Workshop
Arles, 31.08.2020 - 04.09.2020

Monastische Strömungen im spätantiken und frühmittelalterlichen Gallien. Lebensformen, Ideale, Vernetzung

Im spätantiken und frühmittelalterlichen Gallien gab es nicht ‚das‘ Mönchtum in einer bestimmten Gestalt, sondern eine Vielzahl verschiedener monastischer Strömungen: Teils koinobitisch geprägt, teils um größtmögliche Anachorese bemüht, orientierten sich die Bewegungen sowohl an östlichen Vorbildern als auch an gallischen Adaptionen dieser Ideale. Es ist davon auszugehen, dass zumindest einige dieser Strömungen voneinander wussten und nicht nur im Austausch miteinander standen, sondern zudem bemüht waren, vom Leben anderer Gemeinschaften sowie einzelner Personen zu lernen. So wurden spirituelle Praktiken der eremitischen Wüstenväter und -mütter Ägyptens in adaptierter Form bald auch hinter den Mauern der gallischen Klöster geübt. Aber auch über die Klostermauern hinaus entwickelte dieses besondere Mönchtum, wie es in Gallien vorzufinden war, bald eine gewisse Strahlkraft: So wurden beispielsweise Vorsteher von Klöstern nicht nur als Experten zu theologischen Debatten der Kirche hinzugezogen, zunehmend etablierten sie sich auch als von der Öffentlichkeit geschätzte Prediger und wurden zu beliebten Anwärtern auf das Bischofsamt.

Zu dieser vielschichtigen Vernetzung monastischer Strömungen in Gallien soll im Spätsommer 2020 ein Workshop in Arles stattfinden. Es werden ca. zwölf angehende und ausgewiesene Expert/innen für das spätantike gallische Mönchtum eingeladen, sich während fünf Tagen nicht nur über ihre individuellen Projekte auszutauschen, sondern vor allem zwischen diesen Projekten Anknüpfungspunkte und Verbindungslinien zu finden und zu diskutieren. Arles wurde als Tagungsort gewählt, da die Stadt einerseits in der Spätantike ein bedeutendes monastisches Zentrum war, das vielfältig mit verschiedenen monastischen Strömungen in Verbindung stand; andererseits, da sowohl in Arles selbst als auch in der näheren Umgebung noch vielfältige Spuren des frühen Mönchtums in Gallien zu fassen sind. Nicht nur die Besichtigung von erhaltenen Klostergebäuden, sondern auch die grundsätzliche Erfahrung der südgallischen Landschaft werden eindrückliche Einsichten in die Vernetzung des frühen Mönchtums vor Ort ermöglichen.

Konkret ist der Workshop so geplant, dass es am Dienstag-, Mittwoch- und Donnerstagvormittag jeweils zwei bis drei Arbeitseinheiten geben wird, die von je einer teilnehmenden Person gestaltet werden. In diesen Arbeitseinheiten soll im Rahmen der eigenen Forschung folgenden Leitfragen nachgegangen werden: Welchen Idealen folgten verschiedene monastische Bewegungen? Wie wurden diese Ideale in konkrete Lebensformen übertragen? Welche verschiedenen – von diesen Idealen angetriebenen – monastischen Strömungen gab es und wie waren diese miteinander vernetzt? Entstanden durch die Vernetzung neue Formen des Mönchtums und gab es ein originär gallisches Mönchtum? Die Gestaltung der Arbeitseinheit liegt in den Händen der Referent/innen, vorgesehen sind bisher die Arbeitsform des Vortrags mit Diskussion oder die Anleitung einer gemeinsamen Quellenlektüre. Die Nachmittage sind thematisch ausgerichteten Exkursionen in Arles und in die nähere Umgebung (Cloître St. Trophime, Abbaye Saint-Victor und Abbaye de Saint-Romain) vorbehalten, um auf diese Weise einen noch umfassenderen Zugang zur Vernetzung des spätantiken Mönchtums in Gallien zu erhalten. Die Abende wiederum dienen dem kollegial-kritischen Austausch, um so möglichst viele Impulse für die eigene Arbeit mit nach Hause zu nehmen. Gerahmt werden die drei Workshoptage von einem Einführungsvortag am Dienstagmorgen und einem Abschlussvortag am Donnerstagabend.

