Editing Carthage (section)

===Archaeological sites===
{{See also|Punic people#Genetics}}
[[File:Plan du terrain et des ruines de Carthage - levé et dessiné en 1831 par Falbe... - btv1b530984294.jpg|thumb|1833 map from the first modern archeological publication on Carthage, by [[Christian Tuxen Falbe]]]]
The Danish consul [[Christian Tuxen Falbe]] conducted a first survey of the topography of the archaeological site (published in 1833).
Antiquarian interest was intensified following the publication of Flaubert's ''[[Salammbô]]'' in 1858. [[Charles Ernest Beulé]] performed some preliminary excavations of Roman remains on Byrsa hill in 1860.<ref>Charles Ernest Beulé, ''Fouilles à Carthage'', éd. Imprimerie impériale, Paris, 1861.</ref> In 1866, [[Muhammad Khaznadar]], the son of the [[Prime Minister of Tunisia]], carried out the first locally led excavations. A more systematic survey of both Punic and Roman-era remains is due to [[Alfred Louis Delattre]], who was sent to Tunis by cardinal [[Charles Lavigerie]] in 1875 on both an apostolic and an archaeological mission.<ref>Azedine Beschaouch, ''La légende de Carthage'', éd. Découvertes Gallimard, Paris, 1993, p. 94.</ref>
Audollent cites Delattre and Lavigerie to the effect that in the 1880s, locals still knew the area of the ancient city under the name of ''Cartagenna'' (i.e. reflecting the Latin ''n''-stem ''Carthāgine'').<ref name=Audetym>Audollent, ''Carthage Romaine, 146 avant Jésus-Christ – 698 après Jésus-Christ'' 1901, [http://www.mediterranee-antique.fr/Auteurs/Fichiers/ABC/Audollent/Carthage/Cart_203.htm p. 203])</ref>

[[Auguste Audollent]] divided the area of Roman Carthage into four quarters, ''Cartagenna'', ''Dermèche'', ''Byrsa'' and ''[[Cisterns of La Malga|La Malga]]''. Cartagenna and Dermèche correspond with the lower city, including the site of Punic Carthage; Byrsa is associated with the upper city, which in Punic times was a walled citadel above the harbour; and ''La Malga'' is linked with the more remote parts of the upper city in Roman times.

French-led excavations at Carthage began in 1921, and from 1923 reported finds of a large quantity of urns containing a mixture of animal and children's bones. [[René Dussaud]] identified a 4th-century BC stela found in Carthage as depicting a child sacrifice.<ref>Dussaud, Bulletin Archéologique (1922), p. 245.</ref>

A temple at [[Amman]] (1400–1250 BC) excavated and reported upon by [[Basil Hennessy|J.B. Hennessy]] in 1966, shows the possibility of bestial and human sacrifice by fire. While evidence of child sacrifice in Canaan was the object of academic disagreement, with some scholars arguing that merely children's cemeteries had been unearthed in Carthage, the mixture of children's with animal bones as well as associated epigraphic evidence involving mention of ''mlk'' led some to believe that, at least in Carthage, [[Tophet#Carthage and the western Mediterranean|child sacrifice]] was indeed common practice.<ref>J.B. Hennessey, Palestine Exploration Quarterly (1966)</ref> However, though the animals were surely sacrificed, this does not entirely indicate that the infants were, and in fact the bones indicate the opposite. Rather, the animal sacrifice was likely done to, in some way, honour the deceased.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schwartz |first1=Jeffery H. |last2=Houghton |first2=Frank |last3=Macchiarelli |first3=Roberto|last4=Bondioli |first4=Luca |date=2010-02-17 |title=Skeletal Remains from Punic Carthage Do Not Support Systematic Sacrifice of Infants |journal=PLOS ONE |volume=5 |issue=2 |pages=e9177 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0009177 |pmid=20174667 |pmc=2822869 |bibcode=2010PLoSO...5.9177S |doi-access=free }}</ref>

