问题,即使它们在适用于古代世界之前需要进行一些调整。目前的这项研究纳入了从这些不同方法中得出的有关问题,这些问题应予考虑。在第二章中讨论的分析框架提供了一个整体工具,可以帮助评估希腊化时期小亚细亚保护区的各种背景。没有两个圣所是一样的,它们之间的关系也不一样
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Urban Rituals in Sacred Landscapes
In this book, I have asked the question why autochthonous, local or regional sanctuaries were so vital to the development of poleis in Hellenistic Asia Minor even though they were located at great distances from the urban center. Although I have focused this research on a few case studies, the phenomenon was fairly common, as discussed in the introduction with the list of cities whose major sanctuaries were situated at a distance, sometimes even in faraway places (Table 1.1). In examining current approaches from archaeological and historical studies, it soon becomes apparent that available models are tailored to answer very different questions, regarding either the rural setting of urban sanctuaries in the context of Archaic and Classical Greece, or the degree of autonomy and economic, social or political dimensions of sanctuaries in Asia Minor. While both approaches have informed the framework of analysis applied here, they nonetheless leave a gap in interpreting the urban roles of major sanctuaries in the chora of poleis in Hellenistic Asia Minor, particularly regarding the dynamics of change that many of these local or regional shrines underwent as they were drawn into the orbit of the polis to become its primary sanctuary. The difference between the two main approaches lies not only in the nature of the disciplines of archaeology and history, but also in the different kinds of material or epigraphic data. I have attempted a synthesis, but have also noticed that the major studies in this area are largely informed by dualistic paradigms, with core-periphery, urban-rural, civilized-wild, and even Greek-non-Greek polarities that are more reflective of modern concerns than ancient realities. Since such biases will inevitably steer the results, I took a step back to look to other disciplines in order to gain a broader perspective on some of the fundamental issues at hand. Perceptions of space and landscape, ritual, cross-community contact, and identity are often taken at face value in studies of antiquity, yet are central concerns to the cognitive, social and spatial sciences. These disciplines help problematize these issues from very different angles, even if they require some tweaking before being applicable to the ancient world. This current study incorporates relevant issues drawn from these various approaches that should be taken into account. The resulting framework of analysis, discussed in Chapter 2, provides a holistic tool that can help assess the multifarious contexts of sanctuaries in Asia Minor in the Hellenistic period. No two sanctuaries were alike, nor were their relationships with their
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信