Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
951974, 2012
0160-7383/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Printed in Great Britain
www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures
doi:10.1016/j.annals.2011.11.013
Abstract: The peninsula of Mount Athos and the rocky complex of Meteora are the two
largest monastic communities in Greece and among the main holy landmarks in the Ortho-
dox Christian world. Both are UNESCO sites and, besides their unique cultural and spiritual
heritage, they also host the most stunning worlds sceneries. As such, Mount Athos and Mete-
ora constitute powerful magnets for vast numbers of pilgrims and tourists. Yet, differences in
their history and in the management of tourist flows make them different too. This article
approaches the two sites through the lens of landscape, destabilizing boundaries between
the sacred and the secular, the sublime and the prosaic, tourism and pilgrimage. Keywords:
Mount Athos, Meteora, landscape, pilgrimage, heritage, wilderness. 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All
rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION
Wilderness and the holy share two main similarities. Firstly, they both
evoke separation from the ordinary against which they are defined.
Secondly, taken literally, they both cause bewilderment, wonder,
displacement. Wilderness is psychological as much as it is geographical:
it can be a state of mind and a state of the land (Lane, 1998). Yet, for
951
952 V. della Dora / Annals of Tourism Research 39 (2012) 951974
This article seeks to further these debates through the lens of land-
scape. The term landscape refers both to a framed view of specific sites
and the scenic character of whole regions (Cosgrove, 2006). It is both a
socio-economic product, and a way of seeing shaped by culturally spe-
cific pictorial conventions (Cosgrove, 1985; Gold & Revill, 2004).While
some recent studies do refer to pilgrims appreciation of the natural
environment at pilgrimage sites (including Orthodox shrines), land-
scape usually remains a contour, or rather, a backdrop to pilgrims
experience (see Andriotis, 2009; Coleman & Elsner, 2003; Gothoni,
1998). At the same time, extant studies discussing the role of nature
(and landscape) in shaping spiritual experiences focus on tourists mov-
ing outside of the frame of institutionalized religion (Digance, 2003;
Sharpley & Jepson, 2011).
Here I would like to move landscape to the fore and focus explicitly
on its agency in the context of religious pilgrimage sites. In other
words, I would like to put landscape to task (Rose, 2002). Not only
does landscape contribute to the shaping of the pilgrims experience,
I argue, but it can also be a primary attractant for other categories of
visitors (I use the generic term visitor to encompass the wide range
of motivations behind a journey to a sacred site). As such, it may often
dramatically increase the pressure on the shrine by non-pilgrims and in
turn impact pilgrims experience and their own experience too, be-
sides the lives of permanent residents (Digance, 2003).
The article contributes to recent studies on Orthodox pilgrimage
shrines (Andriotis, 2009; Gothoni, 1998; Shackley, 2001; Rahkala,
2010; Dubisch, 1995; Kotsi, 1999) from a cultural geography perspec-
tive. In particular, it focuses on the peninsula of Mount Athos and
the rocky complex of Meteora, the two largest and most iconic monas-
tic communities and major pilgrimage centres in Greece, also renown
for their natural beauty and breathtaking sceneries. As the article will
show, the two sites share many similarities and are bound together
by the same spiritual tradition. Yet, historical circumstances and the
different strategies their permanent residents have adopted to regulate
visitors flowsself-containment through spatial boundaries and access
restricted by visitors numbers (and gender) in the case of Athos versus
mass access restricted by temporal boundaries in the case of Meteora
make these sites very different case studies.
As Myra Shackley notes, when sacred sites (and in this case the land-
scape in which they are embedded) become visitor attractions, opera-
tion management becomes essential, and ultimately it is the task of
sacred sites to manage the mysterious and reach for the sublime, while
coping with the prosaic (2001, p. xviii). Yet, studies on holy sites man-
agement usually focus on localized congested sites, such as individual
shrines and monasteries (Carlisle, 1998; Shackley, 1998). How are
these policies implemented over extended areas such as Athos and
Meteora? How do they impact the experience of pilgrims and tourists?
Can we trace stark boundaries between these two categories of visitors?
And ultimately, can we separate the monastery experience from the
landscape experience?
954 V. della Dora / Annals of Tourism Research 39 (2012) 951974
places which have been sanctified over the centuries through the pres-
ence of ascetics.
Mount Athos is the most ancient Christian holy mountain in Greece.
