DOCSLIB.ORG

ABSTRACT Dirlik, N., 2012. the Tholos Tombs Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ABSTRACT Dirlik, N., 2012. the Tholos Tombs Of ABSTRACT Dirlik, N., 2012. The Tholos Tombs of Mycenaean Greece. Master’s thesis in Classical Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University. Nil Dirlik, Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University, Box 626, SE – 751 26 Uppsala, Sweden. This thesis is contains descriptions and definitions of the 2nd millennium BC tholos tomb architecture in Mainland Greece. The study area is divided into eight regions: Peloponnessos, Central Greece, Epirus, Attica, Euboea, Thessaly, Macedonia and Thrace. The time period of earliest tomb dated between 2000-1675 BC and the latest between 1320-1160 BC. Attention has been put on issues of typological characteristics, construction technique and stone materials of the tholos tombs. Keywords: Mycenaean, Messenia, Argolis, Arcadia, Laconia, Epirus, Euboea, Attica, Thessaly, tholos, tumulus, dromos, stomion. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................................1 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.....................................................................................................4 1.1. Background and presentation of the tombs.............................................................8 1.2. Aim and goal............................................................................................................8 1.3. Method.....................................................................................................................9 1.4. Research History....................................................................................................10 2. STONE MATERIALS OF THE THOLOS TOMB.............................................................13 2.1. Limestone...............................................................................................................14 2.2. Conglomerate.........................................................................................................15 2.3. Poros.......................................................................................................................15 3. CLASSIFICATION OF THE THOLOS TOMB.................................................................16 4. CONSTRUCTION OF THE THOLOS TOMB...................................................................18 4.1. Tumulus..................................................................................................................19 4.2. Dromos...................................................................................................................22 4.2.1. Direction, proportion and the profile......................................................23 4.3. Stomion..................................................................................................................27 4.3.1. Arrangement of the stones.......................................................................29 4.4. Lintel......................................................................................................................31 4.5. Relieving triangle...................................................................................................33 4.6. Chamber and Dome...............................................................................................37 4.6.1. Construction types of the tholos tomb chamber......................................39 2 5. ORIGIN OF THE THOLOS TOMB....................................................................................40 6. CHRONOLOGY…………………………………………………………………………...44 7. FINAL DISCUSSION..........................................................................................................45 BIBLIOGRAPHY.....................................................................................................................48 ABBREVIATIONS..................................................................................................................64 CATALOGUE..........................................................................................................................65 ILLUSTRATIONS..................................................................................................................100 3 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Fig. 