Organisatorische Informationen:

Der Workshop wird vom 31. August bis 4. September 2020 in Arles stattfinden, wobei der 31. August als Anreise- und der 4. September als Abreisetag geplant ist. Die Reise- und Aufenthaltskosten können ganz oder teilweise finanziert werden, sofern die beantragten Gelder bewilligt werden. Weitere Informationen ergehen im Anschluss an die Anmeldefrist im Rahmen der Paperauswahl. Für die Teilnahme wird ein Unkostenbeitrag von voraussichtlich 130 € / 150 Fr. erhoben. Der Workshop wird hauptsächlich auf Deutsch durchgeführt, Beiträge in englischer Sprache sind jedoch auch willkommen.
Wir freuen uns auf interessante Abstracts zu einer Präsentation oder Quellenlektüre (1/2 A4-Seite) mit Angaben zur Person und zum akademischen Hintergrund bis zum 29. Februar 2020 an:

rahel.schaer@theol.unibe.ch und dorothee.schenk@theologie.uni-goettingen.de

Kontakt:
Rahel Schär
Universität Bern, Institut für Historische Theologie
Länggasstrasse 51
3012 Bern
rahel.schaer@theol.unibe.ch

Organisatoren:
Dorothee Schenk, Lehrstuhl für Kirchengeschichte, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen und
Rahel Schär, Lehrstuhl für Ältere Geschichte des Christentums und der interreligiösen Begegnungen, Universität Bern

International Conference
University of Fribourg (Switzerland), 22-24/06/2020

Toys as Cultural Artefacts in Ancient Greek and Roman Cultures: Anthropological and Material Approaches

The international conference "Toys as Cultural Artefacts", organized by the ERC Locus ludi research team, invites experts from different disciplines - anthropologists, archaeologists, philologists, art historians – to share reflections on the cultural notion of toy and playful experience in ancient Greece and Rome in a multidisciplinary and diachronic perspective. Linguistic and archaeological researches have elaborated on the continuities as well as on the differences between Antiquity and modern times. The aim is to develop these first observations in order to attempt to define the specificities of ancient playthings. The conference will debate the following questions in a comparative, diachronic and cross disciplinary approach:

Session 1

What is a “toy”? What do we mean by toy in a post-industrial contemporary society? and how was it defined in the past? Since when and how were playthings associated with a specific age group or gender? Adults have games, but what about toys? Archaeologically, can we define the distinctive features of such object in Classical antiquity (size, material, ergonomics, cheap or costly...)? Semiologically, when did specific terms appear to qualify them, and why? In the Greek lexicon, different words, from paignion to athurma, refer to playful experiences which could include what we call toys, but the contexts of use are different, such as artistic performances, verbal jokes, as well as erotic discourses. In the Latin vocabulary, only the adjective ludicrum may be associated with actions that we could translate, albeit inaccurately, with 'toy'. Archaeologically, how can it be identified?

Session 2

The toy stage in the biography of objects. As Sally Crawford (2009) demonstrated, any object can become a toy in the hands of a child, and it is thus impossible or very difficult to identify it without an archaeological context (cultic, funerary, domestic). Problematic too are terracotta replicas of objects found in tombs or sanctuaries. Why were such replicas of toys made, and can we distinguish the real artefact from its symbolical substitute? Similar reflections apply to miniature objects often associated with children, but with different functions according to time and space, some clearly distinct from play, as with defunctionalised miniature offerings (see Pallas 2011). Terracotta figurines of animals also belong to that debated category.

Session 3

Cheap or costly toys? self-made by children or caretakers, or products of specialists? More work should be undertaken to identify the making of playthings by children, their caretakers or specialised craftsmen. Did one play with self-made or manufactured artefacts? Written sources describe remarkable playthings that were made by specialists, such as the flying dove of Archytas or luxurious puppets. Some of these costly productions are literary fictions, but few surviving exceptional objects in bronze, amber or other precious material, such as an articulated bronze warrior, testify precious objects imitating what we would call toys. But are these toys?

Session 4

Playful rites or ritual play? How can we account for the complex relationship between playful activities on the one hand and religious and devotional experiences on the other in the ancient world? Apart from the so-called “dolls” are a key feature of sanctuary offerings, other playthings such as knucklebones, balls and spinning-tops were dedicated in sanctuaries, each with varying associations and manipulations to explore. Game and divinatory practices are contiguous, as displayed by dice and knucklebones which belong to objects able to activate divine action.