In the ninth century its geographical isolationThessalonica, the clos-
est urban centre, lie approximately 100 kilometres awayattracted her-
mits escaping iconoclastic persecution and the Arab invasion of the
Egyptian desert, or simply looking for a quieter place to spend their
lives. In 963 Saint Athanasius established the first coenobitic founda-
tion on the peninsula (the still-extant monastery of Great Lavra) on
one of its most inaccessible spots. Other nineteen monasteries followed
throughout the following five centuries (Speake, 2002).
The history of Meteora is bound to that of Athos. The founder of its
first coenobitic monastery (Great Meteoron), who was also called
Athanasius, came from the holy peninsula, which he was forced to
abandon after repeated pirate incursions in the mid fourteenth cen-
tury. As with Athos, Meteoras spiritual landscape was carved out of
its unique geology through ascetic discourse and practice. At its peak
of prosperity, Meteoras rocky pinnacles and caves hosted no less than
twenty-three monasteries.
While Athonite monasteries were protected by the sea and their for-
tified walls, Meteorite foundations were naturally protected by their
height. They were islands suspended in the air, as the term Meteora
(the suspended) suggests. Until steps were carved in the rock in 1897
956 V. della Dora / Annals of Tourism Research 39 (2012) 951974
and a road was built in 1922, the only way to access the monasteries was
through a net hauled by a rope. But, as Donald Nicol observed, com-
munication with the world was something the Byzantine monk was sup-
posed to regard simply as a regrettable necessity (1963, p. 16).
Wilderness and isolation were indeed pre-requisites for the spiritual
V. della Dora / Annals of Tourism Research 39 (2012) 951974 957
Figure 3. View of the western slope of Mount Athos from the sea (photograph
by Monk Apollo Docheiarite)
and pilgrim flows are remarkably thinner, and, as with the previous vis-
it, it lasted one week. All together, the three visits provided a dia-
chronic perspective on the impact of tourist flows on the sites, as
well as on the mutable presence of the natural landscape through
three different seasons (Nicol, 1963, p. 3).
The three visits, however, also differed in terms of my own position-
ality and methodologies: the first visit occurred long before my conver-
sion to Orthodoxy, as a (non-religious) tourist; in my second visit I was
a participant observer who had the fortune to spend four nights in one
of the monastic foundations and take part to their liturgical life, thus
experiencing Meteora outside visitors hours. This visit involved close
interaction with the permanent residents of my hosting nunnery and
with Greek pilgrims. The last visit was devoted to the collection of inter-
national visitors impressions by means of semi-structured interviews
and conversations (Andriotis, 2009). These normally occurred on
the premises of the six monasteries during opening hours, and in
the guesthouse in the valley where I was based.
Since most of the visitors were usually pressed by time (most of them
would spend one or maximum two days in Meteora), I also used open
questionnaires printed on pre-stamped postcards which informants
could complete at their leisure on their way home and mail from
any part of Greece. They were asked to comment on their experience
of Meteora, with specific reference to the role of landscape. Besides
(optional) information such as age, gender, nationality and religious
affiliation, the postcards also included the question: Do you consider
yourself a pilgrim or a tourist and why? Of 150 postcards, 42 were re-
turned, including participants from fifteen countries and five religious
affiliations (Orthodox Christian, Roman Catholic, Protestant, Jewish,
Buddhist) and non-affiliations (atheist and agnostic).
Another source I originally planned to access to gain insights into
lived experiences was visitors books (Andriotis, 2009; Noy, 2008).
Yet, much too my dismay, such books are not kept by Meteoras mon-
asteries because of the large volume of visitors. They are on Mount
Athos though, and the fathers of one of the monasteries were generous
to scan their last book and e.mail it to me. Interviews with some of
them (which were conducted in their female dependency outside of
Athos) provided me with an insiders perspective (though, of course,
this cannot be generalized to the entire population of the peninsula).
Travel blogs provided another valuable source of information in some
ways akin to visitor books, with the benefit of further space and images.
Finally, twelve collections of digital photographs taken by monks and
pilgrims to Athos (some of whom I interviewed before and after their
pilgrimage) provided a further insight into their experience of Athos
and the place of landscape in that experience (Markwell, 1997).
SETTING BOUNDARIES
Meteora and Mount Athos share a common spiritual tradition and
are both enlisted as UNESCO heritage sites based on cultural and
960 V. della Dora / Annals of Tourism Research 39 (2012) 951974
My experience was really not so good. I liked the nature but wonder
how monks can live their life there. There are too many tourists
(Greek Orthodox, M 2635).
