The Oxford Handbook of the Phoenician and Punic Mediterranean

by Carolina Lopez-Ruiz

  What they exported is less clearly attested. The fifth-century bce comic poet Hermippus’s mention of Carthage supplying Athens with “carpets and well-stuffed pillows” (fr. 63, in Athenaeus, Deipnosophistae 1.22 [1.49] C28a) is no more exhaustive than the one or two items apiece that Hermippus ascribes to other lands—or the miscellaneous items, mainly for homes and shops, that Hanno the itinerant merchant purveys two centuries later in Plautus’s Poenulus: ladles, waterpipes, nuts, lard, mattocks, and so on (Poen. 1011–19). The many and varied remnants of seeds and nuts found in the fourth-century shipping channel—inter alia figs, olives, peaches, plums, almonds, and pistachios—may represent exported produce rather than imports (Hurst and Stager 1978: 340), for by then the surrounding countryside was well developed, as mentioned earlier. Incidentally a nonfiction Carthaginian merchant trading abroad was, it seems, the “Nobas son of Axioubos” (his Punic name was more likely Nubo, Nabal, or on another reading Hannibal, and “Axioubos” probably Hasdrubal) lavishly honored by the Boeotian League in the 360s bce on an inscription now lost (SIG 3 179; Rhodes and Osborne 2007: no. 43).

  Carthage’s dealings with Rome, first attested in the treaty reproduced by Polybius who dates it to 509 bce, continued to flourish: the second treaty in Polybius’s collection is variously dated to 348, 343, or even 306, while an addendum or rider to this was negotiated in 279 (or, less likely, 280 or 278) to cover the possibility of either state’s allying with Pyrrhus of Epirus (on these treaties: Polybius 3.22–25; Walbank 1957: 337–55; Hoyos 1984, 1985; Scardigli 1991, 2011; Serrati 2006; Richardson 2008). The second treaty, like the first, was largely about permissions for, and restrictions on, trade and traders, but with wider scope and extra limits on Roman traders: now these were banned from the Phoenician-settled coasts of Spain, from Sardinia, and even from Libya outside Carthage itself. Nonetheless trade between the two was busy: “Campanian” black-figured pottery of the early third century bce, in fact made at Rome, is found at Carthage and nearby (e.g., at Utica and Kerkouane), as well as at Motya, in southern Gaul, and—treaty notwithstanding—at Gades (Morel 1969: 102, fig. 27; Morel 2007: 496, 498, 501).

  Hellenistic and Other Art at Carthage

  The attraction of Greek cultural forms did grow, even if Justin (20.5.13) is right in reporting a decree ca. 368 that banned Carthaginians from using the language; if not a fiction, it must have been short lived. War booty taken from Sicilian Greek enemies accumulated—in 146 bce, Scipio Aemilianus repatriated quantities, including the famous bull of Phalaris to Acragas and a revered statue of Artemis to Segesta (Cicero, II Verr. 2.72–84; cf. Dudzinski 2013)—and such booty no doubt stimulated further enthusiasm for Greek art. Artworks of Greek provenance, or influenced by Greek art, found at Carthage include the famous “priestess of St. Monique” discovered in 1901: a full-length marble relief sculpture in Greek style, its original painted hues still faintly visible, on the lid of a sarcophagus dated to the later fourth century bce (Lancel 1992a: 346–48; Maass-Linderman 2004: 284–85, with fig. 61; see figure 12.1). The priestess, shown as a beautiful young woman, wears a formal chiton and clasps a dove in her right hand; her headdress is of Egyptian style and two great wings embrace her lower body down almost to her sandaled toes—features that point to her deity being Isis, who was widely revered at Carthage and sometimes identified with Tanit. Another full-length sarcophagus relief from the St. Monique site presents a bearded elderly man in a long robe, right arm raised in a gesture of blessing or prayer; so does a small ossuary of perhaps third-century date, from the Cape Gammarth area above the city, carefully carved in even an more clearly Greek style (Peters 2004: 286, fig. 64). The theme of a priest or priestess in ritual garb, with raised right hand, is common on figurines and tombstones of similar date, traditional and hieratic in style but with some again showing Greek influence, especially in the faces (e.g., Lancel 1992a: 366, fig. 220; Peters 2004: 285–86, figs. 63, 65–67).

