HERAKLES PROJECT: Classical Boiotia through the GIS
Dr. José
Pascual
(Extended version from the paper published in
Teiresias, Volume 35
(Part 1), 2005; images added for this Web presentation)
[ISSN
1206-5730]
1.
GIS
Since 1991 the Universidad Autónoma
de Madrid, with financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Education and
Culture and the private company Ontex Peninsular S.A., has been carrying out a
research project, the Herakles Project.
Although the project includes other areas of Greece such as the Isthmus of
Corinth, Attica, Phokis and East Lokris, its main objective is the application
of Geographical Information Systems (GIS)
to the study of ancient Boiotia. Here we
give a brief report of some of the results of the work to date.
The
project is based on the maps produced by the Greek State on a scale of 1:
200.000 and 1:50.000. To use Geographical Information Systems, this series of
maps first has to be converted into a digital format, that is, put on the
computer. In the second phase of the Herakles
Project, we then transferred all the available information to the
microcomputer: ancient evidence, archaeological data, intensive field survey,
historical topography, aerial photographs and our personal observations, field
notebooks and photographs. Obviously the GIS
software facilitates entering and editing data, as well its organization and the
eventual sorting and plotting. We encountered many difficulties, especially in
defining ancient boundaries, which we have to recognize are only approximate,
but once the digital conversion had been completed we had:
1. A new, high
precision computer-generated map.
2. A map where we
could determine any point with the same degree of accuracy.
3. A map that
could be reproduced in an infinite number of times, every time the same, to replace
traditional, less accurate cartography.
4. We could
combine and superimpose unlimited sources of evidence and numbers of
"layers" on a single map, and will be able to add any other
information that might become available in the future.
Figure. 1. Boiotia
and Central Greece (hypsometry, hydrology and modern routes)
5. We can store hundreds
of maps and data on a single computer and plot them out in any size and on any
scale, defining smaller zones, or adding others, enlarging, etc., virtually at
a moment’s notice. The layers can be assigned different colours or line
weights, and associations that would never have been noticed on the standard maps
in the past can be readily distinguished.
6. We could both
display maps in two or three dimensions and introduce or delete information for
a particular purpose at any given time, producing maps to meet our needs. For
example, we can introduce elements no longer present in the modern landscape
such as lakes, allowing better reconstruction of the ancient territory.
 Figure 2. Boiotia
and Central Greece (Ancient Boiotia and Lake Kopaïs restored) |
 Figure 3. West of
Boiotia in 3D |
|
Figure 4.
Haliartos (A Study for the Battle) |
|
7. One of the most
obvious applications was saving time. We have substantially reduced the time it
takes to make maps. We can now measure areas, perimeters, distances, water
courses, contour lines, etc. and do it with quantities of data, speed and reliability
impossible to obtain using traditional cartography.
8. We can
calculate viewsheds, decisive not only for providing an insight into ancient
battles but particularly for understanding the defensive system of a polis.
To deal with the frustrating lack of
information facing the ancient historian, GIS
have three features we could describe as extraordinary: the ability to handle a
vast amount of data with a high degree of accuracy in a very short period of
time. So we have a base map that becomes another and important source for
historical research.
This valuable amount of information can be
used to study the three primary objectives of our research project:
1. A more precise
analysis of the Geography of Boiotia and its historic constants. Of course, it
is practically impossible to describe the ancient geography of an area, but the
GIS allows us to get closer to it.
2. The occupation
of the territory and distribution of the population, initially only in the classical
period
3. The size of the
Boiotian poleis, their territorial
structure and their relationship with the Federal State
2.
The Boiotian environment
Boiotia is a roughly ellipsoidal or
diamond shape. Its west-east axis is 100 Km long and is twice that of that of the
approximately 40 Km. between the Northern and Southern boundaries of Boiotia.
