Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 14
Patterns in Early Greek Colonisation Author(s): A. J. Graham Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol.09/2013 18:37 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, re searchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. . The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies. http://www.jstor.org " id="pdf-obj-0-2" src="pdf-obj-0-2.jpg">

Patterns in Early Greek Colonisation Author(s): A. J. Graham

Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 91 (1971), pp. 35-47

Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/631368 .

Accessed: 02/09/2013 18:37

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Patterns in Early Greek Colonisation Author(s): A. J. Graham Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol.09/2013 18:37 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, re searchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. . The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies. http://www.jstor.org " id="pdf-obj-0-36" src="pdf-obj-0-36.jpg">

The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

PATTERNS IN EARLY GREEK COLONISATION

THE centuries before the Greeks

but

they

began

to write

history are of the greatest

uncertainty, obscurity

interest and

and dispute.'

significance, The reason is

to work, and

uniquely

itself.

military

broad

are also for the historian full of

because of that

Part of this value lies in the

mainly the simple

it

is

partly

inadequacy of the information with

inadequacy

that the

which the historian has

colonising movement2 is

activity in

seapower,

few

mention only a

known the colonising

relatively large

valuable.

revealing nature of colonial

knowledge, seafaring,

if not

Think what it tells us about geographical

achievements, state

organisation,

But

in

a

obvious categories.

economic conditions-to so

period

inadequately

a

and

extremely important amount of clear and unequivocal facts. In the context of the

the fact that such and such a

piece

of definite and valuable

numbers

city sent a colony

knowledge.

we can

to such and

Since it is also

of colonial expeditions,

extremely significant

amount of

definite and

There is

movement is also

to the historian as

source of a

eighth

and seventh centuries B.C.

constitutes a rare

such a place

possible to

movement

is in general

assign dates to large

provides a large terms clear and

say that the colonising

information,

which

historical

relatively well dated. still a further reason for the

of the

of these centuries is

general importance

archaeological

of the colonial movement.

Apart

source of new informa-

move-

This is a field in which

from new fragments tion on the

ment is

history

to say

we can look for continuing improvement in our knowledge.

early lyric poets on papyrus

archaeology,

the

only likely

and the

history of the colonising

discoveries.

especially that much of the most

well suited to benefit from

important

It would be fair

has come from

excavation of Old

new material on

early Greek history

epoch-making

archaeological discoveries on Greek colonial sites. The

Smyrna

Minor,

not

only

but also contributed most

and rise of the Greek

city-state.3

transformed our knowledge of the Greek settlement of the coast of Asia

significantly

and

valuably to the question of the nature

Syria

also

have

not only

thrown

effectively

determined

The discoveries at Al Mina in

very early times, but have

light on Greek trade and colonisation in

our interpretation

on early

Greek civilisation.4

provided

West,

of the relations between the Greeksand the East and the oriental influences

On the island of Ischia the excavations of Pithecusa have

on the one hand invaluable information about the earliest Greek ventures in the

but on the other the site is one of the most informative of all Greek settlements of the

This is substantially the text of a lecture delivered

1

to the Hellenic Society on March 18, I971.

I

am

most grateful for helpful suggestions made by some

of

my In this
my
In this

auditors on that occasion.

paper

I refer to the

following works by the

author's name alone (or as indicated):

J.

Berard,

L'expansion et la

colonisation grecques

jusqu'auxguerres midiques (Paris I 960).

J.

Boardman, The GreeksOverseas (London 1964).

G.

Buchner in Metropoli e coloniedi

Magna

Grecia

(Atti III Convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia,Naples

1964) 263-74 (Buchner, Convegno).

G.

Buchner, 'Pithekoussai, oldest Greek colony

in

the West' in Expedition viii no. 4 (1966) 4-12 Expedition).

(Buchner,

J.

N. Coldstream, Greek geometricpottery (London

M.

