Chronicle 25. “CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!”

Chronicle 25. “CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!”

/ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΑ/ Χρονικό 25. “CARTHAGO DELENDA EST!”

● Phoenicians and Punics ● Colonization ● Impact of Persian Expansion
● Tartessos: the Apple of Discord ● Battle of Alalia ● Tartessos and
Carthage Ruined ● Macedonia and Rome

Michales Loukovikas

Back to the ancient Mediterranean troubled waters

Prow of a ship on a Punic coin (replica)

IF PLUTARCH’S PARALLEL LIVES PORTRAYED peoples in pairs, one could very well parallel the Minoans to the Canaanite Phoenicians, and the Mycenaeans to the Carthaginian Punics:⁽¹⁾ the latter expanded not only founding colonies, but also through conquests. Crete and Phoenicia, by contrast, with their limited territories, could not become springboards for war expeditions. Expansion was only possible through trade and colonization, thanks to their navigators.

• ⁽¹⁾ Especially in this Chronicle, a clear differentiation is needed between the Canaanite Phoenicians and the Carthaginian Punics, so as to avoid confusion: the term Canaanite refers to Phoenicia, Canaan; the term Punic to Carthage; while the term Phoenician covers both, the entire family in the Mediterranean.

Attican hydria (vessel to carry water; 6th century BCΕ)

The restrictions the Greeks faced, as soon as they awoke from their “Dark Ages”, in order to expand anew to the West, were the “faits accomplis” the Phoenicians had set up in the meantime. The Hellenes had no problem to cross the Aegean as it was a Greek sea. With Troy burned down, no one could block their entrance to the Black Sea – only Nature. That’s why they euphemistically called it Euxine Pontus, “hospitable sea”, trying to appease Poseidon, and dominate there. But they knew that in the Mediterranean competition was fierce. The Phoenicians, who avoided “cruises” in the Aegean and the Black Seas,⁽²⁾ were “omnipresent” anywhere else, having created their commercial network while they voyaged on the seas almost alone. They were motivated by profit through exchange. Part of the profit, though, had to be paid as tribute to the metropolises, or the empires, which took turns in the role of the master of Phoenicia.

• ⁽²⁾ I do not mean to say that the Canaanites did not sail in the Aegean; Hellenic ships voyaged to Canaan, as well. The Graeco-Phoenician relations were age-old, and their exchange was done on equal terms. What I mean is that the Aegean could never become Tartessos: a Canaanite trader voyaging to Hellas was just a trader; the same person in Iberia acted like a monopolist.

Generally speaking, an ancient colony differed from a contemporary one in that the former was a polis (not a country) founded by another polis, the metropolis. In addition, a Hellenic colony was usually sovereign from its inception. However, in the Phoenician world, a colony, although autonomous, had to pay tribute to the metropolis: Carthage e.g. was a dependency of Tyre. This was out of need: the Phoenicians lacked the population to found large self-sustaining colonies and most of them had fewer than 1,000 inhabitants, with Carthage being one of the few exceptions.

Magna Graecia, Carthage and Etruria

The Greeks had other problems or incentives: hunger, wars, or various disputes, drove many to other lands. Population growth and cramped spaces in Hellas, in combination with a desire to expand the sphere of economical influence, had motivated them to settle in Italy c. 800 BCE. It was the next place to colonize and Hellenize after the shores of Asia Minor or the Black Sea. In the next 150 years, several poleis founded their colonies along the coast of southern Italy and Sicily, controlling trade routes and dominating the Strait of Messina. This zone came to be known as Magna Graecia. The Phoenicians generally avoided any military confrontations with the Hellenes, unless a land of strategic importance was at stake, e.g. Sicily. To the north, the Greeks faced another adversary, the Etruscans, who had risen to the status of a regional power in Italy, and also expanded in the western Mediterranean, due to the mining and trade of metals. The Hellenic presence was undermining their interests, especially since the Phocaeans began founding colonies on the coasts of Corsica, Gaul, and Iberia. This obliged the Etruscans to ally themselves with the Punics, whose interests also collided with those of the Greeks.

