The Parastaseis Syntomoi Chronikai is a dossier of materials composed throughout the eighth century by a variety of authors. These materials are unified by their concern with the statues of Constantinople and the prophecies they are understood to embody. The authors are unified by their claim to descent from old Constantinopolitan families and their xenophobic opposition to arrivistes in the imperial service. Thus the Parastaseis asserts a form of knowledge unique to the well-born and essential to the management of the empire. It is an artefact of aristocratic particularism in reaction to the centralizing efforts of the eighth-century emperors.

In 2005, Tia Kolbaba published an article in Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies entitled ‘On the closing of the churches and the rebaptism of Latins: Greek perfidy or Latin slander?’ In it she argued that reports of Greek closure of Latin churches and rebaptism of Latins in the early 1050s were fabricated. This is in line with a strand of scholarship which plays down the provocative aspects of Greek activity in precipitating the crisis of 1054. This paper argues against that strand of scholarship, insisting instead that the sources contain sufficient evidence to indicate that Greek behaviour can indeed be interpreted as provocative.

J. R. Ryder’s analysis of the events of 1054 and of Greek rebaptism of Latins in the Middle Ages makes several points about my article of 2005 in this journal. I am grateful to the editors for this chance to respond. I have chosen to respond to four issues that are crucial to my article and to Ryder’s critique:

1. 1. Ryder maintains that my account of the events of 1053–1054 follows a tradition of playing down ‘the provocative aspects of Greek activity’.

2. 2. Ryder is worried that my arguments might be taken as conclusive in some broad way in spite of my emphasis on limited and specific situations.

3. 3. Ryder emphasizes that the sources surrounding the events of 1054 need more attention – perhaps some re-editing, certainly some re-reading. With regard to my article, this seems primarily to mean that my conclusions are premature, given the state of the evidence.

4. 4. Ryder points out various inconsistencies in my arguments about rebaptism of Latins.

Narratives on the birth of the Ottoman city of Bursa, the first capital of the Ottomans, known to the Byzantines as Prousa, highlight its early Ottoman identity. Although Bursa represents one of the richest legacies of early Ottoman architecture, the city’s urban fabric has suffered from several fires and earthquakes that resulted in heavy restorations and remodellings. The first aim of this paper is to discuss the textual and visual evidence for the built environment in the early fourteenth century and, second, to offer commentary on the Ottoman attitude toward Byzantine architecture in an effort to unearth the Byzantine substrata of Ottoman Bursa. In the service of the latter goal, this article debunks the Ottoman-centric views. With the aid of drawings of Bursa’s upper city that predate the 1855 earthquake we may begin to visualize a city far less uniform in character, in which the Byzantine legacy both endured and informed the construction and urban design practices of the ascendant Ottomans.

In this article, the five poems with the word ‘Μέρες’ in their titles are discussed, and possible explanations for the dates in the titles suggested. The poems were written and revised between 1909 and 1932, but it is argued here that their initial composition dates are closer together than previously thought. The article examines revisions to the five poems; their positions, where applicable, in Cavafy’s thematic collections, and the dates in their titles in relation to events in the poet’s life and other writings from the same period. A history of composition and publication, including an account of all extant published revisions, is provided and the implications of this kind of bibliographical and biographical approach are discussed.

In recent years, the trauma concept has been applied to fiction in several literary studies. This article discusses the narrative mediation of traumatic experiences in selected Civil War novels, using narratological tools and focusing on the complex relationship between trauma, memory and narration. The authors use innovative narrative and representational strategies, such as a disrupted chronological order or intertextual references, to illustrate the paradoxical character of remembering and narrating trauma. These works highlight diverse aspects of the Greek Civil War, depart from conventional narrative modes and share common characteristics with so-called ‘trauma fiction’.