Boiotian borders are generally clearly
defined by the sea and by a series of mountain ridges that separate Boiotia
from the neighbouring states. Ancient Boiotia occupied 2,816 Km2 with
a perimeter of 326 Km, an area of 2,818 Km2 and a perimeter of 338
km if we include the small islands of the Domvraina
Bay in the south. However, this was not the total area of the Federal State or
its useable land during specific periods of history or times of the year. So we
would have to deduct from this area, depending on the period, Oropos (some 158 Km2)
and, depending on the season, the area occupied by the three lakes – Kopais, Likeri and Paralimni – that covered part of the West of Boiotia between
November and March. This leaves about 2,400
Km2 which, nevertheless, made Boiotia one of the largest
The presence of Lake Kopais,
covering 234 Km2 at that time, the largest lake of Greece, and its
seasonal changes was one of the major features of the Boiotian Geography in
Antiquity. Lake Kopais was a good example of a fluctuating karstic lake, almost
drying up in summer due to surface evaporation. We can ignore other changes that
occurred over the centuries, such as the degradation of vegetation, the
variation of the river courses or changes to the coastlines, but without
introducing the possible size of Lake Kopais or describing its environment it is
impossible to get an accurate picture of living conditions in ancient Boiotia.
Figure 5. Lake
Kopaïs, now drained, from Orchomenos
Together with Lake Kopais, the two parallel
large mountain ridges that cross Boiotia from northwest to southeast represent the
other two major features of the relief. The so-called Southern Barrier
Mountains, which roughly corresponds with the Helikon, include 192 km2
over 600 meters high. The Northern Barrier Mountains are more discontinuous and
lower; only 45 km2 of these mountains are over 600 meters.
|
Figure 6. The Sourthern
Barrier (Helikon) from Haliartos |
Figure 7. The Plain of Chaironeia with the Northern
Barrier behind
|
A simple analysis using GIS provides accurate evidence that Boiotia
was far from being a mountainous region. None of it is over 1,600 m. high and
the area within Boiotia that we could consider mountainous, that is, over 600
m., amounts to 273 Km2, which is only 9.7% of Boiotia’s entire area.
293.1 Km2, 10.40%, is between 600 and 400 meters and 2252.7 Km2,
nearly an 80% of total, is between 0 and 400 meters. These figures are exactly
the opposite of the Greek average, where an 80% of the territory is considered
mountainous or semi-mountainous.
|
Figure 8. Hypsometry (Map) |
Figure 9. Hypsometry (Table)
|
Lake Kopais and the two mountain ridges
divided Boiotian relief into four major zones: the mountainous areas, the coastal
plains of the Corinthian Gulf, the Euboian Channel and the two great basins of
the Kopais and Thebes.
The mountains, from the point of
view of their altitude, the area they cover and population were of little
importance in Boiotian life. Settlements of any size, except perhaps farms, were
not found in the mountains. The coast plains of Boiotia occupied some 452 Km2,
16% of Boiotia’s total area. The shores of the Corinthian Gulf cover an area of
235 km2, similar to the northern coastal plains, around 217 km2,
although those in the north are richer and those in the south drier. They are
nearly all poorly connected with the hinterland. The small size of the coastal
plains also indicates their scarce political and economic importance. They had a
small amount of cultivable land capable of supporting few people. This is
demonstrated by the fact that none of the capitals of the eleven Boiotian poleis at the beginning of the Fourth
Century B.C. were on the coastal plains. Thus the heart of Boiotia was inland,
and consisted of the Kopais and Thebes basins. The Thebes basin would have occupied
1,059 km2, 38% of total Boiotia, while Kopais accounted
for about 1,044 km2, or 37%. As it was once said, Boiotia is essentially
an inland country ringed with mountains.
But this similarity was only apparent.
The lakes, Kopais, Likeri and Paralimni, took up much of the surface area
of the basin, reducing its 1,044 km2 to 780. The three lakes shaped
the typical landscape of western Boiotia, which in the winter was an impenetrable
amphibian world of swamps, marshes and lagoons, bristling with rushes and reed
beds, the realm of islands and numerous springs and caverns. It was a domain of
malaria, asthma and rheumatism. Here, in the Boiotian lakes, during the winter
season, the farmer became a fisherman, hunter and gather. The richest and most
fertile area of Boiotia was undoubtedly the so-called Theban basin, its
extensive plains were effectively the granary of Boiotia.
