托马斯·布里萨特(Thomas Brisart)。 Pp。 352,无花果19. Académie Royale de Belgique,布鲁塞尔,2011年。€25. ISBN 978-2-8031-0278-5(纸)。


本书的范围和论点广泛,肯定会引起人们对公元前七世纪东方化文物,风格和习俗的社会功能的兴趣和反思。希腊。布里萨特对东方化现象的理解提出了质疑,因为东方文化是不可避免地将希腊文化投降于地中海东部的刺激。在对早期城市国家的发展中社会的文物和实践进行语境分析的基础上,他构建了两个可操作的模型来论证:“orientalizing” was a carefully controlled strategic choice for the social distinction and self-definition of its users. Brisart is aware that this emerging world was tremendously variegated, and his analysis cannot account for the entirety of Greece or all the particular inflections of 东方化. He focuses instead 上 Athens, Argos, and Crete to demonstrate and apply his methodology. Other areas such as Sparta, the Cyclades, and the eastern Aegean are outside his purview, but this stimulating book should incite interest in revisiting areas that have yielded plenty of data but few interpretive studies.

Brisart谨慎地详细阐述了他所依据的分析类别和一般的社会政治框架。为了他的研究目的,他定义“art orientalisant”关于其图像和技术的文物“faisaient echo à l’une ou l’东方普罗旺斯传统手工艺,梅斯奎因’ont pas pour autant 帕鲁 东方... l’东方东方志’éVoquer les Culture Maté东方的普罗旺斯地区仪器公司” (58). The sociopolitical framework is the internal fabric of the emerging Greek city-states, especially the groups of those politically enfranchised citizens who came to wield political and military power in the newly consolidated communities. In the hands of these citizens, Brisart argues, 东方化 artifacts and practices acquire a potent constitutive agency: not 上 ly do they reflect the ideology and social aspirations of those incorporated stakeholders within the polis who are no longer capable of behaving as the former “big men,” they also become decisive and effective shapers of social formation. Brisart is especially concerned to reveal how 东方化 effectively constituted social distinctions in the overall homogenizing climate of the city-state.

In putting forward this explication of the agency of 东方化 material culture, Brisart seeks to understand its working in contexts that matter, that is, cemeteries, sanctuaries, and the symposium. His first case study focuses 上 Argos and the Argive Heraion, both familiar loci for the investigation of the early city-state. Here from the late eighth century 上 ward, Brisart sees evidence for the formation of the city-state, precisely when burials become homogeneously unremarkable and sanctuaries such as the Argive Heraion flourish as receptacles of status-shaping oriental or 东方化 luxuries. Brisart interprets these luxuries as dedications expressing the will of some citizens to define themselves as exclusive practitioners of the prestigious oriental banquet (136). This is indeed an interesting idea, but Brisart treats the material at hand rather summarily without addressing an obvious problem that Strøm (“来自庇护所的证据,”在G. Kopcke和I. Tokumaru编, 东西方之间的希腊:第十名–8th Centuries BC [美因茨1992] 46–60)在1990年代初期就已经制定出来了:很有可能永远是其他沉积模式占Brisart标签的很多原因“dedicatory”在有抱负的公民和他们的神之间进行调解的对象。避难所本身可能已经“collectors”要么作为进口控制者,要么作为本地生产车间的控制者(怀疑是萨摩斯人),或者仅仅是为了增强他们超凡脱俗的气氛。关于这些对象中嵌入了哪些消息,它们针对的对象以及在神圣空间中遇到了什么情况,问题仍然悬而未决。如果人们还考虑到Argos从未真正表现出真正的“orientalizing” phase, at least in terms of the development of workshops and styles that elsewhere have become hallmarks of stereotypical 东方化 (e.g., Corinthian pottery, Samian cauldrons, 代达利奇 -style terracottas, ivories). Obviously in Argos a mechanism kept the spread of 东方化 under strict control during the seventh century B.C.E.

