In recent scholarship on the Ottoman Mediterranean, it has become commonplace to challenge narratives of heroic discovery and cultural superiority expounded in publications by European travellers. Rather than taking a polished, published account as its starting point, this paper discusses the travels of Edward Falkener (1814–96), a lesser-known Victorian architect and writer whose extensive tour around Anatolia (1844–5) was never communicated to a broader audience. If Falkener is remembered today, it is usually as the author of the first anglophone monograph on ancient Ephesus and editor of the first British academic journal devoted to classical art and architecture. This paper reviews Falkener’s career, but instead of these publications, the focus is on his remarkable personal archive of diaries, sketchbooks, watercolours, contracts and notes for an incomplete book about his tour of Anatolia. Drawing on this collection, it explores his fluctuating interests in heritage from different periods of Anatolia’s history and well-documented interactions with a variety of local actors who helped or hindered his meandering tour. Representing the first attempt to study Falkener’s journey, this paper explores the utility of his archive for understanding the challenges and contingencies of Victorian travel in the Ottoman Empire.

In 1937 the philosopher Robin Collingwood excavated a henge monument in Cumbria and identified the postholes of a series of timber buildings, which he compared with those at other sites. These structures at Eamont Bridge were replaced by a stone circle. He planned to continue the work for a second season, but was prevented by illness. His project was completed by the famous German scholar Gerhard Bersu, who concluded that many of the features identified two years earlier were of geological origin; others were rootholes and animal burrows. Their projects have played a part in the history of fieldwork, but in recent years influential researchers have tried to rehabilitate Collingwood’s reputation as an excavator. Their views were encouraged by his pivotal role in studies of the northern frontier of Roman Britain. In 2023 parts of the monument at King Arthur’s Round Table were re-excavated with the aim of settling the dispute. The new work supported Bersu’s interpretation, but recognised that Collingwood’s approach was not as misguided as his critics had supposed – it was directly based on his agenda for historical research. The real problem is that he had been working without sufficient experience on a difficult subsoil. This article considers the methods used by both researchers at King Arthur’s Round Table and compares their distinctive approaches to field archaeology.

This article develops a model to explain the emergence and persistence of shared memory, providing a practical toolkit for empirical research in memory studies. It begins with a review of the concepts of individual and collective memory, highlighting their limitations. In response, the article introduces two alternative concepts – subjectivised memory and hegemonic memory – that capture the interdependence of individual and collective memory while moving beyond their dichotomy. These concepts form the theoretical basis of the proposed model. The article applies the model to the example of Holocaust remembrance in Germany, illustrating how memory becomes hegemonic and persists over time.