Shorenstein Journalism Award panel explores China’s religious landscape
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs
China is encountering a religious resurgence. Its revival symbolizes tension between the past and the present, as people search for purpose in a country that’s been shaken by expansive reforms and modernization efforts over the past four decades.
That was the message shared by veteran journalist Ian Johnson, the 2016 winner of the Shorenstein Journalism Award, who gave a keynote speech followed by panel discussion titled “Religion after Mao,” part of the Award’s 15th anniversary ceremony at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center on Monday.
Johnson, who has spent 30 years as a journalist, has written extensively about Chinese history, religion and culture, and is also a teacher and published author, most recently releasing the book The Souls of China: The Return of Religion after Mao.
“Ian is maybe one of the most remarkable awardees we’ve had in recent years,” said Daniel Sneider, Shorenstein APARC associate director for research, who introduced the event by talking about Johnson’s distinguished career, which has included writing for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and New York Review of Books and led to a Pulitzer Prize win in 2001.
Xueguang Zhou, a Stanford professor of sociology and senior fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute, and Orville Schell, the director of the Asia Society’s Center on U.S.-China Relations and former dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at U.C. Berkeley, joined Johnson on the panel, while Sneider moderated the discussion.
In a wide-ranging conversation, the panelists discussed the varied history of religion in Chinese society during the 20th and 21st centuries, offering stories of their experiences living and working in China.
According to Johnson, religious persecution in China is often thought to be associated with the anti-religious campaigns of Mao Zedong following the Chinese Communist Party’s assumption of power in 1949, but in reality, it existed decades before and has lingered in national memory.
Into the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Chinese government remained superstitious of religion, trying to redefine religious groups as “culture” alone, under the assumption that religion could be desensitized enough to eventually disappear, Johnson said.
But that did not happen, he said, and instead an opposite trend did. Reaching a high point in the 2000s, China’s economic reforms – both sweeping and fast-paced – brought growing angst and anxiety and prompted people across every socioeconomic background to turn to religion as an outlet.
Johnson, who has spent weeks at a time living among religious groups, noted a shift from the time he was in China in the mid-1980s to the past decade, where now “the government sees that religious groups can provide some sort of moral framework for some people.”
Image
Chinese people today are searching for meaning, the panelists said, and are driven to join religious groups amid resource competition and mass migration that has usurped traditional family structures and disquieted many people who have moved from close-knit rural towns to alienating urban centers.
“Everybody is out there…trying to reify that part of life which isn’t filled by bread alone, by commerce alone,” said Schell, who has written about China since the 1970s as an author and journalist. “It’s a pretty chaotic quest and it’s very hard to know where it will all end.”
At the moment, religious groups in China remain heterogeneous and fragmented, Zhou said, but cohesion is growing in some regions and participation of local government leaders has drawn greater attention to the practice of faith.
“In grassroots China, religion, spiritual life and the Party, really go hand-in-hand – they’re intertwined,” said Zhou, whose research focuses on Chinese bureaucracy and economic development. “Local elites are involved both in the spiritual world and the Party world, and they shift back and forth simultaneously.”
However, the future of the relationship between religion and the government remains to be seen, according to the panelists.
Religious groups could fracture, or the government could continue to favor “native” religious groups, which if exacerbated over time, could lead to quasi-state religions, Johnson said. (Today, China recognizes five religions: Buddhism, Catholicism, Daoism, Islam and Protestantism).
While religious groups increasingly provide a service to some people, the Chinese government continues to be wary of them as an alternative source of knowledge and values, Johnson said, which hold the potential to coalesce into a nascent civil society.
“Every dynasty in China knows that one way dynasties usually ended was with some millenarian movement,” Schell added of the government’s apprehension. “They are afraid of religious movements because they do bespeak of higher values, higher loyalties and different organizational structures that don’t owe fealty to the Party.”
A video of the keynote speech is posted at this link.
Hero Image
All News button
1
From Emigration to Post-Migration and the “Refugee Crisis”: Historical Perspectives on Migration in Austria and Germany
-
Please note that this workshop is open to Stanford faculty, students, visiting scholars, and staff only.
