Coins, Cities and Territories 1 The Imaginary Far West and South Iberian and North African Punic Coins Bartolomé Mora Serrano Nineteenth and 20th century European historiography on the archaeology of the Maghreb and its early history contains numerous references to the close relations between southern Iberia and western Mauretania, the future Mauretania Tingitana. This geographical proximity was particularly obvious in the area of the Gibraltar Straits and had remarkable influence not only on ancient Greek and Latin literary sources but also on innumerable archaeological remains analyzed in depth by research projects in southern Spain and Portugal and northern Morocco.2 Coins have contributed to the definition of the geographical and cultural area known as the ‘Círculo del Estrecho’, a term proposed by M. Tarradell in the 1960s.3 Recent works by J. Alexandropoulos, L.I. Manfredi, L. Callegarin and E. Gozalbes reflect appropriately the current relevance of these topics in the field of numismatics (Pl. 1). At the same time, these works also reflect superseded antique visions of a colonial nature present in archaeological researches from the times of the Protectorate4 (for example, numismatic studies since the 1850s). Thus, one of the main Spanish numismatic corpuses was directed by A. Delgado in late 19th century and includes a chapter devoted to the coins from Tingitan Africa for a better understanding of ancient Hispanic coinage.5 Leaving aside the political and ideological background which partly inspires these works, I must highlight the existence of other numismatic arguments which justifies my interest in the ancient history of southern Spain and northern Africa, considered as a single research area. Using less information than that available nowadays, numismatic literature since the late 19th and early 20th centuries contains many modern concepts such as ‘community of interests’ and ‘cultural and ethnic interrelations’. The inscriptions on Hispanic-Punic and Mauretanian coins, their iconographic similarities, but also closer observations regarding coin findspots or the similarity of diameters and weights between coins from both sides of the Straits of Gibraltar area culminates in a Theory of Homonoias between the major cities from Baetica and Tingitana.6 Of course, this old theory is overcome nowadays. However, many studies insist on analyzing the important role played by Gadir/Gades (present-day Cádiz) within the Straits area and, particularly, in North African territories. The necessary review of ancient literary sources and the growing number and quality of archaeological records have incorporated, under new methodological approaches, one of the richest historical testimonies: the ancient coins from southern Iberian Peninsula and north-western Africa.7 Phoenician-Punic influence in coin design The usefulness of Phoenician-Punic influenced coin iconographies in western Mauretania must be seen from a threefold viewpoint: civic, territorial and self-defining. Thus, coins minted in this region between the 3rd and 1st centuries bc may be interpreted as a book put into images which belatedly reproduce the Phoenicians’ and Greeks’ perception of the Mediterranean Far West. This ranges from the first references by Homer and Hesiod, and subsequent references by Greek-Sicilian poets such as Stesichorus of Himera,8 to the later and decisive contributions in Hellenistic-Roman times such as Eratosthenes, Posidonius, Strabo and Pliny, among others. This survey does not omit Peripletic literature: it is also important to highlight the peripluses of Pseudo-Scylax and Hanno, etc.9 Firstly, these literary images from the Far West were alien to the inhabitants of these territories, but – as confirmed by the coins of the governing aristocracies in these towns and especially of the Mauretanian monarchy – they assumed and re-elaborated these geographical myths.10 With such an aim, they made use of ancient iconographies but also introduced new designs. Previous studies have particularly looked for coincidences. I will also emphasize the existing differences put Plate 1 ‘Circulo del Estrecho’ (Círcle of the Straits) and its coinage ©B. Mora Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa | 21 Mora Serrano Plate 2 Gadir (Alfaro IV.2) from Cayón auct. 2002 no. 388 © Áureo&Calicó Plate 3 Panormo-sys (SNG Cop. 679) CNG 78 2008 © Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., http://www.cngcoins.com forward by some outstanding and striking absences. In my opinion, the abovementioned points suggest the possibility of looking for a political and ideological justification regarding the unquestionable influences of the Hispanic side of the ‘Circulo del Estrecho’ (particularly of Gadir) on the coins from western Mauretania. I certainly believe that Phoenician-Punic-influenced iconographies from the Far West reflect the existence of old myths related to ecumenical limits. However, at the same time, these populations were in a marginal situation in relation to the central Mediterranean. This peripheral situation is enforced by the belated and limited diffusion of civic coins, which was fostered by the restrictive monetary policy of Carthage in this region until the end of the 3rd century bc,11 with only one important exception: Gadir. The coinage of this city demonstrates the town’s interest in highlighting the territorial and self-defining role of the old God of Tyre, responsible for the colonization of the Far West, then administered by Gadir. In short, it reflects Gadir’s intended cultural and economic hegemony over the region.12 in beautiful coins showing the shape of a star with a human face occupying its central part (Pl. 3).16 However, it is further west where new and more numerous references to this iconography are found in the earliest coins from Gadir, dating back to the 3rd century bc. Nevertheless, these types alluding to the west where the Sun sets, also seem to have their own personality and meaning, which is independent from the Melqart-Heracles image, used in coins of the Straits area throughout the 2nd and 1st centuries bc. The most evident testimony is provided by the coins from Malaca (present-day Málaga) and Baria (present-day Villaricos, Almería). These cities, the only two Hispanic-Punic mints located on the coasts of southern Spain, made no use of the already widespread Melqart-Heracles iconography (Mora Serrano, 2007: 429).17 Furthermore, the same iconographic motif was represented in some enigmatic silver denominations with no inscription which are likely to have been minted in the southern Iberian Peninsula within the context of the Second Punic War (CNH 77.4; Campo and Mora, 1995b: 110). The male, bearded deity, wearing an oriental crown, is combined with a little head surrounded by light rays on the reverse (Pl. 4), which is undoubtedly the same representation of Helios-Šamaš found on the reverse of the earliest bronze Malaca coins (ibid.: 107–19, pl.3.3). This is a relevant piece of information to expand upon later, but now I would like to emphasize the appearance on the obverse of the first issue of Malaca of Egyptian iconography – very possibly representing the Baal of the city – as can be deduced from the presence of the double crown or pschent. Malaca’s craftsmen follow the archaic fashion of oriental inspiration, and especially Egyptian styles which are reworked by Punic artisans.18 It should also be noted that although it is a civic coinage, it seems likely that the abundant minting should be linked to the presence of Carthaginian troops in the region that would take advantage of the port and its good connection with the valley of Guadalquivir, at least from 212–211/209 bc. when it seems that these territories became a strategic position for the Carthaginian army.19 The influence of the coins of Gadir in the Straits region, Iberia and northern Africa must also be tackled. This influence is unquestionable20 and can be observed both in the diffusion of town epigraphic formulae preceding place names21 (mb’l - Lkš/ Lixus and mb’l – tyng’/Tingi) and in the influence of the composition schemes of coin reverses. On several occasions The monetary language of Gadir The coins of Gadir makes use of Greek monetary language, which exemplifies the mythic image of the region shared by both Phoenicians and Greeks. Gaditanus Melqart is shown as Heracles by means of an iconography created in Cyprus and perfected in Sicily.13 This area plays a key role in the development of the monetary iconography of Melqart-Heracles and it is not surprising that we find the main parallels in the coins of Solus minted from the beginning of the 4th century bc, and also in tetradrachms minted by Carthage in Sicily.14 However, when the city mints silver coins in the second half of the 3rd century bc, besides adding the place name and the formula of issue, it introduces a new element to the type of Melqart-Heracles from Gadir: a club or clava. It is a well-known attribute of this deity but only in Gadir is it combined with the image of the beardless god and also carries the lion-skin. Thus the uniqueness of these coins is ensured, and by extension the city itself. The head of Melqart-Heracles – in lion’s scalp and with tuna fish – is combined with an interesting type: the facing head of Helios (Phoenician Šamaš) which, under Greek interpretation (Pl. 2), refers to the travel completed by Heracles on Helios’ golden bowl.15 That is how Stesichorus (frag. 184–185) and Pherecydes (frag. 1–13, 17) recount it as a result of that new image of the Mediterranean Far West, which is on the limits of the known earth but nonetheless