Photographic Reportage on the Rebuilding after the Irpinia-Basilicata 1980 Earthquake (Southern Italy)

Abstract

This paper aims to present, through a photographic reportage, the current state of rebuilding of the most devastated villages by the earthquake that hit the Southern Italy on 23 November 1980, in Irpinia-Basilicata. The earthquake was characterized by magnitude Ml = 6.9 and epicentral intensity I₀ = X MCS. It was felt throughout Italy with the epicenter in the Southern Apennines, between the regions of Campania and Basilicata that were the most damaged areas. About 800 localities were serious damaged; 7,500 houses were completely destroyed and 27,500 seriously damaged. The photographic survey has been done in 23 towns during the last five years: Castelnuovo di Conza, Conza della Campania, Laviano, Lioni, Santomenna, Sant’Angelo dei Lombardi, Balvano, Caposele, Calabritto and the hamlet of Quaglietta, San Mango sul Calore, San Michele di Serino, Pescopagano, Guardia dei Lombardi, Torella dei Lombardi, Colliano, Romagnano al Monte, Salvitelle, Senerchia, Teora, Bisaccia, Calitri and Avellino. Forty years after the 1980 earthquake, the photographs show villages almost completely rebuilt with modern techniques where reinforced concrete prevails. Only in few instances, the reconstruction was carried out trying to recover the pre-existing building heritage, without changing the original urban planning, or modifying it. We argue that this photography collection allows to assess the real understanding of the geological information for urban planning after a major destructive seismic event. Even more than this, documenting the rebuilding process in a large epicentral area reveals the human legacy to the natural landscape, and our ability, or failure, to properly interpret the environmental fate of a site.

1. Introduction

The earthquake of 23 November 1980, more commonly known as the Irpinia-Basilicata earthquake, was the strongest seismic event to hit the Southern Apennines in the last 100 years. It was characterized by magnitude Mw = 6.9 and intensity Io = X Mercalli Cancani Sieberg (MCS) scale and/or X Environmental Seismic Intensity 2007 (ESI-07) scale [1,2,3,4]. It was felt throughout Italy, from Sicily in the South, to Emilia Romagna and Liguria in the North (Figure 1). It caused devastating effects in over 800 localities distributed in the regions of Campania and Basilicata with a total of 75,000 houses destroyed and 275,000 seriously damaged. The number of victims was about 3000, with 10,000 injured people. Several municipalities distributed in the provinces of Avellino, Salerno and Potenza were almost totally destroyed, since the local felt intensity was I > VIII MCS. In the Campania region, the level of damage of 542 towns was classified as follows: 28 towns destroyed, 250 seriously damaged, 264 damaged; in the Basilicata region, 131 municipalities were classified of which nine were destroyed, 63 seriously damaged and 59 damaged [5,6,7].

The earthquake also caused several striking effects on the natural environment including extensive coseismic surface faulting, observed between Lioni (Avellino) and San Gregorio Magno (Salerno) [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. Moreover, over 200 landslides occurred, the most devasting hit the territories of Calitri in the urban center [11,19,20,21,22], Caposele (Buoninventre landslide) and Senerchia (Serra d’Acquara landslide) (Figure 2) [11,23]; also, widespread soil fracturing was observed, and minor liquefaction effects [24,25,26,27]. Furthermore, the coseismic faulting of the regional karst aquifer induced important hydrological variations in the springs of Caposele and Cassano Irpino [25] (

Table 1. The table contains the visited localities, their geographic coordinates and MCS and ESI intensity with the most significant environmental effects observed after the 1980 earthquake (SF surface fault; F fractures, L landslide, SC Soil Compaction, HC Hydrological Changes, LQ Liquefaction) [1,2,3,11,12,14,19,20,21,22,23,25,26,27].

