Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T04:39:13.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Canal of Xerxes: summary of investigations 1991–2001

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2013

B. S. J. Isserlin ,
R. E. Jones ,
V. Karastathis ,
S. P. Papamarinopoulos ,
G. E. Syrides  and
J. Uren
B. S. J. Isserlin
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
R. E. Jones
Affiliation:
University of Glasgow
V. Karastathis
Affiliation:
National Observatory of Athens
S. P. Papamarinopoulos
Affiliation:
University of Patras
G. E. Syrides
Affiliation:
University of Thessaloniki
J. Uren
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper summarizes the results of the earlier phase (1991–8) of geoarchaeological investigations at the Canal of Xerxes in northern Greece and then presents the findings of recent work. Through the combination of geophysical survey and analysis of sediments obtained from bore holes drilled along the supposed course of the canal it was established in 1996 that at least in the central sector of the 2 km wide isthmus there was indeed a deeply buried trench-like structure, c. 30 m wide. This is most likely to have been a canal that would have had a depth of water of up to 3 m. The recent work has explored first the situation at the southern end of the canal where one ancient writer claimed that the terrain would only have allowed the construction of a slipway (diolkos). However, seismic survey and sedimentological analysis of cores in that area found no obstacle to the digging of a canal. Second, the results of seismic survey (supported by the evidence of satellite imagery) at the northern end of the canal have suggested that its course was more easterly than that proposed earlier on the basis of the line of present-day lowest ground. In sum, all the indications are that there was a canal across the Athos peninsula and not a diolkos, and that the canal's features conform to those outlined by Herodotus in his description of the structure built by Xerxes to allow the Persian fleet into the Aegean for the invasion of Greece in 480 BC.

Type
Articles
Information
Annual of the British School at Athens , Volume 98 , November 2003 , pp. 369 - 385
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Historiae vii. 22–4, 37, 122

2 de Choiseul-Gouffier, M. G. A. P., Voyage pittoresque en Grece, 2 vols. (Paris, 1782 and 1809)Google Scholar; Spratt, T., ‘Remarks on the Isthmus of Mount Athos’, J. Royal Geographical Society, 17 (1847), 145–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Struck, A., Makedonische Fahrten: Chalkidike (Vienna and Leipzig, 1907 Google Scholar); id., ‘Der Xerxeskanal am Athos’, Neue Jahrbücher für das Klassiche Alterum: Geschichte und Literatur 10 (1970), 115–30 with map on p. 160 which contains more information.

3 Voyage dans la Macédoine, ii. 153 ff. (Paris, 1831 Google Scholar).

4 Barber, R. (ed.), The Blue Guide, Greece (London and New York, 1990), 199 Google Scholar.

5 The arguments are summed up in Isserlin, B. S. J., ‘The Canal of Xerxes: facts and problems’, BSA 86 (1991), 86 ffGoogle Scholar.

6 Ibid.

7 Isserlin, B.S.J., Jones, R. E., Papamarinopoulos, S. P. and Uren, J., ‘The Canal of Xerxes: preliminary investigations in 1991 and 1992’, BSA 89 (1994), 277–84, esp. 279–80Google Scholar. See also Isserlin, B. S. J., Jones, R. E., Papamarinopoulos, S., Syrides, G. E., Maniatis, Y., Facorellis, G. and Uren, J., ‘The Canal of Xerxes: investigations in 1993–1994’, BSA 91 (1996), 329–40, esp. 329 Google Scholar.

8 Sarris, A. and Jones, R. E., ‘Geophysical and related techniques applied to archaeological survey in the Mediterranean: a review’, J. Mediterranean Archaeology, 13/1 (2000), 3–75 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. its application at the harbour at Itanos in Crete, Ibid., 37–8, pl. 4 and table 5.

9 Isserlin et al. 1996 (n. 7), 330, and 280–2. See also a full integrated presentation of results in Jones, R. E., Isserlin, B. S. J., Karastathis, V., Papamarinopoulos, S. P., Syrides, G. E., Uren, J., with Balatsas, I. and Kapopoulos, Ch., ‘Exploration of the Canal of Xerxes, Northern Greece: the role of geophysical and other techniques’, Archaeological Prospection, 7 (2000), 147–703.0.CO;2-2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Karastathis, V. and Papamarinopoulos, S. P., ‘The detection of the Xerxes Canal by the use of shallow reflection and refraction seismics—preliminary results’, Geophysical Prospecting, 45 (1997), 389–401 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Karastathis, V.. Papamarinopoulos, S. P. and Jones, R. E., ‘2-D Velocity structure of the buried ancient canal of Xerxes: an application of seismic methods in archaeology’, J. Applied Geophysics, 47 (2001), 29–43 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Papangelos, I. and Kambouroglou, E., ‘Historical and archaeogeomorphological researches for the Xerxes Canal at Athos peninsula’, Proc. ph Panhellenic Geographical Soc. (1999), Athens (forthcoming)Google Scholar.

11 See Isserlin et al. 1996 (n. 7), fig. 1 a–c;, Jones et al. (n. 9), fig. 12.

12 See Jones et al. (n. 9), fig. 6, GT 96/13–17, pp. 157–9, and fig. 9.

13 Zelt, C. A. and Barton, P., Journal of Geophysical Research, 103 (1998), 7187–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Zelt, C. A. and Smith, R. B., ‘Seismic traveltime inversion for 2-D crustal velocity structure’, Geophysical Journal International, 108 (1992), 16–34 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Jones et al. (n. 9), fig. 6, GT 96/16.

16 Ibid., 154–6.

17 Ibid., fig 6. B, c, D and 96/10.

18 It is hoped in the future to experiment with the pole–pole array, which would give better stratigraphic information.

19 For instance in the 120 m profile at right angles across the canal where borehole (BH) 2 was located a 600 nT negative anomaly of some 50 m width was found; this has not yet been explained.

20 Jones et al. (n. 9), fig. 6 for the location of this grid, p. 156, and pl. 1.

21 Isserlin et al. 1996 (n. 7), 330–7. Further presentation in Jones et al. (n. 9), 159–64.

22 Drilled by Mr N. Nezis of Technodrill, Eleusis. As before, the core cylinders were split down their central axis and allowed to dry for almost ten weeks. They were examined macroscopically at Nea Roda before samples were taken to Thessaloniki for analysis.

23 Unfortunately it was not possible to drill BH 5 down to the crystalline basement in order to clarify the exact depth of the older torrent incision.

24 Furthermore, GS, who has some twenty years' field experience in the area, has not located any such solid rock exposure.

25 We thank Dr B. Tsigarida for this information. See A. Delt. 44 (1989), Chr. 328Google Scholar.

26 Recent settlement has gradually filled this area with debris in order to make it suitable for building on.

27 The image was published in a paper describing the fire on the Mt. Athos peninsula in 1990: Kritikos, G. and Karteris, M., ‘Assessment of forest fire damages in Greece using remote sensing techniques’, German–Greek Bilateral Co-Operation in Environmental Research (International Bureau, Forschungszentrum Jülich; Jülich Google Scholar).

28 Discussed by Jones et al. (n. 9), 166–8.

29 See now N. Drivaliari and G. Syrides, ‘Bio-indicators in transitional archaeo-environments. A case study at “Xerxes Canal”’, in G. Facorellis, N. Zacharias, and K. Polikreti (eds), Proceedings of the 4th Hellenic Archaeometry Symposium (Athens 2003) (in press).