THE ROCK SETTLEMENTS OF CAPPADOCIA

JOINT ANALYSIS IN THE ROCK SETTLEMENTS OF
CAPPADOCIA
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES
OF
THE MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
BY
GÖKHAN SEV ND
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
THE DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING
DECEMBER 2003

Approval of the Graduate School of Natural and Applied Science
____________________________
Prof. Dr Canan ÖZGEN
Director
I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Master
of Science.
____________________________
Prof.Dr.Asuman TÜRKMENO LU
Head of Department
This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate,
in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science.
____________________________
Assoc. Prof.Dr. Vedat TOPRAK
Supervisor
Examining Committee Members
Prof. Dr. Asuman TÜRKMENO LU ____________________________
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gül ASATEKIN
____________________________
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tamer TOPAL
____________________________
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Bora ROJAY
____________________________
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Vedat TOPRAK
____________________________

ABSTRACT
JOINT ANALYSIS IN THE ROCK SETTLEMENTS OF
CAPPADOCIA, TURKEY
Sevindi, Gökhan
M. Sc. Department of Geological Engineering
Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Vedat Toprak
December 2003, 74 pages
This thesis attempts to seek a relationship between the joints developed in the
ignimbrites and the rock settlements carved in the same units. Orientation of rooms,
directions of walls and joints (both in the rooms and in the field) are input data used in the
study. Two sites in Cappadocia (Eskigümü ler and Çanl kilise) are selected to investigate
the relationship. Both sites are carved within the same ignimbrite (K z lkaya) and are
located on the south-southeastern slopes of the ignimbrite scarp. Measurements taken
from 61 rooms of the former and 27 rooms of the latter are analyzed for the room and
joint directions, joint locations in the room and joint densities both in the rooms and in the
field.
Conclusions derived from the analyses are: 1) The rooms are oriented oblique to joint
strike to get the maximum sunlight, 2) Joint directions in the rooms strike in one single
direction and greatly differ from the field joint directions, 3) Density of the room joints is
less than the field joints indicating that joint spacing is an important factor in the selection
of sites, 4) Joints in the Eskigümü ler sites are concentrated towards the margins of the
room while an opposite observation is made for the Çanl kilise site, 5) Total length of
joints in the largest rooms are relatively shorter.
Key words: Rock settlement, ignimbrite (tuff), joint (fracture), Cappadocia, Turkey
iii

ÖZ
KAPADOKYA BÖLGES (TÜRK YE) KAYA YERLE
ANAL Z
MLER NDE EKLEM
Sevindi, Gökhan
Yüksek Lisans, Jeoloji Mühendisli i Bölümü
Tez Yöneticisi: Doç. Dr. Vedat Toprak
Aral k 2003, 74 Sayfa
Bu tez ignimbritlerde geli en eklemler ile ayn birimlerde aç lm kaya yerle imleri
aras ndaki ili kiyi incelemeyi amaçlar. Oda yönleri, duvar do rultular ve eklem
do rultular (odadaki ve arazideki) çal mada kullan lan verilerdir. Bu ili kiyi incelemek
üzere Kapadokyada iki yerle im (Eskigümü ler ve Çanl kilise) seçilmi tir. Her iki yerle im
de ayn ignimbritte (K z lkaya) aç lm olup ignimbrit falezinin güney-güneybat
yamac nda yer al rlar. Birinci alanda 61 odadan, ikinci alanda ise 27 odadan ölçülen
veriler oda ve eklem yönlerini, eklemlerin oda içindeki konumunu ve eklemlerin hem
odadaki hemde arazideki yo unlu unu belirlemek için analiz edilmi tir.
Analizlerden elde edilen sonuçlar unlard r: 1) Odalar eklem yönüne verev olarak
gün ndan en fazla yararlanacak ekilde yönlenmi tir, 2) Odalardaki eklemler belirli bir
yönde yo unla m olup arazi eklemlerinden büyük farkl l klar gösterir, 3) Odalardaki
eklemlerin yo unlu unun arazideki eklemlere göre daha az ç kmas , eklem aral n n yer
seçiminde önemli oldu unu gösterir, 4) Eskigümü ler yerle iminde eklemler odan n
kenarlar na do ru yo unla m ken Çanl kilise de bunun tersi bir gözlem yap lm t r, 5) En
büyük odalarda toplam eklem uzunlu u göreceli olarak daha azd r.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Kaya yerle imleri, ignimbirit (tüf), eklem (çatlak), Kapadokya, Türkiye
iv

To Demet
v

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I express my sincere appreciation to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Vedat Toprak for his guidance and
insight throughout the research.
To my sweet heart, Demet, I offer sincere thanks for her unshakable faith in me and
her supports and helps during the field study.
I would like to thank Nev ehir and Aksaray museums staff, particularly Murat Gülyaz and
Yücel Kiper, for their useful information provided on the rock settlements of the region.
To my parents, I thank them for their patience and understanding my problems.
To my friend, M. Tuna Kaskat , I thank him for his computer support.
To my friends, Erkin Yanyal , O uz çili, Cem Y ld r m, I thank them for their help during
the field study.
vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iii
ÖZ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iv
DEDICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
LIST OF THE TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
LIST OF THE FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x
CHAPTER
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1. Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2. Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3. Previous Works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3.1. General Characteristics of Ignimbrites . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3.2. Literature on the Cappadocian Ignimbrites . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3.3. Literature on historical aspects of the sites . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.4. Method of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.5. Organization of Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2. REGIONAL GEOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.1. Geological Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2. Rock Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3. Fault Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.4. Origin and Age of Joints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3. DATA AND MEASUREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
3.1. Selection of Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.2. Data Measured in the Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.3. Measurements at Eskigümü ler Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.4. Measurements at Çanl kilise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4. ANALYSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.1. Directional Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.1.1. Eskigümü ler site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.1.2. Çanl kilise site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38
4.2. Spatial Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.2.1 Location in relation to entrance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.2.2. Location in relation to center of room . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4.3. Density Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
vii

5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.1. General Aspects of Settlements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.2. Method Applied . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
5.3. Interpretation of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.4. Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
APPENDICES
A1. Eskigümü ler Room, Wall and Joint Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . 57
A2. Çanl kilise Room, Wall and Joint Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
B1. Eskigümü ler Joint Density Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .66
B2. Çanl kilise Joint Density Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
C1. Eskigümü ler Field Joint Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
C2. Çanl kilise Field Joint Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72
GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74
viii

LIST OF TABLE
TABLE
4.1. Joint densities in the field and in the room for both sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45
ix

LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURES
1.1. Location map of Eskigümü ler and Çanl kilise sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
1.2. Models of eruption columns formed during ignimbrite volcanism . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3. Columnar (cooling-thermal) joints developed within ignimbrites . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
1.4. General views of churches existing in the sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1. Simplified geological map of Cappadocian volcanic province . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.2. Stratigraphic section showing ignimbrites identified in the area . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3. Plan view of cooling-joint pattern measured east of Derinkuyu . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
3.1. Flowchart showing the major steps applied in this study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
3.2. Location map of the rooms measured in Eskigümü ler site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3 General views from Eskigümü ler site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.4. Plan views of rooms measured at Eskigümü ler site (Rooms 1 to 15) . . . . . . . . .23
3.5. Plan views of rooms measured at Eskigümü ler site (Rooms 16 to 30) . . . . . . . . 24
3.6. Plan views of rooms measured at Eskigümü ler site (Rooms 31 to 45) . . . . . . . . 25
3.7. Plan views of rooms measured at Eskigümü ler site (Rooms 46 to 61) . . . . . . . . 26
3.8. Area of joint field survey for Eskigümü ler site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.9. Location map of the rooms measured in Çanl kilise site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.10. General views of Çanlikilise site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29
3.11. Plan views of rooms measured at Çanl kilise site (Rooms 1 to 15) . . . . . . . . . 31
3.12. Plan views of rooms measured at Çanl kilise site (Rooms 16 to 27). . . . . . . . . 32
3.13. Pillars of Çanl kilise site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
3.14. Area of joint field survey for Çanl kilise site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4.1. Rose diagram prepared from room axes for Eskigümü ler site . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.2. Rose diagrams prepared from measurements of Eskigümü ler site . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.3. Rose diagram prepared from room axes for Çanl kilise site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.4. Rose diagrams prepared from measurements of Çanl kilise site . . . . . . . . . . . .40
4.5. Method to measure the proximity of joints in relation to entrance . . . . . . . . . . . .41
4.6. Results of the location of joints in relation to the entrances in the sites . . . . . . . . 42
4.7. Method to measure the proximity of joints in relation to the center of room . . . . . . 43
4.8. Results of the location analyses of joints in relation to the center of rooms . . . . . . 44
4.9. Graphical representation of joint densities for both sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4.10. Scatter plots of room area versus joint length for both sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.1. Two major types of rock settlements in Cappadocia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48
5.2. Interpretation of room axes in relation to the ignimbrite scarp . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
x

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Purpose and Scope
Cappadocian region is characterized by settlements carved within the rocks. These
settlements, although currently not in use, are mostly located within the volcanic products
that are exposed in the area between Nev ehir, Kayseri, Ni de and Aksaray. Common
characteristics of the settlements in relation to rocks are as follows:
- Two major types of settlements are observed in the form of either underground cities
or cliff settlements depending on the local conditions existing at the site. Underground
settlements have a multi layer structure while the cliff settlements are composed of
an array of rooms aligned almost horizontal.
- Almost all of the settlements are confined to tuff (ignimbrite) layers that are
extensively exposed in the area.
- Both types of the settlements are composed of rooms carved irregularly rather than
in a systematic pattern. Size, shape of the rooms and the spacing between the rooms
(or the floors) change from place to place.
Ignimbrite layers, on the other hand, that host these settlements have following
characteristics:
- There are several ignimbrite layers each having a considerable amount of thickness.
Minimum thickness is about 5 m in the central part of Cappadocia where rock
settlements are common. Although the thickness can drop to cm at distal parts, it can
reach to a thickness of 80 m in Ihlara valley and in Selime village.
- Ignimbrites, in general, are intercalated with lacustrine sedimentary sequences, which
are not suitable for rock settlements. In some places, however, two or more
ignimbrites are deposited on top of each other forming a thick sequence with no or
minor sedimentary intercalation.
- All ignimbrites are characterized by cooling (thermal) joints that are developed
perpendicular to the layer. The pattern of the cooling joints is polygonal in plan view
1

anging irregularly from 3 to 8 sides. The spacing between the joints range from a
fraction of m to tens of m.
- Almost all the ignimbrite layers in the area are horizontal. The joints within the
ignimbrites are, therefore, vertical.
Spatial distribution of the rock settlements in the area strongly suggests that there is a
genetic relationship between the settlements and the rock type. These rocks were
selected to host the settlements because they are suitable for carving. One unknown or
unclear point here is the role of the joints existing in the rocks on selection of the site and
style of carving.
The main objective of this study is to investigate a possible effect of the joints on the rock
settlements. Two major aspects of the settlements that will be questioned in this thesis
are: 1) whether the joint density plays a role on the selection of site, 2) are the joints
taken into consideration when the settlement is dig.
1.2. Study Area
Two ancient settlements are selected for the measurements in this study. These
settlements are Eskigümü ler (Ni de) and Çanl kilise (Aksaray). A set of criteria are
applied during the selection of the sites that will be mentioned in Chapter 3.1.
Location map of the settlements is given in Figure 1.1.
1.3. Previous Works
Previous works are organized under three sections. In the first section, general
characteristics of the ignimbrites with particular emphasis on the occurrence and eruption
sequence will be given. The second section summarizes studies carried out on the
ignimbrites in the Cappadocian Volcanic Province (CVP). In the last section available
literature on the historical aspects of the sites studied in this thesis will be given.
1.3.1. General characteristics of ignimbrites
Following review of the ignimbrites is mostly based on the work of Cas and Wright (1988).
The term ignimbrite is first used in 1935 and is one of the problematic and confused
volcanological definitions. The term is sometimes used as a lithological term that means
welded tuff and sometimes as a genetical term that means the rock formed from
pyroclastic flows . Pumice-flow deposits, ash-flow tuff and nuee ardente are other terms
used to define these deposits.
2

Figure 1.1. Location map showing settlements visited (above) and the detailed maps of
selected sites (Eskigümü ler and Çanl kilise).
The most striking characteristic of the ignimbrites is their volume erupted during one
single eruption. Each eruption is believed to have a volume of more than 1000 km 3 and
covers hundreds of square kilometers. Widespread ignimbrite occurrences are common
in the USA, Central and South America, northern Mediterranean belt, Iceland, Japan,
Indonesia and New Zealand.
Many of the voluminous ignimbrites are rhyolitic in composition and associated with large
calderas although small products can be erupted from strato-volcanoes.
3

