-
The Organisation and Exploitation of the Colonial Chora Between
the Late ArchaicPeriod and the Classical Period: Himera
Alessandro GuaggentiIntroduction
The Greek chora offers an insight into an important and often
overlooked aspectof the Greek world, that being the rural life of
the polis. The Chora provided,agriculturally and economically for
the Greek cities and constituted a significantproportion of the
population of the states, as well as being a place to which
townsmenwould commute. These aspects obviously influenced the
economic situation of the city,but also the religious, political
and social characteristics and policies of the cities.However the
organisation, importance and exploitation of the Greek chora can
bewidely variable across the Greek world, especially in relation to
mainland Greece. Thechora which developed in the Greek colonies
would have had distinct differences inrelation to those of the
homeland, and the colonial chora offers an insight into
thesedifference and, in turn, the character and aims of Greek
colonisation, specifically in thearchaic period. This essay aims to
evaluate the use, organisation and importance of thehinterland
through the evaluation of a specific case study of the chora in the
colonialGreek world, alongside considering it in relation to other
examples.
Fig 1: Himeran Chora (represented in dark green), after
Vassallo, 2005, p.90
-
Studies focusing on the Greek chora have only recently come to
the forefront ofstudy, thanks to the advancement of modern
archaeological techniques, the results ofwhich can be studied in
relation to the ancient sources and classical
studies.Archaeological techniques, notably non-intrusive surveying,
has allowed the creationof a corpus of knowledge on large swathes
of rural land surrounding Greek cities.Notable studies are those of
Metaponto in southern Italy1 and also in large areasaround the
Black sea2, particularly in the region of the Crimea. In Greece
itself anumber of studies have been particularly insightful, with
examples being seen at theancient city of Megalopolis in the
Peloponnesus and around Athens in Attica, amongothers.
In focusing on a specific area for this essay, a territory in
the region of northernSicily was chosen. This consisted of the
chora of the ancient Greek city of Himera.Founded by Zanklaeans,
Greek colonists from the north-eastern tip of Sicily, in 648B.C3,
the city was part of a second wave of Greek colonisation in the
westernMediterranean. Other contemporary Greek foundations can be
seen at Selinunte,Agrigento and Kamarina in Sicily4, alongside
Massalia5 and Alalia6 in Southern Franceand Corsica, Poseidonia7
and Laos in south-western Italy, and a large number ofGreek
colonies in the Black sea region. This era of colonisation has
evolved from theprevious one seeing developments in division,
organisation and efficiency of the chora,influencing the foundation
and territorial aspects of Himera.Defining the Himeran
Territory
In this essay I shall be looking at the Himeran territory
primarily in the archaic andclassical periods and therefore it will
be necessary to define the territory of Himera inthese two periods
first. From the founding of the city up until the late fifth
century it islikely that Himera controlled a territory (fig 1.)
which spread southward through the SanLeonardo, Himera and Torto
river valleys1. As well as the definition of the Himeranchora,
archaeological investigations have built up a picture detailing the
Himeransphere of influence throughout Sicily2 (fig 2.) during the
archaic and early classical
1 Carter, 2006.2 Doonan, 2006; Avram, 2006; Ochotnikov, 2006;
Kryzickij, 2006; Bujskick 2006; Kutajsov, 2006; Zinko2006.3 Thuc.
6.2.4 Thuc. 6.2.5 Timaeus Ps.-Scymn. 209-214 [= FGrHist 566 F71.];
Thuc. 1.13.6 Herodotus 1.165-167.7 Strabo, 252.1 Vassallo, 1996,
203.2 Vassalo, 1996, 202.
-
periods. What is most evident from this picture is the impact of
the naturalsurroundings, within which Himera was placed, on the
development of economicinteractions of the early colony and thus in
turn the political development of the state.
Enclosing initially an area of around 16km from the city3,
Himera expanded, by theclassical period, to an area of c.1260 km24.
Of this land, around 70-90% is believed tobe agricultural, equating
to an agricultural area of around 94,500 ha5. This makes
theterritory of Himera the fourth most fertile and agriculturally
productive of the multitudeof ancient Greek states in Sicily (Table
1.). Therefore it is understandable that agriculturewould have laid
at the heart of this colony influencing many aspects of the
polis.