J. Mellink (ed.), Dark ages and nomads (Istanbul

1964) (Dark ages and nomads).

E.

Meyer, Geschichte desAltertums (2nd ed. Stuttgart

1937) iii 388-438.

C.

Roebuck,

Ioniantrade and colonization (New York

1959).

2 There mented histories of

are no

ment of the archaic

recent, complete and fully docu-

the great Greek colonising move-

period.

The nearest

approach

to such a work is B&rard's, but it is most unfortunately

incomplete

(see my

review,

JHS

lxxxi

[1961]

201).

Boardman's book is

extremely

useful as

a

compre-

hensive account of the archaeological evidence.

3 J.

M.

Cook,

BSA

liii-liv

(1958-9)

1-34;

The

Greeksin lonia andthe East (London 1962) chs. 2 and 3;

CAH ii2 ch.

38.

1968).

R.

 

4

T.

J.

Dunbabin,

The Greeks and their eastern

M. Cook, 'Ionia

and Greece in the eighth and

(1946) 67-98.

seventh centuries B.C.' in JHS lxvi

T.

J. Dunbabin, The westernGreeks (Oxford 1948).

neighbours (London 1957) chs.

2-5,

especially

25-9;

Boardman ch. 3, especially 61-74; Coldstream

31o-16, 345, 384-5, 423.

  • 36 A. J. GRAHAM

eighth century.5

was divided.

At

Metapontum

it is

possible to see in air photographs

belong

to archaic

times,

city's even if it does not

early

about land

on Greek

society

how the

land

This division can be shown to

We thus have a most

represent the original

seventh

century.6

division in

division made at the establishment of the colony at latest in the

significant

addition to our

evidence which throws

knowledge

light

Greek settlements, which is also

at the time, and even on such important themes in Greek history well known from later

times, like redistribution of land and

evidence can tell us.

they will

precise

always

remain the

and

detailed knowledge

imagine, always be the

not the

questions

of

spade.8

which it is

best known of

equal rights.'

Not that I want to fall into the common error of

often obtain from a

overestimating

may

what

archaeological

bulk, but

The literary sources on Greek colonisation

most important.

we

be small in

Archaeology cannot

literary

provide us with the

Cyrene will, I of Herodotus

account.

early Greek colonial enterprises-because

archaeological

still

But even when we ask the

capable

of

record the relatively simple in the use and

interpretation

answering there are

Greek colonies.

dangers

archaeological settlement at a certain date is not

settlement? At

Acragas,

evidence about

Even the establishment of the fact of

How much material

proves

a

entirely straightforward.

good literary

where we have

evidence, the finds include a little

to

reject the

A clear

literary foundation date,

example,

it

appears, that

hand,

At Thasos, on the other

which

Once pottery

presence

on a site need not

point

the

made it."

To illustrate the

literary

evidence for the

origin of

writing, we should be tempted by

colony.12

archaeological evidence

That knowledge origins and dates

material of earlier date than 580. Yet it seems

wrong since the bulk of the material comes from after that time.9

the earliest material on a site

no

archaeological

the foundation of the

may

not date the settlement.

present:

fundamental problems, the main evidence-as

of trade, and not

tell us anything

by absurdity:

settlers of

is normally the case-is chattel

a

personal

simply

locally produced,

who

about the movements of the

pointed

people out that if we had no

it has been

Pithecusa, and

looking

at the

cannot

will always

only rarely

finds are earlier than about 650. Yet I doubt if many would care to put

colony

so late.10 This illustrates a

major difficulty

which is

always

In addition to these

always

arise when

is an

object

can one be sure that the earliest material has come to light?

we have the uncertainties of

interpretation

painted pottery.

its

if we had no records of their

eighth-century pottery

to call it a Corinthian

frameworkof

picture

When we consider all these difficultieswe must concede that the

totally change

remain on

the nature of our

knowledge

the whole skeletal, a

enriched by

detail.

