The reconversion of Hagia Sophia from a museum to a mosque in 2020 under Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan continues to generate controversy with political, cultural, and religious implications for both domestic and international audiences.

The building’s significance as a Byzantine cathedral, Ottoman mosque, secular museum, and UNESCO World Heritage Site underscores the sensitivity surrounding its status.

The motivations behind Erdogan’s decision, criticisms, and practical outcomes are points of discussion, particularly for those guiding visitors from Europe and the West who may have strong feelings about this development.

Hagia Sophia’s historical journey—from its construction as a cathedral in the 6th century, its transformation into a mosque after the Ottoman conquest, its secularization as a museum in 1934, and ultimately its re-designation as a mosque—reflects Istanbul’s layered cultural and religious heritage.

Its conversion in 2020 was justified by Erdogan and the Turkish government as an exercise in national sovereignty and the fulfillment of longstanding public demand.

Erdogan further positioned the change as a corrective to the perceived imposition of secularization under the republic’s early leadership and a means to reclaim Turkish dignity and independence from global influence.

The legal rationale cited a Turkish court ruling nullifying Atatürk’s museum decree, allowing the restoration of the mosque status .

Criticism was immediate and wide-ranging.

Internationally, UNESCO expressed concern that Turkey’s unilateral decision failed to fulfill the requirement for prior consultation about changes to World Heritage Sites.

UNESCO emphasized that Hagia Sophia represents universal value and should remain accessible and protected for all humanity, not a single religious community.

A specific risk if Turkey does not comply with its obligations is that UNESCO could add Hagia Sophia to the “World Heritage in Danger” list, issue formal warnings, or in the most severe case, revoke its World Heritage designation altogether.

Such consequences would threaten Turkey’s reputation as a steward of world heritage, possibly reduce international tourism appeal, and jeopardize access to international funding for restoration or conservation.

The organization underscored the importance of safeguarding the site’s architectural integrity and ensuring universal accessibility .

Political and religious leaders, particularly from Greece, the United States, and global Orthodox Christianity, viewed the reconversion as an affront to religious tolerance and cultural coexistence.

These critics argued that the decision appeared to favor the Islamic dimension of the site at the expense of its broader, multicultural symbolism, undermining Istanbul’s legacy as a crossroads of civilizations and potentially threatening the rights and recognition of Christian minorities .

Within Turkey, secular and minority voices saw the move as a politically expedient display of Islamo-nationalism, reinforcing Erdogan’s base and distracting from internal political and economic challenges.

Critics in these circles lamented the loss of the museum’s status as a symbol of secular, multi-faith harmony .

Practical consequences of the reconversion are now apparent and directly affect visitor experience.

Since 2020, access controls for tourists have tightened: an entrance fee was introduced, sections of the building—especially the main sanctuary—are restricted during prayer, and some Byzantine mosaics are periodically covered.

Specific conservation concerns have arisen due to unprecedented visitor numbers and patterns of use.

Hagia Sophia experienced a notable surge in traffic; in 2022, around 13.6 million people visited, a significant increase compared to museum-era figures, and Turkish officials claim over 21 million visitors have entered since the reconversion.

This spike is one of the key reasons for the implementation of stricter access and intensified visitor management protocols .

The higher visitor load has been accompanied by a rise in reports of damage and maintenance issues.

In 2022, footage emerged showing architectural fragments—including sections of the dome—falling near visitors, raising alarm over the building’s structural health.

Experts from the Turkish Art History Association issued warnings that without timely and effective restoration, Hagia Sophia could face catastrophic damage, particularly in the event of an earthquake.

Damage also occurred due to cleaning procedures, where heavy machinery negatively affected ancient marble floors, and the Imperial Gate—a 1,500-year-old wooden door—was severely compromised.

Critics have emphasized the urgency of comprehensive preservation efforts to safeguard the monument’s physical integrity for the future .

Contemporary visitor sentiment is mixed and reflects the complexity of the situation.

Many Western tourists express disappointment regarding reduced access to the sanctuary and regret the perceived dilution of the site's universal character.

Some voice concern that Hagia Sophia now feels less like a monument to world heritage and more like an exclusive place of worship.

Conversely, certain international visitors, including those with ties to Turkey, appreciate the renewal of religious significance and see the introduction of the entrance fee as reasonable, provided funds are used for broader preservation efforts.

For example, a Turkish-German tourist remarked, “As long as the entrance fee isn’t too high, I think it’s acceptable.

Why shouldn’t Turkey and the government take advantage of this place?

These funds can be channeled to preserve more religious places.”

This division highlights that while disappointment is common among some visitors, others understand or even support the financial and religious rationale behind the changes .

When responding to tourist questions about the reconversion, the most effective diplomatic approach for a guide is to acknowledge the building’s complex, layered legacy and to emphasize inclusivity and ongoing stewardship.

A suggested phrasing, based on best practices, is: “Hagia Sophia has been a significant place of worship and cultural exchange for centuries, reflecting many chapters of Istanbul’s history.

Today, as a mosque and a UNESCO World Heritage Site, efforts are made to balance its religious role with its importance to people of all backgrounds.

Access for tourists continues, and restoration work is ongoing to protect the monument for future generations.

We hope everyone can appreciate its history and significance from multiple perspectives.”

This affirms the legitimacy of tourists’ concerns, conveys respect for different viewpoints, and avoids political debate, while sharing the official Turkish position on continued accessibility and preservation .

In summary, the controversy regarding Hagia Sophia’s reconversion revolves around questions of religious and national identity, international obligations for heritage protection, and practical challenges in conservation.

Criticism focuses on the perceived marginalization of its broader historical legacy and on procedural shortcomings in UNESCO’s terms.

The government’s justification centers on sovereignty and democratic will.

Notably, while visitation remains robust—demonstrating ongoing fascination—physical strain on the monument and divisions in visitor perception prompt ongoing debate.

A diplomatic response for guides should reflect historical context, regulatory developments, continued efforts at inclusion, and a respect for the diversity of visitors’ emotions and expectations concerning this unique site.

The reconversion of Hagia Sophia from a museum to a mosque in 2020 under Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan continues to generate controversy with political, cultural, and religious implications for both domestic and international audiences.

Title:

Content: She returned Hagia Sophia to a mosque.
Turkey has challenged global trusteeship
Daily Morning
Istanbul, Turkey
Posted at 29.10.2022 10: 23
Hagia Sophia Mosque (Getty Images)
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Friday that the fact that Turkey has returned the Hagia Sophia museum from a museum to a mosque represents a major challenge to the global trusteeship.
Speaking at a ceremony announcing the vision of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) “Turkey ’ s Century ” in Ankara, Erdogan said his country was challenging global tutelage and thanked citizens for their support for the decision to return Hagia Sophia.
He noted that his party has always sought to eliminate any vestiges of guardianship and promote democracy in the country over the past 20 years.
Turkey has lived through a remarkable period in its history in general and the history of Istanbul, especially when Hagia Sophia was transformed from its status as a museum and restored to its former glory as the Grand Mosque of Hagia Sophia on July 24, 2020.
The historic building remained a church for 916 years until the conquest of Istanbul.
It was then used as a mosque between 1453 and 1934, nearly 500 years before becoming a museum for 86 years.
It is one of the most visited historical buildings in Turkey by domestic and international tourists, and Hagia Sophia was added to the UNESCO World Heritage List in 1985.
On July 10, 2020, a Turkish court overturned a 1934 ministerial decision that turned Hagia Sophia into a museum, paving the way for it to be used again as a mosque after an 86-year hiatus.

The building’s significance as a Byzantine cathedral, Ottoman mosque, secular museum, and UNESCO World Heritage Site underscores the sensitivity surrounding its status.

Title:

Content: Turkey officially opens the Byzantine church and museum "Khora" as a mosque (PHOTOS)
World News
"Kari Mosque" in the Museum and Monastery of "Khora"
Copy Link https: / / www.rt.com / xhpk
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Monday officially opened the Kari Mosque in Istanbul ’ s Byzantine Museum and Monastery of Khora, four years after the church dedicated a mosque to Muslims.
On Monday, Erdogan oversaw the official remote opening of the Khora mosque and a number of restored sites from the conference hall of his residence in Ankara.
Erdogan said during the opening ceremony, which was broadcast on Turkish television, "May it be a good start."
One of the first worshipers at the mosque told Anadolu Agency: “I have been waiting for its opening for four years, and I have been honored to pray in such a place. ”
Anadolu quoted another serum as saying: “Thank God for showing us these days, I hope we come here from time to time and do our prayers. ”
The site near the walls of the old city of Istanbul is famous for its fine mosaics and frescoes.
The church dates back to the 4th century, although the edifice took its present form during the 11th and 12th centuries.
Greece has criticized the Turkish government ’ s decision to return it to use as a mosque, accusing Ankara of “personal insult ” to another World Heritage site, saying the decisions to turn Hagia Sophia and Khora back into mosques are steps aimed at strengthening the support base of conservatives and the religious trend of Erdogan ’ s ruling party amid an economic downturn.
The museum was built "Khora" monastery, in 534, the building was converted into "Kari Mosque" at the beginning of the 16th century, it was used as a mosque for more than four centuries and was converted into a museum in 1945 by a Turkish ministerial decision.
In August 2020, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan signed a decree on the conversion of the Hagia Sophia Cathedral and the Kari Museum, known as a “bottomless church ” in Turkish, into mosques.
The conversion of the two churches into mosques was praised by Muslims, but drew criticism from Greece and other countries that urged Turkey to protect important Byzantine monuments, both of which have been listed as World Heritage Sites by the United Nations.
Source: A B
Agree.
This website uses cookies. You can read the terms of use to activate this feature by clicking here

What was the significance of Hagia Sophia's conversion into a museum in 1934?

repositioned Hagia Sophia as a global cultural landmark.

The motivations behind Erdogan’s decision, criticisms, and practical outcomes are points of discussion, particularly for those guiding visitors from Europe and the West who may have strong feelings about this development.

Title:

Content: Earthquakes and rampant inflation: Why did Erdogan win again?
Font Size:
Source: Hong Kong 01
Author: Liu Yanting
On May 28, Turkey held the second round of the presidential election.
Although Turkey's Supreme Electoral Council is not expected to announce the official results until June 1, according to preliminary election statistics, with 99.59% of the votes cast, the incumbent President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has 51.91% of the votes, defeating his opponent Kemal Kılçdaroğlu with 48.09% of the votes. Determine the rate of re-election.
This election has caused global concern.
First, people are curious about whether there will be a regime change in Turkey, changing its fierce cross-border diplomatic style.
Looking back over the past two years, since the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war in 2022, Turkey has repeatedly played a fierce swing beyond the size of medium-sized countries, including facilitating the Russian-Ukrainian foreign ministers' talks in March 2022, blocking Finland and Sweden's accession to NATO in May, and announcing the "green light" in June, leading Russia to sign the Black Sea Food Agreement in July, and negotiating energy cooperation with Russia at the CICA summit in October. For the first time since the start of the war, senior officials have talked about launching a new round of military action in Syria, implying that it may threaten Russia ’ s and Iran ’ s geopolitical interests.
In between, the outside world is surprised by Erdoğan ’ s active actions, and also uncertain about Turkey ’ s opportunistic diplomatic style.
Second, Erdogan suffered two major shocks before the election, causing the outside world to generally not optimistic about his re-election, one is in 2022 for months to break through 80% of the serious inflation, the second is the earthquake disaster.
Among them, Turkey ’ s high inflation is the sequela of the 2018 economic crisis. The deep reason is that Turkey ’ s long-term economic overheating and political interest rate cuts have caused a linked financial storm after the Federal Reserve raised interest rates in Turkey. He lost power in big cities such as Istanbul and Ankara.
And the earthquake will also affect voters' support for Erdogan.
On February 6, 2023, a 7.8-magnitude earthquake occurred in southeastern Turkey, killing nearly 50,000 people, and economic losses are even more incalculable.
After the disaster Erdoğan once faced criticism, public opinion criticized its failure to improve the phenomenon of uneven development and urban poverty, resulting in old buildings with low earthquake resistance being vulnerable to a strong earthquake, and fragile buildings are often difficult to get away from the collusion of officials and businessmen, cutting corners, the ruling Erdoğan and the positive development party are to blame.
However, from the results of this election, although the gap between the two people is less than 5%, but Krechidaloğlu is finally a step away from the door, showing that whether it is high inflation or an earthquake, can not prevent Erdogan from being re-elected.
In addition to the lack of integration of Turkish opposition forces, Erdogan ’ s success in mobilizing the new situation of “Turkey ’ s rise ” is also key.
The opposition is not well integrated.
First of all, although the polls of the Republican People's Party (CHP) party leader Krechidar Oulu once exceeded Erdoğan ’ s, making many foreign media boldly predict that Turkey will soon change, but focusing on the current state of Turkish politics, Erdoğan ’ s positive party is the strongest force, and the opposition ’ s long-term mountainous and independent government has not only offset the integration efforts to challenge Erdoğan, but also to some extent.
Looking at the interaction of Turkish opposition parties in recent years, there have been obvious signs of integration until the 2017 constitutional referendum.
At that time, Erdoğan greatly expanded the presidential power and removed the obstacles to re-election in the system, causing a collective panic among the opposition forces. The four major opposition parties, the Republican People's Party (İYü), the Good Party (İYü), the Happiness Party (SP) and the Democratic Party (DP), jointly formed the "State Union" (Millet İttifakı), advocating the restoration of the parliamentary system and abolition of the executive presidential system, hoping to curb the positive party and Erdoğan. Together with the Democratic and Progressive Party (DEVA), they formed the "Six Party Round Table" (Altılı Masa), which is seeking to jointly launch a presidential candidate representing the opposition forces and compete with Erdogan in 2023.
After all, Erdogan was the president at the time, with political resources such as the media and the judiciary, enough to crack down on various opposition forces, such as Ekrem İmamoğlu, the mayor of Istanbul from the Republican People ’ s Party, who was originally highly polled and regarded as a star of tomorrow enough to end Erdoğan ’ s 20 years in power, was sentenced to more than two years in prison in December 2022 for “suspected insult to the Supreme Electoral Council. ” He lost the right to run for president.
After Imam Oulu was forced out, the "six-party round table" did not immediately integrate new candidates, but entangled in ideological scuffles, political spoils distribution, until March 2023, it was determined to nominate CHP party leader Krechidar Oulu, but this nomination was initially not supported by the good party, the latter also threatened to withdraw from the "six-party round table".
After many days of consultations and political exchanges, Krechdarolu agreed to have Ankara Mayor Mansur Yavaş and Imam Oulu as vice presidents, and the good party agreed to stay at the "six-party round table" and support the nomination of Krechdarolu for election.
In fact, from the point of view of the composition of the structure, the only ideology that can unite the "six-party round table" is against Erdogan.
Because the Republican People's Party with the most seats is the centre-left pro-European secularism party, the Happiness Party is a Eurosceptic conservative party with Islamism, the Democratic Party is a centre-right nationalist party, the Democratic and Progressive Party is a centre-right pro-European party, the Future Party is a right-wing pro-European party, and the Good Party is a centre-right nationalist party.
In short, the parties have a combination of ideologies that straddle Islamism and secularism, and basically if Erdoğan and the AKP had not been in power for too long, the parties would have no incentive to integrate.
However, even if it is reluctantly integrated, the "six-party round table" is still divided, otherwise it will not be until two months before the election to determine the nomination of candidates; and after the confirmation of the presidential candidate, the "six-party round table" broke out in a new civil war on the list of parliamentary candidates, all parties want to strive for more security seats distribution, resulting in the continued difficulty of the list.
All these things are quite chilling in the eyes of Turkish voters: Erdoğan may have a monopoly on power and love the position of power, but the opposition forces are also only interested in the division of territory and political division of spoils, and have no intention of changing Turkey's development predicament.
Under the balance of the two, or some voters who are tired of Erdoğan, after going through a thousand turns of heart, they chose to continue to vote for the positive party and Erdoğan, instead of supporting the opposition forces whose governing ability is unknown and whose positions are mixed, resulting in the eventual defeat of Krechdar Olu by a small margin.
How Erdoğan mobilised the "rise of Turkey"
In addition to the weak integration of opposition forces and the failure to gather enough political energy, Erdoğan and the Positive Development Party are still able to gather support and call for votes under the impact of high inflation and earthquake disasters, which is also the key to the defeat of Krechdar Olu.
According to the results of the poll, voters in large cities whose wealth has been severely eroded by high inflation supported Krechdarolu in the election, including the top three cities of Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir and Adana, the fifth largest city; however, Bursa, the sixth largest city of Gaziantep, and the seventh largest city of Konya. (Konya) is still supporting Erdoğan, and Gaziantep is still the hardest hit area of the 2023 earthquake, but voters still vote for the current president who has been denounced by public opinion, and it is clear that Erdoğan still has a certain degree of political energy.
Looking at this source of energy, it is obvious that it is not all the economic achievements that have been downhill.
Looking back at Erdoğan ’ s path to power, he experienced high economic growth in Turkey during his term of office, which can escort him to power.
From 2008 to 2013, developed markets such as the United States, Europe and Japan adopted a number of rounds of quantitative easing policies, international "hot money" poured into emerging markets including Turkey, stimulating the latter's economic growth. Erdogan took advantage of the momentum to promote easy credit, ask the central bank to continue to cut interest rates, and promote large-scale infrastructure projects. On the altar alone, no one can resist.
However, after the US Federal Reserve released a possible interest rate hike in 2013, foreign investment was greatly withdrawn, and emerging market currencies, including the lira, began to depreciate, and Turkey ’ s economic growth continued to slow down. And...
In the process of coping with the crisis, Erdoğan obviously wants to sacrifice prices and preserve economic growth, so he used extreme economic means and insisted on cutting interest rates in the face of high inflation.
The result, while maintaining economic growth to a certain extent, has led to a sharp depreciation of the lira, soaring prices, a near collapse of the bond market, and widespread protests in major cities such as Istanbul.
But looking at Erdoğan ’ s political actions in the past 10 years, it can be seen that he has begun to actively mobilize public support in the military, historical traditions, and diplomatic fields of major powers to fill the “Turkish rise ” narrative under the slowdown in economic growth and make up for his political loss.
As far as the diplomatic tradition after the Cold War is concerned, Turkey is an intermediate power anchored in the Western world and, with its strategic position across Eurasia, moves among different groups of countries.
However, after the outbreak of the Arab Spring in 2010, the outside world saw a more "eastern" and "military power" Turkey: on the Egyptian issue, its support for the Muslim Brotherhood, its involvement in the local political situation; on the battlefield of Syria and Libya, it has successively sent troops to intervene in the civil war there since 2016, and successfully achieved certain results. In the Gulf field, Turkey and Iran have maintained close interaction with Qatar, to a certain extent, prompting the 2017 Qatar severance storm, but because Turkey and Iran insisted on not retreating, the final storm ended with Saudi concessions in 2021, and Turkey successfully maintained its political achievements in the Gulf.
Of course, Turkey's foreign military operations are not all fruitful results.
Taking the Syrian battlefield as an example, Turkey launched four military operations against Syria: the Euphrates Shield from 2016 to 2017, the Olive Branch in 2018, the Peace Spring in 2019 and the Spring Shield in 2020.
Since the "olive branch" operation, the Turkish army has not only attacked the Kurdish forces, but also exchanged fire with the Syrian government forces supported by the Russian side, causing strong dissatisfaction in Moscow.
After many unsuccessful coordination, the Russian army was brazenly engaged with Turkey in 2020, resulting in the scribbled end of the "spring shield", and Turkey can only be forced to obey the Russian-led order in northern Syria.
However, under the propaganda of the Erdogan government, Turkey is not clearly aware that Turkey lost to Russia, but to see the Turkish army fighting in northern Syria in order to fight terrorism, which is very encouraging for nationalists and patriotic people.
In addition, in the historical tradition, Erdogan ’ s most classic action is to announce in July 2020 the abolition of the 1934 cabinet decree, the end of the 86 years of Hagia Sophia ’ s museum years, and the restoration of its mosque status.
Although this has caused many Western countries to criticize, but Erdoğan is not without the basis of public opinion, because in the 2015 capture of Junstenburg memorial ceremony, many Turks have held morning prayers in the museum square, in 2018, the Turkish Islamic Association is publicly applied to hold worship in the museum, although it was finally rejected, but has attracted a lot of public support.
Therefore, Erdogan's decision to "liberate St. Sophia" is aimed at the Islamic resurgence in Turkey in recent years, hoping to draw the support of anti-Kemalist voters.
And in the great power diplomatic field, Turkey's action is not to be said, in addition to the neighboring Central Asia and the Middle East, the Russian-Ukrainian war under various violent swings across Eurasia, are Erdogan's excellent election materials.
Taking the March 2022 Russian-Ukrainian Foreign Minister ’ s talks in Turkey and the landing of the Black Sea Food Agreement in July as an example, Turkish state media vigorously promoted Erdogan ’ s “peacemaker ” role; as for blocking Finland and Sweden from joining NATO, Turkish state media used Erdogan ’ s“ defense of national interests ”, “no fear of offending the West ” and“ combating Kurdish terrorism ”.
Of course, under the burden of economic decline and governance for many years, the narrative situation of mobilizing military, historical traditions and great power diplomacy can play a role in Erdoğan ’ s election, which can only be determined by the election results.
Judging from the results of 51.91% to 48.09%, although the above actions did not create a brilliant victory, they were enough to defeat the opposition forces and guarantee Erdogan another five-year term, which obviously still has some effect.
However, Turkey ’ s high economic growth has ended, and how to buffer Turkey ’ s economic storm and find new solutions outside of “Erdoğan ’ s economics ” are difficult issues that cannot be solved in the short term.
After the election, Erdoğan ’ s challenge continued.
LIKE Our official Facebook page for more information

Hagia Sophia’s historical journey—from its construction as a cathedral in the 6th century, its transformation into a mosque after the Ottoman conquest, its secularization as a museum in 1934, and ultimately its re-designation as a mosque—reflects Istanbul’s layered cultural and religious heritage.

Title:

Content: After Hagia Sophia, Turkey converts a second ancient Byzantine church into a mosque

Hundreds of worshippers filled the narrow streets of Istanbul's Fatih district on Friday to hear the sounds of Friday prayers ringing out from the newly inaugurated Kariye Mosque.

Once known as the Chora Church, the site spent the last 79 years as a museum. But it is now the latest structure to be converted back into a mosque by the government of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, following the conversion of Hagia Sophia in 2020. While viewed as a triumph by many Turkish Muslims, the Greek Orthodox Church has decried it as an "ill-advised decision" that "makes a mockery of the Turkish government's commitment to religious tolerance and religious freedom."

Chora's conversion was announced shortly after Hagia Sophia's, but its opening for prayer was delayed by years of restoration work.

The showing for the first Friday prayers at Kariye was relatively quiet compared to Hagia Sophia, which drew hundreds of thousands who filled the streets with prayer rugs for blocks and blocks away from the building. By contrast, the crowd on Friday was relatively average for a mosque in one of Istanbul's more religiously conservative neighborhoods, where Friday worshippers frequently spill out onto the streets.

Both the Chora Church and Hagia Sophia are 4th-century Byzantine constructions. They spent nearly a millennium as Christian holy sites before being converted to mosques by the Ottomans after their conquest of Constantinople in the 15th century. Despite their conversions, they remained revered by Orthodox Christians. After the founding of a secular Turkish Republic in the early 20th century, the decision was made for both to be neither mosque nor church but simply museums.

"Both Hagia Sophia and Chora embodied Byzantine and Ottoman pasts, and they became symbols of co-existence and multi-faith living practices. Their conversion fundamentally implies a hierarchy, prioritizing the Islamic past over all other layers, Greek Orthodox, Armenian, Jewish, Syriac, et al," Dr. Özgür Kaymak, a lecturer and researcher on minority rights at Istanbul's MEF University, told Religion News Service in an email.

Rededicating the sites as mosques is more than just a status change. According to Islamic tradition, artwork of human figures are forbidden in places of prayer, while in Orthodox Churches, icons of Christ, saints and other biblical figures are a defining feature.

In Hagia Sophia, the mosaics of Jesus and Mary have been covered with curtains since the conversion. While Erdoğan promised Hagia Sophia would remain fully accessible and free to all visitors, Turkey reneged on that earlier this year, reimposing an entrance fee on tourists and relegating them to the upper level, while the main floor is exclusive to Muslim worshippers.

Observers have also criticized the Turkish Directorate of Religion's caretaking of the site, noting damage that did not exist when it was under the purview of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism.

Though Chora is significantly smaller than Hagia Sophia, it is home to some of the best-preserved examples of late-Byzantine art, including mosaics, icons and frescoes, and is considered a UNESCO World Heritage site.

"For us it's a very important place because it remembers our culture and our traditions here," Father Evangelos Markantonis, an Orthodox priest who was leading a group of theology students to Chora on Friday, told Religion News Service.

"Though we cannot venerate as Orthodox Christians, we have to try to find things we can be united on. Only with dialogue and good deeds can we continue our lives," Markantonis, who is also a professor at the University of Athens, said when asked about the controversy.

Erdoğan had long refused calls from his right to convert churches like Hagia Sophia and Chora, telling supporters in 2018 to fill the nearby Sultan Ahmet Mosque (also known in English as the Blue Mosque) before they talked about needing to pray in Hagia Sophia.

Nonetheless, he made an about-turn in 2020.

"My dear nation, the conquest of Istanbul and the conversion of the Hagia Sophia into a Mosque are among the most glorious chapters in Turkish history," Erdoğan said at the time in a speech inaugurating the Hagia Sophia as a mosque.

