Posts by Marios:
- Anyone interested in exploring the theoretical underpinnings of reflective practice, and diverse theoretical approaches to reflection
- Anyone interested in hearing about good practice, and sharing their own
- Anyone involved in teaching and assessing reflective practice
- Anyone currently involved in reflective writing
( I have asked my course participants to write theirs in 500 words, so I’m doing one in solidarity)
I started to teach straight out of my doctorate (in 2004), and was fortunate enough to be given a choice of topic. I naturally chose the topic of my thesis, as it was obviously what I knew best. My module was organised around 3-hour lectures, and my lectures were basically written based on my thesis. I quickly realised that my students were anxious to write down everything I said. The exam, a 3-hour affair at the end of term, confirmed my worst suspicions: the students just replicated, from memory (and memorising their notes) things I had said in my thesis. Some did it so badly-because after all learning isn’t just memorising-that I started to doubt whether I made mistakes in my own lecture: such was the level of fidelity between the lecture and the end product.
This experience made me realise that there is, there should be, more to learning than this. I wanted to enjoy teaching more. I wanted my students to learn something from it that was different to what I told them. Or perhaps do something with that. I also wanted to learn from the experience myself.
Years later, I found that the philosophy which appeals to me is the one put forward by Paulo Freire: critical pedagogy-especially the dimension which talks about teachers and learners being fellow travellers of the same, shared path towards learning. Part of Freire’s ideas cast the teacher not as a static source of a fixed truth, but as someone who is also learning, and is subject to change themselves. The reason Freire’s work appeals to me is that I see my role as a teacher not as one who is there to communicate a dominant narrative, an ‘orthodoxy’ of what’s what, but as one who is interested in critically discussing the topic at hand with students, learners, participants, offering his views and knowledge, while being able to consider, debate and (god forbid) accept those of others.
Quite frankly, it’s about acknowledging that the teacher’s knowledge has its limitations, and that it can be increased and refined through teaching, through conversations with students. The relationship for me can never be that of someone who delivers to someone who receives passively. There is more mutuality. If what we teach is irrelevant to the students’ knowledge (and being), it will fail to connect in a deep and meaningful manner. Students might be able to repeat it back to you, but we should aspire for more.
Years later I found that what I had accidentally done to my first students all those years ago, was what Freire called the banking concept of education. I had simply deposited something in my students’ brains, only to retrieve it further down the line as proof of learning. Had learning taken place? Encyclopaedically perhaps. But is that what higher education is about?
So this is why I ‘teach’ the way I do. I think.
What is this series about?
[Download the full programme here]
What is reflection? How does it work? How do we apply it to our scholarly work and practice? What does it mean to be a reflective practitioner? What are key theories of reflection? How can these inform the way we teach and assess reflection to our students?
These, and many other questions such as these, will be explored in an exciting new seminar series organised by CLAD & Learning Spaces in 2016-17. We will host a number of scholars from Birmingham and beyond, who will discuss theoretical and practical aspects of reflective practice.
There are two types of contributions to this series – contributions attending to theory and contributions offering examples of practice.
The series considers key theoretical approaches to reflection on a chronological basis. This allows for a deeper understanding of the origin and development of the concept of reflection, and facilitates a considered examination of the different approaches to reflective practice.
The practice sessions will not always be linked to a particular theorist, though it is intended that the theories may guide the consideration of these examples.
There series offers an opportunity for those attending to take part in discussions and to share ideas and perspectives.
Is it for me?
This series is open to everyone, and will be of particular interest to:
For further information contact the organisers Petia Petrova [firstname.lastname@example.org] and Marios Hadjianastasis [email@example.com].
The series will take place at the Centre for Learning and Academic Development & Learning Spaces, Watson Building, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT.
Booking for this series
Given the nature of the series we recommend that you consider attending all of the seven seminars if practicable. To book, please e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org .
During my recent trip to Cyprus it occurred to me that recent generations, including mine, were brought up with the ever-present backdrop of violence. My generation, born during the 1974 conflict, had as its soundtrack the sirens and the sound of tanks in the background. I seem to remember child art from my time in nursery and early primary school depicting bombers, bombs, tanks, soldiers and death. We were, as children, fascinated by (our) soldiers, their helmets, weapons, bayonets and anything associated with them (and we were terrified by the ‘other’ soldiers). We played ‘war’ in the back yard and empty building plots in my neighbourhood. We made rifles out of bits of wood, helmets out of chicken wire, re-enacting conflict as leisure. We grew up with the ubiquitous military parades, hollow displays of power and bravado against the enemy. These still take place today, as a promise that ‘next time we’ll be better prepared’.