integrated within the oikumene. This iconography is a clear geographical reference to the dominions of the Gaditanus god – the western territory where the sun sets. It is found in Sicily (Panormus - sys), particularly 22 | Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa Plate 4 AR obol from southern Spain (CNH 77.4) (size 2:1) © B. Mora Coins, Cities and Territories Plate 5 Tingi (SNG Cop. 721) © B. Mora though – as observed in Tingi (Pl. 5) – both tuna fishes are substituted by two wheat ears. The same can be seen in the designs by relevant mints in the southern Iberian Peninsula subjected to strong cultural and ethnic Phoenician-Punic influence (Domínguez Monedero, 2000: 64–5). However, there are also important absences in need of a convincing explanation such as the absence of Gadir’s obverse type, showing Melqart-Heracles wearing a lion’s scalp, which remains a widely-known image within the region. This is not only due to its presence on coins whose identification in Mauretanian coins turns out to be as scarce as it is problematic. Prior to the widely-known coins by Juba II, the clearest representation of this divinity is found in Numidian coins from Hippo Regius, although its iconography differs widely from Gadir’s.22 This deity has also recently been described on the obverse of coins of Zilil. However, most researchers identify a classic representation of Hermes/Mercury on the basis of the caduceus in front of the head.23 The deficient execution of these coins, together with the scarcity of well-conserved coins, remains a serious obstacle for this new identification. The same occurs with that recently proposed for the obverse head on the coins of Rusaddir (present-day Melilla) (López Pardo, 2006: 175–6). The bad conservation of these coins only enables researchers to relate them to representations from Tingi and other mints in western Mauretania, identifying the image as Baal-Melqart, an unknown local divinity or, more recently, a royal portrait, possibly that of Bocchus I (Manfredi, 1995: 182; Alexandropoulos, 2000: 199–200). Two interesting observations can be drawn from the previous comments. 1) The scarcity or absence of the adoption of Gadir’s MelqartHeracles model in civic and royal coins in western Mauretania. It should be noted however that this absence has no direct relation to the existence of the worship of Melqart, widespread in these Far West territories.24 2) Closely related to point 1, there is a difficulty in identifying Melqart-Heracles or other divinities of the Phoenician-Punic pantheon. Identification is therefore sometimes justified on the basis of the existence of a strong local component which consciously impregnates many of the anthropomorphic representations found in western Mauretanian coins.25 This contrasts with the more canonized models found in mints west of the Moulouya River.26 Gadir and Lixus: the iconography of altars and temples This singularity or localism, which is particularly projected on certain monetary iconographies in these regions due to the infrequency of type or to the novelty of their combinations, can be observed in the coins of Lixus. The importance and antiquity of the Phoenician founding of Lixus is well documented in texts (the capital city of the Kolpos emporikos, ‘the Gulf of Commerce’, mentioned by Strabo, Geographica, 17.3, 2). It does however need confirmation which can only be provided by archaeological excavation. The earliest works in the archaeological site date back to the 1950s, with Spanish and French missions. These works are continued nowadays by a Spanish-Moroccan archaeological team which is currently obtaining excellent results.27 As already pointed out, the absence of Gadir’s MelqartHeracles iconography in the coins of Lixus is very significant. This is also striking for many researchers,28 especially if we bear in mind the close relation between this North African emporium and Gadir. This relationship became closer within the context of the great developments undergone by fishing and pickling industries in the Hispanic-Phoenician town and its surroundings from the 6th–5th centuries bc.29 In literary sources, a classic example of this is the intended symmetry between Gadir and Lixus situated on the 41' meridian, which reproduces the Pillars of Hercules westwards. Referred to by Eratosthenes’s Geographica,30 among some other passages referring to the great age of the sanctuary of Hercules, its origin is to be found in the re-elaborations of ancient mythicgeographical tales which took place in Hellenistic times. This last was also fostered by the attempt of local aristocracies to rival neighbouring cities’ aristocracies in antiquity and prestige.31 Undoubtedly, numismatic iconography is a suitable field to spread this kind of message, as can be observed within a later context of the Romanization of Hispanic-Punic and Punic-Mauretanian coin series.32 In spite of having separated the identification with MelqartHeracles from the enigmatic identity of the characters portrayed on the obverse of the coins of Lixus, whose parallels in form with the coins of Malaca have supported an unlikely identification with Chusor/Khotar (Hephaestus-Vulcan),33 the coins of Lixus show the clearest allusion to Herculean myths in this region. However, this allusion is singular, since it represents a naiskos or altar devoted to its worship (Pl. 6).34 Unquestionably, this image is related to literary references to the Melqart altar located in Lixus’ vicinity – an old tradition collected and reported by Strabo (17.3, 3). In this and the subsequent, more explicit passage by Pliny (Naturalis Historia, 5.2–4) there is a reference to the existence of an altar (bomos/ ara) located on the outskirts of Lixus, in an islet located in the estuary of the Loukkos River. Therefore, it differs from the sanctuary of this divinity within the city walls, in the monumental quarter, which must be identified with the famous delubrum Herculis.35 These tales must have been well enough known among the ruling classes in Lixus at least since the second half of the 2nd century bc. This is because they were materially, culturally and Plate 6 Lixus (Mazard 640) from Triton XI 2008 © CNG Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa | 23 Mora Serrano Plate 7 Lascuta (CNH 126.2) from IVDJ no. 2042 © Instituto Valencia de Don Juan (Madrid) Plate 8 Lascuta (CNH 126.3) from IVDJ no. 2043 © Instituto Valencia de Don Juan (Madrid) literarily open-minded to the Mediterranean Hellenistic Koine36 which firstly favoured their early and intense contact with Gadir and then with the presence of Romans and Italics in the Straits region. Therefore, this literary culture is likely to have inspired directly this minting activity, which, due to the neo-Punic and Latin epigraphy, is believed to have taken place in the second half of the 1st century bc.37 The Lixus altar occurs rather infrequently in the iconography of the Phoenician-Punic coins of the Straits area. However, it finds its main parallel in the Hispanic coins from Lascuta.38 Here, the relation to Gadir’s Melqart-Heracles worship manifests itself in the representation of two altars linked to the image of the Phoenician god wearing a lion’s scalp and carrying a club on the coin’s obverse (Pls 7–8).39 The fact that these types appear in a traditional Hispanic LibyanPhoenician mint has numerous implications when it comes to evaluating the existence of an ethnic or, at least, cultural North African Punic component in the populations of Phoenician origin which differs from that reported.40 The Hispanic testimonies commented on so far show an early inclusion of worship objects into coin design in the ‘Círculo del Estrecho’. This reaches its climax in coins from the 1st century bc and the beginning of the following century with the presence of temples in Malaca, Abdera (present-day Adra, Almería) and, later, in Gades.41 The altar on the coins of Lixus fits into this iconographic environment, although, as commented previously, it shows a strong local personality. in mythic-geographical literature connecting the extreme of the oikumene to fantastic events and to the riches and fertility of these territories.42 What images then do they use? Common topics, of course. There are no clear references to the items we know through archaeology and literary sources (e.g., Hanno’s long Periplus)43 such as furs, gold, ivory, wild animals, precious timbers, etc. These elements have been defined as exotic riches whose image is projected into literary references after the Roman conquest of Mauretania.44 On the other hand, the craftsmen producing Mauretanian coins were subject to the technical and composition-space limitations which characterize this kind of work.45 Apart from some already mentioned exceptions, these designs are usually inspired by common iconographic resources and the craftsmen compose an image discourse at the service of the governing authorities.46 Thus, they make use of old types such as the tuna fish – an antique symbol of sea wealth in Greek iconography of the Archaic and Classic periods. Therefore, the tuna fish should not always be associated with Melqart or pickling activities either. However, it is true that in the Phoenician-Punic Far West, and particularly in Gadir, the image of the Phoenician god is closely related to the protection and indirect control of fishing and related industries by means of the well-known westernPhoenician pickling products (Pl. 9), whose consumption in Athens, Olympia and Corinth were reported by literary sources and are found in the archaeological record.47 However, most of these images of the riches of