I’ve been looking at Malaperdas and
Zacharias’ paper from 2018 and using the helladic.info Site Aspect
pages to check some of their figures.[1] This very interesting
paper examines 18 Mycenaean sites in Messenia from the
geophysiological viewpoint. The authors examine site aspect, slopes,
water resources, and site geology in an attempt to derive clues to explain why the Mycenaeans established settlements where they did.
The
concept of site aspect is a complex one. First there’s the problem of
determining what aspect actually is. I take this word to mean the
direction of the largest slope. Aspect can change radically as one
gets further away from the site. I’m not aware that there is an
agreed distance at which the slopes for determining aspect should be
calculated.
In
the Mycenaean Atlas Project each site elevation is matched to eight
other elevations. These ‘sample’ elevations are taken at 150 m
and 300 m in each cardinal direction (N, S, E, and W). That means
there are two slopes calculable for each site in each of the four
directions, one at 150 m and one at 300 m. For each site the direction with largest slope at
150 m and direction with the largest slope at 300 m are used to
determine ‘Site Aspect’. There are ten possible results: N, E,
S, W, NW, NE, SW, SE, NS, and EW. For each site the aspects at 150 m
and at 300 m may very well differ.
 |
| Site Aspect Map for Messenia. Blue arrows indicate aspect. Clicking on an arrow brings up an info-box for that site. Mousing over the arrow gives you the name of that site. |
More
than the problem of determining aspect mathematically there is the
consideration that many sites are large and complex. It is quite
reasonable to associate different parts of a site with different
aspects. I do not generally take this factor into account in the Mycenaean
Atlas.
Sites
with very low slopes (< 3º)
in every direction have no meaningful aspect in my opinion.
Malaperdas and Zacharias [2018] are not explicit about how site
aspect was determined. I compared my site aspect results to theirs.
(All numbers in the form Cnnn or Cnnnn are references to the
Mycenaean Atlas Project at www.helladic.info.
1.
Ano Englianos (C219). This large and complex site lies on both
sides of a ridge that runs approximately NE-SW. Nestor’s Palace
itself actually sits on a part of that ridge that runs more directly
EW. Malaperdas and Zacharias [2018] give its aspect as ‘South’.
In fact, its real aspect is North-West-South, that is, orthogonally
away from its ridge in both directions (NS) and with a clear view of
the ocean (W).
2.
Koryfasio-Beylerbey (C238). This little site sits on top of a tiny
plateau (elev. 31 m. a.s.l.) and has very little slope in any
direction. Only to the N and W at 150 m. does its slope amount to
‘slight’. Malaperdas and Zacharias have its aspect as
‘Southeast’. A better value would be NW but, in fact, aspect
has little meaning for this site.
3.
Iklaina (C223). I have taken our authors to mean ‘Ikaina-Traganes’
which is the major site on the Iklaina plateau. Iklaina is located
near the S edge of a large plateau which falls away precipitously to
the S and W but that’s not enough to give the site a south-westerly
aspect. In fact C223 has no more or less aspect than any other site
on that plateau which is essentially flat.
4.
Koukounara (C421). Koukounara is part of an enormous complex of BA
sites (mostly tombs) each of which differs from the others. It has
never, to my knowledge, been adequately mapped.[2] The first task
is to try and figure out what Malaperdas and Zacharias mean when they
say ‘Koukounara’. The Potamou tou Arapi is a rema or
gully (as we say in America) that runs roughly N-S. At one point
two separate remas come together and create a southwest-facing
promontory and the little settlement (C421) sits on that promontory
facing S. I have its aspect as West at 150 m and South at 300 m. so
I make its aspect to be predominantly S and W. Malaperdas et al.
make this aspect to be S and E.
5.
Yialova: Palaiochori (C249). For the exact location of this
settlement see McDonald and Simpson [1961].[3] It sits on the west
end of a ridge running EW. We are explicitly told that the
site sits on the summit of the westernmost bump on that ridge.[4] As
a result it has aspect to the N, W, and S. Malaperdas’ suggested
value of ‘Southeast’ is not adequate.