1. Plan and section of the Cyclopean Tomb. (Wace 1949, 288, fig. 14a.) Fig. 2. Plan and section of the Epano Phournos Tomb. (Wace and Hood 1953, fig. 42.) Fig. 3. Plan and section of the Tomb of Aegisthus. (Wace 1921-23, pl. XLVI.) Fig. 4. Plan and section of the Kato Phournos Tomb. (Wace 1921-23, 312, fig. 61.) Fig. 5. Plan and section of the Panaghia Tomb. (Wace 1921-23, 317, fig. 59.) Fig. 6. Plan and section of the Lion Tomb. (Wace 1921-23, pl. III.) Fig. 7. Plan and section of the Tomb of the Genii. (Wace 1921-23, pl. LX.) Fig. 8. Plan and section of the Tomb of Clytemnestra. (Wace 1949, pl. LVIII.) Fig. 9. Plan and section of the Treasury of Atreus. (Wace 1949, fig. 5.) Fig. 10. Plan and sections of the tholos tomb at Prosymna. (Wace 1921-23, pl. LIV.) Fig. 11. Plan and sections of the tholos tomb at Berbati. (Santillo Frizell 1984, fig. 2.) Fig. 12. Plan and sections of the tholos tomb at Dendra. (Persson 1931, fig. 16.) Fig. 13. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Tiryns. (Papadimitriou 2001, fig. 59.) Fig. 14. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Kokla. (Demakopoulou 1990, fig. 2.) Fig. 15. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Analipsis A. (Marinatos 1954, 273, fig. 3.) Fig. 16. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Vaphio. (Waterhouse & Simpson 1960, 77.) Fig. 17. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Pellanes. (Spyropoulos 1998, 28, fig. 2.1.) Fig. 18. Plan of the tholos tomb at Nichoria Akones. (Choremis 1968, 159, fig. 21.) Fig. 19. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Nichoria Tourko Kivoura B. (Choremis 1970, fig. 152.) Fig. 20. Plan of the tholos tomb at Nichoria Tourko Kivoura C. (Choremis 1970, fig. 152.) 4 Fig. 21. Plan of the tholos tomb at Nichoria Tourko Kivoura E. (Choremis 1970, fig. 154.) Fig. 22. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Nichoria Tourko Kivoura F. (Nancy & Wilkie 1973, 232.) Fig. 23. Plan of the tholos tomb at Kato Englianos. (Blegen et al. 1973, fig. 319-320.) Fig. 24. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Ano Englianos. (Blegen et al. 1973, fig. 321- 324, 326.) Fig. 25. Plan of the tholos tomb at Vagenas. (Blegen et all. 1973, fig. 327.) Fig. 26. Plan of the tholos tomb at Tragana 1. (Korres 1977, 297.) Fig. 27. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Routsi 1. (Pelon 1976, fig. Th. 17A.) Fig. 28. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Routsi 2. (Pelon 1976, fig. Th. 17B.) Fig. 29. Plan of the tholos tomb at Voidokilia. (Korres 1977, 244.) Fig. 30. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Tourliditsa. (Marinatos 1966, 128.) Fig. 31. Plan of the tholos tomb at Peristeria 1. (Korres 1977, 325.) Fig. 32. Plan of the tholos tomb at Peristeria 2. (Korres 1977, 325.) Fig. 33. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Peristeria 3. (Marinatos 1965, 115, fig. 6.) Fig. 34. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Kopanaki. (Valmin 1927-1928, pl. IV.) Fig. 35. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Malthi 1. (Valmin 1926-1927, pl. I-II.) Fig. 36. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Malthi 2. (Valmin 1926-1927, pl. III.) Fig. 37. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Vassiliko. (Valmin 1927-1928, pl. II.) Fig. 38. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Kaplani. (Arapogianni 1993, 107.) Fig. 39. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Kakavatos A. (Dörpfeld 1908, 300, fig. 2.) Fig. 40. Plan of the tholos tomb at Kakavatos B. (Dörpfeld 1908, 308, fig. 4.) Fig. 41. Plan of the tholos tomb at Kakavatos C. (Dörpfeld 1908, 311, fig. 5.) 5 Fig. 42. Plan of the tholos tomb at Kephalovryso. (Chatzi-Spiliopoulou 1998, 234.) Fig. 43. Plan of the tholos tomb at Thorikos B. (Servais 1968, fig. 3.) Fig. 44. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Maraton. (Pelon 1976, fig. Th.31.) Fig. 45. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Menidi. (Bohn et. al. 1880, fig. 1.) Fig. 46. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Orchomenos. (Schliemann 1881, pl. IV-VII.) Fig. 47. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Medeon A. (Pelon 1976, fig. Th. 34A.) Fig. 48. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Medeon T 239. (Pelon 1976, Th. 34B.) Fig. 49. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Bellousia. (Pelon 1976, fig. Th. 35.) Fig. 50. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Katakalou. (Pelon 1976, fig. Th. 36.) Fig. 51. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Oxiylithos. (Pelon 1976, fig Th. 37.) Fig. 52. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Volos. (Arapogianni 1993, 232.) Fig. 53. Plan of the tholos tomb at Dimini T 239. (Pelon 1976, fig. Th. 39B.) Fig. 54. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Pteleon A. (Verdelis 1951, 142, pl. II.) Fig. 55. Plan of the tholos tomb at Pteleon B. (Verdelis 1952, 168, fig. h.-t.) Fig. 56. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Pteleon C. (Verdelis 1953, 121, fig. I.) Fig. 57. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Pteleon D. (Verdelis 1953, 121, fig. I.) Fig. 58. Plan and section of the tholos tomb at Parga. (Marinatos 1960, 126, fig. 3.) Fig. 59. The general view of the tholos tomb at Genii. (My photograph.) Fig. 60. The general view of the tholos tomb at Tiryns. (My photograph.) Fig. 61. The general view of the tholos tomb at Dimini. ( 20.05.2012) (http://www.panoramio.com/photo/55324316 ) Fig. 62. The general view of the tholos tomb at Atreus. (My photograph.) 6 Fig. 63. The general view of the tholos tomb at Analipsis. (My photograph.) Fig. 64. The corner of the Dendra tholos tomb’s stomion. (My photograph.) Fig.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Examination of the Correlation Between the Justification and Glorification of War in Charles Mee's Iphigenia
    An Examination of the Correlation Between the Justification and Glorification of War in Charles Mee’s Iphigenia 2.0: A Director’s Approach Caroline Donica Table of Contents Chapter One: Charles Mee and the History Behind Iphigenia 2.0 4 Introduction 4 The Life and Works of Charles Mee 4 Just War 8 Production History and Reception 11 Survey of Literature 13 Conclusion 15 Chapter Two: Play Analysis 16 Introduction 16 Synopsis 16 Given Circumstances 24 Previous Action 26 Dialogue and Imagery 27 Character Analysis 29 Idea and Theme 34 Conclusion 36 Chapter Three: The Design Process 37 Introduction 37 Production Style 37 Director’s Approach 38 Choice of Stage 38 Collaboration with Designers 40 Set Design 44 Costumes 46 Makeup and Hair 50 Properties 52 Lighting 53 Sound 55 Conclusion 56 Chapter Four: The Rehearsal Process 57 Introduction 57 Auditions and Casting 57 Rehearsals and Acting Strategies 60 Technical and Dress Rehearsals 64 Performances 65 Conclusion 67 Chapter Five: Reflection 68 Introduction 68 Design 68 Staging and Timing 72 Acting 73 Self-Analysis 77 Conclusion 80 Appendices 82 A – Photos Featuring the Set Design 83 B – Photos Featuring the Costume Design 86 C – Photos Featuring the Lighting Design 92 D – Photos Featuring the Concept Images 98 Works Consulted 102 Donica 4 Chapter One Charles Mee and the History Behind Iphigenia 2.0 Introduction Charles Mee’s Iphigenia 2.0 is a significant work in recent theatre history. The play was widely recognized and repeatedly produced for its unique take on contemporary issues, popular culture, and current events set within a framework of ancient myths and historical literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetics of the Peloponnesean Populations and the Theory of Extinction of the Medieval Peloponnesean Greeks
    European Journal of Human Genetics (2017) 25, 637–645 Official journal of The European Society of Human Genetics www.nature.com/ejhg ARTICLE Genetics of the peloponnesean populations and the theory of extinction of the medieval peloponnesean Greeks George Stamatoyannopoulos*,1, Aritra Bose2, Athanasios Teodosiadis3, Fotis Tsetsos2, Anna Plantinga4, Nikoletta Psatha5, Nikos Zogas6, Evangelia Yannaki6, Pierre Zalloua7, Kenneth K Kidd8, Brian L Browning4,9, John Stamatoyannopoulos3,10, Peristera Paschou11 and Petros Drineas2 Peloponnese has been one of the cradles of the Classical European civilization and an important contributor to the ancient European history. It has also been the subject of a controversy about the ancestry of its population. In a theory hotly debated by scholars for over 170 years, the German historian Jacob Philipp Fallmerayer proposed that the medieval Peloponneseans were totally extinguished by Slavic and Avar invaders and replaced by Slavic settlers during the 6th century CE. Here we use 2.5 million single-nucleotide polymorphisms to investigate the