the Far West are of an agricultural nature and so wheat and barley ears play an important role in design. As with the tuna fish, this is an iconographic type very widespread among ancient coins, especially in Greek and Punic coins from the central Mediterranean regions. This can be seen from the well-known Greek models of Metapontum48 to those developed in Carthaginian coins as a reflection of Carthage’s cereal policy. It is rather striking that these types gathered a territorial meaning based on their use in coins in the Libyan revolt and especially on the reverses of the city of Iol (Pl. 10).49 Thus, it is important to point out the antiquity of the coins from this old African capital city (the future Caesarea). The appearance of new coin finds in well-dated hoards or archaeological contexts Images of the Far West In spite of the evident contact and influence on coin iconography in the Straits area, there are also clear differences, and it is on this point that I shall focus attention next. The singularity of coin types from western Mauretania should not be explained by reasons of ‘Africanism’ or ‘indigenism’. I certainly believe that it is more appropriate to talk about the existence of ancient and new types articulated with local and regional intention. These iconographies are also considered to reflect an antique mythology of the Phoenician-Punic Far West. However, – unlike the Hispanic population – Phoenician-Punic communities select those most closely-related to their territory. They therefore link an image to the old traditions reproduced Plate 9 Gadir (Alfaro V.1) from Cayón auct. 2002 no. 416 © Áureo&Calicó 24 | Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa Plate 10 Iol (SNG Cop. 679) from CNG 805644 © Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., http://www.cngcoins.com Coins, Cities and Territories Plate 11 Bar Kochba War (Hendin 729) Amphora © D. Hendin Plate 12 Lixus (SNG Cop. 695) from IVDJ no. 2009 © Instituto Valencia de Don Juan (Madrid) bringing forward their chronology up to late 3rd century bc, within the same chronological environment as Numidian coins.50 In spite of being a less frequent type, though preserving the same significance, there is the question of how the presence of the bunch of grapes should be interpreted. It is also an old trope related to the riches and fertility of a particular territory. The clearest example of this can be found in the Bible (Numbers 13.24) with the well-known bunch of grapes sent to Moses from the Valley of Eshcol (symbolizing the fertility and riches in the Promised Land), an image which was to be renewed later on coins from the two Jewish revolts against Rome (Pl. 11).51 Once we have arrived at this point, we now face again the possibility of an ‘economic’ viewpoint of these types, assuming an ancient wine production in the region. Although the archaeological evidence is insufficient, the representation of bunches of grapes in coins is used to prove52 or to look for other explanations 53 in which it is considered that in this case bunches of grapes may be explained as the result of a complex set of traditions including cultural customs and traditions derived from mythic-geographical literature. This justification is complex, but we should recall the existence of place names in the region such as Arambys (Hanno’s Periplus, 5) and Ampelusia (Pomponius Mela, De Chorographia, 1.5), meaning ‘Mount of Grapes/Vines’, which is identified with Cape Spartel. In addition there is an ancient belief relating Dionysus to these territories and the vine culture developed by holy Ethiopians to serve the Olympic banquets mentioned in the Iliad (I.423–25) and the Odyssey (I.22–26).54 These iconographies become territorial images and gather in the coins of western Mauretania, both in civic and Mauretanian royal coins.55 When did this happen? The identification and interpretation of iconographies in ancient coins in general and in Mauretanian coins in particular faces an important obstacle. The inaccuracy surrounding many preimperial series is problematic and, as previously raised in Hispanic-Punic numismatics,56 so is the fact that the same coin may be dated with a range of more than a century according to the supporters of a high or a low chronology. This fact does not affect type interpretation to a relevant extent, but it does influence research on type origin and subsequent diffusion. The fact that the coins of Lixus are the ones likely to have included and spread these types (tuna fish, wheat ears and bunches of grapes) turns out to be interesting. However, so far only the chronology of the second quarter of the 2nd century bc has been ascertained (Ancient Mauritanian Period I, c. 200/175–150 bc) for denominations combining a male head with exotic tiara and long cord on the obverse, with a bunch of grapes flanked by the neo-Punic legend mb’l/lkš (Pl. 12).57 In the absence of further well-dated finds, traditional studies on types and style, metrology and metallography will help to identify the remainder of the coin issues in this important mint.58 In this sense, it will be important to know if the Lixus mint begins with divisions of the unit, which are to be minted later on as well. Another remark should be made regarding the variety of combinations shown by the Lixus coinage (also valid for other mints such as Tingi) in the sense of an ‘overall reading’ of the iconographies of a particular mint in successive issues. The local nature of these coins and the prolonged period during which coins are used as currency enabled users a continuous and rich reading of these iconographic programs.59 Tuna fish, and especially bunches of grapes and wheat ears, predominate in the mints on the Atlantic coast of present-day Morocco, but their presence also extends to other Mediterranean enclaves,60 among which Rusaddir (present-day Melilla) is to be highlighted. The reverse composition of these coins (in its two variants)61 is considered to show the reception, in this eastern region, of the same riches-related topics commented on so far. The tendency to interpret the types of Rusaddir through economic reasons occurs again.62 This is in spite of the fact that the possible agricultural advantage which could be obtained from the city surroundings must be limited and, so far, is only known through references from subsequent years. On the contrary, monetary iconography contributes nothing to the obvious exploitation of sea resources, and perhaps also to city-controlled miners.63 Its possible relation to the commercial route drawn by the Moulouya River should not be ruled out, since the establishment of the city is essentially due to its strategic coastal position.64 This is justified in the sense of the city’s Phoenician name rs’dr: Rus (‘cape’) –addir (‘powerful’), and its Greek versions, Akros from Pseudo-Scylax (Periplus, §111), and possibly also Strabo’s Metagonion (17, 3, 6). This is clearly related to the main geographical feature of the Cape Tres Focas.65 Multiple interpretations have also been contributed to the bee design on Rusaddir reverse designs (Pl. 13), which undoubtedly is the most exotic among those commented upon here. The handiest interpretation relates it to regional agriculture,66 but there are also some other more suggestive proposals, such the idea of a relation to some goddess such as Artemis or Astarte (Fernández Uriel, 2004: 156–62). This could be supported by the discovery of a sanctuary of this Phoenician deity in Melilla and by the re-interpretation of ‘Addir’ as an epithet related to different goddesses of the Punic pantheon such as Astarte, Isis and Tanit (López Pardo, 2006a: 170, 176–9). The inclusion of the bee may be interpreted here – as in Plate 13 Rusaddir (SNG Cop. 714v.) from IVDJ no. 1993 © Instituto Valencia de Don Juan (Madrid) Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa | 25 Mora Serrano the case of the wheat ear and the bunch of grapes – as a generic allusion to the riches and fertility of these African Far West territories.67 Apart from the complex interpretation of these Rusaddir reverse types, I am also interested in their interesting compositional scheme. The central motif (bee) is flanked by two other motifs (two wheat ears or bunch of grapes and wheat ear). This tripartite composition, whose origin is likely to be in a Carthaginian coin reverse design showing three wheat ears, and is also found in Iol’s reverse designs.68 This finds its closest parallel in the coins of Timici where a bunch of grapes is flanked by two palm leaves or maybe wheat ears.69 This can however especially be seen in the troublesome mqm šmš coins, which will be examined below. The bee is replaced in these coins by a star with a bunch of grapes and a wheat ear, and sometimes also a meander pattern. The attribution of the first issues of this coin to Bocchus I (c. 180–80 bc) (Alexandropoulos, 2000: 196–7, 406), together with the find of a Rusaddir coin in an archaeological context dating back to the second half of the 2nd century bc (Villaverde Vega, 2004: 1863), leads us to suppose that the coins are contemporary. At the same time, this raises the possibility that the Rusaddir mint adopted some types and designs they identified themselves with, and then substituted the star with the bee. This is another illustrative example of the strong personality of the Mauretanian numismatic types. New designs from old territorial images and mqm šmš However, other new well-known topics from ancient images used in regional coins – apart from these fertility-related topics from the Far West – are added to coin designs later, but in new forms. I refer