CIPA 2003 XIX 11 ' International Symposium, 30 September - 04 October, 2003, Antalya, Turkey 
498 
Figure 4. West side of KAM 1979 
Figure 5. West side of KAM 1998 
Figure 6. North side of KAM 
To find an answer to the open question of the original location 
of the Peter-and-Paul-Basilica to which KAM was connected an 
important hint could be the deformations of the four big pillars 
on the southern part of the octagonal centre. Their upper parts 
show a great deviation from the vertical in radial direction 
while the four pillars on the northern part stand straight This 
leads to the conclusion that in times of construction a static 
stabilizing mass of any sort of building had adjoined to the 
northern wall of KAM. 
At least the orthophoto directs our attention to the fact that 
KAM - we think most parts inclusive the octagonal centre and 
the dome - had survived in the last 1500 years a lot of 
desastrous earthquakes (average: one earthquake every 30 
years), the last big one was the Izmit-earthquake august 1999 
with a magnitude of 7,4 which will be discussed at the end of 
the article. 
The third example gives a first impression of the various cracks 
in the building especially in the octagonal centre. The dome of 
the KAM - later discussed in detail but now have a first look at 
figure 13 - consists of sixteen different segments, eight 
segments curved only in one direction with a window in it for 
the light and for static reasons and eight stronger segments 
curved in both directions in an alternate order. At the sides of 
the windows next to the border between the different segments 
there are theoretically weak points in the construction of the 
dome, in reality there are a lot of cracks. In the following we 
concentrate at two cracks of the described type: the first and 
most prominent crack (A) in the north east of the building starts 
in the dome in a height above the windows and passes through 
the whole building inside and outside. Crack (B) in the south 
west of the building is the symmetrical pendant and in some 
way the static answer of (A). The third crack (C) is a little bit 
untypical before it runs through the middle of a double curved 
segment above one of the big pillars. Figure 7 shows the 
context of the three discussed cracks. 
Figure 7. Location of the discussed cracks 
In figures 8-10 we show zoomed details of images taken at 
different times and we see the changings of the three cracks 
from the point of view of quality: two of the cracks can be seen 
today but they didn’t exist or they were hidden at former times, 
one crack could be seen years ago but today it is plastered. To 
have a look at the changing of two of the cracks (A und C) from 
the point of view of quantity some photogrammetric studies 
were performed: measurements were performed on images 
taken in the years 1979 and 2002 with the help of an analytical 
photogrammetric system (WILD AC3), some photogrammetric 
blocks were adjusted by the bundle-method. At this way the