Lehrstuhl für Landschaftsarchitektur und öffentlicher Raum LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ON ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES Establishing landscape design principles for archaeological sites by means of examples from West Anatolia, Turkey Aslı Saruhan Mosler Vollständiger Abdruck der von der Fakultät für Architektur der Technische Universität München zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doktor-Ingenieurs genehmigten Dissertation. Vorsitzender: Univ. -Prof. Matthias Reichenbach-Klinke Prüfer der Dissertation: 1. Univ. -Prof. Christoph Valentien, i.R. 2. Univ. -Prof. Dr. -Ing. habil. Wolf Koenigs 3. Univ. -Prof. Regine Keller Die Dissertation wurde am 20.12. 2005 bei der Technischen Universität München eingereicht und durch die Fakultät für Architektur am 14.06.2006 angenommen. 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis is a result of a collaboration of different subjects and departments and it was carried out under support of Prof. Christoph Valentien and Prof. Dr. Wolf Koenigs at the Munich Technical University. I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Prof. Christoph Valentien for giving me the opportunity to work at the Department of Landschaftsarchitektur und öffentlicher Raum as well as valuable comments, suggestions and academic support. I would also like to express my appreciation to Prof. Dr. Wolf Koenigs for introducing me in the field of archaeology and restoration at the Department of Baugeschichte und Bauforschung by involving me to the Fachgespräche which provided very supportive and constructive source for developing my research. I would like to thank Dr. Ute Kort-Krieger from the Department of Sociology of the Munich Technical University for her intensive advice, support and valuable comments on my dissertation and methods of empirical data presentation. Special thanks go to the excavation directors of the archaeological sites of Priene, Miletos, Aphrodisias, Pergamon, Didyma, Hierapolis, Ephesos and museum directors of Miletos, Pergamon and Aphrodisias with whom I interviewed during my research excursion in West Turkey in 2002. With an enthusiasm they gave me valuable knowledge and technical advice in the field of archaeological studies. Also I would like to acknowledge everyone who helped to provide data for this thesis in Turkey. I am very grateful for the financial support I have received from Frauenförderung HWW: Programm “Chancengleichheit für Frauen in Forschung und Lehre” for one year. The research excursion grant supported by the Freunde der TUM is also gratefully acknowledged. And finally I want to express my deepest appreciations to my parents and my husband: To my father Dr. Nurcan Uydaş for his inspiration, and to my mother Oya Uydaş for her motivation. To Martin for all the encouragement and supportive critics throughout the years. I dedicate to them this work. It would have been impossible to accomplish this work without intensive encouraging help and support of them. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 11 2 LANDSCAPE and CULTURE 15 2.1 Cultural landscape 16 2.2 Evolution process of historical landscapes 17 2.2.1 Working landscapes 19 2.2.2 Human disturbance regime and ecological dynamics 19 2.2.3 Decay era 20 2.2.4 Discovery and anticipation of ancient world 20 2.2.5 New approaches to the archaeological landscapes 21 2.3 Evaluation of landscapes 22 2.3.1 Resource base of cultural landscape 23 2.3.2 Value systems 24 2.4 Classification of landscape types under protection 27 Interrelations between cultural resources and nature conservation 29 2.5 Re-defining the past landscapes 30 2.5.1 Forms in the landscape 31 2.5.2 Visual qualities and the image of a place 33 2.5.3 Perception of past landscapes through design and planning objectives 36 2.6 Cultural tourism 37 2.6.1 Functions and uses of tourism 39 2.6.2 Cultural resources as a means for tourism development 40 2.6.3 Archaeological sites and tourism 41 2.6.4 Tourism industry versus archaeological sites conservation: Problems and challenges 42 Summary 46 3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AND LANDSCAPE 48 3.1 Protected landscapes: Archaeological sites and their environment 48 3.1.1 Structural and functional classification of archaeological sites 49 3.1.2 Importance of archaeological contribution to the landscape studies 50 3.1.3 Archaeological sites of present-day and their constant relations with human and nature 51 4 Archaeological Resource Management 52 3.2 Spatial pattern of archaeological sites in rural landscapes 54 3.2.1 Archaeological site as artefact 54 3.2.2 Archaeological site as three-dimensional space 55 3.2.3 Archaeological site as scenery 57 From an isolated setting to a cultural heritage landscape: Stonehenge (WHS) as an example for an archaeological heritage site management 58 3.3 Heritage 61 3.3.1 