View allAll Photos Tagged methodical
www.visualcomplexity.com/vc/project.cfm?id=522
As a great admirer of Paula Scher's work, it was just a matter of time before her work appeared on VC.
A solo exhibition of new paintings by renowned artist and graphic designer Paula Scher opened on November 8th, 2007, at the Maya Stendhal Gallery at 545 West 20th Street in New York City. Scher expands on her highly acclaimed Maps series to create her most engaging work yet, depicting entire continents, countries and cities from all over the world that have been the critical focus of attention in recent headlines. Featured paintings include India, Tsunami, Manhattan at Night, NYC Transit, Middle East and Paris. An exhibition catalogue has been published. The show remains on view through January 26th, 2008.
Through an acute understanding of the powerful relationship between type and image, Scher harmonizes witty with tragic, the methodical with the intuitive, and the personal with the universal in these new paintings. Dynamic images are saturated with layers of elaborate line, explosions of words, and bright colors creating a plethora of visual information that produces an emotive response to places lived, visited, and imagined. Scher's maps also reflect the abundance of information that inundates us daily through newspapers, radio, television, and the Internet to reveal the fact that much of what we hear and read is strewn with inaccuracy, distorted facts, and subjectivity.
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
Coro Femminile “Liepos” (Vilnius, Lituania) Diretto da Audronė Steponavičiūtė Zupkauskienė
Il coro femminile Liepos, del circolo culturale di Vilnius è un gruppo particolarmente attivo che si è formato 25 anni fa. L’attività del coro consiste in numerosi concerti che si tengono sia in Lituania che all’estero, durante i quali vengono presentati programmi particolari che spaziano dalla musica contemporanea a diverse epoche del passato, fino a nuove opere di compositori sia locali che stranieri. Il coro Liepos ha registrato molti concerti sia per la radio che per la tv nazionale ed ha già inciso 3 cd. Il coro ha partecipato a svariati concorsi e festival ed in particolare nel 2006 si è aggiudicato il premio come miglior coro femminile della Lituania. Nel 2014 il coro femminile ha celebrato il 25° anniversario di fondazione.
La direttrice è Audronė Steponavvčiūtė Zupkauskienė che si è laureata in direzione corale all’accademia delle arti di Vilnius. Mentre studiava in accademia ha iniziato l’attività di direttore di coro con il gruppo femminile Liepaitės. Attualmente è un‘insegnante di musica e infatti segue alcune classi di bambini per insegnare solfeggio e metodo didattico. Oltre a dirigere il coro Liepos dal 1991 partecipa come relatrice in molte conferenze per promuovere la musica popolare lituana.
Female choir “Liepos” of Vilnius Culture Centre is the productively working group for 25 years yet – giving many concerts home and abroad, preparing and performing peculiar concert programs, which present the choral music of different styles and epochs as well as the newest choral works of Lithuanian and foreign composers. The listeners enjoyed the concert cycles by “Liepos”:
•„Ave Maria“
•French Choral Music
•Works by G. P. Da Palestrina and O. Di Lasso
•Choral Music of Renaissance
•Christmas Music
•Contemporary Works of Lithuanian Female Composers for Female Choir
•„Love Songs“
“Liepos” have recorded a lot at Lithuanian Radio and TV. The choir has released three CDs; they include Lithuanian folk and original compositions as well as choral pieces of foreign composers. “Liepos” have participated in numerous local and international choir festivals and contests and are award winners. In 2006 “Liepos” was recognized the best female choir in Lithuania, and awarded “The Golden Bird” in nomination “The Brightest Lithuanian Star”. In 2014 Female Choir “Liepos” celebrated the 25th anniversary and the 50th anniversary of Girls' Choir “Liepaites” from which it grew up.
The Artistic Director and Conductor Audronė Steponavičiūtė Zupkauskienė gained the specialty of choir conductor and teacher of choir disciplines at Academy of Music and Theatre. Beside the studies at academy she started working in Girls’ Choir Study „Liepaitės“, which has developed into School of Choir Singing „Liepaitės“. At present she is the expert teacher, directs the Junior Choir, trains solfeggio, writes tutorial programs, prepares methodic materials, and arranges concerts of the choirs. She has been heading the Female Choir „Liepos” since 1991. When selecting the repertoire for the choir, A. Steponavičiūtė Zupkauskienė focuses on challenging pieces that encompass wide range of epochs, styles and characters. The major part of arrangements for female and children choirs is adapted by the A. Steponavičiūtė Zupkauskienė herself.
A. Steponavičiūtė Zupkauskienė takes an active part in the Lithuania‘s musical life – runs seminars and gives open lessons to Lithuanian and foreign teachers. She has performed in several festivals and contests as conductor, organiser and jurywoman. Recently Audronė Steponavičiūtė Zupkauskienė was awarded the medal of Order for Merits to Lithuania by the President of Lithuanian Republic.