A navigator at Zákantha (Sagunto)

The situation began to change dramatically sometime after 640 BCΕ, when the first Hellene trader dropped anchor at Tartessos. It was possibly the first arrival of a Greek at Iberia in historical times, after the voyages of the Mycenaeans and their legendary heroes (e.g. Heracles) to the peninsula. This sailor was Colaeus (Κωλαῖος), a Samian silver explorer and trader, who arrived at Tartessos c. 640 BCΕ, according to Herodotus. In an era when merchants were anonymous, the “father of history” thought that Colaeus was important enough to note. Since no other Greek merchant had previously sailed to Tartessos, Colaeus was able to obtain a cargo of metal (150 kg of silver) and take it back safely to Samos, thus realizing one of the greatest trade profits at the time. The Massalian Phocaeans followed Colaeus’ route many years later and also dropped anchor at Tartessos. Herodotus wrote that the Phocaeans were the first Hellenes to make long sea-voyages, having discovered and explored the coasts of the Adriatic, Tyrrhenia, Iberia, and Tartessos. He added that Arganthonios, the famous Tartessian king, welcomed the Greeks and urged them in vain to settle there. But why “in vain”? After all they did settle there. And why was the king so anxious to have them in his land? The answer to this question is given by the historical developments.

Phocaean warrior (500-480 BCE)

Hearing that the Persians were becoming a dominant power in the area of their metropolis, Phocaea, the king gave them 1500 kg of silver to build a defensive wall about their city. Despite this wall, however, Phocaea was conquered in 546 BCΕ. Rather than submit to Persian rule, most Phocaeans abandoned their city. Some of them fled to Chios, others to their colonies in Corsica and elsewhere in the Mediterranean, they founded Elea c. 540 BCΕ, and some eventually returned to Phocaea. It is the period when Persia captured the Hellenic cities on the Asia Minor coast. Ironically, the Greeks were not alone in this tragedy; the Canaanites suffered even more: the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Tyre in 572 BCΕ; then, in 539, the Persian king Cyrus the Great conquered Canaan; Phoenicia declined further and was obliged to pass the baton to Carthage; the Canaanites moved to their colonies, even to the new rising metropolis. The consolidation of the great Empire of the Achaemenids would re-arrange the map of the entire Mediterranean, not only in the Orient but also in the Occident. The 6th century BCE proved to be a major turning point.

The consolidation of the Achaemenids rearranged the map of the
entire Mediterranean, East and West. It was a major turning point.

Phoenician ship, marble mosaic

PHOENICIAN COLONIES were founded on both routes to Iberia and its mineral wealth: a) along the North African coast, and b) on the northern island route (Sicily, Sardinia, the Balearics).⁽³⁾ As we mentioned before, they paid tribute to either Tyre or Sidon, but neither had actual control on them. This rule changed c. 650 BCΕ, when Carthage gained independence from Tyre, establishing hegemony over other Phoenician colonies in the West. While some of them willingly submitted, giving up their foreign policy, and paying tribute to the Punics, others in Iberia and Sardinia resisted. Carthage sent troops there and appointed magistrates, retaining direct control over them. It was a policy rigidly enforced during the Punic Wars, when Carthage would become the undisputed leader of all Phoenicians, and resulted in a number of Iberian towns siding with the Romans. If that was the treatment reserved for their kindred, their brothers, one can easily imagine what would happen to all the rest.

• ⁽³⁾ What was the purpose of the Phoenician colonies on the second route to Iberia? The first one was the natural route linking Phoenicia with Iberia sailing by the North African coast; while the second one was the natural route linking Greece with Iberia voyaging from island to island. So, this was not a trade route for the Phoenicians. Its exclusive purpose was to block the Hellenes to sail west: it was of strategic importance.

