 |
| top: Parthenon in 1821 (Edward Dodwell); bottom: in 2004 (uncertain - cropped) |
"... the changes that the site had undergone were phenomenal. The visual impression of the Acropolis in the pre-Independence era, partly preserved through drawings and engravings of the period must have been stunning and totally unfamiliar to present-day eyes: it was a palimpsest of human activity, and a monumental legacy of the attraction and multiple meanings of the site for diverse groups and people; ... there were traces of post-classical activity, with the most prominent the Ottoman mosque inside the the Parthenon (with its minaret which survived until 1843), the houses and other buildings for the garrison stationed on it, and the the remnants of the western occupation of Athens, with the most impressive being the highly visible medieval tower at the Propylaia.
"Most of these buildings were destroyed in the decades following the foundation of the state, with the medieval tower surviving until the mid-1870s. The demolitions and clearings which were started by the team set up by Klenze were continued by the Athens Archaeological Society, which together with the State Archaeological Service were the two bodies responsible for most of the archaeological activity at the time. The destruction of virtually all post-classical buildings was a ritual purification of the site from what were seen as remnants of 'barbarism' and the material manifestations of the occupation of Greece by foreign invaders."
Yannis Hamilakis, The Nation and its Ruins: Antiquity, Archaeology and National Imagination in Greece, Oxford, 2007, p. 88 (footnotes and refs. removed).It was not just Ottoman remains that were destroyed in Athens: A decree in 1837 was made to stop the continuous destruction of Byzantine antiquities and in an 1843 decree, churches and other recent buildings were protected. Yet, in an earlier time the closest cultural connections the people were with the Christian remains and the earlier classical remains were seen as "works of the 'Hellenes', people who were seen as distinctive an different from the contemporary ones, living in another time, the mythical time of the Hellenes." (ibid. p. 67). Hamilakis points out that the latter categorization was promoted by the Church at the time. Fortunately, those remains were not swept away but tolerated. We can imagine a situation whereby culture D removes all traces of earlier cultures A, B, and C, and then are conquered by culture E who then removes all traces of culture D. In current times, modern societies condemn less modern societies for doing the same things the modern societies used to do in their earlier stages of development. This sort of thing is not restricted to the actions of religious fundamentalists like ISIS or the Taliban, but also to China with its developing industrialization and the resulting pollution. I can remember London when the buildings were black from soot, and in 1969 I saw in Los Angeles, a vapor trail from a jet plane where the pollution had changed it into a multi-coloured "oil-slick" in the sky. This is not "ancient history".
 |
| Athenian plated coin of the emergency issue of 406/5 BC photo: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. |
Athens is the capital and largest city in Greece, but in the ancient Greek world, its economic and political dominance started in 480 BC with the Persian War and ended at the close of the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BC). Some people could have seen it start and finish.
But the Greek world was
 |
| Silver coin of Syracuse, Sicily, 405-400 BC photo: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc. |
 |
| The Fountain of Arethusa in Syracuse photo: Giovanni Dall'Orto |
John's Coydog Community page
Isn't coin zapping about removing the evidence of centuries in the soil and the changes in burial environment? Why are all the coins you show so 'clean'? Why is corrosion not collectable?
ReplyDeleteHello John:
ReplyDeleteThis from the Barford blog about you:-
"Pompous collector: "most archaeologists are so uninformed about numismatics that they believe the only academic value in ancient coins is to date an archaeological site [...] Archaeologists are among the least informed about ancient coins". I would say that just about corresponds to what many, if not most, collectors actually know about archaeology. The difference being that archaeology outreaches to collectors, many collectors merely write insultingly about archaeologists."
And he expects you to help him?
Best
John Howland
UK
Hi John,
DeleteTypical PR nonsense. I answered because serious readers might like to get more information about silver chloride etc. (that is the main application in that sort of cleaning and its upper layers provide no valuable information being so porous and disturbed).
No archaeologist asked me for information about the the recent Le catillon hoard. The only person was a numismatist/forensic scientist from the U.K who visited me here in Calgary. I had even tried to contact the main restorer through LinkedIn and my request was ignored. It is really unusual for any archaeologist to contact an independent for information and help. That only happens to me from archaeologist who are at the top of their field (Raimund Karl has asked for my contributions three times now; for two of his papers and one project. Lesser archaeologists believe they know more about everything and are only interested in teaching what they think they know to the "uninformed public". It is most often in a very condescending manner at that. I have shared information with detectorists so they can be better at finding Celtic sites and they have provided me with much information about their finds so that, together, we can identify the nature of those sites. this was typical fro other independents, too, such as Henry Mossop who engaged with detectorists and the archaeologist Jeffrey may. Information resulting from thsi sort of interaction is magnitudes of importance greater than archaeologists who go it alone. Many of them miss out on really important information.
