Textiles, Trade and Theories Textiles Have Textiles Always Been Among the Most Popular Goods of Mankind

Textiles. Trade and Theories, from the Ancient Near East to the Mediterranean.

Nosch, Marie Louise Bech; Dross-Krüpe , Kerstin

Publication date: 2016

Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Citation for published version (APA): Nosch, M. L. B., & Dross-Krüpe , K. (Eds.) (2016). Textiles. Trade and Theories, from the Ancient Near East to the Mediterranean. Ugarit-Verlag, Münster. Karum – Emporion – Forum. Beiträge zur Wirtschafts-, Rechts- und Sozialgeschichte des östlichen Mittelmeerraums und Altvorderasiens Vol. 2

Download date: 30. sep.. 2021 18.10.2016 15:18:09 ⋼ forum Edited by Kerstin Droß-Krüpe Droß-Krüpe Edited by Kerstin Nosch and Marie-Louise Textiles, Trade Trade Textiles, Theoriesand Near East the Ancient From to the Mediterranean ἐμπόριον

Kārum – Emporion – Forum 2 Beiträge zur Wirtschafts-, Rechts- und Sozialgeschichte des östlichen Mittelmeerraums und Altvorderasiens

KEF 2 Textiles, Trade and Theories www.ugarit-verlag.com Textiles have Textiles always been among the most popular goods of mankind. Considering their significance in theancient Mediterranean and the ancient Near East alike, as well as significant hold textiles economicassets, key as value their potential for analyses the economic detailed understanding more of of the subject the ancient them economy. Making in their own right is a Becausevolume. it is not possible to central analyze distributional objective of the present patterns or the textiles exclusively on channels the basis of either written sources of distributionor archaeological findings, this for ancient volumedifferent source brings material, disciplines, together and methodological approaches, including modern Economics, to analyze the textiles that were traded, trade-routes, markets for buying institutions of operation and formation the and selling, and textile of processes of smooth functioning the ensured that exchange. KEF-2-Cover.indd 1

Textiles, Trade and Theories

From the Ancient Near East to the Mediterranean

Edited by Kerstin Droß-Krüpe and Marie-Louise Nosch

Beiträge zur Wirtschafts-, Rechts- und Sozialgeschichte des östlichen Mittelmeerraums und Altvorderasiens

Band 2

Herausgegeben von Angelika Lohwasser, Hans Neumann und Kai Ruffing

From the Ancient Near East to the Mediterranean

Edited by Kerstin Droß-Krüpe and Marie-Louise Nosch

2016 Ugarit-Verlag Münster

Textiles, Trade and Theories: From the Ancient Near East to the Mediterranean Edited by Kerstin Droß-Krüpe and Marie-Louise Nosch Kārum – Emporion – Forum 2

© 2016 Ugarit-Verlag, Münster www.ugarit-verlag.com All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photo-copying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Printed in Germany ISBN: 978-3- 86835-224-5

Printed on acid-free paper

Conference participants Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity 2 – Kassel, 11–14 November 2015 (photo R. Frei)

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 © 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Table of Contents

Maps ...... IX

Kerstin Dross-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch Preface and Acknowledgements ...... XV

Evelyn Korn Cloth for Wheat or Cloth for Cloth? Ricardo and Krugman on Ancient International Trade ...... 1

Agnès Garcia-Ventur a Descriptions of Textile Trade and Distribution in Handbooks of Ancient Near Eastern History: A View from Gender Studies ...... 15

Wim Broekaert The Empire’s New Clothes: The Roman Textile Industry in an Imperial Framework ...... 29

Miko Flohr The Wool Economy of Roman Italy ...... 49

Laetitia Graslin-Thomé Imported Textiles and Dyes in First-Millennium BCE Babylonia and the Emergence of New Consumption Needs ...... 63

Sebastian Fink War or Wool? Means of Ensuring Resource-Supply in 3rd Millennium Mesopotamia ...... 79

Salvatore Gaspa Trade and Distribution of Textiles in Ancient Assyria ...... 93

Stella Spantidaki Textile Trade in Classical Athens: From Fibre to Fabric ...... 125

Monika Frass Die Welt der „Mode“ bei Aristophanes: Kleidung im soziologischen und sozioökonomischen Kontext ...... 139

Brendan Burke Phrygian Fibulae as Markers of Textile Dedication in Greek Sanctuaries ...... 159

Elisabetta Lupi Milesische Wolle in Sybaris: Neudeutung eines Fragments von Timaios (FGrH 566 F 50) und die Frage nach dem Textilhandel zwischen Kleinasien und Süditalien) ...... 169

Maria Papadopoulou Wool and the City: Wool and Linen Textile Trade in Hellenistic Egypt ...... 193

Eivind Heldaas Seland Here, There and Everywhere: A Network Approach to Textile Trade in the Periplus Maris Erythraei ...... 211

Herbert Grassl Zur Struktur des Textilhandels im Römischen Reich ...... 221

Orit Shamir Textile Trade to Palestine in the Roman Period According to the Talmudic Sources and the Textile Finds ...... 231

Peter Herz Das Preisedikt Diokletians als Quelle des Textilhandels ...... 247

Ines Bogensperger How to Order a Textile in Ancient Times: The Step before Distribution and Trade ...... 259

Sabrina Tatz Die Textilfunde von Deir el-Bachît (Pauloskloster), Theben-West: Ein Beispiel monastischer Textilproduktion in der Spätantike ...... 271

Kerstin Dross-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch Textiles, Trade and Theories:How Scholars Past and Present View and Understand Textile Trade in the Ancient Near East and the Mediterranean in Antiquity ...... 293

List of Contributors ...... 331

Index of Sources ...... 335

Maps

Map 1: Overview map

Map 2: Italy and Central Europe

1. Parma 8. Abbazia di Montecassino 2. Brescello 9. Minturnae 3. Reggio nell’Emilia 10. Cales 4. Campi Macri 11. Met apont u m 5. Modena 12. Herakleia 6. Portus 13. Ta rent u m 7. Ostia 14. Brindisi

Map 3: Eastern Europe and Asia Minor

15. Th essalonica 31. Delos 16. Perachora 32. Samos 17. Isthmia 33. Didyma 18. Thebes 34. Miletus 19. Athens 35. Magnesia 20. Brauron 36. Ephesus 21. Koropi 3 7. H ierapolis 22. Pireaus 38. Colossae 23. Aegina 39. Laodicea 24. Melos 40. Šadikanni 25. Hermione 41. Harran 26. Argos 42. Karkemish 2 7. S parta 43. Antiochia 2 8 . Te gea 44. Kullania 29. Chios 45. Qatna 30. Eythrai

Map 4: Africa and Arabian peninsula (key on page XIII)

40. Šadikanni 52. Gaza 64. ‘En Boqeq 76. Philadelphia 41. Harran 53. El Arish 65. Masada 77. Herakleopolis 42. Karkemish 54. Rogem Zafir 66. ‘En Gedi 78. el-Hibe 43. Antiochia 55. Nessana 67. Wadi Murabba’at 79. Qarara 44. Kullania 56. Sh‘ar Ramon 68. Qumran 80. Oxyrrhynchus 45. Qatna 57. Q asra 69. Jericho 81. Te btynis 46. Sidon 58. En Rahel 70. Beth She’an 82. Karanis 47. Tyre 59. Mo’a 71. Giscala 83. Arsinoē 48. Sihin 60. Nahal Omer 72. Damascus 84. Deir el-Bachît 49. Megiddo 61. Petra 73. Pelusium 85. Deir el-Bahari 50. Samaria 62. ‘En Yahav 74. Saqqa ra 86. Pathyris 51. Jerusalem 63. ‘En Tamar 75. Memphis

Map 5: Indian subcontinent

Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch

Every conference relies on resourceful patrons and dedicated participants. This is especially true when it comes to an interdisciplinary conference, co-organized by two institutions from two different countries such as the one whose proceedings we submit here. From the 11th to the 14th November 2015, around 40 experts from the fields of Ancient History, the Ancient Near East, Archaeobotany, Classical Archaeology, Pre history, Economics, and Textile Research from 13 different countries came together to Kassel, to discuss the mechanisms, ways and models for the distribution/circulation of textiles in Antiquity. They exchanged recent research results, presented various analytical methods, and discussed and debated new research approaches. We chose as broad a spatial and temporal framework for the conference as possible: from Babylon and Assur to the north-west provinces of the Roman Empire, from the 2nd millennium BCE to the 5th century CE. Thus, it continued the first “Textile Trade and Distribution” conference organized at the University of Marburg in April 2013,1 but the approaches were expanded and enhanced to give us an even greater theoretical, and especially economic, perspective on our theme. For the publication we decided to put the papers with a particularly strong theoretical focus first, followed by a chronological run. We wholeheartedly thank all participants for their insightful and thought-pro- voking papers, lively discussions, inspiring exchange of ideas, the raising of unex- pected and unorthodox questions, the crossing of academic borders, and above all for the possibility of strengthening existing friendships and making new ones. We would like to express our gratitude to those individuals and institutions who have contributed to the success of the conference and for the rapid publication of these conference proceedings. First and foremost for the generous financial support from our donors which provided us with the structural framework for this vibrant conference: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), the Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Textile Research (CTR), the Alexander von Humboldt- Foundation, the Groupe de Recherche International “Ancient Textiles from Orient to the Mediterranean” (ATOM) and the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS). We are grateful to the University of Kassel for the provision of the styl- ish ambience of our conference. And our heartfelt thanks go out to all our dear and cherished colleagues who skillfully moderated the individual conference ses- sions and discussions enriching them with their expertise: Kai Ruffing, Helmuth Schneider, Beate Wagner-Hasel and John Peter Wild, as well as Charlène Bouchaud, Cecilie Brøns, Margarita Gleba, Barbara Köstner, Felicitas Maeder, Björn Onken, Sabine Schrenk, and Felicity Wild. Furthermore, we would like to address a particular warm thanks to Rebecca Frei, Carolin Hols, and Jane Parson Sauer, who worked intensively behind the scene to manage with practical organization, ensured

1 For the results of this conference see K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden 2014 (Philippika 73).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 XVI Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch that everything ran smoothly, and helped to give the conference a special, warm atmosphere. The publication of the proceedings would not have been possible without the indefatigable efforts of Carolin Hols (editing, indexing) and Yvonne Wagner (type- setting, layout), who adopted the utmost care and circumspection in ensuring the project’s success. Sidsel Frisch contributed to this volume by taking excellent care of the maps, Sebastian Fink competently and patiently answered all our questions concerning the citation of Near Eastern sources. Peder Flemestad, Virginia Geisel, Mary Harlow, Jonathan Wiener, and John Peter Wild gave us valuable comments on the language. We are grateful to Ellen Rehm from Ugarit Publishers for her cooperation in making the publishing process as smooth and as troublefree as possible. We are delighted that Angelika Lohwasser, Hans Neumann and Kai Ruffing accepted this volume for the KEF series and hope that it will enjoy a large and interested reader- ship who find that the network of textiles, trade and theories is as exciting – and as rewarding! – as we do.

Marie-Louise Nosch & Kerstin Droß-Krüpe

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Cloth for Wheat or Cloth for Cloth? Ricardo and Krugman on Ancient International Trade*

Evelyn Korn

As an economist I am clearly an outsider to the Studies of the Ancient World. However, the interdisciplinary exchange with scholars from the field I have experienced over the last years has raised my interest in economic activities in ancient times. Therefore, I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this collected volume on ancient textile trade. The idea of this contribution is to show how modern economic theories can be helpful to understand trade patterns and how they depend on geophysical, social, and political factors. However, theories need to be matched with and tested by empirical evidence – which needs to be done by researchers from the field itself. Therefore, the ultimate goal is to contribute by developing new research questions to support further research. This chapter is intended to show along which lines the development of questions could work. One basic assumption in the application of economic theory to ancient cultures is that human behaviour has followed the same structural rules over the last 3000 years. That observed behaviour differs across times and cultures, follows from the fact that the institutions shaping this behaviour have changed.1 Thus, it is worthwhile to investigate first how institutions shape individual behaviour and vice versa and then to address differences between different regions or periods from an institutional perspective. The argument to follow will focus on institutions shaping long-distance textile trade. The theory to apply is that of ‘International Trade’. Despite the name this theory can be employed to trade in general and does not need a clear definition of a nation. It explains under which conditions it is beneficial for two individuals or groups of individuals to exchange goods or services. The paper will explain different models from this theory and discuss two recent accounts of ancient textile trade using these models. Natural starting points for theories of trade are the works of Adam Smith and David Ricardo.2 Their fundamental insights have been expanded in the early 20th century by Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin3 and later on Paul Krugman and Elhanan Helpman.4 The focus will be on those parts of the models that explain empirical findings that exist on ancient textile production and distribution. Particularly important aspects in this context are market structures and distribution channels which can then be interpreted as parts of a general institutional design.

* I am indebted to Sabine Föllinger and Jürgen Lorenz who acquainted me with phenomena of the Ancient World that can be addressed by Institutional Economic models and to Kerstin Droß-Krüpe who asked me to participate in the conference and was a wonderful support in finding the necessary information to analyze the structure of ancient textile trade. 1 North 1990 defines institutions as the rules of the game we are all playing every day. 2 Smith 1776; Ricardo 1817. 3 Heckscher 1949; Ohlin 1933. 4 Krugman 1980; Helpman 1981.

The connection to ancient textile trade is based on two scholarly papers: Miko Flohr’s work on textile manufacturing and distribution in the Roman World5 and Hatice Erdemir’s analysis of the wool business in the Lycus Valley also at the time of the Roman Empire.6 Data from both texts will be selected and presented from an institutional economics perspective. Issues raised are why similar goods have been produced under small-scale as well as large-scale production; how distribution channels and trade routes developed; why there was branding; how geographic aspects have impacted the development of an industry; and why and how guilds of different crafts have developed. All these issues can and will be addressed using ideas from the models mentioned before.

Empirical Findings Erdemir aims at connecting the development of the wool industry in the Lycus Valley to its geographical advantages in sheep husbandry as well as wool production and distribution and to show how these advantages have shaped the development of the industry. In addition, she discusses the organization of different parts of this industry and connects it to the social structure of the region. The collection of quo- tations from her text that follow is intended to show the basis of my interpretation of her results: Erdemir describes “woollen textiles as one of the prime sources of revenue for the Lycus Valley within global markets of Antiquity”.7 Thus, understanding the development of this industry is an important part of the analysis of the society in Colossae’s region. She states that there was a twofold geographical advantage to the wool business in the area as it was suited for sheep husbandry as well as for the processing of wool: “Colossae and its surrounding area provided the physical geography, fauna and flora that were an especially suitable environment for raising 8 9 sheep” and “Strabo (…) notes ‘the water of Hierapolis is suitable for dyeing wool’ ”. Obviously, a wide range of crafts in the wool industry were present and had found a way to jointly voice their interests. Erdemir refers to an inscription that names the “most august guild of wool washers”10 and another one that mentions a wool dyers guild.11 In addition, there was an industry of by-products that have been used inside and outside the Lycus Valley: “(…) lanolin, an expensive by-product of sheep wool, was a key ingredient in cosmetics (…)”.12 Woollen products were sold far outside the region which also made it important to protect brand rights: “ ‘Laodicean’ may have become a designated style (…)”.13 As Erdemir notes, the term ‘Laodicean’ could have actually named the region of origin – and that way signal the quality of the product sold – or have been used for a certain style of garment – which means that the branding activities were successful enough to impact fashion. One

5 Flohr 2014. 6 Erdemir 2011. 7 Erdemir 2011, 105. 8 Erdemir 2011, 108. 9 Erdemir 2011, 114. 10 Erdemir 2011, 114. 11 Erdemir 2011, 115. 12 Erdemir 2011, 123. 13 Erdemir 2011, 117.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Cloth for Wheat or Cloth for Cloth? 3 reason for that latter impact could be that the quality of the wool and the dyeing technique in use produced lively colours in the garments. The reach of the industry was considerable which is shown by the fact that “(…) merchant T. Flavius Zeuxis (…) had been through the Peloponnese 72 times en route to Italy”.14 The potential for major travel and exchange was again based in a geographical advantage – here, however, the ultimate cause for this advantage remains unclear: For, she states that Laodicea was positioned “at a junction of major trade routes [which] enhanced its commercial potential”.15 The success of the wool business had an impact on the local social structure and on behavioural norms, particularly for women: in inscriptions “Palmyrene women are represented as having been busy spinning and knitting yarn through their lives”.16 This latter statement seems to be disconnected from the other obviously economic statements as it names a cultural standard that was applied to wealthy women – who could afford to be buried in a grave with an inscription. It is highly unlikely that these women did the spinning and knitting themselves; it is far more likely that slaves did this kind of work if it was done in the household sphere. However, it still hints at a feature that will be important later on: producing high-end products as those textiles seem to have been requires high technical standards, preferably with a competitive edge against other producers. The cultural standard that turned the ability to spin and knit into a virtue, kept the incentives high to master the necessary techniques for women who would be the leaders in a home-based industry. Flohr provides an account of textile trade in the Roman Empire. Similar to Erdemir, Flohr stresses that textiles were easy to export as they were light weight, durable, not extremely fashion-dependent and, thus, well storable. To provide the context necessary to understand the development and organization of trade, he sketches the general political landscape and describes globalization in trade as a follow-up to political unification: due to Romanization “(…) more and more people became accustomed to products that originally came from regions far away.” (…) “As far as dress is concerned, the consumption of certain types of clothing may have globalized.”17 Comparable to Erdemir’s statement he considers the meaning of brand names: “It is possible that labels had lost their original geographical meaning and now just referred to the physical properties of the garments (…)”.18 Thus, the joint market for garments ensured general access to information concerning quality of a certain good; in addition, the Roman government also provided price information. In that context Flohr mentions Diocletian’s Price Edict. However, the Edict seems to cover luxury items only such that the question arises – and is discussed by Flohr – if there was a strict market segregation: a globalized market for luxury items and local markets for commodity items?19 To Flohr this separation seems to be a puzzle; as will be shown later on, it is absolutely reasonable in the light of modern trade theories. In sum, Flohr suggests that the described Romanization had a number of effects on trade; it reduced transportation costs and helped to spread information on quality

14 Erdemir 2011, 118. 15 Erdemir 2011, 119. 16 Erdemir 2011, 121. 17 Flohr 2014, 3. 18 Flohr 2014, 3. 19 Flohr 2014, 3.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 4 Evelyn Korn and prices – the political regime would, thus, reduce transaction costs in general. However, the institutional frame was helpful but not perfect as there were “Large- scale investments in infrastructure such as ports and roads (…)”20 but “Market information was (…) far from perfect.”21 Flohr also provides observations on textile manufacturing and distribution that are outside the scope of political economy. There is another transportation-cost argument as Flohr assumes that textile trade – at least in some regions – started as a by-product of other trade: Wool trade from Hispania Baetica was “based on olives, silver and lead.”22 As to the organization of production he observes different size models: “(…) it may become more attractive to invest on a larger scale – either it becomes easier to obtain large quantities of raw materials or half-finished products (…)”, 23 where the extent depended on the technology in use. Bigger production units were especially helpful for “sheep rearing, dyeing and fulling” but not for “spinning and weaving”.24 In general, “(…) small scale remained the norm (…)”25 but “large-scale workshops did appear in the Roman textile economy”26 and coexisted with the small-scale businesses. Flohr describes the co-existence of differently sized workshops as a puzzle and formulates the hypothesis that large-scale investment had rather been used for customization of imported intermediate products (as there were fulling and dyeing factories in Rome and Pompeii) and not for immediate production for the home market or for the export of finished goods.27 An alternative explanation for this puzzle will be provided later on.

Trade Models I – From Smith to Heckscher-Ohlin Both texts provide evidence that textile trade was a lively activity in the Roman Empire and its neighbouring regions. In contrast, trade theories have been developed at a much later point in time. In particular the idea that trade is mutually beneficial is a very recent idea – it dates back to the 18th century when Adam Smith started to persuade his government to allow for free trade. When Smith entered the scene, mercantilism was the general ideology in political economy which saw trade as a political activity. At his time, governments were very sceptical about the inflow of foreign goods. In as much as they had real impact on trade (it seems to be a historical constant that politicians overrate their influence on economic activities), they considered imports and exports as a political measure of success. The idea was that as long as exports outperform imports, the nation’s wellbeing would increase; there was no positive path to accepting imports. In consequence, trade barriers were erected, tariffs were introduced, and everything was done to promote exports.28

20 Flohr 2014, 5. 21 Flohr 2014, 5. 22 Flohr 2014, 5. 23 Flohr 2014, 9. 24 Flohr 2014, 9–10. 25 Flohr 2014, 10. 26 Flohr 2014, 11. 27 Flohr 2014, 12. 28 Acemoglu & Robinson 2012 give an (historically not always accurate but still interesting) account of trade policies of the last 500 years.

So, when Smith and later on Ricardo formulated their theories, they did so with a political agenda. Smith’s famous quotation “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest”29 is far from being a summary of contemporary general opinion. It was intended to spread a revolutionary idea: even if all agents in an exchange follow selfish interests, the exchange can still be beneficial to all parties. The principal structure of this argument stays unchanged, no matter if the parties under consideration are two nations, two neighbouring villages, two neighbouring households, or, even, when explaining why one exchanges services and goods with one’s spouse. When explaining the mutual effect of trade, Smith described two countries that can each produce two products, cloth and wheat. He assumed that time (labour) is the main input in production and that the time needed to produce each unit of a goods is constant. Table 1 shows an example30 for cloth and wheat production in two countries named A and B.

Country A Country B Country A Country B 1 bushel of bushels wheat 2 hours 2.5 hours 2 2/5 wheat yard cloth 1 yard of yards cloth 4 hours 1 hour 0.5 2.5 cloth bushel wheat

Table 1: Absolute advantages The left-hand table shows how many hours are needed to produce one unit of cloth and wheat in each country. The right-hand table expresses relative prices of production; to produce one unit of cloth more, a household in country A would have to give up the production of two units of wheat, etc.

Workers in both countries can produce cloth and wheat. Each household in country A would need two hours to produce one bushel of wheat and four hours to produce one yard of cloth. In country B, each household requires 2.5 hours to produce a bushel of wheat and one hour to produce a yard of cloth. Smith developed the concept of absolute advantage. Households in country A are better at manufacturing wheat as wheat production takes less time in country A than in country B. Households in country B are better at producing cloth as it takes less time there than in country A (as indicated in the left-hand table in Table 1). So, country A has an absolute advantage in producing wheat while country B has an absolute advantage in producing cloth. Based on this observation Smith argues that trade between these countries would be beneficial for everybody. To show the benefit to be expected Smith used the concept of so-called relative prices. He asked the question of how many bushels of wheat a household in country A would have to give up for one additional yard of cloth. In the example of Table 1 (shown in the right-hand table), a household in country A would have to give up two bushels of wheat for one additional yard of cloth. This price system can be introduced for exchange between items

29 Smith 1776, 19. 30 All numbers in the examples are taken from Lindert & Pugel 1996.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 6 Evelyn Korn in both countries. While households in country A have to give up two bushels of wheat for one yard of cloth in country A, it is just the other way around for households in country B – they would have to give up 2.5 yards of cloth for an additional bushel of wheat. And here the option of mutually beneficial trade comes in: Smith argued that households in both countries could gain by specializing on production of that item for which they face an absolute advantage and exchanging goods on mutually beneficial terms. For, what happens if households from both countries could exchange goods, that is, international trade is allowed? Smith has assumed that trade between countries does not involve any costs. As both Erdemir and Flohr have pointed out for their example economies and as for any trade in the real world, this is an unrealistic assumption. There are transportation costs, information costs, and, of course, costs associated to taking the risk of exchange. Introducing these costs into the model would reduce the set of mutually beneficial exchange options, but the general argument would stay unchanged. Therefore, let us accept this assumption for the moment – it will be discussed within the application sections below. As long as households in both countries have to produce all of their goods themselves, they will have a mixed production function. When considering the opportunity of trade, a farmer in country B assesses the following chain: instead of producing the last bushel of wheat, the household could produce 2.5 yards of cloth; transporting these 2.5 yards of cloth to country A, the household could offer to exchange each yard of cloth against 1.5 bushels of wheat (which would make the exchange also beneficial for the trade partners in country A as they would have to give up two bushels of wheat for each yard of cloth they want to produce) – which means that the household could receive 3.75 bushels of wheat in total. Thus, the comparison to make for a household in B is to use time for the production of one bushel of wheat directly or to use the same amount of time to produce 2.5 yards of cloth and exchange them against 3.75 bushels of wheat. As long as the household expects to find trading partners (which will be the case in equilibrium), specialization in the production of cloth is the better option. Smith has pointed out that the household from country B does not gain at the expense of its trading partners in country A. To the contrary, by accepting the trade, the household in A is better off than by produ cing self-sufficiently. For, the production of each yard of cloth means to give up the production of two bushels of wheat while the exchange resulted in giving 1.5 bushel of wheat for a yard of cloth. The actual exchange rate for cloth and wheat depends on a number of factors like how many people in each country have actually decided on specialization (which determines the amount of wheat and cloth that can be traded in a certain time period) or individual abilities in negotiations. Thus, without further assumptions, a clear prediction of the market result is impossible. However, Smith’ main point is independent of the full picture: specialization and trade are beneficial. What Smith could show in addition is that the information needed by each household is minimal. It suffices to know personal exchange rates and to observe at which prices actual transactions have taken place. Ricardo supported Smith’s argument and went one step further by claiming that international trade is not only beneficial if countries haveabsolute advantages

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Cloth for Wheat or Cloth for Cloth? 7 in producing certain goods.31 He claimed that trade would be beneficial whenever countries have different production abilities which would lead to so-called compara tive advantages. Table 2 shows the basis of his argument.32

Country A Country C Country A Country C 1 bushel of bushels wheat 2 hours 1.5 hours 2 2/3 wheat yard cloth 1 yard of yards cloth 4 hours 1 hour 0.5 1.5 cloth bushel wheat

Table 2: Comparative advantages Country C is better at producing wheat and at producing cloth as the left-hand table shows. The right-hand table shows that relative prices of production still allow for mutually beneficial trade.

Assume there is a 3rd country, country C; country C is better at producing both goods compared to country A, i.e., households in C need fewer hours per bushel of wheat and per yard of cloth. In consequence, there is no absolute advantage for one of the goods for country A such that Smith’ explanation cannot be applied. However, Ricardo argues that prices express relative scarcities and therefore absolute advantage is not the concept to use. The only important concern is how much wheat a household has to give up for producing one unit of cloth and vice versa. As the ratios that express this rate are inverse to each other, either the fraction of ‘wheat to cloth’ needs to be higher for country A or the ratio ‘cloth to wheat’. In the example given, it is the ratio ‘wheat to cloth’ which implies that country A has a comparative advantage in producing wheat. For, in country A households have to give up two bushels of wheat for one yard of cloth, while in country C households would have to give up only ⅔ of a bushel of wheat for one yard of cloth. There is still scope for exchange between a household in country A and a household in country C as both only care about the best allocation of their time to production. Moreover it is still better for a household in country C to allocate all time to producing cloth and exchanging it against wheat from a household in country A. An exchange rate that trades one yard of cloth against one bushel of wheat would be good for both parties to the trade: the household from country C would have to give up 1.5 yards of cloth instead of one for the additional bushel of wheat when producing on its own; the household from country A would have to give up 2 bushels of wheat instead of one for the additional yard of cloth when producing in autarky. Thus, according to Ricardo, trade is mutually beneficial as long as all parties to the trade differ in their production possibilities because this is the only prerequisite for having different comparative advantages. Smith and Ricardo have made a neat point by showing that trade can offer – and actually does so in many cases – gains to all parties involved. Yet, a number of

31 Ricardo 1817. Ricardo used cloth and wine as the goods to exchange – which provided the name for this chapter; for sake of consistency, I stick to cloth and wheat throughout the example. 32 Numbers are again from Lindert & Pugel 1996.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 8 Evelyn Korn open questions remain. The prices in the examples have been chosen in a discretion ary way. However, the actual exchange rate determines how the gains from trade will be shared between the parties. Typically, the country with the higher productivity gains more from trade. In consequence, the inequality between the two countries grows over time. This effect limits the long-run gains that can be realized from trade as inequality is not only a matter of justice but actually influences the development of new technologies.33 In addition, Smith and Ricardo produce a rather extreme result. In their model, perfect specialization should be expected in equilibrium, that is, country A produces wheat only and Countries B and C produce cloth only. This is an unrealistic prediction (which is more harmful than the unrealistic assumption of zero transportation cost). It is caused by the very simple model of production underlying Smith and Ricardo’s argument. I would like to address three aspects. First of all, the model assumes that production costs for both goods are linear, i.e., the first cloth takes 4 hours to produce as does the millionth yard of cloth. In a more realistic scenario, production costs would differ with size, an effect that is covered by so-called economies or non-economies of scale in production. Secondly, production typically needs more inputs than just labour and productivity of all factors is interdependent. As an example consider sheep husbandry to produce the wool needed for the cloth. Sheep need food (that comes from meadows) and shepherds. If the number of sheep increases moderately, neither labour nor access to meadows might be limiting. But at some point the flock will be too big for one shepherd and good grazing land will become scarce such that adding an additional sheep to ones flock becomes very expensive. Thirdly, what determines that households in country A are better at pro ducing wheat than households in country B? All three issues can be addressed within a slightly bigger model of production that uses two production factors instead of one. To stick to the wheat and cloth (sheep husbandry) example let us assume that the two factors under consideration are land and labour. The so-called Heckscher-Ohlin model of international trade34 explains why different countries have developed different production technologies and, thus, comparative advantages in the production of certain goods by the relative abundance of production factors. The basis of their idea is that people adapt to their environment and use those inputs first that are easily accessible when devel oping technologies. Let us assume that growing wheat needs fertile soil (and some labour) while herding sheep and producing fabric needs labour (and some land). The theory then predicts that advanced wheat-farming technologies will be developed in countries where fertile soil is abundant (and labour is relatively scarce) while textile production will be developed where labour is abundant (and fertile land is scarce). This perspective explains why different countries specialize in the production of different goods – which is part of the story behind Tables 1 and 2. Thinking about input factors as abundant or scarce also allows for including changes in productivity related to the amount already produced. It is reasonable to assume that (beyond a

33 This issue has been addressed within economic theory throughout the last decades. Bowles 2012 explains some of the effects. 34 The model goes back to an article by Heckscher 1949 that was originally published in Swedish and translated into English in 1949 and the PhD thesis of his student Ohlin 1933. The model as it is used today is an adaptation of the original work by Heckscher and Ohlin.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Cloth for Wheat or Cloth for Cloth? 9 certain threshold) per-unit costs of production are increasing with every unit produced. Thus, the first units of a product are relatively cheap and costs increase the more gets produced. This feature of production functions prevents perfect specialization. For, even if households in country A need very little time to produce the first bushels of wheat and are better in producing wheat than cloth, an expansion of the production of wheat will raise the cost per unit. Keeping the amount of cloth produced constant, there is an amount of wheat at which the relationship turns. Producing the next bushel of wheat will be more expensive than producing the next yard of cloth. In consequence, all countries would produce all goods. However, there is still scope for international trade. For, the tipping point in the relative production costs of wheat and cloth might be at such high quantities of wheat for country A and such high quantities of cloth for country B that it still pays off to partly specialize and to exchange goods. In that case each country would produce both goods and country A would export wheat and import cloth (and vice versa for country B). Based on Smith and Ricardo’s ideas concerning the fundaments of exchange and the Heckscher-Ohlin model to explain the sources of specialization, a first attempt to sort Erdemir and Flohr’s observations can be made.

Application I – Ricardo and Heckscher-Ohlin in Colossae and Rome The description of the Laodicean wool production perfectly fits the Heckscher-Ohlin model. As Erdemir pointed out, the region around Colossae provided geo-physical conditions that encouraged the specialization in sheep husbandry (physical geography, flora, fauna) as well as in wool manufacturing (water quality). In addition, trade with other regions was possible at reasonable cost which is a necessary condition for the application of the trade theories explained in the last section. The Heckscher-Ohlin model also suggests that wool and textiles should be a net export but not the only product of the region. Thus, major parts of Erdemir’s description can be explained by these basic models. However, some open questions remain. Why is it reasonable to have different guilds? Why is branding a reasonable activity for a net exporter? And how can the cultural standard of spinning and wea ving for women be explained? In a similar fashion, some of Flohr’s observations on trade within the Roman Empire fit the Ricardo- and Heckscher-Ohlin setting well while others cannot be explained. His observations on trade costs and market information address the backbone of all trade theories: individuals will only enter trading if there is reliable information on prices, quantities, and qualities available. These minimal set of information is already part of Smith’ theory as individuals make their decision for specialization based on market expectation. To think in exchange opportunities and relative benefits from an individual perspective also explains why only luxury items were traded across longer distances. Producing luxury items demands advanced abilities, which increases the comparative advantage in producing a certain item. In consequence, these items yield a greater per-item profit margin such that the mutual benefit from trade is still positive even if parties to the trade have to bear high tra ding costs. Conversely, the profit margin for commodity items would be very low, having a negative impact on the incentive to trade such items.

Observations that cannot be explained by the Heckscher-Ohlin model include the fact that similar styles have been produced in and exported from different regions of the Roman Empire. The models considered so far would predict a flow of commodities in one direction. In addition, the theories presented so far have assumed that the producers of one country (village, region) are similar in their structure as they adapt to similar exogenous circumstances. So, why can large- and small-scale firms in the same business context be observed within one village? All these questions call for an extension of the theories.

Trade Models II – Krugman and Helpman Heckscher and Ohlin not only fail to explain the trade flows in the Ancient World with their streams of similar products in different directions; the prediction is also proven wrong by today’s everyday trade. Here, cars are the classic example. Why should we import Japanese cars to Europe, why should Americans import European cars? The answer is simple but has not been represented in the trade models described above: people have different tastes – be it for cars or for fabrics and garments. Krugman35 and Elhanan Helpman36 have addressed these issues as parts of a bigger model of so-called monopolistic competition. Their presumption is that not all pre- dictions from the Heckscher-Ohlin model are wrong but that they do not cover all trade that can be observed. To separate those trade activities that can be explained by Heckscher-Ohlin and those that cannot, there is a distinction between ‘net trade’ that flows one-directionally from one country to another and ‘intra-industry’ trade that has trade flows in both directions and cannot be explained by comparative advantages. These two parts of the total trade balance of a country belong to different industries. For example, the EU is a net importer of Brazilian sugar (although lobby- ists try to keep the inflow as small as possible) as Brazil has a comparative advantage in sugar production. Intra-industry trade is only possible with product differentiation – that is, consumers need to consider them as similar (otherwise it would not be the same group of goods) but different in a certain aspect of the good. This difference does not need to be objective or quantifiable; it suffices if (some) consumers perceive a difference between two varieties of an item. This is the rationale behind branding and other advertising activities. Only if goods are sufficiently differentiated, consumers would accept different prices. One way to model the competition between firms that offer similar but differen tiated products is monopolistic competition. The car industry might serve as an example: consumers consider a Lexus and a Mercedes (of similar size) as different products. So, Lexus can to some extent act as a monopolist towards their customers and Mercedes can do so as well which means that they can set prices to skim consumers’ willingness to pay. But there is a limit to their power as the average Lexus customer would switch to Mercedes if inconvenienced by the price. As the differentiation of goods opens a small range pricing range only, intra- industry trade does not allow for profits that are much higher than those that could

35 Krugman 1980. 36 Helpman 1981.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Cloth for Wheat or Cloth for Cloth? 11 be made on a local market. Therefore, intra-industry trade is prevalent where trade barriers and, thus, trading costs are low. The question remains why firms do not offer differentiated products that cater to all tastes on their home market and save transportation costs. Here, economies of scale play a role, that is, advantages to size. If firms can produce a wide range of different varieties at the same cost as they can produce a single style of the item, they will do so and there is no scope for outside competition. But in many cases producing more items of a certain style is cheaper than starting different production processes for different varieties. If there is an advantage to size, it might pay off to produce all goods of a certain kind at one firm and distribute them across the world (like the Lexus by Toyota) while other varieties are produced at different places (like the Mercedes). There are two sources for economies of scale that impact the organization of a market for differentiated products in different ways: firm-internal and firm-external sources. A firm faces internal economies of scale if the per-unit cost of producing a certain item decreases with the number of items produced. Only this source of economies of scale leads to direct product differentiation by the following mechanism: if firms can lower per-unit costs through economies of scale, they have an incentive to expand trade internationally. Market size increases, but so does competition as other firms take advantage of the same perceived economies of scale. This is why it pays to invest in product differentiation and branding, e.g. creating niche markets, unique styles. A firm faces external economies of scale if the size of the industry within an area causes a decline in per-unit costs. This form of economies of scale is particularly important for firms that are too small to seize a relevant share of the market by building a niche for their own product. In that case, joint activities like building cooperatives to buy raw material at a cheaper price, sharing training facilities for employees, building joint infrastructure, or providing a joint base for knowledge diffusion. In this case, there is no product differentiation at the firm level, but regions might build a reputation for a style or product. In either case – be it a single firm or a group of firms – does the existence of economies of scale lead to segregation of the market for a single item into a group of (neighbouring) markets of similar goods. For each of these niches, the Heckscher- Ohlin model can be applied again as now each firm (or group of firms) is a net -ex porter of their particular style. Krugman’s approach can thus be used to find levels of internal or external economies of scale to determine level of competition that explains a certain set of observations.

Application II – Intra-Industry Trade in the Ancient World This approach can be applied to the questions from the Lycus Valley and the Roman Empire that had remained open at the end of the first application section. The observations on guilds and cultural standards in the Lycus Valley can be seen as means to provide external economies of scale. Spinning and weaving were production activities that took place at the household level – and single households were clearly too small to produce large quantities. Thus, we should expect a large number of small-scale businesses that have implemented structures to keep costs

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 12 Evelyn Korn low. One way to do so was the standard that women should be good at spinning and weaving which had two effects for the whole community: By setting the standard, it was made sure that a large fraction of women learned to produce yarn in the desired quality – thus, it ensured labour supply. At the same time the region gained a reputation of producing high quality yarn and colours which is a form of branding. In addition, it produced a specialization in human capital that made it easier to hand down knowledge within the region and reduced the training costs for the next generation of wool producers. The standard implemented product differentiation at the regional instead of at the firm level and it reduced the production costs for all firms in the region. The formation of guilds/professional associations can be similarly seen as a means to reduce organizational cost at the regional level. Guilds pool the demand on input markets that way keeping input prices low and they can share risks. Even if this latter point has not been explicitly mentioned, it will have played an important role. By having different crafts in the same neighbourhood, knowledge on new technologies, or information concerning the global market could be shared which reduced organizational costs and again provided external economies of scale. Krugman and Helpman’s ideas also help to gain more insights on the structure of textile trade in the Roman Empire as described by Flohr. Romanization helped to produce intra-industry trade because it reduced trade costs – as Krugman argues a crucial ingredient for trade in goods that are close substitutes. The description that textile trade was in the beginning based on the trade in other goods (olives, silver, lead) draws the line between net trade and intra-industry trade. Using the routes that were opened by trade based on comparative advantages enabled the multidirectional flow of similar products as the additional cost of producing a sample was low and that way the news of different styles could be spread. Flohr has pointed to the co-existence of large- and small-scale firms in the same industries at the same place. This observation can be explained by the co-existence of internal and external economies of scale. All firms in the textile industry profited from better trade routes, political stability, and the size of a regional market. Thus, there were external economies to scale. In addition, some of the production steps could be organized in a way that exhibits additional internal economies of scale which leads to bigger firm sizes. Both, Erdemir and Flohr, have discussed the labelling of garments by a regional attribute and have asked if labels did actually hint at the region of origin or had become synonymous for a certain style. Either way, the observation shows the importance of branding which hints at international competition for customers. For merchants to secure sufficient demand, it was necessary to define a distinguishable style that was connected to their region if not their firm.

Conclusion The chapter has aimed at presenting a way of connecting economic research methods to the studies of the Ancient World. It displayed fundamental economic concepts to explain international trade and showed in an exemplary way how these concepts can be applied to the analysis of historical contexts. The theories can, in particular, provide a unifying framework for observations that seem to be contradictory at first glance. For instance, they can be used to ex-

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Cloth for Wheat or Cloth for Cloth? 13 plain why small- and large-scale businesses from the same industry can be located in the same village; why trade in similar products flows in different directions; why some items have been trade on global and others – though from the same product group – on local markets. However, what is more important than providing explanations for observations that have been well documented and explained within other contexts is to trigger the formulation of new research questions. My hope is that the exposition of the Heckscher-Ohlin and the Krugman model has provided lines along which material can be sorted in new ways. Questions, I do not see fully answered are: which goods were actually net exports and which were traded within industries? Are there data on abundant and scarce input factors? Did intra-industry trade take place for finished products only? Which products were considered as finished products as compared to intermediate products or even raw materials? How did trade in these goods interact with wars and other invasive activities? Judging from what I have learned within this conference on textile trade there is a lot economics could contribute to our understanding of the Ancient World.

Bibliography Acemoglu & Robinson 2012: Acemoglu, D. & Robinson, J.: Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty, New York. Bowles 2012: Bowles, S.: The New Economics of Inequality and Redistribution, Cambridge. Erdemir 2011: Erdemir, H.: Woollen Textiles: An International Trade Good in the Lycus Valley in Antiquity. In A. H. Cadwallader & M. Trainor (eds.), Colossae in Space and Time, Göttingen, 104–129. Flohr 2014: Flohr, M.: Towards an Economic History of Textile Manufacturing and Trade in the Roman World. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 1–16. Heckscher 1949: Heckscher, E.: The Effect of Foreign Trade on the Distribution of Income 1919. In H. S. Ellis & L. A. Metzler (eds.), Readings in the Theory of International Trade, Philadelphia. Helpman 1981: Helpman, E.: International Trade in the Presence of Product Differentiation, Economies of Scale and Monopolistic Competition: A Chamberlin-Heckscher-Ohlin Approach, Journal of International Economics 11, 305–340. Krugman 1980: Krugman, P.: Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade, The American Economic Review 70/5, 950–959. Lindert & Pugel 1996: Lindert, P. & Pugel, T.: International Economics, Boston, 10th edition. North 1990: North, D. C.: Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge. Ohlin 1933: Ohlin, B.: Interregional and International Trade, Cambridge. Ricardo 1817: Ricardo, D.: On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, London. Smith 1776: Smith, A.: An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations I, London.

Agnès Garcia-Ventura

It is well known that the trade and distribution of textiles were crucial facets of the economy, social organisation, and politics of the ancient Near East. Their importance is amply demonstrated by the papers published in this volume, by the organisation of the workshop where the papers were first presented, and by similar projects promoted with great success by the CTR1 in recent years. Given this recognition, one might expect handbooks of the history of the ancient Near East to deal with textile trade and distribution in some detail; but in fact scholars of textile studies have repeatedly stressed that textiles have attracted little attention in archaeological and historical research, and are scarcely mentioned at all in general handbooks. In this paper, I aim to assess the presence of the first millennium BCE textile trade and distribution in handbooks of the history of the ancient Near East published since the 1960s, in order to see whether these more general works do justice to the importance of this key economic activity. To do so, I will focus on a selection of 16 handbooks which have appeared over the last 50 years in different countries and in different languages. In the last section, I will also consider the subject from the perspective of gender studies.

Secondary Literature as a Primary Source: Handbooks as a Case Study As a preliminary question, one might wonder whether it is justifiable to choose secondary literature (in this case, reference works), as primary sources for research. I propose several complementary answers to this question. First, the study of reference works such as handbooks offers a good way of identifying the general trends in a particular field. Second, as they reach a broad audience, these reference works themselves become trendsetters. As Diane Bolger2 noted in her assessment of the participation of men and women in archaeological research, based on an examination of general handbooks published between 1952 and 2006. These broad-based ‘synthesis’ volumes are used widely by students and scholars as references, general background sources, and college textbooks; in addition, they are read by a general audience of ‘history buffs’ interested in learning about the history and archaeology of this important geographical area. On account of this

* This paper was prepared during a Postdoctoral scholarship awarded by the Beatriu de Pinós programme (modality A), with the support of the Secretariat for Universities and Research of the Ministry of Economy and Knowledge of the Government of Catalonia. I wish to thank Kerstin Droß-Krüpe and Marie-Louise Nosch, as organisers of the workshop where a preliminary version of this paper was presented, for their invitation to take part in the event, as well as all the participants for providing a stimulating climate of debate. I also wish to thank Charlène Bouchaud for her advice about secondary literature on cotton in Antiquity. 1 The Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Textile Research, University of Copenhagen. 2 Bolger 2008, 340.

wide-ranging audience, authors of general works in Near Eastern archaeology tend to achieve a high profile within the field. Third, I think that when writing these syntheses scholars take on a bigger challenge than when they limit themselves to particular periods, artefacts, or texts. The structure of a reference work obliges them to be selective, and it seems to me that in choosing what to include and what to omit they tend to reveal their assumptions and preconceptions more often and more easily than when they deal with more specific issues. For all these reasons, I think that reference works are an ideal source to explore the topic at issue here. Moving on now to the choice of handbooks I have included in the study, I deci ded to narrow my selection down to a time span covering approximately the last half- century. I took 1964 as my starting point, because that year saw the publication of three handbooks that can be considered as classics today: Adolph Leo Oppenheim’s Ancient Mesopotamia. Portrait of a Dead Civilization, Georges Roux’s Ancient Iraq, and Josef Klíma’s Gesellschaft und Kultur des alten Mesopotamien.3 Chronologically, the last handbook I included is Amanda Podany’s The Ancient Near East: a Very Short Introduction published in 2013. In my selection, I decided to include not just works written or translated into English (even though they are the most numerous), but others written in French, Italian, German and Spanish (fig. 1). I felt that diverse academic traditions were likely to generate different ways of presenting research topics and would produce different results, and I thought it was important to take this geographical and linguistic diversity into account. I obtained a selection of 16 handbooks,4 which will be the focus of this account from now on.

3 One of the participants at the workshop, Eivind Heldaas Seland, urged me to consult Google Scholar to see how many citations these handbooks had received (I am most grateful to Eivind for this idea). For these three handbooks the search is indeed very illuminating: Oppenheim’s volume is the most cited (978 citations, the most cited of all 16 handbooks, followed by Kuhrt 1995 as the second most cited with 408). Roux’s Ancient Iraq has 327 citations and Klíma’s handbook only seven (for the original version in German, while paradoxically the translation into Spanish published the year 1980 had 34). All data given here are available at https://scholar.google.it/ (accessed February 2016). 4 The handbooks selected are shown here according to their year of publication: Klíma 1964; Oppenheim 1964 (revised edition 1977); Roux 1964 (revised edition 1992) and 1985; Lloyd 1978; von Soden 1985; Liverani 1988 (revised edition 2011); Margueron 1991; Kuhrt 1995; Snell 1997; Sanmartín 1998; Joannès 2000; Nissen 2000 (revised edition 2012); Leick 2001; Matthews 2003; Van de Mieroop 2004; Podany 2013. Throughout the paper, I quote the authors of the handbooks following the chronological order of publication of their volumes as well, and not alphabetical order. This list comprises 17 books, not 16 as stated above. The reason is that, for the purposes of this paper, I consider the two handbooks by Georges Roux as one. Roux published Ancient Iraq in 1964, and La Mésopotamie in 1985. Although the two books were written in different languages and a period of about 20 years passed between their respective publications, the second book is an update of the first. For this reason, I consider them as a single work and discuss them together when appropriate.

Spanish Italian 6% 6% French 13%

English 56% German 19%

Fig. 1:Fig. Original 1: original language language ofof publication of theof thehandbooks handbooks

Textile Trade and Distribution in Handbooks The first millennium BCE Mesopotamia is often characterised as ‘The Age of Empires’.5 The image of both theWomen Neo-Assyrian and the Neo-Babylonian periods as dominated by war, conquest and political20% intrigue is the one that prevails in most synthesis volumes.6 This impression, indeed, is quite logical in view of the nature of the primary sources at our disposal, which rarely deal with issues other than political Men history.7 Thus, when scholars address topics like textile production or textile trade 80% in these chronologies, they start by acknowledging the limitations of the primary sources.8 Fortunately, most of the handbooks then go on to devote some words, lines or (in exceptional cases) a few paragraphs to textile production, the textile trade, or trade in general.

5 This label has been discussed and critically analysed, for example, by Francis Joannès in his handbook devotedFig. exclusively 2: percentage to first of the millenniumauthors of the BCEhandbooks Mesopotamia by sex (Joannès 2000). 6 I decided to focus only on these two periods of the first millennium BCE, as they are extensively discussed in most of the handbooks and they are thus the ones that provide us with the most material for analysis. 7 Garfinkle 2007, 56–58. Regarding the specific limitations of written sources to deal with first millennium BCE textile trade, see Graslin (2005, 121, footnote 3) for the Neo-Babylonian period, and Michel (2001, 199) who summarises the state of the art concerning both the Neo-Assyrian and the Neo-Babylonian periods as follows: “l’époque néo-assyrienne n’offre que très peu de données sur le commerce en général, les contrats, rédigés en araméen sur des matériaux périssables, ne nous étant pas parvenus. Par ailleurs, la politique de conquêtes des souverains néo-assyriennes a considérablement développé d’autres types d’exchanges inter- nationaux. C’est par le biais de pillages ou de tributs imposés aux populations vaincues que l’empire se procure en grand nombre matières rares et précieuses. [...] À l’époque néo-babylonienne, la documentation de nature commerciale provient des grands temples ou encore de quelques transactions privées, issues des archives des grandes familles babyloniennes. [...] Les temples babyloniennes financent des expéditions commerciales pour s’approvisionner à l’étranger, mais effectuent également leurs achats à Babylone auprès des étrangers.” 8 Among others, see especially: Roux 1964, 337; Kuhrt 1995, 536–537; Snell 1997, 83–84; Matthews 2003, 245.

Only four of the 16 handbooks considered make no mention at all of textiles or textile trade and distribution in the first millennium BCE. These four handbooks, authored by Setton Lloyd, Jean-Claude Margueron, Hans Nissen, and Amanda Podany,9 were published in different languages and in different countries over a period of more than 30 years. Despite this diversity, three out of the four authors (Lloyd, Margueron and Nissen) are archaeologists; as their main focus is archaeolo gy, the scarcity or even absence of primary sources for certain periods and themes is more evident than in the case of other scholars working in other areas. Though the handbook by Roger Matthews, another archaeologist, does deal with textiles this lack of primary sources may help to explain, at least at first sight, the choices made by these scholars. The only exception to this possible explanation is Podany, who is a historian. Probably, the reason why Podany makes no reference to textile trade or to trade in general in the first millennium BCE is that her handbook was published in the Oxford University Press series A very short introduction to…, a collection of pocket books of around 100 pages, and so the question of space is much more pressing than in the other volumes considered here. In addition, the sources regarding textiles are scarcer than those for other topics, and so it is easy to understand why she made this choice when describing certain periods. Indeed, the fact that she deals with textiles and textile trade in her discussion of other eras such as the Old Assyrian period (the early second millennium BCE) proves that she is well aware of the textile evidence; in each period, she highlights the significant elements that the sources provide. Leaving these four handbooks aside, the remaining twelve all discuss aspects of textiles or textile trade and distribution. First, as most presentations of the Neo- Assyrian and the Neo-Babylonian periods use the succession of kings to the throne as their common thread, the authors frequently mention the only story to link a king, textiles and trade: the reference to King Sennacherib and cotton imported from abroad.10 Amélie Kuhrt interprets it as an example of entrepreneurship: A widespread royal concern for prosperity in Assyria itself is shown by several texts. Some describe the ‘new cities’, such as Kalhu and Dur Sharrukin, built at royal command; others depict Nineveh’s revitalisation as a result of Sennacherib’s massive refurbishment of the old city [...] An interest in stimulating new activities is reflected by Sennacherib’s attempt to grow Indian cotton in the palace gardens. Moreover, to understand the importance that the secondary literature attributes to the relationship between king Sennacherib and cotton,11 and to see that in fact it has a long historiographical tradition, it is worth noting that the first volume of

9 Lloyd 1978; Margueron 1991; Nissen 2000; Podany 2013. 10 Kuhrt 1995, 536. Cf. Klíma 1964, 123; Roux 1964, 345–346; Oppenheim 1977 [1964], 94; Leick 2001, 229 (when presenting the city of Nineveh). 11 For a classical reference to cotton in Mesopotamia, including both written sources and discussion of archaeological remains, see Talon 1986. For an update on the use of cotton in the ancient Near East, also with reference to archaeological remains, see Völling 2008, 64–67. For a map showing cotton finds in the Near and Middle East at the beginning of the first millennium BCE (considering as finds the actual presence of fibres, presence of seeds and textual evidence), see Bouchaud, Tengberg & Dal Prà 2011, 406, fig 1. However, Brite & Marston 2013, 43, suggest that most likely climatic conditions should not allow the cultiva-

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Descriptions of Textile Trade and Distribution in Handbooks 19 the Reallexikon der Assyriologie, published as early as 1928, had an entry named ‘Baumwollenbaum’.12 A second common feature of most of the handbooks is the inclusion of wool and textiles among the items commonly used in domestic trade, or as exports. Oppenheim, for instance, lists the exports from Mesopotamia as wool, hair, leather and textiles. He does not restrict his analysis to the first millennium BCE: What can be termed industrial production in the ancient Near East up to the Muslim Middle Ages is concerned exclusively with the weaving of textiles and related activities.13 Oppenheim refers to a longue durée – as does Mario Liverani when highlighting the role of textiles in Mesopotamian economy in general, emphasising its role during the first process of urbanisation (and not just the first millennium BCE).14 Nevertheless, other handbooks do refer specifically to the first millennium BCE. Josef Klíma, Wolfram von Soden, Daniel Snell, Joaquín Sanmartín, Gwendolyn Leick and Marc Van de Mieroop all mention wool, textiles or both as the main exports from Babylonia.15 Georges Roux does the same, though he refers more generally to Assyria, not only to Babylonia. The third issue discussed in several of the handbooks is the participation of the Phoenicians in the textile trade. Roux refers to them (as well as to other lands and peoples) in his discussion of the items that the Neo-Assyrian Empire imported, which included “rare items such as cotton, dyes, precious stones and ivory”.16 Matthews17 also mentions textile fibres as raw materials arriving in Assyria which were later used in the production of textiles for the elites, a production carried out mainly in the surrounding territory. Van de Mieroop,18 meanwhile, identifies purple cloth as one of Assyria’s main imports, and defines it more as a tribute than as an import per se at a certain point in the Neo-Assyrian period: that is, linked more to textile distribution than to trade. Other handbooks mention the Phoenicians as well, or at least the economic relations between the Mediterranean area and Mesopotamia. The authors of these works reinforce their arguments and enrich their sources with references to the Bible. So

tion of cotton in first millennium BCE Mesopotamia despite what is stated in Sennacherib’s inscription. 12 The entry was written by Erich Ebeling (1928, 439), who founded the Reallexikon der Assyriologie with Bruno Meissner in 1922. William F. Leemans emphasises this in the entry ‘Handel’ of the Reallexikon, published some 50 years later: “Auch müssen die Verbindungen mit Indien wiederhergestellt worden sein: Auf Siegeln finden sich naturalistische Darstellungen von Affen [...], die Baumwolle wurde bekannt, und Sanherib bemühte sich, sie in Assyrien anzu- pflanzen.” (Leemans 1972–1975, 87–88). 13 Oppenheim 1977 [1964], 84. 14 Liverani 1988, 49. 15 Klíma 1964, 151; von Soden 1985, 123; Snell 1997, 105; Sanmartín 1998, 104; Leick 2001, 258; Van de Mieroop 2004, 264. Joannès also mentions the use of wool for the production of textiles in the temples, although he does not highlight its role in trade (Joannès 2000, 114). 16 Roux 1964, 353. Cf. Roux 1985, 297. 17 Matthews 2003, 245. 18 Van de Mieroop 2004, 207–208.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 20 Agnès Garcia-Ventura textile trade and distribution as portrayed in the Bible is the fourth common issue discussed in some of the handbooks. Indeed, in this context of scarcity of written sources for first millennium BCE trade in Mesopotamia, the Bible alludes to it directly and highlights the role of textiles. Consequently, most scholars see the Bible as a helpful historical source, despite all the caveats regarding its use. Oppenheim notes that the Bible rejects the commercial nature of both Nineveh and Babylonia.19 Kuhrt20 states that Assyria appears in the Bible as an area that produced carpets and embroidered textiles, a description reinforced by a quotation from Herodotus. Finally, in Snell’s volume references to the Bible are ubiquitous.21

Textile Trade and Distribution in the Handbooks: Insights from Gender Studies In the previous section I outlined the main four topics discussed in the handbooks with regard to textiles and textile trade and distribution. Although the presence of these topics in 12 of our 16 works might be interpreted as positive, their treatment is extremely cursory – in most cases just a short note or a few lines. Moreover, these few discussions are extremely limited and none of them offers deep insights into the development of textile trade and distribution in the first millennium BCE. So, just as I posited at the beginning of this paper, the presence of the textile trade in the general handbooks is indeed scarce. In an attempt to explain why this might be so, in what follows I focus on gender studies, and more specifically on feminist epistemologies. In my view, these approaches can help us as scholars to understand some of the choices made by the authors. Feminist epistemologies emerged in the English-speaking world of science during the 1980s.22 One of their aims was to question and rethink the process of producing knowledge and the choice of topics of study. The historian of science Donna Haraway launched the proposal known as ‘situated knowledges’.23 Haraway claimed that it is impossible to be objective or neutral.24 In other words, our research is always biased by our standpoint and we cannot erase it completely: all we can do is to be aware of it and be explicit about it. Presumed ‘objectivity’, then, is biased as well. Feminist epistemologies have also been referred to as defenders of ‘strong objectivity’, a term used to expose the fallacy of the habitual use of ‘objectivity’ as a neutral,

19 Oppenheim 1977 [1964], 65 and 90. 20 Kuhrt 1995, 537. 21 Snell 1997, 93 and 105–106. 22 For classic references on this topic, see Alcoff & Potter 1993 (including papers by Helen Longino and Sandra Harding, among others) and the reader edited by Harding 2004. See as well the special issue of the journal Gender & History titled Gender History across Epistemologies. In the introduction to that issue, Gabaccia & Maynes (2012, 521–523) offer a brief summary of several epistemological options applied in recent decades within feminism and gender studies. For some thoughts on their applicability and usefulness in ancient Near Eastern studies, see Garcia-Ventura (forthcoming). 23 Haraway 1988. 24 Obviously this proposal is not a completely new idea attributable to Donna Haraway or to those presented here as exponents of feminist epistemologies. It should be understood in the framework (and with the influences) of several post-World War II philosophical ideas. One of these references, for instance, is Hannah Arendt’s essay The Concept of History: Ancient and Modern, published 1961 [revised edition 1968]. In this essay, Arendt reflected on how subjective research is – even research in ‘hard science’ disciplines, like physics.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Descriptions of Textile Trade and Distribution in Handbooks 21 disembodied path for knowledge production. From this point of view, the choice of a topic of study is not neutral; so the idea of a ‘lack of sources’ might be interpreted as an excuse (and, we may even start to wonder about its veracity). From the perspectives of the feminist epistemologies, knowing the profiles of the Spanish authors may be illuminatingItalian for a better6% understanding of their research, as research is never disembodied and aseptic.6% Embracing this view, in what follows I will focus French on two aspects13% of the profiles of the authors: their sex and their main specialisation. As far as sex is concerned, the first thing we notice when listing the authors of the handbooks is the imbalance in the male to female ratio (13 men vs. three women, i.e., 80% : 20%, see fig. 2). Does this imbalance have any effect on the results of the research? Does our sex influence the way we carry on our research? These questions are particularly difficult to answer, and a fruitful debate on the matter has ensued. Those who contend that the sex of scholars might have an effect on the results of re- English search claim that the assessments of the role of women in archaeology,56% for example, 25 have highlightedGerman certain common ideas. The first is that increasing the visibility of women researchers19% and women archaeologists is likely to increase the visibility of women in the past. The second is that precisely because fewer women hold positions of leadership, they tend to question research issues and assumptions more readily than men.26 In this secondFig. 1: original case, languagethen, sex of publicationand hierarchy of the handbooks are both considered as influential for the way we as scholars develop our research.

Women 20%

Men 80%

Fig. 2:Fig. Percentage 2: percentage of theof the authors authors of the handbooks handbooks by sexby sex

25 See Root 2004 (esp. 28–29, the section entitled Is There a Female Archaeology?) for some reflections and previous references. “Many readers here in the first decade on the twenty-first century will cringe from this rhetorical question as a ‘politically incorrect’ postulate that serves only to revive and reinforce stereotypes of the male hegemonic discourse. Yet some feminist thinkers have recently been reassessing this question. In contemporary ethnographic practice, for instance, some attention is being focused on the important potentials of the reflexive female voice as a critical filter of experience encountered in the field. It is now being recognised, furthermore, that early Western women travellers in the Orient (who were the direct ancestors of our women archaeological pioneers) probed in their writing nuances of Middle Eastern cultures that their male counterparts were not (could not be?) receptive to.” (Root 2004, 28). 26 Seidman 2008, 201–203.

To quote Bolger27 in her assessment of the participation of men and women in archaeological research mentioned above: The correlation between the greater numbers of women contributing to general works and the more frequent tendency to include women’s roles in the past as part of general archaeological narratives cannot be coincidental and reflects a heigh- tened sensitivity toward issues of gender, by men as well as women, both in the present and in the past. On the other hand, there is also a danger of considering women scholars in ancient Near Eastern studies as a compact group, distinct from that of men in the same discipline. In the introduction to their book on women in archaeology, Margarita Díaz-Andreu and Marie-Louise Stig Sørensen28 summarise this situation as follows: Feminist studies often assume that the first women in academia had a sense of solidarity, and that they self-consciously saw themselves as pioneering women’s acceptance in new fields. It is, however, important to come to terms with the fact that the reality is far from this idealized picture – only then can a critical social historiography emerge. Women in the archaeological profession never constituted a unified political group. We can roughly divide these early women into two groups: those who clearly perceived themselves as unique women, and those who were actively involved with contemporary women’s movements.

So there are two possible interpretations of the influence of gender. For this particular case, I do not see any relevant differences between the way male and female scho lars deal with textile trade and distribution. However, I think we see the same trend already noticed by Bolger in her analysis of gender and scholarship in ancient Near Eastern studies: far more men than women write general handbooks and syntheses, and in my view it is worthwhile thinking about why this is so. I also think it is important to consider the profiles of the authors and to reflect on the possible influence of certain aspects of their profiles on their research. Once this is done, determining that a factor (sex in this case) might not be influential is also significant. In addition, although it seems to me that the sex of the scholars does not have a particular impact, I would say that another aspect of their profile, their specialisation, is indeed highly influential. Regarding academic specialisations, I propose classifying the authors as archaeo logists, philologists, historians, and anthropologists (fig. 3).29 Obviously these cate gories are not watertight compartments and indeed most of the authors might be classified under more than one, but deciding which category they fit best seems to me to be potentially useful, as it helps to highlight the most salient aspects of their academic profile and, consequently, their choices when approaching certain

27 Bolger 2008, 341–342. 28 Díaz-Andreu & Sørensen 1998, 6. 29 Only Roux does not fit this classification. A medical officer who lived in Iraq, he wrote both his books from a background that was really very different with respect to that of the other scholars. While in Iraq, Roux worked for the Iraq Petroleum Company, and back in the UK he worked for a British pharmaceutical company. For more details on his life see the obituary published by Harry Saggs, September 8th 1999, in The Guardian (http://www. theguardian.com/news/1999/sep/08/guardianobituaries1, accessed February 2016).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Descriptions of Textile Trade and Distribution in Handbooks 23 research topics. Most of them fit in the first three categories:30 five are historians,31 five philologists,32 and four archaeologists.33

Others 6,5% Assyriology History (Philology) 31% 32%

Anthropology Archaeology 6,5% 25%

Fig. 3:Fig. Main 3: main academic academic specialisation specialisation of thethe authors authors of theof handbooksthe handbooks

In this case study, the differences in the profiles of the authors proved to have an effect regarding the space they devote in their handbooks to textile trade and distribution. As I already noted in my presentation of the handbooks, the topic is wholly absent in three of the four handbooks written by archaeologists,34 present in four of the five written by historians,35 and present as well (and in some cases given a certain prominence) in the five written by philologists. The authors usually justify their choices by alluding to the availability of primary sources, which vary according to the field of study.36 For me, however, it is interesting that philologists always mention the textile trade, textile distribution or both, even if it is just to say that the scarcity of texts at their disposal does not allow them to write about the topic at greater length. For this reason, it is clear to me that interpreting the absence of certain topics in handbooks as a mere consequence of the lack or scarcity of sources is not entirely satisfactory; even the absence of something may be a finding to be put on the table and discussed, as some of the handbooks analysed here demonstrate. At this point, then, accepting that even the choice of the topics of study is influenced by our standpoint and by our preconceptions, applying the perspectives of feminist epistemologies may allow us to reflect on the presence or absence of certain

30 Leick trained both as an anthropologist and as Assyriologist. I would say that it is her background in anthropology that best defines the type of research she undertakes. 31 Liverani 1988; Kuhrt 1995; Snell 1997; Van de Mieroop 2004; Podany 2013. 32 Klíma 1964; Oppenheim 1964; von Soden 1985; Sanmartín 1998; Joannès 2000. 33 Lloyd 1978; Margueron 1991; Nissen 2000; Matthews 2003. 34 Only present in Matthews 2003. 35 Only absent in Podany 2013. 36 The imbalance between material remains and written sources in the study of textiles was formulated as follows in the classic paper by Harriet Crawford, in which the author described textiles (among other products) as ‘invisible exports’ from Mesopotamia: “Archaeological, as opposed to textual, evidence for the importance of textiles and leather to the economy is tenuous” (Crawford 1973, 235–236).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 24 Agnès Garcia-Ventura topics and on the way certain issues are portrayed in these handbooks. And this brings us to another of the aims of feminist epistemologies: to draw attention to androcentrism in research, understanding it as “the tendency to privilege male-biased or male-centred, values and assumptions”.37 Let me show an example of how this androcentrism might function through the way men and women are portrayed in the secondary literature in relation to textile trade and textile production. In the previous section I noted that most handbooks mention wool or textiles as goods for import or export. Some of them make reference to the production of these textiles too. When they do so, this allows us to see how differently textile workers and merchants are portrayed and reveals a great deal about gender constructs and roles. Interestingly, textile production is usually associated with women (who are the main workers in the textile sector in many geographies and chronologies) while trade and distribution are usually associated with men. Interestingly as well, in the few cases of handbooks referring to the production of the textiles to be traded or distributed, some of them explicitly state that it was women who produced these materials, and present them as slaves (and in one case even as ‘indigents’).38 Meanwhile, no thing is said either about the status of the merchants or about their sex. Merchants, then, tend to remain either automatically identified with men or as disembodied and neutral. In both cases, however, it is implicitly assumed that they were not women. In other words, this different way of approaching trade and production in some handbooks reproduces the situation reported by Nancy Hartsock, another author related to the feminist epistemologies. Echoing the dichotomy ‘men-culture versus women-nature’, Hartsock formulated a provocative contrast between ‘abstract mas- culinities’ and the ‘feminist standpoint’.39 She alluded to the classical binaries link- ing men with culture and the public and women with nature and the private. These binary oppositions as categories of analysis, in their turn, have been strongly criticised in gender studies for defining terms through opposition to each other rather than with reference to their own characteristics.40 Taking these binaries into account, we might at least reflect on the fact that considering women as producers and men as traders, in some cases, might be more a preconception, an a priori assumption, than something that a careful scrutiny of the primary sources would confirm.

37 Gilchrist 1999, xiii. 38 Klíma 1964, 148; Roux 1964, 363; Cf. Snell 1997, 127: “Indigent women and children especially were used to process textiles, always a major source of Mesopotamia’s wealth because they were relatively light, valuable, and easy to export.” However, only von Soden explicitly considers the possibility of men working in the textile sector and does not qualify women as slaves in any case: “Das Spinnen und Weben war im Orient wie später überwiegend, aber nicht ausschießlich die Arbeit von Frauen” (von Soden 1985, 100). Cf. Klíma, who assumed that female slaves carried out almost all the duties in textile production with the exception of weaving: “Bereits in sumerischer Zeit gehörte die Wollbearbeitung zur Beschäftigung vor allem der Sklavinnen […]. Das Weben wurde wahrscheinlich meistens handwerkmäßig von den Männern ausgeübt” (Klíma 1964, 148). For a discussion of the adequacy of the translation of some of these terms regarding the female workforce, see Garcia-Ventura 2012a, 212–215 (with previous references). 39 Hartsock 1983. 40 For further development of these arguments see, among others, Dobres (2000, 104–108) or McCafferty & McCafferty (1998, 214). For the case of the ancient Near East, see Garcia- Ventura 2012b.

Of course I am not claiming that it does not respond to a trend, but I think it is worth bearing in mind that it is a hypothesis which needs to be checked and not just accepted uncritically.41

Conclusion In this paper my aim was to assess the presence of textiles and textile trade and distribution in first millennium BCE Mesopotamia in the handbooks of the history of the ancient Near East published over a time span of 50 years. I show that although most of the 16 handbooks mention these topics, the treatment is cursory – in most cases just a quotation, a few words or a few lines. This seems to confirm that the prevalent image of first millennium BCE Mesopotamia in general handbooks re- inforces the features that are always highlighted from both the Neo-Assyrian and the Neo-Babylonian periods: that is, war and political intrigue. This is partially because of the nature of primary sources at our disposal. At this point, then, after acknowledging the scarce presence of the topic in handbooks, what strategies can we use to reverse this situation in future handbooks and to bestow on textiles and textile trade and distribution the relevance they deserve? One strategy might be to maximise interdisciplinary research. By doing so, we may be able to counterbalance the scarcity of some primary sources, as is especially clear in the case of textile research. A second strategy, to be pursued together with this first one, might be to stress the importance of ‘history from below’, in contrast to the ‘history from above’ that still predominates in many handbooks. I feel that this might help to create a space in which textile trade and distribution, as well as textile production, are more clearly present as part of the general discourse. Needless to say, gender studies perspectives like the ones outlined here may help to achieve this goal, because women (the main characters in the textile sector) are more easily ‘found’ when writing ‘history from below’ than when writing ‘history from above’. In this regard, in his 1964 handbook Ancient Iraq Roux42 argued for the study of: […] what went on behind the façade of wars and diplomatic moves. [...] What were the materials, the routes and the volume of its internal and external trades? [...] In short, what was the Assyrian empire? [...] This extremely difficult question could only be answered if the Assyrian empire was apprehended in its entirety and in great detail, but this would require much more material than is at present available. Today, 50 years after Roux’s book was published, there is much more material at our disposal. Specialists can now give more nuanced and fuller answers to certain questions if they have avenues in which to share the material available with broader audiences, for example in the form of handbooks. At this point, then, it is more necessary than ever to foster the communication between academia and the general public in order to give our research a more profound meaning in today’s world.

41 However, see Thomason 2013 for an example of how changing our perspective and assumptions when starting research may help to identify the active role of women in trade as well. The paper provides a good critical discussion of the previous literature on the topic. For textile production, see Garcia-Ventura 2014. 42 Roux 1964, 337.

Bibliography Alcoff & Potter 1993: Alcoff, L. & Potter, E.: Feminist Epistemologies, London. Arendt 1968: Arendt, H.: The Concept of History: Ancient and Modern. In H. Arendt (ed.), Between Past and Future. Eight Exercises in Political Thought, New York, 41–90. Bolger 2008: Bolger, D.: Gendered Fields in Near Eastern Archaeology. In D. Bolger (ed.), Gender Tthrough Time in the Ancient Near East, Lanham, 335–359. Bouchaud, Tengberg & Dal Prà 2011: Bouchaud, C., Tengberg, M. & Dal Prà, P.: Cotton Cultivation and Textile Production in the Arabian Peninsula During Antiquity; the Evidence from Madâ’in Sâlih (Saudi Arabia) and Qal’at al-Bahrain (Bahrain), Vege tation History and Archaeobotany 20, 405 – 417. Brite & Marston 2013: Brite, E. B. & Marston, J. M.: Environmental Change, Agricultural Innovation, and the Spread of Cotton Agriculture in the Old World, Journal of Anthro pological Archaeology 32, 39–53. Crawford 1973: Crawford, H. E. W.: Mesopotamia’s Invisible Exports in the Third Millen nium B.C., World Archaeology 5/2, 232–241. Díaz-Andreu & Sørensen 1998: Díaz-Andreu, M. & Sørensen, M. L. S.: Excavating Women: A History of Women in European Archaeology, Oxfordshire. Dobres 2000: Dobres, M.-A.: Technology and Social Agency, Oxford. Ebeling 1928: Ebeling, E.: s.v. Baumwollenbaum, RIA 1, 439. Gabaccia & Maynes 2012: Gabaccia, D. R. & Maynes, M. J.: Introduction: Gender History Across Epistemologies, Gender & History 24/3, 521–539. Garcia-Ventura 2012a: Garcia-Ventura, A.: El trabajo y la producción textil en la Tercera Di nastía de Ur. PhD Dissertation, Universitat Pompeu Fabra (http://www.tesisenred.net/ handle/10803/97050, accessed February 2016). Garcia-Ventura 2012b: Garcia-Ventura, A.: The Emperor’s New Clothes: Textiles, Gender and Mesopotamian Foundation Figurines, Altorientalische Forschungen 39/2, 235–253. Garcia-Ventura 2014: Garcia-Ventura, A.: Weaving in Ur III Mesopotamia: Women’s Work? In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Phi lippika 73), 135–140. Garcia-Ventura (forthcoming): Garcia-Ventura, A.: Postfeminism and Assyriology: An (im)possible Relationship? In S. Svärd & A. Garcia-Ventura (eds.), Studying Gender in the Ancient Near East. Garfinkle 2007: Garfinkle, S. J.: The Assyrians: A New Look at an Ancient Power. In M. W. Chavalas (ed.), Current Issues in the History of the Ancient Near East, Claremont, 53–96. Gilchrist 1999: Gilchrist, R.: Gender and Archaeology. Contesting the Past, London. Graslin 2005: Graslin, L.: Les Théories économiques du commerce international et leur usage pour l’étude des échanges à longue distance à l’époque néo-babylonienne. In H. D. Baker & M. Jursa (eds.), Approaching the Babylonian Economy: Proceedings of the START Project Symposium Held in Vienna, 1–3 July 2004, Münster, 121–136. Haraway 1988: Haraway, D.: Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective, Feminist Studies 14/3, 575–599. Harding 2004: Harding, S.: The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader. Intellectual and Political Controversies, New York &London. Hartsock 1983: Hartsock, N.: The Feminist Standpoint: Developing the Ground for a Specifically Feminist Historical Materialism. In S. Harding & M. B. Hintikka (eds.), Discovering Reality: Feminist Perspectives on Epistemology, Metaphysics, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science, New York, 283–310. Joannès 2000: Joannès, F.: La Mésopotamie au 1er millénaire avant J.-C., Paris. Klíma 1964: Klíma, J.: Gesellschaft und Kultur des alten Mesopotamien, Prag. Kuhrt 1995: Kuhrt, A.: The Ancient Near East: c. 3000–330 BC, London. Leemans 1972–1975: Leemans, W. F.: s.v. Handel, RIA 4, 76–90 Leick 2001: Leick, G.: Mesopotamia: the Invention of the City, London. Liverani 1998: Liverani, M.: Antico Oriente. Storia, società, economia, Roma.

Lloyd 1978: Lloyd, S.: The Archaeology of Mesopotamia. From the Old Stone Age to the Persian Conquest, London. Margueron 1991: Margueron, J.-C.: Les Mésopotamiens, Paris. Matthews 2003: Matthews, R.: The Archaeology of Mesopotamia. Theories and approaches, New York & Londen. McCafferty & McCafferty 1998: McCafferty, S. & McCafferty, G.: Spinning and Weaving as Female Gender Identity in Post-Classic Mexico. In K. Hays-Gilpin & D. S. Whitley (eds.), Reader in Gender Archaeology, New York & London, 213–230. Michel 2001: Michel, C.: Commerce International. In F. Joannès (ed.), Dictionnaire de la Civilisation Mésopotamienne, Paris, 196–199. Nissen 2010: Nissen, H. J.: Geschichte Alt-Vorderasiens, München 2010 (Oldenbourg, Grund riss der Geschichte 25). Oppenheim 1977 [1964]: Oppenheim, A. L.: Ancient Mesopotamia. Portrait of a Dead Civili zation, Chicago & London. Podany 2014: Podany, A.: The Ancient Near East: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford. Root 2004: Root, M. C.: Introduction. Women of the Field, Defining the Gendered Ex perience. In G. M. Cohen & M. S. Joukowsky (eds.), Breaking Ground. Pioneering Wo men Archaeologists, Ann Arbor, 1–33. Roux 1985: Roux, G.: La Mésopotamie. Essai d’histoire politique, économique et culturelle, London. Roux 1964: Roux, G.: Ancient Iraq, London, revised edition. Sanmartín 1998: Sanmartín, J.: Historia antigua del Próximo Oriente, Madrid. Seidman 2008: Seidman, S.: Contested Knowledge. Social Theory Today, Hoboken. Snell 1997: Snell, D. C.: Life in the Ancient Near East, 3100–332 B.C.E, New York. Talon 1986: Talon, P.: Le coton et la soie en Mesopotamie?, Akkadica 47, 75 –78. Thomason 2013: Thomason, A. K.: Her Share of the Profits: Women, Agency, and Textile Production at Kültepe / Kanesh in the Early Second Millennium BC. In M.-L. Nosch, H. Koefoed & E. Andersson Strand (eds.), Textile Production and Consumption in the Ancient Near East. Archaeology, Epigraphy and Iconography, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 12), 93–112. Van de Mieroop 2004: Van de Mieroop, M.: A History of the Ancient Near East, ca. 3000– 323 BC, Hoboken. Völling 2008: Völling, E.: Textiltechnik im Alten Orient. Rohstoffe und Herstellung, Würzburg. Von Soden 1985: von Soden, W.: Einführung in die Altorientalistik, Darmstadt.

Wim Broekaert

In a stimulating paper, Miko Flohr recently argued that the Roman textile industry cannot be approached as a static part of the Mediterranean economy, but requires a historical narrative, in which the interaction between empire-wide political and socio-economic developments on the one hand and the organization and performance of the textile industry on the other can be contextualised.1 Put differently, what we need is a macro-economic framework which takes into account the long-term institutional changes in the Roman world and consequently allows us to analyse how these developments affect the textile industry. Flohr then discussed the impact of growing socio-cultural integration, improved opportunities for trade and transport and a possible increase in scale of exchange, demand and consumption of textiles. He concluded that the establishment of a better integrated imperial superstructure eventually resulted in a more integrated and efficient textile industry, able to cater to demand over longer distances and in higher volumes than before, but that at the same time in many, if not most regions local small-scale production continued to be the rule.2 We are thus essentially presented with a historical discourse of increased opportunities and lowered trading costs, made possible by the gradual integration of the Empire. While I completely endorse Flohr’s call for a macro-economic analysis of the textile industry and find myself in agreement with his conclusions, I here want to point out that creating better opportunities for production and exchange in itself does not necessarily lead to improved economic performance or an increase in efficiency. People engaged in the textile industry must also be able to capture these benefits of imperialism and directly respond to new opportunities, which involves costs and (at least initially) requires additional investments. As Flohr’s paper clearly suggests that in the end Roman entrepreneurs were successful in taking this step, I therefore intend to explore how and to what extent they managed to take advantage of a better integrated Empire and which institutions might have been able to assist them in further lowering trading costs and making the necessary investments feasi- ble. The purpose of this paper thus is to make a first attempt to integrate part of the micro-economic evidence we have into Flohr’s macro-economic model or, in other words, to put some flesh to the bones.

1 Flohr 2014. 2 In terms of scale however, the integration in an Imperial superstructure is not always beneficial for textile industries. Rome’s demand for Egyptian grain effectively limited the opportunities to massively increase the production of other agricultural goods, including flax (and this despite Egypt’s reputation as a major flax producer). Mayerson 1997 has shown that under Fatimid rule, Egyptian landowners abandoned grain cultivation and turned to the production of flax, because a large consumer market for grain, such as Rome had been, was no longer present.

Trading Costs, Investments and Profitability The integration of the Mediterranean world and large parts of Europe and the Near East seems to have promised considerable gains from market-oriented production and exchange for virtually every single sector in the economy, and economic historians now agree that the Imperial age witnessed moderate levels of economic growth.3 How did the Roman textile industry respond to this new economic framework? Whether or not the artisans and merchants engaged in textile production and trade would eventually have been able to make a profit largely depended from the trading costs necessary to capture these gains. If participation in the textile industry on a new level, above local production and exchange and answering to the new needs of an imperial economy, entailed costs too high to finance for the average businessman, the textile industry may not have benefitted from imperial integration after all. If on the other hand they did manage to adapt to the new situation, one should wonder which investment strategies turned out to be most profitable and who was in the best position to successfully apply them. In order to structure the discussion of costs and investments below, I here rely on the model developed by Kohn, who divides trading costs into three separate components, viz. transaction costs, transportation costs and financing costs.4 Transaction costs, first, include the costs of identifying trading opportunities, gathering information, negotiating agreements and protect- ing oneself against fraud and abuse. Transportation costs obviously are essential to commercial exchange, but apart from the costs for physically moving merchandize, this category also involves the cost of predation incurred through taxation, piracy and theft. Finally, financing costs are related to the value of the goods, the distance they need to travel, the availability (or absence for that matter) of credit and credit institutions, and unforeseen large price fluctuations. Only when actual gains exceed all these costs can the textile producer or merchant make a living. It is important to note how the different categories of costs can be affected simultaneously when a single aspect of the exchange process is altered. Kohn develops this argument for the distance merchandize had to travel before reaching the consumer. Thus, while increased integration (for instance within an imperial context) promotes long-distance trade, trading costs rise proportionally: merchants now have to deal with strangers whose reputation and trustworthiness is not always guaranteed (transaction costs), transport becomes more costly and the risk of predation grows (transportation costs), credit institutions can be more problematic to use and anticipating market situation and price levels becomes increasingly difficult or even impossible (financing costs). Theoretically, the consequence would be that only luxury items with sufficiently high profit margins to level out the rising costs travelled over longer distances, while bulky, cheap merchandize was only exchanged on a local level. This conclusion comes very close to the substantivist model of the ancient economy, which however has met with increasing resistance. I will argue below that the organization of the textile trade is indeed not so straightforward, due to the nature of the merchandize

3 I will not enter the (ongoing) discussion whether the Roman empire experienced aggrega- te economic growth, simply due to the increase in population, or per capita growth. See Scheidel 2009; Wilson 2009 and Bowman & Wilson 2009. The theoretic approach in this paper only intends to explore how businessmen reacted to better opportunities, which both resulted from and contributed to economic growth. 4 Kohn (forthcoming).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 The Empire’s New Clothes 31 as well as the specific structure of the Roman textile market, and that businessmen found ways to cope with rising trading costs. The following sections will explore the impact of the three different types of costs on the Roman textile industry and trade and discuss how individuals tried to lower trading costs, either by making use of the institutional framework of the Empire already in place (which in itself influenced the level of costs to a considerable extent), or by deliberately taking action in order to optimise the exchange process. I will argue that most of the individual strategies to increase efficiency are motivated by and/or heavily rely on the connections with the Roman government, relevant networks (in the first place occupational associations) and kinship ties. Nevertheless, many aspects of the Roman textile industry remain particularly difficult to reconstruct. Even for Egypt, where a relative wealth of documents on production and distribution survives, it is challenging to analyse the various strategies adopted in the organization of the textile industry.5

Transaction Costs The increasing economic integration during the Empire had a considerable impact on the level and scale of the Roman textile industry. Producers and merchants were presented with higher demands and easier access to new markets. However, as mentioned above, proportionally rising transaction costs can have prevented some economic players from taking advantage of these opportunities. I will discuss three, often interrelated, factors which determine to what extent producers and merchants would have been able to profit from the benefits of imperial integration and a rising demand in distant markets: the available labour pool, the distance merchandize needed to travel and the consumer’s identity. A short discussion of those factors will show how they start to change quickly when doing business in non-local markets and how they influence one another. On a local and perhaps also interregional level, transaction costs usually are fairly limited. Demand will only rise slowly, so a major and sudden increase in the labour force or the number of partners one is forced to cooperate with, is not required. Business opportunities can be easily identified, because the entrepreneur himself can either personally or with a limited number of assistants travel around to assess demand. Personal contacts in a face-to-face setting and the possibility of communicating one’s reputation and previous engagements facilitate the negotiation of agreements and reduce the risks of fraud or breach of contract. On an interpro- vincial or even interimperial level (taking into consideration the textile trade with the Arabian and Indian world), when new markets are opened up and the physical distance between markets and mental distance between the contracting parties tend to increase, transaction costs quickly start to rise. Trying to gain better knowledge of more distant markets by personally frequenting these markets more often is a particularly costly and time-consuming strategy without any guarantee of success, especially in the early stages of business transactions when trust still needs to be established. Demand in large urban markets surpasses the possibilities of a single producer or a small household, so larger, more wealthy families or businessmen working together in partnerships will be more successful in gaining access to the new

5 Jones 1960; Droß-Krüpe 2011a, 170–190.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 32 Wim Broekaert customers. Prospective travels to unfamiliar markets become more complicated and the trustworthiness of customers whom one has never met before is difficult to assess, so more permanent connections to local markets are required. In the following sections, I will explore these aspects of transaction costs and how businessmen tried to limit costs. Most details of this business organization will continue to elude us, although circumstantial evidence can point to the existence of various cost-reducing strategies.

Entering a New Market: Information and Connections Whenever a new market opens up, newcomers face many problems. How will they be able to identify business opportunities and collect information on potential partners and customers? The most straightforward way to cope with these uncertainties is frequently prospecting markets and trying to assess the reputation of colleagues and customers, but especially in an imperial context, this process can be labour and cost intensive and above all time consuming. Only businessmen with access to a large labour pool may have tried to systematically collect information on foreign customers and become established in new markets, either by assigning the supply of different markets to different partners or even have agents reside (maybe even permanently) in commercial hubs in order to create more durable connections to the local clientele. The strategy of relying on family members, in this case freedmen, to operate in different markets may have been applied by the CC. Rusonii, who, as sagarii, supplied the market in Saint-Romain-en-Gal, but were also present in the commercial hub of Lyon.6 Epigraphy can provide more examples, but we should be careful not to read too much in the inscriptions, especially when all too common family names are involved.7 Because not everyone could rely on the support of a large family to prospect new markets, businessmen alternatively tried to tap into the information resources acquired by colleagues engaged in the same or a similar trade. Connections to other businessmen working in different regions or originating from distant areas (and thus capable of providing information on local trading conditions) could be established through formal partnerships, but also through more informal networks, viz. by join-

6 CIL 12/1898 and 13/1970. As the gentilicium is quite rare, a family connection between the individuals seems very likely. The Rusonius who was buried in Lyon did not include an occupation in his epitaph, but belonged to the local seviri augustales, an association mainly consisting of prominent freedmen who had earned their money in trade and industry. A similar specialization in the textile trade as mentioned by the Rusonii in Saint-Romain-en- Gal therefore seems plausible. 7 Postumii: CIL 5/3217 and 5/1041 (two lintiones; see Gleba 2004). Pontii: CIL 9/826 (a lanarius); CIL 5/5932 (a negotiator lintiarius et castrensiarius) and AE 2001, 866 (a negotians canusinarius; see Silvestrini 2003). Licinii: CIL 6/9962 (a vestiarius Narbonensis) and CIL 12/4521 (a vestiarius in Narbonne [!]). Plutii: CIL 6/9814 (a plumarius); 14/2433 (a purpu rarius) and 14/2793 and 2812 (a negotiator sericarius). CC. Vettii: CIL 6/6182 (a pictor [here an embroiderer]) and CIL 5/6123 (a textile merchant, given the ‘Tuchprobe’ depicted in the relief). PP. Avilii: CIL 6/33920 (4 or 5 vestiarii) and CIL 9/358 (two PP. Avilii in Canosa, a city famous for its textile production; see Vicari 2001, 26–29). For the presence of families engaged in the textile industry in both Rome and Canosa, see also ERCanosa 2/Add 23 and CIL 6/33921 (a vestiarius), both mentioning individuals with the very rare gentilicium Giganius.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 The Empire’s New Clothes 33 ing one or several occupational associations.8 To further explore the possible networks created by membership, I here list all connections between the centonarii, the association of textile dealers most frequently documented in epigraphy, and other associations (Figure 1).9 Through the negotiation of individual centonarii who joined several associations or who had been elected patron by another collegium, members may have gained access to the information collected by colleagues in a similar trade (vestiarii, sagarii), merchants specializing in other goods but also reaching different customers (negotiatores frumentarii), shippers (navicularii, nautae), people engaged in transport by land (utriclarii), potential customers (veterani) and overarching associations in which most members had earned their living in trade and industry (seviri augustales).10 Each connection could result in better information on markets and customers, new orders and profitable cooperation.

Fig. 1: Connections between the centonarii and other associations

Sometimes these connections to other trades became internalized in the associative structure itself. Exceptionally large commercial associations, such as the Cisalpini et Transalpini who controlled the exchange of goods over the Alpine passes, appear to have been divided into several smaller sections according to merchandize, including slaves and textiles.11 The connections to businessmen active in other trades framed

8 For the economic power of Roman associations, see Broekaert 2011 and Liu 2013. 9 For the centonarii, see Liu 2009, which also includes a catalogue of relevant inscriptions. 10 Although utriclarii specialized in transporting liquids in animal hides, probably on the back of mules, the flexibility and limited weight of textiles allowed them to transport small batches of textiles in addition to wine and oil. For the utriclarii, see Kneissl 1981 and Deman 2002. Theseviri augustales in particular pooled connections to a variety of economic sectors. See Broekaert 2014a for this idea and an application to the association of seviri augustales in Ostia. For textile merchants other than centonarii who had joined the seviri augustales, see e.g. AE 1996, 450 (a sagarius); CIL 10/1872 (a negotiator sagarius); 10/540 (a purpurarius); 9/5752 (a sagarius); 5/6777 (a vestiarius tenuarius) and 11/862 (a negotians lanarius). More examples can be found in the catalogue compiled by Vicari 2001, 94–113. 11 AE 2000, 632 (negotiator vestiarius Cisalpinus et Transalpinus) and CIL 13/5116 (patro nus venaliciorum corporis Cisalpinorum et Transalpinorum). For the idea of the Cisalpini et

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 34 Wim Broekaert the textile dealers’ economic interests within a much more powerful associative context and allowed members of the association to frequently exchange information and assist in receiving orders. Informal supportive networks could also be established through apprenticeship. Several Egyptian papyri show how weavers apprenticed family members to other weavers rather than teaching them the necessary skills at home. In the family of Tryphon for instance, his brother and son were each apprenticed to different weavers in the neighbourhood.12 Another weaver, Pausiris, apprenticed each of his two sons to different colleagues.13 One may wonder why Egyptian weavers deliberately chose to have their children apprenticed to other weavers, because this training not only entailed costs, but also implied that the family temporarily lost access to the child’s labour. What then was their incentive? It has been argued that children were sent to visit other workshops to learn new production techniques, different from those already mastered at home. The specialization in the Egyptian textile industry would force newcomers to acquire broad skills and knowledge.14 This hypothesis however seems to run counter to economic logic: a form of apprenticeship in which newcomers try to learn as many production techniques as possible would quickly threaten or even eradicate specialization, especially when weavers tried to gain access to different specialized workshops by sending their children to different colleagues. Specialized producers may be less willing to communicate trade secrets during apprenticeship, as this could endanger future profits. I therefore agree with Liu that we better see the Egyptian system of apprenticeship as a way to create intergenerational ties of trust and cooperation, to give fellow-weavers a motive for reciprocity, for sharing information, financial support or clientele when needed.15 Precisely because children and other young family members were sent as apprentices, the weavers also indicated that they were willing to transfer the mutual trust to the next generation. In this respect, the rationale of apprenticeship can be compared to the incentive of joining an association, as both institutions were able to generate similar benefits.

Increasing Productivity: Workforce and Division of Labor When entering markets on a supra-regional level, businessmen are confronted with rising demands and more customers. To better capture these opportunities, they will be forced to increase scales of operation by making additional capital investments in infrastructure and/or expanding the labour pool. As the first aspect will be discussed in more detail below under financing costs, I here focus on engaging more labourers in a single occupation. The standard way to increase the workforce in a particular sector of the textile business was to provide specialized training to relatives, including slaves and freedmen, and pass down the occupation to the following generations.16 The most famous example of a nuclear family relying on its members to increase output is no doubt the family of the Egyptian weaver Tryphon, specialis-

Transalpini as an umbrella association, see Mennella 2000 and Degen 2005. 12 Brewster 1927. 13 Droß-Krüpe 2011a, 119–120. 14 Bergamasco 1995; Droß-Krüpe 2011a, 119–120. 15 Liu (forthcoming). 16 Additional hired labor to increase output has also been documented, but wage-earning weavers seem to have asked rather high salaries. See Jones 1960, 188.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 The Empire’s New Clothes 35 ing in weaving for at least 3 generations.17 Epigraphy offers numerous case studies for the use of multiple family members in a single textile trade. As most texts come from the Italian peninsula, where businessmen more than in other regions relied on slave and freedman labour, the cooperation between patrons and their former slaves is particularly well documented.18 If the nuclear family was too small to allow an increase in the labour force, businessmen could also start a partnership with people specialising in the same trade. Ulpianus for instance mentions a societas between sagarii.19 In Abbazia di Montecassino, a dealer in purple textiles was buried longe ab domo by his fellow-freedman and business partner (conlibertus et socius).20 Yet, there were limits to the Roman labour market and in order to reduce risks of fraud, partners were usually selected among trusted colleagues, friends, fellow-members of an association or more distant family members.21 Here again associations also had many benefits to offer to their members. They gained access to the labour pool provided by fellow-members and their respective families, but also to the association’s slaves. In Modena for instance, a local association of textile dealers specialising in purple fabrics seems to have possessed several slaves, as two inscriptions mention freedmen whose name clearly was derived from the specialization of the collegium.22 An important advantage was that partners found in an association could be considered more trustworthy than outsiders, in particular because the collegium provided a reputational control mechanism.23 Another way to increase productivity, this time with the purpose of internalizing different stages of the production and distribution process, so as to limit the number of (perhaps unreliable) partners, entailed a division of labour between different, but above all trustworthy associates, who could each specialize in various aspects of the textile business and obtain greater efficiency in each subsector.24 Businessmen in

17 Brewster 1927. See also Hanson 1979 for another textile establishment run by a family. 18 QQ. Cornelii: CIL 6/9866–9868 (3 sagarii). LL. Salluvii: AE 1995, 228 (3 sagarii); CIL 6/37378 (a sagarius) and perhaps also 6/7971 (a sagarius; the gentilicium Sallyi makes no sense, but can be read as a mistake for Sallu(v)i). LL. Arleni: CIL 6/9675 and 6/12331 (a negotiator sagarius and a mercator sagarius). DD. Veturii: CIL 6/37820 (3 or 4 purpurarii) and AE 1923, 59 (a purpurarius). LL. Camerii: CIL 6/37826 (3 or 4 vestiarii; the same trade was continued by freedmen of freedmen). PP. Avilii: CIL 6/33920 (4 or 5 vestiarii). MM. Matutinii: CIL 5/5929 (a negotiator sagarius from Gaul who had died in Milan, probably on a business trip; he was accompanied by his brother, who most likely specialized in the same trade). LL. Mecii: CIL 6/9493 (an epitaph providing details on a small family business, in which Mecia Flora was a tonstrix [here rather female wool-comber than hair dresser], her daughter Mecia Dynata owned 3 shops, probably for the production or sale of textiles, and her son L. Mecius Rusticus was a lanarius with his own shop). MAMA 4/349 (2 brothers, both sellers of fine linen cloth). 19 Dig. 17.2.52.4. 20 AE 1972, 74 (a mercator purpurarius). 21 See Broekaert 2012a for the rationale of Roman partnerships. The analysis of the Roman labour market in Temin 2004a is far too optimistic. 22 AE 2003, 654: C. Purpurarius Nicephor. Inscr. It. 10/5, 675: Ti. Purpurarius Saturninus. 23 Broekaert 2011; Liu 2013. 24 Not all traditional stages of the textile industry however needed to be entrusted to different partners, because contrary to other pre-industrial textile industries, in the Roman textile production many specializations were so to speak internalized in the trade itself: because

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 36 Wim Broekaert particular tried to allocate different stages in processing, transport and distribution to their agents or partners.25 Such a division of labour required a number of associates, recruited within the entrepreneur’s family or among his colleagues through partnerships and informal cooperation. I here present a number of case studies, only to illustrate the frequent occurrence of these strategies and the various scenarios available to businessmen. The spatial organization of workshops in Pompeii can offer a first clue for investments made by a single businessman in various sectors of the textile industry, in order to internalize different stages of processing textiles. One of the dyeing workshops for instance also had the necessary infrastructure for felt-making (VII 14,5.17–19), while a number of adjacent workshops specialising in fulling and dyeing may have belonged to a single proprietor (V 1, 2; 4 and 5).26 Papyri provide several examples of small-scale businessmen working together with trusted colleagues in order to control different stages in the production chain. For instance, we find evidence of a weaver and fuller living in the same house and no doubt sharing the same customers. Another document shows a dyer personally engaging a weaver to produce clothes and delivering the finished products to the customer.27 Traces of informal cooperation to monitor production and distribution can also be found in the silk trade: Procopius mentions that merchants dealing in silk garments were forced to raise the price of the finished products because the price for raw silk had gone up and they had to pay more to the Persians, who controlled the supply of raw materials. This text suggests the merchants managed the whole production and distribution process from purchasing the raw silk to selling the finished clothes.28 Particularly interesting is also the case study of the Veturii, who specialized in the trade in purple textiles, but appear to have relied on informal networks to strengthen their connections to other textile trades as well.29 Through ties of marriage and/or friendship, the Veturii were linked to a lanarius and a vestiarius, and it seems likely that the family used these connections to find new customers.30 Finally, the family of the Nonii had sev-

garments were woven in one piece, there was little need for additional cutting or sewing before bringing textiles on the market. See Wild 2001. An obvious exception is the trade in second-hand textiles. 25 This strategy is called vertical integration and has been explored by Silver 2009 and Broekaert 2012b. 26 Borgard et al. 2003; Flohr 2012. For the proximity of textile workshops in Roman cities, see also Botte et al. 2009. 27 Droß-Krüpe 2011a, 171 and 173 for further references. 28 Procop. Anec. 25.16.24 and Jones 1960, 191. 29 See note 7. 30 CIL 6/9489 (Veturia Deutera, probably married to a lanarius). NSA 1917, 292 (Asinia T.l. Rufa and T. Asinius Faustus, appearing in the same epitaph of 3 Veturii; cf. CIL 9/1712 for T. Asinius T.l. Antiochus, a vestiarius). See also CIL 14/2433, an epitaph for L. Plutius Eros, a purpurarius, his coliberta and Veturia Attica. The relationship between the 3 individuals is not indicated, but Attica may have been working in Eros’ shop. This way the Veturii not only reached out to businessmen in related textile trades, but also to colleagues in the purple trade as well. Cf. Gregori 1994 and Vicari 2001, 21. Similar family connections motivated by common business interests can be assumed for the PP. Avilii (vestiarii; see note 15) and the PP. Fannii (CIL 6/9976: a vestiarius). CIL 6/17707 suggests that a P. Avilius apparently has been adopted by a P. Fannius. Adoption for commercial reasons is not unknown. See for

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 The Empire’s New Clothes 37 eral textile merchants supplying the neighbouring markets of Modena and Reggio nell’Emilia, but can at the same time have been engaged in the production stages, as the family name also occurs on a contemporary loom weight from Ferrara, a city located rather close to Modena.31

Dealing with Customers A final strategy to control risk and uncertainty in a more globalized market was to cooperate with or work for a powerful customer, who could generate sufficient demand or even control market resources. The obvious candidate here is the Roman army, which may annually have needed as many as 1,000,000 pieces of clothing.32 Regular suppliers to the Roman army could more or less predict demand and were able to produce textiles in anticipation of orders: most of the garments had roughly standardized measurements and quality requirements, so producers and merchants were less vulnerable to fluctuating and unpredictable demand than under normal market conditions.33 In addition, they also enjoyed exemption from liturgies.34 Civilian textile workers clearly recognized the benefits of the supply contracts to the Roman army, as they went at great lengths to protect their interests and exclude other competitors. In Philadelphia for instance, the local administration placed an order for clothing, most likely destined for the army, with an association of 12 weavers.35 They informed the administrators that four members had already been assigned other liturgies and demanded the exemption from other duties, in order to give priority to the order for textiles. Contemporary census records from Philadelphia list far more weavers than the 12 members of the association, who either had not joined any collegium at all or were members of another, rivalling association.36 Although the weavers thus could have called upon the labour force of outsiders, they preferred not to. This raises the question which producers and merchants would have been able to benefit from the often advantageous contracts with the Roman army. In other words, were there privileged players in the army supply? The case study of the weavers from Philadelphia already suggests that members of occupational associations may be in a better position to receive orders than outsiders. Associations could easily manage negotiations with the Roman administration, which thus only needed to address a representative of the association, rather than start seeking a

instance the case of Cn. Sentius Felix (CIL 14/409; cf. Broekaert 2013, nr. 406 for a detailed analysis and further references). 31 CIL 11/869 and 11/963 (two vestiarii). Loom weights: Calzolari 2012; Corti 2012 (accepting a connection between the names on the loom weights and textile production); Antolini & Marengo 2012 (arguing in favor of seeing the names as referring to the producers of the weights). The epigraphy on loom weights is often difficult to interpret: some only record a single cognomen (a slave’s name) with sometimes figulus added, hence referring to the producer, but more elaborate names might also indicate the owner. 32 Liu 2011. 33 Standardization of Roman military outfits: Wild 2001. 34 Duties and exemptions: ILLPRON 1450-7 on the exemptions enjoyed by the centonarii from Solva, who provided services for public needs; Droß-Krüpe 2011b and Liu 2011. 35 P.Phil. 10. This document has recently been discussed by Jinyu Liu in a forthcoming paper (Liu forthcoming) 36 BGU 7/1615 and P.Corn. 23.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 38 Wim Broekaert number of individual producers.37 Another category of privileged players included those businessmen who maintained direct, personal connections to army officers, through family ties, previous military experience or contemporary military service. Inscriptions from Lyon and Augsburg mention textile dealers each having a brother who had served in the local garrison, either as a soldier or a standard bearer.38 It seems likely these merchants used the family connections to the army to receive orders for military equipment. Soldiers themselves also appear to have directly invested in commerce, particularly in the distribution of those goods needed by the army. An anonymous soldier of the German fleet specialized in beer and textiles (?) and was ideally placed to gather information on demand.39 In a similar vein, a veteran of the Roman fleet who later invested in the textile industry will have relied on his previous connections with officers and fellow-soldiers to supply his old garrison.40 Finally, local elites with interests in the textile industry can also be considered attractive business partners for the Roman army, if only because they controlled the primary resources (wool), labour pools (slaves, other dependent workers and tenants) and financial means necessary to produce sufficient merchandize to meet the military’s demand. Because these elites could act as a go-between for the Roman army and small-scale producers, negotiating orders and communicating requirements to smaller players in the economy, they also reduced transaction costs for the latter. It is possible that the business organization of the Secundinii was grounded in this kind of cooperation. The exact relationship between the Secundinii and the people figur- ing on the reliefs of the Igel monument is still far from clear, but the men presenting textiles and being paid out may have been tenants working on the estates possessed by the Secundinii, receiving a wage for their labour or a price for the final product.41

Transportation Costs Physically moving goods to the consumer always entails some costs, even under favourable trading conditions such as stimulated by the integration of the Roman Empire. It is now widely accepted that the establishment of imperial rule went hand in hand with a general improvement of transport conditions and infrastructure.42 Longer periods of political stability and internal peace, a relative reduction of piracy and banditry and the development of the Roman road system and harbour infrastructure (particularly in Ostia and Portus) all contributed to a general decrease of transport costs, an accomplishment of the Roman government all businessmen

37 Droß-Krüpe 2012. 38 AE 1982, 709 (Lyon): negotiator purpurarius; CIL 3/5816 (Augsburg): negotiator vestiarius. 39 AE 1928, 183 (Trier). There is some debate whether or not the occupational specialization artis offecturae mentioned in this inscription refers to dyed textiles. For a discussion of the text and the various interpretations, see Broekaert 2013, nr. 253. 40 CIL 5/774 (Aquileia): vestiarius. For soldiers and veterans engaged in business, see in particular Wierschowski 1982. 41 For the nature of the textile business of the Secundinii, see Drinkwater 1977–1978; Mehl 1997; Béal 1999; Wild 2001 and Broekaert 2014b. Varro RR 1,2,21 already mentions rural estates being equipped with weaving workshops. This business organization however cannot be compared to the putting-out system of Early Modern Europe, as correctly argued by Droß-Krüpe 2011c. 42 Scheidel 2011.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 The Empire’s New Clothes 39 could equally enjoy.43 Yet, individual businessmen could also try and limit transport costs by additional strategies, some of which more or less overlap with the ones discussed for transaction costs and thus served a multiple purpose. It should first be noted however that in the Roman economy, transportation costs for textiles often are difficult to analyse independently, because the nature of textiles encouraged merchants to transport clothing as a secondary cargo to other merchandize. Textiles have a high value-to-weight ratio and can easily supplement a larger cargo of heavy merchandize, in particular because textiles can be used to protect more vulnerable goods during the voyage and merchants can store them in bales of seize and weight required to fill the hold.44 Textiles thus were the perfect merchandize to ride piggy-back with other goods. This particular feature of textiles as merchandize clarifies why traditional transaction cost theory does not apply in full to the textile trade: contrary to the theory that increasing distances between producer and consumer drive out cheap merchandize in favour of luxury items, able to subsidize transport costs, the flexibility and lightness of textiles also allowed common clothing to travel over longer distances. On the trade routes between Rome, Syria and India for instance, silk travelled alongside cheaper textiles.45 Perhaps only large-scale entrepreneurs who derived a large part (if not most) of their wealth from textile production and distribution, such as the Secundinii, transported complete barge and wagon loads of clothing to customers.46 Small-scale merchants, such as the shipper depicted on the relief from Colonzelle, preferred mixed cargoes of amphorae, textiles wrapped in a bale and wine barrels.47 This aspect of the supply system can explain why we find comparatively few merchants in the northern provinces, or in any region of the empire for that matter, exclusively specialising in textiles, even though the demand of the private and military market was considerable.48 Many merchants supplying the civilian and military markets may have used the ‘subsidized’ transport of bulky merchandize with inelastic demand such as grain and foodstuffs stored in amphorae, to add clothing to the cargo as well. The frequent references in the papyri to the textile industry indeed refer far more often to the many specializations in the production stages than to the distribution of textiles.49 In Greek and Latin epigraphy even these occupations only rarely occur, because a large part of the textile production, at least the early stages, was located in rural areas, where fewer inscriptions were being erected, and considered an integral part of agriculture, an economic sector which largely remains invisible in epigraphy because so many people were engaged in agriculture that this profession was hardly

43 Comparative evidence provides a wealth of data on the impact of war, predation and bandi- tism on the textile industry. See Broekaert 2014b for further references. 44 Wild 1978. 45 Albaladejo Vivero 2013; Droß-Krüpe 2013; Ruffing 2014. 46 Wild 2001. 47 Blanc 1976. 48 Bowman & ThThomas omas 1994, nr. 192 and 207 (for the various goods, including pieces of clothcloth-- ing, delivered to Vindolanda by the merchant Gavo); P.Fouad. 77 (a business letter written by a wool merchant to a colleague, which also mentions grapes being sent); Ruffing 2000 (for the diversified business interests, among which investments in the textile trade, of Aurelius Nebuchelus); Vicari 2001, 74–76; Flohr 2014. 49 Droß-Krüpe 2011a, 47–102.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 40 Wim Broekaert worth mentioning. The consequence is that in the past, the low numbers of textile producers and merchants in epigraphy sometimes led researchers to underestimate the scale of this industry.50 Nevertheless, despite transportation costs for textiles being indirectly subsidized by other goods, we can point to two additional cost-saving strategies already encountered. First, suppliers to the Roman army enjoyed an exemption from tolls, at least for the merchandize destined for the military market. We cannot exclude however that, similar to fiscal fraud by shippers in the urban food supply system, clever merchants tried to pass some merchandize ordered by private customers (including officers and soldiers purchasing textiles in addition to the usual military outfit) as belonging to the army supplies.51 In an interesting letter from Vindolanda for instance, the centurion (?) Clodius Super discusses an order for pieces of clothing produced in Gaul and approved by one of his soldiers, Valentinus, who had been dispatched to the mainland.52 In the same letter, Clodius Super asks Cerialis for some cloaks and tunics to be sent to him for his personal slaves. Was the centurion making use of the military supply lines for purchasing goods for private use? The fact that the Roman government needed to state time and again that only official supplies were exempt from customs implies that merchants, but also soldiers with a keen eye for business, continued to try and evade duties on merchandize traded on private accounts.53 Finally, the role of occupational associations again needs to be stressed. A number of businessmen engaged in the textile industry appear to have maintained close connections to collegia specialising in riverine or land transport. I already mentioned the frequent connections between centonarii and utriclarii, nau tae and navicularii, but similar evidence can be adduced for other textile sectors as well.54 It seems possible that these informal connections resulted in lower transport fares or priority given to the business interests of trusted colleagues.

Financing Costs Finally we take into consideration the category of financing costs, which largely depend on the available financial institutions to assist producers and merchants in running their business.55 Commercial exchange commonly relied on credit arrange- ments made possible through the interaction with banks, private financiers and socio-economic institutions such as the family capital and the money pooled by associations, and there is no reason why the textile industry should be organized along different lines.56 Yet, it should be pointed out that (similar to transportation costs) financing costs had perhaps less impact on the investments made by people engaged

50 Carrié 2004. 51 For fiscal fraud in the urban annona, see Sirks 1991 and Broekaert 2009. 52 Bowman & Thomas 1994, nr. 255. 53 Lex portorii Asiae 27; Tac. Ann. 13.51.1. The soldier and veteran of the Roman fleet engaged in the supply of textiles (see above) may even have used vessels belonging to the army to ship goods, thus limiting the required investments in transport infrastructure. 54 CIL 13/1998 (Lyon): lintiarius and utriclarius. CIL 13/2023 (Lyon): negotiator artis pros sariae and utriclarius. 55 For some general remarks on financing the Roman wool trade, see Frayn 1984, 162–172. 56 For financial institutions in the Roman economy, see Rathbone 2003; Temin 2004b (perhaps too optimistic) and Rathbone & Temin 2008.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 The Empire’s New Clothes 41 in the textile industry than for other trades, because their merchandize could easily be preserved and stored for longer periods of time, making them less vulnerable to wildly fluctuating market prices or changes in demand. Because conclusive evidence for the regular involvement of banks and money- lenders in textile production and trade is, to the best of my knowledge, virtually non-existent, which obviously has more to do with the nature of our evidence and the absence of personal archives than with the actual credit facilities involved in the Roman textile industries, I therefore focus on the already familiar strategies, viz. cooperation with the state and the use of informal networks such as family and associations as credit facilitators. First, textile producers contracting with the Roman government should have been able to limit financing costs, because advance payments were made to them in order to purchase raw materials or hire additional labour. There is however a downside to this agreement, because in times of rapid inflation or volatile prices, the money furnished by the imperial administration may not cover all the costs and the producers may risk financial loss.57 More advantageous than contracts with the army however was the access to elite money. Businessmen engaged in the textile industry who belonged to wealthy families usually experienced little trouble in financing their enterprise, as they were backed up by patrons and family members providing raw materials (in their capacity of owners of land and flocks), finished goods, production infrastructure, workshops and/or capital. There is now good evidence to support the existence of elite investments fuelling the Roman textile industry.58 That elite money was required to increase the scale of the textile industry is already suggested by the relative price levels in the Price Edict for the often quite expensive raw materials and the far more moderate wages of people engaged in textile production. The proportion between them indicates that an increase in scale probably goes hand in hand with a considerable investment in materials and production infrastructure, rather than in labour or processing infrastructure.59 This is where the elite is best suited to take the first step, as investments in land, flocks and workshops entail a considerable capital outlay.

57 See P.Oxy. 12/1414 and Jones 1960 for this risk. 58 Pleket 1984 (municipal elites investing in the textile industry); Labarre & Le Dinahet 1996 (evidence from Asia Minor); Kudlien 2002 (case study of P. Patulcius, a fuller being member of the local elite in Magnesia); Flohr 2011 (on large-scale, purpose-built fullonicae in Ostia and Rome); di Giuseppe 2012 (on the spinning industry of the villa S. Pietro near Tolve, managed by L. Domitius Cnidus, most likely a freedman of Domitia Lepida, Nero’s aunt, who owned considerable agricultural estates with herds in the vicinity); Broekaert 2014b (epigraphic evidence); Flohr 2014 (infrastructure). See also P.Oxy. 22/2340 for the head of a number of workshops for linen weavers, who eventually was nominated for a liturgic office. Soldiers also qualified as more well-to-do investors: see for instance P.Oxy. 66/4534 for a soldier and a specialized linen weaver (tarsicarius; for this occupation see Drexhage 2004) jointly leasing a warp-weighted loom for a single year, and P.Oxy. 14/1705 for a soldier own- ing and selling a similar loom. Moreover, if elites reinvested the profits made in the textile industry back in land, where herds could graze or flax could grow, they then indirectly supported a further increase of scale in the textile production as well. 59 Pleket 1984; Jongman 2000; Wild 2002; Broekaert 2014b. There are exceptions, such as the large-scale fullonicae in Rome and Ostia (Flohr 2011), but these investments were only motivated by the presence of an enormous market for textiles.

Because elite landowners, who controlled the raw materials, also had urban properties, a considerable share, if not most, of the textile workshops in the city probably belonged to the same people, allowing them to control the whole production chain.60 Moreover, increasing investments in land and production infrastructure also had re- percussions for transportation costs. If more territory would be dedicated to sheep- rearing to answer the increased demand for textiles, people and animals would start to compete for the same land.61 Sheep in particular need plenty of space and were kept in places with relatively low population density. Many of the urbanized and often densely populated Mediterranean coastal areas were not suited for an increase in animal husbandry, which was transferred to more rural, and often provincial, areas. The consequence however is that production zones became more separate from consumption centres, because demand was largely concentrated in more urbanized regions, and that an increase in production capacity thus also led to increased transport costs. This development left plenty of room for shippers, merchants and retail- ers to take advantage of the globalization of the textile industry, but also implied that only more privileged players with sufficient means could in these circumstances hope to control production as well as transport.62 It is therefore perhaps not surprising that most traces of vertical integration mentioned above witness the attempts to internalize transport, processing and/or distribution, but that we find very little information on families trying to control the whole textile production chain, from producing the raw material to selling the finished products on the market. Elite investments not only benefitted the labour force controlled by aristocratic families themselves, but also held advantages for textile producers who otherwise may have experienced difficulties in financing their business independently. In Evreux for instance, the infrastructure to optimise water supply was donated to be used by the local fullers (usibus fullonum).63 Wealthy benefactors could also donate production infrastructure to the city, which could then be leased out to private entrepreneurs.64 It seems however that these leases were only available to the more well- to-do textile producers. The rent paid by Caecilius Iucundus to the city of Pompeii for the publicly owned fullery amounted to 1,652 sesterces per annum, a sum independent small-scale producers may have found difficult to raise.65 The Egyptian papyri present a very similar picture for private lease contracts: leases often involve considerable sums, entail high risks and frequently result in lessees being unable to pay the rent.66 It is possible that donations to support the textile industry only took place when large-scale production was at stake and merchandize was transported to more distant regions, when individual textile workers or even associations struggled

60 For the spatial distinction between the first stages of textile production situated on the estate and the finishing process in the city, see Wild 1999; Jacques & Hoët-Van Cauwenberghe 2010 (Arras); Flohr 2011 and 2012 (Pompeii). 61 Jongman 2000. 62 The reliefs on the monument of the Secundinii with scenes depicting ships and wagons suggest these large-scale entrepreneurs may have been able to do so. 63 CIL 13/3202 and Deniaux 1990. 64 See for instance CIL 9/2226 for the construction of textile workshops by the duoviri and the stipulations for the lease contracts. 65 Andreau 1974, nr. 141–144; Tran 2009. 66 Droß-Krüpe 2011a, 142–151.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 The Empire’s New Clothes 43 to raise the money, but the evidence for this kind of munificence remains too narrow to warrant any decisive conclusions.67 Finally, members of occupational associations usually had access to the pooled finances of their fellow-members through cheap or even interest-free loans, and to the money stored in the common fund and managed by the association’s officials. Members of a collegium could also jointly defend fiscal privileges or protest against increasing taxation, so as to better protect the finances of each individual member. The famous dispute between the Roman fullers and the Roman municipal authorities (lis fullonum), in which the association defended their exemption from water rates based on an ancient privilege accorded to the collegium, or the cooperation between the associations of weavers and dyers to file a complaint with the government against rising taxes, illustrate the negotiating power of Roman associations.68

Conclusion This paper has tried to analyse the opportunities in the Roman textile industry as a consequence of slowly increasing integration by making use of the concept of trading costs. The purpose was to evaluate to what extent businessmen would have been able to take advantage of the imperial superstructure, in which new markets became more accessible and rising demand posed new challenges. The outcome is a mixed picture, displaying both prospects and limits of a globalizing textile economy. Economic integration presents businessmen with opportunities, but at a cost: in distant markets, businessmen were exposed to different rising trading costs. The people ideally placed to profit the most from globalization are, not surprisingly, municipal and imperial elites. They controlled a large share of the raw materials, production facilities, workforce and investment capital to meet trading costs. This is not to say that middling groups did not profit from a better integrated textile industry, but we should be careful not to overstate their potential to independently benefit from these empire-wide developments. It seems that for middling groups additional supportive institutions were required to help them participate in the new globalized market. Associations provided a good solution, and it is not a coincidence that collegia flourished in major commercial hubs. In conclusion, did globalization and integration during the Empire profoundly change the Roman textile industry? Undoubtedly. Did this development present businessmen with new challenges and opportunities? Certainly. I am more sceptical however about the extent to which these developments contributed to real income growth or better living standards for anyone other than elites and wealthy businessmen at the top of the middling groups.69 These people stood to benefit the most from the development of the Roman economy and levels of inequality may even have become more pronounced as a result. The cake may have been larger, but the slices were still unequally divided.

67 In the case of Evreux (see note 31), the local textile industry was well-connected to different regions in Gaul and could rely on the riverine and road network to reach the markets in Rouen, Bretagne and Lyon. See also the inscription of Illiomarius Aper, a linen dealer (CIL 13/1998), who originated from the same region and was firmly integrated in the business community of Lyon. 68 Lis fullonum: Tran 2007 with further references. Protest against rising taxes: P.Tebt. 2/287. 69 Jongman 2006.

Bibliography Albaladejo Vivero 2013: Albaladejo Vivero, M.: Textile Trade in the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea. In M. Gleba & J. Pásztókai-Szeoke (eds.), Making Textiles in Pre-Roman and Roman Times. Peoples, Places and Identities, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 13), 142–148. Andreau 1974: Andreau, J.: Les affaires de monsieur Iucundus, Rome. Antolini & Marengo 2012: Antolini, S. & Marengo, S. M.: Scrivere i pesi da telaio. ��La docu- mentazione dell’Italia romana, Sylloge Epigraphica Barcinonensis 10, 149–168. Béal 1999: Béal, J.-C.: Remarques sur l’imagerie du Pilier funéraire d’Igel. In N. Blanc & A. Buisson (eds.), Imago Antiquitatis. Religions et iconographie du monde romain. Mélanges offerts à R. Turcan, Paris, 95–104. Bergamasco 1995: Bergamasco, M.: Le didaskalikai nella ricerca attuale, Aegyptus 75, 95 –167. Blanc 1976: Blanc, A.: La scène de halage de Colonzelle (Drôme), RANarb 9, 247–250. Borgard et al. 2003: Borgard, Ph., Brun, J.-P., Leguilloux, M. & Tuffreau-Libre, M.: Le produzioni artigianali a Pompei. Richerche condotte dal Centre Jean Bérard, RStPomp 14, 9–29. Botte et al. 2009: Botte, E., Excoffon, P. & Pasqualini, M.: Un quartier d’artisanat du textile à Forum Iulii (Fréjus, Var). In J.-P. Brun (ed.), Artisanats antiques d’Italie et de Gaule. Mélanges offerts à Maria Francesca Buonaiuto, Naples, 203–209. Bowman & Thomas 1994: Bowman, A. K. & Thomas, J. D.: Vindolanda: the Latin Writing- Tablets II, London. Bowman & Wilson 2009: Bowman, A. K. & Wilson, A. I.: Quantifying the Roman Eco nomy: Integration, Growth, Decline? In A. K. Bowman & A. I. Wilson (eds.), Quanti fying the Roman Economy. Methods and Problems, Oxford, 3–84. Broekaert 2009: Broekaert, W.: Tied down, Wings cut? The Relation between the State and the navicularii during the Later Roman Empire. In B. Antela-Bernárdez & T. Ñaco del Hoyo (eds.), Transforming Historical Landscapes in the Ancient Empires, Oxford, 169–173. Broekaert 2011: Broekaert, W.: Partners in Business. Roman Merchants and the Advantages of being a collegiatus, AncSoc 41, 219–254. Broekaert 2012a: Broekaert, W.: Joining Forces. Commercial Partnerships or Societates in the early Roman Empire, Historia 61, 221–253. Broekaert 2012b: Broekaert, W.: Vertical Integration in the Roman Economy: A Response to Morris Silver, AncSoc 42, 109–125. Broekaert 2013: Broekaert, W.: Navicularii et Negotiantes. A Prosopographical Study of Roman Merchants and Shippers, Rahden/Westf. (Pharos 28) Broekaert 2014a: Broekaert, W.: The Augustales in Ostia: Origin, Occupation and the Nature of the Collegium, MBAH 32, 135–172. Broekaert 2014b: Broekaert, W.: Modeling the Roman Textile Industry in the Northern Provinces: Conceptions and Comparisons. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 55–70. Calzolari 2012: Calzolari, M.: La lavorazione della lana nella bassa pianura del Po: dai pesi da telaio al paesaggio di età romana. In M. S. Busana & P. Basso (eds.), La lana nella Cisalpina romana. Economia e Società. Studi in onore di Stefania Pesavento Mattioli. Atti del Convegno (Padova-Verona, 18–20 maggio 2011), Padova, 451–465. Carrié 2004: Carrié, J.-M.: Vitalité de l’industrie textile à la fin de l’antiquité: considérations économiques et technologiques, AntTard 12, 13–43. Corti 2012: Corti, C.: L’economia della lana a Mutina. In M. S. Busana & P. Basso (eds.), La lana nella Cisalpina romana. Economia e Società. Studi in onore di Stefania Pesavento Mattioli. Atti del Convegno (Padova-Verona, 18–20 maggio 2011), Padova, 213–229. Degen 2005: Degen, R.: Der Tuchhändler von Vitudurum, HelvA 36, 96–102. Deman 2002: Deman, A.: Avec les utriculaires sur les sentiers muletiers de la Gaule romaine, Cahiers du Centre Gustave Glotz 13, 233–246. Deniaux 1990: Deniaux, E.: L’activité des foulons d’Evreux et le contrôle impérial à l’époque d’Antonin, Cahiers des Annales de Normandie 23, 53–68.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 The Empire’s New Clothes 45 di Guiseppe 2012 : Di Giuseppe, H.: Lanifici e strumenti della produzione nell’Italia centro- meridionale. In M. S. Busana & P. Basso (eds.), La lana nella Cisalpina romana. Eco nomia e Società. Studi in onore di Stefania Pesavento Mattioli. Atti del Convegno, Padova – Verona, 18-20 maggio 2011, Padova, 479–496. Drexhage 2004: Drexhage, H.-J.: Einige Bemerkungen zu den tarsikarioi im römischen und spätantiken Ägypten (3.–8. Jh.n.Chr.), MBAH 23/1, 66 – 87. Drinkwater 1977–1978: Drinkwater, J. F.: Die Secundinier von Igel und die Woll- und Textilindustrie in Gallia Belgica: Fragen und Hypothesen, TrZ 40–41, 107–125. Droß-Krüpe 2011a: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Wolle – Weber – Wirtschaft. Die Textilproduktion der römischen Kaiserzeit im Spiegel der papyrologischen Überlieferung, Wiesbaden (Philippika 46). Droß-Krüpe 2011b: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Purchase Orders of Military Garments from Papyri of Roman Egypt. In M. L. Nosch (ed.), Wearing the Cloak. Dressing the Soldier in Roman Times, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 10), 13–18. Droß-Krüpe 2011c: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Zwischen Markt und Werkstatt tritt der Verleger? Überlegungen zur Existenz des Verlagssystems in der römischen Kaiserzeit, MBAH 29, 95–114. Droß-Krüpe 2012: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Stoff und Staat – Überlegungen zur Interaktion von Textilökonomie und römischer Staatlichkeit im 1.–3. Jh. n. Chr. In S. Günther (ed.), Ordnungsrahmen antiker Ökonomien. Ordnungskonzepte und Steuerungsmechanismen antiker Wirtschaftssysteme im Vergleich, Wiesbaden (Philippika 53), 215–226. Droß-Krüpe 2013: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Textiles and their Merchants in Rome’s Eastern Trade. In M. Gleba & J. Pásztókai-Szeóke (eds.), Making Textiles in Pre-Roman and Roman Times. People, Places, Identities, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 13), 149–160. Flohr 2011: Flohr, M.: Exploring the Limits of Skilled Craftsmanship. The fullonicae of Roman Italy. In N. Monteix & N. Tran (eds.), Les savoirs professionnels des gens de mé tier. Études sur le monde du travail dans les sociétés urbaines de l’empire romain, Naples, 87–100. Flohr 2012: Flohr, M.: Working and Living Under one Roof: Workshops in Pompeian Atrium Houses. In A. Anguissola (ed.), Privata Luxuria: Towards an Archaeology of Intimacy. Pompeii and Beyond, München, 51–72. Flohr 2014: Flohr, M.: Towards an Economic History of Textile Manufacturing and Trade in the Roman World. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 1–15. Frayn 1984: Frayn, J. M.: Sheep-Rearing and the Wool Trade in Italy During the Roman Period, Liverpool. Gleba 2004: Gleba, M.: Linen Production in Pre-Roman and Roman Italy. In C. Alfaro Giner, J. P Wild & B. Costa (eds.), Purpureae vestes. Textiles y tintes del Mediterráneo en época romana, Valencia, 29–37. Gregori 1994: Gregori, G. L.: Purpurarii. In Epigrafia della produzione e della distribuzio ne. Actes de la VIe Rencontre franco-italienne sur l’épigraphie du monde romain, Roma, 739–743. Hanson 1979: Hanson, A. E.: P.Mich. inv. 1933: Accounts of a Textile Establishment, BAmSocP 16/1–2, 75–83. Jacques & Hoët-Van Cauwenberghe 2010: Jacques, A. & Hoët-Van Cauwenberghe, C.: Artisanat et commerce: les étiquettes de plomb inscrites découvertes à Arras (Neme tacum), REA 112/2, 295–317. Jones 1960: Jones, A. H. M.: The Cloth Industry Under the Roman Empire, Economic History Review 13/2, 183–192. Jongman 2000: Jongman, W. M.: Wool and the Textile Industry of Roman Italy. A Working Hypothesis. In E. Lo Cascio (ed.), Mercati permanenti e mercati periodici nel mondo ro mano. Atti degli incontri capresi di storia dell’economia antica, Capri 13–15 ottobre 1997, Bari (Pragmateiai 2), 187–197.

