by barter; for competition, while tending seriously to reduce the profits, could not then have increased the demand to an extent equivalent to the reduction in price. As long as the savage is kept in ignorance, he is ready to exchange goods of great value for mere trifles, and rivalry would only serve to enlighten him as to their actual value. Moreover with uncivilized nations whose wants are limited, it is impossible to create a demand adequate to the loss accruing from open competition. Hence Carthage watched these branches of her trade with peculiar jealousy, and, while throwing wide open the harbours of the capital, closed as far as possible her colonial ports to the shipping of rival nations.
It seems, therefore, unreasonable for Heeren to call the commercial policy of Carthage "paltry and selfish:"[1] for if she did guard the colonial trade which her genius and industry had created, her policy generally, as compared with that of contemporaneous nations, was as liberal as that of Great Britain now is in comparison with that of the United States of America. Carthage acted on principles of reciprocity, while her neighbours were rigid protectionists. She was ready to grant, as her treaties show, reciprocal privileges to all nations ready to deal with her on similar conditions; and on such terms, she dealt largely with Greece and with Egypt during the reign of the Ptolemies, and even with Rome.
Limits of trade. The trade of Carthage, as might be anticipated from her position, was almost entirely with the west, her chief rivals being Sicily, Italy, and Massalia (Marseilles), who prevented her from obtaining any-*
- ↑ Heeren's "Ancient Nations of Africa," vol. i. p. 159.
