DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.32867#0037
THE COUNTRY
7
Three questions present themselves to the traveler in this barren region of rocks
with its occasional oases of vegetation and its scattered human habitations: Have
these conditions always prevailed? If not, how long have they been as we find them
to-day ? And what has brought them about ? These questions I shall attempt to
answer only from the archaeological standpoint and in the light thrown upon them by
the architectural remains of the country.
To the first query I must answer no; most assuredly not. If every foot of soil
now to be found upon the tops of the ridges and in the little valleys had been under
the highest state of cultivation, it could not have been made to support even a small
fraction of the population of the great number of towns which we see in ruins to-
day. The narrow valleys between the mountain ranges could have contributed but
very little to the support of so great a population, and the plains to the east had
towns of their own to supply. This question will be answered furthcr in the discus-
sion of others.
How long have the conditions been as we find them to-day? This question is
partly answered by the monuments themselves. The ancient inhabitants of this
country were very careful to inscribe dates upon many of their buildings and upon
a large numberof their tombs. The latest ancient dated inscriptions 1 which we found
in all the region belonged to the early years of the seventh century. The styles of
architecture may be definitely traced from the second century after Christ to that
period. After that there was no continuation of the development, no decline ; building
activity stopped short; and the inhabitants seem to have been few, for there are no
more dated tombs. But we cannot believe that a rich and productive country was
abandoned in a single year; the process must have been gradual. How may it be
accounted for? The answer to this brings us to the third query: How were these
conditions brought about ?
An hypothesis only can be offered in reply to this question, an hypothesis which I
think is supported by archaeological evidence. It is intended as an answer to all
three of the above questions.
This whole mountain country, I believe, was once well covered with soil, clad
with verdure, and capped with forests. B'orests could not have grown without soil,
and verdure could not have existed without moisture. If we have forests we have
moisture; we must show, then, that there were forests. For evidence we may turn to
the monuments of the country. These are built upon a plan that depended abso-
lutely upon wooden construction for completion. Basilicas, baths, and private
houses, large and small, had roofs, intermediate floors, balconies, loggia cover-
ings, doors, door and window frames, shutters, and other important dctails of
wood. Some of these features called only for small pieces of wood, such as olive
and other small trees might possibly have furnished; but others, such as the roofs of
1 Part II, insc. 71.
7
Three questions present themselves to the traveler in this barren region of rocks
with its occasional oases of vegetation and its scattered human habitations: Have
these conditions always prevailed? If not, how long have they been as we find them
to-day ? And what has brought them about ? These questions I shall attempt to
answer only from the archaeological standpoint and in the light thrown upon them by
the architectural remains of the country.
To the first query I must answer no; most assuredly not. If every foot of soil
now to be found upon the tops of the ridges and in the little valleys had been under
the highest state of cultivation, it could not have been made to support even a small
fraction of the population of the great number of towns which we see in ruins to-
day. The narrow valleys between the mountain ranges could have contributed but
very little to the support of so great a population, and the plains to the east had
towns of their own to supply. This question will be answered furthcr in the discus-
sion of others.
How long have the conditions been as we find them to-day? This question is
partly answered by the monuments themselves. The ancient inhabitants of this
country were very careful to inscribe dates upon many of their buildings and upon
a large numberof their tombs. The latest ancient dated inscriptions 1 which we found
in all the region belonged to the early years of the seventh century. The styles of
architecture may be definitely traced from the second century after Christ to that
period. After that there was no continuation of the development, no decline ; building
activity stopped short; and the inhabitants seem to have been few, for there are no
more dated tombs. But we cannot believe that a rich and productive country was
abandoned in a single year; the process must have been gradual. How may it be
accounted for? The answer to this brings us to the third query: How were these
conditions brought about ?
An hypothesis only can be offered in reply to this question, an hypothesis which I
think is supported by archaeological evidence. It is intended as an answer to all
three of the above questions.
This whole mountain country, I believe, was once well covered with soil, clad
with verdure, and capped with forests. B'orests could not have grown without soil,
and verdure could not have existed without moisture. If we have forests we have
moisture; we must show, then, that there were forests. For evidence we may turn to
the monuments of the country. These are built upon a plan that depended abso-
lutely upon wooden construction for completion. Basilicas, baths, and private
houses, large and small, had roofs, intermediate floors, balconies, loggia cover-
ings, doors, door and window frames, shutters, and other important dctails of
wood. Some of these features called only for small pieces of wood, such as olive
and other small trees might possibly have furnished; but others, such as the roofs of
1 Part II, insc. 71.