This was the Police response on the morning of the Solstice in 1988. They had courdoned off part of the duel carriageway to allow us all to walk up to the stones but then wouldn't let us in. A few clods of earth were thrown which gave the police the opportunity to baton charge the crowd. The police then methodically cleared the whole area of people. This must be about 7am we were heading back to our campsite at Cholderton. Thousands of police were employed to stop people from getting to the Stones that year.
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.
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.
Churlish Stories for Curious Children
The Remisier Caper
Acte Two
Quickly the two women move from the kitchen and up the back stairs, moving past the locked, still-silent, study, reaching the dimly lit corridor in the wing where the guest bedrooms are located
Lightening flashes outside, adding an ominous feeling to the already electric air.
As the pair stalked down the hall, Emilee instructed her friend as to where Cecelia hides her jewelry case.
Her diamond tiara is locked in the hidden safe inside Sir Reginald’s study.
Much to her dismay, Emilee will not be helping rob this room. Cecelia must not be made aware the French maid has had any part in this.
So Emilee asked a favour.
“In the wardrobe, a long-sleeved white satin blouse with the ruffles. Please Mon Ami?”
The thief had winked, pulling out the torch from her kit.
Reaching the target, the maid stands guard outside in the hallway as the thief carefully opens the door and slips inside.
Inside the room, turning on her torch, the thief sweeps the interior.
Cecelia is fast asleep in her bed, elegant in a long white satin nightgown, as she lays out upon the purple satin sheets.
Her pretty evening gown is over a high-backed velvet-covered chair.
Fire flashed from the diamonds hanging around the sleeping girl's throat. The rest of her diamonds lay in blazing glory, invitingly sprawled out upon the room’s vanity.
The thief approaches the bed, and the wind outside shrieks as a crack of lightning illuminates the room, waking the sleeping girl.
Her eyes sleepily open, then go wide as she sees the masked intruder at her bedside. The thief puts a finger to her lips, and motions the girl to come off the bed.
Cecelia, still not fully awake, limply obeys, and the thief leads her to the chair. There, using one of her victim’s long satin gloves, she is gagged and with a rope, her satin-clad figure is quickly tied up.
As the victim watched, paralyzed with fear, the thief pulls off a satin pillowcase and going to the vanity sweeps off her glittering diamonds down inside it.
Then, as Cecelia whimpered, the masked thief leans down and opens the drawers of her vanity.
Of course, looking back at her captive as she does, not wishing her snooty victim to miss the show.
Reaching the bottom drawer, the thief see’s Cecelia uneasily struggling against her well-tied ropes.
Smiling, the thief quickly pulls out the silky clothes on top. At the bottom lies the prize.
Quickly several velvet-covered cases are extracted and opened with their shimmery contents dumped out inside the pillowcase. Then the cases are carelessly discarded off to the side, adding to the silky underthings already littering the floor.
Hearing the tied-up Celia trying to talk with muffled unclear words, the thief turns and faces the poor girl.
“Don’t worry luv, after I’m done cleaning you out, I’m sure that maid I saw in the dining room will be in to clean it up for you.
Turning back, the thief opens the last, and by far, largest velvet case, a royally dazzling display of large emeralds and diamond set jewellery almost blinds the thief’s eyes.
The case is closed and then added to the loot.
Holding the pillowcase, the masked intruder goes to the wardrobe. Opening it she reached and begins pulling out and checking over the designer dresses and gowns inside. Casually casting them off to the side as she goes do.
Coming to the white ruffled satin blouse she sees there is a black onyx pin holding the high-necked satin bow in place. Perfect.
She takes it to a full-length mirror and holds the blouse up, seeing Cecilia’s wretchedness reflected behind her in the mirror.
She doesn’t feel sorry for the bound and gagged lass.
The thief, in planning this little caper, had learned about the spoiled Cecilia’s tyrannical attitude towards, well, everyone and everything. Her personal servants, as well as her horse, and the family pets, have the scars, both real and emotional, to prove it.
Stuffing the blouse inside the pillow case the thief moves over to the tied-up girl and lifts the diamonds hanging down around her throat. The thief sees the pricy gems sparkling in Cecelia’s wide-open eyes.
The thief then reached back with her free hand and undid the clasp. Saying to her squirming victim as she pulls off the necklace.
“Very nice my haughty lady. I doubt any of the other guest rooms will have anything this nice. Hopefully, I’m wrong.”
She tweaks the poor girl's cheek, then pats thoroughly down her satin-clad, totally compliant figure, deliberately feeling along every bump and bulge for any more of the young lady’s valuables. Nothing is found, but the thief is by no means disappointed.
The thief cuts off the torch’s beam. Pulling off the satin pillowcase from a second pillow, the thief leaves the room as another flash of lightning ominously lights up the bedroom.
Giving poor Cecelia a backside view of the departing thief carrying away the pillowcase full of her heirloom quality jewellry.
