Figure 13.1. Mediterranean Bronze Age sea routes. Sites: (a) Byblos, (b) Ugarit, (c) Ura (?), (d) the Side shipwreck, (e) Cape Gelidonya, (f) Uluburun, (g) Deveboynu Burnu, (h) Kommos, (i) Mersa Matruh (drawn by the author)
Navigation
The sailing season in antiquity was normally limited to the summer months, between March and November, when northwesterly winds prevail in the eastern Mediterranean.1 This had a profound effect on the sailing routes plied during the Bronze Age, for the boom-footed square rig then in use was intended primarily for sailing with a following wind. Although it was possible to travel a direct path from Europe to Africa, the return voyage had to be made following the Levantine coastline.
Sea Routes
The following Mediterranean sea routes are documented in the Bronze Age:
Egypt/Syro-Canaanite Coast (Fig. 13.1: A)
Evidence, discussed above, indicates the intense use of the sea route along the Syro-Canaanite coast between Ugarit and Egypt as early as the Late Uruk period.2 These include voyages to and from Egypt and intercity contacts, particularly by Syro-Canaanite and Egyptian ships.
Cilicia/North Syrian Coast (Fig. 13.1: B)
Ugarit carried on an active maritime trade with Ura (c), which was the main Mediterranean port for the Hittite kingdom. Ura was probably located in Cilicia, perhaps near modern Silifke, or about sixty kilometers to the west in the region of Aydincik.3
Syro-Canaanite Coast/Cyprus/Egypt (Fig. 13.1: C–D)
In EA 114, Rib-Addi, the embattled king of Byblos, reports that he is under land and coastal siege by his enemy, Aziru, who has taken control of the sea routes.4 Toward the end of the letter, Rib-Addi emphasizes his isolation by bringing the following action to the pharaoh’s attention:
Under the circumstances it goes very badly with me.
Here is the other,
Amanmasha.
Ask him if I did not send him (via) Alashia to thee.5
W. L. Moran, in his commentary to this text, notes that the order of the words emphasizes the place name, Alashia.6 Amanmasha is presumably the same Egyptian official who had been previously stationed at Byblos.7 Y. L. Holmes notes that Rib-Addi is saying that because of the difficult situation, he considered it necessary to send Amanmasha to Egypt by a route other than the normal coastal route between Byblos and Egypt.8
Now if Alashia is located north of Byblos on the North Syrian coast or in Cilicia as some scholars contend, then Rib-Addi’s actions are incomprehensible. Not only would Amanmasha be sailing in the wrong direction, but this would also require him to sail along the Syrian coast—precisely the area that was under Aziru’s control and which Rib-Addi would have wished Amanmasha to avoid at all costs.
If Alashia is located in Cyprus, however, then Rib-Addi’s actions are clear and make perfect sense. To avoid Aziru’s ships that lurked along the coast, Amanmasha’s vessel would have sailed across the open sea from Byblos to Cyprus (Fig. 13.1: C). From there, with the aid of the predominantly northwestern wind, Amanmasha would have then sailed safely across the open sea to Egypt (Fig. 13.1: D).9 Both legs of the “Alashia route” (Syrian coast-Cyprus, Cyprus-Egypt) must have been familiar to Rib-Addi for him to send Amanmasha that way. This text is also notable in that it is the earliest recorded open-sea voyage in the Mediterranean.