I have examples of such information in my Iceni hypothesis series, and some other series, too. Besides, what on earth has Paul Barford ever published on archaeology or done for the subject? At least I've published in a number of academic journals and in two books (including my own). the attitude is typical as evidenced by him calling me a collector rather than the proper terms "independent researcher" and writer (my collecting takes up less than 1% of the time I spend in research and writing). How does he imagine that I got my FSA without doing a lot of useful work over the last thirty+ years? I am just critical about bad and mediocre archaeology. If it seems that I condemn all archaeology I guess it just means that there is a lot of it, No?
The coins in this post have "cabinet toning" and are obviously hoard coins from a deep level of a hoard. Most high denomination coins are hoard coins and the hoards were used for transferring funds; as treasuries; buried for safety; and as founders hoards or for recycling.
ReplyDeleteBad silver corrosion (silver chloride) is very porous and often disfiguring on the surface but less porous on the interior surface. Lesser damaging silver chloride can leave a smooth purplish "hoard patina" that many find desirable, but if it is too thick, some details will be lost without electrolysis cleaning. X- rays can be used but have little either commercial or archaeological application. Non obstructing and non-active patinas are often very desirable and can add value to the coins and are left on.
More information here on silver chloride corrosion:
https://heritagesciencejournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/2050-7445-2-5
Some information about changes in a burial environment might be gleaned by breaking a coin in two and examining for changes in layers of corrosion with a scanning electron microscope but the chances are most likely that such changes will be at the modern layers and such information is already known through such things as testing buried copper piping. It has thus has little practical application and it is a destructive method, anyway. Breaking a coin is better used for the detection of surface enrichment after the coins were struck which might very well have happened with Coriosolite billon coins. Drilling or sawing the coin destroys that evidence. It has to be broken with a sharp hammer blow.
The first Coriosolite coin I bought was from the 1st Le Catillon hoard. it was not recognizable as a coin being a globule of copper oxide. It took me less than two seconds to clean it down to its natural grey billon patina but I used a very dangerous method that would not work on either higher grade silver or copper and bronze. The copper oxide was very porous.
The evidence of soil is another matter. With the current Le Catillon hoard, the Jersey Museum staff had not read the literature, so they imagined at first that the coins were a "refugee hoard" (highly unlikely, anyway). They did not know that this and other Jersey hoards were a secondary hoard (like the British Iceni silver hoards but for a different reason), and dated to decades after the Gallic War (The most likely date in my opinion being the early years of Tiberius).
I had thought of methods to (hopefully) back track the composition of each part of the hoard to the places where the coins had been gathered in Brittany and Normandy (and perhaps other locations). Unfortunately, they went ahead and cleaned the coins so those methods cannot be used. With most primary hoards, however, the previous environmental conditions can be probably be gleaned from core samples in non agricultural areas where the ground has lain undisturbed. Only secondary hoards would be of interest as they would bring traces of previous burial environments.
You either misunderstand my point, or I yours. I assumed that what you were writing about in your blog post was the removal of later accretions to a site to bring it back to some 'primary' state - and then attempting to maintain that as a static system. No? But then in what way is that different from coins which are cleaned of the historical accretions showing their later history to make them look as they did in only part of their history? That was a serious question related to the topic of your post, I was not looking for a lecture on corrosion products, chlorides or how to study palaeoenvironments. I assumed you were talking about presentation and use of cultural heritage here.
ReplyDeleteAh, I see. The accumulation of corrosion is just a chemical process and usually does not express any cultural expressions (other than in the modern use of chemicals rather than the previous organic farming).
DeleteThe restoration of any object to what is was after it was last touched by human beings does not eliminate any cultural content, and if all coins are treated in the same way then no cultural continuity has been harmed. If only one period of coinage was collected and all others were neglected or even destroyed then you would have the situation you see with the acropolis.
Similarly, if only certain types of coins are allowed to be freely owned, or displayed and others types are not then the reception of the complete culture will be absent or at least lessened, and as cultures pass on ideas through their remains (as with their adoption into later languages, art, architecture, literature, dress, and even political/social structures and so on aspects o previous cultures affect modern cultures through multiple cultural frames in a human-generated evolutionary fashion which is similar to the way individual lives evolve through the experiences and preferences of the individual.
It is often said that in looking at one's current situation, all of our previous experiences seem to have inevitably lead to to that point. Cultural changes are the same. When people are "stuck" in a particular period of their life and try to relive it over and over, in the present, they are considered to be neurotic. Not allowing people to see how their cultures have changed over the centuries attempts to make people associate with a "stuck" moment. That is mostly done for political manipulations as Mussolini did with his romanità as an expression of Italian fascism using the idea of Roman conquests.