"This is the most honorable day that Islam has been looking forward to, Greek Constantinople has become Turkish Istanbul," he added, quoting the Turkish poet Nazim Hikmet.

"The resurrection of Hagia Sophia heralds the liberation of the al-Aqsa Mosque. The resurrection of Hagia Sophia is the footsteps of the will of Muslims across the world to come out of the interregnum," Erdoğan said in his concluding remarks.

Chora's opening as the Kariye Mosque comes just weeks after Erdoğan's Justice and Development Party (AKP) suffered its largest electoral defeat in two decades during Turkey's nationwide municipal elections.

"The recent conversion of Chora into a mosque may be due to Erdoğan's many problems, including his geopolitical power politics, his appeal to religio-nationalism to revive his electoral popularity after the March elections or his tactic to divert attention from Turkey's economic downturn," Kaymak said.

Many analysts have attributed the loss to AKP bleeding votes to the more Islamist-leaning New Welfare Party, which has pressured Erdogan over his response to the Israel-Hamas war and humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip.

Muslim worshippers at the mosque on Friday said they viewed its rededication as an Islamic site to be a national win for Turkey.

"This mosque is one of the symbols of the Conquest. We are proud and happy. There are very beautiful frescoes inside. They were also nicely renovated before they were closed. May it be good for our country and our nation," a bystander, Ahmet Öteyüzoğlu, told Turkish media.

"Thank God for these days. Not everyone has the opportunity in their lifetime," another bystander named Mehmet Çelik told the Turkish news service Anadolu Agency, in reference to having been able to pray at both the rededicated Hagia Sophia and Kariye Mosques.

However, Greece, the U.S. State Department and Orthodox Christian institutions worldwide have all criticized the decision to revert the structure into a mosque.

"I want to publicly express my intense dissatisfaction, interpreting the feelings of all Greek women and men, for the completely unnecessary conversion of a historic Byzantine temple, the Monastery of Chora, into a mosque. It is, I believe, an action that offends the rich history of Istanbul itself as a crossroads of cultures," Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said shortly before leaving for Turkey for a planned meeting with Erdogan.

"We encourage the Turkish government to preserve and ensure access to sites and buildings that have hosted different religious communities in a way that respects their diverse histories," a State Department spokesperson said in response to questions from Greek media.

"The Turkish government's appropriation of both as the property of one faith group not only constitutes yet another sign of that government's contempt for Turkey's rich Orthodox Christian heritage but further imperils the religious freedom of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the remaining Christians of that land," the Archons of the Ecumenical Patriarchate said in a statement.

© Religion News Service

How did the role of Hagia Sophia change following the Ottoman conquest?

Hagia Sophia became a central Islamic religious site for centuries

Sultan Mehmed II converted Hagia Sophia into a mosque,

What was the original historical and cultural significance of Hagia Sophia in the Byzantine Empire?

Served as the central church of Byzantine Christianity,

When was Hagia Sophia built and under whose rule?

Its conversion in 2020 was justified by Erdogan and the Turkish government as an exercise in national sovereignty and the fulfillment of longstanding public demand.

Title:

Content: Gazeta.ru on desktop
for quick access
Install
Not now
In ATOR called an insignificant amount of €25 for the entrance to the mosque of Hagia Sophia
In ATOR warned tourists about the rise in price of tickets to the palace-museums of Istanbul
A rise in prices for tourist services in Istanbul is inevitable due to the weak position of the local currency - the lira.
This was stated in an interview with Gazeta.Ru Vice President of ATOR Arthur Muradyan, commenting on the decision of the authorities to make a visit to the Hagia Sophia mosque for foreigners paid.
From January 15, the entrance will cost €25.
“From the point of view of tourists, the amount of 25 euros, and for a family of two or four people it is 50-100 euros, can not be called some significant expenditure.
On the other hand, of course, some tourists will think about spending money on visiting this attraction.
Of course, it is a landmark for Istanbul, and I think that the Turkish authorities have approached carefully to determine the amount of fees for visiting this architectural monument, ” Muradian said.
In his opinion, following the Hagia Sophia mosque, the authorities can raise prices for entrance tickets to other museums.
“The rise in prices for tourist services is inevitable to some extent due to the not very good fate of the lira, which we have seen in the last few years.
And, of course, tourists should be ready to increase the cost of services related to the use of the tourism infrastructure of Istanbul, ” said ATOR Vice President.
On January 12, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism of Turkey reported that the entrance to the Hagia Sophia mosque in Istanbul for foreign citizens from January 15, 2024 will cost €25.
The ministry explained that when setting the fee for visiting the mosque, they were guided by the recommendations of UNESCO.
Hagia Sophia, which is now called the Great Mosque of Hagia Sophia, was erected in the 6th century under the emperor Justinian and for more than a thousand years remained the largest Christian temple in the world.
In 1453, after the capture of Constantinople by the Ottoman Turks, Saint Sophia was converted into a mosque.
In 1934, the temple was given the status of a museum, it retained both Christian and Muslim decoration.
In July 2020, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan signed a decree on the resumption of Muslim worship in Hagia Sophia.
Entrance to the mosque was free for all visitors, including tourists.
Earlier it became known about the destruction of a mosque in Gaza after Israeli shelling.
What do you think?
Downloading

What kind of domestic reaction did Erdogan's reconversion of Hagia Sophia receive?

Erdogan further positioned the change as a corrective to the perceived imposition of secularization under the republic’s early leadership and a means to reclaim Turkish dignity and independence from global influence.

What political motivations influenced Erdogan's decision to reconvert Hagia Sophia?

Erdogan's decision was influenced by Turkey's Islamic resurgence.

The legal rationale cited a Turkish court ruling nullifying Atatürk’s museum decree, allowing the restoration of the mosque status .

Criticism was immediate and wide-ranging.

Title:

Content: ROME – It’s fitting that the phrase “all publicity is good publicity” conventionally is attributed to P. T. Barnum, because, in the 21st century, spasms of public attention almost inevitably degenerate into a media circus rivaling anything Barnum & Bailey ever staged.

Pope Francis presided over just such a circus this week, and that was even before the pontiff departed Thursday evening for a four-day trip to Mongolia, where the tiny Catholic population numbers roughly 1,450 hardy souls.

The PR fracas for the pope began when it emerged that during a video conference with Russian Catholic youth in late August, Francis had praised “great Mother Russia.”

“You are heirs of the great Russia, the great Russia of the saints, of kings, the great Russia of Peter the Great, of Catherine II, that great, enlightened Russian empire, of so much culture, so much humanity,” the pope told the youth gathered for a Catholic festival in St. Petersburg.

That language brought swift protests, including from a spokesperson for the Ukrainian government, which said it smacked of “imperialist propaganda,” and from the head of Ukraine’s Greek Catholic Church, who said the pope’s language had caused “great sorrow and concern.”

Naturally, the furor wasn’t limited just to Ukraine, but also spread to its allies and backers, prominently including several American commentators.

“Can he truly be serious in advising young Russians to hang on to a legacy of death and destruction? The mind boggles,” said American political scientist Alexander J. Motyl, writing in The Hill.

“The pope’s silence in the presence of manifest evil is bad enough,” Motyl opined. “Far worse — far, far worse, almost unforgivably so — is his open endorsement of Russian imperialism.”

As it turns out, the contretemps over Russia was merely a warm-up act in terms of American public opinion this week, since the pope also took a direct shot at a segment of the American Catholic population in a different context.

As is customary, Francis met with a group of his fellow Jesuits when he was in Portugal in early August to preside over World Youth Day. Also as is customary, the transcript of that informal chat was released only this week, and it’s set off a mini-tempest in light of the pontiff’s response to a question about resistance to his progressive agenda in the United States.

“In the United States, the situation is not easy: There is a very strong reactionary attitude,” he said, asserting that some American Catholics are “backward” in their thinking about Catholic doctrine.

“Those American groups you talk about, so closed, are isolating themselves,” Francis said. “Instead of living by doctrine, by the true doctrine that always develops and bears fruit, they live by ideologies. When you abandon doctrine in life to replace it with an ideology, you have lost, you have lost as in war.”

Predictably, many conservatives in the U.S. chafed. Here’s a typical riposte posted in the comments box on the New York Post.

“This Pope is the most political pope of at least the last 50 years. It’s laughable that he calls out others for putting politics over faith,” this reader said. “His reign is all politics, and he is a globalist who supported lockdowns. He is chipping away at the faith while calling it modernization. I appreciate those true Catholic priests fighting to prevent the secularization of the church.”

While Francis is aware of such reaction, he’s hardly going out of his way to smooth things over. Asked during his flight to Mongolia on Thursday about American Catholics who were upset, the pontiff brusquely suggested they need to “move on.”

Of course, this is hardly the first time Pope Francis has said something destined to elicit blowback from Americans, especially American conservatives. It almost feels as if he goes out of his way at times to deliver such pokes in the eye.

What gives? Two observations suggest themselves.

First, one way to understand the deep ambition of Francis’s papacy on the geopolitical level is as a long-term effort to redefine the nature of the Vatican, away from being seen as a primarily Western cultural institution and towards a truly global and non-aligned center of influence. In most respects, Francis is closer to the diplomatic agenda of the newly expanded BRICS alliance, which now contains 11 nations representing almost half the world’s population, than he is to the US or the EU.

In that sense, distancing himself from American foreign policy, as Francis has over Ukraine, and even being directly critical of America, or at least some segment of its population, all serves the pope’s interest by making it clear he’s not in Washington’s pocket.

Second, while this may be no more than cold comfort for American conservatives, there’s a sense in which his occasional critiques amount to a back-handed compliment.

It’s difficult to imagine, for instance, the pope publicly complaining about the “reactionary attitude” of some hardline Marxists in China’s State Administration for Religious Affairs, or calling anti-Roman traditionalists in the Russian Orthodox fold “backward.” The reason is because in both cases, such rhetoric might produce backlash against Catholics on the ground – clergy might be detained, churches might be closed, missionaries might find their visas denied, and the Vatican might find its diplomatic relations interrupted.

Francis knows full well that the United States won’t do any of those things. On the contrary, given America’s commitment to religious freedom and the public esteem religious faith enjoys, nobody’s going to pay any real price in the U.S. when the pope speaks, even if what he has to say generates heartburn in some American chests.

In other words, the mere fact of saying critical things out loud about the United States is, de facto, a tribute to America’s basic maturity. Of course, some Americans might be tempted to reply they could do without such indirect praise, but there it is anyway.

Internationally, UNESCO expressed concern that Turkey’s unilateral decision failed to fulfill the requirement for prior consultation about changes to World Heritage Sites.

Title:

Content: New rules come into force for the visit of Hagia Sophia Mosque in Turkey - Sunrise Gate
Tuesday 16 January 2024 2: 04 PM Cairo Cairo 24 °
Most Read
You might like it, too.
Share your opinion
Do you support calls to boycott some restaurants that have been proven to support the occupation soldiers?
New rules come into effect for visiting Hagia Sophia mosque in Turkey
DBA
Published on: Tuesday 16 January 2024 - 1: 54 PM | Last updated on Tuesday 16 January 2024 - 1: 54 PM
The project for the Hagia Sophia mosque was closest to the heart of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan – but it was also the project that drew international criticism.
In the summer of 2020, Erdogan restored Hagia Sophia to be a mosque after it was originally a church, converted into an Ottoman mosque, converted into a museum.
At the time, Erdogan assured citizens that entry fees would be abolished, adding that the cultural edifice would remain open to everyone – Muslims or non-Muslims alike.
There will be another major change from January 15, with access to the Hagia Sophia restricted and visitors will have to pay fees again.
Turkish Tourism Minister Mehmet Nuri Arsoy hopes this will improve coexistence between religious and tourist visitors.
Arsoy said recently that tourist visitors are making noise and disrupting calm and prayer.
Until recently, visitors and worshippers were allowed to enter the interior of Hagia Sophia together, with barriers and signs keeping a certain distance between them.
However, from now on, worshippers and tourists will be introduced through different entrances.
Although worshippers can use the same entrances as before, tourists will be guided through an upstairs hallway.
According to Arsoy, tour guides will not be allowed to accompany visitors through the corridors, and earphones will be used instead.
“Our priority there is prayer, ” Arsoy said, noting that the building is a world cultural heritage site and should therefore remain open to all visitors around the world.
Zuleiha Duman, 29, who returned to Istanbul from Germany to see Hagia Sophia after it was converted into a mosque, said she found it taking away.
Welcoming the new rules, she said: “As long as the entrance fee isn ’ t too high, I think it ’ s acceptable. ”
“Why shouldn ’ t Turkey and the government take advantage of this place?
These funds can be channeled to preserve more religious places. ”
Hagia Sophia has been on the UNESCO World Heritage List as part of Istanbul ’ s history since 1985.
Built by Emperor Justinian, Hagia Sophia was the largest place of worship in Christianity for nearly a thousand years, it was the main church during the Byzantine Empire, and from the seventh century, the emperor was crowned inside.
After the Ottomans entered Constantinople (now Istanbul) in 1453, the Hagia Sophia was converted into a mosque.
On the orders of the founder of the Turkish Republic Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the building was converted into a museum in 1934 until the summer of 2020.
Hagia Sophia is as symbolically important to Orthodox Christians around the world as St. Peter ’ s Basilica is to Catholics.
After the building was converted into a mosque, criticism poured in from the Greek Orthodox Church.
The UNESCO Foundation also criticized the decision without consultation.
For Erdogan, turning the place into a mosque was his “childhood dream, ” as he himself said, and pleasing to religious voters.
A few external changes were made at the time, for example, a green carpet was placed above the marble floor.
It seems clear that all these things did not detract from the popularity of this teacher.
According to official statistics, some 13.6 million people visited the Hagia Sophia landmark in 2022, not all of them from Europe.
The number of visitors from Indonesia in particular has risen, Hagia Sophia Imam Binyamin Topoglu told Turkey ’ s Anadolu news agency in 2023.
The amount of the fees has not yet been determined.
Tourism Minister Ersoy says the proceeds will be spent on cultural assets, for excavation or preservation of monuments such as the Hagia Sophia.
You might like it, too.
Share your comment

What was UNESCO's main complaint about the reconversion?