Migration is obviously the single biggest challenge for European countries and the European Union today. It is closely linked to questions of (national) identity, social pluralism, and diversity. However, it is mostly understood as a purely contemporary phenomenon, something ahistorical, as though migration had no history in Europe and as though migration has not been altering societies and cultures since ever before. With a special focus on Austria and Germany and with different case studies, the workshop puts the current so-called “refugee crisis” in the context of the broader history of the 19th and 20th century. It also discusses general questions like the status of migration in the hegemonic collective memory and the challenges it poses for historiography.
SCHEDULE:
9:30am: Welcome and Introductions
Dirk Rupnow, Visiting Austrian Chair Professor, The Europe Center, Stanford University, and Professor of Modern History, University of Innsbruck
9:35am: Austria, Germany, and Migration: Putting the Current European “Refugee Crisis” in Historical Perspective
Dirk Rupnow, Visiting Austrian Chair Professor, The Europe Center, Stanford University, and Professor of Modern History, University of Innsbruck
Austria and Germany were crucial actors in the so-called “refugee crisis” during the summer of 2015. Both countries have a distinct, but in part also a shared, history of migration. The talk focuses on Austria as an example and puts the current so-called “refugee crisis” in the context of the broader history of the postwar Austrian Republic. It discusses the status of migration in the hegemonic collective memory and the challenges it poses for historiography.
10:15am: Migration Backed Securities: European Migrants and the Transatlantic Bond Market
Benjamin Hein, PhD candidate in Modern European History, Stanford University
Historians often think about migration as a story that unfolds between two key actors: the sovereign state and the (im)migrant. But what if the state was only an intermediary channeling another party’s interests? In the 19th century German Empire, progressive legislation aimed at improving the lives of emigrants to the Americas has been interpreted as part and parcel of the Bismarckian welfare state. There is evidence to suggest, however, that such legislation emerged not as a matter of German government policy but instead as a result of enterprising bankers who sought to prop up nascent transatlantic securities markets. In this paper, I will consider the case of Kaiserreich Germany to complicate narratives about migration that have followed a more traditional sovereign state versus (im)migrant binary.
11:05am: In Transit or Asylum Seekers? Austria and the Cold War Refugees from the Communist Bloc
Maximilian Graf, Visiting Scholar, The Europe Center, Stanford, and Project Leader, Austrian Academy of Sciences
The presumption of an extraordinary humanitarian engagement is an integral part of Austria’s popular postwar history and memory. The country’s aid for refugees from the communist bloc continues to shape this image until today. In each case – the “Hungarian Revolution” in 1956, the “Prague Spring” in 1968, the crisis in Poland 1980/81, and the revolutions of 1989 in East Germany and Romania – within a short period of time, tens of thousands fled to Austria, although constellations differed significantly. Even though Austria earned considerable merits in handling the early stages of the Cold War “refugee crises”, the resulting picture requires a demythologization: Austria never aimed at serving as a refugee’s haven, but as a transit country only. By critically reassessing the existing master narrative, a first comparative analysis of the major “waves“ of Cold War refugees reaching Austria will be provided.
11:45am: Sending Foreigners Home: Historical Origins of EU Voluntary Repatriation Programs
Michelle Kahn, PhD Candidate in Modern European History, Stanford University
A central question amid today’s refugee crisis is if, when, and how the refugees will ever return to their home countries. Yet this question has deeper historical origins. As early as the 1970s, European nation-states began devising programs aimed at the voluntary repatriation of refugees, labor migrants, and other foreign nationals. This talk examines the case of West Germany, focusing on the controversial 1983 “Law for the Promotion of Voluntary Return” (Rückkehrförderungsgesetz). Aimed at reducing the Turkish population at a time of rising anti-foreigner sentiment, the law offered unemployed former guest workers a “return premium” of 10,500 Deutschmarks to return to their home countries. The talk explores contemporary debates surrounding the law, as well as parallels to the development of German and EU-wide voluntary repatriation programs still in use today.