Jongman 2006: Jongman, W. M.: The Rise and Fall of the Roman Economy: Population, Rents and Entitlement. In P. F. Bang, M. Ikeguchi & H. G. Ziche (eds.), Ancient Economies, Modern Methodologies: Archaeology, Comparative History, Models and Insti tutions, Bari, 237–254. Kneissl 1981: Kneissl, P.: Die utricularii. Ihre Rolle im gallo-römischen Transportwesen und Weinhandel, BJ 181, 169–204. Kohn (forthcoming): Kohn, M.: The Origins of Western Economic Success: Commerce, Finance, and Government in Preindustrial Europe, forthcoming (a first draft is available online: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~mkohn/Papers/00-05.pdf, accessed July 2015). Kudlien 2002: Kudlien, F.: P. Patulcius L. f., Walker und Probulos im späthellenistischen Magnesia, Laverna 13, 56–68. Labarre & Le Dinahet 1996: Labarre, G. & Le Dinahet, M. T.: Les métiers du textile en Asie Mineure de l’époque hellénistique à l’époque impériale. In Aspects de l’artisanat du textile dans le monde méditerranéen (Égypte, Grèce, monde romain), Lyon 1996, 49–115. Liu 2009: Liu, J.: Collegia centonariorum: the guilds of textile dealers in the Roman, Leiden & Boston. Liu 2011: Liu, J.: Clothing Supply for the Military. A Look at the Inscriptional Evidence. In M. L. Nosch (ed.), Wearing the Cloak. Dressing the Soldier in Roman Times, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 10), 19–28. Liu 2013: Liu, J.: Trade, Traders and Guilds (?) in Textiles: the Case of Southern Gaul and Northern Italy (1st–3rd Centuries AD). In M. Gleba & J. Pásztókai-Szeoke (eds.), Making Textiles in Pre-Roman and Roman Times. Peoples, Places and Identities, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 13), 126–141. Liu (forthcoming): Liu, J.: Work, Occupations, and Group Membership: a Conceptual Analysis. Paper presented at the Conference ‘Work, Labour and Professions’ (Ghent, May 30th–June 1st, 2014) (http://www.rsrc.ugent.be/work_labor_professions, accessed July 2015). Mayerson 1997: Mayerson, P.: The Role of Flax in Roman and Fatimid Egypt, JNES 56/3, 201–207. Mehl 1997: Mehl, A.: Wirtschaft, Gesellschaft, Totenglauben: die “Igeler Säule” bei Trier und ihre Grabherren. Mit einem Anhang: das Grab des Trimalchio, Laverna 8, 59–92. Mennella 2000 : Mennella, G.: Un ‘negotiator vestiarius Cisalpinus et Transalpinus’ a Fara Novarese, Epigraphica 62, 125–136. Pleket 1984: Pleket, H. W.: Urban Elites and the Economy in the Greek Cities of the Roman Empire, MBAH 3/1, 3–36. Rathbone 2003: Rathbone, D.: The Financing of Maritime Commerce in the Roman Em pire, I–II AD. In E. Lo Cascio (ed.), Credito e moneta nel mondo romano, Bari, 197–229. Rathbone & Temin 2008: Rathbone, D. & Temin, P.: Financial Intermediation in 1st Century AD Rome and 18th Century England. In K. Verboven, K. Vandorpe & V. Chankowski (eds.), Pistoi dia tèn technèn: Bankers, Loans, and Archives in the Ancient World: Studies in Honour of Raymond Bogaert, Leuven, 371–419. Ruffing 2000: Ruffing, K.: Die Geschäfte des Aurelios Nebuchelos, Laverna 11, 71–105. Ruffing 2014: Ruffing, K.: Seidenhandel in der Römischen Kaiserzeit. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 71–81. Scheidel 2009: Scheidel, W.: In Search of Roman Economic Growth, JRA 22/1, 46–70. Scheidel 2011: Scheidel, W.: A Comparative Perspective on the Determinants of the Scale and Productivity of Maritime Trade in the Roman Mediterranean. In W. V. Harris (ed.), Maritime Technology and the Ancient Economy: Ship-Design and Navigation, Ports mouth, 21–37. Silver 2009: Silver, M.: Glimpses of Vertical Integration/Disintegration in Ancient Rome, AncSoc 39, 171–184. Silvestrini 2003: Silvestrini, M.: Un ‘negotians canusinarius’ in una nuova epigrafe di Canosa. In A. M. Corda (ed.), Cultus splendore. Studi in onore di Giovanna Sotgiu, Senorbi, 893–907.

Sirks 1991: Sirks, A. J. B.: Food for Rome. The Legal Structure of the Transportation and Processing of Supplies for the Imperial Distributions in Rome and Constantinople, Amsterdam. Temin 2004a: Temin, P.: The Labor Market of the Early Roman Empire, Journal of Interdisciplinary History 34/4, 513–538. Temin 2004b: Temin, P.: Financial Intermediation in the Early Roman Empire, Journal of Economic History 64, 705–733. Tran 2007: Tran, N.: Le ‘procès des foulons’, Mélanges de l’École française de Rome, Anti quité 119/2, 597–611. Tran 2009: Tran, N.: ‘Tabernae publicae’: boutiques et ateliers dans le patrimoine des cités de l’Occident romain, Cahiers du Centre Gustave Glotz 20, 327–350. Vicari 2001: Vicari, F.: Produzione e commercio dei tessuti nell’Occidente romano, Oxford. Wierschowski 1982: Wierschowski, L.: Soldaten und Veteranen der Prinzipatszeit im Handel und Transportgewerbe, MBAH 1/2, 31–48. Wild 1978: Wild, J.P.: Cross-Channel Trade and the Textile Industry. In J. du Plat Taylor & H. Cleere, Roman Shipping and Trade: Britain and the Rhine Provinces, London, 79–81. Wild 1999: Wild, J. P.: Textile Manufacture: a Rural Craft? In M. Polfer (ed.), Artisanat et productions artisanales en milieu rural dans les provinces du nord-ouest de l’Empire romain. Actes du colloque organisé à Erpeldange (Luxembourg) les 4 et 5 mars 1999 par le Séminaire d’Etudes Anciennes du Centre Universitaire de Luxembourg et Instrumentum, Montagnac, 29–37. Wild 2001: Wild, J. P.: Textiles et activités relatives au textile sur le monument d’Igel, Annales de l’Est 2, 83–92. Wild 2002: Wild, J. P.: The Textile Industries of Roman Britain, Britannia 33, 1–42. Wilson 2009: Wilson, A. I.: Indicators for Roman Economic Growth: a Response to Walter Scheidel, JRA 22/1, 71–82.

Miko Flohr

Of the three regions in the Roman world for which we have larger bodies of evidence about textile manufacturing and trade, the Italian peninsula probably is the most important one when it comes to understanding the textile economy of the Roman world as a whole. This has in the first place something to do with evidence, of course. While the evidence from Italy mostly lacks the detailed, sometimes trans- actional specificity of the Egyptian papyri, and while the epigraphic record of Italy (not counting Rome) is to some extent rivalled by that of Anatolia, there is no doubt that both the archaeological and the iconographic record have no equal elsewhere in the Roman world; not unexpectedly, Italy is also treated best by Greco-Roman literary authors. Indeed, there are many discussions of textile economies in other regions of the Roman world where evidence from Italy at some point pops up to fill in an essential gap, or to provide a necessary parallel. Yet more important than the evidence is, of course, the fact that Italy, especially in the imperial period, was very much the spider in the web: it was the epicentre of the empire that tied together all the loose ends of trade and transport networks, and that exerted a strong influence on regional economies in other parts of the Mediterranean and beyond.1 Italy was partially exempted from taxes, and profited enormously from revenues generated by Italian landowners who controlled property in other provinces but spent the profits in Italy.2 Large parts of Roman Italy, but particularly the old Roman heartland of Latium and Campania became absurdly wealthy over the course of time and developed a rather demanding public dress culture, as is repeatedly observed by ancient commentators.3 Moreover, Italy had Rome, an extremely large metropolis with, in terms of demand for textiles, a fortuitous combination of both exceptionally wealthy and exceptionally many people.4 There can be little doubt that Italy was the largest single consumer market for textiles in the Roman world, and that demand from the peninsula at least potentially had an impact on the textile economies of other regions as well. It would thus be very hard to understand the history of Roman textile economies without understanding the textile economy of Roman Italy and of its historical development from the middle republic to the high empire and beyond. This article intends to propose a model for the historical development of the wool economy of the Italian peninsula that may help to explain the geography of wool production as it is suggested by textual sources. It will do so on the basis of a rather traditional evidential basis: the core of the argument rests on a few snippets of literary evidence, which at a couple of points will be supplemented by some inscriptions. The archaeological evidence for wool production and textile manufacturing – basically consisting of loom weights and spindle-whorls – will be mostly neglected: it is not known to us sufficiently well enough to inform a discussion on the more

1 Particularly through Rome, cf. Morley 1996. 2 On the economic foundations of Roman Italy see Purcell 2000, 432–440. 3 On dress culture in Roman Italy see Flohr 2013b, 70–71. 4 On the impact of the Roman metropolis on the Italian economy see the classic Morley 1996.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 50 Miko Flohr macro-economic aspects of the Italian textile economy, even if its value in asses sing local histories of textile trade and manufacturing is undeniable.5 The argument will start with a brief review of past approaches to the Italian wool economy, and will then focus on two key points: the historical development of the geography of demand and the development of the geography of supply. A key element of the argument will be that, in order to understand the geography of the early imperial Italian wool economy, it is essential to look at the way in which the Italian wool economy took shape in the period when the city of Rome became increasingly independent on the import of wool – the second century BCE. While the present argument does not start from a very precisely circumscribed theoretical position on how the economic history of manufacturing and trading textiles should be written (it rather starts from what has been happening in the historio graphy of the Italian textile economy), it embraces a number of ideas that are worth pointing out explicitly here. In the first place, contrary to many past approaches to Roman textile production, ‘time’ will be a very central component of the present argument. This is because economic systems, as they emerge and evolve, do so not in a vacuum, but in a world already shaped by a variety of historical factors (and actors), and in which certain scenarios had already become impossible as the result of past developments, and others may have become less attractive that they may have looked on the theoretical drawing table – you can only understand the outcomes when you know the processes shaping them. Path-dependence is a real issue when discussing the development of economic geographies, and is, for that reason, a hotly debated issue among economic geographers.6 A second point is related: while it is tempting to focus on the development of one specific branch of the economy, these branches do not develop on their own, but are interrelated, especially when they involve large- scale land use: land can be used only once, and what is used for grazing cannot be used for cultivating cereals or grapes. There is no way to understand a wool economy, without understanding the other sectors of the agricultural economy too, and the extent to which agricultural economies were, actually, specialized in their orientation towards the outside world. Thirdly, and finally, the present argument quietly assigns a key role to social networks in shaping and maintaining supra-local trade economies: rather than acting on their own, and venturing into the big unknown, traders and manufacturers started from what (and whom) they knew and what they had easily access to: familiarity is a crucial issue in an economy in which the risks of trade over longer distances were considerable.7 As will be suggested in what follows, the complex Italian textile economy of the imperial period seems to have emerged from modest and familiar Republican period beginnings, with Romans initially tapping known and easily accessible markets, and expanding on that basis at a later moment.

Debating the Italian Wool Economy There is a rich bibliography on textile manufacturing and trade in Roman Italy, but a large majority of approaches focuses on a specific city or region. This makes the debate rather fragmented, even if it there are clear clusters of discourse on Cisalpine

5 Cf., on Pompeii, Flohr 2013a; Monteix 2013. 6 See e.g. Martin & Sunley 2006; Martin 2010. 7 This is also clear from, e.g. the role of freedmen in trade. Cf. Broekaert 2016.

Gaul and Apulia.8 Moreover, the standard approach traditionally also has been static: scholars have often tried to reconstruct ‘the’ textile economy of ‘the’ Roman period without considering historical development, and often without providing an awful lot of geographical context as well. There are a number of publications in which scholars highlight the supra-local importance of textile production in a certain place based on supposedly significant evidence, but without including a critical comparative component in the analysis. In this vein, there have been discussions of export-oriented textile economies for, famously, Pompeii, Tarentum, southern Latium, Modena, Altinum, and Canosa.9 Without denying the importance of the evidence at each of these places for understanding the broader picture, it is of course not particularly straightforward to reconstruct what was happening in Roman Italy on the basis of evidence from one place only, and it has led to a certain bias in scho larly discourse in which places with more evidence get more attention. Essentially, the present situation is that wherever you look for scholarship on textile production, you will find scholars arguing for export oriented industries, because they mainly discuss examples where this may have been the case. There have been few attempts to discuss the textile economy of Roman Italy as a whole. The most important, and most recent one is by Wim Jongman, who around the turn of the millennium proposed a model in which wool was produced in North and South Italy, while he took occupational epigraphy to suggest textile manufacturing happened close to consumption in the densely urbanized regions in between, thus envisaging a system in which substantial quantities of raw wool – rather than finished clothing – were traded and transported, though even this involved only the better qualities.10 There are many things that can be said about the value of Jongman’s model for the first centuries of our era – it is sketchy to the point of imprecision, it is extremely thin and superficial on both evidence and discourse, and it neglects the role of Italy’s unique assemblage of coastal plains and mountain ranges in shaping the geography of wool production – but the real problem here, too, is that the model is a head without a body – a historical state without historical roots: Jongman sketched the situation as he envisaged it for the early imperial period, as if things always had been like that. Obviously, they had not. The wool economy of early imperial Italy, its trade flows and its geographical differentiation, was shaped by a complex set of historical developments about which we are extremely badly informed, but which we nevertheless somehow need to make sense of if we are to fully understand the dynamics of textile manufacture and trade in Roman Italy. The only aspect of the Italian textile economy of which the history has been discussed to some extent is transhumance – the yearly migration of flocks between the low-lying winter pastures and the summer pastures in the mountains. For a large part however, this debate has developed completely independently of debates about textile manufacturing, and recent work on the textile economy of Roman Italy has engaged with this tradition only to a very limited extent. Indeed, Jongman does

8 Even regional overviews are scarce. For Cisalpine Gaul cf. Noè 1973; Vicari 1994. For Apulia, no overview exists. 9 Pompeii: Moeller 1976; Jongman 1988; Flohr 2013a; Monteix 2013; Tarentum: Morel 1978; Southern Latium: Coarelli 1996; Modena: Corti 2012; Altinum: Buonpane 2003; Cottica 2003; Canosa: Acri 1983. 10 Jongman 2000.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 52 Miko Flohr not even refer to the transhumance phenomenon at all: he simply states that sheep need a lot of room and thus should be where there are few people.11 Transhumance, however, undeniably was a key phenomenon in the Italian wool economy. It was discussed in print as early as 1905 by Albert Grenier, who dated the emergence of transhumance in the first half of the second century BCE and related it to the after- math of the Second Punic War, which resulted in the availability of large amounts of public land.12 Subsequent scholars have expressed a variety of views about the causes of long-distance transhumance, but the chronological horizon suggested by Grenier is still widely accepted, also because it fits nicely with the literary evidence: transhumance is not mentioned by Cato, but discussed to some detail by Varro.13 Only recently, some scholars have suggested that transhumance was actually a much older phenomenon that just became more visible in the late Republic, and maybe became more widespread or large-scale.14 Indeed, Cato’s neglect of transhumance is not in itself a strong argument against its existence in the mid second century BCE or earlier; as MacKinnon suggests, the archaeological evidence is inconclusive, but transhumance is known to have existed in prehistoric societies all over the world.15 Moreover, the ecological circumstances fostering the movement of flocks from the plain to the mountains of course remained mostly unchanged, except for some mi- nor variations in climate.16

Shifting Geographies of Demand Key factor in the historical development of the Italian textile economy is without any doubt the explosive growth of the city of Rome and its consumer market in the middle and late Republic. It is important to distinguish two parallel but not directly related developments. In the first place, there is obviously the sheer increase in population. While there are no reliable figures, scholars tend to agree on an ap- proximate size of Rome of around one million inhabitants in the time of Augustus, while the development of the aqueduct system has been thought to suggest a figure of about 200,000 at the beginning of the second century BCE.17 This would mean that Rome more than quadrupled in size in the last centuries BCE, a phenomenal development that had a defining impact on the entire Italian economy, including the peninsular wool economy: regular demand for textiles is likely to have grown with the city’s population. Moreover, while a considerable proportion of the population increase in Rome was related to migration from Italy, there is a general agreement that the population of Italy also grew, though less exponentially than Rome. The more conservative scenario envisages a growth of about five million in the late third century to about six million under Augustus; a more optimistic scenario estimates the population under Augustus at 14 million, from a late third century figure of six

11 Jongman 2000, 192. 12 Grenier 1905, 314–322. 13 See e.g. Toynbee 1965, 286–295, Pasquinucci 1979, Gabba 1990, and, recently, Roselaar 2010, 173–176. 14 Frayn 1984; MacKinnon 2004. 15 MacKinnon 2004, 125–130. 16 On the climate in the Roman world see Scheidel 2012, 10–12; Sallares 2007, 17–20. 17 Morley 1996, 39.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 The Wool Economy of Roman Italy 53 to eight million.18 In both scenarios, net population increase created new markets for clothing throughout the peninsula, but especially in the Roman Metropolis. Moreover, population increase is not the only development of the later Republic: through warfare and taxation, Roman Italy also became exceedingly rich; particularly after establishing hegemony over the Western Mediterranean at the end of the second Punic war (and even more so after Pydna), Italy developed a consumer economy with an increasingly demanding dress culture, and a public life that for many people was increasingly full of occasions where dress mattered.19 This increase in demand is exceptionally hard to quantify on the basis of the evidence we have, but developments in domestic architecture in, especially, Latium and Campania, make clear that this was not just a matter of a few senators and knights enriching themselves: we see the emergence of wealthy urban elites who participated heavily in conspicuous consumption.20 This further drove up demand for textiles, and particularly for textiles of higher quality. It is worth emphasizing that demand for textiles, and thus for wool, not only increased, but also shifted geographically and became less equally divided over the peninsula, with a growing emphasis on the city of Rome and the increasingly wealthy provinces of Latium and Campania. This, in turn, suggests that these regions also gradually became more dependent on import of textiles from further away, particularly because Rome itself, as a city of around 200,000 inhabitants in the early second century, probably had already been dependent on imported wool and textiles for quite some time. It is clear that this gradually increasing and shifting demand created possibilities for investment: if people need substantial amounts of wool, a flock of sheep becomes a valuable property, and eventual profits may be used to create larger flocks that produce even higher yields. There is ample evidence that the Roman elite was not blind to these opportunities, and neither was the state. Varro reports how flocks driven over transhumance routes from Apulia to Samnium had to be registered with the tax authorities, which probably involved the payment of a small tax, but in any case reflect a desire on the part of the Roman government to control what was going on.21 This is also suggested by the late-republican Lex Agraria (111 BCE), which states tax exemptions for flocks below a certain size for the use of the pastures situated on public land.22 Varro himself reports to have possessed a flock of 700 sheep spending the

18 On the debate between scholars supporting the ‘low count’ of 6 million and those supporting the ‘high count’ of 14 million see De Ligt 2012, 5–10. 19 On the economic impact of conquest see e.g. Bang 2012, 201–203. 20 This is of course best illustrated at Pompeii, where there is a shift towards larger, more luxurious houses in the second half of the first century BCE, but comparable domestic architecture can also be found at other sites, e.g. Paestum and Vulci. On the development of domestic architecture in second century BCE Pompeii see Dickmann 1999, 49–158. 21 Varro, RR 2.1.16: “Hence, flocks of sheep are driven all the way from Apulia into Samnium for summering, and are reported to the tax-collectors, for fear of offending against the cen- sorial regulation forbidding the pasturing of unregistered flocks”. Transl. Hooper & Ash 1934, 323. 22 Lex Agraria (CIL 1, 200), 11: “Those who pasture on the common pastures larger animals of no greater number than ten plus their offspring up to one year of age ... or those who pasture there smaller animals of no greater number than ... plus their offspring up to one year of age, shall not owe any tax or fee for these animals ... to the State or to any tax farmer nor give

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 54 Miko Flohr winter in Apulia, while pasturing close to Rieti in Latium in the summer; his friend Atticus is reported to have a flock of 800 sheep.23 In all probability, they were not the only ones, and elite ownership of flocks is likely to have been a defining feature of the Italian wool economy for the entire Roman period: we know from the well- known second century ad inscription found on the north gate of Saepinum that, by that time, the emperor himself owned flocks as well.24 Indeed, the entire conflict between the shepherds and the magistrates of Bovianum and Saepinum attests for the continued importance of the Italian wool economy to the Roman government: the point made, repeatedly, in the correspondence about the situation is the importance of the flocks, both those privately owned and those owned by the emperor, to the Roman tax authorities.25 The developments in demand in the Late Republic fostered the emergence of a large wool economy in which both the Roman elite and the Roman state became and remained actively involved – so even if we start from a scenario in which the practice of transhumance already existed beforehand, it is likely to have increased in scale, and will have been more and more directed towards the needs of the Romans. As it became more visible to the Roman elite over the course of the late second and early first century BCE, they also started writing about it – hence, Varro discusses at length what Cato appears to neglect completely. There are, in Roman literature, two regions in Italy that are repeatedly mentioned in connection to wool production: Cisalpine Gaul and Apulia; both Columella and Pliny explicitly highlight these two regions together as outstanding, at least qualitatively.26 It makes therefore sense to briefly discuss the roots of the wool and textile economies of these two parts of Italy.

Apulia Wool production in Apulia is basically only known through literary texts. It is em- phatically associated with the transhumance phenomenon – both in the Roman evidence and in later historical periods: in the early modern period, and basically up to the early twentieth century, there was a dense network of tratturi centering on Foggia but continuing basically until the Salento.27 Roman authors of the early imperial period repeatedly single out two cities as places where wool came from: Tarentum and Canosa. Tarentum is best known, and was studied in an 1978 article by Jean-Paul Morel, which brought together and analysed the literary evidence, and

security nor pay anything for this reason.” Transl. Johnson, Coleman-Norton & Bourne 1961, 51. 23 Varro RR 2.2.10: “I had flocks that wintered in Apulia and summered in the mountains around Reate, these two widely separated ranges being connected by public cattle-trails.’ Transl. Hooper & Ash 1934, 337; 2.10.11: ‘If flocks of sheep are very large (and some people have as many as 1000) you can decrease the number of shepherds more easily than you can in smaller flocks, such as those of Atticus and mine. My own flocks contain 700, and yours, I think, had 800; but still you had one tenth of them rams, as I do.” Transl. Hooper & Ash 1934, 411. 24 CIL 9, 2438. On this text see esp. Corbier 1983. 25 Corbier 1983, 130–131. 26 Colum. 7.2.3; Plin. NH 8.190. 27 See on the transhumance economy of this period Marino 1992.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 The Wool Economy of Roman Italy 55 discussed the dynamics of the Tarentine wool economy.28 Morel argued that while there is ample evidence for wool-production and wool-processing, the evidence for the actual production of textiles is very slim, suggesting that most of what left the city was raw wool, not textiles, an idea that was subsequently taken up by Jongman and projected upon the whole of Roman Italy.29 A crucial element in the Tarentine wool economy was that south Apulia was the place where flocks had their winter pasture. In spring, they moved northwards, but not before they had been shorn, thus leaving, every year, large quantities of wool behind in the region. Thus, whereas our sources emphasize the quality of the Tarantine wool, it should not be forgotten that the very existence of a transhumance system also presupposes that it was regionally available in meaningful quantities: the yearly shearing of the sheep created an surplus that could be marketed – or, from a Roman perspective – that could be tapped to satisfy metropolitan demand. Tarentum played a crucial role in this: not only was it the traditional political centre of the region; moreover, as the only real port city on the Ionian sea it also enjoyed the easiest trading connections with Rome – much better than Metapontum and Heraclea, which, to judge from their location at the entrance point of major valleys heading in northern direction, may have been involved in the regional transhumance economy, but did not have a natural harbour.30 The second centre, Canosa, was in a similarly privileged position at the winter end of several long-distance transhumance routes, but it lacked the direct connection to the sea, and for most of the Roman period, the road connection was not of the quality that the early second century Via Traiana would bring, though there probably was some overland connection between Canosa and the sea: Strabo suggests the Canusini had an emporium on the Adriatic.31 Actually, the city had a position that was quite similar to that of Foggia in the Early Modern period, though slightly more to the south. Very much like Tarentum, Canosa was the largest pre-Roman urban centre of its region, as well as the one situated closest to the coast: if there is one place in the region where Roman traders in the late Republic could easily enter the regional market to buy up wool, it was at here rather than further to the north at Arpi or Lucera, even if the latter had been a Roman colony since the late fourth century.32 Contrary to Tarentum, where there is no evidence for textile production, it has been argued that Canosa also developed a significant textile industry, specializing in the so-called canusinae, which were mantles.33 The evidence on which this idea is based,

28 Morel 1978. 29 Jongman 2000, 190. 30 Metapontum was situated close to the mouth of the Bradano river, which carved out the largest north-south valleys of Southern Italy and formed a natural transhumance route. Heraclea was situated next to the Agri, the second largest valley of the region. 31 Strabo 6.3.9: “From Barium to the Aufidus River, on which is the emporium of the Canusiti is four hundred stadia and the voyage inland to the emporium is ninety”. Translation Jones 1924, 127. 32 On pre-roman Daunia see Volpe 1990, 28–29. Grelle and Silvestrini have also argued that the location of Canosa, close to a key wade in the Ofanto, made that the annual shearing of flocks passing in Northern direction took place here. Grelle & Silvestrini 2001, 98. 33 This point is particularly emphasized by Grelle & Silvestrini 2001.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 56 Miko Flohr however, is very thin; most passages referring to the canusinae suggests that the toponym refers to the colour of the wool rather than to the shape of the textile.34 In summary, both at Tarentum and at Canosa, the Romans seem initially to have connected to an existing infrastructure, and the wool economy came to reflect those earlier (political) realities. Once this trade pattern had been established, it also quickly settled in the mental geography of the Roman elite, at the relative expense of other places in the region from which wool was exported, such as Brindisi: these are only rarely mentioned in our literary sources, but this may reflect a cultural bias of the elite rather than economic realities.35 It does not need to mean that Tarentum and Canosa completely monopolized the regional wool economy, as will also become clear when we discuss the evidence for wool-production in Cisalpine Gaul.

Fig. 1: Map of Roman Italy showing the places with particular evidence for wool production

34 For an overview of the sources see Volpe 1990, 268–271. 35 On Brindisi see Strabo 6.3.6: “Their country is better than that of the Tarantini, for, though the soil is thin, it produces good fruits, and its honey and wool are among those that are strongly commended.” Transl.: Jones 1924, 119.

Cisalpine Gaul For Cisalpine Gaul, the evidence is much richer and also includes a significant epigraphic record. Contrary to the wool of Tarentum and Canosa, the wool of northern Italy was noted for its whiteness, and, as Columella notes, this made it increasingly popular in the early imperial period – perhaps primarily because, as Columella suggests, its white colour meant that it could be used with a greater variety of dyestuffs.36 We have no direct information about long-distance transhumance in this part of Italy, but this is also unnecessary: throughout Cisalpine Gaul, summer and winter pastures could be found at a relatively short distance from each other, with the Alps on the north side, and the Apennines on the south. Wool was produced on both sides of the plain. On the north side, two of the main cities of the Veneti, Altinum and Patavium stand out in the literary sources; on the south side, authors praise the famous wool of Mutina and refer to Parma, and there is, for the Republican period, evidence for a yearly market at Campi Macri – near Mutina – where one could buy sheep.37 All these places were situated at the winter end of transhumance routes, and, with the exception of Altinum, they were close to the mountains, suggesting that the regional flocks, in spring, left considerable quantities of wool when they left for the greener pastures. Significantly, both Mutina and Parma were situated close to four of the largest tributaries to the Po: their valleys constituted the most important trans humance routes of the region; the valley of the Scultenna (the modern-day Panaro) near Mutina is explicitly highlighted as producing wool of the highest quality.38 The wool-exporting cities of Cisalpine Gaul were also well connected: Parma and Mutina were directly on the Via Aemilia, while Altinum was situated directly on the Venetian Lagoon, and Patavium was not far from it; all had their own hinterland: there may have been competition between them, but this must have been about fin ding markets rather than about finding wool. Moreover, like in Apulia, some of the cities that in the Roman period got a reputation for their wool had been traditional regional centres – Altinum and Patavium were two major pre-Roman settlements of the Veneti.39 In the South, Parma and Mutina were the two original colonies related to the construction of the Via Aemilia and were both founded in 183 BCE, a few years after the road had been constructed, and for that reason enjoyed a privileged position in the Roman trade network right from the start.40 However, there is some evidence suggesting that underneath this schematic geo graphy of our literary sources lies in fact a much more complex one, in which smaller

36 Columella 7.2.3–4: “Our farmers used to regard the Calabrian, Apulian and Milesian as breeds of outstanding excellence, and the Tarentine as the best of all; now Gaulish sheep are considered more valuable, especially that of Altinum, also those which have their folds in the lean plains round Parma and Mutina. While white is the best colour, it is also the most useful, because very many colours can be made from it; but it cannot be produced from any other colour.” Transl. Forster & Heffner 1954, 235. 37 See e.g. Columella 7.2, Pliny, NH 7.43, Strabo 5.1.12. 38 Mutina is surrounded by the Panaro (Scultenna) and the Secchia rivers; Parma has the Taro and Parma rivers in its direct environment. Strabo 7.1.12: “As for wool, the soft kind is produced by the regions round Mutina and the River Scultenna (the finest wool of all).” Transl. Jones 1923, 333. 39 Cf. Pellegrini et al. 1976, 39–41. 40 Livy, 39.55.6.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 58 Miko Flohr centres also played a role, whereas the bigger centres were simply better known or specialized in better qualities. In the first place, at Regium Lepidi – half way between Mutina and Parma – an inscription refers to a group of lanarii pectinarii et carminatores honoring a member of the local elite.41 Both their number and their close ties to the elite suggest that these were not poor, marginal craftsmen but rather representatives of a (small) wool export economy. There is evidence for a sodalicium of lanari carminatores from the small town of Brescello, situated in the same region directly on the Po.42 A small dossier of inscriptions suggests that the city of Brescia had a flourishing wool economy, with epigraphic attestations not only ofmany people involved in the local wool economy, but also of a variety of specializations: we have a professional group of coactores lanarii – probably they are the wool equivalent of the coactores argentarii, so involved in buying up wool – a group of sodales lanarii pectinari and, separately, a group of sodales lanarii carminatores.43 Moreover, there is a passage in Strabo claiming that the coarse wool of the Insubri – living in the region around Mediolanum – together with that of the Ligures was used to produce large quantities of cheap, simple clothing used throughout the peninsula.44 Most likely, therefore, there was a lively export-oriented wool economy in the entire region, and Mutina, Parma, Altinum and Patavium should be seen as the tip of the iceberg, perhaps serving the better section of the market because of their historical connections to Rome, or perhaps simply being more renowned. A more difficult issue concerns the amount of textile manufacturing in the region. There is a strong Italian tradition of scholarship assuming that Cisalpine Gaul produced textiles, but in fact the only direct evidence we have is Strabo’s remark that lots of locally manufactured textiles left Patavium for Rome: all other evidence points to wool rather than textiles.45 Hence, Jongman believed textile production took place closer to the centres of consumption in central Italy, and dismissed the situation at Patavium as ‘exceptional’.46 This may be too pessimistic: there is evidence that import of textiles into the Roman metropolis was common practice.

First of all, as I have argued elsewhere, the infrastructure of large-scale fulling establishments situated on the major transport routes to Rome at Ostia and in the Roman Suburbium suggests that there was a substantial influx of finished textiles.47 Secondly, the anecdote about Patavium does not stand completely on its own: Strabo also noted that the Ligures also exported finished cloaks and tunics through the emporium of Genoa.48 Furthermore, besides disproportional amounts of inscriptions involving lanarii, Cisalpine Gaul also has returned a lot of inscriptions mentioning of vestiarii and sagarii. Particularly, this is true for Mutina, Regium Lepidum and Mediolanum.49 While these may have been locally operating traders, some appear tied to other regions as well – one of the vestiarii from Mutina had direct ties with Rome, and a sagarius from Mediolanum ended up buried in Ricina, in Picenum.50 The evidence is not strong or explicit, but I would say that, at the very least, it argues for a model in which right from the start, together with the wool some of the textiles produced in the region also began to be exported and it is very well possible that some of this export after some time also lead to an increased production of textiles and thus, to some extent, to export oriented manufacturing: labour costs associated with spinning and weaving may have been higher in the city Rome than they were in Cisalpine Gaul, especially on the countryside, thus making it more profitable to import woven textiles rather than raw wool.

Discussion The geography of the Italian wool economy that emerges from early imperial literary sources is a geography of trade and transport rather than a geography of production: few of the flocks of which the wool was traded via Mutina, Altinum, Canosa and Tarentum spent most of their time in the direct environment of these cities, and the owners of the flocks may have lived as far away as Rome itself; where textile manu-

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 60 Miko Flohr facturing took place remains mostly unspecified, but the idea that at least some manufacturing took place in wool-producing regions remains attractive. Arguably, the default model of the Italian wool economy should be one in which both raw wool and finished textiles were traded, and the debate should be about the relative proportions, though we have little way of knowing or even modelling these. Yet the central point made here is that we should approach the economic geo graphy of the imperial period as a product of the Republican past. Probably, the Italian wool economy took its more-or-less definitive shape in the course of the se cond century BCE: this was both the moment in which the demographic explosion of Rome necessitated fundamental changes to its supply system and the moment in which Cisalpine Gaul developed its first direct social and political ties with the Roman metropolis; it is possible, and perhaps likely, that wool from Apulia had already been exported to Rome before, but there is no direct evidence. Once established, this system remained fundamentally unaltered, though it may have spread from the initial centres that got the name to surrounding areas and, as Columella suggests, there may have been a shift of emphasis away from Apulia and towards Cisalpine Gaul when white and light-coloured clothes became more popular some- where in the early empire. However, even though the Roman economic network became increasingly complex, and even if Italy became a net consumer of wool, Cisalpine Gaul and Apulia never seem to have encountered any competition challenging their dominant position on the Roman wool market. This makes perfect sense: the summer pastures in the Apennines and Alps could not be made profitable through other forms of agriculture, and were closer to Rome than possible competitors. Moreover, they were closely tied to the Roman market, from early on, through the Roman elite, who owned a significant proportion of the flocks and quite simply never encountered any strong incentive to divest.

Bibliography Acri 1983: Acri, A.: Sulla produzione laniera di Canosa, Annali della facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia dell’università di Bari 25–26, Bari, 188–200. Bang 2012: Bang, P.: Predation. In W. Scheidel (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Ro man Economy, Cambridge, 197–217. Broekaert 2016: Broekaert, W.: Freedman and Agency in Roman Business. In A. Wilson & M. Flohr (eds.), Urban Craftsmen and Traders in the Roman World, Oxford, 222–253. Buonopane 2003: Buonopane, A.: La produzione tessile ad Altino: le fonti epigrafiche. In G. Cresci Marrone & M. Tirelli (eds.), Produzioni, merci e commerci in Altino preromana e romana (2), Venezia, 85–297. Coarelli 1996: Coarelli, F.: Fregellae, Arpinum, Aquinum. Lana e fullonicae nel Lazio meridionale. In M. Cébeillac-Gervasoni (ed.), Les Élites Municipales de l’Italie Péninsulaire des Gracques à Néron. Actes de la table ronde de Clermont-Ferrand 28–30 novembre 1991, Rome, 199–205. Corbier 1983: Corbier, M.: Fiscus and Patrimonium: The Saepinum Inscription and Trans humance in the Abruzzi, JRS 73, 126–131. Corti 2012: Corti, C.: L’economia della lana a Mutina. In M. Busana & P. Basso (eds.), La lana nella cisalpina Romana. Economia e società. Studi in onore di Stefania Pesavento Mattioli. Atti del Convegno Padova – Verona, 18–20 maggio 2011, Padova, 213–229. Cottica 2003: Cottica, D.: Dalla ‘lana altinata’ al prodotto finito: filatura e tessitura in altino romana alla luce dei resti della cultura materiale. In G. Cresci Marrone & M. Tirelli (eds.), Produzioni, merci e commerci in Altino preromana e romana, Venezia, 261–283.

De Ligt 2012: De Ligt, L.: Peasants, Citizens and Soldiers: Studies in the Demographic History of Roman Italy 225 BC–AD 100, Cambridge. Dickmann 1999: Dickmann, J.-A.: Domus Frequentata. Anspruchsvolles Wohnen im pompe janischen Stadthaus, München. Flohr, M. 2013a: Flohr, M.: The Textile Economy of Pompeii, JRA 26, 53–78. Flohr, M. 2013b: Flohr, M.: The World of the Fullo. Work, Economy and Society in Roman Italy, Oxford. Flohr 2014: Flohr, M.: Towards an Economic History of Textile Manufacturing and Trade in the Roman World. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 1–16. Forster & Heffner 1954: Forster, E. S. & Heffner, E. H.: Columella. On Agriculture, Volume II: Books 5–9, Cambridge (Loeb Classical Library 407). Frayn 1984: Frayn, J. M.: Sheep-Rearing and the Wool Trade in Italy During the Roman Period, Ann Arbor. Gabba 1990: Gabba, E.: La transumanza nell’economia Italico-Romana. In Giornate inter nazionali di studio sulla transumanza. Atti del convegno, L’Aquila, 15–27. Grelle & Silvestrini 2001: Grelle, F. & Silvestrini, M.: Lane apule e tessuti canosini. In M. Pani (ed.), Epigrafia e territorio. Politica e società. Temi di antichità Romane, Ann Arbor, 91–136. Grenier 1905: Grenier, A.: La transhumance des troupeaux en Italie et son rôle dans l’histoire romaine, MEFRA 25/1, 293–328. Hopper & Ash 1934: Hooper, W. D. & Ash, H. B.: Cato, Varro. On Agriculture, Cambridge (Loeb Classical Library 283). Jones 1923: Jones, H. L.: Strabo. Geography, Volume III: Books 3–5, Cambridge (Loeb Classical Library 50). Jones 1924: Jones, H. L.: Strabo. Geography, Volume III: Books 6–7, Cambridge (Loeb Classical Library 182). Johnson & Coleman-Norton & Bourne 1961: Johnson, A. C. & Coleman-Norton, P. R. & Bourne, F. C.: Ancient Roman Statutes, Austin. Jongman 1988: Jongman, W.: The Economy and Society of Pompeii, Amsterdam. Jongman 2000: Jongman, W.: Wool and the Textile Industry of Roman Italy: A Working Hypothesis. In E. Lo Cascio (ed.), Mercati Permanenti e Mercati Periodici nel Mondo Romano. Atti degli Incontri capresi di storia dell’economia antica Capri 13–15 ottobre 1997, Bari, 189–197. Marino 1992: Marino, J. A.: L’economia pastorale nel Regno di Napoli, Napoli. MacKinnon 2004: MacKinnon, M.: Production and Consumption of Animals in Roman Italy: Integrating the Zooarchaeological and Textual Evidence, JRA 54, 264. Martin 2010: Martin, R.: Rethinking Regional Path Dependence: Beyond Lock-in to Evo lution, Journal of Economic Geography 86/1, 1–27. Martin & Sunley 2006: Martin, R. & Sunley, P.: Path Dependence and Regional Economic Evolution, Journal of Economic Geography 6/4, 395 – 437. Moeller 1976: Moeller, W. O.: The Wool Trade of Ancient Pompeii, Leiden. Monteix 2013: Monteix, N.: The Apple of Discord: Fleece-washing in Pompeii’s Textile Economy, JRA 26, 79–88. Morel 1978: Morel, J.-P.: La Laine de Tarente, Ktema 3, 93–110. Morley 1996: Morley, N.: Metropolis and Hinterland. The City of Rome and the Italian Eco nomy, 200 BC– AD 200, Cambridge. Noè 1973: Noè, E.: La produzione tessile nella Gallia Cisalpina in età romana, Rendiconti. Classe di lettere e scienze morali e storiche. Istituto lombardo, Accademia di scienze e lette re 108, 918–932. Pasquinucci 1979: Pasquinucci, M.: La transumanza nell’Italia romana. In E. Gabba & M. Pasquinucci (eds.), Strutture agrarie e allevamento transumante nell’Italia romana, Pisa, 75–184.

Pellegrini et al. 1976: Pellegrini, G. & Bosio, L. & Nardo, D.: Il Veneto Preromano e Ro mano. In G. Folena & G. Arnaldi (eds.), Dalle origini al Trecento, Vicenza, 29–64. Purcell 2000: Purcell, N.: Rome and Italy. In A. Bowman, P. Garnsey & D. Rathbone (eds.), The High Empire: A.D. 70–192, Cambridge (The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 11), 405–444. Roselaar 2010: Roselaar, S.: Public Land in the Roman Republic: A Social and Economic History of Ager Publicus in Italy, 396–89 BC, Oxford. Sallares 2007: Sallares, R.: Ecology. In W. Scheidel, I. Morris & R. Saller (eds.), The Cam bridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World, Cambridge, 15–37. Scheidel 2012: Scheidel, W.: Approaching the Roman Economy. In W. Scheidel (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Economy, Cambridge, 1–21. Toynbee 1965: Toynbee, A.: Hannibal’s Legacy II. The Hannibalic War’s Effects on Roman Life, Oxford. Vicari 1994: Vicari, F.: Economia della Cispadana Romana: la produzione tessile. Rivista Storica dell’Antichità 24, 239–260. Volpe 1990: Volpe, G.: La Daunia nell’età della romanizzazione: paesaggio agrario, produzi one, scambi, Bari.

Laetitia Graslin-Thomé

Textiles were long a major trading commodity in Mesopotamia, especially in the southern region of Babylonia. Assyriologists generally argue that the Mesopotamian alluvial plain lacked raw materials and therefore relied on imports for most of their needs. In exchange, textiles, mostly wool fabrics provided by the many herds grazing on the Mesopotamian steppe, were the major export.1 However, and this contradiction is the starting point for the discussion presented here, Mesopotamia imported textiles as well. The Babylonians themselves became increasingly dependent on imported fabrics, for example Egyptian linen was required for the garments of the gods while purple Levantine fabrics were a typical gift from the king to members of his court.2 This apparent contradiction is in fact applicable to most civilizations and raises several questions, including why textile goods were traded, why people agreed to pay for more expensive commodities that fulfilled the same need as a cheaper, locally produced one, why a trade network was developed and which are the factors underlying its formation and dissolution. These questions inevitably lead to others related to the geographical, economical, political and social consequences of trade in ancient times. However, such questions are rarely addressed by Assyriologists, who tend to focus on the description of the textiles used in Babylonia3 and sometimes import patterns of exotic products into Babylonia,4 but the question of why a product was imported is rarely considered.5

* I am grateful to Becky Miler, who corrected my English. 1 This was already the case at the beginning of the 2nd millennium BCE, when traders from Aššur, in northern Mesopotamia, travelled long distances to sell tin and textiles in Kaniš in Cappadocia. For recent studies on this subject, see Breniquet & Michel 2014. 2 Zawadzki 2006, 23–33. More detailed textual documentation is provided by the Seleucid period ritual text UVB 15, p. 40, edited by Falkenstein (1956): “The consecrated lamentation- priest is covered with a linen lubāru-coat” (l. 11’). See also Linssen 2004, 307–312, l. 43’–44’: “The lamentation-priests are clothed with a linen garment.” 3 Knowledge of Mesopotamian textiles has dramatically improved in recent years due to interdisciplinary research. For Neo-Babylonian textiles, see Zawadzki (2006; 2010; 2013); Quillien 2014; Joannès 2014. 4 Graslin-Thomé 2009, 196–204. 5 Assyriologists have not participated in theoretical debates in the same way as researchers focusing on ancient Classical period economies. Polanyi’s model has been the most influential over time, mainly to describe 2nd millennium BCE Mesopotamian economy (Polanyi et al. 1957; Renger 1984; Clancier et al. 2005). Recently, other models have been proposed, particularly for the 1st millennium BCE since primitivist models are not very well suited for the new kind of economy that began to develop in the 6th century BCE. Researchers have also shown increasing interest in other approaches, such as D. North’s New Institutional Economics. On theoretical models used by Assyriologists working on the 1st millennium BCE, see Oppenheim 1969; Graslin-Thomé 2009.

Addressing all of these questions in detail is clearly beyond the scope of this paper; the aim here is rather to discuss some aspects of the textile trade in order to open new avenues for research and future discussion. In this respect, mid-1st millennium BCE Mesopotamia serves as a good case study.

Written Sources as Evidence of Imported Textile Use While archaeological remains are rare, especially of textiles, this is compensated by a significant number of written sources. The 6th-century BCE in Babylonia is one of the best-documented periods of Antiquity, with more than 20,000 texts published, and many more conserved in museums and as yet unstudied.6 Most come from temple complexes but are rarely directly related to the cult itself. Some rituals provide information on the fabrics required for worshipping the gods.7 Most of the tablets are administrative in function. Mesopotamian gods required the same kind of attention as humans: they had to be provided with food and clothing in daily ceremonies. Textiles were therefore used on a daily basis in Mesopotamian temples to dress the statues of the gods and provide the priests and the large temple staff with garments of varying quality. Temple administrators were responsible for the care and maintenance of these textiles (having them cleaned, repaired and protected from theft). This resulted in the production of many administrative documents, including laundry contracts,8 inventories9 and other matters related to garments.10 The present study is not limited to the Neo-Babylonian period since the Persian conquest by Cyrus in 538 BCE and Greek domination after Alexander’s victory of Gaugamela in 331 BCE did not put an end to Mesopotamian civilization. The textile trade continued, with some changes due to the new political context. For the period of Persian and Hellenistic domination, written documentation becomes less common, but some inventories still provide an accurate image of textiles kept in temple treasuries.11 A temple inventory from the Seleucid period shows, for example, that the temples kept numerous luxurious textiles, such as linen, byssus (sea silk) and even cotton, in their treasury.12 Evidence provided by temple archives may be complemented by information found in texts in contemporary private archives. These are much less common than those from temples, but provide valuable insights on garments used in non-religious contexts. For example, a few dowry contracts provide a list of the different pieces of fabric given to the bride.13 Accurate descriptions of the textiles used in all private contexts should not be expected in such texts since not everyone was wealthy enough to find it useful to write such contracts and not all garments or fabrics were recorded in the dowries. Fabrics mentioned in such texts were precious goods used only in the

6 Jursa 2005. 7 Linssen 2004. 8 Waerzeggers 2006. 9 For an inventory of goods, including garments, belonging to the gods, see Beaulieu 2003. 10 For a general study on garments in Mesopotamian temples, see Zawadzki 2006; Zawadzki 2013. 11 Joannès 2014. 12 NCBT 1244, edited by Beaulieu 1989, 69–76. 13 Roth 1989.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Imported Textiles and Dyes in First-Millennium BCE Babylonia 65 wealthiest families. Such information does, however, provide information on the use of imported textiles in a different social context than temples.

Written Sources as Evidence for Long-Distance Trade Written sources provide a relatively clear image of the commodities used in temples and, to a lesser extent, by wealthy Babylonian families. To describe the pattern of long-distance trade is, however, a significantly more complex matter. Very few documents provide information on the means of importing fabrics to Mesopotamia. The origins of imported goods are very rarely mentioned and at times commodities trade can only be inferred. Less than ten texts dating from the Neo-Babylonian period contain pertinent data.14 These show that the Eanna temple invested capital in trading caravans intended to travel abroad and bring back exotic products. The text cited below is one of the contracts written in this context in which money was given to two people who had been commissioned to travel to different Levantine production centres (Eber-Nari) and bring back different kinds of commodities:15 15 minas of silver, property of the goddesses Innin and Nanâ, are given as capital for a trading expedition in Transpotamia to Iqīša and Balāţu, sons of Lābāši, from the Šum-ušabši family. Among the consignment which they will receive in Transpotamia and will transport to Babylon, they will deliver to the Eanna temple white wine, white honey, copper, iron, tin, blue-purple wool and other trading goods for Eanna. Other texts detail a list of trade goods brought back by the same middlemen: linen and purple-dyed fabrics are often mentioned.16 We have as yet no way of knowing if these caravans were the standard means of importing goods to Babylonia. As is often the case in Antiquity, written evidence describes the exceptional procedures rather than routine ones.

Trading Networks in First Millennium BCE Babylonia For historians intending to analyse and explain the opening of trading networks and adaptation to external changes and dissolution, the history of Mesopotamia during the mid-1st millennium BCE is a rich area of research. External changes were numerous and of different types. The first centuries of thest 1 millennium BCE were marked by the arrival and settlement of Aramean populations.17 Their language and writing system gradually overtook ancient Akkadian. This demographic change also had implications for the use of textiles. Joannès has demonstrated that Aramaic terms for garments were not uncommon in Neo-Babylonian textile terminology.18 However, it is difficult to determine what specifically changed: the form of the -gar ments, the raw materials or only the word adopted. In this fluctuating ethnic and social context, major political changes occurred during the second half of the mil-

14 YOS VII, 63; TCL XII 84; YOS VI 168; Oppenheim 1969; Graslin-Thomé 2009, 38–54. 15 YOS VII, 63; Oppenheim 1969, 240. 16 YOS VI 168; Oppenheim 1969, 237. 17 Fa les 2007. 18 Joannès 2014. Gammidatu, gunakku and šir’am are Aramaic terms for garments, most of which were already in use during the Neo-Assyrian period. These were valuable clothes, while garments worn in daily life appear to have retained their Akkadian terms.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 66 Laetitia Graslin-Thomé lennium, notably the Persian conquest in 538 BCE, followed by another political shift due to Alexander’s conquest in 333, which profoundly changed political and probably social structures. The ways in which commercial networks were affected is still a key topic of research, but the changes that occurred were certainly significant. During the Neo-Babylonian period, Babylon, the empire’s capital, attracted most of the wealth of its conquests. After the Persian and Greek conquests, Babylon lost its independence and became the breadbasket of empires centred outside Mesopotamia. Economic structures changed as well; it has been recently demonstrated by Jursa19 that monetization of the economy dramatically increased in the 6th century BCE. Coinage was imposed after Alexander’s conquest.20 Such major changes demonstrate that this period constitutes a good case study for analysing the effects of external shifts on consumption and trade, particularly for textiles, which are closely tied to social changes. Mesopotamians were aware of the social meaning of textiles and used specific clothing in their imagery to differentiate between different peoples. As clothing is an ethnic identification marker, it is particularly affected by political changes.21 To give some coherence to this disparate and allusive documentation and to contribute to an explanation of the nature and organization of the textile trade in the mid-1st millennium BCE, this paper uses models developed in the social sciences to explain the establishment of long-distance trade. The issue of whether such international trade was desirable is not discussed here since the debate between mercantilism and classical economics (closed and free trade systems) is not relevant for Mesopotamian Antiquity where the opening or closing of frontiers to trade was never an issue.22 This paper will focus rather on models that have been developed to explain the very existence of long-distance trade. It will describe some of these, discussing the ways in which they could be applied to past realities. It should be stressed that the aim here is not to detail all of the different models proposed, but to focus on some of the most pertinent in order to evaluate how they could be used to describe the textile trade in 1st millennium Mesopotamia.

The Economics of the Textile Trade: A. Smith and D. Ricardo The first response is clearly economics. The study of economics has been addressing international trade for centuries and has developed several models to explain the existence of trading connections between countries.23 Studies of international trade usually begin with Adam Smith. In his 1776 Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, this Scottish economist developed the theory that trade is the consequence of absolute advantage. When a country is able to produce a greater quantity of a commodity than other countries using the same amount of resources, it enjoys an absolute advantage. The best choice

19 Jursa 2010. 20 Graslin-Thomé & Monerie 2012. 21 This idea was first developed by Barthes 1957, but has rarely been exploited by historians of Antiquity. See, however, for Greece and Rome, Huet & Gherchanoc 2007. 22 At least in the surviving evidence, and unlike the Greek world, where the issue of autarky is discussed by philosophers such as Plato. 23 For an introduction to trade theory, see Mucchielli & Mayer 2010; Krugman et al. 2015; Rainelli 2015, and Korn in this volume.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Imported Textiles and Dyes in First-Millennium BCE Babylonia 67 for a country is to specialize in the production of the goods for which it has such an advantage. It will therefore have to limit its production of other goods, but in a world largely open to free trade, this does not matter as the goods it no longer produces can be imported. Antiquity, of course, does not entirely fit Smith’s model. Historians do not deal with trade between countries but between regions and, in 1st millennium Babylonia, between institutions, as evidence is generally limited to the large temples. In Smith’s model, labour is the only input, while the available written sources mainly provide information on the raw material. Nevertheless, during this period we find “absolute advantage” when a region has access to raw material that others do not. This is illustrated here with the example of purple dyes. Purple-dyed garments were prized in Babylonian temples, where they were used for the most luxurious garments of the gods. Two kinds of purple appear in the Babylonian evidence: takiltu with a hyacinth shade of blue and argamannu with a more reddish shade.24 Both were extracted from a mollusc shell, the Murex, which was found on the Levantine coast, hundreds of kilometres from Mesopotamia. As it would appear difficult, if not impossible, to transport the dye itself over long distances,25 it is likely that Babylonians had to import fabrics that were already dyed. Levantine states thus enjoyed an absolute advantage for such fabrics because it was the only region to have this access to this kind of mollusc shell. In the early 1st millennium BCE, specialization was an established phenomenon, at least in the thinking of its inhabitants. Neo-Assyrian kings regularly brought back dyed fabrics obtained during military expeditions in the Levant. Despite Smith’s optimism, absolute advantage here did not encourage trade, but rather forced appropriation through tribute or booty, followed by the distribution of goods by the king to members of his court. This system was active during the period examined here, as can been seen in the following text, from the Persian period,26 in which the satrap of Byblos, on the Phoenician coast, delivered around 70 kg of argamannu and takiltu to the temple of Sippar: 12 shekels of white silver, 1 mina 50 shekels of red purple wool, 1 mina 24 shekels of blue purple wool, 2 vessels of wine, 1 trunk of cedar tree (present) the tithe of Rikis-Kalâmu-Bēl, the governor of the city of Byblos. Date (Darius king). Despite the existence of imitations, the very appearance of purple-dyed garments demonstrated their foreign provenance and high value. Those who admired the fabrics knew that they came from abroad. This was enough to ensure the prestige necessary for the usual purposes of those fabrics: purple-dyed garments were associated with royal or divine power. King Nebuchadnezzar (first part of the 6th century BCE) wore a purple garment so highly prized that it was kept in the main Babylonian temple long after his death, to be displayed to visitors until the Hellenistic period.27 However, if it can be readily understood how Phoenicia could take advantage of the uneven distribution of resources by specializing in purple dye and dyed fabric production, Babylonia itself had no obvious absolute advantage in raw materials,

24 Graslin-Thomé 2009, 196–204. 25 Gratton 2007; Graslin 2008. 26 CT 55 90; Dandamayev 1995. 27 Sachs & Hunger 1989, 187.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 68 Laetitia Graslin-Thomé at least from what historians can observe. From an economic perspective, this does not mean that Babylonia could not take part in international trade. In the early 19th century, David Ricardo explained in Principles of Economics that countries could engage in trade, even if one of them had no absolute advantage in any commodity. He demonstrated that a comparative advantage is sufficient: a country will specialize in the production of the commodity where it has the least comparative disadvantage. If each country specializes in the commodity for which it has a comparative advantage, then the global production of both goods increases, and, even in this case, trade is better than autarky (being economically self-sufficient). The Babylonian context -dif fers, but some examples of specialization related to trade can be found, consistent with the comparative advantage theory. Kristin Kleber28 described how the Eanna- temple partially specialized in wool production. The annually produced quantities were huge (up to 115 tons), greatly exceeding the temple’s needs. About one-third of the wool was sold outside the temple. The silver that temple obtained by selling the wool surplus was then used to purchase foreign goods, such as the dyed fabrics from the Levant. Ricardo’s model can therefore be adapted to apply to two centres trading with one another. The first is the Levant which had an absolute advantage, due to unequal distribution of resources with its access to Murex shell. Eanna, the other centre, possessed an advantage in wool production. Whether this was absolute or comparative is irrelevant given that we know that Eanna specialized in wool production and indirectly exchanged its wool for purple-dyed fabrics from the Levant. In classical and neo-classical economic theory, such a mechanism of specialization permitted by trade is a consequence of a set of commonly proposed assumptions. One of the most important is the existence of a free market for goods. While it is not the aim of this paper to discuss whether ancient economies were market- oriented or not, it has recently been convincingly demonstrated by Jursa29 that the Mesopotamian economy, in the 6th century at least, tended to have been more mon- etized and market-oriented than previously assumed. With the Persian and Greek conquests, this process continued, resulting in a more integrated Near East and a higher degree of monetization with the expanding use of coinage. The general economic context therefore approached the assumptions of economic theory.

Recent Development in Economics More recently, economists have focused on other consequences of international trade which seem to be more useful for describing the current form of exchange between modern countries. One of the more important consequences of international trade is, according to Paul Krugman, regional specialization.30 Such specialization is sometimes due to the uneven distribution of raw materials, but can also be the result of choices made in some places to develop specific technologies or benefit from -in creasing returns. Regional specialization is all the more complete when the standard assumptions of economic models are met: an efficient market, full information and negligible transport costs. This is clearly not the case for ancient economies, and as seen above the evidence mainly reflects non-market exchange, such as the organiza-

28 Kleber 2010, 595–616. 29 Jursa 2010. 30 Krugman 1991; see also Korn in this volume.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Imported Textiles and Dyes in First-Millennium BCE Babylonia 69 tion of commercial expeditions by temples. It is therefore unsurprising that complete specialization did not exist in Antiquity. However, contemporary economists also fail to find such complete specialization in the modern world. On the contrary, partial specialization frequently occurred in ancient periods and it is not uncommon that some products were considered of higher quality because they came from a specific geographic origin.31 For example, Babylonian fabrics were highly valued until the Roman period: Pliny the Elder refers to Babylonian bed covers which achieved amazingly high prices.32 Specialization can also change over time. This process was described in the ‘product-life cycle theory’ developed by Raymond Vernon.33 This theory is based on the premise that technological transfers occur through time: a new product or technology may be developed first in one country, and then exported to others who adopted the technology and were able to produce the product more efficiently than in the originating country. At the end of this process, the innovating country ends up importing the product. Such a cycle can sometimes be observed in ancient periods, for example for lubulti birme, a kind of wool fabric embroidered with coloured thread. This was commonly mentioned in the tributes or booty collected from Levantine states.34 During the Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid periods, they were still an imported product but according to administrative texts, textile craftsmen of the temples may have also themselves made these kinds of fabrics with imported or locally produced thread. During the Hellenistic period, these colourful garments had become a famous branch of Babylonian technology, so much so that ‘Babylonian embroidery’ became the general term used to refer to any colourful fabric.35 One of the starting points in the recent development of economic research is that the Ricardian theory of comparative advantage had overlooked the role of demand to explain the terms of exchange. This new focus on demand emphasized by the ‘new theory of international trade’ has led scholars to attempt to explain intra- industry trade.36 This is defined as the exchange of similar commodities produced within the same industry, Toyota cars and Peugeots, for example. Such exchange is difficult to explain within the framework of neo-classical theory, which was therefore required to develop new models to understand how countries created artificial technological differences and encouraged partially artificial trade.37 At first view, one might think that such intra-industry trade had no place in the ancient world. Historians typically consider transport costs to have been so high that long-distance trade only took place when it was impossible to produce the required goods locally. However, a closer examination shows that cross-trade of products meeting the same needs did exist during Antiquity.

31 Graslin-Thomé 2009, 196–205. 32 Pliny, NH VIII, 74, 3. 33 Vernon 1966. 34 A passage of the Ezekiel lament on Tyr (Ez. 27), probably dated to the 6th century, mentions purple fabric exported by the Phoenician city. 35 Pliny, NH VIII, 74, 2. According to Flavius Josephus (BJ 5, 5, 4), the holy house of the temple of Jerusalem was decorated with a Babylonian curtain, embroidered with purple. 36 Rainelli 2003. 37 Greenaway & Milner 1987; Greenaway & Milner 2005; Greenaway & Milner 2006 with bibliography; Krugman et al. 2015, 176.

One example is the importation of linen to Babylonia, which was known for its wool production. Linen and wool fabrics both met the same needs, but were nevertheless exchanged in a form of trade which can be defined as intra-industry. Linen had always been produced in Mesopotamia, but had remained marginal while wool enjoyed a near-monopoly.38 Nevertheless, in the mid-1st millennium BCE, references to flax become more common in Mesopotamian written sources, both in dowries and temple inventories. The Hellenistic ritual mentioned above (see note 2) for example, demonstrates that linen was at this time also used for priests’ garments while it had previously been used only for the gods.39 A marriage contract from the Seleucid period confirms that the shift in linen consumption also involved the private sphere:40 among the thirteen garments given to the bride, seven were of linen, while during the Neo-Babylonian period a bride only received woollen garments. This change is so significant that when Herodotus described the standard Babylonian garment of his time, it included linen underwear.41 Such a change can be explained by a shift in both production and consumption. Admittedly, linen production increased during the Neo-Babylonian period as a result of public irrigation projects, but was initially so low that even increasing production did not manage to satisfy demand. Significant quantities were still imported from the Levant: the two shipments listed in the aforementioned contracts record 153 minas (more than 75 kg) of linen imported by the temple. A more independent trade in linen also appears to have existed, documented by a single text.42 When a linen fabric disappeared from the treasury of the Šamaš temple, suspicions fell on a craftsman named Ubalissu-Gula who had to prove that he was the real owner. In self-defence, he explained that he purchased the linen by bartering with an Egyptian:43 I received this linen šupallitu fabric from an Egyptian, in the presence of Erībaia, son of Šum-libši-Marduk, of Šumaia, son of Nāsir, of Šum-iddin, son of Bēl-apla- iddin, of Širktu, Šamaš oblat, for a payment in flour and dates. Paradoxically then, import of linen existed in a country with an ancient woollen textile tradition as a form of intra-industry trade with a shift in consumption from locally produced commodities to imported ones in the Late Babylonian period. Economic models would explain this situation as follows: if Babylonians used more linen than before, this would be either because the price of linen decreased or because their consumption pattern changed. The first explanation assumes a change from the offering side of exchange, which would then be due to a shift in consumption, perhaps benefiting as well from technological progress or other internal or external factors. The second explanation is based on change occurring on the demand side of exchange due to a shift in consumer preferences. However, while economic models can satisfactorily explain change in production, it is well known that they

38 Quillien 2014. 39 Zawadzki 2006, 23; Joannès 2010. 40 BM 76968. 41 I, 195. 42 CT 2, 2; Oppenheim 1969, 77. 43 However, it cannot be inferred that this linen had been imported from Egypt.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Imported Textiles and Dyes in First-Millennium BCE Babylonia 71 face difficulties to convincingly explain change in demand44 from the consumer’s perspective.45 Attempts have of course been made to provide an explanation of international trade in terms of the demand side of the exchange. To successfully do so, models must explain consumer preferences using the economic concept of utility function, a mathematical curve designed to represent the satisfaction experienced by the consumer of a commodity. The entire neo-classical economic theory relies on the assumption that consumers are able to measure the level of utility or satisfaction they derive from consuming a particular combination of goods. With this in mind, they choose between different goods, obviously taking the prices into account as well. According to this model, Babylonians would have a utility function for wool and another for linen fabrics, despite the fact that both met the same needs. Based on mathematical reasoning, incorporating both functions and the prices of both goods, that products that they would have chosen can be predicted. However, it is difficult, on purely economic grounds, to explain how a utility function is constructed46 and why it may change. Thus, following Fine and Leopold, it can be argued that consumer theory does not have an important place in modern economic theory:47 Prevailing theory still construes individuals as behaving rationally in maximizing the production of their own utility subject to the income and price constraints they face. This is the simple conceptual basis for individual decision-making. The origins of individual preferences remain unexplored as if inherited at birth. The question of why the taste of consumers causes them to prefer one item to another, independently of price variations, is rarely addressed by economists. It is therefore not certain that economic models are able to help historians to understand why Mesopotamians chose to use linen imported from Egypt instead of Babylonian wool.

44 This issue is discussed in most textbooks on trade theory. See, for example, Rainelli 2003, 59–63, or Hummel & Levinsohn 1993 for an unsuccessful attempt to statistically validate models of intra-industry trade. 45 For this assessment, see Fine & Leopold 1993. The main argument is that economics effectively lacks a theory of consumption as distinct from production. The authors also stress that different social sciences have different and sometimes irreconcilable theories of consumption. In neoclassical economics, consumption is reduced to the conditions under which utility is maximized; in sociology, consumption is explained by emulation and distinction; in psychology, it can be the expression of identity or neural responses to stimuli. 46 Kelvin Lancaster explains this difficulty by the fact that consumers are not in fact looking for the goods themselves, but the rather the characteristics inherent in them: “We assume that consumption is an activity in which goods, singly or in combination, are inputs and in which the output is a collection of characteristics. Utility or preference orderings are assumed to rank collections of characteristics and only to rank collections of goods indirectly through the characteristics that they possess” (Lancaster 1966, 133). Similarly, Krugman focuses on consumer taste and the fact that variety is sought. 47 Fine & Leopold 1993, 4. The same can be said of another major model, the Heckscher- Ohlin-Samuelson model, another major model designed to bring resource endowments of nations to the forefront as the determining factor for mutually gainful trade; see also Korn in this volume.

Use of other Social Sciences to explain Ancient Trade Historians should therefore turn to other social sciences to explain trade. A focus on consumption has experienced a renewal in research in different fields of the social sciences.48 Anthropologists argue that consumer goods have a significance that goes beyond their utilitarian character and commercial value. Arjun Appadurai’s major work in the 1980s suggested that “consumption is eminently social, relational, and active rather than private, atomic, or passive.”49 He explored the ways in which economic objects have different values depending on the society in which they are used:50 Part of the reason why demand remains by and large a mystery is that we assume it has something to do with desire, on the one hand (by its nature assumed to be in- finite and transcultural), and need on the other (by its nature assumed to be fixed). I suggest that we treat demand, hence consumption, as an aspect of the overall political economy of societies. Demand, that is, emerges as a function of a variety of social practices and classifications.

This argument is even more valid for garments. In the collective book edited by Appadurai, Bayly51 focuses on the basic uses of cloth in the social process: its use in symbolizing status or recording changes in status. Cloths of different textures, colours, or origin may do more than simply impart information within society, but may also change the moral and physical nature of the individual. This specific function could explain why people agreed to make themselves dependent on the importation of highly prized fabrics. This social significance of garments may explain the appearance of Aramaic- termed garments during the 1st millennium BCE or the increasing use of linen after the Greek conquest. These successively appeared as the garments of the new dominant groups in the country: Arameans in the first part of the st1 millennium BCE and then Greeks who used many more linen garments than the Babylonians had. Knowledge of Hellenistic Babylonia has been greatly improved by recent research.52 The kind of mixed civilization which existed in Babylonia during the Hellenistic period is now better understood. Inhabitants maintained their Babylonian culture while partially adopting Greek customs. The same occurred after Aramean settlement during the first part of the st1 millennium BCE. Adoption of Aramaic or

48 See Veblen 1995. For an introduction on theories of consumption proposed in different social sciences, see Heilbrunn 2010; Lury 2011. The last 30 years have been a time of dramatic renewal of consumption theories in many different fields. The foundation in the 1970s of the Journal of Consumer Research, a journal focusing on this specific field of study, is a sign of such dynamism. 49 Appadurai 1986, 29. 50 Appadurai refers to Simmel’s argument that value is never an inherent property of objects, but rather a judgment of value made about them by producers and consumers. Simmel suggested that objects are not difficult to acquire because they are valuable, “but we call those objects valuable that resist our desire to possess them” (Simmel 1900). 51 Baylay 1986. 52 For a general introduction to Hellenistic Babylonia, see Clancier 2007.

Greek-style garments may have been part of this acculturation process.53 Change in demand linked to this partial shift to new kinds of garments would thus not have been due to prices or specialization, but rather to a cultural choice related to the symbolism of the garment. In this context, it is of particular interest to note that the shift to increasing use of linen did not occur in the same way in every context of consumption. It took place primarily with respect to the most prestigious garments, those used in temples or given in dowries. Wool remained the basic material for clothing in daily life. This pattern is also observed to an extent in the terminology used. The kinds of everyday clothing and the terms used did not noticeably change. Yet for the garments of the gods, used in temples, the terms used were also slow to change, which could indicate that the garments of the gods preserved archaic fashions even though new materials, including cotton, byssus and linen, were introduced and imported from Egypt whenever possible. The separate lines of change for every day, precious and religious garments, which adapted differently to the social and political changes of the times, are clearly an example of the fact that garments are not only economic but also profoundly social objects. Historians need to take into account all the more the fact that trade itself is not disconnected from the social meaning of garments. This has already been stressed by anthropologists, following the important book The World of Goods.54 This interdisciplinary research, conducted by an anthropologist, Mary Douglas, and an economist, Baron Isherwood, demonstrates that consumption, in any society, cannot be reduced to a single issue, as economists or other social scientists are inclined to do: The social sciences have unsurprisingly tended to construe consumption by an exclusive reliance upon their own terms of reference. Economics presumes that consumption is due to preferences, that remain unexplained and fixed, even across generations of the population separated by profound economic and social change. Consumption derives from the maximization of utility according to price and income constraints. The example of economics, whose theory of consumption has not found favor amongst other disciplines illustrates the isolating fragmentation of consumption analysis. Each of the many horizontal approaches begins with a particular factor considered crucial to the determination of consumption and ge- neralizes from it across the economy as a whole.

In other words, consumption always has a social and cultural dimension. It is associated with functions of social meaning and communication as well as with prices, trade and economic relations. The social meaning of a commodity, therefore, depends not only on the raw material used to produce it, but also on how consumers acquired it.

53 For a detailed study of textual evidence documenting changes in garments in Babylonia during the Persian and Hellenistic periods, see Joannès 2014. Garments used for daily life do not appear to have changed between these periods; Greek garments were probably not suitable for the Mesopotamian climate. However, in prestigious contexts such as temple ceremonies, linen becomes increasingly common. Similarly, Aramaic terms were used for heavy and expensive cloths while everyday garments retained the traditional Akkadian term. Traditional garments were probably more convenient for daily life and were more appropriate to the climate. 54 Douglas & Isherwood 1979.

Such particular attention to the object itself and the way in which it circulated leads historians away from a purely economic interpretation. In Antiquity, price was not the only meaningful source of value of a commodity, as economists would argue; how it came to be in the possession of the owner was also significant. The same piece of fabric would have had a different social value if it had been given by the king who had brought it back from a military expedition than its value if purchased in the local market. A piece of linen may have been seen as appropriate for use as the garment of a god if it came from Egypt, but not if it had been made in Babylonia. Precious Mesopotamian garments had long had a symbolic dimension. The main and perhaps only way to own them was to receive them from the king or his relatives. Everyone therefore knew that a purple garment had been given by the king, and this common knowledge gave the garment its value. A linen garment was all the more worthy of being worn by a god when the population could infer its history from the fabric itself: that it probably originated from Egypt and likely had been brought back by a military expedition. Precious fabrics were prestige goods, and their prestige came as much from the way in which they are acquired (i.e. gift from the king, military victory, etc.) as from the quality of the fabric itself. An issue meriting further research is whether such a symbolic dimension lost its importance during the Hellenistic period. Linen is a highly significant commodity, occupying a small but increasing place in textile dowries during this period, indicating expansion within civil society in the use of a type of fabric that had been previously reserved for religious purposes or for the luxury garments of the elite.55 In the temples, linen was likely to have been given by the king or sent by a foreign governor, but linen in dowries was much more likely to have been purchased in a more common way. The political and social changes that occurred after Persian and Greek conquest may have had an important effect on the way in which commodities were imported to Babylonia. There were no longer kings to offer prestige goods to Babylonian gods, but it became easier to buy precious goods to satisfy private desires for luxury. This changed the very nature of the goods consumed: there were fewer prestige goods, valuable because of the way in which they had been acquired, but there were more luxury goods, valuable because they were uncommon and prized, regardless of how they had been acquired.56 The shift from prestige to luxury would be, if confirmed, evidence the major changes which affected Near Eastern economy and society in the second half of the 1st millennium BCE.

Abbreviations BM: Tablets in the British Museum’s Department of the Ancient Near East. CT 2: Pinches T. G.: Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, London 1896. CT 55: Pinches T. G., Finkel, I. L.: Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, London 1982.

55 Joannès 2014. 56 The issue of ‘prestige goods’ versus ‘luxury goods’ is not commonly used in ancient history, despite important theoretical contributions from other social sciences. See, for example, Berry 1994. For ongoing research on luxury in ancient times, see Trinquier et al. 2014, https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01202124/document (accessed June 2016).

TCL XII: Contenau G.: Contrats néo-babyloniens 1: de Téglah-phalasar III à Nabonide, Paris 1927 (Textes cunéiformes du Louvre 12). YOS VI: Dougherty R. Ph.: Records from Erech. Time of Nabonidus, New Haven & London 1920 (Yale Oriental Studies, Babylonian Texts 6). YOS VII: Treymayne A.: Records from Erech, Time of Cyrus and Cambyses (538–521 B.C.), New Haven & London 1925 (Yale Oriental Series, Babylonian Texts 7).

Bibliography Appadurai 1986: Appadurai, A.: The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, Cambridge. Barthes 1957: Barthes, R.: Histoire et sociologie du vêtement, Annales. ESC 3, 430–441. Bayly 1986: Bayly, C. A.: The Origins of Swadesi (Home Industry): Cloth and Indian Society, 1700–1930. In A. Appadurai (ed.), The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective, Cambridge, 285–323. Beaulieu 1989: Beaulieu P.-A.: Textes administratifs inédits d’époque hellénistique pro- venant des archives du Bit resh, Revue d’assyriologie 83, 54–55. Beaulieu 2003: Beaulieu, P.-A.: The Pantheon of Uruk during the Neo-Babylonian Period, Leiden & Boston. Berry 1994: Berry, C. J.: The Idea of Luxury: A Conceptual and Historical Investigation, Cambridge. Breniquet & Michel 2014: Breniquet, C. & Michel, C. (eds.), Wool Economy in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean: From the Beginnings of Sheep Husbandry to Institutional Textile Industry, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 17). Clancier 2007: Clancier, P.: La Babylonie hellénistique, apercu d’histoire politique et culturelle, Topoi 15, 38–41. Clancier et al. 2005: Clancier, Ph., Rouillard, P., Joannès, F. & Tenu, R.: Autour de Polanyi: vocabulaires, théories et modalités des échanges, Paris. Dandamayev 1995: Dandamayev, M. A.: A Governor of Byblos in Sippar. In K. Van Lerberghe & A. Schoors (eds.), Immigration and Emigration Within the Ancient Near East: Festschrift E. Lipiński, Leuven (Orientalia Lovaniensia analecta 65), 29–31. Douglas & Isherwood 1979: Douglas, M. & Isherwood, B.: The World of Goods: Towards an Anthropology of Consumption, New York. Fales 2007: Fales, F. M.: Arameans and Chaldeans: Environment and Society. In G. Leick (ed.), The Babylonian World, New York & London, 288–298. Falkenstein A.: Zwei Rituale aus seleukidischer Zeit, Uruk – Vorläufige Berichte über die in Uruk-Warka unternommenen Ausgrabungen 15, 36–44. Fine & Leopold 1993: Fine, B. & Leopold, E.: The World of Consumption, New York & London. Graslin 2008: Graslin, L.: Les produits liés à la mer dans les temples babyloniens au premier millénaire av. J.-C.: L’apport des sources mésopotamiennes à une étude des activités maritimes en Méditerranée orientale. In J. Napoli (ed.), Ressources et activités maritimes des peuples de l’Antiquité, Dunkerque, 295–310. Graslin-Thomé 2009: Graslin-Thomé, L.:Les échanges à longue distance en Mésopotamie au premier millénaire av. J.-C., Paris. Graslin-Thomé & Monerie 2012: Graslin-Thomé, L. & Monerie, J.: Compter, peser, divi- ser: L’introduction du monnayage en Babylonie (vième–iiième s. av. J.-C.). In P. Pion & B. Formoso (eds.), Monnaie antique, monnaie moderne, monnaies d’ailleurs...: métissages et hybridations, Paris, 55–65. Gratton 2007: Gratton, K.: Production et échange de la pourpre au Proche-Orient aux épo- ques grecque et romaine, Topoi, Supplément 8, 151–172. Greenaway & Milner 1987: Greenaway, D. & Milner, C. R.: Intra-Industry Trade: Current Perspectives and Unresolved Issues, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Eco nomics 123/1, 39–57.

Greenaway & Milner 2005: Greenaway, D. & Milner, C. R.: What Have We Learned from a Generation’s Research on Intra-Industry Trade? In P. J. Lloyd & S. Jayasuriya (eds.), Trade Theory, Analytical Models and Development: Essays in Honour of Peter Lloyd, Cheltenham, 147–160. Greenaway & Milner 2006: Greenaway, D. & Milner, C. R.: Recent Developments in Intra- Industry Trade: Introduction by Guest Editors, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Economics 142/3, 425–432. Heilbrunn 2010: Heilbrunn, B.: La consommation et ses sociologies, Paris. Huet & Gherchanoc 2007: Huet, V. & Gherchanoc, F.: S’habiller et se déshabiller en Grèce et à Rome, pratiques politiques et culturelles du vêtement, approche historiographique, Revue historique 641, 3–30. Hummel & Levinsohn 1993: Hummel, D. & Levinsohn, J.: Product Differentiation as a Source of Comparative Advantage?, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings 83, 445–449. Joannès 2010: Joannès, F.: Textile Terminology in the Neo-Babylonian Documentation. In C. Michel & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Textile Terminologies in the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean From the Third to the First Millennia BC, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 8), 400–408. Joannès 2014: Joannès, F.: Fabrics and Clothes from Mesopotamia during the Achaemenid and Seleucid Periods: The Textual References. In C. Breniquet & C. Michel (eds.),Wool Economy in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean: From the Beginnings of Sheep Husbandry to Institutional Textile Industry, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 17), 453–464. Jursa 2005: Jursa, M.: Neo-Babylonian Legal and Administrative Documents: Typology, Con tents and Archives, Münster. Jursa 2010: Jursa, M.: Aspects of the Economic History of Babylonia in the First Millennium BC: Economic Geography, Economic Mentalities, Agriculture, the Use of Money and the Problem of Economic Growth, Münster. Kleber 2010: Kleber, K.: Eanna’s Trade in Wool. In Jursa, M. (ed.), Aspects of the Economic History of Babylonia in the First Millennium BC: Economic Geography, Economic Men talities, Agriculture, the Use of Money and the Problem of Economic Growth, Münster, 595–616. Krugman 1991: Krugman, P. R.: Geography and Trade, Leuven. Krugman et al. 2015: Krugman, P., Obstfeld, M. & Melitz, M.: Économie internationale, Paris. Lancaster 1966: Lancaster, K.: A New Approach to Consumer Theory, Journal of Political Economy 74, 132–157. Linssen 2004: Linssen, M. J. H.: The Cults of Uruk and Babylon: The Temple Ritual Texts as Evidence for Hellenistic Cult Practices, Leiden (Cuneiform Monographs 25). Lury 2011: Lury, C.: Consumer Culture, New Brunswick. Mucchielli & Mayer 2010: Mucchielli, J.-L. & Mayer, T.: Économie internationale, Paris, 2nd edition. Oppenheim 1969: Oppenheim, A. L.: Essay on Overland Trade in the First Millennium BC, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 21, 236–254. Polanyi et al. 1957: Polanyi, K., Arensberg, C. & Pearson, H. W.: Trade and Market in the Early Empires: Economies in History and Theory, Glencoe. Quillien 2014: Quillien, L.: Flax and Linen in the First Millennium Babylonia BC: The Origins, Craft Industry and Uses of a Remarquable Textile. In M. Harlow, C. Michel & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Prehistoric, Ancient Near Eastern and Aegean Textiles and Dress. An Interdisciplinary Anthology, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 18), 271–297. Rainelli 2003: Rainelli, M.: La nouvelle théorie du commerce international, Paris. Rainelli 2015: Rainelli, M.: Le commerce international, Paris. Renger 1984: Renger, J.: Patterns of Non-Institutional Trade. In A. Archi (ed.), Circulation of Goods in Non-Palatial Context in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the International

Conference Organized by the Istituto per gli studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici, Roma, 31–123. Roth 1989: Roth, M.: The Material Composition of the Neo-Babylonian Dowry, Archiv für Orientforschung 36–37, 1–55. Sachs & Hunger 1989: Sachs, A. & Hunger, H.: Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts From Babylonia, Wien (Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, Denkschriften 195). Schneider et al. 2015: Schneider, P. et al.: Ex oriente luxuria (I). Introductory seminar: to wards a definition of the luxury item (https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01202124, accessed June 2016) Simmel 1990: Simmel, G.: The Philosophy of Money, New York. Veblen 1995: Veblen, T.: The Theory of the Leisure Class, New York. Vernon 1966: Vernon, R.: International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 80, 190 –207. Waerzeggers 2006: Waerzeggers, C.: Neo-Babylonian Laundry, Revue d’assyriologie, 83–96. Zawadzki 2006: Zawadzki, S.: Garments of the Gods: Studies on the Textile Industry and the Pantheon of Sippar According to the Texts from the Ebabbar Archive, Göttingen (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 218). Zawadski 2010: Zawadski, S.: Garments in Non-Cultic Context (Neo-Babylonian Period). In C. Michel & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Textile Terminologies in the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean From the Third to the First Millennia BC, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 8), 409–429. Zawadzki 2013: Zawadzki, S.: Garments of the Gods, Göttingen (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 260).

Sebastian Fink

This article argues that Mesopotamian civilizations basically had two options to acquire foreign resources. The first is to acquire them by means of violence, conveni- ently summarized by “war” in the title. “Wool” – the second part of the title – aims to describe all deliberate exchanges of goods with foreign lands and points to the great importance of textiles for Mesopotamian foreign trade. Mesopotamian textiles were famous throughout antiquity and we hypothesize that they would have been used frequently as a valuable trade commodity. In the following pages, I will give some general considerations concerning trade, possible Mesopotamian exports and war in early Mesopotamia. The main part of this article examines the royal inscriptions of the Sargonic period for information regarding our question. Finally, I will compare the results from the royal inscriptions with what we know from administrative texts. In the conclusion I will briefly compare this information to information concerning the situation of the Ur III period. It is commonly agreed that trade played a crucial role in the process of urbanization.1 Without imports, the major cities of Mesopotamia, like many highly industrialized nations today, would have lacked the most basic resources like food, clothing and the raw materials for the highly advanced products these cities could produce. Without imports, bigger cities simply would have been – and would be – an unattractive place to live. Southern Mesopotamia, commonly regarded as the birthplace of urbanization, is characterized by its lack of natural resources. Besides its famous abundance of agricultural products including grain, livestock, fish, and reed, all found in the fertile areas along the river banks, almost every basic ingredient of a highly developed material culture had to be acquired from abroad. On first sight, Mesopotamia does not seem to be a fitting place for the first cities to emerge. The fact that southern Mesopotamia is situated on an alluvial plain explains why natural resources are limited. Besides clay, salt and stones of minor quality, everything else needed to be imported. The softwood of the poplars and willows that grow in the salty soil of southern Mesopotamia2 cannot be used as construction timber for larger buildings, so we can conclude that the monumental buildings, that we recognize as a sign of urbanization, would not have been possible without import. Therefore, this culture was highly dependent on imports from foreign lands, particularly of stones, metals, timber and precious stones. At this point, we have to ask ourselves how it was possible for the Mesopotamians to get their hands on the foreign goods they needed. Basically, there are two possible

1 See Algaze 1993 for an investigation of the “Uruk World System.” See also Crawford 2013 with numerous references to literature. McCorriston 1997 argues that the changes we can observe in early Mesopotamian societies might closely be linked with a technological change, namely the replacement of flax by wool. 2 For the problem of salinization see Fink 2015 with references to further literature.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 80 Sebastian Fink methods: trade or war.3 In the introduction to the proceedings of the conference’s forerunner where a preliminary version of this paper was presented, Kerstin Droß- Krüpe described the problem in the following way: So not all exchange processes are automatically to be called trade; not every ‘exotic’ object came to the place where it was found by means of trade. Other distribution channels as presents, subsidies, tributes and booty, should not be neglected, though it is certainly often difficult to identify them.4 If we consider all of these possibilities, it does not seem very convincing that the Mesopotamians were able to organize all of the resources they needed through wars or foraging expeditions alone, even if the royal inscriptions, as I will demonstrate below, seem to emphasize this possibility. When we think of advanced weaponry, which heavily relies on the use of metal, it becomes clear that the Mesopotamians needed metal imports in order to build the weapons they needed. It appears to be a kind of paradox in which trade seems to have enabled the Mesopotamians to defeat their trading partners. The advantage the Mesopotamians had over some of their neighbours, which were organized as small tribal communities, seems to be that of a well-organized society that was able to train and maintain a large professional army.5 However, it also seems quite reasonable that after a certain time, the victims react and organize themselves into bigger groups – the secondary state formation – that render it virtually impossible to simply visit them with an army and collect their goods without paying. At this point, it should be mentioned that the empire of Agade as well as the Ur III empire were finally destroyed by their eastern neighbors that were heavily exploited by those empires.6 The fact that the victims start to react and thereby increase the costs and the risks of military operations against them provides an additional argument that the spoils of war could not guarantee the long-term resource supply of Mesopotamia. Therefore, we will explore the possibilities for trade. It is obvious that the Mesopotamians needed some goods that could be given in exchange for all the materials they wanted to import, so we have to look at the possible exports of Mesopotamia. Especially for the third millennium, the textual material available to answer this question is so meagre that Crawford wrote an article entitled Mesopotamia’s invisible exports in the third millennium B.C.7

3 Crawford 2013, 447 gives a nuanced picture of the “mechanisms other than trade, in the strict sense, by which objects can be moved over long distances and these are frequently ignored.” 4 Droß-Krüpe 2014, X. 5 Schrakamp 2014 presents the evidence for Presargonic Lagaš and comes to the conclusion that this state was able to mobilize an army of at least 5.000 soldiers (Schrakamp 2014, 717). 6 For the fall of Agade see Foster 2016, 22–25. To witch extent the Ur III state relied on spoils of war or on the exploitation of its eastern provinces is still a matter of discussion as the available sources are not always clear about the origin of incoming goods but at least sometimes we surely know that spoils of war arrived in Ur III warehouses. See Garfinkle 2014 and Hebenstreit 2014 for a discussion of the evidence. 7 Crawford 1973.

A literary text known as “Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta”8 informs us about an ancient Mesopotamian’s view on trade, and interestingly the text directly touch- es the question, “Trade or war?”, as it describes Enmerkar’s desire for the precious metals and stones of the Lord of Aratta, who lives behind seven mountain ranges. Enmerkar, the lord of Uruk, first tries to threaten the Lord of Aratta; then, they start a kind of challenge, and finally, unfortunately, the text is not too clear in the end. It seems that Inana instructs Enmerkar to purchase these precious items from Aratta: Enlil, King of all countries, has now established this execution of tasks: The people of Aratta have as their task the trading of gold and lapis lazuli and the fashioning of golden fruits and fruity bushes laden with figs and grapes ...; they shall heap up these fruits in great piles; they shall dig out flawless lapis lazuli in lumps; they shall remove the crowns of the sweet reeds, and for Inana, Lady of the Eana, they shall heap them up in the courtyard of the Eana. (Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta, 616–625)9

It is clear that Enmerkar did send grain to Aratta in a time of drought, but the following text describes that the drought ended at some point, and that the grain started to grow again in Aratta. This could mean that Aratta doesn’t need to import grain anymore. Therefore, we can only conclude that this text discusses our question, makes clear that there existed a demand for metals and lapis lazuli in Mesopotamia and hints to the possibility of acquiring goods by either force or trade. However, what the text does not make clear is what the Mesopotamians were able to give in exchange for these precious items, but maybe this is due to the fragmentary state of the end of the text. The text also hints to a major advantage of trade and good relations with neighbouring cities – in case of a drought and a subsequent bad harvest, trade significantly reduces the risk of famine. As we are still searching for potential Mesopotamian exports, we should consider the products that were available in abundance. As mentioned above, these were primarily agricultural products and salt. But as grain, fruits, fish or meat or even salt are not the most precious products, and as at least meat, fruits and fish need a special treatment in order to enhance their storage life, their transport would be very expensive compared to their exchange value. At this point, you might think of all the salt-trading routes, especially in middle and northern Europe, that clearly demonstrate that salt was a highly esteemed commodity in this area for quite a long time. But the situation for the area around the Euphrates and Tigris seems to be quite different, as natural sources of salt are widespread all over this area and are easily exploited via the salt lakes or salt swamps that dry up in summer and can be exploited by simply cutting blocks. The Euphrates and the Tigris have a quite high concentration of dissolved salt, making it possible to extract salt, even from fluvial water.10 Therefore, even if the Mesopotamians were in contact with some areas that were in need of salt, the value of this commodity would not have been very high as the resources were easy to exploit, and every nomad tribe could theoretically participate in the salt-trade and compete with the city-dwellers.

8 An edition and a helpful commentary to the text is found in Vanstiphout 2003. 9 Vanstiphout 2003, 91. 10 See Potts 1984 for a discussion of sources for salt in Mesopotamia.

Another possibility that I will not discuss in detail is profiting off long-distance trade as a simple middleman. So the Mesopotamians could trade commodities from the East to the North and West and vice versa – a possibility that is well documented for the Old Assyrian trading colonies, especially regarding metals.11 Compared to all the other domestic Mesopotamian products wool and textiles are the ideal commodity as they have a very good weight / exchange value relationship. The value of one donkey load of luxury textiles would be that of dozens of donkey loads of grain, so textiles are easy to transport12 and like recent research on the rise of elites in the Mediterranean societies has stressed, foreign luxury goods provide local elites with the opportunity to distinguish themselves from the com- moners and to stress their special status.13 Besides this textiles are a basic need of every population. As we know from wool distribution lists in Mesopotamia workers usually got wool rations and most probably manufactured the textiles themselves.14 So basically every community had a need for textiles or the basic materials, like wool or linen, which were needed in order to produce them. If we rely on royal inscriptions the impression arises that the supply with foreign products was mostly ensured by means of war instead of trade. But due to the reasons mentioned above and a somewhat skeptical approach to royal-self-representation we may doubt the correctness of this information. But after all these preliminary considerations, we should finally have a look at the sources. What I am going to do now is to collect information on “resource supply” from royal inscriptions and literary texts and compare them with the information we have from other, mainly administrative, sources.

Case Study: The Sargonic Period (ca. 2350–2200) The rise of the first dynasty of Akkad can be seen as a major turning point in Mesopotamian history. For the first time, a huge territory ranging from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean was under the control of one Dynasty. Therefore, the Sargonic Period (I quote Benjamin Foster) “expanded forever the Mesopotamian idea of what was military and politically possible.”15 After five kings, the Akkadian state experienced a ‘Period of Confusion’ and shortly afterwards the ‘first world empire’16 was destroyed, and only parts of it were taken over by the Gutium – a people from the east – for a short period of time. After the dynasty of Akkad, the situation seems to have been the same as before its rise – for a period of nearly a hundred years,

11 See Veenhof 2010 for a short overview with further references. See Michel 2014a and 2014b for a discussion of textile and wool trade in this period. 12 Postgate 1992, 213 also stresses the role of textiles as an additional item in transit trade: “There was a sound sense in the combination of tin and textiles, because the animals could bear only so much weight, and the regular packages of tin, divided equally with 65 minas (≈ 32.5 kg) on each side, left plenty of space for the large volume taken up by four to six textiles.” 13 Foster 2016, 109 states concerning the Akkadian Empire that „the ruling elite provided a greater market for skills, craftsmanship, and products than existed previously.” 14 For the Akkadian period see Foster 2014, 119. See Uchitel 2002 for the Ur III period. 15 Foster 2014, 115. 16 This title was chosen for collected volume on Akkad edited by Mario Liverani in 1993.

Mesopotamia was divided into a number of independent city states, a situation that was only ended with the rise of Ur III.

Royal Inscriptions The scribes of the Royal Inscriptions of the Sargonic period seem to have had a taste for military actions and heroism. Most of the texts praise the great deeds of a heroic king who defeats all his enemies, captures their rulers and shows no mercy.17 Agade, the capital of this early empire, has not been found yet, so our knowledge of Akkadian history heavily depends on copies of Akkadian royal inscriptions from later periods. This limitation also implies that we often know that there was a relief or a stele celebrating a victory, but usually we only have the textual evidence from the copies and can only recognize from the colophons of the copyist that the text originally was inscribed on a monument.

Trade and Booty in the Inscriptions Sargon was the founder of this empire, and, according to the Sumerian King List,18 he ruled for 56 years. The evidence from the inscriptions does not enable us to establish a history of events for his reign.19 The inscriptions inform us that he carried out numerous campaigns and one of his main victories was over Lugalzagesi of Uruk, who had established hegemony over 50 city rulers in the south. Additionally, he invaded Elam and captured Susa. It seems obvious that this intense warfare and the defeat of cities brought, as a side effect, the availability of numerous goods as spoils of war, reducing the necessity of trade. On the other hand, we have to keep in mind that not all required resources were available in the area of Sargon’s conquests and that the new elites of the empire had a need for luxury and exotic items in order to demonstrate their newly acquired wealth. So we can find the booty and trade mentioned in Sargon’s inscriptions. In two inscriptions, it is mentioned that “he moored the ships of Meluhha, Magan, and Tilmun at the quay of Agade,”20 which basically means that he redi- rected the previously existing long-distance trade21 to the harbor of his new capital, Agade. Another inscription, in this case with only a copy of the text that originally was inscribed on a stele known to us, mentions booty and captured enemies from Arawa and Saliamu.22 Unfortunately, we are not informed about the nature of the booty.

17 For an analysis of the battle descriptions in these texts see Fink 2016. 18 For an edition and discussion of this text see Glassner 2004, 117–126. 19 Foster 2016, 3–6 summarizes the available evidence. 20 RIM E2.1.1.11, 9–13 and E2.1.1.12, 0’–5’. I quote the royal inscriptions according to their standard edition, the Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia (RIM). The first number indicates the volume, the following numbers chapter, text number and lines – they can be easily found in the RIM volumes on the top of each page. The volumes used here are RIM E2 (Frayne 1993) and RIM E3/2 (Frayne 1997). 21 For an overview of foreign trade in early Mesopotamia see Postgate 1992, 206–222 and more recently Crawford 2013 with further references. 22 RIM E2.1.1.7.

The inscriptions of Rimuš,23 son and successor of Sargon, show a taste for exact numbers, but they are mainly used to specify the numbers of dead or captured enemies. Unfortunately the same precision is missing when he comes to other booty, but nevertheless the slave-trade must have also been an important business when we take the great numbers of captured enemies into account. In Rimuš 8 – again we only know this text from an Ur III copy – booty was depicted and described as Diorite, dušû-stone and other stones that were taken as booty of Parahšum.24 As material evidence for this booty, numerous bowls and vases were found in Nippur with an inscription stating that they come from the booty of Elam.25 An inscription of Man-ištūšu, the successor of Rimuš, also informs us that the ruler brought diorite from faraway lands to his capital. The diorite monument of Man-ištūšu proves that at least his claim to have diorite available must have been true.26 It seems that this bringing of diorite had become an obligation for every Akkadian ruler and had become the eastern counterpart of cutting cedars in the west: Further, he conquered their cities, [st]ru[ck] down their rulers and af[ter] he [roused them (his troops)] he plundered as far as the Silver Mines. He quarried the black stone of the mountains across the Lower Sea, loaded (it) on ships, and moored (the ships) at the quay of Agade.27 The inscriptions of Narām-Sîn, who had to face a major rebellion “of all the four quarters” in several parts of his empire, are full of descriptions of how he managed to overcome this rebellion. But besides the great rebellion, one text also mentions a campaign against Magan.28 This time the inscription itself does not mention booty at all, but four vases found in Babylon and Ur bear an inscription that indicates that they were part of the booty from this campaign. Obviously booty was not necessarily mentioned in all inscriptions, as it was obvious that booty was made. A piece of direct evidence for the making of booty is found in Narām-Sîn 13, a statue base found in Susa that mentions the same campaign to Magan and states: He conquered Magan and captured Maniu[m], the rul[er] of Magan. In their moun tains he quarried diorite stone and brought it to Agade, his city, and fashioned a statue of himself.29 Narām-Sîn 25 mentions “presents” from Subartu and the Upper Lands. If these presents were part of a tribute or offerings given for a special occasion, is not indicated in the text, but they point to the later on frequently mentioned possibility of getting a hand on foreign goods without trade or war, or maybe better without going on

23 For the successors of Sargon see Foster 2016, 6–29. 24 RIM E2.1.2.8. 25 A lot of these stone objects were inscribed with the same inscription that marks them as booty from Elam and Parahšum. See RIM E2.1.2.11–16. For a detailed discussion of these objects see Potts 1989. 26 For a picture see Foster 2016, 2. 27 RIM E2.1.3.1, 20–41. 28 RIM E2.1.4.3, iv 19–27. 29 RIM E2.1.4.13, ii 1–16.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 War or Wool? 85 campaign every year, namely by threatening cities or states to destroy them and to let them dwell in freedom in exchange for routine payments of tribute:30 The governors of Subartum and the lords of the Upper bro[ught] th[eir] offerings before [him].31 In Narām-Sîn 29, we find the king cutting down cedars in the Amanus Mountains for temple building. Such deeds of his father are emulated by his successor, Šar-kali- šarrī (5, 45–57). We can conclude that in the extant evidence, we only have one inscription mentioning trade, while all the other inscriptions focus on booty or the collecting of the raw materials sought by the king. But what were the items that were so important that the kings mentioned them in their inscriptions? As we have seen, only precious stones like diorite and cedar wood are mentioned. The archaeological evidence in the form of inscribed stone bowls and vases shows that other material was taken as booty, but obviously only diorite and cedar wood were prestigious enough to be mentioned besides the great victories of the Akkadian kings.

Literary Texts We have no direct evidence for Akkadian literary texts in a narrow sense, but we have quite a number of texts from later periods that show us that some kind of information was available about the kings of Agade. As usual, the role of an oral tradition is hard to determine but the kings of Agade occupied the minds of the Mesopotamian literati.32 Here, I want to address the Curse of Agade, a text that was most probably composed and written in the Ur III period, and the legends around Sargon. In “Sargon, the Conquering Hero”, the first ruler of the dynasty is represented as the foremost hero fighting in foreign lands and making booty there: Securely founded were the strongholds of the enemies, all nine of them, (but every) man, ox, and sheep, to[geth]er he cap[tured]. (65–67)33 A text conventionally labeled as “Sargon in Foreign Lands”, also mentions that Sargon took captive “man, cattle, goat and sheep” (14’)34, and most probably it is stated – the line is broken – that he brought this booty to Agade (16’).35 The most interesting text regarding trade and booty is the “King of Battle”, where Sargon sets out to an Anatolian city to aid his merchants – interestingly this tale is known in Hittite as well as in Akkadian. At the plea of the merchants, whose business seems to have been blocked in the city of Purušhanda, Sargon takes his army to the north and conquers the city:

30 Fuchs 2008 convincingly argues that the payment of tribute was used by the Assyrians to destroy the loyalty between local rulers and their population. 31 RIM E2.1.4.25, 33–40. 32 For the reception of the Akkadian period in Mesopotamia see Foster 2016, 245–286. 33 Westenholz 1997, 71. 34 Westenholz 1997, 91. 35 Westenholz 1997, 93.

Nur Daggal, had not yet finished the(se) word(s) in his mouth, when Sargon un- dermined his city, broadened the Gate of the Princes, two ikū wide. [He cast] it down; in the highest part of its wall he made a breach(?); he smote all of his wine- intoxicated men. (7’–9’) After his victory and obviously after having reached his aim of securing the trade routes, Sargon left the city and the text ends here. This text, maybe in a back projec- tion of the importance of foreign trade in the time of the composition of this oeuvre, brings together trade and war, as war is clearly a tool to secure trade in this story. Now we turn to the most impressive description of the wealth of Agade that is interestingly not found in a text praising its kings, but rather in a lamentation. The curse of Agade describes the destruction of this city and the downfall of the world’s first empire, but before this the extraordinary wealth of this city is described. Inana built her sanctuary in this city and did all to let it prosper:

So that the warehouses would be provisioned, that dwellings would be founded in that city, that its people would eat splendid food, that its people would drink splendid beverages, that those bathed (for holidays) would rejoice in the courtyards, that the people would throng the places of celebration, that acquaintances would dine together, that foreigners would cruise about like unusual birds in the sky, that (even) Marhaši would be reentered on the (tribute) rolls, that monkeys, mighty elephants, water buffalo, exotic animals, would jostle each other in public squares – thoroughbred dogs, lions, mountain ibexes, alusheep with long wool (so that all this might happen), holy Inanna did not sleep. (12–24)36

Here, we can see a depiction of an unprecedented wealth of a city. Even zoos with exotic animals were established for the joy and entertainment of the city’s population. The texts lists gold, silver, copper, tin and blocks of lapis that are delivered to the granaries of Agade.37 Interestingly, no acts of war are mentioned at this point; all the merchandise seems to flow into the capital by itself:

Ships brought the goods of Sumer itself upstream (to Agade), the highland Amorites, people ignorant of agriculture, came before her (Inanna) there with spirited bulls and spirited bucks, Meluhhans, people of the black mountains, brought exotic wares down to her, Elam and Subir carried goods to her like packasses, all the gouvernors, temple administrators, and land registrars of the Gu’edena, regularly supplied monthly and New Year offerings there. (45–52)38 Summarizing the evidence from the literary texts, we can state that in the Sargon legends, the booty consists mainly of men, oxen and sheep, and as we have seen, oxen and sheep are never mentioned as booty in the Akkadian royal inscriptions but were surely an important part of the usual spoils of war. The curse of Agade focuses on the availability of exotic animals and materials while admiring the unprecedented wealth of Agade, but “normal” animals that are brought to the temple of Inana are also mentioned here.

36 Cooper 1983, 51. 37 Here we have to note that it seems that the military actions of the Akkadian kings in the east led to a breakdown of the support of the Empire with tin. See Foster 2015. 38 Cooper 1983, 53.

Akkadian Economy But what do we know about Akkadian economics? One important factor, likely a consequence of the numerous rebellions the kings of this dynasty had to overcome, was the replacement of old elites by newcomers. These people could enter the network of royal patronage through activities in either the military the administration, thereby becoming Akkadian and belonging to this empire’s ruling class.39 The economic basis of the empire of Agade was built on agriculture, and therefore, Akkadian notables were appointed to manage large plots of land that belonged to the Akkadian king. The land that was owned by the king was purchased, confisca ted or developed by extending irrigation works.40 Additionally, the elites themselves were able to buy land privately, and they often did so. Therefore, this period is often seen as the fostering of individuality with an emphasis on individual ownership. It seems that the agricultural land was mostly cultivated by individual farmers, most of whom were engaged in the cultivation of barley, rye, wheat and a variety of legumes,41 and they were required to pay a tax of 50 percent or more to their landlord. If agriculture and tax collecting worked properly, huge yields resulted and were available to the ruling class. Administrative documents inform us that huge amounts – one source speaks of a delivery of 885,000 liters, approximately 530 tons, of barley42 – of agricultural products were shipped from Sumer to the capital of Agade. However, even if this business was quite interesting, the thing to do for people who wanted to make money was to engage in animal husbandry, as this work promised a ten percent annual increase of the capital invested. Clearly, the economic potential of herding was somehow limited by the opportunities to sell or process the products of the flock, and in the case of sheep, a market for the wool was needed. Compared to the well-documented Ur III period43, we do not have much information on textile manufacturing in this period, so it’s hard to tell whether the production mainly took place in private homes or, like in Ur III for the most part, state-run workshops. But as we have evidence for mass productions of pottery and also for the processing of enormous numbers of fish, it seems clear that large workshops existed in this period.44 Because the newcomers mentioned above seem to have felt the need to show their newly acquired status and wealth, clothing seems to have been very important with trends changing quite often. Therefore, it is clear that these rich individuals were a permanent source of demand for high-quality luxury clothing that was either made of wool or of linen. Besides this important but rather small sector, simple clothing needed to be provided to everyone, and according to administrative texts,

39 Foster 2016, 40–41. 40 Foster 2015, 8. 41 Foster 2015, 10. 42 Foster 2015, 9. 43 Today there are numerous studies available on the textile production in the Ur III peri-period. Waetzoldt 1972 still is the classical treatment of Ur III textile industry. For detailed studies quoting older literature, focusing on the recently published Garšana-archive, see Kleinermann 2011 and Waetzoldt 2011. 44 See the chapter on industries and crafts in Foster 2016, 109–134.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 88 Sebastian Fink this was done by giving wool rations to the workers or soldiers, who were seemingly able to take care for the processing of the wool themselves.45 Now we finally come to the export of textiles and wool. Wool was quite precious in the Akkadian period. An official price from the early Akkadian period for wool was one quarter shekel of silver per mina, so people having large flocks at their disposal could amass a fabulous wealth. Unfortunately, we have no reliable evidence from administrative texts about long-distance trade of wool from the Akkadian period, but from earlier times, we know that a Dilmun merchant used 300 minas of wool from Lagaš to buy 375 minas of copper in Dilmun.46 Evidence for international trade is found in the Akkadian colony at Susa, where merchant families engaged in long-distance trade.47

Conclusions If we want to summarize the evidence, we might come to the conclusion that despite the occasional mentioning of booty in the inscriptions, the organization of the state brought such an enormous wealth of wool to Agade that, considering wool’s excellent exchange rate with metals, war does not seem to have been the best or most economic method of supplying oneself with resources from far-away countries. So we can conclude that despite the relatively sparse evidence for foreign trade in the royal inscriptions, trade seems to have played an important role for ensuring resource supply in the Akkadian empire. As it seems useful to compare the evidence with that of a subsequent period, I will give some basic information about the Ur III Empire. The Ur III Period48 lasted 109 years and is conventionally dated 2112–2004 BC.49 Its dynasty was established by Ur-Namma, who was succeeded by Šulgi, Amar-Suena, Šu-Suen and Ibbi-Suen, with whom the Ur III period ended. Characteristic for the Ur III period is the rich- ness of material from state archives50 that enables historians to compare administrative material with claims from other sources. Thanks to this material, we have the opportunity to confirm a ruler’s claim of having defeated and looted his enemies by administrative documents that register booty from these campaigns.51 Basically, the situation regarding the Royal Inscriptions can be compared to the Presargonic Period as these inscriptions focus on the building of temples and the dedication of objects to the gods. However, trade is also mentioned quite promi-

45 Foster 2014, 119. 46 Foster 2014, 118. 47 Foster 2015, 15. 48 According to the Sumerian King List this dynasty is the third that ruled in Ur and therefore it is called Ur III. See Sallaberger 1999, 123. 49 The Th e most detailed treatment of the Ur III period is Sallaberger 1999. Recent shorter treattreat-- ments are van de Mieroop 2008, 73–84 and Nissen 2012, 86–92 (with extensive references to literature). 50 The number of available documents have exploded in recent years, not at least due to new forms of online publication. Sallaberger 1999, 128 estimates that the number of published texts is around 40,000. 10 years later Lafont 2009, 2 mentions 80,000 published cuneiform tablets on CDLI (http://cdli.ucla.edu/) and BDTNS (http://bdtns.filol.csic.es/). Today (27.05.2016) both online databases contain around 100,000 Ur III tablets. 51 Sallaberger 1999, 156. See also Hebenstreit 2014 who compares the administrative docu-documents mentioning booty with the campaigns mentioned in the year-names.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 War or Wool? 89 nently; for example in Ur-Namma 17 – Ur-Namma praises himself for having rees- tablished the trade with Magan: Ur-Nammu, mighty man, king of the lands of Sumer and Akkad, the one who built the temple of the god Nanna, brought into being the ancient state of affairs. On the shore had trade reach (the) ki-SAR-a (and) returned the ships of Magan into his (Nanna’s) hands.52 Ur-Namma 20 – the focus of the text is the establishing of justice by the king – informs us about the reorganization of international trade and the liberation of his business-partners from foreign rule: Freedom was established for those conducting trade (free from) the chief sea-captain, for those who held back cattle, held back sheep, and held back asses (free from) the herdsman, and for the Akkadians and foreign[ers](?) in the land of Sum[er and Akkad]. At that time, Umma, Marad, GIRkal, Kazallu, Us.arum – those (cities) which had been subjugated by An[š]an – by the might of the god Nanna, my lord, I established their freedom.53 Ur-Namma also mentions the cultivation of agricultural land in his inscriptions: For the god Nanna, first-born son of the good Enlil, his lord, Ur-Nammu, mighty man, king of Ur, king of the lands of Sumer and Akkad, in a swamp planted with date palms – it was a veritable swamp – he brought forth from the water a field that had an area of 3,600 bur.54 From that, we can conclude that economy plays a more important role in the inscriptions of Urnamma than in those of the Sargonic Period. It seems more important to depict the king as a pious builder, as someone who reestablishes justice in the land and takes care for its economic well-being than it is to depict him as a successful and merciless warrior. However, the Royal inscriptions also make their claims about booty in the traditional way, and, as already mentioned above, the administrative documents show us that these claims were based on reality.55 In contrast to the Sargonic Period, we have quite a lot of evidence for textile workshops in the Ur III period, and thanks to the detailed administrative records, not only can we figure out how many people worked there, but also we can give at least some information on the question of how long these workers lived, or more conservatively, when they disappeared from the ration lists. The quite young age at which these people often seem to die and the mentioning of runaways from these workshops might indicate that working conditions were substandard, but actually, as the main evidence consists of ration lists, there is plenty room for different interpretations.56

52 RIM E3/2.1.1.17, 5–14. 53 RIM E3/2.1.1.20, 117–130. 54 RIM E3/2.1.1.19, 1–14. 55 Garfinkle 2014; Hebenstreit 2014. 56 A highly interesting comparative approach of the Mesopotamian ration lists with South American evidence is found in Uchitel 2002. An important study of the social statues of these mostly female textile workers is Maekawa 1980.

We also know that the price of wool – maybe simply due to an increasing production and competitors from adjacent regions – dropped quite heavily (more than 50 percent) from Akkadian to Ur III times57, and so the way out of declining revenues from wool trade seems to have been one of the reasons to foster textile trade rather than wool trade in Ur III times. Compared to today’s situation, Mesopotamia was no victim of the resource curse, maybe better known as the paradox of plenty, which describes the paradox situation that countries with an abundance of non-renewable natural resources grow more slowly than economies with little natural resources. So, it seems that the scarcity of resources fostered the need for innovation in Mesopotamia58, and the falling prices of wool might have led to the rise of the world’s first large-scale textile industry in Ur III times.59

Bibliography Algaze 1993: Algaze, G.: The Uruk World System, Chicago. Cooper 1983: Cooper, J. S.: The Curse of Agade, Baltimore & London. Crawford 1973: Crawford, H.: Mesopotamia’s Invisible Exports in the Third Millennium B.C., World Archaeology 5/2, 232–241. Crawford 2013: Crawford, H.: Trade in the Sumerian World. In H. Crawford, The Sumerian World, New York & London, 447–461. Droß-Krüpe 2014: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Textiles Between Trade and Distribution: In Lieu of a Preface. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), VII–XII. Fink 2015: Fink S.: The Two Faces of Salt in Mesopotamia. In M. Alexianu, R.-G. Curcă & V. Cotiugă (eds.), Salt Effect. Second Arheoinvest Symposium: From the Ethnoarchaeology to the Anthropology of Salt, Oxford (BAR International Series 2760), 3–9. Fink 2016: Fink, S.: Battle-descriptions in Mesopotamian Sources I: Presargonic and Sargonic Period. In K. Ulanowski (ed.), The Religious Aspects of War in the Ancient Near East, Greece and Rome, Leiden (Ancient Warfare Series 1), 51–64. Foster 2014: Foster, B. R.: Wool in the Economy of Sargonic Mesopotamia. In C. Breniquet & C. Michel (eds.), Wool Economy in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean (Ancient Textiles Series 17), Oxford, 115–123. Foster 2015: Foster, B. R.: Akkadian Economics, Rivista die Storia Economica 31, 7–23. Foster 2016: Foster, B. R.: The Age of Agade. Inventing Empire in Ancient Mesopotamia, London & New York. Frayne 1993: Frayne, D.: Sargonic and Gutian Periods (2334–2113 BC), Toronto (The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia Early Periods, Vol. 2 = RIM E2). Frayne 1997: Frayne, D.: Ur III Period (2112–2004 BC), Toronto (The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia Early Periods, Vol. 3/2 = RIM E3/2). Fuchs 2008: Fuchs, A.: Über den Wert von Befestigungsanlagen, Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 98, 45–99. Garfinkle 2014: Garfinkle, St. J.: The Economy of Warfare in Southern Iraq at the End of the Third Millennium BC. In H. Neumann (ed.),Proceedings of the Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale 52, 2006, Münster, 353–362.

57 Foster 2014, 119. 58 See also Foster 2016, 114 with a similar observation: “Mesopotamian metallurgy is one of the first instances in history of a sophisticated industry based entirely on imported raw materials, in which superior technology compensated for lack of resources.” 59 Waetzoldt 1972, XXV mentions documents from this time which mention 85,000 sheep and others 18,700 talents (approximately 566 tons) of wool. This clearly demonstrates that we can speak of a large-scale textile industry.

Glassner 2004: Glassner, J.-J.: Mesopotamian Chronicles, Atlanta (Writings from the Ancient World 19). Hebenstreit 2014: Hebenstreit, L.: The Sumerian Spoils of War During Ur III. In H. Neu mann et al. (eds.): Krieg und Frieden im Alten Vorderasien. 52e Rencontre Assyriologique International, Münster (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 401), 373–380. Kleinerman 2011: Kleinerman, A.: Craft Production at Garšana: The Leather and Textile Workshops. In D. I. Owen (ed.), Garšana Studies, Bethesda, Maryland (Cornell Uni versity Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology 6), 183–207. Lafont 2009: Lafont, B.: The Army of the Kings of Ur: The Textual Evidence, Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 5, 1–25 (http://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlj/2009/cdlj2009_005.html, accessed June 2016). Liverani 1993: Liverani, M. (ed.): Akkad, the First World Empire: Structure, Ideology, Traditions, Padova (History of the Ancient Near East. Studies V). Maekawa 1980: Maekawa, K.: Female Weavers and Their Children in Lagash – Pre-Sargonic and Ur III, Acta Sumerologica 2, 81–125. McCorriston 1997: McCorriston, J.: The Fiber Revolution. Textile Extensification, Aliena tion, and Social Stratification in Ancient Mesopotamia, Current Anthropology 38/4, 517–535. Michel 2014a: Michel, C.: The Assyrian Textile Trade in Anatolia (19th century BCE). In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity (Philippika 73), Wies baden, 111–122. Michel 2014b: Michel, C.: Wool Trade in Upper Mesopotamia and Syria according to Old Babylonian and Old Assyrian Texts. In C. Breniquet & C. Michel (eds.), Wool Economy in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean (Ancient Textiles Series 17), Oxford, 232–254. Nissen 2012: Nissen, H. J.: Geschichte Alt Vorderasiens (Oldenbourg Grundriss der Geschichte 25), 2nd edition, München. Postgate 1992: Postgate, J.N.: Early Mesopotamia. Society and economy at the dawn of history, London & New York. Potts 1984: Potts, D.: On Salt and Salt Gathering in Ancient Mesopotamia, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 27, 225–271. Potts 1989: Potts, D.: Foreign Stone Vessels of the Late Third Millennium B.C. from Southern Mesopotamia: Their Origins and Mechanisms of Exchange, Iraq 51, 123–164. Sallaberger 1999: Sallaberger, W.: Ur III Zeit. In W. Sallaberger & A. Westenholz (eds.), Mesopotamien. Akkade-Zeit und Ur III-Zeit, Freiburg & Göttingen (Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 160/3), 121–390.

Schrakamp 2014: Schrakamp, I.: Krieger und Bauern. RU-lugal und aga3/aga-us2 im Militär des altsumerischen Lagaš. In H. Neumann et al. (eds.), Krieg und Frieden im Alten Vorderasien. 52e Rencontre Assyriologique International, Münster (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 401), 691–724. Uchitel 2002: Uchitel, A.: Women at Work: Weavers of Lagash and Spinners of San Luis Gonzaga. In Simo Parpola & R. M. Whiting (eds.), Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East II. Proceedings of the XLVIIe Rencontre Assyriologique in Helsinki, Helsinki, 621–631. van de Mieroop 2008: van de Mieroop, M.: A History of the Ancient Near East, 3rd edition, Malden. Vanstiphout 2003: Vanstiphout, H.: Epics of Sumerian Kings. The Matter of Aratta, Atlanta (Writings from the Ancient World 20). Veenhof 2010: Veenhof, K. R.: Ancient Assur: The City, its Traders, and its Commercial Network, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 53, 39–82. Waetzoldt 1972: Waetzoldt, H.: Untersuchungen zur neusumerischen Textilindustrie, Rom (Studi Economici e Tecnologici 1).

Waetzoldt 2011: Waetzoldt H.: Die Textilproduktion von Garšana. In D. I. Owen (ed.), Garšana Studies, Bethesda, Maryland (Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology 6), 405–454. Westenholz 1997: Westenholz J. G.: Legends of the Kings of Akkade, Winona Lake (Meso potamian Civilizations 7).

Salvatore Gaspa

Understanding trade and distribution in Assyria in the 1st millennium BCE not only requires an investigation of what the two concepts represented in the historical period in question; it also requires the examination of major socioeconomic changes in the Near East with regard to trade networks and groups involved in trading activities. Other important aspects in the elucidation of trade and distribution in Assyria concern the value of the commodities exchanged in trade and the way they entered the palatine and domestic milieus. In the wake of the crisis in the Late Bronze period, one of the major changes in the Near Eastern economy concerned its western most region, which extended roughly from the Mediterranean to the Euphrates: the crisis concerned Anatolia, Syria, Palestine and the Aegean area. In these regions, the former palace-centered Bronze Age system and its economic activities collapsed. Various factors brought this situation about, including the development of nautical technology and camel caravans, which promoted the growth of trade routes towards overseas regions in the Mediterranean and into the arid regions of the Arabian Peninsula and the Iranian plateau. The growth of trade in these areas resulted in the development of forms of control over the new routes to resources by new states. In the Iron Age, the development and spread of alphabetic writing was another important factor relating to the development of social groups involved in trade and in creating or strengthening new trade networks. As a consequence, in the Iron Age the political and economic scenario of the West (Anatolia, Syria, Palestine and Aegean area) was dominated by city-states and ethnic kingdoms, and especially by trade routes whose dimensions were incomparably larger than those of the 2nd millennium BCE had been. More importantly, the routes connecting the foci of this new trade organization, represented by harbours and caravan cities, only marginally touched the main ‘markets’ of Assyria, Babylonia, and Egypt. These regions corresponded to the oldest urbanized areas in the Near East where the main concentrations of population lived.1 Of course, the areas of ancient urbanization in Upper and Lower Mesopotamia already enjoyed a long tradition in textile trading. Trade in Assyria involved the exchange of goods against metals, generally silver, according to specific standards of weight. In Assyria during the st1 millennium BCE, silver was used as money and its use in transactions was regulated according to three different weight norms.2 Palaces were the establishments where income from taxation, trade and gifts was distributed among people belonging to the state sector, both in the provinces and in the heartland of Assyria. In the Assyrian state, the distribution system at the time was also characterized by payments of contributions as a commuted version of military and civil service (ilku) and by work-assignments to craftsmen (iškāru). While the former system served to relieve the state of the burden of distributing goods to various recipients, the latter restrained the state’s interven-

1 Liverani 2003, 130–137. 2 For the analysis of trade and money in Assyria see Radner 1999a and 1999b with previous literature.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 94 Salvatore Gaspa tion by only allocating materials to specialists and by defining their obligation to supply specific end products.3 The mercantile role of the city of Assur in the textile trade with Anatolia is well attested in the early part of the 2nd millennium BCE, when the city exported wool textiles produced not only in Assur, but also in southern Mesopotamia.4 Documents found in the merchant archives of the commercial outpost in Kaneš (Kültepe) shed light on the private affairs of Old Assyrian families, whose women produced textiles that were subsequently exported to Anatolia, where they were traded for silver and gold. The commercial activities of the people of Assur continued in the st1 millennium BCE, when the city’s inhabitants were granted exemptions by the state.5 In Assur, private trading ventures are attested in the Neo-Assyrian period. Merchants from Assur were involved in long distance trade involving various goods by river transport and overland journeys. Presumably, in addition to wine, dyed wools were imported by these merchants from abroad.6 The trade in textiles is also well attested in the Middle Assyrian kingdom of the Late Bronze Age. Texts from this period document the existence of an institutional and centralized production of textiles, with private establishments connected to internal production and export. Documents from the archive of Bābu-aḫa-iddina, a high-ranking individual in Assur’s state elite during the reigns of Shalmaneser I (1273–1244 BCE) and Tukultī-Ninurta I (1243–1203 BCE), show that his household was extensively involved in textile production. Here, dependent female workers manufactured textiles under work-assignment contracts. Texts from this archive clearly show that the textiles produced by Bābu-aḫa-iddina’s artisans were passed to merchants for export. Textiles resulting from the work-assignment of a woman called Allanzu, for example, were handed to a number of merchants for a trading expedition to the land of Canaan, confirming the export-orien ted production of some of the textiles produced in Assur.7 It seems that merchants were regularly engaged in transporting and selling išḫanabe- and kusītu-garments produced by Bābu-aḫa-iddina’s household in the Levant. Presumably, these textiles were exchanged in situ for products which were available in the Levantine cities such as tin, antimony and ebony.8 Another text from this archive shows that clothing was also acquired by Bābu-aḫa-iddina through the activity of travelling merchants.9 From the 9th century to its collapse, at the end of the 7th century BCE (612 BCE), Assyria developed into an imperial structure, reaching a phase of maximum territorial expansion during the 7th century BCE, when the northern Mesopotamian state dominated a vast territory stretching from Egypt to the Zagros and from southern Anatolia to the Persian Gulf. This process of unification in the Near East was in

3 On distribution of income in the light of the economy of the Assyrian Empire see Postgate 1979a, 200–207. 4 For the textiles traded by Old Assyrian merchants in Anatolia see Veenhof 1972; Michel & Veenhof 2010, 210–271; Michel 2014, 240. 5 Sargon II established exemptions to Assur and Harran, two cities which supported his rise to power. See Liverani 1997, 797. 6 See Postgate 1995, 405 on the possibility of trade in the western desert, which would have given the Assyrian merchants access to caravan routes originating from Arabia. 7 Postgate 2013, 219 on the text no. 62 of this archive. 8 Postgate 2013, 220. 9 Postgate 2013, 218 on the text no. 6.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Trade and Distribution of Textiles in Ancient Assyria 95 later times also achieved by the Achaemenids and the Macedonians. The acquisition of goods exchanged along the caravan routes was one of the main concerns of the social elite ruling Assyria at the time of its greatest political and economic power in the Near Eastern scenario. To implement the acquisition of goods from various regions of the Empire as well as from abroad, the Assyrian kings established an efficient road-network that criss-crossed the imperial territory and connected it to the main caravan routes.10

Textile Trade and Assyrian Merchants In Assyria, the crown owned and managed the Empire’s economic system, directing large-scale investments towards infrastructures. The crown promoted and managed the procurement of goods of every sort, both raw and finished, including textiles, and directed the redistribution of these goods within the state system. Exploitation of conquered regions in the adjacent western, northern and eastern areas was made in the form of tribute and booty. This is evident from the linen clothes and woollen garments with multicoloured trim, as well as the dyed wool varieties abundantly mentioned among the foreign goods registered in royal inscriptions of Neo-Assyrian kings as tribute or booty. These products had been taken along the major trajec- tories of the Assyrian military expansionism, from the regions in the west (Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine, Transjordan, Arabia, Egypt), the north (southern Anatolia), the south (Babylonia) and the south-east (the north-western Iranian area).11 In visual

10 On the road network of the Assyrian Empire see Astour 1995, 1417. 11 For linen clothes and wool garments with multicoloured trim, see, e.g., Assurnaṣirpal II: RIMA 2, A.0.101.1 i 79 (Šadikanni and Qatnu), 95 (Laqû), ii 123 (Bīt-Zamāni, see also A.0.101.19:89), iii 55 (Bīt-Adini, Tīl-Abni), iii 74 (Patinu, see also A.0.101.2:50; A.0.101.73), iii 78 (Iaḫānu), iii 87 (Tyre, Sidon, Byblos, Maḫallatu, Maizu, Kaizu, Amurru and Arwad, see also A.0.101.2:30); Shalmaneser III: RIMA 3, A.0.102.2 ii 22 (Patinu), 25 (Bīt-Gabbari), ii 40 (unspecified areas of the seashore and the banks of the Euphrates); A.0.102.60 (Unqi); Adad-nērārī III: RIMA 3, A.0.104.7:7 (Damascus); Tiglath-pileser III: RINAP 1, 12:10’ (Unqi); 32:9 (Kummuḫ, Damascus, Samaria, Tyre, Byblos, Que, Karkemish, Hamath, Sam’al, Gurgum, Melid, Kaska, Tabal, Tuna, Tuḫana, Ištunda, Ḫubišna, the Arabs, [...]); 42:14’ (Gaza); Sargon II: Levine 1972, line ii 18 (Tabal); Esarhaddon: RINAP 4, 1 ii 76 (Sidon, see also 2 i 26; 6 ii’ 20’). Esarhaddon also mentions garments of byssus, see RINAP 4, 103:21 (Egypt). Wool garments with multicoloured trim alone are attested in Assurnaṣirpal II: RIMA 2, A.0.101.1 ii 79 (Zamua, see also A.0.101.17 iii 107), ii 81 (Ḫudun, Ḫartišu, Ḫubušku and Gilzānu, see also A.0.101.17 iii 114), iii 7 (Bīt-Ḫalupê), iii 47 (Laqû), Tiglath- pileser III: RINAP 1, 47:28 (Bīt-Yakīn). Only linen garments are attested in Assurnaṣirpal II: RIMA 2, A.0.101.1 iii 71 (Patinu, see also A.0.101.2:47); Shalmaneser III: RIMA 3, A.0.102.8:41’ (Patinu). Interestingly, byssus, clothes with multicoloured trim and linen garments occur in Shalmaneser III: RIMA 3, A.0.102.90 (Suḫi). For dyed wool see, e.g., Assurnaṣirpal II: RIMA 2, A.0.101.1 i 87–88 (blue-black wool and violet wool: Sūru, city of Bīt-Ḫalupê); i 97 (blue-black wool: Ḫindānu); Shalmaneser III: RIMA 3, A.0.102.1:95’ (violet wool: Unqi, Gurgum, Sam’al and Bīt-Agūsi); A.0.102.2 ii 23 (violet wool: Patinu); Tiglath-pileser III: RINAP 1, 11:10’ (violet wool: Karkemish, [Gurgum?]). For linen and dyed wool see, e.g., Assurnaṣirpal II: RIMA 2, A.0.101.1 iii 68 (blue-black and violet wool: Ḫatti). For wool clothes with multicoloured trim and linen garments along with dyed wool see, e.g., Tiglath-pileser III: RINAP 1, 12:1’ (blue-black and violet wool: various unknown lands, probably in the surroundings of Arpad); 15:3 (blue-purple and red-purple wool: Kaska, Tabal, Tuna, Tuḫana, [Ištunda], Ḫubišna and Arabs); 35 iii 21–22 (blue-purple

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 96 Salvatore Gaspa art, imported textiles rarely occur. In depictions of bearers of tribute and booty, textiles are displayed among other items forcibly acquired by the Assyrians during military campaigns, as can be observed in the Black Obelisk depicting Shalmaneser III’s military activities in the Euphrates zone and the receipt of tribute from Marduk- apla-uṣur, a ruler of Suḫi, a kingdom on the middle Euphrates, in Syria (Fig. 1).12 The epigraph illustrating this scene mentions byssus (cloth or garments), (wool) clothing with multicoloured trim and linen (garments),13 while in the carved scene the items brought with a long pole by the tribute bearers seem to be two fringed carpets or curtains, presumably a typical luxury textile produced or traded in the land of Suḫi. The same textiles suspended from carrying poles are also depicted on fragments of the bronze bands that decorated the temple gates at Imgur-Enlil (Balawat) as the tribute paid to the Assyrian king by the cities of Tyre and Sidon.14

Fig. 1: Fringed textiles (carpets or curtains?) from the land of Suḫi in a carved scene from the Black Obelisk, Nimrud, Northwest Palace, reign of Shalmaneser III, c. 825 BCE (from Layard 1849–1853, I, pl. 54)

and red-purple wool: Ḫatti, Aramaeans, Qedarites, Arabs, Kummuḫ, Damascus, Samaria, Tyre, Byblos, Que, Melid, Tabal, Atuna, Tuḫana, Ištunda, Ḫubišna, Kaska, Karkemish, Sam’al, Gurgum); 47 r.12’ (with garments of violet wool: Kummuḫ, Que, [Byblos, Tyre, Karkemish], Hamath, Sam’al, Gurgum, [Melid, Kaska], Tabal, Tuna, Tuḫana, [Ištunda, Ḫubišna], Arwad, Ammon, Moab, [...], Ashkelon, Judah, Edom, [...], Gaza); Sargon II: Mayer 1983, line 366 (blue-purple and unspecified wool varieties with garments of red wool: Urarṭu, Ḫabḫu, see also Fuchs 1998, IVb:49’–51’); Fuchs 1994, Ann. 407, 449 (blue-purp le and red-purple wool: Kummuḫ and all the conquered lands, see also Prunk. 181–182); Sennacherib: RINAP 3/1, 4:56 (blue-purple and red-purple wool: Judah). For dyed wool and unspecified textiles see, e.g., Shalmaneser III: RIMA 3, A.0.102.2 ii 28–29 (violet wool: Karkemish). For unspecified (dyed?) wool and linen garments see,e.g. , Shalmaneser III: RIMA 3, A.0.102.6 iii 13–14 (Patinu). Unspecified wool is also attested in Shalmaneser III: RIMA 3, A.0.102.84 (Tyre, Sidon). 12 Layard 1849–53, I, pl. 54. 1849–1853. 13 RIMA 3, A.0.102.90 bu-u-ṣi túg.lu-búl-ti bir-me u gada.meš. It is worth noting that the campaign against Suḫi is not recorded in the preserved texts of Shalmaneser III. 14 Tubb 2014, 136 fig. 44a–b. Tubb interprets the items as “skeins of dyed wool”, although the ending parts of the suspended textiles are similar to the fringed extremities of the textiles represented in the Black Obelisk.