John; you make so much sense that it brings tears to my eyes. We live in a world where logic is anathema and common sense is laughed at with scorn. Why some academic degree beoomes a license to pontificate is beyond my meagher level of comprehension (even though I myself have one equal to that of Mr. Barford). Paul is clearly well adivised to shut up while he can. On that note, I do thank you for engaging him in publc, so the whole thinking world can get the real message. The past belongs to ALL of us.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Wayne, and the objects of the past should be allowed to be part of everyone's life, not something that is locked away and often forgotten in some distant museum. The more people have direct and personal contact with it, the more will be understood and appreciated about it. How could that be otherwise?
Deletehi john,i totally agree with the acropolis being restored to its natural beauty.are you seriously suggesting that it would have been better with a mosque right in the middle of the parthenon, overlooking the greek capital,a mosque a symbol of conquest and oppression for the greek people,you keep quoting Yannis Hamilakis but he is just one voice out of many.if he had his way the mosque would still be there.he is talking from an extreme left wing view of archaeology where anyone wanting to rid themselves of the reminders of occupation is a nationalist.the greeks are not like the egyptions or even britons.we use the same names as the ancient greeks,language,customs.the olive tree,pouring libations,burning incense in religious festivals.i could name many more
ReplyDeletekyri.
Hi Kyri,
DeleteActually, yes. The mosque was a symbol of Ottoman rule from the mid-15th century until the establishment of the modern Greek state in 1832 after The Greek War of Independence which started in 1821, so the Greek people took back control after more than 350 years of foreign domination. That is quite a feat and cannot be compared to taking back a territory after a brief term of occupation. The mosque would have been a symbol of that and also a symbol of the Ottoman attitude to the Parthenon. But it is also part of the history. The spirit that continues so many ancient cultural customs is the same spirit that managed that feat. It is not something that should be hidden.
Best,
John
hi john,another thing,on the one hand we have the arguments that having an academic degree becomes a "license to pontificate" and than other members of the ACCG are saying the opposite that lack of qualifications should exempt people from commenting at all,Dave welsh has said this many times.personally im with Wayne Sayles on this,having a degree does not make one anymore qualified than anyone else and in fact its the people with degrees that sometimes say the silliest things [although im not specifically accusing Paul Barford of this, i have seen it from all sides].as for the mosque,did you know that mosques were banned in athens up to about 3 years ago.i think up to date there are only 3 legal ones in the city.
ReplyDeletekyri.
Hi Kyri,
DeleteHaving a degree can be a factor with the very young as it indicates a few years of intensive study but after many decades of experience in researching one's subject; practical experience and being published, it is largely irrelevant and only useful for people who do not have the ability to evaluate the work for themselves on its own merits. The disadvantage to having a degree is those extra years of "academy" indoctrination and the dangers of coasting on former glory. I have heard stories of lecturers who read from the same tattered papers they have been using for years and I have also noticed that many academic's ideas change, on average, slower than independents who do not teach at all. I can only think that positive reinforcement and groupthink puts the brakes on development.
My opinions on the Celts has undergone many changes over the years and continue to do so. One of the latest being on the structure of kingship away from heredity lines and the issuance of coinage by tribal leaders. I am now convinced that coins were also issued by those aspiring to leadership (and with no heredity factors at play) "buying votes" as it were, and also that some inscribed coins with different names on them are contemporaneous. But that is just part of my changes in thought: the recent post about the "banner" iconography on Coriosolite coins (Aug. 2nd)is a revised interpretation dating to only a couple of days before I wrote it. Often, minor ideas come about while I'm writing the post about a topic!
I frequently censor Paul Barford's comments whenever he makes really dumb comments or becomes too belligerent. I'm actually doing him a favor thus. So many times I could have said (like Wolfgang Pauli did once) "It's not even wrong!" (meaning it is too far removed from any understanding of the topic to make any correction even possible). His idea of post burial corrosion having any connection to cultural changes was one of them I did allow through but it was close enough to Hamilakis' talk about the objections Greeks had to the cleaning of the Elgin marbles (although that patina was culturally-visible and in the open air, rather than from something buried out of sight and thus not specific to ongoing cultural identification). It had a minor (present time) cultural association with the artificial patinas that are applied by sculptors to bronze statuary which can attain such patinas visibly, in the open air as well as invisibly, below the ground. So it was a borderline case.
I am completely in agreement with religious freedom and the vast numbers of Islamic refugees indicates that a lot of Islamic people are as much against ISIS as anyone else. Perhaps, when some religious people realize that faith is not dependent on historicism and begin to understand metaphor and symbolism, more people will share my views on this.
If the mosque at the Parthenon had been subsequently used for secular purposes, that would have preserved the cultural change while not destroying its history. What about the many Christian monuments within Megalithic monuments in the U.K.? I don't see any demands to have either removed to favor the other. Both Christianity and Islam are Abrahamic religions and they are radically different from Megalithic religion. Religions can die out but history is (if allowed to be) continuous.
Best,
John