View allAll Photos Tagged methodical
My 14 month old son enjoys watching the laundry spin around. He had just "helped" sort and load. Notice how methodical he is when wiping the door. That is because that is how the child minder had done it earlier in the day.
One of calming activities is finding nice sticks while out on walks, taking the bark off and letting them dry in the sun. Then I spend days/weeks/months sitting outside slowly and methodically sanding them down. I work in stages increasing the fineness of the grit to nearly buffing it. I then use local beeswax (often infused with herbs or hemp) and a microfiber cloth to bring the surface to a protected smooth shine. There is no “purpose” to this really, just something nice to do with my hands when my anxiety is high. Plus other than keeping stocked on sandpaper and beeswax, it’s more or less a free activity which I also love.
“A” Company of the Special Operations Regiment, together with Unit 302 of the Coalition’s Counter-Terrorism Division, was tasked with a village clearance operation aimed at disrupting insurgent networks and degrading their ability to launch coordinated attacks.
After 2nd Platoon established blocking positions around the village and set the conditions for the Ground Assault Force (GAF), 1st Platoon and Unit 302 launched the assault in the middle of the night. Unit 302 led the charge, clearing the first series of buildings.
Contact was made almost immediately as the assault teams advanced into the village, but the assault force quickly returned fire, clearing each structure methodically.
To be continued…
Note: This story, including all names, characters, and incidents, is entirely fictitious.
Prussian infantry tactics during the Franco-Prussian War (1870–1871) reflected a modern, well-coordinated system that emphasized discipline, flexibility, and the integration of firepower with maneuver. The Prussian Army, shaped by the reforms of the 1860s and guided by the General Staff under Helmuth von Moltke, operated as a highly efficient instrument of combined arms warfare. Central to its success was the principle of mission command (Auftragstaktik), which allowed subordinate officers freedom to act on their own initiative within the framework of their commander’s intent. This decentralized approach encouraged adaptability and quick decision-making in battle, contrasting sharply with the French Army’s rigid, top-down command style.
German tactics emphasized envelopment battles reminiscent of Cannae, seeking to encircle and destroy enemy armies through coordinated movements of multiple corps. Artillery was used offensively whenever possible, massed in powerful batteries to break French defensive lines before the infantry advanced. Rather than attacking in rigid columns or extended lines, Prussian infantry operated in dispersed skirmish groups and company formations, which made them less vulnerable to artillery and to the long-range fire of the French Chassepot rifle. Superior organization, efficient rail mobilization, and the ability to concentrate large numbers of troops at decisive points made these encirclements both practical and devastatingly effective.
At the tactical level, Prussian infantry advanced under the protective umbrella of massive, coordinated artillery fire. The Dreyse needle gun, though technically inferior in range to the Chassepot, was used in conjunction with flexible maneuver and rapid fire to maintain constant pressure on French positions. Forward skirmishers (Schützen) engaged the enemy to fix them in place, while reserves and flanking units maneuvered to exploit weaknesses. This methodical combination of movement and firepower—always supported by close artillery coordination—allowed Prussian formations to sustain attacks without disorganization. Their ability to synchronize infantry and artillery on the battlefield proved decisive at Wörth, Mars-la-Tour, and Gravelotte.
The Prussian system reflected the growing industrialization of warfare, where planning, logistics, and coordination outweighed individual valor. While French soldiers often fought with great courage, their attacks were spontaneous and poorly supported compared to the methodical, staff-driven operations of their opponents. The Prussians’ mastery of combined arms, flexible command, and large-scale encirclement made them the most modern army in Europe by 1871. Their victory in the Franco-Prussian War demonstrated the effectiveness of this new tactical doctrine and set the pattern for continental military strategy for decades to come.
www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project
Phaselis Research
Phaselis
When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.
This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.
Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.
By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.
Phaselis Territorium
The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.
Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.
PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.
Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.
www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project
Phaselis Research
Phaselis
When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.
This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.
Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.
By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.
Phaselis Territorium
The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.
Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.
PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.
Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.
Picture shows: IMELDA STAUNTON as Maud Hill
TX: TBC
(c) Studio Canal/BBC 2011
THE AWAKENING is set in 1921, in a post-war world of loss where the bereaved seek solace in spiritualism. Haunted by the death of her fiance, Florence Cathcart (REBECCA HALL) spends her time debunking supernatural claims, using methodical and rational explanations to disprove the notion that the dead can still haunt us. So she feels compelled to accept a request to go to Rookford, a boarding school in the countryside where a boy has recently been found dead and rumours about a ghostly boy hunting the school are causing panic amongst pupils and parents alike.
WARNING: Any images attached to this e-mail are solely for use by the recipient organisation and may not be forwarded to any third party without prior agreement with Origin Pictures.
You will be considered to have accepted these terms unless you raise any queries regarding them on receipt of the images.
Herons remind me of old grandfather clocks They always look old, they’re big and move methodically. Unfortunately, herons can’t tell the time.
Touchstone 1994, 463 pages, index, photographs, ISBN 0-684-80036-5, trade paperback
From Publishers Weekly
Associated Press correspondent Arnett was made a pariah by U.S. military authorities in Saigon because of his vividly blunt reports from the combat zone. He became controversial again as a CNN reporter covering the opening days of Desert Storm and as an interviewer of Saddam Hussein; he was denounced on the floor of congress and accused by several members of playing Josef Goebbels to Saddam's Hitler. In this engrossing memoir, Arnett describes his adventures and misadventures in covering several wars, airs his views on the media as an instrument of power and provides memorable portraits of several journalistic colleagues. Reporters will find intriguing his account of his methodical training as a combat correspondent by Malcolm W. Browne, AP bureau chief in Saigon. Arnett states as a simple fact that there's no thrill comparable to covering a war, and that he's good at it. Readers of this exciting memoir will agree with him on both counts.
“Some years ago - never mind how long precisely - having little or no money in my purse, and nothing particular to interest me on shore, I thought I would sail about a little and see the watery part of the world. It is a way I have of driving off the spleen, and regulating the circulation. Whenever I find myself growing grim about the mouth; whenever it is a damp, drizzly November in my soul; whenever I find myself involuntarily pausing before coffin warehouses, and bringing up the rear of every funeral I meet; and especially whenever my hypos get such an upper hand of me, that it requires a strong moral principle to prevent me from deliberately stepping into the street, and methodically knocking people’s hats off - then, I account it high time to get to sea as soon as I can. This is my substitute for pistol and ball. With a philosophical flourish Cato throws himself upon his sword; I quietly take to the ship. There is nothing surprising in this. If they but knew it, almost all men in their degree, some time or other, cherish very nearly the same feelings towards the ocean with me.”
Herman Melville
View Large On Black to see the real atmosphere of the image.
Jan 20, 2010
I wanted to take this picture for the cinematic feel that I felt it had. You can just imagine the storyline of some dark mysterious plot unfold as the nefarious '30's era gangster steps out of his Plymouth 4dr, the rain rolling off of his hat onto his long trench coat as he begins to draw his Tommy gun to his hip... (Or, something like that. I think I'll stick to photography!)
It's been raining here in SoCal for a while now - something we're not used to. To us, this is our big blizzard. You know... the one where you run to the store for milk, bread and TP. Who knows why we do it, but we all do. Anyway, the very moment I stepped out of my car to take the shot, the rain switched from methodical, steady downpour to gully-washer. I've neveer seen it rain that hard except for a time in New Orleans when a Gulf storm rolled in. Immediately, I was drenched, head to toe. I wasn't out in the rain for more than 8 seconds but the entire back of my jeans was so wet that even upon arriving at my home I was dripping water across the floor. Yuk.
Nikon D90
Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8
I watched as he carefully and methodically delivered the fly to the water's top, anxiously waiting for his trophy trout to take it under.
Below the surface of Shantell Martin’s characteristic black and white compositions is an artists’ inquiry into the role of artist and viewer. In Martin’s world, a work of art is inseparable from its creator and its audience, and art is more than an object of admiration disconnected from the process of its inception. Rather, she sees her work as a vehicle to forge new connections between education, design, philosophy and technology — the glue in an increasingly interdisciplinary world. Her methodical practice of bringing the audience and surroundings into her drawings is a reflection on ever changing time and space.
When I was younger I read a short story by the author Orson Scott Card. I do not recall the story at all but for one line, "The center of a child's body does not lie within, but rather where the fingers of the right hand and those of the left meet." Something to the effect. This is the same girl as the previous photo. This time near the end of the race. Here she is again caught up in her own methodical process of collecting chalk dust. With the chaos all around her she just sat there scooping up chalk, filling her little cup, and the rest of the world melted away.
Saturday, mid-day
watching the harry potter marathon on ABC Family
sewing sewing sewing
sequins
one by one
tedious, but pleasantly methodical.
Lot-840-8: “Firemen of the Fleet,” August 15, 1943. In peace or war, there is one foe eternally feared by every man that goes to sea – fire. In wartime, fire is twice as deadly in peace. Ignited by enemy shells or bombs, the flames menace personnel already busy at their battle stations – and every man called from his post gives the foe that much more advantage during action. Thus the Navy has founded fire-fighting schools to train specialists in the grim art of extinguishing fires anywhere aboard ship quickly and methodically. Different methods are taught the seagoing fireman for combatting flames in different sections of the ship. To lend realism to the courses, substantial “mock-ups” of vessels have been built, in which the trainees learn their grim lessons, mater the use of their flame-fighting equipment. Shown: Charge of the Hose Brigade. Spraying a smothering blanket of fog in front of them, student fire-fighters advance on a fire blazing in the Christmas tree shack, constructed to simulate a ship’s compartment. U.S. Navy Photograph. Courtesy of the Library of Congress. (2016/04/14). Photographed through Mylar sleeve.
