Polybius, Histories
Layout
Translation

Bibliography

(0)
No bibliography content available

Archaeology

Places

Book 10 - Chapter 10

1
<w lemma="%2Akei%3Dtai">Κεῖται</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="ou%29%3Dn">οὖν</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="%2A%29ibhri%2Fas">Ἰβηρίας</w> <w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="me%2Fshn">μέσην</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="parali%2Fan">παραλίαν</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="ko%2Flpw%7C">κόλπῳ</w> <w lemma="neu%2Fonti">νεύοντι</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Fnemon">ἄνεμον</w> <w lemma="li%2Fba:">λίβα·</w> <w lemma="ou%28%3D">οὗ</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="ba%2Fqos">βάθος</w> <w lemma="e%29sti%5Cn">ἐστὶν</w> <w lemma="w%28s">ὡς</w> <w lemma="ei%29%2Fkosi">εἴκοσι</w> <w lemma="stadi%2Fwn">σταδίων</w>, <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="pla%2Ftos">πλάτος</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="tai%3Ds">ταῖς</w> <w lemma="a%29rxai%3Ds">ἀρχαῖς</w> <w lemma="w%28s">ὡς</w> <w lemma="de%2Fka:">δέκα·</w> <w lemma="lamba%2Fnei">λαμβάνει</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="dia%2Fqesin">διάθεσιν</w> <w lemma="lime%2Fnos">λιμένος</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="pa%3Ds">πᾶς</w> <w lemma="ko%2Flpos">κόλπος</w> <w lemma="dia%5C">διὰ</w> <w lemma="toiau%2Fthn">τοιαύτην</w> <w lemma="ai%29ti%2Fan">αἰτίαν</w>.
2
<w lemma="nh%3Dsos">νῆσος</w> <w lemma="e%29pi%5C">ἐπὶ</w> <w lemma="tou%3D">τοῦ</w> <w lemma="sto%2Fmatos">στόματος</w> <w lemma="au%29tou%3D">αὐτοῦ</w> <w lemma="kei%3Dtai">κεῖται</w> <w lemma="braxu%5Cn">βραχὺν</w> <w lemma="e%29c">ἐξ</w> <w lemma="e%28kate%2Frou">ἑκατέρου</w> <w lemma="tou%3D">τοῦ</w> <w lemma="me%2Frous">μέρους</w> <w lemma="ei%29%2Fsploun">εἴσπλουν</w> <w lemma="ei%29s">εἰς</w> <w lemma="au%29to%5Cn">αὐτὸν</w> <w lemma="a%29polei%2Fpousa">ἀπολείπουσα</w>.
3
<w lemma="tau%2Fths">ταύτης</w> <w lemma="a%29podexome%2Fnhs">ἀποδεχομένης</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="pela%2Fgion">πελάγιον</w> <w lemma="ku%3Dma">κῦμα</w> <w lemma="sumbai%2Fnei">συμβαίνει</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="ko%2Flpon">κόλπον</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Flon">ὅλον</w> <w lemma="eu%29di%2Fan">εὐδίαν</w> <w lemma="i%29%2Fsxein">ἴσχειν</w>, <w lemma="plh%5Cn">πλὴν</w> <w lemma="e%29f%27">ἐφ᾽</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Fson">ὅσον</w> <w lemma="oi%28">οἱ</w> <w lemma="li%2Fbes">λίβες</w> <w lemma="kaq%27">καθ᾽</w> <w lemma="e%28ka%2Fteron">ἑκάτερον</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="ei%29%2Fsploun">εἴσπλουν</w> <w lemma="pareispi%2Fptontes">παρεισπίπτοντες</w> <w lemma="klu%2Fdwnas">κλύδωνας</w> <w lemma="a%29potelou%3Dsi">ἀποτελοῦσι</w>.
4
<w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="ge">γε</w> <w lemma="mh%5Cn">μὴν</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Fllwn">ἄλλων</w> <w lemma="pneuma%2Ftwn">πνευμάτων</w> <w lemma="a%29kludw%2Fnistos">ἀκλυδώνιστος</w> <w lemma="w%29%5Cn">ὢν</w> <w lemma="tugxa%2Fnei">τυγχάνει</w> <w lemma="dia%5C">διὰ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="perie%2Fxousan">περιέχουσαν</w> <w lemma="au%29to%5Cn">αὐτὸν</w> <w lemma="h%29%2Fpeiron">ἤπειρον</w>.
5
<w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="tw%3D%7C">τῷ</w> <w lemma="muxw%3D%7C">μυχῷ</w> <w lemma="tou%3D">τοῦ</w> <w lemma="ko%2Flpou">κόλπου</w> <w lemma="pro%2Fkeitai">πρόκειται</w> <w lemma="xerronhsi%2Fzon">χερρονησίζον</w> <w lemma="o%29%2Fros">ὄρος</w>, <w lemma="e%29f%27">ἐφ᾽</w> <w lemma="ou%28%3D">οὗ</w> <w lemma="kei%3Dsqai">κεῖσθαι</w> <w lemma="sumbai%2Fnei">συμβαίνει</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="po%2Flin">πόλιν</w>, <w lemma="periexome%2Fnhn">περιεχομένην</w> <w lemma="qala%2Ftth%7C">θαλάττῃ</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="a%29p%27">ἀπ᾽</w> <w lemma="a%29natolw%3Dn">ἀνατολῶν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="meshmbri%2Fas">μεσημβρίας</w>, <w lemma="a%29po%5C">ἀπὸ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="du%2Fsewn">δύσεων</w> <w lemma="li%2Fmnh%7C">λίμνῃ</w> <w lemma="prosepilambanou%2Fsh%7C">προσεπιλαμβανούσῃ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="tou%3D">τοῦ</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Frkton">ἄρκτον</w> <w lemma="me%2Frous">μέρους</w>,
6
<w lemma="w%28%2Fste">ὥστε</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="loipo%5Cn">λοιπὸν</w> <w lemma="to%2Fpon">τόπον</w> <w lemma="me%2Fxri">μέχρι</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="e%29pi%5C">ἐπὶ</w> <w lemma="qa%2Ftera">θάτερα</w> <w lemma="qala%2Ftths">θαλάττης</w>, <w lemma="o%28%5Cs">ὃς</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="suna%2Fptei">συνάπτει</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="po%2Flin">πόλιν</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="h%29%2Fpeiron">ἤπειρον</w>, <w lemma="mh%5C">μὴ</w> <w lemma="ple%2Fon">πλέον</w> <w lemma="u%28pa%2Frxein">ὑπάρχειν</w> <w lemma="h%29%5C">ἢ</w> <w lemma="duei%3Dn">δυεῖν</w> <w lemma="stadi%2Fwn">σταδίων</w>.
