The Morphology of Continuity: An Analytical Documentation of Vernacular Architecture in Phoenix Rural Settlements

Abstract

Rural architectural systems in the Mediterranean reflect a long-term entanglement between human agency, material conditions, and environmental constraints. This study uses this framework to explore architectural continuity in settlements near ancient Phoenix in Türkiye. While scholarly focus often remains on monumental ruins, it aims to examine how rural building practices, such as stone masonry, traditional carpentry, and the reuse of spolia, have persisted since antiquity. The methodology combines UAV photogrammetry, GIS analysis, and oral histories to reveal spatial patterns and craft traditions across generations. The findings show that structures are transmitted through technical knowledge, with stone and timber co-evolving with local livelihoods. By documenting the structural logic and embedded intangible knowledge of seasonal settlements like Fenaket and Büğüş, the study identifies a ‘continuity through change’ paradigm rooted in circular resilience and adaptive reuse, This study emphasizes the need for conservation strategies that integrate digital documentation with community experience to preserve the cross-border cultural landscape of the Aegean region amid environmental threats and the decline in craftsmanship, thereby sustaining it as a dynamic living culture.

1. Introduction

Rural architectural systems in the Mediterranean are linked to agricultural practices and ecological conditions. Historically, patterns of production shaped not only economies but also settlement structures, spatial organisation, and construction techniques. As shown in previous studies [1], from the Iron Age through the Medieval period, land-use systems determined building form, materials, and regional connectivity, thereby marking architecture as both a product and expression of environmental interaction.

Across the study’s landscape, vernacular traditions consistently feature materials like stone, timber, clay, and reused architectural fragments (spolia). These elements reflect resource adaptation, besides the continuity of cultural knowledge passed through generations. The spatial evolution of Taşlıca and Fenaket exemplifies these dynamics on the Bozburun Peninsula (Figure 1). Their construction methods and material choices align with broader Aegean patterns of architectural continuity and ecological adaptation, shaped by geography, topography, and microclimate [2,3].

Such rural environments are increasingly recognised as cultural landscapes, which are defined as living systems where natural and human histories overlap. As emphasised by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) [4], and ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites) [5,6], cultural landscapes are not fixed monuments but evolving sites of memory, craftsmanship, and local agency. Policy frameworks such as the European Landscape Convention [7] and the ICOMOS-IFLA Principles [8] advocate for integrating community voices and valuing traditional skills in conservation planning [9,10].

This study investigates the historical continuity of vernacular construction systems (masonry, roof carpentry, and the reuse of spolia) in the rural settlements of Taşlıca, Büğüş, and Fenaket, layered around the ancient city of Phoenix. These villages, shaped by environmental constraints and historical memory, offer a perspective on how building traditions persist, adapt, and connect with neighbouring Aegean settlements such as Simi and Tilos.

The theoretical framework draws on the principle of entanglement, as developed by Hodder [11], and Turner [12], to interpret how architecture and landscape co-evolve. In this view, the rural character of Taşlıca, Fenaket and Büğüş is not only a historical artifact but a living archive of knowledge, embedded in stone, timber, and spatial practice.

However, these transferred techniques face rapidly increasing threats such as population decline and drought, mass tourism, and unregulated construction. These pressures not only threaten the built heritage but also cause the disappearance of the cultural background that sustains it. Understanding this fragility is crucial for developing sustainable and community-focused conservation strategies [13].

Despite the urgency of these threats, scholarly engagement with the Phoenix landscape has historically followed a trajectory from general documentation to specialized survey. While academic studies primarily focus on the region’s archaeological fabric and general settlement patterns, they lack detailed architectural documentation of structural features. Furthermore, comparative studies of construction techniques across vernacular settlements remain underexplored. By documenting the structural logic of seasonal hamlets like Fenaket and Büğüş through an interdisciplinary lens, this study addresses this gap, bridging the disciplines of archaeology and rural architectural heritage. The integration of Phoenix Archaeological Project (PAP) data helps recontextualize the landscape as a living archive of building knowledge, material reuse, and intergenerational adaptation.

The main objective of this study is encapsulated in the research question: How do construction techniques mediate landscape continuity in Phoenix’s cultural landscapes (Figure 2)? By analysing construction techniques, material continuity, and the reuse of stone, it attempts to define the relationship between physical tectonic traditions and ecological environments. To address this overarching inquiry, the research is structured around three specific research questions (RQs):

RQ1: How does the relationship between historical material usage and spolia demonstrate the physical continuity and circular resilience of the Phoenix building culture from antiquity to the present?

RQ2: How do intangible repair rituals and place-based insights reveal the entanglement between humans, materials, and places in the 21st century?

RQ3: Which structural techniques are essential for preserving fading vernacular knowledge, and can a conservation strategy be formulated based on current risks?

Vernacular architecture is increasingly recognised as a cultural heritage shaped by the interplay of human behaviour, ecological adaptation, and material tradition. According to these perspectives, domestic architecture arises not only from technical constraints but also from social values, ritual norms, and environmental relationships. In this view, buildings are cultural phenomena shaped by climate and social organization [14,15]. Studies of historical centers in the Mediterranean have demonstrated that the quality of residential heritage is inextricably linked to the preservation of these traditional spatial logics [16].

