Archaeology; Civilization, Ancient; Despotism; Greece -- History -- To 146 B.C.; Wealth
In any case we have good reason for interpreting the written texts in
the sense that the Milesians’ Fort made way for the Greek Naukratis
during the reign of Psammetichus. This is historically important. The
Milesians’ Fort may have been a fortified trading station[616]: but it
never had the commercial importance of Naukratis. If, as we have just
seen good evidence for believing, Greek Naukratis was already a
considerable place before Psamtek’s death and owed the fact to Psamtek
himself, then there is an increased probability that Diodorus is right
when he says that Psamtek owed his throne to commercial dealings with
traders from across the sea.
[Sidenote: (δ) the Egyptian quarter, with its early temple of Aphrodite]
There are two further points in which the Naukratis excavations bear out
the texts that support this view. Hogarth has shown that South Naukratis
was the Egyptian quarter, and that it goes back probably to before King
Psamtek’s reign. We have seen too that as early as 688 B.C. the Greek
merchant Herostratos is said to have made offerings at Naukratis in the
temple of Aphrodite. There is only one spot at Naukratis that compares
with the Milesian temenos for early Greek finds, and that spot is marked
by a long series of dedications to Aphrodite[617] incised or sometimes
painted on the pottery, which includes Milesian, Naukratite, Ionian buff
and black, and other seventh and sixth century wares. The site of this
temenos has a significance that seems to have been overlooked. It lies
just on the borders[618] of the black stratum area that appears to mark
the limits of the original Egyptian town. When excavations were resumed
in 1899 there was discovered in the North part of the town a second
Aphrodite shrine forming a sort of side chapel to the real
Hellenium[619]. The earliest finds from this Northern Aphrodite shrine
date from the earlier part of the fifth century[620]. May not the
position of the earlier and more southerly shrine be due to the fact
that it was founded before the occupants of the Milesians’ Fort had
moved to Naukratis and established a Greek quarter there? In other
words, may we not see in it a confirmation of Polycharmus[621] when he
speaks of a Greek as offering an image of Aphrodite in a temple of that
goddess at Naukratis in 688 B.C.? The fact that the Aphrodite site was
not burnt is no proof that it did not form part of the earliest
settlement. The men from the Milesians’ Fort who defeated Inaros may
well have spared the Greek sanctuary when they burnt the rest.
[Sidenote: and the statuettes of the goddess found on the temple site.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account