12:25pm: Wrap Up
Dirk Rupnow, Visiting Austrian Chair Professor, The Europe Center, Stanford University, and Professor of Modern History, University of Innsbruck
Speakers:
Maximilian Graf is a Visiting Scholar at The Europe Center. He studied history in Vienna and worked as a Junior Scholar and Postdoc at the Austrian Academy of Sciences and the University of Vienna. He is currently project leader at the Institute for Modern and Contemporary Historical Research of the Austrian Academy of Sciences. His main areas of research are Cold War history and the history of Communism. He was Chercheur Associée at the Centre Marc Bloch in Berlin and was awarded the Karl von Vogelsang Prize for the History of Social Sciences in 2014 and the Dr. Alois Mock Prize in 2015. Selected publications: Österreich und die DDR 1949–1990. Politik und Wirtschaft im Schatten der deutschen Teilung (2016); (co-ed.) Österreich im Kalten Krieg. Neue Forschungen im internationalen Kontext (2016); (co-ed.) Orient und Okzident. Begegnungen und Wahrnehmungen aus fünf Jahrhunderten (2016).
Benjamin Hein is a PhD candidate in modern European history at Stanford University. He received his B.A. in history and economic (summa cum laude) from Emory University. Currently, Benjamin is completing his dissertation entitled "Emigration and the Industrial Revolution in German Europe, 1820-1900," in which he explores the impact of sustained emigration to North America on the evolution of key economic institutions and commercial law in German-speaking Europe. Benjamin teaches and is interested in topics in the history of capitalism; the history of migration; Atlantic World and Global History; and political economy.
Michelle Kahn is a PhD Candidate in Modern European History at Stanford University. Her dissertation, “Becoming Almancı: The Transnational History of Turkish-German Migrants, 1961–2011” explores the political, social, and economic history of Turkish immigrants’ transnational connections to their home country. Her research and teaching interests include German and Turkish history, transnational history, migration history, and the histories of race, gender, and sexuality. After serving as a 2015–2016 German Chancellor Fellow of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Michelle is currently completing her dissertation in Cologne. She has an office at her primary archive, the Documentation Centre and Museum for Migration in Germany (DOMiD), where she contributes voluntarily as a Research Associate. She is also a Guest Scholar at the University of Cologne’s Historical Institute.
Dirk Rupnow is Stanford University's 2016-2017 Visiting Austrian Chair Professor and is in residence at The Europe Center. He is Professor of Contemporary History and head of the Institute for Contemporary History at the University of Innsbruck where he is also the founding coordinator of the Research Center Migration & Globalization. He earned his M.A. in 1999 (Vienna), PhD in 2002 (Klagenfurt) and Habilitation in 2009 (Vienna). Rupnow was project researcher with the Historian’s Commission of the Republic of Austria in 1999/2000. He has been awarded numerous research stays and fellowships in Austria, Germany, France, Israel, and the US, as well as the 2009 Fraenkel Prize in Contemporary History of the Wiener Library, London. His main research interests are 20th Century European History, Holocaust and Jewish Studies, Cultures and Politics of Memory, Intellectual and Migration History. Selected publications: (co-ed.), “Holocaust”-Fiktion. Kunst jenseits der Authentizität (2015); Judenforschung im Dritten Reich. Wissenschaft zwischen Politik, Propaganda und Ideologie (2011); (co-ed.), Zeitgeschichte ausstellen in Österreich. Museen – Gedenkstätten – Ausstellungen (2011); (co-ed.), Pseudowissenschaft. Konzeptionen von Nichtwissenschaftlichkeit in der Wissenschaftsgeschichte (2008); Vernichten und Erinnern. Spuren nationalsozialistischer Gedächtnispolitik (2005).
Dirk Rupnow
Encina Hall
616 Serra Street
Stanford, CA 94305-6165
0
drupnow@stanford.edu
Distinguished Visiting Austrian Chair Professor (2016-2017)
Professor of Contemporary History, University of Innsbruck
Prof. Dr. Dirk Rupnow studied history, German literature, art history and philosophy in Berlin and Vienna, earning his M.A. in 1999 (Vienna), Ph.D. in 2002 (Klagenfurt) and Habilitation in 2009 (Vienna). Prof. Rupnow was Project Researcher with the Historian’s Commission of the Republic of Austria in 1999/2000. He has been awarded numerous research stays and fellowships in Austria, Germany, France, Israel, and the USA and the 2009 Fraenkel Prize in Contemporary History of the Wiener Library, London. Prof. Rupnow has been on faculty at the University of Innsbruck since 2009 and the Head of the Institute for Contemporary History since 2010. His main research interests are 20th Century European History, Holocaust and Jewish Studies, Cultures and Politics of Memory, Intellectual and Migration History.
