- Oriental Studies, Ottoman History, Archaeology, Classical Archaeology, Anatolian Archaeology, Greek Archaeology, and 24 moreRoman Archaeology, Egyptian Archaeology, Modern Greek History, Turkish History, Intellectual History, Cultural History, Ottoman Law, 19th century Ottoman history and politics of education, Ottoman Studies, Modern Ottoman History, Late Ottoman Period, Ottoman Empire, Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage, Cultural Heritage, History of Concept of Heritage, Cultural Heritage Concept, Oral history, Oral History and Memory, Oral History and Documentary, Oral History, Oral History and the Humanities, International Oral History Association, Sözlü Tarih, Oral History, and Digital Humanities(Roman Archaeology, Egyptian Archaeology, Modern Greek History, Turkish History, Intellectual History, Cultural History, Ottoman Law, 19th century Ottoman history and politics of education, Ottoman Studies, Modern Ottoman History, Late Ottoman Period, Ottoman Empire, Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage, Cultural Heritage, History of Concept of Heritage, Cultural Heritage Concept, Oral history, Oral History and Memory, Oral History and Documentary, Oral History, Oral History and the Humanities, International Oral History Association, Sözlü Tarih, Oral History, and Digital Humanities)edit
- Artemis Papatheodorou is a cultural historian specialising in the history of archaeology and heritage protection, as ... moreArtemis Papatheodorou is a cultural historian specialising in the history of archaeology and heritage protection, as well as the classical reception in the long 19th century in the Ottoman Empire. She is currently Early Career Fellow at the Center for Hellenic Studies, Harvard University. She was previously Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the ANAMED Research Centre of Koç University (Istanbul, Turkey). She has also taught as Adjunct Lecturer in Ottoman and Modern Turkish History at the Department of Political Science and History, Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences (Athens, Greece), and Visiting Assistant Professor in History at the Department of International Studies, American University of Sharjah (United Arab Emirates). She holds a PhD in Oriental Studies from the University of Oxford. Her thesis, which was completed in 2018 under the supervision of Dr Laurent Mignon, discusses the Ottoman policies on archaeology in the 19th and early 20th centuries, and traces the emergence of the concept and practice of heritage protection in Ottoman lands. Artemis' MPhil in Modern Middle Eastern Studies is also from the University of Oxford, and her BA in International and European Studies from Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences in Athens, Greece. Outside of academia, she has extensive work experience in cultural management and the promotion of inter-cultural dialogue and human rights, while her interests focus on the use of history in non-formal education. Besides Greek and English, Artemis speaks Turkish and French, and reads Ottoman Turkish, including manuscripts in rika.(Artemis Papatheodorou is a cultural historian specialising in the history of archaeology and heritage protection, as well as the classical reception in the long 19th century in the Ottoman Empire. She is currently Early Career Fellow at the Center for Hellenic Studies, Harvard University. She was previously Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the ANAMED Research Centre of Koç University (Istanbul, Turkey). She has also taught as Adjunct Lecturer in Ottoman and Modern Turkish History at the Department of Political Science and History, Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences (Athens, Greece), and Visiting Assistant Professor in History at the Department of International Studies, American University of Sharjah (United Arab Emirates). She holds a PhD in Oriental Studies from the University of Oxford. Her thesis, which was completed in 2018 under the supervision of Dr Laurent Mignon, discusses the Ottoman policies on archaeology in the 19th and early 20th centuries, and traces the emergence of the concept and practice of heritage protection in Ottoman lands. Artemis' MPhil in Modern Middle Eastern Studies is also from the University of Oxford, and her BA in International and European Studies from Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences in Athens, Greece. Outside of academia, she has extensive work experience in cultural management and the promotion of inter-cultural dialogue and human rights, while her interests focus on the use of history in non-formal education. Besides Greek and English, Artemis speaks Turkish and French, and reads Ottoman Turkish, including manuscripts in rika.)edit
PhD thesis submitted at the Faculty of Oriental Studies, University of Oxford, and degree awarded with no corrections in 2017. For a summary and the table of contents see below. Thesis summary: This thesis discusses the Ottoman... more
PhD thesis submitted at the Faculty of Oriental Studies, University of Oxford, and degree awarded with no corrections in 2017. For a summary and the table of contents see below.
Thesis summary:
This thesis discusses the Ottoman policies on archaeology in the aftermath of the initiation of the Tanzimat reforms (1839) and until the end of the Ottoman Empire (1923). It explores the activities of the central state, the autonomous Principality of Samos in the Aegean, and the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople. Primary and secondary sources in Ottoman Turkish, Katharevousa Greek, Modern Turkish and Modern Greek, English and French inform the analysis. The first chapter looks at the contexts within which an Ottoman interest in archaeology emerged. It discusses the rise of archaeology as a distinct area of scientific and scholarly research in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the encounters of the Ottomans with western archaeologies in that period, and those intellectual dynamics that made them receptive to archaeology. The second chapter focuses on the Ottoman legislation on antiquities, and secondarily looks at related institutional developments. It discusses at lenght the emergence of an Ottoman voice on archaeology through the crystallisation of increasingly comprehensive and mature sets of rules and procedures on heritage management. By looking at the autonomous Principality of Samos, the third chapter shifts the attention to the western periphery of the empire, and explores how the Greek Orthodox, when outside the direct control of the central state, could develop their own understanding of, processes and structures regarding archaeology. The fourth chapter looks, for the first time in the literature, at the archaeological activities of the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople, and discusses the contribution of Ottoman society to the promotion of archaeological research and the protection of monuments. Overall, this thesis provides a critical analysis of the emergence of the concept and practice of heritage protection in the Ottoman Empire in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Table of contents:
Introduction;
Chapter I: A context for Ottoman archaeology
- Archaeology in the West
- Western archaeologies in the Ottoman East
- An Ottoman intellectual context for Ottoman archaeology;
Chapter II: Ottoman archaeology: laws and parallel developments
- Regulation without a regulation: Ottoman archaeology between 1839 and 1869
- The 1869 regulation
- The 1874 regulation
- The 1884 regulation
- The 1906 regulation;
Chapter III: Policies on antiquity in the Ottoman Principality of Samos
- The Principality of Samos
- The archaeological policies of the Principality of Samos;
Chapter IV: Archaeology and the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople (1861-1923)
- The Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople at a glance
- The society's engagement with antiquity;
Conclusions;
Bibliography
Thesis summary:
This thesis discusses the Ottoman policies on archaeology in the aftermath of the initiation of the Tanzimat reforms (1839) and until the end of the Ottoman Empire (1923). It explores the activities of the central state, the autonomous Principality of Samos in the Aegean, and the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople. Primary and secondary sources in Ottoman Turkish, Katharevousa Greek, Modern Turkish and Modern Greek, English and French inform the analysis. The first chapter looks at the contexts within which an Ottoman interest in archaeology emerged. It discusses the rise of archaeology as a distinct area of scientific and scholarly research in the 19th and early 20th centuries, the encounters of the Ottomans with western archaeologies in that period, and those intellectual dynamics that made them receptive to archaeology. The second chapter focuses on the Ottoman legislation on antiquities, and secondarily looks at related institutional developments. It discusses at lenght the emergence of an Ottoman voice on archaeology through the crystallisation of increasingly comprehensive and mature sets of rules and procedures on heritage management. By looking at the autonomous Principality of Samos, the third chapter shifts the attention to the western periphery of the empire, and explores how the Greek Orthodox, when outside the direct control of the central state, could develop their own understanding of, processes and structures regarding archaeology. The fourth chapter looks, for the first time in the literature, at the archaeological activities of the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople, and discusses the contribution of Ottoman society to the promotion of archaeological research and the protection of monuments. Overall, this thesis provides a critical analysis of the emergence of the concept and practice of heritage protection in the Ottoman Empire in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Table of contents:
Introduction;
Chapter I: A context for Ottoman archaeology
- Archaeology in the West
- Western archaeologies in the Ottoman East
- An Ottoman intellectual context for Ottoman archaeology;
Chapter II: Ottoman archaeology: laws and parallel developments
- Regulation without a regulation: Ottoman archaeology between 1839 and 1869
- The 1869 regulation
- The 1874 regulation
- The 1884 regulation
- The 1906 regulation;
Chapter III: Policies on antiquity in the Ottoman Principality of Samos
- The Principality of Samos
- The archaeological policies of the Principality of Samos;
Chapter IV: Archaeology and the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople (1861-1923)
- The Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople at a glance
- The society's engagement with antiquity;
Conclusions;
Bibliography
Research Interests: Near Eastern Archaeology, Greek History, Ottoman History, Anatolian Archaeology, Ottoman Archaeology, and 18 moreOttoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Greece, Modern Greek History, Ottoman Historiography, Ottoman Balkans, Modern Ottoman History, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, Ottoman-Turkish Westernization, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, Aegean Archaeology, Ottoman art and architecture, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, History of Archaeology, Late Ottoman History, Ottoman Greeks, and Ottoman Turkish historical writing(Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Greece, Modern Greek History, Ottoman Historiography, Ottoman Balkans, Modern Ottoman History, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, Ottoman-Turkish Westernization, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, Aegean Archaeology, Ottoman art and architecture, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, History of Archaeology, Late Ottoman History, Ottoman Greeks, and Ottoman Turkish historical writing)
(Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Greece, Modern Greek History, Ottoman Historiography, Ottoman Balkans, Modern Ottoman History, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, Ottoman-Turkish Westernization, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, Aegean Archaeology, Ottoman art and architecture, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, History of Archaeology, Late Ottoman History, Ottoman Greeks, and Ottoman Turkish historical writing)
Research Interests:
Ο Εν Κωνσταντινουπόλει Ελληνικός Φιλολογικός Σύλλογος (ΕΚΦΣ) δημιουργήθηκε το 1861 και, έως το 1923, αποτέλεσε έναν από τους σημαντικότερους φάρους πολιτισμού για τους Έλληνες της Οθωμανικής Αυτοκρατορίας. Ξεκίνησε το έργο του... more
Ο Εν Κωνσταντινουπόλει Ελληνικός Φιλολογικός Σύλλογος (ΕΚΦΣ) δημιουργήθηκε το 1861 και, έως το 1923, αποτέλεσε έναν από τους σημαντικότερους φάρους πολιτισμού για τους Έλληνες της Οθωμανικής Αυτοκρατορίας. Ξεκίνησε το έργο του αποδεχόμενος και εντασσόμενος στο οθωμανικό πολιτικό πλαίσιο, εντός του οποίου όρισε για τον εαυτό του μια εκπολιτιστική αποστολή που ξεπερνούσε τα όρια της ελληνορθόδοξης κοινότητας και αγκάλιαζε το σύνολο της οθωμανικής κοινωνίας. Ωστόσο, αυτός ο προσανατολισμός άλλαξε μέσα στις δεκαετίες, με τον Σύλλογο να υιοθετεί τον ελληνικό αλυτρωτισμό στα τελευταία χρόνια της δράσης του. Το περιοδικό του Συλλόγου, γνωστό ως Σύγγραμμα Περιοδικόν, μας επιτρέπει να έχουμε πρόσβαση σε ενδιαφέροντα επεισόδια από τη ζωή και τη δράση του και να παρακολουθήσουμε τη μετάβαση από τον οθωμανισμό στον ελληνικό αλυτρωτισμό. Παράλληλα, μας δίνει τη δυνατότητα να επιχειρήσουμε να κατανοήσουμε και άλλες συναφείς πτυχές της ταυτότητας του ΕΚΦΣ, όπως είναι η σχέση του με τη Δύση.