UNESCO emphasized that Hagia Sophia represents universal value and should remain accessible and protected for all humanity, not a single religious community.

What was the significance of Hagia Sophia's conversion into a museum in 1934?

repositioned Hagia Sophia as a global cultural landmark.

A specific risk if Turkey does not comply with its obligations is that UNESCO could add Hagia Sophia to the “World Heritage in Danger” list, issue formal warnings, or in the most severe case, revoke its World Heritage designation altogether.

Such consequences would threaten Turkey’s reputation as a steward of world heritage, possibly reduce international tourism appeal, and jeopardize access to international funding for restoration or conservation.

The organization underscored the importance of safeguarding the site’s architectural integrity and ensuring universal accessibility .

Title:

Content: [ditty_news_ticker id="27897"] Video Shows Fragments Falling from the Dome of Hagia Sophia - Orthodox Christian Laity

Video Shows Fragments Falling from the Dome of Hagia Sophia

0

Source: Greek Reporter

A still from a recently released video shows visitors rushing to take cover as fragments fall from the dome of Hagia Sophia. Credit: Daily Motion/BirGün

A video from 2022 that came to light recently shows fragments falling on visitors from the dome of Hagia Sophia, the former epicenter of Christian worship at Constantinople, today’s Istanbul.

The footage released by the Turkish newspaper, BirGün, raises serious questions over the safety of the former Orthodox Christian cathedral, now a mosque.

BirGün notably quoted officials as saying that “pieces are falling from the roof, due to the humidity created by the crowd, but no precautions are being taken”.

The president of the Turkish Art History Association, Serif Yasar, argued for restoration of the monument as soon as possible, suggesting that “If Hagia Sophia is not restored, it will collapse with the first earthquake.”

The monument was restored as a mosque three years ago after serving as a museum from 1935-2020 and has since received 21 million visitors, according to Turkey’s tourism and culture minister.

Yasar added that when the church was a museum, the scientific council overseeing it urged that groups of no more than 25 people should be allowed to enter the building at any one time.

This enormous lift in visitation has likely brought to the forefront the need for repairs and it was indeed reported in September that the Turkish government had decided to start long-term maintenance of Hagia Sophia.

Turkey to implement visitor management policy at Hagia Sophia

In early October Turkish historian Ilber Ortayli expressed fears that the large number of visitors to Hagia Sophia could lead to a catastrophic structural failure if not addressed immediately.

Writing in the Hürriyet daily, Ortayli said that the monument, which attracts three million pilgrims annually apart from tourists, has undergone significant damage since its conversion into a mosque.

He asserted that even a modest number of 20-30 thousand people annually, including scientists, historians, archaeologists, representatives of the Muslim religion, politicians, and public officials, could be considered excessive for the endurance of the monument.

In June 2022 a number of tiles of the ancient marble floors in Hagia Sophia were damaged by heavy machines used to clean the site.

In April 2022, The Turkish Association of Art Historians stated that the historic Imperial Gate in Hagia Sophia had been badly damaged.

The group posted a picture clearly depicting the damage to the oak wood of the 15-century-old gate.

Turkey unveiled plans in late October for a visitor management policy at Hagia Sophia, including charging foreign tourists with an entrance fee to be implemented starting Jan. 15.

Minister of Culture and Tourism Mehmet Nuri Ersoy said that extensive restoration work is underway in various sections of Hagia Sophia, now a mosque, with plans to progress to other parts upon their completion.

He emphasized that, based on UNESCO’s recommendations, a visitor management plan would be enforced to enhance the quality and safety of visits while preserving the historical significance of the site.

Related Articles
Officials argue for repairs to Hagia Sophia after footage shows fragments falling from the dome – Neos Kosmos

Share.

Political and religious leaders, particularly from Greece, the United States, and global Orthodox Christianity, viewed the reconversion as an affront to religious tolerance and cultural coexistence.

How did Muslims and Orthodox Christians react to the reconversion?

Who was angered by the reconversion of Hagia Sophia in July 2020?

These critics argued that the decision appeared to favor the Islamic dimension of the site at the expense of its broader, multicultural symbolism, undermining Istanbul’s legacy as a crossroads of civilizations and potentially threatening the rights and recognition of Christian minorities .

How did Muslims and Orthodox Christians react to the reconversion?

What political motivations influenced Erdogan's decision to reconvert Hagia Sophia?

Erdogan's decision was influenced by Turkey's Islamic resurgence.

Who was angered by the reconversion of Hagia Sophia in July 2020?

Within Turkey, secular and minority voices saw the move as a politically expedient display of Islamo-nationalism, reinforcing Erdogan’s base and distracting from internal political and economic challenges.

Title:

Content: >
December 9, 2021

Christian leaders look forward to Turkey's new law on religious foundations

This is an issue of vital importance for local Christian communities whose places of worship are entrusted to and managed by their governing bodies

Religious minorities in Turkey are looking forward to the increasingly Islamo-nationalist government making good its promise of outreach to non-Muslims by giving them freedom to establish and run their religious and social institutions.

The Turkish government is preparing to issue a new regulation on the administrative management of foundations linked to non-Muslim faith communities, which have been paralyzed for years by a legislative impasse that blocks the renewal of their governing bodies.

This is an issue of vital importance for local Christian communities such as Armenians and Assyrians, whose places of worship – many of them historic --, other real estate and public institutions are entrusted to and managed by foundations.

Burhan Ersoy, head of the state-run Directorate of the Foundations, has confirmed that the plan for the drafting of a new regulation concerning the elections for the assignment of offices within the foundations has come into being, Fides reported.

The draft of the text has been drawn up, taking into account requests and proposals from the various minority communities, and it is expected that the new rules, after obtaining government approval, would be implemented by April 2022.

The previous electoral regulation for the top management of foundations had been suspended in 2013, after the government chose to establish new procedures to make the management of real estate more functional and transparent.

This led to some confusion with representatives of the various minority communities unable to come to a consensus to either accept or reject the new electoral rules, Ersoy said.

The Syrian Orthodox Christian Süleyman Can Ustabaşı, current representative of the non-Muslim Foundations within the Assembly of Foundations, has said that the structure of foundations and their membership profiles had changed over time.

The Turkish government already had consultations with the representatives of religious minorities to resolve the dispute over board elections for their foundations.

But Ustabaşı now urges Turkish authorities to carry out another consultation with representatives of minority communities before the new text is to be implemented in 2022.

The legal status of the Foundations is still based on the Peace Treaty of Lausanne, signed in 1923 by Turkey and the Entente powers (British Empire, France and Russian Empire) victorious from the First World War.

The treaty guaranteed equality before the laws and the freedom to promote and manage "religious and social institutions" for non-Muslim communities in Turkey.

However, the state had seized properties run by these foundations and had to contend with litigation as these foundations claimed the rights guaranteed by the Treaty of Lausanne.

Also, starting from 1936, legislative provisions had allowed foundations of non-Muslim communities to acquire new properties. But in 1974, this guarantee was canceled and the state begun seizing assets acquired by these foundations.

Between 2013 and 2018 about 1,084 properties were returned to the foundations linked to non-Muslim communities, and 20 places of worship restored and given back to the foundations, according to official data.

Greek Orthodox Laki Vingas, in a speech published by the Armenian-Turkish newspaper Agos, said that the legislative deadlock on the question of the regulation of the foundations has had a negative effect on the life of the different ecclesial communities.

The block in the processes of renewal of the governing bodies of foundations had led to the expulsion of young people from the institutions linked to their communities, and also that many voluntary activities were "unfortunately interrupted".

Non-Muslim places of worship

Within the general Assembly of the Turkish Foundations are some 167 minority foundations. The Turkish Greek community has 77, the highest number of foundations. The Armenian community has 54 and the Jewish community has 19 foundations.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan after a cabinet meeting held on October 25 announced that authorities had put on the agenda the question of the elections of the directorates of the foundations linked to religious minorities.

He also spoke of fundamental tools for the management of assets and resources destined for non-Muslim places of worship.

The issue of the foundations come at a time when Turkish authorities have expelled more and more Protestant Christians -- foreigners and Turkish converts-- on grounds they constitute a "threat to national security".

Turkey had also recently transformed museums into mosques, such as the Hagia Sophia and the Church of the Holy Saviour in Chora.

Both churches had been turned into museums after the end of the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of modern Turkey.

The Church of the Holy Saviour in Chora was built by the Byzantines in the 5th century. The Ottomans then turned it into a mosque after they captured Constantinople in 1453. And it remained a Muslim worship space until the end of the Second World War when it was transformed into a museum.

The same happened to the Hagia Sophia Museum in Iznik, and the high-profile reconversion of the Hagia Sophia Museum, Istanbul's most identifiable monument.

Many observers believe that President Erdogan, weakened internally by a bad economy and a lack of political perspective, is compensating with erasing part of the country's multiculturalism, aimed at shoring up the ranks of his Islamo-nationalist base.

Newsletter
Get the latest from La Croix International. Sign up to receive our daily newsletter.
SUPPORT LA CROIX INTERNATIONAL’S COMMUNITY OF READERS
Support La Croix International's unique blend of international Catholic journalism by making it available to people in Asia and Africa who can't afford a subscription and often don't have credit cards to pay for it either.

DONATE NOW
| Catholic Digest | UCAN | Living in faith | La Croix Africa | La Croix español

What political motivations influenced Erdogan's decision to reconvert Hagia Sophia?

The decision aimed to rally anti-Kemalist voters.

Erdogan's decision was influenced by Turkey's Islamic resurgence.

Critics in these circles lamented the loss of the museum’s status as a symbol of secular, multi-faith harmony .

What was the significance of Hagia Sophia's conversion into a museum in 1934?

Symbolized Turkey's secular reforms under Ataturk

Practical consequences of the reconversion are now apparent and directly affect visitor experience.

What was the significance of Hagia Sophia's conversion into a museum in 1934?

made Hagia Sophia a major tourist attraction.

Since 2020, access controls for tourists have tightened: an entrance fee was introduced, sections of the building—especially the main sanctuary—are restricted during prayer, and some Byzantine mosaics are periodically covered.

Specific conservation concerns have arisen due to unprecedented visitor numbers and patterns of use.

Hagia Sophia experienced a notable surge in traffic; in 2022, around 13.6 million people visited, a significant increase compared to museum-era figures, and Turkish officials claim over 21 million visitors have entered since the reconversion.

This spike is one of the key reasons for the implementation of stricter access and intensified visitor management protocols .

The higher visitor load has been accompanied by a rise in reports of damage and maintenance issues.

In 2022, footage emerged showing architectural fragments—including sections of the dome—falling near visitors, raising alarm over the building’s structural health.

Experts from the Turkish Art History Association issued warnings that without timely and effective restoration, Hagia Sophia could face catastrophic damage, particularly in the event of an earthquake.

Damage also occurred due to cleaning procedures, where heavy machinery negatively affected ancient marble floors, and the Imperial Gate—a 1,500-year-old wooden door—was severely compromised.

Critics have emphasized the urgency of comprehensive preservation efforts to safeguard the monument’s physical integrity for the future .

Contemporary visitor sentiment is mixed and reflects the complexity of the situation.