7
<w lemma="h%28">ἡ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="po%2Flis">πόλις</w> <w lemma="au%29th%5C">αὐτὴ</w> <w lemma="meso%2Fkoilo%2Fs">μεσόκοιλός</w> <w lemma="e%29sti:">ἐστι·</w> <w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="a%29po%5C">ἀπὸ</w> <w lemma="meshmbri%2Fas">μεσημβρίας</w> <w lemma="pleura%5Cn">πλευρὰν</w> <w lemma="e%29pi%2Fpedon">ἐπίπεδον</w> <w lemma="e%29%2Fxei">ἔχει</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="a%29po%5C">ἀπὸ</w> <w lemma="qala%2Ftths">θαλάττης</w> <w lemma="pro%2Fsodon:">πρόσοδον·</w> <w lemma="ta%5C">τὰ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="loipa%5C">λοιπὰ</w> <w lemma="perie%2Fxetai">περιέχεται</w> <w lemma="lo%2Ffois">λόφοις</w>, <w lemma="dusi%5C">δυσὶ</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="o%29reinoi%3Ds">ὀρεινοῖς</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="traxe%2Fsin">τραχέσιν</w>, <w lemma="a%29%2Fllois">ἄλλοις</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="trisi%5C">τρισὶ</w> <w lemma="polu%5C">πολὺ</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="xqamalwte%2Frois">χθαμαλωτέροις</w>, <w lemma="spilw%2Fdesi">σπιλώδεσι</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="dusba%2Ftois:">δυσβάτοις·</w>
8
<w lemma="w%28%3Dn">ὧν</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="me%2Fgistos">μέγιστος</w> <w lemma="a%29po%5C">ἀπὸ</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="a%29natolh%3Ds">ἀνατολῆς</w> <w lemma="au%29th%3D%7C">αὐτῇ</w> <w lemma="para%2Fkeitai">παράκειται</w>, <w lemma="protei%2Fnwn">προτείνων</w> <w lemma="ei%29s">εἰς</w> <w lemma="qa%2Flattan">θάλατταν</w>, <w lemma="e%29f%27">ἐφ᾽</w> <w lemma="ou%28%3D">οὗ</w> <w lemma="kaqi%2Fdrutai">καθίδρυται</w> <w lemma="new%5Cs">νεὼς</w> <w lemma="%2A%29asklhpiou%3D">Ἀσκληπιοῦ</w>.
9
<w lemma="tou%2Ftw%7C">τούτῳ</w> <w lemma="d%27">δ᾽</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> * <w lemma="a%29po%5C">ἀπὸ</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="du%2Fsews">δύσεως</w> <w lemma="a%29nti%2Fkeitai">ἀντίκειται</w>, <w lemma="paraplhsi%2Fan">παραπλησίαν</w> <w lemma="qe%2Fsin">θέσιν</w> <w lemma="e%29%2Fxwn">ἔχων</w>, <w lemma="e%29f%27">ἐφ᾽</w> <w lemma="ou%28%3D">οὗ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="basi%2Fleia">βασίλεια</w> <w lemma="kateskeu%2Fastai">κατεσκεύασται</w> <w lemma="polutelw%3Ds">πολυτελῶς</w>, <w lemma="a%28%2F">ἅ</w> <w lemma="fasin">φασιν</w> <w lemma="%2A%29asdrou%2Fban">Ἀσδρούβαν</w> <w lemma="poih%3Dsai">ποιῆσαι</w>, <w lemma="monarxikh%3Ds">μοναρχικῆς</w> <w lemma="o%29rego%2Fmenon">ὀρεγόμενον</w> <w lemma="e%29cousi%2Fas">ἐξουσίας</w>.
10
<w lemma="ai%28">αἱ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="loipai%5C">λοιπαὶ</w> <w lemma="trei%3Ds">τρεῖς</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="e%29latto%2Fnwn">ἐλαττόνων</w> <w lemma="bounw%3Dn">βουνῶν</w> <w lemma="u%28peroxai%5C">ὑπεροχαὶ</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Frkton">ἄρκτον</w> <w lemma="au%29th%3Ds">αὐτῆς</w> <w lemma="me%2Fros">μέρος</w> <w lemma="perie%2Fxousi">περιέχουσι</w>.
