- 66 -

ANCIENT BUILDINGS IN HIGH RISK AREAS

Patrick de HAISONNEUVE
Europe's traditional built heritage is characterised by its
great diversity, as those concerned have learnt how to make best use
of the resources and materials available in their area at any
particular time. On the other hand, and paradoxically, European
architecture also bears witness to a continuous interchange of skills
and techniques, which have always been subject to local adaptations.
I. The lesson of the past
Before looking at the rules which apply to ancient buildings,
it is important to understand what is being talked about and to
distinguish between the different types. There are various families
of buildings, which have their own specific characteristics, depending
on the materials used to construct their walls, and which as a
consequence react in different ways. It is therefore necessary to see
buildings in terms of their family type - timber framed houses and
those which are stone built, for example, react and age differently,
and face different potential threats. This is why measures to protect
buildings must be based on their particular characteristics. The
different types or "families" of buildings - distinguished according
to the materials used: broad stone or ashlar, timber framed, earth
built, terracotta or some mixture of these - must always be borne in
mind. Each of these building types, depending on whether they occur
as isolated constructions or in groups, will react in particular ways
which we must attempt to understand.
An examination of ancient buildings still in existence will
enable those responsible for their protection who are not
archaeologists to gain a better understanding of the techniques used
in their construction. On the basis of various studies we can state,
possibly with a certain measure of presumption but quite sincerely,
that traditional buildings dating from ancient times indicate a
technological level which was as advanced as our own and sometimes
more clearly conceived. There is written evidence that those
concerned were careful to take account of seismic rules in their
constructions. Professor Bruno Helly's work states repeatedly "God
had punished them for failing to respect the rules". But what were
these rules? To answer this question we must visit the sites and
examine them from a fresh perspective.
The work undertaken by Jean-Pierre Adam at Pompei has revealed
the restoration work undertaken by the Romans after the earthquake of
51 AD, before the city was finally buried in 79 AD.
At the site of Delos in Greece, the remains of the sub-
foundations are astonishing. For example, the houses situated close
to the "house of masks" (noted for its mosaics) have quite remarkable
walls. Each is made up of large stone blocks, interspersed with small
stones, whose presence in such numbers in a polished form clearly
indicates their importance. This anti-seismic system is comparable to
that used on neighbouring islands such as the island of Seriphos,
where houses dating from the Middle Ages (1^33, as well as more recent
examples (1885) are constructed on the same principle, subject however
to the difference that the stone blocks are often smaller and less
well finished. Nevertheless, any house built in 1^33 which has lasted
to the present day must have been able to survive earthquakes.
- 67 -
There are other very interesting features to be seen in Delos.
Walls in which the stones overlap as if they have been welded
together. A similar form of wall construction is to be found in the
ancient site of Thera, on the island of Santorini. In Delos we find
very long blocks of stone which connect two walls, wall breaks or
houses together. The technique recurs in the sites of the Venetian
banks as well as in the traditional houses on the Greek island of
Andros. Finally, the walls which support the terraces of the Theatre
in Delos are remarkably carefully designed. Sites such as Delos are
full of features which should be considered in more detail and
compared with those of other sites. A whole range of techniques
exists, of which we have so far only discovered a small part.
At the archaeological sites of Herculaneum and Pompei examples
of timber framed construction are to be found.
Although Vitruvius in his book pays little attention to timber
framed houses from the point of view of potential site investigations,
there is considerable evidence that timber frames were much more
extensively used than is thought. In Herculaneum, timber was
extensively used in upper storeys. One example is a house - the Casa
Graticcio - which Amadeo Maiuri has excavated. We should not be
surprised that this house, which is completely timber-framed, occupies
an ancient site where the ground floors are of stone. Its present
state, and the various ways in which archaeologists have attempted to
rehabilitate it provide the starting point for an examination of it.
Despite the rehabilitation techniques used (such as reinforced
concrete floors) the high technical level of timber-frame construction
in the Roman era can still be readily appreciated and is to be found
in numerous other ancient buildings still in existence. We can now
begin to fill in some of the missing pieces of the puzzle. The timber
frames in this house were conceived and constructed just as carpenters
in the Middle Ages and subsequent eras would have done. These
carpenters, who understood the principles of ship-building, knew how a
wooden house could be set in a stable fashion between two stone built
houses. The theory - put forward by the architect for this ancient
site, Valeric Papaccio - is that the house was built by one or other
of the owners of the two Samnite houses on either side of it, using
the space occupied by the garden or outhouses of one of them, either
for letting or, more likely, following an earthquake. This house does
not have timber-framed gable walls. All the load-bearing elements
(the floors) rest on brick pillars, which are not joined to the walls
of the neighbouring houses. As will be seen in the third part of this
paper, following an earthquake an empty space must never be left
between two houses which have been affected.