The weak-minded girl finally passes out cold from all the anxiety.
The masked thief heads out the door into the hallway where Emilee keeps watch, standing along the wall beside the door.
The thief nods as Emily licks her lips looking at the small bulge at the bottom of the satin pillowcase.
The thief opens it up, and Emilee gives a squeal seeing the blouse she had so coveted while seeing Cecilia wearing it the day before, as well as the bewitching jewelry piled inside the pillowcase.
The thief gently chided her partner in crime, saying as she jovially rubs her shoulder.
“Quit your droolin lass, plenty of work ahead of us this evening.
Lightening again flashes as they begin to scurry down the hallway.
Quickly the pair then enters each of the occupied guest rooms located down the hallway. With a methodical determination, each room is picked clean of any jewels, money, and small valuable items.
It is quick work, with the upstairs maid Emilee pointing out where the lady guest’s better jewels are kept, they both make a fast, quite accurate, job of it.
Like Cecelia, Rose Buxton had her valuable jewels hidden away at the bottom of a vanity drawer full of lingerie.
Lady Susan Macready had her better baubles in a soft-sided jewelry case under her bed’s Pillow.
Diane, Spencer’s fiancé, had a private room, and her good jewelry was in a case conveniently left open on her vanity.
Mrs. Marlene Cabot—Hinny’s overly expensive ‘borrowed’ diamonds from the jewelry shoppe, were found tucked inside a suitcase hidden under the bed.
Emilee grins as the jewels are located and added to the growing loot being added to the satin pillowcase she is holding, her mind going to the ladies in the Parlour downstairs, totally oblivious as to the robbing of their valuables that is occurring above their high held heads.
Cases of sparking jewels are located and dumped into the satin pillowcase. Purses are riffled, bedside drawers checked, and looted of valuables.
Each room entered is left picked clean with expert prowess.
Finishing plundering the last guest room, the pair slink past the study, to the master bedroom next door.
Both enter the stately outfitted room.
Standing as the thief sweeps her torches’ beam. All the light touches conveyed a sense of glamour and very upper-class level wealth.
As with the guest rooms, the pilfering is methodically fast and easy with the Maid’s help.
Quickly the thief is shown the large jewelry amour, and it is opened, showing off a massive collection of jewelry in all styles, and shapes, made with pricey metals and some set with mesmerizing gems. No costume jewelry here. Two pairs of hands begin pulling off from hooks and emptying small drawers, brim full of expensive baubles.
Madeline’s good jewels are kept in the study safe. Next on the list.
The vanity is also ransacked.
A gold mirror, brush and several silver compacts are taken. Several wallets are found, then quickly emptied of cash.
Everything is placed in the same pillowcase.
Last is lord Reginald’s nightstand. Cases of watches, rings, and cuff links are found and emptied. A gold clip with folded notes is found, as well as four billfolds containing notes. All added to the growing pile of loot.
The thief looks around, itching to be done here and tackle the study.
The lightning flashes outside, coming a little more frequently, are adding a feeling of impending foreboding to the thief’s intoxicating “cat burglar’s dance” this evening.
“Anything else? what about the closets, worth it in this room?”
“Oh yes, I Bet there are Lovely things in there that were not in the others… Here
Let me show you”
Emilee opens a double door exposing gowns dresses and other fine designer apparel of all makes and material
Emilee starts on one end, her partner on yet other. Feeling for any broaches or pins. They are treated for their efforts by finding a solid gold broach set with dripping pearls and a pair of diamond clips from a very pretty satin evening gown.
“That’s it then?”
Emilee nods her head yes.
“The rest is in the study safe, mon ami”
Her partner grins…
“Not safe for long then…”
They leave and head to the study next door.
Emilee unlocks the study door, opening it. The pair blink in the brightness of the room as they survey the scene displayed in front of them.
The thief smiled, picturing Emilee and herself as a pair of vultures, eagerly waiting to pick through the carcasses that were the bodies of the sleeping rich men strewn about the room.
Emilee showed her partner where the safe was.
It was actually a small vault, a full meter tall and half that wide, hidden in the wall behind a sliding bookcase.
Crouching down, the thief began the task of opening it.
Emilee took the now weighty satin pillowcase and went to each of the passed-out cold gentlemen in turn.
She skillfully began searching their figures. Almost like using a practice dummy, slipping her hands inside theri breast pockets, extracting handsome leather billfolds.
So it was a rather enjoyable, as well as profitable, undertaking going through pockets and searching in their clothes. Taking anything else of value, along with wallets… watches, rings, precious metal cigar /cigarette cases, tie pins , and cuff links were also nicked from the knockout-drugged male victims.
Emilee quickly located with methodical precision all of the unconscious males valuables, reliving the items from their persons, and plopping them inside the pillowcase.
To the man who had ordered “tea”, Emilee went to last, taking extra time over.
