See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281576191

The Phoenician Hippos Figurehead. Preserved Tradition and Types of Ship

Conference Paper · June 2011

CITATIONS READS

2 2,392

1 author:

Zaraza Friedman
Independent Researcher
19 PUBLICATIONS 55 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Zaraza Friedman on 22 November 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 On Sea and Ocean:

New Research in Phoenician Seafaring

3
 Archäologisches Seminar der Philipps-Universität Marburg

MARBURGER BEITRÄGE ZUR ARCHÄOLOGIE

BAND 2

herausgegeben von
Rita Amedick, Heide Froning und Winfried Held

Eigenverlag des Archäologischen Seminars der Philipps-Universität

Marburg . 2015

4
 Ralph K. Pedersen (ed.)

On Sea and Ocean:

New Research in Phoenician Seafaring

Proceedings of the Symposion held in Marburg, June 23–25, 2011

at Archäologisches Seminar, Philipps-Universität Marburg

Eigenverlag des Archäologischen Seminars der Philipps-Universität

Marburg . 2015

5
Sigel der Marburger Beiträge zur Archäologie: MarBAr

Cover:
Drawing of an Phoenician vessel after an Assyrian representation by J. Liebich, in:
E. Wallis (ed.), Illustrerad Verldshistoria (Stockholm 1875) 96 Fig. 36

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek

Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der

Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten
sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.

Bibliographic information published by Deutsche Nationalbibliothek

The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the

Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliografic data are
available on the internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de.

Redaktion: Heide Froning

© 2015 by Eigenverlag des Archäologischen Seminars der Philipps-Universität Marburg

ISBN: 978-3-8185-0516-5

Alle Rechte vom Verlag vorbehalten. Wiedergabe, auch von Teilen des Inhalts,
nur mit dessen ausdrücklicher Genehmigung.
Satz & Gestaltung: Matthias Nöth, Marburg
Druck: msi - media serve international Gmbh, Marburg
Printed in Germany

6
 Contents

Foreword IX

Abdelhamid, Selma 1
Phoenician Shipwrecks of the 8th to the 6th century B.C. –
Overview and Interim Conclusions

Blot, Maria Luísa Pinheiro 9

Ancient environmental contexts and Phoenician maritime shelters in the
southeastern part of the Iberian Peninsula: Portugal

Friedman, Zaraza 19
The Phoenician Hippos Figurehead. Preserved Tradition and Types of Ship

Galasso, Mario 35
Testa scolpita in trachite da Porto Conte – Santa Imbenia, Alghero (SS)

Giardina, Baldassare 45
Fari fenici et punici: fonti ed evidenze archeologiche

Haggi, Arad 53
Phoenician Deepwater Harbours: Atlit as a Case Study

Hermanns, Marcus Heinrich 61

Frühe Erztransporte zwischen der Iberischen Halbinsel und Ibiza

Pappa, Eleftheria 71
Who’s the Phoenician on the Atlantic? Disentangling Seafaring from
Colonization in Portugal and Marocco

Semaan, Lucy 95
New Insights into the Iron Age Timber Trade in Lebanon

Tilley, Alec 121

Phoenician Triremes and other crafts

List of Authors 129

VII
VIII
Zaraza Friedman
The Phoenician Hippos Figurehead. Preserved Tradition and Types of Ship
The Phoenician
According to ancient authors Phoenicia occupied
the entire Levantine coast, as far as Suez and the Gulf
of Alexandretta1. In 1110 B.C., king Tiglath-pileser I
(1114–1076 B.C.) conquered the cities of Arvad, Sidon,
Tyre and Byblos. This event did not last long because
King Ashurnasirpal II (883–859 B.C.) invaded Phoeni-
cia in 883 B.C. and imposed a heavy tribute on the cities
on the Mediterranean coast2. This event caused many
Phoenicians to leave their homes and look for new lo-
cations in the western Mediterranean. The maritime ex-
pansion and trade of the Phoenicians started from the
cities of Tyre and Sidon. These events also were caused
by the geographical location of Phoenicia with its nar-
row strip of land and lack of natural resources. They
took to the sea and sailed westwards for new resources
and lands to settle. Carthage was one of the first Phoe-
nician colonies on the North African coast, which was
settled in 814 B.C.3. The heavy tributes to Assyria dur-
ing the 8th and 7th centuries B.C. brought the Phoeni-
cians to rebel. One such revolt of the Phoenician cities
under the leadership of Tyre was severally crushed by
Sennacherib (705–681 B.C.). As a result of this combat
Sidon was destroyed and its population was replaced
by Assyrians brought from the hinterland4. The Phoe-
nician cities regained their independence in 612 B.C.,
when the Medes and the Babylonians defeated the As-
syrians5. Phoenicia was brought under the Babylonian
rule in 605 B.C., when the Pharaoh Necho III and the
allied cities were defeated. When Babylon was captured
by Cyrus in 538 B.C., Phoenicia became part of the
Persian satrapy and Sidon replaced Tyre as a leading
city. After the Battle of Issus in 333 B.C., Phoenicia
was conquered by Alexander the Great6. The classic
Phoenicia ended in 64 B.C., when Pompey conquered
and turned it into a Roman province. Phoenicia had a
full autonomy in her internal matters under the Roman
reign7.
Phoenician Ships
The Phoenicians were the greatest navigators and
the masters of the seas for about a millennium, from
1250 B.C. (the date assigned to their establishment in
the eastern Mediterranean) to 250 B.C., during the First
Punic war, when the Romans defeated Carthage, the
rulers of the western Mediterranean Sea. They also
were skilled shipwrights building three distinct types of
vessels:
1. Small to medium burden crafts (20–120
tons) with the prow adorned by a horse-head
protome, which were named hippos (horse in
Greek). They were used mainly to transport
wooden logs and varied supplies on rivers or
along the coast. These vessels were rowed by
6–8 rowers, each working one oar. With ade-
quate wind conditions the hippos vessels were
rigged with sailing gear comprising a mast
stepped amidships, and a square sail mounted
to the yard. The sailing gear was more efficient
for fast navigation in open sea, with adequate
winds rather than rowing on long sea-ways8.
2. Sea-going merchantmen known as Canaanite
type, with broad and rounded hulls, and ver-
tically raised stem-and-stern posts; e.g. on the
wall of a Theban Tomb, dated c. 14th century
B.C. are depicted Phoenician ships trading
on the Nile9. These vessels had a load capac-
ity from 200 to 450 tons. The propulsion was
provided by a wide quadrilateral sail mounted
to the yard supported by several lifts going
through rings attached to either side of the
masthead10.
3. Phoenician warships comprise two types:
A) Broad hull with both rounded ends, vertical
stem-and-stern posts, and two decks: on the
lower deck were two superimposed levels, with
4–5 rowers per level, thus on each side were
8–10 rowers; the total crew comprised 16–20
rowers, each working one oar. On the top su-
perstructure with a railing of rounded shields
were sited the passengers11. This type of vessel
probably was used as auxiliary in the navy to
1 Markoe 2000, 10.
2 Negev – Gibson 2001, 393.
3 Markoe 2000, 181.
4 Markoe 2000, 181.
5 Markoe 2000, 181.
6 Markoe 2000, 181.
7 Negev – Gibson 2001, 394.
8 deGraeve 1981, ig. 79 f. 85.
9 Davis – Faulkner 1947, pl. 8.
10 Gardiner – Morrison 2000, 23 top.
11 Gardiner – Morrison 2000, 43.
19
 Zaraza Friedman

Fig. 1 a: Detail of the bronze bands from the Balawat Gates, London, British Museum 117112

Fig. 1 b: Detail of the bronze bands from the Balawat Gates, Paris, Louvre AO 14038

transport warriors and supplies or as a flag Catalogue of the hippos ships

ship in a convoy of merchantmen en route in
the Mediterranean12.
B) The combat vessels had elongated hulls end-
ing with a projecting pointed beak (ram) at the
water level, high-rounded stern and two decks:
on the lower deck were sited the rowers in two
superimposed levels, each working one oar.
On either side there were 8–11 oars, each
worked by one rower; thus the crew com-
prised 16–22 rowers. The top superstructure
was surrounded by a railing of rounded shields
accommodating the warriors. The ships were
also rigged with sailing gear comprising a mast
stepped amidships, and a square sail that was
furled beneath the yard when the ship was
rowed. The mast was secured by double-line
fore-and-back stays13. The warriors on the top
deck could also operate the sailing gear when
the ship sailed in open waters to reach its des-
tination14.
The purpose of this paper is to bring into discus-
sion only the Phoenician hippos vessels, and the pre-
served tradition of the hippos protome, as well as the
types of ship adorned with such zoomorphic igure-
heads.
River hippos vessels – Balawat Gates
The earliest pictographic evidence of Phoenician
hippos vessels were depicted on several bronze bands
that were afixed to the gigantic wooden gates of the
palace on Tell Balawat – therefore they are known as
Balawat Gates – dated to the reign Shalmaneser III
(859–824 B.C.)15. These bands illustrate the military ex-
12 deGraeve 1981, igs. 87. 87 a; Gardiner – Morrison 2000, 43.
13 Gardiner – Morrison 2000, 43.
14 deGraeve 1981, ig. 87. 87 a; Gardiner – Morrison 2000, 43.
15 The bands were discovered by H. Rassam in 1878 in a mound

