Chronicle 20. THE ENIGMATIC SEA PEOPLES

Chronicle 20. THE ENIGMATIC SEA PEOPLES

/ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΑ/ Χρονικό 20. ΟΙ ΑΙΝΙΓΜΑΤΙΚΟΙ ΛΑΟΙ ΤΗΣ ΘΑΛΑΣΣΑΣ

● Bronze Age Collapse Due to Famine ● Trojan War and Anatolian
Sea Peoples ● Merneptah Stele and Exodus ● Hittites and Luwians

Michales Loukovikas

The “Great Green” Mediterranean, the “Sea of Hellenes”

BEFORE WE VOYAGE WEST, we need to sail off onto the “Great Green” of the “Sea of Hellenes” (Egyptian terms referring to the Mediterranean), in search of the Sea Peoples, meeting more migrant-refugee bands on the way. Voyaging in space and time, in history, legend or myth, let us go back to the explosive finale of the 17th century BCE, i.e. the “big bang” of the Minoan volcanic eruption on Thera, as it occurred very close to the period that the Sea Peoples initially appeared in Egypt. If we take into account the wrecking of the Minoan navy policing the seas, we can presume that these peoples were then nothing but pirates, and we also realize how interdependent the great powers were in the ancient world, as well.

Ancient ship, Egyptian papyrus painting

Later the Egyptians started identifying various bands of Sea Peoples in their own style, and one of the first they mentioned were the Sherden, or Shardana, a large group of pirates. They disrupted trade in the late 13th century and contributed greatly to the collapse of the Mycenaean civilization. Nonetheless, they are not mentioned in either Hellenic or Hittite legends or documents, suggesting that they did not originate from either sphere of influence. Many scholars relate the Shardana to Sardinia due to the similarity between the two words. Based on the same principle, the archaeologist Margaret Guido proposed that the Shardana might have ultimately derived from Sardis, and the Sardinian plain nearby, in Lydia, and perhaps migrated later to Sardinia. It seems that many people, and not only the Trojans that would become Romans, left Anatolia and the Aegean for the Italian peninsula and its islands due to the Bronze Age collapse rather than before. There is evidence that gives credit to Virgil’s Aeneid – but without excluding the possibility of earlier migrations. Recent genetic studies indicate that the populations not only of people, but even of cattle, in several Italian regions, especially in Tuscany, are more related to Asia Minor, and mainly in the northwest, than to anywhere else.

A famous passage from Herodotus, quoted by scholars quite often, portrays the migration and drifting of Lydians in the Mediterranean because of famine:

Etruscans dancing, painting on a tomb

“Their king divided the people into two groups, so that the one should remain and the other leave the country. His son, Tyrrhenus, was to be the head of those who departed. They went down to Smyrna and built themselves ships. After sailing past many countries they came to the Umbri, where they founded cities and called themselves Tyrrhenians.”

We can’t but remember that Anatolia faced the same acute problem of famine in the time of the collapse and, as a result, the Sea Peoples, then a coalition of seagoing migrants, closed ranks seeking relief from scarcity. Drought could have easily precipitated socio-economic problems and wars. As regards the story told by Herodotus and its link to the Sea Peoples, some scholars contend that those people called Teresh by the Egyptians were none others than the Tyrrhenians, or Tyrsenians, who are often identified with the Tusci (hence Tuscany), the Latin exonym for the Etruscans, or Ras(en)na, as they called themselves. The Tyrsenian linguistic family, together with Etruscan, includes the Lemnian language, spoken on the Aegean island of Lemnos to the 6th century BCE. Another Aegean tongue possibly related to the Etruscan was the Minoan Cretan. A third Aegean island close to Asia Minor mentioned as their possible origin by Thucydides is that of Lesbos. The Romans, as Virgil’s readers, identified the Teresh with the Trojans. There are clues to support this view. Several writers, e.g. Andrea Salimbeti in The Greek Age of Bronze: Sea Peoples, comment that a Trojan connection in the case of the Teresh (or Tursha) should be at first taken under consideration:

The double-headed eagle, the Byzantine symbol of Empire, was used before by Mycenaeans and Hittites, e.g. this relief at Alaca Höyük (1400 BCE)

“Troy appears in a Hittite record as Taruisa. It is a reasonable assumption that the people of Taruisa called themselves by some name close to this; stripped of vowels so that it can be compared to the Egyptian spelling”.

The Troad (or Troas) was outside the territory but within the sphere of influence of Hatti. Nevertheless, another Hittite record points to a different location, for it contains a list of cities, among them Tarsa, most likely Tarsus. These toponyms and corresponding ethnicities would be written down in Egyptian hieroglyphs, or in any cuneiform script, as “T-r-s” or “T-r-sh” – i.e. without vowels.⁽¹⁾

• ⁽¹⁾ A very good example of how important the Greek innovation with the vowels in the alphabet has been. If the Egyptian script had vowels, as well, the enigma of the Sea Peoples might have long since been solved!

“The Sea Peoples may well have been Troy and its confederated
allies, and the literary tradition of the Trojan War may well reflect
the Greek effort to counter those raids.” (Eberhard Zangger)

Anatolian amalgam: the most important regions and peoples

Anatolian connections have been suggested for other Sea Peoples, too, such as the Lukka (Lycians). Most striking is that they mostly seem to have descended from the Troad. Thus the Swiss geoarchaeologist,⁽²⁾ Eberhard Zangger, thinks that “the Sea Peoples may well have been Troy and its confederated allies, and the literary tradition of the Trojan War may well reflect the Greek effort to counter those raids.” This is what the Iliad seems to reflect.⁽³⁾

• ⁽²⁾ Geoarchaeology uses techniques and subject matter of geography, geology, and other Earth sciences, to examine topics which inform archaeological knowledge. Geoarchaeologists study the natural processes that affect archaeological sites, such as geomorphology, as well as soil and sediments, to contribute to archaeological studies.

• ⁽³⁾ According to this scenario, the Trojan War was “just” and defensive on the part of the Greeks, not intended for conquest and destruction of the city controlling the passage to the Black Sea.

Ilium/Troy: the wider area and, below on the right, the modern coastline in red and, therefore,
the floodplain that interested Zangger – on the strategic straits and close to the border area.

Eberhard Zangger

Eberhard Zangger’s Anatolian Hypothesis

● In his Anatolian hypothesis, Eberhard Zangger caused a sensation because of his controversial identification of Troy as Atlantis. Zangger’s point of view is that Plato used an Egyptian version of the story about Troy for his famous report on Atlantis. He based his argument on comparisons between the Mycenaean culture and Plato’s account of the Hellenic civilization facing Atlantis, as well as parallels between the recollections of the Trojan War and the one supposedly fought between Greeks and Atlanteans (a Titanomachy variation). He interpreted the legend of the Trojan War to be the memory of the momentous chaos leading to the Bronze Age collapse, and arrived at the conclusion that Troy must have been much bigger than scholars had presumed, with artificial harbours inside the modern floodplain. In order to prove it, he prepared a helicopter-based geophysical exploration of the plain to locate layers of settlement and artificial port basins, using ground-penetrating techniques. Having granted an “exclusive excavation license” for Troy to Manfred Korfmann, a German archaeologist, the Turkish government rejected Zangger’s request. Disappointed, the latter summed up his theory giving a lecture in the Heidelberg Academy of Science. In my view, his ambitious project was undermined not by Korfmann’s… exclusive rights to excavate for Troy (! – Zangger’s plan did not entail any real excavations) but rather by Turkey’s unwillingness to authorize any disclosure of sensitive military data in an area close to the border for the sake of science.

The historicity of the Iliad

Trojan War scenes on pottery

Despite the attempts of several historians to discredit the historicity of the Iliad, the Trojan War is considered a historical event; in addition, it is a key to grasp the underlying causes of all these epoch-making developments. “For sure, the Sea Peoples’ movement was one of the largest and most important migrations in history that changed the face of the ancient world more than any other single event before the time of Alexander the Great”, remarks Andrea Salimbeti. This long, ravaging war, in combination with the widespread famine in the entire peninsula, created the explosive conditions leading to the collapse. Under the circumstances, many Trojans, allies or neighbours, became refugees, and some survived by their wits or swords. Archeological evidence leads to the conclusion that the Sea Peoples were not pirates anymore, nor raiders plundering and pillaging established cities, but instead a mass of people looking for a place to settle, in search of a home. This was obvious since their first invasion of Egypt under Libyan leadership, when they were accompanied by their families and belongings. The Libyan tribes also played a role in the first campaigns against Egypt. Herodotus and Hecataeus mentioned one of them centuries later. It was the Berber tribe of the Maxyes or Mazyes, the Mazaces to the Romans, or the Meshwesh to the Egyptians – who claimed to have Trojan blood in their veins…

A Peleset headdress, and a similar (?) Phaestos disc symbol (below on the right)

Pelasgians and Philistines (Peleset)

An important Sea People have been the Peleset, identified with the Philistines, or in a broad sense, the Palestinians:

“One of the theories”, says Salimbeti, “links them to the Pelasgians who were allies of Troy and one group of them lived in Thrace. Those Pelasgians would have migrated south, overrunning and fatally damaging Achaean Greek civilization. Shortly after, many would have gone farther south to Crete.”

There are also Biblical references to the Philistines as coming from a place called Caphtor, identified by several scholars with Crete:⁽⁴⁾

• ⁽⁴⁾ According to Wikipedia: “Caphtor is a locality mentioned in the Bible and related literature. The people of Caphtor are called Caphtorites (Caphtorim) and are named as a division of the ancient Egyptians. Traditional Hebrew sources place Caphtor in the region of Pelusium [in the Nile Delta]. Other sources [?] associate Caphtor with localities outside Egypt e.g. Cilicia, Cappadocia, Cyprus or Crete.” The least probable scenario is “hard truth” for some scholars… (See Chronicle 27, footnote 10).

The Nile Delta with Pelusium in the East, the Hellenic colony Naucratis in the West, and further on the location Alexandria was to be built. The ancient canal linking the Mediterranean and the Red Seas is also shown.

“This theory”, adds Salimbeti, “has been somewhat strengthened by the discovery in Crete of the Phaestos disc. One of the symbols shows the head of a man crowned with feathers – very similar to the feather-topped helmets of the Peleset depicted” at the Temple of Ramses III.⁽⁵⁾

• ⁽⁵⁾ Well, it was certainly unavoidable: “The similarity [of the Peleset helmet] with Maya and Aztec feather headdresses is truly amazing, given the distance that separated the Mesoamerican culture” from the Mediterranean… Galloping imagination somewhere in the Internet Sea, while far in the distant horizon the land of Atlantis is gradually emerging…

● Well, what about the language of the Philistines? Wikipedia informs us of “possible relations to Indo-European languages, even Mycenaean Greek, [which supposedly] support the independently-held [?!] theory that immigrant Philistines originated among ‘Sea Peoples’.” And what do we know about the Pelasgian language(s)? “In the absence of certain knowledge about the identity (or identities) of the Pelasgians, various theories have been proposed. Since Greek is classified as an Indo-European language, the major question of concern is whether Pelasgian was an Indo-European language”. For more information, we are forwarded to the Aegean language family, proposed by Giulio M. Facchetti, due to some alleged similarities between Etruscan, Lemnian, and some other languages of the area, such as Minoan Cretan, Eteocretan, Eteocypriot, and Philistine. These languages could constitute a pre-Indo-European phylum stretching from Canaan to the Alps. But this is not a view held in common; there are attempts to link Eteocretan and Eteocypriot with Semitic.