This transformation has been expanded upon by academics who reconceptualise local architecture as a living system of knowledge transfer [17,18]. Their work emphasises that these traditions encode concrete logic, collective identity, and social practices, sustaining their functions and meanings across generations. Vernacular architecture is a field of practice in which local knowledge is actively sustained and reshaped through craft practices and ecological interventions.

In the Mediterranean context, this cultural–environmental dialogue is particularly evident. Studies of Crete, the Cyclades, and southwestern Anatolia show that rural communities share an “economy of means” approach to building dwellings with locally available materials using techniques of reuse, repair, and environmental adaptation [19]. These strategies demonstrate that vernacular systems are resource-efficient and resilient, based on a deep understanding of climate, topography, and seasonal cycles.

Despite this resilience, traditional building systems now face significant threats. Vellinga [20] and Mileto et al. [21] contend that depopulation, abandonment, and incompatible modernisation are undermining the intergenerational transmission of craft knowledge essential for vernacular continuity. Consequently, the documentation, reinterpretation, and community integration of these practices have become increasingly urgent in the Bozburun Peninsula, where regional heritage forms persist yet remain vulnerable to loss.

1.1. Material and Construction Traditions: Stonework, Roof Systems, and Earthen Techniques

The practices in the construction materials lie at the core of Mediterranean vernacular continuity, where building systems reflect not only environmental adaptation but also embedded cultural values. An essential element of this tradition is the reuse of architectural elements or spolia that serve both practical and symbolic purposes. Brilliant and Kinney’s work Reuse Value [22] reframes spolia not only as remains of the past but as active actors in the creation of meaning. Following Esch’s fundamental concept of “a form of new life” [23], reuse is reimagined as renewal rather than decay. In Taşlıca, Büğüş and Fenaket, the integration of carved stones and column drums into the new structure exemplifies this principle. Here, spolia is not simply material recycling but also a cultural orientation towards time, memory, and identity (Figure 3).

Additionally, the use of wooden element systems complements the stone tradition and incorporates a similarly adaptable architectural principle. Research conducted in Rhodes, Simi, and Bozburun reveal the consistent use of pine and cypress wood in the beams, columns, and joists of the structures [24,25]. These wooden structures combine structural efficiency with material availability in response to environmental conditions such as seismic activity and seasonal loads. The repetition of these structures throughout the region reflects the transmission of building knowledge through shared craftsmanship and families [26].

Recent studies have highlighted earth techniques as a vital yet often disregarded component of the Mediterranean local heritage. Mousourakis et al. [27] documented adobe, wattle-and-daub, and earth-filled systems in rural settlements in Greece, observing their continuity from antiquity to the modern era. These methods demonstrate a complementary material system in which stone, wood, and earth function within a unified architectural logic of repair, flexibility, and cyclical renewal [26,27,28]. The continuity here is based on monumentality and permanence, as well as on maintenance, care, and community participation. These overlapping construction traditions support a holistic view of local resilience.

1.2. Cultural Landscape, Entanglement, and Heritage as Process

The concept of the cultural landscape provides a critical interpretive framework for connecting architecture, environment, and social practice. According to UNESCO [4] and the European Landscape Convention [9], landscapes are defined as dynamic systems continuously shaped by the interaction of nature, culture, and human activity. From this perspective, landscapes are characterised as palimpsests, or multi-layered terrains where historical traces coexist with ongoing practices. This perspective situates architectural heritage within a dynamic continuum, rather than conceptualising it as a static remnant of the past [29,30].

Building on this foundation, the entanglement theory [11,12] further refines the analysis by highlighting the shared relationships among people, nature, and materials. In this framework, built environments are not merely passive outcomes of human intent, rather, they act as active participants in shaping cultural memory and behaviour. DeSilvey’s [31] concept of “curated decay” offers a valuable framework for understanding heritage as a process of transformation, representing an ongoing negotiation between material persistence and cultural reinterpretation. From this perspective, change is not in opposition to conservation; rather, it is a natural aspect of conservation practices [3].

This paradigm shift towards traditional heritage has brought vernacular conservation to the forefront of recent discussions. Harney [32] posits that the preservation of vernacular architecture is inherently linked to the maintenance of the social and ecological practices that imbue it with significance. This encompasses craft knowledge, resource cycles, and community agency, situating conservation within living systems of care rather than static preservation. These frameworks complement the entanglement theory by suggesting that heritage endures not through immobilisation but through ongoing enactment, a phenomenon clearly observed in the construction material practices and continuity present in Taşlıca and Fenaket.

This approach is supported by empirical evidence. Castrorao Barba et al. [33] show that resilience in Mediterranean cultural landscapes is rooted in adaptive reorganisation rather than permanence, using GIS-based settlement analysis in Sicily’s Sicani Mountains. Their concept of “continuity through change” closely parallels the construction logics observed in Taşlıca and Fenaket, where spolia, hybrid techniques, and repair practices reflect a long-standing tradition of adapting materials to social and ecological changes.

However, these living systems are vulnerable. Gómez Martínez et al. [34] emphasise how the loss of rural residents affects the passing of traditional skills from one generation to the next, thereby jeopardising the cultural practices and the knowledge they represent. As communities decrease in population or age, previously resilient architectural systems become fragile and fall into disrepair. These dynamics strongly resonate with the current conditions in Taşlıca and Fenaket, where demographic decline endangers the cultural transmission embedded in dry-stone techniques and timber carpentry.