  Figure 12.1 Priestess of Isis, relief on a Carthaginian sarcophagus lid, fourth century bce (Carthage National Museum, Byrsa, Tunisia), reconstruction.

  Source: Drawing by Père Delattre (Ancient History Encyclopedia), public domain.

  Other varied craftworks unearthed at Carthage, or in Punic territory, illustrate the appeal of Hellenistic art: as, for instance, a woman’s distinctive high-relief profile in bronze and silver on the back of a mirror (much like another found at Corinth); a graceful white-painted ewer with decorative motifs finely drawn in red, clay figurines of girl musicians with their instruments; and—from a grave at Ksour Essaf, a dozen miles south of Mahdia and 150 miles from Carthage—a pair of elaborately wrought ceremonial plates of body armor, fashioned perhaps in Magna Graecia and the property (no doubt) of a senior military figure of the Hellenistic period (Peters 2004: 291, fig. 86; 288, fig. 74; 239, fig. 28; 346, fig. 33; 33, fig. 1). The links between Hellenistic-era Carthage and the Greek world also included Punic coinage in silver and bronze (and, rarely, gold), which from around 400 bce was struck in Sicily and from time to time at Carthage. Types were modeled on Syracuse’s but utilized recurring Punic motifs: a standing horse or horse’s head, palm tree, and profile bust of a goddess presumed to be Tanit (Visonà 1998: 1–12; Baldus 2004; Frey-Kupper 2014; see also chapter 25, this volume). Fragments of architecture, such as Doric or Ionic pilasters, show that some buildings (temples especially) followed Greek architectural styles, if sometimes for only certain features, like their columns (Lancel 1992a: 332–40). It is hardly necessary to assume that all works in Greek style were designed by Greek artists and craftsmen imported for the task. Carthage in fact exported at least one known artist to Greece, the bronze smith Boethos: on a Hellenistic statue base at Ephesus, he named himself as a Carthaginian and son of one Apollodoros, and apparently was also the Boethos mentioned by Cicero (II Verr. 2.32), Pliny the Elder (34.84), and Pausanias (5.17.4).

  Carthaginians remained receptive to other cultures as well, notably from Phoenicia, their traditional homeland, their Libyan neighbors, and Egypt. They maintained their ancient custom of sending a yearly offering to the gods of Tyre: Alexander the Great supposedly warned the envoys he found there that Carthage was in his sights (Curtius Rufus, Hist. Alex. 4.2.10–11, 3.19–20, 4.18). They venerated not only Isis but also other Egyptian deities such as Bes and Ptah, adorned some of their hatchet-shaped ritual razors with figures of deities or priests in Egyptian style (e.g., Picard and Picard 1968: pls. 22–23; Lancel 1992a: 237, fig. 113)—while others adopted Hellenistic modes (Lancel 1992a: 227, fig. 109)—and built shrines for them in that style, to judge from the surviving model in a tomb at Thuburbo Maius near the city (Lancel 1992a: 333–35).

