Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Phoenicians and The Iron Age Mediterran

    Uploaded by

    Marcus Antonino McGinty
    29 views13 pages
    Punic maritime trading empire

    Original Title

    Phoenicians_and_the_Iron_Age_Mediterran

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Punic maritime trading empire

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    29 views13 pages

    Phoenicians and The Iron Age Mediterran

    Uploaded by

    Marcus Antonino McGinty
    Punic maritime trading empire

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 13
    The Connected Iron Age INTERREGIONAL NETWORKS IN THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN, 900-600 BCE Edited by Jonathan M. Hall and James F: Osborne ‘The Univerty of Chap rea CHICAGO AND LONDON fe Se Feldman chapter ain this, {Sven ltd ns Ost, “Eaers Materinen Fcc “aching ing be rn Age Potable Xe occ nd Neon Aceon ‘Ans Cpt Sp ory inthe Ama ale Ty” PLoS Oven (Go te dao 05371 jor poneD68399 “i Gintn Leng sd ny Arle Shiperche Gree, ewan, snd Gry“ Contac aed ald tayo Age Shires” Oo eee hier tht did proce nab ofextelany ‘Siesta fren sie hw th Bj els Campane rk e ‘Dut cent oS whe hehe ty ur spn ot ene ‘hn Pets meri) cede, ac gery ‘Scions ftps among my oer pera ens td maar Mah Por "te je dla Campe Shipwch odCsil Trade Phen {LenS aya lbe at Df Cla Ag Jou A, ‘Sun Gr anda Ree Yook, Mepham oA Ses chapters hive. 2 CHAPTER 2 @ Phoenicians and the Iron Age Mediterranean A Response to Phoenicoskepticism cARoLiNA LOMH-KUIZ (la memory of Brigit W.Treamane, 138-2020) Wandering by lone ses breakers, And tng by deslt steams; Word losers nd woronser, ‘On whom the pale moon gleams ete are the moves ad baker, Ofte werd freer itseems* The Dead Bd of Skepticism “tn the ios Sabatino Mosca crete the Phoenicians” So stars the creation myth of Phoenician studies. After the eld passed through ts ‘Archaic and Clsial pris, snow in a Late Skeptical, evisonist, ‘mood, Inhasrcently been argued thatthe catalog ofthe famous 1988 ‘Venie exhibit, Fei was aa act of refation, which cemented out view ofthe Phoenicians and thei material culture? 1 ste that the ‘atic and Mosest’s work inevitably shaped oor view ofthe material future tociated withthe Phoenicians, but he was not true demirge, single-handedly cresting a mbject. Moscat was making 2 niche for what he took o bea homeless and growing body of materi. He was also andig our view ofthe Phoenicia weld fom the Pheeician main land to the other end of the Medterancan, a framework as broad and ‘complex at their commercial and colonial netwoek We ae sil deal. ‘ng withthe same problems asthe founding father. The field of Phoe ian studies eminn seatered and fragmented with few institutional ‘or publishing homes, Moreover Mosct already woried about the ap ‘between thot infected by Phoeaicomania and those who dened that Phoeicuseted. He hopedto stinule more dscusionand pointed ‘outta ere be tothe sae quetons bout the Euan more yamine would hve enue in bi ative Bay “he academic gap peat if most choline ine ‘wee hoe tendencies doe ot engage head on with he olen. Despite inresing dats and more contentious pool ey of non-Gree Roman, underrepresented group, the Phoenicians ae m- jecto ongoing deconstruction, The rpecial testment theyre, my Wie canbe undertood oly thogh tr tee eltonsip ith last Calholanhp The Phoesican, cod the infamous Cain ‘ky are peripheral grt the dncipineofclac bt louie the construction of western tadion the are waped betwen Neat East fn sts and lial and Ratory they sre presenti he Greco-Roman corpo st ae oer tested ranting dees com Plctng the arate of Grek excepuonabin The ethnonym Phos ss ltepllyplaed in quotation aks and ts aot a od in recent scholabip treats tha onfe the conmenton wi he ‘ren impying or expt tating that the Phoenician never ext that we ean ak oat Phoenisnsoly om he sath enury BCE ned "ten fm the penpecve ofa cles andRomaniorn Joe Phin Quins bok In Seorch of the Phoecian propor tht "he Phe can’ never scaly exited” Lonely the oemsale guns of ‘idence that Quin Beslan other hitorne asemblein a orto ‘mane the leged Phen construct gh tbe importance of th cl which even Phoercokepbe sea colescing rund “ct efi, clo tes, and roo practices may wll tat we eed otk the minima interpretation a ary retort {Sunnie we an app tony ance sours