The Himeran chora, on its eastern and western extremities, is
bound by themountainous and hilly terrain of the Madione and Monti
Sicani regions. Along thenorthern side, a coastal plain, a typical
aspect of Greek colonies, makes up a smallpercentage of the
territory, and quickly rises into upland areas.
These upland areas, along with the mild precipitation
experienced in this part ofthe island (Table 2.), facilitates the
creation of smaller rivers which filter into the threemain valleys,
allowing the land in this area to be particularly well watered and
fertile.
3 Vassallo, 1996, 202.4 DeAngelis, 2000, 132.5 DeAngelis, 2000,
133.
Fig 2: Himeran sphere of influenced based on the distibution of
Himeran type K480 cups, after Vassallo, 2005, 83.
-
Territory sizein km2 (and
ha)Percentage ofagricultural
landAgriculturalland in ha*
Number ofpeople
supportable**Syracuse 1000
(100,000)86.5% 86,500 108,125-144,165
Kamarina 670(67,000)
90% 60,300 75,375-100,50
MegaraHyblaia
400(40,000)
83% 33,200 41,500-55,333
Leontinoi 830(83,000)
80% 66,400 83,000-110,665
Katane 830(83,000)
60% 49,800 62,250-83,000
Naxos 600(60,000)
59% 35,400 44,250-59,000
Zankle 1,120(112,000)
57% 63,840 79,800-106,400
Himera 1,260(126,000)
75% 94,500 118,125-157,50
Selinous 1,500(150,000)
86% 129,000 161,250-215,000
Akragas 2,500(250,000)
87% 217,500 271,875-362,50
Gela 1,350(135,000)
86% 116,100 145,125-193,500
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov DecRainfall
(mm)
109 95 64 42 81 14 6 16 44 90 90 130
This land was situated around the main trade routes, those being
theaforementioned three valleys. These lead southward through areas
of nativesettlements, and on to the territories of the southern
Sicilian Greek cities (Selinunte,Agrigento and Gela)(fig 3.). The
importance of these contacts can be identified in the
Table 2. Average precipitation of the province of Palermo, after
DeAngelis, 2000, 121.
Table 1. Summary of the hypothesized agricultural productivity
capacities calculated for Sicily's Greekcity-states, after
DeAngelis, 2000, 125.
-
classical sources relating to Himeran interaction with Akragas6
and Selinunte7 in thearchaic age.
From this information, one sees a large and diverse landscape
which the city ofHimera came to control, and through an
understanding of the geographical featureswe can have a competent
understanding of main routes of penetration into thehinterland
which were bounded by areas of rich agricultural potential.
The Himera Survey
Himera and its territory is fortunate enough to have been the
focus of survey work,lasting from 1981-1985, which has facilitated
the identification of a number of sitesaround the ancient city.
Many other areas in the island have suffered from this lack
ofarchaeological technique which creates a large unknown in Sicily
on determining therelationship between the city and its hinterland.
The work by Alliata, Belvedere,Vassallo, and Vallet8, has covered
an area of around 16-18 km sq, close to the actualcity (fig 4.),
between the Torto and Imera rivers, and illustrates a range of site
typeswithin in the Himeran chora during the archaic and classical
period, which has been6 Aristotle, Rhetoric, 2.20; Also see
Polyaenus 5.1.3-4.7 Diod. 11.21.4-5.8 Aliiata, Belvedere, Vassallo,
Vallet, 1988.
Fig 3: Plan of Himeran routes leading into Selinuntine,
Akragantine and Geloan territories, afterGoogle Earth 2014, using
AWMC Antiquity a la carte overlays 2012.
-
further complimented by modern scholarship which has looked
further inland in theHimeran chora9.
9 Vassallo, 1999; 1996; 2007; Belvedere, 1989; DeAngelis, 2000;
Vassallo and Zirone, 2006;
Fig 4. Area of the Himera III survey with the identification of
sites relevant to this essay.After, Belvedere, 1988, 198.