Prof. Rupnow will be teaching the course "The Holocaust and its Aftermath" for the Department of History in the Spring Quarter.
Head, Institute for Contemporary History, University of Innsbruck
Founding Coordinator, Center for Migration & Globalization, University of Innsbruck
Maximilian Graf
Encina Hall
616 Serra Street
Stanford, CA 94305-6165
0
maximilian.graf@oeaw.ac.at
Visiting Scholar at The Europe Center, 2016-2017
Maximilian Graf is a Visiting Scholar from the Institute for Modern and Contemporary Historical Research of the Austrian Academy of Sciences. He specializes in Cold War Studies and the History of Communism. In November/December 2013, he was chercheur associée at the Centre Marc Bloch in Berlin. In 2014, he received the Karl von Vogelsang Prize – Austrian State Prize for the History of Social Sciences, and in 2015 the Dr.-Alois-Mock-Wissenschaftspreis. In September 2017, he will start a new position at the European University Institute in Florence. At the moment, he is working on a book with the working title Overcoming the Iron Curtain. A New History of Détente in Cold War Central Europe.
Graf's most recent publications include his first book on Austrian–East German relations during the Cold War Österreich und die DDR 1949–1990. Politik und Wirtschaft im Schatten der deutschen Teilung (Vienna: ÖAW, 2016); the edited volumes Franz Marek. Beruf und Berufung Kommunist. Lebenserinnerungen und Schlüsseltexte (Vienna: Mandelbaum, 2017); Österreich im Kalten Krieg. Neue Forschungen im internationalen Kontext (Göttingen: V&R unipress, 2016); Orient & Okzident. Begegnungen und Wahrnehmungen aus fünf Jahrhunderten (Vienna: Neue Welt Verlag 2016, ²2017); and numerous articles and book chapters, including: together with Wolfgang Mueller, "An Austrian mediation in Vietnam? The superpowers, neutrality, and Kurt Waldheim’s good offices," in the Sandra Bott/Jussi Hanhimaki/Janick Schaufelbuehl/Marco Wyss (eds.) book Neutrality and Neutralism in the Global Cold War. Between or within the blocs?, (London: Routledge, 2016), 127–143; "(Kalter) Krieg am Bergisel. Skispringen im Spannungsfeld von Politik, Sport und Nation: Österreich und die DDR als Fallbeispiele," in Zeitgeschichte 42 (2015) 4, 215–232; "The Rise and Fall of 'Austro-Eurocommunism'. On the 'Crisis' within the KPÖ and the Significance of East German Influence in the 1960s," in the Journal of European Integration History 20 (2014) 2, 203–218.
Benjamin Hein
PhD candidate in modern European History
Stanford
Michelle Kahn
PhD candidate in modern European History
Stanford
Workshops
Historical Research in a Digital Age: Reflections from the Mapping the Republic of Letters Project
Paragraphs
What can a big data approach bring to the study of the early modern Republic of Letters? This is the question we asked ourselves in our collaborative project Mapping the Republic of Letters. For the past nine years, we have been exploring the limits and possibilities of computation and visualization for studying early modern correspondences, whose massive and dispersed character have long challenged their students. Beyond cliometrics, what new ways of discovery and analysis do today’s big data offer? What can we learn by visualizing the archives and databases that are increasingly accessible and viewable online? In a variety of case studies focusing on metadata (in the letters of John Locke, Athanasius Kircher, Benjamin Franklin, and Voltaire, and in the travels of those engaging in the Grand Tour), we experimented with visualizations to produce maps of the known and unknown quantities in our datasets, and to represent intellectual, cultural, and geographical boundaries. In the process, we experienced collaborative authorship, and worked with designers and programmers to create an open access suite of visualization tools specifically for humanities scholars, Palladio. What might the next research steps be, as linked data rapidly develops further possibilities?
All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
The American Historical Review
Number
2
Democracy: Stories from the Long Road to Freedom
Paragraphs
From the former secretary of state and bestselling author -- a sweeping look at the global struggle for democracy and why America must continue to support the cause of human freedom.
From the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union to the ongoing struggle for human rights in the Middle East, Condoleezza Rice has served on the front lines of history. As a child, she was an eyewitness to a third awakening of freedom, when her hometown of Birmingham, Alabama, became the epicenter of the civil rights movement for black Americans.