in particular to the Helios (Šamaš) design which uses both iconography and epigraphy. It should be taken into account that this design was found in Malaca in the 1st century bc in some denominations showing the neo-Punic inscription šmš under a tetrastyle temple (Campo-Mora 1995a: 120–1; Mora Serrano, 2007: 429) (Pl. 14). It is difficult to understand the nature of this east–west relationship in the monetary types of Malaca, but I think it is justified with Malaca’s view of itself as a Far West place, as with other places in the region. Does this imply close contact between this city and more western territories? Recalling the oldest of Malaca’s emissions with solar types, the astral symbols and the inscription šmš that is now under discussion, these have interesting parallels in North African coins. But there is no evidence of a direct influence between the coin-dies of Malaca and other North African mints, although the parallels – though not direct – are oriented towards western Mauretania, especially Lixus and mqm šmš. Along with other numismatic and archaeological evidence, we can recall the reference of Strabo (3.4.2) in which he describes Malaca as a market for the nomadic people (or Numidian) from the opposite coast.70 Plate 14 Malaca (CNH 101.16) from Cayón 2002 no. 481 © Áureo&Calicó 26 | Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa I consider that both the star and the mqm šmš inscription (‘place of the sunset’)71 generically allude to the Far West and therefore are also applicable to western North Africa, where they acquire a special significance. This does not prevent the design idea being claimed by other localities in the Circle of the Straits, as in the case of Malaca72 or Lixus. Indeed as I have pointed out this is so for the solar disc at the top of the altar or chapel (shown by Alexandropolous, 2000: 340). This can even be noted in the place name Lkš, since its meaning could be related to the idea of remote, extreme places dominated by the Sun.73 If this interpretation is accepted as a working hypothesis, one of the most relevant issues in the study of mqm šmš coins the location of its mint74 – would now occupy a secondary position in relation to the justification of the existence of these singular types and inscriptions. These coins, both those known as autonomous and those referring to Mauretanian monarchs (Bocchus I, Bocchus II and Juba II), show sophisticated designs. Therefore, my argument is based on two main relevant points: 1) an insistance on the absence of references to Melqart; 2) the coins show an iconographic and epigraphic synthesis with a clear pan-Mauretanian purpose. Therefore, from this viewpoint, I believe that proposing the attribution issues to the Mauretanian monarchy is very interesting (Alexandropoulos, 2000: 195, 202–3). From a chronological viewpoint, this dating is indirectly supported, as already noted, by the discovery of a coin of Rusaddir in contexts corresponding to the late 2nd century bc and by the evident similarities among the reverses of both coins.75 Thus, together with well-known types alluding to mythic territorial riches such as the wheat ear and the bunch of grapes, other types are now added which locate it with greater accuracy. This can be seen in the double allusion to HeliosŠamaš through the inclusion of a star at the centre of the design and the neo-Punic inscription mqm šmš below it (Pl. 15). As already pointed out, aside from the numerous transcriptions proposed for the whole inscription (mqm šmš)76 it is a ‘nonexistent place name’ (López Pardo, 2006a: 210) and requires a knowledge of the relationship of Šamaš with the Far West.77 In this case, one or several mints in the service of the Mauretanian monarchy could be in charge of minting these abundant coins which mark, with the reign of Bocchus I (c. 118–80 bc), the expansion of the use of local coinages in these territories.78 Ocean iconography The other piece of iconography used in the design of these coins which alludes to the Far West is the ocean. But, how is this represented? Curiously this is represented in two forms, both in an archaic image and a modern one. The former appears on royal coin reverses in the shape of a zigzag79 or meander80 pattern which refers to no particular river but to the ancient image of the river-ocean which borders these lands to Plate 15 Mqm šmš (SNG Cop. 705-706) © B. Mora Coins, Cities and Territories Plate 16 Tamuda (SNG Cop. 718 v.) from IVDJ no. 1994 © Instituto Valencia de Don Juan (Madrid) Plate 17 Mqm šmš (SNG Cop. 711) from Triton auct. V 592 2002 © Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., http://www. cngcoins.com the west (Pl. 15).81 However, in the choice of this archaic type, the image the inhabitants of this region had of the meandering streams of the large rivers flowing into the Atlantic Ocean (large towns are located on the banks of the Sebou and Loukkos) should not be dismissed. This justifies Pliny’s (Nat., 5.2–4) allusion to the dragon which watched over the Garden of the Hesperides, whose appearance in the coins of Tamuda, flanked by two wheat ears (Pl. 16),82 strengthens this territorial interpretation. At the same time, as we have already commented in the case of Rusaddir, Tamuda coin reverses show clear dependence on the designs made widespread by šmš coins. The second reference to the Ocean is much more widespread and is found in the ‘autonomous’ series of coins. (Pl. 17). On their reverse the image of the king is replaced by the Ocean in a classical and high-quality representation. This fits well into an exoceanic trend developed since the mid-2nd century bc and of which Posidonius’ book on the Ocean is an excellent example.83 This iconographic trend explains the presence of the Ocean in the pre-imperial coins of Tingis and also later in Augustan times, which can be related to the šmš types.84 They can also be related indirectly to the coins of Gades through the acrostilolium present in the reverse of the sestertius and dupondius coins minted in the name of Agrippa.85 The more explicit incorporation of Ocean into Gaditanus Hercules iconography is provided by Hadrian’s aureus (Pl. 18).86 Conclusions These iconographies got progressively Romanized, but the process by which they became an iconographic trope in the Straits area can be observed in the transition to the Roman age. The first coin of Julia Traducta (Algeciras?), founded in Augustan times with inhabitants from Tingis and Zilis, illustrates this process neatly. Combined with the obverse representations of Gaius and Lucius, the reverses are occupied by well-known iconographies from the region of the Circle of the Straits such as the bunch of grapes, wheat ear and tuna fish.87 Although debatable, a very late echo of these monetary types with clear territorial allusions is probably found in Islamic transitional coins minted in this region, which, apart from the representation of a star on the gold coins, show a wheat ear and tuna fish as their central motif (Pl. 19).88 Looking back, most of the coin types from the cities of the Phoenician-Punic tradition in the region of the Straits, can be explained according to civic identity. However, this local reading should not be interpreted as a localism because, when the vast majority of these coinages were produced – 2nd–1st centuries bc – the Roman hegemony in the region had important consequences for these cities, transforming the socio-economic and political structures and, more slowly, their cultural structure in its broadest sense. An important aspect of these changes is the development of commercial channels and, consequently, the intensification of inter-regional contacts, which in my opinion favours a supra-political reading for a common iconography of these territories of the Far West. My work is intended to demonstrate the geographical, selfdefining and non-ethnic interpretation of the coins of the Straits area and especially of those from western Mauretania. Unquestionably, there are shared myths and a common substrate, but the differences between both territories also turns out to be rather significant. With the gradual economic and political integration of Mauretania into the firstly Hellenistic and subsequently Hellenistic-Roman Mediterranean oikumene (since the late 3rd century bc), a common cultural koine is constructed. This fixes old clichés and mythic images linked to extreme spaces since very ancient times. The ‘canonization’ of these traditions in Hellenistic times ends up becoming a part of the idiosyncrasy of certain peoples – those from western Mauretania in this case - who associate with one another by means of symbols and myths belonging to a legendary past constituting their identity. Notes 1 2 3 4 5 Plate 19 Islamic coin from North Africa or Al-Andalus (Codera pl. II.9) © F. Codera (1879) Plate 18 AV Hadrianus (RIC II 125 ) from CNG © Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., http:// www.cngcoins.com 6 Research project: HUM 343; PO6-HUM-01575; HUM2007-63419. I would like to thank G. Cruz for interesting suggestions and A. Dowler (BM) for improving the English version of this paper. In the case of the Maghreb, these projects were promoted through the creation of international Hispanic-Moroccan research teams. Excavation projects focused on the ancient towns of Lixus, Tingi, Tamuda (Beltrán and Habibi, 2008; Bernal, Raissouni et al., 2008), Volubilis, Thamusida and Gilda are good examples of this. Cf. Tarradell (1965), on classic works on this issue developed by Blázquez (1961) and Ponsich (1975). However, more recent views should also be reported, such as that of Niveau