She slid him from the chair he was on and dragged him over to the open part of the bookcase. She place one hand on the lever that opened the bookcase to access the safe. Then she unzipped his trousers and stuck his other hand (after removing a gold signet ring) deep down inside his boxers. He did not stir during the entire ordeal.
None of them did, the knock-out drops that had been added to the gift bottle of brandy would keep them all out for hours.
The thief in the meantime had opened the safe and was stacking the contents on the floor beside her. Piles of banded notes, bonds, and 2 score of jewellery cases. Including 3 that held gem-encrusted tiaras, had all been found inside.
Emilee came to her partner's side and began opening the cases and spilling the contents inside the pillowcase. The notes, bonds. And a few other selected items were added on top.
As she was working on this, the thief moved off Lord Reginald’s desk and pilfered the drawers.
From behind her Emilee instructed.
“Bottom drawer, right. “
That drawer was opened, exposing a black military pistol.
The thief unloaded the cartridges, keeping one loaded in the chambre. She then stuck it in her belt.
The thief looked at Emilee...
“Done?”
She nodded
“Done, for the now we have coup de grâce… we go downstairs to the kitchen, then to the parlour…”
The thief nodded.
Emilee licks her lips. Tossing the masters keys to her partner
Catching them, the thief turns out the lights and locks the study door behind them as they leave
They head to the servants' stairs. As the pair reached them, Emilee puts a hand on her partner's shoulders.
“Juste une seconde..”
Emilee scurried done the corridore. Reaching Cecelia’s room she gives a polite knock.
“Maid, Mademoiselle Ceceylia?, ne vouliez-vous pas plus de sherri ?… more sherri Mademoiselle?”
Emilee turns to face her partner waiting patiently by the stairs. With a smirk, she shrugs her shoulders and scurries back. Passed the thief with a grin, then headed downstairs.
Grinning also, she follows Emilee down the back stairs to the kitchen.
Emilee takes the empty cart and heads down the hallway to the parlour
The thief lays the full pillowcase by the pantry door. With the other, still empty pillowcase, hanging on her arm, she leaves the kitchen and, from a distance, follows the maid down the hall.
The thief waits out in the corridor.
^^^^^^^^^^^
Back in calm maid mode, Emilee wheels in the cart and starts to collect dishes
Lady Madeline is talking about how hard it’s been this weekend being down to just a cook and their worthless slag of a maid, due to the bloody holidays. The fact that Emilee was trained to be an upstairs maid and not a sever is completely not a considerate issue here.
The hostess looks up at Emilee, knowing full well the maid heard every word. She gives her maid a lecture before issuing a command:
“Emilee, I’ve rung you 3 times now. Clear the glasses Then tell the men we would like them to join us at the conservatory .”
“Yes Mum, and Sorry, I was checking on jeune femme Cecelia upstairs. ”
Lady Madeline is clearly still not happy…
“No matter. I think you should pack your things tonight. I probably will want you out of here in the morning. “
Emilee nods dejectedly, then begins collecting the empty wine bottles and glasses.
Lady Madeline’s mother Marlene then arose and says she needs to go to her room and get her wrap since she finds the conservatory chilly.
Marlene adds, looking at Emilee, as she walks out the door
“Your maid shouldn’t be bothering Miss Cecelia, I will check on her myself.”
Marlene no sooner walked out, than she came back in.
Walking backward, hands raised as the thief had the gun trained on the broach hanging from her shiny gown’s midriff.
Over Marlene’s head, The thief snarled a command to the rest of the occupants in the room.
“All right ladies, all of you line up against that wall…NOW!”
The startled ladies obey, their long gowns fluttering along their figures as they miserably line up along the far wall by the windows.
Here now, I’ll have that. Using her free hand the thief unfastened the heavy diamond broach wedged between Marlene’s bulging breasts.
She tried to protest, but in shock, words failed her, and she only managed a high-pitched squeaking noise.
Marlene is then boldly told to turn around.
Given no choice, with the pistol now poking her in the back, Marlene is pushed to go to the end of the line.
Outside lightning cracked, illuminated the gardens outside, casting an eerie light inside the Parlour.
The thief takes a step back into the center of the room, facing the elegantly dressed ladies wearing valuably shimmering jewels, lined up against the wall, all with their gloved hands stretched up.
“Now listen to me you miserable lot. I don’t want you on my tail as soon as I leave. So let’s begin by having all of you strip off those lovely frocks and only your frocks. You too maid, lose that pretty outfit.”
As a group, the ladies begin protesting, including Emilee. The thief points the pistol at the mirror over Marlene’s head and fires the pistol
The loud report, and cracking glass, made everyone jump.
“That was not a request, Strip out of the bloody things …now.”
Then, as if on a movie director’s cue, another bolt of lightning streaks outside, followed by a flash and loud retort, literally making every one of the victims jump again.