Gandhara is the name given to an ancient region or province invaded in 326 B.C. by Alexander the Great, who took Charsadda (ancient Puskalavati) near present-day Peshawar (ancient Purusapura) and then marched eastward across the Indus into the Punjab as far as the Beas river (ancient Vipasa). Gandhara constituted the undulating plains, irrigated by the Kabul River from the Khyber Pass area, the contemporary boundary between Pakistan and Afganistan, down to the Indus River and southward towards the Murree hills and Taxila (ancient Taksasila), near Pakistan"s present capital, Islamabad. Its art, however, during the first centuries of the Christian era, had adopted a substantially larger area, together with the upper stretches of the Kabul River, the valley of Kabul itself, and ancient Kapisa, as well as Swat and Buner towards the north.
A great deal of Gandhara sculptures has survived dating from the first to probably as late as the sixth or even the seventh century but in a remarkably homogeneous style. Most of the arts were almost always in a blue-gray mica schist, though sometimes in a green phyllite or in stucco, or very rarely in terracotta. Because of the appeal of its Western classical aesthetic for the British rulers of India, schooled to admire all things Greek and Roman, a great deal found its way into private hands or the shelter of museums.
Gandhara sculpture primarily comprised Buddhist monastic establishments. These monasteries provided a never-ending gallery for sculptured reliefs of the Buddha and Bodhisattvas. The Gandhara stupas were comparatively magnified and more intricate, but the most remarkable feature, which distinguished the Gandhara stupas from the pervious styles were hugely tiered umbrellas at its peak, almost soaring over the total structure. The abundance of Gandharan sculpture was an art, which originated with foreign artisans.
In the excavation among the varied miscellany of small bronze figures, though not often like Alexandrian imports, four or five Buddhist bronzes are very late in date. These further illustrate the aura of the Gandhara art. Relics of mural paintings though have been discovered, yet the only substantial body of painting, in Bamiyan, is moderately late, and much of it belongs to an Iranian or central Asian rather than an Indian context. Non-narrative themes and architectural ornament were omnipresent at that time. Mythical figures and animals such as atlantes, tritons, dragons, and sea serpents derive from the same source, although there is the occasional high-backed, stylized creature associated with the Central Asian animal style. Moldings and cornices are decorated mostly with acanthus, laurel, and vine, though sometimes with motifs of Indian, and occasionally ultimately western Asian, origin: stepped merlons, lion heads, vedikas, and lotus petals. It is worth noting that architectural elements such as pillars, gable ends, and domes as represented in the reliefs tend to follow the Indian forms
.
Gandhara became roughly a Holy Land of Buddhism and excluding a handful of Hindu images, sculpture took the form either of Buddhist sect objects, Buddha and Bodhisattvas, or of architectural embellishment for Buddhist monasteries. The more metaphorical kinds are demonstrated by small votive stupas, and bases teeming with stucco images and figurines that have lasted at Jaulian and Mora Moradu, outpost monasteries in the hills around Taxila. Hadda, near the present town of Jalalabad, has created some groups in stucco of an almost rococo while more latest works of art in baked clay, with strong Hellenistic influence, have been revealed there, in what sums up as tiny chapels. It is not known exactly why stucco, an imported Alexandrian modus operandi, was used. It is true that grey schist is not found near Taxila, however other stones are available, and in opposition to the ease of operating with stucco, predominantly the artistic effects which can be achieved, must be set with its impermanence- fresh deposits frequently had to be applied. Excluding possibly at Taxila, its use emerges to have been a late expansion.
Architectural fundamentals of the Gandhara art, like pillars, gable ends and domes as showcased in the reliefs, were inclined to follow Indian outlines, but the pilaster with capital of Corinthian type, abounds and in one-palace scene Persepolitan columns go along with Roman coffered ceilings. The so-called Shrine of the Double-Headed Eagle at Sirkap, in actuality a stupa pedestal, well demonstrates this enlightening eclecticism- the double-headed bird on top of the chaitya arch is an insignia of Scythian origin, which appears as a Byzantine motif and materialises much later in South India as the ga1J.qa-bheru1J.qa in addition to atop European armorial bearings.
In Gandhara art the descriptive friezes were all but invariably Buddhist, and hence Indian in substance- one depicted a horse on wheels nearing a doorway, which might have represented the Trojan horse affair, but this is under scan. The Dioscuri, Castor and Pollux, familiar from the previous Greek-based coinage of the region, appeared once or twice as standing figurines, presumably because as a pair, they tallied an Indian mithuna couple. There were also female statuettes, corresponding to city goddesses. Though figures from Butkara, near Saidan Sharif in Swat, were noticeably more Indian in physical type, and Indian motifs were in abundance there. Sculpture was, in the main, Hellenistic or Roman, and the art of Gandhara was indeed "the easternmost appearance of the art of the Roman Empire, especially in its late and provincial manifestations". Furthermore, naturalistic portrait heads, one of the high-points of Roman sculpture, were all but missing in Gandhara, in spite of the episodic separated head, probably that of a donor, with a discernible feeling of uniqueness. Some constitutions and poses matched those from western Asia and the Roman world; like the manner in which a figure in a recurrently instanced scene from the Dipankara jataka had prostrated himself before the future Buddha, is reverberated in the pose of the defeated before the defeater on a Trojanic frieze on the Arch of Constantine and in later illustrations of the admiration of the divinised emperor. One singular recurrently occurring muscular male figure, hand on sword, witnessed in three-quarters view from the backside, has been adopted from western classical sculpture. On occasions standing figures, even the Buddha, deceived the elusive stylistic actions of the Roman sculptor, seeking to express majestas. The drapery was fundamentally Western- the folds and volume of dangling garments were carved with realness and gusto- but it was mainly the persistent endeavours at illusionism, though frequently obscured by unrefined carving, which earmarked the Gandhara sculpture as based on a western classical visual impact.
The distinguishing Gandhara sculpture, of which hundreds if not thousands of instances have outlived, is the standing or seated Buddha. This flawlessly reproduces the necessary nature of Gandhara art, in which a religious and an artistic constituent, drawn from widely varied cultures have been bonded. The iconography is purely Indian. The seated Buddha is mostly cross-legged in the established Indian manner. However, forthcoming generations, habituated to think of the Buddha as a monk, and unable to picture him ever possessing long hair or donning a turban, came to deduce the chigon as a "cranial protuberance", singular to Buddha. But Buddha is never depicted with a shaved head, as are the Sangha, the monks; his short hair is clothed either in waves or in taut curls over his whole head. The extended ears are merely due to the downward thrust of the heavy ear-rings worn by a prince or magnate; the distortion of the ear-lobes is especially visible in Buddha, who, in Gandhara, never wore ear-rings or ornaments of any kind. As Foucher puts it, the Gandhara Buddha is at a time a monk without shaving and a prince stripped off jewellery.
The western classical factor rests in the style, in the handling of the robe, and in the physiognomy of Buddha. The cloak, which covers all but the appendages (though the right shoulder is often bared), is dealt like in Greek and Roman sculptures; the heavy folds are given a plastic flair of their own, and only in poorer or later works do they deteriorate into indented lines, fairly a return to standard Indian practice. The "western" treatment has caused Buddha"s garment to be misidentified for a toga; but a toga is semicircular, while, Buddha wore a basic, rectangular piece of cloth, i.e., the samghiifi, a monk"s upper garment. The head gradually swerves towards a hieratic stylisation, but at its best, it is naturalistic and almost positively based on the Greek Apollo, undoubtedly in Hellenistic or Roman copies.
Gandhara art also had developed at least two species of image, i.e. not part of the frieze, in which Buddha is the fundamental figure of an event in his life, distinguished by accompanying figures and a detailed mise-en-scene. Perhaps the most remarkable amongst these is the Visit to the Indrasala Cave, of which the supreme example is dated in the year 89, almost unquestionably of the Kanishka period. Indra and his harpist are depicted on their visit in it. The small statuettes of the visitors emerge below, an elephant describing Indra. The more general among these detailed images, of which approximately 30 instances are known, is presumably related with the Great Miracle of Sravasti. In one such example, one of the adjoining Bodhisattvas is distinguished as Avalokiteshwara by the tiny seated Buddha in his headgear. Other features of these images include the unreal species of tree above Buddha, the spiky lotus upon which he sits, and the effortlessly identifiable figurines of Indra and Brahma on both sides.
Another important aspect of the Gandhara art was the coins of the Graeco-Bactrians. The coins of the Graeco-Bactrians - on the Greek metrological standard, equals the finest Attic examples and of the Indo-Greek kings, which have until lately served as the only instances of Greek art found in the subcontinent. The legendary silver double decadrachmas of Amyntas, possibly a remembrance issue, are the biggest "Greek" coins ever minted, the largest cast in gold, is the exceptional decadrachma of the same king in the Bibliotheque Nationale, with the Dioscuri on the inverse. Otherwise, there was scanty evidence until recently of Greek or Hellenistic influences in Gandhara. A manifestation of Greek metropolitan planning is furnished by the rectilinear layouts of two cities of the 1st centuries B.C./A.D.--Sirkap at Taxila and Shaikhan Pheri at Charsadda. Remains of the temple at Jandial, also at Taxila and presumably dating back to 1st century B.C., also includes Greek characteristics- remarkably the huge base mouldings and the Ionic capitals of the colossal portico and antechamber columns. In contrast, the columns or pilasters on the immeasurable Gandhara friezes (when they are not in a Indian style), are consistently coronated by Indo-Corinthian capitals, the local version of the Corinthian capital- a certain sign of a comparatively later date.
