Paphos

Name Tables

Paphos

**Paphos**
Transliterated Name	Source	Name
Paphos	Greek	Πάφος
Baf	Turkish

Old Paphos

**Old Paphos**
Transliterated Name	Source	Name
Old Paphos
Palaepaphos	Greek	Παλαίπαφος
Kouklia (modern village)	Greek	Κούκλια
Kukla	Turkish
Konuklia	Turkish
Covocle	French

New Paphos

**New Paphos**
Transliterated Name	Source	Name
New Paphos
Kato Paphos (modern village)	Greek	Κάτω Πάφος
Nea Paphos	Greek	Νέα Πάφος

Introduction

Paphos is a coastal city in southwest Cyprus. In classical antiquity, two locations were called Paphos:

Old Paphos or Palaipaphos (Παλαίπαφος) in Greek, today known as Kouklia (Κούκλια)
New Paphos aka Nea Paphos (Νέα Πάφος) or Kato Paphos (Κάτω Πάφος)

Description, History, and Exploration

from Franz Georg Maier in Meyers et. a. (1997)

Paphos, ancient city on the southwest coast of Cyprus (34°42' N, 32°35' E), situated on a low hill above the coastal plain, fewer than 2 km (about 1 mi.) from the shore. The original settlement was also called Paphos, but since the end of the fourth century BCE has been called Old Paphos (Gk., Palaipaphos; Lat., Palaepaphus), to avoid confusion with the recently founded harbor town of New Paphos (Nea Paphos), some 19 km (12 mi.) along the coast to the northwest.

The ancient name of the city was lost during the Middle Ages. In the sixteenth century, the Swiss traveler Ludwig Tschudi (1519) and the Venetian official Francesco Attar (1540) discovered that the ruins outside the village of Kouklia marked the site of the renowned Sanctuary of the Paphian Aphrodite. The first excavations at Palaipaphos-Kouklia were carried out in 1888 by an expedition from the Cyprus Exploration Fund. After an interval of more than seventy years, the British Kouklia Expedition (1950-1955) initiated a systematic archaeological investigation of the city and the sanctuary. Since 1966, regular excavations have been conducted under the auspices of the German Archaeological Institute and the University of Zurich.

Paphos represents the only capital of the ancient kingdoms of Cyprus whose history dates to the early third millennium BCE . The site was inhabited in the Chalcolithic period (c. 2800 BCE) . Greek immigrants began to appear in the extensive Late Bronze Age settlement at Paphos (late twelfth or early eleventh century BCE) . The city remained the capital of the Kingdom of Paphos from the Iron Age until the conquest of Cyprus by the Ptolemies, in 294 BCE , who abolished the island's local monarchies. The city of Palaipaphos, however, continued to function as a noted place of worship throughout antiquity.

A local fertility cult is attested at Paphos as early as the third millennium. It seems that the Greek immigrants transformed it into the worship of the Paphian Aphrodite, whose cult later also adapted elements of the Syrian Astarte. The shrine at Paphos, situated close to the spot on the coast where the "foam-born" goddess was believed to have risen from the sea, gradually became one of the most famous sanctuaries of Aphrodite in the Greek and Roman world. The sanctuary therefore formed the chief architectural feature of Paphos. The first monumental sanctuary buildings date to about 1200 BCE . Basically, they represent a type of Near Eastern court sanctuary, combining a small, covered hall with a large, open temenos (a sacred precinct), originally filled with altars and votive gifts. The hall probably housed the idol of the goddess in the shape of a conical stone, a symbol of fertility. The aniconic worship of Aphrodite at Paphos throughout the sanctuary's history was a legacy of the original autochthonous cult.

In the large Late Bronze Age city of Paphos, workshops produced refined pottery, jewelery, and ivory objects that exhibit a characteristic fusion of Cypriot, Aegean, and Levantine traditions. Yet, probably the most flourishing phases in the history of the city were the Archaic and Classical periods, as shown by the large number of tombs of the wealthy and by an architectural heritage. In the sanctuary itself, a thorough Roman remodeling destroyed the LB buildings, but the cult's continuity is amply attested by more than four thousand fragments of Geometric, Archaic, and Classical terra-cotta votives. An imposing Late Archaic or Early Classical ashlar building most likely served as a royal residence. It is modeled on Achaemenid prototypes and exhibits a certain monumental elegance. A large Late Classical peristyle mansion, discovered a few years ago, may have served a similar purpose in the fourth century BCE . Another important feature of the Classical period is the vast chamber tomb Spilaion lis Ragainas, the burial place of two fourth-century kings of Paphos.

