Suchergebnisse

Kostas Sarris, Chrysanthos Notar as and the publication of "Dodekavivlos" by Dositheos of Jerusalem: a case of false publication date (1715 / c.1722)The article focuses on «Dodekavivlos» by Dositheos the patriarch of Jerusalem (1641-1707). His historiographic work was published after his decease by the Greek publishing house of Anthime in Bucharest. The book was edited by his nephew and successor to the patriarchical throne of Jerusalem Chrysanthos Notaras and the publisher and future bishop of Wallachia Mitrofanis Grigoras. The study concentrates on the false date of publication noted under the title of "Dodekavivlos", that is to say, October 1715, whereas, in reality, the book was published between 1721 and 1723. In the first part of the article, the process followed during the edition and the publication of the book is depicted. Moreover, the outset of the aforementioned procedure as well as the publication date of «Dodekavivlos» is determined. In this context, some aspects of history of the publishing house Anthime are clarified whilst the publishing work and the technical impediments confronted by a Greek publishing house in the Rumanian Principalities in the turning point of the 18th century are delineated. The second part of the article attempts to formulate a cohesive and comprehensive interpretation of the false publication date. Both the polemic character of the content of «Dodekavivlos», which due to the rivalry over the religious establishments of the Holy Land, was of political nature, and Chrysanthos Notaras' correspondence along with the historical background of the publication can conduce to some conjectures over Chrysanthos' decision not to record the real date but an earlier one as well as the choice of the particular date of the title. According to the interpretation brought forward, Nicolaos Mavrokordatos' potential political ventures played a significant role. Also, telltale, though of less importance, is the fact that the name of the publisher and bishop of Wallachia Anthimos Iviritis is not recorded under the false date of the title of «Dodekavivlos». ; Kostas Sarris, Chrysanthos Notar as and the publication of "Dodekavivlos" by Dositheos of Jerusalem: a case of false publication date (1715 / c.1722)The article focuses on «Dodekavivlos» by Dositheos the patriarch of Jerusalem (1641-1707). His historiographic work was published after his decease by the Greek publishing house of Anthime in Bucharest. The book was edited by his nephew and successor to the patriarchical throne of Jerusalem Chrysanthos Notaras and the publisher and future bishop of Wallachia Mitrofanis Grigoras. The study concentrates on the false date of publication noted under the title of "Dodekavivlos", that is to say, October 1715, whereas, in reality, the book was published between 1721 and 1723. In the first part of the article, the process followed during the edition and the publication of the book is depicted. Moreover, the outset of the aforementioned procedure as well as the publication date of «Dodekavivlos» is determined. In this context, some aspects of history of the publishing house Anthime are clarified whilst the publishing work and the technical impediments confronted by a Greek publishing house in the Rumanian Principalities in the turning point of the 18th century are delineated. The second part of the article attempts to formulate a cohesive and comprehensive interpretation of the false publication date. Both the polemic character of the content of «Dodekavivlos», which due to the rivalry over the religious establishments of the Holy Land, was of political nature, and Chrysanthos Notaras' correspondence along with the historical background of the publication can conduce to some conjectures over Chrysanthos' decision not to record the real date but an earlier one as well as the choice of the particular date of the title. According to the interpretation brought forward, Nicolaos Mavrokordatos' potential political ventures played a significant role. Also, telltale, though of less importance, is the fact that the name of the publisher and bishop of Wallachia Anthimos Iviritis is not recorded under the false date of the title of «Dodekavivlos».

