Coastal highlands, the sea and dissident behaviour on the margins of society

IF 1.4 1区 历史学 0 ARCHAEOLOGY Archaeological Dialogues Pub Date : 2019-06-01 DOI:10.1017/S1380203819000035
N. Rauh
{"title":"Coastal highlands, the sea and dissident behaviour on the margins of society","authors":"N. Rauh","doi":"10.1017/S1380203819000035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"King’s thought-provoking paper raises a number of important issues regarding the archaeological record of banditry and rebellion. I will focus my remarks on a particular aspect of the challenges raised by the paper, namely the matter of topography and how close familiarity with it enabled renegades to engage in ‘asymmetrical’ forms of resistance against colonial powers. In King’s discussion, she focused on the reliance by South African herders on habitual refuges in the Maloti– Drakensberg highlands to evade the imposition of sedentary lifestyles by British authorities. In my research a similar dynamic concerns a reliance on the rugged coast of Rough Cilicia by the so-called Cilician pirates to resist Roman hegemony in the Mediterranean world between 139 and 67 B.C. Parallels between the two landscapes are evident, as are the highly mobile lifeways of the rebels in each instance. One of the more challenging questions for the Cilician example, however, concerns the precise role played by agropastoralists of the Cilician mainland in piratical disturbances along the coast. Were the pirates and the Cilician natives one and the same people, or did they represent a merger of interests between two wholly unrelated yet mutually supportive groups? Much like the Maloti–Drakensberg highlands, the rugged, 200-kilometre-long coast of Rough Cilicia (south coastal Turkey directly north of Cyprus) offered limited capacity for agricultural settlement. The shore rises from sea level to 2,000 metres elevation in less than 30 kilometres, with long stretches of the shore forming prohibitive walls of inaccessible coastline. Prior to the Roman era (67 B.C.–250 A.D.) the principal lifeway in Rough Cilicia consisted of transhumant agropastoralism. Remains of necropolis centers in the ‘midlands’ (c.500–900 metres elevation) indicate that tribal entities drove their herds into the highland meadows (c.1,500 metres elevation) during summer and returned them to the shore for slaughter, processing and winter grazing (Matei, Kansa and Rauh 2011). During their time in the highlands the animals would obtain four times the nutrients otherwise available on their trek. These midland ritual centres occupied a halfway point along the arduous route that was traversed twice a year and became logical places for herders to settle the sick and the infirm (Frachetti 2009). Confirmation of this pattern is available not only from the consistent placement of these ritual centres along the midlands, but also from an otherwise visible lack of permanent stone structures throughout the region prior to the conquest of Alexander the Great (c.333 B.C.). From the perspective of built landscapes, the most dominant influence was the Ptolemies of Egypt and Cyprus, who governed this rugged coast from c.301 to 197 B.C., securing the shore with stone-constructed fortresses and signal towers (the largest being the fortress at Korakesion – modern-day Alanya – constructed by Ptolemy I, c.309 B.C.; Rauh, Dillon and Rothaus 2013). Settlements which did exist at this time, such as Korakesion, were small, and often little more than moorages furnished by projecting promontories, natural embayments or lagunal river mouths. It needs to be stressed that the nature of ancient Mediterranean seaborne commerce, nonetheless, required negotiating this prohibitive coastline. Although ancient cargo ships were suitably capable of plying the open seas of the Mediterranean, the requirements","PeriodicalId":45009,"journal":{"name":"Archaeological Dialogues","volume":"26 1","pages":"45 - 50"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S1380203819000035","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeological Dialogues","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1380203819000035","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