genetic structure of Peloponnesean populations in a sample of 241 individuals originating from all districts of the peninsula and to examine predictions of the theory of replacement of the medieval Peloponneseans by Slavs. We find considerable heterogeneity of Peloponnesean populations exemplified by genetically distinct subpopulations and by gene flow gradients within Peloponnese. By principal component analysis (PCA) and ADMIXTURE analysis the Peloponneseans are clearly distinguishable from the populations of the Slavic homeland and are very similar to Sicilians and Italians. Using a novel method of quantitative analysis of ADMIXTURE output we find that the Slavic ancestry of Peloponnesean subpopulations ranges from 0.2 to 14.4%.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Mycenaean Arkadia: Space and Place(S) of an Inland and Mountainous Region
    Early Mycenaean Arkadia: Space and Place(s) of an Inland and Mountainous Region Eleni Salavoura1 Abstract: The concept of space is an abstract and sometimes a conventional term, but places – where people dwell, (inter)act and gain experiences – contribute decisively to the formation of the main characteristics and the identity of its residents. Arkadia, in the heart of the Peloponnese, is a landlocked country with small valleys and basins surrounded by high mountains, which, according to the ancient literature, offered to its inhabitants a hard and laborious life. Its rough terrain made Arkadia always a less attractive area for archaeological investigation. However, due to its position in the centre of the Peloponnese, Arkadia is an inevitable passage for anyone moving along or across the peninsula. The long life of small and medium-sized agrarian communities undoubtedly owes more to their foundation at crossroads connecting the inland with the Peloponnesian coast, than to their potential for economic growth based on the resources of the land. However, sites such as Analipsis, on its east-southeastern borders, the cemetery at Palaiokastro and the ash altar on Mount Lykaion, both in the southwest part of Arkadia, indicate that the area had a Bronze Age past, and raise many new questions. In this paper, I discuss the role of Arkadia in early Mycenaean times based on settlement patterns and excavation data, and I investigate the relation of these inland communities with high-ranking central places. In other words, this is an attempt to set place(s) into space, supporting the idea that the central region of the Peloponnese was a separated, but not isolated part of it, comprising regions that are also diversified among themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Iphigenia in Aulis by Euripides Translated by Nicholas Rudall Directed by Charles Newell
    STUDY GUIDE Photo of Mark L. Montgomery, Stephanie Andrea Barron, and Sandra Marquez by joe mazza/brave lux, inc Sponsored by Iphigenia in Aulis by Euripides Translated by Nicholas Rudall Directed by Charles Newell SETTING The action takes place in east-central Greece at the port of Aulis, on the Euripus Strait. The time is approximately 1200 BCE. CHARACTERS Agamemnon father of Iphigenia, husband of Clytemnestra and King of Mycenae Menelaus brother of Agamemnon Clytemnestra mother of Iphigenia, wife of Agamemnon Iphigenia daughter of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra Achilles son of Peleus Chorus women of Chalcis who came to Aulis to see the Greek army Old Man servant of Agamemnon, was given as part of Clytemnestra’s dowry Messenger ABOUT THE PLAY Iphigenia in Aulis is the last existing work of the playwright Euripides. Written between 408 and 406 BCE, the year of Euripides’ death, the play was first produced the following year in a trilogy with The Bacchaeand Alcmaeon in Corinth by his son, Euripides the Younger, and won the first place at the Athenian City Dionysia festival. Agamemnon Costume rendering by Jacqueline Firkins. 2 SYNOPSIS At the start of the play, Agamemnon reveals to the Old Man that his army and warships are stranded in Aulis due to a lack of sailing winds. The winds have died because Agamemnon is being punished by the goddess Artemis, whom he offended. The only way to remedy this situation is for Agamemnon to sacrifice his daughter, Iphigenia, to the goddess Artemis. Agamemnon then admits that he has sent for Iphigenia to be brought to Aulis but he has changed his mind.
