Archaeology and History

Introduction.
1. Une scène de sacrifice.
2. Écrire la mémoire d’Antioche.
3. Apamée, site archéologique d’importance.
4. Importance et originalité d’une mosaïque inédite.
Pour aller plus loin (bibliographie).

Découverte lors de fouilles clandestines en octobre 2011, sur le site antique d’Apamée, cette mosaïque inédite représente une scène très rare et hautement symbolique : la fondation d’Antioche par Séleucos Ier Nicator vers 300 avant J.-C. Aujourd’hui cette œuvre du IVe siècle de notre ère est recherchée  par Interpol.
Il s’agit d’une scène de sacrifice.
La première identification de la mosaïque d’Apamée et son étude approfondie a été réalisée avec le consentement de la DGAMS-Direction Générale des Antiquités et des musées de Syrie et de son Directeur Général, Prof. Maamoun Abdulkarim, en 2016.

Bridging the Gaps: Integrating Archaeology and History in Oaxaca, Mexico does just that: it bridges the gap between archaeology and history of the Precolumbian, Colonial, and Republican eras of the state of Oaxaca, Mexico, a cultural area encompassing several of the longest-enduring literate societies in the world.

Fourteen case studies from an interdisciplinary group of archaeologists, anthropologists, ethnohistorians, and art historians consciously compare and contrast changes and continuities in material culture before and after the Spanish conquest, in Prehispanic and Colonial documents, and in oral traditions rooted in the present but reflecting upon the deep past. Contributors consider both indigenous and European perspectives while exposing and addressing the difficulties that arise from the application of this conjunctive approach.

Inspired by the late Dr. Bruce E. Byland’s work in the Mixteca, which exemplified the union of archaeological and historical evidence and inspired new generations of scholars, Bridging the Gaps promotes the practice of integrative studies to explore the complex intersections between social organization and political alliances, religion and sacred landscape, ethnic identity and mobility, colonialism and resistance, and territoriality and economic resources.

Contributors: Bruce E. Byland, Bas van Doesburg, Viola König, Peter Kroefges, Michael Lind, Carlos Rincón Mautner, Geoffrey G. McCafferty, Sharisse D. McCafferty, Liana I. Jiménez Osorio, John M. D. Pohl, Emmanuel Posselt Santoyo, Adam Sellen, Ronald Spores, Stephen L. Whittington, Andrew Workinger, Danny Zborover, Judith F. Zeitlin

For over a century, the archaeology of the Land of Israel went hand in hand with the Bible. Biblical Archaeology, the outcome of this interaction, has been normally conceived as the handmaiden of the biblical texts, authenticating and illustrating them. Whether motivated by theological or secular agenda, the main tenet of Biblical Archaeology was political history. In spite of recent claims for the emancipation of archaeology from the tyranny of the biblical texts, the archaeological agenda is still biblical, pursuing questions related to biblical historiography. Paradoxically, however, due to its problematic nature, the use of the Bible in archaeological discourse is considered today almost illegitimate.
We envision a different integration between archaeology and the Bible. On the one hand, an archaeological agenda, independent of the biblical text, will open a much wider range of social and cultural questions. On the other, using the Bible as a cultural document to answer these questions will restore its central place in the archaeological discourse of the biblical period. Conceiving of both biblical texts and ancient material artifacts as cultural documents, we believe that their inspection will be fruitful and enlightening. Words and artifacts can give us access to the mindset of the people of the biblical period. Encapsulated in both are the worldviews, cosmology, perceptions of landscape, ideology, symbolism, etc. of the people who produced them. The insights gained by this approach will eventually result in a better understanding of biblical political history.