The port of the kingdom of Salamis

See this text in

Topography

The kingdom of Salamis extended to the east littoral of Cyprus with its capital on the estuary of Pediaeos river. According to myth the establisher of the city was the Trojan hero Teukros, son of Telamon, the king of island of Salamina in Saronic Gulf (Greece). The city succeeded Prehistoric Engomi and flourish during Geometric period as the wealthy finds of the so-called ‘king tombs’ indicate. Professor Karageorghis states that the Archaic and Classical city extended seaward, north of the Geometric city, in a larger area around the port, and was the predominant city of Cyprus. This northward movement may have been due to the gradual silting of the port by the river’s sediments and thus coaxing the inhabitants to the area of the northern anchorage (Karageorghis 1969, 167-169).

A reef can be discerned today that goes parallel to the shore at distance of almost 100m, forming a "lagoon" at the south of it. The two ancient harbours of Salamis were at the north and south ends of this "lagoon". The commercial harbour was more likely at the south and the military harbour to the north.

Chronology

During Hellenistic Period, in 274 BC, a new city named Arsinoe was founded southward of Salamis by Ptolemy Philadhelphos, showing the attention that the Ptolemies were giving to the area opposite the Syrian littoral of the Seleukid state. Salamis and its harbour continued to function but without the importance they had enjoyed in the past. For geopolitical reasons Paphos was from then on, until the end of Roman period the capital of the island. The catastrophic earthquakes of 432 AC more likely fully devastated the city. Similarly, Arsinoe was also destroyed by the earthquake and succeeded by Constantia, which in turn was succeeded by Ammochostos.

Ancient Written Sources

Ancient written sources can document better than any other the port of Salamis, from the Classic to the Roman period. Isocrates attributes the construction of the port to the famous King Evagoras mentioning: "After he had taken over the government of the city, which had been deduced to a state of barbarism and, because it was ruled by Phoenicians, was neither hospitable to the Greeks nor acquainted with the arts, nor possessed of a trading-port or barbour, Evagoras remedied all these defects and, besides, acquired much additional territory, surrounded it all with new walls and build triremes, and with other construction so increased the city…".

Pseudo-Skyllax later states that: "…Salamis Greek, having a closed winter harbour…" although there is always the problem of whether his information refers to the mid forth century, the Classical, or the Late Archaic period. On the other hand it is unfeasible for the most prosperous city to lack port facilities. Alternatively, if the reference of Isocrates to the lack of a port is correct, and Pseudo-Skyllax re-used information from Skyllax from Karyanda, then we can assume the presence of a port that was silted by the Classic period, thus Evagoras either repair it or constructed a new one for the commercial and naval requirements of his kingdom.

Both Diodorous Siculous and Ploutarch in describing the naval battle between Ptolemy and Demetrius (306 BC) record that the port had a narrow exit, for which the protection of ten ships was enough.

Strabo, however, mentions Salamis without any reference to its port. Instead, he mentions Arsinoe with its port and this is indicative of the importance of the new city against the old one during the Roman period.

However, there is a reference to the port of Salamis from the Evangelist Loucas in Acts of the Apostoles saying that the Apostoles Paul, Mark and Varnavas disembarked in the port of Salamis, coming from Seleukeia in Syria. Apostoles Mark and Varnavas also took a ship from Kition and disembarked in Salamis when they were in Cyprus in 49 BC, according to the False Gospel Life and Martydom of Varnavas the Apostole, attributed to Mark. The reference says that the entrance was full of islets with idols on them.

By the end of the Roman period Stadiasmos mentioned a devastated city named Ammochostos (covered with sand), which has a port for every wind, and also Salamis having a port. This report clearly shows that the port could have been still utilizable. The silting and abandonment however could not be avoided with the passing of time.

Research

Excavations at the site of ancient Salamis by the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus and the French Mission of the University of Lyon were in progress until 1974, when the Turkish Invasion interrupted them. Several publications concerning the history and archaeology of the area has been published, the main one being Salamis in Cyprus. Homeric, Hellenistic and Roman (Karageorghis 1969). Linder and Raban also investigated the port area in 1971 (Raban 1995, 162-163), as did Flemming in 1973 (Flemming 1974, 163-174).