Δεν παρατίθεται περίληψη στα ελληνικά. ; Yiannis Papatheodorou, a The cruel April of 1944»: Fiction, History and Memory in Straus Tsirkas's Drifting Cities Stratis Tsirkas, a distinguished Greek diaspora novelist in Egypt, published his important and controversial trilogy {The Club, Ariagne, The Bat), in the early '60s. The novel is situated in three colonial Mediterranean cities —Jerusalem, Cairo and Alexandria— drifting towards chaos in a war-torn Middle East, during 1942-1944. As far as the plot is concerned, the trilogy is inscribed to the wider context of postwar European literary «master-narratives» elaborating representations of war, Nazism and resistance, and also opening an agenda to the traumatic phenomena of a discontinuous modernity: violence, social repression, exclusion of the Other. This article discusses the politics of history and memory in Stratis Tsirkas's trilogy Drifting Cities in order to show how he problematizes the tropes of historical representation in a dialogical perspective, by focalizing to the Greek military left underground «movement of April 1944». His historical point of view, which clearly can be identified as the «return of the repressed», is related to the questions of an alternative narration about the past, enriched within a critical and deliberating interpretation of the left collective memory.

Δεν παρατίθεται περίληψη στα ελληνικά. ; Alexandros N. Teneketzis, Art and Politics in Cold War. The International Sculpture Competition for the Monument to the Unknown Political Prisoner The gradual transfer of the metropolis of the western art world from Paris to New York and specifically in circles around the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) under the leadership of Alfred H. Barr Jr. and with the theoretical foundation by Clement Greenberg, but practically under the guidance and financing from the CIA, was also visible in the case of public memory and art about the Second World War. The international institution that was the cause for the widespread diffusion of the artistic standards grown in USA was the "International Sculpture Competition for the Monument to the Unknown Political Prisoner", which was organized under the auspices of the Institute of Contemporary Arts (ICA) in London and the Tate Gallery, but actually with the encouragement, blessings and supervision of the CIA. The competition was from the beginning a large turnout and the proposals submitted until January 1953 surpassed 3.500 –mainly abstract or semi­abstract stylistic suggestions. The biggest names at the time in the international arena of sculpture in West took part, while artists from the Eastern Bloc boycotted the process. Therefore were precluded any realistic academic representative works and of course any relationship with socialist realism, giving thus the tone for both the style, and for all other future monuments in the western world. Eventually, the first prize of 2.500 pounds awarded to the British sculptor Reg Butler, unknown to the general public until that time but with a decisive commitment to abstraction. However, the work of Butler was never completed, principally because of the changing international circumstances and relationships after the death of Stalin in '53 and Khrushchev's secret speech in '56. The new "Thaw" era in East­West relations imposed the final rejection in 1960. A public monument like that of Butler's, which would refer to the previous tense situation, was no more possible. Nevertheless, the dual objective of recognition and legitimization of abstract art in the western world and at the same time of the weakening of socialist realism and therefore of communism was promoted and achieved up to a certain degree.

Michalis P. Liberatos, The Greek Communist Party and the SlavophonesMinority in West Macedonia during the German Occupation (1941-194The existence of a Christian Slavic-speaking population in West Macedoniaafter the exchanges of populations in 1923-1924 and its confrontationwith Greek residents affected not only the relations between Greeceand the neighbouring Balkan countries but also determined the attitudeof KKE towards the Greek political stage and its relations with the otherpolitical parties. Especially during the German Occupation in Greece thecontroversies were enforced because of the existence of Bulgarian occupationalauthorities in the region and the attempt of Germans to treatethnic differences as an instrument of oppression. On the contrary, theGreek resistance forces that acted in Macedonia attempted to avert theaccession of Slavophones to Bulgarian nationalism and tried to compromisethe contradictions between the minority and the Greek population.The main resistance movement in the region, EAM, an organisationthat included KKE as the stronger part of it, had the advantage thatit was acceptable to the minority. On the other hand, other Greek organisations,like PAO, caused a feeling of fear, insecurity and mistrust tothe minority as representatives of Greek nationalism. KKE, because of itspolitical attitude towards the