UNESCO Ancient Civilizations of Africa (Editor G. Mokhtar)

The Carthaginian
period
B. H. WARMINGTON
The entry of the Maghrib into recorded history begins with the arrival
on its coasts of sailors and settlers from Phoenicia. The reconstruction
of the history of this period is complicated by the fact that the sources
are almost all Greek and Roman, and for these two peoples the Phoenicians
of the west, especially under the leadership of Carthage, were for most
of it bitter enemies. Hence the picture in the sources is a hostile one. No
Carthaginian literature has survived; 1 the contribution made by archaeology
is also limited because in most cases the Phoenician settlements are
overlaid by much more substantial Roman towns, though in the last two
decades some progress has been made. There are a large number of
inscriptions in various forms of the Phoenician language but almost all
are tomb or votive inscriptions which tell us little.
The development of the indigenous Libyan cultures before the third
century is likewise to some degree obscure. The Neolithic in the Capsian
tradition continued in the Maghrib well into the first millennium before
our era and there was little that could be described as a separate Bronze
Age. The archaeological picture of the first millennium is therefore one of
continuing slow evolution but with Phoenician influences operating with
increasing effect from about the fourth century. The particular phenomenon
of widespread large stone-built surface tombs appears to have no
connection with the much earlier megalithic cultures of northern Europe,
and it seems probable that they are to be dated to our period. The largest,
such as the tumulus of Mzora and the Medracen, are probably connected
with the growth of larger tribal units in the fourth or third centuries. There
is a marked degree of uniformity throughout the Maghrib.
i. S. Moscati, p. 113: 'Greek and Latin authors chiefly concentrated their attention on
the wars first between Carthage and Syracuse and later between Carthage and Rome.
Here the accounts are comprehensive, detailed and written soon after the events. With
regard to the rest of Carthaginian history the information is sporadic. Aristotle's observations
on the Punic Constitution, Polybius' account of the revolt of the mercenaries, the Greek
version of Hanno's inscription, the list of Carthage's dominions in Africa in the middle
of the fourth century given by Pseudo-Skylax, are examples taken from a scattered and
disorganized documentation, full of lacunae and frequently difficult to assemble.'