Very often, when a house has collapsed, architects attempt to
strengthen the neighbouring houses by supporting the gable walls with
wooden posts and beams. This is the very technique that was used in
the case of the Casa Graticcio. Quite simply, the empty space became
a building. It is the classic phenomenon of owners putting empty
space to use. If this house is compared with the timber-framed
houses of Limoges or Toulouse it can be seen that the Romans had a
very good grasp of this construction technique.
All the studies, observations and information which are
reported to us substantiate our understanding of timber frame
construction, as set out in the ^5 volume collection on old buildings
published by EOF (the French Electricity Board). This highlights the
importance of timber-frames in high risk earthquake zones such as
Pompei and Herculaneum.
- 68 -
These two extremely well known ancient sites thus show that
their builders understood anti-seismic techniques and knew how to use
them.
II. Anti-seismic techniques are available
In areas of seismic risk, the same features apply to the
traditional buildings which we still occupy and which date from the
Middle Ages right up to the present day. Depending on their
particular form (stone built or other), these traditional buildings
have certain constant features which must be continually rediscovered
and developed. The techniques involved do not form a hierarchy but
are very closely linked to the different types of building.
1. Stone built constructions
As was seen above, the walls of Greek houses are made up of a
carefully arranged mixture of large and small stones; the partitions
are wooden framed and a particular feature of the ceilings is that
they are made from wooden logs on which flat stones can move. The
overall construction is covered to a considerable thickness with
earth. If these techniques are replaced by the use of concrete slabs,
the building becomes much more vulnerable to tremors. After 15 or 20
years a certain number of cracks appear and the edges of the slabs
rise up. Thus rather than use any available technique, it is
necessary to keep to those used in ancient forms of construction and
rely on the experience and knowledge of local masons, who know not
only how to apply them but also what maintenance they subsequently
require. We are all aware of the widely used technique of reinforcing
wall bases, as found, for example, in Annecy and Corsica. Other, more
sophisticated techniques also exist, behind one of which is taking
place a permanent rehabilitation process, the outcome of one of the
first projects to follow the November 1980 earthquake in the Italian
region of Campania.
The technique consists of the superimposition of buttresses
and the use of the space between them. It is used most spectacularly
in certain Italian islands such as Procida, where close examination
reveals a succession of buttresses which advance towards the sea. The
same approach is to be found in the Greek island of Santorini.
Although it is used to a lesser extent here, enormous buttresses can
still be seen, supporting houses dating from the Middle Ages.
Finally, a more sophisticated approach is used on the island
of Paros: an internal arch. An examination of the positioning of this
arch, which is often situated in the centre of the room, shows that it
is supported by another arch outside the house which serves as a
covered passage. The latter, in turn, bears on the arch of a
neighbouring house. The result is a vast network of internal and
external arches. If they are not maintained they lose all their
effectiveness. Anyone strolling through the covered passages of the
Greek islands can only admire, with the greatest of pleasure, the
untiring determination of the inhabitants to create this network of
arches in order to protect themselves. These features, which might
appear to be purely decorative, in fact play a critical role in
earthquake protection.
The houses of Santorini and occasional examples still to be
found in the Amalfi area of Italy are veritable arches in themselves,
with the roofing constituting one complete arch. Numerous minor
techniques relating to openings and windows are also to be found in
Yugoslavia and Greece.
- 69 -
Before going on to examine timber framed houses, we should
look at those made from stone or other materials whose upper part is
timber framed, such as are to be found in the north of Greece or in
Yugoslavia. These represent something of a transitional phase. Every
metre or so, the walls include a sort of wooden ladder set flat
against the surface. Thus, the houses are ribbed on every floor by
timber serving as wall ties or bonding. As Haroun Tassief indicates
in his work, this technique is also found in Turkey, where it is
advocated as a model for rural housing and is presented as such in
promotional material.
In the case of timber frames, it is in Alsace (France) that
the technique involving lengths of wood which rise several storeys is
used. In this region, there is a tendency to separate each storey,
the roofing beams are triangularly braced and a length of "le Man"
timber is used to square the lengthwise beams with the angle posts. A
particular feature of this piece of timber is that it is fixed
externally. Exactly the same technique is used in timber framed
houses in Turkey and Greece. A similar approach is also used on the
island of Lefkas, although following the last earthquake those
carrying out restorations preferred to put concrete steps in front of
this type of house, thus completely ignoring the fact that the steps
had previously been constructed from wood. One of the properties of
wood is that it can become deformed.