The ladies, getting the ugly message, begin undoing their luxurious gowns, letting them drop to their feet.
Emilee has to help a few of them unzip and undress.
Soon their elegant silk nickers, other rich shiny undergarments, as well as a bit of naked flesh, are all exposed.
The thief motions the pistol at the gawking maid stripped down to her bra and nickers.
“You, collect those gowns and pile them underneath the window. Move it.”
Emilee quickly moved to the beginning of the line, and reaching down begins to pick up the discarded finery. Taking the pile to the end of the room, she threw them all down on the floor in front of the window in a slickly shiny heap.
Emilee, then turned around to face the room.
Seeing the thief motioning to her with a finger, she hesitantly approached.
The thief tossed the empty satin pillowcase to Emilee, pointing her pistol at Susan, only wearing a two-piece thin blue see-through slip and top, and is first in line.
“Here maid, take this, stand in front of the bluebird.”
Emilee catches the case and goes to Lady Susan Macready, holding open the pillowcase.
The thief addressed all of her richly jewelled-up victims. Pointing the pistol with menacing intent at each of the semi-naked, satin glove-wearing ladies lined up against the wall in turn.
“ In case it has not seeped in, this, ladies is a robbery. I’ll be having your jewels handed over. This will be over quickly as long as you lot don’t quibble. Your maid is holding the bag in front of you, I want you each to remove all, and I mean all, of your valuables. I’ve been watching from outside. So I know what jewels each of you fine ladies is wearing. Keep your hands up where I can see them until the maid reaches you.”
The thief waves the pistol along the line of desolate, rich ladies, ending up back Susan.
“Go one bluebird, time to pluck off those glittery feathers. Stop that whining. Let’s get going!”
Hands shaking, Lady Susan Macready begins removing her splendidly shimmering sapphire and diamond set jewels. Ears, throat, and wrists are all soon bare. As her last of four rings are pulled off, she steps back as the thief looks her dead in the eyes, the ugly black pistol pointed at her.
The thief speaks, looking at Susan
“Nicely done lady, now get those hands back up.”
Next in line is ravishing red-haired, impossibly large, emerald green-eyed, Diane, who is now only elegantly clad in an ankle-length crimson red half slip…and nothing above!
Standing there, half-naked, she sighs deeply, her face crestfallen.
The thief looks at her as if just noticing her condition of being half-dressed for the first time…
“You now, my perky red-breasted chick, I’ll be having those pearls.”
Diane lowered her hands and began slipping off her ropes of pearls and sadly dropping them inside the pillowcase.
As she was removing her necklace and working off her long earrings, then bending down to let them plop inside the open satin pillowcase, her naked breasts put on a show worthy of any French burlesque tease.
“And what is it about real pearls against naked skin that makes them look so sensuous ?”
Undoing her pricey bracelet last, she miserably watched it disappear inside.”
The thief calls out, startling everyone.
“I thought I said everything. The ring hunny bunny, now.”
Sadly Diane struggled, then finally managed to pull free her vulgarly large diamond ring, letting it drop inside the bag.
Emilee managed not to let her glee show, keeping her mouth tight, her eyes emotionally empty.
As Diane reassumed her position, raising her hands back up, points high and perked. The thief then turned the pistol to Lady Madeline.
Madeleine, wearing a full mint green taffeta slip, started to protest but was abruptly cut off by the thief.
“Zip it, don’t start lady, or I’ll remove those delicious emeralds your so richly wearing me self…”
lady Madeleine, use to being the one giving orders, not being ordered about, feels insulted.
Thinking any minute the men should be coming to their rescue. She says with a snarly voice only the very rich seem to be able to pull off
“My husband will be down any minute, let’s see how Insouciant you will be then…”
Annoyingly, the thief does not answer, only gives her a haughty look, and motions to the hanging satin pillowcase her maid is holding.
So with a sigh, she drops her hands, then begins to unhappily remove her emerald bracelet and rings from her green satin opera-length gloves, huffily tossing them into the pillowcase Emilee is holding.
She then pulls out her earrings, and finally, reaching up behind her neck, unfastened her long dripping-down necklace, plopping them all inside the makeshift bag in turn.
The thief points the pistol at her head.
“The diamond hairpiece, please. “
lady Madeleine tried to reason
“But it’s not real, surely you can see that..”
“Then I’ll take a chance on being a fool by taking it. Be a good rich girl and it over…”
Reluctantly the expensively flashy real diamond hairpiece is pulled out and added to the unseen collection inside the pillowcase.
Lady Madeline pulls her fallen hair back with an evil glare.
Rose is next to last in line.
Her petite necklace of diamonds flashes with a beckoning brilliance as her figure is tightly outlined by her stylish blue thin silk lingerie, her thinly covered breasts heaved up and down with the anguish she is feeling.
Emilee moved in from of her, and the thief also moved in behind, keeping the pistol trained on Lady Madeline.