Recognising continuity as a dynamic process within construction techniques emphasises the necessity of heritage strategies that prioritise community vitality alongside material preservation. In this context, cultural landscapes must be understood as ecologies of knowledge where architecture, the environment, and social life remain mutually entangled, not as static artifacts.

1.3. The Historical Evolution of Phoenix: Built-Environment and Social Values

The rural settlement of Phoenix, located on the Bozburun Peninsula (Figure 4), offers a distinctive case study of architectural and socio-economic transformation. These transformations have been shaped by successive political regimes and environmental adaptation. From the Late Classical period through the Republican era, the region underwent significant transformations in governance, marked by the transition from Rhodian hegemony to Ottoman administration and the subsequent development of modern nation-building. These historical shifts left enduring imprints on the region’s built environment and settlement patterns [35].

During the Roman and Byzantine periods, the city of Phoenix retained its strategic significance [39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46]. As evidenced by the transformation of temples into churches and the repurposing of necropolises for residential use in rural settings [47] (Figure 5), a clear demonstration of spatial and material continuity emerges. This phenomenon, characterised by the convergence of sacred and domestic architecture, marks the inaugural manifestation of spolia-based adaptation strategies.

The Turkish and Ottoman periods introduced novel demographic and spatial logics. The Menteşe Beyliği established Tarahya (formerly Phoenix) as a semi-nomadic hub [48], where ancient ruins provided materials for emerging village structures.

The Republican era was marked by significant demographic shifts, particularly with the 1923 Population Exchange [49]. The mass population exchange of Greek (Rum) populations resulted in a diminution of the region’s skilled labour base. However, oral histories indicate that Greek craftsmanship, particularly from the nearby island of Symi (known locally as Sömbeki), was maintained and incorporated by Turkish builders. This knowledge transfer played a crucial role in preserving the cultural heritage of vernacular stonework traditions, particularly in the context of demographic shifts [50]. The consolidation of the settlement into Taşlıca in 1968 formalised the spatial transition from dispersed to nucleated settlements.

In essence, Phoenix, also known as Tarahya, Fenaket, and Taşlıca, exemplifies how historical transformations in power, population, and production have given rise to a multifaceted architectural and cultural landscape (Figure 6). Its continuity is not rooted in architectural permanence, rather, it is sustained by the adaptive reuse of space, material, and memory across political regimes. This finding aligns with the broader argument posited in the study, which asserts that cultural landscapes endure through negotiated entanglements between environment, governance, and vernacular knowledge.

Scholarly research on Phoenix transitioned from fragmented 19th-century travelogues to the systematic epigraphic and topographic synthesis established by Fraser and Bean [51,52,53,54]. Subsequent late 20th-century surveys and epigraphical analyses have clarified Phoenix’s urban layout and its socio-political integration into broader Aegean networks under Rhodian rule [42,43,55,56,57,58]. Regional site-specific studies have identified consistent continuities in construction and settlement forms across the peninsula (e.g., Gürbüzer at Amos, Kuban and Saner at Kıran Gölü, and work at Kastabos). A significant methodological shift occurred with the documentation of seasonal settlements such as Fenaket, which bridged archaeology and rural architectural heritage [59]. GIS-based spatial reconstructions have significantly enriched our understanding of the region’s archaeological diversity and settlement distribution [60,61]. Building upon these studies, a systematic archaeological research project has been ongoing since 2021, providing the contemporary framework for the detailed investigations presented in this study [25,44].

Collectively, these milestones have established a robust archaeological and spatial foundation for the region. However, they also highlight a significant transition in research focus: moving from the identification of monumental ruins toward the documentation of the often-overlooked vernacular layers that constitute the living cultural landscape. This paradigm shift is further reinforced by current initiatives aiming to nominate the Phoenix cultural landscape for the UNESCO World Heritage Tentative List, a process that emphasizes the site’s outstanding universal value as a testament to human interaction with a resilient Mediterranean topography.

2. Materials and Methods

The present study investigates the evolving relationship between building form, environment, and cultural practice in the Phoenix landscape. The research design is interdisciplinary and multi-scalar, integrating architectural analysis, archaeology, and digital humanities to trace the continuity of vernacular construction.

The research is grounded in the Entanglement Framework [11,12] and conceptualises Fenaket–Taşlıca as a living cultural landscape, which is defined as a space shaped by reciprocal interactions among human agency, ecological conditions, and material persistence. This theoretical foundation informed the integration of archival material, field documentation, and digital technologies to assess the continuity of craftsmanship over time [59]. The present study combines traditional architectural survey techniques with contemporary tools such as UAV photogrammetry, GIS mapping, and 3D modelling. This hybrid approach enables both quantitative spatial analysis and qualitative interpretation of local construction systems. The primary objective of this integrated methodology is to document the current state of the multi-layered architectural fabric in Taşlıca, Fenaket, and Büğüş, specifically facilitating the production of analytical maps and the systematic mapping of building materials, including the strategic reuse of spolia. Of particular significance is the methodological model it provides, which supports community-based heritage documentation grounded in lived experience and material evidence.

The present study benefits from reports and archives from the Phoenix Archaeological Project (PAP). This approach reflects a complementary utilisation of existing resources, with PAP materials serving as contextual references rather than as primary data. The methodological stance adopted in this study aligns with Harney’s [32] conceptualisation of heritage as a process of care, emphasising continuity through practice rather than preservation alone.