Pelasgian Cycladic civilization: on this “frying pan”’s design (2800 BCE), some imaginative people see a map of Atlantis!

Surely, all the above are nothing but hypotheses, as Facchetti himself admits. What counts is the idea the ancient Hellenes had about the Pelasgians, who had survived even in the classical period in several locations of mainland Greece, Crete and other Aegean islands. People identified as “Pelasgian” spoke a language or languages that the Hellenes described as “barbaric” – that is, they were incomprehensible to them. A tradition also survived that many parts of Greece had once been Pelasgian before being Hellenized. Hence, we can relish watching all scholarly theorizations crumbling and crashing down… (On the Pelasgians see Chronicle 15, footnote 7).

Another “Trojan” Sea People might have been the Weshesh. Again, the scarcity of information led… “necessarily” to speculation about possible links between their name and that of Ilion, as the city of Troy was also called by the Greeks – Wilusa (or Wilusiya) by the Hittites – after king Ilus (thence the Iliad). “The W of Weshesh”, notes Salimbeti, “is a modern invention for ease of pronunciation; the Egyptian records refer to Uashesh.” Some scholars associate this people with Assos, also in the Troad, or with Iassos in Caria, or with Issus (Issos) in Cilicia. Others have theorized that they became part of the Israelite confederacy as the tribe of Asher. Another people connected with the Hebrews were the Tjeker. Moving to Canaan, they captured the city-state of Dor and turned it into a large, well-fortified capital of their kingdom. Dor was violently destroyed in the mid-11th century BCE by the expanding Phoenicians, who were initially checked by the Philistines, and then by the Hebrews. King David (if he was something more than just a mythological figure) supposedly conquered Dor and the Tjeker were mentioned no more.

Teucer (Teucrus) of the Troad and Salamis

Achilles and Ajax playing a dice game: an amphora
by painter-potter Exekias, ca 540-530 BCE

A possible linguistic connection has been proposed between the Tjeker and the Tekrur, identified with the Teucri, a tribe described by some ancient sources as inhabiting northwest Anatolia to the south of Troy. Tradition offers basically two candidates for their homeland: Crete or Attica. Legend links all three places and goes even further, following two heroes with the same name: Teucer (Teucrus). According to Virgil, the older Teucer was from Crete but left the island with a third part of its inhabitants during a great famine (how many such stories…). They eventually settled near a river, named Scamander after his father. On the contrary, Dionysius of Halicarnassus claims Teucer had gone to the Troad from Attica. Scamander (or Xanthos) was a river-god, a son of Oceanus. According to Homer, he fought on the side of the Trojans after Achilles insulted him. He was the personification of the river that flowed by Troy. The Hellenes had set up their camp near its mouth, and their battles with the Trojans were fought on its plain. The land was initially called Teucria, after Teucer. When Dardanus arrived there, it was renamed as Dardania (thence Dardenelles), and later Troad (from king Tros). But these toponymic changes would not deter the Trojans to often call themselves Teucrians. Aeneas e.g. is described as “the great captain of the Teucrians”.

The Judgement of Paris (1904), by Enrique Simonet: Aphrodite, the winner in this ancient beauty pageant, stepping forward triumphantly naked, while Hera and Athena stay behind humiliated…

Teucer the younger, or “bastard”, was half-Trojan because his mother, Hesione, a concubine of king Telamon, was a princess of Ilion. His father had arrived from Aegina to Salamis, as he was sent away by his own father for he had accidentally killed his brother. Teucer also fought in the Trojan War, but on the side of the Hellenes, having his half-brother, Ajax, as a co-fighter, while his cousins, Hector and Paris, and his uncle Priam, were “enemies”. After all, war was a family affair – let alone for Teucer Jr. On his return to Salamis, however, his father accused him for not bringing Ajax’s body back home. He was in his turn disowned, exiled and set out to find a new home. With his departing words that Horace turned into a moving ode, he exhorted his companions to “despair in no way… tomorrow we shall set out upon the boundless sea”.⁽⁶⁾ This speech, related later to the theme of voyages of discovery, is also found in Dante’s Inferno and Tennyson’s Ulysses. Teucer eventually joined king Belus of Tyre in a Phoenician campaign against Cyprus, and when the island was seized, the king handed it over to Teucer as a reward. He founded there the city of Salamis, named after his homeland.

• ⁽⁶⁾ Horace, Odes: “Wherever fortune may bear us, kinder than my father, | We shall go, o men and comrades! | Despair in no way with Teucer as your leader and as protector, | Surely resolved Apollo has promised uncertain | Future to Salamis in a new world. | O men, who with me often have endured | Worse fortunes, now, banish cares with wine; | Tomorrow we shall set out upon the boundless sea!”
  (Quo nos cumque feret melior fortuna parente, | ibimus, o socii comitesque. | Nil desperandum Teucro duce et auspice Teucro; | certus enim promisit Apollo ambiguam tellure nova Salamina futuram. | O fortes peioraque passi | mecum saepe viri, nunc vino pellite curas; | cras ingens iterabimus aequor.”)

Leda and the Swan, from the Sanctuary of Aphrodite,
Paphos, Cyprus (3rd century CE)

The “copper island”, a vital node in the trade networks, experienced two waves of Grecian settlement: the initial wave consisted of Mycenaean traders, c. 1400 BCE. Towards the end of this period, great amounts of Mycenaean pottery were produced in Cyprus. A major second wave, connected with Teucer’s story, took place after the Bronze Age collapse, c. 1100 BCE, with the island’s predominantly Hellenic character dating from this era, due to the invasion of Helladic refugees. Apart from Salamis, Teucer is credited as a founder of other cities, too. A local legend in Galicia, in northwestern Iberia, relates the foundation of Pontevedra to “Teucro”. The legend seems to be based on the conjecture that Greek traders might have arrived there in ancient times. Though legends appear for a certain reason, historians and archaeologists tend to agree that the initial settlement was probably formed when Gallaecia was integrated into the Roman Empire (1st century BCE). Pontevedra, i.e. “old bridge”, in reference to an old Roman bridge across the Lérez river, is sometimes poetically called “The City of Teucro”, and its inhabitants teucrinos – just like the Trojans!⁽⁷⁾ (See Chronicle 26, Odysseys in the Aftermath of the Trojan War: Colonization of Iberia).

Oil lamp, Tróia

• ⁽⁷⁾ It seems as if Tróia, across Setúbal, Portugal, was named after Troy but we do not know why. Tróia peninsula has been inhabited since prehistoric times when it was an island called Acalá. In the 1st century CE, the Romans built a town and named it Cetóbriga. It served as a fishery centre until 412, when it was destroyed completely by an earthquake with tsunami. If the town’s initial name had been Tróia, we could think that the Romans, as originating from the Trojans, decided to build a “Troy” in the vicinity of the city of Odysseus – Olisipo, Lisbon! According to José Pedro Machado, Tróia – in the Onomastic-Etymologic Dictionary of the Portuguese Language – is not a toponym found exclusively in the area of Setúbal. There are more Tróias in Portugal and a Troya in Galicia. Their “godfathers” were probably inspired by the Iliad. Based on an article in the Great Portuguese and Brazilian Encyclopedia, Machado expressed the idea this name to originate from Cetóbriga: > Cetóbria > Cetróbia > Cetróia > Xetróia > Atróia – though it seems too much of an adventure for a toponym… Or perhaps the name comes not from Troy but from either Troyes or Truyes, two cities of France; or its origin is the Latin phrase “Trogia (villa)”, from the Celtic name Trogus – which is the most likely explanation.

Mosaic in Conímbriga

Thracian and Celtic Coincidences

● Cetóbriga is apparently a Celtic toponym, too. But because of the reports on the presence of even Thracians in Iberia, who also had the suffix –briga in their tongue, let’s have a look at that possibility, too. This suffix is very common in several toponyms of the peninsula. The most well-known city with such a name is Conímbriga, one of the greatest Roman settlements in Portugal. During pre-Roman times, the Conii (or Cynetes, who settled later in southern Portugal) occupied the settlement. After the town was destroyed by Suebi c. 465-468 CE, several of its inhabitants went to live in the neighbouring Aeminium that was gradually renamed as Coimbra. The word Conímbriga is not related to the Conii; it is formed by the native term conim (rock) and the Celtic suffix –briga (citadel), deriving from the Celtic Brigantes, who had Brigantia, N. England, under their control in pre-Roman times. Ptolemy wrote that the Brigantes also lived in SE Ireland, while Strabo mentioned the Brigantii as a subtribe of the Vindelici on the Alps. There was a Brigantium (Coruña) in Galicia, and a Brigaecium in Asturias. But there were also the Bryges, or Brigantes, a numerous Thracian people, whose cradle was perhaps the land of the Cicones, a Homeric tribe, between the Hebrus (Maritsa) and Nestos rivers, or the area around the Prespes or Brygeides lakes. The Bryges were ancestors of the Phrygians (‘B’ turned into ‘Ph’), who originally lived in the Balkans, and then settled in Asia Minor. The land of the Cicones, according to Herodotus, was initially called Briantica. The Bryges spread to N. Epirus (c. 700 BCE), to Paeonia, to Illyria (as Scymnus of Chios wrote in his Periēgēsis), to the Adriatic (in the area of the Brygeides islands), and later to West Europe, campaigning as followers of Dionysus. According to Hesychius, the suffixes –briga, or –bria, were typical in the names of the Thracian Brigantes’ towns (See Chronicle 26, Odysseys in the Aftermath of the Trojan War: Colonization of Iberia).

Trojan Horse: its oldest known depiction
on the Mykonos vase; ca 670 BCE

UP TO NOW, excluding Teucer, who attacked Cyprus in collaboration with the Phoenicians, representing all those who found refuge there, we have seen no Hellenes fighting alongside the Sea Peoples, or their allies, but rather against them in the Trojan War. It is what Sanford Holst already told us in the previous Chronicle:

“The Mycenaeans attacked the Anatolian people from the seaward side. To deal with this problem, warriors and ships in the Sea Peoples confederacy poured from Anatolia and the Black Sea into the Aegean, where they ravaged the Mycenaeans.”

Let us try to verify this in Wikipedia:

“The invaders, that is, the replacement cultures at those [Mycenaean] sites, apparently made no attempt to retain the cities’ wealth but instead built new settlements of a materially simpler cultural and less complex economic level atop the ruins. For example, no one appropriated the palace and rich stores at Pylos, but all were burned up, and the successors (whoever they were) moved in over the ruins with plain pottery and simple goods. This demonstrates a cultural discontinuity.”

This may demonstrate a logical discontinuity, as well! The question of who the invaders might have been is left open. However, the author identifies them with “the replacement cultures”, who were stupid enough to “burn up the palace and rich stores”, instead of appropriating them. Quite simply, those invaders had no intention to settle there; they went there just to destroy: for sure, they were not “the replacement cultures”!

Captive Sea Peoples in Egypt

The Anatolians were prevalent among the Sea Peoples but they were not alone. Several tribe names in the Egyptian files have a dubious or unknown origin – i.e. the Shekelesh, perhaps the Siculi, who moved to Sicily from the Italian mainland.

“There was a gigantic series of migratory waves”, Michael Grant remarks, “extending all the way from the Danube valley to the plains of China”; and Moses Finley agrees: “A large-scale movement of people is indicated… The original centre of disturbance was in the Carpatho-Danubian region of Europe… pushing in different directions at different times.”