A typical sequence of eruption involves following phases, ordered from bottom to top:
a) plinian phase producing a pumice-fall deposit (Figure 1.2-A).
b) pyroclastic flow phase producing ignimbrite and pyroclastic surges (Figure 1.2-B).
c) effusive phase producing lava.
The eruption column height grows steadily until sudden collapse occurs. Pyroclastic flows
generated by the collapse of the column (Figure 1.2) can travel long distances. Maximum
traveled distance so far known belongs to Sapinero Mesa Tuff with a distance of 110 km.
Columnar joints are common characteristics of ignimbrites which are the main concern in
this thesis. The result of thermal stresses within the cooling ignimbrite (initially 500-800
C°) is the contraction of material that produces fractures propagating in a plane normal to
the direction of flow (Figure 1.3). These fractures bound multi-sided, polygonal columns
that develop perpendicular to the cooling surface. The columns, which vary from 5 cm to
>3 m in width, are typically straight and have parallel sides, but some may be curved.
(a)
(b)
Wind
3
400-600 m s-1
Pumice
Flow
Figure 1.2. Models of eruption columns formed during ignimbrite volcanism. (a) plinian
phase, (b) ignimbrite-forming phase (from Cas and Wright, 1988)
Figure 1.3. Columnar (cooling-thermal) joints developed within ignimbrites.
4

1.3.2. Literature on the Cappadocian ignimbrites
In this section the literature available on various aspects of the Cappadocian ignimbrites
will be discussed because these ignimbrites form the main theme of the study. Literature
on other geological features of the region is not dealt here considering the purpose of the
study. A geological overview of the area, however, will be given in the next chapter.
Pasquaré (1968) mapped Nev ehir area at 1/25.000 scale. This is the first study on the
stratigraphy and nomenclature of the ignimbrites in the region. He measured type
sections of all individual ignimbrites and suggested a depositional area for each of the
ignimbrites.
Innocenti et al. (1975) studied stratigraphy, chemical composition and geochronology of
the ignimbrites around Nev ehir. The volcanism in the region is determined to be
calcalkaline in nature. Age determinations from different ignimbrites indicate that the main
phase of volcanic activity is Middle-Late Miocene to Pliocene.
Pasquare et al. (1988) divided the volcanic activity within the volcanic province into three
main periods. Accordingly, first period is represented by a mostly andesitic effusive
activity. The second period is represented by the emplacement of numerous ignimbrites.
During the third period andesitic-basaltic strato-volcanoes and acid monogenic centers
are developed. They suggested that Çiftlik area (north of Melendiz mountain) is the
probable site of eruption for most of the Cappadocian ignimbrites.
Schumacher et al. (1990) discussed depositional characteristics of the ignimbrites
existing within the CVP and attempted to setup a stratigraphy for these deposits.
Le Pennec et al. (1994) established the stratigraphic succession of the ignimbrites for the
whole volcanic province. Various field data are collected and measured to locate the
source of ignimbritic eruptions. Accordingly, the source area for the major ignimbrites of
the Nev ehir plateau is inferred as Derinkuyu basin extending between Nev ehir and the
Melendiz Da volcanic complex.
Toprak (1994) stated that a major fault zone named as Central K z l rmak Fault Zone
defines the northern margin of Cappadocian volcanics. Most of the ignimbrites are
emplaced within the Ürgüp basin that extends to Ni de to the south.
Topal and Doyuran (1995) investigated the control of discontinuities (joints) on the
development of the fairy chimneys in Cappadocia. Engineering geological characteristics
5

of the tuffs of the Kavak member of the Ürgüp formation indicated that the size, shape
and the field alignment of the chimneys are mainly controlled by the spacing, aperture,
persistence, and strike and dip of discontinuities.
Toprak and Kaymakç (1995) analyzed slip-lineation data developed over the ignimbrites
along the Derinkuyu fault. The joints measured are originally the cooling joint formed
during the emplacement of ignimbrites. They concluded that there is not any direct control
of the main fault on the development of the reactivation of preexisting cooling joints.
Schumacher and Mues-Schumacher (1996) studied various aspects of K z lkaya
ignimbrite throughout Cappadocia. They propose that the eruption center of the ignimbrite
is located in the Misli plain (northeast of Ni de) as deduced from thickness, grain-size
variations, flow direction indicators welding patterns and certain types of xenolits. The
ignimbrite is composed of two flow units identified by local pumice enrichment in the
upper part of the lower unit.
Schumacher and Mues-Schumacher (1997) studied general characteristics of Akda -
Zelve ignimbrite for which the northeast of Kaymakl is suggested the location of the
eruption center. The ignimbrite comprises five stratigraphic layers totaling up to more
than 50 m.
Topal and Doyuran (1997) studied the material and mass properties of Cappadocain tuff
with a special emphasis on the conservation of cultural heritage. These properties are
evaluated for the assessment of rock durability. The discontinuity surveys revealed two
dominant joint sets, which not only controlled the formation but also control the structural
stability of the fairy chimneys.
Topal and Doyuran (1998) determined engineering geological and physico-chemical
characteristics of tuffs to contribute to the conservation studies of the historical heritage.
Temel et al. (1998) presented petrology and geochemistry of the ignimbrites in the area in
detail. The origin of the volcanic units is found to be related with fractional crystallization
of a mantle-derived magma. He modified stratigraphy of Pasquare (1968) with a main
focus on the ignimbrites.
Aydan and Ulusay (2003) investigated the physical and short-term mechanical
characteristics of Cappadocian tuffs in relation to the man-made underground structures
that exist in the area.
6

1.3.3. Literature on historical aspects of the sites
The ignimbrites exposed in the area are extensively carved for settlement and/or other
reasons. Erguvanl and Yüzer (1977) and Aydan et al. (1999) indicate the main reasons
for the use of ignimbrites under six headings as follows:
- severe daily and seasonal changes of temperature in the region,
- thermal isolation properties of the rock units covering the area,
- self-supporting behavior and construction opportunities in these rocks
- easily carved particularly soft pumice tuffs,
- provide hiding places and camouflage to provide a defensive advantage and safety
against enemy attacks,
- superior resistance and protection against natural disasters due to earthquake
and/or volcanic eruptions.
Two sites selected in this study (Figure 1.1) are two ancient rock settlements and are
attractive tourist localities. The reason for this is that both sites comprise churches known
as Eskigümü ler Monastery and Çanl Kilise (The Bell Church) (Figure 1.4). Most of the
available literature is concentrated on the churches rather than the rock settlements. Both
sites are briefly explained in various web sites if searched under the same title.
Literature on the Eskigümü ler site: No printed material is found about the site.
Following information is provided from several web pages particularly from:
- www.nigde.gov.tr
- www.atamanhotel.com/cappgumusler.html
- www.cappadociaonline.com/eskitr.html.
The rock-hewn monastery of Eski Gümü ler has a rock-cut passage with a large
courtyard surrounded by rock-hewn dwellings, crypts, a kitchen and refectory with deep
reservoirs for wine and oil. The crypt to the right of the entry passage has several
skeletons still in place. Across the courtyard another crypt, beneath protective covers of
wood and glass, holds a well-preserved and apparently undisturbed skeleton.
The main church, to the right off the courtyard, has the best-preserved Byzantine
coloured frescoes in Cappadocia, painted from the 7th to 11th centuries. The Virgin and
Child to the right of the altar-space is particularly affecting, with Mary given a Mona Lisa
smile. The frescoes of Two Saints and the Presentation are very nice. The church s
great columns are completely unnecessary, but were left when the rock was cut away to
mimic the appearance of a traditional temple. The crosshatch motif was favored during
the Iconoclastic period (AD 725- 842) when sacred images were prohibited and artists
resorted to geometries, a preference soon picked up by Islam.
7

The frescoes in the church are restorated by Michael Gough in 1964-1965. The church
is open to visit seven days a week during working hours.
A
B
Figure 1.4. General views of churches existing in the sites.
A. Eskigümü ler Monastry
B. Çanl kilise (The Bell Church)
8

Literature on the Çanl kilise: Endo ru and Kara (1998) reported a late Byzantine
church with burials. Among other finds a Byzantine text (of Bible?), ivory cross,
Byzantine pottery, glass and terracotta oil lamps of 8th-10th centuries AD are also
found in the site.
Wisseman et al. (1998) analyzed fresco pigments in the church as an attempt to clarify
painting phases within a single building. The pigment samples were taken in 1994 with
the permission of the Turkish Ministry of Culture. The 11th century church was
constructed in three phases: 1) the naos, 2) the south narthex and the north narthex,
and 3) the parekklesion. All four spaces were decorated with frescoes, which are now in
poor condition.
Ousterhout (1995) claimed that Çanl kilise is one of many Byzantine settlements in the
picturesque volcanic region of Capadocia in central Turkey. He is the first researcher who
mapped the settlement around the church. According to him the settlement includes
about twenty rock-cut living units. Most commonly, these consist of a series of rooms
organized around three sites of a courtyard cut into the slope of the hill. Many of the
rooms have distinctive plans and most preserve both church and a large, centrally
positioned hall.
Ousterhout (1997) measured coordinates of the settlement for preparation of contour plan
of the site using a total station EDM. The entire map of the site and the plans of all
sections are drawn through this study.
1.4. Method of study
This thesis is completed in three main stages.
The first step is the compilation of available data particularly on the distribution of
ignimbrites in CVP and the rock settlements in Cappadocia. Objective of the study is
clarified and the sites were selected after this step.
The second step is the collection of field data. Necessary data are collected at the sites
after several visits to the settlements. Directional data are measured with a Brunton
compass and 5 m long steel tape. Directions are initially measured in Quadrant format.
The third step involves analysis of the data collected in the field. Sketch diagrams,
histograms and rose diagrams are prepared using FreeHand v.08, Excell 2002 and
RockWorks 2000 softwares, respectively.
9

1.5. Organization of thesis
This thesis is organized into five chapters. A brief description of each chapter is as
follows:
The first chapter introduces the area and summarizes the literature available on the
subject.
Chapter 2 is a review of the geological characteristics of the study area compiled
from the literature. Regional setting, rocks units, fault systems and distribution of
ignimbrites are the main interest of this chapter.
Chapter 3 explains the data collected in the field. An initial visual interpretation of the
measurements is made in this chapter.
Chapter 4 deals with the analysis of data carried out for two sites. These analyses
are performed to seek a relationship between the joints and the carved rooms.
Chapter 5 discusses the results and gives the main conclusions reached in this
thesis.
10

CHAPTER II
REGIONAL GEOLOGY
2.1. Geological Setting
Cappadocian Volcanic Province (CVP) extends as a belt in NE-SW direction for a length
of 250-300 km situated in Central Anatolia (Figure 2.1). The volcanism of the CVP has
been investigated by several researchers who mainly concentrated on the chronology,
petrographical and geochemical characteristics, and ignimbrite emplacement (Pasquare,
1968; Keller, 1974; Innocenti et al., 1975; Batum 1978 a, b; Pasquare et al., 1988;
Schumacher et al., 1990; Ercan et al., 1990, 1992; Bigazzi et al., 1993; Aydar et al.,
1994; Le Pennec et al., 1994; Druitt et al., 1995). The CVP is a calc-alkaline volcanic
province whose formation is attributed to the convergence between Eurasian and Afro-
Arabian plates occurring in the eastern Mediterranean.
2.2. Rock Units
Rock units within the CVP can be grouped into four categories. These are Mio-Pliocene
volcaniclastics, Miocene-Quaternary volcanic complexes, Quaternary basalt and cinder
cone fields, and Plio-Quaternary continental clastics (Figure 2.1).
Mio-Pliocene volcaniclastic rocks are dominantly composed of tephra deposits
(ignimbrites) intercalated with the lacustrine-fluvial deposits. The sequence is named as
Ürgüp formation by Pasquare (1968) and has a thickness of more than 400 m around
Ürgüp.
Age, composition and distribution of ignimbrites are studied by several researches
(Pasquaré; 1968; Innocenti et al., 1975; Pasquaré et al., 1988; Schumacher, et al., 1990;
Temel, 1992; Le Pennec et al., 1994; Schumacher and Mues-Schumacher, 1996, Temel
et al., 1998). Accordingly, they are calc-alkaline in composition, ignimbritic activity
occurred between 11 and 1 Ma and they are observed in an almost circular area with a
diameter of 120 km.
11

Figure 2.1. Simplified geological map of Cappadocian volcanic province (CVP) (Toprak,
1998).
A stratigraphic section showing different ignimbrite layers is given in Figure 2.2.
Frequency, position and nomenclature of this section can slightly change among different
studies. The ignimbritic layer, which is the main interest of this thesis, is K z lkaya
ignimbrite that is located almost to the top of the sequence. The settlements analyzed in
this study are situated within this ignimbrite.
The first attempt to locate the vent for the ignimbrites is made by Pasquaré et al., (1988)
who proposed Quaternary Çiftlik Basin as Çiftlik caldera and an ignimbrite source for
the area (Fig 2.1). Later studies show that this basin is not a caldera and therefore the
source should be searched in other places (Göncüo lu and Toprak, 1992, Le Pennec et
al., 1994). Based on various field data the source area for the major ignimbrites of the
Nev ehir plateau is proposed as Derinkuyu basin (Fig 2.1) extending between Nev ehir
and the Melendiz Da volcanic complex (Le Pennec et al, 1994).
12

