9. MEGARA HYBLAEA and the SICELS of the Many Deficiencies In

9. MEGARA HYBLAEA AND THE SICELS

Of the many deficiencies in our evidence for Greek colonization in the Archaic period, one of the worst is the lack of good informa­ tion about the native peoples among whom the Greeks established their new settlements. We are fortunate if we know more than the general name of the people involved. The size and nature of their political units and institutions must usually be guessed on the basis of probabilities and analogies. So the initial relations between colonists and natives can only be grasped, at best, in a vague and general manner. Yet we do know that these relations ran the gamut from most hos­ tile, when colonization was achieved by the forcible expulsion of the native inhabitants, to most friendly, when the colony was established as the invitation of the local people. The best example of the latter phenomenon, had colonization resulted, would be provided by Herodotus' story ( 1.163) of Arganthonius, king of Tartessus, and the Phocaeans. In this instance the Phocaeans traded regularly with Tartessus and became so beloved by the local king, that he invited them to settle in his country. Although the invitation was refused, our evidence does provide a small number of other cases where Greek colonies were established at the invitation of the native peo­ ple. The earliest and perhaps the best attested is that of Megara Hyblaea. II Megara Hyblaea was founded on the East coast of Sicily by set­ tlers from Megara in Greece in c. 728 BC.1 This date can be reached by very close calculations on the basis of Thucydides' statements (6.4.1-2). 2 The higher date, c. 750, which was proposed by Vallet and Villard and widely accepted until recently, was chiefly based on inferences from archaeological material, which have since been found to be incorrect, and has been publicly retracted by its proposers. 3

1 See CAH IIF.3, 106-8; ]. Berard, La colonisation grecque de I'Italie et de Ia Sicile dans l'antiquite, second edition (Paris 1957) 109-16. 2 See T. J. Dunbabin, The Western Greeks (Oxford 1948) 435-8. 3 G. Vallet and F. Villard, "Les dates de fondation de Megara Hyblaea et de Syracuse," BCH 76 (1952) 289-346, and, for the retraction, Insediamenti coloniali

Local Ethnopolitical Entities qf the Black Sea Littoral in the Seventh to Fourth Centuries BC (1988), 304-321 150 MEGARA HYBLAEA AND THE SICELS

Our most authoritative source, Thucydides, states that the colonists were conducted to their final site by the Sicel king, Hyblon, who gave them the land (6.4.1). This statement is in general terms strongly confirmed by topography and archaeology. The low-lying site has no natural defences on the westward, landward, side, and the low escarpments on its eastern, northern and southern sides where the land rises from the sea and two small rivers, which have been con­ sidered natural defences by some authors, 4 are in truth barely worthy of such a description. It is more realistic to regard the whole side as undefended by nature and its choice undoubtedly reveals the colonists' confidence on the goodwill of the native inhabitants. Archaeological investigations have also shown that human settle­ ment of the site began with the establishment of the Greek colony, which was, therefore, planted on virgin, unoccupied, land.5 These facts would lead us to postulate circumstances of settlement similar to those described by Thucydides, even we did not possess his explicit statements. If the general circumstances of Megara Hyblaea's settlement are pleasingly clear, it is much more difficult to achieve the sharper definition and greater detail that we arc bound to seek. For this a close examination of the literary sources is the essential beginning. We have four main passages to consider: Thuc. 6.4.1; Polyaenus, Strat. 5.5; Strabo 6.267; and Ps.-Scymnus 270-79. The two last were derived, whether or not directly, from Ephorus, and are printed as his fragment 137 in Jacoby's collection (FGH 70 F 137).6 Ephorus' account of the early colonization of Sicily diverges significantly from that of Thucydides (as also from Polyaenus), so we must subject it to close scrutiny. greci in Sicilia nell' VIII e VII secolo A.C., Cronache di Archeologia e di Storia dell' Arte 17 (1978) 150-2. 4 E.g. Berard, op. cit. 114 and Villard, 'Megara Hyblaea', Me!.Arch.Hist.Ecole Franc Rome 63 (1951) 7-52. 5 Compare Villard's description of the stratigraphy, op. cit. 10-12. 6 The unmistakable similarities in the passage Ps.-Scymnus, 264ff. show that it too came from Ephorus, even though his name is not mentioned, whether directly or through an intermediary. (Both Jacoby, FGH Introduction to the commentary on 70, Ephorus von Kyme, pp. 34f., and G. L. Barber, The Historian Ephorus, Cambridge 1935, I 75-6, believe that the author of the geographical poem did not use Ephorus directly.) The main importance of the Ps.-Scymnus passage is that it establishes the dating given by Ephorus, since there is a corruption at this point in the MSS. of Strabo; see Jacoby's commentary on the fragment and Berard, op. cit. 76 n. I. We have two passages which attest Ephorus' date for the Return of the