The

of Greek colonisation.

simple

facts about

of Greek colonisation that we can achieve will,

continually

In that

reconstructions.

therefore, always

to

task he

ground

activity is looking

the

pattern

be drawn in rather broad lines, and the task of the historian is

of these rather

general

try to improve the quality and validity

inevitably

works not

just

with the direct source material but also with the back-

expeditions were made.

justification

for

my

In simple

title.

terms this

If we look at

or the context within which colonial

at

patterns on a map;

hence the

of Greek colonies

on a map, we find, for instance, that Egypt is virtually free of

Greek colonies, and it is a commonplace to conclude that the Greeks were not able to

See the valuable general accounts of his excava- tions by Buchner cited in n. I above.

6

6

Adamesteanu,

Rev. Arch. 1967

3-38,

especially

25-7.

(Milan

highest

Cf.

A.

Giuliano,

Urbanistica delle citta greche

1966)

44-5,

48, whose arguments for the not

are

completely con-

possible

date

vincing.

7

On

this topic

see D. Asheri,

Distribuzioni di terre

nell' antica Grecia (Mem. Accad. Sci. Torino, Classe Sci.

Mor. Stor. Fil.,

and

5-

ser.

4a

no.

10,

Turin

1966)

chs.

I

  • 8 F. Chamoux, Cyrene sous la monarchiedes Battiades

(Paris

1953) ch. 3; Boardman

169-73.

  • 9 Boardman 198-9; Dunbabin 305-12.

10

Boardman 238;

cf. J. Pouilloux, Recherches sur

l'histoire et les cultes de Thasos

11

Cf. my

remarks

and

(Paris

I954)

references

in

22-3.

Colony and

mother city

in ancient

Greece

(Manchester

1964)

13-14.

12

Buchner,

Convegno267.

PATTERNS IN EARLY GREEK COLONISATION 37

territory even here the pattern is not so simple.

by permission

of the

establish settlements in the

of an advanced and organised state.

As it

happens,

The colony at Naucratis, a trading post established

under

precise Egyptian regulations,13might

territory.

But the

seem

very as has been well
very
as has been well

Pharaoh, and existing

merely to emphasise that Egypt

large-scale permanent

observed recently,'4 settle abroad was

as a whole was not Greek colonial

settlements of Greek

mercenary soldiers in Egypt,

can be seen as a kind of colonisation, in which the need of the Greeks to

specially adapted to the opportunities available in an advanced host

country.

It

is not

surprising that the interpretation of the patterns

satisfactory

as we

descend in

date.

It

is,

of Greek colonisation

for example,

generally clear that we can

with

archaeological

becomes more

combine what we learn

from literary sources, especially Herodotus,

valid

picture seventh century.15

evidence, to obtain a generally

Mediterranean from the

of the Phocaean colonisation in the Western

The chronology,

causation and

end of the

character of this colonisation

of

Spain,

emerge clearly enough;

peoples

both in

we have the attractions of the riches

Spain and Gaul, the

Carthaginians,

the

ability of the

pressure

of

good relations with native

compete

Phocaeans to

with hostile rivals, especially the

city.

This

relatively

Sea colonies,

oriental powers on the mother

fully from the latter

not

matched for the Black

of the

part In both these areas and

or to test

the literary

The

colonisation.

can

There is a

rich and secure evidence of all kinds is

is now available to

true of all areas and periods of Greek

as

but even so the pattern of settlement there,

clear.16

supplement

seventh century onwards, is also reasonably

periods archaeological evidence

That is not

yet

information.

absence of archaeological evidence does not prevent pattern-making,

which are not

But one notes above all the

no way of checking

or

way confirming his literary

myths

dubious evidence of

easily be seen by consulting any

good

account of this nature in

pre-archaeological account of Greek colonisation. Meyer's Geschichtedes Altertums.17 A combination

of the history of non-Greek peoples and shrewd

by

any means

totally

different from

in which an author without

evidence.