Dido building Carthage (The Rise of the Carthaginian Empire), by J. M. W. Turner (1815)

The founder of Carthage, according to Greek historians, was Elissa, renamed as Dido in Virgil’s Aeneid. The city was built on a promontory, making it master of maritime trade in mare nostrum. All ships crossing the sea had to sail between Tunisia and Sicily, affording the city great power and influence. Founded in 814 BCΕ, it was one of the largest cities in Hellenistic times (by some estimates, only Alexandria was larger). The Punics, unlike other Phoenicians, had a landowning aristocracy, who controlled trans-Saharan trade routes and ruled the hinterland of North Africa. Besides, unlike the Romans, and despite the lack of manpower, Punic citizenship was exclusive, and the goal of the state was more focused on protecting commerce. Exempt from taxation, the citizens were primarily involved in this domain as traders or workers. As a result, Carthage could not afford to wage long wars, because commercial activities slowed down.⁽⁴⁾

Dido and the walled city of Carthage, medal (ca 1550 CE)

• ⁽⁴⁾ This contradiction is the superpowers’ Achilles’ heel. Carthage, as a commercial empire, would prefer peace; but as a commercial empire, had to conduct wars continuously – and this is in fact what happened: first against the Hellenes, and then against the Romans. In addition, the Punics’ refusal to grant their neighbours privileges, in order to integrate them into their society, turned them into a small, privileged, but vulnerable minority until the end, and obliged them to rely more and more on mercenaries during the wars. This would prove fatal for Carthage…

The war machine, however, was very efficient. Its navy was one of the largest in the Mediterranean, using serial production to maintain high numbers at a low cost, while the army included the now extinct North African elephants trained for war. Carthage turned west and became the “middleman” between mineral resource-rich Iberia and the Orient. The eastward expansion along the African coast was blocked by the Greek colony of Cyrene, founded in 630 BCΕ. The wars against Hellenes were due to the vulnerability of the Punic economy to Greek competition, since products “Made in Carthage” were inferior to Hellenic goods. The Greek colonists posed a twofold threat: a) undercutting the Phoenicians by offering better products; and b) taking over the distribution network.

Wars against Hellenes due to the vulnerability of Punic economy to
Greek competition: Punic products were inferior to Hellenic goods.
The Greeks posed a twofold threat to: a) undercut the Phoenicians by
offering better products, and b) take over the distribution network.

Punic gold coin with a horse

The empire depended heavily on its trade with Tartessos and Iberia in general, from which it obtained vast quantities of silver, lead, copper, and cassiterite that was essential for the manufacture of bronze. Carthage’s trade relations with the Iberians and the naval might that enforced its monopoly on this trade and with tin-rich Britain allowed it to be the sole significant tin broker and bronze maker. This monopoly, one of the major sources of power and prosperity for Carthage, should be maintained at any cost; a Punic sea merchant would rather crash his ship upon the rocky shores of Britain than reveal to any antagonist how it could be safely approached. In addition to being the sole significant distributor of tin, its central location in mare nostrum and control of the waters between Sicily and Tunisia (those “Pillars of Heracles” within the Mediterranean) allowed it to check the Orient’s supply of tin, as well. Carthage was also the largest producer of silver, mined in Iberia or North Africa, and, after the tin monopoly, this was one of its most profitable trades. The purple dye was also one of the most highly valued commodities, being worth 15-20 times its weight in gold. Ancient sources agree that Carthage via its trade had become perhaps the wealthiest city in the world. However, without the monopoly on trade with Tartessos and Iberia at large, the Punic Empire was inconceivable. Its leaders should have been aware of this fact when they replaced the Canaanites as overlords of Iberia c. 575 BCΕ. Sometime afterwards the Massaliote Phocaeans turned up at Tartessos. King Arganthonios’ friendship with the Hellenes must have greatly annoyed Carthage that felt its monopoly was at stake. It was urgent to take action against the “intruders”, in order to establish itself as the greatest economic and military power in the West of the Mediterranean.

The Punic Empire was inconceivable without Iberia.
The Battle of Alalia: a Grecian “Cadmean victory”…

Trireme, a mosaic from Carthage

This “action” took place in the Tyrrhenian Sea c. 537 BCΕ: it was the historic naval Battle of Alalia. When the metropolis Phocaea fell to Persia, most citizens chose to move to Alalia (or Aléria in Roman times), their colony in Corsica. But this led to a decline of Punic and Etruscan trade in the island and to an alliance between Carthage and Etruria. Their joint fleet of 120 ships, disguised as a pirate force, was defeated by just 60 Phocaean ships carrying people to Alalia. It would have been a great tactical victory of the Greeks, who wiped out an enemy force twice as large; but they lost almost two-thirds of their own fleet. Herodotus said it was a Cadmean victory – what would later be described as a Pyrrhic victory.⁽⁵⁾