The notable Begram hoard confirms articulately to the number and multiplicity of origin of the foreign artefacts imported into Gandhara. This further illustrates the foreign influence in the Gandhara art. Parallel hoards have been found in peninsular India, especially in Kolhapur in Maharashtra, but the imported wares are sternly from the Roman world. At Begram the ancient Kapisa, near Kabul, there are bronzes, possibly of Alexandrian manufacture, in close proximity with emblemata (plaster discs, certainly meant as moulds for local silversmiths), bearing reliefs in the purest classical vein, Chinese lacquers and Roman glass. The hoard was possibly sealed in mid-3rd century, when some of the subjects may have been approximately 200 years old "antiques", frequently themselves replicates of classical Greek objects. The plentiful ivories, consisting in the central of chest and throne facings, engraved in a number of varied relief techniques, were credibly developed somewhere between Mathura and coastal Andhra. Some are of unrivalled beauty. Even though a few secluded instances of early Indian ivory carving have outlived, including the legendary mirror handle from Pompeii, the Begram ivories are the only substantial collection known until moderately in present times of what must always have been a widespread craft. Other sites, particularly Taxila, have generated great many instances of such imports, some from India, some, like the appealing tiny bronze figure of Harpocrates, undoubtedly from Alexandria. Further cultural influences are authenticated by the Scytho Sarmatian jewellery, with its characteristic high-backed carnivores, and by a statue of St. Peter. But all this should not cloud the all-important truth that the immediately identifiable Gandhara style was the prevailing form of artistic manifestation throughout the expanse for several centuries, and the magnitude of its influence on the art of central Asia and China and as far as Japan, allows no doubt about its integrity and vitality.
In the Gandhara art early Buddhist iconography drew heavily on traditional sources, incorporating Hindu gods and goddesses into a Buddhist pantheon and adapting old folk tales to Buddhist religious purposes. Kubera and Harm are probably the best-known examples of this process.
Five dated idols from Gandhara art though exist, however the hitch remains that the era is never distinguished. The dates are in figures under 100 or else in 300s. Moreover one of the higher numbers are debatable, besides, the image upon which it is engraved is not in the conventional Andhra style. The two low-number-dated idols are the most sophisticated and the least injured. Their pattern is classical Gandhara. The most undemanding rendition of their dates relates them to Kanishka and 78 A.D. is assumed as the commencement of his era. They both fall in the second half of the 2nd century A.D. and equally later, if a later date is necessitated for the beginning of Kanishka`s time. This calculation nearly parallels numismatics and archaeological evidences. The application of other eras, like the Vikrama (base date- 58 B.C.) and the Saka (base date- 78 A.D.), would place them much later. The badly battered figurines portray standing Buddhas, without a head of its own, but both on original figured plinths. They come to view as depicting the classical Gandhara style; decision regarding where to place these two dated Buddhas, both standing, must remain knotty till more evidence comes out as to how late the classical Gandhara panache had continued.
Methodical study of the Gandhara art, and specifically about its origins and expansion, is befuddled with numerous problems, not at least of which is the inordinately complex history and culture of the province. It is one of the great ethnical crossroads of the world simultaneously being in the path of all the intrusions of India for over three millennia. Bussagli has rightly remarked, `More than any other Indian region, Gandhara was a participant in the political and cultural events that concerned the rest of the Asian continent`.
However, Systematic study of the art of Gandhara, and particularly of its origins and development, is bedeviled by many problems, not the least of which is the extraordinarily complex history and culture of the region.
In spite of the labours of many scholars over the past hundred and fifty years, the answers to some of the most important questions, such as the number of centuries spanned by the art of Gandhara, still await, fresh archaeological, inscriptional, or numismatic evidence.
Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) was a French botanist. He was born to a well-to-do family in Aix-en-Provence. Tournefort initially took up studies in theology. However, as he had a marked inclination towards natural sciences, he turned to medicine. He completed his studies at the University of Montpellier. In 1681, he was in Barcelona doing research in botany. In 1694 Tournefort published his first three-volume work, in which he classified 8846 plants. In 1698 he became Doctor in Medicine of the University of Paris. At that time his treatise was also translated into Latin. Tournefort became a famous physician and naturalist. He travelled extensively in Western Europe (Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, England). He had published a number of works on botany, and had acquired a fabulous collection of nearly 50.000 books, as well as costumes, arms, minerals, shells and various curiosities. Thus, he already had a very important career behind him when Louis XIV entrusted him with the mission to bring new plants to the Royal Botanical Garden.
Tournefort started out on his voyage to the Near East in the spring of 1700, at the age of 44, accompanied by a painter and a doctor. He visited thirty-eight islands of the Greek archipelago, as well as Northern Anatolia, Pontus and Armenia, and reached Tiflis in Georgia. Tournefort returned to Marseilles in June 1702.
His manuscript, composed of his letters to the Minister of the Exterior Count de Pontchartain, was published posthumously in 1717. A number of re-editions followed, while his work was also translated into English, German and Flemish. There is also a Greek translation of the first part. The fact that Tournefort had discovered new plants in his journey led him to publish a supplement to his main work of botanical classification in 1703. He taught Botany in the Académie, while continuing to practice medicine; at the same time, he was in charge of the Royal Gardens, where many plants he brought from his travels were cultivated with success. Having survived a multitude of adventures, Tournefort died of an accident in 1708. He did not live to see the publication of his travel chronicle, which in the following three centuries became the basic manual to all travellers to these regions. Until today, researchers from numerous fields turn to Tournefort’s text, as it remains an invaluable source of information. He describes the places he visited in a particular systematic manner.
The systematic way he organizes his information on topography, economy, administration, ethnic composition, customs and habits of everyday life shows how one can arrive at truth and knowledge through research, methodical study, classification and generalisation. To document his research, Tournefort cites a hundred and thirty-five texts by Greek and Latin authors as well as Byzantine writers, Humanists, and earlier travel accounts.
He methodically narrates his visit to each island, and describes the locations as well as events that he witnessed and encounters with locals. He then continues with the island’s history from ancient times to the current age, citing the corresponding myths, and comparing with the information provided by ancient coins. Subsequently, he writes on the island’s administration and taxes, commerce, products and prices thereof. An entire chapter is dedicated to the Greek church. Tournefort also writes on monasteries and churches, house architecture and caves. He also describes the customs, the dress and the occupations of the inhabitants. He concludes his chapters with geographical observations from the highest point of each main region.
Naturally, his work includes engravings of city views, locations and monuments as well as plants, instruments and costumes. The text becomes alive with vivid descriptions of his encounters with islanders, be it Turks, Franks, Greeks or privateers. Of special interest are his descriptions of fortresses, ports, safe havens and his information on map drawing.
The second volume is a publication of his thoroughly documented manuscripts. It was not edited by Tournefort himself as had happened with the first. On numerous occasions he refers to the politics, administration and ethnic composition of the Ottoman Empire. He continues with his journey on the southern coast of the Black Sea to Armenia. The work closes with a short description of Smyrna and Ephesus.
Tournefort is considered the first to have shown the islands of the Archipelago to be “travel material”, as he offered information which inspired the interest for further research, and also highlighed each location’s wealth and uniqueness.
Written by Ioli Vingopoulou
Fransız botanikçi Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) Aix-en-Provence'da varlıklı bir aile içinde doğar, ilk önce tanrıbilim (teoloji) dersleri izler ancak genç yaştan beri doğa bilimlerine eğilim gösterir. Bu yüzden Montpellier'de tıp öğrenimi görüp 1681'de botanik araştırmaları yapmak üzere Barcelona'ya gelir. 1694 yılında üç ciltlik ve 8.846 bitkinin sınıflandırmasına ilişkin ilk eserini yayınlar; 1698'de Paris Tıp Fakültesinden doktor unvanını alır ve bu kazanımı yapıtının latince çevirisi izler. Doktor ve doğa bilimcisi olarak ün salmış, Batı Avrupa'da (İspanya, Portekiz, Hollanda, İngiltere'ye) seyahat etmiş, botanoloji ile ilgili kitaplar yayınlamış, 50.000'e yakın kitaptan meydana gelen bir kitaplık oluşturmuş, ayrıca yerel kıyafet, silah, mineral, deniz kabuğu ve daha başka ilginç şeylerden oluşan hayranlık uyandıran koleksiyonlar sahibi olmuşken, kral 14. Louis ona Kraliyet Botanik Bahçesine yeni bitkiler getirme görevini verir. Tournefort 1700 yılının ilkbaharında, 44 yaşındayken, yanına yoldaş olarak bir ressam ve bir doktor alarak Yakın Doğu'ya doğru yola çıkar.
Ege adalarından 38 tanesini ziyaret eder, Kuzey Anadolu'nun her tarafını gezip Karadeniz ve Ermenistan yörelerine gelir, Tiflis'e varır. Tournefort, 1702 yılının Haziran ayında Marsilya'da karaya ayak basar.
