ΛΙΜΗΝ ΚΛΕΙΣΤΟΣ: FREQUENCY OF THE TERM

In order to answer the first question – namely, to assess whether or not the expression λιμὴν κλειστός is employed consistently in Strabo's Geography – it is essential to consider the nature of this work. Indeed, although its originality is undeniable, the Geography draws on earlier heterogeneous sources to which the Greek geographer, historian and philosopher added considerations deriving from his first-hand experience (Aujac Reference Aujac1966). The result is an impressive 17-volume work that conveys much of his contemporary knowledge, but in which variations relating to the original sources can be detected (Rouillard Reference Rouillard, Bresson and Rouillard1993, 46). The particular nature of this work makes it necessary to modify slightly the approach to the first question (i.e., to what extent λιμὴν κλειστός is consistently employed in the Geography), by initially enquiring into the background of the expression's frequency of appearance, or from what kind of source it might have stemmed.

When considering the passages including the expression λιμένες κλειστοί, three different approaches to harbour descriptions can be identified (see Table 2). The first approach can be observed in the cases of Mytilene, Kaunos, Knidos, Kition and Tyre. The descriptions of these harbours follow a comparable scheme and offer valuable maritime information, such as references to specific harbour services (e.g., one of the harbours of Knidos was used by triremes as a naval base: Strabo 14.2.15) and facilities (e.g., the northern harbour of Mytilene was protected by a breakwater: Strabo 13.2.2). Even though these descriptions are not analytical, but limited to schematically recording a series of data, they provide relevant maritime information. Their overall structure and the terminology that they employ call to mind the composition of earlier periploi or other specialised documents containing a description of coastlines (cf. Periplus of Ps.-Skylax [Mauro Reference Mauro2022] and the anonymous Stadiasmus of the Great Sea [Medas Reference Medas2008]). Explicit evidence of Strabo's debt to nautical sources is repeatedly found in the Geography, since he himself openly admits to owing much of his coastal knowledge to previous accounts of sea voyages (e.g. Strabo 1.2.26, 8.1.1 and 8.3.20). The conceivably common origin of these passages may therefore indicate that they are referring to a consistent – or at least similar – situation when recording the existence of a λιμὴν κλειστός in a certain place. Furthermore, examining both Strabo's biography and work, it is tempting to suggest that these references to λιμένες κλειστοί might have even been borrowed directly from the same source, viz. Timosthenes’ Περὶ λιμένων (On Harbours).

Timosthenes of Rhodes, the admiral and chief helmsman of the fleet of Ptolemy II (285–246 BC), was mainly stationed at Alexandria. He wrote a treatise entitled Περὶ λιμένων in 10 books which Strabo certainly consulted, probably during his stay at Alexandria (e.g. Strabo 2.1.40 and 9.3.10). This observation, combined with the fact that all the λιμένες κλειστοί mentioned in the Geography fall into the geographical area better known to Timosthenes,Footnote ⁴ reinforces the possibility that all the aforementioned descriptions (Mytilene, Kaunos, Knidos, Kition and Tyre) might have been borrowed from that treatise, thus meaning that they all date to the third century BC.Footnote ⁵

The second approach involves the description of Alexandria. In this case, it is particularly detailed and occupies a considerable amount of space. The reason behind this wealth of information, as well as the special attention devoted to it, can be found in the author's own biography: Strabo actually spent a few years at Alexandria around 20 BC and was, therefore, familiar with its topography and infrastructures. Unlike the descriptions deriving from earlier periploi, for his account of Alexandria the geographer relied mainly on his own experience, for which reason it is attributable to the end of the first century BC (Dueck Reference Dueck2000, 42; Roller Reference Roller2018, 946).