He is

of literary evidence, geography, knowledge

estimates of

probability yields patterns

today.

has

those we should draw

archaeological evidence

also forced

to turn frequently to the very

in order to enrich his

picture. When one turns from such

pre-archaeological

paper

of

accounts to R. M. Cook's very useful

to

see the great improvement

archaeological

evidence

discussionof Greek colonisation in his

in the strength

has allowed.

i946,18 it is easy

and quality of the historical reconstructionwhich the

This was a

very known of the Greek colonising movement at that time, and it makes a good base from which

to estimate the

improvements

which have accrued in the last

have tended to use-to

in its most

quarter of a century.

history

In

addition Cook's remarks about the ways in which reconstructions of the

colonisation have

paper.

been made provide

people

He notes that

geographical

colony

to

the

determinism

founding

an

of Greek

enlightening text for what I am attempting in this

a

greater

or lesser

degree-a

simple

(leading

extreme form to the thesis that the nearer the

foundation),

and have

ignored

such

native

state the earlier the date of

factors as 'the comparative attractiveness of sites, the attitude and strength of the

well-informed and well-balanced critical account of what was

inhabitants,

and chance:

but these are factors of which we know little'.'9

We may admit

13

See the very good discussion

by

M. M. Austin,

by Boardman,

ARfor I962-3,

in English,

and E. Belin

Greeceand Egypt in

the archaic age (Proc.Camb. Phil. Soc.

de

Ballu, L'histoiredes colonies grecques du littoralnord de

Suppl.

2, 1970) 22-33.

   

la Mer Noire (Leiden 1965), in French.

It

is

to

be

14

Austin op. cit. 15-22,

especially

 

18.

 

hoped

that

the results of the

recent work on

the

15 Cf Boardman 16 Boardman

223-30;

255-67;

Berard

B6rard

129-33.

Ioo-7;

Roebuck

ch. 8.

The active

archaeological work on the Greek

mostly published

in Slavonic

accounts of that work

colonies in the Pontus is

languages. There are useful

archaeological

Dr

J.

G.

F.

become

17

19

evidence for Greeks in the Pontus

Hind

of the

available

by

University of Otago will

through publication.

(see n. I above).

generally

I bove.

n.

28.

See n.

70 with

18 Pp. 70-80

  • 38 A. J. GRAHAM

the truth of the last comment,

but since the factors mentioned

may well have been decisive

in most, if not all, colonial enterprises, no reconstruction which ignores such aspects can be

called satisfactory.

One

of the results of the possession of the new evidence

from archaeology

has been

a

tendency to be unwilling to trust the literary evidence when it stands unconfirmed by archaeological discoveries, a tendency which we can also see in Cook's paper. Such an

attitude is no doubt from an ideal point of view perfectly correct.

We must all look forward

to the day when the literary evidence can all be evaluated against a background of adequate archaeological exploration. But it seems to me that the outstanding general result from all

the archaeological

discoveries about Greek colonisation

has been that the literary record is

on the whole thoroughly

trustworthy.

This

conclusion

has, it

is

true, been

more solidly

It was

not,

established by evidence unearthed since Cook's paper was written. At that time there was

a disturbing element of circularity in the argument. The painted pottery had been given

absolute dates from the literary foundation dates of the colonies in the West.

therefore, entirely satisfactory to go on to conclude that the pottery confirmed those literary dates. But the excavations on Ischia have provided external dating evidence-notably

the Bocchoris scarab-so that the chronology of the painted pottery can now be regarded as

independently

archaeological

established.20

As

a result

we

now

have

in Italy

and Sicily

evidence

even for the colonies of the eighth century

to

be

able

enough

good

to assess the

quality

of the literary

sources.

The

result is highly

encouraging,

perhaps

even a little alone and

surprising.