Kaleme aldığı metin (Dışişleri bakanı Kont de Pontchartain'e yolladığı mektuplar biçiminde) ilk olarak 1717'de yayınlanır, bu ilk yayını bir çok yeni baskı izler ve eser ingilizce, almanca ve flamanca gibi dillere- ilk kısmı yunancaya da - çevrilir. Yeni keşfettiği bitkilerin daha önce belirlemiş olduğu sınıflandırma sistemine eklenmesi sonucu olarak 1703'te yeni bir cilt yayınlar. Tournefort botanik profesörü sıfatıyla Akademide dersler verir, doktorluk mesleğini ve bunlara koşut olarak Kraliyet Bahçesinin sorumluluğu görevini sürdürür. Gezilerinden getirmiş olduğu birçok yeni bitki bu bahçede başarılı bir şekilde yetiştirilir. Tournefort geçirdiği birçok maceradan kefeni yırtmışken, üç asır boyunca her gezginin bu bölge için başucu kitabı olacak seyahatnamesinin yayınlanmasını göremeden 1708'de bir kaza sonucu ölür. Bugün hâlâ çeşitli dallardan araştırmacılar Tournefort'un metnine başvurup son derece değerli bilgilerinden faydalanmak durumundalar. Eseri anında ingilizce, hollandaca ve almancaya çevrilmişti.
Gezdiği yerleri betimlerken belirli bir yöntem izleyerek topoğrafya, ekonomi, yönetim, milletler sentezi ve günlük yaşamdaki örf ve adetlere ilişkin bilgiler verirken, Tournefort, bilginin gerçeğe uyup uymadığı konusuna araştırma, düzenli okuma, sınıflandırma ve genelleştirme yoluyla yanaşılabileceğini kanıtlıyor. Kanıtlayıcı belgeleri arasında antik Yunan ve Latin yazarlarından, ayrıca Bizans yazarlarından ve daha eski hümanist bilgin ve gezginlerden 135 tane metin bulunmakta.
Ziyaret ettiği her ada için düzenli olarak ziyaretini anlatıp birçok yeri ve olayı hatta yerlilerle olan görüşmelerini de betimler. Bunlara ek olarak, adanın eski çağlardan gününe dek tarihi ve bununla ilintili efsaneler, sikkeler hakkında, yönetim, vergilendirme usulleri, ticaret, ürünler ve fiyatları hakkında bilgiler verir. Ayrıca Yunanistan'ın dinî (kilise) yaşamına başlıbaşına bir bölüm ayırır. Manastırlar, kiliseler, evlerin mimarisi, mağaralar hakkında yazar, adetler ve kıyafetleri betimleyip halkın uğraşlarından sözeder ve önemli yörelerin her birinin en yüksek irtifasından yaptığı coğrafya gözlemleri ile anlatımını bitirir.
Doğal olarak eserinde şehir, yer, anıt, bitki, alet, ve kıyafet görünümleri ile ilgili gravürler de yer almakta. Ayrıca metni ada halkıyla (Türkler, Latinler, Yunanlılar, korsanlarla) ilişkilerinden çarpıcı betimlemelerle de çeşitlenir. Kitabında hisarlar, gemi barınakları, güvenli limanlar hakkında yaptığı betimlemeler ve harita çizimi ile ilgili verdiği bilgiler özel ilgi uyandıran kısımlar arasındadır.
Eserinin birinci cildinin yayına hazırlığını kendisi denetlemişken ikinci cilt kendi ayrıntılı yazılarına sadık kalınarak basılır. Bu cildin başındaki birçok bölüm Osmanlıların siyasal, yönetimsel ve etnografik durumuna ayrılmıştır. Bunun devamında Karadeniz'in güney kıyılarında yaptığı Ermenistan'a kadar varan yolculuğunu anlatıp kitabı İzmir ve Efes'in kısa bir betimlemesi ile bitirir.
Böylece Tournefort, başkalarında arayış isteğini besleyecek nitelikte malzeme sağlamanın yanısıra, gördüğü her yerin sonsuz zengiliğini ve kendine özgü niteliklerini yüzeye çıkarması açısından Ege adalarına bir "yolculuk uknumu" veren ilk şahıs olarak bilinir.
Yazan: İoli Vingopoulou
A film biography of Formula 1 champion driver Niki Lauda and the 1976 crash that almost claimed his life. Mere weeks after the accident, he got behind the wheel to challenge his rival, James Hunt.
Directed by Ron Howard, he and the cars from that fateful season descended upon the race track at Snetterton to recreate Fuji 1976, these are a few snapshots from that day - 1/5/2012.
Set against the sexy, glamorous golden age of Formula 1 racing in 1976. Based on the true story of a great sporting rivalry between handsome English playboy James Hunt (Chris Hemsworth), and his methodical, brilliant opponent Niki Lauda, (Daniel Bruhl). The story follows their distinctly different personal styles on and off the track, their loves and the astonishing season in which both drivers were willing to risk everything to become world champion in a sport with no margin for error: if you make a mistake, you die.
www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project
Phaselis Research
Phaselis
When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.
This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.
Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.
By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.
Phaselis Territorium
The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.
Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.
PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.
Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.
Seedpod Urn
Earthenware
19 1/2"h, 10"w,11"d
Embroidered florae weave secrets over the seeds that rest latent with reserved energy. I stand in awe at the ephemeral blossoms emerging amid the decay, unearthing the fragility and changeability of life within this moment. In the intimate act of a hand touching the earth, sifting and turning the soil, or a moment of quiet reverence in one’s surroundings, a deep relationship is formed. I am compelled to make work that references moments of exchange between the self and the earth and the sense of wonder it instills.
References to decorative ceramic traditions, the garden, and natural forms are manifested in my work. Through a slow, repetitive process of coil-building and pinching clay I construct vessels that embody a fabric of woven wilderness with sensitivity to the fantastical. Working methodically in a progression, I embrace uncertainty and allow each form to give rise to the next. My works are metaphors that tell us of their world, and tell us something about our world: they embody a sense of transformation, of one thing becoming the other, of wonder, of the mysterious, and of a world in flux.
What Do I See? (What They Do To Me?)©
Execute my fears, kill them, blow them all away with relief
Have a blast, have a say, let this moment have it's way
Fine weather, a pretty face, flirty eyes opening the door of passionate belief
A name, a redefined mood for disposable concoction of utter dismay
And here we are presiding over burning formulae for icy morning
The blue sky has an Anglian sunrise for it's blessed crowning
Song two fills my head, seeking and destroying the webs of waste
Not yet fully awake my sleepy thoughts exorcise toxins conceit
Something inside so sulphuric, spiteful and slighted by taste
Disharmonious with the Zen of flow before the tri-coloured repeat
An undeclared war of zones one and two, the spell of present ages
Fanatical powers fire our hatred, for imagination to repel the facing pages
Torn, burnt, damaged and lost from a fingertip switch of chi-annal
This unfinished story of indigestible med to pacify the docs of admin
Creating the other me from a science that heaves to political throe of channel
No cure for the broken spine that must take it all on the chin
Weak yet keeping a distance the touch of pain seems such a conspiracy
Where apathy retains youth, health grows old and out of sight from deliracy
However, every feeling is labelled meticulously, dated methodically
And hurt medically...vigour poisoned by every medic looking out for himself
My Soul is fractured left right and central to spinal sensations lost analogically
Walk away if it could my anger is blue like my breath numbing itself
Designing hygiene for the senses acquiescent, my severed nerves cut off from reality
They increase the prescription! I wish to avenge sevenfold their hospitality
Change tack! it really is nice out, the sunbeams pole-dance the trees with ease
Light is the greatest dancer, the erotic benefice of anguished posterity
One morning after She looks as sexy as ever, this pneumatic heartbeat tease
With a withy whipped-up enthusiasm She is the Gloria of salvation and temerity
No more do I wish to see the twibilled surgical topping
For my sensual natural lover is atop my senses for the pain She is a heart stopping.
by anglia24
09h35: 09/12/2008
©2008anglia24
www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project
Phaselis Research
Phaselis
When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.
This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.
Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.
By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.
Phaselis Territorium
The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.
Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.
PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.
Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.
This is a photo to show proof and evidence of the methodical, carefully orchestrated 'IPI' conspiracy across the board: politically, religiously, dynastically motivated from the rivaling factions' rife from ancient to modern times...This is a photo of Laura Rangel founder of 'karito kids' and her side kick: lisa steen proctor not shown this photo: comapare this image of laura rangel and 'laurie' pete's ex-wife: very similar and look at her 'IPI' toy doll: a picture od 'Ling' doll,ehh: resembles me, ehh...a political, religious, dynastic faction rife of a conspiracy: 'IPI' across the board...a picture is worth 1000 words and more...oh what a wicked web woven and decieved now uprooted, brought to light..for the world to sea...aye, maties!
After a brief repose which followed our initial ascent up the Longji terraced fields, our band of three left the hotel to resume again our hiking. To catch the setting sun, we set off for the high western hills that lay directly behind our residence. Another group of ardent Hong Kong tourists joined us on this trek.
Though we neither anticipated such an arduous journey, nor did we bring enough water to satisfy our parched lips, we nonetheless reached the peak of the acclivity without too much ennui to warrant a hasty departure. As if crack troops on the watch, we bunkered down on our hill, affectionately called "47," and from there we waited for the sun's final languid descent into obscurity.