Title:

Content: Hagia Sophia must once again become a place of Christian worship, demands the American Council for the Liberation of Hagia Sophia.
For a start, according to the organization, it is possible to allow liturgies in Hagia Sophia, preserving its museum status.
Although Christians still perceive this cathedral captured together with Constantinople in 1453 as one of the most important shrines.
In case of refusal, the “Council ” intends to appeal to the ECHR.
However, the situation around Hagia Sophia is much more complicated; the observer of IA REGNUM Stanislav Stremidlovsky analyzes the recent events around the former main temple of Byzantium.
Erhan Elaldı – Anadolu Agency
The 564th anniversary of the conquest of Constantinople was celebrated by the Hagia Sophia as a museum.
What is the 565th anniversary?
The head of the “Council ”, American politician Chris Spirou, has already been declared a provocateur by the Turkish authorities.
Today, when Erdogan is increasingly moving away from “his overseas partners ” at least in terms of the desired image of the president, and the new owner of the White House pays much more attention to Middle Eastern Christians than Obama, the situation is clearly changing.
There are already hints that Hagia Sophia from the museum will become a mosque.
At the same time, Erdogan ’ s victory in the last referendum made the president a debtor of domestic Anatolia (at least she believes so), who gave him their votes.
The Anatolian Youth Association strongly opposes any manifestations of non-Muslim faith in Turkish society.
For three years now, they have been trying to make Hagia Sophia a mosque.
And although Erdogan is in no hurry to meet, the Association expects decisive measures from him.
Where the Turkish president is inclined and what Hagia Sophia, cathedral or mosque can become, read here: Internal Anatolia, who supported Erdogan, demands to make Hagia Sophia a mosque
Read other articles by Stanislav Stremidlovsky on the relationship of world religions.

Many Western tourists express disappointment regarding reduced access to the sanctuary and regret the perceived dilution of the site's universal character.

Some voice concern that Hagia Sophia now feels less like a monument to world heritage and more like an exclusive place of worship.

What was the significance of Hagia Sophia's conversion into a museum in 1934?

repositioned Hagia Sophia as a global cultural landmark.

Conversely, certain international visitors, including those with ties to Turkey, appreciate the renewal of religious significance and see the introduction of the entrance fee as reasonable, provided funds are used for broader preservation efforts.

How did Muslims and Orthodox Christians react to the reconversion?

For example, a Turkish-German tourist remarked, “As long as the entrance fee isn’t too high, I think it’s acceptable.

Why shouldn’t Turkey and the government take advantage of this place?

These funds can be channeled to preserve more religious places.”

This division highlights that while disappointment is common among some visitors, others understand or even support the financial and religious rationale behind the changes .

How did Muslims and Orthodox Christians react to the reconversion?

What kind of domestic reaction did Erdogan's reconversion of Hagia Sophia receive?

When responding to tourist questions about the reconversion, the most effective diplomatic approach for a guide is to acknowledge the building’s complex, layered legacy and to emphasize inclusivity and ongoing stewardship.

What did the CALHSC president urge regarding decisions on Hagia Sophia?

Consider both Muslim and Christian voices

A suggested phrasing, based on best practices, is: “Hagia Sophia has been a significant place of worship and cultural exchange for centuries, reflecting many chapters of Istanbul’s history.

What was the original historical and cultural significance of Hagia Sophia in the Byzantine Empire?

Served as the central church of Byzantine Christianity,

Today, as a mosque and a UNESCO World Heritage Site, efforts are made to balance its religious role with its importance to people of all backgrounds.

Title:

Content: Documentation from the Arab Perspective (2 / 2)
The 2022 FIFA World Cup Qatar did not pass without reminding us that there are many differences between our pride in our values and our Arab-Islamic affiliation and the victory of others, although they do not, of ideas that are unacceptable to various cultures in the world.
The positions of some quarters on false issues seemed to make us think since the World Cup until now about the need to present to the world our identity and culture from our perspective and not from the perspective of those in whom the scourges of colonial thought lingered in our minds until our days.
Therefore, I was keen in the World Cup period and afterwards to call for the documentation of everything, because when we document, we do so with our perspective on life, our authentic culture and our vision of our relationship with other cultures, while if others document our present, they will undoubtedly give him a lot of their views and ideas.
What made us realize is that the documentation is not just a written or visual account of what happened, but collecting all the documents and presenting them from our perspective, as we must consider from our Arab history when the facts were presented from the perspective of others, darkening our ancestors as well as our culture and civilization and distorting our image.
Let ’ s look at that clever treatment of novelist Amin Maalouf in his book “The Crusades as the Arabs Seen Them ” when he returned to the documents of Arab journalists to confront the“ facts ” about the details of 200 years of conflict between the Franks and the Muslim Arabs. Frankish wars "or" invasions ", but the West invented this term to turn the relationship between the Arabs and him into a" religious "clash!
Therefore, Maalouf explains his purpose in the book: “The truth is that what we wanted to present is not another history book, but rather, from a hitherto neglected point of view, a ‘ true narrative ’ about the Crusades and these two turbulent centuries that created the West and the Arab world and still define their relations today. ”
If Maalouf returned to extracting the documents of the ancients to correct history, today we will not wait for years and centuries for our future generations to adopt our "present history" with the novel of others, are we not better to document our "novel" of our history?
It is the demand of Arab generations who have lived for decades facing the image of our civilization from the perspective of the West.
I don ’ t think documenting an important historical event like the World Cup is a Western matter, but it is a matter for us before others.
We document the facts from what we have lived, and this basic principle of documentation is also a scientific basis for what is called in historical studies "the history of the present time", where historians have returned to the contemporary experience, including moving material and living memory, based on the observation of "witnesses" of what happened in a period when the past is close to the present.
Qatar National Library (QNL) has strived to fulfill this historical and societal responsibility, as it has been working since its inception to preserve the Arab-Islamic heritage as one of the most important pillars of its mission.
Our Arab civilization has long been hurt by the Orientalism movement, which documented our heritage and "achieved it", Orientalism has a known strategy, which Edward Said described in detail, when he saw that the West sees itself only as the "upper hand" that has the advantage over the Arabs, and that the Orientalist movement is linked to colonialism on the one hand and racism on the other.
However, we cannot ignore the positive impact of Orientalists. They dusted hundreds of manuscripts and did exactly the bibliography of Arab manuscripts, issued indexes to the most prominent Arabic manuscripts in the coffers of European libraries, and studied the sources of Arab heritage. Qia has greatly benefited the religious, military and expansionist goals of Western countries, so we reiterate the seriousness of documentation, its objectives and the paths that sometimes control it.
In view of that enormous heritage of manuscripts heritage achieved by Orientalists, we have to pay attention to a very important issue, which is related to the methods of investigation, their approaches were influenced by what accompanied their criticism of the ancient Latin classical texts, as they were questioned, so dealing with the Arab heritage came from the same angle, and therefore many critical approaches to it without taking into account the origins of codification among Arabs. This concern has passed to a number of Arab researchers and writers due to the impact of the Orientalist movement, and it has become necessary to get rid of the orientalist view of our heritage, by developing an authentic approach derived from the standards of Arab codification and documentation.
There is no doubt that the interest in manuscripts and their preservation is part of the documentary awareness. In this context, Qatar National Library has sought to fulfill this historical and community responsibility. Since its establishment, it has been working to preserve the Arab-Islamic heritage as one of the most important pillars of its mission. For decades, the rulers of Qatar and the well-to-do have taken care of the manuscripts and acquired them.
Sheikh Jassim bin Mohammed Al Thani, the founder of the state, took care of the manuscripts and spent in printing them to provide them to students of science in various Arab countries. His son Sheikh Abdullah bin Jassim Al Thani followed his example when he stopped some manuscripts, as well as Sheikh Ali bin Abdullah Al Thani, who was known for his passion for science and book and stopped his books in the Qatari Library in Al-Ahsa.
This cultural orientation has created a suitable environment for the interest of manuscripts among Qatari intellectuals, and most private libraries are rich in manuscripts, and they were seeking to acquire and benefit from them, thus becoming the talk of their councils and the nucleus of many of their knowledge.
It is not unusual for the Qatar National Library to assume this responsibility and to play its role in the maintenance of manuscripts in a modern way, as the heritage library abounds with the same manuscripts, documents, maps and rare images.
In order to provide a larger inventory of manuscripts for the benefit of readers and researchers alike, QNL has established a bridge to connect with libraries, archives and international institutions to obtain digital copies of documents and manuscripts and display them in the digital portal, which is the result of long-standing partnerships with the British Library and Qatar Foundation.
The digitization project included nearly a million historical documents from the British archives on the history of the region, which facilitated our understanding of the Middle East, a rich material for study that may convey the perspective of the other, but if we are aware of our culture and history, we study them from our own angle and with methods that feed our vision and do not make us lose sight of the facts.
If we know that the huge archive known as the India Office Records wipes nearly nine miles of the British Library ’ s shelf space, we are aware of the importance that nations attach to documents.
We need documentation We need to build a wide archive as well, because historical memory requires the existence of this archive, through which the individual and institutions can turn memory into an active force in the present, I have observed in all my travels the spread of the culture of documentation in the countries of the world, especially Western countries, where they train children from a young age to document their personal histories through photo albums and write memoirs about their journeys, and record the simplest things. archiving its history.
Documentation helps us individuals and communities from memory loss, and makes our recent past after it is classified in "heritage" material belonging to us by various standards, and the historical archive becomes a witness to all social, cultural, economic and even political and administrative aspects. without memory.
Throughout my career, I have made sure that my works are a kind of documentation of the course of my life, as each book is a kind of documentation of a stage of my life.
I have often been concerned with the literature of trips because of its documentary value, and considered human life more like a trip, and he only has to leave a trace in it and record what he sees as suitable for documentation for his own benefit and for the people, and considered that the Arabs' quest to document their trips helped us a lot from the isolation of Western narratives about our countries and other peoples.
Since the end of the ninth century AD, the Arab trips with Al-Masoudi began to convey the geographical and historical facts and the lifestyles of the peoples and their customs and traditions through experiences and observations.
The book "The Promoter of Gold and Minerals of the Essence", which combines history, geography and politics, and the twelfth century AD was one of the most recorded centuries of trips, so we knew the journey of Ibn Jubayr al-Andalusi and the journey of Ibn Battuta, which he called "masterpiece of the masters in the odyssey and wonders of travel" and presented a comprehensive picture of the Islamic world in the eighth century AH.
Voyages continued to our current era through the era of the "Arab Renaissance", who can ignore the journey of Rafaa Rafaa al-Tahtawi, whose details are recorded in his book "Saving the Briz in the Summary of Paris", which showed the progress achieved by the West at the end of the nineteenth century, and the impact of what he recorded on the movement of thought and literature in the generations of Arabs.
We cannot deny the great role that travel literature has played in conveying our Arab-Islamic perspective to the other and in showing the nature of our thinking and receiving human civilization in different historical times. Therefore, these trips are documents formulated by the Arabs from the point of view of their thinking and from their culture and vision of the world.
I was aware early on of all these deep dimensions of travel literature and the importance of documentation wherever it was analyzed. My diplomatic responsibilities as ambassador of my country in more than one country allowed me to learn about the cultures of peoples and to document what I wrote about the major issues that occupied me and Arab culture. My book, Controversy of Battles and Settlements: The First Gulf War and the Security Council, is to some extent a documentation of the subject that occupied me with my fellow ambassadors of the Arab Gulf States. Ambassador of my country to the United Nations in New York on the Security Council's handling of the Iran-Iraq war.
In my book “As Much as the Determined People ”, I documented my work as Minister of Information and then Minister of Culture, Heritage and Arts, not evidenced by what I documented about the event“ Doha Capital of Arab Culture in 2010 ”, which turned Doha into a center of Arab cultural radiation.
I also documented the cultural cities of the Arab world where I lived, including Cairo and Beirut, and recorded my observations of the museums I knew, including the Louvre, the Metropolitan Museum, the Museum of Islamic Art, and the Qatar National Museum, which were accompanied by my intellectual views and positions.
As for the books “The injustice of relatives ” and“ Bridges without walls ”, they are accurate documentation of my candidacy and my march towards the presidency of UNESCO and the challenges I faced during this march, and there is no doubt that their documentary data will contribute to presenting this experience from the Arab angle and not from the angle of “Western media ”. The need for memory is inevitable, and how much we need to record our own experiences that are directly related to the homeland and to the issues experienced by Arab societies, for I was in those days a voice for Arab intellectuals who have long suffered from the exclusion of those who harboured human rights, cultural diversity and equality among peoples.
I continued my documentary work in my book “Musafirzadeh Camels ” where I recorded what Al-Qirqah achieved in inspiring moments and documented by technology. Instagram absorbed short texts, in addition to pictures on many topics, including personalities I knew and made part of the history of their countries, visits to countries and meetings with their intellectuals, leaders and senior officials. I urge event makers to personally document their contributions for the benefit of their communities.

Access for tourists continues, and restoration work is ongoing to protect the monument for future generations.

We hope everyone can appreciate its history and significance from multiple perspectives.”

What did the CALHSC president urge regarding decisions on Hagia Sophia?

Consider both Muslim and Christian voices

What was the significance of Hagia Sophia's conversion into a museum in 1934?

repositioned Hagia Sophia as a global cultural landmark.

This affirms the legitimacy of tourists’ concerns, conveys respect for different viewpoints, and avoids political debate, while sharing the official Turkish position on continued accessibility and preservation .

What did the CALHSC president urge regarding decisions on Hagia Sophia?