• ⁽⁵⁾ Cadmean is a victory involving one’s own ruin; from Cadmus, legendary founder of Thebes, who required water from a spring guarded by a water-dragon and all his companions perished. Herodotus could not know the subsequent similar phrase, Pyrrhic victory, achieved at such a devastating cost that it is a prelude to defeat. It is named after Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, whose army suffered irreplaceable casualties in defeating the Romans twice in 280-279 BCΕ during the Pyrrhic War. The Romans suffered even greater casualties but had a much larger supply of men. Pyrrhus is reported as saying: “Another such victory and I come back to Epirus alone”…

King Pyrrhus of Epirus

Realizing that they could not withstand another attack, the Hellenes evacuated Corsica, and sought refuge in Rhegion. According to a legend, Greek prisoners were stoned to death by the Etruscans, while the (more practical) Punics sold them into slavery. Etruria got hold of Corsica, and Carthage kept Sardinia. The Punics would fight two more major naval battles with Massalia, losing both, but still managing to safeguard Iberia and close the Pillars of Heracles, the Strait of Gibraltar, to Hellenic shipping, thus containing Grecian expansion in Iberia until 480 BCΕ. The Massaliotes made no gains and just kept control of their Iberian colonies. It seemed as if the Iberian status quo remained in place; but in fact, a great tragedy was unfolding in Andalusia with the collapse and demise of the Tartessian polity and civilization.

Tartessos… delenda est!

SOME AUTHORS CONSIDER that this Phocaean victory/defeat in Alalia and the absence of Greek traders in Tartessos led to the collapse… Here we go again! During all those centuries of development, these authors saw only Phoenicians trading there. But, all of a sudden, the Hellenic presence became so vital for the Tartessians’ survival that they died out when the Punics cut their “oxygen” off! Other scholars offer the alternative of an “armed conflict”, but in general terms, and avoid being precise as to who was fighting whom. There are also versions of the Tartessian tragedy that specify both the perpetrators and time: “The Punics brought about the collapse by 530 BC”. Carthage should have put Tartessos in “quarantine”, sometime after the death of Arganthonios c. 550 BCΕ. This was the reason why ten years later, with the Punics and Etruscans allied against the Hellenes, the Tartessians did not remain “prudently neutral”; so, they stood by the Greeks and paid dearly. The situation did not allow “luxuries” such as neutralities…

The island of Gadir > Gades > Cádiz

Emboldened by the outcome of the Battle of Alalia, the Punics unleashed such a “reign of terror” that even their kindred in Gadir turned against them. The Punics besieged promptly the fraternal Canaanite colony and captured it. The Gaditans suffered so much and for so long that in 206 BCΕ, during the second Punic War, they rebelled against Carthage; and when Gadir fell to the Romans, they hailed the victors. Certainly, the new overlords were no better: just one year later, the Roman presence was shaken by a mutiny and an Iberian uprising against them. There was at least one aspect where the Canaanites proved to be superior to the Punics: just after the fall of Gadir, the Persian king Cambyses became master of Egypt in 525 BCΕ. Carthage was then spared a trial of arms against the Persian Empire, since the Canaanites refused to lend ships to the Persians for an African expedition against their own brothers. It seems that at least for the Canaanites, unlike the Punics, blood ties were still important. But even without losing a war, the Punic Empire may have paid tribute irregularly to the Great King of Kings.

The Punics were spared a trial of arms against the Persians, because the
Canaanites did not lend ships for a Persian expedition against Carthage.