The city of Paphos was defended by a circuit of walls built in the Early Archaic period and maintained until about 300 BCE . The northeast gate, which forms a sector of these fortifications, represents an important and, in some respects, unique monument of military architecture. Elaborate siege and countersiege works excavated on the site allow a detailed reconstruction of the siege of Paphos by a Persian army during the Ionian Revolt in 498 BCE. In order to amass the materials to construct a vast siege ramp, the attackers destroyed a sanctuary outside the walls. This debris contained several hundred fragments of sculptures and votive monuments that include some of the finest Archaic Cypriot statues known. These finds testify to a considerable local school of sculptors whose work combines Egyptian trends with Greek and Phoenician influences; they also provide a key date for the art history of ancient Cyprus. The potter's craft also lived on in the Iron Age, as shown by a large number of remarkable vessels decorated in the rather severe Paphian style that relies mainly on austere geometric patterns.

At the beginning of the third century BCE , when a considerable part of the population was transferred to the harbor city of Nea Paphos, the importance of the old city of Paphos declined, but it did retain its fame as an important religious center in the Hellenistic and later the Roman world. The sanctuary was rebuilt in about 100 CE, possibly after a destruction caused by the earthquake of 76/77 CE. This Roman sanctuary, which incorporated part of the LB buildings, was not in the classical Greco-Roman design. The building retained tire basic Oriental character of an open-court sanctuary, reminiscent of the cult's Near Eastern antecedents.

The shrine with the longest cult tradition on Cyprus did not survive the final outlawing of all pagan religions by Emperor Theodosius I (391). Yet, several centuries later, at the beginning of the twelfth century, Palaipaphos (then named Couvoucle) regained some of its former importance. The royal manor house was erected adjacent to the sanctuary site, incorporating a thirteenth-century hall that is one of the finest surviving monuments of Gothic secular architecture on Cyprus. The manor served as a center of cane sugar production. On the coastal plain below it, a large and fairly well-preserved cane-sugar refinery was discovered and excavated. Erected in the late thirteenth century, it represents a so-far unique example of a medieval industrial plant; it remained in use until the end of the sixteenth century

Old Paphos from The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites

PAPHOS or Palaipaphos (Kouklia) Cyprus
from The Princeton encyclopedia of classical sites

New Paphos from The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites

PAPHOS or Nea Paphos (Kato Paphos) Cyprus
from The Princeton encyclopedia of classical sites

Aerial Views, Plans, and Photos

Old Paphos

Aerial Views

Old Paphos in Google Earth

Old Paphos in Google Earth

click on image to explore this site on a new tab in Google Earth

Plans

Area Plans

Sanctuary of Aphrodite

Normal Size

Plan of the Sanctuary

Sanctuary of Aphrodite, Palaepaphos

click on image to open a high res magnifiable version in a new tab

Rjdeadly - wikipedia - CC BY-SA 4.0

of Aphrodite in Old Paphos from wikipedia

Magnified

Plan of the Sanctuary

Sanctuary of Aphrodite, Palaepaphos

click on image to open a high res magnifiable version in a new tab

Rjdeadly - wikipedia - CC BY-SA 4.0

of Aphrodite in Old Paphos from wikipedia

New Paphos

Aerial Views

New Paphos in Google Earth

New Paphos in Google Earth

click on image to explore this site on a new tab in Google Earth

Plans

Site Plans

Normal Size

Plan of Nea Paphos

Plan of Nea Paphos

Vitaliia Pavlyshyn - wikipedia - CC BY-SA 4.0

from wikipedia
Fig. 1 Plan of Nea

Fig. 1

Site plan of Nea Paphos with indication of the main districts and monuments

Base map after K. Nicolaou and E. Papuci, modified by Cl. Balandier. Produced by E. Rossignol.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Paphos from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 5 Plan of Nea

Fig. 1

Site plan of Nea Paphos with indication of excavation operations by sector

Background map after Kyriakos Nicolaou and Ewdoksia Papuci-Wÿadyka, modified by Claire Balandier. Created by Emilie Rossignol.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Paphos from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Magnified