The forcible acquisition of goods was, however, also supplemented by peaceful trade relationships between the Empire and foreign polities. The volume of business that resulted from these peaceful relationships has been considered by scholars as quanti- tatively irrelevant when compared to forcible acquisition of goods.15 But the silence regarding trade in royal inscriptions can be ascribed to the ideological background of Assyrian kingship. The categories of textual sources that lie outside the channels of the official records, such as administrative records and letters from the royal correspondence, show that various forms of imported goods from international trade reached the Assyrian cities in addition to tribute or booty.16 Of course, written sources largely concern themselves with royal affairs and the palace-orientation of the evidence has probably determined the comparatively rare attestations in the texts of mercantile activity, especially in the private sector. Another reason for the scarcity of attestations of merchants’ transactions may be attributed to the use of perishable writing materials, the common tools used in Aramaic alphabetic script that in those very centuries spread through all the strata of Assyrian imperial society. These limits prevent us from reaching a full understanding of the trade and transactions made by merchants, but it is clear that trade existed and, more importantly, that it represented another channel for provisioning the court and the state sector along with taxation. In this political and economic scenario, the tamkārus, ‘the merchants’, played a significant role in the acquisition of certain commodities to supply the needs of the Assyrian state machinery as well as for the development of the private economy, although the latter is poorly documented. Memories of the Assyrian merchants and their activity in the Near East emerge from the words of the Biblical prophet Nahum, who spoke of Assyria’s merchants as being ‘more numerous than the stars of heaven’.17 But who were these Assyrian merchants? From what we can learn from written sources in the Neo-Assyrian archives, they were members of the Palace elite who in their mercantile activity acted as royal agents.18 For the acquisition of the commodities needed by the king, the royal family, and the ruling class living in the capital and the major cities of Nineveh (Qūyunǧiq), Assur (Qal‘at Šerqāṭ), and Kalḫu (Nimrud), the Assyrian merchants, equipped with diplomatic and military competences, travelled along the main overland trading routes within and outside the Empire’s territory, using routes such as those connecting Assyria with Babylonia, Arabia, Egypt, Anatolia and Iran. Their primary trading role seems to be concerned with the procurement of goods regularly needed to support the state machinery, especially the royal army – horses, slaves and various raw materials such as metals19 – but they also acquired other important commodities, including textiles. Names of merchants mentioned in lists of debts in silver, possibly due to the palace, indicate the connection between such agents and the state.20 The crown equipped them with

15 See Renger 2003, 36. 16 Radner 2004, 156. 17 Nah. 3:16. 18 Radner 1999a, 101–103. This does not exclude, however, that these royal tamkārus also operated in independent trade and that other categories of merchants were active in 1st millennium Assyria. See the discussion in Graslin-Thomé 2009, 401–405. 19 See Postgate 1979a, 207. 20 SAA 7, 30 iii 9’–10’; 32 i 10’; 39 i’ 4’–5’, 8’–9’.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 98 Salvatore Gaspa large sums of money to allow them to purchase various commodities on their business travels. Textiles of every sort and provenance were among the goods traded by the Assyrian tamkārus. For textiles originating from maritime trade, the Assyrian merchants probably relied on the Phoenicians, whose expertise in sailing is witnessed by depictions of Phoenician ships in the Neo-Assyrian palace reliefs and other artifacts (Fig. 2).21

Fig. 2: Phoenician ships in a relief from the Southwest Palace of Sennacherib, Nineveh, 7th century BCE (from Layard 1849–1853, I, pl. 71)

Other groups providing textiles to Assyrian merchants come from regions adjacent to Assyria. One example of such a group is the ḫundurāius of the city of Assur, a professional group who were either textile makers themselves or, as suggested by Postgate, transporters22 whose possible Iranian origin probably favoured the trade connections with the Iranian area. The role played by Iranian merchants is also echoed in the Book of Ezekiel, which mentions dealers from Assyria and Media and the fine textiles (“violet cloths and brocades, stores of coloured fabric rolled up and tied with cords”) exported by these traders to Tyre.23 Agents involved in trading activities with Anatolia and Egypt also had a significant role in the acquisition of

21 Layard 1849–1853, I, pl. 71. 22 Postgate 1995, 405–406. 23 Ez. 27:23–24.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Trade and Distribution of Textiles in Ancient Assyria 99 textiles from these two important economic regions, and local intermediaries indig- enous to those lands were certainly involved in Assyrian trade. Thanks to their role as intermediators Phoenicians, Philistines and Arabs were probably involved in the Assyrian trade with Egypt, a country from which fine linen garments and papyrus were imported to the Empire.24 To achieve its goals in the acquisition of textiles exchanged along the main trading routes, the Assyrian state also cooperated with local polities. This was done through a variety of means: by settling Assyrians at strategic crossroads of the trade routes, by establishing a number of commercial ports (kāru) along frontiers of the Empire and trade routes of the subject regions,25 and by direct control of foreign polities and their commercial networks. The re-location of nomads was another means employed by the Assyrians to reach specific goods that were exchanged along caravan routes, such as in the case of Arab trade.26 It was thanks to the multiple means of exploitation involved and their flexible application to different local polities that the Assyrian Empire’s economic growth reached its peak during the 7th century. Of course, it is reasonable to assume that local foreign polities also strongly benefitted in caravan trading under the protection granted by Assyria.27 To the Assyrians, Southern Mesopotamia represented a rich trade network. In the 1st millennium, the city of Nippur (Nuffar) was an important trade centre28 which, thanks to its location on the pastoral frontier of Babylonia, imported large amounts of wool from the adjacent regions populated by Aramaean and Chaldean pastoralists. From letters of the Governor’s archive, dating back to the mid-8th century BCE, we learn that wool, especially blue-purple and red-purple wool, was pro- cessed into fine textile products in Nippurean textile workshops by local weavers. Purple dyes were probably obtained by Chaldeans from Phoenicia from the trading caravans via northern Arabia or Syria.29 During the Neo-Assyrian period, Chaldeans were able to achieve control of the commercial routes of southern Mesopotamia, consolidating their political enclaves in Babylonia by gaining direct access to high value goods from Arabia, the Levant and Egypt that were available through the caravan trade.30 The presence of merchants from northern Arabia is attested in st1 millennium sources, and their commercial activities certainly strengthened trade connections between southern Mesopotamia and Arabia, allowing the Babylonian cities access to Arabic goods.31 Although the letters from Nippur do not specify the destination of these luxury garments, it is probable that they were traded abroad.32 One of the

24 Elat 1978, 21, 28–32. 25 Radner 2004, 157–162; Graslin-Thomé 2009, 370. 26 Eph’al 1982, 106. 27 Radner 2004, 155. 28 Cole 1996, 56–68. 29 Cole 1996, 64. 30 Fales 2011, 97. 31 See, e.g., letter SAA 18, 153, concerning the arrest of a merchant from Tēma (Taymā’), an important trade city in northern Arabia. The oasis of Tēma was a nodal point in the caravan trade routes that crossed Arabia: in this city the Neo-Babylonian king Nabonidus (555–539 BCE) established his court for a period of about ten years. 32 Cole 1996, 61.

Assyrian conquerors’ main concerns was to achieve direct control of Nippur’s textile trade and thereby control the tribes that traded along the caravan routes connecting Babylonia with the Euphrates valley, the Iranian plateau, and northern Arabia. The Assyrian Empire’s economic interest in the Babylonian ‘textile market’ is seen in some Babylonian cuneiform dockets found in Dūr-Šarrukēn (Ḫorsābād) and Kalḫu. These inscribed objects, which accompanied the bundles of dyed wool transported to Assyria from southern Mesopotamia, could indicate the existence of peaceful trade exchanges between Assyria and the Chaldeans involved in the southern textile trade.33 Further information on the textiles that reached Babylonia from adjacent regions and which attracted Assyrian interests may be found in letters in the Sargonid royal correspondence from southern Mesopotamian cities. In one of the letters sent from Uruk (Warka), Marduk-nāṣir mentions a caravan coming from Laḫīru and wool transported from Bīt-Imbî,34 two regions lying at the border of Elam and certainly representing the endpoints of caravan routes originating in Elam and the Iranian area. Another letter, possibly from Babylon, enumerates various goods of unknown provenance, among which first quality wool, naṣbatu-garments, one garment of first-quality wool and one hat.35 In comparison to other near eastern polities, the Assyrians allowed the Phoenician cities and Babylonia – two important and wealthy trade centres – to retain a certain degree of self-determination.36 This was done to avoid disruption to local trade and to take the maximum profit from it. In order to acquire goods otherwise inaccessi- ble, the Assyrians preferred to control the income from the Phoenician trade instead of directly controlling the territory of the Phoenician cities. Qurdi-Aššur-lāmur’s letter to the Assyrian king provides a good illustration of the relationships between Assyria and Tyre at the beginnings of the Assyrian dominion of Phoenicia (738–734 BCE). The governor ofṢ imirra reports to the king that an agreement had been concluded with Tyrians, according to which they were free to access the trading posts (kārāni) and to sell or buy as they wished.37 Moreover, Assyrian tax-collectors were appointed in the ports of trade in order to levy taxes on the trees felled in Mount Lebanon. The freedom granted by the Assyrians to the local population was, however, not unlimited. According to Qurdi-Aššur-lāmur, Sidonites were not allowed to sell wood to the Egyptians or to Philistines,38 two strong trade competitors of the Assyrians in the area. Similar limitations were certainly applied to other wares. The treaty of Esarhaddon with Ba’al, king of Tyre, is another important piece of evidence attesting to the deliberate intention of the Empire to allow Phoenician commercial activities to proceed within a certain degree of autonomy. In fact, the Phoenician ruler was allowed free access to all the trade ports on the Mediterranean coast.39

33 Dalley & Postgate 1984, 139. 34 SAA 17, 136:6–11. 35 SAA 18, 19:3’–4’, 7’–9’. 36 See Postgate 1979a, 206; Bedford 2009, 57–58. 37 SAA 19, 22:5–13. 38 SAA 19, 22:24–e.27. 39 See SAA 2, 5:18’–26’: “These are the ports of trade and the trade routes which Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, [entrusted] to his servant Ba’al: to Akko, Dor, to the entire district of the Philistines, and to all the cities within Assyrian territory on the seacoast, and to Byblos, the Lebanon, all the cities in the mountains, all (these) being cities of Esarhaddon, king

It was only when the city-states of the Phoenician coast violated the treaties with the Empire that the Assyrian kings moved in force against them. The treatment meted out to Sidon, which was conquered and reduced to an Assyrian province in 677 BCE, demonstrates that the military option was considered as a last resort for those who refused to cooperate peacefully with the conquerors. Just five years after the conclusion of the treaty with Esarhaddon, Tyre itself was conquered after its refusal to abide by the former agreement with Assyria. In practice, these agreements were often violated by local rulers and merchants, as can be inferred from letters concerning the Phoenician city of Arwad. Here, Ikkilû, the king of Arwad, is referred to in a letter from Itti-Šamaš-balāṭu as the one who systematically impounded the boats going to the port of the Assyrian king, turning the trade and its profit for himself.40 Presumably, these boats transported goods from other harbours along the Syro-Palestinian coast, as well as from Egypt and the Aegean. The successor of Esarhaddon, Assurbanipal (668–631/627? BCE), imposed a yearly tribute on Ikkilû, consisting of gold, reddish wool, black wool, fish and birds.41 As regards the favourable treatment of Babylonia manifested during the reigns of Sargon II, Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, the privileges and the tax concessions for the inhabitants of the Babylonian cities were recognized by the Assyrians and certainly constituted an integral facet of controlling the local trade and its important resources.42 The purpose underlying this preferential treatment is clearly expressed in Esarhaddon’s royal inscriptions, in which he claims to have opened up the roads of Babylon to allow the resettled inhabitants to develop trade and communication with all the other lands.43 Other Near Eastern regions were highly valued as production centres for high- quality dyed wool. One such region was Anatolia with which Assyria had enjoyed strong commercial ties since the early 2nd millennium BCE, as mentioned above. Ašipâ, a governor operating on the northern frontier of the Assyrian Empire who wrote various letters to Sargon, was also concerned with procurement of red wool (tabrību) for the king.44 In this case, local Anatolian wool was procured through tax collection. However, this is not the sole attestation of the trade in Anatolian wool in Neo-Assyrian sources. According to a letter sent by Crown Prince Sennacherib to his father Sargon, the emissaries of Kummuḫ, an important Anatolian region (corresponding to Classical Commagene) from which dyed wool was imported in Assyria, questioned the competence of merchants to select the red(?) wool (síg.meš lum.lum.meš) that constituted the king’s tribute. It seems that among the palace staff only the king’s female weavers were considered to have the necessary expertise to check the quality of Kummuḫean wool.45

of Assyria. Ba’al [may enter these] cities. The people of Tyre [will], in accordance with what Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, has per[mitted, stay] in their ships, and all those who enter into the towns of […], his town, his villages, his ports of trade which […] for collecting [toll …], and all (the places) in their outskirts, will [pay toll], as in the past.” 40 SAA 16, 127:15–21. 41 Borger 1996, 186 r. 27 and Baker 2000, 488b s.v. Iakīn-Lû. 42 See the letters SAA 17, 21; 23; 145; SAA 18, 158. 43 RINAP 4, 105 vii 38–42. 44 SAA 5, 28:7–10. 45 SAA 1, 33:19–r.3.

It is reasonable to assume that the Empire’s strategy to promote trade in important areas such as Phoenicia and Babylonia must have been counterbalanced by analogous efforts to develop commercial life also in the major cities of central Assyria, although this is difficult to document, especially in the domain of private commercial activities.46 Private trade certainly existed in the Assyrian Empire, but it is scarcely attested in the extant sources. A few attestations show that tamkārus did not only act as crown agents in home and foreign trading activities, but conducted private business as well. An idea of this may be gained from SAA 11, 26, a memorandum from 7th century Nineveh on transactions done by some Assyrian merchants. Unfortunately, the broken part at the top of the tablet prevents us from knowing the purpose of the document. Nevertheless, according to the text, the tamkārus mentioned in the memorandum operated in the city of Harran (Assyrian Ḫarrānu, Classical Carrhae), an important city in western Syria, and traded various goods, including textiles. Linen garments (kitû) and togas (šaddīnu), as well as dyed wool, occur as wares purchased by a number of traders. This text not only sheds light on the mobility of merchants of different provenance within the imperial territory, but, more importantly, also documents private trade. In fact, all the persons mentioned in the document are described as involved in the exchange of merchandise against silver for their own profit, not for the Assyrian state. This means that the merchants did not operate exclusively for the crown’s interests and, more importantly, that the same luxury textiles which constituted the palace income were also part of parallel non-state-controlled trade whose purpose was private profit. In this document, two linen garments are recorded as purchased by an unnamed Aramaean merchant,47 while five togas were acquired from a merchant from the land of Kummuḫ.48 Unfortunately, the origin and identity of the purchaser of the amounts of black (ṣalittu) and red wool (sāntu) are not preserved in the tablet.49 Kitûs and šaddīnus were high-value items of clothing at the time and trade in these garments seems to have been controlled by the state. Taxes collected by governors in the Assyrian provinces also included textiles. The provincial tribute delivered by Adda-ḫā��ti, governor of Hamath, to Sargon comprises two šaddīnus and three kitûs.50 This is also clear from a letter by Sennacherib, the crown prince, which enumerates fine textiles among tribute received from the Levant. The textiles, some of which are categorized as tribute maddattu( ) and others as audience gifts (nāmurtu), comprised linen tunics (kitû), togas (šaddīnu) of unspecified material, probably linen, a small number of togas made of būṣu, possibly a very fine quality of linen, and Hasaean tents. The recipients of these textiles are listed in this letter: from the extant lines of the tablet we learn that these luxury textiles had to be assigned to the Palace, the queen, the crown prince, the grand vizier, the second vizier, the commander-in-chief, the sartennu, the chief eunuch, the palace superintendent, the overseer of the domestic quarters, the palace scribe, the chariot

46 According to Postgate 1979a, 207 the inhabitants of the old Assyrian cities would have expanded their commercial activities thanks to their favoured position in the central region of the Empire. 47 SAA 11, 26 r.5–6. 48 SAA 11, 26 r.8–9. 49 SAA 11, 26 r.11–13. 50 SAA 1, 176:8.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Trade and Distribution of Textiles in Ancient Assyria 103 driver and the ‘third man’.51 In Assyrian, the term kitû designated not only flax and a linen garment,52 but also linen textiles for various purposes, for instance, as covering for furnishings53 or carts.54 As to the šaddīnu, it was a luxury garment of linen.55 Those made of byssus bū( ṣu) were highly appreciated by the Assyrian elite: the number of byssus šaddīnus, a small fraction if compared to the total number of these garments sent to the Palace (four byssus šaddīnus vs. 20 šaddīnus [= 10 ordinary(?) šaddīnus and 10 large šaddinus])56 is also indicative of the high-status of the few that could wear such a garment at the Assyrian royal court. That thešaddīnu -garment was peculiar to royal wardrobe is also evident from the presence of such a garment among the precious objects plundered by Esarhaddon’s soldiers in the conquest of Memphis.57 Another possible indication that most of the Levantine linen textiles listed in Sennacherib’s letter ultimately came from Egypt,58 the home of linen industry, is given perhaps from the mention of scrolls of papyrus in this letter,59 a writing material of Egyptian origin that could have been used by those Assyrian scribes who used Aramaic script in their everyday record-keeping.60 Kitûs and šaddīnus also come together in a Nimrud document listing goods from Ashkelon; presumably, these were Egyptian products which were available in the Philistine trade. In this text, 50 šaddīnus are listed and totalled with the generic term miḫṣu, ‘woven textiles’.61 A specific and low number of the same item of clothing is mentioned aside in the text and simply qualified by the scribe asdamqu , ‘fine’. 62 Perhaps, these šaddīnus were of a very fine quality of linen and corresponding to those of byssus mentioned in Sennacherib’s letter. Byssus was not a novelty for Assyrian traders, since, according to what is referred to by Shalmaneser III as regards tribute from the land of Suḫi,63 this material was available along with coloured wool and linen textiles in the central Euphratic region, presumably as goods imported from the Levant. The existence of independent trade in the hands of merchants from different provenance and the state’s interests in controlling it also emerge from letters such as the one sent by Aššur-rēṣūwa�� to Sargon, where the author, who operated in the northern frontier of the Empire, describes the illegal trade of the inhab-

51 SAA 1, 34:8–r.21’. 52 KAR 141:21 (Ebeling 1931, 88); ND 2672:5 (Iraq 23 [1961], 42, pl. XXII = TCAE 387); ND 2687:3, 4, r.6 (Iraq 23 [1961], 43, pl. XXIII); RINAP 3/2, 154 r.5’; 223:33; SAA 5, 152 r.10; 206 r.7’; SAA 7, 109 r. iv 3’; SAA 10, 289 r.5; SAA 11, 26 r.5; 31 r.7; StAT 3, 1 r.32. See AHw, 495b; CAD K, 473a; CDA, 163a; AEAD, 51a. 53 For kitûs used as covering of beds and chairs see SAA 7, 115 r. ii 5. 54 For Aššur-ālik-pāni’s request for new carts, possibly furnished with nim.[ma] ⌈túg?⌉.gada ša ki.ta kuš.⌈tu?⌉-nim-me, “linen abo[ve] and tunimmu-leather below”, see SAA 5, 152 r.10–11. 55 CTN 2, 155 r. v 13’; ND 2307 r.2 (Iraq 16 [1954], 37, pl. VI); SAA 11, 26 r.8. 56 SAA 1, 34:11. 57 RINAP 4, 103:21. The booty list is fragmentary and, therefore, it is not possible to know if other precious textiles were included. See comments in Elat 1978, 25. 58 See also Elat 1978, 30–31. 59 SAA 1, 34 r.19’. 60 Elat 1978, 31. 61 ND 2672:23–24 (Iraq 23 [1961], 42, pl. XXII).

62 ND 2672:29 (Iraq 23 [1961], 42, pl. XXII) 4 túg.ša-din sig5.meš. 63 RIMA 3, 90.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 104 Salvatore Gaspa itants of Bususu, a city in the area of present-day Kurdistan. These are accused of purchasing Assyrian luxury items in Kalḫu and Nineveh and of selling these wares to the people of Kumme,64 a city in the vicinity of Bususu. It is possible that the category of ṣaḫittu, ‘luxury item’, used by Aššur-rēṣūwa to describe the commodities exchanged in this illegal trade, also comprised textiles, presumably available in the major Assyrian cities. Kummeans are involved in transporting these Assyrian wares to Urarṭu and to import other goods from that land.65 This piece of information sheds important light on private commercial life in Assyrian cities and at the border as well as the difficulties faced by the Assyrian state in the control of these activities. Foreign linen and wool textiles were regularly acquired by Assyrian merchants in centres of international trade, as in the above-mentioned case of Harran, an impor tant trading centre of western Syria where dealers of different provenance regularly met for their private affairs. Another important Syrian centre where Assyrian merchants acquired foreign textiles and, perhaps, exchanged Assyrian textiles against silver, was Hamath (Assyrian Ḫamātu). A document from the archive N1 of Assur lists textiles destined for the Aššur temple, perhaps to be used as vestments for cultic personnel and as textiles for other destinations in the sanctuary: these textiles are qualified as “kuzippu-garments from Hamath”.66 This probably indicates that these items were all imported in Assyria through trading activities conducted by tamkārus in that city. The merchandise available in Hamath reflected the provenance of the dealers operating in that city. In fact, among the items of Hamathean origin listed 67 68 in the Assur text we find a Tabaleansi.lu ḫ and a Babylonian niksu. Tabal is mentioned as one of the places of origin of wool garments with multicoloured trim and linen clothes, as well as dyed wool, in royal annals of Tiglath-pileser III (744–727 BCE) and Sargon II (721–705 BCE).69 The presence of exotic items was not limited to these textiles. From other texts we are informed about textiles imported from the Levant and specific items of military clothing of Anatolian origin, as may be observed in the case of a number of urnutus imported from Byblos (Assyrian Gublu) in an administrative record from Nineveh70 and in that of šupālītu ḫalluptus of Phrygian origin occurring among various items assigned(?) to Assyrian state officials.71 In a letter sent by Nabû-šumu-līšir to Sargon, the issue of clothes to a king’s relative and his wife is described. This piece of information is highly interesting, since it gives us an impression of the wardrobe used by members of the royal family during journeys. Abu-erība, the zēr šarri, receives a kusītu, a wool cover and a muṣīptu-garment threaded(?) according to the Tukriš tradition or fashion.72 Analogous clothes were probably given to his consort and their personal attendants,73 although the text is silent on this matter. It is not clear whether the Tukrišean textile was a Babylonian

64 SAA 5, 100:12–16. 65 SAA 5, 100:16–r.5. 66 StAT 3, 1 e.35. 67 StAT 3, 1 r.24. 68 StAT 3, 1 r.31. 69 See n. 11 for references. 70 SAA 7, 108 r. ii’ 4’. 71 SAA 7, 126:4. 72 SAA 17, 122:7–9. 73 SAA 17, 122:15–e.18.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Trade and Distribution of Textiles in Ancient Assyria 105 imitation of features that were peculiar to the textile manufacture of this garment in Tukriš or, alternatively, a muṣīptu imported from Tukriš. Textiles from Tukriš, a region possibly to be identified with the area of Luristan,74 were imported in Babylonia since the 2nd millennium BCE. Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions give no details on the specific textiles imported into Assyria as tribute or booty from conquered regions and standard denomina- tions of textile products concern lubulti birme, ‘garments with multicoloured trim’, as already observed. In other passages dealing with tribute or booty, we also find the generic mention of textiles mātišunu, ‘of their country’.75 It is not stated what kind of textiles were intended in this generic definition and what were their specific characteristics. In all likelihood, the decorative design of the birmu, possibly, a de- tachable piece of cloth76 to be used for the fabrication of girdles and border strips, varied according to the place of production. If so, a Tabalean birmu was probably different from that from central Syria, Phoenicia or Zagros mountains. In Assyria, the birmu was a characteristic element of textiles such as the kusītu,77 the maqaṭṭu78 and the qarrāru.79 The continuous import of these foreign clothes from the West certainly increased the demand for new exotic textiles by the Assyrian elite during the 8th and 7th centuries. An idea of the commodities imported from abroad may be gained by a letter of the royal correspondence of King Esarhaddon. A delivery of large amounts of linen thread, red and black wool, as well as alum and natron, are mentioned as imported goods from the West in a letter sent by a certain Marduk-šarru-uṣur to Esarhaddon.80 With the exception of alum and natron, the same commodities are listed in a long record of linen, dyestuffs and red wool from Nineveh; according to the concluding lines of this document, these goods were not acquired by the state as tribute (literally, ‘from the magnates’), but were bought,81 presumably through the activity of royal merchants. Also the qualification kar, ‘of the commercial port’, in opposition to kur, ‘of the country’, that we regularly encounter in Ninevite labels and lists enumerating various textiles exchanged and consumed in the government sector of the Assyrian Empire82 may possibly be referred respectively to products imported from abroad through trading activities and products deriving from taxation. In all likelihood, the amounts of alum and natron mentioned in Marduk-šarru- uṣur’s letter were imported from Egypt through the Levantine trade posts. A professional called ša-gabêšu is recorded in a Neo-Assyrian edict as one of the workers

74 See Groneberg 1980, 239. 75 RINAP 1, 12:1’; 47 r.12’. 76 See Dalley 1991, 120, 124; Postgate 2014, 408. 77 PVA 238; SAA 7, 99:1; 105:6’, 7’. 78 SAA 7, 97 r.5. 79 StAT 3, 1:9. 80 SAA 16, 82. 81 SAA 7, 115 r. ii 21–23 ta* igi lú*.gal.meš / la ni-maḫ-ḫar / ni!-la!-qí! ni!-id!-dan!. See the discussion in Radner 2004, 156. 82 For textile labels and lists from Nineveh see, respectively, SAA 7, 93–106 and SAA 7, 107– 116. One label mentioning textiles is also documented in the city of Assur. See KAN 4, 14. For these texts see the discussion in Radner 2004, 156–157.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 106 Salvatore Gaspa transferred from Assur to Kalḫu by Assurnaṣirpal II (883–859 BCE).83 It is not clear whether this professional had to do with only procurement or selling the mineral to the palace.84 In any case, he worked in connection with artisans employed in both the leather and textile industry. To fix the colorant to the vegetal and animal fibres a mordant was required. In Middle Assyrian times, alum was imported from Egypt,85 a practice that certainly continued in the 1st millennium BCE, as witnessed by the Neo-Babylonian attestations.86 Another source for alum, presumably extracted from alunite, was Anatolia.87 In its native state alum was found in the form of efflores- cence or deposits in argillaceous or carboniferous rocks in desert places such as the oases of the western Egyptian desert.88 In antiquity it was probably from a place such as present-day El-Shab that alum was transported to various trade posts in the Levant and from there to Assyria. Although the aforesaid textile labels and lists from the central state administration are written in shorthand and many parts are fragmentary, they provide useful insights into the textile products consumed in the Neo-Assyrian state sector. It is not easy to understand whether these qualifications refer to the textile itself or to the colour, usually red.89 The Assyrian reading of the logogram kar as kāru, ‘port’, has been definitely established on the basis of the occurrence given in a Nimrud text dealing with wool.90 Textiles for which both a variety called kur, ‘of the country’ (C), and one called kar, ‘of the (commercial) port’ (P), are attested are: gulēnu (C,91 P92); qirmu (C,93 P94); šītu (C,95 P96); and urnutu (C,97 P98). A number of textiles are only qualified as coming from ‘the country’, a fact showing that they were produced

83 SAA 12, 83 r.15. One wonders whether the profession called ša-parzillīšu, ‘iron man’, attested in ND 2440 r. ii 7, 9 (Iraq 23 [1961], 26, pl. XIII), also had something to do with the procurement of iron for mordanting in dyeing. Iron is mentioned along with other mordants in the Assyrian ‘chemist’s manual’, see Campbell Thompson 1934, 781–784. For the use of iron salt in dyeing see Cardon 2007, 39–46. 84 For a discussion on this profession see Radner 1999a, 122, 124. 85 MARV 8, 67:2–3. Alum also occurs along with madder as material for leather industry. See the Middle Assyrian document Ass.2001.D-2035:2–3 in Frahm 2002, 74. 86 See CAD G, 7a s.v. gabû for references. The exploitation of alum from Egypt and Anatolia continued in the following centuries and especially during the Middle Age, when the textile industries of Europe and the Islamic world expanded considerably. See Cardon 2007, 23. 87 See CAD G, 7ab for references. For the exploitation of alum from Phocaea, in Asia Minor, in the Middle Age, see Cardon 2007, 24. 88 Cardon 2007, 21–22.

89 For the possibility that this qualification refers to red wool sa( 5) see Fales & Postgate 1992, xxviii.

90 ND 2307:14–15 (Iraq 16 [1954], 37, pl. VI) síg.sa5 ka-a-ri. See Fales & Postgate 1992, xxviii. 91 SAA 7, 96:5’. 92 SAA 7, 107 r.8’. 93 SAA 7, 98:10’. 94 SAA 7, 98:9’. 95 SAA 7, 108 i’ 15’. 96 SAA 7, 108 i’ 13’. 97 SAA 7, 94:5; 98:7’; 109 r. iii 10’. 98 SAA 7, 96 r.2; 97:10’, r.2; 98:6’; 109 r. iii 9’.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Trade and Distribution of Textiles in Ancient Assyria 107 in Assyria and come from taxation: elītu (an upper garment);99 kubšu (a headdress);100 kusītu (toga?);101 and sasuppu (a band of cloth).102 Others, instead, are only attested as exclusively coming from trade (P): maqaṭṭu;103 muklālu;104 naṣbutu;105 raddīdu;106 ṣipirtu;107 and ša-iš.108 At first sight, one wonders whether the ‘red of the port’ of the Neo-Assyrian texts had something to do with the red-purple dye available in the 1st millennium through caravan trade via central Syrian and northern Arabian intermediation or directly in Phoenicia. It is, however, more plausible that imported madder or another red colorant was intended with this term. In any case, the ‘red of the port’ was either a dye which was not available in Assyria or an exotic and high-quality variant of an Assyrian dye. Accordingly, it had to be imported from abroad. Against the hypothesis that the ‘red of the port’ is purple is the fact that purple was well known in Assyria and that two terms were used to designate wool dyed with this colorant. As known, Phoenicians produced both a blue-purple and a red-purple dye from different species of murex: these were called respectively takiltu and argamannu by the Assyrians.109 Both the varieties of purple dyes are attested in 2nd millennium BCE Assyria: one text from Assur documents that argamannu could be given in substitution of tabarru-red.110 Administrative texts from the royal palace show that both blue and purple dyed wool were used in textile production. In fact, amounts of argamannu and takiltu dyed wool were issued under work-assignment to female weavers for the fabrication of naḫlaptu-garments.111 From the Neo-Assyrian royal inscriptions mentioning tribute in textiles from conquered lands, we learn that the Assyrians imported these two varieties of purple- dyed wool from various regions of Anatolia and Syria, also profiting from the intermediation of those nomadic people along the caravan routes, such as Aramaeans, Qedarites and Arabs.112 Outside the corpus of the royal inscriptions, argamannu and takiltu are scarcely attested. Argamannu is the colour of clothes donated by the Assyrian king to his servants as a sign of favour. In his letter to the crown prince, the haruspex Tabnî reminds the prince of the favour granted by the king, who dressed

Tabnî’s father in red-purple robes (síg.za.gìn.sa5) and appointed him chief haru

99 SAA 7, 105:9’. 100 SAA 7, 120 ii’ 16–17. 101 SAA 7, 105:7’. 102 SAA 7, 120 ii’ 4–6. 103 SAA 7, 93:1; 97 r.1. 104 SAA 7, 105:8’; 119 r. i’ 6’, 7’. 105 SAA 7, 96:11’, r.1; 97:11’. 106 SAA 7, 105:3’. 107 SAA 7, 96:8’; 120 ii’ 12–14. 108 SAA 7, 119 r. i’ 10’. 109 Cardon 2007, 554–555; 571–572. For the Akkadian designations for purple varieties, see CAD A/II, 253a s.v. argamannu, CAD T, 70b–73a s.v. takiltu.

110 MARV 1, 24:9 1 ma.na síg.za.gìn.sa5 ki-mu ta-bar-ri. 111 Prechel & Freydank 2014, text no. 40. To produce one naḫlaptu, one mina and three kisallu of red-purple dyed wool was needed. 112 See n. 11 for references.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 108 Salvatore Gaspa spex.113 The same motif of the royal grant, dispensed to foreign delegates welcomed at court, submissive rulers as well as workmen employed in building activities, is frequently attested with regard to linen clothes and garments with multicoloured trim: Shalmaneser III, for instance, claims to have dressed the inhabitants of Babylon and Borsippa, to whom he granted freedom, in clothes with multicoloured trim; Sargon claims to have clothed a foreign ruler in linen clothes and wool garments with multicoloured trim; finally, Sennacherib did the same for the workmen who were employed in canal works in Nineveh.114 Instead, takiltu-wool occurs in a fragmentary Babylonian letter from the correspondence of Esarhaddon dealing with illegal trade.115 Evidently, trading in purple-dyed wools was restricted to commercial activities directed by the state through royal trade agents, while commercial activities involving such precious textiles by independent merchants were not allowed, although it seems that analogous situations were common.116 Red is the most frequently attested dye in Neo-Assyrian administrative documents dealing with textiles. However, black dye is also documented. In the aforementioned letter by Marduk-šarru-uṣur we learn that not only finished textiles, but also wool could be defined askur . In his letter, amounts of red wool (šāptu sāntu) and black wool (šāptu ṣalittu) of the country-type are mentioned.117 This demonstrates that the kur-qualification also applied to black wool, not only to the red variety.118 Secondly, the fact that Marduk-šarru-uṣur’s message specifies that the black wool was of the kur-typology could be an indication that also the kar-typology existed for ṣalittu-wool. The following items of clothing are accompanied by the qualification kar: ––gulēnu.119 This linen garment, which bears a name of possible West Semitic origin,120 was probably a cloak, coat, or shirt. It had a red front-part,121 which

113 SAA 10, 182:12–13. See also ibid. r.5. Instead of red-purple, red (síg.sa5) is used in SAA 16, 63:29. 114 RIMA 3, A.0.102.5 vi 4; Fuchs 1998, Vb:57’; RINAP 3/2, 154 r.5’; 223:33. See also CAD B, 258ab s.v. birmu for references. The reference to the colour or the garment used to dress high-rank individuals is sometimes omitted in Neo-Assyrian letters and administrative records. See, e.g., SAA 1, 29 r.20–21, 134:13, SAA 11, 29 r.3–5, SAA 15, 91 r.2, and SAA 17, 122:17–e.18, where it is possible that garments with multicoloured trim or purple-dyed clothes are intended. 115 SAA 18, 103:14’–15’. 116 On illegal trade of iron by some merchants to Arabs see the letter SAA 1, 179:20–29. According to the author of this message, the traders are identified with some people from ’Atā, a region of Syria. See also SAA 18, 115:2’–8’, on Assyrian merchants purchasing iron from palace smiths. 117 SAA 16, 82 r.6–7. For black wool see also the letter 216:11. 118 But in Fales & Postgate 1992, xxviii these qualifications are only understood as referring to red. 119 CTN 2, 1:11’; 154 r.2’; ND 267 (Iraq 12 [1950], 195); ND 2097:8 (Iraq 23 [1961], 19, pl. IX); ND 2307 r.1 (Iraq 16 [1954], 37, pl. VI); ND 2691:9 (Iraq 23 [1961], 44, pl. XXIII); PVA 246; SAA 1, 193:4’, r.2, 6; SAA 7, 94:2; 96:2, 4, 5; 98:8, 12; 105:2; 107 r.8; 113:1, 4; 117 r.4; SAA 10, 289 r.5; SAA 11, 28:11; 36 ii 13; SAA 17, 69 r.21; TH 48:10; TH 52 r.13; TH 63:7. See AHw, 296b; CAD G, 127a; CDA, 96a; AEAD, 31b. 120 CAD G, 127b. 121 PVA 247; SAA 7, 96:5’; 98:8’; 107 r.8’.

could be of the country122 or of the port-type.123 This textile could also be a common item of dress, since it was used by soldiers, members of the palace staff,124 and women.125 ––maqaṭṭu (also maqaṭṭutu, muqaṭṭutu). This item of clothing, whose name is of West Semitic origin, has been interpreted as a sort of gown or short-cut gown.126 It was made of linen127 or biršu,128 a coarse material. Among the varieties consumed in Assyria, we find that its linen variety could be equipped with a red- coloured front-part of the port.129 This red front-piece was probably attached to a maqaṭṭu of different colour. In fact, a document from Kalḫu informs us that this item of clothing could be white.130 This garment was used by women,131 and, possibly, by palace officials and personnel.132 A finely-executed type of maqaṭṭu was distributed to foreign leaders, perhaps on occasion of diplomatic visits to Nineveh.133 It occurs in a document from the goldsmiths’ archive in Assur as one of the commodities owned by some individuals and it was presumably traded in private transactions.134 ––muklālu (also maklulu, muqlālu). This was a wool shawl or a cape135 whose front- part was coloured of commercial red.136 Another type was made of biršu and was characterized by a red front-piece and stones sewn onto it.137

122 SAA 7, 96:5’. 123 SAA 7, 107 r.8’. 124 SAA 1, 193:4’, r.2, 6; SAA 11, 36 ii 13; TH 48:10; TH 63:7. 125 ND 2307 r.1 (Iraq 16 [1954], 37, pl. VI). 126 ND 2311:5 (Iraq 23 [1961], 20, pl. X); ND 2687:3 (Iraq 23 [1961], 43, pl. XXIII); ND 3407:5 (Iraq 15 [1953], 138, pl. XI); PVA 249; SAA 7, 93:1; 94:4; 95:1, 2, 6; 97 r.1, 3, 5, r.2; 98:4’; 104:1’, 2’, 3’, 4’; 107 r.9’; 108 r. ii’ 3’; 109 iii 2’, r. ii 2, 4, 6; 111:1; 112:10’; 115 ii 9; StAT 2, 164:12; 255:6’; StAT 3, 1:15; VAT 8659:2 (Parpola 2008, 57); ZTT I, 8:2. See AHw, 607b; CAD M/I, 251a; CDA, 196b; AEAD, 60a. 127 SAA 97 r.1, 5; 108 r. ii’ 3’; 109 iii 2; 112:10’. 128 SAA 95:1, 2; 97 r.3; 98:4’. 129 SAA 7, 97 r.1. See also SAA 7, 93:1–2; 94:4, although it is not specified whether it was of linen. 130 ND 2311:5 (Iraq 23 [1961], 20, pl. X). 131 StAT 2, 164:12–13. 132 See SAA 7, 115 ii 9–10 and SAA 7, 112:10’–e.12’. 133 SA A 7, 111:1–2. 134 StAT 2, 255:6’–7’ [x x x x x x tú]g.mu-qa-ṭu-tú / [x x x x—aš-š]ur a Idšú—e, “[...] muqaṭṭutus [of ...]-Aššur, son of Marduk-iqbi”. This garment occurs after a list of bronze and silver objects owned by a priest. 135 CTN 2, 152:2, 6, r.11; 224:2; ND 2311:2 (Iraq 23 [1961], 20, pl. X); PVA 250; SAA 10, 289 r.5; ZTT II, 33:2. Perhaps, another attestation is in ZTT II, 36:2 túg.ma-[ak-lul.meš?] (not transliterated by MacGinnis and Willis Monroe). See AHw, 590a; CAD M/I, 137b; CDA, 192a. For different interpretations see AEAD, 59a “cape” and Postgate 2014, 420: “hood”. 136 SAA 7, 105:8’. 137 SAA 7, 96:7’.

––naṣbutu. This textile ofbiršu -fabric, probably a coat or a sash holder,138 was characterized by an edging139 and a front-piece140, both coloured with red of the port. It occurs as a component of wardrobes of upper class women in Assur.141 ––qirmu (or qermu, qeremu). This was possibly a wool overcoat or mantle142 with a red-coloured front-part.143 The red dye could be of the port-type144 or of the country-type.145 ––raddīdu. This item of clothing, perhaps a veil,146 was characterized by a front- piece of red ‘of the port’.147 ––ṣipirtu. This textile has been interpreted as a scarf, a girdle, or a waist-belt.148 Both a red-coloured variety ‘of the port’149 and a white variety were used in the Neo-Assyrian period.150 The commercial red-coloured ṣipirtu was also used as covering for chairs.151 ––ša-iš. Of this item of clothing152 red-coloured153 and multi-coloured varieties are attested in the Neo-Assyrian period.154 It had a front-part that could be commercial red155 or black.156

138 K 6323+ iii 26 (Kwasman 2009, 115); ND 3407:2 (Iraq 15 [1953], 138, pl. XI); SAA 7, 96:11’, r.1; 97:6’, 11’; 102:1’; 119 r. ii’ 2’; SAA 18, 19:4’, 9’; StAT 2, 164:13. See AHw, 756b: “ein Mantel”; CAD N/II, 47b: “a garment”; CDA, 244b: “a coat”. See also AEAD, 75a: “sash holder”. 139 SAA 7, 96:11’, r.1; 97:11’. See also SAA 7, 102:1’. 140 SAA 7, 96 r.1. 141 StAT 2, 164:13. 142 AEAD, 88b. Instead, a generic translation is given in the other dictionaries. See AHw, 918a; CAD Q, 268b; CDA, 288b. 143 SAA 7, 97:7’; 98:9’, 10’. 144 SAA 7, 98:9’. 145 SAA 7, 98:10’. 146 SAA 7, 96:6’; 98:11’; 105:3’. See AHw, 941a; CAD R, 60a; CDA, 295a; AEAD, 91a. 147 SAA 7, 105:3’. 148 K 6323+ r. i’ 8’ (Kwasman 2009, 116); PVA 244; SAA 7, 96:8’; 120 i’ 14, ii’ 12; 124:10’; 127:10’; SAA 11, 28:12; 42 r. i 4’; 67:1; 202 ii 17’; SAA 19, 14:12, r.1, 4; VAT 8659 (Parpola 2008, 57); ZTT I, 8:1. See AHw, 1103b: “Band oder Schärpe aus Textilgeflecht?”; CAD Ṣ, 201b: “a sash woven or treated in a special technique”; CDA, 339a: “an item of clothing”; AEAD, 105a: “(woven) girdle, sash, waist-belt, cummerbund”. See also Postgate 2014, 423: “rug, blanket”. 149 SAA 7, 96:8’. 150 ND 2086 (Iraq 23 [1961], 18) 50 túg.ṣip-rat babbar.meš. 151 SAA 7, 120 ii’ 12–14. 152 CTN 2, 153, 2, 3; SAA 7, 105:6’, 7’; 119 r. i’ 10’, 11’; 127:9’; ZTT II, 33:4. See Fales & Postgate 1992, xxix for the interpretation that this textile was a “dust garment”. 153 SAA 7, 105:7’. 154 SAA 7, 105:6’. 155 SAA 7, 119 r. i’ 10’. 156 SAA 7, 119 r. i’ 11’.

––šītu. This wool textile could be red157 or multicoloured.158 Its front-part could be red ‘of the country’,159 red ‘of the port’,160 ‘limestone’-red161 or multicoloured.162 ––urnutu. This garment163 could be made of wool,164 linen,165 and biršu.166 Different varieties of urnutus are attested in the Neo-Assyrian period: red,167 violet,168 black,169 multicoloured,170 and with a red front-piece.171 The red front-piece could be of the country-type172 or ‘of the port’.173 The edging of this garment could be red-coloured174 according to the country-type175 or the port-type.176

We have seen that Assyria imported purple-dyed wools from the international trade for the needs of the palace-oriented textile industry. However, purple was not the only colorant appreciated by the Assyrian elite. Administrators in Nineveh kept record of the consumption of ḫūrutu, ‘madder’, a red-dye substance that, according to an account listing this substance and red-dyed wool, was imported from western cities located in North-West Syria, South-East Anatolia, Phoenicia, central Syria and Palestine, precisely Sāmirīna (Biblical Samaria), Kullania (Biblical Calneh), Damascus, Arpad, Karkemish, Que (Cilician plain), Megiddo, Ṣimirra (Classical Simyra), Manṣuāti, Ḫatarikka, Ṣūpat (Biblical Zobah), Sam’al, Tušḫan and Amidi.177 Accounts like SAA 7, 116 show that dyes were an integral part of the taxes imposed on these western cities and that scribes periodically recorded the income of colorant deriving from taxation. In this case, we see that, for instance, Karkemish delivered one hundred talents of red wool and two talents of madder.178 According to another account from Nineveh which lists products purchased by the state (and not coming from taxation), scribes registered disbursements of large quantities of madder for

157 SAA 7, 105:5’. 158 SAA 7, 108 i’ 8’. 159 SAA 7, 108 i’ 15’. 160 SAA 7, 108 i’ 13’. 161 SAA 7, 108 i’ 14’. 162 SAA 7, 108 i’ 9’, 10’, 11’, 12’, 13’. 163 NATAPA 2, 100:3; ND 2307:15, 16, 18, r.4 (Iraq 16 [1954], 37, pl. VI); ND 2311:6 (Iraq 23 [1961], 20, pl. X); SAA 7, 94:5; 95:3, 4, 5; 96 r.2, 3; 97:3’, 10’, 12’, r. 2, 6, 9, 10; 98:5’; 99:3, 4, 5; 101:2’; 102:2’; 103 r.1’; 104 r.2’; 107 r.2’; 108 ii’ 6’, r. ii’ 4’; 109 ii 2’, r. iii 4’, 9’; 112 e.11’; 115 ii 10; SAA 11, 28:13; StAT 2, 164:10, 11. 164 ND 2307:15 (Iraq 16 [1954], 37, pl. VI); ND 2311:6 (Iraq 23 [1961], 20, pl. X); StAT 2, 164:11. 165 ND 2307:16, 18 (Iraq 16 [1954], 37, pl. VI); SAA 7, 96 r.3; 97 r.2, 6; StAT 2, 164:10. 166 SAA 7, 95:3, 4, 5; 96 r.2; 97:10’, 12; 98:5’, 6’, 7’; 99:4; 109 r. iii 9’. 167 SAA 7, 109 ii 6’, 7’. 168 ND 2311:6 (Iraq 23 [1961], 20, pl. X). 169 SAA 7, 109 r. iii 11’. 170 SAA 7, 97 r.6. 171 SAA 7, 95:3, 4, 5; 97:10’; 98:5’, 6’, 7’; 109 r. iii 9’. 172 SAA 7, 94:5. 173 SAA 7, 97 r.2. 174 SAA 7, 96 r.2; 97:12’. 175 SAA 7, 98:7’; 109 r. iii 10’. 176 SAA 7, 96 r.2; 97:10’; 98:6’; 109 r. iii 9’. 177 SAA 7, 116. 178 SAA 7, 116:4’.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 112 Salvatore Gaspa various purposes; to judge from the list of recipients in the ‘madder-section’, it is clear that it served to dye a large number of textiles for various purposes (uniforms for soldiers and gate-overseers, clothes for exorcists, drapes or carpets for the palace entrance, etc.).179 This shows that madder was procured both from taxation and commercial activities. It is worth noting that a large amount of madder, a quantity very close to those listed in the list SAA 7, 115, occurs in a Nineveh list among various commodities possibly belonging to the private household of an individual named Ṭāb-šār-papāḫi.180 Presumably, the quantity of colorant, assigned to him from the state, served to dye the clothing used in his household. Apart from madder, the account SAA 7, 115 also lists consumption of ḫuḫḫurāti-dye. Its consumption is connected to dyeing of red wool,181 so it was an alternative colorant to ḫūrutu. This dye also occurs among various goods, including šaddīnus and kundirašši-garments, connected with Bēt nayālāni, a country possibly located in the West.182 As already observed, the city of Assur had a long tradition in trading activities. The private documents stemming from its archives inform us of transactions in which a number of merchants jointly borrow the capital for trading ventures (bēl ḫarrāni). Presumably, these ventures concerned long-distance trade of goods through river and overland transportation. In all likelihood, there were also luxury textiles among the wares purchased by caravan entrepreneurs of Assur in their tra ding journeys along the Tigris or overland routes. An unnamed man is mentioned in connection with kuzippu-clothes in a private letter of a certain Aššur-balāṭu-iqbi of Assur, perhaps dealing with traded commodities.183 A number of textiles (túg. kár.meš), also possibly coming from trade, are listed along with iron items in a text from the archive N25.184 Kuzippu is used as a generic term for clothes in Assyrian. It is also used to refer to king’s robes as well as to clothes by which the Assyrian king or his officials dress foreign delegates or court members.185 In the above-mentioned document which records commodities belonging to Tāb-šār-papāḫi’s estate, kuzippī for the bodyguards are also listed.186 Some of the textiles traded by merchants of Assur in their journeys were certainly part of the dowries of their daughters. For instance, varieties of urnutu- and maqaṭṭutu-garments, textiles qualified as ‘of the port’ in administrative texts from Nineveh and probably imported from the West, occur in a marriage contract from the archive N31 of Assur as components of Mullissu-ḫammat’s dowry (675 BCE).187

179 SAA 7, 115 ii 6 – r. i 9. 180 Ki 1904-10-9, 154+ e.53 (Iraq 32 [1970], 153, pl. XXVII) ⌈x⌉ g[ú.u]n giš.ḫab. See, e.g., SAA 7, 115 ii 11 (three talents: Epâ, for the gate-overseers), 21 (two talents: the tailor’s house), 22 (two talents: Šār-Issār), r. i 7 (two talents: the weavers of sashes). Note that the names of the individuals Tāb-šār-papāḫi and Bābilītu, attested in Ki 1904-10-9, 154+1–2, are omitted in respectively Radner 1999c, 246a and Baker 2011, 1347b–1348a. 181 SAA 7, 115 r. i 12, 15, 19. 182 SAA 7, 121 r. i’ 5. 183 StAT 2, 315 e.10. 184 StAT 2, 128:7’. 185 SAA 15, 90:25; 91 r.2. 186 Ki 1904-10-9, 154+ r.36 (Iraq 32 [1970], 153, pl. XXVII). 187 StAT 2, 164:10–13 túg.ur-na-te gada 4 túg.kun-dar-a-šá-ni / 1 túg.ur -nu-tú síg 2 túg.

ur -nu-tu bé-te / 1 túg.mu-qa-ṭu -tú bé-te 1 túg.mu-qa-ṭuú-t sikil / 1 túg sig5 ki.min. © 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Trade and Distribution of Textiles in Ancient Assyria 113

It is also important to note the presence of linen garments in her dowry (four items of clothing out of 17), probably also including fine-quality linen items coming from caravan trade. Linen maqaṭṭutus must have been appreciated by women of the upper class, as may be inferred also by the mention of linen maqaṭṭus assigned to the daughter of the crown prince in a document from Kalḫu.188 That linen consumed by the Assyrian ruling elite was also imported from abroad is evident from the above-mentioned account from Nineveh that lists linen purchased by the state, presumably through the activity of the king’s trade agents, and consumed in various establishments.189 As known, flax was cultivated since the beginnings of agriculture in Mesopotamia (ca. 9.000 BCE) and linen textiles have been locally produced there since then, although textile production in Mesopotamia has been predominantly oriented towards wool through its entire history.190 The Neo-Assyrian account SAA 7, 115 documents that Assyria imported flax during the imperial period. The listed amounts were assigned to a number of households located in the Review Palace of Nineveh, the Review Palace of the New Corps, the Palace of the Queen, the New Palace of Kalḫu, the Review Palace of Kalḫu and the Domestic Quarters, as well as the cities of Adian, Naṣībina and Assur, also seats of royal establishments. It is possible that palace women belonging to the royal ‘harems’ of these establishments were engaged in linen textile manufacture, although the texts do not tell us whether only for basic operations, like spinning, or in other and more complex phases of the linen chaîne opératoire, such as weaving.191 Linen textiles are a commodity peculiar to the upper social stratum of the Assyrian imperial society, as witnessed by their consumption in both palace and temple contexts. The origin of imported linen is not clear in the texts issued from the state central administration, but from royal inscriptions we learn that linen was a typical western commodity,192 perhaps imported in the western countries from Egypt. Circulation of exotic linen textiles was probably increased in the Assyrian cities where groups of foreign individuals or descendants of deported people lived, as in the case of Assur, where a number of Egyptians are attested. Many of the people involved in the aforesaid marriage contract from Assur, such as the father of the bridegroom and, perhaps, also the father of the woman Mullissu-ḫammat, bear Egyptian names193 and may have been involved in trading linen textiles with their home country. Analogous fine-quality textiles are attested in two marriage contracts from Kalḫu, the former possibly belongs to the 8th century, the latter, on the other hand, is from the end of the 7th century. In the former document, thirty-two textiles are mentioned.194 Of these, only three are explicitly qualified as wool textiles, namelyša - ḫīlis of red wool and various pieces of red purple wool.195 This dowry also comprises

188 ND 2687:3 (Iraq 23 [1961], 43, pl. XXIII) 1 túg.ma-qa-ṭu gada dumu.mí dumu—man. 189 SAA 7, 115 i 1, r. ii 3, 13, 15. 190 Breniquet & Michel 2014, 2. 191 For the hypothesis that these ‘harem’ women were only involved in spinning see Parpola 2012, 618. 192 See n. 11 for references. 193 See Baker 2002, 977a s.v. Pabbā’u and Baker 2011, 1311a s.v. Tap-naḫte. 194 CTN 2, 1:12’. 195 CTN 2, 1:6’–8’.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 114 Salvatore Gaspa gulēnu-garments,196 another commodity qualified as coming from ‘the port’ by the accountants of the state administration in Nineveh. The second marriage contract from Kalḫu describes the components of Ṣubētu’s dowry. In total, there are 45 textile products that entered her wardrobe. These include both linen and wool items, in all likelihood of a very fine quality. The linen items comprise five urnutus and one šaddīnu.197 Interestingly, the document specifies that two kuzippu-garments and two urnutu-garments were made of red wool of the port,198 perhaps a red dye available in western textile trade. The gulēnus are also mentioned as components of Ṣubētu’s wardrobe, followed by gammīdu-garments as in the other contract from Kalḫu.199 In this case, the Phoenician name of the woman and the West Semitic name of her husband, Milki-rāmu, could indicate connections with western trade. Perhaps, the huge number of textiles in the dowry may be explained in light of the profession of the husband. If Milki-rāmu is the same person attested as chief tailor who was eponym in the year 656 BCE,200 access to luxury textiles of foreign origin in international trade must have been easily available to him thanks to his professional background. On other fibres imported in Assyria we are not informed. As known, cotton had been used for woven textiles in the Indus valley since the Early Bronze Age.201 Although Sennacherib provides us with the important piece of evidence that cotton was cultivated and used in the Assyrian textile manufacture,202 the fact that there is no specific word for this fibre in Assyrian is indicative that cotton did not become common in the Empire’s territory.203 This does not exclude the possibility, however, that cotton textiles could have been imported during the Neo-Assyrian period from abroad, perhaps through Babylonia. In Assyria, cotton textiles probably represented a small-scale production for an extremely limited number of individuals of the palace elite, as may be inferred from presence of cotton among the textile fragments found in the Nimrud queens’ tombs.204

Textiles from Trade and their Distribution in the Neo-Assyrian Empire Textiles that came into the Assyrian Empire by way of tribute and trade activities conducted by the king’s tamkārus were redistributed by the state administration to various recipients. In addition to the king and members of the royal family and court, these recipients included members of the palace’s dependent personnel, administrative and military staff. The textiles were disbursed in the form of raw materials or as end products (clothing). Dyed wool, dyestuff and finished textiles bought by the Assyrian merchants in various commercial outposts abroad were consigned

196 CTN 2, 1:11’. 197 ND 2307:16, 18, r.4 (Iraq 16 [1954], 37, pl. VI). Note that the sign for gada, “linen”, at the end of line r.4 is not included in Parker’s transliteration. 198 ND 2307:14–15 (Iraq 16 [1954], 37, pl. VI). 199 ND 2307 r.1 (Iraq 16 [1954], 37, pl. VI). 200 For Lipiński’s suggestion that he is identical with the eponym see Baker 2001, 753a s.v. Milki-rāmu no. 3. 201 Dalley 1991, 120. Cotton seems to have reached the northern side of the Mediterranean area only in Classical times, coming perhaps from Egypt. See Barber 1991, 33. 202 RINAP 3/1, 17 vii 56, viii 64. 203 Dalley 1991, 121. 204 See Toray Industries 1996, 199–200 and pl. 2b (Specimen no. 4).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Trade and Distribution of Textiles in Ancient Assyria 115 to state officials and stored in the storerooms of the main households. Here, the administrators recorded the incoming items in order to define assignments to the main textile workshops of the Empire. Weavers received wool and, according to the iškāru-system, had to present a number of finished textiles to the state within a given deadline. These workshops produced a large variety of clothes and other textile products, some of high quality and others of middle or lower quality, depending on the final destination of the items in question. The finer materials were used for the clothes of the king and the palace elite or were woven into luxury carpets and curtains for palaces and temples, while the lower quality wool was made into soldiers’ uniforms, work clothes or ordinary tents for the army. Wool also entered the distribution chain of the Assyrian state as a quota for professionals linked to the palace,205 as can be seen from SAA 11, 36, an account from Nineveh dealing with tribute to be distributed to palace personnel. In this text, 20 minas of tabrību are mentioned as the assignment of the chief fuller.206 In a Nimrud document listing linen clothes distributed to various persons of the palace, including the crown prince’s daughter, we find the following garments:gammīdu s, maqaṭṭus, kitûs, šupālītu ḫalluptus and karballutus.207 These items of clothing are then collectively totalled as ṣubātu. The archaeological discovery of linen traces in the remains of garments that covered the bodies of the Assyrian queens in the Nimrud tombs confirms the use of linen for palace women.208 Some of the items of clothing in the Nimrud document also occur as the lot of clothes provided by the state to court members, as may be observed from a letter of salary complaints written by the exorcist Urad-Gula in which the court scholar mentions gulēnus, kitûs and maklulus as king’s gifts that another court scholar had secured for himself.209 This seems to indicate that the most expensive textiles were the prerogative of members of the royal family, the court and high- ranking officials. The much-quoted Sennacherib’s letter on tribute and audience gifts provides further evidence of the high-ranking recipients of imported textiles and their respective quotas. The letter mentions the grand vizier (15kitû s and 11 šaddīnus); the commander-in-chief (15 šaddīnus and 10 kitûs); the sartennu (six šaddīnus and three kitûs); the second vizier (six? šaddīnus and three? kitûs); the chief eunuch (three šaddīnus and three kitûs); the palace superintendent (three šaddīnus and two kitûs); the overseer of the domestic quarters (one šaddīnu), the palace scribe (one šaddīnu), the chariot driver and the ‘third man’ (both receiving one šaddīnu each).210 Textiles composing the palace supervisor’s quota are also recorded in a Ninevite account concerning the distribution of tribute among palace members. According to this docu ment, his quota comprises six cloaks, four sashes and two pairs of saddle-bags.211

205 On the distribution of wool not transformed in textiles as rations to palace employees in the 2nd millennium see Michel 2014, 250. 206 SAA 11, 36 ii 19. 207 ND 2687:1, 3, 4, r.6, 7, 9, e.11 (Iraq 23 [1961], 43, pl. XXIII). 208 Toray Industries 1996, 199–200 and pls. 1–3 (Specimens nos. 1–3, 5, 7–8). 209 SAA 10, 289 r.5’. The shortage of garments affecting Urad-Gula also occurs in another letter of this court scholar, where he states that his salary conditions prevent him to pay a tailor and to have a spare suit of clothes (kuzippī). See SAA 10, 294 r.27–28. 210 SAA 1, 34:8–r.21’. 211 SAA 11, 36 ii 13–15.

Clothing and equipment for military staff constitutes one of the main concerns of the Assyrian state. This can be inferred from the large amounts of madder purchased by the state for dyeing the uniforms of specific units of the Assyrian army (e.g., the ‘Gurreans’, the chariot-fighters, the archers).212 Textiles were also distribu ted by the Assyrian palace administration in the form of gifts to various foreign individuals linked to the Assyrian court. Sheikhs are attested as recipients of textiles in the Assyrian state sector. A record of wool and flax amounts mentions two minas of red wool for the production of an unspecified number ofmaqa ṭṭutu-garments for the nasīkus, ‘the sheikhs’. The title nasīku was used by the Assyrians to refer to the rulers of nomadic or semi-nomadic populations, such as the Aramaeans.213 Textiles were also disbursed to foreign delegates visiting the Assyrian king. Those issued for Urarṭian delegates comprised reinforced lower garments, leggings, black upper garments, ša-iš garments and ṣipirtu-sashes.214 Another administrative text from Nineveh lists envoys from Iran and mentions a linen garment in that context,215 probably a royal gift for one of them. Inscribed sealings – pieces of clay bearing the impression of a stamp seal – are also proof that textiles circulated within the state sector and were destined for pala ce staff, although we cannot say with any certainty if they were tribute or goods brought in as part of trade activities conducted by royal agents. These sealings were attached to the bundles of textiles that were transported. Two sealings concern kuzippu-clothes: the first, from Kalḫu, is dated to the 9th century and records ilku- payments from the magnates of Shalmaneser III, son of King Assurnaṣirpal II.216 The second, from Nineveh, belongs to the late phase of the Neo-Assyrian period and mentions kuzippus along with ṣipirtu-sashes, probably received by the palace manager Mannu-kī-Adad for internal distribution within the palace.217 As already observed, it is reasonable to assume that the enlargement of the Assyrian state and the access this enlargement brought to international trade greatly favoured those Assyrian private merchants benefitting from living in major cities of the Empire and from tax exemptions. Merchants operating in the major cities of central Assyria certainly grew rich from the continuous flow of commodities that reached Assyrian cities from state-driven international trade. However, it seems that some goods acquired by the state and assigned to artisans in charge of supplying the palace with certain end products were illegally sold to local merchants for money.218 As with many other goods belonging to the Palace, it is possible that textiles could also be stolen and sold for money by palace personnel.219 It is reasonable to think that through thefts by palace personnel, some Assyrian luxury items, including textiles and metal objects, entered the trade of independent merchants who operated

212 SAA 7, 115 ii 17–20. 213 Elat 1978, 29. 214 SAA 7, 127:3’–4’, 8’–10’. 215 SAA 11, 31 r.7. 216 ND 3413 (Iraq 15 [1953], 139, pl. XI). 217 SAA 11, 67. 218 This is the case of iron assigned by the state to palace smiths and sold by them to merchants of Kalḫu for money. See SAA 18, 115:2’–8’. 219 See, e.g., Ašipâ’s letter SAA 19, 114 about some palace wares stolen and sold by a baker and the ‘harem’ manageress.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Trade and Distribution of Textiles in Ancient Assyria 117 in the Assyrian cities as intermediaries for foreign dealers. This seems to be the case for the Assyrian luxury wares illegally traded by foreign people operating in Kalḫu and Nineveh and transported outside Assyria, described in Aššur-rēṣūwa’s letter mentioned above. The illegal trade in luxury wares in the Assyrian cities and at the borders of the Empire also illustrates how the political unification of the Near East under Assyrian dominion and the enormous flow of goods from institutional trade to the major urban centres of Assyria determined the expansion of profit opportunities for ordinary people in subjected and adjacent areas. Other goods were purchased by private individuals of the Assyrian elite through independent trade. Ṭāb-šār-papāḫi, who belonged to the circle of the trader Aššur-mātu-taqqin, is mentioned in various documents of the reign of Assurbanipal. He was a businessman involved in a wide variety of commercial activities. In one of these documents, he is asked by Aššur-mātu-taqqin and Nabû-taqqinanni to send turbans,220 presumably to be purchased through trade. Not only independent merchants of the city of Assur, but also private persons of the higher social ranks of the Empire must have benefitted from state access to international trade. High-ranking officials in the state sector probably profited from their position, wealth and palace connections to purchase goods from international trade, presumably relying on tamkārus who were regularly involved in transporting goods to the major Assyrian cities. We can certainly speculate with some degree of authority that various protagonists would have profited from an increasing demand for foreign textiles by the upper echelons of society. This would have included the royal trade agent, for whom this would have represented a lucrative side-activity to his official job at the service of the palace, to various professional transporters, who would have seen this as a remunerative way to implement their wages. These unofficial transactions, however, are of course difficult to detect from the extant documentation. Reconstructing a complete picture of the circulation of textiles within the Assyrian Empire would also require a wider set of data about the value of the items exchanged by merchants. Unfortunately, we are informed about the price in silver –the most attested pre-coinage currency in Assyria in the late centuries of the Empire– for only a limited number of commodities. From the presence of certain textiles among the commodities recorded by the scribes in administrative documents, we may obtain useful insights into the circulation of foreign goods among the upper echelons of the Assyrian imperial society, although the restricted number of attestations in written sources prevents us from getting a broader understanding of the full range of textile products circulating in Assyria and their value throughout the whole Neo-Assyrian period. In addition, what little data we possess confines our observations to the upper class living in the main cities, and no details are offered about the circulation of textiles outside this context. According to the above-mentioned Ninevite memorandum on private transactions in Harran, the total cost for two linen garments (kitû) purchased by an Aramaean merchant was one mina 23 shekels,221 a price per unit of 0.61 minas. Instead, it seems that šaddīnus were cheaper; half a mina is the total price paid by

220 See Baker 2011, 1348a s.v. Ṭāb-šār-papāḫi 5. 221 SAA 11, 26 r.5.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 118 Salvatore Gaspa a merchant from Kummuḫ for five linen šaddīnus,222 corresponding to six shekels per unit. Other prices in silver for textiles are documented in texts from Kalḫu. A letter sent by Bēl-abū’a to the Palace scribe in Assur informs us that the cost of one ṣipirtu-sash of ordinary quality corresponded to half a mina, namely 30 shekels.223 Two documents from Assur offer further evidence on textile prices. In the first, 13 urnutu-garments are purchased for one mina, which works out less than five shekels per urnutu.224 The second document from this city appears to attest a price of eight shekels for one textile(?) product.225 In a list of expenditures from Kalḫu, probably related to the preparation of a wedding ceremony226 to be celebrated in the North- West Palace, the price for one kuzippu-garment corresponds to four and a half she kels,227 while that of a ša-ḫallupte-cloth only two and a half shekels.228 Interestingly, in one of the Nimrud lists possibly dealing with expenditures for a marriage we find some of the items of clothing that composed the dowries of the above-mentioned women from Assur and Kalḫu (maklulu, maqaṭṭutu, urnutu and ḫuzūnu).229 In addition to the prices of garments, there are also a few attestations of values in silver for wool. We have seen above that dyed wool was purchased by Assyrian merchants in private transactions. According to the price given in SAA 11, 26, one mina ten shekels of dyed wool was purchased for one mina of silver.230 In an 8th century letter, Aššur-mātka-tēra, a royal agent, informs the king about the favourable exchange rate in the land, according to which forty(?) minas of wool went for one mina of copper(?).231 This price probably refers to Nineveh.232 In Assyria, copper was progressively substituted by silver as currency in the course of the 7th century, but we are not able to say how the price of wool in terms of the two metals varied across the entire Neo-Assyrian period. The price for undyed wool is difficult to determine. In an administrative note from Nebi Yunus the price for an unspecified amount of shorn wool (gizzu) is twenty talents thirteen minas eighteen and one-third shekels of silver,233 but this price presumably reflects a judicial decision (the sum is qualified as sartu, ‘penalty, fine’), rather than the current ‘market price’. These data about prices for textiles in the Late Assyrian period are scanty if compared with the rich information we get about costs and selling prices of the textiles traded by the Assyrian merchants in the 19th and 18th centuries BCE. However, they too shed light on the circulation of textiles in private contexts.

222 SAA 11, 26 r.8. 223 SAA 19, 14 r.4–6. 224 NATAPA 2, 100:3–5. 225 NATAPA 2, 102:4. 226 See Postgate 1979b, 100. 227 ND 2312:1 (Iraq 23 [1961], 21, pl. X). 228 ND 2312:2 (Iraq 23 [1961], 21, pl. X). 229 ND 2311:2, 5–7 (Iraq 23 [1961], 21, pl. X). 230 SAA 11, 26 r.11–13. 231 SA A 19, 19:14–15. 232 The possibility that Nineveh is intended in the part concerning wool is suggested by the fact that Nineveh is listed first in the passage referring to the value of barley in SAA 19, 19:9–13. 233 SAA 11, 100:1–4. See Fales & Postgate 1995, xxiv for comments.

Concluding Remarks The picture about the textile trade that we can reconstruct from the extant sources from the main Neo-Assyrian archives is predominantly if not exclusively centered on the circulation and consumption of textiles in a palace context. With their ideological focus on the motif of forceful acquisition of resources from conquered lands, royal inscriptions are silent regarding trade in textiles and, consequently, only document the inclusion of luxury textiles as tribute and booty levied on cities conquered by the Assyrian kings. A richer impression of the various aspects of trade and distribution of textiles emerges from letters and administrative records, although the picture that we get from these sources is far from complete. It is highly probable that the few labels and administrative lists concerning textiles only represent a small fraction of the documentation –a significant part of which was probably written in Aramaic on perishable writing materials– on the acquisition and management of these goods via taxation and trade by the state administration in Nineveh. The same can be said for documentation concerning the distribution of textiles within the Assyrian state sector. The evidence is too scanty and fragmentary to determine how or which textiles entered in the quotas of commodities assigned to palace personnel: from the few attestations in letters and administrative records it seems that high value linen textiles such as šaddīnus and kitûs were treated as standard items in this type of professional quotas, although it is reasonable to surmise that other textiles which are mentioned as coming from taxation or trade in the contemporary letters and administrative records also entered the palatine re-distributive system. Textiles in the private trade represent another important aspect in the study of the textile economy in imperial Assyria. Unfortunately, the documents from private archives attesting to commercial activities are represented only by evidence un- earthed in the city of Assur. Among the transactions undertaken by high-ranking officials, the purchase of textiles and other utilitarian commodities is not documented. The only attestation of textiles in legal documents is given by a th7 century contract from Nineveh that dates to the reign of Sennacherib and mentions textiles that were at the disposal of a chief weaver, possibly for the fabrication of a napkin for the king, a work for which he had to pay a sum of copper.234 It is hard to believe that the Empire’s ‘big spenders’, who profited extensively in private affairs from their -of ficial position , were only interested in buying land and slaves and not luxury textiles for themselves and their family. In their spending, these state officials also purchased a variety of everyday goods. These must have included small-scale commodities, including textiles, as may be inferred from the above-mentioned circle of the trader Aššur-mātu-taqqin and its interest in turbans. In this regard, the textiles included in marriage contracts represent another remarkable source of information on the garments that were circulating among the Assyrian urban elites. Certainly, luxury clothing entered the wardrobes of these high-ranking officials through a number of channels: some formed an integral part of the quotas assigned to them from the palace, while others were probably acquired though private trade. These observations on textile trade in st1 millennium Assyria mainly concern imported textiles. However, it is possible that a quota of textiles produced in Assyrian cities was destined for export. This is well-documented in the private trade

234 SAA 6, 190:1–7, s.1–2.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 120 Salvatore Gaspa of 2nd millennium Assur, but not for the Neo-Assyrian period. However, it is plausible that the establishments involved in textile production in the major Assyrian cities not only worked to supply the internal demand of textiles, but also for export, in a way similar to the one attested in the Middle Assyrian period. The employ- ment of a work-force from deported people of different provenance and professional backgrounds is a structural characteristic of the economic and military system of the Assyrian Empire and it must also have affected the textile manufacture of the Assyrian heartland. The study of the textiles included in the dowries as well as the investigation of the value in silver of traded textiles may provide useful insights into the merchandise that was regularly purchased and consumed within the higher strata of Assyrian imperial society. These two elements illustrate the circulation of certain goods outside the institutional channels of the palace-conducted trade and involving merchants from Assyria and of other provenance. These merchants were probably small-scale protagonists if compared to the royal trade agents operating with the financial and political support of the crown in the international trade scenario, but they too are the result of the stable acquisition and control by the Assyrian state of important foci of the international textile trade in the Near East and of the mobility granted by the state within the Empire’s territory. From the evidence discussed above it does not seem likely that the Assyrian crown’s main policy was to monopolize the trade of textiles. Independent trade of high value textiles was certainly sanctioned by the Assyrian state when it eluded state taxation and control, but this does mean that transactions in textiles were confined to the illegal trade.235 This illegal trade probably concerned certain high value textiles regularly purchased by the palace. However, analogous high value textiles occurring side by side with textiles of appa rently medium quality and everyday destination in marriage contracts from private archives lead us to surmise that these must have been acquired through private commercial activities within the context of everyday trade accepted by the state.

Abbreviations AEAD: S. Parpola and R. M. Whiting, Assyrian-English-Assyrian Dictionary, Helsinki 2007. AHw: W. von Soden, Akkadisches Handwörterbuch, I–III, Wiesbaden 1958–81. CAD: The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, Chicago 1956–2010. CDA: J. Black et al., A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian, Wiesbaden ²2000 (SANTAG. Arbeiten und Untersuchungen zur Keilschriftkunde 5). CTN 2: J. N. Postgate, The Governor’s Palace Archive, London 1973 (Cuneiform Texts from Nimrud 2). KAN 4: B. I. Faist, Neuassyrische Rechtsurkunden, IV, Berlin 2010 (Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 132). MARV 1: H. Freydank, Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte, I, Berlin 1976 (Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin 19, N.F. 3). MARV 8: H. Freydank & B. Feller, Mittelassyrische Rechtsurkunden und Verwaltungstexte, VIII, Berlin 2007 (Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichung der Deutschen Orient-Gesell schaft 119).

235 For the hypothesis that independent transactions must have been limited to small quantities and to illegal trade see Graslin-Thomé 2009, 281.

NATAPA 2: K. Deller, F. M. Fales & L. Jakob-Rost, Neo-Assyrian Texts from Assur. Private Archives in the Vorderasiatisches Museum of Berlin, Part II, State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 9 (1995), 3–137. ND: siglum of the texts from Nimrud (Kalḫu). PVA: B. Landsberger & O. R. Gurney, The Practical Vocabulary of Assur,Archiv für Orient forschung 18 (1957–58), 328–341. RIMA 2: A. K. Grayson, Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC I (1114–859 BC), Toronto 1991 (The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia: Assyrian Periods 2). RIMA 3: A. K. Grayson, Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC II (858–745 BC), Toronto 1996 (The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia: Assyrian Periods 3). RINAP 1: H. Tadmor & Sh. Yamada, The Royal Inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III (744–727 BC) and Shalmaneser V (726–722 BC), Kings of Assyria, Winona Lake 2011 (The Royal Inscriptions of the Neo-Assyrian Period 1). RINAP 3/1: A. K. Grayson & J. R. Novotny, The Royal Inscriptions of Sennacherib, King of Assyria (704–681 BC), Part 1, Winona Lake 2012 (The Royal Inscriptions of the Neo- Assyrian Period 3/1). RINAP 3/2: A. K. Grayson & J. R. Novotny, The Royal Inscriptions of Sennacherib, King of Assyria (704–681 BC), Part 2, Winona Lake 2014 (The Royal Inscriptions of the Neo- Assyrian Period 3/2). RINAP 4: E. Leichty, The Royal Inscriptions of Esarhaddon, King of Assyria (680–669 BC), Winona Lake 2011 (The Royal Inscriptions of the Neo-Assyrian Period 4). SAA 1–19: State Archives of Assyria, vols. 1–19, Helsinki 1987–2012. StAT 2: V. Donbaz & S. Parpola, Neo-Assyrian Legal Texts in Istanbul, Saarbrücken 2001 (Studien zu den Assur-Texten 2). StAT 3: B. Faist, Alltagstexte aus neuassyrischen Archiven und Bibliotheken der Stadt Assur, Wiesbaden 2007 (Studien zu den Assur-Texten 3). TCAE: J. N. Postgate, Taxation and Conscription in the Assyrian Empire, Roma 1974 (Studia Pohl: Series Maior 3). TH: J. Friedrich et al., Die Inschriften vom Tell Halaf. Keilschrifttexte undaramäische Ur kunden aus einer assyrischen Provinzhauptstadts, Osnabrück 1940 (reprint 1967; Archiv für Orientforschung, Beiheft 6). VAT: siglum of the texts in the collections of the Vorderasiatisches Museum in Berlin. ZTT I: siglum of the texts nos. 1–28 from Ziyaret Tepe (Tušḫan), edited in Parpola 2008. ZTT II: siglum of the texts nos. 29–36 from Ziyaret Tepe (Tušḫan), edited in MacGinnis & Willis Monroe 2013–2014.

Bibliography Astour 1995: Astour, M.: Overland Trade Routes in Ancient Western Asia. In J. M. Sasson (ed.), Civilizations of the Ancient Near East III, New York, 1401–1420. Baker 2000: Baker, H. D. (ed.), The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Volume 2, Part I: Ḫ-K, Helsinki. Baker 2001: Baker, H. D. (ed.), The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Volume 2, Part II: L–N, Helsinki. Baker 2002: Baker, H. D. (ed.), The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Volume 3, Part I: P–Ṣ, Helsinki. Baker 2011: Baker, H. D. (ed.), The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Volume 3, Part II: Š–Z, Helsinki. Barber 1991: Barber, E. J. W.: Prehistoric Textiles. The Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages with Special Reference to the Aegean, Princeton, 3rd edition. Bedford 2009: Bedford, P. R.: The Neo-Assyrian Empire. In I. Morris and W. Scheidel (eds.), The Dynamics of Ancient Empires. State Power from Assyria to Byzantium, Oxford, 30–65. Borger 1996: Borger, R.: Beiträge zum Inschriftenwerk Assurbanipals. Die Prismenklassen A, B, C = K, D, E, F, G, H, J und T sowie andere Inschriften, Wiesbaden.

Breniquet & Michel 2014: Breniquet, C. & Michel, C.: Wool in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean. In C. Breniquet & C. Michel (eds.), Wool Economy in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean. From the Beginnings of Sheep Husbandry to Institutional Textile Industry, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 17), 1–11. Campbell Thompson 1934: Campbell Thompson, R.: An Assyrian Chemist’s Vade-mecum, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 771–785. Cardon 2007: Cardon, D.: Natural Dyes. Sources, Tradition, Technology and Science, London (English translation of Le monde des teintures naturelles, 2003). Cole 1996: Cole, S. W.: Nippur in Late Assyrian Times, c. 755–612 BC, Helsinki (State Archives of Assyria Studies 4). Dalley 1991: Dalley, S.: Ancient Assyrian Textiles and the Origins of Carpet Design, Iran 29, 117–135. Dalley and Postgate 1984: Dalley, S. & Postgate J. N.: The Tablets from Fort Shalmaneser, London (Cuneiform Texts from Nimrud 3). Ebeling 1931: Ebeling, E.: Tod und Leben nach den Vorstellungen der Babylonier, Berlin. Elat 1978: Elat, M.: The Economic Relations of the Neo-Assyrian Empire with Egypt, Journal of the American Oriental Society 98, 20–34. Eph’al 1982: Eph’al, I.: The Ancient Arabs on the Borders of the Fertile Crescent 9th–5th Centuries BC, Jerusalem. Fales & Postgate 1992: Fales, F. M. & Postgate J. N.: Imperial Administrative Records, Part I: Palace and Temple Administration, Helsinki (State Archives of Assyria 7). Fales 2011: Fales, F. M.: Moving Around Babylon: On the Aramean and Chaldean Presence in Southern Mesopotamia. In E. Cancik-Kirschbaum, M. van Ess & J. Marzahn (eds.), Babylon: Wissenskultur in Orient und Okzident, Berlin, 91–112. Frahm 2002: Frahm, E.: Assur 2001: Die Schriftfunde, Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient- Gesellschaft 134, 47–86. Fuchs 1994: Fuchs, A.: Die Inschriften Sargons II. aus Khorsabad, Göttingen. Fuchs 1998: Fuchs, A.: Die Annalen des Jahres 711 v. Chr. nach Prismenfragmenten aus Ninive und Assur, Helsinki (State Archives of Assyria Studies 8). Graslin-Thomé 2009: Graslin-Thomé, L.: Les échanges à longue distance en Mésopotamie au Ier millénaire. Une approche économique, Paris (Orient & Méditerranée 5). Groneberg 1980: Groneberg, B.: Die Orts- und Gewässernamen der altbabylonischen Zeit, Wiesbaden (Répertoire Géographique des Textes Cunéiformes 3). Kwasman 2009: Kwasman, Th.: A Neo-Assyrian Royal Funerary Text. In M. Luukko, S. Svärd & R. Mattila (eds.), Of God(s), Trees, Kings, and Scholars. Neo-Assyrian and Re lated Studies in Honour of Simo Parpola, Helsinki (Studia Orientalia 106), 111–125. Layard 1849–1853: Layard, A. H.: Monuments of Nineveh, London (I–II). Levine 1972: Levine, L. D.: Two Neo-Assyrian Stelae from Iran, Royal Ontario Museum, Art and Archaeology: Occasional Paper 23, 34–45. Liverani 1997: Liverani, M.: Antico Oriente. Storia società economia, Roma/Bari, 3rd edition. Liverani 2003: Liverani, M.: The Influence of Political Institutions on Trade in the Ancient Near East (Late Bronze to Early Iron Age). In C. Zaccagnini (ed.), Mercanti e politica nel mondo antico, Roma (Saggi di storia antica 21), 119–137. MacGinnis and Willis Monroe 2013–2014: MacGinnis, J. and M. Willis Monroe: Recent Texts from Ziyaret Tepe, State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 20, 47–56. Mayer 1983: Mayer, W.: Sargons Feldzug gegen Urartu – 714 v. Chr. Text und Übersetzung, Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 115, 65–132. Michel & Veenhof 2010: Michel, C. & Veenhof, K. R.: The Textiles Traded by the Assyrians in Anatolia (19th–18th Centuries BC). In C. Michel & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Textile Terminologies in the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean from the Third to the First Millennia BC, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 8), 210–271. Michel 2014: Michel, C.: Wool Trade in Upper Mesopotamia and Syria According to Old Babylonian and Old Assyrian Texts. In C. Breniquet & C. Michel (eds.), Wool Economy

in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean. From the Beginnings of Sheep Husbandry to Institutional Textile Industry, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 17), 232–254. Parpola 2008: Parpola S.: Cuneiform Texts from Ziyaret Tepe (Tušhan), 2002–2003, State Archives of Assyria Bulletin 17, 1–113. Parpola 2012: Parpola S.: The Neo-Assyrian Royal Harem. In G. B. Lanfranchi et al. (eds.), Leggo! Studies Presented to Frederick Mario Fales on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, Leipzig (Leipziger Altorientalische Studien 2), 613–626. Postgate 1979a: Postgate, J. N.: The Economic Structure of the Assyrian Empire. In M. Trolle Larsen (ed.), Power and Propaganda. A Symposium on Ancient Empires, Copenhagen (Mesopotamia: Copenhagen Studies in Assyriology 7), 193–221. Postgate 1979b: Postgate, J. N.: On Some Assyrian Ladies, Iraq 41, 89–103. Postgate 1995: Postgate, J. N.: Some Latter-Day Merchants of Aššur. In M. Dietrich & O. Loretz (eds.), Vom Alten Orient zum Alten Testament, Festschrift für Wolfram Freiherr von Soden zum 85. Geburtstag am 19. Juni 1993, Münster (Alter Orient und Altes Testa ment 240), 403–406. Postgate 2013: Postgate, J. N.: Bronze Age Bureaucracy: Writing and the Practice of Government in Assyria, Cambridge. Postgate 2014: Postgate, J. N.: Wool, Hair and Textiles in Assyria. In C. Breniquet & C. Michel (eds.), Wool Economy in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean. From the Beginnings of Sheep Husbandry to Institutional Textile Industry, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 17), 399–426. Prechel 2014: Prechel, D. & Freydank H.: Urkunden der königlichen Palastverwalter vom Ende des 2. Jt. v. Chr. Das „Archiv“ Assur 21101 (M7 F), Wiesbaden (Studien zu den Assur-Texten 5). Radner 1999a: Radner, K.: Traders in the Neo-Assyrian Period. In J. G. Dercksen (ed.), Trade and Finance in Ancient Mesopotamia (MOS Studies 1). Proceedings of the First MOS Symposium (Leiden 1997), Leiden (Publications de l’Institut historique-archéologique néerlandais de Stamboul 84), 101–126. Radner 1999b: Radner, K.: Money in the Neo-Assyrian Empire. In J. G. Dercksen (ed.), Trade and Finance in Ancient Mesopotamia (MOS Studies 1). Proceedings of the First MOS Symposium (Leiden 1997), Leiden (Publications de l’Institut historique-archéologique néerlandais de Stamboul 84), 127–157. Radner 1999c: Radner, K. (ed.): The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Volume 1, Part II: B–G, Helsinki. Radner 2004: Radner, K: Assyrische Handelspolitik: Die Symbiose mit unabhängigen Handels zentren und ihre Kontrolle durch Assyrien. In R. Rollinger & Ch. Ulf (eds.), Commer ce and Monetary Systems in the Ancient World: Means of Transmission and Cultural Interaction. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Symposium of the Assyrian and Babylonian Intellectual Heritage Project Held in Innsbruck, Austria, October 3rd–8th, 2002, Stuttgart (Oriens et Occidens 6), 152–168. Renger 2003: Renger, J.: Trade and Market in the Ancient Near East. Theoretical and Factual Implications. In C. Zaccagnini (ed.), Mercanti e politica nel mondo antico, Roma (Saggi di storia antica 21), 9–39. Toray Industries, Inc. 1996: Toray Industries, Inc.: Report on the Analysis of Textiles Uncovered at the Nimrud Tomb-Chamber, Al-Rāfidān 17, 199 –200. Tubb 2014: Tubb, J. N.: Phoenicians and Aramaeans. In J. Aruz, S. B. Graff & Y. Rakic (eds.), Assyria to Iberia. At the Dawn of the Classical Age, New York, 132–140. Veenhof 1972: Veenhof, K. R.: Aspects of Old Assyrian Trade and Its Terminology, Leiden (Studia et documenta ad iura orientis antiqui pertinentia 10).

Stella Spantidaki

This text is not an economic analysis paper. It has to do, however, with the real economy of Athens in the Classical period. How can we approach such a significant sector of a given society that is so distant both in time and culture? The task is difficult and full of obstacles. To understand this social activity, we can either use, in reality impose, mental tools fabricated for another period and society, namely ours, or we will need to be immersed in the “spirit” of the past society, to speak with M. Weber, and to participate, if possible, in the mood, the ethos, the mentality of the society being considered and its specific temporality, a task more than difficult, ἀπορώτατον, as Aristotle would say. In recent decades, and since Finley’s memorable Ancient Economy,1 which expanded mostly the views of the great M. Weber, K. Polanyi and others, a sharp “Historisch-Ökonomischer Streit” about status and comprehension of the ancient Greek economy developed between the so-called primitivists and modernists, sub- stantivists and formalists. The story is too well known to discuss it here any further. But let me state some common realities about how I think that people of that period perceived this social institution, economy, especially in Classical Athens. In medias res: the economic moment in Athens, whatever its importance, was neither a central moment nor separated from the rest. The kleos and the kudos, an Indo-European heritage, were strongly valued; the passion for public matters, their institution/trans- formation, i.e. the politics, was penetrated by the ubiquitous agonistic principle, as was the passion for beauty (art) and wisdom (philosophy). To give an example: it has not occurred to the inventor of the famous Antikythera mechanism, an analogi- cal calculator, recently back in vogue thanks to the decipherment of its inscription, to design it for calculations of data, imported and exported goods or quantities of countable output. Everything that mattered, everything that counted for this society was not what could be counted. Therefore, the economy as well as economic moti- vation, an essential component of each ancient or primitive society, had its place in ancient Greece and Classical Athens, but without being overarching (as it became in the capitalist Occident since the modern times and until today, for better or for worse). It seems that the Athenians did not have a centralised economy or fiscal policy as we understand them today. Economic policy was most probably understood in terms of the local production and management of necessities. However, the polis of Athens did have several significant concerns and interests within the economic sphere. It took great care, for instance, to maintain the high quality silver of its coinage and to keep the same familiar design, the owl of Athena, unchanged for centuries. In this way, the coins of Athens (the “owls”) constituted a stable currency and

* I would like to thank the organisers Kerstin Droß-Krüpe and Marie-Louise Nosch for kind- ly inviting me to participate in this conference. 1 Finley 1973.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 126 Stella Spantidaki traders were aware that their silver would be recognised and accepted even in remote parts of the world. Indeed, the Athenian owl, like some other currencies (the gold daric of the Achaemenid Empire, the Aeginetan tortoise, Alexander’s tetradrachm in the Hellenistic period) rapidly received general trust and became “international currency”. In this way, the economic activity would have been as organised as any other social activity; however, it does not make any sense to say, for instance that the polis conducted a Keynesian economic policy or any other. It seems that the organisation was fragmentary and that the economic and financial mechanisms focused on what was most important to the polis, as well as the necessities, leaving private individuals to go about their business. Modern scholars, mostly historians (not economists) are called to draw a descriptive and historical panorama, while also trying to decipher and restore the social features of the period, which were embedded in a given concrete institution, the economy. Yet it seems there is distance and proximity at the same time.2 This paper provides a preliminary overview of the available information on the exchange and trading of raw materials and textiles in Classical Athens. With the term Classical, I am referring to the 5th and 4th centuries BCE in Athens and the sources for this time period. These sources consist of fragmentary information concerning the circulation of textiles and are scattered among different textual sources (inscriptions and literary sources, such as theatrical, historical and political texts). References to trade are represented by what are mostly qualifiers of provenance describing raw materials, types of fabrics or luxury items. The iconography of the period is less helpful, since specific details, such as fibre materials are not illustrated, but iconography provides us with representations of conventional Greek garments and accessories, and of those worn by non-Greeks. Finally, extant textiles themselves can provide crucial information on both local and foreign materials and techniques. Trade is only one of the various methods of textile circulation in antiquity. Textiles, as well as skills and technical know-how, were transferred with the movement of people. Already in Homeric times, foreign slave women are mentioned as destined to work on the production of richly decorated textiles for their new mas- ters.3 Families and craftspeople who settled in colonies also brought with them their tools and garments, their skills and Greek textile technology, which was thus transferred far from the mainland and subsequently fused with the local textile material culture. Intermarriage is a similar case; when brides travelled to their new homes, they also brought their textile tools and precious fabrics with them. Finally, textiles also circulated as booty, as regular gifts offered inside the Greek gift exchange system, and also changed hands as dowries.4 Information on trade in antiquity primarily concerns a few large cities, such as Athens or Alexandria, while occasional references mention exotic items travelling from one city to another. Yet, in general, textual information focuses on particular cases of luxury goods, while more common trade activity often remains unnoticed.

2 This is why, while maintaining my position, I believe that “modernist” studies, such as by P. Acton 2014 may be both productive and enriching. 3 Il. 6.456; E. Tr. 199–200. 4 Gleba 2014, 83–103.

Written sources offer scattered information on purchases, imported and exported goods, but this is limited to lists of trade goods and does not provide a comprehensive idea of how local and long-distance trade was actually conducted. We have pie ces of a large puzzle to put together, combining information from different strands of evidence. As for the administration of the economy, Athens had introduced trade taxes on imports and exports. Moreover, it established numerous state officials to supervise the agora and the port of Piraeus (agoranomoi),5 which regulated the transactions, ensured the quality of the goods, occasionally controlled the prices, and resolved commercial disputes according to the law of Obligations and the Maritime Law. Thus, the polis had a board of ‘measure magistrates’ (metronomoi),6 which controlled weights and measures and made sure merchants used genuine standards. Fraud among merchants was indeed a common problem in local markets. Aristotle mentions purple dye sellers (halourgopōlai) trying to tamper with their scales in order to sell their products at higher prices.7 Similarly, Aristophanes refers to wool-sellers at the market selling wet wool, which was heavier and thus could be sold at a higher price.8

Local Trade A high proportion of textiles in Classical Athens were produced by women in the domestic sphere, the oikos, in the context of oikonomia, in the etymological sense of the term, the art of household management. These fabrics were mostly intended for household consumption; however, part of them may have also been intended for sale.9 This action could indeed be an emergency measure for poor women during times of economic need. Women could sell products directly to their customers, as for instance, the woman mentioned selling a “spindle full of flax” in the market,10 or another selling felt hats to construction workers.11 However, textiles intended for sale may also have been manufactured in small workshops situated within the household besides fabrics made for household consumption.

5 Ar. Ach. 723, 824, 968, Vesp. 1407; Xen. Symp. 2.20.3, An. 5.7.2.4, 5.7.23.4, 5.7.24.1, 5.7.29.2; Pl. Resp. 425d.5, Leg. 760b.1, 763c.3, 763e.4, 764b.1, 764c.4, 849a.3, 849e.4, 881c.4, 913d.6, 917b.2, 917e.3, 920c.5, 936c.3, 953b.5; Lys. Against the grain dealers 16.4. Harrison 1971, 23-27, 34 & passim. Cohen 1973 passim. Karayiannis and Hatzis 2012, 639 & passim. Let us remind that the Athenian Maritime Law’s influence outlasted its primary application area and has not been affected by the Roman Law that was dominant in later times but not sufficiently developed in this field. Moreover, codified in the Νόμος Ῥοδίων ναυτικός (Rhodian Maritime Law), the Athenian Maritime Law went on to influence the latter and thus the subsequent development of European Commercial, Transport and Maritime Law. 6 Arist. Ath. 51.2.1, Fr. varia 8.44.452.1, 8.44.452.2, 8.44.452.6 (Rose); Din. Fr. 19.8.1, 19.8.2, 19.8.7 (Conomis). 7 Arist. [Mech.] 849b.34–39. 8 Ar. Ran. 1386–1388. 9 Brock 1994, 338. 10 Ar. Ran. 1347. 11 IG II2 1672.70–71 “πῖλοι τοῖς δημοσίοις παρὰ Θετάλλης” (“felt hats [sold] to the public slaves by Thetallē”).

Every Classical Greek polis had an agora, a place of social gathering which was also used as a marketplace, in the centre of the city. The agora of the Classical polis was the space for exchange in the broadest sense of the term. It was instrumental in the diffusion and exchange of views, ideas and information, and the preparation of discussions and decisions to be taken in the ekklesia. The agora was the public/ private sphere, an intersection of the purely private and the purely public domains.12 It was also the agora in the specific and technical sense of a market, overflowing with shops, stalls, and warehouses, a place where kapēloi (middlemen), emporoi (traders), dēmiourgoi (craftsmen), citizens, metics and foreigners discussed business. In this sense, it was also a space for weavers or textile traders, whom Plato listed as the third of the most basic elements of the polis: “τῆς ἐσθῆτος καὶ τῶν τοιούτων”, i.e. clothing and such things.13 The Athenian agora, which counted among the largest ones in the 5th and the 4th centuries BCE, was divided into several sectors depending on the products being sold. Next to the Kerameikos (the pottery district), there were the himatiopōlis, the speiropōlis and the gynaikeia agora. Thehimatiopōlis agora was probably the place where garments were sold and purchased; the speiropōlis was a market for tow, cords, lower quality linen fabrics and probably sailcloth.14 Finally, in the gynaikeia agora (women’s market), one could find products either made by women (such as textiles), made for women (such as jewellery or perfumed oil), or women themselves.15 Religious festivals and athletic games also formed a part of the economic activity. Athletes and spectators had to be fed, entertained and offered the essentials for ritual sacrifices, thus making such festivals and games the perfect occasion for temporary markets.16 A large variety of textile-related products were available in local markets or fairs, always in relation to the size of the specific polis. It seems that materials for every stage of the chaîne opératoire of textile production could be bought or sold: raw wool or flax, tow, woollen or linen thread, dyestuffs, finished fabrics of different qualities and even high quality, patterned textiles. Ancient literary texts and inscriptions mention several traders of textile-related products. Women are mentioned as selling amorgina fabrics,17 ribbons18 and linen thread19 in the market. Amorgina were a type of exceptionally fine and transparent, high quality linen fabrics, probably also treated with olive oil (amorgē) to accentuate the effect of transparency.20 Men are described as selling all sorts of items including

12 Castoriadis 1997, 405. 13 Pl. Resp. 369d. 14 Alex. Fr. 264 (330), 99 (331) (Kock); Poll. Onom. 7.78, 10.18; Reuthner 2006, 253, 254. 15 Theophr. Char. 2.9. 16 Bresson 2008b, 20. 17 Aesch. In Tim. 97.8: “γυναῖκα ἀμοργινὰ ἐπισταμένην ἐργάζεσθαι καὶ ἔργα λεπτὰ εἰς τὴν ἀγορὰν ἐκφέρουσαν”. 18 Eup. Fr. 262 (243) (PCG V); Dem. Eubul. 34.1. 19 Ar. Ran. 1347. 20 Spantidaki (forthcoming).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textile Trade in Classical Athens 129 sheep,21 raw wool,22 tow,23 needles,24 purple dye,25 as well as garments.26 These tra ders were not necessarily specialists in one single trade. There may have been people trading specific products as for example the seller of purple dye and others selling a variety of different items, as for example the needle seller. One may ask whether it might be possible to determine the role that the sail- making industry played in textile production and trade in Classical Athens. It would have been substantial, given the number of triremes listed in the naval records of Piraeus in the relevant period.27 One must also consider the number of the triremes’ spare sails, as well as the sails intended for the ships that always accompanied the fleet during military exhibitions, for commercial ships holkades( ) and last but not least, for fishermen’s boats. For the latter there is not much information and we must not assume that every boat used a sail, but some of them may have. Did the fishermen procure their own sail? Did they buy it from a market in Athens or Piraeus, or did they make their wives weave it? The sizes even for small sails must have been considerably larger than for garments or usual household textiles, thus pointing rather to trade than individual production. Moreover, the term histiorraphos refers to specialised craftsmen assembling different pieces of cloth to make sails.28 Flax has most probably been used for sails in ancient Greece; it is strong, durable, and when its fibres get wet, its strength increases thus making it very suitable for fabrics used outdoors and in connection to water.29 Ancient written sources mention sails imported from Egypt, but they do not clearly state whether they were made of linen or papyrus.30 Moreover, a passage from Pseudo-Xenophon mentions flax among the most significant materials for the fleet.31 Furthermore, the considerable number of all kinds of sails used simultaneously in Classical Athens raises the question of their place of manufacture: was the entire amount produced locally, in Athenian workshops or in neighbouring places controlled by Athens? It is plausible to think that the great need for raw flax and linen fabrics would require both local cultivation and imports.32 And if so, were the sails imported as finished items, as woven fabric, or simply as raw material to be woven and assembled locally? A passage from Hermippos points to imported sails, not simply sailcloth.33 Yet this sole reference does not provide enough evidence. Moreover, although for earlier periods there is evidence of flax processing installations in Attica that point to the possibility of local cultivation,34 in Classical times,

21 προβατοπώλης: Ar. Eq. 132, 138. 22 ἐριοπώλης: Critias. Fr. 70.4 (DK); IG II2 1568.7; SEG 12:84.18. 23 στυππειοπώλης: IG II2 1570.24, 1572.8. 24 βελονοπώλης: Ar. Plut. 175; Critias Fr. 70.7 (DK). 25 ἁλουργοπώλης: Arist. [Mech.] 849b.34. 26 ἱματιοπώλης: Critias Fr. 64.1 (DK); Apollod. Car. Fragments and titles 30 (25) (PCG II); IG II2 1673.46, 11254.1 27 Böckh 1840. 28 Ar. Thesm. 935. 29 Harris 2009, 105, 106, Table 18.2. 30 Nosch 2014, 22. 31 Xen. [Ath. Pol.] 2.11. 32 Nosch 2014,18. 33 Hermip. Fr. 63.13 (Kock). 34 Kaza Papageorgiou & Kardamaki 2011, 201–208.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 130 Stella Spantidaki the cultivation of flax in Piraeus, if there was one, has left no traces and references in written sources are non-existent. Given the huge amount of fibre resources required to equip all kinds of ships, I hope that this subject will become the object of systematic research that will shed more light on the cultivation and trade in flax and linen fabrics in the Classical period, as well as on the impact of this activity on the general textile industry of Athens.

Long Distance Trade Products traded in local markets were both local and imported. Foreign products derived from the networks of trade with other Greek poleis and foreign cities. Ancient Greeks were aware that natural resources are unequally dispersed, and hence, commerce was originally established in order to compensate for this natural inequality. No city was capable of autarky, but all depended on imports for the procurement of non-local products.35 Textile trade seems to be a case of the “archéologie du disparu”. Although we have to imagine raw materials and textiles travelling from and towards Greek cities at a steady flow, the routes of textile trade are more difficult to trace than those of other crafts, such as pottery or metallurgy. Long distance trade was performed by private individuals and not organised by the polis. However, the polis collected a duty on the cargo of all ships entering and leaving the port of Piraeus. Indirect taxation was the most important revenue for the city; the pentēkostē36 (2%) on imports and exports was calculated by the market managers and collected by private individuals acting as agents. In Classical times, there was an established and substantial network of Greek colonies that acted as commercial settlements (emporia) all over the known world: from Massalia and Emporion in the west, through Italy to Naucratis in Egypt and even up to the Black Sea.37 More likely to be seen as results of the dynamism of Greek cities and their need to expand and profit rather than of their misery, the em poria constituted crucial points d’appui of trade. We can invoke the text of the speech of the Corinthians about the Athenians in Thucydides I, 70 for these adventurous and fearless seafarers.38 So textiles and textile-related goods travelled primarily to the colonies and foreign materials and fabrics were brought to Athens, Corinth, Samos and other major Greek poleis to fulfil constant needs for resources including a taste for luxury items. Textiles from the Classical period discovered in the Greek colony Panticapaeum in today’s Kertch are decorated with friezes depicting Gods and heroes from Greek my- thology with their names written in Greek.39 They may either have been imported from the Greek mainland, or produced locally by Greek colonists (as it was the case in Etruria for instance) or using Greek patterns and techniques.

35 Ps. Xen. Ath. Pol. 2.11–13; Isoc. Pan. 4.42; Arist. Pol. 1257a.6 –7. 36 IG II2 404.16, 1128.23, 1635.38; IG II3 447.12, 447.14-15; Dem. Tim. 120.6, Meid. 166.5, 167.1, [Neaeram] 27.3, On the taxation groups 27.2. 37 For instance Boardman 1999; Malkin 2011. 38 “They love innovation and are swift to devise and also to execute what they resolve on. They are bold beyond their strength, adventurous above their own reason … they love to be abroad etc.” 39 Gerziger 1972, 51; Barber 1991, 206–209; Gleba & Krupa 2012, 413, Fig. 20.14.

As textiles are not easily preserved, information on long distance textile trade is primarily based on textual sources that mention qualities of raw materials and their provenance, as well as types of foreign garments and fabrics.

Raw Materials Good quality raw materials were crucial for the production of patterned, transparent, pleated or crepe fabrics and were often imported from other Greek and foreign cities. Plato mentions linen from Sicily,40 Herodotus from Colchis,41 and Xenophon recommends linen from Egypt, Carthage or Colchis.42 Pseudo-Xenophon mentions the importation of linen for sailcloth as a common practice. As we have already seen, it is mentioned as being imported from Egypt to Athens.43 Moreover, Pausanias claims that byssos, a high quality flax variety was growing in Elis, in the north-western Peloponnese.44 Fabrics made of this material are often mentioned in Athens. The amorgina fabrics, a type of very fine and high-quality linen garment, were probably initially imported as fibre, yarn or finished fabric from the island of Amorgos.45 However, during the 5th century BCE, this fibre quality is mentioned as being worked in Athens.46 Regarding wool, Miletus was famed both for its high-quality wool fibres and fabrics.47 According to Diodorus of Sicily, already in the early 7th century BCE, Zaleucus passed a law in a south Italian Greek colony, Epizephyrian Locri, prohibi ting men from wearing garments made of Milesian wool, as they were considered too luxurious.48 In contrast, the opulent inhabitants of Sybaris, another Greek colony of Magna Graecia, were especially famous for wearing such rich garments.49 Wool was also imported from Phrygia50 and Taranto.51

Dyestuffs Regarding the dyes, the sources provide important but very insufficient data and it is very difficult to trace trade networks for dyestuffs and mordants. However, there are references to the importation of shellfish purple (porphyra) from Asia Minor and Phoenician cities,52 saffron krokos( ) from Asia Minor53 and natron (nitron/litron) from Egypt.54

40 Pl. Ep. 363.a.4. 41 Hdt. 2.105. 42 Xen. Cyn. 2.4. 43 Xen. [Ath. Pol.] 2.11–13. 44 Paus. 7.21.7, 10.37.2 –3. 45 Spantidaki (forthcoming). 46 Aeschin. In Tim. 97.8; Ar. Lys. 735–738. 47 Timae. Fr. 50.2 (Thesleff); Eub. Fr. 89 (90).3 (PCG V). 48 Diod. Sic. BH 12.21.2.1 (Bekker, Dindorf). 49 Diod. Sic. BH 8.18–8.20 (Bekker, Dindorf). 50 Ar. Av. 493. 51 Men. Epit. 489 (Sandbach); Morel 1978, 94–110. 52 Arist. HA 547a.5–6. 53 Bresson 2008a, 153. 54 Hippoc. Morb. 2.6.9.1, 2.6.29.3; Mul. 235.2: “λίτρον αἰγύπτιον τὸ καθαρώτατον” (the purest Egyptian natron).

Alum (styptēria), also used in medicine due to its astringent qualities, was stu died in a lost work of Theophrastus, On salt, natron and alum.55 Herodotus informs us that in the 6th century BCE, the pharaoh, Amasis, sent 1,000 talents of alum to Delphi to be used in the reconstruction of the Apollo temple, which had burned in a fire in 548 BCE.56 Similarly, Hippocrates mentions alum from Egypt,57 but it is first in Roman times that we have a better understanding of the trade networks of alum through the study and distribution of the amphorae of Melos and Lipari.58

Finished Fabrics The need for foreign products is paralleled by a taste for luxury that started to develop along with the great circulation of diverse exotic items. This is established both by the discovery of foreign artefacts among grave offerings in Greece and of Attic vases in several parts of the world.59 Both vase-paintings and sculpture of the Classical period show types of foreign garments, such as the tights of the Persian rider at the Acropolis Museum,60 or sleeved garments, such as the kandys.61 Pericles himself boasts of the great commercial activity of Athens, which allowed people to indulge in various exotic items.62 Similarly, Antiphanes refers to blankets from Corinth,63 while Hermippos makes mention of carpets and patterned pillows from Carthage.64 Chitōnes from Lydia are mentioned among the textile offerings to Hera in the votive inscription from Samos dated to c. 356/5 BCE.65

Extant Fabrics The extant fabrics from the Classical period constitute another source of information. The usual criteria that make us think that a textile probably has a foreign provenance are: exotic material, technique or pattern, as well as the comparison with textiles found elsewhere. Most of the fabrics from Iron Age Greece have several common characteristics in the materials, the weave, the thread structure and twist direction.66 In consequence, fabrics that differ from this pattern raise questions as to their provenance. However, since textile research in Greece is still at an early stage, it is expected that new discoveries will also change current patterns. Few extant textiles do indeed diverge from the common characteristics of Classical Greek fabrics. The th5 century BCE fabric from Argyroupoli, south of Athens, has most of the characteristics of Iron Age Greek fabrics. It is a mineralised, weft-faced linen tabby with single s-twisted threads with a diameter of 0.40 mm for the warp and of 0.42 mm for the weft (fig. 1). In Classical Greece, however, most textiles were z-twisted

55 D.L. Vitae 5.42.15 (Long). 56 Hdt. 2.180.7. 57 Hippoc. Ulc. 14 “στρυπτηρίη αἰγυπτίη” (Egyptian alum). 58 Borgard et al. 2005, 5–7. 59 For instance the crater found in Vix, France, dated to c. 500 BCE. 60 520–510 BCE, Acropolis Museum (Acr. 606). 61 For instance see the funerary stele of Myttion, 400 BCE, The Paul Getty Museum. 62 Th. 2.38. 63 Antiph. Incertarum Fabularum Fragmenta (IFF) 11.2 (Meineke). 64 Hermip. Fr. 63.23 (Kock). 65 IG XII, 6, 1.261, 14–16; 27. 66 Spantidaki & Moulhérat 2012, 195.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textile Trade in Classical Athens 133 and only two out of c. 30 extant textiles from Attica are s-twisted.67 In other words, this is extremely rare and could be an indication of a foreign provenance, although it is not a sufficient proof by itself.

Fig. 1: Stereoscope view of the 5th c. BCE fabric from Argyroupoli. Image: ARTEX

The th5 century BCE fabrics from Trachones, south of Athens constitute another candidate for non-local products. Three tabbies have been discovered together in a bronze urn and according to the results of their study carried out in the mid-20th century, one is made of linen, one of cotton and one of hemp.68 Yet the study of these fabrics is already out-dated and there are no recent analyses of their fibres. Moreover, there is no other example of hemp fabric and finds of ancient cotton fabrics are extremely rare in Greece.69 In addition, as ancient authors always mention these materials as used by foreign people,70 we can include the Trachones fabrics in the list of textiles with exotic materials. This time, the cotton and hemp fabrics have a z-twist, while the linen one an s-twist. Linen was always s-spun in Egypt71 — is this an indication for a foreign provenance of these fabrics? A hypothesis is that they may have belonged to a foreigner (perhaps a metic), who was buried with his personal belongings. Unfortunately, as the fabrics derive from an illegal excavation, no information on burial offerings is available, which might have helped establish the identity of the deceased. A further case is the 5th century BCE fabrics from Koropi, also south of Athens.72 Their material, weave, thread structure and twist all conform to the Greek pattern. They are fine linen balanced tabbies with single z threads. In this case, what raised doubts about their provenance is the exotic technique and the exotic pattern. Among

67 Spantidaki & Moulhérat 2012, 198, Table 7.5; Spantidaki (forthcoming). 68 Zissis 1954, 587–593; Spantidaki (forthcoming). 69 For textile studies that suggest cotton, see Moraitou 2007, 6; Margariti et al. 2011, 525, 526. 70 Hdt. 3.47.7; Theophr. HP 4.7.7.1, 7.13.8.1, 4.74.1; Hdt. 3.106.10. 71 Kemp & Vogelsang-Eastwood 2001, 59. 72 Beckwith 1954, 114, 115.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 134 Stella Spantidaki them there is the only fragment of ancient embroidery discovered so far in Greece, and that was enough to question the local production of the fabric (fig. 2). However, embroidery is not frequently archaeologically attested, but iconography and ancient texts show that it was most probably used in Greece during the Classical period. Ancient vases frequently depict garments decorated with small, easily embroidered patterns73 and the term katastiktos74 seems to have referred to this technique. Another factor for ascertaining the provenance of this fabric is the pattern depicted. The fabric is decorated with small lions, measuring one centimetre, inside the lozenges of a lattice-diaper pattern. The lions are similar to oriental depictions of lions; however, Greek art had already passed its orientalising era and it is known that Greek craftsmen were very much influenced by orientalising subjects and styles,75 so this is not a sufficient argument for foreign provenance.

Fig. 2: Stereoscope view of the 5th c. BCE embroidery from Koropi, Victoria & Albert Museum, London. Image: ARTEX

The well-known 4th century BCE fabric from the antechamber of the so-called “Tomb of Philip” in Vergina is the richest ancient textile ever discovered in pre- Roman Greece.76 Its tapestry weave, the first discovered in Greece, and its floral decoration is once again similar to eastern patterns and raised questions about its provenance. However, tapestry could be performed on the warp-weighted loom77 and the border and the central decoration of the fabric are reminiscent of other Classical and Hellenistic Greek works.78 In consequence, I would be more inclined to see this fabric as a local product.

73 For instance, a garment decorated with small dots on the cup of the Brygos painter in the British Museum 1848,0619.7, dated c. 490–480 BCE. 74 Men. Fr. 1019.1 (Kock); Megasth. Fr. 21.20 (FHG II); IG I3 403.41; IG II2 1514.6, 1514.9, 1514.11, 1514.38, 1514.56, 1514.57, 1514.67, 1514.71, 1515.4, 1515.5, 1515.30, 1516.16, 1516.32, 1516.33, 1516.44, 1517.B142, 1518B.54 –55, 1518B.68–69, 1518B.85, 1518B.89, 1521B.50, 1521B.66–67, 1523.9–10, 1523.13, 1523.20, 1523.25–26, 1523.27, 1524B.164, 1524B.177, 1524B.193, 1524B.200, 1524B.202, 1524B.208–209, 1528.19–20. 75 For instance see the Proto-corinthian olpe with animals and sphinxes, c. 640–630 BCE, Louvre Cp 10475. 76 Andronikos 1984, 78, 79, 191, 192; Drougou 1987, 303–316. 77 Harlizius-Klück 2009. 78 Drougou 1987, 306, 308; Gleba 2008, 65.

Additional evidence on the origins and circulation of textiles in antiquity can nowadays be provided by the use of new scientific analytical methods, such as strontium isotope tracing. This new technique has already provided valuable information on the origin of Iron Age garments in Denmark.79 Yet, it has never been carried out in Greece, and moreover, the mineralised state of most extant Greek textiles provides an additional difficulty for its implementation.

Concerning the Transportation of Raw Materials and Textiles Regarding the transportation of raw materials and textiles, some hypotheses are worth discussing despite the fact that the available information is very poor. A variety of different containers depending on the state of material, volume and properties of the transported goods was used. We have to imagine vases for liquids and powders, as well as a variety of boxes, baskets, sacks, chests and trunks for raw materials and finished fabrics. Moreover, larger textiles may have been wrapped around wooden rods, as is still the practice today. In the 4th century BCE votive inscription from Brauron, soft wool is mentioned as wrapped in fine cloth (“ἐν ὀθονίῳ ἔρια μαλακά”).80 Perhaps this was done to store and protect the material, and we can imagine high quality raw materials being wrapped in cloth during transport or storage. Valuable textiles (especially those decorated with metal threads) may also have been wrapped in other textiles for protection. A very rare depiction of the weighing and storage of trade goods on the 6th century BCE Arkesilas cup shows containers illustrated with diagonal lines referring to a textile weave being filled with a white material (fig. 3).81 As Arkesilas II was the king of Cyrene, a Greek colony which had the monopoly on silphion,82 a popular plant used as a panacea until it became extinct in Roman times, this scene may show the storing and loading of this particular item.83 In any case, it shows the practice of storing trade goods in sacks or nets and provides an image of how raw wool may also have been transported.84

Fig. 3: Arkesilas cup, Cabinet des Médailles, Paris, inv. no. 189. Image: Photo BnF, Dist. RMN – Grand Palais/Image BnF 79 Frei et al. 2009a, 252–276; 2009b, 1965–1971. 80 IG II2 1514.57–58, 1516.34. 81 Arkesilas cup, Cabinet des Médailles, Paris, inv. no. 189. 82 Sol. Fr. 39 (West 2); Hdt. 4.169–170; Ar. Av. 1579; Hippoc. Acut. 7.31 (Littré 2). Σιλφιο πῶλαι: Crit. Fr. 70.5 (DK). 83 Murray 2001, 122–123. 84 Sparkes 1991, 46.

Transport by Land and Sea Trade between cities on the Greek mainland, for instance Athens and Plataea, was most probably carried out by land. However, the ancient Greeks never built a large system of paved roads such as the one in place in the Roman Empire. In contrast, Greek roads were mostly simple tracks suitable for pack animals and rarely large enough for wheeled carts pulled by oxen, donkeys or mules, thus making trade by land a difficult and time-consuming endeavour. Textiles would be stored in sacs or baskets and carried by donkeys or carts, as was the practice in rural Greece until the mid-20th century. Long distances were covered by large commercial ships called holkades.85 Ancient authors mention the transport of raw wool by sea as a common practice, stored in sacks or chests.86 In the mid-3rd century BCE, the enormous ship Syracusia of Hieron II transported 520 tonnes of wool from Syracuse to Alexandria.87 Recently, there has been an increasing interest in underwater archaeology in Greece. Several shipwrecks have been discovered in the Aegean Sea and the whole Mediterranean, for instance in Marseille.88 Finds of shipwrecks constitute a rare opportunity for the study of trade routes, the variety of trade goods, storage practises and naval construction. The new discovery of 45 ancient shipwrecks near the small island of Fournoi in the eastern Aegean will certainly provide new evidence and insights on the types of cargo, which hopefully includes some textile material as well (rope or sailcloth, leather).89

Conclusion Our understanding of the economy in general and the Classical Athenian textile trade in particular is fragmentary. It derives mostly from inscriptions and literary texts that provide significant but scattered information on purchasing and selling in local markets, importation and exportation of raw materials and fabrics and the people involved in this activity. The information we find is too limited to let us draw a clear image of the organisation of consumption and distribution of raw materials and textiles in this period. However, even this fragmentary material points to the existence of a dynamic trade that allowed the Athenians to take advantage of local resources, as well as enjoy exotic items. This information is complemented by depictions of foreign garments and accessories in Classical iconography and by data emerging from the study of extant fabrics. It is my hope that new studies will combine the available sources with new scientific results and lead to a deeper understanding of the field of textile circulation and trade in antiquity.

85 Alc. Fr. 142.1 (Page); P Nem. 5.2, Fr. Dub. 355 (Snell); Th. 6.22.1.7, 6.30.1.3, 6.44.1.2; Hdt. 3.135.12, 7.191.2; Pherecr. Fr. Tyrannis 4–5 (Meineke). 86 Bresson 2008b, 198; Aen. Tact. Pol. 29.4.6. 87 Ath. Deipn. 5.44.3. 88 Pomey 2001. 89 Romeo 2016.

Bibliography Acton 2014: Acton, P.: Poeisis. Manufacturing in Classical Athens, Oxford. Andronikos 1984: Andronikos, M.: Vergina. The Royal Tombs, Athens. Barber 1991: Barber, E. J. W.: Prehistoric Textiles: the development of cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Age with special reference to the Aegean, Princeton. Beckwith 1954: Beckwith, J.: Textile Fragments from Classical Antiquity: An Important Find at Koropi near Athens, Illustrated London News 224, 114–115. Boardman 1999: Boardman, J.: The Greeks Overseas. Their Early Colonies and Trade, London, 4th edition. Böckh 1840: Böckh A.: Urkunden über das Seewesen des attischen Staates, Berlin. Borgard, Brun, & Picon 2005: Borgard, Ph., Brun, J.-P. & Picon, M. (eds.), L’alun de Méditerranée, Colloque international, Naples, 4–6 juin 2003, Naples & Aix-en- Provence (Collection du Centre Jean Bérard 23). Bresson 2008a: Bresson, A.: L’économie de la Grèce des cités I. Les structures de la production, Paris. Bresson2008b: Bresson, A.: L’économie de la Grèce des cités II. Les espaces de l’échange, Paris. Castoriadis 1997: Castoriadis, C.: The Greek Polis and the Creation of Democracy. In D. A. Curtis (ed.), The Castoriadis Reader, Oxford, 267–289 (= Castoriadis, C. The Greek Polis and the Creation of Democracy, Graduate Faculty Philosophy Journal of the New School, 9/2 [1983], 79–115). Cohen 1973: Cohen, E. E.: Ancient Athenian Maritime Courts. Princeton University Press. Drougou 1987: Drougou, S.: Το ύφασμα της Βεργίνας. Πρώτες παρατηρήσεις (The Fabric of Vergina. First observations). In Αμητός. Τιμητικός τόμος για τον καθηγητή Μανόλη Ανδρόνικο (Ametos. Volume in honour of Professor Manolis Andronikos), Thessa loniki, 303–316. Finley 1973: Finley, M.: Ancient Economy, London. Frei et al. 2009a: Frei, K. M. et al.: Provenance of Ancient Textiles – A Pilot Study Evaluating the Sr Isotope System in Wool, Archaeometry 51/2, 252–276. Frei et al. 2009b: Frei, K. M. et al.: The Huldremose Iron Age Textiles, Denmark – An Attempt to Define Their Provenance Applying the Strontium Isotope System, Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 1965–1971. Gerziger 1972: Gerziger, D.: Eine Decke aus dem sechsten Grab der “Sieben Brüder”, Antike Kunst 18, 51–55. Gleba 2008: Gleba, M.: Auratae Vestes. In C. Alfaro & L. Karali (eds.), Purpureae Vestes II, Textiles and Dyes in Antiquity. Vestidos, Textiles y Tintes. Estudios sobre la produccion de bienes de consumo en la Antiguedad. Actas del II Symposium Internacional sobre Textiles y Tintes del Mediterraneo en el mundo antiguo (Atenas, 24 al 26 de noviembre, 2005), Va lencia, 61–77. Gleba 2014: Gleba, M.: Cloth Worth a King’s Ransom: Textile Circulation and Transmission of Textile Craft in the Ancient Mediterranean. In K. Rebay-Salisbury, A. Brysbaert & L. Foxhall (eds.), Knowledge Networks and Craft Traditions in the Ancient World. Material Crossovers, London, 83–103. Gleba & Krupa 2012: Gleba, M. & Krupa, T.: Ukraine. In M. Gleba & U. Mannering (eds.), Textiles and Textile Production in Europe. From Prehistory to AD 400, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 11), 399–425. Harlizius-Klück 2009: Harlizius-Klück, E.: Gesponnen & Verworben. Textiles zu Zeiten von Römern und Germanen, Bramsche. Harris 2009: Harris, S.: Smooth and Cool, or Warm and Soft: Investigating the Properties of Cloth in Prehistory. In E. Andersson Strand et al. (eds.), NESAT X, The North European Symposium for Archaeological Textiles, Oxford, 104–112. Harrision 1971: Harrison, A. R. W.: The Law of Athens, II Procedure. Oxford, Clarendon Press.