Research Interests:
This article contributes to our understanding of the links between forced exile, refugee trauma, and antiquities. It zooms in to the case of the Ottoman Greek refugees who fled to Greece in the wake of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire... more
This article contributes to our understanding of the links between forced exile, refugee trauma, and antiquities. It zooms in to the case of the Ottoman Greek refugees who fled to Greece in the wake of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the defeat of the Greek army by the Turkish National Movement forces in 1922. It critically discusses memories of ordinary people from Lithri (ancient Erythrai, modern-day Ildırı), Nymphaio (near ancient Sardeis, modern-day Kemalpaşa), and Ayasolouk (ancient Ephesus, modern-day Selçuk). It also looks at aspects of the literary world of Smyrna-born poet and Nobel Laureate George Seferis. It is argued that, for these refugees, antiquities served as conduits, symbols, metaphors, and allegories for expressing the trauma linked to their state of uprootedness and forced exile. The refugees in question employed reverse “rescue archaeologies,” where it was for antiquities to salvage refugees rather than the other way round. The main primary material consulted consists of refugee testimonies from the Oral Tradition Archive of the Centre for Asia Minor Studies and Seferis’s diary. The approach is interdisciplinary and, besides Ottoman Greek history, draws on cultural geography, anthropology, archaeology as well as broader discussions in memory studies and critical heritage studies.
Research Interests: Cultural History, Cultural Studies, Archaeology, Near Eastern Archaeology, Ottoman History, and 15 moreCultural Heritage, Refugee Studies, History and Memory, Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Memory Studies, Cultural Memory, Greek Archaeology, Refugees, History of Archaeology, Memory, Late Ottoman History, Refugees and Forced Migration Studies, Refugee memory, and Seferis' Poetry
Research Interests:
From its earliest days, photography was linked to material remains of the past. Western pioneers of the medium were attracted to photographing Ottoman lands, especially the land of the Pharaohs, and the Holy Land. The Ottomans also seized... more
From its earliest days, photography was linked to material remains of the past. Western pioneers of the medium were attracted to photographing Ottoman lands, especially the land of the Pharaohs, and the Holy Land. The Ottomans also seized upon photography themselves, turning the lens upon monuments and artefacts within their own Empire. The literature on archaeological photography in the region has focused on European travel photography, and on the upper echelons of state officialdom. This article shifts attention to Ottoman bureaucracy, and to the societal level. It discusses the relationship between photography and the daily tasks associated with the Ottoman administration of antiquities. Additionally, it looks at the ways that an important learned society, the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople, used photography. The article treats Ottoman archaeological photography in its own right, largely on the basis of primary material in Ottoman Turkish and Greek. The article argues that photography was a new, technologically advanced medium that - in tandem with other visual reproduction techniques - was instrumental in promoting visions of modernisation. Photography, and other visual media, helped the Ottoman state promote state centralisation and modernisation, while enhancing the Hellenic Literary Society’s civilising mission.
Research Interests:
Invited lecture at the British Institute at Ankara, 18 April 2023 (hybrid) In modern times, the Ottoman Empire was one of only a handful of states that pioneered archaeological heritage protection through law. Between 1869 and 1906,... more
Invited lecture at the British Institute at Ankara, 18 April 2023 (hybrid)
In modern times, the Ottoman Empire was one of only a handful of states that pioneered archaeological heritage protection through law. Between 1869 and 1906, Constantinople promulgated four special laws on antiquities aimed at regulating this field in a comprehensive manner. This presentation will discuss the goals of each one of these laws. It will also examine their content, especially in terms of protection of antiquities, ownership and export of finds, and archaeological research. This presentation will moreover look into the ways in which the laws on antiquities were implemented throughout the Empire. Finally, it will try to locate the Empire in a global (archaeological) context, primarily through a comparison with Greece and Great Britain.
Watch online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfkse4rw74Y
In modern times, the Ottoman Empire was one of only a handful of states that pioneered archaeological heritage protection through law. Between 1869 and 1906, Constantinople promulgated four special laws on antiquities aimed at regulating this field in a comprehensive manner. This presentation will discuss the goals of each one of these laws. It will also examine their content, especially in terms of protection of antiquities, ownership and export of finds, and archaeological research. This presentation will moreover look into the ways in which the laws on antiquities were implemented throughout the Empire. Finally, it will try to locate the Empire in a global (archaeological) context, primarily through a comparison with Greece and Great Britain.
Watch online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfkse4rw74Y
Research Interests: Archaeology, Ottoman History, Cultural Heritage, Heritage Studies, Ottoman Archaeology, and 11 moreOttoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Cultural Heritage Law, Cultural Heritage Management, Archaeological Heritage Management, History of Collections (Archaeology), History of Archaeology, History and Archaeology of Asia Minor, Heritage Law, History of Classical Archaeology, and History of Archaeology and Anthropology(Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Cultural Heritage Law, Cultural Heritage Management, Archaeological Heritage Management, History of Collections (Archaeology), History of Archaeology, History and Archaeology of Asia Minor, Heritage Law, History of Classical Archaeology, and History of Archaeology and Anthropology)
(Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Cultural Heritage Law, Cultural Heritage Management, Archaeological Heritage Management, History of Collections (Archaeology), History of Archaeology, History and Archaeology of Asia Minor, Heritage Law, History of Classical Archaeology, and History of Archaeology and Anthropology)
Invited talk at the Architecture Department, Middle East Technical University (Ankara, Turkey) - 27.3.2023 [For the video recording of this lecture, please contact me at academia.edu or artemisuni@yahoo.gr] It is widely believed that... more
Invited talk at the Architecture Department, Middle East Technical University (Ankara, Turkey) - 27.3.2023
[For the video recording of this lecture, please contact me at academia.edu or artemisuni@yahoo.gr]
It is widely believed that the Ottomans were indifferent to the antiquities in their lands. Although instances of neglect, harm and destruction support this argument, I contend that the Ottomans – state and society alike – were more aware of the importance of the material remains of the past around them than this widely held belief allows us to think. In this presentation, I will trace such awareness in the ways that Ottoman lives were entwined with antiquities in cityscapes, landscapes, and soundscapes. First, I will explore cityscapes. Faced with the dual pressure of urbanization and modernization, state authorities in charge of antiquities and Ottoman learned societies developed their own responses to protect archaeological heritage. This is seen in the case of the construction of the Thracian railway and in that of a plan to endow the Ottoman capital with avenues. Similarly, in the early 20th century, a special law was introduced to regulate the demolition of ancient edifices. I will then examine landscapes. For ordinary Ottomans, antiquities around them led to embodied experiences of the past that were informed by their senses, such as sight, touch, even smell. This will take me to my final point, the role of soundscapes – involving the sense of hearing - in how ordinary Ottomans perceived antiquities. I will more precisely discuss a Greek folk song that reveals how Byzantine heritage could act as a metaphor for the beauty of the loved one. Overall, this presentation will attempt to show how cityscapes, landscapes, and soundscapes formed contexts within and channels through which the Ottomans expressed their appreciation and concern for heritage. A variety of primary sources, including the Ottoman States Archives, the periodical of the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople, and the Oral Tradition Archive of the Centre for Asia Minor Studies, will be used in support of an analysis that will be both interdisciplinary and transcultural.