11
<w lemma="kalei%3Dtai">καλεῖται</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="triw%3Dn">τριῶν</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="a%29natola%5Cs">ἀνατολὰς</w> <w lemma="neu%2Fwn">νεύων</w> <w lemma="%2A%28hfai%2Fstou">Ἡφαίστου</w>, <w lemma="tou%2Ftw%7C">τούτῳ</w> <w lemma="d%27">δ᾽</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="sunexh%5Cs">συνεχὴς</w> <w lemma="%2A%29alh%2Ftou">Ἀλήτου</w> — <w lemma="dokei%3D">δοκεῖ</w> <w lemma="d%27">δ᾽</w> <w lemma="ou%28%3Dtos">οὗτος</w> <w lemma="eu%28reth%5Cs">εὑρετὴς</w> <w lemma="geno%2Fmenos">γενόμενος</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="a%29rgurei%2Fwn">ἀργυρείων</w> <w lemma="meta%2Fllwn">μετάλλων</w> <w lemma="i%29soqe%2Fwn">ἰσοθέων</w> <w lemma="teteuxe%2Fnai">τετευχέναι</w> <w lemma="timw%3Dn">τιμῶν</w> — <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="tri%2Ftos">τρίτος</w> <w lemma="prosagoreu%2Fetai">προσαγορεύεται</w> <w lemma="%2Akro%2Fnou">Κρόνου</w>.
12
<w lemma="sumbai%2Fnei">συμβαίνει</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="li%2Fmnhn">λίμνην</w> <w lemma="th%3D%7C">τῇ</w> <w lemma="parakeime%2Fnh%7C">παρακειμένῃ</w> <w lemma="qala%2Ftth%7C">θαλάττῃ</w> <w lemma="su%2Frroun">σύρρουν</w> <w lemma="gegone%2Fnai">γεγονέναι</w> <w lemma="xeiropoih%2Ftws">χειροποιήτως</w> <w lemma="xa%2Frin">χάριν</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="qalattourgw%3Dn">θαλαττουργῶν</w>.
13
<w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="tou%3D">τοῦ</w> <w lemma="diei%2Frgontos">διείργοντος</w> <w lemma="au%29ta%5Cs">αὐτὰς</w> <w lemma="xei%2Flous">χείλους</w> <w lemma="diakoph%5Cn">διακοπὴν</w> <w lemma="ge%2Ffura">γέφυρα</w> <w lemma="kateskeu%2Fastai">κατεσκεύασται</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="ta%5C">τὰ</w> <w lemma="u%28pozu%2Fgia">ὑποζύγια</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="ta%5Cs">τὰς</w> <w lemma="a%28ma%2Fcas">ἁμάξας</w> <w lemma="tau%2Fth%7C">ταύτῃ</w> <w lemma="poiei%3Dsqai">ποιεῖσθαι</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="parakomidh%5Cn">παρακομιδὴν</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="e%29k">ἐκ</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="xw%2Fras">χώρας</w> <w lemma="a%29nagkai%2Fwn">ἀναγκαίων</w>.
<a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> lies half way down the coast of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Spain&groupId=983&placeId=1735">Spain</a>, in a gulf which faces south-west and is about twenty stades long and ten stades broad at the entered. This gulf serves as a harbour for the following reason.
At its mouth lies an island which leaves only a narrow passage on either side,
and as this breaks the waves of the sea, the whole gulf is perfectly calm, except that the south-west wind sometimes blows in through both the channels and raises some sea.
No other wind, however, disturbs it as it is quite land-locked. In the innermost nook of the gulf a hill in the form of a peninsula juts out, and on this stands the city, surrounded by the sea on the east and south and on the west by a lagoon which extends so far to the north that the remaining space, reach as far as the sea on the other side and connecting the sea with the mainland, is not more than two stades in breadth.
The town itself is low in the centre, and on its southern side the approach to it from the sea is level. On the other sides it is surrounded by hills, two of them lofty and rugged, and the other three, though much lower, yet craggy and difficult of access.
The biggest of these hills lies on the east side of the town and juts out into the sea, and on it is built a temple of Aesculapius.
The second is opposite it on the western side in a similar position, and on it stands a magnificent palace said to have been built by Hasdrubal when he aspired to royal power.
The three other smaller eminences are to the north of the city,
the most easterly being called the hill of Vulcan, the next one the hill of Aletes, who is said to have received divine honours for his discovery of the silver mines, while the third is known as the hill of Saturn.
An artificial communication has been opened between the lagoon and the neighbouring sea for the convenience of shipping,
and over the channel thus cut through the tongue of land that separates lagoon and sea a bridge has been built for the passage of beasts of burden and carts bringing in supplies from the country.

