The research team, which included collaborators from institutions in Japan, Germany, Ireland, Australia, the Netherlands and Finland, deliberately built its evidence base from across the full spectrum of education stakeholders. The seventy participants represented academia, research, industry, policymaking and frontline teaching, a composition designed to prevent any single perspective from dominating the outcome. The work was carried out as part of EDUsummIT 2025, an international summit held at the DCU Institute of Education in Ireland, where thematic working groups of researchers, policymakers and practitioners convened to develop strategies and action plans for technology integration in education. The group whose findings now appear in the journal focused specifically on how AI agents might be woven into educational ecosystems without eroding the human relationships at their core.

Methodologically, the study relied on a Delphi approach, a structured consensus technique long used in education and policy research to surface areas of agreement among experts who might otherwise never deliberate together. In a Delphi study, participants respond to successive rounds of questionnaires, and their feedback is aggregated and fed back to the panel so that positions can converge on the issues that matter most. This iterative process is particularly valuable for emerging technologies, where the evidence base is thin and expert judgment carries disproportionate weight. By applying the method to AI in education, the researchers were able to move beyond the polarized rhetoric that often surrounds the topic, in which AI is framed either as an existential threat to teachers or as a cure-all for educational stagnation, and instead identify concrete areas where coordinated action is both necessary and feasible.

The consensus process yielded five priorities, and their ordering is itself informative. Ranked highest was the development of AI-related competencies for learners and educators. The experts emphasized that competence in this context means far more than operational fluency with a chatbot or an automated grading tool. Genuine AI literacy requires the ability to critically evaluate what these systems produce, to recognize their limitations, and to reason about the ethical implications of delegating cognitive and administrative tasks to algorithms. In other words, the panel placed human understanding, not technical deployment, at the top of the agenda, a finding that directly challenges the tool-first mentality that has characterized much of the recent wave of educational technology adoption.

The second and third priorities address the two sides of the classroom relationship: how learning is assessed and what teachers do. Automated formative assessment and feedback was rated as a key priority because AI systems can, in principle, provide students with rapid, personalized responses to their work at a scale no human teacher could match. Formative assessment, the ongoing diagnostic feedback that helps learners understand their own progress, has always been constrained by teacher workload, and AI promises to relieve some of that constraint. Yet the study is careful to frame this as an augmentation rather than a substitution. The third priority, the evolving role of teachers working alongside AI agents, reflects the panel’s conviction that educators will remain central to learning. Rather than simply adopting whatever tools arrive, teachers may increasingly act as orchestrators of learning, combining the analytical capabilities of AI with professional judgment about what each student needs, when to intervene, and how to interpret machine-generated feedback in light of classroom context.

The remaining two priorities confront the structural risks that technological optimism tends to obscure. Explainability and trustworthiness emerged as a priority because AI systems in education must be transparent, reliable and fair if they are to be legitimately entrusted with decisions that affect learners’ futures. When an algorithm recommends a learning pathway, flags a student as at risk, or scores an essay, the reasoning behind that output matters, both pedagogically and ethically. Opaque systems undermine the trust that educational relationships depend on. The fifth priority, accessibility and equal access, addresses the distributional question head-on: students from different socioeconomic, geographic and linguistic backgrounds must have equitable opportunities to benefit from AI-supported learning. The experts’ warning is explicit in its implication, namely that technological progress alone does not guarantee better education, and that without deliberate attention to equity, AI could widen precisely the achievement gaps it is often marketed as closing.

One of the study’s most consequential arguments is that AI adoption should not be treated as a purely technological issue. Education, the researchers contend, is an interconnected ecosystem involving learners, educators, institutions, data, infrastructure, policies and society. Each of these elements shapes how an AI system performs in practice. A sophisticated tutoring agent is of little value in a school without reliable connectivity; a well-designed feedback tool can do harm if institutional policies give its outputs unwarranted authority; a national AI literacy curriculum will falter if teachers receive no professional development to support it. Framing education as an ecosystem shifts the unit of analysis from the individual tool to the network of relationships and resources in which that tool is embedded, and it implies that evaluation of AI in education must be similarly holistic.

