Hazard Risk Resilience Magazine Volume 1 Issue 3 | Page 20

INTRO | HIGHLIGHTS | FEATURES | INTERVIEWS | PERSPECTIVES ‘Historical documents and archaeology tell a very interesting story in the Middle Ages and the story that developed is extraordinarily modern’, says Gerrard. In many cases societies throughout Europe were ‘risk sensitive’ both in how they responded to different kinds of risks, normally to hazards, but also to famine and disease which were persistent at this time. In the case of low-probability, high-impact events such as earthquakes, whether people were prepared or not depended on whether the hazard event had occurred before within living memory. ‘If they didn’t take place during someone’s generation or their father’s generation, there’s not the same learning process. There isn’t a memory embedded there within the community that gives them the confidence to respond’, says Gerrard. But often there was a lasting memory of hazardous events, and there is archaeological evidence from across Europe showing that people were proactive in managing them. Low-frequency, high-magnitude events were usually the most catastrophic, because preparedness was lower. When remains of the town wall in Andújar, in southern Spain, were uncovered by archaeologists they told a story of how the people who lived there responded to risk. The wall was destroyed by an earthquake in 1170. When it was rebuilt the foundations of the wall were cemented, and plugged to ensure that it was more resistant to the next earthquake. The builders in Andújar changed their construction practices in response to seismic risk, an early example of a ‘build back better’ strategy. An excavation in Glastonbury, in the UK, revealed a similar story. When St Michael’s Church at the top of Glastonbury Tor was excavated by archaeo