Listed 6 sub titles with search on: Information about the place for destination: "IMERA Ancient city SICILY".
A colony founded in 648 B.C. on the N shore of the island (Ptol. 3.4.3)
by the Myletidai (perhaps Syracusan refugees, guests of the people of Zankle)
by the Chalkidians of Zankle and of Mylai, and by an ethnic group probably originating
from Euboia (Thuc. 6.5.1; Diod. 13.62.4; Strab. 6.272). The leaders were Euclid,
Simon, and Sakon. The Ionic-Chalkidian culture of Himera, mixed with Doric elements,
was subverted in 476 B.C. by Theron of Akragas who, to avenge his son Thrasideos,
exterminated the Ionic inhabitants of the city and replaced them with Doric colonists
(Herod. 7.165ff; Thuc. 7.58.2-3; Pind. 0l. 12; Diod. 11.48.6-8 and 49.3-4). In
480 B.C. Himera was the site of the famous battle between a league of Sicilian
Greeks and the Carthaginians who, having been utterly defeated on that occasion
(Herod. 7.165-67; Diod. 11.20ff and 13.62.1-4), returned to attack the Doric cities
of Sicily in 409 B.C. Himera was razed to the ground and abandoned (Diod. 11.49.4;
13.62.4-5; 13.79.7-8 and 114.1), and Graeco-Carthaginian political interests to
the West with the foundation of Thermai Himeraiai (Thermae Himerenses: Cic. Verr.
2.35.86).
In antiquity the city and its territory occupied a large portion of
the coastal plain to the W of the river Grande (the N stretch of the ancient river
Himera) and the two adjacent hills which dominate the plain to the S (cf. Thuc.
6.62.2 and 8.58.2; Herod. 7.165ff; Pind. 0l. 12.26-27). In 1929-30 a large Doric
temple was excavated-- the so-called Temple of Victory, which had been erected
near the river, perhaps in commemoration of the victorious battle fought in 480
B.C. It is hexastyle peripteral (55.9 x 22.4 m) with 14 columns on the sides,
rising on a four-stepped crepidoma, and having pronaos, naos, and opisthodomos;
small stairways cut into the anta walls between naos and pronaos gave access to
the roof; the splendid sima with lion-head water spouts (of which 56 units have
been recovered) deriving from two different sculptural conceptions, was carved
by several masters.
Uphill, on the Himera Plain, campaigns from 1963 to 1972 led to the
identification of a sacred area with three temples, an altar, and traces of the
temenos wall, some blocks of the ancient habitation quarters, three sections of
a necropolis, and some stretches of the archaic city walls. The three temples
are of pre-Doric type, without peristasis. An archaic shrine (15.7 x 6 m), which
has yielded a rich votive deposit, was built in the decades immediately after
the foundation of the colony. A new and more elaborate sacred building (30.7 x
10.6 m) incorporated within its structures the remains of the archaic shrine,
undoubtedly for religious reasons. The long life of the new temple, from the middle
of the 6th c. until 409 B.C., is attested by a very large number of terracotta
reliefs (metopes, pediments, akroteria) and by numerous and diverse elements of
architectural terracotta decoration. The third temple (14.3 x 7.1 m) is toward
the N border of the sacred area. The monumental altar (13.1 x 5.6 m) lies to the
E on the axis of the main temple. The urban system and the typology of the houses
show that the city was planned as a whole and at one time (early 5th c. B.C.)
on the Himera Plain, with full adherence to a single and strictly orthogonal system,
to replace an older and irregular archaic plan. The necropolis contains inhumations
in terracotta sarcophagi with grave goods dating from the second half of the 5th
c. B.C. The finds from the early excavations are housed in the National Museum
of Palermo and in the Civic Museum of Termini Imerese; those of the recent campaigns
will be exhibited at Himera, in an antiquarium soon to be erected.