In this book, Rice explains what these epochal events teach us about democracy. At a time when people around the world are wondering whether democracy is in decline, Rice shares insights from her experiences as a policymaker, scholar, and citizen, in order to put democracy's challenges into perspective.
When the United States was founded, it was the only attempt at self-government in the world. Today more than half of all countries qualify as democracies, and in the long run that number will continue to grow. Yet nothing worthwhile ever comes easily. Using America's long struggle as a template, Rice draws lessons for democracy around the world -- from Russia, Poland, and Ukraine, to Kenya, Colombia, and the Middle East. She finds that no transitions to democracy are the same because every country starts in a different place. Pathways diverge and sometimes circle backward. Time frames for success vary dramatically, and countries often suffer false starts before getting it right. But, Rice argues, that does not mean they should not try. While the ideal conditions for democracy are well known in academia, they never exist in the real world. The question is not how to create perfect circumstances but how to move forward under difficult ones.
These same insights apply in overcoming the challenges faced by governments today. The pursuit of democracy is a continuing struggle shared by people around the world, whether they are opposing authoritarian regimes, establishing new democratic institutions, or reforming mature democracies to better live up to their ideals. The work of securing it is never finished.
All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Twelve
External URL
The Cold War: A World History
-
Abstract: The Cold War was about the rise and the solidification of US power. But it was also about more than that. It was about the defeat of Soviet-style Communism and the victory, in Europe, of a form of democratic consensus that had become institutionalized through the European Union. In China it meant a political and social revolution carried out by the Chinese Communist Party. In Latin America it meant the increasing polarization of societies along Cold War ideological lines of division. This book attempts to show the significance of the Cold War between capitalism and socialism on a world scale, in all its varieties and its sometimes confusing inconsistencies. As a one-volume history it can do little but scratch the surface of complicated developments. But it will have served its purpose if it invites the reader to explore further the ways in which the Cold War made the world what it is today.
About the Speaker: Odd Arne Westad is the S.T. Lee Professor of U.S.-Asia Relations at Harvard University, where he teaches at the Kennedy School of Government. He is an expert on contemporary international history and on the eastern Asian region.
Before coming to Harvard in 2015, Westad was School Professor of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). While at LSE, he directed LSE IDEAS, a leading centre for international affairs, diplomacy and strategy.
Professor Westad won the Bancroft Prize for The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of Our Times. The book, which has been translated into fifteen languages, also won a number of other awards. Westad served as general editor for the three-volume Cambridge History of the Cold War, and is the author of the Penguin History of the World (now in its 6th edition). His most recent book, Restless Empire: China and the World since 1750, won the Asia Society’s book award for 2013.
Arne Westad
Harvard University
Seminars
Changing attitudes toward diversity in South Korea
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
South Korean culture has long held ethnic homogeneity as an integral part of national identity, but attitudes toward multiculturalism are slowly beginning to change amid the country’s shifting demographics, Gi-Wook Shin, professor of sociology and director of the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, said in an interview with Al Jazeera English. Read the article.
Hero Image
People walking on the streets in Myeongdong, Seoul, South Korea.
iStock Editorial/Getty Images Plus
All News button
1
Indian historian: Freedom of expression key to vibrant democracy
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs
Protecting freedom of expression is essential to vibrant democracies and to meet the needs of people now and into the future, Indian historian Ramachandra Guha said at a Stanford event seeking to draw people together for policy-relevant discussions about India’s growth following 25 years of reforms.
Guha’s remarks were part of a colloquium titled “Eight Threats to Freedom of Expression in India,” and one in a series, co-hosted by the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC) and Center for South Asia.
The colloquia, which continue this spring, are motivated by an opportunity to garner reflections and expertise from Kathleen Stephens, the William J. Perry Fellow in the Freeman Spogli Institute, who served as chargé d'affaires at the U.S. Embassy New Delhi in 2014.
“As I was preparing to go to India, I read Ram’s extraordinary book India after Gandhi, which provided much-needed historical, cultural and political context,” Stephens said. “When I visited Bangalore, we met and instantly clicked as we talked about U.S.-India relations. It’s a pleasure to welcome him back to Stanford.”