No sooner had we made ourselves quite comfortable, exploring the adjacent mounds and running along the ridge while emoting in our Braveheart impersonations, than we noticed the ominous smoke billowing into the sky from the nearby mountaintops. The concentrated haze, the result of controlled brushfires, we concluded, was moving closer and closer towards us. Eventually, the crackling from the intense combustion of browned and dry foliage, that had been methodically placed on certain declivities, tinged our ears; and the smoke, which had so far been blown away by an easter gale whose ferocity also invited a biting cold to hill 47, at length enveloped our position, compromising our ability to remain there any longer. But by this time thankfully, the meek sun had ambled its way into the opaque distance and with our primary objective met, we gladly capitulated our untenable camp to our fiery nemesis. As the dark blanket of dusk settled on Longji, we swiftly fell back into the dimming wood, eager to return to our lodgings for a hot meal.
www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project
Phaselis Research
Phaselis
When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.
This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.
Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.
By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.
Phaselis Territorium
The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.
Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.
PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.
Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.
via WordPress bit.ly/2S8P95N
Hopefully you’ve read Part 1 of this article, and also seen the video I created talking about this. If not, I recommend grabbing a mug of tea and reading / watching those first – this will make a lot more sense. In part 1, I talked about labelling the new wiring harness whilst it’s out the car, and whilst you still have the old harness in your car to refer back to. Whilst time-consuming, this made the following steps much quicker and less daunting.
So now you’re ready to remove the old wiring harness.
Step 2: Disconnect the Old Harness
Firstly, disconnect the battery Negative and Positive terminals in the boot, and remove the battery just to be sure no wires touch it. Throughout this process I recommend trying to keep the old harness in one piece as far as possible – there may be wires, connectors, bulb holders or cables that you may need to re-use in some way when the new harness goes back in. And it may be that you still want to refer to the old harness in later steps.
I also recommend that wherever the old loom is connecting to other wires or equipment, before disconnecting the wires make sure you can tell the terminal numbers or the colour-codes of the other wires, otherwise you’ll get into a mess here. On my car, the wires that come out of the wiper motor were impossible to identify, so I cut the main harness to leave ‘stubs’ of identifiable wire in the bullet connector – at least that way I knew what wires go where when re-connecting the new harness. Obviously this breaks the notion of keeping the old harness as complete as possible, but it was the safest way to do this. Alternatively, label the cables or terminals, but be sure the labels don’t fall-off!
Now start disconnecting the old harness in the engine bay. Work logically and take lots of photos of each terminal or component as a record. Disconnect the lights in the wings – there are bullet connectors at the front right and left of the engine bay. Disconnect the wires from the fusebox and the surrounding components. Also don’t forget to disconnect the reverse light switch and starter inhibitor switch cabling that run to the gearbox. These come through the bulkhead just to the left of the heater matrix. You’ll also find the starter relay to the left of the heater matrix.
In total there are 4 places where cables come through the bulkhead into the engine bay:
Left side of bulkhead, behind left bonnet hinge.
Just to the left of the heater matrix.
Left of the fusebox.
Right side of bulkhead, behind right bonnet hinge.
Once done, move inside the car. You’ll need to remove the cardboard cover under the dashboard, and also undo the front of the main instrument binnacle. Once unscrewed, this can then be pulled backwards slightly. You’ll need to get your hand in there to disconnect the Speedometer and the trip reset cable – this is easier if you first disconnect the other end of the trip reset cable from the dash rail. The binnacle front should then move back a bit further. It’s very cramped in there.
Start disconnecting the wires from the instruments, switches and warning / illumination lights, taking lots of photos. Once every wire is free, the binnacle front can be removed, This is a great time to recondition the binnacle or the instruments themselves. On a Coupe don’t forget the instruments slung inner the main binnacle – these screw into the main binnacle from underneath, and some have a short extension harnesses for lamps – keep this, as it probably won’t be part of the new harness.
Next, move to the left front footwell. Remove the trim panel in the footwell (it pulls away), as behind here is the connection point where the front harness connects to the rear harness. You’ll should see a bunch of bullet connectors pushed into the cavity on the left – disconnect these, taking lots of photos first.
Finally, there’s the centre console. You’ll need to remove this, as the cabling passes through metal frame. Remove the switch panel, disconnect the wires, and don’t forget the gear selector illumination cabling as well. Also there are normally cables under the dash (cold-start warning light switch).
Step 3: Remove the Old Harness
OK, so you should now have the harness disconnected. The next challenge is removing it from the car. To do this you really need to remove the bonnet hinges – the harness snakes around the hinges after coming through the bulkhead into the engine bay, and it’s impossible to remove the old harness (or fit the new one) with the hinges in place.
Once the bonnet is off, push/pull the harness back through the bulkhead into the car. Try to preserve any grommets that are in good condition – the original Lucas grommets are very soft and easy to fit, but are almost impossible to find. Modern cheap grommets are horrible in comparison. Once you have the harness inside the car, work from one side to the other threading the old harness out.
Now is a great time to recondition the dashboard coverings etc. The car will be looking pretty awful, but things will get better! As mentioned, try to preserve as much of the old harness as possible.
Step 4: Fit the New Harness
Just do everything you’ve just done, but in reverse, Simple! Well, actually, no, but this step needs some patience and strength to get the new harness installed correctly. Start by placing the new harness across the dashboard, laying parts of the harness in approximately the correct place. Now, you need to get the harness ends back through the bulkhead into the engine compartment. You need to do this without damaging your expensive new harness, but that’s not so easy when you have small, sharp-edged holes to get through.
My solution was to buy a roll of thick polythene tubing, they type that can be used by companies to create heat-sealed bags. This is ideal to protect the harness as you pass it through the bulkhead – the polythene may get damaged, but your harness should be safe. Wrap the harness in the polythene, securing it tightly with PVC table, and start pushing/pulling the harness through the bulkhead. It should go through eventually. Do this at all 4 places the harness passes through the bulkhead, positioning the grommets correctly – these are absolutely necessary otherwise the panel will cut into the harness.
Use the same trick wherever the harness passes through a panel.
I used the same polythene tubing to pass the harness through the passenger footwell, and also through the metal frame of the centre console. Once the harness is in place, carefully unwrap the tubing and pull it off the harness, being careful not to let the panel edge damage the harness. As you do each one, refit the harness grommets. Once they’re fitted, you’re past the worst.
Now is a good time to re-fit the bonnet and hinges, making sure to route the harness neatly around the hinges, and replace the plastic edge-trim that prevents the hinge cutting-into the harness.
Step 5: Connecting the New Harness
Now you need to connect the new harness. This part needs time and patience, as mistakes now will take much longer to find and fix later.
Take your wiring diagram (see the Shop!) and a dry-marker pen. Work through every cable and component, checking the terminal numbers, wiring colour etc, and connecting it up. Make sure wires are routed as neatly as possible.
Make a final check that all wires of the new harness are connected, and it all looks correct.
Step 6: Testing the New Harness
This is the scary step, but don’t panic – follow these steps and you should be fine. Firstly, remove all the fuses from the fusebox. This means that even with the battery connected, most of the harness will be ‘dead’.
Now make-up a short cable with an inline fuse holder, and temporarily connect that to the positive battery lead. I’d suggest starting with a 2Amp fuse. This is a safeguard in case something’s wrong when you reconnect the battery.
Now, connect your fused lead to the battery, and then connect the earth lead. You shouldn’t see, hear or smell anything bad, and the fuse shouldn’t blow. If you removed all the fuses, nothing should be visibly powered at this point – no lights on, the clock shouldn’t be working etc. There is power in the harness, but only the bare minimum.
The next step is to add each fuse in-turn, starting at the top, and test each circuit. Measure some voltages making sure they’re as expected. To make this easier I split my wiring diagram by function, so you can just look at each part in turn. Once happy with each circuit, remove that fuse and insert the next fuse.
If a fuse blows when inserted, you know that that circuit has a short, The only thing to do is trace that circuit, checking all connections carefully. Hopefully, if nothing else was changed, you’ll find the issue. I recommend that you don’t disturb anything else through this process such as the wiper motor, as that adds another variable – at least of you haven’t touched these things you’ll know it must be the harness that’s wrong. I didn’t follow my own advise here, but fortunately it worked out OK for me.
Once you’ve gone through each fuse and are happy everything works as expected, start adding the fuses again, but leave the previous fuse in-place. Again, check that everything works as expected. At the end of this, you should have a fully-working car again.
Summary
Throughout this process, it’s particularly important to work methodically and carefully. One incorrect wire can disable the whole car, so care is definitely needed. But by putting effort into Step 1, you can hopefully prevent any problems later. I was fortunate in that apart from a couple of things that needed terminals cleaning, everything worked after reconnecting the new harness. It can certainly seem daunting, but if I can do it, you can do it!
In the third-and-final part, I’ll discuss some of the changes I made to my new harness, mainly to make the car safer to use. By making these changes to the new harness before fitting it, I could re-wrap the harness so that the changes look completely original.
