The Great Splice

Sometimes it’s difficult to avoid concluding the historical narrative has been spliced and diced to create a desired happy ending.

Follow The Money

Trying to “follow the money” usually involves identifying the ultimate sources and/or beneficiaries associated with a series of financial transactions.

“Follow the money” is a catchphrase popularized by the 1976 drama-documentary motion picture All The President’s Men, which suggests a money trail or corruption scheme within high (often political) office.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Follow_the_money

Trying to “follow the money” in ancient times is a far more generic and haphazard exercise that presents plenty of problems:

● Identify and interpret any iconography on the coin.

● Identify and translate any text on the coin.

● Identify the entity that issued the coin.

● Identify the mint that created the coin.

● Determine the denomination of the undenominated coin.

Date the undated coin.

● Attempt to determine whether the coin is genuine or counterfeit.

The mainstream approach to resolving these problems is primarily based upon making educated guesses that conform to the consensus opinions promulgated [by the archaeological and historical experts] for the context in which a particular coin was found.

These consensus opinions create so many preposterous storylines they are simply accepted as normal [“not remarkable”] by many commentators.

It seems, however, that only two issues were actually produced by the Romans in Spain between 218 and the governorship of C. Annius in the early first century, both tiny issues of victoriati or its associated denominations.

The problem is not simply, however, that the Roman administration of Spain generated in effect no Roman coinage in Spain for over a century.

That in itself is not remarkable.

The problem is that after the end of the Second Punic War Roman silver coinage appears for all practical purposes not to have travelled to or circulated in Spain until the end of the second century, although the behaviour of Roman bronze coinage was, as we shall see, quite different.

Coinage and Money Under the Roman Republic – Michael H Crawford – 1985
https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_84_G_8q6WQcC#page/n114/mode/1up

The consensus narrative includes gaps that are smoothed over with speculation.

The only coinage which might have been used after 146 was Roman coin; how might one suppose that this arrived in Africa?

The Romans struck no coinage in Africa before the age of Caesar and it is hard to imagine the Roman provincial administration putting much coinage into circulation in normal times.

By the time we get to the first century there is no problem; coinage was officially shipped over to Africa in 111 and 110 (Sallust. BJ 27, 36. 1) and again in 82 (Plutarch, Pomp. 11); …

Coinage and Money Under the Roman Republic – Michael H Crawford – 1985
https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_84_G_8q6WQcC#page/n165/mode/1up

And the consensus narrative creates baffling and mystifying situations.

If we are ill informed about Carthage, we are catastrophically ignorant about Numidia.

All the Numidian kings no doubt exported wheat and barley; they apparently imported on the whole luxuries, and their tombs and other archaeological indications reveal their wealth.

Their coinage, on the other hand, although produced on an enormous scale, is only of bronze, which does not suggest that the ‘state’ aspect of the monarchy was very developed …

Three hoards are known from Africa; a vast quantity of the coinage, along with hundreds of pieces of Carthage, found its way to a small area of Dalmatia, for reasons which are largely mysterious (p.222).

https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_84_G_8q6WQcC#page/n165/mode/1up

The latest dated material in the hoards under discussion is perhaps of the middle of the second century, they are perhaps to be regarded as having been undisturbed since about 100; but it is inconceivable that at either date the earliest material was in circulation anywhere.

It remains to me wholly baffling why this relatively small area sucked in bronze predominantly from Rome and North Africa from the middle of the third century onwards and then on the whole simply kept it in its original form for up to a century and a half, though some isolated coins travelled further north and east (App. 49).

Coinage and Money Under the Roman Republic – Michael H Crawford – 1985
https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_84_G_8q6WQcC#page/n248/mode/1up

Follow The Mining

An alternate way to “follow the money” in ancient times is via metal mining.

In the case of metal mining:

Possession is nine-tenths of prosperity and Italy possessed very little [natural] prosperity.

https://livedataoxford.shinyapps.io/OxRep_maps_mines/

Possession is nine-tenths of the law is an expression meaning that ownership is easier to maintain if one has possession of something, or difficult to enforce if one does not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_is_nine-tenths_of_the_law

The remaining one-tenth of prosperity was obtained via pillage and the military mint.

https://archive.org/stream/ancientmoderncoi2009stac_f4c6#page/19/mode/1up

By your standards, victorious in ten campaigns, and by your triumphs I swear, whoever be the foe whom you triumph over — if you bid me bury my sword in my brother’s breast or my father’s throat or the body of my teeming wife, I will perform it all, even if my hand be reluctant.

