-
MediterraneanArchaeologyandArchaeometry,Vol.2011,No.2,pp.3753Copyright2011MAA
PrintedinGreece.Allrightsreserved.
THEINITIALAPPEARANCEOFASHLARSTONEINCYPRUS.SSUESOFPROVENANCEANDUSE.
MariaPhilokyprou
DepartmentofArchitecture,UniversityofCyprusP.OBox20537Nicosia1678,Cyprus
Tel:+35722892974,99354436,Fax:+35722660834
Received:18/05/2011Accepted:30/07/2011
Correspondingauthor:[email protected]
ABSTRACTInCyprusstonewastheprimarybuildingmaterial,eitherasrubbleorinadressedform(called
ashlar),sincetheNeolithicperiod.InitiallystonewasusedonlyasrubblebutlaterduringtheLateBroneAgeashlarstoneappearedforthefirsttimeontheisland.TheaimofthispaperisthepresentationoftheresultsofasystematicresearchregardingthedifferenttypesandusesofashlarstoneandthetechniquesfollowedduringtheLateBronzeAgeinCyprusincomparisonwithotherMediterranean
areas.Themacroscopic andmicroscopic examination of selected samples
showed thatsedimentaryrocksofvariousgeological
formationswereusedasashlars.One, twooreven
threedifferenttypesofstonesweretransportedfromthequarriesnearesttothesettlements.Somecharacteristicmethodsof
stonedressing, suchas finishingonly thevisible
facesandcreatingdraftedmarginsaround the faceof theashlarblocks,are
tobe foundnotonly inLateBronzeAgesettlementsbutalso
inmorerecentexamples from the last
twocenturies.Thechoiceofashlarand
themethodsofconstructioncanberelated tosocial,religiousandpolitical
factorsandwerenotonlybasedonaestheticcriteriaandpracticalissues.Thus,themostimpressivestructuralsolutionswerefollowedintheconstructionoftemplesandpublicbuildings,whereasmoresimplemethodscanbeobservedinresidentialcomplexes.
KEYWORDS:Quarries,Draftedmargins,Orthostats,Courses,Calcareoussandstone
-
MARIAPHILOKYPROU38
INTRODUCTIONSince theNeolithicperiodanduntil the last
twocenturies,stonehasconstitutedtheprimarychoice in the
construction ofwalls inCyprus,giving structures stability and
satisfactoryaesthetic appearance (e.g. Khirokitia, MarkiAlonia,
AlambraMouttes, MaroniVournes,AlassaPaliotaverna, KalavasosAyios
Dhimitrios: Philokyprou 1998a). The most primitiveNeolithic
circular houses made of perishablematerials timber, reedsetc.
(KalavasosTenta)were succeededbymorepermanent structuresusing
rubble stone (Khirokitia: Le Brun 1984,KalavasosTenta: Todd 1987).
Rubble stoneseemstobetheonlychoiceofstoneduringtheNeolithic,
Chalcolithic, Early and
MiddleBronzeAgeinCyprusforeconomicandtechnologicalreasonswhereasduringtheLateBronzeAge,stoneinadressedform(calledashlar)wasalsoused
in combinationwith rubble.According toG.Hult (1983),BronzeAgeashlar
stonerefers to wrought blocks which approach theideal of a
rectangular visible face when
theblocksareinplace.Thefacesthatarenotvisibleare mostly unwrought
and the sizes of theblocksvaryconsiderablyfrom0,50X0,30X0,30m(Hala
SultanTekke) tovery large sizeswith
alengthof1,005,00m,aheightof0,501,50m,andathicknessof0,500,90m(Kition,Alassa).Therearealsosomepartlycarved
(worked)piecesofstone that are often used among unworkedstoneblocks
(rubblestones)
indomesticbuildingsoftheEarlyBronzeAge(MarkiAlonia)tothe Late
Bronze Age (Hala Sultan Tekke,Enkomi etc.).Ashlarblockswith all
facesperfectlyworked toshapeandusuallyofuniformsize and occupying
the entire thickness of thewall occurredmainly during theClassical
period (true ashlar masonry). Ashlar was always left exposed on the
external facades
ofbuildings,andforthisreasonitsusehadanimportantaestheticvalue
inaddition to its structuralone.
Theuseofstonehasalwaysbeenassociatedwith the geology of each
area, the immediateenvironment of the settlements and the
availabilityofsuitablematerialtobequarried.Thesefactors resulted in
theemergenceof theuseofdifferent types of rock in the various areas
of
the island and in the absence of the use ofdressed stones in
areas where suitable
rockswerenotavailableespeciallyduringtheearliestperiodsofantiquity.
Theinitialappearanceofashlarsdidnottakeplace simultaneously in
every civilization duetomany factors (available
rocks,urbanization,bronzetoolsetc.).InEgyptitsuseisdatedbacktothebeginningofthethirdmillenniumandinSyria
to the middle of the same
millennium(Hult1983).InUgarit(Wright1985),ashlarappeared in the
beginning of the secondmillennium.The extensivedefences ofEbla
(DamascusGateway) dating to the Early andMiddleBronzeAge (3rd and
2ndMillennium
BC)wereconstructedwiththeuseofashlar(Hadjisavvas2007). In
Palestine, somewhat limited use ofashlarcanbeobserved in
theMiddleandLateBronzeAge. InAnatoliaandmainlandGreece,this
techniquewas adoptedduring the end oftheMiddle and especially in
the beginning oftheLateBronzeAge (Hult1983).Morespecifically,
limestone blocks with a regular
shapewerefoundtobeusedinmanypartsofGreeceduring
thePrehellenicperioddue to the easyway inwhichrocksweresplit
intorectangularblocks(Laurence1983).
The development of ashlar in Crete
isthoughttooriginateintheEarlyMinoanperiod(Shaw 1983). Ashlar
masonry seems to
havebeeninitiallyusedineliteresidenceslocatedinthesurroundingsofurbansettlementsofCrete(Mallia,
Chrysolakkos: Schoep 2006).
MonumentalarchitectureinCreteusingashlarblocks(orthostatsetc.)wasobserved
from theMiddleMinoan period onwards (Phaistos,
MalliaChrysolakkos,QuarterMu,Hypostyle Crypt).Shortly after the
beginning of theMiddleMinoanperiod, largeorthostatswereused in
theMiddleMinoan IB palaces at Phaistos and atChrysolakkos,which
constitute the earliest examplesoforthostats in theAegeanarea
(Shaw1983).AccordingtoDriessenandSchoep(1995),for the rest of the
island of Crete during theMiddleMinoan
IIperiod,orthostatsareabsentandashlarisverylimiteduntiltheLateMinoanperiod.In
theMiddleBronzeAge inthesettlementofKeos, largeroughlysquared
limestoneblockswereusedfor theconstructionofanewdefensive system,
while in northern Rhodes
-
THEINITIALAPPEARANCEOFASHLARSTONEINCYPRUS.SSUESOFPROVENANCEANDUSE
39
ashlar masonry appeared during the
LateBronzeAgeIandII(Davis1992).