While vacationing in a hot climate a little while back, I was sporting painted pink toes. I was sunbathing at the pool and it was very hot, so I'd taken a dip to cool down a bit. I came out of the water dripping wet and totally refreshed, and had just layed down on my pool chair, when along came a little bee. I'm not at all afraid of bees, so I was curious to see what this bee was up to. I watched it with great interest and delight. It hovered briefly over each of my toes, going from one to the next, to the next... then over to my other foot where it very methodically hovered over each of those five pink toes. Upon finally concluding that none of my pink toes were flowers, my little bee friend landed lightly upon my ankle, which was still glistening with small droplets of water. She gently walked up to the edge of a droplet of water and, to my delight, began to drink. She took tiny bee sips from exactly three droplets of water on my ankle. My little friend then lifted off once again, took one more fly-by over each of my bright pink toes and buzzed off in search of real flower blossoms. To this day, I cannot look at pink toes and not be reminded of that delightful little memory. I took this shot sitting out in my highrise balcony garden.
PSE Drybrush
John Thompson, architect of adjacency and PC Forum speaker, is a very methodical guy. When he came to Symantec nearly six years ago, he says, “I had spent the last ten years fixing things.” That’s what he proceeded to do at Symantec, but this time as CEO. “I found a company whose core competence was shipping things in yellow boxes. It was a technology company optimized around distri- bution.” Its business was also 60 percent consumer-based. Starting not from scratch but with a successful $632-million-revenues business, Thompson proceeded to remold it to reflect the industry around him – 65 percent enterprise – and to shift its core back to security. “My question to the team was, ‘What is our strongest and most relevant technology?’ The answer was anti-virus. The near adjacencies were content filtering and intrusion detection. Better yet, there were no big players – no IBM, no Microsoft… If we ran fast, we could be the biggest dog in the pound.“ (At least until recently!)
So the company shed everything else to focus on security. Thompson got a curve ball of sorts in the last few years. The consumer business suddenly grew 50 percent a quarter as consumers finally reacted to the virus threat and started buying antivirus product in droves. That threw things off balance, though in a positive way.
But there was more to it than customer mix. “We did a postmortem after the ‘slammer’ worm and realized that it could have been stopped dead in its tracks if corporate users had only patched their systems according to what they had been warned of six months earlier. We realized that a lot of security isn’t just the tools; it’s how you use them. So we bought Powerquest, with Windows imaging, provisioning and disaster recovery tools, and On Technology, which provided key infrastructure-management tools.”
More recently, the company’s pending acquisition of Veritas is in part a move to redress the balance of the company towards the enterprise, and in part a way to address problems that can’t be as easily solved as mere virus threats. “It’s also a recognition that security isn’t just intrusion detection and exclusion; it’s the reliability and integrity of what you have inside,” says Thompson.
He continues, “Security for the enterprise covers other issues such as inclusion [identity management and provisioning] and compliance. Right now we don’t have anything that focuses on compliance, Sarbanes-Oxley, Graham-Leach Bliley or other regulatory initiatives. But technically, you can instantiate all those compliance rules in our software, whether it requires an internal development or the integration of some third-party capability.”
But that’s within Symantec. On a broader scale, Thompson agrees with Charney that government has a role, but he is more focused on public education. “There’s only so much that vendors can do,” he says, especially in an environment where price and convenience seem to overcome security as a sales message every time. He adds, “We must all be responsible for the security and safety of our own little piece of the Internet. We should integrate computer safety into basic computer training in elementary and secondary schools. We also have to educate busi- nesses on the need to implement multiple security technologies throughout the network and to maintain a balance between the security and the availability of their information assets.”
www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project
Phaselis Research
Phaselis
When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.
This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.
Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.
By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.
Phaselis Territorium
The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.
Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.
PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.
Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.
www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project
Phaselis Research
Phaselis
When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.
This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.
Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.
By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.
Phaselis Territorium
The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.
Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.
PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.
Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.
Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) was a French botanist. He was born to a well-to-do family in Aix-en-Provence. Tournefort initially took up studies in theology. However, as he had a marked inclination towards natural sciences, he turned to medicine. He completed his studies at the University of Montpellier. In 1681, he was in Barcelona doing research in botany. In 1694 Tournefort published his first three-volume work, in which he classified 8846 plants. In 1698 he became Doctor in Medicine of the University of Paris. At that time his treatise was also translated into Latin. Tournefort became a famous physician and naturalist. He travelled extensively in Western Europe (Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, England). He had published a number of works on botany, and had acquired a fabulous collection of nearly 50.000 books, as well as costumes, arms, minerals, shells and various curiosities. Thus, he already had a very important career behind him when Louis XIV entrusted him with the mission to bring new plants to the Royal Botanical Garden.
Tournefort started out on his voyage to the Near East in the spring of 1700, at the age of 44, accompanied by a painter and a doctor. He visited thirty-eight islands of the Greek archipelago, as well as Northern Anatolia, Pontus and Armenia, and reached Tiflis in Georgia. Tournefort returned to Marseilles in June 1702.
His manuscript, composed of his letters to the Minister of the Exterior Count de Pontchartain, was published posthumously in 1717. A number of re-editions followed, while his work was also translated into English, German and Flemish. There is also a Greek translation of the first part. The fact that Tournefort had discovered new plants in his journey led him to publish a supplement to his main work of botanical classification in 1703. He taught Botany in the Académie, while continuing to practice medicine; at the same time, he was in charge of the Royal Gardens, where many plants he brought from his travels were cultivated with success. Having survived a multitude of adventures, Tournefort died of an accident in 1708. He did not live to see the publication of his travel chronicle, which in the following three centuries became the basic manual to all travellers to these regions. Until today, researchers from numerous fields turn to Tournefort’s text, as it remains an invaluable source of information. He describes the places he visited in a particular systematic manner.
The systematic way he organizes his information on topography, economy, administration, ethnic composition, customs and habits of everyday life shows how one can arrive at truth and knowledge through research, methodical study, classification and generalisation. To document his research, Tournefort cites a hundred and thirty-five texts by Greek and Latin authors as well as Byzantine writers, Humanists, and earlier travel accounts.
He methodically narrates his visit to each island, and describes the locations as well as events that he witnessed and encounters with locals. He then continues with the island’s history from ancient times to the current age, citing the corresponding myths, and comparing with the information provided by ancient coins. Subsequently, he writes on the island’s administration and taxes, commerce, products and prices thereof. An entire chapter is dedicated to the Greek church. Tournefort also writes on monasteries and churches, house architecture and caves. He also describes the customs, the dress and the occupations of the inhabitants. He concludes his chapters with geographical observations from the highest point of each main region.
Naturally, his work includes engravings of city views, locations and monuments as well as plants, instruments and costumes. The text becomes alive with vivid descriptions of his encounters with islanders, be it Turks, Franks, Greeks or privateers. Of special interest are his descriptions of fortresses, ports, safe havens and his information on map drawing.
The second volume is a publication of his thoroughly documented manuscripts. It was not edited by Tournefort himself as had happened with the first. On numerous occasions he refers to the politics, administration and ethnic composition of the Ottoman Empire. He continues with his journey on the southern coast of the Black Sea to Armenia. The work closes with a short description of Smyrna and Ephesus.
Tournefort is considered the first to have shown the islands of the Archipelago to be “travel material”, as he offered information which inspired the interest for further research, and also highlighed each location’s wealth and uniqueness.
Written by Ioli Vingopoulou
Fransız botanikçi Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) Aix-en-Provence'da varlıklı bir aile içinde doğar, ilk önce tanrıbilim (teoloji) dersleri izler ancak genç yaştan beri doğa bilimlerine eğilim gösterir. Bu yüzden Montpellier'de tıp öğrenimi görüp 1681'de botanik araştırmaları yapmak üzere Barcelona'ya gelir. 1694 yılında üç ciltlik ve 8.846 bitkinin sınıflandırmasına ilişkin ilk eserini yayınlar; 1698'de Paris Tıp Fakültesinden doktor unvanını alır ve bu kazanımı yapıtının latince çevirisi izler. Doktor ve doğa bilimcisi olarak ün salmış, Batı Avrupa'da (İspanya, Portekiz, Hollanda, İngiltere'ye) seyahat etmiş, botanoloji ile ilgili kitaplar yayınlamış, 50.000'e yakın kitaptan meydana gelen bir kitaplık oluşturmuş, ayrıca yerel kıyafet, silah, mineral, deniz kabuğu ve daha başka ilginç şeylerden oluşan hayranlık uyandıran koleksiyonlar sahibi olmuşken, kral 14. Louis ona Kraliyet Botanik Bahçesine yeni bitkiler getirme görevini verir. Tournefort 1700 yılının ilkbaharında, 44 yaşındayken, yanına yoldaş olarak bir ressam ve bir doktor alarak Yakın Doğu'ya doğru yola çıkar.
Ege adalarından 38 tanesini ziyaret eder, Kuzey Anadolu'nun her tarafını gezip Karadeniz ve Ermenistan yörelerine gelir, Tiflis'e varır. Tournefort, 1702 yılının Haziran ayında Marsilya'da karaya ayak basar.
Kaleme aldığı metin (Dışişleri bakanı Kont de Pontchartain'e yolladığı mektuplar biçiminde) ilk olarak 1717'de yayınlanır, bu ilk yayını bir çok yeni baskı izler ve eser ingilizce, almanca ve flamanca gibi dillere- ilk kısmı yunancaya da - çevrilir. Yeni keşfettiği bitkilerin daha önce belirlemiş olduğu sınıflandırma sistemine eklenmesi sonucu olarak 1703'te yeni bir cilt yayınlar. Tournefort botanik profesörü sıfatıyla Akademide dersler verir, doktorluk mesleğini ve bunlara koşut olarak Kraliyet Bahçesinin sorumluluğu görevini sürdürür. Gezilerinden getirmiş olduğu birçok yeni bitki bu bahçede başarılı bir şekilde yetiştirilir. Tournefort geçirdiği birçok maceradan kefeni yırtmışken, üç asır boyunca her gezginin bu bölge için başucu kitabı olacak seyahatnamesinin yayınlanmasını göremeden 1708'de bir kaza sonucu ölür. Bugün hâlâ çeşitli dallardan araştırmacılar Tournefort'un metnine başvurup son derece değerli bilgilerinden faydalanmak durumundalar. Eseri anında ingilizce, hollandaca ve almancaya çevrilmişti.