If you bid me plunder the gods and fire their temples, the furnace of the military mint shall melt down the statues of the deities ; if you bid me pitch the camp by the waters of Etruscan Tiber, I shall make bold to invade the fields of Italy and there mark out the lines ; whatever walls you wish to level, these arms shall ply the ram and scatter the stones asunder, even if the city you doom to utter destruction be Rome.”

To this speech all the cohorts together signified their assent, raising their hands on high and promising their aid in any war to which Caesar summoned them.

Lucan – The Civil War – Book I
Translation: James D Duff – Trinity College – Cambridge – 1928

https://archive.org/stream/lucancivilwarboo00lucauoft#page/27/mode/1up

Marcus Annaeus Lucanus (39-65 AD), better known in English as Lucan, was a Roman poet, born in Corduba (modern-day Córdoba), in Hispania Baetica.

Surviving work: Pharsalia or De Bello Civili (On the Civil War)…

Lost works: Catachthonion, Iliacon from the Trojan cycle, Epigrammata, Adlocutio ad Pollam, Silvae, Saturnalia, Medea, Salticae Fabulae, Laudes Neronis, a praise of Nero, Orpheus, Prosa oratio in Octavium Sagittam, Epistulae ex Campania, De Incendio Urbis…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucan

Theoretically, pillage, plunder and the military mint can fund the conquest of natural prosperity.

https://edh-www.adw.uni-heidelberg.de/home?&lang=en

The ancient jewels in the crown were the gold mines in Spain, Transylvania and Wales.

In Roman metallurgy, new methods for extracting gold on a large scale were developed by introducing hydraulic mining methods, especially in Hispania from 25 BC onwards and in Dacia from 106 AD onwards.

One of their largest mines was at Las Medulas in León, where seven long aqueducts enabled them to sluice most of a large alluvial deposit.

The mines at Roşia Montană in Transylvania were also very large, and until very recently, still mined by opencast methods.

They also exploited smaller deposits in Britain, such as placer and hard-rock deposits at Dolaucothi.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold#History

And the most prized territorial possession was Iberia.

https://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/EarlyMiningintheLowerSeguraValleySESpain/

Unsurprisingly, Iberia and wars of conquest appear together in the history books.

The Power of The Prosperous

The “greatest war in history” was initiated by Hannibal Barca from his prosperous Iberian base.

The Second Punic War (Spring 218 to 201 BC), also referred to as The Hannibalic War and by the Romans the War Against Hannibal, was the second of three wars between Carthage and the Roman Republic and its allied Italic socii, with the participation of Greek polities and Numidian and Iberian forces on both sides.

It was one of the deadliest human conflicts of ancient times.

Fought across the entire Western Mediterranean region for 17 years and regarded by ancient historians as the greatest war in history, waged with unparalleled resources, skill and hatred, it saw hundreds of thousands killed, some of the most lethal battles in military history, the destruction of cities, and massacres and enslavements of civilian populations and prisoners of war by both sides.

The war began with the Carthaginian general Hannibal’s conquest and destruction of the pro-Roman Iberian city of Saguntum in 219 BC, prompting a Roman declaration of war on Carthage in the spring of 218.

Hannibal surprised the Romans by marching his army overland from Iberia to cross the Alps and invade Roman Italy, followed by his reinforcement by Gallic allies and crushing victories over Roman armies at Trebia in 218 and on the shores of Lake Trasimene in 217.

Moving to southern Italy in 216, Hannibal at Cannae annihilated the largest army the Romans had ever assembled, killing or capturing more than 67,000 Roman soldiers.

After the death or imprisonment of 130,000 Roman troops in two years, 40% of Rome’s Italian allies defected to Carthage, giving her control over most of southern Italy.

Macedon and Syracuse joined the Carthaginian side after Cannae and the conflict spread to Greece and Sicily.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Punic_War

Hannibal Barca inflicted “devastating defeats” on the Romans and triggered the “complete collapse” of their monetary system”.

When Hannibal invaded Italy in 218, he not only succeeded in inflicting in the course of three years a sequence of devastating defeats on the Romans, but also changed the pattern of coinage in Italy out of all recognition and for ever.

