le page renouf 1894 where was tarshish

8/13/2019 Le Page Renouf 1894 Where Was Tarshish

1/11

PROCEEDINGSOF

THE SOCIETY

BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGY.

NOVEMBER, 1893,

DECEMBER, 1894.

VOL. XVI. TWENTY-FOURTH SESSION.

PUBLISHED ATTHE OFFICES OF THE SOCIETY,37, Great Russell Street, Bloomsbury, W.C.

1894,


2/11

HARRISON ANn SONS,PHINTERS IN ORDINARY TO HER MAJESTY.

ST. martin's lane, LONDON.


3/11

Feb. 6] SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL ARCIL^OLOGY. [1894.

WHERE WAS TARSHISH?By p. le Page Renouf.

I.

The identification of Tarshish with Tartessus in Spain is souniversally taken for granted, not only by the most accomplishedBiblical scholars but by writers of secular history, like Grote andDuncker, that it would argue a great want of modesty to call it inquestion were not the arguments in its behalf well known to bedevoid of positively demonstrative force. The utmost that must beclaimed for them is that they lend probability or plausibility to whatis in fact a very modern conjecture.

The identification in question was entirely unknown to the earlierinterpreters of Scripture. The Septuagint version understandsCarthage to be meant in certain places where Tarshish is alluded to,and the same sense is adopted by the Vulgate in Ezekiel xxvii, 12.Josephus understands Tarsus in Cilicia, and is followed by somelater Jewish and Christian authorities. But Tarshish is translatedSea in the Septuagint, Isaiah ii, 16, in the Targums, and in severalplaces of the Vulgate. And St. Jerome remarks : Hebraei putantlingua propria mare Tarsi's appellari.

Eusebius stands alone in identifying Onpaei^ with Spain, and thisconjecture was caught up and modified in the seventeenth centuryby the learned French scholar Samuel Bochart, and has sinceflourished under the authority of great names. If however anEgyptian inscription of Thothmes III, or an Assyrian one of Sargonor Sennacherib, were to mention Tarshish as being on the Phoenicianor Syrian coast, the Tartessian hypothesis would at once be dismissedand the arguments in support of it recognised as destitute of value.

The truth is that in the days of Bochart and down to the days ofeven Winer, Gesenius and Grote, the most learned scholars had noconception of the amount of historical and geographical informationwhich was hidden from them, and has only been gradually discoveredto the world during the last forty or fifty years. They seem, un-

104


4/11

Feb. 6] PROCEEDINGS [1894.consciously to themselves, to assume that the explanation of whatthey did not know was to be found in what they already knew. Itis impossible for us now to use books which in our younger dayswere the most justly entitled to the praise of learning and insight,without being forced to sift the rich materials which they containand separate them from the combinations into which they have beencast.

The strongest point in the hypothesis of Bochart is that bychanging the first tl? into the letter t we obtain identity of soundbetween Tarshish and Tartessos. In this etymological equation hehas certainly been more fortunate than in many others as, forinstance, in his derivation of Phoenician from B'ni Anak ' Sons ofAnak.' But identity of name is by itself a matter of little im-portance. We have but to look at a geographical index in order tobe convinced of the small worth of such coincidences. TheEgyptian Abydos and Thebes have nothing in common with theMysian Abydos, and the Thebes of Boeotia. The Camerina ofBabylonia has no etymological connection with the SicilianCamerina. The Iberians of the Caucasus were not related tothe Iberians of Spain. The African Ludim of Gen. x, 13, aredistinct from the l,ud of v. 22. Combinations such as that ofArpakshad and Arraphachitis are now definitely given up by all whohave any pretention to scholarship. And nothing is more certain,on the other hand, than that the same country is known in differentlanguages under widely different names. As Germany, Allemagne,and Deutschland are but different names of the same country at thepresent day, so were Hellas and Graecia in the Roman period, butthe Egyptians would not have recognized their country under thenames given to it by Greeks, Hebrews, or Assyrians. The name ofCanaan as denoting the country so called in Scripture is entirelyunknown to Assyrians and Babylonians, who speak of it under othernames.

Now what besides the name is there to show that Tartessos isTarshish ? Is there a particle of historical evidence that intercourseever existed between Tyre and Tartessus ? Is there a single recordof a Tartessian ship sailing either upon the Mediterranean, or onthe Red Sea ? What, in fact, do we know of Tartessos to induceone to believe that a locality beyond the Straits of Gibraltar naturallypresented itself within the range of vision of the Hebrew writers?Is there any certainty that Tartessus ever existed?