In conclusion, the environmental
conditions and also its own historical evolution made Boiotia a peculiar
region. Unlike most of Greece, the mountains were not significant or important,
although they did make communications difficult between the coast and the hinterland
and contributed to Boiotian isolation from the sea. The small coastal plains
lacked good ports and were unable to support a large population. So the ancient
Boiotians lived mainly in the East and South, around what we could call, in
Greek terms, large plains, whereas in the watery world of the north and west,
in the area of the lakes, Kopais, Likeri
y Paralimni, the main element that
marked its existence was water, not because of its shortage, but, great paradox
within the paradoxes in Greece, particularly because of its abundance. Flatter,
wetter and more fertile that usual in Greece, Boiotia was an overwhelmingly
continental region. Moreover, in essence, it was a world divided into two,
between the lakes, the West of Boiotia, around Orchomenos, and the great plains
of the East and South.
3. Boiotian
Settlement
Using GIS we can try to reveal some of the characteristics of Boiotian
settlement. Thus, we can establish a relationship between altitude and
settlements. First, the vast majority of the ancient sites are located below 400
m. Only Evangelistria is located
between 400 and 600 m and only Askra, Hippotai and Milia, the last probably a farm, are over 600 m. The reason for
this has to be found in the especially favourable conditions of the Musses
Valley and the high plateau of Koukoura,
which provided sufficient resources for communities to survive here. These few
exceptions do not invalidate the general rule: Boiotian settlement was normally
below 400 m, so perhaps we should consider the areas over 400-600 m as
semi-mountainous areas without settlements in Antiquity.
The settlements are distributed
practically 50/50 between 0-200 m (33 sites) and 200-400 m (27 sites) but they mainly
seem to be concentrated either side of the 200 m contour line. Thus a very
clear conclusion can be drawn: the ideal altitude for a Boiotian settlement was
around the 200 m. contour line.
Figure 10. Ancient
settlements and the contour line of 200 meters.
The distribution of the settlements shown
by GIS can also give us a fairly accurate
idea of their concentration. In fact, they seem to be around the edges of
valleys and plains, in the foothills bordering the plains themselves or on the
promontories rising in the middle of the plains. All sites need accessible
water sources but the main feature of Boiotian settlement was the desire to
leave as much land as possible free for cultivation and maintain visual control
over their own territory.
Figure 11. Ancient
Koroneia from the East.
4. The size of Boiotian
poleis
According to the Hellenika Oxyrhynchia (19.373-405, 1-4),
in 395 B.C. the Boiotian Confederacy included eleven federal poleis: Tanagra, Thebes, Thespiai,
Hysiai, Koroneia, Haliartos, Lebadeia, Chaironeia, Akraiphiai, Kopai and Orchomenos.
Using GIS, based on several sources of information we can trace the boundaries
of the Boiotian poleis (it has to be
recognized that the line is usually a hypothetical one), measure the resultant
areas and classify the Boiotian poleis
by size into three different categories.
a)
Small poleis. Akraiphiai, Chaironeia and Hysiai,
which each had an area of around 50-60 km2 (to be precise, ranging
from 47 to 57 km2) and a perimeter of between 32 and 35 Km. They each
covered approximately the 2% of the Federal territory. Due to their small
territory these poleis had a
precarious existence. In terms of their economic self-sufficiency, their usable
territory was reduced by their neighbours, and although they might work their
territory intensively, none of them needed to create even a secondary
settlement to make better use of the tiny area available for cultivation. In
the political field, they were threatened by the adjacent states and lost some
of their territory, as in the case of Akraiphiai, which saw the shrine of
Apollos Ptoios near to the city occupied by Thebes, or lost their political
independence for periods of time, as happened to Hysiai and Chaironeia.