I enjoyed the characteristic nature and the architectural part. At Var-
laam I found a well-preserved life; but I also found that in other mon-
asteries the tourist invasion causes a deviation from the typical
patterns of monastic life (Italian Benedictine monk, M 4655).
The landscape of Meteora is hard at first to even grasp. The buildings
themselves and the now saints that dedicated their lives to this are
amazing, but, because of the tourist nature of how the monasteries
of Meteora are set up, my pilgrimage was most different from other
monastery visits in the US (American Greek-Orthodox, M 4655).
Meteoras landscape (or Meteora-as-a-landscape) embeds a funda-
mental paradox. As suggested by many of my informants, landscape
alone is a main attractant of mass tourism. Mass tourism, in turn, is
the main source of income for the monasteries; yet at the same time
it is perceived by visitors as altering, if not compromising, spiritual
experience. A local villager ascribed the low numbers of monks in
Meteora largely to tourism and contrasted them to Athos flourishing
population (Speake, 2002). One-day pilgrims likewise perceived mass
tourism as a negative museifying factor somehow depriving place of
its spiritual magnetism. As opposed to pristine, non-commodified
Athos, they seemed to envisage Meteora as a beautiful yet contami-
nated island.
From an insiders perspective, however, tourism to Meteora does not
seem to be as problematic as perceived from the outside: visitors are
allowed only to certain parts of the monasteries and only for a few
hours a day. While the whole peninsula of Athos is regarded as a single
large monastery subject to the avaton and the same regulation policies,
in Meteora visitors flows are regulated through temporal and spatial
micro-boundaries (Figure 5). During opening times, designated lay-
people deal with visitors while most of the nuns and monks simply
move to a different part of the monastery which is fenced off to the
public. The avaton is thus enforced at a microscale. After visitors
hours, silence falls once again, until the following morning.
To some visitors, boundaries can feel constraining. I was really frus-
trated with the time constraints of the group tour, as well as with phys-
ical restrictions of what I could see/do, an American art historian said.
Yet, the nuns regard streaming visitors flows an effective strategy, as it
allows them to conduct religious services (before and after visitors
hours) totally undisturbed, as opposed to Athos, where the monks have
to deal with their few visitors constantly: in the church (often behaving
inappropriately), in the refectory (complaining about food!), and on
several other occasions throughout the day. Many Greek and foreign
visitors are not necessarily led to Athos by spiritual motivations. Some
just take their stay there as a cheap vacation destination, and this is
attested by the variety of signs and reminders of decorous behaviour
on the peninsula. Its a lot of work for the monks, a Meteorite nun
962 V. della Dora / Annals of Tourism Research 39 (2012) 951974
suggested. Here [in Meteora], on the contrary, tourists just walk by.
Their attention is split between the monasteries and the landscape.
The Athonite monks I interviewed, however, insisted on the impor-
tance of involving visitors in their liturgical life:
Meteora has its unique nature and tourism. We have spirituality. Peo-
ple may come for all sorts of purposes, but most of them leave [Athos]
transformed. Here they get something different. People who have not
confessed themselves for entire years would ask to be confessed here.
Comments in the visitor book seem to confirm the importance of
participation to monastic liturgical life. It strengthened our Christian
faith and personal spirituality, a group of Spanish Roman Catholic vis-
itors wrote. An American visitor in his late fifties defined Athos emo-
tional: What really hit was entering the monasterys church during
a service: the atmosphere, the chants, the incense . . . I burst in tears.
I could not speak for the first two days without crying. On his return
home he would still listen to a CD purchased at the monastery:
I have been listening to the CD in my car. It makes me feel like I am
still in Mt. Athos. I disconnect from this crazy world . . .
physical boundaries (Bell & Lyall, 2004, p. 23; Coleman & Crang, 2004,
p. 4).