Figure 2.2. Stratigraphic section showing ignimbrites identified in the area (Schumacher
and Mues-Schumacher, 1997)
13

The sedimentary units within the Mio-Pliocene volcaniclastics are relatively poorly studied
compared to ignimbrites. These sedimentary units are characterized by volcanic
conglomerates and pelitic rocks at the base, by marls and fine-grained slightly tuffaceous
sandstones in the middle part and by clay minerals, marls and lacustrine limestones at
the top (Pasquare, 1968). Sedimentary content of the Ürgüp formation is named as
Bayramhac l member by Pasquare (1968) and Çökek member by Temel (1992). Six
fossil mammal deposits are recognized at different stratigraphic positions in the
sequence. The palaeontological data show an age between Maeotian (Late Miocene) and
Pontian (Late Miocene-Pliocene) times ( enyürek, 1953; Pasquaré, 1968). This age is
conformable with the radiometric ages of the associated ignimbritic units identified by
Innocenti et al. (1975).
Miocene-Quaternary Volcanic complexes correspond to the major eruptive centers in the
province and form huge topographic masses. Nineteen volcanic complexes are identified
within the province (Figure 2.1). Although some of the complexes are studied in detail,
most of them are still poorly known. Most of them are polygenetic volcanoes; others are
in the form of either a dome or a caldera. The complexes are aligned in NE-SW direction,
more or less, parallel to the long axis of the volcanic belt (Toprak, 1998). The dominant
lithologies of the complexes change from andesite, dacite, rhyolite, rhyo-dacite to basaltic
andesite.
Quaternary basalts and cinder cone fields are composed of monogenetic (parasitic)
eruptions and their associated lava flows. They are scattered throughout the study area
being concentrated in certain parts. Most of these volcanoes are in the form of cinder
cones although some exist as rhyolitic or andesitic domes and maars (Pasquare, 1968;
Keller, 1974, Batum, 1978a). The cinder cones have a basal diameter of a few tens of
meters to 1-1.5 kilometers with a height of a few ten meters to a few hundred meters.
They are all associated with basaltic lava flows and are Late Quaternary in age (Ercan et
al., 1990; 1992; 1994; Bigazzi et al., 1993). Rhyolitic domes are common around the
Ac göl caldera (no: 11 in Figure 2.1) and are characterized with the large basal diameters
reaching up to 5 km. They are Quaternary in age. Andesitic domes, on the other hand,
are mostly observed in the area between Nev ehir, Derinkuyu and Ye ilhisar. They range
in age from Late Miocene to Quaternary.
Plio-Quaternary continental deposits cover large areas within the CVP. These deposits
are exposed within isolated basins developed under the influence of tectonic and volcanic
structures existing in the area. Toprak (1996) distinguished 7 basins (Figure 2.1) and
classified them according to their modes of origin. The basins are all developed within the
14

main depression of the CVP and are filled with mostly fluvial clastics. The ages of these
depressions are assigned relative to the age of the youngest unit of Ürgüp Formation.
Accordingly, they have an age of Plio-Quaternary with minor variations from place to
place.
2.3. Fault Systems
Tectonic activity and volcanism are two processes that coexist within the CVP. Two fault
systems of different age and natures are recognized within the CVP (Toprak and
Göncüo lu, 1993). These are (1) Tuzgölü-Ecemi fault system, and (2) CVP fault system.
(1) Tuzgölü-Ecemi system is a fault swarm located between the conjugate Tuzgölü fault
in the west and the Ecemi fault in the east (Fig. 2.1). The Tuzgölü fault, with a length of
more than 150 km and a vertical offset of more than 300 m, defines the eastern margin of
the Tuzgölü basin (Uygun, 1981). Ecemi fault with a total length of about 600 km
Beyhan (1994) cuts across the CVP in its eastern part. Other major faults within this
system are Keçiboyduran-Melendiz (Toprak and Göncüo lu, 1993) and Derinkuyu
(Toprak and Kaymakç , 1995) faults.
(2) CVP faults strike NE-SW, parallel to the long axis of the CVP. Two major faults of this
system are Central K z l rmak (Toprak, 1994) and Ni de faults that define the northern
and southern margin of the volcanic depression, respectively (Fig. 2.1).
2.4. Origin and age of joints
As indicated in the statement of the purpose, the joints are the main elements of this
thesis. Brief information will be given here to explain the nature of the joints existing in the
area. Although a joint survey is carried out in both of the sites (Eskigümü ler and
Çanl klilise), their behavior to tectonic activity was not dealt in this study. The area,
however, is tectonically active and later modifications of the joints are expected.
Origin of joints: Joints in the rocks can develop in different ways. Some major causes
are 1) tectonic stress, 2) residual stress, 3) contraction, 4) pore-water pressure, 5)
release of overburden pressure, and 6) surficial movements (Secor, 1965; Billings, 1972;
Segall and Polard, 1983; Hancock, 1985; Thorpe and Brown, 1985).
Joints within the study are mostly developed by contraction due to rapid cooling of
ignimbrites when they are emplaced. The best evidence of cooling origin is the pattern of
the joints observed in the area (Figure 2.3). Later tectonic movements, however, can
reactivate these joints, since the area is tectonically active. Toprak and Kaymakç (1995)
illustrated that most of the cooling joints are reactivated and there is not a preferred
orientation for the reactivation.
15

Figure 2.3. Plan view of cooling-joint pattern measured on a horizontal surface over
ignimbrites east of Derinkuyu (Toprak and Kaymakç , 1995).
Age of joints: Age of the joints in relation to the age of the settlements is an important
issue and should be considered in the analysis. It is believed that the joints measured in
the field are all older than the age of the settlement. Because, the joints measured are
either initial cooling joints of reactivated joints by later tectonic movements. In both cases
original age is equal to the age of ignimbrite that is about 5.4 million years for K z lkaya
ignimbrite.
Other joints or fractures formed by post-settlement, man-made activities are distinct in the
site by their fresh and irregular joint surfaces. Such joints are common particularly at the
entrance of the rooms and are easily distinguished.
16

CHAPTER III
DATA AND MEASUREMENTS
This chapter introduces the method of the study and explains details of each step related
to the data collection. A flowchart of the method is given in Figure 3.1
3.1. Selection of Sites
The first step in the study is the selection of sites. Criteria for the selection of the sites are
as follows:
1. More than one site should be selected for the analysis. The reason for this is that
the results should be compared with each other and the conclusions should not
be based just on one site.
2. The sites should be located within the same rock unit to keep the consistency in
the nature of the data. This in turn will affect the interpretation of the results.
3. The sites should correspond to an ancient settled area rather than randomly
distributed cave areas so that closely spaced rooms will be available for the
measurements. Widely spaced rooms would create problems since the distance
between the two end members increases.
4. The sites should be of the same type either as rock-settlement or underground
settlement because different human considerations might be applied to these
different settlement types.
5. The site should provide a suitable area for the field measurement of the fractures
next to the settlements in order to compare the fractures in the rooms with the
fractures in the vicinity.
Several field trips are organized to select the most appropriate sites. Information provided
from Nev ehir museum (by archaeologist Murat Gülyaz), Aksaray museum (by
archaeologist Yücel Kiper) and documentary material about Cappadocia played an
important role during these reconnaissance visits. After evaluation of the potential sites
the area was restricted to Nev ehir-Aksaray-Ni de triangle because the best exposures
of the ignimbrites are confined to this area. The type of the site was decided to be rock
settlement and therefore underground settlements were discarded.
17

Figure 3.1. Flowchart showing the major steps applied in this study.
18

The most promising sites are identified as the settlements around Zelve, Göreme, Gelveri
(Güzelyurt), Ürgüp, Selime, Yaprakhisar, Maz köy, Tatlarin, Goligoli, Eskigümü ler,
Çanl kilise, Uzunkaya, K z lkaya and Ihlara (Figure 1.1). All these sites are visited and
only two of them, namely Eskigümü ler and Çanl kilise are selected taking abovementioned
requirements into consideration.
3.2. Data Collected in the Field
After selecting two sites for the measurements, the sites are visited to measure
necessary data. Four sets of data are collected in each site. These are:
1. Room measurements: Room measurements aim to locate the room with
respect the north that helps to prepare a sketch of the room. The direction of the
axis of the rooms with respect to the entrance is measured. Each room is
assigned a number and two data sets explained below (wall and joints) are stored
in the database linked to this room number.
2. Wall measurement: All the wall directions in the rooms and their lengths are
measured. Although, in general, the rooms are considered rectangular, directions
of all walls are measured separately. In the case of a curved wall, the wall is
segmented into 1 m intervals and the direction of each segment is recorded. Wall
measurements are coded in quadrant method in the field and later are converted
to dip-direction for the analysis.
3. Joints in the rooms: All the joints observed within the room are measured. The
measurements consist of direction, length and position of the joint. Direction of
dip is measured in quadrant format. Amount of dip is not measured because
almost most of the dips are vertical to sub-vertical. Length of the joint is
measured only within the room and is not followed further if it extends beyond the
room. Two reasons for this are: a) for the density analysis that will be carried
later, the total length of the joints within the room should be calculated, 2) the
same joint might cuts-across several rooms and can create confusion during the
measurements. Measuring its end members from certain reference planes such
as wall or next joint identifies the position of the joints.
4. Joint in the field: Joint survey is carried out in the close vicinity of the
settlement. The purpose of this survey is to compare the joints measured in the
rooms with the joints that exist in the region. For each site a rectangular area of
25 to 40 m is selected and all the joints observed in this area measured. The
measurements include direction and lengths of the joints.
19

The collected data are given in the appendices as six datasheets. Appendix A1 and A2,
show the room measurements for Eskigümü ler and Çanl kilise, respectively, each in
eight columns. These columns, from left to right, are: room number, direction of the room
axis, label of room, length of room, direction of wall, explanation of wall, direction of joint
and explanation of joint. Appendix B1 and B2 illustrates the room areas and joint lengths
for both sites. Appendix C1 and C2 lists the joints measured during the field survey.
3.3 . Measurements at Eskigümü ler Site
Eskigümü ler is situated about 8 km southeast of Ni de city center (Figure 3.2). The site
is accessible by a paved road to Yenigümü ler that is the new settlement close to the
site. Eskigümü ler site today is not settled and is famous with its monastery.
The rock unit exposed at the site is K z lkaya ignimbrite with a thickness of 7-8 m (Figure
3.3). Recent alluvial deposits surround ignimbrites; therefore, the base is not seen. The
upper surface of the ignimbrites, on the other hand, is exposed to the erosion. Erosion of
the ignimbrite produced a natural scarp all around the outcrop. The rooms are carved
along the southern and southwestern faces of this scarp. Therefore, the measurements
are taken along a curved line that strikes almost NW-SE at the western part and E-W at
the southern part of the settlement. Rock failure is a common process observed in the
vicinity of Eskigümü ler site. Large blocks of rocks topple and accumulate at the front of
ignimbrite scarp (Figure 3.3).
A total of 61 rooms are measured at this site. Although, there are more rooms than this
number in the site, some of them are ruined while some others are not accessible.
Diagrams illustrating plan views of these rooms are illustrated in Figures 3.4 to 3.7.
Following observations can be made on the room patterns basin on these diagrams:
The rooms are concentrated on the southern and southeastern slopes of
ignimbrite cliff suggesting a maximum benefit from the sunlight.
Height of the rooms is not the same everywhere and commonly ranges between
1.5 to 2.5 m.
Only 24 rooms have rectangular shapes with four ideal walls. Others are either
circular or elliptical in shape or composed of nested rectangular rooms.
Minimum and maximum room areas are 6 and 124.3 m 2 , respectively (Appendix
B1). Average room area is about 30.2 m 2 (e.g. 5*6 m).
In 6 rooms cylindrical or rectangular columns (pillars) are observed (Rooms no:
15, 31, 52, 55, 58, 61) whereas in 3 rooms internal walls among the separate
rooms exist (Rooms no: 11, 31, 55).
20

Joints measured within the rooms vary in frequency, direction and pattern. Following
visual interpretations can be made on the joints with respect to the wall direction:
Total length of joints in all rooms is 493.1 m.
In three rooms no joints are detected (no: 38, 40 and 49).
In 22 rooms only one joint is observed (no: 8, 9, 16, 19, 26, 30, 31, 35, 36, 37, 41,
42, 43, 44, 46, 48, 51, 53, 54, 56, 59 and 60).
Figure 3.2. Location map of the rooms measured in Eskigümü ler site
21

A
B
C
Figure 3.3 General views from Eskigümü ler site.
22

Figure 3.4. Plans of rooms measured at Eskigümü ler site (Rooms 1 to 15). Thick lines
are joints indicated by their strikes. Letters refer to wall segments (see Appendix).
Dashed lines correspond to collapsed entrances. North is top of the page.
23

Figure 3.5. Plans of rooms measured at Eskigümü ler site (Rooms 16 to 30). Thick lines
are joints indicated by their strikes. Letters refer to wall segments (see Appendix).
Dashed lines correspond to collapsed entrances. North is top of the page.
24