Figure 12.
Chaironeia. Fortifications from the South.
b)
Four poleis had an area of about 100 km2
and formed what we could call medium-sized Boiotian states: Haliartos (88 Km2),
Koroneia (117), Kopai (116) and Lebadeia (127).
Except for Kopai, whose territory was very irregular because the Northeast
Bay of Lake Kopais cut deeply into its territory, the perimeter of these poleis was between 44 and 49 km. Each of
them accounted for from 4 to 5% of the total area of the Boiotian Confederacy.
Figure 13. Kopai
from the South-East.
c)
The other poleis can be considered relatively large:
Orchomenos, with 196.265 Km2, was twice the average area; Tanagra,
with 245.65 Km2, over twice the average, and Thespiai with 447.358 Km2 covered more than 4.5 times
the average territory for a Boiotian polis.
Figure 14.
Orchomenos. Hellenistic Fortifications.
d)
Finally, Thebes,
with 907.612 km2, nine times the average, was a great polis, unusually large. It covered a
third of the total area of Boiotian Confederacy and is the hegemonic polis of the Confederacy.
 Figure 15. Ancient Boiotia in 395 B.C. |
Figure 16.
Boiotian federal poleis
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thus, in Boiotia, the average area of
a polis was around 100 km2.
This was enough to ensure the survival of a polis
with a sufficient level of economic self-sufficiency and continued political
independence. With a smaller area, the poleis
of 50-60 km2 had a precarious economic and political existence. It was necessary for a city to have al least
200 km2 to be considered, in Boiotian terms, a leading power and 1,000
km2, like Thebes or Corinth (with 948 km2), to be
considered a great Greek State.
5. The
relationship between the size of Boiotian poleis
and federal organization.
At the beginning of Fourth Century
B.C., the Boiotian Confederacy was basically organised into districts (meros), of which there were eleven, which
served as an electoral and fiscal unit and as the basis for military
recruitment. Each unit or district had a duty to provide one Boiotarch, the
most important federal official, sixty bouleutai or federal councillors, one
thousand hoplites, a hundred horsemen and a certain number of judges. Each unit
made the same financial contribution. These eleven districts were
asymmetrically distributed amongst the eleven poleis that formed the Federal State: four districts corresponded
to Thebes, two to Thespiai, one to Tanagra; two to Orchomenos and Hysiai,
probably distributed 1 2/3 for Orchomenos and 1/3 for Hysiai; Lebadeia, Koroneia
and Haliartos formed a single district and Chaironeia, Kopai and Akraiphiai
also shared control of one district.
Although the division of Boiotia
into districts and the attribution of the districts to the various poleis was based fundamentally on a
demographic assumption - the number of adult males that could be hoplites and
horsemen - and not on the size of its territory, we can begin with a working
hypothesis: in agrarian societies the relationship between population, economic
resources and territory has to be very close. This would permit us to
investigate the possible territorial size of a Boiotian district and the
relationship that might exist between that size and the various Boiotian poleis.
If we calculate the available land
of the Boiotian Confederation to be 2,400 Km2, Theban territory
would account for 908 km2, 37.8% of total. With its four districts
Thebes provided the 36.36% of federal contributions. If we divide its territory
into four districts, each district will have an average size of 227 km2.
Thespiai, with an area of 447.358 Km2, had 18.6% of the land. With
two districts it ought to contribute 18.19% of the federal obligations. The
average size of its two districts was of 224 Km2. 9.1% of the
federal contributions were demanded from Tanagra and, with its 246 Km2,
it occupied 10.2% of the territory. The shared district of Akraiphiai, Chaironeia
and Kopai had to provide the 9.09% of federal charges and its total territory
came, by adding the three poleis
together, to about 221 Km2 and accounted for 9.2% of the total. In
the same way, the Confederacy demanded 9.09% of the federal contributions from Lebadeia,
Koroneia and Haliartos between them, and their territory, taken together, was some
331 Km2, accounting for 13.8% of the federal territory. Orchomenos
and Hysiai had a combined area of about 247 km2, 10.3% of the
federal territory, and their two districts had to contribute 18.18% of the
federal charges.
Figure 17. The
relationship between the Boiotian poleis
and federal organization
|
Figure 18. The
federal Council of the Boiotian Koinon (poleis and number of bouleutai) |
Hence there is a close correlation
between the size of the poleis’
territories and their contribution to the Federal State. This correlation only
breaks down in the case of the shared district of Haliartos, Lebadeia and Koroneia
and the two individual districts of Orchomenos and Hysiai. The main reason for
this was the Theban policy of trying to weaken its main rival, Orchomenos.
According to Thucydides, Chaironeia still belonged to Orchomenos in 424, and
between that date and 395, was divided to form the districts of Akraiphiai and Kopai.
After this, Orchomenos’ charges were increased considerably so its territory
(196.265 km2), already subject to the normal obligations of a single
district, also had to contribute 2/3 of another district, that of the small polis of Hysiai (which occupied some 50
Km2), which only contributed a 1/3. It is understandable then that,
apart from other considerations (ancient animosity, wars, etc.), the Orchomenians
were dissatisfied and defected from the Confederacy in 395. Before 424, the
five poleis around Lake Kopais – Lebadeia,
Koroneia, Haliartos, Kopai and Akraiphiai – probably formed two shared
districts; these had to provide an 18.18% of the federal charges and their
total area, some 494 Km2, accounted for 20% of the Confederacy’s total
territory.
There is also a close relationship
between population and territory size. In Boiotia, an average area of 225-250 Km2
was sufficient to support around two thousand five hundred male adult
citizens: one thousand hoplites, one hundred horsemen and a similar number of
social classes under the hoplite census, to which we have to add males between
18 and 20 years and those over 60. However,
that size and number of citizens was far beyond the possibilities of the small
and medium-sized Boiotian cities, which is why the Confederacy only demanded a
third of a district. This leads us to suggest that Boiotian small and medium-sized
cities, with an area of between 50 and 100 Km2, had a citizen body of
a thousand, or one thousand five hundred at the most, adult male citizens.
6. Hierarchization
and distribution of secondary settlements in the chora.
We can now advance the hypothesis
that the distribution of settlements within the territory of each polis is not arbitrary but forms a group
ordered by different elements within which structured and hierarchical
relations are established. The control and hierarchization of a territory are
precisely two of the basic elements that define the polis as a state.
First, we can try to establish a
relationship between the total area, the perimeter of a territory and the
number of secondary settlements that exist in the chora of each polis. None
of the small Boiotian poleis, Chaironeia,
Akraiphiai and Hysiai, has a secondary settlement in its chora, what proves that the whole territory, to varying degrees and
intensities, tended to be exploited directly from the centre or asty. Only in the case of medium-sized poleis, with an area of 90-100 Km2,
do we can find secondary settlements.
Ideally, the best territory would be
one that is circular, where it would be possible to reach all the cultivable
land from one single point. In Boiotia, the ideal relationship would be where
the perimeter is only between 30/40 % of the area (34.69 Km from the total area
of 96.6 Km2). If a territory had a long perimeter and its territory was
an irregular shape, in addition to the problems of defence involved, the polis was driven to multiply the number
of settlements to reach all the cultivable land or to leave vast tracts uncultivated. Kopai is a case in point. Poleis of a similar size, such as Koroneia
with Alalkomenai/Solinari, Rachi and Koukoura (probably ancient Hippotai) or Haliartos with Zagora-Evangelistria, Seïdi and Onchestos (village), have
three settlements, but Kopai has five (Stroviki,
Pyrgos-Ayia Marina, Megali Katavothra, Ayios Yannis and probably Gla)
and this is due to the fact that its perimeter is long and its territory a very
irregular shape because the Northeast Bay of Lake Kopais penetrated deeply into
it. Lebadeia has no secondary settlements in its territory for two main reasons:
the most distant parts from the asty
are so steep that a settlement would not be profitable here, and communication with
the asty is easy enough to reach these
resources.