Session 5

The agency of toys: for the ancients, did toys generate a fictional universe, and did they possess a subjectivity? Toys participate to the construction of social identity. Did they differ according to age groups and gender? Did they promote interaction between children, siblings, or friends, between individuals of different sex or status? Did adults (child-minders or parents, mothers or fathers) play with children, and how? And where, in domestic, public or sacred spaces? On a more general level: did toys transmit cultural values shared by a Mediterranean koinê? and can we trace transmissions and transformations in later historical periods?

How to apply: Please send a title, abstract (300-500 words max.), a short bio-bibliography

Contact: veronique.dasen@unifr.ch and marco.vespa@unifr.ch

Bibliography:

• Appadurai, A. (ed.), The Social Life of Things, Cambridge 1986.
• Capra, A. – Torre, C. (eds.), Percorsi della ludicità tra antico e modern, ACME 69.1 (2016), p. 9-100.
• Crawford S., The Archaeology of Play Things: Theorising a Toy Stage in the 'Biography' of Objects, Childhood in the Past, 2, 2009, 55-70.
• Dasen V. (éd.), Ludique. Jouer dans l’Antiquité, catalogue de l’exposition, Lugdunum, musée et théâtres romains, 20 juin-1er décembre 2019, Gent, 2019.
• Dasen V. – Haziza T. (dir.), Dossier thématique Jeux et jouets, Kentron 34, 2018, 17-128. https://journals.openedition.org/kentron/2414
• Dasen V. –Schädler U. (dir.), Dossier thématique Jouer dans l’Antiquité. Identité et multiculturalité, Archimède. Archéologie et histoire ancienne, 6, 2019,71-212.  archimede.unistra.fr/publications-et-collections/revue-archimede/archimede-6-2019/
• Gell, A., Art and Agency. An Anthropological Theory, Oxford 1998.
• Kidd, S.E., Play and Aesthetics in Ancient Greece, Cambridge 2019.
• Severi, C., L’objet-personne. Une anthropologie de la croyance visuelle, Paris 2017.
• Smith, A. – M.E. Bergeron (eds.), The Gods of Small Things, Pallas 86, 2011.

Workshop
Gesellschaft für antike Philosophie, Universität Marburg, 19.06. - 20.06.2020

3. Workshop des AK "Philosophie und Religion" der Gesellschaft für antike Philosophie

Der Arbeitskreis ‚Philosophie und Religion‘ der GanPh unter der Leitung von Dr. Angela Ulacco (Universität Fribourg), Dr. Diego De Brasi (Universität Marburg) sowie PD Dr. Marko J. Fuchs (Universität Bamberg) bietet v.a. Nachwuchswissenschaftler*innen ein Forum, um sich mit dem Verhältnis und wechselseitigen Einfluss von Philosophie, Theologie und Religion in der Antike auseinanderzusetzen und sich damit mit einem Forschungsgebiet zu beschäftigen, das zentral für ein historisch und systematisch angemessenes Verständnis zahlreicher philosophischer Positionen dieser Epoche ist. Hauptziel des AK besteht demnach darin, sich denjenigen Texten zu widmen, die das Verhältnis von Religion, Theologie und Philosophie in der Antike – sei es von der klassischen Philosophie und traditionellen griechischen/römischen Kulten, sei es von der hellenistischen Philosophie und ägyptischen Kulten bzw. Judentum, sei es von der kaiserzeitlichen und spätantiken Philosophie und Gnosis, Hermetismus, Orakelliteratur sowie Christentum – beleuchten, und diese Texte historisch und systematisch zu interpretieren und zu kommentieren.

Thema des dritten Treffens des Arbeitskreises, ist Plutarchs Schrift Über Isis und Osiris. In diesem Text bietet Plutarch eine ‚philosophische‘ Analyse der Erzählung über Isis und Osiris und der ägyptischen Religion. Dabei präsentiert er unterschiedliche Interpretationen des Mythos und beurteilt deren Tragfähigkeit. So lehnt Plutarch Deutungen ab, nach denen Isis und Osiris vergöttlichte Menschen oder ‘Personifikationen’ von Naturphänomenen seien, und zieht diesen Auslegungen Interpretationen vor, die stark von der griechischen Kultur und insbesondere von der Philosophie Platons beeinflusst sind. In welchem Verhältnis die unterschiedlichen Argumentationsschritte und die zahlreichen Digressionen zueinanderstehen bzw. welche Aspekte des Mittelplatonismus Plutarchs in seiner Analyse der ägyptischen Religion einfließen sind nur einige der sowohl in philologischer als auch in religionsphilosophischer Hinsicht offenen Fragestellungen mit Blick auf diese Schrift. In einer Linie mit dem Profil und den Zielen des Arbeitskreises soll in diesem Treffen eine kooperative Arbeitsatmosphäre angestrebt werden, in der das ausgewählte Werk kommentiert wird. Dabei wird jeder Teilnehmer eine Sektion des Werkes historisch und systematisch einleiten und die Übersetzung bzw. kommentierende Lektüre und anschließende Diskussion moderieren.