    [Show full text]
  • Master Thesis-Cyprus.Final
    MORTUARY PRACTICES IN LC CYPRUS A Comparative Study Between Tombs at Hala Sultan Tekke and Other LC Bronze Age Sites in Cyprus Marcus Svensson Supervisor: Lovisa Brännstedt Master’s Thesis in Classical Archaeology and Ancient History Spring 2020 Department of Archaeology and Ancient History Lund University Abstract This thesis investigates differences and similarities in the funerary material of Late Bronze Age Cyprus in order to answer questions about a possible uniqueness of the pit/well tombs at the Late Bronze Age harbour city of Hala Sultan Tekke. The thesis also tries to explain why these features stand out as singular, compared to the more common chamber tomb, and the reason for their existence. The thesis concludes that although no direct match to the pit/well tombs can be found in Cyprus, there are features that might have had enough similarities to be categorised as such, but since the documentation methods of the time were too poor one cannot say for certain. The thesis also gives an explanation of why not more of these features appear in the funerary material in Cyprus, and the answer is simply that the pit/well tombs were not considered to be tombs but wells. Furthermore, direct parallels to the pit/well tombs can be found on mainland Greece, first and foremost at the south room of the North Megaron of the Cyclopean Terrace Building at Mycenae but also at the Athenian Agora. Key Words Hala Sultan Tekke, Late Cypriote Bronze Age, pit/well tombs, chamber tombs, shaft graves, Mycenae. Acknowledgements This thesis is entirely dedicated to the team of the New Swedish Cyprus Expedition, especially Jacek Tracz who helped me restore the assembled literature in a time of need, and to Anton Lazarides for proofreading.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Tell a Cromlech from a Quoit ©
    How to tell a cromlech from a quoit © As you might have guessed from the title, this article looks at different types of Neolithic or early Bronze Age megaliths and burial mounds, with particular reference to some well-known examples in the UK. It’s also a quick overview of some of the terms used when describing certain types of megaliths, standing stones and tombs. The definitions below serve to illustrate that there is little general agreement over what we could classify as burial mounds. Burial mounds, cairns, tumuli and barrows can all refer to man- made hills of earth or stone, are located globally and may include all types of standing stones. A barrow is a mound of earth that covers a burial. Sometimes, burials were dug into the original ground surface, but some are found placed in the mound itself. The term, barrow, can be used for British burial mounds of any period. However, round barrows can be dated to either the Early Bronze Age or the Saxon period before the conversion to Christianity, whereas long barrows are usually Neolithic in origin. So, what is a megalith? A megalith is a large stone structure or a group of standing stones - the term, megalith means great stone, from two Greek words, megas (meaning: great) and lithos (meaning: stone). However, the general meaning of megaliths includes any structure composed of large stones, which include tombs and circular standing structures. Such structures have been found in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, North and South America and may have had religious significance. Megaliths tend to be put into two general categories, ie dolmens or menhirs.
    [Show full text]
  • Γεωγραφικός Εντοπισμός Distomo, Boeotia
    IΔΡΥΜA ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ Συγγραφή : Τσώτα Εύη Μετάφραση : Κούτρας Νικόλαος Για παραπομπή : Τσώτα Εύη , "Archaeological Collection of Distomo", Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Βοιωτία URL: <http://www.ehw.gr/l.aspx?id=12668> Περίληψη : The Archaeological Collection of Distomo was established in 1994. In its three rooms are exhibited antiquities dating from the Bronze Age to the Early Byzantine period. The finds in this collection originate from the archaeological sites of north-western ancient Phocis (mainly Distomo, Anticyra, Medeon, Karakolithos and Zemeno), which nowadays belongs to the prefecture of Boeotia. Γεωγραφικός Εντοπισμός Distomo, Boeotia 1. General Description The Archaeological Collection of Distomo was established in 1994 by the Ephor of Antiquities Evangelos Pentazos. The building housing the collection, formerly the premises of the local elementary school, was erected in 1901 by the hegumen of the Hosios Loukas monastery, Ioasaph Kastrites (fig. 3). In 1987 the Municipality of Distomo ceded the building to the Ministry of Culture, for the purpose of assembling and housing finds unearthed during the excavations conducted in the area, and disseminating the history of ancient eastern Phocis. The exhibition extends over three rooms, and includes exhibits dating from the Bronze Age to the Early Byzantine period. 2. Entrance Hall Funerary stelae of the Classical, Hellenistic and Roman periods, originating in the wider region of Distomo (ancient Ambrŏssus) are exhibited in the entrance hall. These stelae are made up of local gray marble. The ancient city of Phokis situated in the area of modern Distomo is known through epigraphical testimonies as Ambry(s)sus, Ambrōssus or Amphrys(s)us. The Classical period stelae are simple pedimental stelae, with the name of the deceased person often inscribed on their upper part.