Guha, a renowned author and scholar, has written numerous critically acclaimed books about India’s history and culture as well as social ecology, and is a frequent commentary contributor to publications such as The Telegraph and Hindustan Times. In 2000, Guha was a visiting professor at Stanford, where he taught courses on the politics and culture of South Asia and cross-cultural perspectives on the global environmental debate.
India is often referred to as the world’s largest democracy for its population size of 1.3 billion and system of governance since partition and independence in 1947. Guha said that, while India is “solidly and certifiably democratic,” there are serious flaws, including growing threats to freedom of expression of Indian artists, filmmakers and writers.
Indian society, Guha said, has become too sensitive to criticism, wherein “somebody will take objection” to any message. This kind of environment has encouraged newspaper editors to self-censor, for example, and led public figures to, at times, neglect to protect artists, filmmakers and writers.
In total, Guha detailed eight threats to freedom of expression in contemporary India: 1) archaic colonial laws affecting the first amendment, 2) imperfections in the judicial system, 3) rising importance of identity politics, 4) complicity of the police force, 5) pusillanimity of politicians, 6) dependence of media on government-sponsored advertisements, 7) dependence of media on commercially-sponsored advertisements and 8) ideologically–driven writers.
Would an absence of those threats imply freedom of expression? Responding to the question from the audience, Guha lamented that the answer wasn’t simple. His task was to offer a diagnosis of the challenges, he said, and not provide instruction on how to solve them, but in general, focused efforts bear change.
“Building democracies is about quiet persistent work,” Guha said of next steps in the process to extinguish threats to freedom of expression. “I think quiet persistent work in repairing our institutions, modernizing our laws and improving civil society institutions can still mitigate some of the threats.”
Guha expressed optimism about India’s civil society, noting an expansion in the supply of non-governmental organizations working on social issues and private philanthropists funding projects in that sector. But he tempered: “we could do more.”
Stephens ended the event by thanking Guha for leading the discussion, and referenced America’s first president George Washington, who at the end of his term in office, called upon citizens to be “‘anxious, jealous guardians of our democracy.’”
“And, I see that today in Ram and in the many people here – very jealous, anxious and passionate guardians of our democracy – who we can learn a lot from,” she said.
Hero Image
Indian historian Ramachandra Guha speaks to an audience of nearly 100 faculty, students and community members about freedom of expression in contemporary India, Oksenberg Conference Room, April 5, 2017.
Debbie Warren
All News button
1
Eight Threats to Freedom of Expression in India
Related Multimedia
Sheep and Socio-Economic Growth in Europe
Although sheep are only one of the important domesticates exploited in many parts of the world, it has played a near-paradigmatic role throughout the emergence and spread of European civilization. Domestic sheep and goat unambiguously originate from Southwest Asia where their wild ancestors live. Therefore sheep distributions across Europe represent an element of evident diffusion in the otherwise complex neolithization process. The numerical increase in sheep remains can be spectacular at Early Neolithic sites in Central Europe, even in habitats less than favorable for sheep. In various instances mutton outcompeted locally available pork in the diet as shown by animal remains from archaeological sites across Eurasia. Reasons for this trend seem to be diverse, ranging from greater pastoral mobility through secondary products (wool and dairy) to side effects of religious regulations such as the Iron Age taboo imposed on pork first documented in Judaism. Concomitant strict regulations concerning the “proper” way of slaughtering livestock link the increased dietary importance of sheep to the emergence of metallurgy, i.e. availability of quality blades.
Image
László Bartosiewicz has worked as an archaeozoologist since 1979. He has studied animal-human relationships during various time periods in several countries of Europe and some in the Near East as well as South America. His research often has a cultural anthropological focus viewing animals as material culture. Recently he has specialized in animal palaeopathology. He published three books and over 350 academic papers. Following teaching positions at the Universities of Budapest (Hungary) and Edinburgh (UK), he currently heads the Osteoarchaeological Research Laboratory at Stockholm University (Sweden). He was twice elected president of the International Council for Archaeozoology (2006–2014).
This event is part of the Origins of Europe Series and is sponsored by the Stanford Archaeology Center and co-sponsored by The Europe Center.
Archaeology Center, Building 500
László Bartosiewicz
Speaker
Stockholm University
Lectures