Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T01:59:15.813Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Hamilcar of Barce? Discerning Barcid proto-history and Polybius’ mixellēnes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2020

Andrew M. Hill*
Affiliation:
Trinity College Dublin*

Abstract:

Hamilcar and Hannibal Barca embody a colossal father-son military legacy. Yet their family – the so-called ‘Barcid’ dynasty – has a murky history. Modern scholars have presumed that Hamilcar, the first notable historical figure to bear the name Barkas, received it as a ‘nickname’ meaning ‘lightning’. The rationale is that the name derives from the Phoenician word brq and is thus the equivalent to the Greek epithet Keraunos. There is, however, no evidence in our classical sources, to which exclusively we owe our knowledge of events, supporting this. Furthermore, the name Barca was passed on to Hamilcar’s sons, something suggestive of an inherited family surname. This article submits an alternative to the widely endorsed ‘lightning’ theory. This new perspective explores the possibility that the Barcid dynasty had roots in the city of Barce in Cyrenaica and was a relatively new addition to the Carthaginian aristocracy in the third century BC. Using textual evidence from Polybius, Diodorus and others, this fresh take clarifies other aspects of the Barcid dynasty’s tumultuous history, such as their animosity towards the Carthaginian Council of Elders and their departure to Spain in the 220s.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

[email protected]. I am indebted to Shane Wallace and Brian McGing, my mentors at Trinity College Dublin, and to Andrew Erskine of the University of Edinburgh, for their criticism of earlier drafts. Special thanks are also due to Jonathan Prag, Bruce Gibson and Sean McGrath, whose conversation provided me with many useful insights. I would finally like to express my gratitude to the editors and anonymous reviewers of the JHS for their many useful suggestions. All errors remain my own.