Gezdiği yerleri betimlerken belirli bir yöntem izleyerek topoğrafya, ekonomi, yönetim, milletler sentezi ve günlük yaşamdaki örf ve adetlere ilişkin bilgiler verirken, Tournefort, bilginin gerçeğe uyup uymadığı konusuna araştırma, düzenli okuma, sınıflandırma ve genelleştirme yoluyla yanaşılabileceğini kanıtlıyor. Kanıtlayıcı belgeleri arasında antik Yunan ve Latin yazarlarından, ayrıca Bizans yazarlarından ve daha eski hümanist bilgin ve gezginlerden 135 tane metin bulunmakta.
Ziyaret ettiği her ada için düzenli olarak ziyaretini anlatıp birçok yeri ve olayı hatta yerlilerle olan görüşmelerini de betimler. Bunlara ek olarak, adanın eski çağlardan gününe dek tarihi ve bununla ilintili efsaneler, sikkeler hakkında, yönetim, vergilendirme usulleri, ticaret, ürünler ve fiyatları hakkında bilgiler verir. Ayrıca Yunanistan'ın dinî (kilise) yaşamına başlıbaşına bir bölüm ayırır. Manastırlar, kiliseler, evlerin mimarisi, mağaralar hakkında yazar, adetler ve kıyafetleri betimleyip halkın uğraşlarından sözeder ve önemli yörelerin her birinin en yüksek irtifasından yaptığı coğrafya gözlemleri ile anlatımını bitirir.
Doğal olarak eserinde şehir, yer, anıt, bitki, alet, ve kıyafet görünümleri ile ilgili gravürler de yer almakta. Ayrıca metni ada halkıyla (Türkler, Latinler, Yunanlılar, korsanlarla) ilişkilerinden çarpıcı betimlemelerle de çeşitlenir. Kitabında hisarlar, gemi barınakları, güvenli limanlar hakkında yaptığı betimlemeler ve harita çizimi ile ilgili verdiği bilgiler özel ilgi uyandıran kısımlar arasındadır.
Eserinin birinci cildinin yayına hazırlığını kendisi denetlemişken ikinci cilt kendi ayrıntılı yazılarına sadık kalınarak basılır. Bu cildin başındaki birçok bölüm Osmanlıların siyasal, yönetimsel ve etnografik durumuna ayrılmıştır. Bunun devamında Karadeniz'in güney kıyılarında yaptığı Ermenistan'a kadar varan yolculuğunu anlatıp kitabı İzmir ve Efes'in kısa bir betimlemesi ile bitirir.
Böylece Tournefort, başkalarında arayış isteğini besleyecek nitelikte malzeme sağlamanın yanısıra, gördüğü her yerin sonsuz zengiliğini ve kendine özgü niteliklerini yüzeye çıkarması açısından Ege adalarına bir "yolculuk uknumu" veren ilk şahıs olarak bilinir.
Yazan: İoli Vingopoulou
I worked some more on my rolling tool cart today, making the cuts that I need and getting the boards ready… when you watch television shows they neglect to show all the back-end work that goes into preparing the pieces for assembling- they make it look like it just goes together in 15-20 minutes. That’s not how it works… You really have to be methodical and take your time, and because I am using sliding drawers on this project the cuts have to be exact as I possibly can get them.
I am also going to stain and gloss all of the boards including the drawers, which means that I have to have the right weather conditions. So, 100% humidity is actually NOT the ideal weather conditions for painting. There is a system coming through tonight so I think for tomorrow the humidity will lift and I can get a good chunk of work done.
Theme: Re-Creation
Year Nine Of My 365 Project
www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project
Phaselis Research
Phaselis
When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.
This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.
Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.
By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.
Phaselis Territorium
The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.
Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.
PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.
Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.
"François Gabart, 29, is seen as one of the most gifted yachtsmen of his generation. He is a friendly and methodical skipper with a rigorous and scientific approach to his job, which does not prevent him from enjoying offshore racing with an enthusiastic freshness."
IN: www.vendeeglobe.org/en/skipper/31/francois-gabart.html
Capitainerie, Les Sables d'Olonne, Vendée, France, 01/2013
One of the tighter and more famous switchbacks descending Black Bear Pass above Telluride, CO. My wife decided to walk this turn instead of riding with me. It would have been ok though. This section of trail is one way only (downhill). Jeeps and other 4x4 vehicles have to backup at least once in this turn to keep from falling off the side. There is plenty of room for a motorcycle or ATV. Although easy for a bike, you still take it very slowly and methodically because a mistake would at least ruin your day if not kill you.
The story of Margareten
For the first time in 1373 has been an estate named, the in contrast to an "upper court" at the height of the Viennese mountain (Wienerberg) as "lower court" on (today) Margaretenplatz is designated. 1395 donated Rudolf Tirna, an owner of the facility, together with his wife Anna and his brother Louis one to Saint Margaret of Antioch dedicated chapel. As other early mentions of the "Lower Court" and the chapel we find in 1411 the St. Margaretenkapelln to Metzleinstorff, 1548 St. Margareten, 1568 Sandt Margareten and in 1594 hoff to St Margareten. The around this Margaretner Hof in todays area Margaretenplatz - Hofgasse - Schlossgasse emerged estate hamlet constituted the starting point for the development of the suburb. The estate, it is shown on the circular plan of Niklas Meldemann in 1530 armed with a mighty tower, has been at the siege of 1529 of Turkish groups of fighters set on fire - a commemorative plaque on the house Margaretenplatz 3 remembers at it. The court subsequently changed hands several times until it purchsed Olav Nicholas, Archbishop of Gran, 1555 commercially. Olai had the courtyard and the chapel partially rebuild and he layed out a large castle garden.
He appointed settlers to Margareten and founded south of his farm Nikolsdorf. In the middle of the 17th Century, 1647-1667, finally completed the envoy to the Sublime Porte, Johann Rudolf Schmidt von Schwarzhorn the building. In the 1662 appeared "Topographia Archiducatus Austriae Inferioris Modernae" by Georg Matthäus Vischer the present castle is represented as a two-storey building whose siebenachsiger (7-axle) residential wing in the east is reinforced by a corner tower with loggia-like ambulatory and to the west is surmounted by an onion-shape crowned clock tower. In this figure, however, lacks the this very day preserved with mighty rusticaded stones cladded castle portal. After the destruction of the Türkenjahr (Siege of Vienna) 1683 the construction was rebuilt. Already about 1725 had in the front of the castle developed in the run of today Margaretenstraße through building development the methodic rectangular shape of today's Margaret Square.
1727 sold Earl of Sonnau the manorial system Margareten to the city of Vienna. Between 1749 and 1783 was located in the large deserted castle garden, which served partly as a grain field and pasture, the first Mulberry School in Vienna. In the premises of the castle in 1751 a factory of Leonean goods was established, but which burned down in 1768. 1786 Anton Schwarzleithner moved the factory to Mannersdorf (Lower Austria). Thereafter, the entire reality was measured and came up for auction. The largest parcel, the old castle at Margaretenplatz with the adjacent factory building at 23 Schlossgasse, bought the silk ribbon maker and judge of Margareten, Francis Plumper. By a daughter Prallers, Elizabeth, married Pichler, the building complex came into the possession of a book printer family, which to 1869 handled a print shop here. The new factory building at 21 Schlossgasse was purchased by auction by Johann Brauneck who in the same year petitioned for an increase. On the neighbouring to the west to the castle connecting parcel (Margaretenplatz 3) the silk stuff promoter Paul Hochholzer in 1787 by architect Johann Michael Adelpodinger the existing buildings had adapted, over the entrance gate the building inscription of the old castle of 1651 was immured. The to the west adjoining parcel with the in 1783 deconsecrated St Margaret's Chapel acquired the Samtmacher (velvet maker) Leopold Urspringer, who had the chapel demolished and the ground for the construction of a residential building (77 Margaret Street) used. Also the area of the small castle garden that had the Vienna municipal judge Leopold van Ghelen on lease, was parceled out and developed through newly created streets. In the period from 1781 to 1788 arised on the site of the great palace garden in the of the Gartengasse and Schlossgasse on the one hand and Margaretenstraße and Siebenbrunnengasse surrounded territory on the other not less than 41 parcels.
Margaretenplatz as a historical center of Margareten is particularly accentuated by the 1835/36 before the House Margaretenplatz 3 built well, on those square base the by Johann Nepomuk Schaller modelled statue of the over the dragon triumphant hl. Margaret, the eponym of the suburb rises. As part of the regulation of 1886, the Margaret Square fountain was offset by 20m to the southwest, and received its present location .