Karayiannis & Hatzis 2012: Karayiannis, A. & Hatzis, A. N.: Morality, Social Norms and the Rule of Law as Transaction Cost-Saving Devices: The Case of Ancient Athens, European Journal of Law and Economics 33/3, 621–643. Kaza Papageorgiou & Kardamaki 2011: Kaza Papageorgiou, K. & Kardamaki, E.: Κοντο πήγαδο Ἁλίμου Ἀττικῆς. Οἰκισμὸς τῶν ΠΕ καὶ ΥΕ χρόνων καὶ ΥΕ ἐργαστηριακὴ ἐγκατάσταση, Archaeologikē Ephēmeris 150, 201–208. Kemp & Vogelsang-Eastwood 2001: Kemp, B. J. & Vogelsang-Eastwood, G. M.: The Ancient Textile Industry at Amarna, London. Malkin 2011: Malkin, I.: A Small Greek World, Oxford. Margariti, Protopapas, & Orphanou 2011: Margariti, C., Protopapas, S. & Orphanou, V.: Recent Analyses of the Excavated Textile Find from Grave 35 HTR73, Kerameikos Cemetery, Athens, Greece, Journal of Archaeological Science 38, 522–527. Moraitou 2007: Moraitou, G.: The Funeral Pyre Textile from Royal Tomb II in Vergina. Report on the 1997 Documentation, Treatment and Display, Archaeological Textiles Newsletter 44, 5–10. Morel 1978: Morel, J. P.: La laine de Tarente, Ktema 3, 94–110. Murray 2001: Murray, O.: Early Greece, London (1st ed. 1978). Nosch 2014: Nosch, M.-L.: Linen Textiles and Flax in Classical Greece: Provenance and Trade. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 17–42. Pomey 2001: Pomey, P.: Les épaves grecques archaïques du VIe siècle av. J. Chr. de Marseille: Épaves Jules-Verne 7 et 9 et César 1. In H. Tzalas (ed.), Tropis VI. Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Ship Construction in Antiquity, Athens, 425–437. Reuthner 2006: Reuthner, R.: Wer webte Athenes Gewänder? Die Arbeit von Frauen im anti ken Griechenland, Frankfurt et al. Romeo 2016: Romeo, N.: How Archaeologists Discovered 23 Shipwrecks in 22 Days. http:// news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/07/greece-shipwrecks-discovery-fourni-ancient- diving-archaeology/ (accessed July 2016). Spantidaki (forthcoming): Spantidaki, S.: Textile Production in Classical Athens, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 27). Spantidaki & Moulherat 2012: Spantidaki, Y. & Moulherat, C.: Greece. In M. Gleba & U. Mannering (eds.), Textiles and Textile Production in Europe. From Prehistory to AD 400, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 11), 185–200. Sparkes 1991: Sparkes, B. A.: Greek Pottery. An Introduction, London. Zissis 1954: Zissis, V. G.: Βαμβακερά, καννάβινα καὶ λινὰ υφάσματα τοῦ 5ου π.Χ. αι ώνος. Ἀποδίπλωσις καὶ συντήρησις αὐτών, Proceedings of the Athens Academy 29, 587–593.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Die Welt der „Mode“ bei Aristophanes Kleidung im soziologischen und sozioökonomischen Kontext

Monika Frass

Neben den zahlreichen philologischen Arbeiten zu Aristophanes, dem bekanntesten Vertreter der Alten Komödie,1 sind soziologische und sozioökonomische Themen bisher nur vereinzelte Randerscheinungen geblieben. Nach Victor Ehrenbergs Untersuchung „Aristophanes und das Volk von Athen“ ist hier vor allem die umfassende Studie von Jörg Spielvogel „Wirtschaft und Geld bei Aristophanes“ mit Schwerpunkten im Bereich Privathaushalt, Staatshaushalt und Handelsgeschehen in Athen zu nennen. Wie diese Studien zeigen bietet das Oeuvre des Aristophanes, trotz Einbindung in das literarische Genre Komödie, durchaus eine geeignete Ausgangsbasis für differen- zierte Fragen zum Alltagsleben Athens im 5. Jh. v.Chr.: Der Dichter bediente sich der Realität je nach Bedarf der von ihm gestalteten Handlung, das war seine Maxime bei der Abfassung der Komödien (...) Insofern beruht der generelle Quellenwert der Alten Komödie – soweit sie sich in den elf erhaltenen Stücken des Aristophanes darbietet – auf den in eine fiktive Umwelt ein- gearbeiteten Realien, die durch funktionale Integration in den komischen Kontext eine eingeschränkte Bestandsaufnahme der sozioökonomischen Gegebenheiten in Athen gegen Ende des Perikleischen Zeitalters bis in die erste Hälfte des 4. Jahrhunderts ermöglichen.2

Aristophanes zeichnet vertraute soziale und wirtschaftliche Szenarien, in welchen seine Protagonisten agieren, Beschreibungen von menschlichen Alltagsgewohnheiten und Verhaltensweisen, die in dieser Detailfülle für die Zeit des 5. Jh. v.Chr. einzig- artig geblieben sind. Gerade der zwischenmenschliche Faktor sowie das andernorts schwer fassbare ‚Atmosphärische‘ im täglichen Gesellschaftsleben des ‚einfachen‘ Bürgers werden hier in besonders anschaulicher Form greifbar.3 Im reichen Sortiment von Gebrauchsgütern findet sich neben Hausrat, Arbeits gerät und militärischer Ausrüstung wiederholt auch Kleidung der diversen Bühnen figuren der Alten Komödie.4 Die vielfältigen Formen der Gewänder und ihre spe

1 Zimmermann 1998; Möllendorff 2002; Holzberg 2010; Halliwell 2015; Compton Engle 2015; Dönt 2012; Abhandlungen zu Aristophanes mit historischem Bezug Dobrov 1997; Mhire & Frost 2014; Zumbrunnen 2015, mit weiterführender Basisliteratur. 2 Spielvogel 2001, 26. 3 Ehrenberg 1968f, 13–14; zu gesellschaftlichen Aspekten bei Aristophanes siehe auch Sutton 1980. 4 Eine detaillierte Analyse der bei Aristophanes (und in den Fragmenten) genannten Kleidung bietet die inzwischen als Standard-Referenzwerk anerkannte Monographie von Stone 1981, mit Auswertung nicht nur des literarischen, sondern auch des – ansatzweise – einschlägi- gen archäologischen Befunds; Hughes 2006, 39–68, mit Schwerpunkt auf Kostümen der Alten und Mittleren Komödie; neuerdings auch Compton-Engle 2015, 1, mit aktuellem Forschungsüberblick und Forschungsansätzen zu innovativer Symbolik der Kleidung: „My interest lies not so much in the cloak’s color or material, but whether the cloak was given freely, exchanged, or stolen from someones’s body, what the recipient will do with it, and

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 140 Monika Frass zifischen Bezeichnungen nutzt Aristophanes geschickt zur Charakterisierung seiner Heldinnen und Helden verschiedener sozialer Schichten.5 Kriterien wie Farbe, Qualität des Stoffes, Herkunftsattributiv, aber auch Hinweise auf Alter und Zu stand des Gewandes – rein oder verschmutzt, abgetragen oder neu – dienen, ebenso wie das Fehlen bestimmter Kleidungstücke im Gesamt-Outfit zur näheren Kenn zeichnung seiner Träger/innen. Die Kleidung eröffnet Einblick in interne gesell schaftsspezifische Erkennungsmuster, in Normen und Abweichungen durch die Varianz und/oder Konstanz in der äußerlich wahrnehmbaren Erscheinung der Bevölkerungsschichten, Aspekte im Rahmen der Aristophanischen Komödien, die – auch erweiterbar – durchaus noch Forschungsdesiderate bilden: Costume is an underappreciated weapon in the comic poet’s arsenal, often deplo- yed for specific theatrical and thematic purposes. Its use in comic performances also reflects cultural assumptions about power, the body, status, and mimesis.6 Hier soll nicht nur die soziologisch-normative Bedeutung von Kleidung für An gehörige diverser Gesellschaftsgruppen im Mittelpunkt stehen, sondern der Fokus ist, im Sinne der Neuorientierung der wirtschaftsgeschichtlichen Untersuchungen in Richtung „economic passions“,7 auch auf – nicht immer deutlich abgrenzbare – sozioökonomische Aspekte gerichtet. Von Interesse sind Informationen bei Aristophanes zum materiellen Wert der unterschiedlichen Gewandtypen, aber auch zu ihrer qualitativen Wertigkeit sowie fassbare Möglichkeiten zum permanenten oder kurzfristigen ‚Erwerb‘ von Kleidungsstücken. Neben Eigenproduktion lassen sich in den Komödien gestreut subtile Formen der humanitären ‚Selbsthilfe‘ finden, wie Ausborgen von Kleidung oder der Erhalt von Gewändern durch Schenkungen. Im Gegensatz zu diesen positiven Zugangsoptionen sind aber auch betrügerische Machenschaften wie Diebstahl von Gewändern in unterschiedli- chem Kontext bezeugt. Darüberhinaus bietet Aristophanes Hinweise zu merkantilen Erwerbs- und Vertriebsformen für dieses existentiell wichtige Alltagsprodukt.8 Das Aufeinanderprallen der Interessen von Kunden und Kaufleuten/Produzenten/ Händlern (-poles, -poioi, -ourgoi)9 in den Komödien des Aristophanes eröffnet Einblick in andernorts verborgene individuelle Kaufs- und Verkaufsstrategien des

how that action fits into any patterns of dressing and stripping within the play.“ Zu Kleidung generell Rössler 1974, 1539–1569; Pekridou-Gorecki 1989; Bieber 1928. 5 Stone 1981, 2, nennt hier unter den von Aristophanes präsentierten Bühnencharakteren „men, women, gods and heroes, special characters, and members of the chorus“. 6 Compton-Engle 2015, 1, mit Hinweis auf die bisher unterschätzte Bedeutung von Kleidung bei Aristophanes; vgl. auch Stone 1981, 269: „The exceptions are used in some cases to pro- voke humor and in others to indicate the age, social class, occupation, and national origin of the characters, with or without elements of humor.“ 7 Davidson 2012, 23. 8 Zur antiken griechischen Wirtschaft, speziell zu Vertrieb, Verkauf und Marktgeschehen siehe u.a. Bresson 2000 und 2007; Chankowski & Karvonis 2012; Demetriou 2012; Frass 2013; Harris et al. 2016, 1–39, mit aktuellem Forschungsüberblick. 9 Zur Problematik der Differenzierung dieser Terminologie im griechisch und römischen Quellenbefund, siehe Drexhage et al. 2002; 120–126, mit Bezug zu Fragen des örtlichen Handels.

Kleinhandels zwischen dem Anbieter und dem Verbraucher aus ‚marktpsychologi- scher‘ Sicht.10

Mode und Modetrends im soziologischen Kontext Kleidermodelle und Kleidervielfalt Unterschiedlichste Kleidermodelle für Ober- und Untergewand sind in differen- zierter Terminologie in den Komödien bezeugt, deren Kenntnis nicht nur beim Publikum der attischen Komödie vorausgesetzt werden sollte: (…) the poet expects the viewer to recognize at once the nuances and associations of each item of clothing: in many cases, individual jokes and entire scenes cannot be interpreted properly without such knowledge.11 Zu den bekanntesten Obergewändern (epiblema/periblema) bei Aristophanes, dem lose drapierten Gewandtypus zählen vor allem himation, tribon, chlaina, chla nis.12 Unter den vergleichsweise seltener bezeugten enger am Körper getragenen Untergewändern (endyma) werden als üblichster Gewandtyp, chiton/chitonion genannt. Gerade in dieser Kategorie ‚Unterkleidung‘/‚Hemd‘ sind Spezifika häufig, die sich durch diverse nicht immer zuweisbare und deutlich voneinander abgrenzbare Beschaffenheit der Gewandtypen auszeichnen, wie beispielsweise krokotos (safran- farbene durchsichtige Kleidung), ledarion (dünnes Sommergewand) oder batrachis (grüner chiton) erkennen lassen.13

10 Vgl. Holleran 2012, 4, mit Hinweis auf ein entspechendes Forschungsdesiderat für das kai- serzeitliche Rom: „Despite the centrality to the lives of the Romans, the retail trade is an area of commerce that has been insufficiently studied by ancient historians. Roman economic historians have tended to focus on largescale maritime trade, on agricultural and artisa- nal production, or on financial institution, rather than on the mechanics of consumption.“ 11 Stone 1981, 2, 155, zu Macharten, Trageweisen und Typen; auch mit quantifizierter Auswertung der einzelnen in den Komödien genannten Kleidungsstücke; zu Einteilungskriterien siehe Bieber 1928; Pekridou-Gorecki 1989, 56–101; vgl. Pekridou-Gorecki 1989, 121–136, auch mit generellem Verweis auf die Begrenztheit der Zuweisbarkeit von Terminologie und Darstellungen; Hughes 2006, 62, zur weitgehenden Übereinstimmung von Bühnenkostümen mit der wirklichen Alltagskleidung. 12 Stone 1981, 155–170, mit numerischer Auswertung (siehe hier Zahlen in Klammern) und Beschreibung der entsprechenden Kategorien „Obergewand – „Garments of the epiblema Type“: chiton (42); chlaina (15); tribon (13); chlanis/chlanidion/chlaniskion (7); zu weiteren Formen des „Obergewandes“ (epiblema) werden enkyklon (4); sisyra (4), diphthera (3); katona ke (2), ledarion (2), kaunake/Persis (1), chlamys (1) gezählt. 13 Stone 1981, 170–185, mit numerischer Auswertung der Kategorie „Untergewand“ –„Gar ments of the endyma Type“: chiton (9), krokotos (10), exomis (3), batrachis (2), halourgis (1), hemidiploidion (1), Kimberikon (1), peplos (1), orthostadion (1). Zusätzlich werden noch diverse Mischformen von Gewändern verschiedenster Materialien und Accessoires genannt wie phoinikis (5), Felle (4); thorax (2), xystis (2); zonion (1), strophion (5).

Selektive Liste von Gewandtypen bei Aristophanes (nach Stone):1415

„The batrachis is a men’s chiton which has been dyed to a batrachis pale green color; it was apparently the robe Stone 1981, 176 βατραχίς required for Prytaneian dinners.“ „The chlaina is an expensive type of men’s himation made chlaina from heavy wool and generally worn doubled Stone 1981, 160 χλαῖνα over; fastening the chlaina was optional.“ „This garment is a lighter, finer version of the chlaina, chlanis Stone 1981, which retains the doubled form of the prototype; unlike χλανίς 163f. the chlaina, however, it is worn by women as well as men.“ „… the term chiton is a generic name for garments … worn by both men and women. The structure of a chiton is based chiton on a piece of material which has been folded vertically and Stone 1981, 170 χιτών is then secured around the body by pinning or sewing the open side and by buttoning or pinning the shoulders …“

„The diphthera is a jerkin made form unprepared animal diphthera skin and worn chiefly by rustical males such as Stone 1981, 166 διφθέρα farmers and herdsmen.“

„The enkyklon is a type of women’s himation, which was enkyklon usually belted … the passages leave no doubt that the Stone 1981, ἔγκυκλον enkyklon is strictly a woman’s garment, and that a normal 164f. man will look rather foolish so dressed.“ „This masculine garment is a short, belted chiton which is only attached at one shoulder, leaving the opposite arm exomis Stone 1981, totally free for movement. It is normally worn by slaves, ἐξωμίς 175f. poor men, and those who regularly perform strenuous physical activity.“ thorax „The thorax is a metal breastplate which was fastened onto a Stone 1981, 182 θώραξ back piece at the shoulders and worn into battle.“ (= LSJ) halourgis „The halourgis is a chiton which has been dyed purple.“ Stone 1981, 177 ἁλουργίς „The himation is the basic epiblema (ἐπίβλημα15), or outer himation garment, for both men and women; it is distinguished Stone 1981, 155 ἱμάτιον from other types of mantles by the fact that it is drapedbut not fixed.“ katonake „The katonake is a ‚coarse frock with a border of sheepskin, Stone 1981, 167 κατωνάκη worn by slaves and laborers‘.“

14 Alle hier relevanten Begriffe zur Kleidung bei Aristophanes werden, sofern nicht anders ausgewiesen, in dieser Liste überblicksartig erfasst. 15 Stone 1981, 155: „Both men and women owned or wore two basic items of clothing, an epiblema (ἐπίβλημα) (also called periblema [περίβλημα]) and an endyma (ἔνδυμα). The epiblema is a loosely draped outer garment, usually a himation of some sort. Theendyma , on the other hand, is a chition-type garment, worn close to the body“.

„The kaunakes is a thick, woolen cloak with hanging kaunakes woolen tufts or tassels arranged in rows all over; Stone 1981, 168 καυνάκης it is probably Persian or Babylonian in origin.“ „According to Pollux (7.49) and Hesychius s.v., the Kimberikon Kimberikon is a type of full-length women’s chiton, known Stone 1981, 178 Κιμβερικόν especially for its fineness and transparency.“ „This is a woman’s chiton which has been dyed to a saffron krokotos color. The color adds gaiety to the garment, making it Stone 1981, 174 κροκωτός suitable for ceremonies and holidays, and also limiting it strictly to use by women.“ ledarion „The ledarion is an inexpensive, lightweight himation Stone 1981, 167 λῃδάριον for use in summer.“ „This is a chiton worn in straight-hanging folds, with orthodastadion no belt, and hence, no kolpos … Whenever a diaphonous Stone 1981, 179 ὀρθοστάδιον chiton was worn, clearly the orthostadion style would increase its transparency, and thus, its allure.“ „The sisyra is a thick, fleecy epiblema made from uncarded sisyra and unspun animal hair, usually that of a goat. The sisyra Stone 1981, 165 σισύρα was used as a blanket as well as a rustic mantle.“ „The spolas is a leathern jerkin, worn over the chiton … spolas the spolas may have had a special function as a Stone 1981, 168 σπολάς sacrificial garment.“ „The tribon is a poorer type of men’s chlaina, worn by tribon Spartans, ascetic philosophers, slave and poor people. Stone 1981, 162 τρίβων It was made of coarse, homespun material, and was worn doubled.“

Kleidung zwischen gesellschaftlicher Norm und Abweichung Als Standardkleidung von Männern gelten der um die Schultern geschlungene himation sowie ein kurzer gegürteter chiton.16 Geschlechtsspezifika17 sind fassbar, wenn von Schuhen wie den lakonikai 18 gesprochen wird, die ebenso wie der typische Mantel (chlaina) der Männerwelt zugeordnet werden:

16 Stone 1981, 268, mit Ausnahmen von der üblichen Erscheinungsform und weiterführender Literatur. 17 Spielvogel 1982, 151: „Das äußere Erscheinungsbild eines Atheners, einer Athenerin wird in den Komödien mit diesen charakteristischen Kleidungsstücken verbunden: Spartanerstiefel und Mäntel sind männerspezifisch, durchsichtiges Unterkleid, Safrangewand und Bänder schuh sind Frauenattribute.“ 18 Stone 1981, 225–227, mit Hinweisen auf die mögliche Beschaffenheit dieses Schuhwerks und weiteren Belegstellen bei Aristophanes: „Lakonikai are full shoes with uppers, fastened onto the feet with straps; they were normally red or white, and considered to be finer than the embas“ (a.O. 225–226); vgl. Spielvogel 2001, 151 zu lakonikai – ihrer geschlechtsspezfi- schen Aussage und der Anspielung auf Sparta: „Das äußere Erscheinungsbild eines Atheners, einer Athenerin wird in den Komödien mit diesen charakteristischen Kleidungsstücken verbunden: Spartanerstiefel (lakonikai) und Mäntel sind männerspezifisch, durchsichtiges

Du selber Bursch sag an: Bist du ein Mann? / Doch wo der Schweif? Der Mantel (chlaina)? Wo die Stiefel (lakonikai)? – 19 Neben den Standardgewandformen für Frauen, wie himation/enkyklon und dem langen darunter getragenen chiton, ist es vor allem die Transparenz bestimmter weiblicher Kleidung, die wiederholt moralisierend thematisiert wird. Neben speziellen transparenten chitons 20 werden weitere durchsichtige Gewandtypen wie krokotos, aber auch enkyklon oder Kimberikon als verführerisches Spezifikum der Frauenwelt genannt, assoziiert mit humoristisch überzeichneten weiblichen Attitüden der Ver schwendungssucht, Putzsucht und Lasterhaftigkeit: Aristophanes will natürlich den Athenerinnen unterstellen, dass sie mit der Durch sichtigkeit des safranfarbenen Stoffes den Blick auf ihr Untergewand freigaben, sie also bewusst in aufreizender Kleidung einherschritten.21 Eine ‚verkehrte‘ Welt und damit verbunden – entsprechend (negativ) gewertete – Charaktereigenschaften werden durch das bewusste oder unbewusste Vertauschen von Frauen- und Männergewändern und somit ihrer gesellschaftlichen Rollen be wirkt. Der ungewollten lächerlich erscheinenden „effeminatio“ von Männern in Frauenkleidung wird die bewusste ‚gefürchtete‘ Emanzipation von Frauen im Männer gewand gegenübergestellt. Männerkleidung wie Mäntel (himatia) und Schuhwerk (lakonikai) werden hier ebenso herangezogen, wie weibliche Gewandstücke (enky klon), um die wechselnden Geschlechterrollen auch optisch zu verdeutlichen.22 Im Vergleich zu den zahlreichen Männercharakteren und den zu ihrer Verkörperung bezeugten Gewandtypen ist die Anzahl von Frauenrollen und weiblicher Kleidung in den Komödien des Aristophanes jedoch weitaus geringer. 23 Gewänder unterschiedlicher sozialer Gruppierungen und Altersklassen geben Einblick in gesellschaftliches Normverhalten, nicht zuletzt durch Hinweise auf

Unterkleid, Safrangewand und Bänderschuh sind Frauenattribute.“ Zum zusätzlichen öko- nomischen Aspekt in der Nennung der Produkte, siehe Spielvogel 2001, 153. 19 Thesm.141–142. 20 Lys. 48; 150; 411–412. 21 Spielvogel 1982, 152; vgl. Rößler 1974, 1545 (3); vgl. Thesm. 138–140; Lys. 42–48: „Ach, geh, was werden Fraun Vernünft’ges tun, / Was Glänzendes? – Frisiert, gefärbt, so sitzen / Wir da, geschminkt, im safrangelben Schal, / Mit Bänderschuhn und transparenten Kleidern (…) (krokotophorousai) / Lysistrate: Das eben ist’s, was Rettung uns verspricht, / Die gelben Schals (Kimberik’ orthostadia), die Bänderschuh, die Salben, / Die Schminke, die durchsichtigen Gewänder (diaphane chitonia).“ Zur lasterhaften Zeichnung der Frauen (durch Euripides), siehe besonders Thesm. 393–394; Lys. 369. 22 Vgl. Eccl. 74, 269, 508: Der Chor der Frauen trägt die Schuhe (lakonikai) ihrer Männer; Eccl. 345, 542: Praxagora trägt die lakonikai ihres Mannes Blepyros. Zur effeminatio siehe Thesm.142: Mnesilochos weist auf die „Unmännlichkeit“ von Agathon, mit Hinweis auf das Fehlen der entsprechenden Schuhe (lakonikai); vgl. auch die Vergabe des himation/enkyklon von Euripides von Mnesilochos, um seine Verweichlichung anzuzeigen (Thesm. 250/261). 23 Stone 1981, 297: „The costumes of the female characters in Aristophanes are much less varied than those of the males. In addition, the women do not dress and undress on stage as often as the men.“ vgl. Hughes 2006, 47: „Athenian comedy inevitably centred upon men … In the extant plays of Aristophanes, however, almost a quarter of both speaking and silent characters are women or girls, although only nine female characters can be counted among approximately 50 principal characters“.

Abweichungen von der Regel. So wird die übliche altersgerechte Kleidung erkennbar, wenn der Greis in untypischer Gewandung erscheint und anstelle von Rock (tri bon) und Holzschuhen (embas), plötzlich mit zierlichem Schuhwerk (konipode) ein- herschreitet und in exklusiver Fellkleidung (chlaina).24 Humoristisch überzeichnete Fürsorge erweist der Sohn dem alten Vater, wenn er diesen zwar mit entsprechender ‚greisengerechter‘ Nahrung, mit Gerstenschleim, ernährt, aber darüberhinaus mit (erdrückend) wärmender Kleidung ausstattet, und zum behaglichen Rock (chlaina) noch einen wärmenden Pelz (sisyra) spendet.25 Die exomis wird bei Aristophanes im Zusammenhang mit Kleidung von Sklaven und Armen erstaunlicherweise keines wegs häufig genannt:26 Als Gabe eines Herrn an seine beiden Sklaven wird die Un dankbarkeit dieser Zielgruppe für die scheinbare ‚Großzügigkeit‘ des Philokleon bei Ihrer Einkleidung ‚beanstandet‘. Nicht nur die exomis, sondern auch der ländliche Lederrock (diphthera), Pudelkappe (kynas) und altes (Fell-)Schuhwerk (embas) gegen Winterfrost gehören zu den von ihnen wenig geschätzten ‚Geschenken‘, wohl stigmatisierenden Kennzeichen einer sozialtypischen hier zudem als ländlich cha- rakterisierten Sklavenbekleidung: Wird doch die diphtera generell als Kleidung von einfachen Schafhirten angesehen, ein aus städtischer Sklavenperspektive wohl wenig geachtetes Gewand, worin ein zusätzlicher Hinweis auf ein Bewusstsein um ein dis- kriminierendes Stadt-Landgefälle im Outfit geschlossen werden kann: The garment diphtera( ) is obviously inexpensive and suitable for hard, outdoor work. We may expect that any farmer who appears [on stage] wears the diphtera, and … that the jerkin (exomis) may occasionally appear on rustic slaves as well.27

Chor: Seh’ nur einer her: die beiden, wie an ihrem alten Herrn / Sie sich freventlich vergreifen und vergessen undankbar / Wams (exomis) und Pelz (diphthera) und Pudelkappe (kynas), die er ihnen einst gekauft, / Und wie er zur Zeit des Winters ihnen warm die Füße hielt, / Daß sie nicht die Zeh’n erfroren! Doch in ihren Augen ist / Keine Dankbarkeit für diese alten – abgetragnen Schuh!28

24 Eccl. 848–850: Heroldin: „Im Pelzrock (chlanis), in den zierlichsten Sandalen (konipode) / Lacht, schäkert mit dem Jüngling dort der Greis.“ 25 Vesp. 737–738; vgl. hingegen Vesp. 1120–1157 zur neuen Ausstattung des Vaters Philokleon durch seinen Sohn mit dem kostbaren Persermantel (kaunake). 26 Stone 1981, 175: Die nur dreimalige Erwähnung dieses typischen Sklaven- und Armen gewandes bei Aristophanes (Vesp. 444; Lys. 662 und 1021) wird als nicht repräsentativ für die Erscheinung dieser Personengruppen auf der Bühne betrachtet: „For example the many slaves who appear in the plays probably are distinguished as such partially by the exomis. Elsewhere, poor and working Athenians may wear the exomis in place of the two-shoulder tunic, though the text provides no direct evidence.“ 27 Stone 1981, 166–167. 28 Vesp. 441–447; vgl. Spielvogel 2001, 50–51, der durch Hinweise auf die anfängliche Anzahl von zwei Sklaven, eine ökonomische Einschätzung dieses Privathaushalts von Philokleon vor- nimmt: „Zur ersten ökonomischen Einschätzung dieses Privathaushalts dient der Hinweis, daß der Vater noch zwei der mittlerweile fünf Sklaven mit Kleidung und Schuhwerk aus- gerüstet hatte. Die vergrößerte Sklavenschar und die luxuriösen Kleidungstücke weisen Bdelykleon (= Philokleon) als städtischen, wohlhabenden Athener aus, der Symposien mit seinesgleichen feiert.“ Zum Erwerb von spezieller regional importierter Sklavenkleidung (chlaniskion) auf der Agora, siehe auch Pax 1002.

Sklavenkleidung (katonake) wird andernorts auch von Lysistrata im politischen Dialog mit dem Prytanen metaphorisch dem freien Bürgergewand (chlaina) gegenübergestellt.29 Informationen über ein ‚spartenspezifisches‘ Outfit bietet auch das Szenario um die Neueinkleidung des prozesssüchtigen Philokleon. Die Reaktion des ‚bäuerlich‘ einfachen Vaters auf die überraschende Ausstaffierung mit kostbaren Gewändern durch seinen ‚urbanisierten‘ Sohn (Antikleon) wird zum soziologischen Spiegel: Der inzwischen schäbig gewordene Soldatenmantel (tribon) – eine Reminiszenz auf die siegreichen Perserkriege – wird nur ungern vom widerwillig beschenkten Philokleon gegen den unbekannten Luxuspelz (chlaina/kaunake), der kostbaren importierten Ware aus dem Perserreich (Ekbatana) abgelegt. Die Verwechslung dieser Gewandung mit einfacher einheimischer Ware, einem Pelz (sisyra) aus Thymaitadai stellt zudem die begrenzte antiquiert-traditionelle Welt des Philokleon der jugend- lich aktuellen Weltoffenheit gegenüber und gleichzeitig die bürgerliche Einfachheit einer nun neureichen Geistesgesinnung: Für den Vater hielt der alte abgewetzte Mantel die Erinnerung an seine Soldatenzeit wach, der neue macht ihn fortan zum reichen Athener, nur seine bäuerlichen Manieren kann er nicht abstellen.30

Mode und Modetrends im sozioökonomischen Kontext „Wert“ und „Wertigkeit“ von Gewändern Die qualitative Wertigkeit dieser Gewänder ist neben dem – nicht immer gebotenen Kontext – durch verschiedene, oft nur bedingt aussagekräftige Faktoren, fassbar. Neben der Nuancierung in den Bezeichnungen, möglichen Diminutiven etc.,31 werden variierende Qualität oder Machart durch Hinweise auf unterschiedlich wertvol- le Materialien, wie Wolle, Leinen, Fell, aber auch durch die Angabe der Herkunft verdeutlicht. Überliefert sind milesische, phrygische oder zyprische Wolle;32 Pro dukte aus Persien (Mantel: kaunakes), aus Thymaitadai (Fell/Pelz: sisyra)33 oder aus

29 Lys. 1155–1156. Zur Beschaffenheit dieser katonake, vgl. Stone 1981, 167 (siehe oben Liste Gewandtypen). 30 Vesp. 1139–1147: „Antikleon: Halt nimm den Mantel um und laß das Schwatzen. / Philokleon: Was ist denn das für ein verfluchtes Ding? / Antikleon: Ein Perserpelz, man nennt es auch Kaunake. / Philokleon: Für’n Schafspelz (sisyra) hielt ichs’s aus Thymaitadai. / Antikleon: Ich glaub’s: nach Sardes bist du nie gekommen, / Sonst kenntest Du’s, so aber – / Philokleon: Ich nach Sardes?“; vgl. Spielvogel 2001, 50–51. Zur Soldatenkleidung (phoini kis) – vor allem mit Bezug zu Spartanern, siehe Stone 1981, 180–181 (unter „Miscellaneous and clothing accessories“); dazu auch Hughes 2006, 55. 31 Stone 1981, 173, zur generellen Verwendung von chitonion in den Komödien und entsprechenden Bedeutungsvarianten, siehe Anm.65: „The matter of diminutives is complex …; man vermutet dabei eine besondere Feinheit des Gewebes ebenso wie eine ‚affectionate familiarity‘.“ 32 Lys. 729–730; 735–741; u.ö. 33 Stone 1981, 168; Spielvogel 2001, 153, mit Hinweis auf Produktion und Vertrieb dieser kost spieligen, importierten Ware: „Ein kostbarer Mantel, in Ekbatana von persischen Schneidern genäht, fand in Athen ebenfalls seine Käufer.“ Die Seltenheit dieses Produkts in heimischer Umgebung wird durch die Unkenntnis von Philokleon, des unwilligen Empfängers dieses Übergewandes (kaunake) noch unterstrichen, wenn er mit spezifischen Anspielungen die-

Phrygien (Mantel: chlaina).34 Diese tendenziösen Informationen geben jedoch vor- dergründig oft nur Einblick in Klischees über entsprechende Herkunftsgebiete aus der Sicht Athens im 5. Jh., humoristisch verfremdet durch die Brille des Komö dienschreibers, wenngleich eine assoziative Vorstellung vom Warenwert und -preis bei Kunden durch der Angabe regionaler Herkunft von Produkten sehr wahrscheinlich scheint.35 Nur in wenigen Fällen findet man konkrete Preisangaben bei Kleidungsstücken bzw. Schuhen, die wiederum nur selten durch unmittelbare relationale Vergleiche auswertbar für ein Verständnis des Preis-Leistungsverhältnis dieser Zeit sind. Un realistisch hoch scheint die Summe von einem Talent für einen Persermantel (kau nakes) aus Ekbatana.36 Die Ausgabe für dieses Kleidungsstück kann jedoch als Indiz für die ökonomische Basis des Eigentümers betrachtet werden: Der Gegenwert des Talents definiert die Güte des Mantels, suggeriert dem Audi torium aber auch, das monetäre Privatvermögen dieses Haushalts auf der Ebene der reichen Athener einzustufen ... einen Privathaushalt ..., der mindestens mit dem eines Hippeis vergleichbar ist, denn für solch einen luxuriösen Mantel konnte man sich auch ein Pferd zum Preis von zwölf Minen leisten.37 Realistischer muten dagegen Preise von zwanzig Drachmen für einen Mantel (hi mation), oder acht Drachmen für Schuhe (hypodemata) an.38 Relative Qualitäts unterschiede sind auch durch direkte Vergleiche verschiedener Kleidungsstücke im Kontext zu erschließen. So scheint der Wert von Mänteln bereits durch die Be zeichnung impliziert zu sein: der tribon galt als billigeres Kleidungsstück als die chlaina;39 diese wiederum wurde qualitativ von der chlanis, einem weiteren Ober

ses besonders wärmende Kleidungsstück für ein einheimisches (Ziegen-)Fell (sisyra) aus Thymaitadai hält Vesp.( 1135–1141). 34 Vgl. Av. 493; zu chlaina siehe oben Liste-Gewandtypen. 35 Spielvogel 2002, 153 und 167, mit Hinweis auf die von Aristophanes vorausgesetzte Kenntnis des ökonomischen Wissens beim Publikum, im Sinne einer Warendifferenzierung: mit dem Produktnamen wird schon der zu erwartender Kaufpreis verbunden: „Bestimmte Produktbezeichnungen für Mäntel und Schuhe wiesen die Käufer vorab auf eine billige oder luxuriöse Preiseinstufung hin, so daß auch eine interne Warendifferenzierung vorlag.“ 36 Vesp. 1139–1141; zur unterschiedlichen Interpretation dieser Summen – als Hinweis auf das Gewicht, der darin verarbeiteten Wolle, bzw. verständlicher, wenngleich zu hoch angesetzt, als Geldwert, siehe Spielvogel 2001, 51 Anm.102. 37 Spielvogel 2001, 51, mit Hinweis auf den Pferdekauf des Strepsiades – allerdings auf „Kredit basis“ – Nub. 21–23. 38 Plut. 980–986, als Gaben einer älteren Amantin für ihren jugendlichen Liebhaber; wobei neben konkreten Preisen für die avisierten Kleidungsstücke, auch Sachwerte in Naturalien, wie vier Scheffel Weizen als „Dank“ der Geliebten abgestattet werden. Zu weiteren vergleichbaren Werten für Kleidung, siehe Spielvogel 2001, 152: Zehn Drachmen für die ge- wöhnliche Sklaven- und Armenkleidung (exomis), nach Plut. mor. 470–471. Zu Preisen für persönliche Kriegsausstattung wie u.a. Brustpanzer zehn Minen; Helm eine Mine, siehe unten. 39 Vesp. 1132: Antikleon/Bdelykleon: „Leg ab den schä’gen Flaus (tribon); / Trag jünglings- haft dafür den wollnen Mantel (chlaina)“; vgl. Hughes 2006, 55, zum Materialunterschied zwischen dem kostbaren und zerlumpten Mantel: „The homespun tribon is the poorest; it is worn by the Chorus of Acharnians, the slave Kario’s tribon is full of holes (Plut.714); impro-

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 148 Monika Frass gewand übertroffen. Ähnliches findet sich im Zusammenhang mit Schuhen, Mo delle wie lakonikai (Spartanerstiefel/-schuhe) werden als (unbestimmt) teurer als embas (Holzschuhe) bewertet.40 Umgekehrt wird für Kleidung nicht nur Geld aus- gegeben, sondern dieses auch zur Lukrierung von erwünschtem Bargeld eingesetzt: Anhand von Frauengewand (enkyklon) wird deutlich in die erotische Welt des ver- botenen Vergnügens verwiesen, in bewährter Unterstellung der weiblichen Untreue, sowie der Trunk- und Verschwendungssucht, wenn Kalonike für den Frieden zu unglaublichem ‚Opfer‘ bereit ist: Lysistrate: Sagt, würdet ihr nun wohl, wenn ich das Mittel / Euch sag, mit mir dem Krieg ein Ende machen! / Kalonike: Bei Gott, sogleich, und müßt ich meinen Rock (enkyklon) / Versetzen und das Geld noch heut vertrinken.41 Die ‚Wertigkeit‘ eines Kleidungsstückes kann indirekt auch durch den Hinweis auf die Tragik für den Eigentümer durch Verlust des entsprechenden Gewandes erschlossen werden, wie das Beispiel des Euelpides zeigt, der den Diebstahl seines Mantels beklagt. Das Fehlen des eigenen, einzigen Mantels wird auch in der Komödie Lysistrate thematisiert, wenn Blepyros sich im weiblichen Gewand dem Nachbarn präsentieren muss, der ebenfalls über den peinlichen Verlust seiner unverzichtbaren Ausgehkleidung (himation) lamentiert, waren doch diese Kleidungsstücke den diebi- schen Übergriffen ihrer ‚revolutionären‘ Ehefrauen zum Opfer gefallen.42 Neben humoristisch überzeichneter bewusster Aneignung von männlichen Kleidungsstücken als Mittel der Verkleidung für den ungehinderten Zugang zur Volksversammlung durch Frauen, werden auch realistischere Motive für die unrechtmäßige Aneignung fremder Kleidung erkennbar. Unökonomisches, nicht zeitkonform-vorausschauen- des Wirtschaften konnte zu Engpässen in der Beschaffung hausinterner notwendi- ger Textilien führen und schlimmstenfalls in kriminellen Handlungen, wie Stehlen von Kleidung, münden.43 Als verantwortlich für Übergriffe auf die Kleidung anderer, wird aber auch spezifischer Lebenswandel vermutet, wie die Anspielung auf die wenig einträgliche Philosophenzunft vermuten lässt, die mit Diebstählen an wohl leicht zugänglichen Orten, wie der Palästra oder raffinierten listigen Einverleibungen von Gewändern in Verbindung gebracht werden,44 eine unrechtmäßige Aneignung von Kleidung, die auf Seiten der Bestohlenen auf Grund des nicht unbeachtlichen

vement in a man’s fortunes can be marked by the exchange of his tribon for a chlaina (Vesp. 1131–1132; vgl. auch Plut. 842–844).“ 40 Vesp. 1157–1158: „Antikleon/Bdelykleon: So! – Zieh dir jetzt die lump’gen Sohlen (embadai) ab, / Und binde dies spartan’sche Paar (lakonikai) dir unter!“ 41 Lys. 111–114. 42 Av. 493–498: Euelpides beklagt den Diebstahl seines phrygischen Wollmantels (chlaina/ himation); vgl. Eccl. 352–353: Der Nachbar des von Praxagora um sein Ausgehgewand ge- brachten Blepyros beklagt ebenfalls den Verlust seines Mantels (himation), der sein einziger war: „Ich muß zur Volksversammlung gehen, ’s ist Zeit. / Hätt ich nur meinen Rock (hima tion)! Er ist mein einziger.“ Zum Kleiderdiebstahl von Praxagora und generell, siehe Lagger 2008, 489–493. 43 Vgl. oben. 44 Selbst Sokrates, als Vertreter der mittellosen Philosophenzunft wird bei Aristophanes mit dem Diebstahl eines Mantels in Verbindung gebracht, entwendet aus der Palästra zur Versorgung seiner Studenten (Nub. 177–179); die Abnahme des Mantels des studierwilligen Strepsiades in der „Denkerei“ wird ebenfalls als „Gabe“ eines Opfers der intellektuellen

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Die Welt der „Mode“ bei Aristophanes 149 individuellen Wertes auch von Alltagskleidung als besonders schlimmes Übel emp- funden werden konnte.45 Das Bemühen um Sauberhaltung der Kleidung zählt ebenso zum Anliegen der Bevölkerung, wie entsprechende verzichtbare Ausgaben zeigen. Die verursach- ten Kosten in der Höhe des ‚Soldes‘ für die Reinigung des Gewandes schlagen schwer zu Buche, wie die Klage des Philokleon, des prozesssüchtigen Richters bezeugt. Ungeeignet für bessere Kleidung ist er mit seinem schäbigen unempfindli- chen Gewand (tribon) durchaus zufrieden. Die Unvereinbarkeit mit hochwertigerer Kleidung – dem kostbaren Persermantel (Fell) – scheitert aus seiner Sicht nicht zuletzt durch die vorgegebene Unfähigkeit zur Sauberhaltung seines alltagstauglichen Gewandes beim einfachen Mahl.46 Diese privilegierte Ablehnung anspruchsvoller Kleidung aus persönlichen Gründen kann als Umkehr der wirklichen Realität betrachtet werden. Im gewöhnlichen attischen Alltagsleben war das Fehlen anspruchs- vollerer Kleidung bei attischen Bürgern wohl vor allem auf hoffnungslose ausweglose Armut zurückzuführen. Die Auswirkung dieses existentiell bedrohlichen Elends wird wiederholt – direkt oder indirekt – durch Hinweise auf abgetragen, zerrissene, schäbige Kleidung verdeutlicht, u.a. durch eine Kleidermetapher, wenn Chremylos der Göttin Penia die durch sie bewirkten untragbaren Lebensumstände schildert: Statt des Mantels (himation) bescherst du den schäbigen Flaus (rakos), der zerrissen von oben bis unten.47 Auch Festgewänder, wie Brautkleider oder Kultgewänder werden in verschiedenster Beschaffenheit und Qualität spezifiziert.48 Die Besonderheit der Kleidung bei kul- tisch festlichen Anlässen wird u.a. am Beispiel des Tragens eines „Safrankleides“ (kro

(sophistischen) Zunft in Erwägung gezogen (Nub. 497; 856; 1498); zur Schwierigkeit der Interpretation diese Stelle, vgl. u.a. Lagger 2008, 488. 45 Av. 493–498: „Du kannst mich fragen: / Meinen Mantel (chlaina) von Phrygischem Wollenzeug hab ich Armer durch diesen verloren! / Ich war in die Stadt zu dem Namensfest eines Bübchens geladen, da trank ich / Mir ein Räuschchen und dämmerte allmählich ein, eh die anderen noch tranken: da kräht’ er; / Ich wähnend, es tag, geh Halimous zu und lavie- re so grad vor die Mauern / Hinaus: da versetzt mir ein Straßendieb mit dem Knüppel eins über den Rücken: / Da lag ich im Dreck und versuchte zu schrein, doch davon waren Mantel (himation) und Spitzbub!“ Zum Kleiderdiebstahl auch als Symbol für physische Gewalt, siehe Compton-Engle 2015, 9: „Control over clothing is closely linked with control over the body itself: to have one’s cloak forcibly removed is one small step away from being physically beaten.“ Zu Kleidung als Beute diebischer Übergriffe und deren möglichen Verkauf am „Schurkenmarkt“ in Athen, siehe Lagger 2008, 489–494 (mit weiterem Quellennachweis). 46 Vesp. 1125–1132. 47 Plut. 540: Zur Kleidung des Armen; vgl. auch Plut. 714: Ein zerlumpter/löchriger Mantel (tribon) des Sklaven Karion; Plut. 842–846: der alte Mantel (tribonion) als Weihgeschenk des Gerechten, in dem er 13 Jahre lang gefroren hatte; Av. 1416–1418: Das zerlumpte reno- vierungsbedürftiges Gefieder des „Sykophanten“ wird – wiederum von Peithetairos in der Komödie „Vögel“ – metaphorisch mit einem Mantel (himation) in entsprechend schäbigem Zustand verglichen; vgl. auch Av. 915: auf ein verwahrlostes Gewand (ledarion) eines armen langhaarigen Poeten verweist die Frage von Peithetairos an den vermeintlichen Sklaven (doulos): „Peithetairos: Dein Rock (ledarion) hat auch schon lang gedient: man sieht’s!“ 48 Vgl. Stone 1981, 178–179 (peplos): Üblicherweise als weibliches Gewand deklariert (aus Wolle, mit Befestigung an beiden Schultern); er scheint unter den häufigsten weiblichen Gewandtypen neben chiton und himation auf, vgl. Pekridou-Gorecki 1989, 121); die nur

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 150 Monika Frass kotos) in Brauron dokumentiert durch den Chor der Frauen anlässlich der Weihung an Artemis beim Bärenfest.49 Dass auch im Zusammenhang mit Festgewändern die Folgen von Armut spürbar und sichtbar werden konnten, zeigt der Hinweis auf die Beeinträchtigung der Qualität des Brautgewandes (himation), wenn das Schmücken der Braut mit kostbaren bunten Stoffen nicht mehr leistbar war.50

Erwerb und Vertrieb von Kleidung Zwischen Eigenproduktion und „Marktwirtschaft“ Die Produktion von selbstgefertigter Ware war im bürgerlichen Haushalt der Athener durchaus verbreitet, wie Hinweise auf Wollverarbeitung, vom Scheren der Schafe bis zur Anfertigung von Gewandstücken zeigen.51 Die Eigenproduktion von Kleidung, durch Wollverarbeitung von Frauen,52 konnte, sofern diese Haushaltstradition im zunehmend merkantilen Alltagsleben der städtischen Bevölkerung Athens möglich war, die Notwendigkeit des Kleidungskaufs reduzieren. Wie die Komödie zeigt, wurde Wolle bzw. fertig Gewalktes/Gewebtes jedoch nicht nur für den Eigenverbrauch produziert, sondern war auch für den Verkauf am Markt vorgesehen: Ach ich Arme saß so emsig / An meiner Arbeit, die Spindel voll Garn / Ei-ei-ei- eifrig in Händen drehend, / ein Knäuel (knephaion) zu fertigen, um morgen früh / Am Tag auf den Markt ihn zu tragen.53 Heimische Wolle wurde somit neben importierten Produkten für die Weiterver arbeitung angeboten, andererseits wurde auch importierte Ware in den heimischen Haushalten erstanden und weiterverarbeitet:54„Der Warenumfang im Textil- und

einmalige Erwähnung in Ach. 423 weist dieses Gewand jedoch als männliche Kleidung aus; zur ebenfalls seltenen Erwähnung der chlamys, Stone 1981, 169–170. 49 Lys. 645; vgl. oben Liste-Gewandtypen; zu Kleidung im Kult, siehe auch Pekridou-Gorecki 1989, 101–108. 50 Plut. 529–530: „… die Braut ... / Noch zierst mit gestickten Gewändern (himatia) du sie, buntfarbig, von köstlichen Stoffen.“ 51 Vgl. den Chor der Vögel in Av. 713–715; zur Versorgung der Männer mit Gewand (himatia), siehe Lys. 654. 52 Zum detaillierten Ablauf weiblicher Wollverarbeitung, mit der Herstellung eines wollenen Mantels (chlaina) als Endprodukt, vgl. die Wollmetapher von Lysistrate (Lys. 567–586). Zur Wollverarbeitung als sexuelle Metapher, siehe Lys. 729–730: „Frau: Ich muß nach Haus / Ich hab daheim milesische Wolle liegen, / Die mir die Motten fressen … / Soll ich um die Wolle kommen; Lys. 735: „Frau: Ach Gott, ach Gott, mein Flachs! Ich ließ daheim ihn ungehechelt –.“ Zur Verantwortlichkeit von Frauen für den Webstuhl, siehe auch Ran. 1314–1316; 1346–1350; auch Thesm. 821–822. 53 Ran. 1346–1350: In welcher Form, die „Wolle“ angeboten wurde, ist jedoch ungewiss; Spielvogel 2001, 153: „… manche Frauen boten ihre fertigen Kleidungsstücke auf der Agora an.“ Zum möglichen Anteil von Frauen bei der Herstellung und bei Eigentum von Kleidung innerhalb des oikos und außer Haus ab klassischer Zeit, siehe Tsakirgis 2015, 167–186, mit Hinweis auf die wohl bisher unterschätzte Beteiligung von Männern am Herstellungs prozess und die Problematik des Rückschlusses auf die Anzahl von Beschäftigten in der Textilproduktion nach der bisherigen archäologischen Evidenz der Webgewichte: „The conclusion to be drawn is that any discussion of textile work and sale in Classical and Hellenistic Greece needs to be better informed by feminist theory, better supported by material as well as literary evidence, and freed from the assumption that only women spun and wove“ (185). 54 Lys. 729–730.

Schuhsektor mußte also bei der hohen Population des urbanen Zentrums, selbst wenn sie nicht gänzlich das Angebot in Anspruch nahm, einem relativ breiten Käuferkreis entsprechen, so dass es nicht verwunderlich ist, daß Rohmaterialien oder fertige Handelswaren importiert wurden: Milesische, phrygische und zyprische Wolle wurden zur gewerblichen oder privaten Verarbeitung benutzt.“55 Der erforderliche Wechsel der Gewänder und die Vorsorge für die Bereitstellung jahres- zeitengemäßer Kleidung werden metaphorisch entsprechend thematisiert. Spezielle gefiederte Boten, u.a. Kranich, Weih und Schwalbe verkünden prophetisch in der Komödie „Vögel“ die Jahreszeiten und die damit für den Menschen verbundenen Aufgaben in den oikoi: im Rahmen dieser Arbeiten wird auch der nötige Aufwand für die Produktion der saisonal notwendigen Bekleidung, für den Sommer ein leda rion, für den Winter die wärmere chlaina genannt:

Wir verkünden die wechselnden Zeiten des Jahrs, den Frühling, den Sommer, den Winter: / Der Kranich er mahnt euch zu säen im Herbst, wenn er krächzend nach Libyen wandert, / … / Den Orestes heißt er sich weben ein Kleid (chlaina), um im Frost es nicht stehlen zu müssen. / Kommt aber der Weih, so verkündet er euch nach dem Winter die mildere Jahreszeit, / Wo die Frühlingswolle den Schafen ihr müßt abscheren; die zwitschernde Schwalbe, / die erinnert euch jetzt, zu vertrödeln den Pelz (chlaina) und ein sommerlich Röckchen (ledarion) zu kaufen; / Kurz, Ammon sind wir und Delphi für euch und Dodona und Phoibos Apollon!56

Wie wesentlich die Ausstattung mit Kleidung im Alltag war, lässt auch die entsprechende vorsorgliche Frage von Blepyros an Praxagora im ‚utopischen‘ Staatsmodell Ecclesiazusen erkennen: Die Bekleidung jedoch (himatia), wer versieht uns mit der? Denn auch dieses ver- lang ich zu wissen.57 Wenn Praxagora Blepyros für den Erhalt des Gewandes vertröstet bis zur Neuein kleidung durch Frauen, wird ebenfalls ein modus vivendi im alltäglichen Umgang mit Kleidung – nicht nur hinsichtlich der Produktion durch Frauen – erkennbar. Die Notwendigkeit des „Auftragens“ von Gewand wird durch Praxagoras’ Statement noch verdeutlicht: Ihr behaltet vorerst, was ihr tragt, auf dem Leib, wir weben in Zukunft euch neue.58 Dass die Auswahl im ‚Kleiderschrank‘ des durchschnittlichen Bürgers, der sich mit dem Taggeld (mistharion) von drei Obolen am Existenzminimum begnügen musste,

55 Spielvogel 2001, 153; zur Verarbeitung von Wolle für den Eigenbedarf und den möglichen Vertrieb, vgl. Ehrenberg 1968, 135. 56 Av. 709–722. 57 Eccl. 653. Zur Einkleidung von „nackt“ (scheinenden) Männern mit „gewöhnlicher“ Klei dung (exomides), vgl. auch Lys. 1019–1024: Chor der Frauen zum Chor der Männer: „Wie es dir gefällig! – Trotzdem bring ich’s doch nicht übers Herz, / Dich so nackt zu sehen! Du bist ja, sieh nur selbst – der Kinder Spott! / Nun ich komm zu dir und ziehe, mit Verlaub, dies Wams (exomis) dir an! / … / So nun siehst du wie ein Mann aus, bist nicht mehr der Kinder Spott!“ Zur Verwendung des Begriffs „Nacktheit“ als Hinweis auf spezifische Kleidung, siehe Stone 1981, 144–150. 58 Eccl. 654.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 152 Monika Frass bescheiden war, darauf weist der Besitz von nur einem ‚Mantel‘ hin, der Männer daran hinderte aus dem Haus zu gehen, wenn sein Gewand nicht verfügbar war.59

Verleihen – Ausborgen – Schenken Wie gestreute Hinweise in verschiedenen Komödien zeigen, war das Ausborgen von Gewändern durchaus üblich. Eine ausführliche Szene in den Acharnern widmet sich diesem Thema, wenn der Protagonist der Komödie, Dikaiopolis, Euripides inständig darum ersucht, ihm für seinen gefürchteten Auftritt vor dem Chor schäbige Gewänder aus den Requisiten seiner tragischen Helden, im Sinne von Bettelgewändern, „Kostümen des Jammers“ zu borgen.60 Wird hinter der Verkleidung des Dikaiopolis als Bettler im Kostüm des Telephos vor allem Aristophanisches Spiel mit ‚theatralischer‘ Verkleidung61 gesehen, so lässt sich neben dieser ‚mehr- schichtigen‘ Figur noch eine weitere Betrachtungsebene finden, eine Umkehr der Realität. Das Ausborgen von Kleidung diente im wahren Alltagsleben wohl eher dem kurzfristigen Erwerb von geeigneteren Objekten – wärmeren, stattlicheren oder ‚modischeren‘ (?) – Kleidern zur optischen Verbesserung, wenn diese aus ökonomi- schen Gründen unerschwinglich blieben oder überhaupt fehlten. Wirtschaftliche Notsituationen werden verdeutlicht durch Hinweise auf angespannte finanzielle Ressourcen der Einzelhaushalte. So konnte, wie im Falle Kalonikes angedeutet, Kleidung versetzt werden, um zu Bargeld zu gelangen,62 oder man half sich – vor allem unter Frauen – gegenseitig mit benötigten Utensilien auf Leihbasis aus. Dies verdeutlicht der Dialog zwischen Chremes und Blepyros in den Ecclesiazusen. Erstaunt berichtet Chremes über das friktionsfreie Funktionieren eines entsprechenden ökonomischen ‚Mikrokosmos‘ in der Frauenwelt: Die Weiber, sagt’ er, leihn einander Kleider (himatia) / Und Schmuck und Geld und Trinkgefäße unter / Vier Augen, ohne Zeugen: dennoch geben / Sie alles treu und redlich wieder heim: / Wir meint er, sei’n im Unterschlagen stark.63 In den begehrten Besitz von neuer Kleidung konnte man auch durch Schenkung von Kleidung gelangen. So beispielsweise im Falle des jugendlichen Liebhabers, der Gaben seiner ältlichen Gespielin erhält, nicht ohne Entsprechendes auch für seine Familienangehörigen, Schwester und Mutter zu fordern.64 Die Ausstattung des Galans mit Kleidung kann wohl in Umkehr der realen Gepflogenheiten zwi-

59 Eccl. 527; 535: Praxagora entwendet den Mantel (himation) ihres schlafenden Gemahls Blepyros , und hinterlässt ihm dafür ihr eigenes „Unterröcken“ (enkyklion), das ihm jedoch wenig Ersatz für den als Bettdecke – eine weitere Funktion der antiken Kleidung – genutzten Mantel bot, wie sein Vorwurf an Praxagora zeigt. 60 Ach. 410–448: mit Beispielen von „Bettelgewändern“ (rakos, tryche, peplos, peploma, rakoma, et al.) verschiedener tragischer Helden der Tragödien des Euripides. 61 Zur Funktion von Verkleidung vor allem hinsichtlich „gender“ und dem deutlichen Bezug zu „tragic theater and mimesis“ in den Komödien Acharner, Thesmophoriazusen und Fröschen, siehe Compton-Engle 2015, 88–109. 62 Lys. 111–114, vgl. oben. 63 Eccl. 446–450. 64 Plut. 980–986: „… Er achtete mich ungemein! Geld, etwa zwanzig Drachmen, heischt er wohl / Zu einem Mantel (himation), acht zu neuen Schuhen (hypodemata), / Dann sollt’ ich seinen Schwestern etwas kaufen, / Ein Kleid (chitonion), ein Mäntelchen (himatidion) für seine Mutter / Vier Scheffel Weizen auch erbat er sich.“

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Die Welt der „Mode“ bei Aristophanes 153 schen älteren Liebhabern und Hetären/Gespielinnen gesehen werden. Textilien als Brautgeschenke, aber auch als Gaben an (arme) Poeten zeigen ebenfalls die sozialöko- nomische Wertigkeit und Funktion dieser Objekte. Unter Gaben scheinen jedoch nicht nur Alltagsgewänder auf, sondern gerade hierin liegt die Möglichkeit, um in eigener Angelegenheit zu werben, wie die Vergabe von ‚Spezialgewändern‘ (batrachis) an verdienstvolle Personen durch den Demos zeigt. Auch Werbegeschenke in Form von Festgewändern (halourgis)65 durch nicht ganz uneigennützige Gönner sind hier erwähnenswert, verdeutlicht durch den taktischen Schachzug des Wursthändlers im Wettstreit mit dem sogenannten Paphlagonier (Kleon) um die Gunst des Volkes. Die Bereitwilligkeit für Kleiderspenden an Bedürftige findet ihren Ausdruck auch am Beispiel des spärlich bekleideten Poeten, der erfreut sein zeitlich unpassendes (Sommer-)Gewand (ledarion) gegen die von Peithetairos initiierte Kleiderspende (spolas/chiton) eintauscht.66 Kleidung wird bei Aristophanes auch als verpflichtende (Ab-)Gabe für bestimmte Berufsgruppen genannt: Der Kürschner (skylodepses) wird dazu verpflichtet, Vergehen mit einer bestimmten Anzahl von Fellen zu sühnen. Diese Vergehen mit Verpflichtung zur Abgabe von Kleidung für den Staat und die Bürger stehen wiederum im Kontext mit einem idealen Zukunftsmodell der Ecclesia, einem ökono- mischen Versuchsmodell: Euaion empfiehlt im Zuge der Übergabe der Herrschaft an die Frauen folgendes ökonomische Heilmittel für die Gemeinschaft speziell zur Winterszeit:

Die Walker liefern allen, die’s bedürfen, / Pelzmäntel (chlaina), wenn der kürz’ste Tag sich naht, / Dann wird kein Mensch mehr über Schnupfen klagen; / Und wer kein Bett hat, keinen Schlafpelz (sisyra), der / Legt, säuberlich gebadet, sich ins Nest / Bei einem Kürschner: weist er ihm im Winter / Die Türe, soll er’s mit drei Pelzen büßen. 67 Sind Gegengaben des ‚Staates‘ für die hier geforderten Realien der Fellproduzenten nicht bekannt, so wird andernorts durchaus Leistung mit Leistung vergolten: Wahr sager werden für ihre Dienste ‚naturalwirtschaftlich‘ entlohnt; sie erhalten für ihre Orakelsprüche Gaben in Form von Kleidung und Schuhen, wie die entsprechende eindeutige Aufforderung an den Kunden Peithetairos beim Verlesen des Orakel spruches durch den Orakeldeuter zeigt.68

Kauf von Kleidung Dass spezieller Kleiderkauf aber dennoch – trotz zahlreichen Alternativen zum merkantilen Erwerb – auch im Haushalt der Eigenproduzenten erforderlich war, wird nicht nur in den wenigen Anspielungen auf den angestrebten Kauf von Luxusstoffen für Frauen und weiterer kostspieliger Produkte erkennbar. Der notwendige und zeit-

65 Equ. 1404–1406: „Demos: Du aber kommst mit mir ins Prytaneion, / Der Platz von diesem Sündenbock ist dein; / Da, nimm dies grüne Kleid (batrachis) und folge mir!“; zu einem weiteren Festgewand in Purpur, siehe Equ. 967–969: Dem Demos wird vom Wursthändler im Wettstreit mit dem Paphlagonier ein besticktes Pupurgewand versprochen (halourgis). 66 Av. 933–948; der Spender dieses Sommergewandes wird auf Grund der Bezeichnung des Gewandes (spolas) auch im kultischen Bereich vermutet. 67 Eccl. 415– 421. 68 Av. 973: „Schenke dem Seher ein schmuckes Gewand und neue Sandalen.“

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 154 Monika Frass gerechte Verkauf von Winterkleidung (chlaina) eigens für den Erwerb von Sommer gewand (ledarion), den es im Kreislauf des Jahres zu bedenken galt (siehe oben), weist ebenso in diese Richtung. Neben den mitunter fassbaren persönlichen Motiven für den Erwerb von Kleidung wie existentiell bedingter Notwendigkeit, der moralisch verpflichtenden Einkleidung von Abhängigen, der Schenkung aus persönlichen Motiven und/oder auf Grund von erwiesener Gegenleistung, dem Ausborgen bzw. Verleihen von Gewändern, bietet Aristophanes auch Einblick in marktpsychologische Verhaltensmuster, bei Kauf und Verkauf von Ware. Wenngleich wie obiges Beispiel erkennen lässt, Tauschhandel mit Naturalien ebenso zu den Gepflogenheiten der aristophanischen Gesellschaft gehörte, spiegeln die erprobten Kaufverhandlungen und -gespräche in der Komödie „Frieden“ eine funktionierende Markt- und Geld wirtschaft auf der Basis von Angebot und Nachfrage. Textilien konnten im öffentlichen städtischen Einkaufsbereich, der Agora von Athen69 erworben werden, wie es im Zusammenhang mit Sklavenkleidung (chlanis kion) möglich war. Diese wurde – zumindest in wirtschaftlich intakten Friedens zeiten – u.a. von Händlern aus Böotien eingeführt.70 Auch der Walker (knafes) wird als Vertreiber von warmen Mänteln genannt (chlaina). Neben dem Angebot auf dem bekanntesten Marktplatz Athens und in den Produktionsstätten selbst, konnte entsprechender Kleinhandel auch frei Haus direkt beim Kunden erfolgen. Trygaios wird zum begehrten Ansprechpartner zahlreicher Kleinhändler/Verkäufer/Produzenten, die ihre Produkte – u.a. Soldatenkleidung und -zubehör (Brustpanzer, Helmbusch, etc.) zum Verkauf anbieten. Am Dialog zwischen Kunden und Verkäufer lassen sich detaillierte Kaufs- und Verkaufsstrategien ablesen. Die Palette an „Kleinhändlern“ ist anhand diverser Bezeichnungen fassbar: Eine Reihe von Waffenhändlern – deren Überspezialisierung vermutlich auch dem komischen Element der Komödie zugeschrieben werden kann71 – wie der Brustpanzerverkäufer (thorakopoles), der Kriegstrompetenverkäufer (salpigopoios), der Helmschmied (kranopoios) und der Helmbuschmacher (lofopoios) stehen Verkäufern landwirtschaftlicher Güter, dem Sichelmacher (drepanourgos) und (fiktiven) Töpfer gegenüber.72 Die Auswahl dieser

69 Zu oikos und Agora bei Aristophanes, vgl. Crane 1997, 207–215; zur Funktion, Lage und Entwicklung der Agora als funktionales und ideales Kommunikations- und Wirtschafts zentrum für Käufer und Verkäufer, Harris et al. 2016, 1–39. 70 Pax 999–1015: Mit wichtigen Details zum täglichen Marktgeschehen im angestrebten Frieden und der Marktatmosphäre auf der Agora, dem idealen Produktangebot – von Lebensmitteln unterschiedlichster Herkunft bis zur Spezialkleidung von Sklaven (chla niskion); von Marktzeiten bis zur Verfügbarkeit und regionaler Herkunft von Produkten, zum persönlichen Kaufserlebnis, aber auch dem Agieren von Kunden und Verkäufern. Vgl. Spielvogel 2001, 152, mit Hinweis auf die Herstellung der exomides in Megara (nach Xen. mem. 2,7,6). 71 Zur Überspezialisierung der Berufssparten bei Aristophanes, bereits Ehrenberg 1968, 131–133. 72 Die unterschiedlichen Beizeichnungen der Tätigkeiten wie -poles, -poios, -ourgos der verschiedenen Produktanbieter, scheinen auf Grund des Kontextes des Dialogs nicht immer richtungweisend zu sein. Trotz des Hinweises auf Herstellung bzw. Produktionstätigkeit im Falle des „Trompetenmachers“ (salpigopoios) outet er sich selbst als Zwischenhändler, der seine Ware um einen speziellen, nicht unbeträchtlichen Einkaufspreis erstanden hatte; vgl. jedoch den Helmbuschmacher (kranopoios), der durchaus auch als Hersteller des Objekts angesehen werden könnte; zu vergleichbaren Berufsbezeichnungen im Bereich des lokalen

Berufe ist von Aristophanes geschickt gewählt, um seinen ökonomischen Markt gewinner in dem von Trygaios errungenen (Zwischen-)Frieden zu präsentieren.73 Während Waffenhändler zu den wirtschaftlichen Aufsteigern im Krieg zählten, er- leben der Sichelmacher bzw. Töpfer nun im Frieden einen Aufschwung durch die gestiegenen Preise ihrer Produkte und die entsprechende Nachfrage: Aristophanes gibt in der Komödie Frieden die Reaktionen der verschiedenen Händler auf das Kriegsende wieder: Waffenhändler, Helmschmied und Lanzen schäfter beklagen, daß ihre Waren nicht mehr gefragt sind, während Sichel-, Hackenschmied und Töpfer ihren guten Verkauf bejubeln.74 Als Dank an den Friedensbringer wird sogar ein Teil des Gewinns als Geschenk zum Hochzeitsfest in Form von Gratissicheln weitergegeben. Das Bewusstsein und Wissen um marktspezifische Preisschwankungen bei Anbieter und Verbraucher wird durch Informationen über mögliche Gewinnspannen konkretisiert, die von Aristophanes geschickt in das zeitspezifische monetäre Tagesgeschehen eingebunden werden. So verweist der nun erfolgreiche Sichelverkäufer darauf im Krieg dafür na- hezu nichts mehr – mit Hinweis auf die zeitspezifische Kleinwährung kollybos – für eine Sichel erhalten zu haben, die er nun im Frieden jedoch um fünfzig Drachmen an den Mann zu bringen wusste. 75 Verkaufs- und Kaufsstrategien geben wiederum Einblick in mögliche Einkaufs preise (isonia) der Händler aber auch in das geschickte Feilschen der Kunden um den Bestpreis unter gezielter Ausnutzung der Marktlage. So werden die ruinösen Absatzschwierigkeiten des Brustpanzerverkäufers (thorakopoles) verdeutlicht, wenn der vermeintliche Käufer die Ware anstelle des Einkaufswertes von zehn Minen nach anfänglichem Einverständnis völlig ablehnt. Aristophanes nennt auch den Grund dafür, die mangelnde Passform als Nachttopf, zu dem der Brustpanzer (tho rax) – dieses nun nutzlose Kriegsobjekt – von Trygaios alltagstauglich umfunktio- niert wird, allerdings zum Leidwesen des gedemütigten Verkäufers:

Handelsgeschehens, zu Schwierigkeiten der Interpretation und Fragen der Spezialisierung, siehe Drexhage et al. 2002, 120–126. Vgl. auch Ehrenberg 1968, 131–133, der jedoch zu- sätzlich einen Sprecher, in der Funktion eines Vertreibers/Verkäufers (kapelos) von Waffen für die angegebenen Spezial-Berufszweige sehen will. 73 Siehe Ehrenberg 1968, 131, der in der Spezialisierung der hier genannten Waffenproduzenten/- händler/-verkäufer eine bewusste Überzeichnung des Komödienschreibers sieht, um „zu zeigen, wie groß die Zahl der Kriegsgewinnler wirklich war.“ 74 Spielvogel 2001, 83–84, auch mit Hinweis auf Kleidungs- und Schuhhersteller, die aufgrund der Flucht der attischen Bauern hinter die Langen Mauern Athen ebenfalls zu den vermeintlichen Kriegsgewinnern gezählt werden: „Der militärische Handelssektor wird die größten monetären Gewinnspannen bis 404 erzielt haben. Ebenfalls auf der Habenseiten rangierten die Händler, deren Waren die Bauern während der kurzzeitigen Flucht hinter die Langen Mauern zusätzlich zu den sonstigen städtischen Käufern abnahmen.“ Zur Bedeutung dieser spezifischen Kaufverhandlungen im Frieden des Aristophanes für das Wissen um Marktstrategien, siehe Harris et al. 2016, 1–2. 75 Pax 1198–1202; vgl. Spielvogel 2001, 71, zur überhöhten Preisangabe der hier genannten Produkte: „Beide Preislagen sind bewußt zu hoch taxiert, weil zum einen der Gewinn des Sensenmachers (drepanourgos), zum anderen der Wertverlust eines kostbaren Brustpanzers in Friedenszeiten betont werden soll“.

Waffenhändler stellt einen Panzer auf den Boden / Was fang ich Armer mit dem schöngefügten, / Zehn Minen werten Panzer an? O Jammer! / Trygaios: An diesem Panzer sollst du nichts verlieren! / Den nehm ich schön zum Einkaufspreis dir ab! / Er paßt zum Nachtstuhl, wie gemacht dazu! Setzt sich drauf / Waffenhändler: Du, meine Ware laß ich mir nicht schänden! / … / Waffenhändler: Zehn Minen lässt du dich das Kacken kosten? / Trygaios: Du dummer Kerl, versteht sich! Meinst du denn, / Mein Hintern sei mir feil für tausend Drachmen? / Waffenhändler: So geh und hol das Geld! / Trygaios: Ja – wenn er nur / Den Steiß nicht zwickte! Fort ich kauf ihn nicht!76

Durch Degradierung der ehemals teuren Kriegsware zum nunmehr minderwertigen – wenngleich durchaus nützlichen – Alltagsprodukt77 wird der angestrebte Kauf als funktionaler Handel auf Basis eines gerechten Preis-Leistungsverhältnisses karikiert. Wenn Trygaios seine ‚Recyclingvorschläge‘ als Wirtschaftshilfe für die angeschlage- ne Händlerzunft verstanden wissen will, so erhöht dies zudem den humoristischen Wert der Komödie, ebenso wie der Protest der auf diese Weise verhöhnten wirtschaftlich angeschlagenen Waffenhändler, die sich in ihrer Notlage sogar dazu erniedrigen müssen, mit unangemessenen Naturalien, wie drei Feigen für einen Helmbusch, abgespeist zu werden. Doch sogar dieser Preis wird durch den Käufer letztendlich abgelehnt, aufgrund der festgestellten Unbrauchbarkeit der umfunktionierten Ware – der Helmbusch erwies sich als ungeeignet zum Tischfeger – eine Reklamation, durch die der Ruin der entsprechenden Berufssparte des Helmbuschmachers (lofo poios) zynisch zum Gaudium der attischen Bevölkerung untermauert wird.78 Dass Verkaufsstrategien und damit verbundene Preisentwicklungen jedoch nicht immer nur tagespolitisch bestimmt waren und nicht nur Händler von Kunden ‚übervorteilt‘ wurden, zeigen geschickte Manipulationen an Waren durch Verkäufer. Man findet entsprechende Hinweise bei unterschiedlichsten Produkten, beim Le bensmittelverkauf (Mehl, Wein) ebenso wie beim Handel mit Schuhwerk oder auch beim Verkauf von Wolle. Betrügerisch Agieren, wird bei Aristophanes mit dem Ver kaufsstil des Wollhändlers (eriopolikos) gleichgesetzt, der sein Produkt listig für seinen Gewinn zu verändern verstand, indem er es ‚einwässerte‘ und so das Gewicht der Wolle zu seinem Vorteil ‚verbesserte‘.79 Gerade die letzten Beispiele lassen bei Aristophanes und seinem Publikum eine gewisse Kenntnis marktwirtschaftlicher Prinzipien erkennen, die Bedeutung des Preis-Leistungsverhältnisses und des Prinzips von Angebot und Nachfrage.80 Sie zeigen ein Bewusstsein um die wirtschaftliche Abhängigkeit des einzelnen von aktuellen politischen Situationen und bieten psychologisch gelungene Porträts möglicher ‚Marktgewinner‘ vor allem aber der ‚Verlierer‘. Zudem bietet Aristophanes anhand der gestreuten Hinweise zu Bedeutung und Wert von Kleidung gelungene Charakterstudien mit Blick auf das individuelle

76 Pax 1224–1239. 77 Worin auch ein bei Aristophanes erkennbares Bemühen um funktionale Wiederverwertung von Waren gesehen werden kann; zur ‚Secondhand‘-Ware mit Schwerpunkt auf Kleidung in papyrologischen Quellen, siehe Drexhage & Reinard 2014, 1–60. 78 Pax 1188–1193; 1210–1223. 79 Zur Wolle Eccl. 1386–1387; zu betrügerischen Machenschaften u.a. der kapeloi, siehe Ehrenberg 1968, 127–128. 80 Vgl. auch Harris et al. 2016, 1–2.

Bemühen um den Erwerb und Vertrieb von Kleidung in verschiedensten Facetten und somit Einblick in andernorts nur schwer fassbare Aspekte des Sozialverhaltens und Wirtschaftslebens unterschiedlicher Personengruppen im Athen des 5. Jh. v.Chr.

Bibliographie Aristophanes (Editionen) Aristophanes, Komödien, London 1990 (dt. Seeger, L.; Newiger, H.-J., ed.) Aristophanes, I–VI, Cambridge Mass. & London 1998–2007 (engl. Henderson, J., ed.) The comedies of Aristophanes: Warminster 1992–1998 (engl. Sommerstein, A.H., ed.) Scholia in Aristophanem, Groningen et al. 1964–1996 (Koster, W. J. W. & Howerda, D., eds.)

Bieber 1928: Bieber, M.: Griechische Kleidung, Berlin & Leipzig. Bresson 2007: Bresson, A.: L’économie de la Grèce des cités (fin VIe–1er siècle). I. Les structures et la production, Paris. Bresson 2000: Bresson, A.: L’économie de la Grèce des cités (fin VIe–1er siècle). II. Les espaces de l’echange, Paris. Chankowski & Karvonis 2012: Chankowski, V. & Karvonis, P. (eds.), Tout vendre, tout acheter. Structures et équipements des marchés antiques. Actes du colloque international d’Athènes, Bordeaux. Compton-Engle 2015: Compton-Engle, G.: Costume in the Comedies of Aristophanes, New York. Crane 1997: Crane, G.: Oikos und Agora. Mapping the Polis. Aristiphanes’ Wasps, BICS 34, 112–125. Davidson 2012: Davidson, J.: Citizen Consumers: The Athenian Democracy and the Origins of Western Consumption. In F. Trentmann (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of Consumption, Oxford & New York, 23–46. Demetriou 2012: Demetriou, D.: Negotiating Identity in the Ancient Mediterranean The Archaic and Classical Greek Multiethnic Emporia, Cambridge. Dobrov 1997: Dobrov, G.W. (ed.), City as Comedy, Chapel Hill. Dönt 2012: Dönt, E.: Komödie als Distanz und Identifikation, Wien. Drexhage et al. 2002: Drexhage, H.-J., Konen, H. & Ruffing, K., Die Wirtschaft des römi schen Reiches (1.–3. Jh.), Berlin. Drexhage & Reinard 2014: Drexhage, H.-J. & Reinard, P.: Vom Wert der Dinge: Ver schlissene, getragene und ausgebesserte Kleider und Textilien im papyrologischen Be fund. Überlegungen zum Verwertungskreislauf und Second Hand-Markt, MBAH 32, 1–70. Ehrenberg 1968: Ehrenberg, V.: Aristophanes und das Volk von Athen, Zürich & Stuttgart. Frass 2013: Frass, M. (ed.), Kauf, Konsum und Märkte. Wirtschaftswelten im Fokus – Von der römischen Antike bis zur Gegenwart, Wiesbaden. Halliwell 2015: Halliwell, S.: Clouds, Women at the Thesmophoria, Frogs. Aristophanes. A Verse Translation, with Introductions and Notes, Oxford. Harris et al. 2016: Harris, E. M., Lewis, D. M. & Woolmar, M. (eds.), The Ancient Greek Economy. Markets, Households and City-States, New York. Holleran 2012: Holleran, C.: Shopping in Ancient Rome, Oxford. Holzberg 2010: Holzberg, N.: Aristophanes. Sex und Spott und Politik, München. Hughes 2006: Hughes, A.: The Costumes of Old and Middle Comedy, BICS 49, 39–68. Lagger 2008: Lagger, U.: Ging der toichorychos durch die Wand? Überlegungen zum Einbruchsdiebstahl im klassischen Athen. In M. Mauritsch & I. Weiler (eds.), Antike Lebenswelten. Konstanz – Wandel – Wirkungsmacht. Festschrift für Ingomar Weiler zum 70. Geburtstag, Wiesbaden, 475–502. Mhire & Frost 2014: Mhire, J. J. & Frost B.-P.: The Political Theory of Aristophanes, Albany.

Möllendorff 2002: Möllendorff, P. v.: Aristophanes, Hildesheim. Pekridou-Gorecki 1989: Pekridou-Gorecki, A.: Mode im antiken Griechenland, München. Rößler 1974: Rößler, D.: Gab es Modetendenzen in der griechischen Tracht am Ende des 5. und im 4. Jahrhundert v. u. Z.? In E. C. Welskopf (ed.), Hellenische Poleis, Krise – Wandlung – Wirkung, Bd. 3, Darmstadt, 1539–1569. Spielvogel 2001: Spielvogel, J.: Wirtschaft und Geld bei Aristophanes, Frankfurt. Stone 1981: Stone, L. M.: Costume in Aristophanic Comedy, New York. Sutton 1980: Sutton, D. F.: Self and Society in Aristophanes, Washington D.C. Tsakirgis 2016: Tsakirgis, B.: Whole Cloth: Exploring the Greek Economy through the Evidence for Textile Manufacture and Purchase in Greek Houses. In E. M. Harris, D. M. Lewis & M. Woolme (eds.), The Ancient Greek Economy. Markets, Households and City States, New York, 166–186. Zimmermann 1998: Zimmermann, B.: Die griechische Komödie, Düsseldorf. Zumbrunnen 2012: Zumbrunnen, J.: Aristophanic Comedy and the Challenge of Democratic Citizenship, Rochester.

Brendan Burke

As this volume attests, in recent decades the important role of textiles and cloth production in the ancient economy has been a greatly emphasized. For the Classical world, however, and ancient Greece in particular, textile scholars are faced with a great challenge, in that very little cloth is preserved from the first millennium BCE.1 In addressing the problem of nearly invisible textiles, many scholars have looked to what I would term a broad range of ‘proxy’ studies for cloth and its manufacture. That is, we look to things that are ‘stand ins’ for the original. This may seem intui- tive or obvious to those of us who work in the Mediterranean but to other scholars of textiles and ancient economies around the world, it is worth highlighting. We do not have very much of the thing that we study. From Late Bronze Age Greece, we have images of well-dressed figures in wall-painting, tools of cloth manufacture, and clay records in the Linear B script that describe the raw materials, labor, and types of cloth. The tablets also refer to rations supplied to a dependent and semi-dependent labor force, primarily women and children. In Iron Age Greece, however, we lack documentary evidence, but by the Archaic period (beginning ca. 700 BCE) we begin to find visual representations of cloth and its production. The skyphos from Chiusi showing Penelope at her loom with Telemachos is just one example of a standing warp-weighted loom.2

Fig. 1: Skyphos from Chiusi, by the Penelope Painter showing Penelope at her loom with Telemachos, Drawing: A. Furtwängler & K. Reichhold, Griechische Vasenmalerei: Auswahl hervorragender Vasenbilder, München 1921, pl. 142

1 A recent survey of finds from Greece can be found in Spantidaki & Moulherat, 2012. 2 For examples of textiles in vase painting, see Ferrari 2002 and Bundrick 2008. Attic red- figure skyphos from Chiusi, showing Penelope at her loom and Telemachos to the left, by the Penelope Painter, 440–430 BCE, Museo Archeologico, Chiusi, Italy.

The poetry of Homer also provides an early, cultural context for cloth and its role in Greek society. Penelope, again, is the model, seated at her loom, waiting for Odysseus. She is synonymous with weaving and wifely devotion.3 In Athenian drama, playwrights also make effective use of textiles. For Plato and early philosophers – textiles were a well-suited metaphor and model for knowledge.4 Greek textile research has made use of all of these diverse sources of evidence and reached a point where reports of textile tools need to be incorporated into larger site narratives and into a wider cultural-historical framework. Nearly everyone would agree that textiles were important and were widely produced, traded and consumed, but we need to move on from the theoretical dead end of ‘people made cloth this way’ and ‘the textiles looked like this’. What more can be said about this rich tapestry of evidence that specialists have assembled in the last twenty five years or so? In this paper religious dedications by non-Greeks in Greek sanctuaries are addressed to understand distribution, consumption, and mobilization of not only textiles but a whole range of material culture to highlight the interconnected relationship between Greece and the east.

Fibulae and Belts My focus is bronze dedications – fibulae and belts, beginning as early as 850 BCE, based on recent major shifts in Anatolian chronology associated with the Early Phrygian destruction level at the site Gordion in central Turkey.5 These objects are closely connected with textiles and have been studied in detail by Blinkenberg and Muscarella, with particular attention paid to their chronological significance, and more recently studied by Vassileva.6 The original function of fibulae was to fasten garments. Earlier scholars had claimed that the fibula in Greece came with the ‘Dorians’ at the end of the Late Bronze Age. This origin story, like the Dorians themselves, has proven an illu- sion. Fibulae were made continuously from the Middle Helladic period onwards in Greece.7 They are found in Mycenaean contexts and some Late Bronze Age types from Greece have connections to Anatolian types. By looking at fibulae of foreign origin or style in Greek contexts, this paper asks if it is a valid assumption to say that Phrygian bronze fibulae and belts are good proxies for Phrygian textile dedications in early Greek sanctuaries. Can we use these metal dedications associated with cloth as a proxy for now-lost Phrygian textiles, something we know from ancient sources and archaeological evidence was a highly valued product, and if so, what does this say about the trade and distribution of cloth? After the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces in the twelfth and eleventh centuries, the early Greek sanctuary begins to take on some of the centralizing functions previously held by the palace. In this new, post-Bronze Age Greece it is at early sanctuaries that people assembled for feasts, made alliances, established territories, displayed their rank and power. Like palace centers during the Bronze Age, Greek

3 For theoretical readings of weaving in Greek culture see Bergren 2008. 4 Svenbro & Scheid 1996. 5 DeVries & Voigt 2011; DeVries 2011; Rose & Darbyshire 2011. 6 Blinkenberg 1926; Muscarella 1967a and 1967b; Vassileva 2012 and 2014. Fuller 2014 also explores this topic. 7 Killian 1975; Caner 1983.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Phrygian Fibulae as Markers of Textile Dedication 161 sanctuaries were the location of great concentrations of wealth – in the form of dedications. The sanctuaries varied in scale, from humble, rural shrines with small clay votives, to the growing international sanctuaries like Delphi, Olympia, the Artemision at Ephesus and the Heraion on Samos, where early Greek and non- Greek material culture is found.8

Fig. 2: Fibulae from Sanctuary of Hera at Samos (Samos Museum, photo B. Burke)

From later inscriptions, beginning in the sixth century but presumably earlier, in Greek sanctuaries dedications of cloth and related items were made to local divinities.9 Sacred dedications, such as the votive relief to Artemis found at Achinos, now in the Lamia Archaeological Museum (AE 1041), shows the important role of cloth in rites of Greek religion. On the relief sculpture, found in 1979, the dedicant dis- plays the clothes that were likely part of a successful childbirth. Artemis stands at the far right holding a torch. Ritual attendants, at smaller, human scale, include a nurse and baby, someone leading a bull led to an altar, and what is likely the heavily veiled mother carrying incense. Above the procession scene hang the garments, a sleeved chiton, himatia, belts with fringes and a tunic. On Delos a Hellenistic inscription tells us that a Phrygian textile was dedicated to the goddess Eileithyia, the divinity associated with successful child birth.10 The connection among women, childbirth, and the dedication of clothing and associated items is strong. In Greek literature, references to fibulae often stress their great value: they occur in the Iliad and the Odyssey. At Odyssey (18.293–294), fibulae appear as items of aristocratic gift exchange and markers of élite status. Antinous, one of the suitors vying for Penelope’s affection, gives her a gift of a “… beautiful robe / All embroi-

8 Kerschner 1997 and 2005. 9 Brøns 2014 and 2015. 10 ID 1442 B, l. 57, 146/145 BCE. Pingiatoglou 1981, 69.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 162 Brendan Burke dered. It had twelve golden fibulae / Each of them fitted with hooked clasps”. The other time a fibula is mentioned Odysseus himself is wearing one (19.256) and it is described in detail. Made of gold it had an intricate scene of a hound taking down a fawn as its design. It is paired with a “fleecy purple cloak” (19.242). In the Iliad, on the other hand, we start to see the violent uses of dress pins: Aphrodite is wounded by one (5.425) and Hera is able to deceive Zeus with another (14.178). Thus begins the literary tradition in which the fibula is used as a tool of female violence. The more famous reference to pins in Sophocles is the moment when Oedipus discov- ers Jocasta’s, suicide (Soph. Oid. T. 1267–1270). This also takes place in the bridal chamber. Oedipus takes up the pins from her dress and strikes out his eyes, blinding himself. Both references in Sophocles come at moments of high drama and the focus on the mundane item of dress pins heightens the dramatic irony of the moment. Herodotus (5.87) records the story of a failed Athenian expedition against Aegina. It was a disaster for Athens and only one man returned alive but he was murdered by a band of Athenian wives distraught at the loss of their husbands. The women used their dress pins (περόναι) to stab the man. Herodotus notes that this disaster (Athenian women committing murder against an Athenian man) was worse than their military defeat. As punishment, the women are made to change their dress, from the Doric peplos which required fastening with a fibula or pin, to the Ionic linen tunic which required no pin (5.88). Tombs in Argos and Aegina of the fifth century show that pins were still part of grave assemblages, however. In addition they are still depicted on vases during this time.11 What Herodotus was right about however, is that the Aeginetans dedicated fibulae in sanctuaries to various goddesses and fibulae are received in the literary tradition in association with violence. More importantly however, they form part of aristocratic gift exchange, and are closely tied to finely-made garments. Fibulae are markers of status among elites and in sanctuaries. Herodotus, in the context of the Lydian King Gyges’ claim to kingship, tells us that King Midas of Phrygia was the first foreigner to make a dedication at a Greek sanctuary – his throne at Delphi. Keith DeVries suggested that the ivory lion tamer found among Near Eastern dedications at Delphi, and dating to the 7th century BC, may be part of this royal dedication of Midas.12 The ivory dedication, however, does not appear to be Phrygian in style nor does it compare well with other pieces of Phrygian furniture that exist from Gordion tumuli. Phrygian fibulae at Delphi may be a better indicator for eastern interest in Greek sanctuaries. From the archives of Sargon II we know that the historical Midas reigned in the late 8th century (c. 720–700 BCE). Recent changes in Iron Age chronology are showing that earlier Phrygian-made or Phrygian style fibulae may have been dedicated in Greek sanctuaries perhaps earlier than the historical Midas. The range of sanctu aries which have reported fibulae of Anatolian origin or inspiration is quite extensive and the distribution of the dedications seems to have a gender bias as well. Female divinities seem to receive more Phrygian fibulae and belts in East Greece/Western Anatolia, than male divinities. Sanctuaries include the Heraion at Samos, Artemis/ Apollo Didyma, Artemis at Ephesos, Aphrodite at Zeytintepe, Miletos, Athena

11 Cf. Jacobsthal 1956, 111. 12 Rose 2012.

Old Smyrna and Eythrai, Larisa, Athena in the Troad, three Athena sanctuaries on Rhodes, Lindos, Yalissos and Kamiros, Lesbos, Athena at Chios.13 In mainland Greece, Delphi and Olympia, and other prominent sanctuaries also receive a variety of Phrygian fibulae.14 The excavators at Delphi associate the finds with Athena, while at Olympia the finds are associated with Zeus rather than Hera. The sanctuary of Aenodia at Pherai, Athena at Tegea in Arcadia, the sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at Sparta, the Heraeion of Argos and at Perachora, and the sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia all have evidence for Phrygian fibulae and/or belts as dedications. These are objects either made in Phrygia or made in a style similar to ones found in the Phrygian heartland. What does this mean? Is the gender of the divinity an issue? Are Phrygian pilgrims bringing cloth and pins to make dedications to Greek gods?

Phrygians of the Anatolian Iron Age The nature of the evidence is such that it does not seem possible to answer such questions completely. It is helpful to review what is known about the historical Phrygians and their relationship with the Greek world. The Phrygians appear as allies of Troy in the Iliad. Their King Midas figured heavily in the Greek and Roman imagination, the most famous legend of the Midas being his golden touch. The essence of this legend and that of the stories told of wealthy King Croesus of Lydia, is that these were vastly wealthy eastern monarchs who fascinated and perhaps terrified Greek audiences of the fifth centuries. The Phrygians perhaps acted as a kind of stand in for the growing, looming presence of the contemporary Persian Empire. These kings become the archetypal wealthy ruler. At Gordion, the home of Midas, we do not find vast amounts of gold – contradicting the legend of the golden touch, but instead we have evidence for large scale textile production, huge amounts of bronze vessels, and metal fibulae (gold, electrum, silver, and bronze). The alloyed fibulae had a high zinc content and likely gave them the appearance of gold. Archaeologically, we can say that the around 1000 BCE the Bryges/Phrygians migrated from the southern Balkans and Thrace westward into central Anatolia, filling a power vacuum left by the declining Hittites. The Phrygians settled along the fertile rivers that cut through the Phrygian highlands, and founded cults in the open air, on mountain tops to their primary divinity the ‘Mother’, known sim-

13 Samos: Jantzen 1972, 49–53, Taf. 44–48; Boehlau & Habich 1996, 124, Abb. 3; Baumbach 2004; Chios: Lamb 1934–1935, 149, Figs. 32–33; Boardman 1961/1962, 179–189; Ephesos: Hogarth 1908, Pl. 19, 1–2; Bammer 1991/1992, 37–43, Abb. 28–33; Klebinder-Gauß 2007, 93–103, Nos. 710–60; Didyma: Naumann & Tuchelt 1963/1964, 47–48, Taf. 31, 2–4; Old Smyrna: Boardman 1961/1962, Fig. 21b; Erythrai: Caner 1983, G18, G21, Taf. 79; Larisa: Boehlau & Schefold 1942, Taf. 10.25; Troad: Caner 1983, No. 1174. 14 Jantzen 1972, No. 473; Ephesos: Klebinder-Gauß 2007, 48, No. 108; Delphi: Perdrizet 1908, 78, Fig. 270; Tegea: Voyatzis 1990, 213–214, B256; Artemis Orthia: Dawkins 1929, 198–99, Pl. LXXXIII, c, LXXXIV, b, d, f, g; Argive Heraion; Perachora: Payne 1940, Pl. 17.10, 12, 19; Pl. 73.21, 24, 27; Isthmia: Raubitschek 1998, 53, No. 200, Pl. 36; Lindos: Blinkenberg 1931, 88–89, Nos. 110–121; Sapouna-Sakellarakis 1978, Nos. 1619–1626A.B.; 1632–1636A; 1674–1677; 1696; Aegina: Sapouna-Sakellarakis 1978, Nos. 1651–1656, 1689; Lesbos: Sapouna-Sakellarakis 1978, Nos. 1637–1640; Paros: Sapouna-Sakellarakis 1978, Nos. 1629, 1649–1650; Thasos: Sapouna-Sakellarakis 1978, No. 1678.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 164 Brendan Burke ply as Matar.15 The largest known well-excavated Phrygian settlement is its capital, Gordion, located along the Sakarya River in accordance with the geographer Strabo’s description. The site of Gordion lies 80 km southwest of Ankara in central Turkey. The site is in the village of Yassıhöyük, which means ‘flat mound’. The flat mound is the settlement itself, while the curved mounds that dot the landscape are burial tumuli for early elites. The German Körte brothers conducted two seasons at Gordion, excavating on the citadel mound and several of the tumuli in the landscape, to understand the Phrygian capital.16 Beginning in 1950, Rodney Young and teams from the University of Pennsylvania have explored the extensive Phrygian fortifica- tion system, massive City Mound with elite architecture, and monumental burial tumuli.17 The citadel contains very elaborate public buildings, some with mosaics, decorated roofs, ivory inlaid furniture, all concentrated on the eastern side. One the western side of the excavated portion of the citadel we also learn something about the Phrygian economy from craft residues found inside the citadel. Two primary activities were textile production – spindle whorls and loom weights – and food production, indicated by grinding platforms and cooking installations.18 Fragments of textiles were also found along with the clay weights, accidentally fired in the destruction, still in a row, showing the width of the dozens of working looms and among other tools was this burnt weavers comb, with unwoven thread on one side, and a pattern weave on the other. We also have some fibulae made of precious materials, gold, electrum, and silver from the Destruction Level. Early Phrygian Gordion, the well-preserved level excavated by Rodney Young since the 1950s, was thought to date to the reign of King Midas, active around 720–700 BCE.

Fig. 3: Terrace Building, Gordion, showing Phrygian spinning and weaving equipment (B. Burke, from Gordion Archives) 15 Brixhe & Lejeune 1984. 16 Körte & Körte 1904. 17 Young 1981. 18 Burke 2010.

Fig. 4: Reconstructed Phrygian loom (B. Burke)

Radio carbon samples excavated in the late 1980s have upended the traditional chronology of Gordion.19 The destruction is now dated more than 100 years earlier, to about 810 BCE. This impacts not only the archaeology of the citadel, but also the chronology of nearby tumuli. And since much of Blinkenberg’s fibulae chronology relied heavily on the early excavations at Gordion, the chronology of many sites that have used fibulae as an anchor point is also impacted. At Gordion overall, in other tumuli and in the settlement mound, over 677 examples of Blinkenberg’s Asia Minor type xii fibula were found. 75% (512) of them came from tumuli. However, among the four hundred items that accompanied the man buried in Tumulus MM at Gordion were 182 fibulae; of these, 80% (145) were in a cloth sack and 37 fibulae were found on the skeleton and bier. Most fibulae at Gordion are bronze, although there is no direct evidence for a bronze workshop at Gordion. In addition to the fibulae, a great concentration of wealth is found in the bronze cauldrons, trefoil jugs and omphalos bowls from the tumulus, demonstrating that the Phrygians at Gordion had a ready supply of bronze and were skilled crafts people.20 The date for the Gordion Midas tumulus is now put at about 740 BCE, about a generation earlier than the historical figure of Midas. Some have suggested that the occupant of the Midas tomb, an older wealthy man, was Gordias, a legend- ary father of Midas. By about 720 BCE or a little later, Near Eastern historical records provide an historical bases for Midas, one that is much more informative than the later fantas-

19 Rose & Darbyshire 2011. 20 Muscarella 1968, 35.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 166 Brendan Burke tic stories of Greek and Latin authors.21 In texts of the Assyrian King Sargon II the Phrygians are referred to as Mushku, and their king is Mita, certainly Midas. From these sources we know King Midas reigned at Gordion at least between 718–709 BCE. Later Classical sources tell us he died around 696 BCE. It is likely that this was the king Herodotus referred to making dedications at Delphi, and also likely that Phrygian textiles accompanied the offering. The presence of Phrygian fibulae in Greek sanctuaries including Delphi suggest that it is equally likely that textiles would have accompanied some of the pins. The fibula and cloak of an ally of King Midas, Warpalawas of Tyana, for example, supports this idea. On the Neo-Hittite relief at Ivriz, King Warpalawas of Tyana (fl. 738 BCE), is shown wearing a Phrygian garment fastened with a Phrygian style fibula. These were both likely gifts between ruling elites. Warpalawas was a competitor of Tiglath-pileser III (745–727 BCE) and his image is carved on a rock relief standing before a fertility god at the source of an important spring in south central Anatolia. The king’s outer garment is secured by a fibula similar to the Phrygian types found at Gordion and Ankara, identified by Muscarella as type 12.9. The carved designs of the textile are also typical of Phrygian art and the cloth likely accompanied the fibulae in an act of royal gift-exchange. Based on this it is likely that Phrygian textiles and fibulae were likely given as gifts together, at least at the royal level. The legend of the wealthy easterner, as epitomized by Midas and the Lydian King Croesus of Sardis, were often seekers of wisdom in the Greek imagination, and Midas, in Roman thought, was eventually punished for his excessive wealth. The objects associated with them are extremely valuable and highly recognizable. The fibulae are a portable concentration of metallic wealth in an age before coinage. They are exotic and they are distinctive of the easterner, the Phrygian or the Lydian. More than anything, the dedication of Phrygian metal objects in Greek contexts should be viewed as an overt display of wealth and with them would likely have come ornate textiles. These would make a most appropriate dedication in a sacred context.

Fig. 5: Warpalawas of Tyana, Ivriz relief (photo B. Burke) 21 Berndt-Ersoz 2008.

Bibliography Bammer 1991/1992: Bammer, A.: Multikulturelle Aspekte der frühen Kunst im Artemision von Ephesos, ÖJh 61, 17–54. Baumbach 2004: Baumbach, J. D.: The Significance of Votive Offerings in Selected Hera Sanctuaries in the Peloponnese, Ionia, and Western Greece, Oxford (BAR International Series 1249). Bergren 2008: Bergren, A.: Weaving Truth: Essays on Language and the Female in Greek Thought, Washington, D.C. (Center for Hellenic Studies Series 19). Berndt-Ersoz 2008: Berndt-Ersoz, S.: The Chronology and Historical Context of Midas, Historia 57, 1–37. Blinkenberg 1926: Blinkenberg, C. S.: Fibules Grecques et Orientales, Copenhagen. Boardman 1961–1962: Boardman, J.: Ionian Bronze Belts, Anatolia 6, 179–189. Boehlau & Schefold 1942: Boehlau, J. & Schefold, K. (eds.), Die Kleinfunde, Larisa am Hermos 3, Berlin. Brixhe & Lejeune 1984: Brixhe, C. & Lejeune, M. (eds.), Corpus des Inscriptions Paléo-Phry giennes 2, Paris. Brøns 2014: Brøns, C.: Representation and Realities: Fibulas and Pins in Greek and Near Eastern Iconography. In M. Harlow & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Greek and Roman Textiles and Dress An Interdisciplinary Anthology, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 19), 60–94. Brøns 2015: Brøns, C.: Textiles and Temple Inventories: Detecting an Invisible Votive Tradition in Greek Sanctuaries in the Second Half of the First Millennium BC. In J. Fejfer & M. Moltsesen & A. Rathje (eds.), Tradition. Transmission of Culture in the Ancient World, Copenhagen (ActaHyp 14), 43–84. Bundrick 2008: Bundrick, S.: The Fabric of the City: Imaging Textile Production in Classical Athens, Hesperia 77, 283–334. Burke 2010: Burke, B.: From Minos to Midas: Ancient Cloth Production in the Aegean and in Anatolia, Oxford. Caner 1983: Caner, E.: Fibeln in Anatolien I, Prähistorische Bronzefunde (PBF) XIV 8. DeVries & Voigt 2011: DeVries, K. & Voigt, M. M.: Emerging Problems and Doubts. In B. Rose & G. Darbyshire (eds.), The New Chronology of Iron Age Gordion, Philadelphia, 23–48. DeVries 2011: DeVries, K.: The Creation of the Old Chronology. In B. Rose & G. Darbyshire (eds.), The New Chronology of Iron Age Gordion, Philadelphia 2011, 13–24. Ferrari 2002: Ferrari, G.: Figures of Speech: Men and Maidens in Ancient Greece, Chicago. Fuller 2014: Fuller, E.: Adornment and Cult in the Iron Age: Textile and Fibulae Dedications in the Eastern Mediterranean, BA Honours Thesis, University of Victoria (unpublished). Jacobsthal 1956: Jacobsthal, P.: Greek Pins and their Connexions with Europe and Asia, Oxford. Jantzen 1972: Jantzen, U.: Ägyptische und orientalische Bronzen aus dem Heraion von Samos, Bonn. Kerschner 1997: Kerschner, M.: Ein stratifizierter Opferkomplex des 7. Jhs v. Chr. aus dem Artemision von Ephesos, ÖJh 66, 85–226. Kerschner 2005: Kerschner, M.: Die Ionier und ihr Verhältnis zu den Phrygern und Lydern, AMS 54, 113–146. Killian 1975: Killian, K.: Fibeln in Thessalien von der mykenischen bis zur archaischen Zeit, München (Prähistorische Bronzefunde 14/2). Klebinder-Gauß 2007: Klebinder-Gauß, G.: Bronzefunde aus dem Artemision von Ephesos, Wien. Körte & Körte 1904: Körte, G. & Körte, A.: Gordion: Ergebnisse der Ausgrabung im Jahre 1900, Berlin. Lamb 1934–1935: Lamb, W.: Excavations at Kato Phana in Chios, ABSA 35, 138–164. Muscarella 1967a: Muscarella, O. W.: Fibulae Represented on Sculpture, JNES 26, 82–86. Muscarella 1967b: Muscarella, O. W.: Phrygian Fibulae from Gordion, London.

Muscarella 2012: Muscarella, O. W.: Deconstructing the Destruction of King Midas’ Gordion. Review of The New Chronology of Iron Age Gordion, ACSS 18, 377–390. Naumann & Tuchelt 1963–1964: Naumann, R. & Tuchelt, K.: Die Ausgrabungen im Südwesten des Tempels von Didyma 1962, IstMitt 13/14, 15– 64. Payne 1940: Payne, H.: Perachora I: The Sanctuaries of Hera Akraia and Limenia. Architecture, Bronzes, Terracottas 1930–1933, Oxford. Perdrizet 1908: Perdrizet, P.: Mouments figurés. Petits bronzes, terres cuites, antiquités diverses, Paris (Fouilles de Delphes 5). Pingiatoglou 1981: Pingiatoglu, S.: Eileithyia, Würzburg. Raubitschek 1998: Raubitschek, I.: Isthmia VII: The Metal Objects (1952–1989), Princeton. Rose & Darbyshire 2011: Rose, C. B. & Darbyshire G. (eds), The New Chronology of Iron Age Gordion, Philadelphia (Gordion Special Studies 6). Rose 2012: Rose, C. B. (ed.), The Archaeology of Phrygian Gordion, Royal City of Midas. Gordion Special Studies 7, Philadelphia. Sapouna-Sakellarakis 1978: Sapouna-Sakellarakis, E.: Die Fibeln der griechischen Inseln, München (Prähistorische Bronzefunde 14/4). Spantidaki & Moulherat 2012: Spantidaki, Y. & Moulherat, C.: Greece. In M. Gleba & U. Mannering (eds.), Textiles and Textile Production in Europe from Prehistory to AD 400, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 11), 189–201. Svenbro & Scheid 1996: Svenbro, J. & Scheid, J.: The Craft of Zeus: Myths of Weaving and Fabric, Cambridge. Vassileva 2012: Vassileva, M.: Early Bronze Fibulae and Belts from the Gordion City Mound. In C. B. Rose (ed.), The Archaeology of Phrygian Gordion, Royal City of Midas, Philadelphia (Gordion Special Studies 7), 111–126. Vassileva 2014: Vassileva, M.: Phrygian Bronzes in the Greek World: Globalization through Cult? In M. J. Geller (ed.), Melammu: The Ancient World in the Age of Globalization ,7 Berlin, 217–234. Voyatzis 1990: Voyatzis, M.: The Early Sanctuary of Athena Alea at Tegea and other Archaic Sanctuaries in Arcadia, Göteborg. Young 1981: Young, R. S.: Three Great Early Tumuli, Philadelphia.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Milesische Wolle in Sybaris Neudeutung eines Fragments von Timaios (FGrH 566 F 50) und die Frage nach dem Textilhandel zwischen Kleinasien und Süditalien*

Elisabetta Lupi

Seit der zweiten Hälfte des 5. Jh. v.Chr. steht der Name Sybaris für Überfluss und Üppigkeit.1 Die literarischen Traditionen stellen diese Stadt in Süditalien als Zentrum eines übermäßigen Konsums von Luxusgütern dar. Zu diesen zählen nach Timaios (FGrH 566, F 50) auch Gewänder, himatia, aus milesischer Wolle: ἐφόρουν δ’ οἱ Συβαρῖται καὶ ἱμάτια Μιλησίων ἐρίων πεποιημένα, ἀφ’ ὧν δὴ καὶ αἱ φιλίαι ταῖς πόλεσιν ἐγένοντο, ὡς ὁ Τίμαιος ἱστορεῖ· ἠγάπων γὰρ τῶν μὲν ἐξ Ἰταλίας Τυρρηνούς, τῶν δ’ ἔξωθεν τοὺς Ἴωνας, ὅτι τρυφῇι προσεῖχον. Die Sybariten trugen außerdem Gewänder, gefertigt aus milesischer Wolle, woraus in der Tat freundschaftliche Beziehungen zwischen den poleis entstanden, wie Timaios berichtet: denn sie schätzten die Etrusker von denen aus Italien, die Ionier von denen aus der weiten Ferne, weil sie dem Luxus nachgaben.

Seit mehr als hundert Jahren wird die bei Athenaios überlieferte Aussage des Timaios als Beleg für die Existenz eines Handels mit Mänteln interpretiert, die in Milet ge- werbsmäßig produziert und nach Süditalien exportiert worden seien. Die Sybariten sollen den Weiterverkauf dieser milesischen Textilien bis nach Etrurien organisiert haben. Da Sybaris im Jahr 510 v.Chr. von den Krotoniaten zerstört wurde, muss der Textilhandel bereits in archaischer Zeit existiert haben. Die Existenz dieses Textilhandels scheint heutzutage von niemandem bezweifelt zu werden. In der 2001 erschienenen Monographie zur Geschichte Milets nennt Vanessa Gorman die kommerziellen Beziehungen der Milesier mit Sybariten und Etruskern.2 Noch im Jahr 2005 schreibt Hans van Wees: Milesian cloaks […] were imported in large quantities by the Greek cities of southern Italy well before the end of the sixth century. The Sybarites […] imported these cloaks on such a scale that they formed a close friendship with the Milesians.3 Eine genaue Lektüre des Fragments und Einordnung des Werks des Timaios in die literarische Tradition des 4. Jh. v.Chr. wecken jedoch Zweifel an einer solchen Lesart. Ich möchte im Folgenden eine alternative Deutung vorschlagen und die Überlieferung des Timaios in den Kontext eines Luxusdiskurses einordnen. Der

* Für die Einladung zur Tagung bedanke ich mich bei Marie-Louise Nosch und Kerstin Droß- Krüpe. Die Reflexionen für den hier vorliegenden Beitrag konnte ich dank des Stipendiums ‚Ancient Textile History‘ (eine Kooperation des Historischen Seminars Hannover mit der Universität Kopenhagen) entwickeln. Beate Wagner-Hasel hat die Entstehung des Beitrags durch zahlreiche Anmerkungen und Kommentare in entscheidender Weise unterstützt: Ihr gilt mein herzlicher Dank. Eventuelle Fehler sind natürlich nur meiner Verantwortung zuzuschreiben. 1 Vgl. Ar. Pax 344; fr. 225 KA. 2 Gorman 2001, 52–53. 3 Van Wees 2005, 49.

Konsum milesischer Wolle, wie er in Dichtung und Geschichtsschreibung des 5. bis 3. Jh. v.Chr. aufscheint, diente – dies ist meine These – als semantisches Zeichen und ist als ethische Aussage des Timaios über die politische Lebensweise der Sybariten, nicht aber als Urteil über ökonomische Vorgänge zu lesen. Um diese These zu verdeutlichen, möchte ich zunächst auf die gängige Deutung des milesisch-sybaritischen Textilhandels eingehen, um mich dann einer genauen Lektüre des Fragments von Timaios zuzuwenden.

Der Handel zwischen Milet und Sybaris in der wirtschaftshistorischen Forschung In seinem Eröffnungsvortrag auf der tarentinischen Großgriechenlandtagung 1972 verurteilte der französische Althistoriker Éduard Will die gängigen ökonomischen Interpretationen der Texte zum sybaritischen Luxus als „un catalogue raisonné des erreurs méthodologique [...] interprétations laxistes ou abusives des textes anciens“.4 Die Vorstellung eines kommerziellen Bündnisses zwischen Sybariten, Etruskern und Milesiern bezeichnete er als „un «cocktail» fantaisiste et dépourvu de toute valeur scientifique“.5 Seine Kritik fand auf der Tagung keinen Anklang. Die Reaktion auf seinen Vortrag war durchweg negativ und Wills Position wurde als ‚primitivistisch‘ abgelehnt.6 Noch im Jahr 2000 gilt sein tarentinischer Beitrag als Beispiel für einen unfruchtbaren Ansatz in der Wirtschaftsforschung des Altertums.7 Will stützte sich in seiner Argumentation auf den althistorisch ausgebildeten Nationalökonomen Karl Bücher.8 In einem Beitrag zur antiken Wirtschaftsgeschichte von 1901, der 1922 in erweiterter Fassung erschien, ging Bücher ausführlich auf die Texte zur milesischen Wolle ein. Bücher kritisierte dabei die Methode, jede Erwähnung milesischer Wolle und Textilien außerhalb Milets als Verweis auf einen

4 Will 1973, 55. 5 Will 1973, 59. 6 Siehe die dem Vortrag folgende Debatte. Momigliano 1973, 78 artikuliert seine Kritiken am Vortrag von Will folgendermaßen: „io credo che si debba attribuire più importanza di quanto Will ha forse dato al concetto di tryphé, che è stato usato dalla storiografia ellenistica per la caratterizzazione della economia precedente. Si tratta qui [...] di una reazione di una storiografia radicata in una civiltà di consumi, molto più larga, ad un tipo di economia più di lusso. Questa storiografia (per es. Timeo) ha informazioni sulla economia precedente e cerca di sistemarle sotto certe categorie, di cui una importante è quella della tryphé“. Lepore 1982, 89-90 definierte die Wills Position als „un tipo di storiografia economica dell’antichità ancor troppo primitivista“ und setzte fort: „noi abbiamo assistito all’«empasse» generale di rispondere a Will, che scetticamente escludeva ogni fenomeno economico, dal suo punto di vista molto coerentemente, perché non trovava che strumenti modernistici per leggere la dinamica economico-sociale della Magna Grecia“. Kritiken am Wills Beitrag finden sich noch in Gras 1989, 416–418. Die Bezeichnung der Position von Will als ‚primitivistisch‘ ist bemerkenswert, weil die Forschung zu Großgriechenland an der Diskussion zwischen Modernisten und Primitivisten sonst nicht teilgenommen hatte, vgl. Gras 1989, 401. 7 Gras & Naso 2000, 136: „uno dei problemi da chiarire in Occidente sarà quello di riuscire a dare una valutazione precisa del contributo di Mileto verso l’Occidente, superando le discus- sioni del convegno di Taranto del ‚72 sul passo di Timeo e il commercio fra Mileto e Sibari

con la menzione esplicita della lana‘ “. 8 Will 1973, 57 Anm. 73. Will hatte die Kontroverse zur Wirtschaftsgeschichte der Antike in einem Beitrag geschildert und den modernistischen Ansatz abgelehnt (Will 1954).

Handel zwischen Kleinasien und dem jeweiligen Ort zu lesen.9 Ihm zufolge be- zeichne der Ausdruck ‚milesisch‘ nicht zwingend die regionale Herkunft der Wolle beziehungsweise der Textilien, vielmehr könne es sich um eine Übertragung des Adjektivs auf die Wollsorte handeln. In der darauf folgenden Analyse der einzelnen Quellen zur milesischen Wolle schloss der Nationalökonom die Existenz einer Exportindustrie Milets komplett aus.10 Bücher antwortete damit auf die Kritik des Altertumswissenschaftlers Eduard Meyer, der 1895 auf dem dritten Historikertag sein zwei Jahre zuvor entwickel- tes Konzept der geschlossenen Hauswirtschaft angegriffen hatte.11 Meyer hatte damals auf den Handel zwischen Sybaris und Milet als Beispiel für „eine für den Export arbeitende Industrie“ von Kunstprodukten für die Zeit über die Archaik hinaus verwiesen.12 Ihm zufolge „fabrizieren die Milesier vor allem Wollstoffe, Purpurgewänder, Teppiche, die sie über Sybaris nach Italien exportieren, namentlich an die Etrusker“.13 Die These war zwar nicht neu,14 aber zum ersten Mal in eine umfassende Rekonstruktion der antiken Wirtschaft eingearbeitet, die auch die Zustimmung von Julius Beloch erhielt.15 In der Fortsetzung der Debatte zum Charakter der antiken Wirtschaft wurden die Äußerungen Büchers zur milesischen Wolle kaum rezipiert. Überraschend ist, dass diesbezüglich die Position Büchers sogar von denjenigen, die seinem Ansatz grundsätzlich folgten, nicht aufgegriffen wurde. Henri Francotte, der den Bücher-Meyer-Streit kannte und sich auf die Seite Büchers stellte, zweifelte trotzdem nicht an einem milesischen Export kostbarer Stoffe aus Milet nach Italien.16 Johannes Hasebroek, der die Position Meyers als modernistisch kritisierte und ihm die Unschärfe der Begriffe vorwarf, lehnte wohl die Vorstellung einer milesischen

9 Bücher 1901, 241; Bücher 1922, 41. 10 Bücher 1901, 240–248; Bücher 1922, 40–49. Bedeutet der Typ der geschlossenen Haus wirtschaft eine Einheit von Produktion und Konsumtion, ging es bei Textilien nach Bücher um häusliche Verarbeitung für den eigenen Bedarf. 11 Zum dritten Frankfurter Historikertag und zum heftigen Schlagabtausch zwischen Bücher und Meyer siehe Wagner-Hasel 2011, 198–203. 12 Meyer 1910, 105. Gewerbsmäßige Produktion, Luxus und Handel wurden dabei als un- trennbare Tatsachen angesehen, vgl. Meyer 1910, 116: „vielmehr haben wir bereits gesehen, wie sich als das eigentlich treibende Element der Handel und der Export und damit die Fabrikation für den Handel entwickelt hat: erst daraus sind die Grosstädte und der in diesen sich sammelnde Reichtum erwachsen, der den Luxus und die Arbeitsteilung ermög- licht“. In denselben Jahren untersuchte Sombart 1913 Luxus als Motor zur Entstehung des Kapitalismus. Über den Einfluss moderner Wirtschaftsverhältnisse auf die Darstellung der antiken Wirtschaft bei Meyer schreibt Wagner-Hasel 2011, 213: „gerade in der Orientierung an wirtschaftlichem Wachstum, Export und Absatzgebieten […] ist als Hintergrundfolie die expandierende Wirtschaft des Wilhelminischen Kaiserreiches sichtbar“. Zum Konzept der engen Verbindung zwischen gewerblichen Produktionsverfahren, Luxustextilien und Entwicklung des Handels siehe Reuthner 2006, 67–76. 13 Meyer 1910, 105. 14 Vgl. Grote 1852, 397; Grothe 1866, 293; Büchsenschütz 1869, 67; Blümner 1869, 31–32; Lenormant 1881, 274–276; Busolt 1893, 400–401. 15 Beloch 1899. Beloch spricht hierbei von einer „griechischen Großindustrie, die im 7. und 6. Jahrhundert begonnen hatte“ (21). Der milesische Textilexport nach Italien findet in Beloch 1899, 19; Beloch 1912, 278 Erwähnung. 16 Francotte 1900, 153; Francotte 1916, 1393–1394.

Massenfabrikation von Textilien ab,17 fand aber die Position Büchers diesbezüglich ebenfalls „hinfällig“.18 Nur über die Rolle von Sybaris als „Stapelplatz“ für die milesischen Textilware in Italien drückte sich Hasebroek vorsichtig aus: Dies sei einfach nicht erweisbar.19 Nachfolgende Wirtschaftshistoriker stellten den archaischen Textilhandel zwi schen Milet und Sybaris nicht infrage.20 Dies galt auch für Spezialstudien zur Wirtschaft Milets und Kleinasiens, die Adelaide Dunham, Johannes Röhlig und Carl Roebuck vorlegten.21 Die Existenz des Exports milesischer Mäntel nach Italien blieb weiterhin unbestritten.22 Allzu logisch fügt sich die Vorstellung eines Luxus gütertausches zwischen Kleinasien und Italien in unser Bild der Wirtschaft in der Archaik.23 Es war allein Will, der den erfolglosen Versuch unternahm, die Position Büchers zu stärken.

Die philologische Debatte in der Sybaris-Forschung Aufgrund des wundersamen und vordergründig unglaubwürdigen Charakters jeder Erzählung über das sybaritische Leben wurde in der Sybaris-Forschung die Wahrhaftigkeit der in den Quellen enthaltenen Informationen kritisch betrachtet.24 Dennoch kam lange Zeit in der philologischen Debatte kein Zweifel an der Glaubwürdigkeit der Aussagen des Timaios bezüglich der sybaritischen Mäntel auf.25 Zu sehr passt der Konsum von prächtigen Textilien zum Bild der luxusver- wöhnten Sybariten. Und kein Zweifel kam auch an der Existenz einer kommerziellen Beziehung zwischen Sybariten und Milesiern auf, wofür diese Mäntel als Zeichen dienen würden. Man nahm an, dass die antiken Autoren ökonomische Fortschritte der Stadt missverstanden beziehungsweise in einem schlechten Licht (als tryphé)

17 Hasebroek 1928, 50. 18 Hasebroek 1928, 60: „nicht in Textilfabriken, wohl aber in der Werkstätte des milesischen Textilhandwerkes wird der Händler die Erzeugnisse des Milesischen Textilhandwerkes ein- gehandelt haben, um sie in die Ferne zu bringen“. 19 Hasebroek 1928, 115. 20 Michell 1957, 292: „Fabrics from Miletus were greatly favoured at Sybaris“. 21 Dunham 1915, 24; Röhlig 1933, 39; Roebuck 1959, 19 Anm. 43. Vgl. dazu Gehrke 1986, 134. 22 Siehe oben. 23 Der Handel von Luxusgütern stellt in der Forschung eine unbestrittene Komponente der archaischen Geschichte dar, vgl. Foxhall 1998; Möller 2000, 54–60; Foxhall 2005. Selbst Moses Finley, der dem Handel eine geringe Bedeutung in der antiken Wirtschaft beimaß, nahm den Transport von Luxusgütern über weite Räume als selbstverständlich an (Finley 1973, 60; 131). 24 Schon Kleinschmidt 1894, 2 wies auf „die durch Anekdoten aller Art bewirkte Trübung der überlieferten Nachrichten“ hin; ähnliche Beobachtungen finden sich in jeder Publikation zu Sybaris, vgl. insbesondere Cessi 1901; Sartori 1960; Rutter 1970; Pugliese-Carratelli 1972– 1973; Ampolo 1993. Luraghi 1994, 65 definiert die Quellen zu Sybaris als „una mescolanza inestricabile di storia e taumasiografia“. 25 Vgl. Bernhard 2003, 63: „neben den ausgesprochen fabulistischen Bestandteilen gibt es bei der Sybarislegende auch konkretere Elemente. Diese beziehen sich hauptsächlich auf die Kleidung […] Was über die Kleidung berichtet wird, erscheint glaubwürdig: Allgemein zo- gen wohlhabende Sybariten die kostbare milesische Wolle der einheimischen vor, wie denn überhaupt die Handelsbeziehungen zu Milet intensiv waren“.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Milesische Wolle in Sybaris 173 hatten erscheinen lassen wollen.26 Unter Schichten anekdotischer Erzählungen wür- den sich Sachinformationen zur sybaritischen Wirtschaft verstecken. Die Erzählung des Timaios über die von Sybariten, Milesiern und Etruskern geteilte Vorliebe für die tryphé sei auf gemeinsame kommerzielle Beziehungen zwischen Kleinasien und Italien zurückzuführen.27 Diese Interpretation stützt sich auf eine von Polybios beeinflusste Einschätzung des Timaios als Historiker, der die Wahrheit durch seine moralisierenden Ansichten verzerrte. Als 1991 das Buch von Riccardo Vattuone zu Timaios erschien, der eine Neudeutung der Fragmente vornahm, die Stellen zum sybaritischen Luxus als Übertreibungen auslegte und auf deren topischen Charakter verwies,28 hatte sich die These des milesisch-sybaritischen Textilhandels so gefestigt, dass diese kritische Einschätzung die herkömmliche Deutung des Fragments des Timaios nicht mehr erschüttern konnte. Während die archäologische Forschung die Bedeutung des Handels aus Milet nach Italien relativierte und die Nutzbarkeit der kommerziellen Landroute von Sybaris nach Etrurien problematisierte,29 ist die übliche Lektüre der timaiischen Stelle noch im Jahr 2005 von Flavio Raviola unter- stützt worden.30 Jüngste Forschungen zum Werk des Timaios legen jedoch nach, die gängige Deutung des Fragments zu überdenken. Zu nennen ist vor allem die 2013 erschiene- ne Monographie von Christopher Baron, der eine Einordnung des Geschichtswerks des Timaios in die hellenistische Historiographie lieferte und den athenischen

26 Vgl. insbesondere Momigliano 1973, 78; Cozzoli 1980, 143. 27 Vgl. Lenormant 1881, 274–276; Kleinschmidt 1894, 11; Cessi 1901, 8–9; Ponnelle 1907, 257–259; Ciaceri 1927, 225–228; Dunbabin 1948, 242; Sartori 1960, 155; Rutter 1970, 174; Pugliese-Carratelli 1972–1973, 19; Cozzoli 1980, 143. Siehe auch Lepore 1966, der auf die ökonomische Relevanz von Sybaris für die Handelsbeziehungen mit Ioniern und Etruskern hinweist (261–262) und sich auf das veränderte Szenario in Großgriechenland konzentriert, nachdem Sybaris zerstört wurde. Elea hätte das „Erbe von Sybaris“ angetreten. De Sensi Sestito 1988, 241–243 hält es für wahrscheinlich, dass die freundschaftlichen Beziehungen der Sybariten mit Milesiern und Etruskern aus einem regelmäßigen Gütertausch entstanden; mit Bezug auf die sybaritische Wirtschaft schreibt sie aber vorsichtig: „quanto è noto dalle fonti e dai rinvenimenti archeologici appare insufficiente a fare attribuire a Sibari un ruolo di grande rilievo nel commercio internazionale“ (241). Dagegen sprach Pugliese-Carratelli 1972–1973, 20 von „il preminente carattere mercantile di Sibari“. Zum Textilhandel der Milesier mit den Sybariten (ohne Erwähnung der Etrusker) siehe auch Callaway 1950, 72; 78. 28 Vattuone 1991, 323–330. 29 Vgl. Vallet 1958, 178: „si l’on ajoute à cela la tradition littéraire relative à l’amitié des Sybarites avec les Milésiens et les Etrusques, on doit reconnaître alors que ce transit par voie de terre de Sybaris à Laos des étoffes de Milet paraît très vraisemblable. Il ne faudrait pas en exagérer l’importance. Cette voie de portage n’a dû être utilisée que pendant une période assez courte“. Siehe auch die vorsichtigen Äußerungen zum Verhältnis zwischen Sybariten und Etruskern in Pallottino 1969, 44–46. Croissant 1993, 551 und Croissant 2000, 449 stellte fest, dass die Archäologie gegen jede Erwartung keine besondere Rolle milesischer Importgüter in Sybaris bezeugen konnte. Zur Nutzbarkeit der Landroute zwischen Sybaris und Etrurien vgl. Vallet 1963, 135; Guzzo 1981, 38; 43. Kategorisch Greco 1993, 481: „la via Mileto-Sibari-Etruria non è mai esistita come percorso razionale e coerente“. 30 Raviola 2005, 122. Bezüglich der Existenz von kommerziellen Beziehungen zwischen Syba- riten, Milesiern und Etruskern schreibt Raviola: „lo scetticismo e la sfiducia talora manife stati mi paiono oggi francamente non più sostenibili“.

