"Chronology","Id","dc-creator","Redirect","UserLevel","dc-title","Icon","Name","dc-description","dc-date","Collection","dc-publisher","Type","dc-subject"
"","Corinth:Publication:Sapirstein, Hesperia 78:2, 2009","Sapirstein, Philip","","","How the Corinthians Manufactured Their First Roof Tiles","Corinth:Image:digital 2014  11157::/Corinth/Icons/PublicationCovers/Hesperia.jpg::250::323","Sapirstein, Hesperia 78:2, 2009","Hesperia","April","Corinth","","Publication",""
"","Corinth:Publication:Sapirstein, American Journal of Archaeolog117:4... 2013","Sapirstein, Philip","","","Painters, Potters, and the Scale of the Attic Vase-Painting Industry","","Sapirstein, American Journal of Archaeolog117:4... 2013","American Journal of Archaeology","2013","Corinth","","Publication",""
"","Corinth:Publication:Sarris amp Rife, Kenchreai Cemetery Project, Ko... 2005","Sarris, A. & Rife, J.L.","","","Kenchreai Cemetery Project, Korinthia","","Sarris & Rife, Kenchreai Cemetery Project, Ko... 2005","7","June","Corinth","","Publication",""
"","Corinth:Publication:Sarris, Technical Report: Geophysical Prospection ... 2003","Sarris, A.","","","Technical Report: Geophysical Prospection Survey at Kromna-Kesimia and Perdikaria as Part of the Eastern Korinthia Archaeological Survey (EKAS-2002)","","Sarris, Technical Report: Geophysical Prospection ... 2003","","2003","Corinth","","Publication",""
"","Corinth:Publication:Sarris, et al. Archaeological Prospection 14:1, 2007","Sarris, A.; Dunn, R.K.; Papadopoulos, N.; Kokkinou, E. & Mundigler, C.","","","Geological and geophysical investigations at Kenchreai (Korinthia), Greece","","Sarris, et al. Archaeological Prospection 14:1, 2007","Archaeological Prospection","2007","Corinth","","Publication",""
"","Corinth:Publication:Scahill, The South Stoa at Corinth: Design, ... 2012","Scahill, David","","","The South Stoa at Corinth: Design, Construction and Function of the Greek Phase","","Scahill, The South Stoa at Corinth: Design, ... 2012","The focus of this dissertation is the design, construction and function of the South Stoa at Corinth in its initial phase. The South Stoa was first published in a monograph by Oscar Broneer in 1954.1 In addition to dealing with the Greek and Roman phases of the building, Broneer's study also dealt with the pre-stoa remains. Certain aspects of the architecture of the stoa, however, were either treated only briefly or were entirely left out of the publication. While it was one of the first attempts at a full study of a secular Greek building, several conclusions deserve re-evaluation, including the date of construction and the design of the building in its initial phase, which has an impact on subsequent phases of remodeling, the function of the building, as well as its place in the historical development of stoas. Re-evaluation of the in situ remains of the stoa combined with newly identified architectural fragments of the building, particularly from the superstructure, provide important evidence to suggest an alternative reconstruction to that previously put forward. This new reconstruction is presented as the most likely solution, in awareness of the possibility that future finds may give rise to modification. As will be shown, the staircases inside the first and last front rooms of the stoa do not belong to the initial building phase as previously thought, but instead date to the Roman period, while evidence in the form of foundations and cuttings for a staircase inside the colonnade at the west end of the stoa, dated prior to 146 B.C., belongs to the initial phase of the building and calls for an entirely different interior reconstruction. The date of the stoa, which has fluctuated from sometime after the middle of the fourth century B.C. 340-320 (B.C.) to the early decades of the third century B.C., can now be more precisely determined in view of recent examination of pottery deposits from beneath the stoa terrace, which was built prior to the stoa's construction. These deposits have been dated between 300-290 B.C., which would push the date of the stoa's construction to the beginning decades of the third century B.C. This has considerable bearing on the early development of Hellenistic stoas and on the stylistic chronology of several other buildings built around the end of the fourth century B.C. Having resolved aspects of the reconstruction and situated the stoa chronologically, the focus of this study moves on to design considerations, including examination of the proportions and of the ancient foot unit used in the design of the building. Construction and statics of the building are also considered.","2012","Corinth","","Publication",""
"","Corinth:Publication:Schaffrin amp Snow, Linear Algebra and its Applica432:8... 2010","Schaffrin, Burkhard & Snow, Kyle","","","Total Least-Squares regularization of Tykhonov type and an ancient racetrack in Corinth","","Schaffrin & Snow, Linear Algebra and its Applica432:8... 2010","Linear Algebra and its Applications","April","Corinth","","Publication",""
"","Corinth:Publication:Schellenberg, “Where Is The Voice Coming From?” ... 2012","Schellenberg, Ryan Scott","","","“Where Is The Voice Coming From?” Querying the Evidence for Paul's Rhetorical Education in 2 Corinthians 10-13","","Schellenberg, “Where Is The Voice Coming From?” ... 2012","Although it would be an exaggeration to speak of a consensus, a majority of scholars now sees Paul as a man of relatively high social status. Most often cited as evidence for such status is Paul's putative education in formal rhetorical theory. The prevailing logic consists of two propositions: First, Paul's letters can be analyzed according to the dictates of GrecoRoman rhetoric; therefore, Paul must have been well educated in rhetoric. Second, rhetorical education was available only among the wealthy elite; therefore, Paul must have been brought up in such circles. A number of scholars have observed that such argumentation fails to consider the extent to which rhetorical ability exists independently of formal education. But despite this general observation, there has been no attempt to determine whether the specific rhetorical competencies to which Paul's letters attest admit of informal acquisition. In this study, I use insights from comparative rhetoric and sociolinguistics to get methodological leverage on this problem and thus to reevaluate the evidence for Paul's rhetorical education. Using 2 Cor 10-13 as a test case, I demonstrate that Paul's use of rhetoric provides no evidence of formal education; on the contrary, his persuasive strategies are instances of informal rhetoric. After undertaking a history of scholarship in part 1, in part 2 I reassess recent claims of Paul's conformity with formal rhetorical conventions in 2 Cor 10-13. Here I demonstrate that many alleged parallels derive from misleading treatment of the rhetorical sources and cannot be sustained. Convincing parallels are few I isolate four and rather general; nevertheless, they do merit further explanation. I seek to provide such explanation in part 3 by offering a basic theory of informal rhetoric and its acquisition, and demonstrating the use, by speakers with no knowledge of formal rhetorical theory, of precisely those rhetorical features found both in Paul and in the ancient rhetorical sources. Finally, in part 4, I begin a redescription of Paul's persuasive voice: Paul's prose style, his self-description in 2 Cor 10:10 and 11:6, and his foolish boasting reveal him to be a speaker at once abject and defiant.","2012","Corinth","","Publication",""