ancl ole ‘yandtoalacholly catego anes This mipht ao oda the Grek, woprovde the neal acd for dines of Poe Ginn Reto scontracto, however, eat higher pc fox noncasnica people epeilly when econ oar rie sais "acl concept with the denial ofthe agency or exit fhe peo pleto whom the concept fers Ia Qu words thee Phoenicia ‘sls Greek oven, an hee sno good evidence. that hese hoencanr se thems or are clecive ems above he level cf the yop the ay" Going beyond mere sep tit erat anc eaves the Phoeicinsdefences a well 2 eels, nce the own iterator wale ( Boog ese faces we might {tat wee complica Hellenocenim and ey, Eocene). Printed an german 36 soso tem we met back on the ve of Cos nd Roman escort ony quatre aa wee wy “ety aes bet os bye ang hem Ee ret wlan Feta Thies te oe sete rep fom vc ey met expe By cnn no not sae wl pode slat he Gres an Roan nee ws nbc. ‘Martin's recent assessment of the relationship between ethind Moen ste mor ete ater own sy SEE Ge ty, chonelogs cnege (te Can! ped and ail cnn (and Pht) lem wth + maw Seite Pownce ef the Ey geste Powican Tart age eres on Poel ind ith tn he Clase Teter an enon ce rth epee of Pekan Tigers sd forth cle ctl or ren eile ons tndmad he ern oer Phony oor" snide to cy ed sensu as Gre ie ty ws Alou Marin at te oes ese ‘cnn ety ete tome pti en ge ere techie oppor re hi op sat tol looking tower the peed wes we an ore corde Hees ret uments om sence concn tres ted Powlcns att cn or neu ting Medter: ‘aun hier af he Ge rn epg oe Semler BCE ht ofthe Poets pap nym bot Ercan iat" Ont oe eg he as sul by Horeca penpecte sa ew of eck exept Sethe teomer tie ce pro temas, Har dow fin the Pounce (who nee joel ech cepnaln) fom Ea ete phat s word do ed by Qian ate [ots Bowiman forth Ts ore et tt scr {i ici und heels inthe ie ge ae sec rua ore tcf Gres sc te Pow se agg sn i ested sets the tun ofthe bt lesa BEE seo). tn tent ve were din Pheri late megs fom ca esd sath CE wnt ne at thense of Tulsa on pe I ten at we cantly tect here se ssn eColeie Parson” Bat thes brary ew most Porn ‘ody Pn pd sn ath om tera an eel ‘See Mebane iin od seligoas monuments fom this Iter period revels dhoryncrases and sign of Phoenician identity even as thee culture adjusted to the broader ‘atl feameworks (Persian, Helle) my view, ths inerpretive approach could be applied productively to Phoenlclan mata of the previous period, and would help the field move beyond a focus on fine {ut such at vores and metal bows and embrace all aspects of Phoeni ‘San clar, to reconstruct fom he bottom op. As matters stad, Ion ‘Age Phoenician art tends tobe sen a electic (x, lacking its own pe sonality) if nt altogether nonexistent! Once more, the Phoenicians seseen ashistoricl pent only when oherrse them arse, They 37 teappe in Gren referent, and they ae granted “Phoenicians nly a psa to "Hellen and within «peciodiaton driven by 3 (Grek historical framework. Here | propose that we shouldbe locking ‘tier and beyond Greece snd the Phoenician homeland tofndPhoen- ‘lan cate and collective agency, and tht this vew is etetal to ex plsining the interconnection Age." ‘The Case for the Phoenicians Keeping up with the surge of Phoenician related studies roquies ea ity lnlading an ee for archaeological seports from the Levant to Por toga and crescaural studies of Phoeiclan-leal elton in eve yeas [alo requires that we ee ourselves fom the conrsnt of he rmonodisipinary perspective (whether archaeological oat hist), tnd that welook beyond the stagnant Vhoenician-Greck debate Does our Greck-derived lbs “Phoenician” polnt to a people who rained thei etic ocltarl coherence through ll his complexity? “The evidence strongly suggests tha it di To reason according toca tories used outiney by ancien itoring, they unquestionably sized 2 stint language and script with only sgh vrations” (ts unity i ‘xsightorward emit the fc that some nonlingssts ad epigap hist ‘bye called t “dul” and dialectal) they shared a telly enti able pantheon with iyspectc vation in emphasis and epithets of ‘he same gods 2nd they constrctd nsting colonial lations artic lated throgh shared mythologies, at we cane inthe foundation sores of Tyre, Carthage and Gadi, aswell as common cls (Bal Hammon, ‘Ashurt Melgart) andes (funerary castoms, types of amulet and ‘symbols, the fpher ual)" Already it antiquity, Phoenician were as sociated with specifi types of iconography crf andindostes, whose suchaclogil survisl largely maps onto Phoenician networks Bot the mccee and relence of howe networks by neces depended on te socess of shared myths, which underpin instutons, Kents, and rep economic agendas among al dasporc roups these ae curated ‘Shuugh both lene and visi means, 5 Taco Terpstra rece intend eapeding Phoenician trade.