[For the video recording of this lecture, please contact me at academia.edu or artemisuni@yahoo.gr]
It is widely believed that the Ottomans were indifferent to the antiquities in their lands. Although instances of neglect, harm and destruction support this argument, I contend that the Ottomans – state and society alike – were more aware of the importance of the material remains of the past around them than this widely held belief allows us to think. In this presentation, I will trace such awareness in the ways that Ottoman lives were entwined with antiquities in cityscapes, landscapes, and soundscapes. First, I will explore cityscapes. Faced with the dual pressure of urbanization and modernization, state authorities in charge of antiquities and Ottoman learned societies developed their own responses to protect archaeological heritage. This is seen in the case of the construction of the Thracian railway and in that of a plan to endow the Ottoman capital with avenues. Similarly, in the early 20th century, a special law was introduced to regulate the demolition of ancient edifices. I will then examine landscapes. For ordinary Ottomans, antiquities around them led to embodied experiences of the past that were informed by their senses, such as sight, touch, even smell. This will take me to my final point, the role of soundscapes – involving the sense of hearing - in how ordinary Ottomans perceived antiquities. I will more precisely discuss a Greek folk song that reveals how Byzantine heritage could act as a metaphor for the beauty of the loved one. Overall, this presentation will attempt to show how cityscapes, landscapes, and soundscapes formed contexts within and channels through which the Ottomans expressed their appreciation and concern for heritage. A variety of primary sources, including the Ottoman States Archives, the periodical of the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople, and the Oral Tradition Archive of the Centre for Asia Minor Studies, will be used in support of an analysis that will be both interdisciplinary and transcultural.
Research Interests:
Invited talk - Danish Institute at Athens (12.9.2022) This lecture looks at the ways antiquities in/from Ottoman Anatolia affected how refugees of the Asia Minor Catastrophe related to their state of exile and uprootedness, and aims to... more
Invited talk - Danish Institute at Athens (12.9.2022)
This lecture looks at the ways antiquities in/from Ottoman Anatolia affected how refugees of the Asia Minor Catastrophe related to their state of exile and uprootedness, and aims to shed light on the links between trauma and material remains of past civilizations. It focuses on memories of ancients ruins and other ancient finds by ordinary Ottoman Greeks – men and women - from Lithri (ancient Erythrai, modern-day Ildır), Nymphaio (close to ancient Sardeis, modern-day Kemalpaşa) and Ayasolouk (ancient Ephesus, modern-day Selçuk). Besides the place that antiquities retained in refugees’ memories, the analysis suggests that certain ancient finds played a profoundly tangible and symbolic role in refugees’ transition from a life in Ottoman Anatolia to one in Greece. To discuss such uses of antiquities, the analysis draws largely on refugees’ testimonies that were collected by the Centre for Asia Minor Studies between the 1930s and 1970s. Through a critical study of George Seferis’ diaries, we are also able to discuss the impact that ancient sites had on this world-acclaimed Smyrniote’s own account of exile and uprootedness.
This lecture looks at the ways antiquities in/from Ottoman Anatolia affected how refugees of the Asia Minor Catastrophe related to their state of exile and uprootedness, and aims to shed light on the links between trauma and material remains of past civilizations. It focuses on memories of ancients ruins and other ancient finds by ordinary Ottoman Greeks – men and women - from Lithri (ancient Erythrai, modern-day Ildır), Nymphaio (close to ancient Sardeis, modern-day Kemalpaşa) and Ayasolouk (ancient Ephesus, modern-day Selçuk). Besides the place that antiquities retained in refugees’ memories, the analysis suggests that certain ancient finds played a profoundly tangible and symbolic role in refugees’ transition from a life in Ottoman Anatolia to one in Greece. To discuss such uses of antiquities, the analysis draws largely on refugees’ testimonies that were collected by the Centre for Asia Minor Studies between the 1930s and 1970s. Through a critical study of George Seferis’ diaries, we are also able to discuss the impact that ancient sites had on this world-acclaimed Smyrniote’s own account of exile and uprootedness.
Research Interests: Ottoman History, Refugee Studies, Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Greek History, and 12 moreLate Ottoman Period, Refugees, History of Archaeology, Late Ottoman History, Modern Greek Studies, Ottoman Greeks, Asia Minor, Ephesus, Refugees and Forced Migration Studies, Greeks in Asia Minor, Refugee memory, and Late Ottoman Political and Cultural History
Invited talk - University of Vienna (18 January 2022) From the Adriatic Sea to the mountainous borders with Iran and from the Black Sea to the scorched shores of the Red Sea, the Ottoman domains were home to myriad locations of... more
Invited talk - University of Vienna (18 January 2022)
From the Adriatic Sea to the mountainous borders with Iran and from the Black Sea to the scorched shores of the Red Sea, the Ottoman domains were home to myriad locations of archaeological importance. The multitude of prehistoric, ancient and medieval civilisations that had left their imprint on Ottoman lands was bound to attract the interest of Europeans. Ottoman subjects were not in themselves left uninterested. Visits, digs, illicit traffic, museums and many more activities attest to this.
As the 19th century was progressing with the number of manifestations of an interest in ancient finds rising, the Ottoman state decided to take it upon itself to regulate this area of human activity. This presentation discusses the legal responses of the Ottoman state to this rising interest and, more specifically, the laws on antiquities of 1869, 1874, 1884 and 1906. It traces their origins, such as the incidents or other factors that motivated the state to promulgate the laws. It aims to shed light on the topics these laws covered, such as definitions on antiquities, the ownership of finds, stipulations on the import and, significantly, export of antiquities, any protective measures, and the regulation of excavations. It also provides a comparison between Ottoman archaeological legislation and that of the Greek kingdom in an attempt to identify points of convergence and divergence. To what extent was Ottoman policy inspired by Greece’s treatment of antiquities? Finally, this presentation does not fail to investigate the reasons for replacing one law with another. In this, a discussion of how each law was implemented in the vast domains of the empire remains crucial.
In all, this presentation aims to provide a comprehensive picture as to the Ottoman legal approaches to antiquities that, together with the development of Ottoman museums, encapsulate Ottoman archaeological policy. In discussing the laws, we shall see how the Ottoman state evolved from being largely a bystander into a guardian of antiquities in its lands.
From the Adriatic Sea to the mountainous borders with Iran and from the Black Sea to the scorched shores of the Red Sea, the Ottoman domains were home to myriad locations of archaeological importance. The multitude of prehistoric, ancient and medieval civilisations that had left their imprint on Ottoman lands was bound to attract the interest of Europeans. Ottoman subjects were not in themselves left uninterested. Visits, digs, illicit traffic, museums and many more activities attest to this.
As the 19th century was progressing with the number of manifestations of an interest in ancient finds rising, the Ottoman state decided to take it upon itself to regulate this area of human activity. This presentation discusses the legal responses of the Ottoman state to this rising interest and, more specifically, the laws on antiquities of 1869, 1874, 1884 and 1906. It traces their origins, such as the incidents or other factors that motivated the state to promulgate the laws. It aims to shed light on the topics these laws covered, such as definitions on antiquities, the ownership of finds, stipulations on the import and, significantly, export of antiquities, any protective measures, and the regulation of excavations. It also provides a comparison between Ottoman archaeological legislation and that of the Greek kingdom in an attempt to identify points of convergence and divergence. To what extent was Ottoman policy inspired by Greece’s treatment of antiquities? Finally, this presentation does not fail to investigate the reasons for replacing one law with another. In this, a discussion of how each law was implemented in the vast domains of the empire remains crucial.
In all, this presentation aims to provide a comprehensive picture as to the Ottoman legal approaches to antiquities that, together with the development of Ottoman museums, encapsulate Ottoman archaeological policy. In discussing the laws, we shall see how the Ottoman state evolved from being largely a bystander into a guardian of antiquities in its lands.
Research Interests: Archaeology, Near Eastern Archaeology, Greek History, Ottoman History, Anatolian Studies, and 12 moreAnatolian Archaeology, Ottoman Historiography, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, Anatolian Archaeology (Archaeology), History of Archaeology, History and Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, History of Law, History and archaeology of Epirus, History and Archaeology of Asia Minor, History of Islamic law, and History of Architecture and Cultural Heritage Protection Policies and Management(Anatolian Archaeology, Ottoman Historiography, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, Anatolian Archaeology (Archaeology), History of Archaeology, History and Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, History of Law, History and archaeology of Epirus, History and Archaeology of Asia Minor, History of Islamic law, and History of Architecture and Cultural Heritage Protection Policies and Management)
(Anatolian Archaeology, Ottoman Historiography, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, Anatolian Archaeology (Archaeology), History of Archaeology, History and Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, History of Law, History and archaeology of Epirus, History and Archaeology of Asia Minor, History of Islamic law, and History of Architecture and Cultural Heritage Protection Policies and Management)
In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the Ottoman state formulated and implemented a series of archaeological policies. These focused on developing a legal and an institutional framework for the administration of antiquities and on... more
In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the Ottoman state formulated and implemented a series of archaeological policies. These focused on developing a legal and an institutional framework for the administration of antiquities and on building the capacity of the state in terms of heritage management. The legal framework centered around four regulations on antiquities promulgated in 1869, 1874, 1884, and 1906. The institutional framework was based on the establishment and operation of the Imperial Museum, and building the capacity of the Ottoman Empire to deal with the remnants of Antiquity focused on producing experts in the field of archaeology. The talk provides a critical overview of the Ottoman policies on antiquities by looking at major legal and institutional developments and at the efforts of the Ottoman Empire to build its capacity in the field of archaeology.
Research Interests:
Unofficial Diplomats: East Mediterranean Archaeologists and Britain’s Imperial Project Tuesday, 12th December 2023 09:20 - 18:00 GMT School of History, Classics and Archaeology, Meadows Lecture Theatre, Doorway 4, Old Medical School,... more
Unofficial Diplomats: East Mediterranean Archaeologists and
Britain’s Imperial Project
Tuesday, 12th December 2023
09:20 - 18:00 GMT
School of History, Classics and Archaeology,
Meadows Lecture Theatre, Doorway 4,
Old Medical School, Teviot Place, Edinburgh EH8 9AG
Organisers: Anna Kelley (University of St Andrews) and Jessica Varsallona (University of Edinburgh)
For centuries, archaeology has been facilitated by both official and unofficial forms of colonialism, an indelible fact whose consequences continue to be grappled with in historical narratives of the past. The British Empire, once spanning the globe, was a critical player in establishing these dynamics. While different parts of the Mediterranean had different colonial
experiences with the British Empire, it was a crucial conduit to the East, and was therefore of strategic importance, and British interests were pursued through a combination of hard and soft power politics. Archaeologists working in the East Mediterranean, simultaneously able to
speak to both colonial and nationalist ideologies, therefore became critical actors in the theatre of imperial administration.
