Retour sur l’arc d’Orange (Vaucluse), son environnement et sa datation

This article proposes a re-examination of the Arch of Orange based on ancient and recent data collected in urbanism and archeology. It is also the occasion for the author to share her thoughts concerning the scientific method that mostly relies on hypotheses. One of these idea concerning this famous...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Djamila Fellague
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: CNRS Éditions 2016-12-01
Series:Gallia
Online Access:https://journals.openedition.org/gallia/2730
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832096461783826432
author Djamila Fellague
author_facet Djamila Fellague
author_sort Djamila Fellague
collection DOAJ
description This article proposes a re-examination of the Arch of Orange based on ancient and recent data collected in urbanism and archeology. It is also the occasion for the author to share her thoughts concerning the scientific method that mostly relies on hypotheses. One of these idea concerning this famous monument of Orange assumes the existence of a first arch. If this construction existed we should wonder why it has been destroyed and we should also reconsider the inscription. Indeed, with this hypothesis the word restitutio could be understood as a reference to the destruction of this first arch. Associated to this hypothesis, the idea of a devasting flood will also be mentionned in the following lines but as this article is not an epigraphic study and because its purpose is not to provide any certainty, this thesis will only be briefly considered. In fact, the author wants to remind the reader of the uncertain nature of archeology even with such a well-known subject as the arch of Orange. For instance, if the idea of an arch originally dedicated to Germanicus then « given back » to Tiberius is now accepted as a fact, the author rejects this option and mentions that the Tiberian date for the monument has been lately debated. Actually, the arch of Orange – which is probably Augustan or Tiberian – demonstrates the difficult task in dating a monument on the basis of typology, which is yet nothing less than the founding principle of archaeology. Indeed, if the criteria selected are crucial their choice depends on the hypothesis defended.
format Article
id doaj-art-d4d97e893d09462d9a030685cac815ff
institution Kabale University
issn 0016-4119
2109-9588
language English
publishDate 2016-12-01
publisher CNRS Éditions
record_format Article
series Gallia
spelling doaj-art-d4d97e893d09462d9a030685cac815ff2025-02-05T15:46:56ZengCNRS ÉditionsGallia0016-41192109-95882016-12-0173214516810.4000/gallia.2730Retour sur l’arc d’Orange (Vaucluse), son environnement et sa datationDjamila FellagueThis article proposes a re-examination of the Arch of Orange based on ancient and recent data collected in urbanism and archeology. It is also the occasion for the author to share her thoughts concerning the scientific method that mostly relies on hypotheses. One of these idea concerning this famous monument of Orange assumes the existence of a first arch. If this construction existed we should wonder why it has been destroyed and we should also reconsider the inscription. Indeed, with this hypothesis the word restitutio could be understood as a reference to the destruction of this first arch. Associated to this hypothesis, the idea of a devasting flood will also be mentionned in the following lines but as this article is not an epigraphic study and because its purpose is not to provide any certainty, this thesis will only be briefly considered. In fact, the author wants to remind the reader of the uncertain nature of archeology even with such a well-known subject as the arch of Orange. For instance, if the idea of an arch originally dedicated to Germanicus then « given back » to Tiberius is now accepted as a fact, the author rejects this option and mentions that the Tiberian date for the monument has been lately debated. Actually, the arch of Orange – which is probably Augustan or Tiberian – demonstrates the difficult task in dating a monument on the basis of typology, which is yet nothing less than the founding principle of archaeology. Indeed, if the criteria selected are crucial their choice depends on the hypothesis defended.https://journals.openedition.org/gallia/2730
spellingShingle Djamila Fellague
Retour sur l’arc d’Orange (Vaucluse), son environnement et sa datation
Gallia
title Retour sur l’arc d’Orange (Vaucluse), son environnement et sa datation
title_full Retour sur l’arc d’Orange (Vaucluse), son environnement et sa datation
title_fullStr Retour sur l’arc d’Orange (Vaucluse), son environnement et sa datation
title_full_unstemmed Retour sur l’arc d’Orange (Vaucluse), son environnement et sa datation
title_short Retour sur l’arc d’Orange (Vaucluse), son environnement et sa datation
title_sort retour sur l arc d orange vaucluse son environnement et sa datation
url https://journals.openedition.org/gallia/2730
work_keys_str_mv AT djamilafellague retoursurlarcdorangevauclusesonenvironnementetsadatation