defence of the social rights of the minorityin the Inter-War period, had gained the confidence of that population,something extremely useful for the purposes of the liberation struggle.Nevertheless, the other political forces in Greece suspected that KKEhad returned to its attitude about the «Autonomy» of Macedonia fromthe Greek State, which KKE had declared in the decade 1925-1935. Thatwas a great obstacle for a political party that for a long period exerteditself to prove that it had abandoned that policy and especially in relation with EAM, which was based primary on its patriotic character. In orderto avoid the charges that it favoured the Slavophones separatists andthe possibility of an internal crisis that might have dissolved the politicalalliance of EAM, KKE pursued to incorporate the Slavophones into theGreek liberation movement on purpose to create a state of mutual confidencebetween the two populations. At the same time, it tried to isolatethe minority from the propaganda of Bulgarian separatists and destroythe corresponding armed groups.The problems regarding the relations between the minority and theGreek resistance movement became more complicated because of theinvolvement of Tito's regime in Yugoslavia. Tito and his partisans attemptedto use their ideological connection with EAM as a means to persuadeGreeks to accept the existence of minority as a cause of a new arrangementof the borders between Greece and Yugoslavia in the post Warperiod. On the other hand, the leaders of EAM tried to avoid Tito's accusationsthat Greeks impeded the development of a Balkan resistanceco-operation against Axis and strove to confine the massive accession ofSlavophones to the Yugoslavian resistance army by incorporating membersof the minority in organisations of EAM. It was a very difficulttask and often caused more problems than it resolved. ; Michalis P. Liberatos, The Greek Communist Party and the SlavophonesMinority in West Macedonia during the German Occupation (1941-194The existence of a Christian Slavic-speaking population in West Macedoniaafter the exchanges of populations in 1923-1924 and its confrontationwith Greek residents affected not only the relations between Greeceand the neighbouring Balkan countries but also determined the attitudeof KKE towards the Greek political stage and its relations with the otherpolitical parties. Especially during the German Occupation in Greece thecontroversies were enforced because of the existence of Bulgarian occupationalauthorities in the region and the attempt of Germans to treatethnic differences as an instrument of oppression. On the contrary, theGreek resistance forces that acted in Macedonia attempted to avert theaccession of Slavophones to Bulgarian nationalism and tried to compromisethe contradictions between the minority and the Greek population.The main resistance movement in the region, EAM, an organisationthat included KKE as the stronger part of it, had the advantage thatit was acceptable to the minority. On the other hand, other Greek organisations,like PAO, caused a feeling of fear, insecurity and mistrust tothe minority as representatives of Greek nationalism. KKE, because of itspolitical attitude towards the defence of the social rights of the minorityin the Inter-War period, had gained the confidence of that population,something extremely useful for the purposes of the liberation struggle.Nevertheless, the other political forces in Greece suspected that KKEhad returned to its attitude about the «Autonomy» of Macedonia fromthe Greek State, which KKE had declared in the decade 1925-1935. Thatwas a great obstacle for a political party that for a long period exerteditself to prove that it had abandoned that policy and especially in relation with EAM, which was based primary on its patriotic character. In orderto avoid the charges that it favoured the Slavophones separatists andthe possibility of an internal crisis that might have dissolved the politicalalliance of EAM, KKE pursued to incorporate the Slavophones into theGreek liberation movement on purpose to create a state of mutual confidencebetween the two populations. At the same time, it tried to isolatethe minority from the propaganda of Bulgarian separatists and destroythe corresponding armed groups.The problems regarding the relations between the minority and theGreek resistance movement became more complicated because of theinvolvement of Tito's regime in Yugoslavia. Tito and his partisans attemptedto use their ideological connection with EAM as a means to persuadeGreeks to accept the existence of minority as a cause of a new arrangementof the borders between Greece and Yugoslavia in the post Warperiod. On the other hand, the leaders of EAM tried to avoid Tito's accusationsthat Greeks impeded the development of a Balkan resistanceco-operation against Axis and strove to confine the massive accession ofSlavophones to the Yugoslavian resistance army by incorporating membersof the minority in organisations of EAM. It was a very difficulttask and often caused more problems than it resolved.