But if we have faith in Michael Wood, they were… “essentially” [?!] Hellenes:

“Were the Sea Peoples in part actually composed of Mycenaean Greeks – rootless migrants, warrior bands and condottieri on the move? Certainly there seem to be suggestive parallels between the war gear and helmets of the Greeks and those of the Sea Peoples”. Moreover, he reminds us that “there were migrations of Greek-speaking peoples to [Sardinia and Sicily] at this time”, and therefore, he includes the Sherden and Shekelesh among the “villains”. Troy, he concludes, “was sacked by essentially Greek Sea Peoples”…⁽⁸⁾

• ⁽⁸⁾ It’s a pity there were “essentially” no Britannic “condottieri on the move”. Or else this… “thinking woman’s crumpet” (as Wood was humorously dubbed by British newspapers for his good looks most appealing to women) would have found Hellenic colonies even on Mars!

Cycladic head: a Pelasgian who is suspect as an “islander”: he has deformed his features!

Michael Wood is not alone, either. The identification of the Denyen and Ekwesh with the Danaans and Achaeans respectively are long-standing issues in Bronze Age scholarship, as the “suspects” also lived “in the isles”…⁽⁹⁾ Were the Egyptian scribes so naïve to use two names for one and the same people? What species of Bronze Age scholars are they if they (pretend to) ignore that Achaeans and Danaans are synonymous terms? Have they not been schooled in the Iliad? Homer mentions the name Achaeans 598 times; Danaans 138 times; Argives 182 times; and Hellenes only once. According to a version of the myth, they were ancestors of the Greeks and their tribes: Hellen, Graecus, Magnes, and Macedon (Makednós) were sons of Deucalion and Pyrrha, the only survivors of the Great Flood. Sons of Hellen were Dorus, Xuthus, and Aeolus; sons of Xuthus were Ion and Achaeus. Danaus, coming from Egypt, Pelops, from Anatolia, and Cadmus, from Phoenicia, gained a foothold in Greece, were assimilated and Hellenized. At least for the Danaans, perhaps due to their “Egyptian” origin, there is some “flexibility”: they are identified with the people of Adana in Cilicia, or possibly related to the land of the Danuna, near Ugarit, in Syria, or it is rumoured they joined Hebrews to form one of the original 12 tribes of Israel, that of Dan.

• ⁽⁹⁾ Although the connection of the Hittite toponym Ahhiyawa, or Ahhiya, with Achaea is strongly disputed (cf. Wikipedia: “the exact relationship of the term Ahhiyawa to the Achaeans beyond a similarity in pronunciation is hotly debated by scholars”; see also the conclusion of this Chronicle), the… “Wikipedists” are absolutely sure about the identification of the Achaeans with the Ekwesh. So, if you search for the entry “Ekwesh”, you are redirected to the “Achaeans”… As for the phrase “in the isles”, used by the Egyptians when referring to Sea Peoples and quoted by scholars as an argument, it ends up meaning: “Whoever is not a landsman is a suspect”!

THE MAJOR EVENT DURING PHARAOH Merneptah’s reign (1213–1203 BCE) was a war against a confederacy, termed the “Nine Bows”, under the leadership of the king of Libya. The pharaoh declared that he defeated the invasion, killing 6,000 soldiers and taking 9,000 prisoners. To be certain of the numbers, among other things, he took the penises of all uncircumcised dead and the hands of all the circumcised.⁽¹⁰⁾ We mention this macabre detail because, as it turned out, the so-called “Achaeans”, the Ekwesh, were circumcised, a fact that would certainly have obliged any serious Bronze Age scholar to “acquit” the Grecian Achaeans!⁽¹¹⁾

• ⁽¹⁰⁾ Imagine those poor soldiers who were assigned to count all these penises and hands…

• ⁽¹¹⁾ …“a fact causing some to doubt they were Greek,” is what we actually read in Wikipedia! They were circumcised as a… camouflage! Or just to baffle our Bronze Age scholars! What they do remember is Virgil’s aphorism: “Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes”; i.e. “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts” – in this case: bearing circumcision! Our scholars have been schooled in the Aeneid, at least… Note that not only the Ekwesh, but also the Shekelesh and Shardana were circumcised, as the Egyptians made clear (pity, they did not inform… Michael Wood)! Thus these two peoples had also been Oriental in origin and settled in Sicily and Sardinia only later. Those who were not circumcised were the Peleset. (“Aha!”, I can hear you chuckling, my dear scholars…)

Merneptah stele: the Zionist usurpers… usurped it from
another usurper!

Merneptah Stele and Exodus

● The pharaoh’s victories over the Libyans and their Sea People allies are glorified on the Merneptah Stele, a black granite slab over three meters high, that Flinders Petrie discovered in Thebes in 1896. There is, however, a kind of footnote in the final two of the 28 lines, which refers to a separate campaign in Canaan. There the king boasts of defeating and destroying four cities, the fourth one being most probably a city and valley in northern Canaan, called Jezreel – a word so similar to… Israel! For sure, that would be far more convenient and beneficial for all: the entire Jewish diaspora, the emerging Zionism, formally established as a movement the next year after the discovery, for many Christians, especially the clergy, and of course, for Petrie himself! That day he wondered: “Won’t the reverends be pleased?” and then he prophesied: “This stele will be better known in the world than anything else I have found.” He was not a fool: if this set of hieroglyphs on Line 27 could be read as… “Israel”, instead of “Jezreel”, it would present the first documented instance of this name in the historical record, and the only mention in ancient Egypt!

Although the readings in many places are illegible due to the rough surface and the poor cutting (Petrie’s own translation of the text contains dozens of question marks; only next to the controversial word the mark is missing…), most biblical archeologists accept Petrie’s version. So, his find was also proclaimed as… “Israel Stele”;⁽¹²⁾ based on a disputed word in the penultimate line of a text dealing with another subject! What a disgrace for Merneptah: a proud pharaoh boasting of a triumph over a handful of poor villagers! There were no more than about 25 villages then on the highlands of Canaan. Archaeologists and historians have attempted to trace the origins of these villagers but it’s been impossible to identify any distinctive features that could define them as specifically Israelite. “It is probably… during Iron Age I” (1200–1000 BCE), says archaeologist Paula McNutt, that “a population began to identify itself as ‘Israelite’.” The Kingdom of Israel emerged as an important, worth-mentioning local power even later, by the 9th century BCE, before falling to the Assyrians in 722. Thus, there was no “Israel” for Merneptah to mention – unless he was as prophetic as Petrie himself!

• ⁽¹²⁾ Merneptah is also to blame: he “appropriated” the stele from his predecessor, Amenhotep III, turned it round and wrote his controversial text on its rough surface. He could never imagine how this text would be distorted. For sure, he was not a prophet like Petrie!

Departure of the Israelites, by David Roberts (1829)

● This “misspelling” trick was some kind of “compensation” for the historical “error” of the Egyptians to mention neither the notorious Exodus nor the calamitous Biblical plagues. The archeologists are equally “guilty”, as they failed to find any evidence to support the “story” of the Jews in Egypt and the Sinai. The consensus among biblical scholars is that there was never any exodus of the proportions described in the Bible. According to the book of Exodus, arguably the most important in the Bible, the Jews leaving the country would have numbered some 2 million – compared with an entire Egyptian population of around 3 to 3.5 million in 1250 BCE! Marching ten abreast and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 240 kilometers long! No evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered such a demographic and economic catastrophe, or that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds… The date proposed initially of an Exodus around 1450 BCE is also problematic: digs in the 1930s had failed to find traces of the simultaneous destruction of Canaanite cities c. 1400 BCE – and in fact many of them, such as Jericho, the first one to fall to the Israelites according to the Bible, were then uninhabited. A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence that can be directly related to the captivity, and the escape and travels through the wilderness, and most archaeologists have abandoned their investigation of Moses and the Exodus as “a fruitless pursuit”. Archaeologist William Dever says that there is “no room for an Exodus from Egypt or a 40-year pilgrimage through the Sinai wilderness.”

Flinders Petrie’s “fine, Caucasian, dynastic race” invading Egypt…!

● Flinders Petrie, who could possibly “address the issue”, died a long time ago and was buried on Mount Zion, in Palestine. Besides, he remains a controversial figure as a committed advocate of “eugenics” and of the “superiority” of the white, Northern peoples over the Latinate and Southern peoples, as well as for his affiliation with a variety of fascist groups and anti-democratic thought in England. His archaeological views were equally racist: he contended that the Egyptian civilization was derived from a “fine”, invading “Caucasian Dynastic Race”, which had conquered Egypt in pre-dynastic times of late prehistory and introduced the pharaonic, dynastic culture to the “inferior” “mulatto” race then inhabiting the country. These views spilled over into disputes with E. A. Wallis Budge. The British Museum‘s Egyptologist declared that the ancient Egyptians were an African people with roots in eastern Africa and their religion was essentially identical to the religions of the peoples of northeastern and central Africa. However, all but some of his colleagues followed Petrie – a most revealing fact about the dominant ideology at the time, at least among intellectuals. Thus Petrie and his followers derided Budge’s ideas as impossible and “unscientific”…

NEXT ROUND in this protracted war against the Sea Peoples, marking the Bronze Age collapse, took place some three decades later, during the reign of Ramses III (1186–1155 BCE), the last great pharaoh of Egypt. His inscriptions state that the “Nine Bows” re-appeared as another “conspiracy in their isles”… Most Sea People tribes were there again; we are also informed that at least two great battles were fought, one on the sea, and the other on land.

The pharaoh proudly presented his captives (from L to R): the Libyan, Nubian, Syrian, Shasu, and Hittite (the… Hellene probably escaped!)

“When it was over”, says the Wikipedia article on the Sea Peoples, “several chiefs were captive: of Hatti, Amor, and Shasu among the ‘land peoples’, and the Tjeker, ‘Sherden of the sea’, ‘Teresh of the sea’ and Peleset or Philistines (in whose name some [?] have seen the ancient Greek name for sea people: Pelasgians)”…⁽¹³⁾

• ⁽¹³⁾ Pelasgian is related to πελός and Πέλοψ (Pelops: dark-skinned), or to πέλας (the fellow man, or the one nearby) and πελάζω-πλάζω (approach), or to περάω and πέρα (cross to the other side, as a migrant tribe). Once more, the scholars are wrong, as there is no connection with the sea, specifically πέλαγος (pelagos < πλήσσω or πλήττω, i.e. hit).

What conclusions can we draw? We are surprised, first of all, since our scholars were not… surprised at all when they read about a Hittite chief among those captive. Hatti had been a Sea Peoples’ arch-enemy – and one of their greatest victims. But scholars are usually aware of such “details” and are not taken by surprise. Besides, the same thing happened before and the pharaoh’s official complaints were forwarded to the Hittite monarch – as long as this empire still existed. OK, but why don’t they bother to explain, instead of wasting their time trying to involve the Greeks in this… “conspiracy theory”?

Ramses III vs the Sea Peoples

Eventually, we realize that the destruction of the established civilizations, mainly the Hittite and Mycenaean, was a deliberate tactic of the Sea Peoples to garner more strength at sea and amass land forces, as well. After all, the empires were of the aristocracies, Hittite or Mycenaean. What else could a desperate Hellene or a destitute Anatolian do, under the circumstances, but follow and stand by the peoples with whom he shared the same aspirations for a better life?

What else could a desperate Hellene or a destitute Anatolian do but follow the peoples with whom he shared the
same aspirations for a better life?

But what a pity for our scholars: not even one Greek among the captive chiefs… He probably escaped! The other captives were chiefs of the Amorites, who lived in Syria and part of Mesopotamia, and possibly of the Hebrews: Shasu is a term for nomad wanderers, and at least one of the tribes worshipped the Jewish god Yahweh. The rest were sea captains.