Plan of Nea Paphos

Plan of Nea Paphos

Vitaliia Pavlyshyn - wikipedia - CC BY-SA 4.0

from wikipedia
Fig. 1 Plan of Nea

Fig. 1

Site plan of Nea Paphos with indication of the main districts and monuments

Base map after K. Nicolaou and E. Papuci, modified by Cl. Balandier. Produced by E. Rossignol.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Paphos from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 5 Plan of Nea

Fig. 1

Site plan of Nea Paphos with indication of excavation operations by sector

Background map after Kyriakos Nicolaou and Ewdoksia Papuci-Wÿadyka, modified by Claire Balandier. Created by Emilie Rossignol.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Paphos from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Photos

Ramparts

Normal Size

Fig. 1 Southern Rampart

Fig. 1

Surveys of the southern rampart to the west of the kastro (Ottoman castle). View towards the East.

Photos: Mafap/C. Balandier

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

to the west of the kastro (Ottoman castle) from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 2 Western Rampart

Fig. 2

Surveys on the western rampart: rock tower. View towards the north.

Photos: Mafap/C. Balandier

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 3 Northern Rampart

Fig. 3

Survey of the base of the northern rampart to the northwest of Fabrika hill.

Photos: Mafap/C. Balandier

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

to the northwest of Fabrika hill from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 4 Western Rampart

Fig. 4

Survey of the western edge of the ditch of western rampart (constrescarp) and the base of a proteichisma (?)

Photos: Mafap/C. Balandier

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Magnified

Fig. 1 Southern Rampart

Fig. 1

Surveys of the southern rampart to the west of the kastro (Ottoman castle). View towards the East.

Photos: Mafap/C. Balandier

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

to the west of the kastro (Ottoman castle) from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 2 Western Rampart

Fig. 2

Surveys on the western rampart: rock tower. View towards the north.

Photos: Mafap/C. Balandier

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 3 Northern Rampart

Fig. 3

Survey of the base of the northern rampart to the northwest of Fabrika hill.

Photos: Mafap/C. Balandier

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

to the northwest of Fabrika hill from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 4 Western Rampart

Fig. 4

Survey of the western edge of the ditch of western rampart (constrescarp) and the base of a proteichisma (?)

Photos: Mafap/C. Balandier

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Rocky (Eastern Rampart Related ?) Substrate at the foot of the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti

Normal Size

Fig. 100 Orthophoto of

Fig. 100

Orthophoto of Rescue operation and sounding #10 at the foot of the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti

Photogrammetric survey carried out in the field by Manuel Tastayre and Yohan Échaubard and computer processing carried out by Matthieu Guintrand

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Rescue operation and sounding #10 at the foot of the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 97 Block (?) and

Fig. 97

Block (?) and cut rock to the north of the street. View towards the southwest.

Photo: C. Balandier.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

cut rock to the north of the street from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 98 Rocky base of

Fig. 98

Rocky base of the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti. View to the East.

Topographic survey by MafaP/Efa. Photos: MafaP/C. Balandier.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 99 The rock cut

Fig. 99

The rock cut to the north of the church. View to the South.

Topographic survey by MafaP/Efa. Photos: MafaP/C. Balandier.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

to the north of the church from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Magnified

Fig. 100 Orthophoto of

Fig. 100

Orthophoto of Rescue operation and sounding #10 at the foot of the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti

Photogrammetric survey carried out in the field by Manuel Tastayre and Yohan Échaubard and computer processing carried out by Matthieu Guintrand

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Rescue operation and sounding #10 at the foot of the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 97 Block (?) and

Fig. 97

Block (?) and cut rock to the north of the street. View towards the southwest.

Photo: C. Balandier.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

cut rock to the north of the street from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 98 Rocky base of

Fig. 98

Rocky base of the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti. View to the East.

Topographic survey by MafaP/Efa. Photos: MafaP/C. Balandier.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 99 The rock cut

Fig. 99

The rock cut to the north of the church. View to the South.

Topographic survey by MafaP/Efa. Photos: MafaP/C. Balandier.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

to the north of the church from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Cistern on Fabrika Hill

Normal Size

Fig. 115 Aerial View of

Fig. 115

The cistern. Zenith view.

Orthophoto: C. Abellan

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Cistern from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 116 Aerial View of

Fig. 116

Zenithal view of the southeast of the Fabrika hill plateau: aqueduct slabs on the left, cistern in the center and top of the theater on the right. North is on the left.