Einfluss auf die Sichtweise des Historikers aufzeigte. Daneben ist die Bedeutung der tryphé als historiographisches Konzept bei Timaios im Rahmen philologischer Untersuchungen zu den Deipnosophistai infrage gestellt worden. Die expliziten Verweise auf die tryphé seien letztendlich auf Athenaios und nicht auf den von ihm zitierten Autor zurückzuführen.31 Dementsprechend haben wir heute ein besseres und in gewisser Weise neues Bild von der Historiographie des Timaios, was mir die Gelegenheit bietet, die These vom Textilhandel auf der Grundlage der vorge- nommenen philologischen Revisionen einer erneuten Überprüfung zu unterziehen. Ich stütze mich dabei zudem auf jüngste Studien zur Konsumforschung, die nach der kommunikativen und identitätsstiftenden Funktion des Gebrauchs von Gütern fragen.32 Milesische Wolle kann als semantisches Zeichen gelesen werden, das Auskunft über Ordnungsvorstellungen bietet, wie dies für andere ‚Konsumgüter‘ wie Fisch oder Kleidung gezeigt worden ist.33

Das Fragment des Timaios: Kontext der Überlieferung und Lektüre Unser Fragment stammt aus dem Hauptwerk des Timaios zur Geschichte Siziliens und Süditaliens, dessen Titel nicht genau bekannt ist.34 Das Werk legte die Geschichte der Region seit der ältesten mythischen Zeit bis zur Gegenwart des Autors vor. Unser Fragment gehört zum ‚archäologischen‘ Teil. Die Überlieferung ist Athenaios zu verdanken, der den Geschichtsschreiber innerhalb eines langen Kapitels über die Manifestationen des sybaritischen Luxus (Ath. XII 518 c–522 a) zitiert. Es handelt sich um kein wörtliches Zitat, sondern um eine Paraphrase.35 Der originale Kontext ist schwer rekonstruierbar und sogar die Länge des Fragments ist umstritten.36 Wir befinden uns in der schwierigen Lage,

31 Siehe Anm. 36; 77. 32 Zum Wechsel von der Produzenten- zur Konsumentenperspektive, siehe Wagner-Hasel 2011, 336–340. Auf die Beachtung der Konsumentenperspektive bei der Untersuchungen archäologischer Kontexte hatte Foxhall 1998 und Foxhall 2005, 233 aufmerksam gemacht. Konsumforschung kann außerdem die symbolische Bedeutung von Gütern untersuchen. Vgl. Hodos 2010, 20: „Consumption research therefore may focus on the symbolic aspect of goods and how they look, and their role as communicators (as well as loss of meaning, appropriation, or revaluing, for example)“. 33 Zum Fischkonsum in den athenischen Texten als Symbolik für Machteinstellung siehe Davidson 2002, 315–320. Die Analyse der Zeichenhaftigkeit von Textilien in der non- verbalen Kommunikation stellt einen modernen Ansatz in der Textilforschung dar. Vgl. Reuthner 2006, 77–79. Durch Textilien können allgemeine Werte visualisiert, sowie ein Diskurs über die gute Ordnung vermittelt werden, vgl. Wagner-Hasel 2006, 96; Wagner- Hasel 2009, 146–147. Auch der Konsum von bestimmten Wollqualitäten gehört dieser dis- kursiven Praxis an, vgl. Wagner-Hasel 2015, 41–42. 34 Baron 2013, 28. 35 Vgl. Lenfant 2007, 51 (Typ J). 36 In der Fortsetzung der Erzählung sind die Gewohnheiten und die merkwürdigen Sitten der Sybariten sowie ihre Neigung zu Luxus und Gemütlichkeit ausführlich beschrieben. Felix Jacoby schrieb Timaios die komplette Erzählung (Ath. XII 519b–520c) zu, wobei der Name des Geschichtsschreibers nur am Anfang in der oben zitierten Passage vorkommt. Derselben Meinung auch Vattuone 1991, 323. Gorman & Gorman 2007, 52–53 haben die Zuschreibung der ganzen Erzählung an Timaios in Zweifel gezogen. Im Anschluss daran hat sich Baron 2013, 262–263 über die Länge des Fragments vorsichtig ausgedrückt: „we simply have no way of knowing how much of this comes from Timaeus“ (263). Die additionale

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Milesische Wolle in Sybaris 175 den Sinn einer verlorenen Erzählung aufgrund einer Paraphrase nachvollziehen und ihre Interpretation auf wenige Indizien stützen zu müssen. Dies soll erst einmal vor jeder apodiktischen Aussage warnen. Im Fragment ist die Beschreibung der sybaritischen Kleider ziemlich knapp, was letztendlich Raum für Ergänzungen gelassen hat. Als Ergänzung der Forschung gilt die milesische Herstellung der sybaritischen Gewänder, worüber der Text nichts aussagt. Hier ist vielmehr nur von der Wollsorte die Rede, die als „milesisch“ charakterisiert wird. Wo die Mäntel aus milesischer Wolle produziert wurden, sagt das Fragment nicht. Die milesische Wolle war in der Antike und noch bis zum Diokletianischen Preisedikt von 301 n.Chr. für ihre hochwertige Qualität bekannt.37 Während Plinius ihr nur den dritten Platz in der Hierarchie der Wollsorten zugesteht,38 stellt die milesische Wolle bei Ktesias und Strabo einen so hohen Maßstab dar, dass es für sie als erstaunlich erscheint, dass vergleichbare oder sogar bessere Qualitäten zu existieren scheinen.39 Dass nach Timaios dieses Qualitätsmerkmal der Wolle ursprünglich als Her kunftsbezeichnung zu verstehen sei, lässt sich direkt aus dem Fragment ersehen. Im Nebensatz werden nämlich poleis genannt, die zweifellos in Sybaris und Milet zu identifizieren sind. Das Verb ἐγένοντο bezeichnet den Prozess, der zur Entstehung freundschaftlicher Beziehung zwischen den zwei poleis führte. Das Komplement ἀφ’ ὧν, das den Nebensatz mit dem Hauptsatz in Verbindung setzt, bringt den Ursprung dieser Beziehungen und nicht einfach den Grund dafür zum Ausdruck.40

Erklärung über die Gründe der sybaritischen Freundschaftsbeziehungen zu Etruskern und Ioniern (ἠγάπων γὰρ τῶν μὲν ἐξ Ἰταλίας Τυρρηνούς, τῶν δ’ ἔξωθεν τοὺς Ἴωνας, ὅτι τρυφῆι προσεῖχον) geht zum Beispiel nach dem Ehepaar Gorman und Baron auf Athenaios zurück, der die Stelle als Beleg für den Luxus der Sybariten zitiert. Die moderne Forschung zu den Deipnosophistai hat in der Tat gezeigt, dass Athenaios auf eigene Kommentare nicht verzichtet, die ohne eine eindeutige Trennung zur Quelle in die Zitate einfließen, vgl. Pelling 2000. Nichtsdestotrotz ist es wahrscheinlich, dass diese Erläuterung ebenfalls aus dem Werk des Timaios stammt. Eine ähnliche Anmerkung zur Vorliebe der Sybariten für Tyrrhener und Ionier wegen der luxuriösen Lebensweise findet sich in einem Fragment Diodors (VIII 18,1: τῶν ἔξωθεν ἐθνῶν μάλιστα ἠγάπων Ἴωνας καὶ Τυρρηνούς, ὅτι συνέβαινεν αὐτοὺς τοὺς μὲν τῶν Ἑλλήνων, τοὺς δὲ τῶν βαρβάρων προέχειν τῇ κατὰ τὸ ζῆν πολυτελείᾳ). Die Quelle Diodors ist hier mit aller Wahrscheinlichkeit Timaios, vgl. Diod. Sic. VIII 18,2 und Timaios, FGrH 566 F 43; Diod. Sic. VIII 19 und Timaios, FGrH 566 F 9 und natürlich Diod. Sic. VIII 18,1 und Timaios, FGrH 566 F 50. Bezüglich dieser Stellen Diodors schreibt Jacoby 1969, 560: „T[imaios] ist ausgeschrieben von Diodor“; derselben Meinung sind auch De Sensi Sestito 1991, 128 und Cohen-Skalli 2012, 303. 37 Ed. Diocl. 24,6. 38 Plin. HN VIII 73, 190: lana autem laudatissima Apula et quae in Italia Graeci pecoris appella tur, alibi Italica; tertium locum Milesiae oves obtinent. Zur Interpretation der Stelle Wagner- Hasel 2015, 44–46. 39 Ktesias, FGrH 688 F 10b; Strabo XII 8, 16. 40 Mich überzeugt die Übersetzung des Komplements ἀφ’ ὧν von Claus Friedrich „aufgrund- dessen“ (Athenaios, Das Gelehrtenmahl, Buch XI–XV, erster Teil, 2000, 110) nicht: ἀπό in Abhängigkeit vom Verb γίγνομαι bezeichnet den Ursprung, von dem etwas ausgegangen ist. Vgl. die Übersetzung von Maria Luisa Gambato “circostanza da cui derivò l’amicizia tra le due città” (Ateneo, I Deipnosofisti: prima traduzione italiana commentata su progetto di L. Canfora, vol. 3, Libri XII–XV, traduzione e commento dei libri XII–XIII a cura di

Aus der Wortwahl und Art der Formulierung lässt sich schließen, dass der Konsum milesischer Wolle eine Rolle bei der Entwicklung von Freundschaftsbeziehungen in Sybaris und Milet spielte; für einen regelmäßigen Textilhandel fehlen dagegen konkrete textuelle Hinweise im Text.41 Man könnte zum Beispiel auch annehmen, dass im Original des Timaios nicht die milesische Wolle, sondern das milesische Schaf genannt worden ist, wie dies in der Erzählung von Klythos und Alexis über die Luxuspolitik des Polykrates belegt ist.42 Außerdem könnte es sich um die Erwähnung einer einmaligen textilen Gabe gehandelt haben, mit der er eine Bindung zwischen den beiden poleis hatte zum Ausdruck bringen wollen. Man kann nicht ausschlie- ßen, dass Timaios solche sozialen Praktiken beschrieb, wie wir sie nicht nur aus den Epen Homers, sondern auch aus Herodots Erzählungen kennen.43 Das Interesse des Athenaios war hingegen auf die Gewänder als Beispiel für die Luxusgüter der Sybariten gerichtet; im Rahmen seiner Narration über den sybaritischen Luxus war die Bedeutung der Handlung nicht relevant. Um die ursprüngliche Bedeutung des Fragments zu verstehen, kann die Klärung der Quellen des Timaios und eine Einordnung der Aussage über die Gewänder aus milesischer Wolle in den Kontext seiner anderen überlieferten Fragmente helfen.

Die Quellen des Timaios Cicero beschreibt Timaios als eruditissimus, Ps.-Longinos als πολυίστωρ.44 Dement sprechend war Timaios ein sehr belesener Historiker. In einem Fragment seines Werks bezeichnet Timaios selbst die Zusammenstellung des Materials sowie die sorg- fältige Erforschung als den schwierigen Teil der Aufgabe eines Historikers.45 Für die Rekonstruktion der älteren Vergangenheit sollte sich diese historische Erforschung auf Schriften antiker Autoren stützen. Entfernt sich die Geschichtsschreibung von der Gegenwartsgeschichte, sollte sich nämlich die historiographische Methode von der Primärforschung durch Autopsie ablösen.46 Dies betrifft auch die Geschichte der Beziehung zwischen Sybaris und Milet, die auf die Zeit vor der Zerstörung der ita- liotischen Stadt 510 v.Chr. zurückging. Die Anwendung von schriftlichen Quellen und die Kritik an älteren Autoren sollten in der Tat eine wichtige Rolle im Werk des Timaios spielen, wie der Spitzname Epitimaios „Tadler“47 und die Kritik des

M.L. Gambato, Rom 2001, 1291) und Barbara Gauger „dadurch entstanden freundschaftlichen Beziehungen zwischen den Städten“ (Die Fragmente der Historiker: Ephoros von Kyme [FGrHist 70] und Timaios von Tauromenion [FGrHist 566], Stuttgart 2015, 207). 41 Gambato 2001, 1291 Anm. 3 unterstützt in ihrem Kommentar zu den Deipnosophistai die Lektüre der Stelle in ökonomischer Hinsicht. Gorman & Gorman 2007, 52 gehen auch davon aus, dass sich Timaios hier auf einen Textilhandel bezog. 42 Klythos, FGrH 490 F 2; Alexis, FGrH 539 F 2. Der Tyrann von Samos habe das milesische Schaf auf der Insel eingeführt. Dazu Günther 1999. Sie kommt zum Schluss, dass „die Historizität der Tierimporte des Polykrates nach Samos nicht haltbar [ist]“ (54). 43 Herman 1987; Wagner-Hasel 2000. 44 Cic. De or. II 58 (= Timaios, FGrH 566 T 20); [Longinus], Subl. 4, 1 (= Timaios, FGrH 566 T23a). 45 Timaios, FGrH 566 F 7. 46 Vgl. Marincola 1997, 95–117. 47 Timaios, FGrH 566 T 16. Vgl. Baron 2013, 52–53.

Polybios48 an seiner Buchgelehrsamkeit andeuten. In Athen, wo der Historiker 50 Jahre (c. 315–265 v.Chr.)49 verbrachte, hatte er auf jeden Fall die Möglichkeit, sich mit den Schriften älterer Autoren zu beschäftigen.50 Über die Existenz von Freundschaftsbeziehungen zwischen Milet und Sybaris konnte Timaios durch die Historien Herodots informiert sein. Diesbezüglich berichtet Herodot wie folgt:

Hdt. VI 21.1 πόλιες γὰρ αὗται μάλιστα δὴ τῶν ἡμεῖς ἴδμεν ἀλλήλῃσι ἐξεινώθησαν. Die beiden Städte [i.e. Sybaris und Milet] waren am engsten von allen, die wir kennen, miteinander in Gastfreundschaf verbunden.

Wenn Timaios (bzw. Athenaios) die Verbindung zwischen beiden Städten ganz allgemein als φιλίαι bezeichnet, benutzt Herodot einen Begriff, der auf reziproke Gastfreundschaft verweist, nämlich das Verb ξενοῦσθαι. Raviola, der zuletzt den Charakter dieser Gastbindung untersucht hat, stellt die These auf, dass die Pluralform φιλίαι im Fragment des Timaios eine Anlehnung an das Pluralverb ἐξεινώθησαν in der Stelle Herodots darstellt.51 Dass in beiden Texten die poleis (πόλιες in Herodot; πόλεσιν in Timaios) das Subjekt dieser Freundschaftsbeziehungen sind, zeige ebenfalls, dass Timaios den herodoteischen Text als Quelle verwendete. Herodot berichtet weiter, dass sich alle Milesier im Jungendalter die Köpfe scho- ren und tiefe Trauer hielten, als Sybaris von den Krotoniaten erobert wurde.52 Die Reaktion aller Milesier auf die Zerstörung von Sybaris und der Bezug auf die poleis als Subjekt der Freundschaftsbeziehungen sind als Hinweise darauf gelesen worden, dass es sich hier nicht um private Beziehungen zwischen Gastfreunden, sondern eher um ein zwischenstaatliches Bündnis handelte, eine Art von ‚Übergangsinstitut‘ zwischen der archaischen xenia und den späteren Traktaten philia kai symma chia.53 Angesichts des engen Zusammenhangs zwischen individuellen und kollek- tiven Formen von Bindung,54 liegt aber die Vermutung nahe, dass Nahverhältnisse

48 Polyb. XII 25d; 25h ( = Timaios, FGrH 566 T 19). Die Hauptkritik des Polybios an Timaios ist bekannt: Das Werk des Timaios zeigt Mängel an politisch-militärischer Praxis und Autopsie, da dies auf der Buchgelehrsamkeit und nicht auf der eigenen Erfahrung des Autors basierte. 49 Baron 2013, 18–21. 50 Baron 2013, 135–136. 51 Raviola 2005, 123. Die Auswahl der Pluralform philiai (statt philia) bringt nach Raviola die Schwierigkeit des Timaios (beziehungsweise Athenaios) zum Ausdruck, die Praxis dieser Gastfreundschaft zwischen poleis genau zu erfassen. Mit dem Begriff philia können xeniai bezeichnet werden, dazu Panessa 1999, xv; xxii. 52 Hdt. VI 21,1. 53 Gauthier 1972, 23: „sans doute, il arrive qu’on mentionne encore, à propos du VIe siècle, des relations de xenia établies de cité à cité: ainsi entre le Lydiens de Crésus et Sparta, entre Milet et Sybaris. Ce n’est là qu’une phase transitoire entre la xenia archa��ï��que, dont elle recueille cer- tains éléments (dons et contre-dons), et la philia de l’âge classique et hellénistique“. Vgl. dazu Panessa 1999, xxii. Die These des ‚Übergangsinstituts‘ ist nicht problemlos, siehe Raviola 2005, 109: “ma tanto nelle Storie quanto al di fuori di esse, in tutta la restante documenta- zione letteraria e non, noi non abbiamo altra notizia di un simile rapporto interpoleico”. 54 Vgl. Baltrusch 1994, 6–8; Wagner-Hasel 2000, 102–104.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 178 Elisabetta Lupi zwischen den gene schließlich als kollektiv bedeutsam wahrgenommen oder dargestellt wurden.55 Die Stelle Herodots könnte nämlich bedeuten, dass Sybariten und Milesier durch viele einzelne Beziehungen von Gastfreundschaft mehr als andere Gemeinschaften miteinander verbunden waren.56 Die Pluralform φιλίαι bei Timaios könnte ebenfalls auf die Vielzahl einzelner Nahbeziehungen hinweisen. Der Vergleich mit dem Text Herodots macht jedenfalls deutlich, dass die Beziehungen zwischen Milesiern und Sybariten eine ritualisierte Form besaßen. Die tiefe Trauer der Milesier mit der Verlust ihrer Handelspartner in Italien er- klären zu wollen,57 scheint mir angesichts der sozial-politischen Bedeutung dieser Freundschaft nicht länger vertretbar. Das Verhalten der Milesier lässt sich eher als „ritualisierte Freundschaft“ mit den Sybariten verstehen, und zwar im Sinne eines ritualisierten Verfahrens durch die Generationen hindurch. Tauschaktionen im Rahmen einer ritualisierten Freundschaft hatten eben keine kommerzielle, sondern soziale Bedeutung, wie Gabriel Herman herausstellt.58 Die Gewänder aus milesischer Wolle, die Timaios als Voraussetzung für die Freundschaft angibt, könnten daher als Gaben zwischen Gastfreunden interpretiert werden.59 Gegen eine Interpretation des timaiischen

55 Vgl. Herman 1987, 8: “the horizontal ties of solidarity which linked together the elites of separate communities were stronger than the vertical ties which bound them to the inferiors within their own communities”. 56 In diesem Fall würde der Name poleis nicht die Staaten, sondern ihre Bürger bezeichnen. Raviola 2005 vertritt die Meinung, dass es um einzelne xeniai zwischen milesischen und sybaritischen aristokratischen Familien ging, aber dass diese privaten Beziehungen wegen ihrer ökonomischen Bedeutung eine politische Relevanz hatten, die die Außenpolitik der beiden Staaten beeinflusste und schließlich die poleis als Kollektive betraf. Die ökonomische Bedeutung dieser Beziehungen sieht er im Handel zwischen Milet und Italien. Handelt es sich um individuelle Bindungen, würde ich angesichts der vorherrschend persönlichen Natur der Beziehung nicht von ‚Außenpolitik‘ sprechen. 57 Michell 1957, 292; Pugliese Carratelli 1972–1973, 19. 58 Herman 1987, 10 definierte nämlich „ritualised friendship [...] as a bond of solidarity ma nifesting itself in an exchange of goods and services between individuals originating from separate social units“. Bezüglich des Gütertausches fügt er hinzu: „transactions of ritualised friendship were supposed to be carried out in a non-mercantile spirit; from the point of view of the partners, they appeared not as an end in itself but as a means for creating a moral obligation“. Vgl. schon Will 1973, 56: „il est bien hardi de donner à la xeniè surtout à l’époque archaïque (et même dans l’usage d’Hérodote) un contenue commercial: on n’en a pas moins interprété cette xeniè d’abord comme «traité d’amitié», ensuite comme «traité commercial»“. Raviola 2005, 106 n. 10 versteht die Gastfreundschaft zwischen Sybariten und Milesiern ebenfalls als Form von ‚ritualisierter Freundschaft‘; überraschend kommt er aber schließlich auf das ‚alte‘ Modell der Handelsbeziehungen zwischen Sybariten und Milesiern zurück: „Timeo […] ci informa su un meccanismo produttivo e commerciale che va dalla materia grezza al prodotto finito e alla sua esportazione, in un circuito che non si ferma sulle coste della Magna Grecia, ma prosegue ben oltre Sibari per toccare niente meno che gli Etruschi, possibili acquirenti finali“ (122). 59 Vgl. Will 1973, 56–57. Für meine Interpretation ist die korrekte Deutung des Komplements ἀφ’ ὧν als Ursprung der φιλίαι von entscheidender Bedeutung: Aus dem Gebrauch der Mäntel entstanden nach Timaios die freundschaftlichen Beziehungen, d.h. die Mäntel be gründeten die Beziehung zwischen den poleis. Zum Ritual der Gastfreundschaft vgl. Wagner- Hasel 2000, 104–122. Auch Gauthier 1972, 23, der die Beziehung der Sybariten mit den

Fragments als Beleg für einen Textilhandel spricht letztendlich auch die Tatsache, dass in einer Timaios zugeschriebenen Stelle Sybaris als Stadt ohne Hafen dargestellt wird.60 Der Vergleich mit Herodots Aussagen zu Sybaris und Milet wirft ein neues Licht auf den Charakter des Verhältnisses zwischen Milesiern und Sybariten und führt zu einer Deutung der Kleider als Gaben und nicht als Handelswaren. Da Herodot aber den Gebrauch der milesischen Wolle in Sybaris nicht erwähnt, stellt sich die Frage, woher Timaios diese zusätzliche Information erhalten haben könnte. Mir geht es im Folgenden nicht darum, eine Quellenforschung in engerem Sinne vorzulegen. Auf die beschränkte Bedeutung einer solchen Untersuchung hat bereits Felix Jacoby hingewiesen.61 Die folgenden Überlegungen sollen vielmehr das Ziel verfolgen, die Vorbehalte gegen eine allzu voreilige Indienstnahme der Fragmente als Beleg für sybaritische Realien herauszustellen. Wenn wir nicht wissen, woher Timaios seine Informationen über die sybaritischen Kleider hatte, können wir immerhin fragen, welche Relevanz einer solchen Aussage für seine Art der Geschichtsschreibung zukam. Die ersten zu berücksichtigen Autoren sind Antiochos von Syrakus und Hippys von Rhegion, die im 5. Jh. v.Chr. über die Geschichte Italiens berichteten und dank ihrer westlichen Herkunft über Informationen aus erster Hand verfügten.62 In beiden Fällen ist es jedoch problematisch zu postulieren, dass Timaios den Beleg über die Kleider der Sybariten in ihren Werken fand. Die erhaltenen Fragmente von Antiochos offenbaren sein Interesse für die mythischen Erzählungen zur griechischen Kolonisation sowie für die Ethnographie Italiens und Siziliens. Die materielle Kultur und der Lebensstil in den griechischen apoikiai finden dagegen keinen Platz, was natürlich die Möglichkeit nicht ausschließt, dass sich Antiochos dennoch mit solchen Themen befasste. Aber es ist schwer zu behaupten, dass Timaios sein Werk als Quelle für die sybaritischen Kleider verwendete. Timaios distanzierte sich außer- dem expliziert vom Werk des Vorgängers.63 Ein Fragment des Hippys zeigt das Interesse des Historikers für Exportgüter,64 aber Bezüge zwischen seinem Werk und dem des Timaios sind nicht bekannt. In den erhaltenen Fragmenten erwähnt Timaios den Geschichtsschreiber aus Rhegion kein einziges Mal.65

Milesiern als ‚Übergangsinstitut‘ zwischen der xenia und der philia kai symmachia inter pretiert, behauptet, dass der Gütertausch bei der Begründung dieser Beziehung eine wichtige Rolle spielte, siehe oben Anm. 53. 60 Timaios, FGrH 566 F 50. 61 Jacoby 1969, 533: „was er alles gelesen hat, können wir nicht sagen; aber ich meine, wir müssen Polybios die prinzipielle Kritik dieser Bücher als Schreibtischarbeit glauben“. 62 Dies behauptet Antiochos in einem erhaltenen methodischen Fragment seines Werks (FGrH 555 F 2). Vgl. Luraghi 2002, 72. Die Datierung von Hippys ist umstritten. Vgl. Vanotti 2002, 33–38; 51. 63 Timaios, FGrH 566 T 17. 64 Hippys, FGrH 554 F 4 erwähnt die Rebe ‚Eileos‘, die aus Süditalien nach Syrakus eingeführt wurde. 65 Vgl. Meister 1998, 612: „in Wirklichkeit scheint H[ippys] selbst wenn die Frühdatierung zuträfe, die Überlieferung kaum beeinflusst zu haben“.

Weiterhin könnte die athenische Komödie infrage kommen, da hier verschiedene Anspielungen am Wohlleben in Sybaris erscheinen66 und Timaios laut Polybios Komödien als Quellen für seine historische Recherche verwendete.67 In der Tat: Im attischen Theater scheint sich ein Bild von Sybaris durchgesetzt zu haben, das sich auf das Motiv der Üppigkeit beim Symposion konzentrierte. Keine überlieferte Stelle aus der Komödiendichtung enthält dagegen Hinweise auf Luxustextilien in Sybaris. Genauso schwierig ist es zu belegen, dass Timaios die Information über die Kleider der Sybariten im Werk des Ephoros gefunden hatte.68 Ephoros ist nämlich einer der Autoren, die Timaios stark kritisiert.69 Die Details über den sybaritischen Lebensstil, die Timaios ausführlich beschreibt, stehen außerdem im Gegensatz zum methodischen Ansatz des Ephoros, demzufolge genau die Fülle an Details verdäch- tig ist, wenn es um die Rekonstruktion der alten Zeiten geht.70 Unter den Fragmenten des Aristoteles und seiner Schule ist eine Beschreibung der Kleider der Siriten ediert, die der Verfassung der Sybariten zugeschrieben wird und als Hinweis auf die aristotelische Herkunft des Belegs über die Gewänder der Sybariten gelten könnte.71 Die Länge des Fragments ist aber sehr fraglich und genau diese Beschreibung gehört möglicherweise nicht zum aristotelischen Zitat.72 Darüber hinaus übte der Epitimaios ebenfalls heftige Kritik an den historischen Aussagen des Aristoteles.73 Dieser kurze Überblick über einige Autoren und Gattungen, die als Quellen für die sybaritischen Gewänder infrage kommen könnten, zeigt die Schwierigkeiten, die die Interpretation der Passage als von Timaios und seiner narrativen Strategie unabhängiges Faktum mit sich bringt. Darüber hinaus sollten wir uns beim Fall der athenischen Komödie, des Ephoros und Aristoteles genauso nach der Herkunft der Information fragen - und wir werden uns in einer Sackgasse wiederfinden. Man sollte nicht zuletzt in Betracht ziehen, dass die milesiche Wolle erstmals im letzten Viertel des 5. Jh. v.Chr. literarisch belegt ist,74 was die Zweifel noch ver- stärkt, die Kleider der Sybariten der archaischen Zeit zuzuordnen. Die Aussage über die Kleider lässt sich meines Erachtens vielmehr in den Rahmen der literarischen Tradition des 4. Jh. v.Chr. einordnen und erklären.

66 Ar. Pax 344; fr. 225 KA; Metagenes fr. 6 KA (zum sybaritischen Gebiet als Schlaraffenland). 67 Timaios, FGrH 566 F 35b. Zur Verwendung der attischen Komödie als Quelle bei Timaios vgl. Vattuone 2002, 196. 68 Ephoros diente möglicherweise als Quelle Diodors für die Erzählung über die sybaritische Geschichte (Diod. Sic. XII 9–10,1). Vgl. De Sensi Sestito 1991, 129–132; Bugno 1999, 8; Nafissi 2007, 395. 69 Timaios, FGrH 566 T 17; F 110; 154b. 70 Ephoros, FGrH 70 F 9. 71 Arist. fr. 584 Rose3 = 601 Gigon. 72 Gorman-Gorman 2007, 47–48. 73 Timaios, FGrH 566 F 156; zur Kritik des Timaios an Aristoteles siehe Galvagno 2011; Baron 2013, 114–125. 74 Vgl. Wagner-Hasel 2015, 44–45.

Das historiographische Konzept des Timaios Die größte Herausforderung eines antiken Historikers und Bestandteil seiner Fach kompetenz bestand darin, zu rekonstruieren, was seine Quellen nicht sagten.75 Dies betraf vor allem die Rekonstruktion der fernen Vergangenheit, bei der die Autopsie nur als Überprüfung der verfügbaren Dokumenten (Inschriften, Denkmäler und Ähnliches) dienen konnte. Die Angabe beziehungsweise Integration von Ursachen, Handlungsmotiven und Diskursen gehörte zu den Aufgaben eines antiken Histo rikers an, um eine möglichst ausführlichere Darstellung der Vergangenheit als die der Vorgänger zu verfassen. Es gab natürlich ‚Regeln‘: die Narration musste als veri similis gelten, und zwar musste es einen glaubwürdigen und angemessen Zusammen hang zwischen ihren verschiedenen Teilen geben. Infolgedessen kann man die These aufstellen, dass es Timaios selbst war, der die herodoteische Erzählung durch die Beschreibung der sybaritischen Gewänder ergänzte. Diese Ergänzung ist meines Erachtens nicht bloß als topos zu verstehen, der im Rahmen einer moralistischen Darlegung der von tryphé geprägten sybaritischen Geschichte seinen Platz findet, wie Will behauptet.76 Da die Rolle der tryphé im Werk des Timaios nicht leicht einzuschätzen ist,77 sollten im Vordergrund der Interpretation nicht allein das Motiv der tryphé und seine ‚Phänomenologie‘ stehen, wie es bei Vattuone der Fall ist.78 Allein aus dem Motiv der tryphé kann man die timaiische Angabe zu den sybaritischen Mänteln nicht erklären.79 Vielmehr könnte diese Angabe den mögli- chen Ursprung der freundschaftlichen Beziehungen erklären helfen und damit ein anschauliches Bild für die politische und ethische Einstellung der Sybariten bieten.80 Die Beschreibung der Gewänder hätte somit meines Erachtens eine narrative Funktion, die darin besteht, dem Publikum die Vergangenheit zu ‚visualisieren‘.81 Dahinter steckt eine Vorstellung der Historiographie, die die Geschichte dem Leser nicht nur erzählt, sondern wie ein Dichter ‚vor Augen führt‘.82 In den erhaltenen Fragmenten des Timaios finden sich in der Tat mehrere Hinweise auf Kleidung und Tracht.83 Diese Anmerkungen zum Aussehen können als rhetorische Mittel verstanden werden: Sie dienen der historiographischen Narration, insofern sie ein Bild der

75 Nicolai 2012, 61: „��„l’abilitàl’abilità�� dello storico non consiste tanto nell’uso corretto delle fonti docudocu-- mentarie quanto nella capacità di restaurare ciò che le fonti non dicono“. 76 Will 1973, 57–58. Zur Topik der tryphé siehe Passerini 1934. 77 Vgl. Gorman & Gorman 2007, 44; Baron 2013, 256–258; 263. 78 Vattuone 1991, 323–329. 79 Die Interpretation der Details zum sybaritischen Luxus als topoi und als Zeichen der tryphé führt in unserem Fall zu einem ‚Henne-Ei-Problem‘: Was kam zuerst, die tryphé oder die milesische Wolle? Aus den topoi zur tryphé besteht nämlich die tryphé selbst. 80 Es gilt hierbei die Anmerkung von Walbank 2002, 167: „how„��how�� Timaeus saw the past is some-something to be discovered not simply from what he says about it but also from how he narrates past events“. 81 Vgl. Serghidou 2012, 90 zur Kleiderbeschreibungen und opsis in den Historien Herodots. 82 Vgl. Vattuone 2005, 114: „sul solco della tradizione storiografica di IV sec. a.C., uno dei problemi essenziali nell’ambito della ricerca della ‘verità’ dei fatti era costituito dalla loro rappresentazione: [...] il paradigma ricorrente delle arti plastiche e pittoriche metteva in evi- denza come il tema della ἀλήθεια [...] fosse esteso alla vivacità della raffigurazione di fronte ad un pubblico di lettori che avrebbe dovuto ricevere l’immagine di eventi cui non erano stati presenti, come se quelli si svolgessero una seconda volta davanti ai loro occhi“. 83 Timaios, FGrH 566 F 16; F 26a; F 31b; F 44; F 50; F 51; F 55.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 182 Elisabetta Lupi betroffenen Personen beziehungsweise Völker undpoleis erzeugen. Warum dies gerade die milesische Wolle kann, darum kreist mein letzter Punkt. Im Folgenden geht es mir um die mit dem Konsum milesischer Wolle verbundenen ethisch-politischen Konnotationen, um die Frage beantworten zu können, warum für Timaios diese Wollsorte für die Rekonstruktion der sybaritischen Vergangenheit relevant war.

Die Bedeutung des Konsums milesischer Wolle bei Timaios Timaios verbrachte 50 Jahre seines Lebens in Athen und sein Werk war hauptsäch- lich für ein athenisches Publikum gedacht.84 Die Frage nach dem Publikum ist keine Nebensache. Form und Inhalt hängen vom sozialen Kontext ab, in dem das Werk produziert wurde. Die kommunikative Vermittlung der Vergangenheit kann nur ge- lingen, wenn der Historiker und sein Publikum eine gemeinsame Sprache sprechen. Dies betrifft auch die symbolische Ebene der Kommunikation. Jede Zeit hat eigene sprachlichen Zeichen und einen eigenen Zeichengebrauch. Der Gebrauch von sprachlichen Zeichen stellt eine Möglichkeit zur Mediation zwischen Vergangenheit und Gegenwart dar,85 insofern diese Zeichen in der aktuellen Kommunikation eine Vorstellung der Vergangenheit vermitteln. Die milesische Wolle war ein bekanntes Motiv für das athenische Publikum, wie Belege aus der Komödiendichtung zeigen. In einem Fragment aus der Komödie Odysseus des Amphis (zweite Hälfte des 4. Jh. v.Chr.) gibt der erste Sprecher anscheinend Befehle an einige Sklaven: Sie sollten die Wände eines Raums mit Textilien aus milesischer Wolle schmücken, die Gäste mit einem seltenen Öl salben und schließlich Weihrauch anzünden.86 Die fragmentarische Natur des Textes erschwert die Rekonstruktion des Kontextes. Es ging möglicherweise um die könig- liche Ausstattung eines Raums für den Empfang von wichtigen Gästen (vielleicht Odysseus selbst?).87 Die Übertragung von Gegenständen aus der Gegenwart auf die mythische Vergangenheit ist in der Komödie üblich.88 Dass es bei milesischer Wolle um ein besonderes Gut, um einen ‚Wahlkonsum‘ ging, lässt sich anhand älterer Stellen aus der Komödie gut belegen. Sie legen lächer- liche Situationen dar, in denen die Wolle von ‚falschen Konsumenten‘ gebraucht wird. In den Fröschen des Aristophanes (405 v.Chr.) schildert Dionysos eine völlig absurde Situation: Es wäre doch lächerlich – sagt dabei Dionysos – wenn der Sklave Xanthia auf einer Decke aus Milet liegend eine Tänzerin küsste!89

84 Baron 2013, 105–106. 85 Vgl. Marincola 1999, 309: „the inclusion of such material in his (of the historian) work tries to mediate between that vision of the past and the present reality in which he finds himself“. 86 Amphis fr. 27 KA. 87 Papachrysostomou 2008, 84–88. 88 Im Epos findet sich keine Erwähnung der milesischen Wolle. In der Komödie Odysseus ist es wohl möglich, dass „the play consisted of myth travesty and anachronistic transfer of the plot to the contemporary era“ (Papachrysostomou 2008, 84). Vgl. Papachrysostomou 2008, 26: „The comic world is located half way between myth and contemporary reality“. 89 Ar. Ran. 542–546.

Als lächerlich sollte ebenfalls die Vorstellung eines Hundes auf einem Tuch aus milesischer Wolle erscheinen, welche Eubulos vorlegt.90 In welchen Kontexten der Konsum von Textilien aus milesischer Wolle als an gemessen galt, zeigt dagegen ein späterer Text aus einem nicht athenischen Kontext. Im Gedicht Theokrits Die Syrakusanerinnen bewundert die Sängerin beim Adonis fest die Ausstattung für den Gott: Die Hirten aus Milet oder Samos können auf die purpurnen Decken stolz sein, die die Liege des Adonis bedecken.91 Der Diskurs über die Wollsorte erweist sich als Reflexion über Konsum und Konsumenten. Art des Konsums und Status der Konsumenten sind bei Luxus objekten von entscheidender Bedeutung, um angemessene Aufwendungen vom unpassenden Luxus und Übermaß zu unterscheiden. Als aufwändige Güter waren Textilien aus milesischer Wolle für demonstrative Zwecke bei bestimmten gesellschaftlichen Anlässen (Amphis?) und für kultische Ausstattungen (Theokrit) geeignet. Aufwendungen für den Empfang von Gästen und für die Ehrung der Götter galten nach Aristoteles als ehrenwert.92 Die Verwendung der milesischen Wolle für die Anfertigung von Kleidung für Männer scheint dagegen problematisch gewesen zu sein. In den Aufwandsbeschränkungen, die unter dem Namen des Gesetzgebers Zaleukos von Lokroi Epizephyrioi überliefert wurden,93 wird der Konsum von Mänteln nach milesischer Art (ἱμάτιον ἰσομιλήσιον) verboten. Männer sollten solche Kleider nicht tragen, sofern sie nicht auf Prostitution oder Ehebruch aus waren.94 Im klassischen Athen verlor Kleiderluxus seinen Prestigewert, was sich durch die aristotelische Aussage verdeutlichen lässt, nur törichte Menschen schmücken ihre Kleider.95 Das klassische Bürgerideal umfasst schlichte Kleidung und Ablehnung des privaten Luxus.96 Die prächtigen Gewänder der Sybariten aus milesischer Wolle sollten als Zeichen für eine alte97 und oligarchische Gesellschaft dienen, in der das Prestige der Elite von der Zuschauerstellung von privatem Luxus abhängt. Als sich Timaios in Athen befand, gab es einen Wandel in der Wahrnehmung des öffentlichen Luxus,98 aber anscheinend hatte er eine kritische Einstellung zur

90 Eubulus fr. 89 KA. 91 Theoc. Id. XV 125–127. 92 Arist. Eth. Nic. IV 1122b–1123a. 93 Die Historizität des Zaleukos galt schon in der Antike als problematisch; daran verzweifelte Timaios, FGrH 566 F 130a. Die Forschung tendiert heute dazu, die ihm zugeschriebenen Gesetzte als historische Rückprojektionen aus der Zeit nach der zweiten Hälfte des 4. Jh. v. Chr. zu verstehen, Bernhardt 2003, 31. 94 Diod. Sic. XII 21, 1. 95 Arist. Eth. Nic. IV 1125a. 96 Nach Geddes 1987, 321–331 stand die Einfachheit der männlichen Kleider im klassischen Athen für „leisure“, „fi„fitness“, tness“, „equality“ und „like-mindedness“. Zur Bedeutung schlichschlich-- ter Mäntel für die Konstruktion des Bürgeridealbildes siehe Wagner-Hasel 2009, 168–170; Hartmann 2011; Schmitt Pantel 2012, 130–131. Zum Kleiderluxus als Kennzeichnung für Gewaltherrscher und Barbaren vgl. Alföldi 1955. Für die Ablehnung des privaten Luxus siehe die Äußerungen von Dem. III 25–26; XXIII 207. 97 Vgl. Thuc. I 6 behauptet, dass das alte Hellenentum τὸ( παλαιὸν Ἑλληνικὸν) wie die heutigen Barbaren lebte, wie seine prächtigen Kleidungen bezeugten. 98 Baron 2013, 99–104. .

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 184 Elisabetta Lupi individuellen Prachtentfaltung99 sowie zur göttlichen Verehrung von politischen Persönlichkeiten.100 Der Konsum milesischer Wolle bei den (männlichen) Sybariten könnte von Timaios als unangemessen, exzessiv und Zeichen der hybris gedeutet worden sein. In den Kontext einer missbilligenden Schilderung des Luxus lässt sich ferner die Aussage des Pseudo-Skymnos einordnen, der den Ursprung der sybaritischen Dekadenz mit der Aufhebung der Gesetzte des Zaleukos verband.101 Im Kontext des Fragments könnte die milesische Wolle außerdem als Zeichen der sybaritischen Verweiblichung dienen. Welcher mächtige Einfluss der Kleidung im Hinblick auf den Charakter zugeschrieben wurde, zeigt bereits eine Erzählung Herodots: Feine Gewänder und hohe Schuhe konnten zusammen mit einer musi- kalischen Erziehung und dem Waffenverbot nach dem Rat des Kroisos an Kyros die kriegerischen Lyder in ein effeminiertes und mühelos zu beherrschen Volk ver- wandeln.102 Wie die feine Kleidung der Lyder könnten die weichen Gewänder der Sybariten nach ionischer Art den effeminierten103 Charakter ihrer Träger belegen. Dafür ist das allgemeine negative Bild der Ionier und Milesier entscheidend, auf das die milesische Wolle verweist.104 Dieses Bild scheint mir auch für die Interpretation der frühesten Erwähnung der milesischen Wolle aus der Komödie Lysistrate des Aristophanes (411 v.Chr.) bedeutsam zu sein. In der Komödie tritt eine Frau auf, die sich beeilt nach Hause zu kommen, damit ihr die milesische Wolle nicht verderbe.105 Im Rahmen der dra- matischen Handlung ist ihre reale Intention offensichtlich: Sie will die Akropolis verlassen, um sexuelle Befriedigung zu finden. Die Absicht lässt sich gleich durch- schauen, als die Frau mit einem zweideutigen Wort hinzufügt, dass sie die Wolle auf dem Bett ausbreiten will.106 Über den Grund, warum Aristophanes die milesische

99 Zur Kritik des Timaios an der Prachtentfaltung als Zeichen von Tyrannis und hybris vgl. Vattuone 2002, 202–203. 100 Baron 2013, 103; 123–124. 101 [Scymn.] 346–349. 102 Hdt. I 155. Zur Darstellung der Lyder im 5. Jh. v.Chr. Bernhard 2003, 121–125. 103 Bei den Frauen der Elite war der Kleiderluxus ein wichtiger Ausdruck ihres Prestiges, siehe Wagner-Hasel 2009, 170: „für die weiblichen Mitglieder der Elite galten ohnehin andere Maßstäbe. De Visualisierung ihres Prestiges wird sowohl vor als auch nach den Perserkriegen nur über ihre Kleidung möglich gewesen sein“. Zum Bild der effeminierten Sybariten passt die Darstellung der sybaritischen Ritter mit Safrankleidern (κροκωτοὺς) über die Panzer in Timaios, FGrH 566 F 50 (aber die timaiische Zuschreibung der Stelle ist umstritten, siehe Anm. 36) gut. Sind die Safrankleider typisch weibliche Gewänder, sollen die sybaritischen Ritter effeminiert und lächerlich aussehen wie Dionysos, der in Ar. Ran. 45–47 mit einem Safrankleid über einem Löwenfell auftritt und Herakles zum Lachen bringt. 104 Hdt. I 143 nennt die Ionier den schwächsten aller griechischen Stämme und bezeugt, dass die Athener nicht als Ionier bezeichnen werden wollten, vgl. auch Hdt. VI 11–12. Zum negativen Bild der Ionier in der klassischen Zeit und zur Rolle des ionischen Luxus vgl. Lombardo 1983, 1098–1099; 1102–1103; Geddes 1987, 318–319; Dorati 2003, 513–519. 105 Ar. Lys. 729–732. 106 Ar. Lys. 731–732: ἀλλ’ ἥξω ταχέως, νὴ τὼ θεώ, / ὅσον διαπετάσασ’ ἐπὶ τῆς κλίνης μόνον. Die Wolle ist dabei nicht erwähnt und bleibt im Text zugunsten der sexuellen Anspielung implizit, vgl. Ar. Lys. 733. Siehe die Scholien zur Stelle: Das Verb διαπετάννυμι ist zweideutig und hat hier eine obszöne Konnotation (Schol. Ar. Lys. 732). Gleich danach will eine zweite Frau nach Hause gehen, angeblich um den Flachs zu hecheln (Ar. Lys. 735–739). Sie wolle den Flachs (aber auch in diesem Fall bleibt das Wort implizit) schnell durchwalken

Wolle in diesem Kontext erwähnt, könnten einige Scholien zu Lysistrate und das Lexikon Suda eine Erklärung liefern: Hier wird den Milesierinnen die Verwendung von olisboi zugeschrieben.107 In Anlehnung an die Ergänzung τ[ὰς Μιλησίας fand diese Gewohnheit der Milesierinnen auch in einem Aristophanes zugeschriebenen Fragment aus einer unbekannten Komödie Erwähnung.108 Ionische Frauen galten in anderen Texten als Ehebrecherinnen, und auch bei Aristophanes wird eine lüs- terne Frau als ‚brennend in ionischer Lust‘ beschrieben.109 Diese Vorstellung von der Ionierin könnte also auf eine Zweideutigkeit der milesischen Wolle bei der Lysistrate hinweisen. Darüber hinaus könnte das Bild der Milesier als verweiblich eine Rolle gespielt haben. In der Komödie Plutos zitiert Aristophanes einen verbreiteten Spruch („vor Zeit waren die Milesier noch stark!“),110 der auf die Sittenverderbnis bei den Milesiern und auf ihre militärische Schwäche Bezug nimmt. Eine solche Vorstellung passt gut zur Figur der Frau, die den Kampf gegen die Männer wegen ihrer Begierde unterbrechen will. Daraus lässt sich schließen, dass die milesische Wolle kein wertneutrales Objekt darstellte. Sie symbolisierte die Verbindung einer Person mit der ionischen Welt, die ethisch konnotiert war. Die Sybariten galten in ihrem Charakter als den Ioniern ähnlich, wie die Pracht ihrer Kleider zeigte.

Conclusio: Lebensstil und Konsum bei den Sybariten, Ioniern und Doriern In seiner Monographie zu Sybaris stellte Joseph Sevier Callaway eine scheinbar merkwürdige Tatsache heraus: With the beautiful cloths of Tarentum close at hand, we have no evidence that the Sybarites used Tarentine fabrics.111 Angesichts der Nähe und Pracht der tarentinischen Wolle hätte er offenbar den Konsum tarentinischer Textilien bei den Sybariten erwartet. Warum dann importierten sie ihre prächtigen Textilien aus der weiten Ferne? Callaway antwortet auf diese Frage folgendermaßen: „on the basis of the evidence apparently Miletus had the monopoly of the foreign cloth market as far as Sybaris was concerned“.112 Ein literarischer Beleg über den Konsum tarentinischer Wolle in Sybaris hätte mich dagegen überrascht. Es gab laut Antiochos einen atavistischen Hass zwischen

und sofort zurückkommen. Das Verb αποδείρειν, das den Abzug des Felles bezeichnet, ist ebenso zweideutig und hat hier eine obszöne Bedeutung, was die Intention der Frau deutlich erahnen lässt, vgl. Ar. Lys. 953. 107 Schol. Ar. Lys. 109; Suda o 169 Adler. Diese Erläuterung kann aber direkt aus Aristophanes (Lys. 109: eine Frau klagt, sie habe keinen olisbos mehr gesehen, seitdem die Milesier die Athener verraten hatten) abgeleitet sein; dies würde die Erläuterung als Pleonasmus ent- larven. In Herod. VI 58 kommt der beste Hersteller von olisboi aus Chios oder Erythrai. Henderson 1991, 221 n. 491 schließt daraus die ionische Herstellung der olisboi. Vgl. Tibiletti Bruno 1969. 108 Ar. fr. 595, 16–17 KA: τί ἐστι τοῦθ’ ὃ λέγουσι τ[ὰς Μιλησίας / παίζειν ἐχούσας, ἀντι βολῶ, [τὸ σκύτινον; 109 Aeschines fr. 61 Giannantoni; Ar. Eccl. 920. Zur Darstellung der Ionierinnen und Mile sierinnen vgl. Göbel 1915, 106–107; 114. 110 Ar. Plut. 1002; 1075. Der Spruch findet sich schon in Anac. fr. 81 Page. 111 Callaway 1950, 78. 112 Callaway 1950, 78.

Sybaris als achäische Stadt und Tarent als spartanische Siedlung. Der Grund da- für bestand in der Vertreibung der Achäer aus Lakonien durch die Dorier.113 Die Sybariten hielten sich von der dorischen Welt weit entfernt, und dies spiegelt sich in ihrem Konsum wider. Tarentinische Wolle, wenn auch noch so prächtig, wäre in Sybaris kein Prestigegut gewesen. Wegen der Nähe zu den Ioniern aufgrund der achäischen Abstammung bereitet dagegen der Konsum milesischer Wolle bei den Sybariten keinerlei Schwierigkeiten. Die Distanz zu den Doriern und die Nähe zu den Ioniern ist aber vor allem eine Sache der Wahl zwischen zwei Lebensstilen, wie zwei durch Diodor überlieferte logoi sybaritikoi am besten verdeutlichen. Der eine logos sybaritikos erzählt die Geschichte eines Sybariten, der Sparta besuchte und zu dem Schluss kam, die Spartaner seien so tapfer, weil jeder lieber dreimal sterben würde als lebend eine spartanische Lebensweise auszuhalten.114 Im anderen logos sybaritikos behauptet ein Sybarit, er habe während seiner Reise durch die Welt eine einzige freie Stadt gesehen: Milet.115 Die logoi sind höchstwahrscheinlich Timaios zuzuschreiben, der Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten zwischen Sybariten, Spartanern und Ioniern mit deren jeweiligen Lebensweise begründet.116 Kleider konnten die unterschiedlichen Lebensstile am besten veranschaulichen.117 Nicht ökonomische Vorgänge, sondern ethische Aspekte stehen ebenfalls bei der Vorliebe der Sybariten für die Etrusker im Vordergrund.118 Um zusammenzufassen, gab der Konsum milesischer Wolle Informationen über die Lebensweise ihrer Konsumenten, und nicht über ihre Wirtschaftsverhältnisse. Die Kleider aus milesischer Wolle waren nämlich nicht ‚wertneutral‘, sondern wiesen auf einen Diskurs über den angemessenen Konsum hin, welcher besonders bedeutsam für die Luxusgüter erscheint. Zum Schluss möchte ich einen Vergleich mit der griechischen Bildhauerei ziehen. Wie bekannt, bilden die griechischen Portraits keine realistische Darstellung einer historischen Figur, sie nutzen vielmehr eine bildliche Sprache, in der einzelne Elemente wie Haltung, Kleider und Bart als Bedeutungsträger gelten, um den Charakter der dargestellten Figur zu veranschaulichen. Das Potenzial dieser ‚bildlichen‘ Sprache ist meines Erachtens genauso wirksam und bedeutsam in der Historiographie. Die milesische Wolle steht nicht nur für eine hochwertige Woll sorte. Zentral wird hierbei eher die Figur des Konsumenten. Wird die milesische

113 Antiochos, FGrH 555 F 12. Für meine Argumentation ist es irrelevant, ob Antiochos den Konflikt zwischen Thurioi und Tarent auf die archaische Zeit rückprojizierte. Mich interes- siert hier nur die Darstellung der politischen Lage Großgriechenlands. 114 Diod. Sic. VIII 18. 115 Diod. Sic. VIII 20. 116 Die Verbindungen zwischen den Lebensweisen der Ionier und Sybariten ist darüber hinaus literarisch belegt. Philo De specialibus legibus IV 102 vergleicht den Lebensstil der Sybariten mit dem der Ionier und Philostr. Her. 1, 1 erwähnt ein ‚ionisches Sybaris‘, das im Luxus schwelgt und mit Milet zu identifizieren ist. Vgl. Berenson Maclean & Bradshaw Aitken 2003, 1 Anm. 1. 117 Vgl. Plut. CPG I, 1 p. 21 Leutsch-Schneidewin über die prächtigen ionischen Kleider des Aristagoras von Milet. In Sparta wurde sein Luxus abgelehnt, was zum Spruch οἴκοι τὰ Μιλήσια „(nur) zu Hause der milesische Luxus“ geführt habe. Vgl. Klearchos fr. 45 Wehrli. 118 Für die Vorliebe der Sybariten für die Etrusker vgl. Timaios, FGrHist 566 F 50 und Diod. Sic. VIII 18. Die Quelle Diodors ist mit aller Wahrscheinlichkeit Timaios, siehe Anm. 36.

Wolle von den ‚falschen‘ Konsumenten gebraucht, fungiert sie als ein Mittel der Diskreditierung und Ironie.

Bibliographie Alföldi 1955: Alföldi, A.: Gewaltherrscher und Theaterkönig: Die Auseinandersetzung einer attischen Ideenprägung mit persischen Repräsentationsformen im politischen Denken und in der Kunst bis zur Schwelle des Mittelalters. In K. Weitzmann (ed.), Late Classical and Mediaeval Studies in Honor of Albert Mathias Friend Jr., Princeton, 15–55. Ampolo 1993: Ampolo, C.: La città dell’eccesso: per la storia di Sibari fino al 510 a.C. In A. Stazio & S. Ceccoli (eds.), Sibari e la Sibaritide, Atti del trentaduesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto-Sibari 7–12 ottobre 1992, Tarent, 213–254. Baltrusch 1994: Baltrusch, E.: Symmachie und Spondai: Untersuchungen zum griechischen Völkerrecht der archaischen und klassischen Zeit (8.–5. Jahrhundert v.Chr.), Berlin & New York. Baron 2013: Baron, C. A.: Timaeus of Tauromenium and Hellenistic Historiography, Cambridge. Beloch 1899: Beloch, J.: Die Großindustrie im Altertum, Zeitschrift für Socialwissenschaft 2, 18–26. Beloch 1912: Beloch, J.: Griechische Geschichte, Vol. 1, Die Zeit vor den Perserkriegen, Straßburg. Berenson Maclean & Bradshaw Aitken 2003: Berenson Maclean, J. K.& Bradshaw Aitken, E.: Flavius Philostratus: On Heroes, Translated with an Introduction and Notes by Jennifer K. Berenson Maclean and Ellen Bradshaw Aitken, with a Preliminary Essay by Casey Dué and Gregory Nagy, Atlanta. Bernhardt 2003: Bernhardt, R.: Luxuskritik und Aufwandsbeschränkungen in der griechischen Welt, Stuttgart (Historia Einzelschriften 168). Blümner 1869: Blümner, H.: Die Gewerbliche Thätigkeit der Völker des klassischen Alterthums, Leipzig. Bugno 1999: Bugno, M.: Da Sibari a Thurii: La fine di un impero, Naples (Centre Jean Bérard Études 3). Bücher 1901: Bücher, K.: Zur griechischen Wirtschaftsgeschichte. In K. Bücher & A. Schäffle (eds.), Festgaben für Albert Schäffle zur siebenzigsten Wiederkehr seines Geburtstages am 24. Februar 1901, Tübingen, 191–254. Bücher 1922: Bücher, K.: Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsgeschichte, Tübingen. Büchsenschütz 1869: Büchsenschütz, B.: Die Hauptstätten des Gewerbfleisses im klassischen Alterthume, Leipzig. Busolt 1893: Busolt, G.: Griechische Geschichte bis zur Schlacht bei Chaeroneia, Vol. 1, Bis zur Begründung des peloponnesischen Bundes, Gotha, rev. edn. Callaway 1950: Callaway, J. S.: Sybaris, Baltimore. Ciaceri 1927: Ciaceri, E.: Storia della Magna Grecia, Vol. 2, La Grande civiltà del Mezzogiorno d’Italia: sviluppo, potenza ed azione politica degli stati italioti dal sec. VII alla metà del sec. IV, Mailand. Cessi 1901: Cessi, C.: Leggende Sibaritiche, Studi italiani di filologia classica 9, 1–29. Cohen-Skalli 2012: Cohen-Skalli, A.: Diodore de Sicile, Bibliothèque historique, Fragments, Livres VI-X.: texte établi, trad. et comm. par Aude Cohen-Skalli, Paris. Cozzoli 1980: Cozzoli, U.: La τρυφή nella interpretazione delle crisi politiche. In M. Pavan (ed.), Tra Grecia e Roma: Temi antichi e metodologie moderne, Atti del convegno, Roma 15–16 maggio 1979, Rom, 133–146. Croissant 1993: Croissant, F.: Sybaris: La production artistique. In Sibari e la Sibaritide, Atti del trentaduesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto-Sibari 7–12 ottobre 1992, Tarent, 539–559. Croissant 2000: Croissant, F.: La diffusione dei modelli stilistici greco-orientali nella co- roplastica arcaica della Grecia d’Occidente. In Magna Grecia e Oriente Mediterraneo

prima dell’età ellenistica, Atti del trentanovesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 1–5 ottobre 1999, Tarent, 427–455. Davidson 2002: Davidson, J. N.: Kurtisanen und Meeresfrüchte: Die verzehrenden Leiden schaften im klassischen Athen (Engl. orig. 1997), Berlin. De Sensi Sestito 1988: De Sensi Sestito, G.: La Calabria in età arcaica e classica: Storia, economia, società. In S. Settis (ed.), Storia della Calabria antica, Vol. 1, Rom, 227–303. De Sensi Sestito 1991: De Sensi Sestito, G.: La storia italiota in Diodoro: Considerazioni sulle fonti per i libri VII–XII. In E. Galvagno & C. Molè Ventura (eds.), Mito sto ria tradizione: Diodoro Siculo e la storiografia classica, Atti del convegno internazionale, Catania-Agira 7–8 dicembre 1984, Catania, 125–152. Dorati 2003: Dorati, M.: La Lidia e la τρυφή, Aevum Antiquum 3, 503–530. Dunbabin 1948: Dunbabin, T. J.: The Western Greeks: The History of Sicily and South Italy from the Foundation of the Greek Colonies to 480 B.C, Oxford. Dunham 1915: Dunham, A. G.: The History of Miletus: Down to the Anabasis of Alexander, London. Finley 1973: Finley, M.: The Ancient Economy, London. Foxhall 1998: Foxhall, L.: Cargoes of the Heart’s Desire: The Character of Trade in the Archaic Mediterranean World. In N. Fischer & H. van Wees (eds.), Archaic Greece: New Approches and New Evidence, London, 295–309. Foxhall 2005: Foxhall, L.: Village to City: Staples and Luxuries? Exchange Networks and Urbanization. In R. Osborne & B. W. Cunliffe (eds.),Mediterranean Urbanization 800–600 BC, Oxford, 233–248. Fracotte 1900: Francotte, H.: L’industrie dans la Grèce ancienne, vol. 1, Brüssel. Francotte 1916: Francotte, H.: Industrie und Handel, RE IX/2, 1381–1439. Galvagno 2011: Galvagno, E.: Timaeus adversus Aristotelem. In M. Lombardo & C. Marangio (eds.), Antiquitas: scritti in onore di Salvatore Alessandrì, Galatina, 95–102. Gambato 2001: Gambato, M. L.: Ateneo, I Deipnosofisti: prima traduzione italiana commen tata su progetto di L. Canfora, vol. 3, Libri XII–XV, traduzione e commento dei libri XII–XIII a cura di M. L. Gambato, Rom. Gauthier 1972: Gauthier, P.: Symbola: Les étrangers et la justice dans les cités grecques, Nancy. Geddes 1987: Geddes, A. G.: Rags and Riches: The Costume of Athenian Men in the Fifth Century, CQ 37/2, 307–331. Gehrke 1986: Gehrke, H.-J.: Jenseits von Athen und Sparta: Das dritte Griechenland und seine Staatenwelt, München. Göbel 1915: Göbel, M.: Ethnica, Breslau. Gorman & Gorman 2007: Gorman, R. J. & Gorman, V. B.: The Tryphê of the Sybarites: a Historical Problem in Athenaeus, JHS 127, 38–60. Gorman 2001: Gorman, V. B.: Miletos, the Ornament of Ionia: a History of the City to 400 B.C.E., Ann Arbor. Gras 1989: Gras, M.: L’economia. In R. Vitale & A. Stazio (eds.), Un secolo di ricerche in Magna Grecia, Atti del ventottesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 7–12 ottobre 1988, Tarent, 395–420. Gras & Naso 2000: Gras, M. & Naso, A.: Commercio e scambi tra Oriente e Occidente. In Magna Grecia e Oriente Mediterraneo prima dell’età ellenistica, Atti del trentanovesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 1–5 ottobre 1999, Tarent, 125–164. Greco 1993: Greco, E.: L’impero di Sibari: Bilancio archeologico-topografico. In A. Stazio & S. Ceccoli (eds.), Sibari e la Sibaritide, Atti del trentaduesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto-Sibari 7–12 ottobre 1992, Tarent, 459–485. Grote 1852: Grote, G.: History of Greece, vol. 3, Boston. Grothe 1866: Grothe, H.: Die Geschichte der Wolle und Wollmanufaktur im Alterthum, Deutsche Vierteljahrs-Schrift 29/4, 259–304. Günther 1999: Günther, L.-M.: Alles von überall her ... Handel und Tryphe bei Polykrates von Samos, MBAH 18/1, 48–56.

Guzzo 1981: Guzzo, P. G.: Vie istmiche della Sibaritide e commercio tirrenico. In M. Napoli (ed.), Il commercio greco nel Tirreno in età arcaica, Atti del seminario in memoria di Mario Napoli, Salerno, 35–47. Hartmann 2011: Hartmann, E.: ‚Mäntel machen Bürger‘: Überlegungen zu Darstellungen von Männern mit Mantel im klassischen Athen. In T. Fuhrer & M. Formisano (eds.), Gender Studies in den Altertumswissenschaften: Gender-Inszenierungen in der antiken Literatur, Trier, 159–176. Hasebroek 1928: Hasebroek, J.: Staat und Handel im alten Griechenland: Untersuchungen zur antiken Wirtschaftsgeschichte, Tübingen. Hendersoon 1991: Henderson, J.: The Maculate Muse: Obscene Language in Attic Comedy, New York. Hermann 1987: Herman, G.: Ritualised Friendship and the Greek City, Cambridge. Hodos 2010: Hodos, T.: Local and Global Perspectives in the Study of Social and Cultural Identities. In S. Hales & T. Hodos (eds.), Material Culture and social Identities in the Ancient World, Cambridge, 3–31. Jacoby 1969: Jacoby, F.: Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, dritter Teil b: Kommentar zu Nr. 297–607, Text, Leiden. Kleinschmidt 1894: Kleinschmidt, M.: Kritische Untersuchungen zur Geschichte von Sybaris, Hamburg. Lenfant 2007: Lenfant, D.: Les «fragments» d’Hérodote dans les Deipnosophistes. In D. Lenfant (ed.), Athénée et les fragments d’historiens, Actes du colloque de Strasbourg 16–18 juin 2005, Paris, 43–72. Lenormant 1881: Lenormant, F.: La Grande-Grèce: paysages et histoire, Vol. 1, Paris. Lepore 1966: Lepore, E.: Elea e l’eredità di Sibari, PP 21, 255–278. Lepore 1982: Lepore, E.: Intervento. In Megale Hellas: nome e immagine, Atti del ventunesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 2–5 ottobre 1981, Tarent, 88–90. Lombardo 1983: Lombardo, M.: Habrosyne e habrà nel mondo greco arcaico. In Forme di contatto e processi di trasformazione nelle società antiche, Atti del Convegno di Cortona 24–30 maggio 1981, Rom, 1077–1103. Luraghi 1994: Luraghi, N.: Tirannidi arcaiche in Sicilia e Magna Grecia da Panezio di Leontini alla caduta dei Dinomenidi, Florenz (F.L.F. Studi e Testi 3). Luraghi 2002: Luraghi, N.: Antioco di Siracusa. In R. Vattuone (ed.), Storici greci d’Occidente, Bologna, 55–89. Marincola 1997: Marincola, J.: Authority and Tradition in Ancient Historiography, Cambridge. Marincola 1999: Marincola, J.: Genre, convention, and innovation in Greco-Roman historiography. In C. Shuttleworth Kraus (ed.), The Limits of Historiography: Genre and Narrative in Ancient Historical Texts, Leiden & Boston, 281–324. Meister 1998: Meister, K.: Hippys, DNP 5, 611–612. Meyer 1910: Meyer, E.: Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung des Altertums. In E. Meyer (ed.), Kleine Schriften zur Geschichtstheorie und zur wirtschaftlichen und politischen Geschichte des Altertums, Halle a. S., 79–168. Michell 1957: Michell, H.: The Economics of Ancient Greece, Cambridge. Möller 2000: Möller, A.: Naucratis: Trade in Archaic Greece, Oxford & New York. Momigliano 1973: Momigliano, A.: Intervento. In Economia e società nella Magna Grecia, Atti del dodicesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 8–14 ottobre 1972, Neapel, 77–80. Nafissi 2007: Nafissi, :M. Sibariti, Ateniesi e Peloponnesiaci: Problemi storici e storiografici nel racconto di Diodoro sulla fondazione di Thurii. In E. Greco & M. Lombardo (eds.), Atene e l’Occidente: i grandi temi, Atti del convegno internazionale, Atene 25–27 maggio 2006, Athen, 385–420. Nicolai 2012: Nicolai, R.: La storiografia come restauro necessario, Seminari romani di cul tura greca 1/1, 59–69.

Pallottino 1969: Pallottino, M.: La Magna Grecia e l’Etruria. In La Magna Grecia e Roma nell’età arcaica, Atti dell’ottavo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 6-11 ottob re 1968, Neapel, 35–48. Panessa 1999: Panessa, G.: Philiai: l’amicizia nelle relazioni interstatali dei Greci, Vol.1, Dalle origini alla fine della Guerra del Peloponneso, Pisa. Papachrysostomou 2008: Papachrysostomou, A.: Six Comic Poets: A Commentary on Selected Fragments of Middle Comedy, Tübingen. Passerini 1934: Passerini, A.: La τρυφή nella storiografia ellenistica, Studi italiani di filologia classica 11, 35–56. Pelling 2000: Pelling, C. B. R.: Fun with Fragments: Athenaeus and the Historians. In D. Braund & J. Wilkins (eds.), Athenaeus and His World: Reading Greek Culture in the Roman Empire, Exeter, 171–190. Ponnelle 1907: Ponnelle, L.: Le commerce de la première Sybaris, Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire 27, 243–276. Pugliese-Carratelli (1972–1973): Pugliese-Carratelli, G.: Le vicende di Sibari e Thurii, Atti e memorie della Società Magna Grecia 13–14, 17–33. Raviola 2005: Raviola, F.: Erodoto e la «xenia» tra Sibari e Mileto, Anemos 3, 101–125. Reuthner 2006: Reuthner, R.: Wer webte Athenes Gewänder? Die Arbeit von Frauen im anti ken Griechenland, Frankfurt. Roebuck 1959: Roebuck, C.: Ionian Trade and Colonization, New York. Röhling 1933: Röhlig, J.: Der Handel von Milet, Hamburg. Rutter 1970: Rutter, N. K.: Sybaris: Legend and Reality, G & R 17, 168–176. Sartori 1960: Sartori, F.: Il problema storico di Sibari, Atene e Roma 5, 143–163. Schmitt Pantel 2012: Schmitt Pantel, P.: Politische Identität und Lebensstil: Plutarchs Sicht auf die politische Elite im Athen des 5. Jahrhunderts v.Chr., Historische Anthropologie 20, 122–139. Serghidou 2012: Serghidou, A.: Vêtements et preuves chez Hérodote. In F. Gherchanoc & V. Huet (eds.), Vêtements antiques: S’habiller, se déshabiller dans les mondes anciens, Arles, 77–91. Sombart 1913: Sombart, W.: Luxus und Kapitalismus, München. Tibiletti Bruno 1969: Tibiletti Bruno, M. G.: Un confronto greco-anatolico, Athenaeum 47, 303–312. Vallet 1958: Vallet, G.: Rhégion et Zancle: histoire, commerce et civilisation des cités chalcidi ennes du détroit de Messine, Paris. Vallet 1963: Vallet, G.: Les routes maritimes de la Grande Grece. In Vie di Magna Grecia, Atti del secondo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 14–18 ottobre 1962, Neapel, 117–135. Vanotti 2002: Vanotti, G.: Ippi di Reggio. In R. Vattuone (ed.), Storici greci d’Occidente, Bologna, 33–54. van Wees 2005: van Wees, H.: Trailing Tunics and Sheepskin Coats: Dress and Status in early Greece. In L. Cleland, M. Harlow & L. Llewellyn-Jones (eds.), The Clothed Body in the Ancient World, Oxford, 44–51. Vattuone 1991: Vattuone, R.: Sapienza d’Occidente: Il pensiero storico di Timeo di Tauromenio, Bologna. Vattuone 2002: Vattuone, R.: Timeo di Tauromenio. In R. Vattuone (ed.), Storici greci d’Occidente, Bologna, 177–232. Vattuone 2005: Vattuone, R.: Timeo, Polibio e la storiografia greca d’Occidente. In G. Schepens & J. Bollansée (eds.), The Shadow of Polybius: Intertextuality as a Research Tool in Greek Historiography, Proceedings of the International Colloquium, Leuven 21–22 September 2001, Leuven, 89–122. Wagner-Hasel 2000: Wagner-Hasel, B.: Der Stoff der Gaben: Kultur und Politik des Schenkens und Tauschens im archaischen Griechenland, Frankfurt & New York. Wagner-Hasel 2006: Wagner-Hasel, B.: Die Reglementierung von Traueraufwand und die Tradierung des Nachruhms der Toten in Griechenland. In T. Spät & B. Wagner-

Hasel (eds.), Frauenwelt in der Antike: Geschlechterordnung und weibliche Lebenspraxis, Frankfurt et al., 81–102. Wagner-Hasel 2009: Wagner-Hasel, B.: Brautgut oder Mitgift? Das textile Heiratsgut in den Solonischen Aufwandbestimmungen. In B. Hildebrandt & C. Veit (eds.), Der Wert der Dinge: Güter im Prestigediskurs, München, 143–181. Wagner-Hasel 2011: Wagner-Hasel, B.: Die Arbeit des Gelehrten: Der Nationalökonom Karl Bücher (1847–1930), Frankfurt. Wagner-Hasel 2015: Wagner-Hasel, B.: „Canusiner Gewand, das trübem Honigwein sehr gleicht [...]“. Wollqualitäten und Luxusdiskurs in der Antike. In H. Harich- Schwarzbauer (ed.), Weben und Gewebe in der Antike: Materialität – Repräsentation – Episteme – Metapoetik / Texts and Textiles in the Ancient World: Materialiy – Representation – Episteme – Metapoetics, Oxford, 39–66. Walbank 2002: Walbank, F. W.: Polybius, Rome and the Hellenistic World: Essay and Reflections, Cambridge. Will 1954: Will, É.: Trois quarts de siècle de recherches sur l’économie grecque antique, Annales (Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations) 9, 7–22. Will 1973: Will, É.: La Grande Grèce, milieu d’échanges: réflexion méthodologique. In Economia e società nella Magna Grecia, Atti del dodicesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia Taranto 8–14 ottobre 1972, Neapel, 21–67.

Maria Papadopoulou

A Country of Textile Manufacturers Besides food, textiles were among the most important goods in ancient societies. Conceivably, the textile market was second only to the grain market in Ptolemaic and Roman times.1 Narratives recounting the foundation of Alexandria tell the story of how the barley (alphita,2 pharina,3 polenta4), used in order to trace the outline of the city, was an omen foretelling that the prosperity of the city would be based on grain.5 Some versions record that the urban plan of Alexandria imitated the shape of a Macedonian chlamys, the wool military Macedonian cloak.6 The narratives of the foundation of Alexandria reached us through the texts of historians who flourished in Roman times. A possible ‘reading’ of these stories places textile trade next to grain trade at the core of Ptolemaic economic activities. The aim of this paper is to discuss papyrological data in Greek, which pertain to aspects of the wool and flax economies in Hellenistic Egypt, namely their trade and distribution from fibre to finished cloth. What we hope to show is that these sources reveal a complex hybrid model, which, to a certain degree, is regulated by state hierarchies active at the local level, but which also consists of an intricate network of relations that we can only partially conjecture or reconstruct based on the material at hand. What follows is limited to internal textile trade and distribution and does not look at textiles as exported goods. Ptolemaic textile trade is examined on the institutional, the public, the local and the private level. The value of documentary papyri as sources of information on textile production, consumption, distribution and trade in Hellenistic Egypt, as well as glimpses of everyday life in this pre-modern society cannot be overstated. They offer a great volume of information, but their fragmentary state can hamper the task of reconstructing the social context they were produced in. As Mueller nimbly points out, tapping into the problem of a spatial reconstruction of Ptolemaic administration, “Despite thousands of Greek and Demotic Egyptian papyri, we appear to know next

* I would like to thank Marie-Louise Nosch, Kerstin Droß-Krüpe and Peder Flemestad for looking at early versions of this paper. My participation to this conference was funded by the EU-Marie Skłodowska-Curie project “Chlamys. The cultural biography of a garment in Hellenistic Egypt”. 1 Ruffing 2008, 80–81. 2 Strabo 17.1.6;; Plut. Alex. 26.5; Arr. 3.2; Steph. Byz. s.v. Alexandria; Eust. Commentarii in Dionysium Periegetam 254. 3 Amm. Marc. 22.16.7. 4 Curt. 4.8.6; Val. Max. 1.4 ex. ext. 1. 5 Ogden 2014; Papadopoulou 2015. 6 Diod. Sic. 17.52; Strabo 17.1.8; Plut. Alex. 26.5.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 194 Maria Papadopoulou to nothing.” 7 The reconstruction of the network of textile distribution and trade and the spatial political geography of the Ptolemaic state, are heavily interdependent.

In Search of the Model of Ptolemaic Textile Economy What was Greek about the Ptolemaic organization of the textile economy? According to Rostovtzeff, it was the organization of the textile industry (along with oil, and papyrus), internal trade and taxation.8 The Ptolemies inherited an age-old system but adapted it to their own visions and needs. The influx of Greeks into Egypt necessitated the use of Greek as the language of administration, and the Greek influence on private and public life, including dress, food, cult, and recreation. The influential scholars of Ptolemaic economy, Michael Rostovtzeff9 and Claire Préaux10, approached the topic with an underlying focus on the revenues of the royal house. The Ptolemaic economy was seen as driven by the need of the royal house to maximize revenue and as a continuation of the Egyptian model of Dynastic times, which placed emphasis on the control of the resources, the workforce and the trade- routes, and which was also seen as centralist, predatory and bureaucratic.11 Thus, the bulk of Ptolemaic economic activity was thought to consist in a series of initiatives undertaken with the aim to regulate agricultural and craft production in several fields, especially those of luxury goods, such as fine linen textiles, and to create state monopolies.12 This model has long been considered to only partly reflect the complex social realities of the Ptolemaic state, which was not limited to the redistribution of wealth through the state mechanisms.13 More recent scholarship gradually moved away from primitivist and statist approaches, acknowledged the complexity of Hellenistic Egypt, interpreted it as a combination of Greek capital and Egyptian workforce,14 and paid attention to the stock of knowledge manifest in the Ptolemaic reclamation project and in the ‘hidden technology’ that made the trade in fine textiles possible.15 Nobel-prize winner John Hicks’s three-fold typology of economies as ‘subsistence’, ‘command’, ‘market’16 provided the starting point of Joseph Manning’s analysis of the Ptolemaic economy.17 Manning’s model posited a fourth pillar: in addition to the economy of villages (which he equated to Hick’s economy of subsistence), the bureaucratic hierarchies (which he equated to Hicks’ command), the economy of gateway communities, key nodes of trade such as temples (Hicks’ markets), Manning emphasized the role of social networks.

7 Mueller 2005, 112. 8 Rostovtzeff 1920, 167. 9 Rostovtzeff 1920, 164; Rostovtzeff 1922. 10 Préaux 1939. 11 See Manning 2003b for a short introduction to the economy of ancient Egypt from 3200 BCE until the Roman period. On the economic theories applied to Dynastic Egyptian economy and Old Kingdom Trade see Warden 2014, 2–12, with relevant bibliography. 12 Rostovtzeff 1920, 165–168. 13 Manning 2003a, 21–25; Manning 2006. 14 Thompson 1988, 226. 15 Manning 2008, 86; Rihl 2009, 485. 16 Hicks 1969, 6 and 25. 17 Manning 2011, 73–164.

What follows takes these concepts on board and looks at the institutions and centres of textile trade by adopting a close-reading approach that focusses on the micro-structure of transactions involving textiles. Textile trade is pictured as a combination of bureaucratic infrastructure, specialized labour force, a range of products and standards, and extensive wholesale or retail sales. This is a somewhat tentative approach to Ptolemaic textile trade in terms of the bureaucratic (infra)structure that regulated it, the labour force that facilitated it, the range and quality products involved, and the particular methods of distributing textiles.

State Bureaucracy, Big Estates and Temples Before Alexander’s time, the Egyptian economy was based on a bartering system using fixed units of textiles, grain and precious metals.18 The Ptolemies introduced coinage and contract, i.e. monetary and contractual relations, new kinds of commodities, such as wine, and adopted an organizational set of land and labour more intelligible to the Greeks on both the institutional level and the communicative level.19 The introduction of a monetary economy and the minting of Ptolemaic coinage practically meant that duties could be paid in cash and kind. The royal exploitation of public revenue was subtly organized and implemented by means of a network of public officers. In some cases, the Ptolemaic royals exempted their subjects from paying their taxes, including the duties in fine linen. Such is the case of the trilin- gual Rosetta stone inscription (OGIS 90), which literally set in stone an agreement between the king and a council of priests proclaiming, among other things, that the priests’ tax for byssus cloth was reduced to one third of the full amount.20 Throughout Egyptian history, governments took great care in organizing the textile economy.21 Any increase in animal husbandry normally suggests an increase in textile economy. As Rostovtzeff notes “we do not know how important sheep and goat breeding was in the Egypt of the Pharaohs, but under the Ptolemies certainly, and especially in the Fayum, sheep and goat breeding assumed very large proportions.”22 The Ptolemies sought to improve the textile economy and paid special attention to wool, breeds of sheep and breeding methods.23 They promoted innovation in the textile sector in order to maximize revenue and strengthen the economy. It is probable that the extensive manufacturing of cloth for Greeks was woven on warp-weighted looms,

18 Haring 2009. 19 The Ptolemies introduced the Greek institution of public auctions for tax collection. They also made Greek the official language. See von Reden 2006, 163 and 165. 20 The term used in the Greek text is βύσσινα ὀθόνια (lines 17–18 and 29). According to the English translation of the Demotic version, the pharaoh ‘remitted the two-thirds share of fine linen’’ (Ray 2008, 166). According to the English translation of the Greek version he remitted “the prices of the byssus-cloth not delivered to the royal treasury, and of that delivered (he remitted) until the same time [e.g. until the eight year] the cost of having it inspected” Bagnall-Derow 2004, 271. 21 In the early 19th century CE Muhammad Ali strove to create a vibrant cotton economy in Egypt through impelling farmers to cultivate the newly introduced cotton crop and through stimulating the construction of Egyptian cotton mills (Beckert 2014, 131; Carstens 2014, 660). 22 Rostovtzeff 1922, 112. 23 Roche 1995, 2; Secord 2016, 216.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 196 Maria Papadopoulou even though it is not clear whether the term histos (which in Greek is usually used to denote an upright construction) is used exclusively for the warp-weighted loom.24 In Ptolemaic Egypt, fine textiles were a precious commodity, a repository and representation of wealth, a symbol of high status, and a marker of group identity. The Ptolemies took a special interest not only in regulating the production and trade in linen textiles, which was the fibre Egypt was renowned for, but also in wool garments following the Greek fashion and taste. The Ptolemaic administrative system was highly bureaucratic and consisted of a network of state officials on the nome level, who reported to the chief financial officerdioikētēs ( ) in Alexandria. The oikonomos, the chief official in charge of finances on the districtnome ( ) level, was responsible for overseeing both the grain and the textile trade. Hellenistic Egyptian bureaucracy was structured around the inherited system of nomes. In the Arsinoite nome (Fayoum), the division in merides (districts) was also important. Table 1 provides a general frame of reference illustrating the basic structure of Ptolemaic bureaucracy. This structure was relevant to all economic activity including the trade and distribution of textiles.

Ptolemaic bureaucratic structure (officials) Inherited Introduced Alexandria basilikos grammateus dioikētēs nome nomarch oikonomos stratēgos meris meridarch antigrapheus epistratēgos topogrammateus logeutēs toparch telōnēs syngenēs kōmē kōmarch komogrammateus

Table 1: Ptolemaic Bureaucracy (Adapted from Lloyd 2010, 241) The so-called Papyrus of Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus (259–258 BCE)25 is an official memorandum from the dioikētēs of the nome to a local oikonomos. It contains useful information on Ptolemaic royal taxation, administration and monopolies.26 Better preserved is the part of the text which pertains to the oil monopoly (περὶ τὴν ἐλαϊκήν). The part referring to the regulation of the textile market is unfortunately very lacunose. It refers to royal regulations on the retail textile market and mentions textile commodities in the textile market. It mentions weavers, othonia, finished woven cloth,linon , cushions, textiles made of byssus, hemp and wool (βυσσίνων, στυππείνων, ἐρικῶν) and other types of textiles (χειρομάκτρων, i.e. cloth for wiping the hands; περιζωμάτων, i.e. cloth wrapping the waist), and finally gives an idea of how the price of wool and linnen commodities rises, when ‘exported’ from the nome and transported to Alexandria.

24 See discussion in Ciszuk & Hammarlund 2008, 123. 25 Wilck. Chr. 181. 26 First published by B. P. Grenfell in 1896 with text, commentary and appendices. See also edition and an introduction see Bingen 2007, 157–188. For a translation of columns 1–58 see Bagnall & Derow 2004, 181–195.

P. Teb. 1.5 (116 BCE) contains a decree by pharaoh Ptolemy VIII Euergetes or Physkon (145–116 BCE), copied by the local scribe of Kerkeosiris for the local community of textile workers. The long text of the papyrus informs us that the king proclaimed amnesty to all his subjects and took measures against social unrest by preventing craftsmen from abandoning their workshops and selling their tools. The text mentions four different types of weavers: wool-weavers ποκύφους( line 170), another category of weavers called τανυφάντας (line 171), weavers in linen cloth (λίνυφους line 240), those who produce byssos cloth (βυσσουργούς line 240) and weavers of peploi (πεπλύφους line 240).27 Such variety in occupational terms is a strong indication of specialized textile trade. Additional evidence is found in P. Teb. 3.1.703, lines 86–99 (c. 210 BCE): a dioikētēs in Alexandria sends a written memorandum to an oikonomos instructing him to go inspect the textile mills which produce othonia (τὰ ὑφαντεῖα ἐν οἷς τὰ ὀθόνια ὑφαίνεται), and to make sure that most of the looms are in operation so that the weavers do not fall behind with production. Failure to produce the expected quantity was not acceptable. The monthly production of linen textiles was regulated and all stages of production from the preparation of flax fibre to the weaving of linen cloth were monitored. It was important that the output prescribed for the nome be reached, but not at the cost of producing lower quality. The oikonomos was to make sure the textiles had the prescribed number of weft-threads (ἁρπεδόνας) as a measure to monitor quality. The oikonomos was also instructed to go to the dye-bath workshops (hepsētēria) where the ōmolina (raw flax) was treated in order to make sure they have enough supplies in kiki (a plant oil, probably castor oil) and nitron (sodium carbonate) for the dyeing. The duty of theoikonomos of Tebtunis was also to oversee that the quantities scheduled for monthly production and distribution (ἐπιμήνιος ἐκτομή) were the ones already prescribed. Should there be surplus, then the revenue (πρόσοδος) from this quantity would be booked as part of the quantity to be delivered the following month. This long extract of the papyrus finishes with the instruction to place in storage in the metropolis of the nome (i.e. Arsinoē) the looms that were not in use (ὅσα δὲ τῶν ἱστέων μὴ ἔστιν ἐνεργά). The prototypical example of a dioikētēs in Hellenistic Egypt was Apollonios, the chief officer of finance under Ptolemy II both a high-official and an active businessman in Ptolemaic Syria-Palestine, Alexandria, and the Egyptian chora.28 Details on Apollonios’ activities over three decades in the middle of the 3rd c. BCE are found in the papyri of the Zenon archive, named after his trusted steward, Zenon of Kaunos. The textile-related economic activities of Apollonios and Zenon as his secretary revolve around the estate that was given to Apollonios by king Ptolemy II and consist in the cultivation of flax, in extensive animal husbandry, in ownership and management of textile mills, in management of specialized labour for all these activities in the collecting of taxes including some levied on textile raw materials and production, and finally in the trade of raw materials and textiles.

27 The term peplyphos also appears in P. Teb. 5.250 (again 2nd c. BCE) and in PSI 4.371.8 (3rd c. BCE) as an exclusively male occupation. On the other hand, histourgos is a term used to designate a female weaver (PSI 4.371). 28 See Clarysse & Vandorpe 1995 for a concise introduction to Zenon’s archive, especially pp. 63–68 on the textile related initiatives referred to in the papyri of the archive. Clarysse & Geens 2009.

The following examples illustrate some of Zenon’s extensive textile-related activity on behalf of Apollonios. In 256 BCE Apollophanes and Demetrios, two brothers who are wool cloth manufacturers (τεχνῖται τῆς κατὰ τὴν ἐρέαν πᾶσαν γυναικυϋφῆ), write to Zenon to let him know that they are willing to move to Philadelphia because they had heard many nice things about the city and about Zenon.29 They would like to move to this city, which had been designed by Apollonios. They give a list of all their products: woven textiles and garments such as chlamydes, chitōnes, zones (girdles, belts), a himation and the list goes on to mention rare terms denoting items of men’s Greek dress (ξιφιστῆρα, κιρίας) and women’s dress (σχιστούς, τεγίδια, συμμετρίαν, παραπήχη).30 Another papyrus from the Zenon archive contains a list of ribands accompanied by four samples of different- coloured tainiai and four wool fillets or ribbons λημνίσκοι( ), and apparently an order was to be given for a certain number of each kind.31 Both Zenon and Apollonios were active in stock-breeding. Zenon owned 1,836 sheep and 122 goats but Apollonios owned 6,371 sheep and 206 goats.32 Apollonios imported sheep from Miletus and Arabia, aiming at achieving a high quality product, and brought shepherds from Asia Minor. According to P. Cair. Zen. 2.59195, a certain Maron was sent to the estate in order to oversee the Milesian sheep, the sheep enclosure (προβατεών), and train the local shepherds in stock-breeding. In P. Cair. Zen. 2.59142 (256 BCE) Apollonios writes to Zenon to inform him that he approves the distribution of Milesian wool to the slave-girls in Memphis, and to ask him to give orders to let them have as much as they need. The wool came from a flock of Milesian sheep which Apollonios owned in the Fayoum and the girls were employed in a wool factory belonging to him in Memphis.33 P. Cair. Zen. 2.59295 provides evidence on a specialized line of production in the textile industry of the Fayum. A short list gives the numbers of the women engaged in wool working, in accordance with the census of year 35, in three villages in the Fayoum. Polemon meris was a group of seven villages.34 It is a census (apographē) from the year 250 BCE at the villages of Mouchis, Oxyrrhyncha and Tebtynis in the Polemon meris, a division of the Arsinoite nome, showing a considerable number of women working the wool (erithoi): 320 at Mouchis, 314 at Oxyrrhyncha,35 150 at Tebtynis (and gives a total of 784), which points to a local specialization in the production of textiles.36 Apart from the royal administration and the big estates, simple subjects, members of the textile workforce were interested in seeking profit, while fueling the textile economy. Two Egyptian linen weavers, Petesouchos, son of Petoys, and his partner Marres the elder, son of Petobastes, from Krokodilopolis write to king Ptolemy to ask for permission to found two new textile mills for linen cloth.37 They acknowledge

29 Weaving as a family business was uncommon also in Roman Egypt, cf. Tryphon Oxyrrhyn chus early first c. His family practiced the trade in five generations, Brewster 1927. 30 PSI 4.341. 31 P. Cair. Zen. 4.59696. 32 P. Cair. Zen. 3.59394.4–10, Thompson 2001, 395. 33 Loftus 1999. 34 On the composition of districts in the Arsinoite nome see Clarysse & Thompson 2006, 115. 35 Clarysse 2008, 55 and 65; Clarysse & Thompson 2006, 203. 36 Thompson 1988, 52. 37 SB 18.13312 (246–221/221–204 BC).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Wool and the City 199 the fact that there are already in place several installations for the manufacturing of linen and byssus cloth, and they ask permission to demolish them, so as to leave room for the new ones. The replacement of the byssus weaver’s (βυσσοϋφαντεῖον) workshop with a linen weaver’s workshop (λινοϋφαντεῖον) along with the justification of this petition to the king by saying that this is the only way they will be able to pay their taxes, is perhaps an indication that the local textile market was not quite flourishing as before, and that the trade in luxury textile commodities that were probably exported from the nome had to be replaced with products that could also address the local market.38 Since Dynastic times, the large temples also possessed human resources in weavers, and this was continued in Ptolemaic times. The temple estates were the traditional unit of textile production. Textile production was important in the temple of Horus in Edfu, Upper Egypt. The temple is quite well documented thanks to the Milon archive.39 Milon was a Greek praktor, an official that was called by a prominent family of priests in Edfu to help resolve their financial issues. The revenues of the temple came from the ownership of land, but also from the manufacturing of fine linen cloth. In a letter to Milon, Pinyres and Psintaes ask for Milon’s help to solve problems over land sold by their father, Estphenis, who had served as high priest of the temple. Their father had sold land ἐπράθη( ̣ ἡμῶν γῆ) as a form of guarantee (πρὸς ἐγγύην) for the money owed to the state regarding the production of byssus (πρός τε τὰ βύσσινα).40 The Serapeum of Memphis, the old Egyptian capital, was another ‘gateway community’ in Manning’s terms. Ptolemaios, son of Glaukias, was a katochos (i.e. a recluse)41 in the Serapeum of Memphis, where he lived with his younger brother Apollonios and two Egyptian girls, Taues and Taous.42 A petition denouncing an as- sault by Ptolemaios mentions a certain Mys himatiopoles, a seller in cloaks himatia.43 The network of textile-related activities covered an extensive area and included suppliers of flax, wool and hemp, a dye-shop, and agents who purchased cloth for resale.

A Specialized Workforce As textiles became an important commodity, their importance also rose in the labour market. Textile production, taxation and trade was profitable, and highly specialized, as is shown in the relevant terms used in the papyri:44 fuller (γναφεύς,

38 Piejko 1986. 39 Clarysse 2003, Manning 2003a, 83–85. 40 P. Eleph. 27 (223 BCE). 41 On the meaning of katochos see Bagnall & Derow 2004, 279. 42 UPZ 1.7, 163 BCE; UPZ 1.85 (160 BCE), see Thompson 1988, 226. 43 In my view himatiopoles here means ‘seller of (finished) himatia’, and is distinguished from e.g. othoniopoles ‘seller in othonia’, i.e. finished linen cloth. Cf. that in the LSJ and Cleland 2007 et al. s.v. himation waver between the general sense for ‘garment’ and the sense a type of ’outer garment’. The term deserves a closer investigation that goes beyond the scope of the present paper. 44 For the variety of occupations and specializations in the textile manufacturing sector in Greco-Roman Egypt see Reil 1913, 93–121; Calderini 1946; Alfaro Giner 1999; Wipszycka 1965; Droß-Krüpe 2011.

στιβεύς)45 weaver of τάπης (ταπιδυφάντης),46 weaver of linen cloth,47 weavers of cloth,48 menders of cloth,49 cloth dealers in othonia,50 cloth dealers in himatia,51 a special tax on linen cloth making.52 Weavers’ wages are termed ὕφαντρα, fuller’s γνάπτρα, and money paid for the preparation of wool by washing is termed πλύματα.53 The production and distribution of textiles, especially linen (in special textile mills called λινυφαντεῖα), was a substantial part of the Ptolemaic royal economy. The production was sometimes regulated by official memoranda from the dioikētēs of the nome. In some cases, it was regulated by royal decrees. P. Teb. 1.5 (28 April, 118 BCE) contains one such decree by pharaoh Ptolemy VIII Euergetes or Physkōn (145–116 BCE), copied by the local scribe of Kerkeosiris for the local community of textile workers. The long text of the papyrus informs us that the king is proclaiming amnesty to all his subjects. Also, the king takes measures against social unrest by preventing craftsmen from abandoning their workshops and selling their tools. The text mentions four possible different types of weavers: wool-weaversποκύφους ( line 170, ὑφάντης ἐρεῶν)54, another category which is to be understood as distinct from the previous one (τανυφάντας line 171), in flax/linen cloth (λινύφους line 240),55 those who produce byssos cloth (βυσσουργούς line 240) and weavers of peploi (πεπλύφους line 240).56 An ostrakon from Elephantine contains in three lines two occupational terms pertaining to textile manufacturing: fullers (γναφεῖς), weaver (ὑφάντης).57 In P. Cair. Zen. 4.59539, we find out that Agathon, the fuller (γναφεύς), has worked on a gaunakes (γαυνάκης) and a chlamys. A list of female textile workers (see Table 2) contains some names ending in -ion, i.e. the neuter diminutive form, suggest that these women could have been slaves.58 The list is possibly a registry recording daily absenteeism and duties. It is not clear whether they specialize in different stages of the preparation of the wool fibre for weaving or there is a roster of tasks. Out of a total of fourteen, one is spinning, four work the thread (νήθω). The verbῥαδανίζω is used for another two, five are on ‘sick leave’. Mαλλουργῶ is prima facie a quite transparent compound word which means ‘work the wool’. We cannot be sure, however, which exact stage this part of

45 P. Cair. Zen. 2.59206 col. 48 (3rd c. BCE); P. Petr. 3 p.173 (3rd c. BCE). 46 P. Count. 3 col. 3.58 (229 BCE) mentions a total of 34 ταπιδυφάνται which suggests a local centre of specialized production. See also Clarysse & Thompson 2006, 112 and 151. 47 BGU 16.2674 son of Tanis, weaver of linen cloth (λίνυφους). 48 P. Hib. 1.67 (228) from the Herakleopolites nome contains the payment of ὑφάνταις. 49 SB 16.12375; P. Teb. 1.120, (97/64 BCE) contains the cost of mending a wool female chiton. 50 UPZ 109.13, 1st c. BCE. 51 P. Count. 3.80, O. Bodl. 1.295, Thebes, st1 c. BCE. 52 ὀθονιηρά (cloth tax, cloth revenues) appears in many papyri, see e.g. the cloth tax of the trimester (ὀθονιηρὰ τριμήνου) O. Wilck 1499. Taxes levied on the sales of himatia (ἱματιοπωλική), P. Erasm. 1.5 from the Arsinoites nome (184–160 BCE). 53 P. Cair. Zen. 3.59398. 54 P. Cair. Zen. 2.59176. 55 UPZ 1.85 (163–160 BCE), Memphis. 56 The term peplyphos also appears in P. Teb. 5.250 (2nd c. BCE) and in PSI 4.371.8 (3rd c. BCE) as an exclusively male occupation See LSJ s.v. 57 O. Eleph. DAIK 6, 2nd c. BCE. 58 BGU 10.1942.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Wool and the City 201 the process of preparing the wool for weaving corresponds to. Furthermore, it is not listed in LSJ.

αλλουργεῖ νήθει ῥαδανίζ ἄρρωστος Women workers (is working the wool) (is spinning) (is heddling?59) (on sick leave) Arkadia + Aristonike + Gaza + Dionysia + Dianoia + Demarion + Helenis + Euthene + Hermione + Ebenion + Herakleia + Theophila +

Table 2: List of female textile workers

Taxes were due not only on the profit from sales, but also levied in connection to craft. In P. Hamb. 4.237 (265 or 227 BCE) the praktor, Athenagoras, denounces Leon, the fuller, for not having paid his taxes as an artisan in Tmois (χειρωνάξιον) and for the tax evasion on the wool he sold. Wages were paid in coin or in kind.60 In PSI 6.599, we find out that there is a discrimination against women weavers in terms of wages. Zenon will pay a family of weavers (3 men, 1 woman will work for 3 days) 1 drachma for cleaning, and either 3 drachmas for weaving a piece or per day, 1½ a man, and ½ a woman. There is a different price for every step of thechaîne opératoire, from yarn to woven cloth, including washing and carding. The archive of Menches, a kommatogrammateus, (i.e. one who held the important office of village scribe between 120 and 110 BCE) from Kerkeosiris, gives a taste of the textile market in late Ptolemaic Egypt.61 The archive contains two dockets (n. 117 and n. 211) on separate papyri, similar in hand. The second and third column of n. 211 are an account of wool for clothing (ἔρια εἰς ἱματισμόν), which contains a list of payments for women weavers (col. 3.54 ὑφάντρᾳ Θῆτι), expenditures for quantities of wool bought for a female himation (col. 2.29–34) and for the weaving, the warping (col. 3.50–55 ἱστοῦ μισθοῦ, μισθοῦ στήμονος, col. 3.67 μισθοῦ

59 The verb does not appear in LSJ and its sense is uncertain. A first hypothesis is to relate it to ῥοδανίζω, ῥοδάνι (spun thread), ῥοδανóς, ῥαδινóς (slender); compare Modern Greek ροδάνι (spinning wheel). In antiquity ῥoδάνι probably denotes the rod for spun thread, i.e. heddle-rod. I thank Marie-Louise Nosch for the latter suggestion. 60 E.g. in PSI 4.371.8 (3rd c. BCE) Zenon writes to Labon and orders him to pay Perdikkas, the peplyphos, in kind (σιτομετρίαν). 61 Verghoogt 1988, 38.

κρόκης), and expenditures for buying purple dye (col. 2.39 πορφύρα) to dye the wool.62 Mending cloth could be done by either a male or a female stitcher (ἠπητής, ἠπήτρια). In P. Cair. Zen. 3.59423, Dionysios informs Artemidoros that he is sending down the river two carpets by Kriton’s boat, one of them weighing 50 and the other 50 minae and both of them purple-bordered. He adds that he is also sending the old carpet which he has unwoven and partly rewoven by renewing the warp (ἀναλύσαντες ὑφάναμεν προσεμβαλόντες στήμονα καινὸν διυφήν).

High Quality Products and Standards Buying or preordering goods including textiles, textile fibres and garments wholesale or retail was an important reason to write a letter in Ptolemaic Egypt. Nechthosiris writes to the toparch Leon requesting supplies and reports that he has already asked Dionysios to buy and send a himatidion and a chiton but has received nothing yet.63 One of the most characteristic examples of the list of clothes is a papyrus from the Zenon archive containing a list of clothes that Zenon used for his numerous business travels, when employed by Apollonios, the dioiketes of Ptolemy II.64 The clothes possibly came from the textile mills in the Fayoum, where Zenon was stationed. The estate where Zenon worked owned textile mills, and Zenon himself imported wool and sold clothes. P. Cair. Zen. 1.59012 (259 BCE) contains a long text in which imported luxury goods to Pelusium from Syria are valued in order for taxes to be levied. The goods are shipped on behalf of Apollonios on two vessels. The one whose skipper is Patron (Πάτρων) carries a large quantity of pure wool in chests. In his letter to Isingos, Zenon informs him that the wool of the Arabian sheep that he received (τὰ ληφθέντα παρὰ σοῦ ἔρια Ἀράβια) are of very poor quality, namely very dirty (ῥυπαρά)65 and rough (τραχέα). Zenon had to return them to Isingos. Good quality wool should be soft and clean (καθαρά and μαλακά). Presumably quality seems to be determined in terms of consumer next-to-skin wear and skin comfort. Dirty wool was also not acceptable in the Ptolemaic textile market, also because it naturally meant more time spent before the cloth was woven, as pointed out by Gorgo, one the characters of Theocritus’Idyll 15.20 set in Alexandria at the time of Ptolemy II, who complains that her husband bought a large quantity of dirty wool. PSI 4.364 (251 BCE) is a letter from Zenodoros to Zenon: Zenodotos is proud to announce to Zenon that his brother Dionysios had won the athletic competition at the Ptolemaia. Zenodotos requests another himation, thicker (παχύτερον) and of softer wool (μαλακόν), for his brother to wear at the Arsinoeia. The quality of the woven product was partly determined by the purity, partly by the soft- ness of the wool. P. Mich. 1.58 (248 BCE) is a letter from Pyrros to Zenon and Epharmostos informing them that the himation being woven for them is ‘worthy of them’ (ὑφαίνεται δὲ καὶ τὸ ἱμάτεν ἄξιον ὑμῶν) and that he has added one mina of his own wool for it.

62 P. Teb. 1.117 (99 BCE). 63 P. Yale 1.42 (229 BCE). 64 P. Cair. Zen. 1.59092. 65 P. Cair. Zen. 2.59287 (250 BCE). Dirty wool also in P. Col. 4 113.

Showcasing the Distribution of Textiles in Hellenistic Egypt: Orders and Sales One of the features of textile trade in Hellenistic Egypt is the extensive market both of raw materials and of finished cloth. The parties taking part in this kind of transcation are usually the local providers of raw materials, the textile workers, the local banks and the topogrammateus (district scribe).66 A considerable number of Greek papyri deal with accounts which include textiles or textile fibres and name the quantity and the price.67 Notably a number of them come from the archive of Zenon from Kaunos.68 Some of them are receipts attesting to the purchase of goods or services related to the local textile market. Others are part of private correspondence, and afford an almost voyeuristic view to glimpses of real life in Hellenistic Egypt and the place of textiles and garments in it. What follows is a very short list of cases where the most important topic and purpose of the correspondence was related to textiles and garments. P. Cair. Zen. 1.59048 (257 BCE) is a memorandum to Aratos from Aristeus, a man of good position in the household of Apollonios, who asks Aratos to remind Zenon the oikonomos and Kriton the admiral to purchase some rugs (μνησθῆναι ... ψιλοταπίδων), garments, a bedspread from Tanis (καυνάκου, χλαμύδος, χιτῶνος, ἐγκοιμήτρου Τανιτικοῦ) and bring them down to Alexandria, as he had asked them to do before they left town. In P. Cair. Zen. 3.59433, Eudemos writes to Zenon to tell him among other important things about the crops that he had sent Theodora to bring to Zenon the leukophaios (white-grey) chiton he had ordered. This information comes at the beginning which suggests that in Ptolemaic times, and especially in the time and social circle of Zenon, the buyer expected the delivery of the clothes ordered in time.69 P. Cair. Zen. 3.59469 is a memo from Menodoros to Zenon to buy a himation and a small chiton (χιτωνάριον), preferably a ‘sleeved’ one (χειριδωτόν, i.e. reaching down to the wrists). In P. Mich. 1.16 (257 BCE), Nikon writes to Zenon to ask about the fleeces of rams’ wool that Zenon had left to be spun into yarn by Bia. Nikon reports that Bia needs them, and that this is the reason why she is behind in delivering the yarn. P. Cair. Zen. 4.59775 is a receipt for the purchase of wool or flax to be made into chitons.70 The upper part of P. Cair. Zen. 1.59088 (258–257 BCE) is an account of rugs received from the textile factory of Apollonios. P. Cair. Zen. 1.59087 is an account of linen garments (βύσσινα) and handkerchiefs (χειρόμακτρα). In a letter from Apollonides to Zenon, we find out that Apollonides had received money to make a wool mattress (κρασπεδόω, κρασπέδωσις) and dye it. Apollonides writes that instead of making a forty mina (wool) mattress, he made two fifty mina ones of the finest quality with a band ofporphyra all around, so he asks for extra money.71

66 The topogrammateus was in the middle of the hierarchical scale of scribes in Ptolemaic Egypt, and stood higher than the komogrammateus (village scribe), and lower than the basilikos grammateus (royal scribe), see Bauschatz 2013, 351. 67 P. Teb. 1.117 R (99 BCE). 68 E.g. PSI 3.368; P. Cair. Zen. 4.59775. 69 E.g. Gorgo and Praxinoa the main characters in Theocritus’ Idyll 15. 70 On buying (in general) in the Zenon archive see Reekmans 1996. 71 P. Col. 3.15.

Shopping for clothes sometimes meant going to the local centre as suggested in P. London 7.1945 (257 BCE). Hierokles writes to Zenon that he sent Apollodoros upriver (ἀναπλεῖ) to Herakleopolis to buy himatia and chitons. In another letter to Zenon (P. Cair. Zen. 1.59061), Hierokles writes about a boy called Pyrrhos who is going to school in Alexandria and is training for athletic competitions. Hierokles asks Zenon to send quickly to the boy a bedspread (περίστρωμα) and cushions (προσκεφάλαια).

Showcasing the Distribution of Textiles in Hellenistic Egypt Successful Delivery of Purchased Textile Goods and some Cases that went wrong A personal wardrobe consisted in several clothing items. On such example, hard not to place in the elite of the society, despite Burnet’s assertion that these clothes are quite simple, is P. Cair. Zen. 1.59092.72 The papyrus contains a list of clothes, ordered by Zenon and sent or delivered to him by Peisikles, neatly placed in a chest and identified by name, colour, season and state of wear (e.g.χλαμὺς γεωβαφὴς χειμερινὴ πεπλυμένη καὶ τριβακή). The list includes a set of cushions (ζεῦγος προσκεφαλαίων) and two pairs of ‘leggings’ (ζεῦγος πoδείων). Apart from the quality of the textile commodities, successful delivery was highly dependent on punctuality. A delivery of othonia that was reported delayed is mentioned in P. Cair. Zen. 4.59594. Another order of chitōns is attested in P. Cair. Zen. 2.59263 (251 BCE) containing a letter from Philon to Zenon saying that Maindria, the weaver, has written to him about a chlamys that Zenon had ordered. The purpose of Maiandria’s letter is to explain that she is presently ill, and this will mean a delay in the delivery of the garment. The letter goes on with the information that Apollonios has now been appointed dioiketes and Dionysodoros has become chief ac- countant (ἐκλογιστεύοντα). Reporting on the progress on the delivery of the cloak seems to take precedence over reporting on important changes on the political scene in regard to the person he was working for! In some cases, buying cloth went bad for the buyer, who could then write a petition (enteuxis) addressed to the king but handed to the strategos of the nome, who was also asked to take immediate action.73 Such is the case of Philiskos from Cyrene, holder of a piece of land (100 arourai) in the Themistou meris of the Arsinoite nome who had paid Hedeia, a woman weaver from the same village, to weave two himatia on the same loom (ἐπὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἱστοῦ). She received the money for the work (ὕφαντρα), but of the two himatia, one himation she left unfinished τὸ( μὲν ἓν αὐτῆς ἐξυφανάσης οὐχ οἵα ἐστίν) and the other she finished, but poorly (κακοτεχνοῦσα).74 Harmeusis, an Egyptian wool seller (ἐριέμπορος) from Crocodilopolis, who had purchased wool from Seos, a Jew from Alabanthis on behalf of Amyntas, a Greek, complains of having being cheated out of the quantity he had paid for. Harmeusis, the petitioner, maintains that unless justice be done and the right quantity of goods arrives, Amyntas cannot pay his dues to the king in Alexandria

72 Burnet 2003, 97. 73 P. Enteux. 1 (259 BCE); P. Enteux. 38 (221 BCE). 74 P. Enteux. 4 (244–243 BCE).

(βασιλικὴ παραβολή). Perhaps Amyntas represents the foreign trade side in this network which starts at Fayum and ends in Alexandria.75 The names of dealers in finished himatia and othonia may disclose both Greek and Egyptian ethnic identities.76 An occasional sale of clothes is described in a memorandum to Zeno by Phamounis, an Egyptian boat captain transporting goods along the river. He asks for money in order not to have to sell the himatia.77

Selling or Distribution Clothing for Survival Pawning and theft of textile goods were alternative modes of textile circulation and distribution, as defined in this volume, since they are not wholly unrelated to the idea of profit. A list of items deposited at a pawnbroker mentions a chiton, a type of long cloth (σινδών), and wool before processing (ἄγναφον).78 The pawning of a himation is recorded in the Zenon archive.79 Clothes among other valuables are recorded in wills: P. Petr. (2) 1.13 (238–237 BCE) contains such a list of clothes and accessories: a female wool chiton, a number of theristria, a male chiton, a new chiton, a woman’s belt (ζώνη), a haploidion, an enkoimetron, sindones (long pieces of cloth), and hypodemata (shoes). Women did not have full rights to sell anything from the household, including garments, without their husband’s presence or written consent, as shown in SB 5.7574.80 Stratonikos writes his Egyptian wife Senchnoubis, mentioning the permission he had given her to redeem the new chiton with money. P. Bad. 4.48 (127 BCE) gives us a glimpse of the struggle for survival of women who had to support their household, while the husband was away in the military. Dionysia writes (probably from Alexandria) to her husband, who is away, to inform him that she could not sell the mattress by Neon, that the mattress was sealed up in the town hall (archeion) and the sale did not take place.81 Cloth was not only made available by means of buying in Hellenistic Egypt. Soldier’s expenditure for clothing was covered by the state. In the epigraphy of Ptolemy and Cleopatra Philometor from Philae (149–148 BCE), the strategos, will give the soldiers wheat, wine and wool for sacrifices to the king-gods and to cover their own needs. Plutarch records that in the final years of the Ptolemaic era, when Anthony was in need of money and clothing for the soldiers, it was Cleopatra who provided both the clothing and the money,82 and that others say that he raised the money from his own funds and distributed it to his army along with the clothing as a gift from her.83

75 P. Enteux. 2. Bagnall 1976, 86–87. 76 UPZ 1.8, Memphis 111 BCE; O. Bodl. 1.295, 1st c. BCE, probably from Thebes; P. Count. 3, 229 BCE Arsinoites; P. Herakl. Bank 3, 144–137 BCE from Herakleopolis; P. Teb. 3.2.890, 2nd c. BCE). 77 P. Col. 3.44. 78 SB 22.15236m, Fr.1, r. 2 (211–210 BCE). 79 P. Cair. Zen. 3.5907. 80 On the other hand, there is evidence of women brokers (προπωλήτρια), e.g. P. Lips. 1, Pathyris 99 BCE. 81 Bagnall & Cribiore 2008, 107–108. 82 Plut. Anthony 51 ἐσθῆτα πολλὴν καὶ χρήματα κομίζουσα τοῖς στρατιώταις. 83 Plut. Anthony 51; for a translation see Burstein 2004, 113.

Textiles as Stolen Goods Reports of theft of clothes in the papyri is often deplored as a major material loss and is often accompanied by an official complaint seeking compensation.84 P. Sorb. 3.110 reports the theft of an anthinos chiton among other valuables. The price for an anthinos chiton according to P. Teb. 5.1151 (112 BCE) was 720 copper drachmas. P. Cair. Zen. 2.59145 (256 BCE) is a petition to Zenon from Sphragis, one of the women weavers at one of the textile factories owned by Apollonios in the Fayum. Sphragis had been robbed on her way to Sophthis, a village in the Memphite nome, of what she was carrying, including two himatia, some wool (ἔρια) and some copper money. Having heard that the items have been found, she writes Zenon to write to Leontiskos, the chief policeman in that district, to give her back the stolen things. One of the most characteristic cases is UPZ 1.121, reporting that two slaves ran away, listing the items they had taken with them. As is obvious from P. Cair. Zen. 3.59474, only escaped slaves would walk about naked. This was probably an additional reason why these runaway slaves stole the clothes, i.e. to wear them and pass themselves off as free men. P. Heid. 9.423 (158 BCE) from the Herakleopolites nome contains a list of stolen items: a new himation for a man, a half-worn chiton and a chlamys, a himation for a woman with fringes (κροσσωτόν), a himation for a scribe (γραφεύς), which was to be delivered under contract (ἐκδόσιμον). ��Obviously��, this kind of detailed description helped not only in retrieving the items in cases were they might be found, but also to match the value calculated in drachmas. The garments mentioned are often identified in terms of colour, style, fibre, technique, state of repair, purpose of use, seasonality, gender, age.85

Conclusion This paper has aimed at painting a picture of the complex hybrid model of Ptolemaic textile economy in broad strokes, by analysing the papyrological record. The aim was to showcase how the Egyptian textile market was organized in Ptolemaic times by means of connecting the existing labour force and stock of knowledge to the inflow of new human capital. Ptolemaic bureaucracy, specialized labour, specialized textile products has as their target to increase the volume of market exchange. The textile market played an important role in the economy at both the central and the local level as is reflected in the documentary evidence from Egyptian papyri. The interest in the textile market taken by the central state bureaucracy is visible in the ways the centre interacted with local infrastructures so as to keep track of the textile market. The orders for textile commodities were very detailed, and demanded high quality and timely delivery of the product. The wholesale market sought high quality raw materials, which was also important for the timely delivery of the textile commodities. The retail textile market was highly diversified and offered lots of options to consumers and buyers.

84 P. Lille 1.6 (3rd c. BCE); P. Sorb. 3.110 (220/219 BCE); P. Petrie 2.32 (197 BCE); P. Heid. 9. 423 (158 BCE); P. Enteux. 30. See also Grier 1934, 53. 85 E.g. chiton with sleeves (χειριδωτός) SB 8.9689 (145–116 BCE); linen chiton P. Köln 8.346, chitōn made of byssus (βύσσινος) from an ostrakon dated between 193–187 BCE (BGU 7.1525). In BGU 16.2669 (c. 21–5 BCE) there is mention of a child’s cloak (λακέρνιον παιδικόν).

The labour engaging in the textile production, distribution and trade were Egyptians and Greeks, women and men, male and female slaves. Textile labour added value through workmanship. Quality was sought at every single stage of the process of manufacturing cloth from fibre. The flow of production and distribution had to remain fairly stable from month to month, so that the state taxes could be levied. Paying in cash and kind were both possible. Stable quantity, high quality and timely delivery were the standards that had to be monitored and observed. The movement of textile labour depended on demand. Textile trade made the most of the Nile as the most convenient way of moving commodities and people. Close reading of the lacunose information in the papyri shows that textiles occupied a prominent place in the provincial markets of the Egyptian chora. Textiles were valuable, irreplaceable property, which, if lost, for whatever reason, this loss would mean great financial damage to their owners. Finally, the material I retrieved from Egyptian documentary papyri puts into relief the need for detailed prosopographical studies of the people active in textile trade, from those who placed these precious commodities on the market to those who consumed them.

Bibliography Alfaro Giner 1999: Alfaro Giner, C.: Sobre trabajadores textiles especializadas en el Egipto helenístico y romano, Saitabi 49, 313–331. Bagnall 1976: Bagnall, R.: The Administration of the Ptolemaic Possessions Outside Egypt: With 3 Maps, Leiden. Bagnall & Cribiore 2008: Bagnall, R. & Cribiore, R.: Women’s Letters from Ancient Egypt. 300 B.C.–A.D. 800, Ann Arbor. Bagnall & Derow 2004: Bagnall, R. & Derow, P.: The Hellenistic Period. Historical Sources in Translation. Malden, MA & Oxford. Bauschatz 2013: Bauschatz, J.: Law and Enforcement in Ptolemaic Egypt, New York. Bingen 2007: Bingen, J.: Monarchy, Society, Economy, Berkeley. Beckert 2014: Beckert, S.: Empire of Cotton. A Global History, New York. Brewster 1927: Brewster, E.: A Weaver of Oxyrhynchus: Sketch of a Humble Life in Roman Egypt, TAPA 58, 132–154. Burnet 2003: Burnet, R.: L’Égypte ancienne à travers les Papyrus: vie quotidienne, Paris. Burstein 2004: Burstein, S. M.: The Reign of Cleopatra. Westport, Connecticut & London. Calderini 1946: Calderini, A.: Ricerche sull’industria e il commercio dei tessuti in Egitto, Aegyptus 26, 13–84. Carstens 2014: Carstens, P. R.: The Encyclopaedia of Egypt During the Reign of the Mehemet Ali Dynasty 1798–1952, Victoria. Ciszuk & Hammarlund 2008: Ciszuk, M. & Hammarlund, L.: Roman Looms – a Study of Craftsmanship and Technology in the Mons Claudianus Project. In C. Alfaro, J.-P. Wild. & B. Costa (eds.), Purpureae Vestes II. Textiles y tintes del Mediterráneo en época romana, 119–134, Valencia. Clarysse 2003: Clarysse, W.: The Archive of the Praktor Milon. In K. Vandorpe & W. Clarysse (eds.), Edfu, an Egyptian Provincial Capital in the Ptolemaic Period, Brussels. Clarysse 2008: Clarysse, W.: Graeco-roman Oxyrrhyncha. A Village in the Arsinoite Nome. In S. L. Lippert & M. Schentuleit (eds.), Graeco-Roman Fayum: Texts and Archaeology: Proceedings of the Third International Fayum Symposium, Freudenstadt May 29–June ,1 2007, Wiesbaden, 55–74. Clarysse & Geens 2009: Clarysse, W. & Geens, K.: Textiles and Architecture in Graeco- Roman and Byzantine Egypt. In A. de Moore & C. Fluck (eds.), Clothing the House. Furnishing Textiles of the 1st Millennium CE from Egypt and Neighbouring Countries.

Proceedings of the 5th Conference of the Research Group “Textiles from the Nile Valley”, Antwerp 6–7 October, 2007, Antwerp, 39–47. Clarysse & Thompson 2006: Clarysse, W. & Thompson, D. J.: Counting the People in Hellenistic Egypt, Cambridge. Clarysse & Vandorpe 1995: Clarysse, W. & Vandorpe, K.: Zénon, un homme d’affaires grec à l’ombre des pyramides, Leuven. Cribiore 2005: Cribiore, R.: Gymnastics of the Mind, Princeton. Droß-Krüpe 2011: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Wolle – Weber – Wirtschaft. Die Textilproduktion der römischen Kaiserzeit im Spiegel der papyrologischen Überlieferung, Wiesbaden (Philippika 46). Gagos & Potter 2009: Gagos, T. & Potter, D. S.: A Companion to the Roman Empire, Malden, MA & Oxford. Grier 1934: Grier, E.: Accounting in the Zenon Papyri, New York. Haring 2009: Haring, B.: Economy. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, vol. 1. UCLA: Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures. Retrieved from: http://escholar- ship.org/uc/item/2t01s4qj (accessed June 2016). Hicks 1969: Hicks, J.: A Theory of Economic History, vol. 1., Oxford. Lloyd 2010: Lloyd, A.B.: A Companion to Ancient Egypt, Malden, MA & Oxford. Loftus 1999: Loftus, A.: A Textile Factory in the Third Century BCE Memphis: Labor, Capital and Private Enterprise in the Zenon Archive. In D. Cardon & M. Feugère (eds.), Archéologie des textiles des origines au Ve siècle. – Actes du Colloque de Lattes, octobre 1999, Montagnac, 173–186. Manning 2003a: Manning, J.: Land and Power in Ptolemaic Egypt. The Structure of Land Tenure 332–30 BCE, Cambridge. Manning 2003b: Manning, J.: Egypt – Ancient and Classical Periods. In J. Mokyr (ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Economic History, vol. 2, Oxford, 171–175. Manning 2006: Manning, J.: The Ptolemaic Économie“ royale”, State Formation, Economic Integration and the Limits of Centralized Political Power. In R. Descat (ed.), Approches de l’économie hellenistique, Saint-Bertrand-de-Comminges, 257–274. Manning 2008: Manning, J.: Coinage as ‘code’ in Ptolemaic Egypt. In W. Harris (ed.), The Monetary Systems of the Greeks and Romans, Oxford, 84–111. Manning 2011: Manning, J.: Networks, Hierarchies and Markets in the Ptolemaic Economy. In Z. H. Archibald, J. K. Davies, V. Gabrielsen & G. J. Oliver (eds.), The Economies of Hellenistic Societies, Oxford, 296–323. Mueller 2005: Mueller, K.: Redistricting the Ptolemaic Fayum, Egypt. From Nomarchies and Toparchies to Weighted Voronoi Tesselation, AfP 51, 112–126. Ogden 2014: Ogden, D.: Alexander, Agathos Daimon, and Ptolemy: The Alexandrian Foundation Myth in Dialogue. In N. Mac Sweeney (ed.), Foundation Myths in Ancient Societies: Dialogues and Discourses, Philadelphia, 129–150. Papadopoulou 2015: Papadopoulou, M.: The chlamys City: Urban Landscapes and the Formation of Identity in Hellenistic Egypt. In S. Pantouvaki & E. Petridou (eds.), Dress and Politics. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the ICOM Costume Committe. Nafplion, Athens, 7–13 September, 2014, Nafplion, 122–127. Piejko, F. 1986 A Petition for new Looms, BASP 23, 131–135. Préaux 1939: Préaux, C.: L’Économie royale des Lagides, Bruxelles. Ray 2008: Ray, J.: The Rosetta Stone and the Rebirth of Ancient Egypt, London. Reekmans 1996: Reekmans, T.: La consommation dans les archives de Zénon, Brussels. Reil, T. 1913: Reil, T.: Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Gewerbes im Hellenistischen Ägypten, Bonn & Leipzig. Rihl 2009: Rihl, T.: Ancient Technology. In A. Erskine (ed.), A Companion to the Ancient World, Chichester & Malden, MA, 486–496. Roche 1995: Roche, J.: The International Wool Trade, Cambridge. Rostovtzeff 1920: Rostovtzeff, M.: The Foundations of Social and Economic Life in Egypt in Hellenistic Times, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 6/3, 161–178.

Rostovtzeff 1922: Rostovtzeff, M.: A Large Estate in Egypt in the Third Century B.C. A Study in Economic History, Madison. Ruffing 2008: Ruffing, DieK.: berufliche Spezialisierung in Handel und Handwerk, Untersuchungen zu ihrer Entwicklung und zu ihren Bedingungen in der römischen Kaiserzeit im östlichen Mittelmeerraum auf der Grundlage griechischer Inschriften und Papyri, Rahden/Westfalen (Pharos 28). Secord 2016: Secord, J.: Overcoming Environmental Determinism. Introduced Species, Hybrid Plants and Animals, and Transformed Lands in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds. In R. Futo Kennedy & M. Jones-Lewis (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Identity and the Environment in the Classical and Medieval Worlds, London & New York, 210–229. Thompson 1988: Thompson, D. J.: Memphis under the Ptolemies, Princeton. Thompson 2011: Thompson, D. J.: Animal Husbandry in Ptolemaic Egypt. In Z. H. Archibald, J. K. Davies & V. Gabrielsen (eds.), The Economies of Hellenistic Societies Third to First Centuries BCE, Oxford, 390–401. Verghoogt 1988: Verghoogt, A. M. F. W.: Menches, Komogrammateus of Kerkeosiris: The Doings and Dealings of a Village Scribe in the Late Ptolemaic Period (120–110 BCE), Leiden. von Reden 2006: von Reden, S.: The Ancient Economy and Ptolemaic Egypt. In P. F. Bang, M. Ikeguchi & H G. Ziche (eds.), Ancient Economies, Modern Methodologies: Archaeo logy, Comparative History, Models and Institutions, Bari. Warden 2014: Warden, L.A.: Pottery and Economy in Old Kingdom Egypt, Leiden & Boston. Wipszycka 1965: Wipszycka, E.: L’industrie textile dans l’Égypte romaine, Wroklaw.

Eivind Heldaas Seland

The Periplus Maris Erythraei is a first-century guide to trade and navigation in the Indian Ocean. The text is not only the primary literary source for the import of Indian and Chinese textiles into the Roman Empire, but also documents a variety of fabrics, qualities, patterns and producers in all parts of the region, many of them not documented in other textual sources or from archaeological contexts. Employing Network Analysis in order to study patterns of production and distribution, this paper highlights the role of textile exchange in Indian Ocean networks, demonstrating the vital role of textiles in integrating Old World trade.

Textiles and the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea Despite the increased interest in the history and archaeology of textiles over the last two decades, few studies have utilised the potential of textiles as cases that can shed light on the general operation of premodern systems of exchange.1 Textiles are arguably well suited for this purpose, as the commodity-group included subsistence as well as high-cost and prestige varieties, was produced in some form in many or most locations, and was subject to local, regional and interregional exchange. Based on a Greek text called The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, this short article investi- gates what textiles can reveal about the Indian Ocean trade in the first century CE. Information contained in the text is subjected to network analysis, and it is argued that the results show that textiles were a backbone in the Indian Ocean exchange system, creating an integrated network out of what would otherwise to a large extent have been a set of point-to-point contacts. Network analysis, a set of methodologies originally developed in the social sciences in order to emphasise interaction over traditional studies of agents, combined with graph visualisation originating in computer sciences, physics and mathematics, 2 has had large influence within history and archaeology over the last decade. 3 In this study the methodology is used primarily as a tool for visualisation, which can arguably highlight structures that are difficult to discern in the linear narrative of a text. Periplus means ‘circumnavigation’, and the main content of the work is a description of where and how to sail, and what to trade in ports along the Red Sea, Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean. In addition there is a varying amount of information on the ethnography, geography, history, economy and sociopolitical conditions of the regions described. The work is generally considered the product of a single author, living in Egypt in the mid 1st century CE, and with considerable personal experience of Indian Ocean trade.4 The Periplus is unique among sources for ancient

1 See, however other articles in this volume as well as Droß-Krupe 2014. 2 Wasserman & Faust 1994, 1–17. 3 Works directly inspiring this study include Ruffini 2008; Sindbæk 2009; Malkin 2011; Brughmans 2013; Collar 2013. 4 Dihle 1965; Casson 1989, 7–10. On the personal experience of the author, Meyer 2007; Seland 2010, 15. The debate has recently been reopened with suggestions of the cumulative

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 212 Eivind Heldaas Seland commerce in general as well as for early Indian Ocean exchange in particular in its comprehensive coverage, descriptive nature and wide geographical outlook. This has made the text the natural point of departure for any historical, and point of reference for any archaeological inquiry into ancient Indian Ocean trade.5 The description of textile trade in the text, however, has received relatively little attention in earlier scholarship. Casson gave a thorough historical and philological commentary to his edition and translation of the text, which serves as the point of departure for most later studies, including this.6 Vivero has summarised and presented the material related to textiles in the Periplus, and Wild and Wild have given a major contribution in aligning the varieties of textiles described in the text, some of them difficult to identify or translate, with the growing archaeological evidence from Roman Egypt, in particular the Red Sea port of Berenike.7

Methods: From Text to Network The aim of this article is not to reiterate this earlier scholarship or to contribute further to the identification and interpretation of textiles described in the Periplus, but to take the textile trade out of the Periplus and study this commodity group in order to better understand not only the subsystem(s) represented by the textile trade, but also the structure of 1st century Indian Ocean trade in general.8 Textile trade in the Periplus is approached by way of network analysis, focusing on the pattern of movement of different kinds of textiles through the Indian Ocean world. In summary, the Periplus describes 57 centres of trade, most of them ports, but some inland markets, from China in the East to present-day Tanzania in the South, and Egypt and Mesopotamia to the north. The text also mentions 110 different commodities altogether, some of them no doubt overlapping, as there are different qualities and regional varieties, and as we cannot expect the author to have been fully consistent in his terminology. 25 of these can be identified as textiles (table 1), and belong in the categories wool, linen, cotton, and silk. This figure also includes leather and fur, but not pigments, although they also have a certain relevance to textile trade. In order to prepare this material, each port and each commodity was entered into a spreadsheet and assigned a number, ports going from 1001 to 1015, products from 2001–2110. These represent the nodes of the network. Then every movement of commodities described in the Periplus was recorded as a dyad of numbers, with the sequence describing directionality. Thus the dyad 2026 à 1007 would indicate that commodity 2026, [cotton] cloth (ὀθόνιον), was imported into port 1007, Barygaza (modern Broach), a major emporium in north-western India, as we learn in sections 48 and 51 that cloth was brought to this port from the inland centres of Ozene (Ujjain) and Tagara (Ter). 1007 à 2026 indicates that Barygaza exported cloth,

nature and geographical purpose of text: Arnaud 2012; Marcotte 2012. 5 See Seland 2010: for an overview of earlier research, Boussac, Salles & Yon 2012: for recent studies, Seland 2014: for a review of the archaeology of Indian Ocean trade. 6 Casson 1989. 7 Wild & Wild 2007; Wild & Wild 2014; Vivero 2013, 142–148. 8 This is one of four studies of the Periplus in a network perspective. General introduction and detailed description of methodology in Seland 2016a. Case study of gemstone-trade in Seland 2016b. Comparison of commodity networks in Seland (forthcoming).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Here, There and Everywhere 213 which was also the case in this centre of transit, as we might read in section 49.9 These movements of commodities constitute the edges (connections) of the network, which was then visualised using the graph visualisation software Gephi.