    [Show full text]
  • THE SANCTUARY at EPIDAUROS and CULT-BASED NETWORKING in the GREEK WORLD of the FOURTH CENTURY B.C. a Thesis Presented in Partial
    THE SANCTUARY AT EPIDAUROS AND CULT-BASED NETWORKING IN THE GREEK WORLD OF THE FOURTH CENTURY B.C. A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University by Pamela Makara, B.A. The Ohio State University 1992 Master's Examination Committee: Approved by Dr. Timothy Gregory Dr. Jack Ba I cer Dr. Sa u I Corne I I VITA March 13, 1931 Born - Lansing, Michigan 1952 ..... B.A. in Education, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 1952-1956, 1966-Present Teacher, Detroit, Michigan; Rochester, New York; Bowling Green, Ohio 1966-Present ............. University work in Education, Art History, and Ancient Greek and Roman History FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: History Studies in Ancient Civi I izations: Dr. Timothy Gregory and Dr. Jack Balcer i i TABLE OF CONTENTS VITA i i LIST OF TABLES iv CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 I I. ANCIENT EPIDAUROS AND THE CULT OF ASKLEPIOS 3 I II. EPIDAURIAN THEARODOKOI DECREES 9 IV. EPIDAURIAN THEOROI 21 v. EPIDAURIAN THEARODOKOI INSCRIPTIONS 23 VI. AN ARGIVE THEARODOKOI INSCRIPTION 37 VII. A DELPHIC THEARODOKOI INSCRIPTION 42 VIII. SUMMARY 47 END NOTES 49 BIBLIOGRAPHY 55 APPENDICES A. EPIDAURIAN THEARODOKOI INSCRIPTIONS AND TRANSLATIONS 58 B. ARGIVE THEARODOKO I I NSCR I PT I ON 68 C. DELPHIC THEARODOKOI INSCRIPTION 69 D. THEARODOKO I I NSCR I PT IONS PARALLELS 86 iii LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Thearodoko i I nscr i pt ions Para I I e Is •••••••••••• 86 iv CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Any evidence of I inkage in the ancient world is valuable because it clarifies the relationships between the various peoples of antiquity and the dealings they had with one another.
    [Show full text]
  • Assigning Macroseismic Intensities of Historical Earthquakes from Late 19Th Century in Sw Peloponnese (Greece)
    ASSIGNING MACROSEISMIC INTENSITIES OF HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKES FROM LATE 19TH CENTURY IN SW PELOPONNESE (GREECE) Nikos SAKELLARIOU1 and Vassiliki KOUSKOUNA2 ABSTRACT The seismic activity of Greece has always been present in the country’s history. Numerous earthquakes have occurred in the area of SW Peloponnese, which includes the seismically active faults of Kalamata, Pamisos and Messinian gulf, as well as the subduction zone of the Hellenic arc. In the present paper macroseismic information was collected from contemporary and recent earthquake studies and the local press for three significant earthquakes of this area, i.e. Messini (1885), Filiatra (1886) and Kyparissia (1899). These earthquakes are presented in detail, as far as the flow of information, damage reports, seismological compilations and intensity assignment and distribution are concerned, from which macroseismic parameters (i.e. epicentre, magnitude) were assessed. The macroseismic datapoints of the studied earthquakes were introduced to a database, containing the event dates (OS/NS), source of information and date, the digitized original texts containing all sorts of macroseismic information and, finally, the assigned intensities expressed in EMS98, which may also act as input to the Hellenic Macroseismic Database (http://macroseismology.geol.uoa.gr/). INTRODUCTION Throughout the ages earthquakes have been the most destructive of all natural hazards, having been associated with crises due to their effects in several aspects of human life. In historical times the damage and sudden crippling of the economy of an area led to population movements, emigration or desertification of villages, even small towns. Since we are not able to foresee what will happen in the future, we have to find out what happened in the past and extrapolate to modern times.