Walbank Commentary

Overview
10.2.1 - 10.20.8
<p rend="Plain Text">Scipio's character; the capture of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a></p> <p rend="Plain Text"> To succeed the two Scipios, killed in 211 (viii. 38 n., ix. 11), Publius' son, P. Cornelius P.f. L.n. Scipio (Africanus), was sent out with imperium pro consule by popular vote (Livy, xxvi. 18. 4–11, 19. 10–11); on the reasons for his appointment in place of Claudius Nero see Scullard, Pol. 66. Livy dates his arrival in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Spain&groupId=983&placeId=1735">Spain</a> to 211, and consequently <milestone unit="page" n="191">[191]</milestone> puts the fall of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> in 210; but in fact he arrived in 210, and took the Punic base in 209 (see above, p. 14). On Scipio's preparations during winter 210–9 see Livy, xxvi. 19. 12–20. 6. </p> <p rend="Plain Text">The account of Scipio's character, introduced at the point at which he harangues his troops before crossing the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Ebro&groupId=549&placeId=1031">Ebro</a> in spring 209 (cf. 6. 1 n.), does not aim at completeness (3. 1, where his beneficence and magnanimity are passed over as well known; cf. Bruns, 3). The digression is designed to counter popular views of how Scipio took <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a>, and is thus parallel to the polemic against the sensational historians who attributed Hannibal's crossing of the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Alps&groupId=313&placeId=609">Alps</a> to divine intervention (iii. 47. 6–48. 12); in both passages (11. 4, cf. iii. 48. 12) P. supports his version by the claim of autopsy. Consequently the origin and credibility of P.'s interpretation of Scipio's character cannot be disentangled from the question of the credibility of his account of the capture of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a>. According to P., Scipio learnt, while still in winter quarters, of the existence of a shallow lagoon on the inside of the city, and of a fall in its level each evening (8. 7); and on arriving there, the day before the attack was due to begin, he harangued his troops, promising them inter alia the manifest intervention of Neptune (11. 7–8) on their side. When at the proper time the ebb came and the wading party was sent across the lagoon, the army was struck with the thought that this was <w lang="el-GR">μετά τινος θεοῦ προνοίας</w> (14. 11). This illustrates P.'s thesis that Scipio did not owe his success to 'the gods and Tyche' (9.2), but to his own foresight (2. 13); but that he, like Lycurgus (2. 8–11), deliberately represented the fruit of calculation as the work of divine powers (2. 12).</p> <p rend="Plain Text"> What is the truth about the ebb? Although the Mediterranean is in general tideless, tides occur at some points. But if this ebb is a tidal phenomenon P. must be wrong in saying that it occurred daily <w lang="el-GR">ἐπὶ δείλην ὀψίαν</w> (though he may, of course, have generalized what was true for the day for which Scipio planned the attack). Alternatively the ebb had some other cause such as wind action. Livy (xxvi. 45. 8) mentions a north wind which assisted the tide; and Scullard (Scip. 76–9) quotes several examples of similar phenomena due to wind, from the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Red Sea&groupId=223&placeId=474">Red Sea</a>, the Crimea, the Suez Canal, and Geneva. It is also attested that north or north-east winds can lower the level of the water by one to one and a half feet in the neighbourhood of Cartagena (Mediterranean Pilot <emph rend="superscript">6</emph> , i. 69; Scullard, Scip. 78–79 n. 3). Scullard also considers (Scip. 79) the possibility of volcanic phenomena, but rightly dismisses this as unlikely. Tide or wind, either explanation of the ebb presents difficulties. If it was tidal (and so predictable) why did Scipio launch a violent attack in the morning instead of waiting for the ebb later in the day? Having promised Neptune's help (11. 7), why did he embark on an <milestone unit="page" n="192">[192]</milestone> operation the success of which would have made that help superfluous? And why did Mago do nothing to guard against an obvious danger? If on the other hand the ebb was caused by wind action, clearly Scipio could not be quite sure it would occur; how then could he, the previous day, promise the god's intervention? </p> <p rend="Plain Text">These difficulties would be evaded if the whole story of the ebb were a legend. But the character of P.'s sources virtually excludes this hypothesis. For his account of the capture of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> he used at least three, and possibly four, sources, apart from his own autopsy (11. 4 n.). He had the evidence of C. Laelius, Scipio's close friend (3. 2), probably oral (Laqueur, Hermes, 1921, 207–25, argues unconvincingly for a written account). He had also access to an account written by P. Scipio himself and sent (presumably after 190) to Philip V of Macedon (9. 3), in which he confirmed that his operations were based on the calculations expounded by P., including the information on the lagoon. Further, Silenus described the capture (Livy, xxvi. 49. 3), and P. may be assumed to have consulted him. The strong similarity between the accounts of P. and Livy points to a common tradition, but it is not easy to establish the relationship between the two versions. It has been argued that Livy used P., either directly or more probably via Coelius, and that the additional details which he gives (cf. Klotz, Appians Darstellung, 73) come from a secondary source like Silenus (added by Livy or again, more probably, by Coelius); cf. Kahrstedt, iii. 289 ff.; De Sanctis, iii. 2. 372. On this hypothesis, the Roman point of view in both P. and Livy derives from P.'s use of Scipio and Laelius. Klotz has argued, however, that Livy's additions form an integral part of the narrative and are only to be explained as coming from a source common to P. and to Livy (again, used probably via Coelius); cf. Klotz, Livius, 178 f.; Hermes, 1952, 334–43. On this view the Roman colouring must derive from this common original source, who will hardly be other than Fabius Pictor. P. will have made Fabius his main source, checking him from Laelius and Scipio's letter.