® But even 50 for many today, rePhoenicans do not pass the tt of our iden of nee, or ern of {poap bound by ctl dentiy. The tabled seafarers” of the ra Age epey ae sometimes alld are to some nothing but storia mirage, ‘inp asf tion planted bythe Gresks fom Homer on, eb al by later itertre, and thea ken wp by modern schlaly and ma tional dicosres = "What doe take, the, to be worthy of callie name more com fowtaly sceptd is scholarship? Two main concerns seem to drive the tres of skeptic, The fist se the lack of Phoenician plissl Tt "sate’ encompassing the cites kentied historically 3 Phoei- ‘San’ Not util Romaa times was Phoenicia sn administrative nt and tventhen ts borders were noted. In discussions of Phoenician de ty concern abou the ak fs central potical unit fen aed with- tut acknowledging that most ancient peoples, whose names (leqoenty to externally defined ae not reg paced within quotation mars, tls did not form single anid poli ents. Greeks and Ftscans* forinstanc, were onpnied in independent iy sate ina sma way 2 the Phoenicians sometimes aetig i allances, sometimes Sighting Among themselves, yet bound by cla and ehni es that et thers side vie Avithet ther olectives, Likewise, jst as forthe Phoenician polities, st of thee ctyatates were not unfed a single state wt the Roman Empire engulfed them, Moreover, stating that Phoenicians ‘woul have largely dented themes wih they hardly an age {ent aint shared Phoenician identity, as this ithe case with other ‘Contemporary societies, Regarding the Gres, forinstanc,thescholcy arate stresses how fre civic lyse coexisted within a lose eh ic framework wit ary edges” Bu this complet snot taken tothe ‘ete of debunking Greek entity o cute nite entiety “But? the desilit wil sy “they never called themselves Phoe- ans” or indeed by any other wellatested name There is some ter ‘hal evidence ofthe ur ofthe emic term "Canauntes” (kata) for Northwest Semis, 3 term possi connected to purple color or trade (eee below) the evidence, coming from North African soares and the New Testament efor the moment meer, ba sil sigcant™ In {ny case bythe ie we ave snore walen sources stemming rom the Phoenician zepion (writen in Gree) from Hellenistic times on, they have rei accepted the Grekreferen Phoinix(see more elo) Not surprisingly, we do aot have anything of the sore atest fr the Baty ton Age At the sme time we vet admit that virtually nothing wr ten by Inds from the Phoenician cite or the diaspora whorl they might have reflected pon thir own collective ontology survives tp the epigrapic of literary records. The Phoenicians are not alone in lacking srbos texteal documentation of thee own culture, Caltral autoethaographes from outside the privileged and selective corp of GGreekand Roman ters have been lost andthe Greco-Roman ons were paved down aeducitional and itor articts in Byzatim dhe medieval west But we know there wat «Phoenician Mature. Scraps of apy with Phoenician spt ay ssl wth ppyrasimpreson, and the Greek word forpapyrs oll (bilo, afer the Phoenician center, By- os) hint at Tost eazy largely writen on pesshble mea Moreover, ‘works by Phoenicians Carthaginians ate mentioned in many Literary genes, expeilly historiography, travel acount, aricutunl teats, Philosphy, aecival documents cosmogony and mythology References to these works andthe few fragments we have are wansited by Greck tnd Roman author, sometines quoting Phoenician asthor who weote Jn Greek. Brena ate ax Hellenic o Roman times some Phoenician speakers are thought to ave works in both languages” “Thus, the Phoenician voice i with a few exceptions confined to the thousands of inscriptions in Phoeniclan- Panic lngaage, steed thoughout the Mediterranean, which ce mostly rie pd formic and limited to few genres (funerary votive, commercial), Thee senate ful testimonies trom which o reconstruct calla story as they do not convey group selection, But then agin, how would Grek cal ture lookif we ba only Gree