The pharaoh concluded his report as follows: “I slew the Denyen in their isles” and “burned” the Tjeker and Peleset… Therefore, he implied some maritime raids of his own, or some punitive expeditions elsewhere in the Mediterranean. In the Aegean? Where, what and whose were these “isles”? Whatever the answers, the chain reaction of the raids went on; it was the Egyptians’ turn to destroy – but destruction bears no signature…

Lady of Mycenae (fresco)

Homer mentions an Achaean attack upon the Nile delta, while Menelaus speaks of that in the Odyssey, recounting his voyage back home from the Trojan War. It was not, however, the only such marauding action by Mycenaeans against Egypt where they went “just for the fun of it” – and some gain, of course!

Taking into account the continuous turbulence among or within the sovereign Mycenaean royal families, the hypothesis that they may have utterly destroyed themselves is long-standing, and seems to find support by the reputable Greek historian Thucydides:

“For in early times the Hellenes and the barbarians of the coast and islands… were tempted to turn to piracy, under the conduct of their most powerful men… They would fall upon a town unprotected by walls… and would plunder it… no disgrace being yet attached to such an achievement, but even some glory”…

Hittite chariot

The “Achaeans” through Hittite eyes

VARIOUS HITTITE ACCOUNTS, from c. 1400 to c. 1220 BCE, mention a land in western Anatolia, named Ahhiyawa (or Ahhiya). The term is thought to be a Hittite rendition of the word “Achaea”, with the broader meaning of “the Achaeans’ land”. This idea was strongly disputed by other Hittitologists (see e.g. footnote 9). In addition, a precise geographical location of this land cannot be drawn from the texts. In any case, it seems that “Achaea” and Hatti evidently dealt with each other both on a diplomatic and a military level. We can read a letter that the Hittite king sent to his “Achaean” counterpart, where the latter is recognized as a “Great King”, and of equal status with the other contemporary great Bronze Age rulers: the kings of Egypt, Babylonia and Assyria. Referring to Millawanda (or Milawata: Miletus?) as a city within the “Achaean” domain,⁽¹⁴⁾ the Hittite monarch mentions an earlier “Wilusa episode”, within his own area, where the “Achaeans” lined up with his enemies. We have seen that Wilusa was most probably Troy (cf. the archaic Ϝίλιον, and later Ilion, i.e. the Trojan acropolis). This “episode” is possibly connected with the Trojan War.⁽¹⁵⁾

The Love of Helen and Paris, by
Jacques-Louis David (1788)

• ⁽¹⁴⁾ The Minoans had created in Miletus perhaps their most important settlement on Anatolian soil. The Mycenaeans inherited it, when they replaced the Cretans as the leading power in the Aegean. The city grew and became prosperous, as it is attested not only from the archaeological evidence, but also these Hittite records, which indicate that Miletus was the most important base for “Achaean” activity in Asia Minor ultimately reaching Iassos, Ephesus, and other cities.

• ⁽¹⁵⁾ Unfortunately, we cannot cross-check the available evidence because the Mycenaeans, unlike the Hittites, did not bother to write down such… “details”! The records in Linear B just refer to administrative bureaucratic issues of the palace. Even commerce is curiously absent from the written sources in Linear B! That’s why it’s impossible to reconstitute from texts in Linear B the late Bronze Age’s political developments. (Hittites vs. Mycenaeans: 1–0!)

In the second half of the 13th century, a long anti-Hittite revolt broke out with “Achaean” support, and headed by Piyama-Radu, who married his daughter to the vassal ruler of “Miletus”. His case is of particular interest since it appears to intertwine with that of the Trojan War. It was a remarkable revolt for its duration, having spanned at least 35 years, during which time he posed a considerable threat to three consecutive Hittite kings; it caused a great deal of turmoil in the areas of Wilusa, Arzawa,⁽¹⁶⁾ and Seha, and led to an invasion of Lazpa (Lesbos?), which passed under “Achaean” control. The aforementioned letter was sent in this period, as the Hittite king tried to persuade his “Achaean” counterpart to restore peace. Among other things, he mentions a brother of the “Achaean” monarch, named Tawagalawa, or… Eteocles,⁽¹⁷⁾ according to several imaginative scholars! Much more controversial is the “identification” of Piyama-Radu: it is speculated that he “corresponds to the archetype” of the Trojan king Priam… What’s next? They will probably… rewrite the Iliad!

• ⁽¹⁶⁾ “Achaea” and Arzawa joined forces several times against the Hittites. Arzawa was a kingdom, or a confederacy of local rulers, in western Anatolia, with Apasa, later Ephesus, as a capital.

• ⁽¹⁷⁾ The story of Oedipus’ son and king of Thebes is part of the Theban Cycle that is unrelated to the Trojan (Epic) Cycle and the Atreides. Eteocles’ brother was Polynices, with whom he fought for the throne and both were killed. The tragedy culminated with their sister Antigone’s death.

Places mentioned in this Chronicle (counter-clockwise): Wiluša, Lazpa, Seha, Mira, Apaša, Millawanda, Arzawa, Hapalla, Lukka, Alašiya, Ugarit, Amurra,Tarša, Hatti, Hattuša.

Warfare between “Achaeans” and Hittites began c. 1400 BCE. Hittite records mention the operations of the “Achaean” warlord Attarsiya in southwestern Asia Minor, possibly in Lycia, against Hittite vassals. It is the first recorded “Achaean” military activity on the Anatolian mainland, and is associated with an increase of Mycenaean findings in Miletus in this period (early 14th century BCE), indicating that a number of Greeks moved from mainland Hellas to this region. Attarsiya used the city as a military base, and hostilities continued until circa 1250 BCE. “Achaean” activity was to interfere in Asia Minor, with the support of anti-Hittite uprisings, or through local vassal rulers that the “Achaean” king used as agents for the extension of his influence. Speculation, of course, is also present here: It has been suggested by several scholars that the warlord was none other than Atreus, a mythical king of Mycenae, and father of Agamemnon. Others, noting that the Hittites do not speak of the “high king of Achaea”, argue that he should have been some general, named Atreus, or with a similar name, or finally that Attarsiya means Atreidēs, i.e. he was a member of the royal dynasty.

In order to undermine the Hittites, the warlord intervened in Anatolian affairs attacking Hittite vassals, such as Madduwatta from Arzawa (Luwia),⁽¹⁸⁾ whom he repeatedly defeated, as the army he deployed included 100 war chariots. But he eventually withdrew from Asia Minor to prepare a campaign against Alashiya (Cyprus?). He had the Lukka (“Lycians”) on his side, providing him the necessary naval support, together with a number of his Anatolian allies, even Madduwatta, who decided to switch camps. This worried the Hittites, since they considered the island one of their dependencies. The invaders finally defeated them, and thus Alashiya passed under their control. The Mycenaean presence in Cyprus is also corroborated by archaeological evidence, as we have seen, for Mycenaean finds dating from that time were unearthed there.

Anatolian hieroglyphs

• ⁽¹⁸⁾ The Luwians lived in central, western, or southern Asia Minor, as well as the northwestern part of the Levant, in the Bronze and Iron Ages. They spoke the Luwian language, an Indo-European Anatolian tongue written in cuneiform of Mesopotamian origin, or a unique native hieroglyphic script, which was sometimes also used by the linguistically related Hittites.

The following decades were a period of Mycenaean expansion on the Anatolian coast (c. 1380–1320 BCE). In 1320-1315, there was another anti-Hittite rebellion in Arzawa, in cooperation with “Miletus”, and supported by the “Achaeans”, who appeared to be in control of a number of islands in the Aegean, an impression also supported by archaeological evidence. Finally, the Hittites were victorious. The king of Arzawa managed to escape to “Achaean”-controlled territory, and his land was split into three provinces: a southern province, Mira, would later become known as Caria; a northern province, Seha, would be renamed as Lydia; and an eastern province called Hapalla (the Grecian Pisidia). That was the finale of this kingdom’s history, which had passed into oblivion, and came back on the surface thanks to the Hittite texts.

If, indeed, the information contained in these archives corresponds up to a point to historical facts, it seems that the Mycenaean and Hittite palatial civilizations of the Aegean and Anatolia were “bored” (to death) by the same woodworms…

The Luwian Civilization: The Missing Link in the Aegean Bronze Age

ALBEIT BELATEDLY, I’VE STUDIED Eberhard Zangger’s book,⁽¹⁹⁾ The Luwian Civilization / The Missing Link in the Aegean Bronze Age (2016). I feel it is useful to outline his main points regarding the Sea Peoples:

• ⁽¹⁹⁾ Since 1994 Zangger has been advocating the view that a Luwian civilization existed in Western Asia Minor during the 2nd millennium BCE. In 2014 he established the international non-profit foundation Luwian Studies.

The Luwian Civilization / The Missing Link in the Aegean Bronze Age. Cover: probably an Atlantis-like reconstruction of Troy, the most prominent Luwian city, as Eberhard Zangger imagined it.

“Over twenty years ago, I proposed a chronological reconstruction of the political and economic development in the countries around the Eastern Mediterranean during the 13th century BCE. It causally links three wars comprised of reciprocal attacks. First, the so-called Sea Peoples’ invasions took place, during which the navy of allied Luwian petty states from the eastern shore of the Aegean Sea advanced to the southeast. The Luwians were then attacked a few years later by allied Greek forces – and this is memorialized in the tradition of the so-called Trojan War. And finally, a civil war… broke out in Greece.”

“Perhaps the trigger for the [Luwians’] decision to engage in war was [Hatti’s] conquest of Cyprus… possibly to get access to its copper resources. The Luwians in western Asia Minor played an active role in long-distance trade and may have depended on Cyprus as a port of call. Therefore they entered into a military alliance and built a fleet of fast, agile vessels for invasions. Instead of moving against the Hittite forces over land, they dashed across the sea and reached the important Hittite borderlands of Cyprus and Syria. The acclaimed mercenary armies of the Lukka and Sherden had become marine forces which no longer fought alongside the Hittite king but against him – they had formed the coalition known as the Sea Peoples… [Eventually] the capital Hattuša was wiped out overnight – and with it the Hittite Empire.”

Sphinx Gate at Hattusa

“The petty states from western Asia Minor suddenly controlled an area stretching from Macedonia across Anatolia to Syria and Canaan, where it touched upon the Egyptian dominion… Together with this vast territory, the Luwians now dominated almost all ore deposits in the Eastern Mediterranean, as well as the trade routes on land and at sea… Both the access to the Black Sea region as well as the connection through Cyprus and Syria to Mesopotamia were now under Luwian control. Considering the distribution of mineral resources, arable land, the path of the perennial rivers and of the trade routes, the Mycenaeans were about to face a superior force for an extended period of time. To avoid complete dependence… they engaged in a coalition themselves with the ultimate purpose to raid western Asia Minor… About ten years later, united Greek forces attacked western Asia Minor – and this was later remembered as the ‘Trojan War’… which was thus a counterattack against the previously victorious Sea Peoples.”

“While the Mycenaean kings were fighting at Troy, their wives and less competent deputies had taken their thrones. When the surviving victorious kings returned, many of these deputies did not want to give up their power. A civil war broke out and consumed progressively one citadel after another… Pylos – and later Ithaca – may have been among the last palaces to fall into the hands of the insurgents.” (Eberhard Zangger, The Luwian Civilization / The Missing Link in the Aegean Bronze Age; see Chronicle 26, Odysseys in the Aftermath of the Trojan War: Colonization of Iberia).