Lastly, a third approach is adopted in the passages referring to Cyzicus and Smyrna. For these cases, Strabo could also have technically drawn on Timosthenes’ work; however, the descriptions of Cyzicus and Smyrna are quite different from the other cases in which λιμένες κλειστοί are mentioned. In a comprehensive study of Strabo, Dueck (Reference Dueck2000, 15–30) had already noted that the geographer lavished attention on these two cities, suggesting that this might have been due to the fact that he had visited them.Footnote ⁶ Although the scant information available on his travels does not allow us to confirm this point,Footnote ⁷ we can rule out the possibility that the descriptions of these harbours were based on earlier nautical information. The details of the harbours of Cyzicus and Smyrna are, in fact, inaccurate or, at least, they cannot be regarded as being fully relevant from a seafarer's point of view.Footnote ⁸ Therefore, whereas it can be assumed that the passages refer to the two cities whose descriptions either derive from the author's first-hand knowledge (Roller Reference Roller2018, 733) or from an uncredited source (which might have also been first-hand) (Roller Reference Roller2014, 9), it can hardly be claimed that they derived directly from earlier nautical sources.

The three abovementioned approaches basically involve two categories of sources: those based on nautical sources, likely to be identified with Timosthenes’ Περὶ λιμένων (i.e., the descriptions of the harbours of Mytilene, Knidos, Kaunos, Kition and Tyre), and those that were not (i.e., those of the harbours of Alexandria, Cyzicus and Smyrna). The references to the λιμένες κλειστοί pertaining to the first category could be tentatively dated to the third century BC, while the rest could be later and/or attributed to the first century BC, if it is accepted that they all derived from the author's autoptic experience. Returning to the question raised in the introduction – namely, to what extent λιμὴν κλειστός is consistently employed in the Geography – it can be contended that, while it is impossible to assume a priori that this is indeed the case, it is at least possible to assess whether or not those passages influenced by the same type of sources employ the expression in the same way, before comparing the findings.

THE ‘CLOSED HARBOURS’ IN STRABO'S GEOGRAPHY

In the Geography, the expression λιμὴν κλειστός appears nine times and probably refers to 10 harbour basins located in Cyzicus, Mytilene, Smyrna, Kaunos, Knidos, Kition, Tyre and Alexandria. Therefore, all the harbours labelled as ‘closed’ were located in the Eastern Mediterranean (Fig. 1). Bearing in mind the various possible origins of the passages containing the expression, the available archaeological evidence dating to the period between the third and first centuries BC will now be examined in order to attempt to determine its meaning in each case, following the order in which the references to it appear in Strabo's work. In particular, the focus is placed here on the presence, or absence, of those characteristics which in current scholarship are generally considered as synonymous of a ‘closed harbour’, that is, the existence of a harbour inside the walls of a city (Lehmann-Hartleben Reference Lehmann-Hartleben1923, 65–74), its physical closure by chains or booms (Von Gerkan Reference Von Gerkan1924, 113–14) or its use for naval purposes (Rougé Reference Rougé1966, 116–17). In this last case, the existence of shipsheds is understood here as a general indicator of the naval use of a harbour, since they normally housed warships. There is yet another possibility: as has been hypothesised in the case of the Periplus of Ps.-Skylax, the expression might have referred to harbours accessible through a naturally narrow or an artificially narrowed entrance (Mauro and Gambash Reference Mauro and Gambash2020).

Fig. 1. Geographical location of the ‘closed harbours’ mentioned in Strabo's Geography.

The first mention of the expression λιμὴν κλειστός refers to Cyzicus. Here, the text reports the presence of two ‘closed harbours’ and over 200 shipsheds, without specifying how many of them were located in each one (Strabo 12.8.11; cf. Apollonius Rhodius 1.940). Insofar as shipsheds, as just noted, normally housed warships, this passage possibly suggests that the city's fleet was moored in both harbours. Currently, there is no archaeological evidence supporting the existence of shipsheds in the harbours of Cyzicus, but as the city has not been satisfactorily excavated (Avram Reference Avram, Hansen and Nielsen2004, 983), Strabo's information cannot be simply ruled out.Footnote ⁹ With regard to the location of the harbours, there was probably a bay on either side of the bridges connecting the mainland with the island (ancient Arktonnesos),Footnote ¹⁰ both of which were located outside the city walls (Fig. 2).Footnote ¹¹ As to their closure, there is no evidence for the existence of specific devices. The western harbour, which could be identified as the λιμήν mentioned by Apollonius Rhodius (1.954), was accessible through an entrance marked by a breakwater, still visible underwater at the beginning of the twentieth century. The eastern bay, now landlocked, was accessible through a small channel; to the north of the entrance, de Rustafjaell (Reference Rustafjaell1902) identified the foundations of a large structure in brick and granite, considering that this extended seaward to offer the entrance to the channel leading into the eastern bay further protection. Additionally, a third, inner, basin must have been located within the isthmus (Avram Reference Avram, Hansen and Nielsen2004, 985) and have been accessible, as a scholium on Apollonius Rhodius (1.954; Wendel Reference Wendel1935, 83) clarifies, from both bays through a channel.Footnote ¹² Although Apollonius Rhodius mentions three basins, he praises as excellent only two of them, the ones at the western bay and the inner harbour;Footnote ¹³ these basins probably corresponded to the two λιμένες κλειστοί mentioned by Strabo, as the eastern bay does not seem to have been spacious enough to accommodate a considerable number of shipsheds.