Was it entirely

to be expected

that a sentence

of Livy21 standing

referring to events of the eighth century B.c. would be so triumphantly justified as it has been by the excavation of Pithecusa ? It is important to note here that the modern arguments

about the chronology of' the early colonies in Sicily do not seriously shake the general

reliability of the literary dates. However one may believe the authors of the fifth century and later obtained the foundation dates which they transmitted-whether or not they were

artificially computing

by generations-the

general terms reliable.22

fact is that those dates have been proved to be in

This is a result of major importance for early Greek history in general, but for my present purpose I would emphasise its implications for the history of Greek colonisation. It shows

that when the Greeks came to write history they were able to discover the fundamental facts about many colonies established in the eighth century, not just the origin of the colony but

also its date. It seems therefore that it is not good

method to ignore or disbelieve informa-

tion about early colonial foundations in our literary sources merely because that information

is without archaeological confirmation. Thus, if we venture to look at patterns in

early

Greek colonisation in areas where the archaeological evidence is still very slight, we have at

least this advantage over our pre-archaeological forerunners: we know that the literary evidence on which we mainly depend, and in particular the literary foundation dates, have been proved in other areas to be in general reliable. In the light of these introductory remarks it seems worthwhile to reconsider certain

aspects and areas of Greek colonisation in the eighth and early seventh centuries, where

there is manifestly still room for improvement

in our understanding

of the general pattern.

(Thus I exclude Sicily, where a relatively satisfactory picture, even of the earliest colonisa-

tion, can

evidence

be said

to have

been

achieved.)23

In

some of these

areas new

archaeological

acquired over the last two decades has made such a reassessment necessary.

In

others, although there is no such direct new evidence, the implications

of the new evidence

from elsewhere affect our interpretation

of the existing historical sources.

In attempting

20

22

Coldstream

316-I7,

322-7.

21 Viii 22.5-6.

Coldstream ibid.; Dunbabin Appendix I; my

Colony and Mother

23

City

221

n.

2.

See, for instance, the good accounts of Berard,

La colonisation grecque de l'Italie mdridionaleet de la Sicile

dans l'antiquiti (2nd

edition

Paris

I957)

chs.

2,

3,

6;

Dunbabin chs. I, 3; A. G. Woodhead, The Greeksin

the West (London

1962)

ch.

3.

PATTERNS IN EARLY GREEK COLONISATION

39

this reconsideration I also hope to give due weight to those factors, which Cook recognised to be important, but then dismissed because they were so little known.24

The little

eighth-century

colonisation in the Black Sea which is attested by literary

sources has still neither been confirmed

nothing The colonisation

correctly,

nor disproved by archaeological evidence, so

subject some years ago.25

a

promising

It has

field for

speculation

for

long been held,

in the

I have

attempt

to add to what I wrote about this

of the Propontis26 offers

instance, I am sure

that the absence of Greek colonies from the north shore in

to make sense of the

pattern of settlement.

early times is to be

attributed to the warlike

strength

of the local Thracian tribes.27 There

are several examples

dangerous oppo-

in the history of Greek colonisation of expeditions which fell foul of these

nents.28

They may

also be called in to

explain

the

paradox, which has troubled interpreters

since ancient times,29 that Chalcedon was settled before the

We

need an explanation,

particularly

for the

by

of site

favoured

splendid

headland of

magnificent site of Byzantium.

is an

example

of a

type

in

rejected it

for the earliest

Byzantium

Greek colonists.30 They would not have

very strong reason. was

Propontis

largely

forbidden

territory

early

favour of Chalcedon without some

However, if the north side of the

Greek colonists, we find a number of colonies on the south side with

in the

literary

sources.