anerary and votive epigraphy? We would scea strong iba eligious and ivi entity aaa Panellenione tracy whit we sein Phoenician epigrphs, which ame de city and the fay ‘Ginen the sate of the writen evidees therfore, ceconstctag a Phoenician clare based on emicsecouats isnot an option, On in Roman ines do we End something of the sori the wock of Philo of Byblos who ie offen discredited because ofhis date” But thsi no rea- son fo build an argument from sence" In the absence ofthe sort of "xpanalve teary evidence avaiable forthe dy of ancient Gree, our cond bes resource woul be external acount that consistent reat them as ingle nore oes coherent peopl, dept their vision sto ‘iysttes, Those acounteare indeed present in Astean, Hebrew, Grek, tnd Roman sources. Thee accounts ae often demise a evidence of = ‘ied Phoenician clare besa the Phoenicians they describe ae nat wifi o consistent octe onthe Phoenician manlang, basses they ar ofenvagelystaocated with the sen” or Beaute they are not ‘shown as sharing eobecent "Phoenician character, clr, o society” Howeves these objections themselves are vague and donot only pera tothe Phoenicians for this period. We would not be able to ienty any tele cule, people, of ethnic group if we consistently demanded such precision athe scares In a, the ontology ofthe exoayen ie - Jean: Phoenicians in Greckand Lain texts (Ge Phone, Lat Pun) tre aot defied geoyraphicalyprecsly because thelr encounters with the Gress fen took place outside the Phoenician city-states, especially tse, Tis macs that the name india people, nt apace Whats mmor, when one city, Tyr, establshed colonies and commer em Die nthe wes, st was the gene ehnic sme that allowed them there, ‘ot only the name ofthe metropolis. leu, the Greeks and Romass new a Phoenician when they tw ove ‘Nevertheles ths images vulnerable because it i neitably bound ap with Merry epresestaions. one Winter captured the clic ‘entered viewpoint in erhighy inet lece"Homers Phoenicia” Inbea sh wrote: “Homer Phoenicians donot represent the world ofthe ‘Phoenicians; athe, they peesnt 2 mstrul Mterary construct a once produce by and working to produce the brosder soca politi 0 soml and symbolic fabric ofthe early tate in Arca Geeece™ This fen-cted ia (or similar ones) capres the "otitarian”atitude to sward others" in Greck iterate (oot famously the Persians), bt the {aatology is evident everything in Homers tera. ‘Theltenry or ideological use ofa thing doesnot however, eft tht ‘hing’ toil eitence. We woeld be paralysed by thie principle we applied it consistent: it would preven som conducting any histor Cslingiy. Granted, there ze contents nd each question for wich the application of ethnic categories such as Grek or Phoenician snot well or relevant. And oor source about other peoples’ thn are sometimes more reveling sbout ou sources own clare than bout sakject mater This i not the problem Iam aresing here, The prob lems that septic fnme the appearance of Phoenicians in our sures ‘ot jst 8 representation or even (reconstruction, but a invention, 2 sub shit in etegories for which hearts ofthe 70s and 19808 wee taken to task Are Phoeniclan dealt wing to accept the fll ep ‘emologcal implications ofthat postion? Tis woud require them to ‘conde that inthe case ofthe Phoenicians, the Greeks and Romo ‘engaged for centuries na massive and sustained act of arbtary ethic [abing, the likes of which they did for no ether people whom they amed and whose existence is assured: Hgyptans, Persians Trains tnd o on: The denialt postion peobabiy only wants to et wih the Language of representation and decontraction, but at follow it through tot logical conelasion. ‘An afirmatve view f the Phoenician i by contest relatively 357 to sat: I the Grats had not invented name fr them, we would have hd to doit oursehes. Given the archaoloicl advances ofthe st ce ‘tur our postcolonial and portmonsmental approach, and our pst-fine srt erentation, even without the Grek and Latin evidence, we would Inevitably ave bad to devise an evant concept tat encompassed Phoenician culture from the Irom Age int the later historia periods, and from the Levent to Iberia, Based onthe clear consistencies among Phoenician communitesin angaoge and waiting, religion, a and other characteristics mentioned throughout tis chapter, we would ead up ‘mapping our (e)constructed