GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Caeciliusinhorto ( talk · contribs) 23:22, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
This is right up my street – I look forward to going through it properly
Caeciliusinhorto (
talk)
23:22, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
all the Athens grave-diggers (Greek: τυμβωρύχοι, romanized: tymborychoi)[c] who dig for tombs throughout Attica: I would be inclined to include the Greek word used here in the endnote rather than in brackets in the body text
He did so without securing the required permission from the state committeeI'm slightly confused by this – wasn't it Rhousopoulos, as the seller, who needed permission to export the aryballos?
Similar vases, often with names inscribed upon them, are frequently found in women's graves at Corinth: in 1942, the archaeologist Marjorie Milne suggested that they "served some feminine purpose"the quote checks out, but what is the source for "often with names inscribed on them"? Milne calls the presence of the inscription a "unique feature" of the vase she is discussing. And, at that rate, Milne doesn't exactly support the claim that the vase she is discussing is "similar" to the Aineta one; her only mention of the Aineta vase that I can see is a footnote where she says rather equivocally that it "might at first sight offer a parallel".
Its date has since been disputed: in 1961, the archaeologist Lilian Hamilton Jeffery dated it to approximately 625 BCE on the basis of the letter-forms used in the inscriptionThis is how Wachter presents it, but I'm not sure it's a great summary of what's in LSAG: Jeffery specifically attributes the date she gives for the vase to Payne, and I think "LHJ dated it to ..." is a somewhat misleading formulation.
The name Menneas, which comes first in the list and is written slightly larger and more boldly than the others, seems to belong to Aineta's chief admirerIs this what W means? It's a possibly interpretation, but I read him as saying not that Menneas is necessarily the chief admirer, but that he is "of primary importance" in the commissioning/gifting of the vase, which isn't necessarily the same thing.
Such artefacts could be sold freely overseas, provided that their owners secured the judgement of a state committee of three experts that the object was "useless" to Greek museumscitation says p.16, but I can't see any discussion of this law there; it looks as though pp.6-7 is the correct target?
Galanakis 2012e gives 1866; Galanakis 2012d says that the vase "appeared in the new acquisitions of the British Museum" a year after 1865, and the museum's records give its acquisition date as 1865.You seem to have got muddled somewhere here. "appeared in the new acquisitions" comes from '"University Professor - Antiquities Looter"?', which is Galanakis 2012e; I don't see Galanakis 2012d ("On Her Majesty's Service") explicitly gives any specific date for the acquisition – it mentions that the acquisition was discussed in a BM report of 1866, and mentions it in the context of "developments that took place in Greece between 1865 and 1867", but both of those would fit with a date of either 1865 or 1866.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Caeciliusinhorto ( talk · contribs) 23:22, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
This is right up my street – I look forward to going through it properly
Caeciliusinhorto (
talk)
23:22, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
all the Athens grave-diggers (Greek: τυμβωρύχοι, romanized: tymborychoi)[c] who dig for tombs throughout Attica: I would be inclined to include the Greek word used here in the endnote rather than in brackets in the body text
He did so without securing the required permission from the state committeeI'm slightly confused by this – wasn't it Rhousopoulos, as the seller, who needed permission to export the aryballos?
Similar vases, often with names inscribed upon them, are frequently found in women's graves at Corinth: in 1942, the archaeologist Marjorie Milne suggested that they "served some feminine purpose"the quote checks out, but what is the source for "often with names inscribed on them"? Milne calls the presence of the inscription a "unique feature" of the vase she is discussing. And, at that rate, Milne doesn't exactly support the claim that the vase she is discussing is "similar" to the Aineta one; her only mention of the Aineta vase that I can see is a footnote where she says rather equivocally that it "might at first sight offer a parallel".
Its date has since been disputed: in 1961, the archaeologist Lilian Hamilton Jeffery dated it to approximately 625 BCE on the basis of the letter-forms used in the inscriptionThis is how Wachter presents it, but I'm not sure it's a great summary of what's in LSAG: Jeffery specifically attributes the date she gives for the vase to Payne, and I think "LHJ dated it to ..." is a somewhat misleading formulation.
The name Menneas, which comes first in the list and is written slightly larger and more boldly than the others, seems to belong to Aineta's chief admirerIs this what W means? It's a possibly interpretation, but I read him as saying not that Menneas is necessarily the chief admirer, but that he is "of primary importance" in the commissioning/gifting of the vase, which isn't necessarily the same thing.
Such artefacts could be sold freely overseas, provided that their owners secured the judgement of a state committee of three experts that the object was "useless" to Greek museumscitation says p.16, but I can't see any discussion of this law there; it looks as though pp.6-7 is the correct target?
Galanakis 2012e gives 1866; Galanakis 2012d says that the vase "appeared in the new acquisitions of the British Museum" a year after 1865, and the museum's records give its acquisition date as 1865.You seem to have got muddled somewhere here. "appeared in the new acquisitions" comes from '"University Professor - Antiquities Looter"?', which is Galanakis 2012e; I don't see Galanakis 2012d ("On Her Majesty's Service") explicitly gives any specific date for the acquisition – it mentions that the acquisition was discussed in a BM report of 1866, and mentions it in the context of "developments that took place in Greece between 1865 and 1867", but both of those would fit with a date of either 1865 or 1866.