habitat rupestre.pdf - Società Friulana di Archeologia

R. CapraraEconomy? It was principally a rural economy, with poor commercialactivity (especially as it regards the Early Middle Age)and craft. Once again, as everywhere. Sometimes the inhabitantsof rupestrian villages developed activities that also openminded experts could not expect. This is the case of the steelworksthat Caprara and Dell’Aquila have discovered throughthe finding of slag in the village of Madonna della Scala (Massafra).Political organization? The small rupestrian villages of theGreek and Roman eras were structured as the other villagesof those civilizations.The rupestrian villages under Byzantium were choria or castra(if they were fortified) and they paid taxes to the centralgovernment, as the cities did. For instance, this is documentedfor the rupestrian village of Old Palagiano (today called Palagianello).Social organization? It was exactly the same “rural civilization”of the suburban villages.So, this presumed “rupestrian civilization” is only characterizedby the choice of living in caves instead of buildinghouses. This is very little to characterize a “civilization”. It islike a “skyscraper civilization”, or a “terraces civilization” inopposition to a “roof tile civilization”, which should be alsodivided in a “pantile civilization” and an “interlocking tilecivilization”.More, the medieval stage of “living in caves” is not the onlyone. Apart from Prehistory, rupestrian villages were commonin the great ancient civilizations in the Mediterranean area, aswell as in the Near and in the Far East, in America, and wherevergeology allowed that kind of settlement.We respect the deep and meaningful sense of that word, whichdoes not deserve such a degradation and misuse (like “winecivilization” and “car civilization”, which are as well questionableas the “rupestrian civilization”, since their meaningsare so limited to become meaningless).We have never surrendered to the easy fashion of the archaeologicalmeaning of “rupestrian civilization”; we have alwayspreferred the idea of rupestrian churches and settlements, asthe serious archaeologists have always done.The choice of living in ravines never constituted an autonomouscivilization, but it was only one possibility of livingthroughout the ages in many different civilizations all overthe world.The concept of “rupestrian civilization” can be accepted invillage fairs, but not in real experts, which have to abandon itto avoid the risk of future generations’ scorn.In the early seventies of the past century (that is forty yearsago, a very long period during which other studies have beenaccomplished) the most “cultured” exeprts had only read thebooks on rupestrian churches in Cappadocia by De Jerphanionand the ones on our rupestrian churches by Diehl and Bertaux.We knew nothing about similar settlements in France, Spain,Northern Africa, Armenia and Balkans. Today we know allthose settlements: this makes speaking of “rupestrian civilization”ridiculous.If Franco dell’Aquila discovers (and publishes) Christianchurches, mosques and a synagogue in a small Libyan area,are those episodes of “rupestrian civilization” or “rupestrianepisodes” of Byzantine, Arab and Hebraic civilizations in thatarea?If I find an abandoned mosque beside twelve unedited churches,are those documents of Cappadocian “rupestrian civilization”or “rupestrian documents” of the Byzantine and Islamiccivilizations, which followed each other and lived together inCappadocia?When Aldo Messina publishes a rupestrian mosque in Sicily,is that an episode of Sicilian “rupestrian civilization” or a rupestrianepisode of Islamic civilization, which dominated Sicilyfor centuries?Our colleagues from Genoa report the results of their Armenianmission, which implement the previously collected dataon subterranean places of worship in the area of Ahlat. The resultis a wider and more diversified picture than before. Thoseworks are not limited to Christian structures, but to those ofdifferent religions too.Evidently, the use of the subsoil was inspired by geographic,climatic and morphological characteristics of the territoriesand by the lithology of the places, which induced populationsand Civilizations to get their buildings in the rock, leavingtheir religious faith aside. The most evident proof is the presenceof a Buddhist temple in the cliff of Eski Kale, in the districtof Harabeşehir. It has been attributed to the Mongol domination,and it was recognized by prof. Nakış Karamağaralı.This is the most western Buddhist temple known.The presence of a mescit (a very small mosque) in the area ofSultan Seyyid is very meaningful. It is constituted by a setof ancient underground rooms, which are partly ruined. Thesite is halfway between the Buddhist temple and the ChristianFig. 3 Gravina Rivolta, Est side. Ginosa (TA).15volumeRicerca_OK_2012-11-15.indd 15 16/11/2012 15:00:42