Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Selma Abdelhamid
run(15m), Maagan Mikhael (13,4 meters) and Kyrenia (15 m)4. Similarly to the latter, their tonnages are
estimated at 25 tons which is much less than examples
known from literary sources. One text found in Ugarit
could indeed indicate that Canaanean ships around
1200 B.C. carried up to 450 tons5; for the first millennium B.C., maximal cargoes are thought to have taken
100 to 500 tons6. Furthermore, sources like the Old
Testament cite specific vessels like the Tarshish ships7,
which were cargo ships employed for trade with the
still unidentified Tarshish, a half-mythical El Dorado
on the edge of the contemporary sphere of action. Attempts to definitively locate Tarshish have failed, suggesting that it might not have been a single spot but
rather a mental construct to which were, over the centuries, attributed several distant market places8. Likewise, it is not clear if the moniker Tarshish referred only
to the destination, or to a particular naval architecture.
To the contrary, ships called gauloi9 from the early Iron
Age onward referred to a certain cargo ship type10,
which is often equated with depictions of the early 7th
century B.C. in the palace of Sennacherib in Ninive11.
Nevertheless, no evidence allows us to identify Tanit or
Elissa as a Tarshish ship or a gaulos, since we do not know
anything about their building technique.
The amphoras recovered from both ships are of
the same type and present a cylindrical, slightly concave
body and a sharp shoulder. They are often termed Storage Jar 5 after Bikai12 or Type 2 after Sagona13. Further
designations are class Levantine 114, Iron Age Jar15, crisp
ware16 or torpedo-shaped amphora17. The type is mainly
known from Northern Palestine and Lebanon and was
found in Hazor18, Sarepta19, Megiddo20, Tyre21 and even
Carthage22. Very few were unearthed in Spain, for instance in Castillo de Doa Blanca23 and Toscanos24. In
the Levant, these amphoras are mostly dated to the second half of the 8th century B.C. and become rare after
700 B.C. As states Stager, they were built specifically
for maritime shipping: with a shape that allows them
not only to be stacked [] but also to be recognized as
a container from Phoenicia, with a consistent capacity,
and with special handles too fragile for lifting or pouring but just right for guide ropes used to secure the
stacked amphoras25. Chemical analysis attested that
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Phoenician Shipwrecks of the 8th to the 6th century B.C. Overview and Interim Conclusions
Selma Abdelhamid
provided precious information about the building technique, which was surprisingly advanced. In contrast to
contemporary or even later ships, whose hulls were
sewn, the planks of Mazarrn-1 are joined with pegged
mortises and tenons. The frames, although lashed, no
longer function as support; they appear to be rather a
technological holdover than a necessity. Furthermore,
it has been observed that several wood types were employed according to functional requirements, as is described in literary sources like Ezekiel36 or Theophrastus37: the keel, as the core of the ship on which the
mortise-and-tenon joints conferred all kinds of interactions like water pressure, wind or weight of the cargo, was made of hard cedar wood. The resistant tenons
were made of olive, which was both sturdy and easy
to carve. The planks were made of pine-tree and the
frames of fig-tree, a wood so fragile that it is not even
used for furniture. That it was employed on Mazarrn-1
again underscores the idea that the frames were placed
in a decorative and traditional manner rather than for
reinforcement. As regards the findings, ropes were
found on board the ship and identified as made of esparto grass, a plant growing in different parts of the
Western Mediterranean, and also in Mazarrn. More
problematic are the ceramics, which collected over the
years in the bay of the Playa de la Isla. Despite almost
20% of them being Roman or modern, the excavators
consider the Phoenician ceramics as coming from the
Mazarrn-1 ship and use them for its dating and reconstruction of its route: Dado que la estructura de
la embarcacin que denominamos B-1 apareci muy
incompleta, abierta, e prcticamente sin cargamento,
trabajamos con la hiptesis de que todo o gran parte
del material cermico proceda de esta embarcacin38.
Therefore, they take for granted that a ship must have
had a cargo, which must have spread over the seabed
during the wrecking and is thus retraceable. They do
not take into account that the ship could also have been
empty while lying at harbor, unloaded while navigating, or that the ceramics could be the cargoes of other
ships that have yet to be discovered or perhaps that the
ceramics represent remains of jettison, that is, cargo
discarded by ships in danger of sinking. However, the
discovery of the second ship demonstrates that the bay
was an area frequented in Phoenician times, in which
more than one wrecking had taken place, and makes, in
my opinion, the identification of the ceramics with the
cargo of Mazarrn-1 quite likely. These pieces, which
are of multiple forms, can at best give general indications about the harbor Mazarrn in a period when it
had commercial relationships with southern Spain.