Consider both Muslim and Christian voices

In summary, the controversy regarding Hagia Sophia’s reconversion revolves around questions of religious and national identity, international obligations for heritage protection, and practical challenges in conservation.

Criticism focuses on the perceived marginalization of its broader historical legacy and on procedural shortcomings in UNESCO’s terms.

The government’s justification centers on sovereignty and democratic will.

Title:

Content: Hong Kong as a Method (1) _ The Source of Hong Kong ’ s Deep-Level Problems: Clash and Integration of Civilizations
Author: External Submission
Published: Updated:
Professor Qiao Shigong of the School of Law of Peking University has put forward a grand narrative for the relationship between China and Hong Kong. From the perspective of comprehensive, thorough and sustainable understanding, we are looking for a suitable identity for Hong Kong from the perspective of modern civilization and globalization.
From the global perspective of hundreds of years of world history, Professor Qiang found a deep interpretation of the Hong Kong problem, extending the traditional composition of the Hong Kong issue from local to global, from short-term phenomena to the overall history, from passive to active, connecting Hong Kong, China and the world, and examining experience, culture, history and civilization as one.
He believes that the obstacles to China's rise and national rejuvenation are the outdated world order, and the vested interests in the international geopolitical structure are a threat to the growth of developing countries, but the selfish and hegemonic logic of power can not be sustained, and even hurt the interests of the people of the developed countries in the West.
Hong Kong ’ s history deconstructs the relationship between the two narratives, providing fodder for a deeper exploration.
As a "frontier" Hong Kong, in addition to providing inspiration and stimulation to the mainland as the center, but also to participate in China as a "frontier", to put forward global reform requirements for the western developed countries that were once the center.
As a hub of change, Hong Kong has been confused about how to position its role, and the article by Qiang Shikong gives good tips on how to open up a wider path in the new landscape.
I strongly recommend you to read the article patiently, not only to think about the development of Hong Kong, but also to understand the role of China in the future of the world with a new perspective.
If Hong Kong used to be an “overseas tourist ”, it should be a master today, working together with the country, to carry out a paradigm shift to promote modern civilization and a new type of globalization.
This is not inconceivable. The people of Hong Kong should not belittle themselves, but should pick up from the confusion, conflict, decline, and reflection that has occurred, and reconstruct the narrative of history to make another career for Hong Kong and the country.
"One country, two systems" is not just a means to solve specific problems, it is the accidental integration of history into the new law of the method theory, with the power of history to resolve the changes in history, continue to cultivate the historical law, promote the advance of history.
(Yu Pinhai)
Xi Jinping solemnly declared at the 25th anniversary of Hong Kong ’ s return to the motherland that the “one country, two systems ” policy“ has no reason to change and must be upheld for a long time ”. This is not only to solve the political doubts of Hong Kong, but also to understand “one country, two systems ” as a long-term national policy from a historical perspective. (AP / Photo)
On July 1, 2022, at the mid-term node of Hong Kong ’ s “one country, two systems ” unchanged for 50 years, President Xi Jinping delivered an important speech at the General Assembly to celebrate the 25th anniversary of Hong Kong ’ s return to the motherland, solemnly declaring that the“ one country, two systems ” policy “has no reason to change and must be upheld for a long time. ”
This is a further political commitment by the country ’ s top leaders that “one country, two systems ” will remain unchanged for 50 years after Deng Xiaoping announced that Hong Kong ’ s“ one country, two systems ” will remain unchanged for a long time.
When Deng Xiaoping proposed that the "one country, two systems" should remain unchanged for 50 years, the main purpose was to solve the "confidence" problem of the people of Hong Kong.
Although Deng Xiaoping said that “50 years from now, it will not change ”, but after all, it is only an expectation, not a formal commitment, so that with the arrival of the“ 50 years from now ” mid-term node, the Hong Kong community is constantly debating “what to do after 50 years ”.
Concerns about the future of Hong Kong and the fate of families, caused by this uncertainty of expectations, have also hit the hearts of Hong Kong people from time to time, exacerbating the feeling of Hong Kong ’ s “overseas traveler ” in the“ borrowed place, borrowed time ”.
In particular, the Central Government has used the crack to quickly end the chaos in Hong Kong, causing a huge shock in Hong Kong. Many Hong Kong people have emotional fluctuations due to their lack of understanding of the Central Government ’ s policies and even emigrating abroad.
From this perspective, Xi Jinping ’ s timely release of the signal that the “one country, two systems ” policy“ must be upheld for a long time ” will undoubtedly help stabilize Hong Kong ’ s political situation and promote Hong Kong ’ s historic leap from chaos to governance, governance and prosperity.
Looking at Hong Kong and “one country, two systems ” from the perspective of the history of Chinese civilization, Xi Jinping not only aims to resolve Hong Kong ’ s current political doubts, but also understands“ one country, two systems ” as a long-term national policy from a historical perspective.
In fact, since the establishment of the New China's policy of "remain unchanged and make full use of" to Hong Kong, the Central Government has always emphasized from a strategic height the unique advantages of Hong Kong, "one country, two systems" is also a product of this strategy, that is, to make full use of Hong Kong's close ties with the global capitalist economy, and play its role as a "channel" for the introduction of Western capital, technology, knowledge and experience and exports of Chinese products.
We can only truly understand Hong Kong ’ s unique historical process and its unique place in the national strategy if we start from the global geography and recognize Hong Kong ’ s geographical advantages in China ’ s maritime frontier.
In this sense, the concept of "Hong Kong, China" not only indicates that Hong Kong is part of China, but more importantly, the Hong Kong issue is used as a "key" or "index" to understand China's problems, and even as a "method".
This article takes Hong Kong as an example, and believes that to understand China as a super-large political entity with a civilized order, it should start from the theoretical perspective of “trans-civilization ” and pay close attention to the two frontier zones formed by the long-term interaction between Chinese civilization and other civilizations. and update the active role of change, thus breaking through the mainstream narrative of civilization centralism or Western centralism, and understanding the universal law of the development of human civilization in a qualitative historical perspective.
On this basis, this paper focuses on a new chapter in the future development of Hong Kong's "one country, two systems", proposes to build a set of cultural values that match the "one country, two systems" policy, and reflect on the center from the border. And...
This article focuses on the new chapter of the future development of "One Country, Two Systems" in Hong Kong. It proposes to build a set of cultural values that match the "One Country, Two Systems" policy. We should not only focus on the negative "problems" of Hong Kong, but should also take it as a positive "method" to reflect on how Hong Kong as a new frontier gives China a strategic meaning to rise and participate in global governance.
Ever since the Central People's Government proposed in 2003 that Hong Kong should pay attention to solving "deep-seated problems", Hong Kong people have been arguing about this.
If economic problems and even political superstructure problems are superficial problems, then deep problems are ideological problems involving cultural values.
This means that we cannot simply focus on Hong Kong ’ s “legal reunification ” from the perspective of dominant politics, but also on the“ return of people ’ s hearts ” from the perspective of cultural politics, which inevitably touches on the deep-seated “decolonization ” of Hong Kong.
(1) Conflicts and Convergence of Civilizations: The Source of Hong Kong ’ s Deep-seated Problems
The question of the human heart involves questions of faith, value, meaning, identity, and even emotion, and thus the legitimacy of political activity.
It is also true that "the name is not right, the word is not right, and the word is not right."
Political correctness, first and foremost, is the establishment of proper recognition of acts of political domination, including the use of violence.
The problem of the human heart is the real political problem, and politeness is the political root.
The attribution of this to “cultural leadership ” or“ soft power ” is simply a question of bridging the separation of politics and morality in the modern political tradition of the West.
In Chinese, the concept of “politics ” vividly combines“ politics ” and “governance, ” giving rise to the concepts of“ government ” and “governance. ”
On the question of Hong Kong, we often use the concepts of "sovereignty" and "governance". In fact, "sovereignty" means "government power".
Unfortunately, our understanding of "sovereignty" often starts from a legal perspective, emphasizing the absolute nature of the exercise of violence, understood as the exercise of military, diplomatic, legislative and other powers, while ignoring the cultural perspective, sovereignty also means having the highest right to determine truth issues and even religious values.
Therefore, in the constitutional structure of "one country, two systems", the Central People's Government exercises its legal sovereignty in Hong Kong (such as the garrison, foreign affairs and legislation), but the cultural regeneration system of the core values of Hong Kong society continues to remain unchanged, which means that Hong Kong has "cultural leadership" (or "soft power") on legitimate reproduction, thus creating the "recognition" of the Central People's legal power in Hong Kong.
This “cultural leadership ”, which revolves around“ acceptability ”, has continuously impacted on the legitimacy of the central government ’ s lawful exercise of sovereignty in Hong Kong, which has triggered cultural and political divisions within Hong Kong, and even led to the separatist trend of “Hong Kong independence ”.
It can be seen that the so-called conflict between the Central Government and the Special Administrative Region, the conflict between the "two systems", ultimately stems from the cracks left in the sovereignty of the unique constitutional form of the country, such as in the "Leviathan" image, the sword and the shepherd cannot be fully grasped in the hands of one person, and thus there is an inherent tension between them.
The reason why the Central People ’ s Government adopts the “one country, two systems ” constitutional structure, which contains cracks and differences within the sovereignty, precisely stems from the ideological differences between Hong Kong and the mainland in cultural and political affairs in modern times. The ideology of“ the end of history ” since the Cold War has strengthened the ideological legitimacy of the capitalist system in Hong Kong, so that “one country, two systems ” has tacit its cultural ideology. Authority.
It can be said that since China was integrated into the US-led world imperial system in the post-Cold War era, China as a sovereign state has its political power in law, but it has always been intellectually controlled by the cultural leadership in the world imperial system. Since 2008, China has begun to rise politically and economically. of the subjects.
This is where the problem of "depression in China" comes from.
In Hong Kong, the political struggle around political development since 2008 has always been accompanied by a cultural struggle, from “nativism ” to“ state-to-state turmoil ”, from “comprehensive governance ” to“ city-state autonomy ”, from the “universal suffrage ” concept to the definition of“ patriots ”, all focused on the struggle for cultural leadership in the field of cultural ideology.
In the field of culture and art, there are debates around the "folk style" and the red tradition, "squinting" and even "toxic teaching materials". The debate, as well as the debate on the Internet about "public knowledge" and "self-improvement", "hate the party" and "little pink" and so on.
It can be said that no matter what happens internationally, or what happens in China, it will lead to similar disputes in the field of cultural politics.
It can be seen that although the Hong Kong problem occurs in Hong Kong, the crux of the problem lies in China and the world, and Hong Kong, as a frontier area where Chinese and Western civilizations meet, has become an "index" for us to think about China and global problems, and even a "method".
Although the Hong Kong problem occurs in Hong Kong, the crux of the problem lies in China and the world, and Hong Kong, as a frontier area where Chinese and Western civilizations come into contact, has instead become an "index" or even a "method" for us to think about China and global issues.
The issue of political legitimacy or cultural leadership implies the theme of “cultural politics. ”
These questions eventually converge on questions of faith and values, which form the core of the concept of “civilization. ” Huntington thus understands the global order as“ a clash of civilizations, ” and the Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao region, as the new frontier of Chinese civilization facing the maritime world, is precisely in the “civilization ’ s fault line ” that confronts the conflict of Christian civilization from the maritime world.
The deep-seated contradictions that have arisen in Hong Kong on the issue of political identity and the return of people's hearts to China are precisely the result of conflicts between different civilizations and orders.
However, the Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao region is not only a "civilization breakaway zone", but also a "civilization contact zone", which is a "window" for Westerners to understand, study and even learn Chinese civilization (for example, the Jesuit will enter China through the window of Macao to understand and learn Chinese civilization), and is also a "window" for Chinese people to "see the world".
From Wei Yuan, who was known as the "master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master master The revolutionary power of modern civilization.
As a result, Hong Kong ’ s discourse in China, on the one hand, has become the starting point for the defeat of Chinese civilization by Western civilization in the context of the clash of civilizations, thus opening up the humiliating history of modern China, so that the narrative mode of “Since the Opium War … ” has become the standard language for us to understand modern history, and on the other hand, it has become the starting point for Chinese civilization to learn Western civilization to keep open. A symbol that incorporates other civilizations and promotes self-renewal and self-growth.
These two different ways of understanding are intertwined and constitute the deep ideological code of the Chinese people.
It is in this organic interaction between the clash of civilizations and the fusion of civilizations that we can truly understand the “deep issues ” facing Hong Kong after the reunification.
(2) Hong Kong ’ s Cultural and Political Imagination: “Metropolis ”,“ Cultural Desert ” and “Overseas Travellers ”
Since the Opium War, Chinese and Western civilizations, in particular, have clashed on the value scale of the distinction between “civilization ” and“ barbarism. ”
The British Macartney mission to China focused on this clash of civilizations.
In the Western treaty system, the moral etiquette that once made the Chinese proud as "civilized people" is regarded as "stupid" in the eyes of the West. Similarly, the violent worship ("Shang Li") and the "villain" that the Chinese consider to be a "barbarian" are regarded as a symbol of "civilization".
Therefore, in the process of learning and absorbing the history of Western civilization, the Chinese people will consciously and unconsciously accept this set of values about "civilization" and "barbarism" and promote the transformation of Chinese civilization according to the standards of Western civilization. The “civilized ” international society that has been built has undoubtedly formed the main line of the continuous, implicit or explicit“ politics of recognition ” in modern times.
There is no doubt that the May Fourth Movement is an ideological enlightenment movement which has launched a fierce criticism and even a complete denial of the degeneration of Chinese civilization into barbarism according to the Western "civilization" scale.
If the Chinese traditional Confucianism is understood as a political and religious system (Confucianism) that integrates politics and ideology, the May Fourth Movement is similar to the Western religious reform movement, separating Confucian culture from the political structure of the dynastic politics and even the system of tribute to the world, and transforming it into a modern Western academic thought in the scientific sense, forming a relative separation of "culture" and "politics".
However, different political opinions will also form different cultural opinions, and political differences will also develop into cultural differences, and "cultural politics" will come from this.
Since the May Fourth Movement, cultural and political differences have emerged in modern China.
One is the "recognition politics" that takes Western capitalism as a model and model, thus forming the ideology of "the end of history"; the other is the emerging socialist cultural and political proposition in the West, and the "revolutionary politics" to establish a new form of human civilization.