The thief then moved the pistol to point at Rose. She begins addressing Rose, though her eyes never leave the stern-faced Madeline’s eyes. Much like a teacher keeps an eye on an insolent child as she resumes her lecture after being rudely interrupted.
“Okay my lady, remove those delicious diamonds and make it quick now.
Rose lowers her hands and begins working off all her lovely precious jewels. Plopping them piece by glittering pieces into the open pillowcase.
As she does, The thief spied Lady Madeline taking a glance towards the door.
The thief points her pistol toward her.
“Lady, I told you, helps not coming.”
Then points the pistol back at Rose
“Let’s hurry off with those rings, trust me, you don’t want me helping you!”
With a sigh, Rose pulled off the last ring from her sleek blue satin dinner gloves, then steps back and puts her hands up.
The thief, with unabashed attention, looks over Rose, her figure perked, points nicely outlined by thin blue silk.
“Thanks, lady, it looks to me like you are feeling a bit chilled. No worries, it’s almost over.
The thief then finally points the pistol at Marlene, clad in a stretched-out purple bra and knee-length half slip.
“Now as for you my plump purple bird, ripe for the plucking, so let’s prune off some of your shiny trimmings shall we…”
Marlene desperately pleads.
“The other’s jewels are real, mine are not. You already have my broach, The rest is worthless. Can’t you see? Don’t you have enough already? You’ll let me keep them then?”
The thief grins:
“Like I told the green bird, I’ll be the fool then, now be a luv and remove them.”
Marlene snaps;
“You’ll never get away with this.”
The thief walks up to her, leaning over Emilee’s shoulder she picked up Marlene’s long shimmery necklace.
The yanks it off her throat, dropping it In the pillowcase as the thief hisses with a snarky tone of voice:
“I do believe mum, I already am….”
Whimpering, Marlene stands stone-still. Shocked to the core
The thief snaps out an order.
“You, Maid, help the lady off with the rest. That’s the girl…”
Then, struggling not to show her glee over doing this, Emilee reached up with one hand and pulled free each of Marlene’s diamond earrings, plopping them one by one inside the pillowcase. She then went for Marlene’s glittering bracelet, slipped it off, and dropped it into the pillowcase. Then taking Marlene’s white satin gloves hands, works off the lady’s rings. Some of which were actually her own, and not “borrowed”.
Emilee looks back to the thief as she finishes. Thinking to herself how she would have loved to have done a bit of poking and prodding along priggish Marlene’s figure while removing her jewellery.
The masked thief, still training the pistol on the whining Marlene, beckons to Emilee with a free hand
“Good girl, now Maid, hand over the bag.”
Emilee did a neat little act of not wanting to give it to the thief. She looks at Lady Madeline as if for instructions.
The thief clicks her tongue.
“Don’t worry about your mistress, Let’s be a good girl now, hand it to me.”
Emilee hands it over, her back is to the ladies, and she winks as she does.
The thief keeps a stone face. Grabbing the dangling bag, she looks over the maid's head.
“Ok, Maid. Open that window.”
The thief, looking back down, spots the thin gold chain and cross the maid was wearing under her frock.
Come, come, now Maid…No holding out. I’ll have that gold crucifix of yours.
Unhappily Emilee removed it and reverently hands it over. The thief placed it on top of the loot inside the satin pillowcase.
Pouting, Emily turns and goes to open the window.
The thief then addresses them all, pointing the(now empty) pistol at the ceiling.
“Now maid, throw them clothes all out the window. And no shenanigans for the rest of you. I may or may not be a good shot. “
They all start to protest, but the thief waved the pistol at them, and they immediately shut up.
The Maid is forced to throw all the gowns and her outfit out the parlour window. The windows of the parlour are higher than the dining room windows, 3 full metres from the ground.
Everyone is watching Emilee. As the last shiny gown is dropped from the window sill, they all turn back to face the thief, only to discover she was already at the door, leaving the room with the pillowcase containing all of their nicked jewellery.
As the silent group watched. The thief turned off the lights, casting the room in darkness as she closed the door.
She then Locked the parlour door, turned, and made her way down the hallway to the kitchen.
In passing, she tossed the pistol and the keys on the cutting tables, then heads into the pantry.
She takes the empty Remisier brandy bottle, and adds it to the pillowcase she is holding.
Then picking up the first satin pillowcase, heavy with the upstairs haul, she heads outside into the yard. With the dark umbrella of rain-swollen clouds threatening overhead.
Outside by the door, the thief retrieved her rucksack.
Stuffing the pair of now full pillows inside she sprints around to the parlour window. Looking up she sees the shadows of her semi-naked victims moving about in the now-lit room above.
The thief quickly packs up the gowns, including the maid's costume, piling them inside her rut sack on top of the satin pillowcases. It fills up nicely.
Keeping an eye on the window as she does, but as earlier, no faces appear.