This workshop will explore the role archaeologists came to embrace as unofficial diplomats in the Near East, exploring the relationship between archaeologists and British colonialism between c. 1800 and 1947. While recent studies have demonstrated the relationship between archaeological missions and the European ideology of imperial expansion and the results this has had on cultural heritage, there has been little focus on the individual amateurs and academics conducting the excavations. These were individuals acting as intermediaries between imperial and local governments, negotiating access to sites, payments to workers and
officials, the fates of discovered artefacts, and, ultimately, the narratives of regional histories.
While the West has tended to treat these early archaeological explorers as romantic figures in noble pursuit of ‘truth’ and the preservation of the past, this has masked the use of these excavations as pretexts for expanding political influence.
This is also not to say archaeologists were unwitting accomplices to these policies. In reality, there was a spectrum of self-interest and web of negotiation that motivated many excavations.
Recognising that the nature of archaeological research responded to specific political and colonial contexts, participants will be encouraged to adopt a multifaceted methodological approach to publications of imperial-era archaeological excavations, private and administrative correspondence, and material culture acquired by heritage institutions during the period in question. This workshop will ultimately advance the discourse of how to untangle the dynamics between the British government and the academe by analysing the mechanisms by which archaeologists became integral to the perpetuation of Britain’s imperial project.
Britain’s Imperial Project
Tuesday, 12th December 2023
09:20 - 18:00 GMT
School of History, Classics and Archaeology,
Meadows Lecture Theatre, Doorway 4,
Old Medical School, Teviot Place, Edinburgh EH8 9AG
Organisers: Anna Kelley (University of St Andrews) and Jessica Varsallona (University of Edinburgh)
For centuries, archaeology has been facilitated by both official and unofficial forms of colonialism, an indelible fact whose consequences continue to be grappled with in historical narratives of the past. The British Empire, once spanning the globe, was a critical player in establishing these dynamics. While different parts of the Mediterranean had different colonial
experiences with the British Empire, it was a crucial conduit to the East, and was therefore of strategic importance, and British interests were pursued through a combination of hard and soft power politics. Archaeologists working in the East Mediterranean, simultaneously able to
speak to both colonial and nationalist ideologies, therefore became critical actors in the theatre of imperial administration.
This workshop will explore the role archaeologists came to embrace as unofficial diplomats in the Near East, exploring the relationship between archaeologists and British colonialism between c. 1800 and 1947. While recent studies have demonstrated the relationship between archaeological missions and the European ideology of imperial expansion and the results this has had on cultural heritage, there has been little focus on the individual amateurs and academics conducting the excavations. These were individuals acting as intermediaries between imperial and local governments, negotiating access to sites, payments to workers and
officials, the fates of discovered artefacts, and, ultimately, the narratives of regional histories.
While the West has tended to treat these early archaeological explorers as romantic figures in noble pursuit of ‘truth’ and the preservation of the past, this has masked the use of these excavations as pretexts for expanding political influence.
This is also not to say archaeologists were unwitting accomplices to these policies. In reality, there was a spectrum of self-interest and web of negotiation that motivated many excavations.
Recognising that the nature of archaeological research responded to specific political and colonial contexts, participants will be encouraged to adopt a multifaceted methodological approach to publications of imperial-era archaeological excavations, private and administrative correspondence, and material culture acquired by heritage institutions during the period in question. This workshop will ultimately advance the discourse of how to untangle the dynamics between the British government and the academe by analysing the mechanisms by which archaeologists became integral to the perpetuation of Britain’s imperial project.
Research Interests:
(Turkologentag, Vienna, 21-23.9.2023) The Oral Tradition Archive of the Centre for Asia Minor Studies is central for our understanding of Ottoman Greeks, especially rural communities, in the decades leading up to the dissolution of the... more
(Turkologentag, Vienna, 21-23.9.2023) The Oral Tradition Archive of the Centre for Asia Minor Studies is central for our understanding of Ottoman Greeks, especially rural communities, in the decades leading up to the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. Acknowledged as “invaluable” (Anestides, 2007, p. 5) and “grand” (Kyriakidou-Nestoros, 1987, p. 182), it tends to be treated as a most authentic source of knowledge. Yet, as any other archive, it is not a neutral repository of first-hand testimonies of life in Anatolia and Eastern Thrace. Its users should be aware of both its strengths and limitations. For example, it has rescued information that few other sources bring to us today, and its focus on the voice of ordinary Ottoman Greeks rectifies a tendency to focus on the histories of elite segments of the Ottoman Greek society. At the same time, questions of representation (e.g. selection of narrators, gender balance), on its nature as a “hybrid” archive standing in-between oral history and ethnographic research, as well as its current use by what Marianne Hirsch (2012) calls “the generation of postmemory” are important in ensuring a critical approach to the information that it contains. Finally, I wish to discuss the potential usefulness of this archive for the study not only of Ottoman Greek communities, but of their Muslim neighbours as well.
Research Interests: Ottoman History, Refugee Studies, History and Memory, Oral history, Ottoman Studies, and 11 moreOttoman Empire, Memory Studies, Cultural Memory, Modern Greek History, Collective Memory, Oral History and Memory, Late Ottoman History, Modern Greek Studies, Refugees and Forced Migration Studies, Oral History, and Refugee memory
(7th European Congress of Modern Greek Studies, Vienna, 11-14.9.2023) This paper provides a critical analysis of the salience of the Oral Tradition Archive of the Centre for Asia Minor Studies for the study of the reception of antiquities... more
(7th European Congress of Modern Greek Studies, Vienna, 11-14.9.2023) This paper provides a critical analysis of the salience of the Oral Tradition Archive of the Centre for Asia Minor Studies for the study of the reception of antiquities by ordinary Ottoman Greeks before 1922. It first looks at the Archive as a whole, and discusses the factors that informed the selection of narrators, the place of women in the body of narrators, the relationship between interviewers and narrators as well as its ethnographic and oral history characteristics. It then discusses the place of antiquities in the testimonies of the refugees: how information on archaeological heritage was elicited, and how the methodology employed by the interviewers might affect our understanding of the reception of the past by the narrators in the present. A discussion of trauma as a major formative factor for this Archive cuts across the analysis. The locations studied include Ayasolouk, Nymphaio, Pergamon and Lithri in western Anatolia.
Research Interests: Archaeology, Classical Archaeology, Near Eastern Archaeology, Ottoman History, Refugee Studies, and 14 moreHistory and Memory, Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Memory Studies, Cultural Memory, Modern Greek History, Collective Memory, Late Ottoman History, Modern Greek Studies, Asia Minor, Refugees and Forced Migration Studies, Greeks in Asia Minor, Refugee memory, and Seferis' Poetry
Middle East Studies Association Annual Conference 2022 (1-4.12.2022) This paper discusses the reception of antiquities by ordinary Ottoman Greek men and women in late 19th and early 20th-century Ottoman Anatolia. At a time of growing... more
Middle East Studies Association Annual Conference 2022 (1-4.12.2022)
This paper discusses the reception of antiquities by ordinary Ottoman Greek men and women in late 19th and early 20th-century Ottoman Anatolia. At a time of growing interest in the history of archaeology, including in the Ottoman Empire, it aims to complement the picture that we have managed to recreate so far - one that focuses on state actors and elites, such as governments, museums, archaeological missions, learned societies and exploration societies – by shifting the attention to those whose views have largely been neglected, the ordinary people. The analysis is based on the concept of “indigenous archaeologies” as described by archaeologist and Brown University professor Yannis Hamilakis, i.e. “local, vernacular discourses and practices involving things from another time” (2011). It is true that capturing the voice of ordinary men and women from the past is usually hard, given a dearth of primary sources. Yet, in our case, the oral history archive at the Centre for Asia Minor Studies, which was put together in Greece between the 1930s and 1970s, provides access to thousands of ordinary people’s testimonies, including on antiquities, from across late Ottoman Anatolia. Through a multitude of unheard-of before incidents, attitudes, beliefs and (mis)understandings on the material remains of the past, and unique accounts on these people’s relations with their Muslim neighbours, the Ottoman authorities, and, on occasion, foreigners on archaeological matters that this archive brings to us, we shall be able to critically reconstruct the archaeological world of ordinary Ottoman Greeks, and significantly enrich our understanding of the history of (Ottoman) archaeology. As will be shown, in these people’s archaeological world, time and the past is conceptualised in the modern linear way, as well as in pre-modern atemporal ways. Engagements with antiquities speak of protection but also of harm and destruction. We come across instances of illicit traffic in finds at the same time that finds are consciously preserved on site. Significantly, antiquities may be endowed with talismanic value, which transcends the boundaries of Christianity and may attract the Muslim neighbours of our subjects. This paper, in other words, aims to critically analyse and organise the multitude of experiences that ordinary people could have with antiquities by stressing that reducing them to one type of engagement would be misleading. Even if ordinary Ottoman Greeks did not overall partake in elite understandings of antiquities, their reception of the past is consequential for understanding the history of (Ottoman) archaeology.
