Dimitri Nakassis · University of Colorado Boulder · PhdFit
Resume-aware faculty matching
Find professors who actually fit you
Upload your resume. PhdFit's six research agents compare your background with faculty profiles, recent publications, lab focus, and outreach opportunities, then rank professors with evidence you can review.
Resume-aware matchingEvidence from recent researchOutreach drafts included
Advisor Match Brief Resume uploaded
Resume signals5 found
NLPHCIFairnessGraph MLPyTorch
Six-agent analysisRunning
Axel · Candidate AnalystResume parsed
Nova · Professor ResearcherRecent papers
Echo · Match ExplainerEvidence linked
Atlas · Strategy AdvisorFit ranked
Lyra · Outreach WriterDraft queued
Juno · Meeting Prep CompilerNext step ready
SC
Dr. Sarah Chen
Stanford · NLP & interpretability
91
fit
Fairness + NLP projects overlap with her recent work.
Strong methods fit: model evaluation and interpretability.
Clear outreach angle for current trustworthy AI research.
Outreach angle
Ask how her lab is extending interpretability methods into fairness audits for real-world AI systems.
Dimitri Nakassis
· College Professor of Distinction ClassicsVerified
Dimitri Nakassis is a Professor of Distinction in the Department of Classics at the University of Colorado Boulder. He holds a Ph.D. from Texas, obtained in 2006. His research focuses on the material and textual production of early Greek communities, with particular emphasis on the Mycenaean societies of Late Bronze Age Greece. Nakassis has developed new methods for investigating individuals named in the administrative Linear B texts and has argued that Mycenaean society was far less hierarchical and more dynamic than previously thought. His notable publication, 'Individuals and Society in Mycenaean Pylos' (Brill 2013), explores these themes. He has also published extensively on Homer and Hesiod, Greek religion and history, archaeological survey, Linear A, and the economy, society, and prosopography of the Mycenaean world. Currently, he is working on a second book titled 'Mycenaean histories,' which is a polemic against the traditional study of the Mycenaean palaces. Nakassis is co-director of the Western Argolid Regional Project (WARP), a diachronic archaeological survey in southern Greece, and also co-directs the 'Pylos Tablets Digital Project,' which involves the digital documentation of administrative documents from the Palace of Nestor at Pylos. In 2015, he was named a MacArthur fellow.
This chapter argues that the dominant historical periodization of the early Greek world (ca. 1400–700 BCE) is premised on a specific master narrative that relies on Orientalist tropes. This narrative is most clearly articulated in the work of Moses Finley and has become a major force in Anglo-American scholarly literature. Finley and others characterize the Bronze Age as essentially Near Eastern in character, a characterization that was premised on the (inaccurate) perception that Mycenaean states were rigid, monarchical, centralized, and bureaucratic. The dramatic and sudden collapse of the Mycenaean palatial system ca. 1200 BCE provides a clean break, with hardly any vestiges of the old order surviving through the Early Iron Age, a period that is understood to contain the sources of Classical institutions and structures. Thus, the Oriental Bronze Age is temporally juxtaposed with the European Iron Age, so that Greek history contains within itself the narrative of civilizational progress from East to West, but expressed in temporal rather than geographical terms. This state of affairs is not only problematic in theoretical and political terms but also does a poor job of explaining the archaeological and textual evidence.
Hesperia The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens · 2024 · 3 citations
Geography
Archaeology
Physical geography
ABSTRACT: The Western Argolid Regional Project (WARP) is an intensive pedestrian survey of 30 km2, located northwest of Argos along the banks of the Inachos River. Using high-intensity collection strategies, WARP generated very fine-resolution data that provide insights into the ways this seemingly marginal area contributed to and was impacted by regional histories. A key question is how the network of mountainous routes that traverse this landscape, connecting the area to the Corinthia and Arkadia, may have influenced localized, diachronic settlement patterns. This article focuses on areas of high artifact densities to demonstrate how regional activity and interconnectivity changed from the Neolithic to Modern period at this crossroads in the northeastern Peloponnese.