Photo: Mafap/Chr. Papadopoulos

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

the southeast of the Fabrika hill plateau from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 117 View of the

Fig. 117

View of the cistern during excavation with the outlet of the underground gallery through the north wall. View towards the North.

Photo: Mafap/C. Balandier 2011.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

cistern during excavation from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Magnified

Fig. 115 Aerial View of

Fig. 115

The cistern. Zenith view.

Orthophoto: C. Abellan

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Cistern from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 116 Aerial View of

Fig. 116

Zenithal view of the southeast of the Fabrika hill plateau: aqueduct slabs on the left, cistern in the center and top of the theater on the right. North is on the left.

Photo: Mafap/Chr. Papadopoulos

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

the southeast of the Fabrika hill plateau from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)
Fig. 117 View of the

Fig. 117

View of the cistern during excavation with the outlet of the underground gallery through the north wall. View towards the North.

Photo: Mafap/C. Balandier 2011.

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

cistern during excavation from Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

1st Century BCE Earthquake ?

Discussion

Balandier and Guintrand (2023:53) examined a rocky substrate at the foot of the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti which they interpreted as the result of the extraction of ... blocks that could have been used for the erection of the eastern rampart as well as other buildings. They also concluded that the regularity of the visible face (fig. 99) could suggest that it had been used to support the [eastern] rampart. Based on their observations of the interpreted remnants of a rampart at the foot of the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti and ramparts elsewhere in New Paphos, Balandier and Guintrand (2023:54) concluded that ramparts [in New Paphos] that made up the Hellenistic period enclosure had been badly damaged by an earthquake (probably the one that occurred in 16/15 BC).

Ambraseys (2009) and Guidoboni et al. (1994) list this earthquake in their catalogs which they variously date to between 17 and 15 BCE and consider Diodorus, Eusebius, Dio Cassius, and, to a lesser extent, Syncellus as the primary historical sources for this event.

References

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Rescue operation and Sounding #10 at the foot of the church of Panaghia Theoskepasti

from Balandier and Guintrand (2023:53-54)

During the topographic work on the outline of the urban enclosure, in May 2023, the destruction of a recent house on the edge of the street running along the northern face of the re-cut substrate on which the Panaghia Theoskepasti church was built drew our attention to what looked like large blocks or arranged rock (fig. 97 and 98) at the edge of the perpendicular street which went towards the north.

Now, this rocky substrate serving as a base for the church is considered, since the synthesis of K. Nicolaou (1966) on the topography of Paphos, like the base of a tower of flanking a door (fig. 98). This base must first have been the result of the extraction of rock to extract blocks that could have been used for the erection of the eastern rampart as well as other buildings.

The regularity of the visible face (fig. 99) could suggest that it had been used to support the rampart. It was the excavation of the Department of Antiquities, led by Eustathios Raptou, which confirmed this a few months later, in October 2023.

Our own field observations determined that some block negatives were similar to those unearthed by our Mission at the top of Fabrika Hill and corresponded well to the modules of the blocks of the enclosure.

In addition, the very layout of the route (restored in fig. 100, orthophoto below), a few centimetres back from the regularised break in the slope of the cliff, was another element of similarity. It is clear that the blocks used in the elevation of the rampart had been extracted on site, thus regularising the height on which the rampart was to be erected and preparing its location. It is the layout of this location that partly remains today, providing the broad guidelines for the route, despite the new exploitation of stone in the area in the late period. However, developments from the Roman period have preserved the broad urban orientations: a stoa seems to have been then located on the route of the dismantled rampart.

This seems to confirm what we have observed elsewhere: the ramparts that made up the Hellenistic period enclosure had been badly damaged by an earthquake (probably the one that occurred in 16/15 BC) and were not resurrected. On the other hand, the main line of their layout could have been preserved and their blocks reused in new urban developments. In addition, this sector could have been that of a gate, the South-East gate, the hypothesis of which had been proposed by K. Nicolaou in 1966. If lines perpendicular to the outline of the rampart could suggest this, subsequent interventions on the site (including the construction of the Panaghia Theoskepasti church in 1920) have caused many clues to disappear. However, continued research in this sector in 2024 should help us refine the observations and conclusions.

(a request for additional excavations was made to the Department of Antiquities). The photogrammetric survey was carried out in the field by Manuel Tastayre and Yohan Échaubard and the computer processing carried out by Matthieu Guintrand (see fig. 100 below).