InCyprus, the firstuseofashlar isdated totheLateBronzeAge IIC
(13251225BC)whenthe first public and administrative
buildingcomplexes appeared (Kalavasos, Maroni). Itwas more
widespread later during the LateBronzeAge IIIA (12251125BC)when the
firsturban centerswith buildings of differentiateduse were
established in various sites such asEnkomi,Kition,Kouklia
andMyrtou. Theuseof ashlar is related to the widespread use
ofbronzetoolsatthatperiod(Philokyprou1998a).Theappearanceofashlaralwaysdemandedthefulfillment
of some prerequisites (appropriatetypeof rock, tools,wealth,
socialorganization,availableworkforce).This is the reason for
thetime difference in the dissemination of
thistechniqueinthevariouscultures.
Fig.1.LateBronzeAgesettlementofKalavasos
Fig.2.LateBronzeAgesettlementofKition
Theuseofashlar,inCyprus,duringtheLateBronze Age wasmainly
limited to
importantpublicbuildingsandadministrativecomplexes(KalavasosAyios
Dhimitrios: Fig.1, MaroniVournes,AlassaPalaiotaverna),places
ofworship (KitionKathari: Fig.2, KoukliaPalaipaphos,
MyrtouPighades, Enkomi)
andmajorresidentialcomplexes,someofwhichareconsideredaspalaces.Toalesserdegree,ashlarwas
used in fortifications, simple houses
andtombs.Thus,themoreprimitivetemples(ruralworship places) of the
beginnings of the LateBronze Age (e.g. Ayios Iakovos,
DhaliAmbelleri) constructedmainly of rubble stonewere succeededby
theashlarmonumentalurban structuresof
theLateBronzeAge.Tombsconstructedentirelyofstoneandinsomecasesofashlar
stoneappearedalsoduring the
sameperiodLateBronzeAge(Westholm1939).
EXPERIMENTALWORKANDRESULTS
Aimsandmethodologyofresearch
Inthispaper,theresultsofafirstsystematicresearch aiming to
investigate the
differenttypesandusesofashlarstoneaswellasthedifferent structural
solutions followedduring theearliestperiodsofantiquity
inCyprusarepresented. At the same time, comparisons
aremadewiththeuseofashlarinotherMediterranean areas aswell as in
the recent vernacularbuildingsof the island
(19thandearly20thcenturies) in order to investigate similarities
anddifferences in characteristics and constructiontechniques.The
researchaimedatascertainingthe composition of the various types of
stoneused and the reasons for theparticularuse ofeach
type.Thisresearchwasconsideredessentialbecauseof
theabsenceofanoverall
studyontheuseofashlarstoneinCyprusthroughoutantiquityandtheassociatedstonequarries.
During this research, the different types ofbuildings aswell as
the different parts of eachstructurewhere ashlar stonewasusedwere
investigated. The present researchwas based
primarilyonthestudyofrocksusedasashlarsintheLateBronzeAge
settlements inCyprus. For theinvestigation of the provenance of
ashlar stone,samples fromdifferent typesof stones from
thevariousstructureswereselected formacroscopic
-
MARIAPHILOKYPROU40
andmicroscopicexamination,followedbyasystematicsurveyaroundtheprehistoricsettlements.Afterascertainingprobablesourceareas,asearchwasmade
to find tracesofoldquarrying:channels and trenches in rocks, step
formations,
etc.Thesecondaryuseofmanyquarriesduringmorerecentperiodsconstitutedaserioushindrance
toanyattempttodate theoldquarries,as inmanycases the ancient trace
marks have been completely dissipated. Comparisons were made
ofsamplesgatheredfromthequarrieswiththeashlarblocksofthesettlementsonthebasisoflithology,porosity,grainsizeandcolour.Petrographictechniqueswereemployedinordertoidentifyallcomponents
including mineral matrices in theashlar stoneof each
settlementaswellas in thesamplesfromthecorrespondingquarries.
Theselectionofrockstobeusedasashlar
Arockcanbeusedasashlaronlyifitcanbequarried in a sufficient size
inorder to satisfythe construction purposes for which it is
intended,andifitisfreeofanymineralsthatmaycausechemicaldecompositionorbeaffectedbyweather
conditions. In Cyprus, ashlars
werealmostexclusivelyderivedfromlocalsedimentary rocks of various
geological
formations,whichcouldbeeasilyquarriedandatthesametimewereresistant
tomechanicalandphysicalstresses.
The finegrained calcareous sandstone
thatbelongstothePachnageologicalformationhadthemostwidespreadusesinceitisanespeciallydurable
rockwithagoodaestheticappearance(Fig.3). It consistsmainly of
biogenic componentswitha
fewparticlesofsilicate,allboundtogetherbymicrocrystallinecalcite,micriteandsparite.Useof
theaboverockcanbeobservedin theLateBronzeAgesites
inKalavasos,Maroni,AlassaandKouklia.
Quarriesof this rockare tobe found in
theLimassol,LarnacaandPaphosdistricts(Pachna,Kivides, Tochni etc.).
This rock appears veryoften in layersof
thicknessrangingfromafewcentimeterstoafewmeters.Betweenthelayersthereareusuallynarrowmarly
layers.Insomecasesthenaturalrockdiscontinuationscreatearectangulargridthatservestheeasyremovalofrectangularpiecesofstone.
Fig.3:CalcareoussandstoneofPachnageologicalformation(a.Specimenandb.Thinsectioncross
nicolsshowingadensestructurecomposedofafewparticlesofsilicates(quartzetc.)andmanybiogeniccomponentsboundtogetherbycalcite,micriteand
sparite)
Aratherextensiveusewasmadeofahighly
porous yellowishochre calcareous
sandstonethatbelongstotheNicosiaAthalassageologicalformation(Fig.4).Duringtheprehistoricperiod,rocksofthistypewereusedinsecondarystructuresof
importantbuildings (Kitionsanctuary)and ina few
residentialbuildingsofothersettlements (Hala SultanTekke).All the
biogenicand silicate grains of this rock are
looselyboundtogetherbymicrosparryandsparrycalcite.According to
theclassificationofDunham(1962) this is agrain stone,while
according tomore recent publications (Ioannou et al. 2009)this
stone can be considered as a vuggy limestone.
QuarriesofthisporouscalcareoussandstonecanbefoundinbothNicosia(Aglantzia,Mammari,
Gerolakos etc.) and Larnaca
districts(OrokliniandDhekelia).Thelessprevalentuseof this
typeofrockcompared to thesandstoneof Pachna formation can be
attributed to itsmoderate diagenesis and the weak
bondingcomponents, whichmakes it a highly porousrock.
a
b1mm
-
THEINITIALAPPEARANCEOFASHLARSTONEINCYPRUS.SSUESOFPROVENANCEANDUSE
41
Fig4:CalcareoussandstoneofNicosiaAthalassa
geologicalformation(a.Specimenandb.Thinsectioncrossnicolsshowingaveryporousrockcomposedmainlyofbiogenicmaterialboundtogetherwith
calciteandmicrite)
Use of the whitish reef limestone that be
longs to the Koronia geological
formation,composedmostlyofmicrospar,wasconfinedtosignificant
prehistoric buildings such as themagnificent sanctuaries in Kition
(Fig.5).
Itspleasingcolourandgreatdurabilitymakesthisstoneparticularlyattractiveforwhatmusthavebeen
very impressive monumental structures.Quarries of this rock have
been discovered intwo places: Potamos tou Liopetriou
andMosfiloudhia,southwestofthevillageofXylofagou(Xenophontos1985).