20
 The Phoenician Hippos Figurehead. Preserved Tradition and Types of Ship
Fig. 2: Detail of a relief from the Palace of Sargon II at Khorsabad
peditions of Shalmaneser III during the irst decade of
his reign (859–848 B.C.)16. The scenes on the bands are
arranged in two registers. The inscription depicted on
top describes the illustrated scene. On band III from
the British Museum (BM 117112) is depicted the cam-
paign of the king to Phoenicia in 859 B.C. (Fig. 1 a).
The text above the boats mentions »the tribute of the
ships of the Tyrians and the Sidonians I receive«17. Two
boats each with an elongated hull and lat bottom are
depicted in a river. Either boat has hippos protome on
the stern-and-stem posts with a slight outwards angle.
The animals look in opposite directions. Two standing
men are found in every boat and each of them works
one oar. The long and thin shaft worked with both
hands by the standing man on the bow probably is the
row-oar. The broader and arched oar worked from the
port quarter is the steering-oar (Fig. 1 a). Each steering-
oar is worked by a standing helmsman who grabs the
loom with both hands. The blades of the rowing and
steering oars are not visible, probably as they are sub-
merged in the water. When the boat arrived near the
river bank, apparently it was towed by a tow-line coiled
around the sternpost, just beneath the hippos head,
and each line was pulled by one man from the bank.
Band N, now in the Louvre Museum (AO 14038)
also depicts the campaign of the king to Phoenicia
in 859 B.C. (Fig. 1 b). The inscription on top of the
scene is slightly different than the previous one, »The
tribute of the city of Tyrians (and) the city of the Si-
donians: silver, gold, lead, bronze, (and) purple stuff I
receive«18. The scene is similar to that in Fig. 1 a. Two
river boats with elongated hulls and flat bottoms ar-
rive at a river bank. Both boats have vertical stem-and-
stern post with hippos protomes looking in opposite
directions. The left-hand boat is inhabited by one man
who works the steering-oar from the starboard quarter,
and his head is turned backwards looking to the men
towing the boat from the river bank. The helmsman
grabs the loom with both his hands and maneuvers the
steering-oar. The towline is coiled around the sternpost
just above the gunwale, and each line is pulled over the
left shoulder of a single man on the bank. Each steer-
ing-oar has a short elliptical blade submerged in the
water. The standing helmsman in the right-hand boat
steers the boat with the steering-oar mounted on the
starboard quarter. His head is also turned backwards,
though looking to the boat on the rear. The standing
man on the bow is passing the tributes to the man on
the shore.
Hippos boats on the pond in park
This scene is depicted on a relief from the Palace
of Sargon II at Khorsabad (722–705 B.C.). It is the
lower register of a larger relief illustrating banqueting
in the upper register and a royal hunt. A building, prob-
ably a temple or fishing pavilion, stands on the mar-
gins, or in the middle, of the royal pond/lake, or on
the riverbank. The façade of the building is adorned
with two columns surmounted by capitals resembling
the Ionic type19. Beneath the base of the platform, on
which stands the pavilion, are depicted two boats afloat
on the water. They have slightly elongated hulls and
rounded bottoms. Their vertical stemposts are sur-
mounted with a hippos protome looking forwards, while
the vertical sternposts have a fishtail protome (Fig. 2).
near the village of Tell Balawat (Imgur Enlil); there are thirteen
bands preserved in the British Museum; other pieces are found
in the Louvre Museum, the Walters Art Gallery in Baltimore,
and the Archaeological Museum in Istanbul, Turkey; deGraeve
1981, 41.
16 deGraeve 1981, 41.
17 deGraeve 1981, 43.
18 deGraeve 1981, 43.
19 In a relief at Kouyunjik is depicted a castle flanked by two
columns similar to those in the scene at Khorsabad. The scene
probably represents the city of Tyre or Sidon. Apparently the
Ionic columns appeared on monuments from the 8th or the 7th
B.C.; Layard 1849, 274.
21
 Zaraza Friedman
Fig. 3: Detail of a relief from the North Palace at Kŭyŭnjik
Both boats are identical, and both lack prolusion and
steering gear, as well as the human figures to propel
the boats. They are depicted in the same plane but in
opposite directions. Three fish swim above the boats.
Due to the two dimensional depiction, the scene ap-
pears though to show three horizontal registers, which
was meant to give some realistic appearance. The artist
lacked the perspective perception of the scene, gave it
a static or a ›frozen‹ view.
The royal lion-hunt in the North Palace at Kŭyŭnjik
Three hunting scenes are depicted in three reg-
isters: the largest scene, which is in the middle, takes
place on a river (Fig. 3), while the other two are in a
hunting park20. The North Palace belonged to Ashur-
banipal (669–626 B.C.), who did not build a new palace
but renovated the residence of his predecessor Sen-
nacherib (705–681 B.C.)21. The hippos royal ship in this
discussion is depicted on the larger slab and compris-
es the theme of the middle register. The vessel has a
broad and elongated hull with high arching stern. The
sternpost is adorned with a hedgehog?, or some bird-
head protome. The vertical and broad stempost is sur-
mounted by hippos protome looking forward (Fig. 3).
The propulsion consists of 15 rowing oars worked
from two levels on the starboard side. 8 oars are worked
from the gunwale, while 7 are worked from the lower
deck with the shafts protruding through rounded oar-
ports cut into the side of the hull; thus the row-crew
comprised 30 rowers each working one oar. The blades
of the oars are not shown; apparently they are sub-
merged in the water. The ship is steered by two long
and tapered rudders, one mounted on either quarter.
Each rudder is worked by a tiller held by one standing
helmsman on the quarter, thus the steering was con-
trolled by two helmsmen (Fig. 3). The largest figure on
22
the deck and throwing the spear at the lion jumping
towards the prow is the king. He is accompanied by
other 6 soldiers equipped with elongated shields and
long lances; one of them is the archer, holding the bow
to shoot the arrow at the lion. Two soldiers standing on
the prow throw the lances at the jumping lion on the
prow. The scene takes place in shallow waters, probably
a marsh, indicating that lions could pass such terrains.
Already a hunted lion with all his four legs is tight to
the starboard quarter, as the prize of the hunting game.
Many fish and crabs swim in the water around the ship.
Hippos Warship – Karatepe
Karatepe is located on the west bank of the Cey-
han River, in the north-east corner of Cilicia22. The site
is set on a natural hill just south of the foothills at the
junction of the Taurus and Amianus mountain range23.
The fort of Karatepe is quite small with a north-south
axis of c. 430 m long, and east-west axis of c. 190 m
long24. The fortress is dated to 730 B.C. (the reign of
Tiglat-pileser III; 745–727 B.C.), and apparently it was
occupied for only one period of rather a short dura-
tion25. Evidently there are no signs of anterior or poste-
rior archaeological layers, nor architectural reconstruc-
tions or repairs. Many unfinished reliefs suggest that
the palace probably was destroyed by a violent event,
even before the whole construction was completed26.
The reliefs of Karatepe are carved on basalt orthos-
tats, which define the T-shape entries and gatehouses
at the north and south ends of the fortification walls27.
Each gate is marked by a pair of portal lions and the
north Gate-Chamber by a pair of portal sphinxes28.
According to the inscriptions preserved on some pan-
els that continue along the sculpted slabs, the research-
ers deduced that the orthostats were first set in place
and fitted together, and then they were sculpted29. The
Phoenician inscriptions on the slabs appear to be an
isolated instance at Karatepe30. Phoenician inscriptions
in Cilicia also suggest that there were important politi-
cal and cultural ties between Cilicia and the Phoenician
coastal cities from the 9th to the 7th centuries B.C.31.
20 deGraeve 1981, 57.
21 deGraeve 1981, 52.
22 Çambel 1948, 148, fig. 1.
23 Winter 1979, 134, fig. 3.
24 Çambel 1948, 149.
25 Çambel 1948, 151.
26 Çambel 1948, 151.
27 Winter 1979, 116.
28 Çambel 1948, pl. I.
29 Çambel 1948, 151.
30 Winter 1979, 137.
31 Winter 1979, 138.
 The Phoenician Hippos Figurehead. Preserved Tradition and Types of Ship
Fig. 4: Detail of a relief from the fortress of Karatepe (North Gate)
The decorations on the slabs at Karatepe suggest that
Phoenician artists may have been employed to produce
the reliefs.
The Warship
Representations of military scenes are scarce
among the Karatepe reliefs. Only a few depict warriors
with helmets and shields, or warriors on horseback as
facing each another32. The depiction of the warship on
the orthostat at the North-Gate is highly realistic and it
also shows some proportion to the crew (Fig. 4). The
elongated and broad hull has a concave stem extend-
ing forward with a broad forefoot, with a vertical cut
end, which indicates the ram just above the water-level.
The high-arching stern is surmounted by a raised and
inner turned sternpost adorned with a stylized horse-
head or a water-bird (with a wide beak) protome look-
ing forward. The vessel has two decks, in which the
top deck is supported by 11 short stanchions, forming
some kind of railing. The propulsion comprises row-
ing oars and sailing gear. On the port side of the hull
are depicted 5 oars with backwards slanting. The shafts
protruding between the stanchions supporting the top
