"Barbarians" and Blemmyes: Who Was in Control of the Red Sea Port of Berenike in the Late Antique Period?

IF 0.5 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Matthew M. Cobb
{"title":"\"Barbarians\" and Blemmyes: Who Was in Control of the Red Sea Port of Berenike in the Late Antique Period?","authors":"Matthew M. Cobb","doi":"10.1353/jla.2021.0029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:In the early centuries ce, the Roman state attempted to monitor, tax, and protect traders and travelers crossing the Eastern Desert (against the potentially dangerous barbaroi). These traders were operating from sites like Berenike and Myos Hormos, key ports for the Red Sea branch of the Indian Ocean trade. Conversely, during the course of the third century, this situation changed. The praesidia (small forts) lining these routes were abandoned, Myos Hormos ceased to operate, and activity at Berenike reached a low ebb. In the late antique period there was a revival of activity, with more northerly ports like Clysma and Aila coming into prominence. Berenike also saw a revival, but who controlled this site remains less clear. Three possible scenarios are examined in this article. The first is that the Roman state was (in)directly in charge, perhaps through Christianized Saracen foederati. The second is that (a certain faction of) the Blemmyes were employed as foederati. The third is that the Blemmyes largely controlled Berenike and that traders were permitted to operate at the port under their sufferance. It is argued here that the latter two possibilities are now the most likely in light of recent archaeological and epigraphic discoveries.","PeriodicalId":16220,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Late Antiquity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Late Antiquity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jla.2021.0029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract:In the early centuries ce, the Roman state attempted to monitor, tax, and protect traders and travelers crossing the Eastern Desert (against the potentially dangerous barbaroi). These traders were operating from sites like Berenike and Myos Hormos, key ports for the Red Sea branch of the Indian Ocean trade. Conversely, during the course of the third century, this situation changed. The praesidia (small forts) lining these routes were abandoned, Myos Hormos ceased to operate, and activity at Berenike reached a low ebb. In the late antique period there was a revival of activity, with more northerly ports like Clysma and Aila coming into prominence. Berenike also saw a revival, but who controlled this site remains less clear. Three possible scenarios are examined in this article. The first is that the Roman state was (in)directly in charge, perhaps through Christianized Saracen foederati. The second is that (a certain faction of) the Blemmyes were employed as foederati. The third is that the Blemmyes largely controlled Berenike and that traders were permitted to operate at the port under their sufferance. It is argued here that the latter two possibilities are now the most likely in light of recent archaeological and epigraphic discoveries.
“野蛮人”与布莱米斯:谁在古代晚期控制着红海港口贝列尼克?
摘要:公元前几个世纪初,罗马政府试图监控、征税和保护穿越东部沙漠的商人和旅行者(对抗潜在危险的野蛮人)。这些贸易商在Berenike和Myos Hormos等地开展业务,这是印度洋贸易红海分支的关键港口。相反,在三世纪期间,这种情况发生了变化。这些路线上的要塞(小堡垒)被放弃了,Myos Hormos停止了运作,Berenike的活动达到了低潮。在古代晚期,有一个复兴的活动,更北部的港口,如Clysma和Aila开始突出。Berenike也看到了复兴,但谁控制了这个网站仍然不太清楚。本文研究了三种可能的场景。第一种是罗马政府直接掌管,可能是通过基督教化的撒拉逊联盟。第二件事是布伦米派(某一派别)被雇佣为联邦军。第三,布伦米家族在很大程度上控制着贝雷尼克,在他们的容忍下,商人们被允许在港口经营。本文认为,根据最近的考古和碑文发现,后两种可能性是最有可能的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Late Antiquity
Journal of Late Antiquity HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
50.00%
发文量
18
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信