de Villedary (2001). Nevertheless, there are scarce historiographical analyzes on the diffusive historical and archaeological context in which this term was created (López Pardo, 2002: 21–6; Aranegui, 2008: 126–31; Ramos, Pérez Rodríguez et al., 2008: 116–21). The number of bibliographic references on this topic has grown considerably within the last few years, although under widelydiffering perspectives (Gozalbes Cravioto, 2008: 76–91; En-Nachioui, 1996–7: 785–8; Sebaï, 2005). Gago, 1873: 351–64, the author of this chapter, recalls the fact that some of these territories were part of the region of Hispania in Roman times. Applying to the West the well-known topic of monetary alliances previously assayed in the main study focused on North African Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa | 27 Mora Serrano 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 numismatics: Numismatique de l’Ancienne Afrique by L. Müller (Mora Serrano, 1994: 68). As shown up in a recent overall view (Callegarin, 2008). The slow evolution of their perception culminates with Ptolemy from the viewpoint of the history of ancient geography (cf. Janni, 1997: 37). It is true that no accurate conclusions can be drawn from the first references regarding the relationship existing between western mythology and Heracles, the Garden of the Hesperides, the Sunset, the Ocean and the fertility associated with liminal spaces, due to incomplete data, among other reasons. Its relationship to sailing and Phoenician-Punic and Greek environments however seems rather clear (López Pardo, 2008). Although it is of too late a date to be included in this discourse, the most evident example of all this is found in Juba II (cf. ColtelloniTrannoy, 1997; Alexandropoulos, 2000: 222–30). This topic was tackled in depth by L. I. Manfredi (2003: 422–3 and 2006: 264–71). This especially conditions Gadir’s political-economical features in relation to Carthage (Chaves Tristán, 2009: 332–40). The Carthaginian defeat in Iberia and the subsequent pact signed by the inhabitants of Gadir with Rome gave rise to a new stage in which, together with its well-known economic background, ideological strategies aimed at reinventing Gadir’s identity were put into practice, as reported by Strabo (Cruz Andreotti, 2007: 64). Cf. Bonnet, 1988: 414–15 and Hermary, 1992: 131. Melqart’s classic aspect must be related to the Greek elements associated to Melqart worship in Herakleion, although the traditional, Phoenician component of its worship still remains (Marín Ceballos, 2001: 323– 7). AlfaroAsins, 1998: 37; Manfredi, 2000: 13 and Jenkins, 1978: 5–10. As reported in other, later works such as that by Apollodorus’s Bibliotheca, who tried to show an archaic version of these myths (Giovannelli-Jouanna, 2004: 194–5). This relationship of Gadir’s coins with Helios-Sun is compatible with the sailing vocation of the town’s patron god (Chaves Tristán, 2009: 319). Cf. Manfredi, 1995: 342–3, nos 43–6) and Gandolfo, 1998: 349. The references to coins in the different corpuses used are not exhaustive but are aimed at illustrating a few representative issues. By re-reading the types in this mint and in the neighbouring Tgl(y)t/Tagilit (present-day Tíjola, Almería), the intended representation of Melqart-Heracles is now interpreted as AstarteIsis (Alfaro Asins, 2003). Therefore, the iconography of the Hispanic mint is on the most western limit of the numismatic representations of this goddess (Manfredi, forthcoming). Cf. Hölbl, 2004, 65. At least cf. López Sánchez, 2010: 43–4. Among recent works analyzing this topic, the contributions by J. Alexandropoulos (1988) stand out.This also tackles other important aspects such as metrology, drawing special attention to weight standards. Thus, Mauretanian coins from Lixus, Tingi, Rusaddir, etc. are subjected to a twofold influence: that of Numidian coins (Syphax) and Gadir’s coins between the 2nd and 1st centuries bc, weighing around 12.5 g and diam. 27mm (Alexandropoulos, 2000: 194; Mora Serrano, 2006: 46). Manfredi, 1995: 86–7 (Tingi); 90–1 (Lixus). Their repercussion on the remaining coins in the region is anecdotal (cf. Manfredi, 1995: 138 – Thagaste), although the greatest diffusion of this epigraphic formula is found in Gadir’s Hispanic-Punic coins (Alfaro Asins, 1991: 115–16; Manfredi, 1995: 130–2). The date these coins were minted is not precisely known; however, proposed dates are near the Barkid intervention in Iberia, thus reaffirming their political autonomy (cf. Mora Serrano, 2007: 416–17, 427), in agreement with the early and intense development of western-Phoenician urban development in the 6th century bc (Ferrer Albelda and García Fernández, 2007). A similar interpretation may be proposed for the early adoption of these civic formulae in Lixus and Tingi – in this case as an expression of their civic identity in opposition to the Mauretanian monarchy. It is represented with no lion’s head, the club behind and a star over its head, thus strengthening its astral nature (see for example, SNGCop nos 672–4; Manfredi, 1995: 172–3; Alexandropoulos, 2000: 312). Alexandropoulos, 2000: 337; Mazard, 1955: nos 627–9; SNGCop nos 743–5. Some other authors prefer not to declare themselves 28 | Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 regarding this issue: they recall the prevalence of the caduceus in North African religious iconography (cf. for this view Manfredi, 1995: 185–6). Cf. Jourdain-Annequin, 1992: 282–91 and Bonnet, 1988: 186–8, 196–201. This idea was developed by J. Mazard (1960: 112–16), while J. Marion (1972: 65) added a Hispanic shade highly praised in recent studies (Manfredi, 1995: 182–6 and Alexandropoulos, 2000: 203). This is a traditional border between both Mauretanias which has its limits in the east with the ‘region of Iol-Caesarea’. Among a vast bibliography where we find reasonable overviews about these coins, I must point out the excavation reports published by the University of Valencia (Aranegui, 2005), which are especially interesting for the study of the coins of Lixus. The location of the Gulf of Commerce in Lixus’ neighbourhood is not unanimously agreed upon due to transmission errors in ancient sources, but it is the most likely location (for this argument see López Pardo, 2004: 89–90). In this sense, it is not fully discarded, according to the weight of archaeology and especially the Herculean literary tradition related to the city (cf. Bonnet, 1992: 124–5).. Cf. Muñoz Vicente and Frutos Reyes (2009) and Aranegui Rodríguez and Rodrigo (2007). Cf. Moulay Rchid, 1989: 328–31; Jourdain-Annequin, 1992: 268–9. Cf. López Pardo, 2000: 821–5. The best example is still Gadir/ Gades (Cruz Andreotti, 2007: 60, 386). The continuation of neoPunic epigraphy and the persistent use or revision of ancient types in Roman-provincial Hispanic coins emphasize this point (Beltrán Lloris, 2002: 179). Where there is a combination of civic identity and connection to the imperial house (Ripollès, 2005a: 91; and Amandry, 2000). Gadir is one of the most significant cases: the portraits of Augustus and his successors, together with the allusion to Balbo (López Sánchez, 2003: 103–5), are associated with the ancient protective divinity of Gadir (cf. Chaves Tristán, 2009: 346). Manfredi, 1995: 186–7; Alexandropoulos, 2000: 339–40; Botto and Oggiano, 2003: 145–6. Manfredi’s (1996) well-documented study of this monument, whose general research lines I assume, supports the formal identification of this representation as an Egyptian style votive aedicula or edicule for which parallels from Carthage-influenced regions in the central Mediterranean can be found. At the same time, this work also recalls the existence of other sources of inspiration for coin types such as the carving of precious stones and gold/silver work, better known through Punic numismatics from eastern Mediterranean regions (see Mora Serrano, 2000: 158, 164). Buildings H and, especially, F – according to M. Ponsich’s (1975) names – are the best candidates for identification with the Melqart-Heracles temple (see also Blázquez, 1988: 531–5, 537–40; López Pardo, 1992; Mierse, 2004: 570–1). For this view see Ghazi-Ben Maïssa (2005). Although its Hispanic origin is likely, the diffusion of imitations of black-varnished dinner-services in western Mauretania is an interesting indicator, together with the evolution of the index of shapes (see Bridoux, 2008: 621–4). In general, the study of ceramic materials (particularly amphoras) from Mauretanian archaeological sites is essential to get to know the nature and evolution of the integration of these territories into Mediterranean commercial circuits (Callegarin, 2008: 315–8). Cf. Mazard, 1955, nos 639–40 and Alexandropoulos, 2000: 478–9. The possibility of relating these coins to the extraordinary labours performed by Juba II in this town (his literary erudition is widely known, as pointed out by Roller (2003: 163–82)) is rather attractive. Therefore, it is unquestionable that Juba II took advantage of the town’s mythic past in relation to MelqartHeracles (for further views see Jourdain-Annequin, 1992: 290; Roller, 2003: 133–5, 154–5; Aranegui, 2008b: 126). CNH 126,1–2; 126,3: we must add to these examples the type of Tagilit already mentioned (SNGCop no. 750), related in this case to Astarte-Isis’ worship in Baria. Cf. García-Bellido, 1987: 135–5. Apart from its definition, one of the main problems faced by its study is determining the moment, or the different stages, at which the settlement of these peoples took place: Punic or Second Punic War times (see Domínguez Monedero, 2000: 67–70; López Pardo Coins, Cities and Territories and Suárez Padilla, 2002). 