Indeed, the amphoras belong to the type Trayamar-1
36
37
38
39
40
Phoenician Shipwrecks of the 8th to the 6th century B.C. Overview and Interim Conclusions
These three ships can be placed into a general context in southern Spain, which has important Phoenician settlements. Gadir on the Atlantic Ocean was an
essential stopover on the Iberian silver and copper
route. Once mining and smelting had been carried out
by locals in exchange for items such as Levantine olive
oil and wine, the metals were shipped to Tyre, Greece,
and other centers of the Mediterranean. Even though
the southeast coast of Iberia never became as important as the region of Gadir, it contained several mines
and specialized centers like Morro de Mezquitilla in the
8th century or Toscanos in the 7th century B.C. Apart
from the island Ibiza, the coast near Murcia had been,
until a few years ago, not much considered in Phoenician archaeology45. Later, however, it was suggested
that a Phoenician settlement existed in Guardamar del
Segura46, and furthermore, a multitude of new findings
have proven that Phoenicians had commercial relationships in this area, as is visible from the late 8th century
and early 7th century B.C. in Los Saladares (Orihuela),
La Pea Negra (Crevillente), and Monastil (Elda)47. Indigenous settlements in turn demonstrate that foreign
influences adapted to the local life way, as is visible in
the ceramics production. The needs of metal processing seem to have been answered by a restructuring of
the region creating large free spaces. Most obvious evidence for contact with Phoenicians is the import of
ceramics, which can be divided into an initial phase of
intermittent trade and a later period characterized by
regular exchange. The findings in the bay of the Playa
de la Isla correspond to this scheme. In addition, the
shipwreck Mazarrn-2 shows that lead from Murcias
mining area was shipped. It certainly had a pre-defined
destination, and that the ship was so small and heavily
loaded makes a short trajectory realistic. It could have
been on its way to a local stocking and smelting center,
Selma Abdelhamid
Conclusion
The presented shipwrecks differ by type, size,
cargo and route. However, recurrent elements can be
compared.
First of all, a series of objects which were found
on all ships, with the exception of Rochelongues, are
assumed to have been used by the crew, in particular
ceramics and above all coarse wares. The cases of Tanit
and Elissa, on which few utilitarian ceramics were found
in the presence of a huge quantity of similar amphoras, are particularly obvious: it is highly improbable that
these rare and often unique objects were destined for
exchange. Use wear is not reported but would, if noted,
underscore this aspect. Even though the basic data is
limited, a few preliminary hypotheses can be proposed.
First, it is interesting that cooking pots were found on
Tanit and Elissa while they are missing in Mazarrn,
where there were only ceramic and organic containers. This might advance the supposition that the cargo
ships had a cabin or kitchen and went for long journeys
without having to go ashore, whereas the smaller boats
undertook short trips which did not require cooking
on board. In addition, a few items which were repeatedly found could indicate that they belonged to basic
ship equipment: not only anchors and ropes, but also
mortaria and grinding stones55 recovered on at least
49 For instance fibulae similar to a type of the mid-6th century
B.C. known from Agullana, Spain: P. de Palol, La necrpolis
hallstttica de Agullana (Gerona) (Madrid 1958) 73 fig. 3. 213.
50 J. Ruiz de Arbulo Bayona, Santuarios y comercio martimo en
la pennsula ibrica durante la poca arcaica, Quaderns de Prehistria i arqueologia de Castell 18, 1997, 520.
51 D. Garcia, Le territoire dAgde grecque et loccupation du sol
en Languedoc central durant lAge du fer, in: P. Arcelin M.
Bats D. Garcia et al. (eds), Sur les pas des Grecs en Occident Hommages Andr Nickels. Collection tudes massalites 4 = Travaux du Centre Camille-Jullian 15 (Paris 1995)
140143.
52 O. Arteaga J. Padr E. Sanmart, La expansin fenicia por
las costas de Catalua y del Languedoc, AulaOr 4, 1986, 303
314.
53 For instance B. Dedet, Le premier ge du fer dans le Languedoc mditerranen, in: J.-P. Mohen (ed.), Le temps de la prhistoire 1 (Dijon 1989) 456.
54 C. Albore Livadie, Lpave trusque du Cap dAntibes, RstLig
33, 1967, 300326.
55 The same remark can be made for later ships, for instance of
the Roman world, and on which grinding stones are very often
found. Sometimes, however, they can be interpreted as trade
items, like on the shipwreck in Kyrenia. H. Wylde Swiny M.
L. Katzev, The Kyrenia Shipwreck: A fourth-century B.C.
Greek Merchant Ship, in: D. Blackman (ed.) Marine Archaeology (London 1973) 342.
Phoenician Shipwrecks of the 8th to the 6th century B.C. Overview and Interim Conclusions
Future prospects
Amongst the aspects quickly deserving further investigation, the provenience of raw materials and artifacts is a priority. Indeed, the limits of traditional methods have been reached in the past years. Even though
petrographic analysis, for example, can tell where amphoras were produced, it does not reveal where their
contents came from59 an essential question in particular when relating to Phoenicians who are often attested
to have acted as middlemen collecting their wares from
several places. However, there have been recent innovations in these fields. New methods in molecular biology for instance allow the detection an empty jars
former contents by studying DNA that penetrated into
the clay60. In the field of raw materials, several projects
have been started for the constitution of databases,
thus collecting, for example, information about metal
items and mines61. Indeed, it is most important not
only to study the objects themselves, but also to retrace
their provenience by undertaking extensive geological
surveys and other studies. In the end, traditional and
new methods can be used successfully only if comparative data is available.
Acknowledgements