תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

Art. III.—1. Recherches sur l'Emplacement de Carthage. Par

C. T. FALBE, Capitaine de Vaisseau et Consul-Général de

Danemarck. Paris : 1833. 2. Recherches sur la Topographie de Carthage. Par M. DUREAU

DE LA MALLE, Membre de l'Institut. Paris : 1835. 3. Fouilles à Carthage. Aux frais et sous la direction de M.

BEULÉ, Membre de l'Institut. Paris : 1861. . 4. Carthage and her Remains ; being an Account of the Excava

tions and Researches on the Site of the Phænician Metropolis in Africa and other adjacent places. Conducted under the auspices of Her Majesty's Government. By Dr. N. Davis, F.R.G.S., &c. London: 1861. 5. On recent Excavations and Discoveries on the Site of ancient

Carthage. Communicated to the Society of Antiquaries, by AUGUSTUS W. FRANKS, Esq., M.A., Director. We are told that the Emperor Claudius, whose great ambition

E

it was to obtain a reputation as a writer of history, composed a work on Carthage in eight books; and to give it every chance of surviving to later ages, he built a new lecturehall adjoining the Museum at Alexandria, and provided an endowment for having it publicly read every year. Unfortunately for the gratification of the author's wish, he fell upon times in which the world was moving too fast to allow 'attention to be wasted upon a work composed in the spirit of an antiquary; and in spite of the illustrious position of the writer, there is every reason to suppose that the Claudian Readers of Pupic * History' soon found themselves in possession of a sinecure. To the best of our belief, there is only one allusion -- and that by no means of a complimentary character — to these worthies

in subsequent times, and none whatever to the unfortunate book they were paid to recite. Appian, who when a boy had an annual opportunity of listening to it, altogether ignores its existence, although he writes at a period when the new era of prosperity which the cities of North Africa, and especially Carthage, were beginning to enjoy under the auspices of Hadrian and his successor, must have excited more than common interest in their early history.

But it would seem that with nations, as with individuals, a spiritual vitality is the only security against oblivion. Modern Europe can feel a human interest in the doings of Romans, and

VOL, CXIV. NO. CCXXXI.

[ocr errors]

Greeks, and Jews, though separated from them by millenniums; for it recognises in them the sources of law, of science, and of religion; but the feeling awakened by the discoveries of Assyrian and Egyptian antiquity rather resembles that with which we listen to the comparative anatomist as he expounds the organisation of a mastodon or sea-lizard. All is marvellous, but too unlike our own day for us to do more than wonder. We can as little picture to ourselves the hopes and fears and daily interests of the court of Memphis, or of the population which reared the temple of Belus, as we can imagine an existence among woods of tree-ferns filled with browsing iguanodons.

Carthage occupies in the scale of human interest a sort of middle place between the gigantic despotisms of Mesopotamia and Egypt, and the active political organisations of the Hellenic and Italian peninsulas, from which modern civilisation has been inherited. But it is remarkable that even this middle place has been won only by contact (albeit a hostile one) with the latter. Rome destroyed her rival, but in that destruction immortalised her. Carthage exists for us embalmed in the Æneid and the third decade of Livy. The beautiful romance into which the genius of Virgil has worked up the rude material furnished by the local myths of Africa and Italy, has made Dido the type of female confidence betrayed; while the scarcely less poetic narrative of Livy has taught the youthful student to see in Carthage only the country that produced a Hannibal. It is almost painful to strip off the veil with which a foreign literature enveloped the dead corpse, and discover the foul features

the superstition, the cruelty, the blind faction -- which disfigured the living body.

The first historical fact which throws any important light upon the political relations of Carthage is the treaty with Rome and some of the other Italian cities, preserved by Polybius. This curious document dates from the year after the expulsion of the Tarquins. It speaks of the members of a federation on both sides, and is curiously illustrative of the semi-piratical character of commercial enterprise in those early times, as well as of the jealous care which watched over the monopoly of a lucrative traffic. The Romans and their allies

which consist of the Latin towns lying on the Italian seaboard as far south as Terracina—are prohibited from navigating beyond the “Fair Point,' a designation which in later times was appropriated to Cape Zebib, although it may be questioned whether in the treaty so strict an interpretation was contemplated. The only exception allowed was the case of compulsion

a

either by stress of weather or hostile force. In this event, no traffic was allowed to take place with the shore, except for the purpose of obtaining victims to sacrifice, and of repairing damage occasioned by storms; and in any case the intruder was only allowed three clear days of intercourse with the natives. Roman merchants who came for the

purpose

of traffic : to those parts of Sicily which were under Carthaginian control,

were to be allowed to trade on the same terms as Carthaginians, but in Sardinia or Africa this was not the case. All sales there had to be made in the presence of a public functionary; and the payment of the value of the merchandise was publicly guaranteed. This arrangement appears to indicate a kind of traffic by guilds of merchants, such as was commonly practised throughout Europe in the middle ages, and prevails at this day in many parts of central Africa. It implies a very imperfect civilisation, and a want of power to enforce the performance of contracts between individuals, which necessitates the united action of a trading company. There are not wanting reasons for believing that a similar system prevailed with regard to the early Greek commerce in Egypt; and until very recently the same principle regulated the traffic between Russia and China at Kiakhta and Maimachin. The last provision in the treaty is perhaps, of all, the most worthy of note, from the indication it affords of the habitual practice of buccaneering on the part of the great commercial republic. The Carthaginians were forbidden to commit any injury upon the Latin cities which owned the Roman supremacy; but with regard to the others, the only way in which Roman jealousy exhibited itself was in an anxiety to prevent their rivals from obtaining a footing in the country under any pretext. Those who landed to pillage were not to capture towns, or, if they captured them, were to give them up to the Romans. The buccaneers were not to pass the night on shore; and, above all, no stronghold was to be erected on the soil. In a second treaty made a little more than a century later, the same principles of policy are even more distinctly manifest, while at the same time the extension of the Carthaginian power is exhibited, and apparently also the growth of popular influence on the internal administration of the government.

