Sophia Germanidou
Current research results on hydraulic structures are significant and impressive, especially those related to aqueducts, attracting the research interest of various disciplines. These studies, however, tend to focus on the ancient and roman time periods, and (/or) the documentation of the monumentality of hydraulic constructions.
As a result, our current knowledge on water management and supply during the medieval and later time periods is scarce and fragmentary. Additionally, as most studies offer sampling results from restricted areas, such as castles and monasteries, there are only a few case studies with broad geographical interest.
The ‘Hydromedie’ project aims to fill this gap1. It is funded by a ‘Marie-Curie Individual Fellowship’ under Horizon 2020 and implemented at the Mc Cord Centre for Landscape Archaeology, in the Department of History, Classics, and Archaeology, at Newcastle University, under the supervision and coordination of Prof. Sam Turner. By studying textual and archival sources, archaeological remains, and ethnography, alongside with the use of geophysics, geomorphology, GIS and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL), this project aims to form a framework for new interdisciplinary lab and digital methodologies to be applied in hydraulic archaeology.
The paper is a first presentation and a brief overview of the archaeological material investigated. Few sites will be further selected as case-studies for the new interdisciplinary lab and digital methodologies to be implemented. Future contribution will show the progress and the results of the project.
The focus area of ‘Hydromedie’, Messinia, is a geographical district and administrative unit in south-western Peloponnese, in the south of Greece (fig. 1)2. The geomorphology of the area features a combination of relief and flatland suitable for cultivation, and a low-lying semi-rocky coastline. It is favoured by the Mediterranean climate, of mild winters and hot and dry summers. The local hydrology is equally advantageous: there are numerous, calm hydraulic sources such as small rivers, streams, torrents, and springs (fig. 2). No natural lakes; however, there is an artificial lagoon in Gialova, Pylos (fig. 3) and a natural vivarium in Polichni, in the centre of Messinia (fig. 4). Semi-arid to arid areas prevail in the south-east, which is part of the Mani peninsula, and prove to be one of the most challenging areas of this study.
The time frame of the project is from the establishment of Christianity (early byzantine), including the post medieval era, until the beginning of the 19th century.
A very brief historical outline of Messinia, during this long-lasting era, shows that it is quite turbulent, experiencing constant war conflicts and successive ruler changes of different ethnic origin: Romans, Franks, Ottoman Turks, and Venetians, all of them co-existing with other ethnicities such as Slavs, Albanians, Catalans, Genoese, Jews, Arabs. Main historic landmarks are the end of the byzantine rule and the establishment of the (frankish) Principality of Achaia after 1204 and the Venetian domination in two colonies, Methoni and Koroni. The Frankish governorship in messinian territories became soon unstable, while various foreign intruders dismantled its cohesion until its final submission to the Ottoman Turks in 1453.
Methoni and Koroni shared the same fate in 1500. From 1686 to1715, there was once again a second brief Venetian occupation, and a second Ottoman one from 1715 to 1821, when the Greek war of independence broke out.
The project has adopted certain terms widely used in water management studies, which merit clarification within the framework of this project. ‘Hydrotechnology’ refers to the particular ways and constructions used mainly for water collection, storage and less for distribution. These structures are cisterns, rarely wells, and occasionally, channels, conduits, ducts and drains, even terraces, along with the study of their architectural, functional, and decorative parts.
A significant aspect of this study aims at exploring the chronological, typological, and cultural differences of these structures, as these characteristics are relating to craftsmanship under ethnically different groups and rulers. So under the term ‘management’, it is this rulership that is examined: who had the power, and also the responsibility, to provide the village, monastic, fortified and rural communities with sustainable water supplies. What kind of water storage and distribution structures correspond to different social groups and even livestock?
Do farmers, guards and garrisons, monks and hermits, villagers share the same water facilities?
The main corpus of water-related constructions dates to the period between the 13th and 15th centuries, when Latin forces, Franks and Venetians, ruled Messinia.
There are only scarce remains of ancient, roman or byzantine cisterns (fig. 5). Large, ambitious, and costly water constructions were invested by initiative of the Ottoman Turks, in the16th and the first half of the 17th century (fig. 6). Venetians applied a vivid and expert interest in enhancing, consolidating, and utilizing as effectively as possible natural and artificial hydraulic resources (fig. 7). A limite sample of modern-era cisterns dating to the 18th and 19th centuries is also included (fig. 8).
