Get Real! wrote:@Oracle, did you whack Paphitis on the head with a frying pan and how hard a whack was it?
@Paphitis, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU! The idiot of the year award is winging its way to you!
@Everyone:
This paper should be made compulsory reading for all Greek Cypriots!
Soon I'll be getting in touch with Natasha to praise her work, minus one or two errors she's made, and hopefully make her a member here even!
No I did not whack him over the head ... but I think you have had one whack too many!
Go back and re-read the article in view of the fact that the author admits to not being able to dent the theory/narrative that concludes (rightfully) that Cyprus is Hellenic.
Oracle wrote:The use of the term "Narrative" in this Archaeological context, is equivalent to the use of the term "Theory" in Science. So when the author says this:
"CONSTRUCTING AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL NARRATIVE:"
It can be read as:
"CONSTRUCTING AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL THEORY:"
The author then attempts to dissect the evidence from detractors and supporters, which uphold or tear-apart the "theory/narrative". However, she has presented nothing noteworthy which debunks the more widely held, and evidenced, theory on the Hellenisation of Cyprus. On the other hand, she cannot help but indicate the wealth of evidence which exists to support Hellenisation along the way, thus (unwittingly?) reinforcing the narrative/theory that Cyprus is overwhelmingly, irrefutably (even with this outright biased attempt) Hellenic.
My feeling is that she has jumped on the bandwagon to find something new to discuss (and isn't it fun to be a "maverick" GR!) ... so there is a clear bias towards proving the contesting, recent (Turk-inspired), views that Cyprus is not Hellenic .... But she has failed to deconstruct (if that was the aim) the widely held view that Cyprus was Hellenised, millennia ago.
As an academic and not a researcher, she does not provide any evidence of her own, some new discovery or artifact to seriously oppose the substantial narrative/theory that Cyprus was colonised and recolonised and received continual exchanges with mainland Greece for thousands of years.
The author was obviously presented with an assignment to weigh up the opposing views as an exercise in criticism. Fine.
Maybe the author has set herself a monumental task to put an end to one or other view and cleverly starts with the most controversial bias i.e. preference to believing Cypriot Hellenism is a myth, builds up the controversy (keeping GR! happy) ... BUT by failing to find adequate support for it, has achieved the ultimate confirmation of a Hellenic Cyprus (making Paphitis ecstatic). Brilliant! Anyone who can still doubt Cyprus' Hellenic historical/present connections, even based on this critical paper, has a serious anti-Cypriot political agenda. I guess that would just be the Turks then!
Not having much time for forum-play today, I cannot see if a conclusion has been presented and can't download the software to read the pdf ...
So Paphitis .... does the paper reach an effective conclusion?