2.1. Data Collection

2.1.1. Oral History and Local Knowledge

Oral history constituted a central component of the research, aimed at documenting the transmission of traditional building knowledge and interpreting architecture as a living cultural process. The participant pool for this study is drawn from the inhabitants of Taşlıca Village, which has experienced a steady demographic decline during the research period, with population records dropping from 449 in 2023 to 440 in 2024 and reaching 438 in 2025 [60]. Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted with residents of Fenaket and Taşlıca, representing a demographic cross-section of five men and five women aged 29 to 75.

The field research followed protocols approved by the ethics committee and was carried out with participants who explicitly consented to the interviews and digital recordings. The primary selection criterion was that participants were born in the old settlements (Fenaket or Büğüş) and belonged to families who have resided in the region for generations. By focusing on individuals whose families witnessed historical and demographic ruptures, the study aimed to investigate the survival of construction knowledge inherited from antiquity and to reveal memories of building culture.

The participants were specifically chosen for their multicultural experience and their expertise in traditional construction techniques. Prior to each session, voluntary informed consent was obtained, ensuring ethical compliance. This approach was chosen to ensure the inclusion of individuals with significant traditional knowledge and involvement in local practices, thereby enhancing the reliability and representativeness of the oral history data. The inquiries focused on the traditional use of earth, stone, and timber, exploring the methods of material procurement and the cultural logic of building practices.

One illustrative question posed to female participants, particularly focusing on repair rituals, was: ‘Can you describe a specific repair ritual that is important in maintaining your home, and how this knowledge was passed down to you?’ This question further highlighted the depth of gendered knowledge and showcased how repair practices were interlinked with cultural identity and memory. The comprehensive list of interview questions is provided in the Supplementary Materials.

The following topics will be covered in this section:

The identification of construction techniques and the acquisition of knowledge regarding materials, including quarrying sites, dry-stone techniques, lime-burning, timber treatment and roof design. Special attention was paid to how historical demographic shifts influenced changes in these techniques over time.

Spatial and Social Transformations: The phenomenon of seasonal migration, the establishment of production zones, and the relocation of settlements due to the influence of tourism and improved access to water.

The focus of this study is on the concept of craftsmanship and its intergenerational transmission, with specific attention paid to the roles of master and apprentice, communal labour, and gendered practices of repair.

The transcribed interviews were then subjected to thematic coding, with motifs such as “the language of stone”, “living houses”, and “from flat roofs to pitched tiles” being identified. These oral narratives provided a cultural context for physical transformations, revealing that spolia reuse, natural wood preservation, and lime-clay mortars persist through non-written, embodied knowledge.

These testimonies underscore the significant emotional and mnemonic value of abandoned structures. Some families continue to occupy ancestral houses seasonally, perceiving them as repositories of memory rather than ruins. This perspective is consistent with the entanglement theory’s emphasis on material–human–memory relationships, thereby supporting the interpretation of architecture as an active archive.

2.1.2. Architectural Survey

The architectural survey was conceived to evaluate the morphological evolution and the continuity of building techniques across temporal and settlement layers. The research focused on residential architecture in Lower and Upper Fenaket, Büğüş, and Taşlıca. A three-phase documentation strategy was employed:

• Preliminary assessment: general condition and accessibility.
• Mapping and Delimitation: GPS marking of structures, settlement boundary definition.
• The collection of architectural data encompasses the documentation of photographs, sketches, typological inventories, and the recording of construction details.

This methodological approach facilitated typological classification, identification of spatial hierarchies, and mapping of wall systems. These findings contributed to the development of digital reconstructions and facilitated cross-temporal comparisons.

2.1.3. Digital Documentation and Analysis

To ensure the highest possible spatial accuracy, aerial photogrammetry was carried out using DJI Mavic 3 and Phantom 4 Pro drones at a flight height of 50–70 m. The ground control points were georeferenced using GPS. The images were processed in Agisoft Metashape to produce dense point clouds and surface meshes, integrating both aerial and terrestrial datasets (Figure 7). The structural details and spatial organization of the documented dwelling are further illustrated in an interactive 3D model (Figure 8). This model allows for a granular examination of material interventions, such as the transition from earthen roofs to modern corrugated sheets, and the integration of spolia into the masonry walls.

The outputs were subsequently utilised to facilitate the generation of the following:

• 2D architectural plans (AutoCAD 2025)
• Wall section analyses (Photoshop)
• Interactive modelling (Sketchfab)

Subsequently, all data were imported into a Geographic Information System (GIS) environment, thereby enabling the linkage of typologies to topography, orientation, and elevation. The primary objective of this integration was to update a holistic inventory of the structures and visualize the complete spatial distribution of the surviving architecture. This workflow provided a technical basis for damage mapping, material analysis, and conservation planning while simultaneously identifying specific construction techniques and structural components. By mapping material usage in this digital framework, the study aims to tangibly document and reproduce ancestral building knowledge that is otherwise at risk of being lost.

2.2. Data Analysis

The scope and logic of architectural continuity were interpreted through the integration of data analysis, spatial documentation and oral history. The application of Geographic Information System (GIS)-based visualisation techniques has yielded insights into the correlations between settlement layout, environmental conditions, and building form. In addition, three-dimensional (3D) models have been employed to highlight patterns of spolia reuse, roof transformations, and wall repairs.

