 Σηλα day, are the different values of archaeological sites for different groups, different interest groups, so let's begin. So archaeology can play a powerful role in defining identities in the present. Because it is able to account for histories of spatiality and temporality. Προσπαθείς για την στιγμή του αρχαιολογικούς κομμάτου είναι πιο σημαντικά πρόσφυγη για την στιγμή και την ιστορία της πλήκας. Στον αυτό το παιδί θα χρησιμοποιήσω εξαμπορία από Ελλάδα και Τερκία, γιατί είναι η στιγμή της κομμάτου, όχι όλη την αρχή της αρχαιολογικούς κομμάτου, για να αγωθείς ότι οι στιγμές του αρχαιολογικούς κομμάτου δεν είναι ομιγινές, είναι διαφορετικοί, και όλοι οι στιγμές του αρχαιολογικούς, ιστορικούς και πολιτικούς κομμάτου. Στον αρχαολογικό κομμάτου, η αρχαολογία έχει been strongly coloured by several major biases, including classicism, nationalism and the rest you can see, or you already know, which continue this biases to influence research, social imaginaries and public conversation today. In Greece, the symbolic and ideological value of the glorious classical past has always been favoured at the cost of prehistory. And when prehistory was investigated, when prehistory is still investigated, it is mainly the Bronze Age Minoan and Mycenaean cultures which attracted and still attract attention. Not least because they can be taken to extend the wider belief in Greece as the cradle of European civilization back to later prehistory. In Turkey, prehistoric archeology in particular has been used to promote modern Turkish identity as an amalgamation of thousands of years of Anatolian cultural history. The image of Anatolia as the cradle of civilizations have been among the most powerful metaphors for collective identification in Turkey. Let's see some examples. The mini is among the most famous Neolithic settlements of Greece and one that has prompted various models and interpretations. Some of these models claim, typically, that the origins of the Cretomycinian Pala societies are to be found in the Neolithic and in sites like this. However, such views are top-down and ahistorical. The quest for centralized hierarchy in non-state societies presumed to be the ancestors of future states only serves to highlight the continuing bias of the perceived value of later prehistory. What's more, it's not substantiated by the data. This quest, this assumed hierarchy because analysis of the data indicated instead a remarkable social cohesion and egalitarianism for the Neolithic community. This was the result of complex social integrative mechanisms in the Neolithic favoring collective rather than elite identity. Now, in the late Bronze Age, in the Mycenaean period and after a considerable span of time, of course, after the Neolithic we are talking about 2,000 or 3,000 years later, 2 Mycenaean tholus tomes were found. Ah, sorry, this is the Neolithic site. You can see it's a mound. So what happened in the Mycenaean area in the era in the late Bronze Age? 2 Mycenaean tholus tomes were found in here to the north of the mound and the Mycenaean city to its east. This is the Mycenaean city. What is significant is to observe that unlike other Mycenaean cities in Greece, this one was not fortified and also was not established on the Neolithic mound but at the foot. In other words, it left the old Neolithic settlement intact and visible. In my view, this whole arrangement indicates a Mycenaean claim to cultural origins and identity and assumed continuity of the remote past which in reality had nothing to do with Mycenaeans. Thus, this is an example of the construction of heritage and the past within the past in my view. Now despite its fame and importance, this site or any other Greek Neolithic site has not been nominated for the World Heritage List nor has it generated an excitement in the public and in the media. Apparently, earlier prehistory in Greece has not yet become validated as important to the national agenda. Now in Turkey, Gebekli Tepe recently inscribed in the World Heritage List has fueled public imagination and has given rise to very diverse lines of speculation. This is just a new shelter for the inscription. The late excavator saw the Klaus Schmidt, saw the buildings as temples and has called the site Stone Age Mountain Sanctuary, Cathedral on a Hill, Amphictioni and Pilgrimands Center. Other archaeologists have criticized this interpretation for using terms and analogies from much later context. Now for the world media and for pseudoarchaeology, Gebekli's value is associated with the Garden of Eden narrative and generally with the Bible. In 2006, when the Spiegel, these are just examples of the media. In 2006, the Spiegel made such a link with the Eden, the Garden of Eden and Turkish newspapers picked up the story given that Adam is also considered a weird figure in Islamic faith and the ensuing debate briefly threatened to disrupt further excavation on religious grounds. For the Turkish Muslims, the nearby city of Urfa, or Sanliurfa, also known with its Greek name Edessa, is the birthplace of the prophet