Figure 13.1. Mediterranean Bronze Age sea routes. Sites: (a) Byblos, (b) Ugarit, (c) Ura (?), (d) the Side shipwreck, (e) Cape Gelidonya, (f) Uluburun, (g) Deveboynu Burnu, (h) Kommos, (i) Mersa Matruh (drawn by the author)
There are numerous references to Alashians located in Ugarit and in Egypt.10 One Ugaritic text is a (partial?) lading of the cargo of an Alashian ship docked at Atallig, one of Ugarit’s ports.11 Anchors add to this evidence. Ugaritic and Byblian anchors found underwater off Cyprus, and what appears to be a Cypriot “basket-handle” anchor uncovered at Ugarit, indicate the movement of ships between these two lands.12
Aegean/Syro-Canaanite Coast (Fig. 13.1: E)
The earliest evidence for this route is the appearance of a Caphtorite (Minoan) at Mari in the early eighteenth century B.C.13 On their way to the Levant, the Minoans evidently influenced the indigenous Cypriot culture, for the Cypro-Minoan script derives from Linear A.14 The “Admonitions of Ipuwer” also may allude to the early use of this route.15
A royal dispensation given to Sinaranu, an Ugaritic merchant, reveals that Syro-Canaanites were voyaging to the Aegean by the latter part of the Late Bronze Age and that this run was apparently considered especially lucrative.16 A Hittite vassal treaty with Amurru dating to the end of the Late Bronze Age also indicates sea contact between Ahhiyawa and the Syro-Canaanite coast.17
This route had a number of variations. One of these is mentioned much later in the itinerary of Abbot Nikolás, an Icelander who made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the twelfth century A.D. (Fig. 13.2). After crossing the Aegean, his ship appears to have stopped at Kos, Patara, Kastellorizon and/or Kaş (Myra), and Cape Gelidonya.18 From there the ship headed southeast to Paphos in Cyprus and then on to Acco.
G. F. Bass notes that the east to west transit of this route is evidenced by the shipwrecks and find-sites of single oxhide ingots at Side in the Bay of Antalya (Fig. 13.1: d), Cape Gelidonya (e), Uluburun (f), and Deveboynu Burnu (Cape Krio) (g).19 He suggests that these sites mean that the route hugged the coast. Another possibility is that they represent craft that had been blown off course from a route that kept farther away from the coast to avoid its dangers.20
There was the ever-present problem of shore-based pirates. And with primitive and unreliable anchors, a lack of good rope-hauling machinery, and a rig of limited maneuverability that made being caught against a lee shore in any kind of weather a very dangerous experience, the Bronze Age seafarer probably deemed the coast something to be avoided. This consideration is emphasized by the quantities of ancient ships that wrecked on the Mediterranean’s shores.
The Aegean (Fig. 13.3)
A topographical list on the base of a statue in the forecourt of Amenhotep III’s mortuary temple at Kom el Hetan contains a list of Aegean place names.21 Amenhotep’s name appears in the center of the base’s front side above a s
sign with two Syro-Canaanites bound to it. To its right are two place names:
1) Keftiu
2) Tinay
To the left of the s sign are three additional names. Nine more names, and part of a tenth, appear on the base’s left side. They are:
1) Amnisos
2) Phaistos
3) Kydonia
4) Mycenae
5) Tegai
6) Messenia
7) Nauplia
8) Kythera
9) Ilios
10) Knossos
11) Amnisos
12) Lyktos
R. S. Merrillees theorizes that the lack of any apparent geographical order in the list makes it of limited historical significance.22 When the sites are plotted on a map, however, a different picture emerges. The list begins with a cruise around Crete (1–3) and then describes a trip along mainland Greece (4–7). It then visits Kythera (8) and perhaps describes a visit to the Asiatic coast (9).23 The list finally returns to Crete (10–12), repeating Amnisos (1 and 11).
Although somewhat confused, these names appear to be based on an itinerary of a clockwise circuit of the Aegean.24 Only in this manner is the double appearance of Amnisos understandable. The list is not derived from a pilot, as several of the sites are inland.
The earliest sea routes in the Aegean may have followed seasonal fish migrations.25
Aegean/Egypt (Fig. 13.1: F [1])
The appearance of Minoans in the Theban tomb wall paintings requires at the very least two separate visits to Egypt by Minoan envoys during the combined reigns of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III.26 There may have been more visits by Minoans, perhaps many more—but for these, evidence is lacking.
