5 ms·

Phoenician culture spread mainly through cultural exchange

85 points by gmays 2y ago

elevaet 2y ago
> The researchers even found a pair of close relatives (ca. second cousins) bridging the Mediterranean, one buried in a North African Punic site and one in Sicily. This is from over 2500 years ago. How amazing is that, that we have this capacity in DNA analysis now to discover details like this from so long ago?
- ahazred8ta 2y ago
  In the 1700s a ring was found in England, inscribed Silvianus with the name Senicianus scratched into it. In the 1800s a curse tablet was found 80 miles away, complaining that Senicianus stole the ring of Silvianus.
  - numbsafari 2y ago
    Ah, my precious…
  - GolfPopper 2y ago
    There are three different extant clay tablets from Ur (circa 1750 BCE) complaining about the wares of the copper merchant Ea-nāṣir. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-n%C4%81%E1%B9%A3ir#Other_tablets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-n%C4%81...
    - vanattab 2y ago
      Thats seems less interesting to me because they where all found in the copper merchants house. So it was just a records cache.
ants_everywhere 2y ago
> “This provides a new perspective on how Phoenician culture spread—not through large-scale mass migration, but through a dynamic process of cultural transmission and assimilation.” > “At each site, people were highly variable in their ancestry, with the largest genetic source being people similar to contemporary people of Sicily and the Aegean, and many people with significant North African associated ancestry as well.” They say "cultural exchange" but is this a euphemism that includes things like warfare and slavery? Like the way Alexander the Great spread Greek culture? It seems like the main hypothesis they're ruling out is migration.
- tbrownaw 2y ago
  I'd suspect less "euphemism" and more "jargon". It's probably relatively hard to identify whether the culture was carried by means we currently think positively vs negatively about, so it's useful to have a word that doesn't rely on having a way to measure that distinction.
  - rotis 2y ago
    I dunno. Cultural exchange has positive connotations in my book.
    - pegasus 2y ago
      "Cultural assimilation" though, less so.
- fdb345 2y ago
  of course it is. port cities and settlements shared slaves not love stories.
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    They probably sold both and more. They probably sold anything they could manage to fit on a ship, and books were almost certainly among that.
- 2y ago
0xDEAFBEAD 2y ago
My vague impression is that the Phoenicians may have been just as important, historically, as the Greeks (first alphabet seems like a huge deal!), but they just didn't leave behind as many records. I remember trying to find a good book on them without succeeding. I wonder if Carthage had beaten Rome, the Phoenicians would take away the "ancient Mediterranean genius" slot away from the Greeks, since the availability of historical materials would be reversed.
- beloch 2y ago
  Ever wonder why Spain was a civilized province while Gaul and Germany remained hostile frontiers for the Roman republic? Just take a look at the map in this article. Spain originally belonged to Carthage. Large parts of Rome's empire were civilized, not by Rome, but by Carthage and the Phoenicians. I think you're right that the Phoenicians deserve more credit, as does Carthage. There is yet hope more of their history may come to light. We're unlikely to uncover records on the organic media the Phoenician alphabet was tailored for, but Mesopotamian cultures were contemporaries of the Phoenicians and we're discovering/translating new cuneiform tablets all the time. Entire Mesopotamian cities remain to be discovered, and some significant ones that we know of are likely buried beneath modern settlements. We may never get the Phonecian's story from their own perspective, but we may yet get a better picture of them from people who didn't have a vested interest in erasing their history.
  - thaumasiotes 2y ago
    We have a lot of documents from Ugarit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugarit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugarit This is mostly a matter of excavating the tells we can see with our eyes. The history is easy to discover, but there's very little interest, so it doesn't get done. Note that the initial wave of archaeology in Mesopotamia was fueled by popular interest in the Bible. That sputtered out when archaeology turned out not to support most of what the Bible said. So now there isn't interest from people who'd like to see the Bible confirmed, and there also isn't interest from the general public who have no particular connection to the region.
Lirael 2y ago
[flagged]
- fdb345 2y ago
  Its just trade. It really is that simple.
- tbrownaw 2y ago
  > challenges the assumption that gene flow equals cultural influence Have you perhaps heard of anime? Or seen how widespread men's suits are? Or looked up how much images of Jesus and Mary (the ones from the Christian religion) vary across the world?
- rpicard 2y ago
  I’m pretty sure this is an AI bot of some kind, especially after reviewing its history.
  - gus_massa 2y ago
    Have you send an email to hn@ycombinator.com so dang and tomhow can take a look? Remember to add a link to https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=Lirael https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=Lirael to save them a click.
fdb345 2y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
curtisszmania 2y ago
[dead]
ohadpr 2y ago
Wes Anderson’s “The Phoenician Scheme” is coming out in the next few weeks…
gatlin 2y ago
Is there an instance where "Phoenician" is not 100% bidirectionally synonymous with "Canaanite?" I've wondered why we have two terms for the same group. In this instance it is literally the same peoples and neither term gives, as far as I'm aware, any kind of specialized connotation.