N. Bonacasa, ed.
This text is from: The Princeton encyclopedia of classical sites,
Princeton University Press 1976. Cited Nov 2002 from
Perseus Project URL below, which contains 39 image(s), bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
A celebrated Greek city on the north coast of Sicily, west of
the mouth of the river Himera, was founded by the Chalcidians of Zancle, B.C.
648, and afterwards received Dorian settlers, so that the inhabitants spoke a
mixed dialect, partly Ionic (Chalcidian), and partly Doric. In B.C. 409 it was
taken by the Carthaginians, and was levelled to the ground. It was never rebuilt;
but on the opposite bank of the river Himera the Carthaginians founded a new town,
which, from a warm medicinal spring in its neighbourhood, was called Thermae (Termini).
The poet Stesichorus was born at the ancient Himera, and the tyrant Agathocles
at Thermae.
Himera: Eth. Himeraios, Himerensis, but the adj. Himeraeus: near Termini.
An important Greek city of Sicily, situated on the N. coast of the island, at
the mouth of the river of the same name, between Panormus and Cephaloedium. Thucydides
says it was the only Greek city on this coast of Sicily (vi. 62, vii. 58), which
must however be understood with reference only to independent cities; Mylae, which
was also on the N. coast, and certainly of Greek origin, being a dependency of
Zancle or Messana. All authorities agree that Himera was a colony of Zancle, but
Thucydides tells us that, with the emigrants from Zancle, who were of Chalcidic
origin, were mingled a number of Syracusan exiles, the consequence of which was,
that, though the institutions (nomima) of the new city were Chalcidic, its dialect
had a mixture of Doric. The foundation of Himera is placed subsequent to that
of Mylae (as, from their relative position, might naturally have been expected)
both by Strabo and Scymnus Chius: its date is not mentioned by Thucydides, but
Diodorus tells us that it had existed 240 years at the time of its destruction
by the Carthaginians, which would fix its first settlement in B.C. 648. (Thuc.
vi. 5; Strab. vi. p. 272; Scymn. Ch. 289; Diod. xiii. 62; Hecat. fr. 49; Scyl.
p. 4. § 13.) We have very little information as to its early history: an obscure
notice in Aristotle (Rhet. ii. 20), from which it appears to have at one time
fallen under the dominion of the tyrant Phalaris, being the only mention we find
of it, until about B.C. 490, when it afforded a temporary refuge to Scythes, tyrant
of Zancle, after his expulsion from the latter city (Herod. vi. 24). Not long
after this event, Himera fell itself under the yoke of a despot named Terillus,
who sought to fortify his power by contracting a close alliance with Anaxilas,
at that time ruler both of Rhegium and Zancle. But Terillus was unable to resist
the power of Theron, despot of Agrigentum, and, being expelled by him from Himera,
had recourse to the assistance of the Carthaginians, a circumstance which became
the immediate occasion of the first great expedition of that people to Sicily,
B.C. 480. (Id. vii. 165.) The magnitude of the armament sent under Hamilcar, who
is said to have landed in Sicily with an army of 300,000 men, in itself sufficiently
proves that the conquest of Himera was rather the pretext, than the object, of
the war: but it is likely that the growing power of that city, in the immediate
neighbourhood of the Carthaginian settlements of Panormus and Solus, had already
given umbrage to the latter people. Hence it was against Himera that the first
efforts of Hamilcar were directed: but Theron, who had thrown himself into the
city with all the forces at his command, was able to maintain its defence till
the arrival of Gelon of Syracuse, who, notwithstanding the numerical inferiority
of his forces, defeated the vast army of the Carthaginians with such slaughter
that the battle of Himera was regarded by the Greeks of Sicily as worthy of comparison
with the contemporary victory of Salamis. (Herod. vii. 166, 167; Diod. xi. 20-23;
Pind. Pyth. i. 152.) The same feeling probably gave rise to the tradition or belief,
that both triumphs were achieved on the very same day. (Herod. l. c.)