More recently, the discovery of fragments of Minoan-style wall paintings (some of a religious nature) at Tell el Dabca strongly suggests that Minoans actually lived there during the latter part of the Second Intermediate period and that they were in close contact with the ruling class.27
Figure 13.2. The route of Abbot Nikolás from Italy to Acco in the mid-twelfth century A.D. included the following sites: (a) Bari, (b) Durazzo, (c) Corfu, (d) Cephalonia, (e) Sapienza, (f) Cape Malea, (g) Martin Carabo, (h) Kos, (i) Rhodes, (j) Kastellorizon, (k) Patara, (1) Myra, (m) Cape Gelidonya, (n) Paphos, (o) Acco (after Gelsinger 1972:158 fig. 1)
Figure 13.3. Map illustrating the sites mentioned in the topographic list of Aegean names from Amenhotep III’s mortuary temple at Kom el Hetan: (a and k) Amnisos, (b) Phaistos, (c) Kydonia, (d) Mycenae, (e) Tegai, (f) Messenia, (g) Nauplia, (h) Kythera, (i) Troy (Ilios), (j) Knossos, (1) Lyktos (drawn by the author)
By which route did the Minoans reach Egypt? Did they follow the Anatolian and Syro-Canaanite coasts in a clockwise route, or did they venture south in blue-water voyages across the Mediterranean? Writing in 1950, A. Furumark assumes that in the Late Bronze Age, ships never left sight of land. He believes that all traffic between Crete and Egypt went via the Syro-Canaanite coast.28 Minoan ships, in his opinion, never got farther than the Syro-Canaanite coast, and all Minoan contacts with Egypt were therefore indirect.
The obvious sea route from the Aegean to Egypt, however, is directly across the Mediterranean with the predominant northwest winds.29 A western open-water route from Crete to Egypt may be indicated in “The Teachings of Merikare,” dated to the end of the twenty-second century: “I pacified the entire west, as far as the coast of the sea. It works for itself, as it gives meru-wood, and one may see juniper. They give it to us.”30 J. Vercoutter notes that both meru and juniper are conifers.31 Meru wood was imported from the Syrian coast. Since it is highly unlikely that conifers grew and were harvested in the western delta, Vercoutter logically assumes that the timber was imported. Because there is no reason for wood imported from the Syro-Canaanite coast to arrive via the western delta, Vercoutter suggests that Merikare is alluding to goods arriving from the Aegean via the direct sea route.
Vercoutter raises a second point, which I believe to be the strongest evidence available in support of the Minoans using a blue-water route on their way to Egypt. It is this: the Egyptians always considered Keftiu a western country.32 Had they known the Minoans only as arriving by way of the Syro-Canaanite coast, they would have thought that Keftiu was located northeast of Syria.
Minoans may have first reached Egypt via the Syro-Canaanite coast. Eventually, however, they must have realized the advisability of sailing straight across the Mediterranean. The appearance of Minoans in Egypt at Tell el-Dabca at the time of the Thirteenth Dynasty suggests that they were the first navigators to open this route.33 In charting this course, the Minoans may have followed bird migration routes; alternately, the discovery of a direct route from Crete to Egypt may have occurred from an involuntary drift voyage.34 A Minoan ship blown off-course by the Etesian winds while on the southern coast of Crete would have been carried to Egypt.
Presumed direct contact back and forth between the Minoan culture and Libya is difficult to sustain because the return journey from Libya to Crete would have nearly always required a trip along the Syro-Canaanite coast. Predynastic artifacts found in Crete do not necessarily indicate early trade contacts: a strong argument can be made for them being brought as “antique” trinkets that arrived in the Aegean during the Middle Minoan III–Late III periods.35
Homer supplies us with the earlier literary reference to the open-sea route from Crete to Egypt. Odysseus relates:
We embarked and set sail from broad Crete, with the North Wind blowing fresh and fair, and ran on easily as if down stream. No harm came to any of my ships, but free from scathe and from disease we sat, and the helmsman guided the ships.
On the fifth day we came to fair-flowing Aegyptus, and in the river Aegyptus I moored my curved ships.36
Elsewhere, Odysseus calls this route “a far voyage.”37 Classical references describe a three- to four-day crossing from Crete to Egypt.38
Although such goods were rare in the Aegean, the Uluburun ship was laden with Cypriot pottery when she went down.39 Bass and C. M. Pulak suggest that this cargo was not meant for the Aegean region but that the ship may have been on a counterclockwise circuit of the eastern Mediterranean, a trade route previously proposed by Vercoutter.40
After dropping off its main cargo in the Aegean, the ship would have continued across the Mediterranean, possibly reaching land at the Libyan port of Mersa Matruh, the only natural harbor between Alexandria and Tobruk, before continuing on to Egypt (Fig. 13.1: F [2]).41 Excavations at the Late Bronze Age site on Bates’ Island near Mersa Matruh revealed Egyptian, Palestinian, Minoan, and Mycenaean sherds—but primarily Cypriot pottery.42 This pottery dates to the Eighteenth Dynasty. The excavator suggests that Bates’ Island served primarily as a way-station for ships to take on supplies arriving from the Aegean.