Das dritte Treffen des Arbeitskreises wird in Kooperation mit der Deutschen Sektion der International Plutarch Society organisiert (https://www.ku.de/slf/philologie/professur/ginesti/forschung/ips/) und findet in Marburg am 19.-20.06.2020 statt. Herr Prof. Dr. Rainer Hirsch-Luitpold (Bern) wird die Keynote Speech halten. Wir möchten überdies fünf Nachwuchswissenschaftler/innen die Möglichkeit bieten, an dieser Tagung teilzunehmen. Anfallende Kosten können teilweise übernommen werden.
Es dürfen bis zu drei Präferenzen (in einen Wunschrang von 1 bis 3) für entsprechende Sektionen des Werkes vorgeschlagen werden, die im Rahmen des Treffens gemeinsam gelesen und kommentiert werden sollen. Die Veranstalter werden anschließend eine Sektion pro Teilnehmer zuordnen.

Bitte schicken Sie bis zum 15.03.2020 die Rangliste mit Präferenzen im Umfang von max. 500 Wörtern sowie ein kurzes CV an angela.ulacco@unifr.ch, diego.debrasi@uni-marburg.de und marko.fuchs@uni-bamberg.de.

Kontakt:

Diego De Brasi
Philipps-Universität Marburg,
Institut für Klassische Sprachen und Literaturen/Klassische Philologie
Wilhelm-Röpke-Str. 6D
35032 Marburg

diego.debrasi@uni-marburg.de

International Conference
Institute for Medieval Studies of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, December 4-5, 2020

Correctness in Comparison.
Negotiating Linguistic Norms in Greek from the Imperial Roman until the Later Byzantine period (I – XV AD)

Linguistic correctness is a concept common to many, if not to all, linguistic systems. It primarily mirrors the basic need for speakers to share acknowledged rules for any form of communication to work. However, it can also have many other implications. For example, it can indicate a user’s (lack of) ability to express their thoughts in what is believed to be a standard language, and thus mark their social, geographical, etc. origins. Further, it can also show how certain social groups were influential in changing existing, or creating new, linguistic norms, etc.

The Greek language is unique among European languages because of the length of its written tradition, ranging from the first documents in the Linear B script (c. 1450 BC) to the present day, and represents an unparalleled terrain for linguistic studies. Among the issues in Greek linguistic theory, linguistic correctness, known as hellenismós, has earned a central status (Pagani 2014). Reflections on the concept can be found as early as the pre-Socratics, and are attested until the late Byzantine period and echoed in the debates on the Katharevousa in the 20th century.

Throughout the ages, hellenismós has been connected to various intellectual traditions: early discussions were framed in a philo­sophical line of thought, focusing, among other things, on the ‘correctness’ of nouns. Further, reflections on hellenismós can also be detected in the philological tradition, that is, the application of grammatical reflections to literary texts by the Alexandrian school. In the Hellenistic period, hellenismós featured as an object of theoretical speculation in the grammatical tradition: treatises on the criteria that can be used to establish correctness first made their appearance at that time.

In the rhetorical-stylistic tradition, too, hellenismós had a prominent role: it was con­sidered one of five virtutes dicendi by the Stoics. It is in this tradition, and in the work of Dionysius of Halicarnassus in particular, that the origins of ‘Atticism’ are usually situated, a movement that emerged during the Roman period and that searched for purity in vocabulary, as well as in morphology and syntax. This move­ment had a major impact on the then current conceptions of hellenismós: the main criterion for correctness became a canon of certain Classical authors, and the attitude changed from (positively) advocating Classical features to (negatively) rejecting anything non-Classical. Lin­guistic correctness, and the proper use of higher-register ‘Attic’ Greek more generally, became a hallmark of elite social identity, and played a pivotal – and very concrete – role in reshaping the inherited literary language.