</p> <p rend="Plain Text"> To choose between these hypotheses is not easy. But it weighs against Klotz that in xxvi. 45. 9, 'hoc cura ac ratione compertum in prodigium ac deos uertens Scipio . . .', Livy echoes P.'s own attitude towards Scipio's exploitation of the gods; and though this phrase occurs in Livy's account of Scipio's speech just before the crossing of the lagoon, which has nothing corresponding in P. and owes a good deal to Livian rhetorical elaboration, nevertheless its ultimate origin in P. seems unquestionable. If, as Klotz argues, the additions in Livy read like an integral part of his narrative, this could merely be evidence of Livy's skill rather than an argument for the use of a common source from which P. omitted them. Further, at two points (9. 7 and 11. 1–3), where P. seems to have combined two sources with <milestone unit="page" n="193">[193]</milestone> less than his usual skill, Livy (xxvi. 42. 6, 42. 9) faithfully reproduces what he says. Klotz's theory is therefore to be rejected. P.'s source will be most likely Silenus, modified by information from Laelius and Scipio; but though conclusive evidence is lacking, he may well have made use of Fabius too, for a Roman source could have obtained information on Mago's dispositions (12. 2–3) from Mago himself when a prisoner at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> (cf. 19. 8) perhaps more easily than Silenus in the camp of Hannibal. Livy's account will go back ultimately to P., probably through Coelius; but he gives information not in P. which is not always due to elaboration (e.g. xxvi. 42. 5, 43. 1, and 44. 10 on the part played by the fleet) and may have been added by Coelius from elsewhere. </p> <p rend="Plain Text">With all these sources to draw on P. will hardly have described a purely imaginary ebb. On the other hand, some of the difficulties which it creates and which have been mentioned above are perhaps less serious than they seem. If the ebb was due to wind action (and this is on the whole more likely, despite P.'s use of <w lang="el-GR">ἄμπωτις</w>, 14. 2 and 14. 7) the risk that it might not occur on the day in question could be very considerably reduced if Scipio had his local informants with him to confirm that weather conditions made its occurrence reasonably certain. Moreover, the morning attack was probably designed to exhaust the enemy (as P. indicates, 12. 7) rather than to capture the city by direct assault. As attacker Scipio had the initiative and could contrive the time-table of the operation; and if things went especially well, it was always possible to send the wading-party across the lagoon even before the ebb, since, as Scullard observes (Scip. 80–81), it was fordable without it (8. 7). Scipio was counting on using the ebb; but he was not wholly dependent on it for the success of his strategy.</p> <p rend="Plain Text"> There is then no good reason to doubt P.'s assertion that an ebb took place at the critical moment and that its appearance was foreseen well in advance and counted on by Scipio as part of his plan; for in view of the fact that P. had access to Scipio's own account of the attack and that he assures his readers (9. 3) that this account confirms his own version of Scipio's calculations, the fall in the level of the water can scarcely be regarded as an act of Tyche on which he was not primarily relying. However, some difficulties still remain unexplained. In particular, P.'s statement that on the previous day Scipio promised his men Neptune's help has been regarded as hardly credible; and it has even been suggested that when Livy (xxvi. 45. 9) makes Scipio refer to Neptune's guidance in a speech delivered just as the attack is about tobe launched, this order of events is the right one, and P. has transposed Scipio's speech to the earlier position to support his picture of Scipio's unscrupulous rationalism (Scullard, Scip. 81–82). On this hypothesis what were originally mere words of <milestone unit="page" n="194">[194]</milestone> encouragement to the men about to cross the lagoon have been twisted into a prophetic claim to supernatural help. </p> <p rend="Plain Text">Such a view would carry serious implications for P.'s integrity as a historian. But if the speech was movedand one must accept the view that it is taken from P.'s original source, not invented (cf. Vol. I, pp. 13–14)then surely it is Livy (or his immediate source) who has moved it for rhetorical effect, along with the reference to the information given by Tarraconese fishermen, which now comes in awkwardly in this context (cf. Meyer, Kl. Schr. ii. 450 n.). Delivered at the very moment of the attack, the speech is more rhetorically effective than it would be delivered the previous day (as in P.); cf. Klotz, Appians Darstellung, 74: 'wenn Livius diese Tatsache in die sptere Erzhlung einfgt, so tut er dies aus knstlerischen Rcksichten' (though for 'er' read perhaps 'er selbst oder seine Quelle'). In fact, the reference to Poseidon the previous day is perfectly credible if the risk of the prophecy's not being fulfilled is only very slight; and this was so. For even if it proved necessary to send the men across the lagoon before the ebb occurred, this manoeuvre could without too much difficulty have been attributed to Neptune. In any case, in the moment of victory no one was going to ask too many questions about Scipio's promise; an epiphany could always be conveniently reported from some other part of the field, and in the last resort only the successful prophecies are remembered.</p> <p rend="Plain Text"> By saying that Neptune would give his help, when he was in fact proposing to use the ebb water to cross the lagoon Scipio lies open to a charge of using religious terminology to deceive. Reluctance to believe this has been due to a reluctance to follow P. in his characterization of Scipio as a man who cynically exploited religion to gain his ends; and it has been pointed out that the other story recounted to support this thesis, viz. that of Scipio's election to the aedileship, must be rejected for the reasons given below (4. 1–5. 8 n.), and that there is little evidence from the rest of Scipio's career as P. describes it (Haywood, 33–34). The origins of P.'s interpretation have been much debated. Ed. Meyer argued that it went back to C. Laelius, whom he took to be a Stoic rationalist (Kl. Schr. ii. 423–57 = S.