Transl. Transl. Greek Greek (Casson) (Casson) ἱμάτια Βαρβαρικὰ Egyptian clothing ἄγναφα τὰ ἐν tunics χιτῶνες „for the Barbaroi“ Αἰγύπτῳ γινόμενα Ἀρσινοϊτικαὶ wraps from Arsinoe cloaks Σάγοι στολαὶ colored cloaks ἀβόλλαι νόθοι purple cloth πορφύρα (abollai) χρωμάτινοι ἱματισμὸς Ἀραβικὸς linens λέντια Arab sleeved clothing χειριδωτός double fringed items δικρόσσια [cotton] cloth ὀθόνιον kaunakai γαυνάκαι blankets λώδικες [heavy cloaks] ἱματισμὸς „expensive clothing“ native clothing ἱματισμὸς ἐντόπιος πολυτελὴς monache μοναχὴ plain clothing ἱματισμὸς ἱκανὸς [cotton cloth] sagmatogene σαγματογῆναι printed Clothing ἱματισμὸς νόθος [cotton cloth] girdles περιζώματα multicolored textiles πολύμιτα molochinon μολόχινα Chinese cloth ὀθόνιον Σιρικὸν cotton garments σινδόναι Chinese yarn νῆμα Σιρικὸν argaritides σινδόνες αἱ [cotton cloth] Ἀργαρίτιδες

Results: Indian Ocean Textile Networks The resulting graph (fig. 1) show all movements of commodities as described in the Periplus. Each port and each commodity is represented by a circle. Arrows going from a port to a commodity indicate that the port exported that particular commodity, while arrows from a commodity to a port show that the product was imported into the port. Rather than situating ports according to their geographical position, the network is distributed in order to minimise crossing edges, and despite its limited size might appear confusing. The benefit of the visualisation, however, is that it allows us to zoom in on any given commodity and follow its road through the Indian Ocean system.

9 The dataset is available from Bergen Open Research Archive: http://hdl.handle.net/ 1956/11470. The methodology is described in more detail in Seland 2016a.

214 Eivind Heldaas Seland Argaritides Balita Argaru Semylla ebony sissoo Leuke Kome Leuke teakwood Omana Apologos Copper Gold Gold Native clothing Native Kolchoi Malabathron Pearls Peridot Sulphide of antimony of Sulphide Sopatma Glassware Diamonds Realgar Yellow sweet clover sweet Yellow Printed clothing Printed aloe Akabaru Dates Lead Sapphires Poduke Barygaza Plain clothing Plain Barbarikon Coral Pepper Kamara Ganges Raw glass Raw Storax Thina Chinese cloth Chinese Orpiment Multicolored textiles Multicolored Paithana Onyx nard costus purple cloth purple Ozene Muziris Nelkynda Agate Chinese yarn Chinese Syagros lykion unguent Slaves Mandagora Indigo Frankincense Transparent gems Transparent Moscha Limen Moscha Kane Bdellium Taprobane cloth lapis lazuli lapis "expensive clothing" "expensive turquoise gizeir Chinese pelts Chinese Wine Horaia horses cotton-garments cyperus Berenike Long pepper Long blankets saffron Myos Hormos Myos Tin Silverware Arab sleeved clothing sleeved Arab molochinon magla cinnabar Dioskurides asyphe [Roman] money [Roman] Muza moto Mokrotu Grain Ironware aroma Tortoise shell Tortoise Duaka copperware Sarapis (Isle of) (Isle Sarapis Okelis Chryse Island Chryse Makeir precious stones precious Taigara pack mules pack White marble White Kankamon Aromatics Rice Ivory Aksum Colored cloaks (abollai) cloaks Colored Cassia Ptolemais Theron Ptolemais Koloe Rhinoceros-horn Myrrh Linens Goldware girdles Byzantion Mosyllon sesame oil sesame Rhapta awls Lac-dye axes Avalites Adulis Malao Steel Spice Port Spice Kaunakai [heavy cloaks] [heavy Kaunakai knives monache [cotton cloth] [cotton monache Ghee Mundu adzes Palaipatmai Olive oil Olive cane sugar cane sagmatogene [cotton cloth] [cotton sagmatogene brass Tunics Drinking-vessels Wraps from Arsinoe from Wraps Opone millefiori glass millefiori Olives (unripe) Olives double-fringed items double-fringed Cloaks glass stones glass Iron Nautilus shell Nautilus Komar copper honey pans(?) honey copper large, round copper drinking vessel drinking copper round large, Egyptian clothing "for the Barbaroi" the "for clothing Egyptian Melizeigara Fig. 1: Network of ports and commodities in 1st century Indian Ocean Trade

Suppara as described in the Periplus. Graph produced in Gephi

Eudaimon Arabia Eudaimon © 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Kalliena Naura Kammoni Tyndis Here, There and Everywhere 215

In fig. 2, all nodes except the textiles and the ports involved in textile trade have been removed from the network. Ports are dark grey, commodities light grey. Nodes and their labels are sized according to degree, simply a count of how many connections they have. ThePeriplus has no information on quantity or volume apart from general remarks such as ‘a little’ or ‘considerable amount’, so size is an indication of the diversity of the local textile trade or the number of ports dealing in a specific commodity, rather than its volume or value. Nevertheless, the Egyptian ports of Myos Hormos and Berenike, as well as Barygaza, stand out as the most important centres of textile trade, both in terms of import and export, with ports along the coasts of India well represented as suppliers, and ports in the Southern Red Sea and Gulf of Aden as markets for a range of textiles.

Thina Omana

Apologos Muziris Kamara Nelkynda Native clothing Spice Port Cloaks Multicolored textiles Chinese yarn Malao Sopatma Mundu Chinese cloth Tunics Opone Barbarikon Printed clothing Mosyllon Poduke Plain clothing Egyptian clothing "for the Barbaroi" Barygaza blankets monache [cotton cloth] "expensive clothing" Berenike girdles sagmatogene [cotton cloth] Argaru Myos Hormos Colored cloaks (abollai) Adulis Avalites Arab sleeved clothing double-fringed items Kaunakai [heavy cloaks] Kane molochinon purple cloth cloth Taigara Wraps from Arsinoe cotton-garments Argaritides Linens Ganges Muza Taprobane

Okelis Ozene

Fig. 2: Network of textile trade as described in the Periplus. Graph produced in Gephi

The network makes it possible to take out single commodities and groups of commodities. A look at silk trade (‘Chinese cloth’/ ὀθόνιον Σιρικὸν and ‘Chinese yarn’/ νῆμα Σιρικὸν) as in fig. 3 will reveal that a number of ports in India both imported and exported silk. Ports in Egypt imported silk, and the place simply described as Thina (China), which must be interpreted more as a source of supply than as a market-town, exported silk. This graph allows us to ask not only how silk moved through the Indian Ocean system (by way of Indian ports), but also which possibilities merchants who were interested in silk would have besides those explicitly discussed in the Periplus. Thus, we might hope to move beyond some of the biases and idiosyncrasies inevitably present in a text that is the product of a

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 216 Eivind Heldaas Seland single author with limited knowledge and personal interest. We learn, for instance, that silk was available not only in the four Indian ports of Barbarikon, Barygaza, Nelkynda and Muziris, that the author of the Periplus reported to be regular destinations of Egyptian shipping, but also in ports such as Poduke, likely identified with Arikamedu, a site with archaeologically documented Mediterranean connections, albeit of uncertain nature,10 and a likely centre also for the processing and redistribution of cotton textiles from the South Indian hinterland.

Nelkynda Muziris

Kamara Thina

Chinese cloth Poduke Sopatma Chinese yarn

Barygaza Barbarikon Berenike Myos Hormos

Fig. 3: : Ports involved in silk trade. Graph produced in Gephi

Thina Omana

Apologos Muziris Kamara Nelkynda Native clothing Spice Port

Chinese yarn Malao Sopatma Mundu Chinese cloth Opone Barbarikon Printed clothing Mosyllon

Poduke Plain clothing

Barygaza monache [cotton cloth] Berenike girdles Myos Hormos sagmatogene [cotton cloth] Adulis Avalites Kaunakai [heavy cloaks] Kane molochinon purple cloth cloth Taigara cotton-garments Ganges

Muza Taprobane

Okelis Ozene

Fig. 4: Ports involved in cotton trade. Graph produced in Gephi 10 Wheeler, Gosh & Deva 1946; Begley et al. 2004.

Instead of a commodity, the network could also be centred on a port. Fig. 4 shows the ego-network of Barygaza with a depth of two, that is all commodities imported or exported by way of Barygaza and all other ports dealing in those commodities. The graph visualises the Indian city not only as a centre for the export of Indian cotton textiles, but also as a hub for the trade in Mediterranean, Mesopotamian and Chinese textiles. Finally, it is also possible to take out a commodity group, such as that represented by the trade in cotton (fig. 5). Although the Egyptian ports are very much parts of this system, it is not primarily a trade between the Mediterranean and India, but rather a sub-system of Indian Ocean trade spanning from the Bay of Bengal to Africa, with Barygaza in the position of a redistributive hub.

Spice Port

Malao

Mundu Mosyllon

Opone Barygaza monache [cotton cloth] Berenike Myos Hormos Avalites Argaru cloth sagmatogene [cotton cloth]

Adulis Taigara

cotton-garments

Argaritides molochinon Ganges

Muza Taprobane Okelis Ozene

Fig. 5: The textile trade of Barygaza, India. Graph produced in Gephi

Discussion: Textile Trade in the Indian Ocean The network visualizations presented above contain no information that is not in the Periplus, and that could not be gathered from close reading of the text. As pointed out in the introduction the possible advantage of network analysis in this case lies in bringing to the forefront crossing patterns of trade that are present, but underplayed in the linear narrative of a text emphasizing primarily trade out of Egypt. Arguably visualizing textile trade in this manner does provide some insights that have not received attention in earlier scholarship. Indian Ocean trade is traditionally primarily discussed as a trade in certain expensive key commodities between the Mediterranean and India, Arabia and Africa, such as African ivory, Arabian aromatics and Indian spices or gemstones, paid for to a large extent with Roman money.11 While Mediterranean demand was certainly

11 E.g. Begley & De Puma 1991; Warmington 1995 [1928]; Tomber 2008; McLaughlin 2010.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 218 Eivind Heldaas Seland an important attraction for Indian Ocean commerce, it is noteworthy that textiles partly moved according to different patterns. Some of the movement was subsistence trade, with plain or even inferior textiles moving in large quantities; some of it is extreme luxury trade with textile interwoven with gold. Most interestingly, textiles move in all directions, so that some ports import certain types and export others. This is not prestige trade or gift exchange, but an integrated market system with producers and traders catering to local demand, so that Egyptian and Mesopotamian tailors made certain varieties especially for sale in India or Arabia, and in India they were able to buy a range of qualities and varieties known by their origin, as in later periods we know tweed or damask. In this way textile trade, being ubiquitous and multidirectional was arguably the backbone that integrated the Indian Ocean trade into a system, making it more than a series of point to point contacts going out of Egypt in order to procure certain special and expensive commodities.

Bibliography Arnaud 2012: Arnaud, P.: Le Périple de la mer Érythrée: une œuvre de compilation aux préoccupations géographiques, Lyon (Topoi Supplement 11), 27–61. Berley & De Puma 1991: Begley, V. & De Puma, R. D. (eds.), Rome and India, the Ancient Sea Trade, Madison. Begley et. al. 2004: Begley, V.; Francis P., Karashima, Jr., N., Raman, K. V., Sidebotham, S. E. & Will, E. L.: The Ancient Port of Arikamedu. New Excavations and Researches, 1989–1992 Vol. 2, Paris (Memoires Archéologiques 22.2). Boussac, Salles & Yon 2012: Boussac, M.-F., Salles, J.-F. & Yon, J.-B. (eds.), Autour du Périple de la mer Érythrée, Lyon (Topoi, Supplément 11). Brughmans 2013: Brughmans, T.: Thinking Through Networks: A Review of Formal Network Methods in Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 20/4, 623–662. Casson 1989: Casson, L.: The Periplus Maris Erythraei, Princeton. Collar 2013: Collar, A.: Religious Networks in the Roman Empire: The Spread of New Ideas, Cambridge. Dihle 1965: Dihle, A.: Umstrittene Daten – Untersuchungen zum Auftreten der Griechen am Roten Meer, Opladen (Wissenschaftliche Abhandlungen der Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Forschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen 32). Droß-Krüpe 2014: Droß-Krupe, K. (ed.): Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73). Malkin 2011: Malkin, I.: A Small Greek World: Networks in the Ancient Mediterranean. Oxford & New York. Marcotte 2012: Marcotte, D.: Le Périple de la mer Érythrée dans son genre et sa tradition tex tuelle, Lyon (Topoi Supplement 11), 7–25. McLaughlin 2010: McLaughlin, R.: Rome and the Distant East: Trade Routes to the Ancient Lands of Arabia, India and China, London. Meyer 2007: Meyer, J. C.: Roman Coins as a Source for Roman Trading Activities in the Indian Ocean. In E. H. Seland (ed.), Definite Places, Translocal Exchange: The Indian Ocean in the Ancient Period, Oxford, 59–68. Ruffini 2008: Ruffini, G. R.: Social Networks in Byzantine Egypt, Cambridge. Seland 2010: Seland, E. H.: Ports and Power in the Periplus: Complex Societies and Maritime Trade on the Indian Ocean in the First Century AD, Oxford 2010 (Society for Arabian Studies Monographs 9). Seland 2014: Seland, E. H.: Archaeology of Trade in the Western Indian Ocean, 300 BC– AD 700. Journal of Archaeological Research 224, 367–406. Seland 2016a: Seland, E. H.: The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea: a Network Approach.Asian Review of World History 4/2, in press.

Seland 2016b: Seland, E. H.: Gemstones and Minerals in the Red Sea/Indian Ocean Trade of the First Millennium. In S. Greiff, A. Hilgner & D. Quast (eds.),Gemstones in the First Millennium AD: Mines, Trade, Workshops and Symbolism, Mainz, in press. Seland (forthcoming): Seland, E. H.: Commodity networks in the Periplus Maris Erythraei. In. M. Żuchowska (ed.), Proceedings of the Conference ‘Exchange of Goods and Ideas: Long Distance Trade in Asia in the 1st Millennium AD’, Warszaw April 18–20 2016. Sindbæk 2009: Sindbæk, S. M.: Open Access, Nodal Points, and Central Places: Maritime Communication and Locational Principles for Coastal Sites in South Scandinavia, c. AD 400–1200, Eesti Arheoloogia Ajakiri 13/2, 96–109. Tomber 2008: Tomber, R.: Indo-Roman Trade, From Pots to Pepper, London. Vivero 2013: Vivero, M. A.: Textile Trade in the Periplus. In M. Gleba & Pásztókai-Szeőke (eds.) Making Textiles in Pre-Roman and Roman Times. People, Places, Identities, 142–148. Warmington 1995 [1928]: Warmington, E. H.: The Commerce Between the Roman Empire and India, Cambridge. Wasserman & Faust 1994: Wasserman, S. & Faust, K.: Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, Cambridge. Wheeler, Gosh & Deva 1946: Wheeler, M., Gosh, A. & Deva, K.: Arikamedu: An Indo- Roman Trading-Station on the East Coast of India. Ancient India 2, 17–38. Wild & Wild 2007: Wild, J. P. & Wild, F. C.: Chapter 11: Textiles. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (eds.), Berenike 1999/2000, Los Angeles, 225–227. Wild & Wild 2014: Wild, J. P. & Wild, F. C.: Berenike and Textile Trade on the Indian Ocean. In K. Droß-Krupe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 91–110.

Herbert Graßl

Der römische Textilhandel ist in den größeren Rahmen der Wirtschaftsgeschichte eingebunden und bildet einen substantiellen Teil der ökonomischen Performanz dieser Epoche. Wir kennen einerseits einen lokalen Handel mit regionaler Produktion und Vermarktung, als Marktorte sind nur Städte nachgewiesen. Andererseits ist auch ein vernetzter Handel über große räumliche Distanzen dokumentiert, in dem spezialisierte Textilhändler als Mittler zwischen Produktionsstätten und Ver brauchern unerlässlich waren. Dieser Handel schloss auch Textilien außerhalb des Luxussegmentes mit ein und bildete deshalb einen Teil der globalisierten römischen Ökonomie. Die Quellen für eine Untersuchung des römischen Textilhandels liefern liter arische Texte, die Epigraphik, Papyri und selbstverständlich die materiellen Denk mäler. Aus der antiken Literatur mit Einschluss der Rechtstexte gewinnen wir nur sehr wenige Hinweise, die aber aussagekräftig sind und natürlich entsprechend interpretiert werden müssen. Inschriften bieten die dichteste Information über das Personal des Textilhandels und lassen bei entsprechender Funddichte auch strukturelle Aussagen zu. Durch glückliche Neufunde ergänzt sich der bisherige Wissensstand hier in vielerlei Hinsicht. Die Papyri zur römischen Textilwirtschaft sind sehr gut bearbeitet, doch tritt in dieser Quellengattung der Handel gegenüber der Produktion weit zurück. Daher wird in weiterer Folge auf diese Quellengattung nicht zurückgegriffen. Archäologische Funde von Textilien, die für immer mehr Provinzen des Imperiums, zuletzt etwa für Noricum1 vorgelegt werden, lassen andere Fragestellungen und Erkenntnisse zu. Da sie aber nur indirekt die Strukturen des Handels und schon gar nicht sein Personal beleuchten, bleiben sie in dieser Arbeit ausgeklammert. Grabdenkmäler mit Bildprogrammen aus dem Textilgeschäft2 werden ebenfalls sehr unterschiedlich gedeutet: entweder als Zeugnisse des Handels oder als Dokumentation der Qualitätskontrolle des Produktionsprozesses. Ein fundamentaler Unterschied in den Strukturen des Textilhandels im Römischen Reich fällt sofort ins Auge, nämlich der Unterschied zwischen dem Westen und Osten des Imperiums. Im Westteil sind bislang keine Frauen im Textil handel nachgewiesen, im Osten dagegen begegnen einige wenige Frauen in dieser Funktion. Dies mag ein Erbe aus dem klassischen Griechenland sein, das vereinzelte Frauen in diesem Metier kennt. Auch im römischen Ägypten finden wir eine ähnli- che Geschlechterverteilung.3

1 Grömer 2014. 2 Young 2000, 215–233. 3 Zur Präsenz von Frauen im römischen Textilhandel Larsson Lovén 2013, 109–125; zu Griechenland und Ägypten Ruffing 2008, 548; Meyenburg 2014, 184.

Fragen der Definition Die Zuordnung einzelner Personen in die Gruppe der Händler oder Produzenten stellt sich bei Fehlen zusätzlicher Informationen nicht immer leicht dar. Dazu gibt es in diesem ökonomischen Segment auch Überlappungen in der Funktion, etwa im Produzentenverkauf. Eindeutige Zuordnungen lassen sich etwa bei Be rufsbezeichnungen mit ausschließlichem Bezug zur Handelstätigkeit vornehmen, z.B. negotiator, negotians, mercator, venditor und vergleichbare Ausdrücke, auch Umschreibungen dieser Tätigkeit. An die Seite der lateinischen Termini lassen sich natürlich auch die griechischen Varianten stellen, die von Kai Ruffing zusammen gestellt wurden.4 Die vielen lateinischen Berufsbezeichnungen mit der sprachlichen Endung -ius und auch die griechischen Entsprechungen liefern keine siche- ren Indizien auf eine ausgeübte Handelstätigkeit, auch reine Produzenten und Produzentenhändler werden so angesprochen. Dies führt dazu, dass sich in der wissenschaftlichen Literatur viele Unklarheiten oder offene Möglichkeiten finden, etwa in der Qualifikation ‚Produzent und /oder Händler‘.5 Zum Teil führt diese Unklarheit auch zu gravierenden Missdeutungen wie im Fall der centonarii. In der Monographie von Frau Jinyu Liu zu dieser Personengruppe werden alle centonarii als Produzenten und Händler verstanden, die für alle Art von Alttextilien oder jedenfalls Wollwaren zuständig gewesen sein sollen. Dies kann aber in dieser Pauschalierung nicht zutreffen, da die centonarii auch in kleinsten Städten in dichter Konzentration bezeugt sind und zur Bezeichnung des Handels mit centones eine spezielle Ansprache nachgewiesen ist (centonum mercator).6 Neben den direkt ausgewiesenen Textilhändlern sollen für diesen Geschäftsbereich weitere Personen in Anspruch genommen werden. Darunter fallen Personen mit Nennung des Ortes ihrer Tätigkeit oder eines Geschäftslokales. Eine solche Angabe etwa in Grabinschriften macht nur Sinn, wenn an diesen Stätten ein Kundenkontakt gepflegt wurde, der auch öffentlich bekannt war. In weiterer Folge betrifft dies Personen, bei denen auf fremde Herkunft oder hohe Mobilität hingewiesen wird, woraus ein ökonomisches Interagieren zwischen Produktionsgebiet und entferntem Absatz deutlich wird. Auch fallen in diese Gruppe Personen, die mit einem ganz speziellen Warenspektrum in Verbindung gebracht werden, was als Hinweis auf Konsumentenorientierung verstanden werden kann. Reine Textilhändler waren selbstverständlich auch die Seehändler, die im Mittelmeerraum oder auch im äußeren Ozean Textilprodukte vermarktet haben. Im lokalen Textilhandel spielen Produzentenhändler und auch der Detailvertrieb auf einem überschaubaren Marktsegment die vorrangige Rolle. Da manche Aspekte dazu schon von Miko Flor vorgelegt wurden, soll an dieser Stelle nicht weiter darauf eingegangen werden.7

4 Ruffing 2008. 5 So etwa bei Wissemann 1984, 120–124; Potthoff 1992, 51; 84; 113; 123; Grelle & Silvestrini 2001, 121–126. 6 Liu 2009, 69; 80; 83; AE 1988, 504 mit Lesung cent(onum) merc(ator); Buonopane 2003, 308 präferiert die Auflösung cent(onarius) merc(ator). 7 Flohr 2014, 1–15; zum Seehandel mit Textilien Jones 1974, 364; Albaladejo Vivero 2013, 142–148; Droß-Krüpe 2013, 149–160; zum transalpinen Textilhandel Mennella 2000, 125–135.

Spezialisierungen im Textilhandel Schon lange ist die Tatsache bekannt, dass der römische Textilhandel durch in- haltliche Spezialisierungen gekennzeichnet war. Am häufigsten ist der (negotiator) vestiarius bezeugt, der die breiteste Produktpalette an Textilien anbot. An nächster Stelle steht der (negotiator) sagarius, der die beliebten Umwürfe (saga) vertrieb. Es folgt der lintearius (mit sprachlichen Varianten) für Leinenwaren. Eine Vernetzung von Handelsaktivitäten in einer Person ist nur ausnahmsweise belegt: ein centonarius et sagarius, ein vestiarius centonarius, ein sagarius et pellicarius, der auch mit Tierfellen handelte.8 Diese wenigen Ausnahmen betreffen zumindest Kleidung im weitesten Sinn. Ein einziges Zeugnis erwähnt einen Händler für paenulae (Mäntel) und Tonwaren; sein Standort im kleinen Sumelocenna (Rottenburg, Baden-Württem berg) ließ offensichtlich eine einseitige Spezialisierung nicht zu.9 Zudem wird die gleiche räumliche Herkunft der genannten Warengruppen wohl aus Gallien eine Rolle gespielt haben. Weitere Spezialisierungen auf einzelne Textilgattungen, etwa den Verkauf von paenulae oder indusiae (Oberbekleidung) und auch noch seltenere Produkte runden das gewonnene Bild ab.10 Wollprodukte und Leinenwaren blieben in der Vermarktung stets getrennt.

Orte des Textilhandels In republikanischer Zeit sticht allein die Stadt Rom heraus, die ein dichtes Warenangebot vorrätig hielt. Für spezielle Bedürfnisse wie z.B. Kapuzenmäntel standen auch Orte in Kampanien oder Südlatium zur Verfügung. (Cato agr. 144):

Romae tunicas, togas, saga, centones, sculponeas; Calibus et Menturnis cuculliones In Rom (kauft man) Tuniken, Togen, Überwürfe, Flickenmäntel, Holzschuhe, in Cales und Minturnae Kapuzenmäntel.

An dieser Textstelle steht die Kundeninformation wie bei einem modernen Branchen verzeichnis im Vordergrund, die Strukturen des Handels und auch die Händler bleiben ausgeblendet. Die zentrale Rolle Roms blieb während des gesamten Altertums erhalten, und auch die oft weiteren Wege, die Kaufinteressenten dorthin zurückle- gen mussten. Es fällt aber auf, dass es in Rom im Unterschied zu anderen Handelswaren (Vieh, Gemüse, Fisch, Wein) kein spezialisiertes Forum oder auch eine Basilika für Textilien gab, im Unterschied etwa zu Athen, einigen Städten im römischen Nord afrika oder in Ägypten, wo solche Einrichtungen bezeugt sind.11 Epigraphische Zeugnisse nennen aber bestimmte Straßen und Plätze als Zentren des Textilhandels.

8 CIL XII 1898; CIL V 50; dazu Buonopane 2003, 301–314; CIL V 5928: die Abkürzung pell(icario) kann auch zu pell(ario) oder pell(iario) aufgelöst werden, dazu Grelle & Silvestrini 2001, 126; auch paenulae (Mäntel), sonst von paenularii vertrieben, finden sich im Sortiment der vestiarii: CGL III Col. Montepess. 13b; dazu Dickey 2015, 101; 125–125. 9 CIL XIII 6366 (225 n.Chr.); der Freigelassene M. Messius Fortunatus ist negotiator artis cretariae und negotiator paenularum. 10 Ein Überblick über selten bezeugte Textilien und deren Händler bei Potthoff 1992, 113; 123; 177; Wissemann 1984, 120–122; Pelletier 1996, 133–134; Vicari 2001, 94–114. 11 Poll. 7,78; eine basilica vestiaria in Cuicul CIL VIII 20156, ein forum vestiarium adiutricia num in Thamugadi AE 1998, 1583.

Auch hier fällt auf, dass es keine Überschneidungen im Warensortiment gab: vestia rii, sagarii und auch lanarii (Wollhändler) waren an jeweils gesonderten Plätzen an- zutreffen.12 Der Textilhandel fand in Geschäftslokalen oder Säulenhallen statt, was auch in Wandgemälden aus den Vesuvstädten und Ladenschildern dargestellt wird.13 Textilhandel wurde aber auch in reichen Privathäusern betrieben; hier kommen die Händler zur Kundschaft, wie das auch in der neueren europäischen Geschichte praktiziert wurde und in abgewandelter Form durch Versandhauskataloge und den Internethandel vom heimatlichen Computer aus weiter lebt. Ein interessantes Beispiel für diese Praktiken findet sich beim römischen Komödiendichter Plautus (Aul. 508–522):

stat fullo, phyrgio, aurifex, lanarius; caupones patagiarii, indusiarii, flammarii, violarii, carinarii; stant manulearii, stant † murobatharii, propolae linteones, calceolarii; sedentarii sutores diabathrarii, solearii astant, astant molocinarii; [petunt fullones, sarcinatores petunt;] strophiarii astant, astant semul sonarii. iam hosce absolutos censeas: cedunt, petunt treceni, cum stant thylacistae in atriis textores limbularii, arcularii. ducuntur, datur aes. iam absolutos censeas, cum incedunt infectores corcotarii, aut aliqua mala crux semper est, quae aliquid petat. Da steht der Walker, Sticker, Goldschmied, Wollewirker; Die Händler mit Bordüren und mit Negligés, Mit Kleidern in Orange, in Violett, in Gelb; Die Ärmelkleidermacher, die Parfümverkäufer (?), Die Höker mit dem Leinenzeug, die Stiefelmacher, Die schemelhockenden Schuster von Pantoffeln und Sandalen, die Malvenkleidermacher stehn bereit; [Es fordern Walker, Kleiderflicker fordern ein,] Da stehn die Miederhändler, stehn die Gürtelmacher, Schon denkst du dir, die seien bezahlt: da kommen, stehn Zu fordern Hunderte bettelnd schon im Atrium, Schatullenhändler, Saum- und Bortenfertiger. Man führt sie vor, bezahlt; du denkst, die seien bezahlt: Da rücken noch die Safranappreteure an, Oder irgend sonst ein Kreuz ist stets da, das verlangt. (Übersetzung P. Rau)

12 In Rom sind vestiarii u. a. am vicus Tuscus, Cermalus, beim Cerestempel, beim Dianatempel, in den Horrea Agrippiana und Volusiana oder beim Hain der Libitina bezeugt, sagarii beim Marcellustheater und den Horrea Galbiana, lanarii am vicus Fortunae, vicus Caesaris und in der Subura. 13 Olivito 2013, 50–60; 173–180.

Der Raum für Handelsgeschäfte war das Atrium. Hier treffen sich reine Dienstleister wie der Walker, die Färber oder der Schuster, dazu Produzentenverkäufer für Schmuckkästchen oder Bortenweber, weiters reine Detailhändler mit Textiler zeugnissen in den gefragten Modefarben. Neue Modeströmungen wurden in dieser Welt nicht durch neue Schnitte, sondern durch neue Farben zum Ausdruck gebracht. Auch bestimmte Accessoires wie Bordüren, Binden, Bänder, Netze, Gürtel und Appliken dienten diesem Zweck. Bei diesem Verkaufsgeschäft zeichnet sich eine klare Geschlechterteilung ab: Männer bieten Waren und Dienstleistungen an, die Hausfrau ordert die Waren und trifft Kaufentscheidungen, wohl im Kreise der Haustöchter und Sklavinnen. Der lanarius (Vers 508) ist kein „Wollewirker“ wie in der Übersetzung von Peter Rau, sondern ein Wollhändler. Die reiche Hausherrin bezieht von ihm den Rohstoff für die Textilarbeiterinnen, die sie zu beaufsichti- gen hatte. Zur Kaufentscheidung wurden Wollproben vorgelegt. Der Hausherr selbst steht offensichtlich völlig stumm daneben, hofft auf ein baldiges Ende der Einkäufe und sah sein Vermögen dahinschmelzen. Bei Lukian (de merc. cond. 38) findet sich ebenfalls eine ähnliche Szene. Hier folgt der Textileinkauf in einem reichen römischen Haushalt auf Kredit und der Textilhändler musste sich mit anderen Lieferanten und Dienstleistern um das Geld für seine Ware streiten. Gerne wüss- ten wir, wie oft solche Auftritte von Händlern vonstatten gingen. Da eine Vielzahl von Personen präsent ist, muss ein Termin vorausbestimmt worden sein. Auch eine Absprache der einzelnen Haushalte wird man annehmen dürfen. Natürlich über- zeichnet ein Komödientext alltägliche Erfahrungen. Da die Kompetenzen der öffent- lichen Marktbehörden (aediles) nicht in die Privathaushalte eingriffen, waren auch Klagen bezüglich der Produktqualität erschwert.

Die gesellschaftliche Rolle der Textilhändler An der Wende zur Kaiserzeit war die Vernetzung im Textilhandel schon sehr weit fortgeschritten. Der Geograph Strabon (4,4,3) erwähnt in Augusteischer Zeit die Lieferung von saga aus Gallien nach Rom und Italien. Textilhändler sind jetzt in vielen Städten Italiens und auch in den Provinzen, hier vor allem in den Hauptstädten wie z.B. Augsburg, Lugdunum oder Narbo nachgewiesen.14 Feinere und damit auch teurere Ware, die von vestiarii tenuiarii angeboten wurde, ist allerdings nur in Rom und Italien zu beziehen gewesen.15 Die Verankerung der Textilhändler in der römi- schen Gesellschaftspyramide lässt sich auch an der Rechtsstellung festmachen. Der überwiegende Teil gehörte den Freigelassenen (liberti) an. besonders in Rom und Italien. Der Dichter Juvenal (sat. 6,588–591) schildert die schwere Entscheidung einer Frau, ob sie nach der Trennung vom Gastwirt (caupo) einen Textilhändler (saga vendens = sagarius) heiraten soll.

Plebeium in circo positum est et in aggere fatum. quae nudis longum ostendit cervicibus aurum consulit ante falas delphinorumque columnas, an saga vendenti nubat caupone relicto.

14 Flohr 2014, 5–9. 15 Kolendo 1978, 194–202.

Das Schicksal des einfachen Menschen entscheidet sich im Zirkus oder auf dem Wall. Die auf dem bloßen Nacken eine lange Goldkette zur Schau stellt erfragt vor den Holztürmen und den Delphinsäulen, ob sie den Gastwirt verlassen und den Mantelhändler heiraten soll. (Übersetzung J. Adamietz) Der Besuch beim Astrologen sollte die Entscheidung erleichtern. Mit diesem Partner wechsel konnte für die Frau auch ein sozialer Aufstieg verbunden sein. Immerhin wäre die neue Beziehung eine rechtmäßige Ehe, die Kinder freie Bürger. Auch das Lebensmilieu ist ein anderes. Gaststätten waren Zentren der Prostitution, wohin- gegen die Geschäftsstätten der sagarii an vornehmen Plätzen situiert waren. Ob der Textilhändler und sein Heiratswunsch der Grund für die Trennung vom Gastwirt waren, muss offen bleiben. Die letzte Beziehung kann auch keine Ehe gewesen sein, denn eine solche konnte eine Frau von sich aus nur unter klaren juristischen Vorgaben beenden. Neuere Kommentatoren stießen sich auch an der Tatsache, dass die Frau eine lange Goldkette auf bloßem Nacken zur Schau stellte.16 Dabei ging man soweit, den Vers 589 sogar zu athetieren oder sprachlich zu verändern, ganz nach dem Motto: eine abergläubische Unterschichtenfrau und eine Goldkette passen nicht zusammen. Solche Überlegungen sind völlig unstatthaft. Das Tragen teuren Goldschmucks war gerade in diesen Kreisen durchaus bekannt und die einzige materielle Absicherung der Frau. Der Schmuck könnte auch aus Geschäften der Prostitution stammen, etwa als Lohn für exquisite Liebesdienste. Der Textilhändler konnte ein selbstständiger Unternehmer und Importeur sein, aber auch einfacher Verkäufer in fremdem Auftrag (institor, circitor). Eine viel kleinere Anzahl von Textilhändlern war frei geboren, darunter mehrere Personen in den Provinzen.17 Interessant ist die Tatsache, dass Textilhändler, die das römische Heer belieferten, immer Freie waren. Eine Institution wie das Heer sollte offenbar mit dem Odium der Unfreiheit nicht berührt werden. Zu den bislang bekannten Heereslieferanten aus Mediolanum, Aquileia, Viminacium und Augusta Vindelicum (Augsburg)18 gesellt sich ein epigraphischer Neufund, der 2014 ans Licht kam:19

1 TIB(erio) CL(audio) QVOND(am) VICTORI V[eterano] 2 EX N(umero) EQ(uitum) SING(ularium) NEGOT(iatori) ART(is) VES(tiariae) R[…] 3 VIXIT ANN(os) LXX 4 IVL(ia) IVLIA VXOR CONIVGI PIENT(issimo) 5 F(aciendum) C(uravit) CVM LIBERTIS Dem Tiberius Claudius Victor, ehemals Veteran des Numerus der Gardereiter, Kleiderhändler, er lebte 70 Jahre. Seine Ehefrau Iulia Iulia ließ dem liebevollsten Gatten zusammen mit den Freigelassenen (dieses Grabmal) errichten.

16 Nadeau 2011, 301–302; siehe auch Courtney 1980, 340. 17 Dazu Lega 1994, 760; Orlandi 1994, 764. 18 CIL III 5816; III 13803; V 774; V 5932; vgl. AE 2006, 1827. 19 Die Lesung nach Gairhos 2015, 70–72.

Der Veteran hat sich für seine nachmilitärische Lebensführung ein Geschäftsfeld eröffnet, für das er das vorhandene militärische Netzwerk nutzen konnte. Das rö- mische Heer hatte ständigen und kalkulierbaren Lieferbedarf und war auch ver- lässlicher Zahler. Dabei wurden auch weite Wege nicht gescheut, wie die Texte aus Vindolanda zeigen. Für die fehlende Textpartie in Zeile 2 kann folgende Ergänzung erwogen werden: R[OM], aufzulösen in ROM(anae). Textilhändler haben bisweilen ihre persönliche Herkunft bzw. die Herkunft und Qualität ihrer Ware näher angegeben. Eine Herkunft aus Rom war für feinere Textilien durchaus wahrscheinlich; alternativ könnte man an Textilmode nach römischem Vorbild denken. Nach dem veröffentlichten Foto wäre auch eine Lesung VEST(iariae) denkbar. Nur wenige Sklaven sind im Textilgeschäft bezeugt.20 Sie waren offensichtlich noch zu jung, um freigelassen zu werden.

Konkurrenz Nur wenige Quellen lassen sich für die Frage der Konkurrenz im Textilhandel aus- werten. Der Jurist Scaevola aus der zweiten Hälfte des zweiten Jh. n. Chr. hatte sich mit der Frage zu beschäftigen, ob der Freigelassene eines Textilhändlers in derselben Stadt und sogar am selben Platz gegen den ausdrücklichen Willen des Freilassers sein Textilgeschäft betreiben darf (Dig. 38,1,2,45). Nach Scaevola darf er es, sofern der Patron daraus keinen Schaden erleidet. Einen Gebietsschutz gab es also nicht und dies entsprach auch der antiken Gewerbefreiheit.21 Auch zwischen dem Patron und seinen Freigelassenen musste also Konkurrenz hingenommen werden. Der Newcomer durfte allerdings den angestammten Textilhändler geschäftlich nicht vernichten. Wie dies nachgewiesen werden könnte, bleibt allerdings offen. Reichten dafür Statistiken in den Geschäftsbüchern? Für die Interessen der Kunden war die geschäftliche Konkurrenz am selben Marktplatz natürlich ein Vorteil, da damit Vergleiche bezüglich der Preise und Warenqualität ermöglicht wurden. Der einzelne Händler musste sich jetzt mehr anstrengen, um dem Geschmack der Käufer gerecht zu werden, was durch intensivere Kundenbindung möglich war. Die Aspekte der Konsumenten werden freilich in der juristischen Sachentscheidung nicht angesprochen. Sieht man sich die Konzentration der Textilhändler in Rom an, so war offensichtlich Platz für viele Einzelpersonen und so gut wie fast alle waren Freigelassene anderer Textilhändler. Von Geschäftsauflösungen wegen mangelnder Nachfrage ist uns überhaupt nichts bekannt. Über die Mechanismen der Preisbildung im Textil handel soll eine Textpartie bei Plinius (NH 18,225) den Ausgang bilden:

Servantque id sidus etiam vestis institores, et est in caelo notatu facillimum. ergo ex occasu eius de hieme augurantur quibus est cura insidiandi, negotiatores avari. Ita nu bilo occasu pluviosam hiemem denuntiat, statimque augent lacernarum pretia; sereno asperam, et reliquarum vestium accendunt. Auch die Kleiderverkäufer richten sich nach diesem Sternbild, und dieses lässt sich am Himmel sehr leicht beobachten. Aus dem Untergang (der Plejaden) schlie-

20 CIL VI 9963, VI 37402; Sklavinnen und Sklaven mit der Funktionsbezeichnung vestiaria oder vestiarius waren vornehmlich mit der Kleiderverwaltung des kaiserlichen Haushalts und anderer vornehmer Häuser betraut. 21 Zum Wettbewerb im antiken Geschäftsleben Wacke 1982, 188–215; Kudlien 1994, 1–39.

ßen daher diejenigen auf (die Art) des Winters, die auf ihren Vorteil bedacht sind, nämlich die habsüchtigen Händler. Gehen die Plejaden im Nebel unter, so kündigen sie einen regnerischen Winter an, und sogleich steigen die Preise für die Oberbekleidung; gehen sie aber bei heiterem Wetter unter, so wird der Winter streng, und es steigen (die Preise) für die übrigen Kleider. (Übersetzung R. König) Da diese Textpassage von der Textilforschung bislang nur kurz angesprochen und nie eingehend ausgeleuchtet wurde, sei dies hier vorgestellt. Plinius spart nicht mit bit- teren Vorwürfen an die Textilhändler, die Preise zu Beginn des Winters in die Höhe zu treiben. Warum konnte ein solches Vorgehen erfolgreich sein? Der Autor erklärt das Phänomen nicht mit ökonomischen Erwägungen, nämlich der Preisbildung durch Angebot und Nachfrage, sondern mit einem quasikriminellen Verhalten einer Seite, der Händler. Die römischen Textilhändler konnten in collegia oder corpora zusammengeschlossen sein, und diese Institutionen waren möglicherweise auch die Foren für kollektive Preisabsprachen.22 Die Textilhändler konnten eine prognosti- zierte höhere Nachfrage zu ihren Gunsten ausnützen. Dabei stellt sich eine Reihe von Problemen. Kannten nur die Händler die Wetterprognosen? Dies wird man verneinen können, handelte es sich doch um altbekanntes Allgemeinwissen oder was man dafür hielt. Reagierten alle Textilhändler auf Wettervorhersagen oder nicht vielmehr auf eine tatsächlich gestiegene Nachfrage? Wechseln wir einmal die Seite und nehmen die Konsumenten in den Blick. Auch ihnen musste der jährlich wiederkehrende Prozess witterungsbedingter Preiserhöhungen bekannt sein. Kauften jähr- lich alle Kunden bei spezieller Witterung ganz bestimmte Kleidungsstücke? Nach Plinius gab es nur zwei Alternativen für das Winterwetter in Rom: ein feuchtes, aber wärmeres oder ein trockenes, dafür kaltes. Kennt die Antike für die gesamte Wintersaison nur diese Alternativen? Oder musste man sich nicht vielmehr auf wechselnde Wetterlagen mit beiden Extremen einstellen? Und gab es keine Kleidung für beide Wetterlagen? Wie verfuhr man dann, wenn die Wetterprognosen nicht eintrafen und der Untergang der Plejaden am 11. November als Lostag für den gesamten Winter versagte? Wurden in diesem Fall die Preise wieder nach unten korrigiert? Nach heutigen Erfahrungen würde man einen früheren Ausverkauf zu günstigeren Preisen erwarten. Nicht verkaufte Ware musste sonst auf Lager gelegt werden, und dies verursachte Kosten. Auch die Versorgung der Händler mit einzelnen Kleidungsstücken bleibt ausgeblendet. Ein antizyklisches Kaufverhalten der Kundschaft hätte allen Preismanipulationen die Grundlage entziehen können, aber ist solches für das Altertum bezeugt? Denkt man alle Positionen näher durch, bleiben so manche Fragen offen. Für die Konsumenten waren aber die real gefühlten Wetterlagen und langjährige Erfahrungen bei Kaufentscheidungen maßgeblicher als vage Prognosen. Es bleibt aber die Tatsache bestehen, dass die Preisbildungsprozesse bei Kleidung denjenigen der Getreidepreise entsprachen. Für den Getreidepreis konnte man von einem stabilen Konsumverhalten und Schwankungen des Angebotes ausgehen, bei Textilien war dies genau umgekehrt. Während der antike Staat bei Getreidepreisen massiv eingriff und vor allem gegen Preisabsprachen vorging, sind Eingriffe bei den Textilpreisen nicht erfolgt und eine Stützung aus öffentlichen oder privaten Geldquellen unbekannt. Erst im Preisedikt Kaiser Diokletians finden sich auch Textilpreise im Gesamtpaket alle Güter und Dienstleistungen. Auch

22 Zu Vereinigungen der Textilhändler Liu 2013, 126–141.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Zur Struktur des Textilhandels im Römischen Reich 229 bei dieser Regulierung wird der Vorwurf an die Geldgier der Händler laut, die als Sündenböcke ökonomischer Fehlentwicklungen geortet werden. Da Forschungen zum Konsumverhalten im Altertum noch keineswegs in ausreichendem Umfang betrieben wurden, bleiben hier noch viele Themen für künftige Bemühungen offen und auch der römische Textilhandel ist davon nicht ausgenommen.

Bibliographie Albaladejo Vivero 2013: Albaladejo Vivero, M.: Textile Trade in the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea. In M. Gleba & J. Pásztókai-Szeöke (eds.), Making Textiles in Pre-Roman and Roman Times: People, Places, Identities, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 13), 142–148. Buonopane 2003: Buonopane, A.: Un vestiarius centonarius ad Aquileia: sulla genuinità di CIL V 50, Aquileia nostra 74, 301–314. Courtney 1980: Courtney, E.: A Commentary on the Satires of Juvenal, Berkeley. Dickey 2015: Dickey, E.: The Colloquia of the Hermeneumata Pseudodositheana II, Cambridge. Droß-Krüpe 2013: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Textiles and their Merchants in Rome’s Eastern Trade. In M. Gleba & J. Pásztókai-Szeöke (eds.), Making Textiles in Pre-Roman and Roman Times: People, Places, Identities, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 13), 149–160. Flohr 2014: Flohr, M.: Towards an Economic History of Textile Manufacturing and Trade. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 1–15. Gairhos 2015: Gairhos, S.: Die Grabinschrift des Gardereiters und Kleiderhändlers Tiberius Claudius Victor aus Augsburg-Oberhausen, Das archäologische Jahr in Bayern 2014, 70–72. Grelle & Silvestrini 2001: Grelle, F. & Silvestrini, M.: Lane apule e tessuti canosini. In M. Pani (ed.), Epigrafia e territorio. Politica e società, Bari (Temi di antichità romane 6), 91–136. Grömer 2014: Grömer, K.: Römische Textilien in Noricum und Westpannonien im Kontext der archäologischen Gewebefunde 2000 v. Chr.–500 n. Chr. in Österreich, Graz (Austria Antiqua 5). Jones 1974: Jones, A. H. M.: The Cloth Industry under the Roman Empire. In P. A. Brunt (ed.), The Roman Economy. Studies in Ancient Economic and Administrative History, Oxford, 351–364. Kolendo 1978: Kolendo, J.: Inscription d’un tenuiarius (marchand de vêtements fins) dans une collection polonaise, Études et Travaux 10, 194–202. Kudlien 1994: Kudlien, F.: Die Rolle der Konkurrenz im antiken Geschäftsleben, MBAH 13/1 (1994), 1–39. Lega 1994: Lega, C.: Vestiarii (1). In Epigrafia della produzione e della distribuzione, Collection de l’École française de Rome 193 (1994), 759–762. Larsson Lovén 2013: Larsson Lovén, L.: Female Work and Identity in Roman Textile Production and Trade: A Methodological Discussion. In M. Gleba & J. Pásztókai- Szeöke (eds.), Making Textiles in Pre-Roman and Roman Times: People, Places, Identities, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 13), 109–125. Liu 2009: Liu, J.: Collegia Centonariorum: The Guilds of Textile Dealers in the Roman West, Leiden & Boston 2009. Liu 2013: Liu, J.: Trade, Traders and Guilds (?) in Textiles: the Case of Southern Gaul and Northern Italy (1st–3rd Centuries AD). In M. Gleba & J. Pásztókai-Szeöke (eds.), Making Textiles in Pre-Roman and Roman Times: People, Places, Identities, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 13), 126–141. Mennella 2000: Mennella, G.: Un negotiator vestiarius Cisalpinus et transalpinus a Fara Novarese, Epigraphica 62, 125–135. Meyenburg 2014: Meyenburg, J.: Berufsbezeichnungen von Frauen in kaiserzeitlichen Papyri. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 177–187.

Nadeau 2011: Nadeau, Y.: A Commentary on the Sixth Satire of Juvenal, Leuven (Collection Latomus 329). Olivito 2013: Olivito, R.: Il Foro nell’atrio. Immagini di architetture, scene di vita e di mercato nel fregio dai Praedia di Iulia Felix (Pompei, II, 4,3), Bari. Orlandi 1994: Orlandi, S.: Vestiarii (2). In Epigrafia della produzione e della distribuzione, Collection de l’École française de Rome 193 (1994), 763–766. Pelletier 1996: Pelletier, A.: Aspects de l’artisanat du textile dans le monde mediterraneen (Egypte, Grèce, monte romain), Paris, 133–136. Potthoff 1992: Potthoff, A.: Lateinische Kleidungsbezeichnungen in synchroner und diachroner Sicht, Innsbruck. Ruffing 2008: Ruffing, K.: Die berufliche Spezialisierung in Handel und Handwerk. Unter suchungen zu ihrer Entwicklung und zu ihren Bedingungen in der römischen Kaiserzeit im östlichen Mittelmeerraum auf der Grundlage griechischer Inschriften und Papyri, Rahden/ Westf. (Pharos 24). Vicari 2001: Vicari, F.: Produzione e commercio dei tessuti nell’Occidente romano, Oxford. Wacke 1982: Wacke, A.: Wettbewerbsfreiheit und Konkurrenzverbotsklauseln im antiken und modernen Recht, ZRG 99, 188–215. Wissemann 1984: Wissemann, M.: Die Spezialisierung des römischen Handels, MBAH 3/1, 116–124. Young 2000: Young, A.: Representations of Cloth Vendors and the Cloth Trade on Funerary Reliefs in Roman Gaul and Italy. In D. Cardon & M. Feugère (eds.), Archéologie des textiles des origines au Ve siècle, Actes du collogque de Lattes, oct. 1999, Montagnac (Monographie Instrumentum 14), 215–233.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textile Trade to Palestine in the Roman Period According to the Talmudic Sources and the Textile Finds*

Orit Shamir

Thousands of textiles from the Roman period have been discovered in the Judean Desert (Fig. 1) from Qumran, Masada, ‘En Gedi, the Cave of Letters, Cave of the Treasure, the Christmas Cave, Wadi Murabba‘at, caves around Jericho, such as the Avior Cave, and in the Negev and ‘Arava at sites on the Spice Routes connecting Petra and Gaza: Mo‘a, Sha‘ar Ramon, En Rahel and Qasra. The arid climate in modern southern Israel helped the preservation of these textiles: they allow us to obtain a broad picture of the textile industry in Palestine during the Roman period.

Fig. 1: Map of the Dead Sea and its sourroundings (Credit: S. Shamir)

This article will deal with the place of manufacture of the textiles and the route they took to their new owners. Unlike pottery production centres, textile production centres almost never leave diagnostic debris in the archaeological record. Thus, how can we determine where textiles were made? Textile scholars use the following approaches to answer the question:

1. Places with concentrations of textiles give indications concerning the dominant material, spin direction, weaving techniques, etc. 2. The location of the earliest known examples of a certain kind of technique. 3. Historical sources. 4. Other archaeological finds.

* My thanks are due to Kerstin Droß-Krüpe for the invitation to the conference, and to John- Peter Wild, Peder Flemestad and Marie-Louise Nosch for their editing and comments. All photos except 1, 8 are: Courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority. Photos by Clara Amit.

In this article I will compare the features of these textiles including their materials, spin direction, weaving techniques, dyes and garments to the historical sources such as the Talmudic literature and other ancient written sources.

Talmudic Sources The rabbinic literature of the Mishnaic and Talmudic periods is a summary of the discussions that were held in the different schools batei( midrash), particularly in the period between the 1st and the 5th centuries CE.1 The Mishna served as a textbook in the schools of the Talmudic period, and it played a central role in the determination of laws that were established for subsequent generations. The authors of the Jerusalem Talmud, 3th–4th centuries CE, considered the Mishna to be a textbook, as well as a book of rules. It is not fully edited and is difficult to comprehend. The Babylonian Talmud, 5th century CE, is similar to the Jerusalem Talmud in character, but was written in Babylonia.2 During the Pax Romana in the 1st and 2nd centuries CE, a period of relative peace, the Roman economy thrived and trade routes were established. The Romans built huge, architecturally impressive structures, and made significant advances in infrastructure, e.g. building aqueducts, and road systems. The Romans, in the 1st century BCE, conquered much of the known world, ending the reign of the Greeks, as well as the reign of the Jewish Hasmonean dynasty in Israel who ruled between 140 BCE and 63 BCE.3 From a cultural perspective, the territory of Palestine during the Roman period was part of a Roman Empire.4 Alongside Roman culture, however, there was still Greek influence through Hellenistic culture. The Jewish population lived alongside the Greek population and its effects were evident in all aspects of life.5 In general, during the Second Temple period (the end of 1st century BCE–70 CE), the Jewish economy was almost entirely self-sufficient and there was very little exporting or importing. Imported goods were rare, except for the very rich population, like those who lived in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem, but this is the exception that proves the rule.6 Flavius Josephus (37–100 CE) writes:

Well, ours is not a maritime country, neither commerce nor the intercourse which it promotes with the outside world has any attraction for us (…) there was clearly nothing in ancient times to bring us into contact with the Greeks, as the Egyptians were brought by their exports and imports and the inhabitants of the sea-board of Phoenicia by their mercenary devotion to trade and commerce.7

1 Mishna, 1st–2nd centuries CE, means ‘to learn’, so that mishna means learning the decision or the settlement of a controversy between two sages (rabbis), without justification or explanation. Talmud means ‘study’. The Talmud is a study of the Mishna, an investigation of the rationale and precedents of each decision, a search for parallels and examination of its possible implications. 2 Safrai 1994, 459–462. 3 Safrai 1994, 1–3. 4 Haensch, 2010, 71. 5 Stemberger 2010, 503. 6 Safrai 1994, 222; Shamir 2007, 310. 7 Joseph. Ap. 1, 12, 60–61 English translation by R. Marcus.

Textile Materials Traded during the Roman Period Flax/Linen

Fig. 2: Cave of Letters, child under-tunic, linen, unbleached (IAA No. 1961–1310)

During the 1st century CE Judea provided most of its own textiles, and it may be taken for granted that imported garments and footwear, on the whole, were to supply specialized and fashionable tastes. Some foreign articles were available for those with money to spend; e.g. the fine linens of Pelusium and India worn by the high priests.8 The high priest Rabbi Meir from the st1 century CE on the morning (of the Day of Atonement, in the Jerusalem Temple) put on (a tunic called) Pelusin which cost 1800 zuz, and in the evening, (a tunic called) Hinduin which cost 1200 zuz.9 Pelusium was an important city in the east of Egypt’s Nile Delta and Pliny10 also mentions that linum Pelusiacum was both abundant and of a very fine quality. According to the Talmudic sources, flax as a raw material was imported into Judea from Syria, chiefly in a so-called sabbatical year: the seven-year agricultural cycle was mandated by the bible for the Land of Israel, and is still observed in contemporary Judaism. During a sabbatical year, the land is left to lie fallow and all agricultural activity, including ploughing, planting and harvesting, is forbidden by Jewish law.11 The linen textiles in Israel were usually produced locally. The weave is weft- faced and not very dense as in Egypt, the fibre is less glossy and yellow and less delicate. Linen was an exported crop of Israel until the early Medieval period, when its cultivation had ceased almost entirely in Israel.12 The major exporter was the city of Beth She’an,13 a city in the North District of Israel which played an important historical role due to its geographical location, at the junction of the Jordan River Valley and the Jezreel Valley. In the Hellenistic period, the 3rd century BCE, it was called by the Greeks Scythopolis. The city flourished under the Pax Romana, as

8 Mishnah Yoma 3, 7; Applebaum 1976, 670–671; Sperber 1976, 136. 9 Mishnah Tractate Yoma 3, 7; Babylonian Talmud Yoma 34b; Ben-Yehuda 2014. 10 Plin. HN xix. 1. s. 3. 11 Exodus 23, 10–11; Leviticus 25, 1–7; Tosefta Shebiith 4, 19; Mishnah Shabbath 9, 5; Applebaum 1987, 673–674. 12 Amar, Gorski & Neumman 2010, 25. 13 Clem. Al. Paed. 2, 20, 115.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 234 Orit Shamir evidenced by a high level of urban planning and extensive construction, including a Roman theatre, as well as a hippodrome, a cardo and other trademarks of Roman influence.14 The city grew enormously in the nd2 century CE when the Roman Sixth Legion was stationed in Scythopolis. At the same time the city became one of the textile producing centres of the Roman Empire. The linen from the city was famous. The plant attracted Jewish peasants from the countryside, but Jewish leaders warned against the corrupting influence of life in a Roman city. Nevertheless, Jews kept migrating to the city.15 The Jewish weavers of Beth She’an achieved widespread fame as producers of fine fabrics. The workmanship of the fine linen garments manufactured at Beth She’an was of high quality and the fabrics fitted the skin comfortably. The Talmud refers to the “fine linen vestments which come from Beth She’an” and “that one was hardly conscious of wearing them”16 because they were so light and comfortable. The Romans set a high price on the garments and encouraged the export of Beth She’an’s manufactured products to every corner of the Roman Empire. The Roman emperor Diocletian made an effort to halt inflation by means of strict price controls designed to freeze prices at arbitrarily fixed levels. Nevertheless, in 301 CE he allowed very high prices to be charged for the high-class products of Beth She’an: “Textile goods are divided into three qualities: First, second and third, ‘the statutes provide’. In each group the product of Scythopolis appears in the first class”17 In contrast to Beth She’an’s excellence, the linen garments produced at Arbel (Lower Galilee) were coarse and cheap.18 This was also true regarding Egyptian linen products. It is significant that Clement of Alexandria,19 when accusing the women and men of Egypt of extravagance, claimed that they wear linen garments from the Land of the Hebrews and are no longer content with the coarse home-produced textiles of Egypt.20 This information about linen from the Talmudic sources and Diocletian’s Edict of Maximum Prices is in accordance with the linen textiles discovered in Palestine. The quality of these textiles is generally high and their flax fibre processing is based on thousands of years of experience using tree bast fibres.21 Cultivated flax was already known 10,000 years ago in the Southern Levant. Weaving faults are rare, indicating a long tradition. The linen textiles are sometimes bleached. Bleaching was a long process intended to whiten linen textiles, which are naturally of a grey-brown colour. The textiles were soaked in cleaning and whitening chemicals and were then exposed to the sun for weeks.22 There is no indication of Pelusium’s linen textiles which were probably more delicate, with finer threads and denser and there is no evidence in the archaeological finds for imported linen textiles from Egypt during

14 Tsafrir & Foerster 1997, 85–86. 15 Schaalje 2001. 16 Yerushalmi Ketubot 7, 9, 31c; Kiddushin 2, 5, 62c; Aberbach 1994, 132–133. 17 Ed. Diocl. 26; Aberbach 1994, 132–133; Roussin 1994, 182–183; Shamir 2007, 302. 18 Midrash Rabbah, Genesis 19, 1. 19 Clem. Al. Paed. 2, 20, 115. 20 Allon 1953, 102; Aberbach 1994, 133–134; Safrai 1994, 155–157; Sperber 1976, 133; Shürer 1906, 77. 21 Leuzinger & Rast-Eicher 2011, 535. 22 Forbes 1956, vol. 4, 95.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textile Trade to Palestine in the Roman Period 235 the Roman period or earlier. Hinduin – Indian linen – was probably Z-spun and has not been found in Palestine. Nonetheless, the percentage of linen cloth among thousands of Roman period textiles which have been discovered in this area is low and stands on 23% (1531 out of 6679). Wool was the favourite material, due to its ability to absorb the dyes efficiently. Qumran was the exception: the site of the Dead Sea scrolls has provided 100% linen textiles, which were not made at the site but traded by the Jewish Essenes who wished to differentiate themselves from the rest of the population on the basis of their style of garments.23

Cotton The word cotton kutna( in Hebrew) is not mentioned in the Bible but is mentioned a number of times in rabbinic sources. Judging by the minimal number of references, it would appear that it was not widely cultivated and was of little importance. In the Mishnah cotton is referred to as “wool vine” because the leaves of cotton resemble the leaves of the vine, in Hebrew tsemer gefen and not cutnah.24 According to most commentators, the reference in the Mishna is to cotton.25

Fig. 3: ‘En Boqeq, cotton (IAA No. 1994–9005) When we look at the archaeological finds, cotton textiles were not found in Palestine before the Byzantine period. In Jordan one cotton textile was found at Khirbet Qazone.26 Cotton was imported to Palestine during the Byzantine period but still in small quantities (21 of 274, Table 1): ‘En Boqeq (14),27 Nessana (5),28 Rogem Zafir (1).29 Most pieces are S-spun. In general Z-spun cotton is considered to be of Indian or Yemeni origin30 and S-spun cotton is of Nubian origin. In the late 6th century CE Gregory of Tours, in his book Glory of the Martyrs31 writes with convincing detail

23 Shamir & Sukenik 2011, 206. 24 Mishnah Kilayim 7:2. 25 Hirschberg 1924, 92–95; Safrai 1994, 162 26 Granger-Taylor 2000, 155. 27 Sheffer & Tidhar 1991, 22–23. 28 Bellinger 1962, 91, 98–99. 29 Shamir 2007, 271. 30 Golombeck & Gervers 1977, 83; Mackie 1989, 88. 31 Gregory of Tours Glor. mart. 17; Safrai 1994, 163; Wild 1997, 291; Wild & Wild 2014, 212.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 236 Orit Shamir of cotton growing in the oasis at Jericho.32 Cotton was quite rare in Israel as well as Egypt up to the Umayyad period. After the Arab conquest changes occurred which should be linked to the development of trade with Asiatic centres such as India, China and Persia, where cotton was more common.33 But still cotton fragments have been found at only two sites of the Early Islamic period, at ‘En Yahav (2 out of 57)34 and at Nahal Omer where a proportionally large number of cotton fragments were discovered (153 out of 251 textiles), all imported.35By the 10th century CE cotton was an important agro-industrial product in the economies of Palestine and Syria, and part of the output was diverted to export.36 Cultivation of cotton in this region continued in the Crusader-Ayyubid periods. The Crusader conquest brought a new momentum to the cotton trade between Israel, Syria, and Europe, a process which continued and even intensified in the Mamluk period.37

Site Number of textiles S-spun Z-spun ‘En Boqeq 14 13 1 Nessana 5 2 3 Rogem Zafir 1 1 0 Total 20 16 4

Table 1: Cotton Spin Direction in the Byzantine Period in Israel

Silk Silk is mentioned only once in the bible.38 Silk was not found in the textile repertoire of Roman-Period Palestine, although it is mentioned in the Talmudic sources. The different types of silk are mentioned quite often in the Talmudic literature, but usually as an imported product. Palestine probably took part in the international silk trade. According to the ancient Hebrew sources it would appear that a small amount of silk was also produced in Palestine. The midrash describes silk as being locally produced and secured from Giscala in the Upper Galilee.39 Silk appears to have been woven at Migdal Tzebia and at Sihin in the Galilee, according to a tradition transmitted by Rabbi Johanan (3rd century CE) referring to the period before 70 CE.40 Two sorts of silk are mentioned in the Mishnah.41 Only a few silk textiles were found in Palestine from the Byzantine Period, six from Nessana and one from ‘Avdat, probably imported from Egypt. Silk textiles were still very rare in Palestine during the Early Islamic period and only three have been found, all of them from one site, Nahal Omer (3 of 391) located on the Spice Route between Petra and Gaza.

32 Safrai 1994, 163; Wild 1997, 291; Wild & Wild 2014, 212. 33 ‘Amar 1998, 115; Watson 1983, 31. 34 Shamir 2007, 243; Shamir (forthcoming). 35 Baginski & Shamir 1995, 23; Shamir & Baginski 2014, 67. 36 Al-Muqadassî 160, 180; Ibn Bassâl 115–116. 37 ‘Amar 1998, 115. 38 Ezekiel 16, 10. 39 Midrash Ha-Gadol on Deuteronomy 8, 9; Safrai 1994, 161–162. 40 Yerushalmi Ta’anith IV, 69a. 41 Kilaim 9, 2; Bodenheimer 1951, 17; Applebaum 1976, 682.

Fig. 4: ‘Avdat, silk compound weave, Byzantine period, 6th century CE (IAA No. 1965–1104)

Goat hair Goat-hair textiles were also used in Palestine, but in smaller quantities (58 of 1446) than wool and linen; they were usually used for non-garment textiles. Goat-hair cloth from Cilicia is reported in a Talmudic source42, the so-called cilicium, a coarse cloth made of Cilician goat hair. It is also mentioned by the Acts of Paul,43 160 CE. Paul’s native province of Cilicia was noted for its goats’ hair cloth which was exported under the name of cilicium and was used largely for tent-making. We are told in the passage mentioned that Paul dealt with and worked at tent-making.44 Cilicia is a region, which is known to have exported textiles.45

Fig. 5: ‘En Rahel, goat-hair (IAA No. 1997–9139)

Wool Wool was the most common textile material in the Roman Period in Palestine and makes up some 77% (5148 of 6679) of the total corpus. Most of it is locally produced, except for a few Z-spun textiles and/or twills that are probably imported or brought by the Roman troops and will be discussed below.

42 Mishnah Kelim 29, 1. 43 New Testament Apocrypha, Acts of Paul 18, 3. 44 New Testament Apocrypha, Acts of Paul 20, 34. 45 Flohr 2014, 7.

Fig. 6: The Cave of the Letters, wool, tunic with purple bands (IAA No. 1996–9132)

Mixed Wool and Linen Mixed sheep’s wool and linen – sha’atnez in Hebrew, is very rare in the Land of Israel compared to Egypt and Syria (e.g. Dura Europos and Palmyra). Jewish law forbids sha’atnez – wearing garments of mixed wool and linen. This is mentioned twice in the Bible in Leviticus and in Deuteronomy: “You shall not wear cloth of wool and linen mixed together”.46 The law is strictly observed by the Jewish orthodox even today. The almost complete absence of mixed wool and linen sha’atnez( ) textiles also at non-Jewish sites, except for a Nabatean burial at ‘En Tamar from the Roman Period, suggests that most of the textiles in Israel during the Roman Period were produced by Jews and some were purchased by the non-Jewish population.47

Fig. 7: ‘En Tamar (Nabatean site), Linen decorated with wool bands, sha‘atnez (IAA No. 2003–9038)

The Nabatean Area The Spice Route (Fig. 8) was the main artery which connected the Nabatean capital of Petra in the Edom mountains of present-day Jordan with mercantile outlets on the Mediterranean Sea, notably Gaza and El Arish. It was used from the 3rd century BCE till the early Islamic period, the 8th century CE, when it was abandoned.

46 Deuteronomy 22, 11. 47 Shamir 2014, 302.

The main junctions connected routes from many areas: Egypt and the Medi terranean littoral to the north and west, the Arabian Peninsula, the Persian Gulf and thence to India in the south, and Mesopotamia, Central Asia, and the silk route to China in the northeast. Most of the sites such as Mo’a, Sha’ar Ramon, and ‘En Rahel on these routes connecting Petra and Gaza were used as road stations.48 The Nabateans were middlemen in this venture. They controlled one of the crucial overland passages and could tax merchandise passing through their territory northwards to Syria and westwards to the Mediterranean. They also undertook much of the transport themselves. They overcame the physical difficulties of the region and set up caravanserais, watering points and fortresses.49 The Nabatean kingdom was annexed by the Romans in 106 CE and re-named Provincia Arabia. After this, traffic gradually declined, but still continued till the Early Islamic period. There is a close resemblance between the Nabatean and Jewish textiles (1st–2nd centuries CE), including spin direction, shaded bands and the number of threads per cm. It can be assumed that the Nabateans sold spices to Jews and in return bought textiles. Trade with the East, and particularly with Arabia, had always been very brisk. A great quantity of spices, probably the raw materials for the spice trade in Jerusalem, was brought by the Arabs.50 The Old Testament already speaks of frankincense from Arabia.51 The Talmudic sources state that the incense used in the Temple came chiefly from the desert.52 Cinnamon and cassia53 are mentioned as spices for the Temple, and both grow in tropical or sub-tropical climates.54

Fig. 8: Location of sites along the Spice Route (Shamir and Baginski 1995, 21)

48 Meshel & Tsazfrir 1974; 1975; Cohen 1982. 49 Cohen 1991, 28–30. 50 Ps.-Aristeas 114. 51 Isaiah 60, 6; Jeremiah 6, 20. 52 Jerusalem Talmud 5, 218. 53 Jerusalem Talmud 6, 390. 54 Jeremias 1969, 8, 37.

Spinning Is it possible to find evidence for trade through studying spin direction? Most of the textiles from the Roman period in the Land of Israel are S-spun (spinning counter- clockwise) and are usually considered to have been locally made. S-spin also appears in sewing threads. Z-spun textiles are usually considered to have been imported to Israel. Throughout antiquity, Z-spun woollen textiles were rare both in Palestine (only 4.5% of the corpus) and in Egypt. Z-spun textiles were always common in Syria, Mesopotamia and Iran but it can be assumed that some of them were brought by the Roman soldiers who passed through the sites (and see below).

Weaving Is it possible to find evidence for trade through studying weaving techniques? Plain weave or tabby was the most common weave in all periods. Twills of wool are well suited to outer clothing, being supple and warm,55 as well as tighter and thus more able to withstand wear than tabby.56 Despite the fact that looms capable of weaving twill existed in this period and even earlier, such as the warp-weighted loom, twill has not been found in Israel prior to the Roman period and was presumably not produced there. The Roman period yielded small numbers of twills (32 out of 1635, Table 2) including the Cave of Letters, Masada57 (Fig. 9), Murabba’at,58 Sha’ar Ramon, Mo’a,59 and the Judean Desert caves survey. Most of them are Z-spun balanced 2/2 twill textiles that may derive from Europe,60 apparently from Celtic and Germanic Europe.61

Fig. 9: Masada, twill textile (IAA No. 2014-9151)

55 Bellinger 1962, 92. 56 Vogelsang-Eastwood 1988, 596. 57 Sheffer & Granger-Taylor 1994, 205–211. 58 Crowfoot & Crowfoot 1961, 52. 59 Shamir 2005, 100, 112. 60 Bender-Jørgensen & Vogelsang-Eastwood 1990. 61 Sheffer & Granger-Taylor 1994, 237.

A few of them found at Mo’a and Sha’ar Ramon were probably imported from Europe or brought with Roman troops who passed through the sites. Comparisons between textiles from several Roman sites in Egypt’s Eastern Desert reveal that twills are significantly more common at military sites than at those with major civilian population groups.62

Site Number of Textiles Cave of Letters 1 Masada 13 Murabba’at 6 Judean Desert caves survey 1 Sha’ar Ramon Nabatean site 2 Mo’a Nabatean site 9 SUM 32 Table 2: Twill textiles

Weft-faced Compound Tabby Two weft-faced compound tabby textiles found at Masada from the 1st century CE were probably imported from Egypt. They are of high commercial and social value63 but were not traded in great quantities in Palestine.

Dyes Madder One way to know if the fabric is made locally or imported is through dye identification using HPLC. For example, from the study of Dr. Naama Sukenik on the textile remains from the Cave of Letters most of the textiles were dyed in madder which grew in the country and so they are probably local products. Madder roots in combination with indigotin were used for the production of “fake purple”.64

Kermes Four ‘En Rahel Nabatean textiles provide the first evidence that the rare and expensive oak-kermes scale insect dye was used for ancient textiles in Israel but these textiles were probably imported by the Nabateans.65

Real Purple Although thousands of Roman textiles were found in Palestine, only a few were dyed with real purple and they are only from two sites: Masada and Wadi Murabba’at. Two textiles from Wadi Murabba’at were dyed purple with the Hexaplex trunculus sea mollusc and Armenian cochineal in order to give the textile a reddish purple colour.66

62 Bender-Jørgensen 2004, 71. 63 Vogelsang-Eastwood 1988, 652–653. 64 Sukenik et al. 2014. 65 Koren 1999, 133; Shamir 1999. 66 Sukenik et al. 2014.

Garments The extraordinarily powerful influence of Greece, and of Hellenistic culture in general, on Palestinian trade is clear from the substantial number of loan-words in all sections of everyday life, and especially of trade, which are attested already in the Mishnah.67 Hebrew texts make clear the extent of external influence on clothing: the Tal mud Yerushalmi68 and the Babylonian Talmud69 list eighteen essential garments for men and the terms are almost entirely based on Greek or Latin words:70 Rabbi Jose said: ‘[Only] eighteen garments. And these are the eighteen garments: a cloak, under-tunic, hollow belt, linen [sleeveless] tunic, shirt, felt cap, apron, a pair of trousers, a pair of shoes, a pair of socks, a pair of breeches, the girdle round his loins, the hat on his head and the scarf round his neck.’ Thus, the basic items of clothing worn by Jews did not differ significantly from those worn by other inhabitants of the Graeco-Roman world.71 None of the textiles studied from Jewish sites show specifically Jewish characteristics. Although the basic items of clothing are the same, there are two traditions in Jewish garments that are distinctive: the laws of sha’atnez which were mentioned above and tzitzit – tassels at each corner of the mantle72, but these have not been found in the archaeological record.73 However as we showed most of them were locally produced.

Conclusions Although the Roman Empire traded extensively with the East including in cloth and clothing, for example, from China, India and Parthia,74 the Land of Israel gained little from this trade. Silk and cotton have not been found in the textile repertoire of Roman- period Israel. As we saw, most of the textiles were locally produced in Palestine and the textile industry was a key sector in the country. Few fabrics came from outside the country, and others were probably not commercially traded, but purchased privately by people. It can be assumed that the reason is that most of the raw materials were common in the country. Furthermore, there was already sufficient local knowledge to produce the fabrics, although the Jews did not adopt weaving techniques, such as twill and compound weave from nearby areas such as Egypt and Syria. Possibly, due to religious restrictions, such as sha’atnez, they refrained from trading non-Jewish fabrics for their own use. Although we depend entirely on chance information, the conclusion may be drawn that foreign trade had considerable importance for Jerusalem. The Temple attracted the largest share. For the rest, foreign trade consisted of food supplies, precious metals, luxury goods and a small amount of textiles/fibres.75

67 Jeremias 1969, 23; 35. 68 Shabbath 16, 5. 69 Shabbath 120a. 70 Sheffer & Granger-Taylor 1994, 241. 71 Roussin 1994, 183, 188. 72 Numbers 15, 38; Babylonian Talmud, Menahoth 38–52. 73 Shamir 2014, 303–304. 74 Edwards 1992, 237. 75 Jeremias 1969, 37.

Bibliography Aberbach 1994: Aberbach, M.: Labor, Crafts and Commerce in Ancient Israel, Jerusalem. al-Muqadassî 1906: al-Muqadassî, A. M.: Ahsan al-Taqâsîm fi Ma’rifat al-Âqâlîm. In M. J. De Goeje (eds.), Kitab Ahsan At-Taqasim fi Ma’refat Al-Aqalim, Beirut. Amar 1998: Amar Z.: Written Sources Regarding the Jaziret Fara’un (Coral Island) Textiles, Atiqot 36, 114–119. Amar, Gorski & Neumann 2010: Amar, Z., Gorski A. & Neumman N.: The Paper and Textile Industry in Light of an Analysis of the Cairo Genizah Documents. In B. Outh waite & S. Bhayroed (eds.), From a Sacred Source, Genizah Studies in Honour of Professor Stefan C. Reif, Leiden & Boston, 25–42. Appelbaum 1976: Applebaum, S.: Economic Life in Palestine. In Z. Safrai & M. Stern (eds.), The Jewish People in the First Century. Vol. II, Assen, 631–700. Baginski & Shamir 1995: Baginski, A. & Shamir, O.: Early Islamic Textiles, Basketry and Cordage from Nahal Omer, Atiqot 26, 21–42. Bellinger 1962: Bellinger, L.: Textiles. In H. D. Colt (ed.), Excavations at Nessana, London, 91–105. Ben-Yehuda 2014: Ben-Yehuda, N.: Maimonides Córdoba and Dabiqi. Presentation at Purpureae Vestes IV, https://www.academia.edu/6527376/_Maimonides_C%C3%B3rdoba_and_ Dabiqi_-_Presentation_at_Purpureae_Vestes_V_2014 (accessed June 2016). Bender-Jørgensen & Vogelsang-Eastwood 1990: Bender-Jørgensen, L. & Vogelsang-East wood G.: The Abu Sha’r Textiles, Archaeological Textiles Newsletter 11, 5. Bender-Jørgensen 2004: Bender-Jørgensen, L.: Team Work on Roman Textiles: The Mons Claudianus Textile Project. In C. Alfaro, J. P. Wild & B. Costa (eds.), PurpureaeVestes. Textiles y tintes del Mediterráneo en épocaromana, Valencia, 69–75. Bodenheimer 1951: Bodenheimer, S.: Silk and Silk-Weaving in Palestine, Eretz Israel 1, 17–18. Cohen 1982: Cohen, R.: New Light on the Date of the Petra-Gaza Road, Biblical Archaeologist 45, 240–247. Cohen 1991: Cohen, R.: Ancient Routes From Petra to Gaza in Light of New Findings. In A. Orion & Y. Eni. (eds.), The Spice Route, Sedé Boker, 28–77. (In Hebrew). Crowfoot & Crowfoot 1961: Crowfoot, G. M. & Crowfoot, E.: The Textile and Basketry. In P. Benoit, J. T. Milik & R. De Vaux (eds.), Discoveries in the Judaean Desert II: Les Grottes de Murabba’at, Oxford, 51–63. Edwards 1992: Edwards, D. R.: Dress and Ornamentation. In D. N. Freedman (ed.), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. II., New York, 232–238. Flohr 2014: Flohr M.: Towards an Economic History of Textile Manufacturing and Trade. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Phi lippika 73), 1–16. Forbes 1956: Forbes R. J.: Studies in Ancient Technology IV, Leiden. Golombeck & Gervers 1977: Golombek, L. & Gervers, V.: Tiraz Fabrics in the Royal Ontario Museum. In V. Gervers (ed.), Studies in Textile History, in Memory of H. B. Burnham, Toronto, 82–125. Granger-Taylor 2000: Granger-Taylor H.: The Textiles from Khirbet Qazone (Jordan). In D. Cardon & M. Feugère eds. Archéologie des Textiles des origins au Ve siècle Actes du colloque de Lattes, octobre 1999. Montagnac, 149–162. Granger-Taylor 2000: Granger-Taylor, H.: The Textiles from Khirbet Qazone (Jordan). In D. Cardon & M. Feugère (eds.), Archéologie des Textiles des origins au Vesiècle. Actes du colloque de Lattes, octobre 1999, Montagnac, 149–162. Haensch 2010: Haensch, R.: The Roman Provincial Administration. In C. Hezser (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Daily Life in Roman Palestine, Oxford, 71–84. Hirschberg 1924: Hirschberg, A. S.: Textiles and the Textile Industry, Warschau. Ibn Bassâl 1995: Ibn Bassâl: Libro de Agricultura, tr. and eds. J. M. Millas Vallicrossa & M. Aziman, Tetuan 1955.

Jeremias 1969: Jeremias, J.: Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus: An Investigation Into Economic and Social Conditions During the New Testament Period, Philadelphia. Koren 1999: Koren, Z. C.: Microscopic and Chromatographic Analyses of Decorative Band Colors on Nabatean ‘En Rahel Textiles – Kermes and Shaded Bands, Atiqot 28, 129–136. Leuzinger & Rast-Eicher 2011: Leuzinger, U. & Rast-Eicher, R.: Flax Processing in the Neo lithic and Bronze Age Pile-Dwelling Settlements of Eastern Switzerland, Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 20, 535–542. Mackie 1989: Mackie, L. W.: Textiles. In W. Kubiak & G.T. Scanlon (eds.), Fustat Expedition Final Report, Fustat-C, Vol. II, Cairo. Meshel & Tsazfrir 1974: Meshel, Z. & Tsazfrir, Y.: The Nabataean Road from ‘Avdat to Sha’ar Ramon (Part I), Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement 106, 103–118. Meshel & Tsazfrir 1975: Meshel, Z. & Tsazfrir, Y.: The Nabataean Road From ‘Avdat to Sha’ar Ramon (Part II), Palestine Exploration Fund 107, 3–22. Roussin 1994: Roussin, L. A.: Costume in Roman Palestine: Archaeological Remains and the Evidence from the Mishnah. In J. L. Sebesta & L. Bonfante (eds.), The World of Roman Costume, Madison, 182–190. Safrai 1994: Safrai, Z.: The Economy of Roman Palestine, London. Schaalje 2001: Schaalje J. Beit Shean: Archaeology in Israel, The Jewish Magazin, January 2001, http://www.jewishmag.com/39mag/shean/shean.htm (accessed June 2016). Shamir (forthcoming): Shamir, O.: Textiles From the ‘En Yahav. Shamir & Baginski 2014: Shamir, O. & Baginski, A.: The Earliest CottonIkat Textiles from Nahal ‘Omer Israel 650–810 CE. In M.-L. Nosch, Z. Feng & L. Varadarajan (eds.), Global Textile Encounters, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 20), 65–73. Shamir & Sukenik 2011: Shamir, O. & Sukenik, N.: Qumran Textiles and the Garments of Qumran’s Inhabitants, Dead Sea Discoveries 18, 206–225. Shamir 1999: Shamir, O.: Textiles, Basketry, and Cordage from ‘En Rahel, Atiqot 38, 91–124. Shamir 2005: Shamir, O.: Textiles, Basketry, Cordage and Whorls from Mo’a, Atiqot 50, 99–152. Shamir 2006: Shamir, O.: Textiles, Basketry and Cordage and Fruits from ‘En Tamar: Pre liminary Report. In P. Bienkowski & K. Galor (eds.), Crossing the Rift Valley, Oxford (Levant Supplementary Series 3), 191–194. Shamir 2007: Shamir, O.: Textiles in the Land of Israel from the Roman Period till the Early Islamic Period in the Light of the Archaeological Finds, PhD dissertation, Jerusalem. Shamir 2014: Shamir O.: Two Special Traditions in Jewish Garments and the Rarity of Mixed Wool and Linen Threads in the Land of Israel. In M. Harlow, C. Michel & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Prehistoric, Ancient Near Eastern and Aegean Textiles and Dress: An Interdisciplinary Anthology, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 18), 298–308. Sheffer & Granger-Taylor 1994: Sheffer, A. & Granger-Taylor, H.: Textiles from Masada: A Preliminary Selection. In Y. Aviram, G. Foerster & E. Netzer (eds.), Masada IV, Jerusalem, 153–256. Sheffer & Tidhar 1991: Sheffer, A. & Tidhar, A.: The Textiles from the ‘En-Boqeq Excavation in Israel, Textile History 22, 3–46. Shürer 1906: Shürer, E.: Geschichte des Jüdischen Volkes II, Leipzig. Sperber 1976: Sperber, D.: Objects of Trade between Palestine and Egypt in Roman Times. JESHO 19, 113–147. Stemberger 2010: Stemberger, G.: The Impact of Paganism and Christianity. In C. Hezser (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Daily Life in Roman Palestine, Oxford, 503–520. Sukenik et. al. 2014: Sukenik, N., Iluz, D., Shamir, O., Varvak, A. & Amar, Z.: Purple- Dyed Textiles From Wadi Murabba’at – Historical, Archaeological and Chemical Aspects, ATR 55, 46–54. Tsafrir & Foerster 1997. Tsafrir Y. & Foerster G.: Urbanism at Scythopolis-Bet Shean in the Fourth to Seventh Centuries, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 51, 85–146.

Vogelsang-Eastwood 1988: Vogelsang-Eastwood, G. M.: The Development and Spread of Compound Weave Textiles with Particular Reference to Weft-Faced Compound Weave Textiles in Wool from Egypt, PhD-Thesis Manchester. Watson 1983. Watson A.M. Agricultural Innovation in the Early Islamic World, Cambridge. Wild & Wild 2014: Wild, J. P. & Wild, F. C.: Through Roman Eyes: Cotton Textiles from Early Historic India. In S. Bergerbrant & S. H. Fossøy (eds.), A Stitch in Time: Essays in Honour of Lise Bender Jørgensen, Gothenburg, 209–236. Wild 1997: Wild, J. P.: Cotton in Roman Egypt: Some Problems of Origin, Al-Rafidan 28, 287–298.

Peter Herz

Das große Preisedikt Kaiser Diokletians gehört ohne Zweifel zu den Basistexten der antiken Wirtschaftsgeschichte, obwohl die sachgerechte Kommentierung vieler Partien noch in den Kinderschuhen steckt. Dieses Urteil hat auch für eine Reihe von sprachlichen Phänomenen dieses Quellentextes zu gelten, welche die sachgerechte Bearbeitung nicht gerade einfacher machen. Meine anschließenden Ausführungen verstehen sich daher als kleiner Beitrag, um diesem Zeugnis etwas besser gerecht zu werden. Ich möchte mich dabei auf die Analyse des Kapitels 19 konzentrieren, wo eine Vielzahl an textilen Waren und Handelsgütern vorgestellt wird, die aus dem Grundstoff Wolle gefertigt waren.1 Bei der Rezeption der Forschungsliteratur habe ich mich mit Absicht zurückgehalten, da es meine Absicht war, mich zunächst auf die Text-Analyse im eigentlichen Sinne zu konzentrieren. Eine ausführlichere Kommentierung von Kapitel 19 ist für die Zukunft ins Auge gefasst. Zunächst zu den textilen Produkten, die sich eindeutig einer bestimmten Re gion zuweisen lassen und offensichtlich im ganzen römischen Imperium bekannt und verbreitet waren.

Arabia 19,6 rachana Arabica sive Damascena vel alterius civitatis tincta habita ratione ponderis lanae et plumaturae ditrai debet / ἐνδρομὶς Ἀραβικὴ ἤτοι Δαμασκήνε ἤ ἐτέρας ὁποιασδηποτοῦν βαπτὴ λόγου γενομένου τοῦ λειτρισμοῦ τῆς ἐρέας καὶ τῆς πλουμαρίσεως πιπράσκεσθαι ὀφείλει

Italia2 19,13 [dalmat]icoma[fortium Mutinen]se subsericum clavan[s pur]purae hypoblatt[ae libram u]nam quadraginta qu[attu]or milibus / δελματικομ[άφερτος Μου]τουνή[σιος συνψειρικὸς] 19,21 [chlamys Mutin]ens[is dupl]ex clavans [hapl]iae uncias [-----] X d[----] / [χλαμὺς Μουτουνηςία διπλῆ . 19,22 [--- qualit]ate lana[e ---] et [habita ratione ponderis auri] et plumatur[ae dist]rahi potuerunt / [χλαμὺς ----] 19,23 chlamys Mutin[ensis simplex] clavan[s purpurae ---] unc[ias] quin[que X ---] /

1 Die textliche Grundlage für meine Untersuchungen lieferte Giacchero 1974. Als Kommentare wurden die Arbeiten von Blümner 1902 und Lauffer 1971 herangezogen. 2 Für den gesellschaftlichen Hintergrund dieser italischen Textilproduktion vgl. Alföldy 1999.

19,24 fibulatorium Mu[tinen]se simpl[ex--- clavans purpura]e hapli[ae] unc[ias quattuor --- X ---] / 19,50 burrus Canys[inus optimus --- X quattuor milibus] / βίρρος Κανυσεῖνος κάλλιστος σημιωτός Χ δ‘ 19,64 [paenula Balesina X quattuor milibus] / παίνουλα Βαλυσείνη Χ δ‘

Asia Minor bzw. Laodiceia 19,27 [Fib]ulatoriu[m Laodicen]um clabans purpu[rae ---] primae un[cias qu]attuor / [φιβουλατῶριον Λα]δικηνὸν ἔχ[ον ἱσγ]ίνη[ς ----- οὐ(γκίας) δ‘ 19,30 [tapete Cappa]docicum sive Ponticu[m formae pr]im(ae) X tribus milibus / τάπης Καππαδοκικὸς ἢ Ποντικός Χ γ‘ 19,31 [formae secun]dae [X duobu]s milibus / φώρμης β‘ Χ β‘ 19,37 burrum Laodicen[um X quattuor milibus quingentis] / βίρος Λαδικηνός Χ δφ‘ 19,38 burrum Laodicenum i[n similitudinem Nervii X decem milibus] / βίρρος Λαδικενὸς ἐν ὁμοιότητι Νερβικοῦ Χ Μ α‘ 19,39 asema Laodicena trilex [X duobus milibus] / δελματικὴ ἄσημος Λαδικηνὴ τρίμιτος Χ β‘ 19,40 paracaudae Laodicenae a[ddito pretio purpurae reliqua] inputanda [sunt] / παραγαῦδιν Λαδικηνόν. προστιθεμένης τῆς τειμῆ[ς] τῦς πορφύρας τὰ ὑπό[λ] ο[ι]πα ἐνλογεῖθαι δεῖ 19,45 burrus Taurogastricus X duod[ecim milibus] / βίρρος Ταυρογαστρικός Χ Μ α β‘ 19,49 burrus Meditom[agensis] X sex milibus / βίρρος Μελιτομαγήσιος Χ ς‘ 19,62 [singilio Phrygiacus sive Bessicus X sescentis] / σινγιλίων Φρυγιακὸς ἤτοι Βέσσος Χ χ‘ 19,63 [paenula Ladicena optima X quinque milibus] / παίνουλα Λαδικηνὴ καλλίστη Χ ε‘

Britannia 19,28 [Tap]ete Britannic[u]m primae form[ae X quinqu]e mili[b]us / τάπη[ς Βρετ]α[ννικὸς φώρμης α Χ ε‘]. 19,29 [For]ma[e] secundae [X quattuor] milibus / φώρμης β Χ γ‘.

~~19,48 burrus Britanni[cus] X sex milibus / βίρρος Βρεταννικός Χ ς‘~~

Gallia 19,44 burrus Nerbicus leonin[us optimus] X quin[decim milibus] / βίρρος Νερβικὸς ἢ λεωνεῖνος κάλλιστος Χ [Μ ας ‘] 19,57 [banata Gallica X quindecim milibus] / βάνατα Γαλλική Χ Μ αε‘ 19,58 [fedox Gallicus X octo milibus] / βέδοξ Γαλλικός Χ η‘ 19,60 [singilio Gallicus X mille ducentis quinquaginta] / σινγιλίων Γαλλικός Χ αςν‘ 19,66 [fibulatorium Trevericum X octo milibus] / φιβλατώριον Τρεβερικόν Χ η‘ 19,73 sagum Gallicum, hoc est [Ambianense sive Biturigense X] octo milibus / σάγος Γαλλικός τουτ‘ ἔστιν Ἀνβιανήσιος ἤτοι Βιτουρητικός Χ η‘

Balkan 19,46 burrus Ripensis X octo mili[bus] / βίρρος ‘Ρειπήσιος Χ η‘ 19,47 burrus Noricus X decem milibu[s] / βίρρος Νω[ρικός Χ Μ α‘] 19,52 burrus Argo[licus prim]ae qualitatis X sex mili[b]u[s] / βίρρος Ἀργολικὸς πρῶτος τε κάλλιστος Χ ς|| 19,53 [burrus Achaicus sive Ph]rygiacus optimus X duobus [milibus] / βίρρος Ἀχαικὸς ἤτοι Φρυγιακὸς κάλλιστος Χ β‘ 19,55 [banata Norica duplex --- X vigi]nti milibus / βάνατα Νωρικὴ διπλῆ ἤτοι καταβίων Χ Μ β‘ 19,56 [fedox Noricus optimus ---- X decem mi]libus / βέδοξ Νορικὸς κάλλιστος ἤτοι βῆλου Χ Μ α‘ 19,59 [singilio Noricus X mille quingentis] / σινγιλίων Νωρικός Χ αφ‘ 19,65 [fibulatorium Rhaeticum X duodecim milibus quingentis] / φιβλατώριον ‘Ραιδικᾶνον Χ Μ α βφ‘ 19,67 [fibulatorium Petovionicum X quinque milibus] / φιβλατώριον Πετουβιωνικόν Χ ε‘ 19,69 [chlamys Dardanica duplex optima X duodecim milibus quingentis] / χλαμὺς Δαρδανικὴ διπλῆ καλ(ίστη) Χ Μ α βφ‘

~~19,70 [chlamys Dardanica simplex optima X septem milibus] / χλαμὺς Δαρδανικὴ ἁπλῆ καλ(ίστη) Χ ζ‘~~

~~Aegyptus 19,32 [tapete Aegyptiu]m mill[e septingentis] quinquaginta / τάπης Αιγύπτιος Χ αψν‘~~

Africa3 19,35 [tapete Afrum] X mille q[uingentis] / τάπης Ἄφρος Χ αφ‘ 19,51 burrus Numi[dicus X tribus milibus] / βίρρος Νουμεδικός Χ γ‘ 19,54 [burrus Afer X mille qui]ngentis / βίρος Ἄφρος Χ αφ‘ 19,61 [singilio Numidicus X sescentis] / σινγιλίων Νουμεδικός Χ χ‘ 19,68 [fibulatorium Afrum X duobus milibus] / φιβλατώριον Ἄφρον Χ β‘ 19,72 [sagum A]frum [X quingentis] / σάγος Ἄφρος Χ φ‘

Die beiden folgenden Einträge sind als Sondergruppe anzusehen, da das ‚laodike- nische fibulatorium‘ hier nicht die Herkunft bezeichnet, sondern als Gattungsbegriff zu verstehen ist. Ähnliches hat auch für die Chlamys zu gelten.

19,25 Fibulatorium L[adicenum] simp[lex] ex lan[is Mutinen]sibus et Ladicenis [clavans ut] s(upra) uncias quattuor X [-----]a [------] / φιβουλατώριον Λαδι[κην]ὸν ἁππλῦν ἔχον [ἁ]πλίου οὐ(γκίας) δ Χ Μα β‘ 19,26 Chlamys simplex ex l[anis Muti]nensibus et Ladiceni[s clavans] unc[as ---- X ] quin decim milib[us] / [χλαμὺς ἁ]πλ[ῆ ἐξ ἐρίων Μουτοθνηςίςν καὶ Λα]δ[ι]κηνῶν ἔχουσα] οὐ(γκίας) Χ Μα ε‘].

Wenn man die Verteilung der hier genannten Güter über das gesamte Imperium Romanum betrachtet, dann fallen einige deutlich unterrepräsentierte Regionen ins Auge. Spanien fällt als Lieferant völlig aus, ebenso ist Aegyptus nur durch ein einziges Produkt vertreten, was den übrigen Zeugnissen zur Textilproduktion dieser Groß provinz deutlich widerspricht.4

3 Für die nordafrikanische Textilproduktion als Einstieg geeignet ist Fentress 2015. 4 Vgl. Droß-Krüpe 2011 und auch die ältere Arbeit von Wipszycka 1965. Als lokale Studie ist van Minnen 1986 wertvoll.

In Gallien können wir eine deutliche Differenzierung zwischen Nord- und Süd gallien erkennen. Neben der globalen Bezeichnung ‚Gallicus, -ca‘ haben wir vier Be zeichnungen, die vom Namen einer nordgallischen civitas abgeleitet sind.5 Der hier vermittelte Eindruck widerspricht sogar dem späteren amtlichen Zeug nis der Notitia Dignitatum, denn die kann immerhin für die südgallischen Städte Arles und Lyon procuratores gynaecii benennen.6 Dafür werden wir mit einer ver gleichsweise großen Zahl an regionalen oder sogar lokalen Produktionsstätten auf dem Balkan beschenkt, die von der provincia Raetia im Norden bis zur ripa (Gothica) an der unteren Donau reichen.7 Ähnlich verworren sieht es auch in der großen Region Asia Minor aus. Neben dem großen Produktionsort Laodikeia am Lykos steht ein weiterer Beleg für das untere Tal des Maiandros (19,49).8 Daneben haben wir lediglich vereinzelte Hinweise auf kappadokische bzw. pontische Decken (19,30–31) und den [singilio Phrygiacus sive Bessicus] (19,62). Der ‚burrus Taurogastricus / βίρρος Ταυρογαστρίκος‘ (19,45) ist ein Sonderfall, auf den ich noch gesondert eingehen möchte (s.u.). Zu all den gro- ßen textilproduzierenden Städten Kleinasiens etwa in Bithynien oder an der Küste der Ägäis fehlen weitgehend die Hinweise.9 Auch im syrisch-arabischen Raum sieht es nicht besser aus. Wenn es um Woll produkte geht, haben wir lediglich einen einsamen Hinweis (19,6) auf eine racha na, die aus Damaskus oder einem anderen Ort dieses Gebietes stammen konnte. Ansonsten kennt der Maximaltarif aus diesem wichtigen Gebiet lediglich Leinen produkte, was mit dem spätantiken Produktionsprofil kaum in Einklang zu bringen ist.10 Wir können also als erstes Ergebnis unserer Prüfung festhalten: der Maximaltarif kann zwar wichtige Informationen zur damaligen Textilproduktion liefern, ist allerdings ausgesprochen einseitig, da er wichtige Produktionsgebiete völlig übergeht. Er kann daher nur ein sehr eingeschränktes Bild der damals wirklich vorhandenen Vielfalt der Produkte liefern. Diese seltsame regionale Verteilung der hier erschließbaren Produktionsstätten wird aber meines Erachtens verständlicher, wenn wir erstens die damaligen Haupt residenzen der Tetrarchen und zweitens die Verteilung der wichtigsten Militärein heiten berücksichtigen.11 Bei den Residenzen haben wir die Orte Treveris, Mediolanum, Sirmium, Thessa lonica, Nicomedeia und Antiochia (am Orontes). Wenn man die Konzentrationen des Militärs hinzunimmt, wobei ich hier in erster Linie an die mobilen Einheiten des

5 Zum Einstieg in die Materie geeignet sind Drinkwater 1982, Deniaux 1995, Schwinden 1989. 6 Not. dign. occ. 11, 54–55. 7 Es besteht ein deutliches Forschungsdefizit in diesem Gebiet. Ansätze bei Herz 2011. 8 Wichtig ist Thonemann 2011, 178–202 (The pastoral economy) und 242–294 (The rural economy). 9 Für die Textilproduktion in der Asia Minor wichtig sind Bender-Weber 2013; Drexhage 2007. Daneben sind lesenswert die Beiträge von Harland 2011, sowie Huttner 2008. 10 Für den Einstieg in die Textilwirtschaft dieses Gebietes geeignet sind Saur 2008 und Lom bard 1978. 11 Da die für die Bibliotheca Teubneriana angekündigte Edition immer noch nicht erschienen ist, habe ich die Ausgabe von Neira Faleiro 2005 als Basistext herangezogen.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 252 Peter Herz comitatensischen Heeres denke, dann können wir Schwerpunkte in Nordgallien, in Oberitalien, an der mittleren und unteren Donau, um Nicomedeia und im syrischen Raum um Antiochia erkennen. Zwischen diesen Zentren bewegten sich sowohl die Spitzen der staatlichen Verwaltung mit ihrem jeweiligen Gefolge, aber auch die gro- ßen mobilen Heeresverbände, die von einem militärischen Brennpunkt zum nächs- ten verlegt wurden. Die übrigen Regionen des Reiches wurden in dieser Zeit lediglich bei Unruhen, die nicht mehr mit den lokal vorhandenen Ressourcen zu bewältigen waren, von grö- ßeren Heeresverbänden aufgesucht. Britannien wurde z.B. nur zweimal in 20 Jahren von einem Kaiser betreten: nach dem Ende des britannischen Sonderreiches unter Carausius und Allectus und zu Beginn des 4. Jh. bei der Abwehr von Stämmen im Norden Englands. Dieser spezielle Aufenthalt hat durch das Ableben des amtieren- den Augustus Constantius Chlorus und die anschließende Herrschaftsübernahme seines Sohnes Constantinus welthistorische Bedeutung erlangt. Wenn man die Einleitung des Preisediktes liest, so wird die gesetzgeberische Zielrichtung dieses Ediktes etwas deutlicher. Eines seiner Hauptmotive war der Schutz der Soldaten, die bei einer Verlegung ihres Einsatzortes durch überhöhte Preise für Waren geschröpft wurden, die sie unterwegs auf dem freien Markt zu- kaufen mussten. Und diese Gruppe lässt sich noch unschwer erweitern, wenn man bedenkt, dass auch die Zivilverwaltung damals als militia verstanden wurde.12 Lange Zeit hat man das Preisedikt lediglich unter dem Aspekt der staatlichen Willkür interpretiert, die den Kräften des freien Marktes entgegenwirken wollte. Ich möchte in diesem Fall eine weitere Überlegung einbringen, der vielleicht eine wichtige Nuancierung bewirken kann. Die spätantike Wirtschaft war nach der katastrophalen Geldentwertung des 3. Jh. zumindest partiell wieder zu einer Sachwirtschaft geworden. Besonders deutlich wird dies bei der Versorgung des Militärs, aber auch bei der Besoldung der Ver waltung. Wir finden hier eine Mischung aus Bargeldzahlungen, die durch vom Staat bereitgestellte Sachlieferungen ergänzt wurden. Diese Güter wurden bei den Unter tanen als Sachsteuer eingezogen, die dann über teilweise große Strecken zu ihrem Bestimmungsort transportiert werden mussten. Um die Transportkosten und damit indirekt auch die Belastung für die Bevölkerung zu reduzieren, bestand aber grund- sätzlich die Möglichkeit, die gesetzliche Verpflichtung für eine solche Sachlieferung durch die Zahlung einer Geldsumme, die sogenannte adaeratio, abzulösen. Dies war keine Erfindung der Tetrarchen, sondern dieses System wird bereits in den Verrinen Ciceros beschrieben.13 Damit bekommt das Preisedikt eine zusätzliche Bedeutung, denn es liefert für viele Waren und Dienstleistungen feste Wertangaben, die man bei einer eventuel- len adaeratio einer solchen Sachlieferung heranziehen konnte. Diese Wertangaben schützten also die Zivilisten davor, dass man unter dem Deckmantel einer adaeratio von ihnen überhöhte Geldleistungen einfordern konnte. Als Beispiel für dieses System kann der folgende Papyrus dienen: P. Cair. Isidor 54 (= SB 6/9071; 314 n.Chr., Karanis):

~~12 Für das proemium des Preisediktes und seine ideologische Botschaft vgl. Speidel 2009. 13 Cic. Verr. II 3,191–192.~~

An Antonius Sarapammon, Stratege des Nomos Arsinoitis, von Aurelius Isidoros, Sohn des Palenius, und Aurelius Doulos, Sohn des Timotheos, beide Komarchen des Dorfes Karanis, und Aurelius Isidoros, tesserarius desselben Dorfes.

Wir haben von den Bankiers der öffentlichen Gelder des Gaues, in Übereinstimmung mit deinen Anweisungen, als Preis für die Tuniken und Mäntel, die wir für das 7. und 5. Jahr besorgten und ablieferten, erhalten.

Abgeliefert an Kyrillos und Demeas, die Empfänger: Tuniken 22, jede 4000 Drachmen 14 Tal. 4000 Dr. Mäntel 8, jeder 5000 Drachmen 6 Tal. 4000 Dr. Gesamt 21 Tal. 2000 Dr. Abzug von 6½ % 1 Tal. 2190 Dr. Gesamter Restbetrag 19 Tal. 5810 Dr.

~~Möge die Quittung richtig sein. In Beantwortung der formalen Frage haben wir es bestätigt. Im Jahr nach dem 3. Konsulat unserer Herren Constantinus und Licinius, der Augusti. 20. Tybi = 15. Januar.~~

(2. Hand) Wir – Aurelius Isidoros, Aurelius Doulos und Aurelius Isidoros – haben den oben erwähnten Betrag erhalten. Ich, Aurelius Ision, habe für sie geschrieben, weil sie Analphabeten sind. Diese ‚militärische‘ Komponente des Preisediktes wird noch deutlicher, wenn man die folgenden Angaben aus dem Preisedikt betrachtet, die als Produkt an sich nur für das Militär von Interessesein konnten. Militärstiefel oder für das Militär bestimmte Pferde dürften kaum Waren gewesen sein, die sich auf einem offenen Markt als Produkte gut verkaufen ließen. Dies ist gerade bei den Pferden zu beachten, da in einigen Regionen des Reiches der Besitz oder Gebrauch von Pferden untersagt war, um so die latrones in den Griff zu bekommen.14

Artikel mit einem Bezug zum Militär 9,6 caligae militares sine clabo X centum / καλίκων στρατιωτικῶν ἀνηλώτων Χ ρ‘ 9,11 compagi militares X septuaginta quinque / καμπαγῶνες στρατιοτικοί Χ οε‘ 10,2 scordiscum militarem X quingent[is] / σκορδίσκον στρατιοτικόν Χ [Χ φ‘] 10,8 zona Babulonica X centum / [...... ]υ[...... ] Βαβυλονικός Χ ρ‘ 10,9 item lata [----] X ducentis / [ζ]ώ[νη] Ἀλεξαν[δ]ρ[εινή Χ σ‘ 10,10 subalare Ba[bulonicum] X centum / ὺποπ[...... ] Βαβ[υλονικ]ός [Χ ρ‘]

~~14 Vgl. die kaiserlichen constitutiones CTh 9,30,1 (30.9.364); 9,30,2 (5.10.364); 9,30,3 (21.6.365); 9,30,4 (16.12.365).~~

10,11 zona alba [dig]itorum quattuor X sexaginta / [ζ]ώνη [λευκὴ τεσσαραδακτυλαῖος Χ ξ‘] 10,12 item digi[torum se]x X septuaginta quinque / ζώνη ἑξδακ[τυλι]αῖος [Χ οε‘] 19,1a [----] / χλαμὺς στρατιωτικὴ ἰνδικτιωνάλια καλλίστη 19,2 [----] / στίχη ἰνδικτιωνάλια 19,33 [tapete --- X q]uadrage[ntis] / τάπης καβαλλαρικός 27,8 [----] asema militar[is] una X duobus [milibus quingentis] / στρικτωρία[σ ἀσήμου στρα]τιω[τικῆς /------οὐ]νκίας ς σινγου[λᾶρις Χ βφ‘ 27,9 [---asem]a militaris cu[---]aris una X mille duc[entis quinquaginta] / στρικτωρ[ίας] στρατιωτικῆ<ς> [ὀγ(κίας) ς] ἰσγινο(σήμου) [------]ος α ἔςων ὀγ(κίας) ς σινγουλ (ᾶρις) Χ ασν‘ 27,10 [--- militar]is isginosemae [----]aris una X mi[lle] / [------ἀσήμ]ου στρατιωτικῆς γ ἱσγινο(σήμου) [------] λ (ίτρα) α Χ α‘ 30,1a equus curulis X (centum milibus) / [ἵππος ----- Χ ι Μ] 30,2 equus optimus militaris primae formae X (triginta sex milibus) / [ἵππος κάλλιστος στρατιωτικὸς α φώρ(μης) Χ γ Μ ς‘]

Zwei ausgewählte Begriffe Um die beiden im folgenden Text zu besprechenden Begriffe in ihren richtigen Kontext einzuordnen und zu interpretieren, ist es notwendig, sich zunächst einige Besonderheiten in der Sprache des Preisediktes vor Augen zu halten.15

Sprachliche Besonderheiten ––Verwechselung von ‚u‘ und ‚i‘: 19,51 burrus Numidicus / βίρρος Νουμεδικός ––Verwechselung von ‚v‘ und ‚b‘: 19,38 burrum Laodicenum i[n similitudinem Nervii] / βίρρος Λαδικεν]]ὸς ἐν ὁμοιότετι Νερβικοῦ. Ebenso in 19,8 dalmati comaforium muliebrem ex lanis grossioribus clabans prpurae isgine libr(as) II X CC mit ‚clabans‘ für ‚clavus‘. ––Verwechselung von ‚c‘ [κ] und ‚g‘: 19,40 paracaudae Laodicenae a[ddito pretio purpurae reliqua] / inputanda [sunt] / παραγαῦδιν Λαδικηνόν. Προστιθεμένης τῆς τειμῆ[ς] τῆς πορφύρας τὰ ὑπό[λ]ο[ι]πα ἐνλογεῖθαι δεῖ. ––Schwanken zwischen geminiertem und einfachem Buchstaben: 19,51 (βίρρος) und 19,54 (βίρος).

~~15 Für die sprachlichen Entwicklungen bzw. viele lexikalische Besonderheiten wichtig ist Giacchero 1974 I p. 97–109.~~

––Unterdrückung eines Vokals: 19,37 burrum Laodicen[um] / βίρος Λαδικηνός ἐν ὁμοιότητι Νερβικοῦ. ––Auswirkung der Nasalierung, d.h. Ausfall eines ‚n‘ [ν]: 19,46 burrus Ripensis / βίρρος ‘Ρειπήσιος. 19,49 burrus Meditomagensis / βίρρος Μελιτομαγ(ν)ήσιος. ––Auswirkungen des Itazismus: 19,50 burrus Canys[inus / βίρρος Κανυσεῖνος. Korrekt wäre die Schreibweise ‚Canusinus‘. 19,8 dalmaticomaforium muliebrem ex lanis grossioribus clabans prpurae isgine libr(as) II X CC. Korrekt wäre ‚hysginae‘. Daneben kann man bei diesem Eintrag auch noch erkennen, wie das auslautende ‚ae‘ der frühen Kaiserzeit in dieser Periode bereits zu einem langen ‚e‘ gewandelt wurde. Hinzu kommen Schreibweisen, die man sicherlich auf Lesefehler in der Vorlage zurückführen kann. Dazu gehört sicherlich der ‚burrus Meditom[agensis]‘ (19,49), der wahrscheinlich durch eine Verwechslung von ‚Λ‘ und ‚Δ‘ in einer griechischen Textvorlage entstanden ist, ein Phänomen, das aus der Epigraphik bestens bekannt ist. Korrekt wäre die lateinische Form ‚Miletomag(n)ensis‘. Vor dem Hintergrund dieser sprachlichen Entwicklungen möchte ich jetzt Vorschläge für zwei bisher nichtzufriedenstellend geklärte Herkunftsangaben im Preisedikt machen.

1.) Balesina nach MT 19,64 [paenula Balesina] / παίνουλα Βαλυσείνη Bei diesem Eintrag ist zunächst zu beachten, dass wir gesichert nur auf die griechische Version des Textes zurückgreifen können, während die lateinische Version ‚paenula Balesina‘ von den Editoren lediglich erschlossen wurde. Bei einer sachge- rechten Erklärung des bisher nicht einwandfrei gedeuteten Herkunftsnamen müsste daher zunächst unter sprachlichen Gesichtspunkten beachtet werden, dass in der damaligen Sprache und daher natürlich auch im Maximaltarif sehr oft das anlautende ‚V‘ mit dem Buchstaben ‚B‘ verwechselt wurde. Dieses Phänomen wird durch die entsprechenden epigraphischen Zeugnisse ausreichend gesichert. Es genügt, an den Namen des Kaisers Septimius Severus zu erinnern, der des Öfteren als Septimius Seberus in den Inschriften auftaucht. Man kann also in diesem Fall durchaus eine ursprüngliche lateinische Form ‚* Valesina‘ ansetzen. Da im Maximaltarif aber auch des Öfteren die Doppelung von Konsonanten bzw. die Auswirkungen der Nasalierung unterschlagen wurden, wäre auch durchaus eine ursprüngliche Form wie ‚* Valle(n)sina‘ denkbar. Daher scheint es durchaus möglich, dass wir hier von einem Wort ‚vallis‘ oder ‚Vallensis‘ als Ursprungsform ausgehen können. Die Tatsache, dass die griechische Version an Stelle des ‚e‘ in der erschlossenen lateinischen Fassung ein ‚υ‘ verwendet, lässt sich durch den Einfluss des Itazismus leicht erklären. Es könnten also einige Indizien für die Vermutung sprechen, dass mit dieser ‚* paenula Valle(n)sina‘ ein textiles Produkt aus dem Bereich der südlichen Alpentäler gemeint ist, wobei momentan leider keine weitergehende Spezifikation möglich scheint. Es handelt sich dabei wahrscheinlich um einen einfachen aus Wollstoff gefertigten Kapuzenmantel, bei dem allerdings unklar bleiben muss, durch welche

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 256 Peter Herz konkreten Eigenschaften man ihn von anderen vergleichbaren Produkten unterschieden konnte.16

2.) Taurogastricus nach MT 19,45 ‚burrus Taurogastricus‘ Ebenfalls nicht leicht zu deuten ist die Herkunftsangabe ‚Taurogastricus‘, die insgesamt zweimal im Preisedikt erwähnt wird. Zunächst finden wir diesen Begriff bei der Auflistung der Textilien in MT 19,45 als ‚burrus Taurogast(e)ricus / βίρρος Ταυρογαστρικός‘. Daneben taucht dieser Begriff auch noch in MT 22,23 bei den Lohnangaben für die fullones auf. Dort wird gemeldet: ‚[in byrro Ripensi sive Taurog]asterico rude X (trecentis) / βίρρου Ρειπηςίου ἢ Ταυρογαστρικοῦ καινοῦ Χ τ‘. Hugo Blümner vermutete seinerzeit in seinem Kommentar zum Preisedikt, daß es sich bei diesem enigmatischen Begriff um einen verdorbenen Völkernamen handeln könne. Dieser interessante Vorschlag hat sich aber nicht durchsetzen können.17 Da wir aber in der Schreibweise der Ortsnamen, die im Maximaltarif aufgeführt werden und die eindeutig zu identifizieren sind, noch ganz deutlich die Einflüsse der sprachlichen Fortentwicklung sowohl der griechischen als auch der lateinischen Sprache erkennen können, sollte man methodisch auch in diesem speziellen Fall an diesem Punkt ansetzen. Daher sollte man m.E. in einem ersten Schritt den Begriff Taurogastricus‚ ‘ in seine verschiedenen Bestandteile aufteilen. Dabei möchte ich den ersten Bestandteil ‚tauro-‘ nicht auf einen ‚taurus‘, also auf einen ‚Stier‘, beziehen, sondern als geogra- phischen Hinweis auf das Taurus-Gebirge in Kilikien verstehen. Danach verbleibt uns noch der zweite Teil dieses Namens. Für diesen können wir zunächst feststellen, daß er wie ein griechisches Adjektiv ‚* -γαστρικός‘ gebildet ist. Dabei könnte eine solche Bildung mit der Endung ‚-ικός‘ auf eine Ableitung von einem ursprünglichen Substantiv hindeuten. In einem zweiten Schritt dürfen wir für das hier zu vermutende Ausgangssubstantiv wahrscheinlich einen Wortstamm der Form ‚* -γαστρ-‚ ansetzen. In der sprachlichen Entwicklung dieser Zeit würde aber eine Vertauschung eines anlautenden Konsonanten ‚Gamma‘ mit einem ‚Kappa‘ eine durchaus attraktive Möglichkeit liefern. Ein sehr schönes Beispiel für dieses Phänomen liefert der Papyrus P.Grenf. I 49 mit der Form ‚γυβερνήτης‘ für das korrekte ‚κυβερνήτης‘. Die Annahme einer solchen Vertauschung könnte dann eventuell zu einer ursprünglichen griechischen Wortform ‚* ταυροκαστρικός‘ und einer danach zu erschließenden lateinischen Form ‚* taurocastricus‘ = ‚aus den castra des Taurus‘ führen. Mit diesen castra des Taurus wären dann die schwer zugänglichen befestigten Bergsiedlungen der ein heimischen isaurischen Bevölkerung gemeint.18 Als Parallele für eine solche Bildung eines Herkunftsnamens, bei dem zwei geo- graphische Begriffe in einem einzigen neuen Wort zusammengezogen wurden, kann man z.B. auf den marmor Potamogallenos verweisen, also den Marmor vom Fluss

16 Für die Wirtschaft in den Alpentälern wichtig ist Walser 1994, der auch auf wichtige Familien hinwies, die in der Vereinigung der negotiatores transalpini et cisalpini aktiv waren. 17 Blümner 1902, 153. 18 Zur allgemeinen Information zu verwenden ist Feld 2005, der aber nicht auf die wirtschaftlichen Verhältnisse in diesem Gebiet eingeht. Für die ländlichen Strukturen in einem Teilbereich nützlich ist Varinlioglu 2013, obwohl die Ergebnisse für die Wirtschaft eher enttäuschend sind.

(potamos) Gallos in Bithynien (31,19). Auch die Form ‚Miletomagnensis‘ (19,49), die sich aus den Ortsnamen ‚Miletos‘ und ‚Magnesia‘ zusammensetzt, kann hier als Beispiel herangezogen werden. In der Kombination mit der Qualitätsbezeichnung ‚rudis/rude‘ könnte dies einen einfachen und robusten burrus bezeichnen, der in den castra, also den befestigten Bergsiedlungen des Taurus-Gebirges, von den dort lebenden einheimischen Bauern und Hirten hergestellt wurde. Dabei lässt sich nicht endgültig entscheiden, ob in diesen castra lediglich der textile Rohstoff, also die eigentlichen Tücher, produziert wurden oder ob die dort lebende Bevölkerung auch für die Herstellung des Endproduktes verantwortlich war.19 Sollte man diese 1. Variante bevorzugen, also nur die Herstellung der Tücher, dann könnte man ohne Probleme an eine Herstellung des Endproduktes in den Werkstätten der größeren Städte entlang der kilikischen Küste denken. Ob bei diesem hier verwendeten Grundstoff eine Beziehung zu den bekannten ‚cilicia‘ bestand, also zu den vorwiegend aus Ziegenhaaren gefertigten Decken aus dieser Region, vermag ich nicht zu entscheiden. Es zeigt sich auch an diesem kleinen Detailproblem, dass der Weg zu einem besseren Verständnis des diokletianischen Höchstpreis-Ediktes nur über die geduldige Interpretation der Einzeleinträge führen kann.

Bibliographie Alföldy 1999: Alföldy, G.: Die Eliten im römischen Norditalien. In G. Alföldy, Städte, Eliten und Gesellschaft in Gallia Cisalpina. Epigraphisch-historische Untersuchungen, Stuttgart (HABES 30), 257–341. Bender-Weber 2013: Bender-Weber, I.: Textile Production Centers, Products and Merchants in the Roman Province of Asia. In M. Gleba & J. Pásztókai-Szeöke (eds.), Making Textiles in pre-Roman and Roman Times: People, Places, Identities, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 13), 171–191. Blümner 1902: Blümner, H.: Der Maximaltarif des Diocletian, Berlin. Deniaux 1995: Deniaux, E.: L’artisanat du textile en Gaule. Remarque sur quelques inscriptions, Cahier du Centre Gustave Glotz 6, 195–206. Drexhage 2007: Drexhage, H.-W.: Wirtschaftspolitik und Wirtschaft in der römischen Provinz Asia von Augustus bis zum Regierungsantritt Diocletians, Bonn (Asia Minor Studien 59). Drinkwater 1982: Drinkwater, J. F.: The Wool Textile Industry of Gallia Belgica and the Secundinii of Igel. Questions and Hypotheses, Textile History 13/1, 111–128. Droß-Krüpe 2011: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Wolle – Weber – Wirtschaft. Die Textilproduktion der römischen Kaiserzeit im Spiegel der payrologischen Überlieferung, Wiesbaden (Philippika 46). Feld 2005: Feld, K.: Barbarische Bürger. Die Isaurier und das römische Reich, Berlin & New York. Fentress 2015: Fentress, E.: Diana Veteranorum und the Dynamic of an Inland Economy. In L. Lavan (ed.), Local Economies. Production and Exchange of Inland Regions in Late Antiquity, Leiden & Boston (Late Antique Archaeology), 315–342. Fink 1971: Fink, R. O.: Roman Military Records on Papyrus, Cleveland. Giacchero 1974: Giacchero, M.: Edictum Diocletiani et collegarum de pretiis rerum venalium in integris fere restitutum a Latinis Graecisque fragmentis, Genova.

~~19 Wichtig für die sozialen Strukturen, unter denen die Hirtenwirtschaft des Taurus-Gebietes existieren konnte, sind die Ausführungen von Hopwood 1999, der leider nur wenig rezipiert wurde.~~

Harland 2011: Harland, Ph.: Acculturation and Identity in the Diaspora. A Jewish Family and ‘Pagan’ Guilds at Hierapolis. In J. A. North & S. R. F. Price (eds.), The Religious History of the Roman Empire. Pagans, Jews and Christians, Oxford, 385–418. Herz 2011: Herz, P.: Textilien vom nördlichen Balkan. Zur Wirtschaft der römischen Pro vinzen Raetia und Noricum. In P. Herz, P. Schmid & O. Stoll (eds.), Handel, Kultur und Militär. Die Wirtschaft des Alpen-Donau-Adria-Raumes, Berlin (Region im Umbruch 4), 61–78. Hopwood 1999: Hopwood, K.: Bandits between Grandees and the State. The Structure of Order in Roman Rough Cilicia. In K. Hopwood (ed.), Organised Crime in Antiquity, London, 177–206. Huttner 2008: Huttner, U.: Die Färber von Laodikeia und Hierapolis. Eine Nachricht aus dem Corpus der Alchemisten, MBAH 26, 139–157. Lauffer 1971: Lauffer, S.:Diokletians Preisedikt, Berlin (Texte und Kommentare 5). Lombard 1978: Lombard, M.: Les textiles dans le monde musulmane. VIIe–XIIe siècle, Paris et al. (Civilisations et Sociétés 61). Neira Faleiro 2005: Neira Faleiro, C.: La Notitia Dignitatum. Nueva edición critica y comen tario histórico, Madrid (Nueva Roma 25). Saur 2008: Saur, M.: Der Tyroszyklos des Ezechielbuches, Berlin (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für alttestamentliche Wissenschaft). Schwinden 1989: Schwinden, L.: Gallo-römisches Textilgewerbe nach den Denkmälern aus Trier und dem Trevererland, Trierer Zeitschrift 52, 279–318. Speidel 2009: Speidel, M. A.: Wirtschaft und Moral im Urteil Diokletians. Zu den kaiserlichen Argumenten für Höchstpreise, Historia 58, 486–505. Thonemann 2011: Thonemann, P.:The Maeander Valley. A Historical Geography from Anti quity to Byzantium, Cambridge. van Minnen 1986: van Minnen, P.: The Volume of the Oxyrhynchite Textile Trade, MBAH 5/2, 88–95. Varinlioglu 2013: Varinlioglu, G.: Rural Habitat in the Hinterland of Seleucia ad calycad- num during Late Antiquity. In M. C. Hoff & R. F. Townsend (eds.), Rough Cilicia. New Historical and Archaeological Approaches. Proceedings of an International Conference Held at Lincoln, Nebraska, October 2007, Oxford, 199–209. Walser 1994: Walser, G.: Studien zur Alpengeschichte in antiker Zeit, Stuttgart (Historia Ein zelschrift 86). Wipszycka 1965: Wipszycka, E.: L’industrie textile dans l’Egypte romaine, Breslau et al.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 How to Order a Textile in Ancient Times The Step before Distribution and Trade*

~~Ines Bogensperger~~

Ordering Textiles: An Almost Invisible Stage Before textiles became goods in trade and distribution, before they were even produced in different workshops, textiles – like any other goods – needed to be ordered first. Today, textiles are generally available in abundance and sold in finished condition (‘prêt-à-porter’). Customers can chose from standardized sizes for garments and household textiles, being worn or used without any major alteration, and from colours as well as designs following prevailing fashion trends. In pursuing the question of ordering textiles in Antiquity, we enter a hitherto unseen moment in the ancient textile industry, before the goods were distributed and traded. Placing orders is a vital process before distribution and trade. This is a moment when we learn about customers’ behaviour, unseen and almost invisible; because for this stage, there is very little evidence preserved from historic times. In Antiquity, ordering additionally involved planning the production and design of the textiles, as textiles were often made bespoke instead of ready-to-wear. Ordering, planning and designing are activities that took place in a close and in- teractive exchange between weaver and consumer, craftsman and buyer. It appears likely that communication was basically done orally, and even if some ideas were written down, they were modifiable by nature and had a relatively short life span, as ideas of buyers were changing and options by craftsmen limited to a certain extent. That is mainly why this phase of textile production is hard to capture in historical documentation. The only evidence we have from ancient times is the final product preserved as a textile and, occasionally, written sources. But before those final products were made, consumers needed to order textiles and design them. It is during this stage when we find two parties involved: client and craftsman. Papyri, ostraca and parchments preserved in the arid climate of Egypt provide us with indispensable information on everyday life issues. Through these texts, categorized as ‘documentary’ texts as they do not contain literature, we encounter persons and their personal needs, which are otherwise lost. This is the reason why the scholarly field of papyrology yields unique evidence for our historical understanding. The focus of this paper is set on Greek papyri, mainly dating to the first four centuries CE. All texts presented in the present paper, in particular terms for textiles, were checked for correct translation using relevant electronic papyrological tools and databases, lexica as well as papyrological bibliography.1 Some additional written

* I would like to thank my colleagues Katerina Koroli and Helga Rösel-Mautendorfer for many discussions. Furthermore, I am grateful to Bernhard Palme, Hans Förster and Thomas Kruse for their constant support as well as to Kerstin Droß-Krüpe and Marie-Louise Nosch for inviting me to this inspiring conference. I owe my thanks to Cheri Hunter, who has corrected my English. All remaining errors are my own. 1 All papyrological editions as well as corresponding literature for papyri, ostraca and tablets are listed in the ‘Checklist of Editions’ which is available online: http://library. duke.edu/rubenstein/scriptorium/papyrus/texts/clist_papyri.html. Since 1932 bibliogra-

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 260 Ines Bogensperger sources were included, as they seem to be essential for the topic. In the case of Egypt not only texts, but also textiles have been preserved. Both fields of research, papyrology and textile research are considered and mutually complemented by one another. In this paper, some important aspects of ordering are investigated, issues that had to be agreed upon in advance and suiting all parties involved. Although we are never able to reconstruct the whole story in all its details, we are confronted with some personal demands and needs.

Ordering Textiles in Documentary Papyri In less literate societies, ordering goods, including the process of planning and designing, were presumably based on oral agreements. Under certain circumstances, orders needed to be placed in writing, especially when one party was not at the same place or when necessary resources were not available locally. Various goods needed in the household were ordered with the help of other private persons, even designa ted as friends (philoi), with clear instructions for the required quantity.2 If no ‘friend’ (intermediary) was available, orders and deliveries ran the risk of being postponed.3 Ordering textiles means to decide on features according to one’s budget and one’s need. In documentary papyri from ancient Egypt, the following issues may be encountered.