deck are worked by rowers sited in the hold. Each oar
has a small elliptical blade, which resembles a golf-
club. The sailing gear comprises a tapered vertical mast
stepped amidships, a horizontal raised yard attached
beneath the masthead by a wide collar-like parrel, a
furled square sail beneath the yard and lashed by reef-
bands, and 6 lines hanging from beneath the yard to
the deck (Fig. 4). The right-hand line, hanging between
the tip of the yardarm and the top of the horse/bird
protome may indicate the starboard brace. The middle
line attaching the edge of the beak probably indicates
one brail. The slightly angled line to the right side of
the mast may indicate the backstay, or the halyard as its
lower end is held by the man near the mast. The slightly
angled line to the left side of the mast probably is the
forestay misplaced, or the port shroud. The middle
line that goes behind the head of the forward-looking
captain standing on the prow may indicate one brail.
The extreme right-hand angled linethat is held by the
man standing on the prow may indicate the port brace.
The steering gear comprises a broad rudder on the port
quarter plank. The short thick shaft protrudes through
a square oarport cut into the upper quarter. The wide
rectangular blade is submerged in the water. The lower
end of the shaft transverses the blade longitudinally,
thus indicating that the blade is made with wings; the
shoulders and the lower end have a horizontal cut. The
arrangement of the rowing oars and the rudder on the
port hull also were true on the starboard side, thought
the crew comprised 10 rowers, each working one row.
The helmsman probably worked both rudders by a
tiller inserted into the head of each loom. The crew on
the top deck comprises 4 men, each engaged in a differ-
ent task to work the sailing gear. The man standing on
the prow and holding the port brace is the prorates/cap-
tain, probably looking forward for hazards ahead and
ordering the rowers. Both men near the mast worked
the tackle lines when the ship sailed. They look at the
helmsman sited on a raised bench on the quarter, with
his right arm raised and palm clenched, while his hand
lies on his left thigh. He is not working the rudder but
is at rest. We may conclude that the crew comprised the
prorates, the helmsman, 10–12 rowers, and 2–4 addition-
al crew members who worked he tackle lines when the
ship sailed, for a total crew comprised of 14–16 men.
Two men (probably part of the crew) are swimming
beneath the bottom of the ship among various fish.
They probably are diving to catch fish for their meals
on board of the ship. The vessel seems to be anchored,
though the anchoring or mooring devices are missing.
Apparently the crew is preparing the ship to sail. The
rowers worked the rowing oars when the ship entered
or left the harbor/anchorage, whereas the sailing gear
was difficult to maneuver. The main propulsion of the
ship was by the wind when sailing in the open waters.
32 Çambel 1948, 154.
23
 Zaraza Friedman
Fig. 5 a: Detail of a relief from the Palace of Sargon II at Khorsabad
The Karatepe ship probably was used as auxiliary in the
Phoenician navy to transport supplies and warriors, or
such a vessel also could follow and protect convoys of
merchantmen en route in the Mediterranean.
Hippos vessels transporting wooden logs – Palace of Sargon II
at Khorsabad
Any new Assyrian king who came into reign built a
new palace and fortification. Sargon II (722–705 B.C.)
built his new city at unoccupied location and named
it Dur-Sharrukin (fortress of Sargon)33. The text com-
memorating the founding of Sargon’s new city mentions
in detail several stages of the planning and construc-
tion, as well as the great feast held after the completion
of the construction of the palace complex34. The great
construction project was carried out by foreigners cap-
tured in the occupied territories. There are some letters
mentioning that military forces and civilian population
from Assyria also took part in the construction pro-
ject of Sargon II35. The construction project started in
717 B.C., in the 5th year of Sargon’s II reign. The struc-
tures were built of bricks and various woods. The relief
carved on the great limestone slabs portraying cities de-
feated in battles embellished the walls of the palace36.
Sargon went on a military campaign in 705 B.C. and
died in the battle. The city and the palace of Sargon II
apparently had a single period of occupation and func-
tioning. The unfinished city was abandoned by Sargon’s
son and successor, Sennacherib (704–681 B.C.) who es-
tablished his royal city at Nineveh, which had been oc-
cupied from much earlier periods37. Dur-Sharrukin was
neglected until the end of the Assyrian empire.
Only the panels depicting the hippos ships trans-
porting wooden logs will be discussed in this paper
(Figs. 5 a. b). These scenes are rendered over five large
limestone slabs. They illustrate the stages of shipping
24
Fig. 5 b: Detail of a relief from the Palace of Sargon II at Khorsabad
the wooden logs to a coastal city, loading them in ships
and then transporting the logs overseas. Some of the
logs are loaded in the ships in three or four tiers on
top of the stem-and-stern posts. Another three logs are
towed astern, secured to the sternpost by thick tow-
ropes (Fig. 5 a. b). During the continuous assaults of
Sargon II against the lands of Manneans and Urartu in
719 B.C., the Assyrians consolidated their occupation
in the central and northern Zagros mountain range for
the exploitation of the timber resources which became
a necessity38. The Assyrian letters present vast informa-
tion of large scale operations of timber supply from
Urartu. A bill mentioning the building of the palace in
Khorsabad includes the timber supply needed for the
construction39.
33 deGraeve 1981, 46; Albenda 1986, 35; n. 11.
34 Albenda 1986, 35
35 Albenda 1986, 35
36 Albenda 1986, 35; n. 15.
37 Albenda 1986, 36.
38 Linder 1986, 275.
39 372 heavy timbers, 808 second size, 2313 third size, 11807 of
four sizes, all of first class. From these letters it is possible to
reconstruct the process in which the timbers were exploited
and stored and then transported to Khorsabad: the timbers
 The Phoenician Hippos Figurehead. Preserved Tradition and Types of Ship
Fig. 6: Carnelian gem, Haifa, National Maritime Museum
The Khorsabad ships
All the vessels depicted in the reliefs have iden-
tical hull shape of varied sizes and different propul-
sions. They have elongated hulls with flat bottoms and
vertically raised stem-and-stern posts. The stempost is
adorned with hippos protome looking forward, while
the sternpost with a fishtail protome (Fig. 5 a. b). The
horse-head protome defines the name of these vessels,
known as hippos ships (in Greek). In the Khorsabad
reliefs we may distinguish two types of hippos ships,
which apparently have distinct functions:
1. The wooden-log transporters are rowing ves-
sels, being propelled by 4–5 rowers per side,
which indicated that the crew comprised 8–10
rowers, each working one oar (Fig. 5 a). The
crew was also in charge with the loading/un-
loading of the logs from/at their destination
(Fig. 5 b). The oars have short elliptical blades
with a backwards angle, resembling golf clubs.
No steering-oar is depicted.
2. The second type of Khorsabad vessels have
similar hull shape as the log transporters and
are distinguished by two methods of propul-
sion: when sailing in the harbor or an anchor-
age the vessels were rowed by 2–3 rowers per
side, thus indicating that the crew comprised
4–6 rowers, and the prorates/captain standing
on the prow. When sailing in open sea these
vessels were rigged with sailing gear, compris-
ing a mast stepped amidships and secured in
place by one fore-and-back stay. The ships also
were equipped by a square crow-nest set atop
the masthead. A watcher stood in the crow-
nest to look for the hazards ahead or the ap-
proaching enemy vessels. The yard and the sail
are missing, thus indicating that when the ves-
sels plied in a harbor this gear was lowered and
only being mounted when the ship sailed in the
open sea. This gear became a burden and was
not efficient in sailing within the limited area
of the harbor basin. The oars of both rowing
and sailing vessels are similar with a short ellip-
tical blade with a backward angle, resembling
golf clubs. Both, the rowing and the sailing
vessels when not engaged in transporting the
wooden-logs probably were auxiliaries in the
navy to protect and supervise the sailing con-
voy of the log merchantmen en route to their
port destination.
Hippos ship on a carnelian gem – National Maritime Museum
in Haifa, Israel
A hippos ship is depicted on a carnelian gem (12 x
18 mm), probably from Sidon and dating to the 3rd cen-
tury B.C. (Fig. 6)40. The ship has an elongated hull with
a flat bottom. The broad rounded stern and upraised
sternpost is adorned with a fishtail protome. The al-
most vertical stempost is shaped as a thick neck with a
horse-head looking forward. The keel extends forward
in a short and broad pointed cutwater, which is a con-
structional element to provide better hydrodynamics
and stability to the ship, or this may indicate a stylized
ram. The propulsion comprises 6 rowing oars with a
slight forward slanting. The blades are not visible, be-
ing submerged in the water. The shafts project from
beneath the lower edge of the outrigger plank repre-
sented by a wide board alongside the starboard hull.
Actually, this element is supported by four short stan-
chions above the wale. The same oar arrangement was
true also on the port side, which suggests that the crew
comprised 12 rowers, each working one oar. The steer-
ing oars or rudders are missing. No crew men are de-