2nd Century CE Earthquake ?

Discussion

Balandier and Guintrand (2023:64) used ceramics to date the initial construction and later destruction of a cistern on Fabrika hill in New Paphos to the 2nd century CE. They attributed the cistern's destruction to an earthquake in the 2nd century CE and suggested that it was probably the one that occurred during the reign of Hadrian which they dated to 127 CE. It is unclear what earthquake they are referring to. Neither Ambraseys (2009) nor Guidoboni et al. (1994) refer to an earthquake in Cyprus around this time. Guidoboni et al. (1994) note that The Life of Hadrian in the Historia Augusta records in very general terms that various disasters occurred during the reign of Hadrian (117-138 A.D.) but these events were neither precisely dated nor precisely located. Guidoboni et al. (1994) suggest that they struck the Italian mainland. There is a spatially and/or temporally ambiguous report of an earthquake, ostensibly in Palestine, around ~130 CE which is documented in this Earthquake Encyclopedia as The Eusebius Mystery Quake.

References

Balandier and Guintrand (2023)

Operation 3. The rock hydraulic works of Fabrika hill

Introduction

from Balandier and Guintrand (2023:62)

The problem of the water supply of the Fabrika hill is one of the themes of interest to this new four year research program because the hill does not have any water points, but is dotted with remains of pipes, an aqueduct and an underground gallery supplying a cistern, uncovered by MafaP during the first two research programs. This is why it seemed necessary to resume the global study of these remains. This is the subject of Cyril Abellan's Master's research, who presents his first observations here. Some of these reflections were presented at the PoCA (Colloquium bringing together young researchers in Cypriot archaeology) and at the 3rd international colloquium on Nea Paphos that we co-organized in Athens in November 2022.

1. The cistern and underground gallery unearthed by MafaP at the top of Fabrika hil

from Balandier and Guintrand (2023:62-66)

This cistern, unearthed between 2008 and 2012 (fig. 116 and 117), measures 10.8 m long and 5.5 m wide for its internal walls. The restored vault culminates at 3m high. We can therefore estimate a volume of approximately 178 m³ (fig. 115).

The whole building can be understood as a reception basin for water arriving from the underground gallery opening through the north wall of the cistern. In fact, a small basin into which the north gallery opens is covered with hydraulic coating. It is followed by a channel which starts from the east wall of the basin in an easterly direction before changing direction at 90° to follow the east wall of the cistern and join the well located in the southwest corner.

This basin was used to regulate the flow of water which was then distributed through the canals. The water's path ended further south: the original southern gallery continues its course at least to the theatre without its final destination being identified. It seems that the cistern is later than what was originally a single rock gallery that the digging of the cistern would have divided into two distinct parts to the north and south.

The study of the ceramic material that was found below, to the east of the cistern, from the cleaning of the cistern in the 13th century, made it possible to establish the oldest dating of the cistern. The ceramics were in fact composed exclusively of jugs and other hydraulic containers covered with calcareous concretions characteristic of a prolonged stay in water. The study of this material made it possible to date it to the 2nd century AD. We would therefore have here the traces of the end of the use of the cistern as such. Its establishment therefore dates from the 2nd century at the latest. Let us understand this first phase as follows: dug and built no later than the 2nd century, the cistern functioned until its destruction by one of the clearly identified earthquakes that struck Paphos at the beginning of our era, here at the end of the 2nd century AD, probably the one that occurred during the reign of Hadrian¹.

The cistern and the two galleries, North and South, which accompany it (or rather the gallery which was divided into two parts by the digging of the cistern), were dug directly into the dune sandstone rock, or marine calcarenite, of the hill.

The North gallery (fig. 118 and 119), until now referred to as a "rock aqueduct" in the reports, could not be dated precisely, as no excavation could be carried out there for safety reasons. Only the plug that blocked the entrance could be dated to the 13th century AD, a late phase of the reuse of the cistern as a place to store goods. The fact that this gallery opens into the Roman cistern could suggest that it was contemporary with the cistern, but Claire Balandier has also suggested that it could be an earlier hydraulic system reused in the Roman era².