10;


5/11

Fkb. 6] SOCIETY OF 15IBLICAL ARCII.EOLOGY. 1894.Nothing, indeed, or hardly anything, authentic is known about

Tartessus. The early references to it are mixed up with poetry andfable. Stesichorus speaks of it as a river near to the cavern whereGeryones was born, and Anacreon alludes to the 150 years of KingArganthonius, of whom Herodotus has also spoken (I, 163-165).There is a most serious chronological difficulty in the story as toldby Herodotus, but if there be any truth at all in it Arganthonius, theKing of Tartessus, was a native Iberian prince and not a Phoenician.The Phocean navigators who were so hospitably treated by him,never seem to have come across any Phoenicians in the country.Another story is told by Herodotus, in connexion with the foundationof Cyrene, respecting the Samian merchant Colaeus, who was carriedoff by contrary winds through the pillars of Herakles as far asTartessus, where he sold the cargo he had brought from Egypt at aprice so exorbitant that in gratitude for hjs good fortune he dedicatedto Here of Samos a magnificent bronze vase which cost six talentsand represented the tithe of his gains. Now this story, whatever maybe its truth, is quite inconsistent with the hypothesis of the Phoenicianorigin or government of Tartessus. Herodotus never appears to havesuspected such a connection, and Grote writes entirely withoutauthority when he says that Colaeus found himself an unexpectedvisitor among the Phenicians and Iberians of Tartessus, and that the secret of Fhenician commerce at Tartessus first became knownto the Greeks.If Tartessus ever really existed elsewhere than in the realms ofimagination, like the isle of Calypso, or the gardens of the Hesperides,its site was certainly unknown at the time of Strabo, though it wasthen identified on grounds of probability with the neighbourhood ofthe Guadalquivir. Late writers, like Valerius Maximus, Pliny, andArrian, confound Tartessus and Gades. There is no doubt thatGades was Phoenician, and bore a Semitic name. It was moreoverso ancient a Phoenician settlement, and so effectual a block in theway to Tartessus as to render incredible all the stories of navigationto that spot. Whatever commerce came from the west of Spainmust have proceeded from Gades, not from Tartessus, and after thegrowth of Carthage must have passed to that emporium rather thandirectly to Tyre.

The chief characteristic which has been pointed out as commonto Tartessus and to Tarshish is the great metallic wealth ascribedto each of them, and above all the possession of tin. Now it is

106


6/11

Feb. 6] PROCEEDINGS. [1894.asserted that tin can only be looked for either directly in Spain, oras brought by Phoenician ships from Britain.

The entire force of this argument must now be considered asoverthrown by recent discoveries, which almost dispense me fromthe necessity of pointing out the fact that the great metallic wealthof Spain, and of the Turdetanian region in particular, about whichStrabo is eloquent, was first made known to his countrymen, anddeveloped by the great Hamilcar Barcas, who laid the foundationof the Carthaginian empire in Spain. This was not till after thefirst Punic war, and therefore long after the times of Isaiah andEzekiel.

The discoveries to which I allude are partly archaeological andpartly philological, and each is of irresistible weight in its own de-partment.

The Bronze and the Tin which are so often mentioned in theHomeric poems are not inconsistent with the hypothesis that thetin which is necessary for the manufacture of bronze may have beenprocured by Phoenician commerce from the west of Europe, thoughit was not necessary even in Europe to go as far as Spain.

But the implements in bronze and tin which have been discoveredin Mycenae cannot be disposed of so easily. They are witnesses,like the gold and silver which were found along with them, to thesplendour of a civilization which had passed away, perhaps beforea single Phoenician ship had reached the western coast of theMediterranean.We may probably never know even the approximate dates ofthese prehistoric antiquities. But the bronze weapons of ThothmesIII are from the earlier years of the i8th dynasty, and those ofKing Kames are a little anterior to the dynasty. If the bronzecylinder bearing the name of Pepi I was made for that sovereign,or for his family, we have Egyptian bronze works of art from the6th dynasty.

The same result meets us in Mesopotamia. The well-knownbronze gates of Balawat speak for themselves, but they are modernin comparison with the bronze works of art dating from the earlyBabylonian empire. There are fine specimens of this art both inParis and in London. Whence came the tin which entered intothe composition of all this bronze ?