In1968at theareaofMosphiloudhiaunfinished statues of
theHellenisticRoman periodtogether with three incomplete capitals
werefound (Vermeule 1979). It is therefore
evidentthatthisquarryhasbeenusedbothforthecarvingofstatuesaswellasforthesupplyofbuilding
stones during the Hellenistic and Romanperiods, without precluding
the possibility
ofanearlieruseofthisquarrypredatingtheseperiods(e.g.LateBronzeAge).
The finegrain chalk thatbelongs to
theLefkarageologicalformationhadalimiteduse
intheprehistoricperiod.Use of such a rock has
beenobservedatKitionandat
theneighbouringLateBronzeAgesettlementofHalaSultanTekke(Fig.6).
Fig.5:WhitishreeflimestoneofKoroniageologicalformation(a.GeneralviewofashlarorthostatsofKitionandb.Thinsectioncrossnicolsshowinga
denserockcomposedmainlyofmicrospar).
Fig.6.FinegrainchalkofLefkarageologicalformation
(a.ThinslabsofchalkusedaswallfacinginabathroominHalaSultanTekkeandb.Thinsectioncrossnicolsshowingmanyfossilsandforaminifersboundtogetherwithmicrocrystallinecalcite)
a
b
a
b 1mm
a
b1mm
a
b1mm
-
MARIAPHILOKYPROU42
The rock is composed almost entirely ofmicrocrystalline
foraminifera, tightly boundtogetherwithmicrite andmicrocrystalline
calcite. Itwas used for architectural componentswhich demand fine
carving, cutting into
thinslabsforwallfacing,basesandthresholds.Rockof this type appears
in theKoshi andLymbiaareawherequarry faces can be observed.Another
very suitable type of rock used whentherewasademand for
finecarvingwasgypsum. Gypusm slabs (called gyphomarmara)were
employed during all the prehistoric andhistoric periods because of
the abundance
ofthismaterialontheislandandtheeasywayofcuttingitintothinslabs.
Inmost of the Late BronzeAge sites onlyone type of rock was used
as ashlar for allbuilding purposes, although therewere
caseswhereaselectiveuseoftwo,threeormoredifferent types of
rockwereused invery important building complexes (such as the
ancientKitiontemples).Itisthereforeevidentthatsincethe Late Bronze
Age there has been a clearknowledge of the qualities, properties
and ca
pabilities on which the selection of the mostsuitable type of
rock was based. These rockswere transported from the nearby
quarries onland or via the sea (Xenophontos 1985). It isclear that
the prehistoric people decided totransport large pieces of ashlar
stone from avery longdistance inorder toobtain
themostappropriateanddurable rock for theconstruction of impressive
buildings during the LateBronze IIIA period (12251125 BC),
whereasother quarries existedmore closely to the settlements
butwith less durable rocks (e.g. calcareous sandstone of Athalassa
formation)(Fig.7). This practice of transporting a specifictype of
stone over a long distance can be observed even inmore ancient
periods of antiquity(2100BC)fortheconstructionofimportantmonuments
such as the Stonehedge. Despitethe fact that the huge trilithons of
the Stonehedgeweremadeoflocalstone,theBluestonesfor the
construction of the inner part of themonument were transported from
over
250milesaway,fromthePreseliHillsinPembrokeshire,WestWales(Jones2008,Wright2000).
Fig.7.GeologicalmapofKitionareashowingtheprovenanceofashlarstonefortheconstruction
oftheancientKitiontemples
-
THEINITIALAPPEARANCEOFASHLARSTONEINCYPRUS.SSUESOFPROVENANCEANDUSE
43
The investigationof theancientquarries revealed that during
antiquity the quarrying
ofstonefollowedmoreorlessonegeneralmethod(Fig.8).The stone
tobequarriedwas
removedfromtheparentrockbytheopeningofcircumferentialtrenchestotherequireddepthwiththeuse
of axes, chisels, saws and sometimeswedges. This procedure was
followed by theundercuttingoftherockwiththeuseoflevers,chisels and
more often metal or woodenwedges.Most of the ancient quarrieswere
onhill slopes or near the sea and
quarryingwascarriedoutinconsecutivesteps.Incaseswheresuitablematerialwasnotpresentatorclose
tothesurface,undergroundquarrieswerecreated(e.g.Dhekelia,Gerolakkos,Aglantzia).
Fig.8:PotamostouLiopetriou.Ancientquarry(a.Photo
andb.Sketchplanandsection)
It is important to note that in contrast to
other Mediterranean regions and MainlandGreece, in Cyprus during
all prehistoric
andevenhistoricperiodsthecalcareoussandstonesconstituted the prime
construction materialwhilstmarbleandotherharderandmoredurable
materials were almost completely
absent.Ontheotherhand,marblewasusedindifferentbuildingsinAtticaandinmanyAegeanislandsdue
to the abundance of marble quarries in
theseareas(Kea:Mendoni1998,Kythnos:Chatzianastasiou 1998,
Andros: Koutsoukou andKanellopoulos 1990). Soft creamy
yellowlimestone,sandstoneaswellasveryhardclosegrainedbluelimestone(sideropetra)wereusedin
different settlement of Minoan Crete andwere quarried from the
nearby areas of eachsettlement (Rehak and Younger 1998). Limestone
and schist stones were used in otherMediterranean areas such as the
EuboeaDragonHousesatStyraoftheClassicaltoHellenistic period and
were provided from thenearby schistpeaks (Chindiroglou
2010,Reber2010,LiritzisandArtelaris2010).
IntheSyroPalestinianregion,goodbuildingstone such as white
coarsegrained limestonewaswidelyused as this rockwas available
inall parts of the region. Calcareous sandstonewasdistributed in
the coastalplainandbasaltwas only used in monumental buildings
becauseof itshardness and for its striking chromaticeffect
(Wright1985).Thus,
ineachcountrythematerialusedisrelatedtothegeologyofeachparticulararea.Theabsenceofmarbleandother
hard (dense)materials inCyprus led tothe widespread use of local
calcareous sandstonesinalltheperiodsofantiquity.
Maincharacteristicsofashlarstones
A key feature of the ashlarmasonrywhichhas appeared on the
island since the LateBronze Age onwards is the dressing
andsmoothingofonly its
faceswhichweremeanttobevisible(freevisiblesurfaces)andpartiallyofthesurfacessetagainstotherstones,whereasthe
back of the stone almost always remainedunworked. Dressing the
stone only on itsvisible face and leaving the back face
roughconstitutes a common technique during antiquity in the
SyroPalestinian coast, in Crete(Shaw 1973) and Anatolia (Wright
1996), butnot inEgyptandmainlandGreece.Thedressing of the contact
surfaces of ashlar stones oftheLateBronzeAgesettlements
inCyprusdidnot incorporate anathyroris, which is a verycommon
characteristic of the ClassicalmonumentsofMainlandGreece.
Inmany cases there is a smooth, carefullyworkedperipheralband
calleddraftedmargin
b
a
-
MARIAPHILOKYPROU44
on the external visible surfaces of ashlars
surroundingacentralpanelthatprotrudesslightly(Fig.9).