Figure 3.6. Plans of rooms measured at Eskigümü ler site (Rooms 31 to 45). Thick lines
are joints indicated by their strikes. Letters refer to wall segments (see Appendix).
Dashed lines correspond to collapsed entrances. North is top of the page.
25

Figure 3.7. Plans of rooms measured at Eskigümü ler site (Rooms 46 to 61). Thick lines
are joints indicated by their strikes. Letters refer to wall segments (see Appendix).
Dashed lines correspond to collapsed entrances. North is top of the page.
26

In 21 rooms two joints are identified (no: 5, 7, 11, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 27, 29, 33,
34, 39, 45, 47, 50, 52, 55 and 58).
The number of joints in the rest 15 rooms is three or more. The maximum number
of joints is 6 in room 61).
In three rooms the joint is either tangential to or partly observed in the corner (no:
42, 43 and 51).
The entrance is fully controlled by joints in 6 rooms. In these rooms the entrance
(or the front wall) is parallel to the joint planes (no: 2, 18, 20, 22, 33 and 36).
In 22 rooms a total of 24 walls, other than the front wall, exactly juxtapose at or
very close to joint planes (no: 1, 2, 4, 10, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 25, 27, 28,
30, 32, 34, 45, 52, 57, 58 and 61).
Four of the pillars (out of 6) are closely located to joint planes. One face of these
pillars is controlled by joint planes (no: 15, 52, 55, 58).
Rectangular rooms generally have regular joint sets. Typical examples are rooms
no: 6, 18, 39, 47, 50, 52 and 57). Circular or arched rooms, on the other hand,
generally comprise more complicated joint patterns such as in room no: 2, 5, 7,
15 and 24.
Field joint survey of the Eskigümü ler site is carried out directly at the top of ignimbrite
layer within which the rooms are carved. A suitable area of 25*40 meters is selected to
measure the joints (Figure 3.8). Some parts of the area are covered by soil or vegetation
that corresponds to almost one tenth of the total area. The net area of the section is
therefore 885 m2. The joint pattern in this area is illustrated on a section of 5*5 meters in
Figure 3.8.
A total of 190 joints are measured during this survey (Appendix C1). The minimum and
maximum joint lengths are 0.4 and 8, respectively. Total length of the joints is 309.9 m.
3.4. Measurements at Çanl kilise
Çanl kilise site is situated southeast of Aksaray, approximately 10 km away from the city
center. The name of the site is derived from the church (Bell church) next the rock
settlement. The site today is not settled and the closest village is Çeltek approximately 2
km at the east.
The site is located on the upper part of Tuzgölü fault scarp close to the top of a
mountainous area. It is facing south and southwestern direction similar to Eskigümü ler
site (Figure 3.9 and 3.10). Hasanda mountain (and strato-volcano) that constitutes the
highest peak of the region is clearly visible almost from all rooms of the site.
27

Figure 3.8. Area of joint field survey for Eskigümü ler site. Survey is carried out at an
area of 25*40 m partly covered by vegetation. Small square shows the details of joints
measured in this survey.
Figure 3.9. Location map of the rooms measured in Çanl kilise site. The map is prepared
by Ousterhout (1997). Number indicate residential areas. The measurements are taken
along the solid black line.
28

A
B
C
Figure 3.10. General views of Çanlikilise site
29

The rooms in the sites are excavated within K z lkaya ignimbrite that has a thickness of
4-5 m. The ignimbrite is capped by lacustrine limestone; therefore the upper surface of
the ignimbrite is not exposed at the site.
Intensity of the natural destruction at this site is more than Eskigümü ler as indicated by
extensive rock fall and talus deposits. Some of the rooms are buried beneath these talus
deposits while some others are partly exposed to the surface. This destruction can be
attributed to the activity of the Tuzgölü fault.
Number of the rooms measured at Çanl kilise site is 27. The rooms carved within another
ignimbrite lying beneath the K z lkaya ignimbrite are not measured to keep the
consistency. Some other the rooms are collapsed by later events and buried under talus
like deposits (Figure 3.10-C). Therefore, only limited amount of numbers are available at
this site for the measurements. Plan views of the rooms and the joints measured in these
rooms are illustrated in Figures 3.11and 3.12.
Following observations are made on the rooms at Çanlikilise site:
The rooms are concentrated on the southern and southeastern slopes of
ignimbrite cliff, an observation similar to Eskigümü ler site, suggesting a
maximum benefit from the sunlight.
Height of the rooms ranges between 1 to 2.5 m.
13 rooms have rectangular shapes with four ideal walls. Others are either
circular or elliptical in shape or composed of nested rectangular rooms. Minimum
and maximum room areas are 10 and 146 m2, respectively (Appendix A2).
Average room area is about 40,6 m2 (e.g. 5*8 m)
In 3 rooms cylindrical or rectangular columns (pillars) are observed (Rooms no: 1,
3, 6) (Figure 3.12) whereas in one room internal walls separate nested rooms
(Rooms no: 11).
Following observations are made on the joints in the Çanl kilise site:
Total length of joints in all rooms is 282,1 m.
In 8 rooms only one joint is observed (no: 1,4 ,5, 6, 8, 13, 15, 27)
In 9 rooms two joints are identified (no: 1, 2, 3, 14, 16, 17, 23, 25, 26).
The number of joints in the rest 10 rooms is three or more. The maximum number
of joints is 4 in room 11.
In 2 rooms, joint is either tangential to or partly observed in the corner (no: 4, 8).
3 of the pillars (out of 4) are closely located to joint planes. One face of these
pillars is controlled by joint planes (no: 1, 3, 11) (Figure 3.13).
30

Figure 3.11. Plans of rooms measured at Çanl kilise site (Rooms 1 to 15). Thick lines are
joints indicated by their strikes. Letters refer to wall segments (see Appendix). Dashed
lines correspond to collapsed entrances. North is top of the page.
31

Figure 3.12. Plans of rooms measured at Çanl kilise site (Rooms 16 to 27). Thick lines
are joints indicated by their strikes. Letters refer to wall segments (see Appendix).
Dashed lines correspond to collapsed entrances. North is top of the page.
Field survey of the Çanl kilise site is carried out about 150 m north of the site, because
lacustrine sediments cover ignimbrite at the site. In the area selected (25*40 m), top of
ignimbrite is exposed on a flat barren surface (Figure 3.14). Some parts of the area are
covered by soil or vegetation that corresponds to almost one tenth of the total area. The
net area of the section is therefore 935 m2. The joint pattern in this area is illustrated on a
section of 5*5 meters in Figure 3.14. A total of 132 joints are measured during this survey
(Appendix C2). The minimum and maximum joint lengths are 0,4 and 9 m, respectively.
Total length of the joints is 355.7 m.
32

Figure 3.13. Pillars of Çanl kilise site.
33

Figure 3.14. Area of joint field survey for Çanl kilise site. Survey is carried out at an area
of 25*40 m partly covered by vegetation. Small square shows the details of joints
measured in this survey.
34

CHAPTER IV
ANALYSES
This chapter presents the analysis made on the data explained in the previous chapter.
Three analyses made are directional analysis (directions of rooms and joints), spatial
analyses (position of the joints in the room) and density analysis (comparison of joints in
the rooms and the field).
4.1. Directional Analyses
Directions of data collected at the sites are analyzed based on their strike measurements.
In each site four sets of data exist, namely, room entrance directions, wall directions, joint
directions in the rooms; and joint directions in the field. Rose diagrams prepared for these
data are as follows:
- one diagram for the room entrance
- two diagrams for wall directions (non-weighted and weighted)
- two diagrams for joints in the rooms (non-weighted and weighted)
- two diagrams for joints in the field (non-weighted and weighted)
For each site, therefore seven rose diagrams are explained. Interpretations of these
diagrams are made below for two sites separately.
4.1.1. Eskigümü ler site
Direction of room entrance: The direction of the room is the axis for that room in
relation to the entrance. Rose diagrams prepared from these axes are illustrated in Figure
4.1. Two diagrams are prepared based on the direction of ignimbrite scarp. The western
part of the scarp is oriented in N70W direction and 25 rooms are located in this section
(Figure 3.2). Eastern part of the scarp, on the other hand, has an orientation of N30E with
36 rooms. Both diagrams indicate that most dominant direction is N00-10E / S00-05W
with a concentration of 35 %. This is followed by minor concentrations at different
directions.
Considering the direction of the scarp, therefore, it could be concluded that selection of
south-facing entrances is not a natural result of the exposure, but rather a preference
made by the people.
35

Rooms: 01-25
Scarp direction: N70W
Rooms: 26-61
Scarp direction: N30E
Figure 4.1. Rose diagram prepared from room axes for Eskigümü ler site.
The walls: Rose diagrams prepared from the directions of walls are illustrated in Figure
4.2. A total of 235 walls are measured during the analyses. There is almost no major
difference between the non-weighted and weighted rose diagrams. A small difference,
however, is that in the non-weighted diagram the randomly distributed minor directions
tend to concentrate in NW-SE direction.
Two dominant wall directions are observed (N05E-S05W and N85W-S85E) that have
exactly the same density (20 %). The main implications of these diagrams are:
- Each direction corresponds to a pair of facing walls in the room. Accordingly the
rooms are rectangular in shape. It should be noted that, circular to elliptical rooms
are put into the analysis as segments of linear structures.
- Comparison of the room axis and wall direction suggest that N-S oriented
directions represent the side walls and the E-W oriented direction represent the
front and back walls of the room.
Joints in room: Rose diagrams of joints measured within the rooms do not display any
major difference between non-weighted and weighted analyses (Figure 4.2). A dense
concentration is observed in N10-60W and N00-10E directions. The density of each 10-
degree interval is 10-13 %. The pattern of rose diagrams indicates that:
- The joints in the rooms have certain trends represented by a swarm.
- There is an obvious angular relationship between the wall and joint directions.
This angle makes an acute angle of 30-35° with the sidewalls of the rooms.
- There is no or only minor joint concentrations in NE-SW and E-W directions.
36

Non-weighted
Weighted
Wall
N=235 N = 984
Joints
in
room
N=110 N=477
Joints in
field
survey
N=212 N=706
Figure 4.2. Rose diagrams prepared from measurements of Eskigümü ler site. (N is
number of measurements)
Joints in field: Rose diagrams of the joints measured in the field survey show several
differences compared to joints measured in the room (Figure 4.2):
- The first difference is in the patterns of non-weighted and weighted rose
diagrams. The reason for this is that, most of the field-joints are longer than the
room-joints that affect frequency during segmentation. The room-joints are
37

observed only in a limited area depending on the size of the rooms and do not
show significant change when it is segmented.
- In both non-weighted and weighted diagrams, there is not a definite pattern of the
joints as indicated by their multi directional nature. Therefore, both diagrams
indicate typical directional pattern for cooling joints as expected to develop in
almost all directions.
- An important difference between room-joints and field-joints is that, the most
commonly observed field-joint direction (NE-SW) is absent in the rooms.
4.1.2. Çanl kilise site
Direction of room entrance: Rose diagram prepared from the room entrance directions
for Çanl kilise site is illustrated in Figure 4.3. The diagram indicates that the most
dominant direction is N20E-S25W with a concentration of 32 %. Other concentrations of
about 8-9 % are observed in different directions. The scarp of the ignimbrite at this site,
similar to the scarp of ignimbrite at the Eskigümü ler site is facing south and southwest.
At this site, however, southwest and west facing scarps are longer than south facing
ones. Therefore, the directions observed in the rose diagram indicate that western
direction is avoided and that southeastern direction is preferred.
Rooms: 01-27
Scarp direction: N09W
Figure 4.3. Rose diagram prepared from room axes for Çanl kilise site.
The walls: Rose diagrams prepared from the directions of walls are illustrated in Figure
4.4. A total of 135 walls are measured at Çanl kilise site. There is almost no major
difference between the non-weighted and weighted rose diagrams. The only difference is
that smaller concentrations in NW-SE direction observed in non-weighted diagram are
gathered to concentrate in a certain trend in weighted one.
38

The walls are carved in two dominant directions, as averages, in N15E-S15W and N65W-
S65E. Densities of both directions are about 14 %. The main implications of these
diagrams are:
- Rectangular shape of the rooms at Çanl kilise site is under question. The average
angle between two wall directions is approximately 80°. This might be due to the
circular or irregular rooms existing in this site.
- The rooms are slightly oblique (about 10°) with respect to the entrance.
- Comparison of the room axis and wall direction suggests that NE-SW oriented
walls are side walls and the NW-SE oriented direction represent the front and
back walls of the room.
Joints in room: Rose diagrams of joints measured within the rooms for the Çanl kilise
show following characteristics (Figure 4.4):
- Non-weighted and weighted analyses do not display any major difference. The
maximum concentration is about N40W-S40E with a density of 13-15 %.
- The range of the joint direction compared to Eskigümü ler site is very narrow.
- Minor concentrations of 4 % are observed in NE-SW direction.
- The angle between wall and joint directions is about 45-50°.
Joints in field: Rose diagrams of the joints measured in the field survey for Çanl kilise
site are illustrated in Figure 4.4. It should be noted that the field survey was carried out
away from the site because there was no exposed surface in the close vicinity. Following
observations are made on the rose diagrams of these joints:
- Non-weighted and weighted rose diagrams do not display great differences. In
both diagrams similar directions get maximum density values.
- The joints are regularly concentrated in two directions, namely, N-S and WSW-
ESE, which is an observation not usual for cooling joints. One reason for this
might be the location of the site very close to Tuzgölü fault, so that, earlier cooling
joints are reactivated and become dominant in certain directions. Presence of
abundant striated surfaces at this site can be an evidence for this.
- An important difference between room-joints and field-joints is that, the most
common field-joint directions are absent in the room-joints.
39