The immediate consequence of the Roman loss of control over large areas of Italy was a progressive dispersal of the production of coinage; only with the end of the war was production concentrated once again at the mint of Rome.

In addition, it was the strain of the war which led to the rapid reduction in the weight of the Roman bronze unit and and the debasement of the Roman silver didrachm.

The complete collapse of the Roman monetary system was followed by the creation ex novo of the denarius system, which lasted with minor modifications until the third century AD.

Coinage and Money Under the Roman Republic – Michael H Crawford – 1985
https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_84_G_8q6WQcC#page/n82/mode/1up

The Miracle of Impoverished Power

Then, according to the history books, a miracle occurred.

The impoverished and vanquished Romans somehow managed to find the fortitude and resources necessary to defeat the Carthaginians in [both] Iberia and Africa.

Against Hannibal’s skill on the battlefield, the Romans adopted the Fabian strategy – the avoidance of battle against Hannibal and defeating his allies and the other Carthaginian generals instead.

Roman armies recaptured all of the great cities that had joined Carthage and defeated a Carthaginian attempt to reinforce Hannibal at Metaurus in 207.

Southern Italy was devastated by the combatants, with hundreds of thousands of civilians killed or enslaved.

In Iberia, which served as a major source of silver and manpower for the Carthaginian army, a Roman expeditionary force under Publius Cornelius Scipio captured Carthago Nova, Carthage’s capital city in Iberia, in 209, massacring and enslaving the inhabitants.

Scipio’s destruction of a Carthaginian army at Ilipa in 206 permanently ended Carthaginian rule in Iberia.

He invaded Carthaginian Africa in 204, inflicting two severe defeats on Carthage and her allies at Utica and the Great Plains that compelled the Carthaginian senate to recall Hannibal’s army from Italy.

The final engagement between Scipio and Hannibal took place at Zama in Africa in 202 and resulted in Hannibal’s defeat and the imposition of harsh peace conditions on Carthage (Carthaginian peace), which ceased to be a great power and became a Roman client state until its final destruction by the Romans in 146 BC during the Third Punic War.

The Second Punic War overthrew the established balance of power of the ancient world and Rome rose to become the dominant power in the Mediterranean Basin for the next 600 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Punic_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scipio_Africanus

The Battle of Zama —fought in 202 BC near Zama (Tunisia)— marked the end of the Second Punic War.

A Roman army led by Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus (Scipio), with crucial support from Numidian leader Masinissa, defeated the Carthaginian army led by Hannibal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Zama

The Impoverished Become Prosperous

But the conquering Romans needed another 200 years to complete their conquest of Iberia.

Roman armies invaded the Iberian peninsula in 218 BC… It was not until 19 BC that the Roman emperor Augustus (r. 27 BC–AD 14) was able to complete the conquest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispania

The Cantabrian Wars (29–19 BC) (Bellum Cantabricum), sometimes also referred to as the Cantabrian and Asturian Wars (Bellum Cantabricum et Asturicum), were the final stage of the two-century long Roman conquest of Hispania, in what today are the provinces of Cantabria, Asturias and León, in northwestern Spain.

Under the reign of Augustus, Rome waged a bloody conflict against the last independent Celtic nations of Hispania: the Cantabri, the Astures, and the Gallaeci.

These warlike peoples presented fierce resistance to Roman domination: ten years of war and eight legions with their auxiliary troops—more than 50,000 soldiers in total—were needed to subdue the region.

Roman troops even lost one of their standards to them, something inexplicable and humiliating in those days.

Such were the disasters and the embarrassments that, although the Roman historians justified the campaigns as retribution for Cantabrian incursions in the Roman-controlled Meseta Central, there must have been a certain lust after Asturian gold and Cantabrian iron as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_Wars

The Romans then resisted their “lust” for gold for the next 75 years.

Las Médulas is a historic gold-mining site near the town of Ponferrada in the comarca of El Bierzo (province of León, Castile and León, Spain). It was the most important gold mine, as well as the largest open-pit gold mine, in the entire Roman Empire.

The area Hispania Tarraconensis was conquered in 25 BC by the emperor Augustus.

Prior to the Roman conquest the indigenous inhabitants obtained gold from alluvial deposits.