Thispanelcalledapergonhadaroughrectangular, unworked orworked
flat surface.Agreat variation in the number of draftedmargins and
their degree of carving can be observed. These appear either as
peripheralaround the faceof the ashlar,or are
restrictedalongone,two,orthreesidesofthefaceofthestone(Fig.9).
Insomecases,thesemarginsareclearlyvisible and in other cases
hardly distinguishable.Marginswere drafted before commencing
thebuildingprocess inorder todirect theplacingof the blocks and to
show towhat depth thedressingshouldbe.
Fig.910:DraftedmarginsinLateBronzeAgemasonry(1200BCFig.9)andinacolonialbuilding(19thcen
turyACFig.10)
Inorder todressa stone, it isessential thatfourpointsdefining
thesame levelare locatedat its fourcorners.After thecarvingof
theperipheralmargins the restof the surface canbemore easily
worked. With the help of thesemargins thepiece of stone could be
set at exactly thesame levelas
theneighboringblocks.Thecentralsurfacewascarvedentirelyorpar
tially before, ormore often, after placing
thestone.Duringtheearliestperiodsofantiquity,itseems that this
carving processwas as a
rulecarriedoutaftertheinstallationofthestoneandsometimes the
smoothing work was nevercompleted. Thus the margins are still
visibletoday.Working ashlar stonewith the help ofdraftedmarginswas
also recognized in
otherareasoftheEasternMediterraneanArea(SyroPalestinian coast:
Reich 1992, Ugarit:
Wright1996andAnatolia:Wright2000)duringthelastquarterofthesecondmillenium.
Fig.1112:Bossesobservedonthesurfacesofashlarstones(Fig.11:AlassaPhoto,Fig.12:KalavasosPlan
andelevations)
Thesemarginswere also employed in Cyprus later during the
CyproArchaic andCyproClassical periods (Karageorghis andMaier
1984). The presence ofmargins is alsovery common inmainlandGreece
duringArchaic and Classical periods (retaining wall ofAthena
Pronaia terrace at Delphi, temple ofAthena Aphaia at Aegina island:
Orlandos195960). In thecolonialarchitectureof the late19th and
early 20th centuries in Cyprus, thedrafted margins appeared again
and werewidelyused in the facadesofpublicbuildingsandprivatehouses
(Fig.10).Whilst initially the
10
9
11
12
-
THEINITIALAPPEARANCEOFASHLARSTONEINCYPRUS.SSUESOFPROVENANCEANDUSE
45
marginsplayedaclearstructuralrole,theylateracquiredanaestheticvaluesincetheirpresencecreated
an interesting decorative effect
(Fig.910).Itisageneralruleinmasonrydevelopmentthatfunctionaldevicessurviveduringlaterperiodsasdecorativeones(Wright1992).
Fig.1314.AshlarsfromKitionshowingsmallmortises
atthetopoftheorthostats
Some interesting structural features of theLate Bronze Age
ashlar stones are the smallprotrusions (bosses) that are observed
in themiddle of their visible surfaces (Fig.1112).Thesewere usually
of a square, triangular orirregular cross section and were left on
thestonesurfaceatthebeginningofitsworkingsoas to ease its
handlingwith the use of levers(Coulton1974).Suchprotrusionscanbe
foundboth in the low,nonvisiblepartsofbuildings
as well as in orthostats and other
prominentpartsofmasonry.During the
finalworkingofthestonesurfacesthebosseswerecutoff.Thereare,however,exampleswhere
these remained,probably foreconomic reasons, thus
formingadecorative element and being witnesses ofthe initial size
of the stone which had beenquarried. Inmost cases, one boss can be
observedoneachblock,whilstthereareexamplesof two protrusions
usually on corner
stones(Kition,Alassa).Thepresenceofbossescanbeusually observed on
stones of relatively
largesizeusedmainlyinpublicbuildings.Thebossesare very common
features of Greek
ArchitecturethatcanoftenbeobservedinmanyClassicalmonuments (Temple
ofAphaia atAegina,Thesion,Temple ofAthenaNike,Propylaia
ofAcropolis:Orlandos195960).
Ontheuppersurfaceofsomeorthostatsandalsoontheuppersurfaceofthelowercourseofthe
walls on which these orthostats
stood,smallsizedshallowmortises(blindholes)werecut.Theirregularsizeandshapeoftheseholesat
the topof the lowercourseofstones lead
tothetheoryoftheirpossiblerelationtotheuseofa lever for the
placement of the stones abovethem.On the otherhand, theuniform
regularform and size of themortises (rectangular orsquare) and the
frequency of their appearanceon the topof theorthostats (Fig.1314)
indicatetheir possible use in fastening the timber elements of the
superstructure.Wooden dowelswouldhavebeenset in theseholes.
(KarageorghisandDemas1985).
Methodsofconstructionusingashlar
DuringtheLateBronzeAge,ashlarmasonrywas not employed for
building entire structures,mainlyduetoeconomicalreasons.Itsusewas
often confined to the lower part of
thewallsandfrequentlyintheconstructionofonlycertainpartsofthestructures.Mostofthepublicbuildingshave
the lowerpartof theirwalls(socle) constructed entirely of ashlar
for betterstabilityand for theprotectionof
themasonryagainstrisingdampcausedbycapillaryaction.Inmanycases,theuseofashlarwas
limitedtothe visible importantparts of the buildings asshaping
ashlars was timeconsuming and ex
-
MARIAPHILOKYPROU46
pensive.Theuseofashlarcanalsobeobservedin key positions (wall
corners, frames of
theopenings,etc.).Thisselectiveusereinforcedthestructuresandat the
same time createdan
interestingaestheticeffect.SelectiveuseofashlarinrubblewallsforimprovingthestabilityofthevariousstructuresappearssincetheprehistoricperiodsintheterritoryofMinoanCrete(Rehakand
Younger 1998) and in Ugarit (Hult 1983,Niemeier 1991). These areas
share commoncharacteristics during the Late Bronze Age(Niemeier
1991, Cline 1995) that show
closeconnectionsbetweenthem(Crete,Cyprus,Ugarit) and underline
anAegean presence in theLevant during the Late Bronze Age (Tell
elKabri,TellQuasileetc.).
Ashlar stones, since the Late Bronze Agewere usually laid
lengthways along both theinteriorandexterior
facesofawall,creatingashelltype construction (Alassa,
Maroni,Kalavasos:Fig.1516).Oftenasmallnumberofstoneswithawidthequaltothethicknessofthewallorslightlylesswereplacedtransverselyatregular
intervalsasheadersconnecting its
twofaces(HalaSultanTekke:Fig.16).Thusthemasonrywallacquiredacertaindegreeofstability.Intheshelltypewalls,theintermediatehollowspacebetweenthetwoparallelstonefaceswasusuallyfilledwithrubble,mudandearth.
Fig.1516:Ashlarwallsofshelltype(Fig.15:Kalavasos:Wallwithstoneslaidlengthwaysalongbothfaces.Fig.16:HalaSultanTekke:Wallwithsome
stoneslaidtransverselyasheaders)
This building technique is described byVitruvius (Second Book of
Architecture), whoassigns to theGreeks
theuseofheaderscalleddiatonoi (Atzeni 2003), but this
constructionmethodseemstohavebeenusedsincetheLate
Bronze Age (Cyprus Hala Sultan Tekke,Enkomi:Philokyprou 1998a).