This paper discusses the reception of antiquities by ordinary Ottoman Greek men and women in late 19th and early 20th-century Ottoman Anatolia. At a time of growing interest in the history of archaeology, including in the Ottoman Empire, it aims to complement the picture that we have managed to recreate so far - one that focuses on state actors and elites, such as governments, museums, archaeological missions, learned societies and exploration societies – by shifting the attention to those whose views have largely been neglected, the ordinary people. The analysis is based on the concept of “indigenous archaeologies” as described by archaeologist and Brown University professor Yannis Hamilakis, i.e. “local, vernacular discourses and practices involving things from another time” (2011). It is true that capturing the voice of ordinary men and women from the past is usually hard, given a dearth of primary sources. Yet, in our case, the oral history archive at the Centre for Asia Minor Studies, which was put together in Greece between the 1930s and 1970s, provides access to thousands of ordinary people’s testimonies, including on antiquities, from across late Ottoman Anatolia. Through a multitude of unheard-of before incidents, attitudes, beliefs and (mis)understandings on the material remains of the past, and unique accounts on these people’s relations with their Muslim neighbours, the Ottoman authorities, and, on occasion, foreigners on archaeological matters that this archive brings to us, we shall be able to critically reconstruct the archaeological world of ordinary Ottoman Greeks, and significantly enrich our understanding of the history of (Ottoman) archaeology. As will be shown, in these people’s archaeological world, time and the past is conceptualised in the modern linear way, as well as in pre-modern atemporal ways. Engagements with antiquities speak of protection but also of harm and destruction. We come across instances of illicit traffic in finds at the same time that finds are consciously preserved on site. Significantly, antiquities may be endowed with talismanic value, which transcends the boundaries of Christianity and may attract the Muslim neighbours of our subjects. This paper, in other words, aims to critically analyse and organise the multitude of experiences that ordinary people could have with antiquities by stressing that reducing them to one type of engagement would be misleading. Even if ordinary Ottoman Greeks did not overall partake in elite understandings of antiquities, their reception of the past is consequential for understanding the history of (Ottoman) archaeology.
Research Interests:
Just before the outbreak of the Greek War of Independence, Samos was a small island in the Ottoman periphery and of little consequence to Constantinople. As a result of the Greek War of Independence, Samos was granted autonomy within the... more
Just before the outbreak of the Greek War of Independence, Samos was a small island in the Ottoman periphery and of little consequence to Constantinople. As a result of the Greek War of Independence, Samos was granted autonomy within the Ottoman state largely by means of intervention by European powers. This gave the island the right to promulgate its own laws, inter alia, on antiquities.
This paper explores how this peripheral and insular locality could subvert established geopolitical centres, and the limits of such a capability, as seen in the case of archaeology. More specifically, this paper looks into the Samian legislation on antiquities, and discusses its place between two centres: Constantinople and Athens. It shows that Samos was influenced by their takes on archaeological legislation, while at the same time maintaining an agency that allowed it to borrow selectively and only to the extent that it suited its own understanding of the administrative handling of antiquities. What is of particular interest is that the earliest Samian legislation on antiquities predates that of Constantinople, the capital to which Samos remained attached in the context of its autonomy. Also, by situating Samos within the broader picture of heritage protection in Europe, we shall see that it was able to develop its archaeological legislation long before London, the most important imperial capital of that time, thus, making this Aegean island a pioneer in this field.
The analysis will also cover the museological choices of Samos. An initiative to collect items from around the world, and the donation of approximately 190 items of Egyptian antiquities point to an archaeological-cum-museological vision that transcended the shores of this small island. The ways in which these non-Samian antiquities were collected suggest alternative ways to creating universal museums compared to the ones practiced back then especially by colonial powers.
Finally, this paper will look at how Samos and its archaeology ended up, in the final years of the period of autonomy, entangled in a major archaeological war by proxy between Constantinople and Berlin, on the one hand, and Athens on the other. This will allow us to discuss the limits of the archaeological autonomy of this island that up to that point had managed to develop, according to its own needs, one of the first archaeological policies in the region and beyond.
Overall, the analysis will show how Samos, in spite of its location in the western periphery of the Ottoman empire, its small size and insular geography, was able to make itself one of the pioneering polities in the field of heritage protection globally, how far it could go in this respect, and the limits to its agency when confronted with the political agendas of regional and European centres of power. In this way, we will be able to explore how a small Aegean island could outrun established centres in archaeological matters, and suggest alternative means to similar goals.
Paper to be presented at the conference "Greece and Norway: European centre, periphery or it's complicated?" (11 April 2022 - online)
More information: https://www.rchumanities.gr/en/greece-and-norway/
This paper explores how this peripheral and insular locality could subvert established geopolitical centres, and the limits of such a capability, as seen in the case of archaeology. More specifically, this paper looks into the Samian legislation on antiquities, and discusses its place between two centres: Constantinople and Athens. It shows that Samos was influenced by their takes on archaeological legislation, while at the same time maintaining an agency that allowed it to borrow selectively and only to the extent that it suited its own understanding of the administrative handling of antiquities. What is of particular interest is that the earliest Samian legislation on antiquities predates that of Constantinople, the capital to which Samos remained attached in the context of its autonomy. Also, by situating Samos within the broader picture of heritage protection in Europe, we shall see that it was able to develop its archaeological legislation long before London, the most important imperial capital of that time, thus, making this Aegean island a pioneer in this field.
The analysis will also cover the museological choices of Samos. An initiative to collect items from around the world, and the donation of approximately 190 items of Egyptian antiquities point to an archaeological-cum-museological vision that transcended the shores of this small island. The ways in which these non-Samian antiquities were collected suggest alternative ways to creating universal museums compared to the ones practiced back then especially by colonial powers.
Finally, this paper will look at how Samos and its archaeology ended up, in the final years of the period of autonomy, entangled in a major archaeological war by proxy between Constantinople and Berlin, on the one hand, and Athens on the other. This will allow us to discuss the limits of the archaeological autonomy of this island that up to that point had managed to develop, according to its own needs, one of the first archaeological policies in the region and beyond.
Overall, the analysis will show how Samos, in spite of its location in the western periphery of the Ottoman empire, its small size and insular geography, was able to make itself one of the pioneering polities in the field of heritage protection globally, how far it could go in this respect, and the limits to its agency when confronted with the political agendas of regional and European centres of power. In this way, we will be able to explore how a small Aegean island could outrun established centres in archaeological matters, and suggest alternative means to similar goals.
Paper to be presented at the conference "Greece and Norway: European centre, periphery or it's complicated?" (11 April 2022 - online)
More information: https://www.rchumanities.gr/en/greece-and-norway/
Research Interests: Egyptology, Ottoman History, Egyptian Archaeology, Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, and 8 moreModern Greek History, Late Ottoman Period, Aegean Archaeology, History of Collections (Archaeology), Ancient Egyptian Art and Archaeology, History of Archaeology, Modern Greek Studies, and Late Ottoman Political and Cultural History
This paper deals with the reception of antiquities in Ottoman Turkey by Greek refugees who settled in Greece in 1922, and the links between antiquities back in their ancestral lands on the one hand and their state of forced exile on the... more
This paper deals with the reception of antiquities in Ottoman Turkey by Greek refugees who settled in Greece in 1922, and the links between antiquities back in their ancestral lands on the one hand and their state of forced exile on the other. The focus is on the area of Ionia and, more specifically, the villages of Ayasolouk (Ephesus), Nymphaio (near Sardes) and Lithri (Erythrai). This paper delves into a number of oral testimonies collected by the Centre for Asia Minor Studies (oral history project that spanned the years 1930-1975) and, thus, gives prominence to the voice of ordinary men and women.
Research Interests: Archaeology, Ottoman History, Anatolian Studies, Anatolian Archaeology, Ottoman Archaeology, and 15 moreAnatolian History, Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Greek History, Ottoman Historiography, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, Anatolian Archaeology (Archaeology), History of Archaeology, Hellenic Studies, History and Archaeology of Asia Minor, Asia Minor, Greeks in Asia Minor, Hellenic History, and Late Ottoman Political and Cultural History(Anatolian History, Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Greek History, Ottoman Historiography, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, Anatolian Archaeology (Archaeology), History of Archaeology, Hellenic Studies, History and Archaeology of Asia Minor, Asia Minor, Greeks in Asia Minor, Hellenic History, and Late Ottoman Political and Cultural History)
(Anatolian History, Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Greek History, Ottoman Historiography, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, Anatolian Archaeology (Archaeology), History of Archaeology, Hellenic Studies, History and Archaeology of Asia Minor, Asia Minor, Greeks in Asia Minor, Hellenic History, and Late Ottoman Political and Cultural History)
In the 19th century, the Ottoman state gradually developed a concrete interest in antiquities found in its lands. This interest was translated into specific activities to manage archaeological heritage in the empire and was codified in a... more
In the 19th century, the Ottoman state gradually developed a concrete interest in antiquities found in its lands. This interest was translated into specific activities to manage archaeological heritage in the empire and was codified in a sequence of regulations between 1869 and 1906. This paper looks at these regulations and discusses the goals that they served, and the way that they were implemented. It also looks at the 1912 regulation on the protection of monuments and at how it affected archaeological heritage management in the empire. Given that the last Ottoman regulation on antiquities survived the transition into the Turkish Republic, this paper also aims to shed light on continuity and discontinuity between the two periods. Analysis largely relies on a critical reading of Ottoman archaeology-related legislation, and administrative documents that survive at the Ottoman Archive at the Office of the President in Istanbul. Paper presented at the symposium "Archaeology in Anatolia", which was organised by the Royal Anthropological Institute, SOAS, the Anglo-Turkish Society and the British Institute at Ankara on 10.2.2020.