Fig. 2. Plan of Cyzicus, with the city walls, the two harbours on either side of the bridges (Western Harbour and E.H., Eastern Harbour), the possible third harbour (Inner Harbour) and the structures identified by de Rustafjaell. After de Rustafjaell Reference Rustafjaell1902, pl. XI.

The second reference to a ‘closed harbour’ concerns Mytilene, on the island of Lesbos: here, the Geography specifies that the city was equipped with two harbours, of which one was closed.Footnote ¹⁴ In this regard, the text provides important details, specifying that the ‘closed’ harbour was the one lying on the southern side and that it had room for 50 triremes; in contrast, its northern counterpart is described as wide, deep and protected by a mole (Fig. 3).Footnote ¹⁵ The southern ‘closed’ harbour was located inside the city walls and its entrance was marked by a breakwater on the west side and a tower on the east.Footnote ¹⁶ In 1973, remains of the fortifications and the entrance towers were discovered near the mouth, thus strengthening the hypothesis that this harbour might have been physically closed (Baika Reference Baika, Blackman and Rankov2013, 218 n. 64). Additionally, it probably included a complex of shipsheds on its eastern shore, which has given rise to the suggestion that it was used chiefly for naval purposes (Acheilara Reference Acheilara2004).

Fig. 3. Plan of Mytilene, on the island of Lesbos, with the city walls and the two harbours. After Baika Reference Baika, Blackman and Rankov2013, fig. A11:5.

The most numerous references to the expression λιμὴν κλειστός are found in Book 14 (Strabo 14.1.2 and 14.1.9; Dueck Reference Dueck2000, 42). The first ‘closed harbour’ appearing in this book pertains to Smyrna. Here, the Geography initially records the existence of a harbour near the plain where most of the city was located, before mentioning a ‘closed harbour’ (Strabo 14.1.37). Comparing this testimony with that of Aelius Aristides – who states that there was a harbour in the centre of the city (Aelius Aristides, Orations 17.231),Footnote ¹⁷ plus a second outer one (Aelius Aristides, Orations 22.270–1)Footnote ¹⁸ – it is perhaps possible to contend that there were two basins at Smyrna.Footnote ¹⁹ Hellenistic Smyrna, which was rebuilt at the end of the fourth century BC across the gulf on Mount Pagos,Footnote ²⁰ has since undergone significant changes. Such alterations in the site's geomorphology, consisting in the advance of the shoreline towards the north-north-west, combined with the continuous occupation of this area over time, have seriously undermined our archaeological comprehension of the Hellenistic settlement. However, the ‘closed harbour’ seems to be identifiable in the layout of a small, semi-circular basin still noticeable on the city plan (Fig. 4),Footnote ²¹ whereas the second outer harbour was probably located between the inner basin and Deirman-Tepe (Lehmann-Hartleben Reference Lehmann-Hartleben1923, 126).

Fig. 4. Plan of Smyrna, with the closed harbour and the Hellenistic city walls.