Eusebius gives

the following

foundation dates:

foundation dates for Cyzicus 756

and 679;

for Astacus 71;

for Parium

709;

for

Chalcedon

685 (and Byzantium 659).31

Cyzicus

and Proconnesus

Herodotus' story (iv 14-15) of Aristeas of

were already

Proconnesus implies that

in existence as Greek cities more than 240 years before Herodotus' own time,

say

c. 690.32

There is a great has been excavated

dearth of

and yields

archaeological material from this area, and material of a relevant date is the modern

Here part

of an

entirely

Greek

city

the only site which Hisartepe, a place

pottery

as

early

with

some 20 miles south of Cyzicus. as the first half of the seventh

identified by its excavator as

In

century

was unearthed.33

The site was

with great probability

region

we

Dascylium, capital of the third

pattern

of

early

Persian satrapy.

attempting need first of all to set

Propontis

expect

it to be a

to reconstruct the

this small

Greek colonisation in this

in

quantity has been well called 'a little

very

of direct evidence

Aegean'.34

Other

colonists.

our

its geographical context. The we should

things being equal we can make esti-

Fortunately

knowledge

of non-Greek peoples,

attractive area for Greek

mates as to how far other

things were equal by using

whose activities can be shown or assumed to have influenced the

colonising

movement.

The three peoples who come into the picture are the Cimmerians,35 the Phrygians and the

Lydians.

R.

M.

Cook made himself merry about those who used the Cimmerians-'these dim but

explain problems in the record of Greek colonisation.36 And

the Cimmerians remain very fugitive.

There

useful barbarians'-in order to

it is still true that archaeologically speaking

24

See above

p.

37.

25 BICS v (1958) 25-42.

31

R. M. Cook

usefully set out the literary dates of

26

For recent useful accounts and discussions see

colonial foundations (77).

Berard

95-Ioo;

Boardman

245-55;

Coldstream

32

As

Cook 77; cf. 71 n. 42.

376-80;

Roebuck

I 1o-5.

33

Akurgal, Anatolia i

(1956) 15 if.; cf. Coldstream

27

28

See, for instance, already Meyer

  • 418. 377; Boardman 249, 254-

34

CAH iii 658.

As Thasos, see Pouilloux, Recherchessur l'histoire

et les cultes de Thasos 22-3; Abdera,

see Hdt.

i

168;

35

The

Cimmerians were not the only nomadic

and, later, Amphipolis, see Thuc. iv 102.2-3.

29

Hdt. iv

144.1-2.

  • 30 Examples of such sites: Croton, see Dunbabin

85 opp.;

Berard,

Colonisation .

.

. I'Italie

.

.

.

et.

.

.

people in the

regions

under discussion at this time;

see CAH iii 187-9, 511; but since we cannot distin-

guish

them

convincingly

all

merians to embrace

I shall use the term Cim-

the nomads active in Asia

Sicile 157 ; Elea, see Berard op. cit. 270-I

; W. Hermann,

AA 1966, 360-4; 2 and

figs.

3-

Istrus, see BCH Ilxxxii (1958)

337-8

Minor in the eighth and seventh centuries.

36 73.

40

A. J. GRAHAM

is no occupation who are firmly

level at

any site which can be securely

contemporary

identified as theirs.37

But

a people

simply

attested in

oriental and Greek records38 cannot be

possible

regions

two

ignored, which these may theories are not,

so that we are

required

to take account of their

colonial enterprises modern

speculation.

in the

Of

literary

activities and the effects

under discussion. Such

in the

have had on

after all,

pure

Greek sites-Sinope

actually

Black Sea and Antandrus in

the Troad--our

widespread

sources

state that there was

Cimmerian occupation,39 and the

destruction by Cimmerians in Asia Minor is

indisputable. We know that Cimmerian and

over a period of some fifty years

Gordium,

for

instance, or

possibly

other nomadic raiders were active in Asia Minor

Their most famous destructions, of

There is

nothing

in

the least

founded before

their incursions,

from about 700.