I’d always known of this of course: Cyprus had experienced conflict and violence, political, ethnic and (let’s not forget) that caused by organised crime during most of the twentieth century. These different kinds of violence were of course not mutually exclusive, and recent research suggests an overlap between them at times. Violence was experienced in terms of the nationalist movements of EOKA and TMT from the 1950s onwards; during the labour movement in the 1940s, where unionists and strike-breakers (and their families) were the victims of violence; during the periods of ethnic tensions and conflict, from the 1950s until the forced partition and population exchange in 1974; during the violent suppression of a communist movement by the British, EOKA and TMT, and the state and its affiliated paramilitary groups; during the period of ethnic conflict between the Greek Cypriot National Guard and other paramilitary groups against Turkish Cypriot enclaves; finally, the violence experienced during the 1974 Greek/Cypriot coup d’etat against President Makarios and the subsequent Turkish invasion, which affected most of the population of Cyprus.
This violence, experienced first hand by children and adults, has since been propagated and re-experienced in a number of ways. Here I will touch upon two: the education system and mass media. In terms of the education system, I can speak mostly for the Greek Cypriot case. The education system had until recently as its core mission to indoctrinate children with a nationalist-driven truth. The dominant narrative exposed children regularly to instances and examples of violence, offering vivid and often visual evidence to promote a message of victimhood and injustice against ‘our’ nation, endemic in our relationship with the ‘other’, but most notably the Turks. The need to pitch our ‘nation’ in a timeless struggle against the other has found the imagery of violence extremely useful in causing shock and horror. From the descriptions of Athanasios Diakos‘ impalement, to the executions of Cypriot higher clergy (both in 1821) and a long series of pictorial representations of violence hence, have been utilised in education from early years to drive home the dominant narrative of suffering.
Other notable examples for the Greek Cypriot side include: images from the deaths of EOKA fighters, such as Gregoris Afxentiou, Kyriakos Matsis and others. I remember vividly as a child being exposed to such imagery. Afxentiou’s charred remains, Matsis’ bloody body after the battle in which his hideout was blown up, the bloody remains of the four fighters at a stable in Liopetri. Such images, clearly unsuitable for children, were freely utilised to shock and horrify, and ultimately calcify the dominant narrative. A visit to the Mouseion Agonos (the museum for EOKA’s anti-colonial struggle) was a must, and exposed young children to images and physical remains of violence. These were followed up with visits to the state prison where the bodies of 9 EOKA fighters who were executed by the British were buried. Visits to these graves were part of the primary school curriculum when I was growing up, as was a visit to the room where the gallows stood, accompanied by a description of how a hanging actually worked, levers and trapdoors included.* Needless to say, EOKA’s other violence, against Greek and Turkish Cypriots, had until recently been conveniently neglected. In fact, EOKA murdered more Greek Cypriots (148) than British soldiers (105) during its four-year anti-British struggle. The former were mostly communists.
Such violence came to be complemented with that of the conflict between Greek and Turkish Cypriots, and in particular their respective armed groups. The period between 1967 and 1974 were on the whole downplayed in terms of dominant message, as ‘our’ side had a plethora of imagery from the 1974 Turkish invasion which helped its narrative.** We have imagery from the fighting and bombing, including the photo of a dead man hanging out of a ruined Famagusta building. Such imagery was utilised throughout education as a lesson about ‘barbarism’ (associated with the quality of ‘other’).
Alongside these examples from state education, mass media has also reproduced such images throughout the last half century. The state-owned channels (CyBC and Bayrak), as well as other, privately-owned channels, have produced and broadcast a series of documentaries on the Cyprus conflict, especially the 1974 events. Some of these are broadcast annually in July and August, when the anniversaries of the 1974 war occur.*** More recently we have had the brutal killings of two men (Tasos Isaak and Solomos Solomou) during anti-occupation protests in Dherynia (1996), which produced fresh media depicting violence and death which has since been utilised in a similar manner.
What impact has this systematic exposure to first- or second-hand violence had on Cypriots? Apart from the generations of people (especially children)**** involved directly in acts of violence or displacement, we also have generations of people for whom the violence is systematically repeated through education or media. This has potentially the ability to cause similar trauma as to those who have experienced violence first-hand. What impact does seeing the gallows and hearing the descriptions of hangings have on an 8-10 year old child? The violence plays out again in front of their eyes, and must have a similar impact to witnessing or being a victim of such violence themselves. The images and videos of Afxentiou’s death (burnt to death in his hideout in 1957), cannot but reproduce the violence once again for the children to witness afresh.