Flipping the happily full rut sack onto her shoulders she sprints from the shadows of the hedges and races across the yard as a bolt of lightning rips across the black swirling cloud-filled sky.
Rain starts pouring down as she reaches the treeline
The thief keeps a quick pace as she makes her way through the woods along the riding path she now knows by heart, having snuck up it several times over the last few months. Good thing too, since the dark sky and pelting rain are making visibility harder. She dared not lite up her torch. Going with the occasional lightning strikes to lite her way.
She safely made the almost 5-kilometer hike back to her hidden rental car without incident.
The journey of her escape had given the thief plenty of time to mull over the robbery…
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Little chance Emilee would be a suspect, she was a mere maid after all.
The thief thinks over the plan that had been put into motion for this evening, it had gone like clockwork.
She had bought the expensive Remesier brandy through a dealer and poured it into a secure decanter to celebrate with it later, just her and Emilee.
She had drugged a much cheaper high-quality brandy and poured it inside the empty Remesier bottle, resealing it. She wasn't going to waste good brandy on that lot.
Then had packaged it, written the note, and sent it to Sir Reginald.
They had also learned of how the unhappy upstairs maid was being treated by Lady Madeline and had paid her, through an intermediary, to give notice a week before the ball.
Emily applied and was accepted immediately.
She estimated that the entire takings from the robbery would be well over 8 mills.
By the end of the week, she would be out of the country, the mansion haul placed in her Swiss bank safety deposit box. Giving the hot ice time to chill.
As for the gowns, what she and Emilee didn’t want for themselves, would find their way to an OXFAM Shoppe Bin.
She was already planning on picking up a pretty leather skirt for Emilee to go with the lovely white satin blouse, imagining what a sexy outfit it would be as a distraction while on a future pickpocketing spree. That would be a delicious treat to help and watch her at “play” lifting fat wallets from leering males.
After Switzerland, the thief would then continue on vacation in Germany, Italy, and finally, France, where in a fortnight she and Emilee had already planned to meet up.
For it was in France that she had first met Emilee, actually more of an encounter…
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Our Thief, a few years before, had been in France to attend a wedding. The fact that she had not been invited was a trivial matter.
A few days before the weekend wedding, She had been walking down a street located in a busy shopping district. A well-dressed lady came out of a store carrying a large bag in her arm, talking to a female companion. On the wrist of the arm coddling the bag, was a fancy gold bracelet. As the lady’s head was turned to her companion, the thief had “bumped up against the lady, her fingers slipping easily up the long sleeve of her silk blouse, reaching the bracelet, and whisking it off her wrist in the process of apologizing to her in broken French.
As the thief had walked no more than a block away, a young long haired girl in a bohemian-style silk dress bumped into her. Realizing the trademark, the thief felt her pocket and realized the gold bracelet had been lifted. The stalker had been stalked herself.
The young stinker made her living robbing pickpockets.
The thief quickly caught up to the young girl, and keeping in step, began a guarded conversation, dropping enough hints to let this young version of herself know that there was a kindred spirit.
It worked and lunching over déjeuner woyj, wine, and Salade Niçoise, discussed their similarities. At first, the conversation was very guarded between the two, but by the end, it was one that fast friends would have.
Emilee had begun working the streets at a very young age. Using her looks and long fingers she found pickpocketing to be a pleasing and profitable profession to pursue.
Then she took it a level up and began robbing pickpockets of the items they had lifted from unwary victims. She soon was able to pick out the more professional thieves, accurately figuring out that they would be lifting from a richer class of persons.
Then she leaned the skills to be an upstairs maid. Using this to not only make a living but for herself to also level up into a better class of victims to use her nimble fingers on, discreetly of course.
For when a wealthy married male wanted a romp with an attractive, witty servant. Emilee played the seductress perfectly. And after a night satisfying the crétine (Pratt), if his wallet disappears, along with some of his wife’s jewels, well who was going to risk exposure by pointing a finger at her?
So over the course of a few months, as their lier (bond) grew, the thief introduced Emilee into her world of rich society, fancy dances, selections of wealthy victims, lifting of precious jewelry and wallets, as well as collecting information to rob mansions and other fancy dwellings of the ultra-rich.
Soon the pair as a team was doing quite well. Their adventure’s proving quite profitable. Emily only needed to work as a maid when the situation required it. Otherwise, she was the outside watcher for the inside cat burglar thief.
So how had tonight’s manor heist materialized?
^^^^^^^^^^^
While out on her own devices one evening, Emilee had taken a liking to a gold pendant worn by a boorish old lady she had spotted while “working” a reception.
She got close and as she watched the mesmerizing pendant, overheard what the lady was loudly droning on about, not caring who listened in, as long as they were impressed.
It appeared that she was claiming to be closely related to royalty, though her clothes and manner did not entirely back her story up.