For a long period of time, this later development, and its effects on linguistic and literary production, did not receive a lot of attention. Horrocks (2010:4), for example, describes how many of his predecessors viewed higher-register Greek ‘as an artificial construct devoid of interest for historical linguistics, a “zombie” language that was incompetently handled by its prac­titioners throughout its pseudo-his­tory’. In recent years, various relevant issues have been ad­dressed, including the consideration of high-register Medieval Greek as a worthy object of linguistic considerations in its own right (Hinterberger 2014); the value of metalinguistic resources such as scholia and textbooks (Gaul 2007; Cuomo 2017; Tribulato 2019); the influence of the lower on the higher register (Horrocks 2017a, 2017b); linguistic levels in non-literary sources (Bentein 2015); new digital approaches to measuring linguistic levels (Bozia 2016); etc. And yet, many other relevant issues remain to be ad­dressed.

The main aim of this conference is to consider the role and importance of linguistic correctness, hellenismós, in later periods of Greek, that is, from the Imperial Roman to the later Byzantine eras (first to fifteenth centuries AD).

Interested scholars are invited to submit proposals (600 words max.) for 30 min. papers on one of the suggested topics to MA Katharina Preindl at: katharina.preindl@oeaw.ac.at, by May 31, 2020.

For more information, please check our website at

https://www.correctnessincomparison.ugent.be/

International Conference
University of Kiel, Germany, 22-23 May 2020

Medical Knowledge and its 'Sitz im Leben': Body and Horror in Antiquity

The conference will explore ancient and modern concepts of horror with reference to the human body. Our aim is to examine how the body is processing, affectively as well as cognitively, a horrifying experience but also how it can turn itself into a source of horror, e.g. in contexts of sickness and death. While we are firmly aware of the fact that ‘horror’ as a (largely post-Romantic) concept is not unproblematic when applied to Greek and Latin texts, we will try to show that its classical antecedents/roots are definitely worthy of close consideration and help to shed light on the ways in which the horrific, as a category that shapes our encounter with various forms of art but also with life itself, is understood today.

List of speakers/titles:

• Noёl Carroll (The Graduate Center, CUNY): “Philosophy, horror, and popular culture”
• Giulia Maria Chesi (U. of Humboldt, Berlin): “Horror in the Odyssey: Polyphemus and Odysseus in comparison”
• Debbie Felton (UMass, Amherst): “The ancient emotion of horror”
• Maria Gerolemou (U. of Exeter): “Heracles’ automatic body: Madness, horror and laughter in Euripides’ HF”
• Lutz Alexander Graumann (Justus-Liebig-University Gießen, University Hospital): “Overcoming horror: faintness and medical agents. Some tentative thoughts on antiquity and today”
• Lutz Käppel (U. of Kiel): “Roots of horror: Environment, bodies, societies”
• George Kazantzidis (U. of Patras): “Horror and the body in early Greek paradoxography”
• Dunstan Lowe (U. of Kent): “Hot and cold blood in Lucan’s Civil War”
• Nick Lowe (Royal Holloway, U. of London): “A terrible history of classica horror”
• Glenn Most (Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa/U. of Chicago): “The horrific body in Sophocles”
• Alessandro Schiesaro (U. of Manchester): “Apocalypse: Horror and divine pleasure”
• Rodrigo Sigala (U. of Tübingen; independent scholar): “The thrilling forces behind horrific experiences: A neuroscientific approach”
• Evina Sistakou (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki): “The visceral thrills of tragedy: Flesh, blood and guts off and on the tragic stage”
• Dimos Spatharas (U. of Crete): “Enargeia, the lower senses and the abhorrent”
• Chiara Thumiger (U. of Kiel): “Having guts”

Abstracts of papers and the finalized program will be uploaded soon in our website at:
https://www.cluster-roots.uni-kiel.de/en/calendar-events/roots-events/medical-knowledge-and-its-sitz-im-leben-body-and-horror-in-antiquity

For those who wish to attend: there is no registration fee, but please send an e mail to

Chiara Thumiger cthumiger@roots.uni-kiel.de and

George Kazantzidis gkazantzidis@upatras.gr

Organizers: George Kazantzidis (U. of Patras) / Chiara Thumiger (U. of Kiel)

The conference is generously funded by the Exzellenzcluster ROOTS

EABS (European Association of Biblical Studies) Annual Conference
Wuppertal, Germany, 3rd-6th August 2020

The Language of Colour in the Bible: From Word to Image

Red: Colour, Symbol, Emotion

Nowadays, the colour red is considered one of the basic colour terms of modern languages. The digital era allows the creation and nuancing of the various hues and shades it possesses. Its strength is such that today it forms part of logos, brands, announcements, road signs, etc. However, the expressive strength of the colour red is also found in antiquity. Curiously the Bible, which is characterized by its sober use of the language of colour, utilizes this colour through both direct (colour terms) and indirect (terms that themselves denote colour such as blood or fire) designations.