picted. Two dolphins, probably bottlenose type, seem
to plunge with their heads towards the deck of the ship.
This depiction results from the lack of perspective of
the scene. The dolphins actually are jumping in the wa-
ter, on the port side as they follow the vessel when it
sailed. Both are depicted with a tail similar to the stern-
post fishtail protome.
were felled on the Zagros mountains, floated down to the
lower Zab, bound into rafts and floating towards Ashur; there
they were stored in one of the lumber yards of the empire,
awaiting for shipment up the Tigris to the nearest distribution
point to be transported to the building site of Khorsabad:
Linder 1986, 275.
40 Ringel 1984, fig. 51; Friedman 2009, 201 fig. 2a.
25
 Zaraza Friedman
Hippos thalamegos/cabin-carrier – Nile mosaic from Palestrina
Originally the mosaic formed the floor of a nym-
phaeum in the form of an apsidal recess, made as an
artificial grotto. It was built to the north of a rectan-
gular hall, being attached to the eastern end of the
basilica constructed on the north side of Praeneaste
forum. The preserved mosaic measures 5.85 m at the
base (originally the mosaic was one meter wider at its
base = 6.85 m), and 4.31 m in depth; it is dated to the
end of the 2nd century B.C.41. The design of the mosaic
comprises two themes: 1. the upper part may be inter-
preted as illustrating the Ethiopian Heights and some
hunting games; 2. the lower part depicts the Nile Delta
at the time of the annual flood, the festivities of flood
and the celebration of the Goddess Isis (Roman God-
dess Fortuna). Within the Nilotic scene are depicted
nine vessels of different construction, size, and type.
The vessels will not be discussed in this paper, rather
only the ship with the hippos protome.
The Thalamegos/cabin-carrier
This is the largest and most luxurious vessel ren-
dered in the mosaic. It sails from right to left with the
prow pointed to the left (Fig. 7). The hull is rendered
with dark reddish-brown, ochre, dark grey, green, and
black hues of tesserae, which suggest the long wood-
en strakes. The upraised prow has an outward angle
(c. 45 degree). The graceful stempost is adorned with
hippos protome looking forward; apparently cast in
bronze or gold. The broad and rounded stern is sur-
mounted by a reversed curving sternpost adorned with
a stylized fishtail protome. A narrow yellow banner is
coiled around the upper part of the fishtail protome,
thus giving the vessel a festive appearance. Beneath the
port gunwale is a long and wide strake rendered with
dark brown tesserae. This may indicate the top wale
attached to the hull just beneath the gunwale. Its after-
end extends in a wing-like shape that was mounted to
the quarter by horizontal short through spars. The up-
per shaft of the port rudder was mounted on these
spars. The same steering arrangement was true on the
starboard side. A graceful cabin with an arched roof
covered with terracotta tiles is placed on the mid-deck.
Each arched pendant is decorated with an acroteria in
the shape of acanthus leaf (common decorative ele-
ment in classical art and architecture). On the port side
of the cabin two Ionic columns frame the half-height
lattice-screens. The fore-wall of the cabin seems to be
built with bricks and an open door is placed in the mid-
dle. The propulsion gear comprises 3 long poles with
26
Fig. 7: Detail of the Nile mosaic from Palestrina, Palestrina, Museo
Nazionale Prenestino
backward slanting that are mounted to the port gun-
wale by rope or leather grommets with free hanging
ends on the port hull. The blades are not visible, be-
ing submerged in the water. The same oar arrangement
was true on the starboard side, thus we may conclude
that the rowing crew comprised 6 rowers, each working
one oar. Two sited rowers with their backs turned to
the prow each works one oar from the fore-gunwale. A
third man coming out from the cabin works the loom
of the third oar with his left hand. The vessel is steered
by two large rudders, one mounted on the either quar-
ter. The helmsman sited on a raised quarter bench be-
neath the arched sternpost works the rudders by a tiller
inserted into the head of either loom; each is decorated
with some small figurehead. Three running figures on
the gangway are engaged in the hippopotami hunting
beneath the prow and the bottom of the ship. Two of
the men are in the process of throwing the long lances
at the hippopotamus beneath the prow.
The hippos thalamegos depicted in the Nile mosaic
is a luxurious vessel, probably royal, sailing on the
Nile and used for hippopotamus hunting in the Nile
Delta, as part of the games held during the flood fes-
tival. Athenaeus (V. 204) gives a detailed account on
the construction of a thalamegos by Ptolemy Philopator
(240–204 B.C.) under the supervision of Archimedes.
He does not mention the decoration of the stem-and-
stern posts. The horse-head protome on the stempost
of the Nile thalamegos illustrates the preserved tradition
of the Phoenician hippos protome that continued to
adorn the stemposts of later Hellenistic vessels.
41 Meyboom 1995, 11; Friedman 2011, 70.
 The Phoenician Hippos Figurehead. Preserved Tradition and Types of Ship
Fig. 8 a: The Neumagen merchantman, Trier, Rheinisches Landesmuseum
Neumagen hippos wine-barrel merchantman
The city of Trier is found about six miles from
the border of Luxemburg and sixty nine miles south-
west of Coblenz. At the time of Augustus the city was
known as Augusta Treverorum, on a site probably cho-
sen by Agrippa42. Under Diocletian‘s reorganization
of the provinces, Trier became the capital of Belgica
Prima43. It was part of Gallia Belgica. The Romans
on the way to Gaul crossed the Moselle River in Trier.
When Augustus was in Belgic Gaul (16–13 B.C.), the
planning of Trier was undertaken with streets intersect-
ing at right angles44. During this time the Romans also
built a bridge over the Moselle River. The remains of
few wooden poles were assumed to belong to the old
bridge or piers. As Trier expanded on the river bank, a
port was built there due to the active commercial activi-
ties. Wooden remains of this were revealed when the
level of the Moselle River dropped in the summer of
192945. After 70 A.D., the rebellion against the Romans
died down and afterwards the entire region of Moselle
became a center of wealth and one of the most flour-
ishing parts of the Roman Empire in the West. Around
the city of Trier were built luxurious villas known
as villae rusticae. The most significant remains are the
sculptures known as the Neumagen monuments, which
originally were funerary monuments in the vicinity of
Trier. They were used as building materials in the later
Roman fort built by Constantine at Neumagen46. The
prosperity of Trier during the 2nd and the 3rd centuries
A.D. is reflected in the bath built at an extensive scale
(one of the largest outside Rome) near the bridge. In
the Middle Ages the site was known as Sankt Barbara.
Apparently the name derives from the Roman bath
known as Barbara-therme47. Diocletian, Maximian
(given rank to Caesar in 285 A.D. and Augustus in 286
A.D.) made his seat at Trier, when he did not reside at
Milan or Aquileia48. From this time on Trier knew the
most glorious period in its history. Constantius Chlorus
who was elevated to the rank of Caesar of the West, in
293 A.D., came to Trier and made his preparations for
the campaign against Britain; presumably he also built
his fleet there49. Trier also was the city of Constantine.
He took up his residence at Trier, in 306 A.D., shortly
after he was proclaimed Emperor of York50. Ausonius
mentions Noviomagus (Neumagen) in his description
of the Moselle region as the place were stood »divi catra
inclita Constantine«51. He rebuilt the bridge over the Mo-
selle, erected a great circus and enriched the city with
stately buildings, thus giving the appearance of his fu-
ture capital52. The monuments were used for the foun-
dations of »castra Constantini«, as mentioned by Auso-
nius53. The glory of Trier lasted until the 5th century
A.D. when the pressure of the barbarians increased; in
470 A.D. the city was definitely Frankish54.
The Neumagen hippos merchantman
The best known monument from Trier is the large
merchantman sailing on the Moselle River and trans-
porting four wooden wine-caskets (Fig. 8 a). The mon-
ument is 3.68 m long and dated to c. 220 A.D.; today
is found in the Rheinisches Landesmuseum of Trier.
The crew and the propulsion gear are clearly depicted.
The ship has a broad and elongated hull with vertically
raised stem-and-stern posts, each adorned with a fig-
urehead. The sternpost is adorned with lion/dragon-
like protome looking forward, while the stempost is
adorned with a stylized horse-head resembling also
some kind of a dragon looking forward. The vertical
stem terminates at the water level in a pointed forefoot,
which is a constructional element to provide better hy-
drodynamics and stability to the vessel. This element is
not a ram. A narrow lattice-screen bulwark is mounted
above the gunwale, and protecting the crew on the deck.
42 Gwatkin 1933, 3; Liversidge 1972, 107.
43 Wightman 1970, 58.
44 Gwatkin 1933, 3.
45 Gwatkin 1933, 4.
46 Many of these monuments depict scenes of every daily life
from the Roman period: e.g. a family at meal; a lady at her toilet
sited in a chair and looking in a mirror held by her servant; a
school room with a schoolmaster in the center sited between
two pupils, each unrolling a scroll; Gwatkin 1933, 5; Wightman
1977, pl. 14.
47 Gwatkin 1933, 6.
48 Wightman 1970, 58.
49 Wightman 1970, 58 f.
50 Wightman 1970, 59.
51 Rostovtzeff 1933, 356; Ausonius X.11.
52 Gwatkin 1933, 8.
53 Rostovtzeff 1933, 357.
54 Gwatkin 1933, 11.
27
 Zaraza Friedman