Heritage as a concept 61 3.3.2 Heritage conservation 62 3.4 Role of design in heritage conservation 64 3.4.1 Authenticity and design 65 3.5 Contemporary functions and uses in historical environments 68 3.5.1 General usages of heritage 70 3.5.2 Multifunctional usage 72 3.5.3 Distinctions in the functions of historical sites 72 Summary 74 4 EMPIRICAL RESEARCH: SURVEY AND ANALYSIS 75 4.1 Methodology and terms 75 4.2 Archaeological sites 76 4.3 Questionnaire 92 4.4 Results 93 Discourse “Planning aspect” 94 Discourse “Landscape design” 96 Discourse “Landscape integrity” 99 4.5 Typology of archaeological site presentation 102 4.5.1 Interpretive model 102 4.5.2 Purist model 106 4.5.3 Imaginary model 107 4.5.4 Archaeological network model 108 4.5.5 Park-like presentation model 109 Summary 112 5 THEORETICAL LANDSCAPE DESIGN and PRESENTATION PRINCIPLES FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES 113 5 5.1 The task of landscape design on archaeological sites 113 An example: Landscaping at Acropolis, Athens 117 5.2 The goals of landscape design and presentation 119 5.3 The significance of visual aspects in landscape design and presentation 120 5.4 Design elements at heritage sites 122 5.4.1 Site organization and routing network 122 5.4.2 Signs 124 5.4.3 Infrastructure 124 5.4.4 Design aspects and design material 126 5.5 Planting and vegetation control at archaeological sites 127 5.5.1 General information about the Aegean vegetation 128 5.5.2 Plant use 130 5.5.3 Plant species and their design effects on the site 133 5.5.4 Conclusion 135 Summary 137 6 PLANNING PROPOSALS FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES: THREE CASE STUDIES 139 6.1 Pergamon 140 6.2 Ephesus 150 6.3 Hierapolis-Pamukkale 160 Summary 172 7 CONCLUSIONS 174 BIBLIOGRAPHY 180 6 LIST OF FIGURES (All illustrations and photographs are by the author, unless stated otherwise) Figure 2.1 From working landscapes to cultural heritage 21 Figure 2.2 Tourism according to the interests and resources (After Ashworth and Tunbridge 2000: 56) 37 Figure 2.3 Location of the archaeological sites at the southwest of Turkey (After Soykan 1998: 184) 44 Figure 3.1 Sardis “The Bath-Gymnasium Complex: Marble Court” 56 Figure 3.2 Stonehenge circle “The Stones” (Exon et al. 2000: 69) 60 Figure 3.3 Stonehenge from Bush Barrow (Exon et al. 2000: 89) 60 Figure 4.1 The location of archaeological sites in the western Turkey (1998-1999 Microsoft) 77 Figure 4.2 The plan of Aphrodisias and the new tracing at the archaeological site (Courtesy of Aphrodisias Archaeological Excavation) 78 Figure 4.3 Aphrodisias; view from the “non-archaeological part” 79 Figure 4.4 Tetrapylon and the plant formations 80 Figure 4.5 The tomb of Prof. Dr. Kenan Erim 80 Figure 4.6 Didyma Temple 82 Figure 4.7 İlyas Bey Mosque at Miletos 84 Figure 4.8 The ancient city plan of Miletos (After A. V. Gerkan; Griechische Städteanlagen 1924; Tuttahs 1998: 4) 84 Figure 4.9 The coastal change in the course of time (Brinkmann et al. 1991: 10) 85 Figure 4.10 The location of ancient city Miletos and the landscape formations in the region (After Brinkmann et al. 1991: 5) 86 Figure 4.11 View to the Meander valley at Miletos 87 Figure 4.12 Information panels with graphics for the orientation at Miletos 88 Figure 4.13 The plan of ancient city Priene (After the excavations in 1895-99, Kummer G. and Wilberg, W.) 89 Figure 4.14 View of Grand Meander (Büyük Menderes) valley 90 Figure 4.15 Athena Temple at Priene 90 Figure 4.16 Car park at the entrance of Priene (Hennemeyer 2004) 91 Figure 4.17 The integrated presentation models 102 Figure 4.18 The wooden horse at the archaeological site of Troy 103 Figure 4.19 The garden in Bodrum Castle 104 Figure 4.20 Alinda and the marketplace 107 Figure 4.21 The “Red Hall”; Roman temple in Bergama 110 Figure 4.22 The remains of Roman bath in Frankfurt am Main 111 7 Figure 4.23 Archaeological remains at the center of the Michaelerplatz (Vienna) 111 Figure 5.1 Factors for planning heritage sites 117 Figure 5.2 Design details from Acropolis, Athens by D. Pikionis (Courtesy of Lehrstuhl für Landschaftsarchitektur und öffentlicher Raum, TUM) 119 Figure 5.3 Detail from Cafe house at Acropolis, Athens by D. Pikionis (Courtesy of Lehrstuhl für Landschaftsarchitektur und öffentlicher Raum, TUM) 119 Figure 5.4 Overview of the plant cover at Aphrodisias 136 Figure 5.5 Venus and Roma Temple in Rome (Courtesy of Lehrstuhl für Baugeschichte und Bauforschung, TUM) 137 Figure 6.1 The city plan of Pergamon (Koester 1998: 444) 141 Figure 6.2 The location of Pergamon (After Tül 2000: 19) 142 Figure 6.3 “Red Hall”, or Temple of the Egyptian Gods 144 Figure 6.4 Park elements at the entrance of the “Red Hall” 145 Figure 6.5 View of Acropolis - Pergamon from the square of the modern city of Bergama 145 Figure 6.6 The view of the street in front of the Red Hall 146 Figure 6.7 The theatre and Trajan´s