Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:40:57.069Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mapping Gerasa: a new and open data map of the site

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2019

Achim Lichtenberger
Affiliation:
Institut für Klassische Archäologie und Christliche Archäologie/Archäologisches Museum, Domplatz 20–22, 48143 Münster, Germany
Rubina Raja*
Affiliation:
Department of Classical Studies and Centre for Urban Network Evolutions (UrbNet), Moesgård Allé 20, 8270 Højbjerg, Denmark
David Stott
Affiliation:
Unit of Archaeological Information Technology, Moesgaard Museum, 8270 Højbjerg, Denmark
*
*Author for correspondence (Email: rubina.raja@cas.au.dk)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article presents a new and accurate map of Gerasa/Jerash, an important site located in modern northern Jordan, which displays urban development spread across more than two millennia.

Type
Project Gallery
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd, 2019 

The Decapolis city of Gerasa has been the subject of continuous research since it was rediscovered by the German scholar Ulrich Jasper Seetzen in 1806 (Kruse et al. Reference Kruse, Dr Hinrichs and Müller.1854: 388–90). The Decapolis—nominally 10 cities—were located in the heavily urbanised region of what is today northern Jordan and southern Syria, with one city, Scythopolis, situated on the west bank of the River Jordan in modern Israel and Hippos East of Lake Tiberias. After the rediscovery, Gerasa was visited by numerous travellers in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (Stott et al. Reference Stott, Kristiansen, Lichtenberger and Raja2018: 1; Lichtenberger & Raja Reference Lichtenberger and Rajain press). The city, which covers more than 80ha, holds numerous monumental buildings that have been visible since antiquity. Although several maps have been produced of the site, none, however, have aimed for complete accuracy. Seetzen produced the first map of the site, published in 1854. Later travellers also made maps, largely recording the same monuments (Burckhardt Reference Burckhardt1822; Boyer Reference Boyer2016; Raja Reference Raja, Lichtenberger and Rajain press). Gottlieb Schumacher visited the site several times and his map of the site was published in 1902 (Schumacher Reference Schumacher1902).

In 1938, the Anglo-American expedition to Gerasa published a new map in the final publication of the excavations (Kraeling Reference Kraeling1938; Fisher Reference Fisher and Kraeling1938: pl. I). For decades, this was the map used in scholarship. Browning (Reference Browning1982: 83, map 3), in his book on the archaeology and history of the site, published a reduced map. When the Jerash Archaeological Project was initiated in the 1970s by the Department of Antiquities of Jordan with the support of UNESCO, another map was published in the resulting volume (Pillen Reference Pillen and Zayadine1986). In 2001, Braun et al. (Reference Braun2001: 434) published another updated map, which included monuments that have been lost over time to modern development. In 2011, Lepaon (Reference Lepaon2011: 416) published an updated map of the site, collating information from the previous maps. This incorporated spatial inaccuracies (Stott et al. Reference Stott, Kristiansen, Lichtenberger and Raja2018: 2), however, and did not include a legend, despite a numbered list of monuments being included in the article. All these maps were made using terrestrial data, compiled partly by the cartographers themselves and partly from earlier data, leading to a propagation of errors from previous maps.

Since 2011, the Danish-German Jerash Northwest Quarter Project has been producing maps of the area behind the Sanctuary of Artemis through survey and excavation (Lichtenberger & Raja Reference Lichtenberger and Raja2015, Reference Lichtenberger and Raja2017). In 2016, lidar data and orthophotography were acquired through the Royal Jordanian Geographic Society. This allowed for the precise topographic measurement of the city and its surroundings, and provided an accurate basemap for co-registering historical aerial photography. This resulted in the mapping of a large number of archaeological features (Stott et al. Reference Stott, Kristiansen, Lichtenberger and Raja2018).

During the process of combining the existing mapping with data from the aerial surveys, it became clear that an updated map of the city was required (Stott et al. Reference Stott, Kristiansen, Lichtenberger and Raja2018: 2). The authors used the 2016 data as the basis to integrate the existing mapping into a common spatial framework. Numerous nineteenth-century travellers described the site, and archaeological fieldwork has been ongoing for over a century. Hence, there is little consensus on the names of the city's monuments. In particular, early excavators chose Latin names for monuments—inappropriate for a Greek city in the Roman East. The new map has taken a pragmatic approach. Whenever possible, we use the appropriate emic terminology and names for the monuments, but when they already have well-established ‘nicknames’, we have respected these in recognition of the long history of the city and its historiography.

The new map provides a more accurate spatial understanding of the city, and it will prove valuable to archaeologists, cultural heritage managers and visitors (Figures 1–3). In this spirit, the map is released under a Creative Commons licence, permitting re-use and reworking of the map. This is important as our understanding is continually evolving, and this map will need to be updated as we learn more. Sharing knowledge in this way enables better collaboration, reduces duplication of effort and conforms to the international FAIR Guiding Principles for data management and data sharing (Wilkinson et al. Reference Wilkinson2016; https://dg.dk/forskningsaktiviteter/god-forskningspraksis/open-access-politik/).