A comparative analysis between Fenaket, Büğüş and Taşlıca demonstrated that continuity is not static reproduction but rather a pattern of adaptation, shaped by local knowledge and ecological responsiveness. Within the entanglement framework, built forms were interpreted as co-evolved outcomes of cultural memory, ecological constraint, and social agency. However, the study has certain limitations that must be acknowledged. The sample size of the oral interviews was relatively small, and the research was subject to seasonal constraints that may have limited the scope of fieldwork observations. Additionally, there are potential data gaps, particularly in historical records, which may impact the completeness of the findings. Nonetheless, this integrated approach has two principal benefits. Firstly, it reveals the resilience of vernacular systems. Secondly, it offers a replicable heritage method. The study demonstrates that sustainability and identity in cultural landscapes are contingent on documenting living knowledge rather than solely on architectural form.

Table 1. Summarized methodology.

Component	Goal/Focus	Methods/Tools/Conceptual Base	Key Outputs/Contribution
A. Research Framework	Examine physical & spatial transformations through the interaction of natural and cultural processes.	Theoretical Base: Cultural Landscape & Entanglement [11,12]. Disciplines Integrated: Architecture, Archaeology, Engineering. Data Sources: Literature review, pre-PAP surveys, post-2020 digital documentation.	Holistic Analytical Framework combining spatial and social dimensions.
B. Data Collection
1. Oral History & Local Knowledge (Qualitative)	Understand Socio-cultural continuity, the human–construction material–memory triad.	Period: 2023–2024. Participants: 10. Method: Semi-structured interviews (45–60 min). Themes: Construction & materials, spatial/social change, craft transmission & gendered roles. Tools: Audio recording, Transcription, Thematic coding.	Documentation of socio-cultural continuity, craft transmission, and gendered roles.
2. Architectural Survey (Quantitative + Qualitative)	Focus on Residential typologies and wall system documentation.	Sites: Upper & Lower Fenaket, Büğüş, Taşlıca. Phases: Preliminary assessment, Mapping & GPS marking, Data collection (photos, sketches, measures).	Typological Inventory, detailed wall system documentation.
3. Digital Documentation & Analysis (Technological)	Generate precise 3D models, 2D plans, and enable advanced typological analysis.	Tools: DJI Mavic 3, Phantom 4 Pro, GPS. Software: Agisoft Metashape, AutoCAD, Photoshop, SketchUp, GIS.	Accurate 3D models, 2D plans, restitution proposals, and typological analysis.
C. Data Integration & Analysis	Understand the co-evolution of humans, materials, and the environment via Entanglement.	Integration: Quantitative (spatial) + Qualitative (oral) data. Analysis: Comparative analysis (Fenaket, Büğüş & Taşlıca), GIS & photogrammetry (typology–topography relations), Thematic synthesis (spolia reuse & building continuity). Conceptual Lens: Entanglement.	Spatially and socially contextualized findings on typology–topography relations and building continuity.
D. Outputs & Contribution	Provide a replicable model and contribute to rural heritage studies.	Sketchfab open-access modelling	Replicable Model for integrating digital documentation + community knowledge. Contribution: Sustainability (material continuity), Identity (craft-based local meaning), Resilience (adaptive reuse and social memory).

exemplifies how the interdisciplinary methodology, which synthesizes digital documentation with community memory, provides a holistic and replicable model for documenting and preserving architectural continuity within cultural landscapes (Table 1).

3. Results and Discussion

This section presents and interprets the findings derived from field documentation, oral history interviews, and digital analyses conducted in Fenaket, Büğüş, and Taşlıca. The objective of this study is to elucidate how material practices, spatial organisation, and local knowledge collectively contribute to the perpetuation of architectural continuity within the cultural landscape of the Bozburun Peninsula. The discussion evolves from a descriptive account of building typologies to an examination of the dynamic relationship between people, materials, and environment. This elucidates how these interactions embody the principles of entanglement and cultural landscape. The section’s linkage of empirical evidence to theoretical interpretation situates the Phoenix settlements within broader Mediterranean patterns of resilience, adaptation, and continuity.

The cultural landscape of the Bozburun Peninsula displays a complex pattern of continuity, whereby settlements have evolved in close relation to agricultural systems and environmental conditions. The guiding question of this section, namely “What factors determine the architectural continuity of Taşlıca?”, is approached through a combination of spatial analysis, oral testimony, and archaeological documentation. The results demonstrate that the spatial and material logic of the historical settlements (Fenaket, Büğüş and Taşlıca) is rooted in the dual relationship between landscape productivity and social organisation. The following subsections explore these dynamics through analyses of spatial settlement patterns, architectural typologies, the transmission of craft knowledge, and material procurement practices, concluding with a synthesis of the landscape’s overall resilience.

3.1. Spatial Continuity and Settlement Patterns

The Fenaket settlements (Lower and Upper Fenaket), located in the vicinity of the Acropolis of ancient Phoenix, exhibit a persistent vernacular order shaped by topography and water sources. The arrangement of dwellings along terraces, the proximity to cisterns and streams, and the evidence of ancient workshops and presses indicate that agriculture and animal husbandry were the principal drivers of settlement morphology since the Hellenistic period. The adaptation of necropolis terraces for habitation during the Byzantine and Medieval periods reflects a significant transformation in the cultural landscape from collective sacred use to individualised domestic occupation (Figure 9).