Considering the dozens of thousands of children who underwent this systematic exposure to violence, how can we analyse and interpret Cypriot society today, when those generations have reached maturity? One gets the sense that in Cyprus we live as if suspended in a relative period of calm likely to be disrupted by outbreaks of violence. The combined effect of the violent trauma in all of us and the continuing political limbo of the Cyprus Problem render our present situation, no matter how peaceful, temporary. It is as if we are not allowed to relax and take peace for granted. Outbreaks of violence are always likely, and we may (or not) be prepared for such eventuality.
How does our society, ‘westernised’ and ‘civilised’ today, enhanced by modern technological advances, exist with the underlying truth of violence? Is our modernity but a veneer over a dark, violent past and present? Is there always some violence threatening to surface, be it at a football match, night club or-in fact-a queue at Lidl on a Thursday morning? Is violence a shared skeleton in our closet, a common relation nobody wants to acknowledge?
It would make for a fascinating research project for someone, to carry out psychological and anthropological research among the Cypriot population to help define our attitudes to a wide range of ‘everyday’ topics, and our propensity to see violence as a potential solution. I wonder how we compare versus, say, the Maltese? Although scholars such as Papadakis and Bryant have explored the anthropological aspects of the Cyprus problem, it would be interesting to see the psychological impact of the conflict and the re-play of violence in the lives of the children of Cyprus.
The challenge for the teacher of today
The challenge for the teacher today is multiple. Firstly, to resist the exposure of children to such imagery and narratives of violence and hatred. Perhaps to a degree this is happening, but I am not convinced that we have denounced the reproduction of violence to those too young not to be traumatised by it. Secondly, teachers, and society more widely, must resist the utilisation of education-as-nationalist-narrative (or any dominant narrative in fact) in favour of a more relevant, pupil-centred approach which allows children to explore and shape their own truths based on their own social, economic and ethnic backgrounds. This is not far from a Freirean educational ideal, but let’s face it, it’s not happening any time soon. Such a shift would most likely be the result of the activity of individual teachers rather than an organised, top-down initiative. States are not likely to encourage a pedagogy which in turn encourages critical thinking and emancipation from sociopolitical and religious shackles.
It is possible to teach history not as a politically-driven dominant narrative, but as a shared endeavour to better understand the past based on evidence. Emotive (and traumatic) imagery and discourse only serves to distort such truths in the service of the elites. And it has so far succeeded.
* I have deliberately chosen not to include such imagery here. If you really want to find it, Google is your friend.
** However, for the Turkish Cypriots who were often on the receiving end of Greek-Cypriot state-sponsored violence against their enclaves and communities, there are other horrifying images which served their purpose. One such example is that of a mother and her three children, murdered in the bathtub in their house in 1963, and used as an example of Greek Cypriot barbarism, which formed the basis for the Museum of Barbarism.
*** Such broadcasts have also been used for education purposes.
**** See Rosenblatt’s Children of War
I have just returned from the 3rd Annual Critical Pedagogies Conference held at Liverpool Hope University. I was there for the first one, two years ago, and it has become a highlight of my academic calendar. The conference is supported by the Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain.
What is critical pedagogy?
How to explain this? Critical pedagogy is a term created by Paulo Freire, whose seminal Pedagogy of the Oppressed remains a cornerstone of the discipline. Although Freire’s work was written within the context of post-colonial Brazil and the domination of indigenous populations (and their education) by a white post-colonial elite, it has had great resonance for many different contexts. The work of bell hooks has introduced the perspectives of race and gender, while Henry Giroux‘s work has brought critical pedagogies up to speed with a North American context.
Key to the idea of a critical pedagogy is the concept of critical consciousness (conscientização) one the one hand, and solidarity with the oppressed on the other. In this context, our aim as teachers is not to transmit a truth which arrives from above, unquestioningly, but to instil criticality into our work and our students’. This criticality should go beyond that which is required for interpretation and analysis of data/sources/evidence, but should be a key characteristic of their lives as critically thinking citizens in a democratic society.
Another interesting aspect is the need to move beyond the limitations of power and authority to enact an open and democratic classroom.