This great victory left Theron in the undisputed possession of the
sovereignty of Himera, as well as of that of Agrigentum; but he appears to have
bestowed his principal attention upon the latter city, and consigned the government
of Himera to his son Thrasydaeus. But the young man, by his violent and oppressive
rule, soon alienated the minds of the citizens, who in consequence applied for
relief to Hieron of Syracuse, at that time on terms of hostility with Theron.
The Syracusan despot, however, instead of lending assistance to the discontented
party at Himera, betrayed their overtures to Theron, who took signal vengeance
on the unfortunate Himeraeans, putting to death a large number of the disaffected
citizens, and driving others into exile. (Diod. xi. 48.) Shortly after, seeing
that the city had suffered greatly from these severities, and that its population
was much diminished, he sought to restore its prosperity by establishing there
a new body of citizens, whom he collected from various quarters. The greater part
of these new colonists were of Dorian extraction; and though the two bodies of
citizens were blended into one, and continued to live harmoniously together, we
find that from this period Himera became a Doric city, and both adopted the institutions,
and followed the policy, of the other Doric states of Sicily. (Id. xi. 49.) This
settlement seems to have taken place in B.C. 4761, and Himera continued tinned
subject to Theron till his death, in 472: but Thrasydaeus retained possession
of the sovereignty for a very short time after the decease of his father, and
his defeat by Hieron of Syracuse was speedily followed by his expulsion both from
Agrigentum and Himera. (Id. xi. 53.) In B.C. 466 we find the Himeraeans, in their
turn, sending a force to assist the Syracusans in throwing off the yoke of Thrasybulus;
and, in the general settlement of affairs which followed soon after, the exiles
were allowed to return to Himera, where they appear to have settled quietly together
with the new citizens. (Id. xi. 68, 76.). From this period Diodorus expressly
tells us that Himera was fortunate enough to escape from civil dissensions (xi.
49), and this good government must have secured to it no small share of the prosperity
which was enjoyed by the Sicilian cities in general during the succeeding half-century.
But though we are told in general terms that the period which elapsed
from this re-settlement of Himera till its destruction by the Carthaginians (B.C.
461-408), was one of peace and prosperity, the only notices we find of the city
during this interval refer to the part it took at the time of the Athenian expedition
to Sicily, B.C. 415. On that occasion, the Himeraeans were among the first to
promise their support to Syracuse: hence, when Nicias presented himself before
their port with the Athenian fleet, they altogether refused to receive him; and,
shortly after, it was at Himera that Gylippus landed, and from whence he marched
across the island to Syracuse, at the head of a force composed in great part of
Himeraean citizens. (Thuc. vi. 62, vii. 1, 58; Diod. xiii. 4, 12.) A few years
after this the prosperity of the city was brought to a sudden and abrupt termination
by the great Carthaginian expedition to Sicily, B.C. 408. Though the ostensible
object of that armament, as it had been of the Athenian, was the support of the
Segestans against their neighbours, the Selinuntines, yet there can be no doubt
that the Carthaginians, from the first, entertained more extensive designs; and,
immediately after the destruction of Selinus, Hannibal, who commanded the expedition,
hastened. to turn his arms against Himera. That city was ill-prepared for defence;
its fortifications were of little strength, but the citizens made a desperate
resistance, and by a vigorous sally inflicted severe loss on the Carthaginians.
They were at first supported by a force of about 4000 auxiliaries from Syracuse,
under the command of Diocles; but that general became seized with a panic fear
for the safety of Syracuse itself, and precipitately abandoned Himera, leaving
the unfortunate citizens to contend singlehanded against the Carthaginian power.
The result could not be doubtful, and the city was soon taken by storm: a large
part of the citizens were put to the sword, and not less than 3000 of them, who
had been taken prisoners, were put to death in cold blood by Hannibal, as a sacrifice
to the memory of his grandfather Hamilcar. (Diod. xiii. 59-62; Xen. Hell. i. 1.
37) The city itself was utterly destroyed, its buildings razed to the ground,
and even the temples themselves were not spared; the Carthaginian general being
evidently desirous to obliterate all trace of a city whose name was associated
with the great defeat of his countrymen.
