Alexander the Great’s Route to Gaugamela and Arbela

Marciak, Michał; Sobiech, Marcin; Pirowski, Tomasz

doi:10.1515/klio-2020-2024

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it should be stressed that the majority of modern scholars support the localization of the famous battle in the Navkur Plain. This identification can be argued on several premises: first, the continuity of local onomasticsthe name Tell Gomel can be considered a remnant of the ancient name Gaugamela (Fales and Del Fabbro 2014: n. 6;Morandi Bonacossi and Iamoni 2015, 12, n. 8); second, the existence of a long-distance travel route between Nisibis and Arbela leading through the Navkur Plain in the times of Alexander the Great (Marciak et al 2020); third, the appropriate topographic and geomorphological features in the Tell Gomel Plain (Marciak et al 2022). At the same time, the identification in the Karamleis Plain features several serious deficiencies (Marciak et al 2021a, b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interpretation of multispectral satellite data as a tool for detecting archaeological artifacts (Navkur Plain and Karamleis Plain, Iraq)

Pirowski

Szypuła²,

Marciak³

2022

Archaeol Anthropol Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary studies of geographical space, including archaeological research, incorporate multiple spatial digital data. Such data provide an opportunity to extend research to large areas, and to objectify studies on the basis of quantitative data thus obtained and gaining access to the hard-to-reach study area. Examples of such data are satellite images at various spatial resolutions and in a wide spectrum of electromagnetic radiation (visible, infrared, and microwave). The authors made an attempt to use satellite images to analyze the areas of probable location of the Battle of Gaugamela (the Navkur Plain and the Karamleis Plain in Iraq). The photointerpretation was performed, enhanced by the multivariate processing of the multispectral image. The aim of the work was indicating the most likely places where the camp and the battle were located based on the visual interpretation of an array of satellite data. The adopted methodology of precise allocation of interpretative values to remote sensing materials for every detected artifact provided an opportunity to accumulate an extensive amount of information. It also provided the basis for a synthetic analysis regarding the methods of image processing on the one hand and the dates of recording on the other. It turned out that the season in which the photos are recorded is very important—although the best data for analysis turned out to be the autumn data (38% of all recognized artifacts), the use of data from three seasons increased the total number of indicated artifacts by as much as about 50% (the so-called unique detections). In addition, advanced image processing (such as principal component analysis and decorrelation stretch) turned out to be important, as it increased the number of areal artifacts by 31% compared to the interpretation of only photos in natural (true) color composite and false color composite (with near-infrared). The conducted analyses have confirmed the usefulness of high-resolution satellite data for archaeological applications, and the detected and described anomalies visible in satellite images are excellent material for selecting sites for detailed field research.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interpretation of multispectral satellite data as a tool for detecting archaeological artifacts (Navkur Plain and Karamleis Plain, Iraq)

Pirowski

Szypuła²,

Marciak³

2022

Archaeol Anthropol Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 91 This conclusion is also corroborated by the results of our analysis of the chronology and itinerary of the march of the Macedonian army on the east bank of the Tigris – from the Tigris crossing to Gaugamela. See Marciak, Sobiech and Pirowski (2020). In short, given the amount of time on the march (six days) and the estimated average rate of the march (24 km), it is unlikely that the Macedonians crossed the Tigris in the vicinity of Abu Dhahir or Abu Wajnam (even less likely at Eski Mosul or Nineveh) as frequently suggested.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Alexander the Great in Mesopotamia in 331 BCE

Marciak

Sobiech²,

Pirowski

2022

Antichthon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a selected aspect of research conducted within the Gaugamela Project, which seeks to finally identify the location of the Battle of Gaugamela. Its particular aim is to analyse the strategic situation of the army of Alexander the Great in Mesopotamia in the summer of 331 BCE, with a special focus on the itinerary and chronology of the army's march. The paper critically reviews Classical sources (Arrian, Curtius, Diodorus, and Plutarch), but also employs topographic and archaeological data as well as GIS capabilities (least cost paths). In contrast to most previous scholarship, it is suggested that the Macedonian troops crossed the Euphrates much later than suggested by Arrian (Anab. 3.7.1) – around September 2, 331 BCE. Their march led across the Tur Abdin escarpment (via Nisibis) and left Mesopotamia through a ford in the vicinity of modern Cizre or Basorin. What is more, the Macedonian marching rate was definitely not slow (contra W. E. Marsden), but faster than average due to the activity of the Persian scouting troops and logistic necessity. In total, the Macedonians covered around 370 to 394 km within a maximum of 16 days.

show abstract

Alexander the Great’s Route to Gaugamela and Arbela

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Interpretation of multispectral satellite data as a tool for detecting archaeological artifacts (Navkur Plain and Karamleis Plain, Iraq)

Interpretation of multispectral satellite data as a tool for detecting archaeological artifacts (Navkur Plain and Karamleis Plain, Iraq)

Alexander the Great in Mesopotamia in 331 BCE

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About