6. Metaxada-Kalopsana (C203). This
little site lies at the bottom of a valley which runs N-S. We would
expect, by inspection, that its aspects would be N-S. But it also
lies on a small ridge running E-W in that valley and so it has a
non-negligible westerly slope. Nevertheless, I make its aspect to be
South at both distances. Malaperdas et al. make the aspect here to
be Southeast. I do not see how that is possible.
7. Rizomylos-Nichoria (C159).
Nichoria is situated on a ridge that runs nearly perfectly E-W.
(260º). A road ran
through the settlement and parallel to the ridge. It is completely
open on all sides and, while a little valley does open to the south,
the idea of aspect is nearly meaningless with respect to this site.
Its site would not, for example, shelter it from the north wind.
8. Thouria-Ellinika (C403). I take
Malaperdas et al. to be referring to a site which, in the Mycenaean
Atlas, I call C403. This is the same as the ‘Myc. Site’ on
Richard Hope Simpson’s map in his article from 1966 [5] This
little settlement sits directly on top of the Thouria ridge and just
to the south of the chamber tomb complex dug into that ridge.
Mathematically its aspect is East and West and inspection confirms
this. Its slope to the south is slight (4.29 and 4.76 at 150m and
300m respectively).
9. Pidma – Agios Ioannis (C113).
This site is open to the N, W, and S. It backs against those cliffs
which bound the Pamisos valley on the east. We would expect its
dominant aspect to be away from the cliffs and to the W. This is so
but the slopes to the three cardinal directions are so slight that it
can hardly be said to have aspect at all.
10. Kalamata Kastro (C111). The
Kastro sits on top of a small plateau and is open to the sky in all
directions. Even though there is strong slope in all directions at
150m this is purely an artifact of the plateau edge and cannot
figure into any calculation of aspect. The concept of aspect at this
site does not apply.
11. Kardamyli Kastro (C103). The
location of the Kastro of Kardamyle is given in Simpson [1957] 234-6.
It is the high plateau (+110 m) that stretches out about 800 m to
the NW of the modern town. Simpson provides an excellent map.[6]
Malaverdas et al. seem to have picked a different place. To judge by
their reported elevation they apparently chose the little height
about 400 m to the southwest. But this is not the Kastro of
Kardamyle. Simpson reports activities on both sides of this high
acropolis. Indeed, activities on the south side have southern aspect
and activities on the north side have northern aspect. The acropolis
itself, however, is flat and has both N, W, and S aspect. It has,
for example, shelter only from the east. Otherwise none.
12. Leuktra: Stoupa (C447) Southeast
of the little town of Stoupa a volcanic plug rises suddenly out of
the plain to a height of about 50 m. (72 m a.s.l.) above the
surrounding level. The top of this plug is relatively flat and it
measures ca. 118 m. northeast to southwest, and as much as 35 m.
northwest-southeast at its widest point. In the LH a Mycenaean site
of little consequence was placed here – sherds have been found.
Again, as in previous examples, this site has no aspect. It is
completely open in every direction. The Mycenaean Atlas reports
strong slope in every direction but that is not enough to establish
any directional aspect.
13.
Kato Melpia: Krebeni (C121). You
can see Kato
Melpia in
Google
Street View at the location 37.328513°,
21.933230° and looking
directly N. Kato Melpia is not the high peaks but the shelf lying
about half-way down. It has some shelter from the N and I make its
aspect to be south and west. In this I agree with Malaperdas et al.
14.
Malthi-Gouves (C149) The site selected by Malaperdas et al. Is not
Malthi-Gouves. Judging by their reported elevation they seem to have
selected the primary tholos at the bottom of the Malthi hill (C1207),
and not the actual settlement which is at the top of the hill about
125 m. above it. The settlement itself
covers the top of the hill and
is unsheltered in every direction. The concept of aspect really does
not apply to it although
inspection of the photographs here() show a slight incline towards
the south. The site
seems, however,
to have been chosen purely for the sake of the visibility it affords
over the central Soulima
valley. The site selected by
Malaperdas as ‘Malthi’ is a large tholos tomb, not badly
preserved, but which is
tucked into the Malthi ridge
at its base on the West side. They give it an aspect of southeast
but I do not see what relevance aspect has in this context.[7]
15.
