DOI issue:
Syria
DOI article:Białowarczuk, Marcin: Early neolithic wall construction techniques in the light of ethnographical observations on the architecture of the modern syrian village of Qaramel
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.42093#0603
TELL QARAMEL
SYRIA
Nemrik 9, it was a kind of mortar made of
clay mixed with humus (Kozlowski [ed.]
1992: 25). Chemical analyses of this mortar
suggest also the addition of egg white to the
mortar (Kozlowski [ed.] 1990: 176).
BRICK SHAPE AND SIZE
The oldest mud bricks were plano-convex or
cigar-shaped and varied in dimensions.
Modular forms, cuboids, as we know them
now, started to spread through the Near East
during the PPNB period. Some of the
oldest were discovered in Chafer Hoyiik in
southeastern Anatolia. Cuboid mud bricks
of standardized dimensions were used there
from the beginning of the PPNB (Cauvin,
Aurenche 1982: 124). During the middle
and late PPNB, this kind of building material
became popular in the other regions of the
Near East. A good example can be Tell
Buqras in the middle Levant (Akkermans
etalii 1981:499).
In light of archaeological data, the
process of shape and size standardization
took place during the developed Neolithic
Period. The best example thereof seems
to be ((iatal Hiiyiik, where standardized
mud bricks were found in layer VI A. From
that time onward, the standard dimensions
were 32 x 16 x 8 cm (Mellart 1967: 55).
According to some architects, this example
clearly indicates another important
issue: from this point in architectural
development, a simple measurement system
was used, measuring length by multiplying
smaller units (Tobolczyk 2000: 103).
The coordinated dimensions of bricks
from C^atal Huyiik suggest that the
Neolithic builders based them on natural
measures, such as a foot and a hand or their
multiples. The length of 32 cm is very close
to the measure of one foot and it is four
times longer than a hand, which is 8 cm
(Tobolczyk 2000: 103).
CONCLUSIONS
All the described techniques of modern
Qaramel architecture and their comparison
with early Neolithic techniques clearly
indicate the survival of certain architectural
traditions for more than 10,000 years.
Wall construction seems to be much
more conservative than any other building
element. Roofs, for example, conform to
weather conditions and their construction
has been modified through the ages. Certain
methods of wall construction have survived
in unchanged form in spite of civilizational
and technological development, testifying
thus to people s attachment to tradition.
This phenomenon is especially conspi-
cuous in rural architecture where it seems
to be connected with village location. From
prehistoric times settlements have been
located mostly at the edges of various ecolo-
gical zones. This border location ensured
better use of natural resources to meet needs
(Bielihski 1985: 26). In terms of architectural
development, the location provides access
to certain raw materials which can be used
for building. Raw materials in turn dictate
specific ways of use (Tobolczyk 2000: 42).
For this reason wall construction is
ranked among the most conservative build-
ing techniques and traditions of wall con-
struc-tion have survived down the ages. It is
only now that modern architecture with its
array of developed techniques is fast replacing
the old architectural traditions. Many
ethnographical elements of importance for
comparative studies in archaeology are in
danger of extinction. It is therefore not just a
need, but also an obligation for researchers to
document examples still in existence.
597
Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 19, Reports 2007
SYRIA
Nemrik 9, it was a kind of mortar made of
clay mixed with humus (Kozlowski [ed.]
1992: 25). Chemical analyses of this mortar
suggest also the addition of egg white to the
mortar (Kozlowski [ed.] 1990: 176).
BRICK SHAPE AND SIZE
The oldest mud bricks were plano-convex or
cigar-shaped and varied in dimensions.
Modular forms, cuboids, as we know them
now, started to spread through the Near East
during the PPNB period. Some of the
oldest were discovered in Chafer Hoyiik in
southeastern Anatolia. Cuboid mud bricks
of standardized dimensions were used there
from the beginning of the PPNB (Cauvin,
Aurenche 1982: 124). During the middle
and late PPNB, this kind of building material
became popular in the other regions of the
Near East. A good example can be Tell
Buqras in the middle Levant (Akkermans
etalii 1981:499).
In light of archaeological data, the
process of shape and size standardization
took place during the developed Neolithic
Period. The best example thereof seems
to be ((iatal Hiiyiik, where standardized
mud bricks were found in layer VI A. From
that time onward, the standard dimensions
were 32 x 16 x 8 cm (Mellart 1967: 55).
According to some architects, this example
clearly indicates another important
issue: from this point in architectural
development, a simple measurement system
was used, measuring length by multiplying
smaller units (Tobolczyk 2000: 103).
The coordinated dimensions of bricks
from C^atal Huyiik suggest that the
Neolithic builders based them on natural
measures, such as a foot and a hand or their
multiples. The length of 32 cm is very close
to the measure of one foot and it is four
times longer than a hand, which is 8 cm
(Tobolczyk 2000: 103).
CONCLUSIONS
All the described techniques of modern
Qaramel architecture and their comparison
with early Neolithic techniques clearly
indicate the survival of certain architectural
traditions for more than 10,000 years.
Wall construction seems to be much
more conservative than any other building
element. Roofs, for example, conform to
weather conditions and their construction
has been modified through the ages. Certain
methods of wall construction have survived
in unchanged form in spite of civilizational
and technological development, testifying
thus to people s attachment to tradition.
This phenomenon is especially conspi-
cuous in rural architecture where it seems
to be connected with village location. From
prehistoric times settlements have been
located mostly at the edges of various ecolo-
gical zones. This border location ensured
better use of natural resources to meet needs
(Bielihski 1985: 26). In terms of architectural
development, the location provides access
to certain raw materials which can be used
for building. Raw materials in turn dictate
specific ways of use (Tobolczyk 2000: 42).
For this reason wall construction is
ranked among the most conservative build-
ing techniques and traditions of wall con-
struc-tion have survived down the ages. It is
only now that modern architecture with its
array of developed techniques is fast replacing
the old architectural traditions. Many
ethnographical elements of importance for
comparative studies in archaeology are in
danger of extinction. It is therefore not just a
need, but also an obligation for researchers to
document examples still in existence.
597
Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 19, Reports 2007