What does all this have to do with higher education I hear you say? Well, where once Citizenship Education was a key element to education from early years onwards, we now focus on employability and ‘soft skills’ which make our students more ‘useful’ to the economy. Don’t get me wrong: I fully acknowledge the need for students to be able to find employment, but that is not the sole purpose of education. It’s not even the main purpose. In its latest White Paper, the government puts this right by having very little reference to criticality, citizenship or democracy, but a whopping 53 instances of the word ‘market’. That, and the increasing push for quality assurance, monitoring and measurement systems serve to shrink the space for democracy and freedom in our classrooms and institutions. Freedom of speech is already under threat in this brand-aware environment. This is just another encroachment of the neoliberal into the public space, one more step towards the eradication of the latter.
So this is where critical pedagogies come in. How can we ensure the democratic public space is not sacrificed at the altar of marketisation? How can we help instil in our students a sense of ownership, direction beyond marks/CV-building and ‘social mobility’? How can we protect ourselves and each other from victimisation and the dehumanising effect of neoliberalism? Well, the answer lies in small steps. Just try to enact a democratic classroom, try to limit the impact of a neoliberal agenda where possible. Educate yourself and your students, your colleagues. Working from within is harder, but is the only way.
Highlights of the conference
The conference itself was an interesting mix. Most papers were able to offer a philosophically-grounded approach to how we ‘do’ education in a critical and democratic way. I particularly enjoyed the keynote speeches by Peter Roberts (Christchurch NZ) and Judith Suissa (IoE). Peter’s talk focused on the theme of despair and hope which comes with critical consciousness, especially in the work of three thinkers: Leo Tolstoy, Miguel de Unamuno, and Paulo Freire. The despair felt by the first two bordered on the existentialist, and indeed Tolstoy seriously considered suicide after finding it difficult to come to terms with the finality of death and the lack of meaning in his life. Unamuno’s work dealt with the idea of suffering as a necessary component of life, without which happiness is rendered meaningless. Peter finished on a hopeful note, focusing on Freire’s Pedagogy of Hope and how no matter how desperate critical consciousness makes us, we can and should still be hopeful for a different future. A key element here was that critical consciousness is a threshold: one cannot go back from it. These are very relevant emotional processes for teachers, especially for the ones who come to harsh realisations about the state of higher education and its privileging of research over teaching (in elite institutions).
Judith Suissa‘s excellent talk discussed the process of critical consciousness and solidarity with the oppressed outside the classroom, as found in Neel Mukherjee’s The Lives of Others. Judith’s talk helped us see critical pedagogy “in the streets”, and was grounded on the work of Rebecca Tarlau on critical pedagogy and social movements and Jose Medina’s work (The Epistemology of Resistance). She also drew the connection between anger and hope, emotions which Judith (and Freire) suggest should be combined.
Other highlights included Cristina Cammarano‘s talk on the critical, yet powerless, students, and the moral dilemma for the critical teacher who supports her students towards critical consciousness, only for them to discover the despair and powerlessness which may follow (as Peter told us earlier). Caroline Obiageli‘s talk from Nigeria via Skype discussed the theme of educative entertainment and especially how entertainment can be the vehicle for concealed learning purposes. What little I caught from Andrew Brogan‘s talk on the ‘exilic’ classroom, I found very thought-provoking, as Andrew explored the theme of classrooms as safe spaces where democratic practice can be enacted, based on the works of De Certeau, and in particular the concept of ‘wiggery’, after De Certeau’s la perruque, a form of subversion using the resources available. Ruth Heilbronn’s work also got a mention here.
Ana Lucia Souza de Freitas discussed the relationship between Freire’s work with that of Gert Biesta, and especially the theme of ‘risk’ in education. Louise Jackson and Jonathan Owen Clark discussed critical pedagogy within the context of art education.
Penny Enslin‘s keynote speech focused on themes of colonialism and postcolonialism, drawing from both British and South African contexts. This is particularly relevant in an age of dramatic expansion for British and American institutions into ‘new markets’.
Conclusions and action
On the whole this was a full-on two days which as usual gave me some time and space to think, question my practice and learn new things. I came back armed with another handful of new references for things to read. It also made me realise that some colleagues in philosophy work on an abstract plane for so long that they forget its significance or connection to reality. There were a couple of moments when I wondered what such examples were doing at a critical pedagogies conference. The irony was lost on such colleagues. I will say no more, as this was a mere side-note to an otherwise excellent conference. Indeed, I return to this conference year after year because it’s a relatively small one, everybody is down to earth, friendly and welcoming, and I make many useful contacts.
