Im taking part in an oxford debate next week and the topic is whether the peloponesian war was unavoidable or not. I watched quite a lot of videos on yt, but still want to know more, and perhaps do a little arguing. The opposite team will be covering the side of "it WAS unavoidable" so if anyone shares this view id love to talk to you. Thanks

Underwater archaeologists working near Kekova Island in southern Türkiye have uncovered amphorae dating back roughly 4,400–4,700 years from an Early Bronze Age shipwreck.

Clay analysis suggests that some of the vessels may have been produced in the Jordan Valley, while similar examples have been found in Egypt, Troy and Crete — offering a glimpse of maritime connections across the eastern Mediterranean thousands of years ago.

One particularly unusual amphora has nine markings and two holes. Researchers think it may have been used as a churn for making cheese or butter, raising an intriguing possibility that sailors were producing food during long voyages.

The site has been described by Türkiye’s Culture and Tourism Ministry as the world’s oldest shipwreck, although further archaeological evidence will be important as excavation continues.

What interests me most is this: what can a wreck this early tell us about how extensive Mediterranean maritime trade already was in the Early Bronze Age?

Source: Anadolu Agency / Türkiye Ministry of Culture and Tourism (2026).

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/culture/4-700-year-old-amphorae-discovered-near-turkiyes-kekova-island

​

Lions and bulls are motifs frequently seen in ancient Anatolia. As can be seen on the coins, the most fundamental motif appearing on the Lydian coins—which are considered the first minted coins—is the lion. Another motif seen on the coins of the Lydian Kingdom depicts the moment when that lion attacks a bull.

The motifs seen on these earliest coins, minted in the 6th century BCE, belong to the Kingdom of Lydia. Although there are various interpretations as to why they chose the lion for their coins, it is generally accepted that they were inspired by a species of lion found in ancient Anatolia. However, there is no clear, accepted explanation for why the lion is depicted attacking the bull. It is likely that this served as propaganda depicting a confrontation between the Kingdom of Lydia and another kingdom in Anatolia (Phrygians?).

What really caught my attention, however, is that this motif continued to be used in the Tarsus area during the Hellenistic period. We know that the satrap who ruled the region before Alexander the Great used this symbol and that Alexander continued this tradition. Indeed, the fact that the Asian Lion (Panthera leo persica), native to Anatolia, lived in the eastern and southeastern regions of Anatolia explains the lion depicted on these coins (and, of course, the lion seen on Babylonian coins as well).

It can be said that the Late Hittite city-states, which emerged in the southeastern region after the collapse of the Hittite Empire around 1200 BCE, clearly reflect Aramaic influence. But how is it that the Kingdom of Lydia, located to the west, used a type of lion found in the east, while its eastern rivals were symbolized by a bull?

It is unfortunate that the history of the period between 1200 BCE and 500 BCE is so obscure, forcing us to rely heavily on interpretation. Nevertheless, the fact that nearly the same figure was used in the same way for over 300 years is quite impressive.

An interesting inscription on a tombstone in Greek mentioning a Thracian king who took part in the Battle of Pharsalus in 48 BC when Julius Caesar with much fewer troops decisively beat Pompey, who then fled to Egypt where he met his end. Caesar was then the leading person in the Roman empire, although it was still technically a Republic. Interestingly, the person for whom this was set up might have fallen in battle 6 years later when Mark Antony and Octavian beat the army of Caesar's assassins Brutus and Cassius in Philippi. That town in ancient times was in Macedonia, on the border with Thrace, although there was a sizeable Thracian population then. Now it is in the modern Greek region of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace.

"Inscribed schist tombstone stele. The date of the inscription E and P= 105, that rests on the Macedonian chronology, places the stele chronologically to the year 43-42 BC. The inscription hails as a hero Drioziges, son of Rivoukenthes from Polge (unknown Thracian town probably in the plain of Chrysoupolis) who was killed in a battle at the side of king Riskoupores. All these names are Thracian. The referred king Riskoupores must be identical with the known prince of the Thracians Sappaii Raskoupores, who took part in the battle of Farsala in 48 BC and helped the democratics in the battle of Philippi in 42 BC. It is very likely that in this battle Drioziges was killed." Per the archaeological museum in Philippi, Macedonia, Greece where this is on display.

Egyptian archaeologists working in Behbeit El-Hagar, a village in Gharbia Governorate, have uncovered the remains of two giant royal statues, and experts believe both show King Ramesses II.

A block of pink granite carved with hieroglyphs came out of the ground close by. The Egyptian mission of the Supreme Council of Antiquities made the find during rescue excavations in the village.

The discovery began when a local man, busy working on a plot of land he owns in front of his house, struck a stone block covered in carvings. He told the local antiquities inspectorate right away, and inspectors rushed to the site, where a first check showed the block was ancient.

The Behbeit El-Hagar inspectorate then completed the legal paperwork, while the Supreme Council of Antiquities formed a committee and a team of specialists to begin rescue excavations, which brought both statues and the granite block to light.

The first statue is known from an enormous head about 1.60 meters tall, which shows the king wearing the double crown, a symbol of the union of Upper and Lower Egypt.

Archaeologists also found the upper section of the statue’s back pillar, and an inscription on the pillar gives the king’s Horus name, “Hor Ka Nakht Meri Maat.” Judging by the size of the head, the team estimates the whole statue, base included, once stood about 8.5 meters high, which gives a sense of how grand the monument was.

The second statue survives in much better shape, though the legs and base are gone. The main body measures roughly 2.40 meters long and shows the king in the royal nemes headcloth, with part of the top broken away. The head was found as well, and the face is still clear and well preserved, closely matching the face of the first statue.

Experts think this figure also represents Ramesses II, but they have not confirmed the identification.