41 Mierse, 1993: 40–9. Chaves Tristán 2009: 346. Their interpretation is not consistent. Without denying a possible allusion to the new imperial order, I think this is compatible with the allusion to the old Heracleion. 42 Common topics in many cases related to Heracles, Helios or Ocean in the mythic-geographical space shared by both Phoenicians and Greeks, who were interested in the exploitation of the natural resources of these Far West territories (for examples of this see Jourdain-Annequin, 1992: 269–72; López Pardo, 2000: 11 and 2004: 86, 96). 43 The problematic data and authorship of this work has been exhaustively analyzed (see González Ponce, 2009: 19–44). However, I believe this does not affect the general aspects I am interested in, such as sources of wealth and the characteristics of commercial exchange in Atlantic Africa. 44 See Gozalbes Cravioto, 2008: 602–6. 45 See Gozalbes and Ripollès, 2002: 15–16. 46 See Mora Serrano, 2000: 158, 160; 2007: 423. 47 Manfredi (1987); Mederos (2007) and López Castro (1997: 96–100) all contribute literary references and archaeological and numismatic documentation. 48 That is, SNG ANS no. 602, from the late 3rd century bc. 49 See in particular Manfredi, 1993: 200; 1993–1995: 247–9 (on land). 50 Cf. Manfredi, forthcoming. Contemporary to Syphax coins, it has been suggested – for silver issues from the Second Punic War – there is a possible dependence on the monetary policy of the Numidian kings (for this view see Manfredi, 1995: 179; Ripollès, 2008: 56–7). 51 In a clearer way in the Second or Bar Kochba War: 132–5 bc (e.g. Hendin, 2001: n. 729–30). See also Porton, 1976: 173 and Goodman, 2005: 166. This image of opulence (see Goor, 1966: 49) is moved to Africa, as reported by Strabo (XVII, 3, 4), who refers to such heavy bunches that two men were necessary to carry them. 52 See Marion, 1970: 110–1; Alexandropoulos, 2000: 339; Hilali, 2008: 224–6. 53 This is generally the most extended interpretation for HispanicPunic coins (for this view see Chaves Tristán and García Vargas, 1991: 140; Mora Serrano, 1993: 74–5). 54 See Bianchetti, 1991; López Pardo, 2004: 88, 95–6; Gabard and Rebuffart, 1990: 231–2. 55 Since the interesting coins attributed to the western Numidian realm, perhaps to Massinissa (see Mazard, 1955: nos 99–100 and Manfredi, 1995: 313 nos 31–32), date back to early 1st century bc (Alexandropoulos, 2000, 404). An advanced chronology is also proposed for the coins of Sala, whose reverses (for example, SNGCo nos 715–716) reflect the iconographic model created in Lixus and, particularly, the mqm šmš issues. 56 Campo, 1994: 82–4; Ripollès, 2005b: 196. 57 E.g. Mazard, 1955: no. 633; SNGCop no. 694; Alexandropoulos, 2000: no. 168 and Tarradell-Font, 2005: 188–9. Other similar examples, also including the possibility of anepigraphic coins with the same types are reported in a higher number of levels corresponding to Antique Mauritanian 2 phase (c. 150–30 bc) 58 See L. Callegarin in this issue. 59 Cf. García-Bellido, 1992: 241; Mora Serrano, 2000: 161–2 and 2007: 410, footnote 4. 60 I recognize here the presence of these types as the main or outstanding part of a design and not as an accompanying secondary type or element, as occurs, for example, with the bunch of grapes on the obverses of Gunugu/Gunigum (see Mazard, 1955: no. 569). 61 Cf. SNGCop nos 713–4. 62 For this view see Marzard, 1960: 115; Manfredi, 1993: 200; Gozalbes Cravioto, 2004: 146. However, other authors are more cautious and generically allude to fertility-related types (for example, Alexandropoulos, 2000: 200). 63 The knowledge of Phoenician-Punic Melilla began with the important necropolis in Cerro de San Lorenzo. Furthermore, recent excavations in other areas of this town, especially in Plaza de Armas, confirm the existence of a pickling industry (see López Pardo, 2006: 183; Fernández Uriel et al., 2008: 10–3). On the other hand, the exploitation of iron and lead mines in antique times has also been suggested (see Manfredi, 2006: 264). 64 It is a convenient stopover in the Straits route due to its strategic location in the Alboran Sea and its connection with Malaca, on the 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 Hispanic coast (cf. Gozalbes Cravioto, 1991: 112; Callegarin, 2008: 298, 302). See Lipinski, 2004: 418–20 and López Pardo, 2006: 169–74. E.g. Mazard, 1955: 177; Manfredi, 1995: 182; Alexandropoulos, 2000: 200, the latter two following the interpretation by Fernández Uriel, 1992: 328–9. Although assumed by some researchers (e.g. Fernández Uriel, 2004: 161), the relationship between Rusaddir and some place names such as Melissa or Melitta in ancient sources which refer to North African coastal locations are rather unclear (e.g. Hecateus, frag. 327 and Hanno’s Periplus, 5, 8), since the nearest location may correspond to Slyt (if we admit its reconstruction via Selitta), to be found between former Zilil and present-day Asilah (see López Pardo, 2004: 89; Lipinski, 2004: 450). Anyway, Melitta/Melissa is reported to refer to other locations in the North African littoral (cf. Lipinski, 2004: 569). Furthermore, it should not be fully discarded that the bee is an allusion to one of the former town names, thus following widely-known examples in Greek numismatics (see GarcíaBellido, 1992: 241). However, the coin would be the only remaining testimony. In spite of being rather forced, we may recall here the old proposal by St. Gsell justifying Siga’s reverse type with the representation of Bacchus, as a pun between the name of the king and that of the Roman god (for this see Alexandropoulos, 2000: 200). Honey is also a symbol of abundance and prosperity in ancient imagery (for examples see Vázquez Hoys, 1991: 65). Reused in a coin of Tingi (SNGCop nos 734–737). See Mazard, 1955: no. 577 and Manfredi, 1995: 181. On the other hand, its relation to the types attributed to Camarata is obvious (SNGCop nos 676–7) (see Alexandropoulos, 2000: 198). The head on the obverse of these coins is considered to be a representation of a Mauretanian king, possibly Bocchus I, as suggested also for Tingi, Tamuda, Sala and mqm šmš (Alexandropoulos, 2000: 196– 203). No findings prove these earlier chronologies, unlike those already mentioned for Lixus and Rusaddir, or the identification of the interesting re-striking of Timici over Ebusus (see Callegarín, 2008: 313–4). López Castro and Mora Serrano 2002: 187–8. Cf. Bonnet, 1989: 98. For examples of these see López Castro and Mora Serrano, 2002: 187–8. For this theory see López Pardo, 2004: 86; Jourdain-Annequin, 1992: 268. It is a widely discussed topic. However, no agreement has been reached by researchers yet. The classic connection to Lixus (Manfredi, 1995: 88–91 and 2006: 282) is opposed by a more northern and interior location between Volubilis (Alexandropoulos, 2000: 197–8) and Gilda (Callegarin and El-Harrif, 2000: 29–31). Among the arguments used to support one or another location, the distribution of coin finds is very important. This highlights the scarce presence of the šmš coin in Lixus and its surroundings. The publication of new coin find suggests greater prudence when putting forward this argument (cf. Callegarin, 2008: 314). In any case, it remains clear that the coins of Rusaddir coins are previous to the reign of Bocchus II (49–33 bc) as has been previously discussed. Many viewpoints have been proposed for this inscription following its interpretation as market, temple and even necropolis, but all of them agree in its relation to the Far West (Manfredi, 1995, 89–90). This should logically also be applied to the Hispanic Eastern World, as in the iconographic study of one of its most representative monuments (López Pardo, 2006b: 208–10). Cf. Alexandropoulos, 2000: 203 and Callegarin, 2008: 311, 316. Alexandropoulos, 2000: 200, suggests the stylized representation of a sun-ray. Suggested by Manfredi, 1995: 187. This is a very old literary image, as seen in Homeric poems, closely linked to the Far West and the colonial environment shared by Greeks and Phoenicians (cf. Plácido, 2008: 37). Cf. Mazzard, 1955: nos 583–4; SNGCo nos 718–19. See also LIMC VII/1, 32 and pl. 22. 1 However, its popularity and diffusion can be found in Artemidorus’ and Polybius’ writings quoted by Strabo (see Cruz Andreotti, 2007). Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa | 29 Mora Serrano 84 For this see Alexandropoulos, 1988: 5–13 and 2000: 333. 85 RPC nos 80–84; Alfaro Asins (1998: 155–6) and Chaves Tristán (2009, 346). However, the main and most evident relation is to Agrippa, whether as Praefectus Classis or as town patron. 86 Especially RIC II no. 125, where – apart from the legend HERCGADIT – it is represented with the bow of a ship and a reclining figure (probably alluding to the Ocean, maybe even to the Oceanus gaditanus mentioned by Pliny (Nat. 2.227; 9.10) (cf. García-Bellido, 1963: 145; Corzo Sánchez, 2004: 53–62; Cruz Andreotti, 2007: 434). 87 RPC nos 101–106. 88 Its possible relation to the Straits’ ancient numismatics was pointed out by A. Delgado in the 19th century (see Rodríguez Pérez, 2005: 25–9). Bibliography Alexandropoulos, J., 1988. ‘Le Détroit de Gibraltar. Remarques d’iconographie religieuse’. MCV 29: 5–18. Alexandropoulos, J., 1992. ‘Contributions à la définition des domaines monétaires numides et maurétaniens’, in T. Hackens and G. Moucharte (eds), Numismatique et Histoire économique phéniciennes et puniques (Studia Phoenicia. IX), Louvain-la-Neuve: 133–47. Alexandropoulos, J., 2000. Les monnaies de l’Afrique Antique 400 av.J.-C. – 40 a J.