I also came away feeling that we could do with something more focused on higher education. Ultimately critical pedagogy is about praxis, taking action (or committing ‘wiggery’!) within one’s context. It’s also about irreverence, especially towards anything which some people may consider ‘canonical’ in the field of philosophy, and that does include Freire. It’s about a ‘smash and grab’ philosophy, an ‘edu-punk’ approach as a good friend once said, where we utilise what’s useful, always with a critical eye and aware of the limitations.
At a time when the White Paper is diminishing the teacher’s and learner’s freedoms in a very overt manner, we can at least attempt to identify our predicament and mitigate its consequences. In a discussion over a pint with an esteemed colleague, we thought that the time is right for an HE-focused critical pedagogies conference to take this plan forward.
Things for me to read
Nicholas C. Burbules and Rupert Berk (1999).Critical Thinking and Critical Pedagogy: Relations, Differences, and Limits. Published in Critical Theories in Education, Thomas S. Popkewitz and Lynn Fendler, eds. (NY: Routledge)
Martin Carnoy (1974). Education as cultural imperialism (Longman)
Seewha Cho (2010). Politics of Critical Pedagogy and New Social Movements. Educational Philosophy and Theory,Vol. 42, No. 3, 2010
Michel de Certeau (2002), The Practice of Everyday Life (University of California Press)
Kevin Harris (1982). Teachers and Classes: A Marxist Analysis (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul)
Ruth Heilbronn (2012). Teacher Education and the Development of Practical Judgement (NY: Bloomsbury)
Linda Keesing-Styles (2003). The Relationship between Critical Pedagogy and Assessment in Teacher Education. Radical Pedagogy.
Gustav Landauer (2010). Revolution and Other Writings: A Political Reader. Edited by Gabriel Kuhn (Oakland: PM Press)
José Medina (2011). Toward a Foucaultian Epistemology of Resistance: Counter-Memory, Episte-mic Friction, and Guerrilla Pluralism. Foucault Studies, No. 12, pp. 9-35, October 2011
José Medina (2013). The Epistemology of Resistance: Gender and Racial Oppression, Epistemic Injustice, and the Social Imagination. (Oxford: OUP)
Bill Readings (1997). The University in Ruins (Cambridge MA and London: Harvard University Press)
Dean Spade (2011). Normal Life: Administrative Violence, Critical Trans Politics, and the Limits of Law (NY: South End Press)
Rebecca Tarlau (2014). From a Language to a Theory of Resistance: Critical Pedagogy, the Limits of “Framing,” and Social Change. Educational Theory, Volume 64 Number 4
On Wednesday 24th of February, we are extremely pleased to welcome friend, colleague and Birmingham alumnus Antonis Hadjikyriacou, who will give a lecture titled:
Insularity, Empire and the ‘Spatial Turn’: Ottoman Cyprus and the Mediterranean World
The presentation examines the correlations between insular space and the development of economic, social and political structures in Ottoman Cyprus. Insularity here is not taken literally, but rather as the condition of being, and being perceived as, an island. In other words, insularity is not just about islands: it is about connections, links, networks, and contexts. The presentation further enquires into the production of space á la Henri Lefebvre, and explores the triad of conceived, perceived and lived space with reference to insularity.
Envisioning the Cypriot insularity entails an understanding of the climatic, geographical, and environmental conditions conducive to a polycultural, water-demanding, labour-intensive, cash crop-oriented economy. Cyprus was large and productive enough to have a sizeable surplus; contained enough as an economic space to be controlled by particular networks; and distant enough from Istanbul to escape serious imperial attention.
Antonis Hadjikyriacou is a Marie Curie Intra-European fellow at the Institute for Mediterranean Studies/ Foundation for Research and Technology, Hellas
In September 1993 I entered the Department of Turkish Studies at the University of Cyprus as an undergraduate student. I did not know what to expect. The Department and degree programme were at their infancy-I was in the second-ever cohort to enter.