It is evident thatAncientGreeksused this technique in
amoresystematic and regularway. There are only
afewexamplesofcompactstructurescreatedbylarge stones occupying the
entire width of awall. Ashlar was, as a rule, combined withother
materials, both along the length of thewallaswell as in
itsheight.There are severalcases inwhichone single faceof
thewallwasbuiltwithashlarmasonrywhile theother interior face, which
was of less importance, wasconstructed of rubble. A similar
constructiontechniquewith the faces of fortificationwallsbeing
constructed with large stones and thespace inbetween filledwithmud
and
smallerstonescanbeobservedinNeolithicsettlementsinCyprus(Khirokitia:LeBrun1994,KalavasosTenta:
Todd 1987) and in the Aegean world(Strofilas fortification wall in
Andros: Liritzis2010) aswell as in the cyclopeanwalls of theLate
Bronze Age in Cyprus (Kition, Enkomi,Maaetc.).
A simplemethodof construction comprisesthe setting of ashlars in
successive horizontalcourses. Coursedmasonrywas not used
veryoftenduringtheLateBronzeAgeinCyprusbutsawmuch greater use in
the periods that
followedanduptomoderntimes.DuringtheLateBronzeAgeinthefewexamplesofcoursedmasonry,thestonesdidnothaveauniformlengthand
each successive coursewas of a differentheight.
Insomecases,suchasanaltar inMyrtouPighades, there was a reduction
of theheight of the consecutive courses of
stones(Hult1983).Coursedmasonrywaswidelyusedin the Classical period
and Vitruvius (SecondBook of Architecture)mentions the names
ofvarious techniques following this
system(isodomic,pheudoisodomic).Themost
ancientandwelldevelopedcoursedmasonrysystemoftheislandisrepresentedintheLateBronzeAgebuilt
tombs of Enkomi (Westholm
1939,Schaeffer1952).Intheroofsofthesetombs,thecorbelling system of
building blocks was followedwith slightlymoreprominent blocks
insuccessive courses (Westholm 1939).A similarway of roofing using
the corbelling system
isobservedmainlyintombsofthesameorearlierperiods excavated in
Syria, at Ebla (Middle
16 15
-
THEINITIALAPPEARANCEOFASHLARSTONEINCYPRUS.SSUESOFPROVENANCEANDUSE
47
BronzeAge:Hadjisavvas 2007), also atUgarit(Late Bronze Age) in
Ras Shamra, MinetellBeida, Ras Ibn Hani, as well as in
Mycenae(Hult, 1983). The various similarities
betweentheCypriotashlartombsandthecorrespondingbutearlieronesofUgaritandSyria(Ebla)indicatethatthelatterwereprobablyprototypesoftheCyprusexamples.ThetombsofEnkomiareprobably
associated with new settlers(Achaeans, Sea people),who came to
theisland during this period and brought
withthemtheirlocaltraditions.
Itisworthmentioningthatwhereasuntiltheendof
theEarlyBronzeAgeCyprushadcloserelationsmainlywith the
EastMediterranean,since the Middle Bronze Age (19001650
BC)Minoanpottery appearedon the
island.Later,attheendoftheMiddleandduringthebeginningoftheLateBronzeAge(17001400BC)theconnections
with the Aegean world
becamecloserasCyprustookaleadingroleinthetradeof the Eastern
Mediterranean. The Minoanships used Cyprus as an intermediate
stopwhen travelling to Ugarit. During the LateBronze Age the
connectionswith the Aegeanbecamemoreclose(existenceofalargenumberof
importedAegean items on the island) andduring 1500BC anewwriting
system, the socalledCyproMinoan scriptwas introduced inthe island
probably due to the relations betweenCypriotsandMinoans
inUgarit.During1450/1400BCmanyMycenean itemswere imported
toCyprusandanew typeof localpotterycalledMyceneanMCIIIC:2bappeared
thatshowedMycenaeaninfluences.
Thebuilding
techniquewhichwasmostoftenusedduringtheprehistoricerainvolvedtheuseoforthostats
(uprightplacedstones)setonahorizontal course of larger,
slightlyprotrudingstones(calledplinths)(Fig.17).Thismethodhadawideapplicationmainlyduringtheearliestperiodsofantiquity(Philokyprou1998b)butnotatalaterperiod.Intheconstructionofwallswiththeuseoforthostats,severalvariationsasto
the method of placing the orhtostats
andformingtheirbasecanbeobserved(Fig.17).
Usuallytheorthostatsrestedonahorizontalcourse of ashlar stones
(Fig.17. A2) and veryrarely on irregularlyshaped large
blocks(Fig.17.A1).Theplinthwaseitherformedintoa
singlehorizontallevel(Fig.17.A2)ortherewasadifferenceinthelevelsbetweenthetwohorizontalstonesof
the twosides (Fig.17.A3).Thedifference in the levels might have
providedmore stability to the orthostats orwasmerelydue to
adifference in theground levelon theinside and outside of the
building. There arealso some very elaborate structures with
twoseries of orthostats arranged on a single
largeashlar(Fig.17.B1).Insomecasestheupperfaceof theplinthsonwhich
theorthostatswere tobesethadtworabbetsforplacingandfasteningthe
orthostats (Fig.17. B2, B3). Thus,
thewallwasmadeentirelyoftrueashlarsandappearedverysolid.Theupperpartoftheorthostatswasformed
into a single horizontal levelwith theuse of orthostats of the same
or differentheights (Fig.17.B3,C1)oradifference in
levelwascreatedbetweenthetwofaceswiththeuseoforthostatsofdifferentheights(Fig.17.C2).
Fig.17.DifferentMethodsoftheorthostatsystem
Therewere some cases of the existence of
rabbets (cut off part of the top surface) alongthe
topofbothorthostatsmaintaining the
restofthesurfaceinamoreroughcondition(Fig.17.B2).Thismethodresultedinthebettersupportofhorizontaltiebeams,whichprobablyservedasabaseof
the superstructure.Sometimes thedouble
rowoforthostatswascoveredbyslabsplacedhorizontally surmounted by
the timber
-
MARIAPHILOKYPROU48
andmud brick superstructure. This
techniqueofusingorthorstatswasappliedatahighlevelof development
during its first appearance
inCyprus.Theextensiveuseofthistechniqueandits continuation later,
especially when in theneighbouring countries thiswas succeeded
bythemethod of building in successive courses,might be a result of
the conservatism of theCypriots (Hult 1983).Buildingwith
theuseoforthostats appeared in Palestine
(Megiddo,BethShear)duringtheMiddleandLateBronzeage (Shiloh, 1979)
and inUgarit andAnatolia(TelKabri:Niemeier1991,Alalakh,AlayaHuyuk,
etc.) since the secondmillennium. In TelKabri many other aspects of
civilization(painted floorsetc.)showcommoncharacteristics with the
Minoan civilization
(Niemeier1991).AshlarmasonryusingorthostatssetatopafootingcourseconstitutesacommonarchitecturalfeaturemainlyintheProtopalatialpalacesofMinoanCreteandwasrarelyobservedintheNeopalatialpalaces(RehakandYounger1998).The
Cypriot technique of orthostats presentsseveral similarities to
that used in the SyroPalestine coast and especially that of
Ugarit(Shiloh1979)andCrete(Hult1983).