Large-scale production did not begin until the second half of the 1st century AD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Medulas

In Roman metallurgy, new methods for extracting gold on a large scale were developed by introducing hydraulic mining methods, especially in Hispania from 25 BC onwards and in Dacia from 106 AD onwards.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold#History

Apparently, the Romans inherited the ancient world because they were meek and modest.

gold was seen as a mark of un-Roman luxury.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aureus

The Problem With Caesar

The problem with this miraculous tale of Roman rags to Roman riches is Caesar.

Caesar was very “un-Roman”.

Caesar started striking golden coins “more often”.

https://coinweek.com/dealers-companies/atlas-numismatics/new-ancient-world-coins-atlas-numismatics-september-2016/

The aureus was a gold coin of ancient Rome originally valued at 25 pure silver denarii.

Before the time of Julius Caesar the aureus was struck infrequently, probably because gold was seen as a mark of un-Roman luxury.

Caesar struck the coin more often, and standardized the weight at 1/40 of a Roman pound (about 8 grams).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aureus

Latin: aurum
English: Gold (metal/color), gold money, riches

Latin-Dictionary.net
http://www.latin-dictionary.net/search/english/gold

The city of Rome itself is known in modern Arabic as Rūmā

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%BBm

Caesar was so “un-Roman” even his coins looked positively Carthaginian.

http://www.rare-coins.us/?tag=elephant-coins

https://www.coinarchives.com/a/results.php?search=Carthage+elephant

https://www.coinarchives.com/a/results.php?search=caesar+elephant

In Gaul his military mint produced coins that looked distinctly Carthaginian.

https://archive.org/stream/ancientmoderncoi2009stac_f4c6#page/19/mode/1up

In Italy his military mint produced coins that looked absolutely, positively Carthaginian.

https://www.coinarchives.com/a/lotviewer.php?LotID=1354947&AucID=2738&Lot=30267&Val=d3e565e82dae319d2295225eb1c18f92

On 10 January 49 BC, commanding the Legio XIII Gemina, Caesar crossed the Rubicon River, the boundary between the province of Cisalpine Gaul to the north and Italy proper to the south.

Caesar’s march on Rome was a triumphal procession

The Senate, not knowing that Caesar possessed only a single legion, feared the worst and supported Pompey. Pompey declared that Rome could not be defended; he escaped to Capua with those politicians who supported him, the aristocratic Optimates and the regnant consuls.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar%27s_Civil_War#Civil_War

Which leaves the independent observer to decide whether the CAESAR so boldly emblazoned on these coins refers to:

a) The Gaius Julius Caesar that appears in the history books
or
b) A Carthaginian military dictatorship aka Carthaginian martial law.

Personally, I favour the follow the money Carthaginian martial law:

1) The coins provide strong supporting evidence for Carthaginian martial law.

2) The coins support the beginning of the first Invasion of Britain narrative.

Elephants also featured throughout the Roman campaign against the Celtiberians in Hispania and against the Gauls.

Famously, the Romans used a war elephant in the invasion of Britain, one ancient writer recording that “Caesar had one large elephant, which was equipped with armor and carried archers and slingers in its tower.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_elephant#The_Mediterranean

3) The ancient red and white banded masonry in Britain looks positively Carthaginian.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/09/04/c-for-colossal/

But, as always, readers are encouraged to review the evidence and draw their own conclusions.

Gallery | This entry was posted in Books, Epigraphy - Inscriptions, History, Roman Chronology. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to The Great Splice

  1. I just wonder whether this confused mainstream history was making sense of some enormous catastrophe no one really remembered because those who experienced died, and those who wrote the histories, then, never experienced the destruction in the first place. Killing civilians seems a bit excessive and stupid. More like marauding survivors of a catastrophe trying to cope with life seeking food and whatever. Similarly for the collapse of Rome.

    And the total absence of mining in Italy, the fount of Rome, is totally bizarre. Fake history!