Δεν παρατίθεται περίληψη στα ελληνικά. ; Alexander Helladius (ca. 1686- ?) from Larissa was an important Greek intellectual and made a name for himself in Western Europe through his studies and activities in various countries. The objective of this paper is to examine his relations with Russia, the emerging political and military power of the Orthodox East at the beginning of the eighteenth century. Helladius met with Peter the Great through the help of Robert Erskine, Peter's personal physician, in Karlsbad in 1712 and decided to dedicate his magnum opus Status praesens Ecclesiae Graecae [Altdorf] (1714) to the Czar as a sign of extreme admiration and as a token of gratitude. Probably, through that act Helladius was intending to secure his future move to Russia, where numerous Greeks were living and working at that time including some of his friends (e.g., Anastasios Michail from Nausea). Helladius arrived to Moscow in September of 1715 and was employed as a physician, since he had studied medicine earlier at the University of Altdorf. Although his further whereabouts in Russia still remain unknown, Helladius played several years later indirectly a role through his book Status in the condemnation of his compatriots, Serapheim from Mytilini in 1732 and Liverios Golettis in 1734. Russia's most eminent ecclesiastical figure at that time, Feofan Prokopovich, used the information provided by Helladius in his Status about these two persons as additional evidence in order to achieve their condemnation. It is hoped that the investigation of archival material in the future will shed more light on Helladius' activities in Russia and will unearth an ignored side of the Graeco-Russian relations of that period.

Δεν παρατίθεται περίληψη στα ελληνικά. ; The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of cultural propaganda in formulating and conducting foreign policy aiming at political supremacy and cultural penetration within the overall context of the ideological conflict between East and West during the Cold War era. Educational and cultural exchanges and other events of a nominali}'' nonpolitical nature are examined within their political context. In particular, the paper observes Anglo-Soviet relations over Greece. These relations turned increasingly hostile in mid-February 1945. Around that time a marked intensification of Soviet propaganda occurred. In July 1945, the Greek-Soviet League was established. It is interesting that, in response, the British Foreign Office concidered that the British Council in Athens should be reinforced and acquire a permanent representative. It was also decided to reopen the question of the Anglo-Greek Cultural Convention that was signed in 1940 but never ratified. This presentation seeks to examine the purpose of establishing these two cultural agencies, their staffing, the funding of their activities, the content of their cultural programmes, and the profile of their Greek supporters, both state officials and private individuals. How successful was the effort by the British Council and the Greek-Soviet League to promote their cultural programmes and what was the impact of these programmes on Greek public opinion? How did their cultural initiatives continue during the Greek Civil War? On the basis of the sources available, did each agency, and if so to what degree, enjoy the support of the country it represented? The comparative study of British and Soviet cultural propaganda in Greece will contribute to understanding the differences and similarities in the means used by each country to achieve its political ends in Greece.

Δεν παρατίθεται περίληψη στα ελληνικά. ; The aim of the current study is an attempt to address the problem which emerged in the Hellenic Society during the years of the inter war as well as the first post civil war period, due to the change of the calendar. The introduction, from the Hellenic Church, of the new (Gregorian) calendar in 1924 created a strong reaction among the believers wich resulted to the creation of a new movement, named Greek Religions Community of Genuine Orthodox Christians (C.O.Ch.). This conservative minority, having had a great influence, insisted in the reinstatement of the old calendar and caused important conflict in the Hellenic society. The issue is examined from a political viewpoint, since the G.O.Ch. functioned as a pressure group towards the governments, demanding the free exercise of their religious duties. The governments appeared rather uncourageous in facing the problem, as they relied on G.O.Ch's vote. However, there had been systematic chasing persecutions against their clergymen, with them arrested or sent to the exile, facts which aggravated the problem. In this article, we also attempt to analyse the ideological stigma of the G.O.Ch. movement as their moved against all innovations of West-European origin and they declared their dedication to the traditional customs. Another aspect of the issue, concerns the so-called Macedonian issue and since the Church as well as many politicians considered the G.O.Ch. as being Serving the Yugoslav propaganda between the Slavonic-speaking minority of Macedonia, given that the Serbian Church maintained the old calendar. The C.O.Ch. Church attempted to defend itself against those accusations claiming that the change of the calendar served the political plans on the northern neighbours.