Hydraulic ‘historical’ and ‘physical’ landscape are two interrelated notions and are used in this paper as such. For example, an area with a natural water source, such as a spring, may be considered in conjunction to nearby archaeological remains of a settlement as it would have played a critical role in the long-lasting sustainability of that community. A representative case of this tight relation of th natural with the cultural landscape are the watermills and terraces at the Rintomo gorge complex, in the Outer/Messinian Mani which functioned thanks to the constant flow of nearby springs (fig. 9).
The initial survey realised in Messinia recorded and investigated water-related structures, especially the preservation and function of cisterns. Following this first theoretical stage of research, specific sites for the project’s methods to be applied were selected. Most cisterns were discovered in ruinous condition, difficult to reach and often covered by wild vegetation, or even settled by animals (fig. 10).
All structures are examined within their natural, historical and archaeological settings and have been divided into three categories depending on their function:
1. Water for the guards, the garrisons and the safe-guarded: Cisterns in fortified sites
There is a great number of deserted and ruinous fortifications in Messinia, in various sizes and for several purposes: castles, fortresses, forts, fortified complexes, and towers as outposts or beacons. They form a strategic, dense defensive- residential network in the semi-mountainous inland and the coastline.
Almost all of them were built close to a natural water source, even if not detectable at first sight. Most of them included cisterns within their walls, as an indispensable structure.
At sizeable castle-cities, it was common for the water to be transferred by means of an aqueduct since the fortified locations are usually arid. Unfortunately, these aqueducts lie largely destroyed, without their route having been prior recorded.
Such are the cases of Neocastro and Paleokastro (Old Navarin) in Pylos, Koroni and Methoni castles, where almost all kinds of water constructions were in function: aqueduct, fountains, central reservoirs, cisterns, bath houses (figs.11, 12).
At smaller fortifications, barrel-vaulted cisterns, rectangular in plan, dated mainly to the late medieval period (13th- 15th century), provided water to a limited number of guards. They were mainly constructed by the Franks, purposed to cover needs of a limited number of guards (figs.13, 14).
2. Water for the farmers and the livestock: Cisterns at the fields
Cisterns are a ubiquitous feature in the fields. They are often of a common or similar type of structure, and most date to the 18th century onwards. They are usually found combined with other agricultural facilities such as threshing floors, olive or grape presses. One of the most exceptional cases, corresponding to a ‘pre-industrial zone’, is to be found in the outskirts of Pyrgos, a semi-mountainous semi-arid village in the Outer/ Messinian Mani district, where more than thirty cisterns, and many threshing floors, arranged in a disused limestone quarry. This area used to be a vital field for productive activities, at least from the 18th century onwards (fig.15).
According to the account of the Ottoman traveller Evliya Çelebi (1670), a similar complex appears to be found at Pente Alonia (Five Threshing Floors) village above Rintomo gorge (figs.8, 16).
From 18th century onwards, cisterns are found to be preserved in a better condition and in greater number of samples. They represent a uniformity regarding their structural and functional parts: they are rectangular in shape; barrel- vaulted, with a square slightly protruding mouth; with stone steps leading to the roof, and a small door opening at the side, for entering and cleaning the interior (figs.17, 18).
3. Water for the monks, the hermits and the faithful: Water in monasteries, hermitages and churches
Water access was essential in monastic communities and the surviving water storage infrastructure seems to be rather elaborate in Messinia. A distinctive example is the half-explored water supply system at Samarina monastery, dedicated to the ‘Life- giving Spring’. Dating to the end of the 12th century, the main church (katholikon) is one of the most noted monuments of southern Greece. A rare sample of a byzantine cistern with in- built conduct leading water to a well, at the courtyard of the church was identified. The mouth of the well is probably of ancient origin and re-used (figs.19- 21).
In contrast, the ascetic ideal of a life with the least of comforts and limited access to basic subsistence commodities, led hermits to seek and dwell in challenging and completely arid landscapes. Such is the location of Saint Onoufrios near Methoni, in south- western Messinia. The hermitage was founded in the 12th century at a Late Antiquity funerary site. In the middle byzantine period, a rockcut system collected rainwater and stored it through runnels to a surface cistern.
Another rock-cut runnel, branching out of the main system, led excessive water to a different, pear-shaped, subterranean cistern (figs.22, 23).