  2. carol says:

    I never realised until reading this article the significance of the dates of the war with Hannibal. There is a volcanic signature (low growth event) in tree rings at 207/6BC and whatever caused it may be the reason why the Carthaginians were overwhelmed by the Romans in the aftermath – and victorious in the years preceding the event. In addition, and something you might like to explore, after 200BC to around 200AD we have what is known as the Roman climate optimum. This is a quite different weather system to that of the 4th and 5th centuries AD (which is dominated by the North Atlantic Oscillation bringing dry conditions to the Mediterranean basin and very wet weather in northern Europe (Azores highs are a blocking mechanism whereas Icelandic lows have the opposite effect). The optimum is an interesting phenomenon as the name implies it has similarities with the so called Mid Holocene Climate Optimum. How could that be? Ptolemy, ensconced in Alexandria, says it rained there every month of the year apart from August (which is quite different to the situation nowadays where summers are dry as a bone). In other words, there was a different climate regime in the optimum – one dominated by humidiy and warmth. Where on earth could that come from? Well, in quiet solar periods we get more cosmic rays penetrating the magnetosphere, and possibly this may invoke a warmer surface down below. In addition, according to the Svensmark theory (outlined in The Chilling Stars) cosmic rays can cause clouds to form (more than normal) which theoretically could cause more humidity and rain to fall regularly in virtually every part of the world including the Med basin. However, there is always a downside as Svensmark didn’t see cloud formation in quite that way – as clouds can cause chilly weather. Thought you might like to bring your mind to the subject of climate change in the Roman era.

  3. malagabay says:

    Climate Change in the Roman era is a fascinating subject.

    To get a different perspective on the scale of the changes take a look at:
    https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/05/07/enigmatic-egypt-roman-ruination-desert/

    To get a different perspective on climate and chronology take a look at:
    https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2016/04/08/digitised-japanese-isotopic-tree-thermometer/

  4. The Numidian type elephant seems to be a pygmy, by the size of its head…..

    The Roman elephant seems to be a badly drawn Indian elephant as the ears are smaller….

    The Carthiginian elephant is well drawn, modern even, shows powerful rear legs and an African elephant.

    Interesting points about the end of Carthage…

  5. The whole premise of these articles is that we cannot trust the recorded histories, from the usual sources. Being able to date catastrophe by tree rings is the most reliable way of estimating dates and events. It is priceless. Carbon dating is dependant upon a force that is heavily influenced by solar radiation as to amounts of carbon and effects of electromagnetic forces on deterioration of nuclei.

    It would not surprise me to hear that it, Dendrochronology, is being starved of funds!

  6. The problem with Libby’s data is the rings were calibrated by radiocarbon dates, as well as from the homogenisation of the raw data into 5 year averages (each year being defined as a tree-ring). Which leads to the question of whether the 1859 CE Carrington event was noticed in modern tree ring data? From 1600 to 1800 CE the tree-rings show a significant change in isotope ratios (see Tim’s link in reply to Carol’s comment). and that’s the Maunder Minimum but where has the Little Ice Age gone ? There was a significant global catastrophe at the time and sunspot records basically start around 1600 CE. The isotope data suggest the Maunder Minimum was similar in effect as the Arab Horizon at 610 CE but from 610 to 1600? There’s something awry with the dating.

  7. malagabay says:

    “The problem with Libby’s data is the rings were calibrated by radiocarbon dates”

    Not so.
    They were hand counted.
    The hand count was validated by Radiocarbon dating.

    Kigoshi counted the rings of this tree and verified the count by making 50 radiocarbon datings on them.

    Isotopic Tree Thermometers
    Leona Marshall Libby, Louis J Pandolfi, Patrick H Payton, John Marshall III, Bernd Becker and V Giertz-Sienbenlist
    Nature 261, 284 – 288 – 27 May 1976

    See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2016/04/08/digitised-japanese-isotopic-tree-thermometer/
    See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2015/11/19/isotopic-tree-thermometers/

  8. Uhm, If CME events disrupt the isotopic state of the atmosphere, then that will cause a reset in the radiocarbon levels. So present day levels can be retro-calculated to 1859 CE, earlier than which a new decay period has to be calculated. The assumption Libby et al made is that radiocarbon dating, apart from the post WWII atomic explosions, was constant and not interrupted by external factors such as abnormal increases in cosmic rays to form extra peaks in the C14 quantities. It makes the C14 curve decidedly non-linear, and hence impossible to use as a forecasting tool.

  9. The other problem is if the RC dates are accurate and match the tree rings, then CME or plasma events, which nuclear explosions are, do not affect C14 numbers. Except they do, and if the solar cycle perturbates the IMF and the geomagnetic field by induction, so too C14 production.