Bronce Carriazo: a Tartessian bronze plaque found near Seville representing a local goddess of the marshes and assimilated to Astarte and Hathor

Carthage proceeded to destroy Tartessos and drive Greeks away from southern Iberia, defending its trade monopoly in the western Mediterranean, with attacks even on the merchant ships of its rivals. Historical reports indicate that Tartessos had little military defense, as its success was always based on trade and friendly relations with its neighbours. This is hard to believe, however, for the kingdom was so wealthy that many Iberian tribes would covet it. There should have been defensive walls and/or deterrent land and sea forces, i.e. army and navy. As for the year of the catastrophe, in several historical texts we can find one that sets the date as 533 BCΕ, i.e. it is consistent with what was cited before (“by 530 BC”), and another one sometime later, around 500 BCΕ. We cannot be sure if the two dates refer to the same event, or if there was an “armed conflict” between Punics and Tartessians that lasted about thirty years. “It is reported”, we can read in one of those texts, “that around 500 BC, Tartessos was attacked by the Carthaginians, who destroyed the capital and left it without protection from the sea.” It makes sense if we remember those accounts that Tartessos had a sophisticated system to regulate the river flow of its tidal river, and also its supposed similarity to Atlantis.

“Tartessos was attacked by the Punics, who destroyed
the capital and left it without protection from the sea.”

Auletris (woman playing aulos), Iberian high-relief from Osuna (Seville province, end of 3rd or beginning of 2nd century BCE)

The abrupt disappearance, and the fact that its capital has never been found, led to a lot of speculation: how could such an important civilization disappear with no traces left behind? If the capital eludes us, there are Tartessian cities that can “speak” the truth. Balsa–Tavira in the Algarve was violently destroyed in the end of the 6th century, probably together with the capital and other sites, when the Punics proceeded to impose their “iron will” (see Chronicle 21, footnote 11). Maenaca (Mainakē), the Hellenic colony founded close to Málaga under the aegis of Tartessos, is claimed it was also destroyed c. 500 BCE. We additionally know that many Canaanite colonies were deserted at the same time. We cannot be sure if this was connected with Phoenicia’s decline, or Carthage’s “ethnic cleansing” operations, or some local rebellions. Despite the numerous excavations, it has not been possible to locate with certainty either Maenaca, or Acra Leucá at Alicante, or the city of Tartessos. Whatever the result of all these continuous efforts, the ancient texts that mention these cities cannot be ignored; otherwise, the story of Tartessos and its demise should be treated as fiction, as well…

There is a tendency to present the Canaanites as “peaceful colonists”, while the Punics as “warlike colonialists”. However, we have seen the Phoenicians acting in a manner anything but peaceful whenever they could “manage” the adversary.⁽⁶⁾ In a text on the History of old Onuba (Huelva), except numerous open questions and hypotheses, we have some interesting data presented. Tartessos, it seems, began gradually sinking into crisis and decline in the 8th century BCΕ, at a time when there was a co-existence of Phoenician and Grecian colonies such as Gadir and Portus Menesthei, which was identified as a Phocaean site.⁽⁷⁾ The author was impressed by the closeness of the Greek site to the Tartessian capital and noted what the archaeologists in Huelva had observed, i.e. a decrease in Phoenician pottery, in parallel with an increase in Hellenic ceramics of far better quality.⁽⁸⁾

Hellenic helmet, Asta Regia (Jerez de la Frontera), close
to Portus Menesthei

• ⁽⁶⁾ We can’t say that this mentality has been a Phoenician peculiarity; it’s a human characteristic: virtually everyone acts likewise. The Hellenes e.g. very often acted as the “bullies” of antiquity (though this feature sometimes saved them, as it happened during the Persian Wars). Regarding the Canaanites, let’s go back to Chronicle 20. The Enigmatic Sea Peoples: one of them

“the Tjeker, moving to Canaan, 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 BCΕ by the expanding Phoenicians, who were checked by the Philistines, and then by the Hebrews.”

And, of course, except these minor local powers that blocked Phoenician expansion, there were superpowers, such as the Assyrians, Babylonians and Persians. Conclusion: there was absolutely no room for Phoenician expansion in the Levant.

• ⁽⁷⁾ Amid all this speculation and conjecture, the author claims that the 8th century was “a time when Phoenician and Greek colonies, such as Gadir and Portus Menesthei, coexisted”. When did this coexistence actually occur? Was it in the 8th or in the 6th century? In Chronicle 22, both versions were presented:

Tartessian King Arganthonios

“The Hellenic cities on the Mediterranean coast of Iberia probably appeared on the ‘map’ after the foundation of Massalia, c. 600 BCΕ”. However, “the Hellenes of the Homeric era (at least their goods) arrived at Iberian ports… in the 9th or 8th century BCΕ. Those who transported the Greek ware… might very well have been the Phoenicians… What the Phoenician ships could not transport and, therefore, made the Greek presence absolutely necessary in Iberia, was Hellenic culture, art, ideas, models, architecture, burial habits, etc.”

