Eupalinus of Megara

Greek architect

• Born: c. 575 b.c.e.
• Birthplace: Megara, Greece
• Died: c. 500 b.c.e.
• Place of death: Unknown

Eupalinus was the architect of the tunnel and aqueduct on the island of Samos that bear his name. Probably built for the tyrant Polycrates in the sixth century b.c.e., they still stand today as monuments to the engineering skills of the Greeks of the archaic period.

Early Life

Eupalinus (ew-PAW-lee-nuhs), the son of Naustrophos, was from the Greek city-state of Megara, in the district of Megaris, located between Athens and Corinth. No details of his life have been preserved, but much can be inferred from what is known about the history of his birthplace in the sixth century b.c.e. Eupalinus was born into a prosperous land. Megara had experienced much growth in the years before his birth and was the mother city of numerous colonies.

The young Eupalinus doubtless heard stories from his father and grandfather about the tyrant Theagenes, who had diverted water from the mountains to the city. The waterworks were still in operation, and the youth must have observed for himself the extensive underground conduit system that the tyrant had built to provide the city with water. The Megaris area was not well endowed with water, and the management of that precious resource was a prime concern. It is possible that a fountain house built in Megara toward the end of the century was designed by Eupalinus. In any case, it is likely that he gained some reputation in hydraulic engineering before being called to Samos for the great tunnel project.

Education for boys of Megara in the sixth century was mostly a matter of training for military activities and of learning manners and politics from their elders during banquets and symposia (drinking parties). Eupalinus would also have observed the productions of some of the first comedies, for the Megarians were said to have invented this dramatic form during Eupalinus’s youth. As a result of his upbringing, it is likely that he was cultured and comfortable among other citizens of privilege.

Eupalinus probably lived most of his life in the democracy that followed the tyranny but would have observed the many struggles between the wealthy conservative oligarchs and the poorer supporters of popular rule. The poetry of Theognis of Megara preserves many of the passions that this strife aroused. The differences between rich and poor were exacerbated by the introduction of coinage, which also took place during Eupalinus’s lifetime, as did the Palintokia, or debt-relief measures meant to help farmers.

Eupalinus had firsthand experience with siege and warfare as well. Throughout the sixth century, Megara fought a series of wars with neighboring Athens. In one incident, the Athenian Pisistratus is said to have besieged and captured the Megarian harbor Nisaea. This background points to Eupalinus’s later success in his life’s work: He had a worldly background in politics and culture and a good knowledge of warfare and hydraulic engineering. These elements point to his future favor in the court of Polycrates.

Life’s Work

Eupalinus is known from statements by Herodotus to have been the architect of the Eupalinos Tunnel, cut through the mountain bordering the capital city of the island Samos. Herodotus said that on Samos were the three greatest constructions of all the Greeks and listed the tunnel of Eupalinus first, describing its dimensions fairly accurately. The other two marvels of construction were Polycrates’ great harbor works and the temple of Hera. Today, the tunnel is by far the best preserved of the three. Archaeological evidence points to a date somewhere between 540 and 530 b.c.e. for the beginning of the work. Scholars have inferred that the tyrant Polycrates called Eupalinus from Megara to direct the project.

The task facing Eupalinus was formidable: In order to keep the Samians supplied with water in time of siege, he was to bring water from a spring on the north side of Mount Ampelus (now called Kastro) into the walled city on the other side. His solution was ingenious, consisting of an 850-meter-long underground conduit (high enough for a man to walk) that led from the spring to the entrance of a straight tunnel cut almost one kilometer through the mountain. The conduit was circuitous, so as to make disposal of the fill easier on the hilly terrain and to make detection more difficult and thus secure the Samians’ water supply. The tunnel not only had a channel for the water but also provided a convenient escape route should the city ever be taken. The system was so efficient that it continued to be used into Byzantine times, after which it fell into disrepair. The system was also well hidden; it lay undiscovered until 1853, when some of the conduit pipes were found, but the tunnel itself was not located by archaeologists until 1882, when a German team began excavations. The results of their work are still being published.

The tunnel was cut through solid limestone by workers using only hammer and chisel. It consists of two levels: an upper level on which people could walk—approximately two meters in height and width—and a deeper shaft on the east side up to seven and a half meters deep, where the water flowed in a channel made of ceramic tiles.

Eupalinus instructed his workers to divide into two teams, each of which began digging at opposite ends of the mountain. The method he used to ensure that they met in the middle has not yet been discovered. The teams were only two meters apart when they could hear each other’s chisels and abruptly turned east. The northern team then broke through into the southern tunnel at a right angle. It has been calculated that had the workers continued digging in a straight line, they would have met head-on, although the northern shaft was a bit higher than the southern one. A conduit within the town led from the south end of the tunnel, providing not only drinking water for the inhabitants but possibly also a steady stream to operate the town’s water clock.