Non-weighted
Weighted
Wall
N=135 N = 655
Joint
in
room
N=60 N= 272
Joint
in
survey
N=132 N=316
Figure 4.4. Rose diagrams prepared from measurements of Çanl kilise site. (N is number
of measurements)
4.2. Spatial analyses
Spatial analysis aims to locate position of joint within the room. If the position of the joint
can be quantified, that can help to understand how the joints are dealt then the room is
carved. Two methods of quantifying position of the joints are proposed here. Details of
each method are explained below and applied for both sites
40

4.2.1. Location in relation to entrance
Some joints are visible at the outcrops surface before the rooms are carved. Particularly if
the direction of the joint is parallel to the axis of the room, this joint is expected to expose
to the surface. The direction of the joint, on the other hand, if is parallel to the front wall
(or back wall) this joint will be encountered during the digging of the rooms. Aim of
location analysis in relation to the entrance is to measure the distance of the joint from
entrance in order to investigate how the joints are dealt when they are faced interior of
the room while the carving operation is continuing.
The method of measuring location of joints is shown in Figure 4.5. The joints are
assigned a number in the range of 0 to 100 % depending on their distance from the
entrance. Accordingly, the closest joint gets a value of 0 % (front wall) and the farthest
joint a value of 100 % (back wall).
Figure 4.5. Method to measure the location of joints in relation to entrance.
Several problems may arise during the assignment of the value for a joint. To avoid
confusion and keep the consistency, following rules are applied during scoring:
- If the joint is parallel to the axis of the room, it is suggested to be visible at the
outcrop face; therefore, it gets a value of 0 %.
- If the joint is parallel to the front (or back) wall, its distance is measured from the
scale given in the diagram. The distance, in this case, will be the same on both
sidewalls from the entrance.
41

- If the joint is oblique than the distance to the entrance will be different on both
sidewall. In this case, the position of the entrance can be used to select the most
appropriate sidewall. However, in most cases either the whole front wall forms
the entrance or the location of the entrance is not next to one of the sidewalls. To
avoid the complexity, therefore, it is decided to measure the distance along the
central axis of the room.
All the distances are measured and converted to the scale to get the values in terms of
percentages. The results are shown in the histograms in Figure 4.6.
Figure 4.6. Histograms showing results of the location analyses of joints in relation to the
entrances in the sites.
Histograms for two sites show different characteristics:
- In the Eskigümü ler site the distance from the front wall to back wall gradually
decreases (from 25 to 5 %). The most populated interval is the fist one that
corresponds to immediate distance at the entrance. This suggest that majority of
the joints were visible before the room was carved.
- In the Çanl kilise site the pattern is almost opposite to the first site. Frequency of
the joints, which are away from the entrance gradually, increases with a break
almost at the center of the room.
42

- In both sites the pillars (columns) and internal walls are not taken into the
consideration. These structures should be in a way put into the calculations that
can lead to more meaningful results.
4.2.2. Location in relation to center of room
This analysis aims to detect if the joints are concentrated at the central part of the room
or at the periphery. A method for this purpose is proposed which is illustrated in Figure
4.7. Similar to the previous analysis the distance of each joint is assigned a number in the
range of 0 to 100. This number is 100 if the joint passes exactly from the center of the
room; it is zero if it is along one of the walls. Rectangular boxes in the figure represent
scale lines for every ten percent interval. These boxes will be used if the room is
rectangular. In the case of circular rooms these boxes should be converted to circles.
Figure 4.7. Method to measure the location of joints in relation to the center of room.
Following rules are applied during assignment of the values:
- If the joint is parallel to any wall of the room, the percentage will be directly read
from the scale.
- If the joint is oblique to the room walls than the shortest distance from the center
of the room to the joint be measured.
The results of this analysis for both sites are shown in the histograms in Figure 4.8.
Following observations can be made on these diagrams.
43

- In the Eskigümü ler site the distance from the margins of the rooms towards the
center gradually decreases (from 35 to 6 %). The most populated interval is the
fist one that corresponds to the periphery of room. Therefore, the frequency of
the joints that cuts across the room is low. It is not possible to understand from
the diagram, to which wall the joint is closer. This diagram, together with Figure
4.6, however, suggests that the closest wall is the front wall.
Figure 4.8. Histograms showing results of the location analyses of joints in relation to the
center of rooms.
- In the Çanl kilise site the pattern of the histograms implies an opposite case
compared with the Eskigümü ler site. Frequency of the joints that are closer to
the center of the room gradually increases from 7 to 17 %. There are two breaks
almost at 35 and 65 % distances.
- Similar to the Eskigümü ler site, position and frequency of pillars and internal
walls are not considered in these calculations.
44

4.3. Density Analysis
Density analysis aims to investigate the relationship between the joint lengths versus the
area of the rooms. This analysis is carried out in two steps.
The first step is to compare the densities of the joints measured in the room and in the
field. Table 4.1 shows total measurements for both places in both sites. The field joints
have densities of 0.35 and 0.38 m/m2 for Eskigümü ler and Çanl kilise sites, respectively.
Room joints, on the other hand, have densities of 0.27 and 0.38 m/m2 for the same sites
(Figure 4.9).
Table 4.1. Joint densities in the field and in the room for both sites.
Total joint
lenght (m)
Total area
(m2)
Density
(m/m2)
Eskigümü ler Room 493.1 1840.35 0.27
Field 309.9 885 0.35
Çanl kilise Room 282.1 1096.85 0.26
Field 355.7 935.0 0.38
Figure 4.9. Graphical representation of joint densities for both sites.
Two main implications of these results are:
1) Room and field densities are almost the same among themselves,
2) Room densities are less than field densities.
45

The second step is to plot room area versus joint length measured in the sites. Scatter
plots of this analysis (Figure 4.10) indicate that:
1) The room area increases as the joint length increases. The best-fit line illustrating
this relationship suggests that the larger rooms are carved in relatively small joint
lengths.
3) The density of the Çanl kilise is slightly greater than that of Eskigümü ler. This
might be due to the close vicinity of the site to the Tuzgölü fault zone.
Figure 4.10. Scatter plots of room area versus joint length for both sites.
46

CHAPTER V
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The study carried out in this thesis will be discussed under four separate headings that
focus on 1) general aspects of the settlements, 2) the method applied, 3) the
interpretation of results obtained, and 4) recommendations for further studies.
5.1. General Aspects of Settlements
Rock settlements are highly affected from certain characteristics of joints and hosting
ignimbrites. These characteristics play an important role in the selection of site and the
design of the settlement. Three of these characteristics are thickness of ignimbrites,
morphology formed along the ignimbrites and attitude of ignimbrites.
Thickness of the ignimbrites: Most of ignimbrites have thickness ranging from 5 to 80
m (Schumacher et al., 1990; Le Pennec et al., 1994; Schumacher and Mues-
Schumacher, 1996; 1997). Although this thickness gradually decreases to cm at distal
parts, they have their maximum thickness in the area between Ni de, Nev ehir and
Aksaray where most of the rock settlements are located. This thickness forms a suitable
medium for the development of columnar joints (Cas and Wright (1988). Therefore, the
settlements and the joints are genetically related and in all rock settlements presence of
columnar joints should be expected. The spacing and the length of joints, however, can
change from place to place depending on the local conditions existing at the site. Zelve,
Selime and Yaprakhisar rock settlements, for example, are carved within ignimbrites with
widely spaced joints.
Morphology formed by ignimbrites: Most of the rock settlements in Cappadocia (other
than underground cities) are carved within the steep slopes formed along the ignimbrites.
These slopes are commonly observed in two forms as valleys and cliffs (Figure 5.1).
Examples of valley type settlements are Zelve, Göreme, Gelveri (Güzelyurt) and So anl .
Two settlements selected in this study are examples of cliff type settlements. Other
examples are Selime, Yaprakhisar, Uzunkaya and Tatlarin.
47

Since the study is carried out in cliff type settlements, certain results such as orientation
of the room axes are consistent in this study. In valley type settlement, however, the
rooms will be located on both sides of the valley and the room orientations might indicate
different directions.
Figure 5.1. Two major types of rock settlements in Cappadocia.
Attitude of ignimbrites: All the maps prepared in the area indicate that the ignimbrites
are almost horizontal except some in local regions close to the faults. A horizontal
ignimbrite implies vertical joints since the joints are developed perpendicular to flow
direction (Cas and Wright, 1988).
Two settlements selected in this study are located within almost horizontal layers.
Therefore, the joints are vertical which can control in same cases the margin of a room. In
an inclined layer, on the other hand, the joints will also be inclined that will be oblique to
the room wall. Similar study carried out in inclined strata can show how people dealt with
such inclined joints.
5.2. Method applied
Algorithm of the method proposed in this study is given in Figure 4.1. The method
attempts to seek relationship between joints and the rock-hewn settlements. Analyses
made from the data collected test:
- effect of joint orientation on the design of the room,
- position of the joints within the room,
- effect of joint density on the selection of site,
- effect of joint density on the size of the room.
48

There is no assumption made during the analyses. All data are processed using common
PC-softwares and the outputs are provided in the form of rose-diagram, histogram or
scatter plot. In this case, the method is simple and straightforward. The only necessary
requirement is the availability of data related to joints both in the rooms and in the field.
To increase accuracy of the results, however, several other analyses can be added to the
method. Two important analyses that are missed here are volume calculations and
consideration of pillars.
Volume refers to the 3D recognition of the room. All the rooms measured in this study are
represented in plan views and show only 2D nature of the data. The volume of the room,
on the other hand, can modify the results obtained for the joint densities.
Pillar refers to the column left-behind when the ignimbrite is carved. The supportive use
of the pillar can be quantified in relation to joints. The number of the pillars in this study (6
for Eskigümü ler, 3 for Çanl kilise sites) was not enough to carry out a statistical analysis.
5.3. Interpretation of Result
Following conclusions are derived from the present study:
1) Room axes for both sites concentrate at certain directions. These directions are
approximately N05E-S05W for Eskigümü ler and N25E-S25W for Çanl kilise site.
The direction of the ignimbrite scarp along which the rooms are aligned is different in both
sites. At Eskigümü ler site the scarp has is composed of two segments with distinct
orientations, namely, N70W and N30E (Figure 5.2). Expected room orientations,
therefore, should be in N20E and N60W, respectively if the room is carved perpendicular
to the scarp. The observation made in the field, however, indicates that the rooms are
oriented in almost N-S direction that is oblique to the scarp.
A similar observation is made in Çanl kilise site. The scarp of ignimbrite is in N09W
direction at this site. Accordingly, the average room axis direction is expected to be at
N81E direction that is the trend perpendicular to the scarp. An oblique relationship,
however, of about 55 degrees is detected in the analysis.
The difference between the scarp direction and the room axes in both sites as make use
of maximum sun light during the configuration of the rooms.
49

Figure 5.2. Interpretation of room axes for both sites in relation to the ignimbrite scarp.
Rose diagrams indicate the room orientations shown in Figures 4.1 and 4.3.
2) Wall directions at both sites are represented by two dominant directions consistent with
the room axis direction. The angle between two wall directions suggests almost
rectangular rooms for the Eskigümü ler site. The angle in the Çanl kilise site, on the other
hand, is about 80 degrees. This deviation might be due to the segmentation of the wall in
circular/elliptical rooms.
3) Joints measured in the rooms and in the field display different characteristics. Room
joints are dominantly in the same direction while the field joints have a multi directional
nature. The room joints in both sites have a distinct angle with the directions of the walls.
Position and location of the pillars should be utilized to further quantify this analysis.
50