Despina Iosif, «Christianos ad Leonem». The Case of Perpetua Two Greek editions of the diary of Perpetua have recently appeared, one by Polymnia Athanassiadi and the other by Thanassis Georgiadis, both bound to attract attention. Perpetua lived at Thuburbo Minus, west of Carthage in North Africa. She was an upper class, well-educated Roman citizen, twenty-two years of age, newly married and mother of a baby boy, who converted to Christianity and chose martyrdom instead of sacrificing to the traditional gods of the Roman Empire. Her decision was interpreted as an insult to the gods and the emperors, and a direct challenge to the established order and resulted in her being sentenced to death to the beasts of the arena in Carthage in 203 CE. It was a well-established Roman belief that the traditional gods offered military victories, stability, prosperity and grandeur to the Roman people. In return and to secure the continuation of this benevolence, the Roman people carried certain strictly defined rites in honour of their gods. Pagan religion was less a matter of personal devotion than of national significance. The Christians despised the traditional gods, declaring that they did not exist or that they were malevolent demons and neglected or obstructed the traditional religious rites. This conduct disrupted the agreement the Romans had made with their gods and made the empire vulnerable. From the second century on, natural disasters were being attributed to the wrath of gods as a result of the Christian atheism and the hatred Christians allegedly had for the world. It is extremely fortunate that Perpetua's diary, which she kept while in prison awaiting her death, has survived. It is a bold, vivid and honest account of her prison life, her dreams and the hopeless efforts of her father to persuade her to conform and sacrifice. The fact that the text praised prophesy and placed martyrs above the established church hierarchy led scholars to believe that is was a Montanist product. Fourth and fifth century bishops felt uncomfortable with Perpetua's diary and surrounded it with homiletic commentaries. Instead of letting the text speak directly to the community of the faithful, they guided the understanding of words, subtly changing its messages, and controlled its dissemination. They made Perpetua less appealing as a role model and less threatening to the social order. The impression and fascination her diary exerted, however, remain unchanged. ; Despina Iosif, «Christianos ad Leonem». The Case of Perpetua Two Greek editions of the diary of Perpetua have recently appeared, one by Polymnia Athanassiadi and the other by Thanassis Georgiadis, both bound to attract attention. Perpetua lived at Thuburbo Minus, west of Carthage in North Africa. She was an upper class, well-educated Roman citizen, twenty-two years of age, newly married and mother of a baby boy, who converted to Christianity and chose martyrdom instead of sacrificing to the traditional gods of the Roman Empire. Her decision was interpreted as an insult to the gods and the emperors, and a direct challenge to the established order and resulted in her being sentenced to death to the beasts of the arena in Carthage in 203 CE. It was a well-established Roman belief that the traditional gods offered military victories, stability, prosperity and grandeur to the Roman people. In return and to secure the continuation of this benevolence, the Roman people carried certain strictly defined rites in honour of their gods. Pagan religion was less a matter of personal devotion than of national significance. The Christians despised the traditional gods, declaring that they did not exist or that they were malevolent demons and neglected or obstructed the traditional religious rites. This conduct disrupted the agreement the Romans had made with their gods and made the empire vulnerable. From the second century on, natural disasters were being attributed to the wrath of gods as a result of the Christian atheism and the hatred Christians allegedly had for the world. It is extremely fortunate that Perpetua's diary, which she kept while in prison awaiting her death, has survived. It is a bold, vivid and honest account of her prison life, her dreams and the hopeless efforts of her father to persuade her to conform and sacrifice. The fact that the text praised prophesy and placed martyrs above the established church hierarchy led scholars to believe that is was a Montanist product. Fourth and fifth century bishops felt uncomfortable with Perpetua's diary and surrounded it with homiletic commentaries. Instead of letting the text speak directly to the community of the faithful, they guided the understanding of words, subtly changing its messages, and controlled its dissemination. They made Perpetua less appealing as a role model and less threatening to the social order. The impression and fascination her diary exerted, however, remain unchanged.