• >> Chronicle 21. IBERIAN “EL DORADO”
• << Chronicle 19. PHOENICIA’S STROKE OF FORTUNE

Next Chronicle 21. IBERIAN “EL DORADO” ● Minoans, Mycenaeans, Phoenicians in Iberia ● Fortunate Isles, Hesperides ● Sardinia ● Odysseus, Calypso, Ophiussa ● Tartessos

Mycenaean gold diadem

Chronicle 16. MEDITERRANEAN PERIPLUS-PARAPLUS

II. CASSITERIDES ARCHIPELAGO

Sailing to Tartessos

.

.

Chronicle 16. MEDITERRANEAN PERIPLUS-PARAPLUS

/ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΑ/ Χρονικό 16. ΜΕΣΟΓΕΙΟΥ ΠΑΡΑΠΛΟΥΣ-ΠΕΡΙΠΛΟΥΣ

● Periplus: Circumnavigation or Log ● Navigators and Intellectuals
● The Peloponnesian War and Euripides ● Nomos (Law Song)

Michales Loukovikas

WHAT WAS THE MOTIVE BEHIND MAN’S decision to take his chances and go out to sea? As always, he had needs to satisfy: he initially was in search of a better place to live. After settling down, his needs changed: there was much food in the sea and he could certainly fish far better with a canoe or a boat. The more he familiarized himself with the sea, the further he went out there, and thus the vessel also became a means of transport. Men started exchanging goods and, as long as production increased, all these boatmen were divided into fishermen and traders – and sea warriors, as well. Commerce developed in parallel with navigation. As a rule, a sea trader was obliged to take notes and map out his routes. This notebook gradually developed into

P E R I P L U S

Ancient Greek pottery (cylix) depicting
merchant ships and warships

“PERIPLUS” is the Latin form of the Hellenic word περίπλους, a “sailing-around”. The word also developed specialized meanings; one of them became a term in the navigation of Greeks and other peoples. Such a periplus was a manuscript listing – in order and with approximate intervening distances – the ports and coastal landmarks that the captain of a vessel would see along a shore.⁽¹⁾ It served the same purpose as the Roman itinerarium, i.e. a map of road stops. If the navigators were skilled geographers (as many were), they added various notes, contributing to the geographical knowledge of the time. In that sense the periplus was a type of log. We can have an idea about such ancient logs from the earliest Hellene historian, Hecataeus of Miletus. The Histories by Herodotus and Thucydides contain passages that appear to have been based on such peripli, as well.

• ⁽¹⁾ Before the nautical charts, the primary store of geographic information for maritime navigation (a mariner’s handbook of written sailing directions) was known in antiquity as a periplus; later, in medieval Italy and the Mediterranean, it was substituted by a portolano. Portuguese navigators in 16th century called it roteiro, the Spaniards derroterro, the French routier, the English rutter, the Dutch leeskarte, and the Germans Seebuch. Portulano in Italian means “related to harbours”.

● A paraplus is similar to a periplus, meaning “sailing by (the coast)”.

● A periplus was also an ancient naval manoeuvre in which attacking triremes would outflank or encircle the defenders in order to strike them in the rear.

The map of Hecataeus

● The Milesian Hecataeus (Ἑκαταῖος, c. 550 – c. 476 BCE) lived in the time of the Persian invasion. Having travelled extensively, he settled in his native city devoting his time to the composition of geographical and historical works. He is the first Greek historian to mention the Celts. He is credited with a work written in two books and entitled Γῆς περίοδος (World Survey, or Travels Round the Earth). Each book is organized like a periplus, a point-to-point coastal survey. One, on Europe, was like a Mediterranean periplus, describing each region in turn, and reaching as far north as Scythia. The other, on Asia, was similar to the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, giving information on the countries and inhabitants of this area, the account of Egypt being particularly comprehensive. It was accompanied by a corrected and enlarged version of Anaximander’s map of the Earth.⁽²⁾ This work survives only in fragments, mainly in Ethnica, the geographical lexicon compiled by Stephanus of Byzantium (6th century CE). Another work of Hecataeus was the Genealogiae, a systematized account of the Hellenic legends and myths, where he breaks with the epic myth-making tradition. The extant fragments are just enough to show what we are missing.

The map of Anaximander

• ⁽²⁾ Anaximander (Ἀναξίμανδρος, c. 610 – c. 546 BCE), a pre-Socratic philosopher, succeeded his master, Thales, one of the Seven Sages of Greece, as head of the Milesian school, where among his pupils he counted Anaximenes and, arguably, Pythagoras. He is the first philosopher known to have written down his studies, although only one fragment of his work remains. He was an early proponent of science trying to observe and explain different aspects of the universe, with a particular interest in its origins. In astronomy, he tried to describe the mechanics of the celestial bodies in relation to the Earth. In physics, his idea that the ἄπειρον (infinite) was the source of all things led Hellenic philosophy to a new level of conceptual abstraction. He created a map of the world and contributed greatly to the advancement of geography. According to Carl Sagan, he conducted the earliest recorded scientific experiment.

The world according to Herodotus

● Herodotus (Ἡρόδοτος, c. 484 – c. 425 BCE), born in Halicarnassus, is regarded as the “Father of History”. He was the first historian known to systematically collect his material, test its accuracy to a certain extent and arrange it in a well-constructed and vivid narrative. His celebrated Histories were a record of his Inquiries into the origins of the Greco-Persian Wars that culminated in 490–479 BCE. He describes in detail that period, which would otherwise be poorly documented – adding numerous long digressions about the various places and people he encountered during his wide-and-long-ranging travels around the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, and beyond.

Fragment from the Histories (VIII, Urania) on Papyrus Oxyrhynchus (early 2nd century CE)

Ἡροδότου Ἁλικαρνησσέος Ἱστορίης ἀπόδεξις ἥδε, ὡς μήτε τὰ γενόμενα ἐξ ἀνθρώπων τῷ χρόνῳ ἐξίτηλα γένηται, μήτε ἔργα μεγάλα τε καὶ θωμαστά, τὰ μὲν Ἕλλησι, τὰ δὲ βαρβάροισι ἀποδεχθέντα, ἀκλεᾶ γένηται. (Herodotus of Halicarnassus’ Inquiries are here set down to preserve the memory of the past by putting on record the astonishing achievements both of our own and of other peoples).

It was rather conventional at that time for authors to have their works “published” by reciting them at popular festivals. Herodotus took his Histories to Olympia, in the Olympian Games, and presented his entire work (9 books) to the assembled people in one sitting, receiving rapturous applause at the end. Others, nevertheless, said he refused to start reading until some clouds offered him a bit of shade, by which time, however, the assembly had dispersed – hence the proverbial expression “Herodotus and his shade” to describe anyone who misses his opportunity through delay.

● The Athenian Thucydides (Θουκυδίδης, c. 460 – c. 395 BCE) is the notable author of the History of the Peloponnesian War between Sparta and Athens (431–404 BCE) to the year 411. Its finale is recounted by Xenophon in his Hellenica. Thucydides is regarded as the father of “scientific history” due to his strict standards of evidence-gathering and analysis in terms of cause and effect without reference to intervention by the gods. He has also been called as the father of the school of political realism, which views the relations between nations as based on might rather than right. His Melian dialogue still remains a seminal work of international relations theory.⁽³⁾

• ⁽³⁾ The Melian dialogue is the account of a confrontation between Athens and Melos, a neutral island in the southern Aegean, east of the Peloponnese, in 416-415 BCΕ, during the Peloponnesian War. Athens wanted to conquer Melos to intimidate Sparta. The confrontation ended in tragedy: the Athenians executed all captive men and enslaved women and children…

● Melos was an important source of obsidian, a valuable volcanic material in the Neolithic era, to make cutting and piercing tools.

Venus de Milo, or Aphrodite of Melos (130-100 BCE)

● However, the island is famous all over the world because of a work of art that was found there: it is the celebrated statue of Aphrodite of Melos, better known as Venus de Milo. It was abducted by the French, supported by the Ottomans still occupying Hellas (1820), during clashes, at Melos and Piraeus harbours, that left more than 200 Greeks dead!

The Peloponnesian War, after the glorious end of the Persian Wars, marked the dramatic finale to the Golden Age of Hellenic civilization.

● In the first phase of the war Sparta launched invasions of Attica, and Athens raided the Peloponnesian coast, taking advantage of its naval supremacy. The Athenians sent later a huge expeditionary force to attack Syracuse in Sicily failing disastrously. This ushered in the final phase of the war, when Sparta, already receiving support from Persia, incited rebellions in the Athenians’ subject states in the Aegean and Asia Minor, undermining their hegemony. The destruction of their fleet put an end to the war and Athens surrendered in the next year. This Greek “civil war”,⁽⁴⁾ a few years after the glorious end of the Median (Persian) Wars (499–449 BCΕ), reshaped the ancient Hellenic world. Athens, the strongest polis in Greece prior to the war’s beginning, was reduced to almost complete subjection, while Sparta became established as the leading power. However, the economic costs of the war were felt all across Hellas; poverty became widespread in the Peloponnese, while Athens, totally devastated, would never recover its pre-war prosperity. The war also wrought subtler changes to Grecian society; the antagonism between democratic Athens and oligarchic Sparta, each of which supported friendly political factions within other poleis, made civil war a common occurrence in Hellas. Greek warfare, originally on a limited scale, was transformed into an all-out struggle between city-states, complete with large-scale atrocities. Shattering religious and cultural taboos, devastating whole cities and the countryside, this civil war marked the dramatic finale to the 5th century BCΕ and the Golden Age of Hellenic civilization.

• ⁽⁴⁾ The Peloponnesian War was ἐμφύλιος in the Greek sense of the word: not just a civil war, but a war within the “phylum” of the Hellenes.

During celebrations for victory, someone sang a song of Euripides.
The Spartans were so moved they changed their minds: “They felt it
would be barbarous to annihilate Athens that produced such men.”

Euripides, by Sebastià Giralt

● The Peloponnesian War is the background of a didactic story on music and politics centered on Euripides (c. 480–406 BCE) – perhaps the best of the Greek tragedians. He was also musically avant-garde, working with the most experimental musicians – a fact exploited by conservatives, such as Aristophanes, in order to ridicule him. Yet, it was Euripides’ music (and not that by Aristophanes, neither by Aeschylus, nor by Sophocles) that saved many Athenians, and Athens itself, during the war. Since then, and for many centuries to come, people used to sing the best odes of tragedies (we can say “arias” in operatic terminology). Hence, the modern Greek word for “song” (“τραγούδι”) originates from the word of “tragedy” (τραγῳδία). After the disastrous Athenian expedition to Sicily, many Athenians held captives there saved their lives as they were able to sing songs of Euripides. And at the end of the war, the victorious Spartan generals had a meeting to decide the fate of Athens. They concluded that the city should be demolished and its citizens enslaved. Then, during a banquet to celebrate victory, someone sang an ode from Euripides’ Electra. The generals were so much moved that they changed their minds: “They felt it would be a barbarous act to annihilate a city that produced such men”! These generals, needless to say, could appreciate the music of Euripides thanks to their culture.⁽⁵⁾ A most celebrated song in the ears of today’s generals or politicians would have no effect whatsoever… (These episodes are from Plutarch’s Parallel Lives – those of Nicias and Lysander).