The underground gallery highlighted, to the north of the cistern, is therefore dug directly into the dune sandstone of the hill and does not follow a perfect rectilinear path (fig. 116 and 117). In cross-section, the rock gallery can be seen as a trapezoid wider at the base with a dimension of about 0.75m and narrower at its summit with a width It measures a little over 15m in length before being interrupted by a scree seeping through a manhole from the surface, to the north. We can therefore only observe a small part of the excavation. About thirty meters are still necessary to reach the aqueduct visible on the surface, further north still. Its internal height measures, at its highest, 1.90m and 1.65m at its outlet in the cistern. The internal walls have, on either side, a regular horizontal crack approximately halfway up the tunnel (fig. 119). Traces of erosion characteristic of water circulation are visible on the walls, clearly marked below this crack, less so for the upper part where there are more traces of cutting. Similarly, the silting, sometimes very significant, due to the crumbling of the dune sandstone rock in contact with water, testifies to the past of this gallery in water. We will also observe, at regular intervals at the top of the walls, small notches which were most likely used to hold oil lamps during the miners' work³.

The southern part (fig. 120), separated from the northern opening by the presence of the cistern, has similar characteristics⁴: the opening in the cistern is 0.68 m wide and 1.60 m high. It is not currently possible to enter the tunnel, as it has been deliberately blocked by the installation of masonry blocks, two of which remain in the lower part of the opening. This southern outlet of the cistern is preceded to the north by a rectangular space covered with a pink coating, most likely for a hydraulic function (water repellent)⁵, creating a well measuring 1mx1.10m. At the bottom of the latter, the excavation revealed a terracotta siphon still in place.

In the upper eastern part of the theatre, we can finally observe the southernmost outlet of our tunnel (fig. 121 and 122). The rock gallery of the South of the cistern thus follows a non-rectilinear path to reach this outlet of the theatre. This tunnel is also difficult to access due to the presence of a tree that has grown at its entrance. The dimensions of the opening in the dune sandstone rock are similar to those of the openings described in the cistern. On the other hand, the interior of the gallery is very eroded although some traces of human work on the rock are still perceptible. In front of the exit, at the level of the steps, we notice the traces of masonry work based on There may also have been a well here, but this seems to have been abandoned, as well as the gallery, to make way for the construction of the theatre's steps.

Footnotes

1 An earthquake is known during his reign, around 127. It is identified by archaeological excavations of the Australian missions, in the theater, and Polish, in the Maloutena district.

2 BALANDIER, Claire, GUINTRAND Matthieu and DE PONTBRIAND Ségolène, “From the Ptolemaic city to the imperial reconstruction: new elements to the North of the Fabrika hill. Results of the French archaeological mission in Paphos (2012-2017)”, in BALANDIER, Claire, MICHAELIDES, Demetrios, RAPTOU, Eustathios (eds.), Nea Paphos Nea Paphos and Western Cyprus. Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Paphos held in Paphos, 11-15 October 2017, organized by the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus, the University of Avignon and the University of Cyprus, “Mémoires”, Ausonius Editions, forthcoming.

3 Jean-Claude Bessac, in his analysis of rock art techniques, describes this digging work as the work of a miner rather than a quarryman: BESSAC Jean-Claude, “The technical aspects of the rock art developments of Paphos.”, in BALANDIER Claire ed., Nea Paphos: foundation and urban development of a Cypriot city from Antiquity to the present day archaeological, historical and heritage studies proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Paphos, Avignon, October 30, 31 and November 1, 2012, Bordeaux, 2016, pp. 101-116.

4 The collapse of the hill's eastern slope fault line following various earthquakes that have struck Paphos, together with the erosion of the rock, make it difficult to follow the exact route of the gallery to the outlet observed in the theatre.

5 A major study on the chemistry of coatings could teach us a lot about the history of the use of these structures. A study of this type was recently conducted in Marseille. See on this subject: FUMADO ORTEGA Iván and BOUFFIER Sophie, Mortiers et hydraulique en Méditerranée antique, Archéologies méditerranéennes, PUP, Aix-en-Provence, 2019

References

Articles and Books

Balandier, Claire and Guintrand, Matthieu (2023) Mission archéologique française à Paphos : rapport de la campagne de fouilles 2023 . Avignon Université; UMR 5189 HiSoMA; Ecole française d’Athènes; Com- mission des fouilles du ministère de l’Europe et des aﬀaires étrangères. 2024. hal-04476875

Jean Berard, “Recherches Archéologiques à Chypre dans la région de Paphos,” RA 43 (1954) 1-16MI

Jean Deshayes, “Chronique Archéologique, Les Fouilles Françaises de Ktima,” Syria 35 (1958), 412-21I

Jean Deshayes, La Nécropole de Ktima (1963)

Dussaud, R. (1895), ‘Voyage en Syrie Octobre-Novembre 1895 Notes Archeologiques’ , pp. 299–336.