Lower Fenaket developed along terraced slopes with access to agricultural plains, while Upper Fenaket adapted to higher elevations, emphasising water-collection systems and storage structures. The Büğüş Plain, situated north of Taşlıca, serves as an active landscape of human activity from antiquity to the present, featuring ancient road traces and agricultural terraces that align with the broader Phoenix cultural landscape. Like the Fenaket settlements, the Büğüş houses are aligned on the southern slopes of hills (specifically Akçaasar Hill), oriented toward agricultural plains and terraces. The settlement period in Büğüş, confirmed by oral history and a tombstone dated 1854–1918, mirrors the 19th-century occupation layers found in Fenaket and Taşlıca.

The endurance of these infrastructural logics, subsequently reflected in Taşlıca, stresses the region’s ongoing commitment to terrestrial productivity and seasonal mobility.

This intentional spatial design is deeply embedded in local environmental knowledge regarding drainage and water management. As one resident explained: ‘There is no way for the water to be absorbed here, it goes straight down... If they [the ancestors] weren’t smart, would they build cisterns in front of the houses, [my dear]?’ (Interviewee, Female, 54). Such narratives underscore that the placement of structures on sloping, rocky terrains was a deliberate engineering choice to facilitate drainage while simultaneously enabling water harvesting through strategically positioned cisterns.

These findings confirm that the evolution from Fenaket to modern Taşlıca was not a rupture but a gradual reorganisation within the same spatial logic, aligning with the entanglement principle [11] in which human settlements and their environmental frameworks co-evolve through reciprocal adaptation.

3.2. Architectural Typologies and Material Culture

Architectural documentation of Fenaket and Taşlıca reveals that, despite differing temporal layers, the settlements demonstrate a coherent vernacular grammar. The typical house is single-storey, comprising one to three rooms, and is characterised by simple rectangular or square floor plans and flat earthen roofs (Figure 10).

“In the past, there weren’t houses like these around here. There were single-room houses; some would consist of two rooms side-by-side if the family was large.”

(Interviewee, Male, Age 65)

In Fenaket, walls were constructed from local limestone and fieldstone, bound with a mixture of lime mortar and red soil. Additionally, spolia from ancient structures, including inscriptions, tomb blocks, and architectural fragments, were reused in thresholds and facades as illustrated in the interactive 3D model (Figure 11).

The field survey identified 44 buildings in Lower Fenaket and 38 in Upper Fenaket. Many of these structures were found to have retained their intact masonry. The consistent use of rubble-stone infill and double-wythe wall systems (60–80 cm thick) indicates a localised construction tradition (Figure 12).

The presence of hearths, wall niches, and semi-open forecourts suggests continuity of domestic practices and gendered spatial functions. Document 17 identified architectural structures and building foundations too. Büğüş provides clear evidence of the courtyard-centered plan. Residences consist of rooms defining a semi-open space known as a “hayat”. The construction in Büğüş utilizes a unique local variation: rubble stone walls reinforced with lime mortar made from Taşlıca’s distinctive red soil and completed with ceramic fragments. Survey results explicitly link the house plans of Büğüş to those recorded in Lower and Upper Fenaket, confirming a shared regional construction logic (Figure 13).

In contrast, in Taşlıca Village, traditional masonry techniques are still employed, though they now coexist with modern materials such as reinforced concrete. Historical dwellings are distinguished by their flat earthen roofs and courtyard-centred plans, while post-1980 constructions adopt pitched tile roofs. The juxtaposition of these forms symbolises the ongoing conflict between architectural continuity and modernisation, demonstrating that traditional morphological structures endure through hybrid adaptations rather than replication [26]. This phenomenon has been observed in other Mediterranean contexts, including Rhodes and Symi [61,62].

3.3. Craftsmanship and Transmission of Knowledge

Oral history interviews with ten local residents were conducted to provide crucial insight into the transmission of construction knowledge and craftsmanship. Testimonies indicate that Greek masons operating during the late Ottoman period played a significant role in shaping the local building tradition. Following the 1923 population exchange, Turkish settlers benefited from these practices, which they adapted by learning directly from craftsmen from Symi, according to interviewers.

Male participants placed significant emphasis on the continuity of techniques, encompassing stone dressing, lime preparation, and wood treatment. In contrast, female participants offered detailed accounts of maintenance rituals, seasonal roof repairs, and the preparation of binding soils and mortars. Such oral testimonies illustrate that the persistence of architectural forms is underpinned by intangible heritage processes involving labour division, memory, and gendered participation in craft. These accounts embody the “human–material–memory” triad central to the entanglement framework and confirm that continuity in construction is not only a technical phenomenon but a cultural practice of care [32].

3.4. Material Procurement and the Practice of Spolia

Material sourcing strategies in the region demonstrate how construction was directly dictated by the availability of local resources, particularly stone and timber. Masonry units were sourced from agricultural fields and outcrops, shaped on-site, and reused cyclically over generations. One interviewee reflected on the landscape’s influence on construction, noting: “It is rocky, [you see], everywhere is rocky... Everyone built houses by clearing [the land]; they built courtyard after courtyard.” (Interviewee, Male, 62).

According to oral tradition, these are called ‘field stones and memory stones’. These repurposed elements from older buildings that have been incorporated into new dwellings symbolise both resource efficiency and ancestral continuity (Figure 14).