The next ‘closed harbour’ to be listed is that of Kaunos (Strabo 14.2.3).Footnote ²² This reference is unique since it is the only case in which the existence of a λιμὴν κλειστός is recorded in both the Periplus of Ps.-Skylax and the Geography (Ps.-Skyl. §99; Mauro and Gambash Reference Mauro and Gambash2020). As with Smyrna, due to significant changes in its geomorphology, little is known about the topography of Kaunos. The harbour of Kaunos was located inside the city walls (Fig. 5) in a small basin close to the lower course of the River Calbis (Fig. 6);Footnote ²³ this specific situation made the harbour particularly safe, as Thucydides himself defined it.Footnote ²⁴ Over time, the accumulation of river sediments has drastically transformed the ancient harbour basin, to the point that it currently corresponds to Sülüklü Gölü, a modest freshwater lake which in Antiquity was located on the western side of the acropolis (Gates Reference Gates1996, 282; Brückner Reference Brückner1997, 67). The Geography also records the presence of shipsheds (Strabo 14.2.3).

Fig. 5. Plan of Kaunos, with the closed harbour and the city walls.

Fig. 6. Photo of the present-day harbour area of Kaunos. Courtesy of Dick Osseman.

Moving on to Knidos, the Geography records two harbours, one of which is referred to as ‘closed’ (Strabo 14.2.15).Footnote ²⁵ The ‘new’ Knidos, which was re-founded on Cape Krio (present-day Tekir) at the end of the fourth century BC, was located on a small offshore island connected to the mainland by a narrow isthmus, on each side of which there was a harbour (Fig. 7). Although the orientation of the Knidian ‘closed harbour’ is not specified in the Geography, the only eligible candidate appears to be the north-western harbour, which is said to have been used by triremes and have been capable of berthing up to 20 ships. It was located inside a small natural bay, with a naturally narrow entrance (Fig. 8) and protected by the city walls; the pattern of the fortification and the existence of two towers flanking the mouth of the ‘trireme harbour’ have led some scholars to speculate on the possibility that its entrance could be blocked by chains or booms (Newton Reference Newton1893, 349; Krischen Reference Krischen1938, pl. 2). Notwithstanding the fact that the entrance was scarcely wider than a normal gateway (McNicoll Reference McNicoll1999, 54–9), no evidence of chains or booms has been found to date. Nowadays, the ‘trireme’ harbour is partially silted up, while the shipsheds mentioned by Strabo have yet to be identified.

Fig. 7. Plan of Knidos, with the city walls and the two harbours. After Baika Reference Baika, Blackman and Rankov2013, fig. A11:4.

Fig. 8. Knidos, photo of the ‘trireme harbour’. From a previous version of the website of the Institute of Nautical Archaeology 2015.

On the island of Cyprus, the Geography reports the existence of a ‘closed harbour’ at Kition (Strabo 14.6.3). In addition to the fact that the ancient settlement is currently underneath the city of Larnaka, the changes in sea-level, tectonic mobility and silting phenomena (Nicolaou Reference Nicolaou1976; Gifford Reference Gifford, Karageorghis and Demas1985; Morhange et al. Reference Morhange, Goiran, Bourcier, Carbonel, Le Campion, Rouchy and Yon2000) all make it difficult to reconstruct the exact plan of the Hellenistic and Roman city. In the last centuries BC, the coastline would not have been as straight as it is today, for geological analyses have highlighted the presence of an embayment to the north of the settlement (Fig. 9). To the south, a second harbour area – usually referred to as Bamboula harbour – has been identified (Yon Reference Yon2000, 111–12) and should probably be interpreted as the ‘closed harbour’ mentioned by Strabo (McKenzie Reference McKenzie, Blackman and Rankov2013). The ‘closed harbour’ was thus accessible from the north and completely protected from the action of the sea by the western spit, whose formation might date back to the sixth century BC (Morhange et al. Reference Morhange, Goiran, Bourcier, Carbonel, Le Campion, Rouchy and Yon2000); additionally, it was neither directly connected to the open sea, nor was it apparently located inside the city walls.Footnote ²⁶ On its west shore, there was a complex of shipsheds which was probably abandoned in 312 BC, following the conquest of Kition by Ptolemy I Soter (Blackman Reference Blackman, Morrison and Coates1996).

Fig. 9. Plan of Kition, with the alleged original course of the city walls and the closed harbour. The shipsheds are highlighted, despite the fact that they are not mentioned by Strabo. After McKenzie Reference McKenzie, Blackman and Rankov2013, fig. B9:1a.