-B. Berlin, 1916, 1068–85); but, as Laqueur has shown (Hermes, 1921, 151 ff.), rationalism was no part of Stoic doctrine before Panaetius, and there in no evidence that Laelius was either a Stoic or a rationalist. Scullard (Scip. 12) therefore seems to be right when he claims P.'s rationalism as his own, not that of Laelius. P. approves Scipio's supposed policy of attributing his achievements to the gods in order to impress the masses, just as he expresses his willingness to allow false stories of miracles in order to instil piety into the populace (xvi. 12. 9). His picture of Scipio is his answer to the 'legend' which in some form must already have existed when he wrote and which <milestone unit="page" n="195">[195]</milestone> probably appeared in his main source, whether Silenus or not; for discussion of the development of the 'legend' see below, 2. 3 n. </p> <p rend="Plain Text">This does not however mean that Scipio's speech at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> is to be rejected as part of the 'legend'. Even if P. drew largely on Silenus, he had access to Scipio's letter (9. 3) and Laelius' recollections. It has been argued that Laelius did not fully understand P.'s questions (Haywood, 35–38) and indeed the two men may have made quite different assumptions about religious matters. But unless we are to dismiss Laelius as a dotard, we must surely assume that he confirmed Silenus' account that the men were promised Neptune's help and that in the ebb the next day this 'prophency' was fulfilled. However, Scipio was not necessarily the rationalist that P. describes. De Sanctis (Riv. fil. 1936, 192–3) argues that the existence of the 'legend' implies that Scipio believed in it. This is surely going much too far. On the other hand, Scipio may well have made the 'prophecy' attributed to him at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> and yet have believed sincerely in the gods; he may even have taken the existence of the ebb as a sign that Neptune was favouring his enterprise. Scullard (Scip. 19) regards the 'legend' as a proof of Scipio's genius: 'a pure rationalist or a smaller man would never have gained such a romantic halo'. Scipio was certainly a great man, and he can hardly have been a rationalist of the Polybian stamp. He was probably religious as Romans of that age understood religious orthodoxy; but, as Haywood (44) points out, even extreme piety is not identical with mysticism, and there seems to be no reliable evidence that Scipio believed himself to be divinely inspired or thought that he could count on divine help to a greater extent or more regularly than anyone else who observed true piety. See for discussion of the problems touched on above: Kahrstedt, iii. 502–11; Ed. Meyer, Kl. Schr. ii. 423–57; Laqueur, Hermes, 1921, 131–225; Scullard, Scip. 6–19, 56–99; R. M. Haywood, 9–44; De Sanctis, Riv. fil. 1936, 189–93; H. Bengtson, HZ, 168, 1943, 487–508; F. W. Walbank, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc., 1966–7.</p>
10.9.8 - 10.10.13
<p rend="Plain Text"> Description of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a>. For similar insistence on geographical details see iii. 36–38, v. 21. 3–9; they are equally important for the general, cf. ix. 13. 8. In 11. 4, correcting the figure of 40 stades given as the perimeter of the city, P. says that he has seen it himself. If he accompanied Scipio to <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Spain&groupId=983&placeId=1735">Spain</a> in 151 (cf. Vol. I, p. 4 n. 10) he may have visited it then; he certainly need not have waited until 133, when some scholars believe he was at the siege <milestone unit="page" n="205">[205]</milestone> <figure> <graphic url="10001.gif" scale="100%" /> </figure> </p> <p rend="Plain Text">7. NEW CARTHAGE. (Based on Scullard, Scipio Africanus in the Second Punic War, 290)</p> <p rend="Plain Text"> of Numantia (Vol. I, p. 6 n. 3; below, 11. 4 n.). But he probably composed his account of the capture of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> before 151 (iii. 1–5 n., § 1), and it is not to be assumed that the whole description of the topography depends on P.'s autopsy. He does not claim that for more than the single point of the length of the walls; and it is relevant that his account of Hannibal's crossing of the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Alps&groupId=313&placeId=609">Alps</a> (iii. 49. 5–56. 4) depends on a literary source, despite a similar claim to have 'seen for himself' (iii. 48. 12). The false orientation first observed by Droysen (Rh. Mus. 1875, 62 ff.) may be due to P. or may go back to his source; for discussion of his suggested explanation see below, 10. 5 n. Without adequate maps errors of orientation are easily made; and despite his emphasis on directions (cf. v. 21. 8) P. goes wrong <milestone unit="page" n="206">[206]</milestone> elsewhere (cf. iii. 47. 2–5 n., on the Rhne). Modern scholars are not without fault here; cf. Vol. I, p. 530 for a map of Alipheira in which Leake's original orientation had to be corrected from Frazer. The particular topographical points are discussed in the relevant notes. For general discussion see Droysen, Rh. Mus. 1875, 62 ff.; StrachanDavidson, 629–41 (with map); Hbner, RE, 'Carthago nova', cols. 1621–4 (unconvincing); Cuntz, 8–20 (with map); Kahrstedt, AA, 1912, 225–35; Geschichte der Karthager, iii. 509 n. 2; Brewitz, 47–53; R. Laqueur, Hermes, 1921, 170–80 (based on his 'layers of composition' theory); M. F.-V. Canovas, Estudios geogrficos-histricos de Cartagena desde los tiempos prehistricos hasta la expulsin de los rabes (Cartagena, 1905; non vidi); Scullard, Scip. 289–99 (with map), probably the best account; S. Witkowski, Bull. Intern. Acad. Pol. Suppl. 5, 1947, 1–12; A. Beltran, Arch. esp. de arq. 1948, 191–224, 'Topografa di Carthago noua'. </p>
Specifics
10.10.1 - 10.10.1
