This article presents the results of new field and aerial photo surveys of
the Atalanti fault and of the mesoseismal area of the 20 and 27 April 1894
earthquakes. Coupled with a reanalysis of contemporary reports and previous
investigations, these are used to gain a better understanding of the fault
s responsible for these events and their seismic behavior. The first shock
was smaller and probably located inshore or offshore the Malessina peninsul
a. No resolving field evidence has been found to locate the seismogenic str
ucture responsible for this shock. On the basis of the limited information
available, we suggest the Malessina escarpment, a 12-km long, ENE-trending,
NW-dipping fault as a possible structure responsible for this event. On th
e other hand, the second and largest shock is definitely related to the Ata
lanti fault sensu stricto, a main WNW-trending, N-dipping active fault exte
nding between the Platirema valley (a few km NW of the town of Atalanti) an
d Larymna. The total length of the rupture recognized in the field is about
32 km, but it can be extended further SE up to 40 km. No evidence for a lo
nger rupture extending some other 20 km to the NW, between the Karagiozis r
iver and Ag. Kostantinos, is found. The complex geometry of the fault with
bends and step overs appears to be controlled by preexisting transverse str
uctures. Minimum coseismic vertical throws, measured in the field after mor
e than a century elapsed from the earthquake, are 30-80 cm, thus consistent
with contemporary reports indicating 1-m average. Slip rates are not well
constrained. The available estimates fall in the range 0.1-0.5 mm/yr confir
ming the smaller amount of crustal extension taking place in this area with
respect to other nearby regions such as the Corinth gulf. No new data are
available to define the average recurrence interval typical of the Atalanti
fault. However, a reconsideration of the existing information induced us t
o rule out the possibility that the famous 426 B.C. earthquake occurred on
the Atalanti fault. On the basis of the extent and size of the rupture reco
gnized in the field, a M 6.8 is estimated for the second and largest shock.