Landmass of Ancient Civilizations

[asianboy]

Sometimes, it is hard to find the landmass of some of the states in the ancient world. I made this thread so that those who want to find out about the total land areas could ask it here.

I want to find the total area that was under the Carthaginian control during their height. All of the Carthaginian maps that I have seens seems to be consistent. Yet, I have never found the numerical value for the area. Does anybody in this forum know the what that was?

[removeduser_487563287433]

Well, no, because that data doesn't exist. The Carthaginians didn't know themselves. That's because of ill defined borders and technical inability to record their area. We know what towns were controled by the Carthaginians and somestimes we're lucky enough to be told when something like a river forms a border, but that's about it. No Ordinance Survey maps in the ancient world.

[konny]

We don't know much about Carthagian Africa at all. You also shouldn't confuse Ancient "rule" with modern "state". The majority of the hinterlands they "held" would be lands of local Berber lords that were under partonage, vassalage, alliance or whatever with Carthago. That's at least how things worked in Spain.

[♔Goodguy1066♔]

Even if maps were recorded, I'm pretty sure the Romans destroyed them all after they conquered Carthage. Shame...

[SigniferOne]

Sometimes, it is hard to find the landmass of some of the states in the ancient world. I made this thread so that those who want to find out about the total land areas could ask it here.

I want to find the total area that was under the Carthaginian control during their height. All of the Carthaginian maps that I have seens seems to be consistent. Yet, I have never found the numerical value for the area. Does anybody in this forum know the what that was?

That value would be easy to calculate. What you do is take the modern measurements of, say, a third of Sicily, all of Corsica, Sardinia, all of Spain up to the river Ebro, the Tunisian promontory, and fractions of the North African states west of Tunis which roughly correspond to the sliver of land under Carthage's control, and you roughly estimate all of the land they had at the peak of their power, right around the First Punic War. At another point, about a century earlier, they controlled 95% of Sicily but only a coast of Spain, so I doubt you'd choose that as their height point.

[removeduser_487563287433]

That value would be easy to calculate. What you do is take the modern measurements of, say, a third of Sicily, all of Corsica, Sardinia, all of Spain up to the river Ebro, the Tunisian promontory, and fractions of the North African states west of Tunis which roughly correspond to the sliver of land under Carthage's control, and you roughly estimate all of the land they had at the peak of their power, right around the First Punic War. At another point, about a century earlier, they controlled 95% of Sicily but only a coast of Spain, so I doubt you'd choose that as their height point.

This completely ignores the fact that much of this area was recently occupied or not considered part of the lands of Carthage or its colonies or allies whatsover, but tributary or otherwise loosely alligned states. And since we do not know the precise political status or territory or even existance of all these groups it is not "easy to calculate". It is impossible. You can at best make an educated guess.

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

This completely ignores the fact that much of this area was recently occupied or not considered part of the lands of Carthage or its colonies or allies whatsover, but tributary or otherwise loosely alligned states. And since we do not know the precise political status or territory or even existance of all these groups it is not "easy to calculate". It is impossible. You can at best make an educated guess.

It's not relevant, SigniferOne seems to have learnt history in the 1890s, so he can easily caluculate landmass, with his mighty white man brain.

I'd eco Ferrets, considering that much of ancient empires consisted of vassls, client states and noble's personal fiefdoms and the lack of much central authority, it would be very difficult to cacluate the landmass of any empire until the 1700s with any degree of accuracy.

[SigniferOne]

This completely ignores the fact that much of this area was recently occupied or not considered part of the lands of Carthage or its colonies or allies whatsover, but tributary or otherwise loosely alligned states. And since we do not know the precise political status or territory or even existance of all these groups it is not "easy to calculate". It is impossible. You can at best make an educated guess.

That's fine, we can guesstimate which landmasses were merely allies, and subtract them from the overall list. My point is that the relative volume of landmasses has not changed since ancient times, a very often overlooked obvious fact. If we've determined that country X could've been counted as legitimate territory, then we can look at the modern volume of the landmass as a determinant of its ancient times.

[removeduser_487563287433]

That's fine, we can guesstimate which landmasses were merely allies, and subtract them from the overall list. My point is that the relative volume of landmasses has not changed since ancient times, a very often overlooked obvious fact. If we've determined that country X could've been counted as legitimate territory, then we can look at the modern volume of the landmass as a determinant of its ancient times.

Actually... in some cases... yes, the land itself has changed since ancient times. I mean, their are medieval port towns in England - that are now inland, such as Rye. Let alone ancient times.

But the limited knowledge we have of the territory of ancient states is much more of a problem.

[conon394]

You might find this article useful/interesting:

Size and Duration of Empires: Growth-Decline Curves, 600 B.C. to 600 A.D.
Author(s): Rein Taagepera Social Science History, Vol. 3, No. 3/4 (1979), pp. 115-138

[Ludicus]

You might find this article useful/interesting:

Size and Duration of Empires: Growth-Decline Curves, 600 B.C. to 600 A.D.
Author(s): Rein Taagepera Social Science History, Vol. 3, No. 3/4 (1979), pp. 115-138

Indeed, interesting.
----
Another link

"We excluded the maritime empires of the European Great Powers, because our measure of the latitudinal tendency is not applicable to such noncontiguous, widely distributed collections of territories"

East-West Orientation of Historical Empires
year 1270: Mongol empire 24.00 Mm2
year 117 Rome 5.00 Mm2
Edit:

Care to elaborate?