I, alongside another 20-odd hopefuls, was greeted by a charming, tall, white-haired gentleman whose wide smile, sparkling blue eyes and warm demeanour captured me immediately. He was Prof. György Hazai, a globally prominent figure in the world of Turkish Studies who was at the time Head of Department. Prof. Hazai was one of those unforgettable academics, who left an indelible mark on my own career, values and attitude in my own work. You see, despite the fact that we was a truly renowned, world-class scholar in his field, editor of the prestigious Archivum Ottomanicum among other things, his attitude towards his students was nothing other than collegial, supportive, encouraging and open. He addressed all of us as ‘dear colleagues’, building the Department on the basis that we were all equally invested in the scholarship of our field, we all had a voice and a share in proceedings, from the learning arena to departmental policy matters. You can imagine what an impact this approach had on 18-20 year olds who thought that university was something like high school. Hazai transgressed the boundary of power and authority inherent in every teaching situation, which unfortunately most of his peers still adhere to. You see, many academics can boast a rich CV, a successful career with groundbreaking research. But how many of them can genuinely say that they were an inspiration to their students, a positive force which not only achieved much, but enabled others to follow? Hazai was exactly that.
I was able to benefit from his wealth of knowledge and the vast horizons he was able to open up for his students and peers. Alongside a couple of others, his role was hugely important at a formative time for me.
Hazai was always a friend, a good colleague and a supportive teacher, no matter how many years had passed, no matter how many other students he taught. When I found out of his passing I was at first saddened at the loss of a warm and thoughtful person I once knew, a knowledgeable scholar of the kind which is becoming increasingly extinct. Then I remembered the good times, and felt genuinely privileged and fortunate that our paths crossed. I will never forget him.
Nur içinde yat, dear colleague. I hope you are having some interesting conversations with Lajos Fekete and the other luminaries up there.
Where does the time go? Once upon a time, I was lucky to be one of many friends and colleagues involved in the organisation of the first ever PG Colloquium at the Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies at Birmingham. Sixteen years on, and this event has really taken off-thanks to the continuing efforts, and enterprising endeavour, of current postgrads. It has gone from a casual gathering which aimed to report on our own research at the Centre-and encourage exchange amongst us-to a fully-fledged international conference for postgraduate researchers.
Its function is multiple: it serves as a fantastic platform for new scholars to showcase their work, practise their craft, and, finally, disseminate their work across the institution and beyond.
This year’s offering is impressive: the chronological, thematic and disciplinary layers are all woven together. We have everything from Byzantine art history, studies on the Veneto-Greek ‘space’, a sprinkling of Kazantzakis, economic history of the Ottoman period alongside the antique world. We have contributions from Greece, Finland, Italy and Germany, all perfectly complementing an array of contributions from across the UK. Add to that the planned visits to the Cadbury Research Library and the Barber Coin Collection and then you realise that this is a little gem of an event.
That this activity has been taking place annually, at such a high level of scholarship and exchange, is nothing short of spectacular. Is it time we gave this event the recognition it deserves, as a focal point in the calendar of Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies? It is not by coincidence that this incredible event flourished here. We have the only example of a ‘symbiotic’ Centre, truly interdisciplinary in nature, and, quite frankly, unique. We must protect both at all costs.
For a programme click here. Registration is essential, especially for the visits, as spaces are limited. Please contact email@example.com to register, no later than 13 May.
You may remember a while ago that I was happy to complete and send off a paper, intended as a chapter in a volume on Famagusta. the paper/chapter deals with the 1607 Tuscan/Spanish/English raid on Ottoman Famagusta. Thanks to Michael Walsh and his hard work, the book where the chapter sits is finally out. I am really pleased and thankful to Michael and of course all the colleagues and friends who took part in that Budapest conference all that time ago.
This is from the publisher’s website:
“Despite its undoubted importance, there has never been a volume dedicated entirely to studies of the historic city of Famagusta in the years which followed the siege of 1571. City of Empires: Ottoman and British Famagusta takes an important first step in redressing this imbalance. The four centuries which followed the conflict, as the contributions gathered here demonstrate, are rich research seams for scholars of history, urban design, photography, art history, literature, drama, military history and the post-war mandates. City of Empires also places emphasis on the tangible heritage of Famagusta – twice listed as endangered by World Monuments Fund and now the recipient of an increasing number of international efforts to protect it.”
So, go on, buy it!
Island Insularity and Connectivity: an interdisciplinary symposium on Cypriot island identity in the Mediterranean from antiquity to the present dayApril 22nd, 2015
[reposted from here]
Friday 1st May 2015, 12-5 pm
The Wolfson Research Exchange, Main Library, University of Warwick
(Please note the change of venue)
All are welcome to attend. Registration is free. Lunch and refreshments will be provided throughout the day. Please email firstname.lastname@example.org by Thursday 23rd April 2015 to register your attendance.