Video available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv1aUxgMntk (30 min)
Video available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv1aUxgMntk (30 min)
Research Interests:
Η εισήγηση αφορά στη σχέση του οθωμανικού κέντρου, όπως εκφραζόταν από την κυβέρνηση στην Κωνσταντινούπολη, και την Κύπρο όσον αφορά αρχαιότητες που ανακαλύφθηκαν στο νησί από τα μέσα του 19ου αιώνα μέχρι τις αρχές του 20ου αιώνα, όπως... more
Η εισήγηση αφορά στη σχέση του οθωμανικού κέντρου, όπως εκφραζόταν από την κυβέρνηση στην Κωνσταντινούπολη, και την Κύπρο όσον αφορά αρχαιότητες που ανακαλύφθηκαν στο νησί από τα μέσα του 19ου αιώνα μέχρι τις αρχές του 20ου αιώνα, όπως αυτή η σχέση αποτυπώνεται σε έγγραφα που διασώζονται στο οθωμανικό αρχείο στην Κωνσταντινούπολη. Η ανάλυση παρακολουθεί τη στάση που ακολούθησε η κεντρική διοίκηση αναφορικά με τις ανακαλύψεις αυτές. Ειδικότερα, εξετάζεται ποιο υπήρξε το ενδιαφέρον της και προς ποια κατεύθυνση ήταν. Ακόμη, η ανάλυση προσπαθεί να εμβαθύνει στον ρόλο που έπαιξε η οθωμανική νομοθεσία περί αρχαιοτήτων στην περίπτωση της Κύπρου, εστιάζοντας στην περίπτωση του Αμερικανού προξένου Cesnola και τις δραστηριότητές του συλλογής κυπριακών αρχαιοτήτων. Τέλος, η ανάλυση προσπαθεί να απαντήσει στο ερώτημα του ποια ήταν η σχέση της κεντρικής διοίκησης με την Κύπρο, από τη στιγμή που το νησί πέρασε υπό βρετανική διοίκηση (1878), με την Κωνσταντινούπολη να συνεχίζει να επιδεικνύει κάποιο ενδιαφέρον για τις κυπριακές αρχαιότητες. Οι βασικές γλώσσες έρευνας είναι η οθωμανική τουρκική για τις πρωτογενείς πηγές και η αγγλική για τις δευτερογενείς, ενώ πρωταρχική πηγή αρχειακού υλικού είναι το οθωμανικό αρχείο της τουρκικής Προεδρείας, το οποίο φυλάσσεται στην Κωνσταντινούπολη. Η εισήγηση παρουσιάστηκε στο πλαίσιο του συνεδρίου «Συλλογές Κυπριακών Αρχαιοτήτων στην Ελλάδα.
Ιστορικό και νομικό πλαίσιο», που διοργανώθηκε από τον Σύνδεσμο Αποφοίτων του Ιδρύματος Λεβέντη και το Σπίτι της Κύπρου στις 22/11/2019.
This paper deals with the Ottoman stance regarding Cypriot antiquities from the mid-19th century to the early 20th century. It is primarily based on material from the Ottoman state archive in Istanbul. It was presented in the conference "Cypriot Antiquities in Greece: Historical and legal framework”, which was organised by the A.G. Leventis Scholars Associationand the House of Cyprus on 22.11.2019
Ιστορικό και νομικό πλαίσιο», που διοργανώθηκε από τον Σύνδεσμο Αποφοίτων του Ιδρύματος Λεβέντη και το Σπίτι της Κύπρου στις 22/11/2019.
This paper deals with the Ottoman stance regarding Cypriot antiquities from the mid-19th century to the early 20th century. It is primarily based on material from the Ottoman state archive in Istanbul. It was presented in the conference "Cypriot Antiquities in Greece: Historical and legal framework”, which was organised by the A.G. Leventis Scholars Associationand the House of Cyprus on 22.11.2019
Research Interests:
Η παρούσα εισήγηση αφορά στην αποκατάσταση και πρόσληψη ενός Οθωμανικού αρχοντικού κτιριακού συγκροτήματος του 19ου και των αρχών του 20ου αιώνα στη Ρόδο. Εισαγωγικά, παρουσιάζεται η ιστορία του κτιρίου και η αποκατατάστασή του για χρήση... more
Η παρούσα εισήγηση αφορά στην αποκατάσταση και πρόσληψη ενός Οθωμανικού αρχοντικού κτιριακού συγκροτήματος του 19ου και των αρχών του 20ου αιώνα στη Ρόδο. Εισαγωγικά, παρουσιάζεται η ιστορία του κτιρίου και η αποκατατάστασή του για χρήση ως αναψυκτήριο κατόπιν σχετικής απόφασης από τον Δήμο (1988). Σχετικές πληροφορίες αντλούνται κυρίως από εμπλεκόμενους στις εργασίες αποκατάστασης, όπως αρχιτέκτονες. Ένας δεύτερος άξονας της εισήγησης εξετάζει τη στάση Ροδιτών και φορέων του νησιού, συμπεριλαμβανομένης της μουσουλμανικής κοινότητας, απέναντι στο οθωμανικό μνημείο. Γνωρίζουν την ύπαρξή του και πώς το αξιολογούν στο πλαίσιο της πόλης τους; Επίσης, προσπάθεια γίνεται να αξιολογηθεί και το πώς αντιλαμβάνονται τη χρήση του ως αναψυκτήριου. Οι σχετικές πληροφορίες βασίζονται σε συνεντεύξεις και ερωτηματολόγια. Καταληκτικά, γίνεται μία κριτική αποτίμηση της αποκατάστασης και πρόσληψης του μνημείου στη Ρόδο σε μία προσπάθεια να εξαχθούν συμπεράσματα εν δυνάμει επωφελή και σε άλλες αντίστοιχες πρωτοβουλίες αποκατάστασης οθωμανικών – και μη – μνημείων. Παρουσίαση στο πλαίσιο του συνεδρίου "Οθωμανικά Μνημεία στην Ελλάδα: Κληρονομιές υπό διαπραγμάτευση", Γαλλική Σχολή Αθηνών, 20-22 Ιουνίου 2019
This paper discusses the Kibrisli mansion on Rhodes, widely known by the name “Toptsubasi”, its restoration and current reception by local people. Presented at the conference on "Ottoman Monuments in Greece: Contested Heritage", French School at Athens, 20-22 June 2019
This paper discusses the Kibrisli mansion on Rhodes, widely known by the name “Toptsubasi”, its restoration and current reception by local people. Presented at the conference on "Ottoman Monuments in Greece: Contested Heritage", French School at Athens, 20-22 June 2019
Research Interests: Ottoman History, Cultural Heritage, Heritage Studies, Heritage Conservation, Ottoman Empire, and 11 moreLate Ottoman Period, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, Cultural Heritage Management, Architectural Heritage, Heritage Management, Ottoman art and architecture, Rhodes, Dodecanese, Ottoman Heritage Art and Architecture, Rodos, and Late Ottoman Political and Cultural History
Many a tale can be said about the relationship between the West and the Ottoman Empire in the 19th and early 20th centuries and the influence of the West on Ottoman archaeology in those decades makes no exception to this. With the... more
Many a tale can be said about the relationship between the West and the Ottoman Empire in the 19th and early 20th centuries and the influence of the West on Ottoman archaeology in those decades makes no exception to this. With the Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815) shifting the antiquities-related interest of the West to the Eastern Mediterranean, the exchanges between Ottomans and Westerners reached unprecedented heights. These exchanges were of many qualities, reflect various opportunities, challenges and dilemmas for each side, and speak of antagonism as much as they speak of companionship. It would be unrealistic to attempt to chart all such reference points. I have, instead, chosen to focus on the impact of the West on Ottoman archaeological legislation, which codifies in the most emblematic way how the Ottoman state positioned itself vis-à-vis the Western archaeologist and his ambitions. Also, I have looked at how western diplomats and travellers might have tried to shape Ottoman responses to archaeological matters by sharing information and their ideas. The Imperial Museum is too central an institution to miss out and, importantly, employed westerners to carry out key tasks. Lastly, Westerners who resided in the empire and beyond engaged themselves with Ottoman learned societies, as shown in the case of the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople. Paper presented at the conference "Approaches to Classical Lands - Travellers, Scholars, Tourists", Finnish Institute at Athens, 31/5 – 1/6/2019.
Research Interests:
This paper attempts to shed light on the use of photography in Ottoman archaeology from the 1860s onwards by looking at how it was incorporated in the workings of the state and of the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople (Εν... more
This paper attempts to shed light on the use of photography in Ottoman archaeology from the 1860s onwards by looking at how it was incorporated in the workings of the state and of the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople (Εν Κωνσταντινουπόλει Ελληνικός Φιλολογικός Σύλλογος), a learned society established in 1861 and open to all irrespective of religion. Based largely on a critical reading of primary sources, such as the Ottoman legislation on antiquities and the periodical of the Hellenic society, it shows that photography was critical for documenting and protecting antiquities, already in the early years of their conceptualisation as heritage in the 19th century, alongside other reproduction techniques, such as drawing and estampage on paper. More particularly, the analysis traces the introduction of photography into the Ottoman legislation on antiquities and the operation of the Imperial Museum, and discusses the weight that this carried in enhancing state control over antiquities in its own right and vis-à-vis local and foreign contenders. In the case of the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople, the analysis follows various instances of actual or aspired use of photography either by the society as a collective body or individual members, including two major photographic projects, and discusses how photography could support a learned society in its efforts to spread knowledge and promote heritage protection.
Research Interests:
This presentation aims to critically explore our understanding of the archaeology-related networks that existed in the Ottoman Empire. We tend to think of archaeology in the Ottoman Empire in terms of a North-South divide, more often than... more
This presentation aims to critically explore our understanding of the archaeology-related networks that existed in the Ottoman Empire. We tend to think of archaeology in the Ottoman Empire in terms of a North-South divide, more often than not understood on colonialist and imperialist terms. This paper aims to enrich the way we view the networks of Ottoman archaeology and to show that reality on the ground was more complex with inter-Ottoman and South-South relations also being possible. In particular, this paper explores how Athens, Constantinople, Egypt, the Aegean island of Samos and Smyrna influenced one another through networks of knowledge and know-how exchange. It looks for proof at legal exchanges and, to a lesser extent, museum collections, while tracing how knowledge could be disseminated from one place to another. More specifically, this paper looks at the influence of Greek law on Ottoman and Samian legislation on antiquities. Also, it looks at how a considerable donation of antiquities from the Egyptian government to the museum of Samos was achieved, and discusses how the Evangelical School at Smyrna supported the Samian administration and a major voluntary organisation in the Ottoman capital, the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople, in their efforts to improve their heritage-related activities. In doing this, this paper makes use of primary sources, such as laws and publications, from the late 19th and early 20th century in Ottoman Turkish and Greek.