The Greek for tin is Kaaai-repo^, which has found its way intomany other languages, as in the case of the Arabic kasdir. But the

107


7/11

Feb. 6] SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL ARCILF:0L0GV. [1S94.word, to all appearance, is neither Indo-European nor Semitic, andas the Accadian has a word of the same meaning very like it,id-kasdurii, it is much more likely that it came to the Greeks fromBabel through Phoenicia than that it came into Accadian fromGreek.

And the metal itself may have come from the mines ofParopamisos.*

I am not aware of the existence of any other direct argument infavour of Tartessus beyond those I have mentioned, viz. : (i) thesimilarity of name, (2) the commerce of certain metals, notably oftin ; others will find their place later on ; and at the present day it isdifficult to exaggerate the weakness of these arguments. They aresupplemented, of course, by the consideration that this hypothesisdoes not contradict the sacred writings, but helps towards theirinterpretation.

I hold, on the contrary, that the sacred Scriptures point inanother direction, and that the Tartessian hypothesis has only led tofalsify translations of the Bible and given rise to the most forcedinterpretations of the sacred text.

* O. Schrader, Prehistoric Antiquities, p. 192, 193, 214 and following.It would be too long here to discuss possible objections, but I have carefullystudied the matter from the Assyriological point of view, and believe thatSchrader's position is thoroughly sound.

t This is sometimes put forward in the form, Turdali or Titrdelani =Tartessus = Tarshish. Some writers who see the weakness of Tartessus proper,imagine that the part is put for the whole, hence Tarshish = Tartessus = Spain.

\_To be continued in next number?^

108


8/11

Mar. 6] SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGY. [1894.

WHERE WAS TARSHISH?II.

P. Le Page Renoup'.Tarshish is always mentioned in connection with ships or

commerce.Thou breakest the ships of Tarshish with an east wind, says

the Psalmist (xlviii, 7) ; who is not King David, but a waiter familiarwith the works of the Prophets, even of those who lived during theexile. The words just quoted are a direct reference to Ezekielxxvii, 26 : The East wind hath broken thee [Tyre] in the midst ofthe seas. The Psalmist identifies Tyre and Tarshish. But he isnot the earliest authority for this identification, which cannot bemore strongly expressed than in the Burden of Tyre, in Isaiahxxiii.* This prophecy is perfectly intelligible and clear if byTarshish we understand Phoenicia ; it is absolutely without sense ifTartessus is thought of.

Howl ye ships of Tarshish ; f for it is laid waste. . . . Be still, ye inhabitants of the isle . . . Pass ye over to Tarshish ; howl ye inhabitants of the isle.*' Pass through thy land as a river, O daughter of Tarshish, there

is no more strength. Howl ye ships of Tarshish, for your strength is laid waste.The Phoenician ships are here called upon to wail for the ruin of

Tyre, which was their strefigth, and now is laid waste. Theinhabitants of the is/e, that is of the insular Tyre, are told to passover to Tarshish, the Phoenician coast. Tyre, as the daughter ofTarshish is told to pass through her land as a river, because thereis no more strength. Pass ye over to Tarshish, Hli^'^li^'^n IHi^and Pass through thy land, '^ i ^t^ ^ ^IVj ^ ^^ exactly equivalent

* For the present argument it matters not wliether the prophecy belongs toIsaiah or to a somewhat later contemporary.

+ Naves maris in the Vulgate.138


9/11

Mar. 6] PROCEEDINGS. [1894.expressions, addressed to the population of the island of Tyre, thestrength of which was laid waste.

If we are to believe the fabulous stories told by the Greeks,Tartessus was not indeed a colony of the Phoenicians but anEl Dorado, whence boundless wealth of gold and silver might beacquired by them at a trifling cost. But why under these circum-stances should the fortunes of Tartessus be identified with those ofTyre ? Why should the ships of Tartessus be told to howl because''their strength is laid waste? In what sense could Tyre be calledthe strength of Tartessus ? Tartessus (according to the hypothesis)was rather the strength of Tyre, as furnishing the sinews of war.The ruin of Tyre could not affect the fortunes of Tartessus. I cannotunderstand how a sensible and profound writer like Ewald could failto see that the siege of Tyre, however successfully conducted byShalmaneser, could never produce such an effect as to compel thepopulation of Tartessus to overflow its land in flight, even as theNile overflows Egypt.* For so he understands v. 10. But thedaughter ofTarshish is not Tartessus, but Tyre.The phophecy of Ezekiel (ch. xxvii) admits the same explanation.Tarshish is Phoenicia, and as the merchant of Tyre includes allthe kingdoms and cities of its coasts.