• ⁽⁵⁾ Indeed, it’s very impressive that at that time, the most popular songs were avant-garde! It goes without saying that the citizens’ cultural level was very high…

Pytheas of Massalia: the greatest navigating explorer of the era with his periplus of Europe

A “Periplus” made of stone and the first one around Africa

JUST LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE, merchant shipping started in… “our own Orient” (it’s time for me to be sarcastic with this cliché! See Chronicle 6, footnote 1). The available data lead us to Egypt. Very soon the initiative passed to some sea peoples (Carians, Cretans, Greeks, Phoenicians, etc.), for the Egyptians, as a land people, were prone to agriculture. The Mediterranean, a closed sea with many islands, was in fact ideal for… sailing courses – the Aegean even more! Periplus as a log appeared with long-distance navigation, which is unthinkable without such a log. A captain kept his notes in any script, even… stenographic scribble, he could manage. It was impossible to memorize everything, and he could not impart his expertise to others.

● Hannu (Hennu, or Henenu), serving under Mentuhotep III (late 21st century BCE) re-opened the old trade routes to the land of Punt (in the Horn of Africa) and “Libya” – i.e. Africa beyond the Nile (the Maghreb). Hannu set out as head of 3000 soldiers, crossed the mountainous desert via Wadi Hammamat (“Valley of Many Baths”) and went on to the coast of the Red Sea. He wrote of his expedition on stone, on a rock-inscription in the same valley (therefore, his “Periplus” was made of stone):

Boat of Khonsu, the Egyptian god of the Moon

“I was sent to conduct ships to the land of Punt, to fetch for Pharaoh sweet-smelling spices… I reached the Great Green [i.e. the sea]. Then I made the ships and dispatched them with all manner of things and made for them a great oblation of cattle, oxen and gazelles. When I returned from the Great Green… I brought for His Majesty every product that I found on the shores of God’s Land; [… and also] splendid blocks of stone for the temple statues.”

Hannu’s road was the one used in the time of the Ptolemies and Romans; it led from Coptos to Leucos Limen (White Harbour, now Qoseir) on the Red Sea. It’s the same commercial thoroughfare of merchants of all countries, who traded in the wonderful products of Arabia and India, and thus turned into a bridge of all nations, which of old united Asia and Europe. Hannu is the first eponymous explorer. Coming back to Egypt, he brought precious treasures, e.g. myrrh, metal, wood. As for the Kingdom of Punt, it was probably situated in the area of today’s Somalia; others point towards neighbouring eastern Ethiopia and Eritrea. This lucrative trade network continued all the way into the classical era connecting local merchants with Phoenicia, Ptolemaic Egypt, Greece, Parthian Persia, Sheba, Nabataea, and the Roman Empire.

Penteconter

● In Hannu’s time, or perhaps a little later, the Cretans started their voyages during the Minoan thalassocracy in the Mediterranean, and maybe beyond. There followed the Argonautic expedition, and the Odyssey (meaning Odysseus’ wanderings) in the late Bronze Age.⁽⁶⁾ Everything we know about those voyages, and many others in that period, comes not from the navigators’ logbooks but from other sources. This does not mean they did not keep notes: long-distance voyages were inconceivable with no such peripli-logs of some sort, as we have said.

• ⁽⁶⁾ The Trojan War, according to Eratosthenes, took place in 1194-1184 BCE. So, Odysseus returned to Ithaca in 1174. But some researchers, using NASA data, compared the solar eclipses recorded in the Odyssey and specified he got back on his island on October 25, 1207 BCE. Hence the war took place in the decade 1227-1217. (On the Argonauts, see Chronicle 15, footnote 7, and Chronicle 22, Massaliote Periplus revival).

● According to Herodotus, the Phoenicians carried out a great feat: the first periplus of “Libya” (i.e. Africa), on behalf of the Egyptians, in the years of Necho II (610–595 BCE). It started from the Red Sea and lasted almost three years. A Persian awaiting execution attempted to repeat the feat, following the reverse course, in an effort to save his life, but eventually abandoned – though death was waiting for him… Even now, a voyage from the Red Sea to the Nile around Africa is not an easy thing. Epic voyages of such calibre have nothing to envy from today’s manned flights in space! Like the astronauts, in case of a long stay “out there”, the Phoenicians, too, were obliged to sow and harvest every year, since it was impossible to carry supplies for an indefinite period of time.

Herodotus and Thucydides

Herodotus’ Histories, Melpomene: “Libya is washed on all sides by the sea except where it joins Asia, as was first demonstrated, so far as our knowledge goes, by the Egyptian king Necho, who, after calling off the construction of the canal between the Nile and the Arabian Gulf, sent out a fleet manned by a Phoenician crew with orders to sail west about and return to the Mediterranean and Egypt by way of the Pillars of Heracles. The Phoenicians sailed from the Erythraean Sea into the southern ocean, and every autumn put in at some convenient spot on the Libyan coast, sowed a patch of ground, and waited for next year’s harvest. Then, having got in their grain, they put to sea again, and after two full years rounded the Pillars of Heracles in the course of the third, and returned to Egypt”…

The Phoenicians’ voyage to the unknown (on a “boat” called… hope) was additionally unknown how long it will last, as we have said. Consequently, the crew had to create temporary settlements, cultivate the land and maintain themselves. Herodotus’ brief reference to this incredible venture ends with a truly fantastic assertion:

“These men made a statement which I do not myself believe, though others may, to the effect that as they sailed on a westerly course round the southern end of Libya, they had the sun on their right – to northward of them. This is how Libya was first discovered by sea.”

As they sailed round the southern tip of Africa, the sailors told him, they had the sun on their right – something that he wrote down, although he was doubtful, as it went beyond the knowledge of his time. This is exactly what makes his story reliable. For sure, the Greeks could understand the movement of the sun, but found it incredible that Africa reached so far south; they thought it was a lot smaller with the southern part connected to Asia. Thus we believe Herodotus, because he did not believe an account handed down to him by oral tradition, which is why he recorded it: this is where he differed from Thucydides; the latter would not bother to mention it – so we would never get to know the story… And it was not only Thucydides: Polybius, Strabo and Ptolemy had also many doubts, unlike Pliny. The Egyptologist A. B. Lloyd observes: “It is extremely unlikely that an Egyptian king would, or could, have acted as Necho is depicted as doing.” This rumour, he adds, might have been triggered by the failure of Sataspes (the death-row Persian) to circumnavigate Africa under Xerxes I.

The Canal of the Pharaohs

So, what could the pharaoh’s motives be? When Necho took over, the situation was anything but rosy in Egypt’s northeastern border. The Babylonians had captured the Assyrian capital, Nineveh, and then defeated the Egyptians in Carchemish to punish them for their support to the Assyrians. According to the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle, Necho was campaigning in Syria (609–605 BCE), when the Babylonian king defeated him. The pharaoh perhaps considered the possibility to attack southern Babylonia by sea, and ordered a canal to be constructed between the Nile and the Red Sea. Then he realized he was giving free access to his enemies, as well. Consequently, the canal remained uncompleted until the Persians took over Egypt, in late 6th century, and Darius commissioned its completion. But it was Necho who started the construction (or restoration) of a canal some 85 kilometers long, foreshadowing the Suez Canal.

The periplus of Africa was related to Necho’s defense plans. He asked for Phoenician assistance because they were excellent sailors and had several colonies in the West, such as Gadir (Cádiz), next to the Pillars of Heracles. The Phoenicians must have also been happy to help, as they shared the Babylonian enemy. So, technically, a voyage around Africa would have been possible. The currents and winds favour a clockwise, East-West, periplus, according to plan, as long as it is a paraplus, sailing by the coast, keeping it in sight. The periplus’ purpose was to determine the exact size of Africa. If it was as small as they thought, the canal might not be such a great idea, taking into consideration the economic cost. Other Egyptologists dispute that a pharaoh would authorize such an expedition – except for the reason of trade, opening new maritime routes. Indeed, such voyages were made for economic gain. Despite Hannu’s accomplishments, the Egyptians lagged behind in the control of the seas; and they were not after sea adventures of any kind. There was already a status quo in place in the Mediterranean, with the Greeks exerting control over the northern shores, and the Phoenicians over the southern coast. The only region where Egypt, with its inferior fleet, might acquire influence and wealth was eastern Africa, where they had already established trade ties – that could thus be further expanded.

Re-enactment of the first periplus of Africa

According to the Livius site: “The Phoenicians must have started their expedition in July, and must have reached the Horn of Africa after an uneventful trip, relying on the northern wind. The Red Sea (which Herodotus calls ‘Arabian Gulf’) was well known to their Egyptian pilots, because the Egyptians traded incense with the Arabs of modern Yemen… After they had passed Africa’s most eastern shores, the northeast monsoon – which started in October – sped up their journey, and in March they must have reached the Equator. The Agulhas Current must have brought them through the Mozambique Channel and along the coast of modern South Africa. Sailing on their westerly course, they must have observed that they had the sun on their right… When they reached Cape Agulhas, they left the current that had helped them to the south. At the same time, they encountered the contrary South East trade winds. And they must have been surprised to discover that here, on the southern hemisphere, the winter was already approaching. However, they must happily have noticed that they had started to go north. The plain behind Saint Helena Bay, 150 kilometers north of modern Cape Τown, offered a fine opportunity to land. They must have sowed their wheat in June, started to repair their ships, and harvested in November.

“The Benguela Current and the now favorable South East trade winds brought the Phoenician sailors back to the hot equatorial regions; they will have experienced its effects in a most unpleasant way, when they sailed along the Namibian coast, which is a waterless desert. It took several weeks to reach a more fertile coast. In March, a new and equally unpleasant surprise awaited them: they had been traveling on a northerly course, but now, the coast curved to the west again. They may have benefited from the westward Guinea Current, but not for long, because it changes its direction during the spring. For weeks, they were struggling against the wind and the current, only to reach – in July – the African west coast, where they encountered the contrary Canary Current and the North Eastern trade winds. But they must have been relieved to find themselves rowing in a northerly direction again. Somehow they managed to beat against the wind and the current, and in November they must have landed somewhere on the coast of modern Mauritania… The voyagers sowed their wheat, repaired their ships, and waited for the next harvest…

“In May, they brought their ships to the sea, and started to beat their way up to along the Moroccan coast, where they discovered that they had returned to the world they knew: the town on Mogador island was occupied by Phoenicians. Having told the incredible story of their trip to the southern hemisphere, and no doubt with new equipment, they continued their voyage; soon they reached Phoenician towns like Lixus, modern Cádiz and Málaga, and Carthage. They must have reached Egypt at the end of the summer. Their expedition had lasted three full years. This story, told by Herodotus, was generally questioned after the famous geographer Ptolemy had said that it was impossible to circumnavigate Africa”… Thus this “top secret” epic periplus left no trace in the geographical knowledge of the time.

Peripli of the Classical and Hellenistic eras

Trireme

SEVERAL PERIPLI have survived, in whole or in fragments, and in quotations cited by other writers. The impression one gets, even with a first look at the list below, is that for a long time, from the 6th to the 4th centuries BCE, it was a Graeco-Phoenician “bras de fer” between Massalia and Carthage aimed at dominating the sea routes leading to regions rich mainly in gold, silver, tin and amber:

● The Massaliote Periplus (6th century BCE), preserved in Avienus’ Ora Maritima (Sea Coast, 4th century CE), followed Tartessian trade routes along the Atlantic shores of Europe, and recorded a voyage from Marseille to the British Isles, circumnavigating Iberia. It described the coasts of Spain and Portugal, and made a brief mention of a visit to the “sacred isle” Ierne (Ireland), located across from Albion (Britain). It is the earliest work about the trade links between northern and southern Europe; the fact that such a manual existed indicates the importance of these trade links. Especially the trade in tin to be used for making bronze is attested by archaeological evidence from even earlier periods. The riches to be won attracted numerous adventurers to the North Atlantic coast.