On the basis of currently available studies, we cannot yet
claim to have identified techniques appropriate to earth houses. On
the other hand, we do know that one particular feature of such houses
is to have, as they say in the Dauphine "good boots and a good hat".
In other words, the tying and pressure of the roof structure holds the
whole house together on firm supports. Any weaknesses in the angle
ties will usually result in the collapse of walls.
We study the techniques used in these different types of
construction not only to achieve optimum results through the
application of ancient as well as modern building methods but also ,
and above all, to gain insight into building behaviour and rediscover
the skills accumulated by generations of users. However, much still
remains to be identified and, even more important, analysed.
III. Earthquake resistant buildings; rules and action required
In the periods preceding and following an earthquake, certain
risk factors remain constant:
1. The non-maintenance of buildings and inappropriate forms of
construction,
2. The misinterpretation of cracks, and the consequent failure to
recognise the threats they signify.
In high-risk areas, the danger often arises from the absence
of maintenance. No matter what type of construction is involved,
failure to maintain a building's roof and walls will leave both it and
its neighbours vulnerable to tremors. It is often possible to observe
buildings which have suffered in earthquakes because of a defective
element such as a beam which is not properly anchored. The first
indication may be a potentially dangerous chimney, a badly positioned
tile or an unstrengthened lintel which may pose a threat.
- 70 -
Similarly, unauthorised building is a very serious problem and
one which is growing. The owner of a top floor who constructs an
additional storey without taking account of his surroundings is a real
danger. In Polla in Italy, an inappropriate construction has
destabilised a complete block, even though this had survived very well
up to the present day, thanks to its buttresses.
Another problem is a change in the materials used. When the
owner of a stone built house sets out to strengthen it by replacing a
wooden beam with one made of metal, or by substituting a concrete for
a wooden floor, the materials will react in a different way and may
create disorder. One of the first houses I visited after an
earthquake had a ground floor made from ashlar, the first floor in
concrete and the second floor in brick. The son had built on top of
his father's house and had then constructed a second floor brick-built
dwelling for his own son. When the earthquake occurred, the floor made
from concrete moved 10 to 15 cm while the brick built storey collapsed
totally. There were also houses whose roofs had been replaced by
ones made from concrete: roof slabs situated on stone walls had moved
several centimetres.
Interpreting the cracks in buildings
Within particular blocks, an examination of cracks helps us to
understand what has happened to the building. We also have to know
whether the cracks are dangerous or not.
In any consideration about what can be done with old
buildings, existing knowledge of the subject must be taken into
account. This has for long been ignored and is still not taught in
schools of architecture. The problem is a real one since attempts to
rehabilitate may do more harm than good. It is easy to identify
archaeological sites where restoration work has contributed to their
destruction. Knowledge of the buildings concerned is important since
it is the poorest families who live in such areas, with the men
working in other regions or countries. The introduction of city based
techniques may be totally inappropriate and in any case the
traditional local masons may not understand them. Those who are on
the spot must therefore be helped to apply their own methods which
take account of the buildings' needs. It is quite astonishing to find
a technique used in Yugoslavia also being used in Greece and other
countries. Thus, before reaching any conclusions, we must extend our
knowledge by research and exchanges of information. One of the main
problems associated with such buildings is how to maintain them. Any
building is more likely to react well if it is properly maintained.
As has been seen above, we must extend the search for special
techniques in seismic areas, which will often involve an examination
of the methods used by our forebears, from antiquity through to the
present day.
Throughout the world, governments and individuals now place
great stress on their cultural environment and heritage. Major
efforts have been made, and special teams and programmes established,
to study and rehabilitate this heritage. Somewhere between the
domains of the historian and the archaeologist, architects in the
field of historic and ancient buildings are currently creating a
genuine specialist movement which is attempting to extend our
knowledge of old buildings, so that they can be restored. A brief
- 71 -
overview of the situation in Europe shows that the body of relevant
knowledge is still at a very embryonic and empirical stage.
Nevertheless, various undertakings are appearing on the scene, whose
promoters are expressing a need for historical, scientific and
technical information which they are anxious to exchange and
disseminate.
These are the principles underlying the involvement of the
PACT group with ancient buildings in high-risk areas. The aim is to
bring together research and training networks in the field of
archaeological and architectural heritage restoration, in order to
focus on shared problems.