-C., Toulouse. Alfaro Asins, C. 1988. Las monedas de Gadir/Gades, Madrid. Alfaro Asins, C. 1991. ‘Epigrafía monetal púnica y neopúnica en Hispania. Ensayo de síntesis’, in Ermanno A. Arslan Dicata, I, (Glaux, 7), Milan: 109–50. Alfaro Asins, C. 2003. ‘Isis en las monedas de Baria y Tagilit’, Numisma 247: 7–18. Amandry, M. 2000. ‘Transformation des villes indigènes en villes romaines en Maurétanie: Apport de la numismatique’, in M.P. García-Bellido and L. Callegarin (eds), Los cartagineses y la monetización del Mediterráneo Occidental, (Anejos de AEspA XXII), Madrid: 43–52. Aranegui, C. (ed.) 2005. Lixus 2 Ladera Sur. Excavaciones marrocoespañolas en la colonia fenicia. Campañas 2000–2003 (Saguntumextra 6). Valencia. Aranegui, C. 2008a. ‘Tarradell y la historiografía de la arqueología del norte de Marruecos’, in J. Beltrán Fortes and M. Habibi (eds), Historia de la Arqueología del Norte de Marruecos durante el período del Protectorado y sus referentes en España, Seville: 121–33. Aranegui, C. 2008b.‘La arqueologíaa de Lixus y la monarquía mauritana’, in J.M. Candau Morón, F.J. González Ponce and A.L. Chavez Reino (eds), Lybiae lustrare extrema. Realidad y literatura en la visión grecorromana de África (Estudios en honor del Profesor Jehan Desanges), Seville: 117–26. Aranegui, C, Rodríguez and C.G., Rodrigo, N.J. 2007. ‘Datos para la gestión pesquera de Lixus (Larache, Marruecos)’, in L. Lagóstena, D. Bernal and A. Arévalo (eds), Cetariae 2005. Salsas y salazones de pescado en Occidente durante la Antigüedad, (BAR Int. Series 1686), Oxford: 205–14. Aranegui, C. and Mar, R. forthcoming, ‘Juba II y Lixus (Marruecos)’, XVII Congress AIAC (Rome 2008). Beltrán Lloris, F. 2002. ‘Identidad cívica y adhesión al príncipe en las monedas municipales hispanas’, in F. Marco Simón, F. Pina Polo and J. Remesal Rodríguez (eds), Religión y propaganda política en el mundo romano. Barcelona: 159–87. Beltrán, J. and Habibi, M. (eds) 2008. Historia de la Arqueología del Norte de Marruecos durante el período del Protectorado y sus referentes en España. Seville. Bernal, D., Raissouni, B., Ramos, J., Zouak, M. and Parodi, J. (eds) 2008. En la orilla africana del Círculo del Estrecho. Historiografía y proyectos actuales (Actas del III Seminario Hispano-Marroquí de especialización en Arqueología), Cádiz. Blázquez, J.M. 1961. ‘Las relaciones entre Hispania y el norte de Africa durante el gobierno Bárquida y la conquista romana (237–19 a.C.)’. Saitabi 11: 21–43. Blázquez, J.M, 1988. ‘Los templos de Lixus (Mauritania Tingitana) y su relación con los templos de ciudades semitas representados en las monedas’, in El estrecho de Gibraltar (Actas del I Congreso Internacional), Ceuta: 529–61. Bianchetti, S. 1991. “Aethiopes in Africa: aspetti della storia di un nome”, in L’Africa romana VIII, Sassari: 117–25. Bonnet, C. 1988. Melqart: cultes et mythes de l’Héraclès tyrien en 30 | Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa Méditerranée, (Studia Phoenicia, 8), Leuven. Bonnet, C. 1989. ‘Le dieu solaire Shamash dans le monde phénicopunique’, Studi epigrafichi e linguistici sul Vicino Oriente antico 6: 97–115. Bonnet, C. 1992. ‘Les divinités de Lixus’, Lixus. Actes du Colloque (Collection École Française de Rome, 166), Rome: 123–9. Botto, M. and Oggiano, I. 2003. ‘L’artigiano’, in J. A. Zamora (ed.), El hombre fenicio. Estudios y materiales, Rome: 129–46. Bridoux, V. 2008. ‘Les “imitations” de céramiques à vernis noir en Numidie et en Maurétanie (IIIe–Ier siècles av. j.-c.): état des recherches’, inJ. González, P. Ruggeri et al.(eds), L’Africa romana XVII, Rome: 609–36. Callegarin, L. and El Harrif, F.Z. 2000. “Ateliers et échanges monétaires dans le ‘Circuit du Détroit’”, in M.P. García-Bellido and L. Callegarin (eds), Los cartagineses y la monetización del Mediterráneo Occidental. (Anejos de AEspA XXII), Madrid: 23–42. Callegarin, L. 2008. ‘La côtte mauretanienne et ses relations avec le littoral de la Betique (fin du IIIe siècle a.c. – Ier siècle p.c.)’. Mainake XXX: 289–328. Campo, M. 1994. ‘Moneda griega y púnica de Hispania: las primeras emisiones’, in IX Congreso Nacional de Numismática, Elche 75–92. Campo, M. and Mora, B. 1995a. Las monedas de Malaca, Madrid. Campo, M. and Mora, B. 1995b. ‘Aspectos de la política monetaria de Malaca durante la Segunda Guerra Púnica’, in M.P. García-Bellido and R.M. Sobral Centeno (eds), La moneda hispánica. Ciudad y territorio. I Reunión de Numismática Hispana, (Anejos de AEspA 14), Madrid: 105–10. Chaves Tristán, F. 2009. ‘Identidad, cultura y territorio en la Andalucía prerroana a través de la numismática: el caso de Gadir-Gades’, in F. Wulff Alonso and M. Álvarez Martí-Aguilar (eds), Identidades, culturas y territorios en la Andalucía pererromana, Málaga: 317–59. Chaves, F. and García Vargas, E. 1991. ‘Reflexiones en torno al área comercial de Gades: Estudio numismático y económico’, in Alimenta. Estudios en homenaje al Dr. Michel Ponsich (Gerión Extra 3), Madrid: 139–68. CNH = Villaronga, L. 1994. Corpus Nummum Hispaniae ante Augusti Aetatem, Madrid. Codera y Zaidín, F. 1879. Tratado de numismática arábigo-española, Madrid. Coltelloni-Trannoy, M. 1997. Le Royaume de Maurétanie sous Juba II et Ptolémée, Paris. Corzo Sánchez, R. 2004. ‘Sobre la imagen de Hercules Gaditanus’, Romula 3: 37–62. Cruz Andreotti, C. 2007. ‘Estrabón y la tradición geográfica’, in G. Cruz Andreotti, M.V. García Quintela and J. Gómez Espelosín (eds), Estrabón. Geografía de Iberia, Madrid: 44–66. Domínguez Monedero, A.J. 2000. ‘Monedas e identidad étnicocultural de las ciudades de la Bética’, in M.P. García-Bellido and L. Callegarin (eds), Los cartagineses y la monetización del Mediterráneo Occidental, (Anejos de AEspA XXII), Madrid 59–74. En-Nachioui, E.-A. 1996-1997. ‘Mauritania Tingitana: Romanización, urbanización y estado de la cuestión’, Annals d l’Institut d’Estudis Girondins 37: 783–93. Fernández Uriel, P. 1992. ‘Algunas consideraciones sobre la miel y la sal en el extremo del Mediterráneo Occidental’, in Lixus. Actes du Colloque (Collection École Française de Rome, 166), Rome: 328. Fernández Uriel, P. 2004. ‘La moneda de Rusaddir. Una hipótesis de trabajo’, Gerion 22(1): 147–67. Fernández Uriel, P., Bravo Nieto, A. et al. 2007. “Diez años de arqueología en Melilla”, Akros 6: 7–18. Ferrer Albelda, E. and García Fernández, F.J. 2007. ‘El fenómeno de la polis en el mundo púnico occidental’, in J.J. Justel, B.E. Solans, J.P. Vita and J.Á. Zamora (eds), Las aguas primigenias: el Próximo Oriente Antiguo como fuente de civilización, Zaragoza: 653–67. Gabard I. and Rebuffat R. 1990. ‘La vigne au Maroc, dans L’archéologie de la vigne et du vin’, in Gaule et dans les provinces voisines (colloque du Centre de recherches A. Piganiol), Paris: 219–36. Gago, M. 1873. ‘Africa Tingitana’, in A. Delgado y Hernández, Nuevo método de clasificación de las medallas autónomas de España, Seville: 351–84. García y Bellido, A. 1963. ‘Hercules Gaditanus’, AEspA 36: 70–153. García-Bellido, M.P. 1987. ‘Altares y oráculos semitas en Occidente: Melkart y Tanit’, Rivista di Studi Fenici 15(2): 135–58. García-Bellido, M.P. 1992. ‘La moneda, libro en imágenes de la ciudad’, in R. Olmos (ed.), La sociedad ibérica a través de la imagen, Madrid: 237–49. Coins, Cities and Territories Ghazi-Ben Maïssa, H. 2005. ‘Le règne de Bogud (78–38 avant J.C.) ou l’extraordinaire effervescense économique du Maroc anticue’, La Recherche Historique 3: 5–23. Giovannelli-Jouanna, P. 2004. ‘L’hellénisme chez les historiens grecs de l’Ouest. Les historiens grecs et le Périple d’Heraclès Dans l’ouest de la Méditerranée: Les enjeux du mythe’, in J.M. Candau, F.J. González Ponce and G. Cruz Andreotti (eds), Historia y mito. El pasado legendario como fuente de autoridad, Málaga: 193–209. González Ponce, F.J. 2009. Periplógrafos griegos I. Épocas Arcaica y Clásica 1: Periplo de Hanón y autores de los siglos VI y V a.C., Zaragoza. Goodman, M., 2005. ‘Coinage an Identity: The Jewish Evidence’, in C. Howgego, V. Heuchert and A. Burnett (eds), Coinage and Identity in the Roman provinces, Oxford: 163–66. Gozalbes Cravioto, E. 1991. La ciudad antigua de Rusadir. Aportaciones a la historia de Melilla en la Antigüedad, Melilla. Gozalbes Cravioto, E. 2008a. ‘Los españoles y las antigüedades de Marruecos. De Ali Bey el Abbasi al inicio del Protectorado (18001936)’, in J. Beltrán and M. Habibi (eds), Historia de la Arqueología del Norte de Marruecos durante el período del Protectorado y sus referentes en España, Seville: 63–95. Gozalbes Cravioto, E. 2008b. ‘La economía exótica en el África occidental en época romana”, L’Africa romana XVII. Rome: 602–6. Gozalbes, M. and Ripollès, P.P. 2003. ‘La fabricación de moneda en la Antigüedad’, in XI Congreso Nacional de Numismática, Zaragoza: 11–34. Gandolfo, L. 1998. ‘Le monete’, in C.A. Di Stefano (ed.), Palermo punica, Palermo: 348–59. Goor, A., 1966. ‘The History of the Grape-Vine in the Holy Land’, Economic Botany 20(1): 46–64. Hendin, D. 2001. Guide to Biblical Coins, New York. Hermary, A. 1992. ‘Quelques remarques sur les origines procheorientales de l’iconographie d’Héraclès’, in C. Bonnet and C. Jourdan-Annequin (eds), Héraclès d’une rive à l’autre de la Méditerranée. Bilan et perspectives, Brussels-Rome: 129–43. Hilali, A. 2008. ‘In vino veritas: la vérité sur une richesse africaine à l’époque romaine’, in J. González, P. Ruggeri et al. (eds), L’Africa romana XVII, Rome: 223–36. Hölbl, G. 2004. ‘Iconografie egiziane e documenti archeologici dell’Italia punica’, in E. Acquaro and G. Savio (eds), Studi iconografici nel Mediterraneo antico. Iconologia ed aspetti materici, Sarzana: 65–82. Janni, P. 1997. ‘Los límites del Mundo entre el mito y la realidad. Evolución de una imagen’, in A. Párez Jiménez and G. Cruz Andreotti (eds), Los límites de la Tierra. Espacio geográfico en las culturas mediterráneas, Madrid: 23–40. Jenkins, G.K. 1978, ‘Coins of Punic Sicily. Part IV’, Revue Suisse de Numismatique 57: 5–68. Jourdain-Annequin, C. 1992. ‘Héraclès en Occident’, in C. Bonnet and C. Jourdain-Annequin (eds), Héraclès d’une rive à l’autre de la Méditerranée. Bilan et perspectives, Brussels-Rome: 262–91. Lipinski, E. 2004. Itineraria Phoenicia (Studia Phoenicia, 18. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 127), Leuven-Dudley. LIMC = Cahn, H.A. 1994. s.v. ‘Okeanos’, in Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae. VII, Zurich-Munich-Dusseldorf: 32–3. López Castro, J.L. 1997. ‘Los fenicios occidentales y Grecia’, in J.M. Presedo et al. (eds), Xaipe. Homenaje al profesor Fernando Gascó, Seville: 95–105. López Castro, J.L. and Mora Serrano, B. 2002. ‘Malaka y las ciudades fenicias en el occidente mediterráneo. Siglos VI a.C. – I d.C.’, Mainake 24: 181–214. López Pardo, F. 1992. ‘Reflexiones sobre el origen de Lixus y su Delubrum Herculis en el contexto de la empresa comercial fenicia’, in Lixus. Actes du Colloque (Collection École Française de Rome, 166), Rome: 85–101. López Pardo, F. 2000. El empeño de Heracles. La exploración del Atlántico en la Antigüedad, Madrid. López Pardo, F, 2002, ‘Los fenicios en la costa atlántica africana: balance y proyectos’. in B. Costa and J.H. Fernández Gómez (eds), La colonización fenicia de Occidente. Estado de la investigación en los inicios del siglo XXI, (Treballs del Museu Arqueologic d’Eivissa i Formentera 50), Ibiza: 19–48. López Pardo, F. 2004. ‘Puntos de mercado y formas de comercio en las costas atlánticas de la Lybie en época fenicio-púnica’, in F. Chaves and R. González Antón (eds), Fortunatae Insulae (Exhib. Cat. Museo Arqueológico de Tenerife), Tenerife: 85–100. López Pardo, F. 2006a. ‘La fundación de Rusaddir y la época púnicai, in A. Bravo Nieto and P. Fernández Uriel (eds), Historia de Melilla, Melilla: 167–89. López Pardo, F. 2006b. La torre de las almas. Un recorrido por los mitos y creencias del mundo fenicio y orientalizante a través del monumento de Pozo Moro (Anejos de Gerión 10), Madrid. López Pardo, F. 2008. ‘Marinos y colonos fenicios codificando la costa atlántica africana’, in J.M. Cadau Morón, F.J. González Ponce and A.L. Chavez Reino (eds), Lybiae lustrare extrema. Realidad y literatura en la visión grecorromana de África (Estudios en honor del Profesor Jehan Desanges), Seville: 25–51. López Pardo, F. and Suárez Padilla, J. 2002. ‘Traslados de población entre el Norte de África y el sur de la Península Ibérica en los contextos coloniales fenicio y púnico’, Gerión 20(1): 113–52. López Sánchez, F. 2003. ‘Retratística imperial en las series hispanolatinas y estructuración territorial de un Far-West romano’, in Les imatges monetàries: llenguatge i significat (VII Curs d’Història monetària d’Hispània), Barcelona: 103–18. López Sánchez, F. 2010. ‘Numidian Kings and Numidian Garrisons during the Second War: Coins and History’. Potestas: Religión, poder y monarquía, Revista del Grupo Europeo de Investigación Histórica 3: 17–52. Manfredi, L.I. 1987. ‘Melqart e il tonno’, Studi di egittologia e di antichità puniche 1: 67–83. Manfredi, L.I. 1993. ‘La coltura dei cereali in età punica in Sardegna e Nord-Africa’, Quaderni della Soprintendenza Archeologica di Cagliari e Oristano 10: 191–218. Manfredi, L.I. 1993–1995. ‘Il grano e l’orzo fran Nord-Africa e Sardegna’, Nuovo Bolletino Archeologico Sardo 5: 219–76. Manfredi, L.I. 1995. Monete puniche. Repertorio epigrafico e numismatico delle leggende puniche (Bolletino di Numismatica, Monografia 6), Rome. Manfredi, L.I. 1996. ‘Un’edicola votiva punica su due serie monetali di Lixus’, Rivista di Studi Fenici 34(1): 47–57. Manfredi, L.I. 2003. La politica amministrativa di Cartagine in Africa, Rome. Manfredi, L.I. 2006. ‘Le monete puniche nel Mediterraneo antico: produzione, coniazione, circolazione’, Mediterranea III: 257–98. Manfredi, L.I., (forthcoming). ‘Le monete neopuniche di Iol-Caesarea (Cherchel, Algeria)’, in VI Congresso Internacional de Estudos Fenícios e Púnicos (Lisboa 2005), Lisbon. Marín Ceballos, M.C. 2001. ‘Les contacts entre Phéniciens et Grecs dans le territoire de Gadir et leur formulation religieuse: Histoire et Mythe’, in S. Ribicini, M. Rocchi and P. Xella (eds), La questione delle influenze vicino-orientali sulla religione greca. Stato degli studi e prospettive della ricerca (Atti del Colloquio Internazionale, Rome 1999), Rome: 315–31. Marion, J. 1970. ‘Le thème de la grappe de raisin dans la numismatique antique’, Cahiers Numismatiques 26: 101–11. Marion, J. 1972. ‘Les monnaies de Shemesh et des villes autonomes de Maurétanie Tingitane au Musée Louis Chatelain à Rabat’, Ant. Afr. 6: 59–127. Mazard, J. 1955. Corpus Nummorum Numidiae Mauretaniaeque. Paris Mazard, J. 1960. ‘Création et diffusion des types monétaires maurétaniens’, Bull. Arch. Mar. 4: 107–16. Mederos, 2007. “Los atunes de Gadir” in D. Plácido, F. Moreno Arrastio and L.A. Ruiz Cabrero (eds) Necedad, sabiduría y verdad: el legado de Juan Cascajero, (Gerión Extra), Madrid: 173–95. Mierse, W.E. 1993, ‘Temple Images on the Coinage of Southern Iberia’, Revue Belge de Numismatique 139: 37–57. Mierse, W.E. 2004. ‘The Architecture of the Lost Temple of Hercules Gaditanus and its Levantine Assotiations’, AJA 108(4): 545–76. Mora Serrano, B. 1993. ‘Las cecas de Malaca, Sexs, Abdera y las acuñaciones púnicas en la Ulterior-Baetica’, in Numismática hispano-púnica. Estado actual de la investigación (VII Jornadas de Arqueología Fenicio-Púnica), Ibiza: 63–95. Mora Serrano, B. 1994. ‘Notas sobre Numismática e Historiografía. Berlanga y las homonoias hispano-africanas’, in IX Congreso Nacional de Numismática, Elche: 67–74. Mora Serrano, B. 2000. ‘Las fuentes de la iconografía monetal feniciopúnica’, in M.P. García-Bellido-L. Callegarin (Coords.), in M. P. García-Bellido and L. Callegarin (eds), Los cartagineses y la monetización del Mediterráneo Occidental, (Anejos de AEspA XXII), Madrid: 157–68. Mora Serrano, B. 2007. ‘Sobre el uso de la moneda en las ciudades fenicio-púnicas de la Península Ibérica’, in J.L. López Castro (ed.), Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa | 31 Mora Serrano Las ciudades fenicio-púnicas en el Mediterráneo Occidental, Almería: 405–38. Moulay Rchid, E.M. 1989. ‘Lixus et Gadès. Réalité et idéologie d’une symetrie’, DAH, 15(2): 325–31. Muñoz Vicente, A. and Frutos Reyes G. de, 2009. ‘La pesca y las conservas en la Bahía de Cádiz en época fenicio-púnica’, in D. Bernal Casasola (ed.), Arqueología de la pesca en el Estrecho de Gibraltar. De la Prehistoria al fin del Mundo Antiguo, Cádiz: 81–131. Niveau de Villedary y Mariñas, A.M. 2001. ‘El espacio geopolítico gaditano en época púnica. Revisión y puesta al día del concepto “Círculo del Estrecho”’, Gerión 19: 313–54. Plácido, D. 2008. ‘Océano y sus hijos: la proyección especial del mito’, in R. González Antón, F. López Pardo and V. Peña Palomo (eds), Los fenicios y el Atlántico, CEFyP VI), Madrid: 31–37. Ponsich, M. 1975. ‘Pérennité des relations dans le circuit du Détroit de Gibraltar’, ANRW II(3): 654–83. Porton, G.G. 1976. ‘The Grape-Cluster in Jewish Literature and Art of Late Antiquity’, The Journal of Jewish studies 227(2): 159–176. Ramos, J., Pérez Rodríguez, M., Domínguez Pérez and Vijande, E. 2008. ‘El africanismo en los estudios pre- y protohistóricos. La aportación del Miguel Tarradell’, in D. Bernal, B. Raissouni, J. Ramos, M. Zouak and J. Parodi (eds), En la orilla africana del Círculo del Estrecho. Historiografía y proyectos actuales (Actas del III Seminario Hispano-Marroquí de especialización en Arqueología), Cádiz: 116–21. RIC II = Mattingly, H. and Sydenham, E.A. 1972. The Roman Imperial Coinage II. Vespasian to Hadrian. London (reprinted). Ripollès, P.P. 2005. ‘Coinage and Identity in the Roman provinces: Spain’, in C. Howgego, V. Heuchert and A. Burnett (eds), Coinage 32 | Money, Trade and Trade Routes in Pre-Islamic North Africa and Identity in the Roman provinces, Oxford: 79–93. Ripollès, P.P., 2005b. ‘Las acuñaciones antiguas de la península ibérica: dependencias e innovaciones’, in XIII Congreso Internacional de Numismática, I, Madrid: 187–208. Ripollès, P.P. 2008. ‘The X4 Hoard (Spain): Unveiling the Presence of Greek Coinages during the Second Punic War’, Israel Numismatic Research 3: 51–64. RPC = Burnett, A., Amandry, M. and Ripollés, P.P. 1992. Roman Provincial Coinage, I. From the Death of Caesar to the Death of Vitellius (44 bc to ad 69), London-Paris (re-published 1999) and Suppl. 1998. Rodríguez Pérez, R. 2005. ‘Iconografía y simbolismo en los feluses de Al-Andalus’, Gaceta Numismática 156: 21–33. Roller, D.W. 2003. The World of Juba II and Kleopatra Selene. Royal Scholarship on Rome’s African Frontier, New York-London. Sebaï, M. 2005. ‘La romanisation en Afrique, retour sur un débat. La résistance africaine: une approche libératrice?’, Afrique and histoire 5: 39–56. SNGCop = Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum: The Royal Collection of coins and medalls. Danish National Museum. Spain-Gaul, ed. G.K. Jenkins, Copenhagen. Tarradell, M. 1965. ‘Los fenicios en Occidente. Nuevas perspectivas’, in D. Harden, Los fenicios, Barcelona: 213–36. Tarradell-Font, N. 2005. ‘Las monedas’, in C. Aranegui (ed.), Lixus 2. Ladera Sur. Excavaciones marroco-españolas en la colonia fenicia. Campañas 2000–2003, (Saguntum-extra 6), Valencia. Villaverde Vega, N. 2004. ‘Nuevos datos arqueológicos de Rusaddir (Melilla): un santuario de Astarté-Venus Marina en Plaza de Armas’, in L’Africa romana XV, Rome: 1837–76.