-
It is now evident that in the lowland area of the coastal plain
running along thenorthern edge of Himeras territory, there is
imposed an organised linear grid plan10(fig 5.). This information
has come from the prospective study of satellite imagery,however no
further work has come to light, as of yet, so only small tracts of
the divisionhave been identified. Further work will highlight the
exact layout of such a division butso far it is nonetheless evident
in this part of the Himeran chora. This land organisationcan be
seen reflected in many Greek colonial sites across the
Mediterranean and Blacksea, with examples seen notably at
Metaponto11 (fig 6.) and Chersonesus12 (fig 7.).However, it is this
technique which we see being largely absent in homeland
Greeceduring the archaic and classical periods13 and it seems to be
a defining, individualquality of only colonial Greeks.
Further inland in the Himeran chora, this organised, linear land
division seems tobe absent and can be assessed as unnecessary for a
number of reasons here. Firstly,
10 Marescalchi, 1988, 47-53. (in Himera III).11 De Julius, 2001,
79-116; Carter, 2006, 91-132.12 Nikolaenko, 2006.13 In Attica for
instance there seems to have been no single Attic settlement
pattern. Whitley, 2001, 382.
Fig 5. Indcations of grid plan imposed on the area of the
coastal plain, between the Himeraand Torto rivers, after
Marescalchi, 1988, 49.
-
this furrowed land division allowed the irrigation of fields on
the coastal plains14. This isa situation which does not need to be
addressed inland due to the natural irrigation ofland by the small
upland rivers and streams which drain down into the valley. It is
onlyin the lowest and flattest areas which would need such
irrigation (a problem formodern day farmers in this types of
areas), and at this level the land is too narrow orstill too uneven
as to be able or worth imposing such an organised division of
land.The territory of the inland regions will be further discussed
at a later point, but for themoment we must return to the Himeran
survey itself.
The majority of the research in this survey pertains to the
material evidence foundthroughout the research area. From this
material a number of few native sites wereidentified alongside
those described as fattoria15, or farmsteads, relating to
specificperiods16.
14 Isager and Skydsgaard, 1995, 153.15 Vassallo, 1988, 57.16 See
figure 4.
-
Fig 6. Plan of the chorra of Metaponto, showing agrarian land
divisions and the location offarmsteads, after Carter, 2006,
83.
Fig 7. Aerial photo of the area between the Streleckaja and
Omega bays in the Chersonese,after Nikolaenko, 2006, 161
-
FarmsteadsThe territory of Himera displays a large range of
farmstead sites, which are found
across the territory of the chora. However, the majority of the
sites are found in closeproximity to the city due to this being the
area of the intense survey carried out in theregion. Other
farmstead sites have nonetheless been identified in the chora but
in amore sporadic way. We must keep in mid that this is not
necessarily due to an areawhich saw less abundance of such sites,
but due to the lack of consistentarchaeological methodology
throughout the region.
Initially we see only a few archaic sites. Of the total sites
found during the survey todate between the archaic and classical
period, the archaic sites make up just 11%whereas the classical
sites make up 89% of those found, or three sites compared to2414.
Further afield we have sites which indicate the presence of
classical farmsteads, aslikely evidenced by the assemblage of
material evidence.
What can be interpreted from this set of data is the fact that
there was an initialbasic occupation of the hinterland via
farmsteads during the archaic period15, at siteswhich seem to
stretch to the furthest possible distance from the city, although
stillbeing close enough to enable commuting to and from the site.
However these sitesare few, and spread out. In the classical period
there is a sudden rise in the occupationof the Himeran hinterland
studied in the survey and there is also the appearance, orpossibly
rise, of sites further into the hinterland16 (fig 8.). This can
possibly be attributedto the victory of the Greeks following the
Carthaginian invasion of 480 B.C17 and theunification of the two
states of Akragas and Himera, under Akragantine control.
14 Belvedere, 1988, 198.15 Belvedere, 1988, 200.16 Belvedere,
1988, 200. infatti numerose fattorie di questo periodo.17 Diodorus
Siculus XI.20;
Fig 8. Location of farmsteads in the Himeran chora from the
Archaic (red) to Classical (yellow) periods,after Google Earth.,
2014.
-
However, in relation to the layout of these sites, their
development typologically,or information of their owners and
occupiers, there is little to discuss. This is due to thelack of
actual intrusive excavations of any of these farmstead sites in the
hinterland. Forinformation on such possible structures we must look
further afield in Sicily andattempt to overlie a possible general
rule of such structures in the Himeran chora.
The territories of both Kamarina and Gela on the south coast of
Sicily allow for thebest examination of examples of farmstead
structures, which are also closely related,chronologically, to the
sites identified in the chora of Himera. From the examples thatwe
see represented in each of the territories (fig 9.) we see that the
il cortile appareuna parte essenziale degli edifici rurali
siciliani18, and occupied a central location of thestructure so as
to serve the number of rural functions demanded of it. A kitchen
isoften located in one corner (usually the south-east) of the
building, and in many casessome buildings exhibit a small tower
(pyrgos)19. Rooms mostly show evidence linkingthem to areas of
working areas rather than rooms in which to stay, highlighting
theaspect of commuting, rather than continuous private
habitation.
These examples are not only distinct to Greek Sicily, or even
the colonial Greekworld, but are often seen in mainland Greece20
and seem to be part of a general styleof edifice built to function
for the rural production of a plot of land (fig 10.).
18 Stefano, 2002, 98.19 Stefano, 2002, 103.20 Whitley, 2001,
378.
Fig 9. Plans of some rural edifices found in the territories of
Camarina and Gela, dating fromthe late archaic periods to the late
classical period, after Stefano, 2002, 95.
-
Sites Considered Villages or Towns
The next sites to be considered are of a more urban nature but
are neverthelessinstrumental in the Himerans relationship with
their countryside21. A number ofhellenised centres have been
identified along the routes of the San Leonardo, Tortoand Imera
valleys22 (fig 1.). The sites are almost always located at
strategical points forboth defense, control and organisation. They
are fairly evenly spread out, spaced fromeach other by no more than
10 km, except in few exceptional cases along the Tortoriver valley.
There distance implies control of an area spaced around 5km from
thecenter. This would appear in keeping with what has been earlier
defined in relation tofarmsteads around the city of Himera.
However, many of these native, hellenised siteshave only been the
subject of small, sporadic investigations23, although there are
someas to which a more intensive archaeological investigation has
been applied.
The most detailed example of these sites, and that which applies
a good templateto the region is that of Colle Madore in the area of
Lercara Friddi24 (fig 11.). Theoccupation of this site is
consistent with that of Himera, both being uninhabited fromthe end
of the fifth century onwards25. This site controlled a strategical
point at thehead of the river Torto, just within the border of
Himeran territory26. Not only was thisthe most direct route from
Himera to Akragas, but there was also a pass at this point,crossing
into the San Leonardo valley27. Located around the site have been
found afew possible farmstead sites, but they are most notable in
the hellenistic period28
21 Belvedere, 1988, 199:limportanza di altre forme di
occupazione del territorio, come quella costituita daisantuari
extra-urbani e dai santuaretti rurali; Valet, 1987, 82, 89-90.22
Vassallo, 1996; 200723 Vassallo, 2007.24 Vassallo, 1999.25
Vassallo, 1999, 75: Dopo il V secolo a.C. Non stata ancora trovata
sul Colle traccia di rioccupazione26 See fig 1.27 Vassallo, 1999,8:
La posizione di privellegio del colle nel passagio dal versante
settentrionale a quellomeridionale dellisola28 Vassallo, 199,
14.
Fig 10. Reconstruction of a farmstead, also showing the
structures per plot of land in the hinterland ofCamarina, after
Stefano, 2002, 102.
-
Fig 11. Territory around Lercara Friddi and Colle Madore, with
surrounding archaeological sites,after Vassallo, 1999, 14.
-
The site illustrates growing interaction with Greeks from the
founding of Himera,up until the sixth century B.C, in the third
quarter of which it formally falls under thecontrol of the Greek
colony29. The site exhibits evidence of the Himeran
Greeksrelationship with their territory through religious identity.
A small temple was built inthe second half of the sixth century
(fig 12.), in a working area of the site, based on aGreek type,
particularly modelled on the types seen in Himera at this time30.
Thelocation of the site in this working quarter seems to be of
particular interest for thismoment in time. It seems metal was
worked in this area, and the territory surroundingis known for its
sulphur deposits, a product sought after by Greeks, particularly
inrelation to colonisation31. Its location therefore, no doubt
relates to the Greek influencein this area through trade and the
number of Greeks frequenting the site for thesereasons. More
interesting is to who the sacellum seems to be dedicated, that
beingHeracles32.
Heracles is rather central to what we know of Himeran mythology
and religion,and even more central to the colonial Greece in the
west. The travels of Heraclesthroughout the western Mediterranean
are renown, and he seems even moreapparent in his travels
throughout Sicily33. As to Himera we are told that Heracles
29 Vassallo, 1999, 69.30 Vassallo, 1999, 43, 50; Bonacasa, 1970,
53-74, 77-83, 122-132, 134-148.31 Homer. Odyssey. 22.481-485.
Odysseus turned to Eurycleia: Now, old nurse, bring sulphur to
cleanseaway this pollution; bring fire as well, so that I may
purify the house.32 Vassallo, 1999, 50.33 Apollodorus, 2.5.10;
Pausanius 4.36.3; 8.24.1; 8.24.3; Diodorus Siculus 4.23-24;
5.4.
Fig 12. Plan of the Sacellum at Colle Madore, after Vassallo,
1999, 44.
-
bathed in the springs found near the city before continuing
westward34. However, thelocation of this sanctuary in Colle Madore
is more notable. We can compare this toanother Heracles sanctuary
known in the Island from around this period35. This othersanctuary
was located in the territory of Selinus36, a southern Greek colony
which couldbe reached from Himera through the San Leonardo valley.
Like the example at Himerait is located on the border of the Greek
choras territory which seems to be the centraltheme in its
dedication here. Heracles sanctuaries can be understood in this way
if welook back to the deity himself. Related to us through a
passage in Theocritus37,mentions how the poplar is sacred to the
god38, and the identification of poplars as atree located on
borders is furthermore evident. It would seem that Heracles had
aparticular identity with ancient borders or territorial
definitions39. In this way we seehow Greeks identified with their
territory, which was influenced by economic andpolitical factors,
and attempted to define such limits through mythical and
religiousidentity, further manifested physically through the
construction of similarly designedsanctuaries based on the ideal of
the polis, exploiting a consistent image, alongsidemarking the
land, to themselves and others.Ethnographic Comparison - Vicari
In an effort to understand the relationship of ancient Himerans
with thesurrounding countryside, I shall compare modern information
on a particular familyfrom Vicari with the land that they own and
farm. Vicari40 is known to have beeninhabited from the prehistoric
period, and it undertook the process of himeranhellenisation at the
same time as Colle Madore41. Sitting on a calcarous spur 800m
high,Vicari dominates the San Leonardo valley and has consistently
been a strategical point,commanding a lower fertile valley, an area
which is known and referred to amongstlocal inhabitants as the
granaio di roma42.
In looking at this area I have collected agricultural
information from a single familyliving in the village. In doing
this, and analysing my findings, I have attempted to
seeconsistencies with information that we already know about Himera
in relation to itsterritory and also to see if the data retrieved
can be applied to the ancient context of34 Pind. Olympian Ode 12;
Nemean Ode 12; Diodorus Siculus, 4.23.1; 5.5.1.35 Sixth century
B.C.36 DeAngelis, 2003, 152-153.37 Theocritus is thought to be a
Greek native of Sicily.38 Theocritus, 2.121; also see Virgil.
Aeneid. 8.276-277.39 Cato the Elder. 6.3: Around the borders of the
farm and along the roads plant elms and some poplars;for
discussions on this also see Laurie, 2000, 155.40 For its location
in the Himeran chora please refer to Figure 141 Vassallo, 2007,
122.42 Antonino Guaggenti, pers. comm., 15.03.14.
-
archaic and classical Himera.Firstly information on land
holdings was collected. These were then plotted onto
satellite imagery (fig 13.) and information was collected on the
topographical featuresof the farms alongside agricultural uses.
Furthermore, information was collected on thegeneral use of the
farms and how the fields were cultivated. This has all been
collatedand displayed through tables (table 4.).
Piece of land Commune CultivationGuardiola/Chiachiaro Vicari
Hay, broad beans, wheat.Rocca Ferruze Vicari Hay, broad beans,
wheat,
almonds, tomatoes,melons, grapes, other smallamounts of
vegetables fordomestic use.
Serpa Vicari Hay, broad beans, wheat.Ossuncuddu Vicari Hay,
broad beans, wheat.Manche Caccamo Olives (on flat ground),
almonds, wheat.Fontana Oliva Vicari Hay, broad beans, wheat.
Table 4. List of contradi/farms owned by Guaggenti family, and
the produce cultivated, AntoninoGuaggenti, Giuseppe Guaggenti Sr.,
Giuseppe Guaggenti jr, pers. Comm., 14.03.14.
Fig 13. Location of farms owned by the Guaggenti family. In the
centre can be seen the town of Vicari,after Google Earth 2014.
-
This shows that the land owned is all within a distance of
2.36km from the centrallocation of the village of Vicari, and each
piece of land is around 0.85 km from another.This layout shows that
owned land occupies a fairly widely spread area, on territorywhich
slopes downhill towards the river bed.This allows for well watered
fields withgood drainage and open to winds. This area would make
the most of the averagerainfall and allows the production of a
number of crops. The crops grown areillustrated on table 4, and are
most suited to these soils, choice of which is alsoinfluenced by
demand, with each crop being rotated every year to create the
mostefficient circumstances for crop growth43. Olive groves are not
apparent on thesefarms and tradition in the area shows that olive
trees are cultivated, but only grownaround the edge of the farms,
in order to create small production and create fieldboundaries44.
However, the production of the farms are largely for commercial
use,although a portion of one farm (Contrada Rochhe Ferruze) is
used for privateproduction and self sufficiency45. Few structures
occupy the land, with only one smallstorage structure located ons
Rocche Ferruze.
The distance of the farms from the main centre of habitation
(Vicari), is a reflectionof something we see in the survey work
done around Himera. This allows an ease ofcommuting between the
rural and urban spheres, which in today's society is necessarydue
to the midday rest from the hottest point of the day.
In relation to the produce of the land in comparison to ancient
times, we knowvery little since there is no evidence from
archaeo-botanical information. Some smallinferences are recorded by
ancient sources46. Crops seem to be fairly consistent, inmodern
times at least. However these traditions seem to go back beyond
memory andcan possibly be continued characteristics of farming
since ancient times. Certainly thelocal tradition of the San
Leonardo valley being the granaio di Roma47 stems fromthis ancient
past. Large amounts of Amphorae at Himera narrate the production
andtrade of wine and olives at least, produce that still seems
rather prevalent in the regionaround Himera (fig 14).
One clear difference we see in this region, from satellite
imagery, is the lack ofequal tracts of land organised by linear
divisions,as is seen on the plains by the coast.This surely must be
due to reasons of more changeable and mountainous terrain inwhich
is inviable to create such boundaries. Instead fields grow up
naturally aroundroads into the countryside, imitating a rippling
effect, adapting to the surroundingtopography which it is situated
on.43 Giuseppe Guaggenti, Antonino Guaggenti, pers. comm.,
15.03.14.44 Antonino Guaggenti, pers. comm., 15.03.14. footnote on
the cycle45 Giuseppe Guaggenti Sr., pers. Comm., 15.03.14.46
Athenaeus, Theocritus.47 Antonino Guaggenti, pers. comm.,
15.03.14.
-
Fig 14. Image detailing the agricultural use of the land
surrounding the city of Himera, and within theresearch area of the
Himera III survey, after Vassallo, 42.
-
ConclusionFrom this information, and the close comparisons we
can make between this
modern information and what we have on the ancient Himeran
chora, we can applysome of this ethnographic study to the ancient
Himeran context. Families may haveowned a number of farms, spread
out at a distance close to their area of habitation,either the
central polis of Himera or one of the further outlying centres, but
certainlyno further than five kilometers from the urban space, so
as to allow daily commuting.These outlying centers control the
territory they overlook, occupying defensivepositions and guarding
not only the farms of their inhabitants, but also the main
traderoutes in the wider geographical picture. They would have
gradually fallen underHimeran control as the city expanded during
the archaic age, first through a process ofHellenisation and then
more formally during the mid sixth century and into the
fifthcentury B.C. With the creation of this delimited chora with
specific boundaries, we seethe creation of Greek sanctuaries
located on the peripheries as the Himerans begin torelate and
interact physically with their territory. These sanctuaries, built
on thefoundations of specific beliefs and myths which lies at the
heart of the polis, is exportedthrough the construction of
sanctuaries based on the type-form found in the mainsanctuary of
the polis on the acropolis.
The rural landscape is further physically altered through the
scarring of the landwith entrenched land divisions, now visible in
satellite imagery, and limited to areascapable of such alteration.
However the land, with the application of crop rotation andsuitable
variety crops for the soils and topography illustrate the fact that
the land was,for its majority, used to exploit its fullest
agricultural potential.
In this way through a number of means, both economically,
politically andreligiously, the Greeks of Himera associated and
depended heavily on their chora.There are similarities seen with
many of the other colonial choras, but other than thefact that
there are shared structural forms for farm buildings, there is
little similaritiesbetween mainland Greece and its more distant
colonial world. The period in whichthese colonies were founded
facilitated the construction of a new ideal and form to thisvirgin
countryside, to which the Greeks could organise and rapidly
transform to theiralready established beliefs, ideals and
technology. This is seems to be expressly evidentin the rich
information, both classical and archaeological, of the polis of
Himera and itschora.
-
Bibliography
Ancient Sources
Apollodorus, Translated by Hard, R. (1997). The Library of Greek
Mythology. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Athenaeus, translated by Olson, D.S. (2006). The Learned
Banqueters, bks 1-3.106E.London: Harvard University
Press.Athenaeus, translated by Olson, D.S. (2006). The Learned
Banqueters, bks 3.106E-5.London: Harvard University
Press.Athenaeus, translated by Gulick, C.B. (1929). The Learned
Banqueters, bks 6-7.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Athenaeus,
translated by Olson, D.S. (2006). The Learned Banqueters, bks
8-10.420E.London: Harvard University Press.Athenaeus, translated by
Gulick, C.B. (1929). The Learned Banqueters, bks 10.420E-11.London:
Harvard University Press.Athenaeus, translated by Olson, D.S.
(2010). The Learned Banqueters, bks 12-13.594B.London: Harvard
University Press.Athenaeus, translated by Gulick, C.B. (1929). The
Learned Banqueters, bks 14.653B-15.London: Harvard University
Press.
Aristotle, translated by Freese, J.H. (1926). The Art of
Rhetoric. London: WilliamHeinemann.
Cato the Elder, translated by Hooper, W.D. (1934). On
Agriculture. London: HarvardUniversity Press.
Diodorus Siculus, translated by Oldfather, C.H.(1946). The
Library of History. London:Harvard University Press.
-
Herodotus, translated by Waterfield, R. (1998). The Histories.
Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
Homer, translated by Murray, A.T. (1919). The Odyssey. London:
Harvard UniversityPress.
Pindar, translated by Lattimore, R. (1942). The Odes of Pindar.
London: The University ofChicago Press.
Polyaenus, translated by Shepher, R. (1793). Strategems of War.
London: George Nicol.
Strabo, translated by Jones, H.L. (1960). The Geography of
Strabo, bks 3-5. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
Theocritus, translated by Wells, R. (1989). The Idylls. London:
Penguin Classics.
Thucydides, Translated by R, Warner. 1954. The Peloponnesian
War. Suffolk: PenguinClassics.
Virgil, translated by Fairclough, H.R. (1916). The Aeneid.
Cambridge: Harvard UniversityPress.
