Journal of Ancient Civilizations (JAC) vol. 32, fasc. 1 (2017)
The JOURNAL OF ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS (JAC) is published annually in two fascicles by the Institute for the History of Ancient Civilizations (IHAC, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, Jilin Province, People’s Republic of China).
The aim of JAC is to provide a forum for the discussion of various aspects of the cultural and historical processes in the Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean world, encompassing studies of individual civilizations as well as common elements, contacts and interactions among them (e.g. in such traditional fields as Assyriology, Hittitology, Egyptology, Classics, and Sinology among others). Hence, we publish the work of international scholars while also providing a showcase for the finest Chinese scholarship, and so welcome articles dealing with history, philology, art, archaeology and linguistics which are intended to illuminate the material culture and society of the ancient Near East, the Mediterranean region, and ancient China. Articles discussing other cultures will be considered for publication only if they are clearly relevant to the ancient Mediterranean world, the Near East and China. Information about new discoveries and current scholarly events is also welcome. Publishers are encouraged to send review copies of books in the relevant fields.
JAC is a double blind peer-reviewed journal. All submitted articles are first carefully read by at least two editors of JAC, who will give a feedback to the author. Articles (excluding book reviews or research reports) are afterwards reviewed anonymously by at least two referees in the specific field, appointed by the editorial board. In cases where the reviewers recommend changes in the manuscript, authors are requested to revise their articles. From time to time, we will publish a list of the referees to make the double blind peer-review process transparent and comprehensible.
Our double blind peer-reviewed articles of this issue present a study on the structure of the Hittite rule in respect of legal terminology in treaties, the anchoring of innovations with regard to religion in Ancient Rome and the influence of a high-ranked person on the issuing of certain coin types during the Tetrarchy. Instead of single reviews, we also offer the first part of a comprehensive research survey on recent developments and studies in the field of Ancient Economy. Additionally, our Forum opens the ground for a discussion of the chances and challenges of Comparative Studies.
All communications, manuscripts, disks and books for review should be sent to the Assistant Editor, Journal of Ancient Civilizations, Institute for the History of Ancient Civilizations, Northeast Normal University, 130024 Changchun, Jilin Province, People’s Republic of China (e-mail: email@example.com), or to the Executive Director in Chief, Prof. Dr. Sven Günther, M.A. (e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com).
TABLE OF CONTENTSVolume 32 (2017)
PALLAVIDINI, MARTA: The Hittite Word kuri/ewana-, kui/erwana-: A New Assessment (1–11)
HEKSTER, OLIVIER: Religion and Tradition in the Roman Empire: Faces of Power and Anchoring Change (13–34)
KIDSON, LYN M.: Anonymous Coins, the Great Persecution and the Shadow of Sossianus Hierocles (35–53)
RESEARCH SURVEY: THE ANCIENT ECONOMY – NEW STUDIES AND APPROACHES
GÜNTHER, SVEN: Introduction (55–67)
GÜNTHER, SVEN: Ancient Greece (69–81)
REINARD, PATRICK: Ancient Rome (Including Greco-Roman Egypt) (83–105)
FORUM: COMPARATIVE STUDIES – CHANCES AND CHALLENGES
MUTSCHLER, FRITZ-HEINER / SCHEIDEL, WALTER: The Benefits of Comparison: A Call for the Comparative Study of Ancient Civilizations (107–121)
GÜNTHER, SVEN: Ad diversas historias comparandas? A First, Short and Droysenbased Reply to Mutschler and Scheidel (123–126)
Marta PALLAVIDINI (DAAD P.R.I.M.E Fellow, Freie Universität Berlin / KU Leuven)KURI/EWANA-, KUI/ERWANA-: A NEW ASSESSMENT (pp. 1–11)The meaning of the Hittite word kuriwana-/kuierwana- has not been yet established with certainty. Some scholars translate it with “independent” while others favor the exactly opposite meaning “dependent.” Since the word is attested in a limited number of documents, it is possible to re-examine all the occurrences and the related contexts, and to propose a new assessment of the meaning of the word. In particular, I will suggest the meaning “juridically equal.”
Olivier HEKSTER (Institute for Historical, Literary and Cultural Studies, Radboud Universiteit)RELIGION AND TRADITION IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE: FACES OF POWER AND ANCHORING CHANGE (pp. 13–34)This article focuses on the apparent paradox within the religious history of the Roman Empire between the historical reality of continuous developments in religious practices and beliefs, and the equally continuous importance of assuming that matters remained the same. It will suggest that a systematic analysis of the relation between exercising power and religious innovation is helpful to solve the paradox, and that an important concept within that analysis is “anchoring.” The article takes the three “faces of power” that have been developed to define the process of exercising power as a starting point, and applies these to three exemplary case studies of religious change within Roman history. This shows how only changes enacted within a shared field of reference had any chance of being successful. Ultimately, religious changes that were most easily “anchored” in changing traditions were the most successful ones.
Lyn M. KIDSON (Macquarie University)ANONYMOUS COINS, THE GREAT PERSECUTION AND THE SHADOW OF SOSSIANUS HIEROCLES (pp. 35–53)Early in the fourth century CE an unusual series of bronze coins was minted in three cities: Antioch, Nicomedia and Alexandria. It is noteworthy that portraits of Emperors and Caesars are missing from these coins. Instead, they mostly depict city gods and goddesses, or in some cases the city tyche. J. van Heesch, in his influential 1993 study, dated all the coins to 312 CE. This study proposes a broader timeframe, 303–312 CE. It also argues that Sossianus Hierocles is a person to whom these issues might plausibly be tied.
Sven GÜNTHER (IHAC, NENU, Changchun)INTRODUCTION & ANCIENT GREECE (pp. 55–67, 69–81)
Patrick REINARD (University of Trier)ANCIENT ROME (INCLUDING GRECO-ROMAN EGYPT) (pp. 83–105)Ancient Economy is a highly competetive as well as innovative field in modern ancient studies. The survey, divided up in two parts (the second part in JAC 32/2 (2017)), presents new theoretical and methodological approaches, models and recent studies that have emerged in the last years. In part 1, Sven Günther will provide a general overview and discusses latest developments with regard to Ancient Greece. Patrick Reinard deals with the Roman world including Greco- Roman Egypt.
Fritz-Heiner MUTSCHLER / Walter SCHEIDEL (Dresden / Stanford University)THE BENEFITS OF COMPARISON: A CALL FOR THE COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS (pp. 107–121)
Sven GÜNTHER (IHAC, NENU, Changchun)AD DIVERSAS HISTORIAS COMPARANDAS? A FIRST, SHORT AND DROYSEN-BASED REPLY TO MUTSCHLER AND SCHEIDEL (pp. 123–126)The forum focuses on comparative studies, their chances and potential challenges. While Fritz-Heiner Mutschler and Walter Scheidel point out the benefits of this approach, Sven Günther offers objections from a historian’s point of view.
Alle Rechte an Texten, Bildern und sonstigen Inhalten liegen bei Clio-online, H-NET und H-Soz-Kult 1996-2023.
Redaktion: hsk.redaktion [at] geschichte.hu-berlin.de. ISSN: 2196-5307