Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

Nothing seems certain any longer in the study of archaic Greece. In recent years, staples of older textbooks such as “tyranny,” “colonization” and “the rise of the hoplite phalanx” have been thoroughly reconceptualized or even consigned to the dustbin of history – at least by a few scholars. Most historical dates, beginning with the year 776 bc as marking the foundation of the Olympic Games and the start of the archaic age, are now widely considered unreliable. Iconic events such as the Lelantine and Messenian Wars may never have taken place. Perhaps some of the scepticism driving such reassessments has gone too far, but it is certainly an important positive development that recent scholarship has been characterized by a more critical approach to the literary evidence. Meanwhile, other kinds of evidence – archaeological and iconographic – as well as numerous topics in the field of social, economic, and cultural history have been demanding increasing attention. As a combined effect of these developments, archaic Greek history has virtually been transformed beyond recognition. Recent surveys by, for example, Robin Osborne (1996) or Jonathan Hall (2007), make an admirable effort to highlight new perspectives and assessments. Still, the task has perhaps become almost too complex for one scholar, and it is high time for an even more comprehensive approach. As is typical of the genre, ... log in or subscribe to read full text