Commerce and Citadels: Prosperity and Preservation at Troy and Corinth - Research Paper Example

Commerce and Citadels: Prosperity and Preservation at Troy and Corinth The ancient cities of Troy and Corinth wereimportant trading and cultural centers separated by the Aegean Sea, yet both were part of an network of city-states connected by sea-borne commerce and trade. While the ethnicity of the people who lived at Troy remains uncertain, they interacted on a regular basis with the city-states of Greece and with the Greek Anatolian settlements of Ionia. Troy shared many of the same concerns, aspirations and lifestyle elements with those who lived at Corinth. As with most cities of the ancient world, both Troy and Corinth were dependent upon the vagaries of the seasons and on the Aegean and Mediterranean seas for commerce and trade. The city-states that rimmed the Aegean were heavily reliant upon the sea, which was the lifeblood of the trade and commerce that supported these ancient civilizations. The ways in which the citizens of Troy and Corinth adapted to external forces, both natural and human, tells us a lot about their daily life. The detritus left behind by these great cities indicates that Troy and Corinth had much in common. Corinth – an overview It is not surprising that Corinth was the first of the Greek city-states to use coinage as a means of exchange. The archaeological evidence shows that coins were in use there as early Name 2 as the 7th century B.C. Corinth was from very ancient times a key trading center, located on the east coast of Greece’s Peloponnesian peninsula, easily accessible by sea. The city was among the first in Greece to initiate a public works program, resulting in the building of aqueducts and public buildings. By comparison with other city-states, it was well-planned and laid out using geometric guidelines (Crouch, 249). The meticulous planning and construction of public buildings is indicative of the importance of commerce at Corinth, a factor that has determined the way in which archaeologists have investigated the ancient city. “So richly endowed with public buildings was Corinth that modern excavators have concentrated on them with little effort to recover the residential areas” (Ibid, 149). Very few residential buildings have been found near the main concentration of civic buildings, indicating that a powerful minority of leading merchants probably lived here so that they might have ready access to meeting places and important centers of business (Ibid, 150). Troy – an overview Troy, too, was a commercial center, yet one that structured itself along more defensive lines than Corinth. The site that Heinrich Schliemann excavated in the late 1800s was actually a small, fortified citadel that was part of a much larger city. This design, which combines a citadel or “fortress” defending an adjacent city is characteristic of other Aegean settlements, such as at Tiryns (Gates, 142). Gates writes that while Troy shared many features with other Aegean settlements, it differed from its Greek counterparts, such as Corinth, in that it also exhibits many typically Anatolian characteristics. “The fortification wall is of Anatolian- Name 3 Near-Eastern type, with foundations consisting of stone-walled compartments filled with earth,” representing casemate walls of a type also found south of Troy at Miletus and at the Hittite city of Hattusha to the east (Ibid, 142). With enemies (or at least potential enemies) on all sides, Troy was built with an eye toward defense, no doubt a realistic concession to its highly desirable geographic location, situated as it was near the confluence of the Aegean and Black Seas. It is thought that defense was likely a civic responsibility as archaeological remains have shown that large quantities of supplies were stored underground along the city’s outer walls. Thus, it is likely that city life at Troy was a pragmatic combination of commercial activity and maintaining an “on guard” defensive posture, a habit no doubt born of a long history of conflict. Defensive designs City dwellers in Corinth were no less familiar with defensive precautions than those who lived at Troy or in Corinth’s sister Greek city-states. As at Athens, Corinth had an acropolis, or high city, known to archaeologists as the Acrocorinth. This retreat is thought to have been fortified as early as the 7th century B.C. and provided citizens with a reliable means of protection in times of danger. It is about this period that Corinth is thought to have reached something of a golden age, establishing multiple island colonies in the near-Aegean thanks to the development of a strong naval force and a burst of economic growth made possible by the benefits of trade. By this time, Corinth had the wherewithal and materiel necessary to expand its reach. The early settlements at Troy, dating to approximately 2200 B.C., were thought to have been largely sea-faring, though the Troy of the Late Bronze Age found itself in a less expansive position than Corinth, having been hemmed in by powerful and often predatory neighbors (not the least of Name 4 whom were the Greeks). Subsistence and trade In spite of their differences in architectural design, Corinth and Troy shared many similarities of a more commonplace nature. The greater Mediterranean/Aegean world, particularly coastal cities such as Corinth and Troy, relied on much the same kinds of food sources and lived in habitations constructed of more or less uniform building materials. Vegetables, cheese, olives, meat and particularly seafood were dietary staples. Situated as they were at important trade cross-roads, Troy and Corinth both would also have had access to foods from many foreign lands. Houses were typically constructed of bricks made from mud and dried by the sun. Later, houses and other buildings were constructed of an amalgam that included stones and timber. Stone craftsmen began fitting stones together sometime after 2000 B.C. The ancient Corinthians began to take advantage of trade opportunities as early as 800 B.C., making small, decorated vases for storing and shipping many commodities. Corinth’s merchants and craftsmen provided the impetus for a powerful economic center that established a trading network throughout the Aegean. Since the time of Heinrich Schliemann, Troy has been regarded as an equally dynamic commercial center, and indeed the archaeological record includes examples of pottery, jewelry and other relics indicating trade activity within the city. However, in recent years the traditional picture of Troy as a powerful and fabulously wealthy commercial hub for Black and Aegean Sea traffic has been called into question. Homer’s influence is considerable here, as it is for most theories having to do with Troy, where “the entire Name 5 history of investigations has been so polarized by the fascination exerted by Homer’s Troy that data provided by more recent excavations…and the factual data offered by the Troy excavation itself have not been sufficiently taken into account” (Kolb, 2004). Colonialism One of the most notable differences between Troy and Corinth was the establishment by the Corinthians of colonies throughout the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean. This gave Corinth (as it also gave the Athenians) the power to exert its influence in the Aegean and Mediterranean and made Athens and Corinth commercial rivals. The story was different in Troy, where trade and commerce did not translate to colonialism. Both Troy and Corinth were ruled by “a ring of powerful families” and were actively involved in commercial endeavors – important criteria for cities with colonialist aspirations (Gwynn, 113). Indeed, research indicates that Troy was very much in the tradition of Late Bronze Age trade, which “was largely palace- and elite-directed, comprising gift exchange and organized trade providing important raw materials and precious objects” (Kolb, 2004). Yet the Trojans appear to have concentrated their trade activities in the Aegean and not the Black Sea. Nor did they appear to have traded significantly within Anatolia or with the Near East. Conclusion The physical remnants of Corinth and Troy tell stories that mirror each other yet exhibit key differences. Both were notable commercial locations though Corinth was more successful, expansive and colonial than Troy. Both city-states were ruled by their elite and, while defensive Name 6 concerns were reflected in most ancient settlements, Troy seems to have been somewhat more concerned with self-preservation, perhaps because it lacked a high place, or acropolis, to which it could retreat in the event of attack. Homer has immortalized the ancient city of Troy in The Iliad and The Odyssey, but Corinth stands very much on its own merits as an important source of Greek culture and commercial development. Name 7 Works Cited Crouch, Dora P. Geology and Settlement: Greco-Roman Patterns. New York: Oxford University Press. 2004. Gates, Charles. Ancient Cities: The Archeology of Urban Life in the Ancient Near East and Egypt, Greece and Rome. New York: Routledge Press. 2003. Gwynn, Aubrey. “The Character of Greek Colonisation.” Journal of Hellenic Studies. Vol. 38. 1918. Kolb, Frank. “Troy VI: A Trading Center and Commercial City.” American Journal of Archaeology. Vol. 108, 4. 2004. Read More