The combination of a holy place -a church or a monastery- built on top of or next to a water source was widely practised, relating to the purifying and cleansing dimension of water. In Messinia, some outstanding examples have been recorded, such as the water storage construction in a small 15th century church, at Zarnata castle, in Stavropigi village, Outer/Messinian Mani. This church features an opening in the roof, from where small channels at the base of the walls led rainwater to a barrel-vaulted cistern at the basement (figs.24, 25). Another illuminating example is an 18th century fountain, on top of which, a few years ago, a church was built, dedicated to the ‘Life Giving Spring’, at Nomitsi village, in Outer/ Messinian Mani (fig.26).
The large number of cisterns recorded have been organized according to their structural, typological, and functional features in categories, grouping in brief their technical and architectural features.
Planning, location, and setting
As cisterns stored the most valuable possession in any settlement, it was planned for them to be built in secure locations, especially where they were built within fortifications. Usually, cisterns were constructed at the basement of towers, forming an integral part of such structures (fig.27). Where cisterns were built in fields, a slope or a slightly inclined place was favored for rainfall water to be collecte effectively (fig.28). There are however many cases where not much consideration was given to their place of construction; as a result, some cisterns are found in the most unexpected settings (fig.29).
Planning, location, and setting
As cisterns stored the most valuable possession in any settlement, it was planned for them to be built in secure locations, especially where they were built within fortifications. Usually, cisterns were constructed at the basement of towers, forming an integral part of such structures (fig.27). Where cisterns were built in fields, a slope or a slightly inclined place was favored for rainfall water to be collecte effectively (fig.28). There are however many cases where not much consideration was given to their place of construction; as a result, some cisterns are found in the most unexpected settings (fig.29).
Shapes and sizes
Most cisterns were built above ground and are rectangular in plan. Exceptions include cylindrical (fig.30), almond-shaped (fig.31) and subterranean, rock-cut and open cisterns. Sizes vary; conventionally, cisterns can be grouped into small, 3 to 9 m², and large, reaching up to 120 m². Small cisterns consist of one compartment, whereas the more spacious may be furnished with up to three compartments (fig.32).
Roofs and covers
The barrel-vault is the most common type of covering for cisterns. Today, however, most recorded cisterns do not preserve their covering vaults. In most cases, it is only the beginning of the arch that suggests the roof form. A unique roofing system, with internal supports with groin vaults, supported by buttressing arches, is attested at Methoni castle (fig.33). In large structures, roofs are supported by pilasters or piers and arches.
The masonry consists of small roughly shaped limestone blocks, sometimes with brick segments, and rarely with re-used ancient stone blocks. Rare also is the use of rectangular sockets for scaffolding, which is only seen in elaborate structures (fig.34).
Mouths and openings
The mouths of the cisterns are sub-rectangular, protruding from the rest of the structure (fig.35). Other openings include the access to the interior and rarely, a small window opening, probably for ventilation.
Other essential parts
Stone steps were used to access the interior of the large cisterns. In post medieval cisterns, steps were placed on the exterior long wall to allow access to the roof for inspection and maintenance (fig.18). Depressions on the floor of the cisterns are common (fig.25).
A sort of pit, which pre-collects and directs cleaner water to a cistern, the ‘prolakkion’, may have been identified in Koroni castle (fig.36). However, this is not characteristic of byzantine cisterns, and probably predates the medieval occupation of this castle.
Ancient sculptures (fig.37), relief, painted, or inscribed symbols, mainly of apotropaic character such as crosses, dates, and commemorations were recorded in several cisterns. Although this was a common practice during the early and middle byzantine periods, it became even more popular in the post medieval era.
Mortars and plasters
Samples of hydraulic (lime) mortars from several cisterns were collected and chemically examined, however, with no significant results, at least concerning the dating of the structures or more details about their manufacture technology. At the Kyparissia castle’s cistern, two layers of mortar were identified: the one above, being the newest, was applied to repair and restore the below, which is the oldest.
A high percentage of silicon was identified in the lime plaster increasing its resistance to humidity.
Concluding remarks
The above presented preliminary results are the first stage of the project’s theoretical basis. Extensive and expert fieldwork, in parallel with the application of lab and digital methodologies, will lead to the assimilation of more elaborate and technical knowledge of medieval and post medieval water collection, storage and distribution systems.
Sophia Germanidou
Marie Curie Research Fellow Newcastle University sophia.germanidou@ncl.ac.uk
Notes
1 See the website of the project hydromedie.com
2 All images are of the author’s unless otherwise stated. Permission was issued by the Hellenic Ministry of Culture, Ephorate of Antiquities of Messinia.