In Book 16, which contains the account of the Levantine coast, there is another reference to a ‘closed harbour’ in connection with Tyre, a city said to have had two harbours of which one was closed (Strabo 16.2.23). Originally an island, Tyre was connected to the mainland by the siege mole built by Alexander the Great (Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander 2.16.7–27.7; Curtius Rufus 4.2–4; Diodorus Siculus 17.40–2; Plutarch, Life of Alexander 24–5; Marriner et al. Reference Marriner, Morhange, Boudagher-Fadel, Bourcier and Carbonel2005, 1303), and was already joined to the mainland at the time Strabo or his source was writing. To the south and to the north, the tombolo created two harbour areas. The southern, or ‘Egyptian’, basin is described as ἀνειμένος (‘open’ or ‘exposed’): indeed, even though it was partially protected by a continuous line of natural reefs running in a north–south direction, the prevailing winds in this area blow from the south-west, thus leaving this bay dangerously exposed. On the other hand, the northern harbour, also known as Sidonian, is referred to as κλειστός by Strabo (Strabo 16.2.23).Footnote ²⁷ Besides being sheltered by a continuous line of natural reefs – which were probably visible above the surface and acted as a natural breakwater (Carayon Reference Carayon2008, 296) (Fig. 10) – the entrance to the northern harbour was further protected by a mole that contributed to narrowing it (Noureddine Reference Noureddine and Blue2019). And as to its relationship with the city walls, it seems that the fortifications surrounded the perimeter of the basin without actually enclosing it (Lipiński Reference Lipiński2004, 298; Noureddine Reference Noureddine and Blue2019, fig. 3). The fact that the northern harbour had a narrow entrance seems to be endorsed by Arrian (Anabasis of Alexander 2.20.9), who – when offering an account of Alexander's siege – stated that this characteristic allowed the Tyrians to block the harbour entrance by lining up triremes.Footnote ²⁸

Fig. 10. A: plan of Tyre, with the two harbours and the submerged reef. After Marriner, Morhange and Carayon Reference Marriner, Morhange and Carayon2008, fig. 2. B: aerial photograph of the northern harbour at Tyre, Lebanon, signalling the location of the ancient mole (Noureddine Reference Noureddine and Blue2019, fig. 2).

In the case of Tyre, Strabo's brief description of the second harbour is particularly interesting, since he refers to it as being ἀνειμένος. This designation can be considered as being the antonym of κλειστός. So, while the entrance to the northern harbour was narrow owing to the reefs and the mole, the southern harbour had no natural or artificial protection whatsoever, thus resulting in it being ‘open’.Footnote ²⁹

The last references to λιμένες κλειστοί appear in Book 17 in relation to Alexandria. The case of the Egyptian city is unique, since – as already observed – it is the only description among those examined here in which Strabo presumably relies on his autoptic experience, rather than on earlier sources. The expression λιμὴν κλειστός is employed twice and is always accompanied by the adjective ὀρυκτός, ‘dug’ (Strabo 17.1.6 and 9). While this could give rise to the impression that the same harbour is involved, a closer reading of the text dispels it. In the first passage, Strabo locates the ‘closed and dug basin’ beyond the Eunostos harbour (also called the ‘Western Harbour’),Footnote ³⁰ on the western side of the Heptastadium (17.1.6),Footnote ³¹ while in the second, he describes a ‘closed and dug basin’ to the east of the Heptastadium, specifically located close to Cape Lochias and the islet of Antirrhodos (17.1.9). In a third passage, he refers once again to a ὀρυκτὸς λιμήν (this time, without adding κλειστός) on the western side of the Heptastadium, specifying that it was called Kibotos (17.1.10).

In light of the foregoing discussion, two harbours referred to as κλειστοί can be identified in Alexandria: one – the Kibotos – to the west, and another to the east of the Heptastadium. The Kibotos, as its name probably indicates, was a box-shaped basin located in the Western Harbour; it was dug out of the rock and connected to Lake Mareotis by a navigable manmade canal.Footnote ³² Since the Western Harbour was a wide embayment with no apparent sub-basin, other than the aforementioned Kibotos, Strabo's two references to a ‘dug basin’ to the west of the Heptastadium should both refer to it; vessels would have entered the Kibotos through a short sea channel on its northern side (El Fakharani Reference El Fakharani, Stucchi and Aravantinos1984, 26), while another similar channel on its southern side would have allowed them access to the passage connecting the basin to the lake (Khalil Reference Khalil2010, fig. 4). Although it has not been precisely identified as yet, recent geological surveys suggest that the Kibotos was possibly located on the southern shore of the Eunostos harbour (Flaux et al. Reference Flaux, El-Assal, Shaalan, Marriner, Morhange, Torab, Goiran and Empereur2017) (Fig. 11). On the other hand, the second ‘closed basin’ was located to the east of the Heptastadium, in the Great Harbour (also known as the ‘Eastern Harbour’). As Strabo himself suggests, it should be identified above all with the port at the foot of the royal palace (Belov Reference Belov, Ivanov and Tolmacheva2015) (see Fig. 11:3); this basin, protected by piers, moles and the islet of Antirrhodos, had a narrow entrance through which only oared vessels could pass (Fig. 12).Footnote ³³

Fig. 11. Plan of Alexandria, with the submerged reefs, the Heptastadium, the two main harbour areas and the four basins inside the Eastern Harbour (the Great Harbour). After McKenzie Reference McKenzie2003, fig. 2; the numbering of the basins inside the Eastern Harbour follows Belov Reference Belov, Ivanov and Tolmacheva2015, fig. 9.

Fig. 12. Submerged remains of the ancient Great Harbour of Alexandria inside the modern Eastern Port of the city (Goddio and Fabre Reference Goddio, Fabre, Robinson and Wilson2010).

TOWARDS A DEFINITION OF ‘CLOSED HARBOURS’ IN STRABO'S GEOGRAPHY

In the Geography, Strabo employs the expression λιμὴν κλειστός probably to refer to 10 harbours located in eight different cities. This formula is always employed in the same formal way, namely, κλειστός is used as an adjective to describe a certain kind of λιμήν, rather than with the verb κλείω forming other constructions. In this sense, the situation that Strabo is describing is not identical to that referred to by Thucydides 7.38.2, who rather than recording the existence of a λιμὴν κλειστός in Syracuse is describing how Nicias asked the Athenian ships to be repaired and placed in front of the palisade, thus creating a sort of temporary λιμὴν κλειστός. On the other hand, Strabo's use of the expression appears to be consistent with the information contained in the Periplus of Ps.-Skylax and other sources deriving from the Greek periplographic tradition (i.e., Dionysus’ Description of Greece), in which the formula is practically identical, even though it is employed to refer to different harbours (Mauro and Gambash Reference Mauro and Gambash2020). Such a similarity may be explained in view of the fact that Strabo mainly drew on periploi or other nautical sources containing schematic and verbal descriptions of the coast. Therefore, the terminology employed in such accounts might have also found its way into those coastal descriptions that were directly based on them.

Furthermore, it is worth noting that the expression λιμὴν κλειστός is employed uniquely in relation to the Eastern Mediterranean. This does not necessarily imply that ‘closed harbours’ from Alexandria westwards did not exist. Rather, it might reveal that this expression was coined and commonly employed in eastern contexts.

As outlined in the Introduction, scholarship has provided different definitions of the expression λιμὴν κλειστός over time, interpreting it variously as a harbour inside the walls of a city (Lehmann-Hartleben Reference Lehmann-Hartleben1923, 65–74), a naval base (Rougé Reference Rougé1966, 107–9) or a physically closed harbour (Von Gerkan Reference Von Gerkan1924, 113–14). Additionally, in a recent study focusing on the Periplus of Ps.-Skylax, it has been proposed that the expression had a technical nautical origin and referred to harbours particularly well-protected for their naturally or artificially narrow entrances (Mauro and Gambash Reference Mauro and Gambash2020). Can any of these definitions be applied to the λιμένες κλειστοί mentioned in the Geography?

What a ‘closed harbour’ was possibly not in Strabo's Geography

In Strabo, there are different cases of λιμὴν κλειστός: cities with only one harbour, described as ‘closed’ (viz., Kaunos); cities with two harbours, both ‘closed’ (viz., Cyzicus); and cities with many harbours, some of which were ‘closed’ (viz., Alexandria). Archaeological evidence available for these places has revealed that some of the harbours defined as ‘closed’ were actually located outside the city walls (e.g., Cyzicus and Kition), thus challenging the hypothesis of λιμὴν κλειστός as a harbour inside them (as proposed by Lehmann-Hartleben Reference Lehmann-Hartleben1923, 65–74) (Table 3).

Table 3. Comparison between the previous theories and the archaeological evidence of harbours identified as λιμένες κλειστοί in the Geography. The question marks (?) indicate cases that are uncertain.

As for the naval use of ‘closed harbours’, in Strabo there seems to be a close correspondence between harbours of this kind and such a use, since the ‘closed’ harbours of Kaunos, Cyzicus and Knidos are said to have included shipsheds, while the ‘closed’ harbours of Mytilene and Knidos are explicitly associated with triremes, a type of vessel employed as a warship. However, this does not seem to have always been the case. The fleet of Alexandria, for example, was berthed in different basins within the Great Harbour, but only one of those basins is called κλειστός in the Geography.Footnote ³⁴ Furthermore, the Kibotos has not been documented as a harbour exclusively given over to naval uses. Additionally, the interpretation of a ‘closed harbour’ as a naval base would not justify the presence of two harbours of this kind in Cyzicus or the fact that the only harbour in Kaunos is referred to as κλειστός. Therefore, although the association between a λιμὴν κλειστός and a naval base is more frequent in Strabo than in the Periplus of Ps.-Skylax, such a definition does not seem to encompass all the cases mentioned by him.

To determine what the expression λιμὴν κλειστός did not mean in Strabo, it is perhaps useful to consider the periplus-based descriptions of those harbours that are the opposite of the ‘closed’ kind. In the case of Mytilene, while the λιμὴν κλειστός is said to have berthed triremes, the other harbour is described as wide, deep and protected by a breakwater (Strabo 13.2.2). As regards Tyre, the text seems to create an opposition between the two extant harbours, one being κλειστός and the other ἀνειμένος (Strabo 14.2.23).Footnote ³⁵ The dichotomy between the two terms is reinforced by the meaning of ἀνειμένος, which literally stands for ‘open’. Considering the situation of the southern harbour of Tyre, ἀνειμένος might have referred to a natural anchorage, open to the winds and waves. As a matter of fact, even though it was partially protected by the north–south natural reefs, the southern harbour was, in any case, oriented towards the direction of the prevailing winds, which in this area blow from the south-west, thus being dangerously exposed. Following this observation, a harbour that was not κλειστός was therefore open – exposed – to the elements. Such a reading is strengthened by the description of the second harbour in Mytilene, which – despite not being ‘closed’ – is said to have been protected by a breakwater. All considered, it seems that in the Geography the expression λιμὴν κλειστός should be related to the physical protection of a harbour, rather than to its location inside the walls of a city or to its function.

ΛΙΜΕΝΕΣ ΚΛΕΙΣΤΟΙ IN OTHER SOURCES

At this point, after having discussed the use(s) of the expression in the Geography, it seems appropriate to take account of other references to it in order to broaden the perspective and to determine whether or not the meanings contained in Strabo are also recorded in other sources and whether or not further light can be shed on the issue.

As the majority of references to the expression λιμὴν κλειστός appear in the Periplus of Ps.-Skylax, they can be tentatively dated to at least the third quarter of the fourth century BC. Be that as it may, as various studies of this document have stressed, these references might have been borrowed from previous nautical sources and therefore have an earlier date (Mauro Reference Mauro2022). As with those appearing in Strabo's Geography, the references contained in the Periplus of Ps.-Skylax are not analytical. On the contrary, they are included in what appears to be a brief list of places coming into, or passing out of, sight. Despite this limitation, two observations can be made to clarify the meaning of this expression in the Periplus of Ps.-Skylax. First and foremost, these references could be slightly earlier than the first examples of artificially closed harbours and, second, the author identifies harbours inside city walls with the expression “λιμένες ἐντὸς τείχους” (Ps.-Skyl. §§13 and 104), thus suggesting that a ‘closed harbour’ is not synonymous with a harbour located inside the walls of a city. This has led to the suggestion that the references contained in this document might have derived from an expression originally used by seafarers to identify particularly safe harbours, owing to the fact that they were accessible through narrow entrances (Mauro and Gambash Reference Mauro and Gambash2020).