D. G. Hogarth, Devia Cypria (1889); A. Sakellarios, Τὰ Κυπριακά I (1890)

V. Karageorghis, “Chronique de Fouilles et Découvertes Archéologiques à Chypre,” BCH 84 (1963) onwards

K. Nicolaou, “The Mosaics at Kato Paphos: The house of Dionysos,” Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus (1963) 56-72MPI

K. Nicolaou, “Excavations at Nea Paphos: The House of Dionysos. Outline of the Campaigns 1964-1965,” Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus (1967) 100-125PI

K. Nicolaou, Ancient Monuments of Cyprus (1968)

K. Nicolaou, Nea Paphos An Archaeological Guide (1970)

I. K. Peristianes, Γενικὴ Ἱστορία τῆς νήσου Κύπρου (1909)

Excavation Reports

W. A. Daszewski, “A preliminary report on the excavations of the Polish Archaeological Mission at Kato (Nea) Paphos in 1966 and 1967, ”Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus (1968) 33-61PI

W. A. Daszewski, “Polish Excavations at Kato Paphos, in 1968-1969,” Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus (1970) 112-41MPI

W. A. Daszewski, “Polish Excavations at Kato (Nea) Paphos in 1970 and 1971,” Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus (1972) 204-36.

Websites

Paphos (Catholic Encyclopedia)

Paphos (Unesco World Heritage Site)

Nea Paphos - Polish Archaeological Center for the Mediterranean

Nea Paphos:50 years of Polish excavations: 1965-2015

Paphos (UNESCO) - New Paphos

Bibliography from Meyers et. al. (1997)

Maier, Franz G., ed. Ausgrabungen in Alt-Paphos. 4 vols. Konstanz, Germany, 1977-1986.

Maier, Franz G., and Vassos Karageorghis. Paphos: History and Archaeology, Nicosia, 1984..

Maier, Franz G. Alt-Paphos aufCypem. Mainz, 1985..

Maier, Franz G , and M.-L. von Warfburg. "Reconstructing History from the Earth, c. 2800 B.C.-1600 A.D.: Excavating at Palaepaphos, 1966-1984." In Archaeology in Cyprus, 1960-1985, edited by Vassos Karageorghis, pp . 142-172. Nicosia, 1985.

Historical Earthquakes Reported in Earthquake Catalogs

Ambraseys (2009)

17–15 BC Cyprus

A destructive earthquake in Cyprus. It occurred in 15 BC (Diodorus) or, according to others (Eusebius), in Ol.190.3 (17 BC), that is sometime between 17 and 15 BC, during which period one or more earthquakes partly destroyed many places in Cyprus, including Paphos. The city was rebuilt with the assistance of Augustus and was renamed Augusta.

Inscriptions found at Palaepaphos (IGR iii. 939, 941–944) confirm the reconstruction activity in the city immediately or soon after 15 BC. An inscription (Dussaud 1896) from Byblus recording the gratitude of a survivor from an earthquake, dated vaguely to the first centuries BC or AD, may perhaps refer to this earthquake, which, in this case, should have occurred between Cyprus and the coast of Syria. A later writer (Georg. Mon. PG. i. 294) confuses Paphos with Salamina and Cyprus with Syria in this connection (see above, 44–32 BC)

Notes

. . . he...gave money to the Paphians who had suffered from an earthquake, besides allowing them, by a decree, to call their city Augusta.’ (D.C.=Dio Cass. LIV. 23/LCL.vi.342).

. . . he (Augustus) relieved others (cities) which had been destroyed by earthquakes .. .’(Suet.Aug.47/LCL.i.200).

The senate and the people of Paphos Sebaste (Augusta) [commend] Tiberius Caesar, son of the divine Augustus, Emperor Augustus and greatest pontifex, to Paphian Aphrodite.’ (IGR.iii.941–942).

An earthquake destroyed many districts of Cyprus.’ (Eus. Gk., 142).

A large part of the island of Cyprus was reduced to a ruin [by an earthquake].’ (Eus. Arm., 142).

In Cyprus many parts of the towns fell in an earthquake.’ (Hieron., 166).