Ashlar,apart from itsuse forwalls,was
incorporatedintheconstructionoffloorsandasalining
forwallswhichresulted insecuringwatertightness. Thus, a wide
application in theconstruction of bathrooms took place (Rehakand
Younger 1998; Schoep 2006; Hult,
1983).Floorsofashlarslabsandwallslinedwithverticallyplaced slabs
thatwere observed inprehistoric bathrooms in Cyprus (Hala
SultanTekke andEnkomi), appeared very frequentlyin the area of
Minoan Crete in purificationrooms (Hult, 1983). Similar floors with
slabswerealsofound inUgarit(TelKabri:Niemeier1991).However, the
examples of Cyprus
presentmanysimilaritiesbutalsoshowsomedifferenceswhen comparedwith
theMinoan examples (lessglamorousetc.).These floorsmayhaveCretan
inspiration but present particularCypriotcharacteristics.
The impermeabilityofashlar
stonehasalsoledtotheuseofdressedstonesintheconstruction ofwater
channels (Karageorghis
andDemas1985),tanksandolivepresses(Philokyprou1998a).Theneed
forachievingacarefullypre
pared final appearance of certain
architecturalelementsandtheacquisitionofagreaterstabilityledtotheuseofashlarintheconstructionofstaircasesandpillars.Roomswithpillarswerecommon
architectural features ofMinoan palaces (Rehak and Younger 1998).
Another keyfactorwas the protection ofwooden elements(staircases
and supports) frommoisture.
Thusthebasesoftimberpostsweremadeofdressedstone.Theparticularaestheticrequirementsandprobably
the need to ensure longer life led totheuseof carved stones in the
constructionofsymbols of worship during antiquity such assacred
horns of consecration, as well asstepped capitals and bases (Late
Bronze Age:Fig.1819).Inadditiontohavingsteps,thecapitals are also
characterized by a cavetto,
similarlymarked.Theoriginofthesecapitalsisnotclearandmaybe related
toMinoanaswellasNear East civilizations. These stone elementsplayan
importantaestheticroleas theyconstitute the first form of capitals
found on the island.
Fig.1819.SteppedcapitalsfromKitionKathari
(Fig.18)andPaphosPalaipaphos(Fig.19)
Incised decorationwas observed only in afew cases during the
Late BronzeAge inCyprusandwasobservedmainlyinsomesteppedbases or
othermembers of the stonewalls.
Inthefirstcase,thedecorationincludesgeometricshapes(rosettes,circles),whileinthelattercasethe
illustrationsweremainly boats. Such incisions are observed in the
large pillars on the
18
19
-
THEINITIALAPPEARANCEOFASHLARSTONEINCYPRUS.SSUESOFPROVENANCEANDUSE
49
southwall of the Temple ofKition 1 and
thesacredaltaroftheTemple4(KarageorghisandDemas 1985). The display
of ships seems tohaveasymbolicsignificance.Theywereprobably sacred
offerings and had a similar role tothe many anchors observed near
the holyshrines of Kition (Karageorghis and
Demas1985).AsimilarmarkboatwasrecognizedonapieceofcarvedstoneinBtiment18ofEnkomiand
dates to the 12th century BC (Schaeffer1952).Graffitiof shipswas
also foundon twopieces of carved stone in Hala Sultan
Tekke(brink1979).Carvingsonrockwallsofearlierperiods
(Neolithic)whichmainly depict
shipswerefoundonsomeblocksofAndrosStrofilas(Liritzis2010).Someenigmaticmasonsmarkssometimes
incised on ashlars ofporous, sandstone or gypsum, but not always on
the
exposedouterwallsurface,aretobefoundinProtopalatialpalacesofMinoanCrete
(RehakandYounger1998).Incisedlettersandnumberscanbeobserved
inmanypiecesofashlarstonesoflater periods (Classical monuments)
whichserved for their easier placement into the correct position
(Temple of Aphaia, temple ofApollonatDelphi:Orlandos19591960).
DISCUSSIONDuring the Late BronzeAge, the construc
tionsolutionswhichwerefollowedusingashlarmainly depended on the
function and size ofthecorrespondingbuildings.Themost impressive
structureswere the
templesofKitionandKoukliawherehugeorthostatsmeasuringupto5m can be
observed. Very elaborate solutionswere followed in the
administrative publicbuildings in Kalavasos, Maroni, Alassa
andEnkomi.Moresimplesolutionscanbeobservedin smaller residential
complexes such as
thehousesatHalaSultanTekkeaswellasthefortificationsand
tombsatEnkomi (coursesofashlar). It isobvious that socialand
religious factorsledtotheuseofashlarsincertainbuildingsand dictated
the construction methods to
befollowed.Thus,theuseofashlarwasnotbasedonlyonpracticalandaestheticcriteria,asarchitecturereflectsthecultural,social,politicalandeconomiclifeofeveryperiod.Itcanbededucedthat
ashlar structures in the Late Bronze Age
wereassociatedwiththeestablishmentofwellorganizedurbancentres
(Negbi1986).Theuseof ashlar stone was the result of the
generalprosperityofCyprus linkeddirectly to the intensification of
the exploitation of copper
andtheactiveparticipationintradewithneighbouringcountries(Hadjisavvas2000).Itisclearthattheashlarbuildingsappearasthemostobviousmanifestationof
thestatusof theeliteafter theaccomplishmentofa
longprocessofurbanization sometime during the Late Bronze
Age(Hadjisavvas2000).TheuseofashlarinCyprusinvolvedhigh costs and
the availability of theappropriate tools and labournecessary for
thequarrying, transportation, processing and installation. Ashlar
was definitely a means ofpromotingthewealthandpoweroftheleadersand
constituted a symbol of prestige.
Ashlarmasonrydidnotappearsimultaneaslyinallthesettlements of the
island. In some settlements(Kalavasos,Maroni) ashlar canbe observed
intheLateBronzeAge IICwhereas
inothersites(Kition,Enkomi,Paphos)itappearedlaterduring the Late
BronzeAge IIIA.A similar phenomenon can be observed in Minoan
Crete(DriessenandSchoep1995).Atsomesites(MalliaandPseira)
thepresenceofashlarwas limited, despite the presence of suitable
quarries.Thus,thisproliferationofashlarmasonrymustbe connected to
social and political relationships.