The use of spolia is a defining characteristic of the region’s architectural identity. Ancient tomb blocks from the necropolis were repurposed for use as door jambs or wall cores, while inscribed stones from the acropolis were incorporated into domestic facades (Figure 15). This layered reuse is consistent with Mediterranean patterns of adaptive appropriation [22], reflecting both pragmatic and symbolic dimensions: material endurance and cultural remembrance [63].

As revealed in the oral interviews, wooden elements were sourced from almond, linden, and gum trees, selected for their availability and strength. Vertical timber posts, typically positioned on stone plinths, supported beams in semi-open hayat (forecourt) spaces, thereby enabling larger interior spans. Timber lintels and horizontal tie-beams (hatıl) were integrated into the walls to bind the double-wythe masonry, (Figure 16).

Furthermore, oral histories have been instrumental in identifying a specific clay known as “sky soil (göktoprak in Turkish)”, which was used for roof waterproofing. This clay was procured from a singular deposit located in proximity to the settlement (Figure 17). In a similar manner, lime was produced in communal kilns, where builders would take turns in maintaining the fire. The technical details of this traditional roofing system and the collective effort required for its upkeep are vividly captured in the following account from a local elder:

“In the past, they used to lay timber over the structure. To prevent soil from falling through the planks, bushes and olive twigs [thin branches] were spread on top and trodden down. Over this, first ordinary soil and then the mineral-rich earth we call ‘sky soil’ [göktoprak] was poured. When it rained, as this mineral soil was greasy, they would compress the earth by going over it with a stone roller [loğ taşı in Turkish]. Every year in September, before the rainfall began, everyone would haul new soil to their roofs; this maintenance was renewed annually.”

(Interviewee, Male, 71)

3.5. State of Conservation and Risks

The Fenaket settlements, now largely abandoned, are deteriorating further due to a combination of natural and anthropogenic factors. The following natural threats have been identified:

• Vegetation overgrowth
• Root-induced wall separation
• Heavy winter rainfall leading to mortar erosion
• Seismic activity is causing wall collapse

Cattle in extensive grazing systems, which have historically been central to local husbandry, exacerbate this decay by rubbing against walls, dislodging loose stones and disturbing ground foundations. The deterioration of the environment is further exacerbated by human factors. The extraction of wooden beams and stone blocks for subsequent reuse in other locations, combined with the waning of local craftsmanship, has accelerated irreversible loss. The designation of Fenaket as a protected zone in 1980, though well-intentioned, inadvertently reduced local stewardship by restricting property rights and discouraging maintenance. While Fenaket was designated a protected zone in 1980, the Büğüş Plain currently has no official site protection status, despite containing 17 documented historical structures. The abandoned settlement in Büğüş faces similar risks of mortar erosion and material loss, necessitating the “restitution studies” and “simple reconstructions” modeled in the survey.

3.6. Interpretive Synthesis: Continuity, Adaptation, and Resilience

The combined results illustrate that architectural continuity in the Phoenix landscape is the result of a combination of material persistence, social adaptation, and environmental negotiation. Fenaket and Taşlıca serve as exemplars of a living continuum in which rural architecture evolves within the framework of ecological constraints and collective memory.

The persistence of earthen roofs, spolia integration, and masonry typologies, which are documented through 3D analytical modelling, demonstrates a resilient architectural grammar that can absorb transformation without losing its cultural identity. This structural logic, characterized by double-wythe masonry and timber tie-beams (hatıl), effectively formed a flexible framework that absorbed seismic energy, providing physical durability that allowed these structures to survive centuries of use. However, this resilience is fragile, contingent on the survival of traditional skills and local participation.

The oral histories reveal that continuity is maintained not by monumental preservation but by everyday practices, including seasonal maintenance, cooperative building, and the ritual of re-roofing. As one resident recalled: “Previously, [the roof] was tiles and earth; they used to mix it with lime. We used to renew them together.” (Interviewee, Female, 75). This practice revealed cooperative production networks embedded in rural architecture, in which the act of building was a shared social performance that reinforced community bonds. Such traditions imbue the structures with a mnemonic value, transforming abandoned dwellings into an active archive of technique and memory rather than mere ruins.

The technical traditions of the Aegean region reveal a shared heritage, with cultural parallels being drawn to the neighboring Dodecanese islands of Symi, Karpathos, and Tilos. These connections are confirmed by recent restoration studies in the region, which directly compare masonry techniques and the revival of abandoned rural settlements [59,64]. This phenomenon of ‘continuity through change’ has been observed in various Mediterranean contexts where historical dwellings endure through hybrid adaptations [62,65,66,67,68].

From a broader perspective, the Phoenix settlements align with cross-Aegean typologies that integrate reuse, adaptation, and vernacular pragmatism. This paradigm can be defined as “continuity through change”, and it asserts that cultural landscapes persist when human–environment relationships remain dialogic, adaptive and community-driven. However, in Taşlıca, unregulated modern construction and concrete extensions have had a detrimental effect on the historical fabric, eroding the settlement’s visual and material integrity. These observations underscore the urgent need for sustainable conservation strategies that integrate local participation, craft revival, and adaptive reuse policies, rather than relying solely on preservation-focused interventions.