A Late Bronze Age ship wishing to return to Cyprus from Egypt without following the Syro-Canaanite coast could, theoretically, sail from the Nile Delta to Mersa Matruh and from there directly to Cyprus (Fig. 13.1?). The sailing direction from Mersa Matruh to the western end of Cyprus is northeast by east; thus, this route lies nine points off the predominant northwest wind. Although feasible in theory, there is no evidence that ships plied this course in the Bronze Age. The return voyage from Egypt across the Mediterranean to Cyprus was possible using a (brailed) square rig, as is illustrated by the later voyage of the Isis.43
Navigational Techniques
“They looked at the sky . . . they looked at the land,” wrote the Shipwrecked Sailor of his drowned companions.44 Seafarers in antiquity must have had a working knowledge of navigational techniques and meteorology. Lacking it could prove fatal. When King Solomon built ships for the run to Ophir, he wisely manned them with Tyrian seafarers who “were familiar with the sea.”45 Interestingly, when Jehoshaphat later built “ships of Tarshish” to repeat Solomon’s feat (without Phoenician experts), the ships were wrecked at Etzion Gever.46
Information on seafaring navigational techniques of the Bronze Age is limited. With the notable exception of sounding weights, I am unaware of nautical navigational instruments surviving in the archaeological record of any of the Bronze Age cultures that peopled the eastern Mediterranean. This does not necessarily imply a lack of navigational knowledge, however: highly developed navigational systems may have existed without leaving any archaeological trace, beyond evidence for the open-sea voyages themselves.
Ancient navigation was an art—not a science. It depended on a vast and intimate knowledge of position-finding factors that were entirely committed to memory.47 This is admirably illustrated by Pacific navigation. Despite the impressive results of native Oceanic navigation, no position-finding instruments were ever taken aboard ship.48 The only navigational aids were stick charts, and these were used only as mnemonic devices that were not taken to sea.49 Theoretically, a similar situation may have existed in the Bronze Age Mediterranean.
Navigational knowledge is usually a well-guarded secret, shared only by a select cadre of navigators. In Oceania, for example, navigational lore was restricted to a privileged few.50 This may result in the loss of navigational techniques, as was almost the case in Oceania until the work of modern investigators.51
It is possible that during the Late Bronze Age, also, navigational techniques were kept secret and may have been lost during times of unrest and turbulence. The Minoans had the navigational knowledge required to use the open-sea route to Egypt. Perhaps the ability to navigate southward across the Mediterranean was lost for a time when the autonomous Minoan culture fell and was never acquired by the Mycenaeans. This is one possible reason for the apparent cessation of direct trade links between the Aegean and Egypt at the end of the Late Minoan IB period.52
Kenamun’s artist depicted lookouts in the bows of two ships measuring the river’s depth with sounding poles, but these would have been useless in coastal navigation (Figs. 3.3, 6). Middle Kingdom models sometimes portray the lookout holding a sounding weight.53 A large lead weight found at Uluburun may have been the ship’s sounding lead.54 The small pierced stones commonly found underwater along the coasts of the Mediterranean are generally taken to be fishnet weights (Fig. 12.35): some of these may have been used as simple sounding weights.
Birds
It is likely that birds were used as a land-finding method in the Bronze Age Mediterranean.55 This land-finding technique, described in the stories of Noah and Utnapishtim, is of great antiquity.56 There are two basic manners of using birds in nautical navigation. In the first, ships sail carrying caged land birds—such as doves, ravens, or swallows—which are incapable of landing on water. When the direction of land beyond the horizon is desired, a bird is released. After gaining height, it will invariably make a beeline for the nearest land—if such is sighted. If it finds no land, the bird has no choice but to return to the ship.
The second manner in which birds can be used depends on knowing the range of seabirds that feed far out at sea but return to their rookeries every evening. Noting the direction that the flocks take in the early morning when they leave their nesting grounds, or in the late afternoon when they return home, indicates land.
