江苏句容下蜀中心山土墩墓发掘简报

2009年2月～4月,南京博物院在江苏句容中心山发掘了一座春秋早期土墩墓,发现祭祀器物群1处、墓葬1座和房址1座。器物群器物出土时破碎严重,属有意识打碎。墓葬堆土成坑。房址位于墓葬下方,主体由基槽和基槽内柱洞组成,为截面呈人字形的两面坡式建筑,有长方形过道,其与墓葬及祭祀器物群的位置关系值得研究。     

A Geomorphological Study of the Giza Necropolis,with Implications for the Development of the Site

There are a number of features of weathering and erosion within the enclosure surrounding the Great Sphinx of Giza that suggest the action of flowing water. That this erosion is not uniformly distributed is consistent not with erosion by rainfall per se but by rainfall run‐off—an erosive agent that is known to have been experienced at Giza until the late Fifth Dynasty. When the spatial relationship of various features within the Giza necropolis is considered, the extant erosion indicates that the Sphinx may pre‐date the reign of Khufu, the builder of the first Giza pyramid. The existence of pre‐Fourth Dynasty development at Giza can be inferred from this—support for which is provided by a number of archaeological finds excavated from the site.     

Does the History of Medicine Begin where the History of Philosophy Ends? An Example of Interdisciplinarity in the Early Modern Era

Abstract

A popular saying attributed to Aristotle states that ‘medicine begins where philosophy ends’—but this principle does not seem entirely valid for the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance, when medicine and philosophy were considered to be integral parts of the same branch of knowledge. For this reason, although today medicine and philosophy are clearly distinct disciplines, historians of ideas cannot study them entirely separately. Indeed, since the early modern era was a period of profound revision of knowledge, probably only a truly interdisciplinary investigation can identify the conceptual shifts and transfers capable of reinstating medicine in its fundamental role in the development of civilisation and modern thought, in particular as a model of a rational knowledge aimed at improving the social good through a fitting interpretation of experience. This article intends to offer arguments in support of such a historiographical approach, and to illustrate certain interesting methodological ideas that emerge from a study in which the history of philosophy and history of medicine cross-pollinate.