Locality	Lat.	Long.	(MCS) Intensity	ESI07 Intensity	Environmental Effects
Castelnuovo di Conza	40.819091°	15.319704°	X	8	SF, L, F
Conza della Campania	40.870562°	15.330818°	X	9	L, F, SC
Laviano	40.786800°	15.309247°	X	9	SF, F, L
Lioni	40.877996°	15.189476°	X	8	L, SF, LQ, SC
S. Angelo dei Lombardi	40.927716°	15.177733°	X	8	L, temporary lake, F
Santomenna	40.808495°	15.321044°	X	-	L, F
Balvano	40.650928°	15.511861°	IX	7	L
Calabritto	40.650928°	15.511861°	IX	9	SF, L, F, HC
Quaglietta	40.745299°	15.235847°	IX	9	L, F
Caposele	40.815372°	15.220236°	IX	10	L, SF, SC, HC
Guardia dei Lombardi	40.953346°	15.209175°	IX	8	L, F
Pescopagano	40.835588°	15.399507°	IX	8	L, F
San Mango sul Calore	40.963896°	14.975828°	IX	8	L, F
San Michele di Serino	40.876228°	14.855731°	IX	6	F, LQ
Senerchia	40.740248°	15.203956°	IX	9	SF, L, F, LQ
Teora	40.852752°	15.253197°	IX	6	F
Torella dei Lombardi	40.940058°	15.114519°	IX	8	F
Colliano	40.725860°	15.291517°	VIII-IX	9–10	SF, F, L
Romagnano al Monte	40.628289°	15.456647°	VIII-IX	-	L, F
Salvitelle	40.591196°	15.459109°	VIII-IX	-	F, L
Avellino	40.916753	14.797924°	VIII	-	F, L
Calitri	40.899432°	15.439435°	VIII	8	L, F, LQ
Bisaccia	41.013215°	15.375352°	VIII	8	L, F, SC

).

Forty years after the 1980 earthquake, we decided to record, through a photographic reportage, the state of the rebuilding, the urban changes that the earthquake had induced mainly in the epicenter and near field areas. This study represents a realistic documentation of what has been achieved over all these years, even with the considerable state economic funding, and the resilience of each community [28]. The study of the various localities portrayed is accompanied by a detailed bibliography starting from 1981 until today.

2. Discussion

The photographic journey, carried out in the last five years, includes the documentation of the villages almost completely destroyed or seriously damaged (Figure 3), with damage levels evaluated at I ≥ VIII MCS, Table 1): Castelnuovo di Conza (Figure 4, Figure 5, Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8 and Figure 9), Conza della Campania (Figure 10, Figure 11, Figure 12, Figure 13, Figure 14, Figure 15, Figure 16, Figure 17 and Figure 18), Laviano (Figure 19, Figure 20, Figure 21 and Figure 22), Lioni (Figure 23, Figure 24, Figure 25, Figure 26, Figure 27 and Figure 28), Santomenna (Figure 29, Figure 30, Figure 31, Figure 32 and Figure 33), Sant’Angelo dei Lombardi (Figure 34, Figure 35, Figure 36, Figure 37, Figure 38 and Figure 39), Balvano (Figure 40, Figure 41, Figure 42 and Figure 43), Caposele (Figure 44, Figure 45, Figure 46 and Figure 47), Calabritto-Quaglietta (Figure 48, Figure 49, Figure 50, Figure 51, Figure 52 and Figure 53), San Mango sul Calore (Figure 54, Figure 55, Figure 56, Figure 57 and Figure 58), San Michele di Serino (Figure 59, Figure 60, Figure 61, Figure 62, Figure 63, Figure 64 and Figure 65), Pescopagano (Figure 66, Figure 67, Figure 68, Figure 69 and Figure 70), Guardia dei Lombardi (Figure 71, Figure 72, Figure 73 and Figure 74), Torella dei Lombardi (Figure 75, Figure 76, Figure 77, Figure 78 and Figure 79), Colliano (Figure 80, Figure 81, Figure 82, Figure 83, Figure 84 and Figure 85), Romagnano al Monte (Figure 86, Figure 87, Figure 88 and Figure 89), Salvitelle (Figure 90, Figure 91, Figure 92, Figure 93 and Figure 94), Senerchia (Figure 95, Figure 96, Figure 97, Figure 98 and Figure 99) and Teora (Figure 100, Figure 101, Figure 102, Figure 103 and Figure 104) [1,2,4,7,29]. In some cases, we also took into account the preliminary seismic microzonation maps drawn up by the PFG of CNR (Finalized Geodynamic Project (PFG) of the National Research Council (CNR), the first major national project for seismic risk assessment and reduction), which provided useful indications for reconstruction [29]. Moreover, two others towns, Bisaccia (Figure 105, Figure 106, Figure 107 and Figure 108) and Calitri (Figure 109, Figure 110, Figure 111, Figure 112, Figure 113 and Figure 114), although characterized by a lower intensity (I = VIII MCS), have been added to our study due to the different pathways for reconstruction, despite having both serious hydrogeological problems. Bisaccia has been often affected by landslides, due to its geological formations, mostly made by conglomerates resting on varicolored clays; indeed it was among the villages admitted to consolidation as early as 1917. Nowadays there are two Bisaccia villages: the old, ancient village recovered around the ducal castle and the new Bisaccia of the ‘Piano di Zona’, the latter almost completely rebuilt according to the urban plan drawn up by the architect Aldo Loris Rossi. Regards Calitri, it was built on the top of a hill made of sandstone and conglomerate rocks, with the middle-lower slopes made of intensely tectonized clay-rich units; therefore, it was often affected by landslides. A great landslide occurred due to the 1980 earthquake, approximately 850 m long and up to 100 m deep; it had terrible consequences on the urban and road structure of the village [19]. Moreover, other significant coseismic environmental effects occurred such as fracturing and liquefaction phenomena. Further landslides occurred in Calitri due to the 1694, 1805, 1910 and 1930 earthquakes [1,7,11,21,22,29,30,31]. We also added the Avellino city (Figure 115, Figure 116, Figure 117, Figure 118 and Figure 119), because it is one of the largest cities in Campania, with level of damage I = VIII [32].