Apollodorus son of Nicon, saved from the earthquake, erected this to Zeus, his saviour.’ (Dussaud 1896).

Let us add that every sea-shore is prone to earthquakes: thus Paphos was not shaken just once . . .’ (Sen. QN. VI. xxvi. 4).

References

Ambraseys, N. N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900.

AD 130 (Neo)Caesarea, Nicopolis

(Neo)caesarea and Nicopolis were destroyed by an earth quake. Nothing else is known about the event, and indeed it is not certain whether the sources refer to Neocaesarea and Nicopolis in the Pontus (Niksar and Enderes, respectively) or Caesarea Maritima and Nicopolis (Emmaus) in Palestine, although the former location is more probable. In the latter case both sites, 120km apart, are situated on the North Anatolian fault zone.

Saint Jerome dates this event Ol.CCXXVII, which began in October AD 129 at the end of Hadrian’s twelfth year, whereas Eusebius (Arm.) gives a.A. 2143 in Hadrian’s eleventh year, AD 128. Since, however, Eusebius tends to antedate second-century events by two years, the most likely date for this event is AD 130.

In the Roman empire at least three towns were called Nicopolis and a very large number Caesarea or Neocaesarea. Either Caesarea, after one of the emperors, would be the town’s only name, or it would be renamed Caesarea if an imperial benefaction had aided its reconstruction after a disaster. There are two principal opinions concerning the location of the two towns involved in this earthquake: the Roman port of Caesarea, near Haifa, and Nicopolis=Emmaus, near Jerusalem.

Archaeological evidence from Caesarea shows that an earthquake must have caused the collapse of vaulted chambers initially built in the first century AD along the waterfront of Caesarea, as well as the destruction of important buildings in the city, during the ‘Late Roman Period’ (Toombes 1978, 230). According to Russell, this earthquake, recorded by Eusebius, is the only possible explanation for the destruction (Russell, 1981), even though the ‘Late Roman Period’, a term used to date ceramics, in fact runs from AD 200 to 300, and Eusebius’s date (AD 130) is seventy years before the earliest possible date for this period. Russell points out that ceramic chronologies are not precise, but this rests on the assumption that any records of an earthquake in Caesarea at this time could not have been lost, or that it could not have gone undocumented: note that there is hardly any record for what is believed to have been a very large earthquake in Antioch in 148 or 130 BC (q.v.), apart from a garbled account in the Chronicle of Malalas.

Afurther problem is Nicopolis (Emmaus), which is so near Jerusalem that Jesus’s disciples went there and returned in a day (Mark, XVI. 12; Smith 1907). It is strange, therefore, that Jerusalem was not affected, or, if it was affected, that it is not mentioned in the sources. The town of Nicopolis was built by Julius Africanus on the site of Emmaus, which in AD 221 was an insignificant village. Eusebius might have recorded an earthquake there owing to the religious associations, but in that case one would expect him to use its Biblical name of Emmaus, rather than the pagan Nicopolis, although it is true that at least some later ecclesiastic authors preferred Nicopolis to Emmaus. In the present case, however, it is rather strange that Jerusalem, which was so close to Nicopolis, was not destroyed or even mentioned.

A more likely location is Neocaesarea (Niksar) and Nicopolis, between Purh and Enderes (Susehri), in northern Turkey, both of which flourished in the second century AD (Cumont and Cumont 1906, 304). They are located about 110 km apart on the Anatolian fault zone and were linked by a major Roman road.

Other locations of the pair (Neo)caesarea Nicopolis would be Eriste, c. 100km south-southwest of Cyzicus, and Nicaea Palaeopolis c. 50km south-southeast of Sardis, both rather unimportant settlements.

Typical examples of the confusion with these place names are the wrong location of Nicopolis destroyed by the AD 499 earthquake at Emmaus (Chr. Ps.Dion. CH 192ftn), and the sacking by Maslamah in AD 728 of Neocaesarea, when Caesarea in Cappadocia is meant (Dion. Tell. CH 24).

Notes

‘Ol.CCXXVII/xii: Nicopolis and Caesarea fell in an earthquake.’ (Hieron. Hist. 200).

‘Nicopolis and Caesarea collapsed in an earthquake’ (Eus. Hist. 166, Greek).

‘Ol.CCXXVII/2145: Nicopolis and Caesarea were over turned by an earthquake.’ (Eus. Hist. 166, Armenian).