  Traditional usages also continued, like the yearly offering at Tyre (on the relations of Tyre with its colonies, see also chapter 39, this volume). Another practice was (apparently) for wealthy citizens to erect freestanding towers as monuments or mausolea. In or near Carthage, only representations in art survive: in the city, a votive column (fourth–second centuries bce?) dedicated to “Tanit face of Baal and Baal Hammon” by one Bodmelqart; and, probably of Hellenistic date, a square-sided meter-high cippus of white limestone topped with a gabled roof, perhaps from the tophet (Peters 2004: 222, fig. 4; 221, fig. 3). A tomb complex at Jebel Miezza, outside Kerkouane, revealed wall paintings that include images of square towers with pyramid-shaped roofs and stepped pediments (Lancel 1992a: 242–44; Maass-Lindemann 2004: 263), images which strikingly match the one surviving actual tower, built in the second century bce by a Numidian lord, Atban, as his dedicatory inscription records in both Numidian and Punic, at Thugga (Dougga) 70 miles southwest of Carthage (J. Debergh, in Lipiński 1992: 282; Hiesel 2004: 63, 66; Hoyos 2010: 78–81). The deserted “tower” that Scipio Aemilianus in 147 bce used to cross the defensive wall of Megara (Appian, Libyca 117.557) may have been one such structure.

  Conclusions

  The archaeological and historical record confirms Carthage in the fifth and fourth centuries bce as a culturally rich a
nd economically highly advanced polity, as well as a territorially ambitious one. By taking over the broad and productive Libyan interior eventually (by 247) as far west as Theveste and Sicca, and also the coastlands beyond Lepcis to the edge of Cyrenaica, it made itself the dominant power in the western Mediterranean, with commercial contacts still farther afield.

  Carthage was nevertheless not an annexationist state like Alexander’s Macedon or Rome in later centuries (or, indeed, Carthage itself, briefly, under the Barcids). Carthaginian rule, indirect as well as direct, extended only over regions up to a few days’ sail or march from the city. The persistent wars against Sicily’s leading Greek states therefore might seem aberrant, especially as war after war ended in stalemate or defeat. In effect, though, the Carthaginians were acting much as did leading Greek powers in Sicily (and elsewhere) against rivals: aiming at economic hegemony and prestige; at warding off expected or real Sicilian Greek encroachments; and perhaps, too, at opening opportunities for Carthage’s competitive aristocrats to earn valuable military credit. Such attitudes were consistent with the Carthaginians’ attachment to Greek culture and Aristotle’s acceptance of them as a quasi-Greek polity. By 265, these developments were well advanced; but the city’s traditional aims and interests were now to come up against those of Rome, a foreign state much more dangerous than even Syracuse in its prime.

  References

  Aubet, M. E. 2001. The Phoenicians and the West: Politics, Colonies, and Trade. Second edition, translated by M. Turton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  Balboa Lagunero, E. D. 2015. “Los textos perdidos: la aportación de las fuentes a la cultura escrita púnica.” Antesteria: Debates de Historia antigua 4: 43–59.

  Baldus, H. R. 2004. “Karthagische Münzen.” In Hannibal ad Portas: Macht und Reichtum Karthagos, edited by S. Peters, 294–313. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss.

  Bechtold, B., and R. Docter. 2010. “Transport Amphorae from Carthage: An Overview.” In Motya and the Phoenician Ceramic Repertory Between the Levant and the West, 9th–6th Century BC, edited by L. Nigro, 85–116. Rome: Missione Archeologica a Mozia.

  Bengtson, H. 1975. Die Staatsverträge des Altertums, Band 2: Die Verträge der griechisch-römischen Welt von 700 bis 338 v. Chr. Second edition (with R. Werner). Munich: C.H. Beck.

  Ben Younès, H. 1995. “Tunisie” (Part III, ch. 15). In La Civilisation phénicienne et punique: Manuel de recherché, edited by V. Krings, 796–827. Leiden: Brill.

  Bondì, S. F. 1999. “Carthage, Italy, and the ‘Vth Century Problem.’” In Phoenicians and Carthaginians in the Western Mediterranean, edited by G. Pisano, 39–48. Rome: Universita degli Studi di Roma “Tor Vergata.”

  Chelbi, F. 1992. “Fouilles d’urgence.” In Pour sauver Carthage: Exploration et conservation de la cité punique, romaine et byzantine, edited by A. Ennabli, 69–72. Paris and Tunis: UNESCO/INAA.

