Land of Sikyon: Archaeology and History of a Greek City-State by Yannis A. Lolos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 385 essays, one on beast hunts and another on public executions. Surprisingly the latter deals very little with the damnatio ad bestias and instead deals with other forms of execution as spectacle. However interesting, the subject matter is not entirely appropriate to the volume, although it does raise the question of where to draw the line between sport and spectacle when it comes to the ancient, and especially Roman, context. Criminals were of course executed in the arena (as many of the essays remind us), but it is not clear that a discussion of all types of executions fits the volume’s scope. Hugh M. Lee is another one of the few authors in the Roman part who deal with sport and not spectacle in his description of how Greek sport came to Rome and its popularity in the second century a.d. In Part III, “People, Settings, Ideas,” Hazel Dodge discusses the origin of amphitheaters both in Rome and in the wider geographical context. Although it only achieved its canonical form relatively late, the amphitheater became a successful design with hundreds of examples built across the Roman empire. In her second essay, “Venues for Spectacle and Sport (other than Amphitheaters) in the Roman World,” Dodge discusses circuses, stadia, and artificial lakes, as well as the adaptability of some venues. Rose McLean in “People on the Margins of Roman Spectacle” discusses support personnel, condemned criminals, and Jewish resistance to Roman spectacles and culture. John Zaleski dedicates most of his essay on “Religion and Roman Spectacle” to votive gifts and curse tablets. Kathryn Mannel discusses opposition to the games, to their violence on the part of literary elites and stoics, to the over-specialization of Greek athletes on the part of doctors and intellectuals, as well as the moral objections of Jews and Christians. Part IV on “Later Roman Spectacle and Sport” comprises only two essays. Michael Carter argues that gladiatorial combats were a cultural bridge between the Greek and the Roman world, while David Alan Parnell considers the interconnectedness of spectacle, sport, riots, and government in the late Roman period, arguing that rioting became widespread because it allowed young men to compete against others in the absence of other opportunities for individual athletic achievement. A dominant topic of the essays in the Roman section is the apparent contradiction between the lowly origins of gladiators on one hand and their status as role models for manly virtue on the other. Another recurrent theme is the ideological significance of the Roman games as an articulation of Roman social structure. This companion will be a great addition to anyone’s library, whether they are scholars of sport and spectacle or general readers interested in life in ancient Greece and Rome. The University of Calgary Reyes Bertol õn Cebri an Land of Sikyon: Archaeology and History of a Greek City-State. By Yannis A. Lolos. Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens (Hesperia Supplement 39). 2011. Pp. xxviii, 635, 413 ills., 12 tables, 6 maps. In Yannis Lolos's own words, his study sets out to “explore human interaction with the landscape” using the example of Sikyonians’ experience throughout antiquity (415). The author defines his work as a “reconnaissance of the land” (xxv) and deploys a variety of traditional, alternative, and specialty tools, including literary and epigraphic sources, maps, excavation and travelers’ reports, and, above all, personally gathered field survey data. The key issue motivating his research is the existent gap between the limitations 386 PHOENIX of Sykonian history as it is represented in primary sources and survey archaeology in the region, which has been almost entirely neglected. The project, which began as a doctoral dissertation, was completed in stages over ten years. In keeping with his goal to deliver a comprehensive and detailed study of the Greek polis of Sikyon “in a broader context” (1), in Chapter One Lolos discusses the physical environment of the land including all characteristics of the landscape and ecosystems, with the objective of delineating both the natural and the political boundaries of ancient Sikyon. Lolos’s field observations and profound acquaintance with the secondary literature provide readers with information about climatic changes...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".