tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6588247216777605704.post4066884220316678885..comments2023-04-05T08:04:07.514-04:00Comments on Bryn Mawr Classical Review: 2013.01.61Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6588247216777605704.post-39595630490889012282013-04-29T06:11:29.331-04:002013-04-29T06:11:29.331-04:00Without doubt E. Farinettis monograph is very usef...Without doubt E. Farinettis monograph is very useful and offers an important new synthesis of the topography of Boeotia. S. Gartland has very well presented all the advantages of this book, and I only take issue with one small point in case it gives the ignoramus the wrong impression. In his praise of Farinetti’s work, the reviewer has felt the obligation to criticize — mildly, it is true — the work of J.M.Fossey, a pioneer of Boeotian topography and epigraphy. One cannot understand Gartland’s passing reference to the "occasional caprices of a solo adventurer", an assessment that is said to apply to “much of Boiotian scholarship". He then goes on to hail the work of a modern team, which, we are let to believe, is superior to that of "solo adventurers”. May I point out that this category encompasses such great scholars as A. Keramopoullos, N. Pappadakis, M. Feyel, P. Roesch, S. N. Koumanoudis, S. Lauffer and K. Pritchett to name only a few? This comparison between two different modes of Boeotian research is anachronistic and ultimately unhelpful. The conditions which J.M. Fossey encountered in Boeotia back in the 60s and 70s are totally different from those offered by modern facilities. <br />I can think of no greater praise for Fossey’s work than the fact that Farinetti herself has used it abundantly in her voluminous monograph. So, even though, as per Sam Gartland “Boeotian Landscapes is a successor to John Fossey’s Topography and Population”, one should not get the wrong impression that the student of Boeotian history and topography can now do without consulting Fossey’s studies. It is my conviction that a great advantage of humanities, and in particular classical archeology, is that older bibliography especially when it is based on autopsy, as in the case of the work of J. M. Fossey, remains always relevant.<br />Yannis Kalliontzisnoreply@blogger.com