Figure 1. Map of potential archaeological features derived from airborne lidar and archival photography. A large number of previously recorded and new features were recorded in the better-preserved part of the city to the west of the wadi (map © Danish-German Jerash Northwest Quarter Project: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7609859.v1).

Figure 2. Synthesis of remotely sensed features and existing mapping from previous studies. Hypothetical building elements (after Lepaon Reference Lepaon2011; Lichtenberger & Raja Reference Lichtenberger and Raja2017) are highlighted in pink. Most of the buildings on the eastern side of the valley are no longer extant (map © Danish-German Jerash Northwest Quarter Project: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7609859.v1).

Figure 3. As Figure 2, with points of interest highlighted (see Table 1) (map © Danish-German Jerash Northwest Quarter Project: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7609859.v1).

Table 1. Jerash map—legend.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the funding bodies of the project: The Carlsberg Foundation, the Danish National Research Foundation (grant number: 119), Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Deutscher Palästina-Verein, the EliteForsk initiative of the Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science, and H.P. Hjerl Hansens Mindefondet for Dansk Palæstinaforskning.

References

Boyer, D. 2016. The ruins of Gerasa in 1816–1819: an analysis of the plan and drawing archives of William John Bankes and Charles Barry. Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan 12: 279300.Google Scholar
Braun, J.-P. et al. 2001. The town plan of Gerasa in AD 2000: a revisited edition. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 45: 433–36.Google Scholar
Browning, I. 1982. Jerash and the Decapolis. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
Burckhardt, J.L. 1822. Travels in Syria and the Holy Land. London: Murray.Google Scholar
Fisher, C.S. 1938. Description of the site, in Kraeling, C.H. (ed.) Gerasa. City of the Decapolis: 1125. New Haven (CT): American Schools of Oriental Research.Google Scholar
Kraeling, C.H. 1938. Gerasa. City of the Decapolis. New Haven (CT): American Schools of Oriental Research.Google Scholar
Kruse, F., Dr Hinrichs, & Müller., F.G. 1854. Ulrich Jasper Seetzen's Reisen durch Syrien, Palästina, Phönicien, die Transjordan-Länder, Arabia Petraea und Unter-Aegypten, I. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Lepaon, T. 2011. Un nouveau plan pour Jarash/Gerasa (Jordanie). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 55: 409–20.Google Scholar
Lichtenberger, A. & Raja, R.. 2015. New archaeological research in the northwest quarter of Jerash and its implications for the urban development of Roman Gerasa. American Journal of Archaeology 119: 483500. https://doi.org/10.3764/aja.119.4.0483Google Scholar
Lichtenberger, A. & Raja, R.. (ed.). 2017. Gerasa/Jerash: from the urban periphery. Aarhus: Fællestrykkeriet AUTRYK.Google Scholar
Lichtenberger, A. & Raja, R.. In press. By the Golden River. Gerasa through the eyes of 19th and early 20th century visitors. Turnhout: Brepols.Google Scholar
Pillen, R.E. 1986. Jerash plan, in Zayadine, F. (ed.) Jerash Archaeological Project 1981–1983 (volume 1). Amman: Department of Antiquities.Google Scholar
Raja, R. In press. Entry and commentary on Catherwood, in Lichtenberger, A. & Raja, R. By the Golden River. Gerasa through the eyes of 19th and early 20th century visitors. Turnhout: Brepols.Google Scholar
Schumacher, G. 1902. Dscherasch. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 25: 109–77.Google Scholar
Seigne, J. & Zubi, I.. 1997. Roman villa, in Castel, C., al-Maqdissi, M. & Villeneuve, F. (ed.) Les maisons dans la Syrie antique du IIIe millénaire aux débuts de l'Islam (Pratique et Représentations de L'espace Domestique: Actes du Colloque International, Damas, 27–30 Juin 1992). Beirut: IFAPO.Google Scholar
Stott, D., Kristiansen, S.M., Lichtenberger, A. & Raja, R.. 2018. Mapping an ancient city with a century of remotely sensed data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 115(24). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1721509115Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M.D. et al. 2016. Comment: The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Nature Scientific Data 3.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. Map of potential archaeological features derived from airborne lidar and archival photography. A large number of previously recorded and new features were recorded in the better-preserved part of the city to the west of the wadi (map © Danish-German Jerash Northwest Quarter Project: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7609859.v1).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Synthesis of remotely sensed features and existing mapping from previous studies. Hypothetical building elements (after Lepaon 2011; Lichtenberger & Raja 2017) are highlighted in pink. Most of the buildings on the eastern side of the valley are no longer extant (map © Danish-German Jerash Northwest Quarter Project: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7609859.v1).

Figure 2

Figure 3. As Figure 2, with points of interest highlighted (see Table 1) (map © Danish-German Jerash Northwest Quarter Project: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7609859.v1).

Figure 3

Table 1. Jerash map—legend.