Inorder tostudy
thecomplexphenomenonoftheinfluencesbetweendifferentcivilizationsandtoarriveatsomeconclusionsregardingtheuseofashlar,
it isessential to
investigateotherarchitecturalcharacteristicsofashlarbuildings.For
example, some of the prehistoric ashlarbuildingsof the island
(Maroni,Kalavasos)established in the Late Bronze Age IIC
sharecommon features. They were built on
specialcommandingpositionsandwereprovidedwithsomespacious
roomsandconsiderablestoragefacilities. It isnoteworthy that
theconstructiontechniquesofashlarmasonryareverysimilarinthemajorityofthesettlementsontheislandindicatingaquiteuniformcivilization
(Hadjisavvas2000).Atthesametime,theintroductionofsome other
innovative architectural elementswith social interpretations in
Cyprus such asthecyclopeanwalls,thecentralhearthsandthe
-
MARIAPHILOKYPROU50
bathtubsnot found inpreviousperiodsconstituted important
characteristics of the civilization of thisperiod and lead todirect
relationswith theAegeanworld. It seems that
CyprusduringtheLateBronzeAgehadverymuchinteraction with Crete and
the
SyroPalestinecoast.ThesimilaritieswithAnatolia,EgyptandmainlandGreecearefewer(Hult1983).S.Hadjisavvas(2007)connectsthehistoryoftheashlarbuildingsofCypruswithanAegeantribe,mostprobably
the Achaeans, whomoved to theislandofCyprusaspartof
thecolonizationbytheSeaPeoples.
In the recent vernacular architecture of thelast two
centuries,no special innovationswithregard to theuseof ashlar stone
and the construction methods followed can be observedcompared to
the prehistoric examples (Ionas1988, Sinos 1976). Themost
significant differenceregardsthemorewidespreaduseofashlarin the
lastcenturies.Althoughduring theLateBronzeAge ashlar
constructionswere encounteredalmostexclusively
inmonumentalpublicbuildings, in the recentvernaculararchitectureof
the 19th and 20th centuries, ashlarwas
alsousedinsimpledomesticstructures.Inthelattercase, thismay be
attributed not only to
socialfactorsbutalsotopracticalissues,suchaseaseofquarryingandcuttingand
transportationascomparedwith the requirementsofagreat
labourforceneededduringtheLateBronzeAge.Social and economic reasons
also lead to thewidespread use of ashlar as the
communitychangedandmorepeoplecouldtakeadvantageof this
ashlarmasonry.Thepreference for theuse of coursed masonry in recent
vernaculararchitectureandnotthesystemoftheorthostatscanbe
attributed to itsmore simple structuralrequirements and its easier
incorporation intodomesticstructures.
Some of the characteristics and buildingtechniques observed in
the Late Bronze Agestructuresaswellas
invernaculararchitectureofthe19thand20thcenturiesaretobefoundinstructuresofvarioushistoricalperiods
(Classical,Romanetc.),perhapspassingfromonegeneration to
theother,and thuscovering
thegapbetweenprehistoryandrecentvernaculararchitecture. These
observations underline the con
servativeattitudeof theCypriotsandshowanexcellent
constructiondevelopmentduring thevery earlyperiods of antiquity.
Since theLateBronzeAge theancientbuildersdevised someexcellent
solutions that were followed on
theislandwithouttheneedforgreatimprovementsandchanges.Thesamestructuralrequirementsin
identical climatic and environmental conditions and the same
availability of
materialshaveprobablyledpeopleofdifferentperiodstoresort to similar
simple and functional solutions.
CONCLUSIONhe appearance of ashlar stone in Cyprus
during the Late Bronze Age was
associatedwiththegreatprosperityoftheareaduringthisperiodand
thedevelopmentof the firsturbansettlements. Some characteristics of
ashlarmasonry (drafted margins etc.) and methods ofconstruction
(orthostats) observed in Cyprusduring theLateBronzeAgeare tobe
found inthe ashlarmasonry of neighbouring countries(Near East,
Aegean World) showing connections and relationsbetween these
civilizations.The same characteristicswere also
recognizedinthestructuresoflaterperiods(Classical,Hellenistic)andeveninthevernaculararchitectureofthe19thand20thcenturies.
Thechoiceofthestonesusedasashlarswasalwaysrelated to
thegeologyofeachareaandwasalsodictatedbysocial,economicandfunctionalcriteria.Thedifferenttypesofstonesemployed
in the same settlement showed
theroutesfollowedforthetransportationofashlarsandgivevaluableinformationabouttheleveloftechnology
during the Late Bronze Age.
Itshowsthatthebuildersacquiredtheknowledgeofselectingthebestqualityofrockforeachparticularuseveryearly.Thisexplains
thepreferenceof transportinga typeofrockovera
longdistancedespitethefactthattherewasarathergoodqualityofrocknearertoasettlement.Thetransportation
of stone over longdistances reveals key facts about the
organization of thegroupsofworkers responsible for the
erectionofthemonumentalpublicbuildingsoftheLateBronzeAge.
-
THEINITIALAPPEARANCEOFASHLARSTONEINCYPRUS.SSUESOFPROVENANCEANDUSE
51
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThisarticleisbasedmainlyonanunpublishedPhDthesisonBuildingMaterialsandStructures
oftheArchitectureinPrehistoricCyprusFromtheNeolithicperioduntiltheLateBronzeAge(inGreek),thatwassubmittedbytheauthorintheUniversityofCyprusandwassupervisedbyProfessorVassosKarageorghis.ValuablescientificassistancewascontributedbyDr.CostasXenophontos,ageologistoftheDepartmentofGeologicalSurveyandfinancialsupportfortheresearchwasofferedbytheA.G.LeventisFoundation.Inaddition,valuableinformationincludedinthisarticleisderived
from furthermultidisciplinaryresearch thatwascarriedoutrecently in
theUniversityofCyprusincollaborationwithGovernmentDepartments.
REFERENCESAtzeni,C. (2003)Stonemasonry
inruralSardinianbuilding.Evolutionof the traditionalbuilding
techniquesbetweenXIX andXX century.Proceedings of the first
InternationalCongress onConstruction History Madrid 20th24th
January 2003, ed. S. Huerta, Madrid: I. Juan
deHerrera,ETSAM,A.E.Benvenuto,COAM,F.Dragados,279289.
Chatzianastasiou,O. (1998)Notes fromKythnos ( ),
inMendoniL.G.andazarakisAinianA.I.(eds.),KeaKythnos:HistoryandArchaeology.ProceedingsofanInternationalSymposium,KeaKythnos,2225June1994,27,259273.
Chindiroglou,M. (2010)Thearchaeological research in the regionof
themodernmunicipalityofStyra:OldandNewFinds,MediterrraneanArchaeologyandArchaeometry,Vol.10,No.3,1928.
Cline,E.H.(1995)Tinker,Tailor,Soldier,Sailor:MinoansandMyceneansAbroad,Aegaeum12,265283.
Coulton,J.J.(1974)LiftinginEarlyGreekArchitecture,JournalofHellenisticStudiesVol.94,119.Davis,J.L.(1992)ReviewofAegeanPrehistoryI:TheIslandsoftheAegean,AmericanJournalofArh
caeology,Vol.96,No.4,699756.Driessen,J.andSchoep,I.(1995)ThearchitectandtheScribe.PoliticalImplicationsofArchitectural
andAdministrativechangesonMMIILMIIIACrete,Aegaeum12Vol.II,649664.Dunham,R.J.(1962)Classificationofcarbonaterocksaccordingtodepositionalstructure,inHam,
W.E.(ed.),ClassificationofCarbonaterocks,AAPGMemoirs.1,108121.Hadjisavvas,S.
(2000)AshlarBuildingsand theirRole inLateBronzeAgeCyprus, inActs of
the
ThirdInternationalCongressofCypriotStudies,Nicosia,387398.Hadjisavvas,S.
