Archaeoseismological evidence of past earthquakes in Rome (fifth to ninth century A.D.) used to quantify dating uncertainties and coseismic damage

Fabrizio Galadini (), Giovanni Ricci, Emanuela Falcucci and Camilla Panzieri
Additional contact information
Fabrizio Galadini: Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia
Giovanni Ricci: Cooperativa Archeologia
Emanuela Falcucci: Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia
Camilla Panzieri: Cooperativa Archeologia

Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, 2018, vol. 94, issue 1, No 17, 319-348

Abstract: Abstract The transformation of Rome during the Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages has been investigated by archaeologists and historians. Social and political changes are the main aspects which led to a progressive modification of the urban framework; abandonment, spoliation and transformation of buildings are quite diffused as documented by the archaeological literature. The consequence of these practices is a higher vulnerability of the buildings which, from the seismological point of view, played a main role in increasing the effects of seismic shaking. A number of earthquakes have struck Rome during the period of investigation (fifth to ninth century A.D.), known from historical sources: 443, 484–508, 618, 801, 847; in some cases (443, 484–508, 801) damage has been documented. In contrast, the archaeological sources characterise collapse layers and evidence of destruction at different sites with changing and not always conclusive chronological constraints. Consequently, collapse and destruction have been alternatively attributed to the above-mentioned earthquakes. Through a geoarchaeological and stratigraphic analysis of potentially coseismic collapse units, we want (1) to describe the archaeoseismic evidence derived from recent excavations and from the available literature (e.g. Piazza Madonna di Loreto, Piazza Venezia, Palazzo Valentini Crypta Balbi, Colosseo, Basilica Hilariana, Basilica di Santa Petronilla, Santa Maria Antiqua,…); (2) to discuss the chronological problems and the uncertainty of attribution of the collapse units to known historical earthquakes; (3) to discuss the earthquake damage exaggeration due to erroneous attribution of seismic origin to the evidence of destruction derived from archaeological data. Finally, we will infer the role that earthquakes may have had on the development of the urban landscape in the fifth to ninth century A.D.

Keywords: Geoarchaeology; Archaeoseismology; Natural disaster (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069-018-3390-0 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:94:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11069-018-3390-0

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11069

DOI: 10.1007/s11069-018-3390-0

Access Statistics for this article

Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards is currently edited by Thomas Glade, Tad S. Murty and Vladimír Schenk

More articles in Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards from Springer, International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().