Abraham. Thousands of people, that's the Hellenistic Acropolis and Roman, thousands of people visit the cave where Abraham may have been born and the fish pond, that's the cave, the fish pond marking the site of the fire where he was almost burned by the pagan king, etc. For the Eastern Orthodox Church, Edessa, is the origin of the world's first icon. For the Armenians, the city of Urfa is the revered place where the Armenian alphabet was invented. Gebekli, as well as Çatalhöyük, were used in the discussions of the constitutional renewal in Turkey starting in 2011 with particular reference to the definition of turkishness and as evidence of the history and the ancientity of the Turks in Anatolia. Local and global politics and agencies have made major efforts to promote the site, including the construction of Turkey's largest, a larger archaeological museum in Urfa and a huge sponsorship of the Dawous Group, a Turkish conglomerate that includes tourism and media companies. This sponsorship was announced at no less a forum than Dawous, the global economic forum in 2016. Now, according to the Dawous Group, Gebekli Tepe is the progenitor of the development of civilization in the world and the proof for Anatolia's central place in it. The city of Urfa is promoted as a meeting point of cultural and religious tolerance throughout history and by extension Gebekli Tepe as a place of unity. However, this assumed all-acceptive and all-inclusive narrative is a selective historiography that does not reflect reality. It chooses to ignore that Urfa, the city, was also a major site of the Armenian and Assyrian genocides beginning in 1915. Urfa's complex multiculturalism, unity and religious tolerance in reality came to an end more than a century ago. Last example, yes, it also, this selective historiography about the archaeological site and the nearby city as a place of unity and religious tolerance and all that, also chooses to ignore the very strong Kurdish presence and legacy in the region. Now the famous site, just a last example from the famous site of Chatalkuyuk, the Neolithic Chatalkuyuk, you are all made familiar, is a very good example of the different views of different communities from politicians to mother goddess groups who visit the site and perform rituals. But I would like to focus here on the less known local understandings. Ethnographic research indicated that for the inhabitants of the local village near Chatalkuyuk, past monuments and particularly mounds had a special spiritual significance as potential repositories of human souls given the human bones that are often found within those mounds. Neolithic burials, later burials in Chatalkuyuk. These beliefs of the local people spread to the Hellenistic and Byzantine remains found all over the area and also include the mausoleum of the Mevlana, a 13th century Persian Sufi mystic in the nearby city of Konya, which is by the way the largest pilgrimage site and most visited museum in Turkey. Thus, the locals conveniently assigned a site with non-Islamic anthropomorphic art to another religious group, the Greeks who were supposed to live there. In contrast, they believed that their own village had descended from the Byzantine remains immediately next to Chatalkuyuk. Thus, the interaction between local people and past spaces was subtle and tolerant. They were, I'm sorry, I forgot to mention that many villagers indicated that the Greeks who lived in the area until the population exchange in 1923 were the two descendants of the Chatalkuyuk inhabitants, the Neolithic inhabitants, which is why I said that the locals conveniently assigned a site with non-Islamic anthropomorphic art to another religious group, the Christians. Thus, the interaction between local people and past spaces was subtle and tolerant. They were aware of the multiplicity of past cultures in their land and had linked these already in a coherent way with their sense of being Islamic. Their complex collective narrative had little overlap either with the archaeological interpretation or with the nationalist politics in the region. In conclusion, hated sites are neither neutral nor static. Their national and ideational constructs and indices of cultural values, identities, meanings, and histories are different times. As such, they are themselves subject to change. Multiplicity of views is not necessarily bad. It is when one group insists that their memories, their identities, and their desired view of the particular past are the right ones and that all others must be suppressed that problems arise. In the current atmosphere of political crisis, the rise of nationalism and cultural intolerance worldwide it is significant for archaeology to consider constructions of identity and self-image. Archaeology cannot be and should not be the subject matter of a single nation or ethnic or religious group. Archaeology must encourage us to contemplate more effectively the refashioning of place and history combined with the reordering of reality as well as our participation in it. Thank you.