Keynote speaker Professor Nicholas Purcell (Classics, University of Oxford)
Fatos Eren Bilgen (Applied Linguistics, University of Warwick): Negotiating identities in prolonged liminality: The case of Turkish Cypriot lecturers’ identity negotiations during uncertainty and redundancy.
İlke Dağlı (Politics and International Studies, University of Warwick): Essentialist Identity Limbo: Broadening the scope of the “ethnic-conflict” in Cyprus
Josette Duncan (History, University of Warwick): Isolation, Segregation and Connectivity: Medical Institutionalisation and Public Health Restrictions on Prostitutes, Lepers and Quarantined peoples in British Cyprus (1878-1914)
Stuart Dunn (Digital Humanities, King’s College London): “Inscriptions Engraved on the Soil”: The Heritage Gazetteer of Cyprus
Antonis Hadjikyriacou (Marie Curie Intra-European fellow Institute for Mediterranean Studies/Foundation for Research and Technology, Hellas): Insularity and Empire in the Eastern Mediterranean: The production of space in Ottoman Cyprus
Marios Hadjianastasis (Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies
University of Birmingham): Post-conquest identities in early Ottoman Cyprus
Georgios Markou (History of Art, University of Cambridge):Title TBC
George Petrou (Royal College of Art)
Anna Reeve (Classics, University of Leeds): John Holmes and the construction of ancient Cyprus in late nineteenth century Yorkshire
Dimitrios Stamatis (Faculty of Philosophy, National & Kapodistrian
University of Athens): Aphrodite and Adonis A sacred marriage of civilizations on Cypris’ island.
As the world’s largest inland sea joining the continents of southern Europe, northern Africa, Anatolia and the Levant, the Mediterranean Sea has long been identified as a unique maritime arena, the connectivity of which influenced the emergence of cultures and societies in its earliest history. The ecology, geography and climate, along with the movement and settlement of people across the region driven by trade, war, conquest, colonisation and tourism, has shaped the character of the Mediterranean as a region, particularly its islands.
Since antiquity, the island of Cyprus has acted as an important hub in the Mediterranean: situated at the crossroads of the eastern and western worlds, the combination of Cyprus’ geographical location, natural resources, political and commercial connections has rendered the island as an attractive proposition for many. The island continues to be identified as a cultural melting pot where cross cultural exchanges, from the distant past to the present day, continue to be seen and experienced in the fabric of its culture and society.
Building upon an initial workshop that took place in October 2013 at the Institute of Advanced Study (University of Warwick), this interdisciplinary symposium will explore the complex topic of ‘Cypriot island identity’. Papers presenting case studies that consider this theme from Cyprus’ ancient history to the present day, as well as comparative case studies taken from other Mediterranean islands, are welcome.
Topics of discussion can include (but are not limited to):
• The ecology and geography of the Mediterranean as a region and the impact of this on the connectivity and insularity of Cyprus.
• The internal insularity and connectivity of local Cypriot communities and the impact of this on issues of identity.
• The legacy of empires: annexation, colonisation, administration.
• The movement and settlement of communities.
• The emergence of, and tensions between, multiple and competing local identities.
• Cyprus and the EU.
• The articulation of Cypriot identity in literature and in visual material culture.
• How archaeology and ancient history has been used to define Cypriot identity.
To be confirmed.
Organised by Dr Ersin Hussein (IAS| Department of Classics and Ancient History). Sponsored by the Institute of Advanced Study and Warwick Global Research Priorities, Connecting Cultures.
[reposted from the original website here]
A two-day symposium (April 23-24) will feature twelve lectures that explore the topography of Ottoman Athens in Cotsen Hall in conjunction with the exhibition “Ottoman Athens, 1458-1833”. The laguages of the symposium are Greek and English; there will be simultaneous translation.
