THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA IN ANTIQUITY

The Maltese Islands

and the Sea in Antiquity

TIMMY GAMBIN

The events of history often lead to the islands…

F. Braudel

THE STRETCHES OF SEA EXTANT BETWEEN ISLANDS AND

mainland may be observed as having primary-dual functionalities: that
of ‘isolating’ islands and that of providing connectivity with land masses
that lay beyond the islands’ shores. On smaller islands especially, access
to the sea provided a gateway from which people, goods and ideas
could flow. This chapter explores how, via their surrounding seas, events
of history often led to the islands of Malta and Gozo. The timeframe
covered consists of over one thousand years (circa 700 BC to circa 400
AD); a fluid period that saw the island move in and out of the political,
military and economic orbits of various powers that dominated the
Mediterranean during these centuries.
Another notion of duality can be observed in the interaction that
plays out between those coming from the outside and those inhabiting
the islands. It would be mistaken to analyze Maltese history solely in the
context of great powers that touched upon and ‘colonized’ the islands.
This historical narrative will also cover important aspects such as how the
islands were perceived from those approaching from out at sea: were the
islands a hazard, a haven or possibly both at one and the same time? It is
also essential to look at how the sea was perceived by the islanders: did the
sea bring welcome commercial activity to the islands shores; did it carry

1
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA

pirate vessels and enemy ships? As important as these questions are, this
narrative would be incomplete without reference to how the sea helped
shape and mould the way in which the people living on Malta and Gozo
chose (or were forced) to live. By this I refer to choices such as where to
live, what to grow and how to adapt to and take advantage of evolving
maritime networks. It is also essential to understand how the sea shaped
the identity of the islands’ inhabitants. Although the focus shall be on the
Maltese archipelago, it is unwise and indeed impossible to separate its
history from that of the broader context of the Mediterranean. Given the
extended timeframe covered, it will also be possible to explore these and
other notions, as well as their effects in the longue durée of Maltese and
Mediterranean history.
For the exploration of such notions, this chapter draws upon both
archaeological and, when available, historical evidence. Whereas the
former is abundant the latter is at best fragmentary but important
nonetheless. For the sake of narrative, the chapter is divided into two
‘periods’: 1. Phoenician-Punic; 2. Roman. Although this division is based
on definite chronological events, the cultural and economic changes that
took place were by no means clear-cut. As shall be seen below changes
were slow and gradual.

Phoenician-Punic

When the Phoenicians sailed westwards from their homeland in

present-day Lebanon they set up a series of colonies on islands along
the Mediterranean coastline and even along the coast of the Atlantic.
Aubet refers to two phases of Phoenician expansion in the west: the ‘pre-
colonial stage’ (12th to 8th centuries BC) and the ‘colonial stage proper’
(8th to 6th centuries BC).1 A recent reappraisal of Phoenician and Punic
material evidence from Malta pushes back the Phoenician colonization
of the islands to circa 1000 BC.2 However, it is important to highlight
that the first archaeological evidence for Phoenician presence in Malta
dates to the late 8th century BC.3 It could well be that prior to the early 8th
century BC, Phoenician contact and interaction with the Maltese Islands
has, to date, remained invisible in the archaeology of Late Bronze Age
Malta, a status that is paralleled by a silence in literary sources.4 There are
plausible explanations for this suggestion. Firstly, the type of materials
(such as cloth) traded locally during this period does not survive in

2
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA IN ANTIQUITY

the archaeological record. Alternatively, Phoenician seafarers sailing in

the central Mediterranean simply made use of the islands’ harbours as
havens with little or negligible contact between them and contemporary
local inhabitants. The absence of any serious rivals probably did not
necessitate the permanent colonization of the Maltese Islands until the
Greeks made inroads in the central Mediterranean during the 8th century
BC. This suggested cause and effect is substantiated by the presence of
evidence for permanent Phoenician settlement in Malta of which the
most telling are burial sites situated around present-day Mdina-Rabat.
At this stage, it is important to discuss why Malta and Gozo would
have proved attractive and useful to Phoenician seafarers. It is an
established fact that after setting off from their bases in the eastern
Mediterranean, Phoenician ships made their way west, as far afield as
the Atlantic mainly in search of metals.5 In order to facilitate this cross-
Mediterranean movement of ships and goods, Phoenician seafarers used
a network of harbours and anchorages that permitted them to trade
and just as importantly to seek shelter so as to wait for optimal sailing
conditions. It is in the context of this maritime network that Phoenician
Malta is best understood. Despite a lack of raw materials, the geography
and topography of the islands combined to offer the Phoenicians safe
shelter in the central Mediterranean.
The geographical location of the Maltese Islands sees them included
in recent nautical charts of both the western and eastern Mediterranean.6
An early seventeenth century chart of the eastern Mediterranean
attributed to Joan Oliva includes Malta on its western extremities. Of
major interest is that of all the ports and harbours in Malta and Gozo,
only one is listed by name, Marzasiroccho, present-day Marsaxlokk. In the
context of an east-west crossing of the Mediterranean, the significance
of the omissions of other Maltese harbours, but more importantly, the
sole inclusion of Marsaxlokk cannot be underestimated. It is listed not
because it is the island’s sole or indeed safest harbour but rather because
it is the first that one would come across when approaching from the
eastern Mediterranean.
It is therefore no coincidence that some of the earliest and most
important evidence for Phoenician activity (apart from tombs) in Malta
is situated in Marsaxlokk. The sanctuary of Tas-Silġ is situated on a low
hill overlooking the entire harbour of Marsaxlokk. Evidence from this
site, including pottery sherds, a ‘fat lady’ statue and structural remains
point to the presence of a sacred building datable to circa 3000-2500

3
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA

Figure 1. Lines of sight from Marsaxlokk Bay to/from the site at Tas-Silġ

BC.7 What is important to the present discussion is the reutilization of

this strategic site that is not linked to any known urban development but
rather looks seaward, connected to those ever-important sea routes. It
is not known whether the temple had a fire which would have proved
essential to approaching seafarers both at night (the flames) and by day
(the smoke). Those approaching the islands on their ships from the east
would have seen the white cliffs of Delimara as their first landfall with
the temple of Tas-Silġ becoming more visible as the vessel gradually
approached Marsaxlokk (Fig. 1).
In ancient seafaring the synergy between temple and landfall went
far beyond the practical notion of waypoint identification. Seafarers
used these temples so as to ‘link them to their sacred benefactors’.8 It
was at such temples that ancient mariners would offer prayers to their
gods in supplication for a safe journey as well as in thanksgiving for a
safe deliverance at the end of a crossing. For later centuries in the period
under discussion, such a practice may be deduced from the presence
of numerous ceramic objects with the dedication ‘to Astarte’ inscribed
on them. These may be considered as a form of offering left by seafarers
making their way up to the temple from the harbour below.
The notion of maritime sanctuaries is certainly not exclusive to
Malta as the Phoenicians built temples in other areas of navigational
importance including both harbours and promontories. In Byblos for
example, the stairs leading to the temple are made from ‘mock’ anchors
which were never used at sea but were carved specifically for this
sacred shrine.9 Furthermore, maritime sanctuaries were not exclusively
a Phoenician phenomenon. The ancient Greeks also built numerous

4
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA IN ANTIQUITY

Figure 2. The promontory of Ras il-Wardija as seen from out at sea

temples with direct maritime links: ‘on the right, as one sails towards
the city,10 is the Poseidon, a promontory with which Mount Mykale
forms the seven stade strait; and it has a temple of Poseidon’.11
Natural features such as headlands, offshore islands and straits posed
dangers to ancient seafarers for a variety of reasons. Around headlands,
currents, winds and waves combine to create localized treacherous
conditions. Fear of such localized conditions were very much present in
the psyche of the ancients as is epitomized by the monsters Scylla and
Charybdis that were believed to dwell on either side of a narrow strait
navigated by Odysseus. It is therefore unsurprising that such natural
features of navigational importance or hazards were also marked with
sanctuaries.12 In the case of headlands, their significance to mariners could
be dual. As highlighted above, they could be dangerous but on the other
hand their height above sea level made them indispensable landmarks
for navigators. It is the headland not the sanctuary built on it that would
be first observed. Prayers, dedications and thanksgiving would probably
have been made when the vessel was closer and the temple visible.13
Two headlands on the Maltese Islands are known to have
archaeological remains believed to be those of temples: Ras il-Wardija
and Ras ir-Raħeb. The first is situated on the westernmost tip of Gozo
on a cliff that is over 144 metres high.14 Vessels approaching Gozo from
the west would have made landfall on the high cliffs extant on this
side of the island (Fig. 2). The headland itself would have provided a
waypoint that would prove essential for vessels wanting to stop at the
nearby harbour of Xlendi as well as for the continuation of a journey that
would skirt the south of the island. For Ras ir-Raħeb (48 metres above

5
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA

sea level), a recent interpretation of some objects recovered from the

site in the 1960s together with a novel approach to Strabo’s Geography
points to a sanctuary dedicated to Herakles-Melkart.15 The Phoenicians
considered this god as ‘a guardian of voyagers’ and many promontories
were dedicated to him.16 What is of relevance here is that natural features
of navigational importance on three different approaches to the Maltese
Islands were marked by sacred structures (Fig. 3).
Once arrived safely at Malta, the master could guide his vessel into
one of the many harbours and anchorages in both Malta and Gozo. In
the case of early Phoenician vessels sailing across the Mediterranean,
the reasons for stopping could be simply to seek shelter from adverse
weather conditions or to wait for an ideal wind that would help them
on their way. There is however a third reason and that is for trade. It is
not certain whether production on Malta in the 8th and 7th centuries BC
went beyond agricultural self-sufficiency. A recent theory propounds
the idea that the Phoenicians actually dyed cloth on the islands and that
an extant textile industry was one of the main factors that attracted the
Phoenicians to Malta.17 Although interesting, there is a lack of evidence
Figure 3. Satillite image of the Maltese Islands showing location of three maritime sanctuaries

6
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA IN ANTIQUITY

for dyeing which would be present in the form of the waste generated by
this activity, mainly discarded murex shells.
A form of activity that may have taken place would have been the
exchange of goods between different Phoenician merchants present on
vessels anchored in Maltese harbours. Goods originating from various
parts of the Mediterranean could be exchanged so as to be transhipped to
markets elsewhere. Although one may use the absence of archaeological
evidence against this idea, this type of activity would, by its very nature,
be invisible in the archaeological record. The key answer to this question
may lie in the silted harbours of Malta and Gozo, as well as in the thick
mud deposits that are present below the seabed.
A brief passage by Diodorus Siculus does shed important light on the
role of the islands as well as on the types of economic activity that took
place. The entire passage reads as follows:
‘For to the south of Sicily three islands lie out in the sea, and each of
them possesses a city and harbours which can offer safety to ships in
rough weather. The first one is called Melite, which lies about 800 stadia
from Syracuse and possesses many harbours which offer exceptional
advantages, and its inhabitants are blessed in their possessions; for it
has artisans skilled in every manner of craft, the most important being
those who weave linen, which is remarkably sheer and soft. The dwellings
on the islands are worthy of note, being ambitiously constructed with
cornices and finished in stucco with unusual workmanship. The island is
a colony planted by the Phoenicians, who, as they extended their trade to
the western ocean, found it a place of safe retreat, since it is well supplied
with harbours and lay out in the open sea; and this is the reason why the
inhabitants of this island, since they received assistance in many aspects
through the sea merchants, shot up quickly in their manner of living and
increased renown. After this island there is a second one which bears the
name of Gaulos, lying out in the open sea and adorned with well situated
harbours, a Phoenician colony.18

This passage was written in the mid-first century BC and it seems to be

a brief and condensed history of the Phoenician and Punic phases of the
islands’ history. It clearly substantiates the aforementioned proposals as to
harbours and location being what originally attracted the Phoenicians to
the islands. Contact with the Phoenicians also led to the development of
weaving, possibly of fibres and thread brought by merchants specifically
to be worked in Malta and Gozo. Some form of industrial activity related

7
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA

to textiles was probably the basis upon which rural farmsteads were set
up. One such farmstead is that at San Pawl Milqi, an area with evidence
for occupation and use datable to as far back as 4000 BC. An agricultural
complex, probably linked to the processing of flax,19 at least in part, was
constructed some time during the 4th century BC or possibly earlier.20
The change in land occupation and utilization coincided with a more
permanent Phoenician/Punic colonization of the islands. Prior to this,
the islands’ Bronze Age inhabitants chose to live on high ground and
fortified areas such as Il-Qolla near Burmarrad and Il-Qarraba overlooking
Għajn Tuffieħa Bay.21 In the Punic period, some of the population
continued to inhabit such strategic hilltop locations such as the Mdina-
Rabat plateau and the areas around Bidnija and Wardija. Other sectors of
the population moved into and settled in most parts of both islands. The
main body of evidence for this ‘invasion’ of rural areas is the numerous
tombs that literally dot the islands.22 Some of these burial sites, such as
those at Xlendi and San Tumas are situated by the sea. Others, such as
those at Ħal Far and Żurrieq are situated within walking distance from
access points to the sea (Birżebbuġa and Wied iż-Żurrieq respectively).
This phenomenon coincides with the period when Malta and Gozo
found themselves within the political, military and economic orbit of
Carthage and no longer heavily linked to the Phoenicians from the east.
During this period Carthage was at war with the Greeks in Sicily and the
Etruscans in the Tyrrhenian. 23 Although one may assume that such wars
may have had some influence on the Maltese Islands, the retention of just
two major fortified spaces (Mdina-Rabat in Malta and Rabat in Gozo)
and the parallel spread of the population into rural areas points to a people
who were not afraid of seaborne raids. Absence of any literary references
to Malta in the wars fought by the Carthaginians with the Greeks in Sicily
makes the interpretation of the islands’ role more difficult. However, it is
plausible to suggest that the island of Pantelleria, situated on the direct
sea route between Carthage and other Punic colonies on western Sicily,
may have played a far more important role than Malta and Gozo.
A tangible site migration occurs around Malta’s main harbours.
Whilst tombs from the Early Punic period are situated in and around
the Qormi area, later ones are found further north and north-east in
Hamrun and Marsa. The slow move away from Qormi towards Marsa
was probably induced by the gradual silting up of the lagoonal bay that
stretched far inland.24 The people living in this area must have moved
away from marshy areas associated with floodplains to get away from

8
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA IN ANTIQUITY

unhealthy living conditions brought about by mosquitoes breeding in

the stagnant waters. Furthermore, shallower waters would have also had
a drastic effect on the maritime functionality of the area. It is therefore
not surprising that in the Late Punic period the main maritime activities
around the Grand Harbour were concentrated around Marsa, Little
Marsa25 and what is today referred to as French Creek. Numerous tombs
have been discovered in and around the Paola area including in Għajn
Dwieli leading down to the head of French Creek. The latter is one of the
best protected sites within the Grand Harbour and it must have provided
access to the sea for a maritime enclave settled in the area. Due to the huge
modifications brought about by the construction of the dockyards in the
late 1800s any evidence (both on land and underwater) for activities
such as fishing has since been lost.
Intense maritime activity during the Late Punic period is evidenced
by the presence of one or more wrecks discovered off the coast of Gozo
at Xlendi Bay. Amphorae recovered over the decades since its discovery
consist mainly of Punic types Ramon 2.1.1.2, Ramon 2.2.1.2 and Ramon
3.2.1.2 (6th, 5th and 3rd centuries BC respectively).26 It is not yet certain
as to the origin or destination of the cargoes being carried by the ships
that went down in the area. There are three scenarios: 1. cargoes of local
produce destined for an overseas market; 2. foreign (North African
or Sicilian) produce destined for the Maltese Islands and 3. cargoes of
vessels that were en route elsewhere in the central Mediterranean but
came to grief before reaching the safety of Xlendi harbour.
The role of the Maltese Islands and their harbours during the
First Punic War is enigmatic and again one is forced into a number of
assumptions based on the theatre of this war and Malta’s geo-strategic
position. However, there is a fragment of literary evidence which sheds
some light on an event which came as a consequence of Carthaginian
possession of Malta and Gozo. Gnaeus Naevius writes that ‘the Roman
army crosses over to Malta and devastates the island and plunders the
possessions of the enemy’.27 This episode probably occurred during the
First Punic War around the year 250 BC.28 Given that this is the only
fragment of literary evidence available, which to date has not yet been
fully corroborated in the archaeological record, one must refrain from
reading too much into it. However, we can safely assume that some form
of raid did take place in the ambit of the First Punic War.
It is during the early phases of the Second Punic War that the islands
are conquered by the Romans. Again, it is a fragment of literary evidence

9
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA

that informs us of the Roman attack of 218 BC. In his War with Hannibal
Livy writes: ‘Arrived at the town [Lilybaeum], Sempronius dismissed
Hiero and the royal fleet, left the praetor to guard the Sicilian coast, and
sailed for Malta, which was in Carthaginian hands. Hamilcar, the son
of Gisgo, commander of the island’s garrison, surrendered with nearly
2000 men, and the island and its town passed into Roman control. A few
days later Sempronius returned to Lilybaeum, where his prisoners of
war, together with those taken by the praetor, with the exception of the
noblemen among them, were sold at public auction. Enough now seemed
to have been done to secure the eastern parts of Sicily, so Sempronius
crossed to the Vulcan Islands where a Carthaginian squadron was said to
be stationed’.29
Malta and Gozo must have played an important role in the
Carthaginian war effort. This is attested by the presence on the island
of a relatively large garrison under the command of a Carthaginian
nobleman, which is reflective of the military effort that the Carthaginians
were willing to invest in the Maltese Islands. There can be little doubt that
such a military presence would have placed much pressure on the islands’
limited agricultural resources. One must therefore consider the logistical
effort aimed at maintaining the islands’ garrison, an effort that would
have included numerous shipments of staples needed to feed the 2000
soldiers. Also of great interest is the final part of the passage, a section that
sheds light on how the islands were perceived by Roman strategists. The
capture of Malta played an important role in rendering the east coast of
Sicily safe. From this one may infer that the Carthaginians had, prior to
218 BC, used the Maltese Islands as an advanced naval base from which
it could launch attacks on Sicily. Despite the Roman military victory in
Malta, Roman culture was to take much longer to percolate through a
society that had its roots firmly embedded in its Carthaginian origins.

Roman Period

Once under Roman rule, the Maltese Islands were incorporated into
the province of Sicily, and the end of the Second Punic War meant that
Malta’s importance as a naval base diminished. Within a span of around
four centuries the islands had evolved from a Phoenician staging post, to
Punic base, to a Roman possession. This brings to mind Braudel’s erudite
interpretation of how Mediterranean islands could be affected by military

10
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA IN ANTIQUITY

and political turmoil: ‘some accidental change of ruler or of fortune may

bring to the island’s shores an entirely different civilization and way of
life, with its dress, customs and language’.30 In the case of Malta and Gozo
after 218 BC, the islands certainly came into the orbit of Rome but there is
also evidence that Punic culture survived, as is attested by the continuity
of burial customs and the survival of the language. The reference to the
local inhabitants as ‘barbaroi’ by the narrator of Paul’s shipwreck clearly
indicates that at least until 60 AD the locals were not speaking Latin or
Greek but probably some derivative of the Punic language.
Despite the clear continuity of Punic culture there is evidence for shifts
away from other trends. This is especially true for the origin of goods
imported into Malta and Gozo during the years that followed the Roman
conquest of the islands. The vast majority of imports studied at Tas-Silġ
and San Pawl Milqi originate from the Tyrrhenian and Adriatic areas.31
However, a direct link between the islands and areas of production in the
Tyrrhenian and Adriatic are not to be taken for granted. One must keep
in mind the possibility of goods arriving to the islands via closer harbours
of transhipment, a practice that was not uncommon in ancient times.32
A short reference to piracy in Cicero’s Verrines has led some scholars
to believe that Malta was used as a pirate base in the years after 218 BC.33
Certainly, in the decades prior to the final eradication of piracy by Pompey
the Great, Cilician and other pirates roamed the Mediterranean in search
of booty and prizes.34 It is reasonable to assume that pirate vessels did
occasionally call into and make use of Maltese harbours but, aside from
the mention in Cicero’s passage there is no further literary evidence for
Malta and Gozo being used as a pirate base. Cicero’s speech must be read
and interpreted within the context it was delivered. By comparing Verres
to pirates, Cicero exaggerated Verres’ actions so as to show the latter in an
even more negative light. This may also have been done to illustrate the
contrast between what Verres should have done ‘as a Roman magistrate’,
and what he actually did, which was rob sections of the empire entrusted
to him.35
Cicero does mention that the temple of Juno (Roman equivalent
of the Punic Astarte) was one of the richest and most venerated in
the Mediterranean world. It supposedly housed numerous treasures
including ivory objects and statues. This description somewhat matches
the archaeological record. At Tas-Silġ there is strong evidence for the
total remodelling of the sanctuary during the second century BC.36 The
enhancement of the sanctuary reflects the continued importance of this

11
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA

site. Ceramic remains from the sanctuary datable to the same period
are reflective of increased activity. Numerous imports present in the
archaeological record point to a continued link between the sanctuary
and the harbour below. It has recently been suggested that trade and
exchange may even have taken place in the sanctuary itself thus making it
the affluent centre that it was.37 Although evidence from recent amphora
studies point to a dearth of imported Sicilian objects, there can be little
doubt on the connectivity between the two islands. It could well be that
at least some of the amphorae originating in the Tyrrhenian areas were
transhipped in Sicily.
The close relationship with Sicily alluded to above must also be
considered from a geographic perspective. Malta, situated just over 90
kilometres away from Capo Passero, may be considered as an offshore
harbour of Sicily. A voyage from a city such as Syracuse to Malta must have
been perceived as no more perilous than a voyage to any other Sicilian
port. The connectivity between the two islands can also be deduced from
yet another passage in Cicero’s Verrines (II, 4, 36-42). In this passage the
author accuses Verres of trying to get his hands on two silver cups that were
the work of Mentoris, a renowned silversmith. These belonged to a certain
Diodorus of Malta (Melitensis Diodorus), who had left the island to settle
in Lilybeum. Upon being informed by Diodorus that the cups were still in
Malta, Verres sent his men to retrieve them. In the meantime, Diodorus
wrote to his contacts on Malta instructing them that, when questioned,
they should inform Verres’ men that the cups had been sent to Lilybeum a
few days earlier. The passage is interesting as it sheds light on a number of
details. Firstly, that a noble person like Melitensis Diodorus once resided
on Malta suggests that the island was not considered as some backwater.
The fashionable cups mentioned in the passage also point to the fact that
Malta was not bypassed when it came to contemporary fashion and tastes
in luxurious items. Of interest is the ease with which both Verres and
Diodorus were able to send people and/or letters between Sicily and Malta,
indicating the existence of regular crossings between the two islands. The
passage is also indicative of the existence of contact networks.

Roman Port

During the Roman period the area around Marsa assumes a degree
of increased maritime importance as is attested by the numerous

12
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA IN ANTIQUITY

Figure 4. Eighteenth century plan by Count Babaro of Roman warehouses on Ras-Ħanżir (Jesuit’s Hill),
Marsa
archaeological finds that were made over the past three centuries.
Remains of a large mole were visible in the seventeenth century and
described by a contemporary antiquarian as ‘a mole built of very large
blocks’.38 In the latter half of the eighteenth century, a large warehouse
complex was unearthed, surveyed and published (Fig. 4). In the 1950s,
part of another Roman warehouse complex was discovered close to Xatt
il-Mollijiet where fifty years later another part of this same complex was
brought to light (Fig. 5).39 When considered collectively, these structures
would have constituted a major port complex that provided thousands of
square metres of storage space, which went far beyond the needs of the
islands’ population during this period.40 Although no urban remains have
been discovered, the presence of large burial complexes in Marsa (Fig. 6)
allude to the presence of a harbour town that would have housed persons
providing maritime related services such as merchants, stevedores,
shipwrights and ropemakers.
At a glance it would seem that such a port complex may have been
too large for a small island like Malta. The answer lies in the massive
movement of goods, foodstuffs and other raw materials (such as marble),
from North Africa (especially Egypt) towards Rome. The latter consumed
huge amounts of grain and it was ultimately the state’s responsibility

13
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA

Figure 5. Remains of port structures unearthed during civil works in Marsa in 2005

Figure 6. A Palaeochristian burial complex discovered in Marsa in the nineteenth century

14
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA IN ANTIQUITY

to engage individuals to ship the merchandize across from the eastern

Mediterranean. The size of the ships used to transport grain varied. A
few reached extraordinary sizes and carried large quantities of grain in
their hold.41 Roman merchant vessels sailed mainly during the summer
months (mare apertum) with the period between November and March
being the closed season (mare clausum) during which maritime traffic was
much reduced.42 Vessels trying to fit in a second crossing and/or those
making slow progress due to light winds would sometimes get caught
out and have to winter in a safe harbour. However, grain does not tolerate
high levels of moisture.43 This means that grain stored in sacks within the
hold of a ship would have surely rotted over the winter months.
Due to a variety of reasons, including its geographical location and
its deep harbours, Malta became a busy and significant transhipment
hub in an official Roman network, that of transporting grain from the
key province of Egypt to the megalopolis that was Rome. Vessels caught
out in the central Mediterranean could stop at the island, offload the
grain for temporary storage at the Marsa warehouses and continue with
their journey after the opening of the sailing season. One such ship of
Alexandria carried Paul to Puteoli via Syracuse after wintering in Malta:
‘Three months later we set sail in a ship which had passed the winter at
the island. It was an Alexandrian vessel with the ‘Heavenly Twins” as its
figurehead’.44 The harbour at Marsa would have been both large and deep
enough to accommodate several grain ships of any size. The discovery
of a large Roman anchor stock, probably from a grain ship, measuring
over four metres in length and weighing over one ton provides further
evidence supporting this suggestion.45 Malta would therefore have
formed part of Rome’s ‘façade maritime’, one of a series of interrelated
ports throughout the Mediterranean that served Rome and the Roman
world.46
The role of Roman Malta in the supply of grain to Rome is similar to
that of the island of Tenedos during the Late Antique period (a small
island in front of the Hellespont) in relation to the supply of grain to
Constantinople in the sixth century:
‘in case of adverse wind, the ships could not pass the straits of
the Dardanelles and had to wait for a favourable wind. To avoid
deterioration of the grain, Justinian had built on the island a
granary for the ships of Egypt before 542. The ships were unloaded
there and then could return to Egypt to make a second or third
trip’.47 The estimated surface of the Tenedos granaries is of 2000

15
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA

square metres, considerably less than those situated around the

Marsa harbour.

The storage of grain on the island provided a source of staple foodstuff

for the local population. This must have decreased the dependency of
the inhabitants on locally grown cereals thus paving the way for the
production of other more profitable cash crops. There are in fact the
remains of a number of Roman villas with olive oil producing capabilities
distributed throughout the islands. Some of these, such as those at
Burmarrad, Bidnija and Ta’ Kaccatura are within relatively easy access
of the sea in line with Cato’s suggestion that farms should be within easy
access to water so as to facilitate the movement of goods.48
It was not just agricultural villas that were situated close to the sea
during Roman times. A number of Roman buildings have been discovered
around coastal areas of both Malta and Gozo, including Ramla il-Hamra,
Marsaxlokk and Floriana. It is not certain whether any of these sites were
linked to marine industries such as the production of garum and/or
salt. What is certain is that they were built on the water’s edge and thus
commanded excellent views of the sea. All three were endowed with bath
complexes pointing to a degree of luxury present within the edifices. This is
confirmed by an eighteenth century description of high-quality mosaics of
fish and dragons that were still visible in the villa situated overlooking the
Grand Harbour in present-day Floriana.49
To date, no remains of Roman coastal settlements have been
discovered. However, large burial complexes, such as those at Marsa and
Salina, close to the sea, point to thriving Roman settlements in proximity
to harbour areas. Evidence from these sites points to a long period of
use stretching from the 4th to the 6th century AD.50 Settlements in these
areas would have been home to those involved in maritime services
including sailmakers, carpenters, stevedores, merchants and prostitutes.
The proximity of these burial sites and Roman coastal villas point to a
population that, over a significant stretch of time, must have felt relatively
tranquil living by the water’s edge.

Conclusion

One may speak of two main factors that determined the maritime role
of the islands. The first being the availability of large safe harbours which

16
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA IN ANTIQUITY

could accommodate the largest ships extant in Antiquity. The second

factor was the islands’ position in the central Mediterranean. However,
the centrality of the islands was only relative if supply and demand
elsewhere in the Mediterranean necessitated the use of Malta for shelter
and trade. When geography, politics and economic factors combined, the
islands harbours provided a place where ships could stop, crews could
rest and goods traded. Whether the islands were used as a stopover along
a long distant route or as a link between an area of production and one of
consumption depended on contemporary geo-politics and economics.
Economic benefits from such connectivity percolated into various strata
of local society as is attested by numerous well-decorated buildings and
burial complexes extant throughout both Malta and Gozo.
Across the sea came not just goods but also people and their ideas.
Cultural influences from various parts of the Mediterranean including
the east, North Africa, Sicily and Italy can be noted throughout the
period under discussion. Phoenician and Punic deities were worshipped
in coastal sanctuaries which were eventually not only maintained but
also upgraded by the Romans after their arrival in 218 BC. Furthermore,
artistic objects such as statues and jewellery illustrate that the populous
of the Maltese Islands were aware of fashion developments across the
Mediterranean and could indeed afford to import such luxury items. The
presence of contemporary Mediterranean luxuries in the archaeological
record illustrates that ‘distant’ island groups are not to be considered
as backwaters. Essentially, the sea must be looked at as a medium that
connected the Maltese Islands to the rest of the Roman Empire, rather
than a barrier which cut it off from mainstream activities.

Notes

1 Aubet, M.E. (2001) The Phoenicians and the West: Politics, Colonies and Trade (Cambridge
University Press).
2 Sagona, C. (2002) The Archaeology of Punic Malta (Ancient Near Eastern Studies Supplement
9) (Belgium: Peeters): 24.
3 Vella, N.C. (2005) Phoenician and Punic Malta Journal of Roman Archaeology 18: 436-450: 439.
4 Bonanno, A. (2005) Malta - Phoenician, Punic and Roman (Midsea Books): 18-19.
5 Aubet 2001: 161
6 See Admiralty Charts 4301 Mediterranean Sea Western Part and Admiralty Chart 4302 Mediterranean
Chart Eastern Part. Both are published by the United Kingdom Hydrographic Office.

17
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA

7 Trump, D.H. (2002) Malta: Prehistory and Temples (Malta: Midsea Books): 138-139.
8 Brody, A.J. (1998) “Each man cried out to his God” The Specialized Religion of Canaanite and
Phoenician Seafarers (Atlanta: Scholars Press): 39
9 Ibid. 44.
10 Refrence is here being made to Samos.
11 Strabo, Geography 14.1.14, 20.
12 Morton, J. (2001) The Role of the Physical Environment in Ancient Greek Seafaring (Leiden:
Brill): 310.
13 Brody 1998: 81.
14 Unlike Tas-Silg, no hard evidence was discovered that ascertains the sacred nature of this site.
However, there is enough circumstantial evidence, including known contemporary practices
described above and its location on the cliff ’s edge away from the ancient centre of habitation
but close to an important harbour, to safely suggest a sacred function linked to the sea.
15 Vella, N.C. (2002) The Lie of the Land: Ptolemy’s Temple of Hercules in Malta, Ancient Near
Eastern Studies 39: 83-112.
16 Brody 1998: 33-37.
17 See Sagona, C. (1999) Silo or Vat? Observations on the ancient textile industry in Malta and
Early Phoenician interests in the island Oxford Journal of Archaeology 18.1: 23-60.
18 Diodorus Siculus Book V – 12.
19 One such process could have been retting.
20 Bruno, B. (2004) L’Arcipelago Maltese in Età Romana e Bizantina: Attività economiche e scambi al
centro del Mediterraneo (Bari: Edipuglia): 127. Bruno suggests that the various channels and pits
were used for the dyeing on textiles, however no murex middens were ever discovered nearby. .
21 Trump 2002: 252.
22 Said-Zammit, G.A. (1997) Population, Landuse and Settlement on Punic Malta: A Contextual
Analysis of the Burial Evidence (Oxford: BAR 682).
23 Bonanno 2005: 74-75.
24 Gambin, T. (2004) Islands of the middle sea : an archaeology of a coastline in De Maria L and
Turchetti R. Evolucion paleoambiental de los puertos y fondeaderos antiguos en el Mediterraneo
occidental : I Seminario, el patrimonio arqueologico submarino y los puertos antiguos, Alicante, 14-
15 noviembre: 127- 145.
25 Today occupied by a Malta shipbuilding site.
26 Azzopardi, E. (2013) The Shipwrecks of Xlendi Bay, Gozo, Malta. International Journal of
Nautical Archaeology, 42: 286–295.
27 Gnaeus Naevius Bell Pun IV – 37.
28 Bonanno 2005: 78.
29 Livy War on Hannibal XXI.51.
30 Braudel, F. (1972) The Mediterranean and Mediterranean World In The Age of Philip II, (The
Folio Society): 122.
31 Bruno 2004: 132.
32 Nieto, X. (1997) Le Commerce de Cabotage et de Redistribution in Pomey, P. (ed.) La
Navigation dans L’Antiquité (Paris: Edisud): 146-59.
33 Cicero Verrines 2.4: 103-4
34 de Souza, P. (2000) Piracy in the Graeco-Roman World (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press): 97.
35 Ibid. 153-54.
36 Bruno 2004: 107.
37 Ibid. 100-11.
38 Abela, G.F. (1647) Della Descrittione di Malta (Malta): 17

18
 THE MALTESE ISLANDS AND THE SEA IN ANTIQUITY

39 For a detailed description of the archaeological remains discovered around the Marsa area
see Gambin, T. (2004-5) Archaeological discoveries at Marsa over the centuries Malta
Archaeological Review Issue 7.
40 For a description of the Roman port of Malta see Gambin, T. (2005) Ports and port structures
for ancient Malta in Gallina Zevi, A. and Turchetti, R. (eds) Le strutture dei porti e degli approdi
antichi: 159-174 (Italy: Rubettino Editori).
41 Houston, G.W. (1988) Some comparative materials on Roman merchant ships and ports
American Journal of Archaeology 92: 553-64: 555.
42 Meijer, F. (1986) A History of Seafaring in the Classical World (London & Sydney: Croom
Helm): 227.
43 To avoid rot, grain should not be stored in areas that have more than 15% humidity. For storage
of grain in ancient times see Rickman, G.E. (1971), Roman Granaries and Store Buildings
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
44 Acts of the Apostles XXVIII: 11-12.
45 Museums Annual Report 1963: 7.
46 See Purcell, N. (1996) The ports of Rome: evolution of a ‘façade maritime’ in Gallina Zevi, A.
and Claridge, A., (eds) ‘Roman Ostia’ Revisited: Archaeological and Historical Papers in Memory
of Russell Meiggs (British School at Rome, London, in collaboration with The Soprintendenza
Archeologica di Ostia): 267-279.
47 Sirks, B. (2003) Some observations on Edictum Justiniani XIII.8. A reaction to Jean-Michelle
Carrié in Marin, B. and Virlouvet, C. (eds) Nourrir les cités de Méditerranée Antiquité-Temps
modernes (Paris: Maisonneuve and Larose): 213-219.
48 Cato De Agricultura published in the Loeb Classical Library, 1934.
49 Barbaro 1794: 10
50 Buhagiar, M. (2000) Four new Late Roman and Early Byzantine burial sites in the island of
Malta Melita Historica 13.1:23-37.

19
The central Mediterranean
area as charted by Ptolemy in
his Geographia, Rome 1490