Dorio-Kontra (C126). The little settlement of Dorio sits on the top
of a conical hill more than 100 m above the surrounding valley of
Stenyklaros. As such it has no aspect. The nearest hills to the N
are about 3 km distant. It seems clear that this site was chosen for
the visibility it has over its surrounds.
16.
Filiatra
– Ayios Christoforos (C188).
This
site is located on a plateau. Ayios Christoforos is where it is
probably because it affords a view of the entire coast to the west.
Immediately to its N is a large hill which shelters it from the N.
Its aspect is S and W.
17.
Myron-Peristeria (C183). This is a complex site with multiple
aspects. Aside from the several tholoi (placed, I am convinced, for
maximum visibility), C183 is a building occupying a position which
Simpson and Dickinson [1979] 167 call an ‘acropolis’. Like
Malthi (C149), it overlooks the Soulima valley to the north and its
measurable aspect is N and W.
18. Mouriatadha-Elliniko (C180). This
site occupies a northwest-southeast ridge in the center of a valley
running EW. It sits on the top and south of this little ridge but
immediately to its south is another and larger ridge running
east-west. To the extent that this settlement has any aspect at all
it is east-west.
Conclusion
If
there are any lessons to be learned from looking at settlement site
aspect they are these:
1.
Sites near the sea usually face the sea.
2.
Whichever way the slope faces the site faces the same direction.
That is if a ridge slopes down to the N then sites on that slope face
N, etc. There are about as many sites on N-facing slopes as
S-facing.
3.
Sites on top of a ridge or on saddles have aspect in opposite
directions orthogonally away from the direction in which the ridge
runs.
4.
Aspect is much less meaningful for sites on peaks or in valleys (or
located on plateaus) and for sites on ground where the slope is less
than 0.05 (2.86°) in
any direction.
These
are general ideas only and can be heavily affected by local
conditions: access to water, tillable fields, etc.
Footnotes
[1]
Malaperdas and Zacharias [2018].
[3]
McDonald and Simpson [1961] 242, '58.
Palaiochori (Gialova)'. And
for more see Mycenaean Atlas Project website at hellenic.info for C249.
[4]
Idem.
[5]
Simpson [1966] 122, fig. 6 ‘Ancient Thouria’. And
see this.
[6]
Simpson [1957] 234-6. Simpson
gives a textual description on p. 234 and an unmistakable map on 235.
[7]
Photos and discussion of this tholos (C1207) are here. There
are photos of the actual settlement (C149) here.
Bibliography
Malaperdas
and Zacharias [2018]: Malaperdas, George and Nikolaos Zacharias. “A
Geospatial Analysis of Mycenaean Habitation Sites Using a
Geocumulative versus Habitation Approach”, Journal of Geoscience
and Environment Protection (6) 111-131. 2018. Online here.
McDonald
and Simpson [1961]: McDonald, William A. and Richard Hope Simpson.
‘Prehistoric Habitation in Southwestern Peloponnese’, American
Journal of Archaeology.
(65:3) 221-260. Online here.
Simpson
[1957] : Simpson, Richard Hope. ‘Identifying
a Mycenaean State’, The
Annual of the British School at Athens (52) 231-259. Online
here.
Simpson
[1966]: Simpson, Richard Hope. ‘The Seven Cities Offered by
Agamemnon to Achilles’, The
Annual of the British School at Athens
(61) 113-131. Online here.
Simpson
and Dickinson [1979]: Simpson,
Richard Hope and O.T.P.K. Dickinson. A
Gazetteer of Aegean Civilization in the Bronze Age, Vol. I: The
Mainland and the Islands.
Paul Åströms Förlag, Goteborg. 1979., 'D 200 Mirou: Peristeria',
pg. 167. Online here.
Zavadil
[2012]: Zavadil, Michaela, Monumenta: Studien zu mittel- und
späthelladischen Gräbern in Messenien, Wien:Osterreichische
Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-Historische Klasse
Denkschriften. 2012. Online here:
