Module 6: The Harbors of Delos
Anchoring Alternatives: The Commercial Viability of Delos' Secondary Bays
Located between Mykonos and Rhenia, the island of Delos served as a significant hub for trade and religious activity in antiquity. Its central position between routes east and west between Europe and Asia, and throughout the Mediterranean attracted merchants and pilgrims from across the region, and served as an early locus of globalization and commerce between the Hellenistic east and Rome (Zarmakoupi, 2018). The main harbor on Delos facilitated this exchange, providing infrastructure supporting the trade of islandβs emporium. Considering the geography of Delos and challenges of ancient maritime navigation, we might speculate on the role other natural bays played adjacent to the primary port. I will examine Skardanas Bay, Gourna Bay, and Fourni Bay, exploring their potential to serve as alternative harbor sites predicated upon geographical advantages, limitations, archeological evidence and accessibility within the context of Delosβ centralized position in the Aegean.
Skardanas Bay, situated northwest of the main and northern ports, offers mixed viability as an ancient harbor. Flanked by rocky cliffs, the bay opens to a small triangular plain shaped by the natural processes of inland siltation. Its modern beach, obstructed by rubble from ancient buildings and strong tidal patterns, complicates assessments of the original coastline and underwater study. Despite these challenges, archeological evidence of maritime activity includes a partly submerged structure in the bay's northern end, resembling the trading facilities of a commercial harbor and suggesting limited use (Nakas, 2022).
One major drawback was the bayβs vulnerability to northern and northwestern winds (Wikipedia, 2024). With no substantial natural or artificial barriers beyond a minor northern outcrop, high waves frequently frustrated shipping operations. Despite these limitations, the presence of the northeast corner building implies Skardanas Bay was still occasionally used as a alternate harbor. Ships may have unloaded here before seeking shelter in more protected areas such as the Merchant Harbor or Southern Anchorage (Nakas, 2022). The bay's natural features allowed for limited harbor functions, with much of its area maintaining depths exceeding 2 meters, and able to accommodate up to five medium or four large ships, with additional capacity for small vessels along the eastern beach. However, its narrow configuration and exposed position limited its practicality for medium-to-large capacity ships.
Gourna Bay, serving as the harbor of the Stadium District, similarly presents a combination of strengths and limitations as an ancient anchorage. The bay is a small cove with a natural pebble beach, disrupted by rock formations and minimally shielded by high ground to the north. While it offered relatively deep waters which would have been conducive to anchoring larger ships, the shoreline suffered from erosion and lacked significant sedimentation or rubble deposits (Nakas, 2022). The discovery of a poorly preserved long stone quay supports an interpretation of organized maritime activity. The quay could accommodate up to five large ships or up to twelve very small vessels, anchored stern-first. The adjacent narrow beach could support smaller ships, though its rocky terrain would have made it unsuitable for larger-scale operations.
Yet unlike major harbors, Gourna Bay lacked sufficient infrastructure for substantial commercial activity. No large-scale warehouses or monumental structures have been found, except for a synagogue to the south and residences spanning the coastal zone. Nearby submerged remains, including a possible tavern or textile dyeing workshop, suggest minor economic function (Nakas, 2022). Despite its open configuration, easing movement and anchoring, the bay's exposed position and predominantly rocky coastline posed challenges for harboring safely, with the bayβs steep shorelines further restricting beaching operations.
Fourni Bay, located at the southern edge of the island, demonstrates more robust potential as an ancient harbor rather than commercial hub. Facing southwest, the bay features a shallow sandy beach at its center and is flanked by a rocky promontory to the west, home to an ancient healing temple, the Asklepieion. On the opposite shore stands a smaller sanctuary, possibly the Leukothion. No ancient harbor works or structures have been discovered either on land or underwater, yet the bayβs positioning outside Delosβ city limits, even at the height of its urban explosion in the early 1st century BCE, further supports the notion that Fourni Bay was not a primary commercial harbor (Nakas, 2022).