For more information go here: http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/index.php/news/eventDetails/symposium-the-topography-of-ottoman-athens.-archaeology-and-travel
10:30 – 11:00 INTRODUCTION: Maria Georgopoulou
11:00 – 14:00 SESSION I: ANTIQUITIES
JOANITA A.C. VROOM, Associate Professor, Faculty of Archaeology, Leiden University Broken Pots of Ottoman Athens: A New View from the Agora Excavations
ΤΑΣΟΣ ΤΑΝΟΥΛΑΣ, Αρχιτέκτων, πρώην Προϊστάμενος του Έργου Αποκατάστασης των Προπυλαίων (1984-2010)
Documents on Ottoman Athens and, especially, on the Ottoman Acropolis / Μαρτυρίες για την Αθήνα και, ειδικότερα, για την Ακρόπολη στα χρόνια της Τουρκοκρατίας
12:00 – 12:30 Coffee Break
ΕΛΕΝΗ ΚΟΡΚΑ, Γενική Διευθύντρια Αρχαιοτήτων και Πολιτιστικής Κληρονομιάς &
S. M. SHARIAT-PANAHI, Ιστορικός
Strong Foreign Powers in the early19th century in Small, Degraded Athens / Ισχυρές ξένες δυνάμεις στις αρχές του 19ου αιώνα στην μικρή παρηκμασμένη Αθήνα
ELIZABETH KEY FOWDEN, University of Cambridge
The Parthenon Mosque, King Solomon and the Philosophers / Το τζαμί του Παρθενώνα, ο Σολομών και οι φιλόσοφοι
16:00 – 18:00 SESSION II: ARCHITECTURE
ΜΑΝΟΛΗΣ ΚΟΡΡΕΣ, Καθηγητής, Σχολή Αρχιτεκτόνων Μηχανικών, ΕΜΠ
Οικίες στην Αθήνα του 18ου αι. / Houses at Athens in the 18th cent.
ΓΙΑΝΝΗΣ ΚΙΖΗΣ, Καθηγητής, Σχολή Αρχιτεκτόνων Μηχανικών, ΕΜΠ
Η αναστήλωση της οικίας Μπενιζέλου / The restoration of the Benizelos Residence
ΧΑΡΑΛΑΜΠΟΣ ΜΠΟΥΡΑΣ, Ομότιμος Καθηγητής, Σχολή Αρχιτεκτόνων Μηχανικών, ΕΜΠ
Η εκκλησιαστική αρχιτεκτονική στην Αθήνα κατά την οθωμανική περίοδο / Ecclesiastical Architecture in Athens during the Ottoman Period
18:00 – 19:00 Free time to view exhibition in the Gennadius Library
19:00 Keynote Address
EDHEM ELDEM, Boğaziçi University
The Ottoman discovery of Athens: 1780-1830
10:00 – 12:00 SESSION ΙΙΙ: TEXTS AND OBJECTS
ΔΗΜΗΤΡΗΣ Ν. ΚΑΡΥΔΗΣ, Καθηγητής Σχολής Αρχιτεκτόνων ΕΜΠ
Του Καρύκη ο μαχαλάς και του Εξέχωρου η βρύση / The neighborhood of Karykes and the fountain of Eksechoron
ΔΗΜΗΤΡΗΣ ΛΟΥΠΗΣ, Υποψήφιος Δρ. Πανεπιστημίου Χάρβαρντ & Επιστημονικός Συνεργάτης, Ινστιτούτο Ιστορικών Ερευνών, Εθνικό Ίδρυμα Ερευνών
The Ottoman Monuments of Athens and their Epigraphic Program / Τα οθωμανικά μνημεία της Αθήνας και το επιγραφικό τους πρόγραμμα
ΑΛΙΚΗ ΑΣΒΕΣΤΑ, Ιστορικός – Συνεργάτης Γενναδείου Βιβλιοθήκης &
ΙΟΛΗ ΒΙΓΓΟΠΟΥΛΟΥ, Ερευνήτρια στο Ινστιτούτο Ιστορικών Ερευνών του Εθνικού Ιδρύματος Ερευνών
Περιηγητικές αφηγήσεις για τα χαμάμ της Αθήνας / Travelers’ Narratives on the Hammams of Athens
12:00 – 12:30 Coffee Break
12:30 – 14:00 SESSION ΙV: CARTOGRAPHY
ΓΙΩΡΓΟΣ ΤΟΛΙΑΣ, Διευθυντής Ερευνών στο Ινστιτούτο Ιστορικών Ερευνών, Εθνικό Ίδρυμα Ερευνών
Αρχαία κείμενα και νέα ερείπια: οι τοπογραφικοί χάρτες των Αθηνών κατά την οθωμανική περίοδο / Ancient Texts and New Ruins: the Topographic Maps of Athens during the Ottoman Period
ΚΑΤΕΡΙΝΑ ΣΤΑΘΗ, Επιστημονική Συνεργάτης στο έργο “ΚΡΗΠΙΣ” του Ινστιτούτου Νεοελληνικών Ερευνών, Εθνικό Ίδρυμα Ερευνών
The Ottoman Map of the Castle of Athens and its Suburb / Ο Οθωμανικός Χάρτης του Κάστρου της Αθήνας και του Προαστίου της