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἐν κόλπῳ νεύοντι πρὸς ἄνεμον λίβα</w>:</emph> P. correctly describes the gulf at the head of which Cartagena lies as facing south-west, or more strictly south-south-west (Cuntz, 12); but his dimensions are too great. If the entrance is measured from Punta de la Podedera, the southern point of the peninsula of Fort las Galeras, to Punta de S. Ana, west of Fuerte San. Julian, it measures only 960 m.; and from this line northwards to the ancient coastline north of the present-day Arsenal Harbour comes to only 2,500 m. (Cuntz, 12–13). StrachanDavidson, 316, measures from Punta de la Podedera to Punta de Gat, further south, to get a figure comparable with P.'s; but he admits that 'the inner line from Navidad Point [north of Punta de la Podedera] straight across (3stades = 670 m.) is more truly the mouth of the harbour'. From the line taken from Punta de la Navidad across to the innermost part of the gulf is about 12 stades, from Punta de Gat about 20 (Strachan-Davidson, ibid.). See, for most of these measurements, Baedeker, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Spain&groupId=983&placeId=1735">Spain</a> and Portugal <emph rend="superscript">4</emph> , Leipzig, 1913, map facing p. 319. </p>
10.10.2 - 10.10.2
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">νῆσος ἐπὶ τοῦ στόματος . . . κεῖται</w>:</emph> the island of Escombrera (cf. Strabo, iii. 159) lies at the entrance to the Gulf of Cartagena, at a point at which the distance across is not 10 stades (2 km.) but 18 stades (3. 5 km.); and since it is only 450 m. long, it comes nowhere near closing the entrance (Strachan-Davidson, 316). StrachanDavidson, who believes P.'s account to be based on his own observations, has discovered a point just off the quay by the Town Hall, from which the island seems to block the entrance to the gulf; but there is no reason to think P. was ever at this point in a boat. The errors are probably those of his source. </p>
10.10.5 - 10.10.5
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">περιεχομένην θαλάττῃ μὲν ἀπ᾿ ἀνατολῶν καὶ μεσημβρίας</w>:</emph> sea surrounded the peninsula on which the city stood to the south and west <milestone unit="page" n="207">[207]</milestone> (not east and south, as P. states). Droysen (Rh. Mus. 1875, 62 ff.) suggested that P. sketched the site on the spot and later put in the compass bearings inaccurately from memory (making east north and so on); but Strachan-Davidson (839–41) points out that this hypothesis does not wholly explain P.'s account of the hills (below, §§ 7–11), which suggests that he has all his bearings 45 out in a clockwise direction, so that his north is the real north-east and so on (see Strachan-Davidson's map with the adjusted directions), an error not excessive, especially if he was calculating north from the polestar, which in his time was 12 east of true north. On this hypothesis, P. is here referring to the water of the harbour lying to the south and south-west (P.'s south), which came round further to the southeast (P.'s east) than it does now. However, Cuntz has some valid objections (10 ff.) to P.'s account, even accepting this hypothesis; and he may be right in suggesting that P. is following an earlier source. </p> <p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δύσεων λίμνῃ</w>:</emph> the lagoon 'to the west and extending to the north' will have occupied the site of the modern marshy plain of Almajar, to the north of the city. Its full extent can only be guessed at, but in the west it probably stopped short of Ramblar de Benipila, a waterway now running into the Canal de Algumeca, which drains the Almajar, and in the east it extended beyond the town proper and even beyond the line of the Castillo de los Moros (see Scullard's map, Scip. 290, correcting Strachan-Davidson). Here 'west' and 'north' can be corrected satisfactorily to 'north' and 'east'. </p>
10.10.6 - 10.10.6
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τὸν λοιπὸν τόπον . . . μὴ πλέον ὑπάρχειν ἢ δυεῖν σταδίων</w>:</emph> the isthmus lay to the east of the town between the sea and the lagoon. It probably ran from a point east of Monte San. Jos to include the railway station on the north, and on the south along a line southwest from the modern barracks (see maps in Scullard or StrachanDavidson); and it included the Castillo de los Moros. The northern and southern limits of the isthmus are located further south by Kahrstedt (AA, 1912, 217–18); see, against this, Scullard, Scip. 297. P.'s width (approximately 2 stades = 400 yds.) is about correct. </p>
10.10.7 - 10.10.7
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἡ δὲ πόλις . . . μεσόκοιλός ἐστι</w>:</emph> it has hills all round (cf. §§ 7–11). </p> <p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">κατὰ δὲ τὴν ἀπὸ μεσημβρίας πλευρὰν ἐπίπεδον ἔχει . . . πρόσοδον</w>:</emph> the side between the cathedral and the Puerta de la Murcia, where the land now stretches considerably further west towards the Arsenal Harbour; there are no hills along this part of the coastline. This line (running in reality south-south-east to north-north-west, and facing west-south-west (not south), can be regarded as the 'south side', either on Strachan-Davidson's hypothesis or on Droysen's (cf. § 5 n.). </p>
10.10.8 - 10.10.8
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ὁ . . . μέγιστος ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνατολῆς</w>:</emph> as Droysen saw (Rh. Mus. 1875, <milestone unit="page" n="208">[208]</milestone> 65), Monte Concepcin, the hill on the south side of the town lying between the cathedral and the military hospital, and crowned by the ruins of a medieval castle. It extends further from west to east than Strachan-Davidson's map shows (see Cuntz, 11 n. 1, and Scullard's map) and it is 201 ft. high. P.'s description of it as lying to the east fits Droysen's hypothesis a little better than Strachan-Davidson's. </p> <p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">νεὼς Ἀσκληπιοῦ</w>:</emph> probably Eshmoun (cf. vii. 9. 2 n., discussing 'Iolaus'), who is usually equated with Asclepios; cf. Gsell, iv. 315 n. 4; Winckler, i. 445; W. W. Baudissin, Orientalische Studien Theodor Nöldeke . . . zum 70-ten Geburtstag gewidmet (Giessen, 1906), 729–55. </p>
10.10.9 - 10.10.9
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ὁ ἀπὸ τῆς δύσεως ἀντίκειται</w>:</emph> the second of P.'s larger hills (§ 7, <w lang="el-GR">ὀρεινοῖς καὶ τράχεσιν)</w> will be Monte Molinete, 123 ft. above sea-level. Against Kahrstedt's attempt (AA, 1912, 230–2) to identify it with Monte Sacco, which in fact lies opposite Monte Concepcin, to the north of the city, see Scullard, Scip. 296–7. P.'s location of this hill in the west can be reconciled with the true orientation on StrachanDavidson's hypothesis, but not on Droysen's, for if the hill containing the temple of Asclepios was on the east side, Monte Molinete should lie to the south, not the west; see Cuntz, 10. </p> <p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">μοναρχικῆς ὀρεγόμενον ἐξουσίας</w>:</emph> P. gives no hint of such an ambibition in Hasdrubal in ii. 13 and 36; it may derive from Fabius' account (cf. iii. 8. 2, <w lang="el-GR">ἐπιβαλέσθαι . . . εἰς μοναρχίαν περιστῆσαι τὸ πολίτευμα τῶν Καρχηδονίων)</w> if Fabius is the source here. See further Meltzer, ii. 594 n. 58. </p>
