CLST 277: The World of Late Antiquity Spring Semester 2017 Dr. Jacqueline Long

Source-Excercises in Historical Evidence

Goals

• To examine, as far as physical presentation or technological representation makes possible, materials for historical inquiry
• To practice conventions of describing historical evidence
• To consider what types of information non-textual evidence can yield for historical inquiry, what additional information conditions that inquiry, and how
• To assess particular items of historical evidence

Instructions Specific instructions for individual Source Exercises will be posted as the exercises come due - keep watching! Each assignment of this set includes a 250-300 word written report (1 typed page), due at the start of the period for which the Exercise is assigned. Legible typing or word-processing, correct spelling and grammar, and meticulous observance of all principles and practices of academic integrity are required.

file in progress

Source-Exercise in Numismatics

• Numismatics is the study of coins, an important material source for late antique history (and other periods!). For a brief, highly pertinent introduction to the coinage of our period, read the paragraphs from "The monetary system of the Roman Empire..." (about two-thirds down the file) through the end of the article (about three-quarters down the file) in the Oxford Classical Dictionary (4th edn.) article "coinage, Roman." Note the important denominations mentioned and the indications coins bore of their official value: this information will help with this exercise.
• Now, take as your target for this exercise the image posted in the announcement about this Source-Exercise at the Sakai site.
• Look at it carefully, and as your report give your best answers to the following questions:
  1. Of what material does it appear to be made? Compare with the images and brief overview at www.luc.edu/faculty/jlong1/ltRomcoinage.htm.
  2. What is the emperor on the obverse ("heads" side) wearing? Which element or elements of his costume tell you something about the value of the coin? What other details of the emperor's appearance seem distinctive and notable, based on what you know about late-imperial Roman culture? Explain briefly.
  3. To the best of your ability to decipher it, what does the writing that wraps about the edges of the coin say, obverse ("heads") and reverse ("tails")? What does this "legend" tell you about the image it encloses? [Have you ever studied Latin? Does that knowledge help with this decipherment? N.b.: I'm not expecting that you have, just imagining that IF you have, it MIGHT help, and wondering whether it does.]
  4. To the best of your ability to decipher it, what is the image inside the legend on the reverse? Describe what you see, in any event. If you can identify who or what a late antique Roman probably thought this image depicted, who or what is it?
  5. Does any of this information help you to identify a date when this coin was produced? Explain briefly.
  6. Based on what you have read on the coin in this exercise, how can you best identify it as a piece of material evidence for the late antique world? Explain briefly, including also any additional significant elements you recognize in the coin, that I haven't asked about.
• The written report of this Source-Exercise is due at the beginning of class, Friday 3 February.

Research-Exercise in Imperial Public Building

• To facilitate communication, Forums have been set up in Sakai for this class. The group corresponding to each Forum (sign up in class Wednesday 15 February) should focus each on its own example of late-Roman imperial building in capital cities. Each group should prepare and deliver to the class a 5-6 minute presentation (no more), including PowerPoint of images, reporting the basic information on the group's monument. Each individual group-member should prepare a 1-page report summarizing the basic information, documenting the primary and secondary sources used, and stating the individual's contribution to the group's research and presentation.
  1. Arch of Galerius, Thessalonica
  2. Baths of Diocletian, Rome
  3. Mausoleum of Diocletian, Split
  4. Aula Palatina, Trier
  5. Basilica of Peter, Rome
  6. Hippodrome, Constantinople
• Use reliable, scholarly sources (not Wikipedia, travel-agency promotions, or religiously-oriented websites: they often don't make their primary sources evident, and some incorporate interpretations and anachronisms in ways that confuse the authentic late-Roman facts). Academically-oriented encyclopedia articles (see Loyola University Libraries' Classical Studies page for links: Oxford Classical Dictionary, Brill's New Pauly, Oxford Bibliographies, etc.) are okay for a start, but only if you follow up their references in ancient primary sources and scholarly secondary sources.
• Get at least one good view of the monument, so that during your presentation the class can see what the monument looks like or looked like (more than one is fine: see what's available and what makes sense for your presentation, so that it will be informative but not confusing)
• When was the monument constructed? Identify both a date and the circumstances of later Roman history contextualizing the construction. Include any major changes to the monument that were made between the third and fifth centuries AD.
• Where was the monument constructed in relationship to the city where it was located? How would its specific location have affected access to the monument by the residents of the city?
• What function was the monument originally built to perform: what did people do with it?
• Beside its function, what elements and qualities of the monument would have impressed late-Roman citizens viewing the monument? What did it "say" to its "audience", and how did it "say" it?
• The presentations of this Excursus are to be delivered by the whole group or by one or more representatives, as the group determines will be most clear and informative, in a 5-6 minute span of class Monday 19 February. All written reports are due in hand at the beginning of class, also Monday 19 February.

1. Follow the link to look at the Lycurgus Cup at the website of the British Museum (www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?assetId=36154001&objectId=61219&partId=1). The cup itself dates to the fourth century. The gilt-bronze rim and foot were added to it about the beginning of the nineteenth century: it is possible the Cup was originally made to be a hanging lamp, and would have had different fittings in antiquity.
2. Below the image of the cup, a link offers you the opportunity to look at "more views." Look at as many of these images as you find helpful, but be sure to include numbers 1, 4, 16, 24, 29, 34, 36, 37, 38, and 40 in order to see all the images around the Cup and other pertinent details.
   • If you were turning the Cup clockwise, you would see the images around its outer surface in the order 1 (and 34); 29; 4; 16; 24.
   • 36 and 37 show virtually the same angle on the Cup, with a change of directions in the light: how the inner surface of the Cup is hollowed out to make some parts of some figures more able to catch light shining through the Cup.
   • 38 and 40 show angles on the surface of the Cup.
3. Background reading: the primary sources (two selections: brief poems by Claudian) and secondary scholarship (chapter in Cameron) assigned for W 3/22; also the article about Cage cups in Wikipedia. (Wikipedia, as a source, needs verifying, but this article is well documented in scholarly sources; if you follow the link to the Wikipedia article about the Lycurgus Cup, however, please note that the paragraph in the section "Iconography" that suggests political and/or mystical significance for the images or the way the glass changes color depending on the angle at which light hits it, is almost certainly not worth taking seriously. The fact Lycurgus images are as widespread in the period as they are, in different media, and none of them closely datable, diminishes the chance they all respond to the same historical event. And the Claudian poems suggest the Cup would have been regarded as a fascinating object for its craftsmanship alone, without any presumption of esoteric meaning. Please exclude from your reports any reference to this untenable speculation.)
4. For your report, please consider (a) how the Lycurgus Cup compares and contrasts with "Cage cups" also preserved from the same period: what characteristics does it share? in respect of what characteristics is it different? (b) what do the images on the Lycurgus Cup imply about its intended "audience" of viewers' knowledge of Classical mythological stories? (n.b. knowledge of stories does not necessarily imply religious belief) (c) identify and explain other connections you can draw between the Lycurgus Cup and late-antique visual and material culture, especially as described by the chapter in Cameron and Claudian's poems. Clearly connect your conclusions to the evidence on which they are based, and explain how you get from the evidence to each conclusion.
5. The written reports of this Excursus are due in hand at the beginning of class, Wednesday 22 March.

Revised 17 March 2017 by jlong1@luc.edu
http://www.luc.edu/depts/classics/