  10. malagabay says:

    “So present day levels can be retro-calculated to 1859 CE, earlier than which a new decay period has to be calculated”

    Bingo.

    See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/a-carbon-14-chronology/

  11. Carol above pointed to something of particular interest as regards date. I had been looking at dates from another perspective and had not realised the relation to the Punic wars. Trawling for ‘correlations with meaning’ others had pointed out to correspondence of peak and root of the Eddy cycle with historical periods. The Roman W P, the Medieval WP, plus the said Modern climate warming MCW, correspond to consecutive peaks. While Dark ACP and Little ice age correspond to the root.
    An earlier root corresponds to the start of the Punic wars. The following root (DACP) saw the Byzantine influence extended in the Med at 535ce. The question is: are these civilisation upheavals influenced by geological/climatic changes?
    Going back in time, three consecutive roots, at 4375bce, 3200, and 2345 were all far more drastic events. In the Irish oak C14 chart above there are discontinuities at 4375 and 2345, and there should be smaller jerks at 3200 and at 3550, the latter a peak, (evident here : http://www.radiocarbon.org/IntCal13%20files/intcal13.pdf ).
    Additionally the Eddy cycle appears to set a chronological tempo that is independent of any other benchmark that has been used for dating history. The main problem so far, for me anyway, is finding the source of this driver.
    Link Eddy cycle: https://melitamegalithic.wordpress.com/2018/07/24/searching-evidence-update/

  12. Gunnar Heinsohn says:

    Dear patoodonnelly!

    The dendrochronologists do not understand why they fail on the 1st millennium CE because they do not understand that the buildings with timber of the “2nd” century are identical with the buildings and their timber of the 9th century. The examples of Zurich and Aachen are used to illustrate this situation. They are looking for timber between the “2nd” and the 9th century that simply does not exist because “2nd” c.==9th c.

    “On the basis of the archaeological findings, a destruction of the settlement structures in ZURICH can be ruled out. The Roman settlement [2nd/3rd c.] has probably continued into the early Middle Ages. Roman roads, buildings and infrastructure hardly changed. Roman roads, buildings and infrastructure continued to be used.”
    (Original German text: “Aufgrund der archäologischen Befunde kann eine Zerstörung der Siedlungsstrukturen in Zürich ausgeschlossen werden. Die römische Siedlung hat sich wohl bis ins Frühmittelalter kaum verändert. Römische Straßen, Gebäude und Infrastruktur wurden weiterbenutzt”; cf. R Kaiser, “Vom Früh- zum Hochmittelalter”, in M. Flueler-Grauwiler et al., eds., Geschichte des Kantons Zürich. Band 1: Frühzeit bis Spätmittelalter, Zürich: Werd, 1995; 130–171 / 152.)

    The “shape of Roman AACHEN […] survived until the Carolingian period” of the 8th-10th century. Most Roman buildings of the 2nd/3rd century ”were only finally abandoned and demolished or built over since the 12th century.”
    (Original German texts: “Gestalt des römischen Aachen […] bis in die karolingische.” / “Straßen und Wohnbauten überwiegend erst seit dem 12. Jahrhundert endgültig aufgegeben und abgebrochen oder überbaut”; cf. . H. Müller, J. Ley, A. Schaub, F.J. Pohle, “Pfalz und vicus Aachen in karolingischer Zeit”, in T. R. Kraus, ed., Aachen. Von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart. Bd. 2: Karolinger – Ottonen – Salier 765-1137, Aachen: Mayersche, 2013, 1-408 / 324 / J. Ley, A. Schaub, “Die Aachener Pfalz: Siedlungs- und Baugeschichte”, In Zeitschrift für Burgenforschung und Denkmalpflege, issue 2, 2018, 66-73 / 68.).

    Gunnar Heinsohn

  13. Gunnar Heinsohn says:

    Impressive work on mines and conquests, many thanks.

    The history of Rome and Carthage contains some of the most striking multiple uses of the same events for the artificial extension of the 1st millennium BCE (see selected list below).

    The 46 BCE war of Caesar against SCIPIO in the conflict over Carthage is particularly puzzling.