One finds Athos coastal profiles on incense boxes, on hand-carved
crosses, on the frontispiece of photographic albums, as well as on cop-
ies of constitutional charters and on prints hanging in monasteries
halls (Figure 7). Likewise, views of Meteoras rocks populate contempo-
rary church frescoes and icons of local saints. We also find them in the
monasteries gift shops, sealing local products with the stamp of
authenticity (Figure 8). Athos and (especially) Meteoras landscapes
are commodities available for sale: one can consume Athos coastal
landscape from the boat on organized trips around the peninsula (Fig-
ure 6), find Meteoras landscape for sale in souvenir shops, or simply as
a hotel room extrayes, because we do attach a price to landscape.
icon, or relics, rather than to the transformative act of the journey (per-
egrinatio). It emphasizes the act of kissing, or touching the sacred ob-
ject, rather than the process of reaching it. For the Orthodox
pilgrim it does not really matter if the shrine is reached on foot or
by car. Pilgrimage is not a mere inspirational matter. It is rather a pos-
sibility to experience a glimpse of paradise at the shrine in a strong,
ontological sense through the sacra, which is through icons, relics, lit-
urgies, and so on (Gothoni, 1994; Bowman, 1991; Dubisch, 1995) and
seek for spiritual counselling (Rahkala, 2010). Landscape then does
not really matter; what makes pilgrimage meaningful are the sacra
and the people at the shrine. What does truly matter is the microcosm
of the church, rather than what surrounds it:
I visited Meteora to attend to some religious services, to venerate the
relics and talk to the nuns (Greek Orthodox, F 2635)
I go to Docheiariou every year to attend to the feast of the Archangels
(Greek Orthodox, M 4655)
A visiting Greek monk and an Egyptian Copt priest in Meteora thus
dismissed my research project altogether: We are not here for the
landscape; tourists are after landscape! We are here for the saints.
As opposed to venerating the relics, the two perceived looking at land-
scape a distraction, a frivolous superficial activity. But do pilgrims just
ignore the landscape? And are tourists just distanced gazers always un-
moved by the religious character of the place?
While the focus of Orthodox pilgrims is the act of veneration within
the church, their journey does not occur within an empty space. As
Andriotis showed, solitude in the wilderness is an important element
in visitors experience of Mount Athos: the colours, shapes, textures,
and other physical qualities of the landscape include the spiritualized
environment through which the pilgrim passes and the place itself
combines spiritual search with physical journey (2009, p. 77). Delight-
ful views dominate the pilgrims and Athonite monks photographic
collections I examined (besides long sequences of liturgical snap-
shots). On Athos walking is, by necessity, the primary mode of locomo-
tion. While not a requirement for Orthodox proskyn e ma, walking allows
the pilgrim to subvert or transcend the rushing, mechanized world of
modernity . . . It emphasizes a slowing down rather than speeding up of
life (Coleman & Eade, 2004, p. 11). As opposed to driving, walking
also increases opportunities for scenic appreciation and enframing
nature (Crandell, 1993).
Likewise, in Meteora, proskyn e ma cannot be totally divorced from
moving through and gazing at the surrounding landscape. Even if
the base of the monasteries is usually reached by coach or car (the asp-
halted roads are not designed for walking, though they can be walked),
as with other visitors, pilgrims have to cross bridges and often climb
steep stairs carved in the rock in order to reach the monastery. Many
of the pilgrims I observed in this process stopped at panoramic spots
and took pictures of the scenery, though charging it with different val-
ues: the struggle of ascetics, the holiness of Creation, eternity.
V. della Dora / Annals of Tourism Research 39 (2012) 951974 967
In such a rocky forest, between earth and heaven, it would have been
strange if the monks had not built their home, just as birds build their
nests on trees. They built their homes there to be as close to God as
possible. The ancient fathers struggled and suffered to build their
monasteries on the rocks. It was not easy to ascend with nets, as they
used to do, or to lift up all the materials for construction. Therefore
landscape and the environment help humans inner journey towards
God (Greek Orthodox monk, 5665).
The landscape transmits very strong sensations. As you stand in front
of the majestic rocks you feel awe and wonder, you feel inclined to
pray and exalt the Creator. For spiritual seekers [like myself], the
rocks and the monasteries of Meteora transpire the holiness of the
monks who lived their ascetic life there (Greek Orthodox, F 2635).
Years pass by, the rocks remain. People age, the rocks remain. The
soul, like the rock, does not belong to what is mortal (Theotekne,
1988).
In a symbolic sense, landscape can thus serve as a source of spiritual
inspiration for the Orthodox pilgrim to Athos and Meteora. It is both a
medium and an icon of moral models, as well as an overwhelming, awe-
inspiring presence. Even when accurately staged and presented
through viewing platforms, it remains wild and holy.