Read above , follow the link

[DAVIDE]

We are talking about few kilometers anyway.. Adria for example, it's just 10 km more or less far from the sea aka original location.. not big numbers at the end and perimetral measurement of an area's not so different by ancient times, especially when those areas changed just in a few way through the centuries

[SigniferOne]

Exactly. Which answers the OP very clearly that yes, we can determine the landmass of ancient civilizations quite easily. I'm not saying that determining whether country X could be counted as legitimate part (rather than a protectorate, ally etc) would be easy, but once we determine all regions which should constitute as legitimate parts, counting their volumes would be very easy indeed. I hope that's clear for you, Caterpillar.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Sig's wrong. We cannot determine the landmasses of ancient states at all.

[DAVIDE]

Sig's wrong. We cannot determine the landmasses of ancient states at all.

Sure we can. What determined the frontier of Roman state in the past for example? morphological formations as mountains, rivers, streets, towns, artificial walls or defences or a proven system of towers and castles on the limes. For example limes Tripolitanus is full of remains of Roman castles at the border and we just have to link the dots with a line to recontruct a precise limes.


Sorry for the quality, i m not good with paint. That is Lybia and red dots are Roman castles/towers





For example this limes was made by 18 forts, castles and watchtowers built along the road starting from Tapaca till Leptis Magna, a second peripheral road joining the first one at Tentheos nearby of the source of rivers Sofeggin and Zemzen in the highland of Garian. Line of fortifications continued from Ghedames, Gheeriat al Garbia, Gheeriat Schergia, Bun Njen etc. towards west.

[cpdwane]

The other thing to remember though is how you actually class Carhage's subjects (if they can be called that) as part of her Empire. Although Carthage was by far the dominant Phoenecaean colony in the western Mediterranian, she didn't always control her subjects directly, although she did exert authority over them. For example Gadir in Spain was not part of Carthages "Empire" as such, and had it's own government and traditions. Hence why the only Punic soldiers considered properly "Charthaginian" were those actually from the city itself or it's immediate neighbours (I'm thinking of the sacred Band here.) It is rather incorrect to describe Carthage as being an "Imperial power", because essentially it was just a single, very powerful city that exerted some degree of control on the other cities and peoples of the area, unlike the Roman Empire (and to a lesser extent Republic) which was a completely unified entity from the Antonine wall to Armenia, although few regions were given full rights as Romans.

[cpdwane]

For the Romans, maybe we can. But as i've already mentioned, for the Carthage it's a bit harder, because Carthage was always a city first and foremost rather then an area of land and even the areas it did control were often only client states or had indefinable borders.

[DAVIDE]

For the Romans, maybe we can. But as i've already mentioned, for the Carthage it's a bit harder, because Carthage was always a city first and foremost rather then an area of land and even the areas it did control were often only client states or had indefinable borders.

Nothing changes. I can make you a local example about Carthage in Sicily. After the destruction of Motya around 398 BC, Greeks and Carthaginians found an agreement that the border line between the two civilizations was represented by river Halykos aka modern Platani, close to Himera




In 310 BC Agatocles lord of Syracuse has been defeated by Hamilcar at Himera and after this defeat he retreated in his town. During the siege he used some ships to attack Carthage in Africa via land defeating Bomilcar. Agatocles chose to ally with Ophela being defeated then by Carthaginians. Greeks obtained a brandnew peace treaty, tracing the limes between Greeks and Carthaginians again at river Halykos

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

Nothing changes.

Oh, really?

The courses of rivers, never change
The sea never errodes
Glaciers never move
earthquakes change nothing

None of these things could concivably change things, making the geography of the land diffrent to that in ancient times, for christ sake's your supposed to be in charge of the Archaeology section yet you know nothing of basic geology/landscape change, a fundemental part of Archaeology.

Also, while your personal anecdote is nice, its nothing more than a logical Fallacy

[DAVIDE]

Oh, really?

The courses of rivers, never change
The sea never errodes
Glaciers never move
earthquakes change nothing

To have a massive changing of things you listed here, it requires more than 5000 years at least . I never seen or read rivers changing from here to there 2000 km away from original loco in a period of time so short as from Roman era till present day. Sea retired but how much? 15 kms in 2000 and more years?

None of these things could concivably change things, making the geography of the land diffrent to that in ancient times, for christ sake's your supposed to be in charge of the Archaeology section yet you know nothing of basic geology/landscape change, a fundemental part of Archaeology.

2000 years later, how many kilometers the sea is far from Adria, famous Roman harbor in the Adriatic? 19/20 km?? and sea from Miletus? the same. Is river Tiber's bed changed? Rubicon? Ebrus? Halykus? And what about the Molochat aka the border of Carthaginian state with Numidia? is that changed?? Did Alps changed location? Did Roman castle at Gholaia border with hic sunt leones area (just to make an example) change location because of an earthquake or desert storm?

Also, while your personal anecdote is nice, its nothing more than a logical Fallacy

Yep but you are forgetting that 2000 years ago there werent villages every 2 miles as now in present era and ancient people were usual to think in this way:

"This is the river blablabla, towns at east of it are mine, towns at west of it are yours"