• ⁽⁸⁾ The author seems to be obsessed with the Greeks, presenting them as a destabilizing factor, allegedly terrorizing the countryside and promoting their goods by force! He accepts, however, that these goods were better in quality! In such cases, the ones who resort to violence are the monopolists with less attractive products, so as to avoid free competition. Anyway, he admits that all his hypotheses are not based on archaeological finds.

The worsening of the situation in the next century is manifested by the almost total disappearance of open settlements, with the walling of cities. During the 6th century, we notice the outbreak of another crisis evidenced by the decrease of mineral exports. Its tragic climax is attested with the destruction of Tartessos by the Punics, because it was an ally of the Greeks. The conquerors, nota bene, had no intention to eliminate just the resistance of the conquered, indicating how merciless this confrontation had been, equivalent to what we now describe as “genocide”. The descendant culture of the Turdetani in southern Andalusia marks a return to the socio-economic features of the late Atlantic Bronze Age within the Iron Age conditions of the 5th century BCΕ, which is translated as a regression of at least two or three centuries.

The Battle of Salamis, by Wilhelm von Kaulbach (1868)

The Phoenicians’ double crushing defeat in Sicily and Salamis

AFTER IMPOSING “PAX PUNICA” in southern Iberia, Carthage turned its attention to another land of strategic importance mostly controlled by the Hellenes: Sicily. The Punics planned the largest overseas expedition thus far: after three years of preparations, they sailed for Sicily. It was the first Sicilian War,⁽⁹⁾ which coincided with Xerxes’ expedition against Greece in 480 BCΕ, prompting speculation about a possible alliance between Carthage and Persia. But even with no official pact, Carthage should have timed its expedition with that of the Achaemenids to exclude the possibility of any aid sent from Hellas to Sicily. The outcome of both expeditions was disastrous for the invaders. For the Phoenicians it was a double defeat: not only of the Punics in Sicily, but also of the Canaanites fighting in the naval Battle of Salamis under Persian orders. The repercussions brought sweeping changes in Carthage: an oligarchic Republic was then established, and also an isolationist policy was followed for the next 70 years when Carthage took no action against the Hellenes, nor even aided any of their rivals. Economically, sea trade with the Orient was cut off by the Greeks in Hellas, while the cities of Magna Graecia boycotted Punic merchants. This led to the development of trade with the West and caravan-borne trade with the East. Focus was shifted on the exploration and expansion in Africa and Europe. This isolationism explains why the two great maritime empires in the 5th century BCΕ, Carthage and Athens, were not engaged in war. Athens began massive exports of pottery in this period to Iberia, especially in the southeast. But again, as in the previous Canaanite era of Iberia, the archaeologists do not know yet if the ships that transported the ware were Punic or Athenian.

The ancient theatre of Tauromenium (Taormina) in Sicily

• ⁽⁹⁾ Essentially, the seven Sicilian Wars or, more properly, the Greek-Punic Wars, were a lamentable continuation of the relentless “tradition” of civil war among the Hellenes, with Carthage being always involved, changing sides, and finally winning, as a rule, the lion’s share. These wars, the longest lasting conflicts of classical antiquity (600–265 BCΕ), would culminate in the Punic Wars (264–146 BCE) against the Romans, and end with Carthage being razed to the ground.