The only possible literary, contemporary use of the expression appears in a fragment attributed to either Philochoros of Athens (fourth–third century BC) or Menekles (second–first century BC),Footnote ⁴⁶ in which it is claimed that the three basins of the Piraeus were ‘closed’ (see again Table 1); however, the dating of the passage is uncertain, and it also employs the expression without providing further specifications.

Additional information on the meaning of the expression can be gathered from a dedication on an altar that the epistates Biares offered to Apollo Didymeus: the inscription, found in front of the so-called Lion Gate at Miletus and dated to 85 BC, contains a mention to a λιμὴν κλειστός (Milet II.3.400)Footnote ⁴⁷ and has been traditionally referred to as the Lion Harbour.Footnote ⁴⁸ According to this text, Biares was responsible for ‘the temple of Apollo of Didyma and the walls and towers and the security of the closed harbour’. While the inscription does not offer insight on the meaning of the expression, it mentions the walls, the towers and the ‘closed harbour’ as three different elements, thus suggesting that a λιμὴν κλειστός could be found independently of the existence of the other two. Furthermore, if one individual was deemed sufficient to ensure the security of all these places (i.e., the temple, the walls, the tower and the harbour), it means that that they were all located nearby and that the access to the harbour could be easily supervised. This hypothesis finds an in situ confirmation, since recent geomagnetic analyses revealed the presence of two anomalies at the entrance of the Lion Harbour, probably two quays reducing the mouth of the basin to a width of barely c. 20 m (Brückner et al. Reference Brückner, Müllenhoff, Herda, Rabbel and Stümpel2014, 70).

The expression λιμὴν κλειστός also appears in Dio Cassio (75.10.5), who, when referring to the harbours of Byzantium, states that those within the walls (οἵ τε λιμένες ἐντὸς τείχους) had been closed with chains (ἀμφότεροι κλειστοὶ ἁλύσεσιν ἦσαν) and that their breakwaters, surmounted by towers, jutted far out into the sea on either side, thus hindering the approach of enemy ships (καὶ αἱ χηλαὶ αὐτῶν πύργους ἐφ᾿ ἑκάτερα πολὺ προέχοντας ἔφερον, ὥστ᾿ ἄπορον τῷ πολεμίῳ τὸν πρόσπλουν ποιεῖν). Notwithstanding its rather later date, this testimony offers food for thought: it underscores, yet again, the fact that closed harbours do not correspond to harbours inside city walls (two different expressions are used, as documented in the Ps.-Skylax and in the Milesian inscription). Additionally, it specifies how their narrow entrances – created by building towering breakwaters on either side – were closed, as if κλειστοὶ on its own did not imply the existence of specific devices.

Apart from the references to λιμὴν κλειστός, there are other sources that contain κλεῖθρα, a term clearly related to devices actually capable of blocking a harbour entrance. As already observed, a harbour defined as κλεῖθρα is firstly recorded in written sources at the end of the fourth century BC and is explicitly linked to the presences of closure devices (Aeneas Tacticus, How to Survive under Siege 11.3; IG II² 1627, lines 317–19). Moreover, these sources also refer to the existence of κλεῖθρα, between the third and the first centuries BC, in the harbours of Kos (SEG 43.549, fragment B, lines 3–5)Footnote ⁴⁹ and Chalcedon (Appian, Mithridatic Wars 10.71; 74 BC), but which – despite being mentioned as localities by Strabo (Kos: 14.2.19; Chalcedon: 12.4.3) – are not described as λιμένες κλειστοί. Therefore, even if the two expressions (λιμὴν κλειστός and κλεῖθρα) were certainly somehow related and a correspondence between the two can be suggested (at least to a certain extent), in view of the current state of the knowledge their association cannot be automatically conjectured.