Phoenicians, by nd lg, ont the Grek tnd Roman etegory, which mntained a surpsing degree of oherence Je sources from Homer opera times Ars minima, we en under stand the category of Phoenician alee external ethnonym used by Geeks when mor specie pointers (Sdonians, Tears, Carthaginians, fe) were not nceary orrelerant™ Not Just” Levontines [Acommoa “Phosnisiannss” appears in other aspects ofthe historical fecord. We know of alliances among Phoenician ces is diferent pes ‘ds and oftheir aleve and disncive eaten as subjects By AS ‘Syrians and others There was an undennbe rene of Kneip between Imetopoltan Phoenicians and the colonial foundations, which i 3 tered for example, 363 reaton aot to join Persian expedition against Phoenician cies in Noch Afric." I aleeady mentioned the rious and pmol inks among Tye, Carthage and Gadi These wer atc [ated through foadation stories and the cls of Melgar ed Ashtart as well as through shared otal landscape. The pha sanctuaries (foundin Carthage, Sarin, Sic, and Males) aso demonstrate a shared sense of ‘entity among the Phoenicians of the central Mediterancan,seming'y “under Cartage’ inuence, thos denoting regional identity But the mo situal and its gos harkened back othe methesands mythologies {tual (whether thoue were modied or even resented nthe wet) So the lope! may hve become a marker of bath regional diferentation tnd Phoenician pride, perhaps way to presen the Carthaginians as ‘more Tyan than he Tans sto speak Phriameelon Ag Merman 36 adewes of Phoenican distinctiveness visi other groups (eg Grok Pesan, Jadaeans) abound in Greck and Reman text too The ‘Serence 2nd consistency with which these texts refer to Phoenicians ‘onl be taken seviowly. We cannot say tha he ancient sources meat thing by the cllective tr “Phoenicians” ther han the people de- fod bythe tats listed eater Nori realy he ase that they sed the name vaguely to generalize about easter maritime merchants** eects, Syrian and Thea poops who were ln close contact wit Phoenicians, are called neither Phoinies by the Gree nor Pan (the atin equvale!) From Homer and Herodotus te Strabo and Josephs, the Phoenicians ae dented witha string of tiesin Lebanon and chi Aisporn For example, when Herodots speaks about Phoenicians he tes either tha frm or specie ive ames (Sidonians, te). Hower, Ibe wes “Syrian for other Northwest Semutegroups, sch a "Syrians fom Palestine” eferring possibly to the Judacans* Instead of eabora fg an ethnography ofthe Phoenicians, the historian showcases them from the start of he narcative a fair agent na sory of hits, tecnologia and culral change.” Ttisimpostibe to know when these Trans, Sdonins Byblians, and oars Became amare that others were refering to them collectively as Phoenicians Surely t became eden in thei interactions daring cen ture of contact with Greek alr, mercenaries, merchant and eigh- borsinthe on Age By the fourth centary BCE, Greks and Phoenicians bad been bound up in contact and exchange or so long that as Cote ‘Bonnet bat shown, our enphass onthe Helleniation of Phoenicia be: comes problematic“ Certain evidence for selFaware Phoenician den- ‘ty comes a he end ofthe ith century BCE: when the Cartbaginians fit started to mint coin in Sci they shove the palm te, o phos, tomack the currency From tat piston, the symbol spree in Poe sin superelonl networks rom the Levan o Carthage and fm Scio tera The palm tre i recurrent heme ln the fens of nen ‘ing metalic bowl although ascrption of ther o Phoenician ar ‘ship and trade the subject of recent debate” Wis the mame derived ‘om this old Levantne symbol, which che Greeks Mestifed with thei ‘owt feguent Levante nterloctors? Did the association between the Phoinikes nd purple color and dye comet? The question finda dead a hoist appear to mena both red/cison and pam ree aeaty ln Mycenaean cords, andthe word! may nt evn be Greek or Indo European! Whatever the case is tempting to take this conc use of| the palm by Cartage and oles Phoenicia Panic polities as nonverbal Projection ofthe Grek stereotype for ther oletiv ident. Ironically, despite the fat tha their wa iterate isles the Phoen- clans were the torchbesners of era ad alphabetic wen, shaging fd eparposing the Cansait nnovtin ofthe alphabet. Te study of ‘Compote iteratures suggest that some of the genres tested moch Inter in fagmets of