The Ships of Tarshish here and everywhere else are simplyPhoenician ships. Such were those of King Solomon (i Kings x, 22)and those of Jehoshaphat {ib. xxii, 48). The Hebrew kings boughtor hired ships made by the Phoenicians. That ships of Tartessusshould be built on the Elanitic gulph, or that ships should be builtthere for the purpose of going to Tartessus are absurdities too grossto be admitted, but in order to avoid them one has had recourse tothe gratuitous supposition that because the ships going to Tartessusmust have been great ships, therefore all great ships were called bythe Hebrews Ships of Tartessus, though they never came from orwere meant to go in that direction. Before appealing to the analogyof our ' East Indiamen,' it would have been desirable to procure theauthority of Semitic usage. When the true sense of Tarshish isunderstood the supposition in question is at once seen to be needlessand idle and extravagant.

It can hardly be necessary to speak of Tarshish in connectionwith the history of the prophet Jonah, which is always quoted as a

* And yet he has understood the prophet as recommending the Tj'rianpopulation to flee to Tartessus 139 N 2


10/11

Mar. 6] SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL ARCII/EOLOGY. [1894.proof that Tarshish was accessible by a ship starting from Joppe.This, of course, I do not deny, and such ships as the prophet foundthere, and was ever Hkely to find there, were more Hkely to arrivesafely on the Phoenician coast than to reach the Straits of Gibraltarand face the waters of the Atlantic. What could a ship iron\ Joppehave to do with Tartessus ?

I will refer but to one more Biblical note of Tarshish.* It ismentioned more than once in connection with the isles. So is Tyre.

What islands ? Islands in the Atlantic ?The Kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents.

So writes the Psalmist, Ixxii, 10, who also speaks of Arabianpotentates. But his words appear to be a reminiscence of JeremiahXXV, 22.

All the Kings of Tyre and all the Kings of Zidon and theKings of the isles which are by the sea-side, &c.

And so do the words of another Psalm, xlv, 12, The daughterof Tyre shall be there with a gift.

Tarshish and the Isles means 'Phoenicia, both continentaland insular.' All the great towns of Phoenicia had kings of theirown, who are frequently mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions,but the unity of the Phoenician nation and the common interestwas fully recognised.Why however, it may be asked, did Hebrew writers give thename of Tarshish to Phoenicia ? The reason for the name will, Ibelieve, be found in its etymology.Tarshish, tL^'^tL^'^n ihe broke?i, is a genuine Hebrew word, whichbears the same relation to the root tlJUJ ^ he broke, which l^p^Tlthe taught {disciple) bears to T^7 he taught. And the applicationof the term to the sea shore will at once be apparent to those whoknow how the Greek aKn) and n7(} are connected with a^/i'v/m break,and /J'/7/ ''' with fnj^ii'vint, which also signifies break. The kindredword />x'' 'S applied to a 7'oeliy shore. Our own word breakers

* leremiah (x. 9) says that Silver spread into plates is brought fromTarshish. This does not help one to identify the place, but it does not tellagainst Phoenicia, for it certainly was from Phoenician hands that this silver mer-chandise came to Jerusalem.

t In the first draught of this essay I spoke at some length of the relationsbetween Tyre and Palai-tyros. I was perhaps understood as holding the termsPalai-tyros and Tarshish to be equivalent and coextensive. To avoid thismisapprehension I now omit the paragra])hs which might give occasion to it.

140


11/11

Mar. 6] PROCEEDINGS. [1894.owes its origin to the same conception. The denuding action ofwater through friction has given rise in our language to the wordshore, as something shorn; and the same result is visible in theSemitic Pfjil' ^T\> ] 'ii\~ and J;>-1-.--*The characteristic feature of Phoenicia is that it consists merelyof a long and extremely narrow line of sea shore, at the foot of hillswhich tower above it everywhere. 'H TrapaXi'a ^oiuiKy . . a-reinj t(9Kcil a\c7evij

le page renouf 1894 where was tarshish

Documents