Diodorus, who relates the total destruction of Himera, tells us expressly
that it was never rebuilt, and that the site remained uninhabited down to his
own times (xi. 49). It seems at first in contradiction with this statement, that
he elsewhere includes the Himeraeans, as well as the Selinuntines and Agrigentines,
among the exiled citizens that were allowed by the treaty, concluded with Carthage,
in B.C. 405, to return to their homes, and inhabit their. own cities, on condition
of paying tribute to Carthage and not restoring their fortifications. (Id. xiii.
114.) And it seems clear that many of them at least availed themselves of this
permission, as we find the Himeraeans subsequently mentioned among the states
that declared in favour of Dionysius, at the commencement of his great war with
Carthage in B.C. 397; though they quickly returned to the Carthaginian alliance
in the following year. (Id. xiv. 47, 56.) The explanation of this difficulty is
furnished by Cicero, who tells us that, after the destruction of Himera, those
citizens who had survived the calamity of the war established themselves at Thermae,
within the confines of the same territory, and not far from their old town. (Cic.
Verr. ii. 3. 5) Diodorus indeed gives us a somewhat different account of the foundation
of Thermae, which he represents as established by the Carthaginians themselves
before the close of the war, in B.C. 407. (Died. xiii. 79). But it is probable
that both statements are substantially correct, and that the Carthaginians founded
the new town in the immediate neighbourhood of Himera, in order to prevent the
old site being again occupied; while the Himeraean exiles, when they returned
thither, though they settled in the new town, naturally regarded themselves as
still the same people, and would continue to bear the name of Himeraeans. How
completely, even at a much later period, the one city was regarded as the representative
of the other, appears from the statement of Cicero, that when Scipio Africanus,
after the capture of Carthage, restored to the Agrigentines and Gelenses the statues
that had been carried off from their respective cities, he at the same time restored
to the citizens of Therma those that had been taken from Himera. (Cic. Verr. ii.
3. 5, iv. 33.) Hence we cannot be surprised to find that, not only are the Himeraeans
still spoken of as an existing people, but even that the name of Himera itself
is sometimes inadvertently used as that of their city. Thus, in B.C. 314, Diodorus
tells us that, by the treaty between Agathocles and the Carthaginians, it was
stipulated that Heracleia, Selinus, and Himera should continue subject to Carthage
as they had been before. (Diod. xix. 71.) It is much more strange that we find
the name of Himera reappear both in Mela and Pliny, though we know from the distinct
statements of Cicero and Strabo, as well as Diodorus, that it had ceased to exist
centuries before. (Strab. vi. p. 272; Mel. ii. 7. § 16; Plin. iii. 8. s. 14.)...
Himera was celebrated in antiquity as the birth place of the poet
Stesichorus, who appears, from an anecdote preserved by Aristotle, to have taken
considerable part in the political affairs of his native city. His statue was
still preserved at Thermae in the days of Cicero, and regarded with the utmost
veneration. (Arist. Rhet. ii. 20; Cic. Verr. ii. 3. 5; Sil. Ital. xiv. 232; Paus.
iii. 19. § 13.; Suid. s. v. Stesichoros.) Ergoteles, whose victory at the Olympic
games is celebrated by Pindar, was a citizen, but not a native, of Himera. (Pind.
Ol. xii.; Paus. vi. 4. § 11.) On the other hand, Thermae had the honour of being
the birthplace of the tyrant Agathocles. (Diod. xix. 2.) The magnificence of the
ancient city, and the taste of its citizens for the encouragement of art, are
attested by Cicero, who calls it in primis Siciliae clarum et ornatum; and some
evidence of it remained, even in the days of that orator, in the statues preserved
by the Thermitani, to whom they had been restored by Scipio, after the conquest
of Carthage; and which were valuable, not only as relics of the past, but from
their high merit as works of art.
This text is from: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854) (ed. William Smith, LLD). Cited June 2004 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