CONCLUSIONS
Experiencing otherness (whether divine, natural, or cultural) de-
mands geographical separation. Seeking refugewhether physically
or imaginatively, or bothin insular utopias is no new practice (Gillis,
2004). In the case of sacred places like Athos, however, the irony is that
while Byzantine typika (foundational charters) usually emphasise the
struggle against wilderness to carve these gardened islands out of wil-
derness (see Talbot, 2002), today, the struggle is to preserve them as
the last islands of uncorrupted wild nature, and, at the same time, as
the last spiritual refuges in an increasingly secularized world (Hobbs,
1995). A Greek Orthodox pilgrim to Athos wrote in the visitor book:
I wish with all my soul that our most merciful God give strength to the
abbot and the fathers of this monastery, so that they can preserve the
Orthodox tradition . . . May this place remain always a beacon of faith
and a safe harbour for the souls.
In different ways, visitors to Athos and Meteora all share a desire to
break from the everyday, to access something unique. And no matter
what. I wish I were a pilgrim to better understand the spirituality [of
Meteora], a South African tourist said. Pilgrims are after an encounter
with the holy; tourists are after an encounter with cultural otherness or
pristine nature. But the holy and wilderness blur into one another
simply because they are defined by imaginary boundaries, or perhaps
because they have no boundaries. In Meteora and Athos they blend
in landscape; and so do these categories of visitors.
Insularity is a mental construct, rather than a geographical object.
Pilgrims are not bothered by other pilgrims. But tourists are by other
tourists (see Coleman & Crang, 2004; Urry, 1990). We perceive tourists
as contaminating the landscape and we do not want them in our pic-
tures, precisely because they are paradoxical reminders of the everyday-
ness we are trying to escape. They are mirror images of that part of
ourselves we decided to leave home, together with modernity. This is
why Meteora is perceived by visitors as contaminated, as opposed to
more strictly regulated Athos. But today nowhere is an island, even
Mount Athos (Friedlander, 2008). Visitors to the holy peninsula often
feel bothered by technological intrusions from the world, such as
monks speedboats or cell phones (http://holymountain-agiono-
ros.blogspot.com/2010/06/pilgrimage-to-mount-athos-by-professor.
html (retrieved May 1, 2011)). Perhaps this is because we like islands;
we need islands; we find them reassuringeven if they are just con-
structions of our mind.
Conceptualized and managed as both natural and sacred islands,
Athos and Meteora constitute privileged sites for tourists and pilgrims
shared quest for authenticity and thus ideal case studies for exploring
ruptures and continuities between these two categories of visitors. As
this study suggested, tourists and pilgrims are driven to both sites by
different motivations, but their gazes curiously converge, or rather
blur, in the landscape. Orthodox proskyn e s, whose main goal was
e t
the veneration of icons and relics at the shrine or attendance to church
972 V. della Dora / Annals of Tourism Research 39 (2012) 951974
AcknowledgementsResearch for this article has been supported by AHRC/ESRC Religion and
Society grant AH/HOO9868/1. I would like to acknowledge the fathers of Docheiariou mon-
astery (Mount Athos) for their most precious assistance and the sisters of Meteora for the
warm hospitality. I would also like to thank Chrysoula, Spyro and Dita for helping me hand
out questionnaires and making my stay in Kalambaka most enjoyable, and finally three anon-
ymous referees for their valuable comments and suggestions on a previous draft of this article.
REFERENCES
Andriotis, K. (2009). Sacred site experience. A phenomenological study. Annals of
Tourism Research, 36(1), 6484.
Badone, E., & Roseman, S. (2004). Approaches to the anthropology of pilgrimage
and tourism. In E. Badone & S. Roseman (Eds.), Intersecting journeys: The
anthropology of pilgrimage and tourism (pp. 123). Urbana and Chicago:
University of Illinois Press.
Bajc, V., Coleman, S., & Eade, J. (2007). Introduction: Mobility and centering in
pilgrimage. Mobilities, 2(3), 321329.
Bell, C., & Lyall, J. (2004). The accelerated sublime: Thrill-seeking adventure
heroes in the commodified landscape. In S. Coleman & M. Crang (Eds.),
Tourism: Between place and performance (pp. 2137). Oxford and New York:
Berghahn.
Bowman, G. (1991). Christian ideology and the image of a Holy Land: The place of
Jerusalem pilgrimage in the various Christianities. In J. Eade & M. Sallnow
(Eds.), Contesting the sacred: The anthropology of pilgrimage (pp. 99121). New
York and London: Routledge.