(2007)Whowere theresidentsof theashlarbuildings
inCyprus?,Patrimoinescul
turels enMditerraneorientale: recherch scientifique et enjeux
identitaires,1eratelier
(29Novembre2007):Chypre,unestratigraphiedelidentit.RecontresscientifiquesenlignedelaMaisondelOrientetdelaMditerrane,Lyon.
Hult, G. (1983) Bronze Age AshlarMasonry in the
EasternMediterranean, Cyprus, Ugarit and
theNeighbouringRegions(StudiesintheMediterraneanArchaeologyLXVI),Gteborg.
IoannouI.etal.(2009)Applicationofthesharpfrontmodeltocapillaryabsorptioninavuggylimestone,EngineeringGeology,Vol.105,2023.
Ionas, J. (1988)LaMaisoneRuraledeChypre.
(XVIIXXesicle).AspectsetTechniquesdeConsturction,PublicationsoftheScienceResearchCentre.Nicosia.Cyprus.
Jones,D.(2008)NewLightonStonehenge,SmithosianMagazine,October.Karageorghis,V.andMaier,F.G.(1984)Paphos.HistoryandArchaeology,A.G.LeventisFoundation,
Nicosia.Karageorghis,V.andDemas,M. (1985)Excavations
atKitionV.ThePrePhoenicianLevels, III,De
partmentofAntiquities,Nicosia.Koutsoukou,A.andKanellopoulos,C.(1990)TowersfromNorthWestAndros,BritishSchoolofAr
chaeology85,155174.
-
MARIAPHILOKYPROU52
Lawrence,A.W.1983:GreekArchitecture,YaleUniversityPress,NewHavenandLondon.LeBrun,A.(1984)FouillesRcentKhirokitia(Chypre)197781,EditionsRecherchesur
lesCivilisa
tions,Paris.LeBrun,A.(1994)FouillesRcentKhirokitia(Chypre)198891,EditionsRecherchesur
lesCivilisa
tions,Paris.Liritzis, I. (2010)Strofilas (Andros
Island,Greece):Newevidence for theCycladic finalNeolithic
periodthroughnoveldatingmethodsusingluminescenceandobsidianhydration,JournalofArchaeologicalScience,Vol.37,Issue6,June2010,13671377.
Liritzis,I.andArtelaris,G.(2010)AstronomicalOrientationsofDragonHouses(LakaPalli,Kapsal,Oche)
and Armena Gate (Euboea, Greece), Mediterranean Archaeology and
Archaeometry,Vol.3,No.3,4152.
Mendoni,L.G.(1998)ThetowersofKea,additionsandnotifications(: )
(in Greek), In Mendoni, L.G. Mazarakis, Ainian A.I.
(eds.),KeaKythnos: History and Archaeology. Proceedings of an
International
Symposium,KeaKythnos,2225June1994,Meletemata1927,275307.
Negbi,O.(1986)TheClimaxoftheUrbanDevelopmentinBronzeAgeCyprus,ReportoftheDepartmentofAntiquities,Cyprus,97121.
Niemeier, W.D. (1991): Minoan Artisans Travelling Overseas: The
Alalakh Frescoes and
thePaintedPlasterFlooratTelKabri(WesternGalilee),Thalassa.LEgeprhistoricetlamer.ActesdelatroisimeRencontregenneinternationaldelUniversitdeLige,Stationderecherchsousmarinesetocanographiques.Calvi.Corse(2325Avril1990),Aegaeum7,189210.
brink,U.(1979)HalaSultanTekke5.ExcavationsinArea22,19711973and19751978(SIMAXLV:5).Gteborg.
Orlandos,A.K.(195960)BuildingMaterialsofAncientGreeksandMethodsofConstruction,Vol.2,()(inGreek),Athens
1958,Libraryof theArchaeological SocietyofAthens ( .37).
Philokyprou,M.(1998a)BuildingMaterialsandStructuresinAncientCypriotArchitectureunpublishedPh.D.Thesis,DepartmentofArchaeology,UniversityofCyprus.
Philokyprou,M.(1998b)BuildingMaterialsandMethodsemployedinPrehistoricandTraditionalArchitectureinCyprus,inEthnographyofEuropeanTraditionalCultures,Arts,CraftsofHeritage,CentreofVocationalTrainingInstituteofCulturalStudiesofEuropeandtheMediterranean,Athens,150164.
Reber,K.
(2010)TheDragonHousesofStyra:Topography,ArchitectureandFunction,MediterraneanArchaeologyandArchaeometryVol.10,No.3,5361.
Rehak,P.andYounger,G,1998:ReviewofAegeanPrehistoryVII:NeopalatialFinalPalatialandPostpalatialCrete,AmericanJournalofArchaeology,Vol.102,No.1,91174.
Reich,R. (1992)BuildingMaterialsandArchitectureElements
inAncient Israel,
inA.KempinskiandR.Reich(ed.),TheArchitectureofAncientIsraelfromthePrehistorictothePersianPeriods,Jerusalem,116.
Schoep, I. (2006)Lookingbeyond the firstpalaces:Elitesand
theAgencyofPower
inEMIIMMIICrete,AmericanJournalofArchaeology,Vol.110,No.1,3764.
Shaw,J.W.(1973)MinoanArchitecture:MaterialsandTechniques.AnnuariodellaScuolaArcheologicadiAteneetdelleMissioniItalieneinOrienteXLIX.NuovaSerie331,Rome.
Shaw,J.W.(1983)TheDevelopmentofMinoanOrthostates,AmericanJournalofArchaeology87,231216.
Schaeffer,C.F.A.(1952)EnkomiAlasiaI.NouvellesMissionsenChypre194650.Paris.Shiloh,Y.(1979)TheProtoaeolicCapitalandIsraeliteAshlarMasonryQedem2Jerusamen.Sinos,S.(1976).AReviewoftheVernacularArchitectureofCyprus.Athens.Todd,I.A.(1987)VasilikosValleyProject6.ExcavationsatKalavasosTenta(SIMALXXI:6).Gteborg.
-
THEINITIALAPPEARANCEOFASHLARSTONEINCYPRUS.SSUESOFPROVENANCEANDUSE
53
Vermeule,C.(1979)AnImperialCommemorativeMonumentneverfinished:ApossibleMemorialoftheTrajansEasternConquests,atSalamisonCyprus.inV.Karageorghisetal.(ed.),StudiesPresentedinMemoryofPorphyriosDikaios.Nicosia,189193.
Westholm,A.(1939)BuiltTombsinCyprus.OpusculaArchaeologica,Rome,2958.Wright,G.R.H.(1985)AncientBuildinginSouthSyriaandPalestine,E.J.Brill,Leiden.Wright,G.R.H.(1992)AncientBuildinginCyprus,E.J.Brill,Leiden.Wright,G.R.H.(1996)MaterialsandTechniquesoftheBronzeandIronAges,inMeyers,E.M.(ed.),
TheOxfordEncyclopediaofArchaeologyintheNearEast.1,363378.Wright,G.R.H.(2000)AncientBuildingTechnology.Vol.I.HistoricalBackground,Leiden.Xenophontos,C.(1985)AppendixVIII:KitionBuildingStoneanditsResources.InV.Karageorghis
andM.Demas,ExcavationsatKition.V.ThePrePhoenicianLevels.I,Nicosia,431437.