    [Show full text]
  • Kd Lald`Fr;K¡
    Megalithic Cultures c`gn~ik’kkf.kd laLd`fr;k¡ Dr. Anil Kumar Professor Ancient Indian History and Archaeology University of Lucknow [email protected] [email protected] Introduction According to V. Gordon Childe the term ‘Megalith’ is derived from two Greeks words, megas means large and lithos means stone and originally introduced by antiquaries to describe a fairly easily definable class of monuments in western and northern Europe, consisting of huge, undress stones. In other words, the Megaliths usually refer to the burials made of large stones in graveyard away from the habitation area. Meadows Taylor believed that resemblances of the east and west were not merely accidental and that “the actual monuments of celto-scythian tribes are found in India and being examined are found to agree in all respects with those of Europe.” James Fergusson argued that they were all “erected by partially civilized races after they had come in contact with the Romans.’ He also stated that it was difficult to comprehend “how and when intercourse could have taken place which led to their similarity.” People like Dubreuil argued an Aryan origin for the megaliths. Elliot and Perry saw the south Indian megaliths and monumental stone architecture as one of the elements reflecting a manifestation of the Egyptian archaic civilization as far back as 1923. In 1872, Fergusson brought out his excellent work entitled “Rude Stone Monuments in all Countries: their age and uses. This first attracted the attention of scholars. Types of megaliths The megaliths are, indeed, among the most widespread remains of stone both in time and space.
    [Show full text]
  • Registration and Promotion of Monumental Olive Trees in Greece. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 7(4) 107-121
    Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol.7, No.4 Publication Date: Apr. 25, 2020 DOI:10.14738/assrj.74.7977. Koniditsiotis, S. (2020). Registration and Promotion of Monumental Olive Trees in Greece. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 7(4) 107-121. Registration and Promotion of Monumental Olive Trees in Greece. Koniditsiotis Stavros Msc of Cultural Policy and Development, Open University of Cyprus, Cyprus ABSTRACT The history oF the olive tree, its cultivation and its products is known For centuries. Some olive tree have survived over millennia and their history dates back to antiquity. In many cases, it is related to mythology and religion. The olive tree is associated with Folk tradition, people's everyday liFe, and customs. In Greece, monumental olive trees are found in the Peloponnese, Crete, Euboea, Chios, Pelion and Attica. This paper explores and describes the particular morphological Features such as shape, size, wood, cavities and age, as well as the cultural characteristics such as historical or religious events, myths and traditions that deFine an olive tree and characterize it as monumental. The main aim oF our research is to examine the key position that monumental olive trees and their materialistic and symbolic maniFestations consist a natural and cultural heritage as well. In this framework the study focuses on various key issues related to monumental olives trees and their natural, historical, social and cultural value. Keywords: Monumental Olive Trees, Nature conservation monuments, Natural sites, Greek monumental Olive Trees, Cultural heritage of olive Trees. 1. INTRODUCTION The present study is a part of a wider research on the value of the natural heritage and specially on ancient olives trees as natural monuments and cultural heritage of all Mediterranean regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Geophysical Journal International - Supplementary Material For
    1 Geophysical Journal International - Supplementary material for 2 3 The GPS velocity field of the Aegean. New observations, contribution of the earthquakes, 4 crustal blocks model. 5 6 Briole, P., Ganas, A., Elias, P & Dimitrov, D. 7 8 SUMMARY 9 10 The analysis of the secular component of the velocity field of the Aegean presented, discussed and 11 modelled in the main text, requires the accurate determination of the transient part of the velocity 12 field. This transient part is dominated by the coseismic displacements produced by the major 13 earthquakes that occurred in the area during the analysed time window. Another significant 14 component is due to the postseismic relaxations associated with those earthquakes. In this 15 supplementary material we review the coseismic and postseismic displacements induced by the 16 crustal earthquakes of magnitude Mw ≥ 5.3 during the period 2000-2020. In addition, several GPS 17 stations have their time series disrupted by other sources of transients with different origins, that we 18 also present and discuss. Once the transient velocity field is estimated it can be removed from the 19 total velocity field to extract what can be considered as the secular velocity field. We discuss the 20 gradients of this secular velocity field as they are measured along three sections originated at the 21 Euler pole of rotation Anatolia-Eurasia. 22 23 24 S1. INTRODUCTION 25 1 26 During the period 2000-2020 several strong earthquakes occurred in the Aegean region, with a 27 concentration in western Greece around and near the Ionian Islands: Lefkada 2003, Movri 2008, 28 Cephalonia doublet 2014, Lefkada 2015, and Zakynthos 2018.
    [Show full text]