These two modern ideas drive the creative transformation of traditional Chinese culture on two theoretical paths.
The former forms a right-wing Confucian tradition that is integrated with liberal ideas, such as the value concept of private property system, the order of etiquette, the value concept of gentry business and cultural elites, and the constitutional order of rule by the emperor. These two cultural concepts are combined to serve the "recognition of politics"; the latter forms a left-wing Confucian tradition that is mutually invented with the communist idea, such as advocating the "public and the nobility". "Light people-based thinking and even the concept of equality, conform to the change of fate and even revolutionary thinking, the political ideal of" harmony under heaven "and so on.
These two cultural and political traditions support two different political paths. The KMT ’ s “politics of recognition ” path identifies with the civilized standards established by Western capitalism and obeys the world imperial order established by the West, while the“ revolutionary politics ” promoted by the Communist Party is committed to overthrowing the world imperial system and establishing a new international political and economic order of equality as its master.
These two paths are intertwined with the global Cold War pattern, forcing modern China to answer whether it is subjugating the Western-built world imperial system with a slave mentality, or breaking all oppressive systems with a revolutionary stance, and embarking on a modernized path in line with China ’ s reality with the spirit of freedom of its masters.
If the modern liberal spirit is based on the master spirit of independence and freedom, then in the world imperialist system built by global capitalism, for the developed countries, "revolutionary politics" really shows the modern liberal spirit.
The differences and conflicts between the two cultural, political and political paths since the May Fourth Movement have concentrated in Hong Kong on how to face the colonialism led by Western civilization.
In order to resist the impact of the May Fourth Revolution on colonial rule, the British Hong Kong Government began to vigorously promote traditional Confucian education in Hong Kong.
Therefore, from the perspective of “recognition politics ”, Hong Kong has always been a model for the Chinese to learn from Western civilization, a“ metropolis ” image that represents modern civilization in the eyes of the Chinese, and the new conceptual order of “ocean ” and“ soil ” in the Chinese discourse, civilization and ignorance, is firmly established in the concrete image of Hong Kong.
However, from the perspective of revolutionary politics, the whole of China has undergone anti-imperialist and anti-feudal cultural and political baptism, and only colonial Hong Kong has combined the Confucian concept of feudal liturgy with the concept of colonial rule, jointly resisting the May Fourth Revolution and safeguarding the British colonial rule in Hong Kong.
Therefore, in the eyes of the May Fourth generation, represented by Lu Xun, Hong Kong's commercial metropolis has become an image of red and green, drunken and corrupt, and Hong Kong, unbaptized by the new revolutionary culture, has undoubtedly become a "cultural desert" and a "wandering child". Strictly, the politics and culture of the two places are gradually diverging, and Hong Kong is slowly becoming an “overseas tourist ”.
After the founding of New China, the United States established the Washington-Taipei-Hong Kong Axis “Culture Cold War ” strategy against China, and Hong Kong became an important fulcrum for overseas Chinese because of its proximity to Southeast Asia.
On the one hand, the United States supported Qian Mu and Tang Junyi in establishing the New Asia College in Hong Kong, using the right-wing Confucian concept to enlarge overseas Chinese population and resist the communist revolutionary trend of thought; on the other hand, it supported Zhang Ailing ’ s literary writing, using her “nightlife ” of emotion and desire to counteract the revolutionary passion of communism with no night but“ day. ”
As a result, the Chinese elite cultivated under Western liberalism and neo-Confucian education became the defenders of the colonial system.
Fei Zhengqing's concept of "co-rule under treaties" is to emphasize the integration of China into the colonial imperial system established by the West with unequal treaties, and the joint governance of China by Westerners and high Chinese elites domesticated by Western civilization. The underlying theoretical logic is that since Confucian intellectuals can cooperate with the Qing rulers, they can naturally cooperate with the British and American colonizers.
It is under the guidance of this concept of “co-rule ” that Kim uses the concept of“ administrative absorption politics ” to vividly demonstrate how the high Chinese elite and the British colonists in Hong Kong form a kind of “collusion colonialism ”.
The group of Chinese elites cultivated under Western liberalism and neo-Confucian education became precisely the defenders of the colonial system … Jin Yaoji used the concept of “administrative absorption politics ” to vividly demonstrate how the higher Chinese elites and the Hong Kong British colonists formed a kind of“ collusion colonialism ”.
Against the background of the clash of civilizations, the core of British colonial rule in Hong Kong was to replace Chinese education with English education.
However, it is precisely the senior Chinese in Hong Kong who are calling on the British Hong Kong government to implement “in-depth education ” in English and oppose the implementation of Chinese education.
Ng Ting-fang, the first Chinese Member to be "absorbed" into the Legislative Council by the British Hong Kong Government and later the diplomatic elite of the Republic of China, left a classic saying in the debate of the Hong Kong and British Legislative Council: Chinese education is simply a "waste of time".
Similarly, when the British Hong Kong government tried to recruit the New Asia College through the Chinese University of Hong Kong, proposed to replace Chinese civilization education with scientific professional education, and replace Chinese education with English education, the right-wing Confucianism had no ability to criticize and resist this colonial rule, and could only compromise and finally surrender.
Overseas neo-Confucianism has gradually become a multicultural embellishment in the international English knowledge system, falling into the situation of "flowers and fruits floating."
Only in this cultural politics of colonialism and right-wing Confucianism can we understand the historical significance of the anti-colonialist democratic protest movement of the radical left in Hong Kong in 1967, that is, to challenge this “collusion colonialism ” with“ revolutionary politics. ”
Although this revolutionary movement was suppressed by the British colonial rulers in Hong Kong, it ignited the left-wing student movement in Hong Kong in the 1970s, making it an important part of the global anti-imperialist and anti-colonial “red revolution ” that China vigorously promoted in the 1970s.
On this basis, the younger generation of Hong Kong took the lead in proposing the political theme of "reunification", trying to make a new connection between "culture" and "politics", not only identifying with the "cultural China" tradition of neo-Confucianism, but also with the "political China" tradition laid down by the New China.
However, it was in the 1970s that Hong Kong ’ s industrialization took off, gradually forming a different local culture, local politics and even a local way of life from the mainland.
The identity of “Hong Kong is my home ” is beginning to emerge, and the sense of superiority of an international metropolis is also growing.
"Understanding the Motherland, Caring for the Society" has become the common political theme of a generation of Hong Kong newcomers.
It was in this left-wing revolutionary tradition of the 1970s that the Chinese people in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao, as well as overseas, became “overseas travelers ” who broke away from political China, thus ushering in the“ Hong Kong Reunification ” promoted by the central authorities in the 1980s in the legends of “Legends of the Dragon ” and“ My Heart of China ”.
Confronting “Collusive Colonialism ”: Three Paths to“ Decolonisation ”
The Hong Kong leftist movement in the 1970s extended the political critique of colonialism in the 1960s to cultural critique, which undoubtedly touched on the issue of “decolonisation ” and promoted the idea of“ democratic reunification ”.
However, the return of right-wing conservatism around the world in the 1980s, China ’ s “de-revolutionization ” process, and the“ one country, two systems ” approach largely suppressed Hong Kong ’ s “de-colonization ” theme.
The political tradition of the British Hong Kong Government as an organic part of the "one country, two systems" strategy of "remain unchanged" and "remain unchanged" has been rightly preserved.
Hong Kong ’ s English “deep education ” system continues to regenerate elite groups loyal to the colonial system, who have gone from colonial rulers to rulers of the SAR government; senior Chinese elites who colluded with the colonists have become prominent targets of the United Nations war; the leftists who were once suppressed by them are still marginalized by mainstream society; and the negation of the Cultural Revolution in the Mainland has dealt a direct blow to the“ Patriarch-recognition ” movement in Hong Kong. As a result, Hong Kong ’ s local “socialists ” have grown into the backbone of society in the process of“ democratic reunification ”.
The external symbols of the colonies such as the rice flag and the queen statue were abolished, but instead of changing the cultural and spiritual order of the colonies, their superiority was reinforced by globalization.
Hong Kong has become a “colony without colonists ”, but it has a more neutral and beautiful concept –“ cosmopolitan city ”.
More importantly, the Mainland ’ s reform and opening up and the “farewell revolution ” drive to“ connect with the world ” has led to the return of “recognition politics ”, and Hong Kong has transformed from a“ cultural desert ” to a “Pearl of the Orient ”, becoming a benchmark and model for national development.
Only by understanding the deep-seated cultural and political contradictions in Hong Kong, the spiritual origins of Hong Kong's political forces such as the SAR Government, the Civic Party, the industrial and commercial sector, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong (DAB) and the Democratic Party, and their role in the political order of Hong Kong, can we understand why the issue of political development in Hong Kong has promoted Hong Kong nativism and even triggered the trend of "Hong Kong independence". "
In such a spiritual order, the slogans of “one country, two systems ”,“ Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong ” and “a high degree of autonomy ” and the consequent continuous political movements in Hong Kong forged the cultural identity of“ Hong Kong people ” born in the 1970s into a political identity.
"Hong Kong people" thus became a corresponding concept to "Chinese people", creating "people's presence" in every political campaign for universal suffrage, and strengthening their sense of political subjectivity.
Only when we understand the deep-seated cultural and political contradictions in Hong Kong, understand the spiritual origins of Hong Kong ’ s political forces, such as the SAR government, the Civic Party, the business sector, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong (DAB) and the Democratic Party, and their role in Hong Kong ’ s political order, can we understand why Hong Kong ’ s political development issues promote Hong Kong ’ s nativism and even trigger the rise of “Hong Kong independence ”.
Resolving the deep-seated cultural and political contradictions faced by Hong Kong after the reunification will inevitably touch on the issue of "decolonisation" triggered by the reunification of the people of Hong Kong.
Literally speaking, the discussion of “decolonisation ” in Hong Kong is clearly aimed at removing the cultural and spiritual order established by the British colonial administration, so who should provide for the new spiritual order in Hong Kong?
The old left may wish to trace its roots back to the anti-British protest movement in Hong Kong in the 1960s and 1970s and thus to the May Fourth Movement, which means that a socialist spiritual order must be provided for Hong Kong, but this is clearly not in line with the “one country, two systems ” theory put forward by the central authorities after Hong Kong ’ s return to China.
However, the local forces of Hong Kong society hope to return to the rise of local society in Hong Kong in the 1970s and the combination of the neo-Confucian “cultural China ” discourse and Western liberalism to jointly resist the cultural and political discourse of socialism.
In this discussion of "decolonisation", the laissez-faire capitalism affirmed by "one country, two systems", the clean and efficient system of the British Hong Kong Civil Service, and the system of executive-led and functional elections are the objects of Hong Kong's need for "decolonisation".
It is from the cultural and political imagination of the Hong Kong nativists that they proposed to see Hong Kong's reunification as Hong Kong's "city-state autonomy" from a British colony to a "colony" of China, recognizing at most that the Central People's Government has garrison and diplomatic power, and other "residual powers" are vested in Hong Kong.
In their argument, the purpose of decolonisation is not to bring about a “return of people ’ s hearts ” to the motherland, but to give Hong Kong political and spiritual independence.
In this way, it is precisely against the background of the proliferation of Hong Kong nativism and the rise of "Hong Kong independence" that the study of "decolonisation" in Hong Kong has really come to the surface.
If we fail to understand the spiritual origins of Hong Kong ’ s homegrown “socialists ” in the 1970s and its ideal of“ democratic reunification, ” we cannot really understand the “deep-seated problems ” that beset Hong Kong.
Discussing the "decolonisation" of Hong Kong will undoubtedly solve the "return of the people", so as to lay a cultural and spiritual foundation for the "one country, two systems".
However, the institutional structure of "one country, two systems" should not only solve the contradiction between the two theories of socialism and capitalism, but also solve the contradiction between left-wing Confucianism and right-wing Confucianism, so as to integrate the Chinese civilization tradition with the capitalist tradition and the socialist tradition.
The concept of "one country, two systems" seeks to eliminate the ideological conflict in the Cold War and the clash of civilizations behind it from the perspective of the fusion of civilizations, which undoubtedly aims to open up the Chinese classical civilization tradition, the capitalist civilization tradition and the socialist civilization tradition (the so-called "three systems") on a larger scale.
This means promoting the "creative transformation" of traditional Chinese civilization on the basis of absorbing Western civilization (including capitalism and socialism), and promoting the formation of a new form of modern Chinese civilization.
This also means that we cannot discuss Hong Kong ’ s “decolonisation ” in the context of the“ clash of civilizations ”, narrowly interpreting “decolonisation ” as the removal of cultural and political traditions from the British Hong Kong era.
On the contrary, it is necessary to fully absorb the beneficial elements of Western capitalist civilization to enrich and develop Chinese civilization in the sense of mutual recognition, integration and even renewal of civilization.
Hong Kong was originally a product of the fusion of Chinese and Western civilizations, and there was nothing that really belonged to Hong Kong ’ s “homeland. ”
Hong Kong ’ s “decolonisation ” is not the removal of“ colonial heritage ” for the purpose of exploring Hong Kong ’ s true “homeland ”, nor the removal of“ colonial heritage ” for the purpose of returning to the Chinese tradition, but the removal of illusions about the Western ideology of “the end of history ”, the removal of the attachment mentality to the world imperial system established by the West, and the establishment of political subjectivity and civilized self-confidence of the Chinese people with an open and tolerance. The outstanding achievements of Western civilization and all great human civilizations have promoted the great revival of Chinese civilization and promoted the formation of a new form of human civilization.
In this sense, the “decolonisation ” of Hong Kong is more about looking to a better future and opening up this future than going back to history.
This means that we must go beyond the simple theory of sovereign states, look back at historical empires, and look forward to a future revival of civilization.
Hong Kong ’ s “decolonisation ” is not to remove“ colonial heritage ” in search of Hong Kong ’ s true “homeland ”, nor to return to Chinese tradition, but to remove the illusion of the Western ideology of“ the end of history ”, to remove the attachment mentality to the world imperial system established by the West, and to establish the political subjectivity and civilized self-confidence of the Chinese. The outstanding achievements of Western civilization and all great human civilizations have promoted the great revival of Chinese civilization and promoted the formation of a new form of human civilization.
Continue reading:
This article is based on “Trans-Civilization ” and“ New Frontier ”: From “The Hong Kong Question ” to“ Hong Kong as the Method ”. The author is Professor of Law at Peking University, Deputy Director of the Department of Social Sciences at Peking University, Director of the Center for Rule of Law at Peking University, and Executive Deputy Director of the Center for Hong Kong and Macao Studies at Peking University.
The article was originally published in the second issue of "Open Times" in 2023. Hong Kong 01 is authorized by the author to reprint the full text, and Mr. Yu Pinhai, founder of Hong Kong 01, provides guidance.