American Journal of Archaeology · 2023 · 7 citations
Senior authorCorresponding
Sociology
Political Science
History
This article presents the results of a demographic survey of authors who published in the American Journal of Archaeology between 2000 and 2020. We sought to better understand the demographics of knowledge production in one of the major English-language journals for Mediterranean archaeology, and, by extension, in the field in general. The survey, delivered by email in the spring of 2021, asked authors about their gender, race or ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, the educational attainment of up to two of their parents, their current academic position and rank, and the number of times they have published in the AJA. Our results indicate that people of color and the children of parents without advanced degrees are greatly underrepresented among AJA authors over the past two decades when compared to the U.S. population as a whole—a phenomenon that likely confirms many scholars’ perceptions of the field but has not yet been empirically demonstrated. We conclude with some reflections on possible causes of underrepresentation and suggestions for creating a more inclusive discipline and publication process.1
Journal of modern Greek studies · 2023-04-30 · 1 citations
articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding
Reviewed by: Archaeology, Nation, and Race: Confronting the Past, Decolonizing the Future in Greece and Israel by Raphael Greenberg and Yannis Hamilakis Dimitri Nakassis (bio) Raphael Greenberg and Yannis Hamilakis, Archaeology, Nation, and Race: Confronting the Past, Decolonizing the Future in Greece and Israel. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2022. Pp. xvi + 218. 25 figures. Paperback $25.99. In a seminal article in 1973, David Clarke declared archaeology’s “loss of innocence,” which he understood as the ongoing process of critical disciplinary definition. Clarke’s paper sketched the radical changes, especially the renewed interest in theory, that then roiled the discipline. Fifty years later, Raphael Greenberg and Yannis Hamilakis present a discussion of a new loss of innocence (161) and a new horizon in archaeology’s development, one that promises to be fertile ground for future exploration. Their aim is to expose archaeology’s “deep roots in colonialism and racism” and “to rebuild archaeology on entirely new foundations” (3). Their method for doing so is not a conventional academic monograph, but rather a series of structured conversations with themselves as interlocutors. Individual chapters focus on archaeology’s colonial origins, its practice in crypto-colonial contexts, the notion of purification, the role of nationalism and race in the development of the discipline, and decolonization. These themes are explored through engagement with the archaeology and politics of the modern nations of Israel and Greece. Clarke (1973, 8) observed that “each archaeology is of its time,” and this book is especially and avowedly so. The influence of the Black Lives Matter movement in particular, but also that of the pandemic, are tangibly felt and indeed highlighted by the authors (3). The book owes its genesis to a seminar taught by the authors at Brown University in the spring of 2020, followed by conversations via video conferencing during the lockdown. It is perhaps unsurprising, therefore, that the main novelty of this book, at least for this reviewer, is its emphasis on race in Mediterranean archaeology. In a Greek context, of course, the issue of race has become especially pressing with the rise of racialized politics and violence against migrants from Africa and Asia, prompting a growing interest in race among Greek scholars (e.g., Avdela et al. 2017). What emerges clearly from that research and the present book is how powerful a lens race is for the study of archaeology’s development: it is critical for analysis not only of the present state of the discipline but also of its history, and it is a sufficiently productive frame that it must be considered on a par with the concept of the nation, to which it has long been subordinated (Hamilakis 2007, 2020). Greenberg and Hamilakis range widely over a broad intellectual terrain. A brief introduction to the authors’ intellectual histories and orientations (chapter 1) sets the stage for an engaging discussion in chapter 2 about the origins and historical trajectories of Greek and Israeli archaeologies. [End Page 149] Crypto-colonialism—that fertile concept first articulated by Michael Herzfeld (2002)—is the subject of chapter 3, which provides a productive lens for comparison of the Greek and Israeli cases and their “superimposed colonialisms” (58). Chapter 4 focuses on archaeology as purification, from the practice of removing material traces and communities seen as out of place to the archaeological desire for purity of categories (e.g., the hard boundaries between chronological periods). Race is the analytical focus of chapter 5, which concludes with a detailed discussion of archaeogenetic studies and the ways that they re-inscribe racial categories. The penultimate chapter (chapter 6) meditates on decolonization, understood not simply as an academic endeavor but as a broad political project. A short conclusion (chapter 7) summarizes the aims of the volume. This is an important book that should have a significant impact on archaeology, for it sets an ambitious agenda for the future of the discipline. Greenberg and Hamilakis’s goal is nothing less than an emancipatory archaeology with the potential to liberate us all from the coloniality that defines our relationship with the past and present (171). Greece and Israel are potent sites for such an undertaking, both because of the dense entanglement of the ancient...
The chapter provides an overview of major socioeconomic developments in the Aegean and Cyprus during the late Middle to Late Bronze Ages (ca. 1750–1050 BC) based on the archaeological and textual evidence. This period witnessed the emergence of a dense network of towns with monumental architecture, palaces, wealthy burials, and writing. The first half of the period (ca. 1750–1450 BC) is characterized by the dominance of “Minoan” Crete and its palatial centers, whose artistic and cultural influence stretched from the Nile delta to the northern Aegean, stimulating the emergence of new hybrid cultures in the Aegean islands and the coastal mainlands of Greece and Anatolia. In the second half of the period (ca. 1400–1200 BC), the newly established “Mycenaean” palaces on the Greek mainland become central to Aegean networks and material expression. Cyprus, while influenced by Aegean developments, undergoes its own distinctive changes connected to the increasing exploitation of the island’s copper sources and its proximity to the Levant. The final collapse of Aegean palatial systems ca. 1200 BC ushers in a period of dynamic transformations that look forward to the establishment of a new Iron Age order.