  Docter, R. 2002–2003. “The Topography of Archaic Carthage. Preliminary Results of Recent Excavations and Some Prospects.” Talanta 34/35: 113–31.

  Dudzinki, A. 2013. “The Bull of Phalaris and the Historical Method of Diodorus.” Histos 7: 70–87.

  Dupont-Sommer, A. 1968. “Une nouvelle inscription punique de Carthage.” Comptes rendus de l’Académie des inscriptions et belle-lettres 112: 116–33.

  Euzennat, M. 1994. “Le périple d’Hannon.” Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 138: 559–80.

  Frey-Kupper, S. 2014. “Coins and Their Use in the Punic Mediterranean.” In The Punic Mediterranean: Identities and Identification from Phoenician Settlement to Roman Rule, edited by J. Quinn and N. Vella, 76–110. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  Geus, K. 1994. Prospographie der literarisch bezeugten Karthager. Leuven: Peeters.

  Hiesel, G. 2004. “Die Karthager und ihre numidischen Nachbarn.” In Hannibal ad Portas: Macht und Reichtum Karthagos, edited by S. Peters, 60–69. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss.

  Hoyos, B. D. 1984. “The Roman-Punic Pact of 279 B.C.: Its Problems and Its Purpose.” Historia 33: 402–39.

  Hoyos, B. D. 1985. “Treaties True and False: The Error of Philinus of Agrigentum.” Classical Quarterly 35: 92–109.

  Hoyos, D. 2010. The Carthaginians. Peoples of the Ancient World. London and New York: Routledge.

  Hurst, H., and L. E. Stager. 1978. “A Metropolitan Landscape: The Late Punic Port of Carthage.” World Archaeology 9: 334–46.

  Huss, W. 1985. Geschichte der Karthager. Munich: C.H. Beck.

  Lancel, S. 1992a. Carthage. Paris: Fayard.

  Lancel, S. 1992b. “Le problème du Ve siècle à Carthage: mise en perspective de documents nouveaux.” In Numismatique et Histoire économique phéniciennes et puniques, edited by T. Hackens and G. Moucharte, 269–81. Louvain-la-Neuve: Université Catholique de Louvain.

  Lancel, S. 1995. “Vie des cités et urbanisme partim Occident.” In La Civilisation phénicienne et punique: Manuel de recherché, edited by V. Krings, 370–88. Leiden: Brill.

  Lipiński, E., ed. 1992. Dictionnaire de la civilisation phénicienne et punique (DCPP).

  Lipiński, E. 2004. Itineraria Phoenicia. Orientalia Lovanensia Analecta 127. Leuven: Peeters.

  Maraoui Telmini, R., R. Docter, B. Bechtold, F. Chelbi, and W. van de Put. 2014. “Defining Punic Carthage.” In The Punic Mediterranean: Identities and Identification from Phoenician Settlement to Roman Rule, edited by J. C. Quinn and N. C. Vella, 113–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  Maass-Lindemann, G. 2004. “Gräber und Grabsitten.” In Hannibal ad Portas: Macht und Reichtum Karthagos, edited by S. Peters, 262–93. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss.

  Morel, J.-P. 1969. “Études de céramique campanienne. I: L’atelier des petites estampilles.” Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’École française de Rome 81: 59–117.

  Morel, J.-P. 1990. “Nouvelles données sur le commerce de Carthage punique entre le VIIe siècle et le IIe siècle avant J.-C.” In Carthage et son territoire dans l’antiquité: Histoire et archéologie de l’Afrique du Nord: Actes du IVe Colloque International (Strasbourg, 5–9 avril 1988), Tome i, edited by C. Lepelley, 67–99. Paris: Comité des Travaux historiques et scientifiques.