Their use not only imbues the text with colour but conveys various symbolic connotations. This happens both in the written text and in the different pictorial representations of the Bible.

As is well known, the Bible does not arise in a culture enclosed within itself. For this reason, it is relevant to study the colour red as it was used and interpreted in antiquity and in the subsequent centuries where we find the history of its reception.

For the 2020 conference, we are welcoming papers which study:

• Colour terms related with the colour red in Antiquity (Hebrew, Hittite, Greek, Latin)
• Metaphor and Symbolism of the colour red in the written text or in the artistic representations
• Pigments and dyes used to elaborate the different hues of red
• Restoration of artistic works and restitution of colours in religious painting

The call for papers is open until 20th February.

The link of the Workshop is:
https://www.eabs.net/EABS/Research-Units/Research_Units/Research_Units_2020/The_Language_of_Colour_in_the_Bible.aspx

The link of the Conference:
https://www.eabs.net/EABS/Conferences/Wuppertal_2020/EABS/Conferences/Wuppertal_2020/Annual_Conference_2020.aspx?hkey=f50f865b-33fc-4851-a732-d7e25eebcff3

To submit your abstract click:
https://www.eabs.net/EABS/Abstract_system/Call_for_papers_Wuppertal.aspx

The chairs will communicate the acceptance of the proposal by March 12th.

10th German Archaeology Congress
Kiel, 20-27 September 2020

AG Römerzeit on "Roman Trade", 23. -24. September 2020

"Trade" is considered an economic activity with the intention of making a profit. This includes manufacturing or processing activities in the craft sector as well as various services. We would like to put these everyday and nevertheless partly elusive aspects of Roman life up for discussion. Although the spectrum of topics should be as broad as possible, we would like to deliberately exclude the fields of pottery production and pottery trade.

At the 10th German Archaeological Congress in Kiel, the session AG Römerzeit will focus on the following aspects of Roman trade:

Features, finds and scientific analyses: How and on the basis of which characteristics does a feature indicate Roman trade? Which finds can be assigned to a trade and can they be used to specify features? In which cases can natural sciences be consulted?

Workshop structures and sizes: Which written sources and archaeological references attest the size and structure of enterprises? Can conclusions be drawn about the number of employees, production volume, sales and trade etc.? In which cases is it possible to reconstruct work processes from the archaeological features?

Localization of trade: It is generally assumed that workshops which posed a high fire hazard or which otherwise "disturbed" their surroundings (smell, noise,…) are located on the edge of a settlement. Does the current state of research support this hypothesis? Where are workshops located and are there differences in the localization of different industries?

Resource extraction: The extraction of resources, be it raw materials for the products themselves or materials for the production process, is trade specific. Does the process of resource extraction influence the choice of location and how is the procurement of resources structured?

Sales and markets: How and in what form can the chain "producer - retailer - recipient" be retraced? Can different distribution systems for commercial end products be identified? Which businesses moved into the vicinity of potential customers and where did it work the other way round?

Position in society: An interesting question will also be what position the different traders had in society. Did some trades offer the possibility to climb up the social ladder or to reach a certain status? As at the last meeting of the WSVA of the AG Römerzeit, we will pursue an interdisciplinary approach.

Speakers from all fields of archaeology, natural sciences and ancient history are cordially invited to present their research and current projects on this topic.

Abstract length: 500 characters
Length of talk: 15 - max. 20 min.

Please submit the abstracts to the speakers of the AG Römerzeit to:
roemerzeit_wsva@gmx.de

At the Kiel congress there will be the possibility to present posters. If you would like to present your thesis or project on other topic of provincial Roman or Roman research within this framework, you are also cordially invited to submit posters.

In particular, we would like to address our young colleagues with this congress in order to further develop networks among the university sector and research institutes.

Information on past conferences of the AG Römerzeit can be found at the following address:

http://ag-roemerzeit.webnode.com/