Size Matters: The Perfect Fit Compared to modern times, precise measurement and exact size played a minor role due to less focus on body shaped cuts of garments. However, size mattered when it came to adults or children, as we might see in the request for a λ[.].νον τέλειον α in P.Oxy. XLII 3080.34, where a probably Laodicean garment for an adult is ordered. Furthermore, we find a clear instruction to send measurements to weave a particular chiton in the postscript of a business letter from the 2nd century CE:5 In a hurry I did not find the cotton chiton as I should have liked. If you want to have one woven for you here [i.e. in the Small Oasis], send warp threads and the

phy concerning papyrology has been collected in the Bibliographie Papyrologique (BP). Today it can be accessed in an electronic database that unites furthermore data from the Advanced Papyrological Information System (APIS), the Duke Databank of Documentary Papyri (DDbDP), the Heidelberger Gesamtverzeichnis der griechischen Papyrusurkunden Ägyptens (HGV): http://www.papyri.info. As an interdisciplinary portal between papyrology and epigraphy Trismegistos incorporates additional resources on the ancient world: http://www.trismegistos.org. Besides many collections offer their own databases that are open access, like the Department of Papyri in Vienna: http://www.onb.ac.at/ev/collections/ papyrus.htm (all accessed June 2016). 2 Cf. P.Oxy. XLII 3080, where a specific type of garment and dyestuff were ordered together with other goods. 3 Cf. P.Tebt. II 413.14–16. For the general use of intermediaries in the exchange of goods see Droß-Krüpe 2014. Regarding the role of ‘friends’ or social dependants as economic institution of the ancient world refer e.g. to Frier & Kehoe 2007 or Verboven 2002. 4 2nd century CE with BL VIII, 265. 5 SB VI 9025.31–32.

measurements (οὐχ εὗρον τὸν χιτῶνα τὸν ἐρε ̣ό ̣ξυλον ῆς ἤθελον. εἰ δὲ θέλεις ὑφανθῆναί σοι ἐνθάδε, πέμψον στήμονα καὶ τὰ μέτρα.).6 That the Greek term metron was used to indicate the size of clothes, is seen in other documentary papyri.7 Despite fewer body-shaped cuts, size and measure still had to be considered to a certain extent whilst ordering.

What to Wear: Choosing the Right Material The previous letter shows the trouble it took to find chitona made of cotton, which, when impossible to buy ready-made, had to be custom-woven.8 Why cotton as material was searched for in particular, is not explained. In another business letter from the same time, (spun) cotton threads of excellent quality are urgently ordered, because cotton chitons are needed as outer garments for work in the fields:9 By all means send me by this load twenty drachmai’s worth of excellent cotton thread. See that you do not neglect it, since your brothers have no outer garments, now that their cotton ones are worn out, and they need them, as you know, in- asmuch as they spend all their time in the field πά[ν]τῃ( πάντως μοι πέμψῃς τῷ ἀγωγίῳ τούτῳ ἐριοξύλου δραχμὰς εἴκοσι σπουδαίας κρόκης. ἀλλ’ ὅρα μὴ ἀμελήσῃς ἐπεὶ οἱ ἀδελφοί σου ἐπενδύτην οὐκ ἔχουσι ἐκτριβέντων τῶν ἐριοξύλων αὐτῶν, καὶ χρείαν ἔχουσι ὡς οἶδας καθὰ πάντοτε ἐν ἀγρῷ διατρείβουσι [l. διατρίβουσι].).10

Both documents must not mislead us into taking cotton for a commonly used fibre in Antiquity. Cotton textiles have been found on the Red Sea Coast (Berenike and Myos Hormos), in the Oases of Egypt’s Western desert (Dakhleh and Kharga), and in Nubia (Qasr Ibrim and Gebel Adda), but were less common in the Nile Valley, where cotton was not cultivated from the beginning.11 Speaking in general, preserved textiles from ancient and late antique Egypt primarily show the use of linen and wool, both materials being appreciated for their special qualities. In papyrus documents, we find that wool fleeces were ordered before the winter season.12 If sheep fleeces were not available, possibly due to high demand, an alternative was to provide any sort of wool. With regard to the wool: You would do well to send us quickly two sheep fleeces, so that they are here for the winter. If that is not possible, then send us whatever fleeces you have καὶ( τὰ ἐρίδια· εὖ καλῶς ποιήσας β ταχύτερον πέμψον ἵν’ ἔῃ εἰς τὸν χειμῶνα· ̓ὰ ἐὰν οὐ μή <ἐρίδια ἔχῃς>, καὶ ἃ πόκια <ἔχῃς> παρακληθεὶς πέμψọ.).13

6 English translation based on Bagnall 2008, 27. 7 E.g. P.Oxy. LIV 3776.15–16; P.Oxy. LI 3626.17–18; P.Tebt. II 414.26–28. 8 Cf. Droß-Krüpe 2011, 171–175. 9 SB VI 9026.10 –15. 10 English translation based on Bagnall & Cribiore 2006, 356. 11 For further reading see e.g. Wild et al. 1998; Wild et al. 2008a; Wild et al. 2008b; Wipszycka 1965, 39–42 and Droß-Krüpe 2011, 22–23. 12 BGU XVI 2622.19–22, 21 BCE–5 CE. 13 Translation based on the editio princeps.

Even in Egypt, the winter season required protection against cold. Unfortunately, the letter does not give any concrete dates, which would allow us to calculate the time span to send the raw material and finish the garments. In any case, the in-time delivery is crucial to textile production for all orders. Then and now, time played an essential factor. In the previous case, whole fleeces were ordered, that is, wool more or less in its state as raw material, although we should not exclude any form of pre-treatment, for instance washing. Apart from numbers of fleeces, wool was also ordered according to its weight and its value in money, as we can find in the following lines:14 [...] so that you would please purchase in advance (?) wool for the value of one tremis for me. And when the lady Patricia needed a solidus’ worth of wool [...] ([…] ἵνα παρακλιθὴς [l. παρακληθεὶς] [προαγορά]σις [l. [προσαγορά]σῃς] μοι ἑνὸς τριμησίου καὶ χρηζομένης τῆς κυρας [l. κυρίας] Πατρικείας ἑνὸς τριμησίου ἑνὸς ὁλοκοττίνου ἐρεον [l. ἔριον] [...]).15

Colours of the Season In view of numerous textiles preserved from late antique Egypt, colours certainly played an essential role for their wearers and owners. Professional dyers possessed profound skill and knowledge in using natural dyestuffs. Dyeing workshops needed not only to provide dyestuffs, but also additional chemicals for dyeing, like mordants that had to be transported from mineral deposits.16 Dye plants need some time to grow for producing sufficient dyestuff, as it is the case with madder.17 Therefore, orders for dyeing triggered additional requirements, i.e. in sourcing and transport from different locations. Apart from resources, colours are linked with personal taste. This matter of subjective aesthetics is seen in a letter, where a wife asks her husband about his preferred colour in order to make cloth for him. She even suggests that he send a little bit of wool as an example or reference, something we denote as a ‘sample’ today:18 I will be working at the wool as you wrote [...] tell me by letter, which colour pleases you or send me a little bit of wool [a small sample] (ἐργά[σο]αι τὰ ἔρι [καθὰ] ̣ἔγρα[ψάς μοι ὁποῖον δέ σοι χρῶ̣[μ]α ἀρέσ [δήλω]σον ἰἐ̣π[ισ]ολῆς ἢ μεικρὸν ἔρ[ιο]ν19 αὐτοῦ π[έμψο]ν.).20

14 SB XIV 11492.1–3, 6th century CE. 15 Translation from Bagnall & Cribiore 2006, 233. 16 Like alum, that was obtained from the Great and Small Oases in Egypt’s Western Desert; see Kruse 2007 and Bogensperger (forthcoming). On dyes and mordants refer further to Herz 2012; additionally see Flohr 2013. 17 Actually, many contrary views can be found, when madder roots should be harvested. Often a three years growth is considered to be optimal, see Schweppe 1993, 670; Chenciner 2000, 100–101. 18 P.Giss. Apoll. 11.14–16 (= P.Giss. I 20.14–16 = W.Chr. 94.14–16). 19 Instead of ἔρ[γο]ν, as suggested by Ulrich Wilcken and Ernst Kornemann (see P.Giss. I 20), I prefer to amend the text with ‘wool’ which is already found in the English translation by Bagnall & Cribiore 2006. 20 Translation based on Bagnall & Cribiore 2006, 152.

The same solution to specify the desired colour is found inP.Oxy. VIII 1153.18–25 from the same time, which tempts us to regard the use of colour samples as a common practice: [...] If I can buy an abolla for you privately, I will send it at once; if not, I will have it made for you at home. The lodices have been cut out; the account of them, as you write, shall be sent by Diogas to Nikanor through Heraklas. A pattern of the colour for the set of garments, that is being made, is enclosed in this letter; give it to Nikanor to look at, in order that, if he likes it, he may write to us [...] (ἀβόλλην σοι ἐὰν εὕρω ἀγοράσαι ἰδιωτικ[ῶς] ἐν τάχει πέμψω, ἐὰν \δὲ/ μή, ἐν οἴκῳ σοι καταρτιμαι [l. καταρτιοῦμαι]. αἱ λώδικες ἐξεταμήθησαν, ὁ δὲ λόγος αὐτῶν, <ὡς> γράφεις, ὑπὸ Διογᾶτος πεμφθήσεται Νικάνορι δι[ὰ] Ἡρακλᾶτος. τῆς γινομέ[νης] συνθέσεως τὸ πρόσχρωμον ἐνείλικται τῇδε τῇ ἐπιστολῇ, ὃ δώσεις τῷ Νικάνορι [κατα]μαθεῖν, ἵν’, ἐὰν αὐτῷ ἀρέσκῃ, γράψῃ ἡμ[ῖν]).21

In this private letter different textile goods are discussed: an abolla, a cloak, which will be either bought or specially made at home for the addressee; further lodices, bedding, that is to say household textiles, that are almost finished; and one final concern applies to the colour of a synthesis being made, which means a set of garments, probably consisting of mantle and tunic. For this, a proschromon has been included in the letter in order to ask the customer if it pleases his taste. Again, it is the personal taste, a question of aesthetics, that mattered.

Fig. 1: Wool dyed with the same dyestuff, but because of different dyeing recipes and types of wool used, diverse colour shades were obtained The use of a colour sample is seen, once again, a bit differently inP.Oxy. I 113.4–9, a letter from the second century CE, where a sample should serve as a reference to purchase dyed wool of the desired colour. For dyeing with natural colours, not only the dyestuff is sufficient to know and order, but also the dyeing recipe and material which will influence the shade of the respective colour (Fig. 1). In addition, the customer puts on some time pressure to start weaving the garment:

~~21 Translation based on the editio princeps.~~

I have enclosed in the former letter a pattern of the colour white-violet. I beg you to be good enough to buy me two drachmas’ weight according to it, and send it to me at once by anyone that you find, because the chiton is about to be woven συνήλλιξα( [l. συνήλιξα] ἐκείνῃ τῆι ἐπιστολῇ δεῖγμα λευκόινα [l. λευκόινον]·πρὸς αὐτό μοι οὖν ἐρωτηθεὶς εὖ ποιήσεις ἀγοράσεις μοι [δραχμὰς] β, καὶ ταχύ μοι πέμψον δι’ οὗ ἐὰν εὕρῃς, ἐπεὶ ὁ κιτὼν [l. χιτὼν] ὑφανθῆναι μέλλει.). That we are not limited to Roman Egypt as a place and time for employing samples may be seen in the Latin treatise on rhetoric called Rhetorica Ad Herennium from the 1st century BC.22 The Latin term exemplum is used, meaning an example for viewing purposes:23 Above all, an example which is cited by a writer on an art should be proof of his own skill in that art. It is as if a merchant selling purple or some other commodity should say: ‘Buy of me, but I shall borrow from someone else a sample of this to show you.’ (Primum omnium, quod ab artis scriptore adfertur exemplum id eius ar tificii debet esse. Ut si quis purpuram aut aliud quippiam vendens dicat: “Sume a me, sed huius exemplum aliunde rogabo tibi quod ostendam.”).24

Although the anonymous author is interested in rhetorical studies, he gives us an insight into sellers’ practises and confirms the use of samples for dyed wool and other goods to secure the customer’s order outside of Egypt. Finding this habit in a Latin textbook, we might be open to regard it as quite common, at least in the Mediterranean region. So far, small amounts of dyed wool served as samples in order for customers to decide on their preferred colour and shade. Samples were even attached to letters to reach an absent recipient. Unfortunately, none of the samples mentioned in the papyrus texts have survived. At least since modern times sample books have been preserved providing dyeing recipes with matching samples mounted on the pages.25 Using samples is not unfamiliar with today’s perception and approach to facilitate decision making by means of optical references. Still, we might wonder how ancient customers were able to compare and verify the quality of the sample with the final result. It is exactly this problem, which we encounter in a draft for a letter, where the writer seeks to complain about several difficulties, inter alia cheating on the order for purple colour:26

22 Rhet. Her. 4.5.9. 23 So far, the loanword exemplum denoting ‘sample’ is also found in Greek documentary papyri, but unfortunately not in a textile context: cf. P.Oxy. VII 1066.6–8 (3rd century CE), where an example for a file is sent. However, this underline the general use of samples and patterns as reference in Antiquity. 24 English translation by Caplan 1964, 246–247. 25 Discussed with Susan Kay Williams in connection with her paper ‘A study of dye colour charts of the 1860s and 1870s and their adoption by fashion of the period’, October 2015 (DHA). 26 BGU IV 1141.40–43.

Regarding the hatching (i.e. of the textile)27 it became clear to me during my investigation with Philoxenos and Hilarios, that the purple has been swapped by Diodoros, and that it was not given to you according to the pattern he had shown to you (περὶ δὲ τῆς σκιᾶς φανερόν μοι ἐγενήθη ἐκζητήσαντι \μετὰ τοῦ Φιλοξέ[νου] καὶ Ἱλάρου/ ἠλλάχθαι μὲν τὴν πορφυρᾶν ὑ ̣π ̣ὸ ̣ τοῦ Διοδώρου καὶ μὴ δεδωκέναι σοί, πρὸς ὃ ἔδειξέ σοι ὑπόδειγμα). As with all other papyrus documents we never get the full picture of the incident, especially as the text at hand is merely a draft with many corrections and blurs. However, we definitely hear of some fraud: apparently, a sample for purple has been shown to the customer, but the dyestuff subsequently used was not the same (but swapped).

Design and Decoration: Pattern Cartoons When it comes to the decoration of textiles, there are plenty of options a customer can choose from. To start with the binding of the weave: a plain weave versus a more complex twill changes the look and feel of the texture and, by using differently coloured threads, patterns are created.28 Finished fabrics may be further decorated, after taking them off the loom, by embroidering, painting or printing. However, many preserved textiles, mainly from late antique Egypt, show decoration woven in tapestry technique, in which all of the designs are created by the coloured weft threads woven into the foundation of the textile. Paintings on papyrus have been preserved from the same era, depicting the same ornaments and compositions as can be seen on the decorated textiles. Scholars have identified these drawings as tapestry weaving cartoons.29 These are well known from Renaissance and Baroque tapestries,30 when large sized wall hangings were produced with the help of ‘cartoons’, i.e. drawings on cloth or paper, which served as a full-scale model of the desired design, showing the composition in all its details.31 Thus, the weavers were able to transfer the design from the cartoon to a tapestry on the loom. In brief, the actual idea behind it is quite simple: The design was first painted with brushstrokes on cloth, paper or papyrus; after being approved by the customer, it was executed in more time-consuming and costly tapestries with yarns. The tapestries preserved from late antique Egypt are of course not exactly like the later monumental European tapestries, which were woven from the backside.32 Nevertheless, a similar working process, to transfer a design from papyrus to threads,

27 On the translation of σκιά (skia) as ‘border’ see Olsson 1925, 52 and BL VIII, 42. With regard to the evidence of preserved textiles from Egypt and the use of hatching in tapestries I prefer a more literal translation in this context. 28 So far not found in Roman Egypt, but definitely in prehistoric Scandinavia and Middle Europe are so called spin patterned textiles; see Barber 1992, 178–180. 29 Horak 1992, 63–92; Stauffer 2008a; Stauffer 2008b. 30 These monumental European tapestries have existed at least from the mid-14th century, although some earlier hangings have survived starting from the mid-12th century; see Cavallo 1993, 73. Tapestry technique itself is much older: earliest examples known so far were found in the tomb of Tuthmosis IV, 15th century BCE. 31 Cf. Vergara & Woollett 2014, where Peter Paul Rubens’ modelli in oil on canvas are confronted with monumental woven tapestries, commissioned by Infanta Isabel Clara Eugenia. 32 This is why cartoons are mirror images of the tapestries.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 266 Ines Bogensperger can be assumed to have existed. This also holds true for geometrical patterns, often executed in flying thread brocading. Scholars believe that in addition, some sort of model was needed to depict the general outline of the pattern; in particular, threads need to be calculated carefully for geometrical designs.33 Such general pattern can be multiplied as many times as necessary for the textile, something that is done as well with weaving cartoons. All these sketches, modelli and cartoons are essential working tools for the weavers, but they also reflect the customer’s decision-making, a process before a textile was woven. Above all, it is the customer who decides what pattern to choose whilst ordering. Written sources provide less tangible information so far. Even the ancient equivalent to the modern term ‘cartoon’, deriving from Italian cartone respectively from Latin carta for paper, has been difficult to identify in ancient text sources. Some scholars have argued for entype, a term best attested in P.Giss. Apoll. 20 (= P.Giss. I 12), a business letter from the beginning of the 1st century CE, where warp, weft and entype are requested to be sent.34 In fact, the term is philologically related to ἐντυπόω35, which would point in the direction of a carved-in pattern rather than a drawing on papyrus.36 More convincing as an equivalent term for cartoon is the diminutive chartarion (χαρτάριον), literally a small sheet of papyrus, when found in a context of textile production, which is the case in some papyrus documents.37 Apparently, these small papyrus sheets were sent via private intermediaries to get to their destination, like the aforementioned colour samples. Preserved paintings on papyrus depicting tapestry decorations are indeed small.38 They often illustrate only one typical ornament, like a clavus, orbiculus or tabula, and could be placed next to the loom as needed. This was done as often as an ornament was woven, that is to say, these cartoons were portable and could be moved and used repeatedly in the workshops. On some ancient cartoons, it is striking to observe partially painted borders for ornaments (Fig. 2 a–b). It is clear that such an incomplete drawing was never a work of art itself, but a sketch providing a suggestion for a border. In any case, ancient weavers were perfectly able to transfer this onto the whole tapestry ornament. The question though remains: who decided on the motifs? Presumably it is the customer, who selects the main features as demonstrated above. Therefore, we can add another function for these cartoons: to serve as a pattern example for helping the customer in ordering the design.

33 Verhecken-Lammens 2013, 143. On the basic units of geometrical motifs see Hodak 2011, 81–435. 34 Kortus 1999, 192; Wipszycka 1965, 82; Stauffer 2008a, 14–15. 35 “to carve or mould in or upon”, see LSJ s.v. 36 On a new approach on entype see Bogensperger & Koroli (in preparation). 37 Cf. O.Claud. II 239. 5 (2nd century CE); P.Tebt. II 414.16–17 (2nd century CE) and probably also P.Tebt. II 413.5 (2nd–3rd century CE); see Nauerth 2009 and Andorlini 2015, 12. 38 In Annemarie Stauffer’s study, the largest papyrus measured 17.5 cm × 29.8 cm (see Stauffer 2008a, 128). As far as large wall hangings with figural decorations of over one meter are concerned (like the ‘Dionysos-hanging’ in the Abegg foundation), no full-scale weaving cartoon has been found so far. The discussion, how such figural hangings were woven, is still ongoing; see Niekamp 2015, 220–222.

~~Fig. 2 a: Design for a clavus with a partially painted border (© Department of Papyri, Austrian National Library, Vienna, inv.-no P. Vindob. G 54797)~~

Fig. 2 b: Design for tapestry decoration on papyrus sheet (H. 15.7 cm; W. 13.5 cm). Narrow borders are executed partially with meander and floral motifs (© Victoria and Albert Museum, London, inv.-no T. 15-1946)

Conclusion Very little evidence can be found for the step before production and distribution, when textiles are ordered, planned and designed. In general, orders, including negotiations, are based on oral communication and discussion, which we are unable to trace back. At least documentary papyrus texts offer some insight on the decision-making process concerning material, quality, measure, colours and patterns. Throughout these texts, we encounter a private and almost intimate atmosphere, which is one of the greatest benefits of reading papyri. Ordering textiles included choosing appropriate material, depending on personal needs and budget. The size (short or long, for an adult or a child) also had to be determined. Apparently, great care and effort was taken to select the perfect colour: with the help of samples, customers were able to chose the colour and even colour shade according to their personal taste. A similar approach can be seen in terms of the design: drawings on papyrus depicted ornaments for textiles. They were executed as sketches, where not all details have been completed, but a general idea was provided. These drawings have been regarded as ‘tapestry weaving cartoons’; however, it seems plausible that they have served as ‘pattern or sample cartoons’ as well, on which the customer could base his decision. Then, the ancient weaver could use them as a model. In all these issues, it becomes quite clear that ordering textiles demanded exchange and close cooperation between customers and weavers.39 Dealing with orders for textiles and other goods confronts us with two additional aspects: firstly, different items were not always available locally and had to be sourced from other places. Ancient society seemed to be well linked and connected as demonstrated in the papyrus texts: all sorts of goods, commodities, raw materials, tools or even samples were sent through a well established and reliable network of personal contacts. This was necessary, as any official postal service was restricted to military use in Antiquity.40 Secondly, sufficient time to acquire all materials needed and to fulfil the order had to be considered. By tracing all this evidence in documentary papyri, we encounter the complexity of ancient textile production already at the initial phase during ordering, planning and designing.

Bibliography Andorlini 2015: Andorlini, I.: Women’s letters concerning textile manufacture (P.Teb. II 413–414). In N. Quenouille (ed.), Von der Pharaonenzeit bis zur Spätantike. Kulturelle Vielfalt im Fayum. Akten der 5. Internationalen Fayum-Konferenz, 29. Mai bis 1. Juni 2013, Leipzig, Wiesbaden, 1–16. Bagnall 2008: Bagnall, R. S.: SB 6.9025, Cotton, and the Economy of the Small Oasis, BASP 45, 21–30. Bagnall & Cribiore 2006: Bagnall, R. S. & Cribiore, R.: Women’s Letters from Ancient Egypt, 300 BC–AD 80, Ann Arbor. Barber 1992: Barber, E. J. W.: Prehistoric Textiles. The Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages. With Special Reference to the Aegean, Princeton. Bogensperger (forthcoming): Bogensperger, I.: Alum from Egypt’s Western Desert. An essential resource for textile production and the papyrological evidence. In A. De Moor,

39 See P.Warr. I 15.8–9, a letter from the 2nd century CE, where, by mistake, two kolobia were woven without any ornament (δίχα σμείου), as the person responsible has been away. 40 DNP 10 (2001), 218–220 s.v. Post (A. Kolb) including bibliography.

C. Fluck & P. Linscheid (eds.), Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the Research Group Textiles from the Nile Valley, Antwerp, 27.–29. November 2015. Bogensperger & Koroli (in preparation): Bogensperger, I. & Koroli, A.: Looking Behind Patterns – The meaning of the Greek term entype and the use of entypai in the textile industry. Caplan 1964: Caplan, H.: Ad C. Herennium. De Ratione Dicendi (Rhetorica ad Herennium). With an English translation, Cambridge (Loeb Classical Library 40). Cavallo 1993: Cavallo, A. S.: Medieval Tapestries in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Chenciner 2000: Chenciner, R.: Madder Red. A History of Luxury and Trade. Plant Dyes and Pigments in World Commerce and Art, London. Droß-Krüpe 2011: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Wolle – Weber – Wirtschaft. Die Textilproduktion der römischen Kaiserzeit im Spiegel der papyrologischen Überlieferung, Wiesbaden (Philippika 46). Droß-Krüpe 2014: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Regionale Mobilität im privaten Warenaustausch im rö- mischen Ägypten. Versuch einer Deutung im Rahmen der Prinzipal-Agenten Theorie. In E. Olshausen & V. Sauer (eds.), Mobilität in den Kulturen der antiken Mittelmeerwelt. Stuttgarter Kolloquium zur Historischen Geographie des Altertums 11, 2011, Stuttgart (Geographica Historica 31), 137–147. Flohr 2013: Flohr, M.: The World of the Fullo. Work, Economy, and Society in Roman Italy, Oxford. Frier & Kehoe 2007: Frier, B. W. & Kehoe, D. P.: Law and Economic Institutions. In W. Scheidel, I. Morris & R. P. Saller (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of the Greco- Roman World, Cambridge, 113–143. Herz 2012: Herz, P.: Gerb- und Färbstoffe in der Antike. In E. Olshausen & V. Sauer (eds.), Die Schätze der Erde – Natürliche Ressourcen in der antiken Welt. Stuttgarter Kolloquium zur Historischen Geographie des Altertums 10, 2008, Stuttgart (Geographica Historica 28), 175–191. Hodak 2011: Hodak, S.: Ornamentale Purpurwirkereien. De variis purpureis segmentis, para gaudis, clavis et ceteris ornamentis cum ornamento, Wiesbaden. Horak 1992: Horak, U.: Illuminierte Papyri, Pergamente und Papiere I, Vienna. Kortus 1999: Kortus, M.: Briefe des Apollonios-Archives aus der Sammlung Papyri Gissenses. Edition, Übersetzung und Kommentar, Gießen 1999 (Berichte und Arbeiten aus der Universitätsbibliothek und dem Universitätsarchiv Gießen 49). Kruse 2007: Kruse, T.: P.Heid. Inv. G 5166 und die Organisation des Alaunmonopols im kaiserzeitlichen Ägypten. In J. Frösen, T. Purola & E. Salmenkivi (eds.), Proceedings of the 24th International Congress of Papyrology, Helsinki, 1–7 August 2004, Societas Scientiarum Fennica, Tammisaari & Ekenäs (Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 122), 523–547. Nauerth 2009: Nauerth, C.: Zu Wirkkartons in den Papyri, ZPE 168, 278. Niekamp 2015: Niekamp, B.: Überlegungen zu Herstellungsablauf und Gestaltung. In D. Willers & B. Niekamp (eds.), Der Dionysosbehang der Abegg-Stiftung, Riggisberg (Riggisberger Berichte 20), 213–239. Olsson 1925: Olsson, B.: Papyrusbriefe aus der frühesten Römerzeit, Uppsala. Schweppe 1993: Schweppe, H: Handbuch der Naturfarbstoffe. Vorkommen, Verwendung, Nachweis, Landsberg/Lech. Stauffer 2008a: Stauffer, A.:Antike Musterblätter. Wirkkartons aus dem spätantiken und früh byzantinischen Ägypten, Wiesbaden. Stauffer 2008b: Stauffer, A.: A Closer Look to Cartoons for Weavers from Graeco-Roman Egypt. In C. Alfaro & L. Karali (eds.), Purpureae Vestes II: Vestidos, Textiles y Tintes. Estudios sobre la producción de bienes de consumo en la Antiguedad. Actas del II Symposium International sobre Textiles y Tintes del Mediterráneo en el mundo antiguo (Atenas, 24 al 26 de noviembre, 2005), Valencia, 159–163.

Verboven 2002: Verboven, K.: The Economy of Friends. Economic Aspects of Amicitia and Patronage in the Late Republic, Brussels (Collection Latomus 269). Vergara & Woollett 2014: Vergara, A. & Woollett, A. T. (eds.), Spectacular Rubens. The Triumph of the Eucharist, Los Angeles. Verhecken-Lammens 2013: Verhecken-Lammens, C.: Flying Thread Brocading – A Technical Approach. In A. De Moor & C. Fluck & P. Linscheid (eds.), Drawing the Threads Together. Textiles and Footwear of the 1st Millennium AD from Egypt. Proceedings of the 7th Conference of the Research Group Textiles from the Nile Valley, Antwerp, 7–9. October 2011, Tielt, 140–149. Wild et al. 1998: Wild, J. P. & Wild, F. C.: The Textiles. In S. E. Sidebotham & W. Z. Wendrich (eds.), Berenike 1996: Report of the 1996 Excavations at Berenike (Egyptian Red Sea Coast) and the Survey of the Eastern Desert, Leiden, 221–236. Wild et al. 2008a: Wild, J. P. & Wild, F. C. & Clapham A. J.: Roman Cotton Revisited. In C. Alfaro. & L. Karali (eds.), Purpureae Vestes II: Vestidos, Textiles y Tintes. Estudios sobre la producción de bienes de consumo en la Antiguedad. Actas del II Symposium International sobre Textiles y Tintes del Mediterráneo en el mundo antiguo (Atenas, 24 al 26 de noviem bre, 2005), Valencia, 143–147. Wild et al. 2008b: Wild, J. P. & Wild, F. C.: Cotton: the New Wool. Quasr Ibrim Study Season 2008, ATN 46, 3–6. Wipszycka 1965: Wipszycka, E.: L’Industrie Textile dans l’Egypte Romaine, Breslau et al. (Archiwum Filologiczne 9).

~~Sabrina Tatz~~

Die große Gruppe der sog. Koptischen Textilien ist ein wichtiger Bestandteil der materiellen Hinterlassenschaften des spätantiken und frühislamischen Ägyptens. Qualitativ verarbeitete Gewänder und komplexe Wirkereien sind nur ein Teil der Objekte in privaten und musealen Beständen, die sich der Gattung angenommen haben. Ein repräsentatives Bild der spätantiken Gesellschaft und ihrer Kleidung können diese meist aus Nekropolen stammenden, unter kommerziellen Zwecken an der Wende vom 19. zum 20. Jahrhundert freigelegten Objekte jedoch nicht bieten.1 Vielmehr sind sie ein Ausschnitt einer gesellschaftlich höher stehenden Schicht und deren Bestattungsritus. Archäologische Informationen wie der Fundkontext oder der Anspruch auf Vollständigkeit – oftmals wurden nur aufwendig gearbeitete Zierstücke aus dem Gesamtobjekt ausgeschnitten – waren bei der Bergung von geringer Relevanz. Wenn auch die Forschung der letzten Jahrzehnte bewiesen hat, dass auch daraus wichtige Informationen über Kleidung, Einrichtung sowie die dahin- terstehende Gesellschaft und Ökonomie gewonnen werden können,2 bleibt dennoch die Lücke zwischen den bewusst ausgewählten Objekten im Sepulkralkontext und dem im Alltag tatsächlichen verwendeten Textilbestand einer Siedlung bestehen. In den letzten Jahren werden zunehmend Textilien aus jüngeren Siedlungs grabungen untersucht und schließen so allmählich diese Lücke. In Bezug auf die spätantike/frühislamische Zeit wurden einige Zusammenfassungen vorgelegt,3 um fassende Publikationen sind bislang ein Desiderat. An dieser Stelle setzt die Be arbeitung des textilen Fundmaterials der Klosteranlage Deir el-Bachît, Theben- West, in Oberägypten an. Der Fokus ist damit auf eine ausgewählte soziale Gruppe in einem definierten Siedlungsraum gelegt, der zwischen dem 6. und 9./Anfang 10. Jh. genutzt wurde. Die dort zwischen dem Grabungsbeginn 2004 und der jüngsten

* Für die Möglichkeit, die Textilien von Deir el-Bachît zu untersuchen, und die vielseitige sowie stete Unterstützung gilt mein herzlichster Dank Ina Eichner, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Wien, und Sabine Schrenk, Universität Bonn. Des Weiteren bedanke ich mich bei dem Grabungsteam, namentlich sei Thomas Beckh genannt, für eine gute und anregende Zusammenarbeit. 1 Einige Sammler wie Georg Schweinfurth bemühten sich früh um eine wissenschaftliche Aufarbeitung. Diese sind dennoch mit einigen Unsicherheiten wie etwa in Bezug auf die Herkunft oder Vollständigkeit belegt (Fluck 2006, 31). Wichtige Fundstätten ab dem 19. Jahrhundert sind Saqqara (bereits seit dem 17. Jahrhundert bekannt), Antinoë und die Nekropolen des Fayum. Völker in Noever 2005, 8. Die Textilien vieler Sammlungen sind inzwischen in Bestands- und Ausstellungskatalogen umfassend vorgelegt worden. Etwa Fluck et al. 2000; Schrenk 2004. 2 Beispielsweise gliedert Schrenk 2004 die Objekte der Schweizer Abegg-Stiftung unter funktionalen Aspekten. Nauerth 2006 zeigt am Material aus den sog. Badischen Grabungen in Qarara und el-Hibe von 1913/1914, wo die Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der nachträglichen Auswertung liegen. 3 Etwa Huber 2006; Huber 2007.

Kampagne 2014 4 freigelegten Textilien können nicht nur an ihrem Fund-, sondern auch an ihrem Herstellungsort untersucht werden. So belegen Webvorrichtungen und Schriftquellen, vornehmlich Ostraka und Papyri, eine klostereigene Produktion und ermöglichen neben der bloßen Textilanalyse die Behandlung weiterer Frage stellungen zur dortigen Ökonomie und Gesellschaft. Bereits auf den ersten Blick unterscheiden sich die Textilfunde des Klosters von alten Sammlungsbeständen. Zum einen betrifft das die schlichte Fertigung der Objekte, zum anderen den Erhaltungszustand. So sind Textilien im Siedlungsraum zahlreichen kontaminierenden Einflüssen unterlegen und gelangten weniger ge- schützt als jene aus Gräbern unter die Erdoberfläche.5 Das Resultat ist eine hohe Anzahl stark zerrissener Fragmente, die nur selten einem bestimmten Produkt bzw. einer Funktion zugewiesen werden können. Die Aussagekraft und die Heran gehensweise der Analyse unterscheiden sich also in einem erheblichen Maß von vollständiger erhaltenen Einzelstücken in Museumsbeständen. Der fragmentarische Bestand erfordert eine Betrachtung bis ins feinste Detail der ‚Konstruktion‘ (verwendete Fasern, Spinnrichtung, -stärke, Webqualität, -regelmäßigkeit etc.) und schärft so den Blick für die Produktionstechnik der Textilien. Mit voranschreiten der Fundaufnahme ließen sich dabei wiederkehrende Muster erkennen: Material, Garnbeschaffenheit, Webdichte sowie bestimmte Dekorationsschemata scheinen auf spezifischen Typen mit einem jeweils eigenen Funktionsspektrum zu deuten. Auf Grundlage des thebanischen Materials wurde daher eine Typologie entwickelt, welche zum einen die Fundaufnahme zeitsparend erleichtert, zum anderen Aussagemöglichkeiten über schlechter erhaltene Fragmente ermöglicht. Im Folgen den sollen sowohl die Typologie als auch erste Ergebnisse vorgestellt werden. Bislang wurden etwa 500 Fragmente analysiert, die vollständige Aufnahme wird noch mehrere Kampagnen in Anspruch nehmen. Die Bearbeitung der Textilien von Deir el-Bachît schreitet seit 2012 parallel zu den Ausgrabungen unter den Grabungsleitern Ina Eichner und Thomas Beckh voran. Für die bisherigen drei Textilkampagnen wurde zunächst eine Auswahl zu unter- suchender Objekte getroffen: Im Fokus stehen die Funde aus den Werkstatträumen, welchen die Textilien aus den Mönchszellen in der Betrachtung gegenübergestellt werden. Problematisch ist dabei der Erhaltungszustand des Klosterareals, sodass nicht gesichert ist, dass die Stücke in ihrem primären Verwendungskontext gefunden wurden. Der räumliche sowie der zeitliche Kontext sind verzerrt und erlauben keine chronologische Betrachtung.

4 Einen Überblick über die Ausgrabungstätigkeiten, Publikationen sowie den Fördermitteln findet sich unter http://www.oeaw.ac.at/antike/index.php?id=447 (letzter Zugriff März 2016). Die Ausgrabungen werden als Kooperationsprojekt des DAI Kairo, RGZM, Ludwig- Maximilians-Universität München sowie der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissen schaften durchgeführt. 5 So können Textilien in einer Siedlung beispielsweise zunächst für einige Zeit an der Ober fläche lagern und dort erste Kontaminierung erfahren (im Gegensatz zu Textilien in Grä bern, die bewusst abgelegt und bereits wenig später durch eine überdeckende Erdschicht geschützt werden). Während das Bodenmilieu im Grab zudem relativ einheitlich ist, kann es in Siedlungen stärker aufgrund unterschiedlicher Versturzschichten, Ablagerungsorte etc. variieren. S. zu möglichen Ursachen und Auswirkungen Kemp & Vogelsang-Eastwood 2001, 16–18.

Ziel des folgenden Beitrags ist es, zunächst die Textilproduktion des Klosters grund- sätzlich zu charakterisieren und damit einen ersten Blick auf dessen potentielle Position/Bedeutung auf dem Textilmarkt der Region zu werfen. Ein Handel mit den textilen Produkten des Klosters kann vor allem anhand von Schriftquellen konstatiert und skizziert, jedoch noch nicht eingehend analysiert werden. Hier gilt es die voranschreitende Textiluntersuchungen sowie die Auswertungen der Ostraka und Papyri abzuwarten.

Textilproduktion im spätantiken Theben-West Das Kloster von Deir el-Bachît (Abb. 1), das antike Pauloskloster,6 liegt auf einer Hügelkuppe in Theben-West, eine einstige Nekropolenlandschaft pharaonischer Zeit. Deren Grabkammern und Totengedächtnistempel umnutzend, entwickel- ten sich hier seit dem 5. Jahrhundert diverse monastische Einheiten sowie säkulare Siedlungen.7 Die Lage nahe dem fruchtbaren Niltal und der Anschluss an die Farshūt- Straße, die am häufigsten frequentierte Karawanenroute der westlichen Wüste,8 versprachen wirtschaftliche Prosperität und erklären die rege Nutzung des Areals bis in das 10./11. Jahrhundert. Das Gebirgsplateau des thebanischen Westgebirges ist bis heute von Zubringerwegen durchzogen, entlang derer sich die monastischen Strukturen niederließen. Diese profitierten nicht nur vom Handelsverkehr an der Straße, sondern trugen auch zu dessen Erhalt bei.9 In dieser Landschaft avancierte Deir el-Bachît zu einem der größten Klöster der Region, welches mit seiner Lage auf der Hügelkuppe von Dra‘ Abu el-Naga sowohl von der Handelsstraße als auch vom Niltal weithin sichtbar war. Ein eng geknüpftes System von Außenanlagen, die mittels schmaler Wege und im Blick zueinander stehenden Wachposten verbundenen waren, bot dem Kloster einen ge- sicherten Anschluss an die wichtige Handelsstraße.10 Archäologisch zeichnet sich eine komplex organisierte, relativ reiche,11 monastische Gemeinschaft ab, die über den thebanischen Raum hinaus Wirtschaftskontakte pflegte.12 Die Gesamtheit ih-

6 Die Identifikation des Klosters von Deir el-Bachît (moderne Bezeichnung) als das Paulos kloster gelang erst in den letzten Jahren, sodass beide Bezeichnungen synonym verwendet werden (Beckh et al. 2011). 7 Bis heute bietet die Karte von Winlock 1926, Taf. 1 die beste Übersicht über die spätanti- ken Strukturen. Deren Datierung ist in vielem unsicher. Sicher belegt ist eine florierende Mönchskultur, im Areal des ehemaligen Ramesseums weist eine Totenstele des Jahres 891 eventuell auch auf ein Nonnenkloster hin; die Lesung birgt jedoch einige Unsicherheiten. Einen guten Überblick zu den wichtigsten Strukturen sowie deren Forschungs- und Publi kationsstand gibt Beckh 2013, 5–9. Zu Nonnen in der Region aus Perspektive der schrift lichen Überlieferung s. auch Boud’hors & Heurtel 2010, 18–19. 8 Die Straße umgeht die nördlich von Theben liegende Nilschleife, indem sie relativ geradli- nig Richtung Norden führt. Zum Verlauf: Graeff 2005, 81–86, Plan VIII, XIV, XV. 9 Darnell & Darnell 1996, 48; Beckh 2013, 72–73. 10 Beckh et al. 2011, 20; Polz et al. 2012, 133–134. 11 Beckh 2013, 97–98 macht dies nicht nur am Handel, sondern auch am Nachweis von einer höheren Anzahl an Nutztieren und luxuriöser Ausstattung (etwa Fensterglas und verzierte Möbel) fest. 12 Polz et al. 2012, 134. Zahlreiche Textquellen informieren zwar über (über-)regionale Han delsbeziehungen, diese sind jedoch noch nicht vollständig ausgewertet. Ein archäologischer Indikator sind die Keramikfunde: Kein anderes Kloster in Theben verfügte über ein derart

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 274 Sabrina Tatz rer Fabrikationspalette kann nicht rekonstruiert werden; diverse Einbauten belegen mindestens das Vorhandensein einer Keramik- und Textil- sowie Nahrungsmittel produktion.13 Wurden die Webanlagen bereits mit der Magisterarbeit von Johanna Sigl14 ausführlich besprochen, gilt es nun die dort hergestellten Produkte genauer zu untersuchen.

Die schriftlichen Quellen Dass der Textilproduktion in Theben-West insgesamt eine wichtige Rolle zukam, geht aus diversen schriftlichen und archäologischen Quellen hervor.15 Die hohe Anzahl an Papyri und Ostraka ist noch lange nicht ausgewertet und in ihrer Masse kaum zu überblicken, sodass eine eingehende Studie an dieser Stelle ausbleiben muss. Problematisch ist zudem die fehlende Datierung einer Großzahl der Schriftstücke. Es kann zwar ein Eindruck der lokalen Textilwirtschaft vermittelt werden, jedoch

breites Spektrum an unterschiedlichen Amphorenformen und gestempelten Amphoren verschlüssen, denen eine gleichsam hohe Menge auswärtiger Transportgefäße gegenüber- steht. Belegt werden können innerägyptische Kontakte, Importe aus anderen Ländern fehlen. Ausführlich zur Keramik s. Beckh 2013, bes. 74–83. 13 Zusammenfassend bei Beckh 2013, 93–94. 14 Zusammenfassung der Ergebnisse: Sigl 2007. 15 Die am häufigsten genannten Materialien in den Ostraka und Papyri sind Getreide, Leinen und Wein (Boud’hors & Heurtel 2016, 11).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Die Textilfunde von Deir el-Bachît (Pauloskloster), Theben-West 275 können für diese keine chronologischen Entwicklungsstränge aufgezeigt werden. Prinzipiell fällt es schwer, das wirtschaftliche Gefüge in seinen Grundzügen zu charakterisieren.16 Deutlich wird eine starke Auffächerung einzelner Arbeitsschritte innerhalb des Gewerbezweiges, an denen mehrere Akteure beteiligt waren.17 Als Händler treten in der Regel Individuen auf, nie agiert ein Verband wie beispielsweise ein Kloster; in einem einzigen Fall ist überliefert, dass eine kleine Gruppe von Mönchen aus dem Pauloskloster gen Norden in das Fayum-Becken reisen wollte, um dort Seile zu verkaufen.18 Aufgrund der schriftlichen Kommunikation kann des Weiteren angenommen werden, dass es eine Handelsniederlassung in der nahen Sied lung Djeme betrieb.19 Eine größere Produktion als Reaktion auf einen Handel mit stetigem Angebot und Nachfrage entlang der Karawanenstraße ist aus den Schrift quellen nicht ersichtlich. Dass Außenposten Deir el-Bachîts als Depots20 genutzt wurden, könnte für einen organisierten, größeren Markt sprechen. Ob darunter auch Textilien fallen, ist nach dem derzeitigen Forschungsstand nicht zu beurteilen. In Bezug auf die genutzten Materialien lässt sich anhand der Schriftquellen sagen: Wichtigster und günstigster21 Rohstoff scheint Flachs gewesen zu sein. Sofern in den Quellen Materialien angegeben werden, handelt es sich meist um Leinen; ein geringer Anteil nennt Wolle – die sprachliche Differenzierung zwischen ‚Haare‘ und ‚Wolle‘ könnte darauf verweisen, dass zwischen Schafswolle und anderen Tierhaaren unterschieden wurde –, Baumwolle fehlt gänzlich.22 Diese Rohstoffe konnten in unterschiedlicher Verarbeitung verhandelt und sowohl eingetauscht als auch gegen Geld erworben werden. Aus dem sog. Epiphanius-Kloster ist beispielsweise eine ver- tragliche Vereinbarung mit einem Bauern erhalten, der für den späteren Abnehmer über einen längeren Zeitraum Flachs anbauen sollte.23 An anderer Stelle wird der Preis für die Pacht eines Feldes zum Flachsanbau mit einem καμίσιον ausgehan- delt.24 P.Mon. Epiph. 35325 beschreibt eine monetäre Bezahlung für (zu Garn?) verarbeitete und gebleichte Flachsfasern, während O.Crum 34126 elf Bündel Flachs nennt. Aus Deir el-Bachît stammt ein Ostrakon (O.Dan kopt 788) mit einer Bestellung

16 Einen Versuch stellt Wipszycka 2011, 240–247 an. 17 Ein Phänomen, das für die römische Kaiserzeit bereits gut untersucht wurde (Droß-Krüpe 2011, 47). 18 P.CLT 3 (Übersetzung s. Wipszycka 2011, 252). Das Dokument stammt aus dem Jahre 728 oder 743. 19 Beckh in Beckh et al. 2011, 19. 20 S. dazu Polz et al. 2012, 133. 21 Offensichtlich prosperierte die Flachsverarbeitung in der Thebais. In den Apophthegmata Patrum, Arsenius 26 wird erzählt, dass Mönche aus Alexandria in das Gebiet reisten, um Flachs zu kaufen, was entweder auf eine besondere Beziehung zu einem Kloster in der Region oder auf günstige Preise zurückzuführen sein könnte. Die Bemerkung liegt auf der literarischen Ebene im Hintergrund der eigentlichen ‚Weisung‘, sodass Wipszycka 2011, 182 nicht an der Information zweifelt. CLT 3. Wipszycka 2011, 243, 252–253. 22 Leinen und Wolle wurden zeitgleich eingesetzt wie z.B. O.29 0660 (Boud’hors & Heurtel 2010, 398 Nr. 754) aus der zweiten Hälfte 7./Anfang 8. Jahrhunderts zeigt. In einem Fall wird ein Schafsfell erwähnt (P.St. Marc. 13). 23 P.Mon. Epiph. 85 (Crum 1926, 85, 173–174). 24 Winlock 1926, 156. 25 Crum 1926, 87, 247. 26 Crum 1902, 67. Textteil 60.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 276 Sabrina Tatz von sechs Pfund Leinen, in einem weiteren scheint die Rede von einer Quittung für Leinen (ⲙⲁϩⲉ ?) zu sein.27 Bei der Größe des Klosters ist es gut möglich, dass man eigene Äcker bewirtschafte.28 Wie bei ‚weltlichen‘ Webern kann des Weiteren davon ausgegangen werden, dass auch die ‚monastischen‘ die Rohmaterialien von einem Klienten erhalten konnten.29 Die in ⲗⲓⲧⲣⲁ verhandelte Wolle konnte gegen Bezahlung bei Hirten erworben oder auch als Zahlmittel eingesetzt werden.30 In Deir el-Bachît wurden nachweislich Tiere gehalten, sodass davon ausgegangen werden kann, dass deren Haare verwendet wurden. Ob dadurch der volle Bedarf für die im Kloster ansässige Textilproduktion gedeckt werden konnte, ist unklar. Wirft man einen Blick auf die textilen Fertigprodukte, stechen Funerärtextilien – Leichentücher aus Leinen und schmale Bänder (aus Leinen und/oder Wolle) zur Befestigung ersterer – ins Auge. Vor allem in den Eremitagen scheint eine rege Produktion der einfachen Tücher und Bänder stattgefunden zu haben, wie Bestell ungen und Quittungen belegen.31 Andere Produkte, die für die unterschiedlichsten Belange des Alltagslebens gebraucht wurden,32 werden in den Quellen seltener genannt. Aus Deir el-Bachît stammt ein Brief33 mit der Bitte, einen Sack und ein Kleidungsstück (καμίσια), letztes offenbar als Lohn, zu senden. Ebenfalls inO.Dan kopt34 203 soll ein Gewand (ϩⲟϊⲧⲉ) übersandt werden, während in dem lückenhaften Text von O.Dan kopt 698 verschiedene Objekte, unter anderem ein Gewand oder etwas aus Leinen (ϩⲃⲟⲟⲥ) sowie vermutlich ein Kopfkissen (ϣⲁⲧ) geordert werden. In dem Brief O.St. Marc. 61735 wird Wolle für einen Schal oder eine Decke genannt, der Begriff ⲑⲱⲣⲁⲕⲉ in O.St. Marc. 4336 weist konkreter auf ein monastisches Kleidungsstück hin. Die Bestellung eines ⲡⲧⲣⲓⲙⲏⲥⲓⲟⲛ ϩⲃⲟ{ⲟ}ⲥ (O.Dan kopt 706), der Übersetzung Suzana Hodaks nach ein Gewand im Wert eines Trimesions,37 gibt Hinweis auf unterschiedliche Qualitätsstufen. Ob sich die Weber dabei an regionalen ‚Normen‘ orientierten, lässt sich anhand einer Inschrift am als Kirche eines koi

27 Für die Zusammenstellung dieser bislang unpublizierten Ostraka aus Deir el-Bachît sei Suzana Hodak, Universität Münster, gedankt. 28 Belege dazu fehlen. Auch einzelne Eremiten konnten Anbauflächen besitzen wie z. B. der Mönch Frange. In O.29 170 (Boud’hors & Heurtel 2010, 145) wird eine Weinanbaufläche genannt. Wipszycka 2011, 245 schließt aus Franges Korrespondenz, dass er über weitere Anbauflächen verfügt haben könnte. 29 Wipszycka 1964, 17–21. 30 Erwähnung bzw. Verkauf z. B. O.29 2070 (Boud’hors & Heurtel 2010, 404 Nr. 763) aus der zweiten Hälfte des 7./frühen 8. Jh., O.St.Marc. 582 und O.Crum 320 aus Medinet Habu (Crum 1902, 40 Nr. 320. Textseite 58). Wolle als Zahlmittel: Hall 1905, 43 Nr. 4. 31 Es lassen sich zahlreiche Beispiele finden, z. B. stammt aus TT 87 ein Ostrakon, das den Preis von 28 Leinentücher (vermutlich als Leichentücher) mit zwei solidi und drei tremisses angibt. Wipszycka 2011, 178 geht fälschlicherweise davon aus, dass das Ostrakon aus Deir el-Bachît stammt. 32 Etwa Gewänder, Tücher oder Vorhänge (Winlock 1926, 156). 33 O.Bachit 1184–1185. 34 Die Ostraka stammen aus einer Außenlage des Klosters. 35 Boud’hors & Heurtel 2016, 54 Nr. 274. 36 Boud’hors & Heurtel 2016, 20 Nr. 29. 37 Dieselbe Formulierung findet sich in O.St. Marc. 79.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Die Textilfunde von Deir el-Bachît (Pauloskloster), Theben-West 277 nobitischen Zusammenschlusses umgenutzten Hathor-Tempels diskutieren.38 Der Autor nennt eine Anweisung (ⲗⲟⲅⲟⲥ/λόγος) für eine Tunika (ⲗⲁⲃⲓⲧⲉ/λεβίτων) und verschiedene ⲑⲁⲗϊⲥ/θάλις-Größen und gibt deren Maße an.39 Die Interpretation der Inschrift ist kontrovers: Chantal Heurtel geht aufgrund des signifikanten An bringungsortes davon aus, dass die Inschrift sich auf liturgische Gewänder beziehen müsse. Ewa Wipszycka hält dagegen, dass in dieser Frühzeit der koptischen Kultur liturgischen Kleidern nicht die hohe Bedeutung späterer Zeit zukam.40 Zu überlegen wäre, ob die Inschrift eine einheitliche Tracht für die Mönche des Klosters um den Hathor-Tempel gewährleisten sollte. Dass die Produkte nicht nur in Form gewebt, sondern auch geschneidert wurden, geht aus mehreren Briefen aus dem sog. Epiphaniuskloster hervor. So bittet beispielsweise ein Epiphanius darum, seine Kleidung zu schneiden oder den Stoff (?) zu übersenden, um den Auftrag vergeben zu können.41 Für spätere Reparaturarbeiten wird in Deir el-Bahari ein ‚Flickschneider‘ genannt.42

Die archäologische Quellen: Webgruben und Textilfunde Archäologisch belegen insgesamt 33 Webgruben43 in Theben-West die starke Präsenz der Tuchproduktion. Mit diesen wurden einzelne Ermitagen, so beispielsweise jene des Mönchs Frange in TT 29,44 oder (gemeinschaftlich genutzte) Werkstattkomplexe ausgestattet. Im Hauptkloster von Deir el-Bachît wurden bislang in zwei Räumen je zwei Webgruben nachgewiesen, während in der Laura des sog. Cyriacus-Klosters sechs, in jener des sog. Epiphanius-Klosters sieben und in Qurnet Murai vier Webgruben belegt sind. Die Produktion scheint keineswegs auf den Eigenbedarf beschränkt gewesen zu sein und wurde von den Mönchen als Teil des Einkommens kalkuliert, wie die Anlage von fünf Webgruben in einer einzelnen Ermitage (TT 85) deutlich zeigt. Hier sind also auf kleinem Raum konzentriert mehr Webgruben als im Pauloskloster, wovon jedoch nicht der Stellenwert der Produktion abgeleitet werden darf. Zum einen ist in Deir el-Bachît ungewiss, ob bereits alle Webgruben freigelegt wurden, zum anderen müssen weitere Faktoren, wie die Art der Produkte (unterschiedliche Qualität, Aufwand, Material etc.), in den einzelnen Werkstätten mit berücksichtigt werden. Sicher ist, dass auch das Pauloskloster einen Überschuss produzierte,45 den es auf dem Markt verkaufen oder eintauschen konnte.

38 Weder die Inschrift noch das Kloster können bislang zufriedenstellend datiert werden. Bezeugen lassen sich zumindest Aktivitäten, die bis in die erste Hälfte des 8. Jh. hineinrei- chen (Heurtel 2004, 26–27; Beckh 2013, 6). 39 Heurtel 2004, 20–23 (Inschrift 25). 40 Heurtel 2004, 21; Wipszycka 2011, 180. 41 Winlock 1926, 158. 42 Jones 1981, 182. 43 Eine Übersicht der Webgruben mit weiterführender Literatur findet sich bei Sigl 2007, 366–367. 44 Für die Untersuchung der Textilwirtschaft ist Frange, ein Eremit der zweiten Hälfte des 7./ frühen 8. Jahrhunderts, aufgrund seiner starken Präsenz in den Schriftquellen, die in seiner Zelle um seine Webanlage gefunden wurden, eine wichtige Quelle. Zu den Ostraka s. Boud’hors & Heurtel 2010. 45 Pro Jahr ließen sich auf den vier Webstühlen etwa 156 m² (ein Weber) bis 209 m² (zwei Weber) eines mittelstarken, einfachen (Leinwand gebundenen) Gewebes fertigen. Das ent spricht etwa 60 bzw. 80 Tuniken wie jener aus dem Grab der Bestattung SK Bachit 4 (s.

Nachweise der eigentlichen Produktion durch Arbeitsabfälle und Fertigprodukte sind dagegen bislang nur selten bekannt geworden, was nicht zuletzt aus der Forschungsgeschichte des Gebietes zu erklären ist. So lag der Fokus der Ausgrabungen seit dem 19. Jahrhundert auf den pharaonischen Strukturen, darüber liegende Strata wurden häufig unzureichend dokumentiert abgegraben. Eine ausführliche Bewertung des teils unpublizierten Fundmaterials lässt auf sich warten, umfassende Arbeiten wie Herbert Winlocks Grabungsaufarbeitung des sog. Epiphanius- Klosters bleiben Ausnahme.46 Dieser nimmt zwar Bezug auf die Textilproduktion, jedoch fasst er die Textilfunde knapp mit „all the fabrics found were of the simp- lest weavings“47 zusammen und führt entsprechend kaum konkrete Beispiele auf. Émile Baraize listet unter den ‚wichtigsten Funden‘ seiner Ausgrabungen in Deir el-Medineh ein Bündel aus rot gefärbten Baumwollfäden auf, die er ‚koptischer‘ Zeit zuordnet, ohne jedoch weitere Zusammenhänge zu nennen.48 Heute sind aus demselben Areal einige Funde erhalten, aus denen zumindest das Vorhandensein gefärbter Wolle hervorgeht; weitere Informationen dazu fehlen.49 Darüber hinaus stammen alle weiteren Textilien von Mumienfunden, welche zum Teil ausgewickelt wurden.50 Die Wicklung dieser Mumien entspricht dem Bild, das auch aus den Untersuchungen51 in Deir el-Bachît gewonnen wurde: Die Leichname wurden mit groben Leinentüchern eingewickelt, nachgewiesen sind vier bis zehn Lagen, die mit schmalen Bändern (κειρία/κηρία)52 eng umbunden wurden. Der Zustand dieser Tücher stützt das Bild aus den Schriftquellen, dass diese eigens für den Funerärgebrauch produziert wurden. Teils durch die technischen Möglichkeiten (Breite der Webstühle) vorbestimmt, präsentieren sich die Tücher

unten). Die Hochrechnung basiert auf Droß-Krüpe 2011, Tab. 30 und geht von einer durch gängigen Nutzung der Webstühle und damit von 313 Arbeitstagen mit einer durchschnitt lichen Arbeitszeit von 14 Stunden/Tag aus. Da mit der Fertigung unterschiedlicher Tuch qualitäten zu rechnen ist, dient die Rechnung primär der Veranschaulichung. 46 Winlock 1926. 47 Winlock 1926, 70. 48 Baraize 1914, 41 Nr. 43666. 49 Boud’hors & Heurtel 2015, 17. 50 Sog. Epiphaniuskloster: Nekropole mit 11 Gräbern. Sechs Gräber gänzlich, drei teilweise geplündert, von fünf Leichnamen zwei intakt. Winlock 1926, 45–50; 70–71. Taf. 11, b. c; Taf. 12. – sog. Cyriacuskloster (Vorhof der Ermitage TT 65): Doppelbestattung sowie ein großes, zusammenhängendes Mumienfragment und zahlreiche Fragmente (Bács 2000; Bechtold 2008). – Grabkammer TT 68: Mehrere Fragmente zusammengeschüttet, darunter zusammenhängende untere Hälfte einer Mumie und zwei einzelne Fragmente, eines gesichert ‚koptisch‘ (Seyfried 1991, 94 Nr. 41; 95 Nr. 66; Taf. 19) – Deir el-Bahari: Zwei Bestattungsareale, die in der Hauptpublikation kaum beschrieben werden. Godlewski 1986, 47–48 mit Abb. 25. – Qurnet Murai: Insgesamt acht Bestattungen, zwei davon besser erhalten, eine ausführlich in Castel 1979 besprochen. Jüngste Untersuchungen von Maximilien Durand, Lyon, unpubliziert. – ‚Älteres‘ Phoibammonkloster: Knappe Erwähnung zweier Bestattungen (Bachatly 1981, 27; Taf. 113). – Deir el-Medineh: Knappe Erwähnung einer Nekropole, Abb. mit zwei Mumien (Baraize 1914, 17; Taf. 8–9). 51 Aus der Nekropole von Deir el-BachÎt stammen mehrere Mumien, von denen eine (SK Bachit 4) exemplarisch ausgewickelt wurde (Lösch et al. 2012, 27–41). 52 Eine Auswahl der gängigsten keriai-Bindungen um den Leichnam findet sich bei Winlock 1926, 49 Abb. 10. Zum Begriff s. z. B. Crum 1926, 245 Nr. 348 mit Anm. 2.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Die Textilfunde von Deir el-Bachît (Pauloskloster), Theben-West 279 in der gesamten Region weitestgehend einheitlich. Besonders deutlich wird dies an den zehn Leichentüchern der ausgewickelten Mumie Nr. 1 aus der Laura von Qurnet Murai: Bei sechs Tüchern wurden 660 Kettfäden in den Webstuhl einge- hängt, bei zwei weicht die Anzahl leicht ab, bei zwei weiteren erlaubt die Erhaltung keine Zählung der Garne. Die Tücher erreichen damit, wie auch bei allen anderen Mumien, eine Breite von 0,83–0,90 m, während die Länge zwischen etwa 2,0 und 3,0 m variieren kann. Am Körper konnten die Verstorbenen einen einfachen Lendenschurz (Epi phanius-Bestattung Nr. 8,53 Deir el-Bachît) aus einem gröberen Leinentextil54 tragen. Darüber lag, entweder in Trageweise am Körper (z. B. Deir el-Bachît) oder als Tuch über diesen (Epiphanius-Bestattung Nr. 8) gelegt, in allen bekannten Fällen mindestens ein weiteres Kleidungsstück. Damit können auch von den Mumienfunden Rückschlüsse auf die Alltagskleidung gezogen werden.55 In ihrer Fertigung können die bekannten Gewänder variieren, in ihrer prin- zipiellen Machart sind sie verwandt. In der Regel war jeder Mönch im Grab mit einer ärmellosen Tunika (Länge 1,1–1,25 m, Breite 0,9–1,25 m) aus einem mittelstarken Leinengewebe in ausgeglichener Leinwandbindung ausgestattet.56 Die Dekorationsschemata beschränken sich auf regelmäßig verteilte Strukturstreifen57 (Deir el-Bachît, TT 65) und schmale, teils farbig gefasste clavi (Curnet Murai, Epiphanius-Bestattung Nr. 8, TT 65). Einzig in Qurnet Murai sind mehrere Klei dungsschichten übereinandergelegt: Unter der bereits erwähnten Tunika trug der Mönch ein ärmelloses, hüftlanges Gewand aus einem bei der Ausgrabung schwarz- braun verfärbten Material, das mit Wachs beschichtet gewesen zu sein scheint.58 Auf dem Kopf trug er eine Wollkaputze, die auf der Vorderseite mit zwei eingewirkten Kreuzen aus grüner Wolle verziert war.59 Diese Textilfunde bestätigen, zumindest für die Sepulkral- und einen Teil der Kleidungstextilien, das Bild der Schriftquellen: Hauptsächlich wurde Leinen und ein geringerer Anteil an Wolle verwendet. Ob die aufgezeigten Produktunterschiede kloster-, weber-, zeit- und/oder geschmacksspezifisch sind, kann nicht beurteilt werden. Des Weiteren zeigt sich, dass Nachuntersuchungen wie im sog. Cyriacus-

53 Winlock 1926, 48 beschreibt das Grab nur mit wenigen Worten. Die weiteren Informationen sind Tineke Rooijakkers, Universität Amsterdam, zu verdanken. 54 Deir el-Bachît-Typ Lg2: Fadensystem I: Fadenstärke 0,9 mm, Webdichte 11 Fäden/cm; Fadensystem II: Fadenstärke 1,4 mm, Webdichte 4 Fäden/cm. Bei dem Schurz handelt es sich um ein längsrechteckiges Tuch, das an den Seiten zusammengeknotet wurde. 55 Dass die Kleidungsstücke getragen wurden, belegen Gebrauchsspuren. Zur Bestattung der Mönche in ihrem Gewand in der schriftlichen Überlieferung s. Winlock 1926, 150. 56 Deir el-Bachît-Typ Lm1. Fadenstärke: 0,5–0,7 mm, Webdichte: 10–15 Fäden/cm in beiden Fadensystemen. Winlock 1926 nennt keine Werte, anhand der Fotos ist jedoch davon auszugehen, dass die Gewänder den anderen Beispielen in etwa entsprechen. 57 Die einzelnen Strukturstreifen wurden jeweils so gruppiert, dass sie optisch das Gewebe untergliedern. s. Bechtold 2008, 83 Abb. 2. 58 Castel 1979, 137. Eine IR-Spektroskopie konnte keine Klärung verschaffen. 59 Castel 1979, 136–137, 141 Abb. 11; Taf. 27. Maße Tuch: 73,0 × 45,0 cm. S-gedrehte Woll garne, Fadenstärke: 0,5 mm, Webdichte Kette: 10 Fäden/cm, Webdichte Schuss: 33 Fäden/ cm. Die Wollmütze wurde jüngst im Magazin des Musée des Tissus, Lyon, wiederentdeckt und wird derzeit untersucht (Stand November 2015).

Kloster60 oder der Anlage TT 68 neue Erkenntnisse bringen können, hier jedoch umso weniger mit Kontexten zu rechnen ist, die sich räumlich oder zeitlich eingren- zen lassen.61 Damit ist Deir el-Bachît eine einzigartige Chance, Einzelinformationen aus sporadischen Textilfunden Theben-Wests in einen allgemeinen Kontext betten zu können.

Das Pauloskloster Das Hauptkloster von Deir el-Bachît (Abb. 1) bildet eine ummauerte Anlage von 71 m × 77 m, die in ihrer maximalen Ausbauphase etwa 70 Personen Platz bot.62 Über mehrere Zugänge gelangte man von hier zu diversen Außenanlagen, der Kara wanenstraße und der im Osten liegenden, heute bis auf wenige Bestattungen stark geplünderten Nekropole. Anhand des Fundmaterials und diverser Einbauten kön- nen im Kloster verschiedene Funktionsbereiche wie Lager- und Werkstatträume, Stallungen, Mönchsunterkünfte sowie ein Refektorium eindeutig identifiziert werden. Nukleus der Anlage ist das sog. Zentralgebäude, welches, ursprünglich als Turm ausgebaut, in ein Netz aus in Sichtweite zueinander stehenden Außenanlagen eingebunden war. Im Norden führt von diesem ein Gang am Refektorium vorbei in den sog. Vorratsraum (Raum 25) und den östlich gegenüberliegenden Mönchszellentrakt. In Raum 25 identifizieren zwei Webgruben diesen als Werkstatt; ob hier noch weitere Handwerke ausgeführt wurden, ist ungewiss. Eine weitere Werkstatt (Raum 44 Süd) mit zwei Webgruben findet sich südlich des Zentralgebäudes. Diese ist im Osten mit dem großen ‚Vierpfeilerraum‘ (Raum 10), eine große Raumstruktur ohne bekannte Nutzung, und im Norden über den Arbeitsbereich 44 Nord und den Hof 42 mit den Lagerräumen 40 und 41 verbunden. Die weiter außen liegenden Räumlichkeiten sind teils noch nicht freigelegt, teils nicht funktional bestimmbar bzw. das textile Fundmaterial ist noch nicht betrachtet worden, sodass hier auf eine Beschreibung verzichtet wird. Der Erhaltungszustand der Strukturen variiert und lässt diverse Störungen (frü- here [Raub-] Grabungen u.ä.) erkennen. Vor allem auf der Hügelkuppe im nörd- lichen Nutzungsareal ist die Kulturschicht stark abgetragen, während die an den Hängen gelegenen, in Terrassen angelegten Strukturen mehr Fundmaterial bergen. Diese Störungen schlagen sich in einem Gefälle der Fundverteilung nieder, das nicht fehlinterpretiert werden darf. Des Weiteren dürfen Räume nicht als klar abgegrenzte Einheiten verstanden werden. Die trennenden Mauern sind teils stark abgebrochen, vor allem in den oberen Fundlagen ist zudem mit Verwehungen und anderen Umschichtungen des Materials zu rechnen, was in der Auswahl des Untersuchungsareals berücksichtigt wurde: Zunächst wurden die Textilien aus den Werkstatträumen untersucht, welche in der Betrachtung um die angrenzen- den Räume erweitert werden. Im Norden betrifft das die nördliche Hälfte des Refektoriums, im Süden die Vorratsräume 40–41, den Hof sowie den nördlichen Arbeitsbereich und den großen Vierpfeilerraum. Hintergrund dieser Auswahl ist die Überlegung, dass das Fundmaterial bestenfalls, trotz diverser Einflüsse, in

60 Bács 2000. 61 So betont etwa Seyfried 1991, 93 bei seiner Bearbeitung der Grabkammer TT 68, dass der Raum lange Zeit als Depot und Schuttraum genutzt worden sei, die Objekte also aus verschiedenen Kontexten zusammengetragen wurden. 62 Burkard et al. 2003, 50–51; Eichner & Fauerbach 2005, 143–146.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Die Textilfunde von Deir el-Bachît (Pauloskloster), Theben-West 281 der Nähe des einstigen Lagerungsorts zum Liegen kam und somit im Kontext ausgewertet werden kann. Diesem künstlich abgesteckten Bereich wurden zwei Gruppen gegenübergestellt: Zum einen zwei der Mönchszellen (Räume 36–37), in denen eine bessere Funderhaltung konstatiert werden kann, und die bereits er- wähnte Mumie SK Bachit 4 aus der Nekropole. Während mit dieser ein eindeutig abgegrenzter Funktionsbereich jenseits des Klosters betrachtet wird, bereitet die Gegenüberstellung der Nutzungsareale ‚erweiterte Werkstatträume‘ und ‚Wohn-/ Schlafzellen‘ Probleme. So wird einerseits eingeräumt, dass nur schwerlich von abgegrenzten Raumeinheiten ausgegangen werden kann, andererseits scheint die Gegenüberstellung jene Voraussetzung zu stellen. Die beiden Gruppen werden zwar auf eventuelle Unterschiede untersucht, insgesamt sind sie jedoch als eng verwandte Bereiche des ‚Lebensraum Kloster‘ zu betrachten. Ein weiteres Problem besteht in der Datierung; die relative Chronologie kann nur vereinzelt mit absoluten Zahlen unterfüttert werden. Die Auswertung der Befunde schreitet stetig voran, jedoch ist kaum zu erwarten, dass diese für die hier herausgegriffenen Bereiche präzise Datierungen ermöglichen wird. Damit erfährt die Auswertung eine Einschränkung: Für alle Textilien muss die Gesamtzeit der Klosternutzung als Datierung angenommen werden, eventuelle Fluktuationen bestimmter Gewebe und Materialien bleiben unerkannt.

Die Textiluntersuchungen Mit Beginn der Textilanalyse sollte zunächst die vorhandene Produktpalette grund- sätzlich charakterisiert und dem bisherigen Bild der thebanischen Textilfabrikation gegenübergestellt werden. So geht beispielsweise Ewa Wipszycka auf Grundlage der Schriftquellen und Mumienfunden davon aus, dass die Mönche „were not able to produce the full array of textiles and limited themselves to what was the simp- lest, namely the linen cloth”63. Bedenkt man den begrenzten Umfang publizierter Textilien, stellt sich die Frage, wie gerechtfertigt der Eindruck im Allgemeinen und in Bezug auf die unterschiedlichen sozialen Gruppen ist. So wäre es beispielsweise denkbar, dass das Geschäft mit dem Tod in Form von simplen Funerärtextilien eine profitable Einnahmequelle mit überschaubarem Arbeitsaufwand/-gerät vor allem für Anachoreten in den Ermitagen attraktiv gewesen ist.64 Größere Zusammenschlüsse wie das Pauloskloster könnten sich dagegen eventuell ein Alleinstellungsmerkmal mit einer anderen (höheren?) Tuchqualität auf dem Markt gesichert und so die gerin- gere Anzahl (im Gegensatz zu Anlagen wie in TT 85) an Webanlagen ausgeglichen haben. Überlegungen wie diese sollen am Material überprüft werden; grundsätzlich wird dabei davon ausgegangen, dass das Gros der Textilfunde aus dem Kloster dort auch produziert wurde. Alle Objekte werden nach dem gängigen Schema mit Angaben zu Maßen, Material, Fadenstärke, Spinnrichtung und Webdichte aufgenommen. Bisher ver- teilen sich die Fragmente auf durchschnittlich 64 % Leinen, 18 % Wolle und 11 %

63 Wipszycka 2011, 243 schließt mit diesem Fazit ihre Untersuchung der thebanischen Kor respondenz. Mit den von ihr angesprochenen „linen cloth“ sind einfache, häufig grobe lein wandgebundene Gewebe gemeint. 64 Nachweislich waren einige Mönche auf mehrere Handwerke spezialisiert, eine starke Pro fessionalisierung eines einzelnen Arbeitsbereiches zeichnet sich weniger ab; s. auch Wips zycka 2011, 183.

~~Baumwolle.65 Hinzu kommt ein geringer Anteil an Ziegenhaaren und weiteren Pflan zenfasern; Kamelhaare sind nicht eindeutig verifiziert worden, jedoch gut möglich.~~

Die Textilien in ihrer räumlichen Verteilung Einige der Funde lassen sich mit der Nutzung der voneinander abgesetzten Areale in Verbindung bringen. So finden sich in den Werkstatträume Arbeitsabfälle, die sowohl das Verspinnen von Flachsfasern (Funde DB04-T008, DB06-T008, -T018; Abb. 2a) als auch deren weitere Verarbeitung belegen, wie ein zusammen- gelegter Haufen von abgeschnittenen Garnen zeigt (DB06-T011; Abb. 2b). Einige Büschel von Tierhaaren (Ziege? DB04-T014) könnten ebenfalls als Rohstoff in die Werkstatt gelangt sein, wenn auch der Befund nicht eindeutig ist. Aus dem erweiterten Werkstattbereich stammen zwei Baumwollblüten, beide mit Rückständen der Kapseln, was die Vermutung aufkommen lässt, dass Baumwolle nicht nur verarbeitet, sondern auch regional angebaut worden sein könnte.66 Das Recyceln von Textilien ist durch eine Gruppe von 27 Fragmenten belegt. Dass die Objekte für eine Nachnutzung vorbereitet wurden, zeichnet sich an Schnitten und klar definierten Rissen ab, die meist an den Fadensystemen ausgerichtet sind. Fabrikate aus sekundär genutztem Material können bislang nicht zugeordnet werden. Das mehrfach reparierte und stark abgenutzte Objekt DB05-T049 (Abb. 3) aus Raum 40 ist zumindest ein Beispiel für eine potentielle Weiternutzung alter Textilien: Das in einer 2:2-Würfelbindung gearbeitete Baumwollobjekt wurde mehrfach gestopft und zusätzlich mit einem zurechtgeschnittenen Flicken aus einem schwarz gefärbten, recycelten Baumwolltextil in Leinwandbindung geflickt.67

Abb. 2a & b: Flachsfasern mit Garnresten (Inv. DB04-T008); Abgeschnittene Garne (Inv. DB06-T011) aus Webgrubenraum Süd 65 Prinzipiell ist die Berechnung der materiellen Verteilung mit einigen Unsicherheiten be- haftet. So variieren die Bodenzusammensetzungen in einer Siedlung stärker und begünsti- gen so an variierenden Fundorten unterschiedlich die Erhaltung der einzelnen Materialien. Zudem stellt sich die Frage der Berechnung: So schwanken die Werte je nachdem, ob man die relative Verteilung anhand der Stückzahl der Fragmente oder anhand der Gesamtfläche (= Summe der Fragmentflächen) eines Materials berechnet. Die oben angegebenen Werte entsprechen dem Mittel aus beiden Rechnungen. 66 Für den Hinweis sei John Peter Wild gedankt. 67 Dass es sich um ein recyceltes Objekt handelt, lässt die Kombination der unterschiedlichen Fabrikate vermuten. Hätte man Flickmaterial produziert, dann wäre es entweder optisch neutraler an das zu flickende Objekt angepasst (wie bei Tunika DB13-T002) oder stabili- sierender/robuster als das relativ feine Baumwollgewebe gewesen. Offenbar nutze man also das, was gerade zu Verfügung stand und anderswertig nicht gebraucht wurde.

~~Abb. 3: Detail des stark abgenutzten und mehrfach reparierten Objekts Inv. DB05-T049~~

Insgesamt fällt auf, dass gehäuft seltenere Materialien68 und aufwendiger gearbeitete Objekte aufbewahrt worden zu sein scheinen. Der Zierstreifen DB13-T012 (Abb. 4), ein Objekt aus den jüngsten Grabungen jenseits des hier vorgestellten Unter suchungsbereichs, zeigt mit seinen Schnitten parallel zur Broschierung, dass man dekorierte Elemente vermutlich wiederverwenden wollte.69 Offenbar bewahrte man derartige Objekte für eine sinnvolle Verwendung auf; die geringe Anzahl von einfachen Objekten unter dem recycelten Material dürften dagegen häufiger unmittelbar als Dochte, Taue u. ä. erneuten Einsatz gefunden haben.

~~Abb. 4: Zierstreifen Inv. DB13-T012 mit Broschierungen in Rot, Grün und Braun~~

Auch in den Mönchszellen finden sich eindeutige Beziehungen zwischen Fund material und Raumnutzung. Zunächst sind hier die zusammengehäuft aufgefunde- nen Ansammlungen aus diversen Rohmaterialien und Arbeitsabfällen (verschieden fein gehechelter Flachs, Garn- und Kordelreste; Abb. 5) zu nennen. Im Kontext ist

68 Mit 14 Objekten ist knapp die Hälfte des recycelten Materials aus Baumwolle. Dagegen gehört nur ein recyceltes Objekt dem Textil-Typ Lm1 (s. unten), die einfachsten und güns- tigste Gewebeform im Kloster, an. 69 Sofern man nicht davon ausgeht, dass der Streifen separat gefertigt wurde und später aufge- näht werden sollte. Ein Beispiel für eine wiederverwendete Broschierung findet sich in der Skulpturensammlung und Museum für Byzantinische Kunst, Berlin, Schweinfurth Inv. Nr. 281, 307–308, Fundort: Arsinoë/Krokodilopolis, 14C-Datierung: 660–780 n. Chr.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 284 Sabrina Tatz davon auszugehen, dass es sich um Füllmaterialien für Kissen, Polster u. ä. handelt. Dass zudem in den Räumen der Anteil von Baumwolle und Wolle wesentlich höher als im Werkstattareal liegt, könnte dadurch erklärt werden, dass die wär- menden Materialien hier vermehrt für in den Zellen aufbewahrte Kleidung und Bettzeug verwendet worden sein könnten.70 Objekte wie DB04-T063 könnten mit dem Dekor aus auf einander folgenden Farbstreifen71 als Decken, Kissenbezüge o. ä. eingesetzt worden sein. Unter den Kleidungsstücken ist der einzige vollständig erhaltene Textilfund hervorzuheben: Eine zweischichtige Baumwollkappe (Abb. 6), zusammengenäht aus einem runden Scheitelteil, an welches zwei seitliche Segmente angesetzt wurden. Weitere Fragmente passen – allgemein als Einrichtungstextilien zu charakterisieren – gut in die Wohnräume, wenn sie auch weniger spezifisch an die Zellen gebunden und ebenfalls im weiteren Betrachtungsareal zu finden sind. Hier treten die für spätantike/frühislamische Textilien typischen Formen von farbigen Broschierschüssen, die auf schlichten Leinengeweben zu geometrischen Mustern kombiniert wurden, auf sowie Textilien mit Karomustern aus blau gefärbte Streifen, die in regelmäßigen Abständen in Kette und Schuss eingesetzt wurden.

~~Abb. 5: Als Polstermaterial verwendete Arbeitsabfälle (Inv. DB04-074)~~

Abb. 6: Die vollständige Kappe Inv. DB04-T054 aus Mönchszelle 36 70 Materialverteilung in den Zellen 36 und 37: Baumwolle 29–31 %, Leinen 46–47 %, Wolle 22–26 %. Die Verteilung kann durch diverse Faktoren (Zersetzungsprozesse, anderer Zer störungs-/Zeithorizont etc.) beeinflusst sein, dennoch soll die funktionale Begründung zumindest in Betracht gezogen werden. 71 Livingstone 2010, 84; Paetz gen. Schieck 2010.

Schließlich sei auf den Kontrast zur Nekropole verwiesen: Während die Gewebe typen des Lendenschurzes und der Tunika vermehrt im Kloster nachgewiesen werden können, fehlt dort das Gewebe der „minderwertigen Meterware“72 Leichentuch gänzlich. Die spezifische Tuchqualität wurde offenbar also nur für den Funerärgebrauch verwendet und fand im Alltagsleben keine andere Verwendung. Der Negativbefund könnte eventuell die Überlegung stützen, dass das Kloster sich auf andere Textilien spezialisiert hatte.

Einstufung der Tuchqualität Grundsätzliche Charakterisierung der Gewebe Trotz diverser Einschränkungen können in Deir el-Bachît also Textilien in ihrer ur- sprünglichen Funktion identifiziert und am entsprechenden Nutzungs-/Produktionsort untersucht werden. Für eine erste Charakterisierung der Produktion kann festgehal- ten werden, dass eine höhere Materialdiversität sowie Gewebekomplexität, als die bisher bekannten Quellen haben vermuten lassen, nachgewiesen werden kann. Das sagt jedoch noch nichts über die Tuchqualität aus; diese soll im Folgenden in den Fokus gerückt werden. Hilfreich dafür ist die Beobachtung, dass bestimmte Werte (Fadenbeschaffenheit, Gewebeart, Dekor etc.) in wiederkehrenden Mustern kombiniert wurden. So treten beispielsweise Strukturstreifen nur bei mittelstarken Leinengeweben in einer 1:1-Bindung wie bei der Tunika von SK Bachit 4 auf. Zwirnbindige Zierstreifen, oftmals in Kombination mit parallellaufenden grünen oder roten Farbstreifen, sind dagegen für Wolltextilien mit durchschnittlich 0,5 mm starken, S-gedrehten Garnen, die in der Kette eine Webdichte von acht und im Schuss von 18 Fäden/ cm aufweisen, reserviert. Aus diesen Erkenntnissen wurde eine Typologie entwickelt, die mit dem Voranschreiten der Textilanalyse kontinuierlich ausgebaut bzw. spezifiziert wird. In der Zuordnung und der Typen-Bezeichnung der Textilien sind die drei Faktoren Material73, Stärke des Gewebes74 und Bindungsart75 ausschlag- gebend; ein vierter Faktor76 ist variabel einsetzbar. Dieses System ermöglicht zum einen dem Bearbeiter einen schnellen Zugang – auf einem Blick ist klar, was z. B. Lm1 für ein Textil ist und dass Lm1I mit diesem verwandt sein muss –, zum anderen werden Textilien unterschiedlicher Materialien vergleichbar: Die Typen Bm1

72 Huber 2007, 67. 73 Zugeordnet wurden bislang B = Baumwolle, L = Leinen, N = Netze, P = Pflanzliche Fasern, nicht näher spezifizierbar, U = Unbestimmte Fasern, W = Wolle, Z = Ziegenhaare. 74 Fein (f) = Fadenstärke bis 0,5 mm, mittel (m) = Fadenstärke unter 1,0 mm, grob (g) = über 1,0 mm. Die Einteilung ist nur ein Orientierungswert. Die Zuordnung erfolgt in der Regel nach dem stärkeren Fadensystem. So bestimmt z. B. bei Typ Lg2 (s. Anm. 54) Fadensystem II maßgeblich die Festigkeit des Textils. 75 Die am häufigsten auftretenden Bindungsarten wurden mit festen Nummern belegt. Alles darüber hinaus ist variabel einsetzbar. 1 = ausgeglichene Leinwandbindung, 2 = Leinwand bindung mit Ripseffekt, 3 = 1:2- bzw. 2:1-Bindung, 4 = 2:2-Bindung. 76 Einsetzbar für Varianten, unterschiedliche Webdichten derselben Bindungsart oder unterschiedliche Spinnrichtungen. Alle Leinen- und Wollobjekte wurden in S-Richtung gesponnen. Bei Baumwolle treten alle denkbaren Kombinationen von S- und Z-gedrehten Garnen auf, sodass die Richtung immer mitangegeben wird (SS bzw. ZZ, wenn in beiden Systemen S- bzw. Z-gesponnene Garne verwendet wurden und SZ, wenn in einem System S-, im an deren Z-gesponnene Garne eingesetzt wurden).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 286 Sabrina Tatz und Lm1 können aufgrund ihrer spezifischen Materialeigenschaften und vermutlich finanziell abweichendem Wert unterschiedlich eingesetzt worden sein. Optisch stehen sie sich jedoch sehr nahe und können, je nach Verfügbarkeit des Materials, in den Funktionssektor des anderen vordringen wie beispielsweise die Kleidungsstücke der Tunika und der Kappe zeigen. Die Typologie soll also auch eine potentielle Funktionszuweisung erleichtern: Indem ähnlich gefertigte Objekte gemeinsam betrachtet werden, können Informationen, die aus einem Einzelstück hervorgehen, allgemein gültiger für eine größere Gruppe formuliert werden. Um einige Beispiele zu nennen: Typ Lm1 wurde, wie die Tunika aus dem Grab zeigt, für Kleidungsstücke verwendet. Die Variante Lm1I, ein Beispiel ist der Zierstreifen DB13-T012, konnte als repräsentativeres Kleidungstück bzw. Ein richtungstextil eingesetzt werden. DB07/1-T003 (Abb. 7) demonstriert, dass auch rein funktionale Objekte, wie grob bearbeitete Beutel, aus Lm1-Geweben gefertigt wurden. Der Wolltyp Wm2I ist dank zweier zweischichtigen Tunikafragmente (DB07-T039, DB13-T002) mit über der Brust verlaufenden clavi ebenfalls funktional im Bekleidungssektor einzuordnen; weitere Funktionen können bislang nicht genannt werden. Der Typ setzt sich deutlich von Wm2II mit einer wesentlich hö- heren Anzahl von Schüssen pro Zentimeter ab. Der koukoullion aus Grab Nr. 1 in Qurnet Murai (s. oben) zeigt, dass Wm2II ebenfalls als (ein aufgrund der hohen Webdichte schützenderes) Kleidungsstück Verwendung finden konnte. Einen deutlichen Kontrast bilden die Typen Bf1ZZ77 und Lg378 (Abb. 8). Für beide lassen sich keine konkreten Funktionen benennen, jedoch ist klar: Während das feinere Textil weich über eine Oberfläche fällt, elastisch ist und zudem höherwertig einge- färbt werden kann,79 ist das grobe weniger repräsentativ, in der Flexibilität eher starr, dafür jedoch robust und reißfest.80 Anhand allgemeiner Eigenschaften sind diese Typen also zumindest in Grundzügen charakterisierbar.

Abb. 7: Fragment eines Beutels mit wulstig eingeschlagenen Kanten an der Öffnung (Inv. DB07-T003) 77 In beiden Fadensystemen 0,2–0,3 mm starke Garne, Webdichte: 25–28 Fäden/cm. 78 Fadensystem I: Fadenstärke: 0,7 mm, Webdichte: 12 Fäden/cm; Fadensystem II: Fadenstärke: 1,9 mm, Webdichte: 4 Fäden/cm. 79 Zu den Eigenschaften von Baumwolle s. z. B. Droß-Krüpe 2011, 22. 80 Zu den Eigenschaften von Flachs s. z. B. Gleba & Mannering 2012, 5.

~~Abb. 8: Die Typen Lg3 (links) und Bf1ZZ~~

Aus diesen Regelmäßigkeiten lässt sich ableiten, dass die Weber offenbar über ein Tuchrepertoire verfügten, das sie je nach gefordertem Anspruch einsetzen und mit einzelnen Elementen ausstatten konnten. Insgesamt wurden bisher 28 Typen definiert, welche wiederum einige Varianten aufweisen. Etwa die Hälfte81 des Bestandes nehmen mittelstarke Textilien ein, die von allen bekannten Materialgruppen be- stückt werden. Unter den feinen Textilien (18 %) steigt der Anteil der Baumwoll- und Wolltextilien, zu groben Textilien (29 %) wurde nur Leinen verarbeitet. Die Typen weisen jeweils ein hohes Maß an gleichbleibenden Werten auf. Bei den Wollobjekten kam es zudem zu einer sorgfältigen Sortierung der Haare: Entweder sind die Textilien durchgehend in einem dunklen Braun oder einem mittelbraun- ockerfarbenen Ton gehalten. Diese Aussagen bezieht sich primär auf die feinen und mittelstarken Textilien, die Gruppe der groben Objekte ist heterogener, dennoch fügen sich die Fragmente zu klaren Typen zusammen. In der qualitativen Verarbeitung scheinen also bewusste Unterschiede gemacht worden zu sein: Ein reißfester Sack musste vor allem funktional und kostengünstig sein, also in einer schnellen Webweise produziert werden. Für Kleidungsstücke und Einrichtungstextilien aus feineren Tüchern war dagegen mehr Sorgfalt für ein gleichmäßiges Erscheinungsbild gefragt.

Luxusprodukte aus den klösterlichen Webwerkstätten? Das Textilhandwerk im Pauloskloster kann also grundsätzlich als solide und dem funktionalen Anspruch angemessen bezeichnet werden. Zur endgültigen Einstufung der Textilproduktion müssen weitere Eigenarten der Gewebe betrachtet werden: Ein einfaches Leinwandgewebe dürften wohl die meisten routinierten Webermönche in einer sorgfältigen Ausführung produziert haben können. Die Aneignung eines festen Repertoires mit einer vorgegebenen Anzahl an Ketten ist ebenfalls in relativ kurzer Zeit erlernbar. Daher sei im Folgenden der Blick auf die aufwendigeren Dekorationsschemata und komplexeren Bindungen gerichtet, die mehr Expertise verlangen und durch den Zeit- und Materialaufwand des Weiteren preislich in einem anderen Segment anzusiedeln sind und somit eine besondere Marktstellung innehatten.

~~81 Die Werte beziehen sich auf die Verteilung im erweiterten Werkstattbereich.~~

Flächige Dekorationen treten bislang nur selten auf, meist reduziert sich der Dekor auf schmale Zierstreifen, die durch eine Variation der Bindung oder Zu führung von farbigen Garnen entsteht. Wenige Kleinstfragmente belegen, dass mehrfarbige Wirkereien aus feinen Wollgarnen vorhanden waren, jedoch ist aus diesen nicht ersichtlich wie groß oder aufwendig die Muster waren; ein zur Hälfte erhaltener orbiculus (Abb. 9) ist jedenfalls relativ schlicht gearbeitet worden. Für Baumwolle sind flächige Färbungen, meist in blau oder schwarz, nachgewiesen, unter den Leinenobjekten wurde nur Typ Lm1I mit den mehrfach erwähnten Bro schierungen aufwendiger ausgestattet. Einige größere, zusammengehörige Frag mente aus Raum 40 ergeben dabei ein vollständigeres Muster von dicht gesetzten Quadraten aus gefärbter Wolle (rot-orange-braun und blau-grün), die von einem Rautenband aus leinernen Broschierschüssen umgeben waren (Abb. 10). Das Objekt findet mehrere Parallelen, die darauf hinweisen, dass sich die Technik und Gestaltung vor allem zwischen dem 6. bis 8. Jahrhundert in Ägypten großer Beliebtheit er- freute.82 Der Aufwand dafür ist gering, das Zuführen eines dekorativen Schusses kann an einem einfachen Webstuhl durchgeführt werden. Die Objekte sind jedoch ein Beleg dafür, dass man sich der aktuellsten Mode seiner Zeit bediente und durchaus unterschiedliche Techniken beherrschte. Das Grundgewebe dafür ist unter allen bekannten Textilbeständen Thebens (s. oben zu den Mumienfunden) bekannt, die weitere Ausstattung zwar eine Steigerung der Qualität, sicherlich jedoch kein seltener Luxusartikel.

~~Abb. 9: Eingewirkter orbiculus (Inv. DB14-T001)~~

82 Cortopassi 2008; De Moor et al. 2011; Verhecken-Lammens 2011. Ein in der Komposition verwandtes Stück findet sich bei einem frühislamischen Teppich der Katoen Natie Kollek tion, Antwerpen, Inv. 152, 14C-Datierung: 759–890 n. Chr.; aus denselben Abhüben in Raum 40 stammt Keramik des mittleren 7. bis mittleren 9. Jh. (Deir el-Bachît-Typ 224 und 291), Auskunft Thomas Beckh.

Abb. 10: Beispiel für ein Einrichtungstextil mit flächiger Broschierung; die gestrichelten Linien geben die Rekonstruktion des einstigen Dekors an, der anhand von Verfärbungen, Gewebeweitungen und Garnrückständen gut erkennbar ist (Inv. DB07-T025 und -T074)

Für Bindungen gilt: Je feiner das Textil, desto höher die Variationsbreite; unter den groben Fabrikaten finden sich höchstens (Halb-)Panamagewebe, die hier eindeutig die Funktion übernehmen, die Stabilität des Produktes zu steigern. Komplexe Bindungen lassen sich für Baumwoll- und Wolltextilien nennen und umfassen Schlingengewebe, Rapportmuster, Köper- und Atlasbindungen, die in größter Sorg fältigkeit eines gleichmäßigen Gewebes umgesetzt sind. Problematisch ist hier das meist singuläre Auftreten der Typen. Stehen die Textilien also am ehesten für eine höherwertige Fertigung, die sich weit vom Durchschnitt absetzt, ist bei ihnen gleichsam am unsichersten, ob es sich um Produkte des Paulosklosters handelt. Hier kann nur die voranschreitende Materialaufnahme ein klareres Bild liefern.

Fazit Für die Textilforschung ist Deir el-Bachît ein Glücksfall: Zeit und Raum der Klosternutzung sind vorgegeben, die Werkstätten, ihre Abfälle und Fertigprodukte sind in großen Mengen erhalten. Hinzu kommt eine hohe Anzahl noch längst nicht voll ausgewerteter Schriftquellen, welche die Produktionsabläufe, die beteiligten Akteure, Produkte und Preise nennen. Das daraus zu rekonstruierende Bild der thebanischen Textilwirtschaft wäre ein interdisziplinäres Großprojekt, das noch einige Zeit in Anspruch nehmen wird. Mit der Textilanalyse ist ein Grundstein gelegt, auf den es aufzubauen gilt. Zu diesem Zeitpunkt kann geschlossen werden, dass in Theben-West ein Textilhandel in Form von Gütertausch sowie monetärem Verkauf stattgefunden hat, an dem auch das Pauloskloster beteiligt war. Ob die Produktion des Klosters primär für den Handel vorgesehen war, der eventuell auch über die Region hinausreichte, oder nur ein (geringfügiger) Überschuss angeboten wurde, lässt sich bislang nicht beurteilen. Klärung ist vor allem vonseiten der Ostraka- und Papyri-Auswertung (aussagekräftig sind beispielsweise Textilrechnungen und -be-

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 290 Sabrina Tatz stellungen) zu erwarten, aber auch die voranschreitenden Textiluntersuchungen leisten ihren Beitrag. So wurde zunächst das Fundmaterial vorgelegt, woraus weitere Überlegungen bezüglich der klösterlichen Produktion und des mit dieser eventuell verbundenen Handels abgeleitet werden können. Feststeht, dass die Weber von Deir el-Bachît ein umfangreiches Repertoire an Textilien beherrschten, das sie in einer gleichbleibenden Qualität einsetzten und aktuelle ‚Modeerscheinungen‘ bedienten. Produziert wurde für die gesamte Breite des alltäglichen Gebrauchs, die von rein funktionalen Objekten wie Säcken bis hin zu repräsentativeren, teureren Produkten reichen konnte. Der am häufigsten nachgewiesene Textiltyp Lm1 ist ebenso in anderen monastischen Anlagen Theben-Wests in Gräbern nachweisbar; ein Alleinstellungsmerkmal zeichnet sich also nicht ab. Auffallend ist jedoch, dass der grobe Textiltyp der Leichentücher nicht im Kloster nachgewiesen wurde. Zum einen belegt das, dass bestimmte Tuchqualitäten für eine spezifische Nutzung vorgesehen waren, zum anderen ist zu überlegen, ob im Kloster eine Vielzahl von unterschiedlichen (besseren) Textilien produziert wurden, die minderwertigen Leichentücher dagegen außer- halb. Ließe sich diese Produktionsverteilung durch weitere Textiluntersuchungen im Kloster sowie in weiteren ‚Tuchwerkstätten‘ Thebens festigen, stände das Kloster zumindest in der Position, einen Handel mit Waren zu betreiben, die aufgrund ihrer beschränkten Verfügbarkeit im Gebiet einen gewissen Absatz versprachen und mit diesem Ziel überhaupt erst gefertigt wurden. Ob die Mönche darüber hinaus in Hinblick auf einen durch die Karawanenstraße begünstigten ‚Fernhandel‘ produ- zierten, dürfte nur schwerlich rekonstruierbar sein. Als hilfreich für die Untersuchung erwies sich die Definition einer Typologie, die nicht nur dabei hilft, die Produktion grundsätzlich zu charakterisieren und einzelne Gruppen übergreifend betrachten zu können, sondern auch eine hohe Anzahl an Fragmenten zeitsparend zu analysieren. Die folgenden Kampagnen werden zeigen, ob sich das bisher gewonnene Bild bestätigen lässt. So warten noch mehrere hundert Textilfragmente auf eine Analyse – darunter einige Wirkereien, die die Textilproduktion Deir el-Bachîts womöglich in ein neues Licht rücken könnten. Parallel dazu schreiten auch die Auswertung weiterer Quellen, wie den Ostraka, und die Ausgrabungen voran.

Bibliographie Bachatly 1981: Bachatly, C.: Le monastère de Phoebammon dans la Thébaïde 1. L’archéologie du site, Kairo. Bács 2000: Bács, T.: The so-called ‚Monastery of Cyriacus‘ at Thebes, Egyptian Archaeology 17, 34–36. Baraize 1914: Baraize, É.: Compte rendu des travaux exécutés à Déîr-el-Médinéh, ASAE 13, 19–42. Bechtold 2008: Bechtold, E.: A Monk’s Decorated Shirt from Egypt, KÚT 2, 81–90. Beckh et al. 2011: Beckh, T., Eichner, I. & Hodak, S.: Briefe aus der koptischen Vergangen heit. Zur Identifikation der Klosteranlage Deir el-Bachît in Theben-West, MDAIK 67, 15–30. Beckh 2013: Beckh, T.: Zeitzeugen aus Ton. Die Gebrauchskeramik der Klosteranlage Deir el-Bachît in Theben-West (Oberägypten), SDAIK 37. Boud’hors & Heurtel 2010: Boud’hors, A. & Heurtel, C.: Les ostraca coptes de la TT 29. Autour du moine Frangé, Brüssel (Études d›archéologie thébaine 3).

Boud’hors & Heurtel 2015: Boud’hors, A. & Heurtel, C.: Ostraca et papyrus coptes du topos de Saint-Marc à Thèbes, Kairo. Burkard et al. 2003: Burkard, G. & Mackensen, M. & Polz, D.: Die spätantike/koptische Klosteranlage Deir el-Bachît in Dra‘ Abu el-Naga (Oberägypten). Erster Vorbericht, MDAIK 59, 41–65. Castel 1979: Castel, G.: Étude d’une Momie Copte. In Hommage à la mémoire de Serge Sauneron (1927–1976) 2, Bibliothèque d’étude 82, 121–143. Cortopassi 2008: Cortopassi, R.: Datation en 14C de Neuf Toiles Brochés du Louvre, Archaeological Textiles Newsletter 47, 2–6. Crum 1902: Crum, W. E.: Coptic Ostraca from the Collections of the Egypt Exploration Fund, the Cairo Museum and Others, London. Crum 1926: Crum, W. E.: The Monastery of Epiphanius at Thebes 2. Coptic Ostraca and Papyri, New York. Darnell & Darnell 1996: Darnell, D. & Darnell, J. C.: The Luxor-Farshût Desert Road Survey, Oriental Institute Annual Report, Bulletin de Liaison du Groupe International d’Étude de la Céramique Égyptienne 19, 36–50. De Moor et al. 2011: De Moor, A., van Strydonck, M., Boudin, M. & Bénazeth, D.: Radiocarbon Dating of Brocaded Furnishing Textiles and Tunics from Katoen Natie and the Musée du Louvre. In A. De Moor & C. Fluck (eds.), Dress Accessories of the 1st Millennium AD from Egypt, Proceedings of the 6th Conference of the Research Group ‚Textiles from the Nile Valley‘, Antwerp, 2–3 October 2009, Tielt, 260–272. De Moor & Fluck 2010: De Moor, A. & Fluck, C. (eds.): Clothing the House. Furnishing Textiles of the 1st Millennium AD from Egypt and Neighbouring Countries. Proceedings of the 5th Meeting of the Study Group ‚Textiles from the Nile Valley‘, Antwerp 6–7 October 2007, Tielt. De Moor & Fluck 2011: De Moor, A. & Fluck, C. (eds.): Dress Accessories of the 1st Millennium AD from Egypt. Proceedings of the 6th Conference of the Research Group ‚Textiles from the Nile Valley‘, Antwerp 2–3 October 2009, Tielt. Droß-Krüpe 2011: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Wolle – Weber – Wirtschaft. Die Textilproduktion der römischen Kaiserzeit im Spiegel der papyrologischen Überlieferung, Wiesbaden 2011 (Philippika 46). Eicher & Fauerbach 2005: Eichner, I. & Fauerbach, U.: Die spätantike/koptische Kloster anlage Deir el-Bachît in Dra‘ Abu el-Naga (Oberägypten). Zweiter Vorbericht, MDAIK 61, 139–152. Fluck et al. 2000: Fluck, C. & Linscheid, P. & Merz, S.: Textilien aus Ägypten 1. Textilien aus dem Vorbesitz von Theodor Graf, Carl Schmidt und dem Ägyptischen Museum Berlin, Spätantike – Frühes Christentum – Byzanz, Wiesbaden (Kunst im ersten Jahrtausend Reihe A, Band 1,1). Fluck 2006: Fluck, C.: Textiles from Arsinoe/Madīnat al-Fayyūm Reconsidered: Georg Schweinfurth’s Finds from 1886. In S. Schrenk (ed.), Textiles in situ. Their Find Spots in Egypt and Neighbouring Countries in the First Millennium CE, Riggisberg (Riggisberger Berichte 13), 17–31. Godlewski 1986: Godlewski, W.: Le monastère de Phoibammon, Warschau (Deir el-Bahari 5). Gleba & Mannering 2012: Gleba, M. & Mannering, U. (eds.): Textiles and Textile Production in Europe from Prehistory to AD 400, Oxford (Ancient Textile Series 11). Graeff 2005: Graeff, J.-P.: Die Straßen Ägyptens, Berlin. Hall 1905: Hall, H. R.: Coptic and Greek Texts of the Christian Period from Ostraka, Stelae, etc. in the British Museum, London. Heurtel 2004: Heurtel, C.: Les inscriptions coptes et grecques du temple d‘Hathor à Deir al- Médîna, Kairo. Huber 2006: Huber, B.: Al-Kom al-Ahmar/Sharūna: Different Archaeological Contexts – Different Textiles? In S. Schrenk (ed.), Textiles in situ. Their Find Spots in Egypt and Neighbouring Countries in the First Millennium CE, Riggisberg (Riggisberger Berichte 13), 57–68.

Huber 2007: Huber, B.: Bautätigkeit und Wirtschaft in Deir el-Qarabin, Klosteranlage bei El-Kom El-Ahmar/Šaruna, BACopt 46, 61–68. Jones 1981: Jones, D.: The Economy and Administration of Egyptian Monasteries from the Fourth to the Ninth Centuries and their Relations with the Non-Monastic Community, Oxford. Kemp & Vogelsang-Eastwood 2001: Kemp, B. J. & Vogelsang-Eastwood, G.: The Ancient Textile Industry at Amarna, London. Livingstone 2010: Livingstone, R.: Late Antique Household Textiles from the Village of Kellis in the Dakhleh Oasis. In A. De Moor & C. Fluck (eds.), Clothing the House. Furnishing Textiles of the 1st Millennium AD from Egypt and Neighbouring Countries. Proceedings of the 5th Meeting of the Study Group ‚Textiles from the Nile Valley‘, Antwerp 6–7 October 2007, Tielt, 73–85. Lösch & Hower-Tilmann & Zink 2012: Lösch, S. & Hower-Tilmann, E. & Zink, A.: Mummies and Skeletons from the Coptic Monastery Complex Deir el-Bachît in Thebes-West, Egypt, Anthropologischer Anzeiger 70, 27–41. Nauerth 2006: Nauerth, C.: Opportunities and Limits of Post-Evaluation: Qarāra and al- Hibe. In S. Schrenk (ed.), Textiles in situ. Their Find Spots in Egypt and Neighbouring Countries in the First Millennium CE, Riggisberg (Riggisberger Berichte 13), 43–55. Noever 2005: Noever, P. (eds.): Verletzliche Beute. Spätantike und frühislamische Textilien aus Ägypten, Wien (MAK Studies 5). Paetz gen. Schieck 2010: Paetz gen. Schieck, A.: Late Roman Cushions and the Priciples of their Decoration. In A. De Moor & C. Fluck (eds.), Clothing the House. Furnishing Textiles of the 1st Millennium AD from Egypt and Neighbouring Countries. Proceedings of the 5th Meeting of the Study Group ‚Textiles from the Nile Valley‘, Antwerp 6–7 October 2007, Tielt, 115–131. Polz et al. 2012: Polz, D., Rummel, U., Eichner, I. & Beckh, Th.: Topographical Archaeology in Dra‘ Abu el-Naga. Three Tousend Years of Cultural History, DAIK 68, 115–134. Schrenk 2004: Schrenk, S.: Textilien des Mittelmeerraumes aus spätantiker bis frühislamischer Zeit, Riggisberg (Die Textilsammlung der Abegg-Stiftung 4). Schrenk 2006: Schrenk, S. (ed.): Textiles in situ. Their Find Spots in Egypt and Neighbouring Countries in the First Millennium CE, Riggisberg (Riggisberger Berichte 13). Seyfried 1991: Seyfried, K.-J.: Das Grab des Paenkhemenu (TT 68) und die Anlage TT 227, Mainz (Theben 6). Sigl 2007: Sigl, J.: Pits with Cross-Bars. Investigations on Loom Remains from Coptic Egypt. In K. Endreffy (ed.),Proceedings of the Fourth Central European Conference of Young Egyptologists, 31.8.–2.9.2006 Budapest, Budapest (Studia Aegyptica 18) 357–372. Verhecken-Lammens 2011: Verhecken-Lammens, C.: Technology of Supplementary Weft Patterned Linen Fabrics in the Katoen Natie Collection. In A. De Moor & C. Fluck (eds.), Dress Accessories of the 1st Millennium AD from Egypt. Proceedings of the 6th Con ference of the Research Group ‚Textiles from the Nile Valley‘, Antwerp 2–3 October 2009, Tielt, 273–285. Winlock 1926: Winlock, H. E.: The Monastery of Epiphanius at Thebes, I New York. Wipszycka 1964: Wipszycka, E.: L’industrie textile dans l’Égypte romaine, Krakau. Wipszycka 2011: Wipszycka, E.: Resources and Economic Activities of the Egyptian Monks, JJurP 41, 159–263.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textiles, Trade and Theories How Scholars Past and Present View and Understand Textile Trade in the Ancient Near East and the Mediterranean in Antiquity*

~~Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch~~

This paper argues that textiles as traded commodities are excellent, relevant and representative examples for reviewing the evidence on ancient economies and trade, particularly for reviewing the ways in which historians, philologists, Assyriologists and archaeologists have interpreted textile trade in antiquity.1 Plato, whose reflections on economics have often been overlooked and have only recently been given the attention they deserve,2 listed clothing as the third most important requirement of his ideal (and utopian) conception of the polis – one of the many, but dispersed, hints in the ancient sources of both the symbolic and commercial role and value of textile products. “Now the first and chief of our needs is the provision of food for existence and life.” “Assuredly.” “The second is housing and the third is clothing and that sort of thing.” “That is so.” “Tell me, then,” said I, “how our city will suffice for the provision of all these things (…)?3 Nevertheless, textile trade in antiquity seems to be a case of archéologie du disparu, the archaeology of lost material culture;4 not only have most ancient textiles per- ished, but in many cases, the material remains of prices, orders, sales and repairs are also lost, as most (literary) sources take little interest in them. Moreover, few

* This paper benefitted immensely from the critical readings and stimulating suggestions from Mary Harlow as well as Peder Flemestad, Salvatore Gaspa, Berit Hildebrandt, Florian Krüpe, Kai Ruffing, Stella Spantidaki, Beate Wagner-Hasel, and John Peter Wild. We owe thanks to Virginia Geisel, Mary Harlow, Cherine Munkholt, and Jonathan Wiener for their help with the clarity of language and thoughts. 1 Cf. Droß-Krüpe 2016. In the last five years, textile exchange, trade and distribution in the Mediterranean and along the Silk Road regions have been explored in conferences Harvard (20–21 April 2012): Exchange along the Silk Roads between Rome and China in Antiquity: The Silk Trade (organized by Berit Hildebrandt); Marburg (9–10 April 2013): Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity (organized by Kerstin Droß-Krüpe); Hangzhou (8–11 April 2013): Wool on the Silk Road: Research on the Eurasian Wool Textiles of Bronze to Early Iron Age (organized by Ulla Mannering and Zhao Feng); Kassel (11–14 November 2015): Textile Trade and Distribution 2. From the Ancient Near East to the Mediterranean 1000 BC to 400 AD (organized by Kerstin Droß-Krüpe and Marie-Louise Nosch); Hannover (9–10 June 2016): Waren und Tribute. Stoffkreisläufe und antike Textilökonomie (organized by Beate Wagner-Hasel and Marie-Louise Nosch), and the results published or are about to appear, see Droß-Krüpe 2013; Hildebrandt 2016; Mannering & Zhao (forthcoming). 2 Föllinger 2016. 3 Pl. Resp. 369d: ἀλλὰ μὴν πρώτη γε καὶ μεγίστη τῶν χρειῶν ἡ τῆς τροφῆς παρασκευὴ τοῦ εἶναί τε καὶ ζῆν ἕνεκα. παντάπασί γε. δευτέρα δὴ οἰκήσεως, τρίτη δὲ ἐσθῆτος καὶ τῶν τοιούτων. ἔστι ταῦτα. φέρε δή, ἦν δ’ ἐγώ, πῶς ἡ πόλις ἀρκέσει ἐπὶ τοσαύτην παρασκευήν. Translation by Paul Shorey with small alterations by the authors. 4 Spantidaki in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 125–138.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 294 Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch installations of textile trading places, such as markets, ports, workshops, and few textile trading artefacts such as textile tools or price tags remain.5 Intangible evidence for textile trade includes names for garments and techniques, a terminology, which maintains a remarkable resilience over time but also identifies a potential wealth of innovations.6 These observations are not only true for Classical Greece and Rome but apply to many other regions and periods of the ancient world. Our perspective is significantly broadened, however, by including documentary evidence, in particular papyri from Egypt (and some other places), cuneiform texts or the epigraphic record.7 For example, traders specialising in selling linen are mentioned both in Attic comedy and in inscriptions,8 professional garment-sellers are mentioned in the Greek epigraphic record;9 the Periplus Maris Erythraei, dating to the mid-1st century CE, illustrates the importance of textiles as trading goods from the Roman Empire all the way to the East (meaning the Arabian peninsula and India) and back again.10 One might also think of the tax law from Palmyra dating to 137 CE, which provides evidence for the export and import of textile raw materials, for example, purple fleeces, as well as the profession of garment traders.11 Diocletian’s Price Edict is a unique source for garments, textile tools, fibres and salaries for textile workers, and numerous Latin inscriptions record freedmen (and -women) earning their living in trading professions connected to textiles.12 All this encourages a more systematic exploration of textiles as trade items. The present paper has a specific aim: to explore in greater depth the theoretical frameworks of textile trade and distribution, and to integrate data from the Greek and Roman worlds with pertinent sources in the ancient Near East, primarily from the first millennium BCE.

Textiles, Trade and Theories in Ancient History In recent years, research in ancient history has increasingly focused on the economy of the ancient world,13 and consequently, research on the ancient economy seems to be experiencing remarkable progress. Possibly, this is at least partially a response to the current global economic and financial crisis, and the need to understand these rather complex and increasingly difficult processes by investigating equivalent historical phenomena. Ancient economic history can look back on a long and significant tradition. However, before the late 20st century, only few, but important, substantial contri-

5 On possible price tags see Graßl 2014. 6 Michel & Nosch 2010; Gaspa, Michel & Nosch (forthcoming). 7 See, e.g. Droß-Krüpe 2011. 8 Ar. Hipp. 129; IG 22/1570, 24; IG 22/1572, 8. 9 IG 22/11254; IG 2²/1673 (recording three entries for a total of 28 exomides purchased for public slaves from various clothes-sellers [himatiopolai]). 10 The main edition is Casson 1989. Cf. Seland 2010; Droß-Krüpe 2013, 150; Wild & Wild 2014. 11 TUAT NF 1, 280–292. 12 E.g. CIL 6/33906 (= ILS 758); CIL 6/3782; AE 1929, 23. See also Larsson Lovén 2013. 13 For example the following publications of the 21st century: Wagner-Hasel 2000; Scheidel & v. Reden 2002; Rollinger & Ulf 2004; Eich 2006; Kloft 2006; Manning & Morris 2007; Bowman & Wilson 2007; Oliver 2007; Moreno 2007; Tomber 2008; Migeotte 2009; Herz et al. 2011; Carla & Marcone 2011; Temin 2012; Terpstra 2013.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textiles, Trade and Theories 295 butions had been made to the discussion: it was particularly the ‘Bücher-Meyer- controversy’ at the turn of the 20th century – rightly considered as the debate of the century in ancient economic history.14 As this is certainly not the right place to resume this debate in toto, some brief (and abridging) remarks ought to suffice: this debate over the basic features of the economy in Classical Antiquity arose with Karl Bücher’s claim that the ancient economy never overcame the stage of a ‘closed household economy’.15 This stance stimulated immediately rigorous rejections from the elite scholars of ancient history. Eduard Meyer, in particular, (along with Karl Julius Beloch and others) dismissed Bücher’s statement as being an unscientific and ill-founded description of the ancient economy. He assumed instead that some periods in ancient history were rather economically comparable with early modern capitalism.16 Another work that has ranked as an basic reference (at least well into the 1990s) was The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World published 1941 by the Russian ancient historian Michail Ivanovič Rostovtzeff, representing a decidedly modernistic view towards the Hellenistic world. Rostovtzeff graded the key sectors of the ancient economy according to their importance as agriculture, forestry, mining, and fishing. Yet, neither trade nor textiles, however, were given any prominent role, although the latter are named as important products – but only for certain regions, these being Egypt, Phoenicia, Cyprus and the Greek poleis on the Ionian coast.17 To Rostovtzeff, textiles are rarely traded and almost exclusively produced within the individual household for personal requirements only.18 In his opinion, trade in all manufactured goods – perhaps with the exception of luxury items – was barely developed. Since Rostovtzeff believed that textiles were a result of subsistence and household production only, they were never looked upon as trading articles, and their potential role as traded commodities was neglected.19 The ‘primitivist’ approaches have been given another boost by the alleged ‘new orthodoxy’20 of neo-primitivistic positions as expressed by the Cambridge school, primarily by Moses I. Finley and his predecessor of the chair of Ancient History at Cambridge, A. H. M. Jones.21 Very briefly outlined, Finley argues, that the ancient (meaning more or less Greek) economy can by no means be conceived in modern terms. He believed the ancient economy to have been primitive, based largely on agrarian production, characterised by localised small-scale manufacturing and very little technical innovations. According to him, only very limited surpluses existed

14 For a good summary of the ‘Bücher-Meyer-controversy’ see Schneider 2009, 347–381, as well as Wagner-Hasel 2009 and 2011, 280–289 and Lupi in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 169–191. 15 Bücher 1893. 16 Meyer 1895; Beloch 1899; Hoffmeister 1899; Meyer 1910, esp. 113 and 144. Bücher respon- ded 1901. Cf. Wagner-Hasel 2015. 17 Rostovzteff 1941, 1222–1223. 18 Rostovzteff 1941, 1227. His view on the Roman world is very similar (Rostovtzeff 1926). 19 However, as John Peter Wild pointed out to us, Rostovtzeff (1938) published the amazing textiles of Dura-Europos, and was well aware of the advanced techniques value of textiles. 20 Cf. Hopkins 1983, xi. 21 Finley 1973 and 1977 – one may note that both his major works barely mention textiles. An overview of the research history can be found in Bresson 2007, 7–26, Ruffing 2008, 1–16, Flohr & Wilson 2016, and Ruffing 2016. For a discussion on the history of ideas, especially in the context of Greek economy, see also Eich 2006, 7–98.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 296 Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch and hardly any trade was conducted (and if so, it was limited to luxury goods only). Although his highly influential study was only published 1973, when he was in Cambridge, a number of his ideas seem to have been developed much earlier under the influence of Polanyi and Jones.22 It is important to note, however, that Finley’s position in particular, in spite of its undeniable impact, was questioned from the start, leading to divergent views on the ancient economy. A core question was the nature of the ancient city: a consumer city as assumed by the Cambridge scholars, following Max Weber’s description of the Konsumentenstadt, or a producer city as assumed by those of more modernist views.23 Few historians and archaeologists of the previous generation who analysed ancient trade rarely, if ever, included textiles and garments in their analyses and interpretation of the ancient world.24 Alain Bresson, in his two-volume L’économie de la Grèce des cités (fin VIe–Ier siècle a. C.) is one of the few ancient historians to include textiles in his comprehensive analyses of ancient economy and trade.25 He did not dedicate a large part of his analysis to textiles, but emphasized the significance and importance of textiles in the ancient economy. Bresson sees here “a genuine mass production”26 and speaks of “textiles, the sector that employed the most labour and which must have produced by far the most profit.”27 To the question of the consumer city or the producer city, Bresson answered with his 2000 work, La cité marchande. Taken as a whole, research on ancient economic history at the turn of the 20th and 21st century showed the need for new methodological approaches. Recent�� discussions on the ancient economy and trade have also emphasized the psychological and emotional aspects of transactions, for example, the roles of trust and confidence as being the driving forces and consolidators of trade, whereas distrust and corrup- tion would slow down or disrupt trade and commercial interaction. The institutional measures to ensure trust and confidence are well addressed in the theories united under the captivating concept, New Institutional Economics (NIE). In New Institutional Economics, institutions are perceived as relevant structures intended to reduce risks and instability.28

22 Flohr & Wilson 2016, 34–35. The works of Tenney Frank (1910; 1918; 1927) and later Arnold Hugh Martin Jones (1940; 1960; 1964) acquired significant impact in to Anglophone academic world – and beyond – during the first two thirds of the 20th century. The latter, stressing that an ancient city was “economically parasitic on the countryside” (Jones, 1940, 268), also dealt with what he called the Roman ‘cloth industry’ (Jones 1960, see also Larson Lovén 2013, 110–111). For Polanyi’s discussion of economic models in antiquity, see 1957 and 1968. 23 Weber 1921; see also pertinent discussion in Hansen 2000, especially 156–160. 24 Garnsey & Whittaker 1983; Garnsey, Hopkins & Whittaker 1983; Andreau, Briant & Descat 1994; Osborne 1996; Parkins 1998; Whitby 1998; Prag, Snodgrass & Tsetskhladze 2000. These works all deal with ancient economy and trade but have none or only rare mentions of textiles. 25 Bresson 2007, 150–160; the French work was translated and updated in the English edition, Bresson 2016, 190–194, 353–358, 360–364. See also Nosch 2014. 26 Bresson 2016, 192. 27 Bresson 2016, 193–194. 28 North 1981, 5; North 1990.

Textiles, Trade and Theories of New Institutional Economics In 1977, Douglass North had suggested a historical analysis of past and contemporary economics based on transaction cost theory,29 a cornerstone of New Institutional Economics.30 Although North himself had published a series of important essays and a fundamental monograph on the use of New Institutional Economics in historical societies,31 this new approach was introduced into ancient history only hesitantly.32 In this respect, Morris Silver, a New York-based economist, played a pioneering role in the 1990s. He had analysed the ancient economy of the Classical world and the ancient Near East from a New Institutional Economics’ perspective,33 and in his Economic Structures of Antiquity, Silver, as North before him, emphasized transaction cost theory. He also included textiles as a key product in his analysis, defining, for example, the textile exports documented in Ebla texts from the mid-3rd millennium BCE in terms of comparative advantages.34 Prior to Silver, Jean-Jacques Aubert had focused on principal – agent relationships – also a cornerstone of New Institutional Economics. His study, Business Managers in Ancient Rome, was published in 1994.35 However, it was not until the first decade of the 21st century that New Institutional Economics experienced a breakthrough in ancient economic history research. In 2005, Elio Lo Cascio, who must also be seen as a pioneer in this field, published a radical request for the application of New Institutional Economics to the Roman economy.36 Dennis P. Kehoe used the same approach of New Institutional Economics in a 2007-study on the reciprocal relationship between Roman legisla- tion and agriculture.37 In the same year, Bresson published his fundamental study on the economic history of the Greek poleis, which also applied New Institutional Economics theories and included textile production as well as trade in raw textile fibre material.38 The breakthrough of this new approach was completed with the publication of The Cambridge Economic History of Greece and Rome edited by Ian Morris, Richard Saller and Walter Scheidel, also in 2007, the theoretical background of which mostly originates from New Institutional Economics39 – but where again, textiles are treated randomly and only appear scattered in a few chapters.40 Broekaert’s paper in the present volume, The Empire’s New Clothes. The Roman Textile Industry in an Imperial Framework, is an apology for a comprehensive NIE analysis of the Roman economy and of the textile industry’s role and performance in it. Broekaert poses a crucial question: with the integration of large parts of southern and central

29 North 1977. 30 Cf. Silver 1995, xxi. 31 Cf. especially North 1992 and 1996. 32 An example of a critical assessment of New Institutional Economics is Maucourant 2012. 33 Cf. Silver 1983; 1995. 34 Silver 1995, 143. See below for a discussion of comparative advantage in antiquity. 35 Cf. Aubert 1994, 40–116. 36 Cf. Lo Cascio 2005 and 2006; see also Lerouxel 2006. 37 Cf. Kehoe 2007, especially 29–52. 38 Cf. Bresson 2007, 23–36; for his opinion on the impact of textile trade see also Bresson 2012; Bresson 2016, 190–194, 353–357, 361–364. 39 Cf. Morris et al. 2007. 40 That this observation is not only true for this most recent companion on the Greco-Roman economy but also for handbooks of the ancient Near East is demonstrated by Garcia-Ventura in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 15–27.

Europe and the Near East into the Roman Empire, how did the Roman textile industry respond to this new economic framework? How did the institutions respond? The present volume provides several answers, and does not limit itself to the Roman textile industry, but also explores the impact of political and military expansion on textile manufacture and trade in other parts of the ancient world. Generally, the New Institutional Economics approach is, in our view, productive and succeeds in extracting and highlighting new aspects of economic actions in the past. Yet, textile production and distribution do not act, or perform in New Institutional Economics terminology, in the same way as most other economic sectors. It has its own particular requirements, modes of communication, customer fidelity, fashions and traditions, and we cannot be certain that frameworks from agriculture, metal extraction and trade are always applicable to textiles. For textile production, transaction costs, and in particular transportation costs, play their own specific roles. Indeed, for the medieval period, which did not see major improve- ments in inter-regional infrastructure compared to, for example, the Roman Empire, the French historian Jacques Le Goff calculated that transportation costs were much lower for textiles than for any other of the major categories of goods: in medieval trade, he calculated 15% transportation costs for the prices of grain but only 2% transportation costs for wool and silk prices.41

Comparing Histories and Quantifying the Economy Currently, New Institutional Economics is not by any means the only the only new methodological and theoretical approach used in the analysis of ancient economies. In 2008, in The Roman Bazaar, Peter Fibiger Bang ventured to describe the economics of the Roman Empire with reference to the Indian Mogul Empire (1526–1857) by using the comparative approach of ‘cross-over history’.42 A comparative approach had already been taken by Henri W. Pleket in 1990, where he chose the economy of Early Modern Europe as a referential base for his economy of the Roman Empire.43 In the realm of textiles, Rosa Reuthner embarked on a similar path in her study of women and textile production in Greek households, compared to household economies of Early Modern Europe and manuals of how to run an efficient and proper domestic economy.44 The universal theme of textiles is, indeed, highly germane to comparative studies for several reasons: textile technology and productivity remains quite stable from the Bronze Age to the early medieval period, and textiles, in particular those made of silk or cotton, are commodities we know linked Asia and the Mediterranean from ancient up to early modern times.45

41 Le Goff 1972, 17; Bresson 2016, 84. 42 Bang 2008 and 2009. 43 Cf. Pleket 1990 and previous studies of 1984 and 1988. On the subject of textile distribution, one of his later essays deserves particular attention: Pleket 1998. Among the more recent works taking this comparative approach see Whittow 2013. 44 Reuthner 2006. 45 This was illustrated in the volumes edited by Nosch, Zhao & Varadarajan 2014 and Hildebrandt 2016. See also Crill 2006, Curtin 2008 or Hildebrandt 2012 (on silk trade); trade in cotton and silk is also addressed in Shamir in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 231–245.

Another approach deserving particular attention is provided by the anthology Quantifying the Roman Economy edited by Alan Bowman and Andrew Wilson in 2009, whose contributions are devoted to quantifying Roman archaeological and documentary source material.46 This leads to the crucial question of whether we can quantify textile trade in antiquity.47 For the Roman world, Miko Flohr raises an important caveat in his paper, ‘Evidence, Models, and the Wool Economy of Roman Italy’, and assumes that it would only be possible to quantify the textile consumption aspect of the Roman economy, but not its production side. Moreover, Emanuel Mayer has recently proposed the concept of a taberna economy in the Roman Empire, serving as a foundation for the development of the financially potent, culturally distinct middle class in contrast to the imperial upper class.48 Likewise, another recent take is the focus on growth in ancient economy and trade, both in the Greco-Roman world and in the ancient Near East.49 However, in these works, economic growth is not analysed in terms of increased textile consumption and production, or accelerated or differentiated textile trade, since most scholars seem to consider textile consumption – if it is considered at all – as a staple basic need, like subsistence food consumption, which is primarily impacted by population growth, and only marginally by economic growth and wealth. Thus, quantifications, taberna economies, and growth are significant new approaches, but it remains to be seen how they can be used to explore and integrate textile trade and distribution. Social network theory is increasingly popular, although economic aspects often take second place to social connections. Particular highlights in this context are Giovanni R. Ruffini’s Social Networks in Byzantine Egypt, 2008 and Irad Malkin’s A Small Greek World: Networks in the Ancient Mediterranean, from 2011.50 Eivind H. Seland has applied network analysis to the datasets of clothing and ports of trade in the Periplus Maris Erythraei. He demonstrates that the Egyptian ports of Myos Hormos and Berenike, as well as Barygaza in India, stand out as extraordinary centres of textile trade, and concludes that textiles are indeed the backbone of Indian Ocean trade. Regarding the extremely valuable commodity silk, it is interesting to note that some Indian ports both import and export silk, thus suggesting local silk production living comfortably alongside silk trade. Seland infers that: textiles move in all directions, so that some ports import certain types and export others. This is not prestige trade or gift exchange, but an integrated market system with producers and traders catering to local demand (…).51

46 Cf. Bowman & Wilson 2007. 47 See e.g. van Minnen 1986; Drinkwater 2001; Droß-Krüpe 2011, 78–86; Broekaert 2014. 48 Cf. Mayer 2012. 49 Morris 2004, 709–742; Bresson 2016; Ober 2010, 241–286; Jursa 2010. 50 None of the latter works of scholarship mentioned include textile products in their analysis. However, see Seland 2016. Broekaert 2011 and 2013 as well as Flohr in this volume (= Droß- Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 49–62 who assign a key role to social networks, though not taking a Social Network Analysis-approach. 51 Seland in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 211–219.