The vessel appears to be propelled by 22 rowing oars

rendered on the port side, with the shafts project from
beneath the outrigger plank mounted alongside the top
wale. The same oar arrangement evidently was true on
the starboard side, thus we may deduce that the row-
ing crew comprised 44 rowers. The shafts have a slight
backward slanting. The lower part of the blades is sub-
merged in the water. The shoulders of the rectangular
blades angle towards the lower shaft. The rudder is in-
dicated only by the upper shaft on the port quarter. On
the lower port stern is depicted a semicircle ring which
may suggest the rowlock that the shaft passed through,
thus being secured to the quarter and also providing
an easy maneuverability. A similar rudder was mounted
on the starboard quarter. The rudders were worked by
the helmsman sited on the higher quarter-bench, and
steered them by a short tiller inserted into the head of
each loom. The ship is adorned with one oculus on ei-
ther stem, just beneath the top wale. The visible crew
comprises 6 men sited on the benches just beneath the
gunwale, the prorates/captain is sited on the raised stem-
bench, with his back to the prow and facing the crew,
holds the edge of the foremost barrel with his right
hand; he was in charge of the cargo of the wooden
wine barrels. We may conclude that the total crew com-
prised 52 men: 44 rowers + prorates + helmsman, and 6
additional men who also were the porters who handled
the wine barrels in loading/unloading the cargo.
The Neumagen merchantman may be compared
to a similar ship depicted on a gold Arras medallion
(Fig. 8 b). The medallion was issued after the campaign
of Constantius against Britain (293 A.D.)55. Constantius
is depicted on horseback approaching the gate of a for-
tified city (probably London) on the right. Beneath the
scene is depicted a hippos ship laden with four soldiers,
sailing toward the city. The ship‘s hull and the stem-
and-stern post protomes, are very similar to the Neum-
agen merchantman (Fig. 8 a). The Arras ship’s hull is
broad and rounded. Both the horse-head protome on
the vertical stempost and the lion/dragon protome
on the inner-turned sternpost are depicted with open
mouth and looking forward, which was meant to re-
flect some fear in the scene of the conquest. Along-
side the port-side hull is mounted a wide lattice-plank,
indicating a bulwark to protect the soldiers seated on
benches just beneath the gunwale. The heads of four
soldiers symbolize the marines engaged in the con-
quest. A rudder-cabin with an arched roof is set on
the quarter beneath the arched sternpost with the lion/
dragon protome (Fig. 8 b). The ship is propelled by 8
rowing oars, as suggested by the shafts, which have a
slight forward slanting, and project from beneath the
Fig. 8 b: Aureus, Arras
lower edge of the bulwark on the starboard side. The
blades are submerged in the water. Evidently the same
oar arrangement was true for the port side; thus we
may conclude that the rowing crew comprised 16 row-
ers, each working one oar. The rudder mounted on the
starboard quarter with backward slanting was worked
by the helmsman sited inside the quarter cabin. The
same rudder arrangement was true for the port quarter.
Probably each oar was worked by a tiller inserted in the
head of each loom. We may assume that the total crew
comprised 16 rowers + prorates + helmsman + 2 men
(engaged in varied works on board) = 18–20 men. Such
warship, an auxiliary in the navy, could transport from
20–40 soldiers to their destination.
Archaeological Evidence
The first riverine oriented societies were Egypt,
dictated by the Nile, and Mesopotamia on the Euphra-
tes and Tigris, which not only provided perennial water
supplies but also contributed to the development of
water transport from very early periods in the histo-
ry. The development of the seafaring led to increased
commercial explorations that brought to the exchange
of products, ideas and cultures. The Phoenicians
were the earlier organized merchants who developed
the network of long distance maritime routes56. Our
knowledge of varied types of Phoenician ships comes
mainly from art depictions. Actual ships are revealed
by occasional discoveries from surveys and underwater
excavations of rare Phoenician ships.
55 Wightman 1970, 58.
56 Stieglitz 1984, 139.