10.10.10 - 10.10.10
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">αἱ . . . λοιπαὶ τρεῖς τῶν . . . βουνῶν</w>:</emph> the three remaining hills from west to east are Monte Sacro, Monte San. Jos, and Castillo de Despea Perros, and can be identified with the hills of Cronos, Aletes, and Hephaestus respectively. On the assumption of a 45 deviation, they can be said to lie in the north part of the city; in reality the first two are in the north and the Castillo de Despea Perros in the east. On the assumption of a 90 deviation Monte Sacro is on the west side. Kahrstedt (AA, 1912, 230–2) identifies Monte San. Jos with Cronos, Castillo de Despea Perros with Aletes, and for Hephaestus he argues in favour of a hill where the Plaza de <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Toros&groupId=1040&placeId=1832">Toros</a> stands and the Roman amphitheatre stood, to the eastern end of Monte Concepcin; but Scullard (Scip. 295–6) argues cogently that the eminence in this area is merely part of the long Concepcin hill, the intervening depression (Calle de Gisbert) being either modern or deepened in modern times. Hence, although Kahrstedt's identifications remove many of the difficulties (since Monte Sacro, Kahrstedt's arx Hasdrubalis, lies to the north (P.'s west) and San. Jos, Castillo de Despea Perros, and the site of the bull-ring all lie to the east (P.'s north)), his treatment of Monte Molinete, which is scarcely to be eliminated as a mons testaceus, and of the bull-ring area, which <milestone unit="page" n="209">[209]</milestone> is scarcely to be turned into a separate hill, is so violent that the traditional identifications seem preferable. </p>
10.10.11 - 10.10.11
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Ἡφαίστου . . . Ἀλήτου . . . Κρόνου</w>:</emph> <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> was a Punic foundation (ii. 13. 1), and the place-names referring to gods may originally have been Punic (cf. 8 n.), unless they represent native deities assimilated to Carthaginian. Cicero (de nat. deor. i. 84) records that a god equated with Hephaestus was worshipped in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Spain&groupId=983&placeId=1735">Spain</a>, and comments on the difference between the Italian Vulcan and the Spanish. He may be the god equipped with a conical hat and pincers on coins of Malaca, a Phoenician colony (cf. A. Heiss, Description gnrale des monnaies antiques de l'Espagne, Paris, 1870, pl. xlv). Herodotus (iii. 37) knows of prophylactic figures called <w lang="el-GR">Πάταικοι</w>, which the Phoenicians set on the prows of their ships, resembling the Hephaestus of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Memphis&groupId=752&placeId=1371">Memphis</a>. This Hephaestus was equated with Ptah, and it has been suggested that Ptah was adopted in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Phoenicia&groupId=894&placeId=464">Phoenicia</a>, and there identified with Kousor (cf. vii. 9. 2 n. discussing 'Ares, Triton and Poseidon'; Gsell, iv. 344 n. 4). Philo of Byblus (FGH, 790 F 2, § 11) identifies <w lang="el-GR">Χουσώρ</w> (MS. <w lang="el-GR">Χρυσώρ)</w> with Hephaestus. That Kousor is the Phoenician god worshipped here (whether or no he replaced an earlier Spanish god) seems probable (Gsell, iv. 344 n. 7). </p> <p rend="Plain Text">Aletes is probably a local divinity, for Aletus and Aletea are fairly common Iberian names (cf. Hbner, RE, 'Carthago nova', col. 1623); that he was originally a man and the discoverer of the silver-mines may be either an Iberian or a Punic belief, but would be a concept familiar to P. (cf. xxxiv. 2. 5 ff. on Aeolus). See Gsell, iv. 466. Pdech, Revue de l'histoire des religions, 1964, 44, suggests that Aletes was a local divinity, whom P. interprets as a man receiving divine honours in the Hellenistic manner.</p> <p rend="Plain Text">Cronos or Saturnus is the usual equivalent of Baal Hammon (cf. vii. 9. 2 n. discussing 'Zeus, Hera and Apollo'; Gsell, iv. 288–90 with 290 n. 3), and may well be the Baal indicated here; the same god gave his name to C. Palos, the promontory of Saturn (Pliny, Nat. hist. iii. 19).</p>
10.10.12 - 10.10.12
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τὴν λίμνην . . . σύρρουν . . . χειροποιήτως</w>:</emph> the artificial canal joining the lagoon with the sea must have lain to the west of the city; against Hbner's attempt (RE, 'Carthago nova', col. 1622) to locate it to the east see Strachan-Davidson, 317, who observes that the isthmus described in § 6 is 'of solid rock and at least 30 ft. above sea level'; cf. Cuntz, 14; Scullard, Scip. 293–4, who drawing on the work of Canovas, describes its exact position. It ran from the eastern end of the Artillery Park, past a hill since levelled, but formerly standing on the site of part of this park to the west of the canal, and from here followed the line of the modern Calle de Santa Florentina in a southwesterly direction until this opened out into the sea in the neighbourhood of the north-west corner of the Arsenal Harbour (see Scullard's <milestone unit="page" n="210">[210]</milestone> sketch-map, Scip. 290). According to Canovas (Scullard, Scip. 294), the sea and lagoon were still linked in the sixteenth century, and a bridge at the Puerta de Murcia was repaired in 1600–2. </p>
10.10.13 - 10.10.13
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">γέφυρα κατεσκεύασται</w>:</emph> probably on the site of that mentioned in the last note; but that referred to by Strachan-Davidson (631) as Roman has proved to be medieval (Scullard, Scip. 293). The general layout resembles Tarentum (cf. viii. 34. 3 n.), where, however, the inner water is still a branch of the sea. </p>
Addenda & corrigenda
10.9.8 - 10.10.13
<p rend="Plain Text"> <emph rend="bold">:</emph> l. 4 of the note, for 'say' read 'says'. </p>

Commentary