It is not known how long Eupalinus took to complete the tunnel—estimates range from five to fifteen years—nor is it known how many people he employed; certainly the size of the shafts would have permitted only a few workers on each team. It is obvious that Eupalinus took pride in his work and was something of a perfectionist, for the quality of the carving is very high, and there are niches carved in the walls to support lamps. In addition, Eupalinus saw to it that the tunnel was well provided with fresh air, which flowed through a ventilation hole and the conduits themselves.

It is likely that the tyrant Polycrates had ulterior motives when he hired Eupalinus. In addition to wanting the citizens of Samos to have a safe water supply and full employment, the tyrant was concerned that his people be occupied with large projects so as not to have time or desire to revolt against his power. Aristotle compares Polycrates’ constructions to those undertaken by tyrants at Athens and Corinth. While the tunnel on Samos is the only undisputed work of Eupalinus, the similarity of the pipes used in its construction to those found in the Pisistratean aqueduct at Athens has led some to think that Eupalinus was the architect of that water system also, but no certain proof has yet been offered.

Significance

Eupalinus was not the first of the ancients—or the last—to engineer an underground tunnel for water transport. His contribution was one not of originality but of quality: He proved that tunneling through a mountain for an aqueduct could be done efficiently with a simple technology. Although his northern team worked at a higher level than the southern tunnelers, and though the tunnel did not meet in a perfectly straight fashion, the work was nevertheless outstanding for its excellence: No other ancient tunnel matched its standards. Two hundred years earlier, a tunnel was constructed at Jerusalem between the Virgin’s Pool and Siloam. Like Eupalinus’s aqueduct, this construction was begun at both ends, but it was not as straight as the Samian tunnel. In fact, the Jerusalem tunnel wasted more than 150 meters on its winding way. A Roman tunnel project in northern Africa, at Saldae (modern Bejaïa), that used the two-team technique—more than five hundred years after Eupalinus—is also known. This project failed because the teams were unable to find each other. Their courses were so misdirected, in fact, that they dug a total distance that exceeded the mountain’s width.

Eupalinus’s engineering methods are not fully understood and probably combined the empirical (trial and error) with some surveying techniques that have yet to be discovered. He might have aligned poles carefully up one side of the mountain and down the other or used a method of triangulation that the engineer Hero of Alexandria described six hundred years later. It is also possible that Eupalinus kept the shafts straight by having his workmen keep their eyes on a light behind them at the end of the tunnel or shining through a hole cut in the roof. Whatever his methods were, they were effective, and the tunnel that bears his name stands as one of the most impressive engineering feats of antiquity.

Bibliography

Burns, Alfred. “The Tunnel of Eupalinus and the Tunnel Problem of Hero of Alexandria.” Isis 62 (Summer, 1971): 172-185. An excellent analysis of Hero of Alexandria’s first century c.e. treatise, Dioptra, in relation to the tunnel, with diagrams from Hero’s work compared with the Samian topography.

Figueira, Thomas J., and Gregory Nagy, eds. Theognis of Megara: Poetry and the Polis. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1985. Provides historical background of archaic Megara. Includes a chronological table with extensive annotations as well as a discussion of Megarian society and education during Eupalinus’s lifetime.

Goodfield, June. “The Tunnel of Eupalinus.” Scientific American 210 (June, 1964): 104-110. An account of a scientific/photographic expedition to investigate the tunnel. Contains summaries of the German excavators’ findings and engineering problems and excellent diagrams, photographs, and maps.

Humphrey, John William, John P. Oleson, and Andrew N. Sherwood. Greek and Roman Technology: A Sourcebook. New York: Routledge, 1998. Contains translations of Greek and Latin works and documents. One chapter covers hydraulic engineering.

Legon, Ronald P. Megara: The Political History of a Greek City-State to 336 B.C. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1981. A good source for the historical background of Eupalinus, discussing Megarian geography, tyranny, oligarchy, democracy, and commerce. Also treats the fountain house of Theagenes and Eupalinus’s possible role in its construction.

Mitchell, B. M. “Herodotus and Samos.” Journal of Hellenic Studies 95 (1973): 75-91. In the course of discussing Herodotus’s relations with Samos and information about the town, Mitchell includes a concise and well-documented discussion of the tunnel, with speculations on date, manpower, rate of work, and use.

Rihll, T. E., and J. V. Tucker. “Greek Engineering: The Case of Eupalinos’s Tunnel.” In The Greek World, edited by Anton Powell. New York: Routledge, 1995. Volume of essays on ancient Greek civilization includes bibliography and index.

Shipley, Graham. A History of Samos: 800-188 B.C. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 1987. Contains an account of the tunnel of Eupalinus with a summary of scholarship on it.

White, K. D. Greek and Roman Technology. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1984. This book includes a section on hydraulic engineering with a discussion of the tunnel, comparative material from other ancient waterworks, and an extensive bibliography, as well as an explanation of Eupalinus’s use of the channel on the east side of the tunnel. Discusses surveying problems and Hero of Alexandria’s solution. Includes illustrations.