28
 The Phoenician Hippos Figurehead. Preserved Tradition and Types of Ship
Porticello Shipwreck
The village of Porticello is located on the Italian
coast on the Straits of Messina. In 1969 a Calabrese
fisherman observed that his catch consisted of many
rockfish. When a local sport diver was asked to investi-
gate the site, he discovered the remains of a shipwreck
with a large amount of amphoras, which was part of
the ship‘s cargo. Immediately the site became the work-
ing ground of looters. In November 1969, the local po-
lice arrested many of the looters and tried them. When
the police in assistance with some divers investigated
the area they discovered the remains of several ship-
wrecks. The systematic excavations of the Porticello
wreck started on July 4, 1970. The wreck is located
225 m offshore at a depth from 33 to 37 meters, on the
north most section in the deepest water57. The working
conditions were difficult, with the main problem be-
ing the current that during the day changed directions
several times, heading northward, then southward,
and then back again58. The researchers assumed that
the original length of the Porticello ship was 16.6 m59,
and its estimated load capacity of 30 tons60. Based on
the pottery shards analysis the ship was dated to 415–
385 B.C. All the lead cargo of the Portobello shipwreck
(except for the anchor stocks) originates from Laurion
in Greece61. Thirty-three amphorae recovered from
the wreck consiste four types: two from Mende and
Byzantion from the northern Aegean, and two of the
Mediterranean tradition, Greek and Punic; the Punic
jars carried salted fish62. Some lead remains were found
on the surviving hull that indicates the ship was coated
with lead sheets at least on the bottom. Only scarce
remains of the hull survived along with some wooden
fittings known as toggles and used with the tackle lines
of a square sail rigging63. Three pieces of wood were
taken for radiocarbon dating, which indicated a dated
range from 485 to 327 B.C.64. The Porticello shipwreck
offers considerable evidence for the maritime trade in
the western Mediterranean around 400 B.C. The ship
carried a mixed cargo of wine amphoras from Byzan-
tion, Mendes; salt fish from a Punic site; lead ingots
from Laurion; ink pots and bronze sculpture from uni-
dentified sites65. It is assumed that the ship started her
voyage from Byzantion, continued to Mendes and then
to Athens, where the lead ingots, probably the ink pots
and the bronze statue, and some amphorae (classified
by the excavators as Type 3) were loaded into the ship.
Possibly she sailed to Taras or Syracuse, and making
her way through the Straits of Messina may have head-
ed towards a port or ports further west or north of the
Sicilian coast when the ship sank on her voyage66. The
mixture of Greek and Punic products on the Porticello
ship also emphasizes that trade items from one city-
state to another were carried on a ship of the same
nation67. This shipwreck is one of the earliest excavated
Punic/Phoenician ships (date to the 5th century B.C.),
in the late 1969 and 1971.
Mazarron 1 Shipwreck, Spain
Several Phoenician shipwrecks were revealed along
the southern coast of Spain; three of these shipwrecks
will be discussed below. Mazarron 1 shipwreck was first
discovered in 1988, when a new marina was construct-
ed at Playa de la Isola Mazarron (Murcia)68. Systematic
excavations were carried out through the »Nave Feni-
cia« project that started in October 1993 and ended in
June 1995. The preserved hull remains measured 5.5 m
in length and 1.5 m in width. The recovered remains
comprised part of the keel (approximately square in
section), 9 planks mounted to one side of the keel
and 4 preserved frames. The planks were joined one
to another and to the keel by mortise and tenons. To
reinforce the jointed planks the shipwright sewed them
along their sides69. Abundant remains of resin coating
on the inside and outside of the planks were found,
which indicates that the hull was coated with resin
to make it watertight70. During the excavation season
in 1996, numerous fragments of Phoenician pottery
(72%) were documented; they were located immedi-
ately under the wooden remains of the ship, separated
only by 4–5 cm of silt and sand. Numerous fragments
of hand-made ceramics correspond to the pottery type
from Spanish Phoenician sites of Correras, Toscanos
and Morro de la Mezquitill on the coast of Malaga71.
Five samples of wood and algae were taken for C14
analysis. All the results of the analyzed samples and the
investigation of the pottery indicate that the ship dates
to 650–600 B.C.72. Other objects include a silver ring
57 Eiseman – Ridgway 1987, 5.
58 Eiseman – Ridgway 1987, 6.
59 Eiseman – Ridgway 1987, 13.
60 Delgado 1997, 404.
61 Delgado 1997, 405.
62 Delgado 1997, 405.
63 Eiseman – Ridgway 1987, 16 figs. 2-10. 2-11.
64 Eiseman – Ridgway 1987, 25, table I.
65 Eiseman – Ridgway 1987, 107.
66 Eiseman – Ridgway 1987, 107.
67 Eiseman – Ridgway 1987, 112.
68 Negueruela et al. 1995, 189.
69 Negueruela et al. 1995, 195.
70 ‹http://www2.rgzm.de/Navis/Home/NoFrames.htm›.
71 Negueruela et al. 1995, 193.
72 ‹http://www2.rgzm.de/Navis/Home/NoFrames.htm›.
29
 Zaraza Friedman
with movable soapstone scarab, a bronze spearhead,
and half of a stone anchor73.
Mazarron 2 Shipwreck
After the excavations of Mazarron 1 shipwreck the
area was intensively investigated with no further results.
Mazarron 2 shipwreck only was found in 1994 (Fig. 9).
This discovery was sensational because the ship was
preserved almost completely, missing her stem-and-
stern posts as well as the sailing or rowing gear. A one-
armed wooden anchor with a cast lead-stock was found
near the ship. The anchor is very similar in its shape to
the Ma‘agan Michael anchor; the Mazarron 2 anchor
appears to be much earlier (7th–6th century B.C.) than
that of Ma‘agan Michael (400 B.C.)74. The preserved
length of the hull is 8 m and its width is 2.25 m75. The
major cargo comprised 2820 kg of lead ingots76. The
researchers assumed that the vessel was transporting
the lead ingots along the southern coast of Spain, or
it transported the ingots loaded in from a larger mer-
chantman anchored offshore in deeper waters, and
thus she sank during her service journey. The vessel
was dated to the 7th–6th century B.C., and since her dis-
covery she is preserved in a steel basin on the bottom
of the sea at a depth of 3 m77. The other cargo com-
prising varied pottery jars and the ingots are preserved
and are displayed today in the Archaeological Museum
of Cartagena.
Bajo de la Campana Phoenician Shipwreck
Phoenician colonization of the Iberian Peninsula,
the exploitation of the metal deposits (silver, tin, lead)
in antiquity, and the search for agricultural resources
may be traced in many land and lately underwater
archaeological sites. At a place known as Bajo de la
Campana (Shallows of Bell, due to the shape of the
submerged site), a Phoenician shipwreck has been un-
dergoing excavation by the Institute of Nautical Ar-
chaeology (INA) and the Spanish Diving Society since
2007 until the present78. The site is located offshore at
La Manga, c.40 km northeast of Cartagena, in the Mer
Menor region of Murcia. The site came first to light in
1950 and then again in 1960, when salvage divers dyna-
miting modern wrecks for metal scraps began to find
ancient artifacts on the seabed in the region where they
carried out their activities79. In the summer of 2007, the
INA team under the supervision of Mike Poltzer and
Pinedo Reyes, carried out a survey which resulted with
the identification of at least three ancient shipwrecks.
The oldest recovered artifacts included western Phoe-
30
Fig. 9: Mazzaron 2 Shipwreck
nician amphorae, bowls, and plates dating to the 7th–6th
century B.C.80. The cargo also contained raw materials
such as tin ingots from Galicia on the northern Atlantic
coast of Iberia, galena (silver bearing lead oars) prob-
ably mined around the area of Cartagena, lumps of
raw amber probably originating from the Baltic region,
and ivory tusks from North Africa81. One of the tusks
found, one meter long, bears a Phoenician inscrip-
tion82. Systematic excavations started in the summer of
2008, and continued throughout 2009 and 2010. Up till
now (2011) no wooden remains of the hull have been
found. Due to the steep sloping sides of the area, ap-
parently the ship sunk on the slope and disintegrated
throughout the centuries through the strong currents.
The artifacts are spread from 16 to c. 20 meters below
sea level on the steep walls of the site. During the ex-
cavation season in 2008, ten more elephant tusks were
revealed. The total number of the found and recovered
tasks from the Phoenician cargo is 32 pieces83. Dur-
ing 2008 season, several objects were found such as a
stone pedestal, a one meter high (altar), as well as sev-
73 Negueruela et al. 1995, 193. 195.
74 Rosloff 2003, 135 fig. 3, 140 fig. 1, 141 fig. 2.
75 ‹http://www.simplynetworking.es/calida-3184-64-9_mazar-
ron_phoenician_boat_interpretation› (26.06.2010).
76 ‹http://www.simplynetworking.es/calida-3184-64-9_mazar-
ron_phoenician_boat_interpretation› (26.06.2010).
77 ‹http://www.simplynetworking.es/calida-3184-64-9_mazar-
ron_phoenician_boat_interpretation› (26.06.2010).
78 Poltzer – Reyes 2007, 58 fig. 2.
79 Poltzer – Reyes 2007, 58.
80 Poltzer – Reyes 2007, 58.
81 Poltzer – Reyes 2007, 58.
82 Poltzer – Reyes 2007, 58.
83 Poltzer – Reyes 2008, 8.
 The Phoenician Hippos Figurehead. Preserved Tradition and Types of Ship
eral wooden parts with bronze fittings which probably
formed a luxurious bed84. The wreck was identified as
a Phoenician merchantman on the basis of the found
cargo. Further investigations may reveal some parts of
the wooden hull and provide information on her con-
struction.
Ashkelon Phoenician Shipwrecks
The Ashkelon ancient shipwrecks were first discov-
ered in 1997, when the US Navy‘s research submarine
NR-1 and the Israeli Navy were engaged to search the
sea-bottom for the remains of the Israeli submarine
Dakar, lost in 1968. The investigations were carried out
at 33 nautical miles off the Gaza Strip shore and in a
depth of 400 m85. During this occasion three targets
of ancient wrecks were recorded without further in-
vestigations. Closer investigations of these sites were
undertaken in 1999 by the team of the North Hori-
zon ship and the Medea/Jason ROV (Remote Operat-
ing Vehicle) system. The first location revealed a sail-
ing ship dated to the 18th –19th century with an iron
anchor and chains86. The second target about 2.4 km
away revealed an oval shaped depression 18 m long and
8 m wide, with a pile of amphorae 2 m high87. When
Jason was used for a closer investigation it revealed two
wrecks 2.4 km apart88. Both wrecks were loaded with
the same type of wine amphora. They lay upright on
the seabed at a depth of 400 m, in a depression made
by the currents throughout the centuries. The wrecks
were named by the investigators as Tanit and Elissa. No
wooden remain of the hull were found yet. The Tanit
cargo measured 11.5 m in length, 4.5 m in width, and
385 amphorae at 2 m high89 (Fig. 1); it was estimated
that the original size of the ship was 14 m long, 6.5 m
wide90. The cargo of Elissa was 12 m long, 5 m wide,
and 396 amphorae also 2 m high91 (Fig. 10); the esti-
mated original size of the ship was c.14.5 m long and
7 m wide92. Several objects were removed from both
wrecks to be studied: 16 jars, 2 cooking pots, and one
bowl from Tanit, while 7 amphoras, 4 cooking pots, one
mortarium, one bowl and 6 ballast stones from Elissa93.
The jars were identified by similar jars found in land ex-
cavations at Megido III, Hazor VI–V, and Tyre III–II,
which are dated to the 8th century B.C.94. The cooking
pots found in both wrecks (part of the kitchen ware)
were used only by the crew of each ship. They belong
to a stylistic family also dated to the 8th century B.C.95,
thus the amphorae and the cooking pots indicate that
both ships were Phoenician, and therefore they are
dated to the period of the artifacts. Each wreck con-
tained four stone anchors, roughly of the same shape
and length; such type is known from similar anchors
dated to the Bronze Age96. The anchors‘ weights vary
from 80 to 400 kg. On Tanit were found three anchors
located roughly amidships while the fourth one was 2
m off the bow97, thus indicating that the crew tried to
anchor the ship when the catastrophe occurred. Appar-
ently the great depth of the sea did not provide the ef-
ficiency of the anchor. On Elissa, all four anchors were
located amidships, two on either side98.
Since Tanit and Elissa were oriented on the east-west
direction, 33 nautical miles on a straight line connecting
Ashkelon to Egypt and Carthage, it was assumed that
the ships sailed from their homeland port at Tyre or
Sidon heading towards their destination somewhere on
the coast of North Africa when they were caught by an
unfortunate storm and both ships sank en route. The
cargos of wine amphora indicate that their load capac-
ity was more than 10 tons per ship99. Tanit and Elissa
were long and broad ships, and not with a slim hull as
ships are depicted on the reliefs of Sargon II Palace at
Khorsabad (Fig. 5 a. b). Though no wooden remains
of the hull or the propulsion gear were preserved, we
may assume that at least the stempost may have been
adorned with hippos protome and the sternpost with
a fishtail protome, the characteristic features of the
Phoenician merchantmen.
Concluding Remarks
The purpose of this paper is to follow the preserved
tradition of the Phoenician hippos figurehead and the
types of ship. The use of the horse figure in the Assyr-
ian arts seems to point to the attribute of the horse as
being a powerful and graceful animal. The horse was
thought to dominate the Assyrian lands and therefore
it was adopted by the Phoenicians as a symbol of their
ships to dominate over the sea routes in the Mediter-
ranean. Throughout the survey of the vessels described
84 Poltzer – Reyes 2008, 8.
85 Ballard et al. 2002, 151.
86 Ballard et al. 2002, 152.
87 Ballard et al. 2002, 152.
88 Ballard et al. 2002, 153.
89 Ballard et al. 2002, 158.
90 Ballard et al. 2002, 157.
91 Ballard et al. 2002, 158.
92 Ballard et al. 2002, 157.
93 Ballard et al. 2002, 158 table 1; 159 table 2.
94 Ballard et al. 2002, 158.
95 Ballard et al. 2002, 161.
96 Ballard et al. 2002, 163.
97 Ballard et al. 2002, 164.
98 Ballard et al. 2002, 164.
99 Ballard et al. 2002, 166.
31
 Zaraza Friedman

Fig. 10: Elissa Shipwreck. Courtesy of H. Sigh and J. Howland © WHOI, IFE, and
Ashkelon Excavations, after Ballard et al. 2002, 154