  Morel, J.-P. 2007. “Early Rome and Italy.” In Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World, edited by W. Scheidel, I. Morris, and R. P. Saller, 487–510. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  Peters, S., ed. 2004. Hannibal ad Portas: Macht und Reichtum Karthagos. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss.

  Picard, G. C., and C. Picard. 1968. The Life and Death of Carthage. New York: Taplinger.

  Prag, J. R. W. 2011. “Siculo-Punic Coinage and Siculo-Punic Interactions.” Bollettino di Archeologia online 1: Volume Speciale (XVII International Congress of Classical Archaeology, 2008): 1–10. www.bollettinodiarcheologiaonline.beniculturali.it/bao_es_a_2.php

  Rakob, F. 1990. “La Carthage archaïque.” In Carthage et son territoire dans l’antiquité: Histoire et archéologie de l’Afrique du Nord: Actes du IVe Colloque International (Strasbourg, 5–9 avril 1988), Tome i, edited by C. Lepelley, 31–43. Paris: Comité des Travaux historiques et scientifiques.

  Rakob, F. 1992. “L’habitat ancien et le système urbanistique.” In Pour sauver Carthage: Exploration et conservation de la cité punique, romaine et byzantine, edited by A. Ennabli, 29–38. Paris and Tunis: UNESCO/INAA.

  Richardson, J. H. 2008. “Rome’s Treaties with Carthage: Jigsaw or Variant Traditions?” In Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History, edited by C. Deroux, 84–94. Brussels: Latomus.

  Rhodes, P. J., and R. Osborne. 2007. Greek Historical Inscriptions 404–323 B.C. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  Scardigli, B. 1991. I Trattati Romano-Cartaginesi. Pisa: Scuole Normale Superiore.

  Scardigli, B. 2011. “Early Relations between Rome and Carthage.” In A Companion to the Punic Wars, edited by D. Hoyos, 28–38. Oxford and Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

  Schäfer, T. 2004. “Urbanistik.” In Hannibal ad Portas: Macht und
Reichtum Karthagos, edited by S. Peters, 210–20. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss.

  Schmitz, P. C. 1994. “The Name ‘Agrigentum’ in a Punic Inscription (CIS I 5510.10).” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 53: 1–13.

  Serrati, J. 2006. “Neptune’s Altars: The Treaties between Rome and Carthage (509–226 b.c.).” Classical Quarterly 56: 113–34.

  Visonà, P. 1998. “Carthaginian Coinage in Perspective.” American Journal of Numismatics (2nd series) 10: 1–27.

  Walbank, F. W. 1957. A Historical Commentary on Polybius, Volume 1: Books I–VI. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  Warmington, B. H. 1964. Carthage. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

  Chapter 13

  The Punic Wars (264–146 bce)

  Christopher de Lisle

  The Punic Wars are the most famous, most studied period of Carthaginian history, embracing the apogee of the Carthaginian Empire and its total collapse. They are, however, usually studied and remember as part of Roman history and so a Carthaginian perspective on their Roman Wars is difficult to reconstruct. The issues are similar to those facing attempts to reconstruct a Persian perspective on the Persian Wars: the extreme disparity in the amount of source material that we have for each side (Champion 2011; Mineo 2011). Our sources are heavily shaped by Roman national myth-building, presenting Romans as brave and just, Carthaginians as cowardly and perfidious, Hannibal as an avenging demon. They nearly completely lose interest in Carthaginian affairs when they do not impinge on Rome. We can narrate the political and personal debates at Rome in this period, trace the genealogy of Roman consuls in excruciating detail, and contextualize their actions by reference to Roman ideas about justice, friendship, class, and masculinity as revealed by literature and art, but most Carthaginian commanders are just names to us (usually “Hanno”), we have no Carthaginian literature, and there is still comparatively little archaeological evidence. (For the Classical sources, see chapter 44, and for Phoenician-Carthaginian literature, see chapter 18, this volume.)