Sardis, show their

strength.

colonies,

improbable in the theories that certain Greek

were

destroyed by

them and then

subsequently This is what we are

and it seems to

defeated and disappeared. account of

long

Ps-Scymnus),

the two dates for

the seventh, which

to the

in the

early

similar explanation

literary in the seventh

record.4'

re-established when the raiders had been

expressly told happened at Sinope (in the of

explaining and one in

objection

Cyzicus

me a perfectly acceptable way

Sinope's foundation, one in the eighth century, by implication,

we have in our

literary which has been offered for -he two foundation dates of

sources.40

So I also see no theoretical

The Cimmerians destroyed Gordium and the

Phrygian Empire

fate, possibly

century.42 Cyzicus could well

have suffered a similar

even at the same time.

It also seems an

acceptable

notion to

me that the dangerous if sporadic

Pontus and Propontis relatively

century.43

When the

appearances of

unattractive to

the nomadic raiders made the whole area of

chose to colonise Siris in southern

Ionia.44 Their choice certainly suggests

and

Propontid region

may

merians

The

great period

Greek colonists in the first half of the seventh

decided to settle elsewhere under

they

people of Colophon

in

Gyges' reign,

pressure of the Lydians, probably early

Italy,

the

only early colony

that all the

in the West founded from

more accessible Pontic

geographically

was unattractive to them for one reason or

another, and the Cim-

eighth century,

and

beginning of

Propontis

well have furnished one of those reasons.

of

Phrygian

domination was the second half of the

it came to an abrupt end with the Cimmerian destruction of Gordium at the

the seventh.45

It is

virtually

certain that the

territory

will have been under Phrygian rule at this time.46

territory

(711)

in the

period

in

and Parium

(709).

doubted.4'

Our earliest

question according

The

high

date

to our

calls Astacus a

colony

on the south side of the

There were three Greek colonies on this

literary sources: Cyzicus

(756), Astacus

for Astacus, a Megarian colony, has long been

area,

Charon of

Lampsacus, be dated after 685,

explained

authority of Chalcedon.48 It should therefore

higher

leave Astacus

on the colonisation of the

apparently

the foundation date of Chalcedon. Possibly the

as a result of calculations

designed to glorify

If we

new foundation of Nicomedia.49

the

date of Eusebius is to be

antiquity of the predecessor of Lysimachus'

on one side, we have one colony,

37

38

Cf. Dark ages and nomads 63.

See CAH ibid.; Barnett,

CAH ii2

ch.

30,

I1-12;

U. Cozzoli, I Cimmeri (Rome 1968) ch. 8.

39

Sinope:

Hdt.

iv

12.2,

Ps-Scymnus

Antandrus: Aristotle, see Steph. Byz. s.v.

40

BICS v (1958) 33-4

with n.

I5, where

941-53;

I discussed

modern rejections of Ps-Scymnus' information,

941-53.

41

E.g. N.

322

B.C. I I5.

42

Young,

351.

G.

L. Hammond,

Proc. Amer. Philos.

History of Greece to

Assoc.

cvii

(1963)

43

Cf. Cook 79 n. I0o8: 'possibly that field was not

references and discussion see Dunbabin

then ripe for colonisation'.

44

For

34-5; Berard,

Colonisation. ..

.'Italie

. . .

et

. ..

Sicile

187-98; cf. Boardman I95; Cook ibid.

45

46

47

Cf. Young, Dark Ages and Nomads 55.

See RE

s.v.

'Phrygia' 787-8.

n.

It is rejected by Meyer 4I9

Cf. Birard 96-7;

19-22.

K. Hanell,

Megarische Studien (Lund I934)

4s FGH 262fr. 6.

49

Cf. Hanell's views about the various foundation

legends, op. cit. 120.

PATTERNS IN EARLY GREEK COLONISATION 41

Cyzicus, allegedly

Parium,

settled about the beginning of the

high Phrygian period, and another,

the Propontis for colonists, we

near its end.

