Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

49 results

Page 1 of 3

  • 16 - The Archaeological and Genetic Correlates of Amazigh Linguistics

  • from Part VI - Linguistic Aspects of Migration and Identity
  • Edited by M. C. Gatto, University of Leicester, D. J. Mattingly, University of Leicester, N. Ray, University of Oxford, M. Sterry, University of Durham
  • Book:
    Burials, Migration and Identity in the Ancient Sahara and Beyond
    Published online:
    21 June 2019
    Print publication:
    14 February 2019, pp 495-524

  • Summary

    This chapter is written in response to that of Christopher Ehret in this volume, aiming to show how the linguistic ‘family tree’ he sketches for the Tamazight, or Berber, language family might relate to the history of Amazigh peoples. This is, of course, a tall order. Any more than an impressionistic correlation between historical linguistics and archaeological evidence is going to fall straight into a series of perfectly well-known pitfalls: that language change does not necessarily imply massive invasions has been constantly repeated, not least by Colin Renfrew, while the various processes by which new languages or their variants may be diffused have been thoroughly theorised, a subset of the diffusion versus acculturation debate.

  • Utica’s urban centre from Augustus to the Antonines

  • Imed Ben Jerbania, J. Andrew Dufton, Elizabeth Fentress, Ben Russell
  • Journal:
    Journal of Roman Archaeology / Volume 32 / 2019
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 October 2019, pp. 66-96
    Print publication:
    2019

  • Since 2010, a team from the Tunisian Institut National du Patrimoine and the University of Oxford1 has been investigating Utica’s monumental centre, located at the tip of the promontory on which the city is built (fig. 1). The range and scale of architectural elements littering this area were remarked upon by most antiquarian investigators of the site. Nathan Davis, working at the site in 1858, noted that, despite the fact that it “had been ransacked for building materials”, this part of the city was covered with “marble and granite shafts, capitals, and cornices, of every order, size, and dimension”.2 Alfred Daux even observed that local residents referred to the largest building of the zone as the “Dar Es Sultan” (Palace of the Sultan), such was its magnificence.3 Aerial photographs commissioned by A. Lézine in the 1950s (fig. 2) show the area at the head of the promontory almost completely robbed out during and immediately after the Second World War, giving it a rather desolate aspect.

Page 1 of 3