To be able to investigate within the Greek colonizations in the area of Italy and Sicily, we must first understand the context in which the Greek metropolises and their populations were located. The stage with which historiography has placed these years is usually defined as archaic timea situation in which the Greeks came out of the famous Dark Age (1100- IX BC), and a trade began to develop along the Greek Mediterranean that ended up producing enormous changes in socioeconomic structures. This archaic era to which we refer lasted from the 8th century BC to the end of the 6th century BC.
It is therefore a moment in which a clear greek expansionism, especially in overseas areas. But equally important is the process of development of the form of political management of the polis, which we will talk about later. Within this Greek expansionism we can distinguish different waves. They did not all occur at the same time, but rather followed an evolution throughout the entire Mediterranean basin between the 8th and 6th centuries BC It is also equally important to clarify that this expansionism did not originate from a single Greek metropolisbut rather came produced from various centers.
What factors explain this great expansion?
The main factor to take into account was the enormous demographic problem that mainland Greece experienced. An overpopulation that occurred at the end of the 9th century BC caused a lack of land for agricultural production, which led to the search for these lands throughout the Mediterranean basin. A large part of the landowners began to see that their possessions were gradually reduced until survival with these crops became practically impossible. This occurred, according to Adolfo. J. Domínguez Monedero from the meeting of the artist around urban centers and sanctuaries, which determined an increase in their joint power. (Dominguez Monedero, 1991:98). Even individuals with relative wealth had problems, for which they had to develop other activities in addition to their main source of wealth. That is why other citizens who did not have such a favorable situation went through a crisis phase. A crisis that, in addition to being deeply related to the lack of arable land, increased with the change in social and commercial relations between small and large owners, since the power of the villages was replaced by state authority.
However, these usurpations or occupations of land from small owners are not very clear about how they occurred. What is clear is that these plots were reduced until in some cases leaving the former growers in bondage.
To this problem of changing land ownership, we must add a demographic problem: A quite noticeable increase in the population in Greece. As there was more population, it also led to a change in the distribution of plots of land or Klerosleaving these lots of land in such a small area that it was not capable of generating subsistence and thus beginning a process of indebtedness.
It is, therefore, a widely recognized fact in historiography that the emigration of individuals from Greek areas to Mediterranean areas was a consequence of all the internal processes that were taking place in Continental Greece. (Dominguez Monedero, 1991: 98)
Nor should we forget a factor that historiography has also dealt with on numerous occasions about the future of events in the history of Greece: Geographic determinism, which comes to say that part of the historical evolution of the Greek peoples is also influenced by the geographical elements of its territory, such as mountain ranges, lands that are difficult to access… we can even find studies that comment on the “isolationism” of some Greek regions, especially the Spartan area, with the help of the mountains. (Antonaccio, Carla; 2017.)
The metropolis itself encouraged emigration, gave facilities to go to the Mediterranean and create colonies. It is for this reason that the metropolis offered ships, the sacred fire, completed the contingent… (Domínguez Monedero, 1991; 105)
How were the Greek colonies in the Mediterranean?
The first thing we must take into account is the differentiation into two more or less differentiated phases: A first stage, from 775 to 678 BC, in which the Greek colonies will have an agrarian character. This corresponds especially to the areas of Calcidia, the Italian Peninsula and Sicily. And a second stage, from 675 to 580 BC, which will be related to the foundations of colonies in the Black Sea Basin, North Africa and more western areas such as the Iberian Peninsula. In addition, these colonies had a mercantile character, moving away from the previous agrarian stage.
Furthermore, these settlements were generally independent of their mother country. What in many cases the inhabitants of these new settlements lost the citizenship of their previous metropolis. Quite the opposite of what happened with the cleruchies Athenians, since they were only polis that increased the range of influence of the metropolis itself. As Julián Espada Rodríguez shows us, «The Greek colonies of the archaic period were not branches of a metropolis, but were already born autonomous, having the caveat that this statement is not strictly true in all cases.» (Sword Rodriguez, 2012; 8.). Therefore, we must take into account the facility we have to find these new apoikias autonomously, but as they say: the exception makes the rule.