    ————————————————————————————————————————————
    >46 BCE: FINAL PUNIC WAR, Caesar defeats, at Carthage, a Roman competitor by the name of SCIPIO.
    ————————————————————————————————————————————
    >146 to 143 BCE: THIRD PUNIC WAR: An additional SCIPIO (Africanus) defeats and, in 143 BC, exterminates Carthage.
    ————————————————————————————————————————————
    >190 BCE: ANOTHER PUNIC WAR: Once again, the TWO SCIPIOS chased Hannibal.
    ————————————————————————————————————————————
    >218-201 BCE: SECOND PUNIC WAR. Against Hannibal fought TWO SCIPIOS, Tiberius Sempronus Longus, Minutius Rufus, Livius Salinator and Claudius Nero. No coins or portraits survived.
    ————————————————————————————————————————————
    >264-241 BCE: FIRST PUNIC WAR. Rome’s commander Marcus Atilius Regulus left no coins, is only known from legends.
    ————————————————————————————————————————————
    >507-348 BCE: The treaties with between ROME and CARTHAGE over rule in Italy (507 BCE) and maritime influence zones up to Gibraltar (348 BCE) are – by scholarly consensus – 1st BCE century inventions because Rome had no fleet before “260” BCE.
    ————————————————————————————————————————————

    Gunnar Heinsohn

  14. Pingback: N for Numeral | MalagaBay

  15. malagabay says:

    In Sicily the military mint also produced coins that look very Carthaginian.

    http://ancientrome.ru/numizm/catalog/coin.htm?id=1188

    Wikipedia has associated this MARCELLINVS coin with Marcus Claudius Marcellus and provides the following caption: “212–210 BC coin of Marcellus, celebrating his conquest of Sicily.”

    Marcus Claudius Marcellus (c. 268 – 208 BC), five times elected as consul of the Roman Republic, was an important Roman military leader during the Gallic War of 225 BC and the Second Punic War.

    Marcellus gained the most prestigious award a Roman general could earn, the spolia opima, for killing the Gallic military leader and king Viridomarus in hand-to-hand combat in 222 BC at the Battle of Clastidium.

    Furthermore, he is noted for having conquered the fortified city of Syracuse in a protracted siege during which Archimedes, the famous mathematician, scientist and inventor, was killed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Claudius_Marcellus

    There are several other BC references to a “Marcus Claudius Marcellus” in the history books.

    ● Marcus Claudius Marcellus (consul 331 BC), briefly dictator in 327 BC

    ● Marcus Claudius Marcellus (consul 196 BC), active in the Second Punic War, and later became consul and censor

    ● Marcus Claudius Marcellus (consul 166 BC), thrice consul before and during the Third Punic War, and who died in a shipwreck off Africa

    ● Marcus Claudius Marcellus (aedile 91 BC), curule aedile in 91 BC, possibly praetor; father of the consul of 51 BC and a Gaius Claudius Marcellus, consul of 49 BC

    ● Marcus Claudius Marcellus (consul 51 BC), political opponent of Julius Caesar, assassinated circa 47 BC by one of his own attendants

    From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Claudius_Marcellus_%28disambiguation%29

    ● Marcus Claudius Marcellus Aeserninus was quaestor in Hispania in 48 BC, under Quintus Cassius Longinus

    From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Claudius_Marcellus_Aeserninus

    There also appear to be AD echoes of Marcellus in the history books.

    ● Marcellus (brother of Justin II) (fl. late 6th century), Byzantine aristocrat and general

    ● Marcellus (comes excubitorum) (fl. 6th century), commander of the Excubitors

    ● Marcellus (general under Justinian I) (fl. 530s), Byzantine general

    ● Marcellus (usurper) (died 366), Roman general

    ● Marcellus of Tangier (c. mid 3rd century – 298), martyr

    From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcellus_%28name%29

    Some may even contain a grain of truth.

    Saint Marcellus of Tangier or Saint Marcellus the Centurion (c. mid 3rd century – 298 AD) is venerated as a Martyr Saint by the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church.

    Marcellus was said to have been a centurion stationed at Tingis (modern-day Tangiers) who refused to participate in the general birthday celebrations of the Emperor Maximian, which would have entailed sacrifice to the Roman gods.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcellus_of_Tangier

  16. Pingback: Roads to Rome | MalagaBay

  17. Pingback: Bristol-Mendip Hoard of 1866 | MalagaBay

  18. Pingback: Gunnar Goes North | MalagaBay

  19. Pingback: Bordeaux Brickwork | MalagaBay

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.