Carlisle, S. (1998). Lalibela (Ethiopia): A religious town in rock. In M. Shackley
(Ed.), Visitor management: Case studies from world heritage (pp. 139160). Oxford:
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Cohen, E. (1979). A phenomenology of tourist experiences. Sociology, 132,
179201.
Cohen, E. (1992). Pilgrimage centres: Concentric and excentric. Annals of Tourism
Research, 19, 3350.
Coleman, S., & Crang, M. (2002). Grounded tourists, travelling theory. In S.
Coleman & M. Crang (Eds.), Tourism: between place and performance (pp. 117).
New York: Berghahn Books.
Coleman, S., & Crang, M. (2004). Grounded tourists, travelling theory. In S.
Coleman & M. Crang (Eds.), Tourism: Between place and performance (pp. 117).
Oxford and New York: Berghahn.
Coleman, S., & Eade, J. (Eds.). (2004). Reframing pilgrimage: Cultures in motion.
London and New York: Routledge.
Coleman, S., & Elsner, J. (Eds.). (2003). Pilgrim voices: Narrative and authorship in
Christian pilgrimage. Oxford: Berghahn Books.
V. della Dora / Annals of Tourism Research 39 (2012) 951974 973
Nolan, M. L., & Nolan, S. (1989). Christian pilgrimage in modern western Europe.
Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.
Nolan, M. L., & Nolan, S. (1992). Religious sites as tourism attraction in Europe.
Annals of Tourism Research, 19, 6878.
Noy, C. (2008). Pages as stages: A performance approach to visitor books. Annals of
Tourism Research, 35, 509528.
Preston, J. (1992). Spiritual magnetism: An organising principle for the study of
pilgrimage. In A. Morinis (Ed.), Sacred journeys: the anthropology of pilgrimage
(pp. 3146). Westport: Greenwood Press.
Rackham, O. (2004). Our Ladys Garden: The historical ecology of the Holy
Mountain. Friends of Mount Athos Annual Report, 48, 57.
Rahkala, M. J. (2010). Pilgrimage as a lifestyle: A contemporary Greek nunnery as a
pilgrimage site. Helsinki: University of Helsinki Press.
Reader, I. (1993). Pilgrimage in popular culture. Houndmills and London:
MacMillan.
Rinschede, G. (1992). Forms of religious tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 19,
5167.
Rose, M. (2002). Landscape and labyrinths. Geoforum, 33, 455467.
Schama, S. (2005). Landscape and memory. New York: Vintage Books.
Shackley, M. (1998). A golden calf in sacred space. The future of St Catherines
monastery, Mount Sinai (Egypt). International Journal of Heritage Studies, 4,
123134.
Shackley, M. (2001). Managing sacred sites. London and New York: Continuum.
Sharpley, R., & Jepson, D. (2011). Rural tourism: A spiritual experience?. Annals of
Tourism Research, 38, 5271.
Smith, V. L. (1992). Introduction: The quest in guest. Annals of Tourism Research,
19, 117.
Speake, G. (2002). Mount Athos: Renewal in paradise. New Haven and London: Yale
University Press.
Talbot, A. M. (2002). Byzantine monastic horticulture: The textual evidence. In A.
Littlewood, et al. (Eds.), Byzantine garden culture (pp. 3867). Washington, DC:
Dumbarton Oaks.
Theotekne, Monache (1988). To petrino dasos t on Meteoron. Holy Meteora: Editions
of St. Stephen Monastery.
Timothy, D. J., & Olsen, D. H. (Eds.). (2006). Tourism, religion and spiritual journeys.
London and New York: Routledge.
Tsames, D. (Ed.). (1980). I oseph Kalothetou syggrammata. Thessalonica: Kentro
Byzantin on Erevn on.
Turner, V., & Turner, E. (1978). Image and pilgrimage in Christian culture:
Anthropological perspectives. Oxford: Blackwell.
Urry, J. (1990). The tourist gaze. London: Sage.
Vukonic, B. (2002). Religion, tourism and economics: A convenient symbiosis.
Tourism Recreation Research, 27, 5964.
Ware, K. (1983). The Church: A time of transition. In R. Clogg (Ed.), Greece in the
1980s (pp. 208227). New York: St. Martins Press.
Williams, G. (1958). Wilderness and paradise in Christian thought: The biblical experience
of the desert in the history of Christianity and the paradise theme in the theological idea
of the university. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers.
Submitted 31 May 2011. Final version 7 October 2011. Accepted 9 November 2011. Refereed
anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Antonio Russo