From this ecosystem perspective follows the study’s central prescription: sustainable AI integration requires coordinated action across research, educational practice and policymaking. No single actor can deliver the five priorities alone. Researchers must generate evidence about what works, for whom and under what conditions, including rigorous studies of how automated feedback affects learning outcomes and how explainability requirements can be met without rendering systems unusable. Practitioners must translate that evidence into classroom routines that preserve teacher agency and student wellbeing. Policymakers must build the infrastructure, regulatory frameworks and funding mechanisms that make equitable access possible, from broadband provision to data protection rules to standards for algorithmic transparency in educational settings. The Delphi consensus suggests that experts across eighteen countries see this coordination, not any particular technology, as the real bottleneck.

The study’s conclusions point toward a future in which AI in education is built around human capability, pedagogical innovation, ethical governance and equity. That formulation is notable for what it excludes: nowhere does the panel position AI as a replacement for educators. Instead, the researchers describe AI as a tool to support teachers, empower learners and strengthen educational ecosystems. This human-centered framing carries practical weight. If the highest priority is competencies, then investment should flow to professional development and curriculum design before procurement. If teachers are orchestrators, then AI systems should be designed to make their judgment more informed, not to bypass it. If equity is a co-equal priority with innovation, then deployment decisions must be evaluated by their distributional effects, not only their average performance.

For education systems now drafting their first AI strategies, the study offers a checklist that is as much political as technical. The five priorities, AI competencies, automated formative assessment and feedback, evolving teacher roles, explainability and trustworthiness, and accessibility and equal access, function as a set of interlocking commitments: progress on any one of them depends on progress on the others. A school that deploys automated feedback without building AI literacy among its staff and students invites uncritical reliance on opaque outputs. A government that mandates AI tools without addressing unequal access risks entrenching disadvantage. The Kumamoto University-led team, drawing on the structured judgment of seventy experts across eighteen countries, has made the case that the transformation of education by AI will be judged not by the sophistication of its algorithms but by whether learners and educators, wherever they are, actually benefit from them. The roadmap is now on the table; the coordinated action it demands is the harder task ahead.

Subject of Research: Responsible integration of artificial intelligence into education based on an international expert consensus study

Article Title: How can AI transform education without leaving anyone behind?

Article References: How can AI transform education without leaving anyone behind?. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: artificial intelligence, education, Delphi study, AI literacy, formative assessment, teacher roles, explainable AI, digital equity, educational technology, Kumamoto University, EDUsummIT, education policy

The symposium arrives at a moment when the foundational assumptions of donor insemination are being overturned. Artificial insemination by donor, known widely as AID, has been a foundational component of reproductive medicine for decades, offering a path to parenthood for people facing infertility, for single women, and for same-sex couples. Yet the traditional model rested on a bargain of secrecy: donors gave gametes anonymously, recipients often chose not to disclose the circumstances of conception, and the resulting children were expected to remain permanently uninformed. That architecture is now collapsing under the combined weight of changing ethical norms, new legislation, and a technology that no legislature can regulate out of existence.

The technological catalyst is direct-to-consumer DNA testing. As commercial genetic genealogy services have spread across the globe, the practical guarantee of donor anonymity has effectively evaporated. A donor-conceived adult can now submit a saliva sample, compare it against expanding databases of genetic relatives, and identify a previously anonymous donor within a matter of clicks, sometimes within days. What was once a carefully protected secret is now, in many cases, discoverable by anyone with an internet connection and roughly the price of a restaurant meal. This reality has forced legislators, clinics, and donor programs to confront an uncomfortable truth: policies of anonymity that were legally enforceable on paper have become technologically unenforceable in practice, and continuing to promise secrecy may simply defer painful revelations to an unregulated future.

Alongside the technological disruption runs a profound ethical realignment. A growing international consensus now recognizes an individual’s fundamental right to know their genetic origins, framing that knowledge not as a privilege granted by parents or clinics but as a basic entitlement of the person conceived. Many nations are consequently moving away from traditional practices of anonymity and non-disclosure, rewriting their laws to require that donor identities be available upon request once the donor-conceived person reaches adulthood or a specified age. The Kumamoto symposium brings together leading experts, legal scholars, counselors, and advocates from Germany, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan to examine this global transition toward identifiable sperm donation and to ask what societies owe the people created through these technologies.