However, its depth and natural organization made it a more viable auxiliary harbor. The bay could accommodate up to fifty small ships, and even larger vessels could approach its entrance with ease, supporting fishing boats, ferries, and lighters supporting ships from the nearby Southern Anchorage or arriving from the south and southwest. Speculation details Fourni Bayβs use as a departure point for boats carrying women in labor or the dying to Rhenia, in accordance with Delian laws prohibiting births and deaths on Apolloβs sacred island (Nakas, 2022).
Delosβ location at the crossroads of major Aegean trade routes became critical to its success as a locus for commercial and religious cultural activity (Zarmakoupi, 2018), with the islandβs harbors providing access to key ports including Piraeus, Rhodes, and Ephesus. Ships arriving from the north, for example from mainland Greece, would have found Skardanas Bay convenient, though its limited capacity and exposure to northern winds would have been deterrents (Tartaron, 2015). Fourni Bay, with its relatively calmer waters, would have been more accessible to ships traveling from southern Aegean ports such as Crete (Casson, 1995). Gourna Bayβs strategic eastern location made it a logical stop for vessels arriving from the the island of Mykanos or further across the Icarian Sea from Persia or Byzantium.
Skardanas Bay functioned as a modest auxiliary harbor, leveraging its depth and protected corner for temporary use. However, its limited capacity, exposure to strong winds (Wikipedia, 2024), and challenging geography made it a secondary option compared to larger, more sheltered harbors in the region. Gourna Bay functioned as a small, open anchorage with limited protection, modest capacity, and minimal infrastructure, primarily catering to auxiliary maritime needs rather than large-scale trade or naval activities. Fourni Bay served primarily as a modest auxiliary harbor, leveraging its depth and sheltered location for local maritime activities, while remaining peripheral to the cityβs main commercial functions.
However, the primary harborβs dominance and sustainability reflect the viability of protected, easily accessible, and well-equipped docking facilities. Its location near the more substantial settlements of Delos enabled efficient handling of goods and passengers on and offshore, making it indispensable to the regionβs economic development (EFA GIS Platform, 2024). The primary harborβs natural protection, accessibility, and established infrastructure provided unmatched support for the emporiumβs extensive operations, making it the most viable choice (Zarmakoupi, 2018). Lack of significant infrastructure in the three alternative bays underscores their secondary status, and attempts to establish a large-scale emporium in these locations would have required more substantial infrastructure investment, making the main harbor not just the more practical choice, but also the more fiscally responsible one.
Delosβ main harbor was integral to its role as a trade and religious center in the ancient Aegean (Zarmakoupi, 2024). While Skardanas Bay, Gourna Bay and Fourni Bay offer unique and compelling features which could have supported less material harbor activities, their limitations in capacity, accessibility, and infrastructure render them less sustainable for hosting the emporium, reinforcing the importance of natural geography and infrastructure in determining the success of ancient harbors.
References
Casson, L. (1995). Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World. Princeton University Press.
EFA GIS Platform. (2024). SIG Delos. [Digital File]. Retrieved from: https://sig-delos.efa.gr/.
Google Maps. (Accessed November 2024).
Nakas, I. (2022). The Hellenistic and Roman Harbors of Delos and Kenchreai. Bar Publishing. [Digital File]. Retrieved from: https://www.ancientportsantiques.com/wp-content/uploads/Documents/AUTHORS/Nakas2022-Delos&Kenchrai.pdf.
Tartaron, T. (2015). Maritime Networks in the Ancient Aegean. Cambridge University Press. [Digital File]. Retrieved from: https://kupdf.net/download/mycene-thomas-f-tartaron-maritime-networks-in-the-mycenaean-world-2013-pdf_590c9d01dc0d603f1f959ee4_pdf#.
Wikipedia. (2024). Etesian. Retrieved from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etesian.
Zarmakoupi, M. (2018). The urban development of late Hellenistic Delos. in D. Millette and S. Martin-McAuliffe(eds.), Ancient Urban Planning in the Mediterranean: New Research Directions (2018), pp. 28-49. [Digital File]. Retrieved from: https://canvas.upenn.edu/courses/1810630/files/136262711?module_item_id=30711739.
Zarmakoupi, M. (2024). Video 6.1. Urban Planning. [Digital File]. Retrieved from: https://canvas.upenn.edu/courses/1810630/modules/items/30711729.