It is worth while to pause for a moment to give a glance on the condition of the civilised world at this time. Rome, her future career undreamed of, was anxiously struggling against the hordes of Gauls which still occupied the Alban hills, and plundered the plains of Latium. The shores of Antium, the marshy woods of Laurentium, and the mouths of the Tiber

a

resounded alternately with the war-cries of these barbarians, and of the Greek pirates who, issuing from the ports of Sicily and Southern Italy, harried the coasts of the peninsula wherever there appeared a prospect of impunity. So entirely had the original population been blotted out in some parts, that it is said on one occasion the sea-pirates on landing, encountered as adversaries their rival freebooters of the land. In Greece, the power of the Macedonian monarchy was beginning to consolidate itself amid the factions of the degenerate republics. Philip had just dismantled the towns of Phocis. The Persian empire, tottering to its fall, was in every direction giving signs of dissolution. Some of the small Asiatic commercial towns had united themselves in an independent confederacy under the auspices of Hermias of Atarna, and in this year the philosopher Aristotle crossed the seas to assist his friend in organising a government for them. For the moment, indeed, the gigantic Eastern monarchy succeeded in crushing the new forms of life springing up within its own perishing carcass; but its destiny was manifest, and only twelve years later Alexander crossed the Hellespont, and the empire of the world passed into new hands. In Sicily, a century of warfare, during which the balance of fortune continually oscillated, had to a great extent destroyed the material prosperity of the island, and proved fatal to the enterprising commercial spirit which had animated the Italian and Sicilian Greeks down to the time of Hiero, and produced results that made their wealth and luxury proverbial throughout Hellas.

Carthage in the meanwhile had been, it would appear, free from the internal dissensions which had proved fatal to Hellenic prosperity on both sides of the Adriatic. It is just at this time that the criticism of her constitution, which we read in the Political Treatise of Aristotle, must have been written. Commending the working of her institutions, which he selects together with those of Crete and Lacedæmon for special encomium, this sagacious observer remarks it as a proof of the excellence of the Carthaginian constitution, that although there is a powerful Commonalty, the form of government had remained unaltered, and neither any sedition worth speaking of taken place, nor any tyrant succeeded in establishing himself. In most of the aristocratic governments of Greece, commerce, being considered to corrupt the spirit, was prohibited for the ruling class ; ‘and yet,' says the philosopher, “in Carthage, although democratically governed, commerce is the ordinary rule, and

still there has been no revolution. Yet he would not deny it the character of an aristocratic republic; for wealth, and

'personal excellence, as well as the will of the people, are re'garded by the spirit of the institutions. Public opinion required that none should be chosen to the highest offices, who were not wealthy; a poor man, it was thought, could not afford to give up his whole time to the public service. This,' says the critic, is a deviation from aristocratic principles; it is oligarchal ' in its character. It makes wealth the only passport to distinc‘tion, and vulgarises the feelings of the whole people. It may

be expected, too, that they who thus in a manner buy their offices, will be quite as much tempted to malversation in office, as a poor man selected only on the strength of his character.' In England we can certainly understand the feeling of the Carthaginians, even if we acknowledge the argument of the Greek. Another oligarchal feature, too, the latter finds in the existence of a very peculiar office, the Pentarchies, which were not only self-elective, but possessed the right of selecting the Council of the Hundred, a body in which more power seems to have resided than any other. The functionaries in question appear to have been Commissioners distributed in Boards of five members, which were sent to the several colonies and subject towns, and in them represented the authority of the metropolis. The office was not paid by a salary, and the appointment was only for a time; but immediate re-election was allowed. Perhaps what appeared so anomalous to a Greek philosopher, will be intelligible enough to an ordinary Englishman who is familiar with the operations of an imperial government in relation to its colonies. The skilful management of these dependencies constituted nine-tenths of the whole policy of the great trading commonwealth of the Old World. We may conceive at least the younger members of these *Pentarchies’ to have been going through their apprenticeship as Carthaginian statesmen,- just as the unpaid attachés of our own embassies, or the private secretaries to eminent public men, do at the present day. During the discharge of their duties, they learned how the commerce of the then known worid was carried on; by what channels it reached the ports to which Carthaginian ships found access ; what were the products of this region and what the demands of that; and what alliances with native chiefs were necessary for the purpose of maintaining the monopoly of carrying and distributing. This class, therefore, almost monopolised the knowledge and administrative ability required in the traditional policy of the Commonwealth: and so completely does this principle appear to have been kept in view, that in all matters of foreign policy, if the council of the Hundred' and the Suffetes (the offi

« הקודםהמשך »