● The Periplus of Hanno the Navigator (6th or 5th century BCE) described the South Atlantic, along the African coast from Morocco down to the Gulf of Guinea – at best; in the worst case, the Punics probably did not sail beyond Morocco. If we trust their trumped-up information, Hanno was in charge of 60 ships and 30,000 colonists and soldiers! In fact, they should not exceed 5,000. This fleet was designed to explore and colonize Northwest Africa. The Punics founded or repopulated seven colonies on the Moroccan coast beyond the Pillars of Heracles (as a rule, the Phoenician settlements were not populous). Then, according to the official version, they proceeded further south, meeting several native tribes. The members of a hirsute and savage tribe were called “Gorillae”. In the 19th century, Hanno’s description was used as a name for the well-known primates.

Hanno’s periplus according to his “official” report

The primary source for this expedition is a Hellenic periplus, supposedly a translation of a tablet Hanno had reportedly hung up on his return to Carthage in the temple of Ba’al Hammon, whom the Greeks identified with Cronus. Its full title was The Periplus of Hanno, commander of the Carthaginians, round the parts of Libya [Africa] beyond the Pillars of Heracles, which he deposited in the Temple of Cronus.⁽⁷⁾ Obviously, the tablet contained falsified information, so that Carthage’s competitors, especially the Hellenes, could not profit. The sole purpose of the tablet was to gratify the pride of the Punics in their achievements. The very purpose of the voyage – the consolidation of the route to the African gold market – is not even mentioned…

• ⁽⁷⁾ This translation, into rather mediocre Greek, was not a complete rendering. The abridged text was copied repeatedly by Hellenes, as well as Byzantines. Two copies are still extant: one is the Palatinus Graecus 398 (9th century CE) in the University Library of Heidelberg. The other is the Codex Vatopedinus 655 (14th century) found in the Vatopedi monastery on Mount Athos, and divided between the British Library and the French Bibliothèque Nationale (it was probably sold: the monks in this monastery have an age-old strain of business acumen in their DNA)…

● Herodotus gives a story based perhaps upon Hanno’s original report:

“The Punics tell us that they trade with a race of men who live in a part of Libya beyond the Pillars of Heracles. On reaching this country, they unload their goods, arrange them tidily along the beach, and then, returning to their boats, raise a smoke. Seeing the smoke, the natives come down to the beach, place on the ground a certain quantity of gold in exchange for the goods, and go off again to a distance. The Punics then come ashore and take a look at the gold; and if they think it presents a fair price for their wares, they collect it and go away; if, on the other hand, it seems too little, they go back aboard and wait, and the natives come and add to the gold until they are satisfied. There is perfect honesty on both sides; the Punics never touch the gold until it equals in value what they have offered for sale, and the natives never touch the goods until the gold has been taken away.”

Herodotus, I’m afraid, lacks the business acumen that characterizes the monks at Vatopedi…

Himilco’s “report”: sea monsters!

● Along with the Massaliote Periplus, sailing to the North Atlantic, the explorations extended south also with the voyage of Euthymenes of Massalia (early 6th century or, according to other writers, second half of the 5th century BCE). Unfortunately, the original text of his Periplus in the Outer Sea was lost; only some quotations survived, such as those by Plutarch, or Seneca the Younger, who was very skeptical. During his exploration, Euthymenes arrived at a large river with hippopotami and crocodiles, whose outflow made the sea at its mouth fresh or brackish. It seems that it was the Senegal River. The Massaliotes should have known that the Punics, led by Hanno, had undertaken a great expedition in the same area and perhaps in the same period. There is no information, however, that the two fleets met. The results of Euthymenes’ venture were probably considered poor. So, the Massaliotes abandoned their effort in the South Atlantic.

● It was the Punics’ turn to expand into the North Atlantic, in the area described by the Massaliote Periplus. The expedition was headed by Himilco the Navigator (late 6th century BCE), with a periplus sailing by the coasts of Iberia and France. Following Tartessian routes, he reached Ophiussa (Portugal-Galicia) to trade for tin and other precious metals. Himilco gave a new dimension to the propaganda of Carthage: his voyage was presented as particularly painful; he painted a grim picture while referring to sea monsters and giant seaweed, so that the competitors, especially the Greeks, would not dare sail out into the Atlantic. It seems that this tactic was particularly effective: the Punic stories about sinister “signs and wonders” became the source of the myths discouraging voyages beyond the Pillars of Heracles.

● The Periplus of Scylax of Caryanda (late 6th – early 5th century BCE), on behalf of the Persians, explored the mouth of the Indus River, the Indian Ocean and Red Sea coasts as far as Suez. Scylax was born in Caria; he was a renowned Hellenized Carian explorer and writer in the years of Darius I. His expedition’s aim, circa 515, was to find the Indus River estuary. Sailing out into the Indian Ocean, he turned west until he arrived at the Red Sea, which he also explored. His voyage took 30 months. His report, perhaps entitled Periplus, and dedicated to king Darius, was lost, except for the quotations by later writers – such as Strabo in his Geography, Herodotus in his Histories, and Aristotle in his Politics, when he refers to the Indian kings. There are seven quotations in all, indicating his Periplus was not merely a log, but contained accounts of people, landscape, the natural conditions and political affairs. Hence it contained information intended for the expansion of the Persian Empire. Written in Greek, it was among the first works to be written in Hellenic prose. Moreover, it was the first account of the peoples of the Orient reaching the Mediterranean world and served as a model for later Greek writers. More lastingly, it registered the name of India and the Indians in geography.

● Periplus Outside the Pillars of Heracles, a work of the historian, chronographer, and logographer Charon of Lampsacus (1st half of the 5th century BCE), who lived before Herodotus; Periplus of the Inner Sea (the Mediterranean), a work of the astronomer, meteorologist and geographer Euctemon of Athens (mid-5th century), who was a student and partner of his compatriot, Meton; and also Ocean Periplus, of the great Abderitan “atomic” philosopher Democritus (c. 460 – c. 370 BCE): none of them has survived; especially in the case of Democritus, there are other reasons beyond fate (see Chronicle 22, intermediate reference to Abdera and Democritus).

● The epic exploration of the top Massaliote navigator, Pytheas (c. 380 – c. 310, or c. 350 – c. 285 BCE), took place around 325, and led him to Britain, Scandinavia, the Baltic Sea and, via river routes, to the Black and Mediterranean Seas, completing a periplus of Europe! His work, Τὰ περὶ τοῦ Ὠκεανοῦ (Things about [or Description of] the Ocean, or even Περίοδος γῆς (Travel around the Earth), survives only in excerpts quoted by other writers, some of whom treat him with skepticism, e.g. the constantly doubtful Strabo, and also Polybius. Pytheas said he “travelled over the whole of Britain that was accessible”, and explored the entire North. He saw the inhabitants of Cornwall to be involved in the manufacture of tin. Some of his observations may be the earliest report of Stonehenge; he also introduced the idea of ultimate Thule to the geographic imagination.⁽⁸⁾ He is the first person to describe the Midnight Sun and polar ice, and to state that the tides are caused by the moon. He measured latitude by the gnomon, and observed Germanic and possibly Finnic tribes.

• ⁽⁸⁾ Thule was believed in the past to be Iceland that was uninhabited until the second half of the 9th century CE. Yet, Pytheas had seen people on the island. By the late 19th century, Thule was identified with Norway. Others linked Thule to Greenland, where human presence dates back to 2500 BCE. Still, the likelihood of Pytheas sailing that far north is considered completely unreal.

Excerpts from his work are quoted or paraphrased by many others, such as Diodorus Siculus, Pliny, Geminus of Rhodes. Late writers gave titles to his book. Other simpler titles are Periplus, On the Ocean, or Ocean. After Britain and Norway, there followed the discovery of the Baltic and the voyage to the Don. And there, Polybius, willingly or not, created uncertainty, claiming that Pytheas turned back at the mouth of the Vistula, at the border of Scythia: “… on his return hence, he traversed the whole of the coast of Europe from Gades to the Tanais”… Was it a second leg in his exploration? And he didn’t pass by Massalia to refit and refresh the crew? Others claimed that the “Tanais” was not the Don, but the Elbe. Some writers raised questions on the first leg of the voyage, implying it had never happened! Since the Punics had blockaded the Pillars of Heracles – is the “incontestable” argument of the “armchair intellectuals” – how could Pytheas pass? Thus we need to examine the relations among Punics, Massaliotes and Romans at the time of his exploration.

Massaliotes, Punics and Romans as… “bitter friends”

Thule (or “Tile” on Olaus Magnus sea map, 1539), located NW of Scotland with monsters, was identified by some other “monsters”,
the Nazis, with Hyperborea (see Chronicle 15) as the cradle of the “Aryan race”: the Nazi party was hatched within the Thule Society.

The Punics had imposed a blockade of the Pillars of Heracles to all ships from other nations. However, by the 4th century BCE, the western Hellenes, especially the Massaliotes, were more or less on “amicable” terms with them. First of all, Massalia was militarily superior to Carthage: they had defeated the empire in the late 6th and early 5th centuries. Not wishing to test the issue any further, the Punics had made an independent treaty with the Massaliotes; and the latter had no trouble to place and maintain colonies on the Mediterranean Iberian coast. Archaeologically the sites of the western Mediterranean show no diminishment of Grecian wares at any time; on the contrary, there was an increase due to their better quality – which is a good indication of trade. Second, Massalia was an old ally of Rome. The Massaliotes had helped the Romans in their conflicts with the Etruscans and the Gauls. In the mid-4th century, Carthage and Rome came to terms over the Sicilian Wars, defining with a treaty their mutual interests. Rome could use Sicilian markets and Carthage could buy and sell in Rome. If Carthage had enslaved allies of Rome, they were to be set free. Rome was to stay out of the western Mediterranean – excepting Massalia. During the last half of the 4th century – the time of Pytheas’ voyage – relations between Rome and its allies on the one hand, and Carthage on the other, were totally amicable. The Massaliotes were free to operate as they pleased. Neither is there any evidence in any of the sources about some kind of problem emerging “in the last moment” in relation to Pytheas’ exploration. On the contrary, mentions of Gades, Tartessos, and the “sacred promontory” (Sagres), at the southern tip of Portugal – all testify to his passing through the Pillars “in broad daylight” and heading north…

Nearchus Paraplus

Nearchus Paraplus

● While Pytheas was circumnavigating Europe, Nearchus, as Alexander’s admiral, was carrying out his Paraplus, under the instructions to steer the fleet from India to the Persian Gulf, sailing by the coast, and meet the Macedonian king at Susa. Nearchus Paraplus is preserved in Arrian’s Indica.⁽⁹⁾ Nearchus was appointed as satrap of Lycia and Pamphylia in 334-333. In 328 he rejoined Alexander in Bactria, bringing with him reinforcements. Two years later, he was made admiral of the fleet that had been built at the Hydaspes (Jhelum) river, and steered it from the Indus to the Persian Gulf – a voyage that he recorded in every detail. Then he became the first Greek to visit Tylos (Bahrain), marking the area’s inclusion in the Hellenic world with the worship of Zeus (as the Arab sun goddess, Shams), and Greek being spoken as the language of upper classes. Nearchus Paraplus was intended by Alexander as a way to learn about the mouth of the Indus and the sea between India and Babylon. After many adventures, Nearchus arrived in Carmania (Kermā, in SE Iran, where one of the Alexandrias was founded), meeting with Alexander after the latter’s crossing of the Gedrosian desert. The king sent him off to complete his voyage – he went as far as the Euphrates river before turning back to rejoin Alexander at Susa, in early 324. He then took the fleet up to Babylon. Nearchus had a place in Alexander’s final plans, as he was to be the admiral of the Arabian invasion fleet – perhaps also in his other plans against Rome, Carthage and Iberia. But these plans were cut short by Alexander’s death in 323 BCE.