Fig. 11: Tarrit Shipwreck. Courtesy of H. Sigh and J. Howland © WHOI, IFE, and
Ashkelon Excavations, after Ballard et al. 2002, 156
in this paper we can see that hippos ships do not define similar hull shape with fishtail protome on the vertical
a certain type or size in any period they appear. We can sternpost and a hippos protome looking forward on the
see that these vessels were used in varied ways and in vertical stempost. The mane of each horse-head is em-
diverse sailing environments. The earliest hippos vessels bellished by a net (Fig. 5 a), a characteristic of horses
are river ferries depicted on the Balawat Gates bronze depicted in the Assyrian reliefs, and concurrent to those
reliefs, dated to the 9th century B.C. These vessels are rendered with ships. They were rowed while the super-
rowed and steered from standing position. When ar- vising vessels in the convoy were sailing vessels rigged
riving close to a landing on the river banks they were with a mast stepped amidships and secured in place by
towed by two men from the banks by a towline coiled one fore-and-back stay. The crow-nest mounted atop
around the stempost and the ends passed over their the masthead provided the watcher to look for hazards
shoulder of the men. Hippos boats were also used for ahead or to the approaching enemy. When working in
pleasure sailing on lakes and ponds or marshes, and a harbor or anchorage they were rowed. Hippos vessels
were used for fishing and hunting games. Such boats were also identified with war galleys. Two such vessels
are depicted on a relief in the Palace of Sargon II at from Kŭyŭnjik (Fig. 3) and Karatepe (Fig. 4) were de-
Khorsabad (Fig. 2). The Khorsabad wooden-log trans- scribed above. They show two similar ships propelled
porters (Figg. 5 a. b) show the distinct features of the by different gear and in differing sailing environments.
typical Phoenician hippos vessels. All the vessels have The Kŭyŭnjik and Karatepe hippos warships show that

32
 The Phoenician Hippos Figurehead. Preserved Tradition and Types of Ship
they were propelled by oars when sailing in shallow wa-
ters of the Euphrates and Tigris marshes (Kŭyŭnjik) or
in harbors, and when sailing in open waters they used
the wind propulsion of a square sail mounted to a mast
stepped amidships (Karatepe). The Kŭyŭnjik ship is
depicted on a relief in the North Palace of Ashurbani-
pal (669–626 B.C.), and is engaged in royal lion hunting
games (Fig. 3). These vessels were used in royal hunt-
ing and fishing games, or an auxiliary in the navy to
transport supplies and soldiers en route to combat site,
or as a flag-ship of merchantmen convoys in the Medi-
terranean. The hippos ship depicted on the carnelian
gem from Haifa (Fig. 6) is propelled by oars and it may
have been used as an auxiliary in the Hellenistic navy of
Tyre or Sidon. The hippos thalamegos depicted in the Nile
mosaic from Palestrina (Fig. 7) shows that the hippos
protome on the stempost continued to be used during
end of the 2nd century B.C. The Palestrina hippos ves-
sel is a luxurious royal yacht used for the hippopotami
hunting games in the Nile Delta during the flood festi-
vals. The vessel is propelled by oars. The loom decora-
tion of the Palestrina steering oars shows a preserved
tradition since the Middle Kingdome of the Pharaonic
Egypt. The hippos Neumagen merchantman (Fig. 8)
transporting wine wooden barrels and the Arras war-
ship dated to the 3rd century A.D., appear to indicate
the latest preserved tradition of the hippos vessels. The
original vessel probably was 15–18 m long, 5–6 m wide,
and possibly could carry a load of 40 or 60 tons; the
four barrel visible on the deck may symbolize the cargo
of 40–100 barrels (an average capacity of 100 liters of
each barrel), were loaded in the hold as well as on the
deck. Both vessels are propelled by oars. The hippos
protome of the Haifa ship (Fig. 6) and both Neuma-
gen (Fig. 8 a) and the Arras vessels (Fig. 8 b) are very
similar, though that their dating span from the 3rd cen-
tury B.C. to the 3rd century A.D. (about 500–600 years
apart). They show that such vessels continued to be
build and sailing in the eastern Mediterranean as well
as on the Moselle River in the Germanic Roman prov-
ince. They represent merchantmen that could transport
cargo and passengers, thus being used as an auxiliary in
the Hellenistic and the Roman navy.
The archaeological remains of Phoenician ships
from the 8th to the 5th century B.C. mainly are iden-
tified upon their cargoes, whereas wooden remains
of the hull diminished throughout the centuries. The
Mazarron 1 and 2 wrecks partly revealed the construc-
tion methods of Phoenician vessels during the 8th–7th
century B.C., based on mortise and tenon joined planks.
Additional reinforcement to the planks was given by
sewing them along the joints. Carrying mixed cargoes,
they also may suggest that when sailing in the western
Mediterranean, along the Iberian coast, they may have
sailed in convoy. The oldest and deepest Phoenician
shipwrecks found offshore Ashkelon are Tanit (Fig. 11)
and Elissa (Fig. 10). They carried one distinct type of
cargo, the prized wine, to the new founded colony of
Carthage or the Old Egypt. They also augment that
when merchantmen sailed in the eastern Mediterranean
they sailed in convoy; thus when an unpredicted storm
arose both ships sank at the same time. The Phoeni-
cian/Punic Porticello ship dated to the 5th century B.C.,
demonstrates that merchantman carried mixed cargo
in transit ports on the eastern coast of Sicily, or prob-
ably en route to North African cities, passed through
the dangerous Straits of Messina, to shorten the sail-
ing route. The Phoenician ships did not preserve the
stem-and stern posts protome or their propulsion gear.
The iconography of the hippos ships suggests the actual
Phoenician hippos vessels that plied the Mediterranean.
They also may be considered as a standard unity for
the typical hippos Phoenician vessels that lasted from
the 9th to the late 2nd century B.C. The Neumagen wine
merchantman and the Arras warship may suggest that
the hippos tradition was adopted upon the attribute and
symbolism of the horse as a powerful and graceful ter-
restrial animal who also could dominate the waters.
Abstract
The Phoenicians were innovators, excellent sailors,
shipbuilders, skillful traders, and therefore they were
called the »Rulers of the Sea«, as known from Ezekiel
26.16:
• »All the Rulers of the sea shall descend from
their thrones…«
• »O thou that art situated at the entry of the
sea, which art a merchant of the people for
many isles …« (Ezekiel 27.3).
This paper will bring into discussion a firsthand re-
search of the Phoenician hippos vessels, especially the
preserved tradition of horse-head protome and the
type of vessels. Since prehistory men were observers
of wild animals by following their behavior and charac-
ter. These attributes were used in varied ways, and espe-
cially adopted them as symbolic adornments on ancient
sailing vessels. The earliest vessels with zoomorphic
stem or stern are known from the pre-dynastic period
in Egypt, the Naqada II period (4500 B.C.)100. Specific
animals chosen to decorate the stern or stem of ancient
100 Landström 1970, figs. 47 f.
33
ships were considered upon their attributes, thus giving
the ship the same character, and also it was intended to
endow the vessel with a life of its own101. The horse-
head protome on ships seems to have been introduced
by the Assyrians and representing their power10. The
horse symbolized the elegance over the sea routes as it
did over the Assyrian terrestrial domains.
101 Wachsmann 1996, 546.
102 Linder 1986, 278.
Bibliografia
Albenda 1976
P. Albenda, Bas-Reliefs in the Bīt-Hilāni of Ashurbanipal,
BASOR 224, 49–72
Albenda 1986
P. Albenda, The Palace of Sargon, King of Assyria: Monu-
mental Wall Reliefs at Dur-Sharrukin, from the Original Draw-
ings Made at the Time of Their Discovery in 1843–1844 by
Botta and Flandin (Paris 1986)
Athenaeus (Gulick Ch. B., Eng. tr.), 1957. The Deipnosophists, Vol.
II, The Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge 1957)
Ausoniu (Whites H. G. E., Eng. Tr.), 1968, The Loeb Classical Li-
brary (Cambridge 1986)
Ballard et al. 2002
R. D. Ballard – L. E. Stager – D. Master – D. Yoerger – D.
Mindell – L. L. Whitcomb – H. Singh – D. Piechota, Iron Age
Shipwrecks in Deep Water off Ashkelon, Israel, AJA 106,
2002, 151–168
Çambel 1948
H. Çambel, Karatepe. An Archaeological Introduction to a
Recent Discovered Hittite Site in Southern Anatolia, Oriens 1,
1948, 147–162
Eiseman – Ridgway 1987
C. J. Eiseman – B. S. Ridgway, The Porticello Shipwreck: A
Mediterranean Merchant Vessel 415–385 B.C. (College Sta-
tion, Texas 1987)
Davis – Faulkner 1947
N. G. Davis – R. O. Faulkner, Assyrian Trading Venture to
Egypt, JEA 33, 1947, 40–46, pl. 8
deGraeve 1981
M. C. deGraeve, The Ships of the Ancient Near East (c. 2000–
500 B.C.) (Leuven 1981)
Delgado 1997
J. P. Delgado, Encyclopaedia of Underwater and Maritime Ar-
chaeology (London 1997)
Friedman 2006
Z. Friedman, The Nile mosaic of Palestrina: an illustration of
shipbuilding traditions, Archaeologia Maritima Mediterranea
3, 2006, 115–145
Friedman 2009
Z. Friedman, Animal Figurehead Decorations on Ancient
Ships; in: Oniz 2009, 190–202
Friedman 2011
Z. Friedman, Ship Iconography in Mosaics: An aid to under-
standing ancient ships and their construction, BARIntSer 2202
(Oxford 2011)
Gardiner – Morrison 2000
R. Gardiner – J. Morrison, The Age of Galleys: Mediterranean
Oared Vessels since Pre-classical Times (Edison 2000)
Gwatkin 1933
W. E. Gwatkin, Roman Trier, ClJ 29, 1933, 3–12
34
Landström 1970
B. Landström, Ships of the Pharaohs: 4000 years of Egyptian
Shipbuilding (Garden City, NY 1970)
Layard 1849
A. H. Layard, Nineveh and Its Remains, Vol. II (London
1849)
Linder 1986
E. Linder, The Khorsabad Wall Relief: A Mediterranean Sea-
scape or River Transport of Timbers?, JAOS 106, 1986, 273–
281
Linder – Kahanov 2003
E. Linder – Y. Kahanov, The Ma’agan Michael Ship: A Recov-
ery of a 2400-Years-Old Merchantman. Final Report, Vol. I
(Haifa 2003)
Liversidge 1972
J. Liversidge, rev. E. M. Wightman, Roman Trier and Treveri
(London 1970), and H. Cüppers, Die Trierer Römerbrücken
(Mainz 1969), AJA 76, 1972, 107–109
Mazarron 1 Shipwreck
‹http://www2.rgzm.de/Navis/Home/NoFrames.htm›
Markoe 2000
G. E. Markoe, Phoenicians: Peoples of the Past (Berkeley 2000)
Meyboom 1995
P. G. P. Meyboom, The Nile Mosaic of Palestrina: Early Evi-
dence of Egyptian Religion in Italy (Leiden 1995)
Negev – Gibson 2001
A. Negev – Sh. Gibson, Archaeological Encyclopaedia of the
Holy Land (New York 2001)
Negueruela et al. 1995
J. Negueruela – J. Pinedo – M. Góemz – A. Miñano – I. Arel-
lano – J. B. Barba, Seventh-century BC Phoenician vessel dis-
covered at Playa de la Isola, Mazarro, Spain, IntJNautA 24.3,
1995, 189–197
Oniz 2009
H. Oniz, SOMA 2008: Proceedings of the XII Symposium on
the Mediterranean Archaeology, Eastern Mediterranean Uni-
versity, Famagusta, North Cyprus, 5–8 March 2008, BARInt-
Ser 1909 (Oxford 2009)
Poltzer – Reyes 2007
M. E. Poltzer – J. P. Reyes, Phoenicians in the West: An An-
cient Shipwreck Site of Bajo de la Campana, Spain, The INA
Annual 2007, 57–61
Poltzer – Reyes 2008
M. E. Poltzer – J. P. Reyes, Phoenician Rising: Excavation of
the Bajo de la Campana Begins, The INA Annual 2008, 5–10
Ringel 1984
J. Ringel, Maritime Motifs on Ancient Coins at the National
Maritime Museum Haifa (Haifa 1984)
Rosloff 2003
J. Rosloff, The Anchor, in: Linder and Kahanov 2003, 140–146
Rostotovtzeff 1933
M. Rostotovzeff, rev. W. v. Massow, Römische Grabdenkmäler
des Mosellandes und der angrenzenden Gebiete II (Frankfurt
1932), AJA 37, 1933, 355–358
Stieglitz 1984
R. R. Stieglitz, Long-Distance Seafaring in the Ancient Near
East, The Biblical Archaeologists 47, 1984, 134–142
Torr 1964
C. Torr, Ancient Ships (Chicago 1964)
Wachsmann 1996
S. Wachsmann, Seagoing Ships and Seamanship in the Bronze
age Levant (College Station, Texas 1996)
Wightman 1970
E. M. Wightman, Roman Trier and the Treveri (London 1970)
Winter 1979
I. J. Winter, On the Problems of Karatepe: The Reliefs and
Their Context, AnSt 29, 1979, 115–151.
 List of Authors