The first thematic pillar of the meeting concerns legal and regulatory frameworks, addressing how different jurisdictions are abolishing anonymous donations and implementing statutes that ensure the disclosure of donor identities. The German experience will receive detailed attention, with presentations on the removal of donor anonymity in German law, case studies drawn from the Berlin Sperm Bank, and qualitative research into how donors themselves experience the transition from secrecy to identifiability. Germany’s legislative journey offers a particularly instructive case, since it required courts, lawmakers, and fertility providers to reconcile long-standing confidentiality practices with a judicially recognized right of donor-conceived individuals to access information about their biological fathers. The Berlin Sperm Bank case studies are expected to illuminate how a major provider restructured its operations, consent procedures, and donor recruitment in response to the new legal environment.

The second pillar turns to the Southern Hemisphere, where some of the world’s most pioneering systems have been built. Presentations will explore registry developments and support structures in Victoria, Australia, a jurisdiction that has gone further than most in not only ending anonymous donation prospectively but also in legislating mechanisms to release historical donor information. Complementing the Australian material, Professor Ken Daniels of the University of Canterbury will present on New Zealand’s historical shift from secrecy and shame to openness and acceptance, a cultural transformation that unfolded over decades and reshaped how donor conception is discussed within families, clinics, and society at large. The Oceanian experience demonstrates that legal change alone is insufficient; durable reform has depended on counseling services, donor-linking programs, and public education that help donor-conceived individuals, parents, and donors navigate new relationships and old silences.

Support systems form the symposium’s third major theme, encompassing the development of counseling, donor-linking services, and resources designed to assist donor-conceived people, recipient parents, and donors themselves. The transition to openness is not merely a legislative act but a psychological and social process that unfolds across a lifetime. Donor-conceived individuals who gain access to a donor’s identity may experience relief, grief, curiosity, or a complicated mixture of all three. Parents who once believed secrecy protected their families must reconsider how and when to tell children about their origins. Donors who gave gametes under guarantees of anonymity decades ago face unexpected contact and questions about their role in the lives of genetic offspring. The symposium’s counselors and advocates will examine how well-designed support infrastructure can determine whether disclosure becomes a source of connection or of distress.

The fourth theme addresses ethical challenges and family dynamics, probing the psychological, social, and ethical implications of non-anonymity on family relationships and on the best interests of children. These questions resist easy answers. Proponents of identity release argue that children’s rights to genetic knowledge must take precedence over adult preferences for privacy, while critics raise concerns about donor recruitment, the willingness of men to donate when anonymity is no longer assured, and the potential consequences for sperm supply. The symposium is structured to host these debates across disciplinary boundaries, pairing legal analysis with psychological research and lived experience rather than allowing any single perspective to dominate.

For Japan, the host nation, the stakes of the conversation are immediate. The final sessions will feature leading researchers from Kumamoto University, Nara University, Osaka University, and Kyushu University, alongside advocacy and support groups such as Donor Link Japan, evaluating the path forward for a country where anonymous donation remains the operative norm and where legislative, ethical, and social debates are still unfolding. The cross-cultural comparison is central to the meeting’s design: by contrasting the completed or advanced legislative shifts of Germany, Australia, and New Zealand with Japan’s ongoing deliberations, organizers aim to give Japanese policy-makers, clinicians, and the public a concrete map of what reform has looked like elsewhere, including its costs, its unintended consequences, and its benefits for donor-conceived families.

The symposium is deliberately inclusive in its audience. Organizers welcome researchers across all disciplines, healthcare professionals, legal experts, students, policy-makers, and members of the general public, reflecting a conviction that decisions about donor identity disclosure cannot be left to specialists alone. They touch on the most intimate questions of family, identity, and truth-telling, and they affect a growing population of donor-conceived people who are increasingly organizing and speaking for themselves. As direct-to-consumer DNA testing continues to erode the technical foundations of anonymity worldwide, the question facing jurisdictions like Japan is no longer whether the era of anonymous sperm donation will end, but how humanely and how well the transition will be managed. The Kumamoto gathering, with its blend of legal scholarship, clinical experience, and advocacy, represents a significant effort to answer that question with evidence rather than assumption. Further information and inquiries can be directed to Dr. Tobias Bauer at Kumamoto University, and the detailed program is available through the university’s website.