Modern Sources
Alliata, V., Belvedere,O., Cantoni, A., Cusimano, G.,
Marescalchi, P., Vassallo, S. (1988).Himera III. Roma: L'Erma di
Bretschneider
Bilde, P.G. And Stolba, V.F. (2006). Surveying the Greek Chora:
The Black Sea Region in aComparative Perspective. Aarhus: Aarhus
University Press.Carter, J.C. (2006). Discovering the Greek
Countryside at Metaponto. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan
Press.
-
Champion, Craige B.. "Timaios (566)." Brills New Jacoby. Editor
in Chief: IanWorthington (University of Missouri). Brill Online,
2014. Reference. The University ofReading. 27 April 2014
De Angelis, F. (2000). Estimating the Agricultural Base of Greek
Sicily .Papers of theBritish School at Rome. 68, p.111-148.
De Angelis, F. (2006). Going against the Grain in Sicilian Greek
Economics . Greece andRome. 53 (1), p. 29-47.
De Angelis, F. (2012). Archaeology in Sicily 20062010.
Archaeological Reports, 58, pp123-195
doi:10.1017/S0570608412000026
De Angelis, F. (2003). Megara Hyblaia and Selinous: The
Development of Two Greek CityStates in Archaic Sicily. Oxford:
Oxford University School of Archaeology.Skydsgaard, J.E. And
Isager, S. (1995). Ancient Greek Agriculture: An
Introduction.London: Routledge.Nenci, G. and Vallet, G. (1992).
Bibliografia Topografica Della Colonizzazione Greca inItalia e
Nelle Isole Tirreniche: IX. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore.Nenci,
G. and Vallet, G. (1992). Bibliografia Topografica Della
Colonizzazione Greca inItalia e Nelle Isole Tirreniche:X. Pisa:
Scuola Normale Superiore.Nenci, G. and Vallet, G. (1992).
Bibliografia Topografica Della Colonizzazione Greca inItalia e
Nelle Isole Tirreniche:XIV. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore.Nenci,
G. and Vallet, G. (1992). Bibliografia Topografica Della
Colonizzazione Greca inItalia e Nelle Isole Tirreniche:XXI. Pisa:
Scuola Normale Superiore.Nikolaenko, G. (2006). The Chora of Tauric
Chersonesos and the Cadastre of the Fourthto Second Century B.C.
In: Bilde, P. and Stolba, V Surveying the Greek Chora: The BlackSea
Region in a Comparative Perspective. Aarhaus: Aarhaus University
Press. p.151-175.Vassallo, S. (2006). La guerra ad Himera. Il
Sistema Difensivo Della Citt e Del Territorio:Guerra e Pace in
Sicilia e Nel Mediterraneo Antico (VIII-III sec. a.C). 1 (1),
p.315-330.
-
Dunbabin, T.J. (1948). The Western Greeks. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.Vassallo, S. (2005). Himera: Citta Greca. Palermo: Regione
Siciliana. Assessorato deiBeni Culturali, Ambientali e della
Pubblica Istruzione. Dipartimento dei Beni Culturali,Ambientali e
dellEducazione Permanente .
Vassallo, S. (2010). Lincontro tra indigeni e Greci di Himera
nella Siciliacentro-settentrionale (VII V sec aC). In: Treziny, H.
Grecs et Indigenes de la Catalogne ala Mer Noire. Aix-en-Provence:
Centre Camille-Jullian. p.41-54.
Vassallo, S. and Zirone, D. (2006). La villa rustica di Contrada
San Luca (Castronovo diSicilia, Palermo). In: Vaggioli, M.A.
Immagine e Immagini della Sicilia e di Altre Isole delMediterraneo
Antico. Pisa: Scuola normale superiore. p.671-678.Vassallo, S.
(1996). Il Territorio di Himera in Eta Arcaica. Kokalos. XLII (1),
p.199-229.
Vassallo, S. (ed). (2007). Archeologia nelle vallate del Fiume
Torto e del San Leonardo.Roccapalumba: Regione Siciliana.
Assessorato dei Beni Culturali, Ambientali e dellaPubblica
Istruzione. Dipartimento dei Beni Culturali, Ambientali e
dellEducazionePermanente.
Whitley, J. (2001). The Technology of Ancient Greece. Cambridge:
Cambridge UniversityPress.