4) Proximity analysis carried out to locate position of the joints in the room display
different characteristics. In the Eskigümü ler site the joints are closer to the margins of
the room, particularly to the front wall, suggesting a design that considered the joints
during the settlement was carved. In the Çanl kilise site, this observation is not clear and
suggests almost a different configuration.
5) Density analysis yields three important conclusions. First of all, the field joints have a
larger density in both sites compared to the rooms. That means the rooms have less
joints than the field. This implies that frequency of joints is considered during the selection
of sites, and areas of fewer joints are identified. Secondly, density gradually decreases,
as the size of the room gets larger. This implies that if the room is not jointed they tend to
enlarge the room as much as possible. The last conclusion is that, the density of the
Çanl kilise site is slightly greater than Eskigümü ler. Although the difference is negligible
a logical explanation can be the distance of the sites to active fault zones. The closet
active fault zone to both sites is Tuzgölü fault zone (Figure 2.1). The distance however is
about 25 km to Eskigümü ler and 1-2 km to Çanl kilise site. This difference can imply the
fact that recent earthquakes might affect Çanl kilise site more than the Eskigümü ler site
and some of the joints can be produced during such activities.
5.4. Recommendations
Recommendations made here aim to contribute to further studies carried out in similar
subjects to increase reliability of results and to extract more information.
- The shape characteristics of the rooms are ignored in this study. Although
most of the rooms have rectangular shapes, other irregular or elliptical forms
also exist in the sites. Some rooms are even nested or more complicated.
The relationship between the joint data and the room geometry should be
tested in further studies. The main reason not to carry out these analyses in
this study is the number of the rooms in this study, which is not enough for
such an analysis.
- This study is based on two-dimensional analyses of the data. The third
dimension (height of the room) is ignored here. If the height were considered
in the calculations, this would lead to investigate the relationship between the
joint density and room volume rather than the room area. Most of the rooms,
however, have arc-shaped roof that complicates data collection which, in
turn, would lead in misinterpretation of the results.
51

- For this reason, it is recommended to carry out these analyses in the sites
where such details are available.
- Only direction and the length of the joints are considered in this study. Other
parameters, if available, such as aperture, should be included into the
method. A further classification of the joints based on these parameters can
better explain why certain directions are observed in the rooms although
other directions also exist in the field.
- Pillars are not investigated in detail in this study. The main reason is that only
a couple of pillars are observed in the rooms. There should be, however, a
relationship between the location of pillar and the room size or joint density. A
study carried out in a site with abundant pillars can clarify this relationship.
- Similar investigations should be carried out in the underground cities
commonly observed in the area. The main difference between cliff
settlements and the underground settlements is that an underground city is
multi-story structure and the joint characteristics can change as the depth
changes.
52

REFERENCES
Aydan, Ö., and Ulusay, R., (2003) Geotechnical and geoenvironmental characteristics of
man-made underground structures in Cappadocia, Turkey, Engineering Geology,
69, 245-272.
Aydan, Ö., Ulusay, R., Yüzer, E., and Erdo an, M., (1999) Man-Made Rock Structures
in Cappadocia, Turkey and Their Implications in Rock Mechanics andRock
Engineering, International Society for Rock Mechanics, 6, 1, 63-73.
Aydar, E., Gündo du, N., Bayhan, H. and Gourgaud, A., (1994) Volcano-structural and
petrological investigation of the Cappadocian Quaternary volcanism, TUBITAK
Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 3: 25-42 (In Turkish with English abstract)
Batum, I., (1978)) a. Geology and petrography of Ac göl and Göllüda volcanics at
southwest of Nev ehir Central Anatolia - Turkey), Yerbilimleri, 4, 1-2: 50-69 (In
Turkish with English abstract).
Batum, I., (1978) b. Geochemistry and petrology of Ac göl and Göllüda volcanics at
southwest of Nev ehir Central Anatolia - Turkey), Yerbilimleri, 4, 1-2: 70-88 (In
Turkish with English abstract).
Beyhan, A., (1994) Stratigraphic outline and neotectonics of the Sulucaova-Koval
segment of the Ecemi fault zone, Ms. Thesis, Middle East Tech. University,
Ankara, 109 p.
Bigazzi, G., Ye ingil, Z., Ercan, T., Oddone, M. and Özdo an, M., (1993) Fission track
dating obsidians of central and northern Anatolia, Bull. Volcanology, 55: 588-595.
Billings, P.B., (1972) Structural Geology, Prentice Hall, Third Edition, New Jersey, 606 p.
Cas, R.A.F., and Wright, J.V., (1988) Volcanic Successions Modern and Ancient, Allen
& Unwin; London, UK; 528 p.
Druitt, T.H., Brenchley, P.J., Gökten, Y.E. and Francaviglia, V., (1995) Late
Quaternary rhyolitic eruptions from the Ac göl complex, central Turkey, Journal of
Geological Society, London, 152: 655-667
Endogru M. and Kara D., (1998), Aksaray Akhisar Köyü Canli Kilise Kurtarma Kazisi
(Rescue Excavation at Canli Church at Village Akhisar at Aksaray). VIII. Müze
Kurtarma Kazilari Semineri. 7-9 Nisan 1997. Kusadasi. T. C., Kultur Bakanligi,
Anitlar ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlügü. [Kültür Bakanligi Yayinlari, 2006/An tlar ve
Müzeler Genel Müdürlügu Yayinlari, 55.] Ankara, Kultur Bakanligi Milli Kutuphane
Basimevi, [ISBN 975-17-1875-9] 585-606.
Ercan, T., Fujitani,T., Matsuda, J.I., Tokel, S., Notsu, K., Ul, T., Can, B., Selvi, Y.,
Y ld r m, T., Fi ekçi, A., Ölmez, M. and Akba l , A., (1990). The origin and
evolution of the Cenozoic volcanism of Hasanda -Karacada area (Central
Anatolia), Jeomorfoloji Dergisi, 18: 39-54 (In Turkish with English abstract)
53

Ercan, T., Tokel, S., Matsuda, J., Ul, T., Notsu, K. and Fujitani, T., (1992). New
geochemical, isotopic and radiometric data of the Quaternary volcanism of
Hasanda -Karacada (Central Anatolia), TJK Bülteni, 7: 8-21 (In Turkish with
English abstract)
Ercan, T., Tokel, S., Matsuda, J., Ul, T., Notsu, K. and Fujitani, T., (1994). Erciyes
Da (Orta Anadolu) Pliyo-Kuvaterner volkanizmas na ili kin yeni jeokimyasal,
izotopik, radyometrik veriler ve jeotermal enerji aç s ndan önemi, Türkiye 6. Enerji
Kongresi Bildiriler Kitab , 208-222 (in Turkish).
Erguvanl , A.K., and Yüzer, E., (1977) Past and present use of underground openings
excavated in volcanic tuffs at Cappadocia area, Rock Storage, Oslo, 15-20
Göncüo lu, M.C. and Toprak, V., (1992). Neogene and Quaternary volcanism of central
Anatolia: a volcano-structural evaluation, Bulletin de la Section de Volcanologie,
Soc. Géol. France, 26: 1-6.
Hancock, P.L., (1985) Brittle microtectonics: principles and practice, Journal of Structural
Geology, 7, 437-457.
Innocenti, F., Mazzuoli, G., Pasquare, F., Radicati Di Brozolo, F. and Villari, L.,
(1975). The Neogene calcalkaline volcanism of Central Anatolia: geochronological
data on Kayseri-Ni de area, Geol. mag., 112 (4): 349-360.
Keller, J., (1974). Quaternary maar volcanism near Karap nar in Central Anatolia,
Bulletin Volcanologique, 38-2: 378-396.
Le Pennec, J., L., Bourdier, J.-L., Froger, J.-L., Temel, A., Camus, G. and Gourgaud,
A., (1994). Neogene ignimbrites of the Nev ehir plateau (central Turkey):
stratigraphy, distribution and source constraints, Journal of Volcanology and
Geothermal Research, 63: 59-87.
Ousterhout, R., (1995) An examination of a Byzantine settlement in Cappadocia, Design
for the environment: The Interdisciplanr Challenge, ASCA, WCRC95, 13-19.
Ousterhout, R., (1997) Survey of the Byzantine settlement at Çanl kilise in Cappadocia:
Rtesults of the 1995 and 1996 seasons, 301-306.
Pasquaré, G, Poli, S., Vezzoli, L. and Zanchi, A., 1988. Continental arc volcanism and
tectonic setting in central Anatolia, Tectonophysics, 146: 217-230.
Pasquaré, G., (1968). Geology of the Cenozoic volcanic area of Central Anatolia, Atti
Accad. Naz. Lincei, 9: 53-204.
Schumacher, R., and Mues-Schumacher, U., (1996) The K z lkaya ignimbrite an
unusual low aspect ratio ignimbrite from Cappadocia, central Turkey, Journal of
Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 70, 107-121
Schumacher, R., and Mues-Schumacher, U., (1997) The pre-ignimbrite (phreato)
plinian and phreatomagmatic phases of the Akda -Zelve ignimbrite eruption in
central Anatolis, Turkey, Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 78,
139-153.
Schumacher, R., Keller, J. and Bayhan, H., (1990). Depositional characteristics of
ignimbrites in Cappadocia, central Anatolia, Turkey, in: M.Y. Sava ç n and A.H.
Eronat (eds), Proceedings of the International Earth Science Congress on Aegean
Regions (IESCA 1990), vol. 2: 435-449.
54

Secor, D.T., (1965) Role of fluid pressure in jointing, American Journal of Science, 263,
633-646.
Segal, P., and Pollard, D.P., (1983) Joint formation in granitic rock of the Sierra Nevada,
Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 94, 563-575.
enyürek, M.Z., (1953). List of localities of Mammalian fossils of Pontian age in the
vilayet of Kayseri, Ankara Univ., D.T.C.F. Dergisi, XI, 1-2-4: 171-176.
Temel, A, Gündo du, N.N., and Gourgaud A., (1998) Petrological and geochemical
characteristics of Cenozoic high-K calc-alkaline volcanism in Konya, C. Anatolia,
Turkey, Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 85, 1-4, 327-354
Temel, A., (1992) Kapadokya eksplozif volkanizmas n n petrolojik ve jeokimyasal
özellikleri, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Geological Engineering, Hacettepe
University (in Turkish)
Thorpe, R., and Brown, G., (1985) The field description of Igneous rocks, Geological
Society of London Handbook Series, Open University Press, 154 p.
Topal, T. and Doyuran, V., (1998) Analyses of deterioriation of the Cappadocian tuff,
Environmental Geology, 34/1, 5-20.
Topal, T., and Doyuran, V., (1995) Effect of Discontinuities on the Development of Fairy
Chimneys in the Cappadocia Region (Central Anatolia-Turkey), TUBITAK Turkish
Journal of Earth Sciences, 4, 49-54.)
Topal, T., and Doyuran, V., (1997) Engineering geological properties and durability
assessment of the Cappadocian tuff, Engineering Geology, 47, 175-187.
Toprak, V. and Göncüo lu, M.C., (1993). Tectonic control on the development of the
Neogene-Quaternary Central Anatolian volcanic province, Turkey, Geological
Journal, 28: 357-369.
Toprak, V. and Kaymakç , N., (1995). Determination of stress orientation using slip
lineation data in Pliocene ignimbrites around Derinkuyu fault (Nev ehir), TÜB TAK
Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 4: 39-47.
Toprak, V., (1994). Central K z l rmak fault zone: northern margin of the Central
Anatolian volcanics; TÜB TAK Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 3: 29-38.
Toprak, V., (1996). Origin of the Quaternary basins developed within Neogene
Cappadocian volcanic depression, Central Anatolia, Proceedings of the 30th
Anniversary Symposium, Trabzon, Turkey, 327-339 (In Turkish with English
abstract)
Toprak, V., (1998), Vent distribution and its relation to regional tectonics, Journal of
Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 85, 1-4, 55-67.
Uygun, A., (1981). Tuzgölü havzas n n jeolojisi, evaporit olu umlar ve hidrokarbon
olanaklar , ç Anadolunun Jeolojisi Simpozyomu, TJK, Ankara, 66-71. (in Turkish)
55

Wisseman, S., Sarin, P., Ousterhout, R., De Sena, E., Williams, W., (1998), Fresco
pigments from byzantine Cappadocia, Part II, In Proceedings of the 1998
International Symposium on Archaeometry, Budapest,
Online References:
www.nigde.gov.tr
www.atamanhotel.com/cappgumusler.html
www.cappadociaonline.com/eskitr.html.
56

APPENDIX A1
Eskigümü ler room wall and joint measurements
ROOM WALL JOINT
No Axis Type Lenght Direction Explanation Direction Explanation
1 N-S A 8 N-S Side N85W (B)
B 4.5 N85W Rear N70W Mid.
C 5 N-S Side N40W Mid.
D 2 N45W Sub. Wall N45W (D)
2 N-S A 10 E-W Front E-W (A)
B 4 E-W Rear N80W
C 5 N-S Side (curved) N15W (D1)
D 5 N-S Side (curved)
C1 2,5 N-S Side (2.part)
D1 2,5 N-S Side (2.part)
3 N-S A 5 E-W Front E-W Mid:
B D: 9 Curved
4 N-S A 6 E-W Front
B D:6 Side (curved)
N20W C 2.5 N20W Side (1.part) N70E 1.part (B)
D 2 N70E Rear (1.part)
E 2 N20W Side (1.part)
N30E F 2 N30E Side (2.part) N40W 2.part
G 2.5 N75W Rear (2. part) N80E 2.part
H 2 N30E Side (2.part)
5 N40W D:15 Curved N80W Mid.
N40W Front
N50W Mid.
6 N80E A 7 N10W Front N30W Rear
B 12 N80E Side N40W Mid:
C 7 N05W Rear (curved) N20W Front
D 12 N85E Side
7 N50E A D:5 Side (curved) E-W Diag.
B 3 N30W Rear N60W (E-W)
C D:5 Side (curved)
8 N30E A 5 N25E Front N30W Mid.
B 3 N60W Side
C 5 N25E Rear
D 3 N60W Side
9 N10E A N80W Front N20E (D)
B N10E Side
C N80W Rear
D N10E Side
57