In this photographic reportage, we have deliberately chosen not to reproduce the tragic images of the catastrophe, destruction, death of the places visited, that characterized all the front pages of the newspapers of the time (e.g., Figure 3) [33]. We have chosen to show the current, rebuilt urban centers.

We analyzed the reconstruction through the representative buildings as the churches, the town halls, the sports centers. In some cases, there are pictures of temporary villages, generally made of wooden houses, where people lived for many years waiting for the final accommodation, now used for local tourism. Almost all the villages were rebuilt in the same place despite some of them were completely razed to the ground not only by the earthquake but also by bulldozers that destroyed everything, even more than necessary.

The buildings of the old urban centers were mostly made in natural stone or baked bricks with poor mortar and wooden floors while the rebuilding involved reinforced concrete buildings, earthquake-proof. The new urban centers were rebuilt with wide roads and outsized areas for new housing compared to the current number of inhabitants, that over the last forty years has decreased dramatically, especially for the most internal areas.

As mentioned above, all of the villages affected by the earthquake were rebuilt in situ, with the exception of Conza della Campania, Romagnano al Monte and Bisaccia. For Conza della Campania, a town almost completely destroyed by the earthquake with a high number of deaths (184 victims), the political choice of the urban center relocation prevailed, supported also by the results of the numerous geological surveys some of which also emphasized local amplification phenomena due to morphology. Indeed, Conza was built on two small hills made by clay and sandy clay in the lower part, conglomerates with sands and sandstones in the middle part, and conglomerates of middle-low resistance in the upper part. The 1980 earthquake induced in this village several different environmental effects such as landslides, ground cracks and ground settlement. Moreover, this choice was also due to the historical memory of the destruction suffered by the community in past earthquakes (1466, 1517,1694, 1732 and 1930 seismic events) [7,18,29,30,31,34]. At present two Conza villages f coexist: the ancient village recovered and enhanced with the creation of an archaeological park that preserves the remains of the ancient Roman ‘Compsa’; and the new Conza, built in Piano delle Briglie, 4 km far from the original nucleus where the topography of this flat area ensured safer conditions. This is a modern village characterized by earthquake-proof houses and wide roads, designed by the architect Beguinot of the University of Naples, [35,36,37,38].

Even for Romagnano al Monte, a small village in the Salerno province with only 370 inhabitants, located 650 m a.s.l., overlooking the gorges of the Platano River, a few kilometres from the epicentre of the 1980 earthquake, the political decision to relocate prevailed. The main reason was due to the declared inhabitability of 446 residential units, after the earthquake, that also caused the collapse of some churches and heavy damage to the town hall. The geomorphological and geological assessment, that accentuated the seismic shaking, also contributed to the choice in the reconstruction process. The old town, in fact, is located at the highest point on the ridge and along the slopes are frequent phenomena of rock fall caused by the high degree of fracturing bedrock.