Subject of Research: Global legal and ethical trends in sperm donor identity disclosure

Article Title: International symposium on global trends in sperm donor identity disclosure

Article References: International symposium on global trends in sperm donor identity disclosure. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: sperm donation, donor anonymity, donor-conceived individuals, DNA testing, reproductive medicine, Kumamoto University, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, fertility law, genetic origins

The ceremony gathered the leadership of all four partner organizations. Kumamoto University President Hisao Ogawa and Yamagata University President Takeshi Deguchi signed alongside Mr. Erik Jung of Fraunhofer IZM and Mr. Christof Landesberger of Fraunhofer EMFT, with representatives from JETRO and the Fraunhofer Representative Office Japan in attendance. The presence of both university presidents and senior institute delegates signaled that the partnership is designed as a strategic, long-term commitment rather than a narrow project-by-project arrangement. The signed memorandum was presented publicly at the event, underscoring the institutional weight each partner attaches to the alliance.

The technical focus of the partnership centers on domains that have become decisive for the future of the semiconductor industry. As the miniaturization of individual transistors approaches fundamental physical and economic limits, the industry has increasingly turned to advanced packaging and system integration as the primary route to performance gains. Advanced packaging techniques, including chiplets stacked and interconnected within a single module, allow designers to combine separately manufactured dies with different functions into compact, high-performance systems. Printed electronics, in which electronic circuits and devices are fabricated by printing functional inks onto flexible substrates, complements this trend by enabling lightweight, conformable, and low-cost electronic systems that conventional silicon processing cannot easily deliver.

Under the memorandum, the four institutions plan to accelerate collaboration through three principal channels. The first is global talent mobility, with active exchange programs for researchers, administrative staff, and students moving between the Japanese and German partners. The second is joint research and development, with co-developed projects aimed at tackling next-generation technological hurdles in semiconductor packaging, system integration, and printed electronics. The third is knowledge transfer, described as the seamless sharing of academic insights, educational resources, and industry data across the alliance. Together, these mechanisms are intended to create a dynamic research cluster that combines the complementary strengths of each institution rather than duplicating effort.

The division of strengths among the partners helps explain the logic of the alliance. Fraunhofer IZM, based in Berlin, is one of Europe’s leading institutes for microelectronics packaging and system integration, with long-standing expertise in reliability testing, wafer-level packaging, and the embedding of chips into circuit boards. Fraunhofer EMFT, located in Munich, specializes in microfabrication technologies, sensors, and printed and flexible electronic systems. On the Japanese side, Kumamoto University sits at the heart of a region that has become one of Japan’s most important semiconductor manufacturing hubs, while Yamagata University brings its own research capacity in materials and device science. Linking these capabilities creates a pipeline that spans fundamental research, applied engineering, and industrial deployment.

The new agreement builds directly on a preceding scientific event. On September 14, one day before the signing, Kumamoto University hosted the Japan-Germany Joint Workshop titled Semiconductor Packaging: Toward Integration with Printed Electronics. The workshop brought researchers from both countries into direct contact and gave the German delegation an opportunity to examine the local research environment at first hand. The sequence of the workshop and the ceremony suggests that the memorandum was the product of sustained scientific exchange rather than a purely diplomatic initiative, with technical dialogue paving the way for institutional commitment.

A decisive factor in shaping the partnership was the ecosystem of small and medium-sized enterprises surrounding Kumamoto University. The German delegation was reportedly impressed by the robust network of local companies specializing in semiconductor equipment and materials, and it emphasized that the memorandum will pave the way for cooperation extending deep into these regional industry networks. This dimension matters because advanced packaging depends not only on large chipmakers but on a dense supply chain of specialized toolmakers, materials suppliers, and precision manufacturers. By connecting German applied-research institutes to this regional base, the alliance could shorten the path from laboratory prototypes to manufacturable processes on both continents.

Kumamoto University’s leadership has also framed the alliance with an eye beyond conventional electronics. President Ogawa underscored the transformative potential of merging advanced semiconductor technology with the medical sector, pointing toward pioneering applications in smart medical devices such as catheters and advanced electrocardiography. This interdisciplinary vision connects naturally with the printed-electronics strand of the partnership. Flexible and biocompatible electronic circuits can be integrated onto the surfaces of medical instruments, enabling catheters that sense pressure, temperature, or electrical activity in real time, and wearable or minimally invasive electrocardiography systems with far higher resolution and comfort than traditional rigid electrodes. The combination of German microfabrication expertise and Japanese clinical and engineering networks positions the alliance to pursue such applications credibly.