Moles

According to Raban the south harbour is the commercial one. It is formed from a breakwater, running southwest - northeast. The south end curves southwest to leave an entrance of approximately 200m. The lower part of it is a rampart built of large blocks down to 6m depth. Over the lower part of large blocks an upper layer consisting of ashlar blocks was placed. This technique of spilled rampart, or breakwater, was not used in Phoenician harbours, but was quite common in Greek harbours, such as the Archaic harbour at Samos, the Classical harbour of Aegina and the commercial port of Cnidos. The construction of the breakwater using this particular technique reflects the orientation Evagoras had towards the Aegean, which hypothesis can be supported by the dense harbour network on the north coast enumerated by Pseudo-Skyllax (Karpasia, Kyrenia, Lapethos, Soloi, Marion). The ashlars are submerged at a depth of 2m, whilst in the basin the depth of the water does not exceed 2.5m. Taking into account the rising sea level from antiquity, estimated to be approximately 1.8-2m, the depth of the harbour would have been only 0.7m. This factor demonstrates the level of silting that occurred in the basin of the harbour, since 0.7m of water is far to shallow for a facility of this size. Under this thick stratum of sediments might possibly lie more architectural features of the harbour, if they exist. To prove this hypothesis excavation would be necessary, since the limited survey of 1971 and 1973 did not locate any further features.

Basins

Furthermore, Raban believes that the lagoon at the north of the city was functioning as the city’s "neorion", the place with facilities for ship construction and repair, storage, and shipment. At the same time he places as only candidate for the "secret" naval harbour, the second basin north of the lagoon.

Flemming, however, in the area of the lagoon that Raban considers as the «neorion», discovered during his investigation two streets, one going parallel to the modern shore and a second one meeting it. Along the length of the streets, and in general the southern half of the lagoon, he also discovered several architectural remains. This apparently means that the area was not submerged by the time of the constructions. His investigation was limited especially in the northern half of the lagoon. On the other hand, he concurs with the location and function of the north and south harbours and makes observations about the silting and the posibility that more features may be buried there.

Fortifications

Raban also considers that the city wall extended along the breakwaters of the two harbours, and possibly the natural ridge, which separated the lagoon from the sea forming the usual "closed harbour" type. On the northeast end of the breakwater of the southern harbour he also recorded a section of fortification wall, outside the main city wall, for further protection.

Flemming, believes the wall to be a reef that acted as a natural wall between the city and the sea during the 4^th century BC. He also interprets several opening on this natural wall as streets that led from the city to the sea.

Summary

From the above it could be stated that the harbour of Engomi and Geometric Salamis were on the estuary of Pedieos. Sequentially, the city moves northwards due to the gradual silting of the southern harbour, and to utilize the northern harbour. This is perhaps the meaning of Isocrates report concerning the absence of port facilities up to the years of King Evagoras. Evagoras either repaired or reconstructed the south harbour and included it in the fortification of the city. Whether the north basin was included in this program or not is yet unknown. Ιt could be used by the time of Evagoras, but in 306 during the naval battle between Demetrios and Ptolemy, Polyaenos states that the fleet of Demetrious was hidden at the north under a cliff without any reference to the north harbour. If it were the naval harbour o Salamis Demetrius’s fleet would not go to this area to be hidden. Furthermore Ploutarchus and Diodorus Siculus mention that ten ships where enough to blockade the entrance of the harbour. A 200m entrance to the southern harbour would comfortably allow ten ships to form a blockading "wall", and therefore concur with these references.

Finally, the lagoon between the two basins was certainly different than today. More likely a part of it or maybe the whole area north of the reef was terrestial, evident from the structures. Different port structures can also be assumed to exist in the south and maybe north basins. All of these of course need further investigation, which is unfortunately not possible for the moment.

Bibliography

Author

Θεοδούλου Θ. / Theodoulou, Th.