A study conducted in 1970 by M. Chabeuf, the then Doctor of Science from the University of Paris, showed little difference between 17 modern Tunisians, and 68 Punic remains.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Chabeuf |first=Maurice |date=1970 |title=Contribution à la craniométrie des Algériens modernes |url=https://www.persee.fr/doc/bmsap_0037-8984_1970_num_6_3_2200 |journal=Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d'Anthropologie de Paris |volume=6 |issue=3 |pages=281–294 |doi=10.3406/bmsap.1970.2200}}</ref> An analysis the following year on 42 North-West African skulls dating back to Roman times concluded that they were overall similar to modern Berbers and other Mediterranean populations, especially eastern Iberians. They also noted the presence of one outlier in Tunisia who appears to have inherited mechtoid traits, which led them to hypothesize the persistence of such affinities well into the Punic and Roman era.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Boulinier |first1=Georges |last2=Chabeuf |first2=Maurice |date=1971 |title=Les squelettes " romains " et paléochrétiens du Musée d'Alger; remarques sur le peuplement préislamique de l'Afrique du Nord |url=https://www.persee.fr/doc/bmsap_0037-8984_1971_num_7_1_2007 |journal=Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d'Anthropologie de Paris |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=7–43 |doi=10.3406/bmsap.1971.2007}}</ref>

M. C. Chamla and D Ferembach (1988) in their entry dealing with the craniometric conclusions of Protohistorical Algerians and Punics in the region of Tunisia, found strong sexual dimorphism with male skulls being robust. Mediterranean elements were dominant, but Mechtoid features, as well as 'Negroid' traits were present in some of the samples. Overall, Punic burials showed affinities with Algerians, Roman Era skulls from Tarragona (Spain), Guanches, and to a lesser extent Abydos (XVIIIth dynasty), Etruscans, Bronze Age Syrians (Euphrates) and skulls from Lozere (France). The anthropological position of the Algerian and [[Punic people]] when it comes to populations of the Mediterranean Basin agreed quite well with the geographical situation.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Chamla |first1=M.-C. |last2=Ferembach |first2=D. |date=1988-04-01 |title=Anthropologie (Partie II) |url=https://journals.openedition.org/encyclopedieberbere/2896 |journal=Encyclopédie berbère |language=fr |issue=5 |pages=713–775 |doi=10.4000/encyclopedieberbere.2896 |issn=1015-7344|doi-access=free }}</ref>

Jehan Desanges stated that "In the Punic burial grounds, negroid remains were not rare and there were black auxiliaries in the Carthaginian army who were certainly not Nilotics".<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gZWuVAL2GooC&pg=PA238 |title=General History of Africa Vol .2: Ancient civilizations of Africa |date=1990 |publisher=J. Currey |isbn=0852550928 |edition=Abridged |location=London |pages=238}}</ref>

In 1990, Shomarka Keita, a biological anthropologist, had conducted a craniometric study which featured a set of remains from Northern Africa. He examined a sample of 49 Maghreban crania which included skulls from pre-Roman Carthage and concluded that, although they were heterogeneous, many of them showed physical similarities to crania from equatorial Africa, ancient Egypt, and Kush; with most having traits conforming to the northern (Lower) Egyptian pattern.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Keita |first1=S. O. Y. |date=September 1990 |title=Studies of ancient crania from northern Africa |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajpa.1330830105 |journal=American Journal of Physical Anthropology |language=en |volume=83 |issue=1 |pages=35–48 |doi=10.1002/ajpa.1330830105 |issn=0002-9483 |pmid=2221029 |quote=The analyses demonstrate the metric heterogeneity of pre-Roman mid-Holocene Maghreban crania. The range of variation in the restricted area described extends from a tropical African metric pattern to a European one and supports the phenotypic variability observed in and near Carthage by ancient writers and in morphological studies. Thus the population emerges as a composite entity, no doubt also containing hybrid individuals. However, the centroid value of the combined Maghreb series indicates that the major craniometric pattern is most similar to that of northern dynastic Egyptians. Furthermore, the series from the coastal Maghreb and northern (Lower) Egypt are more similar to one another than they are to any other series by centroid values and unknown analyses.}}</ref> S.O.Y. Keita's later report in 2018, found the pre-Roman Carthaginian series to be intermediate between the Phoenician and Maghreban. He noted the findings are consistent with an interpretation that it reflects both local and Levantine ancestry due to specific interactions in the ancient period.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Keita |first=S.O.Y. |date=2018 |title=Brief Report: Carthaginian Affinities with Ancient and Recent Maghreban and Levantine Groups: Craniometric Analyses Using Distance and Discrimination |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/44988676 |journal=The African Archaeological Review |volume=35 |issue=1 |pages=133–137 |doi=10.1007/s10437-018-9285-3 |jstor=44988676 |s2cid=165330295 |issn=0263-0338}}</ref>