The timing of the agreement reflects broader strategic currents in the global semiconductor landscape. Governments in Japan, Germany, and the wider European Union have in recent years invested heavily in securing domestic and allied semiconductor capabilities, from leading-edge fabrication to the packaging and materials layers of the value chain. Japan has moved to revitalize its chip industry through regional clusters and international partnerships, while Germany has attracted major fabrication investments and leans on the Fraunhofer Society, one of the world’s largest applied-research organizations, to bridge research and industry. A formal Japan-Germany university-institute alliance in packaging and printed electronics aligns with both countries’ interests in resilient supply chains and in cultivating engineers who can work across borders.

For Kumamoto University, the alliance strengthens an already ambitious international profile in semiconductor research and education. By spearheading the partnership, the university positions itself as a hub where cutting-edge innovation, industry collaboration, and next-generation human resource development converge. The exchange of students and early-career researchers between Kumamoto, Yamagata, Berlin, and Munich is expected to build a cadre of specialists fluent in both the technical demands of advanced packaging and the cross-cultural collaboration that modern chip development requires. As the memorandum moves from signature to implementation, the measure of its success will lie in the joint projects it launches, the regional companies it draws into international networks, and the medical and electronic technologies that emerge from this new bridge between Japan and Germany.

Subject of Research: A Japan-Germany quadripartite research alliance for semiconductor packaging and printed electronics

Article Title: Kumamoto University forges quadripartite Japan-Germany alliance with Yamagata University and Fraunhofer institutes to accelerate semiconductor innovation

Article References: Kumamoto University forges quadripartite Japan-Germany alliance with Yamagata University and Fraunhofer institutes to accelerate semiconductor innovation. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: Kumamoto University, Yamagata University, Fraunhofer IZM, Fraunhofer EMFT, semiconductor packaging, system integration, printed electronics, Japan-Germany collaboration, JETRO, memorandum of understanding, medical devices, semiconductor industry

The award was formally conferred on June 27, 2026, during a ceremony held at the 50th Annual Conference of the Collegium Mediterranistarum in Tokyo. The milestone anniversary lent particular weight to the occasion, as the society marked half a century of promoting interdisciplinary research on the Mediterranean region while simultaneously honoring a new generation of scholars. The Herend Award, established in 1995 with the support of the Herend Porcelain Manufactory and its Japan sole distributor Hoshi Shoji Co., Ltd., is granted annually to promising young researchers for exceptional books and scholarly contributions concerning Mediterranean culture. Recipients traditionally receive an exquisite Herend porcelain decorative plate bearing the Gardens of the Mediterranean motif, inscribed with the winner’s name in gold, a fitting emblem for a prize that celebrates the intersection of European craft tradition and rigorous academic achievement.

The honored publication itself appeared under the imprint of the German Archaeological Institute, the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, one of the most authoritative publishing venues for classical archaeology. Its subject, the ancient theatre at Messene, stands in the southwestern Peloponnese of Greece, where the ruins of the Hellenistic city founded in 369 BCE survive with unusual completeness. Unlike many ancient theatres whose superstructures have vanished almost entirely, Messene’s theatre retains substantial remains of its cavea, or seating structure, along with architectural fragments scattered across the site. This preservation allowed Yoshitake to undertake something rarely achievable for monuments of this class: a full architectural study that reconstructs the building’s design, construction history, and transformation across centuries of use.

At the heart of the monograph is a methodological commitment to meticulous documentation combined with detailed architectural reconstruction. Architectural studies of ancient theatres depend on the patient recording of every surviving block, seat, stairway, and fragment of masonry, followed by the analytical work of fitting those pieces into a coherent three-dimensional understanding of the original structure. By applying this approach to Messene, Yoshitake has produced the first comprehensive study of the theatre’s remarkably well-preserved ruins and architectural fragments. The volume traces the monumental evolution of Greek into Roman theatre architecture on the Greek mainland, a transition that has long fascinated historians of building technology because it encapsulates broader cultural and political shifts accompanying Roman expansion into the Hellenistic East.