Nevertheless, since the relationship
between population and territory is not as flexible in an agricultural society
as in modern industrial economies, there must be approximately the same
population whether concentrated or dispersed.
Even if all the cultivable land were worked, the population would
increase only moderately and cannot exceed certain limits. Therefore, if we
distribute approximately the same population amongst a greater number of secondary
settlements, both these and also the asty
itself will have to be
smaller than a polis that tends to
have a concentrated population. Thus, for example, the size of the secondary
settlements such as the one belonging to the asty is smaller in Kopai than in other poleis of a similar size.
As has already been demonstrated by
the Cambridge/Bradford Expedition,
the chora of a Boiotian polis is organised in a series of
hierarchized settlements on the basis of their distance, size and importance
and can be systematized in the following way:
1. The asty of each polis, actually a vast complex formed by the acropolis, the asty in the strict sense, i.e., the space between the acropolis and the walled enclosure, and the
extraurban complexes: suburbs, necropolis,
adjacent farms and shrines.
2. We will pay
particular attention to what we could call regional centres (actually in many
times syntelic poleis, dominated by
other poleis). At least in Boiotia
there are a series of intermediate settlements that, because of their size and importance,
cannot be considered simple choria or
komai but evidently do form an asty
of a polis either. We can list nearly a dozen of these
intermediate centres: Hippotai, Askra, Hyettos, Thisbe, Korsiai, Siphai, Mykalessos,
Anthedon and Aulis.
Figure 19. Siphai (Alikí) on
the South Coast, a syntelic polis of
Thespiai
These centres have a number of
characteristics: they are a considerable distance from the asty, they are large: at least 5 ha., all or most of them were walled,
they are the centre of that we might call the region or district, and most of
them were at some time politically independent.
a)
Sites between 1 and 2.5 ha that represent the normal area
for secondary settlements such as villages or hamlets (komai or choria) and which
were not normally walled.
b)
Farming-type settlements that usually occupy half ha.
c)
Rural shrines, some of which are as much as 4 ha.
d)
And finally, rural necropoleis
that cover a small area (about 2,000 m2)
7. Hierarchization
and uses of territory.
The economic exploitation of the chora had a primary goal: to make the polis
self-sufficient by obtaining from its own territory the resources essential
for its survival as a political, social and economically viable state. So economic uses of the territory not only
had to be hierarchized and diversified, but also complementary.
There is an economic heartland in
each polis, a valley or plain located
near a settlement that occupies a central place in relation to the territory of
the polis as a whole. Depending on their distance from this
economic heartland, the mountain slopes
and the low hills on the border of the cultivated plain provided grazing
for livestock, wool, leather, milk products, bones and also honey, and in a
limited way, dry crops (for example olive groves). In most cases, the mountains
are furthest away from the chora, and
do not act simply as a boundary, but played an indispensable role because they
supplied the polis, as part of a
system that aimed at self-sufficiency, with a number of important resources,
such as stone, firewood, wood for buildings, hunting, and sometimes, metals. Paradoxically,
without the mountains it would have been difficult for a largely
self-sufficient independent community to exist.
Finally we can say that on average, in
Boiotia, the area between 0-400 m above sea level accounts for 70% of the
territory of a polis, the area of low
hills (400-600 m) accounts for 15% and the mountains in the strict sense
(600-1600m) for another 15%.
Figure 20.
Territories of the Boiotian poleis
and altitude
|
In conclusion, profiting from all the
information that can be gleaned from the surviving ancient literary and other
historical sources, we can apply new methods and working instruments such as
historical topography, intensive surveying and using Geographical Information
Systems that offer an unique way of approaching the analysis of the
territorial, demographic and economic structures of the polis and provide us with an unprecedented opportunity to explore
the true diversity and wealth of Greek world. And in this way the Boiotian
studies can provide a model for other areas of Greece such as the Isthmus,
Attica, Phokis and East Lokris.