King’s thought-provoking paper raises a number of important issues regarding the archaeological record of banditry and rebellion. I will focus my remarks on a particular aspect of the challenges raised by the paper, namely the matter of topography and how close familiarity with it enabled renegades to engage in ‘asymmetrical’ forms of resistance against colonial powers. In King’s discussion, she focused on the reliance by South African herders on habitual refuges in the Maloti– Drakensberg highlands to evade the imposition of sedentary lifestyles by British authorities. In my research a similar dynamic concerns a reliance on the rugged coast of Rough Cilicia by the so-called Cilician pirates to resist Roman hegemony in the Mediterranean world between 139 and 67 B.C. Parallels between the two landscapes are evident, as are the highly mobile lifeways of the rebels in each instance. One of the more challenging questions for the Cilician example, however, concerns the precise role played by agropastoralists of the Cilician mainland in piratical disturbances along the coast. Were the pirates and the Cilician natives one and the same people, or did they represent a merger of interests between two wholly unrelated yet mutually supportive groups? Much like the Maloti–Drakensberg highlands, the rugged, 200-kilometre-long coast of Rough Cilicia (south coastal Turkey directly north of Cyprus) offered limited capacity for agricultural settlement. The shore rises from sea level to 2,000 metres elevation in less than 30 kilometres, with long stretches of the shore forming prohibitive walls of inaccessible coastline. Prior to the Roman era (67 B.C.–250 A.D.) the principal lifeway in Rough Cilicia consisted of transhumant agropastoralism. Remains of necropolis centers in the ‘midlands’ (c.500–900 metres elevation) indicate that tribal entities drove their herds into the highland meadows (c.1,500 metres elevation) during summer and returned them to the shore for slaughter, processing and winter grazing (Matei, Kansa and Rauh 2011). During their time in the highlands the animals would obtain four times the nutrients otherwise available on their trek. These midland ritual centres occupied a halfway point along the arduous route that was traversed twice a year and became logical places for herders to settle the sick and the infirm (Frachetti 2009). Confirmation of this pattern is available not only from the consistent placement of these ritual centres along the midlands, but also from an otherwise visible lack of permanent stone structures throughout the region prior to the conquest of Alexander the Great (c.333 B.C.). From the perspective of built landscapes, the most dominant influence was the Ptolemies of Egypt and Cyprus, who governed this rugged coast from c.301 to 197 B.C., securing the shore with stone-constructed fortresses and signal towers (the largest being the fortress at Korakesion – modern-day Alanya – constructed by Ptolemy I, c.309 B.C.; Rauh, Dillon and Rothaus 2013). Settlements which did exist at this time, such as Korakesion, were small, and often little more than moorages furnished by projecting promontories, natural embayments or lagunal river mouths. It needs to be stressed that the nature of ancient Mediterranean seaborne commerce, nonetheless, required negotiating this prohibitive coastline. Although ancient cargo ships were suitably capable of plying the open seas of the Mediterranean, the requirements
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
沿海高地、海洋和社会边缘的异见行为
金的这篇发人深省的论文提出了一些关于土匪和叛乱的考古记录的重要问题。我将把我的评论集中在论文提出的挑战的一个特定方面,即地形问题,以及对地形的密切熟悉如何使叛徒能够以“不对称”的形式抵抗殖民列强。在金的讨论中,她集中讨论了南非牧民对马洛蒂-德拉肯斯堡高地习惯性避难所的依赖,以逃避英国当局强加的久坐不动的生活方式。在我的研究中,在公元前139年至公元前67年之间,所谓的西里西亚海盗依靠崎岖的糙西里西亚海岸来抵抗罗马在地中海世界的霸权,这两种景观之间的相似之处是显而易见的,就像每个例子中叛军高度流动的生活方式一样。然而,对于西利西亚的例子,一个更具挑战性的问题是,西利西亚大陆的农牧民在沿海海盗骚乱中所扮演的确切角色。海盗和西利西亚土著人是同一个人吗,还是他们代表了两个完全不相关但相互支持的群体之间的利益合并?就像马洛蒂-德拉肯斯堡高地一样,粗糙的基利西亚(土耳其南部海岸,塞浦路斯正北)200公里长的崎岖海岸提供了有限的农业定居能力。在不到30公里的时间里,海岸从海平面上升到海拔2000米,长长的海岸形成了难以接近的海岸线。在罗马时代之前(公元前67年-公元250年),基利西亚地区的主要生活方式是农牧业。“中部地区”(海拔500 - 900米)墓地中心的遗迹表明,部落实体在夏季将他们的牛群赶到高地草地(海拔1500米),并将它们送回岸上屠宰、加工和冬季放牧(Matei, Kansa和Rauh 2011)。在高原上,动物们获得的营养是在长途跋涉中获得的营养的四倍。这些中部地区的仪式中心占据了每年两次穿越的艰难路线的中点,成为牧民安置病人和体弱者的合理场所(Frachetti 2009)。这种模式不仅可以从这些仪式中心沿中部地区的一致位置得到证实,而且在亚历山大大帝征服之前(c.333),整个地区都明显缺乏永久性的石头结构公元前)。从建筑景观的角度来看,最主要的影响是埃及和塞浦路斯的托勒密王朝,他们从公元前301年到公元前197年统治着这片崎岖的海岸,用石头建造的堡垒和信号塔(最大的是在Korakesion的堡垒-现代阿拉尼亚-由托勒密一世于公元前309年建造)来保护海岸公元前;Rauh, Dillon and Rothaus 2013)。当时确实存在的定居点,如Korakesion,都很小,通常只不过是由凸出的海角、天然河口或泻湖河口提供的系泊。需要强调的是,尽管如此,古代地中海海上贸易的性质要求谈判这条令人望而却步的海岸线。虽然古代的货船有能力在地中海的公海上航行,但要求
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Archaeology is undergoing rapid changes in terms of its conceptual framework and its place in contemporary society. In this challenging intellectual climate, Archaeological Dialogues has become one of the leading journals for debating innovative issues in archaeology. Firmly rooted in European archaeology, it now serves the international academic community for discussing the theories and practices of archaeology today. True to its name, debate takes a central place in Archaeological Dialogues.
期刊最新文献
How far does culture go? A study on creative object biographies. Can creative arts be a medium for understanding object–human interaction? Narratives of inequality. Towards an archaeology of structural violence in Late Iron Age Scandinavia Finding the fun: Towards a playful archaeology Archaeologists just wanna have fun
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1