In the west the square is surrounded by the instead of the in 1883 demolished brewery according to plans of the architects Ferdinand Fellner and Hermann Helmer by builder Joseph Müller for Baroness Amalie Lipthay 1884/85 established Margartenhof. The castle-like complex occupies an extremely important position as regards urban development in the district. Historically, it represents the symbolic succession building of the old, today only in fragments existing Margaretner Castle (Margaretenplatz 2,3). The large residential complex with the street-like designed "Zierhof" is an early example of urban development concepts, which in Vienna otherwise only could unfold in the interwar period.
To the east the Margaretenplatz is dominated by an according to plans of Ferdinand Seif 1898 built monumental palace-like structured tenement, where forms of the Venetian city palace of the 16th Century were used. Buildings of the Gründerzeit round off the Margaretenplatz in the north.
www.phaselis.org/en/about/about-project
Phaselis Research
Phaselis
When compared with the previous period of research on the history of the city over the past quarter century it has undergone radical changes. While modern scientists follow the path of their predecessors in collecting data through systematic processes and methodically analysing them, they change the route whereby they approach the city as a context- and a process-oriented structure, having economic, social, cultural, political and environmental dimensions which come together at different levels.
This considerably more inclusive definition expands the discipline concerning the city’s historical research, which consists of archaeology, epigraphy, ancient history and the other ancillary sciences and it encourages scientists from the natural and health sciences to participate within these studies. This is because in the course of the exploration of an ancient settlement the study of both the environment and the ecological setting which make human life possible; together with health issues, such as diet and epidemics, form the context within which human beings live, and which are thereby as important as the human actors.
Within the context of the planned Phaselis Research, even certain knowledge such as the settlement’s appearing on the stage of history as a favorite break-point with its three natural harbours, it being famous for its roses, the frequent seismic upheavals at sea and on its shores and its citizens leaving their homes because of a devastating malaria epidemic suggest the necessity of the application of this multi-dimensional research methodology in order to understand more fully the historical adventure of this city.
By presenting this research project, we aim to implement and realize this multi-dimensional research method, which as yet lacks widespread application in the field in our country, however conceptually and practically with a multi-disciplinary research team consisting of both national and international scientists, we intend to register systematically every kind of data/information regarding all contexts of the city employing modern methods and to present the results to the scientific world in the form of regular reports and monographic studies, thus forming a strong tie between past and future research.
Phaselis Territorium
The boundaries of the ancient city of Phaselis’ territorium are today within the administrative borders of the township of Tekirova, in Kemer District, determined from the archaeological, epigraphic and historical-geographical evidence, reaching the Gökdere valley to the north, continue on a line drawn from Üç Adalar to Mount Tahtalı to the south and extend along the Çandır valley to the west.
Phaselis was discovered in 1811-1812 by Captain F. Beaufort during his work of charting the southern coastline of Asia Minor for the British Royal Navy. Beaufort drew Phaselis’ plan and in the course of conducting his cartographic studies, he saw the word Φασηλίτης ethnikon on the inscriptions and consequently identified these ruins with Phaselis. C. R. Cockerell, the English architect, archaeologist and author came to Phaselis by ship and met Beaufort there. Then in 1838 C. Fellows, the English archaeologist visited the city. He found the fragments of the dedicatory inscription over the monumental gate built in honour of the Emperor Hadrianus and mistakenly thought the Imperial Period main street was the stadion due to the seats-steps on either side of the street. In 1842 Lt. T. A. B. Spratt, the English hydrographer and geographer, and the Rev. E. Forbes, the naturalist came to Phaselis via the Olympos and Khimaira routes. Due to the fact that they all came by sea and they only stayed for a short time, their descriptions of the topography inland are without detailed and there are serious errors in orientation.
PhaselisThose researchers who visited Phaselis between the late 19th and the early 20th centuries concentrated primarily upon the discovery of inscriptions. In 1881-1882 while the Austrian archaeologist and the epigraphist O. Benndorf, the founder of the Austrian Archaeological Institute, and his team were conducting research in southwestern Asia Minor, they examined Phaselis. In the winter of 1883 and 1884 F. von Luschan from the Austrian team took the first photographs which provide information concerning the regional features of Phaselis’ shoreline. In the same year the French scientist V. Bérard also visited Phaselis. In 1892 the members of the Austrian research team, O. Benndorf, E. Kalinka and their colleagues continued their architectural, archaeological and epigraphical studies in Phaselis. In 1904 they were followed by D. G. Hogarth, R. Norton and A. W. van Buren from the British research team. In 1908 the Austrian classical philologist E. Kalinka visited the settlement again, collected epigraphic documents and conducted research on the history of city (published in TAM II in 1944). The Italian researchers R. Paribeni and P. Romanelli visited Phaselis in1913 and C. Anti in 1921. Anti returned to Antalya overland and in consequence discovered several epigraphs and the ruins of structures within the territorium of Phaselis.
Further archaeological, epigraphical and historical-geographical studies of Phaselis were conducted by the English researchers F. M. Stark and G. Bean, who came to the region after World War II. In 1968 H. Schläger, the German architect and underwater archaeologist began exploring the topographical and architectural structures of Phaselis’s harbours. After Schläger’s death in 1969, the research was conducted under the leadership of the archaeologist J. Schäfer in 1970. H. Schläger, J. Schäfer and their colleagues obtained important data concerning the architecture and history of Phaselis through the surface exploration of the city and its periphery. Following the excavations conducted along the main axial street of the city, in 1980 under the direction of Kayhan Dörtlük, the then Director of the Antalya Museum and between 1981-1985 under the leadership of the archaeologist Cevdet Bayburtluoğlu; underwater exploration was carried out in the South Harbour under the direction of Metin Pehlivaner, the then Director of the Antalya Museum.
Neatly staked, the multiple flags line the highway in a methodical manner, saluting the development of the Freedom Park memorial honoring those lives lost on Sep 11th. Though it is Flag Day weekend and the flags themselves may be temporary, the symbolism lives on. Freedom Park, Naples, FL
Atlanta, GA – The Atlanta airport was a crazy mix of African stone art mixed in with modern architectural lines. Although impressive nothing really transitioned well, almost like patch cloth. On a positive note despite the large crowd going through security the crowd control was amazing. There must have been six or seven lines of cattle dressed like people slowly yet methodically were filtered through the nylon bordered lanes.
“4me4you” visits Rook and Raven Gallery showcasing Billy Zane ~ Seize The Day Bed
•Rook and Raven Gallery.>Zane began painting during his seven months of filming the blockbuster movie Titanic in I997, utilising only locally sourced materials to create a series of abstract paintings. His interest for painting quickly developed from being a pastime to a real passion and he now sets up an art studio in each location he films. Using a process that is wildly methodical, Zane draws great inspiration from Action Painting. He explains:
“For me, the act of painting is a seduction by way of a contradiction. While creating on the ground is labour-intensive work, I am somehow transported beyond the physical. Rather than adding layers of paint, I feel I am digging a tunnel to another land. Other times, instead of the floor I feel I am working on the ceiling. Colour tears at my perception and redefines the laws of geometry and gravity. Textures become structures to be broken and rebuilt again and again. This combination of labour and euphoria, of back work and ‘the high arts’ creates a cosmic pull between two forces; then a fleeting no-man’s land appears on my internal GPS from which my most satisfying creations emerge. I feel alone in the moment of creation, regardless of frequent foot traffic, neighbours cars and inflatable kiddie pools sharing my easel”.
Seize The Day Bed is a song to duality in a sun burnt Southern Californian driveway. An offering of improvisations on canvas and paper derived from the influence of opposing forces; a bi-polar, analogue construction in our virtual world of multitasked, second screen experiences. A pun as punch. That’s all I can really say about it.
7:30pm
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
National Arts Centre
Fourth Stage
53 Elgin Street
Ottawa, Ontario
With an introductory set by Linsey Wellman!
Tickets available at the NAC Box Office: nac-cna.ca/en/community/event/9138
An energizing, trail-blazing figure in contemporary music, Norwegian composer, vocalist and instrumentalist, MAJA RATKJE consistently pushes the boundaries of our understanding of music, methodically threading together a musical language spun from the fundamentals of sound and the results are inevitably stirring. On May 20th at the National Arts Centre, see Ratkje perform in a concert combining cutting-edge vocals with live electronics!
“Ratkje’s vibrant vocal fluctuations can make Bjork sound like an “American Idol” candidate.” Christopher Porter in the Washington Post Express
Maja Ratkje has been leading an impressive career as an improviser and a composer since the late 1990s. Her work ranges from raw noise to delicate chamber music. She is best known for her powerful and highly expressive voice, which she first put to use in the group SPUNK and the duo Fe-Mail.
Ratkje released her solo debut in 2002 on Rune Grammofon. It revealed a versatile voice augmented by real-time electronic operations. Since then, the vocalist has released four more solo records (one on Tzadik) and given dozens of solo performances. Her latest recordings demonstrate an artistic maturation, all the while maintaining the frenzied impulse that pushed her early career forward. A riveting display of cutting-edge vocals and live electronics make Ratkje’s solo concerts anything but predictable.
Launched in 2007, A B Series has quickly established itself as a dynamic presenter of the performing arts. Specialized in presenting innovative musical and literary events, it has drawn large audiences and created new energy in Ottawa's cultural life. A B Series serves the greater Ottawa community by presenting a carefully curated program of performances. In addition to presenting cutting-edge musical performances, it programs readings of fiction, poetry and has a rich tradition of producing multi-disciplinary events combining music, visual arts and theatre.