• Abdelhamid, Selma • Hermanns, Marcus Heinrich

Email: selmaabdelhamid@googlemail.com German Archaeological Institut (Madrid)
Serrano 159
• Blot, Maria Louìsa Pinheiro (†) ESP – 28002 Madrid
Email: Marcus.Hermanns@dainst.de
• Friedman, Zaraza
Independent Scholar • Pappa, Eleftheria
4 A PUA Street, Ap. 10 Email: eleftheriapappa@hotmail.com
ISR – Haifa 35311
Email: zaraza@research.haifa.ac.il • Pedersen, Ralph K.
Department of Social Studies
• Galasso, Mario Southwestern Assemblies of God University
Visiting professor in Storia dell’archeologia 1200 Sycamore Street
Instituto per l’Arte e il Restauro – Firenze USA – Waxahachie, Texas 75165
Via Enrico Costa 26 Email: rkpedersen@yahoo.com
I – 07041 Alghero (Sassari)
Email: elburic@alice.it • Semaan, Lucy
Department of Archaeology and Museology
• Giardina, Baldassare University of Balamand
Archemilia SaS Al Kurah Lebanon
Via Sorbelli 10 Postal Address:
I – 40124 Bologna P.O. Box 1553, Jounieh, Lebanon
info@archemilia.it Email: lucysemaan@gmail.com

• Haggi, Arad • Tilley, Alec

145 Grosvenor Drive Lieutenant Commander RN (retired)
UK – Loughton Essex, IG10 2LB Fieldfare, East Street, Hambledon,
UK – Hampshire, PO7 4RX
Email: alectilley@btinternet.com

129
130
 Weitere Titel aus dem Eigenverlag des Archäologischen Seminars
Inhalt:
Vorwort
Beiträge des Festkolloquiums »Die griechische Polis und ihre
Kulte. Zwischen ofizieller Politik und individuellem Glauben«,
abgehalten zu Ehren von Prof. Dr. Heide Froning-Kehler,
Marburg, 15.–16.05.2009.
Bumke, Helga – ‘Konservierte’ Votive in griechischen
Heiligtümern
Korkut, Taner – Die Götterdarstellungen auf den
Münzen von Tlos
Papaefthymiou, Wanda – Christodoulopoulou, Rosalia
– Der Tempel des Asklepios und der Hygieia im
Asklepion von Athen - Neue Forschungen
Pingiatoglou, Semeli – Das religiöse Leben in Dion von
den Anfängen bis in augusteische Zeit
Eine Übersicht über noch lieferbare ältere Jahrgänge des Marburger Winckelmann-Programmes inden Sie unter:
http://www.uni-marburg.de/fb06/archaeologie/publikationen
Marburger Winckelmann-Programm
2014
Herausgegeben von
Rita Amedick, Heide Froning, Winfried Held
(162 Seiten, 184 s/w Abbildungen, 26 Farbabbil-
dungen, fester Einband, Fadenheftung)
ISBN: 978-3-8185-0513-4
Preis: 89,- € (zzgl. Versandkosten)
Shapiro, H. Alan – Votive Relief and Vase Painting: An
Archaeological Kreuzung der Gattungen in Classical
Athens
Tiverios, Michalis – Der Phaethon des Meidias-Malers
und der »Phaethon« des Euripides
Weitere Beiträge
Amedick, Rita – Gallier und Orientalen, Kleinasien und
Rom. Siegesmonumente in der Epoche der römischen
Expansion
Freyberger, Klaus Stefan – Die Heiligtümer von
Kanatha und Seeia: Zeugnisse einer religiösen
Sanktionierung der Verfügungsgewalt über Wasser
Held, Winfried – Seleukidische Tempel babylonischen
Typs
131
 Weitere Titel aus dem Eigenverlag des Archäologischen Seminars

Marburger Beiträge zur Archäologie

Band 1

Eugenia Gerousi-Bendermacher
Sepulkralkultur auf der Insel Thera (Santorin)
Der spätantike Friedhof in Perissa und seine
Ausgrabungsfunde unter besonderer Berück-
sichtigung der Tonlampen.

(221 Seiten, 479 Farbabbildungen, 16 s/w Abbil-

dungen, fester Einband, Fadenheftung)

ISBN: 978-3-8185-0510-3

Preis: 98,- € (zzgl. Versandkosten)

Inhalt:
Vorwort
1. Die Insel Thera und ihre Geschichte 3.1.5 Lampen mit einer schwer bestimmbaren Signatur
1.1 Topographie 3.1.6 Lampen nach nordafrikanischen Vorbildern
1.2 Die Erforschung Theras in neuerer Zeit 3.1.7 Die ägäischen Lampen
1.3 Thera in der Antike 3.1.8 Die scheibengedrehten Lampen
1.4 Thera im frühen Christentum 3.2. Einordnung und Datierung des Lampenbefundes

2. Die Ortschaft Perissa 4. Die Nutzungsphasen des Friedhofs von Perissa

2.1 Bisherige Kenntnisse von dem Ort 4.1 Phase I: 1. bis 2. Jahrhundert n. Chr.
2.2 Das Grabungsprojekt 4.2 Phase II: 3. bis 5. Jahrhundert n. Chr.
2.3 Der Friedhof von Perissa – allgemeiner Überblick 4.3 Phase III: 5. bis 8. Jahrhundert n. Chr.

3. Katalog der Tonlampen 5.Die Identiikation der antiken Siedlung

3.1 Der Befund
3.1.1 Die römischen Lampen 6. Bibliographie
3.1.2 Die griechischen Lampen
3.1.3 Die spätgriechischen Lampen 7. Abbildungsnachweise
3.1.4 Die kleinasiatischen Lampen

Bestellungen richten Sie bitte an:

Eigenverlag des Archäologischen Seminars, Biegenstr. 11, D-35032 Marburg oder Mail an: archverlag@uni-marburg.de

132

View publication stats