Changes in Trade Patterns In this paper, we gather evidence of textile trade over three millennia and it is thus crucial to outline the large-scale systems and changes over this long time span. The political entities, such as Classical Greece, Hellenistic Egypt, the Roman world, first come to mind as scaffolds for our reflection, as do geographical and environmental realities and chronology. It is important to reflect upon what larger factors govern textile trade beyond the local needs and regional networks. Salvatore Gaspa positions textile trade in a historical and chronological context. His interpretive model demonstrates that we need to understand textile trade in the first millennium BCE as fundamentally different from that of the second millennium BCE.52 These two millennia had two quite different systems and strategies for producing and trading textiles, each with its own methods and aims for textile trade, and it is only by interpreting textile trade between these major socio-economic systems in the ancient Near East that we are able to understand and appreciate it fully. A collapse occurred at the end of the Bronze Age with radical changes and crises, especially in the region of the eastern Mediterranean, from the Euphrates to Anatolia, Syria, Palestine and the Aegean area, the Bronze Age palace and temple systems were destroyed and with them collapsed the Bronze Age economic systems. In the second millennium economies, textiles were produced and consumed in palaces and re-distributed to remunerate officials and workers within the palace and temple systems.53 In parallel to these closely monitored systems of textile production, distribution and consumption, there were also other exchange systems between individual persons, households or workshops, based on demands for cloth and the availability of labour and raw materials.54 The new systems of trade networks emerging in the st1 millennium BCE were based on different socio-economic systems, new policies, a new economic geography, but also on innovations, such as improved ship technology and camel caravans, enabling much longer journeys. In the East, this expanded the potential trade networks to comparably more distant areas, which were previously inacces- sible, such as the arid regions of the Arabian Peninsula and the Iranian Plateau. In the 1st millennium BCE, the Iron Age political and economic systems of Anatolia, Syria, Palestine and Aegean area were ruled by city-states and ethnic kingdoms. The new trade network of the 1st millennium not only served the old palace and temple sites but connected new nodes such as harbours and caravan cities, attracting the political and commercial interest of large polities towards these rich international trade centres.55 In the Aegean, in Brendan Burke’s analysis, the 1st-millennium BCE sanctuaries took over the roles which the Mycenaean palaces had previously played, also in terms of the economy, trade, production and distribution. Ritual activities were a driving force of certain parts of the ancient economy, and traders could perhaps gain markets around major sanctuaries. The production, trade and circulation of dedicated valuables in a sanctuary context is difficult to quantify, due to the scarcity of sources, and large parts of dedications, such as ani-

52 Breniquet & Michel 2014. 53 Nosch 2008. 54 Veenhof 1972; Michel 2001; Michel & Veenhof 2010; Michel 2014. Private letters written on papyrus provide information about the transfer of goods across the entire province of Egypt, including textiles. Cf. Droß-Krüpe 2014; Reinard (forthcoming). 55 See Gaspa in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 93–123 with further references.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textiles, Trade and Theories 301 mals, wine or food, were consumed immediately, or used for a short time. Other goods, such as textiles, were stored in the sanctuary and registered, sometimes even annually, as is attested at the sanctuary of Artemis in Brauron on the eastern coast of Attica.56 Burke suggests that the numerous Phrygian bronze fibulae and belts found in early Greek sanctuaries could be interpreted as proxies for the dedications of the renowned Phrygian textiles. “The fibulae are a portable concentration of metallic wealth in an age before coinage”, he claims,57 and this highlights the relationship between textiles, value and the economy. An Integrated Approach to Textile Trade in the Ancient World In the light of research history, it is notable that not only does a wide repertoire of theories and approaches exist, but also that a sharp demarcation persists in our understanding of the economies of the Greco-Roman world, and ancient Near Eastern cultures, respectively.58 Despite textiles being traded across the entire Mediterranean, to the northern Roman provinces, to India and China and back, as scholars, we still tend to interpret them within some preconceived models of economic systems, which are based on history and geography, and confined to the Ancient Near East, to Greece, to Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, and to the Roman Empire. These models can admittedly be helpful scaffolds for research; they do, however, rest upon different academic traditions and upon very different bodies of evidence in the source material. The perception of entirely different types of economies is rooted in the idea of qualifying pre-modern economies as “embedded”,59 which means that political and sociological structures are prerequisites for any economy, and that homo oeconomicus takes second place to homo politicus. This distinction is based on the assumption of a sharp contrast between the ancient Greco-Roman economies being characterized by the oikos and private property, and the ancient Near Eastern economies by large institutional units (i.e. palaces and temples) rather than by private property.60 Notably, Michael Jursa justifiably took an unequivocal stance against the assumption of total otherness regarding ancient Near Eastern economies, in particular that of the Babylonians.61 Against this divided background, it should constitute a specific goal to include the experts in, and pertinent discussions of, ancient economies and trade patterns in these different regions, in order to overcome the previous, rather Eurocentric, focus on the Mediterranean region.62 We strongly believe that bridging east and west is particularly germane when exploring textile trade.

56 Cleland 2005a and 2005b; Brøns 2016; Brøns & Nosch (forthcoming). 57 Burke 2016, 166. 58 In regard to the so-called Asian despotism, cf. Reich 2004, 493–510. 59 Polanyi 1968. 60 Cf. Morris et al. 2007, 8; Bedford 2005, 59–70. See also Papadopolou in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 193–209 for the idea of a predominantly state-driven economy in Ptolemaic Egypt. 61 Cf. Jursa 2007 and 2008 as well as Jursa 2010, esp. 783–800. 62 See Gaspa in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 93–123; Graslin-Thomé in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 63–77; Fink in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 79–92; Shamir in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 231–245.

Common to the ancient Near East and to the Greek and Roman world is the tendency of many scholars to view trade patterns in terms of a centre and periphery model. It can certainly be a very useful model to explain and justify the mo- dalities of trade. However, it has the methodological bias that most textual sources come from centres (and perhaps the presence of texts in fact transforms a site into a ‘centre’ in the course of scholarly analysis). Centre versus periphery models can be seen in Mycenaean palace economies and bureaucracies, in works on Assyrian and Babylonian trade and economy, in the analyses of Athens versus Attica or other parts of the Aegean, and in the analysis of Roman textile trade and production.63 However, here we aim to challenge these models, and to overcome these series of conventional antitheses of primitivism versus modernism, Classical Antiquity versus the Ancient Near East, centre versus periphery, oikos versus palace, household production versus (proto-)industry. We are fully aware that fully overcoming or ignoring these categories is beyond our powers, as we all tend to think in these frames and as these categories are indeed useful, as mentioned above. In our opinion, it is nevertheless important to scrutinize them and to be cognizant of how they determined – and still determine – how we as scholars perceive and interpret ancient sources. To be able to understand current research as well as to explore new research paths, we consider it crucial to adopt an integrated perspective. Nevertheless, regional differences certainly do exist in ancient textile trade, which we wish to briefly outline here, as they are addressed in this volume.

Regional and Chronological Frameworks in Ancient Textile Trade. Balancing Models Based on Households, Private Enterprises and State Control Assyria is also an excellent example of how empires (and also smaller economic and political entities) decide to direct large-scale investments towards infrastructures which facilitated trade in textiles. In Neo-Assyrian sources, the textual documentation focuses almost entirely on textile trade stemming from, or catering to, consumption in palaces and other government-related sectors. Yet, private trade certainly also existed and flourished in the Assyrian Empire, although it is scarcely attested in the extant sources. A few examples demonstrate that the royal officials and state-commissioned tamkārus not only acted as crown agents in domestic and foreign trading activities, but also conducted private business on the side. One might conclude with Salvatore Gaspa that the Assyrian crown’s main policy was not to monopolize the trade of textiles, and that private trade may have represented a substantial part of the Assyrian economy and was permitted – even encouraged – as long as it did not

~~63 Nosch 2003; Gaspa in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 93–123; Graslin-Thomé in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 63–77; Bresson 2016, 348–349; Jongmann 2000; Leveau 2007.~~

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textiles, Trade and Theories 303 evade state taxation and control.64 Laetitia Graslin-Thomé, instead, construes private enterprise in Assyria as having been much more limited in volume and scope.65 Documents concerning textile trade in 1st millennium Assyria primarily concern imported textiles, and neither exports nor internal circulation. A powerful and dominating empire, like that of the Assyrians, had the privilege of choosing between taking political or military control over an area where desired trade goods could be obtained, or taking control over the area’s trade stations and harbours where the desired goods could be levied. Control of the trading posts also enabled the Assyrians to exclude competitors, such as Egypt, from lucrative markets. A third option, however, is to relax the political and military control and instead install efficient taxation systems on trade, upheld by palace tax agents or given out in commission to agents. Gaspa demonstrates that the Assyrians allowed wealthy cities in Phoenicia and Babylonia a high degree of independence in order not to interrupt profitable trade activities. Instead, the Assyrians installed a strict system of taxes in Phoenician ports of trade and forbade trade in certain wares with competitors in the area.66 The traditional view of textile trade in both Classical and Hellenistic Greece and in Rome is strongly focused on small, private enterprises and local, domestic textile production.67 This focus on the private nature of textile trade in Classical antiquity owes much to the ‘Bücher-Meyer-controvercy’ at the turn of the 20th century about how to understand the ancient economy and the significant impact of Finley on the interpretations of Archaic and Classical Greek economy.68 It is particularly interesting to note a significant gap between normative guidelines in the literary sources – being the evidence traditional historians like Finley focused on – and social realities presented in the documentary sources as well as in the archaeological record. The realm of textiles actually highlights and substantiates a wider array of production modes than anticipated by historians, ranging from household economy to a (proto-)industrial textile production69 including a professionalized textile trade. The challenge is thus to weigh them or to argue against those who wish to prioritize

64 Gaspa in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 120. The Assyrian textual material provides an illuminating source basis to discuss the agency of textile traders, especially the state organized trade using the tamkārus, ‘merchants’, in order to fulfil the needs of the Neo-Assyrian state machinery. They were members of the palace elite who acted as royal agents and ensured commercial activities on behalf of the state (Radner 1999, 101–103). 65 Graslin-Thomé 2009, 281. Graslin-Thomé in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 63–77 addresses the crucial questions of why a product is imported, and what motivati- on lies behind trade. She uses the rich sources of the Neo-Babylonian archives (626–539 BCE), which represent some 20,000 texts, and the 2,000 or so archival documents of the Persian period (539–350 BCE). She observes that the origin of imported goods is only rarely mentioned. 66 Gaspa in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 93–123. 67 E.g. Reuthner 2006. Beginning with the Homeric epics, literary sources stress the role of women in the procurement of textiles and cloth for their families (e.g. Hom. Il. 3.125; 6.294–295; Od. 2.104–106). This private (textile) trade was based on dense social networks of family, friends and acquaintances, but could also involve slaves and freedmen, see Verboven 2002; Broekaert 2012 & 2013; Ruffing 2013; Droß-Krüpe 2014. 68 Finley 1973. See discussion above, notes 14–23. 69 One may think of the so-called “house of loom weights” (A viii 7) in Olynthus or a series of industrial complexes on the Rachni at Isthmia; see Droß-Krüpe 2016 with further li-

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 304 Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch one over another. Indeed, this volume illustrates both extremes, as well as hybrid in-between models that co-existed throughout antiquity. Stella Spantidaki reviews the documentation for Athens, and rather than falling into the old trap of primitive versus modern, she instead explores the use, advantages and disadvantages of both models. A defining element of a Classical Greek polis was the agora, the central market place and place for gathering and socialising. Here consumers, traders (emporoi), and producers (dēmiourgoi) met and interacted, both the professional traders and those trading the surplus of their own domestic productions. Specialized markets emerged in Athens dealing with textiles, such as the himatiopōlis, the speiropōlis, and the gynaikeia agora. A series of public offices were established by the Greek city states, such as the agoranomoi and the metronomoi, to ensure quality, supervise trade transactions and prevent fraud.70 Domestic textile production is also seen as a potential way out of financial problems for a family in a time of crisis, according to Xenophon, and thus may represent a kind of private buffer economy which could bolster a fragile financial situation.71 Whether rich or poor, textile production remains closely associated with female labour. Trading textiles, garments, sheep, raw wool, or dyestuffs were in contrast primarily a male sphere of action, although a few female traders of textile accessories and clothing are encountered in the sources.72 Herbert Graßl observed a fundamental difference between textile production structures in the east and west of the Roman Empire: women are not attested as actors in textile trade in the western part, but do appear in the eastern part of the Roman economy.73 The idealisation of textile-working housewives, specifically for girls and women of the upper classes, seems to be quite constant in Greece and in the Roman world as well.74 As mentioned above, papyri including documentary source material have significantly broadened our knowledge of ancient textile trade. In the Hellenistic period, the most prominent source for operations in textile economics derives from large estates in Egypt. In particular, the surviving papers of Zenon of Caunos, manager of one of these estates, cast an interesting light on wool textile production in mid-third century BCE Memphis.75 Based on this evidence, Maria Papadopoulou assesses textile production and distribution in Hellenistic Egypt as entangled in a complex hybrid model of institutions involved on several levels, and also regulated and controlled from the top state level in the desire to meet the requirements of the royal household.76 The crucial question she asks concerns the Greek impact on the Ptolemaic organization of the textile economy. Papadopoulou follows Joseph

terature. Meo 2012; 2014; 2015 has documented the rich data on textile manufacture in domestic contexts of Southern Italy, also well beyond domestic needs. 70 Spantidaki in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 125–138, admits, however, to being most convinced and inspired by modernist studies, such as Acton 2014. See also Reuthner 2006, 253–254 and Spantidaki 2016. 71 Xen. Mem. 2.7. 72 Ar. Ran. 1347. 73 Graßl in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 221–230. 74 E.g. the so-called Laudatio Turiae (ILS 8393 & 8394) or Suet. Aug. 64. 75 Loftus 2000; Papadopolou in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 193–209. 76 Papadopolou in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 193–209; for Roman Egypt see Droß-Krüpe 2011.

Manning77 as well as economist John Hicks’78 three-fold typology of economies as (i) village or local subsistence economies, (ii) the bureaucratic controlled economy, and (iii) the market economy organized by local communities such as temples and market places. However, the historical and archaeological realities are mostly less well defined than a typology and overlaps must be expected. The late antique monastery in Deir el-Bachît, Egypt, makes this point. Sabrina Tatz presents new archaeological evidence from the excavations of weaving workshops, and the quite exceptional evidence for loom pits,79 and for an archaeologist, the monastery would exemplify Manning’s type of a local subsistence economy, but written evidence also illustrates the monastery’s wider trade networks and a bureaucratic control of production. Besides Egypt and Asia Minor, Roman Italy provides one of the largest bodies of textual evidence on textile trade, production and consumption in the Roman world. The population of Italy experienced high growth from the late Republic, and the people of Rome were in constant need of clothing and textiles.80 Moreover, there was a general accumulation of private wealth, and in terms of textile consumption, it is worth noting how the increasing textile production developed alongside a more and more demanding dress culture. Italy was one of the largest sales markets in the Roman Empire, and within Italy, Rome was the main consumer. Miko Flohr, in his paper, ‘Evidence, Models, and the Wool Economy of Roman Italy’, re-examines how to interpret and understand wool trade in Roman Italy.81 Current scholarship has two main models of the Italian textile economy and of Italian – especially Pompeian – wool production. Both Tenney Frank and Walter O. Moeller believed that Pompeii was an outstanding centre of Roman textile production with large-scale manufacturing that was clearly export-oriented.82 In contrast, Willem Jongman assumes that wool was produced in Northern and Southern Italy, while weaving on a large scale took place in Central Italy. Pompeii, in his view, has instead to be interpreted as the archetype of Weber and Finley’s ‘consumer city’ with a small-scale textile industry, serving the local market only.83 In particular, Jongman’s model of the Italian wool producing economy has gained wide support in studies of ancient history.84 Flohr proposes an alternative model of the wool textile economy and geography of Roman Italy:85 while stressing the impact of improved opportunities for trade and transport as well as a possible increase in the scale of exchange, demand and consumption of textiles in Imperial times, he suggests interpreting the Imperial Roman textile

77 Manning 2011, 73–164. 78 Hicks 1969, 6 and 25. 79 Tatz in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 271–292. 80 See various contributions in Nosch 2011. One may note that the production of textiles for the imperial army is also attested in the Assyrian Empire as state-driven production of uniforms for military units documented in the Neo-Assyrian texts. 81 Flohr in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 49–62. 82 Frank 1918; Frank 1927, 260–264; Moeller 1976. 83 Jongman 1988, 155–186. On the consumer city, see above note 23. 84 See also van Minnen 1986; Drinkwater 2001; Droß-Krüpe 2011, 78–86; Broekaert 2014. However, it may be objected that Jongman’s model seems over-inspired by medieval industrial patterns. This point was raised by John Peter Wild during the conference. 85 Flohr 2013, 2014 and in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016).

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 306 Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch economy as woven into Italy’s Republican past.86 He advocates a model of the Italian wool economy where, due to the economic integration of the wider Mediterranean area and the development of a rather market-oriented textile economy, raw wool as well as woven textiles were traded. Flohr thus calls for the debate to shift towards analysing the relative proportion of textile trade – however difficult this may prove to be, considering the sources available. His call is answered by Wim Broekaert, who outlines the prospects and limits of an integrated and globalizing Roman textile economy.87 Consequently, given the regional structures of the ancient textile economy and trade outlined above, as well as the theoretical frameworks they are situated in or emerge from, for us the superordinate and crucial questions for developing an in tegrated approach to this range of topics are: why trade, and in particular, why textile trade?

Why (Textile) Trade? Trade as a Means to Compensate for a Lack of Resources A general view is that trade is a means to obtain sufficient basic resources for survival.88 Thus, our interpretations of the textile trade tend to be defined by general assumptions about the baseline of ancient economies. An example is the general understanding that the alluvial plain of Mesopotamia lacked sufficient resources, and thus, societies were reliant on trade and imports from areas richer in resources. Such assumptions are based on the principal idea that a lack of fibres would generate their import, and an abundance of fibres would facilitate their export.89 This general assumption about the absence of resources as a catalyst for trade can be seen in Sebastian Fink’s paper: Southern Mesopotamia, commonly regarded as the birthplace of urbanization, is characterized by its lack of natural resources. Besides its famous abundance of agricultural products including grain, livestock, fish, and reed, all found in the fertile areas along the river banks, almost every basic ingredient of a highly developed material culture had to be acquired from abroad.90

Evidently, Fink argues that a lack of natural resources would stimulate trade, and that even Mesopotamia’s abundance of agricultural produce was not sufficient. Thus, according to Fink, the trade stimulus does not derive from the competitive advantage of specialization or abundance, but from the desire to acquire foreign, necessary products, especially those of non-local origin, such as metals, glass, and precious fabrics.

86 Flohr in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 50: “the complex Italian textile economy of the Imperial period seems to have emerged from modest and familiar Republican period beginnings, with Romans initially tapping known and easily accessible markets, and expanding on that basis at a later moment.” 87 Broekaert in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 29–47. 88 For an overview on trade, subsistence and surplus theories, see Bresson 2016, 241–242. 89 However, examples from Mesopotamia illustrate that this rather simple logic cannot be de- duced from the sources: places rich in wool, such as Mesopotamia, also import wool textiles. 90 Fink in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 79.

A similar view on ancient trade can be encountered when analysing textile trade in ancient Greece. Alain Bresson states that “natural resources are unequally dispersed and, hence, commerce is established in order to compensate for this natural inequality”.91 This view is clearly based on trade as a provider of subsistence.92 Perhaps a small village could provide for itself and survive as an autarchic production and consumption unit, but in cities and ports, there was not sufficient local production to meet the needs of the inhabitants. According to this view, trade and distribution systems had to be put in place to secure food and clothing. The Greek city-states followed the same rationale when concluding bilateral agreements and enforcing trade monopolies with the providers of necessary materials for the fleet.93

Trade as a Means to Meet the Demand for Luxury An alternative view is that by means of trade, elites gained access to luxury items which were not accessible locally.94 For instance, in Edward Gibbon’s monumental work, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, published between 1776 and 1789, Rome’s trade with the east was considered to target luxury goods exclusively.95 This view sees the craze for luxury as fuelling trade, and assumes that this trade is channelled through elite networks of trust, in order to cater to elite desires.96 This perspective is further inspired by anthropological works on gift-giving and conspicuous consumption.97 In studies of the ancient luxury trade, a special role is generally attributed to Phoenicians, still many ways an enigmatic people known for trading, although better known through literary texts than through archaeology.98 Their connection to true purple dye in particular gives Phoenicians the air of dealers

91 Bresson 2008, 135. 92 This assumption is taken up by Spantidaki in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 125–138. 93 Ps.-Xenophon, Ath. Pol. 2.11: εἰ γάρ τις πόλις πλουτεῖ ξύλοις ναυπηγησίμοις, ποῖ διαθήσεται, ἐὰν μὴ πείσῃ τὸν ἄρχοντα τῆς θαλάττης; τί δ᾽ εἴ τις σιδήρῳ ἢ χαλκῷ ἢ λίνῳ πλουτεῖ πόλις, ποῖ διαθήσεται, ἐὰν μὴ πείσῃ τὸν ἄρχοντα τῆς θαλάττης; ἐξ αὐτῶν μέντοι τούτων καὶ δὴ νῆές μοί εἰσι, παρὰ μὲν τοῦ ξύλα, παρὰ δὲ τοῦ σίδηρος, παρὰ δὲ τοῦ χαλκός, παρὰ δὲ τοῦ λίνον, παρὰ δὲ τοῦ κηρός. (If some city is rich in ship- timber, where will it distribute it without the consent of the rulers of the sea? Again, if some city is rich in iron, copper, or flax, where will it distribute it without the consent of the rulers of the sea? However, it is from these very things that I have my ships: timber from one place, iron from another, copper from another, flax from another, wax from another. Translation by G. Bowersock.) 94 For discussion of theories related to luxury trade, see Bresson 2016, 343. 95 Gibbon 1909, vol. 1 (first edition 1776), 59. On Gibbon’s general attitude to economic issues see Pocock 1985, 143–156. 96 Schneider 1977, 21: “Before the emergence of the capitalist world-system (...) most exchanges between distant places involved the movement of luxuries.” Similarly, for the ancient Near East: Larsen 1987, 55: “It is essential to keep in mind that most of the trade served what we would call luxury needs or demands”. See also Braudel 2011 on the role of luxuries in the early forms of trade. 97 E.g. Mauss 1923–1924 or Gregory 1982. 98 Garcia Ventura in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 15–27; Gaspa in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 93–123.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 308 Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch in luxury goods, satisfying elite networks.99 Georges Roux considers Phoenicians as providers of “rare items such as cotton, dyes, precious stones and ivory” to the Assyrian elites.100 Phoenicians – though certainly instrumentalised in the literary sources to stress cultural identities (and alterities) of the Greeks and other peoples in the Mediterranean – still seem to constitute a useful example of traders trading in all these goods, which are today almost invisible in the archaeological and textual documentation. They are mentioned as traders in the Bible where Assyria is also described as the place producing luxury carpets and embroidered textiles;101 they are also found in the works of Homer102 and Herodotus.103 Marvellous exotic goods are enumerated in Hermippos’ trade list and in other text fragments (Antiphanes and Eubulus) from the Hellenistic period, these lists being a catalogue of traded goods noted with their place of origin.104 Most of the products mentioned are of an expensive and luxurious nature and not for subsistence purposes: sophisticated textiles for house furnishing, such as couches, pillows or carpets. These textiles for interior decoration were traded together with finer foodstuffs for the discriminating palate – fish, pork and cheese, raisins, figs, apples and pears, acorns, almonds and dates, and fine wheat flour. Roberta Tomber, in her study of Indo-Roman trade, noted that trade was conventionally seen as driven by the search for luxury goods, but she makes a crucial observation: that the goods that started out as rare luxury goods were gradually consumed by increasingly larger groups of people: Gems, silks and ostentatious consumption represent the luxury end of the market. But more and more it has been demonstrated that many objects of trade – including pepper and aromatics – became necessities for the Roman way of life, required for medicinal and religious purposes.105 The items that moved along the trans-Eurasian trade routes, often referred to as the Silk Roads, may be a good example of this change from extremely rare luxury goods to a more or less common article: the rarissime silk, in particular, seems to have become ever-present in the city of Rome in Imperial times.106 How else could one interpret Seneca’s – albeit perhaps exaggerated – lament:

99 Landenius Enegren & Meo (forthcoming). 100 Roux 1964, 353; Roux 1985, 297. See Garcia Ventura 2016 for discussion. Ugarit documents indicate that Phoenicia played a key role in textile production as well (KTU 4.132 [= RS 15.004]). 101 E.g. 1 Kings 5.15 or Esra 3.7. 102 E.g. Hom. Od. 14.287. 103 E.g. Hdt. 1.1, 5.57–59, 6.47. 104 Hermippus: fr. 63 (Koch I, 243); Aristophanes: fr. 193 and fr. 236 (Koch II, 92, 115); Eubulus: fr. 19 (Koch II, 171); Eubulus fr. 121 (Koch II, 208). Knorringa 1926, 74–76, 134–136. 105 Tomber 2008, 16; the question of luxury textiles is also raised by Tatz in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 271–292. 106 Cf. Hildebrandt 2009; Ruffing 2014.

~~I can see clothes of silk, if materials that do not hide the body, nor even one’s de- cency, can be called clothes.107~~

Textiles, Trade, War and Crises Is trade a peaceful alternative to war and aggression? Are wars and crises impediments to trade? In Sebastian Fink’s interpretative framework, foreign goods are acquired either via trade or via war.108 Here, Fink launches another set of theories on war and aggression as instruments for politics, and, as is germane here, as instruments facilitating or generating trade and new markets. In this he follows theories of pure classical economist stock of the 19th century, which see war as a potential driving force for development, and aggression as a means of creating new trade opportunities. Carl von Clausewitz is known for his statement that “War is merely the continuation of policy by other means”,109 and in his principal work Vom Kriege, published in 1832, Clausewitz points out that the economic profit-seeking logic of commercial enterprise is equally applicable to the waging of war and negotiating for peace. Furthermore, in colonial economies of the modern world, too, the conquest of land is perceived as a means for acquiring new trade opportunities. Several scholars of ancient Near Eastern history have seen aggression and war, leading to booty, as a thriving alternative strategy to obtain goods, and this strategy could replace, or supplement, trade. In earlier scholarship, in particular the aggressive approach and acquisition by means of war were considered of the greatest importance in the analysis of the Assyrian economy, while the civil exchange of private business and trade was down-played.110 This model reflects the situation of Assyrian textual sources with massive documentation of royal and central administration, and much less documentation of the private business activities, as mentioned above. In Assyria, conquered regions were exploited through tribute and booty, and the situation is registered as such in royal inscriptions of the Neo-Assyrian and Persian kings. Textile booty and textile tributes are both attested.111 Thus, the inflow of goods is formal- ized in these two formats, which can either represent two different strategies, or can co-exist. War can thus supplement the exchange of goods based on business and trade, and this is especially emphasised in the scholarship of the ancient Near East, but incidentally, this is not only true for the ancient Near East, but also for ancient Greece and the Roman Empire.112 It is also true that war and conquest force people and clothes to move and therefore contribute to the general circulation, transmission of techniques and styles, and reuse of clothing. Remains of non-local soldiers’ clothing have come to light in weapon deposits in Northern Europe and in Egyptian stone quarries.113

107 Sen. ben. 7.9.5: Video sericas vestes, si vestes vocandae sunt, in quibus nihil est, quo defendi aut corpus aut denique pudor possit (…) 108 Fink in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 79–92. 109 Clausewitz 1976 (originally published in German 1832), 87. 110 See Renger 2003, 36. 111 Gaspa in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 93–123; Graslin-Thomé in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 63–77. 112 On trade and war, see Lagger 2008, 489–494; Gleba 2014, 83–103; on the economic impact of conquest see Bang 2012, 201–203. 113 Möller-Wiering 2011; Mannering 2000.

An alternative theory on trade and war is that conflicts and instability are generally impediments to profitable trade. In Greek thinking and literary texts, war (polemos) and internal conflicts stasis( ) lead to famine (sitodeia), and shortages of resources (aporia tōn chrēmatōn).114 This situation of penury would rather prevent trade than fuel it, despite the potential market it could provide. When conducting research on ancient economic crises, scholars have focused primarily on famines and shortages.115 Trade, however, is usually not seen as part of the solution to famine and shortage; on the contrary, interrupted trade induces famines and crises. There is a huge body of research on monetary and financial economy and trade, based on ancient texts, numismatics and metallurgical analysis of metal compositions. Monetary challenges in antiquity concern both the deflation due to the reduced metallic value of coins, and the deflation induced by an amplification of the volume of coins. Financial challenges involve difficulties in payments, lack of money, credit problems and debts.116 Well-described financial crises include the debt crisis under Tiberius in 33 CE.117 To a certain degree, crises could be counteracted by political measures regulating debts and credits, and historian Jean Andreau believes in the monetary strength and stability of Roman times.118 Nevertheless, in the 3rd century CE, especially in the second half of the century, coins contain less and less silver.119 This, however, does not necessarily reflect a generalized economic crisis in this period, and there is a noteworthy price stability and lack of inflation according to the data provided from Egypt and Palestine between 215 CE to 274 CE. Inflation first makes a major impact from 280 CE - 360 CE with prices rising steeply by 14 to 20 times.120 The Edictum Diocletiani may have been issued in 301 CE precisely with the

114 Müller 2011, 333. 115 Garnsey 1998, 274, 280. See also Garnsey 1988, 6. According to Paul Garnsey, in antiquity shortages of food and other resources often existed, but real famines were rare. Paul Erd kamp (1998), instead, sees the existence of famines in antiquity as a more recurrent phenomenon which the populations had to endure. 116 It is crucial to distinguish between economic, monetary and financial crises in ancient economy. An example could be that a catastrophic harvest in antiquity would result in an economic crisis, but not in a monetary crisis. 117 Tac. ann. 6.17.1. 118 Andreau 2007, 128: “les crises d’endettement et les crises de paiement se produisent à des moments où les finances publiques ne vont pas si mal et où la monnaie est assez stable ou même très stable. Même au Ier siècle av. J.-C., et en dépit de la désorganisation politique et administrative, le système monétaire n’était pas aussi instable que les apparences pourraient le laisser croire”. 119 Concerning monetary challenges, it is important to note that earlier scholars viewed the decreasing metallic value of coins as problematic and resulting in a return to exchange systems without the involvement of money. Thus, this would have a significant impact on trade. However, since the 1960s–1970s, scholars such as Carrié have proposed a new theory on the effects of the decreasing metallic value of coins, especially in the 4th century CE. Instead, they rather see a larger circulation of coins as a result. Carrié 2007, 140: “Plus personne aujourd’hui ne parle de la ‘grande catastrophe monétaire du IIIe siècle’ ni même de la crise des échanges et de la vie économique qui en aurait été la conséquence, articles de foi indiscutables de la science historique du siècle dernier. Un vaste consensus a reformulé la position dominante, qui dédramatise un désordre monétaire au demeurant incontestable et en relativise les effets.” See also Ruffing 2012. 120 Bagnall 1985; Ruffing 2006.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textiles, Trade and Theories 311 aim of regulating and stabilizing prices and trade in a time of political instability and inflation,121 especially for the benefit of soldiers and their cloth consumption. However, the extent to which the Edict actually had an impact on price behaviour and traders’ behaviour is unknown, but the prices quoted in the Edict do not seem out of touch with reality.122 It seems that the Edict of Maximum Prices was particularly aimed at regulating prices at the frontiers of the Roman Empire where the presence of soldiers would impact local demand on markets and cause prices to rise.123 Textiles and clothing constitute a significant part of the items listed in great detail in the Edict,124 and this is again a relevant piece of information for the present discussion on textile trade and distribution.125

Innovations as Motor for (Textile) Trade? Moses I. Finley argued that the Greek and Roman worlds were in a certain sense ‘blocked’ in terms of technological progress, and their inhabitants lived an era of technological stagnation – thus that the ancient economy was scarcely influenced by innovations.126 Some years earlier, André Aymard held an even more radical opinion: according to him, antiquity categorically rejected any technical innovation.127 This assessment has, however, been heavily criticised. Against this standpoint, Peregrine Horden and Nicolas Purcell argue that there is an economic advantage in technology and innovation – and that people in the ancient world were well aware of it: Technological complexity can be regarded as a form of intensification.128 Moreover, Alain Bresson stresses the impact of technological innovations by suggesting the stimulating hypothesis that innovations in the flour grinding tools in Classical Greece “freed up female workers, considerable numbers of whom were thus made available for work in textile production, ultimately resulting in an increase in the productivity of women’s labour and a distinct increase in overall prosperity.”129 When it comes to textile technology, it is often perceived as a stable and non-innovative craft (by primitivists and modernists alike). However, throughout antiquity, textile techniques develop and affect other fields of knowledge, or are influenced by innovations in other areas. This can be exemplified by iron shears, which represent an innovative tool for many sectors since the flexibility of iron gave new properties to the tool. In the realm of shepherding, shepherds in the Bronze Age harvested

121 Main editions: Lauffer 1971; Giacchero 1974; see Flemestad et al. (forthcoming). 122 Wild 2014–2015, 12. 123 Meißner 2000, 79–84. 124 Specialised papers on textiles and clothing in the Edict include: Erim et al. 1970, 132, with a section on “clothing and cloth” written by John Peter Wild; Wild 2014–2015 on wool types; see also Wild 1964 and Flemestad et al. (forthcoming). 125 Bagnall 1985, 69 has observed that especially for military clothing, prices actually remained quite stable during the 4th century CE. 126 Finley 1965. For a more differentiated view see e.g. Schneider 1992; Meißner 2007. Also Greene 2000 and Wilson 2002 criticised Finley’s view (we thank Beate Wagner-Hasel and John Peter Wild for these references). 127 Aymard 1948. 128 Horden & Purcell 2000, 292. 129 Bresson 2016, 201–211.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 312 Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch handfuls of wool off the sheep, perhaps aided by knives, but the shears in the Iron Age made it possible to free the entire coat of wool off the sheep.130 This gave a new product, the fleece, and made shearing more efficient and less time consuming. Combing wool with iron combs was another textile innovation, supplementing and innovating the combing process, and yielding a new product: fine worsted yarns exclusively made of long-stapled fibres. Another innovation is the olive and wine press, which operates with a complex machinery of screws and gears. A similar press is used for cloth, and this is one of the many examples of innovations passing from one craft to another. Innovations not only changed production modes and shifted work- forces but also modified trade. For instance, Greeks would preserve and transport liquids in clay vessels or in skin containers, but in Roman times, the invention of the wooden barrel would represent more storage capacity and less container weight. This facilitated transportation, providing new opportunities for trade. Each of these innovations represents a specialisation and, potentially, a competitive advantage. Such transmissions of textile techniques and patterns can occur within a single workshop, between local workshops, inter-regionally or via the circulation of pattern cards and samples.131 There is also strong evidence for the transmedial transfer of patterns and motifs between pottery and textiles as illustrated in the animal friezes on orientalising style vessels and on the famous Koropi textile fragment.132

Modern Theories and Ancient Textiles Returning to our stated aim of both highlighting and exploring the theoretical frameworks of (textile) trade and distribution, Adam Smith’s seminal work An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations certainly deserves special attention as a starting point for modern economic thought. In his opus magnum, published on the eve of the Industrial Revolution, the Scottish economist calls for leaving behind the mercantilist policy of erecting trade barriers, in order to facilitate exports and stop or slow down imports133 and instead developed his concept of relative prices by comparing cloth and wheat production in terms of labour and efficiency. Here is a strong continuity and parallel to antiquity where grain and textiles also constituted the two major players in trade.134 According to Smith, trade is a consequence of advantage,

130 Andersson Strand & Nosch (forthcoming). 131 Stauffer 2008; Bogensberger in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 259–270; Broekaert in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 55–70. 132 Spantidaki in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 125–138; Burke in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 159–168 also illustrated the base of a statue in an Etruscan context with a pattern reminiscent of Phrygian patterns borders. 133 This conception can already be found in Plato, who suggested banning imports of purple dye and frankincense (Leg. 847c), and in Pliny, who deplores international trade as a potential huge loss of resources for the sake of unnecessary luxuries imported from the East (Plin. NH 6.101 and 12.84; see also Strabo 2.5.12 and 17.1.13 for the annual number of Roman ships sailing from Egypt to India). 134 Papadopolou in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 193–209 approaches the question of the scale and importance of the textile trade versus the grain trade. Concerning Egypt, both in Ptolemaic and Roman times, she concludes that “the textile market was only second to the grain market”. She observes that there seems to exist a parallel between textiles and grain in Egypt as the two major sources of wealth, and this is mirrored in the foundation myths of Alexandria, by some explained as outlined by visible traces with barley and by

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textiles, Trade and Theories 313 and here he introduces the concept of absolute advantage.135 Adam Smith and other economists after him136 conclude that households and companies in antiquity would gain by differentiating productions and specializing, which leads to relative advantages for them. From Raymond Vernon stems the theory that a new product will follow a certain life-cycle, from the place of invention and the original raw materials, to a matured product produced also in other places and with raw material from other places, until the point when it is eventually standardized and imported into its initial place of origin.137 The difficulty is that for the ancient textile economy we are unable to pinpoint when and where inventions were made, i.e. the beginning of a life cycle. However, Vernon’s life-cycle mechanisms are recognisable in textile production and trade: flax cultivation and linen textile production were a core element of Bronze Age agriculture and craft in Messenia and perhaps a competitive advantage for the western Peloponnese. Likewise, extremely fine linen fabrics are well attested from Early Bronze Age Egypt and must have constituted a competitive advantage.138 In the 1st millennium BCE, flax cultivation had become common and spread all over Greece and eventually became a product known to be imported into the Aegean, with the home industry and specialisation of Greece being neglected.139 Purple extraction and dyes are assumed to have been a specialisation of the Minoans in the early 2nd millennium BCE and represented an advantage which could have potentially catalysed Minoan exports of purple wool products, but according to legend, it is the Phoenician traders who took over this knowledge and exploitation in the beginning of the 1st millennium, and the specialisation became widespread in the Mediterranean, with hubs such as Hermione in the Southern Argolis in the Classical and Hellenistic period, or Ibiza in Roman times.140 Economist Evelyn Korn uses Smith’s concepts as well as other modern economic models to review how scholars analyse and perceive ancient economic systems. In doing so, she demonstrates how modern economic concepts, such as advantages, incentives, the gain of by-products, branding, product life-cycles, or imperfect competi tion, can be used to study ancient sources on textiles. Branding, for example, seems to be a very common phenomenon in antiquity. The use of toponyms to designate textile origins and consequently to create a ranked quality system already constitutes an integral part of textile terminologies in the 3rd and 2nd millennia BCE.141 This toponymic labet system could indicate the origin of the raw material (wool or flax), or the place of manufacture, but in the light of modern economic theory, the

others explained as outlined on the model of Alexander’s chlamys, his Macedonian military wool cloak (Diod. Sic. 17.52; Strabo 17.1.8; Plut. Alex. 26.5, see also Ogden 2014). 135 Smith 1776; Bresson 2016, 343–345. 136 E.g. David Ricardo, who in his work from 1817 On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation introduced the concepts of relative advantage and comparative advantage emphasizes the advantage gained through specialisation, but even more on the competitive advantage gained by those who could produce most efficiently. 137 Vernon 1966. 138 On Messenian flax in the Bronze Age, see Nosch (forthcoming). On archaeological specimens of Egyptian linen, see catalogue in Skals et al. 2015. 139 Cf. Gleba 2004; Nosch 2014. 140 Burke 1999; Bresson 2016, 361–364; Alfaro & Costa 2008. 141 Michel & Nosch 2010.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 314 Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch toponyms may alternatively convey specialization and absolute advantage. Examples include amorgina (clothing from the island of Amorgos),142 stromata/eria milésia (cloaks and wool from Miletus),143 Coan vestes,144 or ‘Laconian shoes’.145 The perhaps most numerous examples of clothing terms are found in the Edict of Maximum Prices.146 Elisabetta Lupi takes this line of thinking even further in her analysis of the textile brand of the toponym Sybaris as the summit of extravagance backed up by the association with the extravagant Milesians and their luxurious Milesian wool.147 The source is Timaios who highlights the luxury trade between Sybaris and Miletus. But was he reporting on real trade patterns, or did he write this to cater to an Athenian audience for whom Milesian wool was a well-known luxury item and the element of a Greek luxury discourse? This example emphasizes the difficulties in using literary sources for trade studies, and the challenge of mapping trade networks by using topographic references of goods. Branding is thus not only used by producers and traders, but also used as an instrument of propaganda in literary discourse. In ancient literature, wool is often associated with Athenian citizenship, modesty, male life style, and democracy,148 while linen can align with a perception of the Ionian style of wealth, Egyptian foreignness and feminine behaviour.149 Indeed, in Roman times, Augustus is praised for wearing home-spun wool garments, made by the female members of his family.150 The crucial place for this cultural encounter of textile fibres is Egypt, renowned for its exquisite linen textiles, and in Ptolemaic and Roman times co-existing with cultures boasting of a long wool tradition. Maria Papadopoulou contrasts wool and linen in the political contexts of Ptolemaic Egypt and especially studies the clothing in Zenon’s archive. She posits a series of dichoto- mies: wool versus linen, Greek versus Egyptian, city versus land.151 Later, in Imperial Roman times, Herbert Graßl observed that wool and linen products continue to be commercialized separately.152 Throughout antiquity, fibres are indeed a battle field of cultures and values, perhaps more than garment types are, and the evidence

142 Spantidaki in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 128. 143 Ar. Ran. 542; Lys. 729; Av. 493; Timaios, FGrH 566 F 50 (see Frass in this volume [= Droß- Krüpe & Nosch 2016], 139–158; Lupi in this volume [= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016], 169–191). 144 This term for silk that is commonly used in Latin poetry. It refers to very fine fabrics with a connection to the island of Cos and the legend of Pamphile who invented silk weaving there. Hildebrandt 2016. 145 Ar. Vesp. 1158, Thesm. 142, 421, Eccl. 74, 269, 345, 508, 542. These shoes or sandals may come from Laconia, but since Laconian footwear is so often mentioned, it rather suggests that the term instead designated a certain type or fashion of shoes, cf. Frass in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 139–158. 146 Wild 2014–2015. 147 Lupi in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 169–191. 148 Geddes 1987; Cohen 2001. 149 Nosch 2014. 150 Suet. Aug. 73: Veste non temere alia quam domestica usus est ab sorore et uxore et filia nepti busque confecta; togis neque restrictis neque fusis, clavo nec lato nec angusto... 151 Papadopoulou in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 193–209. 152 Graßl in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 221–230.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textiles, Trade and Theories 315 for the moral connotations of wool as opposed to the other decadent fibres such as linen and silk is widespread in ancient sources.153 In the Near Eastern as well as in the classical Mediterranean world all kinds of textiles were exchanged, both the finest silks and the coarsest wool. Not only textiles and garments, but also fibres,154 yarns, dyes and raw materials are traded alike, even over considerable distances. The wool trade is known from Old Assyrian documents of the early 2nd millennium,155 and isotopic tracing has illustrated a Bronze Age wool trade in Northern and Central Europe as well.156 In Diocletian’s Price Edict we find separate entries for a range of wool types, from simple to the most exquisite qualities, and if not from Afghanistan, then at least from very distant producers.157 Washed wool of various qualities is a product in itself, and Strabo (3.2.6) tells of Iberia which makes more profit from the wool trade than from making textiles from it.158 In general terms, most economic theories explain trade as the result of differences in supply and demand, prices and production modes. Alain Bresson assumes that trade in Athens was triggered by the increases in Attic coinage in the 5th century when a new silver ore was discovered and exploited in Laurion.159 In modern economic theory, it is accepted that export performance is directly related to a country’s gross domestic product (GDP) and has a stimulating effect on a country’s economy.160 The balance of payments in most political systems is controlled and regulated via taxes and incentives. Classical trade theories, such as Adam Smith and Riccardo’s concepts of advantages, being based on resources, production efficiency or innovation, are not unlike the concerns of traders and rulers in antiquity.161 However, these theories are now centuries old. It is striking that, apart from some cautious steps towards New Institutional Economics,162 more recent economic theories, e.g. on businesses’ internationalisation, market analyses, consumer behaviour, have barely been integrated into the study of the ancient economy. So, why textile trade? Is it only a matter of price competition, comparative advantages in labour, or domestic self-sufficiency? Iconographical, documentary and literary sources clearly illustrate that people did not simply buy garments when they were cheap or when they need them, but also bought textiles and clothes to demonstrate their wealth or even to follow some kind of fashion. Thus, in the realm of

153 Wagner-Hasel 2015. 154 On linen trade in Classical and Hellenistic Greece, see Nosch 2014 as well as Spantidaki 2016 and in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 125–138. 155 Veenhof 1972; Michel 2001. 156 Frei et al. 2009a and 2009b as well as 2015. 157 John Peter Wild discusses the reality of references to sheep’s wool or Cashmere goat hair from Afghanistan in Diocletian’s Edict, but also sees the irony in the fact that “some commentators are perplexed as to why and how such a commodity from far beyond the eastern Roman frontiers should have come to the attention of Diocletian’s officials. (Silk from China, by contrast, raises no eyebrows.)”, Wild 2014–2015, 17. 158 Wild 2014–2015. 159 Bresson 2012 as well as 2016, 278, 342. 160 Morgan & Katsikeas 1997, 68. 161 See Bresson 2016, who also uses Smith and Riccardo as main trade theorists; Korn in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 1–13. 162 E.g. Droß-Krüpe, Föllinger & Ruffing 2016.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 316 Kerstin Droß-Krüpe & Marie-Louise Nosch textiles, when interpreting production only according to the criteria of comparative advantage in terms of resources and labour, time and prices can never be the sole relevant criteria, since even in high cost areas, people continued to produce their own textiles, and even in the low cost areas people would still import textiles from elsewhere. Moreover, there is not necessarily an opposition between home production and acquiring textiles from market traders, both activities happily coexisted. The textile realm is thus a highly promising area to observe complex trade mechanisms at play; but it is also one of the best places to observe how people in antiquity did not necessarily act as homines oeconomici: textile trade transactions, selling and buying, are also based on tastes and fashions, new fibres and patterns, on confidence in and admiration for your favourite weaver, in trusting the trader, on negotiation and communication. In order to better understand these mechanisms, we should also look to theories applied in the social sciences, where group behaviour, individuality and psychology, tastes and peers constitute objects of study.163 Although, as mentioned above, Social Network Analysis is certainly en vogue in current historical and archaeological research, commercial networks are often not at the centre of scholarly attention.164 Apart from Eivind Seland, who explicitly applies Social Network Analysis on ancient textile trade, Ines Bogensperger, in her examination of how to order a textile in ancient times, deals with producer – consumer networks. She addresses the early stage of textile procurement, when orders are placed and decisions on colours and shapes are made.165 Her discussion of the Egyptian papyrological sources highlights that both trust and a shared concept of qualities are necessary elements of this stage of trade. When words and technical terms are insufficient, e.g. when not being able to describe the exact hue desired, clients could send samples of dyed wool and the producers would then be able to copy it. The use of textile samples as a visual and tactile proof of quality and design in addition to verbal or written descriptions seems to be common.166 Circulating samples of yarn and cloth is still today characteristic of textile commerce, and samples may in fact be one of the defining features of the tools and practices of textile trade. The sample becomes the non-verbal token of communication between the weaver and dyer, the trader and the consumer. These textile samples exemplify the ‘international’ nature of textile trade and the practicalities of crossing language boundaries while being traded. Evidently, most production orders were preceded by choices, negotiations and discussions, mostly taking place between textile craftspeople, traders and cli-

163 Veblen 1899 on luxury consumption and capitalism; Barthes 1967 on the fashion system; Bourdieu 1977 on habitus and cultural and social capital; Weiner & Schneider 1989 on anthropological approaches to clothing; Toft & MacKinney-Valentin 2014 on fashion theory to understand early modern textile consumption behaviour. 164 The good news is that this is increasingly changing. Apart from the ground-breaking research done on Greek and Roman economic associations for decades (e.g. Gabrielsen 2001; Broekaert 2011), one might mention Broekaert 2013, or the conference Tracing Networks: Communicating Knowledge in Antiquity and the Digital Age at the British Academy (organised by Lin Foxhall and José Fiadeiro) in 2013, along with Lavan 2015, Mack 2015, Brughmans & Poblome 2016, and Droß-Krüpe (forthcoming). 165 Bogensperger 2014. 166 Cf. Rhet. Her. 4.5.9, in which the author compares the writer’s text sample with the textile merchant’s textile sample, since both exemplify the quality and skill of the producers.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textiles, Trade and Theories 317 ents, as part of market communication, conversations, gossip, messages passed by and expressed in words, and facial expressions. Only a few texts render these negotiation and decision processes visible to us. They are a testament to the choices and logic that form the grounds of trade, illuminating the dense network of commercial actors involved. It is notable how the papyri contain this remarkable blend of private correspondence, communication and technical textile terms. The actors of textile networks are likewise highlighted by Herbert Graßl who emphasizes the social foundations of trade by demonstrating how traders come to private houses to display their goods and conduct business. Graßl also addresses the problem of competition between textile traders and pricing agreements. In sum, the ancient textile network becomes highly tangible when analysing its participants – particularly the traders, but also the producers167 and consumers168 – and their relationships. Textiles were traded with other products. Wool, wine, wood, and bronze are all included in the cargo of a ship arriving in an Egyptian harbour according to an Aramaic papyrus dated 475/454 BCE.169 Wool was transported with grain and salted fish on the great ship Syracusa, built for the tyrant Hieron of Syracuse ca. 240 BCE.170 Textiles for household furnishing, such as couches and pillows from Sicily, carpets (stromata), and pillows from Corinth, were traded along with food, fish, pork, cheese, fruit, nuts and fine wheat flour.171 Thus, if we are to believe these lists, textiles were traded along with highly perishable goods, of a fine quality and destined for the wealthier citizens in the cities. As the Periplus Maris Erythraei indicates, cloth and garments were in Roman times traded together with metal or metal objects (copper, brass, iron) as well as with groceries such as wine, olive oil, wheat, rice and the like – all items of rather average quality.172 Thus, while there is rich evidence of specialised textile products, there is no evidence that textiles were traded alone or along their own trade routes: garments and other textile products were traded with other goods, of all kinds and qualities. Textile trade patterns seem to be governed by a certain degree of stability. While Gaspa argues that there was a significant shift in the pattern of trade between the Bronze and the Iron Age, as shown by the enlargement of the trade networks and caravan routes in the 1st-millennium Near East and the concomitant development of strategies of control of them by large polities, Flohr argues that imperial patterns for the wool trade date back to structures established during the Roman Republic or earlier. That some textile toponyms consistently occur in epigraphy and ancient literature testifies to a certain degree a persistency and a rather conservative or slow development of the textile trade network. This also suggests that trading places would not change from one year to another, and not change much even with price competition over the short term.

167 Droß-Krüpe 2011; Flohr 2014; Tatz in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 271–292. 168 The consumer side is also considered in Frass in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 139–158, especially individual behaviour and choices in Classical Athens. 169 Porten & Yardeni 1993, 82–193 (text C3.7); Briant & Descat 1998; Tal 2009; Bresson 2016, 293. 170 Bresson 2016, 88, 185, 193; Athenaios 5.209a. 171 Hermippos’s trade list and lists from comic fragments from the Hellenistic period. See above note 105. 172 E.g. PME 6 and 14.

Even if no maps were produced in antiquity, and we rarely know of ancient itineraries from the textual evidence,173 archaeology presents us with both new and conventional methods to determine provenance.174 Stylistic analysis is the backbone of archaeological typologies, and the massive body of work in this field makes provenance studies, especially of pottery and metal objects, a rather secure field of interpretation. Certainly, foreign items and material in Southern Europe, such as cotton,175 silk or amber alert the historian and archaeologist to potential trade, and in rare cases the place of origin can be easily determined, such as the in-woven Chinese characters in textiles from Palmyra.176 New methods in strontium isotopic tracing conducted on organic material can determine whether the object – textile, fibre or person – grew locally or outside the local geological zone.177 Textile analysis has also developed a series of precise and sophisticated indicators of locality and provenance, and even if they do not all apply universally, they work very well relatively speaking, by examining the textile hallmarks in a certain region and determining what appears as local characteristics and what appears exceptional or, perhaps, foreign production techniques.178

*** In conclusion: In antiquity, textiles were traded over long distances, in international trade, on a regional scale, and between households and workshops in the same town or village. Textile trade can take the form of retail, and come from both locally settled and itinerant traders and producers. Trade was mainly conducted by men and to a lesser degree by women. Textiles are relatively invisible in the archaeological record, while they are well attested as traded goods in ancient texts. Textiles and garments abound in some of our largest bodies of ancient textual evidence: the archives at Ebla, Mari, several places in 1st-millennium Assyria and Babylonia, the Mycenaean palaces, and the letters on Old-Assyrian trade on private hands; from the Brauron catalogues, papyrus letters, the Periplus Maris Erythraei, and Diocletian’s Edict on Maximum Prices. Still, textiles have not often been considered a resource in the reconstruction of ancient trade, perhaps from a feeling of having exhausted textual material already. It appears surprising, nevertheless, that the numerous references to textile production, trade and consumption in ancient texts, especially in papyri, are not often explored as a source of economic relevance. Archaeology also abounds with textile tools – loom weights, spindle whorls, needles, bobbins – but they have so far only rarely been used for the understanding of ancient economic patterns.179 In contrast,

173 For the Periplus Maris Erythraei, see Casson 1989; Wild & Wild 2014 as well as Seland 2010 andin this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 211–219. 174 For an overview of these, see Harlow & Nosch 2014, 16–19. 175 For a possible identification of an early example of cotton, see Margariti, Protopapas & Orphanou 2011. Early archaeological silk finds are with right questioned by Bender Jørgensen 2013. 176 Stauffer 1996; Schmidt-Colinet, Stauffer & al-As’ad 2000. 177 Frei et al. 2009a; 2009b. 178 See Shamir in this volume (= Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016), 231–245 for the use of production techniques to detect textiles produced non-locally. 179 A few exceptions worth mentioning is Lawal 2014 and Meo 2014; 2015.

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 Textiles, Trade and Theories 319 pottery vessels are very rarely mentioned in texts but pottery fragments are omni- present in the archaeological record. It is therefore interesting to observe that until the present generation, ancient historians and archaeologists welcome data on pottery distribution for the reconstruction of ancient economy and trade,180 but tend to ignore textiles in their analyses. Likewise, coins constitute a popular basis for recon- structions of ancient economic mechanisms. However, we need to consider carefully how far pottery fragments and coins can be used as proxies for trade networks, or as material remains of a textile trade. Based on the current state of knowledge, we argue that buying clothing cannot automatically be equated to the purchase of grain or metals in antiquity. Transportation cost is the first major difference since textiles are light (as opposed to metals) and not readily perishable (as opposed to food). The intimate, identity- shaping and tactile qualities of textiles and garments make them form a singular category of goods; the long production time and complex craft required induce a strong component of trust and personal relationship between producer, seller, buyer and wearer; a quality textile is an item of investment, and the possibility to re-sell it as a second hand product is again more comparable to metals and furniture than to grain, oil or wine. There are, however, also significant similarities between the textile trade and other types of trade. Textiles are traded with other goods, and they follow the same trade routes. Also, like a series of other goods such as wine and food stuffs, textiles are characterised by toponyms which brand the quality. Textiles are produced almost everywhere, just like oil and grain, yet still traded in all directions. As vigorous as the discussion about the definition and interpretation of the ancient economy might be, and as diverse as its methodical and theoretical approaches are, a strong consensus exists today on the significance and value of textiles. However, as we have outlined above, works on trade theory and on ancient economies and trade do not always give fabrics and clothing particular attention. The research focus in studies on ancient trade and economy lies on monetarization, on the production and distribution of food (grains, wine and oil) and, albeit to a lesser extent, on luxury and/or exotic products. In ancient societies, textiles are rated as absolutely essential goods. Considering their significance in the ancient world and their value as key economic assets, textiles hold a significant potential for the understanding of the ancient economy and should thus be given more attention by scholars. Bringing them to light and making them the subject of more detailed economic analyses in their own right was a central objective of the present volume.

Bibliography Acton 2014: Acton, P.: Poeisis. Manufacturing in Classical Athens, Oxford. Alfaro & Costa 2008: Alfaro, C. & Costa, B.: Methodological Aspects of Purple Dye Pro duction on Ibiza: the New Site of Cala Olivera. In C. Alfaro & L. Karali (eds.), Purpureae vestes: 2nd International Symposium on Textiles and Dyes in the Ancient Mediterranean World, Athens, 24–26 November 2005, Valencia, 195–208. Andersson Strand & Nosch (forthcoming): Andersson Strand, E. & Nosch, M.-L.: Into the Wool Zone… Aegean Wool Cultures and Technologies. In S. Bergerbrandt, K. Kristiansen & S. Sabatini (eds.), Weaving the Patterns. Textile Production and

~~180 Tchernia 1986; Lawal 1998; Tomber 2009.~~

Specialisation in Europe and the Mediterranean during the 2nd Millennium BC, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series). Andreau 2007: Andreau, J.: Crises financiers et monétaires dans l’Antiquité romaine du IIIe siècle av. J.-C. au IIIe siècle apr. J.-C. In B. Théret (ed.), La monnaie dévoilée par ses crises, Paris, 103–129. Andreau, Briant & Descat 1994: Andreau, J., Briant, P. & Descat, R. (eds.): Les échanges dans l’Antiquité: le rôle de l’Etat, Saint-Bertrand-de-Comminge (Entretiens d’archéologie et d’histoire 1). Aubert 1994: Aubert, J.-J.: Business Managers in Ancient Rome. A Social and Economic Study of Institores, 200 B.C.–A.D. 250, Leiden et al. (Columbia Studies in the Classical Tra dition 21). Aymard 1948: Aymard, A.: L’idée de travail dans la Grèce archaïque, Journal de Psychologie 41, 29–50. Bagnall 1985: Bagnall, R. S.: Currency and Inflation in Fourth Century Egypt, New York (Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists Supplements 5). Bang 2008: Bang, P. F.: The Roman Bazaar. A Comparative Study of Trade and Markets in a Tributary Empire, Cambridge. Bang 2009: Bang, P. F.: The Ancient Economy and New Institutional Economics, JRS 99, 194–206. Barthes 1967: Barthes, R.: Système de la mode, Paris. Bedford 2005: Bedford, P. R.: The Economy of the Near East in the First Millennium BC. In J. G. Manning & I. Morris (eds.), The Ancient Economy. Evidence and Models, Stanford, 58–83. Beloch 1899: Beloch, J.: Die Großindustrie im Altertum, Zeitschrift für Sozialwissenschaft 2, 18–26. Bender Jørgensen 2013: Bender Jørgensen, L.: The Question of Prehistoric Silks in Europe, Antiquity 87, 581–588. Bogensperger 2014: Bogensperger, I.: The Multiple Functions and Lives of a Textile – the Reuse of a Garment. In M. Harlow & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Greek and Roman Textiles and Dress: an Interdisciplinary Anthology, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 19), 335–344. Bourdieu 1977: Bourdieu, P.: Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge. Bowman & Wilson 2007: Bowman, A.K. & Wilson, A. (eds.): Quantifying the Roman Economy. Methods and Problems, Oxford. Braudel 2011: Braudel, F.: Memory and the Mediterranean, Paris. Breniquet & Michel 2014: Breniquet, C. & Michel, C. (eds.): Wool Economy in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean. From the Beginnings of Sheep Husbandry to Institutional Textile Industry, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 17). Bresson 2000: Bresson, A.: La cité marchande, Bordeaux (Scripta Antiqua 2). Bresson 2007: Bresson, A.: L’économie de la Grèce des cités. I. Les structures et la production, Paris. Bresson 2012: Bresson, A.: Greek Epigraphy and Ancient Economics. In J. Davies & J. Wilkes (eds.), Epigraphy and the Historical Sciences, Oxford, 223–247. Bresson 2016: Bresson, A.: The Making of Ancient Greek Economy. Institutions, Markets, and Growth in the City-States, Princeton. Briant & Descat 1998: Briant, P. & Descat, R., Un registre douanier de la satrapie d’Égypte à l’époque achéménide (TAD C3.7). In N. Grimal & B. Menu (eds.), La commerce en Égypte ancienne, Cairo, 59–104 (BdÉ 121). Broekaert 2011: Broekaert, W.: Partners in Business: Roman Merchants and the Potential Advantages of Being a collegiatus, AnSoc 41, 221–256. Broekaert 2012: Broekaert, W.: Welcome to the Family! Marriage as Business Strategy in the Roman Economy, MBAH 30, 1–18. Broekaert 2013: Broekaert, W.: Financial Experts in a Spider Web. A Social Network Analysis of the Archives of Caecilius Iucundus and the Sulpicii, Klio 95/2, 471–510.

Broekaert 2014: Broekaert, W.: Modelling the Roman Textile Industry in the Northern Provinces: Conceptions and Comparisons. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 55–70. Brøns & Nosch (forthcoming): Brøns, C. & Nosch, M.-L. (eds.): Textiles and Cult in the Mediterranean in the first millennium BC, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series). Brøns 2016: Brøns, C.: Gods and Garments: Textiles in Greek Sanctuaries in the 1st Millennium BC, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 28). Brughmans & Poblome 2016: Brughmans, T. & Poblome, J.: Roman Bazaar or Market Economy? Explaining Tableware Distributions Through Computational Modelling, Antiquity 350, 393–408. Bücher 1893: Bücher, K.: Die Entstehung der Volkswirtschaft, Tübingen. Bücher 1901: Bücher, K.: Zur griechischen Wirtschaftsgeschichte. In K. Bücher et al. (eds.), Festgaben für Albert Schäffle zur siebenzigsten Wiederkehr seines Geburtstages am 24. Februar 1901, Tübingen 1901, 191–254. Burke 1999: Burke, B.: Purple and Aegean Textile Trade in the Early Second Millennium B.C. In P.P. Betancourt et al. (eds.), Meletemata: Studies in Aegean Archaeology Presented to Malcolm H. Wiener as he enters his 65th year, Liège & Austin, 75–82. Carla & Marcone 2011: Carla, F. & Marcone, A.: Economia e finanza a Roma, Bologna. Carrié 2007: Carrié, J.-M.: Les crises monétaires de l’Empire romain tardif. In B. Théret (ed.), La monnaie dévoilée par ses crises, Paris, 131–163. Casson 1989: Casson, L.: The Periplus Maris Erythraei, Princeton. Clausewitz 1976: Clausewitz, C. v.: On War. Ed./trans. by M. Howard & P. Paret, Princeton. Cleland 2005a: Cleland, L.: The Semiotics of Description: Some Reflections on Fabric and Colour in the Brauron Inventeries. In L. Cleland, M. Harlow & L. Llewellyn-Jones (eds.), The Clothed Body in Ancient World, Oxford, 87–95. Cleland 2005b: Cleland, L.: Clothing in the Brauron Inventories: Text, Analysis and Translation, Oxford (BAR International Series 1428). Cohen 2001: Cohen, B.: Ethnic Identity in Democratic Athens and the Visual Vocabulary of Male Costume. In I. Malkin (ed.), Ancient Perceptions of Greek Ethnicity, Cambridge, MA, 235–274. Crill 2006: Crill, R.: Textiles from India. The Global Trade, London. Curtin 2008: Curtin, P.D.: Cross Cultural Trade in World History, Cambridge. Drinkwater 2001: Drinkwater, J.F.: The Gallo-Roman Woollen Industry and the Great Debate. In D.J. Mattingly & J. Salmon (eds.), Economies Beyond Agriculture in the Classical World, London, 297–308. Droß-Krüpe 2011: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Wolle – Weber – Wirtschaft. Die Textilproduktion der römischen Kaiserzeit im Spiegel der papyrologischen Überlieferung, Wiesbaden (Philippika 46). Droß-Krüpe 2013: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Textiles and their Merchants in Roman Eastern Trade. In M. Gleba & J. Pásztókai-Szeöke (eds.), Making Textiles in Pre-roman and Roman Times. People, Places, Identities, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 13), 149–160. Droß-Krüpe 2014: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Regionale Mobilität im privaten Warenaustausch – Versuch einer Deutung im Rahmen der Prinzipal-Agenten-Theorie. In E. Olshausen & V. Sauer (eds.), Mobilität in den Kulturen der antiken Welt. Akten des 11. Internationalen Kolloquiums zur Historischen Geographie des Altertums, Stuttgart (Geographica Historica 31), 137–147. Droß-Krüpe 2016: Droß-Krüpe, K.: Production and Distribution. In M. Harlow (ed.), Cultural History of Fashion and Dress, Vol. 1: Fashion in the Ancient World (500 BC–500 AD), Oxford, 37–48. Droß-Krüpe (forthcoming): Droß-Krüpe, K.: Businessmen and Local Elites in the Lycos Valley. In E. Heldaas Seland & H. Teigen (eds.), Sinews of Empire: Networks and Regional Interaction in the Roman Near East and Beyond.

Droß-Krüpe & Nosch 2016: K. Droß-Krüpe & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Textiles, Trade and Theories, in the Ancient Near East and the Greek and Roman World, Münster (Karum – Emporium – Forum 2). Droß-Krüpe, Föllinger & Ruffing 2016: K. Droß-Krüpe, S. Föllinger, K. Ruffing (eds.), Antike Wirtschaft und ihre kulturelle Prägung / The Cultural Shaping of the Ancient Economy, Wiesbaden (Philippika 98). Eich 2006: Eich, A.: Die politische Ökonomie des antiken Griechenland (6.–3. Jh. v. Chr.), Köln et al. (Passauer Historische Forschungen 14). Erdkamp 1998: Erdkamp, P.: Hunger and the Sword: Warfare and Food Supply in Roman Republican Wars (264–30 B.C), Amsterdam. Erim et al. 1970: Erim, K. T. et al.: The Copy of Diocletian’s Edict on Maximum Prices from Aphrodisias in Caria, JRS 60, 120–141. Finley 1965: Finley, M. I.: Technical Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World, Economic History Review, 2nd series, 18, 168–195. Finley 1973: Finley, M. I.: The Ancient Economy, London. Finley 1977: Finley, M. I.: Die antike Wirtschaft, München. Flemestad et al. (forthcoming): Flemestad, P. et al.: Observations on the Terminology of Textile Tools in Diocletian’s Edict on Maximum Prices. In S. Gaspa, C. Michel & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Textile Terminologies from Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series). Flohr 2013: Flohr, M.: The Textile Economy of Pompeii, JRA 26, 53–78. Flohr 2014: Flohr, M.: Towards an Economic History of Textile Manufacturing and Trade in the Roman World. In K. Droß-Krupe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 1–16. Flohr & Wilson 2016: Roman Craftsmen and Traders: Towards an Intellectual History. In A. Wilson & M. Flohr (eds.), Urban Craftsmen and Traders in the Roman World, Oxford, 23–54. Föllinger 2016: Föllinger, S.: Ökonomie bei Platon, Berlin. Frank 1910: Frank, T.: Commercialism and Roman Territorial Expansion, CJ 5/3, 99–110. Frank 1918: Frank, T.: The Economic Life of an Ancient City, CPh 13/3, 225–240. Frank 1927: Frank, T.: An Economic History of Rome, New York. Frei et al. 2009a: Frei, K. M. et al.: Provenance of Ancient Textiles – A Pilot Study Evaluating the Sr Isotope System in Wool, Archaeometry 51/2, 252–276. Frei et al. 2009b: Frei, K. M. et al.: The Huldremose Iron Age Textiles, Denmark – An Attempt to Define Their Provenance Applying the Strontium Isotope System, Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 1965–1971. Frei et al. 2015: Frei, K. M. et al.: Tracing the dynamic life story of a Bronze Age Female, Scientific Reports, 21 May 2015, 5:10431 | DOI: 10.1038/srep10431 (accessed August 2016). Gabrielsen 2001: Gabrielsen, V.: The Rhodian Associations and Economic Activity. In Z.H. Archibald et al. (eds.), Hellenistic Economies, London, 215–244. Garnsey & Whittaker 1983: Garnsey, P. & Whittaker, C.R. Trade and Famine in Classical Antiquity. London. Garnsey 1988: Garnsey, P.: Famine and Food Supply in the Graeco-Roman World: Responses to Risk and Crisis. Cambridge. Garnsey 1998: Garnsey, P.: Famine in History. In Cities, Peasants and Food in Classical Antiquity. Essays in Social and Economic History, Cambridge, 272–292. Garnsey, Hopkins & Whittaker 1983: Garnsey, P., Hopkins, K. & Whittaker, C.R, Trade in the Ancient Economy, London. Gaspa, Michel & Nosch (forthcoming): Gaspa, S., Michel, C. & Nosch, M.-L. (eds.), Textile Terminologies from the Orient to the Mediterranean and Europe, 1000 BC to 1000 AD, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series). Geddes 1987: Geddes, A. G.: Rags and Riches: The Costume of Athenian Men in the Fifth Century, CQ 37/2, 307–331.

Giacchero 1974: Giacchero, M.: Edictum Diocletiani et Collegarum de pretiis rerum venali um, in integrum fere restitutum e Latinis Graecisque fragmentis. Vol. 1: Edictum. Vol. 2: Imagines, Genova. Gibbon 1910: Gibbon, E.: The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, London (reprint of the 1st edition 1776). Gleba 2004: Gleba, M.: Linen Production in Pre-Roman and Roman Italy. In C. Alfaro Giner, J. P Wild & B. Costa (eds.), Purpureae vestes. Textiles y tintes del Mediterráneo en época romana, Valencia, 29–37. Gleba 2014: Gleba, M.: Cloth Worth a King’s Ransom: Textile Circulation and Transmission of Textile Craft in the Ancient Mediterranean. In K. Rebay-Salisbury, A. Brysbaert & L. Foxhall (eds.), Knowledge Networks and Craft Traditions in the Ancient World. Material Crossovers, London, 83–103. Graslin-Thomé 2009: Graslin-Thomé, L.: Les échanges à longue distance en Mésopotamie au Ier millénaire. Une approche économique, Paris (Orient & Méditerranée 5). Graßl 2014: Graßl, H.: Neue Texte zur Textilwirtschaft im südlichen Noricum. In K. Droß- Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 43–53. Greene 2000: Greene, K.: Technological Innovation and Economic Progress in the Ancient World: M. I. Finley Re-considered, Economic History Review 53/1, 29–59. Gregory 1982: Gregory, C. A.: Gifts and Commodities, London. Hansen 2000: Hansen, M. H.: The Hellenic Polis. In M. H. Hansen (ed.), A Comparative Study of Thirty City-State Cultures. An Investigation Conducted by the Copenhagen Polis Center, Copenhagen (Historisk-filosofiske Skrifter 21), 141-187. Harlow & Nosch 2014: Harlow, M. & Nosch, M.-L.: Weaving the Threads: Methodologies in Textile and Dress Research for the Greek and Roman World – the State of the Art and the Case for Cross-Disciplinarity. In M. Harlow & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Greek and Roman Textiles and Dress: an Interdisciplinary Anthology, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 19), 1–33. Herz et al. 2011: Herz, P., Schmid, P. & Stoll, O. (eds.): Ökonomie und Politik. Facetten eu ropäischer Geschichte im Imperium Romanum und dem frühen Mittelalter, Berlin (Region im Umbruch 4). Hicks 1969: Hicks, J.: A Theory of Economic History, vol. 1, Oxford. Hildebrandt 2009: Hildebrandt, B.: Der Römer neue Kleider. Zur Einführung von Seide im kaiserzeitlichen Rom. In G. A. Lehmann et al. (eds.), Von der bronzezeitlichen Geschichte zur modernen Antikenrezeption (Syngramma. Vorträge aus dem Althistorischen Seminar 1), Göttingen, 11–53. Hildebrandt 2009: Hildebrandt, B.: Seide als Prestigegut in der Antike. In B. Hildebrandt & C. Veit (eds.), Der Wert der Dinge. Güter im Prestigediskurs, München, 175–231. Hildebrandt 2016: Hildebrandt, B. (ed.), Silk. Trade and Exchange Along the Silk Roads Between Rome and China in Antiquity, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 29). Hoffmeister 1899: Hoffmeister, K.: Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung Roms: Eine sozialpoliti sche Studie, Wien. Hopkins 1983: Hopkins, K.: Introduction. In P. Garnsey et al. (eds.), Trade in the Ancient Economy, London, ix–xxv. Horden & Purcell 2000: Horden, P. & Purcell, N.: The Corrupting Sea. A Study of Medi terranean History, Oxford. Jones, 1940: Jones, A.H.M.: The Greek City from Alexander to Justinian, Oxford. Jones 1960: Jones, A.H.M.: The Cloth Industry under the Roman Empire, Economic History Review 13/2, 183–192. Jones 1964: Jones, A.H.M.: The Later Roman Empire, 284–602: A Social, Economic and Ad ministrative Survey, Oxford. Jongmann 2000: Jongmann, W.M.: Wool and the Textile Industry of Roman Italy: A Working Hypothesis. In E. Lo Cascio (ed.), Mercati permanenti e mercati periodici nel mondo ro

mano, Atti degli Incontri capresi di storia dell’economia antica (Capri 13–15 ottobre 1997), Bari (Pragmateiai 2), 189–197. Jursa 2007: Jursa, M.: The Babylonian Economy in the First Millennium BC. In G. Leick (ed.), The Babylonian World, New York & London, 224–235. Jursa 2008: Jursa, M.: The Remuneration of Institutional Labourers in an Urban Context in Babylonia in the First Millennium BC. In P. Briant et al. (eds.), L’archive des forti fications de Persépolis. État des questions et perspectives de recherches, Paris (Persika 12), 387–427. Jursa 2010: Jursa, M.: Aspects of the Economic History of Babylonia in the First Millennium BC. Economic Geography, Economic Mentalities, Agriculture, the Use of Money and the Problem of Economic Growth, Münster (Alter Orient und Altes Testament 377). Kehoe 2007: Kehoe, D. P.: Law and the Rural Economy in the Roman Empire, Ann Arbor. Kloft 2006:Kloft, H.: Die Wirtschaft des Imperium Romanum, Mainz. Knorringa 1926: Knorringa, H.: Emporos. Data on Trade and Trader in Greek Literature from Homer to Aristotle, Amsterdam. Koch 1880–1888: Koch, T. (ed.), Comicorum Atticorum Fragmenta, vol. I–III, Leipzig. Lagger 2008: Lagger, U.: Ging der toichorychos durch die Wand? Überlegungen zum Einbruchsdiebstahl im klassischen Athen. In M. Mauritsch & I. Weiler (eds.), Antike Lebenswelten. Konstanz – Wandel – Wirkungsmacht. Festschrift für Ingomar Weiler zum 70. Geburtstag, Wiesbaden, 475–502. Landenius-Enegren & Meo 2017: Landenius-Enegren, H. & Meo, F. (eds.), Treasures from the Sea. Sea-Silk and Shell Purple Dye in Antiquity. International Workshop in Lecce, Italy, May 2013, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 29). Larsson Lovén 2013: Larsson Lovén, L.: Female Work and Identity in Roman Textile Production and Trade: A Methodological Discussion. In M. Gleba & J. Pázstókai- Szeöke (eds.), Making Textiles in Pre-Roman and Roman Times. People, Places, Identities, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 13), 109–125. Lauffer 1971: Lauffer, S.:Diokletians Preisedikt, Berlin. Lavan 2015: Lavan, L. (ed.): Local Economies? Production and Exchange of Inland Regions in Late Antiquity, Leiden & Boston (Late Antique Archaeology 10). Lawal 1998: Lawal, M.: Ceramics and Positism Revisited: Greek Transport Amphoras and History. In H. Parkins & C. Smith (eds.), Trade, Traders and the Ancient City, London, 75–101. Lawal 2014: Lawal, M.: Transport Amphoras and Loomweights: Integrating Elements of Ancient Greek Economies? In M. Harlow & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Greek and Roman Textiles and Dress: an Interdisciplinary Anthology, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 19), 150 –189. Le Goff 1972: Le Goff, J., Marchands et banquiers du Moyen Age, 5th ed., Paris. Lerouxel 2006: Lerouxel F.: Les femmes sur le marché du crédit en Egypte romaine (30 avant J.-C.–284 après J.-C.). Une approche néo-institutionnaliste, Cahiers du Centre de Recherches Historiques 37, 121–136. Leveau 2007: Leveau, Ph.: The Western Provinces. In W. Scheidel, I. Morris & R.P. Saller (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World, Cambridge & New York, 651–670. Lo Cascio 2005: Lo Cascio, E.: La „New Institutional Economics“ e l’economia imperiale romana. In M. Pani (ed.), Storia romana e storia moderna. Fasi in prospettiva, Bari, 69–83. Lo Cascio 2006: Lo Cascio, E.: The Role of the State in Roman Economy: Making Use of the New Institutional Economics. In P.F. Bang et al. (eds.), Ancient Economies, Modern Methodologies. Archaeology, Comparative History, Models and Institutions, Bari (Pragmateiai 12), 215–254. Loftus 2000: Loftus, A.: A Textile Factory in the Third Century BC Memphis. Labor, Capital and Private Enterprise in the Zenon Archive. In D. Cardon & M. Feugère

(eds.), Archéologie des textiles des origines au Ve siècle. Actes du colloque de Lattes, octobre 1999, Montagnac (Monographies Instrumentum 14), 173–184. Mack 2015: Mack, W.: Proxeny and Polis: Institutional Networks in the Ancient Greek World, Oxford. Mannering & Zhao (forthcoming): Mannering, U. & Zhao, F. (eds.), Wool on the Silk Road. Manning & Morris 2007: Manning, J.G. & Morris, I.: The Ancient Economy: Evidence and Models, Stanford. Manning 2011: Manning, J.: Networks, Hierarchies and Markets in the Ptolemaic Economy. In Z.H. Archibald et al. (eds.), The Economies of Hellenistic Societies, Third to First Cen turies, Oxford, 296–323. Margariti, Protopapas, & Orphanou 2011: Margariti, C., Protopapas, S. & Orphanou, V.: Recent Analyses of the Excavated Textile Find from Grave 35 HTR73, Kerameikos Cemetery, Athens, Greece, Journal of Archaeological Science 38, 522–527. Maucourant 2012: Maucourant, J.: New Institutional Economics and History, Journal of Economic Issues 46/1, 193–207. Mauss 1923–1924: Mauss, M.: Essai sur le don. Forme et raison de l’échange dans les socié- tés archaïques, L’Année Sociologique 1, 30–86. Mayer 2012: Mayer, E.: The Ancient Middle Classes. Urban Life and Aesthetics in the Roman Empire 100 BCE–250 CE, Cambridge. Mazzo 1985: Mazza, M.: Meyer vs Bücher: Il Dibattito sull’economia antica nella storiografia tedesca tra otto e novecento, Società e storia 29, 507–546. Meißner 2000: Meißner, B.: Über Zweck und Anlaß von Diokletians Preisedikt, Historia 49, 79–100. Meißner 2007: Meißner, B.: Die antike Technik in der althistorischen Forschung. In W. König & H. Schneider (eds.), Die technikhistorische Forschung in Deutschland von 1800 bis zur Gegenwart, Kassel, 163–188. Meo 2012: Meo, F.: Attestazioni archeologiche di attività laniera a Eraclea di Lucania tra III e II secolo a.C. Nota preliminare. In M. Osanna & G. Zuchtriegel (eds.), ΑΜΦΙ ΣΙΡΙΟΣ ΡΟΑΣ. Nuove ricerche su Eraclea e la Siritide, Venosa, 259–271. Meo 2014: Meo, F.: New Archaeological Data for Textile Production Understanding: Preliminary Notes on Herakleia, Southern Basilicata, Italy. In M. Harlow & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Greek and Roman Textiles and Dress: an Interdisciplinary Anthology, Oxford (Ancient Textile Series 19), 236–259. Meo 2015: Meo, F.: L’attività tessile a Herakleia di Lucania tra III e I secolo a.C., Roma (Fecit Te 7). Meyer 1895: Meyer, E.: Die Wirtschaftliche Entwickelung des Altertums, Jena 1895. Meyer 1910: Meyer, E.: Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung des Altertums. In E. Meyer (ed.), Kleine Schriften zur Geschichtstheorie und zur wirtschaftlichen und politischen Ge schichte des Altertums, Halle a.d.S., 6–168. Michel & Nosch 2010: Michel, C. & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Textile Terminologies in the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean from the Third to the First Millennia BC, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 8). Michel & Veenhof 2010: Michel, C. & Veenhof, K. R.: The Textiles Traded by the Assyrians in Anatolia (19th–18th Centuries BC). In C. Michel & M.-L. Nosch (eds.), Textile Ter minologies in the Ancient Near East and Mediterranean from the Third to the First Millennia BC, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 8), 210–271. Michel 2001: Michel, C.: Correspondance des marchands de Kaniš au début du II e millénaire av. J.-C., Paris. Michel 2014: Michel, C.: Wool Trade in Upper Mesopotamia and Syria According to Old Babylonian and Old Assyrian Texts. In C. Breniquet & C. Michel (eds.), Wool Economy in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean: from the Beginnings of Sheep Husbandry to Institutional Textile Industry, Oxford (Ancient Textiles 17), 232–254. Migeotte 2009: Migeotte, L.: The Economy of the Greek Cities, Berkeley. Moeller 1976: Moeller, W. O.: The Wool Trade of Ancient Pompeii, Leiden.

Möller-Wiering 2011: Möller-Wiering, S.: War and Worship: Textiles from 3rd to 4th-century AD Weapon Deposits in Denmark and Northern Germany, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 9). Moreno 2007: A. Moreno: Feeding the Democracy – The Athenian Grain Supply in the Fifth and Forth Centuries BC, Oxford. Morgan & Katsikeas 1997: Morgan, R. & Katsikeas, S.: Theories of International Trade, Foreign Direct Investment and Firm Internationalization: a Critique, Management Decision 35/1, 68–78. Morris 2004: Morris, I.: Economic Growth in Ancient Greece, JITE, 709–742. Morris et al. 2007: Morris, I. et al.: Introduction. In I. Morris et al. (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World, Cambridge, 1–12. Müller 2011: Müller, C.: Autopsy of a Crisis: Wealth, Ptotogenes, and the City of Olbia in c. 200 BC. In Z.H. Archibald, J. K. Davies & V. Gabrielsen (eds.), The Economies of Hellenistic Societies, Third to First Centuries BC, Oxford, 324–344. North 1977: North, D.C.: Economic Growth: What Have we Learned from the Past?, Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy 6/1, 157–177. North 1981: North, D.C.: Structure and Change in Economic History, New York. North 1990: North, D.C.: Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge. North 1992: North, D.C.: Institutionen, institutioneller Wandel und Wirtschaftsleistung, Tübingen (Die Einheit der Geschichtswissenschaft 76). North 1996: North, D.C.: Epilogue: Economic Performance Through Time. In L. J. Alston et al. (eds.), Empirical Studies in Institutional Economics, Cambridge, 342–355. Nosch 2003: Nosch, M.-L.: Centre and Periphery in the Linear B Archives. In N. Kyparissi- Apostolika & M. Papakonstantinou (eds.), The Periphery of the Mycenaean World. 2nd International Interdisciplinary Colloquium, 20–26 September, Lamia 1999, Athens, 63–70. Nosch 2008: Nosch, M.-L.: The Mycenaean Palace-Organised Textile Industry. In M. Perna & F. Pomponio (eds.), The Management of Agricultural Land and the Production of Textiles in the Mycenaean and Near Eastern Economies, Napoli (Studi egei e vicinorientali 4), 135–154. Nosch 2011: Nosch, M.-L. (ed.), Wearing the Cloak. Dressing the Soldier in Roman Times, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 10). Nosch 2014: Nosch, M.-L.: Linen Textiles and Flax in Classical Greece: Provenance and Trade. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 17–42. Nosch (forthcoming): Nosch, M.-L.: Textile Crops and Textile Labour in Mycenaean Greece. In C. Varias Garcia et al. (ed.), Land, Territory and Population in the Ancient Greece: Institutional and Mythical Aspects, Colloqui Internacional: “Terra, territori i po blació a la Grècia antiga: aspectes institucionals i mítics”, Barcelona. Ober 2010: Ober, J.: Wealthy Hellas, TAPA 140, 241–286. Ogden 2014: Ogden, D.: Alexander, Agathos Daimon, and Ptolemy: The Alexandrian Foundation Myth in Dialogue. In N. Mac Sweeney (ed.), Foundation Myths in Ancient Societies: Dialogues and Discourses, Philadelphia, 129–150. Oliver 2007: Oliver, G.: War, Food and Politics in Early Hellenistic Athens, Oxford. Osborn 1996: Osborne, R.: Pots, Trade and the Archaic Greek Economy, Antiquity 70, 31–44. Parkins 1998: Parkins, H.: Time for a Change? Shaping the Future of the Ancient Economy. In H. Parkins & C. Smith (eds.), Trade, Traders and the Ancient City, London & New York, 1–15. Pleket 1984: Pleket, H.W.: Urban Elites and the Economy in the Greek Cities in the Roman Empire, MBAH 3/1, 3–36. Pleket 1988: Pleket, H.W.: Greek Epigraphy and Comparative Ancient History: Two Case Studies, Epigraphica Anatolica 12, 25–37.

Pleket 1990: Pleket, H.W.: Wirtschaft. In F. Vittinghoff (ed.), Handbuch der europäischen Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte, vol. 1, Stuttgart, 25–160. Pleket 1998: Pleket, H.W.: Models and Inscriptions. Export of Textiles in the Roman Em pire, Epigraphica Anatolica 30, 117–128. Pocock 1985: Pocock, J.G.A.: Virtue, Commerce and History, Cambridge. Polanyi 1957: Polanyi, K.: The Economy as Instituted Process. In K. Polanyi, C. Arensberg & H. Pearson (eds.), Trade and Market in the Early Empires, Chicago, 243–270. Polanyi 1968: Polanyi, K.: Primitive, Archaic and Modern Economies: Essays, New York. Porten & Yardeni 1993: Porten, B. & Yardeni, A.: Textbook of Aramaic Documents from An cient Egypt, vol. 3, Jerusalem. Prag, Snodgrass & Tsetskhladze 2000: Prag, J.N.W., Snodgrass, A.M. & Tsetskhladze, G.R. (eds.), Periplous. Papers on Classical Art and Archaeology Presented to Sir John Boardman, London. Radner 1999: Radner, K.: Traders in the Neo-Assyrian Period. In J. G. Dercksen (ed.), Trade and Finance in Ancient Mesopotamia (MOS Studies 1). Proceedings of the First MOS Sym posium (Leiden 1997), Leiden (Publications de l’Institut historique-archéologique néer landais de Stamboul 84), 101–126. Reich 2004: Reich, H.: Die „orientalische Despotie“. In B. Schefold (ed.), Wirtschaftssysteme im historischen Vergleich, Stuttgart (Schriften der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft an der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main 18), 493–542. Reinard (forthcoming): Reinard, P.P.: Kommunikation und Ökonomie. Wirtschaftsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu den privaten Papyrusbriefen aus dem kaiserzeitlichen Ägypten, Rahden/ Westf. (Pharos 32). Renger 2003: Renger, J.: Trade and Market in the Ancient Near East. Theoretical and Factual Implications. In C. Zaccagnini (ed.), Mercanti e politica nel mondo antico, Roma (Saggi di storia antica 21), 9–39. Reuthner 2006: Reuthner, R.: Wer webte Athenas Gewänder? Die Arbeit von Frauen im anti ken Griechenland, Frankfurt et al. Ricardo 1817: Ricardo, D.: On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, London. Rollinger & Ulf 2004: Rollinger, R. & Ulf, Chr. (eds.), Commerce and Monetary Systems in the Ancient World. Means of Transmission and Cultural Interaction, Stuttgart. Rostovtzeff 1926: Rostovtzeff, M. I.: Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire, Oxford. Rostovtzeff 1938: Rostovtzeff, M. I.: Dura-Europos and Its Art, Oxford. Rostovtzeff 1941: Rostovtzeff, M. I., The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World, 3 vols., Oxford. Roux 1964: Roux, G.: Ancient Iraq, revised edition, London. Roux 1985: Roux, G.: La Mésopotamie. Essai d’histoire politique, économique et culturelle, London. Ruffing 2006: Ruffing, K.: Wirtschaftliche Prosperität im 3. Jahrhundert: Die Städte Ägyptens als Paradigma? In K.-P. Johne, Th. Gerhardt & U. Hartmann (eds.),Deleto paene imperio Romano. Transformationsprozesse des Römischen Reiches im 3. Jahrhundert und ihre Rezeption in der Neuzeit, Stuttgart, 223–241. Ruffing 2008: Ruffing, K.: Die berufliche Spezialisierung in Handel und Handwerk. Unter suchungen zu ihrer Entwicklung und zu ihren Bedingungen in der römischen Kaiserzeit im östlichen Mittelmeerraum auf der Grundlage der griechischen Inschriften und Papyri, Rahden/Westf. (Pharos 24). Ruffing 2012: Ruffing, K.: Wirtschaft in der griechisch-römischen Antike, Darmstadt. Ruffing 2013: Ruffing, K.: The Trade with India and the Problem of Agency in the Economy of the Roman Empire. In S. Bussi (ed.), Egitto dai Faraoni agli Arabi. Atti del Convegno: Amministrazione, Economia, Società, Cultura dai Faraoni agli Arabi, Milano, Università degli Studi, 7–9 Gennaio 2013, Pisa & Roma, 199–210. Ruffing 2014: Ruffing, K.: Seidenhandel in der Römischen Kaiserzeit. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 71–81.

Ruffing 2016: Ruffing, K.: Neue Institutionenökonomik (NIÖ) und Antike Wirtschaft. In K. Droß-Krüpe, S. Föllinger & K. Ruffing (eds), Antike Wirtschaft und ihre kulturelle Prägung / The Cultural Shaping of the Ancient Economy, Wiesbaden (Philippika 98), 11–22. Schmidt-Colinet, A. and A. Stauffer and K. al-As’ad 2000.Die Textilien aus Palmyra: Neue und alte Funde (Damaszener Forschungen 8), Mainz Scheidel & v. Reden 2002: W. Scheidel & S. v. Reden (eds.), The Ancient Economy, Edinburgh. Schneider 1977: Schneider, J.: Was there a Pre-Capitalist World-System? Peasant Studies 6/1, 20–29. Schneider 1992: Schneider, H.: Einführung in die antike Technikgeschichte, Darmstadt. Schneider 2009: Schneider, H.: Die Erforschung der antiken Wirtschaft vom Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts bis zum Zweiten Weltkrieg: Von A.H.L. Heeren zu M.I. Rostovtzeff. In V. Losemann (ed.), Alte Geschichte zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik. Gedenkschrift Karl Christ, Wiesbaden (Philippika 29), 337–385. Seland 2010: Seland, E.H.: Ports and Political Power in the Periplus: Complex Societies and Maritime Trade on the Indian Ocean in the First Century AD, Oxford (BAR International Series 2102 – Society for Arabian Studies Monographs 9). Silver 1983: Silver, M.: Prophets and Markets: The Political Economy of Ancient Israel, Norwell. Silver 1995: Silver, M.: Economic Structures of Antiquity, Westport & London (Contributions in Economics and Economic History 159). Skals, Möller-Wiering & Nosch 2015: Skals, I., Möller-Wiering, S. & Nosch, M.-L.: Survey of Archaeological Textile Remains from the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Area. In E. Andersson & M.-L. Nosch (eds.) Tools, Textiles and Contexts: Textile Production in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean Bronze Age, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 21), 61–74. Smith 1776: Smith, A.: An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, London. Spantidaki 2016: Spantidaki, S.: Textile Production in Classical Athens, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 27). Stauffer 1996: Stauffer, A.: Textiles from Palmyra: Local Production and the Import and Imitation of Chinese Silk Weavings. In Palmyra and the Silk Road: Special Issue Docu menting the Activities of the International Colloquium, Damascus (Les Annales archéo logiques Arabes et Syriennes: Revue d’Archéologie et d’Histoire 42), 425–430. Stauffer 2008: Stauffer, A.:Antike Musterblatter. Wirkkartons aus dem spatantiken und fruh byzantinischen Agypten, Wiesbaden. Tal 2009: Tal, O.: On the Identification of the Ships of KZD/RY in the Erased Customs Account from Elephantine, JNES 68/1, 1–8. Temin 2012: Temin, P.: The Roman Market Economy, Princeton. Terpstra 2013: Terpstra, T.T.: Trading Communities in the Roman World: A Micro-Economic and Institutional Perspective, Leiden (Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition 37). Toft & MacKinney-Valentin 2014: Toft, P. & MacKinney-Valentin, M.: From Doll Cups to Woollen Sweaters: Trends, Consumption, and Influential in Early 19th Century Southern Disko Bay, Greenland. In T. Engelhardt Mathiesen et al. (eds.), Fashionable Encounters. Perspectives and Trends in Textiles and Dress in the Early Modern Nordic World, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 14), 209–222. Tomber 2008: Tomber, R.: Indo-Roman Trade – From Potts to Pepper, London. Tchernia 1986: Tchernia, A.: Le vin d’Italie romaine: essai d’histoire économique d’après les amphores. Paris. van Minnen 1986: van Minnen, P.: The Volume of the Oxyrhynchite Textile Trade, MBAH 5/2, 88–95. Veblen 1899: Veblen, T.: The Theory of the Leisure Class. An Economic Study of Institutions, New York. Veenhof 1972: Veenhof, K.R.: Aspects of Old Assyrian Trade and Its Terminology, Leiden (Studia et documenta ad iura orientis antiqui pertinentia 10). Verboven 2002: Verboven, K.: The Economy of Friends. Economic Aspects of Amicitia and Patronage in the Late Republic, Bruxelles.

Vernon 1966: Vernon. R.: International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics, May, 1966, 190–207. Wagner-Hasel 2000: Wagner-Hasel, B.: Der Stoff der Gaben. Kultur und Politik des Schenkens und Tauschens im archaischen Griechenland, Frankfurt & New York. Wagner-Hasel 2011: Wagner-Hasel, B.: Die Arbeit des Gelehrten. Der Nationalökonom Karl Bücher (1847–1930), Frankfurt. Wagner-Hasel 2015: Wagner-Hasel, B.: „Canusiner Gewand, das trübem Honigwein sehr gleicht [...]“. Wollqualitäten und Luxusdiskurs in der Antike. In H. Harich-Schwarz bauer (ed.), Weben und Gewebe in der Antike: Materialität – Repräsentation – Episteme – Metapoetik / Texts and Textiles in the Ancient World: Materialiy – Representation – Episteme – Metapoetics, Oxford (Ancient Textiles Series 23), 39–66. Wagner-Hasel, B. 2009: Wagner-Hasel, B.: Hundert Jahre Gelehrtenstreit über die antike Wirtschaft. Zur Aktualität von Karl Büchers Wirtschaftsanthropologie, Historische Anthropologie 17/2, 178–201. Weber 1921: Weber, M.: Die Stadt. Eine Soziologische Untersuchung, Archiv für Sozial wissenschaft und Sozialpolitik 47 (1920–1921), 621–772. Weber 1891: Weber, M.: Die römische Agrargeschichte in ihrer Bedeutung für das Staats- und Privatrecht, Stuttgart. Weiner & Schneider 1989: Weiner, A.B. & Schneider, J. (eds.), Cloth and Human Experience, Washington DC. Whitby 1998: Whitby, M.: The Grain Trade of Athens in the th4 century BC. In H. Parkins & C. Smith (eds.), Trade, Traders and the Ancient City, London & New York, 102–128. Whittow 2013: Whittow, M.: How Much Trade was Local, Regional and Inter-Regional? A Comparative Perspective on the Late Antique Economy. In L. Lavan (ed.), Local Economies? Production and Exchange of Inland Regions in Late Antiquity, Leiden (Late Antique Archaeology 10), 133–165. Wild & Wild 2014: Wild, J.P. & Wild, F.: Berenike and Textile Trade in the Indian Ocean. In K. Droß-Krüpe (ed.), Textile Trade and Distribution in Antiquity, Wiesbaden (Philippika 73), 91–109. Wild 1964: Wild, J.P.: The Textile Term ‘scutulatus’, CQ N.S. 14, 263–66. Wild 2004–2015: Wild, J.P.: The Edict of Diocletian, Aria and Cashmere,Saitabi 64–65, 11–23. Wilson 2002: Wilson, A.: Machines, Power and the Ancient Economy, JRS 22, 1–32.

Ines Bogensperger studied Classical Archaeology and is a PhD candidate in Ancient History at the University of Vienna. As part of the research programme ‘forMuse’ (2010–2012) she investigated and catalogued the collection of late antique textiles held in the Department of Papyri of the Austrian National Library. From 2013– 2015 she was recipient of the FWF research fellowship ‘Egypt’s Southern Border in the 6th–11th Century AD’. In 2015 she participated in the Summer School on ‘Cultural and Natural Heritage on the First Cataract of the Nile in Cologne and Aswan’, organised by the University of Cologne and the University of Aswan. She is currently a collaborator in the FWF project ‘Texts and Textiles from Late Antique Egypt’, which combines both her fields of interest: textile research and papyrology.

Wim Broekaert is currently employed at Ghent University as a post-doctoral assistant. His research focuses on Roman merchants, the organization of trade in antiquity and Roman economic structure from a comparative point of view. He has published several articles on Roman food supply and the creation of business networks by Roman entrepreneurs. He recently published a survey of Roman merchants titled Navicularii et negotiantes. A Prosopographical Study of Roman Merchants and Shippers (Rahden/Westf. 2013).

Brendan Burke is Associate Professor and Department Chair in the Department of Greek and Roman Studies at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, Canada. His PhD is from the University of California, Los Angeles, and his dissertation and related monograph, From Minos to Midas (Oxbow, 2010), focused on the economics of textile production in the Bronze Age Aegean and Iron Age Anatolia. For many years he excavated at the Phrygian capital of Gordion in central Turkey. Currently he is co-director of excavations at the site of ancient Eleon in eastern Boeotia (Greece).

Kerstin Droß-Krüpe is currently employed as a post-doctoral assistant at Kassel University. She studied Classical Archaeology, Ancient History and Business Ad ministration at Philipps-Universität Marburg and obtained her PhD in 2010 with a thesis concerning textile production during the Roman Empire in the province of Egypt, which was published as Wolle – Weber – Wirtschaft. Die Textilproduktion der römischen Kaiserzeit im Spiegel der papyrologischen Überlieferung (Wiesbaden 2011). In 2012 she received a post-doctoral grant at the Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Textile Research (CTR) in Copenhagen. In addition to ancient economic history and ancient textile studies her research focuses on the reception of antiquity. Her current research project deals with the reception of the Babylonian queen Semiramis.

Sebastian Fink studied Philosophy and Assyriology in Innsbruck; he has worked on the Theodicy problem in Leibniz and the Ancient Near East. His doctoral dissertation (2010) was in the field of Philosophy of Language, published as Benjamin Whorf, die Sumerer und der Einfluss der Sprache auf das Denken (Wiesbaden 2015).

~~His current research focuses on philosophy in the ancient Near East, the influence of language and script on thought, and Sumerian lexicography.~~

Miko Flohr is researcher and lecturer at the Institute for History of Leiden University, formerly assistant director of the Oxford Roman Economy Project. His main research focus lies with urban history in the Roman world, with a particular emphasis on economic life in Roman Italy, and on textile economies. His first monograph,The World of the Fullo, was published by OUP in 2013; he has since published a volume on Craftsmen and Traders in the Roman World (OUP 2016) and on The Economy of Pompeii (OUP 2017), both co-edited with Andrew Wilson.

Monika Frass completed her doctoral studies in Ancient History and Classical Archaeology at the University of Graz (1979–1986). She was subsequently em ployed as research assistant at the Department of Ancient History at the Univer sity of Graz (1986–1992). And thereupon at the Department of Ancient History (now the Department of Classical Studies) at the University of Salzburg (‘Vertrags assistentin’), where she has worked as Associate Professor (‘Außerordentliche Uni versitätsprofessorin’) since her Habilitation in 2003. Her research interests lie within economic and social history, and the history of culture and mentalities.

Agnès Garcia-Ventura was awarded her PhD by the Universitat Pompeu Fabra (Bar celona, Spain) in 2012. As Postdoc, she was awarded a fellowship at the Collaborative Research Centre 933, “Material Texts Cultures”, of the Rupert Charles University in Heidelberg (November 2012 – May 2013). She also worked for one academic year as Assistant Professor at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (2013–2014). Since October 2014 she is “Beatriu de Pinós” Postdoc fellow at the “Sapienza”, Università degli studi di Roma. Her main interests are gender and the historiography of Ancient Near Eastern studies.

Salvatore Gaspa is a historian specialized in Ancient Near Eastern studies. His main research interests concern the history, administration, cult, economy and ma terial culture of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. He was awarded a PhD in Semitic Lin guistics by the University of Firenze in 2007 and a PhD in Ancient Near Eastern history by the University of Naples “L’Orientale” in 2011. He has been Marie Curie Fellow at the Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Textile Research of the University of Copenhagen with a research project on textiles in the Neo- Assyrian Empire. In 2015 he was awarded a grant from the Carlsberg Foundation for a project on textiles in rituals and cultic practices in the Ancient Near East.

Laetitia Graslin-Thomé studied Ancient History and Economics in Paris, Tours and Chicago and is specialized in the economic history of the Ancient Near East. She is Assistant Professor at Nancy University, France. In 2009 she published Les échanges à longue distance en Mésopotamie au premier millénaire av. J.-C. Through the example of long distance exchange in first millennium Mesopotamia, the purpose of this book is to investigate how economic models may improve our understanding of ancient economy. In several articles she develops trans-disciplinary methods to confront historical evidence to specific economic theories. She is also member of

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 List of Contributors 333 several research programs focusing on the political, social and economic history of Hellenistic Babylonia.

Herbert Graßl, born in 1948, has been Professor (‘Ordentlicher Universitätsprofessor’) of Ancient History at the University of Salzburg since 1991. He studied Ancient History, Classical Philology and Archaeology at the University of Graz and obtained his Habilitation in 1980. In 1983 he was appointed Professor of Ancient History at the University of Klagenfurt. His research focuses on social and economic history, the regional history of the Alpine region and historical geography.

Peter Herz studied history, classics, and archaeology at the universities of Mainz and Oxford. He received both his PhD and Habilitation in Ancient History at the University of Mainz. In 1994 he was appointed Professor of Ancient History at the University of Regensburg. His research interests include social and economic history as well as epigraphy and the history of the Roman provinces.

Evelyn Korn studied Mathematics at the University of Dortmund, obtaining her Diploma in Mathematics in 1994; her 1999 PhD in Economics investigated economics of the family also in Dortmund; her Habilitation in 2004 was in the field of accounting at the Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen. Since autumn 2004, she holds a full professorship of Economics, at the Philipps-Universität Marburg. Her research interests include: the impact of institutions on individual behaviour and their application to family economics (e.g. on social values and female labour-force participation), biology (e.g. gender differentiation), ancient studies (Hittite treaties, Plato’s concept of the ideal state) and political economy.

Elisabetta Lupi studied Ancient History and Classical Philology at the University of Sassari. She obtained her PhD in Ancient History at the University of Freiburg in 2013 with a thesis on the representation of Sybaris in the literary traditions. In 2015 she was employed as academic assistant of Ancient History at the Leibniz University Hannover.

Marie-Louise Nosch is a historian and the director of the Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Textile Research (CTR) at the University of Copenhagen and the National Museum of Denmark. She is a Professor in Ancient History. She was awarded her PhD by the University of Salzburg in 2000 with a thesis on Mycenaean textile administration in Linear B and has subsequently merged Linear B studies with experimental archaeology and textile tool studies; as director of the CTR, she has launched research programmes combining archaeology and natural sciences. She is author and co-author of works on Aegean Late Bronze Age textile production in the Mycenaean palace economies.

Maria Papadopoulou is a classical philologist. She wrote her PhD at the University of Athens on the ‘Semantics of Colour Terms in Hellenistic Poetry’ in 2011. She has managed several projects in Greek Dialectology. In 2014 she earned a two-year Marie Curie Fellowship at the University of Copenhagen. Her interdisciplinary project focuses on the history of Hellenistic Alexandria. Her research interests include

~~Hellenistic Egypt, Greco-Roman geography, colour terminology, history of urban spaces, and the reception and consumption of Greco-Roman culture in modern times.~~

Eivind Heldaas Seland, Cand. Philol., PhD. (born 1975), is Assistant Professor at the Department of Archaeology, History, Cultural Studies and Religion at Bergen University. His research interests include the ancient economy, Palmyra, the Roman Near East and the Indian Ocean in antiquity.

Orit Shamir is Curator of Organic Materials, Israel Antiquities Authority. She holds a PhD in Archaeology and wrote her thesis on ‘Textiles in the Land of Israel from the Roman Period till the early Islamic period in the light of the archaeological finds’. Her MA thesis in Archaeology was on Textile production in Etetz-Israel at the Iron Age.

Stella Spantidaki is an archaeologist and director of the Hellenic Centre for Research and Conservation of Archaeological Textiles (ARTEX). She was awarded her PhD by the Universities of the Sorbonne (Paris IV) and the Ruprecht-Karls- Universität Heidelberg in 2013 with a thesis on Textile Production in Classical Athens (Oxbow in press). She studies ancient textile technology as a means to better understand the ancient Greek societies. Her research combines different fields such as archaeology, classics and experimental archaeology.

Sabrina Tatz studied Christian Archaeology and Archaeology of the Roman Provinces in Bonn, Cologne and Heidelberg. In her MA thesis she focused on the textile finds from a Coptic monastery in Western-Thebes, Egypt; in 2016/17 she will continue her work on site. Since 2015 she works as a research assistant at the Franz- Joseph-Doelger-Institute, Bonn. Her PhD project will concentrate on the Roman West during late antiquity.

AE 1 Amm. Marc. 1923, 59 35 22,16,7 193 1928, 183 38 1929, 23 294 Amphis 1946, 210 58; 59 fr. 27 KA 182 1972, 74 35 1982, 709 38 Antiph. 1995, 228 35 Incert. Fab. Frag. 11 132 1996, 450 33 1998, 1583 223 Apollod. Car. 2000, 632 33 frag. 30 (25) 129 2003, 654 35 2006, 1827 226 Ar. Ach. 410–448 152 AEAD Ach. 423 150 31b 108 Ach. 723 127 51a 103 Ach. 824 127 60a 109 Ach. 968 127 75a 110 An. 5,7,2,4 127 88b 110 An. 5,7,23,4 127 91a 110 An. 5,7,24,1 127 105a 110 An. 5,7,29,2 127 Av. 493 131; 313 Aeschin. Av. 493–498 149 In Tim. 97,8 131 Av. 709–722 151 Av. 713 –715 150 AHw Av. 915 149 296b 108 Av. 933–948 153 495b 103 Av. 973 153 590a 109 Av. 1416–1418 149 607b 109 Av. 1579 135 756b 110 Eccl. 74 144; 313 918a 110 Eccl. 269 144; 313 941a 110 Eccl. 345 144; 313 1103b 110 Eccl. 352–353 148 Eccl. 415– 421 153 Alc. Eccl. 446–450 152 fr. 99 (331) 128 Eccl. 508 144; 313 fr. 142,1 136 Eccl. 527 152 fr. 264 (330) 128 Eccl. 535 152 Eccl. 542 144; 313

* Ancient sources are abbreviated according to the following criteria: The Oxford Classical Dictionary (OCD), 4th edition for classical Greek and Latin literature, the Checklist of Edi tions of Greek, Latin, Demotic, and Coptic Papyri, Ostraca and Tablets (http://library.duke. edu/rubenstein/scriptorium/papyrus/texts/clist.html) for Papyri and Ostraca, and the Real lexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie (RlA) for ancient Near Eastern source material. For sources not included in these scholarly works we have chosen designations as clear as possible.

Eccl. 653 151 Thesm. 250 144 Eccl. 654 151 Thesm. 261 144 Eccl. 848–850 145 Thesm. 393–394 144 Eccl. 920 185 Thesm. 421 313 Eccl. 1386–1387 156 Thesm. 821–822 150 Equ. 132 129 Thesm. 935 129 Equ. 138 129 Vesp. 441–447 145 Equ. 967–969 153 Vesp. 444 145 Equ. 1404–1406 153 Vesp. 737–738 145 fr. 225 KA 180 Vesp. 1120–1157 145 fr. 595 KA 185 Vesp. 1125–1132 149 Lys. 42–48 144 Vesp. 1132 147 Lys. 48 144 Vesp. 1135–1141 147 Lys. 111–114 152 Vesp. 1139–1147 146 Lys. 150 144 Vesp. 1157–1158 148; 313 Lys. 369 144 Vesp. 1407 127 Lys. 411–412 144 Lys. 567–586 150 Arist. Lys. 645 150 Eth. Nic. 4,1122b 183 Lys. 654 150 Eth. Nic. 4,1125a 183 Lys. 662 145 fr. 584 Rose3 180 Lys. 729 146; 184; 313 HA 547a,5–6 131 Lys. 731–732 184 Mech. 849b,34–39 127 Lys. 735 131; 146; 150; 184 Pol. 1257a,6–7 130 Lys. 953 185 Lys. 1019–1024 151 Ath. Lys. 1021 145 5.209a 316 Lys. 1155–1156 146 12,518 c–522 a 174 Nub. 21–23 147 12,519b–520c 174 Nub. 177–179 148 Nub. 497 149 Ath. Pol. Nub. 856 149 2,11 130; 131; 306 Nub. 1498 149 Pax 344 169 Babylonian Talmud Pax 999–1015 154 Yoma 34b 233 Pax 1188–1193 156 Menahoth 38–52 242 Pax 1198–1202 155 Pax 1210–1223 156 BGU Pax 1224–1239 156 10/1942 200 Plut. 529–530 150 16/2622 261 Plut. 540 149 16/2669 206 Plut. 714 147; 149 4/1141 246 Plut. 842–844 148; 149 7/1525 206 Plut. 980–986 152 7/1615 37 Ran. 45–47 184 Ran. 542–54 182 BM Ran. 1314–1316 150 76968 70 Ran. 1346–1350 150 Ran. 1347 127; 304 CAD Ran. 1386–1388 127 G, 127 108 Thesm. 138–140 144 K, 473a 103 Thesm. 141–142 144 M/I, 137b 109

M/I, 251a 109 6/9962 32 N/II, 47b 110 6/9963 227 Q, 268b 110 6/9976 36 R, 60a 110 6/12331 35 S, 201b 110 6/17707 36 6/33906 294 Cato 6/33920 35 agr. 144 223 6/33921 32 6/37378 35 CDA 6/37402 227 96a 108 6/37820 35 163a 103 6/37826 35 192a 109 8/20156 223 196b 109 9/358 32 244b 110 9/826 32 288b 110 9/1712 36 295a 110 9/2226 42 339a 110 9/2438 54 9/5752 33; 59 CGL 10/540 33 III Col. Montepess. 13b 223 10/1872 33 11/862 33 Cic. 11/868 59 De or. 2,58 176 11/869 37; 59 Subl. 4,1 176 11/963 37; 59 Verr. 2,3,191–192 252 11/1031 58 11/6926a 59 CIL 12/1898 32; 223 1/200 53 12/4521 32 3/5816 226 13/1970 32 3/5816 38 13/1998 40; 43 3/13803 226 13/2023 40 5/50 223 13/3202 42 5/774 38; 226 13/5116 33 5/1041 32 13/6366 223 5/3217 32 14/409 37 5/4501 58 14/2433 36 5/5925 59 14/2793 32 5/5926 59 14/2812 32 5/5928 59; 223 5/5929 35; 59 Clem. Al. 5/5932 32; 226 Paed. 2,20,115 233 5/6123 32 5/6777 33 Colum. 6/3782 294 7,2 54; 57 6/6182 32 6/7971 35 Crit. 6/9489 36 fr. 64,1 129 6/9493 35 fr. 70,5 135 6/9675 35 fr. 70,7 129 6/9814 32 6/9866–9868 35

CT 10,11 254 2,2 70 10,12 254 55,90 67 19,1a 254 19,2 254 CTh 19,6 251 9,30 253 19,8 255 19,13 247 CTN 19,21 247 2,1 108 19,22 247 2,152 109 19,23 247 2,153 110 19,24 248 2,155 103 19,25 250 2,224 109 19,26 250 19,27 248 Curt. 19,28 248 4,8,6 193 19,29 248 19,30 248; 251 Dem. 19,31 248 3,25–26 183 19,32 250 23,207 183 19,33 254 Eubul. 34,1 128 19,35 250 Meid. 27,3 130 19,37 248; 255 Meid. 166,5 130 19,38 248; 254 Meid. 167,1 130 19,39 248 Tim. 120,6 130 19,40 248 19,44 249 Deuteronomy 19,45 248; 251 22,11 238 19,46 249 19,47 249 Dig. 19,48 249 17,2,52,4 35 19,49 248; 251; 255; 256 38,1,2,45 227 19,50 248; 255 19,51 250; 254 Din. 19,52 249 fr. 19,8 127 19,53 249 19,54 250; 254 Diod. Sic. 19,55 249 8,18 131; 175; 186 19,56 249 8,19 175 19,57 249 8,20 186 19,58 249 12,9–12,10,1 180 19,59 249 12,21,1 183 19,60 249 12,21,2,1 131 19,61 250 17,52 312 19,62 248; 251 19,63 248 Ed. Diocl. 19,64 248 9,6 253 19,65 249 9,11 253 19,66 249 10,2 253 19,67 249 10,8 253 19,68 250 10,9 253 19,69 249 10,10 253 19,70 250

~~19,72 250 566 F 154b 180 19,73 249 566 F 156 180 27,8 254 566 T 16 176 27,9 254 566 T 17 179; 180 27,10 254 566 T 19 177 30,1a 254 566 T 20 176 30,2 254 566 T 23a 176 31,19 256 688 F 10b 175~~

~~Ephoros Flav. Ios. 70 F 9 180 BJ 5,5,4 69~~

~~Esra Gregory of Tours 3,7 307 Glor. mart. 17 235~~

Eub. Hdt. fr. 19 308 1,1 307 fr. 89 (90) 3 131 1,143 184 fr. 89 KA 183 1,155 184 fr. 121 308 1,195 70 2,105 131 Eup. 2,180,7 132 fr. 262 (243) 128 3,47,7 133 Tro. 199–200 126 3,106,10 133 3,135,12 136 Eust. 4,169–170 135 Comm. in Dion. 254 193 5,57–59 307 5,87 162 Exodus 5,88 162 23,10–11 233 6,21,1 177 6,47 307 Ezekiel 7,191,2 136 16,10 236 27 69; 98 Hermip. fr. 63 129; 132; 308 FGrH 490 F 2 176 Hippoc. 539 F 2 176 Acut. 7,31 135 555 F 2 179 Morb. 2,6,9,1 131 566 F 7 176 Morb. 2,6,29,3 131 566 F 9 175 Mul. 235,2 131 566 F 16 181 Ulc. 14 132 566 F 26a 181 566 F 31b 181 Hom. 566 F 35b 180 Il. 3,125 303 566 F 43 175 Il. 6,294–295 303 566 F 44 181 Il. 6,456 126 566 F 50 181; 186; 313 Od. 2,104–106 303 566 F 51 181 Od. 14,287 307 566 F 55 181 Od. 19,242 162 566 F 110 180 Od. 19,256 162 566 F 130a 183

~~Ibn Bassâl Joseph 115–116 236 Ap. 1,12,60–61 232~~

~~ID KAN 1442 B 161 4,14 105~~

IG KAR 13/403 134 141 103 22/404 130 22/1128 130 Kiddushin 22/1514 134; 135 2,5,62c 234 22/1515 134 22/1516 134; 135 Kilaim 22/1517B 134 9,2 236 22/1518B 134 22/1521B 134 KTU 22/1523 134 4.132 307 22/1524B 134 22/1528 134 Leviticus 22/1568 129 25,1–7 233 22/1570 129; 294 22/1572 129; 294 Lex portorii Asiae 22/1635 130 27 40 22/1672 127 22/1673 129; 294 Livy 22/11254 129; 294 39,55,6 57 23/447 130 Lukian ILLPRON de merc. cond. 38 225 1450-7 37 MAMA ILS 4/349 35 8393–8394 304 MARV Inscr. It. 1,24 107 10/5, 675 35 8,67 106

~~Isaiah Megasth. 60,6 239 fr. 21,20 134~~

Isoc. Men. Pan. 4,42 130 Epit. 489 131 fr. 1019,1 134 Iuv. sat. 6,588–591 225 Mishnah Kelim 29,1 237 Jeremiah Kilayim 7,2 235 6,20 239 Shabbath 9,5 233 Tractate Yoma 3,7 233 Jerusalem Talmud Yoma 3,7 233 5,218 239 6,390 239

~~MT O. Crum 19,45 256 320 276 19,64 255 341 275~~

~~Nah. O. Dan kopt 3,16 97 698 276 706 276 Narām-Sîn 788 275 13 84 25 84 O. Eleph. DAIK 29 85 6 200~~

NATAPA O. St. Marc. 2,100 111 617 276 2,102 118 79 276 582 276 NCBT 1244 64 OGIS 90 195 ND 267 108 P. Bad. 2086 110 4,48 205 2097 108 2307 108 P. Cair. Isidor 2311 109 54 253 2312 118 2440 106 P. Cair. Zen. 2672 103 1/59012 202 2687 103 1/59048 203 2691 108 1/59061 204 3407 109 1/59087 203 3413 116 1/59088 203 1/59092 202; 204 New Testament Apocrypha 2/59142 198 Acts of Paul 18,3 237 2/59145 206 Acts of Paul 20,34 237 2/59176 200 2/59195 198 Not. dign. occ. 2/59206 200 11,54–55 251 2/59263 204 2/59287 202 Numbers 2/59295 198 15,38 242 3/59307 205 3/59394 198 O. Bachit 3/59398 200 1184–1185 276 3/59423 202 3/59433 203 O. Bodl. 3/59469 203 1/295 200 3/59474 206 4/59539 200 O. Claud. 4/59594 204 2/239 266 4/59696 198 4/59775 203

~~P. CLT P. Lips. 3 275 1 205~~

~~P. Col. P. London 3/15 203 7/1945 204 3/44 205 4/113 202 P. Mich. 1/16 203 P. Corn. 1/58 202 23 37 P. Mon. Epiph. P. Count. 85 275 3 200 353 275~~

~~P. Eleph. P. Nem. 27 199 5,2 136~~

P. Enteux. P. Oxy. 1 204 1/113 263 2 205 7/1066 264 4 204 8/1153 263 30 206 12/1414 41 38 204 14/1705 41 22/2340 41 P. Erasm. 42/3080 260 1/5 200 51/3626 261 54/3776 261 P. Giss. 66/4534 41 1/12 266 1/20 262 P. Petr. (2) 1.13 205 P. Giss. Apoll. 2/32 206 11 262 20 266 P. Phil. 10 37 P. Hamb. 4/237 201 P. Sorb. 3/110 206 P. Heid. 9/423 206 P. St. Marc. 13 275 P. Herakl. Bank 3 205 P. Tebt. 1/5 200 P. Hib. 1/117 202; 203 1/67 200 1/120 200 3,1/703 197 P. Köln 3,2/890 205 8/346 206 5/1151 206 5/250 197 P. Lille 2/287 43 1/6 206 2/413 260

~~2/414 261 Onom. 10,18 223~~

~~P. Warr. Polyb. 1/15 268 12,25d 177~~

~~P. Fouad. Procop. 77 39 Anec. 25,16,24 36~~

Paus. Ps.-Aristeas 7,21,7 131 114 239 10,37,2–3 131 PSI Plat. 3/368 203 Ep. 363a,4 131 4/341 198 Resp. 369d 128; 293 4/364 202 Resp. 425d,5 127 4/371 197; 200; 201 Leg. 760b,1 127 6/599 201 Leg. 763c,3 127 Leg. 763e,4 127 PVA Leg. 764b,1 127 238 105 Leg. 764c,4 127 244 110 Leg. 847c 312 246 108 Leg. 849a,3 127 247 108 Leg. 849e,4 127 249 109 Leg. 881c,4 127 250 109 Leg. 913d,6 127 Leg. 917b,2 127 Rhet. Her. Leg. 917e,3 127 4,5,9 264; 316 Leg. 920c,5 127 Leg. 936c,3 127 RIM Leg. 953b,5 127 E2.1.1.7 83 E2.1.1.11 83 Plaut. E2.1.2.8 84 Aul. 508–522 224 E2.1.2.11–16 84 E2.1.3.1 84 Plin. E2.1.4.3 84 NH 6,101 312 E2.1.4.13 84 NH 7,43 57 E2.1.4.25 85 NH 8,190 54 E3/2.1.1.17 89 NH 8,73 175 E3/2.1.1.19 89 NH 8,74 69 E3/2.1.1.20 89 NH 12,84 312 NH 18,225 227 RIMA 2, A.0.101.1 95 Plut. 2, A.0.101.2 95 Alex. 26,5 193; 312 2, A.0.101.17 95 Anthony 51 205 2, A.0.101.19 95 CPG 1,1 186 2, A.0.101.73 95 mor. 470–471 147 3, A.0.102.1 95 3, A.0.102.2 95 Poll. 3, A.0.102.5 v 108 Onom. 7,78 128; 223 3, A.0.102.6 96

3, A.0.102.8 95 7, 116 111 3, A.0.102.60 95 7, 119 107 3, A.0.102.84 96 7, 120 107; 110 3, A.0.102.90 95; 96 7, 121 112 3, A.0.104.7 95 7, 126 104 7, 127 116 RINAP 10, 182 108 1, 11 95 10, 289 108 1, 12 95 10, 294 115 1, 32 95 11, 26 117; 118 1, 42 95 11, 28 108; 110 1, 47 95 11, 29 108 3/1, 4 96 11, 31 116 3/1, 17 114 11, 36 109; 115 3/2, 154 108 11, 67 116 4, 1 95 11, 100 118 4, 2 95 12, 83 106 4, 103 95 15, 90 112 4, 105 95; 101 15, 91 108 16, 63 108 SAA 16, 82 105; 108 1, 29 108 16, 127 101 1, 33 101 17, 21 101 1, 34 103; 115 17, 23 101 1, 179 108 17, 69 108 1, 193 108; 109 17, 122 104; 108 2, 5 100 17, 136 100 5, 28 101 17, 145 101 5, 100 104 18, 19 110 5, 152 103 18, 103 108 6, 190 119 18, 115 108; 116 7, 30 97 18, 153 99 7, 93 107; 105; 109 18, 158 101 7, 94 106; 108; 111 19, 14 110; 118 7, 95 111 19, 19 118 7, 96 106; 107; 108; 109; 19, 22 100 110; 111 19, 114 116 7, 97 105; 109; 110; 111 7, 98 106; 110; 111 SB 7, 99 105 5/7574 205 7, 101 111 6/9025 260 7, 102 110; 111 6/9026 261 7, 103 111 6/9071 252 7, 104 111 8/9689 206 7, 105 107; 109; 110; 111 14/11492 263 7, 107 105; 109; 111 16/12375 200 7, 108 104; 106; 111 18/13312 198 7, 109 103; 111 20/1465 200 7, 111 109 22/15236m 205 7, 112 109; 111 7, 115 103; 105; 109; 111; Schol. 112; 113; 116 Ar. Lys. 109 185

~~Ar. Lys. 732 184 TH 48:10 108 Scymn. 52 108 346–349 184 63 108~~

~~Sen. Theoc. ben. 7,9,5 308 Id. 15,20 202 Id. 15,125–127 183 Shabbath 16,5 242 Theophr. 120a 242 Char. 2,9 18 HP 4,7,7,1 133 Sol. HP 4,74,1 133 fr. 39 135 HP 7,13,8,1 133~~

Soph. Thuc. Oid. T. 1267–1270 162 1,70 130 2,38 132 StAT 6,22,1,7 136 2, 128:7’ 112 6,30,1,3 136 2, 164 109; 112 6,44,12 136 2, 255 109 2, 315 e.10 112 Tosefta Shebiith 3, 1 e.35 104 4,19 233 3, 1 r.24 104 3, 1 r.31 104 UPZ 3, 1 r.32 103 1/121 206 3, 1:15 109 1/7 199 3, 1:9 105 1/8 205 1/85 199; 200 Strab. 2,5,12 312 Ur-Namma 3,2,6 314 17 89 4,4,3 225 20 89 4,6,2 59 5,1 58 UVB 6,3 55; 56 15 p. 40 63 7,1,12 57 12,8,16 175 Val. Max. 17,1 193; 312 1,4 ex. ext. 1 193

~~Suet. Varro Aug. 64 304 RR 1,2,21 38 RR 2,1,16 53 Tac. RR 2,2,10 54 ann. 13,51,1 40 ann. 6,17,1 310 VAT 8659 109 TCL 12,84 65 W.Chr. 94 262~~

~~Xen. YOS Cyn. 2,4 131 6,168 65 mem. 2,7 154; 304 7,63 65 Symp. 2,20,3 127 ZTT Yerushalmi 1,8 109 Ketubot 7,9,31c 234 2,33 109 Ta’anith 4,69a 236 2,36 109~~

© 2016, Ugarit-Verlag – Buch- und Medienhandel GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 18.10.2016 15:18:09 ⋼ forum Edited by Kerstin Droß-Krüpe Droß-Krüpe Edited by Kerstin Nosch and Marie-Louise Textiles, Trade Trade Textiles, Theoriesand Near East the Ancient From to the Mediterranean ἐμπόριον

~~Kārum – Emporion – Forum 2 Beiträge zur Wirtschafts-, Rechts- und Sozialgeschichte des östlichen Mittelmeerraums und Altvorderasiens~~

KEF 2 Textiles, Trade and Theories © 2016, Ugarit-Verlag und Medienhandel – Buch- GmbH, Münster ISBN Print: 978-3-86835-224-5 – ISBN E-Book: 978-3-86835-225-2 www.ugarit-verlag.com Textiles have Textiles always been among the most popular goods of mankind. Considering their significance in theancient Mediterranean and the ancient Near East alike, as well as significant hold textiles economicassets, key as value their potential for analyses the economic detailed understanding more of of the subject the ancient them economy. Making in their own right is a Becausevolume. it is not possible to central analyze distributional objective of the present patterns or the textiles exclusively on channels the basis of either written sources of distributionor archaeological findings, this for ancient volumedifferent source brings material, disciplines, together and methodological approaches, including modern Economics, to analyze the textiles that were traded, trade-routes, markets for buying institutions of operation and formation the and selling, and textile of processes of smooth functioning the ensured that exchange. KEF-2-Cover.indd 1