4. Conclusions

The study of the Phoenix cultural landscape, encompassing Fenaket, Büğüş, and Taşlıca, demonstrates that architectural continuity in rural Mediterranean contexts emerges not as a static inheritance but as an evolving process of interaction between people, materials, and environment. Through the integration of field documentation, oral testimonies, and digital analysis, the research identified how local building traditions have persisted and adapted across centuries, shaped by ecological constraints, socio-economic change, and collective memory. The settlements examined demonstrate a distinctive cultural ecology, in which construction systems, spatial organisation, and craftsmanship continue to embody the principles of adaptation and resilience.

The study provides definitive answers to research questions established at the outset:

Regarding RQ1, which concerns physical and historical stratigraphy, the findings confirm that physical continuity is evidenced by a systematic logic of material reuse. Spatial analyses indicate that spolia blocks were concentrated in the vicinity of the ancient city centre of Phoenix and gradually diminished in use with distance, suggesting a deliberate recycling of architectural materials across the landscape. The transportation of these stones and their integration into later structures serve to illustrate how the landscape itself functioned as a living archive of memory and technique. Since antiquity, dressed stone walls and cut blocks have been superseded by rubble masonry, which was utilized alongside lime mortar and earthen roof systems. The presence of traditional stone houses, which have remained mainly intact, safeguards ancestral construction knowledge and land-use practices, thereby ensuring their transmission over time.

In response to RQ2, which examines intangible knowledge and craftsmanship, the findings demonstrate that the evolution of building craftsmanship was driven by geographic interaction, leading to adaptation to local environments. The region produced its own craftsmen, influenced by topography, available resources, and travelling experts from Symi, thereby sustaining construction traditions over generations. The ancient city of Phoenix, once a centre of agriculture and maritime trade, flourished during the Hellenistic and Roman periods; subsequently, it evolved into a rural production centre in the Byzantine and Ottoman eras. This cultural continuity has resulted in a layered cultural landscape, in which architecture, belief systems, and craftsmanship have converged to establish a shared heritage. Collective documentation of this continuum of making, encompassing inscriptions, architectural remnants, and oral narratives, provides evidence of a process wherein construction techniques and local practices are embedded within a dynamic socio-environmental system. These attributes render Phoenix and its surrounding settlements vital reference points for comparing other Mediterranean rural heritage as a holistic form of living culture.

The research also highlights within the framework of RQ3 (risks and conservation strategies) an escalating risk to this continuity. The structural and visual integrity of the settlements is threatened by natural deterioration, uncontrolled vegetation, seismic activity, and unregulated modern construction. Furthermore, the diminishing number of skilled stonemasons poses a significant threat to the transmission of intangible knowledge of craftsmanship, thereby weakening the social fabric that sustains the material culture. The study thus affirms that conservation cannot rely solely on protection status; it requires community-based participation and inclusive strategies that merge traditional knowledge with new technologies to be effective.

Consequently, Phoenix and Fenaket, as multi-layered archaeological and rural settlements, preserve the authenticity and integrity of their cultural landscape. According to the criteria established by UNESCO in 2024, the following sites have been identified as significant.

(ii) Manifest a topography that has been shaped by human interaction over an extended period of time.

(iii) Act as a living testament to past civilisations. It is imperative to illustrate the unique rural and archaeological architectural fabric.

(v) Provide an illustration of a conventional human settlement and land-use model characterised by transhumance and dual agricultural systems.

In the view of these findings, the following recommendations are put forward:

• Local knowledge must be integrated into conservation planning. Revitalizing community participation and recognizing local craftsmen as stakeholders are pivotal for sustainable heritage protection.
• Establishing a digital heritage archive is imperative. The photogrammetric models, GIS data, and oral histories collected in this study should be preserved in an open-access archive for education, tourism, and interdisciplinary research purposes. The digital archive is currently under development, with plans to make it accessible to academic researchers and the public through an online portal. The archive provides unrestricted access to registered users, facilitating both scholarly collaboration and public engagement.
• Promoting cross-border cooperation is of paramount importance. Fenaket and Taşlıca can serve as reference landscapes for international collaboration, especially with Greece and the Dodecanese Islands, in alignment with the European Landscape Convention and the principles of the Florence Declaration.
• The establishment of interdisciplinary field schools is to be encouraged. The establishment of partnerships between universities and municipalities has facilitated the transfer of skills in stonemasonry and roof-building techniques, thereby nurturing a new generation of conservation practitioners.
• Advocating for adaptive reuse and low-impact tourism is imperative. The potential exists to restore abandoned structures in Fenaket as interpretive sites or eco-tourism centers, with the objective of integrating cultural heritage into sustainable development strategies.
• The development of a risk management framework is imperative. It is imperative that vegetation control, hydrological assessment, and seismic monitoring be integrated into future conservation and restoration planning.

The Phoenix landscape serves as a paradigm of continuity, representing an ongoing and dynamic process of interaction between material, social, and ecological systems. By maintaining traditional land-use practices while adapting to contemporary conditions, Taşlıca and Fenaket serve as a testament to the resilience of Mediterranean cultural landscapes. The present study adopts a novel approach to the conservation of cultural heritage, eschewing the conventional static preservationist paradigm in favour of a dynamic, living process of care. This research contributes a methodological and conceptual framework that integrates vernacular knowledge, digital documentation, and community participation, thereby offering a sustainable vision for the conservation of rural heritage in Türkiye and the wider Mediterranean region.