Research Interests: Egyptology, Greek History, Ottoman History, Egyptian Art and Archaeology, Middle East Studies, and 21 moreMiddle East & North Africa, Middle East History, Egyptian Archaeology, Middle Eastern History, Ottoman Studies, Turkish and Middle East Studies, Egyptian History, Ottoman Empire, Modern Middle East History, Egypt, Middle Eastern Studies, Modern Greek History, Modern Ottoman History, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, History of Egyptology, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Ancient Egyptian Art and Archaeology, Late Ottoman History, and Ancient Egypt(Middle East & North Africa, Middle East History, Egyptian Archaeology, Middle Eastern History, Ottoman Studies, Turkish and Middle East Studies, Egyptian History, Ottoman Empire, Modern Middle East History, Egypt, Middle Eastern Studies, Modern Greek History, Modern Ottoman History, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, History of Egyptology, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Ancient Egyptian Art and Archaeology, Late Ottoman History, and Ancient Egypt)
(Middle East & North Africa, Middle East History, Egyptian Archaeology, Middle Eastern History, Ottoman Studies, Turkish and Middle East Studies, Egyptian History, Ottoman Empire, Modern Middle East History, Egypt, Middle Eastern Studies, Modern Greek History, Modern Ottoman History, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, History of Egyptology, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Ancient Egyptian Art and Archaeology, Late Ottoman History, and Ancient Egypt)
This paper looks at newly emerging concepts and ways of engaging with antiquities in the Ottoman empire in the 19th and early 20th centuries, as seen in the case of the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople from the 1860s onwards.... more
This paper looks at newly emerging concepts and ways of engaging with antiquities in the Ottoman empire in the 19th and early 20th centuries, as seen in the case of the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople from the 1860s onwards. It is based on the study of the periodical of the Society, especially the minutes of meetings published in it, and complementary readings of material from the Ottoman archive in Istanbul as well as other sources. It is argued that the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople illustrates a shift from pre-modern concepts regarding the material remnants of the past to a modern understanding of antiquity, and a transition from pre-modern patterns of engaging with antiquities to new ones associated with the modern world and progress.
Research Interests: Greek History, Ottoman History, Cultural Heritage, Heritage Studies, Ottoman Studies, and 13 moreOttoman Empire, Modern Greek History, Modern Ottoman History, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, Cultural Heritage Management, World Cultural Heritage, Heritage Management, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Heritage, Late Ottoman History, and Museum and Heritage Studies(Ottoman Empire, Modern Greek History, Modern Ottoman History, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, Cultural Heritage Management, World Cultural Heritage, Heritage Management, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Heritage, Late Ottoman History, and Museum and Heritage Studies)
(Ottoman Empire, Modern Greek History, Modern Ottoman History, Greek Archaeology, Late Ottoman Period, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, Cultural Heritage Management, World Cultural Heritage, Heritage Management, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Heritage, Late Ottoman History, and Museum and Heritage Studies)
This paper explores the impact that Westerners had on the emergence and development of archaeological policies and the protection of archaeological heritage in the Ottoman Empire following the initiation of the Tanzimat reforms in the... more
This paper explores the impact that Westerners had on the emergence and development of archaeological policies and the protection of archaeological heritage in the Ottoman Empire following the initiation of the Tanzimat reforms in the late 1830s and until the demise of the empire. It discusses three patterns of interaction, the reactive, the informative/awareness-raising, and the collaborative ones. It looks at the Ottoman central state, the autonomous Principality of Samos in the Aegean, and the Hellenic Literary Society at Constantinople. The analysis draws extensively on primary material from the Ottoman archive in Istanbul, the archive of Samos, and the periodical of the Hellenic Literary Society, while benefitting from other primary and secondary sources in (Ottoman) Turkish, Greek and other languages. It concludes that, besides a competitive relationship with the West, positive patterns of interaction for the protection of archaeological heritage in the Ottoman Empire can also be identified.
Research Interests: Archaeology, Near Eastern Archaeology, Ottoman History, Middle East Studies, Middle East & North Africa, and 15 moreCultural Heritage, Heritage Studies, Middle East History, Middle Eastern History, Ottoman Studies, Turkish and Middle East Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Middle East History, Middle Eastern Studies, Modern Ottoman History, Late Ottoman Period, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Middle East, and Late Ottoman History(Cultural Heritage, Heritage Studies, Middle East History, Middle Eastern History, Ottoman Studies, Turkish and Middle East Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Middle East History, Middle Eastern Studies, Modern Ottoman History, Late Ottoman Period, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Middle East, and Late Ottoman History)
(Cultural Heritage, Heritage Studies, Middle East History, Middle Eastern History, Ottoman Studies, Turkish and Middle East Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Middle East History, Middle Eastern Studies, Modern Ottoman History, Late Ottoman Period, History of Ottoman Art and Architecture, Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, Middle East, and Late Ottoman History)
Σχεδόν ταυτόχρονα με την ίδρυσή του το 1861 και για 60 περίπου χρόνια, ο εν Κωνσταντινουπόλει Ελληνικός Φιλολογικός Σύλλογος ανέπτυξε συστηματική δράση σε σχέση με την αρχαιολογία και, ιδίως, τις αρχαιότητες της οθωμανικής πρωτεύουσας.... more
Σχεδόν ταυτόχρονα με την ίδρυσή του το 1861 και για 60 περίπου χρόνια, ο εν Κωνσταντινουπόλει Ελληνικός Φιλολογικός Σύλλογος ανέπτυξε συστηματική δράση σε σχέση με την αρχαιολογία και, ιδίως, τις αρχαιότητες της οθωμανικής πρωτεύουσας. Στην παρουσίαση, εξετάζεται το ερευνητικό και εκδοτικό έργο του Συλλόγου, τα δίκτυα που ανέπτυξε σε σχέση με την αρχαιολογία, η προσήλωσή του στη συλλογή αρχαιοτήτων, συμπεριλαμβανομένων των νομισμάτων, και οι σχέσεις του με το οθωμανικό κράτος αναφορικά με αρχαιολογικά ζητήματα. Υποστηρίζεται ότι ο Ελληνικός Φιλολογικός Σύλλογος αποτελεί χαρακτηριστικό παράδειγμα της μετάβασης του οθωμανικού κράτους, και ειδικότερα της οθωμανικής κοινωνίας, σε μία σύγχρονη αντίληψη για την αρχαιολογική κληρονομιά και τη διαχείριση αυτής, όπου νέες χρήσεις και συμβολισμοί, και νέες αξίες επιχείρησαν να αντικαταστήσουν πρακτικές, όπως η ανακύκλωση των αρχαιοτήτων στην οικοδομή.
Research Interests: History, Cultural History, Archaeology, Classical Archaeology, Near Eastern Archaeology, and 13 moreGreek History, Ottoman History, Anatolian Archaeology, Ottoman Archaeology, Ottoman Studies, Ottoman Empire, Modern Greek History, Greek Archaeology, Intellectual and cultural history, Late Ottoman Period, History of Archeology, History of Archaeology, and Modern Greek Studies
This paper looks at the Ottoman policies on archaeology in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The analysis focuses on the laws adopted and implemented between 1869 and the fall of the Empire. It looks at their comprehensiveness and... more
This paper looks at the Ottoman policies on archaeology in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The analysis focuses on the laws adopted and implemented between 1869 and the fall of the Empire. It looks at their comprehensiveness and weaknesses and the way that they were implemented. Critical topics for the development of Ottoman archaeology, such as the ownership of finds and the export of antiquities, are discussed as well. Moreover, this paper explores the sources of the policies and factors that may have influenced their adoption and attempts to locate Ottoman legislation at a regional level with particular reference to the Greek and Egyptian cases.
Research Interests:
Η εισήγηση αποτελεί μία απόπειρα προσέγγισης της οθωμανικής αρχαιολογίας, όπως αναπτύχθηκε τον 19ο και στις αρχές του 20ου αιώνα, μέσα από την εξέταση σημείων επαφής της με στοιχεία ελληνικότητας και, ειδικότερα, το ελλαδικό κράτος, την... more
Η εισήγηση αποτελεί μία απόπειρα προσέγγισης της οθωμανικής αρχαιολογίας, όπως αναπτύχθηκε τον 19ο και στις αρχές του 20ου αιώνα, μέσα από την εξέταση σημείων επαφής της με στοιχεία ελληνικότητας και, ειδικότερα, το ελλαδικό κράτος, την ελληνική αρχαιότητα και τους Έλληνες της Αυτοκρατορίας. Κατά πρώτον, γίνεται προσπάθεια να μελετηθεί και να οριοθετηθεί ο ρόλος της Ελλάδας στην ανάπτυξη της οθωμανικής αρχαιολογίας, ιδίως στον βαθμό που λειτούργησε ως πρότυπο για την προστασία των αρχαιοτήτων. Επίσης, εξετάζεται η θέση της ελληνικής αρχαιότητας μέσα στο ιδεολογικό πλαίσιο της οθωμανικής αρχαιολογίας και γίνεται προσπάθεια να εντοπισθούν τυχόν διαφοροποιήσεις αυτής της θέσης μέσα στον χρόνο. Εν προκειμένω, η μελέτη εστιάζει στη λειτουργία του Αυτοκρατορικού Αρχαιολογικού Μουσείου στην Κωνσταντινούπολη, όπως για παράδειγμα στις μουσειολογικές του επιλογές και το εκδοτικό του έργο. Τέλος, γίνεται απόπειρα να διερευνηθεί η σχέση των Οθωμανών Ελλήνων με την οθωμανική αρχαιολογία και, ειδικότερα, ο συνεργατικός ή συγκρουσιακός χαρακτήρας της σχέσης τόσο σε ατομικό όσο και σε συλλογικό επίπεδο. Εν κατακλείδι, υποστηρίζεται πως η οθωμανική αρχαιολογία δεν αναπτύχθηκε ανεξάρτητα και σε απόλυτη αντίθεση με προγενέστερες και σύγχρονες αυτής εκδοχές της ελληνικότητας και πως η κατανόηση του χαρακτήρα της απαιτεί να δοθεί προσοχή σε παράγοντες που ξεπερνούν το δίπολο ελληνικός-τουρκικός.