In view of the intrinsic attractions of

might be

high

Parium.

enough

justified

in

supposing

that Phrygian rule on the whole excluded Greek colonisation.

short step to doubting the literary

Perhaps

we need not

press

denying the matter in the case of

sources and

the

From such a conclusion it is a

dates

for Cyzicus

Its

origins

and Parium.

are somewhat confused in our sources,50 and its traditional date is near

Phrygian Empire

for it to be

easy

to

accept

the

possibility

power. must either be rejected outright, or taken to show

in the high Phrygian period.

assumption

difficult.

Meyer thought the

to the destruction of the

of a small overestimate and assume that it was in fact founded after the fall of that

But the first foundation date for

that a Greek

colony

Earlier writers

Cyzicus

Phrygians

area.51

could exist on that site

did

not

find the

latter

might have taken their

The

alphabet

from the Greek colonies in the

the

adapted

Hellespontine Phoenician alphabet by

discovery that the Phrygians were using

suggestion that they

argument

from

c. 725 has led to the

may not have received it through Greek inter-

chronology

is not

compelling,53

and since we

Phrygians54 it seems an unnecessary

alphabet by contacts

in

mediaries at all.52 But the

have good

evidence for contacts between Greeks and

extra hypothesis to suggest that the Phrygians also obtained their

the Phoenician area.

However, evidence for peaceful

that the

Phrygians

To

my

intercourse between Greeks and

Phrygians does not

territory that they

Propontis

But this

would have allowed Greek colonists to settle on

prove

controlled.

mind the general absence of colonisation in both Pontus and

eighth century

most

probably implies

rejection

with it the

that

they

did not.

in the second half of the

conclusion

does not necessarily carry

of the first foundation date of

as

preceding

the full

power

of

Cyzicus. It is possible to envisage It is worth

Phrygia.

in the

Pontus.55 We

emphasising

offshore island.56 It

the foundation of

Cyzicus

that similar early dates are attested for the first colonies

Cyzicus

was almost

certainly

then an

should also remember that

seems possible to retain confidence in the first foundation date for

accepting

the view that at its

height the Phrygian Empire

Propontis.

Cyzicus while at the same time

effectively prevented

We

may begin Propontis with the with

must

new colonial settlements on the south shore of the

our examination of Lydian influence on the Greek colonisation of the

very interesting piece

The

of information that

Milesian Abydus was founded

impugned,58

but we

existed between

credibility of this statement has been

specially good

relations we know to have

have led to privileges

interpretation

in the field of colonisation.59

Abydus

of the information about

Gyges' permission.57 concede that the

surely

the Lydian

Miletus and

kings could well

Recently, however, has been offered.

in

Lydian

a much more extreme

It has been

suggested

that it was in fact a settlement of Greek mercenaries

Cyzicus,

service, and that the Greek settlement which has been discoveredsouth of

and identified as Dascylium, should be

called after

Dascylus, Gyges'

forward

puts from the discoveries inland

Boardman

father.60

interpreted in a similar way, because Dascylium was

this view in explicit opposition to the conclusion which I drew from Cyzicus-namely that a Greek settlement twenty miles

50

B6rard 97; F. Bilabel, Die ionischeKolonisation

(PhilologusSuppl. xiv) 49.

51

423.

52

Young,

Proc.

Amer. Philos.

Assoc.

cvii

(1963)

362-4; cf. Dark ages and nomads 55.

53

Cf. the useful discussion by Coldstream 379-80.

54

Roebuck 43-7; cf. Boardman Io04-9.

55

See BICS v (1958)

25-6.

56

F. W. Hasluck,

Cyzicus

I now regard his arguments

my statement on p. 39

of

(Cambridge

I9Io)

2-5.

as

convincing;

contrast

the

the article cited in

previous

affected.

note, though the main

argument is not

51

Strabo xiii 590.

58

with

Cook

thought

(71

n.

41)

that

the

connection

Gyges might have been invented at a later date

promontory near Abydus was called Gygas

it

seems just as easy to accept the

because a