Phoenicia iterture wee cultivate in the are in parle withthe typeof erature that emerge in ral around the tra Of the mlleniun: archival ects, hymns, cosmogoni myths, and his tovied matatves. This ich Bronze Age Mestre cannot have found its tonly expression inthe Hebrew Bible” The works of Andrew George, ‘Martin Went, Walter Burkert, and others ave postulated Phoenician and Aramaic bteratres 3 key vectoes forthe transmission of Canaanite {nd Mesopotamia teary ropes and genre.” “The kof extant Phoenician erature s wnfortanate for our efforts to reconstrct connectivity, especialy inthe early centres of the Sst millenium BCE that concern hs volume Itsin the eighth and seventh entues BCE especialy that we se the spread of Near Eastern mod fs throughout te Meerranesn With the exception of Greece, where ‘we can lo sty hese asptationsin the preserved epic poems, we ae Inosty confined to materi cate and ee o-alled Onentaiing arts tic wave, Notwithstanding the unpopolaity of the tee, which some art historians have used to label the entie“peciod we mus silunderstand the iterations behind the phenomenon, an fr this we rally eanot do without the Phoenician This vale exemplifies the range of p- prosches one can take tothe evidence felt contac in ths psig. Especially relevant ate the dificltes and vss in entifying the groups behind te demand and spl ends, of matching syes with clues et lone ethics "As Maan Feldman hae shown challenges remain in ou forts to understand how oe wy the ye ofthe lary tems oe dented with Phoenician (such aemetal bows and vores) was adoptedby Leanne communities and beyond She finds the Phoenician sociation unsatis factory and analyes thie typeof art apart of abroad Levanine artistic community. The study of elite art indeed shows that 2 Leanne syle Spread precisely 2 this te andin tandem witha Phoenician economic {hd eultul Boom inthe Levant andeslonial expansion inthe Meditera ‘ean The styl bait on recognisable Assyria, Egyptian, and Canaanite ‘lements, but was oerwite distinct from those highly formulaic styles ropes” Ae Feldman shows, produces ofthis Levantine syle actively promoted the Late Bron Age and Canaanite arse henge showing that continuities with tht past were portant for Levantine lon Age ‘communities a sge™ The Phoenicians were nan exelent postion to Pace iden etemiae 3 ean such contin; thet postion s nowhere more evden han ‘thi leading lei developing and spreading thei waiting clr, 0 Athch Teter below Phoenician language and script functioned as « maser of elt peg inthe Kon Age Medhereaness. the snp is adapted wie oper lngusges, noch a» Hebrew, Aramaie, Greek (whence Etuscie), ‘anes n Ibe, and Parga, but twas also used for formal Pho von insriptone stn the broader Levant (ea iia)” We sm {ry todisociate this phenomenon from Phoenician culture andsee the sesip or the a, ofthe pottery as vaguely Levante, becuse it was ped outside Phoenicia" Or we can highlight the iatenational deste for things Pboescian and connect this to their economic dynamism tnd all prestige The nation of "Levantine networks" may be sl fen or useful forthe study of particular objects, If we want to avid ‘pes dentition or we are highlighting regional or acl fests ‘ut eplacing the Phoenician category with tat ofthe eater Levant as 2 gestural entity doesnot eonstitte much schosly progres! The van is imply not equivalent wo dhe Phoenician elon geographic ajuk or ioral terms. Thelsbelconfse he whole othe att tnd deprives uso more speci subcategory that was fonctional since aovguy In onder to understand Ion Age networks we need both specs fy nd macrolevel types of azalyss which requis dealing with the Phowncins, despite the problems tha sccompany theists Mediterranean Models ‘We have good mods forthe study of networks and connectivity that sarpat atonal or poll boundaries and the stuctures posed by "storia peodity. Peregrine Horden and Nichols Purcell The Cor ripting Sea revived langue dr, pan-Medterranean perspective ret ‘tay applied! by Benand Braudel to the European medieval and ealy ‘modeen ped Nevertheles in these histories ofthe Mediterranean (cot only ei) ay to lse ight of whois diag what when, and ‘why. Te approach is loyal to it focus on eavionmental condition, Sehich acount for Mediteranan fragmentation and connectivity, the ‘wo key concep in-tenson The Corrptng Sea