Pataliputra, where Megasthenes was sent: one of the largest cities in the world. Mathura: controlled by the Graeco-Indians (180-70 BCE). Sagala:
capital of Menander’s Graeco-Indian kingdom.

• ⁽⁹⁾ Arrian (late 1st – 2nd centuries CE) was one of the main historians of Alexander the Great, born in Nicomedia, the capital of Bithynia, in NW Asia Minor. His Indica tells the story of Nearchus’ voyage to the Persian Gulf after the Macedonians conquered the Indus Valley. But much of the importance of the work comes from his in depth writing about the history, geography, and also culture, of the Indian subcontinent. Arrian, who had Herodotus as a model, relates the stories of Heracles and Dionysus in India, as well.

Indica is also the title of a similar book by Megasthenes describing the history of India; this was a major source from which Arrian drew. Megasthenes (c. 350–290 BCE), also born in Anatolia in the Hellenistic period, was a Greek ethnographer, who became an ambassador of Seleucus I to Chandragupta at Pataliputra, in Bihar of NE India, some time before 298, the year this Indian chief died. Megasthenes had lived before in Arachosia, southern Afghanistan. At the beginning of his book, he referred to the old Indians who knew about the arrival of Dionysus and Heracles in India, and mentioned the devotees of Heracles (Krishna) and Dionysus (Shiva or Indra). Indica served as an important source to many later writers such as Strabo, Diodorus and Pliny; it also introduced India to the Mediterranean world. Its scope is wide-ranging, from the Himalayas in the North to Taprobana (Sri Lanka) in the South.

Hellenistic culture in the Indian subcontinent: Graeco-Indian banquet, with Hellenic clothes, amphoras, wine, music (1st–2nd centuries CE)

● Androsthenes of Thasos was another admiral of Alexander’s, and also a trierarch (commander of a trireme) of Nearchus’. The account of his voyage is a Paraplus of Indica. Alexander sent him down the Euphrates in an exploration, skirting the coast of Arabia and sailing farther than Archias of Pella. The latter was a geographer and officer who also served as trierarch under Nearchus. Archias was dispatched with a galley and reached Tylos; as he reported, the island was “about a day and a night’s sail” from the mouth of the Euphrates. Onesicritus was also an officer serving under Nearchus as a helmsman. Some quotations of his own Periplus referring to ancient India and its inhabitants have survived. Nevertheless, he was regarded as unreliable and conceited.

● The Periplus of Pseudo-Scylax (330s BCE) was written by an unknown Athenian. He entitled it as Periplus of the Sea of Universal Europe and Asia and Libya, and signed it as “Scylax” for reasons of prestige. He presented the Mediterranean and Black Seas clockwise, starting from Iberia and concluding in western Africa beyond the Pillars of Heracles.

● The Stadiasmus, i.e. Periplus of the Great Sea, is a work of an unknown geographer-helmsman (late 4th – early 3rd century BCE). Extant is only the part about distances, sailing directions, and descriptions of the Mediterranean harbours.

● The ten-volume Periplus of Timosthenes (early 3rd century BCE) was intended to describe more precisely countries already known, specifying the location of harbours and stations in the Mediterranean. Timosthenes of Rhodes was a major navigator, geographer, cartographer, and admiral of the Ptolemaic fleet. He additionally wrote On Harbours, On Islands, and Stadiasmi, drawing up several nautical maps. He was an expert on winds in antiquity, and the first Hellene geographer to use the winds for geographic orientation, rather than merely as meteorological phenomena. There are only quotations surviving in the works of other writers, who referred to him with admiration, such as Erathosthenes, or Strabo. The latter revealed another talent of this versatile man: he composed a Pythic nomos (law), a Pythian “canon”, if you like, for aulos and cithara to be played at Delphi in the Pythian Games in celebration of the victory of Apollo over Python.⁽¹⁰⁾

Apollo slaying Python, by Eugène Delacroix (1850)

Musical Nomos (Law)

• ⁽¹⁰⁾ “Nomos [law, canon] in music was the most important form of composition and interpretation in ancient Greek music. It seems that it evolved from a very old tradition, according to which the laws were sung by the people to be easily memorized and followed [unlike what happens now that the legislators do their best for the laws to be incomprehensible, although – or precisely because – ignorance of the law is not forgiven]… The composition and interpretation of nomoi were very demanding and set high professional standards in the four Hellenic games (Olympian, Pythian, Isthmian, Nemean), where the most distinguished musicians (composers-performers) of their time took part. The Pythian nomos, the most important nomos for aulos, invented by Sakadas, was the first known type of program music and was meant to describe the contest between Apollo and the dragon Python, in five parts…” (Solon Michaelides, Encyclopedia of Ancient Greek Music).

● Timosthenes either innovated, combining the aulos with the cithara in his Pythian nomos, or such a combination was already established in his time. These instruments were mostly played by professional musicians: aulos, a wind instrument, connected with Dionysus; cithara, a string instrument, identified with Apollo. The lyre, instead, was played only by amateurs. (On laws in verse see also Chronicle 11, footnote 1, and Chronicle 21, footnote 5 and the relevant text).

The duel between the citharoedus Apollo and the aulete Marsyas

● Note that no celebration was established, nor was any nomos composed, for another victory of Apollo in a musical contest against the satyr aulete Marsyas from Phrygia. The god, in order to win, was obliged to sing, as well, something that the Muses, who were the judges, permitted, of course. It was a “win on points”, infuriating Apollo, who over-reacted: he flayed Marsyas alive and nailed his skin to a pine tree for his “hubris” to challenge a god! That is how the Hellenic music prevailed over the Phrygian, and the Apollonian spirit subdued the Dionysian… However, in the Hellenistic years, according to Diodorus Siculus, Marsyas was admired for his intelligence (σύνεσις) and self-control (σωφροσύνη), while the Romans praised him for his free speech and boldness (παρρησία), and also “speaking truth to power”. His statue near the Roman forum was regarded as an indicium libertatis, a symbol of liberty, and associated with demonstrations of the plebs, the common people.

● Two great Greek navigators, who might have worked together in the Indian Ocean, were Eudoxus of Cyzicus (c. 150–100), and Hippalos (late 2nd – 1st centuries BCE). Eudoxus explored the Arabian Sea on behalf of the Ptolemies in Egypt. According to Poseidonius and Strabo, he was the first to sail on the monsoon wind system on the Indian Ocean in 118–116. They said that a shipwrecked sailor from India had been rescued in the Red Sea and taken to Alexandria. This Indian offered to guide Greek navigators to India. Eudoxus was appointed for the first voyage, in 118 BCE, guided by the Indian sailor. After he returned with a cargo of aromatics and precious stones, a second voyage was undertaken, in 116, sailing without a guide. Until then, Greek and Indian sailors met to trade at Arabian ports such as Aden, called by the Hellenes Εὐδαίμων (Felix: Fertile and Happy; while Yemen was named Eudaemon Arabia). Attempts to sail beyond Aden were rare and discouraged, involving a long, laborious sailing by the coast to India. On the contrary, Indian ships used the monsoon winds to sail to Arabia. If the Greeks acquired the know-how, they would have no need of the Arabian ports, trading directly with India. Having this accomplished, very soon, by mid-1st century BCE, there was a marked increase in the number of Hellenic and Roman ships sailing this way to India.

Greek ships and a sea monster near the Pillars
of Heracles, sketch by Walter Plitt Quintin

When Eudoxus was returning from his second voyage to India, the wind forced him south and down the coast of Africa for some distance, where he found the remains of a ship. Due to its appearance and the story told by the natives, he concluded that the ship was from Gades (Cádiz) in Andalusia, sailing south around Africa. Therefore, he was inspired to attempt a periplus of Africa. Organizing the expedition on his own, he set sail from Gades, but the difficulties were too great, so he was obliged to go back. He didn’t give up though. He again set out to circumnavigate Africa, but his eventual fate is unknown. Although some, such as Pliny, claimed that Eudoxus did achieve his goal, the most probable conclusion is that he perished on the journey…

● Concerning Hippalus, he is sometimes referred to as Eudoxus’ captain. The writer of the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea credited him with discovering the direct route from the Red Sea to India, correcting the map of the area. Greek geographers before him thought that the Indian coast stretched from west to east. Hippalus recognized the north-to-south direction of India’s coastline. Only someone who had this insight would foresee crossing the Indian Ocean might be a faster way to South India than sailing by the coast. Since the 1st century BCE onwards, we witness the prosperity of trade between Egypt and India. Sometimes Hippalus is credited with introducing to Europe the idea of sailing to India aided by the monsoon winds.

● The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (40–70 CE),⁽¹¹⁾ written by an unknown Alexandrian, gives the shoreline itinerary of the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean, starting each time at the port of Berenice Troglodytica (also known as Baranis). Beyond the Red Sea, the manuscript describes the coast of India as far as the Ganges River and the east coast of Africa (called Azania).

• ⁽¹¹⁾ Although “Erythraean Sea” literally means “Red Sea”, the term for the ancient Greeks included the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf, as well.

● The Periplus Ponti Euxini (130–131 CE) described the trade routes along the Euxine (Black Sea). It was written by Arrian in a letter to the emperor Hadrian, and contains an accurate topographical survey of the coastline. It is possibly connected with his instructions, as a legate of Cappadocia, for a march of the Roman army against the Alani. Its purpose was to inform the emperor of the “lay of the land” – the distances between cities and locations that would provide safe harbour, in case of a military expedition to the region.

● The Anaplous Bosporou (Voyage through the Bosporus, or De Bospori navigatione), written by the geographer Dionysius of Byzantium (2nd century CE), describes the Bosporus coastline and ancient Byzantium, before becoming Constantinople in the 4th century. The text has been described as “one of the most remarkable and detailed of ancient geographic texts.”

Periplus, by Adolf Erik Nordenskiöld.

● The Periplus of the Outer Sea is an original work of the Greek geographer Marcian of Heraclea Pontica (4th century CE). He also prepared some epitomes: The Periplus Inside the Sea, an epitome of Menippus of Pergamon, and Geography, an epitome of Artemidorus Ephesius.

● Finally, a Periplus by Adolf Erik Nordenskiöld (1832-1901), a Finn arctic explorer, geologist and mineralogist, most remembered for the expedition along the northern coast of Eurasia in 1878-79. This was the first complete crossing of the Northern Sea Route, or Northeast Passage. It was a great feat as it opened the way to a periplus of Eurasia. Except his monumental Periplus (5 volumes, 1897), and a popular summary (2 volumes), he published the monograph Early History of Cartography (1889), for he was interested in the history of Arctic exploration as evidenced in old maps.

The Periplus of Eurasia through the North Sea and the Suez Canal Routes

• >> Chronicle 17. MINOAN CRETAN THALASSOCRACY
• << Chronicle 15. SAILING TO RIO DE JANEIRO!

Next Chronicle 17. MINOAN CRETAN THALASSOCRACY ● Minoan Society and Art ● Linear A-B, Phaestos Disc ● Tin Bronze ● Bull-Leaping (Taurocathapsia)