Notably, while visitation remains robust—demonstrating ongoing fascination—physical strain on the monument and divisions in visitor perception prompt ongoing debate.

Title:

Content: - A plus A.
Abdullah bin Ali Al Khatib
If the fifteenth century, as Todorov says in the context of the invasion of America, is not the century of discovering the other, but the century of eliminating the other, it can be said that the nineteenth century - (from the east side), and what we have read through (Orientalism Said) and what Vernel and others wrote - is, often, the century of value judgments on the other, the fiercest attempt to alienate the other He wanted, and it is also (on the material level), as is known, the century of plundering the treasures of the other (the Near East) under the pretext (it alone expresses the gloom of the moral scene), which is, as is known, the completion of the collection of artefacts of the royal palaces in Europe!
At the very moment that I present Fernell ’ s exclusionary discursive behavior in terms of his relationship with the beliefs of the other, we wake up (at the end of 2020) to a debate raging around the world about the speech of (EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Policy) Josep Borrell, who said from the podium of the European Union and on the occasion of the opening of the European Diplomatic Academy: “Europe is a garden. ” Political freedom, economic prosperity and social cohesion have been built by humanity, but...
Most of the rest of the world is jungle. ”
I really don ’ t know, with the spacing of the two characters: Is Borrell so different from Vernell in terms of cultural centeredness and value judgments?
Borrell ’ s speech can be seen as “Borrell ’ s call to tame the world, ” taming the world according to his own vision of the world.
The speech that the world has received is a speech that refers to a complete European society capable of moving everywhere to tame the world culturally and civilizationally.
The use of the term "most of the rest of the world" is one of the harshest and most dangerous terms of cultural centering.
The duality of the rich garden and the jungle refers to the duality of beauty and savagery.
Borrell is not an ordinary person, and the platform from which he spoke is not marginal, so the reception was neither ordinary nor marginal.
There are deep questions about the magnitude of the moral dilemma expressed in Borrell ’ s speech.
Borrell ’ s speech is certainly an extension of the speeches of some Orientalists who have taken it upon themselves to pave the way for the economic, cultural and political expropriation of the other.
The call to go to the jungle is an extension of his speech by Borrell, when he was foreign minister of Spain, when he stated that only four indigenous people were killed by Columbus and Cortes during the invasion of America.
The violence of the discourse here may be an attempt to cover up historical (savage) evils preserved in archives and transmitted in manuscripts, which the West has been unable, in general, to dare to call them by their names.
The problem of the biased Western man (we are talking here about the biased) that he raised himself, following a real rise at the scientific and technical level, over a cloud that made him feel superior, which led to heavy losses on understanding (the other) and dealing with him according to the concept of (common universal destiny).
He who looks from above is at risk of transcendence and detachment from his own reality and that of others.
As long as this is, in general, the intellectual structure of the West, present and vigorously promoted in Western society, it may be impossible to construct a flexible confrontational dialogue capable of striking the delicate chord with regard to human, political, cultural and economic stakes.
But what about the Cognitive Vernel (which, as we have already pointed out, is the collection of the object and its opposite)?
Vernell is very rich and rich.
Vernel is, of course, also part of Orientalism that has given the Arab reader what we will continue to owe him as long as humanity remains.
Cognitive Orientalism, which has left us with scientific studies, approaches, dialogues and debates in most, if not all, fields of science.
Orientalism, which presented us with texts and intellectual approaches founded in language, literature and philosophy.
The Orientalist who said what we wanted to say and couldn ’ t, we could, say.
We couldn ’ t say it, or rather we didn ’ t have the courage to say it, even if it came within the context of “what needs to be said. ”
Cognitive Orientalism spoke of us by proxy simply because, often, we were not — in terms of methodological and epistemological tools, nor in terms of minimal freedom of expression — able to ascend to their high-value theses and questions, open to deliberation and digging for those who wish to explore, probe, or object to them.
In some of his theses of those who said what we wanted and could not say, Farnell is an amazing person at the level of generating deep ideas and asking major questions about cognitive, moral and human issues, has a style of his own, he continues to narrate and think about his approach to any subject, and suddenly he releases a deep (spoken) sentence that makes you unable to overcome without provoking you a huge number of questions and questions.
Vernel is, without hesitation, one of those who has the ability to transform specific short statements focused on specific issues into masterpieces that elicit complex and highly enriching epistemological accounts.
Time-resistant statements, strongly provoking the cognitive debate up to this point.
He has an opinion that has been taught, as far as I know, by generations of theorists about the translation process and its complexities.
He talks about the distance that requires the translator to commit to the text, and the relationship of this commitment to the nature of the text itself, and how he sees that the nature of the text dictates the choice of translation, provided that the translator announces and defends his choices, as he did here (Lamia Al-Arab), the text he loved and suffered for so much, and he did not find embarrassed to describe what he accomplished as a rough work.
He tells us about the context of his translation of Arab illiteracy: “I cannot end this letter without expressing a complaint and a wish.
I seem to understand and identify with Shunfari for a moment, and feel the need to instill every thought into the spirit of the children of my day.
This need stems from the nature of inspiration: but consider this paradox a little: the Sanfari is a predatory man, a man of blood, a man who has never been able to read or write.
Shanfari pours his gallbladder and pride into 28 syllables that are subject to a rich and unique rhyme, and to very complex grammatical rules.
The expression in Shanfari does not suffer, but has a power similar to the power of his thought.
As for me: Am I a predator?
I am a man of reading and thought, a translator into French, a sworn translator who used to write on all the tones and tracks that many people can hardly imagine, from chemistry to romantic texts, and I pour blood and sweat to produce a pale prose in French that reflects this huge flow.
After suffering from the process of translating Lamia, some Arab Days, and other (heritage) texts, he made this remarkable statement: “Every translation of a (ancient) heritage text is a desecration of this text. ”
Fernille said it after imagining that, in his presence, unlike his great teacher Sylvester de Sasse, an orientalist with a prolific and influential production who never set foot in the land of the Orient, he would overcome the difficulties his teacher faced by immersing himself in the cognitive environment, especially Al-Azhar.
Vernell was very precise when he described the act of translating traditional texts as an imperative, although at the same time it was an act of desecration.
We translate knowing that we desecrate these texts, because we are doomed that we cannot ascend to the top in their mother tongue.
Fernell tried to interrogate all Al-Azhar scholars of literature around him, yet he did not object to declaring to the Western reader that he was translating and profane, that his product was inherently deficient because it was a complex (heritage) text and at the same time because it was subjected to the act of translation, because, in my opinion, every translation was inherently deficient.
We can also speak, without hesitation, of Fernell ’ s turn with regard to the study of language, considering that what Fernell has given us in this text is a serious work that satisfies the basic conditions of knowledge: the conditions of valid hypotheses and epistemological verification.
We are talking about the valid hypotheses that Fernille was haunted by Semitic philology and a serious student of his predecessors at the École des Etudes Oriental in Paris.
We talk about cognitive verification in relation to the direct language surveys he carried out, such as his lieutenant to the people of the language (Hassan et al.) and the famous meeting with Antoine Dabadi in Jeddah.
Vernell ’ s unique addition to this topic, I imagine, lies in the (important) article he published on the Hemerite / Shihri language.
Vernell has worked remarkably well in studying the three systems of this language: phonetic, morphological, and semantic.
It is believed that it was Vernel, in his article, who drew attention to the importance of studying this language, paving the way for those after him to cultivate it and reveal its secrets and treasures.
How I wished to get something or look for something (if it existed) that would guide me to what the dialogue and discussion that took place in Jeddah between Fernille and the famous linguist Antoine Dabadi!
Narratives of the Greeks, Romans and the World
Superstition.
This is the word of Vernon: “The unbeliever is the unbeliever. ”
This cry was made by Farnell after a flexible cognitive clash between what he had read in history books since the Greek accounts and his own observations.
He argues that most of the Greek and Roman narratives about ancient objects often enter the realm of superstition, and are full of exaggeration.
The only thing that matters to us is that it is a lie, a lie, a lie, a lie, a lie, a lie, a lie.
Vernell's statement applies to manipulative behavior through the use of exoticism in speech.
Only God knows how much we have suffered in the Arab and Muslim world due to the (unverifiable) use of exoticism in the speeches of some preachers to guide them in the direction that many of the recipients who have given them their trust because of their religious position (ideologue) wish to go.
In a very striking snapshot, Vernell touches on the question of language ’ s relationship to identity.
Considering that the strongest form of resistance (invasion) of any kind lies in the non-slip of peoples by adopting the language of (invader).
Vernel gives an example of this by the fact that the Ottoman presence in the Arab region, and in the Hijaz region in particular, faced a refusal to learn and adopt the Turkish language, and by confining this presence in a certain corner that made it unable to convince the population of the validity and legitimacy of its presence.
Resist by refusing to give up language, because, often, those who give up their language will have the ability to give up everything.
The paradox is that, at the same time that Fernille revives Arab behavior in resisting the Ottoman presence by not adopting the Turkish language, France (his country) practiced the destruction of the Arabic language in Algeria and practiced its (miserable) policies and attempts to empty the Algerian culture and fill it with French culture.
When it comes to the interest of the West and its culture, there is no room, especially in the nineteenth century and earlier, for the neutrality of Fernell and many Orientalists.
Thus was the journey with Farnell, up and down, between a self-proclaimed, often self-centered, possessor of truth who finds no shame in practising the evils of exclusion, isolation, and assimilation through ready-made value judgments, and an epistemological self that has produced deep, controversial, time-resistant ideas that can be deliberated, used, and debated until this moment about our current moral predicaments.

What was the significance of Hagia Sophia's conversion into a museum in 1934?

made Hagia Sophia a major tourist attraction.

A diplomatic response for guides should reflect historical context, regulatory developments, continued efforts at inclusion, and a respect for the diversity of visitors’ emotions and expectations concerning this unique site.