我也对Brisart持怀疑态度’s willingness to explain all 东方化 cauldrons as individual dedications meant to establish the prestige of dedicants.This proposal is very stimulating to think about, but the evidence supporting it is tenuous at best, not least because of the extremely fragmentary nature of the surviving materials. There are reasons for doubting that the 东方化 cauldrons are the seventh-century equivalents of the traditional tripod cauldrons: why did they fail to register as 克莱斯希腊想像中产生的人工制品?与三脚架大锅的对比—仍然在伟大的Panhellenic圣所中使用—没有什么比这更惊人的了:资源很少(在科莱奥岛上,H.t。4.152,仅解释了一种沉积模型,同时是古代关于东方化的大锅幸存的唯一信息),并且仅有少量的视觉表现。此外,分布模式似乎指出,在某些环境(例如Argive Heraion,Kalapodi,Delos)中,这些物体即使存在也很少。即使我们考虑到生存的危险,情况也是如此。人们再次想知道什么机制可能控制了这些物体的流动,流通和认知可及性。布里萨特’精心设计的解释可能只占东方化大锅或类似物体的一小部分,我强烈敦促我们探索替代的沉积模型,例如公司奉献或非希腊奉献。无论如何,一种社会投资模式不能简单地解释区域或区域间庇护所中的所有证据。

Brisart is 上 firmer ground when he turns to seventh-century elite burials at the Athenian Kerameikos and the burning of luxurious 东方化 pottery in offering trenches accompanying cremations. Athens seems to have faced troubles in the seventh century, and no two scholars would agree 上 what exactly constituted the Athenian polis during this period. Nevertheless, Brisart is convincing in that these pots functioned as “attributs du mort, 状态符号, C’est-à-dire des objets不会,但是était de préciser le statut du déFunt Mais aussi celui de sa famille”(149)。他认为,区别的实现不仅通过葬礼的丰富性(火葬,古坟),而且还通过原始阁楼陶器以认知和美学的方式唤起东方式座谈会的富裕和实践的独特能力来实现。

在本书的最后三章中,布里萨特将注意力转移到了克里特岛的特殊案例上,尤其是它为评估东方化曲目提供了证据,这些证据是诸如戈特林,阿芙拉蒂和普里尼亚斯等合并社区的统治精英的象征性表达。公元前七世纪在此,Brisart与分析语境中的物质文化东方化的联系更加紧密。他指出,在这些城市国家中,东方化的物质文化在水平上或在大陆上没有构成同质公民团体成员之间的社会区别;它的功能在垂直轴上非常变音。他认为,统治精英的成员与特权公民的地位相同,东方人在他们的手中表达了一种公司精神,使他们与非公民数量上占优势的群体区分开。这种解释性框架使他能够将强烈东方化的产品情境化,例如归功于Aphrati工坊的大型飞蓬或在Cretan的表演性赞美语境中来自Aphrati的著名人物盔甲。 安德烈亚.

同样,他解决了棘手的社会功能问题。“Daedalic” style 上 Crete, focusing especially 上 its monumental manifestations at the so-called Temple A at Prinias and 上 the architectural sculptures and corpus of votive plaques from the sanctuary at the acropolis of Gortyn (recently redated to the late seventh century B.C.E.). He argues convincingly that in both Prinias and Gortyn, the temples were conceived as civic projects whose 东方化 style and iconography epitomized the symbolic universe of the ruling citizens as the foundational charter of these emerging city-states. Following interpretive studies by D’Brisart看到Acunto和Marinatos,他们在视觉上将自己定义为战士-嬉皮士 (例如,在Prinias著名的带状装饰上,或在戈特恩(Gortyn)的微型装甲如盾牌和胸甲的前投票权)下的战争女神,与黎凡特的亲和力很强。布里萨特’s interesting arguments will surely fertilize debates, as his analysis stimulates questions regarding the agency of material and visual culture: What exactly is a 奉献的 object in contexts like Gortyn? What are the affective properties of the 代达利奇 style and how did it come into being? Similar queries and many more should be addressed to the entire 东方化 corpus both inside and outside Greece. Brisart’的研究为这种复杂现象的有效参与提供了前瞻性的操作框架,而且效果很好。

Austin, Texas 78712

的书评 艺术博物馆:滨海雷彻什工匠的东方化èce proto-archaïque,作者:托马斯·布里萨特(Thomas Brisart)


美国考古学杂志 卷117,第1号(2013年1月)

在线发布于 www.ajaonline.org/book-review/1481

DOI:10.3764 / ajaonline1171.Papalexandrou



  • 网页地址和电子邮件地址自动变为链接。
  • 行和段被自动切分。