Wind Roses
It is generally assumed that before the introduction of the magnetic compass, Mediterranean navigators took their bearings from the winds.57 The invention of the Mediterranean wind rose is associated with the Phoenicians.58 The reasoning behind this kind of “compass” is that each wind had a different “signature” with respect to temperature, moisture, and other characteristics.59
Homer knew four winds: Boreas (the north wind), Euros (the east wind), Notos (the south wind), and Zephuros (the west wind). The Greeks later developed this into an eight-wind system, as depicted on the first-century B.C. Athenian “Tower of the Winds” (Horologium).60 The four additional winds more or less bisect the angles between the original four. The Italians adopted the Greek wind system, giving the winds Italian names. This was later expanded to twelve, then to sixteen, and finally to thirty-two winds.
Wind roses are very real tools in the “art” of navigation, as is evident from their use by Oceanic navigators.61 However, winds can be only secondary directional indicators; they must often be compared with more reliable phenomena. For travel in sight of land, landmarks are sufficient.
In the Mediterranean, navigators no doubt learned visible landmarks that were given names, like the “Antelope’s Nose” mentioned by Uni.62 There are no known Bronze Age parallels, however, to the periploi that were used in Classical times.63 This may be attributable in part to a lack of general literacy in the nonalphabetic scripts in use at that time. Theoretically at least, this should not have been a problem for an Ugaritic navigator using that city’s alphabetic script. The diptych found on the Uluburun shipwreck raises the possibility that at least one person on board that vessel may have been literate.64 I am not aware of any Bronze Age nautical charts.
Other navigational systems depended on the sun. The points where the sun rises and sets fluctuate considerably with the seasons, however. Fixed points were needed, and these could only be supplied by the stars. The original Mediterranean wind rose may have been based on a sidereal compass. Since Mediterranean seafaring was largely in sight of land, however, the need for this may not have arisen.
Stellar Navigation
The later Greeks are said to have learned stellar navigation from the Phoenicians. The Greek poet Aratus (ca. 315–240 B.C.) notes that the Phoenicians used the Ursa minor (Little Bear) constellation, which contains Polaris (the Pole star) for navigation.65 Clearly, Aratus had only a hazy concept of stellar navigation, for noninstrumental stellar navigation must be based on the knowledge of many stars, as has been demonstrated by D. Lewis.66 If stellar navigation existed in the Mediterranean Bronze Age, it was probably not unlike that practiced in Oceania.67
Weather Lore
Bronze Age seafarers must have developed their own weather lore: to quote the Shipwrecked Sailor, “They could foretell a stormwind before it came and a downpour before it happened.”68 Both the Psalmist and Ezekiel seem to consider the east wind the most dangerous.69 Presumably, it was also an east wind that wrecked Wenamun’s ship on Alashia’s shore.70 Josephus describes gale-force winds called the “Black Norther” that destroyed the Jewish rebel fleet at Jaffa in A.D. 67.71 Elsewhere, he notes the destructive southwest wind.72
Perhaps the best-known ancient weather lore appears in the New Testament. When asked to perform a miracle, Jesus—who must have had considerable experience sailing on the Sea of Galilee—answers: “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather; for the sky is red,’ And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.”73
Here Jesus is referring to the well-known sailor’s rhyme:
Red sky in the morning,
Sailors take warning.
Red sky at night,
Sailors delight.
This weather lore has meteorological wisdom. The weather flow in the northern horse latitudes is generally westerly. A red sunset indicates that the next day’s weather in the west is dust-laden and, therefore, dry.
Land and Sea Breezes
Land and sea breezes were essential for coastal sailing, particularly with a boom-footed square sail. Wenamun twice refers to the time of his ships’ departure from harbor: he left Tyre for Byblos “at crack of dawn,” and the ship on which he was to sail back to Egypt from Byblos was to leave at night.74 This timing may have resulted from a desire to utilize land breezes, which follow the cooling of the land after sunset. These winds are normally of low velocity and are restricted to the immediate coastline, but for a ship using a square rig, land breezes would have been invaluable in allowing the craft to clear the coast to catch the offshore winds.
* * *
There is ample evidence for Late Bronze Age sea routes in the eastern Mediterranean. The mariners may have had a developed navigational system that left virtually no archaeological trace. The seafaring capabilities of the Late Bronze Age would seem to support this conclusion, although, with the data presently at our disposal, it cannot be proven.