Research Interests:
Η εισήγηση εξετάζει τη φύση των αρχαιολογικών πολιτικών που αναπτύχθηκαν στην Ηγεμονία της Σάμου την περίοδο 1850-1912. Αποπειράται να ερμηνεύσει τις πολιτικές και ιδεολογικές τους διαστάσεις μέσα από μία κριτική προσέγγιση κυρίως της... more
Η εισήγηση εξετάζει τη φύση των αρχαιολογικών πολιτικών που αναπτύχθηκαν στην Ηγεμονία της Σάμου την περίοδο 1850-1912. Αποπειράται να ερμηνεύσει τις πολιτικές και ιδεολογικές τους διαστάσεις μέσα από μία κριτική προσέγγιση κυρίως της σαμιακής νομοθεσίας και διοικητικών εγγράφων. Στηρίζεται σε εκτενή μελέτη των αρχείων της Ηγεμονίας, που διασώζονται στα ΓΑΚ Σάμου. Άλλες πρωτογενείς πηγές, π.χ. εφημερίδες και εκδόσεις της εποχής, οθωμανικά έγγραφα, καθώς και σύγχρονες ιστοριογραφικές αναλύσεις συμπληρώνουν την εικόνα.
Προβάλλεται η άποψη ότι, παρά το γεγονός ότι η Σάμος ήταν ένα σχετικά μικρό νησί στη δυτική περιφέρεια της Οθωμανικής Αυτοκρατορίας, οι πολιτικές της Ηγεμονίας για την αρχαιολογία συμβαδίζουν, σε γενικές γραμμές, με τη νόρμα, όπως αυτή εκπορευόταν από την Αθήνα και την Κωνσταντινούπολη. Αντί της γεωγραφίας, τα αίτια των αποκλίσεων πρέπει να αναζητηθούν στη φύση του αυτόνομου καθεστώτος και στις οικονομικές προτεραιότητες ή/και την οικονομική στενότητα της Ηγεμονίας.
Προβάλλεται η άποψη ότι, παρά το γεγονός ότι η Σάμος ήταν ένα σχετικά μικρό νησί στη δυτική περιφέρεια της Οθωμανικής Αυτοκρατορίας, οι πολιτικές της Ηγεμονίας για την αρχαιολογία συμβαδίζουν, σε γενικές γραμμές, με τη νόρμα, όπως αυτή εκπορευόταν από την Αθήνα και την Κωνσταντινούπολη. Αντί της γεωγραφίας, τα αίτια των αποκλίσεων πρέπει να αναζητηθούν στη φύση του αυτόνομου καθεστώτος και στις οικονομικές προτεραιότητες ή/και την οικονομική στενότητα της Ηγεμονίας.
Research Interests:
This presentation looks at the policies that Ottoman Samos developed in the field of archaeology from the mid 19th century until 1912. It attempts to trace their evolution, the sources they used and the impact that politics may have had... more
This presentation looks at the policies that Ottoman Samos developed in the field of archaeology from the mid 19th century until 1912. It attempts to trace their evolution, the sources they used and the impact that politics may have had on them. It makes extensive use of archival material in Greek but also benefits from sources in Ottoman Turkish, English and French. It concludes that in spite of its insular geography and its location in the western periphery of the Empire, Samos was able to follow a mainstream policy on antiquities.
Research Interests:
What makes a Christian architect design a mosque? Conversely, what makes a Muslim leader commission the design of a mosque – and a landmark one as such – to a Christian architect? In late Ottoman Constantinople, there was a number of... more
What makes a Christian architect design a mosque? Conversely, what makes a Muslim leader commission the design of a mosque – and a landmark one as such – to a Christian architect?
In late Ottoman Constantinople, there was a number of mosques that were designed by Ottoman Christians, many of them by members of the famous Armenian family of architects, the Balyan. On the sea-side road that connects the Dolmabahçe Palace to the Ҫirağan Palace along the Bosporus there are two such mosques designed by a member of the Balyan family. In between these, up the slope, a third one by Ottoman Greek, state architect Nikolaos Tzelepopoulos completes the trilogy. Let’s have a better look at these three ‘alternative’ mosques designed by Christians.
In late Ottoman Constantinople, there was a number of mosques that were designed by Ottoman Christians, many of them by members of the famous Armenian family of architects, the Balyan. On the sea-side road that connects the Dolmabahçe Palace to the Ҫirağan Palace along the Bosporus there are two such mosques designed by a member of the Balyan family. In between these, up the slope, a third one by Ottoman Greek, state architect Nikolaos Tzelepopoulos completes the trilogy. Let’s have a better look at these three ‘alternative’ mosques designed by Christians.
Research Interests: Ottoman History, Architecture, Ottoman Studies, Islamic Art, Islamic Studies, and 11 moreOttoman Empire, Islamic' Architecture, Islamic History, History of architecture, History of Istanbul, Ottoman Greeks, Ottoman Armenians, Islamic art and architecture, Istanbul, Ottoman İstanbul, and Urban Studies: Constantinople/Istanbul
Interview of Dr Artemis Papatheodorou to Dr Amara Thornton on her engagements with the history of archaeology Available at:... more
Interview of Dr Artemis Papatheodorou to Dr Amara Thornton on her engagements with the history of archaeology
Available at: https://historyofarchaeologyioa.weebly.com/historians-of-archaeology/dr-artemis-papatheodorou?fbclid=IwAR3Mo6CJF3vXiGzSwYTSpv4ZcryclR7EQzI4-36HJM2vHDNjnd7Jicnj5yA
Available at: https://historyofarchaeologyioa.weebly.com/historians-of-archaeology/dr-artemis-papatheodorou?fbclid=IwAR3Mo6CJF3vXiGzSwYTSpv4ZcryclR7EQzI4-36HJM2vHDNjnd7Jicnj5yA
Research Interests: Ottoman History, Cultural Heritage, Heritage Studies, Ottoman Archaeology, Ottoman Studies, and 11 moreOttoman Empire, Modern Greek History, Alexander the Great, Late Ottoman Period, History of Archaeology, Modern Greek Studies, Ottoman Greeks, History and Archaeology of Asia Minor, Asia Minor, Greeks in Asia Minor, and Karamanlidika
Home to the Colossus, one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, the island of Rhodes is also famous for having been the headquarters of the Medieval Knights of Saint John. Their surviving fortifications that encircle the old town are... more
Home to the Colossus, one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, the island of Rhodes is also famous for having been the headquarters of the Medieval Knights of Saint John. Their surviving fortifications that encircle the old town are nowadays on the UNESCO list of World Heritage. Yet less known is the period that came after the Knights. Do you happen to know who succeeded them as overlord of this small Mediterranean island? In 1522, the Ottoman Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent defeated the Knights and led his forces into the town of Rhodes. There started a new era that was to last nearly 400 years. The Ottomans dotted Rhodes with beautiful mosques and hamams that one can still see these days while taking a stroll in the old town. Be this as it may, this article will take us outside the city walls in an adjacent area that once upon a time was full of gardens and orchards and a few Ottoman tower-houses.
Research Interests:
Διαδραστική διάλεξη, σεμινάριο Ιστορίας Δρ. Χαράλαμπου Μηνάογλου, Σύλλογος Κωνσταντινουπολιτών
Research Interests:
A role-playing game at the Ashmolean Museum carried out on the occasion of "Curiosity Carnival" - European Researchers' Night (29 Sep. 2017), which was organised by the University of Oxford This role-playing game drew on the plans to... more
A role-playing game at the Ashmolean Museum carried out on the occasion of "Curiosity Carnival" - European Researchers' Night (29 Sep. 2017), which was organised by the University of Oxford
This role-playing game drew on the plans to demolish the byzantine walls of Constantinople, the capital of the Ottoman state, in 1909 with a view to constructing avenues and aimed at drawing attention to the relation between heritage and sustainable development in our cities. The participants were introduced to the story and the major stakeholders involved. They took over a role and accordingly developed arguments in favour or against the demolition of the walls. They were then introduced to the UN Sustainable Development Goals and were invited to play a game that was based on the case of the city of Liverpool, a UNESCO World Heritage site, which bears a striking resemblance to the Ottoman case from over a hundred years earlier in its challenges to reconcile the needs for modern facilities and heritage protection.
This role-playing game drew on the plans to demolish the byzantine walls of Constantinople, the capital of the Ottoman state, in 1909 with a view to constructing avenues and aimed at drawing attention to the relation between heritage and sustainable development in our cities. The participants were introduced to the story and the major stakeholders involved. They took over a role and accordingly developed arguments in favour or against the demolition of the walls. They were then introduced to the UN Sustainable Development Goals and were invited to play a game that was based on the case of the city of Liverpool, a UNESCO World Heritage site, which bears a striking resemblance to the Ottoman case from over a hundred years earlier in its challenges to reconcile the needs for modern facilities and heritage protection.
Research Interests:
An exhibition showing social exclusion as experienced by the Roma in Greece, and inviting us to put ourselves in their shoes. How can we change things for the better? (e-book)