Joel. D. Irish, when measuring for dental affinities in 2001, found strong similarities and very small distances between the Canary Islanders and Punic Carthaginians (who originated in West Asia), suggesting a particularly close affinity, despite the geographic distance between these two populations. This result according to Irish, may reflect Berber/Carthaginian admixture. Overall, the findings discovered that "the Canary Island sample is most similar to the four samples from Northwest Africa: the Shawia Berbers, Kabyle Berbers, Bedouin Arabs and Carthaginians, less similar to the three Egyptian samples and least like the three Nubian samples."<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Guatelli-Steinberg |first1=D. |last2=Irish |first2=J. D. |last3=Lukacs |first3=J. R. |date=2001 |title=Canary islands-north African population affinities: measures of divergence based on dental morphology |url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11802567/ |journal=Homo: Internationale Zeitschrift für die Vergleichende Forschung am Menschen |volume=52 |issue=2 |pages=173–188 |doi=10.1078/0018-442x-00027 |issn=0018-442X |pmid=11802567}}</ref>

In 2016, an ancient Carthaginian individual, who was excavated from a Punic tomb in Byrsa Hill, was found to belong to the rare [[Haplogroup U (mtDNA)|U5b2c1]] maternal haplogroup. The Young Man of Byrsa specimen dates from the late 6th century BC, and his lineage is believed to represent early gene flow from [[Iberia]] to the [[Maghreb]]. Craniometric analysis of the young man indicated likely Mediterranean/European ancestry as opposed to African or Asian.<ref>{{cite journal|vauthors=Matisoo-Smith EA, Gosling AL, Boocock J, Kardailsky O, Kurumilian Y, Roudesli-Chebbi S |title=A European Mitochondrial Haplotype Identified in Ancient Phoenician Remains from Carthage, North Africa|journal=PLOS ONE|date=May 25, 2016|volume=11|issue=5|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0155046|display-authors=etal|pages=e0155046|pmid=27224451|pmc=4880306|bibcode=2016PLoSO..1155046M|doi-access=free}}</ref>

====Climate change====
{{Main|Sea level rise}}
Due to its coastal location, Carthage Archeological Site is vulnerable to [[sea level rise]]. In 2022, the [[IPCC Sixth Assessment Report]] included it in the list of African cultural sites which would be threatened by [[flooding]] and [[coastal erosion]] by the end of the century, but only if [[climate change]] followed [[Representative Concentration Pathway#RCP 8.5|RCP 8.5]], which is the scenario of high and continually increasing [[greenhouse gas]] emissions associated with the warming of over {{Convert|4|C-change}},<ref>Trisos, C.H., I.O. Adelekan, E. Totin, A. Ayanlade, J. Efitre, A. Gemeda, K. Kalaba, C. Lennard, C. Masao, Y. Mgaya, G. Ngaruiya, D. Olago, N.P. Simpson, and S. Zakieldeen 2022: [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGII_Chapter09.pdf Chapter 9: Africa]. In [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/ Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability] [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, pp. 2043–2121</ref> and is no longer considered very likely.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Hausfather|first1=Zeke|last2=Peters|first2=Glen|title=Emissions – the 'business as usual' story is misleading|journal=Nature|date=29 January 2020|volume=577|issue=7792|pages=618–620|doi=10.1038/d41586-020-00177-3|pmid=31996825|bibcode=2020Natur.577..618H|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Hausfather|first1=Zeke|last2=Peters|first2=Glen|title=RCP8.5 is a problematic scenario for near-term emissions|journal=PNAS|date=20 October 2020|volume=117|issue=45|pages=27791–27792|doi=10.1073/pnas.2017124117 |pmid=33082220 |pmc=7668049 |bibcode=2020PNAS..11727791H |doi-access=free}}</ref> The other, more plausible scenarios result in lower warming levels and consequently lower sea level rise: yet, sea levels would continue to increase for about 10,000 years under all of them.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Full_Report.pdf |title=Technical Summary. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |date=August 2021 |publisher=IPCC |page=TS14 |access-date=12 November 2021}}</ref> Even if the warming is limited to {{Convert|1.5|C-change}}, global sea level rise is still expected to exceed {{convert|2-3|m|ft|0|abbr=on}} after 2,000 years (and higher warming levels will see larger increases by then), consequently exceeding 2,100 levels of sea level rise under RCP 8.5 (~{{convert|0.75|m|ft|0|abbr=on}} with a range of {{convert|0.5–1|m|ft|0|abbr=on}}) well before the year 4000. Thus, it is a matter of time before the Carthage Archeological Site is threatened by rising water levels, unless it can be protected by adaptation efforts such as [[sea wall]]s.<ref>IPCC, 2021: [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM.pdf Summary for Policymakers]. In: [https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/ Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York, pp. 3−32, {{doi|10.1017/9781009157896.001}}.</ref>