However, despite this political independence from the metropolis, it was not so much in the religious field, where the cults of these new settlements will follow those of the old metropolises. Of course, in most cases, due to the processes of cultural assimilation, other cults of indigenous origin will be seen.
It is also an undeniable fact that these colonies had as a source of inspiration the cops to which they belonged. The citizens who occupy these new settlements will be contemporary to the process of formation of their own cops, and therefore, they are also in some way at the service of it. (Dominguez Monedero, 1991; 101). It is for this reason that these individuals reproduce in the new territories the ways of life that were carried out in Greece. But, it is also true that the relations between the settlers who left for the Mediterranean colonies and the metropolis changed significantly since they left Greece. For the metropolis, the serious problem that was causing the lack of lots of land is solved and therefore disregards, and for the settlers, a new opportunity. (Dominguez Monedero, 1991; 105).
The metropolis itself encouraged emigration, gave facilities to go to the Mediterranean and create colonies. It is for this reason that the metropolis offered ships, the sacred fire, completed the contingent… (Domínguez Monedero, 1991; 105) However, it is common that in the collective ideology we conceive «Greek colonizations» as a process coordinated by a Greek state. The opposite was common, since it was not controlled by a superior political entity in Hellas, but was formed by different communities of citizens from some of the regions of archaic Greece. Therefore, many times the expeditions were following the same path that others had traveled, simply to take advantage of the information that previous expeditions provided. (Sword Rodriguez, 2012; 11.)
Similarly, Greek colonies rarely ventured beyond the coast. They did not usually occupy more continental territories (Golo Mann and Alfred Heuss (dir.), 1988; 126). Historiography in general has considered this as a way of not losing contact with something that greatly interested them: access to the sea, and therefore, to trade.
How were these colonies gestated?
The Greeks, when they reached the spaces where they ended up locating, did not deploy large forces, they were normally superior to those who faced them (Golo Mann and Alfred Heuss (dir.), 1988; 126). In addition, they did not always receive resistance, but the indigenous populations of the areas saw that they could also benefit from the Greek presence in their area. It is for this reason that in most cases everything is settled with a peaceful agreement. These peaceful relations were a great advantage for both peoples. For the natives, the Greeks could provide them with high-quality processed products. In return the natives could provide the Greeks with important raw materials.
However, on other occasions very complicated and tense negotiations were seen, as in the case of Cyrene. The Greeks did not seek anything other than to settle in the coastal areas, at least in the beginning, and they stayed within limits that meant greater ease so that they did not encounter excessive difficulties. (Golo Mann and Alfred Heuss (ed.), 1988; 129).
The figure of the oikistes, a figure who was in charge of directing the colonizing expedition, in addition to being in charge of leading it to the final location and once they reached these spaces, he was in charge of dividing up the plots of land among the members of the expedition in the most equitable manner possible. He was also able to eventually dictate the first laws of a legislative nature. It was also very important, in terms of a symbolic character, that the oikistes was in charge of receiving from the authorities of the metropolises the sacred fire that burned in the prytaneo. (Dominguez Monedero, 1991; 106).
The most normal thing was that the oikistes was appointed by the metropolis. If the expedition had individuals from different origins, there could also be more than one oikistes. One example of several oikistes We can find it in some of the cities in the area we are studying: Hímera, whose oikistai were Euclides, Simo and Sacón; and Gela, with Antiphemus of Rhodes and Entimo of Crete. Both cities were very important in the Greek colonization of Magna Graecia. Something significant also happens with the colony of Taranto, in the Italian peninsula, where it is not the metropolis that chooses the oikistes but the settlers themselves. This is what happened with Falanto, who had been the head of a faction that wanted to come to power in Sparta, and who ended up being oikistes of Taranto. (Dominguez Monedero, 1991; 106-107).
Some data suggest that in certain expeditions it was the oikistai those who decided to undertake (sometimes encouraged by the orders of the oracle) the trip. It could be very possible that the oikistai they were individuals of aristocratic origin, and in most cases, that they came from a branch of the family of the original metropolitan leaders.
The oikistes or founder has a great importance in this colonizing process. The names of…