But, smelling an opportunity, Emilee rolled the dice, changed tactics, and walking past the lady, easily lifted the wallet from the boorish lady’s designer purse.
She had contacted her cat burglar friend from wales to look into this, to see if this was a lead into something big.
It turned out it was the whole crux that lit the kindling which flamed up into the manor robbery scheme.
The boastingly boorish lady wearing the gold pendant's name?
Marlene Cabot-Hinny
And that would be the rest of the story.
Fini
Saturday, mid-day
watching the harry potter marathon on ABC Family
sewing sewing sewing
sequins
one by one
tedious, but pleasantly methodical.
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.
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.
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.
Louis Gift, of Barely Methodical Troupe
@BMtroupe
I was lucky enough to get the fellas into a studio during their award-winning run of their debut show, "Bromance" at Ed Fringe 2014.
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.
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
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.
"Call me Ishmael. 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 — Moby-Dick
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
This is coach Karissa Cook. I find it interesting how methodically she records the game data. It almost looks like a scientific study.
Stanford University
Palo Alto, CA
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.
Bob has roofed much of this house over the years. Last year, he roofed the silo. It took him months to figure out how to rig his safety harness correctly, but he came up with a nifty arrangement. He works alone and is very methodical, as well as neat. When he's finished, not only will the barn look good, but no scraps will remain anywhere. Bob likes old New England buildings and his affection for them shows in his work.
A couple more photos of engines under restoration, this time at the Great Central.
Fairburn tank 2-6-4T 42085 came to Loughborough to have its side tanks replaced and as this shot shows the new tanks are well under way.
Interestingly the new ones are welded while the originals were riveted so to retain the authentic look dummy rivets have to be added! David is busy with this job in the shed yard. The locations are marked out & he is methodically forming and welding the heads.
When the locomotive is complete the GCR will be able to use it in service until it has to go back to its permanent home on the Lakeside & Haverthwaite Railway in Cumbria in May 2009.
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.”
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
The Battle of Wissembourg or Battle of Weissenburg, the first of the Franco-Prussian War, was joined when three German army corps surprised the small French garrison at Wissembourg on August 4, 1870.
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.
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
The repainted shutters have dried and been rolled up, as we continue methodically and slowly to get the Bar open.
Year 2088.
A revolutionary leap in advanced rocket propulsion had shattered old frontiers. Humanity, no longer bound by the confines of the Solar System, began reaching outward—toward the stars. The great powers turned their gaze to neighboring systems, launching expeditions with relentless ambition.
The Russian nuclear space fleet advanced methodically, planetoid by planetoid, laying down autonomous research outposts like breadcrumbs across the void. Each mission, another step into the unknown.
Sergey was just another crew member—an astronaut trained more by circumstance than destiny. He and a small team had been deployed to a nameless, rock-strewn world. It didn’t even earn the dignity of a name, only a five-character alphanumeric code. But it had an atmosphere—and in deep space, that alone was enough to warrant interest.
Above him, the sky ignited with the light of departing ships—bright arcs carving through the dark as the fleet accelerated toward the next target. Sergey trudged across the desolate stone wastes, unaware that just beneath his boots, something ancient and alive stirred.
Unaware that fate had chosen him—a quiet man from Bryansk—for a moment that would forever divide human history into two eras: Before Contact… and After.
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.
The date of this photo has been guessed as at the 1880s.
If so, it's an early view, but the clarity of it makes me wonder if it really is that early.
Movement is captured perfectly.
If street directories are methodically worked through it will be possible to date it quite accurately.
(Yet another project, methinks.)
An Edwardian View:
www.flickr.com/photos/44435674@N00/533845598/in/pool-6030...
sometimes it's frustrating, to hear my wrist watch tick in the silence. the little second hand moving at a methodical speed. and sometimes it's frustrating to awake in the morning and fix the sheets a certain way only to mess and wrinkle them up again in just a number of hours. and sometimes, it's frustrating to feel like there's so much to do, only to sit and wait for the calendar to cross its own days out. the emptiness of the little box with nothing written in it swells and disappears as the years go farther, quickly, quickly. sometimes, it's frustrating how the days can seem so slow, yet fade away so fast. the hours fade away so fast, the ticking second hand flying away like the geese in autumn. flying away, flying away.
I adore this version of this song: listen
A small, dark heron arrayed in moody blues and purples, the Little Blue Heron is a common but inconspicuous resident of marshes and estuaries in the Southeast. They stalk shallow waters for small fish and amphibians, adopting a quiet, methodical approach that can make these gorgeous herons surprisingly easy to overlook at first glance. Reference www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Little_Blue_Heron/id
Image - Copyright 2018 Alan Vernon
Performers from 'Kin' by Barely Methodical Troupe which was part of the The Underbelly Circus Hub at this year's Edinburgh Fringe.
This show featured very impressive circus skills mixed with some damn fine comedy.
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.
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.
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.