ROOM WALL JOINT
No Axis Type Lenght Direction Explanation Direction Explanation
10 N-S A 9 E-W Front N80W Rear
B 4 N-S Side
C 5 E-W Rear
E-W D 3 E-W Side (1.part) E-W 1.part
E 3 N-S Rear (1.part) N60W 1.part
F 3 N10W Side (1.part)
N40W G 3 N40W Side (2.part)
H 3 N45E Rear
I 3 N40W Side
11 N-S A 9 E-W Front E-W Mid.
B 4 N-S Side (1.part) N35W Corner
C 4 E-W Rear (1.part)
D 3 N-S Side (1.part)
E 4 N-S Side (2.part)
F 3 E-W Rear (2.part)
G 5 N-S Side (2.part)
12 N10E A 3 N80W Front N20E (D)
B 8 N10E Side N80E Mid.
C 3 N75E Rear N60E Mid.
D 8 N10E Side
13 N10E A 3 N80W Front N20E (D)
B 8 N10E Side N80E Mid.
C 3 N75W Rear N60E Mid
D 8 N10E Side
14 N70E A 7 N-S Front N80E (N20W)
B 4 E-W Side N30W Front
C 7 N-S Rear N20W Rear
D 3 E-W Side
15 N70E D:4 Curved N30W (N70W)
N20W (N70W)
N70W
16 N-S A 3 E-W Front (ruined) N-S (B)
B 2 N-S Side
C 3 E-W Rear
D 2 N-S Side
17 N40E A 1.5 N55W Front N60W Mid.
B 3 N40E Side (curved) N20W (N60W)
C 3.5 N65W Rear
D 4 N45E Side (curved)
18 N40E A 4 N50W Front N50W (A)
B 2 N40E Side
C 4 N60W Rear N60W (C)
D 2 N40E Side
19 N50W A 5 N45E Front N50W (B)
B 4 N50W Side
C 5 N40E Rear
D 4 N55W Side
58

ROOM WALL JOINT
No Axis Type Lenght Direction Explanation Direction Explanation
20 N40W A 3 N70E Front N20W (C )
B 3 N40W Side N70E (A)
C 3 N70E Rear
D 3 N20W Side
21 N-S A 5 E-W Front N40W Diag.
B 7 N-S Side N60W Front
C 5 E-W Rear
D 7 N-S Side
22 N60E A 7 N50W Front (open) N50W (A)
B 3 Curved
C 3 Curved N60E (F)
D 3 N60E Side
E 3 N50W Rear
F 3 N60E Side
23 N25E A 2 N60W Front (ruined) N80W 1.part
B 3 N25E Side (1.part) N50W 1.part
C 3 N25E Side (1.part)
D 4 N25E Side (2.part)
E 4 N50W Rear
F 4 N25E Side (2.part)
24 N-S A 2 N80W Side N80W (A)
B D:2.5 Circle N35W Side
N50W Side
25 N25W A 3 N50E Front N-S
B 3 N20W Side
C 2.5 N15E Side
D 2 N25W Side
E 2 N-S Side
F 1.5 N15W Side (2.part) N30E
G 1.5 N50E Rear (2.part)
H 1.5 N10W Side (2.part)
26 N15E D: 2 Circle N70W
27 N-S A 3 N75E Front N40W (B-C)
B 3 N05E Side N70E ©
C 2 N70E Rear (sub.)
D 2 N80W Rear
E 3 N-S Side (ruined)
28 N30W A 2.5 N55E Front N20W (B)
B 2.5 N20W Side N10E (A-D)
C 3 N50E Rear N10E (D)
D 2.5 Side(curved)
29 N-S A 5 N65W Front N-S Front
B 3 N15E Side N60W Front
C 5 E-W Rear
D 2.5 N20W Side
E 3 N15E Front2
59

ROOM WALL JOINT
No Axis Type Lenght Direction Explanation Direction Explanation
30 N-S A 5 E-W Front (ruined) N-S (F)
B 9 N-S Side
C 2 E-W Rear 1
D 3 N-S Side 2
E 3 E-W Rear 2
F 5 N-S Side
31 N-S A 2 E-W Front (runed)
B 3 N-S Side (circle) N40W (D-E)
D 2 N-S Side 2
E 2 E-W Rear 2
F 4 N-S Side 2
32 N80W A 4 N-S Front N80W (D)
B 7 E-W Side N20W (B-C)
C 4 N-S Rear N60W (B-C)
D 7 E-W Side
33 N60E A 4 N20W Front N15W (A)
B 5 N60E Side N70W Diag.
C 4 N35W Rear
D 5 N55E Side
34 E-W A 5 N-S Front N70W (D)
B 5 E-W Side N40W (A-C)
C 5 N-S Rear
D 5 E-W Side
35 E-W A 4 N-S Front (ruined) N30W (B-D)
B 6 E-W Side
C 4 N-S Rear
D 6 E-W Side
36 N60E A 3 N30W Front N30W (A)
B D:3 Side (circle)
37 N40W A 5 N70W Front N30E (A-C)
B 4 N40E Side
C 4 N30W Rear
D 2.5 N30E Side
38 N-S A 3 N-S Front
B 2 E-W Side
C D:1,5 Circle Rear
D 3 Side
39 N-S A 3 E-W Front (curved) N-S ©
B 3 N-S Side (curved) N-S (B)
C 3 E-W Rear (curved)
D 4 N-S Side (curved)
40 N-S A 5 E-W Front
B 9 N-S Side
C 4 E-W Rear 1
D 3 N15E Side 1
E 4 E-W Rear 2
F 5 N-S Side 2
60

ROOM WALL JOINT
No Axis Type Lenght Direction Explanation Direction Explanation
41 N-S A 4.5 E-W Front N40W (C-D)
B 9 N-S Side
C 4.5 E-W Rear
D 9 N-S Side
42 N50W A 1 N30E Front (ruined) N30W (D)
B 2 N50W Side
C 1 N35E Rear
D 2 N50W Side
43 N-S A 7 E-W Front N40W (B)
B 2 N-S Side 1
C 1.5 E-W Rear 1
D 2 N-S Side 2
E 5 E-W Rear 2
F 4 N-S Side
44 N60W A 8 N50E Front N-S (B-C)
B 12 N60W Side
C 8 N45E Rear
D 12 N60W Side
45 N80W A 6 N-S Front N80W (B)
B 5 N80W Side N-S (C)
C 6 N-S Rear
D 6 E-W Side
46 N-S A 3 E-W Front (ruined) N50W (B-C)
B 5 N-S Side
C 3 E-W Rear
D 5 N10W Side
47 N-S A 6 E-W Front (ruined) N60W Mid.
B 2 N-S Side (curved) N20W (C)
C 5 E-W Rear
D 2 N-S Side (curved)
48 N-S A 3 E-W Front (ruined) N60W (D)
B 3 N60W Side)
C 5 N20E Rear
D 2 N30E Side
49 N30E A 4 N50E Front (ruined)
B 3 N30W Side)
C 4 N45E Rear
D 3 N30W Side
50 N-S D:10 Circle N-S Mid.
N30W
51 N25W A 3 N75E Front (ruined) N80W (C-D)
B 4 N30W Side)
C 3 N70E Rear
D 4 N30W Side
52 N40W A 5 N55E Front (ruined) N15W (A-C)
B 3 N40W Side) N40W (B)
C 5 N60E Rear
61

ROOM WALL JOINT
No Axis Type Lenght Direction Explanation Direction Explanation
53 E-W A 1,5 N-S Front (ruined) N50W (A-D)
B 2 E-W Side)
C 1,5 N-S Rear
D 2 E-W Side
54 N50W A 4 N25E Front N30W (A-C)
B 5 N50W S de
C 4 N30E Rear
D 5 N55W S de
55 N40E A 3,5 N35E Frontt N20E (B-D)
B 9 N55W S de N-S (A-D)
C 3,5 N40E Rear
D 5 N50W S de
E 6 N50W Side(2.part)
F 2,5 N25E Rear (2.part)
G 9 N55W
56 N65W A 5 N20E Front N45W (A-C)
B 4 N70W S de
C 5 N20E Rear
D 4 N75W S de
57 N25E A 3 N70W Front N65W (A)
B 7 N15E S de N30W (B-D)
C 3,5 N70W Rear N60W
D 7 N20E S de
58 N40W A 3 N45E Front N15W Mid.
B 5 N40W S de N40W (B)
C 3 N45E Rear
D 5 N40W S de
59 N70W A 5 N20E Frontt N45W
B 4 N70W S de
C 5 N20E Rear
D 4 N70W S de
60 N50W A 3 N35E Frontt N30W (B-D)
B 7 N50W S de
C 3 N40E Rear
D 7 N55W S de
61 N80E A 8,5 N80E Front N55W
B 3,5 N20W S de N20E
C 4 N25W Side N15W
D 4 N35E Rear
E 4 N35W Side N50E
F 4 N75E Rear N30W
G 4 N35W Side N20E
62

APPENDIX A2
Çanl kilise room wall and joint measurements
ROOM
WALL
JOINT
No Axis Type Lenght Direction Explanation Direction Explanation
1 N70E A 6.5 N10W Front N20E (B-D)
B 9.5 N70E Side N60W (B-D)
C 6.5 N10W Rear
D 9.5 N70E Side
2 N25W A 5 N55E Front N60W (C-D)
B 8 N25W Side N20W (A-C)
C 5 N55E Rear N60E N20W
D 8 N25W Side
3 N-S A 3 E-W Front
B 5 N-S Side N30W (A-B)
C 1.5 E-W Rear N60W (A-B)
D 5 N-S Side
4 N20W A 5 N65E Front N50W B
B 4 N20W Side
C 5 N65E Rear
D 4 N20W Side
5 N-S A 4 E-W Front N10W (D-E)
B 2 N-S Side (curved)
C 2 N-S Side (curved)
D 3 E-W Rear
E 4 N-S Side
6 N50W A 7 N30E Front (open) N30W (A-D)
B 7 N50W Side
C 5 N30E Rear
D 7 N50W Side
7 N25E A 15 N55W Front N05W 3.part
B 5 N25E Side N25W 2.part
C 3 N50W Rear1 N15W 3.part
D 5 N20E Side2 (2.part)
E 5 N50W Rear2 (2.part)
F 5 N20E Side3 (2.part)
G 2 N55W Rear
H 5 N25E Side4 (3.part)
I 5 N55W Rear 4
J 7 N20E Side5 (3.part)
K 2 N50W Rear (main)
L 4 N20E Side5 (4.part)
M 4 N55W Rear5 (4.part)
N 4 N25E Side6 (4.part)
63

ROOM
WALL
JOINT
No Axis Type Lenght Direction Explanation Direction Explanation
8 N05W A 5 N80E Front (ruined) N10W (C-D)
B 2 N05W Side
C 5 N80E Rear (curved)
D 2 N05W Side
9 N20E A 7 N40W Font (ruined) N25W 2.part
B 2 1.part (circle) N25W 2.part
C 3 2.part (circle) N40W 1.part
D 2 3.part (circle)
E 2 N50E Side
10 N50E A 5 N45W Front (ruined) N40W (B-D)
B 3 N50E Side N70W (B-D)
C 5 N40W Rear N05W Small part
D 3 N50E Side
11 N20E A 5 N65W Front (ruined) N40W (B-D)
B 5 N20E Side N50W (B-D)
C 5 N65W Rear
D 5 N20E Side
E 7 N65W Rear N15W (C-D)
F 5 N20E Side N45W D-N15W
12 N30E A 10 N65W Front (ruined) N15E (A-C)
B 4 N30E
C 10 N65W
D 4 N25E
E 2 N30E Side N65W Diag.
F 2 N60W Rear N40W Paral.
G 2 N25E Side
13 N55E A 5 N50W Front N50W Front
B 4 N55E Side
C 5 N50W Rear
D N50E Side
14 N70E A 3 N10W Front (ruined) N50W (A-D)
B 5 N70E Side N40E (C-D)
C 5 N10W Rear
D 5 N70E Side
15 N15W A 5 N70E Front (ruined) N65W (C-D)
B 5 N15W Side
C 5 N75E Rear
D 5 N15W Side
16 N45E A 4 N40W Front (ruined) N40W (A)
B D:4 Side (circle) N55E
17 N-S A 10 N-S Front N05E (A-B)
B 5 E-W Side N70W (A-C)
C 10 N-S Rear
D 5 E-W Side
18 N40E A 6 N60W Front N60W (D-B)
B 5 N40E Side N20W
C 6 N60W Rear N-S (A-B)
D 5 N40E Side
64