explores, Te author plicit interest in “general ecological principles" and “unintended pat ‘ers of behavior" together with thei diachronie approach (rom the [Ache period to Roman and medieval time), doesnot help dently concrete ends and agents. And when it comes tthe Iron Age, Greek Colonization and Gresk bterature ar the author’ default resource, ring sing omni hon ewe hay phaees ‘Cyprian Broodbank extended & similar proach futher back in time i is The Making ofthe Mid Sea surveying the thee of de. ‘lopment and intewonnectivity fiom deep peshisiry until the ea fst millenium BCE. This work places much needed emphasis on hu ‘man innovation as factor behind historia and environment change Even when hs monamental survey is aot about the Phoenician, this group stands outa «main fore in connesting the Ion Age Medes ‘ean in proces tha triggered the importa tatelormations dees throughout this olume. Phoenician selemente and network emerge fume and again a the torchbeuers of innovation and contin, hl login commerce as, and wrtng ntouched by (even bene fm) the rearrangement of powes atthe dawn of the Ion Age Levant. As Broodbask shows around 1200 BCE, new connections, forged forthe fist time, ead the mate preconditions necessary for mp an Mediterranean travel ‘Phoenician’ tid, which hides a multiply of participant beyond Tyee andthe ental Levant, was the mos instante ‘ous ret ‘Broodbank’s work wansus pint the eleologicl perspectives found fn mos histories of the region. Instead, he challenges u tose the lon “Age nots "the forerunner of the Classical word but asthe calmination of developments long inthe making” The transition fom the Bronze tothe lon Age, therefore, scsi this ft milena senate ey being eacerand transitions notin “angina Ao ono ‘sand shakes remala somewhat cited, med by goots and sctered among Broodbanés "mii of prcpuntsis sarvey vier 0 consider patcule groups innovation and inttive, going sometimes long wih and sometimes saat, broader inert, Indeed, trary sources andthe most recent archaeological endence from the western Mecitenanean (especialy Gade and Carthage) 2 fst 2 deberate program of expansion led bythe city of Tye and not 2 desperate and shapes migration forced by Assy oppression, 8 ‘was long assumed Following eater trade tnd ephemeral posts ‘ban foundations started nthe late ninth cencury BCE ae bases of rade and industry (mining, fishes, sk pan) enabled st tele nodal points in southern Ibert Atlantic and Mediterranea shores, in North ‘Afeca (om Lins in the Aantie to Carthage in Tans), othe cen tral Mediterranean (Malta Sil Pithecamae), he Aegean (Crete, Pets chor), and Cypras™ As much a we may be clined Yo hedge around the collective name, we cannot overestimate the historical agoney of ‘Phoenicians inthis story oFunprecedented connect. Orietlization: Meay Problem o nterpretue Opportunity? Motels traitonaly cassie as “Orintlsng” (infested by Near ase tte) found ll over he Mediterranean, have focused atenton ropes local bound contexts and prompted schlarsto engage with Shas of hybvdity and consomption driven adaptations” As Tamar dos proporesiachaperso of ths volume, the phenomenon sain to toatl hd economic globalisation Indeed, Orientals transforms tonsin the eighth and seventh centuries BCE area mate f choice not {nine impostion, and they prodiced diferent revltsin dierent plies The phenomenon rat once ol and lab. Hodos ha already “he in ber sy of oon encounter of Greeks and (more margis- ty) of Phoenicians with ocl communities Se, Sil, and Libya, thatthe typeof hybridization we seas Orientlzton sometimes does fot happen tall even in areas where contac ated for entries, schas Inthe Novth Afean hoteands "The Orentalning phenomenon, therfore, captures the “amusingly complicated and unique” natute of our data in this perio, as James ‘Ouborne and Jonathan Hl putin thee intoduction to this volume’ topic is chapter), Lage with thir cllo sear for ays ar hi ‘messiness into an interpretive opportuni: One such avenues to aves tigate ow the geoprapieal parameters of Orenaliing art and Phoen- ‘i actvityoveap.” Here we run into 2 sere of methodological and ‘iciplinary problems: th Bld of Lon Age archaeology is fagreated, tnd works that del wth Onentaliing materi re uly Limited to ‘one geographical are" they often foes on one type of material with 2

    You might also like