University of Koln

Earthquake-rotated objects (EROs) have been observed and described for centuries (e.g., Hoffmann, 1838; Mallet, 1862; Reid, 1910). Several theories about the rotating mechanisms have been developed. Kozák (2006) classified rotating effects as those caused by a deviation between the projection of the center of gravity into the contact plane and the point of strongest adhesion (Rot1) and those due to subsequent arrival of ground-motion phases from different directions (Rot2). The EROs found in the literature include parts of buildings, such as chimneys, monuments, tombstones, and columns, often described with great care and in detail by early earthquake reports (Mallet, 1862) or still accessible (Boschi et al., 1995). However, in most cases rotational effects are observed on vertically oriented objects such as gravestones, tall monuments, and single columns (Kozák, 2009). Although earthquake- toppled objects (ETOs) allow the determination of minimum ground-motion thresholds which caused the toppling (Kamai and Hatzor 2008; Hinzen, 2010, 2012), EROs and earthquake-deformed objects (EDOs) present the chance to make a more detailed back calculation of the causative ground motion (Yegian et al., 1994; Lee et al., 2009; Hinzen et al., 2010; Hough et al., 2012). Numerous EROs were observed and documented during the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake in central Italy. Cucci and Tertulliani (2011) and Castellano et al. (2012) showed a correlation between the occurrence of EROs in the mesoseismal zone, the fault orientation, and the site conditions. Some of the simply structured and vertically oriented objects mapped by Cucci et al. (2011) and Cucci and Tertulliani (2011) offer the opportunity to use local strong-motion records to test different hypotheses about the mechanisms that caused the rotation. A main question in this context is whether near-field rotational components of ground motion are necessary to rotate the studied objects or whether 3D purely translational ground motions are sufficient to explain the observations. In this study, we use discrete-element models of EROs that are based on laser scans to study the dynamic behavior of the EROs and rotations induced by translation ground motions and uneven foundations.

Seismic refraction, multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW) and ambient noise array measurements using the wireless array analysis (WARAN) system were applied to acquire near-surface profiles of seismic velocities in the Selinunte Archaeological Park. This ancient city is famous for numerous temples, which according to the literature, were destroyed by at least two earthquakes in antiquity. The morphology of the archeological park is affected by two rivers which in combination with the temple remains suggests three study sites. We determined the subsurface velocity at these three locations as essential information for further studies of the response of the temple structures to earthquake ground motions. The stratigraphy of the site indicates that low-velocity layers might exist. Seismic refraction profiles with 69 m spread and 24 geophones were employed during the active seismic experiments. The measured P-wave velocities of the top two layers were used as a constraint during the inversion of dispersion relations from the MASW and WARAN data. The reliability of the velocity profiles was tested by forward calculation of synthetic seismograms. P-wave velocities which were not well constraint throughout the dispersion curve inversions were adjusted through suitable Poisson’s ratios based on the well constraint S-velocities. The combined use of the three different kinds of measurements and multi-mode interpretation of the dispersion curves revealed velocity profiles including lowvelocity layers which are supported by de-amplification observed in ratios of horizontal and vertical components of noise spectra.

This special issue of Journal of Seismology, dedicated to Archaeoseismology, shows the current trends of research in this young branch of seismology. The beginning of modern archaeoseismological practice during the 1980’s and the investigations made during the 1990’s were in many cases conditioned by the lack of cooperation among the spcialists from different scientific diciplines. Numerous publications resulted from the work of archaeologists, in some cases in collaboration with experts in earthquake-geology or seismology, but rarely such work included a complete and multidisciplinary approach and in situ analysis of the evidence. In many cases, archaeoseismological studies were limited to the detection of traces of past earthquakes in archaeological remains without a seismological perspective aiming to derive quantitative parameters necessary to fully describe a past earthquake (magnitude, etc.). In other cases, such investigations were limited to the analysis of archaeological reports of excavations made years or decades earlier. A step towards the quantification of seismological aspects was represented by the “territorial” approach, trying to reconstruct a picture of an earthquake by detecting its signs over a wider region. This procedure was, however, limited by the scarcity and reliability of published or unpublished archaeological material, usually adopted without a critical review.