One of the study’s most significant contributions lies in its analysis of the reuse of Hellenistic building materials. Ancient builders frequently recycled stone blocks, seats, and structural elements from earlier phases of a monument when renovating or rebuilding it, and these reused components preserve valuable evidence of earlier construction techniques and dimensions. By carefully distinguishing original Hellenistic fabric from later Roman interventions, the study is able to read the theatre at Messene as a layered document, one whose stones record successive generations of design decisions. This stratigraphic reading of architecture allows scholars to follow not only how the building looked at any given moment but also how engineering practices, aesthetic preferences, and civic priorities changed as Greek civic culture adapted to Roman rule.

Equally innovative is the monograph’s attention to ephemeral elements of ancient theatrical infrastructure that rarely survive in the archaeological record. Yoshitake’s study explores mobile wooden stages, temporary structures erected for performances that left little direct trace, and mechanisms derived from siege technology, devices whose engineering principles were transferred from military engineering to the staging of spectacles. These reconstructions address a persistent problem in theatre studies: the visible stone shell of an ancient theatre represents only part of the performance environment, while the machinery that enabled scene changes, special effects, and actor movement was often made of perishable materials. By reasoning from structural evidence, parallels, and engineering principles, the study sheds new light on ancient engineering and design practices that conventional excavation alone cannot recover.

The significance of this work extends beyond the boundaries of a single monument. Theatres were among the most complex buildings produced by ancient societies, requiring sophisticated understanding of geometry, acoustics, load-bearing structures, drainage, and audience circulation. Tracing how a Greek theatre of the Hellenistic period was modified under Roman influence illuminates the transfer of building technologies across the Mediterranean world and the ways in which local craftsmen and imperial authorities negotiated architectural change. The theatre at Messene, with its unusually complete remains, offers an exceptional case study for this process, and Yoshitake’s comprehensive treatment makes it newly available as a reference point for comparative studies of theatres throughout Greece, Asia Minor, and the wider Roman world.

The monograph also stands as a vital contribution to the understanding of ancient construction processes and urban evolution. Theatres did not exist in isolation; they anchored the civic life of the cities that built them, hosting festivals, political assemblies, and public spectacles that defined urban identity. Reconstructing the building history of the theatre at Messene therefore contributes to a broader picture of how the city developed, how its public spaces were maintained and transformed, and how investment in monumental architecture reflected the shifting fortunes of the community. Studies of this kind demonstrate that architecture, read carefully, can serve as a historical archive in its own right, complementing texts and inscriptions with material testimony.

For the Collegium Mediterranistarum, the awarding of the Herend Award to this volume reflects the society’s enduring mission of encouraging pioneering academic inquiry across Mediterranean studies. Founded to bring together Japanese researchers working on the many cultures of the Mediterranean basin, the Collegium has used the Herend Award since 1995 to spotlight scholarly work by early- and mid-career researchers whose contributions promise to shape their fields for decades. Yoshitake’s recognition underscores the increasingly international character of classical archaeology, in which a scholar based at a Japanese university can produce a definitive study of a Greek monument published by a German research institute and honored by a Japanese Mediterranean studies society, a network of collaboration that mirrors the ancient connectivity of the region itself.

The full monograph is available through the iDAI.publications catalog of the German Archaeological Institute, where readers can access the complete architectural documentation, reconstructions, and analysis that earned the work its distinction. As research on ancient theatres continues to evolve, incorporating digital surveying, three-dimensional modeling, and new perspectives on performance culture, The Theatre at Messene: An Architectural Study provides a foundational baseline of carefully verified observation against which future interpretations can be tested. The 2026 Herend Award affirms that such patient, technically rigorous architectural scholarship remains central to understanding the ancient Mediterranean, and it signals to the field that the theatre of Messene, long admired by visitors to the Peloponnese, has now received the comprehensive scholarly treatment its exceptional preservation deserves.

Subject of Research: Comprehensive architectural study of the ancient Greek theatre at Messene and its evolution from Hellenistic to Roman design

Article Title: Prestigious Herend Award bestowed upon comprehensive architectural study of the theatre at Messene

Article References: Prestigious Herend Award bestowed upon comprehensive architectural study of the theatre at Messene. (n.d.). Original publication

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: Not provided

Keywords: Herend Award, Messene, ancient theatre, archaeology, Greek architecture, Roman architecture, Hellenistic, Kumamoto University, German Archaeological Institute, Collegium Mediterranistarum, architectural reconstruction, Mediterranean studies