The village was evacuated and abandoned becoming a “ghost town” [39]. The new town was located in Ariola, 2 km from the old center, in a less panoramic position, but providing more convenient access for the inhabitants.

More complex and longer is the history of Bisaccia’s relocation. The village located at 860 m a.s.l., was affected by landslides due to the geological conditions on which it stands and was already destroyed by historical earthquakes (1694 1732, 1930 and 1980 seismic events). These aspects have heavily conditioned its rebuilding. The 1980 earthquake, once again highlighted the territory’s extremely unstable conditions, so the Municipal Administrations opted for the reconstruction of the village in another site, more stable from a geological point of view, called “Piano di Zona”, which was already identified in a previous urban planning, following the 1930 earthquake [7,40,41].

As a matter of fact, there are currently two Bisaccia towns: the old one, an ancient village recovered around the ducal castle; and the new Bisaccia of the Piano di Zona, the latter almost completely rebuilt according to the urban planning drawn up by architect Aldo Loris Rossi [42].

About the other villages we can say that among those among those which have decided to rebuild in situ, some of them have chosen the recovery or rebuilding of the old urban center, respecting the original architectural design, combined with new buildings in the expansion areas.

Among these we mention certainly Sant’Angelo dei Lombardi, with a careful reconstruction of the historical centre and the Abbey of Goleto (Figure 36) [7,29,31,43]; Calitri despite the historical large landslide triggered by the earthquakes (Figure 110) [7,29]; Guardia dei Lombardi (Figure 73) [7,29]; Torella dei Lombardi [7,29];(Figure 75); Caposele [29,34]; Lioni (Figure 28); Balvano (Figure 41); Pescopagano (Figure 66); and Quaglietta (Figure 53), whose medieval village has been recovered to transform it into an “albergo diffuso” (“scattered hotel”) for tourism purposes [34,44].

Even Senerchia, which has been currently rebuilt, tries to recover the remaining houses of the ancient village built on the solid calcareous substratum (Figure 98) [7,29,34]. In all the other villages the new buildings are predominant with some valuable innovative edifices such as the town hall of Lioni (Figure 25), a modern and functional building realized by the architect Verderosa, or in Balvano where the artists Boffo and Eibl designed the houses, or architectural structures often in contrast with the original planning of the village (Figure 42 and Figure 43).

Unfortunately, in many cases during the rebuilding process the identity of Apennine villages such as Laviano (Figure 19 and Figure 22), San Michele di Serino (Figure 62), Castelnuovo di Conza (Figure 5), Santomenna (Figure 30), where the new buildings prevail over the old ones, was lost, becoming only “rebuilt villages”.

3. Conclusions

The rebuilding process, in many localities, has been driven by microzonation maps drawn up as part of the Finalized Geodynamic Project (PFG) of the National Research Council (CNR), created immediately after the 1980 earthquake [29].

The seismic microzonation maps show the areas with different seismic characteristics, illustrating the morphological structure of the territory, the distribution of the building heritage existing in 1980, and in some cases, the level of damage suffered due the 1980 event and provide suggestions for reconstruction. We reported some examples of these maps: Castelnuovo di Conza (Figure 4), Conza della Campania (Figure 11), S. Angelo dei Lombardi (Figure 34), San Mango sul Calore (Figure 55), San Michele di Serino (Figure 60), Calitri (Figure 110).

However, the choices made for the reconstruction did not depend only on the geological assessment of the territory and therefore on the indications given by the microzoning maps, but also on the urban and socio-economic context. Nevertheless, there has not been a socio-economic redevelopment policy for the entire territory which, despite the settlement of some important factories, is currently suffering from unemployment and depopulation [45,46,47,48,49].

Our reportage is certainly not exhaustive, in fact there are still many other places that have undergone considerable transformations during the reconstruction process. The images can guide the future urban development of ancient villages after a major destructive seismic event, with a view to safeguarding the territory and cultural heritage. Even more than this, documenting the rebuilding process in a large epicentral area reveals the human legacy to the natural landscape, and our ability, or failure, to properly interpret the environmental fate of a site. Often in the post-earthquake reconstruction process of 1980, instead of taking into accounts the socio-economic, historical and geological local conditions, different case by case for each affected village, the policy of rebuilding at any cost has prevailed, even with buildings unsuitable for the context of the Apennine inland areas.