While Carthage was engaged in another Sicilian War, the rise of Macedon under Philip II and Alexander the Great saw the defeat of the city-states in Greece and the fall of the Achaemenid Empire. All the Phoenician cities in Canaan submitted except Tyre that was besieged and sacked in 332 BCΕ. The thriving Greeks in the Hellenistic period gradually ousted the last remnants of the formerly dominant Phoenicians over trade routes in the eastern Mediterranean, while their culture disappeared entirely in Canaan. So, the Punics were the last of the Phoenicians. And they were spared another perilous ordeal when Alexander died in Babylon, in 323 BCΕ, while raising a fleet in Cilicia to invade Carthage, Italy, and Iberia…

The Punics were spared another ordeal when Alexander died,
while raising a fleet to invade Carthage, Italy, and Iberia…

Alexander with Heracles’ lion sculp,
cast stone plaque (1st-4th century CE)

Battles of the Diadochi with the three-way struggle among Antigonid Macedon, Ptolemaic Egypt and Seleucid Syria were also good news for Carthage avoiding unnecessary conflicts with the successors. Trade relations were reinstated with Egypt, together with sea-borne access to the eastern markets for the first time since 480 BCΕ. It seemed as if Carthage had also inherited the Phoenicians’ good fortune, since two superpowers, the Persian and Macedonian, could not realize their plans to campaign against its domain. But the confrontation with Rome would prove inevitable. The Punic Wars were a series of three conflicts lasting from 264 to 146 BCΕ. The first one was fought for the control of Sicily. Carthage, finally, evacuated it and paid heavy war indemnities. The end of the war found Rome with a large navy able to prevent sea-borne invasion of Italy, control sea trade routes, and invade foreign shores. Sardinia and Corsica were also seized, while Carthage had plunged into another war with its mercenaries. At last, the most powerful state that emerged in the western Mediterranean was Rome.

Hannibal in Italy: his feat in crossing the Alps with elephants, though many did not survive,
passed into European legend: detail of a fresco by Jacopo Ripanda (ca 1510)

Carthage spent the years after the war improving its finances and expanding its empire in Hispania (Iberia), preparing for the next war that is most remembered for Hannibal’s crossing of the Alps with elephants. He resoundingly defeated the Romans in several battles, but was unable to cause a break between Rome and its allies. Equally important, despite his many pleas, he never received sufficient reinforcements, because Carthage opted to send extra forces only to its source of wealth, Iberia. Thus Hannibal was not able to achieve his goal of ultimately conquering Rome and winning the war. This gave the Romans self-confidence, while they were fighting simultaneously in Italy, Sicily, Iberia, and also against Carthage’s ally, Macedonia. Finally, the war was taken to Africa, where Carthage was defeated and its control reduced to only the city itself.

“Ceterum censeo, Carthago delenda est!” (Cato)

Punic tetradrachm with Elissa-Dido and a lion

The resurgence of hostilities fifty years later, when Carthage recovered its wealth and power, was linked with anti-Roman agitations in Iberia and Hellas. Cato the Elder gave the “motto” for the annihilation of Carthage, ending all his speeches, no matter what the topic, saying: “Carthago delenda est!”, “Carthage must be destroyed!”.⁽¹⁰⁾

• ⁽¹⁰⁾ Cato (234–149 BCE) was a reactionary statesman, the first to write a Roman history in Latin, and prominent for his anti-Greek views, since he saw Hellenism as a threat to Roman culture.

Rome presented a series of unacceptable demands, claiming that Carthage must be demolished and rebuilt away from the coast, deep into Africa. In 146 BCΕ, after a three-year siege, it was systematically sacked and burned to the ground, with the fields salted to make the ground completely infertile and useless for future generations.⁽¹¹⁾ No Punic war records exist, since the books of the Library of Carthage were distributed among African tribes and none remain on Punic history.

In the end, Elissa-Dido was deprived of her immortal fame – by Aeneas…

• ⁽¹¹⁾Ares Alexandrou, Ascent (conclusion):

(…) remain there and look on to the end
look at them, those with keys and others with handcuffs
who’ll be demolishing
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . as allies
roofs bridges wells
look at them
while they’ll be leveling down the town you’ve built
and sowing it with salt.

Elissa-Dido was finally deprived of her immortal fame – by Aeneas…

• >> Chronicle 26. IBERIAN CROSS-CHECK
• << Chronicle 24. THE TRIUMPH OF CRETINISM

Next Chronicle 26. IBERIAN CROSS(-CHECK) ● Naucratis ● Adolf Schulten and Dan Stanislawski ● The Trojan War Odysseys ● Metal Attraction ● Cassiterides ● Balearics ● Arganthonios ● Graeco-Tartessian Friendship Against Phoenicians and Punics

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)