85 points by gmays 2y ago

> The researchers even found a pair of close relatives (ca. second cousins) bridging the Mediterranean, one buried in a North African Punic site and one in Sicily. This is from over 2500 years ago. How amazing is that, that we have this capacity in DNA analysis now to discover details like this from so long ago?

ahazred8ta 2y ago
In the 1700s a ring was found in England, inscribed Silvianus with the name Senicianus scratched into it. In the 1800s a curse tablet was found 80 miles away, complaining that Senicianus stole the ring of Silvianus.
- numbsafari 2y ago
  Ah, my precious…
- GolfPopper 2y ago
  There are three different extant clay tablets from Ur (circa 1750 BCE) complaining about the wares of the copper merchant Ea-nāṣir. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-n%C4%81%E1%B9%A3ir#Other_tablets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-n%C4%81...
  - vanattab 2y ago
    Thats seems less interesting to me because they where all found in the copper merchants house. So it was just a records cache.

ants_everywhere 2y ago

> “This provides a new perspective on how Phoenician culture spread—not through large-scale mass migration, but through a dynamic process of cultural transmission and assimilation.” > “At each site, people were highly variable in their ancestry, with the largest genetic source being people similar to contemporary people of Sicily and the Aegean, and many people with significant North African associated ancestry as well.” They say "cultural exchange" but is this a euphemism that includes things like warfare and slavery? Like the way Alexander the Great spread Greek culture? It seems like the main hypothesis they're ruling out is migration.

tbrownaw 2y ago
I'd suspect less "euphemism" and more "jargon". It's probably relatively hard to identify whether the culture was carried by means we currently think positively vs negatively about, so it's useful to have a word that doesn't rely on having a way to measure that distinction.
- rotis 2y ago
  I dunno. Cultural exchange has positive connotations in my book.
  - pegasus 2y ago
    "Cultural assimilation" though, less so.
fdb345 2y ago
of course it is. port cities and settlements shared slaves not love stories.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  They probably sold both and more. They probably sold anything they could manage to fit on a ship, and books were almost certainly among that.
2y ago

0xDEAFBEAD 2y ago

My vague impression is that the Phoenicians may have been just as important, historically, as the Greeks (first alphabet seems like a huge deal!), but they just didn't leave behind as many records. I remember trying to find a good book on them without succeeding. I wonder if Carthage had beaten Rome, the Phoenicians would take away the "ancient Mediterranean genius" slot away from the Greeks, since the availability of historical materials would be reversed.

beloch 2y ago
Ever wonder why Spain was a civilized province while Gaul and Germany remained hostile frontiers for the Roman republic? Just take a look at the map in this article. Spain originally belonged to Carthage. Large parts of Rome's empire were civilized, not by Rome, but by Carthage and the Phoenicians. I think you're right that the Phoenicians deserve more credit, as does Carthage. There is yet hope more of their history may come to light. We're unlikely to uncover records on the organic media the Phoenician alphabet was tailored for, but Mesopotamian cultures were contemporaries of the Phoenicians and we're discovering/translating new cuneiform tablets all the time. Entire Mesopotamian cities remain to be discovered, and some significant ones that we know of are likely buried beneath modern settlements. We may never get the Phonecian's story from their own perspective, but we may yet get a better picture of them from people who didn't have a vested interest in erasing their history.
- thaumasiotes 2y ago
  We have a lot of documents from Ugarit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugarit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugarit This is mostly a matter of excavating the tells we can see with our eyes. The history is easy to discover, but there's very little interest, so it doesn't get done. Note that the initial wave of archaeology in Mesopotamia was fueled by popular interest in the Bible. That sputtered out when archaeology turned out not to support most of what the Bible said. So now there isn't interest from people who'd like to see the Bible confirmed, and there also isn't interest from the general public who have no particular connection to the region.

Lirael 2y ago

[flagged]

fdb345 2y ago
Its just trade. It really is that simple.
tbrownaw 2y ago
> challenges the assumption that gene flow equals cultural influence Have you perhaps heard of anime? Or seen how widespread men's suits are? Or looked up how much images of Jesus and Mary (the ones from the Christian religion) vary across the world?
rpicard 2y ago
I’m pretty sure this is an AI bot of some kind, especially after reviewing its history.
- gus_massa 2y ago
  Have you send an email to hn@ycombinator.com so dang and tomhow can take a look? Remember to add a link to https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=Lirael https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=Lirael to save them a click.

fdb345 2y ago

[flagged]

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

curtisszmania 2y ago

[dead]

ohadpr 2y ago

Wes Anderson’s “The Phoenician Scheme” is coming out in the next few weeks…

gatlin 2y ago

Is there an instance where "Phoenician" is not 100% bidirectionally synonymous with "Canaanite?" I've wondered why we have two terms for the same group. In this instance it is literally the same peoples and neither term gives, as far as I'm aware, any kind of specialized connotation.