ROOM
WALL
JOINT
No Axis Type Lenght Direction Explanation Direction Explanation
19 E-W A 8 N-S Front N40W (B-D)
B 12 E-W Side N30E (B-D)
C 8 N-S Rear
D 12 E-W Side
E 4 N-S Front
F 6 E-W Side N50W (A-C)
G 4 N-S Rear
H 6 E-W Side
20 N80W A 6 N-S Front N05W (B-D)
B 12 N80W Side N30E (B-D)
C 6 N-S Rear N10W (D)
D 12 N80W Side
E 3 N-S Rear
F 4 N80W Side
G 4 N80W Side
21 E-W A 6 N-S Front (ruined) N50W (B-C)
B 7 E-W Side N50E (C-D)
C 6 N-S Rear N45E (B-D)
D 7 E-W Side
22 N60E A 5 N40W Front (ruined) N20E (A-B)
B 5 N60E Side N50W (B-D)
C 5 N40W Rear
D 5 N60E Side
E 6 N40W Front (entry) N50W (B-D)
F 3 N60E Side
G 6 N40W Rear
H 3 N65E Side
23 N25E A 5 N70W Front N30W
B 5 N25E Side N80W
C 5 N65W Rear
D 5 N30E Side
24 N30E A 4 N60W Front (ruined) N80W (B-D)
B 5 N30E Side N40W (B-D)
C 4 N65W Rear N20E (N40W)
D 5 N30E Side
25 N20E A 4 N70W Front N55E (A-C)
B 4 N25E Side N20W (C-D)
C 4 N70W Rear
D 4 N25E Side
26 N20W A 4 N65E Front (ruined) N40W (A-B)
B 5 N20W Side N60W (C-D)
C 4 N70E Rear
D 5 N30W Side
27 N20E A 3 N55W Front (ruined) N60W (B-D)
B 4 N20E Side
C 3 N65W Rear
D 4 N20E Side
65

APPENDIX B1
Eskigümü ler joint density measurements for rooms
NO ROOM AREA (m2) JOINT LENGTH (m) DENSITY
1 31.6 18 0.57
2 124.3 18.3 0.15
3 19.6 4.2 0.21
4 30.6 6.5 0.21
5 44.2 12.5 0.29
6 84 23.3 0.28
7 20 8.4 0.42
8 28.2 9 0.32
9 49.5 13.5 0.28
10 39 11.2 0.29
11 27.2 15.2 0.56
12 32.5 16.5 0.51
13 35.9 22.2 0.62
14 24.5 16 0.65
15 50.3 13.5 0.27
16 6 2 0.33
17 52 8 0.15
18 32 13 0.41
19 27.8 9 0.32
20 35 10 0.28
21 45.2 13.5 0.3
22 21.2 4.3 0.2
23 30 10 0.33
24 19 5 0.26
25 12 2.5 0.21
26 11 4.5 0.41
27 8 4 0.5
28 15 8 0.53
29 35 5 0.12
30 18 4.5 0.25
31 28 13.5 0.48
32 20 10 0.5
33 23 11 0.48
34 24 5 0.21
35 9.6 2 0.02
36 24 3 0.125
37 12 0 0
38 20 11 0.55
39 56 0 0
40 30 2.8 0.1
41 12 0.5 0.04
66

NO ROOM AREA (m2) JOINT LENGTH (m) DENSITY
42 20 0.5 0.025
43 77 6 0.078
44 22.5 9 0.4
45 15.75 2.5 0.16
46 10.5 3.5 0.33
47 13.5 0 0
48 56 3.5 0.06
49 60 11 0.18
50 37 10.5 0.29
51 20 7.5 0.4
52 3.5 2 0.057
53 35.5 13.5 0.38
54 20 5 0.25
55 22 4.5 0.20
56 26.4 11 0.41
57 20 5 0.25
58 20 4 0.5
59 20 6.7 0.34
60 39 7.5 0.2
61 34.5 9.5 0.28
TOTAL 1840.35 493.1
67

APPENDIX B2
Çanl kilise joint densities
NO ROOM AREA (m2) JOINT LENGTH (m) DENSITY
1 57 14 0,26
2 40 12,5 0,31
3 12 6,2 0,52
4 20 1 0,05
5 22 4 0,19
6 35 7 0,2
7 146 17 0,12
8 35 2,5 0,07
9 20 5,3 0,27
10 22 11,6 0,53
11 48 16 0,33
12 61.95 11.8 0,2
13 22 5 0,23
14 15 7 0,47
15 24,8 4,5 0,19
16 53,2 13,5 0,25
17 50 13 0,26
18 30 9,5 0,31
19 120,5 25 0,21
20 111 35 0,32
21 27,2 11,5 0,42
22 41,2 14 0,34
23 25 8,5 0,34
24 20 11,5 0,58
25 16 8,2 0,51
26 10 4,5 0,45
27 12 2,5 0,21
TOTAL 1096,85 282,1
68

APPENDIX C1
Eskigümü ler Joint Measurements at the Field
No Lenght (m) Direction No Lenght (m) Direction
1 1.5 N30E 34 4 N05E
2 0.4 N70W 35 1 N55W
3 0.7 N80E 36 2.5 N65E
4 2.5 N80E 37 0.6 N50E
5 1 N-S 38 2 N20E
6 0.7 N15E 39 0.5 N80W
7 0.5 N60W 40 2 N15E
8 3 N25W 41 1 E-W
9 1 N60E 42 1.5 N40E
10 1 N20W 43 0.7 N30E
11 2 N40W 44 0.6 N65W
12 1.5 N70E 45 2.5 N20E
13 1.5 N70E 46 3 N35W
14 1.5 N50E 47 1 N45E
15 2.5 N15W 48 2 N-S
16 2 N50W 49 4 N30W
17 1 N20E 50 4 N85W
18 3 N75E 51 1 N05W
19 1.5 N55E 52 2 N05E
20 0.4 N40W 53 2 N65E
21 3 E-W 54 1.5 N10W
22 0.4 N30W 55 4 N40W
23 1 N10E 56 0.8 N50E
24 2 N-S 57 0.7 N70E
25 1 N20W 58 0.6 N65W
26 1 N05W 59 2 N60E
27 1 N10E 60 2.5 E-W
28 2.5 N75E 61 2 N50E
29 4 N70W 62 1.5 N50W
30 1 N25W 63 2 N60W
31 1.5 N50E 64 2 N20W
32 1 N35W 65 5 N45W
33 1 N50W 66 0.8 N80W
69

No Lenght (m) Direction No Lenght (m) Direction
67 3 N60W 107 2.5 N75E
68 2 N05E 108 1.5 N75E
69 2 N40E 109 2.5 N05W
70 4 N10W 110 1 N85E
71 0.6 N60W 111 1 N35W
72 1.5 N65E 112 0.8 N20E
73 3 N65E 113 1 N20E
74 3 N20E 114 1 N65E
75 1 N55E 115 1 N25W
76 2 N25E 116 0.4 N85W
77 0.6 N45W 117 2 N60W
78 0.8 N55E 118 1 N70W
79 0.5 N55W 119 1 N60W
80 1.5 N40E 120 0.8 N60W
81 0.6 N40E 121 0.5 N20E
82 1 N50W 122 0.5 N15W
83 2.5 N50W 123 1 N-S
84 1 N15E 124 0.5 N-S
85 2 N55W 125 0.4 N70W
86 1.5 N50W 126 0.4 N75E
87 1 N40E 127 1 N40W
88 1.5 N-S 128 0.6 N10E
89 2 N25E 129 1.5 N60E
90 2 N50E 130 3 N35W
91 0.5 N20E 131 2 N60E
92 1.5 N30E 132 3 N20W
93 0.4 N70W 133 2.5 N45E
94 1 N50E 134 0.5 N80E
95 1.5 N50W 135 2 N-S
96 2 N45E 136 0.8 N20E
97 0.5 N60W 137 1.5 N40W
98 0.4 N10W 138 1 N60W
99 0.4 N10W 139 1 N60W
100 0.6 N60E 140 1 N20W
101 0.5 N40W 141 2 N50W
102 0.4 N55E 142 1 N20E
103 1.5 N40E 143 1 N70E
104 0.3 N45W 144 1 N35W
105 1.5 N55W 145 6 N10W
106 2 N-S 146 11 N55E
70

No Lenght (m) Direction No Lenght (m) Direction
147 4 N60W 169 3 N30W
148 8 N70W 170 1.5 N35W
149 2 N60E 171 2 N55W
150 2.5 N20W 172 1 N35E
151 1.5 N-S 173 3 N50E
152 1.5 E-W 174 0.6 N20E
153 1.5 N65E 175 2.5 N35W
154 1.3 N50E 176 2.7 N60E
155 0.8 E-W 177 1 N30W
156 0.9 N20E 178 1.8 E-W
157 0.8 N60W 179 1.5 N60E
158 1 N50E 180 3 N35W
159 1 N40E 181 2 N60E
160 1.5 N50W 182 3 N20W
161 0.6 N40E 183 2.5 N45E
162 2.5 N55E 184 0.5 N80E
163 0.8 N50E 185 2 N-S
164 1 N50E 186 0.8 N20E
165 1 N50W 187 1.5 N40W
166 0.6 N60W 188 1 N60W
167 1.5 N40W 189 1 N60W
168 2 N60W 190 1 N20W
71

APPENDIX C2
Çanl kilise Joint Measurements at the Field
No Direction Lenght (m) No Direction Lenght (m)
1 N85W 1,7 34 N10WE 3
2 N60W 1,5 35 N20W 3
3 N70W 2,5 36 N80W 1,5
4 N10E 0,6 37 N10WE 1,5
5 N10E 3 38 N35E 3
6 N80W 3,3 39 N20WE 2,5
7 N05E 3,5 40 N80W 7
8 N85E 2,3 41 N05E 3,5
9 N50E 2 42 N05E 3,5
10 N65W 3 43 N40E 2
11 N20E 3,5 44 N85E 5
12 N70W 4 45 N05E 2
13 N15E 2,5 46 N30E 2,5
14 N30E 1,5 47 N80W 5
15 N40E 1,3 48 N75W 3,5
16 N25E 2,5 49 N25W 2,5
17 N15W 1,4 50 N10E 3
18 N85W 2,5 51 N20E 3
19 N25E 1,5 52 N75W 1
20 N85W 2,5 53 N-S 2
21 N05W 2 54 N-S 0,8
22 N50E 2 55 N75W 0,8
23 N75E 2 56 N65E 1,5
24 N45E 2 57 N80W 1
25 N65W 1,7 58 N50W 2
26 N20W 3 59 N75W 1,5
27 E-W 1 60 N40E 2
28 N85W 1,3 61 N80E 2,5
29 N65W 1 62 N10W 3
30 N60E 1,4 63 N75W 3,5
31 N20E 0,5 64 N80E 4
32 N80W 1 65 N20W 5
33 N40WE 2,5 66 N15W 2
72

No Direction Lenght (m) No Direction Lenght (m)
67 N10E 2,5 100 N50E 2
68 N85E 3 101 N70W 2
69 N75W 5 102 N50W 3
70 N70W 3 103 N70W 3
71 N05E 3 104 N10E 1,5
72 N10W 5 105 N10E 2,5
73 N45W 3 106 N10E 3
74 N10E 5,5 107 N15E 2
75 N70W 5,5 108 N20W 2
76 N10W 4 109 N40E 4
77 N55E 1,5 110 N75W 2,5
78 N40W 3 111 N20W 8
79 N35E 2,5 112 N80E 2,5
80 N60W 4 113 N80W 1
81 N50E 1 114 N70W 2
82 N30W 2 115 N25E 1,8
83 E-W 2,5 116 N60W 3
84 N15W 2 117 N65W 2,5
85 N80W 2 118 N-S 5
86 N25E 3 119 N60E 1,8
87 N10W 3 120 N40W 2
88 N80W 3 121 N75E 0,5
89 N40E 2,5 122 N20E 2
90 N75W 9 123 N80E 2,5
91 N85W 6 124 N85E 1,5
92 N75E 4 125 N60E 2
93 N-S 3 126 N80E 2
94 N65W 5 127 E-W 7
95 N30W 0,5 128 N20W 4
96 N25E 4 129 N80W 4
97 N65W 1,5 130 N-S 1,5
98 N70W 4 131 N20W 1
99 N80E 3 132 N-S 1,5
73

GLOSSARY
This section defines some terms used in this thesis to help the reader who is not familiar
to the terminology.
Ignimbrite: Ignimbrite is a volcanic rock used as a synonymous for tuff in this study and
is defined as consolidated volcanic ash.
Joint: Joint is the fracture developed within the rocks along which there is no movement.
Other terms that can refer to such structures are fracture , rupture or crack .
Rose diagram: It shows the directions (wall, room axis, joint etc.) and their intensities
(radial histogram).
Room: In this study, it refers to all spaces (living room, kitchen, church, shelter etc.).
Length weighted/non-weighted diagram: It means that the intensities are taken into the
consideration with a scale, in other words, a joint, 4-meter in length, and another joint, 1-
meter in length, are not the same in weighted diagram, intensity of the former is four
times greater than that of latter, if the scale is 1m (in length).
Room axis: It refers to the direction of the room entrance.
Aperture: It means the opening of the joint surfaces.
74